ML20071A837

Quad-Cities Nuclear Power Station,Unit 1,Cycle 7 Startup Test Results

ML20071A837
Person / Time
Site:	Quad Cities
Issue date:	02/17/1983
From:	COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20071A833	List: ML20071A832 ML20071A837
References
ID-TS2-B, ID-TS2-B-01, ID-TS2-B-1, NUDOCS 8302250183
Download: ML20071A837 (10)

Text

,mo Ae-(

s 5

m J

--n-

~.w w

f n

w e.-w,4 1

)

e a

i

{_

1 ID/TS2-B J

QUAD-CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATION 1-UNIT 1 CYCLE 7 STARTUP TEST RESULTS

.1-i e

4 4

a L

8302250183 830217 PDR ADOCK 05000254 P

PDR

1

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

' ' ^

5 e

s 9

4 i

f w

J

. A I

i.

~

4

.1 4.

2 i

(;

r 4

i.

4.

t

+

g 4

i r,

?

i R

TABLE OF CONTENTS

- [

i-Test No.*

Title

.Pm

[

l t

i 1

Scram Timingi

.1

[

r

+

1 j

. 2-Shutdown Margin 3

I.

3 Initial Critical

- 4 i

~4 TIP Reproducibility and:

1 Core Power Symmetry 5

4 Y

[

1 1

4 fa-1 i

t r

F a

S l

1 f

f.

t i

e f

4.~

u.

. ~,

L

-=--etw.e e.ww +w.-.wer suer +.-

--e,

.-we-y--,,w..ww,~+,,,--vew,mp.w,,-,.e.eec-w,er-w,.w.,-~-%-m,w-.-w----,~w--m-me.--m

%-w.,,r.w,--

I.

Control Rod Scram Timing Pu rpose The purpose of this test is to demonstrate the scram capability of all of the. operable. 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 during 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 SCRAM INSERTION FULLY WITHDRAWN TIMES (sec) 5 0.375 20 0.900 50 2.000 90 3.500 The average of the scram insertion times for the three fastest control rods of all groups of four rods in a two by two array shall be no greater than:

% INSERTlJ) FROM AVG. SCRAM INSERTION FULLY WITHDRAWN TIMES (sec) 5 0.398 20 0.954 50 2.120 90 3.800' If these times cannot be met, the reactor shall not be made supercritical; if operating, the reactor shall be shutdown immediately upon determination 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 All 177 control rods were scram tested. The results are presented in Table 1.1.

The maximum 90% insertion time was 3.02 seconds for control rod J-10 (34-39). Both criteria A and B were mets., -.-

. ~. _.

m..

Table 1.1 i

Control Rod Scram Results NUMBER REACTOR' AVERAGE TIMES FOR % INSERTED, SEC-0F. RODS' CONDITIONS 5%

20%

50%~

90%

177 Cold 0.22 0.46 0.95.

1.69

.177 Hot 0.27 0.65 1.43 2.52 i

i l

l

+

1 i-i A..

A II.

Shutdown Marsin' Demonstration and Control Rod Functional Checks Purpose 1

- The purpose of 'this test 11s to ' demonstrate for this. core loading in the most reactive condition during.the operating cycle, that the-reactor is suberitical with the strongest control rod full out and-all other rods fully inserted.

-Criteria If a shutdown margin of;0.977% AK (=0.25% + R + B C. settling penalty)-

4 cannot be demonstrated with the strongest control rod fully withdrawn,-

the core loading must 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 0.687%. The control rod B C settling 4

penalty for Unit One is 0.04%.

Results and Discussion On December 4, 1982, control rod N-7 (the rod which,was calculated by General Electric.to be of the highest worth) was fully withdrawn

-to demonstrate that the reactor would remain suberitical with the strongest rod full out..This maneuver was performed to allow cold control rod testing prior to the shutdown margin demonstration.

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 information for the two strongest diagonally adjacent rods P-6 and M-8 with rod N-7 full out. This method provided an adequate reactivity insertion to demonstrate the desired shutdown margin. On December 20, 1982,.a diagonally adjacent shutdown margin demonstration was successfully performed. Using the G.E. supplied rod worth for N-7 (the strongest rod) and diagonally adjacent rods P-6 and M-8,'it was determined that with N-7 and P-6 at gosition 48, and M-8 at position 16, a mode.rator temperature of 128 F, and the reactor suberitical, a shutdown margin of 1.466% A K was demonstrated. - The G.E. calculated shutdown margin with N-7 withdrawn and 68 F reactor water temperature waa 2.656% A K at the beginning of cycle 7.

At approximately 5000 mwd /t into cycle 7 a minimum calculated shutdown margin of 1.969% A K will occur with N-5 fully withdrawn. Note that l

the minimum shutdown margin shifts from rod N-7 at beginning of j.

cycle to rod N-5 at 5000 mwd /T. __ _

~

~

~

g

- g:

'G.E.'s ability to determine rod worth was demonstrated by the accuracy of their.in-sequence criticality prediction. The A'K difference between the expected critical rod pattern.and the actual critical rod pattern was: determined to be 0.326% A K; This' initial critical demonstrated.that the actual shutdown margin at the beginning of cycle 7 was.2.982% A X and that the predicted SDM will be approximately 2.295% A K at 5000 mwd /t into cycle 7.

III.

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

Criteria General Electric's prediction for the critical rod pattern must agree within 1% A K to actual rod pattern.

'A discrepancy greater than 1% A K in the non-conservative direction will be cause for an On-Site Review and investigation by Nuclear Fuel Services.

Results and Discussion On Decsmber 21,1982, at 0610 hours0.00706 days <br />0.169 hours <br />0.00101 weeks <br />2.32105e-4 months <br /> the reactor was brought critical with a reactor water temperature at the-time of criticality of 150 F.

-The AK difference between the expected critical rod pattern at 68 F and the actual critical-rod pattern at 150 F was 0.0050 from rod worth tables supplied by General Electric. The temperature effect was -0.0011 AK from General Electric-supplied corrections.

The excess reactivity yielding the 86 second positive period was 0.0006439 AK.

These reactivities' result in a. 0.00326 tiK differenceE (0.326% AK) between the expected critical rod pattern and the actual rod pattern. ThisHis within the 1% AK required in the criteria of this test, and General Electric's ability to predict control rod worths is, therefore, successfully demonstrated.

l

. 6

~... - _

s

'IV.-

Core' Power Distribution Symmetry Analysis

Purpose

-+

The purpose-of,this' test was.to determine the magnitude of indicated

-core power distribution asymmetries using data-(TIP traces-and OD-1).

' collected 'in conjunction with the P-1 update.

1-Criteria A.

The. total.TIP uncertainty (including randon' noise and geometric:

' uncertainties obtained by-averaging the uncertainties for.all data sets) must be less than 9%.

B.

The gross check o'f TIP signa 1' symmetry should yield a maximum -

deviation between symmetrically located pairs of less than.25%.

Results and Discussion Core power symmetry calculations were performed based upon computer program OD-1 data runs on January 3, 1983, at 97% power, and January 4,'1983, at 97% power. The average total TIP uncertainty from the' two.TIP sets was 5.086%. The random noise uncertainty was 1.481%.

This yields a' geometrical-uncertainty of 4.849%. The: total TIP uncertainty was well within the 9% limit.

Table-2 lists the~ symmetrical TIP pairs-and~their respective. deviations.

Figure I shows the core-location of the TIP pairs and the average

~~

TIP readings. The maximum deviation between symmetrical TIP pairs was 13.37% for pair 23-29.

Thus,-the second criterion, mentioned 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

IL I.

Rij

_R = 18n j=1

'i=5' where Rij is the ratio l for-the ith node of TIP pair j, there being n '

such' pairs, where n=18.

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

n 22 jb1 i=h

( 'd -

a=

R (18n - 1) o U is multiplied by 100 to express O as a percentage c*: the ideal R

R value of R

%O "R

• R 4

ThetotalTIPuncertaintyiscalculatedb'ydividing%a,byif2in order.to account for' data - being taken at 3 inch intervaTs and analyzed

~on a 6 inch' nodal basis.

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

MT NT 1

I I

BASE (N, M, K)

BASE (K) = NT. MT M.=1 N=1 where NT = number a' runs per machine = 4 MT = number of machines = 5 BASE (K) = average reading at nodal level K, K = 5 through 22 The random noise is derived from the average of the nodal variances by:

22 MT NT 2

I I

I BASE (N, M, K) - BASE (K)

%c noise =

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

16 (NT x MT -1)

Finally the TIP geometric uncertainty can be calculated by:

% a geometric = (% o total - % o noise )b Table'2 CORE SYMMETRY-Based on-0D-l's From 1-3-83 (97% power), and 1-4-83 (97% power)

SYMMETRICAL TIP' T=T

-T

_% = 100 x T/ T_ + T PAIR NUMBERS

'ABSOLUT$DIFhERENCE

% DEVIATIONL "2

t

-a b

1 6

7.436 8.310 2 12 2.769 2.632 3 19 9.376 9.130 4 26 11.275 11.410-5 33 2.147 4.184 8 13 1.330 1.191 9 20 3.880 3.317 10 27 0.471 0.463

.11. 34 10.534 10.305--

15 21' 9.036 8.478 16 28 4.263 4.166 17 35 7.547 6.608 18 39-2.100 3.079

'23 29 16.080 13.373 24 36 5.083 4.418 25 40 2.183 3.116 31 37 6.423 2.747 32 41 4.544 7.448 22 Average Deviation =

T = I T (K) /18 5.737%

g g

t=5.

i

.v, Figure 1 UNIT ONE POWER SPIMETRY Average BASE Readings (nodes 5 through 22)

From OD-l's on 1-03-83, and 1-04-83 Avg. BASE TIP/LPRM String No.

Axis of Symmetry do l

l l]_l l

l l

!csyd__M____L_j.l'4/

L/

ispi I c_ d

_ _ l_ _

i 2'll l

i i..i l

I l

l i

I l

i I

I I

t i

5 5Dfi I%3p7l

!/10j d ill7 'l!

!!!3 Y7!

4 l

l

,'(

i I

4 4

T I

33,i l

]yi i

3 51 -

i

'3d

' i S?!

33

_ _ w i

i i

i i

i

,3 f

, 1 a

____L. 'I i

i__ __l

__l__ __l_ _'_ M i

l q,4II__ sil__

__I_.u.2]I__

__I__

')

4of sC

\\M 4')

III

_]g 1!

Mi_. __I_% 2If_ML.__'__fED I

3lI lIlSyi

! s75

s'5 o

i z

31' 36 I

i l

i I

l l

I I

i 8

l 4

8 I

I I

f f

I t

1 I

i i

i t

g g

I I

I e

3 I

l.

i i i

i i

e i

i i

i i

,r l

I 119g 2i

\\llSi o!

ICQ0d 59

'lQDI i

o l

Ill

!7/

lyS32yL_ __!_go m

e 5

i i

_l'll l

2d i

p. i

"'__L Q31 j

ggi_

i i

i

.i i

i i

I e

i i

l

.i i

se i

j j.

l l

l4

,t j

l

l l

l i

1 26 i

flQffil

\\\\llg $

l%, I IlliC9I

!!@ 2ll

!!!7 'I!(

S

\\

! gl7!

! 71 g

4

[

I i

13.i i

ul I

lyi i

151

!gl f (.,

i l'7i

_lfi 8

I I

I l

l l

1 i

t 8

I l

g j

3 y 1

1 i

e I

t e

i e

i I

I e

I l

l I

i I

L_ I__

i ill__

! p; ppn[

wysv:

=-

ss

=

'qpsi tioge

iqya i :

si i

71 l

si I

9:

i io:

i l

a i

i

. O

'l 1

f e

I I

e i

I I

I I

is l

I I

l e

t 4

_ s,, _1_

l i

I e

I l

_g t

i

,,i N3 2%

l/capst l gyd3:__l p:

isgy3l le

!/o h5 l

_ i_4 e

l' 21 9

__ L_ S-I i

1

-l e

t 1

i I.

l g

I l

I a

- i i

i l

l 1

t ;

i M 03 05 of 09 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 33 32 22 kl 43 45 47451 11 55 ST 59 :

i

__