NukeWorker Forum

News and Discussions => History & Trivia => Topic started by: wlrun3@aol.com on Apr 04, 2012, 12:10

Title: B&W PWR
Post by: wlrun3@aol.com on Apr 04, 2012, 12:10

What is the difference between a raised loop, Davis-Besse, and a lowered loop, Arkansas Unit 1, B&W PWR?
These are the descriptions provided on the NRC website.

Title: Re: B&W PWR
Post by: thenuttyneutron on Apr 04, 2012, 04:56
Raised loop means the bottom of the SG is at about the same level as the reactor.  This makes the thermal center higher.  In the lowered loop design, the SG sits lower relative to the reactor than the raised loop design.  The thermal center is not as high in the lowered loop plant.

The benefit of a raised loop is with natural circulation in the event that you lose forced flow.
Title: Re: B&W PWR
Post by: wlrun3@aol.com on Apr 04, 2012, 06:50

Is the raised loop B&W PWR the more advanced of the two in the B&W product line?





Title: Re: B&W PWR
Post by: Fermi2 on Apr 04, 2012, 07:30
Yes it is. In fact Bellefonte is a raised loop design.
Title: Re: B&W PWR
Post by: jams723 on Apr 04, 2012, 09:24
Raised loop means the bottom of the SG is at about the same level as the reactor.  This makes the thermal center higher.  In the lowered loop design, the SG sits lower relative to the reactor than the raised loop design.  The thermal center is not as high in the lowered loop plant.

The benefit of a raised loop is with natural circulation in the event that you lose forced flow.

The lower loop design still develops natural circulation.  But the raised loop is more conducive to NC.
Title: Re: B&W PWR
Post by: Frankie Love on Apr 05, 2012, 10:25
Was all of this a natural progression in engineering or was it part of (made my career) TMI mods?
Title: Re: B&W PWR
Post by: Fermi2 on Apr 05, 2012, 11:40
Natural Progression. DB was in service when TMI happened, in fact DB had a TMI type event before TMI did.
Title: Re: B&W PWR
Post by: SloGlo on Apr 05, 2012, 01:04
Natural Progression. DB was in service when TMI happened, in fact DB had a TMI type event before TMI did.
so did oconee.
Title: Re: B&W PWR
Post by: Frankie Love on Apr 05, 2012, 01:39
Quote
Natural Progression. DB was in service when TMI happened, in fact DB had a TMI type event before TMI did.

Interesting...since my career began the September following TMI, I thought I would have heard of the DB and Oconee incidents. I'll check Wiki but is there other methods of interesting research or reading?

Thanks. Learn something new everyday still holds true.
Title: Re: B&W PWR
Post by: Higgs on Apr 05, 2012, 01:42
Interesting...since my career began the September following TMI, I thought I would have heard of the DB and Oconee incidents. I'll check Wiki but is there other methods of interesting research or reading?

Thanks. Learn something new everyday still holds true.

Yeah had the industry communicated its lessons learned back then, TMI could have been prevented, or at least handled correctly based on what happened a few months earlier at DB.

Justin
Title: Re: B&W PWR
Post by: Fermi2 on Apr 06, 2012, 08:56
B+W ECCS department had actually compiled a great synopsis on the DB event, including some recommendations that appeared in various forms in virtually all PWR EOPs, but it was sitting in B+W customer service as they wanted to ensure it didn't commit B+W to anything and so it would be worded as a  "Hey we're doing this as a service to our customer and not sitting hard and fast recommendations for which we may later be held accountable for" sort of thing.