See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/330365576

ROD CONTROL SYSTEM COIL AND CABLE TESTING IN NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS

Conference Paper · January 2019

CITATIONS READS
0 811

3 authors, including:

Bryan McConkey
Analysis and Measurement Services
18 PUBLICATIONS   49 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Bryan McConkey on 03 April 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ROD CONTROL SYSTEM COIL AND CABLE TESTING
IN NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS

Bryan McConkey, Nick DeJulia, and Trevor Jones

Analysis and Measurement Services Corporation
9119 Cross Park Drive
Knoxville, TN 37923
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

ABSTRACT

A pressurized water reactor (PWR) is equipped with a magnetically coupled positioning

system known as a control rod drive mechanism (CRDM). In many cases, the plant system that
measures the position of the control rods in the reactor core is the digital rod position indication
(DRPI) system. The DRPI system is designed to continuously sense and display the positions of
each of the control and shutdown rods. Both of these systems consist of coils above the reactor head,
connectors at the reactor head and at the containment penetration, instrumentation and power
cabinets, and long runs of interconnecting cables in between these system components.
The objective of cable testing is to evaluate the condition of the rod control and position
indication coils, connections, cables and to identify any defects or anomalies that may adversely
affect their normal operation. Various electrical measurements can provide insight into the health
and reliability of these rod control and rod position cable circuits. Some measurements are used to
identify configuration anomalies, others test the integrity of connectors and proper isolation from
station ground, and some validate the health of the coil to identify resistive connections, insulation
degradation, or turn-to-turn shorts. This systematic approach to rod control and rod position coil and
cable testing increases system reliability, reduces the likelihood of unplanned outages from dropped
rods, and reduces outage times and maintenance costs which in turn reduces costs for the electrical
utility.
Key Words: Rod Control, Cable Testing, Troubleshooting, Rod Position

1 INTRODUCTION

Major nuclear power plant (NPP) components that are of most concern regarding aging management
include the reactor vessel, concrete, and cables. An increasing number of U.S. NPPs have addressed aging
issues through reactor vessel head replacement. Another decision during head replacement is whether to
reuse the existing rod control and position system or replace with new rod control system components.
Either way, coil, connector and cable testing are important to verify proper configuration of all system
components. Additionally, the reactor head is removed and restored during each refueling outage. Cable
testing is recommended both before reactor head removal to identify issues and budget time for repair
planning, and after the reactor head is reinstalled to ensure that no coils, cables or connectors were damaged
during the refueling process. When these NPPs age, detecting and mitigating degradation in plant
components such as rod control systems, position indication systems and their associated parts are
becoming more important for long term plant reliability [1].
 2 DESCRIPTION OF ROD CONTROL SYSTEM

Pressurized Water Reactors (PWRs) are equipped with control and shutdown rods that are inserted into
and withdrawn from the reactor core to control the power level of the reactor (Fig. 1A). The CRDM, which
is a magnetically coupled positioning system, is provided to raise or lower the control and shutdown rods
under either manual or automatic control. Each CRDM consists of three (3) electromagnetic assemblies and
two (2) grippers that are located on the rod control housing below each rod position indication (RPI) coil
stack. The CRDM components consist of a Stationary Gripper Coil, a Movable Gripper Coil and a Lift Coil.
The stationary gripper consists of three (3) latches that are located 120 circumferential degrees around
the control rod drive shaft and an associated electromagnetic coil located outside the control rod drive
housing. When the stationary gripper coil is energized, the stationary gripper latches extend into grooves
machined on the drive shaft to hold the control rod in place. Under normal operating conditions, the
stationary gripper is the only latch holding the rod in place. If power is removed from the stationary gripper
coils and the movable gripper coils described below, the rods will fall into the reactor under the force of
gravity. The movable gripper (like the stationary gripper) also consists of three latches and a coil. When the
movable gripper coil is energized, the latches extend into the grooves on the rod drive shaft. The difference
between the stationary and movable grippers (as the names imply) is that the movable gripper can be moved
up or down one step (⅝") when the lift coil is energized or de-energized. As described above, the lift coil,
when energized, causes the movable gripper to move up one step. If the movable gripper is energized when
power is applied to the lift coil, the control rod drive shaft will move up one step with the movable gripper.

3 DESCRIPTION OF ROD POSITION INDICATION SYSTEM

Located above the rod control system, PWRs incorporate a rod position indication (RPI) system. These
rod position systems consist of various designs such as Digital Rod Position Indication (DRPI), Analog
Rod Position Indication (ARPI) and Microprocessor Rod Position Indication (MRPI). These systems are
used to monitor the positions of the control and shutdown rods within the reactor. This paper focuses on the
DRPI system, which is most commonly used in U.S. PWR designs. Many of these DRPI systems have been
in service for over 30 years in nuclear power stations worldwide. In recent years, however, aging and
obsolescence issues have led to an increase in problems with the DRPI systems including card failures and
coil cable connection problems that, in some cases, may result in unplanned reactor trips. These problems,
along with plans for plant life extension, have prompted the industry to actively seek viable options to
monitor the health and accuracy of these DRPI systems to ensure reliable plant operations for decades to
come.
Existing DRPI systems continuously sense the position of each of the control and shutdown rods using
coil stacks that are mounted on the rod control housing above the reactor. Each coil stack consists of 42
individual coils, which are excited with an alternating current (AC) voltage. When a control or shutdown
rod shaft enters a coil, the AC current through the coil changes. The analog electronics in the existing DRPI
system detect the change in current and set a digital bit for each coil in the coil stack. These digital bits are
transmitted to the control room to provide the rod position (Fig. 1B).
 CRDM assembly (A) RPI Assembly (B)

Reactor Vessel
Figure 1. PWR rod control (A) and rod position indication (B) systems.

4 DESCRIPTION OF ELECTRICAL TESTS

The following is a brief description for some of the tests that are typically performed to determine the
condition of the cable system and/or end device under-test. Using the results from these measurements, the
data can be compared to similar circuits and can reveal anomalies.
Time Domain Reflectometry (TDR): TDR is a distance to fault test that is used to locate impedance
anomalies in cables, connectors, or end devices. As problems such as loose connections, moisture, and
cracks develop in the cable conductors, connectors, or on the cable insulation/jacket material, the impedance
of the cable often changes at the problem location.
The TDR test involves sending a small amplitude voltage step with a fast rise time into a parallel
conductor pair as a transmission line. This can be a conductor pair, conductor to shield, or conductor to
cable tray or conduit. Reflected voltage waves occur when the transmitted signal encounters an impedance
mismatch or discontinuity in the transmission line. TDR reflections are plotted as a unitless amplitude ratio
of the incident signal and the reflected signal, which is expressed in terms of Reflection Coefficient (rho).
The speed that the incident and reflected signals travel in the transmission line is called the velocity of
propagation (VP), which is the speed the pulse travels in the cable type. Distance to any impedance change
is calculated by multiplying the VP of the transmission line by half the round-trip time of the incident and
reflected TDR pulse.
Impedance: Inductance (L), Capacitance (C), and AC Resistance (R) provide lumped parameter or
bulk measurements of the entire circuit under test, including the cables, connectors, and end device.
Impedance measurements for a particular electrical circuit are evaluated to determine if they are as expected
for the type of circuit being tested. Imbalances, mismatches or unexpectedly high or low impedances
between the cable conductors can indicate circuit degradation, possibly from faulty connections and splices
or physical damage. Abnormal capacitance measurements are usually indicative of a breakdown in the
insulation dielectric properties of the cable, or can indicate moisture intrusion into a connector or cable
insulation. Abnormal inductive measurements can indicate changes in the electrical end device caused by
low impedance faults.
Insulation Resistance (IR) Measurements: A constant DC voltage is applied in accordance with
manufacturer and site specifications to an open-circuit conductor pair as a non-destructive test of insulation
integrity. The IR value is a measure of the small leakage current that flows through a cable’s dielectric
material. Ohm’s law is then used to calculate the insulation resistance from the measured leakage current
and the applied voltage. The IR test is often applied for one minute or 10 minutes with a ratio of these two
measurements calculated to evaluate the health of the insulation system.

5 CONTROL ROD OPERABILITY EVENTS

Coil, connector and cable testing is important to verify the proper installation and configuration of all
system components. During cable testing, visual inspections can also reveal damaged and/or aged
components. An appropriate time to check each cable and connector for the reactor vessel head would also
be every refueling cycle. Each time the reactor vessel head is removed for refueling, connections are
disconnected and reconnected, and the cables are moved to and from the head stand. In addition, the cables
and connectors associated with the rod control and rod position indication systems will experience thermal
and radiation degradation and should be checked for anomalies [2].
The reason that rod control systems receive particular scrutiny regarding their reliable operation is the
nature of the pressurized water reactor (PWR) control system design. The control and shutdown rods are
held in place by energized electromagnets and mechanical gripper assemblies. These rods are designed to
fail safe and fall into the reactor core in the event of a malfunction. An accidentally dropped rod during
reactor power production will ultimately lead to reactor shutdown. Therefore, the need to ensure reliable
operation of the rod control cables, connectors, and coils comes more from a financial standpoint than from
a reactor safety concern. There are additional rod drop timing tests performed to ensure that control and
shutdown rods will quickly insert into the reactor in the event of a reactivity excursion that are not the focus
of this paper.
The likelihood of rod control or rod position indication system malfunction increases with age, and
malfunctions of rod control systems can result in reactor trips [3]. Some examples of rod control, rod
position indication system and logic card malfunctions are included in the following list of NRC licensee
event report (LER) records. These examples illustrate that operability issues have originated in the control
cabinet as well as the cables and connectors. A search of over 250 LER records quantified cable anomalies
based on the root cause investigation (Fig. 2).

Others
13% Connector
Failure
Loose 25 %
Terminal
Connection
23% Dirty/Resistive
Connection
10%

Insulation
Failure
29%

Figure 2. Cable anomalies quantified from NRC LER database [4].

 In 2017, a nuclear power plant experienced an intermittent electrical connection that occurred between
a rod control power cabinet card and the power cabinet backplane power supply that were associated with
control bank A. This caused four control rods to be dropped into the reactor core. A preventative action was
taken, which resulted in all backplane connectors being re-formed and re-aligned.
Another example is in 2014, when a plant experienced a partially dropped rod. During a monthly rod
control surveillance testing, Control Bank D rods were inserted 15 steps when operators were alerted of a
misaligned rod. The cause of the malfunction was linked to a short to ground located in the rod’s movable
gripper power cable. Further investigation revealed two blown fuses in the rod control solid-state power
cabinet as well. Testing revealed a short to ground on a 600-volt CRDM power cable on the reactor head.
The fuses were replaced, and the defective CRDM power cable was replaced.
An example of a DRPI logic card anomaly is as follows: in 2014, during a refueling outage another
plant was withdrawing control rods during low power physics testing at approximately 50 steps, during this
period DRPI for one of the control rods suddenly changed to 90 steps. The reactor trip breakers were
opened, and all rods were inserted. Later analysis revealed that the issue was caused by an invalid DRPI
signal that was caused by a detector/encoder card that was associated with that rod. The root cause listed in
the LER was that the DRPI card in question was an older card and therefore this anomaly was attributed to
component aging.

6 CABLE TESTING OE EXAMPLES

6.1 Rod Control Short Circuit

A PWR plant received a rod position indication alarm during withdrawal of a CRDM control bank. All
CRDM coils and cables in this bank were tested while the plant was operating at 100% power using the
suite of electrical tests described earlier in the paper. Electrical noise interfered with DC resistance
measurements because of 60Hz noise currents flowing on the reactor building ground. However, the AC
resistance identified a low resistance short to ground on a movable gripper coil as shown below in Table I.
TDR data was used to overlay healthy coil traces (red and blue) compared to the suspect coil trace (purple)
to determine where the low impedance anomaly was occurring (Fig. 3). It was located approximately 56
feet from the movable gripper coil, which placed the short circuit anomaly on the reactor head.

Table I. Resistance measurements of healthy and failed CRDM coils

Typical Rod Measurements Low Coil to GND Resistance
Lift (+) to Ground 589.32 M 526.31 M
Lift (-) to Ground 561.19 M 596.28 M
Movable (+) to Ground 773.68 M 2.71*
Movable (-) to Ground 797.96 M 130.09 *
Movable (+) to Lift (+) 659.07 M N/A
 Healthy GC TDRs

Location of low
resistance anomaly
Movable Gripper Coil

Figure 3. TDR traces locating the movable gripper coil short circuit on the reactor head.

6.2 Rod Position Intermittent Open Circuit

A NPP was experiencing intermittent rod position indication on a specific rod assembly. Plant
equipment confirmed this was a position indication problem and not a rod movement anomaly. A suite of
cable testing measurements was performed that included DRPI coil inductance, DC resistance, and TDR.
The impedance and DC resistance measurements indicated an open circuit where a DRPI coil was expected,
and repeated TDR signatures revealed that the location of the intermittent connection problem was at the
patch panel on the reactor head (Fig. 4). Follow up testing after repair work was completed on the patch
panel connections verified with expected results that repair was successful.

DRPI data
cabinet
Open circuit
fault on Rx head

Normal DRPI coil

TDR signature

Figure 4. TDR signature of open circuit fault at patch panel on Rx head.

6.3 Rod Position Short Circuit
During a reactor head replacement project at a NPP, the site planned to reuse the existing CRDM and
DRPI assemblies to be reinstalled on the new reactor head prior to head replacement. To ensure the existing
assemblies can be reused, all CRDM and DRPI assemblies were tested in the head assembly building.
Various combinations of wiring in the CRDM and DRPI assemblies where tested to evaluate them for any
potential degradation caused by the removal and reinstallation processes. The TDR signature in Fig. 5
shows a short circuit anomaly in a DRPI connector. The damaged connector was repaired prior to
installation on the new reactor head. The repair work was easier in the head assembly building, and with
less radiation exposure to plant personnel, than if the fault was discovered during operability testing after
the new head was installed.

Figure 5. Short circuit anomaly identified in DRPI assembly prior to installation.

6.4 Rod Control Open Circuit

In an effort to support reliable rod control system operation, a NPP added cable, connector, and coil
testing to the site preventive maintenance (PM) schedule. This testing occurs immediately after reactor
shutdown before the reactor head is removed for refueling. The testing is then repeated after the reactor
head is restored post-refueling and prior to startup. This as-found and as-left combination of cable testing
optimizes system reliability during normal reactor operation. In this example, an unexpected open circuit
anomaly was found on a movable gripper coil during the as-found PM testing. Because this anomaly was
located immediately after reactor shutdown, the necessary repairs could be scheduled and performed
without affecting outage schedule. Without this PM testing, this unexpected connector anomaly would not
have been discovered until rod movement exercises performed just prior to reactor startup which would
have affected the outage schedule. The TDR data shown in Fig. 6, and the corresponding measurements,
saved valuable critical path time by allowing prior planning of timely repairs.
 Test
connection Open circuit
fault at CRDM
plugboard

Normal CRDM
TDR signature

Figure 6. Open circuit CRDM connector located during routine PM testing.

7 CONCLUSION

As nuclear power plants age, the industry is shifting priorities from reactive maintenance to preventive
system health monitoring of their components. This has led to refinement of preventative maintenance
techniques to ensure that these aged plant components operate properly and reliably. Preventative
maintenance testing of cables help ensure that plants do not experience unexpected anomalies such as
dropped rods and also helps in identifying and mitigating degradation in rod control and position indication
systems and their associated coils [5]. As these components age they may eventually need to be replaced,
however with proper testing, plants can reuse older components in tandem with newer components if they
are operating correctly. This is especially beneficial when a plant performs a reactor head replacement.
During the replacement, some plants have re-used existing rod control and position systems and other sites
have replaced them entirely.
Another concern is when the reactor head is removed and restored after fueling. It is recommended
that cable testing is performed before and after the refueling, this will allow for comparisons following
refueling activities to ensure there are no anomalies. Re-installing the reactor head not only causes each
cable and connector to be moved but exposes them to mechanical damage over time. The industry best
practice for rod control and rod position system preventive maintenance surveillance includes a
combination of electrical testing, operability testing, and visual inspections as needed. Many NPPs perform
cable testing of all rod control assemblies immediately after reactor shutdown, which allows maximum time
to plan any necessary repairs, and then again after refueling and prior to startup to identify any configuration
anomalies or incidental maintenance issues, such as foreign material intrusion into connectors. This
methodology is particularly important during reactor head replacement, because all rod control and rod
position indication systems are manipulated off and on the new reactor head in addition to the manipulations
normally performed each refueling outage. The goal of placing rod control surveillances on a preventive
maintenance schedule is optimizing plant reliability during power generation. The LER database history
lists enough dropped rod issues to justify the time and investment in proactive surveillances.
 8 REFERENCES

1. J.S. Bora, P.K. Ramteke, A.K. Babar, H.S. Kushwaha, and V. Venkat Raj, “Reliability Requirements
of Electrical Cables used in Safety Systems of Nuclear Power Plants,” National Power Systems
Conference, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur (2002).
2. E. Grove, W. Gunther, and K. Sullivan, Effect of Component Aging on PWR Control Rod Drive
Systems, BNL-NUREG-47470, Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC), Upton, NY (1992).
3. J. Coble, P. Ramuhalli, L. Bond, J. Hines, and B. Upadhyaya, “A Review of Prognostics and Health
Management Applications in Nuclear Power Plants”. International Journal of Prognostics and Health
Management, Volume 6, pp. 16-38 (2015).
4. “U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Licensee Event Report Search (LER Search),”
https://lersearch.inl.gov (September 5, 2018).
5. W. Gunther, and K. Sullivan, Detection and Mitigating Rod Drive Control System Degradation in
Westinghouse PWR, BNL-NUREG-45316, Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) and U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC), Upton, NY (1990).

View publication stats