ML19240B960

From kanterella
Revision as of 10:13, 19 October 2019 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Nonproprietary Version of 1981 Calvert Cliffs Unit 2 Refueling Outage:End of Cycle 3 Eddy Current Insp Results on Control Element Assemblies.
ML19240B960
Person / Time
Site: Calvert Cliffs  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 03/05/1981
From:
ABB COMBUSTION ENGINEERING NUCLEAR FUEL (FORMERLY
To:
Shared Package
ML19240B958 List:
References
CEN-154(B)-NP, NUDOCS 8104170384
Download: ML19240B960 (7)


Text

,

O 20MSUST10. ENGINEERING, IN .

.

(f

?

1981 CALVERT CLIFFS II PEF;'ELING OUTAGE END OF CYCLE 3 EDDY CURRENT INSPECTION RESULTS ON CONTROL ELEMENT ASSEMBLIES (CEA's)

.

..

CEN-154 (B)-NP

.

'.

MARCH 5, 1981 01170 3 8

LEGAL NOTICE

.

THIS REPORT .VAS PREPARED AS AN ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED BY COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC. NEITHER COMBUSTION ENGINEERING

'

NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON ITS BEHALF: ,

- .

A. MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR R EPR ES ENT ATION, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED INCLUDING THE WARRANTIES OF F#TNESS FOR A P* RTICULAR PURPOSE OR ME R CH AN T A BI LIT Y. WITH n';S PE CT TO 1HE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, CR USEFULNESS OF THE INFORMAT'ON CCT AINED IN THIS REPORT, OR TH AT T HE USE O F AN Y INF ORMATIOrs, APP AR ATUS, *.'.E T HOD, '.

OR PROCESS DISCLOSED IN THIS REPORT MAY Nf]T INF RINGE PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS;CR E. ASSUMES ANY LI ABILITIE3 'AITH RESPECT TO THL USE OF. On FOR DAMAGES RESULTING FRCM THE USE OF, ANY INFORf.1ATION, APPAR ATUS.

METHOD OR FROCESS DISCLOSED IN This REFORT.

. .,

.

A. CEA EDDY CURRE."T TEST RESULTS

,

were eddy current tested during the Calvert

'

C iffs II EGC-3 refueling outage in January, 1981. The CEA's resided in tle core positicns shown in Figure 1 and had been eddy current tested f llowing Cycle 2 (Ref.1). The purpose of the eddy current inspecticns was tolocateandquantifypotentialwearatthe( .

,

d The testing was performed in accordance with approved C-E procedures for the detection of CEA wear. The, of each CEA finger was in-spected with an encircling eddy current coi!.

-

-

At E0C-3, sli;,nt indications of wear were observed

,

The eddy current data collected en ,

could not be interpreted with any certainty due to electronic and mechanical equipment problems encountered during the inspection activity at the site. Consequen.ly no data are presented for tnis CEA.

I from these CEA's are summarized in Thesignalf J Table 1. In order to cetermine the magnitude of wear associated witn a given signal,the signal , ,

in each case must be compared to signals obtained from testing a standard with wear simulations of known size and gecmetry. A description of the wear standard, used in t.his progran, and the corresponding signall .easured at ECC-3 is presented in Table 2.  !!ote that the signal

~~ e .

.

depends' upon thE

~

i

~ l

  • Thestandardusedinthisprogramconsistsoff L

and wa: the same standard used in

. .

the EOC-2 measurements at Calvert Cliffs II.

I 'of the average indicated wear following Cjcle 3 ranges The [ ] .

r -

from

> .

CEAl L -

also exhibits

.

-

tne maximum wear signal of which correspcnds to a wear value of approximately

}

Measurements on the scme fingers at EOC-2 showed as measured after Cycle 3 considering the estimated overall measurement uncertainty , ,

of the CEA eddy current test system. After Cycle 3

,

the maximum signal was found in the Af t .- Cvele 2 the ,

'

approximatewearestimatewasi -

while at EOC-3 the approximate-L .

wear e.wimate was ,

for this indication. It should be added i that comparison of data between different inspection programs.must be based upon Equipment can vary

' '

from one test series to another resulting' in different ~

.

.

The degree of wear measured in the CEA's at EOC-3 is acceptable for

.

continued CEA operation since the measured wear is less than

. .

(Ref. 2).

B. VISUAL INSPECTION

' ~

The lower of was visually inspected by TY. No anomalies

'

.

were observed on any finger and no perceptible diameter variations were observed at any of the wear locations.

REFERENCES -

..

1. "Results of the CEA Guide Tube Inspection Program, Calvert Cliffs Unit #2 Docket No. 50-318", CEN-118 (B)-P, November 8, 1979
2. " Response to Request for Additional Information, CEA Guide Tube Inspection Program, Calvert Cliffs Unit No. 2, Docket No. 50-313",

CEN-116 (B)-P, dated October 8, 1979.

.

e

.

TABLE 1 CALVERT CLIFFS II END-OF-CYCLE 3 CEA 'n' EAR TEST RESULTS

, APPROXIF. ATE LOCATION CEA NO. FINGER RESULTS _

(It'CHES FROM CEA BOTTOM)

.

9.

b e

S

.

TABLE 2

~ CORRELATION: EDDY CURREriT TEST STANDARD SICNfsL lVS. WEAR

. .

WEAR STANDARD (INCONEL 625 TUBING)

.

. WEAR SIMULATION . AVERAGE .

SIGNAL

.

, .

-

_

,

.

.

..

  • CORRELATIONS APPLY TO CALVERT CLIFFS II EOC-3 INSPECTIC!4 DNLY

.

  • 6

.

- - ,

.

.

FIGURL 1 CORE LOCATIONS OF CEA's DURITIG ChCLES 1 TilRU 3 FOR CEA'S TilAT WERE EDDY CURREilT TESTED A

.

.