ML20085A955

Quad-Cities Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 Cycle 12 Startup Test Results

ML20085A955
Person / Time
Site:	Quad Cities
Issue date:	07/19/1991
From:	Robey R COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:	Murley T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RAR-91-029, RAR-91-29, NUDOCS 9107290264
Download: ML20085A955 (10)

Text

.

Ccmmonw2alth Edison O Ouad Cities Nuc!eaf Power Stabon Og< 22710 206 Avene North Cordova, Ilhnois 61242 9740 Telephone 309!654 2241 RAR-91-029 July 19, 1991 Dr. Thomas E. Hurley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Hashington, D.C. 20555 ATTENTION: Document Control Desk

SUBJECT:

Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 Startup Test Report Summary NBC_DockeL11 cts 2_50:254 Dr. Hurley:

In accordance with lechnical Specification 6.6.A.1, enclosed is the Startup Test Report Summary for the Unit 1 Cycle 12 startup. This report contains summaries of those startup tests which are identified in Draft Regulatory Guide SC521-4 for light-water reactor reloads. Additional test results are available at the site.

If there are any questions or comments regarding this submittal, please centact Riia Stols at (708) 515-7283.

Very truly yours, D/N$ p R. A. Robey Technical Superintendent Quad-Cities Nuclear Power Station

Enclosure:

Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 Cycle 12 Startup Test Results RAR/JJM/pim cc: A.B. Davis, Regional Administrator L.N. Olshan, Project Manager T.E. Taylor, Senior Resident Inspector R. Stols, Nuclear Licensing Administrator H.F. Naughton/J.M. Dolter, Nuclear Fuel Services

$,sj 9107290264 910719 PDR ADOCK 05000254 [

f[,

P POR l t

4 L

OVAD-CITIES NUCLEAR P0HER STATION UNIT 1 CYCLE 12 STARTUP TEST RESULTS I

STMOR 09

. - .. - . - - _ -- .- .- - ._. - - . .~.

IABLL0f_C0t(IERIS Test NL J1tle EAgg 1 Shutdown Margin 1 2 Core Verification 2

. 3- Initial Criticality 2 4 TIP Reproducibility and 3 Core Power Symmetry Analysis l

I j STMOR 119 i

. . . . . ~ . . , . . .

1. Stw t downliars in. Demns.t ta t ion _and _ Cont roL Rotf unttionaLChe cks Purpose The purpose of this test is to demonstrate for this core loading in the most reactive condition during the operating cycle, that the reactor is subcritical with the strongest control rod full out and all other rods fully inserted.

Criterja If a shutdown margin of 0.322% AK (0.25% + R + 4B C settling penalty) cannot be demonstrated with the strongest control rod fully withdraw.i. the core loading must be altered to achieve this margin. The core reactivity has been calculated to be at a maximum 4000 mwd /ST into the cycle and R is given as 0.032% AK. The control rod B4C settling penalty for Unit One is 0.04% AK.

ROSullSlud_ Discus 51oD On January 5, 1991 and April 19, 1991, control rod M-7 was fully withdrawn to demonstrate that the reactor would remain subtritical with the strongest rod out. This maneuver was performed twice due to a change in the cooling water alignment in the reactor between the two dates. Rod M-7 was calculated by GE to have the highest worth with the core fully loaded. The strongest rod out maneuver was performed to allow single control rod withdrawals for CRD testing.

Control Rod functional subtritical checks were performed as part of control rod friction testing. No unexpected reactivity insertions were observed when any of the 177 control rods were withdrawn and all control rod drives functioned properly.

General Electric provided rod worth information for the two strongest diagonally adjacent rods L-6 and N-6 with rod M-7 full out. This method provided an adequate reactivity insertion to demonstrate the desired shutdown margin. On April 21, 1991, a diagonally adjacent shutdown margin demonstration was successfully performed. Using the G.E. supplied rod worth for M-7 (the strongest rod) and diagonally adjacent rods L-6 and N-6, it was determined that with M.-7 at position 48, L-6 at position 48, and N-6 at position 08, a moderator temperature of 134*F, and the reactor subtritical, a shutdown margin of 0.926%

AK was demonstrated. The G.E. calculated shutdown margin with M-7 withdrawn and 68'f reactor water temperature was 2.533% AK at the beginning of cycle 12.

At approximately 4000 MHd/ST into cycle 12 a minimum calculated shutdown margin of 2.501% AK will occur with M-7 fully withdrawn.

G.E.'s ability to determine rod worth was demonstrated by the accuracy of their in-sequence criticality prediction. The AK difference between the expected critical rod pattern and the actual critical rod pattern was determined to be 0.276% AK. This initial critical demonstrated that the actual shutdown margin at the beginning of cycle 12 was 2.809% AK and 2.777% AK at 4000 MHd/ST into cycle 12.

' ~

m on m

A 2 CoceledLLca. tion Eurpos.e The p'urpose of this test is to verify proper core location and orientation for -

each core fuel assembly, CLLleEla Prior to reactor startup the actual core configuration shall be verifled to be identical to the planned core configuration.

Risults_anLDLscussion The Unit One Cycle 12 core was va , lanuary 4, 1991, fuel assembly orientation, seating, and ID se I. e ere vertfled for each assembly. Two passes were made over each asrembly rst pass to verify orientation and seating of assemblies. The sscond ass erify bundle ID numbers. A video camera was used during the inspectiot ai, assemblies were found to be properly seated and orientried in their desigt M ed locations.

On January-8, 1991, 16 fuel assemblies re.'e revertfled due to moving 4 fuel assemblies for LPRM flange work. T.so passes were again made for orientation, seating-and ID verification. All 16 assemblies were found to be properly seated and orientated in their designated location.

The bundle ID numbers are shown in figure 1.

3. htLtlaLCriticalfredittion -

PRrpole 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.

Criteda General Electric's_ prediction for the critical rod pattern must agree within 1%

AK to actual rod pattern. A-discrepancy greater than 1% AK will be cause for an On-Site Review and-investigation by Nuclear fuel Services.

ResultLand_ Discus 11on On April 24, 1991, at 0424 hours0.00491 days <br />0.118 hours <br />7.010582e-4 weeks <br />1.61332e-4 months <br /> the reactor was brought critical with reactor water temperature at the time of criticality of 170*f. The AK difference between the expected critical rod pattern at 68'f and the actual critical _ rod pattern at 170'f was 0.00276 AK from rod worth tables supplied by General-Electric. The temperature effect was -0.00175 AK from General Electric supplied corrections. The excess reactivity yielding the-166 second positive period was 0.00036 AK. These reactivities result in a 0.00065 AK difference (0.065f1 AK) between the expected critical rod' pattern and the actual rod pattern. This is within the 17. AK reautred in the criteria of this test, and General Electric's ability to predict control rod worth is, therefore, successfully-demonstrated,

~ ~

smm m

4: Cott_P.oweL Dj sitibu tlotLSymmttty_Analy Sj S l

Purpose The purpose of this test is to determine the magnitude of indicated core power distribution asymmetries using data (TIP traces and 00-1) collected in conjunction-with the CHC update.

Critttia A. The total TIP uncertainty (including random noise and geometric uncertainties obtained by averaging the uncertainties for all data sets) must be less than 91.

O. The gross check of TIP signal symmetry should yield a maximum deviation between symmetrically located pairs of less than 25%.

RtiuttsELD11cusslon Core power symmetry calculations were carried out based upon a computer program 00-1 data run on May 9, 1991 and July 9, 1991 at 100% power. The average total TIP uncertainty from the two TIP sets was 4.260%.

The random noise uncertainty was 0.926%. This yields a geometrical noise uncertainty of 4.158%. The total TIP uncertainty was well within the 9% limit.

Table 1 lists the symmetrical TIP pairs and their respective average deviations. Figure 1 shows the core location of the TIP pairs and their average TIP readings. The maximum deviation between the symmetrical pairs was 12.763%

for pair 32-41. The maximum deviation between symmetrically located pairs for the single OD-1 data run was well within the 25% limit.

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 Rc 18n j-1 1-5 ,

where Rij is the ratio for the ith node of TIP pair j, there being n such pairs, where n-18.

~ ~

nunn n.

? < Next the standard = u,sv1 Atton of the ratios-is cairulated by:

n 2R ,

_E- -

E mij - I)2 _.1/2 -

. o_. 11 15 , , , , _ , . , . , .

R-(18n - 1) -

~ -

og is multiplied by 100-to express aR as a percentage of the ideal value ~of og of 1.0.

~

1 og! = _ o~g x .100 . .

~

The total TIP uncertainty is calculated by dividing'% on by / 2. In order to account-for data being taken at 3 inch intervals and ana"lyzed 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 E E BASE (N, M. K)

BASE (K) NT x MT S1 bl where NT-- number of runs per machine MT - number of machines -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:

- - 1/2 22 MT NT '

,- E- E- E BASE (N. M. K) - BASE-(K) x 100 to noise - K-5 b l- bl ,

BASE (K) ,.

18 (NT.x MT -1) -

l- ' Finally the_TIP geometric uncertainty can be calculated by:

% e geometric _- (% o total 2 - % o noise2 )l/2 1;

v; ; ,

\

_4 m an .

.. ._-_,. . - - . , ,..i._,,-,,i.-.

4 Table 1 CORE SYMMETRY Based on OD-l's from 05-09-91 and 07-09-91 (1007 power)

SYMMETRICAL TIP AVERAGE 3 AIR 14VMBES _ ABSOLUTE DifEERENCE LDEVIMION a-b T- Ta-Th 7. - 100 X 1/((T Tb )/2) 1-6 3.770 k.4876 2-12 6.230 6.677 3-19 6.030 6.508 4-26 4.600 5.043 5-33 2.785 5.448 8-13 6,930 5.560 9-20 2.645 2.270 10-27 2.550 2.239 11-34 1.875 1.807 15-21 13.750 11.159 16-28 11.255 9.013 17- 35 3.280 2.901 18-39 1.590 2.638 23-29 4.180 3.326 24-36 3.040 2.797 25-40 2.150 3.315 31-37 2.380 2.040 32-41 5.760 12.763 22 Average 7. Deviation - 5.021

/18 Tj 1-5E Tj(K) 8iMOf1 tw

FIGURE I CYCLE 12 QUAD CITIES UNIT 1 REACTOR W X wa w -m

'# , U ?> qm 7% !? ?i m '.. a wir = wm . .a .

x, emy2 am am aap y - - - ,. ,

$8 B

7pb o = == = -m a rl'p3 mmym aga aa Qpaem Hipli %ma Epa !?q9 e!!

ma mp?,

aa ma ai

[ ,.

fp'i fqiB m_p"2mp mp.

sp?: PqF Dq$

ea ma mm %m yam rz aa mm3m $m.pu m e. a mm QQu m?>

,rsg qp nqs rys sqsi Wys up wqs aqsWyg aq;m i M ga ma am mm mm mm mm mm mm mmmm m m;p m mm t'g3 11pi. Eq9 Mif Ef His m.q$ EF WqpFqlis Pq$ sqs Wq9 _.

,, _ a mm mm mm mm mm3m mm mm mm mm mm mm mm a

=

a ,._ La n epii I"q$ Elpil mg. Bif Wqs myli Wp 7q13 7p'w

,sa !?qs ma

!;4m mm M$m m Wqm$ m mm3 w. mmaa mm ma me ne mm me

,, _ r.qg aqs mp Wyg ugs wqs m49 qp mp Wys mp rys ryg up m4g

,_ mm mm3m mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm ma 3

"3 ilp;i miSi  !?pn Dipa mp'i e40i Eq9 !?q9 Wq$ UK.sWq% !?qlii Wqs uipa liq 9 y mm m m e, ma mm mm3m ampm am mm mm mm mm ma

1. q9 Eipii m_E IEF %$ W3 $13 Wq3 43 E10 liiM E3 UiB lii$ 43

,, _ t a ,,_ mm mm mm mm mm mm3 W. mm mm m W m ui mm m i; mm mm

( Pqm Q$ Qp3 Wq$ my4 Wps myn %f eph Ep; Mips Wq$ m4m mif.

m.p m mm mm ,mpm em mm mm mm mm3m mm mm ma m

",, a Mq9 mp up Wq9 Rf WqE mp 3 43 mg mp Pqm$!?q9 e i e, , ma W, m mm3m mu mm mm mBi@m mm mm mm m mm qp?, Eipu E Bipi mq$ Ep Wq$ myi mp Wq31 Epn Ep?,

,u, m mmmm Hipu3,p m mm mm mm me =m mm mm3m ma n,, a egg rys Es mp up as wqs eqs eqs wqs mp &

s am mmym mm3m mm mm mmmmmm m m, 4 7qs mp fq9 Es qf mm 4f

, .. m mm mm mm mm Ef mmm.49 mm mf ma A

.: 1 %3 79 4 Eis m.qs Wq9 5 am mm e. m mm ma l l

. .l . . ,.

01 0.1 05 0 9.

o ..

Il t3 14

.I

,e

.l 2, 13 25

.l .l 3,

E 2.

l 3 D l

M 3.,.

M .1

.4 .S .,

St 13 M 5, S.

1 .

4 FIGURE 2 ev:rm UNIT ONE

. . i ,

I (c ..- _ _ _ _ _ _ ,

9- 61'.06 0 l ,_

63'.700l v

. 48!0 1 N .

. .l l  ! .. .:3.d . .

g!. . . .! . .'. (, !. . . . !. . TI P / I.P RM i i

, i i i

$4 e

i ' i i i ' ,

i g Axis of i i p '

Symmetry l l l l l l. l. l l u S8 l M- 49. 7p 0 10}' .F 25 j ,t .l ij4 ]f l t i lli, 11 $ ./ as ! , 911's '

i@ D10 ,! W -

C . i .

i l .

x...'

+

.u_.

i R_

i i

63 .i @ n. w. _, as'. _

1

'.i . . . . . . _ .

i , i , .

u , , .... .

i i . i. i e i .

i i i 3 i

' i '

3 i i .

64 , 6 e i

i i i i, ,e i, , , i I.

i i i

_,,_ d9go !i dgsl. l1(l.2g5l . ..

l 2 tl . g 5 !

l d.gs! y 4.l . 2,*

i i 60 i i

i i s_ . _.i_. .2 t . ..i 28.

i e

i i

22 i

i > i

i. .

_.t.

. n.

i A..

3 i. i. i i. i. i , i i_ __t. , _ i i

, , , , . , , .._1.._ , l . i .

E i

I i i ! i e i l i . i i i i e 9 l 94l. I b5 l 11 $ .140 j i lb 4,<5pj 10[.35 l 1;j7. r 51 O

10[.I70l 61.9sol -O O '

3r l lC19l l ,

s.d i 21l ?2'i.__l- 2 3l l @24 l l 2 51 i i i i p 8 i l 4 e i  !, e i i. . i.

i i. i i

i

, i '

g. i __ e

. i i ,

i i .

,. i i i i- i i i i i t .

a6 l 9((,1 5l 121. g5 i 12l1. 5 ' al 13Q . I 10 l [ 3((. 5 0l 1 l$ ,tgg) l 5(p 4y0 l en i i 12i i iJ g ,

i 11 l

16:

li7 I i

l e

18.

i i e i, n i i .i > i .

i i i 3 i. . . i i

_L. 3 .

i

!  ! l i i I so- l l l i  :

1s- 7 ens; t u.s -l 12p.105l o.

llWsl

.e. t ils 8 51

.o .

104 7 )o t

,o i 16

.s.

. 6i e

i

. 8, i 9, ,. 10, ,

.t.il i

, . i

. . . . . .i .i 26- i i , e i , i, i

e i

e ,i -- i . i. i.

i

. i, i, o le- __.__ ,

31811 Ol 52j51n I 96}415 o Ii .e 71815 l 9 2l. 4 '

10 e

l o l i i, c3.i. . o e i os i i ji . 2 _... , i

._t_s

.6 _

7 i e

i i

i I

i i i

6 on 1  :  !  ! l J or / - - -

i e

i.

i i

e i

1 01 03 0$ 07 09 11 13 15 17 19 21 F) ?$ 21 29 E )) p 17 N 41 43 45 47 69 M St M H 39 6 t.riei tuotto. (1,etter trolest*e TU muhtml lia s e Avera p e u,,i t,.tio. c e,, to.eti- r., .it m -u-ei o .

Stri 40 O pettocatione 6 m toestto.e UNIT ONE W)WER SYMMETRY AVERAGE liASE READINGS

1. 8* = 1****88** (NODE 5-22)

BASSED ON OD-1's 1 rom 5-9-91 (100% POWER) 7-9-91 (100% POWER) j t---_._-._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .