Post on 03-May-2022
January 26-27, 2021
Presented by:AMS CorporationKnoxville, Tennessee
OLM Fundamentals
Prepared for:Norbert Carte, Audit Team Leader, NRR/DEX/EICBRichard Stattel, Sr. Electronics Engineer, NRR/DEX/EICBDavid Rahn, Sr. Electronics Engineer, NRR/DEX/ELTBJoseph Ashcraft, Electronics Engineer, NRR/DEX/EICBTarico Sweat, Reactor Systems Engineer, NRR/DSS/STSBMaggie O’Banion, Project Manager, Licensing Projects Branch
SLIDE 2 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Participants from AMS Side
Hash HashemianAMS President
Greg Morton
Chief Technical Officer
David Lillis
Consultant to AMS
Ryan O’Hagan
Senior Engineer
Tyler Gavin
Software Engineer
AlisonHahn
DOE Project Manager
Brent Shumaker
Senior Engineering Manager
Kate Davy
Assistant Manager, Operations
Mark Burzynski
Consultant to AMS
Randy Olson
Utility Partner
SLIDE 3 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Project Objective
DOE granted AMS funding to work with NRC to determine howthe nuclear industry may extend calibration intervals of pressure,level, and flow transmitters.
Premise• Transmitters do not drift enough to warrant calibrations as often as once
every fuel cycle.• Online Monitoring (OLM) can determine if/when a transmitter calibration
must be checked.
SLIDE 4 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Why Do We Say Transmitters Drift Very Little? (10-year calibration history of a typical nuclear grade transmitter)
+ As Found Limit
- As Found Limit
SLIDE 5 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Traditional Calibration vs. OLM
Step 1. Determine if calibration is needed
Step 2. Calibrate if needed
Traditional Calibration OLM
Step 1. Determine if calibration is needed
Step 2. Calibrate if needed
SLIDE 6 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Drifting Transmitters Identified During Plant Operation (Actual PWR Plant Data)
No drift
Drift
SLIDE 7 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
OLM Data Is Retrieved from Plant Computer
BistableTransmitterProcess (Pressure,
level, or flow)
To Safety-Related Trip
4-20 mA
1-5 Volts
M &TE
IsolationAmplifier
A/D Conversion
Plant Computer
DataLink
CurrentLoop
Historian
OLMData
Data RetrievalComputer
Power Supply / Signal
Conditioning
OLM146-03
SLIDE 8 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Typical OLM Results
Item Group Name Tag Name Result1 SG C OUTLET PRESSURE PT0494 Good
2 SG C OUTLET PRESSURE PT0495 Good
3 SG C OUTLET PRESSURE PT0496 Good
4 PRESSURIZER LEVEL LT0459 Good
5 PRESSURIZER LEVEL LT0460 Good
6 PRESSURIZER LEVEL LT0461 Good
7 PRESSURIZER PRESSURE PT0455 Bad
8 PRESSURIZER PRESSURE PT0456 Good
9 PRESSURIZER PRESSURE PT0457 Good
10 PRESSURIZER PRESSURE PT0444A Good
11 PRESSURIZER PRESSURE PT0445A Good. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
SLIDE 9 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
OLM Development History
Nuclear Industry Has Worked on OLM Since Early 1990s
• EPRI, AMS, DOE, NRC, UT, PNNL, IAEA, INL, ANL, Halden, EDF, KAERI, Others
• AMS Reports: NUREG/CR-5383, 5851, 5903, 6343
• UT Report: NUREG/CR-6895
TR-104965-R1 NRC SER
SLIDE 10 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Commercial OLM Implementations in Nuclear Facilities
• Approved by UK’s Nuclear Installations Inspectorate - 2005
• Calibration induced human error problems minimized
Sizewell B : 2005 - present
Vogtle Units 1 and 2 : 2018 - present
Advanced Test Reactor : 2015 - present
Sizewell B
Vogtle
Advanced Test Reactor
SLIDE 11 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
OLM Reduces Human Errors
Good
0 10 20 300
25
50
75
100
Bad
0 3 4 12115
126
137
148
170
159
0 5 10 15
0
1
2
3
5
4
Bad
Time (Minutes)
Reac
tor B
uild
ing
Pres
sure
(Bar
g)
Time (Minutes)
Stea
m G
ener
ator
A
Leve
l WR
(Per
c)
Time (Minutes)
RCS
Pres
sure
NR
PPS
(Bar
g)
SLIDE 12 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
OLM Implementation in U.S. Plants
• McGuire Unit 2 (4-Loop Westinghouse PWR)- Two consecutive fuel cycles from March 1992 to December 1994
• Watts Bar Unit 1 (4-Loop Westinghouse PWR)- One cycle from November 2006 to February 2008
• Farley Units 1 and 2 (3-Loop Westinghouse PWRs)- Multiple cycles from April 2008 to July 2011
• North Anna Units 1 and 2 (3-Loop Westinghouse PWRs)- Multiple cycles from January 2008 to April 2011
About 10% of transmitters monitored in these plants exceeded their OLM limits
SLIDE 13 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
OLM Checks Calibration Over Much of a Transmitter Operating Range
Time
Rea
ding
0102030405060708090
Pres
sure
CRS039A-02
0 2000 400030001000
StartupData
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Time (Minutes)
Pres
sure
0 1400
CRS039A-01
1200800400 600200 1000
Shutdown Data
SLIDE 14 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
OLM-Noise Analysis Identifies Sensing Line Blockages
PSD
OLM Methodology
SLIDE 16 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Summary of OLM Methodology
• Monitoring for Transmitter Drift (14 steps)
• Detecting Sensing Line Blockages (6 steps)
• Recommendations for Training OLM Analysts
• Changes to Plant Technical Specifications
SLIDE 17 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Drift Monitoring Methodology
1. Select transmitters to be monitored
2. Produce a software configuration file.
3. Provide access security and configuration control.
4. Establish algorithm(s) for data analysis.
5. Establish method of data acquisition.
6. Specify data collection duration and sampling rate.
7. Establish OLM limits.
8. Clean, qualify, and prepare OLM data.
9. Analyze OLM data.
10. Compile OLM results in tables and plots.
11. Identify good and bad transmitters.
12. Prepare report of OLM results.
13. Record all data collection and data processing steps.
14. Determine actions to be taken based on OLM results.
SLIDE 18 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Raw OLM Data
Time Sensor 1 Sensor 2 Sensor 3
02/09 14:00:00 61.3947 63.3874 62.477302/09 14:00:10 61.6889 63.7756 62.674402/09 14:00:20 62.0557 63.3097 62.463102/09 14:00:30 61.6673 63.3680 62.631302/09 14:00:40 61.7395 63.3151 62.710902/09 14:00:50 61.6683 63.6339 62.759102/09 14:01:00 61.8688 63.5525 62.888902/09 14:01:10 61.5883 63.2234 62.478202/09 14:01:20 61.6638 63.5382 62.638802/09 14:01:30 61.3634 63.5392 62.258602/09 14:01:40 62.5153 63.6812 62.535502/09 14:01:50 62.0041 63.7433 62.963802/09 14:02:00 62.1472 63.6838 63.0617
60
61
62
63
64
65 KTB8A-01
Time (seconds)Le
vel (
%)
6603300
SLIDE 19 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Clean, Qualify, and Prepare OLM Data
12
Missing Data Spikes and Outliers
Stuck DataNoisy Data
0
20
40
60
80
100DEM0520-02A
0 15
Time (Hours)
Leve
l (%
)
Data Spikes
Time (Hours)
SLIDE 20 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
OLM Limits
𝑬𝑬𝑬𝑬𝑬𝑬𝑬𝑬 = 𝑺𝑺𝑬𝑬𝑺𝑺𝟐𝟐 + 𝑺𝑺𝑺𝑺𝑬𝑬𝟐𝟐 + 𝑺𝑺𝑺𝑺𝟐𝟐 + 𝑺𝑺𝑺𝑺𝑬𝑬𝟐𝟐 + 𝑺𝑺𝑺𝑺𝑬𝑬𝟐𝟐 + 𝑺𝑺𝑺𝑺𝑬𝑬𝑺𝑺𝑺𝑺𝟐𝟐 + 𝑺𝑺𝑺𝑺𝑬𝑬𝑺𝑺𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 + 𝑴𝑴𝑬𝑬𝑺𝑺𝑺𝑺𝟐𝟐 + 𝑴𝑴𝑬𝑬𝑺𝑺𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 + 𝑴𝑴𝑺𝑺𝑬𝑬𝑺𝑺𝟐𝟐 + 𝑴𝑴𝑺𝑺𝟐𝟐 + 𝑴𝑴𝑺𝑺𝑬𝑬𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 + 𝑴𝑴𝑬𝑬𝑬𝑬𝟐𝟐
ECUL
OLM Limit
Actual Process
Process Estimate Uncertainty
½ Drift Band
Monitoring Channel Uncertainty (MCU)
OLM147-02
SLIDE 21 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
OLM Data Analysis
Process Estimation Algorithms
• Simple Average• Parity Space
Time
Valu
e of
Pro
cess
Var
iabl
e
𝑡1
Evaluation Criteria Simple Average
Parity Space
Simple to Implement
Uncertainty is Quantifiable or Bounded
Automatic Outlier Rejection to Provide Accurate Estimates
Previously Reviewed by the NRC
Produces a Process Estimate for Any OLM Data
Simple Average
Parity Space
SLIDE 22 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Analysis of Startup and Shutdown Data
Normal Operation ShutdownStartup
Data
Val
ue
Time
(a) Raw Data
Data
Val
ue
Time
Devi
atio
n
Time
(b) Partition 1 Raw Data (c) Partition 1 Deviation Plot
Devi
atio
n
% Span
Devi
atio
n
% Span
(d) Result for 1st Partition (e) Result for All Startup Partitions
+ OLM Limit
- OLM Limit
+ OLM Limit
- OLM Limit
+ OLM Limit
- OLM Limit
OLM Data Partition:Partition #1
OLM086-07B
SLIDE 23 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Analysis of Normal Operation Data
Normal Operation ShutdownStartup
Data
Valu
e
Time(a) Raw Data
Data
Valu
e
Time
Devia
tion
Time
(b) Partition 1 Raw Data (c) Partition 1 Deviation Plot
Devia
tion
Month
(d) Deviations Over the Entire Operating Cycle
+ OLM Limit
- OLM Limit
+ OLM Limit
- OLM Limit
OLM086-07C
Startup Shutdown
1 2 3 4 5 6 187 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
SLIDE 24 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Presentation of OLM Results
Tag SU18
June 2013
16 July 2013
06 Aug2013
03 Sept 2013
01 Oct
2013
29 Oct
2013
26 Nov 2013
24 Dec 2013
21 Jan 2014
18 Feb 2014
18Mar 2014
15Apr
2014
13 May 2014
10 Jun 2014
08Jul
2014
05 Aug 2014
02 Sept 2014
SD Final
1BB-L-0465-W
1BB-L-0466-W
1BB-L-0467-W
1BB-L-0468-W X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
TABLE067-02
Startup (SU) 29-May-20132.00
1.00
0.00
-2.00
-1.00Dev
iatio
n
100.075.050.025.00.0
PERC
Shutdown (SD) 29-May-20132.00
1.00
0.00
-2.00
-1.00Dev
iatio
n
100.075.050.025.00.0
PERC
Dev
iatio
n
Normal Operation (June 2013 – Sept 2014)2.00
1.00
0.00
-2.00
-1.00
June 2013
TimeSeptember
2014
Example of Full-Cycle Results
SLIDE 25 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Final Report of OLM Results
Tag Number Startup Month 1 Month 2 … Month 18 Shutdown Result
LT0459 Good
LT0460 Good
LT0461 Good
LT0462 Bad
Item Group Name Tag Name Result
1 SG C Outlet Pressure PT0494 Good
2 SG C Outlet Pressure PT0495 Good
3 SG C Outlet Pressure PT0496 Good
4 Pressurizer Level LT0459 Good
5 Pressurizer Level LT0460 Good
6 Pressurizer Level LT0461 Good
7 Pressurizer Level LT0462 Bad
8 Pressurizer Pressure PT0456 Good
9 Pressurizer Pressure PT0457 Good
10 Pressurizer Pressure PT0444A Good
11 Pressurizer Pressure PT0445A Good
SLIDE 26 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Steps for Detecting Sensing Line Blockages
1. Setup Data Acquisition Equipment Remotely from Control Room Area
2. Connect Equipment to Plant Signals in the Instrument Cabinets in the Control Room Area
3. Collect and Store Data for Subsequent Analysis
4. Screen Noise Data for Artifacts and Anomalies
5. Analyze Noise Data and Check Results for Evidence of Sensing Line Blockages
6. Document Results
SLIDE 27 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Noise Data Acquisition Process
Isolated Plant
SignalAmplifier Low-Pass
Filter
Computer with A/D
Converter
Amplify AC Component
Filter for Anti-Aliasing and Removal of
Extraneous Noise
NOISE002-15A
SLIDE 28 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Connect Equipment to Plant Signals
Noise DataAcquisition System
Field Control Room Area
Existing Current Loop
Transmitter
Plant Instrumentation
Cabinets
PRESS024-05
Resistor
Time
Ampl
itude
SLIDE 29 OF 30January 26-27, 2021
Conclusions
• Comparisons between OLM results and conventional calibrations have produced greater than 99 percent conservative agreement.
• OLM data collected at startup, shutdown, and normal operations can identify drift over much of a transmitter’s span.
• Approval of OLM methodology will enable plants to switch from time-based to condition-based transmitter calibration frequency and detect sensing line blockages.
Questions?
January 26-27, 2021
Presented by:AMS CorporationKnoxville, Tennessee