ML20063D201

Nonproprietary CEN-209(C)-NP, Waterford 3,Cycle 1 Cpc/Ceac Phase 1 Software Verification Test Rept

ML20063D201
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	06/30/1982
From:	ABB COMBUSTION ENGINEERING NUCLEAR FUEL (FORMERLY
To:
Shared Package
ML19268B078	List: ML20063D197 ML20063D201 ML20063D205 ML20063D209 W3P82-1733, Forwards Proprietary & Nonproprietary Versions of Waterford 3,Cycle 1 Cpc/Ceac Phase 1 Software Verification Test Rept & Waterford 3,Cycle 1 Cpc/Ceac Phase II Software Verification Test Rept. Affidavit Encl
References
CEN-209(C)-NP, CEN-209(C)-NP-R, CEN-209(C)-NP-R00, NUDOCS 8207010368
Download: ML20063D201 (25)

Text

-- .

l l

WATERFORD 3, CYCLE 1 l CPC/CEAC PHASE I l SOFTWARE VERIFICATION TEST REPORT l

I I

WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION UNIT NO. 3 l

JUN E,1982 E Els@ETEMS

[!!72s8MSJ888,!jg

l l

. I i

LEGAL NOTICE l

THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED AS AN ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED BY COMSUSTION ENGINEERING, INC. NEITHER COMBUSTION ENGINEERING  !

NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON ITS BEHALF:

i A. MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED INCLUDING THE WARRANTIES OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR i PURPOSE OR MERCHANTA81UTY, WITH RESPECT TO THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, OR USEFULNESS OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT, OR THAT THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS METHOD, OR PROCESS DISCLOSED IN THIS REPORT MAY NOT INFRINGE PP,lVATELY OWNED RIGHTS:OR B ASSUMES ANY LIABILITIES WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF,OR FOR DAMAGES RESULTING FROM THE USE OF, ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD OR PROCESS DISCLOSED IN THIS REPORT.

l

WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION UNIT 3 DOCKET 50-382 CEN-209(C)-NP REVISION 00 CPC/CEAC SYSTEM PHASE I SOFTWARE VERIFICATION TEST REPORT JUNE, 1982 Cortustion Engineering, Inc.

Nuclear Power Systems Power Systems Group Windsor, Connecticut

e CPC/CEAC SYSTEM PHASE I SOFIWARE VERIFICATION TEST REPORT Page 2

ABSTRACT Phase I Design Qualification Testing is performed on the DNBR/LPD Calculator Systen to verify that CPC and CEAC software modifications have been properly implemented.

This report presents the Phase I Test results for the Louisiana Power & Light Company WSES-3 olant CPC/CEAC System Sof tware Revision 00.

The Phase I Testing was performed according to previously issued procedures (Reference 2). The test results indicate that the CPC and CEAC software modifications have been properly implemented.

5 Page 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION TITLE PAGE NO.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

AND

SUMMARY

6 1.1 Objective of Phase I Testing 6 1.2 Results 6 1.3 Conclusions 6 1.4 Prerequisites 6 2.0 APPLICATION PROGRAM TESTING 7 2.1 Test Configuration 7 2.2 Test Cases 7 2.3 Test Execution and Results 8 3.0 EXECUTIVE TESTING 19 3.1 Test Configuration 19 3.2 Test Cases 19 3.3 Test Execution and Results 19 4.0 PHASE I TEST RESULTS

SUMMARY

24

5.0 REFERENCES

25

Page 4

LIST OF TABLES TABLE TITLE PAGE NO.

2-1 Hardware Configuration for Phase I Executive /

Application Program Testing 9 2-2 Application Programs Tested with the Automated Phase I Testing Prooram 10 3-1 Hardware Configuration for Phase I Executive Program Testing 20 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE TITLE PAGE NO.

2-1 Memory Map for Phase I CPC Application Program Testing 11 2-2 Memory Map for Phase I CEAC Application Program Testing 15 3-1 Memory Map for CPC/CEAC Executive Phase I Testing 21 l

1 Page 5

1.0 INTRODUCTION

AND

SUMMARY

This document summarizes the results of the Phase I Design Qualification Testing of changes to the CPC and CEAC software for WSES-3 Cycle 1. The prograns affected by these changes, which are described in Reference 1, were required to undergo Phase I Testing in accordance with Reference 2. The changes reflect the implementation of Sof tware Change Requests 250-254, 259, 260, 264, 266, 281, 310, 333 and 334. These changes were made in accordance with Reference 2.

The tests reported herein were conducted on the CPC/CEAC single channel system. A discussion of the test configuration, test methodology, and test results are presented in this document.

1.1 OBJECTIVE OF PHASE I TESTING The objective of Phase I Design Qualification Testing is to verify the implementation of the Core Protection Calculator System (i.e., both CPC and CEAC) software.

1.2 RESULTS Analysis of the Phase I Design Qualification Tests demonstrated that the sof tware changes had been correctly implemented to meet the system functional requirements.

1.3 CONCLUSION

S CPC System Phase I Testing was performed in the prescribed manner as described by Phase I Test Procedures. The Phase I testing was adequate to meet all of the test objectives. The success of the Phase I Testing demonstrates the adequacy of the CPC/CEAC sof tware implementation.

1.4 PREREQUISITES Before formal Phase I Testing was initiated, the following prerequisites were satisfied:

1. Programmer debug testing was perTormed on the module changes to remove all obvious errors.

2. The programs were integrated into complete software systems and absolute core images were generated on the CPC permanent mass storage medium (floppy disks).

Page 6

2.0 APPLICATION PROGRAM TESTING The CPC and CEAC application programs were tested in accordance with the CPC/CEAC Phase I Test Procedure. This section discusses the actual test configuration, test cases, and test execution and results.

Phase I Test runs used Disk #S151 as the A-B Reference Disk.

2.1 TEST CONFIGURATION Phase I Testing of the CPC and CEAC application programs was performed on the CEAC Single Channel Unit. For the purpose of this testing, the single channel was configured with the hardware complement listed in Table 2-1. The sof tware configuration for the application programs Phase I Testing is shown in Figure 2-1 (CPC) and Figure 2-2 (CEAC).

Memory was loaded with this configuration by the following procedure:

1. The integrated CPC or CEAC system was loaded frcm the WSES-3 Reference Disk (Disk #S151 for CPC's and CEAC #1, Disk #S152 for CEAC #2).

2. The Automated Phase I Testing Software was loaded from magnetic tape, overlaying the CPC/CEAC Executive and unused portions of memory.

3. The Interdata Hexadecimal Debug Frogram, CLUB, was loaded from magnetic tape, overlaying any unused portion of memory.

The Automated Phase I Testing software was then used, with CLUB, to test the programs listed in Table 2-2.

2.2 TEST CASES 2.2.1 Inputs Phase I Test case inputs for the CPC/CEAC application programs were generated in accordance with the CPC/CEAC Phase I Test Procedure.

Sufficient test cases were chosen to exercise each functional branch in the application programs. However, several branches were not exercised because assigned constant values made it impossible to branch on certain conditions. All coding that cannot be executed, because of constant assignments, was verified by inspection to assure correct implementation.

2.2.2 Expected Results Expected results for the CPC and CEAC application programs Phase I Test cases were generated by two methods. The preferred method for generation of expected results utilized the CPC FORTRAN Simulation Code. Test case inputs were stored on magnetic tape and entered into the Simulation Code. The FORTRAN Code calculated the expected results and stored them on magnetic tape in a format acceptable to the automated Phase I Testing Program. In some instances, such as input / output handling, the FORTRAN Code does not simulate the CPC Page 7

coda. In th:se cases, the exprctsd results w:re hand calculated by the test engineer based on the system functional requirements, the programmer's flowcharts, and the system data base document. The results were then manually entered on magnetic tape in a format acceptable to the Automated Phase I Testing Program.

2.3 TEST EXECUTION AND RESULTS When test case inputs had been selected and expected results had been generated, the test engineer prepared the test tape to be read by the ,

Automated Phase I Testing Program. The test case inputs overlayed the portion of memory where data is accessed by the sof tware module under test. After each set of inputs overlayed appropriate memory locations, the sof tware module under test was executed and the actual

- CPC results were compared to the expected results by the Automated Phase I Testing Program. Whenever the actual value differed from the expected value by more than 0.1 percent, an analysis of the error was performed by the test engineer to assure that the deviation was not '

caused by a coding error.

Documentation generated by the Automated Phase I Testing Program consisted of listings which contain input and output differences. For several of the modules tested, it was not obvious which branches in the code were taken when observing the outputs. When tracing through l a portion of code, the location of each critical instruction was I printed when that instruction was executed, which enabled the test l engineer to verify that each functional branch was taken. A Phase I l Test Log was used to maintain a daily account of testing activities.

Phase I Testing was performed on the CPC application programs on June 3, 1982. While the application program test results were being analyzed, Phase I Testing of the Executive System was performed between June 17 and June 19, 1982.

Tests in the Penalty Factor program were run on June 4,1982. No problems were found. Tests on the Display program for both CEAC1 and CEAC2 were also run on June 4,1982. No problems were found.

It was concluded that Phase I testing revealed no coding errors in the CPC and CEAC application programs.

i Page 8

TABLE 2-1 HARDWARE CONFIGURATION FOR PHASE I EXECUTIVE / APPLICATION PROGRAM TESTING (Proprietary Information contained here)

O Page 9

TABLE 2-2 APPLICATION PROGRAMS TESTED WITH THE AUTOMATED PHASE I TESTING PROGRAM (Proprietary Information contained here) i f

l I

1 L

f 1

I l

Page 10

FIGURE 2-1 MEMORY MAP FOR PHASE I CPC APPLICATION PROGRAM TESTING (Proprietary Information contained here)

Page 11

FIGURE 2-1 (Cont.) -

(Proprietary Information contained here) 6

{

i Page 12

FIGURE 2-1 (Cont.)

(Proprietary Information contained here)

I Page 13

FIGURE 2-1 (Cont.)

(Proprietary Information contained here)

l O

p c

I Page 14

4 FIGURE 2-2 MEMORY MAP FOR PHASE I CEAC APPLICATION PROGRAM TESTING (Proprietary Information contained here) i l

Page 15  !

l l

i l

l

FIGURE 2-2 (Cont.)

(Proprietary Information contained here) a i

f f

Page 16

FIGURE 2-2 (Cent.)

(Proprietary Information contained here)

I i

i l

i i

i Page 17

FIGURE 2-2 (Cont.)

(Proprietary Information contained here) c Page 18

3.0 EXECUTIV'E TESTING The CPC/CEAC Executive software was tested in accordance with the CPC/CEAC Executive Phase I Test Procedure. This section discusses the actual test configuration, test cases, and test execution and results.

3.1 TEST CONFIGURATION Phase I testing of the CPC/CEAC Executive was performed on the CPC/CEAC Single Channel System. For the purpose of this testing, the single channel was configured with the hardware complement listed in Table 2-1 (CEAC) and Table 3-1 (CPC). This hardware configuration is functionally identical to the as-built CPC/CEAC design.

The software configuration for the Executive Phase I Testing is shown in Figure 3-1. Memory was loaded with this configuration by the following procedure:

1. An integrated CPC/CEAC system was loaded from WSES-3 Reference Disk #S151 (the entire image was loaded although only the Executive system is tested).

2. The Interdata Hexadecimal Debug Program, CLUB. was loaded from magnetic tape overlaying an unused area in memory.

3. .The Phase I Executive Data Loader was used to establish Executive inputs.

The prescribed test cases were then set up and executed using the CLUB program to test the Executive software.

3.2 TEST CASES ,

The CPC/CEAC Executive Phase I Test Cases are described in the Executive Phase I Test Procedure. Sufficient test cases were chosen to exercise each functional branch of the Executive system.

3.3 TEST EXECUTION AND RESULTS ,

For testing of the CPC/CEAC Executive, the debug program, CLUB, was used to insert test case inputs into memory; to insert breakpoints to trace and intercept code executions; and to examine results.

Documentation produced as a result of Executive Phase I Testing consists of the CLUB teletype printouts, initialed and dated by the

. test engineer.

The CPC/CEAC Executive was tested on June 17 through June 19,1982 and revealed no coding errors.

Page 19

TABLE 3-1 HARDWARE CONFIGURATION FOR PHASE I EXECUTIVE PROGRAM TESTING (Proprietary Information contained here) i  ;

i I

L i

i P

e 5

Page 20

t i

FIGURE 3-1 i f

j MEMORY MAP FOR CPC/CEAC EXECUTIVE PHASE I TESTING l (Proprietary Information contained here) f t

3 n

I 1

4

?

I i

1 1 .

I J

j f s *

%. y, s

• s 4

s s. 4 3, ,

t, , -

s ,

, , - s 1 -

4 4

1 s

.x ,

x-i 1

4 s s.

! JPage.21 --

\

FIGURE 3-1 (Cont.)

(Proprietary Information contained here)

I i

s n i i l I  !

l I

f

~

l Page 22

FIGifRE 3-1 (Conto)

L (Proprietary Information contained here) i l

1 e

l i

I l'

i l

i i

l

\

! o

! I i i I

i o

9 4 i i

f l

i '

i i

1

, Page 23

4.0 PHASE I TEST RESULTS SUPNARY Phase I testing of the CPC and CEAC software for WSES-3 Cycle I was performed in accordance with Reference 2. Test results conclude that the software modifications described in Reference 1 were correctly iglemented.

I i

J 1

i l

l 1

Page 24

i

5.0 REFERENCES

1. CPC/CEAC Sof tware Modifications for Waterford 3 #

] CEN-197(C)-P, March,1982.

2 '. CPC Protection Algorithm Software Change Procedure CEN39(A)-P, Revision 02, December 21, 1978.

I i -

I l

l Page 25

.l COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC.

I i

l l

l O

I l

l l .

.