Print
Flow-accelerated corrosion rate and residual life time estimation for the components of pipeline systems at nuclear power plants based on control data
expand article infoValery I. Baranenko, Olga M. Gulina§, Nikolaj L. Salnikov|
‡ VNIIAES, Moscow, Russia
§ VNIIAES, Obninsk, Russia
| Obninsk Institute for Nuclear Power Engineering, Obninsk, Russia
Open Access

Abstract

As of today, large volumes of data related to non-destructive operational control are accumulated on NPPs. For ensuring safe operation of power units, optimization of scope and scheduling operational control it is necessary to continue development of guidance documents, software products, methodological guidance and operational documentation (Baranenko et al. 1998, Gulina et al. 2013, Recommendation (NSAC-202L-R4) 2013).

Approaches are examined to assessment of the rate of erosion-corrosion wear (flow-accelerated corrosion - FAC) according to the data of operational control. The present study was performed based on the data of thickness gauging of different elements of pipelines of NPPs with different types of reactor. Further development of ideas exposed in (Baranenko et al. 2016) allowed revealing specific features of ECW processes on straight sections, bends and in the zones adjacent to weld joints of pipelines of NPPs equipped with VVER and RBMK reactors. Presence of the process of deposition of corrosion products on internal surfaces of pipeline walls results in the fact that residual lifetime of elements nominally increases due to deposition. However, real wall thickness under the layer of deposits is unknown just as the initial wall thickness is unknown as well. Investigation implemented in the present study is aimed at the substantiation of the methodology of calculation of FAC rate according to the data of operational control for the purpose of drawing calculation results closer to the reality keeping conservatism. Uniform approach to the assessment of FAC rate in the examined elements of pipelines was developed. Methodologies for evaluation of correction coefficients taking into account dimensional technological tolerances, special features of geometry of the element, as well as effect of deposits on the results of thickness measurements were suggested based on the data of operational control and industry standards.

The implemented studies demonstrated efficiency of the developed procedures for pipeline welding zones. Analysis of known and newly developed procedures was performed for bends and ranking of these procedures according to the criterion of “conservatism of evaluation of residual lifetime” was executed.

Introduction of correction coefficients allows enhancing conservatism of calculations of lifetime characteristics as compared with calculations performed on the basis of nominal values of thicknesses; the result depends on the type and dimensions of the element, its geometry, as well as on the type of reactor.

Keywords

Flow-accelerated corrosion (FAC), thickness gauging, evaluation of FAC rate, bends, welding, residual lifetime.

Introduction

Substantiation of the methodology for calculation of FAC rate for NPP piping elements manufactured of carbon steel requires high-quality analysis of data of operational control and taking into account significant number of factors (Baranenko et al. 2010. Introduction of additional correction coefficients taking into account the technology used in manufacturing the pipelines and effects of deposits on the values of initial and minimal permissible thicknesses (Baranenko et al. 2016) results in the significant change of estimated FAC rate and the residual lifetime which ensures certain conservatism of calculations and provides certain time margin for implementation of the next control.

Methodology for estimation of FAC rate presented in (Baranenko et al. 2016) is applicable for calculating straight pipeline sections:

W FAC1 = [(Snom × K11 × K12Smin × K2)] Ksafe/ Δτ0, (1)

where Snom is the nominal wall thickness; K11 is the coefficient taking into account positive tolerance for wall thickness during manufacturing the pipeline; K12 is the coefficient taking into account contribution of corrosion products depositions in the nominal wall thickness; K2 is the coefficient taking into account corrosion products depositions to value of measured minimal wall thickness (Smin); Ksafe is the safety factor; Δτ0 is the duration of operation of the element before the date of control. Geometrical features of such elements as bends and welding zones (Baranenko et al. 2010, Baranenko et al. 2009) will probably require correction of the methodology in question and accounting of real thicknesses of these elements.

The purpose of the present study is the development of methodologies for evaluation of FAC rate taking into account geometrical features of such element as bends and welding zones.

Taking into account specific features of geometry of pipeline elements in the calculation of FAC rate

Determination of correction coefficient for bends. Value of thickness measured during pre-start control must be substituted in formula (1) in the calculations of FAC rates for extended elbow bends as the nominal thickness Snom, otherwise the following dependence (Nakhalov 1983, ОSТ 24.321.26-74 1975) must be applied for calculation of thickness of extended elbow bend sections Sbend:

S bend = Snom (R – 0.2 D)/ (R + 0.3 D), (2)

where R is the radius of pipeline bend, mm; D is the pipeline outer diameter, mm; Sbend is the thickness of extended part of the bend, mm.

The following coefficient is introduced using dependence (2):

K bend = 1 – [0.5 (1 – Sbend/ Snom)]. (3)

Dependence (3) takes into account that maximum thinning can be found on the section located beyond the extended part of the bend.

Determination of correction coefficient for welding zones. Large numbers of welding zones – WZ – are present on NPP power units. Quantities of fittings installed on power units of NPPs with VVER-440, VVER-1000, RBMK-1000 and RBMK-1500 reactors are presented in Table 1. There are two weld joints (WJ) made on each element and, correspondingly, there are two zones adjacent to weld joints on each of them. Besides fitting elements significant number of WZ is found on pipeline systems. Cases of washing out of WZ of NPP pipelines because of FAC were registered in the practice of operation of NPP power units (Korhonen and Hietanen 1994).

Quantities of fittings installed on power units of NPPs with VVER-440, VVER-1000, RBMK-1000 and RBMK-1500 reactors.

Name of the element VVER-440 VVER-1000 RBMK-1000 RBMK-1500
Odd power unit Even power unit Odd power unit Even power unit
Gate valves 74 246 1820 1145 886 886
Shutoff valves 5448 6519 8715 8714 8135 7849
Control valves 80 126 352 265 789 788
Safety valves 65 172 135 135 119 119
Check valves 338 421 609 429 896 896
Total 6005 7484 11631 10688 10825 10538

On straight sections of pipelines and on WZ with outer diameter less than 108 mm initial thickness is similar to nominal thickness. Technological boreholes creating conditions for high-quality mating of joints during welding are drilled on WZ with outer diameter over 108 mm in accordance with industry standard OST 24.125.31-89. Drilling bores is performed on the input and output WZ on the section with length equal to 50 mm (ОSТ 24.125.30-89 1989).

Thickness Sk determining the wall thickness in the zone of weld joint along the length of 50 mm has on the average the value smaller than the thickness of the bore Sr* by approximately 1.3 times. In the process of operational control thickness Sk can be taken as the minimum permissible value.

Values of Sk in the zone of boreholes for WZ of different types and dimensions, nominal thicknesses and boreholes Sr* calculated according to diameters of boreholes (ОSТ 24.125.30-89 1989) are presented in Table 2. Thickness of the borehole Sr* must be accepted as the initial value for WZ with outer diameters ≥ 108 mm. Measurements of wall thicknesses of WZ are performed on the cross-sections located at the distance of less than 50 mm from the weld joint. For pressure equal to 3.92, 5.89, 8.44, 11.77 MPa average value of the ratio Sr/Snom is equal to 0.9. Thus, the value equal to 0.9Snom can be used as the nominal or initial thickness. For determining coefficients K12 and K2 it is necessary to know average values of wall thicknesses of pipelines which can be calculated on the basis of data of operational control. Calculations of average thicknesses are performed for pipelines minimum thicknesses of which are smaller than the initial values. Average wall thicknesses are determined according to the following dependence:

S av = SSi / nmeas , (4)

where Si is the wall thickness in the i-th measurement point; nmeas is the number of measurement points. The following is determined in the calculation of coefficients K12 and K2:

– Difference between the average and initial (nominal) thicknesses:

ΔSinit = SavSinit , (5)

– coefficient K12:

K 12 = (Sinit – ΔSinit)/ Sinit , (6)

(if Sav < Sinit, difference between the values will be negative and value of K12 will be larger than unity);

– coefficient K2

K 2 = (Smin – ΔSinit) / Smin. (7)

Calculation of FAC rate and residual lifetime. Corrosion rate aggravated by the flow WFAC is calculated according to equation (1), nominal thicknesses are replaced with corresponding values of Sbend for bends and 0.9Snom for welding zones. Residual lifetime of pipeline element is calculated according to the following equation:

t = (SminSperm)/WFAC , (8)

where Sperm is the minimum permissible wall thickness of the element (RD EO 1.1.2.11.0571-2015 2012, Case of ASME Requirements 2003).

Thicknesses of boreholes and nominal thicknesses, ratios of thicknesses Sr*/Snom and Sk/Sr* for control pressure and temperature.

p = 3.92 MPa, Т = 200°C p = 5.89 MPa, Т = 275°C
Item no. D o×Snom, mm S r*, mm S k, mm S k/Sr* S r*/Snom D o×Snom S r*, mm S k, mm S k/Sr* S r*/Snom
1 108×6 5.5 3.6 0.655 0.917 108×6 5.5 3.7 0.673 0.917
2 133×6.5 5.5 3.7 0.673 0.846 133×6.5 5.5 3.7 0.673 0.846
3 159×7 5.5 4.0 0.727 1.071 159×7 5.5 4.0 0.727 0.786
4 219×9 7.5 5.5 0.733 0.944 219×9 7.5 5.5 0.733 0.833
5 273×10 8.5 6.5 0.765 1.100 273×10 8.5 6.5 0.765 0.850
6 325×13 11 8.5 0.773 0.885 325×13 11.5 9.0 0.783 0.885
7 377×13 11.5 9.0 0.783 0.962 426×14 12.5 9.0 0.720 0.893
8 426×14 12.5 9.8 0.784 0.893 465×16 14.0 10.8 0.771 0.875
9 465×16 14 10.8 0.771 0.875
10 630×17 16 14.0 0.875 0.941
11 Min 0.655 0.846 Min 0.673 0.786
12 Average 0.754 0.943 Average 0.731 0.861
13 Max 0.875 1.100 Max 0.783 0.917
p = 8.44 MPa, Т = 300°C p = 11.77 MPa, Т = 250°C
Item no. D o×Snom, mm S r*, mm S k, mm S k/Sr* S r*/Snom D o×Snom S r*, mm S k, mm S k/Sr* S r*/Snom
1 108×6 5.5 3.7 0.673 0.917 108×8 6.5 4.7 0.723 0.813
2 133×8 7 5.8 0.829 0.875 133×8 7 5.8 0.829 0.875
3 159×9 8.5 6.9 0.812 0.944 159×9 8.5 6.9 0.812 0.944
4 219×13 12 9.5 0.792 0.923 219×13 12 9.5 0.792 0.923
5 273×16 14.5 11.8 0.814 0.906 273×16 14.5 11.8 0.814 0.906
6 325×19 17.5 14.2 0.811 0.921 325×19 17.5 14.2 0.811 0.921
7 426×24 22 18.5 0.841 0.917 530×28 25 19.0 0.76 0.893
8 530×28 25 19.0 0.760 0.893
9 630×25 24 22.0 0.917 0.960
10 Min 0.673 0.875 Min 0.723 0.813
11 Average 0.805 0.917 Average 0.791 0.896
12 Max 0.917 0.960 Max 0.829 0.944

Calculation of corrosion rate and residual lifetime of welding zones according to the data of operational control and taking into account correction coefficients

Values of wall thicknesses in circular points (Fig. 1) for 16 inlet and outlet WZ of pressure pipelines of feed electric pump and emergency feed pumps, minimum, average and maximum thicknesses, number of measurements with less than nominal thicknesses and thicknesses of boreholes of WZ on the pipeline with standard size equal to 426×24 mm are presented in Tables 3 and 4. Measurements of thicknesses were performed in eight points along the WZ circumference.

Measurements in axial direction were performed in one cross-section with step equal to 45° (corresponding to 12:00, 1:30, 3:00, 4:30, 6:00, 7:30, 9:00 и 10:30 “on a clock dial”). In accordance with Fig. 1 measurements are performed in the zones with wall thicknesses determined by the diameter of the borehole. In the present case thickness of the borehole must be equal to 21.6 mm. Results of measurements on inlet sections of WZ are presented in Table 3, those for outlet sections are presented in Table 4.

Figure 1. 

Layout of measurements of wall thicknesses of ZAWJ in eight points along the circumference: 1 – inlet zone; 2 – outlet zone.

Wall thicknesses in circular points of WZ inlet , minimum, average and maximum thicknesses, number of measurements with values of thickness less than Snom and Sr*.

Item no. Values of thicknesses in circular points, mm Values of thicknesses Number of measurements
12:00 1:30 3:00 4:30 6:00 7:30 9:00 10:30 Min Average Max < 24 mm < 21.6 mm
1 22.9 23.7 .30 22.6 22.7 22.6 22.4 24.2 22.4 23.1 24.2 7 0
3 22.1 23.4 22.4 21.5 21.9 23.8 24.9 24.4 21.5 23.1 24.9 6 1
5 22.2 24.5 24.2 22.7 22.2 22.8 20.4 21 20.4 22.5 24.5 6 2
7 22.9 24.2 23.9 24.8 23.2 24.7 24.6 24.7 22.9 24.1 24.8 3 0
9 22.3 24 25.2 23.6 21.8 23.5 23.2 21.9 21.8 23.2 25.2 6 0
11 20.8 21.8 22.5 22.8 22.4 21.9 22.1 21.4 20.8 22.0 22.8 8 2
13 24.8 24.4 21.5 20.9 22.3 21.6 21.5 22.7 20.9 22.5 24.8 6 3
15 22.2 22 21.9 21.8 21.4 20.6 20.1 20.7 20.1 21.3 22.2 8 4
Min 20.8 21.8 21.5 20.9 21.4 20.6 20.1 20.7 20.1 21.3 22.2 50 12
Average 22.5 23.5 23.1 22.6 22.2 22.7 22.4 22.6 21.4 22.7 24.2 78.1% 18.8%
Max 24.8 24.5 25.2 24.8 23.2 24.7 24.9 24.7 22.9 24.1 25.2

Wall thicknesses in circular points of WZ outlet, minimum, average and maximum thicknesses, number of measurements with values of thickness less than Snom and Sr*.

Item no. Values of thicknesses in circular points, mm Values of thicknesses Number of measurements
12:00 1:30 3:00 4:30 6:00 7:30 9:00 10:30 Min Average Max < 24 mm < 21.6 mm
2 22.6 20.5 20.9 22.2 23.3 23.1 22.2 23.8 20.5 22.3 23.8 8 2
4 22.2 22.4 22.6 25.4 25.5 21.3 21.4 20.3 20.3 22.6 25.5 6 3
6 20.2 21.1 24.2 24.9 24.1 22.2 21 21.4 20.2 22.4 24.9 5 4
8 25.5 23.8 23.8 24 23.5 23.1 22 23.6 22.0 23.7 25.5 6 0
10 25.3 24.1 22.4 24.9 24.8 24.4 24.2 25.5 22.4 24.5 25.5 1 0
12 22.3 21.4 21.8 22.1 22.4 22.8 22.4 23.3 21.4 22.3 23.3 8 1
14 22.8 23 23.1 23.8 23.7 24.3 24.3 23.6 22.8 23.6 24.3 6 0
16 22.2 22.8 22.3 22.5 24.1 22.5 21.8 21.3 21.3 22.4 24.1 7 1
Min 20.2 20.5 20.9 22.1 22.4 21.3 21 20.3 20.2 22.3 23.3 47 11
Average 22.9 22.4 22.6 23.7 23.9 23.0 22.4 22.9 21.4 23.0 24.6 73.4% 17.2%
Max 25.5 24.1 24.2 25.4 25.5 24.4 24.3 25.5 22.8 24.5 25.5

It follows from Tables 3 and 4 that the number of measurements with values of thicknesses less than 24 mm amounts on the WZ inlet and outlet sections to 78.1 and 73.4%, respectively. Number of measurements (on the borehole section) with values of thicknesses less than 21.6 mm amounts for the WZ inlet and outlet sections to 18.8 and 17.2%, respectively.

Results of calculations performed using formulas (5) – (8) are presented in Tables 5 and 6. Calculations of corrosion rates are given for welding zones for which the values of minimal thicknesses have values less than the initial value of the borehole thickness equal to 21.6 mm. Factor K11 was taken in the calculations to be equal to 1.075, time of operation before measurements – 24 years, minimum permissible wall thickness Sperm = 18.5 mm.

Estimated value of residual lifetime obtained using the formula for the nominal thickness Snom (WFAC1 and Т1) is by 1.8 times less than the value obtained taking into account the borehole (WFAC2 and Т2).

Use of borehole thickness instead of Snom results in the estimated value of residual lifetime larger by approximately 1.9 times, i.e. similarly to the picture for WZ inlet. Values of FAC rate and residual lifetime for WZ inlet without correction coefficients are presented in Table 7; borehole thickness equal to 21.6 mm was taken as the value of initial thickness.

Analysis of Table 7 demonstrates that accounting of correction coefficients reduces the difference between the values of residual lifetime due to the indirect taking into account of depositions on internal surface of pipeline. Even taking into account the borehole thickness calculation produces estimations of residual lifetime which are smaller by approximately eight times for WZ inlet and by 5.8 times for outlet. Therefore, calculation methodology with introduction of correction coefficients and using the borehole thickness as the initial thickness is certainly recommended for WZ.

Values characterizing residual lifetime of WZ inlet of pressure pipelines of feed electric pump and emergency feed pumps.

Item no. ΔSin= Sav –Sin, mm K12 K2 Smin WFAC1, mm/yr Т1, years WFAC2, mm/yr Т2, years Т21
3 1.5 0,931 0,930 21,5 0,095 20,3 0,074 31,5 1,55
5 0.9 0,958 0,907 20,4 0,163 11,6 0,172 11,7 1,01
11 0.4 0,981 0,949 20,8 0,170 8,6 0,140 13,5 1,56
13 0.9 0,958 0,93 20,9 0,144 7,0 0,129 16,6 2,37
15 0.3 1,014 0,949 20,1 0,230 2,9 0,205 6,9 2,38
Average 1.8

Values characterizing residual lifetime of WZ outlet of pressure pipelines of feed electric pump and emergency feed pumps 426×24 mm.

Item no. Smin, mm C12 C2 Smin×C2, mm Diff. WFAC1, mm/year Residual lifetime Т1, years WFAC2, mm/year Residual lifetime Т2, years Т21
2 20.5 0,968 0,921 18,9 2 0,276 7,24 0,161 12,4 1,71
4 20.3 0,954 0,898 18,2 1,8 0,294 6,12 0,184 9,78 1,60
6 20.2 0,963 0,902 18,2 1,7 0,304 5,59 0,193 8,8 1,57
12 21.4 0,968 0,963 20,6 2,9 0,198 14,64 0,087 33,3 2,27
16 21.3 0,963 0,953 20,3 2,8 0,207 13,5 0,097 28,8 2,13
Average 1.86

FAC rate and residual lifetime for WZ inlet (WFAC11) and outlet (WFAC21) without correction coefficients.

Item no. Smin, mm WFAC11, mm/year Т11, years Item no. Smin, mm WFAC21, mm/year Т21, years Т11/Т1 Т21/Т2
3 21.5 0.004 750 2 20,5 0,045 44 23,8 3,5
5 20.4 0.050 38 4 20,3 0,054 33 3,2 3,4
11 20.8 0.033 70 6 20,2 0,058 29 5,2 3,3
13 20.9 0.029 82 12 21,4 0,008 362 4,9 10,8
15 20.1 0.062 25 16 21,3 0,012 233 3,6 8,1
Average 8.1 5.8

Bends. For calculating FAC rate and residual lifetime of bends let us examine the data of measurements performed in 1995, 1996, 2000 and 2002 on bends 06-K and 16-K of feedwater pipelines 273×16 mm of the Dukovany NPP during implementation of operational control. Selection of the bends was predetermined by the large number of measurements performed on each of the elements (from 276 to 394) (Rushchak et al. 1996).

W 1 = (SnomSmin)Ksafe/ Δτ0. (9)

The formula W2 = [(Snom×K11×K12Smin×K2)]×Ksafe/ Dt0 (Baranenko et al. 1998) was suggested for estimating the FAC rate for straight sections of pipelines. Corresponding values of FAC rate W2 and residual lifetime Т2 are given in Table 8. Average value of the ratio T1/T2 = 1.5, i.e. application of correction coefficients results in the reduction of the value of estimated residual lifetime of the examined bends by approximately 1.5 times.

FAC rate and residual lifetime for bends without taking (9) into consideration and with correction coefficients (1).

Bend Year Top, years Smin Sav ΔS C12 C2 W1 Τ1 W2 Τ2 T1/T2
06-K 1996 11,7 12,95 16,32 0,32 0,98 0,975 0,236 26 0,329 18,7 1,39
2002 17,7 13,5 16,13 0,13 0,992 0,990 0,128 52 0,190 35,2 1,47
16-K 1995 10,7 13,84 16,17 0,17 0,989 0,987 0,183 38,4 0,285 24,7 1,55
1996 11,7 13,95 16,23 0,23 0,985 0,983 0,159 44,9 0,250 28,6 1,56
2000 15,7 13,76 16,22 0,22 0,986 0,984 0,130 53,5 0,198 35,15 1,52
Average 1.5

Formula for estimation of FAC rate suggested in (RD EO 1.1.2.11.0571-2015 2012),

W 3 = (1,25×Snom – 0,95×Smin)Ksafe/ Dt0 (10)

was also applied with respect to the examined bends. Corresponding values of the rate W3 and residual lifetime Т3 are presented in Table 9.

Estimated values of ECW rate and remaining lifespan for bends obtained according to formula (10).

Bend Year Smin Sav ΔS 0.95×Smin W3 Т3 Т32
06-K 1996 12.95 16.32 0.32 12.3 0.598 10.3 0.55
2002 13.5 16.13 0.13 12.825 0.368 18.2 0.517
16-K 1995 13.84 16.17 0.17 13.148 0.582 12.1 0.49
1996 13.95 16.23 0.23 13.25 0.524 13.6 0.475
2000 13.76 16.22 0.22 13.07 0.401 17.3 0.492

In accordance with formula (2) thickness of extended part of the bend is equal to

S bend=Snom(R – 0.2D)/(R + 0.3D),

where R is the bend radius. For the examined bends (90°) R = 1370 mm. Then Sbend = 14.5 mm and the value of factor Kbend = 1 – [0.5×(1 – Sbend / Snom)] = 0.953.

Average value of the ratio Т3/Т2 = 0.5, i.e. calculation of FAC rate according to the formula presented in the new edition of the regulatory document (RD) (RD EO 1.1.2.11.0571-2015 2012) results in the reduction of estimated value of residual lifetime by two times relative to the formula for straight sections with correction coefficients.

Formula for calculating FAC rate taking into account the bend geometry W4 is similar to formula (1) with corresponding replacement of Snom with Sbend:

W 4 = [(Sbend×K11×K12×KbendSmin×K2)]×Ksafe/ Dt0. (11)

Estimated value of residual lifetime for the described case (Т4) is by 3.5 times larger than that obtained using formula (1) for straight sections (Table 10).

Thus, residual lifetime calculated according to RD is by approximately tree times less than that calculated using the formula for bends.

Estimated values of FAC rate and residual lifetime (W4 and Т4) for bends obtained according to formula (1) taking into account the bend geometry.

Bend Year Smin Sср ΔS C12 C2 W4 Т4 Т42 Т34
06-K 1996 12.95 16,32 0,32 0,98 0,975 0,205 28,4 2,75 0,362
2002 13.5 16,13 0,13 0,992 0,990 0,107 61,4 3,37 0,296
16-K 1995 13.84 16,17 0,17 0,989 0,987 0,149 46 3,8 0,263
1996 13.95 16,23 0,23 0,985 0,983 0,127 54,4 4 0,25
2000 13.76 16,22 0,22 0,986 0,984 0,106 63,5 3,67 0,272
Average 3.5 ~ 0.3

Summary of results for bends are presented in Table 11.

As the final result the most conservative estimation was obtained using the formula taken from RD (W3) and the most optimistic estimation was obtained with introduction of correction coefficients for bends (W4). Reasonable conservatism was demonstrated in this case with introduction of correction coefficients for bends similar to those for straight sections (W2), i.e. without taking the geometry into account. However, it is difficult enough to substantiate this result and, therefore, the whole set of results must be used in order to make decision on the implementation of the next control when already expired time gets close to the minimum among the calculated values of time.

Residual lifetime for bends (summary of results).

Bend Year of measurement Smin Sav Т1 Т2 Т3 Т4
06-K 1996 12,95 16,32 26 18,7 10,3 28,4
2002 13,5 16,13 52 35,2 18,2 61,4
16-K 1995 13,84 16,17 38,4 24,7 12,1 46
1996 13,95 16,23 44,9 28,6 13,6 54,4
2000 13,76 16,22 53,5 35,15 17,3 63,5

Conclusion

1. Methodologies were developed for calculating the rates of flow-accelerated corrosion and residual lifetime for bends and welding zones with introduction of correction coefficients taking into account the effects on the corrosion process produced by the manufacturing technology, as well as influence of depositions of corrosion products.

2. Reasonable conservatism of the calculations is ensured by introduction of correction coefficients and geometry of the elements. It was demonstrated that calculated results obtained taking these correction factors into account are not overly pessimistic.

3. Values of correction coefficients introduced in the calculation dependences are determined on the basis of processing the data of operational control. Calculation of FAC rate and residual lifetime of the WZ are performed using nominal thickness and borehole thickness as the initial value of thickness. Use of borehole thickness instead of nominal thickness results in the estimation of residual lifetime which is by approximately 1.9 times larger both for WZ inlet and outlet of pressure pipelines of feed electric pump and emergency feed pumps with size type 426×24 mm.

4. Calculation without introduction of correction coefficients for the borehole thickness produce estimated values of residual lifetime which are smaller by approximately eight times for WZ inlet and by 5.8 times for outlet. Therefore, calculation methodology with introduction of correction coefficients and application of borehole thickness as the initial thickness is certainly recommended for welding zones.

5. Data of measurements performed on bends of feedwater pipelines 06-K and 16-K 273×16 mm of the Dukovany NPP performed in the course of operational control in 1995, 1996, 2000 and 2002 are examined for calculation of FAC rate and residual lifetime. The following four formulas for calculating FAC rate were examined: for straight sections without corrections, for straight sections with introduction of correction factors, with introduction of correction factors for bends and the formula recommended in RD (RD EO 1.1.2.11.0571-2015 2012). Ambiguousness of the conclusions thus drawn requires application of the whole set of available results for making the decision on the implementation of the next control when already expired time gets close to the minimum among the calculated values of time.

References

  • Baranenko VI, Gashenko VA, Shchederkina TE (1998) A general diagnostic feature for evaluating the wear rate of pipelines in the weld-affected zones (field experience at the Zaporozhskaya NPP] Zavodskaya laboratoriya. Diagnostika Materialov 64(2): 56–58. [in Russian]
  • Baranenko VI, Gulina OM, Salnikov NL, Murzina OE (2016) Substantiation of FAC rate and service life estimation under operation control data. Izvestiya vuzov. Yadernaya Energetika 2016(2): 55–65. [in Russian]
  • Baranenko VI, Yanchenko YuA, Gulina OM, Dokukin DA (2010) On the calculation of FAC rate o and the residual life of NPP. Izvestiya vuzov. Yadernaya Energetika 2010(2): 55–63. [in Russian]
  • Baranenko VI, Yanchenko YuA, Gulina OM, Tarasova OS (2009) Operational control of pipelines exposed to FAC. Teploenergetika (5): 20–33. [in Russian]
  • Case of ASME Requirements for Analytical Evaluation of Pipe Wall Thinning (2003) Section XI, Division 1. Case N-597-2, 13 pp.
  • Gulina OM, Salnikov NL, Baranenko VI (2013) Development of normative documentation for resource management of NPP equipment under FAC conditions. Yadernaya fizika i inzhiniring 2013(3): 273–278. [in Russian]
  • Korhonen R, Hietanen O (1994) Erosion-corrosion of parallel feed water discharge lines at the Loviisa VVER-440. Proceed. of Specialists Meeting Organized by the Inter. Atomic Energy Agency, 19–22 Sept. AEA Vienna held in Kiev, 73–89. [in Russian]
  • Nakhalov VA (1983) Reliability of pipe bends in heat power plants. Energoatomizdat Publ., Moscow, 183 pp. [in Russian]
  • RD EO 1.1.2.11.0571-2015 (2012) Norms of admissible wall thickness for carbon steel piping under flow accelerated corrosion. VNIIAES Publ., Мoscow, 210 pp. [in Russian]
  • Recommendation for Effective Flow-Accelerated Corrosion Program (NSAC-202L-R4) (2013) EPRI/ 3002000563. Technical Report, EPRI, 94 pp.
  • Rushchak M, Kaplan J, Kadechka P (1996) Complex Approach to the Lifetime Evaluation of WWER Secondary Piping Due to Erosion-Corrosion. Proc. of the IAEA Specialists Meeting on Erosion/Corrosion of Nuclear Power Plant Components. Sept. 13–16, Russian Federation, Vladimir, 24–30. [in Russian]
  • ОSТ 24.125.30-89 – ОSТ 24.125.57-89 (1989) Details and assembly units of pearlitic steels for NPP pipelines D = 16–720 mm. Types, construction and dimensions. Gosstandart Publ., Leningrad, 155 pp. [in Russian]
  • ОSТ 24.321.26-74, ОSТ 24.321.28-74, ТU 14-3-460-75 (1975) Geometric characteristics of bends. Drowning of the stretched part of the bends. Limit deviations in the thickness of the walls of pipelines. Moscow. Gosstandart Publ., Moscow, 8 pp. [in Russian]