38
NuclearPlantJournal.com Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2016
We had a workshop, a one-week
workshop, with each crew that came
through. We developed these end
state concepts, where we showed them
progressively how we would step through
a modernization process by replacing
different aspects of the older technologies
with newer technologies and how we
would reach the end state over time
with more, let’s say, digital displays
throughout their control room, as opposed
to what they currently have. Then we ran
through a number of dynamic simulation
scenarios, where they could see, how that
would look and feel. Then as we did that,
we collected data with the crews. We
gathered information from them about
how that might affect their performance,
the pros and cons of those issues. We’re
following a very systematic design
process. There were also engineers and
vendors and independent human factors
consultants who participated in those
studies, so that we get the upfront input
on the design engineering process.
We have identified the systems
that are up for replacement over their
10-year long-term modernization plan.
Then we started looking at ways that
we could reclaim that physical real
estate on the control panels and started
looking at plans for digital replacement
technologies and then started looking
at how that could actually materialize
in new display technologies. One of
the things that we’ve done is, we’ve not
touched any of the safety related devices.
Even the annunciators that used to be
the old analog annunciators are all now
digital and have additional functionality
and features.
5.
Where are the ammeters and
voltmeters, temperature indicators, and
pressure indicators? Are they part of a
computerized system now?
It depends. If it’s a safety related
instrument it’s not touched yet. So, these
are all developed into a 3D design. We
also developed these into a CAVE, a 3D
immersive environment, so that you could
actually walk into this with a headset on
and experience, what it would be like
to operate in that. This is actually being
driven by the exact same simulator as the
plant simulator.
We’re able to run scenarios like
plant startup and shutdown, as well as
transients. Operators are able to start to
interact with their current design, as well
as a future design, and start to get a feel
for what it would be like to test these
differences out in practice, in design, very,
very early preliminary design, before any
technology has been selected, just to get a
feel for what those differences are.
The other thing that we can do is
using modern technologies, we use a
tool that goes through and evaluates the
ergonomics. The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission has developed requirements,
in NUREG 0700,
Human-System
Interface Design Review Guidelines
, for
human factors engineering, especially
ergonomics, saying, you have to be able
to see things, have to be able to reach
things. We’re able to take a 3D model
of the Palo Verde control room. It’s a
complete and exact replica. Into this, we
can put a 95th percentile male for height
and a 5th percentile female for height,
Deploying
Control...
Nuclear Plant Journal Advertiser Web Directory
AAF
AREVA Inc.
BIRNS, Inc.
DRS Consolidated Controls
GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy
HydroAire Service, Inc.
Lifting Gear Hire
Mitsubishi Nuclear Energy
Systems, Inc.
NuScale
Nutherm International, Inc.
OTEK Corporation
Remote Ocean Systems
Rotating Equipment Repair
Structural Integrity Associates,
Inc.
Thermo Scientific- CIDTEC
Tri Tool Inc.
TW Metals, Inc.
Westinghouse Electric
Company LLC
WITTENSTEIN, Inc.
WM Symposia
