AGING AND OBSOLESCENCE SUBCOMMITTEE Bratislava 14 & 15 of April of 2015 AGING BENCHMARKING

AGIN

G A

ND

OBS

OLE

SCEN

CE S

UBC

OM

MIT

TEE

Bratislava 14 & 15 of April of 2015

AGING BENCHMARKING

AGIN

G A

ND

OBS

OLE

SCEN

CE S

UBC

OM

MIT

TEE


TEAM MEMBERS

Luis Yague Cofrentes N. P.P.

Mike Ballard WANO-London

Fernando Mirallas Ascó & Vandellos N. P. P.

Cedric Stappaerts GDF-SUEZ

Esko Luukkonen Loviisa N.P. P. (Fortum)

Emanuele Zampini Slovenske Elektrarne (ENEL)

Nuboyuki Tagashira EPCO (JANSI)

Paul Thomas EDF- Energy

Luboslav Jasovsky Slovenske Elektrarne

Patrick Ryckaert Electrabel

Vladimir Vebr Cez

Vladimir Ondrejka Slovenske Elektrarne

Rober Comby EDF

Dam Philipps First Energy

Angel Benito (Chairperson) Almaraz & Trillo N. P. P.

AGIN

G A

ND

OBS

OLE

SCEN

CE S

UBC

OM

MIT

TEE


PROCESS DESCRIPTION

REACTOR VESSEL RESULTS

CABLES RESULTS

BURIED AND UNBURIED PIPES RESULTS

HEAT EXCHANGERS RESULTS

ELECTRICAL MOTORS RESULTS

NEXT STEPS

AGIN

G A

ND

OBS

OLE

SCEN

CE S

UBC

OM

MIT

TEE


PROCESS DESCRIPTION

Selection of the 5 most relevant equipment

Preparation of questionnaire

Reception of answers

Evaluation of answers

Issue of the report

PROCESS DESCRIPTION

AGIN

G A

ND

OBS

OLE

SCEN

CE S

UBC

OM

MIT

TEE


TOP 5

REACTOR VESSEL

CABLES

BURIED AND UNBURIED PIPES

HEAT EXCGHANGERS

ELECTRICAL MOTORS

PROCESS DESCRIPTION

AGIN

G A

ND

OBS

OLE

SCEN

CE S

UBC

OM

MIT

TEE


QUESTIONNAIRE

One questionnaire for every type of equipment

Question focus in:

Inspection criteria

Inspection results

PROCESS DESCRIPTION

AGIN

G A

ND

OBS

OLE

SCEN

CE S

UBC

OM

MIT

TEE


ANSWERS RECEIVED

7 companies; more than 9 Nuclear Power Plants; more than 28 reactors

Six Countries (Slovakia; Belgium; Finland; Slovenia; Japan and Spain)

Three different technologies (VVER; PWR Framatome & Westinghouse and BWR General Electric)

As a results of participate different countries with different regulatory criteria and use different technologies the answers received are not so homogeneous.

Some answers require some clarification a new questions

However interesting information and conclusion could be achieve.

PROCESS DESCRIPTION

AGIN

G A

ND

OBS

OLE

SCEN

CE S

UBC

OM

MIT

TEE


PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS

The analysis is based in:

Identify different between plants, countries and technologies.

Identified good practices usefull for other plants

AGIN

G A

ND

OBS

OLE

SCEN

CE S

UBC

OM

MIT

TEE


REACTOR VESSEL RESULTS (Nobuyuki & Angel)

All plants use specimens for measuring the irradiation and brittleness. Spanish and Slovenia plants additionally are using external dosimetry.

Belgium, Spanish and Slovenia use ASME code to analyze specimen, Japan use a code similar to ASME, Slovakia Plants use criteria agree with IAEA.

The plant Westinghouse design are involved in the baffle bolts inspection. One plant has discovered cracks in the baffle bolts.

The Westinghouse plants have had problems with split pins in fact split pins have been replaced in some plants.

All plants have inspection programme for the head weld penetration, one plant needed take actions.

None plants has problems with the bottom weld penetration.

Spanish; Belgium, Slovenia Japanese plants inspect thimbles all plants have wear problems.

AGIN

G A

ND

OBS

OLE

SCEN

CE S

UBC

OM

MIT

TEE


ELECTRICAL CABLES RESULTS (Vladimir & Vladimir)

Every company has a cable inspection/testing programs. All companies have own programme based on similar methodologies and

approach (mostly NUREG, GALL, IAEA). There are differences of scoping of inspection/testing cables. Good

practice for cables scoping :

* safety important,

* real environmental condition,

* type of cable insulation,

* voltage levels (power: HV, LV; I&C) Most of companies use EPRI Guidelines All companies monitor environmental condition, but by different way (for

example only hot spot, etc.)

AGIN

G A

ND

OBS

OLE

SCEN

CE S

UBC

OM

MIT

TEE


ELECTRICAL CABLES RESULTS (Vladimir & Vladimir)

Good practice for type of inspection test :

* walkdowns,

* electrical measuring real cables (Insulation resistant, capacitance and tgd, TDR ... )

* mechanical test of tensile (elasticity) of cables deposit samples,

* voltage levels (power: HV, LV; I&C) Testing period is between 1-6 years, Degradation signs are very similar : decoloration, cracking, elasticity

changes , insulation resistance reduction,

AGIN

G A

ND

OBS

OLE

SCEN

CE S

UBC

OM

MIT

TEE


BURIED AND UNBURIED PIPES RESULTS (Robert)

The information received required a lot of qualifications

AGIN

G A

ND

OBS

OLE

SCEN

CE S

UBC

OM

MIT

TEE


HEAT EXCHANGERS RESULTS (Mike)

Heat Exchanger Programmes – All had a programme to address ageing. Slovakia has maintenance templates for HXs

GALL and OE was used as an input for HX programmes (Slovakia and Spain)

Degradation mechanisms – Condenser with Brass tubes have under deposit, surface, and flow induced corrosion (Slovakia)

Degradation mechanisms – Fouling, tube fouling (Spain, Tepco) Degradation mechanisms – wear, impingement, loose parts (Slovenia) Tube Leaks (Tepco) When ECT is not possible – use of tracer gas (Spain-Almaraz) Stations not using ECT on HX – Spain (Asco, Vandellos), Slovakia When ECT is not possible, tubes are replaced Japan (Tepco)

AGIN

G A

ND

OBS

OLE

SCEN

CE S

UBC

OM

MIT

TEE


ELECTRICAL MOTORS RESULTS (Esko)

Every plant has inspection and testing programme All programmes based on EPRI guides except Loviisa & Asco- vandellos Everybody do very similar tests and inspections All plants do trend analyses to identify sings of aging Almost everybody have renewal and refurbishment programs All have similar criteria based on Failure rate, condition assessment,

test results etc. Only difference is that in Japan (TEPCO) will replace most of motors every 20 years at least.

AGIN

G A

ND

OBS

OLE

SCEN

CE S

UBC

OM

MIT

TEE


NEXT STEPS

For achieving a more useful benchmarking we need:

More replies.

Some clarifications about some answers

We are waiting your reply.

AGIN

G A

ND

OBS

OLE

SCEN

CE S

UBC

OM

MIT

TEE


NEXT STEPS

All Community members: Before 30.06.15. Send us questionnaire answers

Answer to new questions and clarifications

Team members: Before 15.05.15: Will request new answers and clarifications Before 15.09.15: Survey other aging management organizations´

activities and identify core values of this group. Before the September meeting: Create progress report. September meeting: Discussion about benchmarking and core values. April of 2016: Create draft report if the team identifies core values.

Documents

AGING AND OBSOLESCENCE SUBCOMMITTEE Bratislava 14 & 15 of April of 2015 AGING BENCHMARKING