PY-CEI-NRR-0835, Motor Valve Testing & Evaluatiion at Perry Nuclear Power Plant (IE Bulletin 85-003)

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Motor Valve Testing & Evaluatiion at Perry Nuclear Power Plant (IE Bulletin 85-003)
ML20151A766
Person / Time
Site: Perry FirstEnergy icon.png
Issue date: 03/31/1988
From:
CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20151A190 List:
References
IEB-85-003, IEB-85-3, PY-CEI-NRR-0835, PY-CEI-NRR-835, NUDOCS 8804070231
Download: ML20151A766 (18)
v • d • e


Text

_

i Attochment .

i PY-CEI/NRR-0835 L Page 1 of 12 l t

f 5

, i 1  ;

i

'i t

i
1 j MOTOR OPERATED VALVE TESTING AND EVALUATION
i AT PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT  !

a

.(IE BULLETIN 85-03)  ;

i  !

a 4  !

=  !

T 1 r I i i

i  !

i i

1 l

i 1

1 l

i l

i 1

0804070231 880331 PDR ADOCK 05000440 G PDR '

i 1

1 a

0 1

J t

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

i Attech:cnt PY-CEI/NRR-0835 L ,

Page 2 of 12 PERRY MOV TESTING AND EVALUATION ,

i

TABLE OF CONTNrFS l

Page P

I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 3 A. Background B. Organization C. Scope of Vork i l II. CALCULATION AND SVITCH SETTING HETHODOLOGY 4 j  !

A. Calculation Methods

  • B. Switch Setting Procedures s

, III. STATIC TESTING 6  !

IV. DYNAMIC TESTING 9 .

A. Scope and Exceptions to Testing B. Test Methods '

{ C. Test Results i

s V. CONCLUSIONS 11 4

A. Continued Maintenance

j
5. Lessons Learned +

1 f I l

i l

l h

i i

i i

i l

l i

Attcchment PY-CEI/NRR-0835 L Page 3 of 12 PERRY MOV TESTING AND EVALUATION I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND A. Background The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company (CEI) presented the ir.i t s response to IE Bulletin 85-03, "Motor Operated Valve Common Mode Failures During Plant Transients Due to Improper Switch Settings" in letter PY-CEI/0IE-0206 L, dated May 14, 1986, which outlines the Perry program to assure MOV operability. Topics covered in this letter included IEB 85-03 items A. Design Basis, B. Motor-Operated Valve Control Svitch Setting, C. Testing and D. Procedures. In addition, the valves to be tested along with their pertinent design data vere listed.

CEI has participated in the BVR Ovners Group (BWROG) Committee'that has developed a BVR position for meeting the requirements of IE Bulletin 85-03. Ve have used the BVROG Final Report as a guideline document and Perry meets or exceeds the applicable requirements in the BVROG report.

A second response letter (PY-CEI/0IE-0263 L) vas transmitted on j January 16, 1987'to add additional valves and clarified that "CEI included all motor-operated valves in high pressure injection systems <

irrespective of normal valve position or safety actions."

B. Organization In order to fulfill the requirements of the IE Bulletin, a Special Project Plan was instituted to best focus experienced personnel on 1 determining and improving MOV operability. This plan was sponsored by ,

the Manager of the Perry Plant Operations Department (PP0D). The MOV i Task Group was comprised of the following personnel l

1. Special Project Coordinator from PP0D's Maintenance Section
2. Field Technicians
3. Vork Planners
4. Spare Parts Evaluator
5. Nuclear Engineering Department Engineers (Meenanical & Electrical)  ;
6. Quality Assurance Personnel I C. Scope of Vork The goal of the MOV Task Group was to establish acceptable operability and reliability of IEB 85-03 designated valves (Bulletin valves) at i Perry. The Task Group's charter included j l

1 I

l

Attechnent PY-CEI/NRR-0835 L Page 4 of 12 o Improving and systematizing design changes, o Spare parts planning, o Performing thrust calculations used to adjust torque switches, o Testing and troubleshooting, ,

o Dispositioning nonconformance reports, o Revorking operators, o Procedures and documentation.

The scope of vork required to assure MOV operability includes procedure preparation and performance of calculations along with testing and maintenance activities. As stated in our initial response, procedures vere in place to determine, control, implement and maintain the correct control switch settings, and testing activities were undervay. These procedures are continuously being improved to reflect our testing experience.  ;

Along with our procedure activities, a calculation methodology was developed as part of our overall program to determine torquc switch '

settings and assure that maximum design differential pressure is taken into account. .

our testing activities vere broken into two types of testing, static and dynamic. All Bulletin valves were static tested (without pressure and flov) to determine "as found" conditions relative to control switch setting and the overall valve operating condition. The valves vere inspected to assure proper equipment qualification configuratione vere maintained and active components vere in operating condition.

The valves vere tested using Motor Operated Valve Analysis and Test

  • System (MOVATS) to determine the quantitative operating characteristics at the as-found svitch settings. In addition. this -

test data was used to reset the limit and torque switches in accordance with our calculations and procedures. J l

Selected valves where also dynamically tested under flov and pressure  :

to verify our switch setting methodology.

II. CALCULATION AND SVITCH SETTING METHODOLOGY A. Calculation Methods Thrust calculations are generated to attain a "target thrust" value that is used in field testing and torque switch adjustment of the subject valves. Cleveland Electric has acquired the vendor's calculation for thrust and related design basis information for use in determining MOV setpoints. In addition, hand calculations were performed in accordance with design procedures based oa the Limicorque Selection Guide methodology. This calculation method conservatively takes into account a variety of "vorst case" variables to provide l sufficient margin for degradation in valve performance. Given the same design maximum differential pressure, the more conservative thrust value was selected between the vendor supplied data and the CEI  !

calculation.

l 1

Attcchment PY-CEI/NRR-0835 L Page 5 of 12 The "target thrust" value was then obtained by multiplying the selected value by 115% to provide an even greater safety margin for torque switch setting. In setting the torque switch, therc is a

+/- 10% tolerance applied to these values due to large differences in thrust values between possible torque switch settings. Settings may be applied at a higher value depending on design application.

This setting methodology is the best compromise to assure valve operability at maximum design loads, while minimizing valve degradation over expected life by staying vell within the operator's and valve's allovable operating parameters.

B. Svitch Setting Procedures There are primarily two procedures used for the setting of MOV switches at Perry, General Electrical Instructions entitled "Hotor Operated Valve Analysis and Test System (H0 VATS) Testing" and "Limitorque Limit / Torque Svitch Adjustment". The torque switch is set in accordance with the latter instruction, using the information gained from MOVATS testing and the calculated "target thrust".

The limit svitch setting is documented by a combination of applicable design dravings and instructions. A brief description of the Perry procedures follows and is the basis for our limit svitch settings.

1. For valves that do have a safety function to open, the valve travels full open, but not to the point of backseating, by the limit svitch. The open torque switch is not utilized thereby the control logic provides maximum torque in the safe direction.
2. For valves that do not have a safety function to open, a torque bypass limit svitch is presently utilized in the circuit, to assure that the torque svitch is not in the circuit until the valve is unseated. The bypass limit is set by evaluating the MOVATS signature trace.
3. For valves which do have a saft.y function to close, the torque bypass limit switch is designed and set so that either the limit svitch or the torque svitch vill close the valve. The limit switch takes the valve closed while the torque svitch seats the valve to a calculated and H0 VATS tested thrust value. In the event there is a torque svitch opening prior to closure, the limit switch vill complete the closure cycle for the safety function.
4. For valves that do not have a safety function to close, the closing torque bypass limit svitch is set to follov the open control limit svitch (which is set to not backseat the valve).

The closing torque bypass limit switch is only in the circuit momentarily and the stroke is completed by the torque switch vince the valve is not backseated and no cracking force is needed to overcome seating forces.

Condition 3 above presents a unique design concern when there is no safety function to go open. Setting the open bypass limit switch after unseating of the valve may improperly set the corresponding

. r Att0chment PY-CEI/NRR-0835 L Page 6 of 12 1 close torque bypass switch on a two train limit svitch design. For these valves there may be improper closed indication provided to the operator and the valve may not complete the closing cycle in the event I

' of torque svitch opening during the valve stroke (nreviously discussed i in IEN 86-29, "Effects of Changing Valve Motor-Operator Switch j 4

Settings").

Our present procedure for setting IJmit switches minimizes this '

condition but does not eliminate it completely. Corrective actions are being taken to change the design by removing the open torque switch and associated bypass limit switch thus allowing the close limit rotor to be set just prior to torque switch operadon. This 4

design change vill eliminate the potential problem of incorrect control room indication of valve position.

III. STATIC TESTING L Each Bulletin valve was static tested without flow. Attachment 1. "Valve  :

Data Summary" details pertinent characteristics of the valves tested. The valves are presently tested in accordance with the General Electrical  !

Instruction "Motor Operated Valve Analysis and Test System (MOVATS)  :

Testing"; its forerunner (FTI-F04) was used previous to 6/86. These i i

procedures were used to obtain "as-found" thrust values and obtain '

nameplate data.

1  !

4 Attachment 2 tabulates the pertinent as-found operating characteristics of the subject valves as summarized below:

i j VALVE PROBLEM

SUMMARY

NO. OF  % OF OCCURRENCES OCCURRENCES l 8

l M(ds whose as-found condition var inoperable and could not have performed their intended safety function 3 12%

Significant MOV problems that left uncorrected could have potentially

] affected MOV operability 9 38%

Specific As-Found Conditions (for 24 valves unless noted) i

] Unbalanced torque switch 16 67%

i Bypass switch set incorrectly ll* 92%

Valve Backseated 0 0 i Overthrust of valve or operator 7 29%

Underthrust compared to calculation 1 4%

l j Stroke times not to Technical Specification 0 0  !

  • NOTE: Only 12 valves use an open bypass switch.  !

l l

b Attcch=nt PY-CEI/NRR-0835 L Page 7 of 12 Torque Svitch:

An unbalanced torque svitch affects the torque applied to the valve when it operates in either the open or close direction. Depending on the extent of imbalance, the corresponding output can potentially put the valve in an overthrust condition. Because of this condition, it has been our practice to balance the torque svitch after taking our as-found thrust values. An unbalanced torque switch was common (67%) as shovn by the high percentage of occurrences.

Bypass Svitch:

The most common occurrence of improper valve set-up is the open torque switch bypass limit switch setting. Vithout diagnostic signature traces it is very difficult to capture the point in time of complete unseating of the valve.

This is especially true in the General Electric standard design when a two-train limit switch is utilized because of its effect on the close indication. Implementation of the design change that removes the open torque svitch for safety-related valves vill eliminate the need for this adjustment. ,

The as-left condition vill assure that the valve has the capability of opening without being restricted by torque switch operation.

Backseating:

Perry's procedures for MOV's do not allov backseating. The as-found condition of the bulletin valves revealed that no valves vere backseated.

Overthrust:

Twenty nine percent of either the valves or operators had a potential for an overthrust condition. Each case of potential overthrust was evaluated using existi.y pror.edures and vendor correspondence, when required, as part of the disposition.

Underthrust:

One of the HPCS valves (lE22F0023) vas found to be in a potential underthrust condition. In our operability assessment, both vendor and CEI calculations vere compared. In addition, credit was taken for the valve vendor's hydrostatic tvsting and our preoperational testing, performed at pressure and temperature, in determining that the valve was operable. Subsequent dynamic .

test results confirm this conclusion. However, torque switch open and close settings vere increased as shown in Attachment 2.

Stroke Times i Valve IE51F0063, RCIC steam supply inboard isolation, experienced failures i

during routine testing under flov and temperature in Janut.ry of 1987. The  !

failure was its inability to open causing fuses to operate and the eventual l failure of two motors over a one month period. Other symptoms discovered i

' during diagnostic testing (increasing pressure and temperature) vas an increasing motor current near or exceeding nameplate during the closing stroke.

During this period, field representatives from both the valve and operator I manufacturers, along with experienced HOV test personnel from Davis-Besse, vere ,

brought in to analyze for root cause and inspect the disassembled valve and I operator.

I l

c. , ,

e Attcchment PY-CEI/NRR-CO35 L  :

Paga 8 of 12 '

t Possible root causes analyzed at the time veres  !

\

1. Continuously energized shunt field of DC motor along with high ambient l
temperatures (approx. 140F) resulting in motor (shunt field) failure.  ;

Direct contact with the motor manufacturer at his faci'lity has led to i

de-energizing the shunt fields.  ;

2. Improperly adjusted limit switch along with a torque switch failure [

driving the disc hard into its seat.

j

3. Piston effect in the closing direction causing excessive current drav.
4. Process conditions (i.e. pipe thermal movement, steam cendensation, etc.) resulting in mechanical binding of valve internals, i

Pipe thermal movement was rejected as a contributor due to close proximity cf component supports. Actual movements via lanyard pots were determined  !

to be vell within acceptable criteria and did not induce significant st esses in the valve assembly or result in body deformation such as seat j contraction which could cause vedge binding. ,

1 Another process condition investigated was steam condensation in the  !

piping dovnstream of 1E51F0063. The 10" diameter steam supply piping is  !

sloped down from a vertical riser upstreem of IE51F0063 (F063) through  :

1E51F0064 to FS.R atop valves 1E12F0052A&B.

' During the cima these motor failuru vere occurring, the steam piping .

collected co < ansats up to a level which caused overflow into a steam i supply pipe *,o the RCIC turbine. During the period immediately following admission of steam into piping downstream of F063, the piping could have

  • filled with enough condensate to cause boving in the pipe due to i differential temperatures (The combinatian of colder condensate in the i e

bottom of the pipe and saturated steam would tend to cause a contraction '

j at the pipe bottom and expansion at the top). Vithout some type of j

j restraint dovnstream of F063, this condition could have induced a bending i moment at the valve body and contributed to a potential binding between j the valve seat and vedge.

i While the above conditio! d credible, it was not a significant factor due i to restraint from a guard pipe assembly downstream of F063. Actual j

measurements were nn obtainable; however, the tight installation t i

2 tolerances for internal guides between the process pipe and guard pipe  ;

vould have restricted pipe deformation to extremely small amounts at

{ F063. Subsequent to modification of F063, drain lines vere added to the i

10" diameter piping near stop valves 1E12F0052A&B, which precludes the I

buildup of condensate in this piping as described above.

It was concluded that neither thermal movement nor ste u conde,Jation vere

! significant contributors to the motor failures of 1E51FOCt1 All of the above possible causes vere v'.gorously pursued but none vere ;cnclusively

! the root cause. The valve operator vas reworked, reassentled and

) installed.

4 I

I

Attechnent PY-CEI/NRR-0835 L Page 9 of 12 l By mid-March of 1987 the valve started to exhibit the same symptoms at 1

j operating pressure and temperatures, and the valve became stuck in the  ;

closed position. At this time a decision was made to make this valve a '

) normally open alternating current MOV vith the ssme characteristics as the ,

)

1E51F0064 outboard isolation valve. No unusual operating occurrences have

, occurred since this design change was implemented. >

. IV. DYNAMIC TESTING

A. Scope and Exceptions to Testing I

)i The dynamic testing program demonstrated valve operability under design flov, temperature and pressure. Flov tests were performed on j valves which would not place the HPCS or the RCIC systems in an i i unanalyzed or undesirable configuration. The following is a listing l

of valves and their tested direction (see Attachment 1 for valve descriptions):

1 1E12F0052A Open and Close i IE12F0052B t, pen and close  !

1E22F0001 Close 1E22F0010 Open and Close i 1E22F0011 Open and Close i

1E22F0012 Open and Close i 1E22F0015 Open l 1E22F0023 Open and Close

! 1E51F0010 Open and Close  !

1E51F0019 Open and close 1E51F0022 Open and close l j 1E51F0031 Open and Close '

IE51F0045 Open and Close 1E51F0046 Open and close 1E51F0059 open and Close i IE51F0063 Close 1

1E51F0076 Open and Close i

The following exceptions to testing are explained belov i

1. 1E22F0001 - This valve was tested in the close direction only. A j

limit switch on 1E22F0015 prevents 1E22F0001 from opening when F0015 is full open. .

2. 1E22F0004 - The HPCS injection valve was not flov tested since it is good operating practice to minimize injections to the RPV and place as fev thermal transients on the RPV nozzles as possible.

During shutdown, it is not possible to properly control vessel level with the HPCS pump injecting.

3. 1E22F0015 - This valve cannot be tested closed under flov conditions since the only suction source is through the F0001 valve which cannot be opened until F0015 is closing. Testing F0015 in the closed direction risks starving HPCS pump suction and cavitation damage.

I

- - - , g

Attccha:nt PY-CEI/NRR-0835 L Page 10 of 12 1

4. 1E51F0013 - The RCIC injection valve was not tested since it injects through the head spray nozzle and would result in moisture carry-over to the main and feed pump turbines.

j

5. 1E51F0063 - This valve was tested only in the closed direction.

It was decided not to subject the associated piping to unnecessary I transients. The identical outboard isolation valve, 1E51F0064,  !

vrs evaluated on the basis of 1E51F0063 test results. A minor )

torque switch setting increase was initiated based on F063 test l findings.

6. 1E51F0068 - Opening or closing the RCIC turbine exhaust isolation valve would subject the RCIC turbine to potentially damaging  ;

loads. '

7. 1E51F0077 and 1E51F0078 - These valves vould experience differential pressures only in the event of an accident which-vould pressurize containment. The static test provides sufficient i

I test data to determine switch settings. I l

8. 1E51F0510 - The Turbine Trip Valve's safety function is to close on spring actuation. The operator is used to reset the spring only. The operator was tested by MOVATS to determine limit switch operation and proper thrust to reset the spring.

B. Test Methods

)

i Temporary Test Instructions vere prepared for the majority of flov testing to adequately control test configurations, operating sequences and data gathering. The valves were tested using M0 VATS test i equiprent to relate actual operator thrust along with its switch j actuations and current characteristics. Along with the M0 VATS data, I an acoustic monitor was used in some cases in an attempt to capture that point in time when the valve opens / closes completely. Vith the thrust trace and the acoustic trace taken in the same time domain, the actual thrust required to open/close the valve was obtained. Vith actual thrust required to open/close the valve at pressure measured, adequate excess margin in thrust was verified (Attachment 3).

The valves were tested as close as possible to the maximum design pressure, but these values are sometimes difficult to achieve. Since flow testing measures performance under actual process conditions, it is preferred over hydro-testing because it takes into account all variables encountered in the open/close stroke. Hydrostatic testing only detirmined "cracking" thrust capabilities of the valve operator going open.

In those cases where maximum design pressure cannot be achieved, an extrapolat',n calculation can be made to derive margin over the designed pressure values. This calculation first solves for the remaining thrust (T remain) required to overcome the maximum delta P using the standard calculation method described in Section II.

Attachsint PY-CEI/NRR-0835 L Page 11 of 12 T remain = Orifice Area X [Hax delta P - Test Pressure] X Valve Factor + Piston Effect Vhere Packing Load (not pressure dependent).is included in the test thrust below and Piston Effect is adjusted down to reflect only the remaining pressure differential.

Once T remain is known, the total designed thrust required [T required) to operate the valve is given by:

T =T +T required test remain T required is compared with the total testec rust at the given torque switch setpoint [T setpolat] te obtain the thrust margin [T margin]:

T =T -T margin setpoint required C. Test Results The Dynamic test results are in Attachment 3. Each valve is shown to perform its design function at the maximum design differential pressure. The dynamic testing of these 17 valves has provided a high confidence level'that our setting methodology assures adequate margin based on its built-in conservatism.

Those valves that vere not dytamically tested vill similarly perform their design function. There was a sufficient sampling of valves to prove our methodology. The methods described in this report are utilized in the setting of switches for safety-related H0V's at Perry.

V. CONCLUSIONS The 24 Bulletin valves at Perry are capable of performing their intended function. This is based on the corbination-of our test findings, the evaluation of the data and continuing implementation of our program.

A. Continued Maintenance CEI has an ongoing preventive maintensnee program which encompasses motor operated valves. The primary document detailing these activities is a Preventive Maintenance Instruction entitled "Haintenance of Limitorque Valve Operators." This document establishes the standards for periodic examination and maintenance of H0V's and includes such items as:

1. Stem condition and lubrication
2. Cracks in vorking components
3. Lubricant sampling evaluation for proper substance properties and level.
4. Electrical properties inspected including motor meggering.

Attsch22nt PY-CEI/NRR-0835 L Page 12 of 12 Special considerations mus'. be apolied to major modifications performed on H0V's to control thrust delivered. Included in major modifications are adjustments to packing due to leakage. This condition is controlled by procedure and provides for Engineering input to make packing adjustments. Typically, adjustment to packing requires additional MOVATS testing to verify proper thrust in accordance with our present program.

B. Lessons Learned There vere substantial "lessons learned" increding these most significant: ,

1. Steam valves exhibit a different characteristic trace as compared to vater valves, which makes it difficult to determine the actual point of flov stoppage.
2. An accurate means for determining valve flov in high ambient noise areas is needed for the industry. Our use of acoustic monitoring had limited success.
3. Dynamic flov testing can be a valuable procedure in determining actual valve performance and thrust margins.
4. Thrust values at the point of torque svitch trip may be more meaningful than the total thrust. Generally, it appears as pressure goes up the amount of operator "coast" becomes less, which decreases the total thrust that was experienced during static testing.
5. Scheduling of testing activities is crucial and the scope of effort must be well defined.
6. The undertaking of a program of this magnitude resulted in positive management involvement, to assign a high priority and i critical resources for the performance of MOV testing. ,

Recognition of the importance of the program was vital to its  !

satisfactory completion.

l l

l

ATTACHMENT 1 VALVE DATA

SUMMARY

VALVE VALVE VALVE MAXIMUM OUTPUT MASTER PARTS LIST VALVE VALVE SIZE RATING DESIGN ACTUATOR MOTOR SPEED VALVE y B_ER _ =____yFQQf K_ - _J Q_ _ _Q . Af ID_=m S GE,_ _ y _EM_ = =_RP_M , ,m W Q J_Q =_ _==_ = =J-_, mR y y Sm=_ r _

1. IE12F0052A BORC-WARNER CLOBE 10 1:00 1040 SMB-2 1700 16.7 RHR STEAM LINE ISOLATION
2. IE12F0052B BORG-WARNER CLOBE 10 1500 104': SMB-2 1700 16.7 RHR STF.AM LINE ISOLATION
3. 1E22F0001 AtCIOR-DARLItK: CATE 16 150 90* SMB-00 1700 23.6 COtOENSATE STORACE
  • MAX. DESJCN PRESSURE TAPE TO HPCS PUMP DIFFERENT FROM PREVIOUS SUCTION RESPONSE 4 IE22F0004 ANCHOR-DARLING CATE 12 655 S3-3 1575 3365 67.3 HPCS TO RPV OUTBOARD l ISOLATION
5. 1E22F0010 ANCHOR-DARLING CLOBE 10 900 1575 SMB-4 1730 20 HPb5TORECIRCULATE TO CONDENSATE STOR-ACE TAPE
6. 1E22FOO11 ANCHOR-DARLING CLOBE 10 900 1575 SMB-4 1730 20 HPCS TEST RETURN TO CONDENSATE STOR-AGE TAFE
7. IE22F0012 ANCHOR-DARLItC CATE 4 900 1575 AB-0 3400 102.7 HPCS MIN. FLOW TO SUPPRESSION POOL
8. 1E22F0015 ANCHOR-DARLItC CATE 24 150 90* SB-1 3450 90.8 HPCS SUCTION FROM
  • MAX. DESIGN PRESSURE SUPPRESSION POOL DIFFERENT FROM PREVIOUS

RESPONSE

9. 1E22F0023 ANCHOR-DAHLItC CLOBE 12 900 1575 hMB-4 1655 11.8 HPCS TEST TO SUPPRESSION POOL
10. IE5110010 bORC-WARNER CATE 6 300 75 SMB-00 1900 38.8 PtVP SUCTION FROM DC OPERATED cot 0ENSATE STORAGE TAFE
11. 1E51FOO15 PORG-WARNFR CATE 6 1500 1400 SMB-1 1900 59.1 RCIC INJECTION SHUT- DC OPERATED OFF VALVE
12. 1E5 t F0019 ROCKWELL CLDBE 2 1500 1400 SMB-000 1900 52 RCIC MIN. FLOW to DC OPERATED SUPPRESSION '<OOL
13. 1E51F0022 BORC 4ARNER GLOBE 4 1500 1400 SMB-0 1900 29 TE.7 ofPASS TO DC OPERATED CONDENSATE STORAGE TATE
16. 1E51F0031 BORC-WARNER CATF 6 300 75 SMB-00 1900 38.8 RCIC SUPPRESSION POOL DC GPERATED SUCTION ISOLATION

AT ECitMENT 1 UALVE DATA SUMIMRY VALVE VALVE VALVE MAXIMUM OUTPUT MASTER PARTS LIST VALVE VALVE SIZE RATING DESIGN ACTUATOR MOTO't SPEED VALVE

- S - :-$. _. $E ===- 5- ^ = - --. ~= Y :== = ==== ??: = = = - - .:- - ~~

15. 1E51F0045 BORG-WARNER GLOBE 4 1500 1177 SMB-0 1900 29 STEAM SUFFLY TO RCIC DC OPERATED TURBINE
16. 1E51F0046 kOCKWELL GLOBE 2 1500 1400 SMB-000 1900 $2 TURBINE LUBE OIL DC OPERATED COOLING WATER SUPPLY
17. 1E51F0059 BORG-WARNER CATE 4 1500 1400 SMB-00 1900 55.7 TEST BYPASS TO THIS VALVE WAS CONDENSATE STORAGE INADVERTENTLY OMITTED TANK FROM PREVIOUS HESPONSES

- DC OPERATED

18. 1E51F0063 BORG-WARRER GATE 10 1500 1177 SB-1 3405 106 STEAM SUPPLY LINE SEE TEXT FOR HISTORY OF ISOLATION TO RHR THIS VALVE.

CONDENSING HEAT EXCIUNGER (INBOARD)

19. 1E51F0064 BORG-WARNER CATE 10 1500 1177 SB-1 3405 106 STEtJI SUPPLY ISOLA-TION (0UTBOARD)
20. 1E51F0068 BORG-WARNER CATE 12 300 30 SMB-0 1900 32.7 TURBINE EXHAUST TO DC OPERATED SUPPRESSION POOL
21. 1E51F0076 ROCKWELL CLOBE 1 1500 1177 SMB-000 1700 12.5 BYPASS FOR E063
22. 1E51F0077 ROCKWELL GLOBE 1.5 1500 30 SMB-000 1700 25 VACCUM BREAKER ISOLATION
23. 1E51F0078 ROCKWELL CLOBE 2 1500 30 SMB ,100 1700 12.5 VACCUM BREAKER ISOLATION
24. 1E51F0510 GIMBEL MACHINE GLOBE 4 900 0* SMB-00J 900 N/A TURBINE TRIP AND
  • MAX. DESIGN PRESSURE WRKS THROTH.ING DIFFERENT FMM PREVIOUS

RESPONSE

ATTACitMEt(T 2 N/A - tot APPLICABLE VALVE FROBLEM

SUMMARY

REPORT I - INDETERMINATE AS-FOUND CONDITION .

RJ, QUIRED VALVE UNBALANCFD OPEN BYPASS VALVE OVER- OVER- AS-FOUND AS-LEFT VALVE STROKE STROKE M4L';TER PARTS LIST TORQUE SWITCII SrX BACat- THRUST THRUST UNDER- TS SETTING TS SETTING FOUND TIME TIME NUMBER SWITCH CORRECTLY SFATED VALVE OPERATOR T11 RUST O. C. MAX O. C. MAX OPERABLE SEC. SEC. RFEARES

1. IE12F0052A YES NO NO No to NO 2.5. 2.5. 3.5 2.5. 2.5. 2.5 YES N/A 56.48
2. 1E12F0052B YES NO NO to NO NO 3.0 2.5. 3.5 2.0, 2.0 2.5 YES N/A 56.14 MOVEMENT BETWEEN T&fE BONhET AND THE OPEPATOR WAS OBSEPVED AND REWORKED
3. 1E22FOOO1 YES NO No NO NO NO 1.25, 1.5. 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 YES N/A 70.76 TORQUE SWITCH WAS UNBALANCED. DECLUTCH TRIPPERS WERE IMPROPERLY ADJUSTED.

4 1E22FOOO4 YES N/A NO YES NO NO 1.5. 1.5. 3.0 1.5. 1.5. 3 YES 27 10.52 OVERTHlGST WAS IN OPEN DIRECTION It(TO THE LCAD CELL DUE TO UNBALANCED TORQUE SWITCH.

5. 1E22F0010 NO No to YES NO NO 2.25. 2.25. 3.75 1.75. 1.75. 2.25 YES N/A 43.1
6. 1E22F0011 YES NO NO YES to No 1.5 1.5. 3.15 1.75, 1.75. 1.75 YES N/A 49.3 OVERW RUST WAS IN THE OPEN DIRECTION INTO THE LOAD CELL DUE TO UNBALANCED TORQUE SWITCH.
7. 1E22F0012 YES NO NO YES to NO 1.5. 1.5. 3.0 1.0 1.0. 1.0 YES 5 4.38
8. 1E22F0015 YES N0 to YES NO NO 1.5. 1.5. 2.5 1.0. 1.0. 1.C YES 24 21
9. IE22F0023 YES NO NO NO NO YES 1.5. 1.5. 4.0 2.0. 7.G. 2.0 YES 180 55.1 e
10. IE51FOO10 YES N/A NO NO NO NO 1.75. 1.75, 2.75 1.0 1.0. 2.0 YES N/A 18.92
11. 1E51F0013 YES N/A NO NO NO NO 2.5. 2.5. 3.5 2.5. 2.5. 3.5 YLS 15 9.6
12. 1E51F0019 NO N/A NO NO YES NO 1.5. 1.0. N/A 1.0 1.0 1.5 YES 5 3.51 DAMACED DECLUTCH TRIPPER FINGER AND WORM CEAR
13. 1E51F0022 NO NO NO NO YES NO 2.0, 2.0, 3.25 1.75. 1.75. 2.0 YES N/A 11.42 TORQUE SWITCH SETTING DID NOT CORRESPOND TO DWGS.-

SHOULDER LOCKNUT WAS OVERTHISHTENED CAUSI!E EXCESSIVE PRELOAD ON SPRING PACr.

16. 1E51F0031 YES NO NO to NO NO 2.0, 2.0. 2.75 2.0. 2.0. 2.75 YES 30 18.62
15. IE31F0045 YES N/A NO NO to NO 2.25, 1.5. N/A 2.0. 2.0. 2.0 YES N/A 11.78 CLOSE TORQUE SWITCH SETTING FOUND NOT PER DESIGN

ATTACHMENT 2 N/A - WOT APPLICASLE VALVE PROBLPM

SUMMARY

REPORT I - INDETERMINATE AS-FOUND CONDITION REQUIRED VALVE UNBALAPCED OPEN BYPASS VALVE OVER- OVER- AS-FOUND AS-LEFT VALVE STRUKE STROKE MASTER PARTS LIST TORQUE SWITCH SET BACE- THRUST THRUST UNDER- TS SETTItC TS SETT1tC FOUND TIME TIME NUMBER . . SWITCH _ CORRECT (Y_ SEATED VALVE . OPERATOR THRUST _. O. C. MAX.__ _ 0..C. MAX _ _ 0PERABLE SEC. _SEC.

REMA_RKS

16. IE51F0046 I N/A NO I I I 1.C. 1.0. 1.5 N/A 1.0. 1.5 YES N/A 3.07 TORQUE SWITCH RM10VED Atas BALAtCED PRIOR TO TESTIIC
17. 1E51F0059 YES NO NO NO NO NO 1.25, 1.25. 1.25 1.5. 1.5 1.5 YES N/A 4.3 STEM NUT NOT ADEQUATF1Y TIGHT AND DECLUTCH TRIPPEPS tot PROPERLY ADJUSTED
18. 1E51F00t>3 YES N/A NO NO NO NO 1.0 1.0. 2.5 2.75, 2.75. 2.75 NO 20 8.38 AS-FOUND TS SETTItC FOR DC OPERATOR-AS-LEFT TS FOR AC OPERATOR - SEE TEXT FOR COMPLETE EXPLANATION
19. IE51F0064 YES N/A NO NO NO NO 2.5. 2.5. 2.5 2.75. 2.75, 2.75 YES 20 8.48
20. 1E51F0063 to N/A NO NO I NO 2.75. 2.75. 2.75 1.75. 1.75. 1.75 YES (30 46.30 CLOSItC LIMIT ItCOERECTLY SET IE51F0076 1 YES I I I I 2.0. 1.5. 2.0 1.0. 1.0 1.5 No 15 11.5 VALVE STEM WAS FOUND 21.

BROKEN DUE TO THE INCORRECT SPRItC PACK.

VALVE WAS kEPLACED Ata OPERATOR REWORKED.

22. 1E51F0077 YES N/A NO NO NO NO I.O. 1.0. 5.0 1.0 1.0. 1.0 YES 22.5 4.98
23. 1E51F0078 I N/A I I I I 2.5. 2.0. 3.5 N/A 1.0, 2.0 NO N/A 10 VALVE OPEN PARTIALLY AND MECHANICALLY BI20ED.

DISASSEMBLY REVEALED DECLUTCH TRIPPER LEVER BROKEN. FINGERS BEffT AND A BAD WORM SHAFT BEARItc.

REPLACED THESE COMPONEtTTS Ato TORQUE SWITCH.

YES N/A NO to to 1.75. 1.75. N/A 1.75. 1.75, 1.75 YES N/A 10 THIS VALVE'S SAFFTY

24. 1E51F0510 NO FUNCTION TS TO CLOSE ON SPPItC AC1/4TEION. THE MOTOR OPERATOR IS USE2) TO 1ATCH THE SPRItC O!G.Y.

ms===x====zzass===zmat======32e===s===zs=======z======zcs==szz========================*2:=======** ===== x===

17 11 0 5 2 3 TOTAL 1 DVER- DVER- Ut* DER- VALVES UNBALANED OPEN BYPASS BACK-TORQUE SET SEATED THRUST THRUST THRUST INOPERABLE SWITCH INCORRECTLY VALVES VALVE OPERATOR

ATTAQtMENT 3 N/R - NOT REQUIREI)

DYNAMIC TEST REPORT N/A - NOT AVAILABLE ,

ESTIMATED Q.OSING VALVE DIRUST THRUST TliRUST MARGIN VALVE TARGET FLOW OPEN STROK E TEST REQUIRED OVER MAX DESIGN REQdIRED t% STER PARTS LIST DIRUST STOPPED UNDER TEST TIME PRESSURE TO STOP TO DELTA P AT NUMBER LBS. SATI SFACTORY PRESSURE SATI SFAC'IT)RY PSIC FLOW LBS. OPEN VALVE SETTING (%) REMARKS

1. 1E12FOO52A 57.007 YES YES N/R 920 N/A N/A 10 FLOW INSTRUMENT TRACES INDICATED THAT FLOW WAS STOPPED PRIOR TO TORQUE SWITQi TRIP BUT DIE EXACT THRUST VALVE COULD NOT BE DETERMINED BECAUSE OF TIME DOMAIN DIFFERENCES.
2. IE12F0052P 57.007 Y t.S YES N/R 920 N/A 10.200 12.5 DYNAMIC TEST RESULTED IN A MINOR INCREASE IN TORQUE SWITOI SETTING BASED ON TEST RESULTS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL MARGIN.
3. 1E22F0001 7.929 YES N/A N/R 50 N/A N/A 44 VALVE WAS TESTED GOING CLOSE ONLY.

TEST DATA WAS INCORRECT DUE TO IMPROPER SET-UP.

' . . IE22F0010 131.452 YES YES N/R 1400 86.745 109.500 58 DYNAMIC TEST WAS PERFORNED NEAR MAXIMUM DESIGN PRESSURE WHICH RESULTS IN ACTUAL DiRUST MARCINS.

5. IE22F0011 131.452 YES YES N/R 1400 100.169 101.800 37 DYNAMIC TEST WAS PERFORMED NEAR MAXIMUM DESIGN PRESSURE WHICH RESULTS IN ACTUAL DIRUST MARGINS.

DIE VALVE WAS FOUND WIDi A CRAQtED YWE DURING THE TEST.

6. IE22FOO12 10.793 YES YES Y3 1400 N/A 9.634 25 THIS IS A FOUR (4) SECOND OPERATED VALVE WHIQ1 MAKES EXACT FLOW STOP-PAGE DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE. THE VALVE WAS TESTED NEAR MAXIMUM DESIGN PRESSURE
7. 1E22F0015 13.585 N/ A YES YES 50 N/A 9.703 42 DilS VALVE WAS TESTED IN DIE OPEN DIRECTION ONLY. THIS OPERATOR DOES NOT C)NTAIN AN OPEN TORQUE SWITCH AND CAN PROVIDE THE FULL CAPACITY OF DIE OPERATOR. THE Q.OSING MARGIN IS ESTIMATED FROM THE AS-FOUND CLOSE TMD READING.
d. 1E22r0023 177.301 YES YES YES 1400 84.573 152.931 92 DYNAMIC TEST WAS PERFORMED NFAR MAXIMUri DESIGN PRESSURE WHIQ1 RESULTS IN ACTUAL THRUST MARGINS.
9. 1E5170010 2.625 YES TES N/R 10 890 1.826 170 THIS VALVE HAS A MAX DELTA P OF 75 PSI AND ITS OPERATOR / VALVE IS VERY Q)NSERVATIVELY DESIGNED.

^T ATTAQIMENT 3 N/R - EDT PEQUIRED DYNAMIC TEST FEPORT N/A - NOT AVAILABLE .

ESTIMATED CLOSING VALVE THRUST THRUST THRUST MARGIN VALVE TARGET FLOW OPEN STROK E TEST OVER MAX DESIGN REQUIRED REQUIRED f% STER PARTS LIST THRUST STOPPED UNDER TEST TIME PRESSURE TO STOP TO DELTA P AT NUMBER LBS. SATISFACTORY PRESSURE SATISFACTORY PSIG FLOW LBS. OPEN VALVE SETTING (2) REMARKS

10. IE51FOO19 6.210 YES YES YES 1.000 N/A N/A 10 THIS IS A FOUR (4) SECOND OPERATED VALVE WHIQt MAKES EXACT FLOW STOP-PAGE DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE. THIS IS A SPRING OPERATED DIAPHRAM VALVE TO GO OPEN.
11. IK51FOO22 21.123 YES YES N/R 1.000 11.495 3.855 20 CLOSING THRUST WAS EXTRAPOLATED TO ESTIMATE MARGIN OVER MAX DESIGN DELTA P.
12. IE51FOO31 2.625 YES YES YES 10 1.127 3.763 330 THIS VALVE HAS THE SAME CHARACTER-ISTICS AS 1E51FOOlO AND IS VERY CONSERVATIVELY DESIGNED.
13. 1E51FOO45 19.129 YES F/A N/R 900 N/A N/A 40 THIS IS A STEAM VALVE WHIQ1 EXHIBITS DIFFERENT TEST Q1ARACTER-ISTICS WHIQI MAKE ACTUAL FLOW STOPPAGE DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE.

VALVE NOT TESTED GOING OPEN.

14 1E51FOO46 6.210 N/A YES N/R 29 N/A N/A 14 VALVE WAS TESTED GOING OPEN ONLY.

TEST DATA WAS INCORRECT DUE TO IMPROPER SET-UP.

15. 101F0050 9.350 YES YES N/R 1.010 7.564 4.554 10 DYNAMIC TEST RESULTED IN A MINOR INCREASE IN TORQUE 41TCH SETTING BASED ON TEST RESULTS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL MARCIN.
16. IE51FOO63 35.981 YES N/A YES 920 N/A N/A 34 VALVE NOT OPEN UNDER FLOW. SEE TEXT FOR EXPLANATION. FLOW DATA WAS LOST DUE iO EXTREME TEMPE5 'IURE DURING TEST AFFECTING TEST EQUIP.
17. 1 01F0064 35.981 N/A N/A YES N/A N/A N/A 25 FLOW TEST WAS WJT PERFORMED BUT WAS EVALUATED AGAINST ITS IDENTICAL VALVE 1E51FOO63. A MINOR TORQUE SWITCH SETTING INCREASE WAS INITIATED BASED ON ITS TEST FINDINGS.
18. 1E51F0076 2.672 YES YES YES 920 N/A N/A 55 FLOW INSTRUMENT TRACES INDICATE THAT FLOW WAS STOPPED PRIOR TO TORQUE SWITCH TRIP BUT THE EXACT THRUST VALUE COULD NOT BE DETERMIhTD BECAUSE OF TIME DOMAIN DIFFERENCES.

THIS IS A SPRING OPERATED DIAPHRAGM VALVE TO GO OPEN.

_ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ._ _ _. _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=PY-CEI-NRR-0835,_Motor_Valve_Testing_%26_Evaluatiion_at_Perry_Nuclear_Power_Plant_(IE_Bulletin_85-003)&oldid=3582056"