Azu TD 1357315 Sip1 M

INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI
films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some
thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may
be from any type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the
copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality
illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins,
and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete
manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if
unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate
the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by
sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and
continiiing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each
original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in
reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced
xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white
photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations
appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly
to order.
University Microfiirrs International

A Bell & Howell Information Company
300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA
313/761-4700 800/521-0600
Order Number 1357S15
Theory and applications of power plant operations: A text

Simmons, Robert Lee, M.S.
The University of Ariiona, 1994
Copyright 1994 by Simmons, Robert Lee. All rights reserved.
UMI
SOON.ZeebRd.
Ann Aibor, MI 48106
THEORY AND APPLICATIONS OF

POWER PLANT OPERATIONS: A TEXT
by
Robert Lee Simmons
Copyright Robert Lee Simmons 1994
A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the

DEPARTMENT OF NUCLEAR AND ENERGY ENGINEERING
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
For the Degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
IN NUCLEAR ENGINEERING
In the Graduate College
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
19 94
STATEMENT BY AUTHOR
This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an
advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University
Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library.
Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission,
provided that accurate acknowledgement of source is made. Requests for permission
for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part
may be granted by the copyright holder.
SIGNB
APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR

This thesis has been approved on the date shown below:
I V ^V*
V* A O 'O
jxOuciI 1^. ocaic
Professor of Nuclear Engineering
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge the special support, motivation, inspiration and
catharsis provided by my spouse and two daughters: Margaret, Laura, and Kelly. As
a family, and as individuals, we continue to show each other that all things are
possible if you dare to dream and work to achieve.
Professor Robert L. Seale and the late Professor George W. Nelson provided
me with the initial seed that this endeavor was possible. They validated my
experience and abilities and encouraged me to proceed. Dr. Seale demonstrated his
trust by allowing me to develop and teach the pilot course upon which this thesis is
based.
My management at PVNGS provided me with the creative work hours and
flexible scheduling which allowed me to attend UofA on a full-time basis.
Additionally, they granted permission to utilize PVNGS specific examples, figures and
data which helped me complete the merging of theory and practice. Finally, they
provided me the time to revise my draft efforts so that we might both benefit. I was
able to complete my thesis and the PVNGS training effort obtained a textbook for
use in the training of Shift Technical Advisors. My co-workers tolerated the flexible
schedule and continued to encourage and support my efforts.
Over the past 25 years my major professional stimulation and sense of
accomplishment has been my students. They have provided me with the feedback
which has rewarded my efforts and convinced me that I belong in front of a
classroom. The NEE seniors who completed NEE 495A in the Spring 1993 term
provided me with an applicable testing ground and valuable feedback and criticism.
Without their positive response this effort might have been abandoned.
DEDICATION
This thesis and my efforts are dedicated to
Faye Lee,
David F. Newell,
and
Mary Sittel.
Alamogordo High School
Alamogordo, NM 1959-1962
These mentors, individually and collectively,

taught me the power of mastering the basics
and demonstrated to me the lasting effect
which can be made by a teacher who cares enough
to stimulate creative and critical thought.
They challenged me to excel, stimulated me when my
motivation sagged, and praised me when I succeeded.
Thanks.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
LIST OF TABLES
11
ABSTRACT
12
1.0
INTRODUCTION
13
1.1
Scope
13
1.2
History
14
1.3
Treatment Overview
15
1.4
Assumptions and Prerequisites
17
1.5
Methods of Use
17
1.6
Results
19
1.7
Summary
20
Suggested Reading
21
2.0
STARTUP PREPARATIONS
23
2.1
Initial Conditions
23
2.2
Major Activities
23
2.3
Heatup of RCS to NOT
23
2.4
System Pressurization
38
2.5
Estimated Critical Condition Methodologies
44
2.6
RCS Dilution to the ECBC and impact of

Boron Chemistiy on the RCS
49
2.7
Boron Equalization Calculations
55
2.8
Differential Pressure Type Level Detection Systems
58
Learning Objectives
64
Suggested Reading
65
Solutions
66
REACTOR STARTUP
89
3.1
89
2.9
3.0
Initial Conditions
3.2
Major Activities
89
3.3
Theory Overview
89
3.4
Sources of Source Neutrons
91
3.5
Subcritical Multiplication
92
3.6
Inverse Count Rate Plotting
103
3.7
Time Response during Subcritical Multiplication
107
Learning Objectives
123
Suggested Reading
124
Solutions
125
3.8
4.0
POWER INCREASE TO THE POWER RANGE
130
4.1
Initial Conditions
130
4.2
Major Activities
130
4.3
Theoiy Overview
131
4.4
Derivation
133
4.5
Startup Rate
138
4.6
Step Reactivity Insertions
143
4.7
Ramp Reactivity Insertions
145
4.8
Power Turning
148
4.9
Reactivity Worth Measurements
152
4.10
Power Stabilization
154
4.11
Power Excursions
160
Learning Objectives
163
Suggested Reading
164
Solutions
165
4.12
5.0
POWER RANGE OPERATIONS
178
5.1
Initial Conditions
178
5.2
Major Activities
178
5.3
Introduction
179
5.4
Reactivity Assessments
186
5.5
Fluid Flow Evaluations
202
5.6
Spatial Distributions of Power Density
211
5.7
Calorimetric Evaluations of Power
223
5.8
Dropped Rod Events
229
5.9
Reactor Power Cutback Events
231
5.10
Reactor Trip Events
234
5.11
Shutdown Margin Evaluation
245
5.12
Boration while Cooling Down
250
Learning Objectives
253
Suggested Reading
256
Solutions
258
5.13
APPENDKA. SYSTEM INFORMATION
299
APPENDIX B. PVNGS CORE DATA BOOK
315
APPENDIX C. MISCELLANEOUS DERIVATIONS
398
C-1, Viscous Flow, Head Loss and Pump Work
399
C-2, Point-Reactor Equations
404
C-3, Step Reactivity Insertion Model
408
C-4, Boration Spreadsheet
411
APPENDIX D. DESIRE PROGRAMS
420
D-1, Subcritical Multiplication for Count Rate

Dynamic Steps
421
D-2, Power Turning
423
D-3, Reactor Trip
426
APPENDIX E. TRANSIENT XENON DATA
..
430
APPENDIX F. EVALUATION OF PRESENTATIONS AND

EFFECTIVENESS OF TEXT
458
F-1, NEE 495A Summative Evaluation
460
F-2, NOX40 Summative Evaluation
470
REFERENCES
F-3, NOX40 Instructor Evaluation
478
F-4, NOX40 Examinations
481
493
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
2.3.1, Temperature vs. Pressure for Water
29
2.3.2, Saturation Curve for Water
30
2.3.3, Pressure vs. Temperature Limits
30
2.3.4, Pressure vs. Temperature Limits
31
2.3.5, Pressure vs. Temperature for NPSH
31
2.3.6, Pressure vs. Temperature Comparison
32
2.3.7, Pressure vs. Temperature Metallurgical Limits
32
2.6,1, Concentration/Dilution Control Volume
52
2.8.1, Differential Pressure Level Measurement System
59
2.8.2, Pressurizer Level (Indicated vs. Actual)
63
3.5.1, Count Rate Response to Successive

Equal Reactivity Insertions
98
3.6.1, 1/M vs. Reactivity Added (Example 3.6.1)
104
3.6.2, 1/M vs. Boron Concentration (Problem 3.6.1)
106
3.7.1, Count Rate and Reactivity vs. Time
112
3.7.2, Count Rate Response (0.5$ step)
114
114
115
4.4.1, Simplified Neutron Cycle
134
4.4.2, Reactor Period vs Reactivity (U-235 data)
137
5.5.1, Typical System Head Loss Curves:

Effects of Back Pressure and Throttling Processes
205
5.5.2, Typical Closed Loop Fluid Flow System Configuration
205
5.5.3, Typical Pump Head Delivery Curves:

Single Pump at Two Speeds and Parallel Identical Pumps
208
5.5.4, Combined Pump-System Curves:

Operating Point Determination
209
10
5.6.1, Evaluation of DNBR using CHF

and Actual Heat Flux profiles
219
5.7.1, General System Diagram
226
5.11.1, Temperature Dependent Shutdown Margin
247
11
LIST OF TABLES
2.5.1, ECBC Worksheet
47
2.8.1, Subcooled System: Dry Reference Leg
61
2.8.2, Subcooled System: Wet Reference Leg
61
2.8.3, Saturated System: Wet Reference Leg
62
3.7.1, Reactor Startup with Source, Summary Data
113
3.7.2, Subcritical Multiplication, K=0.5
116
3.7.3, Subcritical Multiplication, K=0.8
117
3.7.4, Series Expansion for M
118
3.7.5, Generations Required for Stable Count Rate
119
3.7.6, Neutron Population Distribution vs. K
121
4.4.1, Stable Period vs Reactivity (comparison)
138
4.7.1, Ramp Reactivity Insertion
145
4.7.2, Negative Reactivity Insertion Ramp
147
12
ABSTRACT
A textbook which merges nuclear engineering theory and principle with central
station nuclear power plant application was developed and implemented. Palo Verde
Nuclear Generating Station operating processes and procedures were used as the
arena within which to develop and apply nuclear, thermodynamic, and fluid dynamic
theoretical principles.
From plant heatup, through nuclear startup and power
ascension, to power operation and then to plant shutdown, nuclear engineering

principles are applied through the use of discussions, examples, problems and study
questions. Detailed descriptions and solutions are included.
Used as the text for a senior level course at UofA Nuclear Engineering
Department in Spring 1993 and for engineer training at Palo Verde in January, 1994,
this text has been developed, evaluated, tested and revised to assure applicability and
thoroughness. The resultant instrument has been adopted as the text for required
initial training of Shift Technical Advisors at Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station.
13
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Scope
This thesis presents a textbook developed to serve as a tool which integrates
nuclear engineering theory and principles with the procedures and processes used to
startup and operate a large central station pressurized water reactor plant. The
premise is that the text can serve as a viable adjunct to the education of nuclear
engineering undergraduate students while also serving as an applied theory resource
for the training of nuclear facility engineering staff. The goal is not to focus on
technological application; but, instead to use technological application as a framework
within which to reinforce principles, evaluate conditions, solve problems and develop
viable strategies.
Whether an individual works in research, design, or field
engineering activities, experiei.ce in applying nuclear, fluid dynamic and

thermodjmamic principles to specific practical scenarios and processes should allow
the entry level engineer (recent graduate) to establish job competencies at a more
rapid rate. Discipline specific nuclear facility engineers are engineering graduates
with experience in calculus and differential equation based assessment, evaluation and
problem solving. Even though they may not be nuclear engineering graduates, they
should benefit from such an approach by becoming familiar with cross discipline
principles and applications, as well as mastering the cause and effect relationship
between the nuclear, fluid dynamic and thermodynamic principles. By mastering the
interrelationships between theory and application the engineer should be better suited
to extrapolate that knowledge and skill into newly encountered situations and
problems.
14
1.2 History
The concept for this thesis began to emerge during the Fall Term 1992 when
the author was a first semester graduate student in the Nuclear and Energy
Engineering Department at the University of Arizona. With 25 years of nuclear
facility training and operating experience, the author believed that this experiential
inventory provided an understanding of basic principles founded on their applications
which could be strengthened by developing a better understanding of the theories and
principles from whence they originate. Classic training programs at nuclear facilities
focus on developing job specific task knowledge and skill and minimize the
development of subject matter knowledge of personnel. However, in the author's
experience, mastery of subject matter knowledge provided personnel with the ability
to move from the 'rule based' performance arena into the 'knowledge based'
performance arena where assessment, evaluation and extrapolation are possible and
more likely to be successful.
"Was it possible to merge theory and principle with application into a single
treatment?" The author believed so and set out to attempt the task. The method
was to develop a course, present that course to nuclear engineering seniors, revise the
course notes into a textbook and then use that textbook to teach a course to nuclear
facility engineers. This text would then be formatted and submitted as the author's
thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science
in Nuclear Engineering. The evolutional history of this process is presented below.
Evolutional History of
"Theory and Applications of
Power Plant Operations: A Text"
1.
Identify Scope
1.
Fall 92
2.
Propose to Dr. R.L. Seale
2.
Fall 92
3.
Develop Draft
3.
Fall 92
15
4.
Teach to College Seniors
4.
Spring 93
5.
Evaluate results
5.
Summer 93
6.
Revise Draft
6.
Fall 93
7.
Teach to PVNGS Engineers
7.
January 94
8.
Review by Dr. R.L. Seale
8.
Spring 94
9.
Evaluate results/comments
9.
February 94
10.
Revise second draft
10.
March 94
11.
Submit for defense and approval
11.
April 94
1.3 Treatment Overview

This treatment begins by considering the procedures necessaiy, and the
processes and parameters affected, as the reactor coolant system (RCS) is heated up
from refueling conditions (100 F and atmospheric pressure) to normal operating
temperature and pressure conditions (NOT/NOP). While generic processes apply to
any pressurized water reactor, the specific numbers used will be those associated with
the Combustion Engineering System 80 NSSS located at Palo Verde Nuclear
Generating Station (PVNGS). This triple reactor station is operated by Arizona
Public Service Company for the owner/participants. These processes are referred to
as Startup Preparations because it is necessary to heat up and pressurize the system
before the reactor can be taken critical and brought to an operating power level to
generate electricity for the owner/participants. After establishing NOT/NOP, the
treatment considers the processes necessary to safely establish critical conditions in
the reactor in a section called Reactor Startup. Having established a self-sustaining
nuclear chain reaction at a power level of approximately 50-500 watts, it then
becomes necessary to increase power level to the point where it is possible to
generate sensible heat within the primary system and steam within the secondary
system. In Power Increase to the Power Range, the treatment considers both the
methods for establishing, monitoring and controlling the power increase and a variety
16
of reactivity worth measurements which are taken in that range. The section entitled
Power Range Operations considers the dynamics of operation when the reactor is
producing useful power and is sensitive to the various feedback mechanisms such as
fuel depletion, fission product poison accumulation, fuel and moderator/coolant
temperature variations, and variations in steam demand from the secondary plant.
Finally, Power Range Operations considers perturbations to steady state operation
and presents the response of both the reactor and thermodynamic systems associated
with heat removal from the reactor.
Throughout the treatment, the processes applicable to the operation of a
Central Station Commercial PWR are used as examples of application of the basic
principles and theory which are presented in typical undergraduate nuclear
engineering curricula. Physical and mental models are used to aid in understanding
of these processes and the participant is expected to perform calculations related to
power plant operation and upset conditions. In some cases procedures specific to
PVNGS are used to perform assessments, evaluations, and calculations. However,
participants are expected to apply their knowledge and develop alternate strategies
which will accomplish the same task.
Integral with these sections, the treatment provides PVNGS plant specific data
which are used to solve examples and problems and answer questions which relate
to the principles and applications presented in the body of the text. Detailed
solutions to the examples, problems and questions are provided for each chapter.
The treatment attempts to integrate theory and practice by merging derivations,
descriptions, and examples with these problems and questions. Some derivations are
included as appendices so that they might be used, as needed, to meet the needs of
a specific participant target population. Consistent vwth the assumptions identified
in Section 1.4, non-nuclear engineering graduates may need to be exposed to these
derivations to achieve maximum benefit from the course of instruction.
17
1.4 Assumptions and Prerequisites

In developing the scope of treatment for this text, the assumption has been
made that course participants are graduate engineers. As such, they should have
familiarity with the use of calculus and differential equations to assess situations,
derive relationships and solve problems. They should also have experience with
formal derivations which initiate with basic principles and conclude, thru the use of
appropriate limiting or boundary conditions, with relationships whose validity is
limited by those initial conditions. This ability and experience is essential to the
understanding of the derivations used to obtain simplified application relationships.
Course participants need not be nuclear engineering graduates. However, it
is assumed that they have completed introductory level courses in nuclear physics,
reactor theory, thermodynamics, and fluid dynamics as applied to nuclear power
production facilities. These courses could have been either undergraduate college
level or nuclear facility operator initial training courses.
The combination of
engineering analytical abilities and skills coupled with initial fundamental

understanding of nuclear facility principles should be sufficient prerequisites for this
applied theory course.
Each chapter of the text includes a listing of suggested reading materials which
can be used to supplement the course presentation or to solidify prerequisite
understanding. The author has attempted to provide a variety of references for this
suggested reading to help assure availability.
1.5 Methods of Use
The design of this textbook assumes that it will be used as the principal
reference in an instructor directed training session. It is neither intended, nor
desired, that the textbook be read straight thru from Chapter 2 thru Chapter 5. It
is imperative that the instructor first study both the text layout and the participant
background to develop an implementation strategy. If the collection of course
participants consists solely of nuclear engineering graduates, most derivations can be
18
skipped over or at least merely reviewed. The specific use of each is left to the
discretion of the instructor and the individual instructional strategy.
Prior to beginning Chapter 2, general nuclear power plant layout and specific
systems information in Appendix A should be presented. This will set the stage so
that all participants understand the major design features and operating conditions
for a Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS). Appendix A also provides a listing of
acronyms and abbreviations commonly used in the industry and used in this text.
Appendix B provides nuclear data for use in examples, problems and questions
throughout the text. The instructor must be very familiar vwth the layout and use of
this data source. This is best accomplished by studying all examples and problem
solutions. Additionally, each section of the core data book contains a "notes"
introduction which includes information on use and assumptions. The instructor may
choose to introduce participants to Appendix B on a 'review it as we need it basis'
or a 'all at once basis' depending on individual instructional strategy. However, in
either case, the instructor should be prepared to review basic principles and field
questions during this period of instruction. For example, pages 9-11 of the core data
book (Appendix B) present information relative to the power defect reactivity.
Review of the concepts and basis of moderator temperature coefficient, fuel
temperature coefficient, doppler broadening, and soluble boron worth are
appropriate at this time.
Chapters Two thru Five present examples, problems, questions and solutions
to help solidify concept understanding and focus the participant toward appropriate
power plant applications. The solutions to examples are included in the body of the
text. The solutions to problems ans answers to questions are included as a separate
section for each chapter. It is intended that participants attempt to solve problems
and answer questions prior to being provided the solutions. The author believes that
participants learn best when they try to solve problems instead of reading a provided
solution. Further, it is intended that problems and questions be addressed prior to
continuing with the presentation of new material.
19
Each chapter has a list of learning objectives which are summarized at the end
of the material and also included within the body of the textbook in the form of
shaded text boxes. The author believes that participants should be continually aware
of the specific objective being covered so that presentation, derivation, example,
problem, and question are focused in the appropriate manner.
1.6 Results
Initial draft notes of this text were used as the principal source document for
an experimental course in the Nuclear and Energy Engineering Department at the
University of Arizona during the Spring Term of 1993. Entitled "Power Plant
Operations, NEE 495A" this course was taught by the author with support and
assistance from Professor Robert L. Seale. The following description of NEE 495A
was presented in the course call.
'This course will provide enhanced understanding of the applications
of Nuclear Engineering principles to the operation of a Central Station
Nuclear Generating Station. Nuclear engineering students who are
completing their undergraduate education and are well versed in basic
principles and theoretical bases of the nuclear engineering discipline
are encouraged to take this course. Whether your future is in research,
design, or operation, an increased understanding of the operational
applications of your discipline to a nuclear facility will improve your
ability to contribute in a meaningful manner in a shorter time frame."
Student evaluations of NEE 495A are included in Appendix F-1. While
anecdotal in nature they represent a positive evaluation of the scope and
implementation of the course and validate the original thesis statement that merging
theory and application improves student understanding. These student comments,
instructor notes taken during the presentation, and comments from Professor Seale
were used to revise the initial draft text.
20
The author used the revised text to present a course to PVNGS engineers in
January 1994. 'Theory and Applications of Power Plant Operations, NOX40" was
presented to augment the training of Shift Technical Advisor candidates in the area
of applied theory. Engineers from the Nuclear Fuels Management Department also
completed the course. Participant evaluations of the course and text are included in
Appendix F-2. Instructor evaluation of the course and lessons learned are included
in Appendix F-3. Examination questions used to evaluate the subject mastery by
these participants are included in Appendix F-4. The collection of these evaluations
provide subjective argument that the original thesis statement was valid and that this
text serves as a viable tool to facilitate the merging of theory and application.
NOX40 has been incorporated into the official Training Program Description for
Shift Technical Advisors at PVNGS and is scheduled to be presented again in June
1994 with "Theory and Applications of Power Plant Operations: A Text" serving as
the reference text for the course.
1.7 Summarv
Nuclear power plant operating processes and procedures have been used as
the framework to develop a textbook which merges theory and principle with
application and practice. The result is not technology, but understanding of principle
and application and the ability to extrapolate beyond the bounds of 'rule based'
learning. The specific processes and procedures selected for incorporation are
secondary to the heuristic of integrating sound knowledge foundation to applicational
problem solving. Evaluations by participants attest to the success of this integration.
The decision to continue using the text in the power plant engineer training setting
attests to the viability of the text as a resource.
21
Suggested Reading
1.
El-Wakil, M.M., "Nuclear Heat Transport", The American Nuclear Society,
LaGrange Park, IL, (1981).

Chapter 1, Atomic and Nuclear Structure and Reactions
pp 1-28
Chapter 2, Neutrons and Their Interactions
pp 31-49
2. El-Wakil, M.M., "Power Plant Technology", McGraw-Hill Book Company, New

York, NY, (1984).
Chapter 1, A Thermodynamic Review
pp 1-23
Chapter 2, The Rankine Cycle
pp 30-72
Chapter 6, The Condensate-Feedwater System
pp 219-254
Chapter 9, Principles of Nuclear Energy
pp 354-391
Chapter 10, Thermal-Fission Reactors and Power Plants
pp 395-446
3. Tong, L.S., and J. Weisman, 'Thermal Analysis of Pressurized Water Reactors",

Second Edition, The American Nuclear Society, LaGrange Park, IL, (1979).
Chapter 1, Power Generation
pp 1-56
Chapter 2, Fuel Elements
pp 61-149
4. Cohen, P., "Water Coolant Technology of Power Reactors", Second Edition, The
American Nuclear Society, LaGrange Park, IL, (1980).
Chapter 1, Introduction
pp 1-8
5. Ott, K.O., and R.J. Neuhold, "Introductory Nuclear Reactor Dynamics", The
Chapter 1, Basic Topics and Nomenclature
pp 1-3
22
6. Glasstone, S., and A. Sesonske, "Nuclear Reactor Engineering", Van Nostrand

Rheinhold Co., New York, NY, (1967).
Chapter 1, Introduction to Nuclear Reactor Engineering
pp 1-29
Chapter 2, Nuclear Reactions and Radiation
pp 30-102
Chapter 3, Diffusion and Slowing Down of Neutrons
pp 109-150
7. Rust, J.H., "Nuclear Power Plant Engineering", Haralson Publishing Company,

Buchanan, GA, (1979).
Chapter 1, Description of Nuclear Reactors
pp 1-40
8. Kaplan, I., "Nuclear Physics", Second Edition, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.,

Reading, MA, (1962).
Chapter 18, Neutron Physics
pp 559-596
Chapter 19, Nuclear Fission
pp 606-630
Chapter 20, Nuclear Energy Sources
pp 637-675
9. Lamarsh, J., "Introduction to Nuclear Engineering", Addison-Wesley publishing

Co., Reading, MA, (1977).
Chapter 4, Nuclear Reactors and Nuclear Power
pp 102-155
Chapter 5, Neutron Diffusion and Moderation
pp 156-186
23
CHAPTER 2
STARTUP PREPARATIONS
2.1 Initial Conditions
A.
Reactor sub-critical
B.
All control rods fully inserted (ARI)
C.
Soluble Boron concentration high
D.
Xenon concentration zero
E.
Samarium concentration peaked
F.
Reactor Coolant System (RCS) cooled down to 100 F
G.
RCS pressure approximately atmospheric
H.
System integrity established to support operation
2.2 Major Activities

A.
Heatup of RCS to normal operating temperature (NOT)
B.
Establish normal operating pressure (NOP)
C.
Determine Estimated Critical Condition (ECC)
D.
Dilute RCS Boron concentration to the Estimated

Critical Boron concentration (ECBC)
2.3 Heatup of the RCS to NOT

Obviously the increase of RCS temperature from a nominal value of 100 F
to the NOT value of 565 F requires the addition of heat into the system in excess
of heat losses from the system. Only two sources of energy are normally available
to accomplish this process; 1) nuclear energy available from the fission of the fuel
24
and 2) pump work available due to the viscous nature of fluid flow being pumped
around a closed system. In most PWR systems, administrative restrictions apply
which prevent establishing a critical condition below some minimum temperature.
It should be apparent that unless the reactor can be taken critical it will be
impossible to establish a fission power level sufficient to heatup a system which
contains 100,000 gallons of water and many tons of metallic structure . Consequently,
the only process which will be considered for heatup to NOT is pump work.
The restrictions against low temperature criticality are based on the following
basic principles which affect the operation of the nuclear station. Neutron detectors
are located outside the reactor vessel and are separated from the core by the cold
leg downcomer region of the vessel. Because of the variability of water density with
temperature, cold water causes additional neutron scattering and reduces the neutron
flux at the detectors. Thus, cold water causes the neutron "power signal" to be lower
than the actual power within the core which is non-conservative since these signals
are used for both indication of core performance and monitoring of approach to
limits by the safety protection system.
2E001:
Predict the response of nuclear instrumentation to

changing RCS temperature conditions.
Problem 23.1:
Develop a plot of water density vs. temperature for saturated water
over the temperature range of 100 F to 600 F and explain the impact
of this variation on the neutron flux reaching the neutron detectors. Assume
constant core power and leakage flux. In which temperature range is the
measured neutron flux signal changing the most rapidly per degree change in
water temperature?
25
Most reactivity insertion mechanisms have a worth which depends upon the
temperature of the system. Review of the PVNGS Core Data Book (Appendix B)
shows plots of Boron Worth, Total Inserted CEA Worth, and Isothermal
Temperature Coefficient (ITC) which all have strong temperature dependent
variability. Safety analysis processes require that these parameters be within analyzed
bands before the system can be taken critical and power increased. At PVNGS,
specifications require that the reactor not be taken critical, nor operated, if RCS cold
leg temperature is less than 552 F (PVNGS Technical Specifications, 1993). Since
NOT is a T-cold of 565 F, we see that little margin exists for heatup using nuclear
heat and that the bulk of the heatup must be performed by some heat source other
that the fuel.
Typical thermal hydraulic textbooks discuss the nature of fluid friction and
viscous flow, frequently calculate the 'Work requirement of a pump', and reach the
conclusion that the work required to run the pumps is a negligible fraction of the
electrical output of the large PWR plant (Todreas and Kazimi, 1990). However,
further analysis of pumping power and closed system head loss calculations show that
pump work is indirectly converted to fluid heating. Review of the general energy
equation and the concepts of conservation of energy show that pump work makes up
for the fluid friction associated with the flow of the viscous fluid thru the system.
(See Appendix C-1 for a derivation).
PUMP WORK = = = HEAD LOSS

However, pump work still reflects an energy input into the system. The energy
input develops a pressure increase which makes up for the pressure decrease caused
by flow and maintains flow rate constant. The pressure drop caused by flow is a
result of viscous friction which causes heating. Pump work thus indirectly results in
heating of the fluid. If this heat is not dissipated at the same rate it is produced then
the temperature of the fluid will increase. It is important to realize that pump work
26
does not cause heating just in the pump, instead there is a distributed heating of the
fluid in the regions of the system where significant head loss exists. The situation is
analogous to an electrical circuit: for steady current [flow rate] situations, most of the
voltage [pressure] drop occurs in the components (resistors, inductors, capacitors)
[core, heat exchangers, valves, filters] and not in the wiring [piping].
2E002:
Perform pump work calculations
Problem 23.2:
Calculate the Pump Work and Electrical Motor Power requirements (in MW)
for the PVNGS NSSS systems assuming that both the pump and the motor
are 85% efficient.
Data:
1.
System Pressure
300 psia
Coolant Temperature
100 F
Pump Delta P
145 psid
Flow Rate
100 x 10 Ibm/hr
Determine both the enthalpy rise through the pump and the enthalpy
rise through the pump due to the pressure increase.
2.
Estimate the exit temperature of the fluid as it leaves the pump.
3.
Predict: As the system is heated up, what will happen to motor amps?
Pump work? Pumping Power?
4.
Use equations to explain the basis for each of the above variations.
With the pumps being capable of indirectly causing the system to heat up, the
heat up rate can be controlled or adjusted by either varying the number of running
pumps or the rate at which heat is removed from the system. During the process of
27
increasing system temperature, it is necessary to follow certain pressure/temperature

limits for a variety of reasons.
2E003:
Evaluate RCS pressure/temperature conditions relative

to limits.
1. Avoid boiling: pressure must be kept above P, for the

temperature to avoid boiling. In fact, to allow for
instrumentation uncertainty in the measurement
of both temperature and pressure, a minimum
value of subcooled margin must be maintained.
To avoid loss of subcooling it is desirable to
maintain pressure as high as possible.
Question 23.1;
If RCS temperature is 250 F, what minimum pressure is

required if the minimum allowed subcooled margin is 28
op?
Question 23.2:
If RCS pressure is 400 psia, what maximum temperature

is allowed if the minimum subcooled margin is 30 F?
2. Avoid pump cavitation: pressure must be kept high to prevent flashing of

liquid to vapor in the 'eye' of the pump impeller which is the
low pressure spot in the system. Minimum net suction pressure
or Minimum Net Positive Suction Head[NPSH] values are
usually provided, by the pump vendor, for a pump which are a
28
function of flow rate through the pump and the temperature of

the fluid being pumped (Lindeburg, 1990).
Question 233:
If an operating RCP requires a suction pressure 300 psi

greater than Pj^, , what maximum RCS temperature is
allowed if system pressure is 500 psia?
Question 23.4:
What are the indications and consequences of cavitation?
Question 23.5:
What is the mechanism of damage for the process known

as cavitation?
3. Avoid brittle fracture: at low temperature, carbon steel can experience

brittle fracture. This phenomena leads to rapid propagation of
a crack thru the material at stresses considerably less than the
minimum specified yield strength and normal working loads of
the material. One significant contributor to the total stress
experienced by the piping system is the pressure contained by
the system. Thus, it is important to keep pressure low until the
system has been heated up to a temperature above the brittleto-ductile transition such that brittle fracture cannot occur
(PVNGS Technical Specifications, 1993).
Question 23.6:
How is the brittle-> ductile transition temperature

experimentally determined?
The conflicting requirements for pressure-temperature relationship discussed

above result in plant operators needing to pay close attention to pressure as
temperature is changed and plot a path which will keep pressure above the minimum
29
until the system is at a high enough temperature to support full pressurization.

Typical pressure-temperature limit curves for maintaining adequate subcooling,
maintaining pump NPSH, preventing saturation and preventing brittle fracture are
included as Figures 2.3.1 through 2.3.7.
Figure 2.3.6 compares the subcooling,
saturation and NPSH limits. The fact that limit lines cross and slopes diverge
indicate that the subcooling limits are not based on a constant number of degrees of
subcooling and that the subcooling process is not always the most limiting process.
At approximately 500 F, the NPSH process becomes more limiting than subcooling.
Thus, if reactor coolant pumps are still running the RCS pressure must be maintained
higher than if the pumps have been secured.
PRESSURE vs TEMPERATURE for WATER

TOO
4
300
250
500
750
1000
1250
1500
1750
2000
PRESSURE Ipaiai
Tat FOR PRESSURE
28 DEGREE SUBCCXXED
Figure 2.3.1, Temperature vs. Pressure for Water
2250
SATURATION CURVE
2800
2600
2400
2200
l _
\ / \
'/ i
2000
1
1
1
1
1
SUBCCCLED REGCN
1
1
1
1800
1600
<
in
a.
1400
1200
1000
800
500
400
200
>
212
244
\
'
A \
^
:
/
:
^
1 .. . 1 . J .
iUrc;nnc,Hi
1
1
^
., I
1
.
1
1
308
340
372
404
436
458
564
596
523
550
275
500
532
TEMPERATURE T
Figure 2.3.2, Saturation Curve for Water

(ASME Steam Tables, 1967)
NORMAL CONTAINMENT RCS P/T LIMITS
Acceptable
Region
200 F
Subcooled
Region
NOT
Acceptable
fl V^"ii*.rMi
-1
WRioNR
Prrssuir Indicator
Minimum
Subcoohng Limit
Region
NOT
Acceptable
Shutdown Cooling
Region
I
300
400
RCS Tji or Representative GET CD
Figure 2.3.3, Pressure vs. Temperature Limits

(PVNGS Procedures, 1993)
HARSH
HARSH
HARSH
HARSH
HARSH
HARSH
HARSH
HARSH
HARSH
llirsh Contilnment RCS P/T Limits
200 T
Accepuble
Region
Subcooled
Region
NOT
Accepuble
Maximum
Minunum
wRto NR
Pttuuie Indicator
Transition Line
rrrri
Subcoolinc Limti
Ih'K*
Region
NOT
Accepuble
Shutdown Cooun
300
400
RCS Tf, or Representidve GET (T)
HARSH
HARSH
HARSH
HARSH
HARSH
HARSH
HARSH
HARSH
HARSH
Figure 2.3.4, Pressure vs. Temperature Limits [PIARSH]

RCP NPSH Curve

2500
2000
Accepublc
Region
WR 10 NR
Pressure Indicator
Transition Line
inc.
VI3\Si
ihy-ssn
Acccptabl:
300
RCSTcCD
Figure 2.3.5, Pressure vs. Temperature for NPSH
(PVNCS Procedures, 1993)
OOO
32
COMPARISON of LIMITS (P-T)
(PRESSURE v TCMPCRATURCi
12 ^
z\ r
2H
i1.7 h
1.9 jV6
1.6 H
1.5 L
1.4 'r
1.3 r
1.2 r
0.9 i0.6 !0.7 U

0.6 ^
0.5 r
0.4 \0.3
350
NPSH
400
450
500
550
600
RCS TEMPERATURE loF)

SATP : 28SC ^ REO SC
Figure 2.3.6, Pressure vs. Temperature Comparison

REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM PRSS5UREn"EMPSHATUr
UMJTATIONS FOR LESS THAN B EFFECTIVE
FULL POWER YEARS OF OPERATION
LOWEST
SERVICE
TEMP.
U8F
GC-F/MR
MEATUP
(513PSU)
(50PSU
10.=/HR
COOLOOWN
MINIMUM BOLTUP
TLMP.aO'F
CORE CRITICAL
INDICATED RCS TEMPERATURE {F)
T.
Figure 2.3.7, Pressure vs. Temperature Metallurgical Limits
33
Figure 2.3.7 indicates that heatup and cooldown rate limitations also exist.
Whenever system temperature is being changed, the vessel and piping walls are being
heated or cooled by the water flowing through them while the outer surface of the
wall is heated or cooled by conduction through the thickness of the wall. Thus the
inner surface of the wall always leads the outer surface of the wall and a temperature
difference exists across the wall. The magnitude of temperature difference depends
upon the rate that the system temperature is being changed. The temperature
difference and rate of change of temperature result in thermal stresses being induced
into the walls of the piping and vessel and can contribute to stress induced failure of
the component. Failure mechanisms can result either from brittle fracture if the
thermal stress and pressure stress are too large when the system is cold, or fatigue
failure if the thermal stresses are frequently repeated. Figure 2.3.7 indicates that the
magnitude of the limiting rate of change of temperature depends upon value of the
temperature and pressure which further complicates the process of heating up the
plant to operating conditions.
All mechanisms associated with stress in the reactor vessel wall are affected
by enbrittlement caused by fast neutron irradiation of the vessel during operation of
the reactor system. The damage caused by this irradiation history (fluence = flux X
time) manifests itself as an increase in the brittle-ductile transition temperature of the
material. The end result of this process of neutron induced damage is heatup rate
limitations which depend upon the 'age' of the vessel and the potential for not being
able to re-license a reactor system because of the age of the vessel.
34
Problem 233:
Use Figures 2.3.2 thru 2.3.7 to determine which limits apply at the following
conditions of temperature and pressure.
Temperature
TF)
2E004:
Pressure
Limit
(psia)
225
100
225
400
225
600
300
400
300
600
300
1500
400
1000
Predict the etTects of changing RCS temperature on

system fluid hydraulic parameters.
Additional aspects of the plant heatup process are associated with core uplift
forces, reactivity insertion mechanisms, and the accuracy of level detection and
measurement systems over the range of temperature band being discussed.
Combustion Engineering core support design results in restrictions being placed upon
the number of reactor coolant pumps which can be operated below some minimum
temperature (which is 500 F at PVNGS)(PVNGS Procedures, 1993). The increased
viscosity at lower temperature results in unacceptable core uplift forces if more than
three RCP's are operated below 500 F. The discussion of level detection system
accuracy is included in section 2.8 of this chapter.
35
2E005:
Predict the effects of changing pump configurations on

^stem fluid hydraulic parameters.
Question 23.7:
The reactor coolant system is being operated at 510 F with 3 of

the 4 RCP's operating. The fourth RCP is about to be started.
Predict how the following parameters will change due to the
start of the fourth pump. Do not consider the effects of the
starting transient but only the steady state changes caused by the
start of the fourth pump.
a.
Differential pressure across the core.
b.
Differential pressure across the RCP's.
c.
Motor current to one of the pumps which was previously

running.
d.
Flow rate through the core.
Restrictions on not being critical below a specified temperature result in the

process of heating up the RCS occurring when all CEA's are fully inserted and may
or may not be accompanied with diluting the soluble boron concentration. Even
though it is not desired to approach criticality, the change in reactivity state of the
reactor is still of interest. The following examples use the PVNGS Core Data Book
as the data source. (Appendix B)
2E006;
Predict the effects of changing RCS temperature on

core reactivity.
36
2E007:
Perform reactivity calculations and assessments

associated with changing RCS temperature.
Example 23.1:
Determine the net reactivity change associated with a heatup from 100 F
to 565 F with the RCS soluble boron concentration at 2000 ppm.
Assume ARI, Xenon Free, and 200 EFPD conditions.
Solution: Ap,t = Ap + ApcEA
^PiTD
+ 3386 pcm (Table 2.2.2)
^PcEA -
- 2960 pcm (Table 2.15.1)
^P
+ 426 pcm
net
Question 23.8:
~
=
If soluble Boron Worth is dependent upon RCS temperature,

why is a ApBoro term not included?
Example 23.2:
Determine the net reactivity change associated with a heatup from 100 F to
565 F with RCS soluble boron concentration at 1500 ppm followed by a
dilution from 1500 ppm to 1000 ppm. Assume ARI, Xenon Free, and 200
EFPD conditions.
Solution: Aptsj^î- = Api^Q + ^Pcea
^PiTD
^PcEA
^PBoron
PC (Table 2.2.2)
" 2960 pcm (Table 2.15.1)
^Psoron
= + 4365 pcm (Table 2.3.2)
^P
~ + 3158 pcm
net
yi
Problem 23.4:
Determine the net reactivity change associated with a dilution of RCS soluble
boron concentration from 1500 ppm to 1000 ppm, with the RCS at 100 F
followed by a heatup from 100 F to 565 F at 1000 ppm. Assume ARI,
Xenon free and 200 EFPD conditions.
Question 23.9:
How do the solutions of Example 2.3.2 and Problem 2.3.4

compare? What is the reason for any difference?
Problem 23.5:
Determine the net reactivity change associated with a heatup from 100 F
to 500 F with RCS soluble boron concentration at 1250 ppm. Assume
ARI, Xenon Free, and 200 EFPD conditions.
2E004:
Predict the effects of changing RCS temperature on

system fluid hydraulic parameters.
Question 23.10:
If the RCS is heated from 100 F to 565 F, how many pounds

mass of water must be removed from the system?
2E001:
Predict the response on nuclear instruments to

changing RCS temperature conditions.
Question 23.11:
If the RCS is heated from 100 F to 565 F, what happens to the

response of the ex-core neutron detector? Does the response
depend upon the RCS soluble boron concentration? Why, or
why not?
38
2.4 System Pressurization

RCS pressure is maintained by either of two mechanisms which both utilize
the liquid free surface within the pressurizer. Detailed, multi-region models and
descriptions of pressurizer models and operation are presented in engineering
textbooks (Todreas and Kazimi, 1990). The two methods available for pressure
control are 1) the use of a noncondensible gas, such as nitrogen, above the liquid free
surface which obeys the ideal gas law, or 2) the use of a saturated vapor/liquid
dynamic interface within the pressurizer. The former is normally used at low
pressure temperature conditions until the pressurizer is heated up and a bubble of
steam is established by utilizing the installed pressurizer heaters. In this method, the
pressure is controlled by adjusting the mass of noncondensible gas above the liquid
free surface. Variations in system temperature or liquid level also have an impact
on the pressure due to the interdependence of temperature, pressure, and volume
in an enclosed space of ideal, or nearly ideal, gas. Once the steam bubble is
established, then pressure control is maintained by using a combination of heater
operation and pressurizer spray operation to maintain pressure at the established
setpoint 4: some control range.
Assuming that the pressurizer is maintaining 50 psia by the use of a nitrogen
gas pressure above the liquid level in the pressurizer, the operations staff establishes
a steam bubble in the following manner (PVNGS Procedures).
1.
Energize pressurizer heaters (1800 kw maximum at PVNGS)
2.
Maintain level at approximately 50% by discharging water out the

surge line into the RCS and out the letdown line into the Volume
Control Tank [VCT].
3.
Look for indications of saturation within the pressurizer by observing

pressure and temperature.
39
4.
Vent the pressurizer vapor space to eliminate the nitrogen and

establish a pressure control system which depends only on the
saturated vapor/water interface.
The presence of noncondensible gas in the pressurizer vapor space will make
the pressurizer appear to not be at saturation conditions. With both vapor and
nitrogen contributing to the total pressure in the system, the partial pressure due to
nitrogen will result in
> Pâ, for the temperature in the pressurizer. Also the
presence of noncondensible gas will slow down natural pressurizer response during
transients. Even without the action of pressurizer heaters and spray, the saturated
nature of the water/vapor system will respond to help reduce pressure changes. An
outsurge of fluid will lower the pressure which results in saturated liquid flashing to
steam to help maintain the pressure. An insurge of fluid will compress the vapor
bubble resulting in vapor condensation at the increased pressure which reduces the
mass of vapor in the steam space and helps reduce the system pressure back to
where it was. Noncondensible gasses will only obey the ideal gas law and thus will
not help maintain system pressure.
Question 2.4.1:
If the RCS is at 400 psia and 150 F with a N2 bubble in the

PZR and an insurge causes a bubble volume reduction from 900
ft^ to 500 ft^ what happens to RCS pressure? Is a PressureTemperature limit exceeded? Which limit? What could cause
a rapid insurge into the PZR?
Question 2.4.2:
If the PZR is at 50 psia and 100 F and heaters are energized

to increase temperature to 212 F, what pressure would exist
even if no boiling occurred? Assume that the PZR level control
system maintains level constant. If the level were allowed to
40
increase and the mass of liquid within the PZR is held constant,
what would happen to pressure?
To boost the ability of the pressurizer to maintain system pressure, heaters and
spray are used. Assuming a desired control setpoint of 2250 psia, if pressure drops
below this value, heaters energize to increase the heat input, liquid vaporization rate
and pressure. Because the pressurizer system is not perfectly insulated, a group of
heaters is normally left energized at all times to compensate for the heat loss. If
pressure increases above the setpoint, at some point in time the control system will
operate the spray valve to admit cold leg water (565 F) into the saturated vapor
space (T for 2250 psia = 653 F) which causes condensation and resultant pressure
j3,
reduction. Using this approach, the spray line and spray nozzle in the pressurizer will
be frequently cycled between 653 F and 565 F,
2E003:
Evaluate RCS pressure/temperature conditions relative

to limits.
Question 2.43;
What are the metallurgical consequences associated with

frequent temperature cycling of a component?
To prevent frequent thermal cycling of the spray nozzle, a pressurizer is

usually operated with a small constant flowrate of spray which bypasses the spray
valves and keeps the spray nozzle cool (565 F). This bypass spray is an additional
heat loss on the pressurizer and results in additional heater power requirements
during normal steady state operation (PVNGS Procedures, 1993).
2E008;
Perform pressurizer heater power/spray flow calculations.
41
Problem 2.4.1:
Assume that the pressurizer has insulation heat loss of 300 kw and a bypass
spray valve flow rate of 10 gpm, calculate the heater power required to
maintain constant pressure.
Problem 2.4.2:
Assume that 1500 kw of heater power is energized and sufficient spray flow
exists to maintain the pressure constant at 2225 psia, calculate the spray flow
rate in gpm of cold leg water.
The reactor coolant system must not be exposed to a pressure which exceeds
the normal operating pressure by too large of a value.
In fact, Technical
Specifications establish what is known as a Safety Limit on RCS pressure to maintain

the integrity of the RCS piping and component walls(PVNGS Technical
Specifications, 1993). The RCS pressure boundary forms one of three important
barriers between the intensely radioactive fission
products and the public.
Maintenance of the integrity of this barrier is extremely important. To protect the

RCS from over pressurization events, relief or safety valves are installed in the
pressurizer vapor space. While some nuclear facilities also have installed Power
Operated Relief Valves (PORV) which can be actuated from the control room, the
safety relief valves at PVNGS are passive components which open when pressure
exceeds their setpoint (2500 psia) and close below that value with some level of both
accumulation and blowdown. These relief valves are sized to accommodate the
maximum credible upset condition and thus have significant relieving capacity. These
relief valves relieve to a tank inside containment called the Reactor Drain Tank
(RDT) which relieves to containment if it is over pressurized. The line between the
relief valve and the RDT provides a location to install instrumentation to indicate
whether or not these relief valves are fully seated.
42
The expansion of steam from 2250 psia saturation conditions into the RDT at
about 10 psig has two characteristics which serve as the basis for monitoring whether
the relief valve is not fully closed. One is the turbulence of the expansion flow which
is detected by an acoustic detector mounted near the line.
2E009;
Given thermodynamic data and descriptions of processes,

predict the thermodynamic state of the working fluid.
Question 2.4.4:
If the relief valve is stuck in a fixed, non-shut, position what

happens to the acoustic signal as the RCS depressurizes?
The second relief valve indication device is a temperature detector which

measures the temperature of the 'tailpiece' of the valve between the valve and the
RDT. When the valve is closed, the line is empty and is relatively cool (180 F) due
to metallic conduction down the line from the pressurizer. When the relief valve is
open, then steam is isenthalpically expanding from 2250 psia/653 F saturation
conditions to saturation conditions in the RDT. The tailpiece becomes heated and
thus indicates that the valve is not fully shut. The consequences of a Steam Space
Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) will be discussed later.
Example 2.4.1:
The pressurizer relief is relieving saturated steam at 2250 psia to the RDT
which is at 10 psig. Determine the maximum temperature which should be
indicated by the temperature detector.
Solution: The expansion of high pressure steam through a relief valve is an
expansion which does no work. Thus the enthalpy of the process fluid is
unchanged. This leads to the process being called an isenthalpic expansion.
43
The state of the fluid as it expands into the low pressure region is a function
of the enthalpy of saturated liquid and saturated vapor at that lower pressure.
'g(2250)
= 1126.7 btu/lbm
= 206.6 btu/lbm
= 1160.2 btu/lbm
Since the starting enthalpy is less than hg(2S) the resulting fluid is a saturated
liquid-saturated vapor (wet vapor) mixture at 25 psia and consequently has a
temperature of 240 F which is Tja, for 25 psia(ASME Steam Tables,1967).
Problem 2.43:
If the pressurizer relief valve remains open and the RDT pressurizes to 100
psig, what is the expected temperature indicated by the tailpiece temperature
detector?
Question 2.4.5:
The pressurizer relief valve tailpiece temperature detector is

located close to the pressurizer. Steam being released must
travel through a long run of piping before reaching the RDT.
Assume that the RDT is at 100 psig and that the pressurizer is
at 2250 psia, what impact does physical location have on the
temperature indicated by the leak detector?
Even if steam system valves and lines are not monitored by installed
temperature instrumentation, the thermodynamic process of isenthalpic expansion
provides a powerful diagnostic tool to evaluate if valves are leaking. The use of
portable contact pyrometers to identify possible leaking valves is a regular activity at
power stations.
44
Problem 2.4.4:
Assume that the steam generator is at 1250 psia and is relieving to
atmospheric conditions. What are the thermodynamic conditions of the
relieving steam? What temperature would a leak detector indicate?
2.5 Estimated Critical Condition Methodologies
2E010:
Perform ECC calculations.
An Estimated Critical Condition (ECC) calculation is a prediction of where

the reactor will achieve criticality. The ability to accurately predict the ECC depends
upon the accuracy of the reactivity data which is available to perform the calculation.
An extremely accurate calculation could be performed for every startup if computer
codes were used to calculate reactivity data for that specific time in life and RCS
boron condition. However, detailed reactivity coefficients and defects are normally
calculated for only a few times in core life. See Appendix B where data is displayed
for BOC, MOC, and EOC conditions for only a few specific values of RCS boron
concentrations. Consequently, for any specific application such as a startup at 137
EFPD with 935 ppm soluble boron concentration, it is necessary to interpolate
between available tabulated data intervals. Additional data intervals are not provided
due to the cost of generating the data. Since linear interpolations are used between
tabulated intervals, the accuracy of the ECC depends upon the accuracy of the
original data, the linearity of the data, and the accuracy of any physical measurements
which must be made such as soluble boron concentration.
The usual method of performing an ECC calculation is to perform a reactivity
balance which incorporates the reactivity changes which have occurred between a
previously well known condition (Previous Condition) and the conditions which are
45
projected to exist at the time of criticality (Projected Conditions). It is necessary to

account for all of the reactivity insertion mechanisms which insert reactivity between
these two conditions.
At PVNGS, the ECC strategy accounts for the following reactivity insertion
mechanisms [as required by the Technical Specifications].
1.
Power Defect [PD]
2.
Isothermal Temperature Defect [ITD]
3.
CEA position
4.
Boron concentration
5.
Xenon reactivity
6.
Samarium/Plutonium reactivity defect
The fundamental equation used to perform the ECC calculation is :

ApcEA + AppD + Ap,TO + Apxenon + ^PsmTu + AP = 0
b
2.5.1
: where
^P"X" ~ P"x"(projected)
- p.x-(previous)
Changes in either CEA position or boron concentration are used to force this
equation to be equal to zero. If CEA position is used to force the equation to zero
then the calculation is called an Estimated Critical Rod Position calculation (ECRP).
If RCS soluble boron concentration is used to force the equation to zero, then the
calculation is called an Estimated Critical Boron Concentration calculation (ECBC).
When the reactor is operating the following data is recorded at least every 2 effective
full power days (EFPD).
1.
Power Level
2.
Temperature (RCS Tôid)
3.
RCS Boron Concentration
46
4.
CEA position
5.
Xenon reactivity worth
6.
Time-in-Life (EFPD)
After a reactor trip, when a startup and return to power are authorized, the
following data is specified and an ECBC calculation is performed by either the
Reactor Engineer or the STA and reviewed and approved by the Operations Shift
Supervisor(PVNGS Procedures).
1.
Temperature at time of criticality
2.
CEA position desired at time of criticality
3.
Time since trip at time of criticality
The resultant ECBC calculation provides an estimate of the critical condition

in terms of Time, CEA position, RCS Boron concentration and Temperature. The
estimated critical condition (ECC) is a statement of all 4 of these conditions.
Example 2.5.1:
The reactor is operating at HFP with All Rods Out(ARO), 530 ppm Boron,
T-cold = 565 F, and equilibrium Xenon conditions at 200 EFPD when a
reactor trip occurs. Determine the ECBC for a startup with the following
conditions.
1. T-cold = 565 F
2. Group 4 CEA's at 90 inches withdrawn
3. 100 Hours after the trip
Solution: (in class exercise)(See Table 2.5.1)
47
Table 2.5.1
ECBC WORKSHEET
PARAMETER
PREVIOUS CONDITION PROJECTED CONDITION
1. EFPD
2. POWER LEVEL
3. T-COLD
4. BORON CONC
5. CEA POSITION
6. TIME SINCE TRIP
NA
7. XENON REACTIVITY
8. Sm/Pu REACTIVITY
Ap POWER:
Ap ITD:
A p CEA:
Ap XENON:
A p Sm/Pu:
Ap NET:
Ap BORON REQUIRED =
A ppm Boron = (A p Boron)/(Average Boron Worth)
[Iteration may be required]
ECBC = Initial Boron Concentration + A ppm Boron
ECBC =
ppm
48
The startup strategy will now be to establish the ECBC and withdraw the
CEA's toward Group 4 @ 90 inches and monitor the startup progress using
applications of subcritical multiplication vt'hich are presented in Chapter 3. If actual
plant conditions do not closely mirror those specified in the ECBC calculation then
the reactor will not achieve criticality at or near the specific CEA position.
2E011:
Given a completed ECC and plant conditions, determine

if the ECC is still valid.
The following ECC errors will be considered and their individual impact on
the CEA position at the point of criticality established.
1.
Power Defect for the wrong time in life used in the

calculation.
2.
RCS not at the temperature specified in the calculation.
3.
Startup not at the time specified in the calculation.
4.
RCS boron concentration not at the value used in the

calculation.
The key to understanding the impact of these errors is in determining what the
error does to the "Del Rho NET' value in the previous example. If Del Rho NET
is too large, then the reactor will be over borated to compensate and the reactor
should achieve criticality at a CEA position above that specified. If Del Rho NET
is too small, then the reactor will be under borated to compensate and the reactor
should achieve criticality below the specific CEA position.
1.
If the Power Defect used in the calculation is too large (small), then
ApNET is too large (small) and the reactor will achieve criticality late
(early).
49
2.
If T-cold used in the calculation is higher than actual T-cold, and ITC
is negative, then A
pneji
- is too small and the reactor will achieve
criticality early.
3.
If the reactor is started up early (late), then the Xenon term is in error,
A P is too
nct
(
4.
) and the reactor will achieve criticality
). What additional information is required?
If actual RCS boron concentration is lower (higher) than that specified

by the calculation, then the reactor will achieve criticality
(
Question 2.5.1:
What are the consequences of using the wrong value boron

worth in the calculation for ECBC?
2E012:
Develop ECC methodologies.
Problem 2.5.1:
Develop a strategy for determining the ECBC for a startup at 250 EFPD
which uses previous data from a startup at 150 EFPD instead of previous data
from HP? operation just before the trip. Develop the governing equation and
identify the sources of data required to implement this strategy.
2.6 RCS Dilution to the ECBC and impact of Boron Chemistry on the RCS.
2E013:
Perform concentration/dilution calculations and

evaluations.
50
Altering the RCS soluble boron concentration is accomplished by either

diluting the RCS with pure water or borating the RCS with water which has high
concentration of soluble boron [about 4250 ppm]. Such concentration/dilution
processes can be calculated using a variety of strategies depending upon the accuracy
desired by the calculation. The simplest method is to perform a batch process in
which water is either first added or removed and then replaced . In such processes,
the governing equation is developed by performing a mass balance on the specific
solute being considered. Since the mass of a solute = (volume)(concentration)
[symbol VC] the following equation can be used to determine the effect of a
concentrating or diluting process.
2.6.1
Example 2.6.1:
How many gallons of RCS coolant must first be removed and then replaced
with pure water to lower the concentration of the RCS soluble boron from
1000 ppm to 999 ppm?
Solution:
Assume that the RCS has a volume of 100,000 gallons and that
the water being removed and replaced is at the same
temperature as the RCS.
100,000*(1000) + 'X'(0) - 'X'*(1000) = 100,000*(999)

'X' gallons = 100,000*(1000 - 999)/1000 = 100 gallons
Question 2.6.1:
Does the answer differ if the coolant were first charged into the
system and then removed?
51
Question 2.6.2:
Does the answer differ if the coolant were initially at 500 ppm
and being diluted to 499 ppm?
Question 2.63:
Does the answer differ if the coolant were being borated from
1000 ppm to 1001 ppm?
Problem 2.6.1:
Plot gallons per ppm vs ppm for both dilution and boration processes over the
range of 2000 ppm to 100 ppm.
Question 2.6.4:
Does the answer to Problem 2.6.1 differ if the RCS is at 565 F

and the coolant being charged is at 100 F? If not, why not? If
so, how can the answer to Problem 2.6.1 be corrected?
The applications of Equation 2.6.1 are limited to situations in which the system
concentration is being adjusted by a batch process and the system and the input
(charging) fluid are at the same density. In many real applications these limitations
are not part of the boundary conditions and consequently a more general model is
necessary. This model involves establishing a control volume with known inputs and
outputs and solving the differential equation for the time rate of change of the
concentration of the species of interest. One complicating aspect of the solution is
that the fluid in the RCS and the makeup (charging) fluid are not at the same
temperature. The RCS is normally operated in the 550 F to 600 F range and the
charging fluid is at about 100 F. Consequently, it becomes necessary to include
density compensation on system volume and volumetric flow rates to perform an
analysis on the rate of change of mass of the fluid and solute. Temperature
dependent densities and/or specific volumes are available in the ASME Steam Tables.
52
INPUT
OUTPUT
CONTROL
VOLUME
Figure 2.6.1, Concentration/Dilution Control Volume

Data:
Control Volume:
Vsys
Psys
Co
C(t)
Input:
Fin
C,
Pin
Output:
Vout
= C(t)
Pout
53
dC/dt =
PinKinCJPsy
.f'sys-
Pout
Koutôu/Psys Fsys
If the inlet and outlet flows are measured at the same temperature, then
Pin
Pout
Pcharging
PCH
If the system level is constant and the system temperature is constant, then
Psy5 is a constant and
Via ~
Vout
Vcharging
VCH
Example 2.6.2:
Solution of the above model to the dilution process:
Cj = 0, since dilution is with pure water
dC/dt = - P K
ch
ch^/
P V
rcs
rcs
(l/C)dC/dt = "P K /P F
ch
ch
rcs
rcs
Coexp(-pcHKcH^/PRcsf'Rcs)
C(t)/Co = exp(-pcHl^cHt/pRcsFRcs)
^CH ~
~[Prcs/ PCH
] VsYsln(Co/Cr
,ai)
2.6.2
Problem 2.6.2:
Apply Equation 2.6.2 to determine the number of gallons of 100 F water
which must be charged into a 100,000 gallon system, at 565 F, to reduce the
system soluble boron concentration from 850 ppm to 500 ppm.
Problem 2.63:
Develop an equation which applies for boration processes in which the
charging water and RCS water are at different temperatures and the
concentration of the boration water is a variable. Express the solution in
terms of the amount of charging water (gallons) which must be added to affect
a specified increase in boron concentration of the RCS.
Students should verify that they are capable of predicting the impact of
dilution/boration on the magnitude of ITC, Boron Worth, and MTC. An explanation
of the cause of this effect is also required.
Soluble boron used for reactivity control is provided in the form of boric acid
(H3BO3)
which is a weak acid. The dissociation and ionization of boric acid in water
results in the reactor coolant becoming an acidic solution which has an undesirable
effect on the corrosion rate of the walls of the piping and components of the system.
Problem 2.6.4:
If the first ionization constant for boric acid is 6 E-8 at 565 "F, calculate the
pH of a boric acid solution which is 2000 ppm in boron.
In addition to possible system piping failure or heat transfer surface fouling,
an effect of the increased corrosion rate is to remove material from the piping and
vessel walls and allow the material to be transported thru the reactor and become
activated. The resultant RCS activity contributes to the radiation dose rate created
by the reactor coolant if it is allowed to escape into the environment and is limited
(PVNGS Technical Specifications, 1993). To increase the pH and thus reduce the
corrosion rate, the acidic nature of the boric acid is adjusted by the addition of the
strong base lithium hydroxide (LiOH). This base was chosen to help simplify the
chemistry of the RCS since Lithium is produced when the Boron-10 nucleus absorbs
a neutron as it acts as a poison to the reactor system. However, the presence of
55
lithium in the system presents an additional neutron activation hazard which must be
compensated for.
Problem 2.6.5:
Use the Chart of the Nuclides to determine the radiation hazard associated
with using natural lithium as the source of lithium hydroxide and postulate a
solution to this hazard.
As the reactor is operated at power, soluble boron absorbs neutrons and
produces lithium which causes the pH to slowly increase. Periodically it is necessary
to reduce the lithium concentration by the use of a de-lithiating ion exchanger which
selectively removes the lithium cation. The soluble boron concentration is slowly
decreased during operation to insert positive reactivity to compensate for the negative
reactivity caused by fuel depletion and fission product poison accumulation. As the
boron concentration decreases, the efficiency of the dilution processes decreases and
increasingly large amounts of water must be used to cause the dilution [Refer to the
solution to Problem 2.6.1 for an understanding of this process]. To avoid the
generation of large quantities of radioactive waste late in core life a different type of
selective ion exchange media is used. A de-borating resin removes the boron ion
(radical) to perform this reactivity control function.
2.7 Boron Equalization Calculations
2E014:
Perform boron equalization calculations and evaluations.
Whenever the RCS is diluted or borated, the pressurizer liquid volume

concentration does not change at the same rate. Even though the pressurizer is
56
connected to the RCS by both a surge line and a spray line the mass flow rate thru
these lines is relatively small. Consequently it is possible that the pressurizer soluble
boron concentration could be significantly different than the RCS. In such cases, an
outsurge from the pressurizer could have an unwanted reactivity effect. Thus it is
necessary to assure that the pressurizer liquid volume soluble boron concentration is
equalized with the RCS soluble boron concentration. This is accomplished by
increasing the mass flow rate of the spray while maintaining pressurizer level. In
effect, water is taken from the RCS cold leg, thru the spray valves and spray nozzle,
into the pressurizer and out the surge line back into the RCS hot leg.
Boron equalization is initiated by energizing all of the pressurizer heaters
which increases heat input and vaporization rate of the saturated liquid in the
pressurizer. As pressure tries to increase, the spray valves are driven open by the
pressurizer pressure control system to create a flow rate which will absorb the
additional heat input and maintain pressure near the setpoint. Previous calculations
(Problem 2.4.2) have shown that the energization of 1500 kw of heaters will create
a flow rate of about 100 gpm thru the spray nozzle. The increased turnover rate of
liquid thru the pressurizer shortens the time required to equalize the boron
concentration. The pressurizer in the System 80 plants has a 'purification half-life'
of about 1 hour at 100 gpm.
Extrapolating from the information presented in Example 2.6.2, boron
equalization is a dilution process in which the pressurizer is being diluted to the RCS
boron concentration by the RCS fluid.
Consequently, rather than expressing
equations in terms of concentration they will be expressed in terms of a concentration

difference (given the symbol D).
D(t) = Dexp[-F,pyt/7pzR]
2.7.1
57
Kspra/Fpzr has units of time ', is given the symbol L, and represents the time
constant for pressurizer boron equalization.
To derive an expression for the
purification half-life, set D(t)/Do = 0.5 and solve for time.

D(t)/D = e"
tyz = -(In 0.5)/L = 0.693/L
2.7.2
Problem 2.7.1:
Use Equations 2.7.1 and 2.7.2 to verify that the purification half-life for the
System 80 type plant is approximately 1 hour if boron equalization flow rate
is approximately 100 gpm.
The relationship between a purification time constant and a purification halflife is the direct analog of the relationship between a radioactive decay constant and
a radioactive half-life. Both Equations 2.7.1 and 2.7.2 clearly show that the key
physical parameters for determining the efficiency of a dilution [D(t)/D<,] process are
the system volume and the dilution flow rate.
The meaning of a purification half-life applied to the pressurizer is : the
length of time required to reduce the concentration difference between the
pressurizer and the RCS by a factor of 2. PVNGS procedures specify that whenever
the RCS soluble boron concentration is changed by 50 ppm or more, the pressurizer
should be equalized with the RCS until the difference is reduced to less than 10 ppm.
Verification of equalization is accomplished by actually sampling both the RCS and
Pressurizer soluble boron concentration, but the purification half-life is used to gauge
when sampling and analysis is warranted.
58
Example 2.7.1:
With all pressurizer heaters energized, the pressurizer has a purification halflife of 1 hour. If the RCS soluble boron concentration has been diluted by
100 ppm, how long should boron equalization be performed to equalize the
pressurizer to the RCS within 10 ppm?
Solution: Applying the concept of half-lives, somewhere between three and
four half lives are required to reduce the difference from 100 pprn to 10 ppm.
Thus, sampling is not warranted until after 3 or 4 hours of equalization has
taken place.
D = D^CO.S)"^^
t =
t,y2[ln(D/Do)]/ln 0.5 = 3.32 hours
2.8 Differential Pressure Tvpe Level Detection Svstems
2E015:
Given system conditions, predict the relationship

between indicated and actual level in the system.
Differential pressure level detectors function based upon the difference in

pressure generated by the level of water (hydrostatic head) in a tank and the pressure
at the bottom of a reference column. The tank and reference column are connected
across a differential pressure cell as shown in the Figure 2.8.1. The DP cell separates
the liquid in the tank from the reference leg with some type of flexible diaphragm
which moves depending upon the delta-P across it. The diaphragm is connected to
a sensing system which is capable of either local or remote indication or both. The
59
signal from the sensing system can also be an input into an automatic level control
system or protection system.
Reference Leg
gas
liquid
DP CELL
Figure 2.8.1, Differential Pressure Level Measurement System
Problem 2.8.1:
Propose a strategy for converting the mechanical deflection of the level
detection system diaphragm into a useable electronic signal.
The principle of operation of this type of detection system is important to
understand so that the engineer will have confidence that the "indicated level" is truly
indicative of the "actual level" in the tank or system.
Does Indicated Level ===== Actual Level ?
60
Accurate tank level data is extremely important during both normal operating
and upset conditions.
1.
Low tank level readings might cause operators to secure flow from a
tank when flow is really needed from that tank.
2.
High tank level readings could cause pressurizer heaters to become

uncovered and burnout.
3.
High tank level readings could prevent automatic protection systems

from tripping a pump and result in damage to that pump.
Differential level detection systems are installed on tanks which contain

subcooled liquid (VCT) and tanks which contain saturated liquid/vapor combinations
(pressurizer and steam generators). Some systems contain dry reference legs and
some contain wet (filled) reference legs. All of these variations on the basic system
will be discussed. While it is possible to generate equations which calculate the DP
across the detector in terms of level and fluid density, a more physical approach will
be used.
Considering the simple drawing provided earlier, increasing tank level causes
the diaphragm to move to the right which the sensing system detects and indicates
as a level increase. This response is the desired response and with calibration of the
sensing system will result in actual level and indicated level being the same.
Circumstances which result in indicated level changing even though actual level within
the tank remains the same become important since actual level and indicated level
are no longer the same.
Any parametric variation which causes the diaphragm to move to the right,
when actual level remains unchanged, will cause indicated level to increase.
Any parametric variation which causes the diaphragm to move to the left,
when actual level remains unchanged, will cause indicated level to decrease.
61
Table 2.8.1, Subcooled system: Diy Reference Leg

Perturbation
Response
Result
a. Tank pressure
increase/decrease
b. Tank temperature
increase/decrease
c. Condensation within
reference leg
d. Diaphragm failure
Table 2.8.2, Subcooled system: Wet Reference Leg

Perturbation
a. Tank pressure
increase/decrease
b. Tank temperature
increase/decrease
c. Reference leg
temperature
increase
d. Draining of the
reference leg
e. Diaphragm failure
Response
Result
62
Table 2.8.3, Saturated system: Wet Reference Leg with condensing mechanism
Perturbation
Response
Result
a. Tank temperature/
pressure
increase/decrease
b. Draining of the
reference leg
c. Reference leg
temperature
increase/decrease
d. Diaphragm failure
Figure 2.8.2 demonstrates that the relationship between indicated level and
actual level in the pressurizer depends upon the saturation conditions (temperature
and pressure) within the pressurizer. This dependence is based on the variations in
both saturated vapor and saturated liquid as the saturation conditions change.
Problem 2.8.2:
Develop an equation for the differential pressure across the DP cell in a
pressurizer level detection system in terms of the tank size, liquid level and the
thermodynamic properties of the fluid in both the pressurizer and the
reference leg.
The 2250 psia line on Figure 2.8.2 has a slope of one which indicates that the
level detector was calibrated at 2250 psia saturation conditions. As the pressurizer
is depressurized the various lines on this figure are used to infer the actual level in
the system from the indicated level.
63
2400 psia.
100
2250 psia.
653F
1000 psia,
636F
14.7 psia,
70F
w>
u
kJ
u
<
40
100
liuiicalccl Level (','c)
Figure 2.8.2, Pressurizer Level (Indicated vs. Actual)

Problem 2.8J:
Sketch a set of lines similar to those in Figure 2.8.2 which qualitatively depict
the relationship between indicated and actual level if the detector were
recalibrated at 500 psia saturation conditions.
64
Learning Objectives
1.
Evaluate RCS pressure/temperature conditions relative to limits.
2.
Predict the response of nuclear instrumentation to changing RCS temperature

conditions.
3.
Perform pump work calculations.
4.
Predict the effects of changing RCS temperature on system fluid hydraulic

parameters.
5.
Predict the effects of changing pump configurations on system fluid hydraulic

parameters.
6.
Predict the effects of changing RCS temperature on core reactivity.
7.
Perform reactivity calculations and assessments.
8.
Perform pressurizer heater power/spray flow calculations.
9.
Given thermodynamic data and descriptions of processes, predict the

thermodynamic state of the working fluid.
10.
Perform ECC calculations.
11.
Develop ECC methods.
12.
Given a completed ECC and plant conditions, determine if the ECC is still
valid.
13.
Perform concentration/dilution calculations.
14.
Perform boron equalization calculations.
15.
Given system conditions predict the relationship between indicated and actual
level.
65
Suggested Reading
1.
Todreas, N.E., and M.S. Kazimi, "Nuclear Systems I, Thermal Hydraulic
Fundamentals", Hemisphere Publishing Company, New York, NY, (1989).

Chapter 6, Thermodynamics of Nuclear Energy Conversion Systems:
Nonflow and Steady Flow Problems:
First and Second Law Analysis
pp 171-233
Chapter 7, Thermodynamics of Nuclear Energy Conversion Systems:

Nonsteady Flow First Law Analysis
pp 239-287
2. Cohen, P., "Water Coolant Technology of Power Reactors", Second Edition, The
Chapter 3, Physical Chemistry of Water and
Aqueous Solutions
pp 40-85
Chapter 5, Radio- and Nuclear Chemistry of

Water Reactor Systems
pp 144-199
Chapter 6, Chemical Shim Control and pH Effect

on Reactivity
pp 214-264

Chapter 8, Stress Analysis in Nuclear Reactor Systems
pp 357-428
66
2.9 SOLUTIONS
Pnbkm 23.1:
Develop a plot of water density vs. temperature for saturated water over the temperature range of
100 'F to 600'F and explain the impact of this variation on the neutron flux reaching the neutron
detectors. Assume constant core power and leakage flux. In which temperature range is the
measured neutron flux signal changing the most rapidfy per degree change in water temperature?
The plot of water density vs temperature for saturated water and two
pressures of subcooled water is provided below. All three sets of data show the same
trend. The rate of water density reduction increases as temperature increases. The
similarity between the three sets of data indicates that the saturated liquid parameters
for the specified temperature is a very good estimate of the actual subcooled data
and is adequate for most calculations. This is an especially significant conclusion
since subcooled or compressed water tables are not as available as the saturated
water data normally available in condensed versions of the 1967 ASME STEAM
TABLES.
The impact of these water density variations is that changes in temperature
cause a non-linear variation in neutron flux reaching the detectors which changes the
most at high temperature. The fact that the ex-core neutron detectors detect fast
neutron leakage which is assumed to be proportional to core power level must be
modified by the fact that the proportionality constant for the detector efficiency is a
non-linear function of temperature of water in the reactor vessel downcomer region.
It must be stressed that this has nothing to do with the fact that moderator/coolant
temperature changes insert reactivitv which in turn changes core power. One of the
reasons for specifying a minimum temperature for criticality is to assure that the
instrumentation is in its normal range of operation from a temperature standpoint.
A key phrase which relates to this impact is TEMPERATURE SELADOWING OF
THE DETECTOR.
67
For example, a "cold water accident" is a class of event in which the RCS cold
leg temperature is suddenly reduced by an upset in the secondary plant. If MTC is
negative, this reduction in temperature will cause a positive reactivity insertion which
will drive reactor power up, however the colder water in the reactor vessel
downcomer will shadow the neutron detector and consequently the detector will not
increase as much as actual rcactor power increases. If temperature compensation of
the flux signal is not performed then the detector output will read low and possibly
interfere with the power signal reaching a trip setpoint.
Problem 2.3.2:
Calculate the Pump Work and Electrical Motor Power requirements (in MIV) far the PVNGS
NSSS systems assuming that both the pump and the motor are 85% efficient.
Data:
1.
2.
3.
4.
System Pressure
Coolant Temperature
Pump Delta P
Flow Rate
300 psia
100 F
145 psid
100 x 10^ Ibm/hr
Determine both the total enthalpy rise through the pump and the enthalpy rise through
the pump due only to the pressure increase.
Estimate the exit temperature of the fluid as it leaves the pump.
Predict: As the system is heated up, what will happen to motor amps? Pump work?
Pumping Power?
Use equations to explain the basis for each of the above variations.
Pump work and pumping power calculations are performed by analyzing the
pressure rise of the fluid as it passes thru the pump and realizing that pump
efficiency relates to how efficient the pump is at developing pressure head compared
to the total energy input into the fluid by the pump. In an ideal pump, 100% of the
energy input results in pressure head increase and there is no heating in the pump
internals. In a real pump, some of the energy input into the pump results in fluid
heating whereas hopefully most of the energy input results in pressure head increase.
Ideal pump work:
Wp = vAp (specific volume) x (pressure rise)

(ft^/lbm) X (lbf/in2)(144 in^/ft^)
ft-lbf/Ibm
68
Real pump work ; 'Wp(real) = Wp(ideal)/pump efficiency (rjp)

Motor work:
= Wp/motor efficiency (rj^)
Pump power:
Pp = m x Wp [(mass flow rate) x (pump work)]

(Ibm/hr) x (ft-lbf/lbm)
ft-lbf/hr (convert as reqd)
Pump power:
Pp = pAvvAp = AvAp
Pump work: Wp(ideal) = (0.016130 ft^bm) x (145 psid) x (144 in^/ft^)

= 336.8 ft-lbf/lbm = 0.433 Btu/lbm
Wp(real) = 336.8/0.85 = 392.3 ft-lbf/lbm = 0.504 Btu/lbm
Thus: 0.433 Btu/lbm due to pressure rise and 0.071 Btu/lbm due
to Temp rise
Pump Power:
need to know that the nominal mass flow rate is

specified at 100 x 10 Ibm/hr with 3 pumps running and
that there are 3.412 x 10 Btu/hr in 1 Mw.
Pp(real) = (100 x 10 Ibm/hr) x (0.504 Btu/lbm) x ( lMw/3.412 x 10 Btu/hr)

= 14.77 Mw total for that specified flow rate for the three pumps
maximum which are allowed to be operating.
= 4.92 Mw/pump of pumping power delivered by the motor to the
shaft
Pn,(real) = (4.92 Mw-mechanical/pump)/0.85 = 5.79 Mw-electrical per motor
As the fluid is heated from 100 F towards 565 F, the density of the fluid
decreases, the viscosity decreases and thus the fluid friction decreases. Consequently
the Ap around the loop decreases for the same volum.etric flow rate and pumping
power decreases.(Pp = AvAp): note that the density and specific volume terms cancel
and there is no parameter in this equation which is an explicit function of
69
temperature. It is necessary to understand that system pressure drop depends on

temperature thru viscosity. The key point is that pumping power decreases and this
is observed by seeing pump motor amps decrease. Since the pump motor is supplied
a constant vohage, if power required by the motor decreases, then so must the
current since motor power = E,ie x
Question 2.3.1:
x (3)^
If RCS temperature is 250 F, what minimum pressure is required if the minimum

allowed subcooled margin is 28 F?
The value of
for 278 F is 47.7 psia(Steam Tables). Thus, a pressure of
at least 47.7 psia is required to assure that water at 250 F is at least 28 F away from
the onset of boiling.
Question 2.3.2:
If RCS pressure is 400 psia, what maximum temperature is allowed if the minimum
subcooled margin is 30 F?
T,(400 psia) = 445 F : T = T^, - Required SCM = 445 - 30 = 415 T
Question 2.3.3:
If an operating RCP requires a suction pressure 300psi greater than

RCS temperature is allowed if system pressure is 500 psia?
what maximum
Psat(max) = 500 - 300 = 200 psia: Tsa,(200 psia) = 381.8 F
Question 2.3.4: What are the indications and consequences of cavitation?
Cavitation is a fluid dynamic condition which occurs because the fluid pressure
is dropping below Pj^, for the existing temperature and flashing to vapor. The fluid
then re-enters a high pressure area and the vapor bubble collapses creating a shock
wave. The indications are a loud popping noise and vibration caused by the shock
wave. If cavitation occurs in a centrifugal pump, then the shock wave causes erosion
and pitting of the impeller and casing and the vibration can lead to damage to the
pump seals and bearings. Cavitation can also occur when a fluid that has a
70
temperature near to the value of
passes thru a flow restriction (pressure drop)
such as a partially throttled valve or a flow orifice.
Question 2.3.5:
What is the mechanism of damage for the process known as cavitation?
The mechanism is the production of a shock wave caused by the rapid collapse
of vapor bubbles. One model used to explain the process is called the water jet
impingement model. As two adjacent vapor bubbles collapse, the water region
between them is accelerated and impinges on the metal barrier which is the impeller
or casing of the pump or the outlet region of a partially throttled valve. The kinetic
energy of the water jet causes the pitting.
Question 2.3.6:
How is the brittle-- >ductile transition temperature experimentally determined ?
During World War II, the US experienced spectacular failures in

approximately 25% of its Liberty ships and T-2 tankers. The mild steel plates of
these ships were connected by welds that lost their ductility and became brittle at low
temperatures. Some of the ships actually broke into two pieces. Such brittle failures
are most likely to occur when three conditions are met; 1) triaxial stress, 2) low
temperature, and 3) rapid stress loading. Toughness is a measure of the material's
ability to yield and absorb highly localized and rapidly applied stresses. Notch
toughness is evaluated by measuring the impact energy that causes a notched sample
to fail.
In the Charpv test popular in the US, a standardized beam specimen is given
a 45 degree notch. The specimen is then centered on sample supports with the notch
down. A falling pendulum striker hits the center of the specimen. The kinetic energy
expended at impact, equal to the initial potential energy of the pendulum, is
calculated from the initial height of the pendulum. It is designated Q and is normally
71
expressed in foot-pounds. The energy required to cause failure is a measure of the

toughness.
As temperature of the specimen is reduced the toughness decreases. In BCC
metals, such as steel, at a low enough temperature the toughness decreases sharply.
The transition from high energy ductile failure to low energy brittle failure begins at
the fracture transition plastic temperature. This temperature is also known as the nilductility transition temperature.
Pnbkm233
Use Figures 2.3.2 thru 2.3.7 to determine which limits apply at the following conditions of
temperature and pressure.
Temperatuie
Pressure
(P^)
100
Case 1
225
400
Case 2
225
600
Case 3
300
400
Case 4
300
600
Case 5
300
1500
Case 6
400
1000
Case 7
Condition
Subcooled
Subcooling
Harsh Subcooling
NPSH
Metallurgical
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
if
if
if
if
Limit
CP)
225
1
A
A
N
N
N
heatup rate is
heatup rate is
heatup rate is
heatup rate is
2
A
M
N
A
A
< 10 F/hr
< 40 F/hr
<. lO F/hr
< 75 F/hr
Case
3
4
A
A
N
A
N
A
A
A
A(l) A
5
A
A
N
A
A(2)
6
7
A
A
N
A
N
A
A
A
A(3) A(4)
72
Question 2.3.7:
The reactor coolant system is being operated at 510 F with 3 of the 4 RCP's operating.
The fourth RCP is about to be started. Predict how the following parameters wUl change
due to the start of the fourth pump. Do not consider the tweets of the starting transient
but only the steady state changes caused by the start of the fourth pump.
a.
b.
c.
d.
Differential pressure across the core.

Differential pressure across the RCP's.
Motor current to one of the pumps which was previously running.
Flow rate through the core.
The starting of the fourth RCP causes a steady flow increase in the mass flow
rate of the coolant thru the system. Core Ap is a measure of the fluid flow friction
head loss of the coolant as it flows thru the core. Head loss thru a fixed component
depends upon the mass flow rate of fluid thru the component and consequently the
Ap across the core increases. The Ap across the pumps at steady flow conditions has
to be equal to the Ap across the loop and consequently the Ap across the pumps
increases. Flow rate caused by 4 pumps is less than 4/3 times larger than the flow
rate caused by 3 pumps. Thus when 4 pumps are running, each pump is performing
less work than when 3 pumps are running and the individual motor current of each
of the previously running pumps decreases.
Question 2.3.8:
If soluble Boron Worth is dependent upon RCS temperature, why is a ^peoron

included?
^PBoron = ^ ppm(Average Boron Worth): See Notes 2.3.0 in Appendix B

The only time that boron worth is used to determine a reactivity input is when
boron concentration is changed. However, the reactivity effect of a temperature
change does depend, in part, upon the RCS soluble boron concentration at the time
of the temperature change. The effect of differential boron worth as a function of
temperature at constant boron concentration is an input into the determination of
ITD. See Notes 2.2.0 in Appendix B.
73
Problem 2.3.4:
Determine the net reactivity change associated with a dilution of RCS soluble boron concentration
from 1500ppm to 1000 ppm with the RCS at 100 F followed by a heatup from 100 F to 565
F at 1000 ppm. Assume ARI, Xenon free, and 200 EFPD conditions.
The solution strategy is identical to Example 2.3.2 but the values of reactivity
defects are different because of the differences in the tabulated values as a function
of RCS temperature and soluble boron concentration. Unfortunately Table 2.3.2
does not provide soluble boron worth values at 100 F so this problem is not solvable
with the data provided. Review of Tables 2.2.2 and 2.15.1 clearly show that the
values of ITD and change in CEA worth are different. The boron worth data is not
provided because dilution is not usually accomplished until after plant heatup is
complete. The following figure displays the two different paths which can be taken
to move between the two different states. The reactivity difference between the two
states is a fixed number. However the accuracy of the tabulated path reactivity data
might result in different numbers depending upon the path taken.
If the two
different path values are significantly different, due to the use of average values, then
the determination of the path by smaller steps is warranted.
Stale 2
Stale 4
Siale 1
state 3
Stale 1-100 oF/IESO pprr.

State 2 n 565 oF/1500 ppm
State 3 100 oF/1000 ppm
State 4 565 oF/1000 ppm
Process A: ITD(100->S65) @ 1500 ppm
Process C; (DelppmXAvg BW) @ 565 oF
Process B: (DelppmXAvg BW) @ 100 oF
Process D: ITD(100->565) @ 1000 ppm
State CtiangA _ Slale 1->5iale 4
465 oF heatup and 500 ppm dilution
74
Question 2.3.9:
How do the solutions of Example Z3.2 and Problem 13.4 compare? What is the reason
for any difference?
Differences are due to the accuracy and linearity of the data which is used to
make the path values approximate the differences in the state values.
Pmbkm 23S:
Determine the net reactivity change associated with a heatupfrom 100 *F to 500 'F with RCS
soluble boron concentration at 1250 ppm. Assume ARI, Xenon Free, and 200 EFFD conditions.
This problem stipulates MOC conditions and consequently the reactivity

insertion caused by the heat up are tabulated on the MOC ITD vs Teow Table and
Curve (2.2.2) of the core data book (Appendix B). The problem specifies that the
RCS soluble boron concentration is 1250 ppm, consequently interpolation between
the 1500 ppm and 1000 ppm data is required.
A p j = ITDjoo - ITD,00
: a t 1 5 0 0 p p m : A p x = 2 6 7 -(-22) = 2 8 9 p c m
: at 1000 ppm: Apx = -99 -(-1753) = 1654 pcm
Reactivity inserted = (289 + 1654)/2 = 971,5 pcm

An alternate solution could be attempted by manually sketching in a 1250 ppm
line on Curve 2.2.2 and then using that curve. The general principle worth noting is
that the curves are fine for visual display of the trend of a parameter but the best
way to obtain valid numbers is to use the data tabulations which are also provided
for each curve in the form of the associated table.
Question 2.3.10: If the RCS is heated from 100 F to 565 F, how many pounds mass of water must be
removed from the system?
Since the volume of the RCS is fixed, this solution is based on the fact that the
mass of liquid present in the system is the product of the system volume and the
density of the fluid at the specified temperature.
Mass,iqid = Volumejy,,,^ x Densitynî^ = (ft^) x (Ibm/ft^)
75
Density is obtained from the ASME Steam Tables using the saturated liquid
parameter as an estimate. The Steam Tables tabulate the value of the specific
volume (ft^/lbm) of the working fluid which is the reciprocal of the density,
Mass,iqid = Volume^,g/(Specific Volume)nid
Vjoo = 0.016130 ft^/lbm
= 0.022245
VolumCsystem = 12,997
Initial mass = 12,997/0.016130 = 8.058 x 10' Ibm

Final mass
= 12,997/0.022245 = 5.843 x 10 Ibm
Mass removed
= (8.058-5.843) x 10' Ibm = 2.215 x 10' Ibm

which is about 27.5% of the initial mass
Question 2.3.11: If the RCS is heated from 100Fto 565 F, what happens to the response of the ex-core
neutron detector? Does the response depend upon the RCS soluble boron concentration?
Why, or why not?
During this heatup, two mechanisms are causing a change in the neutron
detector response. The heatup is inserting positive reactivity ( See Example 2.3.1)
which causes an increase in actual core power level thru the process of subcritical
multiplication which will be discussed in a later chapter. However, during the heatup
the reactor is extremely subcritical and this reactivity effect is small. Problem 2.3.1
and Question 2.3.9 substantiate that the magnitude of temperature shadowing of the
detector (due to a 27.5% reduction in the amount of water present between the core
and the detector) results in an increase in the detector response. In this case, both
of the mechanisms cause an increase in the detector response.
However, a heatup does not always insert positive reactivity because of the
temperature dependency and the boron concentration dependency of the moderator
temperature coefficient. Even if the heatup inserts negative reactivity which should
76
cause a decrease in actual core power, the fast neutron flux hitting the detector
should increase due to the reduction in temperature shadowing of the detector.
Recall that the detector detects fast neutron leakage from the core which is
thermalized in the vicinity of the detector. Boron-10 is a thermal neutron poison;
consequently the response should be independent of the boron concentration.
Question 2.4.1:
If the RCS is at 400 psia and ISO 'F with a

bubble and an insurge causes a bubble
volume reduction from 900fi^ to 500f^, what happens to RCS pressure? Is a PressureTemperature limit exceeded? Which limit? What could cause a rapid insurge into the
pressurizer?
From the ideal gas law, a volume reduction of 5/9 will cause a pressure
increase of 9/5 [from 400 psia to 720 psia]. The applicable limit is approximately 500
psia from Figure 2.3.7. Such a rapid insurge can occur when a reactor coolant pump
is started in an idle loop and the steam generator in that loop is hotter than the RCS.
Question 2.4.2:
If the PZR is at 50 psia and 100 'F and heaters are energized to increase temperature to
212 'F, what pressure would exist even if no boiling occurred? Assume that the PZR level
control system maintains liquid level constant. If the level were allowed to increase and the
mass of liquid within the PZR is held constant, what would happen to the pressure?
From the ideal gas law, if liquid level is maintained then the change in
pressure is driven by the change in absolute temperature of the gas.
P2 = P [T2/T,] = 50[460+212/460+100] = 60 psia
i
If the mass of liquid is constant then the temperature change causes a liquid
mass expansion and a resultant gas bubble volume reduction as well as heating. The
specific volume of the liquid mass increases from 0.016130 to 0.016719 which is an
increase in the hquid level by a factor of 1.0365 from 50% to 51.825%.
Consequently, the gas bubble volume is reduced from 50% to 48.175% which causes
pressure to increase by a factor of (50/48.175) = 1,0379.
77
P2 = 50(1.0379)[460+212/460+100] = 62.3 psia

Obviously if the pressurizer initial level were not at 50%, then the same
magnitude of liquid volume change would result in a different pressure change due
to the factor by which the gas volume changes. To demonstrate, assume that the
PZR liquid level were initially at 70%. Liquid level increases by a factor of 1.0365
from 70% to 72.555% and the gas volume changes from 30% to 27.445% and causes
a pressure increase by a factor of 1.0931.
P, = 50(1.0931)[460+212/460+100] = 65,6 psia
Question 2.4.3:
What are the metallurgical consequences associated with frequent temperature cycling
of a component?
Temperature cycling of any component whose ability to expand/contract is

restricted produces stress in the component. The temperature cycling produces
alternating compressive/tensile or tensile/compressive loading of the component and
leads to the possibility of fatigue in the component. Fatigue is defined as failure due
the repeated application of cyclic stress with magnitude less than the minimum
specified yield stress [MSYS] of the material. The application of the stress a single
time is not expected to cause failure but the repeated application does. The
endurance limit is that magnitude of stress which can be cyclically applied an infinite
number of times with out causing failure. Stresses between the endurance limit and
the MSYS will result in fatigue failure if applied a sufficient number of times. A
power plant application of this concept is in limiting the cycling of the pressurizer
spray nozzle or the number of plant heatup/cooldown cycles at the specified
maximum rate.
Fatigue failures are fracture failures and not yield failures. They start with
microscopic cracks at the material surface. Some of the cracks are present initially;
others form when repeated cold working reduces the ductility in the strain-hardened
areas. These cracks grow minutely with each loading. Since cracks start at the
78
location of surface defects, the endurance limit is increased by proper treatment of

the surface.
Problem 2.4.1;
Assume that the pressurizer has insulation heat loss of300 hx> and a bypass spray valve flow rate
of 10 gpni, calculate the heater power required to maintain constant pressure of 2250 psia.
Spray flow originates from the RCS cold leg (565 F), enters the pressurizer
and is heated to the saturations conditions of the PZR. Since the PZR level and
pressure are maintained, an equal mass of saturated liquid leaves the PZR out the
surge line. Thus the net energy balance is the conversion of spray flow (10 gpm)
from subcooled liquid at 565 F to saturated liquid at 2250 psia. The enthalpies of
these two conditions are available from the ASME Steam Tables if the subcooled
liquid is approximated as saturated liquid at 565 F. Why is this approximation
valid?
Volume flow rate of spray:
(10 gpm) x (60 min/hr) x (1 ftV7.4805 gal)

= 80.209 ft^/hr
Mass flow rate of spray:
(80.209 ft^/hr) x (1 lbm/0.022245 ft^)

= 3,606 Ibm/hr
Enthalpy change of spray: (701.0 - 568.7) Btu/lbm

Heater Power Required:
(123.3 Btu/lbm) x (3.606 x 10^ Ibm/hr)

= 4.771 X 10^ Btu/hr = 140 kw
Total heater power required = 140 kw^p^y + 300 kwio^^ = 440 kw

If 140 kw will support 10 gpm at 2250 psia, then the total heater power
available in the PZR (1500 kw nominal) will support about 107 gpm of spray
flow while maintaining PZR level and pressure constant
79
Problem 2.4,4:
Assume that 1500 kw of heater power is energized and sufficient spray flow exists to maintain the
pressure constant at 2225 psia, calculate the spray flow rate in gpm of cold leg water.
See solution to Problem 2.4.1

Question 2.4.2;
If the relief valve is stuck in a fixed, non-shut, position what happens to the acoustic
signal as the RCS depressurizes?
The expansion of steam from the pressurizer vapor space, thru the relief valve,
into the Reactor Drain Tank is an isenthalpic process which is very turbulent. As the
RCS depressurizes, the flow rate of the steam will decrease and the magnitude of the
acoustic signal will decrease. The significance of this is that the acoustic monitor will
potentially lie to the operator by indicating that the valve has moved toward the
closed position. Understanding the principle of operation of this detector will help
keep from being misled.
Problem 2.4.5:
If the pressurizer relief valve remains open and the RDT pressurizes to 100 psig, what is the
expected temperature indicated by the tailpiece temperature detector?
As the RDT pressurizes to 100 psig (115 psia) the dynamics of the isenthalpic
expansion change. The wet-vapor mixture is expanding into a higher pressure,
consequently the saturation temperature increases. T,(115 psia) = 338 F.
Question 2.4.3:
The pressurizer relief valve tailpiece temperature detector is located close to the
pressurizer. Steam being released must travel through a long run of piping before
reaching the RDT. Assume that the RDT is at 100 psig and that the pressurizer is at
2250 psia, what impact does physical location have on the temperafttre indicated by the
leak detector?
The temperature of the steam-water (wet vapor) mixture at the location of the
temperature detector depends upon the enthalpy of the sat vapor being released
from the PZR and the actual pressure at that location in the relief line. Obviously
80
the pressure of the RDT is only an estimate of the pressure at the measurement
point in the relief line. The actual pressure must exceed the pressure in the RDT;
consequently the answers to previous questions are only an estimate of the
temperature at that location. The other condition which must be considered is that
the value measured by the tailpiece temperature detector is really only an estimate
of the actual conditions in the pipe and subject to detector lag if conditions are
rapidly changing.
The reason for spending so much time on this issue is that failure to
understand this concept is one of the human performance issues which exacerbated
the event at Three Mile Island. The temperature of the saturated steam inside the
pressurizer at 2250 psia is 652 F.
However, the dynamics of the isenthalpic
expansion process dictates that the temperature down stream of the relief valve
cannot approach 652 F. It must be lower and is driven by the pressure into which
the steam is relieved.
Problem 2.4.4:
Assume that the steam generator is at 1250psia and is relieving to atmospheric conditions. What
are the thermodynamic conditions of the relieving steam? What temperature would a leak
detector indicate?
It is necessary that the steam tables and the Mollier diagram be consulted
while completing this problem. The relieving steam from a PZR at 2250 psia into an
atmospheric or sub-atmospheric condition results in the saturated steam becoming
wet vapor. The process remains under the vapor dome. However, relieving steam
from a steam generator at 1250 psia or lower pressures goes directly into the
superheated region. Thus, the temperature will be greater than 212 F even though
the process is relieving to atmospheric pressure.
Again, understanding of the
dynamics of the physical process is essential to the proper interpretation of the

instrumentation. Steam at 1250 psia which is relieved to atmospheric pressure will
81
be superheated (not visible until some condensation takes place) and will have a
temperature of 280 F.
Question 2.5.1:
What are the consequences of using the wrong value boron worth in the calculation for
ECBC?
The boron worth is used to determine the amount of boron adjustment

necessary to compensate for the reactivity change terms in the ECBC determination.
If the wrong boron worth is used then the core will either be under borated or over
borated for the Time, Temperature, CEA Positions used in the ECBC and the
startup will result in the reactor achieving critical at a CEA position which is lower
than or higher than the ECRP. This could result in an actual critical position which
is lower than the PDIL which is a violation of Tech Specs. The assessments of count
rate change which take place during a startup should preclude actually violating the
startup, but if the error is too big, the startup might have to be aborted and then the
boron adjusted.
A ppm = -(App^ + Aprro + Apcea + Apxenon + ^Psm/Pu )/Boron Worth (avg)

If BW is high then A ppm is low and the core is under borated and criticality
will occur early.
If BW is low then A ppm is high and the core is over borated and criticality
will occur late.
Problem 2.5.1:
Develop a strategy for determining the ECBC for a startup at 250 EFPD which uses previous
data from a startup at 150 EFPD instead of previous data from HFP operation just before the
trip.
ECBC = Original Boron Concentration + A ppm
82
A ppm = -(A Pro + Apxenon + ^PcEA + ^Pg^ + ApcoreAge )/Average BW

Aprro is zero if the two startups take place at the same RCS TcoW
A Pxenon depends on both time in life and time after trip for each startup.
ApcEA depends on both time in life and the CEA position for each startup.
A Psm/pu depends on both time in life and time after trip and power level before
the trip for each startup.
ApcoreAge's determined by evaluating the reactivity insertion between the two
times in life by using the boron letdown curve to predict the change in
boron concentration.
Question 2.6.1:
Does the answer differ if the coolant were first charged into the system and then
removed?
Yes: a dilution batch process is always more efficient if the coolant is first
drained and then replaced than it is if it is diluted and then drained. Not only does
the equation show this, but so does physical insight. If the goal is to reduce the
concentration, then draining the higher concentration before dilution is more efficient.
Efficiency, in this case, is measured by the number of gallons of water which must be
moved to affect the desired concentration and volume change.
Question 2.6.2:
Does the answer differ if the coolant were initially at 500 ppm and being diluted to 499
ppm?
The efficiency of the dilution process is expressed in terms of the number of

gallons of water required per ppm of concentration change. In the first case the 1
ppm change is 1/1000 of the boron present in the system. In the second case the 1
ppm change is 1/500 of the boron present in the system. Clearly these two changes
will require different quantities is water.
83
If the defining equation for batch process small magnitude dilution is solved,
symbolically for the volume drained, the results are:
Vdrained
Question 2,6.3:
* (Desifcd Concentration Change)/(C,|U3|)
Does the answer differ if the coolant were being boratedfrom 1000 ppm to 1001 ppm?
In the case of system boration, the key parameter is the boron concentration
of the fluid being charged into the system as a borating fluid. If the charging fluid
is heavily borated, then very little charging flow is required to increase the system
concentration by 1 ppm. On the other hand, if the charging fluid is only slightly more
borated than the system, then large quantities of charging flow are required to
increase the system concentration by 1 ppm.
If the general batch process concentration-dilution equation is solved for the
required charging volume for small magnitude borations, the results are:
Vadded =
* (Dcsircd Concentration Change)/(C3dded - C,,U3,)
Problem 2.6.1:
Plot gallons per ppm vj ppm for both dilution and boration processes over the range of2000ppm
to 100 ppm.
The solution strategy is to solve the two previous equations for a 100,000
gallon system with a 1 ppm boron concentration change in both the boration and the
dilution m.ode. The dilution fluid has a boron concentration of 0 ppm while the
boration fluid has a boron concentration of 4000 ppm (per Technical Specifications).
Solve the equations over a range of initial concentrations from 2000 ppm to 100 ppm
and compare the results with the typical values given in the core data book
(Appendix B).
84
Dilution:
= V^(A ppm)/Cii^
Borntion.
^drained
Qnitial
âdded
^sys(^ PP'^VCâdded " înitial)
V3dd^(dilution)
V,dd^(boration)
2000
50
50
1500
67
40
1000
100
33
500
200
29
100
1000
26
The solution demonstrates the fact that the efficiency of the dilution process
is significantly affected by the initial concentration of the system and that the
efficiency of the boration process is relatively constant.
Question 2.6.4:
Does the answer to Probiem 2.6.1 differ if the RCS is at 565 F and the coolant being
charged is at 100 F? If not, why not? If so, how can the answer to Problem 2.6.1 be
corrected?
Since the system 'measure' is volume and not mass; and since the fluid being
charged is measured at low temperature while the system is at hot temperature; the
charging system volume added must be adjusted to compensate for the expansion of
the colder fluid to a larger specific volume (lower density). The data in the previous
solution can be adjusted by multiplying by the ratio of fluid densities. The correct
correction factor is p5y5,em/padded or
which can be obtained from the
ASME steam tables.

Problem 2.6.2:
Apply Equation 16.2 to determine the number of gallons of 100 F water which must be charged
into a 100,000 gallon system, at 565 F, to reduce the system soluble boron concentration from
850 ppm to 500 ppm.
85
^CH (^CH^^sytein)^sy5tem^^(^(/^rinal)
VcH = (0.016130/0.022245)(100,000)ln(850/500) = 38,500 gallons
Problem 2.6.3:
Develop an equation which applies for boration processes in which the charging water and RCS
water are at different temperatures and the concentration of the boration water is a variable.
Express the solution in terms of the amount of charging water (gallons) which must be added to
affect a specified increase in boron concentration of the RCS.
Problem 2.6.4;
If the first ionization constant for boric acid is 6 E-8 at 565 F, calculate the pH of a boric acid
solution which is 2000 ppm in boron.
The ionization constant provides information about the extent of ionization of

the chemical molecule into ions. In this case, boric acid ionizes (shghtly) in water to
produce hydronium ion and the hydrogen borate radical. The concentration of the
hydronium ion in the solution is the variable which specifies the pH of the solution.
pH is an important concept since the corrosion rate of the metallic surfaces which are
exposed to the water is a strong function of the pH.
H3BO3 + HjO -> HsO"^ + (HiBOj)' where the ionization constant is:
K =
6 E-8 =
[H30+][H3B03 ] / [H3BO3]
2000 ppm boron as boric acid has a concentration of 1.85 x 10 ' moles/liter of
the boric acid. The value of the ionization constant is so small that essentially none
of the boric acid ionizes and the ionization constant expression becomes
K = 6 x lO"* = XV(1.85 X 10"') = 6 X 10" where X is the unknown amount
(small) boric acid which ionized into the two products. Thus X = {H30''"]
X^ = 1.11 X 10" and X = 1.05 x 10"^ and pH = -logfHjO"'] - 4.00
The conversion of 2000 ppm boron as boric acid into units of moles/liter of
boric acid is as follows:
86
2000 ppm Boron = 2000 mg Boron/kg water = 2 g Boron/liter water

2g B/liter (1 mole B/10.8 g B)(l Mole HjBOj/Mole B) = 1.85 x 10'^ mole/liter
Problem 2.6.5:
Use the Chart of the Nuclides to determine the radiation hazard associated with using natural
lithium as the source of lithium hydroxide and postulate a solution to this hazard.
The Chart of the Nuclides indicates that naturally occurring lithium exists as
two separate isotopes in the following proportions. Li-6 7.5% : Li-7 92.5%. 7.5% is
relatively low; however this isotope has an n-a capture cross section of 941 barns for
thermal neutrons. Consequently the presence of even a small quantity of Li-6 would
result in the following reaction. The ability to evaluate products by writing balanced
nuclear reactions is important because the Chart of the Nuclides provides reaction
data and not a complete listing of reaction products.
'n + Li ~> [^Li*] ~> ''a + 'H : The second reaction product of the Li-6
capture reaction is tritium; and if natural lithium were used, the tritium levels
within the RCS would be considerably elevated. The solution to this result is
to use lithium which has had its Li-6 fraction reduced by enrichment processes
which are quite expensive.
Problem 2.7.1:
Use Equations Z7.1 and 2.7.2 to verify that the purification half-life for the System 80 type plant
is approximately 1 hour if boron equalization flow rate is approximately 100 gpm.
Problem 2.8.1:
Propose a strategy for converting the mechanical deflection of the level detection system
diaphragm into a useable electronic signal.
strategy which works is to apply the principle that the movement of a
metallic core inside an electric coil will change the impedance of the electric circuit.
If the power source is a constant voltage [current] source then motion of the core will
result in a varying current [voltage] which is directly related to the motion and can
87
be calibrated in terms of level.
An alternate strategy would be to make the
diaphragm of the Ap cell the moving portion of a variable capacitor. Again the
motion of the diaphragm would change the impedance of an electrical circuit and
produce a signal proportional to level.
Probkm 2.8.2:
Develop an equation for the differential pressure across the DP cell in a pressurizer level detection
system in terms of the tank size, liquid level and the thermodynamic properties of the fluid in both
the pressurizer and the reference leg.
In terms of the terminology and symbology used in Figure 2.8.1:

X=
Distance between level taps on the tank. This is the height of

the reference column of fluid at density Preference-
h =
Height of the fluid in the tank above the bottom level tap of the
tank at density puquij.
(X-h)=
Height of the vapor or gas column above the fluid level in the
tank at density pg3s(vapor)-
Pgjs(vapor):
Pressure of the cover gas or vapor above the liquid in the tank.
This pressure is also seen by the reference leg side of the Ap cell
since the gas either in on top of the fluid in a wet reference leg
system or fills the reference leg in a dry reference leg system.
Ap
hpjjqyjjj + (X-h)pgj5 + Pgjj - (^Preference
^gas)
Note that P^^^ cancels out on both sides of the An eel! and in the equation.
This is a definite advantage and reason for connecting the reference leg to the top
of the tank instead of referencing the system to atmospheric system. Changes in tank
pressure do not change the indicated level unless the change in pressure causes a
change in the density of the fluid or vapor in the tank.
88
Problem 2.8,3:
Sketch a set of lines similar to those in Figure Z8.2 which qualitatively depict the relationship
between indicated and actual level if the detector were recalibrated at 500 psia saturation
conditions.
TTie 500 psia line would have a slope = 1. Lines which are at higher pressure
would have steeper slope and lines which are at lower pressure would have shallower
slope. The key factor is that saturation pressure (temperature) dictates the density
of the liquid and vapor columns inside the tank and thus impact the relationship
between indicated and actual level.
89
CHAPTERS
REACTOR STARTUP
A.
Reactor sub-critical
B.
All control rods fully inserted (ARI)
C.
ECC complete and RCS diluted to ECBC
D.
RCS at NOT/NOP
E.
All plant systems capable of supporting operation at power levels

capable of producing heat
A.
Perform a reactor startup from ARI to criticality
B.
Monitor neutron detector output during the approach to criticality,

prevent early criticality, and validate the accuracy of the ECRP
3.3 Theory Overview
If a reactor system contains a source of non-fission neutrons then a steady

state neutron population(power level) will be achieved only if the reactor is
subcritical. If the strength of the neutron source is constant, then the steady state
neutron population can be described in terms of the source strength and the
reactivity state of the reactor. As positive reactivity is added to the reactor system,
or as fuel is loaded into the core, the variation in neutron population level can be
utilized to monitor the approach to criticality and predict when the reactor will
achieve that state condition. Utilizing the dynamic response of a neutron detector
to predict the approach to criticality is much more accurate than using reactivity
coefficient data to calculate an ECC. Any analytical approach based on monitoring
90
core power or neutron population must be applied with the understanding that"...
in practice we measure neutron leakage flux near the edge of the core and assume
that leakage flux is proportional to neutron population inside the reactor" (Williams,
1993).
Define:
Subcritical Multiplication Factor (M) :
M = Total steady state neutron population from both fission and sources
divided by source neutron population only.
M = [ S + F ]/S where:
S=
source neutron population produced in a time interval equal to

the fission neutron generation time.
F= fission
neutron population produced each generation.
Generation designation :
Sj = >
source neutrons in first generation

fission
neutrons
in
second
generation
Derivation:
Sj + Fj S2 + F2
[steady state]
F2 = [S, + Fj] X
[neutron generation model]
S, + Fj = S2 + [S, + F,] x Kjff

S = S. = S2
[substitution]
S + Fi - [S + F,] X K^ff = S
[rearrangement]
F = F, = F2
[steady state]
[S+F] X [1-K,] = S
[rearrangement]
[S+F]/S = 1/(1-K.) = M
[constant source strength]
3.3.1
91
At any point during the startup or fuel loading of the reactor, the value of M
can be determined by comparing the current steady state detector response to the
detector response which was present due to the source alone with no fuel.
The
variation in M during the startup or fuel loading will be used to predict when the
reactor will achieve criticality by realizing that as M increases, the parameter (I-K^ )
k
decreases which means K^ff ~> 1. Predictions based on these methods must take into
account that there is a variation in power signal even when the reactor is at steady
state. This variation is caused by the statistical variability of the neutron source
strength which is driven by the radioactive decay processes from which source
neutrons originate. Subsequent sections will discuss these methods.
3.4 Sources of Source Neutrons

Since a source neutron is defined as a neutron produced by some process
other than neutron induced fission, the following nuclear processes can result in the
production of source neutrons.
1.
Spontaneous fission of fissionable material.
^'Pu, and ^û
all have the capability of contributing source neutrons to any fuel

assemblage.
2.
Photoneutron (gamma,n) materials.
Some materials such as
experience (gamma,n) reactions when exposed to gamma fluxes which

exist even after a reactor is shutdown. Thus the presence of deuterium
in water moderated/cooled reactor systems contributes to source
neutrons in a shutdown reactor. Deuterium is present naturally and is
produced by neutron activation of 'H during power operation.
3.
Photo-fission (gamma,f) processes take place with high energy gamma

photons and contribute to the source neutron population in a shutdown
reactor.
92
All of the above listed sources are commonly called the 'intrinsic' source in a
reactor and produce a low level of source neutrons which would allow any reactor to
be started up. However, the source strength(neutrons/sec) from these combined
sources usually result in a subcritical multiplication neutron level too low to accurately
detect by neutron detectors located outside the core. To increase the neutron
population to a level such that the neutron leakage flux is accurately and reliably
detectable, additional sources are usually installed into a reactor system.
Installed sources commonly function based upon the principle that some
materials experience alpha-n type reactions. Thus an alpha emitting source is
combined with a suitable target material to result in an installed source to increase
the total source strength of the reactor. Common combinations are
1.
2.
^Pu / ê
239py / 9Bg
3.
Naturalgjj / 9gg
The first two sources function based upon the natural radioactive decay of
either plutonium isotope producing the alpha which interacts with the beryllium to
produce a neutron. The third process is activated when the reactor is operating at
power. The natural isotopes of Antimony (121 & 123) undergo (n,gamma) reactions
to produce Antimony 122 & 124 which experience beta decay. The gamma which
accompanies these decays excites the beryllium which in turn splits into two alpha
particles and a neutron. The high energy alpha can in turn interact with additional
beryllium and produce another neutron.
3.5 Subcritical Multiplication

The point-reactor equations (Hetrick, 1971) are presented here and are used
to derive useful relationships for monitoring the state of a subcritical reactor. The
93
equations show that a subcritical reactor can and will operate at a constant power
level if a constant neutron source (intrinsic or installed) is present. This process is
called subcritical multiplication and forms the basis for understanding and predicting
the behavior of a reactor during the approach to critical(See Appendix C-2).
Equations:
dn/dt = (p-p)(n/e.) +
+ q
dQ/dt = )3i(n/) - XjQ

with i = l->6
At steady state, with neutron density (n), neutron removal rate [which is
proportional to neutron power] (n/e), reactivity (p),and source strength (q) constant,
both the time rate terms (dn/dt and dC/dt) are zero. The concept of neutron power
is introduced to differentiate from thermal power which is driven by the decay of
fission fragments when the reactor is subcritical and stable on source neutrons due
to subcritical multiplication. The symbol, (n/), has units of neutrons/cm^-sec and is
proportional to the fission rate which is occurring within the subcritical system. If the
reactor is highly subcritical and has been so for long enough that the delayed neutron
precursors have decayed away, then the point-reactor kinetics equations reduce to the
following equations which demonstrate the process of subcritical multiplication and
are completely compatible with Equation 3.3.1 which was developed earlier using a
different approach.
"<>/ = -qo/Po
3.5.1
O = K
= qo/(l-K) = Mq
Where njl and
3.5.2
are representations of the constant power level which
exists due to the constant source level (q^) being acted upon by the reactor system
which is subcritical with a given value of reactivity (p) or K^fj (K). Note that
94
Equation 3.5.2 defines the subcritical muhiplication factor (M) in the identical
manner as Equation 3.3.1 earlier.
3E001:
Given count rate data and reactor conditions, assess the

reactivity state of the core.
Application:
In both Equations 3.5.1 and 3.5.2, n j t and n j t o sr assumed to be
proportional to the count rate (CR) of the neutron detector and CR^ is the count
rate at that detector caused by q^ when K=0. The resulting equations used to
monitor subcritical multiplication are:
CR,p, = CRQ = CR2P2
3.5.3
if the reactor is near critical.

CR,(1-K,) = CR = CRjCI-K,)
3.5.4
if K < 1.
the third useful relationship is that
CRyCR = 1/(1-KJ = M
3.5.5
where M is the Subcritical Multiplication factor.

The important aspect of Equation 3.5.5 is that the subcritical multiplication
factor (M) depends upon the relationship between measured count rate at two
different points. The procedures and strategies presented will utilize the changes in
measured count rate to predict the criticality state of the reactor. Whether the
development is based upon the use of (1-K) and {njlj or on the use of reactivity
(p) and (n^/^); the changes in measured count rate will only accurately model the
criticality state of the reactor if the system is homogeneous and the relative location
of the detector and the source is proper.
95
The differences between Equations 3.5.3 and 3.5.4 depend upon how closely
reactivity ( p = K-l/K) and AK (which is = K-1) model each other. At a condition
with K = 0.95, p = -5263 pcm and AK = -5000 pcm. The difference being
approximately 5%. Since ex-core neutron detectors, which are used to monitor
reactor startups, are not calibrated; 5% represents a reasonable limit of their
accuracy. Thus, below K = 0.95, Equations 3.5.2, 3.5.4, and 3.5.5 will be used. If K
> 0.95, Equations 3.5.1 and 3.5.3 will be used. Furthermore, with K ^ 0.95, M will
be defined as
M = CRyCRi = pi/py
3.5.6
Where the 'i' denotes the state condition of count rate

and reactivity when Equation 3.5.6 starts being applied.
The following examples assume that in the point reactor there are no spatial
effects caused by source distribution, detector location, fuel loading patterns or
control rod locations which impact the response of the detector to reactivity
insertions. Actual response when these conditions do not all apply will be discussed
later. Further, these examples assume that reactivity insertion coefficients and defects
are evaluated and tabulated as reactivity units and not AK units.
Example 3.5.1:
A reactor is highly subcritical with K = 0.85 and a stable count rate = 50 cps.
Boron is diluted to insert +3000 pcm of reactivity. Predict the final stable
count rate which will exist after the dilution.
Solution:
Ko = 0.85 = > Po = -17,647 pcm
Pi = Po
+ 3000 pcm
p, = -14,647 pcm
96
K, = 0.872
CR(1-K) = CR,(1-K,)
CR, = 50(0.15/0.128) = 59 cps
Example 3.5.2:
A reactor has a stable count rate of 200 cps with K = 0.95. Boron is to be
diluted to insert +3000 pcm of reactivity. Predict the final stable count rate
which will exist after the dilution.
Solution:
K, = 0.95 => Pi = -5263 pcm
P2 = Pi + 3000 pcm = -2263 pcm
CR,Pi = CR2P2
CR, = 200(-5263/-2263) = 465 cps
An important aspect of subcritical multiplication can be realized by studying
the solutions to Examples 3.5.1 and 3.5.2. In both cases +3000 pcm was added to a
subcritical reactor. In the first case, count rate increased by a factor of 1.18 (59/50);
while in the second case, count rate increased by a factor of 2.325 (465/200).
The closer a subcritical reactor approaches criticality, the larger the count
rate response will be to a given constant reactivity addition step.
One indication of impending criticality is that large changes in stable count
rate result from relatively small additions of reactivity.
Question 3.5.1:
How would the prediction in Example 3.5.2 have been different

if the reactor had been -5000 pcm subcritical before the addition
of 3000 pcm?
97
Example 3.5 J:
A reactor is 5000 pcm subcritical and has a stable count rate of 100 cps.
Predict the stable count rate which will exist after each of four successive
insertions of 1000 pcm of positive reactivity.
Solution:
CRj
^pj;
CRip,
Px = Pi + ^P
Core Reactivity
Count rate
pcm
cps
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
100
125
167
250
500
The count rate response in this example demonstrates another key aspect of the
process of subcritical multiplication.
If a reactivity insertion causes count rate to double, then that reactivity
insertion has reduced the net negative reactivity of the core by a factor of 2.
Figure 3.5.1 graphically displays the count rate response calculated in Example
3.5.3. It shows the effect of each of the +1000 pcm additions. Following each
addition of positive reactivity, count rate increases and then levels off an the new
stable value predicted by the example. Each successive insertion takes longer for
count rate to stabilize. Details to explain the time response will be presented later.
An indication of impending criticality is the increasing length of time
required for count rate to stabilize after a positive reactivity insertion.
98
Previous examples made the assumption that the initial reactivity state of the
core was known. However, this is not usually the case. Reactivity coefficients are
fairly well known but the actual core reactivity state is inferred from count rate
response. Subcritical multiplication processes can be used to predict the point of
criticality even if the initial reactivity state is unknown.
-1000
g
o
x:
CC
SCO
CR
<n
a.
o
o
s
cc
E
3
O
O
CR
CR,
CR
100"
CR
Time
Figure 3.5.1, Count rate Response to Successive Equal

Reactivity Insertions
99
Question 3.5.2:
Using the information presented in Example 3.5.3 and Figure

3.5.1, predict the final reactivity state of a reactor if a 2000 pern
reactivity insertion causes stable count rate to double. What
impact does uncertainty in the value of the reactivity insertion
have on the predicted final reactivity state of the system?
Example 3.5.4:
2000 pcm is inserted into a subcritical reactor which results in an increase of
stable count rate from 100 cps to 180 cps. Assume that the reactor was
initially in a state with K ^ 0.95. Determine the net reactivity in the core
after the 2000 pcm insertion and validate the assumption that K ^ 0.95 prior
to the insertion.
Solution:
CRjp, = CR2P2
P2 = p, + Ap
P2 = -CRiAp/(CR2 - CRi)
p2 = (100 cps)(-2000 pcm)/(180 cps - 100 cps)
p, = -2500 pcm => Pi = -4500 pcm
Initial assumption that K > 0.95 is valid

Example 3.5.4 illustrates, as long as the assumptions of the point reactor
model hold, that subcritical multiplication processes can predict the core reactivity
state using only changes in the count rate and reactivity additions as inputs. This is
a powerful analytic tool which can be used to prevent inadvertent criticality events
and to assure appropriate reactivity management during a reactor startup.
100
Problem 3.5.1:
750 pcm is inserted into a subcritical reactor and results in stable count rate
increasing from 500 ops to 900 cps. Determine the net reactivity in the core
after the 750 pcm insertion.
3E002:
Evaluate reactor startup strategies for adequacy.
Example 3.5.5:
A reactor is to be started up by diluting soluble boron from the coolant in 100
ppm increments. Initial Conditions are:
1) all safety control rods fully withdrawn
2) regulating rods withdrawn to the ECRP
3) reactor coolant system boron concentration = 1500 ppm
4) count rate = 100 cps.
The calculated predicted boron concentration at criticality is 1000 ppm with
an acceptable margin of +. 50 ppm. Assume that reactivity worth of soluble
boron is -9.5 pcm/ppm in the concentration and temperature range of interest.
After the first 100 ppm dilution, the count rate stabilizes at 300 cps. Should
the dilution toward 1000 ppm continue? Why, or why not?
Solution:
CR,p, = CR2P2
Pi = P2 - 950 pcm
100(p2 - 950) = 300(P2)
p2 = 100(-950)/200 = -475 pcm
DO NOT CONTINUE WITH THE DILUTION !!!!!
101
After only a single 100 ppm dilution, with 4 more planned, the reactor is less
than 500 pcm subcritical. Obviously an additional dilution of 100 ppm (950 pcm) will
result in supercriticality 300 ppm prior to the acceptable target.
Example 3.5.5 could have been evaluated by realizing that the first 100 ppm
dilution had caused count rate to triple. Clearly the next 100 ppm dilution would
have resulted in supercriticality.
An alternate solution could have been based upon the assumption that boron
worth is constant. In such cases, the problem could have been solved in terms of
ppm instead of pcm.
Alternate solution:
Define BM as the boron concentration margin to criticality with units
of ppm.
CR,(BM,) = CRzCBMj)
BMj = BM, + delta ppm
100(BM2 - 100) = BOOCBM,)
BM2 = 100(-100)/200 --= -50 ppm
50 ppm additional dilution will result in criticality.
Example 3.5.6:
A 4000 pcm addition to a subcritical reactor results in an increase in stable
count rate from 100 cps to 200 cps. How subcritical is the reactor after this
first addition?
The count rate doubling guideline says that the reactor was about 8000 pcm
subcritical prior to the first insertion of 4000 pcm. Thus Equation 3.5.4 must be used
for this solution.
102
Solution:
CR,(1-Ki) = CR CI-K ) (Equation 3.5.4)
j
K, = l/(l-p,)
Pi = P2 -
and K2 = l/(l-p2)
Ap : substitution into Equation 3.5.4 yields
CRJP2' - P2(l+Ap) + Ap] =
- P2(l+Ap)]
This final expression must be rearranged as a standard quadratic equation of

the form Ar + Bx + C = 0 and solved using the quadratic formula. The results
are that pj = -3713 pern and that the reactor was only -7713 pom subcritical before
the first insertion of 4000 pcm. Subsequent insertion of another 4000 pcm would
result in the reactor being supercritical by 287 pcm.
If a given reactivity insertion causes count rate to double, then that same
amount of reactivity, added again, will result in the reactor being
supercritical.
Had this example been solved using the same approach in Example 3.5.5, a
much easier solution would have resulted. This alternate solution indicates that the
reactor was exactly 8000 pcm subcritical, the first 4000 pcm insertion caused count
rate to double and a second 4000 pcm would have caused exact criticality. However,
the more complicated solution used in Example 3.5.6 more accurately reflects the
actual response of a reactor system when count rate is used to predict criticality states
and reactivity coefficients are expressed in reactivity units.
103
3.6 Inverse Count Rate Plotting

3E003:
Evaluate reactor startup data and predict where the reactor

will achieve criticality.
Rather than solving algebraic equations to determine the reactivity state based
upon count rate response, a graphical solution is usually performed. This method is
called 1/M or Inverse Count Rate plotting. From Equation 3.5.5 or 3.5.6;
1/M = CR^CR, = (1-KJ/(1-K)
1/M = CR/CRj = pj( / Pi
As CRj increases and 1/M decreases, K converges to unity and the reactivity
state of the reactor converges to zero (criticality).
Example 3.6.1:
Consider the data from Example 3.5.3; but, ignore the fact that the initial
reactivity was stipulated as -5000 pcm. Assume that the count rate data was
measured for each successive insertion of 1000 pcm, calculate 1/M and plot
to determine the anticipated point of criticality.
Solution data:
Data is plotted in Figure 3.6.1:
STEP
DEL RHO
CR
1/M
100
1.00
125
168
250
500
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
(step/total)
0
1
2
3
4
0/0
1000/1000
1000/2000
1000/3000
1000/4000
104
These data indicate that 1/M vs reactivity added is linear for the point kinetics
model with no influencing spatial effects. In theory, the first insertion of 1000 pcm
yielded the same answer as the last 1000 pcm. "Criticality is predicted to occur after
the addition of 5000 pcm total." In reality, 1/M plots are not usually linear and
multiple points are used to evaluate the progress of a reactor startup or a fuel
loading sequence. The actual non-linearity of the response of reactivity insertion or
fuel loading sequence is caused by the relative location of the installed source and
detector, and any associated departures from uniformity such as control rod position
or fuel assembly location relative to the source-detector location. These effects are
particularly prevalent in a large core. However 1/M plotting still produces results
which are very useful in predicting when a reactor will achieve criticality.
T3
T!
E
o
z
:nOO
3000
4000
5000
Reactivity Addad (pcm)
Figure 3.6.1, 1/M vs. Reactivity Added

(Example 3.6.1)
6000
7000
6000
105
Problem 3.6.1:
A reactor is to be started up by diluting soluble boron from the coolant in 50
ppm increments. Initial conditions are:
1) all safety control rods are fully withdrawn
2) all regulating rods withdrawn to the ECRP
3) reactor coolant system boron concentration = 1500 ppm
4) count rate = 100 cps
The calculated predicted boron concentration at criticality is 1000 ppm with
an acceptable margin of +. 50 ppm. Assume that soluble boron worth
(pcm/ppm) is constant in the concentration and temperature range of interest.
Use the following data to develop a 1/M plot and evaluate whether or not the
next 50 ppm dilution should be performed.
Data:
STEP
BORON
(ppm)
0
1
2
3
4
5
1500
1450
1400
1350
1300
1250
CR
(cps)
100
103
110
125
150
320
Discussion:
Referring to Figure 3.6.2, steps l-->4 show the result of the 1/M slowly
converging into the range of 1000 4^ 50 ppm which is the acceptable target range
based upon the predicted calculation. However, the fifth dilution (to 1250 ppm)
caused count rate to increase to 320 cps which is an increase of 2.13 from the
106
previous dilution and yields a 1/M of 0.31. Plotting 1/M between steps 4 and 5 and
extrapolating indicates that another 50 ppm dilution would produce criticality at a
boron concentration which is not consistent with the predicted criticality range +.
acceptable margin. The only prudent action is to stop and resolve the discrepancy
between the predicted and actual dynamic response of the reactor.
Boron Concentration (ppm)
Figure 3.6.2, 1/M vs. Boron Concentration

(Problem 3.6.1)
The final example will be used in class to apply these concepts to a set of real
data associated with the startup of one of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station
units. The example will utilize an actual control rod worth curve and the instructor
107
will provide the count rate data. The actual data and solution is provided in the
solutions portion of this chapter. The PVNGS startup methodology is to utilize 30
inch incremental withdrawal of control rod groups known as the 'regulating rods'. In
the pattern used there are 510 total inches of regulating rod group withdrawal
available. After each 30 inch increment of motion the current stable count rate will
be used to calculate a value for 1/M relative to the point where the regulating rod
withdrawal began. The total worth of the regulating groups of rods is approximately
3500 pcm (depending upon time in life). Consequently Equations 3.5.1, 3.5.2, and
3.5.6 are used to monitor the startup progress.
Students will be expected to analyze the count rate data, determine a current
value for 1/M, project ahead to the anticipated critical position and evaluate the
acceptability of that anticipated position relative to the calculated predicted position.
3.7 Time Response during Subcritical Multiplication
3E004:
Given reactor conditions during reactor startup scenarios,

predict reactor response to a specifled manipulation.
Example 3.5.3 developed subcritical response to successive equal reactivity

insertions. Figure 3.5.1 displays the results and indicates that the closer the reactor
is to being critical, the longer it takes for count rate to stabilize following a reactivity
insertion.
This section develops the time dependencies which govern reactor
response and establishes the foundation for understanding this basic concept.
Using the concept of the neutron multiplication model, K (Keff) is the effect
of the multiplying media (absorption and leakage) on the neutron population from
one generation to the next.
108
N, = N(K)^
3.7.1
where
= number of neutrons starting the first

generation;
= number of neutrons produced by the 'x'
generation; and
X
= number of generations elapsed
If all neutrons are assumed to be prompt, then the number of generations can be
expressed as either:
X = t/o
where t = elapsed time, and

= prompt neutron lifetime
or
X
= t/
where t = elapsed time, and

= neutron generation time
= /K
Thus;
N, = N(K)'''
3.7.2
or, because power is directly related to neutron population

P. = P(K)'''
3.7.3
Example 3.7.1:
Assuming that all neutrons from fission are prompt, determine the reactor
power level one (1) second after insertion of 100 pom of positive reactivity
into a previously critical reactor. Initial power is 1 Mw. Assume that the
neutron generation time for this media is 5 x 10"^ seconds.
Solution:
P, = P^CK)"'
P, = 1 Mw(1.001)''5^-^
Pi = 4.8 X 10 Mw
(Equation 3.7.3)
109
It should be obvious that a power level change of such a large magnitude in

such a short time is an uncontrollable excursion and that the reactor would have
destroyed itself. Neither is a reactivity insertion of 100 pcm unrealistic; nor, does it
produce such a rapid excursion in a real thermal reactor. The fallacy in this example
is that all fission neutrons are not prompt and the small fraction of delayed neutrons
()3) results in an effective generation time much longer than 5 x 10'^ seconds.
The mean effective neutron generation time (') is the time between
successive generations consisting of the effects of both prompt and delayed neutrons.
Consider the lifetime of neutrons to be the total time which elapses between the
instant that a neutron is absorbed by a fuel target atom until the neutrons which are
released by the fission event subsequently either leak from or are absorbed by the
media.
'n +
-> (ûy -> FF, + FF2 + v'n + Y
The compound excited nucleus, (Û), has a lifetime of about 1 x 10 ''*

seconds. This very short time will be ignored in all further discussion because even
the shortest prompt neutron lifetime is orders of magnitude larger than this value.
Of the (v) neutrons produced , )Sv are not produced until the radioactive
decay of the particular fission fragment (delayed neutron precursor) is complete.
This time frame is based upon the radioactive decay mean life (t,) of the specific
precursors and ranges between 0.3 and 80 seconds for the usually referenced 6 group
model for thermal fission in U-235 (Glasstone and Sesonske, 1967). Recall that
tn, =
yx
where
is the decay constant for the group.
Once produced, neutrons [both prompt and delayed] begin their slowing down
and thermal diffusion processes which ultimately result in either fission, capture, or
leakage. In a thermal reactor this time frame is on the order of 5 x 10"^ seconds and
is what is normally referred to as
. Standard reactor dynamics texts present a
formal development of the relationships between the composition of the media (Sj,
110
and M^) and the core geometry (B^) on neutron absorption lifetime, neutron lifetime
and neutron generation time. It should be apparent that all of these time frames
depend upon the composition of the media and consequently will vary as the
composition changes. For example, diluting soluble boron will reduce 2, of the total
core and neutron generation time will increase. It should be noted that prompt
neutrons and delayed neutrons are not born an the same average kinetic energy.
Thus the neutron lifetimes of prompt and delayed neutrons are not quite the same.
This difference will not be considered further because the differences in birth
energies only effect the chances of absorption and leakage of the very fast neutrons.
Applying these time frame concepts an expression for the generation time can
be developed for two theoretical cases.
Case 1: assume all neutrons are prompt.
p = neutron lifetime
p " 5 X 10'^ seconds
Case 2: assume all neutrons are delayed
= precursor mean life + neutron lifetime
" (0.3-->80) seconds + 5 x 10'^ seconds
" (0.3-->80) seconds
As long as the reactor is dependent upon delayed neutrons, the mean effective
neutron generation time becomes a weighted average of the prompt and delayed
neutron generation times.
' = (l-^)p +
3.7.4
pto
where ip and
are defined by the
two previous examples.
Ill
Recalling the typical values of neutron lifetimes and precursor mean life,
Equation 3.7.4 obviously simplifies to
I' =
= PlKit
3.7.5
In conclusion, as long as the reactor system does not depart too far from
criticality then delayed neutrons have a significant slowing influence on reactor
transients by creating an effective generation time which is orders of magnitude larger
than neutron lifetimes.
An alternate derivation for the effective lifetime model is to solve the inhour
equation for small values of omega. The results of this model are essentially identical
to Equation 3.7.5 and are displayed below. (Hetrick, 1971)
= L(/3Ai) =
3-7.6
The basis for the effective lifetime model is that the reactor does not depart
from criticality by too large of a margin.
"As Po increases from zero, the positive root increases very slowly..., but once
Po increases past ^ the slowing effect of delayed neutrons is lost. The
crossover p^ = )9 is called prompt critical because at this point the chain
reaction is self-sustaining on prompt neutrons alone." (Hetrick, 1971)
In addition to the obvious application of studying the determining factors for
stable period in a supercritical reactor, the slowing down effect of delayed neutrons
also can be used to explain the time dependencies of the subcritical multiplication
process.
Example 3.5.3 demonstrated that successive insertions of the same reactivity,
with constant source strength, resulted in successively larger changes in count rate.
Further, the statement was made that after each successive insertion it takes longer
for count rate to stabilize. For completeness, the same example is repeated here.
112
Example 3.7.2:
A reactor is 5000 pcm subcritical and has a stable count rate of 100 cps.
Predict the stable count rate which will exist after each of four (4) successive
insertions of 1000 pcm of positive reactivity.
Solution.(See Figure 3.7.1.)
CR Q
CRjPx
CRoPo
= 100 cps
Po = -5000
pcm
p, = -4000 pcm
finet
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
CR
(CRJCRJ
100
125
167
250
500
1.00
1.25
1.33
1.50
2.00
P2
= -3000 pcm
P3
= -2000 pcm
= -1000 pcm
P4
1000
600
400-
CR
100
CR,
Figure 3.7.1, Count rate Response to Successive Equal

Reactivity Insertions
113
Interactive dynamic system simulation software (Kom, 1989) was used to

simulate a reactor startup with an installed source using point kinetics and the
prompt jump approximation (Hetrick, 1971). In three cases the initial power level
was normalized to unity and the core net negative reactivity was reduced by a factor
of two (2)(Appendix D-1 provides the program used). In all of these cases, the
theory of subcritical multiplication (Equation 3.5.3) predicts a final stable power level
which is twice the initial power level. The results of these simulations are displayed
in Figures 3.7.2, 3.7.3, and 3.7.4 and are summarized in Table 3.7.1.
These power vs time responses clearly substantiate the claim on Figure 3.7.1
that;
At4 > Atj > Atj > Atj
An indication of impending criticality is the increasing length of time
required for count rate to stabilize after a positive reactivity insertion.
Table 3.7.1, Reactor Startup with Source, Summary Data
Case Reactivitv($)
initial final
1
-1.0
-0.5
2
-0.25
-0.125
3
-0.125 -0.0625
Power at
500 sec
2.00
2.00
1.89
Approximate time (sec)

to achieve final power
200
440
>500
During a startup using 1/M plotting, count rate must first stabilize before data
is collected and 1/M is calculated. Otherwise the erroneous value of 1/M will not
accurately predict the point of anticipated criticality. The person responsible for
determining that count rate has stabilized is normally controlled by specific station
operating procedures. However all personnel present during a startup are responsible
for evaluating data and helping assure that reactivity management is maintained. In
114
addition to understanding the fact that it takes longer for count rate to stabilize, it
is important to understand the basis for this response.
75
150
225
300
Time (sec)
Figure 3.7.2, Dynamic Simulation Count rate Response

0.5$ Step with po= -1.0$
75
150
225
Time (sec)
Figure 3.7.3, Dynamic Simulation Count rate Response

0.125$ Step into po = -0.25$
300
115
Q)
30
01
a>
HU>
rH
0)
Cd
TJc
>>
COd)U
Pi
150
Time (sec)
225
300
Figure 3.7.4: Dynamic Simulation Count rate Response

0.0625$ Step into po = -0.125$
Role of the number of generations.
Consider a case where a reactor has a generation multiplication factor (K) of
0.5 and a source count rate (
40 cps.
CRq
) of 20 cps. The stable count rate in this reactor is
CR = CRV(l-K) = 20/0.5 = 40 cps
The interpretation is that the neutron detector 'sees' 20 cps from the source
and 20 cps from fission neutrons produced in the multiplying (subcritical) media due
to fissions in successive generations caused by source neutrons produced in previous
generations. The time response in a subcritical reactor is due to (1) the number of
generations required to achieve a stable count rate and (2) the time duration of the
generations. The effect of the number of generations is presented using a model in
which the subcritical reactor (K = 0.5) is initially free of any source. At time '0' a
source is added which produces, on the average, 20 neutrons in a time frame equal
to the neutron generation time. The effect of successive 'source bursts'- will be
116
studied by showing the effect of the subcritical media on the source. Table 3.7.2
shows that after sufficient generations have elapsed, the stable neutron population
is twice the source neutron population in a reactor with K = 0.5. The multiplying
media produces 20 fission neutrons total from the effect of previous source bursts as
they each decay to zero.
Table 3.7.2, Subcritical Multiplication
K,(( = 0.5::Source Strength = 20
SOURCE
BURST
1
1 20
2
3 mm
4
5
6
7
8
20
TOTAL
* *
2
10
20

30
3
5
10
20
35
GENERATION
4
5
6
3
1
1
5
3
1
10
5
3
20 10
5
20 10
20
38
39
40
7
0
1
1
3
5
10
20
40
8
0
0
1
1
3
5
10
20
40
9
0
0
0
1
1
3
5
10
10
0
0
0
0
1
1
3
5
11
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
3
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
The process portrayed in Table 3.7.2 helps in understanding the following

statement which attempts to define the process of subcritical multiplication.
Subcritical multiplication is the process by which a source of neutrons reacts
in a subcritical media to produce a constant neutron population and power
level.
If the reactor portrayed above is modified by adding positive reactivity until

K = 0.8, subcritical multiplication predicts a stable count rate of:
CR = CR<y(l-K) = 20/(1-0.8) = 100 ops
117
Table 3.7.3 displays the effect of changing the value of K. The tabular model
indicates total neutron population converging to 100 neutrons as predicted by
equation 4 and also shows an increased number of generations required.
Table 3.7.3, Subcritical Multiplication
Kj(r = 0.8::Source Strength = 20
SOURCE
BURST
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
TOTAL
1
20
*
2
16
20
3
13
16
20
***
* **
20
36
49
GENERATION
4
5
6
10
7
8
13 10
8
16 13 10
20 16 13
20 16
20
59
67
74
7
5
7
8
10
13
16
20
79
8
4
5
7
8
10
13
16
20
83
9
4
4
5
7
8
10
13
16
10
3
4
4
5
7
8
10
13
11
3
3
4
4
5
7
8
10
12
2
3
3
4
4
5
7
8
If Table 3.7.3 were carried to completion, the following conclusion could be

drawn:
Following an insertion of positive reactivity into a subcritical reactor, the final
count rate predicted by equations will not be achieved until the effect of the
first source burst has 'decayed to zero' due to the effect of the subcritical
media.
The data displayed in Tables 3.7.2 & 3.7.3 can also be understood by realizing
that M = 1/(1-K) = 1 + K + K- + K^ + .... which is an infinite series. The process
of subcritical multiplication causes M to converge to a new value after addition of
positive reactivity based upon the final value of the net negative reactivit>' in the core.
The series expression for M shows that the degree of convergence depends upon the
118
number of generations which have elapsed. If K = 0.5, then M = 1/(1-0.5) = 2.0.

Table 3.7.4 displays the relationship between the number of generations, the series
expression for M, and the convergence toward 2.0 which represents a stable count
rate.
Table 3.7.4, Series Expansion for M (K = 0.5)
M = 1 + K + K2 + K^ + .... = 2
GENERATIONS
SUM OF SERIES
1.5
1.75
1.875
1.9375
1.96875
1.984375
1.9921875
1.99609375
Problem 3.7.1:
Determine M for K = 0.90 and generate a table which shows
the convergence to a stable count rate.
The process can also be represented by the following equation;
KT
M xrj.
IN qI v
...A
wiicic
No = source burst
N, = a small percent of the
source burst
X = number of generations
119
Let
= No(l X 10"^):
only 0.01% of the source burst is still making

a contribution:
1 X 10^ = K*
X = log (1 X 10-')/log K = -AlXog K
The number of generations required vs K is displayed in Table 3.7.5.
Table 3.7.5, Generations required for Stable Count rate
K
0.80000
0.90000
0.95000
0.99000
0.99500
0.99950
0.99995
X
41
87
180
916
1840
18400
184000
In conclusion, one reason for the increased required time for counts to
stabilize is: as K~>1 more generations are required to develop the full effect of
subcritical multiplication. However, even if 1.84 x lO' generations are required, a
generation time of 5 x 10'^ seconds would result in constant count rate wathin 10
seconds. Clearly the effect of generation time also needs to be included in the
model.
The role of generation time.
Continuing with the previous specific example as a tool from which to draw
generalizations, recall that with a source strength of 20 cps (or 20 source neutrons per
generation) and K = 0.5, total neutron population was 40 neutrons/generation.
Assuming that the delayed neutron fraction is 0.00650 {p for ^Û) then the 40
neutrons/generation (or 40 cps) are distributed as follows:
120
Count rate
Contribution
40
All neutrons
20
Source neutrons
20(1-)3)= 19.87
Prompt neutrons
20)3
Delayed neutrons
= 0.13
Assuming that the reactor will be called stable when the final count rate has
achieved 99.5% of the calculated stable value for all neutrons, in this case the reactor
will be called stable at a count rate of 39.8 cps.
The delayed neutron population is not required to make up the 39.8 cps and
consequently the ability of delayed neutrons to have an impact on effective
generation time is minimal. Source neutrons are continuously being produced and
prompt neutrons have a generation time of about 5 x 10'^ seconds. Thus when the
reactor is very subcritical the effective generation time is dominated by prompt
neutrons and generation time is very small. Stable count rate is established very
quickly after having achieved the final value of K.
This conclusion is consistent with the inhour equation solution for very large
omega in which o = (p^ -)3)/. The period (time dependencies) in a very subcritical
reactor depend upon the neutron lifetime and not the precursor decay. (Hetrick,
1971)
If K is increased to 0.9, then the stable count rate would be
CR = 20/(1-0.9) = 200 cps.
Count rate
Contribution
All neutrons
200
Source neutrons
20
180(1-/3) = 178.83
Prompt neutrons
180)9
Delayed neutrons
1.17
200(0.995) = 199
Stable indication
121
Source and prompt neutrons alone will not produce 199 cps. The reactor will
not be called stable until some of the delayed neutrons have appeared into each
generation.
Since the number of delayed neutrons required to make up the
difference is small, the percentage of delayed neutrons required is small and the short
lived precursors will produce sufficient neutrons.
Delayed neutrons result in an impact on the effective generation time but only
the short lived precursor groups are required. In effect, delayed neutrons represent
a time dependent source which must appear prior to stable count rate being
achieved.
As K~>1, the effect of the source is overwhelmed by the effect of the delayed
neutrons as displayed in Table 3.7.6. Also, as the effect of the delayed neutrons
become more and more important, a stable count rate can not be achieved until
more and more of the 'time dependent source' appears. The delayed neutrons slow
down the transient which is analogous to saying that they lengthen the effective
generation time.
Table 3.7.6, Neutron Population Distribution vs. K
K
0.90000
0.95000
0.99000
0.99500
0.99950
0.99995
NEUTRON POPULATION
TOTAL
SOURCE
PROMPT
200
20
1.79E2
400
20
3.78E2
2000
20
1.97E3
4000
20
3.95E3
40000
20
3.97E4
400000
3.97E5
20
DELAYED
1.17E0
2.47E0
1.29E1
2.59E1
2.60E2
2.60E3
The conclusions of the impact of delayed neutrons in nearly critical reactors

is consistent with the solution of the inhour equation for small omega (small p,,). As
K-->1, the effective lifetime model becomes:
122
In summary, physical models and inhour equation solutions have been used
to explain why a reactor startup procedure must take into account that subcritical
multiplication takes time to fully develop. The accuracy of the 1/M plot depends on
utilizing stable count rate data. A rapid approach to criticality would preclude the
ability to predict criticality, would result in lower count rates at the point of criticality,
and would create smaller periods at the point of criticality as the delayed neutrons
continue to build in. If criticality were poorly predicted and not recognized based on
count rate response, then continued insertion of reactivity would result in
supercriticality and potentially very large values of omega (inverse period).
3E005:
Develop reactor startup monitoring strategies.
Problem 3.7.2:
Apply the principles of subcritical multiplication and develop a strategy, other
than 1/M plotting which will allow the approach to criticality to be monitored
during a reactor startup.
123
Leaminp Objectives
1.
Given count rate data, and reactor conditions, assess the reactivity state of the
core.
2.
Evaluate reactor startup data and predict where the reactor will achieve
criticality.
3.
Evaluate reactor startup strategies for adequacy.
4.
Given reactor conditions during reactor startup scenarios, predict reactor

response to a specified manipulation.
5.
Develop reactor startup monitoring strategies.
124
Suggested Reading
1.0 Ott, K.O., and R.J. Neuhold, "Introductory Nuclear Reactor Dynamics", The
Chapter 2, Delayed Neutrons
pp 5-19
Chapter 3, Preliminary Formulation of the

Point Kinetics Equations
pp 21-37
2.0 Glasstone, S., and A. Sesonske, "Nuclear Reactor Engineering", Van Nostrand
Chapter 4, Reactor Theory: The Steady State
pp 152-225
3.0 Hetrick, D.L., "Dynamics of Nuclear Reactors", The University of Chicago Press,
Chicago, IL,(1971). Reprinted by The American Nuclear Society, LaGrange Park,
IL, (1993).
Chapter 1, Elementary Derivation of the Dynamic Equations pp 1-15
4.0 Lamarsh, J., "Introduction to Nuclear Engineering", Addison-Wesley publishing
Chapter 6, Nuclear Reactor Theory
pp 187-240
125
3.8 SOLUTIONS
Question 3.S.1;
How would the prediction in Example 3.5.2 have been different the reactor had been 5000pcm subcritical before the addition of 3000pcm?
Apply the solution technique using CR,pi = CR2P2: since the net negative
reactivity has changed by -2000/-5000, the count rate has changed by 5000/2000 which
means that the predicted CRj = 500 cps. Either solution is adequate as a prediction
of the final count rate. In fact the final count rate is not a single number but a value
which fluctuates significantly due to the randomness of the radioactive decay
processes associated with the production of source neutrons.
Question 3.5.2:
Using the information presented in Example 3.5.3 and Figure 3.5.1, predict the final
reactivity state of a reactor if a 2000pcm reactivity insertion causes stable count rate to
double. What impact does uncertainty in the value of the reactivity insertion have on the
predicted final reactivity state of the system?
Using the CRp = constant approximation, if a reactivity insertion causes stable

count rate to double, then that reactivity insertion reduced the net reactivity in core
by a factor of 2. Thus a 2000 pcm insertion causing doubling, means that the reactor
was 4000 pcm subcritical before the insertion and is 2000 pcm subcritical after the
insertion. This result is easily obtained by solution of the governing equation
(Equation 3.5.3). In reality, if the reactor count rate doubles due to the insertion of
a specified reactivity insertion, then that insertion, if added again, will result in a
supercritical reactor. These equations and solutions all are based on the assumption
that the efficiency of the detector at monitoring the actual core does not change.
Real reactors are not homogeneous point reactors and thus these solutions are 'best
estimates' of what is happening inside the core. If there is an uncertainty in the
measured count rate (there always is), or an uncertainty in the reactivity insertion
(there always is); then these solutions become even more of an estimate of the
reactivity state of the core. Exact measurements and calculations would need to
include the uncertainty of the count rate and the uncertainty of the reactivity
insertions to derive an estimate and uncertainty of the final predicted reactivity state
126
of the core. In exact measurements, rather than using an instantaneous value of the
count rate a process is normally used to determine the average count rate and the
uncertainty of same. A counter-scaler is used to measure the time required to obtain
a specified number of counts (say 10,000 or 100,000) and then the average count rate
is determined by CR,^ = Total Counts/elapsed time. The standard deviation of the
count rate is then given by CT
cr
= (Total Counts)^/elapsed time (Friedlander,
Kennedy and Miller, 1964). The following tabulation shows that as total counts
increases, the standard deviation expressed as a percent of the average count rate
decreases. The reduced standard deviation (uncertainty) is the goal of the more
sophisticated measurement technique.
Total Counts CRj^g
STD DEV of CR
STD DEV as %
(unit time)
(cps)
(cps)
(%)
100
1000
10000
100000
100
1000
10000
100000
10
31.6
100
316.3
10
3.16
1
0.316
The uncertainty in the predicted final reactivity state is then obtained by using
the uncertainty in the two measured count rates and the uncertainty in the reactivity
added which is the difference between the two reactivity states.
Problem 3.5.1:
750pcm is inserted into a subcritical reactor and results in stable count rate increasing from 500
cps to 900 cps. Determine the net reactivity in the core after the 750 pcm insertion.
P2 = CR,(-Ap)/(CR2-CRi)
p, = 500(-750)/400 = -937.5 pcm
127
Problem 3.6.1:
A reactor is to be started up by diluting soluble boron from the coolant in 50 ppm increments.
Initial conditions are:
1) all safety control rods are fully withdrawn.
2) all regulating rods withdrawn to the ECRP.
3) reactor coolant system boron concentration = 1500 ppm.
4) count rate = 100 cps.
The calculated predicted boron concentration at criticality is 1000ppm with an acceptable margin
of 50 ppm. Assume that soluble boron worth (pcmlppm) is constant in the concentration and
temperature range of interest
Use the following data to develop a IIM plot and evaluate whether or not the next 50 ppm
dilution should be performed.
Data:
STEP
0
1
2
3
4
5
BORON
(ppm)
1500
1450
1400
1350
1300
1250
CR
(cps)
100
103
110
125
150
320
Discussion:
Referring to Figure 3.6.2, steps 1~>4 show the result of the 1/M slowly
converging into the range of 1000 50 ppm which is the acceptable target
range based upon the predicted calculation. However, the fifth dilution (to
1250 ppm) caused count rate to increase to 320 cps which is an increase of
2.1333 from the previous dilution and yields a 1/M of 0.313. Plotting 1/M
between steps 4 and 5 and extrapolating indicates that another 50 ppm
dilution would produce criticality at a boron concentration which is not
consistent with the predicted criticality range +: acceptable margin. The only
prudent action is to stop and resolve the discrepancy between the predicted
and actual dynamic response of the reactor.
128
Problem 3.7.1:
Determine M for K = 0.90 and generate a table which shows
the convergence to a stable count rate.
Table 3.7.4, Series Expansion for M (K = 0.9 analog)

M=1 + K + K2 + K3 + .... = 10 for K = 0.9
GENERATIONS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
25
50
75
100
SUM OF SERIES
1.9
2.71
3.439
4.0951
4.68559
5.217031
5.695327
6.125795
6.513215
6.861895
9.353891
9.953616
9.996670
9.999760
Problem 3.7.2;
Apply the principles of subcritical multiplication and develop a strategy, other than IIMplotting,
which will allow the approach to criticality to be monitored during a reactor startup.
Several options exist which can substitute for the 1/M approach of monitoring
the progress of the startup. They all are based or. the principles of subcriticai
multiplication and may appear on the surface to be identical to the 1/M approach.
However, they do not focus on calculating 1/M and extrapolating the last two points
to determine the current best estimate of the Anticipated Critical Position. Due to
the difference in focus, they have the benefit of possibly preventing a conflict over
129
which 1/M is correct. The two strategies which most often come to mind are the
count rate doubling principle and the length of time for stabilization principle.
If the reactor has just been taken to Group 3 at 30 inches withdrawn and the
values of the ACP derived from different 1/M plots are Group 3 at 60 and Group 5
at 30 inches withdrawn, these two concepts can help resolve whether or not the core
is close to achieving criticality. Suppose that after moving the rods from Group 3 at
0 to 30 inches withdrawn, the time required for count rate to stabilize is 10 minutes;
the conclusion is that the reactor is closer to being critical than the Group 5 at 30
inches ACP indicates and caution should be used. However, if count rate stabilizes
in 1-2 minutes, then the chances of achieving criticality at Group 3 at 60 inches
withdrawn is remote. Focusing on the time, instead of which 1/M is most correct,
broadens the perspective and perhaps prevents an error being made during the
startup.
130
CHAPTER 4
POWER INCREASE TO THE POWER RANGE
A.
Reactor critical at 1 x 10"^% power
B.
All shutdown rods fully withdrawn
C.
Regulating rods at the ECRP
D.
Soluble boron concentration at the ECBC
E.
Xenon concentration zero
F.
G.
RCS at Hot Zero Power (NOT/NOP)
H.
RCS temperature being maintained by running reactor coolant

pumps as a heat source and dumping steam from the steam generators
by automatic pressure control valves

A.
Establish a constant stable period and increase

reactor power from 1 x 10'^% to some point below the point of adding
sensible heat and stabilize reactor power.
B.
Discuss methods of performing control rod and soluble

boron reactivity worth measurements from this initial condition.
C.
Increase power to 3% rated thermal power (RTF) and

stabilize.
D.
Discuss the consequences of a reactivity addition accident from

the initial power level of 1 x 10'% and methods of protecting the core
from such power excursions.
131
4.3 Theory Overview

Now that the reactor has achieved criticality and is stable it is necessary to
insert positive reactivity and make it supercritical. Reactor power will then increase
until the power output is capable of causing heating and temperature changes will
insert negative reactivity. If the initial reactivity insertion is small, then power will
increase in a controlled manner and the temperature feedback mechanisms will react
to stabilize power without significant overshoot. However, if the initial reactivity
insertion is large, power will increase very rapidly and overshoot before the
temperature feedback mechanisms can respond to return the system to criticality. A
well controlled power increase is achieved by knowing the relationship between
reactivity added and the resultant rate of change of power. The term used to
represent the rate of change of power is reactor period, is defined as the number of
seconds required for power to change by a factor of 'e', and is given the symbol ( T).
The question is: "Upon what factors does the reactor period depend ?"
Standard treatments of reactor dynamics provide detailed developments which answer
this question. For a reactor which does not depart too far from criticality , the
reactor period depends upon the following factors:
1.
Net reactivity, p^, in core at time't'.
2.
The delayed neutron fraction, ()3).
3.
The delayed neutron precursor decay constant, (A.).
If reactivity is not constant, then the rate of reactivity insertion also has a
significant impact on the value of the reactor period. Thus both "transient period"
and "stable period" will be discussed; with the differentiating criteria being whether
or not the reactivity state of the reactor is constant.
If the reactor is made
supercritical by a large amount of reactivity, (p>p), then the slowing down effect of
the delayed neutrons no longer has a significant effect and the period depends mostly
132
on the amount of reactivity which is inserted and the neutron lifetime. Since neutron
lifetime is a veiy small number, the reactor period is very small and the rate of
change of power is very large. This condition is known as 'prompt critical' and is a
condition which must be avoided in a power reactor.
Normal convention in PWR facilities is to utilize a term related to reactor
period but which is more mathematically convenient than the base "e" system.
Startup Rate (SUR) is defined as the number of decades (powers of 10) by which
power changes in a minute and is expressed in decades per minute (DPM). Changing
the format of the expression does not alter the fact that the same factors listed above
affect the process; however the format is easier to use. For example, consider the
following:
A reactor has a stable period of +80 seconds.
which is equivalent to saying
A reactor has a startup rate of 1/3 DPM
Both statements accurately reflect the dynamics of the situation but in the
latter case it is easy to predict that in three (3) minutes the power will have increased
by a factor of 10. In the former case, a calculation, utilizing exponentials, is necessary
to predict the final power relative to the initial power level. BWR facilities and most
test reactor facilities utilize the reactor period format, so it is important that the
nuclear engineer be familiar with both methods of expressing the dynamic response
of the reactor. Since this is a power plant operations course, no time will be spent
discussing the effects of significant positive reactivity insertions into critical assemblies,
such as 2$ pulses into a TRIGA, but will focus on the effects of reactivity insertions
much less than the delayed neutron fraction. Large power excursions such as the
military SL-1 accident and the event at Chernobyl obviously can occur. However, the
causes, sequences, and effects of these accidents is beyond the scope of this text.
133
4.4 Derivation
Since Reactor Period [ T 1 is defined as the number of seconds required for
power to increase by a factor of 'e', then:
P, = Poe"^
4.4.1
or
n, =
4.4.2
where n is neutron density which is proportional to power.
Solving Equation 4.4.2 for reactor period leads to

T = n/(dn/dt).
4.4.3
Consequently an expression for reactor period can be obtained by solving the

neutron balance equations for n/(dn/dt).
Using the simplified neutron cycle presented in Figure 4.4.1 (Hetrick, 1971),
the following equations are easily developed. (Appendix C-2)
dn/dt = (n/)(p-/?) +
+q
dCj/dt = (n/))5i - AjCj

with i = l->6
If conditions are limited such that the external source strength is very small
and the collection of delayed neutron precursors is modelled as a single "effective"
group, then the following one-group model equations result.
dn/dt = (n/)(p-0) +
4.4.4
dC/dt = (n/)^ - XeffC
4.4.5
134
NEUTRON
LEAKAGE
NON-FISSION
ABSORPTION
NEUTRON DIFFUSION
FISSION
LOSS RATE n/^,
NEUTRON
SOURCE
PRODUCTION RATE = kn/ô
DELAYED-NEUTRON PRECURSORS
("LATENT NEUTRONS")
Figure 4.4.1, Simplified neutron cycle

(Hetnck, 1971)
4E001:
State the limitations of the Prompt Jump Approximation

(single group model) solution to the reactor dynamics
equations.
4E002:
Given a value for net core reactivity, calculate the value of

til FSuCtGF periOu.
135
These two coupled differential equations can then be solved to provide a

reasonable expression for the reactor period in a reactor which is not very
supercritical. [Prompt Jump Approximation with (p < /3)](Hetrick, 1971).
Assume:
a. p < p
b. dn/dt is small
Derivation:
dn/dt = (n/)(p-/3) + k^C = 0
(Assumptions)
(p-;0)(n/) = -XeC
(Rearrangement)
4.4.6
C = (^-p)(n/)Aeff
(Rearrangement)
4.4.7
Taking the derivative of Equation 4.4.7

dC/dt = [(i3-p)/Xefr](dn/dt) - [(n/)Aeff](dp/dt)
4.4.8
Substituting Equations 4.4.7 and 4.4.8 into 4.4.5 and rearranging

(/3-p)(dn/dt) = n(dp/dt) + Aeffpn
4.4.9
n/(dn/dt) =
4.4.10
= iP-pViKup + p)
of if reactivity is expressed in dollars and given the symbol (R), then

T = (l-R)/(XeffR + R)
4.4.11
The accuracy of Equations 4.4.10 and 4.4.11 can be evaluated by comparing

the results with solutions of the inhour equation displayed in Figure 4.4.2.
136
Example 4.4.1:
Assume:
po
0.2$
= 0
Ajff = 0.1 sec'
Calculate t using Equation 4.4.11 and compare with Figure 4.4.2:
Solution:
T = (l-0.2)/(0.1)(0.2) = 0.8/0.02 = 40 sec
Problem 4.4.1:
Repeat at
4E001:
= 0.5$ and compare.
State the limitations of the Prompt Jump Approximation

(single group model) solution to the reactor dynamics
equations.
In a single group model, no single value of the delayed neutron precursor

decay constant can accurately model the effect of all 6 groups of precursors over a
wide range of net reactivity. Table 4.4.1 displays the solution to Equation 4.4.11 and
the corresponding value from Figure 4.4.2 for specified values of po</3 (R<1). As
Po increases toward
actual reactor response is faster (smaller period) than
predicted by the single group model with fixed decay constant (Xeff = 0.1 sec ').
137
io-
O-io'
-10'
-10
OELATBO CRITI
:AL
PROMPT
1>T
1.0
REACTrviTYIN DOLLARS
Figure 4.4.2, Reactor Period vs. Reactivity (U-235 data)

(Keepin, 1965)
1.4
138
Table 4.4.1, Stable Period vs. Reactivity (Comparison)

Reactivitv
$
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Question 4.4.1:
Period fsec")
Eg. 4.4.1 Fig. 4.4.2
40
40
15
10
6.7
3
2.5
1
What solution(s) exist to result in a closer correspondence

between a single group model and a six group model over a
wide range of reactivity?
Since most normal power plant operations are limited to reactivity insertions
with Po<)3, the following values will be used for the single group model effective
decay constant to simplify calculations.
Reactor condition
Subcritical p<p
0.05 sec"'
Supercritical p<)S
0.10 sec '
4.5 Startup Rate
4E003:
Given a value for reactor period [SUR], calculate the

corresponding value of SUR [reactor period].
Startup Rate [SUR ] is defined the rate of change of power in decades per
minute and satisfies Equation 4.5.1:
Ft =
with time expressed in minutes
4.5.1
139
Problem 4.5.1:
Prove that SUR = 26.06/x and validate that
SUR = [(k,p + p)/(p-p)]26.06
Question 4.5.1:
4.5.2
Specify the units which are required for each of the following in
order that the definitions of reactor period and startup rate are
jointlv satisfied.
a. po
b.
c. êff
d. P
e. 26.06
Electronic circuits in the reactor power monitoring instrumentation measure

the rate of change of power and display the instantaneous value of the startup rate.
The operator is tasked with limiting the value of startup rates established and also
with using the value of startup rates to evaluate the reactivity state of the reactor.
Pursuant with that responsibility, the operator is responsible for performing the
following types of calculations.
4E004:
Given a value for the net core reactivity [stable SUR],

calculate the value of the stable SUR [net core reactivity].
140
Problem 4.5.2;
If 100 pcm is inserted into a critical reactor, what stable SUR results?
Assume that beta = 0.00600 and that the reactor is at a very low power level
so that no reactivity feedback exists.
Problem 4.53:
A power increase procedure says "create a stable SUR no greater than
0.75 DPM". What is the maximum reactivity which should be added to the
previously critical reactor? Assume beta = 0.00600.
4E005:
Discuss the variations in the stable SUR caused by

variations in the delayed neutron fraction.
Question 4.5.2:
Discuss how the value of the stable startup rate would be

affected if each of the following parameters were changed one
at a time.
a. The value of
is increased
b. The value of p is decreased

c. The value of
is increased
Since, for thermal neutron induced fissions, Plutonium-239 has a different

delayed neutron yield than Uranium-235, the production of Plutonium-239 during
core operation causes a change in the effective delayed neutron fraction of the core
as it ages.
= 0.00652
= 0.00266
141
The relative values of the delayed neutron fraction for these two fissile
nuclides result in a decrease in the effective delayed neutron fraction of the core over
the life of the core.
Question 4.53:
Assume that all power is generated by fissions of U-235 and Pu239 by thermal neutrons. Develop an expression for
in
terms of the nuclide specific parameters [fraction of power

produced per nuclide, delayed neutron fraction for each nuclide,
and energy produced per fission for each nuclide].
4E006:
Predict the effect of specified reactivity insertions on the

value of stable SUR over the life of the core (below POAH).
Question 4.5.4;
What impact does this change in the delayed neutron fraction

have on the response of the reactor to a specified reactivity
insertion?
Question 4.5.5:
Is an unplanned positive reactivity insertion event into a critical

reactor more severe at the beginning or end of the operating
cycle? Assume that the reactor is fueled with Uranium fuel
material which is nominally 4% enriched.
Question 4.5.6;
How is Plutonium-239 produced in an operating reactor? Use

balanced nuclear reactions to show the process.
142
Problem 4.5.4
Assume that a new core is fueled with Uranium fuel material which is 4%
enriched. Given the following information, determine the effective value of
the delayed neutron fraction for the core.
a.
85% power production from thermal fission of

8% power production from fast fission of
b. Assume the delayed neutron fraction for each nuclide:

U235(thermal)
= 0.00620
U235(fast)
= 0.00650
U^(fast)
= 0.01400
During a reactor startup, the operator makes a series of positive reactivity

insertions and watches power level increase and level off.
As criticality is
approached, the magnitude of the power level change increases and the time required
for stabilization increases but the reactor power still levels off. If the reactor were
made exactly critical, then fission neutron population would be maintained, and
source neutrons would be adding a constant number of neutrons every generation.
Power would still increase and level off when the number of source neutrons added
per generation becomes a very small percentage of the total population. How then
does an operator recognize that a reactor system has achieved criticality? There is
no direct indication that the reactor is critical and the process of adding positive
reactivity in increments will continue until the reactor is actually supercritical. In this
case, the neutron population will increase exponentially and the operator will be able
to detect the effect of his actions and call the reactor critical. As long as the reactor
power remains very low, insignificant heating occurs as power increases and there is
no reactivity feedback. SUR remains constant and power increases at a steady rate
until the reactivity state of the core is changed. Most reactor startup procedures
143
direct the operator to stop the power increase somewhere before the "point-ofadding-heat" so that criticality checks can be performed. Low power physics testing
can also be performed at these power levels from an initially critical condition.
Problem 4.5.5:
The operator has just created a stable SUR of 0.6 DPM by withdrawing
control rods 10 inches from the critical condition. Power is increasing from
a level of 1 x 10"% toward 1 x 10'^% where it will be stabilized by the
operator. What actions are required by the operator to stabilize power level?
4.6 Step Reactivity Insertions
4E007:
Predict the effect of step insertions of reactivity into an

initially critical core (below POAH).
For conditions where po<</3, reactor dynamics developments lead to

Equation 4.6.1. (See Appendix C-3 for derivation);
n, = [ny(/3-pJ][/3exp(AeffPot/(^-po) - Poexp-(/3-pJt/]
4.6.1
Due to the relative magnitudes of the two exponents, the second term quickly
goes to zero and Equation 4.6.1 reduces to:
n, = nJ;0/()3-pJ]exp[A,,ffPt/(^-pJ]
where:
4.6.2
n^
m- P o )
= initial power level

= prompt (instant) power
144
change factor due to prompt

neutron multiplication.
Aef(Po/(jS-po)
= Inverse stable period (sec"')

due to reactor conditions
Equation 4.6.2 shows that a step insertion of positive reactivity creates the
following:
1.
A rapid prompt jump of power level due to the rapidly decaying

transient, and
2.
A sustained power increase due to the effects of the buildup of delayed

neutron precursors.
Analyzing the same step insertion process with Equation 4.5.2 yields an
expression for the stable startup rate which is completely consistent with the
formulation in Equation 4.6.2.
SUR = 26.06[(A,p + p)/(^-po)]

p = 0 (step insertion)
p = Po (magnitude of step)
SUR = 26.06[Xeffpc/(^-po)]
4.6.3
Problem 4.6.1:
Sketch power level (log scale) vs time for a 0.20$ step insertion into a
previously critical reactor.
145
4.7 Ramp Reactivity insertions
4E008:
Differentiate between stable SUR and transient SUR and

identify the conditions necessaty for each.
4E009:
Predict the effects of ramp reactivity insertions into a

previously critical core (below POAH).
Slow ramp insertions of positive reactivity are most easily evaluated by

evaluating the value of the SUR for a given value of both reactivity and reactivity
insertion rate at a given instant using Equation 4.5.2. Table 4.7.1 portrays the effects
of a one minute ramp insertion of 2 pcm/sec into a previously critical reactor with a
delayed neutron fraction (p) = 0.00600.
TABLE 4.7.1
RAMP REACTIVITY INSERTION
TIME pfRATEl
fsec") Cpcm/sec")
0
0
0*
2
10
2
30
2
50
2
60
2
0
60+
pf VALUED SUR
pcm
CDPM^
0
0.00
0.09
0
20
0.18
039
60
100
0.62
0.76
120
0.65
120
The instantaneous response of power depicted by the rapid (step) increase in

SUR at the instant the insertion starts (1=0"^) is due to the effect of even small
reactivity changes on the existing neutron population. The specific formulation of the
response depends upon the assumptions used to model the process, but independent
146
of the formulation and assumptions; reactivity insertion rate has an effect on reactor
response. As long as po<)3, the reactor is subcritical on prompt neutrons alone and
even a very small insertion of positive reactivity has an immediate prompt effect
which quickly dies off. The reactivity insertion rate term can be modelled as the
cumulative effect of a series of small step insertions with these quickly dying effects.
Because the neutron lifetime is so short compared to delayed neutron precursor
mean lives and reactivity insertion time frames, the effect of these quickly dying terms
is essentially immediate. The long term growth in neutron population (+stable SUR)
is possible only due to the decay of precursors but the prompt neutrons have an
effect when reactivity is being inserted.
4E010:
Identify the conditions necessary for power turning.
Problem 4.7.1:
Qualitatively sketch both SUR and Log Power vs time for a one minute
reactivity ramp and the two minute period following the ramp. Assume that
no reactivity feedback occurs.
Problem 4.7.2:
Continue with the example portrayed in Table 4.7.1.
Assume that two
minutes after having established the +0.65 DPM stable SUR, the operator
inserts reactivity at a rate of -2 pcm/sec for exactly 60 sec. Calculate the SUR
at each increment and complete the data in Table 4.7.2.
147
TABLE 4.7.2
NEGATIVE REACTIVITY INSERTION RAMP
TIME pTRATE^
fsec') fpcm/sec'J
0
180
180+
-2
190
-2
200
2
210
-2
220
-2
230
-2
240
-2
240+
0
Question 4.7.1:
prVALUE^
fpcm')
rPPMI
+0.65
120
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
0.00
Between time 230 and 240 seconds, how is power responding?

What is the core net reactivity?
Question 4.7.2:
If the operator had secured the negative reactivity insertion at

exactly 235 seconds, how would power have responded?
Question 4.73:
How would the transient displayed in Table 4.7.2 have differed

if the operator had inserted negative reactivity at the rate of -6
pcm/sec for exactly 20 seconds?
Question 4.7.4:
An operator withdraws control rods at a constant rate until the

SUR meter indicates 0.5 DPM and then halts the withdrawal.
What will happen to the rate of power change?
Question 4.7.5:
What are the consequences of negative SUR with positive net

reactivity due to negative reactivity insertion rate?
148
4.8 Power Turning

Table 4.7.2 depicts a transient in which negative reactivity is being inserted
into a previously supercritical reactor. The data indicates that the negative reactivity
insertion rate has the effect of causing power to decrease before all of the positive
reactivity is removed from the core. This effect, which is referred to as "power
turning", is summarized as a condition in which:
pe, is positive,
p
is negative,
SUR is zero or negative, and

Power has stopped increasing and started decreasing.
Consistent vwth models previously developed. Equation 4.5.2 is used to identify
the conditions necessary for power turning to occur.
SUR =
26.06[(A.ffp +
p)/()S-p)]
4.5.2
Set SUR = 0 (power constant)

êffpnet +
This Equation
1)
Both
2)
p =
When
(4.8.1)
pnei
and
4.8.1
is satisfied under two circumstances:

p
are zero (trivial case), or
p nj, in which p
is positive and p is negative.
is positive (<<p), any power increase depends upon the
appearance of delayed neutrons from precursors produced in previous generations.

A negative reactivity insertion rate can be reducing the existing neutron population
more quickly than the delayed neutrons can appear. Thus, neutron population
149
decreases even though the reactor is still 'supercritical'. If the negative reactivity
insertion rate is halted, then the existing neutron population is no longer being
suppressed (rapidly dying transients), delayed neutrons from previous generations
continue to appear, and power again increases with a stable SUR due to the then
current value of
p,.
Question 4.8.1:
Power is being increased from 1 x 10"% toward 1 x 10 "% and

the operator is attempting to stabilize power. Control rods are
inserted until the SUR meter indicates zero and then the
insertion is halted. What happens to power after the insertion
is halted?
Power turning due to the dynamic effects of reactivity insertion rate is not an
artifact of the simplifications and assumptions used in the single group prompt jump
approximation which led to Equation 4.5.2. Dynamic simulation experiments were
performed using the neutron balance equations and are included in Appendix D.
The results of these computer simulations show that even in the six group model,
power decreases prior to when reactivity returns to zero during negative reactivity
insertion processes.
The actual timing of power turning is obviously different
between the single group and six group model because no single group effective
decay constant can model the dynamics over a wide range of values of reactivity.
Any negative reactivity insertion mechanism is capable of causing power
turning. Equation 4.8.1 indicates that, within the bounds of this model, the key
parameter for power turning is the rate of insertion of negative reactivity. When the
reactor is below the point-of-adding-heat, the most rapid reactivity insertion
mechanism is the movement of control rods. However, when the reactor is operating
in the power range, temperature dependent feedback mechanisms are also capable
of rapid insertion and will function to limit power excursions. Power/temperature
dependent mechanisms are discussed in Chapter 5.
150
4E011;
Predict the effects of a reactor trip on power level.
A simple example of the effect of power turning is to consider a reactor trip.

Assume that the reactor was critical at 1
E-6%
power when a reactivity insertion
event inserts 0.5$ of positive reactivity. Further assume that control rods worth 17$
are fully withdrawn from the core and capable of being fully inserted within a 4
second time frame from receipt of a trip signal. The power turning model will be
used in the folloviang examples.
Example 4.8.1:
What stable SUR exists after the insertion of 0.5$ of reactivity?
SUR = 26.06[(Aeffpo +
p o
p)/()3-po)]
0.5$
P = 0
SUR = 26.06[>..ffR<y -RJ]
(l
Ro = 0.5$
Aeff = 0.1 sec'
SUR = 2.6 DPM
Example 4.8.2:
When the reactor power level reaches 1 x 10 '%, a reactor trip is initiated.
What is the average velocity' of the control rods as they fall into the core if the
core is 150 inches tall?
Velocity = 150 inches/4 sec = 37.5 inches/sec
If the rods accelerate from rest at the rate of 8 ft/sec^ how long does it take
for the rods to attain a velocity of 37.5 inches/sec?
151
time = Velocity/Acceleration
= (37.5 in/sec)/(96 in/sec^) = 0.391 sec
How far do the rods move as they attain the average velocity of 37.5 in/sec?
distance = ât^ = h(96 in/sec^)(0.391 sec)^ = 7.3 inches
Question 4.8.2:
If the differential control rod worth (DRW) is zero during the

first 7.5 inches of travel, what is the value of pet as the control
rods pass the point 7.5 inches from the top of the core?
Example 4.83:
When the control rods are moving at an average velocity of 37.5 in/sec, what
is the reactivity insertion rate? Assume that the DRW is zero in the top and
bottom 7.5 inches of the core and constant throughout the remaining travel.
p = (DRW)(Rod Speed)
p = (-17$/135 inches)(37.5 in/sec) = -4.72 $/sec
Example 4.8.4:
As the control rods are passing the point 7.5 inches from the top of the core,
what is the value of the transient SUR assuming that Equation 4.5.2 applies?
SUR = 26.06[XeffRo + )/(l
R
-Ro)]
Ae(f = 0.1 sec'R
= +0.5 $
= -4.72 $/sec
SUR = 26.06[(0.05 - 4.72)/0.5] = -243 DPM
152
The previous examples lead to the conclusion that the large negative reactivity
insertion rate is the dominant factor in determining the transient power response.
During a reactor trip, reactor power very quickly begins to rapidly decrease. Even
though the single group model used in this section is clearly an approximation of
reactor response, the qualitative conclusions are still valid. On a reactor trip event,
power level is rapidly decreasing well before the control rods reach the bottom of the
core. This results in a very rapid prompt drop in power level as the neutron
population decreases. The remainder of the reactor trip response is presented in
Chapter 5.
Question 4.83:
Using Uranium-235 delayed neutron data, what is the maximum

possible value for
if it were set equal to the maximum value
of Aj? Would using this value for
change the conclusions
reached in the previous examples?

Problem 4.8.1:
What value of negative reactivity insertion rate is required to instantly turn
power if
Question 4.8.4:
= 0.2 sec ' and
= 0.75 $?
How difficult is it to achieve the value required in Problem 4.8.1

if 10 $ of rods are available and they are capable of being fully
inserted within 5 seconds?
4.9 Reactivity Worth Measurements

If a reactor is at a stable power of 1 x 10"^%, then the stable power level
depends upon the process of subcritical multiplication and thus upon the magnitude
of the source strength and the net negative reactivity in the core. At such a relatively
high power level for subcritical multiplication the reactor must be veiy close to being
153
critical or the source strength is quite large. Taking the former case, the reactor is
very close to being critical with high count rate so very good statistics exist for the
initial state of the system. Subcritical multiplication still applies, thus a sudden
insertion of a quantity of negative reactivity will cause the reactor power level to
decrease to a new level. Both the new level and the rate of power decrease (initial
negative period) are related to the magnitude of the negative reactivity insertion.
Thus it is possible to use the dynamic response of the reactor as a map of the value
of the reactivity insertion. Since the reactor is subcritical, but very close to being
critical, (pe, = -1 pcm), a sudden insertion of positive reactivity would create a
supercritical reactor whose stable period or startup rate is directly related to the
magnitude of reactivity inserted. Incremental changes in control rod position or boron
concentration can be used to effect a response from which the reactivity worth of that
incremental change can be inferred. In addition, incremental temperature changes
can be used as the driving function and the reactivity worth of that temperature
change can be measured.
Specific procedures are used for each of these
measurements but the principles supporting each are founded in the theories and
models presented in this text.
Question 4.9.1:
If the reactor coolant system temperature is increased by 5F

and the
immediate dynamic response is measured, what
temperature coefficient is measured?
Question 4.9.2:
If the reactor coolant system temperature is increased by 5F

and the final stable power level is used to infer the reactivity
change, what temperature coefficient is measured?
154
4.10 Power Stabilization
4E012:
Given a value for stable SUR (below POAH), predict the

power level at which the reactor will stabilize.
4E013;
Given power level and typical plant parameters, predict the

value of RCS Thot and Tvg.
If the reactor is on a positive period, then unless the operator or a control

system intervenes, power level will continue to increase until heating occurs. The
heating of both fuel and coolant produces reactivity feedback which alters the
reactivity state of the system and thus changes the period. In a stable system, the
reactivity feedback is negative and thus the power excursion becomes self limiting.
The nature of the interfacing control systems for such processes as steam demand will
govern the response of the reactor system.
Two fundamental principles must apply when determining where the system
will stabilize. These are:
1.
Since the primary coolant system in a PWR is both an energy storage

and an energy transfer system, if temperature of the system is to
remain constant with time, then power added to the system must equal
power removed from the system.
2.
In order for power added to the primary coolant system to be constant

with time, the reactor core must be critical.
Prior to increasing reactor power level, system temperature is being

maintained at NOT/NOP at hot zero power conditions by running reactor coolant
pumps as a heat source and dumping steam from the steam generators by automatic
155
pressure control valves. Consequently, as the reactor starts making more power, the
steam demand must increase or else the reactor coolant system will be storing the
extra power and will continue to heat up. As the power level being transferred by
the reactor coolant system increases, the loop temperature difference is driven by
heat storage processes (Equation 4.10.1).
Q ~ m Rcs^p(Thot"Tcoid)
4.10.1
where riiRcs "^^ss flow rate (Ibm/hr)

Cp
= average heat capacity (btu/lbmF)
= Heat transfer rate (btu/hr)
The relationship between fuel temperature and average coolant temperature

is driven by the conductive and convective heat transfer processes between the fuel
and the bulk coolant (Equation 4.10.2),
= UA(T^.,-Tavg)
where
4.10.2
Heat transfer rate (btu/hr)
= Heat transfer coefficient from the fuel

into the coolant (btu/ft^hrF)
= Heat transfer surface (ft^)
The actual variation in Tj^g and Tfuî, for a specified power increase, depends
upon how the RCS cold leg temperature is controlled. The option selected for these
discussions is the constant cold leg temperature program. With T^y being held
constant, reactor power increases cause steady state increases in both Tg^g and Tfg,.
The reactivity insertions caused by these temperature changes are due to:
156
1.
Moderator density reduction due to temperature increase.
2.
Doppler broadening due to fuel temperature increase.
3.
Neutron flux spectral hardening due to temperature increase.
4.
Boron atom density reduction in the core due to temperature increase.
5.
Axial flux profile shift due to water density non-linearity as temperature

increases.
These reactivity insertions are cumulatively evaluated and integrated into the
power defect reactivity term tabulated in Appendix B (PVNGS, 1992). The use of
this reactivity defect is demonstrated by example.
Example 4.10.1:
Under MOC conditions, the reactor operator establishes a stable SUR = 0.5
DPM and allows power to increase. As power causes heating, steam valves
automatically open to increase heat removal. At what power level does the
core stabilize?
Assume :
= 0.00570
A,efr= 0.1 sec'^

Solution: Solve the startup rate equation for
SUR = 26.06[(Aep
p
p,.
+ p)/(^-p)]
=0
SUR = 0.5 DPM

A-eff
=0.1 sec"'
n nncrn
/ \j
fj
p,, - SUR/3/(26Xeff + SUR) = (0.5)(0.00570)/(2.6 + 0.5) = 0.00092

= 92
pom
157
Solution: Use power defect value to identify the power level from Table 2.1.1
of Appendix B. By linear interpolation, power = 4.5% RTP.
Thus, if Teo,d is maintained nearly constant at 565 F, then a power increase
to 4.5% RTP will add sufficient negative reactivity to offset the 92 pcm initially
inserted and the reactor will return to criticality at an increased power level.
4E014:
Given power level and typical plant parameters, predict the

value of required feedwater flow rate.
Problem 4.10.1:
Assuming that water is being fed into the steam generators at 100 F and that
the steam pressure is 1150 psia at the new power level, what feed flow rate
is necessary to maintain steam generator levels constant at a reactor power
level of 4.5% RTP with RCP work equal to 0.5% RTP? Assume that any
other heat inputs and losses can be ignored.
Problem 4.10.2:
Repeat Example 4.10.1 under EOC conditions in which jS = 0.00520.
Problem 4.10J:
If the operator desires to stabilize power at 3% RTP, under MOC conditions,
what value of stable SUR should be established? If the operator begins his
positive reactivity insertion at 90 inches withdrawn on Group 4 CEA's, how far
should he withdraw control rods to establish the desired stable SUR?
In the previous examples and problems, the assumption is made that the
steam valve control system automatically adjusts load in response to the power
158
increase. The cause and effect relationship which drives this process is that the steam
valves are controlled from a steam generator pressure signal. As reactor power
increases and starts causing heating, the first parameter to increase is fuel
temperature (Equation 4.10.2). Hotter fuel causes increased heat transfer into the
coolant and
increases (Equation 4.10.1). Hotter coolant temperature causes
increased heat transfer into the steam generators and the increased boiling causes
steam pressure and steam temperature to increase. The steam valve control system
detects the pressure increase and opens the valves to control the pressure. As the
valves open, steam flow rate increases and consequently heat removal from the
primary system by the secondary system increases (Equation 4.10.3).
Q ~
/nteam(hrttam"'^rMd)
4.10.3
where mucam - steam flow rate (Ibm/hr)

hsteam
= Steam enthalpy (btu/lbm)
hfeed
water enthalpy (btu/lbm)
TTiere are limitations on how large of an initial positive SUR is allowed. The
first is caused by the dynamics of the response. Since the solution to Example 4.10.1
is a steady state solution, it does not consider that power level will overshoot and
then come back down to 4.5% RTP. If a larger SUR had been used, then the
overshoot would be even larger. The second is based on the solution to Problem
4.10.1. As the plant is being started up, steam generators are usually fed by auxiliary
feed water pumps which have limited capacity to deliver feed. If the power level
exceeds the capacity of these pumps, then steam generator inventory will decrease.
Higher capacity main feed pumps are normally driven by steam turbines and can be
started only after power level is in the range of 3% RTP.
159
If steam valves are in a fixed position and not capable of responding to an

increase in the steam pressure, then steam flow rate can not significantly change and
the primary system can not stabilize at a higher power level. If the operator
established the same positive SUR = 0.5 DPM as in Example 4.10.1, then the
following scenario would result. As core power increases and causes heating, since
steam demand can not increase, the entire system (Tf^,, Tô,,
and
up, but the temperature differences which drive heat transfer rate
heats
Tcold) do not.
The increase in fuel and moderator temperature inserts negative reactivity, turns
power and returns the reactor to being critical at a power level too low to cause
detectable additional heating. This is an example of an isothermal temperature
change process. The plant will stabilize when the isothermal process has removed
the initial Po by negative feedback.
4E015:
Given a value for RCS
and reactor power level, use
typical plant parameters to predict the value of steam

pressure.
Example 4.10.2:
Determine the isothermal heating which results if the reactor is allowed to
enter the power range with a 0.5 DPM SUR with steam control valves in a
fixed position.
Ap = (ITC)(AT^.eJ
Ap = -Po = -92 pcm (Example 4.10.1)
AT = (-Po
)/rrc
ITC = -12.9 pcm/F (Appendix B)

AT - 7F
160
Since steam conditions start out at approximately 565 F/1180 psia, if steam
temperature increases 7 F, then the conditions would be 572 F/1250 psia. This
steam pressure is above the relief valve setpoint and the option demonstrated by this
example is clearly unacceptable.
In summary, the operator is tasked with increasing power level from below the
point-of-adding-heat into the low end of the power range in a safe and prudent
manner. He must be aware of the cause and effect relationships between his actions
and plant response. He must be aware of system status and constantly evaluate the
adequacy of system response to his actions. His success is based, in part, on his
understanding of the nuclear and thermodynamic principles which govern the
processes and systems.
4.11 Power Excursions
When the reactor is critical, or very nearly critical, below the point-of-addingheat, reactivity insertions create power increases which do not immediately produce
temperature dependent feedback. A reactivity addition event could consequently
create large values of SUR and rapid increases in power level. Ultimately, power
would cause heating, heating would create negative feedback, and the power increase
would turn. However, the peak power produced could be severe enough to result in
damage to the fuel and release of fission product activity into the RCS coolant. Such
inadvertent insertions of positive reactivity must either be avoided or the
consequences of such an event must be mitigated.
Examples of potential initiating events include:
1.
Inadvertent continuous motion of control rods.
2.
Rapid ejection of a control rod due to a failure of the pressure

boundary.
3.
Inadvertent continuous dilution of
RCS
soluble boron.
161
4.
Rapid reduction in RCS Tcold (negative MTC) due to failure in the heat
removal system which causes sudden increase in heat removal rate.
Design features which serve to limit the severity of such events include:
1.
Limiting the reactivity worth of individual control rods and groups of

rods.
2.
Limiting the design speed with which control rods are capable of being
moved by the control system.
3.
Providing alarms for power increase which direct operator attention to

search out the cause if it is not an intentional power increase.
4.
Limiting the rate at which RCS boron can be diluted.
5.
Limiting the magnitude by which heat removal rate can increase.
6.
Limiting the magnitude of the negative MTC.
Features which allow the system to respond to, and mitigate the consequences
of, such an event are based on automatically initiating a reactor trip in response to
a que caused by the event. Whenever the reactor is critical, or close to being critical,
a large quantity of negative reactivity is available for rapid insertion into the core.
Safety, or shutdown, control rods are fully withdrawn and capable of rapid insertion
upon receipt of a reactor trip signal. Reactor trip signals which can initiate a trip in
these reactivity insertion event type scenarios include:
1.
Trip on high power level below the point-of-adding-heat. During a

normal, controlled, power ascent, these trips are bypassed as the trip
setpoint is approached. However, in an inadvertent positive reactivity
insertion event they are designed to prevent power level overshoot
from causing damage.
2.
Trip on high SUR. If power is increasing too rapidly, a trip is initiated

before power level increases to too high of a level.
162
3.
Trip on low steam generator pressure. A low steam generator pressure

is indicative of a large heat removal event such as a break in the steam
line and initiates a trip to prevent the positive reactivity insertion from
RCS cooldown from causing a power increase.
163
Learning Objectives
1.
State the limitations of the Prompt Jump Approximation (single group model)
solution to the reactor dynamics equations.
2.
Given a value for the net core reactivity, calculate the value of the reactor
period.
3.
Given a value for reactor period [SUR], calculate the corresponding value of
SUR [reactor period].
4.
Given a value for net core reactivity [stable SUR], calculate the value of stable
SUR [net core reactivity].
5.
Discuss the variations in stable SUR caused by variations in the delayed

neutron fraction.
6.
Predict the effect of specified reactivity insertions on the value of stable SUR
over the life of the core (below POAH).
7.
Predict the effect of step insertions of reactivity into a previously critical core
(below POAH).
8.
Differentiate between stable SUR and transient SUR and identify the
requirements for each.
9.
Predict the effects of ramp reactivity insertions into a previously critical core
(below POAH).
10.
Identify the conditions necessary for power turning.
11.
Predict the effects of a reactor trip on power level.
12.
Given a value for stable SUR (below POAH), predict the power level at
which the reactor will stabilize.
13.
Given power level and typical plant parameters, predict the value of RCS Tj,,
and RCS Tj^g.
14.
Given power level and typical plant parameters, predict the value of required
feedwater flow rate.
15.
Given a value for RCS
and reactor power, use typical plant parameters
to predict the value of steam pressure.
164
Suggested Reading
1.0 Ott, K.O., and R.J. Neuhold, "Introductory Nuclear Reactor Dynamics", The
Chapter 6, Solution of the Basic Kinetics Problem
pp 84-137
Chapter 9, Measurement of Reactivity
pp 183-225
2.0 Glasstone, S., and A. Sesonske, "Nuclear Reactor Engineering", Van Nostrand
Chapter 5, Control of Nuclear Reactors
pp 230-328
3.0 Hetrick, D.L., "Dynamics of Nuclear Reactors", The University of Chicago Press,
IL, (1993).
Chapter 2, Constant Reactivity and Reactivity Steps
pp 17-51
4.0 Lamarsh, J., "Introduction to Nuclear Engineering", Addison-Wesley publishing

Chapter 7, The Time Dependent Reactor
pp 308-366
pp 241-307
165
4.12 SOLUTIONS
Problem 4.4.1:
Repeat at
= 0.5$ and compare.
T = (l-0.5)/(0.1)(0.5) = 0.5/0.05 = 10 sec

Comparison of these two solutions with Figure 4.4.2 indicates that the solution
for p = 0.2$ is in close correspondence with the information displayed in the figure
but that the solution for p = 0.5$ departs from the value displayed in the figure. The
differences indicate the fundamental limitation in using a single value for
for all
values of the initial reactivity. However, 0.5$ is a relatively large amount of reactivity
insertion for a large commercial reactor and thus the previous equations represent
a good model for the solution of the stable period under normal conditions.
Question 4.4.1;
What solutionis) exist to result in a closer correspondence between a single group model
and a six group model over a wide range of reactivity?
The best solution available to allow a single group model to more closely
represent the 6 group solution is to use a reactivity dependent value for A.j(f in the
solutions.
This approach is cumbersome when attempting to perform quick
calculations but does result in better answers. Another solution is to continue to use
a single value for
in all solutions and recognize that the solutions are estimates
of the actual conditions within the reactor.
Problem 4.5.1:
Prove that SUR = 26.061'^ and validate that
S U R ^ l ( X .p +
p) l (P-p)]26.06
The proof of the relationship between SUR and reactor period is to realize
that both SUR and t both represent the dynamics of the same process and can be
related to each other by use of the governing equation as shown.
166
P(t) = Pg exp(t/T) = Pfl 10^' where t in the reactor period expression is in

seconds and t in the SUR expression is in minutes.
If the transient is
expressed for a period of one minute, then:

P(60 sec) = P(1 min) = P exp(60/r) = P 10^"^ where P is the same
q
in both cases.
P(60 sec)/Po = P(1 min)/Po =
= 10^"^:: take logs and equate.
60/T = (SUR)ln(lO) = = > SUR = 26.06/T
This relationship indicates that the 26.06 in the solution takes into account the
relationship between minutes and seconds and the relationship between base e and
base 10 logs. Thus the units of 26.06 are sec/min with an implied modifier of
(Decades/Power of e) to produce Decades-sec/(Power of e)-min. Thus, dividing 26.06
by reactor period produces decades per minute and dividing 26.06 by decades per
minute produces sec per power of e. Such a derived equation has the possibility of
causing error since the common method of equation usage is to assure unit
consistency. A common error is to take a reactor period of 40 seconds and convert
it to minutes before substituting into SUR = 26.06/T which is clearly wrong.
The validation of the expression for SUR then is made by substituting the
symbolic expression for reactor period into SUR = 26.06/T. Again all units inside
the symbolic expression for reactor period must be in seconds time frame.
Question 4.5.1:
Specify the units which are required for each of the following in order that the definitions
of reactor period and startup rate are jointly satisfied.
aPo
b.
p
C.
Xctt
d.
e.
p
26.06
167
a.
b.
,: any reactivity unit or normalized unit
PJ
P : any unit with similar format to p
For example; if p = 0.00100 then use a p format of 0.00520

if p = 100 pcm then use a p format of 520
if p = 0.2$ then use a value of /3 = 1
c.
A.gff: units of sec"'
d.
p : any reactivity unit or normalized unit consistent with the

value and units of p expressed as p /sec
e.
26.06: see the discussion in Problem 4.5.1 solution.
Problem 4.5.2:
If 100 pcm is inserted into a critical reactor, what stable SUR results? Assume that beta =
0.00600 and that the reactor is at a very low power level so that no reactivity feedback exists.
SUR = 26.06 [(Xgff p + p )/(j0- p )] with
p = 100 pcm
P = 600
p = 0
A-err = 0.1 sec'

SUR = 26.06 (10/500) = 0.52 DPM
Problem 4.5.3:
.A power increase procedure says 'create a stable SUR no greater than 0.75 DPAf. Vhat is the
maximum reactivity which should be added to the previously critical reactor ? Assume beta =
0.00600.
Solve the SUR equation for the value of stable reactivity required to establish
the SUR. Thus p = 0.
p = SUR/S/(26.06A,ff + SUR)
168
p = (0.75)(600)/(2.606 + 0.75) = 134 pcm

Question 4.5.2:
Discuss how the value of the stable startup rate would be affected if each of the
following parameters were changed one at a time.
a.
The value of
is increased.
b.
The value of pis decreased.
c.
The value of Aat is increased.
In all cases, the variation specified causes an increase in the stable SUR
produced by the event. The value of
can be affected by the change in the
reactivity worth of control rods or soluble boron such that the same physical property
change results in a different reactivity insertion. For example, an event which creates
an excessive steam demand will result in a rapid reduction in the value of RCS
which will in turn insert reactivity into the core based on the value of the moderator
temperature coefficient. As the core ages, the value of MTC becomes more negative
and the same sudden reduction in RCS ^cold inserts a larger quantity of positive
reactivity. The value of the effective delayed neutron fraction depends upon the
types of fuel which are producing power and the relative contribution of each. As
the core ages, the fraction of power level produced by U-238 remains relatively
constant, the fraction of power level produced by U-235 decreases significantly due
to the depletion of fuel and the fraction of power level produced by Pu-239 increases
because of the age dependent production of that isotope form U-238. The results
of these changes is to reduce the effective delayed neutron fraction. Reasonable
numbers for the PVNGS cores are
/9boc
= 0.00620, /
Smoc
= 0,00570, and
0.00520. This 16% reduction in the value of the effective delayed neutron fraction
causes a significant variation in the stable SUR over the life of the core even if the
reactivity insertion remains constant.
A specified event such as a control rod ejection event from the "just critical
condition" at 1 x 10"^% RTP must then be analyzed for both the variation in the
reactivity worth of the rod and the variation in the effective delayed neutron fraction
over the life of the core to determine the most limiting conditions.
169
The value of Xen is relatively constant over the life of the core. Even though
the different fuel isotopes produce varying quantities of power level and thus
contribute to the variation in the effective delayed neutron fraction, each fuel
produces delayed neutron precursors in a fairly consistent distribution between the
6 groups and Xjff does not change much.
Question 4.5.3:
Assume that all power is generated by fissions of U-235 and Pu-239 caused by thermal
neutrons. Develop an expression for
in terms of nuclide specific parameters
[fraction of power generated per nuclide, delayed neutron fraction for each nuclide, and
energy released per fission for each nuclide].
Delayed neutrons are produced by the decay of fission products which are
produced at a rate governed by the fission rate of the specific nuclide.
expression for
The
is a weighted average expression taking into account the value of
the delayed neutron fraction for each nuclide with 'per cent fission rate' as the
weighting factor.
Define R-X as the nuclide specific fission rate expressed as a fraction of total
fission rate.
R-X = fraction of power produced by a fissions specific
nuclide/energy released per fission for that same nuclide.
= (R-235)P"^ + (R-239)P^^
Question 4.5.4:
What impact does this change in the delayed neutron fraction

have on the response of the reactor to a specified reactivity
insertion?
See the response to Question 4.5.2. Any specified reactivity insertion results
in a more rapid change in power level as the core ages and the value of the effective
delayed neutron fraction decreases. The design of reactor protection system response
must take into account this variation and assure that the most limiting condition is
protected against.
170
Question 4.5.5:
Is an unplanned reactivity insertion event more severe at the be^ning or end of the
operating cycle? Assume that the reactor is fueled with Uranium fuel material which is
nominally 4% enriched.
See the response to Question 4.5.2 and Question 4.5.3.
Question 4.5.6:
How is Plutonium-239 produced in an operating reactor?

reactions to show the process.
'n +
Use balanced nuclear
--> ^ + Y
The isotope U-239 is radioactive and will undergo decay by the beta minus
mechanism as shown below:
239U --> 'p +
-> 'p + "'Pu
23.5 minutes
2.35 days
While Pu-239 is also radioactive in the alpha decay mode, as are the other fuel
nuclides, with a half life of 2.411 x lO* years, the quantity of Pu-239 does not decrease
by decay. An equilibrium concentration of this fuel would be achieved only after
sufficient quantity has been produced so that the removal rate by neutron absorption
equals the production rate as displayed above. Uranium-238 has a very small fission
cross section, and only then for fast neutrons. However, Plutonium-239 has a thermal
neutron cross section of 742 bams for fission and 269 bams for radiative capture.
The total absorption cross section for thermal neutrons of 1011 bams is 48% larger
than the absorption cross section of Uranium-235 for thermal neutrons making each
atom of Pu-239 a more effective thermal fuel than U-235.
While the reactor is operating at high power levels, this Pu-239 production
mechanism results in an equilibrium level (power dependent) of both U-239 and Np239 existing in the reactor. After a reactor trip, this inventory of Plutonium-239
precursors decays and the Pu-239 atom density increases. The positive reactivity
insertion after a trip is time dependent and must be accounted in the ECC procedure
for maximum accuracy of that procedure.
171
Problem 4.5.4
Assume that a new core is fueled with Uranium fuel material which is 4% enriched. Given the
following information, determine the effective value of the delayed neutron fraction for the core.
a.
85% power production from thermal fission of
b. The delayed neutron fraction for each nuclide is listed as:
iP^thermal)
= 0.00620
lP^(fast)
= 0.00650
l/^(fast)
= 0.01400
The solution strategy to this problem is merely a weighted average calculation

where the weighting factor is the percent power generated by each nuclide.
êff =
+ [iS'^(Pwr^)]fas. +
/SEFF = (0.00620)(.85) + (0.01400)(.08) + (0.00650)(.07) = 0.00685

This solution indicates that the value of /Sgff is greater than the value of
due to the contribution of U-238 which has a very large value of the delayed neutron
fraction. This solution would be typical of the value for a commercial PWR fueled
with uranium isotopes at the beginning of the first cycle of operation. After that
time; however, there is a contribution from the Pu-239 inventory which has been bred
into the core which results in
being less than the value of
This solution
assumes that the energy released per fission is the same for fast and thermal fissions
of both U-235 and U-238. Does this assumption fit the boundary conditions specified
by the real world?
Problem 4.5.5;
The operator has just created a stable SUR of 0.6 DPM by withdrawing control rods 10 inches
from the critical condition. Power is increasing from a level of 1 E-6% toward 1 E-2% where
it will be stabilized by the operator. What actions are required by the operator to stabilize power
level?
To stop the power increase, the reactor must be returned to criticality by the
operator by re-inserting the control rods to the same position as they were before the
172
initial withdrawal. This assumes that rod worth has not changed and no other
reactivity insertion occurred.
Problem 4.6.1:
Sketch power level (log scale) vs time for a 0.20$ step insertion into a previously critical reactor.
Discussions and sketching will take place in class.

Problem 4.7.1:
Qualitatively sketch both SUR and Log Power vj time for a one minute reactivity ramp and the
two minute period following the ramp. Assume that no reactivity feedback occurs.
Discussions and sketching will take place in class.

Problem 4.7.2:
Continue with the example portrayed in Table 4.7.1. Assume that two minutes after having
established the +0.65 DPM stable SUR, the operator inserts reactivity at a rate of -2pcmlsec for
exactly 60 sec. Calculate the SUR at each increment and complete the data in Table 4.7.2.
TABLE 4.7.2
NEGATIVE REACTIVITY INSERTION RAMP
TIME
o(RATE)
(sec) (pcmlsec)
SUR
(iKm) (DPM)
180
120
0.65
180*
120
0.54
190
-2
100
0.42
200
2
-2
80
60
0.30
-2
2
40
0.09
230
20
0.00
240
-2
240*
-0.09
n /)/)
t/.t/W
210
220
Question 4.7.1:
o(VALUE)
0.19
Between time 230 and 240 seconds, how is power responding? What is the core net
reactivity?
The reactor is still supercritical, since net core reactivity is positive but power
is decreasing [negative SUR] due to the reactivity insertion rate.
173
Question 4.7.2:
If the operator had secured the negative reactivity insertion at exactly 235 seconds, how
would power have responded?
The reactor would still have been slightly supercritical and thus the power
level would have stopped decreasing and started increasing.
Question 4.7.3:
How would the transient displayed in Table 4.7.2 have differed if the operator had
inserted negative reactivity at the rate of -6 pcmlsec for exactly 20 seconds?
The effect of the reactivity insertion rate would have been more extreme,
power would have turned quicker, with 60 pcm still in core. A graph will be
developed and displayed in class.
Question 4.7.4:
An operator withdraws control rods at a constant rate until the SUR meter indicates 0.5
DPM and then halts the withdrawal. What will happen to the rate of power change?
The 0.5 DPM transient SUR is due to both the positive reactivity in core and
the positive reactivity insertion rate. When the control rod motion is halted, the
transient SUR becomes a stable SUR whose magnitude depends only on the net
positive reactivity in core. Thus the SUR makes a 'prompt drop' in magnitude. Note
that this transient is really a very rapidly decaying exponential of the short lived
terms.
Question 4.7.5:
What are the consequences of negative SUR with positive net reactivity due to negative
reactivity insertion rate?
Reactor power can be made to quickly start decreasing due to the insertion
rate of negative reactivity. The reactor can be subcritical on the prompt neutron
population even though the delayed neutrons, which will eventually appear, result in
the reactor still being critical. Large negative reactivity insertion rates due to CEA
insertion or fuel heating are very important to accident mitigation.
174
Question 4.8.1:
Power is being increased from 1x10*% toward 1x1

and the operator is attempting
to stabilize power. He inserts control rods until the SUR meter indicates zero and then
halts the insertion. What happens to power after he halts the insertion?
The operator just experienced power turning and the reactor is still
supercritical. Power will start increasing again and the operator will need to insert
additional negative reactivity.
Question 4.8.2:
If the differential control rod worth (DRW) is zero during the first 7.5 inches of travel,
what is the value of
as the control rods pass the point 7.5 inches from the top of the
core?
The rods have not yet inserted any reactivity so the value of pe, is the same
as whatever initial amount of reactivity was inserted into the core. The point behind
this series of examples and questions is to show that the rods achieve terminal
velocity very quickly after they start moving. At that point, they have inserted very
little (or no) reactivity, and since they are travelling at constant speed, when they
start inserting reactivity they will do so at a nearly constant negative rate.
Question 4.8.3:
Using Uranium-235 delayed neutron data, what is the maximum possible value for
if it were set equal to the maximum value of
Would using this value for Arfr change
the conclusions reached in the previous examples?
The maximum value of A,i is that value associated with the delayed neutron
precursor group with the shortest half life. For U-235, the values are th = 0.230 sec
and A.6 = 3.01 sec \ Even if Xgff were 3.01 sec"', the large negative reactivity insertion
rates demonstrated in the previous examples and problems would very quickly turn
power.
Recall::all that is necessary is for
175
Problem 4.8.1:
What value of negative reactivity insertion rate is required to instantly turn power if
and Pa = 0.75 $?
= 0.2 sec'^
~ "êir-P-
Preqd = -(0.75$)(0.2 sec"') = 0.15$/sec

Even at BOC at PVNGS, 0.15$/sec is only 78 pcm/sec which is relatively easy
to achieve.
Question 4.8.4:
How difficult is it to achieve the value required in Problem 4.8.1 if 10 $ of rods are
available and they are capable of being fiilly inserted within 5 seconds?
Not very, the average insertion rate of these rods in 2$/sec which is much
more than required. All that is necessary is to get the rods moving in the right
direction and have them approach their terminal velocity relatively quickly.
Question 4.9.1:
If the reactor coolant system temperature is increased by 5F and the immediate dynamic
response is measured, what temperature coefficient is measured?
The coolant temperature leads the fuel temperature by several seconds

because of the heat transfer time constant between the fuel and the coolant across
the cladding and gas gap of the fuel pin. Thus the immediate dynamic response is
due to reactivity inserted by moderator temperature changes alone. The reactivity
coefficient being measured in this case is MTC.
Question 4,9.2:
If the reactor coolant system temperature is increased by 5F and the final stable power
level is iissd to infer the reactivity chcjfiê, what ternpercture coejjicietit is Ttiecisurcd?
Both moderator and fuel temperatures have changed and the final power level
is driven by the total reactivity insertion of both moderator and fuel mechanisms.
Since ITC = MTC + FTC, this coefficient measurement process measures ITC.
176
Problem 4.10.1:
Assuming that water is being fed into the steam generators at 100 F and that the steam pressure
is 1150 psia at the new power level, what feed flow rate is necessary to maintain steam generator
levels constant at a reactor power level of 4.5% RTP with RCP work equal to 0.5% RTP?
Assume that any other heat inputs and losses can be ignored.
Solution strategy: Convert 5% RTP to btu/hr of heat generation which must

be removed if temperatures are to be maintained constant. Realize that heat
removal is by boiling in the steam generators which convert 100 F water into steam
at 1150 psia.
Solve the equation; q = mfe^(hs,eam - hf^) for m:
q =
(0.05)(3800 X 10^ Kw)(3412 Btu/Kw-hr)
Q = 6.48 X 10 Btu/hr
hsteam
^ hs(1150 psia)=
h'"*'
= h^lOO F)=
1187.0 Btu/lbm
68.0 Btu/lbm
mrd = 6-48 x 107lll9 = 5.79 x 10' Ibm/hr = 9.66 x 10' Ibm/min

Wfeed
= 1165 gpm
Problem 4.10.2:
Repeat Example 4.10.1 under EOC conditions in which fi = 0.00520.
pe, = SURj3/(26A.e[t + SUR);; Substitute values from the problem

Pnei
- 84 pcm: Refer to Table 2.1.1 of the Core Data Book in
Appendix B and interpolate. Answer = 3.1% RTP.

Problem 4.10.3:
If the operator desires to stabilize power at 3% RTP, under MOC conditions, what value of stable
SUR should be established?
If the operator begins his positive reactivity insertion at 90 inches withdrawn on Group 4 CEA's,
how far should he withdraw control rods to establish the desired stable SUR?
177
3% RTP ==> Power Defect = -61.6 pcm from Table 2.1.1 by interpolation.
To achieve that power level, +61.6 pcm must be added which creates a Stable SUR
of 0.32 DPM.
To determine the required control rod motion it is necessary to use Table
2.9.2 of the Core Data Book (Appendix B)
p(Gp4 @ 90)
= -519.0 pcm
A p(required)
61.6 pcm
p (Final Rod position) = -457.4 pcm

Which corresponds to Group 5 @ 18 inches withdrawn by interpolation
from the rod worth curve.
178
CHAPTER 5
POWER RANGE OPERATIONS
A.
Reactor Critical at 3% RTP
B.
All shutdown rods fully withdrawn
C.
Regulating rods at or near the ECRP
D.
Soluble boron concentration at the ECBC
E.
Xenon concentration at or near zero
F.
G.
RCS at Hot Zero Power (NOT/NOP)
H.
RCS temperature being maintained by balancing heat production from

reactor coolant pumps and the core with heat removal by heat transfer
into the steam generators

A.
Perform power range reactivity assessments which include the effects

of feedback from temperature dependent processes and fission product
poisons.
B.
Perform fluid flow evaluations associated with multiple pumps and

parallel flow paths.
C.
Evaluate and control the spatial distribution of power.
D.
Evaluate core power using thermodynamic processes balance

(calorimetric).
E.
Predict system response to a dropped rod event.
F.
Predict system response to a reactor power cutback event.
179
G.
Predict system response to a reactor trip event.
H.
Evaluate the adequacy of shutdown margin.
I.
Evaluate the ability to borate the RCS while cooling down.
5.3 Introduction
Power range operations differ from low power, below the point-of-adding-heat,
operations because of the dynamic power dependent feedback which occurs from
temperature dependent processes and fission product poisons within the core. In
both these mechanisms, power changes initiate reactivity insertions which in turn
affect the criticality state of the reactor. Both the transient and steady state effects
of changing power level are discussed in this chapter. In formulating the presentation
in this chapter, it has been assumed that the student has previously completed a
course of study which included the heat transfer and thermodynamic processes
associated with a nuclear steam supply system. Further, it is assumed that the
student understands the production and removal mechanisms of the principal fission
product poisons present in a relatively high power density thermal reactor. The
purpose of this chapter is to develop the operational, not the theoretical, aspects of
these processes. However, the student must understand the theoretical aspects to
fully understand the operational. To facilitate this understanding, the following listing
is presented as a summary. If the student does not understand the basis for each
statement, individual review of supporting principles should occur.
Temperature processes:
1.
Steady state primary system loop temperature difference depends upon

power level.
2.
Steady state temperature difference between the RCS (Tj^g) and the
secondary (Tjiea^) depends upon power level.
180
3.
Steady state fuel-to-coolant temperature difference in a local region

depends upon the local power density in that region.
4.
The design and operational goal is to maintain RCS cold leg

temperature constant over the entire range of power conditions.
5.
Steam generator feedwater temperature increases as power level

increases.
6.
Steady state steam generator pressure decreases as power level

increases.
7.
Subcooled water density (constant pressure) decreases, at an increasing

rate, as water temperature increases.
8.
Reactivity insertion mechanisms initiated by moderator temperature

changes depend primarily upon the consequent moderator density
changes.
9.
Reactivity insertion mechanisms initiated by fuel temperature changes

depend primarily on changes in resonance capture processes with U238 and Pu-240 nuclides.
10.
When core power level changes, heat transfer processes dictate that
fuel temperature changes lead moderator temperature changes.
11.
When RCS heat removal processes change, heat transfer processes

dictate that coolant temperature changes lead fuel temperature
changes.
12.
The power density produced within the core is not spatially uniform
under either steady state or transient conditions.
Fission product poison processes:

1.
The principal fission product poisons are Xe-135 and Sm-149.
2.
Steady state xenon concentration increases, at a decreasing rate, as

power level increases.
181
3.
Steady state samarium concentration remains constant as power level

increases.
4.
As fission product poison concentration increases, reactivity worth per

atom decreases.
5.
The initial transient response of fission product poison inventory to a

power level change is to produce positive feedback.
6.
Following a reactor trip, xenon inventory peaks then decays to zero.
7.
Following a reactor trip, samarium inventory peaks and then does not
change with time.
8.
The dynamics of fission product poison transients depend upon the half
life of both the specific poison nuclide and any radioactive decay
process parent nuclide.
9.
Xenon-135 transients can result in reactivity insertion rates on the

order of hundreds of pcm per hour while Samarium-149 transients
result in rates on the order of a couple of hundred pcm per day
maximum.
10.
Spatial variations in local power density result in spatial variations in

the local concentration (and worth) of xenon throughout the core.
Thus a redistribution of power within the core can induce a net
reactivity insertion due to the non-linearity of xenon worth and the
distribution of xenon.
Question 53.1:
If Xenon-135 concentration changes were the only reactivity

feedback mechanism present in the core, what would be the
effect of a small positive reactivity insertion initiated by the
operator? Assume no other operator actions occur after the
initial reactivity insertion.
182
In order to increase reactor power and steam demand and maintain Tcold
constant, it is necessary to both open the turbine steam throttle valves and insert
positive reactivity into the core. The process can be initiated by either first opening
the throttle valves followed by positive reactivity insertion or the reverse. In either
case, however, if the two processes are not synchronized then ^cold will change
significantly from the initial value. Adjustments of the power level typically take
place at a rate of 5-10 percent per hour.
The following example serves to
demonstrate the cause and effect relationships which are in effect during a power
increase evolution.
Example 53.1:
The following sequence of events demonstrate the process of increasing power
level from equilibrium 20% RTP to 30% RTP assuming that all systems are
aligned to support the evolution.
1.
The steam plant operator first initiates a steam flow increase by

opening the steam throttle valves.
2.
The steam valve opening causes a reduction in steam pressure within

the steam generator.
3.
Due to the thermodynamics of a saturated water-steam working fluid,

the reduction in steam pressure results in a reduction in steam
temperature.
4.
Reduction in steam temperature and increase in steam flow rate cause

an increase in the heat transfer rate out of the RCS and result in a
decrease in Tcold-
5.
If MTC is negative, T^,d decreasing inserts positive reactivity creating

a supercritical condition and causing power level to begin increasing to
follow the increase in steam demand. This load following capability is
an example of the inherent stability of a control system with negative
feedback.
183
6.
Fuel temperature increases in response to the power level increase and

inserts negative reactivity. All commercial power production reactors
in the United States have a negative fuel temperature coefficient by
design.
7.
When the plant stabilizes; reactor power = steam demand; the positive
Ap due to ATîd and the negative Ap due to ATfyî cancel each other;
RCS loop AT has increased; and RCS
8.
is lower than initially.
To return Tcold to the desired value, the operator inserts positive

reactivity. The magnitude of positive reactivity inserted to return Tjîj
to the initial value following a steam demand change is tabulated as the
"power defect" in Appendix B.
9.
The net steady state effects are:

The reactor returned to a state of criticality, and;
"^cold remained constant,
RCS Loop AT increased,
Reactor power increased.
Steam Generator heat transfer rate increased,
Steam Generator pressure decreased.
Steam Generator temperature decreased.
Steam flow rate increased,
and either RCS soluble boron concentration was changed
or the control rods were moved to provide the required
compensating reactivity.
To facilitate the performance of the evolution outlined in Example 5.3.1, the

operator could have predicted the required reactivity insertion by consulting the
Power Defect data in Appendix B Table 2.1.0. Establishing a reactivity insertion rate
such that the required reactivity becomes inserted within the desired time frame
results in a slow increase in Tôi^. As the steam plant operator observes increasing
184
TcoId> increases in steam demand are created by incremental opening of the steam
throttle valves. The net result is that both of the operators observe reactor power,
steam flow rate, and RCS Loop AT increasing with Tcold being held approximately
constant.
5E001:
Develop cause and effect scenarios whicli illustrate the eflect

of reactivity insertions on key parameters.
Problem 5J.1:
Develop a cause and effect scenario similar to Example 5.3.1 to illustrate why
and how Tcold changes if positive reactivity is inserted while steam demand is
held constant.
Problem 53.2:
Develop a cause and effect scenario similar to Example 5.3.1 to illustrate the
effects of inserting negative reactivity while steam demand is held constant.
SE002:
Differentiate between the effects of positive and negative MTC

conditions on reactor transients.
Vjuestion 53.2:
How do the responses to Example 5.3.1, Problem 5.3.1, and

Problem 5.3.2 differ if it is assumed that the moderator
temperature coefficient is positive?
185
Problem 533:
Develop a cause and effect scenario to illustrate the effects of reducing steam
demand with no other operator initiated changes.
Question 533:
What initiating cue should an operator use to decide when to

insert reactivity when steam demand is being reduced?
5E003;
Predict the magnitude of reactivity insertions necessaiy to

compensate for plant transients.
SE004;
Predict the effects of plant transients on key parameters

(power level and temperature) if adequate compensating
reactivity is not inserted.
Assuming that the transient discussed in Example 5.3.1 were a step change
which was instantly stabilized at 30% RTP, a xenon transient was initiated which will
have the following effects.
1.
Over the next 40-50 hours (at MOC conditions) the xenon transient
will insert -374.1 pcm as equilibrium xenon increases from -1524.3 pcm
to -1898.4 pcm (Appendix B Table 2.5.1).
2.
However the initial xenon transient will be a positive reactivity insertion

as the increased power level causes an increased burnout of the
previous xenon concentration. The total xenon transient is depicted in
Figure E.2.1.
3.
This total xenon transient v.'ould cause a change in RCS T^,;, if the
steam demand were held constant.
186
4.
To prevent the changes in RCS temperature, the operator must be

prepared to insert compensating reactivity as the xenon transient is
occurring. To do so, the operator must recognize that this temperature
transient is an isothermal temperature transient and be able to access
the correct reactivity data from the core data book (See Appendix B
Table 2.2.0).
In reality, power changes are not step changes followed by discreet

temperature changes caused by the resultant xenon transient. Instead, both transients
occur as power is ramped up or down to a new level and then the xenon transient
continues.
Problem 53.4:
Develop a cause and effect scenario which describes the effects of the
previous xenon transient on RCS '^cold* Assume that steam demand is held
constant at 30% RTP.
Problem 53.5:
If a xenon transient inserts -300 pcm while steam demand is held constant,
how much does RCS Tcold change? What action is required, by the operator,
to prevent RCS Tcold from changing?
5.4 Reactivity Assessments

Reactivity assessments in the power range consist of using the reactivity
coefficients or reactivity defects tabulated in the core data book (Appendix B) to
predict the magnitude of control rod motion or RCS soluble boron concentration
adjustment necessary to stabilize the reactor during various transients. The core data
book supplied as part of this text only provides steady state (equilibrium) xenon
187
reactivity data.
Consequently, transient xenon reactivity data must either be
estimated or obtained from a different source. Appendix E provides transient xenon

data which was obtained from a computer program entitled XENON (Revision 6.1)
which is used at PVNGS. This program produces transient xenon reactivity data
specific to each unit, fuel cycle, and time-in-life for either step power changes or for
ramp power changes which are simulated as 15 minute time steps.
The key to understanding reactivity assessments is to realize that a power
plant is operating at stable steady state conditions (above the POAH) when, and only
when, the following two conditions are both satisfied.
1.
The reactor is critical: pne, = 0.
2.
Reactor power level = steam demand; which is to say that heat

generation within the RCS and heat removal from the RCS are equal
to each other. All generated heat is being transferred and none is
being stored.
Thus, if steam demand does not change during a transient; steady state reactor
power level can not change. If steam demand does change during a transient; steady
state reactor power level must change.
If reactivity is inserted into a critical reactor, then compensating reactivity must
be inserted to return the reactor to a state of criticality.
A p (initiating event) + A p (compensating process) = 0
The following examples demonstrate typical reactivity assessments performed
during power range operations. Unless otherwise specified, the assumption is made
that the core is at middle of cycle (MOC) conditions (200 EFPD for Unit 1 Cycle 4
and that RCS cold leg temperature (T^îd) starts out at 565 F. A reasonable value
188
for MOC delayed neutron fraction with mixed uranium-plutonium equilibrium fuel
cycle is /3 = 0.00570.
5E005:
Given a value for stable SUR (below POAH), predict where

the plant will stabilize.
Example 5.4.1:
A stable startup rate of 0.4 DPM was just created and power is increasing into
the power range. Assuming that automatic steam pressure control valves
maintain steam generator pressure at 1170 psia, and that the feedwater flow
system can sustain steam generator levels at up to 5% RTP, at what power
level will the reactor stabilize?
Solution strategy: Solve for
given SUR, and equate to power level
using power defect from Appendix B Table 2.1.1.

From Table 2.1.1: -102.7 pcm for 5% RTP = = > -20.54 pcm/% RTP.
From SUR Equation:
= SUR()3)/(26Aeff + SUR) = 76 pcm.
Final stable power = -pNEr/Power Coefficient = 3.7% RTP.

Question 5.4.1:
In Example 5.4.1, all of the + A p which was inserted to create

the +SUR (0.4 DPM) was compensated by power defect due to
the increase in steam demand. Where does RCS Tcold stabilize?
Example 5.4.2
Assume that the reactor is stable and critical at 10% RTP, with equilibrium
xenon conditions and a RCS boron concentration of 1000 ppm. If steam
demand is increased to 20% RTP, and the resultant RCS transient is
compensated for by changing the boron concentration, what final boron
189
concentration is predicted? Ignore the xenon transient caused by the power

increase.
Solution Strategy: Appo^^ + Apaoron = (reactor returns to critical)
ApBoron ~ (Avcragc Boron Worth)(A ppm)
Relate required change in boron concentration to desired change
in power using boron worth as a coefficient:
A ppm = -(Power defect)/(boron worth)
Power Defect = -402.4 -(-204.6) = -197.8 pern for 10% power increase
From Table 2.1.1
Boron worth at 1000 ppm and 565 F under MOC conditions and
averaging for power level as follows:
Table 2.3.2: 0% RTP:
Boron Worth = -8.85 pcm/ppm
Table 2.3.5: 50% RTP:
Interpolation for average power level during the transient.

15% RTP:
A ppm = -(-197.8 pcm)/(-8.77 pcm/ppm) = -22.6 ppm

the negative sign on A ppm implies a dilution or reduction in
boron concentration is required.
This positive reactivity
insertion is used to offset the negative reactivity insertion caused

by the power increase.
Question 5.4.2:
In Example 5.4.2, reactor power and steam demand were

increased from 10% RTP to 20% RTP.
RCS Tôy was
190
maintained by diluting the RCS soluble boron concentration.

How would the plant have responded if steam demand were
increased but no boron dilution was initiated?
5E006:
Given a specified plant power transient, predict (qualitatively)

the resultant xenon transient
Example 5.4J:
The power increase in Example 5.4.2 initiates a xenon transient which inserts
+ 150 pcm over the three hours following the power increase.
What
temperature change will occur if no reactivity adjustment is made? What RCS

boron concentration adjustment is required to prevent, or respond to, the
temperature change?
Solution strategy: This example is solved using the fact that following the
power increase from Example 5.4.2, steam demand (and consequently steady
state reactor power level) is maintained constant. Reactivity insertions which
occur when power level is constant result in isothermal temperature changes.
Thus the reactivity insertion is related to a temperature change using the
isothermal temperature coefficient. To prevent, or respond to a temperature
change, the required boron change is related to the reactivity insertion with
the boron worth.
Data:
Reactivity insertion: +150 pcm A Pxenon

ITC (20% RTP, 1000 ppm, 565 F)
Table 5.2.2:
- 6.34 pcm/F
Table 5.2.5: -11.25 pcm^F

Interpolated value: -8.30 pcm/F
191
Boron Worth (20% RTP, 1000 ppm, 565 F)

Table 2.3.2: - 8.85 pcm/ppm
Table 2.3.5 - 8.58 pcm/ppm
Interpolated value: - 8.74 pcm/ppm
Solution:
^PXenon
^Pxemp
APxemp = ITC(AT)
AT =
-Apxenon
/rrc = -150
pcm/(-8.30 pcm^F) = 18 F
The positive sign is consistent with the fact that a positive reactivity
insertion will result in heating.
APxenon ^ ^Pfioron ^
A p Boron = Boron Worth(A ppm)
A ppm = -Apxenon/(Boron Worth) = -150 pcm/(-8.74 pcm/ppm)
A ppm = 17 ppm
The positive sign is consistent with the fact that a positive reactivity
insertion from xenon requires a negative reactivity insertion (boration)
to prevent a temperature increase.
Question 5.43:
In Example 5.4.3, the initial effect of the xenon transient is

heating of the RCS. if RCS T^^ increased by 18 F, what
m
happened to steady state steam temperature in the steam

generators?
192
5E007:
Identify the initiating cues which are used to determine that

reactivity adjustments are required.
Question 5.4.4:
What indications would the operator use to determine that it

was necessary to borate the RCS?
Question 5.4.5:
What indications would the operator have to deduce that xenon

was inserting positive reactivity and that compensation was
necessary?
Question 5.4.6:
How long after the power increase from 10% RTP to 20% RTP
should the operator expect to have to borate the RCS to
prevent temperatures from isothermally increasing?
Question 5.4.7:
If the xenon transient does cause an isothermal temperature

increase of 18 F, what is the value of RCS
Question 5.4.8:
which results?
If the xenon transient does cause an isothermal temperature

increase within the RCS, and the system is held at 20% RTP,
what can be said about steam pressure?
Example 5.4.4:
If the reactor were quickly brought to the following conditions, what RCS
boron adjustment would subsequently be required to prevent temperature
from changing due to the induced xenon transient?
Conditions: Power = 20% RTP
RCS Boron = 1000 ppm
Xenon free
193
Solution strategy: After stabilizing power level at 20% RTP, the operator vwll
experience a xenon transient as xenon builds in to the 20% power equilibrium
condition. Table 2.5.1 in Appendix B indicates that the equilibrium xenon
worth at 20% power is -1524.3 pcm. To relate this reactivity insertion to an
RCS boron adjustment it is necessary to use an average boron worth. Since
boron worth is a relatively strong function of RCS boron concentration it is
necessary to iterate the solution.
Data:
Apxenon = -1524.3 pcm

Boron Worth: Table 2.3.2: 1000 ppm: - 8.85 pcm/ppm
500 ppm: - 9.08 pcm/ppm
Table 2.3.5: 1000 ppm: - 8.58 pcm/ppm
500 ppm: - 8.82 pcm/ppm
Interpolated @ 20%, 1000 ppm: - 8.74 pcm/ppm
Solution:
APXenon ^ ^PBoron
AP
botod
= Boron Worth(A ppm)
Final ppm = Initial ppm + A ppm

A ppm = -Apxenon/(Boron Worth) = +1524.3 pcm/(- 8.74 pcm/ppm)
A ppm = - 174 ppm
Final ppm = 1000 ppm - 174 ppm = 826 ppm
Iterate:
Average Boron Worth = (
BWjoqo
+ BW826)/2
Average Boron Worth = (-8.74 -8.82)/2 = -8.78 pcm/ppm

A ppm = -Apxenon/(Boron Worth) = +1524.3 pcm/(-8.78 pcm/ppm)
A ppm = -174 ppm
Final ppm = 826 ppm
194
In this case the iteration was not necessary, but until the variation in
boron concentration and the resultant effect on boron worth is
evaluated; the effect on required boron concentration changes can not
be ignored.
Question 5.4.9:
How long after having stabilized reactor power at 20% RTF

should the operator expect this xenon transient to have an effect
on changing temperature?
Question 5.4.10:
What indications should be available to the operator that this

reactivity insertion is taking place?
Example 5.4.5;
Assume that the reactor is now stable at 20% RTP, equilibrium xenon
conditions, and RCS boron at 825 ppm. If the steam plant operator increases
steam demand to 30% RTP and the primary system operator neither moves
control rods nor changes the RCS boron concentration, where does the plant
stabilize?
Solution strategy: Increases in steam demand result in increased heat removal

from the primary system. Reduced moderator temperature inserts positive reactivity
and power level increases in response. Increased fuel temperature inserts negative
reactivity and the plant stabilizes at the increased power level with temperature lower
than it should be at that power level. Recall, that in order for the plant to stabilize
at desired conditions after a power change, it is necessary that the operator inserts
reactivity equal to, but opposite in sign from, the power defect for the power change.
Failure to insert the appropriate reactivity results in the reactor stabilizing at the
power level equal to steam demand but with temperature 'off program'. Previous
examples have shown that whenever the reactor is off program, the temperature
195
response is an isothermal temperature response. Thus, the solution to this problem

is to relate the resultant AToffpj^gj^^ to the power level change using the power defect
for the power level change and the appropriate value of the isothermal temperature
coefficient.
Data:
App<êr = -186.7 pcm

rrC: Table 5.2.2:
(Table 2.1.1)
1000 ppm: - 6.34 pcm/F @ 565 F

500 ppm: -12.93 pcm/F @ 565 F
1000 ppm: - 4.48 pcm/F @ 540 F
500 ppm: -10.56 pcm/F @ 540 F
Table 5.2.5:
1000 ppm: -11.25 pcm/F @ 565 F

500 ppm: -18.96 pcm/F @ 565 F
1000 ppm: - 9.12 pcm/F @ 550 F
500 ppm: -16.27 pcm/F @ 550 F
Interpolated at 30% RTF, 825 ppm:
-11.83 pcm/F @ 565 F

- 9.94 pcm/F @ 550 F
Solution:
Appower + Apxenip = 0
ApTe,p = ITC(AT)
AT = -App<^,yiTC = 186.7 pcm/(-11.83 pcm^F) = -15.8 F
The negative sign is consistent with the fact that increasing steam
demand will result in a decrease in RCS temperature. The value of
the temperature reduction (15.8 degrees) implies that RCS Tôid ends
up at approximately 550 F. Thus, an appropriate value for ITC to use
during an iteration calculation would be the average value between the
temperatures of 565 F and 550 F. Average ITC -10.89 pcm/F.
196
Iterate:
AT = -Appy(Average ITC) = 186.7 pciii/(-10.89 pcmTF)
AT = -17 "F and Final T^^ - 548 "F
In this example, additional iteration is not possible because the data for ITC
at 50% RTP (Table 5.2.5) is not available in the Core Data Book. However,
a valid conclusion can still be drawn: the data indicates that the plant will
stabilize at 30% RTP with T^^ less than the minimum required by technical
specifications which is 552 F (PVNGS Technical Specifications, 1993).
The previous example shows the solution strategy and effects of changing
power level without inserting the required amount of compensating reactivity. The
changes in temperature caused by adjusting steam demand are rapid and decisive.
In fact, the operator uses these changes as initiating cues to either insert
compensating reactivity or halt the adjustment of power..
The process of increasing steam demand and reactor power level, while
simultaneously maintaining RCS T<^|d, requires close coordination between the
operators. One option is for the primary operator to initiate a dilution of the RCS
soluble boron concentration at a specified rate. This positive reactivity insertion
results in an increase in RCS T^^. The secondary operator uses the change in
temperature as the initiating cue to increase steam demand which reduces Tcold and
causes reactor power level to follow the increase in steam demand.
5E008:
Predict the effect of plant transients on the axial distribution

of power density within the core.
197
5E009:
Explain the mechanism by which plant transients induce

changes in the axial distribution of power density within the
core.
Question 5.4.11:
If the transient described in Example 5.4.5 were allowed to

occur, what changes would occur in the axial distribution of
power within the core?
The previous examples have considered step power changes and have
evaluated the effects of power adjustments and xenon reactivity insertions as separate
processes. In reality, power changes are usually ramp changes and xenon reactivity
changes the instant that power starts changing. Normal operating procedures task
the operator to increase power level at a prescribed rate and maintain the RCS cold
leg temperature at the normal design value a small band. If the operator increases
steam demand and then waits until RCS cold leg temperature starts changing before
initiating a reactivity insertion, it becomes very difficult to maintain both the desired
power ramp and the desired temperature band. Instead, the operator needs to be
able to predict the magnitude of reactivity insertions necessary, the timing of those
insertions, and to be prepared to react in advance to impending changes. Example
5.4.6 considers a one hour ramp from 30% RTP equilibrium conditions and the
simultaneous effects of the xenon transient. The xenon reactivity data is included in
Appendix E.
5EOIO:
Develop, and evaluate the acceptability of proposed, reactivity

control strategies.
198
Example 5.4.6:
Reactor power is to be increased from 30% RTP to 40% RTP at a uniform
rate over a 1 hour period and then held constant for testing. During the
power increase, and subsequent to it, RCS 'êold is to be held constant at a
value of 565 F 2 F by using RCS soluble boron concentration adjustments.
Determine the required boron adjustments both during and subsequent to the
power ramp for a period of 36 hours. Assume that prior to the power
increase, the reactor is stable and at 30% RTP equilibrium conditions with an
RCS soluble boron concentration of 750 ppm.
Solution strategy:
Determine the reactivity insertion due to the power
increase from Table 2.1.1 of the Core Data Book and the insertion due to the
xenon transient from Appendix E. Determine the net insertion of reactivity
during three distinct time frames for the transient:
1. The one hour period during the power increase ramp.
2. The period (3-4 hours) after the power increase while the xenon
transient is inserting positive reactivity.
3. The period (32-33 hours) after the power increase while the xenon
transient is inserting negative reactivity.
Data:
Power Defect: 30%->40% RTP (Table 2.1.1): -181.5 pcm

Xenon Reactivity Change (Appendix E)
During Power Ramp:
+ 16 pcm
Following Power Ramp:Decreasing
+ 29 pcm
Following Power Ramp:Increasing
-255 pcm
Boron Worth: Interpolate (Table 2.3.2 and 2.3.5)

30% RTP and 750 ppm
- 8.81 pcm/ppm
40% RTP and 700 ppm
- 8.77 pcm/ppm
199
Value used for all calculations:
- 8.80 pcm/ppm
Solution:
Appower + Apxenon ~ ^PNET
^PnCT + ^Peoran ~
ApBoron = Avcragc Boron Worth(A ppm)
A ppm = -ApNn/{Average Boron Worth)
Power Ramp:
ApÊx ~ -181.5 + 16 = -165.5 pcm
0-1 Hours:
A ppm = +165.5/(-8.80) - -19 ppm
1-4 Hours :
Apnet
= + 29 pcm
A ppm = - 29/(-8.80) - + 3 ppm

4-37 Hours:
Apn
^ = -255 pcm
t
A ppm = +255/(-8.80) - -29 ppm

Total Transient:
Ap
^ = -391.5 pcm
et
A ppm = -l-391.5/(-8.80) < -44 ppm

Question 5.4.12:
An operator proposes to establish an average boron dilution

rate of 1 ppm/hr, increase steam demand from 30% to 40%
RTP during the first hour and let the plant stabilize at the end
of the 36-37 hour transient at 40% RTP on program. Is this an
acceptable strategy? Why, or why not?
Problem 5.4.1:
Assume that the operator dilutes the prescribed 19 ppm during the one hour
ramp and then waits until the xenon reactivity insertion turns from being
positive to negative before making an additional adjustment to RCS soluble
boron concentration. Would RCS Tcold remain within the desired bounds? Is
this an acceptable strategy?
200
Problem 5.4.2:
Assume that 6 hours after having stabilized the reactor at 40% RTP, the
operator just completed an adjustment to RCS soluble boron concentration
approximately 720 ppm and that RCS Tcold is 566.5 F. How long can the
operator wait before adjusting 7^,^ if the minimum allowed value is 563.5 F?
f
it! ik *
The previous problems and questions are more than mere academic exercises
in using reactivity coefficients and predicting effects. Knowledge of expected trends
(magnitude and direction) allow the operating staff to determine if plant response is
normal or an indication of an abnormal condition. For example, in the time frame
5-10 hours after a power increase the resultant Xenon transient is inserting negative
reactivity and RCS '^cold should be decreasing at a predictable rate. If RCS Tcold is
decreasing more rapidly than predicted, then an inadvertent RCS boration event
might be taking place. If RCS Tcold is constant or increasing, then an inadvertent
RCS dilution event might be taking place. In either case, knowledge of predicted
response allows detection and identification of the abnormal.
Problem 5.43:
Assume that the reactor is stable at 80% RTP equilibrium conditions with an
RCS soluble boron concentration of 575 ppm.
In a manner similar to
Example 5.4.6, evaluate the reactivity transient and soluble boron

concentration adjustment requirements for a 2 hour ramp power increase to
100% RTP and the ten hours following the power increase.
Question 5.4.13;
What is the expected trend in the axial distribution of power

density as power is increased from 80% RTP to 100% RTP?
201
Question 5.4.14:
What is the expected trend in the axial distribution of power

density if steam demand is held constant at 100% RTP and a
xenon transient causes a reduction in RCS "^cold^
Question 5.4.15:
Wên steam demand is held constant, a xenon transient induces

a change in RCS "rcold- Any reactivity insertion will do the same
if steam demand is not changed. What process is used to
discriminate between a normal temperature change caused by
steady state power operation (fuel depletion) and a temperature
change caused by a xenon transient, inadvertent boration or
dilution, or a slipped or dropped rod type event.
Problem 5.4.4:
The reactor is operating at 100% RTP, under MOC conditions, when an
inadvertent boration increases RCS soluble boron concentration from 600
ppm to 615 ppm. Assuming that no change in steam demand occurs, where
does the system stabilize?
Problem 5.4.5:
The reactor is operating at 100% RTP, under MOC conditions, when CEA
regulating groups 4 & 5 drop into the core simultaneously with a rapid
reduction in steam demand to 60% RTP. Where does the system stabilize?
Problem 5.4.6:
The reactor is operating at 100% RTP, under MOC conditions, when a single
CEA worth 75 pcm drops into the core. Assuming that no change in steam
demand occurs, where does the system stabilize?
202
Question 5.4.16:
What change in steam demand is necessary to restore RCS "^cold

to the normal control value following the rod drop event in
Problem 5.4.6?
5.5 Fluid Flow Evaluations
5E011:
Given changes in pump or system configuration, predict the

efTect on fluid hydraulic parameters such as pumping power,
flow rate, and system or component Ap.
During the reactor power level increase from 3% RTP to 100% RTF, it is
necessary to align the main feedwater pumps to provide flow into the steam
generators. At low power levels, an auxiliary feedwater pump provides sufficient flow
and requires minimum pumping power requirements. At higher power levels, a
pump with increased capacity is required; while at or near 100% RTP more than a
single main feedwater pump is required. Due to the need to provide a wide range
of flow rates over the full range of power output, feedwater pumps are normally
variable speed pumps which function in conjunction with regulating valves to provide
controlled flow rate to maintain steam generator levels. The use of parallel pumps
and parallel piping system configurations is commonly used in other systems also.
This section develops the tools necessary to evaluate and predict the performance of
such pumping systems.
Fluid flow systems are used as the energy transfer medium in many of the
systems associated with the operation of nuclear power facilities. These systems
involve a variety of components such as pumps, valves, tanks, heat exchangers, ion
exchangers and filters arranged in a combination of series and parallel connections.
System manipulations such as isolating components, starting/stopping additional
203
pumps, dogging filters or throttling valves all have the ability to affect system flow
rate and differential pressure across the system or individual components. The
operator and engineer should be able to predict the consequences of such system
manipulations and evaluate the performance of the system.
The evaluation of a fluid flow system is analogous to the evaluation of an
electrical system. Normal convention is to treat the system and the source as two
different portions of the total system and develop characteristics for both. For
example, a battery does not provide constant terminal voltage to a system as the load
(current) passing thru the system increases. Neither does the head developed by a
centrifugal pump remain constant as the flow rate thru the system increases. The
voltage drop across a system depends upon the load flowing thru the system; and the
head loss created by a system due to viscous flow is also dependent upon the flow
rate thru the system.
System head loss describes the pressure drop created by the system from the
discharge of the pump or other head source such as a static reservoir and is a
function of the flow rate thru the system as demonstrated by Equation 5.5.1 which
is commonly known as the Darcy equation (Lindeburg, 1990).
hr = fLv^/2Dg
5.5.1
hf:
= head loss (ft)
f:
= Darcy friction factor
L:
= piping length (ft)
V:
= fluid velocity (ft/sec)
D:
= piping diameter (ft)
g:
= gravitational acceleration
In situations where the system offers a back pressure to flow; such as static
head in a tank due to level, a spring loaded check valve, or static pressure in a tank
due to vapor or cover gas, no flow will occur until the head available exceeds the
204
back pressure. Then, the head loss described by Equation 5.5.1 will occur. Head loss
is related to pressure drop by: Ap = hf x p. A typical graph of system head loss is
referred to as the system characteristic curve and is provided in Figure 5.5.1 and a
typical fluid flow system configuration is provided in Figure 5.5.2. These two figures
are used to describe the effects of throttling valves, clogging filters, increased back
pressure and valving in a parallel flow path. Any process which results in the system
becoming more resistive to flow results in the system characteristic curve becoming
steeper. Any process which results in the system becoming less resistive to flow
results in the system characteristic curve becoming flatter. Any process which
changes the system back pressure causes the system characteristic curve intersection
with the 'head' axis moving vertically along that axis. Any process change which
increases the flow rate thru a fixed component causes an increase in the head loss
thru that component.
Question 5.5.1:
If HX #1 and HX #2 are identical components, and HX #2 is

initially isolated so that no flow is passing thru it, what effect
does admitting flow thru HX #2 have on the resistance to flow
offered by the system?
Question 5.5.2:
Component V, is a spring loaded check valve. What effect does

increasing the spring load have on the system characteristic
curve?
Question 5.53:
Component V, is a regulating and control throttle valve. What

effect does opening this valve from 30% open to 50% open have
on the system characteristic curve?
I
3
J ^
6
I
5
7
Flow Rail (WOK spml
SHL300T + SH.500T o SHL300U
Figure 5.5.1, Typical System Head Loss Curves
Effects of back pressure and throttling
ST
HX1
HX3
F ^
ST: SuiigeTank
P; Pump
F: nttBT
HX: Hoet Exchanger
Figure 5.5.2, Typical Fluid Flow System

Configuration
HX2
206
Question 5.5.4:
If the pumps connected to this fluid flow system are varied to

provide increased flow rate, what will the resultant effect be on
the following differential pressures?
Question 5.5.5:
1)
Ap(l->4):
2)
Ap(l->3):
3)
Ap(2->3):
Component F is a fluid filter. If the filter starts to clog and no

other component is adjusted, what will the resultant effect be on
the following differential pressures?
5E012:
1)
Ap(l->4):
2)
Ap(l->2):
3)
Ap(2->3):
4)
Ap(3->4):
Given a pump curve for single pump operation, sketch a

pump curve for multiple pump operation.
Knowing the fluid flow characteristics of the system is only one part of the
solution to fluid flow problems for actual pump-system configurations. The head or
Ap characteristics of the pump provide the source of motive power to cause flow thru
the system. When the pump capacity equals the system loss then flow rate and head
loss stabilize at the 'operating point' of the configuration. For a given impeller and
casing design and constant speed, the head added to the fluid by a centrifugal pump
will decrease as the flow rate thru the pump increases. Pump manufacturers provide
a 'pump characteristic curve' for their pumps which can be used in conjunction with
system curves to determine the operating point for the configuration of pump and
system. A typical pump curve is displayed in Figure 5.5.3 for a single centrifugal
207
pump operating at constant speed, two identical pumps in parallel and a single pump
operating at half speed. This figure only provides information on head delivered by
the pump. Actual curves provided by the manufacturer also include pump efficiency,
pumping power requirements and the minimum net positive suction head
requirements all as a function of the flow rate through the pump. Pumps can be
configured either in series or parallel arrangements.
1.
Pumps in parallel add flow rate at constant head.
2.
Pumps in series add head at constant flow rate.
5E013:
Apply the pump affinity laws.
If a pump is coupled to a variable speed source and the pump impeller-casing

design maintains constant efficiency characteristics, then the resulting head and flow
rate characteristics of the pump can be predicted using relationships known as the
pump affinity laws (pump laws)(Lindeburg, 1990).
1.
(Flow rate)2/(Flow rate)i = speed^/speedi
2.
headj/headj = [speedj/speedj]^
3.
powerj/poweri = [speed^/speedi]^
Question 5.5.6;
If the pump curve displayed in Figure 5.5.3 is for a centrifugal

pump operating at 2500 rpm, sketch a curve for the same pump
(no change in impeller efficiency) operating at 5000 rpm.
Question 5.5,7:
If the pump curve displayed in Figure 5.5.3 is for a single

centrifugal pump, sketch a curve for two of the same pumps
operating in a parallel pump configuration.
208
Figure 5.5.4 displays the system curve from Figure 5.5.1 and the pump curve
from Figure 5.5.3 and depicts the operating point for single pump operation of the
system displayed in Figure 5.5.2. The initial state of the pump-system configuration
is that HX #2 is isolated and the flow rate thru the system is 1 x lO' Ibm/hr.
Consider each of the following questions (5.5.8 thru 5.5.11) separately and use Figure
5.5.4 determine the effect of the manipulation identified.
Question 5.5.8:
Question 5.5.9:
If HX #2 is unisolated. then
1.
Pump Ap (p,-p4): increases, decreases, remains constant.
2.
mass flow rate: increases, decreases, remains constant.
If pump #2 is started and its discharge valve fully opened, then

1.
2.
HX #3 Ap (P3-P4): increases, decreases, remains

constant.
15
a9
o
c
.
06
OS
04
0.1
Flow Rata (100K gpml

,
2PMPKCA0
1PMPKEA0
1/2 SPD PMP HEAD
Figure 5.5.3, Typical Pump Head Delivery curves:

Single pump at two speeds and parallel identical pumps
209
HEAD vs FLOW: PARALLEL PUMPS

System and Pump curve*
"m
It
15ce
o
IIIIIIIIIIIH-'
Flow Rate HOOK gpm)
SHL;
SHL SOOT
SHL 300U
&
1/2 SPDPMP HEAD
2PMP HEAD
1PMP HEAD
Figure 5.5.4, Combined Pump-System curves:

Operating Point Determination
Question 5.5.10:
Filter F begins to clog causing a reduction in system mass flow

rate to a lower value, then
1.
Pump Ap (prP4): increases, decreases, remains constant.
2.
HX #3 Ap (P3-P4): increases, decreases, remains constant.
210
Question 5.5.11:
If regulating valve V, is throttled down from 50% open to 40%

open, then
1.
System mass flow rate increases, decreases, remains

constant.
2.
Differential pressure (prp4) increases, decreases, remains

constant.
3.
Differential pressure (P3-P4) increases, decreases, remains

constant.
Question 5.5.12:
The steam generators are being supplied by two identical

feedwater pumps running at the same speed with regulating
valves on each in the same position. If the steam generator
pressure is suddenly reduced and no pump speed changes or
valve position changes occur, what happens to the flow rate of
feedwater into the steam generators? Why?
Question 5.5.13:
A second feed pump has just been started at 2500 rpm while the
first feed pump is operating at 4800 rpm. Does the second feed
pump need to be increased to 4800 rpm to deliver any flow into
the steam generators?
Question 5.5.14:
The feed pumps are operating at constant and equal speed

supplying the steam generators. If regulating valves are slowly
throttled down, what must happen to pump speed if the system
mass flow rate is to be maintained constant?
Question 5.5.15:
High pressure safety injection pumps are constant speed

centrifugal pumps which deliver borated water into the RCS
211
during certain upset conditions. What happens to the flow rate

delivered by these pumps as the RCS pressure is decreased?
5.6 Spatial Distribution of Power Density
SE014:
Identify the factors which contribute to the spatial variations

of power density within the core.
SE015:
Predict whether or not a specified plant transient will

exacerbate or mitigate spatial variations in core power
density.
The nuclear core at PVNGS is rated to produce 3800 Mw(thermal). Based

on design information included in Chapter 1, approximately 55,000 fuel pins (12.5 ft
each) and 6.9 x 10 feet of fuel pins are present in the core. Consequently, the
average fuel pin produces 68.8 kw and the average linear heat rate which exists in the
core at 100% RTF is 5.5 kw/ft. However, "A striking characteristic of thermal
conditions existing in any core design is the large differences among conditions in
different spatial regions of the core" (Todreas and Kazimi, 1990). To determine if
thermal conditions are approaching a limit, it is necessary to evaluate the limiting
parameter (such as linear heat rate) at the peak (or hot spot) location within the
core. Some fuel pins produce substantially more (less) than 68.8 kw. All fuel pins
have a hot spot. The hottest foot of the hot pin has thermal conditions much closer
to thermal limits than indicated by core average conditions. The following rhetorical
questions are posed to introduce the scope of this section.
212
1.
What features of core design/construction/operation lead to spatial

variations in thermal conditions?
2.
Can expected transient conditions exacerbate the spatial variations in

thermal conditions.
3.
How are average thermal conditions and peak (hot spot) thermal
conditions related?
4.
What thermal conditions are evaluated and pose operating limits?
The spatial variations in thermal conditions throughout the nuclear core derive
from the following features:
1.
Coolant is heated as it passes thru the core so that the exit

temperature exceeds the inlet temperature [ = mCp(Tom-Ti)].
q
2.
Coolant passing thru the core experiences a pressure drop due to

viscous flow so that T,(Exit) < T,(inlet).
3.
Power production vwthin the core is not uniformly distributed so that

coolant heating is not uniform.
4.
In some core designs, coolant flow rate is not uniform throughout the
core due to flow orificing of specific channels.
5.
The relationship between bulk coolant temperature in any location and

the corresponding fuel temperature in that location depends upon the
power generated in that region and the heat transfer characteristics of
that region [
6.
= UA(T-Tbuik)]-
Local power density depends upon fuel density and neutron flux
(principally thermal flux) in that region.
7.
Fuel density varies significantly due to fuel assembly types and

irradiation histories. Typical loading patterns place high enrichment
assemblies near the core center and low enrichment (or previously
213
burned) assemblies near the core edges. Even though this pattern
promotes power density peaking in the central regions of the core, it
is used to reduce power generation near the core edges. Lowering the
peripheral power density reduces the fast neutron leakage from the
core, reduces fuel costs, and helps extend the useful lifetime of the
reactor pressure vessel by reducing the neutron enbrittlement rate.
8.
Local flux depends both on local power density (since fissions produce
fast neutrons) and neutron diffusion processes. In general neutron flux
is high in the central regions of the core and low near the edges and
top/bottom of the core. The temperature gradient across the core
causes a moderator density gradient which impacts neutron diffusion
processes. Consequently, flux is peaked in the bottom of the core
(colder water) and suppressed in the top of the core (hotter water).
9.
Fuel assembly loading and control rod placement are performed in a

symmetrical manner such that the core is comprised of 4 or 8 equal
azimuthal segments. Control rods are then moved in symmetrical
patterns so that all of the segments are affected uniformly.
The combination of fuel loading patterns, control rod locations, control rod
operation and the resultant flux profiles create a non-uniform power density profile
in both the radial and axial direction within each of the supposedly equal quadrants
or octants. It is possible that the maximum local power density under normal
operating conditions is more than twice the global average power density. Each fuel
cycle is analyzed to assure that even though these variations exist, they do not result
in peak thermal conditions exceeding a failure limit. However, abnormal conditions
can result in local power density increasing and the margin to the limit decreasing.
214
Examples include:
1.
Mis-positioning control rods within an assigned group causing the

design symmetry to be disrupted.
2.
Mis-loading a fuel assembly such that a high enrichment assembly is

placed into a location designed for a low enrichment assembly.
3.
Dropping a control rod or control rod subgroup and maintaining core

total output power.
4.
Unequal steaming of steam generators so that cold leg temperatures

returning to the core are significantly different.
5.
Increasing total core power output so that global average power density
and peak power density are both increased.
6.
Creating a situation in which global average power density is

maintained constant but local power density oscillates between a high
value and a low value in a divergent manner.
Global average thermal conditions are easily estimated by measuring total core
power output and thermodynamic conditions of the fluid.
5E016:
Predict core thermal hot spot conditions.
Problem 5.6.1;
The coolant exiting the core at 3800 Mw(thermal) is at a nominal bulk
average temperature of 623 F with a pressure of 2250 psia. Determine the
amount of subcooling in F, the amount of subcooling in psia, and the
enthalpy-margin-to-boil in btu/lbm for the coolant.
Problem S.6.2:
If the average linear heat rate is 5.5 kw/ft at 100% RTF, what is the average
linear heat rate at 75% RTF?
215
Problem 5.63:
If the average linear heat rate is 5.5 kw/ft at 100% RTP, what is the average
heat flux (btu/ft^-hour) at the surface of the fuel pin cladding at 100% RTP?
Question 5.6.1:
If the peak linear heat rate is 2.19 times larger than the global
average linear heat rate, how does the peak fuel pin heat flux
compare to the average fuel pin heat flux?
To determine peak conditions it is necessary to measure or predict power

distribution and use that distribution to infer thermal conditions. Consideration must
be given to engineering and measurement uncertainties.
"Starting with a core average condition such as linear
power rating...nuclear power peaking factors, overpower
factors and engineering uncertainty factors are
sequentially applied, leading to the limiting value".
(Todreas and Kazimi, 1990)
The limiting or maximum peak value is then compared to the failure limit to
determine if a limit has been exceeded. The sequential application of multiplicative
peaking factors is demonstrated as follows:
1.
Nominal steady state full power core average power density is

multiplied by the radial peaking factor to determine the axial average
power density in the peak radial pin at nominal steady state full power.
2.
Axial average power density in the peak radial pin is multiplied by the
axial peaking factor to determine the nominal peak power density in
the peak radial pin at nominal steady state full power.
3.
Nominal peak power density in the peak radial pin is multiplied by the
local flux peaking factor and the measurement uncertainty factor to
216
determine the maximum peak power density in the core at nominal

steady state full power.
4.
Maximum peak power density at nominal steady state full power is

multiplied by the overpower factor to determine the maximum peak
power density in the core for a design overpower event which was
initiated from nominal steady state full power level.
5.
The maximum peak power density is compared to the failure limit

(peak power density which would result in failure) to determine the
margin-to-failure for the specified transient.
Radial peaking factors and axial peaking factors can change throughout the
fuel cycle due to depletion of fuel and the redistribution of the flux profile caused by
that depletion. Control rod alignment, asymmetric steaming, dropped control rods
and power density oscillations can cause either of these peaking factors to change
over a short period of time. It is necessary to monitor these peaking factors by
monitoring the actual distribution of power within the core and continually update
the margin available for both steady state and design transient conditions. At
PVNGS the in-core flux detector system provides the ability to monitor 305 specific
locations and generate both axial and radial profiles which can be used to perform
that task.
The specific thermal conditions which are monitored for approach to limits are
quality margin of the bulk coolant, linear heat rate, and the departure from nucleate
boiling ratio (DNBR). Quality margin is a measure of the bulk coolant enthalpy at
a specific location compared to the saturation enthalpy for the bulk pressure. It is
similar to measuring the amount of subcooling of the bulk fluid. Linear heat rate is
used to assure that local power density is not high enough to cause fuel melting. Fuel
melting would result in molten fuel material (uranium-plutonium oxide) coming in
contact with the cladding and causing cladding perforation. DNBR is monitored to
assure that the coolant remains in the nucleate boiling regime where heat transfer
217
coefficients are large and cladding surface temperature is kept relatively low. If the
coolant experiences DNB then cladding temperatures will escalate and cladding
perforation will occur. Cladding perforation is avoided to maintain the cladding
intact to act as a barrier between the coolant and the excessively radioactive fission
products contained within the fuel material (PVNGS Technical Specifications, 1993).
On-line calculators called the core protection calculators use a variety of inputs
to calculate the real time value of worst case linear heat rate and DNBR for each of
the four core quadrants, compare those calculated values to a limiting condition and
initiate a reactor trip if the calculated value equals the limiting value or setpoint.
Since each of these calculators performs the calculation on a specific core quadrant,
the assumption is made that each quadrant is producing more power than the others.
This is accomplished by using an azimuthal tilt peaking factor which multiplies the
measured power level prior to performing the calculation.
If the actual core
distribution results in an azimuthal tilt greater than the tilt peaking factor used, the
tilt peaking factor must be updated by the operator.
5E017:
Identify the PVNGS safety limits, trips and LCO's which are
related to or based on spatial variations in power density.
The inputs of these calculations are:
Linear heat rate (kw/ft);

Core Power
Radial distribution
Axial distribution
218
DNBR;
Core Power
Radial distribution
Axial distribution
Core inlet temperature (RCS
RCS pressure
Coolant flowrate thru the core
To demonstrate the method behind these calculations, the following example

will outline the calculation of the quality margin on a theoretical fuel pin which is
referred to as the pseudo hot pin. First the core is divided equally into 20 axial slices
and the peak radial power location in each axial node is determined. Coolant with
inlet temperature of RCS Tcold and RCS flowrate is allowed to enter the first node.
The inlet enthalpy is determined from the inlet temperature and pressure. The exit
enthalpy from the first axial slice is determined by using heat transfer equations.
Q local
ôut
wCôut'în)
în
Q\ocaJftl
The exit pressure for the axial slice is estimated and the saturation enthalpy
determined. The exit enthalpy is compared to the saturation enthalpy to determine
the margin and then the exit enthalpy is assumed to be the inlet enthalpy to the
second slice even if the radial peak in the second slice is at a different location than
the first.
The calculation is repeated is succession for each slice with the exit
enthalpy at each node being compared to the saturation enthalpy at that location.
219
Thus the coolant is artificially assumed to always be heated by the hottest location
in the core as it progresses up the core.
In the case of DNBR, the calculator generates a heat flux profile for the hot
channel and compares that profile to the predicted profile for critical heat flux. The
predicted profile for critical heat flux is generated by a vendor specific correlation
which uses temperature, pressure, flowrate and fuel pin design parameters. DNBR
is the ratio between these two profiles [DNBR = Critical heat flux/Actual heat flux).
The relationship between these profiles and a plot of DNBR is displayed in Figure
5.6.1. which clearly indicates that the point of minimum DNBR is not at the core exit.
5E018:
Evaluate the efTects of spatial variations in power density.
40
60
AXIAL POSITION (%l
ACTUAL HEAT FLUX
CRITICAL HEAT FLUX
Figure 5.6.1. Evaluation of DNBR using CHF and

Actual Heat Flux Profiles
DNBR/2
220
Question 5.6.2:
If the RCS pressure is reduced, what happens to the DNBR

margin? How is this explained using Figure 5.6.1?
Question 5.63:
If RCS Tjoid increases, what happens to the DNBR margin?

How is this explained using Figure 5.6.1?
Question 5.6.4:
If the RCS flowrate decreases, what happens to the DNBR

margin? How is this explained using Figure 5.6.1?
Question 5.6.5:
If a dropped control rod results in an increase in the radial

peaking of power density, what happens to the DNBR margin?
Question 5.6.6:
If core power increases from 100% RTF to 105% RTF with no

change in distribution, what happens to DNBR margin? How
is this explained using Figure 5.6.1?
Question 5.6.7:
If core power is held constant and power density redistributes

toward the top of the core, what happens to the DNBR margin?
Another situation associated with spatial distribution of power is power density

oscillation caused by variations in the local xenon concentration and the resultant
reactivity insertions. In terms of control system theor>', the initial portion of a xenon
transient (first few hours) produces positive feedback. Consequently, if power density
is reduced in one region of the core, over the next few hours the local xenon change
will insert negative reactivity and the local power density will continue to decrease.
However, if total core pov/er is maintained constant, then local power density in some
other region of the core must increase which results in a positive reactivity insertion
221
due to the local xenon transient. Thus local power density in the second region of
the core continues to increase. After a few hours, the xenon feedback changes from
being positive in nature to negative in nature and power density continues to
redistribute. In large cores, with significantly non-uniform axial power density profiles
this xenon effect causes an oscillation of power density from the top of the core to
the bottom of the core. If the oscillation is divergent in nature and is allowed to
continue in an unchecked manner, then ultimately the local power density will exceed
a limit. The monitoring and control of these axial oscillations is extremely important.
The axial oscillation of power density is caused by the effects of a local
reactivity insertion from xenon. Control is effected by inserting reactivity into the
core in specific regions to dampen the oscillation. As power density is moving into
the upper portion of the core, negative reactivity is selectively inserted in that region
and the oscillation is temporarily dampened. The mechanisms available to selectively
insert negative reactivity into the top of the core are control rod insertion, increasing
RCS
t while maintaining reactor power constant, and increasing power level while
maintaining RCS Tcold constant.
5E019:
Given a plant transient or parameter change, predict the

effect of that transient on spatial variations in power density.
Question 5.6.8:
Develop a cause and effect scenario to explain why increasing

RCS T^pij while maintaining reactor power constant causes more
negative reactivity to be inserted into the upper portion of the
core than the lower portion of the core.
Question 5.6.9:
Develop a cause and effect scenario to explain why increasing

reactor power level while maintaining RCS Tôy constant causes
222
more negative reactivity to be inserted into the upper portion of

the core than the lower portion of the core.
At PVNGS a parameter known as axial shape index (ASI) is used as the

monitoring and control parameter to control the axial distribution of power with in
the core and provide data for the decision to effect control of the axial power density
oscillations. ASI is defined as the power generated in the lower (L) portion of the
core minus the power generated in the upper (U) portion of the core divided by the
total power generated within the core (L+U).
ASI
(L-U)/(L+U)
The value of ASI is provided by output from the in-core flux detector system
and is displayed on a strip chart recorder available to the operators. A control value
is determined for ASI and the axial oscillation of power density is monitored by
comparing the current value and trend of ASI to the control value. Control action
is taken by operations personnel when power density is moving into the top of the
core. In terms of ASI: control action is taken when ASI is crossing the control value
for ASI heading in the negative direction. Since the driving force behind the axial
power density oscillation is the xenon transient, the time frame for the oscillation is
on the order of magnitude of several hours.
Question 5.6.10:
What characteristics of xenon production and removal processes

are the key determinant of the timing of the power density
oscillation?
**********
At PVNGS, the power density oscillation has a full cycle time of 26-30 hours.
Even though the oscillation can be divergent and would ultimately result in local
223
power densities exceeding a limit, the long cycle time for the oscillation provides
sufficient time for the manual control intervention described above.
5.7 Calorimetric Evaluations of Power
5E020:
Specify the need for and methods of calorimetric

measurement of reactor power.
Neutron detectors (fission chambers or ion chambers) are used to provide an

electronic signal proportional to the reactor core power level by detecting core
leakage flux which is assumed to be proportional to core power. These signals are
used as input to control systems and reactor protection systems [different detectors
and separate systems for each] and must be calibrated against an accurate value of
power level which is obtained by measurements of thermodynamic data;hence, the
name calorimetric. If the electronic signal is not properly calibrated then one of two
undesirable conditions can exist.
Case 1: Indicated power < Actual core power
The control system will allow the reactor to operate at 100 % indicated power
but actual power will exceed 100 %. The core is operating at too high of a power
level and is too close to thermal limits but the reactor protection system is incapable
of detecting the high power level. The reactor protection system safety margin has
been reduced. The design criteria for reactor protection systems require that actual
power is never more than 2 % greater than indicated power level. Thus a trip
setpoint of 110% RTP makes allowance for actual power being at 112% RTF at the
time of trip initiation from an indicated value of 110 %.
This requirement in turn
224
imposes accuracy criteria on the methodology for performing calorimetric power

signal calibrations.
Case 2: Indicated power > Actual core power
The control system will allow reactor output to be taken to 100 % indicated
power. However, actual thermal output will be less than 100 % as will be electrical
power generation which costs the utility in reduced revenue. If turbine output were
to be increased to bring electrical output up to 100 % of nominal power, then the
reactor would load follow. Indicated core power would exceed 100 % which is a
violation of license agreements with the NRC. Also, if the deviation is too large, a
reactor trip at 110 % indicated power could even occur even though actual power
were less than 100 %.
The methods available for calculating reactor power from thermodynamic data
depend upon the reactor plant system configuration. See Figure 5.7.1: General
System Diacram.
Basic Principles:
Qpriraary
Qrx
QrCP
' Qhoss
^Primary ~ /W Pri^pC^hot " '^cold)
if <?RCP
(^Loss ^re known, then measurement of
Tô,, and T^îd allows
the calculation of with appropriate allowance iOi mc urnuui^&tion oi rncHsurcincni

error.
At steady state:
^Primary
C?Secondary
Qs/G
^Secondary
W FeedC^Steam " ^Fced)
225
again, measurement of /^peed. hs,eam from Ps,ean and hfeed from Tpecd will allow
the calculation of
5E021:
Qr
,.
Specify why secondary plant calorimetrics have less

uncertainty than primary calorimetrics.
The secondary calculation is more accurate because of decreased

measurement uncertainty.
Primary:
mrri inferred from RCS A? across the S/G.

Temperature input to enthalpy has large uncertainty.
Question 5.7.1:
Assume that RCS loop AT is measured by separate instruments

for
Tho
, and ^Cold and that each have the ability to measure
actual temperature 1 F. What is the contribution of this

measurement uncertainty to the uncertainty of RCS loop Ah?
5E022:
Explain the principle of operation of Ap type flow meters.
Question 5.7.2:
Would it be a sound engineering decision to install an accurate

AP type flow meter in the primary system to provide accurate
flow rate data? Why, or why not?
Secondary:
measured using a Venturi Flow meter with relatively low

uncertainty
Gi^f JIHRAI. SYSTfi/l DIAGRAM OF

PAl O VEHDE iJUCLEAR GIHNSHRATIWG STATiOS^
LEGEND:
H H SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEMS
a REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM
\ \ M A I N STEAM SYSTEM
MAIN FEEDWATER SYSTEM
TQ'
MAIN CONDENSATE SYSTEM
CONTAINMENT SPRAY
a
Ul
AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM
TURBINE BUILDING
sôragt uiik
|(N AUX BLOG I
PÊTERING PUMP
1INAU:< QLDG)
sipariion
RfHEMtRS
jmR
STEAM
GENERATOR
AUXILIARY
BUILDING
COOLING TOWERS
AND FANS
uotstune
SAFETY
NJECTfON
SPRAY CHEMICAL
0
a
3
a
-1
Eco
h<
C/l
TO
SWiTCHYARD
CONTAINMENT
BUILDING
PRESSUniZER
CONTROL
RODS
MSSS
BLDG.
SHUTDOWN
EQUIPMENT COOLING HEAT
EXCHANGEB
CD
3
9
a>
FROM
AUXILIARY
FEEDWATER
PUMPS
CONTAINMENT
SPRAY PUMP
MAIN CONDENSER
nefuelinc
WATER
TANK
LOW PRESSURE
SAFETY
INJECTION PUMPS
HIGH PRESSURE
SAFETY INJECTION
PUMPS
REACTOR
COOLANT
PUMP
51
(HP)
FEEOW&TER
HEATERS
FEEDWATER
REGULATION
VALVE
CONDENSATE
PUMP
CIRCULATING
WATER PUMP
(LP)
FEEDWATER
HEATERS
MAIN PEEDWATER PUMP
POLISHING
DEMINERALIZERS
CONTAINMENT SUMP
GRAPHIC ARTIST:
CHRIS AANENSEN
N)
N>
0\
Ill
Question 5.73:
What is the principle of operation of a Venturi flow meter?
Psteam
Question 5.7.4:
CHthalpy has low uncertainty
Assume that Psieam is 1100 psia 50 psia. What is the range of

steam enthalpy which would result?
5E023:
Given a set of plant conditions, evaluate the expected

difference between actual core power and the calorimetric
thermal power calculation.
The sources of error for the determination of
are:
1.
Faulty values for RCP and LOSS terms
2.
Venturi Flow meter fouling or erosion leading to increased uncertainty

in the mpeed measurement
3.
Failed sensors for Ps,eam or Tpeed leading to increased uncertainty in the

determination of Ah across the S/G
4.
Failure to account accurately for blowdown heat losses from the S/G
This last source of error requires further discussion. The calculation for
assumes that all feedwater (mpeed
enthalpy hpeed) is heated in the S/G to saturation
conditions and then boiled resulting in a final value of hstg^^. In reality, some of the
feed flow which enters into the S/G is taken away as blowdown flow to help maintain
the purity of feedwater and consequently protect the S/G from accelerated corrosion.
The value of blowdown flow rate and heat removed by blowdown must be accounted
228
for in the calculation of q^. If the value of Qeiowdown is not accurate then Q , will
r
be inaccurate and not representative of the actual core power.

Blowdown flow rate is varied at periodic intervals to increase the impurity
removal rate and stir up sludge in the S/G (PVNGS Procedures, 1993). Assuming
that QRjj(actual) = QR,(calculated), consider the effects of increasing the blowdown
flow rate but not updating the
Qr
, calculation to reflect the new flow rate. The
value of (^R,(calculated) does not change, but the increased heat removal from the
RCS due to increased blowdown will provide reactor feedback and cause an increase
in QRj((actual) and the electronic power signal generated by the nuclear instruments.
Since reactor power instrumentation is compared to, and calibrated by the value of
Q[^(calculated), the increase in blowdown flow rate will result in the condition where
Reactor Powerjndij^jjd = Qi^(actual) > QRji(calculated). Since the calculated value
of reactor power is used to calibrate the nuclear instrument, the indicator would be
calibrated to a lower power level and the condition which would then result is that
actual reactor power would be greater than indicated reactor power. Conversely, if
actual blowdown flow rate is smaller than the value used in the calculation,
Q^(actual) would be less than
calculated). If the nuclear instruments were then
calibrated to the calculation, actual reactor power would be less than indicated
reactor power level.
To prevent blowdown flow from being a source of error in the calorimetric
determination of power level, 1) flow rates and heat removal rates must be accurately
measured, 2) and the calculation of
Qrj
must be updated whenever blowdown flow
rate is changed. On a frequent basis, operators compare the value of QR,(calculated)

to the value indicated by the nuclear instruments. If the difference between these
two values exceeds some threshold value (say 2% RTF) then the electronic
229
instrumentation is adjusted so that they match. This process is referred to as a

calorimetric calibration of instrumentation. On a routine basis the operators refer
to both the value of the calculated reactor power and the nuclear instrument value
of reactor power and control both within plant specific limits.
Question 5.7.5:
If core power is maintained at 100% RTP, what processes occur

over time which could cause a change in the power indicated by
the ex-core neutron detectors?
Question 5.7.6:
During a refueling outage, a low leakage core is loaded. The

net effect is to reduce the fuel density near the core periphery
and increase the fuel density in the central regions of the core.
What is the impact of this loading scheme on the ex-core
neutron detector output?
5.8 Dropped Rod Events
5E024:
Predict the effects of a dropped rod event
5E025:
Develop strategies which mitigate the consequences of a

dropped rod event
5E026:
Predict the efTects caused by the xenon transients initiated

by a dropped rod event
230
The situation described in Problem 5.4.6 identifies part of the effects of a

dropped rod event. The rapid insertion of reactivity causes reactor power to quickly
decrease. However, if steam demand is not also reduced, the mismatch between heat
production and heat removal causes RCS temperature to decrease and reactor power
to return to a value equal to steam demand.
Problem 5.8.1:
Assume that the reactor is operating at 100% RTP at MOC conditions with
500 ppm of soluble boron. A control rod worth -50 pcm drops into the core.
Where does the system stabilize if steam demand is not reduced?
Question 5.8.1;
What factors impact the reactivity worth of a control rod which

might drop into the core? What factors impact the magnitude
of ITC which limits the temperature response to the dropped
rod event? Is the answer to Problem 5,8.1 typical of all possible
rod drop events? Why, or why not?
To return RCS T^,d to the normal value of 565 F, it is necessary to either add
positive reactivity by diluting the RCS soluble boron or reduce steam demand. If the
RCS is diluted, then the reactor would return to normal rated power and
temperature conditions. However, the dropped CEA would be creating a local
reduction in power density and consequently power density must be peaked in other
regions of the core. If the dropped rod is not the single central control rod, then the
dropped rod has also created a non-uniform redistribution of power which is known
as a "tilt". The effects of this redistribution of power density is to cause some
portions of the core to be closer to thermal limits. The option of choice is to reduce
steam demand to reduce both average and peak power density in the core while
returning RCS Tcold to the normal control value.
231
Problem 5.8.2:
Continue with Problem 5.8.1. How much must steam demand be reduced to
result in RCS
Question 5.8.2:
being returned to the normal control value?
What are the effects of the xenon transient which results from
the dropped CEA event if the CEA is left fully inserted?
Question 5.83:
If a symmetrical subgroup drops into the core, is a tilt created?

Is power density redistributed? Is the core closer to or farther
from thermal limits in this case?
Question 5.8.4:
If the tilt can not be corrected by withdrawing the dropped

CEA what other actions can be taken to reduce the long term
effects of the power density redistribution?
5.9 Reactor Power Cutback Events
SE027:
Predict the effects of a RPCB event
5E028:
Develop strategies to recover fh)m the consequences of a

RPCB event
5E029:
Predict the effects caused by the xenon transients initiated

by a RPCB event
232
The situation identified in Problem 5.4.5 is known as a Reactor Power Cutback

(RPCB) event. This event is activated by a control grade instrumentation system
whose purpose is to avoid a reactor trip. A RPCB attempts to quickly reduce reactor
power to a level which is within the capacity of the heat removal system. Two
initiating sequences are common.
1.
Loss of Main Feedwater Pump: the remaining feed pump(s) is (are)

incapable of delivering feedwater into the steam generators at a rate
compatible with the continued production of 100% RTP. The RPCB
system actuation automatically reduces turbine steam mass flow rate
and drops pre-selected control rod groups. If these actions are not
taken quickly, steam generator level will decrease and initiate a reactor
trip.
2.
Large load reject: a rapid large or complete reduction in electrical

generator output results in 100% steam flow and 100% reactor power
no longer being required. Steam bypass valves have the capacity to
dump about 60% steam flow directly into the condenser. Thus the
reactor can be kept on line and hopefully the turbine-generator
realigned to distribute electrical power in a short time. If the bypass
valves can accommodate 60% RTP, then reactor power must be
quickly reduced to about 60% power or the RCS will heat up and
pressure will increase which initiates a reactor trip. Again, pre-selected
control rod groups are dropped into the core to effect the rapid
reduction in power.
For the reactor to stabilize in a RPCB event or any other transient, the
following two conditions must exist.
Reactor power = Steam demand
ApNet = 0 [Reactor is critical]
233
The two reactivity insertion mechanisms interacting in the RPCB event are the
CEA insertion and the power defect. Thus, A Proj, + A PpowerDefect = ^ Pnm with A pRod,
being a negative quantity and A ppo^^ Defect being a positive quantity.
If Apue, = 0, then the reactor power stabilizes at steam demand with
T^,a = 565 F.
If A pNet > 0> then the reactor power stabilizes at steam demand with
T^ > 565 F.
If Apuet < 0, then the reactor power stabilizes at steam demand with
T < 565 F.
Problem 5.9.1:
Use data from the core data book under MOC conditions at 100% RTP to
evaluate where the reactor will stabilize following a RPCB event in which
steam demand is reduced to 60% RTP and the RPCB event drops both
Regulating Groups 4 & 5 into the core. Assume that the RCS is at a soluble
boron concentration of 500 ppm.
Following a RPCB event, a xenon transient will insert reactivity which will
either cause a change in RCS Tcold' necessitate a change in power level,or require
changes in soluble boron concentration or CEA position to prevent Tcold from
changing. The xenon transient for a RPCB event is included in Appendix E.
Problem 5.9.2:
Devise a strategy to be implemented after a RPCB event which allows the
reactor to remain at 60% RTP, T^
qij
to remain at 565 F, and permits the
regulating rods to be withdrawn to the Group 5 at 110 inch position over a 2

hour period.
234
Problem 5.93:
Devise a strategy to be implemented after a RPCB event which allows the
reactor to be returned to 100% RTF,
to remain at 565 F, and permits
the regulating rods to be withdrawn to the Group 5 at 110 inch position over
a 2 hour period.
5.10 Reactor Trip Events
5E030:
Given a plant parameter which is used to initiate a Reactor

Trip event, state the basis for that parameter being used.
A reactor trip (SCRAM) is a manual or automatic insertion of most or all of

the control rods of a nuclear facility. The purpose of the trip is to rapidly and
completely cause the reactor to become extremely subcritical. In such a case, all of
the roots of the In-hour equation are negative and reactor power decreases very
rapidly. Once the "reactivity control" safety function has been established by the
reactor trip, the attention of the operating staff can be directed to mitigating the
consequences of or correcting other off normal conditions. If the core reactivity is
not controlled, and the reactor not forced subcritical, then heat removal or pressure
and inventory control must take a second seat because reactor djoiamics principles
dictate that a supercritical reactor will increase in power until the positive reactivity
is removed or negative reactivity is rapidly inserted. A reactor trip which successfully
completes will establish a subcritical reactor from which the fission rate is quickly no
longer a problem for the heat removal systems to accommodate. Following the
successful reactor trip, the heat sources which must be accommodated are stored
energy and decay heat which are sufficient to cause cladding damage but capable of
being handled even with systems which have degraded capability.
235
The reasons for tripping a reactor can be summarized as follows:

1.
POWER;
Power is increasing too rapidly
Power is at too high of a level
Power density in a local region is too large
Fuel melt may occur
Boiling crisis may be reached
2.
FLOW;
Flow rate is decreasing too rapidly
Flow rate is too low
The Power/Flow ratio is too large (boiling crisis)
3.
PRESSURE & INVENTORY;

Pressure is dropping toward P,
Level is dropping and the core is in danger of
being uncovered
Primary coolant (radioactive) is leaking from the
RCS and getting too close to the PUBLIC
4.
HEAT REMOVAL;
Too large: Reactor power will follow
Too low:
5.
Reactor system will heat up and pressurize
COMBINATION OF THE ABOVE;

Power is slightly too high
Flow is slightly too low
Pressure is slightly too low
Inlet temperature is slightly too high
Power density is peaked in one location
236
Under the combined conditions listed in item 5 above, the boiling crisis could
be at hand and a sophisticated calculator and code are required to calculate the
approach to the boiling crisis. A computer/calculator uses process inputs and
determines if the boiling crisis is being approached. If the limit is exceeded, a reactor
trip is initiated. At PVNGS, the actual parameter which is calculated as an indication
of the approach of the boiling crisis is DNBR which was discussed in Section 5.6.
Some nuclear facilities utilize power-to-flow ratio as an indication of the approach to
the boiling crisis. The convective heat transfer equation
basis of this model. If
= tCpAT] provides the
increases, then AT must also increase. Since inlet
temperature is held constant, an "ncrease in Qljh beyond limits implies that core exit
temperature is approaching the boiling crisis.
The actual parameters which are monitored to initiate a reactor trip vary
between reactor systems, vendors and types. However, the following discussion is
typical of what might be found in a PWR type system. Generally speaking, at least
three separate channels of safety grade instrumentation are monitored for each
parameter and two of these channels must simultaneously indicate a trip condition
before the reactor will trip. Some nuclear power plant designs utilize four separate
channels of safety grade instrumentation to monitor each parameter and process.
The four channel design allows a single individual channel to be taken out of service
for maintenance or calibration and still provides two-out-of-three channel protection.
Any time a critical parameter is trending toward a limiting condition (set point), the
human operator has the ability to manually initiate a reactor trip before the
automatic protection system does so.
Question 5.10.1:
Consider the case of a reactor system with three channel

protection systems. Assume that a single channel is taken out
of service for maintenance and placed in the tripped condition.
While maintenance activities are in progress, a detector or
Til
sensor in one of the two remaining operable systems fails and

enters the tripped condition. What would this single instrument
failure do to the reactor status?
Question 5.10.2:
Consider the case of a reactor system with four channel

protection systems. Assume that a single channel is taken out
of service for maintenance and placed in the bypassed (not
tripped) condition. While maintenance activities are in progress,
a detector or sensor in one of the three remaining operable
systems fails and enters the tripped condition. What would this
single instrument failure do to the reactor status?
* 4c 4e :f: 4c 3|c 4: ^
Typical reasons for initiating a reactor trip include:

1.
Reactor power is too high or increasing too rapidly while the reactor
is in the "power range". Normally set at about 110 % RTP.
2.
Reactor power is below the point-of-adding-heat (POAH) but is too

high or increasing too rapidly. This trip setpoint protects against
positive reactivity insertions below the POAH where temperature
dependent feedback does not occur. This trip function can be bypassed
during a controlled power increase.
3.
Pressurizer pressure is too low which implies a leak from the RCS,an
approach to saturation conditions by the RCS fluid, and the potential
uncovering of the core. This condition is referred to as a loss of
coolant accident (LOCA).
4.
Pressurizer pressure is too high which implies a loss of heat removal

and a challenge to the RCS piping.
5.
Containment pressure is too high which implies a leak of high energy

fluid into the containment atmosphere. If a LOCA exists then each
238
pound of leaking fluid carries approximately 600 btu into the
containment atmosphere. If main steam at 1100 psia is leaking from
the secondary system into containment, then each pound of leaking
fluid carries approximately 1190 btu into the containment atmosphere.
6.
Steam generator pressure is too low which implies a loss of secondary

coolant, an increase in heat removal, and a cooldown of the reactor
coolant.
7.
Steam generator level is too low which implies a loss of feedwater flow
into the generator and an impending loss of heat removal from the
primary system.
8.
Steam generator level is too high which implies that moisture may be
carried over into the turbine and cause damage. If the turbine is to be
tripped, the reactor must also be tripped.
9.
Reactor coolant system flow rate is too low as indicated by the

differential pressure across the steam generator which implies that hot
leg temperature will be increasing toward saturation conditions due to
the power/flow imbalance.
10.
Local power density (kw/ft) is too high which implies that the limiting
region of the core is in danger of approaching limiting fuel
temperatures.
11.
The calculated value of DNBR is too low which implies that the boiling
crisis is being approached and that cladding temperatures will increase
significantly unless heat flux is reduced.
5E031:
Given plant data, predict the power level which vtill result
due to the instantaneous eflects of a reactor trip.
239
The evaluation of the dynamics of a reactor trip can be completed using two
different models to reach similar conclusions. The first model assumes that the
reactor trip is an instantaneous insertion of a large quantity of negative reactivity.
The second model assumes that the reactor trip is a rapid insertion of negative
reactivity at a large rate. Both models are used to show that a reactor trip produces
a very large and rapid reduction in the fission rate of the core.
If, based on fuel composition, a reactor has a delayed neutron fraction (^) of
0.00600, then approximately 0.6% of all fissions are produced by neutrons which were
delayed. The delayed neutron precursors present at the time of the trip will continue
to produce delayed neutrons independent of the fact that the reactor is subcritical
and fission rate (power level) has dropped. Consequently, the reactor power level
can not drop below the level which is sustained by the delayed neutrons. Further,
after having achieved this level, even though the reactor is extremely subcritical,
fission rate can not decrease any more rapidly than the delayed neutron production
rate decreases due to the decay of the precursor inventory.
When the PVNGS reactor is tripped, the total inserted CEA worth is on the
order of 14,000 pcm (negative) which is -22 $ of reactivity minimum (Appendix B).
The minimum required CEA insertion time following a trip is 4 seconds (PVNGS
Technical Specifications, 1993). Consequently, the average insertion rate of a reactor
trip is on the order of -3,500 pcm per second. The following discussion will show how
this large negative reactivity insertion rate and magnitude result in reactor power
(fission rate) being rapidly reduced.
In the step reactivity insertion model, the large insertion of negative reactivity
creates an instantaneous negative multiplication (decrease) of neutron population due
to the very short neutron lifetime. Equation 5.7.1 describes the relationship between
initial power level
(Pg),
instantaneous power level after the prompt drop ( ), and

Pq
reactivity inserted (Ott and Neuhold, 1985).
Pd
um-p)] =
Po([i/(i-R)]
5.10.1
240
This expression was previously used to evaluate step reactivity insertions in
Section 4.6 and was referred to as the 'prompt (instantaneous) power change factor
due to prompt neutron multiplication' in Equation 4.6.2.
Problem 5.10.1:
Assume that the reactor was operating at 100% RTP under MOC conditions
when a reactor trip inserted 14,000 pern of negative reactivity and that
/3=0.00570. Use the prompt drop/jump equation (Equation 5.7.1) to predict
the level to which the nuclear instruments will instantly drop.
5E032:
Identify the process mechanisms which provide reactivity

feedback during :
* Transient over power conditions
* Loss of flow conditions
* Loss of heat removal conditions
* Increase in heat removal conditions
Question 5.103:
Does heat production within the RCS instantly drop from 100%
RTP to 3.9% RTP? Why, or why not?
Question 5.10.4:
Assuming that during the reactor trip event that all reactor
coolant pumps continue to operate, what is the expected
response of RCS loop AT?
Question 5.10.5;
How sensitive is the answer from Equation 5.10.1 to the

magnitude of reactivity inserted by the reactor trip event?
Suggestion: plot ? vs reactivity added by the trip for a range of
reactivity values from -6000 pcm to -15,000 pcm.
241
Question 5.10.6:
Is it sound engineering practice to increase the worth of the

shutdown (scram) rod groups from 14,000 pern to 28,000 pcm?
Why, or why not?
Question 5.10.7:
Assuming that the reactivity worth of the shutdown (scram) rod

groups is constant over the life of the core at 15,000 pcm, does
Pq
depend upon time in life? If yes, how and why? If no, why
not?
In the large negative reactivity insertion rate model, a large negative startup
rate (SUR) is instantly produced. (Refer to Equation 4.5.2 and Example 4.8.4). Even
if core net reactivity is positive, the large negative insertion rate results in power
decreasing rapidly. While the prompt drop equation (Equation 5.10.1) results in a
final power level for the prompt drop, this SUR model adds validity to the fact that
power decrease is very rapid. Interactive dynamic system simulation programs (Korn,
1989) were used to simulate the effects of a reactor trip using six group reactor
kinetic models. The results are included in Appendix D and substantiate the results
of the previous models.
Problem 5.10.2:
If the reactor were critical at 100% RTP when a reactivity insertion event
inserted +30 pcm as a step, how long would it take (minimum) for power
level to reach 110% which is the reactor trip setpoint on high power level?
If there is a 1 second delay time between when the power exceeds the setpoint
and the scram rods start dropping into the core, what is the peak power
possible?
Question 5.10.8
What mechanism(s) would extend the time from the minimum

calculated in Problem 5.10.2?
242
Question 5.10.9:
Is the event described in Problem 5.10.2 more serious at BOC

orEOC? Why?
Question 5.10.10:
How would the answer to the previous problem and questions

differ if the initiating event were a step insertion of+200 pcm?
With the rapid creation of an extremely subcritical system, power rapidly drops
to -4% and the production of fissions becomes driven by the delayed neutron
population which continues due to the inventory of precursors which exist from
previous fissions. Thus, the post trip stable response becomes limited by the decay
rate of the delayed neutron precursors. Equation 4.5.2 can be used to derive a model
which shows the dependency of this response on the effects of delayed neutron
precursors.
SUR = 26.06[(Aeffp + p)/(^-p)

Immediately following the trip, the following conditions apply:
p
=0
= very large negative number
(^-p) = - p
Thus Equation 4.5.2 reduces to SUR - -26A.eff, which shows that the stable
SUR following a reactor trip event depends only on the decay of the precursors.
Since precursor half lite ranges from U.2 sec to 55 sec, the short lived precursors
quickly decay away and the stable startup rate depends only on the longest lived
precursors.
243
SUR - .26X^, Uved
where A = 0.693/t^
SUR - -26(0.693)/t^
with tv4 for the longest lived group = 55 sec
SUR - -1/3 DPM
This solution is consistent with the negative 80 second period referenced in
most reactor dynamics texts and substantiated by the multigroup solution displayed
in Figure 4.4.3. Thus, within a minute or two after a reactor trip event, power
(fission rate) is below 1% power and is decreasing at a rate of -1/3 DPM (3 minutes
per decade).
As power level continues to decrease, the neutron population
eventually approaches a level which is sustained by sub-critical multiplication, and

power levels off. Since sub-critical multiplication will sustain power levels in the
range of 10"^% -> 10'^% power, a duration of 15 to 18 minutes after a trip is
required before fission rate stops decreasing.
5E033:
Given plant conditions, predict the feedwater flow rate

requirements after a reactor trip.
5E034:
Given plant conditions, predict RCS Loop AT after a

reactor trip.
5E035:
Plot neutron power level and thermal power level vs time

after a reactor trip event.
244
Even though the reactor has been "turned off' and the fission process is a level
well below the ability to produce measurable heat; the heat removal systems must
continue to be operated to remove the decay heat and all the stored heat of the
system mass. Decay heat is the term used to describe the energy produced by the
radioactive decay of the inventory of fission products which exist within the fuel
material. These decay processes are mostly /3-y decay in which the beta energy is
deposited directly into the fuel material because of the short beta range.
Consequently, the fuel material must continue to be cooled for a long time after the
reactor is shutdown. The decay heat load is an important parameter which must be
taken into account in the design of safety heat removal systems and post accident
heat removal systems. Consequently, decay heat loads are calculated in accordance
with a standard methodology specified by ANSI 5.1-1979. The key parameters
associated with the decay heat load are the type of fuel (Uranium, Plutonium, or a
mix of the two), the power level and duration of operation and the time interval since
operation has ceased. The PVNGS Core Data Book (Appendix B) provides typical
values of decay heat load vs time and indicates that 1.7% RTF is being generated 30
minutes after a trip from 100% RTF. This magnitude of heat generation would
result in the RCS heating up if it were not removed from the system.
Problem 5.103:
Assume that the reactor trips from 100% RTF, all four reactor coolant pumps
continue operation and the plant stabilizes with RCS Tôij = 565 ''F and S/G
pressure at 1150 psia. What feed flow rate and steam flow rate are necessary
to remove the decay heat and pump work from the RCS to maintain RCS
Tcoid and also maintain S/G level constant at the time frame 30 minutes after
the trip? Assume that the feedwater inlet temperature is 100 F and that
RCP work is 17 Mw.
245
Question 5.10.14:
Consider two otherwise identical reactors which both trip at the

same time. Reactor A has been operating at 100% RTP for 20
days, while Reactor B has been operating at 100% RTP for 200
days. How will the decay heat loads compare at 1 minute, 1
hour, 1 day, 1 month and 1 year after the trip?
Problem 5.10.4:
Plot both neutron power and thermal power vs time for the time period
t=0 to 1 hour for a trip from 100% RTP at t =0. Use a scale which allows
the plotting of the full range of neutron power.
5.11 Shutdown Margin Evaluation
SE036:
Define Shutdown Margin and state the PVNGS technical

specification limits on the value of SDM.
The previous discussion on a reactor trip showed that the reactor is quickly
and completely shutdown. The large amount of negative reactivity inserted at the
time of the trip is sufficient to drive the reactor very subcritical and cause power to
decrease to the level of subcritical multiplication. The minimum amount of negative
reactivity available for a trip is controlled by technical specifications by specifying a
required minimum shutdown margin. In addition, following a reactor trip, several
reactivity insertion mechanisms have the capability of inserting positive reactivity
which could, in theory, cause the reactor to return to criticality. To avoid this
possibility, a minimum value of shutdown margin is specified by technical
specifications and always maintained.
246
Shutdown margin is defined as:
"That amount of negative reactivity by which the reactor is, or is
capable of being instantly made, subcritical from its existing state. In
determining the value of the shutdown margin, the reactivity worth of
the most reactive control rod and the worth of any part length rods are
not included in the reactivity determination." (PVNGS Technical
Specifications, 1993)
The basis of maintaining a minimum value for the shutdown margin is to

assure that 1) the reactor can be made subcritical from any condition, 2) the reactor
can be kept subcritical, and 3) that the reactor is capable of responding to all
anticipated operational occurrences.
At PVNGS, the required values of minimum shutdown margin are:
1)
1% AK/K when all rods are fully inserted, and
2)
a temperature dependent value which ranges between 4% AK/K and

6.5% AK/K when any full length control rod is not fully inserted.
See Figure 5.11.1: Shutdown Margin(SDM) vs Cold Leg Temperature.
5E037:
Evaluate the adequacy of SDM
5E038:
Develop strategies to recover adequate SDM.
The following material determines the magnitude of the shutdown margin

when the reactor system is operating at 100% RTF with all control rods fully
withdrawn and compares that value to the technical specification limiting value of
6.5% AK/K. An equation is developed from the definition which aids in this
247
SHUTDOWN MARGIN vs T-COLD

PVNCiSUNIT1CYCl4
<
hti
a
250
300
350
550
RCS T-COJ) (oF)

Figure 5.11.1. Temperature Dependent Shutdown Margin
(PVNGS Technical Specifications. 1993)
evaluation. Based on the definition of SDM, only the actual core net reactivity and
any instantaneous reactivity insertion mechanism need to be considered. When the
control rods are considered, no credit can be taken for any part length rods and the
maximum possible worth of a single stuck rod must always be discounted from the
calculation. The only reactivity insertions which occur instantly on a reactor trip are
the insertion of control rods and the collapse of power dependent temperature
differences used to determine power defect.
Using the following sjmibols, an
equation for SDM is determined which fits the definition:
248
Pn j
Po
= net reactivity in-core, or instantly available

= initial reactivity in-core prior to any insertion
TRW = Total Rod Worth available for insertion if all full length rods
are fully withdrawTi
PD
= Power defect reactivity associated with core power dependent

temperatures and the temperature dependent reactivity
insertion mechanisms
RI
= reactivity worth of any rods which are in the core prior to the
rapid insertion due to the trip. These rods contribute to
the existing
and must be subtracted from the total rod
worth.
SRW = reactivity worth of the worst case single stuck rod
SDM = -PN,t = -[p + TRW - PD - RI - SRW]
5.11.1
Using values from the core data book(Appendix B), Equation 5.11.1 will be
used to evaluate the magnitude of the available SDM and how the SDM changes
after a reactor trip due to Xenon reactivity transients and RCS cooldown.
Example 5.11.1:
Determine the SDM available when the reactor is operating at 100% RTP
under MOC conditions, with Tcold = 565 F, 500 ppm boron, and all rods fully
withdrawn except for Group 5 which is at 135 inches to control power
distribution.
Data:
p,,
=0
[Reactor Critical]
TRW = -13,570 pom
[Table 2.15.1]
PD
= + 1,885 pcm
[Table 2.1.1]
RI
= +
27 pcm
[Table 2.11.2]
3,470 pcm
[Table 2.16.1]
SRW =
-i-
249
Solution:
Using Equation 5.11.1,
= -8,188 pcm and thus the value of
SDM = 8,188 pcm or 8.188% AK/K which is greater than the

minimum required value of 6.5% AK/K.
Problem 5.11.1:
Assume that the reactor is tripped from the conditions specified in the
previous example and is stabilized at 565 F. How does the value of the SDM
vary over the next 96 hours as the post trip Xenon transient occurs?
Problem 5.11.2:
Assume that the reactor from Problem 5.11.1 and Example 5.11.1 is now
xenon free and is to be cooled down to 250 F so the system can be
depressurized and alternate cooling systems used. How does the value of the
SDM vary as the system is cooled if the assumption is made that no soluble
boron concentration changes occur?
Question 5.11.1:
In general, what can be said about the effects of cooldown with

out boration on the value of SDM?
What is the largest
contributor to the effects?

***********
To avoid needing to perform a reactivity balance calculation to determine

whether or not the available shutdown margin is adequate, the PVNGS Core Data
Book provides a set of curves of required boron concentration vs temperature
which will assure adequate shutdown margin. [See Section 3.1.0 of Appendix B]
Review of the curves and the previous evaluation example show that cool down
without boration results in a reduction in the available shutdown margin. However,
separate analysis has shown that adequate shutdown margin can always be assured
if the cooldown caused contraction of RCS inventory is made up for with heavily
borated [> 4000 ppm] water. The key is to assure that prior to initiating cooldown,
250
RCS soluble boron concentration is above the minimum required for the existing
temperature and to then make up all inventory from a borated source.
Problem 5.113:
Explain why adequate SDM does not exist after a trip in which a single full
length CEA fails to fully insert. Use the conditions specified in Example
5.11.1 and the appropriate curve from Section 3jc.x of the core data book
(Appendix B).
Question 5.11.2:
Will the Xenon present in the core after the trip provide
sufficient reactivity that adequate SDM does exist (Problem
5.11.3)? Why, or why not?
Question 5.113:
What action must be taken to restore adequate SDM for the

situation described above?
5.12 Boration while Cooling Down
5E039:
Evaluate boration strategies and determine if SDM will be

recovered or maintained.
As the RCS is cooled, the contraction of water provides free volume for make
up to the system. In fact, if no make up occurs, then the pressurizer will drain and
the steam bubble in the pressurizer will shift to the reactor head area. Control
systems are available to allow make up water to be pure water, borated water [>
4000 ppm], or a blend of the two at any specified boron concentration. Review of
the core data book and the examples, problems and questions in the latter portion
251
of Section 5.11 indicated that the cooldown also inserts positive reactivity due to
several reactivity insertion mechanisms. To assure that the cooldown does not
compromise the value of adequate SDM, it is necessary to borate the RCS. If all
make up, necessary to compensate for contraction, is taken from the borated water
source, then RCS soluble boron concentration will increase faster than the
requirements for adequate SDM increase.
The basis for these statements is shown in the following calculation
descriptions which were used to develop the spread sheet contained in Appendix C.
1.
Using the specific volume of water at two different temperatures and

the volume of the system, determine the mass of water which can be
added to the system to maintain level while cooling down from the
higher to the lower temperature.
2.
Using the specific volume of the water source, determine the volume
of water make up required to maintain system level while cooling the
system.
3.
Perform a boration calculation on the system for the volume of borated

water added during the cooldown to determine RCS boron
concentration at the end of the cooldown.
4.
Perform 1-3 for each of several temperature increments during the

cooldown.
5.
Plot RCS soluble boron concentration vs RCS Tcold for a given

specified RCS soluble boron and compare to the curves in Section 3.1.0
of the core data book.
Problem 5.12.1:
Assume that the RCS contains 100,000 gallons, Tccj = 565 F, and that make
up capacity with three charging pumps is 150 gpm of 100 F water. Is it
252
possible to cool the RCS at the rate allowed by Figure 2,3.7 and maintain
pressurizer level? Why, or why not?
Question 5.12.1:
Assume that the reactor is tripped, all reactor coolant pumps

are secured and that the following data exists. What action must
be taken to initiate a cool down of the RCS?
Current conditions:
Thot= 540 F (increasing)
Tcoid= 530 F (increasing)
Steam Generator pressure = 1200 psia
Steam Generator level = 50% constant
253
Learning Objectives
1.
Develop cause and effect scenarios which illustrate the effect of reactivity
insertions on key parameters.
2.
Differentiate between the effects of positive and negative MTC conditions on

reactor transients.
3.
Predict the magnitude of reactivity insertions necessary to compensate for

plant transients.
4.
Predict the effects of plant transients on key parameters (power level and
temperature) if adequate compensating reactivity is not inserted.
5.
Given a value for stable SUR (below POAH), predict where the plant will
stabilize.
6.
Given a specified plant power transient, predict (qualitatively) the resultant

xenon transient.
7.
Identify the initiating cues which are used to determine that reactivity
adjustments are required.
8.
Predict the effect of plant transients on the axial distribution of power density
within the core.
9.
Explain the mechanism by which plant transients induce changes in the axial
distribution of power density within the core.
10.
Develop, and evaluate the acceptability of proposed, reactivity control

strategies.
11.
Given changes in pump or system configuration, predict the effect on fluid

hydraulic parameters such as pumping power, flow rate, and system or
component Ap.
12.
Given a pump curve for single pump operation, sketch a pump curve for
multiple pump operation.
13.
Apply the pump affinity laws.
254
14.
Identify the factors which contribute to the spatial variations of power density
within the core.
15.
Predict whether or not a specified plant transient will exacerbate or mitigate

spatial variations of core power density.
16.
Predict core thermal hot spot conditions.
17.
Identify the PVNGS safety limits, trips and LCO's which are related to or
based on spatial variations in power density.
18.
Evaluate the effects of spatial variations in power density.
19.
Given a plant transient or parameter change, predict the effect of that

transient on spatial variations in power density.
20.
Specify the need for and methods of calorimetric measurement of reactor

power level.
21.
Specify why secondaty plant calorimetrics have less uncertainty than primary
calorimetrics.
22.
Explain the principle of operation of Ap type flow meters.
23.
Given a set of plant conditions, evaluate the expected difference between

actual core power and the calorimetric thermal power calculation.
24.
Predict the effects of a dropped rod event.
25.
Develop strategies which mitigate the consequences of a dropped rod event.
26.
Predict the effects caused by the xenon transients initiated by a dropped rod
event.
27.
Predict the effects of a RPCB event.
28.
Develop strategies to recover from the consequences of a RPCB event.
29.
Predict the effects caused by the xenon transients initiated by a RPCB event.
30.
Given a plant parameter which is used to initiate a Reactor Trip event, state
the basis for that parameter being used.
31.
Given plant data, predict the power level which will result due to the
instantaneous effects of a reactor trip.
255
32.
Identify the process mechanisms which provide reactivity feedback during:

* Transient over power conditions
* Loss of flow conditions
* Loss of heat removal conditions
* Increase in heat removal conditions
33.
Given plant conditions, predict the feedwater flow rate requirements after a
reactor trip.
34.
Given plant conditions, predict RCS Loop AT after a reactor trip.
35.
Plon neutron power level and thermal power level vs time after a reactor trip
event.
36.
Define Shutdown margin and state the PVNGS technical specification limits
on the value of SDM.
37.
Evaluate the adequacy of SDM.
38.
Develop strategies to recover adequate SDM.
39.
Evaluate boration strategies and determine if SDM will be recovered or

maintained.
256
Suggested Reading
1.
Fundamentals", Hemisphere Publishing Company, New York, NY, (1989).

Chapter 1, Thermal Hydraulic Characteristics
pp 1-18
Chapter 2, Thermal Design Principles
pp 19-38
Chapter 3, Reactor Heat Generation
pp 39-71
2. El-Wakil, M.M., "Nuclear Heat Transport", The American Nuclear Society,

LaGrange Park, IL, (1981).
Chapter 3, Neutron Flux Distribution in Cores
pp 52-70
Chapter 4, Reactor Heat Generation
pp 73-100
Chapter 5, Heat Conduction in Reactor Elements
pp 103-129
Chapter 6, Heat Conduction in Reactor Elements
pp 131-167
Chapter 13, Core Thermal Design
pp 368-401
3. Tong, L.S., and J. Weisman, 'Thermal Analysis of Pressurized Water Reactors",

Second Edition, The American Nuclear Society, LaGrange Park, IL, (1979).
Chapter 4, Heat Transfer and Transport:
Boiling Heat Transfer
pp 285-303
Chapter 5, Thermal and Hydraulic Performance of

a Reactor Core
pp 335-399

Chapter 5, Heat Generation in Nuclear Reactors
pp 231-250
Chapter 6, Heat Transfer in Nuclear Power Systems
pp 251-356
Chapter 7, Reactor Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis
pp 315-356
257
5. Hetrick, D.L., "Dynamics of Nuclear Reactors", The University of Chicago Press,
IL, (1993).
Chapter 5, Reactivity Feedback and Reactor Excursions
pp 141-234
6. Lamarsh, J., "Introduction to Nuclear Engineering", Addison-Wesley publishing

Chapter 8, Heat Removal from Nuclear Reactors
pp 308-366
258
5.13 SOLUTIONS
Question 5.3.1:
IfXenon-135 concentration changes were the only reactivity feedback mechanism present
in the core, what would be the effect of a small positive reactivity insertion initiated by
the operator? Assume that no other operator actions occur after the initial reactivity
insertion.
If the only feedback mechanism is positive feedback, then the reactor response
would be unstable. A small positive reactivity insertion would drive the reactor
supercritical and power level would start increasing. The positive feedback from
xenon would then insert additional positive reactivity and power level would increase
faster. In the absence of operator intervention, power level would continue to
increase. This example is provided to indicate the destabilizing effects of positive
feedback. In the case of the xenon transient, the rate of feedback is sufficiently small
that intervention would still be possible. However other insertion mechanisms do in
fact exist which counteract the xenon insertion and stabilize the reactor system.
Problem 5.3.1:
Develop a cause and effect scenario similar to Example 5.3.1 to illustrate why and how ^coW
changes if positive reactivity is inserted while steam demand is held constant.
Positive reactivity insertion into a critical reactor while steam demand is held
constant:
The reactor is driven supercritical and reactor power level begins
increasing which causes fuel heating.
As fuel temperature increases, negative
reactivity in inserted which helps counteract the initial positive reactivity insertion.
The increased fuel temperature results in increased heat transfer rate from the fuel
into the coolant and RCS Tôt increases. Moderator heating also inserts negative
reactivity to assist in counteracting the initial positive reactivity insertion. As the
hotter primary fluid enters the steam generators it is cooled off by transferring heat
into the secondary fluid. However, since steam demand has not been allowed to
increase, the heat removal rate is not increased and the primary fluid leaves the
steam generator hotter than before. The RCS stabilizes at reactor power level equal
to steam demand (no change) and net reactivity equal to zero (criticality). Since the
259
initial driving force was positive reactivity, temperatures have increased and since the
isothermal temperature coefficient is negative, the temperature changes add
compensating negative reactivity to restore the state of criticality.
Problem 5.3.2:
Develop a cause and ejfect scenario similar to Example 5.3.1 to illustrate the effects of inserting
negative reactivity while steam demand is held constant.
Similar to the previous problem:: the initial reactivity insertion is negative so

the reactor goes subcritical and for a period of time reactor power is less than steam
demand. The mismatch between heat generation and heat removal results in a
reduction in temperature within the RCS. Since steady state power level does not
change, all AT's along the heat transfer path must remain constant and consequently
all temperatures along the heat transfer path decrease:
Tôt, Tgvg, T,,d, and
Tjteam- Since the isothermal temperature coefficient is negative, the reduction in

temperature inserts positive reactivity which compensates for the initial negative
reactivity insertion and returns the reactor to a state of criticality. In both of these
scenarios, had the magnitude of the ITC been positive, then the reactor would not
have stabilized without intervention on the part of the operator or some reactivity
insertion control system.
Question 5.3.2:
How do the responses to Example 5.3.1, Problem 5.3.1, and Problem 5.3.2 differ if it is
assumed that the moderator temperature coefficient is positive?
See the response to the previous problem. If MTC is positive and sufficiently
large that FTC is also positive, the reactor is destabilized. Positive reactivity insertion
causes power increase which causes heating. With positive ITC, heating inserts
positive reactivity and power increases more. Intervention is required. Negative
reactivity insertion causes power decrease which causes cooling of the system. With
positive ITC, cooling inserts negative reactivity and power decreases more.
Intervention is required.
260
Problem 5.3.3:
Develop a cause and effect scenario to illustrate the effects of reducing steam demand with no
other operator initiated changes.
Assume that the reactor is initially critical at constant power level with power
equal to steam demand and all temperatures "on program" for the power level. If
steam demand is reduced, the rate of heat removal from the RCS by the boiling
processes in the steam generators is reduced and RCS Tcold begins to increase. When
the hotter water reaches the core a reactivity insertion occurs based on the magnitude
of MTC. Assuming that MTC is negative, the temperature increase inserts negative
reactivity and reactor power level begins to decrease to follow steam demand. The
power level reduction decreases fuel temperature which inserts positive reactivity to
compensate for the negative insertion from moderator temperature effects. The
plant stabilizes at the new power level equal to steam demand but the RCS is hotter
than it should be for the new power level. The system is now "off program" because
the reactivity required to counteract the power defect was not inserted by rod motion
or boron adjustment. An uncompensated power adjustment always results in the
RCS being off program.
Since the basis of the temperature program is the
maintenance of a constant RCS Tcold' the easiest method to determine if the

temperature program is not being maintained is to observe RCS
Question 5.3.3:
Tcold-
What initiating cue should an operator use to decide when to insert reactivity when
steam demand is being reduced?
The solution to the previous problem should make it obvious that the initiating
cue is RCS Tcold- If the secondary operator begins to lower steam demand, the
primary operator will observe an increasing trend on RCS Tjîd- Since the normal
control band is 565 F +. 2 F, as Tjîj increases towards 567 F, the primary operator
will initiate negative reactivity insertion to lower temperature. An alternate strategy
is for the primary operator to initiate a negative reactivity insertion (boration). This
negative reactivity insertion will reduce RCS Tcold- As the secondary operator sees
261
the RCS temperature begin to change, steam demand is decreased to return
into
the normal operating band.
Problem 5.3.4;
Develop a cause and effect scenario which describes the effects of the previous Xenon transient
on RCS
Assume that steam demand is held constant at 30% RTF.
Applying previous solutions: The xenon transient induces an isothermal

temperature change since steam demand is being held constant. If the xenon
transient is positive reactivity, then RCS temperature increases and if ITC is negative
the temperature change inserts negative reactivity stabilizing the transient. If the
xenon transient is negative reactivity, then RCS temperature decreases and if ITC is
negative the temperature change inserts positive reactivity stabilizing the transient.
For example: Positive reactivity insertion from xenon drives the reactor
supercritical and causes power to increase above steam demand.
The
mismatch between heat generation and heat removal causes heating of the
RCS. The remainder of the scenario depends upon the value of ITC. If ITC
is negative, then the heating inserts negative reactivity and the reactor returns
to critical at a higher temperature (isothermally). If ITC is positive, then the
heating inserts positive reactivity and the reactor power increases in an
uncontrolled manner until intervention takes place.
Problem S.3.S;
If a Xenon transient inserts -300pcm while steam demand is held constant, how much does RCS
change? What action is required, by the operator, to prevent RCS T^from changing?
The magnitude of the temperature change depends upon the magnitude of

ITC which is dependent upon RCS soluble boron concentration, RCS Tcold' and timein-life and is tabulated in Appendix B.
262
^ Pxenon
^ PXemp
APxemp = ITC(AT)
AToffprogfan, = -[ A Pxenon]/rrC
The operator can not prevent the xenon transient from initiating a
temperature change but attempts to minimize the temperature change can take place.
If the operator has the ability to predict the xenon transient, then compensating
reactivity can be inserted before temperature changes. Or, as temperature changes,
the operator can use the change as an initiating cue to insert reactivity to return
temperature to the previous value and thus compensate for the effects of the xenon
transient. The control reactivity options available to the operator are control rod
motion or soluble boron concentration adjustment.
APXenon ^PBoron ^
Apsoron = Average Boron Worth(Appm)
Appm = -[A
pxenonM
Average Boron Worth)
While knowledge of the magnitude and rate of the xenon transient may not
be used directly to establish a slow boron adjustment rate to prevent temperature
from changing, the knowledge does allow the operator to predict the magnitude and
rate at which temperature will be changing and the frequency with which boron
concentration adjustments will be required.
Question 5.4.1:
In Example 5.4.1, all of the +Ap which was inserted to create the +SUR (0.4 DPM)
was compensated by power defect due to the increase in steam demand. Where does
stabilize?
If reactivity insertion and power change match such that the reactor is
returned to criticality (pe, = 0) then the reactor ends up on program and RCS Tcold
does not change from the value it had prior to the insertion of initiating reactivity.
263
Prior to establishing the +SUR, RCS
was isothermal with steam temperature
and Tcold has not changed.
Initiating
^PPower ~
Appoêr = (Power Coefficient)(A% Power)

A% Power = -[Ap,iti3,ing]/(Power Coefficient)
Question 5.4.2;
In Example 5.4.2, reactor power and steam demand were increased from 10% RTF to
20% RTF. RCS
was maintained by diluting the RCS soluble boron concentration.
How would the plant have responded if steam demand were increased but no boron
dilution was initiated?
If steam demand is increased and compensating reactivity is not inserted by

the operator then the plant stabilizes at the higher power level but with temperatures
lower than they should be at that power level. The reduction in temperatures from
the higher power level value has inserted the reactivity necessary to compensate for
the negative reactivity caused by the power increase.
^ PPower
^ PXemperature
Appower = Power Defect

^ PTempcrature
~ (ITC)(AT)
AToff program = "[Power Defect]/ITC

Question 5.4.3:
In Example 5.4.3, the initial effect of the xenon transient is heating. If RCS
increased by 18 F, what happened to steam temperature in the steam generators?
The heat transfer process between the RCS and steam generators is
simplistically modelled by the equation : Q = UA(T3yg - Tsteam)- The xenon transient
is taking place during a time frame in which both reactor power level and steam
demand are held constant. Consequently, the AT (Tg^g - Tsigg^j) and the heat transfer
rate are constant. The xenon reactivity induced heating has caused an increase in
264
Tjyg of 18 F; thus, Ts^^, must also have increased by the same amount. When the
reactor is operating at constant power and steam demand, isothermal temperature
changes initiated by reactivity insertions propagate into the secondary system based
upon the thermodynamic principles described in the heat transfer equations.
Question 5.4.4:
What indications would the operator use to determine that it was necessary to borate the
RCS?
The power increase is stabilized but has initiated a + Ap for 4-5 hours (See the
Xenon data in Appendix E). With steam demand constant, the +Ap initiates an
increase in RCS Tcold (isothermal temperature change). This increase in RCS Tôid
is the initiating cue to borate and lower temperature. Indirectly, temperature is used
as a "Xenon meter" to serve as an initiating cue for the required action to
compensate for xenon reactivity.
^PXenon ^Pfioron
ApBoron = (Average Boron Worth)(Appm)
Appm = -[Apxenon]/(^v'"2g Boron Worth)
Question S.4.5: What indications would the operator have to deduce that xenon was inserting positive
reactivity and that compensation was necessary?
Tcold increasing with steam demand constant is an indication of positive

reactivity insertion. The rate of temperature change can be related to the rate of
xenon reactivity insertion by realizing that the temperature change maintains the
reactor critical.
^Pxenon
^ Pxemperature
APTempen.tur. = (ITC)(AT)
AT = -[Apxeoonl/rrc
AT/At = -[Apxeo]/ITC
265
Question 5.4.6:
How long after the power increase from 10% RTF to 20% RTF should the operator
expect to have to borate the RCS to prevent temperatures from isothermalfy increasing?
The xenon reactivity insertion will cause temperature increases as long as the
xenon reactivity insertion is positive. The Xenon data in Appendix E indicates that
the power increase from 10% RTP to 20% RTP induces a positive xenon reactivity
transient for 4-5 hours following the power increase.
Question 5.4.7;
If the xenon transient does cause an isothermal temperature increase of 18 F, what is

the value of RCS
which results?
Since the RCS is 18 F "off program" high, the value of T^^g should be 18 F
greater than the normal value at 20% RTP.
Tavg = Tîd + (l/2)(Loop AT)p<^
T^^g = (565 + 18) + (l/2)(0.20)(Full Power AT)
T^vg = 583 + (0.10)(56) = 589 F
Question 5.4.8:
If the xenon transient does cause an isothermal temperature increase within the RCS,
and the system is held at 20% RTF, what can be said about steam pressure?
The increase in Tô,, T^^g, and T,(j with no change in the heat removal rate
must cause an increase in Ts,gan, due to the heat transfer process described by the
equation Q = UA(T3^,g - Ts,ean,). The steam generator is a saturated liquid-saturated
vapor process and consequently the increase in Tsieam drives an increase in steam
pressure within the steam generators.
Question 5.4.9:
How long after having stabilized reactor power at 20% RTF should the operator expect
this xenon transient to have an effect on changing temperature?
The xenon data provided in Appendix E indicates that it takes 40-50 hours of
constant power operation before a new equilibrium xenon concentration has been
266
established. Thus, after the first 4-5 hours of positive reactivity insertion, the xenon
transient will be inserting negative reactivity for 35-45 hours and driving RCS
temperature down. The frequency of required adjustment, by dilution, is dictated by
the rate of xenon reactivity insertion and the magnitude of ITC. See the solution to
Question 5.4.5.
Question 5.4.10; What indications should be available to the operator that this reactivity insertion is
taking place?
While this concept might appear to be covered again and again, it is vital that
it be understood. If steam demand is held constant, then any reactivity insertion will
result in a change in RCS T^,d based on the relationships of the reactivity balance.
^Plnitiation
^ PTemperature
^ PTemperature
~ (ITC)(AT)
AT = -[Ap,i,3,]/ITC
Positive reactivity insertions drive temperature up isothermally and negative
rrC stabilizes the transient. Negative reactivity insertions drive temperature down
isothermally and negative ITC stabilizes the transient.
RCS Tôid changes serve as an indication of reactivity insertion. The rate and
magnitude of these changes are used to determine if the plant is behaving as
expected.
Question 5.4.11: If the transient described in Example 5.4.5 were allowed to occur, what changes would
occur in the axial distribution of power within the core?
When either power level or RCS Tcold are varied, changes in axial distribution
of power within the core are driven by moderator density variations between the top
and bottom of the core. This example and solution do not consider the effects of
267
inserting or withdrawing control rods in the top of the core which has a significant
effect on axial distribution as is discussed later.
This is a complicated solution. Since the power increase is not accompanied
with a dilution of RCS soluble boron concentration, RCS
If RCS Thot were to increase at the same time that
decreases isothermally.
decreases, the solution would
be straightforward. Moderator density reduction in the top of the core and density
increase in the bottom of the core would shift the neutron flux profile [and power
density profile] to the bottom of the core. However, in an uncompensated power
increase it is not obvious that RCS
increases.
Solution strategy: Determine values for both hot and cold leg temperatures
before and after the power increase. Use ASME Steam Tables to determine the
specific volume of the moderator at each temperature and then calculate the %
change in density for both the top and bottom of the core. The region with the
largest density change dictates the direction of axial power density shift.
Tfaot ~ Tcoid + (Loop A i )povver

Tho. = T^,d + (% Power/100)(56 T)
Initial conditions;
20% RTP : on-program
T^,d = 565 F
(v = 0.02224)
Tho, = 576 F
(v = 0.02265)
Final conditions:
30% RTP : off-program 17 F
T< = 548F
(v = 0.02169)
= 565 F
(v = 0.02224)
Note that both RCS Tu, and T.j decreased during this transient even though
the RCS Loop AT increased.
Hot Leg density increase = (0.02265-0.02224)/0.02265 = 1.81%
268
Cold leg density increase = (0.02224-0.02169)/0.02224 = 2.47%
Conclusion: the larger effect in the bottom of the core shifts the power
density into the bottom of the core by changing the slowing down and diffusion
lengths of neutrons.
Question S.4.I2: An operator proposes to establish an average boron dilution rate of 1 ppm/hr, increase
steam demand from 30% to 40% RTP during the first hour and let the plant stabilize
at the end of the 36-37 hour transient at 40% RTP on program. Is this an acceptable
strategy? Wty, or why not?
If the only concern is the endpoints of the path, this is an acceptable strategy.
However, if this strategy were used the value of RCS temperature would be
significantly off program during the transient. This is not an acceptable strategy.
Problem 5.4.1:
Assume that the operator dilutes the prescribed 19 ppm during the one hour ramp and then waits
until the xenon reactivity insertion turns from being positive to negative before making an
additional adjustment to RCS soluble boron concentration. Would RCS
remain within the
desired bounds? Is this an acceptable strategy?
In reality, it depends. If the reactor were exactly at 565 F and the power
increase were exactly compensated during the power increase, then
would again
be 565 F after the power stabilized. Then the +29 pcm due to xenon reactivity
would drive T^.^ >567 F if ITC is < 115 pcm/F|.
However, if Tj,d ends up at 564.5 F after the power increase and xenon
inserts +29 pcm and ITC is -17 pcm/F, then Tôij would not go 'off-program'.
Realizing that the values tabulated in the Core Data Book are best estimates with
some degree of uncertainty, this strategy is too close to call.
Problem 5.4.2;
Assume that 6 hours after having stabilized the reactor at 40% RTP, the operator just completed
an adjustment to RCS soluble boron concentration approximately 720 ppm and that RCS T^
269
is 566.5 F. How long can the operator wait before adjusting ^cold if the minimum allowed value
is 563.5 "F?
The rate of temperature change is driven by the rate of xenon reactivity

insertion which is available in Appendix E.
APxenon
^ PTempeialure ^
APTempen,.u.. = (ITC)(AT)
AT = -[Apxenon]/rrC
Of
AT/At = -[Apxcon]/ITC
The importance of this prediction is that in the time frame specified, Apxenon
is negative and temperature is decreasing at a predictable rate.
inadvertent boration or dilution were also taking place?
What if an
Could the ability to
predicted the expected rate of change of temperature allow the operating staff to
detect an unexpected event?
Problem 5.4.3:
Assume that the reactor is stable at 80% RTP equilibrium conditions with an RCS soluble boron
concentration of575ppm. In a manner similar to Example 5.4.6, evaluate the reactivity transient
and soluble boron concentration adjustment requirements for a 2 hour ramp power increase to
100% RTP and the ten hours following the power increase.
Initial RCS soluble boron concentration is 575 ppm. The power increase from
80% RTP to 100% RTP produces a xenon reactivity transient displayed in Appendix
E. The power defect and boron worth data are available in the Core Data Book
(Appendix B).
AppcwerDcfect =
(-1885-[-1515])=
-370 pcm
A Pxenon (during power increase) =

(-2497-[-2606])=
+ 60 pcm
270
APxenon (Time 2->5 following) =
(.2497-[-2546])=
Apxenon
+ 49 pern
(Time 5->12 following) =

(-2581-[-2497])=
- 84 pern
Predict the final RCS soluble boron concentration at 525 ppm and then use
an average boron worth for 550 ppm an 90% RTP for the event which is obtained
by interpolation from the boron worth data.
Boron Worth at 50% RTP and 550 ppm = - 8.80 pcm/ppm
Apset (0->2 hours)=
-370 + 60 = -310 pcm
^PBoron = + 310 pcm = = >36 ppm dilution

ApNet (2->5 hours)=
+ 49 pcm
, = - 49 pcm = = > 5-6 ppm boration
Apbo
A pêt (5-12 hours) =
- 84 pcm
ApBoron = + 84 pcm = = > 9-10 ppm dilution

Question 5.4.13: What is the expected trend in the axial distribution of power density as power is increased
from 80% RTP to 100% RTP?
Since T^,d is constant and the power increase causes an increase in T|,(, the
moderator density reduction in the top of the core causes a shift into the bottom of
the core.
Question 5.4.14: What is the expected trend in the axial distribution of power density if steam demand is
held constant at 100% RTP and a xenon causes a reduction in RCS T^?
271
If Loop AT (Power level) is constant and RCS Tcold decreases, then the
moderator density increases in both the top and bottom of the core. The density
change is larger in the top of the core, due to the shape of water density vs
temperature, and power density shifts into the top of the core.
Question 5.4.15: When steam demand is held constant, a xenon transient induces a change in RCS
Any reactivity insertion will do the same if steam demand is not changed What process
is used to discriminate between a normal temperature change caused by steady state
power operation (fuel depletion) and a temperature change caused by a xenon transient,
inadvertent boration or dilution, or a slipped or dropped rod type event.
The discrimination between normal and abnormal processes is accomplished

by comparing the actual rate and magnitude of temperature change to the predicted
rate and magnitude.
Problem 5.4.4:
The reactor is operating at 100% RTP, under MOC conditions, when an inadvertent boration
increases RCS soluble boron concentration from 600ppm to 615ppm. Assuming that no change
in steam demand occurs, where does the system stabilize?
The effects of an inadvertent boration at constant steam demand is to lower

RCS temperature below the program value. If ITC is negative, then the plant is
stable. If ITC is positive, then the temperature reduction creates additional negative
reactivity and intervention is necessary.
^PB
^ PTemperature
A ppm(Average Boron Worth) + A T(Average ITC) = 0
otod
= -[Appm(Average BW)]/(Average ITC)

Problem 5.4.5:
The reactor is operating at 100% RTP, under MOC conditions, when CEA regulating groups 4
& 5 drop into the core simultaneously with a rapid reduction is steam demand to 60% RTF.
Where does the system stabilize?
Ill
Depends on how the power defect and the rod worth compare. Rods insert
negative reactivity and the power reduction inserts positive reactivity. If the net
reactivity insertion is zero, then the plant stabilizes at 60% RTP with temperatures
'on-program'. If the net reactivity insertion is positive, then the plant stabilizes at
60% RTP with temperatures "off-program" high. The magnitude of the temperature
change depends upon the net reactivity and the value of ITC. If the net reactivity
insertion is negative, then the plant stabilizes at 60% RTP with temperatures "offprogram" low.
Problem 5.4.6:
The reactor is operating at 100% RTP, under MOC conditions, when a single CEA worth 75 pern
drops into the core. Assuming that no change in steam demand occurs, where does the system
stabilize?
The negative reactivity insertion drives RCS temperature down and results in
the plant being 'off-program' low.
^Toffpnjgnn, = -[AP ]/ITC

roj
The asymmetrical nature of control rod placement creates a power density

imbalance between the various regions (quadrants) of the core which is known as a
flux or power density tilt. The region of the core where the rod dropped is at
reduced power density and other regions of the core are at increased power density
when compared to the values prior to the rod drop event.
Question 5.4.16: What change in steam demand is necessary to restore RCS T^ to the normal control
value following the rod drop in Problem 5.4.6?
To restore normal operating temperatures it is necessary to lower steam

demand and consequently total core power. The reduction in power will cause
temperature to increase and ultimately the reactivity inserted by the dropped rod will
273
have been used to compensate for power defect and temperatures will be back "onprogram" for the new lower power level.
The following solutions make use of and reference to Figures 5.5.1 and 5.5.2 in the
main body of the text The student should use these figures along with these
solutions to fully understand the concept
Question 5.5.1;
IfHX #1 and HX #2 are identical components, and HX #2 is initially isolated so that

no flow is passing thru in, what effect does admitting flow thru HX #2 have on the
resistance to flow offered by the system?
Opening the parallel flow path between Vj and Point 2 increases the flow area
and reduces the head loss (this is quantified by the Darcy Equation). The total flow
resistance offered by the system decreases which allows the flow rate to increase.
Question 5.5.2:
Component Vîs a spring loaded check valve. What effect does increasing the spring
load have on the system characteristic curve?
Increased pump head is required to initiate flow through the system. The
system curve maintains the same curvature (Darcy Equation) but the intersection of
the curve at zero flow increases to a larger head value.
Question 5.5.3:
Component Vîs a regulating and control throttle valve. What effect does opening this
valve from 30% open to 50% open have on the system characteristic curve?
The flow diameter increase (flow area increase) at Vj reduces the head loss
(pressure drop) of that component, the flow resistance of the total system is
decreases and the system characteristic curve (Darcy Equation) flattens out.
Question 5.5.4:
If the pumps connected to this fluid flow system are varied to provide increased flow rate,
what will the resultant effect be on the following differential pressures?
274
Increased flow rate produces increased pressure drop (head loss) due to the
Darcy Equation.
Question S.5.S;
1)
Ap(l->4):
increases
2)
Ap(l->3):
increases
3)
Ap(2->3):
increases
Component F is a fluid filter. If the filter starts to clog and no other component is
adjusted, what will the resultant effect be on the following differential pressures?
Clogging the filter increases the flow resistance between points 2 and 3,
increasing the head loss of the entire system, and decreasing the flow rate through
the entire system. The head loss or delta p of other system components is then
driven by the reduced flow rate.
Question 5.5.6;
1)
Ap(l->4):
increases
2)
Ap(l->2):
decreases
3)
Ap(2->3):
increases
4)
Ap(3->4):
decreases
If the pump curve displayed in Figure 5.5.3 is for a centrifugal pump operating at 2500
rpm, sketch a curve for the same pump (no change in impeller efficiency) operating at
5000 rpm.
In accordance with the Pump Affinity Laws, doubling the speed of the pump
results in runout flow doubling and shutoff head increasing by a factor of 4. See
Figure 5.5.3.A below.
275
Question 5.5.7:
If the pump curve displayed in Figure 5.5.3 is for a single centrifugal pump, sketch a
curve for two of the same pumps operating in a parallel pump configuration.
Pumps in parallel add flow at constant head. See Figure 5.5.3.B below. If the
system curve does not change then the system curve intersects the new pump curve
(2 in parallel) at a larger head loss point and a larger flow rate point. The flow rate
through the system increases but does not double. Thus the flow rate through the
single pump which was previously running actually decreases. This phenomena is
observable by noting the change in pump motor amps when the second pump is
started.
Question 5.5.8:
Question 5.5.9:
JfHX #2 is unisolated. then less system resistance exists and total flow rate throueh the
system increases. The system curve flattens out and intersects the nump curve at a new
point of increased flow rate and reduced delta P.
1.
Pump Ap (PrP4): increases, decreases, remains constant.
2.
If pump #2 is started and its discharge valve fully opened, then the two pump curve
intersects the system curve at a new point of increased head loss and flow rate.
1.
2.
HX #3 Ap (P3-P4): increases, decreases, remains

constant.
Question 5.5.10: Filter F begins to clog causing a reduction in system mass flow rate to a lower value,
then the system head bss characteristic increases and the system curve steepens. The new
operatine point is an intersection with increased head loss and reduced flow rate. The filter
has altered the system. Reduced flow rate throueh all system components results in reduced
delta p for those components.
1.
Pump Ap (P1-P4): increases, decreases, remains constant.
2.
HX #3 Ap (P3-P4): increases, decreases, remains constant.
276
Question S.5.11: If regulating valve K, is throttled down from 50% open to 40% open, then the system
becomes more resistive to flow and the system characteristic curve intersects the pump curve
at a point of increased head loss and reduced flow rate. The reduced flow rate throueh the
other system components causes a reduction in their delta p.
1.
System mass flow rate increases, decreases, remains

constant.
2.

constant.
3.

constant.
Question 5.5.12: The steam generators are being supplied by two identical feedwater pumps running at the
same speed with regulating valves on each in the same position. If the steam generator
pressure is suddenly reduced and no pump speed changes or valve position changes
occur, what happens to the flow rate of feedwater into the steam generators? Why?
Steam generator pressure acts as a back pressure to flow into the generators
which is described by the point of intersection of the system curve with the zero flow
axis. Moving the system curve up [down] along that axis causes the system curve to
intersect with the pump curve at a point of increased head and reduced flow rate for
increased S/G pressure and a point of decreased head and increased flow rate for
decreased S/G pressure. Consequently, sudden pressure reductions in the S/G can
have immediate effects on the flow rate of fluid into that generator.
Question 5.5.13: A second feed pump has just been started at 2500 rpm while the first feed pump is
operating at 4800 rpm. Does the second feed pump need to be increased to 4800 rpm
to deliver any flow into the steam generators?
No. When the discharge pressure of the second pump is greater than the
pressure at the previous operating point, the second pump will begin to contribute
to the flow rate. To provide equal flow rate, the pump speeds and discharge
pressures must be matched.
Ill
Question 5.5.14: The feed pumps are operating at constant and equal speed supplying the steam
generators. If regulating valves are slowly throttled down, what must happen to pump
speed if the system mass flow rate is to be maintained constant?
The system Ap of the delivery piping increases, the system curve becomes
steeper, and the flow rate through the system and into the S/G's decreases. Pump
speed must increase to return flow rate to the previous value. The pump speed
increase creates a new pump curve in accordance with the Pump Affinity Laws which
intersects the steeper system curve at a point equal to the previous flow rate.
Question 5.S.1S: High pressure safety injection pumps are constant speed centrifugal pumps which deliver
borated water into the RCS during certain upset conditions. What happens to the flow
rate delivered by these pumps as the RCS pressure is decreased? Why?
See the solution to Question 5.5.12. Flow rate into a system increases as the
back pressure provided by that system decreases.
Problem 5.6.1:
The coolant exiting the core at 3800 Mw(thermal) is at a nominal bulk average temperature of
623 F with a pressure of 2250 psia. Determine the amount of subcooling in F, the amount of
subcooling in psia, and the enthalpy-margin-to-boil in btu/lbm for the coolant.
Conditions: Temp = 623 F

Margin:
P, = 1826 psia
hf = 651.6 btu/lbm
T, = 653 F
Pac, = 2250 psia
hf = 701.4 btu/lbm
Temp = 30 F
Pmar =
hf = 49.8 btu/lbm
^24 psia
Subcooling = 30 F or 424 psia

Enthalpy-margin-to-boil = 49.8 btu/lbm
Problem 5.6.2:
If the average linear heat rate is 5.5 kw/ft at 100% RTF, what is the average linear heat rate at
75% RTF?
278
The average linear heat rate is core power/total feet of fuel pin.
Consequently, the average linear heat rate is directly proportional to power level. At
75% RTP, average linear heat rate = 0,75(5.5 kw/ft) = 4.1 kw/ft.
Problem 5.6.3:
If the average linear heat rate is 5.5 kwfft at 100% RTP, what is the average heat flux (Btulffhour) at the surface of the fliel pin dating at 100% RTP?
The heat flux at the surface of the average fuel pin location is directly related
to the average linear heat rate of the fuel pin by the geometry of the fuel pin.
Assuming that the fuel pin has a diameter of 0.36 inches, then one foot of fuel pin
has a surface area for heat transfer of (pi)DL = 9.42 x 10'^ ft^. One foot of average
fuel pin produces a linear heat rate of 5.5 kw which is 1.88 x 10'* btu/hr. This results
in an average heat flux of 2 x 10^ btu/ft^-hr. This heat flux can then be used in heat
transfer equations to estimate the difference between the temperature of the clad
surface and the bulk coolant at that location.
Question 5.6.1:
If the peak linear heat rate is 2.19 times larger than the global average linear heat rate,
how does the peak fuel pin heat flux compare to the average fuel pin heat flux?
Linear heat rate and heat flux are both thermal conditions which depend upon
how power density is distributed within the core. The relationship between the peak
condition and the average condition for both parameters is the same.
Peak Condition = Average Condition(RPF)(APF) where
RPF = radial peaking factor or the ratio of the peak condition to the
average condition in the radial direction.
APE = axial peaking factor or the ratio of the peak condition to the
average condition in the axial direction.
In this problem, 2.19 is the product of the radial and axial peaking factors.
Applying the information from Problem 5.6.3, if the average linear heat rate is 5.5
279
kw/ft then the peak linear heat rate is 12.4 kw/ft; and if the average heat flux is 2 x
10 btu/ft^-hr, then the peak heat flux is 2.19 times larger which is 4.4 x 10 btu/ft^-hr.
Question 5.6.2:
If the RCS pressure is reduced, what happens to the DNBR margpi? How is this
explained using Figure 5.6.1?
Margin is reduced. The coolant is closer to boiling conditions and the same
clad surface temperature is more likely to contribute to vaporization of the laminar
layer. The correlation used to generate the CHF line on Figure 5.6.1 would generate
lower values for the CHF at each axial position.
Question 5.6.3;
If RCS
increases, what happens to the DNBR margin? How is this explained using
Figure 5.6.1?
Margin is reduced. For the same power level generated within the core, the
bulk fluid is hotter at every location along the fuel pin. The fluid is closer to the
boiling crisis. The CHF curve would be a lower curve. However, the Tcold increase
also creates an axial shift in the actual heat flux curve due to the effects on
moderator density. The complete evaluation of what happens to margin would have
to include both effects.
Question 5.6.4:
If the RCS flowrate decreases, what happens to the DNBR margin? How is this
explained using Figure 5.6.1?
Margin is reduced. For the same power level generated within the core, the
bulk fluid remains in the core a longer period of time and is heated to a higher
tsmpcrsturc, '
T JJQJ
is clossr to ssturstion. Tlic sctuHl hcst flux ciir\'c would shift due
to the effects on density of the moderator. The correlation used to generate Figure
5.6.1 would produce lower CHF values at all axial locations along the fuel pin.
Question 5.6.5:
If a dropped control rod results in an increas? in the radial peaking of power density,
what happens to the DNBR margin? How is this explained using Figure 5.6.1?
280
In the region of the dropped rod, power density is reduced and the margin-toboil is improved. However, DNBR margin considers the worst case location in the
core. The dropped rod has caused a power density tilt and increased peaking in
other core locations which causes the core to have reduced margins. The actual heat
flux curve would have increased values along the entire length of the worst case fuel
pin due to increased radial peaking.
Question 5.6.6:
If core power increases from 100% RTP to 105% RTP, what happens to DNBR mar^?
Margin is reduced. The core is operating at higher power levels and is closer
to the boiling crisis since heat flux has increased as well as the temperature of the
fluid exiting the core. The actual heat flux curve on Figure 5,6.1 would have
increased values.
Question 5.6.7:
If core power is held constant and power density redistributes toward the top of the core,
what happens to the DNBR margin? How is this explained using Figure 5.6.1?
Margin is reduced. The area under the actual heat flux curve would remain
constant but the peak heat flux would move toward the top of the core and the
margin between the CHF line and the AHF line would be reduced.
Question 5.6.8:
Develop a cause and effect scenario to explain why increasing RCS ^cold while
maintaining reactor power constant causes more negative reactivity to be inserted into
the upper portion of the core than the lower portion of the core.
If RCS Tîd is increased while holding power constant, then the value of RCS
Thot increases isothermally with the cold leg temperature since loop AT is constant.
The variations in water density with temperature cause this isothermal temperature
increase to have a larger effect on density at the top of the core than at the bottom
of the core. The larger reduction in density causes neutron density (power density)
to shift toward the bottom of the core.
281
Question 5.6.9:
Develop a cause and effect scenario to explain why increasing reactor power level while
maintaining RCS ^cold constant causes more negative reactivity to be inserted into the
upper portion of the core than the lower portion of the core.
Power defect is the negative reactivity inserted by all of the power dependent
processes as power level is increased and RCS Tcold is maintained constant. All of
the power dependent processes which insert reactivity as power is changing are based
upon temperature changes within either the fuel or the coolant/moderator. The
temperature change at the bottom of the core is small while the temperature change
at the top of the core is large for a given power change. Based upon the shape of
the water density vs. temperature curve, the density reduction in the top of the core
dominates. If a specified power level change has a power defect of -100 pcm, then
more than half of that -100 pcm is inserted in the top half of the core and power
density shifts toward the bottom of the core.
Question 5.6.10; What characteristics of xenon production and removal processes are the key determinant
of the timing of the power density oscillation?
The timing of the power density oscillation is determined by the half life of
Iodine-135 and Xenon-135 in the production and removal schemes of xenon. The
xenon process produces positive feedback to power level changes and creates the
oscillation.
Question 5.7.1:
Assume that RCS loop AT is measured by separate instruments for ^Hot and Tcm and
that each have the ability to measure actual temperature 1 F. What is the
contribution of this measurement uncertainty to the uncertainty of RCS loop Ah?
At 100% RTF, Thoi = 621 F with Cp = 1.55 btu/lbm-"F

Tcoid= 565 F with Cp = 1.325 btu/lbm-F
Using h( for each temperature from the ASME Steam Tables,
Ah = (648.5-568.9) 2.875 btu/lbm
Ah = 79.6 +. 2.875 btu/lbm which is 3.61 % uncertainty
282
Question 5.7.2:
Would it be a sound engineering decision to install an accurate

type flow meter in the
primary system to provide accurate flow rate data? Why, or why not?
No! The AP type flow meter device acts as a restriction (venturi, orifice, or
flow nozzle) and would impede natural circulation flow rate.
Question 5.7.3:
What is the principle of operation of a Venturi flow meter?
The venturi flow meter is a well machined reduction in flow area with
instrument taps provided at the inlet and the reduced area location known as the
throat. Application of the continuity equation and the general energy equation to a
venturi device shows that the area reduction creates a velocity increase in the fluid.
The velocity increase results in an increase in kinetic energy and a decrease in "flow
energy" to conserve total energy of the fluid. The principle variable in flow energy
is fluid static pressure. The pressure difference between the two pressure taps on the
venturi device is directly related to the flow rate of the fluid if the flow areas and
viscosity are known. The key point is that mass flow rate is directly proportional to
the square root of AP, and the AP is created by the fluid flowing through the reduced
area.
Question 5.7.4:
Assume that
would result?
Psteam =
is 1100 psia 50 psia. What is the range of steam enthalpy which
psia 50 psia:
Refer to the ASME Steam Tables and
determine hg for 1050, 1100, and 1150 psia.

hsteam(1100 psia) = 1189.1 btu/lbm +1.9/-2.1 btu/lbm
hg,.,^(1100 psia) = 1189.1 btu/lbm +. 0.17% uncertainty
Conclusion: the uncertainty of hg,. due to pressure measurement uncertainty is
very low.
283
Question 5.7.5:
1.
If core power is maintained at 100% RTF, what processes occur over time which could
cause a change in the power indicated by the ex-core neutron detectors?
Detector burnup due to depletion of the neutron target density. This

process would cause indicated neutron power level to decrease.
2.
Power density redistribution within the core can cause fast neutron
leakage flux to either increase or decrease depending upon the
'direction' of the redistribution.
Since detectors operate on the
principle that leakage flux is proportional to power level, this shift

would cause a shift in indicated power level.
3.
As the core ages, U-238 nuclides are slowly converted to fissile Pu-239
nuclides which in turn contribute to the power production within the
core. Thermal neutron induced fission of Pu-239 produces more
energy per fission than thermal neutron induced fission of U-235.
Consequently, the full power level fast neutron production rate slowly
decreases over the life of the core. This would cause a slow reduction
in the fast neutron leakage flux and indicated power.
Problem S.8.I:
Assume that the reactor is operating at 100% RTF at MOC conditions with 500ppm of soluble
boron. A control rod worth -50 pcm drops into the core. Where does the system stabilize if
steam demand is not reduced?
^PRod
^PTemperature
^ PTemperature
program(^^^^8 ITC)
Since steam demand is constant, power level initially reduces due to the
dropped rod, but returns to the original value of 100% RTP. For a time, reactor
power was less than steam demand and cooling resulted. ITC inserted positive
284
reactivity in response to the cooling which returned the reactor to critical and the
reactor remained off program low.
AT^progn, = -[ApRodl/CAverage ITC) = +50 pcni/(-22.5 pcni/F)
= -2 F
Question 5.8.1:
What factors impact the reactivity worth of a dropped rod? What factors impact the
magnitude of ITC which limits the temperature response to the dropped rod event? Is
the answer to Problem 5.8.1 typical of the temperature change which any dropped rod
event can produce?
The reactivity worth of a single CEA depends upon the mass of neutron
absorber present and the location of that CEA in the core. Even if two rods have
the same absorber mass, their worths can be significantly different due to their
location in the relative flux profile within the core. An example of this variation can
be shown by using data tabulated in the core data book (Appendix B). The total
worth of all full length CEA's is provided in Table 2.15.1 and has a nominal value of
14,000 pcm at NOT. Since there are 76 full length CEA's in the PVNGS design, the
average worth of a full length CEA is 14,000/76 = 184 pcm. However, Table 2.16.1
tabulates the maximum possible worth of a single CEA at approximately 4000 pcm.
ITC depends upon power level, temperature, time-in-life and RCS boron
concentration and is also tabulated. Under HFP conditions the worth ranges from 10 to -35 pcm/F. The wide variation in both dropped rod worth and ITC indicate
that the temperature change caused by such an event is variable and predictable only
if specific data is known. The solution to Problem 5.8.1 is merely an example.
Problem 5.8.2:
Continue with Problem 5.8.1. How much must steam demand be reduced to result in RCS
being returned to the normal control value?
Lower power to insert +50 pcm to compensate for the dropped rod and force
heating to return temperature back to 565 F.
The magnitude of the power
285
coefficient at MOC can be derived from Table 2.1.1 of Appendix B and indicates that
an approximate 3% RTP reduction is appropriate. In reality, the secondary plant
operator would slowly reduce steam demand and observe the increase in RCS Tcold*
Question 5.8.2;
What are the ejfects of the xenon transient which results from the dropped CEA event
if the CEA is left fully inserted?
The local region around the dropped rod is at very low power level.
Consequently, xenon peaks and then dies away due to decay. If the rod is recovered
and the power density is restored to the local region then the power induced burnout
of xenon will create a very rapid positive reactivity insertion. This rapid local positive
Ap could easily cause a power density transient which would fail fuel.
Question 5.8.3:
If a symmetrical subgroup drops into the core, is a tilt created? Is power density
redistributed? Is the core closer to or farther from thermal limits in this case?
The dropped subgroup would create four symmetrical power density

reductions. A severe tilt should not exist. However, a power density redistribution
still occurs and if total core power is not reduced, then in other locations of the core
the power density is increased and the core is closer to thermal limits in all cases
except one. The one case would be if there were 4 symmetric and severe power
density peaks which were located exactly under the locations of the dropped rods.
In this case, the redistribution caused by the dropped subgroup might result in a
reduction of the peak-to-average power density ratio.
Question 5.8.4:
If the tilt can not be corrected by withdrawing the dropped CEA, what other actions can
be taken to reduce the long term effects of the power density redistribution?
Insert the other CEA's in the subgroup to initiate a symmetrical effect which
reduces the tilt and lower power level to reduce the magnitude of the peak power
density caused by the redistribution of power density.
286
Problem S.9.1;
Use data from the core data book under MOC conditions at 100% RTP to evaluate where the
reactor will stabilize following a RPCB event in which steam demand is reduced to 60% RTP and
the RPCB event drops both Regulating Groups 4 &5 into the core. Assume that the RCS is at
a soluble boron concentration of 500 ppm.
Power
^PRods
^ PTemperalure
Appower =
+745 pcm
ApRodj
"645 pcm (best estimate)
A PTemp =
"
(required for balance)
APxemp = AT(Average ITC)

ATRequired = ^ pTemp/(Ave rage ITC) = -95 pcm/(-21 pcm/F)
ATRequimj = ^.5 F: Plsiit stabiUzes at 60% RTP with
RCS T,â = 569.5 "F
Problem 5.9.2:
Devise a strategy to be implemented after a RPCB event which allows the reactor to remain at
60% RTP, T^ to remain at 565 "F, and permits the regulating rods to be withdrawn to the
Group 5 at 110 inch position over a 2 hour period
Reactivity Balance:
APxenon + Apgoron + APrqjJJ
Borate the RCS to allow withdrawing the control rods, but adjust the boration
to account for the accumulation of negative reactivity from the xenon peaking
initiated by the power reduction.
Problem 5.9.3;
Devise a strategy to be implemented after a RPCB event which allows the reactor to be returned
to 100% R.TPf
to rcfnciiH Qt 5^5
GfidpsTTJiits th6 Tsgulotift^ rods to hs wiihdrQWTi to ths
Group 5 at 110 inch position over a 2 hour period
Reactivity Balance:
APpower +Apxenon + Apgofon "t" Ap^^jj
287
Use control rods to compensate for the xenon reactivity transient and power
increase.
Adjust RCS boron as required to assure that the control rods are
withdrawn above the required position limits in the required time.

Question S.IO.I: Consider the case of a reactor system with three channel protection systems. Assume
that a single channel is taken out of service for maintenance and placed in the tripped
condition. While maintenance activities are in progress, a detector or sensor in one of
the two remaining operable systems fails and enters the tripped condition. What would
this single instrument failure do to the reactor status?
When the instrument channel fails and enters the tripped condition, two of the
three channels are in a tripped state and the reactor will trip. Thus, anytime
maintenance activities are in progress on one channel of protective instrumentation,
the continued operation of the facility is at risk. A single channel failure will initiate
a reactor trip.
Question 5.10,2: Consider the case of a reactor system with four channel protection systems. Assume that
a single channel is taken out of service for maintenance and placed in the bypassed (not
tripped) condition. While maintenance activities are in progress, a detector or sensor in
one of the three remaining operable systems fails and enters the tripped condition. What
would this single instrument failure do to the reactor status?
When the instrument channel fails and enters the tripped condition, one out
of three active channels are in a tripped condition and the reactor will not trip.
Maintenance activities are performed on inactive(b)âssed) channels and the
continued operation of the facility is not at risk. Single channel failures will not
initiate a reactor trip. The cost of the fourth channel of protective instrumentation
must be balanced against the cost of unnecessary reactor trips. The cost of a trip is
not only the cost of lost power production but the more intangible costs of cyclic
stress on the system, public opinion and increased regulatory attention.
Problem 5.10.1:
Assume that the reactor was operating at 100% RTP under MOC conditions when a reactor trip
inserted 14,000 pcm of negative reactivity and that p=0.00570. Use the prompt dropljump
equation (Equation 5.7.1) to predict the level to which the nuclear instruments will instantly drop.
288
The prompt drop equation relates initial power and prompt drop power to the
magnitude of an instantaneous reactivity insertion and the value of the delayed
neutron fraction. A reactor trip inserts large amounts of negative reactivity in a very
short time frame and is reasonably modelled as a prompt insertion.
Pd = KW(P-P)] = 100%(570/14,570) = 3.9% RTP
Question 5.10.3: Does heat production within the RCS instantly drop from 100% RTP to 3.9% RTP?
Why, or why not?
No. Decay heat continues to produce energy which must be removed from
the fuel. Decay heat is the term applied to the energy produced by the radioactive
decay of fission product inventory. The mixed fission product inventory decays with
time with a variable effective half life. Consequently, immediately after the trip the
energy production rate (power) is relatively large and decreasing rapidly. After
several hours the power produced by decay processes has decreased to lower levels
and is decreasing more slowly. The magnitude of decay heat production is a
necessary input into the design of post trip heat removal systems.
Question 5.10.4: Assuming that during the reactor trip event that all reactor coolant pumps continue to
operate, what is the expected response of RCS loop AT?
Loop AT must decrease in these circumstances. The convective heat transfer

equation relates heat transfer rate, coolant flow rate, and the temperature rise of the
coolant.
Q = mCp(AT)
Reactor power rapidly decreases due to the effect of the trip on fission rate,
and decay heat becomes the dominant factor in the required heat transfer rate.
289
Using the following typical data from the core data book (Appendix B), it is possible
to estimate the expected loop AT 30 minutes after a reactor trip.
Normal conditions at 100% RTP:
flow rate = 100%
loop AT
= 56 F
Conditions at 30 minutes post trip:

Power level = 2% RTP
flow rate
= 100%
loop AT
= l->2 "F
Question 5.I0.S: How sensitive is the answer from Equation 5.10.1 to the magnitude of reactivity inserted
by the reactor trip event? Suggestion: plot
vs reactivity added by the trip for a range
of reactivity values from -6000 pcm to -15,000 pcm.
The prompt drop power level is tabulated as a function of reactivity inserted

and delayed neutron fraction below:
Reactivity
Prompt Drop Power (%)
(pcm)
- 6000
- 9000
-12000
-15000
-18000
-21000
-28000
xiiC'
= 0.00620
9.4
6.4
4.9
4.0
3.3
2.9
2.2
uL/iiaviui
kjl
= 0.00520
8.0
5.5
4.2
3.4
2.8
2.4
1.8
tiiC piuiiipi u i u p puwci icvci
Uicil
Hi
lUW
values of reactivity inserted the sensitivity is large whereas at large values of reactivity
inserted the sensitivity is much smaller.
Quesiior. S.16.6: Is it sound engineering practice to increase tkc worth of the shutdown (scram) rod
groups from 14,000 pcm to 28,000pcm? Why, or why not?
290
No. The tabulated data provided in the previous solution indicate that a very
small change would result in the prompt drop power level. Post trip decay heat
removal systems must be designed to remove decay heat levels which are in the range
3->6% RTP immediately after the trip. The reactor trip must insert enough negative
reactivity to create a significant prompt drop, shut the reactor down and keep it
shutdown. The cost of doubling the worth of the scram rods in not justified as long
as adequate shutdown margin is established.
Question 5.10.7: Assuming that the reactivity worth of the shutdown (scram) rod groups is constant over
the life of the core at 15,000 pcm, does
depend upon time in life? If yes, how and
why? If no, why not?
Yes. Refer to the tabulated data provided in the solution to Question 5.10.5
and to Equation 5.10.1. Even if the reactivity inserted is constant (pcm) the value of
the prompt drop power decreases with core age due to the reduced magnitude of the
delayed neutron fraction. Recall that the delayed neutron fraction decreases with
core age due to the accumulation of Plutonium-239 fissile material which then
contributes to power production.
Problem 5.10.2;
If the reactor were critical at 100% RTP when a reactivity insertion event inserted +30 pcm as
a step, how long would it take (minimum) for power level to reach 110% which is the reactor
trip setpoint on high power level? If there is a 1 second delay time between when the power
exceeds the setpoint and the scram rods start dropping into the core, what is the peak power
possible?
A prompt jump in power would be followed by a +SUR which would increase

power level until a reactor trip occurs and the control rods are inserted into the core.
Previous discussion has validated that reactor power level begins to decrease very
soon after the control rods begin to drop into the core. Assume that the 1 second
delay time accounts for the total time between when the set point is exceeded and
power actually begins to decrease. The minimum time is determined by assuming
that there are no feedback mechanisms which insert negative reactivity while the
291
power level is increasing from 100% RTP to the trip setpoint of 110% RTP. In this
specific scenario, the rapid increase in power level would result in fuel heating and
doppler feedback as an initial mechanism with coolant heating and moderator
feedback quickly following as heat transfer processes conduct additional heat into the
coolant.
Prompt Jump:
P = 100%[570/(570-30)] = 105.6% RTP
Stable SUR: SUR = 26.06[(0.1)(30)/(570-30)] = 0.14 DPM

Power Increase:
P, = Po(lO)^'
Time to initiate a reactor trip at 100% RTP:

t = [log(P,/PJ]/SUR = [log(110/105.6)]/0.14 = 0.1266 min
t = 7.6 sec
Time to turn power following the rapid insertion of 30 pcm:

t = 7.6 sec to initiate + 1 sec delay = 8.6 seconds
Question 5.10.8 What mechanism(s) would extend the time from the minimum calculated in Problem
5.7.2?
Any negative reactivity insertion which occurs during the 7.6 second power
increase time will decrease +SUR and extend the time required to reach the trip
setpoint of 110% RTP. However, if the doppler mechanism is strong enough, the
fuel heating inserts sufficient negative reactivity to turn power and prevent a reactor
trip.
Question 5.10.9; Is the event described in Problem 5.7.2 more serious at BOC or EOC? Why?
It depends. The prompt jump in power and the stable 4-SUR would both be
larger near EOC conditions due to the smaller magnitude of the delayed neutron
fraction. The trip setpoint would be reached sooner, but the power overshoot during
the scram delay time would be larger due to the +SUR.
292
Ppeak = 110%(10)S"'^
SUE
Ppc^k
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
110.4%
110.8%
111.3%
111.7%
112.1%
However, the feedback mechanisms are more negative near EOC. Thus the
negative reactivity inserted during the event would be more mitigating near EOC.
The conclusion is that any event such as this example must be analyzed at several
times in core life or simplifying assumptions must be made. One example of such a
simplifying assumption is to not take any credit for negative reactivity insertion during
the progress of the event from either doppler or moderator processes. In this case,
the event is clearly more limiting near EOC. One analysis can be performed to
assure that the scram delay time is small enough to prevent the peak power from
exceeding a limit. In the real plant the actual feedback would make the event less
severe than analyzed.
Question 5.10.10:
How would the answer to the previous problem and questions differ if the
initiating event were a step insertion of+200pern?
With a very large positive reactivity insertion, power level would immediately
increase above the trip setpoint due to the prompt jump alone. The peak power
levels would be very high and the safety analysis would need to verify that specified
acceptable fuel design limits are not exceeded.
TJ
T
X lump I jump,
iDPrompt ~~
Arkno/^TCfnuenn orvrwi
/O r\.ir
Problem 5.10.3:
Assume that the reactor trips from 100% RTF, all four reactor coolant pumps continue operating
and the plant stabilizes with RCS
= 565 F and S/G pressure at 1150 psia. What feed flow
rate and steam flow rate are necessary to remove the decay heat and pump work from the RCS
293
to maintain RCS
and also maintain S/G level constant at the timeframe 30 minutes after
the trip? Assume that the feedwater inlet temperature is 100 F and that RCP work is 17 Mw.
The required heat removal rate is decay heat plus pump work. This power
level (heat transfer rate) is removed by converting subcooled feedwater at 100 F into
saturated steam at 1150 psia. The governing heat transfer equation is the convective
heat transfer equation for latent heat processes.
Qsk
iwfeedc^steam " ^feed)
= Decay Heat + RCPpg^^ = 2% RTP + 17 Mw
Q = 93 Mw = 3.17 X 10 btu/hr
mpeed = msteam
= <?Mh = 3.17
10/(1187-68)
(btu/hr)/(btu/lbm)
TO Feed = 2.836 X 10^ Ibm/hr = 627 gpm
Question S.I0.14:
Consider two otherwise identical reactors which both trip at the same time.
Reactor A has been operating at 100% RTP for 20 days, while Reactor B has
been operating at 100% RTP for 200 days. How will the decay heat loads
compare at 1 minute, 1 hour, 1 day, 1 month and 1 year after the trip?
Assume that an equilibrium level of each radioactive fission fragment is

established after operating at a constant power level for a length of time equal to 5
times the half life for that radioactive nuclide. In Reactor A all fission products with
a half life of 4 days or less have equilibrated and all others are still building in. In
Reactor B all fission products with a half life of 40 days or less have equilibrated and
all others are still building in. Both reactors have the same inventory of the short
lived fission products and different inventories of the long lived nuclides.
Consequently the decay heat loads at 1 minute, 1 hour, and 1 day will be nearly
identical but Reactor A will have lower decay heat loads at 1 month and 1 year after
the trip than Reactor B.
294
Problem 5.10.4:
Plot both neutron power and thermal power vs time for the time period t0 to 1 hour for a trip
from 100% RTP at t =0. Use a scale which allows the plotting of the full range of neutron
power.
Key ingredients of the plot:

Prompt Drop:
Fission rate:
100% -> 3% RTP
Thermal Power:
100% -> 9% RTP
Thermal Power = Fission + Decay Heat

Fission rate decay at -1/3 DPM due to long lived delayed neutron precursors.
Fission rate stabilizing in the range 10"^% ->10'^% due to subcritical multiplication
processes. At -1/3 DPM it should take somewhere between 18 and 21 minutes for
power level to stabilize at subcritical multiplication levels.
Decay heat level dropping to about 1% RTP after one hour due to the decay
of the short lived nuclides.
Problem 5.11.1:
Assume that the reactor is tripped from the conditions specified in the previous example and is
stabilized at 565 F. How does the value of the SDM vary over the next 96 hours as the post trip
Xenon transient occurs?
The Xenon transient is quantified in Appendix E. The first 7-9 hours after the
trip result in negative reactivity insertion and SDM improves. Over the following 7580 hours, the decay of Xenon-135 inserts positive reactivity and the magnitude of
available SDM is reduced.
Problem 5.11.2:
Assume that the reactor from Problem 5.11.1 and Example 5.11.1 is now xenon free and is to
be cooled down to 250 F so the system can be depressurized and alternate cooling systems used.
How does the value of the SDM vary as the system is cooled down if the assumption is made that
no soluble boron concentration changes occur?
295
The cool down inserts positive reactivity for a variety of reasons. This
insertion reduces the magnitude of available SDM and could in facta result in
inadequate SDM being available at lower temperatures unless the cool down is
accompanied with boration of the RCS inventory (See Question 5.11.1).
Temperature reduction inserts positive reactivity due to the magnitude of the
rrC which is tabulated in the core data book (Appendix B).
An additional
mechanism which is tabulated but frequently overlooked is the temperature

dependent variations in total inserted CEA worth. The reduction in moderator
temperature reduces the negative reactivity available from the control rods because
of the reduced diffusion lengths of thermal neutrons.
Question 5.11.1: In general, what can be said about the effects of cooldown with out boration on the
value of SDM? What is the largest contributor to the effects?
Cooldown without boration compromises the available SDM. The largest

contributor of positive reactivity is the reduction in control rod worth due to the
temperature reduction.
Problem 5.11.3:
Explain why adequate SDM does not exist after a trip in which a single full length CEA fails to
insert. Use the conditions specified in Example 5.11.1 and the appropriate curve from Section
3jcjc of the core data book (Appendix B).
The reactor trips from 100% RTP with 500 ppm soluble boron and 2740 pcm
(negative) of reactivity from pre-trip xenon present in the core. SDM is assessed by
comparing the boron available to the boron required which is tabulated in Section
Oi liic cuic uaia uuui^ ^r\ppciiuiA
Curve 3.1,9 requires 190 ppm at 565 F, but only applies if all control rods are
fully inserted.
Curve 3.2.9 requires 750 ppm at 565 F, but only applies if all control rods
which are not fully inserted are trippable. This is not the case in this problem.
296
Curve 3.3.9 requires 1120 ppm at 565 F, and does apply since the control rod
which is not fully inserted is not trippable. If actual RCS boron concentration is less
than the concentration required by the applicable 3
jcjc
curve then adequate SDM
may not exist. The reason that may is specified is that the boron requirements
specified on the 3jc.x curves assume that the core is xenon free. In this case, the
RCS boron is 620 ppm less than required but -2740 pcra of xenon is present and
unaccounted. Normal values for soluble boron reactivity worth are in the range of
9~>11 pcm/ppm. Even if the worth of boron were only -5 pcm/ppm, the core is 620
ppm(-5 pcm/ppm) = -3100 pcm shy of having adequate SDM and the reactivity
provided by Xenon does not change the assessment.
Question 5.11.2: Will the Xenon present in the core after the trip provide sufficient reactivity that adequate
SDM does exist (Problem 5.11.3)? Why, or why not?
No. See the solution to Problem 5.11.3. If credit is taken for xenon reactivity
in the SDM assessment, formal rules for how to account for uncertainty in actual
xenon worth are necessary.
Question 5.11.3: What action must be taken to restore adequate SDM for the situation described above?
The reactor system must be borated to increase the soluble boron

concentration to a value which restores SDM or the stuck control rod must be
reinserted into the core. A reactor trip signal releases the control rods so they can
fall into the core. If the rod is actually stuck then the chances of reinserting it are
low and boration must be initiated. Technical specifications identify the minimum
requirements for boration if adequate SDM does not exist in terms of rate of addition
and minimum required boron concentration.
Problem 5.12.1:
Assume that the RCS contains 100,000 gallons, ^coW = 565 F, and that make up capacity with
three charging pumps is 150 gpm of 100 F water. Is it possible to cool the RCS at the rate
allowed by Figure 13.7 and maintain pressurizer level? Why, or why not?
297
No! The contraction caused by the allowed cool down rate from Figure 2.3.7
of 100 F/hr is larger than can be compensated for by the available charging rate of
make up fluid.
This is a good example of how multiple limits and boundary
conditions exist. K the operating staff was not cognisant of this fact, then the
following scenario might occur.
A rapid cool down rate is established which is within the specifications of
Figure 2.3.7 but exceeds the capacity of the available charging. The excessive
contraction of the RCS inventory results in a reduction in pressurizer level. When
PZR level drops close to the position of the heaters, then automatic control systems
de-energize the heaters to prevent them from failing by overheating. Loss of the
heaters removes the only mechanism available to control pressure of the system and
pressure will begin to rapidly decrease. If safety grade systems function properly,
then the pressure reduction will initiate safety injection of borated water to restore
inventory before subcooling is lost and the coolant begins to boil. If either subcooling
or NPSH are lost, then the reactor coolant pumps must be secured and the cool
down will have to be continued on natural circulation. It should be obvious that the
cool down rate must abe controlled within the limits prescribed by all processes such
as thermal stress and make up capacity.
Solution strategy: Assume that a 100 F cool down does occur and determine
the mass which must be added to return the level to the original condition. Compare
that mass requirement to the mass addition capacity.
Data: At 565 F with a specific volume of 0.02224 ft^/lbm, the 100,000 gallon
system contains 6.0108 x 10^ Ibm of water.
At 465 F with a specific volume of 0.01971 ft^/lbm, the 100,000 gallon
system contains 6.7824 x 10^ Ibm of water.
During the cool down from 565 F to 465 F, 7,7159 x lO"* Ibm of water must
be added into the RCS to prevent the PZR level reduction described above.
298
However, the mass addition rate due to 150 gpm of 100 F water is only 7.4643 x lO"*
Ibm/hr. To complicate the issue, the rate of density change for water is much greater
at higher temperature than lower temperature. Establishing 100 F/hr while at 565
F would very quickly shrink the pressurizer and result in the loss of heaters even if
all available charging pumps are running.
Question 5.12.1: Assume that the reactor is tripped, all reactor coolant pumps are secured and that the
following data exists. What action must be taken to initiate a cool down of the RCS?
Current conditions:
Thot= 540 F (increasing)
T^,d= 530 oF (increasing)
Steam Generator pressure = 1200 psia
Steam Generator level = 50 %.
The RCS is heating up because the steam generator is not removing any heat from
the RCS. The saturation temperature for 1200 psia conditions is 567 F which is
much higher than the RCS. To couple the S/G to the RCS and restore heat removal,
it is necessary to lower the pressure of the S/G until the saturation temperature is
lower than the RCS cold leg temperature. The rate of pressure reduction will
dictate the rate of temperature reduction.
299
APPENDIX A
SYSTEMS INFORMATION
The following information is provided to describe systems and parameters
associated with a model NSSS necessary to perform problems and assessments in this
text. The model NSSS selected is the Combustion Engineering System 80 plant
located at Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station. This triple unit station is located
west of Phoenix, Arizona and is operated for the collection of owner/participants by
the Arizona Public Service Company(APS). Permission was granted by the Vice
President of Nuclear Engineering, Jack A. Bailey, for this information to be included
in this thesis. In accordance with Corporate Policy 570A (Corporate patents and
Copyrights), the Company (APS) and each Participant has the royalty-free right to
use this work in their business operations. The author expresses his thanks to APS
for providing him the opportunity to complete graduate school and allowing him to
make use of PVNGS specific systems descriptions, drawings, figures and data within
this thesis.
The PVNGS System 80 power plant is a 3817 Mw(thermal) two loop
pressurized water reactor (PWR) system. Each primary loop consists of a single hot
leg which connects the reactor vessel to a steam generator and two cold legs which
connect each steam generator back to the reactor vessel. Reactor coolant pumps (4
total) are located in the cold legs and provide the design flow rate of
coolant/moderator through the core. The nuclear core consists of 241 square fuel
assemblies which are assembled in a 16X16 fuel pin array with a pitch of
approximately 0.5 inch. The active fuel is low enrichment uranium oxide clad in
Zircaloy-4. Reactivity control is accomplished by using a combination of soluble boric
acid in the coolant/moderator and control element assemblies (control rods) which
contain boron-carbide pellets. The 89 control element assemblies (13 part length and
76 full length) are placed in the core in a symmetric manner and assigned to groups
such that each group is composed of symmetric partners.
Prescribed CEA
300
movements sequences are followed to assure spatially uniform reactivity insertions.
The normal mode of operation is to use the control elements assemblies during
startup and shutdown but to have them fully withdrawn during full power operation.
Control of boric acid concentration and coolant purity is facilitated by using
concentration/dilution processes thru the use of the chemical volume and control
system. The secondary plant consists of a General Electric turbine arranged as a high
pressure turbine and three low pressure tandem turbines which are separated by
moisture separator steam reheaters. The feedwater system takes a suction on the
condenser and delivers feed to the steam generators through three parallel trains of
low-pressure feedwater heaters (4 heaters in series in each train) and two parallel
trains of high-pressure feedwater heaters (3 heaters in series in each train). The lowpressure feedwater heaters are cascaded back into the condenser. The high-pressure
feedwater heaters are cascaded back to a pressurized collection tank and then
pumped into the feedwater pump suctions. The motive force for feedwater flow is
provided by three parallel multistage electric driven condensate pumps and two
parallel steam turbine driven main feedwater pumps.
Tvpical Plant Parameters:
Primary System
Parameter
Unit
Value
Power level (HFP)
Mw(th)
F
3817
Cold Leg temperature (T^^)

Loop AT (HFP)
OF
565
56
Coolant Flow Rate
Ibm/hr
164 X 10'
Pressure (normal)
psia
2250
Pressure (design)
psia
2500
Volume (without PZR)
ft^
12,097
PZR Volume (liquid)
ft^
900
PZR Volume (vapor)
ft^
900
PZR Heater capacity
kw
1800
301
Secondary System
Parameter
Unit
Value
Pressure (HZP)
psia
1170
Pressure (HFP)
psia
1070
Pressure (design)
psia
1285
Flow Rate (HFP)
Ibm/hr
17.18 X 10'
Steam Quality (S/G exit)
99.75
Feedwater Temperature (HFP)
450
in Hg
3.5
Condenser Pressure (HFP)
The following terms and acronyms are used in the text.

ARI
All control rods fully inserted into the core. The reactor is subcritical.
ARO
All control rods fully withdrawn from the core. The reactor may either
be critical or subcritical.
BOC
Beginning of Cycle conditions (Nominal 0 EFPD).
CEA
Control Element Assembly. This is a collection of either 4 or 12

individual rods which are joined as an assembly and moved as a single
entity. Commonly called a control rod.
ECC
Estimated Critical Condition
ECBC
Estimated Critical Boron Concentration
ECRP
Estimated Critical Rod Position
EOC
End of Cycle conditions (Nominal 400 EFPD for the core being
studied).
FTC
Fuel temperature coefficient of reactivity expressed as pcm/^F

temperature rise of the effective fuel temperature. FTC is always
negative.
GPM
Volumetric flow rate in gallons per minute.
302
HFP
Hot Full Power. The system is at full rated power level [3817 Mw(th)].
Unless specified, the system is also at normal rated temperature with
RCS
= 564 F 2 F.
HZP
Hot Zero Power. The system is at rated RCS Tjo^ but is producing no
power from the core.
ICI
In-core instrument for neutron flux and temperature.
rrC
Isothermal temperature coefficient of reactivity expressed as pcm/F of

system temperature increase when power level is zero or held constant.
The value of FTC may either be positive or negative.
ITD
Isothermal temperature defect of reactivity expressed as pcm insertion

when temperature changes form XXX F to YYY F. The value of
ITD is the integral of ITCdT and may either be positive or negative.
LCO
Limiting Condition for Operation which is specified by the station

specific Technical Specifications as one of many plant parameters or
system configurations required for operation. Each LCO has a
specified action to be performed if the surveillance of the condition is
not met.
MTC
Moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity expressed as pcm/F of

moderator temperature increase. The value of MTC may either be
positive or negative.
MOC
Middle of Cycle conditions (Nominal 200 EFPD for the core being
studied).
NOP
Normal operating pressure.
NOT
Normal operating temperature.
NPSH
Net positive suction head.
NSSS
Nuclear Steam Supply System which is the nuclear primary system and
support systems which allow it to safely supply steam to the turbine for
the generation of useful power.
PCM
A reactivity unit equal to (AK/K) x 10'^.
PPM
Parts per million by weight of a solute in a solution. A concentration

of 1 ppm is equal to 1 mg Solute/Kg solution.
PRI
Primary system.
PWR
Pressurized water reactor.
PZR
Pressurizer.
303
RCP
Reactor coolant pump.
RCS
Reactor coolant system.
RTP
Rated thermal power. The thermal power level for which the reactor
system is rated.
SCM
Subcooled margin (T^^j-T).
SDM
Shutdown Margin is a specific reactivity conditions identified as an

LCO and required for operating conditions.
SEC
Secondary system.
Tavg
Average coolant temperature [(T^ , + Tcid)/2].

Q
Tcoid
temperature in the RCS.
Tho(
Hot leg temperature in the RCS.
Tfuel
Effective fuel temperature,
VCT
Volume control tank. A tank into which RCS water is drained

(letdown) and from which water is made up to (charged into) the RCS
for the purposes of providing a surge volume and a chemical
purification path.
The following figures are included in this appendix.
Figure
Title
Page
A.1
Fuel Assembly Design
A.1
A.2
Fuel Assembly/CEA Locations
A.2
A.3
Full Length CEA
A.3
A.4
CEA Bank Location
A.4
A.5
Reactor Vessel Arrangement
A.5
A.6
RCS Isometric
A.6
A.7
RCS Flow Diagram
A.7
A.8
RCS Piping and Connections
A.8
A.9
Letdown and Charging System
A.9
A.10
RCS Elevations
A.10
A.11
Simplified Feedwater System
A.11
304
UPPER END FITTING
aaanaDQDODDQQOSoi
CEA
GUIDE
TUBE
ASSEMBLY
mcosDsciDnoQaaaDr
SPACER GRID
i a
.xx >.aaa/â>^ 1
FUEL ROD
BOTTG/Vl VIEW
DDaoaDaaoDSDaaa
JV?\.
LOWER END FITHNG
Figure A.1
Fuel Assembly Design
Page A.1
305
s
JXL H -=F. I
lu
'H
w r- H
3:
-r
is
f"
1
T
"1"
s ? f
{[
H
i 1
Li
H
l4
i i
"H"
11
t T
1w
1
^ i-
fi 1"f
H
i 4
i i
T T W T T W |f jJ H
I
^ tH
i i
*
s
i-
^ ft*
- JX
: .j_
-r-
s
TiT
', ' t
r-
s
TT^
>
Ztl
' 1
* >
<
s j
12 ELEMENT FULL LfNGTH CEA's

H
H'
if
HJ
i~T
1 F
f- { F14
i
"4
i
i
H T T
H
H
T T
t
-r
1 -i_
r rH t
fj ^
h
s
ft
1
1
s
y T
4_4.
'
3:
-zn-
1 r
1 -
-r H
4 ELfMENT FULL LENGTH CEA's

4 ELEMENT PA RT LENGTH CEA's
TOTAL
>
48
'
28
13
89 CEA's
Figure A.2
Fuel Assembly/CEA Locations
Page A.2
306
GRIPPER
COUPLING
HOLDDOWN
SPRING^
SPIDER
LOCKING NUT
SERIAL No.
& PLANT ID No.l
S]
2M 5/8
REF
PVI
PLUNGER
END FITTING
FULL
LENGTH
CONTROL
ROD
ASSEMBLY
PLENUM
HOLDDOWN SPRING
STAINLESS STEEL
SPACER
B4C PELLETS
135 1/2
B4C
PELLETS
FELTMETAl
12 i n
REDUCED DIAMETER
B.CPELLETS
FELT.
METAL &
REDUCED
DIA B4C
PELLETS
STAINLESS STEEL
SPACER
\/
Figure A.3
Full Length CEA
Page A.3
5
4
3
2
1
B
A
P2
P^
5
- LEAD REGULATING BANK

- SECOND REGULATING BANK
- THIRD REGULATING BANK
- FOURTH REGULATING BANK
- LAST REGULATING BANK
- SHUTDOWN BANK B
-SHUTDOWN BANK A
- PLR GROUP 2
-PLR GROUP 1
- SPACE CEA LOCATIONS
10
11
20
4
32
12
47
48
50
2
63
83
64
79
80
s
97
113
114
83
99
lis
3
116
67
68
84
69
70
86
56
31
42
44
45
46
60
61
43
4
B
58
57
59
Pi
71
72
88
87
30
A
85
131
132
133
148
100
101
117
118
164
55
29
5
4
B3
41
B
54
18
74
73
89
103
103
119
120
134
150
105
131
132
106
107
333
134
135
136
152
137
138
3
153
154
109
135
136
166
A
181
167
183
2
196
197
18B
169
170
4
184
185
171
198
199
312
186
139
140
156
141
142
110
111
112
137
138
157
158
1
3
143
144
187
200
314
2
234
225
173
174
A
188
1B9
175
159
201
202
219
216
160
190
1S1
227
22B
236
237
A
235
218
205
230
238
330
192
193
207
3
145
161
219
320
232
340
241
Figure A.4
CEA Bank Location
Page A.4
232
231
178
163
179
180
s
A
194
309
B
221
233
223
4
234
146
162
195
2
208
139
1
3
206
P2
329
304
B
217
177
Pi
P2
226
203
176
5
B
213
172
Pi
B
311
95
Pz
B
182
94
5
3
155
108
P2
165
78
A
93
92
Pi
A
1S1
104
5
B
149
77
B
91
90
76
75
Pz
98
147
53
28
Pz
40
39
B
52
27
17
P2
96
130
66
B
B1
61
36
25
38
18
15
Pi
68
37
24
Pz
36
35
14
13
1
23
2
34
33
33
21
A
19
210
308
BOLTING
ASSEMBLY
ij
HOLDDOWN
RING
ALIGNMENT
KEY
CEA SHROUD
ASSEMBLY
CORE
SUPPORT
BARREL
UPPER
GUIDE
STRUCTURE
ik OUTLET
ij NOZZLE
INLET
NOZZLE
CORE
SHROUD
150'
ACTIVE
CORE
LENGTH
FUEL
ASSEMBLY
LOWER
SUPPORT
STRUCTURE
/
INSTRUMENTATION
ASSEMBLY
FLOW
BAFFLE
INSTRUMENT TUBE
(NOZZLE)
Figure A.5
Reactor Vessel Arrangement
Page A.5
309
STEAM
GENERATOR
STEAM
GENERATOR
No. 2
PRESSURIZER
PUMP
PUMP
No. 2B
PUMP
No. lA
REACTOR
VESSEL
Figure A.6
RCS Isometric
Page A.6
PUMP
No. 2A
SPRAYLINE
'^rSUEF
hcj
(T) *rri Cht

> !- m
o
^1 ?:
LOOP 2A
LOOP1B
OJ O H'
OQ C/5 OQ
l/fBLil-
0RCP 2A
RCP IB
SURGE LINE
>
CJ ^
H0)
OQ
ti
STEAM
GEN. No.2
STEAM
GEN. No.1
LOOP 1
REACTOR
VESSEL
LOOP 2
CCot-o Le.c-,')
RCP 1A
LOOP1A
RCP 2B
LOOP 2B
*
O
h-
AUXILIARY SPRAY
REACTOR DRAIN TANK ( RDT
VENT
'"Sj
OQ0) o
W OP
fD hd c
> Ti (D
00
>
OQd 00
(U
3
o
o
dd
(t)
ort
HdO
CO
REFUEL
LEVEL
SAMPLE
PRESSURIZER
CIIARGINQ (CVCS)
LOOP IB
RCP IB
LOOP 2A
MAIN STEAMRCP 2A
MAIN STEAM
SURGE LINE
SAMPLE
/ STEAM
-plGEN. No.l
' STEAM
GEN. No.2
VENT
RDT
MFW
MFW
SAMPLE
RDT
REACTOR
VESSEL
LOOP 1
LOOP 2
RDT
HPSI SDC
RDT I SDC MPSl

REFUEL
LEVEL
RDF
LOOPLA
SIS
SDC
RCP 2B
LETDOWN
(CVCS)
SIS
SDC
312
cc
3*
z >
o
V
in
2 _l
<2
5 t:
u o
Figure A.9
Letdown and Charging System
Page A.9
313
STEAM
GENERATOR
BOTH RWLIS NARROW AND WIDE RANGE

INDICATION START AT PLANT ELEVATION 99'7".
BETWEEN ELEVATION 997"& 102' 11" USE
NARROW RANGE CHANNEL RCN-LI-752A.
FOR ELEVATIONS ABOVE 102' 11" USE WIDE
RANGE CHANNEL RCN-LI-752B.
PZR
50%
97200 gallons
20%
WR. 120'7'
10%
2%
WR.
114'
WR.
107'
82300
77000
73400
7321X1
WR.
lo.v I"
WR J: NK
Hnllon) of Hi'ili'p
Elcvnlion 99* 7"
STEAM GENERATORS ARE ASSUMED

TO UE FULL UNTIL LEVEL IS LOWERED
DELOW ELEVATION 103' P .
Figure A.10
RCS E l e v a t i o n s
Page A.10
REACTOR
VESSEL
314
cn u
ai
55
O<
5Z u.S
2 u. <
,-D|X
Zm I -^1
r-o^j
X;
r<î
5Z I
,-d
-^1
IDij
- I
s -^1
m
>-<4l
- ^ l
oil
o^!
OX
oil
rn
2<
0%i
/\
Is
a *
Z a.
i
O
w
oZ i11.
Figure A.11
Simplified Feedwater System
Page A.11
o
O
315
APPENDIX B:
PVNGS CORE DATA BOOK
rPARTIALI
The PVNGS Core Data Book is a unit and fuel cycle specific tabulation and
display of key reactivity parameters. This document is developed by personnel in the
Nuclear Fuels Management Department at Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station
and is intended for use by reactor operations and engineering personnel to predict
the reactivity response of transients. This Appendix represents a portion of the Core
Data Book which was generated for PVNGS Unit 1 Cycle 4 and provides the
reactivity data necessary to complete analyses performed in the body of the text. As
such, the examples and problems are typical representations of the performance of
PVNGS Unit 1.
Permission for use was granted by the Manager of the Nuclear Fuels
Management Department, Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Mail Station 1605,
Arizona Public Service Company, P.O. Box 52034, Phoenix, AZ 85072-2034.
316
CORE DATA BOOK rPARTIAL)
PALO VERDE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
The attached pages provide Middle of Cycle (200 EFPD) and End of Cycle (400
EFPD) reactivity data for PVNGS U1C4 which will be used for calculations during
the conduct of this course. The student should become familiar with the organization
of this data and proficient with its use. Particular attention should be paid to the
units of the various reactivity worth data to determine whether the data is expressed
as a coefficient or a defect.
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
SECTION
DESCRIPTION
PAGES
1.0
Typical Values for Quick Reference
1-4
2.1.0
Power Defect Reactivity vs Power Level
9-11
2.2.0
Isothermal Temperature Defect vs T-Cold
12,15-17
2.3.0
Boron Worth vs T-Cold

0 % Power
50 % Power
100 % Power
19
22-24
28-30
34-36
2.4.0
HFP Equilibrium Xenon Worth vs Bumup
38,39
2.5.0
Equilibrium Xenon Worth vs Power Level
41-43
2.6.0
Transient Sm/Pu Reactivity Change
44-46
2.9.0
Regulating Groups 1-5 Worth vs Withdrawal (HZP)
51,55-60
2.10.0
Regulating Groups 3-5 Worth vs Withdrawal (50%)
61,64,66
2.11.0
Regulating Groups 4-5 Worth vs Withdrawal (100%
68,71,73
317
2.15.1
Total Inserted CEA Worth vs T-Cold
96-98
2.16.1
Worst Stuck CEA Worth vs T-Cold
98,99
2.17.1
Worst Stuck CEA Pair Worth vs T-Cold
100
3.1.0
Minimum RCS Boron vs T-Cold for SDM

3.1.8 ARI 175-199 EFPD
3.1.9 ARI 200-224 EFPD
3.1.16 ARI 375 EFPD-EOC
3.2.8 Any CEA NOT Full In 175-199 EFPD
3.2.9 Any CEA NOT Full In 200-224 EFPD
3.2.16 Any CEA NOT Full In 375 EFPD-EOC
3.3.8 One CEA Untrippable 175-199 EFPD
3.3.9 One CEA Untrippable 200-224 EFPD
3.3.16 One CEA Untrippable 375 EFPD-EOC
114
122
123
130
139
140
147
156
157
164
5.1.0
Critical Boron Concentration vs Bumup
166-170
5.2.0
ARO Isothermal Temperature Coefficient vs T-Cold

0 % Power
50 % Power
100 % Power
171
174-176
180-182
186-188
5.3.0
SDM Boron Worth vs T-Cold
190,193,195
6.1.0
Key Parameters following Loss of Shutdown Cooling

Tabulation
Decay Heat Load
Time to Boil
Makeup Flowrate Required
Time to Core Uncovery
200
201
202
204
205
206
318
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE4
FOR INFORMATION ONLY
PAGEl
MARCH 14,1992
REVISION 001
1.1
TYPTCAT, VAT,TTT;S FOR 0T7TPK
rATTTTOW
Table 1.1 values are presented for quick reference
o n l y . The a p p r o p r i a t e v a l u e s f r o m s e c t i o n 2 o r 5
or from the Operator Assistance Program, should be
used for calculations affecting reactor operation.
1.
R e a c t i v i t v E f f e c t s o f T e m p e r a t u r e and P o w e r
NOTE
These values do not include effects of
xenon change or boron change.

EOC
O v e r a l l power d e f e c t . 0
> 100% power
Isothermal temperature
d e f e c t f r o m HZP - - - >
210?
(BOC 1 5 0 0 ppm. EOC 0 ppm)
Isothermal temperature
defect from 210
>
80F
(BOC 1 5 0 0 ppm. EOC 0 ppm)
- 1 5 0 1 pcm
- 2 4 6 5 pcm
- 5 5 1 pcm
+3306 pcm
- 1 1 8 pcm
+44 0 pcm
ITC a t 100% p o w e r
(BOC 1 0 0 0 ppm, EOC 0 ppm)
- 1 4 pcm/F
- 34 pcm/F
ITC a t 50% p o w e r
- 1 1 pcm/^F
- 29 pcm/F
ITC a t HZP
- 1 pcm/F
/home/sIawson/frame/ulc4cdbtabl.l
-20 pcm/'F
319

CORE DATA BOOK
PAGE 2
MARCH 14,1992
REVISION 001
UNmCyCLE4
TftBLE 1.1
TYPTCfiL VaLTTES TOB OTTTPK- VT.yy.UVVCT.

2.
. S o l u b l e B o r o n Worth
BOC
HFP (BOC 1 0 0 0 ppm, EOC 0 ppm)
- 8 . 0 pcm/ppm
- 9 . 7 pcm/ppm
ppm, EOC 0 ppm)
- 8 . 3 pcm/ppm
- 1 0 . 1 pcm/ppm
HZP (BOC 1 5 0 0
350F (BOC 1 5 0 0 ppm, EOC 0 ppm)
- 1 0 . 5 pcm/ppm
2 1 0 " ? (BOC 1 5 0 0 ppm, EOC 0 ppm)
- 1 1 . 3 pcm/ppm
- 1 5 . 4 pcm/ppm
1 0 0 F (BOC 1 5 0 0 ppm, EOC 0 ppm)
- 1 1 . 8 pcm/ppm
- 1 6 . 3 pcm/ppm
3.'
Xsngn w g r t h
EOC
HFP e q u i l i b r i u m x e n o n w o r t h
50% p o w e r e q u i l i b r i u m x e n o n w o r t h
P e a k x e n o n w o r t h a f t e r t r i p f r o m 100%
Time of xenon peak after "trip
4.
- 1 4 . 0 pcm/ppm
- 2 6 5 1 pcm
EOC
- 2 5 0 0 pcm
a p p r o x 85% HFP Eq Xe W o r t h
a p p r o x d o u b l e HFP Eq Xe W o r t h
approx 8 hours after t r i p
C o n t r o l Rod W o r t h s
EOC
Reg Group' 5 a n d 4 (HFP o v e r l a p w i t h Group 4 )

ARC t o RG 4 a t 90 i n . wd.
446 pcm
- 5 3 3 pcm
Reg G r o u p s 5 a n d 4 (HZP, o v e r l a p )
(ARO t o RG 4 a t 7-5 i n . w d . )
- 4 7 5 ppm
- 5 7 0 pcm
PLCEA Group P . ( H F P , a l l o t h e r r o d s o u t )
(150 t o 7 5 i n c h e s w i t h d r a w n )
- 1 5 6 pcm
- 2 4 7 pcm
PLCEA Group P (HZP, a l l o t h e r r o d s o u t )

(150 t o 7 5 i n c h e s w i t h d r a w n )
- 2 0 0 pcm
- 3 2 7 pcm
320

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 3
MARCH 14,1992
REVISION 001
TflPLE 1.1
TYPTrnL
5.
FOP nxTTCK
Reactivity nnits and êff

bor
fpeff
0.0060755^
1 pern 0.001 %Ap - 0 . 1 6 5 0

1 0 0 0 pcm - 1.000 % A p - 1 6 5 0
6 0 7 . 5 5 pcm - 0.60755 % A p - 1 0 0 0
6.
Startup Rate
P - Po * e^'^
T - Peff
- p
Xp
P = p e f f
(1+XT)
SUR = 2 6 . 0 6
T
SUR S t a r t u p R a t e ( d e c a d e s / m i n . )
X " Effective delayed neutron decayconstant (1/sec)
T - Reactor period (seconds)
SUR f PPM)
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
-0.2
-0.33
Period f sec ^
26
33
43
65
130
130
79
pglD
"
.'168
141
114
81
43
-110
-206
*Ap
(t
0.168 '
27
0.141
0.114
0.081
0.043
-0.110
-0.206
23
19
13
7
-18
-34
X = 0 . 1 / s e c u s e d f o r p o s i t i v e r a t e s ; X. = - . 0 5 / s e c u s e d f o r n e g a t i v e r a t e s
321

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 4
MARCH 14,1992
REVISION 001
TflBt-E 1 1
typtcat. valuestor
7.
vr.tt.vvkrt'.
Boration/Dilution
PPM
G a l l o n s o f RMW t o
Reduce ppm Bv 1 ppm
G a l l o n s o f RW t o
I n c r e a s e ppm Bv l ppm
836
153
76
19
21
24
100
500
1000
8.
otttrk
gggsy Heat
Rate of production of decay heat following shutdown from f u l l power.

Time A f t e r Shutdown
1
1
30
1
8
'24
48
1
4
9.
Cgre Burnvp Pnitis

1 EFPD " 3 8 . 2 1 3 4 6 MWD/T
second
minute
minutes
hour
hours
hours
hours
month
months
% o f F u l l Power
6 ., 7
3 ,, 7
. 3 ,. 0
1 ,. 4
0 .. 8
0 ,. 5
0 ,. 4
0 ,. 2
0 ., 0 8
322

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE B
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
NOTES 2.1.0
POWER DEFECT VS. POWER LEVEL
(BOC, MOC, EOC)
POWER DEFECT (2.1.1)

Includes the reactivity effects of power
dependent changes in RCS and fuel
temperature assuming that the RCS cold
leg temperature is maintained at
565 t 2F .
Includes the effects of MTC, FTC, flux
redistribution, and the temperature
dependent variations in boron worth.
Assumes that all CEA's are fullywithdrawn, thus the temperature
dependent variations in CEA worth are
not included.
PUKT CONDmONS
OTO 100% POWER
0.0. 200.0. AND 400.0 EFPD
COMMENTS; N210R0
REFERENCr: SOURCP OF DATA

NA-PVl -C04-91-0B7-00
323

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 10
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 2.1.1
POWER DEFECT VS. POWER LEVEL
(BOC, MOC, EOC)
POWER
PERCENT
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
55
70
75
80
85
90
95
TOO
PIAN'T cnvnmoNs
OTO 100% POWER
0.0. 200. AND 400 EFPD
COMMENTS: T21IRO
POWER DEFECT (PCM)

MOC
BOC
200 EFPD
0 EFPD
0.0
-85.7
-170.7
-254.0
-334.8
-412.7
-488.5
-563.1
-637.8
-713.2
-789.0
-864.3
-938.5
-1010.9
-1081.9
-1151.9
-1221.6
-1291.2
-1361.0
-1430.8
-1500.6
0.0
-102.7
-204.6
-304.7
-402.4
-496.9
-589.1
-680.0
-770.6
-861.8
-953.7
-1046.3
-1139.5
-1233.4
-1327.5
-1421.6
-1515.3
-1608.3
-1700.8
-1792.9
-1884.8
EOC
400 EFPD
0.0
-133.6
-266.1
-396.6
-524.0
-647.6
-768.1
-886.3
-1003.3
-1119.9
-1236.9
-1355.1
-1475.3
-1597.8
-1722.1
-1847.2
-1972.2
-2096.3
-2219.5
-2342.2
-2464.6
REFERENCE SOURCE OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
324

PAGE 11
FEBRUARY 21, 1992
REVISION 000
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
CURVE 2.1.1
POWER DEFECT KS. POWER LEVEL
(BOC, MOC, EOC)
WORTH
-2500
-2000
-3
O
3 -1500
C3
n
o
r'
-l r'
-1000
ar
i'
1 r'-'
ir'
r'
r'J
.J
i**
-500
I''
,1
tv
n
3:
ya
a.-u!-
r
10
.
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
POWER LEVEL (%)

EFPD
Pl.ftNT CONniTIONS
0 TO 100% POWER
0. 200.0. AND 400.0 EFPD
COMMENTS: C211R0
D D D
M--M-M
200
-EE
4 00
RFFFRFNCF SOURCE OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
325

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 12
FEBRUARY 21. 1993
REVISION GOO
NOTES 2.2.0
ISOTHERMAL TEMPERATUJÊ DEFECT
VS T-COLD
(65 - 570 F. 0% P, BOC.MOC.EOC)
ISOTHERMAL TEMPERATURE DEFECT (2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.2.3)

Includes the reactivity effects caused by
changing RCS T-cold when the RCS loop
Delta-T is small (HZP) and is held constant
(No change in steam demand).
Includes the effects of MTC, FTC, flux
redistribution, and the variations in
boron worth.
Assumes that all CEA's are fully
withdrawn, thus the temperature
not included.
Positive slope as a function of temperature
indicates a positive MTC.
PUNT CONDTTIONS
0 TO 1007. POWER
0.0. 200.0. AND 400.0 EPPD
COMMENTS; N220R0
RErERENCE SOURCE OF DATA
NA-PV1-C04-91-069-00
326

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 15
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION ODD
TABLE 2.2.2
ISOTHERMAL TEMP DEFECT VS T-COLD
(65 - 570 F, 07o P, MOC)
" T-COLD (F)
0 PPM
68
100
135
150
175
200
212
250
275
300
325
350
375
400
425
450
465
475
500
525
550555
560
565
570
3823
3749
3647
3596
3501
3393
3338
3144
3003
2852
2690
2515
2328
2125
1902
1655
1493
1378
1064
703
284
192
98
-0
-101
PLANT CONDLTINMS
0% POWER
200 EFPD
COMMENTS: T222R0
ISOTHERMAL TEMP DEFECT (PCM)

BORON CONCENTRATION (PPM)
500 PPM 1000 PPM 1500 PPM
1843
1808
1773
1756
1727
1693
1675
161 1
1561
1505
1443
1372
1293
1203
1098
975
891
830
654
442
183
124
63
-0
-66
-25
-22
4
21
53
88
105
161
198
232
264
292
315
332
339
333
322
311
267
195
86
59
31
0
-33
-1793
-1753
-1667
-1619
-1529
-1428
-1377
-1206
-1089
-969
-847
-726
-606
-489
-377
-273
-215
-178
-99
-39
-5
-2
-0
0
-1
2000 PPM
-3458
-3386
-3244
-3167
-3022
-2860
-2777
-2498
-2303
-2103
-1897
-1689
-1478
-1266
-1055
-846
-723
-643
-446
-261
-92
-60
-30
-0
29
RTCFFRKNCF SOURCE OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-069-00
327

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 16
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
CURVE 2.2.2
ISOTHERMAL TEMPERATURE DEFECT
VS T-COLD
( 6 5 - 570 F, 07oP, MOC)
PCM
4000
-11
1 ~
1
1
3500
3000
2300
R -B- >--p-
2000
-b-b
1500
trv's.
>r-.
'>SL
f l -
fv.
b- -p..
B-
1000
500
i
1
i
-500
O"" 'D" -p- KV- fVG

L ri
l^r
1
E""
IH'*
>1
'
1
{i-- y-' 'B
fV-'n-n
"s
u. iS
BJ'
e--
-ww -
H-lr
'
ik^
-1000
FrLe--
-1500
-pe-
Fr^ tr'
-e
) "
-2000
41
-2500
-3000
1r''
1
r+r'
LH-
-3500
>r
h'
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
-40O5'
-4500
-5000
40
PPM
90
A A A
piANT roNnmoNs
07. POWER
200.0 EFPD
COMMENTS: C222R0
140
0
190
E--6-E
240 290 340 390

T-COLD (DEGREES* F)
500
0-&-D 1000
440
490
- 1500
540
590
H-H-H 2000
RFFKRENrF ?;nuRrE or DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-069-00
328

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 17
FEBRUARY 21, 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 2.2.3
ISOTHERMAL TEMP DEFECT 75" T-COLD
(65 - 570 F, 0% P, EOC)
T-COLD (F)
68
100
135
150
175
200
212
250
275
300
325
350
375
400
425
450
455
475
500
525
55a
555
550
565
570
PI ANT CON'DITIONS
0% POWER
400 EFPD
COMMENTS: T223R0
0 PPM
3773
3700
3500
3550
3457
3352
3297
3107
2968
2819
2558
2486
2301
2100
1880
1536
1475
1363
1052
595
281
190
97
0
11 r\ r\
ISOTHERMAL TEMP DEFECT (PCM)

500 PPM 1000 PPM 1500 PPM
1429
1410
1398
1393
1384
1372
1365
1336
1310
1279
1240
1193
1138
1070
988
888
816
763
608
415
173
1 18
60
0
-53
-779
-748
-678
-540
-570
-493
-455
-331
-250
-170
-92
-19
47
105
153
187
198
201
191
150
71
49
25
0
-v r->
zo
-2861
-2781
-2531
-2552
-2405
-2245
-2154
-1895
-1713
-1528
-1343
-1159
-977
-801
-531
-472
-382
-325
-199
-95
-24
-15
-5
-0
5
2000 PPM
-4810
-4587
-4464
-4347
-4129
-3889
-3758
-3353
-3085
-2801
-2513
-2223
-1934
-1545
-1352
-1085
-923
-818
-553
-325
-114
-74
-36
0
35
REFERENCE SOURCF OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-069-00
329

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE A
PACE 19
REBRUARY 21. J992
REVISION 000
NOTES 2.3.0
BORON WORTH VS. T-COLD
(0%, 50%. 100% Power)
(550 - 570 F. BOC.MOC.EOC)
BORON WORTH (2.3.1 Through 2.3.9)

Do not use these curves for shutdown
margin calculations. Use for ECC's only!
Displays the worth coefficient (PCM/PPM)

of soluble boron and it's variation with
temperature and boron concentration.
The reactivity effect of changing boron
concentration is computed by:
Delta Rho = ((boron worth at initial PPM
+ boron worth at final PPM)/2 )*Delta PPM
or
Delta Rho = boron worth * Delta PPM

(If Delta PPM is small).
0 TO 100% POWER
0.0. 200.0. AND 400.0 EFPD
COMMENTS: N230RO
REFERENCE SOURCE OP NATA

NA-PVL -C04-91-067-00

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 22
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 2.3.2
BORON WORTH VS T-COLD
(550 - 570 F. 0% P, MOC)
BORON WORTH (PCM/PPM)
T-COLD (F)
0 PPM
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
-9.48
-9.47
-9.45
-9.44
-9.43
-9.42
-9.40
-9.39
-9.38
-9.36
-9.35
-9.34
-9.32
-9.31
-9.30
-9.28
-9.27
-9.25
-9.24
-9.23
-9.21
P1.ANT CONnmONS
or. POWER
200 EFPD
COMMENTS; T232R0
BORON CONCENTRATION
500 PPM 1000 PPM 1500 PPM
-9.26
-9.25
-9.24
-9.23
-9.22
-9.21
-9.20
-9.19
-9.17
-9.16
-9.15
-9.14
-9.12
-9.11
-9.10
-9.08
-9.07
-9.05
-9.04
-9.02
-9.01
-9.02
-9.01
-9.00
-8.99
-8.98
-8.97
-8.96
-8.95
-8.94
-8.93
-8.92
-8.91
-8.89
-8.88
-8.87
-8.85
-8.84
-8.82
-8.81
-8.79
-8.78
-8.77
-8.76
-8.75
-8.74
-8.73
-8.72
-8.71
-8.70
-8.69
-8.68
-8.67
-8.66
-8.65
-8.63
-8.62
-8.61
-8.60
-8.58
-8.57
-8.55
-8.54
2000 PPM
-8.59
-8.58
-8.57
-8.56
-8.55
-8.54
-8.53
-8.52
-8.51
-8.50
-8.49
-8.48
-8.47
-8.45
-8.44
-8.43
-8.41
-8.40
-8.39
-8.37
-8.36
REFFRF:NCK SOURCE OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
331

PACE 23
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
CURVE 2.3.2
(550" - 570 F, 07o P. MOC)
PCM
-9.6
-9.5
-9 . 4
-9.3
-9.2
D
O73
OZ
So
s
H
-9 . 1
-9.0
-8. 9
^ t
-8.8
'?
-8.7
- 8.6
=~I:
-8.5
rr
-8.4
-8.3
550
555
560
T-COLD
PPM
PIANT CONMRIONS
07. POWER
200.0 EFPD
COMMENTS; C232R0
D D 0
500
565
570
(DEGREES' F)
0 p 0 1000
c 1500
r-T- r 2000
REFERRNcr soimrr nr DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 24
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 2.3.3
(550 - 570 F, 0% P, EOC)
T-COLD (F)
550
551
552
553
554
555
555
557
558
559
560
551
552
553
554
555
555
557
558
559
570
PIAN'T COKniTlONS
07. POWER
400 EFPD
COMMENTS: T233R0
0 PPM
-10.35
-10.34
-10.32
-10.31
-10.29
-10.28
-10.25
-10.25
-10.23
-10.22
-10.20
-10.18
-10.17
-10.15
-10.14
-10.12
-10.11
-10.09
-10.07
-10.05
-10.04
BORON CONCENTRATION
500 PPM 1000 PPM 1500 PPM
-10.09
-10.08
-10.05
-10.05
-10.03
-10.02
-10.01
-9.99
-9.98
-9.95
-9.95
-9.94
-9.92
-9.91
-9.89
-9.88
-9.85
-9.85
-9.83
-9.82
-9.80
-9.82
-9.81
-9.79
-9.78
-9.75
-9.75
-9.74
-9.72
-9.71
-9.59
-9.58
-9.57
-9.55
-9.54
-9.52
-9.51
-9.59
-9.58
-9.55
-9.55
-9.53
-9.52
-9.51
-9.50
-9.49
-9.47
-9.45
-9.45
-9.44
-9.43
-9.41
-9.40
-9.39
-9.37
-9.35
-9.34
-9.33
-9.31
-9.30
-9.28
-9.27
-9.25
2000 PPM
-9.29
-9.28
-9.27
-9.25
-9.24
-9.23
-9.22
-9.21
-9.20
-9.18
-9.17
-9.15
-9.14
-9.13
-9.12
-9.10
-9.09
-9.07
-9.06
-9.04
-9.03
REFERENCE SOURCF OF OATA

NA-PVJ-C04-91-067-00

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 28
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 2.3.5
BORON WORTH VS T^COLD
(550 - 570 F, 507o P, MOC)
T-COLD (F)
0 PPM
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
-9.23
-9.22
-9.20
-9.19
-9.17
-9.16
-9.15
-9.13
-9.12
-9.10
-9.09
-9.08
-9.06
-9.05
-9.03
-9.02
-9.00
-8.99
-8.97
-8.96
-8.94
PLANT CONniTinN'?;
50% POWER
200 EFPD
COMMENTS: T235R0
BORON CONCENTRATION
500 PPM 1000 PPM 1500 PPM
-9.02
-9.01
-8.99
-8.98
-8.97
-8.96
-8.94
-8.93
-8.92
-8.90
-8.89
-8.88
-8.86
-8.85
-8.83
-8.82
-8.80
-8.79
-8.77
-8.76
-8.74
-8.79
-8.78
-8.76
-8.75
-8.73
-8.72
-8.71
-8.69
-8.68
-8.66
-8.65
-8.64
-8.62
-8.61
-8.60
-8.58
-8.57
-8.55
-8.54
-8.53
-8.51
-8.54
-8.52
-8.51
-8.49
-8.48
-8.46
-8.45
-8.43
-8.42
-8.40
-8.39
-8.38
-8.37
-8.35
-8.34
-8.33
-8.32
-8.31
-8.30
-8.28
-8.27
2000 PP
-8.31
-8.30
-8.29
-8.28
-8.27
-8.26
-8.25
-8.24
-8.23
-8.22
-8.21
-8.20
-8.19
-8.18
-8.16
-8.15
-8.14
-8.13
-8.11
-8.10
-8.08
REFERENCE SOURCF OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
334

PACE 29
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT I CYCLE 4
CURVE 2.3.5
(550" - 570 F, 50% P. MOC)
550
555
560
T-COLD
PPM
PIANT CONDITION'S
507. pomR
200.0 EFPD
COMMENTS: C235R0
O D D
500
565
570
(DEGREES"F)
P O P 1000
C C C 1500
r- r r 2 0 0 0
RKFTRFNCF SOWRRF: OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-9I-067-00
335

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 30
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 2.3.6
(550 - 570 F, 50% P, EOC)
BORON CONCENTRATION
T-COLD (F)
550
551
552
553
554
555
555
557
558
559
560
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
568
569
570
PUN'T coNnmnK'y;
50% POWER
400 EFPD
COMMEKTS: T236R0
0 PPM
-10.13
-10.12
-10 . 1 0
-10.09
-10.07
-10.06
-10.04
-10.03
-10.01
-10.00
-9.98
-9.96
-9.95
-9.93
-9.92
-9.90
-9.89
-9.87
-9.85
-9.84
-9.82
500 PPM 1000 PPM
-9.88
-9.85
-9.85
-9.83
-9.81
-9.80
-9.78
-9.77
-9.75
-9.73
-9.72
-9.71
-9.59
-9.68
-9.55
-9.55
-9.54
-9.62
-9.51
-9.59
-9.58
-9.58
-9.57
-9.55
-9.54
-9.53
-9.52
-9.50
-9.49
-9.48
-9.46
-9.45
-9.44
-9.42
-9.41
-9.39
-9.38
-9.35
-9.35
-9.33
-9.32
-9.30
1500 PPM
2000 PPM
-9.24
-9.23
-9.22
-9.20
-9.19
-9.18
-9.17
-9.15
-9.14
-9.13
-9.12
-9.11
-9.09
-9.08
-9.07
-9.05
-9.04
-9.03
-9.01
-9.00
-8.98
-8.98
-8.97
-8.96
-8.95
-8.94
-8.93
-8.92
-8.91
-8.90
-8.89
-8.88
-8.87
-8.85
-8.84
-8.83
-8.82
-8.80
-8.79
-8.77
-8.76
-8.74
RKFFRFNCF SOURCE OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 34
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 2.3.8
BORON WORTH 7 5 T-COLD
(550 - 570 F, 1007o P, MOC)
T-COLD (F)
0 PPM
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
550
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
-9.03
-9.01
-9.00
-8.98
-8.97
-8.95
-8.94
-8.92
-8.91
-8.89
-8.88
-8.87
-8.85
-8.84
-8.82
-8.81
-8.80
-8.78
-8.77
-8.75
-8.74
PUNT rnNniTinNf^
100% POWER
200 EFPD
COMMENTS: T238R0
BORON CONCENTRATION
500 PPM 1000 PPM 1500 PPM
-8.82
-8.80
-8.78
-8.77
-8.75
-8.73
-8.72
-8.70
-8.68
-8.67
-8.65
-8.63
-8.62
-8.60
-8.59
-8.57
-8.56
-8.54
-8.53
-8.52
-8.50
-8.54
-8.52
-8.51
-8.49
-8.48
-8.46
-8.45
-8.43
-8.42
-8.40
-8.39
-8.38
-8.36
-8.35
-8.33
-8.32
-8.31
-8.29
-8.28
-8.26
-8.25
-8.25
-8.24
-8.22
-8.21
-8.20
-8.19
-8.17
-8.16
-8.15
-8.13
-8.12
-8.11
-8.09
-8.08
-8.07
-8.06
-8.04
-8.03
-8.02
-8.00
-7.99
2000 PP
-8.02
-8.01
-8.00
-7.99
-7.98
-7.97
-7.95
-7.94
-7.93
-7.92
-7.91
-7.90
-7.89
-7.88
-7.87
-7.85
-7.84
-7.83
-7.82
-7.81
-7.80

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
337

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT I CYCLE 4
PACE 35
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
CURVE 2.3.8
(550 - 570 F, 100% P, MOC)
PCM
DO
70
Oz
o
TS.
'V
o2:
-7.6
555
550
560
T-COLD
PPM
A-
PIANT CON'niTIONS
1005; POWER
200.0 EFPD
COMMENTS: C238R0
500
565
570
(DEGREES*F)
O D D 1000
C C C 1500
r-r r 2000
R E F E R E N C E S O U R C E O F DATA
NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 36
FEBRUARY 21, 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 2.3.9
(550 - 570 F, 100% P, EOC)
T-COLD (F)
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
PUNT CONDITION'S
100% POWER
400 EFPD
COMMENTS; T239R0
PPM
-9.90
-9.88
-9.87
-9.85
-9.83
-9.81
-9.80
-9.78
-9.76
-9.75
-9.73
-9.71
-9.70
-9.68
-9.67
-9.65
-9.63
-9.62
-9.60
-9.59
-9.57
BORON CONCENTRATION
500 P P M 1000 P P M 1500 P P M
-9.62
-9.61
-9.59
-9.58
-9.57
-9.55
-9.54
-9.52
-9.51
-9.50
-9.48
-9.46
-9.45
-9.43
-9.41
-9.40
-9.38
-9.36
-9.34
-9.33
-9.31
-9.28
-9.27
-9.26
-9.25
-9.24
-9.23
-9.22
-9.21
-9.20
-9.18
-9.17
-9.16
-9.14
-9.13
-9.11
-9.10
-9.08
-9.07
-9.05
-9.04
-9.02
-8.91
-8.90
-8.89
-8.89
-8.88
-8.87
-8.86
-8.85
-8.84
-8.83
-8.82
-8.81
-8.79
-8.78
-8.77
-8.75
-8.74
-8.72
-8.71
-8.69
-8.68
2000 PPM
-8.64
-8.63
-8.62
-8.62
-8.61
-8.60
-8.59
-8.58
-8.57
-8.56
-8.55
-8.54
-8.53
-8.51
-8.50
-8.49
-8.47
-8.46
-8.44
-8.43
-8.42

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
339
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 3B
FEBRUARY 21, 1992
REVISION 000
NOTES 2.4.0
HFP EQUILIBRIUM XENON WORTH
VS. BURNUP
EQUILIBRIUM XENON WORTH VS. BURNUP (2.4.1)

Displays the HFP worth vs. core age
assuming that the reactor stays at full
power. The increase in xenon worth is
caused by decreased competition with soluble
boron and by decreased fissile inventory.
The variations in xenon inventory at HFP
caused by the different fission product
yields of the various fuel nuclides
is included.
lOOJ; POViTR Worth

as o function of EFPD
COMMENTS: N240R0
REFERENCr SOURCE OF DATA

NA-PVl-C04 - 91-067- 00

PAGE 39
FEBRUARY 21.1992
REVISION 000
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
TABLE 2.4.1
HFP EQUILIBRIUM XENON WORTH
75. BURNUP
BURNUP
(EFPD)
0.0
1.3
4.0
13.0
25.0
43.5
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
350.0
400.0
PLANT coNniTinN.'?;
ALL RODS OUT
HFP EQUILIBRIUM XENON AND SAMARIUM
COMMENTS; T241R0
EQUILIBRIUM X E N O N
WORTH (PCM)
-2651.2
-2653.4
-2655.6
-2655.2
-2655.8
-2661.4
-2683.6
-2711.8
-2743.9
-2778.6
-2816.2
-2855.9
-2899.8

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE A1
FEBRUARY 21. 1892
REVISION 000
NOTES 2.5.0
EQUILIBRIUM XENON WORTH VS.
POWER LEVEL (BOG, MOG, EGG)
EQUILIBRIUM XENON WORTH VS. POWER (2.5.1)

The xenon worth displayed is
established after approximately 50 hours
of constant power operation. The
variation is not linear because of the
increased significance of xenon burnout
at higher power levels as a xenon
removal process. To determine the
transient effects associated with a
power level change, the operator must
use the XENON PROGRAM on the control
room assistance computer or the xenon
tables which are provided in the
control room.
PIANT CONDITIONS
Xenon Worth
0.0. 200.0, AND 400.0 EFPD
COMMENTS: N250R0
REFERENCK SOURCE OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 42
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 2.5.1
EQUILIBRIUM XENON WORTH VS. POWER LEVEL
(BOC, MOC, EOC)
EQUILIBRIUM XENON WORTH (PCM)
POWER
PERCENT
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
50
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
P1.ANT CON'nmONS
0 TO 100% POWER
0.0. 200. AND 400 EFPD
COMMENTS; T251R0
BOC
0 EFPD
0.0
-391.7
-754.5
-1100.0
-1379.1
-1589.5
-1743.1
-1858.3
-1953.3
-2043.0
-2128.9
-2209.2
-2281.9
-2345.7
-2401.7
-2451.4
-2495.3
-2537.8
-2575.9
-2614.5
-2651.2
MOC
200 EFPD
EOC
400 EFPD
0.0
-437.1
-851.8
-1221.6
-1524.3
-1744.8
-1898.4
-2007.6
-2095.1
-2179.2
-2261.4
-2338.8
-2408.6
-2468.8
-2520.4
-2555.3
-2605.5
-2642.6
-2577.5
-2711.1
-2743.9
0.0
-519.7
-1010.0
-1441.7
-1785.2
-2021.5
-2171.5
-2266.5
-2337.7
-2410.3
-2485.3
-2557.9
-2623.0
-2677.0
-2721.2
-2758.0
-2790.1
-2819.5
-2847.2
-2873.8
-2899.8
REFERKNCF SOURCE OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
343
PACE 43
REBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION ODD
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
CURVE 2.5.1
EQUILIBRIUM XENON WORTH VS. POWER LEVEL
(BOC, MOC, EOC)
WORTH
-3000
-T-1
T' T
.J
i: -e-'l 1 1 f!t-^
' 1 1 f ...-W
li-'Y' .
1
1
-2500
..M'
1
S
/ M /I
E \/
1500
SI
'^
;
/
5^
/M/
/y
I //
-1000
/W 1
1
///I 1
1
1
1
i-n 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i.f
-500
^-8-^"
Kn
>'"r
i'' ' ^
,F
-2000
o
z
,F
1
tr
10
20
EFPD
PI ANT CONDITION'S
OTO 1007. POWER
0, 200.0. AND 400.0 EFPD
COMMENTS: C251R0
30
0 D B
40
50
60
POWER LEVEL (%).
0
M--M-M
200
70
80
90
100
-E-E 400
RRFERFNCP SOURCF OF DATA
NA- PV1-C04-91-067-00
344

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 44
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
NOTES 2.6.0
TRANSIENT SM/PU REACTIVITY CHANGE
FROM 100% TO 0% POWER
TRANSIENT SM/PU REACTIVITY WORTH (2.6.1)

This curve displays the NEGATIVE
reactivity inserted after shutdown from
100% full power steady state operation due
to the production of ADDITIONAL samarium
(caused by the decay of promethium
inventory) which is not fully offset
by the production of ADDITIONAL
Plutonium (caused by the decay of
the neptunium inventory).
FOR OPERATION AT LESS THAN 100% FULL POWER, multiply
2.6.1 by the AVERAGE POWER LEVEL FOR THE 10 DAYS PRIOR
TO SHUTDOWN. For example, at 200 EFPD, 150 hours after
shutdown from a 10 day average power level of 80%,
the Sm/Pu worth is 0.80*(99) = 79.2 pcm.
PIANT CONDITIONS
Transient SM/PU
Worth
COMMENTS: N260R0

NA-PVL -C04-91-067-00
345
CORE DATA BOOK

UKIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 45
FEBRUARY 21, 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 2.6.1
TRANSIENT SAMARIUM, PLUTONIUM REACTIVITY CHANGE
FROM 100% TO 0% POWER
TIME
IN HOURS
0
5
10
15
25
50
75
100
125
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
PUNT CQNPITIONS
ALL RODS OUT
NO XENON
or. POWER
COMMENTS: T261R0
CYCLE BURNUP EFPD

6.5
200
400
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-5
-10
-14
-22
-38
-50
-58
-64
-69
-74
-77
-78
-79
-80
-80
-80
0
-7
-14
-20
-32
-55
-72
-84
-93
-99
-107
-111
-113
-114
-114
-115
-115
0
-10
-20
-29
-46
-79
-102
-120
-132
-141
-152
-158
-161
-162
-163
-164
-164
REFERKNCF: SOURCR OF DATA

NA-ALL-NCR-69-014-00
346
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAOE 51
MARCH 14. 1993
REVISION 001
NOTES 2.9.0
REG. GROUPS 1-5 WORTH (OVERLAP)
VS. WITHDRAWAL (HZP)
(BOG, MOC, and EOC)
REG. GROUPS 1-5 OVERLAP WORTH (HZP)
(2.9.1 Through 2.9.3)
These curves display the reactivity effects
associated with CEA movement in accordance
with prescribed overlap sequence.
Assumes that the core is at the HZP ESI
for that time in life, xenon free, and
at a calculated boron concentration with
the Group 4 rods at 75 inches and Group 5 at
0 inches of withdrawal.
The calculated reactivity change with rod
motion then is determined at this constant
boron concentration. The total worth
for these rod groups generally increases with
core age because of shifts in radial distribution
of power production (Flux), depletion
o f f i s s i l e inveiiLt-ory, a n d d i l u t i o n o f
soluble boron. The rod worths are calculated

w;ith the PLCEA's at the UEL position.
The HZP PDIL fs 60 Inches of withdrawal

on REG. Group 3
PL^^T CPNPmPNS
Hot Zero POWER
0.0, 200.0. AND 400.0 EFPD
C0MME.NTS: N290B1

NA- PVI-C04-91 -067-00
347

PAGE 56
FEBRUARY 21.1992
REVISION 000
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
TABLE 2.9.2(PACE 2 OF 2 )
REG GROUPS 1 - 5 WORTH (OVERLAP) VS WITHDRAWAL
(HZP, MOO)
CEA POSITION (INCHES OF WITHDRAWAL)
REG. CEA WORTH
GROUP 5 GROUP 4 GROUP 3 GROUP 2 GROUP 1
(PCM)
15
30
45
50
75
90
105
120
135
150
PUNT CNNNTTINN.'!:;
OR. POWER
200 EFPD
COMMENTS: T292R0
105
120
135
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
-471.0
-400.2
-315.5
-258.8
-245.9
-222.0
-182.3
-121.8
-47.5
0.0
REFERENCE SOTJRRP OF HATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
348

PACE 57
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT I CYCLE 4
CURVE 2.9.2
REG GROUPS 1 - 5 WORTH (OVERLAP) 7 5 WITHDRAWAL
(HZP, MOC)
-4000.0
-JSOOX
1
1
I
JU
Nit
'
s
-V
^-looo^r
"TO
o
IS;
x=
V
1
GROUP 3
GROUP 1
no
tsft
GROUP 2
GROUP 5
V
19D
GROUP 4
ISO
CEA POSITION (INCHES "WITHDRAWN)

PLANT
CONDITIONS
HOTZERO POWER
200.0 EFPD
COMMENTS: C292R0
R E F B R K N C B fJOnnCE
OF
DATA
NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
349

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 58'
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 2.9.3(PAGE 1 OF 2 )
REG GROUPS 1 - 5 WORTH (OVERLAP) ^5 WITHDRAWAL
(HZP, EOC)
REG. CEA WORTH
(PCM)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
PLANT rONniTIONS
07. POWER
400 EFPD
COMMENTS: T293R0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
30
45
50
75
90
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
150
150
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
30
45
50
75
90
105
120
135
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
1I cn
0
15
30
45
50
75
90
105
120
135
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
-3224.4
-3224.4
-3222.3
-3218.1
-3204.4
-3157.5
-3083.4
-2929.1
-2704.3
-2419.3
-2140.0
-2112.2
-2047.2
-1924.9
-1735.2
-1494.2
-1307.1
-1284.8
-1231.1
-1129.9
-958.3
-755.1
-577.7
-559.7
-550.7
REFERENCF SOURCR OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
350

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 59
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 2.9.3(PAGE 2 OF 2 )
(HZP, EOC)
REG. CEA WORTH
(PCM)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
Pi-ANTT rnNnmoN'?;
07. POWER
400 EFPD
COMMENTS; T293R0
105
120
135
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
-509.8
-437.9
-336.3
-262.7
-255.7
-240.8
-208.0
-147.5
-62.3
0.0

NA-PVL-C04-91-067-00
351

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT I CYCLE 4
PAGE 60
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
CURVE 2.9.3
(HZP, EOC)
4000.C
s.
s.
?d- 2500X1
o
2000^
s.
s
>
s,
i
1
1
1
1
H"-IMUXf
\
S
-lUUUOJ
1
1
1
>.
"0
o -500.0
1
i
oi
GROUP 1
GROUP 3
GROUP 2
GROUP 5
19D ft
GROUP 4
Oft
CEA POSITION (INCHES WHDRAWN)

PLANT CONDITTONS
HOTZERO POWER
400.0 EFPD
COMMENTS: C293R0
REFERENCE SOt^RfE OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
352

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 61
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
NOTES 2.10.0
REG. GROUPS 5/4/3 WORTH (OVERLAP)
VS. WITHDRAWAL (50%)
(BOC, MOC, and EOC)
REG. GROUPS 5/4/3 OVERLAP WORTH (50%)
(2.10.1 Through 2.10.3)
The worths displayed are based upon the
assumption that ASI = ESI for the specified
EFPD and power level. ASI variations will
result in different actual reactivity
effects due to CEA motion. The total worth
for these rod groups increases with core age
because of shifts in radial distribution
of hssile inventory, and dilution of
with'the PLCEA's at the UEL position.
The 50% PDIL is 111.75 inches of withdrawal

on REG. Group 4 with COLSS in service
PUN-T c o N n m o N s
507. Power
0.0, 200.0. AND 400.0 EFPD
COMMENTS: N2100RO

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 64
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 2.10.2
REG GROUPS 5 / 4 / 3 WORTH (OVERLAP) VS WITHDRAWAL
(50% P, MOC)
GROUP 5
GROUP 4
GROUP 3
0
n
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
PLANT roNnmnN's
50% POWER
200 EFPD
COMMENTS: T2102R0
0
0
0
15
30
45
60
75
90
.105
120
135
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
50
75
90
105
120
135
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
REG. CEA WORTH

(PCM)
-1164.0
-1074.9
-985.8
-874.7
-748.5
-623.4
-521.3
-488.2
-452.2
-397.2
-327.2
-256.1
-202.1
-174.1
-143.1
-108.0
-68.0
-26.0
0.0
REFFRFNCF SOURCE OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 66
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 2.10.3
REG GROUPS 5 / 4 / 3 WORTH (OVERLAP) FS" WITHDRAWAL
(50% P, EOC)
GROUP 5
GROUP 4
GROUP 3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
PLANT CONDITIONS
507. POWER
400 EFPD
COMMENTS; T2103RO
0
0
0
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
REG. CEA WORTH

(PCM)
-1281.2
-1190.1
-1095.0
-973.9
-834.7
-689.5
-563.3
-531.3
-493.3
-436.2
-363.2
-284.1
-223.1
-198.1
-167.1
-131.1
-86.0
-35.0
0.0
REFFRFNCF 5:;NNRCF OF DATA
NA-PVL -C04-91-067-00
355

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT I CYCLE 4
PACE 68
FEBRUARY 21. J 992
REVISION 000
NOTES 2.11.0
REG. GROUPS 5/4 WORTH (OVERLAP)
VS. WITHDRAWAL (100%)
(BOG, MOC, and EOC)
REG. GROUPS 5/4 OVERLAP WORTH (100%)
(2.11.1 Through 2.11.3)
The worths displayed are based upon the
assumption that ASI = ESI for the specified
EFPD and power level. ASI variations will
result in different actual reactivity
effects due to CEA motion. The total worth
for these rod groups increases with core age
because of shifts in radial distribution
of fissile inventory, and dilution of
with the PLCEA's at the UEL position.
The 100% PDIL is 108 inches of withrirawa!

on REG. Group 5
PUNT C O N n i T I O N S
100% Power
0.0, 200.0, AND 400.0 EFPD
COMMENTS: N2110R0
R E F E R E N C E S O U R C E OF DATA
NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
356

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 71
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 2.11.2
REG GROUPS 5 / 4 WORTH (OVERLAP) VS WITHDRAWAL
(HFP, MOO)
GROUP 5
GROUP 4
0
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
PUN'T rON'niTIONS
100% POWER
200 EFPD
COMMENTS: TSLLSRO
90
105
120
135
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
REG. CEA WORTH

(PCM)
-488.3
-427.2
-351.2
-275.1
-218.1
-187.1
-152.1
-114.0
-71.0
-27.0
0.0
REFFRFNCK SOURCR OF OATA
NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
357

PAGE 73
FEBRUARY 21.1992
REVISION 000
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
TABLE 2.11.3
REG GROUPS 5 / 4 WORTH (OVERLAP) VS WITHDRAWAL
(HFP, EOC)
GROUP 5
GROUP 4
0
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
Pt-ANT rOKniTION.S
100% POWER
400 EFPD
COMMENTS; T2113R0
90
105
120
135
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
REG. CEA WORTH

(PCM)
-533.3
-469.3
-390.2
-306.1
-241.1
-212.1
-177.1
-136.1
-87.0
-34.0
0.0
RFFRRKNTF SOTLRCF OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
358

PACE 96
FEBRUARY 21.1992
REVISION 000
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
TABLE 2.15.1
TOTAL INSERTED CEA WORTH
(65 - 565 F, 0% P)
T-COLD (F)
0 PPM
68
100
135
150
175
200
212
250
275
300
325
350
375
400
425
450
475
500
525
55i3
555
-10500
-10540
-10520
-10550
-10720
-10800
-10840
-10980
-11090
-11200
-11330
-11470
-11520
-11780
-11960
-12170
-12390
-12650
-12950
-13300
-13540
TOTAL WORTH (PCM)

500 PPM 1000 PPM 1500 PPM
-10550
-10590
-10560
-10700
-10770
-10850
-10890
-11030
-11130
-11250
-11370
-11510
-11660
-11820
-12000
-12200
-12430
-12690
-12980
-13330
-13570
PLANT CONDITIONS
07.
POWER
MINIMUM WORTH FOR CYCLE (000 EFPD)
PLCEA'S NOT INCLUDED IN TOTAL WORTH
COMMENTS: T2151R0
T-COLD
-10580
-10630
-10700
-10730
-10800
-10880
-10920
-11050
-11160
-11280
-11400
-11540
-11690
-11850
-12030
-12230
-12460
-12710
-13010
-13350
-13590
-10510
-10650
-10720
-10760
-10820
-10900
-10940
-11080
-11180
-11300
-11420
-11560
-11710
-11870
-12050
-12250
-12480
-12730
-13030
-13370
-13610
2000 PPM
-10510
-10660
-10730
-10760
-10830
-10910
-10950
-11090
-11190
-11310
-11430
-11570
-11710
-11880
-12050
-12250
-12480
-12740
-13030
-13380
-13620
RFFERFNFF SOURCF. OF DATA

NA-PVL-C04-91-069-00
359

PACE 97
FEBRUARY 21. J 992
REVISION 000
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
CURVE 2.15.1
TOTAL INSERTED CEA WORTH
VS T-COLD
(65 - 565 F, 0% P)
PCM
-15000
-14000
ao
a
:e
o
}
/
7'
-13000
tz
-12000
-11000
30
-10000
65
PPM
* A
puNTcoNnmoNs
1'
115
165
6-E-E
0% POWER
MINIMUM WORTH F O R C Y C i X (OOO E F P D )
COMMENTS: C2151R0
'' ' 1
215
265
T-COLD
500
315
365
415
(DEGREES F)
1000
465
E-TE 1500
'1
515
565
2000
sntrerr
RFFFRFNCF:
OF DATA
NA-PV1-C04 -91-069- 00

PAGE 98
FEBRUARY 21,1992
REVISION 000
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
TABLE 2.16.1
WORST STUCK CEA WORTH
T-COLD
(65 - 565 F, 07oP)
WORST STUCK CEA WORTH (PCM)
T-COLD (F)
58
100
135
150
175
200
212
250
275
300
325
350
375
400
425
450
475
500
525
55,0
55'5
0 PPM
5 0 0 PPM
1 0 0 0 PPM
1 5 0 0 PPM
2 0 0 0 PPM
-4230
-4220
-4200
-4190
-4180
-4160
-4150
-4120
-4090
-4050
-4030
-4000
-3950
-3930
-3880
-3830
-3780
-3720
-3650
-3570
-3510
-4260
-4250
-4220
-4210
-4200
-4170
-4160
-4120
-4090
-4060
-4030
-3990
-3950
-3910
-3860
-3810
-3750
-3690
-3610
-3530
-3470
-4280
-4260
-4240
-4230
-4210
-4180
-4170
-4120
-4090
-4060
-4020
-3980
-3940
-3890
-3840
-3780
-3720
-3650
-3580
-3490
-3430
-4290
-4280
-4250
-4240
-4210
-4180
-4170
-4120
-4080
-4040
-4000
-3960
-3910
-3850
-3810
-3750
-3690
-3610
-3540
-3440
-3380
-4300
-4280
-4250
-4240
-4210
-4180
-4160
-4110
-4070
-4030
-3980
-3930
-3880
-3830
-3770
-3710
-3650
-3570
-3490
-3400
-3330
PUNT CON'OITIONfl
0% POWER
MAXIMUM WORTH FOR CYCLE (000 EFPD)
COMMENTS: T2161R0
RKFFRKNCF SOURCF OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-069-00
361

CORE DATA BOOK
UKIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 100
FEBRUARY 21, 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 2.17.1
WORST STUCK CEA PAIR WORTH
(65 - 565 F, 0% P)
T-COLD
WORST STUCK CEA PAIR WORTH (PCM)

T-COLD (F)
68
100
135
150
175
200
212
250
275
300
325
350
375
400
425
450
475
500
525
550
5 is
0 PPM
5 0 0 PPM
1 0 0 0 PPM
1 5 0 0 PPM
2 0 0 0 PPM
-6980
-6980
-6990
-6990
-6990
-6990
-7000
-7000
-7010
-7010
-7020
-7030
-7030
-7040
-7050
-7060
-7070
-7080
-7090
-7110
-7120
-7030
-7030
-7030
-7040
-7040
-7040
-7040
-7040
-7050
-7050
-7050
-7050
-7060
-7060
-7060
-7070
-7070
-7080
-7090
-7100
-7100
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7080
-7080
-7080
-7100
-7100
-7100
-7090
-7090
-7090
-7090
-7090
-7090
-7080
-7080
-7080
-7080
-7070
-7070
-7070
-7060
-7060
-7060
-7050
-7050
-7110
-7110
-7110
-71 10
-7100
-7100
-7100
-7100
-7090
-7090
-7080
-7080
-7070
-7070
-7060
-7050
-7050
-7040
-7030
-7020
-7020
PIANT CON'niTIONS
0% POWER
MAXIMUM WORTH FOR CYCLE (000 EFPD)

COMMENTS: T2171R0
REFERENCE SOURCF OF NATA

NA-PV3-C04-91-069-00
362

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 114
FEBRUARY 21, 1992
REVISION 000
NOTES 3.1.0
MIN. RCS BORON CONC. VS. T-COLD
(ALL RODS IN)
(60- 565 F. 0% P)
MIN. RCS BORON CONCENTRATION VS. T-COLD

(3.1.1 Through 3.1.16)
Reflects the minimum boron concentration
required to assure 1% delta K/K SDM if the
reactor is xenon free and has all
rods fully inserted.
PUNT rnNniTinN.t;
OT. P O W E R
All Rods Inserted

COMMENTS: N310RO
REFTREKCK SOURCE OF DATA

NA-PVL-C04-91-069-00
363

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 182
FEBRUARY 21, 1992
REVISION 000
CURVE 3.1.8
MINIMUM RCS BORON CONCENTRATION VS. T-COLD
ALL RODS IN
17S.0 TO 133.99$ EFPD
(60' - S6S' F, OZ P)
1% DELTA K/K SDM

750
700
1.
650
600
0n
z
n
550
acc:eptable
una cceptable
1 500
^ 50
I 00
3 50
3 00 1
v
250 "
200
1'
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
'
550
600
T-COLD (DECREES F)
PiASTrnNDiTinNS
07. POWER
COMMENT: C3IXR0
RFFFRF>JCF SODRCF OF DATA

ANALYSIS P ACKAGE
NA-PVl-CO^-91-059-00
364

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT I CYCLE 4
PAGE 123
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
CURVE 2.1.9
MINIMUM HCS BORON CONCENTRATION VS. T-COLD
ALL RODS IN
200.0 TO 22^.39S EFPD
(CO' - 565' F, 07, P)
1% DELTA K/K SDM

700
650
J-
ACC
JU
j:
J:
\.
550 1
500
rj
n
U N A C C E P T AB L E
4S0
S 4 00
i
]
1
350 1
1
300
];
J
i
j
200
j
250
1.
1 5 0 -TT 50
iOO
X50
200
250
"
300
350
400
450
500
'
550
600
T-COLO (DEGREES F)
pi.fATrn\:n^-;nN-s
07. POWER
COMHENT; 021XRO
REFPRENCE SODRrE OF DATA
ANALYSIS PACKAGE
NA-PVI -C04-91 -069-00
365
PAGE 130
SEPTEMBER 21. 1992
REVISION 0D4
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT I CYCLE 4
CURVE 3.1.16
MINIMUU RCS BORON CONCENTRATION KS. T-COLD
ALL RODS IN
375.0 EFPD TO END OF THE LICENSED BURUNVP WINDOW
(60' - 565* F. 07. P)
1% DELTA K/K SDM
or
ACC:EPTABLE
UNA CCEPTA
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
T-COLD (DEGREES F)
P1J>.NT CONDITIONS
0% POWER
COMMENT: C3IXR4
REFKRKKCK SOURCF: OF DATA

ANALYSIS PACKAGE
NA-PV1-C04-91 -069-00

CORE DATA, BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 131
FEBRUARY A I. 1992
REVISION OOO
NOTES 3.2.0
NO UNTRIPPABLE RODS (ANY CEA NOT FULLY INSERTED)
(60- 565 F. 0% P)
(3.2.1 Through 3.2.16)
Tempprature Dependent Shutdown Margin
Both curves meet the temperature dependent shutdown margin

requirement of Figure 3.1 lA of the Technical Specifications
with all full length CEA's trippable, over the entire temperature
range.
The upper curve (A) provides the minimum boron concentration
required to ensure meeting the K,.,Specification (for T, <_ 500* F)
with all full length CEA's fully withdrawn.
The lower curve (S) provides the minimum boron concentration
required to ensure meeting the K,.,Specification (for T. C. 50C* F)
with a single full length CEA fully withdrawn.
A boron concentration at or above the 'S' curve is acceptable for
withdrawing a single CEA at a time with no untrippable CEA's.
A boron concentration at or above the 'A' curve is acceptable for
withdrawing any or all CEA's simultaneously with no untrippable CEA's.
All data conservatively assunnes that the core is xenon free.
PUVT CONDITIONS
OZ POVr-ER
No U'nLrippftblc CEA's
COI.CMENTS: N320RO

NA-PV1-C04-91-069-00

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 139
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
CURVE 3.2.8
MINIMUM RCS BORON CONCENTRATION
NO UNTRIPPABLE RODS
i's. T-COLD
175.0 TO I S3.939 EFPD

(60' - ses' F, 0% P)
(FOR WITHDRAWAL I
OF. AMY.OB ALL CEA'.S
;S1MULTAKE0U5LY)
-ACCEPTABLE
(FOR WrrHDRAWAL
OF ANY SINGLE CEA)
UNACCEPT>^BLE" \
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
T-COLD (DECREES F)-
A = ANY OR ALL CEA'S WTTHDRA^FN SIMULTANEOUSLY

S = ANY SINGLE CEA WITHDRAWN INDIVIDUALLY
pian-t con'nmon:?;
or. POWER
COMMENT: C32XR0
or
RRFERRVRR SOURCF
HATA
ANALYSIS PACKAGE
NA-PV1-CO<1-9|-069-00
368

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 140
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
5.2.5
NO UNTRIPPABLE RODS
200.0 TO 224.393 EFPD '
(SO' - SCS* F. or. P)
ACCfcP-l AtJLfc
(FOR WITHDRAWAL !
DF.AMY.OR Jai.CEA'.S
StMULTAHEOUSLY)
1200
'
"i
1175
1150
;'A A
1125
1100
1075
o
o
=
o
n
1050
1025
1000
z.
97 5
950
925
900
ACCBSTABLE
(FOR wn"HORAWAL
OF ANY S NGL CE^ 0
: .
875
850
825
800
775
750
725
UNACCEPTABLE
;\
j;
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
4 50
500
550
600
T-COLO (DECREES F) .
pi^sTrnN-niTinN?;
or. POWER
COMMENT: C32XR0
A = ANY OR ALL CEA-S WITHDRA WN SIMULTANEOUSLY

RFFFRFNCF: souRcr or DATA
ANALYSIS PACKAGE
NA-PV1-C04-91-069-00
369

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 147
SEPTEMBER 21, 1992
REVISION 004
CURVE 3.2.16
NO UNTRIPPABLE RODS
375.0 EFPD TO END OF THE LICENSED BURUNUP WINDOW
(BC - 565' F. 07. P)
ACCtFIAbLfc
825
: (FOR WITHDRAWAL
OF ANY OR AU..CA'S
SIMULTANEOUSLY)
800
775
:
; -w
A-Af ^ft'
A A ^ ^ A
750
725
700
675
o
0zn
n
6;5
50 1
625 1
600
1 575 ^
ACCE PTABUE
550 \
(FOR w rTHDRAWAi;
OF AN YSINGL CA)
i
?
525-5'
i 500 J
1
475 1
4 50
425
400
375
UNACCEPTABLE
350
325
50
100
150
200
250.
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
T-COLO (DEGREES F)
Pi-AN'T rnN'niTiONS
0% POWER
COMMENT: C3aXR4
A = ANY OR ALL CEA'S WITHDRAWN SIMULTANEOUSLY

S = ANYSINCLE CEA WITHDRAWN INDIVIDUALLY
RKrRREN'CF: SOURCE OF PATA
ANALYSIS PACKAGE
NA-PV1-C04-9I-069-00

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 148
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
NOTES 3.3.0
ONE KNOWN UNTRIPPABLE ROD
(60 - 565 F, 0% P).
(3.3.1 Through 3.3.16)
Temperature Dependent Shutdown Margin
Both curves meet the temperature dependent shutdown margin
requirement of Figure 3.1-lA of the Technical Specifications
with one known immovable/untrippable full length CEA, over
the entire temperature range.
K,
The upper curve (A) provides the minimum boron concentration
required to ensure meeting the K.j Specification (for T^ <_ 500* F)
with all full length CEA's fully withdrawn.
The lower curve (S) provides the minimum boron concentration
required lo ensure meeting the K., Specification (for T,
500* F)
with one untrippable CEA and all other CEA's fully inserted
A boron concentration at or above the 'S' curve is acceptable for
a single untrippable CEA with all other CEA's fully inserted.
A boron concentration at or above the 'A' curve is acceptable for
withdrawing any or all CEA's simultaneously with one full length
CEA kn.o^n to be immovable/untrippable.
All data conservatively assumes that the core is xenon free.
PUNT CONOmONS
07. POVfER
A Single Known Untrippable CEA
COMMENTS: N330RO
REFTPrNCr SOURCE OP DATA

NA-PV1-COA-91-069-00
371

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 156
MARCH 14, 1992
REVISION GDI
CURVE 3.3.8
ONE KNOM UNTRIPPABLE ROD
17S.0 TO 199.339 EFPD
{BO' - SSS' F, OZ P)
\CCBP
1300
(FOR WITHDRAWAL :
0 ANY OR ALLCEA*$
SIMULTANEGUSUT)
1275
1250
a
o
S)
o
z
8
z
n
1225
z
-4
ACCE PTABLE
>
FOR ASJN CLE KNOV m

MOVABIE/*
UWTRIPPABLE CEA
-3
5 1200
-BTJ
s
1175
1150
UNA CCEPT^^BLE
1'
1125
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
T-COLD (DECREES F)

PIANT CONDITIONS
07. POWER
COMMENT: C33XR1
RFFERRNcr sniiRrr nr DATA

ANALYSIS PACKAGE
NA-PV1-C04-91-069-00
372

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 157
MARCH 14. 1992
REVISION 001
CURVE 3.3.9
ZOO.O TO ZZ4.999 EFPD
(60' - SSS' F. 07. P)
1250
lAbLir
(FOR WITW DRAWAL
0 = AW OR ALLCEA'Q
SiMULTAHEOUSUQ
1225
1200
ao
o
117 5
o
o
2
o
c*3
5
>
1150
ACCEmBLE
(FOR A SINGLE KNO>
O2
?
IMMOVABLE/
UKTRIPPABLE CEA
1125
1100
107 5
UNA SCEPTiABLE
3.050-1
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
T-COLO (DECREES F)

PLANT CONDITIONS
05! POWER
COMMENT: C33XRI
RFFFRFNTF: YNIIRCF nr DATA

ANALYSIS PACKAGE
NA-PV1-C04-91-069-00
373
PAGE 164
SEPTEMBER 21, 1992
REVISION 004
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
CURVE 3.3.16
MINIMUMRCS BORON CONCENTRATION fS. T-COLD
37S.D EFPD TO END OF THE LICENSED BURUNUP MNDOLF
(60' - SB5' F, 07. P)
AUUtt^lABLfc
(FOR w n HORAWAL
OF ANY OF t ALL CEA S
SIMULTANE0U5LY)
li
|:
k-A
j;
J:
i;
ji
r
Ah
1:
1)
.PTABL
NGL KNO
^MOVABLEf
PABLECE/0
1
/
/
i
1:
1'
1.
UNACCEPT ABLE
650 V
SO
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
T-COLD (DECREES F)
PIANT rn\'nmn\'?
0% PO\SXR
COMMENT; C33XR4

S = ANY SINCLE CEA WITHDRAWN INDIVIDUALLY
RFFFRFK'CP SOURCE OF DATA
ANALYSIS PACKAGE
NA-PVl -C04-91 -069-00

CORE DATA BOOK
UKIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 166
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
NOTES 5.1.0
CRITICAL BORON CONCENTRATION
VS. BURNUP
CRITICAL BORON CONCENTRATION VS. BURNUP (5.1.1 and 5.1.2)

Reflects the projected variation in the critical boron
concentration with core age assuming an ARC condition.
Assumes that the core starts out at peak Samarium and
reaches equilibrium Samarium conditions in 25 EFPD.
Actual boron concentration will differ from this projection
if the core is not at the assumed conditions. The small
irregularity in the first few days is due to the combination
of peak Samarium burning out in the old assemblies,
equilibrium Samarium building in within the fresh assemblies
and the initial rapid depletion of burnable poison in the
fresh assemblies. Beyond the first 25 EFPD, the variation
in CBC is driven by the slow changes in fissile nuclide
inventory, burnable poison depletion, and the slow changes
in Xenon and Samarium worth.
PIAKT CONDITIONS
Crilical Boron Concenlralion
HFP end HZP
COMMEKTS: N510R0
REFERFNCr: SOURCE OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
375

PAGE 167
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION COO
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
TABLE 5.1.1
HFP CRITICAL BORON CONCENTRATION
75-. BURNUP
BURNUP
(EFPD)
CRITICAL BORON
CONCENTRATION (PPM)
0.0
1.3
4.0
13.0
25.0
43.5
75.0
100.0
125.0
150.0
175.0
200.0
225.0
250.0
270.2
275.0
300.0
325.0
350.0
375.0
395.0
1052.5
1061.5
1062.3
1028.2
994.8
949.9
857.4
798.1
728.0
658.5
590.0
522.7
456.1
390.0
337.2
324.4
259.1
194.0
128.2
51.8
10.7
PlANT rnNnmnN'=:
ALL RODS OUT
HFP EQUILIBRIUM XENON
EQUILIBRIUM SAMARIUM AFTER 25 EFPD
COMMENTS; T511R0
RRFERFNRF: ?ÔIJRRR OF DATA

NA-PVL-C04-91-067-00
376

PACE 168
FEBRUARY 21,1992
REVISION 000
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLEI
CURVE 5.1.1
HFP CRITICAL BORON CONC. K5 BURNUP
BORON
1200
1100
1000
900
1
1
1
1
1
[\
800
XV
\
1
1
s,
700
ca
o
aj
o
z
M
600
li.
500
S
\
ss
1S
400
300
1
s
200
1
1
1
1
100
50
100
150
200
BURNUP
PIAKT CONDlTinK'S
ALL RODS OUT
HFP EQUIUBRIUM XENON
EQUIUBRIUH SAMARIUM AFTER 25 EFPD
COI.:;.!EKTS. C5L IRO
11
1
1
250
S\
\
\
300
350
400
450
(EFPD) ...
NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
377

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 169
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 5.1.2
HZP CRITICAL BORON CONCENTRATION
VS. BURNUP
BURNUP
(EFPD)
0.0
1.3
4.0
13.0
43.5
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
350.0
400.0
PLANTT CONnmONS
ALL RODS OUT
HZP XENON FREE
EQUILIBRIUM SAMARIUM AFTER 25 EFPD
COMMENTS: T512R0
CRITICAL BORON
CONCENTRATION (PPM)
1550.3
1556.4
1557.3
1524.4
1449.3
1304.1
1170.9
1040.8
913.7
787.9
562.1
532.5

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
378

PAGE 170
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE *
CURVE 5.1.2
HZP CRITICAL BORON CONC. 75" BURNUP
HZPBlO
1700
1600
1500
1400
1300
1200
1100
1000
cs
o
ao
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
50
100
150
200
BURNUP
PIANT CONDlTlnK'S
ALL RODS OUT
HZP. XENON FREE
HFP EQUIUBRIUM SAMARIUM AFTER 25 EFPD
COMMENTS: C512R0
250 _
300
350
400
450
(EFPD)-..
REFTRENCK SOURCE OF DATA
NA-PVI-C04-91-057-00
379

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 171
FEBRUARY 21. 1892
REVISION 000
NOTES 5.2.0
ISOTHERMAL TEMPERATURR COEFFICIENT
VS T-COLD
(65 - 565 F. 0% P. BOC.MOC.EOC)
(550 - 570 F. 50% and 100% P. BOC.MOC.EOC)
ISOTHERMAL TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENT VS. T-COLD
(5.2.1 Through 5.2.9)
Displays the worth coefficient ( PCM/ F ).
Includes the differential reactivity effects
caused by changing RCS T-avg when the core
power level is held constant.
Includes the effects of MTC, FTC. flux
redistribution, and the variations in
boron worth.
Assumes that all CEA's are fully
withdrawn, thus the temperature
not included.
Section 2.2 is the integrated reactivity
worth as a function of temperature based
upon the data in these curves
P1.NT CONDITIONS
OTO lOOr. POWER
0 . 0 . 2 0 0 . 0 , AND 4 0 0 . 0 E F P D
COMMENTS: N520R0
R E F E R E N C E SOURCF: O F DATA
NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
NA-PV1-C04-91-069-00
380

PACE 174
FEBRUARY 21.1992
REVISION 000
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
TABLE 5.2.2
ISOTHERMAL TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENT
(65 - 565 F, 0% P, MOC)
!
T-COLD ( F )
65
90
115
140
155
190
215
240
255
290
315
340
365
390
415
440
455
490
515
540
565
PLANT CNHFNMNN?^
OJ; POWER
200 EFPD
COMMENTS; T522R0
0 PPM
-1.99
-2.41
-2.88
-3.37
-3.86
-4.34
-4.80
-5.25
-5.58
-5.10
-6.54
-7.01
-7.55
-8.20
-8.99
-9.97
-11.19
-12.73
-14.53
-16.99
-19.87
(PCM/DEGREE F)
5 0 0 PPM 1 0 0 0 PPM
-1.23
-1.05
-1.01
-1.07
-1.19
-1.35
-1.55
-1.78
-2.01
-2.25
-2.53
-2.84
-3.21
-3.55
-4.24
-4.98
-5.93
-7.13
-8.65
-10.55
-12.93
-0.46
0.23
0.73
1.07
1.29
1.42
1.47
1.48
1.44
1.37
1.27
1.11
0.91
0.62
0.24
-0.27
-0.96
-1.85
-3.01
-4.48
-5.34
1 5 0 0 PPM
0.32
1.50
2.42
3.12
3.56
4.06
4.36
4.57
4.72
4.81
4.85
4.85
4.79
4.67
4.46
4.16
3.72
3.12
2.31
1.26
-0.10
2 0 0 0 PPM
0.97
2.63
3.96
5.03
5.89
6.56
7.08
7.49
7.81
8.05
8.23
8.36
8.44
8.47
8.44
8.33
8.13
7.82
7.35
6.71
5.85
REFKRRNCK SOURCE OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-Q69-00
381

PAGE 175
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
CURVE 5.2.2
75 T-C6LD
(65 - 565 F, 0% P. MOC)
PCM
11
9
7
J.
"it
" T
^-t-4
nr
T^
1
-1
?.
ji-Ijh'li.l
p)
pj
? f
9-^-1 1
'fc
E
On
o
a
B-0tn
-3
N,
kN
"V
-5
"f
T
\
-7
-9
>
-11
-13
R
L
\
>
-15
\
\
-17
-19
-21
65
115
165
215
265
315
365
415
465
515
565
T-COLD (DEGREES F.)

PPM
A A A
PIANT CONniTIONS
OS POWER
200.0 EFPD
COMMENTS: C522R0
--e-e
500
0-B-D 1000
-eE 1500
!= 2000
REFTRFNCE SOllRCr OF DATA

NA-PVl-004-91-069-00
382

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 176
FEBRUARY 21.1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 5.2.3
(65 - 565 F, 0%P, EOC)
T-COLD (F)
65
90
115
140
165
190
215
240
265
290
315
340
365
390
415
440
465
490
515
540
565
PUNT CONDITIONS
OR. POWER
400 EFPD
COMMENTS: T523R0
0 PPM
-1.97
-2.36
-2.81
-3.29
-3.78
-4.26
-4.72
-5.16
-5.60
-6.02
-6.46
-6.93
-7.47
-8.10
-8.88
-9.85
-^11.06
-12.57
-14.46
-16.80
-19.66
(PCM/DEGREE F)
500 PPM 1000 PPM 1500 PPM
-0.85
-0.51
-0.35
-0.31
-0.36
-0.48
^0.64
-0.84
-1.05
-1.30
-1.57
-1.89
-2.27,
-2.74
-3.34,
-4.101
-5.08,
-6.32'
-7.90
-9.87
-12.31
0.21
1.21
1.95
2.48
2.85
3.09
3.22
3.28
3.27
3.20
3.08
2.89
2.64
2.31
1.86
1.27
0.50
-0.49
-1.76
-3.35
-5.34
1.24
2.90
4.19
5.19
5.94
6.49
6.88
7.15
7.32
7.40
7.42
7.36
7.24
7.04
6.75
6.33
5.77
5.01
4.02
2.73
1.10
2000 PPM
2.11
4.40
6.23
7.68
8.82
9.68
10.34
10.82
11.16
11.39
11.53
11.59
11.58
11.50
11.33
11.06
10.67
10.13
9.39
8.42
7.16
RRFERKNCF SOURRF OF DATA
NA-PVL-004-91-069-00
383

PAC; 180
FEBRUARY 21.1992
REVISIOI 000
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
TABLE 5.2.5
(550" - 570 F, 50% P, MOC)
T-COLD(F)
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
551
552
563
564
555
566
567
568
569
570
P1.ANT COWNTTIONS
507. POWER
200 EFPD
COMMENTS: T525R0
OPPM
-23.77
-23.96
-24.15
-24.34
-24.54
-24.73
-24.94
-25.15
-25.36
-25.58
-25.81
-26.05
-26.29
-26.55
-26.81
-27.08
-27.36
-27.65
-27.94
-28.24
-28.55
(PCM/DEGREE F)
500 PPM 1000 PPM 1500 PPM
-16.27
-15.41
-15.56
-16.70
-15.85
-17.01
-17.16
-17.33
-17.50
-17.68
-17.87
-18.07
-18.28
-18.50
-18.72
-18.96
-19.20
-19.45
-19.70
-19.96
-20.22
-9.12
-9.22
-9.33
-9.44
-9.55
-9.66
-9.78
-9.91
-10.04
-10.19
-10.34
-10.50
-10.68
-10.86
-11.05
-11.25
-11.45
-11.56
-11.87
-12.08
-12.30
-2.16
-2.23
-2.29
-2.36
-2.44
-2.51
-2.60
-2.69
-2.79
-2.89
-3.01
-3.14
-3.28
-3.42
-3.58
-3.74
-3.90
-4.07
-4.24
-4.42
-4.59
2000 PPM
4.73
4.59
4.64
4.60
4.55
4.50
4.44
4.38
4.31
4.23
4.14
4.04
3.94
3.82
3.70
3.58
3.45
3.33
3.20
3.07
2.95
RFIFERENCE SOURCE OF DATA
NA-PVL-C04-91-067-00
384

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 161
FEBRUARY ai. 1982
REVISION 000
CURVE 5.2.5
VS T-COLD
(550" - 570 F, 50% P, MOC)
-0
oPI
S)o
m
pj
-29
550
555
560
565
570
T-COLD (DEGREES E)
AA
PPM
PIANT cnNniTinN';
607. POWER
200.0 EFPD
COMMENTS: C525R0
D D D
500
P -P P 1 0 0 0
C C C 1500
rT- r 2 0 0 0
REFTRFNRT: fioimct: or PATA

NA-PVI -C04-91 -067-00
385

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 182
FEBRUARY 21.1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 5.2.6
(550 - 570 F, 507o P, EOC)
(PCM/DEGREE F)
T-COLD (F)
550
551
552
553
554
555
555
557
558
559
560
561
552
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
PI &KT rOKniTlONS
50% POWER
400 EFPD
COMMENTS: T526R0
0 PPM
-25.63
-25.83
-26.03
-26.23
-26.44
-26.65
-26.87
-27.09
-27.32
-27.57
-27.82
-28.09
-28.36
-28.65
-28.95
-29.25
-29.58
-29.91
-30.25
-30.60
-30.95
5 0 0 PPM 1 0 0 0 PPM
-17.65
-17.80
-17.95
-18.11
-18.27
-18.44
-18.51
-18.79
-18.98
-19.18
-19.39
-19.61
-19.85
-20.10
-20.35
-20.53
-20.90
-21.19
-21.48
-21.78
-22.09
-10.01
-10.13
-10.25
-10.37
-10.49
-10.52
-10.75
-10.90
-11.05
-11.22
-11.40
-11.59
-11.79
-12.00
-12.22
-12.45
-12.69
-12.94
-13.19
-13.44
-13.70
1 5 0 0 PPM
-2.53
-2.51
-2.70
-2.79
-2.88
-2.97
-3.08
-3.19
-3.31
-3.44
-3.58
-3.73
-3.90
-4.08
-4.26
-4.45
-4.55
-4.85
-5.05
-5.27
-5.48
2 0 0 0 PPM
4.81
4.75
4.70
4.54
4.57
4.50
4.43
4.35
4.25
4.15
4.05
3.93
3.80
3.55
3.51
3.35
3.20
3.04
2.89
2.73
2.57
RKFF.RF.NCF. SOURRF. OF N&TA

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
386

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 186
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 5.2.8
(550 - 570 F, 100% P, MOC)
T-COLD (F)
0 PPM
550
551
552
553
554
555
555
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
-28.14
-28.38
-28.62
-28.87
-29.11
-29.35
-29.59
-29.84
-30.08
-30.32
-30.55
-30.80
-31.04
-31.28
-31.52
-31.75
-32.00
-32.23
-32.47
-32.71
-32.94
PUVNT CONDITINN'^
1007. POWER
200 EFPD
COMMENTS: T528R0
(PCM/DEGREE F)
500 PPM 1000 PPM 1500 PPM
-20.12
-20.31
-20.50
-20.69
-20.87
-21.06
-21.25
-21.44
-21.63
-21.81
-22.00
-22.19
-22.37
-22.55
-22.74
-22.93
-23.11
-23.30
-23.48
-23.65
-23.84
-12.49
-12.64
-12.79
-12.94
-13.09
-13.23
-13.38
-13.53
-13.68
-13.82
-13.97
-14.12
-14.26
-14.41
-14.55
-14.69
-14.84
-14.98
-15.12
-15.26
-15.40
-5.10
-5.21
-5.32
-5.43
-5.54
-5.65
-5.76
-5.87
-5.98
-6.09
-6.20
-6.31
-5.42
-6.53
-6.64
-6.75
-6.87
-5.98
-7.09
-7.20
-7.31
2000 PPM
2.16
2.08
2.00
1.93
1.85
1.77
1.69
1.61
1.53
1.45
1.37
1.29
1.21
1.12
1.04
0.96
0.87
0.79
0.70
0.61
0.52
RKFRRFNCK SOURCE OF DATA
NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
387

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 187
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
CURVE 5 . 2 . 8
VS T-COLD
( 5 5 0 - 5 7 0 F, 1007oP,M0C)
H
S0
X.
n
m
0
73n
ro
3
PCM
6
4
f F
2
0
-2
-4
f^ 1^ il: 1^-6
-8
-10
-12 p^
-14
-16
-18
^ff
t ^
-0
bfr
ill
l}) -4 D
20
550
PPM A A A
PiANT rnNDiTinns
looz pores
200.0 EFPD
COMMENTS; CS28R0
555
O D D
560
570
565
T-COLD (DEGREES ET)

SCO
D D a 1 0 0 0 e-E-e
1500
f-f
f 2000

NA-PV1-C04-91-057-00
388

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 188
FEBRUARY 21, 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 5 . 2 . 9
(550 - 570 F, 100% P, EOC)
T-COLD (F)
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
PP M
-30.58
-30.83
-31.09
-31.34
-31.59
-31.85
-32.10
-32.35
-32.60
-32.85
-33.10
-33.35
-33.60
-33.84
-34.09
-34.33
-34.57
-34.81
-35.05
-35.28
-35.51
500
(PCM/DEGREE F)
1000 P P M 1500
PPM
-22.13
-22.34
-22.55
-22.76
-22.96
-23.17
-23.38
-23.58
-23.78
-23.98
-24.18
-24.38
-24.57
-24.76
-24.95
-25.14
-25.32
-25.50
-25.68
-25.86
-26.03
-14.12
-14.29
-14.47
-14.64
-14.81
-14.98
-15.15
-15.31
-15.48
-15.64
-15.80
-15.96
-16.11
-16.26
-16.41
-16.56
-16.70
-16.85
-16.99
-17.12
-17.26
PPM
-6.26
-6.40
-6.53
-6.66
-6.80
-6.93
-7.06
-7.20
-7.33
-7.45
-7.58
-7.70
-7.83
-7.95
-8.07
-8.19
-8.30
-8.42
-8.53
-8.65
-8.76
2000 PPM
1.49
1.39
1.29
1.19
1.09
0.99
0.89
0.79
0.69
0.59
0.49
0.39
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.01
-0.09
-0.18
-0.28
-0.37
-0.47
PUfJT C0NnmnN;
10055 POWER
400 EFPD
COMMENTS; T529R0
RRFRRFNCR SOURCE OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-067-00
389

PACE iso
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
NOTES 5.3.0
SDM BORON WORTH VS, T-COLD
(65 - 565 F. 0% P, BOC.MOC.EOC)
These boron worths should not be used for
ECC's. Use for Shutdown Margin only!
BORON WORTH (5.3.1 Through 5.3.3)
Displays the worth coefficient (PCM/PPM)
of soluble boron and it's variation with
temperature and boron concentration.
The reactivity effect of changing boron
concentration is computed by:
Delta Rho = ({boron worth at initial PPM

+ boron worth at final PPM)/2 )*Delta PPM
or
Delta Rho = boron worth * Delta PPM

(If Delta PPM is small).
PUNT cnNnmnN^
HOT ZERO POWER
0.0, 200,0. AND 400.0 EFPD
COMMENTS: N530R0
REFERENCK SOURCE.OlilDATA
NA-PV1-C04-9I-069-00
390

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 193
FEBRUARY 81. 1992
REVISION 000
TABLE 5 . 3 . 2
SDM BORON WORTH VS T-COLD
(65 - 5 6 5 F, 0% P. MOC)
S D M B O R O N WORTH
(PCM/PPM)
T-COLD (F)
68
100
135
150
175
200
212
250
275
300
325
350
375
400
425
450
475
500
525
550
565
PLANT CONNITINN-';;
07. POWER
200 EFPD
COMMENTS: T532R0
0 PPM
500 PPM
1000 PPM
1500 PPM
2000 PPM
-14.30
-14.19
-14.02
-13.94
-13.78
-13.61
-13.52
-13.23
-13.02
-12.80
-12.57
-12.34
-12.09
-11.83
-11.56
- 11.28
-10.99
-10.68
-10.35
-10.00
-9.77
-13.85
-13.75
-13.58
-13.50
-13.35
-13.19
-13.10
-12.82
-12.62
-12.42
-12.20
-11.97
-11.74
-11.49
-11.23
-10.97
-10.69
-10.39
-10.08
-9.74
-9.53
-13.40
-13.30
-13.14
-13.07
-12.92
-12.77
-12.69
-12.42
-12.23
-12.03
-11.82
-11.61
-11.38
-11.15
-10.91
-10.65
-10.39
-10.11
-9.81
-9.49
-9.29
-12.94
-12.85
-12.70
-12.63
-12.49
-12.34
-12.27
-12.01
-11.83
-11.65
-11.45
-11.24
-11.03
-10.81
-10.58
-10.34
-10.09
-9.82
-9.54
-9.24
-9.04
-12.49
-12.40
-12.26
-12.19
-12.06
-11.92
-11.85
-11.61
-11.44
-11.26
-11.08
-10.88
-10.68
-10.47
-10.25
-10.03
-9.79
-9.54
-9.27
-8.99
-8.80

NA-PV1-C04-91-069-00
391

CORE DATA BOOK
UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 195
FEBRUARY 21. 1993
REVISION 000
TABLE 5 . 3 . 3
SDM BORON WORTH VS T-COLD
(65 - 5 6 5 F. 07o P, EOC)
S D M B O R O N WORTH
(PCM/PPM)
T-COLD (F)
68
ICQ
135
150
175
200
212
250
275
300
325
350
375
400
425
450
475
500
525
550
565
pt.ANT rnNniTinNS
or. POWER
400 EFPD
COMMENTS: T533R0
0 PPM
500 PPM
1000 PPM
1500 PPM
2000 PPM
-16.41
-16.27
-16.05
-15.94
-15.75
-15.53
-15.42
-15.05
-14.80
-14.53
-14.26
-13.97
-13.68
-13.38
-13.07
-12.74
-12.41
-12.07
-11.71
-11.33
-11.08
-15.83
-15.69
-15.49
-15.39
-15.20
-14.99
-14.89
-14.54
-14.29
-14.04
-13.78
-13.51
-13.23
-12.94
-12.65
-12.34
-12.03
-11.70
-11.36
-11.00
-10.77
-15.25
-15.12
-14.92
-14.83
-14.65
-14.45
-14.35
-14.02
-13.79
-13.55
-13.30
-13.04
-12.78
-12.51
-12.23
-11.94
-11.65
-11.34
-11.02
-10.68
-10.46
-14.67
-14.55
-14.36
-14.27
-14.10
-13.91
-13.82
-13.51
-13.29
-13.06
-12.82
-12.58
-12.33
-12.08
-11.81
-11.54
-11.27
-10.98
-10.67
-10.36
-10.16
-14.09
-13.98
-13.80
-13.71
-13.55
-13.38
-13.29
-12.99
-12.78
-12.57
-12.35
-12.12
- 11.88
-11.64
-11.40
-11.14
-10.88
-10.61
-10.33
-10.03
-9.85
RFFFRFNCF SOURCF OF DATA

NA-PV1-C04-91-069-00
392
CORE DATA EOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 2C0
NOVEMBER 10, 1992
REVISION 005
NOTES 6 . 1 . 0
KEY REACTOR CORE PARAMETERS FOLLOWING A LOSS
OF SDC DURING MID LOOP OPERATION WITH A
LARGE OPENING IN A COLD LEG
The results given for key reactor core parameters following a
loss of shutdown cooling (SDC) with a large opening in a cold
leg are for 730 EFPD at 100% power. The decay heat power
is based on the ANSI 5.1-1979 Standard.
The results are based upon a computer analysis using the
RETRAN code with the RCP impeller removed from the cold leg.
The time to boil is based on the time for the water in the reactor
vessel upper head to reach a temperature of 212 degrees F.
The makeup flow rate is based on the steaming rate for a
particular decay heat power with an adjustment for cooler
injection water.
Time to core uncover is based on the time it takes the
water above the core to boil away to top of the core. This
considers the pressurization effects and the loss of water
out of the cold leg
p; )iNT rnnniTiriN'?;
Afler 730 EFPD 9 lOOJ; RTP
COMMENTS: N610R0
grrFRrvrr gni'Rrr nr PATI

SA-AU,-NXR-92-0l5-01
393
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 201
NOVEMBER 10. 1992
REVISION 005
TABLF 6.1.1
KEY REACTOR CORE PARAMETERS FOLLOWING A LOSS
OF SHUTDOWN COOLING DURING MIDLOOP OPERATION
WITH A LARGE OPENING IN A COLD LEG
Time After
Reoctor
Shutdown
(Doys)
Decoy
Heot
Lood
(MWth)
20.67
Time to
Boil
(Min)
Time to
Core
Uncovery
(Min)
1 4 6 . 8
11. 2
13 .15
11 5
95 . 8
85 . 8
10
10 . 50
14
82 . 8
108 . 4
15
9 . 04
17
7 0 . 0
130 . 0
20
7.96
18
5 9 . 2
139 . 4
30
6.75
22
4 9 . 0
157 . 9
40
5.79
26
4 2 . 1
190 . 3
50
5 . 0 1
30
35.7
2 1 9 .1
80
3.82
41 2
27 . 0
2 8 5.7
PUN'T roNniTio-yg
After 730 EFPD at 100% RTF
Data is nol Unit,
or Cycle Specific
COMMENTS: T61 IRO
Makeup
Woter
Flowrqte
(qpm)
RI^FRRENTF ?;0I.'RCF: OF DATA
SA-ALL-NCR-92-015-01
394
PAGE 202
NOVEMBER 10. 1992
REVISION 005
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE A
CURVE 6 . 1 . 1
DECAY HEAT LOAD BASED ON 7 3 0 EFPD
AT 1007o POWER
X
I
1
10
20
30
40
TIME AFTER SHUTDOWN
PtANT CQNn!TIONS
Afler 730 EFPD lOOJS RIP
Dala is nol Unil
or Cycle Specific
COMMENTS: C6UR5
t-
50
60
70
80
(DAYS)
RgrgRr.Ncr. gpuRrr OF DATA

395
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PAGE 204
NOVEMBER 10, 1992
REVISION 005
CURVE 6 . 1 . 3
TIME TO BOIL COOLANT FOLLOWING A LOSS OF SDC
DURING MIDLOOP OPERATIONS WITH A LARGE
OPENING IN A COLD LEG
w
O
-4
10
PUNT COiniTIONS
Aller 730 EFPD lOOJ: RTF
Dala is not. Unit.
or Cycle Specific
COMMEOTS: C6I3R5
20
30
40
50
60
TIME AFTER SHUTDOWN (DAYS)
70
RFFI. RFSTF GPIMRF OR DATA

396
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT \ CYCLE 4
PAGE 205
NOVEMBER 10.1992
REVISION 005
CURVE 6 . 1 . 4
MAKEUP FLOW RATE REQUIRED FOLLOWING
A LOSS OF SDC DURING MIDLOOP OPERATIONS WITH
A LARGE OPENING IN A COLD LEG
MAKO
160
140
120
>
tnPC
oa
73
3
o
tj
s
100
\
\
1 \
i
1
\
80
!
i
i
1
!
1
!
1
60
!
1
i
!
i
11
!
i
!
1
1
1
1
i
)
1
1
40
U1
20
10
20
30
40
1
50
60
70
80

piANT coNnmovs
Afler 730 EFPD @ 1005! RTF

Dale Is nol Unit.
or Cycle Specific
COMMENTS: C6UR5
R F F F R F N C r g Q I I R P F O F DATA
397
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT 1 CYCLE 4
PACE 205
NOVEMBER 10. 1992
REVISION 005
CURVE 6 . 1 . 5
TIME TO CORE UNCOVERY FOLLOWING
A LOSS OF SDC DURING MIDLOOP OPERATIONS WITH
^ LARGE OPENING IN A COLD LEG
UNCOV
300
250
200
o
o
n;
150
100
50
10
20
30
40
'
50
60
70
80
P1ANT roNnmoNS
Afler 730 EFPD 100% RTP
Dala is nol Unil
or Cycle Specific
COMMENTS; C615R5
RFFForxCr SOURCE OF DATA

398
APPENDIX C:
MISCELLANEOUS DERIVATIONS
These derivations are provided to assist the instructor who is using this text as
the principal reference for a course on nuclear power plant operations. They provide
additional background and rigor to help assure that course concepts are fully
developed and understood by participants. They are not included in the main body
of the text because of the expected diverse nature of the educational and experiential
background of participants. Participants with nuclear engineering degrees should be
fully versed in the theory associated with reactor-point kinetics models but they may
need additional background associated with fluid flow principles. Participants without
nuclear engineering degrees may need the additional theory associated with the
nuclear concepts. Since this text is designed to support course instruction in both the
collegiate and power plant settings, the course instructor should incorporate these
derivations into the course an a case-by-case basis depending upon the nature of the
target population.
399
APPENDIX C-1:
Viscous Flow. Head Loss and Pump "Work
Using a closed loop system drawing similar to Figure 5.5.1, apply an energy
balance (General Energy Equation) between the pump discharge and the pump
suction (the system) and the pump suction and the pump discharge (the pump). Use
the following boundary conditions to simplify the general energy equation and show
that pump work does in fact equal system head loss. Then identify that system head
loss occurs only beicause of the viscous nature of the fluid flow process (friction).
Relate the fluid friction
to heating using a common mechanical analog and
summarize that pump work equals system head loss and that head loss causes fluid
heating. This leads into an understanding of the concept of heatup on pump work
covered later in Chapter 2. Familiarity with the general energy equation approach
to problem analysis also allows the participant to understand the principle of
operation of devices such as a Venturi flow meter.
General Energy Equation;
KB, + PE, + FE, + U, +
= KE2 + PEj + FE2 + Uj +
All terms have units of ft-lbf/lbm

KE = >
Kinetic Energy due to the velocity of the fluid.
PE = >
Potential Energy of the fluid due to the elevation of the mass

above a reference datum point.
FE =>
Flow Energy (Flow Work) of the fluid due to the pressure

exerted by the fluid on the system boundaries.
U =>
Internal Energy of the fluid due to the temperature of the fluid.
Qin= >
Energy added to (removed from: Qont) the fluid by heat transfer

processes between the analysis points.
400
Wo=>
Energy added to (removed from: W^y) the fluid by mechanical

processes (pump or turbine shafts) between the analysis points.
Boundary Conditions:
1.
Pump suction and pump discharge piping has the same diameter (flow
area). The Continuity Equation is used to demonstrate that the fluid
velocity at both points is the same as long as the specific volume
(temperature) of the fluid is the same at both points.
2.
Pump suction and pump discharge piping elevations are the same.
3.
Fluid temperature is the same at the pump suction and the pump
discharge.
4.
No heat transfer processes exist between the pump suction and

discharge and all heat transfer processes within the system cancel each
other.
5.
No work is performed by the fluid as it flows through the system.
Assumptions:
1.
Steady flow
2.
Incompressible fluid
3.
Viscous flow
Pump Analysis: (Point 4->l on Figure 5.5.1)

Apply the Continuity Equation
m 4 = ihi
P4
where m = pAv
Pi
A4 = Ai
V4 = Vj
(same temperature)
(same diameter)
implies that KE4 = KE,
401
PE4 = PE,
(same elevation)
U4 = Uj
(same temperature)
Qin = 0
(no heat transfer)
Qout= 0
(no heat transfer)
Wby = 0
(no work by the fluid)
Conclusion: FE4 +
= FE,
^pump ~ FEj - FE4 V,P, - V4P4

V4 = Vj
(same temperature)
Wpp = v(P, - P4)(144)
ft-lbf/lbm
(ft^/lbm)(lbf/in2)(inW)
The effect of the pump in this application is to increase the pressure of the
fluid. Subsequent evaluation will show that this pressure head then becomes the
driving force for the movement of the fluid through the system.
System analvsis: (Point l->4 on Figure 5.5.1)
KE, = KE4
(same area and same velocity)
PEj = PE4
(same elevation)
Uj = U4
(same temperature)
Qin = Qout
(no net heat transfer)
Wby = Won = 0
(no shaft connecting the fluid across the boundary

to the surroundings)
Conclusion:
402
FEj = FE4 which contradicts with the pump analysis. The pump analysis
shows that the existence of pump work requires that the flow energy of the fluid is
increased as the fluid moves through the pump. However, in the system analysis, all
terms in the general energy equation have been accounted for and the indication is
that the pump does no work. We know that pump work is required to maintain flow
rate through the system constant in any real system. Even though the system analysis
indicates that no pump work is required and that flow will occur with no differential
pressure driving head, we know that something must be wrong.
This derivation is presented as written to force the participants to think about
the contradiction and resolve the issue. Participants should be encouraged and
stimulated to constantly ask themselves questions such as:
1.
What am I missing?
2.
Does this result fit with my understanding of reality?
3.
Are there boundary conditions which I am overlooking?
4.
Do my assumptions actually apply to the problem as described?

In this derivation, the missing link is the nature of viscous flow. As the fluid
flows through the system the viscous nature of the flow process (fluid friction)
converts fluid flow energy (pressure) into energy unavailable to continue or promote
flow of the fluid (internally generated heating). The analogy to any mechanical
system is directly applicable. If it were not for mechanical friction, an internal
combustion engine would not be needed to perform work after a vehicle has achieved
the desired velocity. To "correct" the system analysis, it is necessary to account for
the viscous nature of flow by defining a term which represents the reduction in
available energy as fluid flows through the system. We will use the term "head loss"
(hj and will later relate it to the physical and fluid flow parameters of the system.
Viscous flow conclusion:
FEj = FE4 + h^
h^ = FEj - FE4 = v(P, - P4)(144) ft-lbf/lbm
403
Combined analysis;
Wpp = FE, - FE4 = hL
Pump Work = System Head Loss
The pump performs work on the fluid and causes a pressure increase. As the
fluid flows through the system, fluid friction creates resistance to flow and causes a
pressure reduction. The lost energy materializes in the fluid as heating. In a closed
loop steady flow condition, even though no heat is being added to the fluid by heat
transfer processes from
outside the boundary, the fluid will slowly heat up
(temperature increase). This temperature rise will continue until/if heat removal
processes remove energy from the fluid at the same rate as it is being added. This
process is frequently referred to as "heat up by pump work". However, it must be
stressed that the pump maintains the flow and the flow causes heating through the
friction mechanism.
Does any heating occur directly in the pump? Certainly! No real pump is
100% efficient at converting shaft work into a fluid pressure rise. However pumps
with efficiencies of 85% are not uncommon. In these conditions, every 100 units of
work supplied by the prime mover results in 85 units of pressure rise and 15 units of
heating directly in the pump. The 85 units of pressure rise delivered by the pump
are dissipated by the system through friction and ultimately all 100 units of work
result in heating. See Problem 2.2 in the main body of the text.
404
APPENDIX C-2:
POINT-REACTOR EQUATIONS
Not all participants of this course are nuclear engineering graduates. While
these non-nuclear engineers may have completed a reactor operator level reactor
principles course, it is common practice in such courses to down play the importance
of reactor theory derivations. The author contends that some common derivations
are extremely important for participants to experience. These derivations establish
foundations necessary to understand the applications which result.
The point-reactor equations establish the basis for steady state and time
dependent behavior of the reactor system. This derivation begins with applying
common principles to develop time dependent balance equations for both neutron
population (power level) and delayed neutron precursor density. Once the balance
equations are established, they are re-written in terms and symbols which allow them
to be expressed in terms of reactivity, neutron lifetime, delayed neutron fraction and
precursor decay constant. A neutron generation multiplication model is essential to
this derivation. Any model which allows the participant to understand the meaning
of the neutron generation multiplication factor
or K) is suitable. The choice of
the model is left to the instructor using this text. All terms and symbols used in this
derivation should be common knowledge and vocabulary and are not specifically
defined herein.
Derivation basis: Balance Equation (General)
Time rate of change = Production Rate - Removal Rate
d"X"/dt = PRTJ. - RR^
405
Neutron balance:
dn/dt
Pl^fission
^^ûrce " ^âbsorption " ^^leakage
dn/dt
I^^prompt
^^delayed
^^^source ~ ^âbsorption " ^^leakage
All terms are expressed with units of neutrons/cm^-sec

dn/dt = (l-)0)v(Rf)f'"=' + Ei(XiCi) + q -(Ra)"""" Where R is the reaction rate for the specific reaction (Rf is
fission rate in the fuel and R^ is absorption rate in the media)
and depends upon the neutron flux and macroscopic cross
section in the region. L""*'' is the net leakage rate from the
media and depends upon neutron diffusion properties and the
boundary conditions of the media.
Precursor balance:
dCj/dt
= PRfijsion RRdecay
dQ/dt = iSivCRf)^" - XiQ

where i = l->6
These seven differential equations form the basis of the point-reactor kinetics
equations. They are written in terms of symbols and processes which should be
physically meaningful to participants. However, they are not written in a form which
allows them to be conveniently manipulated. This limitation is addressed by defining
the term n!I ^
the total removal rate of all neutrons with units of neutrons/cm^-sec.
With any suitable neutron generation multiplication model it should be apparent that
all neutrons which are produced within the media must be removed from the media
by either absorption or leakage processes as the neutrons diffuse through the media.
Further, it should be apparent that the neutron generation multiplication factor (K)
406
represents the link between neutron production in one generation and fission neutron
production in the next generation.
Neutron balance: in terms of n/o
dn/dt = PRpp,
PRdelayed + PRôuice'
dn/dt = (n/o)(K)(l-/3) + XîCA-iQ) + q - n/

by combining similar terms
dn/dt = (n/)[K(l-^)-l] + Ei(XiCi) + q
dn/dt = (n/j[(K.l)-K^] + Ei(AiQ) + q
define = K and substitute
dn/dt = (n/)[(K-l)/K - p] + EiCAjQ) + q
recall that pj, = (K-l)/K
dn/dt = (n/)(Po-/3) + EjCXiQ) + q
Precursor balance: in terms of n/<,
dCj/dt =
PRprecurson "
dCj/dt = (n/o)(K)/3i - AjQ with = K

dQ/dt = (n/)/3i - AiQ
Conclusion:
dn/dt = (n/)(Po -/3) + Ei(>.iCi) + q

dCj/dt = (n/)/3i - AiQ
These seven differential equations are referred to as the point-reactor dynamic
equations and represent the steady state and time dependent response of the system.
407
If these equations are suitably scaled and simultaneously solved for a variety of core
reactivity conditions, then accurate representations of response will result. Appendix
D provides several examples.
If these equations are used as the starting point for subsequent derivations,
with suitable assumptions, then several interesting and meaningful relationships result.
Several derivations developed in the body of the text depend upon these equations
as a starting point.
Prior to leaving the presentation of this derivation, it is important that all
participants agree with the following statements.
1.
It is reasonable to conclude that reactor power response will depend in some

way on the magnitudes of , p^, /3, and the individual Aj.
2.
If core reactivity is constant, dn/dt can not be zero and constant if precursor
concentrations are still changing. dC/dt = 0 is required before dn/dt can be
zero.
3.
If reactor period [T] is defined as the time (in seconds) required for reactor
power to change by a factor of 'e', then T must be some function of , p^, )S,
and the individual A;.
408
APPENDIX C-3:
Step Reactivity Insertion Model
The purpose of this appendix is to provide the course instructor with outlines
of derivations for time dependent reactor response. These outlines were taken from
Chapter 2 of Dynamics of Nuclear Reactors, by D. L, Hetrick, 1971. These outlines
are to be used to demonstrate to course participants that the equations used in the
text are reasonable and are capable of being rigorously developed. Participants are
neither expected to reproduce the derivations nor be proficient with Laplace
transforms. They are, however, expected to be able to follow the derivation outlines
and agree that the resultant models are reasonable. The instructor should also stress
the limitations of the models which exist because of the assumptions and
simplifications used in the derivations.
The point-reactor equations (6 group) are solved using Laplace transforms, to
produce the Inhour equation. This equation relates the core net reactivity to the
resultant period(T) or inverse period(ti)).
dn/dt = (n/)(p-/3) +
+q
dC/dt = (n/)/3i - XiQ

Apply Laplace transforms and rearrange:
N(s) = {n + Ei[AiCi /
(S
+X;]} / (s+)S-p-Ei[/3i;,i / (s+A;)]
The inverse transform becomes:

with each toj satisfying the following equations
p - p + t a -
/ (c+A.,)]
or
p = <fi> +
/ (w+A,)]
409
These two equations are equivalent versions of the Inhour equation and
demonstrate that reactor response [inverse periodrw] is determined by the values of
Po, , /3j, and A;. This conclusion is identical to that reached in Appendix C-2.
Following the same process it is possible to develop an Inhour relationship for
a single delayed neutron group model in which
constant for the collection of precursors.
and Ajfj is the effective decay

= (l/)3)Si(/3i/Ai).
The resultant equation is:

Po = *<D + ô/(o+A.eff)
If po is small and the second term dominates the expression due to the small
magnitude of both the neutron generation time and the inverse reactor period, then;
po = )S0>/(&) + >.eff)
Po&) + PoA-eff = /SW
Po0> - i3(0 = -poêff
(Po-^) = -Poêff
" = (-êffPo) / (Po-iS) = êfrPo / (i3-Po)
T = 1/fi) = (/3-p) /
Again, reactor response((i)) depends upon p^, , and the delayed neutron
parameters p and A,eff. The instructor should point out that this single group model
can not accurately represent the reactor response for a wide range of values of initial
reactivity if a single value for the effective decay constant is used. The main body of
the text demonstrates this by comparing one group response to 6 group response
using the Reactor Period vs Reactivity graph.
The preceding outlines validate that the equations used in the text for reactor
period are reasonable expectations of reactor response for a reactor which is not
extremely supercritical. Continuing with the step reactivity insertion derivation for
a single group model, it is necessary to assume that the reactor is initially critical and
in equilibrium with no source.
410
Initial Conditions:
dn/dt = 0 =
+ êffCo
dC/dt = 0 (njz)p - AeffCo with Q = (n^)(/3Aeff)

again, using Laplace transforms
n(t) = [no/(wi-"2)]["t(Po/^)-2}exp(o>,t) + {(D,-(po/)}exp(o)2t]
if po is positive, then o>i>0 and (D2<0.
Using the single group Inhour equation, it is possible to determine the values
of both (i)j and &)2 and then simplify the time response equation from above.
Po = + j8W(ci)+Xefr)
o>^ + (/9-Po+X^ff)(o - A.effp = 0
Solve this quadratic equation in omega for the two roots [cdj and 0)2] nd then
substitute those values back into the expression for time response of neutron
population.
Solution:
using the sum of the roots:
(i),+(i>2
-()0-Po+^êff)/^
neutron generation time is short such that
if
Po
is small and less than p, and the
Xeff << ()9-Po)>
then o)i<< |<i)2l and;
2 " -(/3-Po)/^
using the product of the roots:
(i>,<i>2 =
3nd by substitution Wj - (KaPJiP-Po)
And the reactor time response becomes Equation 4.6.1 in the text. Both the
relationship for stable period and prompt response for a step input originate from
this expression.
n(t) - [ny(/3-p)][/8exp(A.,ffPt/{i8-pJ) - pexp(-{/i-p}t/)]
411
APPENDIX C-4:
Boration Spreadsheet
The LOTUS spreadsheet which follows was developed to allow personnel to
answer the following two questions:
1.
If the RCS is at NOT with a soluble boron concentration of XX ppm,

what boron concentration will result at YY F if the cooldown is
accompanied with charging of ZZ ppm boric acid solution and RCS
volume is maintained constant?
2.
If the RCS is at NOT and a charging rate of XX gpm is available, how

rapidly can the RCS be cooled down and RCS volume still be
maintained constant?
The corollary to question #2 is:

3.
If the RCS is at NOT and an injection rate of XX gpm is required,

how rapidly must the RCS be cooled down to maintain RCS volume
constant?
The spreadsheet uses system volume, initial concentration, charging flow rate,
and charging concentration as variable inputs. The temperature dependent specific
volume of water and the initial input conditions are used to generate predicted RCS
boron concentration vs temperature and RCS cooldown rate vs temperature. The
LOTUS Printgraph function is used to visually display the results as a plot of
Predicted RCS Boron Concentration vs RCS temperature. Comparison of the
spreadsheet results with Curve 3.1.9 of the core data book allows the following
conclusion. Not only does the initial RCS boron concentration of 500 ppm at MOC
HFP provide adequate SDM after a trip; but the boration while cooling down
improves the margin.
to
O
a
Boron Concentration as Function of RCS Temperature
3
Initial RCS Cb
550
RCS Volum 13169.
RWSTCb 4000
BoratlonRate 100
ppm
ft*3 (The Boron Cone Is Independent of the RCS volume.)
ppm
gpm
O.
^
o
AHumpDon: Charging liMp* upwftti oootdown luch tliatoonilani RCS volurM It ma/nulntd.
Propirti** lorSuuraM LIquM Iram CE Sitam TabiM
Mrfttur*
Sp^dfloVohjrM
04
662
640
620
600
400
460
0.02221
0.021S2
0.0214Q
0.02091
0.02043
0.02000
0.01061
0.01920
420
400
3S0
o.oim
o.oieM
440
300
340
320
300
280
200
240
220
200
0.01830
0.01811
0.01787
0.01798
0.01746
0.017264
0,017089
0.010026
0.016776
0.010637
OtntHy
46.025
46.830
46.608
47.824
48.048
60.000
60.004
61.921
62.708
63.648
64.406
66.218
66.060
66.625
67.307
67.024
68.617
60.081
60.613
60.107
Ibm/gal
6.010
6.127
6.230
6.394
6.644
6.684
6.817
6.041
7.060
7.172
7.282
7.382
7.461
7.670
7.661
7.744
7.823
7.806
7.070
8.036
o ms
T UIM
602063
603661
613666
620828
644626
668486
671681
683785
606338
706620
717304
727206
736073
746736
764711
762842
770654
778076
786070
701601
DtttaMtN
0
10608
20723
36865
61663
66622
78618
00822
102376
113666
124341
134243
144010
162773
161748
160670
177601
186113
10211S
108626
ncscb
660
611
667
762
826
803
064
1008
1068
1106
1148
1187
1224
1257
1280
1318
1346
1371
1304
1416
TImttoBoral*
(Hf)
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
0.21
0.20
0.32
0.30
0.28
0.26
0.25
0.23
0.23
0.22
0.20
0.20
0.18
0.18
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.14
0.13
MmCooU
-66
60
-62
-67
-72
-76
-61
-86
-80
-02
-100
-102
-113
-111
-122
-127
-134
-142
-163
K)
RCS Predicted Boron vs. Temperature

Constant RCS Volume
200
300
400
RCS Average Temperature (degree F1
500
600
414
SDM Graph:
CORE DATA BOOK

UNIT I CYCLE 4
PACE 123
FEBRUARY 21. 1992
REVISION 000
CURVE 3 . 1 . 9
MINIMUM RCS BORON CONCENTRATION fS. T-COLD
ALL RODS IN
200.0 TO 224.303 EFPD
(CO' - SES' F, 07. P)
1% DELTA K/K SDM
!<
ACC:EPTABL
i
UNA CCEPTA BLE

1
]
1
i
J'
J
j
J,
150
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
T-COLD (DECREES ")

PLtvT
or. POWER
?-o'..'prf or r).\rA
ANALYSIS PACKAGE
NA-PVl-C0^-9l-069-0C
C0M.MENT: COIXRO
Boration LOTUS Program-l

Boron Concentration as Function of RCS Temperature
Initial RCS Cb =
U 800
ppm
RCS Volume =
13169.7
ft'^3 (The Boron Cone is independent of the RCS volume.)
RWST Cb =
U 4000
ppm
Boration Rate =
U 132
gpm
Assumption: Charging keeps up with cooldovm such that
'Properties for Saturated Liquid from CE Steam Tables
(H) +$D$7/7.48/0.01613*60
'^Temperature
'Specific Volume
"Density
'Îbm/gal
'Total Mass
"Delta Mass
'RCS Cb
'Time to Borate
'Max Cooldown Rate
"(Hr)
"(F/Hr)
564
(F5 0.02221
(F3 1/C15
(F3 +E15/7.48
(FO +$D$5*E15
(FO +I15*(1-($G$15/G15))
(FO ($I$15*$D$4+K15*$D$6)/I15
'ppm
552
(F5 0.02182
(F3 1/C16
(F3 +E16/7.48
(FO +SD$5*E16
(FO +I16*(1-($G$15/G16))
(FO ($I$15*$D$4+K16*$D$6)/I16
'ppm
(F2 (K16-K15)/$P$10
(FO (A16-A15)/016
540
(F5 0.02146
(F3 1/C17
(F3 +E17/7.48
(FO +SD$5*E17
(FO +I17*(1-($G$15/G17))
(FO ($IS15*$D$4+K17*$D$6)/I17
'ppm
(F2 (K17-K16)/$PS10
(FO (A17-A16)/017
Boration LOTUS Program-2

A18
CIS
E18
G18
118
K18
M18
N18
018
Q18
A19
C19
E19
G19
119
K19
MIS
N19
019
Q19
A20
C20
E20
G20
120
K20
M20
N20
020
Q20
A21
C21
E21
G21
121
K21
M21
N21
021
Q21
A22
C22
E22
G22
122
K22
M22
N22
022
Q22
520
(F5) 0.02091
(F3) 1/C18
(F3) +E18/7.48
(FO) +$D$5*E18
(FO) +I18*(1-($G$15/G18))
(FO) ($I$15*$D$4+K18*$D$6)/I18
'ppm
(F2) (K18-K17)/$P$10
(FO) (A18-A17)/018
500
(F5) 0.02043
(F3) 1/C19
(F3) +E19/7.48
(FO) +$D$5*E19
(FO) +119*(1-($G$15/G19))
(FO) ($IS15*$D$4+K19*?D$6)/I19
'ppm
(F2) (K19-K18)/$P$10
(FO) (A19-A18)/019
480
(F5) 0.02
(F3) 1/C20
(F3) +E20/7.48
(FO) +$D$5*E20
(FO) +I20*(1-($G$15/G20))
(FO) ($I$15*$D$4+K20*$D$6)/I20
'ppm
(F2) {K20-K19)/$P$10
(FO) (A20-A19)/020
460
(F5) 0.01961
(F3) 1/C21
(F3) +E21/7.48
(FO) +$D$5*E21
(FO) +I21*(1-($G$15/G21))
(FO) ($I$15*$D$4+k21*$D$6)/I21
'ppm
(F2) (K21-K20)/SP$10
(FO) (A21-A20)/021
440
(F5) 0.01926
(F3) 1/C22
(F3) +E22/7.48
(FO) +$D$5*E22
(FO) +I22*(l-($G$i5/G22))
(FO) {$I$15*$D$4+K22*$D$6)/I22
'ppm
(F2) (K22-K21)/$P$10
(FO) (A22-A21)/022
o05sa!5SHnM0>O02;ai-i0Mn>'i00BaH0Mfi><j0as!H0M0>O0253H0W0S'
MIOIOMN>MMMM(>JtOeON>(OtOK)MMIOMN)MMtOtOtOIOIV)MIOM(OtOMtJIOM(OtOfv>M(OMN>IOtJtOMCOtO
^s)v] ^ - j v ) - ^ ^ > j v ] ( A a t o \ o t ( n c h a \ o a \ o > u i u i u i u i u i u i u i u i u i u i i U i . . c w 4 ^ i t i . ^ j !>i( k ^ 4 k U u u u u u i < ) u u u
CJ ->."s S -"-S rf-N *-S *
^^ - - S - - N
CJ
'Tl'd
ij flhO
O WO O O O U U U l O O t O ' O O O O U U O ) O O t O 1 1 O O O O J U U I O O t o t }
>%
M to
vl ^
1 1
>
to to
O -CA
lo d
vl-W
K
O
^+ + + H O
W --CA W
H fO O PO O O
<A --J -CA --4 PO H
H Ul\^^
0)^ ^ 03
*H W
^
C/> 1 to ifk
^ 00
>-0>
iU O
+ -ov
H
to cn
-sl\
* O
<A to
D -J
0\w
^+ + + M O
<A H "(A Cd\
H to O K) O O
0> -(A 0\ to H
H * 01\ 0\ 00
^
M
*H W
M
(A 1 to 4^
0\ 00
CA-CA
O <A
O
to HJ
+ -lA
ov </> H
to O)
H
o
ON\
* o
u> to
o a\
<A-
>
lO to
OV 0^
1 1
>
to to
U) Ul
w w
U1 U1
1 1
to to
iC^
O <A
to
U1 <A
M
O
++ +Mo
lA H <A W\
H to O N> O o
<A Ul <A U1 to H
H 01\ 01 00
UT . H- vj
CJ
M t*l
0^
CA 1 to .r^
O'-^ W 00
(A<A
Q
+ <A
M
to tn
01\
*O
(A to
O Ol
o\^
w
\
H
to
sj
>
N) to
\
H
to
0^
H
to
U1
>
to to
4^ A
1
>
to to
uu
w'
0-<A
to d
-CA
H
O
>-s
hj HJ
>ij hj
toa O O O OJ CJ (J1
tja
o o o t o w ( j i o o
+ + +HO
H -(A w\
to O W O o
4^ <A lU to H
* Ul\ 00
"0
Oi
H W
-(A t to ^
00
-(A<A
lA
H
tA
H
+ -CA
H
to ai
x- (D
<A to
a
-(A^
0\^
\
H
to
4 ^
>
to to
uu
1
>w
to to
to to
ww
O <A
to
U -CA
H
o
^+ + + H O
<A H <A W\
H to O
OO
<A U -(A CJ to H
H * Ul\ tJ 03
Ul'-^ 4> *4
\D
4. H M
<A i hJ
0^ CJ 00
(A<A
Jfi.' 0
+ -W
H
(O U1
W\
0
(A to
Du
-tA^
\
H
to
U
Boration LOTUS Program-4

A28
C28
E28
G28
128
K28
M28
M28
028
Q28
A29
C29
E29
G29
129
K29
M29
N29
029
Q29
A30
C30
E30
G30
130
K30
M30
N30
030
Q30
A31
C31
E31
G31
131
K31
M31
N31
031
Q31
A32
C32
E32
G32
132
K32
M32
N32
032
Q32
320
0.01766
(F3) 1/C28
(F3) +E28/7.48
(FO) +$D$5*E28
(FO) +I28*(1-($G$15/G28))
(FO) ($I$15*$D$4+K28*$D$6)/128
'ppia
(F2) (K28-K27)/$P$10
(FO) (A28-A27)/028
300
0.01745
(F3) 1/C29
(F3) +E29/7.48
(FO) +$D$5*E29
(FO) +I29*(1-($G$15/G29))
(FO) ($I$15*D$4+K29*$D$6)/I29
'ppm
(F2) (K29-K28)/$P$10
(FO) (A29-A28)/029
280
0.017264
(F3) 1/C30
(F3) +E30/7.48
(FO) +$D$5*E30
(FO) +I30*(1-($G$15/G30))
(FO) ($I$15*$D$4+K30*$D$6)/I30
'ppm
(F2) {K30-K29)/$P$10
(FO) (A30-A29)/030
260
0.017089
{F3) 1/C31
(F3) +E31/7.48
(FO) +$DS5*E31
(FO) +I31*(1-($G$15/G31))
(FO) ($I$15*$D$4+K31*$D$6)/I31
'ppm
(F2) (K31-K30)/$P$10
(FO) (A31-A30)/031
240
0.016926
(F3) 1/C32
(F3) +E32/7.48
(FO) +$D$5*E32
(FO) +I32*(1-($GS15/G32))
(FO) (SI$15*SD$4+K32*$DS6)/I32
'ppm
(F2) (K32-K31)/$P$10
(FO) (A32-A31)/032
Boration LOTUS Program-S

A33
C33
E33
G33
133
K33
M33
N33
033
Q33
A34
C34
E34
G34
134
K34
H34
N34
034
220
0,016775
(F3) 1/C33
(F3) +E33/7.48
(FO) +$D$5*E33
(FO) +I33*(1-($G$15/G33))
(FO) ($I$15*$D$4+K33*$D$6)/I33
'ppm
(F2) (K33-K32)/$P$10
(FO) (A33-A32)/033
200
0.016637
(F3) 1/C34
(F3) +E34/7.48
(FO) +$D$5*E34
(FO) +134*(1-($G$15/G34))
(FO) ($I$15*$D$4+K34*$D$6)/I34
'ppm
(F2) (K34-K33)/$P$10
Q34 (FO) (A34-A33)/034
420
APPENDIX D:
DESIRE PROGRAMS
DESIRE (Direct-Executing Simulation in REal time) is an interactive, directexecuting dynamic-system simulation which runs on ordinary personal computers.
DESIRE systems for AT clones solve hundreds of differential equations on typed
command, immediately display graphical results and are capable of performing
multirun statistical and optimization studies(Kom, 1989).
Reactor dynamics programs which run on DESIRE were introduced to the
author during the completion of "Reactor Dynamics", NEE 583 presented by
Professor D. L. Hetrick during the fall 1992 term at the University of Arizona. These
programs were modified and used to present the following dynamic reactor
responses:
1.
Sensitivity of subcritical multiplication response to reactivity state used

to develop Figures 3.7.2, 3.7.3 and 3.7.4.
2.
Reactor response to negative reactivity insertion rate used to validate

the power turning model.
3.
Reactor response to a large negative reactivity step insertion used to

validate the reactor trip response model.
421
APPENDIX D-1;
Subcritical Multiplication
for Count Rate Dynamic Response
Figures 3.7.2, 3.7.3, and 3.7.4 in the main body were developed using the
following DESIRE program. The 6 group point-reactor kinetics model was used to
determine the power transient for a subcritical reactor with a source. A variety of
initial conditions and reactivity insertions were selected to display the time dependent
response of the subcritical multiplication process.
In each case, the conditions were selected such that the reactivity insertion
would result in a doubling of the stable count rate. The parameters were selected
to demonstrate that as the reactor approaches criticality (K->1) an increasing period
of time is required for the doubling to occur.
Figure
AL
Final Power Final omega
3.7.2
fio
-1.000$
+0.5000$
1.991
5.7 X 10-5
3.7.3
-0.250$
+0.1250$
1.877
4.5 X 10"^
3.7.4
-0.125$
+0.0625$
1.695
7.3 X 10-^
The resultant figures clearly demonstrate that the closer the reactor is to being
critical, and if the net negative reactivity is cut in half, then the longer one must wait
before count rate stabilizes. Course participants should be provided a copy of the
program for review. They should be shown how the program equations represent the
time dependent solution of the point-reactor equations. Then the conclusion should
be drawn that the figures represent the expected response.
1.
Subcritical multiplication processes dictate that reducing the net

negative reactivity by a factor of two should result in a doubling of the
stable count rate.
2.
As the point of criticality is approached, count rate stabilization

requires an increasing length of time.
DESIRE Program: Reactor Startup with Source:

Uindowsl Fil^soyflpic.lst.
210
-REACTOR STARTUP UITH SOURCE
Lino:23
Colsl
220
230
240
270
280
290
REACTIVITY - R DOLLARS
NORMALIZED POWER " EN (INITIAL VALUE 1.0)
NORMALIZED PRECURSOR DENSITY -01, I1
6
BETA/L " BOL, LAMBDA - ALI. I-l,....6
NORMALIZED DELAYED NEUTRON FRACTION PI, I"1
320
330
340
350
355
360
370
380
390
400
410
420
430
440
450
460
470
Irule 3
TMAX>300
NN-10001
8cale'>2
tm"50
B-0.0 I RS>-0.1250
BOL>10.0
ALl-0.0124 I Fl-0.033
AL2-0.0305 I F2>0.219
AL3-0.111 I F3-0.196
AL4-0.301 I F4-0.39S
ALS-1.14 I FS-O.llS
AL6-3.01 I F6-0.042
500
510
520
570
575
EN-1. i
display
display
drun I
display
REF: D. HETRICK, "DYNAMICS OF NUCLEAR REACTORS"

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS (1971). CH. 5
Dl'l. I D2>1. I
CIS
NIS
write EN,R,OMEGA
Q
D3-1. I
D4'l.| DS-l. I
580
590
DYNAMIC
600
605
610
630
640
650
660
670
680
690
700
710
720
730
740
A'(-.1250)*swtch( tm-t)+(-.06250)awtch(t-tm)
R-A+Bt
SUMFl*Dl't'F2*D2+F3D3+F4D4+F5D5'fF6D6
ENDOT>BOL(
(R-1.0)EN'SUM-RS)
OMEGA-ENDOT/EN
EnL0G0.4342945ln(EN)
d/dt EN>ENDOT
d/dt D1>AL1*(EN-D1)
d/dt D2-AL2*(EN-D2)
d/dt 03AL3(EN-D3)
d/dt D4-AL4(EN-D4)
d/dt D5-AL5*(EN-05)
d/dt D6>AL6(EN-D6)
ONAX>OMAX(OHEGA-ONAX)BHtch(CHEGA-OMAX)
D6-
423
APPENDIX D-2:
Power Turning
The concept of power turning is frequently
not accepted by course
participants. They seem to believe that negative Startup Rate (Transient Period)
with net positive reactivity still in-core is an artifact ot the prompt-jump
approximation which produces a dp/dt term in the expression for Startup Rate. The
following DESIRE program and graph were created in an attempt to improve
participant understanding of the concept.
The 6 group point-reactor dynamics equations were used to model a negative
reactivity insertion rate into a previously supercritical reactor. During the first 25
seconds of the transient, net reactivity is constant and log power is increasing at a
constant rate, as expected. During the last 25 seconds of the transient, the net
positive reactivity is removed at a constant rate.
When the negative reactivity
insertion rate is initiated, the slope of the log power plot begins to decrease until it
ultimately becomes negative (power turns) at about 37 seconds into the transient.
The graph clearly demonstrates that power is decreasing even though the core net
reactivity is still positive.
As long as participants agree that the program models the 6 group pointreactor dynamics, then they should also agree that power turning is not an artifact of
the prompt jump approximation.
424
DESIRE Program: Power Turning

Window ;1 File:syspic.1st
POWER TURNING EXAMPLE
210
Line:1
Col:l
220
230
240
250
260
270
280
290
300
310
320
330
340
350
355
360
365
370
380
390
400
410
420
430
440
450
460
470
480
490
500
510
520
530
575
580
590
600
602
605
610
620
630
640
650
660
670
680
690
700
710
720
730
740
REACTIVITY = R DOLLARS
NORMALIZED POWER = EN (INITIAL VALUE 1.0)
POWER IN MW = ENP
INITIAL POWER IN MW = ENO
NORMALIZED PRECURSOR DENSITY = DI, 1=1,.. ,6
BETA/L = BOL, LAMBDA = ALI, 1=1,...,6
NORMALIZED DELAYED NEUTRON FRACTION = FI, 1=1, . . , 6
TEMP. COEFF. OF REACTIVITY (DOLLAR/CDEG) = ALF
RECIPROCAL HEAT CAPACITY (CDEG/MJ) = AK
REF:
D. HETRICK, "DYNAMICS OF NUCLEAR REACTORS"

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS (1971), CH. 5
irule 7
TMAX=50 I tin=25
DT=0.000001
NN=10001
scale=5
A=+0.5
B=(0)*swtch(tm-t)+(-.02)*swtch(t-tm)
BOL=140.0
AL1=0.0124
Fl=0.033
AL2=0.0305
F2=0.219
AL3=0.111
F3=0.196
F4=0.395
AL4=0,301
AL5=1.14
F5=0.115
AL6=3.01
F6=0.042
ALF=0.0
AK=0 I GAMMA=0.0
EN0=.001
EN=1. I Dl=l. I D2=l. I D3=l.| D4=l.
display C15
display N15
drun j write END,R
display Q
DYNAMIC
A=(0.5)*swtch(tm-t)+(1.0)*swtch(t-tm)
B=(0)*swtch(tm-t)+(-.02)*swtch(t-tm)
R=A+(B*t)
ENP=ENO*EN
SUM=F1*D1+F2*D2+F3*D3+F4*D4+F5*D5+F6*D6
ENDOT=BOL*((R-1.0)*EN+SUM)
OMEGA=ENDOT/EN
ENLOG=0.4342945*ln(EN)
d/dt EN=ENDOT
d/dt D1=AL1*(EN-D1)
d/dt D2=AL2*(EN-D2)
d/dt D3=AL3*(EN-D3)
d/dt D4=AL4*(EN-D4)
d/dt D5=AL5*(EN-D5)
d/dt D6=AL6*(EH-D6)
d/dt TEMP=7^*ENP-GAMMA*TEMP
D5=l.
D6=l.
426
APPENDIX D-3:
Reactor Trip
The following DESIRE program was used to evaluate the prompt-drop and
transient period/stable period effects of a reactor trip from initially critical conditions.
The point-reactor dynamic equations were used to model the effects of a variety of
step negative reactivity insertions to determine the power level and period as a
function of time after the trip. The following four time intervals were selected.
1.
One second after the trip as a representation of the effects of a step

insertion on the instantaneous value of power level. This value should
compare with the prompt drop equation.
2.
50 seconds after the trip as a representation of the effect that short

lived precursors have on the period of the transient.
3.
200 seconds after the trip as a representation of the effect that the
longer lived precursors have on the period of the transient.
4.
500 seconds after the trip as a representation of the effect that the
longest lived precursors have on the period of the transient.
The results which follow demonstrate that the prompt-drop equation is a

reasonable model. The magnitude of the prompt-drop depends upon the magnitude
of the reactivity insertion. Further, the 50 second, 200 second, and 500 second data
demonstrates that the period starts out small (driven by the short lived precursors)
and converges to a stable value which is dominated by the longest lived precursors.
The period at all time frames is relatively insensitive to the magnitude of the
reactivity insertion as would be expected since the rate of change of a subcritical
reactor is dominated by the decay of precursors.
These results should help participants agree that the models used in the main
body of the text are appropriate and reasonable predictions of reactor response.
DESIRE Program: Reactor Trip

Window :1 File:syspic.1st
210
REACTOR TRIP from CRITICAL
220
No Source Present
REACTIVITY = R DOLLARS
230
240
NORMALIZED POWER = EN (INITIAL VALUE 1.0)
270
NORMALIZED PRECURSOR DENSITY = DI, 1=1,..,,6
BETA/L = BOL, LAMBDA = ALI, 1=1,...,6
280
290
NORMALIZED DELAYED NEUTRON FRACTION = FI, 1=1,
320
330
REF: D. HETRICK, "DYNAMICS OF NUCLEAR REACTORS"
340
UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS (1971), CH. 5
350
355
irule 3
360
TMAX=500
NN=10001
370
scale=l
380
390
tin=l
RS=-.0
B=0.0
400
BOL=10l0
410
420
Fl=0.033
AL1=0.0124
430
AL2=0.0305
F2=0.219
AL3=0.111
440
F3=0.196
450
AL4=0,301
F4=0.395
AL5=1.14
460
F5=0.115
AL6=3.01
470
F6=0.042
500
EN=1. I Dl=l. I D2=l. I D3=l. I D4=l. I D5=l. I D6
510
display C3
520
display N14
570
drun I write EN,R,OMEGA
575
display Q
580
590
DYNAMIC
600
605
610
630
640
650
660
670
680
690
700
710
720
730
740
750
760
A=(0)*swtch(tm-t)+(-1)*swtch(t-tm)
R=A+B*t
SUM=F1*D1+F2*D2+F3*D3+F4*D4+F5*D5+F6*D6
ENDOT=BOL*((R-1.0)*EN+SUM-RS)
OMEGA=ENDOT/EN
ENLOG=0.4342945*ln(EN)
d/dt EN=ENDOT
d/dt D1=AL1*(EN-D1)
d/dt D2=AL2*(EN-D2)
d/dt D3=AL3*(EN-D3)
d/dt D4=AL4*(EN-D4)
d/dt D5=AL5*(EN-D5)
d/dt D6=AL6*(EN-D6)
OMAX=OMAX+(OMEGA-OMAX)*swtch(OMEGA-OMAX)
dispt EN,R
REACTOR TRIP COMPUTER EXPERIMENT RESULTS USING 'DESIRE'

INITIAL REACTIVITY =:0
INITIAL POWER CONSTANT WITH NO SOURCE
DATA @ 50 sec
DATA @ 200 sec
DATA @ 500 sec
DELRHO DATA @ 1 sec
Power
Power
Period
Power
Period
Period
Power
(-$)
Period
(sec)
(%Po)
(sec)
(%Po)
(%Po)
(sec)
(%Po)
(sec)
46.1
0.57
43.8
8.6
8.2
67.2
0.012
1
83.3
27.8
6.6
41.5
0.22
2
3.8
65.8
0.005
81.9
40.0
20.3
5.9
2.5
0.13
65.4
0.003
3
81.9
39.4
16.0
5.6
1.8
0.10
65.4
4
0.002
81.9
38.9
0.07
13.2
5.4
1.4
65.4
5
0.002
81.9

*
*
7.0
5.0
0.7
38.2
0.04
65.4
10
* * **
* *
* * **
* ***
37.7
3.6
20
4.8
0.3
-
4.55708e-02
-1,00000e+01
-1.13741e-01
Initial Conditions:
Power = 100%
Reactivity = 0.0$
Omega = 0 . 0 s e c '
Final Conditions:
Power = k . 6 %
Reactivity = -10.0$
Omega =
1137 s e c
0.00Bt00
:?.50e*R0
Reactor Power (%) and Reactivity ($) vs Time for

4 seconds following^ a trip at 1 second.
5.nHe*0B
430
APPENDIX E
XENON-135 REACTIVITY DATA
for
VARIOUS REACTOR TRANSIENTS
The transient xenon reactivity data included in this appendix was obtained by
utilizing a proprietary code entitled XENON Revision 6.1. This code was developed
by personnel in the Nuclear Fuels Management department at Palo Verde Nuclear
Generating Station and is intended for use by reactor operations personnel to predict
the reactivity effects of xenon transients. XENON provides reactivity data specific
for each of the three units at PVNGS for specific fuel cycles. The program is menu
driven with interactive prompts which cue the user to enter the requisite information.
Data is then printed in tabular format. The graphs included in this appendix as
figures were obtained by entering the transient xenon reactivity data into a
spreadsheet and plotting the data to visually emphasize the nature of the transient.
The transient reactivity data included in this appendix was selected to support the
reactivity assessment examples and problems used in the text.
Permission to use XENON 6.1 to produce these reactivity data was granted
by the Manager of the Nuclear Fuels Management Department, Palo Verde Nuclear
Generating Station, Mail Station 1605, Arizona Public Service Company, P. O, Box
52034, Phoenix, AZ 85072-2034.
431
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
PAGES
Menu
Screen Prompt Menus used to initiate XENON.
E.1
Table E.1.1
Xenon reactivity during and following a 1 hour
E.8
ramp power increase from 30% RTP equilibrium

conditions to 40% RTP.
Figure E.1.1
Xenon reactivity vs time for t=0 to 12 hours for a
E.9
1 hour ramp power increase from 30% RTP

equilibrium conditions to 40% RTP.
Figure E.1.2
Xenon reactivity vs time for t=0 to 37 hours for
E.10
a 1 hour ramp power increase from 30% RTP

Table E.2.1
Xenon reactivity following a step power increase
E.11
from 20% RTP equilibrium conditions to 30% RTP.

Figure E.2.1
Xenon reactivity vs time for t=0 to 50 hours for
E.12
a step power increase from 20% RTP equilibrium

Table E.3.1
Xenon reactivity following a theoretical step
E.13
increase in power from 20% RTP equilibrium

Figure E.3.1
Xenon reactivity vs time for t=0 to 50 hours
E.15
following a step increase in power from 20% RTP

Table E.4.1
E.16
ramp power increase from 80% RTP equilibrium

Figure E.4.1

for a 2 hour ramp power increase from 80% RTP
E.17
432
Table E.5.1
E.18
ramp power decrease from 100% RTP

Figure E.5.1
E.19
for a 1 hour ramp power decrease from

100% RTP equilibrium conditions to 80% RTP.
Table E.6.1
Xenon reactivity following a Reactor Power
E.20
Cutback event from 100% RTP

Figure E.6.1
E.21
for a Reactor Power Cutback event from

100% RTP equilibrium conditions to 60% RTP.
Table E.7.1
Xenon reactivity following a Reactor Trip event E.22

from 100% RTP equilibrium conditions.
Figure E.7.1
E.24
for a Reactor Trip event from 100% RTP

equilibrium conditions.
Figure E.8.1

for step increases in power from 50% RTP
equilibrium conditions to various power levels.
E.25
XENON
Revi s i o n 6 . 1
F1
- EXECUTE
FIO - QUIT
Appendix E
Menu
Page E.l
434
XENON
Revi s i o n 6 . 1
F1
- EXECUTE
FIO - QUIT
Is this computer connected to a printer ? (y/n) :
Appendix E
Menu
Page E.l
UNIT
CYCLE ;
1
4
Appendix E
Menu
Page E.1
UNIT
CYCLE :
Is this the correct unit and cycle? (Y/N)
Appendix E
Menu
Page E.4
-XENON OPERATOR ASSISTANCE PROGRAMSTARTING CLOCK TIME (HHMM):

STARTING DATE (MMDDYY);
3:
(D
0
fl> C
W
Ln
03
OQ
?
?
>
73
(D
3
WHOLE AND ?
QUARTER HOURS FOLLOWING A
FROM
% TO
% AT
Use / key to reenter previous values
FIO
QUIT
EFPD

STARTING DATE (MMDDVY);
hd S >
(W(t)01 d(D d
C (D
dA*
W
p.
o^
X
w
0
103093
50 WHOLE AND 0 QUARTER HOURS FOLLOWING A STEP CHANGE

FROM 100 % TO 60 % AT
200 EFPD
ARE INITIAL XENON AND IODINE CONCENTRATIONS KNOWN?(Y/N)
FIO
QUIT
00

STARTING DATE (MMDDYY):
50 WHOLE AND 0
(p >
03 s
OQ
0) c
SJQU
w
H
X
w
0
103093
XENON-135 CONCENTRATION
IODINE-135 CONCENTRATION
QUARTER HOURS FOLLOWING A
STEP CHANGE
FROM
200
100 % TO
60
* AT
: 100.00
: 100.00
EFPD
fl>
F1
CALCULATE
FIO
QUIT
VO
TIME
Reactor
Power
% FP
Nov 3
0 00
0 15
0 30
0 45
1 00
2 00
3 00
4 00
5 00
6 00
7 00
8 00
9 00
10 00
1 1 00
12 00
13 00
14 00
15 00
16 00
17 00
18 00
19 00
20 00
21 00
22 00
23 00
24 00
93
Nov 4
1:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
13:00
93
Cycle
Burnup
EFPD
1-135
Cone.
% FPEQ
Xe-135
Cone.
%FPEQ
Xe
Worth
pcm
3 0 . 00
3 2 . 50
3 5 . 00
3 7 . 50
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
40. 00
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
40. 00
4 0 . 00
4 0 . 00
40. 00
4 0 . 00
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
30.00
30.07
30.20
30.39
30.64
31.57
32.41
33.17
33.86
34.47
35.02
35.52
35.97
36.37
36.73
37.06
37.36
37.62
37.86
38.07
38.27
38.44
38.60
38.74
38.86
38.98
39.08
39.17
60.95
60.88
60.75
60.57
60.34
59.67
59.32
59.22
59.32
59.56
59.91
60.34
60.82
61.34
61.87
62.40
62.94
63.45
63.96
64.44
64.90
65.33
65.74
66.12
66.48
66.81
67.12
67.40
1869
1867
1864
1859
1853
1836
1827
1824
1827
1833
1842
1854
1866
1879
1893
1906
1920
1933
1945
1957
1969
1980
1990
1999
2008
2016
2024
2031
40.00
40.00
40.00
40.00
40.00
40.00
40.00
40.00
40.00
40.00
40.00
40.00
40.00
200
200
200
200
200
200
201
201
201
201
201
201
201
39.25
39.33
39.40
39.46
39.51
39.56
39.61
39.65
39.68
39.71
39.74
39.77
39.79
67.67
67.91
68.13
68.34
68.53
68.70
68.86
69.00
69.13
69.25
69.36
69.46
69.55
2038
2043
2049
2054
2059
2063
2067
2070
2073
2076
2079
2081
2083
Appendix E
Table E.1.1
Page E.8
XENON TRANSIENT DATA

One Hour Ramp: 30%->40%
>
OQ01 OQH- "O
a> c
d
w n> CL
v>
W
^
V
>
S.^
O) c
V n
c (0
iO|
H
c
o
c
0)
Time (hours)
XENON REACTIVITY TRANSIENT

One Hour Ramp: 30%->40%
Time (hours)
TIME
Reactor
Power
* FP
Cycle
Burnup
EFPD
1-135
Cone.
% FPEQ
Nov 1 93
0:00
20.00
30.00
1:00
30.00
2:00
3:00
30.00
30.00
4:00
30.00
5:00
6:00
30.00
7:00
30.00
8:00
30.00
9:00
30.00
10:00
30.00
30.00
11:00
12:00
30.00
13:00
30.00
14:00
30.00
15:00
30.00
16:00
30.00
17:00
30.00
18:00
30.00
19:00
30.00
20:00
30.00
21:00
30.00
22:00
30.00
23:00
30.00
24:00
30.00
200
26.86
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
Nov 2 93
1:00
30.00
2:00
30.00
3:00
30.00
4:00
30.00
5:00
30.00
6:00
30.00
7:00
30.00
8:00
30.00
9:00
30.00
10:00
30.00
11:00
30.00
12:00
30.00
13:00
30.00
14:00
30.00
15:00
30.00
16:00
30.00
17:00
30.00
18:00
30.00
19:00
30.00
20:00
30.00
21:00
30.00
22:00
30.00
23:00
30.00
24:00
30.00
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
201
201
201
201
201
201
201
201
201
200
200
20.00
21.00
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
21.90
22.71
23.44
24.10
24.69
25.22
25.70
26.13
26.51
Xe
Worth
pcm
27.18
27.46
27.71
27.94
28.15
28.33
28.50
28.65
28.79
28.91
29.02
29.12
29.20
48.17
47.49
47.14
47.06
47.18
47.45
47.85
48.34
48.89
49.47
50.09
50.71
51.33
51.95
52.55
53.13
53.69
54.22
54.72
55.20
55.65
56.07
56.46
56.83
57.17
1529
1510
1500
1498
1501
1509
1520
1533
1548
1565
1581
1598
1615
1632
1648
1664
1679
1693
1707
1719
1731
1742
1753
1762
1771
29.28
29.36
29.42
29.48
29.53
29.58
29.62
29.66
29.69
29.72
29.75
29.78
29.80
29.82
29.84
29.86
29.87
29.88
29.90
29.91
29.92
29.92
29.93
29.94
57.49
57.78
58.05
58.30
58.53
58.74
58.94
59.12
59.28
59.43
59.57
59.69
59.81
59.91
60.01
60.09
60.17
60.25
60.31
60.37
60.43
60.47
60.52
60.56
1780
1787
1794
1801
1807
1813
1818
1822
1826
1830
1834
1837
1840
1843
1845
1848
1850
1852
1853
1855
1856
1857
1859
1860
Appendix E
Table E.2.1
Page E.ll
Xe-135
Cone.
%FPEQ
444

Slap Powan 20X>30%
25
20
Tim* (hour*)
Appendix E
Figure E.2.1
Page E.12
TIME
Reactor
Power
% FP
Cycle
Burnup
EFPD
1-135
Cone.
% FPEQ
Xe-135
Cone.
%FPEQ
Xe
Worth
pern
Nov 1 93
1 00
100.00
2 00
100.00
3 00
100.00
4 00
100.00
5 00
100.00
6 00
100.00
7 00
100.00
8 00
100.00
9 00
100.00
10 00
100.00
100.00
11 00
100.00
12 00
13 00
100.00
100.00
14 00
15 00
100.00
16 00
100.00
17 00
100.00
18 00
100.00
19 00
100.CO
20 00
100.00
21 00
100.00
22 00
100.00
23 00
100.00
24 00
100.00
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
201
201
201
201
201
201
201
201
201
201
201
201
201
28.00
35.19
41.66
47.49
52.74
57.46
61.71
65.54
68.98
72.08
74.87
77.38
79.64
81.67
83.51
85.15
86.64
87.97
89.17
90.26
91.23
92.11
92.89
93.60
43.54
41.85
42.19
43.89
46.46
49.54
52.90
56.34
59.77
63.09
66.25
69.23
72.02
74.60
76.97
79.15
81.15
82.96
84.62
86.12
87.48
88.71
89.82
90.82
1398
1349
1359
1408
1480
1566
1657
1749
1838
1923
2002
2075
2142
2202
2257
2307
2351
2391
2427
2460
2489
2515
2538
2559
Nov 2 93
1 00
100.00
2 00
100.00
3 00
100.00
4 00
100.00
5 00
100.00
6 00
100.00
7 00
100.00
8 00
100.00
9 00
100.00
10 00
100.00
11 00
100.00
12 00
100.00
13 00
100.00
14 00
100.00
15 00
100.00
16 00
100.00
17 00
100.00
18 00
100.00
19 00
100.00
20 00
100.00
21 00
100.00
22 00
100.00
23 00
100.00
24 00
100.00
201
201
201
201
201
201
201
201
201
201
201
202
202
202
202
202
202
202
202
202
202
202
202
202
94.24
94.82
95.34
95.80
96.22
96.60
96.94
97.24
97.52
97.77
97.99
98.19
98.37
98.53
98.68
98.81
98.93
99.04
99.13
99.22
99.30
99.37
99.43
99.49
91.73
92.55
93.29
93.96
94.56
95.10
95.59
96.03
96.42
96.78
97.10
97.39
97.65
97.89
98.10
98.29
98.46
98.61
98.75
98.88
98.99
99.09
99.18
99.26
2577
2594
2609
2623
2635
2645
2655
2664
2672
2679
2685
2691
2696
2700
2705
2708
2712
2715
2717
2720
2722
2724
2726
2727
Appendix E
Table E.3.1
Page E.13
Nov 3 93
100.00
1:00
100.00
2:00
100.00
3:00
100.00
4 00
5;00
100.00
6:00
100.00
100.00
7:00
8:00
100.00
100.00
9;00
10:00
100.00
100.00
11:00
12:00
100.00
13:00
100.00
14:00
100.00
15:00
100.00
16:00
100.00
100.00
17:00
18:00
100.00
19:00
100.00
20:00
100.00
21:00
100.00
22:00
100.00
23:00
100.00
100.00
24:00
202
202
202
202
202
202
202
202
202
202
202
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
99.54
99.59
99.63
99.66
99.70
99.73
99.76
99.78
99.80
99.82
99.84
99.86
99.87
99.88
99.89
99.91
99.91
99.92
99.93
99.94
99.94
99.95
99.95
99.96
99.34
99.40
99.46
99.52
99.56
99.61
99.65
99.68
99.71
99.74
99.77
99.79
99.81
99.83
99.85
99.86
99.88
99.89
99.90
99.91
99.92
99.93
99.93
99.94
2729
2730
2731
2732
2733
2734
2735
2736
2736
2737
2738
2738
2738
2739
2739
2740
2740
2740
2740
2741
2741
2741
2741
2741
Nov 4 93
1 00
100.00
2 00
100.00
3 00
100.00
4 00
100.00
5 00
100.00
6 00
100.00
7 00
100.00
8 00
100.00
9 00
100.00
10 00
100.00
11 GO
100.00
12 00
100.00
13 00
100.00
14 00
100.00
15 00
100.00
16 00
100.00
17 DO
100.00
18 00
100.00
19 00
100.00
20 00
100.00
21 00
100.00
22 00
100.00
23 00
100.00
24 00
100.00
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
204
204
204
204
204
204
204
204
204
204
204
204
204
99.96
99.97
99.97
99.97
99.98
99.98
99.98
99.98
99.98
99.99
99.99
99.99
99.99
99.99
99.99
99.99
99.99
99.99
99.99
99.99
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
99.95
99.95
99.96
99.96
99.97
99.97
99.97
99.97
99.98
99.98
99.98
99.98
99.98
99.99
99.99
99.99
99.99
99.99
99.99
99.99
99.99
99.99
99.99
100.00
2742
2742
2742
2742
2742
2742
2742
2742
2743
2743
2743
2743
2743
2743
2743
2743
2743
2743
2743
2743
2743
2743
2743
2744
Appendix E
Table E.3.1
Page E.14

Step Power: 20%>100%
E
u
a
P>
H-
TO (W
m
C
f-1
(D
>
na
fD
s
Ch
HLn
tn
CO
1
o>
w tl
o)
c
u
m
c 0)
oh
c
o
c
0)
i
20
25
Time (hours)
TIME
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
10
11
11
11
11
12
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
Reactor
Power
% FP
Cycle
Burnup
EFPD
82.50
85.00
87.50
90.00
92.50
95.00
97.50
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
1-135
Cone.
% FPEQ
80.07
80.20
80.39
80.64
80.94
81.31
81.73
82.20
82.67
83.12
83.55
83.98
84.40
84.80
85.20
85.58
85.96
86.32
86.68
87.02
87.36
87.69
88.01
88.32
88.62
88.92
89.21
89.49
89.76
90.03
90.28
90.54
90.78
91.02
91.26
91.48
91.70
91.92
92.13
92.33
92.53
92.73
92.92
93.10
93.28
93.45
93.62
93.79
Appendix
Table
Page
E.4.1
E.16
Xe-135
Cone.
%FPEQ
92.86
92.67
92.40
92.06
91.66
91.21
90.72
90.20
89.75
89.35
89.01
88.73
88.49
88.30
88.14
88.03
87.94
87.89
87.86
87.86
87.88
87.92
87.98
88.05
88.14
88.25
88.36
88.49
88.62
88.77
88.92
89.07
89.23
89.40
89.57
89.74
89.92
90.09
90.27
90.45
90.63
90.81
90.99
91.17
91.35
91.53
91.70
91.88
Xe
Worth
pen
2600
2596
2591
2584
2576
2567
2557
2546
2536
2528
2521
2515
2510
2506
2503
2500
2499
2497
2497
2497
2497
2498
2499
2501
2503
2505
2508
2510
2513
2516
2519
2522
2526
2529
2533
2536
2540
2544
2548
2551
2555
2559
2562
2566
2570
2573
2577
2581
449

2 HOUR RAMP< eOX->IOOX POWER
261
257
256
255
254
253
251
25
T
Tin (hour*)
Appendix E
Figure E.4.1
Page E.17
XENON R E V . 6 . 1
U N I T : 1 CYCLE: 4
TIME
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
10
11
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
15
30
45
00
Reactor
Power
% FP
95.00
90.00
85.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
80.00
Cycle
Burnup
EFPD
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
Appendix E
Table E.5.1
Page E.18
1-135
Cone.
% FPEQ
99.87
99.61
99.23
98.73
98.25
97.77
97.31
96.86
96.43
96.00
95.58
95.18
94.78
94.40
94.03
93.66
93.31
92.96
92.63
92.30
91.98
91.67
91.36
91.07
90.78
90.50
90.23
89.96
89.70
89.45
89.21
88.97
88.74
88.51
88.29
88.07
87.86
87.66
87.46
87.27
87.08
86.89
86.71
86.54
RED
Xe-135
Cone.
%FPEQ
100.21
100.62
101.20
101.95
102.62
103.21
103.74
104.21
104.61
104.97
105.27
105.53
105.75
105.93
106.07
106.18
106.26
106.31
106.33
106.34
106.32
106.28
106.22
106.15
106.06
105.96
105.85
105.72
105.59
105.45
105.30
105.14
104.98
104.81
104.64
104.46
104.28
104.10
103.92
103.73
103.55
103.36
103.17
102.98
Xe
Wort
pcm
2753
2764
2780
2800
2819
2835
2849
2862
2873
2883
2892
2899
2905
2910
2913
2916
2919
2920
2921
2921
2920
2919
2918
2916
2913
2911
2908
2904
2900
2897
2892
2888
2884
2879
2874
2870
2865
2860
2855
2850
2844
2839
2834
2829
451

lhourrani|IOOX->BOX
Z93
Z92
Z9I
23
ZS9
Z6S
2L87
Z66
zes
Z84
ze3
Z62
zei
ZB
Z79
Z7e
Z77
Z76
Z75
Z74
Tims (houral
Appendix E
Figure E.5.1
Page E.19
XENON R E V . 6 . 1
U N I T : 1 CYCLE; 4
TIME
NOV 1
0 00
0 15
0 30
0 45
1 00
1 15
1 30
1 45
2 00
2 15
2 30
2 45
3 00
3 15
3 30
3 45
4 00
4 15
4 30
4 45
5 00
5 15
5 30
5 45
6 00
6 15
6 30
6 45
7 00
7 15
7 30
7 45
8 00
8 15
8 30
8 45
9 00
9 15
9 30
9 45
10 00
Reactor
Power
% FP
Cycle
Burnup
EFPD
1-135
Cone.
% FPEQ
RED
Xe-135
Cone.
%FPEQ
Xe
Worl
pcin
93
100.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
60.00
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
100.00
98.96
97.95
96.96
96.00
95.07
94.16
93.27
92.41
91.57
90.75
89.95
89.17
88.41
87.67
86.96
86.26
85.57
84.91
84.26
83.63
83.02
82.42
81.84
81.27
80.72
80.18
79.66
79.15
78.65
78.17
77.69
77.23
76.79
76.35
75.93
75.51
75.11
74.72
74.34
73.96
Appendix E
Table E.6.1
Page E.20
100.00
101.78
103.40
104.87
106.20
107.40
108.48
109.44
110.30
111.05
111.71
112.29
112.78
113.20
113.54
113.82
114.04
114.20
114.31
114.37
114.39
114.36
114.29
114.19
114.06
113.89
113.70
113.49
113.25
112.98
112.70
112.41
112.09
111.77
111.43
111.08
110.72
110.35
109.97
109.59
109.20
2740
2796
2840
2880
2917
2950
2980
3006
3030
3050
3068
3084
3098
3109
3119
3126
3132
3137
3140
3142
3142
3141
3140
3137
3133
3129
3123
3117
3111
3104
3096
3088
3079
3070
3061
3051
3041
3031
3021
3010
3000
453

Raador Power Cutback' KXni->60X
Timalhowel
Appendix E
Figure E.6.1
Page E.21
TIME
Reactor
Power
% FP
Nov 1
1 GO
2 GO
3 00
4 00
5 00
6 GG
7 00
8 00
9 00
1 0 GO
11 00
12 00
1 3 GO
14 00
1 5 GO
1 6 GO
17 00
18 00
1 9 GO
2 0 GG
2 1 GO
2 2 GO
2 3 GO
2 4 GG
93
Nov 2
1:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
13:00
14:00
15:00
16:00
17:0G
18:00
19:00
20:00
21:00
22:00
23:00
24:00
93
Cycle
Burnup
EFPD
1-135
Cone.
% FPEQ
Xe-135
Cone.
%FPEQ
Xe
Worth
pcm
0.00
G.OO
G.OG
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
G.OG
0.00
G.OG
G.OG
O.GO
G.OO
O.OG
O.GO
G.OO
G.OG
0.00
O.GO
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.GO
0.00
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
2GG
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
90.01
81.02
72.92
65.64
59.08
53.17
47.86
43.08
38.78
34.90
31.41
28.28
25.45
22.91
20.62
18.56
16.70
15.04
13.53
12.18
10.96
9.87
8.88
8.00
117.53
131.30
141.84
149.61
155.00
158.37
160.03
160.25
159.27
157.30
154.50
151.05
147.06
142.67
137.96
133.G3
127.95
122.78
117.57
112.37
107.21
102.12
97.13
92.27
3228
3607
3896
4109
4257
4350
4396
4402
4375
4321
4244
4149
4040
3919
3790
3654
3515
3373
3229
3087
2945
2805
2685
2588
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.GO
O.GO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
G.OO
0.00
O.GO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
7.20
6.48
5.83
5.25
4.72
4.25
3.83
3.44
3.10
2.79
2.51
2.26
2.03
1.83
1.65
1.48
1.34
1.20
1.08
0.97
0.88
0.79
0.71
0.64
87.53
82.94
78.51
74.24
70.14
66.20
62.44
58.84
55.41
52.14
49.04
46.09
43.30
40.65
38.14
35.78
33.54
31.43
29.44
27.56
25.80
24.14
22.58
21.11
2490
2391
2292
2194
2097
2001
1907
1815
1725
1637
1553
1471
1392
1315
1242
1172
1105
1041
980
922
867
814
765
717
Appendix E
Table E.7.1
Page E.22
Nov 3
1: 0 0
2:00
3:00
4 :00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8 :00
9:00
10:00
1 1: 0 0
12 ;00
13:00
14:00
15:00
16:00
17:00
18:00
19:00
20:00
21:00
22:00
23:00
24:00
93
Nov 4
1 00
2 00
3 00
4 00
5 00
6 00
7 00
8 00
9 00
10 00
11 00
12 00
13 00
14 00
15 00
16 00
17 00
18 00
19 00
20 00
21 00
22 00
23 00
24 00
93
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
0.58
0.52
0.47
0.42
0.38
0.34
0.31
0.28
0.25
0.22
0.20
0.18
0.16
0.15
0.13
0.12
0.11
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.05
19.73
18.44
17.22
16.08
15.02
14.02
13.08
12.20
11.38
10.62
9.90
9.23
8.60
8.01
7.47
6.96
6.48
6.03
5.62
5.23
4.87
4.53
4.22
3.92
673
631
591
553
518
485
453
424
396
370
346
323
301
281
262
245
228
213
198
185
172
160
149
139
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.00
3.65
3.40
3.16
2.94
2.73
2.54
2.36
2.20
2.04
1.90
1.77
1.64
1.52
1.42
1.32
1.22
1.14
1.06
0.98
0.91
0.85
0.79
0.73
0.68
129
121
112
104
97
90
84
78
73
68
63
58
54
51
47
44
41
38
35
33
30
28
26
24
Appendix E
Table E.7.1
Page E.23

Reactor Trip from 100% Equilibrium
24
40
32
46
Time (hours)
56
72
60
68
96
XENON REACTIVITY TRANSIENTS

Power Steps from 50% RTP
2.8
2.7
V 0 O 0 0 0 o r>-o
2.6
E
o
a
V
2.5
"5s.""
"
0) c
cO re0>
2.4
> _
0>tJ
oo(D
W
Ln
OQH*
C
(0t-t
w
00
>
(D
dCL
H.
X
w
i +-
gebeaaabbdaaddddq
cjc
OH
c
o
c
2.3
x
2.2
2.1
10
60% Power
I
20
r~
45
35
25
40
30
50
Time (hours)
70% Power
60% Power
90% Power
"j
458
APPENDIX F:
EVALUATION OF PRESENTATIONS AND
EFFECTIVENESS OF TEXT
The concepts and methods presented in this text have formed the basis of two
course presentations with a third being planned. While in the development stages,
the author used draft versions of the text to present the experimental three (3) credit
course NEE 495A at the University of Arizona during the Spring, 1993 term. NEE
495A, "Power Plant Operations" was taught by the author to six (6) NEE senior level
students under the direct supervision of Professor R. L. Seale (thesis advisor). The
students were requested to complete a summative evaluation of this course and five
(5) complied with the request. The results of this evaluation and a summary of their
comments is included as Appendix F-1.
During the summer and fall of 1993 the concepts and methods presented in
this text were revised and refined taking into account student feedback from NEE
495A. Particular attention was placed on expanding the quantity and scope of
examples, problems, and questions and developing detailed solutions for problems
and questions. Second draft versions of this text were assembled as "Theory and
Applications of Power Plant Operations: A Text" which was used as the reference
text for a course taught by the author at PVNGS. Six (6) graduate engineers
completed this 160 contact hour applied theory course (NOX40) during January 1994.
Three of these engineers are currently in training to become Shift Technical Advisors
at PVNGS. The remaining three are junior engineers who work in the Nuclear Fuels
Management Department at PVNGS as Nuclear Analysis engineers or Reactor
Engineers.
Prior to using 'Theory and Applications of Power Plant operations; A Text"
as the reference text for the PVNGS course NOX40, a technical review was
completed.
This review was performed by Dr. James Brittingham a technical
consultant to the Nuclear Fuels Management Department at PVNGS. While this
459
review resulted in few actual revisions of content or scope of the text, it provided
assurance of the technical accuracy of the text.
Upon completion of NOX40, the participants were requested to complete a
summative course evaluation. Copies of the evaluation and their responses are
included as Appendix F-2. Participant comments and notes taken by the author
during the instructional process were used to revise the concepts, methods, examples,
problems, and questions of the text into their current state. The success of PVNGS
course NOX40 in January, 1994 has resulted in this course being scheduled for
presentation in June, 1994. During this presentation, members of the PVNGS
Training Department will complete the course and assume ownership of same from
the author for all future presentations.
In addition to subjective student/participant evaluations, other indicators of the
efficacy of "Theory and Applications of Power Plant Operations: A Text" as a text for
collegiate level instruction are the learning objectives implemented by the text and
the exam questions to which participants responded during the course. The learning
objectives are included within the body of the text in shaded text boxes. All of the
learning objectives have their foundation in the knowledge and skills required of Shift
Technical Advisors at nuclear facilities by the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations
(INPO) in INPO 90-003 "Guidelines for the Training and Qualification of Shift
Technical Advisors".
The exam questions used to evaluate the participants of
PVNGS course NOX40 are included as Appendix F-4. They serve as an indication
of the scope of expectation of course participants.
460
APPENDIX F-1
NEE 495A SUMMATIVE EVALUATION
To:
NEE 495A Students
From:
Robert L. Simmons
NEE Graduate Student
Subject:
NEE 495A Course Evaluation
Power Plant Operations TNEE 495A/499'> is an experimental course which is being

taught (in the spring semester of 1993) as part of my Master's level work in this
department. This evaluation instrument is to be used to determine how completely
this course achieved the published design goals and objectives. You are being asked
to complete the evaluation and return it to me by Monday, May 10, 1993. The
results of this evaluation will be used to shape revisions to, the future design of, and
possible future applications of this course material. Please be as specific and detailed
as your available time allows.
From the course svllabus:
This course will provide enhanced understanding of the applications of
Nuclear Engineering principles to the operation of a Central Station Nuclear
Generating Station.
Nuclear engineering students who are completing their undergraduate
education and are well versed in basic principles and theoretical bases of the
nuclear engineering discipline are encouraged to take this course. Whether
their future is in research, design , or operation, an increased understanding
of the operational applications of their discipline to a nuclear facility will
improve their ability to contribute in a meaningful manner in a shorter time
frame.
461
1.
Did your previous undergraduate education prepare you to understand the

content of NEE 495A ?
Five respondents answered YES
Specific Comments:
-All major systems were covered and specific questions could be
oMani
tied into the overall system.

-The concepts were taught, this course supplied the applications of those concepts.
Particularly reactor dynamics and nuclear heat transport.
2.
Was sufficient overview of typical Central Station Nuclear Generating Station

components, arrangement, systems and terminology provided ?
Specific Comments:
-The abbreviations were numerous, but the handout helped.
-The general components of a plant were clearly stated and how
their function affected the entire system was clearly provided.
-When a new system was discussed, an overview was provided to
understand how the system worked and what concepts were
employed.
3.
Did studying power plant applications improve your understanding of the basic
principles of nuclear engineering ?
Specific Comments:
-My basic understanding increased because systems were integrated, not separated.
-Especially reactivity management.
-This course brought together and related many principles taught in other classes.
462
4.
What is your intended goal after graduation ?

a.
Continue in graduate school. (1): depends on job market
b.
Work for a national lab. (1): possibly
c.
Work for a nuclear design organization. (1): waste mgmt
d.
Work for an organization which operates a nuclear facility. (2)
e.
Work for a nuclear regulatory/oversight organization.
f.
-Work in waste management/health physics
From the course syllabus: Level 1:

A presentation of the actual process of operating a nuclear generating plant
will be given. The plant will be taken through heatup on pump work,
establishing pressure control in the pressurizer, approach to criticality, power
ascent in the subpower range, power ascent with reactivity feedback, operation
at steady state and transient conditions, and ultimately a reactor trip from
full power.
1.
Were the processes specified above presented in an understandable manner

Specific Comment
-Most processes were understandable; the power ascent and reactivity feedback
portion was not entirely clear to me,
2.
Did the course text, class notes, or instructor handouts help you understand
the material ?
Specific Comments:
-The handouts and the core data book were most helpful The text may he better
-if references to other texts students have were made.
463
-Pictures were clear and understandable, examples were appropriate.
-All helped.
3.
Was the course presented in a logical sequence ?

SpecHic Comment:
Very logical sequence from heatup to frill power.
4.
Did homework assignments help you understand the course material ?

Specific Comments:
-Admittedly I did not do assignments as carefrilly as I should have and wanted
to, but they made me think. When you wanted extra work and probed for indepth thought, a direction of where to start would have been most helpful
-The assignments usually both drove home the ideas and concepts as well as high
light possible areas of difficulty.
5.
Was the instructor able to answer your questions in an understandable manner

SpecHic Comments:
An effort was made to relate complex ideas to things that I have previously
understood.
-Always.
From the course syllabus: Level 2:

In parallel with the above sequential process of plant and reactor startup,
operation and shutdown, development of physical models to aid in the
understanding of the basis behind these processes will be included. An
464
example is: Why during an approach to criticality it takes longer for neutron
detector response to level off the closer Keff approaches unity.
1.
Did the physical models used in class help you understand the material ?
Specific Comments:
-Physical models were most helpful especially the 6-Factor Formula model
-The cyclic model of the 6-Factor Formula as well as the flow diagram helped
in relating the physical and mathematical portions of the theory.
2.
Did the physical models used in class help reinforce the basic principles and
theoretical bases of the nuclear engineering discipline ?
Specific Comments:
-The models reinforced basic principles and allowed students to take a different
look at things. Good understanding of principles is needed to be able to
interpret the models.
3.
Were the physical models used in class too simplistic ?

Viree respondents answered NO and two answered YES
Specific Comments:
-At the time some seemed too simplistic, but I'll be damned if I can remember
which ones.
-I had no previous experience with putting the theory together.
Simplicity was appreciated.
-In some ways they were very simplistic but it made complicated theory easier to
understand.
465
4.
Did the physical models used in class adhere to the basic principles you have
previously learned ?
Specific Comments:
-Often provided a new way to look at things.
-Concepts were regularly related to material I was learning in other courses.
-Sometimes with a different view but in the end the same.
From the course svllabus: Level 3:

In support of the two previous levels, the third level will review the theoretical
development as presented in classical undergraduate nuclear engineering
course work. For example, a classical development or review of the In-hour
equation to support understanding of the startup rate equations which are
used at the nuclear station.
1.
Was the material presented in class based upon the theoretical development
presented in your previous undergraduate courses ?
Specific Comments:
Having the instructor know the material from our previous classes was helpful
and the methods of how it was presented.
-It clarified nuclear dynamics and reactivity management.
2.
Was the theoretical basis of the material presented in this class reviewed and
applied ?
Specific Comment:
466
-Reviewed very well and models given to make the knowledge easier to recall
3.
Did completion of this course help you to better understand or apply what you
have previously learned ?
Specific Comments:
-I see where it all fits.
-The course clarified some questions and brought up many more that I have
never considered.
-Very much so.
-Very much so.
4.
In many aspects, the content of NEE 495A is very similar to the content of
NEE 406 (Nuclear Engineering Laboratory), NEE 481 (Nuclear Fuel Cycles),
and NEE 483 (Dynamics of Nuclear Systems).
As such, is NEE 495A
redundant or supportive ?
Five respondents answered SUPPORTIVE
Specific Comments:
-The course is supportive and shows application on an entire plant scale and not
specific components.
-The other courses do not show the relationships to the other subjects in the
context of a large system.
5.
NEE 495A was designed as a Spring Senior year course. Is this the optimum
time for the course ? If not, when should it be taught ?
Five respondents answered OPTIMUM
Specific Comments:
The best time to have the class.
467
-This is the optimum time because you need the classes mentioned above, as well
as, the three AME classes required to be able to derive the full potential this
class allows and expects.
-It is the best time. If it were taught earlier it would be like putting the cart
before the horse.
-It is appropriate concurrently or after the prerequisite material has been taught.
It is the best time since now the knowledge can be applied.
General:
1.
In your opinion, is NEE 495A an appropriate technical elective for a NEE

undergraduate student ?
Specific Comment:
It should be required.
2.
Was the level of difficulty commensurate with a senior level course ?

Specific Comment:
-The homework was sometimes a little easy, and the reading seemed short, but
looking at my notebook there was a lot.
3.
Was the scope of the course commensurate with a 3 credit course ?

Specific Comments:
-Yes, the entire reactor system was covered. More time and credit could have
been covered.
-A lot of material was covered.
468
4.
This course was taught by a Master's Degree candidate. Did this detract from
the course content, presentation or accuracy ?
Five respondents answered NO
Specific Comments:
-Not at all
As long as they know the material and are a good teacher, who cares.
-Outstanding job done.
I felt the instructor was very knowledgeable and trustworthy in the material.
5.
Would you recommend this course to others ?

Specific Comment:
-Every Nuclear Engineer should be required to take this course.
What specific comments do vou have ?

-I enjoyed the course very much.
-I have never been in a class where the prof, had obviously spent as much time
organizing and preparing. This allowed us as students to follow and anticipate his
moves and for Bob to follow and anticipate our thoughts. This synchronization of
teacher and student was a very unique experience and I'm thankful to have experienced
this > Bob also has a special ability to figure out your approach to a problem from your
in class interaction and home work and to use this to aid him in his approach to
explaining ideas to each individual
-Excellent course. Was very good at bringing every thing learned over the last couple of
years together. It is also a good send off course in that it highlighted all the things we
should remember from previous courses.
-Even though Bob Simmons taught this class as a masters degree candidate, his
professionalism was representative of a full time professor. I would highly recommend
this course to any graduating nuclear engineer, before entering the industry. Bob
469
Simmons has been the best teacher I have ever had. Not only did Bob teach us this
course, he also was always available for help in other courses. I would highly
recommend that Bob obtain his PhD and become a professor for this department.
470
APPENDIX F-2
NOX40 SUMMATIVE EVALUATION
This thesis was used as the textbook for a 160 hour long company training
course taught during the month of January 1994 at the Palo Verde Nuclear
Generating Station location.
The student population consisted of six degreed
engineers with an average of 83 years of nuclear facility experience. Three of these

engineers have Nuclear Engineering/Science degrees and work in the Nuclear
Analysis/Reactor Engineering portion of the organization. The completed this course
to improve their job knowledge and skills. The remaining three do not have Nuclear
Engineering degrees and are currently in the Shift Technical Advisor training
pathway and completed this course as part of that pathway to improve their
understanding of nuclear fundamentals and the application of those fundamentals to
specific power plant operational examples.
The following evaluation document was provided to the course
participants in an attempt to solicit their opinions concerning the design and merits
of the course and supporting text. The evaluation document and their responses are
included to as an indicator of the efficacy of this thesis as a teaching instrument in
the industrial setting.
471
SUMMATIVE EVALUATION of NOX40:

THEORY and APPLICATIONS
POWER PLANT OPERATIONS
This course was developed and presented in an attempt to increase your
understanding of the theory and applications of the engineering principles associated
with the operation of a nuclear power facility. Please complete the following
evaluation and return it to me at Station 7595. Since the course text is being
submitted as my masters thesis, I intend to use your comments to validate and/or
revise the text and course scope. Please make your comments as detailed as your
available time allows.
Thank you
RL Simmons, Senior Engineer, STA
Name:
Degree:
Position Title:
Major Responsibilities:
Years of Nuclear Facility Ebqierience:
Years of total Industrial Experience:
1.
Did your previous undergraduate/graduate education prepare you to

understand the content of NOX40 ?
The three participants with Nuclear Degrees answered ja while the other three answered no.
Specific Comments:
a.
The basic principles were kamed in college.
472
b.
My undergraduate nuclear sciences and engineering education encompassed most of the

concepts presented in NOX40, but it was more theoretical, less specyic and had less detail
as far as applications were concerned.
c.
Not realty except for math, thermodynamics and fluids.
d.
The course would have been very difficult for me without previously taking reactor theory
and systems during STA training pathway.
e.
2.
Somewhat
Did any Nuclear Facility technical training help prepare you to understand the
content of NOX40 ? If yes, which specific courses helped the most ?
Five participants answered JB and one answered no.
Specific comments:
a.
Introduction to plant systems and integrated operations course helped.
b.
I took systems and components for technical stqff because it was relevant to the work I was
doing in Risk and Reliability.
c.
All of the courses in fundamentals training which were presented earlier in the STA
pathway. Specifically, reactor theory, thermodynamics and fluids.
d.
Plant experience and Off helped.
e.
Reactor theory and ^stems as part of the training which operators and STA candidates
share.
f.
ROrr fundamentals courses for reactor theory and thermodynamics during the first part
of STA training.
3.
Was the content of NOX40 redundant to the previous courses listed above,
or did this course extend your understanding ?
Specific comments:
a.
I feel that this course extended my understanding more than most of my undergraduate
nuclear courses.
b.
Previous courses were fragmentations. This course extended my overall understanding by

connecting all the pieces.
c.
There was very little redundancy. This course extended my understanding a great deal
d.
This course
vosffv extended
my understanding.
473
e.
I found very Uttle 'redundancy'. NOX40 helped reiitforce and greatly extended previous
understanding obtained in fiindamentals
f.
Both,
and systems courses.
Some of the material was redundant, but this course tended to bring the
fundamentals together with the systems training and provided practical examples and
applications.
4.
Would you suggest that NOX40 be presented at PVNGS again? To what type
of audience ?
All participants responded yes.
Specific comments;
a.
I believe it is excellent training for anyone needing to learn more about reactor principles
and reactor to secondary system interdependencies.
b.
Depnitefy. STA candidates for sure. If you had no reactor theory this would be a
difficult course to follow.
c.
For STA's, Reactor Enêers and Nuclear Analysis personnel
d.
To entry level type STA's, Reactor Engineers and anyone else dealing with reactivity
management and support to operations.
5.
e.
Definitely to STA's; Reactor Engineers and SRO certification persons may benefit too.
To STA's.
Was the course length appropriate ?

Specific comments:
6.
a.
The extra time allowed for questions and self-study was valuable.
b.
I retract
c.
Depending on the audience it could be a little shorter.
d.
It could probably be shortened to 3 weeks.
previous statement that it should be a three week course.
Did the course text, class notes and instructor handouts help you understand
the material ?
All participants responded
474
Snecific comments:
a.
I occasional^ had to refer to notes fivm previous courses to review basic material which
was a precursor to this course.
b.
They were well written.
c.
I feel the course layout, objectives and notes completefy covered the materiaL
d.
Absolutely, I will continue to utilize them as reference materials during completion of

training and on the job.
e.
The use of the printing whiteboard especially allowed me to remain in the flow of the
material being present^. Sometimes note taking is distracting during a presentation.
1.
Was the course presented in a logical sequence ?

All participants responded res.
Specific comments:
a.
The course covered all realms of plant operations starting in Mode 5 to Mode 1 and back.
b.
The course progressed from basic concepts that were expanded upon and at the end,
multiple concepts were integrated; inter-relationships of concepts was stressed.
c.
Very much so'well laid out.
d.
For me the sequence was logical because there was a large gap between fundamentals and
systems in previous training. Even though some things were redundant, it was not overkill.
8.
Did examples, problems, and study questions help you understand the
material?
All participants responded res.
Specific comments:
a.
I learned a lot from performing problems.
b.
The example problems were good for understandu:g one abjective at a time. !feel some of
the problems should be more challenging.
c.
Again, well thought out.
d.
Yes, but even more practical problems would have been good. The best questions are the
ones that make you step outside of the scope of the lesson and evaluate a big picture
situation.
9.
Were the instructor provided solutions helpful to you ?
475
AU participants responded yes.
Specific conunents:
a.
Provided sound methods to solutions, which could be compared to my own path and
answer.
b.
It was also good that the solutions were not provided as part of the text. Waiting until I
had an opportunity to work on the solutions first was a good strategy.
10.
c.
It is often helpful to see how someone who knows what he is doing solves a problem.
d.
They are excellent for review.
Was I able to answer your questions in an understandable manner ?

Specific comments;
11.
a.
Exceeded expectations.
b.
I feel that all questions were answered clearly and with knowledge.
c.
Your answers (including the use of analogies) were excellent.
d.
Consistently.
Did the physical models used in class help you understand the material ?
Specific comments:
12.
a.
It is helpful to not always have to depend on drawings and imagination.
b.
Physical models helped make material less abstract.
Did the physical models used in class help reinforce the basic principles and
theoretical bases of the nuclear engineering discipline ?
Specific comments:
a.
Physical models helped build mental models which ensure understanding.
476
13.
Did the derivations which were presented in class help you understand ths
material and the limitations of the models used ?
Specific comments:
a.
I betieve understanding the derivations is the
to having sound understanding of
material and its limitations. This class did that welL

b.
Without the derivations we shouldn't understand the 'why' part of the limitations or the
assumptions that go along with the results.
14.
Did the physical models used in class adhere to the basic principles you have
previously learned ?
Specific comments:
a.
The models were a definite aid and presented the basic principles soundfy and clearfy.
b.
Models made basic principles clearer.
c.
Tlus course greatfy enhanced my previous understanding for how the reactor and plant
systems operate.
15.
Has completing the class increased your value as a nuclear facility engineer ?
In what ways ?
AU participants responded yes.
Specific comments:
a.
Definitely. Knowledge is power. Even if I were not in STA training, this is a benefit
because I finalh knowlunderstand overall plant operation and causehffect relationships
during plant upsets.
b.
J feel that this class increased my understanding of reactor behavior and secondary
behavior and how they relate. Also gave me further understanding of reactor principles.
c.
This has helped me to understand the interactions between reactivity management and
thermodynamics. No college course I took tied my NE courses to ME courses.
477
d.
Learning how the core data book is used and understanding the how and why of the
calculations involved wUl certainly help me to be more efficient in producing the core data
book, catching errors, andlor being able to make suggestions for improvements. I feel the
same will hold true for other Nuclear Analysis work I will do.
e.
I'm âd I took the course 'post systems' and 'pre-simulator'.
f.
I believe so. The practical applications of ECC's, HM's and transient anafysis helped me
better understand the operation of a PWR and heêd clar(fy some of the duties and
expectations of the STA position.
What specific comments do you have ?

a.
Great job. Well done.
b.
I feel that this was an excellent training class. I cant begin to measure how much I
believe this will help me in my job field. I feel this course was chaUen^g and motivating,
which is a great help in aiding the learning process. I believe this class has broadened my
knowledge of both reactor theory and also how the primary and secondary plants qfjiect
each other. Best training class I have ever taken.
c.
I wish this course had been made available to me earlier. This was an excellent course to
tie together 'textbook theory' and practical plant applications. The text was well written
and the flow from startup to shutdown was logfcaL However, I learned the mostfnm the
lecturesldiscussions and performing the homework problems. This was by far, the best
training I have received at Palo Verde.
d.
Very lopcal flow of the material that develop^ understanding of concepts and their
practical applications with an emphasis on petforming as an STA. Excellent course.
478
APPENDIX F-3
NOX40-00: THEORY and APPLICATIONS
of POWER PLANT OPERATIONS
SUMMATIVE INSTRUCTOR COMMENTS
1.
Course design was 120 hours in a 160 hour format. We lost one day for the
MLK holiday and 4 hours for engineering strategy meetings. Most days the
students had 2-3 hours for study. This study was necessary for them to master
the concepts taught and perform work on study questions and problems.
Conclusion: design assumptions relating to timing and duration were valid.
2.
The text format option of imbedding the learning objectives into a text box
within the text body was a good idea and helped focus the learning process.
However, having all the objectives on a single sheet for review purposes was
also quite valuable.
3.
The students made extensive use of the instructor provided solutions to study
problems and study questions. These solutions were distributed only after the
students had the opportunity to work on each exercise.
4.
During the last week of the course, an electronic white board became
available. If the instructor does a lot of extensive board work, this is a very
good tool. The students used the copies of the board work as supplements to
their notes and the text.
5.
Rather than providing an equation sheet for exams, I allowed each student to
develop and organize their own.
This is a valuable technique.
I am
attempting to help them develop a 'Tjag of lools" which they can use on the
job. The time spent working on the equation sheet provided each of them
with the ability to organize their thoughts.
6.
The students were very receptive to the idea that most of the evaluation
techniques were directly transportable to their jobs. They realize that their
jobs entail real time response to plant situations which require them to
479
evaluate data and processes and post-event reflective evaluation of "did
everything go as expected".
7.
A half day set of exercises using the Operator Assistance Programs (OAP) to
solve problems and evaluate/predict response would be a valuable addition to
the course. If the computer logistics can be worked out. Specific OAP
programs of interest and application are:
8.
a.
AZTILT
b.
LEAK
c.
CRIT
d.
XENON
In addition to providing each student with a copy of "ASME Steam Tables"

and "Chart of the Nuclides", it is important to provide a selected set of data
from the "bam book' to show the neutron energy dependent trends in
microscopic cross sections of key nuclides.
9.
This group of students included 3 STA candidates who had finished operator
academic fundamentals and systems training with the operators. These 3 are
not nuclear engineers. In addition, we had 3 nuclear engineering graduates
who are relatively new to the industry (2 from Reactor Engineering and 1
fi-om Nuclear Analysis). This was a very good synergistic mix of knowledge
and experience.
10.
Should we continue this course as part of either the STA pathway or Engineer
Training in general? I have my own opinions but will defer fi:om stating them
until the student sunmiative evaluations are returned and diagnosed. This
teach cost 600 MH of preparation time plus (7)160 MH of presentation =
1720 MH which is about 1 man year which is approximately $ 65K including
overhead. The commitment cost for another teach contains two variables: 1)
Number of students, and 2) who teaches the course. If I teach the course, the
preparation time will be almost zero since I am going to revise the material
480
anyway as part of my master's thesis preparation.
If another instructor
teaches the course I would expect somewhere between 320 hours and 480
hours of prep time required. The initial intention was to have Peter Murphy
and Jeff Ashton (Engineering Training) complete the course and then take
ownership. A very good plan. However, at the end of the first week they
were both shunted into a simulator course. My recommendation is that if we
wish to keep this course as part of our active STA path that we teach it again
soon. Have me teach it and make Peter and Jeff available to complete the
course.
11.
Exam #1 was administered in 2 parts. A closed book portion and an open

book portion in which the core data book and transient xenon data were
available for use along with the student developed equation sheets. It took
about 5 hours to complete.Exam #2 was administered in a single open book
format and also took about 5 hours to complete. The student course grades
ranged from 84.9% to 94.9% with an average of 91.8%
12.
After collection, diagnosis and summation, the student course evaluations will
be included with this summative evaluation.
481
APPENDIX F-4
NOX40 EXAMINATIONS
1.0
The RCS is heated from 100 F to 565 F with all control element assemblies
fully inserted and a soluble boron concentration which is 700 ppm greater than
the ECBC. The net reactivity change within the core during this heatup
processes is -3000 pcm.
Predict whether you would expect the nuclear
instrument count rate to increase or decrease during this heatup process and
explain the basis for this prediction. (5 points)
2.0
A centrifugal pump is delivering 8 million pounds mass per hour of water with
a suction pressure of 400 psia and a suction temperature of 200 F. The
differential pressure across this pump is 850 psia. Calculate the pumping
power which must be delivered to the pump shaft if the pump has an
efficiency of 80%. Express the answer in Mw. (778 ft-lb^tu)(3412 Btu/kwhr)(5 points).
3.0
The following conditions exist within the RCS.

Pressure = 1000 psia
Temperature = 500 F
The following limits apply at the current time.
RCS Subcooling must be greater than 30 F.
Reactor Coolant Pumps require a Minimum
Net Positive Suction Head of 250 psia.
Are all of the specified limits being met?(4 points)
482
4.0
The RCS is at a temperature of 220 F and a pressure of 750 psia. Is a

heatup rate of 45 F/hr allowed? Why or why not? (Acopy of LCO 3/4.4.8.1
is attached).(2 points)
5.0
As the RCS is heated up from 100 F to 565 F, what is the expected response
of the differential pressure across the core? Assume that the number of
miming reactor coolant pumps remains constant. Explain the basis for this
response. (3 points)
6.0
The reactor coolant system is being operated at 510 F with 3 of the 4 RCP's
operating. The fourth RCP is about to be started. Predict the effect of
starting the fourth pump on the differential pressure across the core and the
differential pressure across the previously running pumps. Do not consider
the effects of the starting transient but only the steady state changes caused
by starting the fourth pump.(2 points)
a. The differential pressure across the core
b. The differential pressure across the previously

running pumps
7.0
The reactor coolant system is being heated to NOT/NOP by pump heat. The
current conditions are 400 F and 2000 psia. There are 900 kw of pressurizer
heaters energized and pressurizer spray flow is maintaining pressurizer
pressure. Ignoring ambient heat losses, estimate the pressurizer spray flow
rate. (3412 Btu/kw-hr).(5 points).
483
8.0
The RCS is operating at a cold leg temperature of 565 F and a pressure of

2250 psia.
The reactor drain tank has been slowly pressurizing and is
currently at 100 psia. The pressurizer relief valve tailpiece temperature

detectors indicate 195 F for three of the valves and 350 F for one of the
valves. Does this data support that one of the relief valves might be leaking
into the reactor drain tank? Why or why not? (3 points)
9.0
The following ECC has been completed.

Estimated Critical Rod Position = Group 4 at 60 inches
Estimated Critical Boron Concentration = 500 ppm
Estimated Time of Criticality = 1000 hours on Jan 14, 94 which is 36
hours after the reactor trip.
A reactor startup is in progress on Jan 14, 94. The latest RCS boron sample
is 495 ppm . It is 1300 hours and the operator is just starting to withdraw the
regulating rods. If the startup is allowed to continue, do you expect the actual
critical position to be at the ECRP, a position which is lower than the ECRP
or a position which is higher than the ECRP? WHY? (4 points)
10.0
The RCS is stable at 565 F and 2250 psia with 1500 ppm soluble boron
concentration. An ECC has been calculated in which the Estimated Critical
Boron Concentration is 700 ppm. Use the following data to estimate the
volume of water which must be charged into the RCS to accomplish the
desired dilution.(4 points)
484
11.0
Total system volume:
100,000 gallons
Average Boron Worth:
8.9 pcm/ppm
Average ITC:
15.9 pcm/F
Charging Rate:
80.0 gpm @ 100 F
RWT Boron Concent:
4250 ppm
Assume that the RCS/PZR system has a boron equalization half life of
approximately 1 hour when full backup heater power is used to accomplish
boron equalization. How long should the boron equalization process be
allowed to continue to compensate for the boron concentration adjustment in
problem #10.0 and result in the Pressurizer being within 10 ppm of the
RCS?(3 points)
12.0
The pressurizer level indicating and control system uses a differential pressure
type level detector with a wet reference leg. The system is calibrated such
that indicated level equals actual level when the pressurizer is under 2250 psia
saturation conditions and the reference leg is at 100 F. For each of the
following conditions, evaluate the effects of the departure from normal on the
relationship between indicated and actual level.(4 points)
a.
A tubing fitting leak is causing the reference leg level to slowly

drain at a rate which is greater than the condensing pot can
accommodate.
Actual level will be
^than
indicated level.
b.
A loss of containment cooling processes is causing the

temperature of the fluid in the reference leg to increase above
100 F. Actual level will be
level.
^than indicated
485
13.0
During a reactor startup process, an insertion of +500 pcm of reactivity results

in an increase in stable count rate from 400 cps to 600 cps. Estimate the
reactivity state of the core after this insertion.(5 points)
14.0
A reactor startup strategy is developed in which the critical position will be

approached in the following manner. The RCS soluble boron will be diluted
to the ECBC (average boron worth = 9 pcm/ppm), the shutdown banks of
control rods will be fully withdrawn (approximate worth of the shutdown rods
= 10,000 pcm), and then the regulating rods will be withdrawn toward the
estimated critical position (approximate worth of the regulating rods is 3,000
pcm). The estimated critical boron concentration is 900 ppm and the
estimated critical rod position is at a point where there are still -700 pcm of
the regulating rods in the core.
Evaluate the following data and determine whether or not you would advise
continuing with the startup of if sufficient reason exists to abort the startup.
Defend your answer.(6 points)
^Vhile diluting from 2000 ppm to the ECBC, the stable count rate
increased from 10 cps to 15 cps.
While withdrawing the shutdown rods, the stable count rate increased
from 15 cps to 60 cps.
15.0
During a reactor startup the following observations were made.

Evaluate these observations for internal consistency and determine
whether or not you would advise continuing with the startup. Explain
the basis for your answer.(5 points)
486
The reactor has been dilated to the ECBC and the ECRP is Group 4
at 90 inches withdrawn. During the pull from Group 3 at 60 to Group
3 at 75 inches, approximately 50 pcm was inserted and count rate
increase from 55 ops to 120 cps. The reactor operator indicated that
count rate had stabilized at 120 cps within about 2 minutes from the
time he stopped pulling the rods.
OPEN BOOK PORTION
1,0
Estimate the reactivity effects of cooling down the RCS from 565F to 350F
at 300 EFPD with RCS boron concentration at 250 ppm. Identify all data
sources used to perform this estimate. Assume ARI. (5 points)
2.0
Determine the ECBC for a reactor startup which is scheduled to occur at 36

hours after a trip from 100% power at 300 EFPD. A partially completed
form and Xenon data are attached. Identify all data sources used to perform
this ECBC. (15 points)
3.0
A reactor startup is in progress.
The ECRP is Group 4 at 90 inches
withdrawn. The MOC HZP rod worth curve (2.921) applies to the startup.
Use the following count rate data to develop a 1/M plot and determine if you
will advise the Shift Supervisor to continue the startup. The next rod pull is
from Group 3 at 30" to Group 3 at 60" withdrawn. Explain the basis for your
advice. (15 points)
487
Rod Position
Count Rate Tcps)
Gp 1 @ 0"
Gp 1 @ 30"
Gp 1 @ 60"
Gp 1 @ 90"
Gp 2 @ 30"
Gp 2 @ 60"
Gp 2 @ 90"
Gp 3 @ 30"
200
210
250
270
295
330
350
425
SECOND EXAM:
1.0
Can the following data and equation be used to accurately calculate the value
of the stable reactor period (T)? Why or why not? (4 points)
Xeft =0.1 sec"'
/S = 0.00600
Po = 500 pcm
T = (0-p)/KaP
2.0
Determine the value of the stable startup rate (SUR) and reactor period (T)
for a reactor in which the following data applies. ( 4 points)
p = 0.00550
Po = 100 pcm
Xeff = 0.1 sec"'
3.0
How much reactivity must be inserted into a previously critical reactor to

create a stable startup rate (SUR) of 0.4 DPM? ( 4 points)
4.0
An event which causes a sudden reduction on RCS Tjou of 10 F while the

core power level is 10'% RTF is being analyzed for severity. Is this event
more severe at BOC, MOC, or EOC? Explain why. (5 points)
5.0
Sketch a plot of power vs time for an event which is a step insertion of

positive reactivity into a core which is previously critical at 10"^% RTP and
stays below the POAH> Describe the factors which cause the sketch to have
the shape you have drawn. (4 points)
6.0
Sketch a plot of log power vs. time for an event which is a ramp
insertion of positive reactivity into a core which is previously critical at
10"^% RTP and stays below the POAH. Describe the factors which
cause the sketch to have the shape you have drawn. (4 points)
7.0
A reactor is supercritical, power is increasing and reactivity is being

inserted at the rate of -15 pcm/sec in an attempt to stop the power
increase. What value of net reactivity will exist in core when power
turns? (3 points)
8.0
PVNGS Unit I Qrcle 4 was operating at 100% RTP (NOT/NOP) at

MOC when the unit tripped and all control rods fully inserted. Plot
fission rate vs. time on a scale which covers at least 8 decades of power
for the time frame 0-1 hour. Explain the basis for all regions of the
plot. (6 points)
9.0
PVNGS Unit I Cycle 4 has just been made critical at 10"% RTP. The
operator desires to stabilize the reactor at 3% RTP, What stable SUR
should be established? Assume that EOC conditions apply. (4 points)
10.0
PVNGS Unit I C^cle 4 is being started up after a refueling outage.

The ex-core neutron detectors have not yet been caUbrated. Is the
following data consistent? Why or Why not? (5 points)
489
Indicated reactor nower
R(^'T^(avg) "
RCS Th,(avg)
Indicated Core Flow Rate
11.0
=
=
=
=
35%
565 T
595 T
102% rated flow
PVNGS Unit 1 Ciycle 4 tripped 60 minutes ago from 100% RTP. All
reactor coolant pumps are running. Use the following data to estimate
the feedwater flow rate in gallons per minute required to maintain both
RCS Tôid and steam generator levels constant. (4 points)
RCS T,d
RCS Pressure
S/G Pressure
Feedwater temp
=
=
=
570 T
2250 psia
=
1170 psia
100 F
The following data applies to PVNGS Unit I Cycle 4 after a trip from
100% RTP. All reactor coolant pumps are off and the RCS has been
^,D and 540 T T^Q,.
cooled down to 530 F T
S/G number 2 is at 1170
psia. How much heat is S/G #2 removing from the RCS in BTU/hr.?
(5 points)
The reactor is critical at 10% RTP near BOC when soluble Boron
concentration is high and both MTC and ITC are positive. If the
reactor operator withdraws control rods to insert +24 pcm and ITC is
+4 pcm/F, how much will RCS Tjî^ change if the operator takes no
other actions? (5 points)
At 1200 hours on January 28,1994 PVNGS Unit I is operating at 85%
RTP, ARO, RCS boron concentration = 1000 ppm and RCS Tj^y =
556 F. Between that time and 1400 hours, the following changes are
made. What value do you predict for RCS T^y at 1400 hours? (6
points)
490
i
O i i n
c\r\/rf
y\3yo S\.H\
2. RCS boron diluted to 985 ppm.
3. Xenon transient insertion of +20 pcm.
4. Power coefficient:
-17 pcm/ % power
ITC =
-10 pcm/ T
Boron worth:
-8.5 pcm/ppm
J.*
15.0
ULCaiii uvmaiiu iiiuicadcd lU
Reactor power was increased from 85% RTP to 90% RTP 6 hours
ago. At the present time RCS Tcold is increasing. Is this the expected
transient? Why or why not? (4 points)
16.0
An RCS Boron concentration adjustment is being used to increase

RCS Tjoid from 563 F to 566 F with core power being held constant
at 85% RTP. What is the expected impact on the axial distribution of
power density within the core. What is the basis of this response? (4
points)
17.0
The reactor coolant system is being operated after a trip when it

becomes necessary to stop two of the four reactor coolant pumps.
Predict the effect of stopping these pumps(one in each loop) on flow
rate through the core, differential pressure across the core and
differential pressure across the RCP's which continue to operate. (4
points)
a. the flow rate through the core:
b. the differential pressure across the core:
c.
the differential pressure across the RCP's

which continue to operate:
491
18.0
An AS! osciiiaiion is in progress. At the current time aii control rods

are fully withdrawn. ESI = -.001 and ASI = .001 and heading in the
positive direction. The primary operator intends to insert Group 5 into
the top of the core to dampen the oscillation. Is this the appropriate
strategy. Why or why not? (4 points)
19.0
The core is being operated at 100 % RTP with RCS Tjo,d=565 F. If

the maximum radial peaking factor is 1.50, what is the maximum core
local coolant bulk temperature at the core exit? (4 points)
20.0
The core is operating at 100% steam demand with RCS T^^y = 565 F
when a Group 5 control rod drops into the core. The rod has a worth
of 50 pcm. If nC is -25 pcm/ F, what value of RCS Tjîj results?
Assume that no adjustment in steam demand occurs. Has the DNBR
margin increased or decreased? Why? (4 points)
21.0
If S/G blowdown flow rate is increased and feedwater flow rate is

increased to maintain S/G level, but no COLSS constants are changed,
then actual core power is
than JSCALOR. (3
points)
22.0
A reactor power cutback occurs from 100% RTP, MOC, ARO

conditions with 700 ppm Boron. The cause is quickly identified and
the shift supervisor directs that power (steam demand) be increased
and rods withdrawn to reestablish normal 100% RTP, ARO conditions
within the next 2 hours. At the end of the 2 hours the following
conditions exist:
492
Power:
100% RTP
Rods:
ARO
Boron:
700 ppm
Is the RCS on program? Why or why not? (4 points)
23.0
PVNGS Unit I Cycle 4 has been operating at 100% RTP (ARO) at

205 EFPD with 450 ppm Boron. A reactor trip occurs in which all
control rods fully insert. (6 points)
a.
If RCS
is 565 F, does adequate SDM exist? Why
or why not?
b.
Would adequate SDM exist if the RCS were cooled to

300 "F within 4 hours after the trip? Why or why not?
c.
Would adequate SDM exist immediately after the trip

(Tcoid = 565 F) if a single full length rod had failed to
fully insert? Why or Why not?
493
REFERENCES
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, "1967 ASME STEAM TABLES", The
Sixth International Conference on the Properties of Steam for the ASME Research
Committee on Properties of Steam, New York, NY,(1967).
"Chart of the Nuclides: Nuclides and Isotopes", Fourteenth Edition, General Electric
Company, San Jose, CA, (1989).
Friedlander, G., J.W. Kennedy, and J.M. Miller, "Nuclear and Radiochemistry",
Second Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, (1964).
Glasstone, S,, and A. Sesonske, "Nuclear Reactor Engineering", Van Nostrand
Reinhold Co., New York, NY, (1967).
Hetrick, D.L., "Dynamics of Nuclear Reactors", The University of Chicago Press,
Chicago, IL, (1971). Reprinted by The American Nuclear Society, LaGrange Park,
IL, (1993).
Keepin, G.R., "Physics of Nuclear Kinetics", Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading,
MA, (1965).
Kom, G.A., "Interactive Dynamic System Simulation", McGraw-Hill Book Company,
New York, NY,(1989).
Undeburg, M.R. (P.E.), "Engineer-in-Training Manual", 7"" Edition, Professional
Publications, Inc., Belmont, CA (1990).
Ott, K.O., and R.J. Neuhold, "Introductory Nuclear Reactor Dynamics", American
Nuclear Society, LaGrange Park, IL, (1985).
"PVNGS Procedures", from The Station Manual, Palo Verde Nuclear Generating
Station, Phoenix, AZ, (1993).
"PVNGS Technical Specifications, Facility Operating License No. NPF-4r', Palo
Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Unit No. 1, Docket Number STN 50-528, Phoenix,
AZ, (1993).
Fundamentals", Hemisphere Publishing Corp., New York, NY, (1989).
494
Williams, J._.,"Nuclear Engineering Laboratory' (NEE 406/506) Lecture Notes",
Unpublished, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, (1993),

Azu TD 1357315 Sip1 M

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Azu TD 1357315 Sip1 M

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

INFORMATION TO USERS

University Microfiirrs International

Order Number 1357S15

Theory and applications of power plant operations: A text

Copyright 1994 by Simmons, Robert Lee. All rights reserved.

THEORY AND APPLICATIONS OF

Copyright Robert Lee Simmons 1994

A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the

APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR

jxOuciI 1^. ocaic

Professor of Nuclear Engineering

These mentors, individually and collectively,

Assumptions and Prerequisites

Heatup of RCS to NOT

Estimated Critical Condition Methodologies

RCS Dilution to the ECBC and impact of

Boron Equalization Calculations

Differential Pressure Type Level Detection Systems

Sources of Source Neutrons

Inverse Count Rate Plotting

Time Response during Subcritical Multiplication

POWER INCREASE TO THE POWER RANGE

Step Reactivity Insertions

Ramp Reactivity Insertions

Reactivity Worth Measurements

POWER RANGE OPERATIONS

Fluid Flow Evaluations

Spatial Distributions of Power Density

Calorimetric Evaluations of Power

Dropped Rod Events

Reactor Power Cutback Events

Reactor Trip Events

Shutdown Margin Evaluation

Boration while Cooling Down

APPENDKA. SYSTEM INFORMATION

APPENDIX B. PVNGS CORE DATA BOOK

APPENDIX C. MISCELLANEOUS DERIVATIONS

C-1, Viscous Flow, Head Loss and Pump Work

C-2, Point-Reactor Equations

C-3, Step Reactivity Insertion Model

C-4, Boration Spreadsheet

APPENDIX D. DESIRE PROGRAMS

D-1, Subcritical Multiplication for Count Rate

D-2, Power Turning

D-3, Reactor Trip

APPENDIX E. TRANSIENT XENON DATA

APPENDIX F. EVALUATION OF PRESENTATIONS AND

F-1, NEE 495A Summative Evaluation

F-2, NOX40 Summative Evaluation

F-3, NOX40 Instructor Evaluation

F-4, NOX40 Examinations

2.3.2, Saturation Curve for Water

2.3.3, Pressure vs. Temperature Limits

2.3.4, Pressure vs. Temperature Limits

2.3.5, Pressure vs. Temperature for NPSH

2.3.6, Pressure vs. Temperature Comparison

2.3.7, Pressure vs. Temperature Metallurgical Limits

2.6,1, Concentration/Dilution Control Volume

2.8.1, Differential Pressure Level Measurement System

2.8.2, Pressurizer Level (Indicated vs. Actual)

3.5.1, Count Rate Response to Successive

3.6.1, 1/M vs. Reactivity Added (Example 3.6.1)

3.6.2, 1/M vs. Boron Concentration (Problem 3.6.1)