Bulletin 79-15: Deep Draft Pump Deficiencies
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 July 11, 1979 IE Bulletin No. 79-15 DEEP DRAFT PUMP DEFICIENCIES Description of Circumstances: On October 20, 1978, Commonwealth Edison Company reported that manufacturing deficiencies had been identified in new high pressure core spray, low pressure core spray, and residual heat removal pumps manufactured by Ingersoll-Rand (I-R) Company, Cameron Pump Division. Each of these pumps is a vertical turbine pump with impellers located in bowls in a sump or a self contained barrel. The motor (prime mover) is located at the highest pump elevation to take into account maximum flooding at the site or space considerations. The suction is at the lower end of the pump while the discharge head is just below the driver. Bearings supporting the vertical shaft segments (usually 5 to 10 segments) are either self lubricated, force fed (lubricated by fluid being pumped), or oil lubricated and maintained within their own isolated system. These pumps are designated as "Deep Draft". Figures 1&2 show typical outlines of such pumps. The internal deficiencies, identified through dimensional and visual inspections were as follows: Low Pressure Core Spray Pumps (I-R Model No. 29APKD-5) (Date of Manufacture - February 1973) . Loose impeller bolts and bolts improperly staked . Loose key - keyway fit . Excessive runout on pump shaft . Bearing showed wear . Bearing clearance exceeded recommended tolerance . Coupling thread galled . Wear ring clearance out-of-specification . Impeller-to-shaft clearance out of specification . Cracks found in second-and-third-stage impellers . Stuffing box bushings were severely galled High Pressure Core Spray Pumps (I-R Model No. 12X20KD) (Date of Manufacture - September 1972) . Bearing clearance exceeded recommended tolerance . Wear ring clearance out-of-specification . Bearings showed wear . IE Bulletin No. 79-15 July 11, 1979 Page 2 of 3 . Bearing loose in casing . Excessive runout on pump shaft . Wear ring lock screws missing on eighth stage . Shrink fit bearing came out of casing during pump shaft removal - casing sleeve socket found to be egg shaped Residual Heat Removal Pumps (I-R Model No. 29APKD-3) (Date of Manufacture December 1972) . Loose impeller bolts and bolts not properly staked . Excessive runout on pump shaft . Bearing found cracked . Bearing clearance out-of-specification . Couplings cut because galling prevented disassembly . Wear ring clearance out-of-specification The above deficiencies were identified at a facility under construction. In 1978, similar deficiencies in deep draft pumps were identified at three other facilities (North Anna 1 & 2, Surry 1 & 2, Beaver Valley 1). Problems with these pumps involved design and workmanship deficiencies which required extensive inspection, replacement of parts and major redesign. The manufacturers involved in these cases were Ingersoll-Rand, Bingham-Willamette and Byron Jackson. Some of the measures taken to assure pump operability at these locations included: 1. Pump shaft bearing redesign 2. Column redesign (stiffening) to improve vibration response 3. Upgraded pump alignment procedures 4. Pump fluid inlet condition reevaluation and redesign 5. Extensive testing The observed deficiencies spanning the past 1 1/2 years indicate that pumps of this class may not be sufficiently reliable particularly when utilized in ECCS and RHR applications where long tem cooling capability is required following a LOCA or similar event. Action to be Taken by Licensees and Permit Holders: All holders of reactor operating licenses and construction permits shall provide the following information within 60 days of this letter. 1. The number of deep draft pumps similar to those shown in Figures 1 and 2 utilized in safety related applications in each facility. 2. Manufacturer, model, capacity and plant application. . IE Bulletin No. 79-15 July 11 ,1979 Page 3 of 3 3. Overall dimensions of pumps. 4. Summary of startup, testing and routine maintenance history. 5. Operational problems and major repair efforts. 6. The longest interval that each pump has been available for operation without corrective maintenance. Identify the number of cycles of opera- tion during this interval, the duration of each cycle and the operating mode(s) (recirculation, rated flow, etc.). Identify the longest con- tinuous operation at or near rated flow conditions for each pump and the status of the pump operability at the end of the run. In addition licensees shall accumulate and make available for inspection at the licensees plant site the following information on the above identified pumps. 1. Drawings, sectional assemblies and parts list. 2. Detailed history of pump maintenance (alignment, parts replacement, etc) including bearing wear data, replacement frequency and a comparison with the manufacturers rated life for wearing surfaces. 3. Quality assurance and reliability testing requirements. 4. Design specifications 5. Results of tests performed during operation or prior to licensing. 6. Details of the procedures used to align the pump column. For those cases where the maintenance or operating history of a particular pump indicates that the design specifications are not being met, initiate appropriate actions that will demonstrate conformance to design requirements. Provide a description of planned actions within 60 days including a schedule for implementation of any actions that will not be completed within 120 days. In addition describe any planned or completed tests involving long tem operation of prototypes or pumps of similar design, which demonstrate the long term operability of such deep draft pumps at your facility. Approved by GAO, B180225 (R0072), clearance expires 7/31/80. Approval was given under a blanket clearance specifically for identified generic problems. Enclosure: Figures 1 and 2
Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021