ML20093J096

Evaluation of Baseline Sys for Determination of Total Gas Concentration During Normal or Post-Accident Conditions, Final Rept

ML20093J096
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	05/30/1981
From:	Lechnick W NUS CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML19269A632	List: ML20093J086 ML20093J091 ML20093J094 ML20093J096 ML20093J105
References
3620, R-27-3-1-1A, NUDOCS 8410160497
Download: ML20093J096 (66)

Text

,

, . o=N:==ce==cr2 t ', ,

[ u.~e.e4<

-:,e ===- ,u.e .~ e e

$ i '

'W -A T'CN g uaa, na sue evous was. mece ovvessom R-27-3-1-1A FINAL REPORT AN EVALUATION CF THE BASELINE SYSTEM FOR DETERMINATION OF TOTAL GAS CONCENTRATION DUPJNG NORMAL OR POST-ACCDENT CONDITIONS )

FOR COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY rncEE5dENEt$non

, ILLINOIS ,,,,,,,,,,,,t,,,,,

am tat SMctitCAigWe UNACCEPTA8'.E NUS PRO 3ECT NO. 3620 '"m> as nmro AS L(fated 481 THE SPEC.

REVIEWED

2. 0. n I2Bdl MAY 1981 SPEC.NO. b 6 //Y A out Bf 9)(t1lBY

. h_ !

V s

SUBMu tco 3Y APPRCVED SY f VILLIAM

!!A mLECHNICX no ,J l- f #

Y.R. GREENATAY.' MAN AGER CONSULT:NG ENGNEER CCNSULTING SERY1r~*% GRCUP 8410160497 841010 PDR ADOCK 05000412 PDR j

E y - - - - - , ---

, . . , . - , , , ,c, ,w, - -- yg , , , - - - - , -,y, , , , , , ,g *--*

e e, a 4

a / Contents . N

. gs A SECTION PAGE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1-1

, i

2.0 CONCLUSION

S AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2-1 2.1 TOTAL GAS CONCENTRATIONS . 2-1 2.2 OPERATING TEMPERATURES .2-1 .

2.3 KEYBOARD REPLACEMENT 2-1 2.4 SEQUENCE OF GAS PEAK EVENTS 2-2 2.5 DETECTOR ASSEMBLY POLARITY CHANGE 2-3 2.6 LINEARITY .

2-3 2.7 INTEGRATOR 2-4 2.8 GAS f.EAKAGE 2-5 2.9 TRAINING PROGRAM 2-5 2.10 BACKFLUSH SEQUENCE  ? 81

3.0 BACKGROUND

INFORM.ATION 3-.

3.1 HYDROGEN - PWR 3-1 3.2 - HYDROGEN - BWR 3-2 3.3 HELIUM - PWR AND BWR -

3-2

- 3.4 NITROGEN - PWR 3-3

\ 3.5 NITROGEN - BWR 3-4

-' 3-4 3.6 OXYGEN - PWR '

3.7 OXYGEN - BWR 3-5 3.8 KR'(PTON AND XENON - PWR AND BWR 3-5 3.9 ARGON AND NEON - PWR AND DWR ,

3-5 x _ ;4.0 TESTING PERFORMED AND RESULTS ACHIEVED 4-1

(*

4.1 TEST METHOD 4-1 4.2 THE EFFECT OF TEf1PERATURE ON GAS ANALYSES RESULTS ,

4-3 43 KEYBOARD CONTROL 4-5 4.4 REV2RSE POLARITY OPERATION 4-5 o 4.5 UNEARITY CHARACTERISTICS AND THE NEED FOR INTEGRATION 4-7 4.6 GAS LEAKAGE 4-8

, 4.7 PO'NER INTERRUPTION AND VOLTAGE FLUCTUATION. ,

4-9 4.8 COLUMN DEGRADATION 4-9 i

5.0 , OPERATING PROCEDURE '5-1 APPENGlX A TOTAL GAS AT TERMINATION A-1 e* t i \

~ +c-

-m- ,.v. . _.,w,.7 __y-. . , , , , . . . . y-~,. .,c.,u m,_..,y,_m_.m_e. - __.c_,,--

5 TABLES NUMBER .

2-1 PWR DISSOLVED GAS CONCENTRATIONS DURING NORMAL AND ACCIDENT CONDITIONS (CC/KG) 2-2 BWR DISSOLVED GAS CONCENTRATIONS DURING NORMAL AND ACCIDENT CONDITIONS (CC/KG) 2-3 TIME SEQUENCE FOR GAS PEAK EMERGENCE FROM THE S ASELINE G AS CHROMATOGRAPH 2a GAS D ATA 2-5 SENSITIVITY O. DETECTION FOR THE B ASELINE G AS CHROMATOGRAPH l- Al HELIUM ANALYSES RESULTS WITH THE l

BASELINE G AS CHROMATOGRAPH b2 HYDROGEN ANALYSES RESULTS WITH THE B ASELINE G AS CHROMATOGRAPH ,

44' NITROGEN ANALYSES RESULT 3 WITH THE I

BASELINE GAS CHROMATOGRAPH 43 OXYGEN ANALYSES RESULTS WITH THE ~

B ASELINE G AS CHROMATOGRAFH 5-1 RECOMMENDED GAS SAMPLE LOOP SEE AND ATTENUATION FACTORS FOR G AS ANALYSES WITH THE-BASELINE G AS CHROMATOGRAPH iii

t ILLUSTRATIONS i

gUMBER 2-1 UNEARITY CHARACTERISTICS FOR HYDROGEN FOR 0.25 AND 1 CC SAMPLE 2-1A LINEARITY CHARACTERISTICS FOR LOW H'JDROGEN CONCENTRATION FOR 0.25 AND 1 CC SAMPLE LOOP 2-2 LINEARITY CHARACTERISTICS FOR OXYGEN FOR 1 CC SAMPLE 4-1 1 X ATTENUATION 0.25 CC SAMPLE LOOP 4-2 0.25 CC SAMPLE LOOP 5 X ATTENUATION 4-3 0.25 CC SAMPLE LOOP 1 x ATTENUATION P

e iv t

,,w -.,,-- , ---- ,,sn,,--,-g,-en,-----,,, ,.,-,,----,--------,-+,y--,,e,--mm, me,,v--- -,,,-,,r---,,-,- - . - ~ - - - - - .,p

r

.y

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of a study performed to determine if the use of the Baseline gas chromatograph could be expanded to analyze a multicomponerat gas mixture as might be expected under accident conditions. The study was commissioned by Commonwealth Edison (W. Nestel). The objective was to determine individual concentrations of gases in solution as well as determining the sum of the components to determine total gas concentration. Under accident conditions, the primary coolant of a PWR or BWR may contain appreciable concentrations of dissolved helium, krypton, and xenon released from damaged fuel rods. In addition, thers could be some nitrogen in solution for a PWR. The end concentrations of these gases can exceed the hydrogen concentration; thus, a hydrogen determination is not necessarily a measure of total gas concentration under accident conditions. Total gas concentration should be known so that steps can be taken to protect against pump cavitation. The Baseline system as now designed provides only for hydrogen determination.

1-1

r

• b.

2.0 CONCLUSION

S AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 TOTAL GAS CONCENTRATIONS Calculations show that a total gas determination should be made under post ,

accident conditions, because the hydrogen concentration may be as little as 25 percent of the total gas concentration during post-accident conditions. This condition would occur if core damage was relatively minor but sufficient to release contained gas from a large number of rods. The potential dissolved gas concentra-tions during normal and accident conditions for a PWR and BWR are listed in Tables 2-1 and 2-2. Some of the accident conditions required to obtain the maximum gas concentrations listed in these tables are very unlikely, nevertheless, do exist. The potential sources of dissolved gases in the primary coolant of a BWR and PWR for both normal and accident conditions are listed in the section titled

" Background Information."

Total gas concentration 'is essentially equal to hydrogen concentration during normal conditions for a PWR. A BWR will conmin only trace concentrations of dissolved gas during normal conditions.

2.2 OPERATING TEMPERATURES The system must be operated,at a column temperature of 75'C to determine helium and hydrogen concentration during post-accident conditions. At lower temperatures, column poisoning from xenon gas will mask all peaks from other gases after a few gas determinations. Column temperature should be increased to 125'C for the oxygen, nitrogen, krypton, and xenon gas determinations. A column temperature of 125'C will also protect against residual poisoning from xenon gas.

2.3 KEYBOARD REPLACEMENT in working with the Baseline gas chromatograph, problems were encountered with entering the computer coce required to perform the gas analyses. This problem, if

%- mq. m ,.p__ pa_.-.,. .e,. . - , . , ,.,,w. -w ,p.9.p ,.9,p,.,,.3,_,9,y,,ye ,yy.9_ ,.,y i,.,,

i -p erp-%.g--..ypp .,,--y p,-,g.p.gn,--g..

.  : + ,

common to all instruments. could lead to serious delay in determining hydrogen concentration under accident conditions. In discussing this with Mr. Ken Forsburg, he ind'icated that Baseline was aware of the problem. He stated the problem would be corrected by replacing the keyboard.

Commonwealth Edison should take action to assure that the Bowmar keyboards on the Baseline system are replaced before they accept delivery of this system.

2.4 SEQUENCE OF GAS PEAK EVENTS The gas peaks will pass through the columns in this sequence: helium, hydrogen.

oxygen, nitrogen, krypton, and finally, xenon. Time sequence for these peaks is shown in Table 2-3. Resolution of the helium and hydrogen peak requires a column temperature of about 75'C, while the oxygen,' nitrogen, krypton, and' xenon peaks are best determined at a column temperature of 125'C. This involves a two-step analyses method. Helium and hydrogen concentrations will be determined at 75'C on a 0.25 cc sample in the first step, and concentrations of the remaining gases will be determined at 125'C on a 1 or 2 cc sample in the second step.

To obtain resolution of all potential gas peaks in the gas mixture, it will be necessary to install a switch or program the system to change temperature from 75'C to 125'C during the cuurse of the analyses. This would be preferentially achieved by installation of a switch with a fixed resistor to increase the oven temperature ,by 50' after the helium and hydrogen determination. About ten minutes ars' required to heat the system from 75'C to 125'C. The fixed resistor to increase temperature from 75' to 125* could be manually operated, or the system could be backfitted to increase temperature programmatically. An indicator light 3

would be required to show low or high range temperature. ,

An alternate approach to total gas determination would be to operate the system continually at 125'C. At this temperature, helium and hydrogen would emerge as a combined peak and the other gases in individual peaks. Depending on the ratio of gases present, the sum of the peak for helium and hydrogen could be less than 2-2

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

, o ,

t would be obtained with individual peak determination at 75'C. A two-step analyses would still be required, for single temperature operation at 125'C, since the hydrogen-helium determination is best made with an 0.25 cc sample loop, while the other gases require a 1 or 2 cc sample loop.

2.5 DETECTOR ASSEMBLY POLARITY CHANGE ,

As shown in Table 2-4, xenon and krypton have negative thermal conductivities as compared to the argon carrier gas, or other potential gases in solution. With the system as is, these peaks would emerge on the negative side of the gas chromatograph recorder trace line. However, testing performed as is discussed later indicates that it is necessary to change polarity of the detector assembly to determine xenon and krypton concentrations in a gas mixture. Polarity reversal should be performed as a permanent change oy switching the two end leads on the thermal conductivity detector. This change will give a negative peak indication for helium, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen. However, this will not affect gas analysis results as determined on the Speedomax recorder in the chemical analysis panel.

The baseline of the Speedomax recorder pen will be set at the midpoint of the chart while the baseline of the Baseline recorder pen will remain unchanged at the left-hand edge of the chart. Peak height of heilum, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen will be determined from the negative side of the baseline on the Speedomax recorder. Krypton and xenon peak height analyses will be determined from the positive side of the line.

2.6 LINEARITY The system is fairly linear for helium and hydrogen from the range of 100 ppm to over 90,000 ppm when using a 0.25 cc sample loop. However, linearity falls off rather quickly when using the 1 cc loop. Hydrogen system linearity characteristics for the 0.25 and 1 cc sample loop size are shown in Figure 2-1 and 2-1A.

It is recommended that two 0.25 ce loops be installed in the system for hydrogen and helium determinations. The 0.25 cc loops will cover all conditions, with 2-3

e o ,

y respect to the' low range sensitivity requirements and the very high hydrogen concentrations that could occur under accident conditions. In addition, a 2 ce gas sample loop should be installed in another of the sample loops to obtain optimum sensitivity for all potential conditions of analyses. With these changes, the Baseline system will have two 0.25 cc sample loops, a 1 cc sample loop, and a 2 cc sample loop installed in that sequence. Changing sample loop size requires installation of a different length of tubing in the sample loop.

Good linearity was achieved with the 1 cc sample loop for oxygen, nitrogen, and krypton. Linearity characteristics for nitrogen, shown in Figure 2-2. are fairly typical of that observed for these gases. Sensitivity of detection was increased with use of a 2 cc sample loop at the expense of some deviation in linearity. There was more increase in peak area than there was in peak height. This deviation from ,

linearity could be minimized by use of an integrator to determine the area under the curve.

For xenon, linearity characteristics are fair with the 1 cc loop and poor for the 2 cc loop. However, sensitivity of detection is increased with the 2 ce loop. It is anticipated that linearity characteristics can be improved with the use of an on ,

line integrator.

Sensitivity of detection via use of the Baseline gas chromatograph for the various gases discussed in this report are listed in Table 2-5. The sensitivities are listed for ppm in gas and for cc's of dissolved gas per kilogram of primary coolant.

Sentry panel design parameters were used in developing this table. Based on thermal conductivities relative to argon, sensitivity of detection should be better for xenon than for krypton. Test results indicate that the reverse is true.

' 2.7 INTEGRATOR Though not required for the hydrogen determination, the use of an integrator is recommended for total gas determination. The bases for this recommendation are indicated below.

i 2-4 e

--~p. w.-y -y -y. ire yet*-.gp- g y --grppe &qy ,.i7-p,.aq-g.--y-,g-.gw+-- +-g-peopggr,_9,.g-wy,eg -yi g- - -,, _, wy -ar a-

E 1 l

l 1

~

s Hydrogen gas concentration in the primary coolant as determined by the Baseline l gas chromatograph in the Sentry system are based on the peak height of a strip

. chart recorder. This will give good results for all potential concentrations of hydrogen and helium when sampling with a 0.25 cc gas sample loop. Acceptable results are achieved for the other gases when using a 1 cc sample loop. However, linearity falls off rather badly at high gas concentrations when using a 1 cc sample loop for the hydrogen and helium determination, or a 2 cc sample loop for other gas analyses. This deviation from linearity can be reduced, but not eliminated, by integrating the area under the curve with an on-line integrator. An integrator can be selected that will give ppm readout of gas for each peak detected. It is, of course, necessary to compare these peaks with a standard solution to obtain this numerical prMtout of gas concentration. One integrator that lends itself very well to this application is the Hewlett-Packard Model No. 33g0A unit. This system would provide for readout of d,issolved gas concentration for each of the gas peaks detected. It will also indicate the date, year, time of day, and any other information that is programmed into this system. It would not serve as a substitute, but rather as an addition to the present strip chart recorder installed with the Sentry system.

2.8 GAS LEAKAGE fnitially, helium gas was used to actuate tne air operated valves because it was convenient to use. Minor helium peaks were observed on a number of recorder tracings, indicating leakage 0,f gas past the valve (s). This problem was corrected by using argon gas as the pressurization source. Even if argon leakage occurs, it will not contribute to extraneous peaks because it is used as the carrier gas.

2.g TRAINING PROGRAM i

One or two people from each plant should be given a basic course in gas l,

l chromatograph operation offered by the Baseline Corporation. This would acquaint these people with the subtleties of the system, and they could serve as service personnel as well as train other people.

l i

l t

2-5 i

r 2.10 BACKFLUSH SEQUENCE in determining the individual gas concentrations in a mixture containing xenon, the precolumn backflush cannot be turned on until the xenon peak emerges. This requires about nine minutes at 75'C. No indication of a xenon peak will be observed with an early backflush.

e 1

2-6

. l l

,c. ,. . , - - - - . - , - , - - - - - - - . . - ,. , , , - . . - - - - - . ..c--- - - . . . . - - - -- ---

3.0 BAC'.' GROUND INFORMATION Under accident conditions, the primary coolant of a PWR or a BWR may contain appreciable concentrations of dissolved helium, krypton, and xenon released from damaged fuel rods. High hydrogen concentrations may also be present from the reaction of Zircaloy with water at elevated temperatures. Calculated concentra-tions of these gases for a PWR and BWR system are indicated in Tab;ss 2-1 and 2-2.

The various gases in the periodic table and their potential for introduction in the primary coolant of a PWR or a BWR for both accident or normal' operating conditions are discussed below. lodine is not included in this discussion because it would not normally behave as a true gas, even under accident conditions. It is expected that the lodine would be converted to the todate by the basic solutions added during accident conditions.

3.1 HYDROGEN - PWR The potential sources of dissolved hydrogen in the primary coolant of a PWR include the following:

(1) During norm : power operations. hydrogen is added to the primary coolant by maintaining a hydrogen blanket in the letdown system. Typically, this resuits in a hydrogen concentration of about 25 to 30 cc hydrogen /kg of water.

(2) Tritium, the radioactive isotope of hydrogen, is produced from ternary

~

l fission of uranium and other nuclear reactions. Tritium concentration produced is too low to be measured with a gas chromatograph.

l (3) Under accident conditions, hydrogen can be produced in rather large amounts by the reaction as follows: )

l 3

Zr + 2 H O + heat - Ir0 2 +2H 2 2

1 l

l l 3-1 '

l l i

- . _ . . - _ . _ . . . . _ . . . . . - . _ - . . _ _ . - . _ . . - . _ _ _ _ . . . _ . - _ - _ . . , . _ _ , . __..._,_-m._..-_.~,__,..._,--,--_.-

Assuming that 30 percent of the core cladding is converted to the oxide form and a 500 ft 3gas-steam bubble in the reactor vessel, the hydrogen produced can result in a maximum end concentration of about 1300 cc hydrogen /kg of water.

However, it is unlikely that the dissolved hydrogen concentration will ever exceed 100 cc/kg under accident conditiorn.

3.2 HYDROGEN - BWR The only measurable source of hydrogen in the primary coolant of a BWR is that resulting from the reaction of Zircaloy with water under accident conditions to produce hydrogen. The maximum concentration that could result based on the volume of hydrogen that could be generated in an accident condition is on the order 3

of 1500 cc hydrogen /kg of wate'. Again, this assumes a 500 ft gas-steam bubble in the reactor vessel. It is unlikely that the dissolved hydrogen concentration will ever exceed 100 cc/kg under accident conditions.

3.3 HELIUM - PWR AND BWR The potential sources of dissolved helium in the primary coolant of a PWR or BWR include the following:

(1) Helium gas pressurization of the fuel rods to provide for structural integrity of the fuel rods. The PWR rocs are pressurized to a higher degree than are the BWR rods.

(2) Tritium decay to form the stable helium. The tritium is produced from ternary fission of enriched uranium, neutron reactions with boron, and naturally occurring deuterium.

(3) Helium formation from electron capture by an alpha decay particle.

I 3-2 1

-.-- , -, .-w .4 ,-w, _..,-----y-- ,,y y ,-e.w-. -.%-- ,-,...-o -

ce%~ . - . - - . m ,-e,r-we%.,. ,.,,o - , - , , - - - . ...-- .. ---

Helium gas used for pressurization of fuel rods is contained, thus, would not contribute to helium concentrations in the primary coolant during normal opera-tion. Under accident conditions, this gas could be released from a few or all of the rods to yield end gas concentration of up to 100 to 200 cc helium /kg of primary coolant for a PWR, or 10 to 20 cc/kg for a BWR. A range is specified for total helium concentration because of variations in manufacturing tolerances, and the degree of which helium penetrates the void volume in fuel pellets is unknovin.

Suffice to say that the end concentration of helium in solution for a PWR could exceed the dissolved hydrogen concentration. The helium concentration resulting from tritium decay or from electron capture of an alpha decay particle could not be detected with normal gas chromatograph analyses techniques unoer normal or accident conditions. End concentrations of helium resulting from this source would be we!! under 0.1 cc He/kg water.

3.4 NITROGEN - PWR The potential sources of dissolved nitrogen in the primary coolant of a PWR include the following:

(1) During shutdown for refueling or other maintenance operations, there will be some buildup of dissolved nitrogen in the system when the hydrogen blanket in the letdown sy' stem is replaced with nitrogen. End concentration is not expected tu exceed 10 ce nitrogen /kg of water.

(2) During normal power operations, there may be trace concentrations of nitrogen in the primary coolant if there is substandard operation of the deaerator to the primary storage tank.

(3) Under accident conditions, th,ere can be dissolved N 2 in the primary coolant if the following s:enario occurs:

(a) Plant pressure is lost as a result of the pressurizer relief valve opening.

3-3

o

-(b) The accumulators actuate to admit boric acid solution to the reactor l vessel. Since the accumulators are pressurized with nitrogen, the l l

boric acid solution will contain dissolved nitrogen. The overall system dissolved gas concentration will not necesrarily be in equili-brium with the nitrogen overpressure, since a static column of water is involved. Migration rate of nitrogen gas through a static water column can be on the order of inches per month.

(c) The pressurizer relief valve closes before the nitrogen can be stripped from solution, and there is no further loss of pressure from the system.

. The scenario postulated - above is considered extremely unlikely. However, if it should occur, the primary coolant may contain an appreciable concentration of dissolved nitrogen. The estimatad range is 10 to 100 cc nitroyen/kg.

Under accident conditions involving recirculation of water from the sump to the reactor, nitrogen in solution would ultimately attain equilibrium with the nitrogen in air. Assuming an equilibrium exists, the water would contain about 10 cc N /kg 2

of water at 30*C decreasing to virtually zero at boiling temperature. Following cool down and a'suming s an open system, weeks would be required for water in the 4

system to attain equilibrium with nitrogen in air.

3.5 NITROGEN - SWR .

Under normal conditions, nitrogen would not be present in BWR coolant. Under accident conditions involving a break, there would be some pickup of nitrogen from the cover gas used in the contaminant.

4 3.6 OXYGEN - PWR The potential sources of dissolved oxygen in the primary coolant of a PWR include

^

the following:

3-4

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

4 q

(1) There can be low ppm or ppb concentrations existing when air saturated water or peroxide is added preparatory to refueling, l

(2) Under shutdown or accident conditions, there can be low ppm or ppb concentrations of oxygen and peroxide existing from the radiolysis of water. Oxygen would only be found in the absence of hydrogen. There would always be hydrogen _ present in any accident condition involving damage to the core.

(3) Under accident conditions involving an open system with recirculation of water from the sump to the reactor, oxygen in the air would eventually attain equilibrium with dissolved oxygen in the water. It would probably take weeks for the coolant to achieve a saturation level of 5 to 6 cc oxygen /kg of water.

. 3.7 OXYGEN - BWR The potential sources of dissolved oxygen in the primary coolant of a BWR include i the following:

(1) Trace quantities ut oxygen and peroxide will exist in an operating reactcr from the radiofysis of Nater.

(2) Under shutdown or . accident conditions, the combined concentration of oxygen and peroxide from radiolysis of s1 tor can incrossa to the low ppm level. No oxygen would be found if there was hydrogen present from an

, accident condition involving damage to the core.

(3) Under accident conditions involving a break and recirculation of the primary coolant, there may be some pickup of oxygen in the primary coolant from oxygen contamination in the nitrogen cover gas in the containment.

3-5

3.8 KRYPTON AND XENON - PWR AND BWR The only source of dissolved krypton and xenon in the primary coolant of a PWR or BWR is from fission product gases. Since the gases formed are essentially all contained within the fuel rods, there will be no measurable concentration of krypton or xenon during normal operation. Under accident conditions involving damage to the rods with subsequent release of fission product gases to the coolant, there can be up to 15 cc krypton /kg and 200 cc xenon /kg of water for a PWR.

Maximum BWR concentrations could range up to 20 and 200 cc/kg for krypton and xenon, respectively. About two percent of the total noble gas concentration is radioactive. It is possible that the krypton and xenon may be released rather slowly from the fuel peilets; if this is the case, it may take days or perhaps weeks

o attain maximum concentration of these gases in solution.

3.9 ARGON AND NEON - PWR AND BWR These gases would not be found in the primary coolant of a PWR or a BWR. Argon and neon are not formed in the fission process, nor are these gases used in any plant application for light water moderated reactors. S m all, immeasurable amounts fror.) air contamination may be present from recirculating primary coolant under accident conditions.

4 i

3-6

_ . ~ - . . _ _ _ _ _

4.0 TESTING PERFORMED AND RESULTS ACHIEVED 4.1 TEST METHOD Testing was performed with the Baseline gas chromatograph to determine if it was possible to analyze a multicomponent gas mixture as might be achieved by degassing primary coolant containing dissolved gases, as indicated in Tables 2-1 and 2-2. Total degasification was assumed in the calculations performed to determine gas concentrations in the gas mixture. Sentry system design parameters were a assumed for the primary cociant degasification and gas ccliection system.

i

'4.1.1 Test Eauioment The following components and gas samples were included in the test equipment.

(1) A Baseline gas chromotograph modified for use in the Sentry chemical analysis panel.

(2) A ten ir.ch strip chart renorder external to the Baseline system. The data used in forming conclusions and making recommendations was taken from this recorder. .

(3) Equipment to provide for various gas mixtures from Individual tanks of pure gas. Included in.the design of this system was a one liter mixing tank which was hard piped to the gas chromatograph. Gas mixtures were prepared by hypodermic injection of the gas of interest in the argon gas at 14.7 psia contained in the mixing tank. Uniform mixing of the gases was provided by a loose fitting plunger inside the tank. Inverting the tank would cause thL plunger to fall from top to bottom, creating a mixing action inside the tank. Good mixing was achieved with one pass of the plunger through the tank. In the work performed, the tank was inverted three or four t!mes each time a standard was prepared.

1 4-1 i

l (4) - A mercury vacuum gauge was attached to the sample tubing to establish that this line and associated lines were properly evacuated prior to introduction of the sample.

(5) Individual gas standards used included the following: helium, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, krypton, and xenon. Argon gas was used as a base for the standards prepared, and as a carrier gas in the gas chromatograph.

(6) Two standards prepared by Matheson containing gas concentrations as follows were used in this work.

Mixture 1 - Low Mixture 2 - High Gas Concentration System Concentration System Helium 95 ppm 910 ppm Hydrogen 865 ppm 9.22%

Nitrogen 994 ppm 1.07 %

Oxygen 582 ppm 2295 ppm Krypton 493 ppm 1376 ppm Xenon 955 ppm 1.98%

Argon Balance Balance t

. Testing was performed initially with single standards in an argon base to determine sensitivity of detection, linearity, and at wnst point in time after injection the peak tor the subject gas could be seen on the strip chart recorder. Variables investigated in this testing included the following:

(1) Effect of temperature (2) Reverse polarity operation (3) Time the recorder was switched on after sample injection (4) Time that the precolumn backflush flow was initiated after sample injection 4-2 r

-e. 7 ,-. .-,,,..--.~...-m,e.,.---,.- ,.-% ,,..-.e+-..-#.*,c-.yn,, ,m-,e__._,,,-wwmy%_

(5) Operation with a 0.25 cc,1 cc, and 2 cc sample loop i

(6) Power interruption and voltage fluctuations.

After testing was performed with single gas standards, testing was pert $rmed with multicomponent systems. Results of all this work are described below.

4.2 THE EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE ON GAS ANALYSES RESULTS Testing performed included an investigation on the effect of temperature on gas analyses results. Testing was performed for the range of 30 to 175'C. Results of this work are discussed below.

Analyses for hydrogen and heilum must be performed at a relatively low tempera-ture in order to obtain separation of the hydrogen and helium peaks. Acceptable operation is achieved in the range of 75'C with the helium peak emerging at about 34 seconds, and the hydrogen peak at 42 seconds. Separation of these peaks is decreased as temperature is increased until finally the two peaks are combined.

(

Hydrogen and heilum analyses cannot be performed at temperatures below 75'C because of column poisoning caused by xcnon. Good analysis results can be obtained initially at temperatures around 40*C, however, there is progressive deterioration of the peaks with 40ntinued operation at this temperature in the presence of xenon. Column poisoning can be eliminated by baking at a temper 3ture of 125'C or above. There is no incentive to determine hydrogen and/or helium concentrations at a lower temperature and then bake the columns at a high temperature, since the system can be operated on a continuing basis at a temperature range of 75'C for helium-hydrogen determination followed by 125'C operation for determination of other gases.

In analyzing at temperatures below 75'C, a xenon peak may be observed for one or two analyses, then the peak progressively deteriorates until no indication of a peak occurs when xenon gas is present in the standard. The xenon gas is released from 4-3

the columns over a long time period, contributing to unexceptable instrument noise and drift. The presence of this xenon apparently prevents the hydrogen from being released in a peak form when hydrcgen is present in the standard.

The poisoning effect observed with xenon does not occur with oxygen or nitrogen.

There may be a borderline e*fect with the krypton; therefore, it is assumed that krypton will contribute to the problem.

The optimum temperature range for operation is to perform the hydrogen and helium analyses at 75'C followed by an increase in column temperature to 125'C to determine the concentration of the other gases in solution. Better sensitivity of detection can be achieved for helium at 50*C; however, the xenon gas will remain in the columns to cause poisoning at this temperature. Xenon gas will pass through the columns at 75'C but not in a sharp peak form that can be used to determine gas concentration,(Figure 4-1). Good separation of hydrogen and helium peaks cannot be obtained at temperatures above 75'C. A two-step analyses procedure is required with the hydrogen and helium determination made with a 0.25 cc sample loop and the remaining gas determinations performed with the 1 or 2 cc sample loop. Increasing the column temperature after the helium-hydrogen determination requires about five minutes. Ramp heat up rate is on the order of 15'C per minute.

System heat up would be achieved by installation of a switch to put a fixed resistor in line. This fixed resistor would increase system temperature by 50*.

An alternate approach to total gas determination would be to operate the system continuously at 125*C. At this temperature, helium and hydrogen would emerge as a combined peak, and the other gases in individual peaks. Helium does cause a slight ramp in the initial slope of the hydrogen peak; however, this ramp is not readily discernible (Figure 4-2). Depending on the ratio of gases present, the sum of the peak for helium and hydrogen could be less than would be obtained with individual peak determination at 75'C. A two-step analyses would still be required since the hydrogen-helium determination is best made with a 0.25 cc sample loop, while the other gases require a 1 or 2 cc gas sample loop.

4-4 e

Installation of the fixed resistor and switch requires an associated signal light

, installation to indicate high temperature or low temperature operation. it is possible to control temperature programmatically; however, the system as purchased does not include this design feature. Backfit installation to permit programming of temperature is not recommended. It is, of course, possible to increase temperature by manual adjustment of a resistor pot as indicated in the Baseline instruction manual. This is a time-consuming operation and it is not recommended for post-accident conditions.

When manually adjusting temperature, please note that is should only be performed when the attenuation switches are at the 250 position (25 x 10) as indicated in the Baseline manual. In theory, it is possible to make temperature adjustments at other ranges; however, problems resulted when this was attempted. Overheating occurred or the columns were tielow the required temperature. Column tempera-ture control worked very well when adjusting at the 250 attenuation range.

in adjusting the system temperature manually, please note that zero temperature is the tracking point on the Baseline recorder scale. Prior to adjusting temperature, adjust the tracking pen to ride on the left-hand edge of the chart. Temperature adjustment is then made oy switching in the appropriate commend number (35) and turning the resistor pot until the tracking pen on the recorder movec to the required point on the Baseline recorder scale.

4.3 KEYBOARD CONTROL Programming problems developed almost immediately with operation of the Baseline gas chromatograph. Initially, three of four attempts we$ required to enter a program into the computer. Apparently, the problem resulted from bad contacts on the keyboard, since the better results were achieved when firm contact was made as the key was depressed.

Keyocard oceration continued to deteriorate as the system was operated. Initially, about five minuter, was required to install a new program. After two weeks of 4-5 ,

t testing, time requirements to install a new program were as long as two hours. The keyboard was subjected to more wear than would be the case in a utility plant, l because a number of new programs were tried to find the best arrangement for determining total gas where a mixture containing xenon is present.

In conversations held with Mr. Ken Forsburg of Baseline, he indicated that they ,

were aware of the problem with certain keyboards. It is Baseline's intent to replace defective keyboards with a model that has sealed contact points and push- l button keys that offer tactile resistance when depressed. Commonwealth Edison should take action to assure that acceptable keyboards are provided.

4.4 REVERSE PO!.ARITY OPEMTION Operation of the Baseline gas chromatograph to obtain the xenon and krypton peaks requires reverse polarity operation. A permanent change should be made by switching the two end leads on the thermal conductivity detector. When these leads are switched, the krypton and xenon will eppear as a positive peak and the Baseline recorder will be off scale with negative peaks for helium, hydrogen, oxygen, or nitrogen. Since the oxygen, nitrogen, krypton, and xenon will be determined in one sequence, provision must be made to accommodate this reverse peaking effect. This is accomplished by adjusting the Speedomax recorder pen in Sentry equipment panel to the midpoint of the chart. Peak height for helium, hydrogen, nitrogen, and oxygen, will be measured from the negative side of the reference point or midpoint on this recorder chart. Krypton and xenon peak height will be measured from the positive side of the scale. The Baseline recorder chart will not be used to determine gas concentration, but its recorder pen should be adjusted to the left hand side of the chart.

Testing was performed to determine if good results could be obtained with respect to krypton and xenon determinations by using the system without switching polarity. Without switch polarity, it was necessary to adjust the Baseline recorder pin to track at the midpoint of the chart. Without this polarity change, the Speedomax strip chart recorcer connected to the Baseline system wculd not track on both sides of the centerline to indicate positive and negative peaks. An internal 4-6

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

bias was created in the Baseline system with the change, resulting in very poor resolution of the krypton and xenon peaks. The peaks were shallow and there was no change in peak height with increasing krypton or xenon concentration. No combination of adjustments could be found which would permit measurement of positive and negative peaks in a single gas determination using normal polarity.

4.5 LINEARITY CHARACTERISTICS AND THE NEED FOR INTEGRATION Linearity characteristics for hydrogen concentration in argon gas for the Baseline system are shown in Figure 2-1 for a 0.25 c. and 1 cc sample loop. Raw data for hydrogen, helium, oxygen and nitrogen determinations are presented in Tables 4-1, 4-2, 4-3, and 4-4. Linearity characteristics are good for the 0.25 cc sample loop for the range from about 100 ppm to over 90,000 ppm. There is a slight bend to the line; results at the upper end of the range would be about five to ten percent low in assuming linearity over the entire range. There is considerable deviation from ,

linearity with the 1 cc sample loop.

Based on visual observations, it is probable that better linearity could be achieved for hydrogen for the 1 cc loop with the use of an on-line integrator. However, it did not appear that true !!nearity could be achieved with this approach. The helium data show much the same results, as was observed with the hydrogen data. That is, peak height linearity was achieved with the 0.25 cc sample loop, but not with the 1 cc sample loop. The use of an integrator would have improved the quality of the 1 cc sample loop data, but would not have succeeded in achieving true linearity as

. based on visual observation.

i Based on these data, it is recommended that helium and hydrogen gas determina-I tions be made with a 0.25 cc sample loop. A typical example showing the helium i and hydrogen peak is shown in Figure 4-4. Sensitivity of detection achieved with 1-

! the 0.25 cc sample loop as shown in Table 2-5 will enable hydrogen determinatloa to be made down to about 2 cc's of hydrogen /kg of water. This assumes complete stripping of gas from solution. Efficiency of the gas stripping operation is not known.

i' l 4-7

Linearity characteristics for nitrogen concentration in argon gas are shown in Figure 2-2 for a 1 cc sample loop. The data are linear ove. the measured range.

Results from the 2 cc sample loop show considerable deviation from linearity. Use

^

of an integrator would result in improvement in linearity characteristics for the 2 cc loop: however, it does n'of appear that true linearity would be achieved as based on visual observation.

4 The oxygen and krypton data do not differ significantly from the nitrogen datt with respect to linearity characteristics for the 1 cc sample loop. Again, considerable deviation from linearity was observed with the 2 cc sample loop. Use of integration would improve the linearity characteristics of the system for the 2 cc sample loop.

The need for using a 0.25 cc and 1 cc sample loop is best demonstrated by the curves shown in Figures 4-4 and 4-5. Note that for the 0.25 cc loop (Figure 4-4) the hydrogen peak is on scale; however, the other peaks are barely visible. A gas determination can be made from the peak height shown for oxygen, nitrogen, krypton, and xenon on the 1 cc loop (Figure 4-5); however, the hydrogen peak is off scale. For high concentrations of gas, the shape of the peak for xenon changes with the 2 cc loop size. This indicates that a 1 cc sample represents the maximum size that can be used for xenon determination without integrating the area under 4

the curve. The peaks shown in the figures referred to above are derived from the mixture 1 low concentration gas system described earlier in this report.

4.S GAS LEAKAGE A helium gas source was used initially to operate the gas-actuated valves. Some leakage past the valve (s) was noted based on Indication of a small helium peak in the tracing when there was no helium in the standard. The helium peak war, i

eliminated by using argon gas as a pressure source to actuate the gas valves.

Argon gas should always be used to actuate the valves, since argon is used as a carrier gas and minor leakage will not contribute to extraneous peaks. Major leakage cannot be tolerated, since this would affect gas ficws and thus create l instrument noise.

f 4-8 4'

.r- , - --c, v.,m-.. -,,cw--.---,r..,y ,, , .-_,q,,y<,.% mm,.,-pr- -- .-,,,,,,y-,,-c.--,,- -,e,,r,v-,c,,,,,,---%,,w.-+.----y-r,:c-w..

a

- 4.7 POWER INTERRUPTION AND VOLTAGE FLUCTU TION l

Power interruptions of a short-term nature will not affect the program stored in the memory of the Baseline system. If the power is off for perhaps an hour or

- longer, the program will generally be be wiped out and it will be necessary to reprogram to perform hydrogen or total gas determinations. The exact time that power interruption can be tolerated was not determined. It is expected that it will v'a ry from system to system. If there has been a power interruption, the gas chromatograph shoulc be checked prior to performing gas analyses to determine that a valid program exists in the system memory. A power interruption indication light should be installed in the system.

Line voltage fluctuations resulting from turning on a small motor on a common line created minor spikes in the recorder tracer. The spikes observed were of no consequence. The effect of major voltage fluctuations was not determined.

4.8 COLUMN DEGRADATION The columns suffer two types of degradation from xenon or moisture poisoning.

There is a low temperature affect (less than 75'C) in wnich xenon poisoning occurs rather quickly. The rate at which poisoning occurs increases with decreasing temperature. Symptoms of this poisoning include deterioration and then disap-pearance of the xenon peak. Soon thereafter, there will be no peaks evident from any gas. The low temperature poisoning effect is reversible by heating the column to 125'C or 150'C for an hour or more.

Degradation of the columns from moisture pickup will occur if the columns are operated continuously at 75'C or less using a backflush sequence starting at ten .

minutes. If the system is operated under these conditions the columns should be changed every three to six months. This degradation will not take place or will occur at a much lower rate if the columns are baked periodically at a temperatures of 125'C to 150*C.

4-9

! -5.0 OPERATING PROCEDURE An operating procedure is provided in Appendix A of this report for single-step temperature operation at 125'C, and for a two-step temperature sequence at 75'C and 125'C. Operation with a two-step temperature sequence is recommended for determining total gas concentration under post-accident conditions. Single-step temperature operation at 125'C provides a single peak for helium and hydrogen,

. determined with a 0.25 ce sample loop. There is a ramp on the front part of the

. hydrogen peak which is indicative of helium gas. Height of the ramp from the baseline is proportional to helium concentration. However, this ramp is not readily discernible. The oxygen, nitrogen, krypton, and xenon determinations are made with a 1 or 2 cc sample loop to obtain the required degree of sensitivity. Thus,a two-step analysis process is involved. All four sample loops are charged with the

unknown gas in the fih process, and then one, two, three, or four sample loops may be analyzed dependent on the gas concentrations present l The two-step temperature sequence provides for helium and hydrogen determina-tion on a 0.25 cc sample loop at 75'C. , At this temperature, there will be separation of the two peaks; however, the intervening valley will be shallow. The i oxygen, nitrogen, krypton, and xenon determinations are made on a 1 or 2 cc i sample loop after the system is heated to 125'C. Both the 0.25 cc and the larger sample loop are charged with gas in the :,ame fill process, and then one, two, three.

or four sample loops may be analyzed dependent on the gas concentrations present.

The oxygen and nitrogen analyses can be performed with the helium-hydregen determination or the krypton-xenon determination, depanoont on the gas concen-trations present. Normally, the same size sample loop will be required for oxygen, nitrogen, krypton, and xenon determinations. About ten minutes are required for the helium-hydrogen analyses; five minutes to heat the system from 75'C to 125'C, and ten minutes for the oxygen, nitrogen, krypton, and xenon determination.

A starting pu.-* for gas loop sizes and attenuation factors required for determining various concentrations of dissolved gases in water is indicated in Table 5-1. Please 5-1 9 Mw m- p N ev-

note that the values indicated should only be regarded as a starting point. Each gas chromatograph may differ to some degree, and thus will require a slightly different attenuation factor.

O I

O O

1 i

4 5-2 i

wr -% -s- yv-- -p-p-%,.--q,.mw,,7-q-yyc ~ ve g w- y.*+nw,7w-o- g-p,9-ew y4,-wwww-w-w-,,-y ow m ,< y w w ww-py w ycw-vywwe ww --g---,m.+rg-s-' - - -yw+vy *m-m

4d

. . .t ' .

APPENDIX A i

TOTAL GAS DETERMINATION e

i e

,,g,- . , , - - , - - -e, ,y- ge-. , _ - -w,--,-ww-, , , , - g-s,y o,,,,

"- -- - , = -- - -- -,e.--~,,m---ewwmw,,,.e-,,,.,,w,n- o--m -.

TOTAL GAS DETERMINATION (Two-Step Temperature)

~

1.0 Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to detail the steps required to determine total gas concentration in the reactor coolant by gas chromatography (GC). This procedure describes GC operations to separate and. identify the major gaseous components of the reaction coolant that can be expected under accident conditions. The procedure includes sections on GC standardization system calibration, and sample analysis. This procedure requires operator actions at the LSP and CAP / CMP.

2.0 Precautions 2.1 The GC calibration loop pressure must remain constant for correct gas analysis. Approval should be obtained from qualified technical management prior to adjusting the back

\ pressure regulator or changing the calibration loop pressure in other ways.

2.2 Precautions shall be observed to prevent the release of radio-active gas or coolant to the LSP or CAP / CMP areas.

2.3 Radiological control monitoring and survey equipment shall be operational and available at the work site as required by local work rules.

2.4 Anti-contamination materials shall be available and installed at the work site as applicable.

2.5 Local work procedures shall be observed to prevent skin

/

contact or ingestion of radioactive materials.

A-1 y-r -- - -.

r -.,-.--..-,w-, , . , , -.7.9-__ ., -._w_,.--s.,.,_p,-,=-,,.,ye,- p.,,w,m.e,,,,,,gp-,- ,q wyg%.-.g-w-y-.. ,,9-.. py.g,,,,,6-9pg.m, -._ 9..weni.-3 my.

- 2.6' The gas chromatograph may be operated using only the following five (5) attenuation settings.

1x1 5x1 100 x 1 25 x 1 25 x 100 3.0 Prerequisites The following prerequisites shall be met:

3.1 Services shall be available at the CAP / CMP as follows:

3.1.1 Electrical power,110VAC 60Hz-10 AMP 3.1.2 Argon for valve operations, approximately 100 psig.

~

3.1.3 Argon carrier gas, chromatography grade, flow to the G C.

3.2 The instrument shall be in the ON or STANDBY condition for a minimum of 30 minutes before sample analysis.

3.3 The temperature selector switch shall be in the low (75')

position.

3.4 The following or equivalent program sha:1 be in the memory of the microprocessor and shall be functional: Verify the program as follows:

Release all buttons Depress MANUAL then CLEAR Release MANUAL Entsr *01", verify corresponding time and order on the digital readout.

A-2

Enter ~02", ~03", "04", etc., and verify each steps' time and 1

cme readout.

t j.tep, Time Code 01 00 01 03 02 00 25 25 03 00 30 01 04 09 00 04 N

05 12 00 00 3.5 The verification and calibration as specified in sections 5.2 and 5.4 shall be complete before analysis of gas from the LSP.

3.6 The instrument shall be recalibrated after any major maintenance / repair, detector change, component repair or

' replacement, or any other circurnstances that could invalidate the ca"5 ration.

3.7 The gas sample for analysis must be available at the LSP for transfer to the GC.

3.8 Calibration and carrier ga,ses shall be installed for use in the G C.

3.9 A cet of calibration curves sha!! be available for conversion of peak height data to gas concentration (cc/kg). Helium, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, krypton, and xenon calibration curves are recuired.

4.0 Equipment and Materials 4.1 Gas Chromatograph, Baseline, Mode! 1030A.

4.2 Recorder, Leeds and Northrup, Speedomax Mark lit or equiva-lent.

A-3 ip--+ w -y a.-- w--- , c- =,,,33-g<--,e--.w-,.---,*-,-----tg----v ,.-- .,,99--9 w-=- ,r----e- -- 'm-

. 4.3 Calibration and carrier gases:

Gas standards shall be mixed by use of strip heaters, mounted on one side of tne tank, near the bottom of the tank. Prior to using the standards, the heaters shall be on (1000 or 2000 watt power) until the top side of the tank opposite to the heaters is slightly warm to the touch. Monitor the prcssure gags during heating to protect against overpressurization of the tank.

4.3.1 Standard 1 - Low concentration gas m!x (Cal.1).

Helium 1000 ppm Hydrogen 2000 ppm Nitrogen 1000 ppm Oxygen 500 ppm Krypton 500 ppm Xenon 1000 ppm Argon Balance 4.3.2 Standard !! - High concentration for gas mix (Cal. 2)

Helium 10,000 ppm Hydrogen 100,000 ppm Nitrogen 2000 ppm Oxygen 2000 ppm Krypton 2000 ppm Xenon 10.000 ppm 4.3.3 Argon, chromatography grade 4.4 Gas Syr!ngas (2 each) 4.4 1 1.0cc 4.4.2 5.0cc 4.4.3 20.0cc A-4

.m ...w-- - w.- .g,- - * - , ,,,yw.,m --..,,.-.i,.,,...,,.%.,.,,,_--.g, . . - , .,_ g.. -.%,,-we:--+w , --sew- +,-c. = e-- w 9.--e

l

. 1

. 5.0 Procedure '

5.1 Valve alignment and GC warm-up '

5.1.1 Open or check open calibration gas valves V-31 and i V-32.

Open or check open (V-tater) and adjust argon valve operator supply pressure to 40+ 2 psig.

Open or check open V-14 and adjust argon carrier gas pressure to 40+1 psig.

Open or check open V-1.

5.1.2 Select attenuation factor of 250 (25 x 10).

Place at: function switches in the OFF (out) position.

5.1.3 Depress MAN and CLEAR switches.

5.1.4 Select Low (75*) position on temperature control switch.

5.1.5 Enter ~00* and allow the GC to warm up and stabilize for a minimum of 30 minutes.

5.1.6 Enter 01 and set pen on the Speedomax recorder at the midpoint on the chart.

5.1.7 Enter then ~35'~to display set point of platen temperature and record for a minimum of 30 seconds.

5.1.8 Enter *45* to display actual platen temperature and record for a minimum of 30 seconds.

Note: Stabill:ation is complete when platen set-point and actual temperature are within 1/2 grid marking of A-5

each other. After stablization enter *00*. Approxi-mately five minutes will be required for temperature stabilization when resetting.

5.1.9 As necessary, repeat steps 5.1.7 and 5.1.8 at a minimum of 5 minute intsrvals until stablization in achieved.

5.2 Calibration Verification 5.2.1 Verify that the GC has stabilized as specified in Step 5.1.6.

5.2.2 Release or check released, AUTO, ENTi'R and SAMP switches to the OFF (out) position. Select Loop No.1 (0.25 cc).

5.2.3 ' Depress or check depressed MAN and press CLEAR.

5.2.4 Enter *23* to evacuate the GC.

Continue evacuation until red HI VACUUM light is on.

Note: . Follow steps 5.2.4a-5.2.8a for standard 1, the low concentration mix: and 5.2.4b-5.2.8b for Standard II, the high concentration mix.

5.2.4a Enter *24* to terminate evacuation of the G C.

Select attenuation factor of 5 (5 x 1).

5.2.5 a Depress CAL-1 switch and wait 10 seconds after amber LOW VACUUM light is on.

A-6

5.2.6 a Release CAL-1 switch and wait 10 seconds. Start the i[ ^

L&N recorder, depress AUTO switch to ON position and press CLEAR. Wait until the GC display clock has timed to a minimum of 12 minutes.

5.2.7a Release AUTO switch to the OFF position.

Press MANUAL Press CLEAR.

Enter *00".

Stop the recorder.

5.2.8a identify the recorder trace with the date/ time, ..s used, loop number, and attenuation factor. Only the he!!um and hydrogen concentration will be deter-mined from this recorder tracing.

The peaks associated with the individual gases will appear in the following sequence:

Approximate Time efter iniection Gas Min. M Helium -

34 Nydrogen -

42 Oxygen 1 08 Nitrogen 1 33 Krypton 2 19 Xenen 8 50 5.2.4b Enter "24" to terminate evacuation of the GC.

Select attenuation factor of 250 (25 x 10) for the Standard Il mix.

A-7 e

5.2.5 b Depress CAL-1 switch and wait 10 seconds after

~

amber LOW VACUUM light is on.

5.2.6b Release CAL-2 switch and wait 10 seconds. Start the L&N recorder, depress AUTO switch to ON position and press CLEAR. Wait until the GC display clock has timed to a minimum of 12 minutes.

5.2.7b Release AUTO switch to the OFF position.

Depress MANUAL Press CLEAR.

Enter ~00*.

Stop the recorder.

5.2.8b Identify the recorder trace with the date/ time, gas used, loop number, and attenuation factor.

5.2.9 ' Calculate the helium and hydrogen peak height as follows:

Peak Height = (Trace oesk beicht - baseline) x attenuation 100 Note: The peak height calculated acove should agree within

.+5 percent of the value shown on the concentration versus peak height curve for the same attenuation factor and calibration gas.

5.2.10 Increase the temperature by selecting the high (125')

position with the temperature control selector.

5.2.11 Depress MANUAL and CLEAR switches.

I A-8

+e-- - -. - , . _ , - - , _ . - _ . - - - , _ , - , - - - , y-__--w- .cv-.._---,,,,- . , , - - . , - , , - . - > . - . - , - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - -

5.2.12 Enter *01" and then *45" codes to display actual platen temperature. Follow the temperature ramp to insure the 125' temperature is reached then enter

• 00".

Note: Stabilization at 125' is complete in approximately five minutes. .

5.2.13 Release or check released, AUTO, ENTER, AND SAMP switches to the OFF (out) position. Select Loop No. 3 (1 cc).

5.2.14 Enter *23* to evacuate the GC. Continue evacuation until red HI VACUUM light is on.

Note: Follow steps 5.2.15a-5.2.18a for Standard I, the low concentration mix: and 5.2.15b-5.2.18b for Standard 11, the high concentration mix.

5.2.15a Enter *24" to terminate evacuation of the G C.

Select attenuation factor of 1(1x 1).

5.2.16a Depress CAL-1 switch and wait 10 seconds after

, amber LOW VACUUM light is on.

5.2.17a Release CAL-1 switch and wait 10 seconds. Start the L&N recorder, depress AUTO switch to ON position and press CLEAR. Walt until the GC display clock has timed to a minimum of 12 minutes.

5.2.18s Release AUTd switch to the OFF position.

Press MANUAL Press CLEAR. j Enter *00*.

Stop the recorder, I

A-9 m __ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . . _. . , , _m. . - . . _ . . _ . , _ . , . , _ _ . . . , - . _ _ _ . - _ . . . . _ . . , . _ - , _....__..._.,.._ ,. ,. ._ _ .___ _, , - _ _ . . . _ . - .

, ga 5.2.19a identify the recorder trace with the date/ time, gas used, loop number, and attenuation factor. The Oas peaks will emerge in the following sequence on their recorder trace. Note that the helium and hydrogen peaks are combined.

Approximate Time after Infection Gas Min. M Helium-Hydrogen -

41 Oxygen 1 02 Nitrogen 1 16 Krypton 1 51 Xenon 4 32 5.2.15b Enter *24' to terminate evacuation of the GC.

Select attenuation factor of 5 (5 x 1).

5.2.16b Depress CAL-2 switch and wait 10 seconds after amber LOW VACUUM light is on.

5.2.17b Release CAL-2 switch and wait 10 seconds. Start the L&N recorder, depress AUTO switch to ON position

.and press CLEAR. Wait until the GC display clock has timed to a minimum of 12 minutes.

5.2.18b Release AUTO switch to the OFF position.

Depress MANUAL Press CLEAR.

Enter *00*.

Stop the recorder.

5.2.19b Identify the recorder trace witn the date/ time, gas used, loop number, and attenuation factor.

A-10

/

9 5.2.20 The high temperature analyses are performed only to determine oxygen, nitrogen. krypton and xenon con- ,

contrations. Calculate the height for each of the peaks as follows:

Peak Height = (Trace peak heicht - baseline) x at+enuation 100 Note: The peak height calculated above should agree within 15 percent of the value shown on the concentration versus peak height curve for the same attenuation factor and calibration gas for nitrogen, cxygen, and krypton. It should agree within : 20 percent for Xenon.

5.3 Sample Analysis 5.3.1 Complete calibration verification in Section 5.2.

Open or verify open V-1.

5.3.2 Reset temperature control switch to the low (75')

position.

5 3.3 Depress MANUAL switch to the ON position and press CLEAR. Enter *00*.

5.3.4 Enter *01* and then ~45' to display set point of platen temperature end follow temperature range to 75',

then enter *00*. ,

Note: Stabilization should occur within 10-12 minutes.

5.3.5 Depress SAMP switch. Verify red sample light is ON.  !

I Select loop No.1 (0.25 cc). j l

A-11

5.3.6 Enter "23" to evacuate the GC until the HI VACUUM light is on. Cycle loop selector through loops 2. 3 and 4, pausing at each loop and evacuating until the HI VACUUM light is on. Cycle a minimum of three (3) times through loop 1, 2, 3 and 4, pausing at each loop for approximately 5 seconds.

Note: When cycling the sample loops depress the loop selector button for two seconds to insure the valve rotates to the next stop position.

5.3.7 Select loop numbert.

Enter *24" to terminate evacuation.

For dissolved ges concentrations associated with normal reactor operations select an attenuation factor of 5. (5 x 1)

For ' accident conditions select attenuation factor of 250 (25 x 10) using the No.1 or No. 2 (0.25 ce loop).

5.3.8 Notify the LSP operator that the G.C. is ready to receive a sample.

Note: Before performing step 5.3.6, verify with the LSP

. operator that the G.C. sample loops may be loaded.

5.3.9 Cycle loop selector througn loops 1, 2, 3 and 4 pausing at each loop for approximately 5 seconds.

Cycle 3 times. Select Loop No.1.

5.3.10 After filling the sample loops, instruct the LSP operator to close valve RC-V-15.

5.3.11 Start the L&N recorder, release MANUAL, dearess AUTO to the ON position and press CLEAR. Wait A-12

~

until the GC display clock has timed to a minimum of 12 minutes.  !

5.3.12 Release AUTO switch to the OFF position.

Depress MANUAL Press CLEAR.

Enter *00".

5.3.13 Stop the recorder and identify the trace with sample, date/ time. loop number and attenuation factor.

Note: If a repeat analysis is necessary, select the next loop, select an appropriste attenuation factor (5x1, 25x1, 100x1 or 5x100). Repeat steps 5.3.8 through 5.3.10 as necessary to obtain satisfactory data.

5.3.14 Roset the temperature control switch to the high (125') position.

5.3.15 Enter *01* then '45* to display set point of platen temperature and follow temperature range to 125*,

then enter *00".

Note: ,Stabill:ation should occur within 10 minutes.

5.3.16 Select loop No. 3 (1 cc).

5.3.17 Clear and release MAN switch to the OFF position.

Start the L&N recorder, depress AUTO to the ON positicn and press CLEAR. Walt until the GC display clcck has timed to a minimum of 12 minutes.

A-13

, , '5.3.18 Release AUTO switch to the OFF position.

( Depress MANUAL Press CLEAR Enter *00*

5.3.19 Stop the recorder and identify the trace with samples, date/ time, loop numbers and attenuation factor.

Note: If a repeat analysis is necessary, select a 0.25 cc or 2 cc sample loop, select an appropriate attentuation factor (1 x 1)(5 x 1)(10 x 1)(25 x 1) (25 x 10). Repeat -

steps 5.3.16 through 5.3.18 as necessary to obtain satisfactory data.

I 5.3.20 Purge the GC of residual gas as follows:

Enter "23" and evacuate the GC until the red HI VACUUM light is on.

i Cycle to each loop and evacuate until the HI VACUUM light is on. ,

5.3.21 Enter "13" to initiate argon purge.

. Cycle loop selector through loops 1, 2, 3, and, 4 pausing at each lo'o p for approximately 5 seconds.

Cycle 3 times.

4 5.3.22 Enter ~14" to terminate the purge.

Enter *24" to terminate the evacuation.

Enter *00".

Release SAMP switch to OFF position.

1 A-14

[

5.3.23 If no additional analyses'will be required within a day, close or check closed the following valves at the CAP.

V-1 V-14 V-10 5.3.24 Calculate the not peak height for each of the gases found on the sample tracer from step 5.3.18 and 5.3.12. Use the values obtained from the standards to determine the concentration of helium, hydrogen oxygen, nitrogen, krypton, and xenon in the unknowns.

5.3.25 The total gas concentration is tho' sum of the individual gas concentration determined in step 5.3.24.

L

\

e A-15

T7

/.

TOTAL GAS DETERMINATION (Single-Step Temperature)

The total gas determination at 125 *C is perf ormed as f ollows

1. Coltrnn temperature is set at 125'C as described in Sections 5.1.5 through 5.1.9. This adjustment can be performed manually rather than by using a switch.

l

2. The analyses is pe-formed as indicated in the two-step temperature process using only that sequence described under the 75 *O temperature operation.

3. A 0.25 ce sampie is reouired f or the hellurn-hyorogen analyses and a 1 or 2 cc samoie f cr the nitrogen, oxygen,leypton, and xenon analyses.

9 e

e e

4 O

A-16

t

6. ,(

l TAIRE 2-1 I ,

PWR DISSOLVED GAS CONCENTRATIONS DUltlNG

! NORMAL AND ACCIDENT

• CONDlilONS (CC/rG) l l Norinal ConsNtions ,

- Accident Conditions Type Gas Typical Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum **

Iletion .0.1 .0.1 ;0.1 .0.1 100-200 Ilydrogen 25-35 5 50-75 15 1300 .

~

Ksypton .0.1 .0.1 .0.1 -

15 Netrogen .1 .1 5-10 .1 10-100 Oxygen .0.1 .0.1 .0.1 .0.1 5 Xenon 0.1 .0.1 .0.1 -

200 9

• 100 percent of gaseous fission products released from 3300 Mwt core to 2.14 x 10 kg of reactor water after approximately 650 days of irradiation.

• • The resanimusn values assume that all rods have been damaged to a degree which perasets escape of gas frorst the rod. Costcorning maximusn hydrogen concentration, M is assumed that 30 percent of the core cladding is converted to the oxide form with ks consequent release of hydrogen to the system. It is also assumed that a 500 ft 3gas-steam bubble. exists in the reactor vessel as a prerequisite to leihlating core damage.

e

m 2 - J AL b4 s -,a.m - _ a -

.g r

A 52 2 !N8  : E ,

I sl c l.,1 j

y -

g 4 o ]E} '

h5 E EEEQ .

I sm. [

g

- 13n. .

= -

dg~!!!

E II  !:-:

~

hu '

~

"3 go i  ; . ;.

.  ;.  ;.  ;. 8!"!g 2 ,!

cy g . j23 '

" Q .

j 3 J j $.5.4i5 E u .

2 5, 3 E

-3,j3 R j Bu i

1-,----

!illN '

,A e m = =. , 3:;25:4; ggg; l it f9 55 ag,E  ?

l4.1 3 nj-leEieli.

G 8 1

2

- [s Ea 3_ ,

- r

r

+

g .

.. TABLE 2-3 TIME SEQUENCE FOR GAS PEAK l

EMERGENCE FROM THE BASEUNE GAS CHROMATOGRAPH I

Peak'IEmeroence in Seconds At Gas R ,11Qff, Helium 34 (2)

Hydrog'en 42 41

. Oxygen 68 62

Nitrogen 93 76 Krypton 139 111 r

f Xenon 530(3) 272 1

i i

(1) Start of the peak.

(2) The helium peak can be combined with the hydrogen peak

, dependent on the concentration of gases present. *

! (3) The peak is very broad and shallow at this

( temperature.

l

. These results were obtained witn a 0.25 cc sample loop and at a 1X attenuation factor. Changing sample loop size and/or j attenuation factor will change the time sequence slightly.

l i

6

TABtE 2-4 GAS DATA  ;

Molecular Thermalpond. Therrnal Cond. Solubility or Atomic call (secgm )(%C/cm) Relative to in Water **

Element Weight x 10 ; At O%C */Ar cc/kg ArDon 40 39.2 .

I 28.5 @ 30%C

, llelium 4 339 8.65 8.6 @ 20%C llydrogen 2 400 10.2 18 @ 20%C Krypton 83 8 20.9 0.53 59.4 @ 20%C Nitrogen 28 58 1.48 16 @ 20%C Oxygen 32 58.5 1.49 6.35 @ 20%C Xenon 131 12.1 0.31 III @ 20%C

• : Gases other than argon

• • - At 14.7 psia over pressure Data taken from the following sources:

Matheson Gas Data Book. Fifth Edition,1971 CRC llandbook of Cheenistry and Physics. Sist Edition, 1970-71 Conelation of Solubility Data for Ilydrogen and Nitrogen in Water, WAPD-TM-633. October 1976.

i TABLE 2-5 SENSITIVITY OF DETECIlON I 'I l

I FOR Tile BASEllNE GAS CilHOMA10GftAPil poen Gas Concentration cc/ku Gas Primary CoolantII O.25 cc 1 cc 2 cc 0.25 ce 1 cc 2cc -

- Sample toop Sample ioop Sasuple ioop Sample Loop Semple Loop Sample Loop

~

i a lie 200 100 -

3.0 1.50 -

11 75 40 -

1.1 0.6 -

2 0 2000 600 350 30.2 9.1 5.3 7

N 700 200 125 10.6 3.0 1.9 i 2

Kr -

380 200 -

4.6 3.0

, X3 -

500E 300N -

7.6 ' 4.5 l

i i

I i

(1) A peak indication can be seen at about half the concentratkms indicated but cannot be 3

J accurately quantitled. (2) Based on complete degassing of a 30 mi primary coolant sample into a 270 j cc gas sample volume w6th an end pressure of 24.7 pale in line gas sample container. (3) Sensitivity of detection could be increased with time use of an integrator. i 1

I i

i j -

I

o.

-t i

TABLE 4-1 IIELIUM ANALYSES RESULTS WITil Tite BASELINE GAS CitROMATOGRAPil i Test Run Percent Loop Peak Total i Nusaber Nuenber Standard Size (cc) Attenuation Height Peak Heleht i

1 1 0.00 0.25 5x 0 0

1 2 0 00 0.25 5x 0 0 i 1 3 0.00 0.25 5x 0 0 i 2 1 0.00 1 5x 0 0 '

i 2 2 0.00 1 5x 0 0 l 2 3 0.00 1 5x 0 0 '

3 1 0 05 0.25 5x 4 20 i 3 2 0.05 0.25 5x 4 20 3 3 3 0.05 0.25 Sn 4 20

! 4 1 0.05 1 5x 12 60 4 2 0.05 1 Sa 12 60 I

4 3 0.05 1 5x 12 60 5 1 0.15 0.25 5x 19 95 5 2 0.15 0.25 5x 19 95

! 5 3 0.15 0.25 5x 19 95 j 6 1 0.15 1 Sa 26 130 6 2 0.15 1 5x 26 130 6 3 0.15 ~1 5x 26 130 l 7 1 0.30 0.25 5x 29 145 7 2 0.30 0.25 5x 29 145 .

7 3 0.30 0 25 5x 29 145 8 1 0.30 1 5x 45 225 8 2' O.30 1 Sn 45 225

{

i 8 3 0.30 1 5x 45 225 I

9 1 0.5 0.25 5x 44 220 l

9 2 0.5 0.25 5x 44 220 -

9 3 0.5 0.25 5x 44 220 ,

l, j 10 1 0.5 1 10x 34 340

( 10 2 0.5 1 10x 34 340 i 10 3 0.5 1 10x 34 340 11 1 1 0.25 10x 38 380 i 11 2 1 0.25 - 10x 38 380 1 11 3 1 0.25 10m 38 380 i 12 1 0 93 1 25m 26 650 2 0 99 1 7 r., ?r, r.r.n 12 ,

. v-l 13 1 4.7G 0.25 50x 27 1350 13 2 4.76 0.25 50x 27 1350 13 3 4.76 0.25 50x 27 1350

.e s

• TAatE 4-1 HELIUM AIGALYSES IESULTS WIIH THE BASELINE GAS CalHOMAIOGHAPH PAGE 2 Test fhan Percent Loop Peelt Total --

Slusniser Shunber Standerd Site (cc) Attenuation teeight Peelt Height 14 1 436 1 100s 30 3000 13 2 416 1 100m 30 3000 14 3 416 -

- 1 100n 30 3000 15 1 9.09 0.25 100m 32 3200 15 2 S.09 0.25 100m 32 3200 15 3 S.09 0.25 100m 32 3200 16 1 S 09 1 100m 46 4600 ,

16 2 9 09 1 100m 46 4600 16 3 S.09 1 100m 4G 4600 E

l-

1 .

TABLE 4-2 HYDROCEN ANALYSES RESULTS WITH THE BASELINE GAS CHROMf 0 GRAPH j

Test Rua percent Loop Peak Total g g Standard Sise (ce) Attenuation Beish t Peak Beisht 1 1 0.05 0.25 5x 5 30 1 2 0.05 0.25 5 5 30 1 3 0.05 0.25 5x 5 30 2 1 0.05 1 5x 8 40 2 2 0.05 1 5x 8 40 2 3 0.05 1 5x 8 40 3 1 0.15 0.25 5x '

19 95 3 2 0.13 0.25 5x 19 95 3 3 0.15 0.25 5x 19 95 4 1 . 0.15 1 5x 28 140 4 2 0.15 1 5x 28 140 4 3 0.15 1 Sz 28 140 5 1 0.30 0.25 5: 36 180 5 2 0.30 0.25 5: 36 180 5 3 0.30 0.25 5x 36 180 6 1 0.30 1 les 28 280

% 2 0.30 1 10m 28 280 6 3 0.30 1 .

los 28 280

• 7 1 0.50

• 0.25 los 31 310 7 2 0.50 '0.25 los 31 310 7 3 0.50 0.25 los 31 310 9 1 0.99 0.25 15 24 600 9 2 0.99 0.25 25 24 600 9 3 0.99 0.25 25 24 600 10 1 0.99 1 25 41 ,

1025 10 2 0.99 1 15 41 1025 10 3 0.99 1 25 41 1025 11 1 4.76 0.25 100 25 2500 '

11 2 4.76 0.25 100 25 1500 11 3 4.76 0.25 100 25 2500 12 1 4.76 1 100 43 4300 12 2 4.76 1 100 . 43 4300 4.76 43 4300

) 12 13 3

1 9.09 1

0.25 100 15 0 16 4000 13 2 9.09 0.25 15 0 16 4000 13 3 9.09 0.25 250 16 4000 14 1 9.09 1 25 0 25 6250 14 2 9.09 1 25 0 25 6250

- la 3 9.09 1 25 0 25 625C

-- -- <-e.-- , - , - . - - . . . . , , - - . , - - - , - - - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - ~ . , - - - -

. , - - , , - , - r -- -- --, - - - - - ---

l TA8LE 4-3 t

l OXYGEN ANALYSES REStKTS WITH

! THE SASEtINE GAS CletOMA10CJtAPH Test flun Percent Loop Peak Total peumeber W S*d Slao Icc) Asseneesion Heleht Peek Heinlet 1 1 a 95 0.25 1 - -

1 2 RDS 0.25 1 - -

1 3 S e5 0 25 1 - -

2 1 e 95 1 1 2 2 2 2 SM 1 1 2 ,

2 2 3 S OS 1 1 2 2 3 1 EIS S 25 1 - -

3 2 a.15 S.25 1 - -

3 3 s.15 e 25 1 - -

4 1 S.15 1 1 7 7

, 4 2 EIS 1 1 7 7 l 4 3 e.15 1 1 7 7 5 i e3 e 25 i s s 5 2 83 9 25 1 5 5 l 5 3 .3 . 25 i . .

' 6 1 83 1 1 15 15 E 2 03 1 1 15 15 6 3 03 1 1 15 15 7 1 E5 a25 1 11 11 7 2 RS 0 25 1 11 11 7 3 0.5 e 25 1 11 11 8 1 95 1 1 23 23 8 2 SS 1 1 23 23 8 3 95 1 1 23 23 9 1 1 R25 1 22 22 3 2 1 8 25 1 22 22 9 2 1 e 25 1 22 22 18 1 1 1 5 10 50 10 2 1 1 5 10 50 10 3 1 1 5 10 '0 11 1 5 9 25 5 23 115 .

11 2 5 0 25 5 2'i t15 11 3 5 9 25 5 23 115 12 1 5 1 le 2? 220

4.?

+

i l , . - '

\ . . *

. 12 3 5 1 le 22 229 I

13 8 18 425 le 22 - 223 -

13 2 10 125 10 22 228 l 425 10 22 age l 13 3 le L

o 9

t

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

TABLE 4-4 N11ROGEN ANALYSES IIESULTS WITH Tile BASELINE GAS CilitOMATOGitAPH Test flun Percent Loop Peak Total Numtier Number Standard Size (cc) Attenuation lleloht Peak fleinht I 1 0.05 0.25 1 1 2 0.05 0.25 .1 - -

1 3 0.05 0.25 -

1 - -

2 1 0.05 1 1 3.5 3.5 2 2 0.05 1 1 3.5 3.5 2 3 0.05 1 1 3.5 3.5 4 1 0.15 1 1 12 12 4 2 0.15 1 1 12 12 4 3 0.15 1 1 12 12 5 1 0.3 0.25 1 11 11 5 2 0.3 0.25 1 11 11 5 3 0.3 0.25 1 11 11 G 1 0.3 1 1 24 24 6 2 0.3 1 1 24 24 6 3 0.3 1 1 24 24 7 1 0.5 0.25 1 19 19 7 2 0.5 0.25 1 19 19 7 3 0.5 0.25 1 19 19 8 1 0.5 1 1 37 37 8 2 0.5 1 1 37 ,37 ,

8 3 0.5 1 1 37 37

Tant E 5-1 RECOMMENDED

• GAS SAMPt E LOOP SIZE AND ATTENUATION FACTORS FOR GAS ANALYSES WITil Tile DASELINE GAS CilROMATOGRAPil Dissolved Gas Sample Attenuallon Dissolved Gas Sample Attenuation i Gas Gas Conc. Loop Size (cc) Factor Gas Conc. Loop Size (cc) Factor 11s 1-5 cc/kg i 1 5-50 cc/kg 0.25 5 11 1-5 c /kg 1 1 5-50 cc/kg 0.25 5 2

O 5-20 cc/kg 2 1 20-50 cc/kg 1 1 2

N 5-10 cc/kg 2 1 10-50 cc/kg i 1 2

i Kr 5-20 cc/kg 2 1 20-50 cc/kg 1 1 i

j Xs 5-20 cc/kg 2 1 20-50 cc/kg 1 1 l -

I

*

The parameters indicated are recommended as a starting point. Actual plant j experience may dictate other values.

1 I

l i

4 I

4 5

I

(

4 L

LINEARITY CHARACTERISTICS FOR HYDROGEN FOR O.P.5 AND l CC SAMPL,E

. e 6-

/

5- -

1 CC S ompte 1. cop 4'

x N

) 3-

/.-

0 25 CC Somple Loop i

E e a

. 2-g_ .

l'O 2'O 3'O 4'O NO 6'O 70 0 dO 10 0 ppm if 2 les Argog X 103 FIGURE 2-1 4

LINERARITY CHARACTER lSTlCS FOR LOW. HYDROGEN CONCENTRATION FOR 0.25 AND 1 CC SAMPLE LOOP s -

I 5-og 4 -

0.25 CC SA Mi't.E LOOP

' i.

E I CC SAMPE LOOP s' 3 X

it' 2-1 -

s

/

i' '

lo 2'o lo 'o do s'o _ di eb 9'o iho ppm 1f2 IN ARGON X 102 FIGURE 2-lA i

i

2 LINEARITY CHARACTERISTICS FOR OXYGEN FOR I CC SAMPLE N

i 50-i l

40-f ' e-r g

E

,30-u i

l 8 / s' 20-1 1 CC Soniple t. cop 10-O O i i l 1 1

• O i

n - o , i,. Argosi y 103 l FIGURE j

1 I

FIGURE 4-1 1 X ATTENUATION O.25 CC SAMPLE LOOP 1000 ppm Xe XENON PEAK OCUT, RING AT 530 SECONDS AFTER INJECTION.

75' C COLUMN TEMPERATURE l

XENON-PEAK l

1

, .,n.,,-+,--,,-_,.w.... , . . , , . , . .,, ,an-r-v,-y,,,,.,,- , . . - ..,n - , , , >-,y, ,y-w, mm, ,

1 FIGURE 4-2.

O.25 CC SAMPLE LOOP 5 X ATTENUATION N

. 02 I

N2 X, INJECT u a V Q OFF ,

, He I NDICATION NOTE HOW HELlUM PEAK COM9INES WITH HYDROGEN WHEN OPERATING WITH A COLUMN TEMPERATURE OF 125

• C c -. , . - , - - - - - - = - - - - - - - - . . - - - , , - - - - . . - ~ . . - - - - ,.-.,v.- p- r -.,---

FIGURE 4-3 ,

s 0.25 CC SAMPLE LOOP lX ATTENUATION l

I L

N2 He 7 \ 02

'} N2 q l

\p .

U START Kr NOTE SEPERATION OF He AND H2 PEAK A,7 75

• C COLUMN TEMPERATURE

- , , , - , - , - , -,u- -

-se-.- - - . --g-,----- ,- , ---- - - - , --, -- r----, - - - -

e FIGURE 4-4 "2

(

I J ,

H, V Xe START '

e PEAK HEIGHT INDICATION WITH C.25 CC SAMPLE LOOP ANO 5X ATTENUATION.

125' C 00LUMN - TEMPERATURE 6

t.

O e

,,.m., - - - - - - - . , , , - . . , , . - . - - - - - - - - ~e.. -

-%m .---e.

r e-b FIGURE 4-5 SAME GAS CONCENTRATION AS FIGURE 4 NOTE HOW H2 PEAK IS OFF SCALE M

e

. N2 ..

I INECT k

c .

PEAK HOGHT INDICATION WITH I CC SAMPLE LOOP AND Xe Kr I X ATTENUATION , .

12**C COLUMN TEMPERATURE 6

- .-,.w ,. --.-- - .. ,

a

- / I , iv f/,]

, "f' April 1982, AnEvahmtionof On-LineBoronAnaIyzers Prepared by NUS CORPORATION e

• f STF.E 1 WCSTER

[ENGmum:I C09024T2 AP*P>vtg 45 OtterfD th 1pt SitCtH38dA UNACCEPT AB'.E APPRL'MfI7 A% IN ITO 63 StinhED IM IFI SFEE REvtEWED

1. 0. NO. . . IN ytc. na. 85 IL9k om 4h\M -

jsv_ddL W L h l v

S3&M v.y2 7 The Nuciar Safst/ Analysis Center is operated for the electric utility incustry by the Electric Power Research Institute

. - - , . - , ,.--,+_,--p,.w-,, -~,,.,,4 , ann. -,,. ,. , , .-,,,--,.--,,,.--,,-__--,,,----,e- . - - , , . - -

r-

>. ,  ?, .

s y,.  %

An Evaluation of On Line Boron Analyzers NSAC46 Final Report, April 1982 .

Prepared by NUS CORPORATION Park West Two Cliff Mine Road Pittsburgh, Pent'sylvania 15275 Principal Investigator W. Lecnnick

.. ( .

v Prepared for Nuclear Safety Arta!ysis Center Operated by

. E!ectric Power Researen inst:tute 3412 Hi!! view Avenue .

Palo Alto, California 94304

< NSAC Project Manager R. N. Kubik

=

• ,4 .' l ORDERING INFCRMATION Copies of this report may be orCered from Research Reports Center (RRC), Box 50490.

Palo Alto, CA 94303, (415) 965-4081. There rs no charge to NSAC memoer utilities and certain otner nonprofit organizations.

I I

. s

. s dee oras Soron Acaryters. Soren Anarrsis. Postace:cet instrurnemanon. Cuanticanon EPRrs prograrns recewe feceral finances amnce ey wrtue et sponsorsne of tre institute ey fecerapy owned utilities, and mer eenefits are avmiac;e to as oisee persons regarciees of race. coior. natenas ongn. nanceao, or age. .

Coornent C 1C02 Nucmar Safety Analyts Center. A8 ngnts reserved.

NOTICE .

The report was procered oy the organizatms) named cocw as an account of wonc soonsorea ey tne Nucioar safety Anaryse Center (NSACL coerateo ey the E'octnc Power Researen Institute. Inc. (EPRI). Neitrer NSAC.

memoors of NSAC. the organizatsor(s) narned cecw. nor atiy person acDng on cenarf of any of tattrr (a) makes any warranty, encress or anones. wem resoect to tre use of any eformation, accaratus. momed, or process cisemed wi tne recort or trat suen use reay not etnnge ormatory cwned tvits: or (c) assurnes any tiaceties wem respect to tne use of. or har camages resuiting frcm tre 6s4 of, any sofermatier., accaratus, rnetnod, or pro-Cees "" WI the recort.

s s Precared by ,d l

NUS Corporaten P ftsourgn. Pennsylvanta S

,? ',

t e p

,I

'{

NSAC PERSPECTIVE

PROJECT DESCRIPIION s

Boron dissolved in the reactor coolant is a primary means of reactivity control in pressurized water reactors and a backup means of reactivity control in boiling water reactors. Thus, boron concentration is a fundamental safety parameter and must be measured. ,

Under normal conditions the boron concentration is determined by analyzing a grab sample and in some cases by an on-line boron analyzer. However, under postacci-dont conditions grab ' samples may involve unwarranted personnel exposure and not all of the new postaccident sample systems provide rapid measurements. Conven-tional on-line baron analyzers are overwhelmed by the radiation expected during an accident. To overcome these shortcomiggs, several new on-line boron analyzers are L on the market. These have been especially designed to ftinction during an acci-dent.

In this service, high radioactive fluids will expose components of on-line 6

analyzers to radiation levels wnich can be as high as 10 R/hr. Radiation of this magnitude can damage some types of electronic components and elastomers that are

~

. present in the instrumenes. Photoelectric devices and small solid state compo-nects are particularly sensitive to radiation damage. It is also possible that high radiation levels may temporarily affect sensing elements.

- The market for on-linc analyzers is limited. Because of this, NSAC was concerned that this equipment might not be thoroughly and independently tested. This test program was sponsored as a result of that concern. Three commercially available postaccident baron analyzers were tested in radiation fields up to and exceeding those that would be encountered in an accident.

PROJECT OB IECTIVE The three boron analyzers were tested under normal conditions and at radiation levels as high as 105 to 106 R/hr. The tests sought to determine the accuracy of v

111

-- y - - - . , - - - -,e-e=.r-- ,a n-~,,n-. -,--+---,---r.,,,-- e--,w--.----, - - - - . - ~ - - - . . . , - --c---~~- - - - .- ---,w- - - -r e-,,-

r,s.,

the analyzers, their reliability under normal conditions, their susceptibility to radiation damage, and their accuracy when exposed to high radiation levels.

PROJECT RESLTTS The Ionics Digiches analyzer as modified by Sentry, the Westinghouse Mark V boron analyser, and the Combustion Engineering Boronneter are all suitable for postacci-dent service if properly installed and maintained. The testing did indicate improvements that could be made to some of this equipment. These suggestions were accepted by' the manuf acturers and are being incorporated into the product line.

Robert N. Kubik-

• NSAC Project Manager 6

, /

e A

+

a

\

d' iv D..

-.. , , . , , , . . - . . , . . . , . . . , .-.,-n... ,a-- - - . - . , , - , . - - . . . . , - - . - , . . . , - , . . - - , - . , . , . - - . - - -

s, ', ,

e ,. .

ABSTRACT R

Testing has been performed to evaluate the performance of three on-line boron analyzers and determine the effect of a high intensity gama field (103 to 10 0 R/hr) on this instrumentation. The main objective of this work was to verify the applicability of the analyzers for boron analyses under post-accident conditions.

The on-line analysers tested included an Ionics model (Digichen Analyser) as modified by Sentry, the Weetinghouse Mark V Analyser, and the Combustion Engineering High Radiation Boronoseter System. Irradiation testing was also performed on elastomers, solid-state electronics, and pH probes. Results of this work indicate that the three on-line analysers tested are suitable for baron determinations during accident conditions. Radiation exposure levels involved in determining bcron concentration with these systems would be essentially zero.

', Results from gamma irradiation tests indicate that teflon will remain serviceable at 100rads exposure. Other elastomers tested were more radiation resistant than 4 -

is teflon. Solid-state components tested showed radiation damage at between 10 '

and 10 rads exposure. A slight but constant bias in readout was noted when pH probes were exposed to high radiat i on levels. This bias has no significant effect on boron analyses results obtained from titracing the boron-mannitol scid complex.

• 9 '.

V

.~.

7 --. - - - *w-.g

. b f r .~. ,

s ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

'b I

We wish to note the cooperation of the Sentry Corporation, Ionics Corporstion, Westinghouse Electric, and Combustion Engineering. These companies furnished the equipment used in this test program and provided the aanpower required for initial startup of the equipment. In particular, we wish to thank Joe Leon of the Sentry Corporation, Dale Lueck of the Ionics Corporation, Rick Pod of Westinghouse Electric, and Joe Kovies of Combustion Engineering.

~ < ,

w..

4 e

9 l

I l

8 l

I 1

i v -

l vii

._,. , _ . . , ._ . ____c._ _ , . _ _ _ , , _ _ _ . _ , . . . . _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ , , - . , , . . _ - . . . _ . - . , _ . _ - . . . , . .

c_

l e .

CONTENTS q

Section -

Page 1 INTRODUCTION AND StBINARY l- 1 2

SUMMARY

OF RESIETS - SENTRY DIGICHEM ANALYZER 2-1 Background Information 2-3 Test Description 2-8 Test Results 2-13 Discussion of Results and Conclusions 2-35 3

SUMMARY

OF RESULTS - WESTINGHOUSE ANALYZER 3-1 Background Information 3-2 Tese Description 3-7 L Test Results 3-10 Discussion of Results and Conclusions 3-17 4 SIMMAR OF RESULTS - CE 30ROMMETER 4-1 3ackground Information 4-2 Test Descripcion 4- 10 Test Results 4-13 Conclusions and Recommendations 4-19 e

I i

4 IX

~

=

ILLUSTRATIONS

• Figure g

2-1 Simplified Flow Diagram of the Digichen Analyser 2-1 2-2 Typical Characteristics of Module H21A3 2-20 2-3 Typical Characteristics of Module MCA8 2-20 3-1 Westinghouse Sampler Tank Assembly 3-4 3-2 Westinghouse Mark V Boron Analyzer 3-5 3-3 Geometry of Irradiation Assembly for Westinghouse Mark V 3-8 Sanpler Tank Assembley 53,000 Ci Total Radiation Source 4-1 Sampler for the CE Boronneter 4-6 f 4,-2 CE Boremmeter 4-7 4-3 Predicted Delay Time Due to Mixing for the CE Boreaneter 4-8 4-4 Geometry of Irradiation Assembly for Boronmeter Sampler 4-11

• 53,000 Ci Total Radiation Source 4-5 One Day Strip Chart Recording of 2960 ppe Boronmeter 4-18

, Analyses Results (Background Radiation) 9 e

0 e

s x1 g,- gm- - - - - ee+---,--+m-ae- -- -r ,rw--- = y r--- --

r+- - - --- , 9 y,w -y- - -,-- ym%w-yw--- ye.9 -9,wy-

r

(

TABLES Tables Page 2-1 Campositions* of Matrix Solutions used 2-12 in Testing the Digichem Analyser 2-2 Radiation Testing of Various Elastomers 2-14 2-3 Irradiation Testing of Photo-Interrupter Cell MCA8 2-15 2-4 Irradiation Testing of Photo-Interrupter Cell H21A3 2-16 2-5 Effect of Radiation ( on an Internal Reference 2-22 pH Probe (L & N Cat #117495) 2-6 Eff ect of Radiation on External Reference Probes 2-23 (Fisher Cat #13-639-8 and 13-639-63) 2-7 Effect of Rgdiation on External Reference pH Probes 2-24 with 5 x 10 Rads Previous Exposure *

(Fisher Cat #13-639-8 and 13-639-63) 2-8 Effect of Long Term Radiation Exposure on pH Probes 2-26 2-9 Boron Analysis Results Vith the Sentry Modified Digichen 2-28 Analyzer in a 1.75 x 10* R/hr Radiation Field 2-10 Boron Analysis Results With 3 entry Modified Digichem 2-29 Analyzer in a 8.64 x 10* R/hr Radiation Field 2-11 Boron Analysis Results With the Sencry Modified Digichem 2-30 Analyzer in a 1.75 x 10' R/hr Radiation Field Beginnirg of a Week End Run 2-12 Boron Analysis Results gith the Sentry Modified Digichem 2-31 Analyzer in a 1.75 x 10 R/hr Radiation Field Near End of a Week End Run 2-13 Standard Boron and Blank Analyses Rcault With the Production Model Digichem Analyzer ,

2-33 2-14 Matrix Solution Analyses Results With the Production 2-34 Model Digichem Analyzer 2-15 Boron Reproducibility Results 2000 ppm Standard 2-38 xiii

Page Tables ,

3-1 Base Level Fissioning Count Rate For the Westinghouse 3-11 Mark V Boron Analyzer (Pure Water Results) 3-2 Eff ect of Irradiation With Pure Water in the 3-12 Westinghouse Mark V Boron Analyzer e

3-3 Effect of Irradiation With 5140 ppa in the 3-14 Westinghouse Mark V Boron Analyzer

- 3-4 Effect of Irradiation With 2570 ppa Boron in the 3-15 Westinghouse Mark V Baron Analyzer

~3-5 Steady State Operation for 1 Second Count Periods With 3-16 2570 ppa Boron in the Westinghouse Mark V Boron Analyser (Background Radiation) .

4-1 Performance Specifications for the Boronmeter 4-3 4-2 Performance Specifications for the Boronneter Preamplifier 4-4 ,

4-3 Performance Specifications for the Baronneter Signal Processor 4-5 4-4 Fission Count Rate (I) as a Function of Radiation levels 4-14 for a 50 and 60 M. V. Discriminator Setting on the Custom Designed Preamplifier WL-24038 (2,960 ppa Boron Concentration) *

< 4-5 Boronneter Accuracy Results for Low Level Baron Concentrations 4-15

- 4-6 Borommeter Accuracy Results for High Level Boron Concentrations 4-17 d

6 e

O t

e e

a

. .s

^*g xiv

'~ ~ .

t Section 1 INTRODUCTION AND S120fARY Four vendors of in-line boron analysers were invited to participate in a progran to test the ability of their equipment to withstand postaccident environeental conditions. Three vendors responded to this invitation as follows:

e Sentry and Ionics with the DigiChem Analyser. This boron analyser is manufactured by the Ionics Corporation and is modified by Sentry i

to withstand the h. gh gasuna radiation levels encountered in post-accident application. The modified instrtament is sold only through Sentry. '

e Westinghouse with their Boron Concentration Monitoring System (BCMS) Mark V Analyser.

e Combustion Engineering with their High Radiation Borosometer System.

f The Sentry Modified Digichen Analyser provides for boron determination by remote

~

titration of the boron-mannitol acid complex. It is assumed that the boron solu-10 tion contains the normal isotopic concentration of 5 to provide for reactivity control of the system. The procedure followed is identical to the referee method used for nor=al laboratory determination of boron concentration. The Westinghouse and Combustion Ingineering analyters provide for boron decemination by measuring

'O the B concentration or the oeutron absorption characteristics of :he system.

Since neutron absorption is determined directly, it provides for an aosolute meas-urement of reactivity control.

Equipment provided by these vendors was tested under normal operating conditions and in the presence of high-level radiation. The high-level radiation testing was 60 performed in a hot cell using Co as the radiation source. Energy level of the 60 Co gassmas are normalized so that the energy absorbed by the materials in test will bs cor parable to the accident case. Maxim a radiation levels were on the 6

order of 105 - 10 R/hr. Test description and results for each analyzer are described separately in the main body of the report.

For those who are interested in results on irradiation testing of elastomers, solid-state electronics and pil probes , your attention is called to the Sentry-Ionics report.

J 1-1

=

The general conclusions derived from this overall study and the advantages of using these on-line analyzers are summarized below:

e Sentry Modified DigiChem Analyzer

--The Sentry modified Digichem analyzer is acceptable for use to determine boron concentration under post-accident conditions.

Concerning its use for nonnal power operations , the accuracy is probably acceptable.

-All boron analyses operations can be performed remotely. The exposure involved in determining boron concentration would approach zero. "

--Sample volume requirements are on the order of 1-2 al per analysis, thus shielding requirements would ba minimal.

--Analyses results can be achieved within 10 minutes af ter the sample line is purged to obtain a representative sample.  ?

T s

--Though not sealed gas tight, there would be little tendency for release of gaseous activity to the acnosphere. This would be i

particularly true if the sample addition sequence is changed to add water prior to addition of the sample.

1 e Westinghouse BCMS Mark 7 Analyzer

! --The Westinghouse Mark 7 boron analyzer is acceptable for use under post-accident conditions. It shoold be possible to obtain l

an analysis within 5 or 10 minutes with this system. Concerning its use for normal power operations , the accuracy is probably -

acceptable. .

' --Count rate increases , and thus the ppa boron readout decreases with increasing radiation levels, however, the effect is a l

1 predictable one and accuracy is still quite acceptable.

5

--For maximum anticipated exposure levels of 5 x 10 1/hr (10 ci/cc activity level), the fissioning count rate will increase by about . s

- u.)

1 .

-~

5 percent. This 5 percent increase in count rate will result in a maall error _ relative to the accuracy required for post-accident conditions.

--The increase in ' count rate fran irradiation is essentially a i constant (as percent of count rate) for the three conditions tested (pure water, 2570 and 5140 ppa boron). The increased

. count rata does not linger when the radiation field is removed.

e Combustion Engineering High Radiation Boronometer System

--The CE Boroameter is acceptable for use under post-accident conditions.

--Reproducibility of results is excellent as based on fission count rate, however, conversion of count rate to ppa is sanewhat below the accuracy desired for daily operations . CE indicates , however,

, that the proper curve fit routine in the microcomputer will provide proper ppm indication.

--A 500 second count rate is recommended for determining boron concentrations below 1,000 ppa.

--The use of a strip chart recorder is recommended for use with the boronometer. This will improve statistics and show trending.

--Thereissomeincrgaseinthestandarddeviationfromradiationlevels in the range of 10 R/Hr at the planned discriminator setting of 50 -

cillivolts. The increase is not significant with respect to pos t-accident analyses requirenants.

9 0

1-3

. . - . . , , - - . -. .c _ _ - - - - - y , , -- -

~~ -~

Section 2

SUMMARY

OF RESULTS - SENTRY DIC1 CHEM ANALYZER The Ionics Digichen Ar. 1yser, as modified by Sentry, performed properly at radiation levels of 8.64 x 10' 1/hr. Maximum radiation levels anticipated under credible accident conditions are on the order of 10' R/hr.

7 The analyser operated at an integrated dose of 2.7 x 10 rade. This corresponds to about three months of operation at maximum dose rates anticipated under accident conditions.

If this system is used, KUS recommends that the analyses to determine boron concentration be performed titrating the boron-mannitol acid complex from a pH of l about 5.5 to pH 8.5. Actual pH used for the low and high pH end points should be

{ '

deteamined by titrating known boron standards after 4ddition of mannitol to the boron solution. Titrating from a low pH inflection point (pH 4-6) to a high pH inflection point (pH 8-8.5) can also be used, however, results of previous testing performed by NUS indicates better precision can be achieved by titrating to specific pH end points. Either method of titration (pH end point or inflection point) is acceptable for post-accident use.

If the production model Digiches analyzer is modified as indicated below it should perform properly at radiation levels of 10' - 10$ R/hr and continue to operate at I

an integrated dose of 10 rada.

e Separate the rotary spin assembly and sample addition module so that only these components are exposed to high radiation fields.

e Replace the photon coupled modules H21AY3 and MCAS with mechanical switches. Alternately. it would be possible to provide localiz5d shielding for these modules to limit exposure level to about 10 reds.

e Move the solid state relay for the solenoid actuated valve on the rotary reaction cell to a location outside the high radiation zone.

e Replace the two nylon pulleys used to drive the rotary reaction cell with metal pulleys.

t

%w 2-1

e Replace the teflon with elascemers that are more resistant to radiation. The teflon does not haveg to be replaced if the integrated exposure is limited to 10 rads.

e G

J 2-2

E

.c ,

f' 9

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

- TEST FURP0gE Testing was performed to determine if the Sentry modified Digiches analyser and selected components from an umsodified Digichen analyser would suffer radiation

, damage in analysing for boron at radiation exposure levels anticipated under post-accident conditions. In addition. testing was performed to determine the accuracy that could be achieved with the Digiches analyser for boron determinations during normal operating conditions. Modifications made by Sentry to the Digiches analyser include replacement of selected components that would be in a high radiation field with components made of more radiation resistant material. The selected components tested from the unmodified system include all solid state components and elastomers that would be exposed to. high radiation fields, 'the rotary spin as'sembly, and sample burette assembly. .Both the rotary spin and sample w burette assemblies would be exposed.to relatively high radiation levels if the system is used in post-accident testing.

, The system provides for boron determination by remote titration of the boron-mannitol acio complex. It is assumed that the boron solution contains the normal isotopic concentration.of 10 3 to provide for reactivity control of the system. The procedure followed is identical to the standard method used for normal laboratory determination of boron concentration.

SYSTEM DESCRIPTION The Digiches analyser system consists of a microcomputer, a rotary reaction cell assembly, a esasurement sensor (pH probe in this appliestion), and up to five saeple and reagent addition modules. A simplified flow diagram of the system is shown in Figure 2-1. The microcomputer consists of a series of plug-in circuit boards and the keyboard control panel devices. A motherboard of bus lines and con-nectors is spread along the inside rear for plugging in the circuit boards as needed. All boards are easily replaced.

w 2-3

a e

• 6 e

S i

a 3 3

3 3 a N$ r

$ 51 1

$ # 3

'! E '

j ^ ~j #

0 g ['_

u1

]

s T, 6 l 8

I i

I I

. .' l l. I i i i i t ..Ly . . _ L .L _ . .L i

l i

I 3

' 1 I e - - - -M L, s.. . 1 i i  : ~ ', ' ii -H ]

l 1 J$... 8-

,l

- a-qp- 3-s

e ,r---  % "**

steere

'~~~

3

~W N

d i l

~

l 6 l

l

, r J %~.

g;

}l.- .

2 .-

l r---= r-- % ,

_,  ; e -s -

a j, I .0M hl -

= , %I 8' 1

, r 15 =e **

I .

m&

$ -./ ( MC!

%l iD

~ Iy a

m 7 y"*

M CI

• -- d TT I's

~

[ $

e -

1 l, 'L.ll

, _ _ _ _ _ . . q -

n- u. . . . . l 1

h'i s .

t

- - =, 3

, 's k

J

, b 853 s ..

\

2-4 .

6

.. a.

• The rotary spin assembly is of modular construction,' located at the lower left side j

, of.the Digiches analyzer enclosure. The reaction cell inside the spin assembly is I fabricated from teflon. It forms the heart of the assembly. As programedy the microcomputer controls a variable speed motor which spins the reaction cell to provide for mixing of the solution as reagents are added. A cover to the spin

. assembly provides entrances for the sample and reagent addition lines and the pH

. probe. Reagent addition and sensing occurs below the surface of the sample.

The sample and reagent dispensing modu'les are located on the bottom right hand side of the Digichen enclosure. All modules are interchangeable with each other. The, sealed plug-in modules provide a dispensing capability for up to five fluids. such as samples, reagents, and buffers. Three reagent (acid, base, and mannitol) d addition modules, one boron standard addition module, and one sample addition module are used in this application. The digital controlled module has a stepper-actor which pushes a plunger through a burette to dispense fluids in precise microliter increments.

The Digichem analyzer was designed for process control applications, providing on-line analyses and control for continuous, semicontinuous, and batch processes. It

/ automatically performs titrimetric, colorimetric or selective-ion analyses. The -

(. -.

• microcomputer controls the automatic functions of sample and reagent dispensing, solution mixing, and concentration sensing through a progra med sequence of analyses. The instrument as it is normally used takes and measures a sample from

~

an on-line stream and performs the following programed operations automatically e A fixed but programable volume of sample is forced into the l reaction vessel. Sample volume required for boron analyses is on the order of 0 5-2 mi for boron concentrations in the range of 1000 4 to 6000 ppa. I.ow boron concentrations require higher sample volumes, o Next the instrument adds dilution water to flush the sample line and provide sufficient volume to cover the tip of the pH probe. If it is planned to use the instrument for post-accident analyses, the prograaning sequence should be changed to add water first. This will dilute the sample and thus reduce the potential for rolesse of iodine gas which may be present. After the sample is added, a little more water (2-5 al) is required to flush the sample addition tip.

e If the solution is basic, as could be the case during an accident.

the system can be programed to add acid to neutralize the base. The manufacturer should be consulted concerning pro-graming requirements.

e A programed volume of mannitol solution is adhed to the ,

! .. reaction vessel. Mixing is achieved by rotation of the reaction vessel.

2-5 l

l l

e - -w-- .-, , , , - - - - - - , , < , , rw e- = , -....-,--wr,,-, c,-y ,y- ---,-- g---- ~,,r--rmmwgyc--,-m-m,-,---+%,r--wer--,----e-------,-wg-+ - + ,v*

I

\

~

'e The solution is titrated with NaOH to an end point pH of 8.5 Alternately, the volume of titrant used can be determined by automatic derivation of the change in slope of the pH line (inflection point), which occurs when the caustic titration of the baron-mannicol complex is complete.

e The microcomputer takes the .infonnation concerning sample size and NaOH titrant volume used and computes the boron concentration.

. Boron concentration is printed out as ppa boron on a computer tape.

Digital readout of boron concentration can also be provided locally or at some distant point.

6c e At the conclusion of each analysis, the rotary speed of the reaction vessel is increased to spin out the solution in the vessel. Water is added at this time to flush the vessel by centrifugal force. ' Waste solutions are gravity ~ drained to a collection tank.

SYSTEM MODIFICATION FOR OPERATION IN A RADIATION ENVIRONME.Vf For operation in a radiation environment, it is necessary.co separate the rotary spin assembly and the sample addition sedule from the microcomputer section to provide for localized shielding of components containing primary coolant. The microcomputer section and other components which are not exposed to the primary coolant probably cannot withstand high radiation exposure levels. Separation poser no serious t'echnical probles since the units are of modular construction. However, 5 this task should not be undertaken lightly since there are many electrical lines which must bc lengthened, three solid state components which must be changsd or shielded and longer length tubing must be provided for sample'and reagent feed.

Preamplification of the pH signal is also required.

SEITIRY MODIFICATIONS TO THE DICICHEM ANALYZER The Sentry approach in providing a system that is suitable for on-line boron analyses under post-accident conditions was to replace all elastomers with more radiation resistant sacerials where neccesary. Specific changes made to the DiglChem analyser by Sentry prior to this test work are indicated below. Other changes have since been made to correct problema identified in the high level irradiation experiments.

e All teflon and Kal-F parts in the system were replaced with more radiation resistant elastomers.

e 0-rings In the radiation zone were replaced with 0-rings made of materials known to be more resistant to radiation.

. e Solid state controls that will be in the high radiation zone were #

replaced with mechanical switches.

s_)

2-6 1

= e -

, = - --w -

y ,-, --- vg qg-- 4rw-y eem, *w w %--.o e.-weyo -t --

g- '""-r m- r**

• ^ ' '

e The rotary spin assembly, sample addition module and reagent addition modules we're separated 25 feet from the control module.

Only the rotary spin assembly and sample addition module will be in

, the high radiation area. Shielding is provided for these .

components.

e A separate pH preamplifier was added.

i g

t e

O a

4 e

i ,q

%- e n

4 9

e 4

O T

e I m.

h*

2-7 s

./

e n, . , - -- e .~ ~ . . ,. -- - . - - - ,--aw-- .-vu - ,-- ,,-n,---<r9 ,r- w---m,,.,-,v-e-n- e,, ,gn-- -.--,-m,--,-vos,--,,---e-

A TEST DESCRIPTION ,

DIGICHEM COMPCNENTS PROVIDED 3Y IONICS The irradiation testing was performed at the hot cell test facilities at Georgia Tech. Components tested were those from the Digichen Analyzer which would be subjected to moderately high radiation levels during boron analyses under post-accident conditions. In selecting the components that will be exposed to high rad-istion levels, it was assumed that the rotary spin assembly and sample addition module would,be located behind a lead shield to separate other components from the high radiacion area. The components tested were in ,the form provided by the manu-facturer in their standard version of the DigiChem Analyzer. These components are as follows:

e Rotary Spin Assembly - This was exposed to 107 rads.

7

- e Sample Addition Module - This was exposed to 10 reds. )>

e Separate photo-interruptar cells for the rotap spin gesembly and 4

sample addition module were tested at 10,, 10 and 10 rads. This additional testing was performed to determine the failure point since the photo-interrupter cells included as part of the rotary spin assembly'9nd sample addition module failed totally af ter exposure to 10 rads.

6 e 0-Rings (Buna, Kalres and Vicon) - These were tested to 10 and 1'0I rads exposure.

e Delivery Tips (Kel-F) - These were tested at 106 and 107 rads exposure.

e Tejlon {ubing 7Two separate lots of teflon tubing were tested at 10 , 10 and 10 rada exposure.

e pH and Reference Electrodes - Testing was performed with two sets of pH probes with external reference cells of the type used by Ionics in their Digiches analyser. In addition, testing was performed on a pH probe with an internal reference cell. Four 6 series of tests were performed at maximum radiation levels of 10

. R/hr, as follows:

-Testing was performed using the buffer Bolutions indicated below.

Buffer solutions were used to minimize the effect of CO2 pickup from air on pH of the solutions. It was necessary to leave the solutions exposed to air during the course of this testing. 5

- O, 2-8 .

9

f*

Organic buffers were not used because these buffers will degrade under irradiation, resulting in a change in pH. This change in pR could be wrongfully actributed to radiation induced degradation of the PR probes.

pH Compound Concentration Comments e

al 4.5 rotassium dihydrogen 0.2 solar Laboratory j phosphate preparation s

7.0 Monobasic potassium --

Commercial

i. ,

phosphate and preparation sodium hydroxide 10.0 Potassium carbonate, --

Commercial

! potassium borate and preparation potassium hydroxide

--One set of buffer solutions was exposed to the radiation field in the hot cell, checking the pH of each solution periodically during the course of the working day. The pH probes and reference call were exposed to the same radiation field as were the buffer solutions. The pH meter was installed outside the hot cell. A 10 foot lead was required for connection of the probe to the pH meter.

i s -- --The temperature of the solution in the hot cell was monitored i so that correction could be made for the temperature effect on pH. The hot cell lights were turned off when not in use so that temperature inside the hot cell would remain relatively constant.

--The control buffer solutions were stored outside the hot cell.

. checking the pH at the same frequency as were the solutions inside the hot cell.

MODIFIED DIGICHEM ANALY*ER The Sentry modified Digichen analyzer is programmed to determine boron concentration by automatic derivation of the change (inflection point) in slope of the pH line which occurs when the caustic titration of the boron-mannitol complex is complete. Af ter the sample is added to the rotary reaction cell, deionized water and mannitol are added to the sample. A pH determination is made at this point and if the solution is basic, acid is added automatically to reduce the pH to the range of 2 to 2.5. Then a back titration is performed to neutralize the excess acid, indicated by an inflection point at around pH 5-6 in the slope of the pH line. Titration of the boron-mannitol complex begins at this time and is complete at the high pH inflection point.

%mer 2-9

Analyses performed with the production model Digiches analyzer followed the pattern indicated above except that a pH of 5.5 was ased as a start poine.for titration of the boron-mannicol cemplex ar.d a pH of 3.5 was used as the end point.

Initially the equipment was operated outside the hot cell using four standard solutions containing 60, 600,1200 and 3000 ppe boron to verify operatien of the system. The equipment was operated with a 25-foot separation between the control unit and other , components as it would be in post-accident conditions. Fellowing the initial testing the rotary spin assembly, with its pH probe, the sample addi-tion module, and the 3000 ppa boron standard were installed inside the hot cell.

The other components, the preamplifier for the pH probe, and the 1200 ppa standard remained outside the hot cell.

Testing was performed at radiation levels of 1.75 x 10' R/hr, 8.64 x 10 1/hr and 1.57 x 105 1/hr. The central point for determining the radiation level was adjacent to, and just above the top of the rotary spin assembly. Other areas may have been slightly higher or lower than the reported radiation level. Total radia-tion exposure for the Sentry modified equipment was approximately 2.7 x 107 rada.

. - 'i PRODUCTION MODEI. DIGICHEM ANAI.YZER A series of boron standards and post-accident matrix solutions prepared by NUS were analyzed with the Digiches analyzer at the Ionics, Inc., plant in Watertown, Massachusetts. The analyses were performed by a NUS represent.*tive using a produc-tion model analyzer. Titration of the samples were performed with 0.5N and 0.1N l NaOH to determine if there is an advantage to using a more dilute titre. No radia-tion exposure was involved in this testing.

i l

. s

. 4j 2-10 -

l L

~

.~

The solutions analyzed are listed below. Concentration of the additives used to make up these solutions are shown on Table 2-1.

e Boron standards based on the weight of boric acid used to prepare the solutions.

e Boron standards containing low concentrations of lithiun hydroxide.

This was to simulate the buildup of lithium in the primary coolant I during normal power operations.

e Post-secident fission product matrices containing known

- concentrations of boron.

e Simulated solutions that might be expected to develop in the reactor containment sump after a loss-of-coolant-accident and activation of caustic containment spray.

e Solutions containing calcium, this testing was performed to ,

determine if calcius that is leached from the concrete during a loss-of-coolant-accident would affect the boren analysis results.

L .

u o

W 2-11 y - - - - - ---

e . .

e y s

s TA3LE 2-1 CCHPOSITICN* OF MATRIX SOLUTIONS USED IN TESTING THE DIGICHEM ANALYZER as/1 as/1 as/1 as/1 as/1 as/1 as/1 as/1 Seasle 3 ti 05 La C1 B4 M0 KI Cs C1 Ce UEO.), (NB.)2 CaC1 3 3 3 2 Matris 1 60 6.9 4.0 15.4 31.0 312.9 20.7 0 Matrix 2 - 2000 6.9 4.0 15.4 51.0 312.9 20.7 0 ,

Matriz 3 6000 6.9 4.0 15.4 51.0 312.9 20.7 0 Matriz & 6004 Matriz 3 0 0.7 0.7 0.4 0.4 1.5 1.5 5.1 5.'1 31.3 31.3 2.1 2.1 0

0

)

Matris 6 , 0 6.9 4.0 15.4 31.0 312.9 20.7 0 Matriz 7 600 1.4 0 0 0 0 0 2018 Matriz 8 60 6.9 0 0 0 0 0 0

• The pga concentrations indicated are based on weigned amounts of sales dissolved in one liter of veter. The boron is indicacd as as/1 of boron. *he other salts are indicated as as/1 af Li CH. La C1) and so forth.

a- *%

b 2-12 ,

--n ,y --,--,-c - - - - - - - - - -- ----

F

'I TEST RESULTS IRRADIATION TESTING OF SELECTED COMPONElffS FROM THE DIGICHEM ANALYZER Prior to reporting results it should be noted that the maximum radiation level 0

expected in the Digichen analyzer would oe 10 R/hr to the teflon plunger of the sample addition module. This considers both gamma and beta radiation levels.

Radiation levels in the other areas of the analyzer would be in the range of 10' -

5 5 10 R/hr. Radiation exposure for other components would be less than 10 rada.

Estimated radiation exposures are based on the following assumptions e The first boron analysis will be performed in triplicat at one hour after the accident occurs. Approximately 25 minutes will be required to perform the triplicate analyses.

f' e The primary coolant will contain a maximum activity concentration

\_ -. of 4 curies per al during the first boron analysis performed.

e Total volume of primary coolant contained within the tubing. the one mi sample addition module and rotary reaction cell will b6 on

- the order of 3 al. This volune is assumed to exist as a point source within an imaginary sphere of one foot diameter.

e The radioactive coolant will be flushed from the system with water when the triplicate analysis is complace. Flushing will require the use of manual commands to the Digichem analyser.

e There will be two additional triplicate analyses performed within the next 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. Boron analyses performed on a once per day basis after this time will not add significantly to total radiation exposure.

Limited radiation damage was observed in the testing performed; however, this was to components which have been replaced with radiscion resistant components in the i Sentry modified system. Solid state componente which were damaged were subse-quently tested at irradiation levels of 100 ,10 5, and 106 rads to establish the threshold level at which damage occurs.

ROTARY SPIN ASSEMBLY 7

After irradiation to 10 rads, the rotary spin cell assembly was installed in an operational Digichem analyzer and the system was activated. The teflon reaction 2-13

.~.- - _ . . . , , . . , , ..- . _ - , , . . _ m. - - . . . . . . .m- -.

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

e .

s TABIZ 2-2 RADIATICM TESTINC 0F VARIOUS T:.ASTCTR$

Exposure Ites in Rade Material Resulte 6 control, 75 DurameterIII Irradiated, 0-Ring 10 Buna

. 70-75 Durometer 7

0-ting 10 Buna Irrediated, 75-80 Durameter 0-Eing 10 6

Kalres control. 84-85 DurameterIII: Irradiated, 80-85 Durameter I

0-Ring 10 Kalres Irradiated, 83-89 Durometer 0 control, 78-40 Durometer(I's Irradiated, 0-Eing 10 vitos 75-80 Durometer 7

. 0-Ring 10 vites Irradiated, 75-80 Durameter 6

Delivery Tipe 10 Kal-F No visible effects material would still serve its intended purpose Delivery Tipe 10 tel-F $ light darkaning notedt sacerial would still serve its intended perpose Tubing (Lot 1)I 5 10 6

Teflom No irradiation effect III

].

Tubing (Lot 1) 10 Tefloo Rupture pressure - 1600 poi for three specimens 7

Tubing (Lot 1) 10 Teflos Severly embrittled; tubing would breals when bent Tubing (Lot :)III 10 3

Teflos No irradiation effect 0

. Tubing (Lot :) 10 Teflos Rupture pressure - 1600 pei III I

Tubing (Lot 2) 10 Teflos Longitudinal ersching occurred when the tubing wee bent Tubing 10 Tyson tupture pressure - 300 poi I 'I for three irradiated specimene (1) Evaluation of results was based on change is hardness. There wee no visual indication of damage.

(2) Control saeples from both lots ruptured at 1600 poi. The failure mode differed in that a bubble developed on the control sample prior to rupture. Pressure f ailure of the irradiated samples resulted free development of pin-hole cracks.

(3) Two lots of tubing from separate sources were tested.

! (4) One control specimen ruptured at 270 poi and the other at 290 poi.

s 2-14 *

(

_ . . _ , - _ . _ . . , , , . . - - . _ , -..__..y--.,,,,._,,.-,.c.,,_._,_,....,m,._,,y, _., . .,-_,-y -

.,7.,..

I l

TABIZ 2-3 IRRADIATION TESTING OF PHOTO-INTERRUPTER CELL MCA8 M1111 amp Irradiation Level Outout *Corment s O rads (Control Sample)301 cell tested  ! .

lo' rads 24 1 cell tested

^

3 10 rads 0.1 2 cells tested 6 2 cells tested 10 rads 0

• 20 ma source, 5v detector excitation 4

e W

2-15 e

,w-r- --,,,y,_ ._,%y,m,,,_. ,, - ,_ y ,,,__

s s

1 TABLE 2-4 .

IRRADIATION TESTING 07 PHOTO-INTERRUPTER CELL H21A3 Irradiation Level Millianpo Outeut*

0 rade (control Suple) 17.5 .

O rada (Control saple) 14.3 T

104 rads 14.0 ,

9.8 10frade 10 rads

• 10 4 0.3 10frads 10 rads 0.9

+40 sa source,10v detector excitation .

S 9

J 2-16

,e .

(

. cell withic the rotary spin cell assembly spun momentarily and stopped. Testing performed indicated that the photon couple'd interrupter module had failed. Sentry has replaced this module with a mechanical system which is not sensitive to radiation. The photo interrupter module was replaced and the teflon reeccion cell j was operational. Also, a solenoid valve would not operate because the solid state 1 relay which activates this valve had failed. Replacement of this relay was required to activate the valve. This relay can be located out' side the radiation sone in the computer control systes, without making any change other than 5 f

- installing longer connection wires. Output from this relay is 120 VAC.

A vicual inspection was then made of the rotary spin assembly with the following results:

e All glass and clear plastics had darkened. This darkening does not detract from the physical properties of the material. ,

e The two nylon pulleys which provide the driving force to spin the teflon cell had a myriad of cracks, however the pulleys held together inhen operated. It would be pointless to do any further test work with these nylon pulleys since they are easily replaced with metal pulleys which are not affected by radidtion.

7

( ,~

- e No visual indication of degradation (cracks, loss of elasticity) could be found in the elastomer belt which connects the nylon pulleys.

e' The teflon tubing which feeds reagents and sample to the assembly had become very brittle. Other testing peric,rmed with teflon tubing indicates the threshold damage indication for teflon tubing is between 10' and 10' rada. Considering radiation damage alone.

the safety factor involved with the use of teflon tubing in this application is several orders of magnitude. s e The teflon reaction cell suffired no apparent visual damage. No cracking occurred when the cup-snaped cell was spread apart and e squeezed together with maximum hand pressure.

SAMPLE ADDITION MODULE The teflon plunger of the semple additien module may see total radiation exposures in the range of 100rada. This component is discussed separately because it is the high exposure item in the overall assembly. Testing performed, as discussed below, indicates that this plunger will be functionally adequate at 10 rada exposure.

However, the system failed at this exposure level for another reason as identifi/d below. ,

g After irradiation to 107 rsosexposure,thesystebwasinstalledinanoperational

- Digiches analyzer and the system was activated. The module did not operate.

2-17

/

--.m-mm,----o,--e_--. - - .-. -- 9 ,--w m,--,w.y-- - - , , -- . - , - - - , , , ,-,--,.%,.ye .we.~-----ym, -.-.--w

c I Testing performed indicated that the photon coupled solid state limit switch had failed. (Sentry has replaced this solid state switch with a mechanical limit switch which is not sensitive to radiation.) After the solid state limit swit:h was replaced, the sample addition module was operated continuously for about 1.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> without problem. Around 100 samples could have been processed during this

! period. The operational test was terminated at this time.

A visual inspection was made of this module with the following results*

e The glass and clear plastics had darkened.

e There was no visual indication of degradation of the teflon plunger or leskage past this plunger as it was operated.

e The teflon tubing was severly embrittled. However, actual B

irradiationlevelghatwilloccurunderpost-accidentconditionsis on thg order of 10 rads or less. The tubing

• is still serviceable at 10 rads exposure.

0-RINGS AND OTHER ELASTOMERS The elastomers were tested at several different radiation levels with results as indicated in Table 2-2. ,,

The result of the testing clearly indicates that all elastomers in the Digichem analyser will withstand 10Irads exposure except for the teflon tubing. Exposure 0

level for the teflon tubing should be limited to 10 rads. This is beyond the exposure levels anticipated under accident conditions. Heavier components, such as the teflon reaction cell and the teflon plunger in the reagent addition module, I

remained operational at 10 rads exposure. However, it would be desirable to limit all teflon components in the system to 10 6rads of cumulative exposure.

Data from the pressure tests performed on the irradiated and control samplse of teflon tubing are somewhat unusual in that all specimens failed at exactly 1600 psi. All specimens were pressure tested with compressed nitrogen in the same manner, slowly increasing the pressure while monitoring a pressure gauge till failure occurred. Aboat one minute was required to increase pressure to the 1600 psi failure level.

Tyson tubing was tested even though none'is used in the Digiches analyzer to develop alternate materials in the event that the teflon tubing failed at some low irradiated exposure level. This material is very resistant to irradiation based on j 7

no indication of change or darkening of this material even at 10 rads exposure. [

2-18

l Results of the test work with teflon tubing reported here are consistent with results of testing performed by General Electric on their nuclear plane project.

In the General Electric work, teflon hose that was maintained under static pressure with a liquid at 1200 psig while under gamsa irradiation 3 started to leak at slightly above 106 rads exposure. Five irradiation tests were performed in the

,l temperature range of 100 to 350*F. Temperature had no effect on test results. The hose was pressurized with a liquid identified as MIL-L-7808C.

Observations made indicate that failure of the elastomers tested ultimately occurs because of embrittlement. This failure mode does not present a problem with the Digiches analyser since there are no components in the system that are flexed on a constant basis. There may be some very minor flexing of the teflon tubing but this would occur very infrequently.

PHOTO-INTERRUPTER CELLS Evaluation of results for these solid state components is based on typical charac-teristic curves developed by the manufacturers. Typical curves for the unieradiated cells are shown in Figures 2-2 and 2-3. A comparison was made of output current verses input current for the control samples and for separate

' ~

_ samples tested after irradiation. As. indicated in Tables 2-3 and 2-4, testing was

~

performed at 10', 105 and 106 rads. Data reported in these tables indicate that threshold damage occurs between 10' and 10' rads for module R21A3 and about 10' rads for module MCA8. It cannot be concluded that the MCA8 module will withstand 10 rads on a consistent basis since only one module was tested at this exposure level. Slight damage resulted from the irradiation, however, the module was still operational.

IRRADIATION TESTIN0 0F THE pH PROBES A separate test was performed to determine the effect of irradiation on pH probes because satisfactory performance on their part while under irradiation is an absolute must to operation of the Digiches analyzer. This topic is of additional interest because of NRC regulations concerning pH determination requirements for j all nuclear systems under post-accident conditions. There is limited data available indicating that pH probes should perform satisfactorily under high level irradiation. However, additional testing was considered necessary to provide direct experience.

2-19 1

.~ _ . , - . . , .._.__.,_._,--m.-___,.,__.__ . _ . _ , _ . _ _ . _ _ , _ _ _ _ , , , - . _ . . . . , _

4 TYPICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF MODULE H2fA3 -

t. i i . . . , , i , ,e i i , ,

I, l i il I if Tl h l ll  !

I ll I/l ll l ll 3 i ,

!j*

i f wa:'-- .

., , , ... i

T. E-

}2 >

f 1 ~ ~ ~ l t A

1. 8 1

'l ,

h:=

h <

/ t 6 t 1 5* /

l 1.

~

r L l

w mm QUTPUT CURRENT VL INPUT CURRENT E

FIGURE 2-2 l

./

TYPICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF MODULE MCA8 ioo.

U.E , . e i ,.

I I I i l Iil to i i 11 l l e e i en/e ie si I

l i IK l Ill I wi .

i ii I

T I I t J

/ I I L

/ I I I c.

i.o 10 loo i,..

_  :. us.

FIGURE 2-3 2-20 -

_. The results of irradiation testing performed on an internal reference pH probe are presented in Table 2-5. There is no effect on pH indication at a exposure level of 3 x 105R/hr, however the pH showed a decrease of around 0.1 pH units for the pH 4 and 7 range at a radiation level of 9.77 x 10 5 R/hr. This differs from external reference probes response which showed a slight increase during irradiation as is j inter discussed. The high level radiation had no significant effect on the internal reference probes for the pH 10 buffer solution.

0 Total exoosure on the internal reference probe was about 2 x 10 rads at the time it was broken while being moved with the hot cell manipulators. There was no observed change with time in the behavior of the pH electrodes during the two hour period the probe was under test.

The results of irradiation testing performed on an external reference pH probe are presented in Table 2-6. An increase in pH of 0.14 units was observed for the pH range of 4 through 10 at a radiation level of 3 x 105 R/ hrs. A further increase of 0.21 pH units was observed when the radiation level was increased to 9.77 x 10 R/hr. The radiation effect is reversible based on data taken when the radiation level was reduced and later eliminated. Note in the subject table that the pH of the neutral buffer increased from 7.06 to 7.20 at a radiation level of 3 x 10 5*

^

(

R/hr. This pH increased to 7.28 at a radiation level of 9.77 x 10 R/hr and then 5

dropped to 7.19 when the radiation level was reduced to 3 x 10 R/hr. The final pH reading at the end of the test was 7.10 for both the control ari, the irradiated sample. The pH of the control sample was taken with the irradiated probe and with a probs that had not been irradiated.

Some radiation degrada' t ion of the pH 10 solution was observed after exposure to an integrated dose of 5 x 100 rads. Note that the measured pH sf this solution dropped from 10.06 to 9.60, however, the control sample outside the hot cell showed no change in pH level wnec measured with the irradiated probe. If the reduction in pH of the basic solution had resulted from radiation damage to the probe, the pH of the control sample should also have indicated a lower pH.

The results of irradiation testing performed on an external reference probe with a previous history of 5 x 10 6rads exposure are presented in Table 2-7. Note that the effect of irradiation on pH is slightly enhanced over that previously 5

experienced. The increase for exposure at a radiation level of 3 x 10 R/hr and 5

9.77 x 10 R/hr is 0.15 and 0.3 pH units respectively versud an increase of 0.14 and 0.21 pH units during the initial testing reported in Table 2-6.

2-21

4 TA31.E 2-5 50I ON AN EFFECT OF RADIATION ,

. INTERNAL REFERENCE pH PROBE (L & N CAT 4117495)

Type pH at pH at Buffer Initial pH 3 x 10 5 9.77 x 10 5 Solution No. Radiation R/H r R/hr 4.60 4.60 II 4.50(2)

EE2 '04 C I"

. IDI PO + 7.0$ 7.06 6.93 .

~

E CO , 30 10.10 10.13(II 10.12 2 3 7 (1) No change in pH from the instantaneous readingwas noted over a 3-10 minute exposure period.

(2) After taking the initial readings, the probe was lef t inmiersed in this sol ution. Readout of the pH seter varied between 4.44 and 4 31 during a 90 minute exposure period. The probe was broken at this time when it was moved.

(3) Total exposure = 2 x 106 reds.

~

A

(

i

• )

2-22

. .. e g -

f TAR &E 2*4 EFFECT OF R&D1AT!cu ON EIT5m&L REFEMNM F80858 (FISER CAT f 11-43e-f and 11-419 43)

Typse laitial S 95 At g Bede sE At g Rede 3E At g Rede 35 At 3 tede final p Buffer We 3 s 10 Ca. 9.?? s 10 Cua. 3 a 10 Ca. 3 a 10 Ca. De telstles__ MhA R fu r A 14r g 34r 1 fadistigo 3

2 2I06 4.39 4.3 1.5 a 10 settled = = = = = butier buffer

(- *

• soluties 6

- 33 7e f.06 7.30 1 3 a 10 8

f.38 $ s 10 I  ?.19 10 f.19 $ s 10 6 7.10 ,

0 10.04 10.19 1.3 a 10 I 10.!? 5 a 10 5 ,,,(3) 10 0

met I33 $ s 10 0 9.60(2)

,pt,>. t - a.. t. -

(1) & 34 eeteressettee wee ease ef ter all eeurtee are ressved from tne ties sett.

(2) a seettet seele taet was oweeed to tae same metrousentet aseettaens vstneut testesses esseeure mee a se of .0.35.

(33 Reestage were est tease besewee of tae estreme diffisisaty is usving tse pd t+ese esta cae maanpu.eters.

• W 2-23

r _

j l

I a ~<.9 TABIZ 2-7 ,

EFFECT OF RADIATION 6

.PR PROBES WITH 5 x 10 RADS PREVIOUS EXPOSL1C (FISHER CAT 413-639-9 and 13-439-63)

Type pH at 'pH at Buffer Initial q g) 3 x 10 5 9.77 x 10 5 Solut1on No Radiation 1/E r 1/Rr .

s ER PO 4 4.45 4.60 4.75 2

XH P0 1 7.08 7.26 7.37

+2Na0R 2 s 10 08 10 2' 10 37 xco'@8 3 (1) The pH sensurements were taken on probes that were previously irradLated as indicated in Table 2-6. No change was noted after about 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> exposure in the test indlested above.

e

. ' )

2-24 .

-r- , --

The results of long term irradiation testing performed on external reference probes are presented in Table 2-8. Note that there is an increase of 0.1 and 0.15 pH 3

units at a radiation level of 10 R/hr. Overall results dif f er somewhat from previous experiments in that there is little effect at the high radiation level exposure (9.1 x 10k R/hr). This may be because the high radiation exposure was 3

. preceded by 60 hours6.944444e-4 days <br />0.0167 hours <br />9.920635e-5 weeks <br />2.283e-5 months <br /> exposure at 10 R/hr. Other experiments did not have this low level exposure preceding the high lovel test.

IRRADIATION TESTING OF THE SENTRY MODIFIED DIGICHEM ANAI.YZER Checkout of the modified equipment was performed outside the hot cell for nominal baron concentrations of 60, 600,1200 and 3000 mg/1. The boron solutions used were obtained by known dilution of a 6000 mg/l stock solution. The system was set up as it would be under accident conditions with 25 feet of separation between the control module and the components that will be exposed to irradiation. Multiple analyses were were performed at each boron concentration. The end point of the titation was determined by automatic derivation of the change in slope of the pR line which occurs when titration of the boron-mannitol titration is complete.

Maxistsa deviation noted from actual boron concentration was 1.1 percent with an r .

average deviation on the order of 1 percent. Accuracy requirements for boron q

determination during normal power operation, as specified by many utilities, are on the order of plus or minus 0.5 percent.

When checkout of the equipnent was completed, the rotary reaction cell assembly, the 3000 ppo boron standard, and the sample addition module were installed in the hot cell. The 1200 ppm boron standard remained outside the hot : ell . The eight 60Co frames (53,000 curies , total) were arranged around the rotary reaction cell assembly and the sample addition module to achieve a radiation level of 1.75 x 10' R/hr, as measured near the top center of the rotary reaction cell assembly. This value is comparable to the general radiation level that may be present during a post-accident condition, assuming a 4 CL/cc activity la the coolant. Baron analyses results with the Sentry modified Digichem analyzer in a 1.75 x 10' R/hr radiation field are presented in Table 2-9. .This testing was perfomed in the hot cell where temperature was on the order of 95'F. Testing perf ormed outside the hot 5 cell to checkout the equipment was perfomed at a temperature of 72'F. This change in temperature could have had some effect on results because of 2-25

--- - - - - - - - v.r -- --_. .-, - - _ . . . , _ - . _ _ , - . , _ - , . , , . _ _ _ _ , , _ , . . , , _ . . _ _ _ _ . , _ _ , , . . _ _ , . _ _ _ _ , . ,. _

m TABIZ 2-8 EFFECT OF LONC TERM RADIATION EXPOSURE ON pH PROBES Two Fisher external reference pa probes were irradiated for 60 hours6.944444e-4 days <br />0.0167 hours <br />9.920635e-5 weeks <br />2.283e-5 months <br /> at 10 3 R/Hr while one probe was in a pH 3.98 and the other probe in a PR 7.00 buffer solution. One probe was new and the other probe had 5 x 106 rads previous exposure. The probe with the previous oposure was not identified in the data that was taken. Results fr:ne this test are as follows:

pR With pH at 10 3 pH Af:er 60 gours No Radiation R/He Exposure at 10 R/ hrs 2.98 4.09 4.09 7.qo 7.15 7.15 ,

The probes were then restandarized with new buffer solutions and the '

radiation level was increased to 9.1 x 105R/H r. One probe was lef t in a pH 3.98 and the other probe in a pa 7.00 solution. Results from this test are as follows:

3 Radiation f.evel = 9.1 x 10 R/He pH With pH At pH At pH At pH At pH At Total No Radiation 5 Min 1 He 2.33 Hrs 17.33 Hrs 20 Hrs Exoos ur es*

3. 98 4.01 3.98 3.99 4.00 3.98 1. 8 x 1077 rade 7.00 7.06 7.04 7.05 7.05 7.06 1. 8 x 10 rade One probe which was not identified prior to performing the test had a

previous exposure history of 5 x 10 rada.

e f )*

. .)

2-26 .

3 ,

b 8

• evolution of gas bubbles from degasification occurring as the liquids were heated.

The boron analyses results had a higher error band and more scatter than was observed in testing performed outside the hot cell or in testing performed at ,

Ionics with a production in model analyzer. However, the results observed were totally acceptable for post-accident use.

. Testing was then performed at a radiation level of 8.64 x 10' R/hr (factor of five 60

. higher). The higher radiation level was achieved by moving the Co frames closer to the test equipment. Results of this test work are presented in Table 2-10.

Note that there is little or no change in variab.ility from results shown in the last part of Table 2-9.

5 The final test phase was performed at a radiation level of 1.75 x 10 R/hr. This was the maximum radiation level achievable at the top center of the rotary reaction cell assembly with the 53,000 curie source. This work was performed over the a weekend. The test was started late Friday afternoon. Reasonable results were .

achieved for the first few analyses, at which time, the test personnel departed for the weekend. The equipment started behaving erratically soon after the personnel

~

departed and continued this behavior for,most of the weekend. Results achieved at ,

(

s , the beginning of this weekend run are presented in Table 2-11. Note that the s.

results of the 1200 ppa and 3000 ppe boron standards are unacceptable for post-sceident use. However, equipment problems were identified that are responsible for this condition and changes have been made to the equipment design to prevent repeat of this occurrence. This is discussed later in more detail. In any event, it should be noted that the radiation levels anticipated under post-accident conditions will not approach the radiation level used in the final testing of the ,

equipment.

As shown in Table 2-12, results improved near the end of the weekend run. Note, in particular, that all values in the 3000 ppm column, except two, are within plus or minus 5 percent of actual. The two exceptions both indicate a boron concentration of 953 ppa (68.2 percent low). Improving results with increased time under j exposure is not consistent with the behavior pattern expected from radiation damage. In particular, radiation damage would not be expected to result in a pattern where both exceptions to general results indicate a boron concentration of 953 ppa.

The test was termi'nated when a nylon pulley broke on the rotary reaction cell assenhly. This nylon pulley is internally stressed with a press fit brass bushing.

2-17 e ee

- -- --.r.- -.wyv- -

y.. r. - -g-y e,. _. .m,_ _. y.w,---m--.,_,,-.7st_y-.m - . -_,g,=_w,m , .g., __.,-.,..w-o 9__wy ,% -.y- _

l

\

t I TiB12 2-9 50E018 AHiLTSIS RESULTS WITH THE SEN21T

, ,!.elvtzo exercarx ANity sx rN i 1.75 ,10 ania aiotarteN vtz:.3 Nominal 1200 rse Soroa solution II} Nominal '3000 9as Soren SolutionIII Percent Percent Stepe(2) of Indicated Deviation Stape(2) of Indicated Deviation 0.1105 N ppm From 0.1105 N ppa from Neou Boron N=isal Ne0R -

Boron Naminal 524 1258 4.8 1243 2983 -0.57 '

537 1291 7.6 1263 3031 1.0 54 6 -

1310 9.2 1233 2959 -1.4 535 1284 7.0 1198 2875 -4.2

• - 506 1214 1.2 1201 2882 -0.39 503 s 1207 0.6 1272 3053 1.8 498 1195 -0.4 1250 3000 0t 50 5 1212 1.0 1276 3042 2.1 528 1267 5.6 1236 2964 - 1.1 529 1270 5.8 1254 3009 0.3 3 536 1*86 7.2 1187 2549 -5.0 <

539 1294 7.8 1199 2878 -4.1 538 1291 7.6 1187 2849 -5.0 529 1294 7.8 1199 2878 -4.1 538 1291 7.6 1244 2990 -0.3 529 1270 5.8 1234 2942 -1.3 531 1274 6.2 1271 3050 1.7 329 1270 5.8 - - -

538 1291 7.6 - - -

1527 1267 5.6 1232 *957 +2.1 e:13.9 334.2 22.8 331.1 +74.6 71 .7

• a,+ 27. 8

. ;68.4 ;5.6 ;42.2  ;,149.2 34 3

'(1) The historical semples could not be found at the Georsia Tech. test facility, so boros concentration cannot be verified. The indicated concentraticas were obtained by (2) One step = 2.17 x% 10 dilution litare. of a 6000 s8/1 boros stock solution.

The analyser wee pro 8 rammed to siternately analyse the 1200 ppe and 3000 ppe boros standards.

t l

t b

o 2-28 ,

/

4 a  !

t i

TA31E 2-10 330N ANALTRI8 EESULTS q SEWrRY NODIFIED DICICIEM ANALTZER IN A 8.64 x 10 R/RR RADIATION FIILD a.

Weinal 1200 som Boree soluties Wesinal 3000 oss Beroe Solution Percent Forcent stepe III of -Indleated Deviaties stepe III of Indiented Deviaties 0.110$ E , ppm From 0.1105 N

• ppa From Ma0E Beroe Weniaal Na0N Baron Maniaal 1291 7.6 1230 3000 0 538 MO 1296 8.0 1257 3017 0.4 336 1286 7.2 1256 3016 0.3 See 1306 8.8 1288 3091 3.0

%4 1306 8.8 1260 3024 0.8 545 1308 9.0 1258 3019 0.6

- - - 1166 2796 -4.7 1341 1299 S.2 1248 2995 1.*

7+3.7 +9. 2 +0.* +38.1 41.6 +2.4 2:{f.4 318.4 [1.4 176.2 [183.1 h.8 (1) One step = 2.17 a 10*4 liters The asalyser was programmed to alternately analyse the 1200 pra and 3000 ppe beres standards.

i t

6 I

e

]

i e eens 2-29 9

e a m_.,,,,,,-ng ..-,,,....e--___,p pp_ ,me._n- ,_,-..m,n,-mm-,-g., , a----., n

- --- , - _ - , , , , en , - , , , , , , , , . , - . - _ - - , , , , , , - - . . . , - - , ,

TA812 2-11

. SElfftY

< ;. . 8 30 EON4N4LT2EE ISD2FIED D2GIGEN 4N4L15132NRSULTS WITH 41.73 x 10 1 y /RE BADI4T10N FIELD 3EGINNING OF 4 '4EE END EUN Weniaal 1200 one neros Setution Nominal 3000 som toren Solution Persest Percent Stepe III of 2ndleased Deviasies Stepe III of ledicated Deviaties 0.1105 N pga From 0.110$ N ppm From Ne0E ' __ tores Nominal Ne04 Doren Meninal 334 1291 7.4 1245 3034 1.2 538 1291 7.4 1260 3024 0.8 3M

• 874 -27.2 633 1319 -49.4 490 1174 - 2. 0 747 1793 -40.1 437 1097 -0.6 838 2011 -33.0 438 1099 -8.4 1000 2400 -20.0 392 961 - 21.6 1213 1911 -3.0 367 481 -26.6 424 1978 -34.1 ,

406 970 -19.2 1452 3445 14.2 440 1056 -12.0 126S 3034 1.2 *

, 468 1123 -6.4 1237 3017 0.6 w S38 1291 7.6 783 1879 -37.4 340 12M 8.0 1237 3017 0.4 528 1267 S.6 902 ' 2165 -27.8

$38 1291 7. 6 1268 3063 1.4 528 1247 S.6 1246 2990 0.3 482 1137 -3.6 383 919 -69.4

$21 1250 4.2 622 1493 -50.2 374 1378 14.8 619 1486 -50.3

\ Sol 1344 12.2 331 794 -73.3 Set 1301 8.4 - 739 1822 -39.3

$37 1289 7.4 6k lu2 -43.3

%1 1298 4.2 1209 2902 -3.3 327 1265 3.4 922 2213 -16.2 600 1459 21.6 937 2249 -13.0 481 ,11% -3.8 1274 30S8 1.9 14h 1196 10.4 M0 2303 23.1 o.43.8 1133.0 117 +309 1 743 112.4 43.6 2e+127.6 *306.0

, 114.2 419 31446 (1) One step = 2.17 a 10** litare

- The metyear wee programmed to alternately analyse the 1200 ppm ad 3000 ppe beres st ederde.

S 2-30 ,

r-

<- ~

t TAB 12 2-12 SENTRY 30BCN ISDIFIED DIGICEN ANALYS18INRE801.T8 ANA1.Y1ER A 1.73 a 10UITE R y /ER RADIATION FtILD

.* l )e *

. E AR END OF A M EI END RUN

" 8aal 1200 som Beres Soluties Naminal 3000 een torea Salueles Persent Percent Stepe III of 2ndiented Devission Stepe III of 2ndieeted Deviatism 0.110$ N ppe Fres 0.1105 5 ppa Fra

,E Seren Actual Na0E Seree actual 531 1274 6.2 1289 30 % 3.1 448 1171 - 2.4 1292 3101 3.4 334 1287 7.2 1283 2.6 307f2) -64.2 SE 13 % 12.8 397 953 330 1272 6.0 1269 3066 1.5 471 1130 -S.8 1287 3089 3.0 Set 1301 8.4 1277 306$ 2.2 473 1135 -3.4 1291 3098 3.3 370 1348 14.0 1869 3%6 1.5 534 1282 6.8 1295 3100 3.6 t . 483 1137 -3.4 1204 3082 2.7 S37 1289 7.4 1287 3009 3.0

.. 331 12M 6.2 1298 3113 3.8 480 1152 -4.0 1292 +

3101 3.4 334 1282 6.8 1283 2.0 307{2) 953 -48.2 SM 13 % 12.8 397 530 1272 14.3 1269 . 3%4 1.5 471 1130 -S.8 1287 3089 3.0

%2 1301 8.4 1277 3065 2.2 473 1135 -S.4 1291 3098 3.3 370 1368 14.0 1269 3%6 1.3 534 1282 6.8 1295 3108 3.6 482 1157

-3.6 1284 3082 2.7 1289 7.4 1287 3089 3.0

$37 1293 3103 3.4 1521 1231 7.6 1285 3083 2.8 o* n ett 23.3 +9.0 +21 5 *0.73

( 48 [163  ;).0 [18.0 33 [1.3 (1) One step = 3.17 s 104 11 tere The analyser was prestemmed to siternately emelyse the 1200 ppa and 3000 pre beres etanderde.

(2) pet within 3 STD Deviettees of the seen, thus are set included is the estaulations.

e 4

2-31 4

G

There was 2.7 x 10# rada exposure on ch'e test equipment at this time. Testing sub-sequently performed with the Ionics equipment indicates that extensive cracking will develop on this nylon pulley with 10I rads expceure. '4hile the pulley on the Ionics supplied equipment did not fall after operation at the 10 7rads exposure level, its eppearence was such that it could have easily failed.

' 8 i

Subcequent examination of the equipment performed by Sentry indicated that the nylon and Rel-f parts that were not replaced had become severely embrittled. This was expected, based on the total exposure levels involved. All metal and electronic components were fully operational.

TEST RESUI.T3 TROM THE PROCUCTION MocE!. DICICHEM ANAL'!ZER The Digiches analyses results and laboratory analyses results for standard boron solutions are presented in Table 2-13. There is reasonable agreement between these results, however, there is more variation than was seen in previous testira per-formed with the Digiches analyser (Table 2-15). Results of this other work Indicate that it should be possible to obtain a precision of f,one percent with the Digiches analyser. Note in Table 2-13 that part of the titrations were perfomed .

)

with 0.5 3,Naos and part with 0.1 N Na0M solutlops. A comparison of the data indicate that essentially equivalent results were achievad with either normality.

The analyses results for estrix solutions containing simulated fission product species and caustic solutions are presented in Table 2-14 These data indicate that the concentrations of fission product species expected following an accident will not interfere with boron analyses results.

The data also Indicate that boron analyses results will not be affected by the caustic added to the primary coolant when the containment sprays are activated during a 1.0CA event. The limited testing performed concerning the effect of 11thium alone on boron analyses results indicates this addition had no apparent effect on accuracy or precision.

..J 2-32 l

> *e. .

f

?

TASIA 2*13 STamm tot 0N AND BLAWE ANALYSES EESILT 1r!TE Tur PRODemCN tcDtt t'101CREM ANM.12ER Bemissal Rumber q t) Laboratory 2 Error Beren of Titrast terse Analreg) Mear Lab g am/1 g Normalite g keeeltt  :.a D Standsed 6000 4 0.5 6124 6108 1.90 standard 4000 6 0.5 5962 6104 =2.39 Standard 4000 5 0.1 5914 610s -3.18 ,

Standard 2000 6 C.5 2082 2017 3.22 Standard 2000 4 0.1 2102 2017 4.*1

, standard 1000 6 0.5 1002 1025 2.24

( , ~

standsed 1000 3 . 0.5 1964 1023 2.34 3.90 standard 1000 1 0.1 1965 1025 S tandar6 60 ' 6 c.5 57.25 61 6.13 standard 60 6 0.1 59.05 -1.54 31mk III O 3 0.5 0.40 - -

slant III 0 5 0.5 -1.12 - -

tiet III O 7 0.1 -3.37 - -

(1) Deionised water (2) Analyses re.ults vita che Digichem analy*er (3) as detetuined by caustic titrattom of the berosmannitol campten a

w 2-33 w .m,

TABIZ 2-14

• ~

MAT 122 SOLUT20N ANALTSES REST'.TS W THE PROTC"M38 Ttti, Dt:tf2EM (MALT !t Eminal W e ber Meag Leberstory 2 Error Boros of T1trant Soros Analyseg Nean-Lao famole et/1 Analvees Normalit? st /1 Seeults'*  :.a s~

Metriel to 3 0.5 39.92 63 -7.82 Mat ria=1 60 3 0.1 38.79 65 -9.35 l

Matrir2 2000 3 0.5 2002 2022 2.97 Natrict 2000 3 0.1 2079 2022 2.82 Marrie3 6000 3 0.3 3897 6101 -3.36

! Matria-3 6000 3 0.1 3860 6101 -6.29 Marri e6 60C0 3 0.3 3995 6136 -2.30 ,

• i Mat ris-6 6000 3 0.1 3927 6136 -3.61 Matria-a Matria-7 600 60 3 3 0.3

0. 5 60s.6 54.73 62 6 64

-16.0

}

Matria-7 60 3 0.1 59.76 44 -9.59 Matria 5 0 3 0.5 -3.61 - -

Mar ria-3 0 5 0.1 -0.61 - -

!tatria-6 0 7 0.3 -2.92 - -

Matris-4 0 3 0.1 -0.64 - -

Saros + 0 4 600 3 0.5 M3.8 664 ~3.33 sees .

Seres

• 0 9 600 3 01 633.8 664 -1.83 Essa l Seres

• 3 3 6000 3 0.3 $916 6036 -2.31 i

sana I

' Seree + 0.q 600 3 0.5 626.8 666 -5.88 sasa scree + 0.q 600 3 01 626.6 666 -4.25 l

(1) Amelyses reesite with the Digichen Analyser (2) as determined by reustic titration of the boronenaitol ccmaplaz v

I .

l 2-34 ',

t-

h DISCUSSION OF RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS a Test results from the irradiation experiments clearly indicate that the critical components in the production model the Digichen analyzer with respect to radiation damage are as follows:

o Photon coupled interrupter module (H21A3). This is a light activated speed control system for the rotary reaction cell.

e Solid state relay for a solenoid actuated valve on the rotary reaction cell.

e Photon coupled solid state limit switch (MCA8) in the sample addition module.

e Two nylon pulleys used to drive the rotary reaction cell.

I

~ Threshol? damage level for photon coupled interrupter module H21A3 is between 10' and 105 rads. For module MCA8 it is about 10 rads. Total radiation exposure for H21A3 and MCA8 could be at the 10' red level in a accident condition, dependant on the overall design and operating philosophy of the sampling system. No conclusions can be drawn that MCA8 vill withstand 10' rads exposure since only one module was tested at this level. The module suffered minor damage with 10 rads exposure, however, it remained op4 rational. Threshold level for the solid relay (total failure at 10 7rads) was not determined since it is easier to locate this relay outside the radiation zone than it would be to determine the threshold damage 0

level. The nylon pulleys would almost certainly remain operational at 10 rads exposure, however, should be replaced with metsi pulleys since this change can be accomplished with little difficulty.

I

~

The solid-stste components listed above that can be damaged by radiation have been replaced with mechanical switches in the modifications made to the Digichem l

analyzer by Sentry. The nylon pulleys-were replaced by Sentry with stainless I steel pulleys as a consequence of the irradiation experiments performed at Georgia Tech.

~

2-35

_j

e a

Teflon tubing can withstand 10 0rads exposure while the heavier teflon components 7

remained operational at 10 rads exposure. It is not expected that radiation damage would preclude the use of teflon components in a Digiches analyzer during a post-accident condition. However, the change made by Sentry to eliminate ceflon in f avor of more radiation resistant materials will add a higher degree of

_; conservatism to the system, For example, the need for flushing the sample lines of

~

highly radioactive coolant within a specified time period becomes less critical with the Sentry. system sidee the teflon has been replaced with more radiation resistant material.

Concerning pH probes the data indicate that high radiation levels (106 R/hr) will decrease the indicated pH by~ about 0.; pH units for an interna 5 reference probe.

Indicated pH will increase by about 0.1 or 0.2 pH units for external reference probes in a high radiation field. An initial effect is noted at 10 R/hr. The increase in pH is insmediate. The effect is fully reversible when the radiation source is removed. The Digichem system has an external reference pH probe.

The shift in pH resulting from radiation should have a slight effect on accuracy of analyses with the Digiches analyzer, however, the effect will not be significant as concerns post-accident requirenents. During normal operating conditions , the . .

3 syszen will he titrating frem pH 5.5 to 8.5 to determine boron concentration.

Under high radiation conditions the system will still titrate from an indicated pH

~

5.5 to pH 8.5. However, in reality it may be titrating from say a pH of 5.3 to 8.3 because of the radiation induced shift in pH.

The erratic results noted in the high radiation level testing (Table 2-11) occurred because of an electronic " loophole" created by the high radiation field. "his resulted in the leakage of current, causing erratic pH electrode behavior. A l

design change has been made which includes a driven shield concept that will -

l

~ prevent radiation induced 1.eakage in the cable shield to the pH electrode. This )

driven shield will be a standard feature in all Digiches analyzers. It should be esphasized, however, that the systen tested without the driven shield operated ,

satisf actorily at radiation levels anticipated under post-accident conditions.

Increased reliability can be anticipated with the addition of the driven shield.

Results of testing performed with the production model Digichee analyzer are not

, equivalent to results previously achieved with this instrument. Compare for example, the data in Table 2-13 with the data from previous testing presented in s Table 2-15. The differeace between these results is not understood. One posssi- -

1

.) l 2-36

~

/

bility is that there may have been some desassing of the titrant solutions or of the sample itself as system pressure is reduced when the plungers of the sample or titrant burettes are withdrawn to replenish system volumes. Introduction of bubbles adds to the error because these bubbles are measured and computed as liquid volume.

4 It is apparent from the data presented in Table 2-15 that there is very little scatter to the results. Virtually all the results are low by about the same per-centage value. This pattern has appeared asain and again, with some results con-sistently low and others consistently high by some small percentage value. .

Generally, the analyses results have been computed based on normality of the caustic solution used for titration. From examination of the dataj it would appear that some improvment in accuracy can be achieved if results were compared directly

~

to results achieved with a known boron standard. The computer can be programmed to provide for such a comparision.

If the Digichen analyzer is used for normal operation or post-accident analyses, it should be noted that the primary coolant must be desassed to a low level prior to introduction of the semple to the sample burette. With high concentrations of gas

( ,

~

present, as can occur in an a(cident involving core damage, bubbles will be produced in the sample stress when system pressure is reduced as the plunger in the sample burette is withdrawn. This would result in values which are lower than actual. The error would be proportional to the ratio of gas volume to liquid volume in the sample stream.

Another feature that would be desirable though not mandatory for this system, would l be to inject a small volume of water to the rotary reaction asse' ably prior to 1 injecting the sample itself. The reason for this is to dilute the sample l

immediately so that there is less tendancy for radioactive iodine to escape from solution during post-accident conditions. It would also be necessary to inject a anal) volume of water after the sample addition to properly flush the semple tip.

The system can be programmed to provide this sample addition sequence. l The overall advantages of using the Digichen analyzer for the boron determinations during accident conditions are as follows:

i-

• All operations can be performed remotely. The exposure involved in determining boron concentration would approach zero.

e Sample volume requirements are on the order of 1-2 al per analysis, thus shielding requirements would be minimal.

2-37 S

l

._ _ _ _ __._ _ _ - ._ . . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ ._, _.__....____a

'1 TABI.E 2-15

+

. BORON REPRODUCI3II.ITY RESUI.TS

, 2000 ppe STANDARD e

i Analysis ppa 2 Analysis ppm 2 Res ul ts DEV Error Results DEV Error 1975 -25 -1.25 1975 -25 -1.25 1977 -23 -1.15 1975 -

-25 -1.25 1973 -27 -1.35 1975 -25 -1.25 1974 -26 -1. 3 1975 -25 -1.25 1074 -26 -1.3 1974 -26 -1.3 1977 -23 -1.15 1975 -25 -1.25 1977 -23 -0.15 1977 -23 -1.15 1975 -25 -1.25 1977 -23 -1.15 1975 -25 -1.25 1998 -2 -0.1 1973 -27 -1.35 2000 0 0 1973 -27 -1.35 1974 -26 -1.3 1973 -27 -1.35 1978 -22 -1.1 ,

g 1979 -21 -1.05 1981 -19 -0.95 <

1976 -24 -0.2 1977 -23 -1.15 1973 -27 -1.35 -

1977 -23 -1.15 1974 -26 -1.3 1977 -1.15 1973 -27 -1.35 1978 -22 -1.1 1973 -27 -1.35 1981 -19 -0.95 1974 -26 -1.3 1982 -18 -0.9 1975 -25 -1.25 1977 -23 -1.15 1974 -26 -1.3 1978 -22 -1.1 1974 -26 -1.3 1978 -22 - 1.1 2002 2 0.1 1977 -23 -1.15 1974 -26 -1.3 1981 -19 -0.95 1974 -26 -1.3 fl975 21.9 1.1 1979 21.2 0.6 a+5.8 +8.9 +0.4

~

+6.5 +6.5 +0.3 2c311.6 317.8 j.8 313.0 313.0 30.6 Average error = -1.052 Maximum error = -1.352 i

1. s

' .)

2-38 l

l _ _ _ . . . _ . . _ . , _ . . _ . - . ,_. . . _ _ , . _ . _ _ _ . , . , . _ . , _ . _ , _ _ . _ , , , . . . . . _ . . _ . _ . ~ , , , _. _ . .

., . g

- e Analyses results can be achieved within 10 minutes af ter the sample line is purged to obtain a representative sample.

e Though not sealed gas tight, there would be little tendency for release of gaseous activity to the atomsphere. This would be par-cicularly true if the sample rddition sequence is changed to add

. ' water prior to addition of the sample.

The disadvantages of using the Digiches analyzers under post-accident conditions are as follows:

e Waste solutions cannot be pumped back to the primary system since chemicals are added to the system in the analysis procedure.

e A small pumping system must be provided to pump the gravity drain vaste solutions from the analyzer to a vaste disposal facility if the waste disposal system is above the level of the analyzer. Mos t plants using this equipsent have gravity drain collection tanks.

CONCI.USIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS e The Sentry modified Digiches analyzer is acceptable for use to determine boron concentration under post-accident conditions.

Concerning its use for normal operations , the accuracy is probably acceptable.

e 'If the Digichem analyzer or Sentry modified system is used for boron determination during normal operations, results should be compared to known boren standards rather than computed solely on normality of the titrant solution. The system can be programmed to provide for such comparison.

e The primary coolant must be degassed to a low lever prior to introduction of the sample to the sample burette. This is to prevent introduction of gas bubbles in the sample stream, e It would be desirable (but not necessary) to program the system to add a small volume of water to the rotary reaction assembly prior to addition of the sample. This will further reduce an existing low potential for release of radioactive gas to the environment.

~

• 2-39 4

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

ec. .

r Section 3

SUMMARY

OF RESULTS - WESTINGHOUSE ANALYZER The Westinghouse Mark V boron analyzer performed well, both at high radiation levels (3.E5x105 R/hr) and under steady state conditions in the absence of radiation. There was an increase in fissioning count. rate resulting from high level irradiation, however, the effect of this increase on accuracy of the boron analyses is not significant. With operation at radiation levels anticipated under NRC post-accident reference conditions, the accuracy achievable is equal to, or

.better than other methods of boron analyses available for use during post-accideat conditions.

The system can be used to monitor boron concentration during normal power operations. Accuracy expected at intermediate or high level boren concentrations should be suitable for normal requirements. Determination of low-level boron

/

\

concentrations would probably require a 500 or 1000 second count rate period.

Na problems of any kind were experienced in operation during a test period of about ,

15 days total. This is a relatively short period compared with duty in a power plant, however, we believe the analy=er will work for a long time in a power plant.

3-1

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

.-j TEST PURPOSE .

Testing was performed to determine if the prototype unit of the Westinghouse Mark 7 boron analyzer would suffer radiation damage or reduction in accuracy when operated at radiation levels anticipated under post-accident conditions. Testing was also I; performed to establish reliability of the equipmen,t when operated under normal conditions.

I i

SYSTEM DESCRIPTION i .

General The Boron Concentration Monitoring Systes (BCMS) Mark V is an electronuclear system j

- that continuously measures the boron content in the primary coolant of a s

pressurized water reactor (PWR) power plant and digitally displays ths results in ,

parts total boron per million parts of water (ppm). In a shielded tank, a sample

of the primary coolant is positioned between a neutron source and a fission chamber. Neutrons originating at the source'are thermalized, then pass through the boron solution (where some are absorbed) and impinge upon the enriched uranium in the fission chamber. Fissioning occurs with the release of charged particles, resulting in voltage spikes in the fission detector that are translated into ppa boron. The charged particle population is directly proportional to the fissioning process, and therefore proportional to the neutron population. This provides a measure of the boron concentration in the water since the fissioning rate and resulting charged particle population varies inversely as does the neutron absorp-tion characteristics of the primary coolant. The charged particle count rate is

. translated into ppa boron by an algorithm programmed into the system's microcomputer which accounts for non-linear response and for temperature correction. Calibration is performed by determining the count rate for three known concentrations of boron solutions and entering this information into the computer unit. The system is self-calibrating at this point. The microcomputer transmits this boron concentration data to local or remote displays.

J The BCMS Mark V is comprised of three major assemblies: the sampler tank, which , )'

3-2 .

r; q

.  ?

I

'~

detects the charged particle count rate and coolant temperature; the electronic processor enclosure, which contains the processing control and monitoring electronics for most of the systems and the remote display, which enables a remote I

indication of boron concentration. The sampler tank is shown in Figure 3-1, and the overall system is shown in Figure 3-2. Test equipment evaluated in this work did not include the use of a remote display unit. This equipment is not required for system operation. Also provided are an interrupt line output and serial data ,

output which permit the processor enclosure to transmit data to the plant computer.

General descriptions of the three main BCMS Mark V assemblies are given below.

Sampler Tank Assembly The sampler tank assembly is a stainless steel cyinder, approximately 15.12 inches (38.4 em) in diameter, 19 inches (48.3 cm) high, and weighing 100 pounds (45.3 kg),

which is secured to the mounting platform by four hold-down clips. The cylinder contains polyethylene which functions as a neutron shield and moderator. The unit has two cavities, one neutron source well and one annulus assembly containing the fission detector. The neutron well is 1 inch in diameter by 7 inches deep in a high density polyethylene epoxy resin. The neutron source is provided by one curie of americium / beryllium (Am-Be). The fission detector has 2 grams of enriched

( /~

As uranium. The Aa-Be source is in the center of the tank in a vertical cavity which s

is inserted on the end of a polyethylene rod. Surrounding the fission detector is a one liter stainless steel annulus assembly. Coolant flow to and from this tank is provided by 0.5 inch tubes with Swagelok fittings for connection to the plant -

piping.

The sampler tank assembi,y receives reactor coolant solutions from a sampling location such as the letdown heat exchanger cr Boron Thermal Regeneration System (BTRS). Reactor coolant samples are routed to the input port of the sampler tank.

A thermocouple inserted through the cover place extends 8 inches into the polyethylene material. Sample flow through the unit is determined by the pressure drop between the inlet and outlet tube connections.

Two electrical signals are derived from the sampler tank assembly (1) fission .

count rate from the fissioning detector and (2) thermocouple potential (in millivolts). Detector pulses are applied to the preamplifier in the processor enclosure via a coaxial cable attached to the detector. The thermocouple signal is applied to a digital thermometer in tae processor enclosure via thermocouple wire.

3-3 v- ,s, --ww, -e,-- -

T e 8 O

M

_C_ *

, _c_

. D UI )

O. ( C_J L_'1

• e e

p. .%.

=

N M

is.:

14.0 Ap**CN. _

a ** a O 9 e A

8 I l I e e I 1 8 s I 9 i 1 ie i I i ' I I I

!  ! 8 !I Cl Am = Se I u i m acs

i e re.s i

• isso ,

l,j ,

I I I i wartt I i u-..s pct.YETNY N f 4.:s- -

d 7

'I m

i k f_ ]= I

^

FIGURE 3-1 '

@ SAMPt.ER TANK ASSEM81Y s

-S

.s e e 3-4 .

i.-.v-, e._ ,y---. ,, - , - , - _ . . y.._,.... , ,____.w.--..

t e *%.

W i

) .

a 25 s *sM si[.

'S

,ali- ,N

.s ,

5

. [. -.

Ia .

.2 8 1 a

.. M n

E E

E E

" =

,o a e at=

~ s a

as.- .

!a 5!5 W

( $M

!l [

~

tg EI'

- =

s.u r

.g - "

g 2

b . E 2

s

. Es E *

• t 38 o

5 3

E

=5I E 5I -

s IW" --

I

s. -

1 yc 3-5

- ., - - - - - - -_,,,.c-,9-, - , . -

.w --a .,----.,.+9,.,,e.-,,,e , --,..- -rm. - ,.-,,,_..,,---,w_.w--..,...,_.y e,,.%e,,- 7m.* ,

O Processor Enclosure The processor enclosure is a wall-mounted, louvered, NEMA 12 enclosure ccataining the components that control operation of the 3 CMS, Mark 7 analyzer. Operator controls and indicators are contained on the control panel which is accessed by

• opening the hinged front door of the cabinet. Also contained in the process

,-jt enclosure is the preamplifier with bias control to discriminate against detection of noise. For maintenance and troubleshcoting purposes, the control panel is hinged to allow' access to the microcomputer power supplies, preamplifier. card cage, terminal boards, and test point assemblias.

The electronic processor enclosure may be located hundreds of cable feet away from

. the sampler tank provided the preasp is removed and located within 20 feet of the

~

I tank. It receives the fission count rate and temperature from the sampler tank

- assembly, processes it, displays the calculated boron concentration (in measure mode) on the local display, and serially transmits the concentration data to the remoen display assembly and plant computer. The electronic processor enclosure containa a microcomputer made up of a single-board central peccessing unit (CPU) board, complementary metal-oxide semiconductor randoe-access memory (CMOS RAM) board with battery backup, and input / output (I/0) expansion board. .

.s Remote Display Assesbly ,

The remote display assembly displays the borou concentration in' ppa at a location (usually in the control room) remote from the processor enclosure. Measuring approximstely 7.75 inches wide, 4.5 inches high, 9.62 inches deep, and weighing 10 pounds, the unit can be inst'alled up to 1000 feet from the processor enclosure.

Concentration data calculated by the processor enclosure is transmitted serially

[

over a tvisted shielded pair. The remote display assembly contains the circuits that receive, decode, and present the data on a four-digit light-emitting-diode (LED) display.

l. -

l l

l

[

i b

m 3-6 .

-- ---,-.w..~,---,w-- __ -n.,,..-r,-. - , . -- , -. -- _ , w.y.,vw,e..--

TEST DESCRIPTION CENERAL The irradiation testing was performed at the hot cell test facility at Georgia Tech. Testing to investigate reliability characteristics of the Mark V boron analyzer was performed at this same location. Testing to determine reproducibility of the boron analyzer was also performed at Georgia Tech.

IRaADIATION TESTING

'The radiation source was provided by eight, 8 x 13 inch frame assemblies containing 60 a total of 53,000 curies Co (6,600 curies per frame). Radiation source from the one liter primary coolant sample tank under accident conditions will be around 40,000 curies for reactor coolant with activity of 4 Ci/cc. Radiation levels were s increased or decreased by placing one or more of these frame assemblies around the sampler tank assembly as shown in Figure 3-3. The radiation level for maximum

~

radiation testing was measured by placing a dosincter at the detector location in a second sampler car'; assembly. Geometry was held constant for the second sampler tank and the tested sampler tank assembly in the irradiation testing performed. A second tank was required to determine radiation dosage because the dosimece war

- placed in the position that would have been occupied by the detector tube during irradiation testing. Testing was performed ac'a maximum radiation level of 3.45 x 5 5 10 R/hr, determined by dosimetry. The level of 3.45 x 10 R/hr required the use of the eight frame radiation sources that were available. A radiation level with the second sampler was determined for only this one configuration because most of the irradiation experiments were performed at the maximum achievable level.

Estimated radiation levels for the *Jestinghouse boron analyzer for reactor coolant with an activity of ACi/cc are around the maximum radiation levels achieved in this test work.

The fission count rate was determined as a functi,on of boron concentration and/or radiation level in the sampler assembly. Count race was determined in the absence of radiation to determine a base level, followed by testing with exposure to high

and intermediate radiation levels. The 60 Co frames were added or remsved to change 3-7

-- - - . _w. - , , - - --,, ,,,

GECMETRY OF 1RRACIAT:CN ASSEMBLY FCR @ MARK Z SAMPLER *ANK ASSEMBLY S3,0C0 CI TCTAL RACIAT CN $CCRCE y t.ien, m

(g)

=

co m

'U o .. '/, ' #~% a.m.a -

M eeurement Poet

• rl / e e \

(Cl 3 '

/ . \

I *

• 17

< v

't

\ s

/(

i . \ /<

% /

V7

- %b e

l t I i i I i li

, 9 i ,

LJ

( )

FIGURE 3-3 3-8 -

l

',' . I l

i l

' '- the radiation levels. R+sults are based on the fissioning rate rather than ppm readout because the main objective of this test was to deterimine the effect of high  ;

l radiation levels on the detector equipment. Evaluation of this equipment can best ,

1 be performed by monitoring the fission rate during testing'under irradiation. 1 1

All testing involving radiation exposure was performed in a hot cell under no-flow conditions. The tank sampler tank was rinsed three times with the reference boron

- solution when conceintration was changed.

(s

( .

Y 3-9 -

. ., , , - - - - - - - - - - , w y , * ---e--. e g.. p-3.g,_ y y .-e--w.,p. yq

l'  %

TEST RESUI.TS

?

IRRADIATION TEST RESUI.TS

. Prior to installation of the sampler assembly in the hot cell, the boron analyzer was operated overnight with pure water in the sampler tank. An average fissioning i

race frequency of 476.83 counts /second was determined for the 30,000 second over- ,

night run. This compares to an average count rate.of 476.16 counts /second for a series of eighteen, 100 second count periods made prior to starting the irradiation tests. This series of 100 second count periods varied from a low of 473.56 to a high of 479.28 counts /second. The data are presented in Table 3-1.

l Initial radiation under testing was performed with pure water in the sample tank.

The count rate increased by almost 3 percent from an average of 474.96 .f

. counts /second to an average of 487.96 counts /second when exposed to a radiation g 5

( level of 3.45 x 10 F./hr. Moving the connector cable so that is was further /

I removed from the radiation source had no effect on count rate based on the average

[ of 487.44 determined for six, 100 second count periods. The count rate returned to the base level obtained in the preirradiation testing when all radiation sources were removed. Data obtained from the irradiation testing performed with pure water are presented in Table 3-2.

l l

Testing performed with 5140 ppa boron solution in the sampler tank showed :he same behavior as was observed with irradiation testing performed with pure water in the tank. In the absence of radiation, the count rate for the 5140 ppa boron solution was 125.98 counts /second for a 100 second count period. This increased by about 3 5

! percent to 129.49 counts /second when exposed to a radiation level of 3.45 x 10 60 R/hr (eight Co frames). Four Co frames were removed leaving a total of four 60 Co frames around the sampler assembly. This reduced the count rate from 129.49 counts /second to an average of 128.19 counts /second or about 1.5 to 2 percent above l

l

• the base level obtained in the absence of radiation. The count rate returned to the original base level when all radiation sources were removed. Data obtained with the irradiation testing performed with 5140 ppe baron solution are presented in Table 3-3.

)

i 3-10 ,

l.

. l l

V l

. TABLE 3-1 BASE IZVEL FISSIONING COUNT RATE

. FOR THE WESTINGHOUSE MARK V BORON ANALYZZR (PURE WATER RESULTS)

Run Counts Time Per Sen. Se ~ .___

30,000 476.83 100 474.91 100 473.83 100 475.86 100 475.71 100 . 473.56 -

1 a

100 476.89

'~

100 474.64 100 479.28 100 478.11 100 475.82 100 476.57 100 475.43 100 474.34 100 477.36 100 479.11

• 100 478.61 100 475.53 100 474.95 x = 476.17 a = +1.73 2a = 13.46 W

3-11

TABI.E 3-2 EFFECT OF IRRADIATION WITH PURE WATER IN THE WESTINGHOUSE

• MARK 'I 50RON ANALYZER 5

Zero Radiation 3.45 x 10 R/hr

• 3.45 x 10 5 R/hr(I)

Run Counts Run Counts Run Counts Time Per Temp. Time Per Temp. Time Per Temp.

Sec. Sec. 'C Sec. Sec. *C Sec. Sec. *C 600(2) 475.69 100 490.93 25 100 491.67 25 100 487.83 26 '

100 474.20 23 100 486.93 25 100 488.47 26 -

100 476.45 23 100 487.93 25 100 485.49 26 100 475.02 23 100 487.07 25 100 490.71 26 S 100 474.04 23 100 485.22 26 100 488.61 26 /

100 474.87 23 100 485.98 26 100 483.51- 27 it 475 488 487 a ~

+ 0.95 2.45 2.55 2c  ;,1.90 4.90 5.10 (1) The cable which connects the sampler tank to the electronic processor enclosure was moved further away from the radiation source for this test sequence. This was to determine if count rate is affected by high radiation level exposure of the cable.

(2) Not included in standard deviation.

I

./

3-12 .

e , .

Testing was also performed with 2570 ppm boron solution in the sample tank. The s'ame behavior was observed as was noted with the pure water and 2570 ppm boron solutions. The count race increased about 3 percent from 206.73 to 212.29 counts /second. These data are presented in Table 3-4 Further tcsting was performed to determine if exposure of the connector cable to very high radiation levels would affect the count. rate. The connector cable was 60 Co frames (1/2 inch gap) to obtain exposure level estimated clasped between two to be in the range of 10 0to 10 R/hr.

I Radiation measurements made in connection with other irradiation experiments performed indicate that radiation levels between the two frames are on the order of 100 R/hr with 3 to 4 inches gap oetween the two frames. Since the actual gap was about 1/2 inch, the radiation level would be well over 106 R/hr. No effect on count rate was noted from this radiation level based on count rates of 206.58, 209.35, 206.96 and 206.35 counts /second over four, 100 second count periods. The base level count rate for this system (2570 ppa boron) in the absence of radiation was 206.73. counts /second. These data are consistent with the data presented in Table 3-2.

The testing performed indicates that the increase in count rate noted with the high '

radiation levels is an instantaneops function of radiation levels. That is,'ths

count rate changes as soon as the radiation level increases or decreases. There is no memory effect, nor is there any indication of permanent damage suffered based on about 2 x 107 rads total exposuis to the sampler assembly. This is equivalent to over 25 hours2.893519e-4 days <br />0.00694 hours <br />4.133598e-5 weeks <br />9.5125e-6 months <br /> operation with an activity level of 4 Ci/cc in the primary coolant.

RELIABILITY TEST RESULTS After the irradiation testing was complete, the Mark V baron analyzer was operated under steady state conditions for a period of 13 days. This was done in the absence of radiation with 2570 ppm of boron in the sample tank. Initially, data were taken every half hour during the course of an eight hour day. Later, the data were taken on an hourly basis or sometimes on a daily basis. This data is shown in Table 3-5.

The Westinghouse equip =ent operated very well during the reliability testing.

There were no outages or system malfunctions of any kind during this test period.

Unfortunately, the data recorded in Table 3-5 represent I second count periods rather than the 100 second or 1000 second data intended. However. since the I

standard deviation is proportional to 7 , n being the number of samples, we can infer a standard deviation for 100 second and 1000 second counting intervals of 1.02 and 0.32 rer.pectively.

3-13 m--.,---.,.-m..,,-,_,-,--2-, , , , - . - - , _ _ . - _ , - . ,

O e TABLE 3-3

. EFFECT OF IRRADIATION WITH 5140 ppa IN THE WESTINGHOUSE MARK V BORON ANALYZER d

• 5 5 2ero Radiation 3.45 x 10 R/hr 2 x 10 R/hr II)

Run Coun;s Run Counts Run Counts Time Per Temp. Time Per Temp. Time Per Temp.

Sjy . _ Sec. *C Sec. Sec. 'C Sec. Sec. *C 600(2) 125.97 32 100 130.20 29 100 127.79 30 100 129.87 30 100 128.85 31 -

100 125.16 32 100 128.90 30 100 127.68 31 ~s 100 124.19 32 100 130.51 30 100 129.86 31 j 100 126.96 32 100 129.38 30 100 127.27 31 100 127.02 32 100 129.19 30 100 127.92 31-32 100 125.63 32 100 128.99 30 100 127.34 32 100 125.68 32 100 129.83 31 100 128.39 32 100 125.58 32 100 130.25 31 100 128.26 32 x 126 129 128 c  ;,0.99 1.62 1.72 37  ;,1.98 3.24 3.44 (1) Estimated radiation level of 2 x 10 $R/hr (2) Not included in standard deviation.

..s i e

I TABLE 3-4 EFFECT OF IRRADIATION WITH 2570 PPM BORON IN THE WESTINGHOUSE MARK V BORON ANALYZER Zero Radiation 3.45 x 105 R/hr Run Counts Run Counts Time Per Temp. Time Per Temp.

Sec. Sec. *C Sec. Sec. 'C II}

600(1) 207.02 32 600 213.20 32 100 212.83 32 100 212.72 32 ,

[

s - 100 206.87 32 100 213.28 32 211.99 32

. 100 . 205.97 32 100 100 205.61 32 100 213.25 32 x 206 213 o + 0.65 0.49 0.98 23 }[1.30 .

(1) Not included in standard deviation.

W 3-15

e e a' '

TAst.E 3-5 STRADY STAft OPERATICW KR 1 SECOND C3mff Ptt10DS WITE 1370 PFM SotCW 15 TME WESTINCEOCSE MARE 7 ANALTZER

. (SACK:ll0UND WADIA*!CND

'. 's. 3 6

eS

, $=28-81 (1) 6-11-91 9-1-91 9-2-91 9-?-91 9 4 41 i Ceum;e Causta Counte Cousta Caumas - Gauata for Temp. Per Temp. Per Temp. Per Temps Per Temp. Per Temp.

h *C A *C See. *C See . * *C Sec. *C See. *C 211 23 200 23 226 24 121 24 205 23 2M 24 199 23 2M 24 202 23 ,, ,

2% 24 228 13 202 13 197 13 217 13 197 to 213 13 191 24 190 to 204 24 ,, !-

214 24 - 119 23 209 24 113 24 112 to 226 24 117 13 218* 24 122 24 194 24 213 24 .T 213 24 207 13 203 13 194 24 209 to 205 to I 200 24 214 13 207 to ICS 24 113 24 221 24 IM to 201 13 218 to 211 24 114 24 212 24 19S 24 110 13 213 24 202 to 200 24 . 233 24 210 24 219 24 . 200 24 199 24 191 24 197 24 199 24 213 24 198 24 189 to 204 24 212 24 233 to 201 23 205 24 207 24 202 24 209 24 187 24 209 to 217 24 117 24 1M to 191 24 193 to 114 *4 193 24 190 24 IM to 213 24 211 24 212 24 186 24 2M 24 LM 24 213 24 104 24 2M to 180 24 211 24 199 *4 *05 24 2M *4 *17 24 190 24 229 24 211 to 193 24 Istal Coasts = 102 a

• 206.14 3

• 10.16 (1) !1ne syeten w e eserated however. taere uds no data trean ever the woessed.

i m .mr 3-16

o - .

k' ,

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS DISCUSSION Results of the irradiation tests indicate that the Westinghouse Mark V bcron s

analyser would perform well under post-accident conditions. Count rate increases, and thus the ppa boron readout decreases with increasing radiations levels, however, the effect is a predictable one. For exposure levels in the range of 2 x 10' R/hr and 3.45 x 105 R/hr (maximum achievable radiation level) the fissioning count rate increases by about 1.5 percent and 3 percent, respectively. Linear extrapolation of this data indicates that the fissioning count rate would increase by about 5 percent for a radiation field of 5 x 105 R/hr. Extrapolation is based on results of other irradiation tests which indicate a linear relationship to 5 5 radiation levels of 7.1 x 10 R/hr. A radiation level of 5 x 10 R/hr is antici-paced in the Westinghouse Mark V analyzer with a primary coolant activity of 10 Ci per cc.

(

~~

An increase in count rate resulting from high radiation levels will not give an equivalent percent decrease in apparent boron concentration. The change in boron .

indication will be slightly less than the percent change in count rate. Even assuming a linear relationship between change and count rate and decrease in indicated coron concentration, the accuracy of this instrument is equivalent to, or better than the accuracy that can be achieved with other methods of on-line or wet-chemical analyses available for use during accident conditions. Consequently, no corrective factor would need be applied to results of this analyzer during operation in a high radiation environment.

The temperature correction system was not operated during this work. However ,

temperature was not a factor in the results since temperature did not vary by more than a few degrees in any one test. The intent was to determine the relative change that may result from high radiation levels rather than measure absolute values. Testing performed with the Combustion Engineering Boronometer indicate that a 5-10 degree change in temperature has no significant effect on count rate.

It is of interest that the increaae in count rate resulting from irradiation effects is essentially a constant (as percent of count rate) 3 - 17

,. m, _ _ _ . - . . . . _ . _ - m .- , _ _ . - _ _ . , - _ _ _ . - - . - . , . --

m,- .

s .

It 's of interest thst the increase in count rate resulting from, irradiation effects is essentially a constant (as mercent of count rate) for the three con-dicious tested (pure water, 2570 and 5140 pps boron).

The data indicate that the standard deviation for boren concentration is acceptable

.j with res pect to post-accident or normal conditions . High radiation levels have no

', significant effect on deviation as indicated below:

Boron Standard Deviation Standard Deviation Concentration No Radiation IgGSec. Count 5 at/l 100 Sec Count 1000 See Count 3.45 x 10 R/hr 2 x 10 R/hr i e i e i e i e i '

1 O 476 1.73 - - - . - - -

1 0 475 0.95 - -

488 2.45 - -

0 - - - -

487 2.55 - -

2500 206 0.55 - -

213 0.49 - -

-2500 206 1.02 206 0.32 4

5000 126 0.99 - -

129 0.81 128 0.86 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ~,

~

e The Westinghouse Mark V boron analyser is acceptable for use under T.

post-accident conditions. It'should be possible to obtain an )

analysis within 5 or 10 minutes with this system. Concerning its use for normal power operations, the accuracy is probably accep-table.

e Count race increases , and thus the ppa boron readout decreases with lacreasing radiation levels, however, the effect is a predictable one and accuracy is still quite acceptable.

l e For maximum anticipated exposure levels of 5 x 105 R/hr (10 Ci/cc

! activity level), the fissioning count rate will increase by about 5 percent . *his 5 percent increase in count rate will result in a l small errer relative to the accuracy required for post-accident conditions . .

e The increase in count rate from irradiation is essentially a constant (as percent.of count rate) for the three conditions tested .

(pure water, 2570 and $140 ppe boron). The increased count rate t

does not linger when the radiation field is removed.

l l .

~ * .

.)

3-18 .

Section 4 StN. MARY OF RESULTS - CE BORONOMETER The Combustion Engineering (CE) boronometer performed well, both at radiation levels of 100R/hr and eder steady state conditions in the absence of radiation.

6 A 53,000 curie 60Co radiation source was used to achieve the 10 R/Hr levels in the high radiation level test work. The boronometer operated at integrated dose of about 2 K 107 rads. This corresponds to 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br /> of operation at maxistaa radiation levels anticipated under radiation conditions. It is expected that the system would remain operational at higher exposure levels based on known characteristics of the system. However, prudent considerations would dictate that radiation exposure be minimized by flushing the sample vessel when the required boron concentration information has been obtained during post-accident conditions .

The system can also be used to monitor boron concentration during norma'1,

- power operations. The instrsasent provides readout of the fission rate of the enriched uranium in the fission chenbers. Fission rate is invarsely proportional to the boren concentration in the sample tank surrounding the neutron source. The boron cencentration is derived from the fission count rate by a mathematical curve fitting routine perf ormed by . microcomputer. Use of the boronometer would not eliminate the need for periodic check analyseg performed using the boron-mannitol titration. However, it would provide a continuirg check against sudden changes in boron concentration and would reduce exposure to personnel.

4-1

5ACEGROUND INFORMATION 4

s TEST PURPOSE Testing was performed to determine if the CE boronometer would suffer radiation damage or reduction in a'ecuracy when operated at radiation levels anticipated under pos t-accident conditions . Testing was also performed to establish accuracy and reliability of the equipent when operated under conditions as anticipated during normal operations. Testing was performed on a preproduction model in the latter stages of developent.

S" STEM DESCRIPTION General T w boronometer consists of a sampler, promplifier ud signal processor. TN D

system used in this test included a strip chart recorder. This is not part of the normal equipment package, however, its use is raccusnanded to improve statistics and show trending. Performance speciilcations for these components are listed in Tables 4-1, 4-2 and 4-3. Schematic design of the sampler which contains the neutron source and fission chambers is shown in Figure 4-1. Only those components shown in this figure are in the high radiation field. Overall schematic systes design is shown in Figure 4-2. Predicted delay ti:se due to mixing is shown in i

Figure 4-3.

l Operation of the boronometer is based on the principle of neutron absorption by 10 3 A small flow of primary coolant containing boron passes through a tank which holds at americite-beryllium source in the center of the tank. Neutrons from this 4

?ource are thermalized and pass through the primary coolant to cause fissioning of the "3 percent enriched uranium contained in the four fission chambers. Location of the fission chambers relative to the neutron source is shown in figure 4-1. The 10 I counting race of the fission chambers is inversely proportional to the 3 concentration in the pri: nary coolant, due to the neutron absorption characteristics

~

10 Signals from the fission chambers (neutron detectors) are accepted by the of 3 preamplifier box which amplifies and transaits the signals to the signal processor. .

4-2 -

r .

TABLE 4-1 PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE BORONOMETER Neutron Detectors Four fission chamber neutron detectors Thermistor Contains one thermistor for temperature compensation control Pressure Drop 0.04 paid at 1.0 GPM, 0.01 paid at 0.5 GPM, 0.0004 psid at 0.1 GPM

. Construction Designed to ASME 331.1 power piping code, rated at 200 psig and 250*F.

All wetted parts are 300 series austenitic stainless steel.

< Standard inlet and outlet

(..,

. cocuection are 1/2 inch, Schedule 40 butt veld.

Volume 0.9 gallon Dimensions Approximately 12 inches in diameter and 19 inches high. ,

Weight Approximately 35 pounds

~

Neutron Source 2 curie Am3e, double encapsulated, with source handling tool, DOT approved shipping container and vessel padlock.

Ambient Operating Temperature Range 40 to 250'F Finish The sampler is constructed of 300 series stainless steel. No finish is applied.

4-3

r 1

. TABLE 4-2 PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE BORONOMETER PREA.W LIFIER POWER REQURIED Low voltage + 15 VDC 100 mAmps High Voltage. maximum 800 Volts MAXIMUM RATINGS Preamplifier Operating Temperature 122*F Pressure 70 psig Relative Humidity 95%

+ 800 Volts

-High Voltage .

Maximum Output Signal Cable Length 500 feet _

_ 3 TYPICAL CHARACTERISTICS Conversion Gain Input 800 mV/pc Rise Time each Input (maximum) 50 nSec ,

- Fall Time each Input 200 nSee Equivalect. Noise Charge 2.5X10[15 C (ras)

High Voltage in Leakags Current (maximum) 1.4 I 10 Amps Enclosure All electronics are l contained in a 14 gauge steel 20 X 20 I 3 inch NEMA 4 box. The box is finished in gray enamel over phosphatized surfaces.

Cabling to Signal Processor L - RC-39/u 1 - 3 conductor No. 16 AWG l

, 1 - 8 conductor No. 16 AWG consisting of four twisted shielded pairs.

O wl  %

a) 4-4

~

(-.

. s i* *

. TABLE 4-3

~

PEFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE BORONOMETER SIGNAL PROCESSOR Digital Displays Sample Temperature *F Detector Count Este - counts /second Boron Concentration ppm natural Boron Analog Outputs One of the following:

4-20 na into 0-600 ohns 1-5 na into 0-2400 ohns 10-50 na into 0-200 ohns 0 to 10 7DC into 500 ohns Full scale for the above signals can be switched to either 3,000 or

. 6,000 ppa.

(- Alarus High and low alarms, front panel adjustable with indicator lights.

Each alarm utilizies a relay with SPDT contacts rated at .1 amp at 120 VAC. Relays deenergized on alarm.

Digital Output Serial, teletype compatible Front Panel The front panel is brushed

. aluminum with a clear anodized finish.

Ambient Operating 40 to 122*F Temperature Dimensions 8-3/4" H I 19" W X 16" D, designed for 19" rack mounting Weight 35 pounds 4-5

4 9 e

, 9 *

1. g 4

+

< W

.J s 3

-~

.$ t I

~ -

II l ==,

N ,. -

. ,J .

\ ,

'g , s

/d l

~

.. \ . -

N l  ?

T  : 0 \ ",

y e =um ==

x1 o

j  : s i v u Q I U s ]-4 ) _ -

g l '

2 y _9.A

=

2 .

\ _

l E

l I 8 - ., l E

TI u >

W

.J

. >=

• e 3 .

4 3 C T '

w w g N

d

! fy . x

/,I'-t'. 's s N

<  ;' ,, W < ,

k a

f r

.. i

. .8 i , lp i v _m

,\

z

,s j w

i* * . 7, s

( fi e d

d,- t 4

~

l J j -

• a.

l /T i

i x i w '

l

\ s i

l

. )

l 4-6 e

( . ..

A-FIGURE A-2 CE 30RCHOMr.7.1 i .

To Microsangster 2 Curie Neutron Source in Well

_^d s_ ,

Temp. Sensor

_L_ .

Fission Chambers Primary Coolant f.

w PREAMPLIFIER SIGNAL PROCESSOR (Located the HighNear RadiationSompierAres Outsidel / - (Lo:sted in Control Room) h HIGH VOLTAGE LOW VCLOGE PCWER SUPo'J PCWER SUPasy AMPLIFIER . SHAPER

,, N N MICRO- -

PPM SCRON i6 , COMPUTER INDICATCR I

POWER SUPPLY Q _jl TEMPERATURE SAMPLE g COUNT RATE kANALOG OUTPUT

- HI ALARM LO ALARM i

4-7 y --.--r .- , - - + .- y--.- y. .--.w, ._,,.w--yy. ,,--,.y g.-g. awe-. , , . y, g..w,-- y ,,.q- ,,,g. --.e ,%--,qe..,, _ynu. -,w -m +-gw.-g--e 9,,gw--mg-9,,, w-yag, , ,.,

sy FIERE 4-3 FIE31C23 3 CAY T:DtB ::CE TO MI:llll3C FCE TIE CE 301CNOMCZ1 10.0 8 8 e a e i e a 6 e e e e e a a a e a :

E g.

= i e . .'

m - -

> t.0 g .- -

t 5 =

l

, w 3 -. -

l- p I -

I

-\

l

, , , , , , , ,,, , , . 1 , , , , , , , ,

l . OJ l C.10 t.Q 5.0 F1.CW R ATE, G PM e

~

s

.- )

4 4-8 -

l r-,- - * , . - --- ..-r,-- - - , , - , --, ,..-,-,,,-,,-5 r,-<%-m

l

. e ,. v l

4 The preamplifier is located remotely outside the high radiation area. The signal processor continuously monitors the signal rate, and through an algorithm stored in a microcomputer in the instrument, convest's the count rate to parts per million of boron. Count races are normally averaged over a time period which can be adjusted over the range of 1 to 999 seconds.

O T

e 4

o e

e e

Y (t - -

9 #

e 1

4-9 0

- ,_- , , . - . , - - - , - - . - , , , - - - - - , - , - - , , - , - --r----e, w e--., -- - - - - - - --,e

- o

~ .

~

TEST DESCRIPTION GENERAL The irradiation testing was perfoemed at the hot cell test 'f acility at Georgia Te ch . Testing to investigate reliability characteristics of the boronometer was performed at this same location. No radiation exposure was involved with the reli-ability testing. Testing to determine accuracy and reproducibility of the borono-meter was performed at the CE test facility and witnessed by NUS. Check analyses of the boronometer results was performed by CE and NUS using a boron-mannitol titration to determine boron concentration.

i IRRADIATION TESTING J-The radiation source was provided by eight, 8 I 13 inch frame assemblies containing x_ '

60 a total of 53,000 curies Co (6,600 curies per frame). Radiation levels desired ')

were achieved by placing one or more of these frame assemblies around the sampler

~

assembly as shown in Figure 4-4. Radiation levels were measured with 40simetry at the center of the assembly at a point just above the neutron source and estimated elsewhere. Testing was perfoened at an estimated maximum radiation level of 1 I 105 R/hr at the detector tubes . Maximum radiation levels at the center ref erence 5

point as determined by dosimetry were 7.1 I 10 1/hr. The detector tubes were several inches closer to the radiation source :han the central reference point, therefore are in a higher radiation level area than is the reference point.

The fission count race was determined as a function of boron concentration and/or

-radiation level in the sampler assembly. Count rate was determined in the absence of radiation to determine a base lev,el, followed by testing with exposure to lew, intermediate and high radiation levels.

All testing involved radiatien exposure was performed in a hot cell under loop flew conditions. Only the sampler assembly was exposed to the radiation source. The remainder of the squipment which includes the preamplifier and the signal processor were installed outside the hot cell. This is the manner in which the equipment would be installed for post-accident or normal operation.

4-10

• v~- - - - - - - - - -. - -

I t

D

- - FIGURE 4-4 s'

GEDMETE! 0F IIIADIATICH ASSEMBLY FOR BORott0 METER SAMPLER 53,000 Ci TOTAL BADIATION SOURCE i

8 in. Wide by 131n High 60C0 Frame l

' , . rW-i Detector i .

Sampler WellsN Enclosure i

O , ,

L

-rv ~ 7

_c / % p 8 '

lo in. ..

g .s v' '

\ \'4'%\

~ =i: ,-. .

1 l

i

-I 5, N Red!ction Level / - Neutron Measured at Center Source i t i

L.

• i 4-11

. i

, 1 RELIA 3ILITY AND ACCURACY TESTING In the reliability coscing, a boron solucion was circulated through the boronomecer for a period of seven days while monitoring the fissien count race. This work was performed inder normal background radiation levels. Accuracy casting under loop flow condicions was performed at CE using boron solutions containing about 100, i - 600,1,800, 3,200 and 5,000 ppa boron.

e t

G e

a - %,

t ,,

f e

d 3

h I

4 e

l.-12

f- -

TEST RESULTS IRRADIATION TEST REISULTS Note that the radistica levels noted are measured at the center ref erence point.

Actual radiation levels at the detector tubes which w' era affected by this .

radiation, were about 25 to 50 peicent higher than the refereace point measure-ments.

Typical results for the fission count rate as a faction of boron concentration and radiation levels for discriminator settings of 50 and 60 millivolts are presented in Table 4-4. The results indicate that virtually total discrimination against radiation noise can be achieved. There is no memory effect nor is there any indi-7 cation of permanent damage based on about 21 10 rade total exposure to the

( ~

detector tubes. This is above the exposure levels anticipated under post-accident conditions.

RELIABILITY TEST RESULTS Af ter the irradiation testing was complete, the boronometer was operated under steady state conditions f or ~a period of seven days. Water containing about 2,960 ppm boron was circulated through the sampler and the fission count rate was recorded on a strip chart recorder. Some noise pickup was evident as is shown in Figure 4-5, demonstracing results of a one day run over this period. However, the systen was found to be completely free of noise when the development model premsp-lifier was replaced with a production model preamplifier.

ACCURACY TEST RESULTS The boronometer test results for low level boron concentrations are presented in Table 4-5. Note that the data are presented in terms of ppn boron for an approxi-mate curve fit that was used when the data was recorded. This curve has been refined subsequent to the testing reported here to provide the proper ppm indi-cation. Accuracy results for high level boron concentrations are presented in Table 4-6. The deviation from results indicated are acceptable for post-accident v analys es .

' 4-13

r-.- .

e *

.s I

TAat2 4-6 II FIS$105 GMFWT RATF A$ A FUNCTION OF RADIAT 05 L2VELS

. FOR A SO Aim 60 M.T. 015CRINIMATOR SETT11BC ON TEE CIFTT1r DES!21E3 PtRAMPL*FTit Wt,*f4019 (2.e40 PM Scace teac!TrtAM*W) 50 M.T. Siserimiwest Settiu 60 M.T. Disetiminatar 4ettine I

Saskaround e44tet19's 2 I gjf t'4r 4 I gjf 1/Wr

• !Ijj

. g 1/97 Sackgresad tadiattee 2X 1/Mr((f 4t.Nr 1 ((f 61lgf R/M r 7.1 t/4r I jj '

g 204 110 210 2C4 124 120 120 119 110 214 114 111 219 121 Ill 121 121 111 i 210 211 tie tia 121 124 120 119 114 s i

tot 212 214 122 120 121 119 120 113 211 203 122 118 114 A

average e 210 212 212 214 121 121 120 120 116 e 2 2.2 1.7 2.1 9.2 1.7 2.0 .4 .9 2.2 3r a 4.6 2.6 4.2 18.6 2.4 6.0 1.6 1.4 6.4

.13 100 secess etes Asterven

!21 Bastattee levete at cae deseeter tuses were baseer by en estimates venue of 23 to 50 pereens team instsated here.

e.

4-14

, = _ . ,

. .. e

^%  %

.t

%i Tantt 4-5 BORONOHETER ACCTRACT REstTI.TS FOR 1.0W 1. EVE' BOROW CONCENTRATIONS 99 oss Boron III 620 pse loron(II Count Perted FFM Count Period PPH Count Count Rate (2)

Seconde Rate (2) Displev Seconde h ,,

100 278 504

. 100 275 603 100 275 653 100 314 89 100 275 679 100 313 68 100 275 697 100 314 56 100 275 648 100 , 310 76 . 100 274 690 s 100 314 72 100 274 710

%- 100 311 77 100 275 697 100 314 61 500 275 6M 100 315 58 500 275 695 100 310 74 500 278 671 500 314 70 500 278 667 500 314 71 - 275 6%

500 315 , 62 e 1.5 ,

55.2 500 214 65 22 2 3.0 110.4 313 69 0 2 1.8 9.0 23 2 3.6 18.0 (1) As determined by chemical analyses (2) Combined count rate fr w four fission chambers

~

\.

4-15

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

--r -

l At the conclusion of the test, the boronometer was operated briefly while increasing temperature of the solution from 80*? to 117*?. In the half hour testing performed, there was no caange in ppa readout beyond the spread noted when temperature was controlled st 30*y. Admittedly, this was a very brief test period, yet it does indicate that minor fluctuation in tempsrature will have little if any effect on boron readout.

i The CE wide range baronometer with BF 3 detectors was also tested by WW in Germany

, at GKN f or a period of about eight months. They reported that the " measured values, compared to other chemical measurement and evaluation methods were within the specified accuracy of + one percent (+5 mg/1)." They further recommended the baronometer for use at the r4 site.

The advantages of operating a baronometer for determining boron concentration during post-er . Ant conditions are as follows:

e All operations can be performed remotely. The exposure involved for determining boron concentration would approach zero.

e No chemicals are added to the sample. Sample flow can be pumped back to the primary system reducing the load on the radweste /

. s ys tem. -

,s

~

e It provides a direct measure of boron-10 or neutron poison concentration in the system.

e The system is sealed, thus preventing release of gaseous activity to the environment.

e Analyses results can probably be achieved within a satter of 15 to 30 sinutes dependent on flow race through the sampler.

• he disadvantages of operating a 5oronometer during post-secident conditions as follows:

e The sampler system would have to be shielded since a relatively large volume of coolant is required. About 15,000 curies of -

activity would need to be transported outside the primary containment to oper' ate this system.

i e The system has not been proven under long-term use, llowever, there is not reason to assume that it would not be reliable. Individual components within the system are off-the-shelf itens. Most of the electronics are identical to those used on CZ's wide range baronometer and CE has been shipping these units since 1977.

_/

4-16

[-

y,. ' . . ,

• '  ?..  :

4

• AB12

. 4-6 SORONOMETER 4CCUR4CY RtSt"75 FOR WICW LTTEL SORON CONCDfTRATIONS

~.  ;

1825 som toron III - 29M eso loroe III 4928 m Borse Count PertedGount Pf91 Goest PeriodGount FFM Count PeriedCount Fru MM Rate (2) Dis 91av Seconde Rate (2)Diestav Seconde Rate (2)Disels, 100 134 1921 100 215 2996 100 191 5309 100 234 1915 100 215 2944 100 191 5317 100 234 1921 100 21 8 2844 100 190 SJM 100 235 1904 100 215 2912 100 195 5004 100 234 1861 100 214 2901 100 1M 5001 100 231 1899' 100 215 2917 100 1M 5005 100 234 1897 100 213 2944 100 191 5033 .

100 234 1915 100 215 2937 100 195 4M4 500 234 1915 100 215 2954 100 1M 3217

/ 500 230 1951 100 115 2900 100 1M 5101 57 ,,.

500 h IM4 100 215 28M 100 190 4954

- 233 1913 106 til 2901 100 1M 4951 e 2 1.7 24.0 100 214 2934 100 194 4th 2r 2 3.4 44 0 100 215 2943 100 195 4834 100 211 3012 100 1M 4475 500 215 2991 100 191 6999

^

500 *14 3016 100 195 4921 215 2943 500 194 5077 e 2 16 46.7 500 194 SMS 2r 2 32 93.4 500 !91

$066

- 193 SM6 e 2 1.8 154.1 3 2 3.6 308.2 (1) 44 4etermined by chemical analysee (2) Coutimed count rate from four fission thenbete o

9 4-17

- , - , _ . , , , - - - - . , . . . _ _ . - , . , , .._,..,,_,.,.-_....,,,,_,,,_,-._,,,.,n,, , - . _ _ , _ - . - . . . , . . , _ . _ _ - . , . , , . . _ _ . , , , , , - , , . . , - - . , - - _ _

s

-May be electscals nol.a pisbup

)

i' E

}l l

l'

~

) O FIGURE 4-5 ONE DAY STHIP CilART RECORDING OF 2060 ppm BORONOMETER ANALYSES RESULTS (Backgsound Radiation) ,

n

1. %, g . 9 *H

(., .

1 I

i

(~

l CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS l

i .

1 e The CE Boreameter is acceptable for use under post-accident )

conditons. '

e Reproducibility of results is excellent as based on fission count rate, however, conversion of count rate to ppa is somewhat below the accuracy desired for daily operations. CE indicates, however, that the proper curve fit routine in the microcon:puter will provide proper ppe indication.

e A 500 second count rate is recommended for determining boron concentrations below 1,000 pps.

e The use of strip chart recorder is recommended fer use with the baronometer. This will improve statistics and show trending.

e There is some increase in the standged deviation (Table 4-4) from radiation levels in the range of 10 R/Hr at the planned

{ .s discriminator setting of 50 millivolts. The increase is not

• significant with respect to post-accident analyses requirements.

e 9

4-19

.