LOFT Monthly Progress Report for July 1980
Abstract
During July, the LOFT test sequence underwent careful review which determined that changes would be appropriate. Evaluation of Tests L3-4 and L6-1 indicated they would not add significantly to the information base available from other experiments; therefore, these tests were cancelled. As shown in the Management Summary Schedule included in this report, the next test to be run is L3-5, scheduled for mid-September. Test L3-5 will be a small-break test in the cold leg side of the operating loop of the plant. Work efforts during July concentrated on plant preparation for the mid-September test. Installation of a new small-break path from the cold leg to the blowdown suppression tank, together with the associated new instrumentation installations, were well underway and on schedule at month's end. The Actual spending rate to date is in agreement with current budgets and authorized funding levels.
- Authors:
- Publication Date:
- Research Org.:
- Idaho National Lab. (INL), Idaho Falls, ID (United States)
- Sponsoring Org.:
- USDOE
- OSTI Identifier:
- 1025001
- Report Number(s):
- L0-MR-008
TRN: US201122%%440
- DOE Contract Number:
- DE-AC07-76ID01570
- Resource Type:
- Technical Report
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
- Subject:
- 22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS; BLOWDOWN; EVALUATION; MANAGEMENT; SCHEDULES; LOFT REACTOR
Citation Formats
N. C. Kaufman. LOFT Monthly Progress Report for July 1980. United States: N. p., 1980.
Web. doi:10.2172/1025001.
N. C. Kaufman. LOFT Monthly Progress Report for July 1980. United States. doi:10.2172/1025001.
N. C. Kaufman. Fri .
"LOFT Monthly Progress Report for July 1980". United States.
doi:10.2172/1025001. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1025001.
@article{osti_1025001,
title = {LOFT Monthly Progress Report for July 1980},
author = {N. C. Kaufman},
abstractNote = {During July, the LOFT test sequence underwent careful review which determined that changes would be appropriate. Evaluation of Tests L3-4 and L6-1 indicated they would not add significantly to the information base available from other experiments; therefore, these tests were cancelled. As shown in the Management Summary Schedule included in this report, the next test to be run is L3-5, scheduled for mid-September. Test L3-5 will be a small-break test in the cold leg side of the operating loop of the plant. Work efforts during July concentrated on plant preparation for the mid-September test. Installation of a new small-break path from the cold leg to the blowdown suppression tank, together with the associated new instrumentation installations, were well underway and on schedule at month's end. The Actual spending rate to date is in agreement with current budgets and authorized funding levels.},
doi = {10.2172/1025001},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Fri Aug 01 00:00:00 EDT 1980},
month = {Fri Aug 01 00:00:00 EDT 1980}
}
-
The fourth nuclear powered small break test (L3-5/5A) was conducted on September 29, 1980. The test was initiated from a steady state operating condition wherein the core was generating heat at a maximum rate of approximately 52 kW/m. The test consisted of two parts: L3-5 simulated a 4-in. pipe break in a commerical pressurized water reactor; the second part, L3-5A, was intended to investigate natural circulation and steam generator heat transfer modes and also plan recovery using secondary system control in a situation where the pipe break and the ECCS accumulator are isolated from the primary coolant system. Initial testmore »
-
LOFT Monthly Progress Report for October 1980
During the month of October, several significant events occurred. Three tests, L6-1, L6-2, and L6-3, in the anticipated transient series were completed. These tests were conducted to provide information on plant control systems and operator responses to transients in which the initiating event was not a loss of primary coolant. These transient tests and others scheduled for the future will add greatly to predicting responses for such transient conditions. On the 16th and 17th of October, LOFT hosted a technology transfer meeting in which representatives from more than sixty power utilities in the United States and several foreign countries participated.more » -
LOFT Monthly Progress Report for November 1980
During November major work efforts were directed towards preparation for Test L3-6/L8-1. These tests, to be run in sequence, will evalute the system effects of primary coolant pump operation during a small break LOCA (L3-6), and are to obtain a partial core uncovery to aid in the planning and conduct of future core uncovery experiments (L8-1). Plant modifications in preparation for the December test included installation of a new PC-3 gamma densitometer to measure the density of fluid coming from the steam generator and the installation of the EPRI Liquid Level Detector system to measure levels of fluid during themore » -
LOFT Monthly Progress Report for December 1980
On December 10, 1980, LOFT conducted its fifth nuclear test in the L3 Series (small break) as well as the first in the L8 Series (core uncovery). The tests, designated L3-6/L8-1, were run in series with each experiment designated to address specific safety questions. Test L3-6 simulated a four-inch break in a commercial pressurized water reactor. The purpose of this experiment was to investigate the influence of main coolant pump operation on the quantity of fluid which leaves the system and the quantity of fluid in the reactor core region during the experiment. The results of L3-6 are being comparedmore » -
LOFT Monthly Progress Report for January 1980
During January, the LOFT Project focused on preparing for the next small-break experiment. That test, L3-2, is scheduled for February 6. The test will simulate a break size corresponding to a failure in a one-inch pipe for a 1000 MW(e) commercial power plant. It will be the second small break experiment in LOFT to use nuclear heat. Overall costs for January are very close to budget (greater than 1%). The costing rate will require continued close monitoring. The manpower rate is higher than budgeted and the material rate is less than budgeted. Detailed investigation has shown that these are intentionalmore »