ML20205K140

Quad-Cities Nuclear Power Station Unit 2 Cycle 9 Startup Test Results

ML20205K140
Person / Time
Site:	Quad Cities
Issue date:	03/26/1987
From:	COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20205K102	List: ML20205K099 ML20205K140
References
NUDOCS 8704010520
Download: ML20205K140 (10)

Text

._.

.w 3

.s 2,

~

i

(

1

+

r s

1 i

?

i a

i

-s.

s N-t, i

\\

i

't i

i 1

i i

4 1

4

'; QUAD-CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 2 CYCLE 9

,-c s

i t

STARTUP TEST RESULTS 1

i 4

i i

u i

E a

I k

1' o

l~

[

i

$s y

\\,

s t

4 g

4 s

i-6 l

g I

g B704010S20 870326 PDR ADOCK 05 g5 P

t 4

5 k

1

t TABLE OF CONTENTS Test No.

Title h

1 Scram Timing i

2 Shutdown Margin 3

3 Initial Critical 4

4 TIP Reproducibility and Core Power Symmetry 4

i i

l 1.

Control Rod Scram Timing Purpose The purpose of this test is to demonstrate the scram capability of all of the operable control rods in compliance with Technical Specifications 4.3.C.1 and 4.3.C.2.

Criteria l

A.

The average scram insertion time, based on the de-energization of the scram pilot valve solenoids at time zero, of all operable control rods during reactor power operation shall be no greater than:

% INSERTED FROM AVG. SCRAM INSERTION FULLY HITHDRAWN TIMES (sec) 5 0.375 20 0.900 50 2.000 90 3.500 The average of the scram insertion times for the three fastest control rods of all groups of four control rods in a two by two array shall be no greater than:

% INSERTED FROM AVG. SCRAM INSERTION FULLY HITHDRAWN TIMES (sec) 5 0.398 20 0.954 50 2.120 90 3.800 If t' ass times cannot be met, the reactor shall not be made supercritical; if operating, the reactor shall be shutdown immediately upon determination that average scram time is deficient.

B.

The maximum scram insertion time for 90% insertion of any operable control rod shall not exceed 7.00 seconds.

If this requirement cannot be met, the deficient control rods shall be considered inoperable, fully inserted into the core, and electrically disarmed.

Results and Discussion All 177 control rods were scram tested.

The results are presented in Table l

1.

The maximum 90% insertion time was 2.91 seconds for control rod K-5(38-19).

Both criteria A and B were met. 0034H/0062Z

Table 1.

Control Rod Scram Results NUMBER REACTOR AVERAGE TIMES FOR % INSERTED, SEC OF RODS CONDITIONS 5%

20%

50%

90%

177 Cold 0.27 0.49 0.95 1.63 177 Hot 0.30 0.67 1.44 2.53

. 0034H/0062Z I

2.

Shutdown Margin Demonstration and Control Rod Functional Checks Purpose The purpose of this test is to demonstrate for this core loading in the most reactive condition during the operating cycle. that the reactor is subcritical with the strongest control rod full out and all other rods fully inserted.

Criteria If a shutdown margin of 0.636% AK (=0.25% + R + B C settling penalty) 4 cannot be demonstrated with the strongest control rod fully withdrawn, the core loading must be altered to achieve this margin.

The core reactivity has been calculated to be at a maximum 5000 mwd /t into the cycle and R is The control rod B C settling penalty for Unit Two given as 0.336% AK.

4 is 0.05% AK.

Results and Discussion On December 8, 1986, control rod P-7 (the rod which was calculated by General Electric to be of the highest worth) was fully withdrawn to demonstrate that the reactor would remain subtritical with the strongest rod full out. This maneuver was performed to allow cold control rod testing prior to the shutdown margin demonstration.

Control Rod functional subcritical checks were performed as part of the cold scram timing and control rod friction testing.

No unexpected reactivity insertions were observed when any of the 177 control rods were withdrawn.

General Electric provided rod worth information for the two strongest diagonally adjacent rods N-6 and N-8 with rod P-7 full out.

This method provided an adequate reactivity insertion to demonstrate the desired shutdown margin. On January 18, 1987, a diagonally adjacent shutdown margin demonstration was successfully performed. Using the G.E. supplied rod worth for P-7 (the strongest rod) and diagonally adjacent rods N-6 and N-8, it was determined that with P-7 and N-6 at position 48, and N-8 at position 08, a moderator temperature of 170*F, and the reactor subcritical, a shutdown margin of 1.062% AK was demonstrated.

The G.E. calculated shutdown margin with P-7 withdrawn and 68'F reactor water temperature was 1.947% AK at the beginning of cycle 9.

At approximately 5000 MHd/t into cycle 9 a minimum calculated shutdown margin of 1.611% AK will occur with N-8 fully withdrawn. Note that the minimum shutdown margin shifts from rod P-7 at beginning of cycle to rod N-8 at 5000 mwd /t. 0034H/0062Z

G.E.'s ability to determine rod worth was demonstrated by the accuracy of their in-sequence criticality prediction.

The AK difference between the expected critical rod pattern and the actual critical rod pattern was determined to be 0.174% AK.

This initial critical demonstrated that the actual shutdown margin at the beginning of cycle 9 was 2.121% AK and 1.785% AK at 5000 mwd /t into cycle 9.

3.

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

Criteria General Electric's prediction for the critical rod pattern must agree within 1% AK to actual rod pattern. A discrepancy greater than 1% aK will be cause for an On-Site Review and investigation by Nuclear Fuel Services.

Results and Discussion On January 21,1987, at 1710 hours0.0198 days <br />0.475 hours <br />0.00283 weeks <br />6.50655e-4 months <br /> the reactor was brought critical with a reactor water temperature at the time of criticality of 163*F.

The AK difference between the expected critical rod pattern at 68'F and the actual critical rod pattern at 163*F was 0.00392 from rod worth tables supplied by General Electric.

The temperature effect was -0.00175 AK from General Electric-supplied corrections.

The excess reactivity yielding the 139 second positive period was 0.00043 AK.

These reactivities result in a 0.00174 AK difference (0.174% AK) between the expected critical rod pattern and the actual rod pattern.

This is within the 1% AK required in the criteria of this test, and General Electric's ability to predict control rod worths is, therefore, sLccessfully demonstrated.

4.

Core Power Distribution Symmetry Analysis Purpose The purpose of this test was to determine the magnitude of indicated core power distribution asymmetries using data (TIP traces and 0D-1) collected in conjunction with the P-1 update.

Criteria A.

The total TIP uncertainty (including random noise and geometric uncertainties obtained by averaging the uncertainties for all data sets) must be less than 9%.

B.

The gross check of TIP signal symmetry should yield a maximum deviation between symmetrically located pairs of less than 25%. 0034H/0062Z

Results and Discussion-Core power symmetry calculations were performed. based upon. computer program i

00-1 data runs on February 4, 1987, at 99.7% power, and February 13, 1987, I

at 99.5% power.

The average total TIP uncertainty from the two TIP sets was 3.872%. The random noise uncertainty was 1.916%. This yields a geometrical uncertainty of 3.365%.

The total TIP uncertainty was well within the 9% limit.

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

Figure 1 shows the core location of the TIP pairs and the average TIP readings.

The maximum deviation between symmetrical TIP pairs l

was 6.07% for pair 11-34. Thus, the second criterion, mentioned above, was also met.

The method used to obtain the uncertainties consisted of calculating the average of the nodal ratio of TIP pairs by:

~

~

22 n

I 1

I E

Rij

_R - 18n

_-1 1-5 j

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

Next the standard deviation of the ratios is calculated by:

~

,02 n

}

I E

(Rij - R)2 _

1/2 J

o-j-1 1-5 R

(18n - 1) oR is multiplied by 100 to express oR as a percentage of the ideal value of oR of 1.0.

% oR = OR x 100 The total TIP uncertainty is calculated by dividing % oR by / 2 in i

order to account for data being taken at 3 inch intervals and analyzed on a 6 inch nodal basis.

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

i i

~MT NT 1

I I

BASE (N, M, K)

BASE (K) - NT x MT

_M-1 N-1 i

where NT - number of runs per machine - 4 MT - number of machines - 5 i

BASE (K) - average reading at nodal level K, j

K - 5 through 22

, 0034H/0062Z

..,.,.,_,.-.,,,rn

_.__,,g,.

The random noise is derived from the average of the nodal variances by:

22 MT NT

.2-1/2 I

I I

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

%o noise -

K-5 M-1 N-1 BASE (K) x 100 18 (NT x MT -1)

Finally the TIP geometric uncertainty can be calculated by:

% o geometric - (% o total 2 - % o noise 2)1/2 1

i i

i 4 0034H/00622

-n.

v

o.

Table 2 i

CORE SYMMETRY Based on 00-l's From 02-04-87 (99.7% power) and 02-13-87 (99.5% power)

SYMMETRICAL TIP i

PAIR NUMBERS ABSOLUTE DIFFERENCE

% DEVIATION a-b T=

Ta - Tb

% - 100 x T/ Ia +.Tb 2

1-6 5.830 8.068 2-12 2.380 2.413 3-19 0.710 0.676 4-26 3.590 3.900 5-33 3.99 8.635 8-13 1.69 1.543 9-20 1.79 1.702 10-27 8.76 7.740 i

11-34 6.07 6.470 15-21 3.65 3.265 16-28 6.57 6.305 17-35 2.81 2.432 18-39 6.56 9.041 23-29 1.79 1.686 24-36 5.32 4.929 25-40 3.11 3.892 1

31-37 1.24 1.147 32-41 1.07 1.949 22 Average Deviation = 3.718 Tj= I T (K)

/18 i

1-5 i

i

~~

0034H/0062Z

f Fir;URE 1 QUAD CITIES w

l l l

l l

l l TIP/LPRM 60 58 l 69.28 1

78.3 l

34.3 ~

l A* *' '

f Symmetry 56 e

t 8

9i i

4 e

1l l

i i

i

__e__

8

$4 1

i l

I l

e i

i i

t I

i 9

9 3,

i i

i i

I l

l l

i i

t i

e so 44.21i 90.8 l

114.16 '

,110.59e 108,.7 5 i

/0 34 l O

e'

_ _ I_ __3J,____ I_ __3.4I_ ___I_. _3 5i_ __ _ i_ _161____!___$__ _ ' _ __3_6___ _'

'8

$6 i

i I

i t

I i

e 1

i l

I e

I t

i g

5, i

8 i

l i

i i

i e

___i i

• • -f g_ _ i.

i i]8.8p l 137.4g ;l lo7.r; 107.3 l lio7.jl; 55.4Q 6o l

l 26 l

27 i

28 j

9l oj 31; 32; 38 I

i 8

i i

i i

l i

8 8

8 8

i e

l lel

,' e ',

- l l

36 i

I i

i i

i 36 l

ios 7!

104. js 109.jt6i 106.1 105.2 j

105.17 ;

81. C ;

__ i __ _ _ l $3; 22

• M--

\\_ _ __l *T 32 l

9l l

2Q j__I'21; i

i 8

I i

i j s

e i

jo

,i s

s e

i i

1 e

i 8

i e

i i

i e

i g

g 2e i

e i

l

.e i

i e

i i

e i

i i

e 26 l

97.4 l

110.35 ;

106. 7 ;

113.61l 100.92 i fl b._ TTi 75.84 l 26 I

12i i @13 i

14 l @15l l

16!

l 7i l4 O

1 22 I

e i

l l

I g

e i

l g

j,,

1 1

1 I

I e

i t

i e

i I

i i

e 20 --

l l I

l i

l I LI i

i -

1h 69 3c 104.

l lo8.j7 l 106.g4i il7.g6 i 96.g )!

16 l

6I i

7; l

8; j

9l l

loj l

l i

i

,i i

th i

i

, i i

i i

e i

i

@ ~,

3 12 i

i i

i e

i i

- i i

g l

i g

g s

lo l

75 l

99 l

104.66l 93.H_ l__ _48~. 20 ;

O C

l l'

l 21 l

3 '__ __ l @ 4l a

l 5

i 06 i

8 I'

,8

,s i

I t

i e

e t

I 04

i. _ _ _ '

02 i

i I

l l

t i

g 31 03 05 37 09 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 17 33 41 43 45 67 49 51 51 55 57 59

@ LPlut Location (Letter indicates TIP machine)

Base 9 f>Iuq Location (com location for all TIP machines) 9 Ilus Incations String No.

6 Slue Locations

1. 8suree Loostions UNIT TWo POWER SYMMETRY AVERAGE BASE READINGS (N0DE 5-22)

BASED oN 00-1's from 2-4-87 (99 7% power) 2-13-87 (99.5% power)