PWRRM

pwrrm@retaqs.com

244 discussions

Start a nNew thread

Paul V. Gurney/NAESCO is out of the office.
by paul_gurney＠fpl.com 17 Oct '07

17 Oct '07

I will be out of the office starting 10/15/2007 and will not return until 10/22/2007.

1 0

Rod Insertion Limits vs. Shutdown Margin
by BRYSON, DAMON V 03 Oct '07

03 Oct '07

This question is for the Westinghouse crowd. We at VC Summer have recently found some inconsistencies between our Rod Insertion Limit (RIL) Lo-Lo alarm and our RIL in the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR). For all control banks besides the lead bank, the installed RIL alarm setpoint is at 213 steps, while our COLR limit is 230 steps. The COLR limit is consistent with our reload shutdown margin analysis, which assumes all rods except the lead bank at 230 steps (the all rods out position). As far as we can tell, our alarm has always been set to 213 for all previous cycles. In previous cycles the COLR only listed the lead bank limit, but no limits for other banks. We placed that limit in the COLR based on our analysis assumptions. Do other plants use similar setpoints? I know many plants have repositioning strategies that require rod motion during the cycle, but our plant does not. I also haven't found any mention of the RIL alarm in the Westinghouse reload design process checklists. My control room operators want some justification for this discrepancy, since I just taught them in our last requal session that the purpose of the RIL alarm is to verify you have shutdown margin. Thanks for any help you can give... Damon Bryson dbryson(a)scana.com 803-345-4814

2 1

RE: [Pwrrm] Rod Insertion Limits vs. Shutdown Margin
by ALDAY, CLINT L 02 Oct '07

02 Oct '07

Waterford (CE NSSS) has the alarms set same as COLR limits, and if the COLR changes we change the alarm. Clint Alday -----Original Message----- From: pwrrm-bounces(a)retaqs.com [mailto:pwrrm-bounces@retaqs.com] On Behalf Of BRYSON, DAMON V Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 4:23 PM To: PWR Reactivity Management Subject: [Pwrrm] Rod Insertion Limits vs. Shutdown Margin This question is for the Westinghouse crowd. We at VC Summer have recently found some inconsistencies between our Rod Insertion Limit (RIL) Lo-Lo alarm and our RIL in the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR). For all control banks besides the lead bank, the installed RIL alarm setpoint is at 213 steps, while our COLR limit is 230 steps. The COLR limit is consistent with our reload shutdown margin analysis, which assumes all rods except the lead bank at 230 steps (the all rods out position). As far as we can tell, our alarm has always been set to 213 for all previous cycles. In previous cycles the COLR only listed the lead bank limit, but no limits for other banks. We placed that limit in the COLR based on our analysis assumptions. Do other plants use similar setpoints? I know many plants have repositioning strategies that require rod motion during the cycle, but our plant does not. I also haven't found any mention of the RIL alarm in the Westinghouse reload design process checklists. My control room operators want some justification for this discrepancy, since I just taught them in our last requal session that the purpose of the RIL alarm is to verify you have shutdown margin. Thanks for any help you can give... Damon Bryson dbryson(a)scana.com 803-345-4814

1 0

Reactivity Trending Question
by Michael.Fanguy＠dom.com 05 Jul '07

05 Jul '07

Surry Power Station is interested if PWR sites classify grid spikes as a Reactivity Management Issue. Is there a criteria that you apply such as whether or not it affects Tave or secondary parameters? Thanks in advance for your feedback. Michael J. Fanguy Nuclear Analysis & Fuel Lead Reactor Engineer Surry Power Station Email: Michael.Fanguy(a)Dom.com Phone: 757-365-2155 Pager #: 3453 ----------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message contains information which may be legally confidential and/or privileged and does not in any case represent a firm ENERGY COMMODITY bid or offer relating thereto which binds the sender without an additional express written confirmation to that effect. The information is intended solely for the individual or entity named above and access by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you.

2 1

Blocking Diode Removal
by Michael.Fanguy＠dom.com 07 May '07

07 May '07

Surry is planning on implementing Westinghouse TB-00-003-R0 (Stationary/Movable Gripper Blocking Diodes) in our next outages. For plants who have removed blocking diodes from Rod Control, did you see increases in rod drop times? Were they in order with the 10 msec stated in the Tech Bulletin? If not what was the increase? Michael J. Fanguy Nuclear Analysis & Fuel Lead Reactor Engineer Surry Power Station Email: Michael.Fanguy(a)Dom.com Phone: 757-365-2155 Pager #: 3453 ----------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message contains information which may be legally confidential and/or privileged and does not in any case represent a firm ENERGY COMMODITY bid or offer relating thereto which binds the sender without an additional express written confirmation to that effect. The information is intended solely for the individual or entity named above and access by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you.

1 0

Secondary Calorimetric Feedback Needed (PWR) - Heat Balance (BWR)
by WILLETT, JOSEPH E 06 Feb '07

06 Feb '07

To All, I apologize, this is a repeat Request, but the HIT Team I'm working on needs more specific information regarding secondary calorimetric calculations. I could use a reply by February 15th. Fort Calhoun Station is currently experiencing 3-5 MWth swings (peak-to-peak) in a one hour period to on our secondary calorimetric calculation. This last outage we replaced both S/Gs and refurbished our FW regulation valves. Prior to this outage our swings were normally 1 MW over 4 hour period. We attempt to keep power at a corporate goal of 1498 MWth (1500 MWth is our rated power level). We do not see these swings on the NI or Delta-T power indications that follow the secondary calorimetric swings. We have not implemented Appendix K using ultrasonic flow measurement for Main feedwater as of yet. Our Question(s) 1) What are other plants goals/expectations for maintaining power level? (=/- MW or goal); -How easy is it to maintain? -Is there a band within which you operate? What is it? Is it maintained? -What procedure or guidance is provided to your operators? -Can I get a copy of the procedure? 2) How is your secondary calculation performed? (Averaging Inputs, Instantaneous values, combination) -Is it a module or program on your plant computer or is it an off-line routine? -What is the frequency of the calculations utilized? (1 sec, 1 minute, 10 minutes 30 minutes, etc...)? -What is the frequency of the scan rate for input parameters utilized? (1 sec, 1 minute, 10 minutes 30 minutes, etc...)? Does it vary by parameter? Are they averaged, and for how long? (30 seconds, 60 seconds, etc...) -What is there BASIS for the calculation? Is there supporting documentation? What is it? -What frequency do the operators control to? (2 minute average, 10 minute average, 30 minute average, etc....) 3) Are your temperature and flow transmitters set specifically for this calculation? (dampening or bias settings) 4) Are any of your control loops (Feedwater) used in the secondary calorimetric calculation? 5) Have you had any issues related to power swings or related to your secondary calorimetric? 6) Who has ownership/control of your program/logic? System Engineering, Design Engineering, Operations, Reactor Engineering or some other department? J. E. Willett ---------------------------------------------------- Joseph E. Willett, P.E. Principal Reactor Engineer-Fuel Nuclear Operations Division E-mail: jwillett(a)oppd.com Omaha Public Power District Phone: (402) 533-7213 P.O. Box 99 Pager: (402) 561-3899 Ft. Calhoun, NE 68023-0390 FAX: (402) 533-6747 Mail Station: FC-1-1 Plant ---------------------------------------------------- -------- This e-mail contains Omaha Public Power District's confidential and proprietary information and is for use only by the intended recipient. Unless explicitly stated otherwise, this e-mail is not a contract offer, amendment, nor acceptance. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

2 1

Paul V. Gurney/NAESCO is out of the office.
by paul_gurney＠fpl.com 06 Feb '07

06 Feb '07

I will be out of the office starting 02/05/2007 and will not return until 02/09/2007.

1 0

Secondary Calorimetric Feedback Needed (PWR) - Heat Balance (BWR)
by WILLETT, JOSEPH E 06 Feb '07

06 Feb '07

To All, I apologize, this is a repeat Request, but the HIT Team I'm working on needs more specific information regarding secondary calorimetric calculations. I could use a reply by February 15th. Fort Calhoun Station is currently experiencing 3-5 MWth swings (peak-to-peak) in a one hour period to on our secondary calorimetric calculation. This last outage we replaced both S/Gs and refurbished our FW regulation valves. Prior to this outage our swings were normally 1 MW over 4 hour period. We attempt to keep power at a corporate goal of 1498 MWth (1500 MWth is our rated power level). We do not see these swings on the NI or Delta-T power indications that follow the secondary calorimetric swings. We have not implemented Appendix K using ultrasonic flow measurement for Main feedwater as of yet. Our Question(s) 1) What are other plants goals/expectations for maintaining power level? (=/- MW or goal); -How easy is it to maintain? -Is there a band within which you operate? What is it? Is it maintained? -What procedure or guidance is provided to your operators? -Can I get a copy of the procedure? 2) How is your secondary calculation performed? (Averaging Inputs, Instantaneous values, combination) -Is it a module or program on your plant computer or is it an off-line routine? -What is the frequency of the calculations utilized? (1 sec, 1 minute, 10 minutes 30 minutes, etc...)? -What is the frequency of the scan rate for input parameters utilized? (1 sec, 1 minute, 10 minutes 30 minutes, etc...)? Does it vary by parameter? Are they averaged, and for how long? (30 seconds, 60 seconds, etc...) -What is there BASIS for the calculation? Is there supporting documentation? What is it? -What frequency do the operators control to? (2 minute average, 10 minute average, 30 minute average, etc....) 3) Are your temperature and flow transmitters set specifically for this calculation? (dampening or bias settings) 4) Are any of your control loops (Feedwater) used in the secondary calorimetric calculation? 5) Have you had any issues related to power swings or related to your secondary calorimetric? 6) Who has ownership/control of your program/logic? System Engineering, Design Engineering, Operations, Reactor Engineering or some other department? J. E. Willett ------------------------------------------------- Joseph E. Willett, P.E. Principal Reactor Engineer, Nuclear Operations E-mail: jwillett(a)oppd.com <mailto:jwillett@oppd.com%20> OR Omaha Public Power District Phone: (402) 533-7213 P.O. Box 399 Pager: (402) 561-3899 Ft. Calhoun, NE 68023-0390 FAX: (402) 533-6747 Mail Station: FC-1-1 Plant This e-mail contains Omaha Public Power District's confidential and proprietary information and is for use only by the intended recipient. Unless explicitly stated otherwise, this e-mail is not a contract offer, amendment, nor acceptance. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

1 0

Re: [Respvr] Question on Power Range NI Replacement
by Bob_Tomonto＠fpl.com 31 Jan '07

31 Jan '07

Michael, We often have to replace power range detectors during refueling outages. Turkey Point has a history of water leakage into the excore detector wells resulting in degradation to the excore detectors. We recently changed to titanium housed detectors on the intermediate range and power range detectors to improve the lifetime (more corrosion resistant). Procedurally we require the Power Range High Flux Trip setpoint to be set at 55% and only after acceptable NIS Calibration of all the detectors (as developed from a flux map at 48%), do we reset the high flux trip setpoint to 108%. If I can be of any help, please do not hesitate to call me at (305) 246-7327. Bob Tomonto FPL Turkey Point Reactor Engineering Michael_Fanguy@do m.com To: respvr(a)keffective.com, pwrrm(a)keffective.com Sent by: cc: Robert_A._Wright(a)dom.com respvr-bounces@re Subject: [Respvr] Question on Power Range NI Replacement taqs.com 01/31/2007 07:38 AM Please respond to "RE Supervisors" This email is being sent out for North Anna Reactor Engineering. North Anna (3 loop Westinghouse) is planning to replace a PRNI in their next outage. The question is do other utilities put any special measure in place for startup due to the new detector? Are your Hi Flux Trips extremely low? Is the startup performed with the NI channel in TRIP? Any feedback would be appreciated. Please send your responses to Robert_A._Wright(a)dom.com. Nuclear Analysis & Fuel Lead Reactor Engineer Surry Power Station Email: Michael_Fanguy(a)Dom.com Phone: 757-365-2155 Pager #: 3453 ----------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message contains information which may be legally confidential and/or privileged and does not in any case represent a firm ENERGY COMMODITY bid or offer relating thereto which binds the sender without an additional express written confirmation to that effect. The information is intended solely for the individual or entity named above and access by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you. _______________________________________________ Respvr mailing list Respvr(a)retaqs.com http://www.keffective.com/mailman/listinfo/respvr

1 0

Question on Power Range NI Replacement
by Michael_Fanguy＠dom.com 31 Jan '07

31 Jan '07

This email is being sent out for North Anna Reactor Engineering. North Anna (3 loop Westinghouse) is planning to replace a PRNI in their next outage. The question is do other utilities put any special measure in place for startup due to the new detector? Are your Hi Flux Trips extremely low? Is the startup performed with the NI channel in TRIP? Any feedback would be appreciated. Please send your responses to Robert_A._Wright(a)dom.com. Nuclear Analysis & Fuel Lead Reactor Engineer Surry Power Station Email: Michael_Fanguy(a)Dom.com Phone: 757-365-2155 Pager #: 3453 ----------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message contains information which may be legally confidential and/or privileged and does not in any case represent a firm ENERGY COMMODITY bid or offer relating thereto which binds the sender without an additional express written confirmation to that effect. The information is intended solely for the individual or entity named above and access by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you.

1 0

← Newer
1
...
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
...
25
Older →

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

PWRRM