risk informed in service inspection ri isi using @risk n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Risk-Informed In-Service Inspection (RI-ISI) Using @RISK PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Risk-Informed In-Service Inspection (RI-ISI) Using @RISK

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 14

Risk-Informed In-Service Inspection (RI-ISI) Using @RISK - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 107 Views
  • Uploaded on

Risk-Informed In-Service Inspection (RI-ISI) Using @RISK. Ching Guey. RI-ISI at Turkey Point. Turkey Point’s application of RI-ISI is limited to Class 1 piping inside containment.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Risk-Informed In-Service Inspection (RI-ISI) Using @RISK' - derica


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
ri isi at turkey point
RI-ISI at Turkey Point
  • Turkey Point’s application of RI-ISI is limited to Class 1 piping inside containment.
  • The purpose of in-service inspection is to identify conditions, such as flaw indications, that are precursors to leaks and ruptures which violate pressure boundary integrity principles.
  • In-service inspection (ISI) activities include ultrasonic testing, surface testing, and liquid penetrant testing.
objectives
Objectives
  • More Effective and Efficient Use of @Risk to Streamlize the Analysis Work
  • Prioritize Turkey Point’s ISI Activities by Risk
    • Decrease cost of outage inspections, and
    • Decrease personnel radiation exposure during outage inspections, while
      • increasing or maintaining personnel safety
      • increasing or maintaining unit reliability
risk informed isi process overview
Risk-Informed ISIProcess Overview

Expert Panel

Categorization

Consequence

Evaluation

Element/

NDE

Selection

Scope and

Segment

Definition

Risk-

Evaluation

Implement

Program

Structural Element

Failure Probability

Assessment

Feedback

Loop

@RISK

turkey point pra loca events and nominal pipe sizes
Turkey Point PRA LOCA Events and Nominal Pipe Sizes
  • Small-Small LOCA 3/8”< X  2”
  • Small LOCA 2” < X  6”
  • Medium LOCA 6” < X  13.5”
  • Large LOCA 13.5” < X
  • Any piping with a nominal diameter less than or equal to 3/8” is assumed not to result in a LOCA event, which could lead to core damage.
failure probability assessment process
Failure ProbabilityAssessment Process

PLANT INFORMATION

(LAYOUT, MATERIALS,

OPERATING CONDITIONS,

PLANT OPERATING

EXPERIENCE)

IDENTIFICATION OF

POTENTIAL FAILURE MODES

AND CAUSES

INDUSTRY EXPERIENCE

ENGINEERING

TEAM

SRRA

TOOL

  • Engineering Team
    • ISI/NDE Engineering
    • Materials Engineering
    • Design Stress Engineering
    • (Engineering Mechanics)
    • -Plant System Engineer

ESTIMATED

LEAK AND BREAK

PROBABILITIES

piping segment definition
Piping Segment Definition
  • Segment
    • Section of pipe for which a failure at any point has the same consequences
    • Over 200 individual segments for each unit
piping failure probability
Piping Failure Probability
  • SRRA Code used to predict piping failure probability
  • Factors used in SRRA Piping Failure Probability Calculation
    • Pipe Segment Dimensions
    • Material Stresses
    • Pressure, Temperature
consequences evaluation
Consequences Evaluation
  • Calculated using the Turkey Point Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA).
  • Postulated different size breaks in each segment.
  • Calculated Conditional Core Damage Probability (CCDP) and Conditional Large Early Release Probability (CLERP) for each segment and break size.
risk evaluation
Risk Evaluation
  • SRRA Code used to predict piping failure frequency.
  • Calculated Conditional Core Damage Probability (CCDP) and Conditional Large Early Release Probability (CLERP) for each segment and break size using the PTN PSA model.
  • Multiplied the segment piping failure frequencies from SRRA by their CCDPs and CLERPs to obtain the CDFs and LERFs for each segment.
  • Calculated risk importance measures for each segment Using @RISK .
  • Assigned a preliminary risk category to each segment based on the RRW.
expert panel
Expert Panel
  • Convened a panel of experts from ISI/NDE, Plant Engineering, Risk Assessment, Operations, Maintenance, etc.
  • Provided each Expert Panel member with all of the risk-related and other information calculated and/or collected for each pipe segment.
  • Reviewed, discussed, and eventually assigned a final risk category to each pipe segment.
  • Documented the basis of the determination.
results
Results
  • Weld Inspection Reduction 84%
  • Radiation Dose Reduction 20man-rem
  • Role of @RISK: Methodology approved by the NRC requires doing Monte-Carlo Simulation and use mean values for the ranking of each segment
  • A sensitivity study to compare Point Estimate and Monte-Carlo Generated Mean provides useful insights for the sensitivity of changes in the input parameters
  • A function: =RiskMean() used saved many hours of manual work
other benefits
Other Benefits
  • Avoidance of potential personnel injury by reduction of:
    • Scaffold Construction
    • Asbestos Removal
    • Insulation Removal
    • Weld Grinding and Buffing
expert panel1
Expert Panel
  • Scope limited to changes in program: new segments, modified segments, and segments whose risk ranking changed from Low to High or Medium to High.
  • Risk ranking change due to changes in SRRA analysis of pipe segment failure frequency, changes in consequence assumptions, and/or changes in PTN PSA model.
  • Expert Panel members will be provided with all of the risk-related and other information calculated or collected for the relevant pipe segments.
  • Expert Panel will review, discuss, and eventually assign a final risk category to each pipe segment.