ML20065G867

Reported Turbine Component Damage at Beaver Valley Power Station Unit 1 Re Conduct of Operational Surveillance Test (Ost) 1.23.1

ML20065G867
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	08/26/1988
From:	Beldecos F, Deahna S, Martin R DUQUESNE LIGHT CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20065G860	List: ML20065G859 ML20065G862 ML20065G867 ML20065G872
References
NUDOCS 9010240029
Download: ML20065G867 (31)

Text

- __ _. . .. - .. . _ . . . - . . . . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ .

. _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - _._ _ .. . 7 1

ATTACHMENT E . ' ';

t i

J l.

o  ;

I l

REPORTED TURBINE COMPONENT DAMAGE

, l

'.l AT BVPS UNIT 1 RELATED TO CONDUCT OF l

1 . .

L OPERATIONAL SURVEILLANCE TEST (OST) 1.26.1 -]

.a a

-i Y

E S1?

4

)

t ll

>l 4

4

.j 1

4

- 9010240029 9010010".'

. PDR ADOCK 05000412 P. PNU,3

f DUQUESNE. LIGHT COMPANY j

, Bsaver Valley Powar Station i 1

'. j s

i e REPORTED TURBINE COMPONENT DAMAGE AT BVPS UNIT 1 RELATED TO.- r CONDUCT OF OPERATIONAL SURVEILLANCE TEST (OST)-1.26.1 i

L A, review of unusual steam flow distribution patterns, steam pressure changes and load disturbances occurring during OST 1.26.1, leading to turbine component:  !

damage.- u i

s l  ;\

l

~

(~

L .fer&t nook h

PREPARED BY: Scott T. Deahna and- 'i Frank A. Beldecos L: SM Q. A04 W l 3

REVIEVED BY: -Frank'A. Beldecos '[

L!

/ ;. Q @, Aa%1so nt' ,

hgg ($Ii/ -

APPROVED BY: Roge n riart I l; ,

1 t

'i August 26, 1988 h;.

4 t - - - - ,

+  ;

. 4-6 t

i REPORTED TURBINE COMPONENT DAMAGE AT BVPS-1

' RELATED TO CONDUCT OF OPERATIONAL SURVEILLANCE TEST (OST) 1.26.1;-

~t

' t . TABLE'0F CONTENTS y Description Page 1 -

INTRODUCTION.......................................................  !-

2,

- PART A - GOVF.RNOR-VALVE TESTING ...................................

PART B - THROTTLE VALVE TESTING ................................... 5-PART C:- REHEAT STOP'AND INTERCEPT VALVE TESTING .................... ~7- ,

,10' CONCLUSIONS'AND RECOMMENDATIONS...............'..............'....... ,i p REFERENCES ...'.................................................... 11 i{

+

[. '

12.

L. . - FIGURES.' ........................................................

- TABLES ........................................................- 25- ,

)

ll '

l

.APPENDIK(

.......................................................< 27 -g .. i l

\

^

1 1,

e -

't t i l s ! ~' .)Ik c,i , iu I

i

- - - - - ~

4 INTRODUCTION Operational Surveillance Test (OST) 1.26.1 is a periodic test conducted to insure that the main turbine throttle, governor, reheat stop, and intercept

• valves are responding smoothly and freely. to imposed test signals that causes a

specific valve to move through its full travel from full open to full closed.

These valves are vital' devices for the control of steam flow, either for. load z

control or for limiting turbine rotor overspeed. The periodic testing,

inspection, maintenance and' repair of these devices is of major operational =

concern. ,

OST 1.26.1 is not a passive test. It imposes unusual stresses and forces on certain turbine components and has caused equipment damage to occur that was not

' clearly recognized or understood at the time the testing program was initiated.

?- In this report, each valve test (throttle, governor, reheat stop and intercept) is reviewed separately and in the sequence required by OST 1.26.1. Since'steen

+

flows are being interrupted with'the exercising of these valves, the problem is usually one of determining how the steam flows are redistributed and what

. pressure drop and velocity changes are occurring and vhat forces are resulting.-

Historically, the. equipment damage has been disguised mainly because damage.-.is the cumulative'effect-of repeated testing and usually not the result of. single events.

l- Modifications have been' incorporated, or vill be incorporated, that vill' bet'ter ,

1 resist some of the potential' damage, but it should be recognized that OST 1.26.'1 imposes a severe service requirement on various turbine. components and that- _

methods to increase the life expectancy of certain main steam turbine components be investigated.

The sequence of valve testing and the order in which they are revievid in this '

report are as follows:  ;

i PART A -Governor Valve Test l- 1 l PART B Throttle Valve Test .

b PART C Reheat Stop and. Intercept Valve Test l

j Of the above three (3) specific valve ~ tests, ,PART C (Reheat and Intercept). l j

imposes the severest challenge to 'the integrity of the Main Steam Turbine- '

System. Approximately $400,000 was expended during the most recent refueling.

outage (December 1987 - March 1988) to repair the cumulative damage to the four

'(4) moisture separator reheaters. These expenses were directly attributed to valve testing. The next most severe challenge comes from PART A (Governor). j Expenditures in this instance are not specifically . budgeted to- Planned' Maintenance activities. However, usual restoration costs include rebabbiting PART'B two (2) HP turbine bearings and HP rotor steam seal strip restoration.

(Throttle) is the least' challenging surveillance test and no restoration costs have been associated with this test.

/*

4 l

1

-l PART A - GOVERNOR VALVE' TESTING The function of;the turbine governor ' valves are to accurately controlithe steam '

[

flow rates directed to' the inlet nozzle ~ chambers of the main turbine. The

- governor valves perform that function in a manner so as'to match'the inlet-steam flow rate to:the electrical load imposed _ on the main generator. An' additional'

' function of the governor valves are to prevent the frequency (speed).of.the. ,

turbine generator from changing beyond a specified value. In the' event of- I

- turbine generator overspeed, the governor a alves are designed to rapidly close to limit.the rotor overspeed. Thus, the goternor valves are an integral part-of the turbine overspeed. protection system.

1 Each governor valve controls the steam 'flov to one (1)aof four (4)-turbine nozzle chamber. The governor valves are located external to the main turbine HP j cylinder in two (2) steam chests located, on opposite sides of the HP turbine.

' There are four (4) governor-valves -- two (2) in each steam chest.; The nozzle" i chambers are positioned internally in the HP cylinder and.the four (4) nozzle .;

- chambers each span an.~ arc ot' ninety. degrees (90'); Figure Al depicts this-  ;

arrangement schematically.

~

The. normal governor valve opening sequence-and valve lifts to-produce 100% power are tabulatedLbelov . ,

1st - Valves #2 and #3 100% Lif t- (together) 2nd - Valve n3 >38% Lift ,

3rd - Valve #4 0% ,

li The' governor valve nomenclature is identical to that' appearing.in Figure Al'.-

i Surveillance' testing requires each governor valve be cbserved.during its full  ?

! travel to-open and close smoothly. vithout s tic king. The testing'sequenceEfor the governor valves are tabulated below: j h lst - Valve #3 Close - Open 2nd - Valve #2 Close - Open 3rd - Valve #1 Close - Open  :)

i t

L

^

s

P Governor valve #4 is not directly stroked but vill move to_the-open position.

'(but not' full open) as a consequence of either Valve #3 c1'o sing or Valve #2 closingh Vith electrical output constant, as Valve #3 (or #2) reopen, Valve #4 vill reclose. Consequently,-all governor valves are stroked.- The surveillance test is conducted with the load reduced 5%. It is important to note'that load reductions beyond 10% vill introduce a " double shock" -to the control stage.

blading.* The region where governor valve testing can be conducted' safely'is; ,

limited to a range of 90% to 100% of full loade (This is at variance to the= r value of 84% to 100% of full load that . appears. in the Turbine Vendor's Instruction Book.) (See Figure A2). s On those occasions when the main HP turbine was disassembled for,a planned-inspection and/or maintenance, the, damage reported has been similar - HP Bearings No. 1 and No.,2 viped and light to medium rotor seal strip rubs on all rows wherever spring backed seals are applied. This situation has' led.to rebabbiting the bearings and restoring or replacing the damaged seals. These '

are all rather costly and time consuming maintenance functions.;

E The cause of this component damage observed was traceable directly to governor-valve surveillance testing, coupled with the unanticipated dynamic. response of' the HP rotor-to the steam forces acting on the turbine blading in the controli (first) stage of the turbine during the specific governor 3 valve testing-interval. ,

Appendix A provides a method for calculating the resultant forces acting on the HP rotors. These steam forces are relatively very large compared to the HP: a rotor weight. For example, the static veight of the~HP rotor between Bearings. .]

No. 1 and No. 2 equals 108,000 lbs.,- while a situation may exist (-670 MV) vhen L

Governor Valves No'. 2 and No. 3 are completely open_(Valves No. l and No. 4 _

I being closed) where the resultant steam forces developed (106,000 lbs.) almost ,

equals the' static veight of the rotor, .but in'the upward direction. Whenever -i that or similar situations develop in the HP turbine, the rotor bearings become very lightly loaded. Figure A3 represents the actual. initial. condition (95%.

load) required to perform- the governor valve . surveillance test. Under these-E

conditions, it can be observed that not- only are Bearings No. 1land No. 21very lightly loaded (less than 30 psi), but the resultant bearing cor. tact = angle is l-L about 40' from the 6 o' clock position, suggesting thatL the ' bearings are L operating in a region of dynamic instability.

i

(

4

• A " double shock" occurs whenever in one revolution of:the rotor, a turbine blade passes through an active (steam flowing) nozzle arc and then enters an inactive (zero steam flowing) nozzle are region then re-enters an active region and finally passes through a second inactive arc. The double impulse.

to the blade may reinforce the vibratory stresses in the blade to the point l that failure may occur. Since Unit I has always performed-the surveillance j test at 95% load, it has not experienced a control stage blade failure' l' attributable to this test.

l 1:

1

~

a -

. . i 4

r The large rotor' bearing displacements . occurring at Bearing No. 1 vere first l observed by the plant operators while performing the governor valve surveillance. 1 tests per OST.l.26.1. The typical bearing vibration patterns observed are shown 1 on portions of the Control Room strip chart recorder, reproduced in Figures A4, A4.1 andLA4.2. -Additional- engineering analysis, supported by supplementary field data, clearly confirmed that. movement-' wasy occurring within the No. 1-' .

bearing'.- Figure SA records the relative position;of Bearing No. 1 center-line during the governor valve test.- It is notevorthy.to observe that the' greatest 7 bearing motion occurs during the. governor Valve No.'3 testing interval. This is in agreement vith calculated-predictions.  ;

Additional confirming evidence of bearing stability problems was supplied by the ,

turbine vendor who provided the following re ply _ _ to an Engineering' Department inquiry:

"BB296 Turbines were originally designed with sleeve bearings. .. Valve test studies indicated- that light bearing loads -vould exist under'certain conditions. Stability studies, however, indicated that the rotors vould be -

stable with the light bearing loads.

"Several years after the first -BB296 Turbines were built, additional' study indicated that the bearings on never units vould become_ totally unloaded-during valve test. A decision was made to install tilting pad bearings on:

all future BB296 Turbines. When this decision was'made, existing units had

-not exhibite'd'any vibration difficulty during valve test and theyfwere not:

j retrofitted with tilting pad bearings."

7 As noted above, in order to eliminate the HP rotor dynamic instability and to' l decrease the HP rotor displacements during the governor valve testing internals, l tilting-pad type bearings should replace- the original sleeve' type bearings. 1 Tilting pad bearings vill permit high bearing contact angl'es to be accepted without introducing " oil whip", " rotor whirl", or other.similar instabilities. i' Observations at BVPS Unit 2 during valve testing appears to confirm:this fact.--

Installation of tilt pad bearings is estimated to require a one.(1) year lead J

time and expenditures of 'about $300,000 for bearings and associated hardware-  !

l

-alone. The earliest installation' date vould coincide with R8 (late 1989 or

• L early 1990) and a-schedule HP turbine maintenance outage. . Labor cost.have nott been' estimated.

i-

! The periodic inspection }of governor' valve assemblies has, from time-to-time, disclosed cracks developing in a part of the valve assembly-(mufflers). These a l

failures are related to flow induced vibrations that may occur whenever a valve operates close to its seat. The failures are not related to governor valve r

j. testing. Modifying the valve lift and overlap characteristics has essentially i controlled the incidence of muffler cracking.

l L .)

r i

PART B - THROTTLE VALVE TESTING-

~

The throttle valves function to shut off the supply of main steam-to the turbine. .Normally,-the throttle valves are either fully closed or fully opened, leaving to the governor valves the function of actually metering the steam. flow to;the HP turbine during normal operation. The one occasion the throttle valves-control steam flow is during a unit start up. This is accomplished by_means of limited capacity-pilot valves that _are an integral-part of the throttle valve (valve within a valve) assembly. During a turbine rotor speed excursion, the-throttle valve vill be actuated to trip (close) at a predetermined rotor speed.

Consequently, the throttle valves provide. a redundant or backup overspeed protection system.

As previously indicated in Figure A1, there are four (4) throttle valves _each attached to opposite ends of either one of two (2) steam chests. The four (4) throttle' valves normally operate in unison. . Valve testing requires that the:

throttle valves be stroked to close (and open) sequentially in their normal numbered sequence No'.-1, No. 2, No. 3, and No. 4.

No observable damage appears to- be attributable to the conduct of this test.

During the throttle valve testing- interval, the largest throttle valve: steam-.

flows appear,in the left side steam chest. First, when the No .1 TV is closed and later when the No. 3 TV is closed. When the Noi 1 TV is closed, the maximum-flows occurs at No. 3 TV.- .Likewise, when the No. 3 TV is closed,-the' maximum-flows occurs at No. 1 TV. This can be clearly seen in the tabulations appearing.

in Table B1 and Table B2. The increase in flows above the normal steam flow is 1.60x or a 2.6x increase in pressure' drop through the throttle valve. -Assuming a 2% throttle valve pressure ~ drop, the- resulting pressure drop increases to 5.1%. This is not considered ~a significant-increase and may explain,the lack of visible damage to any of the throttle valves. Replacement of. bushings, gaskets and locking pins'is considered normal maintenance and not attributable to valve testing.

A summary--of the steam flow relationship at the throttle valves, duringl valve.

testing appears below:

Total Steam Flow to TV (LB./HR.)

No. 1 TV Closed No. 3 TV Closed No. 1 TV 0 6.4 x 100 (Max.)-

No. 3 TV 6.4 x 106 (Max.) 0 6 6 No. 2 TV 2.10 x 10 2.0 x 10 No. 4 TV 2.0 x 10 0 2.0 x 10 6 c'.

F 'r I

f Maximum throttle valve flows do not develop when either No. 2 or No. 4 throttle; i valves are closed. In addition, the power generated does not vary significantly i during valve' testing as indicated by the MV recorder.. As noted earlier,LPART B

- throttle valve testing is the least challenging. surveillance: test and no  ;

4 restoration costs are associated with this test.

The' supplier of the turbine throttle valves has- notified users that if the  !

throttle valves are closed for a period of 15 minutes or longer, then reopened, .f there exists an interval of 15 minutes when valve sticking is likely.to, occur,.

L resulting in possible failure of the valve to close.- The vendor recommends that

'if any throttle valve is held closed ~ for more 'than' ten (10) minutes, upon reopening, it should be stroked by means of the test button. -i.

Addressing'the above concerns, the valve surveillance testing is sequenced;in a '

manner such'that throttle: valve testing always follows governor valve testing.

This assures that the governor valves tested are in working order'and,available for overspeed protection in the event of difficulties with the throttle valves.:

Until the root 'cause of < valve sticking is identified and corrected, the.

additional testing should not- create any additional threat to the mechanical. .i I

reliability of the throttle valves.

j

?

i ..

i l

l V

l

PART C - REHEAT STOP AND '.NTERCEPT VALVE TESTING The' primary function of: the reheat stop and , intercept valves are to. block the flow of, steam into the lov pressure turbines' c during'-~either a rotor speed excursion or load rejection (turbine trip) transient. A significant volume'of high' pressure steam' accumulates.in, (1) the HP turbine exhaust piping, (2) the moisture separator-reheater tanks-and, (3) the turbinc cross-over piping during ,

normal _ operation'. The energy content of this stored steam is such-that if allowed, during'a load transient, to . flow uncontrolled into the;1ov pressure turbines, would increase the potential. overspeed of the turbine-generator. rotor system to undesirable limits. Like the turbine governor valves, intercept

, valves are sensitive to speed changes and can, under certain circumstances, .

modulate the steam flows to the low pressure turbines. _The reheat stop--valves. ] ~

,are a back-up or' redundant overspeed protection system, similar-to_the main turbine throttle valves. They are, therefore, a vital part of the. total -

tverspeed protection system. ,

01e '1) reheat stop and intercept valve combination is located in each of the four (4)- cross-over pipes as -near to the lov-_ pressure turbine inlets.as i practical. Figure'C1 shows this arrangement schematically.

Surveillance testing of the reheat stop and intercept valves follows the.

following sequence:

7

1. LP-1 (Left Side),- TEST IIRL Close-- Open l ;

2. LP-2 (Left Side), TEST 2IRL Close - Open-

3. LP-1 (Right. Side), TEST IIRR Close -'Open

4. LP-2'(Right Side), TEST 2IRR Close-- Open  !

iThis surveillance testing results in a most severe challenge to the mechanical- j integrity..of the main Lsteam- turbine and a concomitant detriment .to its thermodynamic efficiency. The accumulated component-- damage associated with-7>

' valve-testing appears to be centered primarily in the internals of the' moisture- 3 separator-reheaters. An extensive review and discussion of the observed damages and;the'necessary repairs appears in a companion report.*: A brief summary y describing the nature of_the damago is extracted from the report:

a j N.7' }

K' ,

1 R

• Deahna, S. T., " Beaver Valley Power Station No. 1 and No. 2 Holsture' j

p Separator-Reheater Status Report", NED, August 23, 1988.

I

/,:

[ , . ,

P  !

t

p.  ;

"During the Unit 1 sixth refueling outage, tvo (2) types'of damage a

vere discovered in the MSR's. The~ ,first type.of damage vas the 3'

failure of the reheat steam inlet hemi-head partition plate..=The hemi-head partition plate isolates the top half of the U-tube-  :

bundle from the bottom half. Its integrity is required to-ensure '

proper reheat steam flow.- The second type'of damage is the failure-. .

of shellside closure plates. The integrity of-the closure plates is required in order to direct the turbine cycle steam through the" .i cheveton type moisture, separating sections -of 'the MSR vithout<

leaking arounu the reheater." l 1

As a consequence of the shellside closure plate failures,' debris vas. carried  !

-into the' crossover pipe, then passed through the' intercept and stop valves, and.

rested in the turning vanes at the inlet- to the. lov pressure turbine.

Fortunately, these fragments did not- appear to have damaged any_ low pressure turbine blades.  ;

To better understand the actual flow distribution patterns and pressure drops.

being encountered during this specific valve testing, data vas recorded-during a .l required OST 1.26.1, when the intercept tand stop valves were exercised. .The i

't results (pressures and flovs) appear in. Figure C1.1, C1.2, C1.'3 and C1.4.'

~

-An examination of the above test- results clearly'show that' during the'intercepth and. reheat stop valve testing- intervel, the turbine-crossover-(X-0) pipe flows patterns undergo significant changes. The tabulation- below indicates-the ,

maximum individual ~ relative pipe flows are achieved whenever; one (1) set'of  ?!

IV/RSV are closed. The~ maximum X-0 flov increases are'about.XI.76 normal:andt 1 appear in the opposite side X-0 pipe feeding the same low pressure turbine. For' example, when the-intercept and reheat stop valves la b 0 pipe -1A are closed,; j!

the' maximum flow appears in the oppositt'X-0 pip 9 -1B.'

This' increases in steam flows, s t s.am selecities and pre.mure drops during this.

test are a direct -precursor of the premature failures in'the-MSR shellside.

closure plates. 'The following tabulation demonstrat:s the fact that there are -

large forces-to absorb during valve testing:  !

TEST X-0 PIPE X-0 FLOV P (TCST) P (NORMAL) 11RL- (-1B) X 1.69 70.1 29.7 1 2IRL (-1D) X 1.71 74.0 34.0 lIhR (-1A) X 1.87 54.4 29.4  ?

2IRR (-1C) X 1.75 72.5 33.7 3

i

s 1

l The failure of the reheat steam inlet hemi-head partition plate is also related -

to the occurrence of _ excessive pressure differences,4 this time across the.

. divider plate. A response from the MSR vendor states in part the following:

...the cause of distress for both the hemi-head partition plate and closure plates is the abnormally high pressure drops developed during interceptor valve testing..." ,

i The normal pressure drop across the divider plate was_ estimated by the vendor to be 40 PSID. MSR tests at BVPS Uait 1 on June 20, 1988, suggest that at 100%

e load a pressure drop of 63 PSID develops. The vendor further indicated that

- during intercept and reheat valve testing, the pressure drop exceeds 106 PSI. "

Comparable test data is not available from Unit 1.; However, it is' anticipated that a pressure drop of 106 PSI vill be exceeded. .The extensive repairs and modifications to the HSR's, to reduce the incidence of failures caused by these r

pressure drops, are detailed in the companion report!previously cited.

The reach of effects from intercept and reheat stop valve testing is very vide.

- For example,.the generating capability of .the unit fell-from about 780 MV to 720 MV (See Figure C2) as each valve was exercised. At the same time, total-steam flows to one_(1) LP turbine increased by 10-11%. By reference-to Figure-7 C1.1', it was observed that during TEST IIRL, the steam flow to LP-2 increased,by a1 factor of X1.104. As a result of this increase, the LP last row blading in LP-2 experienced'a load -increase of 5% above the normal levels.- Note this increase is-after the load'had been reduced 5% in order to conduct OST 1.26.1.

Continuing with TEST IIRL, the pressure in the -1A cross-under and cross-over piping (no flov/ valves closed) increased to 232.2 PSIG or within about 18 PSIG q of_ challenging the HSR relief valve. Finally, the pressure distribution at the HP turbine exhaust _ region creates a pressure l _and thrust unbalance that causes-

- the rotor position-to move in one direction and then in the other direction.

The above transients are some of the observed effects from valve testing that d may challengeE t he mechanical integrity of the main turbine.

The mechanism of the progressive tube failures (leaks) experienced in the reheat-

. section of the MSRs is not' clearly understood. 'However, it is believed that 3 OST 1.26.1 is a contributor to the tube failures. When valves are ex.ercised

'(closed), severe cycle steam flow distortions occur which,_when coupled to the ,

lov heat transfer rates from the reheater, may be creating unusual ~ strains in  !

the tube' bundles. _

The vendor observed that after surveying the repaired MSR; tanks, estimate'd that ,

replacement reheater tube bundles may be required in about three (3) years. The l total 1 replacement cost vould be about $4,000,000.

, i e

I 3

i a

4 5

[-

p; CONCLUSIONS AND RECONMENDATIONS THROTTLE VALVE TESTING 1

Little,'if any, direct turbine component damage is attributed to throttle valve

-testing. Valve' sticking has been repcited as a problem on some units-(not at i BVPS-1). By following the vendor's recommendations during valve movements, incidents of valve sticking should be eliminated or avoided, t

GOVERNOR VALVE TESTING The dynamic instability of the HP turbine rotor leads to accumulated HP bearing t damage and HP turbine seal rubs during the governor valve testing time interval.

Saih,the vendor and the experience at BVPS-2 (with tilt-pad-bearings) support the conclusion the replacement of the sleeve type bearings at BVPS-1 vith tilt-pad bearings vill improve the stability sufficiently to mitigate the damage. ,

occurring. This modification vill be expensive and require dismantling the HP turbine.

INTERCEPT AND REHEAT VALVE TESTING Intercept and reheat stop valve testing has resulted in extensive damage to the HSR tank internals, which poses a direct threat to the main turbine from debris '

leaving the HSR tanks. Efforts have been made to correct design deficiencies in the MSR to_ mitigate the damage. During valve testing, the relative flows to the LP turbine' changes drastically,. depending on which set of valves are. closed.

Other than velocity and pressure changes observed at i the inlet to the MSRs and

• LP turbine, the following events were also observed to occur during the testing l Interval Sudden loss of 60-70 MV of electrical load i

Svings in rotor position and thrust bearits loads i y

Overloading of the last row turbine blades Heat load unbalance between Condenser A and B of about X 1.25 Feedvater heater' level alarms at 2nd, 4th, and 5th heaters l

i Situation created for high erosion rates in cross-over and cross-under pipes  !

The-propensity for serious turbine component damage is clearly present during  ;

the conduct of this test. Recommendations are to avoid, defer or decrease the frequency of this- testing until the results of this testing are better understood, or an alternative to testing is developed.

u

d

rr , .

f_ ;nlll = . .,lf 'f .

17 y :; " a) , . <

L:, np: .y s Eu h

.a m ,.

./

an +

Q M' ,

o ~

Y y2

o. . .. - -REFERENCES 4 >

E' s b l. ;.operadona11 SurveillanceITest . (OST) li26.1:

2. ; Technical Specification 3.3.4'(BVPS Unit.2)

,e  ?

No.l1" Main: Turbine' Generator. 6FEB87,-

..!W ,' <

> ;3. . Analysis: of HP Turbine Valv'e Cycling, .,

Bentley Nevada, 03/03/87

q. ,

p.b f 4 . -. Field Report, ' Unit . Maintenance . Contract, PGSD 'Vestinghousel Electric

,, , ' < Corporation,.06/20/88 u m ,

5.c Deahna,~S.1 T.', Beaver- Vall'ey . Power Station 'No. '17 and 'No. 2 Moisture g  ; Separator-Reheater Status Report, NED,- 08/23/88

4. .:p -

[n:

.6. . Letter, Vestinghouse Electric Corporation, V.TL.'Shoff,707/.14'/88-E^ 7. i Customer Advisory Letter, Vestinghouse Electric-Corporation,. 09/30/87-f *i

r. -

s

.i

-i If- 4 2 33 ->.

~

i

.s P

f &

• ( - i , ,t i 't i

,s is;' >

g. ' ,

yy , ,

• a

., - u' g

, . , L s.1 ;'. n ' ., ..

f.'.-', 'h ',

@ hun ? l ;f ib y; ;

e ,

, te , ..

.[

l i c' .I I.

N I .

Sins

,ik i li;- ,

).

I i

' y 4 5 I

d,i).'L ,

(G. , _

.= FIGURE NO. Al - -

1 STEAM CHEST - NOZZLE BLOCK --VALVE ARRANGEMENT <

m e

-(VIEW TOWARD GENERATOR FROM GOVERNOR ENO): -

i.

..;  ?',  :

i L

li, .!

y

@ GENERATOR END Q

~

m COVER v i s u ,

'M

. GEN.ENO y; ,

N0ZZLE '

a" j BLOCK i s -

b BASE- ,, ,s ,u ,

t h h 4

, @ GOVERNOR

@ 1

.l o

'o GV GOVERNOR' VALVE 4-3) -l j

i 7' GOVERNOR VALVE OPENING SEOUENCE PHYSICAL . LOCATION NUMBER l

i: ;q

, 4 l

t d' g

c. .l 9

N

. , ' FIGURE, NO. : A2 RECOMMENDEDLLOAD RANGE FOR TESTING' MAIN STEAM INLET VALVES 1 l

'1 l

1 I

e l

.)

H 1000 .. .. . . . .

. . .. .... . . . . - . . . _ .. _ _. _ . . - J 1

,. ... .j g

. _ . . =._ . . . . .

i g .

__ 3_ --

RECOMMENDED -

l~

AD RANGE 1 v

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... _. _ Ng .. _ . -

R VALVE W - . - - -- ,

Ntf.t, .

=

ANW

- TESTING

~

1 t-M IIN H HI I MIM AHt- A

<- nwu m ....__

...m mns vvunwi

~m m. ,. , ',-o, ,,m mu 7www wr vn i v i'.rw -%' h\wW AwW W ~ ~ " ~ ~ ' ~ ~~

5iIAGF HI AI111JG

(\MM

- .

• _ . ,J ggv W 800 ,, mum g . . _ _ m wxww f o, . . . _ y y  ;

-.. . . . - - - - - - am <mv TESTING 'IN g

W awmwv THIS AREA ~ - l

. , . _ _ __ _ __ zwwwy gtt J- . . . . . . . . . . . _ .__. ,

H ,. . . . . .. _ . . . _ . . . . -

ruwwsv INAD 3 g. .._. . . . . .. ^\w xw -LOAO NG ,

L -

-g O ..

,m'm"w"<ww ,

THE TES 7

- - , - 7, *, ,

my mw _

7 aw mww '

F- - . . . _ . _ ...

mswv $ :

.~ ~ . . ~ _ ~ l e

600 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 '70 80' 90. 100t l  % RATED LOAD t

-SEQUWmAL: GOVERNOR VALVE MODE:

y i

I i l

l

.l

+-

Reference:

OST 1.26.1 a >

l-

[

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

1 1

2 ,,

^l

• r t

FIGURE NO. %3

!._ l 1

L  ! q

< c .;

.dHV VALVC bSITto AY; START . or . OST 's.25.1 [('95*fe Loao)' .

NO. I - PARTj OPEN 108,000 LS (WT. or ROTDRI S'ETWEEN BatG& ~ l( 2)

I ROTOR ovsRM4NG eJOT' CONSIDERED = <{

NO 2 - R>LL. ,.optW - ,

l t

I i No.3 - FUL L OPG.h . 1 M,4 - CLOSED,(pogn)'~ Not.sLE CH4mesth ROTAT3ceJ (VIEW PROM OoV.EDO) .

. s. .. +. , .- .

c

,T I

. . .. . . . . _ . . . . . .I . . . .

y . . .

5 ..,,. q .. ,

p . ..

++  := >

y s.

...e . 1

.t...

y i.

.1-

. .s , . . . _ .

f

' l y

j . . n,3 cots (il . . 3 q ,,

y . . ..

. . ... .. . . . . . . RE SULTANT $ , . , ,. . 1

.. . . VERTICAL ... . ~ HORtWNTAL_ .. _ .

?

...... .. m.L. . . . . . . . . . . .

I2t@_.1o6.,.Q00t8 (t)+l%,231,L6 ; 7

. RaToR i.lo8, oco .L.S .' . . . ,

l . . U ).. t ..1 2 , % S I .L 8_ . I

. . + 34 2.11.. LS .

y

)

. . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . Rf SCLUTlON . , . , , , , , .

-i

. . - =. ,6 .

l.'

- IA*

r

.. O.* .40.

SRCs Lo9D 18,x18 -s

' . !, . . . ./. .

.. . / . . . a . . .. , ... .

AL I*** )' Sj6B* __. 23 9 LS/la'. l

, . . 7. . . .

. t 8 765' . _.O

, q. _.

pe)<n .

op**avamm sussp pa) secons. vg uGHTLY LO4DED- r-- O uwsmSLE i

t

I .- J 4 -

-l l 1. 's -l J n<g : l 4 l

l . ' l

i - :. , s 0',0 ( !! 5 3?O ,4?S ,'6!0

?!S , 9?0 ift. Air. , th . j s .'o '

'l

.! l f l-

f. . .. .  ;

l

/

l -. -.

P i

' FIGURE NO. A4'-

on-asiac #41

{I i- c l 1

l- 1  : .  :  : -

) -

.  : t J  !  : TYPICAL.RESPONSF OF CV-3 i

/ '

E t i _) i

p ,%  ; i DURING OST 1.26.1 ON HP l

! 4ir /:: '

l .= m t u 1<( !O t 9::d

i

' ROT'LR DISPLACEMENT =

, t 9 4 .

;

l ' !,

0.00t 0,4 5 ,6.0 ,7<s ,9f0 ,10

. in. :i.js.0 .

.j t i ,

i  :

- 1. t) p!  ! . ,

i -l;

.'ij

L - i .

. i.

pa's

.ao 41 .

. j .

r.  : .  !  :  : 1 n . .

I i  :

l q,

T  : '

[ \ .

Cai!LS g .

l {. {

j y . . . .

4,

.000t,Sjlev5 45 - 6 ,' O 7, S J

9. 0 , Ift. , lit. ,til . {5.0

" i i=r s

.i

• • l . -

.I .: -

.. t +

!aI } .

.\,c,.'-

I MitRI

l e40

• 'q '

?

g.f )

4

t

., i .

. 4

. . +

, 1

. 4

• r

! {)  ! . .  !  :

B = N !tLS l i 4

/

0 00 ,5 3. 0 ., 4 5 64 0 7, 5 9 O ', i f . tit. . til. j5.0 j

'i

j D6 2 .20 39 . .d  ! .!

l  !  !  :  !/ E -

!  ! j' y 3f.

1 *

. i

: l G, J

(.  : .

n -

8 1

...,o A! ,  :

h ,

i +

0 . 0 $ 1, :i,1 0 , 44 5- 4 0 ,7.5 9. 0 if t . tit . 1:i.j5.0 .

i;  :  :*  : 1 I  ;; 5 I . .

1  !  :

l f.

i :l M

[  !

at YF g

i fk hjI .

. .. 1, m . ..... . ,...... ,<.

Vf ~b~ 0( k ,

l

,m. . , , . , . .

15 -

i- ,

t e s'-as . al,14 m i

• *  : + *

.. %p j

.1{

FIGURE NO. A4.1 s ,

g

- j!

j t

i -  :

. i : ,) . ,

. i  :

I 1 i

TYPICAL RESPONSE OF GV-2' c= MIL: i f

/

6, 0 - 9, 0 -s t- tu 10 . j5.0 DURING OST 1.26.1 ON HP -1

.0008, p 3, 0 4. 5 7, 5 . .

u  ;

ROTOR DISPLACEMENT i 1

i j

)

I (- ,

i*

i i -

d%W i '

y 4-g

- m-

./  :

b og'as,th :4 4- l i _

./

i Vi fI Of.i i il I

i B=ilLl l *

p 0.00 1 3 . 10 . ,1:1. j5.0

- 5

,e 0 :,4,5 ,6.3  :

• l -,7,5 ,9.0/ ,.10[

/q i

e

I / 'l if i !! I i i L A /1// i nh

-l '

1  :*

• 06-2{e20e43 '

i .

l l *

!  :. i

! l

)  : l

.i

,i; :-, )  ;'

Asill :

e l

l i 0.00 l 5.,f0,4,5,6,0 - 7. S , 9, 0 10 . ,1 L'I.(5.0

0. [7

o  :

\s  :

r, s-n 1 .

f 8 <

l 1

-)  :  :  :

I (

/

06-26'e'24 : 43 l .m g:  ; , , ,

f g

'J

.i i  %:%  :

i 2*\ LY\ / I

't-j .iI j # $  !/ -ij C=ilL! '

i

\1 i -i 9, 0 ,111 ,ta. ,13. (5.0 J

.0001.'l 3, 0 4. S , 6, 0 ~ 7, S o

N,  ! -

I l j g-

. . )  !

04-24 . 11.142 I  !  !  !  !  :

k y QN f

.. 1<, , 3 t

'l \ i "s*

• i 8 1 m gag e , eg,s,ae,ris,*ge,so. g ,s n. , s a , g s .le 4

If 'I

. 4 FIGURE NO..A4,? -;t

-l .i  ! l, TYPICAL RESPONSE OF GV-1

"* I" 3 DURING OST.1.26.1 ON HP d _$

) -

6 3, 0 4, 5 ' 6, 0 7<5! /a0 .p.

i th .

l In.j5.0 ROTOR DISPLACEMENT

'l* 8 0 1 '

l .

l h- , . . .

l. '

. i  :  !

I s

96;I6 t98!7 ; .

^

i 1

• l . l

. .,._ -- g ,  ;

. . .c

. '. i.

centL1 . ,  : i -t l .. . _ . - _  ;- . ..4-.- ..r-

3. o 4,5. 6<0 7.5 9.0 10 In. ,10.is.0

.ooo I,I1 >

] !

i

m L_ .

~\

06-es i{gp :

44 h '

!.)  :  :.  :.  ;

i.

. i. .

' I ,

. . . . s

i

! l l 2

8'h3 . i d

i

[ ! ,

,- 3) , 4. 5 0.00 1,' 6.0 ,7.5 ,9,0 ,10. ,ta. In.j5.0

(~I 1 . .

l ' 06-26 .

't4'  ! .t-

. 5

• : i l , . . . '

: . . . t

%-w i  :

:  : 4 l:  :  :

2. w.w- i

/

l 1

A m h. ! L  :

- 'M% i .

.r _

QU,t j5.0 1

l- 0.0 0 t < l , 3, ,,

F,4 5 o, u /,5 9-0 , it .

1.

j  :

. 6 l '-

c,- .

i

. (d..  :.

1 I e6126. a t.s 45__ :

1 I

1 1

. ,r, e FIGURE NO.'AS. ,

if 9 J B E N T L Y.: PLO7 HO: -

"; #  : NEVADA 001:

. PLANT ID:- BEAYER-VALLEY p ': .1  : CORP.-

TRAIN ID: UNIT #1

~

MACHINE 1D: HP l L{ ;7; ~'; p, .

, , PROBE- # 1 ID: = , 1XD (RELATIVE) :l' PROBE'#2 ID: 1YD (RELATIVE)'

x .

ROH: 1 DATE: 6 FEB 87 TIME: 4: 55 PM

-g

., ' i 8 .

K PROBE +t- 1 h j

, 4 t- '

p PROBE #2 j - 1 x / -

s

P / . ,

~

/ 6(

s .-

i

. k.

~

l

)

,I .{

2 . , , .

i 4 l3 .

'i L '

/, 1;

.s

, h

- y i

'iHAFT' CENTERLINE' PLOT

"- BEARING CLEARANCE =30.0 MILS

• PLOT RADIUS'=20.00 MILS / 4.00-VOLTS PROBE #1 SCALE FACTOR'= 200 mVeMIL t TIC' SPACING = 1.00 MILS PROBE #2 SCALE FACTOR =:2001mV/ MIL }

' DC VALUES (volts)

-9 RPM TIME- PROBE #1 ' PROBE #2 REMARKS .l h-'

d -

'1 20-50 -14.13 -12.74 PREYIOUS DATA-12 SEP* $6' l '2 l 1300 -13.39 -10.63 100 % LOAD-12~ SEPT 86 s ,

-11.83 -810 MW GROSS-6 FEB $7 0 R 3 1900 1605 -12.83 4 IS00. 1655 -13.10 -11.45 #1 GOV VALVE-6 FEB 87 l b 5 1800 .1655 -13.25 -10.00 #2 GOV VALVE-6 FEB $7 6 1800' 1655 ~12.10 -7.90 m3 GOV VALYE-6 FEB 87

? 1800 1655 , -12.90 -10.75 #1 THROTTLE-6 FEB 87 B= 1800 1655 -12.65 -11.65 #2 THROTTLE-6 FSB $7-

1. 3 THROTTLE-6 FEB $7 6  ? 1000 1655 -12.95 -10.05 I .) '

10 1400- 1655 -12.85 -11.65 #4 THROTTLE-6 FEB B-(

, 1

a. .

3 FIGURE-C1

, .s

~ CROSS - DVER' & CROSS - UNDER PIPE - ARRANGEMENT ' l

- RELATIVE CROSS - 0VER PIPE FLOW DURING VALVE :- TESTING

( N o o ,

H.P. TURBINE O O ,

( / ,

, o t

i,

. :k l,

t Os O '

M MSR P- MSR

. -1B' '

-1A'  ;

' t o o c  ;

-l m v ss #

a W

MS"

1. tnR C ,

I

lC Q O J

v v GEN.END ,

t i

!,4 9 -

, (l'  ;

!" .i - 19

-1 A.

FIGURE C1.1-

. . CROSS -OVER &. CROSS - UNDER PIPE ARRANGEMENTc RELATIVE CROSS OVER PIPE . FLOW. DURING.

VALVE TESTING- (TEsr IIRL) f S .I 220.7 219.'8 -

(201.4) (201.4)'-

H.P. TURBINE- .,

215.6 232.2 g (200.9) (200.6)

% J'

L t

[h O MSR MSR q

-18 -1A L FLOW =0 I FLOW =1.69 m

C (17 D ) CLOSED-1 s- sr i

.9 MSR l ntR -1C-

""l l 4 "' ""l- 4' C .v O (166.9) ,

> GEN.END NOTES

1. All' pressure'in PSIG.

2. Values in parenthesis are for steady-state conditions at 95% load.

3. Steady-state Flow is 1.00 for each X-0 pipe. ,

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

o, .,

.p, .

. FIGURE C1.3 E CROSS -0VER & CROSS. - UNDER PIPE-. ARRANGEMENT n RELATIVE -CROSS - OVER : PIPE FLOW DURING-VALVE TESTING- (TEST-2IRL)

( h' 217.1 .232.6 '

, (201.4)

O C - ( 201. 4 ) : ,

H.P. TURBINE-222.0:

', 222.9 g g (200.6)

(200.9)

% )

t i

O O s

, MSR P. MSR

-18 -1A )

190.3 '

FLOW =1.ll2 A FLOWal.112 g

-i (b.2) l b[ -)

t 4

L Maa Me -V 143.1 I/R, Msa

-1C o lh FLOW =1.714 A g2 FLOW =0 l

0 v vm O l

(166.9) CLOSED u . .'

i- g GEN.END i

I  !

p . NOTES

1. All pressure in PSIG.

2. Value in parenthesis are for steady-state conditions at 95% load.

'3. Steady-state Flow is 1.00 for each X-0 pipe.

p- _m - , 7 n .  :

!! ,, U

e.  ; . i,

' FIGURE C1.3 l. ,

fh.*be '

@ CROSS! -e OVER ' & - CROSS - UNDER PIPET ARRANGEMENT-B RELATIVE CROSS'- OVER PIPE FLOW DURING '

VALVE TESTING' (TEST IIRR)-

j

(, N _

l 221.4'- 220.0-

'(201.4)~

O C (201.4);

, H.P. TURBINE

- 214.1 230.6 (200.9) O- C (200.6) 'i

(  % )

I tj O O a MSR P- MSR l

-1A~ <

FLOW =O 2 FLOWal '.' 8 f> 6 3 C O a CLOSED (171.2). q l

.Y eM ..

u, aj O y

- R P- MSR

' 1C FLOW =1.107 FLOW =1.107 C y O (166.9) v v GEN.END 1

. NOTES

'l'. All pressures in PSIG.

~2. Values in parenthesis are for steady-state conditions at 95% load.

3..9teady-state Flow is'1.00 for each X-0 pipe.

o 22 -

~

, i 5

FIGURE C1.4 ,'

1 CROSS - OVER & CROSC - UNDER PIPE ' ARRANGEMENT ]

RELATIVE CROSS - DVER PIPE FLOW OURING )

VALVE TESTING (TcSt 2 Inn) l

[ \

236.3 218.9 g (203.4)

(201.4)

H.P. TURBINE 221.6 g 222.0 (200.9) g (200.6) t ( )

D [\

MSR P- MSR

-1B -1A ,

FLOW =1.10 FLOW =1.10 (1 I 2) t v .v. 4 l

R P- MSR

-lC FLOW =0 PLOW =1.75 g g m l CLOSED (1 9) v v  :

GEN.END I-NOTES'

l. 1. All pressures in PSIG.

2. Values in parenthesis are for steady-state conditions at 956 load. 1

3. Steady-state Flow is 1.00 for each X-0 pipe.

4. .,

. 5 g " 5 . 8

<3ap y N S ng3?.g*t . S Ez~ "g;o om3 Lp ga y h @g ,.$ ,! E h ao"<>Gn gmd=

~: . - 4 o- g p vl

, k ' D. . pi ., I, 0 ,

t e

r1

, .l -

,., kwy' k1 I - ,

1 5

5, y

M0

_. , 6 0 j

p J r, f '

g6- -g .

r '),l; L, (

1 n6

, _ ,' - ( X)ss . b f e"'g 3 i ' 5-b '

k- 3 yC. - t -

r # .,.

\ r' . ?

wg y 'J - ,

v .

0 0

9 .'

r @j r,

~

5 _1JO e- ,0 M"'

e.

d 6 c s

- - e '

,+

l

~ '

'0 L L

I C

0

., 0 1 8 '

8 h,

1T

[; '

s l - 2_ +r Ja- , '

0 0'>

7, l 5 li e- '

I

_  : a '

h,,, , :

0 ,(' 0 0

0 0

7 7

0 I

n 7

m"

p, h

~

, ~ .a '

0f l

- l 5

5 4 u,

_ l

~

L 9

'9 I

~

5 l' t 5 0

- 0 r.

% 0

- 0 6 l 6

4 ~

TD t t i

s t

, [ f4 j , - 1 1

l T  ;' S s I i

$ S . :" T T' z.

5 I

Z I -W

. Z I' AI0 7f T A A

T' 9

'r Rl95 vi0 Q

W A

G ,  ;

t R]5 E W

A G

E 5

3 E f f

u-sv E Al5 s 'H I

E I

?

f j

(

i l

4 l

N

? 0 0

{

L 0 0

t o

\

0(F

- 0 0

4 I

l 4 4 5 5

?5.

l 8

h< 8 5

l i

8 i

t s

5 ,

[ 5 '

f i

t 3 - j ' l

, )

0

• 'r#'

- 0

/

0 0

l i

_ l 0 #[3 i 0 C ~ a 3 J 3

-V t f, C- t e

t 8 L\O. 8 8 5 i i

5 q5 f 1.

f

( i

{t j

-. ll ll , f l l l llI ,l!ll1:jlllll c

t TABLE B1 ESTIMATED STEAM FLOW RELATIONSHIPS DURING TESTING OF THROTTLE VALVES (LB./HR.)

95% LOAD (NO.1 TV CLOSED) l FLOV TO --y>

TOTAL FLOW NO. 1 GV NO. 2 GV

• NO. 3 GV NO. 4 GV FLOUS

!' FROM (CLOSED) THR. VALVES me NO. 1 TV 0- O.

(CLOSED)

NO. 2 TV 2.0 X 10 6 2.0 X 10 6 6

NO. 3 TV 2.4 X 10 0 4.0 X 10 6 6.4 X 10 (MAXIMUM)

NO. 4 TV 2.0 X 10 6 0 :2.0 X 10 6 1-TOTAL 0 FLOWS 2.4 X 10 6 4.0 X 10 6 4.0 X 10 6 0 10.4 X-10 i

GOV. VALVES l

• If two (2) TV supply (1) GV, the flows are assumed to be supplied equally l from each TV.

i i

TABII B2 ESTIMATED STEAM FLOV RELATIONSHIPS DURING TESTING OF THROTTLE VALVES (LB./HR.) -

95% LOAD (NO. 3 TV Cie!ID) i FLOV TO -->

TOTAL FLOV NO. 1 GV NO. 2 GV

• NO. 3 GV NO. 4 GV FLOVS 4

i FROM (CLOSED) THR.' VALVES Sr NO. 1 TV 2.4 X 10 0 4.0 y 10 6 6.4 X 10 6-(MAXIMUM)

NO. 2 TV 2.0 X 10 6 2.0 X'10 0 ,

NO. 3 TV 0 0' -

(CLOSED) i 4 6 ,

NO. 4 TV 2.0 X 10 0 -2.0 'X.10 TOTAL 2 PLOVS 2.4 X 10 6 4.0 X 10 6 4.0 X 10 6 0 10.4 X 10 '

GOV. VALVES

• If two (2) TV supply (1) GV, the flows are assumed to be supplied equally =

from each TV.

r

r 1 c

.s

?

APPENDIX A CALCULATED HP ROTOR LOADS AT BEARING NO. 1 AND NO. 2 DUE TO HP CONTROL STAGE OPERATION  ;

r l

(1) Power Developed - Torque x Speed of Shaft .

I Torque - Radius x Force j (2) Power Developed, KV = Force (Lb.) x Radius (Ft.) x Speed (RPM) x 2YP

.44247 (Pt.-Lb.) -

(KV-Min.)

(2') Power Developed, KV - Steam Flov (Lb./Hr.) x Energy to Vork (BTU /Lb.)

3412 (BTV/KV-Hr.) ,

Substitute (2) in (2')

(3) Force x Radius x Speed x 2?? = (Steam Flov x Energy to Vork) 44247 3412 Force ' Steam Flov x Energy to Vork x 44247 [

(4)- =

Radius x Speed x 277 x 3412

= 7042 x Steam Flov x Energy to Vork 3412 x Radius x Speed

= 7042 x KV Radius x Speed 1

$I Shaft Speed - 1800 RPM Radius of Stage = 2.725 Ft. (32.70 In.) ,

l-(4') Force (Lb.) = 7042 x KV* = 1.435 KV, (Force Acting at Centroid 2.725 x 1800 of Nozzle Arc) l

• For Estimating KV, See Appendix A1

-i-  !

, APPENDIX Al

^

CALCULATED OUTPUT (KV) 0F IIP ColfrROL STAGE ACTUAL PLAlff DATA - 95% LOAD FOR OST 1.26.1 i

REFERENCE SOURCE 8 Steam Cen. Flov, FPfl 11,097,917 P-250 Computer 9 Blov-Dovn Flov, PPil  ?  :

10 Reheater Flov, PPH 722,339 IleatBalance-@

11 Throttle Flov, PPH 10,375,578 O 12 Stem Leakage, PPil 409 H@eatBalance-@ ]

13 No. of Gov. Valves Open #2 + 13 Full #1 Part. 94 Closed l' 14 Nozzle Flov, PPH 7,988,635 2,386,534 Trial cale. **

15 Throttle Press., PSIA C44 844 P-250 or VL i 16 Gov.A P% (1.00-AP/100) 0.980 (2%) 0.777 (22.5%) Assumed or Derived {

17 Steam Chest Press., PSIA 827.1 656. (at Nozzle Chamber) 18 Inlet Enthalpy, B/Lb. 1197.1 1197.1 Table -

19 Inlet Moisture, % 0.0 0.8 Assumed 0% "

r 20 Inlet Entropy, B/Lb./'F 1.415 1.431 Table f 21 Exit Enthalpy, B/Lb. 1157.5 1177.5 Table 22 Exit Holsture, % 6.2 3.7 Table 23 Exit Press.(1st.Stg), PSIA 516.8 516.8 250 or VB 24 Pressure Ratio,f 1.600 1.270 25 Isentropic Drop, B/Lb.4 H 39.6 19.6 26 FlowCoefficient,/ 0.930 0.700 AssumedCurve(/ vsp) t 27 Nozzle lleight Corr., Ht 1.050 1.050 Assumed 1.040 1.040 Assumed 28 HolstureCorr.,gm 2 50.3 Table 29 K-Factor Lb/Il-In -Lb/In 50.3 30 31 Nozzle !!eight, In. 3.400 3.400 Ref. 739-J-791 '

32 Stage Hean Dia., In. 65.400 65.400 Ref. 739-J-791 Nozzle Gauging, p 0.270 0.270 Ass

-33 r WheelVelocity,Ft./Sec.d 513.8 515.8 V= x Spee /229.1 34 '

35 Isentropic Vel. Ft/Sec, C 1408.3 990.8 = 223.8 2 1.

Velocity Ratio,V' O.365 0.518 43 36 37 Percent Admission 50 25 2

38 Effective Nozzle Area,In 189.078 94.539 $ x7fx @ x @ x @ ,

p 39 40 StageEfficiency,%/100] 0.800 0.880 Est e vs ( )  ;

i 41- Energy to Vork, B/Lb. 31.68 17.25 3 x x 3412.75 42 Output, KV 74,173 12,065 43 44 Forces on Rotor Hid-Span, 106,438 17,300 See Belov *

• Lb. s 45 Forces on Rotor 225' CV 135' CV 12 0' clock - Zero' ,

l Direction, *

• Forces on Rotor Hid-Span @ = 1.435 x @ Lb.

• • Nozzle Flov = @ x @ x @ x @ x @ x @, Lb./llr.

I

. .