| Miniproposals | ||||||||||
|
| Operators | |
| Session leader(s): | Steve Wolfe |
| Physics operator(s): | Bill Rowan |
| Engineering operator(s): | Bill Parkin,Bill Cochran |
| Engineering Operator Run Comment |
| automatically entered by signon - please replace with real comment |
| Session Leader Plans |
| Entered: Jul 1 2009 04:05:49:133PM |
| Author: Steve Wolfe |
Session Leader plan for Thursday, 7/2/2009
MP#555: PF Error field evaluation and compensation
SL: wolfe
PO: Rowan
This experiment calls for long flattop single coil PF pulses under DPCS
control for the purpose of evaluating the non-axisymmetric error fields
arising from tilts or shifts of the PF coils. The last time such tests were
done was on 1030717.
We will also take one long flattop TF pulse (under PLC control) in order to
improve the evaluation of the toroidal tilt of the magnetics sensors, several
of which seem to have changed significantly since reassembly.
Note that depending on results, it may be necessary to modify the
EF3 and EF4 bus connections to pulse the upper and lower coils independently,
as was done on 1030717.
We will also test the a-coils using non-standard tap settings. One change of
A-coil taps is called for during the run.
If/when we finish the field evaluation, the run will go back to MP#298a plasma
cleanup runs. Therefore, we should have overnight ECDC and load the gas plena
as for a normal plasma run, but all valves disabled.
Special engineering instructions: Start with power systems as on: 1030717007
(OH1 only, EF3 Aux power OFF)
Fizzle detector on at 2.2sec, off at 2.3 sec for all shots
Note that all PF shots will use the same settings for fizzle detector and all
those without EF3 will want the EF3 AUX power off.
Acoil: +Btop -Bbot -Gtop +Gbot (Non-standard) Hybrid Enabled (OFF for 1st shot)
Shot sequence plan MP#555
----------------------------------
Note to Physop: trying to load shots from 2003 will bring up the configuration
warning, and a warning that the DPCS tree will not be superceded. The present
DPCS tree should be fine, but the dpcs_fizzle routine should be turned OFF for
these power tests. Remember to turn it back on if we go on to run plasmas in
the afternoon. Wires 4 and 6 (zxl, bz_0) in segment 1 should be zeroed to
avoid warnings about bad sensors in these predictors, which aren't used
for these shots anyway.
The waveforms for steps #3-10 are the same as loaded from
1030717010, so you just need to tell the engineers which coils to energize
(and/or which shots they need to copy from). If we do steps 11 and 12
(separate EF3 and EF4 coils) you can keep the waveforms but need to modify the
observers to look only at the active coil.
1) Load from 1030717007 (OH1 2sec pulse at +20kA)
2) Load (or copy trace) from 1030717010 (OH1 swing -20 to +20)
3) "" 1030717008 (OH2U +20kA, 2sec flattop)
4) "" 1030717009 (OH2L +20kA, 2sec flattop)
5) "" 1030717011 (EF1U +5kA, 2 sec flattop)
6) "" 1030717012 (EF1L +5kA, 2 sec flattop)
7) "" 1030717013 (EF2U -4kA, 2 sec flattop)
8) "" 1030717014 (EF2L -4kA, 2sec flattop)
9) "" 1030717005 (EF4U/L +4kA, 2 sec flattop)
10) "" 1030717006 (EF3U/L +10kA, 2sec flattop) EF3 ON
11) If results from 9 and/or 10 are sufficiently different from the
corresponding shots 1030717005 and 6, then it will be necessary to break down
the bus and take pulses with the coils individually. Otherwise proceed to #13.
Note that the disconnected coil should be terminated in a varistor to
avoid induced currents; check engineering records for 1030717001-004 to see
what was done. Also, the notes indicate that it is necessary to fool the I2t
circuit to allow these shots to be taken.
11A) 2 sec EF4U pulse, +4kA. Use waveform as on #9, change predictor. Compare
to 1030717001. Note EF3 Aux power OFF.
11B) If necessary, 2 sec EF3U +10kA pulse. Same waveform as #10, but modify
predictor. Compare 1030717002, which has modified waveform for gentler
rampdown.
12) For next shot, again reconfigure bus for Lower coil(s) only
12A) 2 sec EF4L pulse, +4kA (note predictor change. EF3 Aux power off.
compare 1030717003
12B) If necessary, 2 sec EF3L +10kA pulse (note predictor change from 11B)
compare 1030717004
13) A-coil only pulse [+Btop -Bbot -Gtop +Gbot] program 4kA
14) Reconfigure A-coil to [+Btop +Bbot -Gtop -Gbot], program 4kA
15) If cases 11 and 12 were run, reconfigure the bus for normal operation and
repeat shots 9 and 10 to confirm connection.
16) Long pulse TF-only pulse (PLC control ok) as on 1080523029. Compare
results to existing magnetics::top.bp_coils:btor_pickup and apply for
future shots. Note that this may necessitate predictor recalculations.
For steps #1-10, and 11-12,15 if necessary, monitor BP difference signals and
compare to corresponding shots from 1030717 where the same signals are
available. Detailed analysis to be done post-run using
/home/wolfe/idl/cmod/error_fields/diff_bpcoils_ts.pro .
|
| Entered: Jul 2 2009 07:07:03:193AM |
| Author: Steve Wolfe |
Addendum to SL Plan for Thursday, July 2, 2009 for continuation of MP#298a after completion of MP#555 pulses. A-coil should be returned to standard tap settings [+Dtop, -Dbot -Jtop +Jbot] Gas system enabled for operation (B-top,B-main, B-side Lower) Load power system from 1090701027 Load DPCS from 1090701027 (900ka, LSN); make sure dpcs_fizzle routine is turned on. Proceed with cleanup discharges. |
| Physics Operators Plans |
| Entered: Jul 1 2009 03:49:07:837PM |
| Author: Bill Rowan |
| -----------------
Purpose ----------------- MP 555, PF Error Field Evaluation and Compensation MP 298A, C-Mod Plasma Startup SL: Wolfe PO: Rowan ----------------- Engineering Setup ----------------- Run begins at 09:00 and ends at 17:00 Power systems as on: 1030717007 OH1 only, EF3 Aux power OFF Fizzle detector on at 2.2 s, off at 2.3 s (see SL plan) Acoil: +Btop -Bbot -Gtop +Gbot Hybrid Enabled (OFF for 1st shot) Gas setup: Fill B-Top with 6 psi D2 Hybrid enabled (PG4) fill B-side lower with 1 psi Ar Hybrid DISABLED (PG1) leave B-side upper as is Hybrid DISABLED (PG2) fill B-main (C-side) with 40 psi D2 Hybrid enabled (PG3) leave NINJA as is DISABLED Enable gatevalves and shutters: ECE, Z-bolo Torvac gatevalve toggle (yes/no): no Boronization(yes/no): no Overnight ECDC (yes/no): yes ICRF(yes/no): yes, when ICRF operator asks for it after MP switched to 298A LH(yes/no): no DNB(yes/no): no Cryopump (yes/no): no Vessel temperature: 35/35/35 ------------------------------ ECDC Parameters ------------------------------ gas and pressure: D2 at 2e-4 Torr sweep: 44/45/103 cm scan: 20/120 s Vessel temp overnight 60/60/60 if possible |
| Session Leader Summaries |
| Entered: Jul 2 2009 05:46:58:420PM |
| Author: Steve Wolfe |
Run Summary for MP#555 on Thursday, July 2, 2009 SL: wolfe PO: Rowan EO: Parkin, Cochran, Byford We completed all the PF tests called for in the run plan. Because the signals on the EF4U/L and EF3U/L showed significant differences on some sensors from the reference shots in 2003, we ended up taking pulses with the individual coils. We also got the long pulse TF test for updating the BTOR_PICKUP values on all the BP coils. The time required for reconfiguring the bus was greater than anticipated, and as a result we had to defer the A-coil pulses with the B and G coilset. The A-coil taps should be set back to the normal configuration before Tuesday's run. Eyeball analysis of the results with OH1, OH2U, OH2L, EF1U and EF1L indicate small if any differences from the same cases in 2003, implying that the removal and reinstallation of these coils did not result in a major change in the non-axisymmetric error fields. This conclusion is tentative, pending detailed analysis of the complete dataset. The variation in the signals using the outboard coils EF3 and EF4 is likely due to diffences in the sensor response, rather than real changes in the location of these coils, but I need to do the full analysis to be sure. The final test pulse (#14), of EF3L only, ran to the PLC limit and tripped the timed overcurrent fault because the feedback observer was inadvertently set to look at the EF4L current instead of EF3L. There was substantial current in the varistors at turn-on and turn-off because the supply was essentially driven to its voltage limit. No current was observed in the disconnected coils, so the induced voltage on these was not enough to make their varistors conduct. The EF4 and EF3 bus were reconfigured to their normal connections, and PLC test pulses (#15,16) taken to verify the change. It was necessary to reconfigure the bus and remove the I2t force in order for the cooling to operate normally over the weekend. Shot#17 was the TF test, taken at 17:30. Thanks to all who stayed late to get this completed! |
| Physics Operator Summaries |
| Entered: Jul 6 2009 06:47:31:470AM |
| Author: Bill Rowan |
| Data was acquired for MP 555. No data was taken for MP 298A.
There were 15 shots. During these shots, OH1, OH2U, OH2L, EF1U, EF1L, EF2L, EF2U, EF4U, EF4L, EF3L, EF3U were all pulsed separately. An error in DPCS setup on shot 014 caused the EF3 to run up to the PLC limit. The EF3 lower bus rogowski returned 11 kA. The demand would have been 10 kA. EF3 was tested under PLC control and found to be okay. |
| Session Leader Comments | |||
| Jul 2 2009 08:11:21:950AM | Steve Wolfe |
Set up monitor scopes, two copies of ~/scopes/scope_bp_corrected_n1.dat
to monitor difference waveforms. These are the primary dataset for the
analysis of this experiment.
Also scope_bp_corrected.dat and scope_bp_corrected_17-26.dat just to
check unsubtracted signals make sense, and check for sensors that may need
zapping during the day.
The good n=1 pairs based on scope traces from 1030717007
(20kA OH1 pulse) were:
Pair Old value New Value
-------- ----------- ----------
BP04_BC-GH +.015 ?
BP06_BC-GH -.008
BP08_BC-GH* 0
BP09_BC-GH* 0
BP10_BC-GH* 0.002
BP11_BC-GH* 0
BP12_BC-GH* .001
BP13_BC-GH* 0
BP14_BC-GH 0
BP15_BC-GH .001
BP16_BC-GH .002
BP19_BC-GH -.001
BP20_BC-GH 0
BP21_BC-GH 0
BP26_BC-GH -.011?
BP11_DE-JK -.001
BP12_DE-JK -.002
BP15_DE-JK -.001
BP16_DE-JK 0
BP17_DE-JK -.004
BP18_DE-JK +.005
BP19_DE-JK -.005
BP21_DE-JK 0
BP22_DE-JK +.003
BP24_DE-JK +.016
BP26_DE-JK -.005
Based on the defaults in analyze_pf_1030717.pro the following were
"bad":
badbp = ['BP01_DE','BP01_GH','BP02_DE','BP02_GH','BP03_DE','BP03_GH','BP04_DE','BP05_DE',$
'BP05_GH','BP06_DE',$
'BP07_DE','BP07_GH','BP08_DE','BP09_DE','BP10_DE',$
'BP14_JK','BP17_BC','BP18_BC',$
'BP20_DE','BP22_GH','BP23_GH','BP24_GH','BP25_GH','BP23_DE',$
'BP06_BC','BP25_JK', $
'BP13_JK']
so I've eliminated the pairs involving those from the above table, even
though the signals looked ok on the scope. Most of these should be
available for today, plus a bunch of others. However, note that the
gains on (at least) BP08_GH-BP13_GH (*) will be different, since they may
be on different integrators, so the between-shot comparison will be problematic.
| |
| Jul 2 2009 09:22:17:387AM | 1090702001 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#1: OH1 flattop (compare 1030717007) Pair Old value New Value -------- ----------- ---------- BP04_BC-GH +.015 +.015 BP06_BC-GH -.008 -.08??? BP08_BC-GH* 0 0 BP09_BC-GH* 0 0 BP10_BC-GH* 0.002 +.002 BP11_BC-GH* 0 +.002 BP12_BC-GH* .001 .002 BP13_BC-GH* 0 .001 BP14_BC-GH 0 .001 BP15_BC-GH .001 .001 BP16_BC-GH .002 .04??? BP19_BC-GH -.001 -.001 BP20_BC-GH 0 0 BP21_BC-GH 0 -.004 BP26_BC-GH -.011? -.011 BP11_DE-JK -.001 0 BP12_DE-JK -.002 -.001 BP15_DE-JK -.001 0 BP16_DE-JK 0 0 BP17_DE-JK -.004 -.003 BP18_DE-JK +.005 +.004 BP19_DE-JK -.005 -.002 BP21_DE-JK 0 0 BP22_DE-JK +.003 .002 BP24_DE-JK +.016 .013 BP26_DE-JK -.005 -.008 These look very similar, except for some that may be broken. Move on to the oh1 swing case. Some of the new coils have strange looking transients before and after the flattop (on the diff signals). Need to see what's going on. |
| Jul 2 2009 09:33:18:463AM | 1090702002 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#2: OH1 double swing (compare 1030717010) Only got -12kA on forward swing. That seems to be what we got on 1030717010 as well. Difference traces look very similar There's a glitch at .812sec, crossover. Ok we didn't get what we asked for, possibly switch didn't close. But this is the same thing that happened in 2003, so move on. |
| Jul 2 2009 09:45:18:230AM | 1090702003 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#3: OH2U 20kA flat (compare 1030717008) This shot had very small diff signals on the reference shot, Biggest was on bp06_bc-gh, which seems to be broken or have wrong integrator signal now. Have to rely on comparison to 04 and 08 and not seeing big signals on others for between-shot comparison. These traces also look very similar. Bp04bc-gh diff is smaller than in 1030717008, but it was noisy then. No large signals where they were small before, and the bp08 and bp24_de-jk look quite similar. Now we have several more signals that are responding, which should provide additional data on this coil tilt/shift, especially in the de set. Bob is going to check on the integrator boards on bp06_gh bp07_gh, which seem to be wrong in the tree. |
| Jul 2 2009 09:56:07:340AM | 1090702004 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#4: OH2L 20kA flat (compare 1030717009) The big signals on the reference are on bp22_de-jk, bp24_de-jk. Note that bp23_de is marked bad, that one also seemed to have responded on the ref shot. The 24 pair looks suspiciously large in the reference. This may have been a gain discrepancy? Ok, similar signals on bp22_de-jk (+.01) and bp24_de-jk (-.02) Have additional data on the bp24-26bc-gh pairs that we didn't have before. Looks good. Move on to EF1's. |
| Jul 2 2009 10:13:46:590AM | 1090702005 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#5: EF1U +5kA flattop (compare 1030717011) Expect major signal on bp04_bc-gh (and the 06 pair, but that one still has a gain problem), noticeable on the 08 pair, mostly flatlines elsewhere. The new upper DE coils should improve the diagnosis on this coil a lot, but formerly we concluded there wasn't much effect. The EF1's are the other coils that were removed and replaced during the disassembly. Ok, the bp04_bc-gh signal is -.008, compared to -.012 in 2003. The 08 pair is -.002 compared to -.003 (roughly); the 12_de-jk are both around +.002. Similar but maybe a little smaller than the reference. There are visible signals on several of the new pairs. Next will be EF1L |
| Jul 2 2009 10:26:04:323AM | 1090702006 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#6: EF1L +5kA flattop (compare 1030717012) The reference has large (-.007 or so) signals on bp20_bc-gh and bp21_bc-gh also signals on bp21_de-jk and bp24_de-jk. The bp20 and 21 bc-gh differences look very similar to the reference shot. However, bp21_de-jk is opposite polarity (-.006 vs ref of +.005); bp24_de-jk is -.003 vs ref of -.005. This may indicate a change of tilt or it could be a sensor issue. Won't know till I get the analysis done. Move on to the EF2U case. |
| Jul 2 2009 10:40:14:760AM | 1090702007 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#7: EF2U -4kA flattop (compare 1030717013) This one had long transients in some sensors that we never figured out. Biggest flattop signatures were on BP09_bc-gh, BP12_bc-gh, bp12_de-jk Notice we got ~200A of unbalanced current in the EF4's on this one. bp09_bc-gh again has a big (-.02) negative signal, signals on bp10 and 12 bc-gh pairs look similar, as di bp12_de-jk. The transients look different (opposite sign) on bp11 bc-gh and de-jk. Since we didn't understand the transients, I'm not sure what this means. We know the coil pack didn't move relative to the vessel, so it's not likely a coil change, maybe something in the induced current path. Move on to the EF2L |
| Jul 2 2009 10:47:15:103AM | 1090702008 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#8: EF2L -4kA flattop (compare 1030717014) Major signals on the 15-20 pairs, especially bp18_de-jk around +.015 Of course, this is just where the signals are biggest, so the apparent diffs are mostly just differential gain, probably. Signals on those coil pairs look almost identical. Move on to the EF4 case. |
| Jul 2 2009 11:11:01:793AM | 1090702009 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#9: EF4 U/L 4kA (parallel) compare 1030717005 This one will determine if we need to separate the ef4 bus later. The reference shot has noticeable signals on most pairs. The signals look very similar. There is a differnce in magnitude on bp10_bc-gh, but this could be different integrators. bp26_bc-gh is +.005 now, vs -.001 in the ref, but the 26 coils have been flakey, so I'm not sure this is real. There is also a small discrepancy in the bp19 levels (-.003 vs -.005 in the ref) but the bc-gh and de-jk values match in each. Move on to the EF3 case. If it doesn't indicate we need to split the bus, I won't ask for the EF4 to be split either. |
| Jul 2 2009 11:56:52:450AM | 1090702010 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#10: EF3 U/L 10kA (series) compare 1030717006 This one will determine if we need to separate the ef3 bus The reference shot has big difference signals on most pairs. If the slight discrepancies on the previous shot were due to changes in gains, there should be similar effects on this one. Again there is a change in the bp26 diff signals, much bigger in this shot than in the reference. I think this is a gain change issue or a sensor problem. There's also a change in the bp21de-jk and the 22de-jk is only half as large in the present shot as in the reference. Also the bp11_de-jk transient seems to go the other way. I think we need to separate the bus and do the EF3U and EF4U separately. There will be a significant delay while this is done. Note that the signal on bp06_gh has been all over the map today, varying by large factors either greater than or less than the other bp06 loops. This does not seem to be an integrator issue, unless the board itself is changing (maybe a bad contact?). More likely the loop or connector is bad. |
| Jul 2 2009 02:22:12:167PM | 1090702011 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#11: EF4U 4kA (separate) compare 1030717001 (timing a little different). The expected signature is opposite sign signals on bp11&12 pairs for bc-gh (negative) and de-jk (positive). Data looks very similar to 1030717001 Looks good. Go to step 11B, the EF3U-only test |
| Jul 2 2009 02:33:15:323PM | 1090702012 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#12: EF3U 10kA (separate) compare 1030717002 (timing a little different). Signals mostly look similar to the reference shot. There are magnitude differences on the bp26 coils, as there were on the combined tests. Also, bp11de-jk has opposite sign, some other diffs will need to be sorted out in the analysis. Now will reconfigure for lower coils only. This will take another access interval |
| Jul 2 2009 04:13:58:963PM | 1090702013 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#13: EF4L 4kA (separate) compare 1030717003 Expect relatively small difference signals on outboard coils, mostly below midplane (bp14-20) Signals look ok, sign is different on bp25_bc-gh Next: Ef3L only test |
| Jul 2 2009 05:11:28:510PM | 1090702014 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#14: EF3L 10kA (separate) compare 1030717004 EF3 current looks bad at turnoff Ran to 11kA. Observer was set on EF4L instead of EF3L, so it never saw current for feedback and kept calling for more, ran up to PLC limit. Breaker opened on timed overcurrent fault. Had some varistor current on the turn-on and turn-off transients because the voltage slammed on and the fault inverted it. Nevertheless, the difference signals look reasonable, should be ok for analysis. There was a short pulse on the chopper at t=0, and EFC got to 1.7kA at t=2.1sec when the EF3 shuts down. Not at all sure how that happened. There was 0. chopper demand from DPCS, but the supply shouldn't have been energized. Will put the bus back to normal, take PLC shots to test. We will skip the TF and A-coil tests today. Can get TF test on Tuesday, do without the acoil test for now. |
| Jul 2 2009 05:19:18:980PM | 1090702015 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#15: With the bus reconfigured for normal operation (EF4U/L in parallel, EF3U/L in series) EF3 PLC test. Looks ok. Next: EF4 PLC test |
| Jul 2 2009 05:34:19:497PM | 1090702016 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#16: With the bus reconfigured for normal operation (EF4U/L in parallel, EF3U/L in series) EF4 PLC test -1KA (forward bridge) Got EF4 and induced EF3 current. Looks good |
| Jul 2 2009 05:41:04:167PM | 1090702017 | Steve Wolfe | Shot#17: Take a TF test based on 1080523029 to complete the power pulses for the original sequence. Move invert time in to 1.5sec from 2.0, fizzle detector at 1.8s That looks good, can use this to set the Btor pickup values on all the BP coils. It looks like several need updating. END OF RUN |
| Physics Operator Comments | |||
| Jul 2 2009 08:46:36:417AM | Bill Rowan | dpcs-fizzle routine turned off
Loaded from 1030717007 set zxl and bz_0 to 0 in segment 1 ECDC did not run as planned. It turned off early in the evening. It will be allowed to run during the first part of the run today. EO: Parkin | |
| Jul 2 2009 09:11:14:857AM | 1090702001 | Bill Rowan | 001. OH1 as requested.
|
| Jul 2 2009 09:24:33:387AM | 1090702002 | Bill Rowan | 002. loaded 1030717010
OH1 similar to 1030717010 |
| Jul 2 2009 09:35:42:433AM | 1090702002 | Bill Rowan | negative swing reaches -12 kA. Positive swing to +20 kA
Note that this does not correspond to what is drawn |
| Jul 2 2009 09:41:52:963AM | 1090702003 | Bill Rowan | 003. No change in DPCS
OH1 off and OH2U on Result is similar to the reference shot 1030717008. |
| Jul 2 2009 09:43:57:950AM | 1090702003 | Bill Rowan | Brief cell entry for Bob |
| Jul 2 2009 09:53:41:357AM | 1090702004 | Bill Rowan | 004. No changein DPCS
OH2U off and OH2L on Result is similar to reference shot 1030717009 |
| Jul 2 2009 10:10:31:620AM | 1090702005 | Bill Rowan | 005. No change in DPCS
OH2L off and EF1U on Result is similar to reference shot 1030717011 |
| Jul 2 2009 10:20:51:370AM | 1090702006 | Bill Rowan | 006. No change in DPCS
EF1U off and EF1L on Result is similar to reference shot 1030717012 |
| Jul 2 2009 10:33:42:840AM | 1090702007 | Bill Rowan | 007. No DPCS changes
EF1L off and EF2U on Result is similar to reference shot 1030717013 |
| Jul 2 2009 10:45:58:760AM | 1090702008 | Bill Rowan | 008. No DPCS changes
EF2U off and EF2L on Result is similar to reference shot 1030717014 |
| Jul 2 2009 10:57:51:823AM | 1090702009 | Bill Rowan | 009.
No DPCS changes EF2L off and EF4U/L on Result is similar to reference shot 1030717005 |
| Jul 2 2009 11:18:05:603AM | 1090702010 | Bill Rowan | 010. No DPCS changes
EF4 off and EF3 on Result is similart to reference shot 1030717006 |
| Jul 2 2009 11:25:23:213AM | 1090702010 | Bill Rowan | 010. No DPCS changes
EF4 off and EF3 on Result is similart to reference shot 1030717006 |
| Jul 2 2009 11:36:26:090AM | 1090702010 | Bill Rowan | Controlled access (cell access) to split bus (see SL Plan)
Extended access expected |
| Jul 2 2009 11:45:40:933AM | 1090702010 | Bill Rowan | For next shot:
EF4U predictor set to 1.0 in segment 1 EF4L predictor set to 0.0 in segment 1 EF3U predictor set to 1.0 in segment 1 EF3L predictor set to 0.0 in segment 1 loaded new setup |
| Jul 2 2009 02:19:36:137PM | 1090702011 | Bill Rowan | 011.
EF4U predictor set to 1.0 EF4L predictor set to 0.0 EF3U predictor set to 1.0 EF3L predictor set to 0.0 EF3 off and EF4U on Result is similar to reference shot 1030717001 |
| Jul 2 2009 02:29:31:713PM | 1090702012 | Bill Rowan | 012. No DPCS changes
EF4 off and EF3 on. Result is similar to reference shot 1030717002 |
| Jul 2 2009 02:30:40:060PM | 1090702012 | Bill Rowan |
Controlled access (cell access) to split bus (see SL Plan) Extended access expected |
| Jul 2 2009 02:34:18:963PM | 1090702012 | Bill Rowan | For the next shot,
EF4U predictor set to 0.0 EF4L predictor set to 1.0 EF3U predictor set to 0.0 EF3L predictor set to 1.0 |
| Jul 2 2009 04:14:42:747PM | 1090702013 | Bill Rowan | 013.
EF4U predictor set to 0.0 EF4L predictor set to 1.0 EF3U predictor set to 0.0 EF3L predictor set to 1.0 EF3 off and EF4U on |
| Jul 5 2009 12:52:11:060PM | 1090702014 | Bill Rowan | 014. No DPCS changes
EF4U off and EF3 on The EF3 observed was set to EF4L instead of EF3L |
| Jul 5 2009 12:53:16:107PM | 1090702015 | Bill Rowan | 015. Shot taken under PLC control: EF3 PLC Test |
| Jul 5 2009 12:53:45:370PM | 1090702016 | Bill Rowan | 016. Shot taken under PLC control: EF4 PLC Test |
| Jul 5 2009 12:54:18:417PM | 1090702017 | Bill Rowan | 017. Shot taken under PLC control. TF PLC 150 kA Test |
| Engineering Operator Comments | ||||
| Shot | Time | Type | Status | Comment |
| 1 | 09:07:20:870AM | Test | Ok | OH 1 only +20KA, 2 sec flat top |
| 2 | 09:21:28:433AM | Test | Ok | OH1 only -12KA to +20KA |
| 3 | 09:37:49:510AM | Test | Ok | OH2U only +20KA 2 sec flat top |
| 4 | 09:50:55:823AM | Test | Ok | OH2L only 20KA 2 sec flat top |
| 5 | 10:07:12:870AM | Test | Ok | EF1U only 5KA sec flat top |
| 6 | 10:18:29:603AM | Test | Ok | EF1L only +5KA 2 sec flat top |
| 7 | 10:31:02:450AM | Test | Ok | EF2U only -4KA 2 sec flat top |
| 8 | 10:43:11:060AM | Test | Ok | EF2L only -4KA 2 sec flat top |
| 9 | 10:54:56:590AM | Test | Ok | EF4U/L +4KA 2 sec flat top |
| 10 | 11:15:00:043AM | Test | Ok | EF3U/L only +10KA 2 sec flat top |
| 11 | 02:16:30:387PM | Test | Ok | EF4U Only |
| 12 | 02:26:34:167PM | Test | Ok | EF3 Only |
| 13 | 04:09:41:860PM | Test | Ok | EF4L Only |
| 14 | 04:17:04:770PM | Test | Bad | EF3L Only |
| 15 | 05:15:14:950PM | Test | Ok | EF3 PLC Test |
| 16 | 05:22:24:603PM | Test | Ok | EF4 PLC TEst |
| 17 | 05:36:42:073PM | Test | Ok | TF PLC 150KA Test |
| System Availability | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Jul 2 2009 09:06:54:590AM | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||