ML20137Y496
| ML20137Y496 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Three Mile Island  |
| Issue date: | 12/02/1985 |
| From: | Torborg M GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137Y475 | List: |
| References | |
| 652, 652-R02, 652-R2, NUDOCS 8512110062 | |
| Download: ML20137Y496 (96) | |
Text
Tors Nc,.
652 REylslON No.
2 ggg BUDGET TECHNICAL DATA REPORT ACTIVITY NO.
123125 PAGE 1
OF 80 PROJECT:
Ouality Assurance /Special DEPARTMENT /SECTION Processes 6 Programs THI Unit 1 OTSG Eddy Current Program RELEASE DATE REVISION DATE DOCUMENT TITLE:
Evaluation of the 1984 Required Technical Specification Examination for the TMI-1 OTSG ORIGINATOR SIGNATURE DATE APPROVALIS) SIGNATURE DATE
- n O G. E. Rhedrick See Rev. O R. O. Barley Q
in f 21l%
M. T. Torborg h @ w
//.Z 2.gf T. J. Patterson g[lMg Ath2k D. L. Langan See Rev. 0
/
q. Kazapas f,( {
,, f, /gf kP.ROfAL FOk EXTERNAL DISYRl8UTION
,DATE Q.\\J \\u 4\\c
\\
Does this TORinclude recommendation (s)? Oyes CNo if yes.TFWR/TR #
o DISTRIBUTION ABSTRACT. Statement of Problem The results of the 1984 eddy current examination performed on B. E. Ballard the TMI-1 steam generator tubing had identified 328 tubes with R. O. Barley confirmed indications of > 407. through wall penetration. These G.
R. Capodanno indications were not identified in previous eddy current examin-J. J. Colitz ations performed prior to mechanical thermal and hydraulic load-B. D. Elam ing evolutions which took place in the steam generators.
I. R. Finfrock Technical Approach F. S. Giacobbe Knowing the locations of the 1984 confirmed indications, a re-H. D. Hukill view of the 1983 and 1982 examinations has confirmed the earlier J. S. Jandovitz presence for a majority of these indications. A characteriza-N. C. Kazanas tion of the 1984 indications by defect location, signal ampli-S.
Kowkabany tude, percent through wall and circumferential extent was per-D. L. 1.angan formed and coupared to the 1982 examination results. A growth R. I..
Long sample study on a random selection of tubes was performed after R. L. Miller the detection of the 1984 indications in order to determine if R. Ostrowski evidence of an active mechanism was occurring.
T. J. Patterson Findings G. E. Rhedrick it was observed that the 1984 indications we.e located in the M. T. Torborg same affected axial and radial areas previously identified dur-R. F. Wilson ing the 1982 examination. The 1984 indications were predominat e l v shorter in circumferential extent.
The review of 1984, 1983 I
and 1982 examination results revealed that the percent through DRF 029572 wall determination showed no trend of continued through wall growth.
907. cf the new indications were of size at or near the threshold of CPUN standard differential technique sensitivit-of detection. The results of the growth sample study showed no evidence of an active mechanism occurring during the period of observation.
Conclusion The 1984 examination identified indications that were already present in the tubes in 1982 but because of their weak signal amplitude were masked by background noise. The mechanical, thermal and hydraulic loads imposed on the OTSG since 1982 examination may have enhanced the eddy currrent detection of small indications by increasing the signal amplitude but with-out evidence of increase to percent through wall.
hK 2
CCOVER
^
09 P
DOCUMENT NO-N M7 TDR-65*'
Page lA TITLE Evaluation of the 1984 Required Technical Specification Examination for the TMI-1 OTSG REV
SUMMARY
OF CHANGE APPROVAL DATE 2
Page 1:
Replaced Revision 0 cover page to permit signatures of different originators and approvers
/l *l.lg for Revision 2.
s b' g.h Page 1:
Changed wording in abstract to reflect l
conclusions of Section VI.
vD Pane 2:
Revised Table of Contents to incorporate Of'11.(Tab new Section VI.
L-
- Page 4
Revised conclusion number two (2).
y alnhr Pages 6, 10, 12, 13, 18, 19:
Revised numbers of tubes to reflect final disposition of tubes.
Page 11: Added reference to Section VI.
Page 14:
Added Note to Table 1.
Page 29:
Added reference to Section VI.
Pages 34, 35:
Corrected typos 20-40.
Page 35:
Clarified first sentence.
Page 37: Added statement on accuracy of ECT at broached support locations.
Page 39:
Added reference to Section VI.
Page 43:
Added note to Table 5.
~
5 E
Page 43:
Corrected typo 28-31, 7
Il 5
3 A00000H 12 83
DOC 81 MENT NO.
gf
'2DR 652 Page IB TITLE Evaluation of. the 1984 Required Technical Specification Examination f or the "D!I-l OTSG REV
SUMMARY
OF CHANGE APPftOVAL DATE 2
Pages 44-63: Added Section VI.
Evaluation of
,y Changes In The Eddy Current Signals From 1982 to 1984 Page 64:
Renumbered Section.
L g, g.((
TgW Page 66:
Renumbered Section.
/
Il 71 L
Page 68: Added reference 6.
Page 68:
Renumbered Section.
I Page 77: Corrected typo 3-coils.
Figures: Added Figure 7.
o O
O 34 9
5 1
A000003412 03
7_,g
..m,-
DOCUMENT No MNuclear
= -632 TITLE Evaluation of the 1984 Required Tecnnical Specification Exa-ination for tne TMI-1 075G e AgV
SUMMARY
OF CHANGg APMtCVAL DATE 1
l The narcer cf conf 1rned indications 240% thru
./;g i wall in " A" Cnce inreagh Stear. Generater has 0;/
l C9ance.1 tn 798 tuhat frnm 747 enhec Tna total 3gh I
f
.....w s v, suuva wit, snoteattensz *vn for cotn
, a.' a 1 asa nas tae,. sea r.,
.. to oco.
f 7;.12 add s'attitle " Status of ISI Tubes."
(C( 3 lM!I<
Revise: Table 1,1 T.W. & Volts 1983 & 1984 4 Revise: Table 2, quantity of tubes in "A" 075G witn indicatiensa 43". to 22 fror 20 and to 298
> f r o.- 2 9 7.
Revised Table 3, add column t: report 5: tabes that were preventively plugged.
Revise: Tabie a, revised cuantity cf tabes examine ar.c tubes SR I to be ir. agreecent with, revision nace to Taele 3.
I Re<ised Tadle 5,1 T.W. & Yolts - 1983 & 1934 g
i i
I i
l a
m 9
I fl*>
3
$ t
OOCUMENT NO ENuclear roa-es2 TUL1 Evaluation of the 1984 Required Technical Specification Exanination for the T'i!-1 OTSG APPROVAL DATE
SUMMARY
OF CHANGE REV 1
The number of confirned indications 2 40% thru 3.E. Rhearic..s/
3'y,s; wall in " A" Once Through Stean Generator has enanged to 293 tubes from 297 tuces. The total F.O.
Earle,'s!
3'64-nunber of tubes witn indications 3 40% for both "A" & "B" has increased by one to 328.
N.C. La:anas's/
3 ':7 i:
99 12 add subtitle " Status of 15: Tubes."
Revised Tacle 1, % T.W. & Volts 1983 & 1984 Revise: Table 2, quantity of tubes in "A" OT53 with indications;3 40; to 22 fron 20 and to 298 fron 297.
Revised Table 3, add colunn to report IS: tuces tnat were preventively plugged.
Revised Table 4, revised cuaqtity of tubes exa91ned an: tubes 'A I to e in agreenent with revis1:n na:e to Table 3.
- Revise
- TaDle 5, % T.W. 5 Volts - 1933 & 1984 I
W I
O 1
i s
I AOMooH 'I 83
TDR 652 Ree. 2 Page 2 of 80 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
{
SUMMARY
3 l
I.
INTRODUCTION 6
II.
METH00 0F EXAMINATION 7
III.
SCOPE OF EXAMINATION 8
IV.
RESULTS OF 1984 EXAMINATIONS 10 i
A.
INDICATIONS REPORT 10 8.
ISI TESTS 10 j
C.
CHARACTERIZATION OF INDICATIONS 15 i
1.
RADIAL DISTRIBUTION 16 l
2.
AXIAL DISTRIBUTION 17 i
3.
SIGNAL AMPLITUDE 18 i
4.
PERCENT THROUGH WALL 18 5.
CIRCUMFERENTIAL EXTENT 20 i
D.
SUMMARY
OF INDICATION CHARACTERIZATION 21 V.
REVIEW PRE-a:INETIC, POST KINETIC AND POST HOT l
FUNCTIONAL EXAMINATION DATA 25 i
VI.
EVALUATION Or CHANGES IN ECT SIGNALS FROM 1982-1984 44
)
VII.
GRCHTH PROGRAM 64 VIII. CONCLUSION 66 IX.
REFERENCES 68 1
j FIGURES la-b, 2a-b, 3a-b, 4a-b, Sa-b, 6, 7 i
APPENDIX l
A ABSTRACTION ON THE DUAL INSPECTION DEVELOPMENT AND PERCENT THROUGH HALL CONVERSION CURVE i
l B
1982-1984 EDDY CURRENT STATISTICS t
I
--m.--.-.-
,.--,-ouv.,,,r-,-.
-,-,--.-pe,,__.,,n,.,-.-g,
_--,.,-n_
_ge-.
--n-y,,
. -, -, - - --,-,.-,n
,,,.w.,
TCR 652
.R2v. 2 Pags 3 of 80
SUMMARY
During the 1984 Technical Spectftcation required eddy current examination, performed on the once through steam generator tubing at IMI Unit 1. a numeer of new relevant indications were detected in the "A" and "B" steam generator tubes.
These new indications were not detected back in November 1982 when a full lengtn eddy current examination was conducted on all the inservice "A" and "B" steam generator tuces.
During botn inspection periods tne same eddy current evamination technicue was employed.
Since the 1982 eddy current esamination botn steam generaters nad undergone mechanical loading due to kinetic espansion tube repair and tnermal/ hydraulic loading due to two not functional tests.
GPUN first cetermined that a new corrosion mechanism was not active.
This was determined tnrougn repeat ecdy current examinations on a controlled grcuo cf tubes in 1984 after initial detection of tne new indications.
Inis revealed that no grewth or change in given eddy current signals occurred for the titre cericd studied.
The 1984 indications were cnaracterized as to size, location, depth and tnen coecared to the 1982 examination results.
GPUN concluded tnat the 1384 inci-cations are a smaller additional sucset of those detected in 1982 evamira-tien.
Tne percent througn wall and circumferential entent fcr 9G% of the
l TDR 652 Rev. 2 i
Page 4 of 80 4
l 1984 indications are of a size that approximates the threshold of detection for the measured sensitivity curve using the GPUN qualified standard dif-1 ferential eddy current examination process, i
Detailed analysis of the new 1984 Indications reveal, that by knowing the specific location of the indication, the majority can be found in the 1982 eddy current tapes.
The indications that could be measured in the 1982 tapes including the in service inspection tubes reveal that:
i (1) No new indications were detected in the ISI subset (one exception explained) l 4
(2) The percent through wall assignments, as determined by phase angle measurement, did not show continued through wall degradation from 1982 to 1984 t
)
i I
(3) For indications not previously identifled in 1982, the amplitude of 1
the eddy current signal has substantially increased in the 1984 tapes a
which would result from some increase in the discontinuity volume.
Presumably the latter is a reflection of the mechanical / thermal l
working of the tubing.
t
)
(4) for indications not previously identified in 1982 the increase 19 t1e i
amp 11tude of the indications in 1984 contributed to our ability to detect the small Indications which now revealed themselves above the surrounding background noise.
The latter combined with the low l
amolitudes associated with the signals from the indications prevented earlier detection, i
e i
j i
[
i TOR 652 1
Ree. 2 Page 5 of 80 i
i i
i Imolicit within this fact, is that the earlier undetected indications were in 1
fact very small.
This is substantiated by the cnaracterization stuales for j
the 1984 Indications which show them to be smaller percent througn wall and i
j circumferential extent than the 1982 indications. Additionally, the 1984 in-i j
dications are located in areas wnicn identify closely to intergranular stress 1
assisted corrosion cracking revealed earlier in the 1981-1982 esaminations.
l i
1.
j i
l.
4
.,4 i
i i
I i
4 1
i 4
r I
i i
t e
4 h
I i
i l
1 i
f
_- - - _ - - - ~..
J VDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 6 of 80 I.
INTRODUCTION 1
In November of 1984, eddy current examination was performed on the TMI -
[
Unit 1, once through steam generator (OTSG) tubing in accordance with Technical Specification, 4.19.
The examination ultimately included 14,615 l
tubes in the "A" OTSG and approilmately 6,500 tubes,in the "B" OTSG, This f
examination was concluded with a total count of 328 tuces with confirmed l ~
indications having tube wall degradation measuring 40 percent through wall j
or greater.
This is a criterion that requires engineering disposition.
I inere were anotner 309 tubes that had confirmed indications with a i
measured through wall degradation less than 40 percent.
Those tubes with 20-40% through wall indication are classified " degraded" tubes and are j
required to be monitored for change at future examinations.
In addition, tnose tubes which contain indications of 40% through wall or greater cut do not meet the accroved plugging criteria will also be monitored.
i Since tne last complete eddy current examination (1982 caselloe) performed on tne OTSG in 1932, the OTSG tuces have been subjected to mechanical 1
l loading cue to kinetic expansion repairs and thermal and hydraulic i
4 loadings cue to the two hot functional tests.
The eddy current esamina-l l
tions performed subsequent to these loadings have resulted in the detec-j tion of indications not seen previously.
I r
i I
i I
N
~.
TDR 652 Ree. 2 Page 7 of 80 i
),
The analysis performec herein has the following purposes:
1.
To characterize and report the indications identifiec during the 1984 examination and compare these characteristics with indications re-1 ported during tne 1982 baseline examination.
The purpose of this 1
l comparison is to evaluat: the pattern of defect cistribution and to determine if the affecte3 areas corresponc to the previously affected areas.
l I
4 2.
Determine the correlation of the kinetic expansion and sucsequent not functional test to the detection of indications not detected Orior to i
these loading events. And, evaluate the imoact from a chronolegical l
c e r s ce t t i'.e.
3.
Review tne cata from the 1984 Growtn Program anc evaluate the results to cetermine if evicence of continued tube cegradatico existed.
l II. METH00 OF EXaMINATICN The eddy current esaminaticns cerformed in Novemoer cf 1984 utilized both f
standard differential and absolute eddy current examination techniques.
This dual examination method was developed by GPUN to specifically detect and confirm small volume but predominately circumferentially criented inner diameter defects.
(See Appendix A).
I i
I t
I
TDR 652 Rev. 2 I
Page 8 of 80 i
The dual examination method involved first examining the tubing with a high gain standard differential technique using a.540" diameter eddy current probe.
If no indications are detected tne eramination is com-
'plete and the tube is considered acceptable.
Tubes found to hase standard differential indications were examined a second time using the I
absolute Sul technique which used a probe having 8 independent coils.
I c
j The absolute 8xl examination determines the circumferential extent of the defect and also determines if the indications are relevant or non-rele-vant.
A relevant indication is a flaw that has been confirmed by abso-j j
lute 841 examination.
1 i
j This dual examination metned is the same method GPUN Quallfled and used l
for tne 1982 baseline eddy current examination of the TMI-I OTSG tubing (Ref. 1)
I III. SCCDE OF EXAMINATICN i
j ine initial set of tuces for the 1984 eddy current e<aminations was a 3%
1 Sample selected in accordance with the recuirements of Tecnnical Scecifi-
]
cation 4.19.
As requirec by 4.19 this set included all tuces remaining i
in service whicn were classified " degraded tubes."
These tubes had Drev.
tously reported indications of 20 40% through wall and are referred to as
}
- ne ISI tubes.
Approiimately 50% of the 3% samole was from the high ce-
]
feet area (outer periphery) with the remaining 50% being located ran:tmly throughout the generators.
I i
i
TOR 652 1
Rev. 2 Page 9 of 80 l
The examination of the initial sample identified some discontinuities which exceeded the 40% through wall technical specification limit.
As a result of these discontinuities, the examination scope was increased to t
include 100% of the tubes in the affected area of both OTSGs.
This in-l creased scope included 100% of the tubes in OTSG "A" and 100% of the tubes in the outer perionery of OTSG "B".
This outer periphery is de-j t'; rad as the area outside the outer tie rod circle ano includes approxi-I mately 6500 tules-The Novemeer 1984 examination was not continued into the center of the 2
"B" generator because no confirmed indications 1 0% througn wall were 4
i found in this area during the random examination.
The indications re-ported in the "B" generator were at a significantly lower frecuency than l
reported in the "A" generator. And their distribution declined sharply witn distance from the outer perimeter and was bounded by the outer tie rod circle.
i As part of the expanded scope, a selected 100 tube sample, designated the "A" Growtn Program, was monitored in order to determine if there was an active mecnanism initiating the 1984 eddy current incications.
This i
sample was also comparatively evaluated against the eady current tapes from the 1982 examination.
I l
i
TOR 652 l
Rev. 2 Page 10 of 80 i
Examinations discussed witnin this recort included the full length of the r
j unexpanded region of the tubes.
Expanded portiens of the tubes cannot be effectively examined and evaluated with the standard differential tech-nique and are therefore not included in the tubing examinations.
IV. RESULTS OF 1984 EXAMINATICNS A.
INDICATIONS REPORT 1
As a result of expanding the scope of the examinations, 14,615 tubes in OTSG "A" and approximately 6500 tubes in OTSG "B" were examined.
Of these tubes, 298 in OTSG "A" and 30 in OTSG B were identified as i
naving relevant indications 40% througn wall or greater.
In addi-tion, 265 tubes in OTSG *A" and 44 tubes in OTSG "B" were identified 1
as having confirmed indications from 20-40% througn wall and are i
classified as " degraded tubes".
These tubes and any tubes with j
confirmed indications 40% through wall or greater which do not meet 1
l the a: proved olugging criteria will be monitored during future-t
)
examinations as "ISI tubes" i
B.
ISI TUEES o
I The subset of ISI tubes included 28 tubes in OTSG A and 56 tubes in OTSG B which had indications of 20-40% througn wall penetration l
l identified and recorded during previous examinations.
i l
These ISI tubes were examined as a suoset and an in depth evaluation l
and comparison of tne 1984 data t0 the previous data was cerformed.
i
'he Ourpose of tnis eva'uatten ans ::mcarlsen wat to determine if Ine i
Ore / cusly !3entifie:
f indicat ons "ad 'grenn" i
l
TOR 652 j
Rev. 2 Page 11 of 80 4
i The criteria used to establish growth addressed significant changes
~
in percent through wall determinations, changes in signal voltage or changes in arc length of the monitored indication.
When performing l
evaluations of this type, it must be noted that changes of acout 10%
through wall can be caused by a change of only 3 degrees in the phase 1
angle measurement of the standard differential response signal.
When I
addressing small voltage signals, measurement errors of this type can ce' expected.
For the absolute 8x1, the orientation of the coils to i
the defect may change the numcer of coils an indication accears on ey 1 additional coil during repeat examinations.
The evaluations must tnerefore factor in these limitations on receatacility.
4 An indectn analysis of tne pnase angles of the indications from 1982.
1983 anc 1984 was performed anc is addressed in section VI of tnis I
TDR.
i ISI Tubes in tne "A" Generator d
From the "A" generator 28 of the 28 ISI tubes snowed no evidence of growthforanyoftheprhviousiyidentifiedindications.
g g
asbeing<40%througnwallwhichweresubseduentlyreportedas1C; 4
through, wall in 1984 Tnese indications were compared by tne data o
j I
(
,,,,-yc.,,;---
e y-c.w - re
-.r--
]
TDR 652 a
Rev. 2 Page 12 of 80 i
analyst on a one-to-one basis to tne previcus data and it was deter-mined that tre change in tne percent thrcugh wall determinations were caused by variatiens in tne repeatability of the overall eddy current l
4 process and not by the pnysical changes in the tube.
(See Tatie 1>.
ISI Tutes in the "E" Generator i
In OTSG "B" there was no indication of " growth" for 56 of tre 56
\\
tutes. One tube E-98-5 did nave an indicatien reported as greater inan 4:?. through wail an: reaairec furtner evaluation.
Tne details for inis tube are shown in Ta:le 1.
r.
i s
Ine 195 and previcus cata fo< this tube was re-evaluated by the cata analyst to compare the e:dj current signal's shape.
The analyst de-termine: the variation in the cercent through wall determinations was i
attributes to distortien of eddy current signals caused ty multiple indicatiens and was not a result of physical cnanges in the tute.
I
^
i Status of ISI Tutes i
A nurbe' of tubes pre /lously placed in the ISI category during the 1982 baseline e, amination were determined to have non-relevant in:'-
4 I
cations as a result of'the 1984 absolute 8x1 examination.
i 1
i
~
l
i-TOR 652 i
Ree. 2 Page 13 of 80 1
These tubes had non-relevant indications as determined by absolute 8xl in 1982 but were placed on the ISI list for monitoring purposes i
in order to verify the precisi,on of the absolute 8x1 confirmation J
4 exams during future dual examination exercises.
With tne completion of the 1984 examination and the consistency of reporting the same standard differential indication as non-relevant, these tuces were i
removed from the ISI list.
4
}
The numcer of ISI tutas (Degraded Tubes) has increased as 254 tubes i
in OTSG A and 20 tubes in OTSG B had confirmed indications'from 20-40% through wall in 1984 which were not previously identified.
This outs the present population of ISI tubes between 20 40% through wall at 265 tubes in "A" and 44 tubes in "B" j
4
}
I t
I s
I
--- ---- -- - ~ -, - -
- - - - - - - - - " - " * ~ ~ - - ~ - - ~ ~ ' -
-... ~. -.
s TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 14 of 80 Table 1 ISI Confirmed Indications Greater Than 40% Through Wall in 1984
~
April hov.
i Incication 1933 Post KE Data 1954 Post HFT Data Gen Row Tube Elevation Oricin
% T.W.
Volts volts 1
A 2-9 US+06*
ID 40%
1.7 45%
1.6 55 - 12E 12+05 10
< 20%
0.9 31%
1.4 13-u9 ID
< 20%
0.6
< 20x 0.6 US-ll ID 23%
1.9 41%
.o 5
95 - 5 US-07*
ID 37%
2.3 42%
4.0 US*01 ID
<20%
1.9 (20%
2.0 i
j
.US+04 ID
< 20%
2.3 21%
3.5 I
T
- inreciately below expances area Note: These tubes were removed from service in 1985.
4 5
1 J
}-
t' 4
f L
}
f
+
Il'
704 652 Rev. 2 Page 15 of 80 i
C.
CHARACTERIZATION OF INDICATIONS The indications detected during the 1984 examinations were character-ized by the location and extent of degradation based on the eddy cur-i rent response signal.
Details, listing the data in support of this section are included in Appendix 8.
The characterization is further defined by comparing the 1984 indica-tions with those reported in 1982.
For.this comparison GPUN usec the i
1984 data describec previously and the 1982 stancard differential nign gain data case.
Tne 1982 data base included all tutes examined using tne GPUN dual examination method Orior to 1984.
This data base was previously used to disposition the OTSG tubes for tne kinetic encansion crocess and suosequent tute plugging.
This data case con-tains the 1982 caseline results which are summarized in TCR 442.
(See Ref. 2).
Soth tne stancarc cifferential anc aosolute tecnnicues are used to furnish these characterization as described below.
Standard differential rescense signal offers the following:
a.
Amo11tude (this relates to the defects geometry and volume, and is recorted as a voltage reading).
c.
Percent througn wall (this relates to the resocnse signal's : ase angle ~and is measured in degrees).
i 1
...,___,.r_
. ~.,.. - _,
TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 16 of 80 c.
Axial locations are reported by distance from the tube support plates tnat are spaced at known elevations in the generators.
l Absolute 8x1 signal offers tne following:
1 a.
Numcer cf coils (this relates to the defect's circumferential entent).
The maximum circumferential extent is 8 coils and represents a defect circumferential arc length that could be as eucn as 360 degrees.
I i
h3TE:
Amplituce, pnase and antal location are also recorded 1
]
on the absolute 8 1 results; however, these results are used only to confirm the standard differential indica-1 tions.
i' l.
RADIAL DISTRIBUTION l
Tne indications detectes during the 1984 examination were located in essentially the same areas of the OTSGs as those discovered in 1952.
The indications were located predominately towards the outer periphery of both OTSG A and 6.
In addition to the indica-tions located in the periphery there was also a smaller number of l
indications present in tne center of OTSG A.
No indications greater than or equal to 401 through wall were reported in the i
center cf OTSG B.
(See Figures la and Ib).
9 i
..... _ = _. - -, - _ -.
- ~.,,
TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 17 of 80 2.
AXIAL DISTRIBUTION The axial location of the 1984 indications can ce characterized as being towards the top of the OTSGs.
For OTSG A, 79 percent of the indications during the 1984 examination are located in or above the 15th span with 57 percent of the indications in OTSG B Iccated in this region.
This corresponds with 82 percent in "A" generator ana 74 percent in "B" generator for the 1982 examina-tion.
a In order to compare the 1982 and 1984 axial distributions, it f
must ce noted that the majority of the indications detectec cur-Ing 1982 were within the upper tube sheet area and were captured 1
i Oy the kinetic expansion crocess.
As a result of the expansion rocess anc the coining of tne tute wall against the tute sneet an evamination of the coined area was not oossible using the standara differential proce. Only the area of :ne tute celcw the encansion 2cne could ce evamined using tne stancarc differential tecnnique.
With the exception of the upper tube sheet region, tne overall distribution of the in01 cations in 1984 closely resemoles the 1982 distributicn.
ints distribution snows the inoications are concentrated towards the uppermost regions of tne OTSGs anc t e f.equency of occurrence decreases sharply at tne icwer regicns.
(See Figures 2a ano 2b).
I h
l n
T TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 18 of 80 3.
SIGNAL AMPLITUDE The majority of the discontinuities detected in 1984 were small volume as indicated by the amplitude of the standard differential signal.
In OTSG A, 93 percent of the 1984 Indications detected were 2 volts or less in amplitude, while in OTSG B 74 percent of
~
the indications were in this category.
This voltage distribution corresponds to approximately 93 percent of the 1982 indications in OTSG A and 78 percent of the indica-tions in OTSG B as being 2 volts or less.
(See Figures 3a and 3b).
To estaclish a reference volume for the discontinuities in this range. a c:mparison can De made to the responses from the call-tration standara.
This standard has a 100% througn wall 0.052" diameter drilled hole wnich produces a 15 volt rescense signal for calibration purposes.
This indicates tnat the discontinu-itles present in the OTSGs are of a significantly smaller volume tnan the calibration standard.
4.
PERCENT THROUGH WALL The 1984 eddy current examination results have snown tnat a c:n-siderable number of the reported indications measured less tran 40% through wall penetration.
The 1984 examination reported 563 1
TOR 652 Rev. 2 Page 19 of 80 l
tubes in "A" and 74 tubes in "B" with confirmed indications.
In the "A" generator the indications in 47% of the 563 tubes were less than 40% through wa.ll and in the "B" generator the indica-tions in 59% of the 74 tubes were less than 40% through wall.
For the 1982 examination, the results indicated higher percent througn wall degradation.
In the "A" generator, 50% of the indi-cations reported were 90% through wall penetration or greater while 3% of the reported indications were less than 40% through wall.
In the "B" generator, 16% of the indications r'eported were 90% tnrougn wall penetration or greater and 40% of the reported indications were less than 40% through wall.
(See figures da and 4b).
The contrast between the 1982 and 1984 examination results for cercent througn wall ccmcarison must consider that most of the tuting witnin tne upper tubesneet region could not be examined in 1984.
This region acccunted for 63% in "A" and 61% in "B" of the recorted indications in the 1982 examination.
Inis comparisen serves as an approximation only, since an improved inner diameter conversion curve was used for the NovemDer 1984 examinations (Ref. 3).
l
.4_.A
-.___a 70R 652 Ree. 2 Page 20 of 80 5.
CIRCUMFERENTIAL EXTENT To confirm the relevancy of the reported standard differential indication an absolute 8x1 examination is performed.
The numoer of coils that respond to a relevant indication provides an esti-mate of the indication's circumferential extent.
The 1984 exam-ination results showed that the confirmed indications ranged from 1 to 3 coils.
The circumferential extent for a one coil indica-tion is from the threshold of detection to 0.194".
A two coil indication is from 0.024" to 0.413" whereas a three coil indica-tion is from 0.219" to 0.632".
(Ref. 4).
For the "A" generator approximately 90% of the confirmed indications were I coil, ao-proximately 10% were 2 coils, and only 2 indications were 3 coils of whicn one was outer diameter.
For the "B" generator 79% of the confirmed indications were 1 coil. 20% were 2 coils, and anly cne was 3 coils.
1 For the 1982 examination the results showec that tne confirmed indications ranged from 1 to 8 coils.
For tne
'A" generator 66%
of the confirmed indications were 1 coil, anc for tne "B" gener-ator 50% of the confirmed indications were 1 cot 1 A greater numcer of 2 coil and greater indications were confirmed by aoso-lute 8x1 during the 1982 examination than in tne 1984 examina-l tion.
(See figures 5a and 5b).
1 i
c n
-w--
.c.,,
~
TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 21 of 80 D.
SUMMARY
OF INDICATION CHARACTERIZATION i
The eddy current examinations performed in 1982 and 1984, both util-ized the GPUN qualified examination program using a combination of
~
standard differential high gain.540" probe and absolute Sul probe.
This dual examination method was developed to detect intergranular stress assisted cracking, predominately circumferentially oriented and initiated on the tube's inner diameter wall.
The 1982 eddy current examinations prior to the kinetic encansion recair were full length examinations performed on all in service tuces in botn "A" and "B" generators.
The 1984 examination were also full length newever the kinetic expanded area could not be examined.
4 i
j i
Some tu:es could not be examined with the 5.0.
540" crece below the center of the lower tubesheet due to ligament oistortion from adja-cent enclosive plugs.
~
j l
Tne comcarison of the 1982 to 1984 cata showee coth similarities and differences in the characterization of the incications reported.
The cnaracterizaticn of the axial and radial distribution showea the in-dications occurred in the same regions of tne OTSGs in both 1982 and 1984.
The amplitudes of the indications also appears to be similar i
in 1982 anc 1984.
The differences between the two sets of data a:-
cear in the percent tnrough walls, which are significantly lower in 1984 than in 1982 and in the circumferential extent whicn is also smaller in 1984 than in 1982.
I
~. -
~_
ICR 652 Rev. 2 Page 22 of 80 This characterization and comparison would suggest the 1984 indica-tions are a smaller additional subset of those detected during the 1982 examination.
To determine how the size of the new 1984 indications reflect on the given sensitivity curve established in TOR 401 and 423, the maximum size of the new incications detected was established and compared to tne above.
It was determined that approximately 90% of the indica-tions are a maximum of one coil.
(Note:
a one coil indication if not preferentially oriented could give a two coil response).
Addi-4 tionally, approximately 90% of the new indications were determined to be between 20-60% through wall. Using this data against the sensi-tivity curve shown in TOR 423, the new indications appear to predem-inately reveal themselves at or near the tnreshold of detection of the given sensitivity curves.
It was determined that accroximately 10% was from a cocula:lon that 6
has 1 0% through wall determination.
For indications 160% through wall all were 1 or 2 coils with the exception of one indication in tube B-97-5.
The indication (76% through wall, 3 coils) was located at the upper tuue sheet lower face region.
It is expected that the sensitivity for detection is suopressed during the ecdy current orcee passage into and out of (0.5" distance) this region. (Ref. 1).
1
TOR 652 Rev. 2 Page 23 of 80 The two other 3 coil indications in tubes A-84-131 and A-79-1 had
<20% and 52% through wall determinations respectively.
The three, 3 coil circumferential extent indications, and the 1 0%
6 through wall indications are of dimension below those analyzed to withstand the main steam line brake loadings (See Figure 6).
l The following is the breakdown of the 1982 and 1984 characterization:
f 1
1982 1984 1.
Radial Olstribution Predominately in the outer Predominately in the periphery of both "A"
outer periphery of both "B" (significantly fewer "A"
& "B" (significantly in "B")
fewer in "B")
2.
Axial Distribution Precominately in the UTS Most in UTS Region :50%.
Region :63%, and Some in 16th span :19%
16tn span :14%
3.
Amplitude 76% less than 2 volts in 75% less than 2 volts in (Voltage)
"A" and 51% less than
A" anc 47% less than 2 volts in "B"
2 volts in "B"
4 Percent 50% greater than 90% T.W.
2% greater tnan 90% T.W.
inrough Wall and 96% greater than 40%
ana 40% greater than 40%
T.W. in "A".
16% greater T.W.
in "A".
1% greater tnan 90% T.W. and 60%
than 90% T.W. ana 27%
greater than 40% T.W. In greater than 40% T.W. in "B"
"B"
_ --=
70R 652 Ree.2 Page 24 of 80 1982 1984 5.
Circumferential The indications ranged The indications ranged Extent from 1 to 8 coils in botn from 1 to 3 coils in both "A" and "B".
For "A" "A" and "B".
For "A" 90%
more than 90% of the in-of the indications were 1 dications were 1 and 2 coll.
For "B" more than i
coils (66% - I coil and 90% of the indications 30% - 2 coils).
For "B" were 1 and 2 coils (79% -
more than 90% of the in-I coli and 20% - 2 coils),
dictations were 1, 2, 3 There was a total of 3 coils (50% -1, 341 -2 indications with 3 cells coils and 8% - 3 coils) 2 were inner clameter and j
1 was outer clameter L
t i
4 1
)
i
?
8 i
e 4
I t
1 l
i i
i i
~_
TDR 652 Rev.2 Page 25 of 80 V.
REVIEW OF PRE KINETIC, POST KINETIC & POST HOT FUNCTIONAL EXAMINATION DATA A.
OVERVIEW GPUN performed a 100?. Examination of the OTSG tubes in 1982.
This examination is referred to as the 1982 baseline.
Since performing this examination GPUN has reesamined a.. select number of the OTSG tubes to monitor the effects of the kinetic-expansion 4
repair (KE) and the subsecuent hot functional testing (HFT).
1 L
These examinations revealed the presence of indications whicn were l
not previously identified during the 1982 baseline examinaticns.
To more fully uncerstand the appearance of these indications GPUN cer-4 formec detailed evaluations of the available eddy current data to I
determine if tne indicatiens had been present but could not ce ce-tectec on crevi0us esaminations or if the indications were in crevi-i cusly unaffected areas of tubing.
1 i
Included in these evaluations were data sets of:
1982 In Drocess Examinations for Kinetic Expansion (Octocer, 1982) i
Purpose:
Determine the effects of (inetically encanding tre 075G tubes.
I vr
+,...-,..w m.e-,,,e.-
..,,,,,n.,
TOR 652 Rev. 2.
Page 26 of 80 This data set censisted of examining 437 tubes in OTSG A and B after the tuees were expanded.
The data was then compared to the 1982 I
baseline.
i 1
1983 Post KE Examinations (Aoril, 1983) i
Purpose:
Determine the effects of the complete kinetic expansion
[
process en the OTSG tubes.
l Tnis cata set consisted of examining 477 tubes in OTSG A & B after tne kinetic enpansion repair was completed.
The data was then com-pared tc the 1982 baseline.
Inis cata set includes the ISI tubes.
i 1984 Post HFT Examinations (Ncvember. 1984)
I j
Purpose:
Determine the cumulative effects of the kinetic expan-l 4
sien recair and subsequent HFT on the condition of the OT5G tubes.
A cata set of 375 tubes was icentified from the November 1984 popula-tion which remained in service for which GPUN had 1983 post kinetic i
expansion cata.
This data set includes the ISI tubes.
This data as 4
i then compared to.the 1933 post kinetic expansion and the 1982 base-t lire cata.
i t
TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 27 of 80 i
i Also included in the review were 45 tubes with indications identified as >407. through wall, during the 1984 examinations.
These tubes were selected from tubes included in the 1984 flaw growth program. Since no 1983 post KE data was available, the evaluation results were com-pared to the 1982 baseline.
B.
METHOD OF EVALUATION Ouring the evaluations, the data analyst reviewed the magnetic tapes of the previous eddy current data for tubes witn newly detectec indi-cations.
This review was accomplished by isolating the' specific area f
of interest and performing a detailed review of the eddy current sig-nals.
By isolating the known area of interest, the data analyst was able to perform an intense analysis of the eddy current signals at a higher level cf sensitivity than allowed by production analysis tech-nicues.
This intense focus permitted the data analyst to identify tne possicle presence of low level eccy current signals.hicn may be maskec by background noise curing production analysis.
Once the signal was icentified and isolatec, tne analyst then measured and recorded the signals amplitude, which indicates tne vol-ume of the discontinuity, and the phase angle, whicn indicates the death of the ciscontinuity.
tDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 28 of 80 The amplitudes and phase angles of the signals were then character-1:ed to determine the relative size of the discontinuities.
The evaluations from the successive examinations were then compared to establish when the signals were first detectable by eddy current.
This also characterized any changes which made the signal detectable by production eddy current techniques.
C.
RESULTS CF EVALUATICNS l
As a result of the evaluations cerformed on these data sets GPUN con-cluded that:
1.
Knowing the exact location of a reported indication, most of the indications coulc te identified in previous esamination data.
Inis incicated the discontinuities were creviously present but j
not detectacle due to their low amplitude.
2.
As a result of tre kinetic expansion and the not functional test-ing the amclitude of creviously unidentified signals increased i
ma(ing the signal resconse more detectable.
This das typically a 100-2001 increase in amclitude which brought tne signals above the tnresnold of detection.
This can ce attributed to an in-4 crease in tne volume of the discontinuity.
Example:
1984 data snows 1.5 volt signal in 0.5 volt noise, re-review of 1982 data shows 0.5 volt signal in 0.5 l
volt noise at the same location.
l l
_ = -
VDR 652 Rev.
2 Page 29 of 80 3.
Although the amplitude of the signals increased, the phase angle of the signals did not show a corresecnding increase for the indications first detected in 1984.
This would indicate that, although the volume of the discontinuity changed, the percent through wall penetration remained constant.
This is ciscussea in greater detail in Section VI of this TCR.
1 4
The new (1984) indications which were reviewed are located at the upper elevations of the OTSGs.
This corresponds to the i
previously affected areas of the OT5Gs identified curing the 1982 enaminations.
I i
D.
OETAILS OF EVALUATIONS PERFORMED ine following is a brie' description of the evaluations performed anc i
tne cetails of the data sets utilized.
The data sets are cresented j
in enronological orcer to demonstrate the cumulative effects of the varicus OTSG activities uDon the tuces since the 1982 baseline.
Inis f
chronology is also centained in Table 2.
i l
1982 In Process Examinations for Kinetic Expansion (Octcber, 1982) t Pur:ose: Determine tne effects of kinetically expanding the OTSG t
tuces.
I
YOR 652 Rev. 2 Page 30 of 80 In order to monitor the effects of the kinetic expansions GPUN ex-amined 437 tubes.
The tubes selected for these examinations were the first tubes to be expanded, located in rows 1-8, in both OTSGs.
4 This examination identified discontinuities which were not previously 1
recorded in 15 of the 437 tubes examined (3.5%).
An evaluation was t
j performed at that time to determine why the indications were not identified previously.
This evaluation is accumented in TOR 401 (Ref. 4) and TR-008 (c. 44 45) (Ref. 5) and concluded that:
3 1
1 1.
The indications ere not initiated by the kinetic eraansien pro-
- ess ner' was tnere any evidence of detectacle orcpagation of entsting incications.
2.
The defects were small (thresnold) tyce indicaticns that nad either been masked by the high background noise levels in the l
ucper tube sneet regions or were sufficiently tight that signifi-1 cant metal removal was not present to permit detection.
Kinetic expansion may have altered these areas to make them more detect-able.
i i
I
'l f
p y-,
,-,-,+-p_w,
---,-y
--w p.y
-,_rr---
g -
,-pw9 y-wy
>-y.-+,g--
,wy,
+7,
TDR 652 j
Rev. 2 i
Page 31 of 80 1983 Post Kinetic Excansion Examinations (Aoril, 1983) i
Purpose:
Determine the effects of the Kinetic ExDansion Repair and associated Tube Plugging Activities GPUN examined a sample of 477 tubes in OTSGs A and B using the dual examination method.
This sample was selected to determine if the i
kinetic espansion crecess had significantly altered the conditicn cf the OTSG tubes.
f 4
'he sample was cased on the requirements of GPUN specificatien i
SP-1101-22-014 which is summarized in TR-008 Appencis A l
d (p. 109-113).
The samole requirements are summarized below:
1.
I (a) All tubes with <40?. tnrougn wall ?,cications =nich remained
)
i1-service.
(ISI Tubes) 4 l
(t) All tubes adjacent to 10 selected sim:1y clugged tubes aitn i
\\
cefects in the 15th, 10th anc 1st scans.
(10 tuces eacn OTSG).
1 i
(c) All tubes adjacent to 10 selected simoly clugged tuees, '-
tne certenery of each OT5G.
i (d) 50 tuces in hign plugging censity areas in eacn OTSG.
i r
i l
l
TDR 652 Ree. 2 Page 32 of 80 (e) All tubes adjacent to 5 plugged tubes in each OTSG with >3 volt signals in the lower part of the OTSGs.
(f) In addition to (a) through (e) above, all tubes identified as leaking during the post repair drip and or bubble tests were included.
i 4
The examination of the above sample of tubes provided an evaluation i
j of the " worst case" areas of the OTSGs.
The examination resulted in the identification of indications 240% through wall whien were net i
previously recorded in 35 tubes (7.5%).
In addition, 1 of the indi-cations previously icentified as being (40% througn wall in OTSG A acceared as 140% and recuired further disoositioning.
The comparison of the tube status prior to and after the (inetic expansion process is summarized in Table 3 and in TR-008, Accendix A (p. 109-113).
4 In its 1983 evaluation GPUN reviewed the 1982 baseline to establish the cause of the newly detected indications.
This review concluded that:
4 I
1.
The majority of the indications could be detected during detailed i
reviews of scecific areas of the 1982 baseline data.
Teese re-views showed the indications had typically teen present at 10 amplitudes and signal to noise ratios of 1 to 1 or less.
i 1
,._m_-.
.._.,_,,___,_,,_,._,m,,..__-
.-.,, _ _ _,, _ _. _ _ ~.
_ _ = -.
TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 33 of 80 2.
The kinetic expansion process apparently caused the amplitude and corresponding signal to noise ratio of the indications to in-crease thereby making them more detectable.
3.
The indications were located near the too of the OTSG.
Twenty eight (28) of the 35 (807.) of the indications 2 0% through wall 4
which had not previously been detected were located within the upper tLbe sheet.
This would be the area most affected by the kinetic expansion process.
4 The onase angles of the inJications recorted in 1983 did not show a relevant increase in the percent through wall when comparea to the 1982 Daseline data.
GPUN also reviewed tne 1982 baseline and 1983 post (E data to de-termine if the incitation (ISI tece in 1982) previously identified as being <407. througn wall in 1982, and tnen reported as greater than 40; tnrougn wall in 1983, incicated a enange in tne status of the tu:e.
A detailec review of this tuce and crier associated indica-tions revealed that they were outside clameter originated and are therefore not Dart of this evaluation for primary side attack.
Its disposition was coverec Dy the TMI Unit I technical scecifications requirements and the tube was removed from servlCe.
l I
. - ---~-
._.. _ _ _. _. _ -. - ~ _ _ -.. _ -
[
F TDR 652 Rev.
2 Page 34 of 80 1984 Post Hot Functional Testing Examinations (November, 1984) t
Purpose:
Determine the cumulative effects of the kinetic expan-ston repair and subsequent hot functional testing on the condition of the OTSG tubes.
Following the hot functional testing (HFT) performed after the kin-i etic evpansion repairs (KE) GPUN performed the 1984 examinations of the TMI OT5Gs.
These examinations provided a basis for determining the cumulative effects of the kinetic expansion repair and subsequent r
I hot functional testing of the OTSG tubes.
These examinations identi-j
?
l fled indications not recorded in previous examinations.
To charac-l terize the newly recorced indications and determine when they could i
first be detected, GPUN performed extensive reviews of the historical
[
data for 2 data sets.
These data sets are discussed in (A) and (B) i telow.
(A) Tne first data set selected for evaluation from the November, i
i 1984 data set was 375 tubes for which post kinetic expansion data was available.
Inis data set included:
(1) All tubes remaining in service in OTSG A which were previott-i i
j ly examined curing the 1983 post KE examination.
This con-i sisted of 163 tubes with no previously recorded indications i
i l
and 28 tubes presiously identified as having 20-40% through wall indications (ISI Tubes).
TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 35 of 80 (2) All tubes in the outer periphery of OTSG B which had been 1
examined in 1983 and remained in service following the 1983 post KE examinations.
This consisted of 128 tubes with no previous indications and 56 tubes previously identified as having 20-40% thrcugh wall indications (ISI Tubes).
As a result of these examinations, 14 of the 291 (5%) tubes with no previous indications were identified as having indications 140% through wall. Of the 84 previous ISI tubes, 3 tubes had indications reported in 1984 which had not been previously identified in 1983.
These 14 tubes with no previous indications and the 3 ISI tubes are discussed separately below.
The results l
of the examinations are summarized in Taoles 4 and 5.
Tubes With No Previous Indications for tne 14 tutes with indications 140% througn wall which were not previously recorded, a complete evaluation of the historical data was performed.
The review characterized the indications and determined if they had been present during the previous examinations. This evaluation concluded that:
1.
During the review of the 1983 post KE data 14 of the 14 indications were detectable but were low amplitude signals within the noise. During the review of the 1982 baseline l
70R 652 Rev. 2 Page 36 of 80 data, 9 of the 14 indications could be identified.
This would suggest that both the kinetic expansion and hot func-tional testing increased the detectaDility of the indications.
2.
The amplitude of the indications increased from the 1983 post KE examination to the 1984 post HFT examinations making them 3
j more detectable from the surrouncing noise.
1 l
3.
The indications recorded during the 1984 Post HFT examina-tions have a small circumferential estent as snown by the 8xl a0 solute probe. Of the 14 Indications naving 140% through wall penetrations, 13 appear as I coil and I appears as a i
2 coil indication.
A 360* indication would appear as an 8
- cil incication.
ISI Tubes J
j For tne tnree crevious ISI tubes wnich have indications 1 C%
4 i
through wall, anich were not previously identified anc reported in 1983, the evaluations are as follows:
l l
One tube A-120-106 showed an additional indication which was i
s identified as Deing 95% througn wall and 4.0 volts arid was lo-I cated at the edge of the 15th support plate.
l
, -~
y
-r-vm--*-
r = --
T-
+*
'~-
TOR 652 Rev. 2 Page 37 of so Upon a re-review of the 1983 Post Kinetic Encansion Data it was determined that the indication was present at approximately 55%
througn wall and 2.1 volts but the signal was masked by the signal i'
from the tube support plate.
The effects of the support plate signal I
also distorts the phase angle of the eddy current, signal T.aking an accurate percent through wall determination impractical.
i l
This particular tube succort is a drilled succort and cannot be
" mixed out" using the multifrecuency eddy current tecnnicues used to examine the broached supports located throughout the remainder of the j
This creates a zone of reduced sensitivity (approximately.5" 4
accve and below the edges of the support plate) at the drilled i
i succort locations.
The 1983 signal at 2.1 volts is below the 3.3 volt tnreshold of detection for the drilled support plate as l
established in TDR 423.
l j
tnis zone of reduced sensitivity acclies to the edges of coth tne eccer and lower tubesheets an: the drilled hole in the 15th support i
i plate.
The drilled holes are located only in the extreme outer j
certpnery of the 15tn support plate.
The remainder of the 15th support plate and the otner 14 support plates are the " broach" design and although tney reduce the accuracy for sizing indications in this l
area, they do not have this zone of reduced sensitivity for detect an
{
of incications.
I P
I L
TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 38 of 80 The other two tubes, A-3-31 and A-149-14, had indications greater than 40% through wall reported in 1984 wnich had not teen previ-ously identified.
In the re-review of tne 1983 data at tne spec-ified location, the indications were identified and compared to the 1984 data.
This comcarisen showed tne indications were low amplitude signals masked by noise in the 1983 data.
(See Table 5).
(S) The second data set selected for evaluation from :he Novemcer 1984 data set was 46 tubes witn indications first identifiec dur-ing tne 1984 examinations.
This data set included:
(1) 12 tutes with insicaticns less Inan 40; tnrough wall anc 34 tutes.itn ircitations greater tnaq 40% tnrougn aall.
The tutes selectea for tnis evaluation were crevicusly included in the 1984 Growtn Program.
The tubes were locatec in the outer ceripnery cf the OTSG A.
the indications were characterizea anc ccmcarea to the 1982 caseline data.
The results of the evaluation conclude tnat:
1 Knowing the exact location of the 1984 indi ations, tne corres-ocnding indicaticns cculd be identified curing a review of t*e 1982 baseline data for 32 (70%) of the tuces.
This would indi-cate the areas nac ceen affected prior to the '382 caseline exam-inations.
TOR 652 m
Rev. 2 Page 39-of 80 s ;
4 2.
A comparison of the 1982 to,1984 data shows the average 1
E amplitude indreased from 0.6 volts in 1982 to 1.5 volts in 1984.
This demonstrates the, amplitude of tne indications s
increased during this time period making them more detectable
)
3.
The comoarison.of the 1982 to 1984 cercent througn wall
~
. determinations snowed a slight downward trend of approx-imately 11 cercent througn wall (equivalent to 3* pnase angle cnange).
Sased onsthis pnase angle evaluation, no significani. trend of through wall growtn can ce estab-lisned.
This trend is further,iscussed in Section VI of this TDR.
L 4
s t
I' i
"b 4
('
~
f
~
)
-)
1
'A e
2.
t g.
i f Il r
.I j
]
/
t r.
e
)
6 r
k j,7
,t t.
!g
1 l'
TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 40 of 80 i
Table 2 Chronology of Steam Generator Evolutions and
. Corresponding Eddy Current Examination Steam Generator Eddy Current Examination Event Duration Data Sets Resul ts > 40% T.W.
A B
Start-up & Test i
131 tubes-leak Oct-Nov 1981 July-Sept 1982 885 273 l
(1982 baseline)
Kinetic Expansion Repair-Oct-Dec 1982 Oct-Nov 1982 9
6 (in process)
April-May 1983 22 14 (Post)
Hot Functional Aug-Oct 1983 Test May 1984 Leak Test June 1984 July 1984 0
i j
Dry Lay up June-Nov 1984 Tecn Spec 4.19-Nov-Dec 1984 Nov-Jan 1984 298 30 1
1 I
i k
J T
f i
I n-
TOR 652 Rev. 2 Page 41 of 80 Table 3 Results of 1983 Post Kinetic Expansion Examinations Status Prior to Kinetic Expansion (1982 Baseline)
ISI Tubei Tubes Tubes Tubes Tubes Preventive OTSG Examine:
NRI
<40% (ISI Tubes)
>40%
Plucce:
A 215 200 14 0
1 S
263 212 51 0
0 TOTALS 47S 412 65 0
1 Status After Kinetic Expansion (1983 Examinations)
ISI Tube:
Tubes Tubes Tubes Tubes Preventiv:
OT5G Examinec hRI
<40% (ISI Tubes)
>40%
Plugge:
A 214 163 25 (12 previous ISI) 22 (l* previous ISI) 1 (16 previous hRI)
(21 previous NRI) 5 263 193
~~ (51 Previous ISI) 14 (0 previous ISI)
C 56
-~
( 5 Previous hRI)
(14 Previous NRI)
TOTALS 477 356 84 36 1
NRI - No Relevant Indications NOTES:
- In 1 tubes, indications reported as <40% tnrough wall in 1982 were reportec as >40% through wall in 1983. These indications are outsice ciameter initiated and are not consiaered relevant to tne present evaluations.
- Tnese 151 tuoes were preventively plugged in accordance with engineering dispositioning based on location (axial and/or racial) of <40; thru wall indications.
I
TOR 652 Rev.
2 Page 42 of 80 Table 4 Results of Post Hot Functional Testing Examinations 2
l j
Status of Tubes Prior to H.F.T.
Tubes Tubes Tubes Tubes l
OTSG Examined-NRI (40% (ISI Tubes) 240%
A 191 163 28 0
f B
154 128 56
__0 l
Tctal 375 291 84 0
i Status cf Tutes After H.F.T.
2 1
Tetes Tubes Tuoes Tubes 1 0%
OTSG Examined NR!
<40% (ISI Tubes) 4 A
191 133 39 (23 previous ISI) 19 ( 5 previous ISI)
(16 previous NRI)
(14 previous NRI) 5 180 127 56 (55 crevious ISI)
_1 ( 1 previous ISI)
( l previous NRI)
( 0 previous NRI)
Tctal 375 260 95 20 1
i l
NRI No Relevant Indic&t:sns l
2 T
l
~
r l
l I
l
---a.-
+.w. - -
m,-~.-y
,.3,,
~-w~
,.g-ws.,
-,,.,v.
3
-,.-..pr,w,-c.ry=
t v vr-+
e---r-
+m-+-+
r-e-.e &w c -i ve- *-
.l TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 43 of so 3
Table 5 ISI Confirmed Indications Greater Than 40% Through Wall in 1984 i
April Nov.
Incication 1983 Post KE Data 1984 Post HFT Data Sen Row Tube Elevation Origin
% T.W.
Volts Volts A
3 - 31 13+0 ID 33%*
1.1 33%
1.5 13+04 ID 27%**
0.8
<20%
1.3 13+05 10 33%**
1.3 36%
3.3 13+08 10 40%**
0.6 45%
1.5 13+15 ID 30%**
0.3 28-31%
0.8 A
149 - 14 14-06 10 86%**
0.4 76%
0.6 15-16 10 80%**
0.5 69%
0.7 US+04 ID 20%
1.0 Not Detected A
120 - 106 12+09 ID 40%+*
0.5 41%
1.4 13-08/15-08 10 50%**
0.4 48%
0.7 15+0 10 55%**
2.1 95%
4.0 05+02 10 20%
1.1 20%
1.2 Represents re-evaluation of 1953 data.
- Incications not previously identified during production examinations, indi-cations first icentified during 1984 review of 1983 data.
Note: These tubes'were removed from service in 1985.
1 a
.]
4 7-v e
TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 44 of 80 VI. EVALUATION OF CHANGES IN THE EDDY CURRENT SIGNALS FROM 1982 to 1984 A.
OVERVIEW GPUN's evaluation of the historical data (1982, 1983) for indications first detected in 1984 revealed changes.in the eddy current signals from 1982 to 1984.
These changes are characterized as an increase in the amplitude (voltage) of the signal with a corresponding decrease in the phase angle of the eddy current signal.
This phase angle change has resulted in an apparent decrease in the depths of the indications observed from 1982 to 1984.
This phenomenon was first identified in 1984 during a review of the nistorical data for the tubes included in the OTSG A growth program discussed in Section VII of this report.
To better understand the cause and impact of these changes in the ECT signals, GPUN evaluated additional sets of avall-able data considered most applicable.
These data sets included tubes previously identified as ISI tubes (Degraded Tubes), tubes previously removed from the OTSGs, tubes subjected to Long Term Corrosion Testing (LTCT) and tubes with synthetic defects (EDM Notches) previously used as qualification standards for the GPUN examination techniques.
The purpose of these evaluations was to:
1)
Investigate the cause of the changes in the ECT signals 2)
Determine the impact of the changes in the ECT signals on the i
f.
GPUN ECT program.
3)
Quantify tne degree of change in terms of percent through wall.
i l
TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 45 of 80 t
4)
Identify the areas in the OTSGs in which the ECT signals were affected.
I i
i 5)
Determine the effect of the changes on future ECT examinations.
I The evaluations performed by GPUN to address these areas are dis-cussed in the body of this section.
B.
CONCLUSIONS Through the evaluations of the available eddy current data from 1932, 1983 and 1984, GPUN was able to characterize and further define the
}
" phase shift" (decrease in phase angle) previously identified in Revision 0 of this TDR.
These evaluations have demonstrated that the cresent GPUN ECT techniques, used to disposition the 1984 examination data, are acceptable as presently quallfled and are not affected by the observed changes in the ECT signals.
Although GPUN was unable to determine the root cause of the " phase shift", the following i
conclusions can be drawn from the technical evaluation of the i
available data.
The review of the ECT process variables shows the reported j
l
" phase shift" is not a result of changes in the ECT techniques.
f The metallurgical data indicates the GPUN ECT program is acce:t-e i
able for dispositioning ECT signals which have been affected by the observed changes.
1
~
TOR 652 Rev. 2 Pace 46 of 80 The " phase shift" initially identified as -11% through wall included both changes in the ECT signals and variability in the ECT data evaluation process. This phase shift was redefined as -6.9% throuch a reevaluation of the data.
l 5
The " phase shift" which was initially identified in the OTSG "A" Growth Sample from 1982 to 1984 has also been identified in the OTSG "A" ISI tube samples from 1982 to 1983.
The shift in phase angles appears to have occurred at all axial and radial locations in tne OTSG where inner diameter indications were observed.
j j
Tne OTSG A ISI Tubes (Cegraded Tubes) demonstrate that once the i
j discontinuities become detectable during production examinations, the phase angle of the ECT signal remains constant (within expected repeatability) during subsequent examinations.
l l
The percent through wall penetrations of ECT indications of one (1) volt j
or greater are shown to be accurately evaluated using the qualified GPUN ECT Program.
Indications of less than one (1) volt have been showr to result in the assignment of overly conservative percent through wall i
values. At a minimum these indications will be evaluated and monitored during successive inspections, t
l
TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 47 of 80 a
C.
ECT PROCESS REVIEW 4
Prior to evaluating the changes in the ECT signals, GPUN reviewed the variables involved in the overall ECT process to verify the validity of the data sets.
The variables reviewed included-both the ECT data collection process and the subsequent data evaluation process.
The review of the data collection process included the ECT eautpment, probes, calibration standards and calibration techniques used during the 1982, 1983 and 1984 examinations.
The data evaluation techniques j
were also reviewed to-determine if changes in the method of analysis i
from 1982 to 1984 or variations between the data analysts could be 1
identified.
4 The review of tne process variables was performed using certified data analysts from two separate NDE contractors.
This review i
concluded that the ECT tecnniques used in 1982, 1983 and 1984 were j
consistent and the changes identified in the ECT signals were not the i
result of changes in the process variables.
The results of this review are documented separately.
i During the review of the evaluation techniques, GPUN and their ECT l
contractors determined the inherent variability of the ECT evaluat'en j
process was introducing additional data scatter into the data evai.a-1
)
tion process and biased the initial comparisons of the 1982 and 1984 4
data. After identifying this variability GPUN was able to account for this bias in subsequent evaluations.
I
TDR 652 Ree. 2 Page 48 of 80 4
i 2
i D.
DISCUSSION OF SIGNAL CHANGES i
To further define the extent of the identified phase angle changes GPUN characterized both the signal to noise ratios (S/N Ratios) of the ECT signals and the shapes of the ECT signals.
This character-4 ization was performed for both the 1982 and 1984 ECT signals and 1
showed a definite change in the signals during this time period.
)
This characterization snowed the 1982 signals were predcminantly very tight looped, straight signals, with very poor signal to noise ratios (typically less than I to 1).
By contrast, the 1984 signals en-e l
hibited broader loops with complex signal formations.
The signal to noise ratio of the 1984 signals was also greatly improved over the 1982 signals.
Typical changes in the signals from 1982 to 1984 are shown in Figure 7.
]
I E.
METHOD OF REVIEW To address the Questions raised by the change in the ECT signals from 1982. to 1984, GPUN performed evaluations or various sets of data.
1 This section details the methods of evaluation and the data sets utilized to resolve these questions.
i i
TDR 652 Rev. 2 l-Page 49 of 80 1)
Investigate the Cause of the Changes in the ECT Signals The review of the EDM notch standards showed the~ characteristic I
shape of the ECT signal from the inner diameter notches changed i
.l In relationship to the signal amplitude.
The characteristic shape of the signals from the notches was similar to tne signals observed in the OTSGs in that the low amplitude signals frora the I
smaller volume EDM notches have the same basic shire as the small amplitude 1982 signals.
The higher amplitu;e signals from the larger volume notches have the same basic shape as the 1984
)
ECT signals.
a As the shape and the amplitudes of the ECT signals changed from 1982 to 1984, the phase angle of the signals also changed.
This j
change l'n the phase angle (percent through wall) can be assc.ited with changes in the volume of the discontinuities, i
Research performed in the industry (Reference 6) has shown a i
{
strong depencence of the phase angle of the ECT signal on the size of the discontinuity, where the geometric shape and the 1
j depth of the discontinuity remained constant while the volume was varied.
For this reason it is important that the methods used for evaluating the phase angles of the ECT signals be based on geometries and volumes representative of the discontinuities.
i i
f l
Based on the aeove information the changes in the shape and l
phase angle of the ECT signals appears to be a function of l
changes in the volume of the inner diameter defects.
These i
factors have been addressed in the qualification of the GPUN ECT j
techniques.
4
-e.
.v ~--....
-.y 4--.
c.
i.m.
e----ye-.,,,
-- - + < -.. -,, -...
w--- - - -
,ytw-- -, -
w,,
,w
...-m
,-y-,
-m,e-w--r--
..-wyve-y
1 70R 652 Rev. 2 j
Page 50 of 80 i
i
]
2)
Determine the Imcact of the Changes in the ECT Signals on the GPUN ECT Program j
To determine the impact of the signal changes on the previously qualified GPUN ECT techniques GPUN evaluated data resulting i
from the ECT examinations of synthetic defects (ECM Notches) and i
l the results of metallurgical examinations performed"on tubes removed from the TMI OTSGs in 1981 and 1982.
l The ECT data from the ECM Notches was reanalyzed to verify that the method of interpretation of the notch decth was consistent l
with the metnods used for interpretation of the insitu ECT data.
Other analysis techniques such as measuring the steepest i
l angle of the ECT signal and analyzing the auntilary frequencies (i.e.
20CKH, 800KH ) were also evaluated.
These evalua-j tions shcwed the present method of analysis to be consistent 4
i i
l To further define the impact of the observed changes on the accuracy of the GPUN ECT technioues, additional correlations of l
the existing metallurgical data were performed.
The data set t
1 o
j used for this sancie included all icentified Dart through wal*
IGSAC.
This data set includes 6 data points which were l
previously used in the tretallurgical correlations in TDR 642.
1 The data set a!so includes 2 additional cata coints previously l
l esclucec fecm TOR 642 tecause of ::or signal te n:tse ratios.
i I
TOR 652 Rev. 2 Page 51 of 80 These data points are included in this set because they are representative of the signal to noise ratios of the indications
{
observed during the review of the 1982 data The ECT data for i
these examinations consists of both.510 S.D. and.540 H.G.S.D.
?
which was performed using the insitu ECT procedures and is i
considered representative of the insitu data.
i The data set of 8 points for which metallurgical data was
.t j
available was statistically evaluated both as, complete set and 3
as 2 additional subsets.
These subsets we.e the 4 Indications with signal amplitudes of 1 volt or greater which are typical of the 1984 Indications and the 4 Indicitions with less than i volt signals which are typical of the indications identified during the review of the 1982 data.
The statistical evaluations are as follows:
4 I
9 t
l
=..._. -
=
TOR 652 Rev. 2 Page 52 of 80 Statistical Evaluation of Part-Through Wall IGSAC i
l t
Data Set:
All available part-through wall IGSAC.
Includes 6 data t
points from TDR 642 and 2 addltional data points.
I 1
Indications
% T.W.
% T.W.
% Diff.
]
In Sample Stat.
Met E.C.T.
Met /E.C.T 1
8 i
45.9 63.4
+ 17.5 i
e 21.8 27.7 25.9 1
Data Set:
Data coints from above set with signal amplitudes less than
)
1 volt.
(Typical of Indications identified during review of 1982 data.)
}
}
Indications
% T.W.
% T.W.
% Diff.
1 In Sample Stat.
Het E.C.T.
Met /E.C.T i,
2 4
i 46.3 77.5
+ 31.3 i
e 25.4 25 4 31.9 i
j Data Set:
Data colnts from above set with signal amolitudes 1 volt or greater.
(Typical of indications identified i
during the 1984 examinations.)
i Indications
% T.W.
% T.W.
% Diff.
l
{
In Sample Stat.
Met E.C.T.
Met /E.C.T i
i 4
i 45.5 49.3
+ 3.8 0
21.4 24.7 6.2 1
)
t i
l 7
Mean value j
o. I Standard Oestation (Sample)
I
-. _ - _ _ _ _. _ = _ _ _. __-
TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 53 of 80 4
The statistical evaluation of this sample can be used to shoe a general trend in the accuracy of the percent through wall calls.
When all 8 data points are included the mean overcall is 17.5%.
When only the 4 signals of one volt or less are consid-ered the mean overcall is 31.3%.
By contrast'the 4 signals with j
axp11tudes of 1 volt or greater showed a mean overcall of 3.8%.
I
~
This data set is limited and the indications included have not experienced the mechanical and thermal stresses applied to the 1
insitu tubes and therefore cannot be used to define exact margins of overcall for part through wall IGSAC.
However, the data indicates a consistent trend of overcalling the percent 4
through wall of the small, poor signal to noise ratio indica-tions typical of those identified during the review of the-1982 data.
The data from the larger, 1 volt or greater, signals i
typical of the 1984 data, implies a degree of accuracy more
{
consistent with the GPUN quallfled techniques (Reference 3) than observed for the lower amplitude signals.
I Since the 1984 ECT signals may be the result of IGA, IGSAC, or i
both, GPUN reviewed available data to determine the accuracy of sizing IGA with IGSAC protruding from the bottom.
The data i
available was limited to only one data point.
This data point i
had a 35% througn wall IGA pit with an IGSA crack extending i
h' 1
l 1
I
TOR 652 Rev. 2 Page 54 of 80 l
i l
completely through wall.
The data reviewed for this defect was l
.510 S.D. Insitu data which showed the indication to be greater j
than 100% through wall (recorded as 95%).
The indication did i
not appear to be affected by the IGA and would have been properly dispositioned.
3)
Quantify the Degree of Change in Terms of Percent Through Wall GPUh evaluated data from 3 data sets to quantify the degree of l
changes in the ECT signals in terms of percent through wall.
1 These various data sets include the OTSG A Growth Program and l
the OTSG A&B Degraded Tubes (ISI Tubes).
The review of a 4th i
l data set, the LTCT data from examinations performed by Westing-l j
house indicated the ECT process was not consistent with the TMI l'
ECT program and therefore the data was net included.
t 4
}
OTSG A Growth Program (100 Tubes)
The primary data set used to quantify the changes in the ECT signals was the 39 indications identified in the OTSG A Growth 1
Program.
This data set did not include any indications-pre-i viously identified during the 1982 examinations and was further j
i limited to those indications 20% through wall or greater.
I.
L Prior to performing a statistical evaluation of the 1982 and 7
1984 data, the data was re-evaluated by a single data analyst.
1
]
The re-evaluation was performed to account for the variability l
previously identified during the review of the ECT process.
i F
i
)
i
.--a.---- -~~..
TOR 652 Rev. 2 Page 55 of 80 This variability applied primarily to the larger amplitude 1984 ECT signals and therefore biased the initial 1982 to 1984 data l
comparisons.
This re-evaluation does not impact the previous disposition of the 1984 data as the majority of the tubes which were included in this sample were removed from service based on the original 1984 evaluations.
For the tubes which remain inservice, the percent through wall values assigned during the re-evaluation process did not exceed 46%.
Inherent in the plugging criteria (40% T.W.) is a tolerance (z 10% based on industry standards) for ECT accuracy.
None of the indications remaining in service exceed this tolerance (50% T.W.).
The j
statistical evaluations performed herein are considered to more accurately reflect the changes in the ECT signals and supercede previously reported values.
The statistical evaluation of the data was performed using the complete data set of 39 points and a subset of 16 points.
The subset of 16 f.oints included indications which had signal amplitudes of.6 volts or greater in both 1982 and 1984 This subset represents a 2:1 nominal signal to noise ratto for the indications.
The results of these evaluations are as follows.
l l
l
TOR 652 j
Rev. 2 Page 56 of 80 1
4
~ Statistical Evaluation of OTSG "A" Growth Program l
i Data Set:
All indications 2 20% T.W. (I.D.) which were confirmed by 8 x 1.
Includes only tubes 1 20% T.W. In both 1982 and i
l 1984.
Indications 4
1982 1984 1982-1984 j
In Sample Stat.
V V
a%
AV 39 i
55.3
.6 48.4 1.6
-6.9
+1.0 i
0 18.9
.4 17.4 1.2 10.7 1.0 1
r Data Set:
All indications 1 20% T.W. (I.D.) which were confirmed by j
8 x 1.
Includes only tubes 1 20% and 2 6V in 82 and 84.
Indications 1982 1984 1982-1984 j
In Sample Stat.
V V
4%
av l
16 i
50.3
.9 46.0 2.1
-4.3
+1.2
]
o 18.9
.5 19.5 1.8 7.6 1.3 F
'i i
l I
L h
l 1
I I
i i
i-Mean Value o-1 Standard Deviation (Sample) 1 l
I
, _ _. _.... _ _ _... - ~ _ - -,. _.. ~ -... -. _
TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 57 of 80 l
4 The statistical evaluation of this population showed a trend of increased signal voltage and a decrease in the reported percent through wall from 1982 to 1984.
The mean decrease in reported 4
percent through wall for the initial data set (39 Pts) was -6.9%
while the mean de, crease for the second data set (16 Pts) was I
4.3%.
The evaluations of the signal amD11tudes also showed a consistent trend for both data sets with the initial data set showing a mean increase in voltage from.6 volts to 1.6 volts for a mean increase of 167%.
The same trend was observed in the second data set as the mean voltage increased from.9 volts to 2.1 volts for a mean increase of 144% from 1982 to 1984.
i Although these data sets showed similar trends in the changes to the ECT signals, the difference in the magnitude of the phase i
shift (-6.9% versus -4.3%) indicates the noise associated with the 1982 data may be a factor.
t J
i OTSG A&B Decraded Tubes (ISI Tutes)
J The evaluation of the 100 tube growth program represented indications which were below the threshold of detectability in 1982 and became detectable in 1984.
By contrast the OTSG A and B Degracad Tubes (ISI Tubes) provide a population of tubes whicn were detectable in both 1982 and 1984 These populations 1
represent better signal to noise ratio indications in 1982 and 1983 and are typical of the indications to remain inservice as degradec tubes.
i i
TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 58 of 80 The total population of ISI tubes with inner diameter i
indications was 15 tubes in OTSG A and 14 tubes in OTSG B.
(Indications at support plates which are considered areas of reduced accuracy are excluded from this evaluation.)
(Reference 1) 1 I
The data sets were statistically evaluated, by OTSG, as a total population for 1982, 1983 and 1984 and as a subset of indica-i tions for OTSG A.
For the statistical evaluation of tne total i
population the indications identified as 20% T.W. or less were all treated as 20% T.W.
For the evaluation of the OTSG A subset, all Indications less than 20% T.W. in 1982, 1983 or 1984 were excluded.
The results of these evaluations are as shown on Table 6.
e The statistical evaluation of these populations shows sig-1 j
nificant differences between OTSG A & B.
Because of these i
differences the data sets will be discussed separately by OTSG.
The statistical evaluation of the OTSG A 2 20% subset from 1982 1
to 1983 showed a mean increase in the signal amplitude of.5 volts (83%) witn a mean decrease in the reported percent through i
j wall of -16.6%.
From 1983 to 1984 the mean voltage increasec oy j
.9 volts (82%) however, the percent through wall remained more f
constant with a 2.9% increase.
This same trend was also 1
observed in the data set containing all inoications, n
TOR 652 Reu. 2 Page 59 of 80 By contrast the evaluation of the OTSG B data set showed no significant changes from uither 1982 to 1983 or from 1983 to 1984. -In OTSG B the limited number of data points (2) with
> 20% T.W. evaluations in 1982, 1983 and 1984 prevented using this criteria for subset.
The evaluations were therefore performed using the complete data set in which the mean percent through wall for 1982 was 22.8% while 1983 was 22.0% and 1984 was 22.0%.
The signal amplitudes for the examinations also remained constant with a mean voltage of 1.6 volts in both 1982 and 1983 and 1.5 volts in 1984.
l GPUN further evaluated the ISI data sets from OTSGS A & B to determine the cause of the significant differences in the statistical results.
This evaluation included a subjective review of the signals by a Level III data analyst and determined the OTSG B indications may not be indications of IGA or IGSAC i
but may be caused by other surface anomalies.
The review of the above data sets would indicate the change in the phase angles of the ECT signals has occurred at various times in the OTSGs and is not associated with a specific thermal or mechanical cycle.
The changes identified in the OTSG A ISI tubes frem 1982 to 1983 were similar to those identified in the OTSG A Growth Program from 1983 to 1984
.I
TOR 652 Rev. 2 Page 60 of 80 The data from the OTSG A Growth Program was evaluated using stricter controls than the production data sets and therefore represents the best available data for auditional analysis.
4)
Characterize the Locations in the OTSGs where Cnances in the ECT Signals Occurrea The previously described data sets were reviewed to enaracterize the axial and radial locations of the O'SGs in which changes in the ECT signals occurred.
The available data incicates tqe Changes in the signals occurred at all locations where inner clameter indications were present.
This includes antal loca-tiens from the 5th T.S.P. to the kinetically espanded area.
The radial locaticns of the indicati:ns was limited to the outer pericnery of the OTSG. in this ceriphery all locations acceared to te affecte: ecually.
5)
Determine the E'fect of the Ceserved Changes in the ECT Signals r ture Evam'nattens cn u
The changes identified in the shape and phase angles of tne ECT signals have been identified in data from esaminations performed at various times since the 1982 baseline.
The change in the ECT signals can first ce i entified when ecccaring the 198: Casel'9e d
cata to tne 1983 cost repair ECT.
The changes observed raria:
this time pertoa are very similar to the enanges ceserved tetween the 1982 arc t9e 1984 data.
TDR 652 Reu. 2 Page 61 of 80 l
During the 1982 examinations the strict plugging criteria i
[
applied to the OTSGs required most of the tubes with Indications to be removed from service.
The only available data base of Indications detected during 2 or more production examinations is therefore the comparison of 1983 and 1984 Degraded Tubes (ISI' l
tubes).
This data set includes 7 indications in OTSG A and 2 l
ll Indications in OTSG B which were greater than or equal to 20%
T.W. and can De used for analysis.
The remainder of the data sets discussed in this section therefore represent the j
comparison of indications which were below the threshold of detection on the first exam-ination and have increased in j
amplitude to become detectable during the second examination.
1 i
The comparison of these two types of data (previously detected i
]
and not previously detected) shows significant differences in the repeatability of the examination results. A review of the
~
statistical data in Table 6 shows that when an indication is l
first detectable during production evaluations and then compared to the previous examinations, a definite shift in the phase angles of the indications can be observed, this shift occurs as i
j the signal amplitude and the signal to noise ratio change to i
make the indication detectable.
In the OTSG A Growth Program.
I which represents this type of data, the mean change in signn!
I amplitudes was +1.0 volts from 1982 to 1984 while the reported i
percent through wall cecreased by a mean of -6.9%.
I
TOR 652 Ree. 2 Page 62 of 80 By contrast, where Indications were of sufficient amplitude to be detected during the 1983 production examinations, phase shifts of this magnitude have not been observed in the 1984.
data.
The comparison of the 1983 to 1984 data for this population of tubes (OTSG A Degraded Tube) shows a mean increase in the amplitude of the indications of.9 volts while the mean change in percent through wall was +2.97..
Based on this ECT data the phase angles of Indications which have become detectable in 1984 and have expertenced the phase shift since 1982 would be expected to stabilize during future examinations.
For indications which increase in ampittude and are first detected during future outages, phase shifts similar to those observed from 1982 to 1984 would be espected.
The results of the metallurgical correlations show the low atc11tude indications of less than i volt are not being accurately evaluated and result in an overly conservative disposition of the tubes.
To minimize the impact of the inaccuracles associted with these small amplitude signals, GPUN can implement guidelines to provide a voltage threshold for evaluating indications.
The evaluation of the OTSG A Growth Program and the Degraded Tubes (IS! Tubes) Indicate a 1 volt threshold for evaluating indications would improve accuracy c-determining the percent through wall penetration of discontinuities.
Tubet with indications below this threshold can be further evaluated using additional data such as 8 i 1 absolute to determine if the tube should be removed from service or mcnitored during future esaminations.
l t
.~.
lattE &
$4pechev 95 5 tall 5lltAt Iwattalla Of 9982,141 Ase 144 (Cl DAT A 142 1983 1944 82-83
~
83-84 82-84 s Pts.
Stat.
1 V
1 V
1 V
k k
k k
k k
l 1994.bre-th all lads. 329%
16 50.3
.9 46.0 2.1
-4.3 1.2 i
E 2 6v en le?
8:
18.9
.5 39.5 3.8 7.6
1.3 Subset
_m=
55.3
.6 48.4 1.6
-6.9 1.0 sample - all 39 Inds. 329%
8:
18.9 4
IF.4 1.2 19.7 1.0 91 E A t11
-a3 (29 35.0
.7 (23 25.8 1.2 (23 27.3 1.7
-13.0
+.5
+1.5
+.5
-II.5 1.0 all I ds.
Varies Dy wr.
8: Pts) 16.5
.6 Pts) 7.3
.7 Pts) 9.3
.8
.5
.5
.7 5=hset:
_3=
49.2
.6 32.7 1.1 35.6 2.0
-16.6
+.5
+2.9
.9
-13.7 1.3 lads. r29%
7 0:
16.3
.5 7.7
.6 19.7
.7 18.5 4
8.5
.6 29.6
.6 ele _E 151
_E: (24 22.8 2.8 (25 22.0 3.8 (25 22.0 3.1
.8
+.3 0
.8
+.3
.8 all Inds.
Varies Sy Tr.
o: Pts) 7.4 1.6 Pts) 6.4 1.6 Pts) 6.5 1.5
.8
.7 1.I Subset:
_23 43.0 1.8 42.5 1.8 43.0 2.6
.5 9
+.5
+.8 8
+.0 lad. 2295 2
8 9.9 8
7.8
.7 7.1 2.I 17.7
.7 14.8 1.3 2.0 2.1 yyy i seran value ee < pe 8: I Standere Seeletion (Samplel e
e
%s H un M
One O
- _.. ~
.~.. -.- -
4 7CR 652 Ree. 2 Page 64 of 80 i
I VII. GROWTH PROGRAM GPUN initiated a growtn program during the examinations in Novemcer 1984 to determine if.a growth mechanism was active during the current (July-Nov 1984) period of extenced dry layup of the TMI-1 OTSGs.
This sample included.a pooulation of 100 tubes in
'A' and 50 tuces in
'B'.
J
'The tubes for botn generators were selected from nign cefect areas of the i
i generators and were examined full lengtn using the GPUN cual examination method.
i
]
OTSG A GROWTH PROGRAM 1
The groatn crogram in tne
'A' OTSG consisted of esamining a CoDulation of
.i l
100 tuces 3 times at accro Imately 2 week intervals.
Initially, these tutes were esaminec as cart of the production eddy current program in Mid-Novemoer 1984.
The tuces were sucsecuentij esamined a second time in late Novemeer 1984 and a tntra time in Mid-Decemoer 1984.
Results of the i
3 esaminations of eacn tuce were then comoarea for enanges in tne numcer of incications anc for enanges in signal resconte voltage Or cercent i
througn aall determinations.
The 100 tuees in the
'A' Grewtn Program incluced 55 tutes witn conftreec
+
4 j
incications and 45 witn no relevant indications.
Tne comparisons of the j
receat esaminations nere cerformec Of evaluating tne signal amolituces 1
anc cercent througn wall determinatic $.
These evaluations revealed
+t-
{
sentially no enange in tne voltage or cercent tnrougn aall setermina-I tions.
These results Indicate that tnere was no continued cegracation suring the three esaminations frcm Noveteer to Decemcer. 1984 l
1
?
T04 652 Ree. 2
- 7. / -
Page 65 of 80 w.
OTSG B GROWTH PROGRAM [.I Th[GrowthProgramin'B'consy,tedofaMt.d-Novemetr',934esaminationof 50 tubes which were previously examined in July 1984.. These 50 tubes were selected from the high defect are& for full.'iength examination in July,1984 derYnh allimited scope e'xaminationGarfornya when primary to
,/
~
secondary leakage was detected.
7
/
s Tite July and Novembe'e 198A Eddy Current results were then comDared and no
^
- s..
~
previously undetected lndication,s were found to esist in the Novemeer 1984 results There was no evideocg.cf continuedA..egradation in these
.s m
' thbes cetween Jul'y andNove *0er 84.
j
s
/
+.
,[
j GROWTH PROGRAM CCNCLUSIONS f
c-
~
The Growth Program fvaluatio*s indiM!e inere nas no si1.I' cant enange 4
,t J
n InthecondittenofthetucesfromJulytoNoyemoer1984.,inthe'B'OTSG or from Mid-Novemte/ to Mid-December in 1984 for tne
'A' 0TSG.
This in-
< formation dees not iridicde,any correlation ce: ween este5ded dry laysjo and identif'. cation of c Qviously undetectee'indicjtlens.
E y
/-
,,> [
e s'
. 4
(
p
/
~?
~~.
4
,p g
9 s'
p
/
.?
se
/ #
~
/
>l p
O' b
4 i L..
.-~
TDR 652 Ree. 2 Page 66 of 80 VIII. CONCLUSIONS i
j f
Based on the characterization of the 1984 Indications, a review of the i
1982, 1983 and the growth program data, GPUN was able to draw the follow-ing conclusions for the 1984 examination results.
1.
The characterization of the 1984 indications by axial and radial lo-l cations, and their correlation to the indications reportec in the
)
1982 baseline. suggest tnat the 1984 indications are an additicnal i
sucset of the 1982 incications.
I j
2.
tne re-evaluation of crevious data suggests that the indications icentifiec in 1984 ere alreacy present curing the 1982 esamination i
cut aere althin tne cac(grounc noise.
t i
The kinetic evoansion recair and hot functional testing may have in-creased the amolituce of tnese oreviously e<isting indications and 4
mace them cetectacle curing creduction examinations.
There was no i
trend of through wall growth associated witn this amplitude increase.
i 3.
Based on the evaluation Of the Growth Program, there is no evidence of continuing tuce cegracation since the OT5Gs were placed in dry l
layup in July 1984 2
I
i,
i i
TDR 652 Rev.2 Page 67 of 80 7
,/
"g 4.
The characterization of the 1984 indications shows that approximately
'90% of the indications are 20-60 percent through wall and I coil.
These indications are at or near the threshold of detection for the previously established sensitivity curve.
5.
Ao::roximately 10% cf the indications are higher percent through wall Q60~.) with a circumferential extent of I or 2 coils.
There is a
- or'al of three 3-cotl circumferential extent indications. All of these indications are between the threshold /[r'detectfon' and the l
most conservative curve for critical crack size.,
(Main Steam Line Break).
N i
i s
4 A,
s f
4
'k i
k k v
s Y
s.
f
-~ 4., a.
,_,\\.
f-
.. ~,,...... _..
.,,..v.,
TDR 652 Ree. 2 Page 68 of 80 I).
REFERENCES 1.
GPUN TDR 423, Rev. 1 R. Barley, J. Janiszewski, G. Rhedrick, M. Torborg, "Three Mlle Island - Unit 1 OTSG Tubing Eddy Current Program Qualification," 3/15/84 2.
GPUN TDR 442, Rev. O, G Rhedrick, " Eddy Current Examination Results of Three Mile Island Unit 1 OTSG," 8/29/83.
3.
GPUN TDR 642, Rev. O, M. Torborg, G. Rhedrick, " Qualification of Conversion Curve for Inner Diameter Discontinuities," 1/29/85.
4 GPUN TDR 401, Rev. O, G.
Rhedrick, " Report on Eddy Current Indications Found Subsequent to Kinetic Expansion of THI-l Steam Generator Tubes," April 1983.
5.
GPUN Topical Report 008, Rev. 3, T.M. Moran, " Assessment of THI-l Plant Safety for Return to Service After Steam Generator Repair",
August 19, 1983.
6.
Sagar, Amrit, "Multifrequency Eddy Current Method and the Separation of Test System Variables," Eddy Current Characterization of Materials and Structures, ASTM STP 722, George Birnbaum and George Free, Eds..
American Society for Testing and Materials, 1981, pp. 269-297.
TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 69 of 80 APPENDIX A ABSTRACT ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DUAL INSPECTICN TECHNIQUE AND PERCENT THROUGH HALL CALIBRATION CURVE
7CR 652 Rev. 2 Page 70 of 80 i
Prior to the 1982 OTSG tubing inspection, GPU Nuclear had always performed its i
OTSG tubing' examinations with the standard differential eddy current technicue for detecting indications that normally originated on the outer diameter of the tube wall.
The eddy current inspection systeai was operated at normal gain and the probes used for these inspections measured 0.510" diameter.
These parameters traditionally were censicered acceptable for inscetting the OTSG tubing which has a nominal inner diameter of 0.557*.
After 131 tubes leaked uoon start-up and test in Novemoer 1981, eddy current examinations were immeciately performed with the standard differential (5.0.)
.510" tecnnicue and scme of the lea (ing indications were not detected.
A sub-secuent examination was performed with a multi-coil absolute eddy current technicue and indications were identified in the roll transition of the leak-ing tubes.
In additicn, other indications which had not been detected by the previous 5.D.
510" examination were identified.
The defects discovered in the OTSG tubing were metallurgically evaluated as inner diameter initiated, very tignt, and orientated around the circumference of tne tuces.
It was tnen reccgnized that tne 5.0.
510" technique was not sensitive enough for detect-ing all cf tne new inner diameter discontinuities.
GPU Nuclear modified and improved tne sensitivity of its standard differential tecnnique by increasing tne probe's clameter to 0.540", and increasing the operating gain.
This modification improved the standard differential's se*31-tivity for cetection of preccminately circumferential, :.D. initiatec incica-tions by approximately 1757. over the older technicue.
The disadvantage of using the high gain and improvec fill factor is tnat the standard differential i
examination becomes overly sensitive to surface anomalies.
l l
L
TCR 652 Re v.2 Page 71 og 80 The absolute technicue used to confirm the standard differential inspection results was also modified and improved.
The development of the 3XI Absolute probe with eight pancake shape coils placed around the probe body provided 360 degrees coverage on the circumference of the tube wall.
This design cermitted a single pass of the probe in the tube during an-examination as compared to multiple passes when fewer coils are used.
The eight coils also provided a fair estimate of the arc length of an indication because the response signal from each coil represents its prcximity to the indication.
Usi'ng the improved S.D.
540" high gain and absolute 3 1 technicues, GPU Nuclear developed a dual method eddy current insoettion technicue.
The ini-tial examination was performed by the S.D.
540" high gain technicue.
If the e<aminatien cy S.D..540" shewed no evidence of a defect. Its examinatten ce-came tne final inscecticn of reccrc.
If the S.D.
540" examination recorted an indication, a second e<aminatien was l
performed using tne aosolute 8xl tecnnique.
The acsolute 8xl examinaticn de-termined if the reported indicatien was relevant Or non-relevant.
For tocse indications determined to be relevant, the absolute 841 result was uses to estimate the arc length and also confirm the origin (I.D./0.D.) and axial Ic-cation of the indication.
-During a standard differential eddy current examination the percent tnrce;,
wall penetration of a flaw is determined by measuring the response signal's onase angle and converting that measurement to tne cercent through wall.
A
.i l
l l
TOR 652 Rev. 2 Page 72 of 80 calibration for this conversion is established by setting up the standard dif-ferential equipment and testing a known stancard.
The phase angle for the eddy current response signal is acjusted to a specified measurement which gen-erally is 40 degrees for a 100 cercent through wall by.052" diameter hole standard.
This calibration is done in accordance with the ASME Section XI code.
The traditional conversion curve for phase angle measurement to inner diameter initiated cercent through wall is determined by the values ~that are extracolated from the 40 degree phase angle-100 percent througn wall (given by the.052" diameter hole standarc) to zero cegree phase angle--zero percent througn wall.
The estimated percent through wall that is extrapolated from ne conversion curve tends to overcall the actual percent through wall of a small volume flaw.
This over calling is consicerec conservative edcy current evaluation and was institutec in the 1982 cual inspection tecnniaue.
It had always ceen acknowlecged that this traditional curve overcalled small volume inner ciameter discontinuities.
The presence of smaller inner ciameter initiated cracks in tne TMI-l OT5G's had recuirec GDUN to cevelop a more ac-curate means of assigning the percent through wall cenetration.
Therefore, I
the traditional inner diameter conversion curve was enhanced by using supple-l mental data from EDM with various Known depths.
This data was usec to ceveico a conversion curve wnich more accurately represented small volume, innec :'-
ameter initiated discontinuities anc this accuracy was verified through metal-lurgical correlations using actual intergranular stress assisted track samples.
., _ _ _ ~
TDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 73 of 80 APPENDIX B 1952. 1984 EDDY CURRENT STATISTICS C
e d
TDR 652 Ree. 2 Page 14 of 80 i
TMI STEAM GENERATOR A AXIAL LOCATIONS OF CONFIRMED INDICATIONS 0-100% THROUGH WALL i
PERCENT VS SPAN 1982 VS 1984 1982 1984 Support Frequency
?.
Frequency LP-1 6
.19 1
.090 1-2 23
.717 2
.181
{
2-3 8
.249 8
.726 j
34 8
.249 19 1.725 4-5 17
.53 7
.635 i
I 5-6 58 1.808 19 1.725 4
6-7 34 1.714 26 2.361 7-8 55 1.060 5
.458 8-9 34 1.714 12 1.1 i
1 9-10 11
.343 4
.367 l
10-11 24 748 8
.726 11-12 54 1.683 13 1.181 12-13 63 1.964 54 4.900 13-14 146 4.551 57 5.177 14-15 97 3.024 78 7.084 15-US 533 16.521 217 19.70 l
US-UP 2040 63.591 571 51.861 I
TOTAL 3208 1101 Note:
(1) 1984 data includes the length of tubing celow tne kinetically ei-j panced zone.
(Aporoximately US+7 and below).
1 (2) 1982 cata includes the length of tubing from US+15 and below.
i (3) Data taken frcm 1982 anc 1984 cata-bases as of 2/15/85.
i l
1 i
i l
=.
ICR 652 Ree. 2 l
Page 75 of 80 TMI STEAM GENERATOR B AXIAL LOCATION OF CONFIRMED INDICATIONS 0-100% THROUGH WALL f
PERCENT VS SPAN 1982 VS 1984 1982 1984 Support Frequency I
Frequency LS 6
468 6
3.109 i
j 1-2 3
.234 2
1.036 2-3 4
.312 1
.518 3-4 20 1.561 3
1.554 4-5 9
.703 6
3.109 5-6 9
.703 4
2.072 6-7 24.
1.874 8
4.145 7-8 12
.937 7
3.627 8-9 19 1.483 4
2.072 9-10 20
'1.561 9
4.663
{
10 11 15 1.171 2
1.036 11-12 34 2.654 12 6.218 12-13 34 2.654 12 6.218 13-14 106 8.275 7
3.627 14-15 81 6.323 7
3.627 I
15-US 98-7.650 25 12.953 US 787 61.144 78 40.414 f
TOTAL 1281 193 4
Note:
(1) 1984 data includes the length of tubing below the kinetically ex-candec zone.
( Apo:cximately US.7 and below).
(2) 1982 data includes the length of tubing from US+15 and telcw.
l (3) Data taken from 1982 and 1984 data bases as of 2/15/85.
l l
P
IDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 76 of 80 TMI STEAM GENERATOR A VOLTAGE DISTRIBUTION FOR CONFIRMED INDICATIONS 0-100% THROUGH WALL PERCENT VS VOLTS 1982 VS 1984 1982 1984 l
Volts Percent Volts Percent I
0 31.807 0
34.968 1
44.653 1
35.15 I
2 16.595 2
23.615 3
4.702 3
4.814 4
1.537 4
.636 5
.338 5
.363 4
6
.184 6
.091 7
.061 7
.182 1
8
.092 8
.182
- l i
9 0
9 0
10
.031 10 0
4 f
i Note:
(1) 1984 data includes the length of tubing below the kinetically e<-
panded zone.
(Approximately US+7 and below).
(2) 1982 data includes the length of tubing from US+15 and below.
(3) Data taken from 1982 and 1984 data bases as of 2/15/85.
i I
.. -., - _ = - -
IDR 652 Rev. 2 Page 77 of 80 i
i TMI STEAM GENERATOR 8 VOLTAGE DISTRIBUTION FOR CONFIRMED INDICATIONS 0-100% THROUGH HALL PERCENT VS VOLTS 1982 VS 1984 1982 1984 Volts Percent Volts Percent 0
23.878 0
26.425 1
28.897
-1 20.207 l
2 25.019 2
27.979 3
9.810 3
11.917 i
l 4
6.844 4
5.699 i
5 1.901 5
3.109 6
1.597 6
1.036 7
.508 7
1.554 i
)
8 1.217 8
1.554 i
i 9
0 9
0 j
10
.076 10
.518 11
.152 11 0
t i
t s
l m.
I l
Note:
(1) 1984 data includes the length of tubing belcw tne.kinetically en-panded zone.
(Approximately US+7 and below).
(2) 1982 data includes the length of tuoing from US+15 and celcw.
(3) Data taken from 1982 anc 1984 data cases as of 2/15/85.
t b
l l
_.. ~ _ -..
..-_._.,,....,~,c__,.,,
. -- -~.
Ils 552 Rev. 2 Page 78 of 80 TMI STEAM GENERATOR A CONFIRMED PERCENT THROUGH WALL i
DISTRIBUTION FOR CONFIRMED INDICATIONS 0-100% THROUGH WALL PERCENT VS PERCENT THROUGH WALL 1982 VS 1984 1982 1984
% Thru-Wall
% Thru-Wall 0-19
.281 0-19 0
20-29 1.434 20-29 39.055 30-39 1.309 30-39 21.163 1
40-49 6.827 40 49 17.802 50-59 13.685 50-59 7.629 i
60-69 9.757 60-69 5.904 i
i 70-79 7.512 70-79 2.186
\\
}
80-89 8.635 80-89 1.907
[
4 t
90-100 50.561 90-100 3.724 l
i l
Ncte:
(1) 1984 data includes the length cf tubing celow the (inetically ex.
cancea zone.
(Approximately US+7 anc celen).
l!
~ 1982 data incluces the length of tubing from US,15 and belcw.
(2)
(3) Data taken from 1982 and 1984 data bases as of 2/15/85.
b s
r 4
i
- - - - - ICR 652 Rev. 2 Page 79 of 80
.i
.)
TMI STEAM GENERATOR S CONFIRMED PERCENT THROUGH WALL DISTRIBUTION FOR CONFIRMED INDICATIONS 0-100% THROUGH WALL PERCENT VS PERCENT THROUGH WALL 1982 VS 1984 1982 1984
% Thru-Wall
?.
% Thru-Wall 0-19 11.788 0-19 0
20-29 11.866 20-29 63.212 30-39 16.472 30-39 13.99 40-49 10.617 40 49 11.917 50-59 13.349 50-59 4.663 60-69 8.041 60-69 3.109 70-79 6.401 70-79 2.073 80-89 5.699 80-89 0
90-100 15.769 90-100 1.036 i
)
i l
1 l
Note:
(1) 1984 data incluces the length of tubing below tne kinetically e<-
cances zone.
(Accroximately US+7 anc celow).
(2) 1982 cata includes the length of tubing from US.15 and below.
(3) Data taken from 1982 and 1984 data bases as of 2/15/85.
i r
i r.
I i
,m,
--w w
,e-
...m.___
i
'OR 652 Rev. 2 Page 80 of 80 CIRCUMFERENTIAL EXTENT FOR CONFIRMED INDICATIONS i
GENERATOR A i
1982 1984 Coils Frequency Colls Frequency 7
0 270 (N/A) 0 321 (N/A) i 1
655 66.973 1
1111 89.959 2
301 30.777 2
122 9.878 3
18 1.840 3
2 0.162 4
1 0.102 4
0 0
5 1
0.102 5
0 0
6 0
0 6
0 0
7 1
0.102 7
0 0
8 1
0.102 8
0 0
l TOTAL 978 1235 GENERATOR B 1982 1984 Coils Frequency Colls Frequency 0
361 (N/A) 0 321 (N/A) i 1
147 50.000 1
102 79.069 2
102 34.694 2
26 20.155
+
3 26 8.843 3
1
.775 4
7 2,381 4
0 0
5 4
1.360 5
0 0
6 0
0 7
0 0
7 0
0 8
0 0
8 5
2.721 9
0 0
l TOTAL 294 129 1
f Note:
(1) 1984 data includes the length of tubing below the Kinetically ex-i panded zone.
(Aoproximately US+7 and below).
(2) 1982 data includes the length of tubing from US+15 and below.
(3) Data taken from 1982 and 1984 data bases as of 2/15/85.
4 1
J I
4 I
FIG. lA TDR-652 THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR aev.
2 GENERATING STATION LRill 1 STEAN GEERATOR A p....,.... rag g4.....,v.....v....v "...::qL..
..s, u
.......... 3......,...6.....,.
.9
.....e...i.,....,........ s..
.. -....v....,.<.........
... ~........
..r s,......
er........s...................................
.....,...............a.
.r.............v....r,.......
. i < i,..
s...
6,
. 3...
,.. o.. m... o..................
...t..... o.
4.s..,....
- t..r.s...............,.r...i...,.
o.
....s......
.............r...
.......s.................i.............
6....,........
....,........... et.
..m.,1,.,.,.,
... 36....m.
........._..,r.......
.....m..
- v....... i...
.....o......
......<..e.................m....re..,.
.....s e.,.
.,1.
ns...........m.....,...................................
..........A...........r....... m.........
.......ii.,....u....,..P..d e.., g.i.o,~..,
.........d...#..
.......... m
..e.. s i i,.i.m.
....... -...............u6..
......o.....
..s....i....
.. o,J. i r.....,.
de...u..
i
.... t
. e..s.
99...
e 6..n. c.. d.r.. 8..
.,......A......... r.A.c.., m..e. r e... t..F.....
g 9.....it
,.4
.e.
..6...
..i u
...,s...............r i
...e.n.. i u......
..... e t e..
i.
r.
e..i t,.
- e...e.e.....i n. s t
..rirajp
.is.
.i.
.....i..n..:..n.......u in..
c o. r on i....m. 6.3.i.
6 i.
.. u..,r:.. 6 n.... o..........i..,..
i c r e..r...g s t.... i.a.... g.
...i.
,....e.............
.. rr on
....ls.1
...........A....Aa.......o..
4
.g i..n.
.1.r..i....,.._.....i l.i t...,T.r....
. u....
6.. c.
.e i.......i.p.6 4.. i..o.r... o. /... -.ue......i.i i...i...
.o,..-
. o. r u s.. n.
...h o
.u. o..........
..2
...i :.... s. n..i. i. i.n ir
...i
.......,...........e..
i o.i f.i t,s..... u d.................
m.
.................. A.r e i.. o.
i.n
.....rr....r....,....
..o..t. aP..i o. A...r i a.....
P ;.9.
f.... o....o..
s
....A....
m...
......t.....
- 1....
.o.........
..... 6.. u.. r 4
.T.....
..P...
..- o.. e m.
..t..........
.6...i
.u....
u e
1
..............3.......
n..
. s,,.... e r s. i. i.. o.r.i........n................n.
in 6
a.
... f.c r...
.....or.
........c,i...
r e r..fr.e r;...
...u.........i.., :/re u..
.u
-s
......... s. ; 4 F..
.k
.........6....i.
.h,..A.... /...
...... :...a,.1. t..
...e...i.o..r......s..........
../vs......
.. c r.
i t. :
e
.........i....... i c ; i.i.......
.....r.....
... ig p..
.t.p
.....u.....u.....n.
(s u.o s..!u.
., /s.d.....
4066 l u. 2(t.u...........
4-
- i......
4 de.. a n..i.i.
.a
.... A. 1 i......./.t. o....... o. di A
.....t.
.....c
.t....
..rs...........i.t.........1.
... i n..t e.i..
..i..,....
i r i.t e.........
...i
. i. n....
n
.i.6
..d.......e. f t.,,? /. s s...
.6 e en i.i.i i.. p.......b...........Fi s..
d-...........66......
.... i..
s.r...
.E....r f. 9... e.r.. e
...t.s...e....g
- te -
i.. : 6. i. g.t
.i i
i 6 : (.
6..
- r... di r r i...
r.. A. i.. i.r re t...i t....... L '/.t,....I'*.i...'......ati,u...#.t.r*d i.......4 '..f.. L.a.s.t. o.... g L.......
s
.s s i s......tu
.,t. h.[. C..
E....r,
..r.k..
6 6i
.t t s
...I. b.... d..
i.
it s
..i
.y
. y6. j.....
t.... r... e m..
. t. g.. t.r,r ;i u.r....
.6..
..1 4
E c.p c. ;.i.-
i i g.i.. o. u.s :... -
i -
.u. s..
s 6..
....h...,.....s
& g.
.s.
.n
.g..
- 6. j*..
r e..c.i ii s... g..5 i
- o. I E I p..t 9[..
i s. g /.d.ci,...
- n.....t. 4 et....
L.t j L*.....
.n1......r.L. r r...
si.
s.f...EL 8
i
/.3.
lp.ik..a J. i A.6 e
. /...
- d 6..s....
- o..........
.......... L. t.. i t..... s.&.6 8.
E.r.f..
/.i.t...
4
.. s.i..... h.g. 8 6 r.
(
....t.r.a.
....t...
..../......//i6..u.. t.o.s...A..r.i e r.n.r i........ 5. s.t.6... 6.../..
i..
.d r.i.,r.r ft/, 6Ys.r
...i..
..... 6.s 6./d..r s a.t i
o / i r..
n.i.t.....
. v. \\... v. i u...
.t.
.......i..6 n
t
............4.....
...i k
. . **'.'eI d-r.s.
.... s.
...o....r... s de. 6'6 6 t o '.. a.....
u...
t
...i..i..
s.:...a
... i.6 g. o. 6 t t.. o.u. i s.o. s....u.. r i s. i. e.
o 66 i
.i
.u 4'..A...
1 P..
6.....
.6..
.6 is.
o 6
tt-
.'r'e.'.6..'.'r'i..o....'..u.s.....'.,-r.t i j......
. c.. -
'.'5 6
- . r 6'6. u'. '.. '. '. '. '.. '.. '
i
. u....r.e...'.....d r.,.
.i, e....:..
n
.i......
i d a..
i....
r. s i r. i....
....... s..... n....., i. A... i... L i, \\6.
- 6...
u.s... ; i.i,. 6..s.t........i.....m 6
.6......i....
../...t o o
- t..
i i
- o.... s i..o..A /..........
........... / ed u......
.6......
i...
1 ei..,........
e..
.re.
4
.. s..... ' A. J. o..n..e. i...... h o.
........'e....
. /. s.a.e..r.e.r.e.r s.r,i s.i.n..o 9...s.#....e s.. r.i e.r..a r.r.r.
- t...e r.e.i/ e.u.vi t.r.o... i.:.
irr sa...
r.,.. o. e o
e
. t. ?.
6A
..o
.-.....o i
t r
r r
. e.
Tr...s...oi.
i.
a....... 6 - c o s.j.s r.s. s. r.... c....-i.
i
..r.s... a.s.
... u... s...........i.
r.r.. 1..
r...
...S..a. o.,s.
.T
.......t..t...
.....,se..........4......
t..
. r..t.6 6 6. i....
f
....1r.
5 e.f. 41
- e....
- 6. i...66
.... /. s..
1.......o.......
- 5. /.5 l e e
........r.........t..s.....
.-...t
..r
....r c.i.s...
........ _...... 5.i......
ins.
...... re t.2, $. 5..6..%../......
4.../.........6...
. s:
....s.i.s........
4
.. c..
i
./........
.../......\\.......
..o....
.............a...
.d..
o
...6............
....a.......6....
.../... f......i s... /...
....T
...a
...............f..
4.t.t.t... 4../.o..f.:s. -
...,.....e...... u. i....
.6..
.r......
s........
j/.......
4 d..s............o.. e.......
isis r,......
. 6
- lf..s.......
.. e/...........t....
.o.n......'..
...r s i.......i.....
....s.
. 6 /./...
s 3i....
g
..ga.r......
A.......
...jf i s...
s.... h.........
6......
.....i..s.. o....., t....................
s.. 6..s....
.o
.Y. e.....
.. f
/.....
./.
,e......s... b F..........
i c.i.t.::h. :2 7...' j?.
- f"..
- x.....
.o..r.
.o...
6.. o..
....o..,.,.....,s.......
.. s e. %. j.... 6.........
e.....
.. i.....
ee.......c.
.. s
.f.'...
2 6.......
O
...,':.. WN.' 1Fr..*Jciei.r../
.......s...../.........
..'.'/cis.Ys ::.V..*.'.'2... ':,*.*:.': *!. 'u.l. '! '.W...W: i.....
?.
..' ' ?.i
- ov
..... P./
J
...... f..
..i..
./......... 6 s../.8i.i..... A....o......
.. /.is t...
,s...........6 i....
..t.........s........
- 4. ; :a. s /....o...
.t.
.u...
6....
i 1........
..6...
...... A. A.d..i...s.
a s. s.6...
e r...o.
c s.a
- o....... o.... e
/6.
r...
.....r........o. /c..a.......
..s...... o n....s o......6 o.....
s u....
r o c. i t....t...
s.o
.. /r..a.... i... s o.. u... o...
...i.t s.
as.........
1...Ar. 6.....
%..d....
d6 6.f. :/. 4./..h...t s....
.o...-
..t.-
i s
... o i.
e4o. v..../....
oo e.
..... t. 0. e..... r t/r 0
.....a.r.......s.a
..a... [.... s.....is..
s..
6.....
............./s.......t....
5.
6
.. s...s.r i.s. u... c.i.t.o..\\..r.., s.. e..
d.. 6 6 6
.u
.u.
.6..
6.. S..
ii
.s.
.6
.....r s
s.. o....
.ssSs......T.s../.,.
..<P,.......is_...
s.
3
.......i.../.......
.. s s as...
T.....c.-....,..a....
s
..........i.t.
r.... Y. i.
...........a....s.
ass.........c..i...p..
. i..
.t.,..s.. r..........c...
r
.....l..
i.
..............i.s.... ? /ff.s.........r.6......
../....f.. A.,............
./.. A.......t.&.......................s..........5......
....i..
- a..
i......
..................A..,.,..r...e.s......
...o.
.....o........
........A.
...... s.. g. i e..v....
o.
.....A..........
.. Jo..
.s
.............A..........o......
....P..
.g..........
.....o.
.gy.......
.......ji.,........,....
.. 6.F..,....
....y........................................
............................,............;.....f.......g........
..... 9..........
.r
. e..
...................,P......J..r... 4.4...
..P.i.................
.-i...........
a.t.....
5.................... 6..................S..
t.......L........t...
...P.......
...o.o........
../..........
.r........
../
2..
..................e..S........),................6...........,....,,iq...g.......................f.,ms,................
.s.....-
.........A.
o.......
......i........./.1............
... -............e.....
...e.i........
...s.....
ec. r.s.............................t...n..
...d...........
............,......a.....
......w.........................
P.................
............................o.r......4_..
.......o............
.s.g...............
s /......
....u......i...
... 9..
Ie
........... i
.-. i
.......... i.... s.
r..
a.
.s..
r
.....s.. a
...... ^.
e 4a. r s. s.t.
..r.
.s.t..,.....
e
. i-n s..
GPU Nuclear Corporat. ion
.,. F
,..M.
29-FES-85
- Phnpeed Tube z Net inspected
I
(
FIG. 1B TDP-r,52 THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR Rn.
2 GENERATING STATION t
(N)T l i
STEAM GOERATOR B
...~~...s.
..%./
ec..
. %e..
.... c.. a M
....t..-
,t
,,...9.;
e.
,,.y,e, :
', ' c. :(...~c.
' s.'.ecs
/
,y Jo!.'rew<cc/
-.* uc" c'
.. /. c..
r.. ?. '4 f, lw?,,Y,s',w/,s'.wlw,v,g,v,"W, d si,w/ v. yy,,h,,i i',v, i ), 7.s
/'w. ' ' W v/,. J ' '.' ?cc '...
J Y.
i v.., / /
"/.c.4-'r..v..
v
, f/J
/ iw,,,vlys v, J 4c '4, ss
/**
i
, v..
v.i
- M..
....../yw/N. /.,W..a. o.,m..c W..a..W.,i,' ' c... /. c.. /4 v'. ?.T c '. /
',i
,J W vis
.,.. c v e..
? -c.?., - /
m m,
o omv.
.o
.cf..M. o.d..r..
V '. ? ','.. /.$v.N'Sw.v.N.Y.:9..h.,l@.!@M. @.lE.XY.l'. N. Y.lN..lN., y!+lN. yv.
os.... s
.... i
" s.
Jer
, ',w4 N viv.v.w ' y s>V4vyWOW W'.w. wNii Q',,
.v.W,v Wc/i
,.f.p.. NJ ". ' /?
- c c
,,., v':v.s,,v, ; e v+s", J
.",+v,,,w..w.,.w, w,,v., ',4,,,+, ;+.,+.,..,.c.,,,w..,c.,,,w..w, w,wc,,'ywy.v +c v,,vc,
..r. c,,.#
co.
e.
oct,v v,v..v.,w,v.,
- s. s
. c/..,.,..,, /..
sY m...cc,co
,.. c.,,
... w. 9,.
.wy w v +.+
g" m
m.,
- m..
v,w,4,s,g4,,w,v,..,.. ~,s,.
o.
,M.c,.., y..,...,.f f. f.,. c.,<..
,w4v,wy4v,v,hc,y',5,.+,w,w,,v.
, g,v.s,y,.v,,, 'o.v,.,v,,
.....;o.,Ju,3..,
,,,v y.
.ssw,.$,....
v
,vos,m e,, s.v,w,.
v,g. w,v,...,g,,g;.w q g,w w e 4c,,,y w,v,,w
.. afm,w
>, s,,
e,,
p7p""6v,.c...r c.w,spw.w,sss,w c,w4;.+ ora",
y, w,y cc
.. s.c..
. v y, v,s
/ca. Mgc. '. c..,wM, v,,,wv, w,w,v.w,.,w.,,s.s c,, :y,v,3,w,,w.$ss,,yc, y,
,v,"<+',"+
v
/.g <svc,.c,
,+c,wec, cyv.w.w.va;. -.. :
c.w w.
,w.,y, <<,v.w,.vyv,v4;,v w.s h,$.'",,+;+,+.v w.,v.wce.v,wccceyec,w.v.w.v,w 1-
.s c.s,
." cow m
.w.w.ss
.,..v,+.
.wc.v,v
.w.
1
.<s
.v,wr",v4 w.v,w+w, vow.wcc.v,v w.w.w.v. h
-c
- y.y F
/
.../-
.vc. w. s w.v,v$ w e.v,v,v v.v w. ce y v
".,,y",v.p7^
h
. v.
<wc,z/w.v.s -
..ve. p,y,(v4,vN,w,w,;i.. sy,w+w c w y0v,v.s; ss, wc<y.,w.s:4w.ssw
,",cy",
cc (9f ;l cc;A y..v w,;%,,j,,w,,.,+w,wc.. w.w.y, c,v c.w
- c..,w,v.v.w.
+c.,,..,v..v +.+s"."4".+.,,,s
, e.
e w.w.vN
.wec,,
.s e,w
..w<#... <e. c,c..
,4,+,g.y,4v
,w s w,,,,.v,,,,v,w,w,w,,,,,w"
,4,.gc..
,,..,.,e e,,s,,
<.v.v c.+w.y c
..,,y4.. 9
.ccvp,,,,,
- k..;<dM+.. pc.
< <c.
":.y<,
v 0 w..v..v,w.weh"sw,v.w,v,y,we,w, v, ;.c,w,,y$w,v.weysw.w4,0"cc w,wc,w.v,w.wc4,
.w ;,v,v,vy v sg :",vvvwys,w,,v
.we,s,v.w v,..
,v,vyw,v,v v
. w.w.sw.w.v.v,v w,." w,w c,w;.;,.w,;y w g w,s w
c,.. cc/..
.w.w g ' y,w,v.w,v,v /c,sw,w.v
..s. w.., J.cA+ A.,+,A,+.+,.v.v.+.c.,w..,c.v
,4 o, ",v.,.w w,,;hv, o. o.?.,w.,..w.,.,.....w
.v..w,e,o,.
.. w c. e._.c. <<c
,, w,.,
v s,w,,
y,v,,
w.v.
,. c o " s o, ccc,vf
..o.
.o
,,,,,y,
.A.
v, w,?v,, i " v,vQw?y.'ca,v.v,v.v.w+,v.w.
'.c, :.
j o
o.
'i',
- y. ".
w'.c.4".v*.'
4 c.v,v
.sp v,4 p
, cy,.,
. c. w2c ;+X. c.v...w. <w,v,f,,;4,.5!jc,v,,p4wyv,v;g;v,,wA, l;y,s, i v/.v,5c....,,,
, v,,v, ig,
o
..w.v,wy;,wc
- ,w c v v v v w4w.v,v.w.v '...
.s
.sw w.. yvqyw.s y' v 4s,,4, 4"v,y4v";, w "c w
edg,,+/.;, " v ucv.w.w.wccc,w.;,yn lw.va,w;0 o a$s$
nv.,w,g w,v,swee. yv,w.sy, v
,v',w,, sc,w.vywcc,w.w,,n,4c+. c+, c$v 3v, w
.u
- g
... /y.
- v..,v.w
,,w
.sw.w c:.-
...ve. v."+A+, O *Ac+suc+Y.w,,wccc,v,f.w.+.$,;t,+,,,c v, u.,.v,v,wcca.v sq. v.e :::c:. v.ss,wese:c:.w..s. w::cunn4vu,y,lv sw,swe.w.sw,v.e w.v.v,v,v.v y
- v. e v,A" $ " A.w,w.
,,,v, pt. e 1
o
. cyc.
4 y
", ?,
4 ; W..-... /c,We.W/ v.WQWi ',cc. cc.WcN,WN, NN4,1' v/NN,y,swe.w
. nu,,,w.sw.w.
ac:,w.we,wn.w:ss
,u,,,
v....vr,,p..y..jh tu
,W/ WJN,vi c.Wcu,vu//c./ccN.v J 4".
i m!c,".,/:.". vc, y;Qv'4./w. o
',.,d-
.c
.v* U.. * /c....,/,s o 's i s..os, i /wiu
- wN' ' ' ' '
w c w, w w ' ' M'4,
' ', w w w u..c.o..v..w /.
. c.c
- .y'.y *. 9... vN.yvN,w,N,w, /,Wy. cqy/NqQs, e, yNJ, No NN. llj u.,w.
so e.
...o
/ '..p )4.p T.
.cv NN,
, c,w,
,, N.s.s iW,v.y,W i.',W N N. N Y
c,w u.w'.w..
. v. cNNNN,w,wc,wn,,w.vu,wn,WNc.Wc,WNNN
,w.w -
N,w c u,,;N. w. w c.w N c # :.r.c./ g.
4'.
.y,
.. we,,syv.w.;c4 av,swagyc,4 y4.4's'y4, c, c q+N.wywM,w.,,w,W i</.+.d t:<</.,,3.
f vs.
.unnnah,yn e,c. e,w.ws.wk.,y;u,sgv,,w'n.w,sgu,;4..wayc.wun ot$cyr:c. u.
.s v n
e v
- gy
- v. ;'.g.v. jree.
, avanu? ;jpdy?dX$qv,w,.u..wn un Mg.:. vy. v4'y44:4w.wan.vu$w?an47 y w,
v 5 E $,E'. 4 y v 4 yfefy,v a v
.yn.w e"'
cu ta.yy,'w,,6%$?l;f/'F,?id ?$$, /n d/dTdY,
, h.. n
- M'"{ii.#8@D9 tF<
c.c.e...w..,y<.y:a,,.:..
,*L v..ws,w v+v,.s4v v+v+,4 4n.j.wn;,tus,;nnsa,vsunne.v/
s.
- r. v. nis,w o u s s a s
- ,.n'..... aq// n.,c. w.w.s' v,vn.,yn.wsp;qv, pyc.q ys
..yc,vcr
.4,.,,,, yy.pn,gy,,y.,,ws,y.w v v v.
v:
c.rc.. atta:. f.,9:! ' t
...cc,u.c.
,yc,,. f,y e
s y, c j :s.,:. e:?
,m
.c.. n
- c. '.w,%wh u.ws.;,w., a,. c,.
. c,:c m c.w::a t e.v qc.:.<ch ca.;, cs wg : '. : ' vsgq:,y;:yv, qq'$...e v +v,+vns 'e::p:se ti
.. i.w3.. s:c. :,w
.vu.w,w,w,s ny v
.c m
y *. c. w
[
..x,.m.a:a.w w v.
- ..w"
.w:
cc
.. v.
w.,?,,. c!.:.,vt, N:c:ce ve:,. v :; J,2&N.,,, y,..,, y,,. j.,,,,,.3,.,,.
,.,.g$,:p*,,w,..,,.,,!.,.w3.Wc.r.,?.w. c.,..,.. c
- a.
... ec y v.
d y
y..,. y.,.,.,
, ;,w,
):N,y?:tNNN,lcu.Y!. ! 2::
v N N w c 3,.,
N v *:
...v ??:c.. c.ce.y;c:;w '.v,.y!v... ':47. i:'wt:. e: ' y v*c,.'lM
- c. a.wat,*cn:
cc.v.
- x.v,ve.'
s, c.s!.v, ! c?,,w.f",:j, c,2. y?s::! ?::f,:. ',.,'.:" e..
l.p.nd w
- .. ?N. v.
...og,.,
..,,...,.y:'j,W :w)jg,y..,
.g 7,,.
q,.
- . c,w,. u I
c>407.h w i u
,c e,'., Tr.,..P"~"'.'.'.
GPU Nuclear Corporation gy_77g.gS
- Pluge.d TiA.
x Not In.p.eted
~
FIGURE 2A TDR 652 Rev. 2
-3
- IB
- L-
. b.
e, a
O M
h i
- ,b-65 i
i i
I i 4 3b j
1 1 4 i
z r
s i
f i
I i
Mk i
b i
5, l y-h i
9 lp h
+
l d
5, l 'P e
h l
A i
I i
1 i
i i
,h i
16 i
4 l
i I
>h b
l I
s i k i
.k e
i i
6 i
a i
'o
.9
-w e
1 i
i
+
h i
i I
i p,y l
i
'd,
p i
5 i
I b
i e,s Iga i
o*,,
9 4
s
=
3 j'
f i
2:
i i
(t gg
,k g-f i
e h
$hnb f,l i
e t
h i
i j
i I
i
'4
[
e)$
i i
i.
I N
6
=
l 0
1 FIGURE 3A TDR 652 Rev. 2 1
l t
Sh ta t
.i l'=
i i
i l
Ile i
i i
j l ie
,i i
i i
j l >>
+
j j
i i.
p i
^
i d4 j
=
1 L
"I n
/=
e t
/
/
l f'
ee I
i I
i
=
l n.
t
?
i 3
4 5
A 8
- y l
TDR 652 j
FIGURE 3B Rev. 2 H
I I
i l >*
i i
i
[
la i
i m
e M
i h
b t
i eE t
i i
M a
gs 9 i.. l i
i 8
w l
i w
i i
=A f
I i
j#
f i
i i
se l
Y i
N 1
M i
i I
I
-l-t 5
I E
R S
E e
l f
~ - " ' ' ' ' - ' ' -
r--,
FIGURE 4A TDR 652 Rev. 2 37 I
E i
d Ib 1
l g
i i
M i
i i
i
! l 8
l N
l zg P-l l/
i iI/
3 i
/ -
i a
- j/
i i
g Ny i
~
i n i
I i
N i
3%%
1 3 3
3 3
3 3
e AE er 4
w r, v.,
Rev. 2 FIGURE 5A ER
- e l
i i
I f ir.
i j
i i
i i
l ie j
i I$
i t
W l
I loi g
~
i' 2
8 l
I lw g
i g
_5-In i
i i
i i
i i
/
a
/
- ?
l
- ^,.
8 2
t
~
3 8
8
l EE
^^-o 1
l
~
l i
i i
Ilb i
i i
I i
.f lie I$
i 3
i i
X i
c t
i i lle
~
i h
i i
g l
i I
l
< HI,
t
_f5 i
i i
i g
i i
i i
n I
i t
I i
j /g/
i i
./
n
+
/
I l
t j
~/p i
3 R
S S
2 R
e S
I- -- -
TDR 652 Rev. 2 FIEURE 6 ESTABLISHED MINIMUM SENSITIVITY FOR THE HIGH GAIN.540 S.D. EX AMIN ATIONS BELOW UPPER TUBESHEET (300 MV) WITHIN UPPER TUBESHEET (1 VOLT) AND TUBESHEET ENTRY (3.3 VOLTS) 2.00
/
i!i:!
!!!I)!!
.;:: !!i!!
1.75
.s
!},l!
r
.:. g.:.
"[!
!!!I;!!
ai:i ::::5ilil "i!!9I 1.50
/3 !!M
- . 4!!!
m di:
w 8
1.25 si:;jjij!!!
z
- lis
<i:ii!{ii
.!: g!
Calculates F
!!l!!
Boundarie u.
iMi!
1.00 Projected o
8 u,n, day,i,g R
z&
/
/
c2
.75
/
/
a i
O i
e#
f
.50 -
'O n.
.25 wer g,,
'194 i mu approx.
ap90% of the 1984 in g 8 on i
detect on l
EDM r* Ported Indications
[
l
,.060 -standards 0
20 40 60 80 100 DEFECT DEPTH IN % WALL THICKNESS i
- -... ~ - - - - -. -., -.. - - -. -.. _, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TDR 652 FIGURE 7 Rev. 2
.>@ eel. NO - 1 ID 18 ROM 107 CIL tl
_j l
.OMeEL 1 M
?
ECTATION - 353 DEGI j
CH44EL 2 DIFF A
FREQ 290 h Hz '
}
PAN -
177
, ROTATION - 357 DEGl 1
1 O#eE3. 3 O!FT FEQ 900 kHz l SP544 SM ROTATICN - iaB0 DEG :
096E1. 4 DIFT 3
iyJ-2'"'
3 m.
g.a.y, ROTATION -
0 DEG l
l
$ NIX 1(5)
(-
f
' OpeELS 12 I
3 SPEN 330 f
b ROTAT!nN -
18 DEGi f
~
1 MIX 2 (6) c Mr
' OneEl.S 13 b
' IPCN 1674 1
E
, ROTATION -
48 CEGi 4
51.MT LHIT*
LG JG DATE
\\ ZETEC Ire. - 1983
- W RE-044. CROWTH I w
IG 10/29/85
} Edition 12.0 Rw 1 Illustration of ECT Signal (Between Small Amplitude 1982 Indication Dots) and Surrounding Noise
O peel NO - 1 ID 19 RCN 107 its 11 F
00 m Hz
]l N
200 j
GOTATION - 351 CEG :
ll 0 6 EEL 2 DIFT 4L._
FPEQ 200 k Hz '
- l IF5N 1117 N
3 EDTATION - 358 DEG,
CHfeeEL 3 DIFF l
FREQ
$80 k Hz :
[
SPAN "29 ECTATION - M9 DEG :
y
(
OpeEL 4 DIFT FREQ 45 kHz '
l 1.37 n T5, e m 4e y gp q
- l
)
i POTATICH -
0 CEG ~
ll M!x :.s>
I i M.S 12 J;
~~
SMN 500
(
,l
_Q WOTATION -
13 DEGl MIX 2 (6) s-I
~
OpeE3.S 13
' TfN 1674 l
l ROTATION -
48 CEG; 3
4 DtJNT
. HIT
- L r,
.EG CATE
- ITEC Inc.
- 1983
- MI MEG CE-EV54.
1 4
!UT 1& 28/P5 Edition 12.0 Rw 1 1
Same Indication As Above In 1984 Illustration of ECT Signal (Between Dots) and Surrounding Noise l