PWRRM

pwrrm@retaqs.com

244 discussions

FW: [Pwrrm] Reactor Power Control, Expectaions and Performance
by BELL, WILLIAM H 15 Jan '07

15 Jan '07

Joseph: The following is the V. C. Summer Station response to your questions: 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? The attached file Ops @ the Licensed Limit.doc contains the guidance our operators use for maintaining reactor power as close to the licensed limit (2900 MWT) as practicable. I have also included a 24 hour plot of data that illustrates our reactor power and feedwater flow rate. As you will see we typically have minute to minute swings in feedwater flow rate based calculated reactor power in the range of 3 to 5 MWT. 2) How is your secondary calculation performed? (Averaging Inputs, Instantaneous values, combination) Is it a module or program on you plant computer or is it an off-line routine? Our calorimetric power calculation is feedwater flow rate based. Our new plant process computer now performs this calculation once a second. However, many of the inputs are one minute average values of one second instantaneous values. The one minute averaging is a holdover from our old (slow) computer that we have had no reason to change. The calculation does not need to be performed at a one second rate but we do it anyway because our new computer can easily handle it. 3) Are your temperature and flow transmitters set specifically for this calculation? (dampening or bias settings) All of the instruments that provide input to the calorimetric are calibrated once every 18 months. Most also undergo quarterly Op tests. However, the instruments themselves have no special dampening or bias settings. All averaging is done by the plant computer. 4) Are any of your control loops (Feedwater) used in the secondary calorimetric calculation? Our feedwater flow rate transmitters used by the calorimetric computer program also provide protection and control functions as well. The steam generator level control system uses these transmitters as does our reactor protection system. 5) Have you had any issues related to power swings or related to your secondary calorimetric? Yes. As you can see in the attached plot of power and feedwater flow rate we occasionally encounter spikes in feed flow in our A loop. We are currently trying to understand the cause of these spikes but so far the solution eludes us. Bill Bell Chemical Engineer Reactor Engineering V. C. Summer Station 803-345-4389 ________________________________ From: pwrrm-bounces(a)retaqs.com [mailto:pwrrm-bounces@retaqs.com] On Behalf Of WILLETT, JOSEPH E Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 4:01 PM To: pwrrm(a)retaqs.com Cc: BLESSIE, WILLIAM J Subject: [Pwrrm] Reactor Power Control, Expectaions and Performance 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 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? 2) How is your secondary calculation performed? (Averaging Inputs, Instantaneous values, combination) Is it a module or program on you plant computer or is it an off-line routine? 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? J. E. Willett "Only those who will risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go." T.S. Eliot (1888-1965) ---------------------------------------------------- Joseph E. Willett, P.E. Principal Reactor Engineer, Nuclear Operations E-mail: jwillett(a)oppd.com <mailto:jwillett@oppd.com%20> OR Joseph_Willett(a)hotmail.com <mailto:jwillett@uswest.net%20> 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. _______________________________________________ PWRRM mailing list PWRRM(a)retaqs.com http://www.keffective.com/mailman/listinfo/pwrrm

1 0

Reactor Power Control, Expectaions and Performance
by WILLETT, JOSEPH E 11 Jan '07

11 Jan '07

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 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? 2) How is your secondary calculation performed? (Averaging Inputs, Instantaneous values, combination) Is it a module or program on you plant computer or is it an off-line routine? 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? J. E. Willett "Only those who will risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go." T.S. Eliot (1888-1965) ---------------------------------------------------- Joseph E. Willett, P.E. Principal Reactor Engineer, Nuclear Operations E-mail: jwillett(a)oppd.com <mailto:jwillett@oppd.com%20> OR Joseph_Willett(a)hotmail.com <mailto:jwillett@uswest.net%20> 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.

2 1

RE: [Pwrrm] Reactor Power Control, Expectaions and Performance
by ALDAY, CLINT L 11 Jan '07

11 Jan '07

1. 99.98%. We find it very easy to operate there and normally maintain based on a twenty minute smoothed value (automatically calculated by COLSS). 2. Combination. We use COLSS (Core Operating Limits Supervisory System) which calculates secondary calorimetric every thirty seconds and primary calorimetric every second. Turbine first stage pressure power is also updated once per second. 3. Don't know. 4. No. 5. No. Clint Alday Waterford 3 -----Original Message----- From: pwrrm-bounces(a)retaqs.com [mailto:pwrrm-bounces@retaqs.com] On Behalf Of WILLETT, JOSEPH E Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:01 PM To: pwrrm(a)retaqs.com Cc: BLESSIE, WILLIAM J Subject: [Pwrrm] Reactor Power Control, Expectaions and Performance 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 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? 2) How is your secondary calculation performed? (Averaging Inputs, Instantaneous values, combination) Is it a module or program on you plant computer or is it an off-line routine? 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? J. E. Willett "Only those who will risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go." T.S. Eliot (1888-1965) ---------------------------------------------------- Joseph E. Willett, P.E. Principal Reactor Engineer, Nuclear Operations E-mail: jwillett(a)oppd.com <mailto:jwillett@oppd.com%20> OR Joseph_Willett(a)hotmail.com <mailto:jwillett@uswest.net%20> 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

Surry Reactivity Management Self Assessment Additional Questions
by Michael_Fanguy＠dom.com 02 Aug '06

02 Aug '06

Surry Operations and Reactor Engineering departments are performing a Self Assessment on our Reactivity Management program this week. An email survey was recently sent out in support of this SA. Our thanks go out to all those that responded. We also have a few follow up questions. If it would be possible, please respond to these few questions within the next 2 days to James_Shell(a)dom.com. Again thanks for your participation in our Self Assessment! 1. What is the content of reactivity plans covered at your Ops shift brief? (i.e. do they discuss how much water they plan to add during the shift, rod motion predicted, etc..) 2. If they deviate from said plan what actions are necessary (i.e. contact Shift Manager, Reactor Engineer, STA, etc...or would it just be between the SRO and RO) 3. Would they only elevate it to Reactor Engineering if the deviation was significant, or would they call you for any change at all regardless of how small? Please respond to: James_Shell(a)dom.com James D. Shell Reactor Engineering Surry Power Station Office: 757-365-2865 Fax: 757-365-2750 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

Surry Reactivity Management Self Assessment Survey
by Michael_Fanguy＠dom.com 31 Jul '06

31 Jul '06

Surry Operations and Reactor Engineering departments are performing a Self Assessment on our Reactivity Management program this week. We would like to include some industry benchmarking in this Self Assessment and would greatly appreciate your responses to the following questions. If possible, respond with your replies within the next 2 days to James_Shell(a)dom.com 1. How are your station’s reactivity management expectations communicated? (i.e. admin procedure, operations procedure, etc…) 2. How are expectations that are outside of the standards communicated/controlled/decided? (i.e. accepted practices not specifically in your standard) 3. What are the expectations for SRO’s/Unit Supervisors/Reactor Operators/Reactor Engineers during routine and non-routine manipulations? (i.e. during daily dilutions to what extent is each party involved? If the shift needed to dilute 50 gals more than predicted who would be involved? Is the Reactor Engineer involved with any normal reactivity manipulations (dilution/ changing cooling water flow that could potentially affect letdown IX temp, etc….)) 4. Is there extra oversight in the main control room during reactivity manipulations (i.e. an extra SRO/US?) 5. When would the shift contact you regarding reactivity issues? 6. Does your station peer check routine reactivity manipulations and can the SRO/Unit Supervisor or the STA be this peer check? 7. What is provided to operations for planned and unplanned unit maneuvers? 8. Do you have any planned interaction with operations regardless of what events are scheduled (i.e. briefing at some interval on reactivity, etc…) 9. Are you involved in your Licensed Operator Initial or Continual Training programs in any way? (New core, periodic during cycle, etc...) 10. When would a planned ramp also be practiced on the Simulator first? 11. Would you be involved and present in support of this Just-In-Time training for ramping (for one shift, all shifts, etc…) 12. Does your Operations shift or STAs have the tools available to model required dilutions/borations and rod positions for emergent ramps when Reactor Engineering is not onsite? 13. How tight does your delta flux control need to be during ramps? Are you a CAOC or RAOC plant? Thanks for your time, Jim James D. Shell (James_Shell(a)dom.com) Reactor Engineering Surry Power Station Office: 757-365-2865 Fax: 757-365-2750 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

RE: [Pwrrm] Rx Eng Self Assessment Support
by Delk, Whiting S 19 Jun '06

19 Jun '06

We are starting our outage during this time frame. -----Original Message----- From: pwrrm-bounces(a)retaqs.com [mailto:pwrrm-bounces@retaqs.com] On Behalf Of Berles, Brad W. Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 11:05 AM To: pwrrm(a)keffective.com Subject: [Pwrrm] Rx Eng Self Assessment Support Palisades will be conducting a Reactor Engineering Focused Self-Assessment in September. We are looking for one industry peer to participate on that assessment. If anyone would be willing to participate, please let me know as soon as possible. We are a CE plant, but a Westinghouse or B&W perspective is also welcome. Thanks, Brad Berles Palisades Nuclear Plant 269-764-2761

1 0

RE: [Pwrrm] Shutdown bank withdrawal guidance question
by Lehmann Elmer E 13 Jun '06

13 Jun '06

At Wolf Creek we are the same way. We provide guidance for withdrawing control rods and do a 1/M plot, but for Shutdown Banks, the operators pull them a bank at a time watching the NI's to make sure there are no large changes in source counts. We verify Boron Concentration prior to pulling any rods, but do NOT provide specific guidance for pulling the Shutdown Banks. Normally, the Shutdown Banks are pulled well in advance of pulling the Control Banks in preparation for a startup. We still dilute to criticality following a refuel shutdown. -----Original Message----- From: pwrrm-bounces(a)retaqs.com [mailto:pwrrm-bounces@retaqs.com]On Behalf Of BRYSON, DAMON V Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 9:59 AM To: pwrrm(a)keffective.com Subject: [Pwrrm] Shutdown bank withdrawal guidance question Benchmarking question: At VC Summer we have detailed procedure guidance for the operators on how to withdraw control rods during the approach to criticality. However, we do not have any procedure guidance on how to withdraw shutdown bank control rods. Some of our operators withdraw the shutdown banks continuously while watching other indications. Some of them stop every 25 steps to look at other indications, and then continue on. Others stop every 25 steps and ask for supervisor concurrence before continuing. What kind of guidance do your plants have on withdrawing shutdown banks? You can email me at the address below, and I will compile all the responses and share them with the entire group. Thanks in advance for your help. Damon Bryson (803) 345-4814 dbryson(a)scana.com

1 0

Re: [Pwrrm] Shutdown bank withdrawal guidance question
by paul_gurney＠fpl.com 08 Jun '06

08 Jun '06

At Seabrook, we withdraw the shutdown banks. Other than the expectation to be monitoring count rate ther is no requirement to periodically stop the withdrawal. Paul Gurney Seabrook Station "BRYSON, DAMON V" <DBRYSON(a)scana.co To: pwrrm(a)keffective.com m> cc: Sent by: Subject: [Pwrrm] Shutdown bank withdrawal guidance pwrrm-bounces@ret question aqs.com 06/08/2006 10:58 AM Please respond to "PWR Reactivity Management" Benchmarking question: At VC Summer we have detailed procedure guidance for the operators on how to withdraw control rods during the approach to criticality. However, we do not have any procedure guidance on how to withdraw shutdown bank control rods. Some of our operators withdraw the shutdown banks continuously while watching other indications. Some of them stop every 25 steps to look at other indications, and then continue on. Others stop every 25 steps and ask for supervisor concurrence before continuing. What kind of guidance do your plants have on withdrawing shutdown banks? You can email me at the address below, and I will compile all the responses and share them with the entire group. Thanks in advance for your help. Damon Bryson (803) 345-4814 dbryson(a)scana.com _______________________________________________ PWRRM mailing list PWRRM(a)retaqs.com http://www.keffective.com/mailman/listinfo/pwrrm

1 0

Rx Eng Self Assessment Support
by Berles, Brad W. 08 Jun '06

08 Jun '06

Palisades will be conducting a Reactor Engineering Focused Self-Assessment in September. We are looking for one industry peer to participate on that assessment. If anyone would be willing to participate, please let me know as soon as possible. We are a CE plant, but a Westinghouse or B&W perspective is also welcome. Thanks, Brad Berles Palisades Nuclear Plant 269-764-2761

1 0

Shutdown bank withdrawal guidance question
by BRYSON, DAMON V 08 Jun '06

08 Jun '06

Benchmarking question: At VC Summer we have detailed procedure guidance for the operators on how to withdraw control rods during the approach to criticality. However, we do not have any procedure guidance on how to withdraw shutdown bank control rods. Some of our operators withdraw the shutdown banks continuously while watching other indications. Some of them stop every 25 steps to look at other indications, and then continue on. Others stop every 25 steps and ask for supervisor concurrence before continuing. What kind of guidance do your plants have on withdrawing shutdown banks? You can email me at the address below, and I will compile all the responses and share them with the entire group. Thanks in advance for your help. Damon Bryson (803) 345-4814 dbryson(a)scana.com

1 0

← Newer
1
...
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
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