Operation and Preventive maintenance of pressure vessels

Schedule maintenance on the nuclear power plants is essential as it enhances the system’s

service life and promotes safe operations. Preventive maintenance does not only enhance system

effectiveness and reliability on all systems, structures, and components on having the

recommended operational safety level as per the design specifications but also ensures that the

general safety status of the plant is not compromised by any form of the underlying defect.

Research has it that Nuclear Power Plants NPP’s are the most reliable carbon-free energy supply

among other systems globally. This implies that nuclear power plants can only be compared with

fossil-fuel-powered plants in terms of energy regeneration, reliability, and cost of producing

energy.

Figure 1: Typical pressure vessel for NPP

The energy produced by nuclear power plants had been on a constant up-streak until 2015

when the figure dropped to below 10% of the global power generated. The dropped in the

amount of energy produced by power plants was established to be due to aging and constant
failure on the components and systems of the nuclear power plant. This implies that the systems

lacked proper and effective or scheduled preventive maintenance on the nuclear power plants,

preventive maintenance on systems aims at detecting and identifying the possible root cause of

failure on systems before they occur and device a corrective measure to prevent the failure from

occurring. The decline could also be attributed to the decommissioning of hundreds of aging

nuclear plants across Europe and America as well as the impact of the accidents associated with

nuclear power productions.

The Fukushima Daiichi accident in Japan saw quite a number of reactors suspend

operations. These incidences served as a stepping stone on global energy development as a new

and robust energy development roadmap in countries like Japan, Arabian countries, United

Kingdom and China have emerged. With these engagements, the energy matrix from nuclear

power is predicted to rise by 7% by 2035. The growth is also facilitated by the increased concern

for environmental sustainability as all plants are required to align their operations in accordance

with the United Nations standards of sustainable development goals. It is through effective

scheduled preventive maintenance, the nuclear power plants can minimize or rather reduce the

accidental cases that often lead to environmental pollution, destruction of properties, or worse

loss of lives.

Nuclear Pressure Vessels Maintenance Framework

Based on the scope and operations of the nuclear power plants, the primary purpose of

preventive maintenance evaluation is to ensure that various components and equipment are fit for

operation and allow required functionality with safety and reliable power generation. Pressure

vessels are part of equipment within a nuclear power plant that requires high maintenance level

for safe and reliable nuclear power generation. Pressure vessels used in nuclear power plants are
fabricated in different shapes, sizes, and capacities depending on the plant layout and design

specifications. Pressure vessels range from simple air compressors to extremely large and

complex reactor pressure vessels. These vessels are utilized for pressure containment of liquids

and gases, some constructed of alloy steel or carbon steel. the dynamics between corrective

maintenance and preventive maintenance on pressure vessels is the time of execution. Preventive

maintenance on nuclear pressure vessels is often conducted before failure while corrective

maintenance is executed after failure on the vessels. The preventive and corrective maintenance

framework is illustrated as below

Figure 2: Vessel maintenance strategy

Dynamics of preventive maintenance

The preventive maintenance on vessels is conducted in four facets; time-based

maintenance (TBM), risk-based maintenance (RBM), failure finding maintenance (FFM),

predictive maintenance (PDM), and condition-based maintenance (CBM). Failure on the nuclear

power plant, especially on the pressure vessels can be catastrophic, thus preventive maintenance

is highly recommended on these pieces of equipment to minimize the effect of failure, prevent

failure from occurring, and evaluating the risks and hazards of the anticipated failure on the

pressure vessels. Preventative maintenance strategy on pressure vessels should be based on

restoring, replacing components of a system at a predetermined interval regardless of its’

operation condition. For instance, if the pressure valves of the nuclear pressure vessels are

scheduled for replacement after every six months, the personnel should stick to the schedule and

replace the valves even if they are still in perfect operating conditions. However, the mode of

schedule for maintenance depends on the structure and operation of the system involved. For

instance, the planned maintenance can be based on usage, for example, service or replacement

after every 100 hours or 200 cycles of operation. The figure below shows preventive

maintenance model for the pressure vessel

Figure 3: preventive maintenance model for the pressure vessel

Time-Based Maintenance (TBM)

Time-based or scheduled maintenance is considered on components whose failure has a

direct impact on the system’s reliability. In a nuclear power plant, failure on the pressure vessels

affects the entire energy generation therefore, schedule maintenance is considered on the system

to ensure that it optimally function thus ensuring the system’s reliability. With a time-based

approach, critical components are prioritized based on the consequences and impact on

performance, reliability, and safety. For instance, pressure valves and pressure gauges should be

checked and maintained on regular basis to ensure that the right amount of pressure is transferred

from the compressor into the plant. From the review, the majority of accidents on nuclear power

plants are caused by an explosion on the system due to feeding excess pressure on the system. In

order to avoid such kinds of accidents, a time-based check aimed at restoration or replacement of

critical components is highly recommended for a functional nuclear power plant.

Since the developed model is a single pressure vessel unit, it operates in combination

with the steam turbine to generate maximum power based on the steam flow rate, pressure, and

steam properties. It, therefore, implies that the components of the system are subjective to wear

and tear due to the high pressure and steam involved in the operation. A combination of high

pressure and steam often leads to high rates of fatigue failure. Hence the system requires a

documented time-based scheduled maintenance for replacement or restoration of worn-out parts.

The reactor that ensures the pressure control for the system is another critical component that

requires scheduled maintenance since it operates on three different modes that alter the thermal

power with variation based on different parameters such as coolant system temperature and

steam pressure.
Risk-Based Maintenance

The risk-based maintenance technique considers the outcome of risk assessment on the

system to implement a safe and secure failure prevention mechanism on the system. Therefore,

elements that pose higher risks in the event of failure are subjective to risk-based maintenance

while components with a low-risk level in the event of failure may be maintained a considerably

lower maintenance frequency. For instance, when reactors are set to operate at a constant average

temperature control mode, the average operation temperature is expected to be constant

throughout the entire process. Therefore, RBM maintenance is recommended on the reactor

control system (RCS) to ensure that it operates at the optimal temperature to avoid accidents that

might occur because of failure of the inlet valves. However, in the constant steam pressure

control model, the temperature rises between the primary and secondary sides while allowing the

average temperature rise in steam pressure to be constant.

For effective implementation of risk-based maintenance, there is a need to minimize the

total risk of failure across the system in the most economical manner. In risk-based maintenance,

the pressure vessels must be marked as per the maintenance records from evaluation, this would

eliminate confusion during maintenance processes. Regular inspection stipulates that the

operator disengages the inspection door and cleans the entire pressure vessel while checking on

the worn-out parts that need replacement. Risk-based maintenance involves non-destructive

testing on the system, periodic or regular inspection, and pre-planned maintenance of the critical

components of the vessel. Generally, RBM is essentially recommended where the scope and

frequency of the maintenance operations are in continuous optimization based on the report and

outcome of inspection or testing in form of risk assessment. Apart from the pressure vessel, the
steam generator is another component of nuclear power plant that deserves risk-based

maintenance because of its dual or 2-phase flow in the secondary parts.

Failure Finding Maintenance (FFM)

Generally, the main reason for risk assessment is to detect and identify failure within the

system. Failure finding maintenance technique also shares on detecting and finding the hidden

failure on vessels and providing the corrective measure on vessels before actual failure. Since

pressure vessels work under extreme conditions, the components like pressure valves, throttle,

and pressure gauges can experience failure while on the operation. From inspections,

maintenance personnel has the capability to detect and predict failure on the element, thus

recommend the maintenance of the marked systems earlier before the failure occurs. According

to the design and configuration of the pressure vessels for the nuclear power plant, safety sensors

are installed on critical parts like pressure gauge and throttle valves to prevent the system from

function in the event of failure on either of the parts.

Fatigue analysis conducted on the pressure vessels through mathematical models was

through failure finding approach. For instance, failure on the pressurizer tanks results in failure

in the reactor vessel thus the whole system cannot function effectively. On the other hand, the

reactor core that contains coolant and fuel temperature models are remotely monitored through

the server to ascertain their functionality within the nuclear power plant. From mathematical

models used on fatigue analysis, it is worth noting that failure finding maintenance only detects

but does not prevent failure, therefore it has to be coupled with other maintenance techniques to

have an efficient and reliable system.

Predictive Maintenance (PM)

 Predictive maintenance and condition-based maintenance are based on similar principles

with the only difference defined by the advent of artificial intelligence. Predictive maintenance

utilizes different products of IoT and innovation like artificial intelligence, innovation, and

equipment sensors to foretell failure on systems before complete shutdown. Predictive

maintenance is the advanced condition-based assessment of components. Manufactures have

advanced their vessels to have in-built safety systems such as sensors and alarm systems to

sound in the event of failure. These have replaced the condition-based assessments aimed at

assessing the operational condition of systems. In the advent of the 21 st century, where systems

are autonomous, there is no need for routine condition assessments since systems have remote

screen-based monitoring systems that show the safety levels and operational conditions of

critical elements within the plant.

The nuclear power plant is controlled due to the hazardous nature of materials involved;

therefore, installation of AI and equipment sensors are highly recommended on systems such as

pressure vessels to help in detection of failure or operation fault instead of humans conducting

conditioned based assessment on parts. Failure analysis is essential on the parts of the vessel to

enable plant operators to understand and know the type or form of corrective measure to consider

for implementation for preventive maintenance on the pressure vessels of the power plant. The

nuclear pressure vessel often integrates the pressurizer to the reactor pressure vessel for

enhanced performance efficiency and reliability. With the developed pressurizer model, vapor

and liquid are involved requires optimal conditions to deliver the desired pressure for the nuclear

power plant.

Modern Techniques of High-Pressure Vessel Maintenance

 Pressure vessels for Nuclear power plants are typical high-pressure vessel with complex

geometries, deep bores, minuscule cracks and thick sections that has a significant impact on

system’s safety and service life (lifetime). Preventive maintenance through non-destructive

evaluation (NDE) techniques are approved for the assessment of nuclear plant pressure vessels

that are designed for fitness-for-service. With machined learning (ML) and artificial intelligence

(AI), substantive improvements have been achieved over conventional techniques like liquid-

penetrant testing, eddy-current testing, single element ultra-sonic testing, or magnetic particle

testing on the vessel. Besides, accuracy, advanced methods have improved turnaround times

with reduced maintenance expenditure on pressure vessels.

The vessel assessment and maintenance are to be conducted by qualified NDE experts

who understand the dynamics of a variety of inspection and analytic techniques. The NDE expert

is authorized to utilize advanced techniques to benchmark vessels in relation to maintenance

practices. There are series of tests that are considered in the pressure vessel maintenance process.

These tests include guide-wave test, eddy-current array test, fatigue analysis, linear-phased array

inspection, fatigue test, static and hydrostatic leak tests.

Fatigue analysis

Pressure vessels are designed with a pressure differential between outside ad inside with

exceptions on limited isolated situations. During pumping and piping, high pressure is generated

from inside, resulting in high internal pressure, for the stability of the system, the material used

in the fabrication has to withstand several forces from inside and outside the vessel. Since the

operation of pressure vessels involves the combination of high temperature and high pressure

that may be accompanied by other flammable radio-active elements, the vessels need to be

designed such that it copes with high temperature and pressure and no leakage can take place
during operations. Fatigue analysis is critical on the material selected for fabrication as it gives

the vessel safety integrity. Therefore, pressure vessels must be designed as per ASME

engineering standards. The vessel’s cylindrical casing has to be made of uniform thickness

evaluated from maximum circumferential stress from internal pressure.

Figure 4: Predicting fatigue failure on pressure vessel

Leakage Analysis/Leak-testing methods

Pressure vessels are designed to transmit and store gases, vapors, and liquids under

pressure. It is the pressure build-up between inside and outside the vessel that allows the vapor,

gas, or liquid transmission, therefore any form of leakage on the vessel affects its functionality.

Gases and fluids involved in the vessel are highly flammable and poisonous thus any leakage to

the environment exposes the public to hazards. The controllable stress analysis is achieved

through hydrostatic and pneumatic leakage tests on the pressure vessels. The hydrostatic test uses

liquids (water) under pressure while pneumatic tests use gas (air) under pressure. However, on

rare occasions, a combination of pneumatic and hydrostatic tests is used together.

Hydrostatic leak test is the most preferred leak-testing technique in evaluating the safety

integrity of the pressure vessel. The hydrostatic analysis is often used since water is easily
accessible and provides a much safer fluid test medium compared to nearly incompressible air.

The amount of energy required to compress air for leak-test is more compared to that required to

compress water. This explains why there are few cases of pressure vessel rapture on models that

considered hydrostatic leak-tests. With the model developed, fatigue analysis and hydrostatic

leak-test are approved for the safety integrity evaluation of the designs.
 Figure 5: Points of concern during leak-test on vessels

Limitation of directly assuming the failure rate form rather than the beginning from

physical model formulation for degradation mechanism, i.e. underlying physical parameters and

phenomena are not recognized in the extrapolation and analysis outside data range that is
debatable. Consequently, the large uncertainties introduce the failure rate prediction and mask

the challenges which affect the risk management of aging mechanisms significantly