ams presentation for nrc audit 1-26-2021

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

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

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.

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

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

OF 30January 26-27, 2021

Drifting Transmitters Identified During Plant Operation (Actual PWR Plant Data)

No drift

Drift

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

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



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. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

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

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

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)

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

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

OF 30January 26-27, 2021

OLM-Noise Analysis Identifies Sensing Line Blockages

PSD

OLM Methodology

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

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.

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

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)

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

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

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

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

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

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



4 Pressurizer Level LT0459 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

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

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

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

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

ams presentation for nrc audit 1-26-2021

Documents