DCL-86-067, Applicant Exhibit A-4,consisting of Responding to NRC Requesting Addl Info Re Reracking of Spent Fuel Pools at Plant

Applicant Exhibit A-4,consisting of Responding to NRC Requesting Addl Info Re Reracking of Spent Fuel Pools at Plant

ML20237J150
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	06/17/1987
From:	Shiffer J PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
To:	Varga S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
DCL-86-067, DCL-86-67, OLA-A-004, OLA-A-4, NUDOCS 8709030507
Download: ML20237J150 (33)

Text

l

.l NS g.gn:;

30

• 2 75l32 Y 6[/7[f7 PGa % Ephibi 0; 4 M-f "h7 AUG 26 P3 :28 l

/h,FACIFIC OAS AND E LE C T rip @g> M@Qli.1M8 .

FG'SE  ! 77 etatt stacci . san rnancisco catironnia 94 os ,. ,<4:s> 7siTiili(. Lt'wx sio 372-ess7

()([ t  !

~, , ,

.JAME S D. SHIPPE R YaEma' March 11, 1986 >

1 PGandE Letter No.: DCL-86-067 Mr. Steven A. Varga, Director PHR Project Directorate No. 3 Division of PHR Licensing-A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 -

Re: Docket No. 50-275, OL-DPR-80 Docket No. 50-323, OL-DPR-82 Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2

- Response to Questions on Spent Fuel Racks l

Dear Mr. Varga:

NRC letter dated February 18, 1986 requested additional information regarding I

reracking of the spent fuel pools at Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2. At a ]

meeting in Bethesda, Maryland, on February 20, 1986, the NRC Staff requested j that PGandE provide additional structural information on the new racks. This I request was documented in the Staff meeting summary dated February 28, 1986.

PGandE's responses to this request are enclosed.

Kindly acknowledge receipt of this material on the enclosed copy of this letter and return it in the enclosed addressed envelope.

Sincerely, e-1 Enclosure ,

f cc: L. J. Chandler R. T. Dodds R. C. Herrick (FRC)

I J. B. Martin "

B. Norton H. E. Schierling ,

j K. P. Singh (Oat)

CPUC O Diablo Distribution 0719S/0042K/DH0/1998 B709030507 870M7

, PDR ADOCK 05000275 l 0 PDR l

_ _ - - - _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ a

Docket k 60'11 LS ms h(1&E N la the Erna of k b~1& E C4tr) PAN 4 Staff IDENTIFIED

' 4piksl RECEIVED f

latervenor REJECTED

(

cont's Off'r Contrator gnig h - b-Othe' Witness Reporter WO'i nd#V i

l l

l i

i j

l l

I 1

4 Y

i- - - _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _

PGandE Letter No.: DCL-86-067 i i

g ENCLOSURE PGandE RESPONSES TO NRC REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Letter Item 26 Hith respect to the computer code, DYNAHIS, discuss specific efforts performed to verify that the code provides realistic seismic responses of the spent fuel racks subject to a set of complex loading conditions and geometric constraints. For example, indicate if any experimental data were used as the basis for demonstrating the validity of the code. Provide a discussion of the l assumptions and limitations which are unique to the code.  !

Heetina Item 26a Regarding Item 26 on the validation of the computer code DYNAHIS, the specific benchmark problems should be identified and appropriately referenced. The results, including response comparisons, of problems run with the DYNAHIS code  ;

and the ANSYS code should be provided. Discuss the extent of use of the j DYNAHIS code in reracking applications by other utilities.

Response 26 and 26a ,

The algorithm of the code DYNAHIS is documented in the book The Component p Element Method in Dynamics by Levy and Wilkinson, McGraw Hill (1976). The application of the code to a wide variety of linear and nonlinear problems is

(

illustrated in that text. The Joseph Oat Corporation (Oat) version of this code contains the added attribute of diagonalizing the mass matrix. However, the code has been tested thoroughly at Oat's computer center. The benchmarking effort consisted of running several nonlinear problems for which classical solutions exist. A dynamic problem involving a nondiagonal mass matrix was also constructed and analytically solved. DYNAHIS was run to verify its accuracy versus the analytical solution. Its accuracy has been further confirmed by comparing results of sample problems run on DYNAHIS and on general purpose codes such as ANSYS. In fact, DYNAHIS has received a level of scrutiny which rivals that given to any general-purpose finite element code used for nonlinear analysis of dynamic systems, including reviews of reracking i applications for Fermi II, Quad Cities I and II, Rancho Seco, Grand Gulf l Unit 1, Oyster Creek, Pilgrim, and V.C. Summar.

{

Since no pertinent data on the dynamics of rack structures exist, benchmarking j againct experiments is not possible. Instead, Oat has taken the proven -

recourse of using a mathematical model that is highly conservative in all ,

respects, e.g., amount of damping and the mass lumping scheme.  !

A detailed description of the calculation method of DYNAHIS is presented in Section 6 of the reracking report. There are no numerical simulations or modeling assumptions unique to DYNAHIS. Moreover, in contrast to a general-purpose finite element code, DYNAHIS does not internally generate the equations of motion. These equations are written out explicitly and can be (n) verified independently. Such verifications have been carried out internally v at Oat, by several . /E firms, and, at the NRC's request, by Franklin Research Center in 1984 07195/0042K

)

, As discussed in meetings with the Staff, one DYNAHIS verification was

[V; conducted as part of Oat's work for Detroit Edison Company on the Enrico Fermi Unit II reracking application. As part of this DYNAHIS validation, several problems that would test the analytical features of DYNAHIS related to hydrodynamic response of rack modules were run on DYNAHIS by Oat and on ANSYS by Detroit Edison's architect / engineer. These problems consisted of various combinations of masses, springs, dampers, and gap elements. Comparisons of the DYNAHIS and ANSYS response predictions confirmed that the results from the two computer codes were in excellent agreement. An additional, more complex ,

problem, a 32-DOF model of a rack module, was also analyzed on ANSYS by the architect / engineer. These results were also compared with Oat's DYNAHIS i response predictions and the comparisons were in good agreement. These i evaluations were not formally documented or submitted on the Fermi II docket. j The following is a description of some specific verification runs that have been made. These benchmark problems used to verify DYNAHIS solutions fall l into three classes: (1) comparison with classical closed form linear i solutions which exercise the features of DYNAHIS (e.g., decoupling of mass i matrix and input force history from external files); (2) nonlinear problems which utilize the gap elements and friction elements and compare results with textbook numerical analyses; and (3) problems which compare DYNAHIS results to corresponding results obtained from general-purpose finite element codes.

Problem 1  ;

2 Degree of Freedom (DOF) Linear System with Mass Coupling

( 2mW1 + mi2 + Kx) - X sin nt mE1 + 2mi2 + Kx2 = 0 The table below shows results obtained for x1(t) and x2(t) from the i analytically derived solutign and from DYNAHIS for the particular values of I m - 750 lb-setz/in., K - 100 lb/in., 0 - 6.28 rad /sec, and K = 386 lb.  ;

)

SOLUTION COMPARISON x1 x 10+3 X2 x 10+I Time Analytical (DYNAHIS) Analytical (DYNAHIS) l (sec) Solution Numerical Solution Numerical

.1 .204 .208 .063 .064 l 2.1 .188 .189 .022 .021 3.6 .252 .256 .054 .054 l 4.1 .330 .332 .040 .041 5.7 .457 .460 .033 .033 8.7 .433 .433 .084 .088  ;

10.8 .423 .423 .109 .109 '

11.2 .398 .398 .061 .063  ;

13.3 .407 .408 .090 .091  ;

G 14.4 .230 .229 .081 .081 U

As can be seen, there is good agreement between the analytical solution and the DYNAHIS results.

07195/0042K  !

l Problem 2 l

{}

V Hass Dropped on a Beam (The Component Element Method in Dynamics." S. Levy, McGraw Hill,1976, pp.151-155). See Figure 1 for details of the model.

One half of the beam is modeled by a 7 degree of freedom system (including rotary inertia in the beam, and one DOF for the dropped mass). The DYNAHIS results are plotted and compared with the text results. The contact force time-history maximum values are predicted with good agreement. The additional higher frequency oscillations in the gap element forces are due to the fact that DYNAHIS includes the effect of higher frequency rotary inertia degrees of freedom. The plots in Figure 2 show the textbook results, and Figures 3 and 4 show the DYNAHIS results. The agreement is found'to be excellent.

I Problem 3 Dropped Mass with Friction Elements (From Levy text, pp. 55-56).

As shown in Figures 5 and 6, the DYNAHIS output plot is in good agreement with the curve (F = 100 lb) from the text. This problem demonstrates that the DYNAHIS coda correctly accounts for friction effects.

Problem 4 Comparisco of ANSYS with DYNAHIS.

The comparison of results was carried out using ANSYS example problem E6.2 s which is a pendulum system as shown in Figure 7. The same numerical values for masses, springs, gaps, etc. were used in the DYNAHIS model. Since the time-history algorithms are different in the two codes, the excellent agreement obtained verified the suitability of the integration algorithm in DYNAHIS. Figures 8 and 10 are reproductions from the ANSYS examples manual showing the mass displacements and contact forces. Figure 9 shows the DYNAHIS ,

mass displacements. The DYNAHIS results for contact forces at selected time  !

intervals are superimposed on the ANSYS output in Figure 10. The two analyses produce results that are in close agreement.

Letter Item 27 Selected l'ad .ombination cases, relative geometries of various fuel racks, ,

and directions of seismic motion were considered in the fuel rack analyses. l Discuss in detail how this approach bounds the significant cases of fuel rack l load geometry conditions to ensure the structural integrity and functionality of the racks.

Meetina Item 27a l

Regarding Item 27 on load combinations for the racks, each of the critical l loading cases for the rack module qualification and stability considerations '

should be described in detail, including a summary description of other cases that were considered in the development of the final rack design. Discuu 4 quantitatively / qualitatively why these-loading cases envelope other loading bQ arrangements that can exist. Discuss the potential and safety margin for overturning the limiting rack module.

l 07195/0042K  !

Resoonse 27 and 27a The loading cases evaluated for the Diablo Canyon limiting rack modules as reported in the reracking report (PGandE letter DCL-85-306 dated September 19, 1985) are as follows:

• Racks fully loaded

• Racks empty e Racks half full (for the 6 x 11 rack module only)

• Racks partially full (11 cells)

Tables 6.8.1 and 6.8.2 in the reracking report also show that significant design margins exist for the above load cases.

The selection of load cases was based on past experience of Oat with cellular rack geometries (Fermi II, Quad Cities I and II, Rancho Seco, Grand Gulf l Unit 1, Oyster Creek, Pilgrim, and V.C. Summer).

Specifically, the selection process included the following:

• Review of licensing submittals from Quad Cities (Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265) c

• Table 1 (a copy of Table 6.5 of a licensing submittal for Quad

/

Cities) shows the results of a number of cases evaluated for Quad k--} Cities. In all cases, a fully loaded rack with u 0.8 results in maximum stress response. This conclusion is valid for the Diablo i Canyon rack design. Accordingly, this load case was evaluated for i the Diablo Canyon racks.

• The kinematic response (maximum displacement) could be greater for asymmetrically loaded racks (other than the cases evaluated for Diablo Canyon). However, such loading cases are not critical for Diablo Canyon since the racks are intentionally engineered to accommodate rack-to-rack impact with a high margin of safety against plastic deformation.

As a result of discussion with the NRC Staff on February 20, 1986 PGandE evaluated an additional loading case involving an asymmetrically loaded 10 x 11 rack module. One quadrant of the module is assumed to be loaded with fuel assemblies. The results are as follows:

1 1

I O 07195/0042K MAXIMUM DISPLACEMENT LOAD FACTORS O. (Top Corner) (Maximum values occur in support legs)

RUN C0F EQ Dx Dy Rj R2 R3 R4 .R5 R6 M04d .8 DE .0748" .0900" .079 .070 .173 .164. .303. .345 M01 .8 HE .1320" .2627" .105 .125 .293 .240 .455 ~ .519.

M03d .2 DE .0292" .0353" .042 .014 .033 .021 .068 .073 M02- .2 HE 1.0920" .0664" .194 .064 .141 .099 .310 .333 A comparison of the above results with the displacements and load factors documented in Table 6.8.1 of.the reracking report confirms PGandE's judgment that a fully loaded rack with p = 0.8 provides maximum response.

F- It is concluded that the-loading cases evaluated are adequate and effectively l bound any other case of fuel rack load geometry condition. based on the following considerations:

• Dat's past experience in designing high density racks for seven other utilities, e an additional evaluation performed at the Staff's request, e special design features (impact effect),

e design margins in the reracking report, e conservatism in the mathematical model (e.g., amount of damping and the mass lumping scheme), and e the conservatism in the required response spectra (RRS) as discussed below in response to Meeting Item 28.

Therefore, the structural integrity and functionality of the racks is ensured.

With regard to the safety margin for overturning for the' limiting rack module, the OT position paper, by reference to the Standard Review Plan, stipulates that a factor of safety of 1.1 over the extreme ~ condition ground motion (Hosgri Earthquake for. Diablo Canyon racks) be provided against rack overturning. Towards this end, the rack module with'the worst aspect ratio j (6 x 11 module) was run with 1.1 times the Hosgri seismic excitation. A coefficient of friction of' = 0.8 was used to produce the maximum overturning condition. The x-axis is. parallel to the short-side and the y-axis is parallel to the long side. The x,y origin is at the rack centerline. Two cases of eccentric loading are considered. Both cases have 50% of the cells filled with fuel assemblies. Case 1 loads all fuel in the positive x half of the rack; Case 2 loads all fuel in the negative y half of the rack. The following table summarizes the results of the two analyses.

O 07195/0042K Rotation in x-z olane. dearaes Rotation in v-2 clane. dearees-Value for Factor Value for. Factor Calculated Incipient of Calculated ' Incipient of Load Case Maximum _T.iprins safety Maximum Tionina safety 1 0.58 19.36 33.4 1.15 35.94 ~31.2 2 0.77 21.14 27.4 1.26 33.38 26.5 These results show that a large margin of safety against kinematic instability exists in all rack modules.

-l t

0 0719S/0042K Heetina Item 28

{]

Discuss the effect of the added weight of the racks and fuel assemblies on the building response.

Resoonse 28 -

As described in FSAR Section 3.7.2.1.7.1 and in PGandE's previous response to Item 15, the seismic inertia loads for the auxiliary building were obtained using a time-history analysis of a spring and lumped mass model. Figure 11 shows the mathematical models used in the previous analysis.

The added weight of the racks and fuel assemblies represents approximately 1%

of the global mass of the auxiliary building. In order to evaluate the effect l of this added weight, the original mathematical model was revised to include l the additional mass consistent with its geometric location in the building.

Figure 12 illustrates the revised seismic model.

The effect of the Hosgri earthquake was evaluated using the Newmark time-histories which govern the building response. The results of the evaluation are as follows:

• The dynamic characteristics of the auxiliary building, in general, remain unchanged as shown in Tables 2a and 2b.

~

• Table 3 compares the s'ignif'icant shear forces and overturning t]

C/

moments of the revised analysis with the previous analysis. The revised analysis results show an increase of approximately 1%

over the original forces which is consistent with the increase in the building mass. As indicated in PGandE's previous response to Item 15b, these minor increases are accommodated by i the design margins.

Figures 13 and 14 show the comparison of typical response spectra at the location of the spent fuel pools (elevation 100 ft). The original RRS was conservatively developed by adding the transnational and torsional spectra, neglecting the phase relationship of the two spectra at the location of the pools.

These spectra used the Blume and Newmark enveloped i

time-histories.

The revised response spectra were developed using two approaches: (1) using the same methodology as described above -

this resulted in an identical RRS; and (2) using the time-histories at mass point 7 (Figure 12) of the revised model

- this result is enveloped by the original RRS.

Based on the above, it is concluded that the effect of the added weight of racks and fuel assemblies is insignificant on the building response.  !

l O l 1 LJ l l

l 07195/0042K Meetina Item 29 O Discuss the potential for and consequence of rack module interaction with the I pool wall.

Resoonse 29 .

The rocking frequencies of the racks as determined by Oat are less than 10 Hz. The fundamental frequencies of the pool walls are greater than 30 Hz.

The two frequencies are far apart, hence the potential interar. tion effect between the rack modules and the pool wall is insignificant. ,

l- i 1

1 1

l 1

l l

l O

0719S/0042K l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ ,

Meetina Item 30 Discuss how postulated sliding of the racks could affect the fuel pool floor if an airspace is assumed to exist underneath the liner, for example, as a result of concrete shrinkage.

Resoonse 30 The assumption of an airspace underneath.the liner was evaluated and found to have no impact on PGandE's previous response to. Item 15f. The floor liner ,

plate is 1/4 inch thick and is welded to embedded angles oriented in east-west and north-south directions as shown in Figure 15. The fuel pool was constructed using standard construction practices for mass concrete-construction which included:

e control of pour rates to minimize the effect of plastic shrinkage e controlled curing to minimize the effect of drying shrinkage

• ample reinforcement to minimize shrinkage e a surface finish having a uniform texture that does not contain voids and is free of projecting .aggregrate, high: spots, and depressions

, Based on the above construction features, shrinkage of the concrete slab is expected to be minimal. Howevgr, it is. conservatively &$sumed that.the -I average shrinkage is 700 x 10-0 in./in. for the entire depth (5-feet thick)

( of the slab. This results in a postulated air gap of 0.042 inches.

The simplified model shown in Figure 16 was used to determine the deformation of the liner under a hydrostatic head of 38 feet of water. The load that would cause contact of the liner with the concrete was determined to be 0.6 psi which'is'small compared with the hydrostatic load of 16.5 psi. The-results, therefore, indicate that the liner would be in contact with the-concrete under a hydrostatic head alone.

To check the liner contact under thermal effects, the same mathematical mode 1 ~ l as described in PGandE's previous response to Item 15b was used. The analysis i indicated that in addition to hydrostatic load, a normal load of'less than 1 0.5 kip per rack leg is needed to achieve full liner contact with the concrete I under the rack leg. This additional normal load is insignificant compared .

with the leg reaction load of 189 kips. Therefore, under thermal conditions, I the liner wi?1 remain in contact with the concrete under the rack leg. -l The liner strains were also determined and found to be within the allowable value. Under hydrostatic loads, the liner strain resulting from'the liner l contacting the concrete due to a postulated air space is 0.00006. The  !

combined strain resulting from the governing load combination, 0+Ta+HE, is l 0.00156 compared with an allowable value of 0.005 (previously reported in PGandE's response to Item 15). This provides a factor of safety of 3.2. .

o Based on the above, it is concluded that the liner will remain in contact with  !

the concrete to develop adequate frictional resistance.

0719S/0042K _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _

Meetina Item 31 Provide details on the spent. fuel cask pit, including dimensions of.th'e )

recessed area, depth of the pit, and'the distance from " Rack Module E" to the edge of the pit. Discuss the cask restraining device shown in the FSAR.

Response 31' Each spent fuel pool has a fuel cask pit area.in the corner of the pool (southwest for Unit 1 northwest for Unit 2). This pit is a recess in the floor to allow spent fuel to be placed into a shipping cask resting in the pit, using the existing spent fuel assembly handling tools, while maintaining adequate shielding water over the assembly. The cask pit size.is 10 ft.

x 10 ft x 4 ft-3'in. deep. The distance from the edge of the cask pit to the center of the closest rack module E support leg is approximately 21 inches.

As part of the original design of the plant, a removable cask lateral support was designed around the cask pit to prevent a shipping cask from tipping into the spent fuel racks during a postulated seismic event. Embedded hardware is in place in the pool walls and floor to support this lateral support and permit installation of the lateral-support at a.later time. Since the initial design was based on an assumed cask size, the lateral support itself was not fabricated and installed, but was deferred pending actual purchase of shipping _

cask and verification that such a support restraint would actually be needed.

. . It is expected that the cask lateral restraint will be installed prior to use.

of a cask and a movement of fuel from the pool.

9 O

0719S/0042K Meetina Item 32 Discurs the spent fuel pool leak chase system, including the frequency for leakage monitoring and applicable technical specifications and operating procedures.

Resoonse 32 The spent fuel storage pool'for each unit is'a reinforced concrete. structure j with a seam-welded stainless steel plate liner. Monitoring trenches approximately 1 inch square are located behind.the liner on each' side of all-seam welds connecting adjacent liner plates in both the walls and floor,of the pool. These trenches lead to one of six collection pipes which are valved and terminate at a common sump. Leakage past the liner would be detected by opening these leak detection shutoff valves and observing any water accumulation or flow. These valves are normally closed.

Prior to placing. irradiated fuel in the spent fuel pool, Surveillance Test Procedure (STP) I-1C, " Routine Weekly Checks" will be revised. STP I-1C will require the operators to open each leak detection shutoff valve on a weekly basis and determine if any water has accumulated.

Plant Technical Specification 3/4.9.11 requires that at least 23 feet of water be maintained over the top of irradiated fuel assemblies seated in the storage

. racks. One assurance of this is provided by a low water level alarm which annunciated in the control room when the poo1~ level goes below 137'-8". If and when a low level alarm occurs, operators would refer to Volume 16 l l

O " Annunciator Response" of the plant manual. Volume.16 would direct the operators to open each leak detection shutoff valve and determine'if any water l . had leaked through the fuel pool liner.

If leakage past the liner is detected, additional testing would be performed and the leak would be repaired as appropriate. There are no safety .

consequences to this since leakage past the liner would be terminated by closing the leak detection shutoff valves, and adequate makeup capability exists which exceeds any credible leakage through the liner (discussed in PGandE letter DCL-86-020 dated January 28, 1986).

l 1

Q a

0719S/0042K l

e e e C

.C

.e - e=e ==

9 ee 9 e 3 e O w 0 .

en M

.et M U M 9 9 9 9 e 9 9 e 9 9 e 9 9 S 9 9" u * * * *

• b * *

• C O O U C O U O O MM = MM MM

. c .

et ce s=s en h *=4 M O h 9 9 - e e9 9 9 e e-)

• 9 e a u 9 9

.e e9 9 mp e Oe Oa9-@

e e 9 9 -

9 e e O O .a a U s

19.0 9 9 .= 9 .O O. a -

On U U 9 4 e e 9 On mW U O O e e e e O O e e e=. e ehe se e e OO ee e e s M M O O = = es ce p O= a ce e4 mO == = he he M M 9 9 C s=8 9 9 a == C et 9 9 h h h h= h h & & h h == h h en ce the the the w en M w w emie w & 4 ne ce M Q. w the w a a e=0 ese et s=e ce ce et M ce me M . Q. Q. he ece ce A. ese M pe Q. O.

2 3 e e e e 3 3 = a e e g4 S c 3 = e e4 A A b he E E E E he b P E E E N N N == he me =P E E E N p N.

O O W m w W N m W wm N**r= a w mene e e ce W en em M en w

@ # e et M te m e r= W ese M + e4 W es w w w W LO W N w *=* w* r=

• ete e m eO Me ee mMe e e O. W et me N W o N eN O* e e

. e e e N e E

• e e e=e O O O O O O,O e a= ce O O O O O M O ce O O O O O e=e OC 0 LD o

• C G C4 $ N w ese eO O N e en es e ee e N- es P= ese ce eat N ee

@U M gn mMMW r= m en m W e en e e r= en ce eme e N ce en

• • • e e4 w e9 M e6 M en m m N r= Ne N oO e=e Gr N r= en N N O g e a e e N. e e e est - e e, e o e e e e e e e e o O O O O O O O LD CL he ce eO e O O es O O O O O O O M s=e N O.

• a q (fl

=

7 CD ** *

.j E O E en M en en m se en N ed N m r= ce M ese eN W e en M ** O es m O w e eO m

• e K , N P= en M m te O NeseOe Oce Wm MMM en N N e ce e a=e MO Pd

"" M' "M @ P g W s=e m M ese O pm

e. . N. O. 8 OC 3 3 . e e M. o . em. . e e o e e e . e e e e 8

W EW ** O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ,

j

- U e he

.O ' G ec= > K l

I 9 0.J E I

>== .M U .M 3 **

N eeW eS m P=

y S N en ce N O N r= en r= M en N m mW M mO pe O e P* en N i

j g = == g m en M ee en O N m re ea w N e en ene w eg M O M O g M g en es w ese M em t= ce e sue m O M O en e o e -e o e e *

• e e e e e e e e o e e e e e o O O O O O O O O E O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O W

%- *e- en

1. e t- to e m O ed en to te m e ese M re e O N e w r= te M -m e M yQ m w r= m e m to O y e a O O r= M w m mw O w O m e we ce N O N O N O O Oe e 3g en g N w M O ese O mO m Oe N O O O'w o e e o e e e e e D e e e e e e e e e

.e O .o O O O O O yg w

O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O CL W

Ct: W N e me O w m a a e a e= en en 6 mO P= 40 mM O m M f* r= N W W N en m M e=0W NN ene O wcewO r= O en r= N- en e4 O N m M M e=0 e=e ese we e e4 w en ese M en N pe e=e O g e e e o e e o e e e e e e e e e e o e e o e e O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I

l e N 3 e. N. e. N. e. N e e N 4 e e e N. eN e.

O O O O O O e e N. m.

aN 6 O O e e N. e e.t e

O O O O O e e l

O O O O O O O O W S ce ce N M w en 40 r= m j e f e4 N M w en te we N m e en W f=

E I O

es e 3 L 4 4 4 4 4 4 M M N M N N M N % 0 0 C U U U C 0

$5 1

l

iF) t a 0 9 4 0 9 8 3 4 1 5 r (

a T 0 8 1 5 9 3 7 8 4 3 P - 4 5 1 - 1 1 - 1 l s ei ds oy Ml a

hn y -

tA c- 6 6 1 0 8 9 3 8 2 4 u n) 5 0 3 4 0 8 9 1 0 4 od ez .

Se uH 1 3 4 6 8 2 9 1 6 0

- s q( 1 1 2 3 3 4 6 7 hi e t v r re F oR N

N O

I T

A 1 7 0 1 5 0 5 4 5 4 R N d) 4 2 7 6 3 3 2 2 1 1 B)

II O oc 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I ie VR S rs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G R e(

FS O P -

OO T H

S( S E U IS L CR P NO ET L a UC A 2 QA N EF O

~

e R I FN T d ,O A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I L ST S n 2 3 1 6 4 5 3 0 8 7 DA N o ) 1 2 9 3 5 5 8 6 2 0 OP A i b 0 7 2 8 5 2 5 8 1 2 II R t r( 1 - 6 7 - 1 3 2 -

RC EI T ao pt R - - - - -

PT - i c R ca FA 0 iF)

OP E t a 0 9 2 7 7 8 3 6 8 9 L r (

ND P a T 0 8 1 4 9 3 5 9 2 3 ON U P - 4 5 1 - 1 1 1 SA O - - -

I C R

A l s P ei M ds oy r O o C Ml t a y c hn c a tA n f u e) 6 6 1 1 9 9 5 3 8 1 ol uz 5 0 3 4 0 8 0 2 0 1 n Sa

- n qH e(

. o 1 3 4 6 8 2 0 1 6 1 i hi r 1 1 2 3 4 4 6 7 t ta ri F a p

or i NO c i

t r

a p

d) oc 1 7 0 1 6 0 5 4 5 4 l ie 4 2 7 6 3 3 2 2 1 1 a rs 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n e( o P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i

- t a

l s

n a

r T

) } s e . c C e do ( 5 0 t )

oN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 o a M .

N (

iF) .

a t 6 0 4 4 1 1 2 1 3 0 r ( . . .

a T 8 0 0 3 1 3 8 5 1 9 P - 6 3 2 - 1 1 1 l s ei ds oy Ml a

tn y .

sA c 5 6 0 4 0 6 8 5 9 2 e n) 4 5, 6 1 8 0 5 4 1 7 Md ez . .

- e uH 1 1 3 6 5 3 5 2 8 9 t s q( 1 1 2 3 3 4 5 6 si e av r Ee F R

N O

I T -

0.

A 8 1 4 2 9 8 4 7 4

_ R N d) 8 4 7 6 3 3 2 2 1 1 O oc

8) 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

_ II I ie VR S rs 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0

_ G R e(

FS O P

_ ^ O T

_ H S( S

_ E U

_ IS L CR P NO ET L b UC A

, 2 QA N O

EF e R I l FN T nb ST DA OP

,O I

A L

S N

A n

o )

b 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 1

0 2 5 1 4 0 4 7 7 2 7 5 4 0 9 1 1 7 6 i

0 6 3 5 2

- II RC R t r( 1 6 7 1

- 1 2 2 1 1

_ EI T ao pt R - - - - -

_ PT - i c R ca

_ FA D i F)

OP E t a 6 0 2 2 8 1 9 8 3 0 L r ( .

ND P a T 8 0 0 3 0 3 7 4 9 1

ON U P 6 3 2 1 1 1 SA O - -

_ I C

_ R

_ A s

- P li

_ M es r O dy o

_ C ol t Ma y c n c a tA n f

_ s e) 5 6 1 5 2 7 4 5 8 2

_ el uz 4 5 6 1 8 0 7 6 8 5 n Wa - n qH e(

o

_ 1 1 3 6 5 3 5 2 8 0 i

_ ti r 1 1 2 3 3 4 5 7 t

_ sa F a al p Er i O c i

t

_ r a

p d) oc 8 1 4 2 9 0 8 3 7 4 l ie rs 8 4 7 6 3 3 2 2 1 1 a 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n e( o P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i

_ t a

l o

_ s

_ n

_ a

_ r T

_ } ) s e .

E c e

_ do C ( 0 t )

oN I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 o a M N (

1

' Table 3 COMPARISION OF BUILDING RESPONSE North-South Horizontal Inout Oriainal Analysis Revised Anaivsis Overturning Overturning Element Shear Moment Shear Moment (Kips x 103 ) (Kip-ft x 10 6) (Kips x 103 ) (Kip-ft x 10 6) 5 3.177 0.1525 3.178 0.1525 1 13.710 0.2949 .13.750 0.2957 2- 71.930 2.0476 72.220 2.0547.

3 115.200 3.7320 115.700 3.7481 4 90.160 5.1101 91.090 5.1391 East-West Horizontal Inout Oriainal Analysis Revised Analysis Overturning Overturning Element Shear Moment Shear . Moment (Kips x 103 ) (Kip-ft x 10 6) (Kips x 103 ) (Kip-ft x 10 6) 5 2.854 0.1370 2.855 0.1370 1 1 13.550 0.2913 13.580 0.2919 2 76.150 2.1104 76.250 2.1130 3 122.500 3.9026 122.700 3.9059 -

4 80.210 5.1456 80.950 5.1617 0719S/0042K l

s

. 1 i

(D g

1

~

Problem 2.

i

~

b, l Model.

~

l -

1 I

ql ,1 - gg s c an an 'a -m I I-a a_ .. - - - -

3 q6 KWe' q4 v q2 .h [

v -K+L' .

q7 q5 ' q3

• /

~

- L ) i l

Data for the Problem:

I 2

b = 1.32",' hn .316"

, L = 80" g = 386 in/sec - f y = .3 9/cu.in'. t = 13.333" - )

we obtain the total beam mass as 2

m = .0259 i sec /in 1

i I

l l

O Figure 1

, I

~{

Problem 2 l

' ,m I O j l

THE CMIPONT.NT CLEMENT METHOD 155 il I

30 f

[

ll

' l

[ )

(

f 20 c

5

- i e 1  ;)

O 10 - ~

I h

&US D 10 0 15 05 Tirne(se:) l

. .a . . .

N g I_ ~ _

j "a

~

] N -

4.5 neglicit!c

^

a?::,

-1 ~

4_

3.,

K El 2  ;

\

'Q F1GURE 3.26 Contact force of ball on beam and deGettions in generalimt coordinates

)

Figure 2 o

w.g-4 e

i m

T s

v e {

_ N c O r I o T F t U I ll il

_ . 2 L g ieJ t

_ O n

_ m S i j e r l Oiu

_ S p v I S P

r H

A t N c v

Y a D t M*

n o

C x

5 0

j

+o l

• O4-9 O

n

.OC9D (

w

+

.- :t . I e i. 4 . *: . i e

)

) n

• 1 o

1. i  !  : . .. II s .o :- . . . !'i $.

t .

F u Ol .

Do

( s

_ es c 'y

_ l N

O i y I t e

- T rL

_ 2 U a

_ L P o m O t S s se 9seor l

b S I

H Mi at s

P A f o N op

_ Y p

_ D to n

en mo ei ct ac

_ l e ,

pr si

_ id D(

1 .

T o. @C o

• ,t M

Problem 3 un ananu w whou man svsiano $6 r ,

inenon incuan

\1 sticle il

/in.

J 80lb/in L J FIGURE 2.13 - 3, Packaged aracle strikes pavement ahr 215in/sec -

falhag 5 A from tailgate of truck. Fncoon a m a nt venuss of l00lb and 400lb ///////////////////

O i i

[' )

l l

l ss ma courownwT mesm wmeooin mwanacs 10

^

l F-100 lb. k,=100 lbrin.

g i , 2 02 Ags y o'. A .5 n ri.<->

n

%r % l i

- 10 I

O Figure 5 1 1'

J,

's Problem 3

-4 i

DYNAHIS SOLUTION ~

-'t ..

problem wLth fr le t ton from text, ' f

• 10 0 ,

1 15.00

-10.00 -- -

5.00 1 O - [e '

Il

]

? j /

/

l 1

en .

0.00

/ \.

J ' \v D

L L - ---~~~ --

i -5.00 u

8 LN. ,

i 3- --

-10.00 ,

x .

f

' j l .7

~

.w.

l 1

- 15. 00.- '

s

-20.00. i

O.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60-ttme(e.e.)

I Figure 6 o________._________________________.__ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _

ANSYS E6.2 Problem 4 0

/// / / //////

/ n

/ -+ t +-

/

/

/

k 0 --> 6-

/

/

/

e4 it i \ h

\

/ h ,,

if

%/

/].~ } I osA

~'

4 5 h 1 2 3 r

$ 9H E R L Figure 1 System of Impacting Pendulums 1

da As As da v*- M^- @5 84 G. .. 1 r wv- @a x

g q @ s j-WW - - -

.g q'G 4 g

g'q-+

a il % g 3y*

m T*

c c '7i s 3

c c 8 Q - Element Numbers Figure 2 Finite Element Model of Pendulum System. l l

Figure 7

ANSYS E6.19 O Problem 4 DISP 2.s. d ws

. 9. r l

l 1.s. g 1...

~*

Impact 3 J /

.s.

/

. s y r 1 >

Q.

.e. ,

~ ~

.50 l .,

UK l

-1.ec

= 1

-1.s.

/

/

1 l ...s.

J n-

.... ..s. .i.. .is. .e.. .es. .3.. .3s. . .. .4s. .s DYNAMIC RESPONSE OF A SYSTEM 0F IMPACTINC PENDULUM 5 ANSYS 1  ;

}

i j Figure 8 Figurg 5 Linear (X) Displacement of N-des (or Spheres) 1, 4 and 5 versus Time.

]

)

.,~ Problem 4

• \

x__j '

DYNAHIS SOLUTION Mass Displacements dLep. of nodes vs ttme 2.00 i#

1.50 /

1.00 0.50

/ ,b i c

./ .

~ 1 I^ 0.00 w.

N~ ~ .

i, .

i'

" -0.50 48 _

-1.00 ,

,- o l

-1.50 ,

/

1

-2.00 l

\

- /

-2.5e 0.40 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35

f. t me (sec.)

i l

/^T C/ ,

Figure 9 l 1

ANSYS

' E6.23 f

Problem 4 {

FORC 12.0 ,

s.e 4.0

..e -

~

2 ,

q E

-s.e

\  ;

-te.e I

} f

) \

4

.i... v+.s

' L 3*+

-ae.e - -

E=3

-24.0

\ t=2 N

11Mg

-28.0 .19e .193 .199 .ggg .ggg

.197 .197 .197 .193 .198 .193 mMgyg 4 DYH4MIC RESPONSE OF A SYSTEM OF (frACTING PEMputtMS t-t 9. D YW A H 15 KE:F u t. T S

' t- > g, a n H

4.$ 4 m **

b "

S-v 0 :

Contact Forces Between Spheres 1 and 2, 2 and 3, 3 and 4, j O Figure 8 '

and 4 and S.

Figure 10 l

LEGEND:

2 - NODE NUMBER

@ - ELEMENT N@BER l -ROTATIONAL DEGREE OF FREEDOM

/ -TRANSNATIONAL DEGREE OF FREEDOM O -MASS POINT W *--- -* E

. p _es.s _ _ si.s _ ,

i = 4 s b 6 6 0

)I E L.1ss' '6 E L # 3' 1 34 f. 4 W e f m  ! s m . 1 2,

E L.140 2N I h' , I

- - 2 *

- RIGID LINK TYP,J t

b RIGID LINK TYP.

p T 3 6 E L 115' ,

TORSIONAL b I

' ~113'

}

SOIL SPRING d #) b

~~

n.100 ~~4N3 l I 4y T

17.7: /

rm.r g;p,NS- t SOIL SPRIN 3 4)ff T mo'TE "ho*TE -

ur_

N S MODEL E W MODEL VERTICAL MODEL l

i i

l Figure 11 DI ABLO CANYON POWER PL ANT UNITS 1 AND 2 I )

AUXILI ARY BUILDING MATHEMATICAL MODELS FOR TRANSNATIONAL, TORSIONAL AND VERTICAL ANALYSIS

LEGENO:

2 - NODE NUMBER

@ ~ ELEMENT NUMBER l l - ROTATIONAL DEGREE OF FREEDOM

/ -TRANSNATIONAL DEGREE OF FREEDOM O -MASS POINT l

W: @E  :

_74*SS.8' _

S1.5'

. 6

6 E L.1ss' 6 d' 6

l

' ' ' ' 1 4 >

1s.n' _

m ,

.F I in 1

e g m ,. 1 2N! 2 EL.140' ,

. RIGID g RIGID LINK TYP. ,, LINK TYP.

s, 3 34p E L 115' 3 p a, y,

(

• :' ~113 l I

SOIL SPRING d o --

1 s

Il N'-

27 5'sJ4 y g ., y o I

d.

4 TRANS EI

[OSOIL LATIONAL / l "p

[8 l

17.7b/ 7 EPRING i 5 l"~' ,

+ 5

! SEE 8* A""

E L. 85'_ Q# i NOTE,2 3E '

l  :

~

13 9.25' L13 9.25'_J N.S MODEL E W'MODEL VERTICAL MODEl. i l

l Figure 12 DI ABLO CANYON POWER PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 0 AUXILIARY BUILDING i REVISED MATHEMATICAL MODELS TO INCLUDE HIG!f DENSITY RACKS -

l

L I

AE .

iRMS s

l TI /

C TSY E DE l.A7 P

D E M SSN '

S I

V T

A EvA t SEY ED A M I ,

ER M U

NR ORo O

=

. RT C S PMT SOS N \

DE E Rt T \

s N PL RFHA '

~

I A SAR ( '

f' L) i' iE DSEC l

T i*

i l

R NE 1

~ - '-

I P ,\\

I U O 3 I Q SP ~

- E EY  % ~,'

I R RB -

f l

,)'

,r' O 3

<:) -

(

[ .'

[

l'

~

[ '

s f - -

( .: ,e a e'

,l ?

j e

5 0 5 0 5 2 2 f. 1 0

O nD f , oRq4% wbUN 4 &kt%An J

o cl

0 0

1 O' A R

T E

M I

S S

I C T Y E

P S D E

S I

L A

A N7

\

E V S E E D N N

O R Y D O A E

S O I P M 0 R N R T

/A V T S O 7  %

C E R A 1

\

M R TC M E RFR S T I

\

\ E E U H A \ P D PS T S NS A L L\ .,

- 0 A - /.

1 DER - ,^

L ES T q ' l\

) TA 1 -

1 RNCE  ;

3 I

OP , *p1 .

C N 1

1 U P3 QS - E O EEY S RRB' ( Z 1

\ N I R

i s D O

\

' O I H

,\ R EW O ^

i f P

E

~

A .

~

s* 1 4 1

'r 0

) \

i E

1i I R

( f l (

U i( ) G

/

F

< ' ..l  !

/

0 0 5 0 0 5

• 5 0

2 I- l. 0 3

O  %* 4 sSN%QutuK a%Q M~"

25'_ O* YO"~\ 7' 0"_ .

^

~

I g E54fx4

_ _ .._eq,___I e )l s

l

'd i i M~ --

l 0

Q '

O j - p:.v$

assan H f r__ ,

~__a i 01".

I i i l i __ _ u or.t._ i_ _ L2< T .! 4_

- T _ _i _ _ _ _ oo i l l ,

l _ _ _ to_ _ _ I ._ _ _ _ 6_ _ _,\

3 20 - - -

i

_ _ _ _as _j_ _ e.g.,_ _ _ ;__-_eo___ 4 i _ __ _ _89. _ E ' _ _ RL _ _ l_ _ _ _4D_ _ to

. i e  ;

---

i y .i 3 _ - - _re __ _ _

,so ,__ _-- ep_-_ , g

' L_.._ _eo___'

E t_, _ _ _sa J_,, __ -__

_ __._D.4

_-_m_ ge._ _ - _ _ _ eo_ - _ '

1

.  ; - - _ oa. y u . _ .Ao = . _ , .. _ ao- - - _

I m~

t _eCL H-_ _eJA A t t ,  %

a t I oc og w-I )

g\ (AS Nf -

i L__

i a- t _ _ _I ___ _ _ c o_ _ _

l n

o

, u - - _. ,

l

\ P/T  ; 4 _ g, __ l_ _ _. _ co __ __

U ____ _ l. _ _ _* # -' _ _ '_ _ _ T _ _ .

p 12'- 0" (TYP L PLA N ( Et. 99'-o") l SPENT FUEL POOL FLOOR-UNIT f w w y;l = n Y %'+ Mua T  ;

'k css) 775 {4 .. /..w..etoea-o- .. .. .. ,

W a 3 . . . >l . . ~. (gr M *,

r.,. .

s Q ..xc:. 1;.:.. .q r, = - . ,, ,

• '4 .

3m m

MONITORING raeuce t wios ,

Q s

L3x3xVa%ss) ,

l , t

% ...i n

- . . c2 tirR> ua ,

rre. so4 a i p 4 C.-g pxou sruos  :' - n - 8

( * ' T. -( cAnsou sr'.i 5.......* ', .. -)-

\ >v < -

e t'.o o.c. crra) -

SECTIOh! A-A naure 1s FLOOR LINER DETAILS

~

urs

s .

4 1

$" LINER HYDROSTATIC LO4D l o [_. o 4 o j o e

.o

.- . is .: . y l

1 gfu " l. 3 X 3 X /B .

() =

POSTUMTED FLOOR UNER DEFLECTION

". (7YP.)

NTs l

l 1

l ll I

Figure 16 i

b _ _____________________________a