L-02-032, Equivalent Usage Factor for Equipment Qualification

Equivalent Usage Factor for Equipment Qualification

ML20062M458
Person / Time
Site:	Grand Gulf
Issue date:	12/15/1981
From:	Chew G, Javid A, Santoro R NUTECH ENGINEERS, INC.
To:
Shared Package
ML20062M453	List: AECM-81-483, Forwards Responses to 810728-30 Audit Questions Re Seismic Qualification L-02-032, Equivalent Usage Factor for Equipment Qualification
References
MPL-02-032, MPL-2-32, NUDOCS 8112170249
Download: ML20062M458 (50)

Text

I

,5 p

[;*

Att'achment I to AECH-81/ B3 t

l KPL-02-032 EQUIVALENT USAGE FACTOR FOR EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION TESTING t

l I

1.

t' Prepared for Mississippi Power & Light Cornpany i

t j

Prepared by NUTECH

]

San Jose, California I

1 Prepared by

)[ Epproved by g4dsPM M

j R.

Santoro G.' P. Chew i

Responsible Engineer Engineering Manager I

Reviewed by A. " Jay 1&

V.

J. Brocato, P.E.

Project Engineer Project Manager 8112170249 8112i5 PDR ADOCK 05000416 l

A PDR

T j **.*

t LEGAL NOTICE This document contains proprietary information of Nuclear Technology Incorporated and it is not to be reproduced or furnished to third parties nor the information contained thereic utilized, in whole or in part, without the prior express written permission of Nuclear Technology Incorporated.

Neither Nuclear Technology Incorporated nor any of the con-tibutors to this document makes any warranty or representatioa (express or implied) with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the information contained in this document or

['

that the use of such information may not infringe privately owned rights, nor do they assume any responsibility for liability or damage of any kind which may result from the use of any of the information contained in-this document.

s I

1 i i i

4 5

I 4

nutech i

MPL-02-032 il i

, TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION TITLE PAGE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1 1.1 Mechanical Aging Requirements for Equipment Qualification Tests 1

1.2 Scope of the Work 1

2.0

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSION 3

3.0 METHOD OF ANALYSIS 6

3.1 Accumulative Damage Factor for Random Input Tests 7

l 3.2

' Accumulative Damage Factor for Sine Dwell Test 8

3.3 Accumulative Damage Factor for Sine Sweep Test 9

i I

3.4 Accumulative Damage Factor Due to SRV Loads 11

j 3.5 Comparative Analysis of Accumulative Fatigue Damage 13 4.0 PARAMETRIC STUDY 14 I

4.1 Numerical Results 16 4.2 Interpretation of Numerical Results 17 4

I 5.0 APPLICATION TO GRAND GULF NUCLEAR 19 POWER STATION i

i

6.0 REFERENCES

26 l

1 l

?

a i

1 Ilutech 1

MPL-02-032 ill

[

4

'le I

~i' EQUIVALENT USAGE FACTOR

'l FOR EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION TESTING

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Mechanical Aging Requirements for Equipment Oualification Tests Prior to testing an equipment item in a seismic environment of Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) intensity, u

[

the equipment must be subjected to a mechanical aging i

process equivalent to the one generated by the vibratory I

loads that may occur during the 40-year life of the

,I i

nuclear plant.

The mechanical aging of the equipment is l

due to the fatigue cumulative damage generated by repeated loading.

-l For fatigue evaluation purposes the significant vibrat'ory loads to be taken into account are the operational basis earthquake (OBE) with an expected number of occurrence equal to 5 (Reference 1) and the I

. safety relief valve actuations with an expected i

frequency equal to 1800 (Reference 2) over the life of a

the plant.

1 I

f I

MPL-02-032 1

~

nutech

I s

(-

l.

1.2 Scope of the Work c.

During the recent seismic review audit at Grand Gulf, the NRC questioned the lack of fatigue testing for equipment which will experience cyclic stresses from I

1800 SRV actuations over the life of the plant.

j However, before the SSE test, the equipment was s.

subjected to some or all of the following preliminary tests:

1)

Preliminary OBE Tests - white noise i

2)

Preliminary Random Input - white noise 3)

Sine Sweep - constant amplitude, varying frequency 4)

Sine Dwell - constant anplitude at equipment resonance frequency i

I Therefore the objective of this study is to show that the mechanical aging due to the preliminary tests is at least as severe as that due to the hydrodynamic load so i;

that the aging requirements are met.

I E

i l

MPL-02-032 2

i nutech

. e

s.

s'-

j' 2.0

SUMMARY

~AND CONCLUSION The equipment mechanical aging by cyclic loading due to r

safety relief valve (SRV) actuations has been compared to mechanical aging due to the preliminary tests to i

i which the equipment is usually subjected prior to the actual seismic qualification test (5 OBE + SSE).

The preliminary tests taken into consideration were:

1)

White Noise Input; 2) Sine Sweep; 3) Sine Dwell.

This evaluation has been conducted in accordance with ASME, 1

Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Fatigue Evaluation Criteria.

l t

For this study the equipment was modeled as a single degree of freedom (SDOF) system.

Further the natural frequency of the SDOF system was assumed to be in the range of 2-50 Hz.

{

A closed form solution for the ratio of the SRV loads to the other loads accumulative fatigue damage factors has been derived and a parametric study carried out.

Table I

.1 gives the magnitude of the vibratory loads that yield I

a SRV load equivalent usage factor.

MPL-02-032 3

nutech e

1.

t ~.

l' The results of this otudy can be rondily uccd for L

establishing the degree whereby preliminary tests do provide mechanical aging at least as severe as that i

i required by the qualification test procedures.

For example, Grand Gulf balance of plant equipment was typically subjected to a preliminary sine sweep res-onance search as part of qualification testing.

The 1

sine test alone typically offsets SRV load mechanical aging.

An example is provided in Section 5.

i i

l 1

i i

I t

I f

i

(

i s

t i_

MPL-02-032 nutech

\\

i.

T; bio 1 j.

EQUIVALENT USAGE FACTOR FOR GRAND GULF BOP EQUIPMENT I

Level of Input Type of Vibratory Load Accel. O to Peak Duration Frequency 0.5g RMS 792 sec.

WHITE NOISE 2-50 Hz

],0g RMS 49.5 sec.

I i

SINE SWEEP 0.46g 1 octave / minute 2-50 Hz I

SINE DWELL 0.5g 4.3 sec.

Equipment 1.0g 0.3 sec.

Resonance 8

NOTE:

Assumes worst SRV parameters value; i.e.

Damping, C 0.02

=

No. of Cycles, N = 7 x 1800 Peak Spectral Acceleration, X

= 3.69 at 20 Hz t

t i

4

?

E apt-02-032 5

nutech

f l

3.0 METHOD OF ANALYSIS l'

The cumulative damage due to the preliminary tests and to SRV loads-has been evaluated for a single degree of freedom system (SDOF) by using Miner's linear cumulative damage assumption (Reference 3) which has been adopted by the ASME, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,.Section III.

I l

Min.er's accumulative damage (AD) law is expressed by the following equation:

i 5

"i 1

^

N(Sg)

I is the number of harmonic stress cycles where ni I

applied to the material at amplitude St.

N(S ) is the i

g number of cycles to failure corresponding to stress I

amplitude Si on the prescribed material SN fatigue curve.

Failure occurs when the accumulative damage reaches unity.

In order to achieve a closed form solution for the r,

I

. accumulative damage factor of the individual loads, a conservative approximation of the S-N fatigue curve prescribed by the ASME Code for carbon steel has been used, namely:

MPL-02-032 6

11utech i

~

,-r,,

l

[S hb i

l, N(S) =

Ny is a convenient point on the S-N curve (see where S, N1 i

Figure 1).

3.1 Accumulative Damage Factor for __ Random Input Tests The excitation is assumed to De a stationary normal acceleration process with a constant spectral density, So (white noise) over the frequency range fl = 2 Hz, f

= 50 Hz.

The resulting stress response of a SDOF

}

2 system will take the form of a narrow band stationary

{

process and the peak stress will have a Rayleigh distribution.

'1 A closed form solution for the expected accumulative i

damage factor can be obtained (Reference 4) 1 fT o

b

^A" N

where 5

the natural frequency of the SDOF system f

=

Tg total duration of input process

=

1,S,b=

parameters identifying the fatigue curve N

i MPL-02-032 7

1 nutech

.~

l I

Gamma function T

=

e standard deviation of peak stress.

=

s For a white noise support excitation of intensity S

the variance of the critical stress is give" by j

g I

2

, 2,_sc 3 1

g

).

s 3

2w g I

where the linear relationship constant between c

=

stress and t

i the circular natural frequency of the SDOF w

=

j system I

the percent of critical damping of the E

=

system 1

Accumulative Damage Factor for Sine Dwell Test 3.2 i

I

,,The support excitation is assumed to be a sinusoidal acceleration of constant amplitude at the SDOF system a

resonance frequency.

The resulting steady state stress, SB, response is then given by:

MPL-02-032 8

4 i

nutech

C V, 8

I

'9 " 2(a 2

e j

where v is the input amplitude.

g 1

The accumulative damage factor is given by:.

B [8 f fT B

n ADB " N(S)

N (S /

y y

where the symbols have the same meaning as previously defined.

I i

3.3 Accumulative Damage Factor for Sine Sweep Test The support excitation is assumed to be a sinusoidal acceleration of constant amplitude and continuously varying frequency (a value of 1 octave / minute is normally uced for testing).

I From a fatigue point of view only the response about the i

resonance frequency will have a significant j

(-

contribution.

This is because the dynamic magnification i

. factor is a sharp function of the SDOF system frequency to input frequency ratio for low damping.

4 h~

l MPL-02-032 9

nutech i

. I

I Let us assume as a first approximation that the response 4

of the SDOF will be a resonance response for input frequencies in the range ia of the SDOF natural f

frequency.

The duration of such an excitation will be approximately:

2a minu';es for a frequency variation of 1 T

=

c octave / minute.

e The accumulative damage factor is given by:

i fT S

n c

c AD i

c N(S)

N S,

y y

I where S

• S (Previously defined).

c B

A reasonably conservative value of a is obtained by t

I' calculating the frequency range for which the dynamic amplification factor for the steady state response of a low damped SDOF system under cinusoidal excitation 5 or t

10.

The corresponding values are calculated to be 10%

and 5%, respectively.

E MPL-02-032 10 nutech i

1, 3.4 Accumulative Damage Factor Dun to SRV Lorda The equipment input excitation due to SRV loads is given I

in terms of the floor response spectra at the equipment support location; the floor response spectra being the result of a finite element dynamic analysis of the whole reactor building structure.

The maximum stress value to be used for fatigue evaluation can be calculated by the formula:

CX I" 'E I max I

max "

,2 0

where Xmax (w,C ) is the spectral acceleration at frequency J

1 and for damping coefficient C.

w I

During each SRV excitation, the equipment time history i

response is assumed to have 7 peaks, i.e. as many peaks as the expected number of peaks of the idealized

?

quencher bubble pressure time history (see Figure 2).

I 3

The accumulative damage factor due to SRV is then given by:

t 7 ng (S ' b g

[N AD

=

y (Sy p.

i=1 MPL-02-032 11 nutech M

I.

where ni is the expected number of peaks at stress level, St.

e Assuming conservatively that all of the seven peaks reach the maximum value, the accumulative damage factor becomes l

i ADD" l~

3.

whe're nt

• 7 * "

I i

A more realistic n can be developed by assuming the t

l first peak at 100%, the second peak at 90%,

l.

seventh peak at 40%, and arriving at an equivalent i

j number of peaks.

For example, assuming b = 4, the total number of effective cycles becomes:

nt n(1 + 0.34 + 0.84 + 0.74 + 0.64 + 0.54 + 0.44)

=

2.5 n

=

t 4

I i

r i

f~

l t i

MPL-02-032 12 nutech i

t,"

l.

3.5 Comparative Analysis of Accumulative Fatique Damage I~

i In order to compare the accumulative damage of f

preliminary tests with that due to SRV actuations, the following cumulative damage factor ratios are evaluated.

l f'

fT[a RANDOM INPUT, ^ A,

f2b/2 7 y,p g

s 1.

SRV AD "t (Smax/

\\

j 2

D fT

/

A 2w fSg b

= ---

"2 7

max t

f, sine sweep, ^ c,

c c

c gc

.j

• p t \\ max /

t 2Ck SRV AD n

n max L

fT S

fT 9

sine dwell, ADB, B

B B

B

{

3.

SRV AD "t

S "t

2EX D

max max In order for SRV mechanical aging to be less severe than I

that in the preliminary tests, the sum of the above factors, corresponding to the preliminary tests actually run, must be greater than unity.

j i

4 f

E i

MPL-02-032 13 j

nutech i

c

~

g l:

l' SRV Excitation Envelope of all response j

spectra (from Grand Gulf SRV analysis results provided by General Electric Co.).

See Table 2.

l i

Table 2 l

Frequency C1 = 0.01 C2 = 0.02 5 Hz 0.65g

.55g 10 Hz 1.4g 1.2g 20 Hz 4.5g 3.69 30 Hz 4.39 3.69 i

SRV number of cycles nt

= 7 x 1800 (worst possible I

case) 2.5 x 1800 (realistic int

=

assumption)

'i

=

ax 0-(sec)

" Sine sweep effective TC duration For a = 5%

T

= 6 sec C

a I-I.

~

MPL-02-032 15 I

nutech 1

I.

f" 4.1 Numerical Results l'I' Assuming worst SRV excitation parameter value, i.e.

~

C = 0.02, nt = 7 x 1800, x,,x = 3.6g-at 20 Hz, the individual preliminary tests offset the SRV mechanical aging if the following inequalities are met.

^A)

RANDOM INPUT y

y, SRV ADD If l

}-

TA> 792 sec for input, RMS = 0.5g Tg> 495 sec for input, RMS = 1.g i

SINE S 2.

f

> 0.46g SR D

gc DD I

Assuming an equivalent resonance response of duration T

)

I

= 6 sec.

1 I

AD SINE DWELL B

SRV ADC If g

1 69 see for input amplitude

= 0.25g T

=

B gB 4.3 sec for input amplitude V

= 0.5g T

=

B g8 0.27 sec for input amplitude V

• 19 T

=

B g8 i

MPL-02-032 16 I1utech

c I

{1 NOTE:

If the more realistic equiva.'.ent number of SRV l

cycles is used, the required duration becomes TREALISTIC and the minimum sine sweep acceleration

= 2.5/7 TWORST,

~

level becomes VgC > 0.31g.

4.2 Interpretation of Numerical Results I

l Under the assumption that the equipment natural frequency lies within the frequency range investigated, t

i.e.

2-50 Hz, the mechanical aging due to SRV loads at

}

the vorst location is equivalent, for example, to having subjected the equipment to any one of the following tests:

I 1.

White Noise Excitation - 0.5g RMS value lasting 13.2 minutes over the frequency range 2 - 50 Hz.

i l

2.

Sine Sweep Excitation - 0.469 peak value constant amplitude and frequency variation of 1

[

octave / minute over the range 2 - 50 Hz.

t I

.3.

Sine Dwell Excitation - 0.59 (zero to peak constant

}

amplitude) lasting 4.3 seconds at the equipment i

e resonance frequency.

MPL-02-032 17 i

nutech

l It should be noted that for equipment whose natural

{

frequency is higher than 50 Hz, the damage due to SRV i

actuation would be negligible.

Since the equipment excitation level would be equal to the zero period acceleration of the applicable spectra.

I 1.

4 i

i t

t i

E i

i I

MPL-G2-032 18 nutech i

l,

. s s

c 5.0 APPLICATION TO GRAND GULF NUCLEAR POWER STATION The requalification of a Westinghouse Model B electric hydrogen recombiner for the Grand Gulf Nuclear Power Station (Reference 6) is taken as a representative i

example to apply the methodology described in this study.

A sino beat test was performed to determine the natural frequencies of the recombiner.

The frequency range covered was 1.0 Hz to 42 Hz at a sweep rate of approximately 1.0 octave per minute.

The input acceleration level was 0.2g during the testing.

Natural

}-

frequencies were determined to be as follows:

'l I

Direction Natural Frequency I

Side-to-side 11.5 Hz Front-to-back 19.0 Hz Vertical 20.5 Hz The applicable hydrodynamic load response spectra t

[

envelopes are shown in Figures 3 and 4.

t I

.In order to compare the accumulative damage of the sine I

sweep test to the applicable SRV load, the cumulative i

e damage factor ratio is given by Equation (2) of Section 3.5 using the following parameter values.

MPL-02-03 2 19 nutech i

~

i' 6 sec Equivalent response duration T

=

e due to sine sweep test (see Section 3.3)

I f

11.5 Hz Lowest and highest equipment

=

20.5 Hz natural frequency 2.5 x 1800 Expected number of peak stress n

=

t cycles due to SRV load (see y

i Section 3.4) i V

0.29 Sine sweep test input acceler-

=

i ation level i

k to be Applicable SRV spectral

=

max determined acceleration value C

0.02 Applicable damping value

=

g e

b 4

Fatigue curve characteristic

=

?

parameter (see Section 4.0) 3 9

E 4

MPL-02-032 20 nutech t

I.

.l.

Setting the sine sweep /SRV accumblative damage factor ratios equal to unity we can solve for the maximum SRV spectral acceleration value which gives the equivalent i

sine sweep mechanical aging.

The resulting value is N

X,,x <

2.02g for 20.5 Hz X

l.76g for 11.5 Hz max l

3-The applicable SRV spectral accelerations from Figures 3 i

and 4 are 0.45g and 0.119 4

t j

Since these accelerations are lower than X i'

max' 0.45g < 2.02 and 0.119 < 1.76, it is concluded that the I

sine sweep test did e f f set the required SRV mechanical ag i':. for the electric hydrogen recombiner qualification I

test and therefore mechanical aging was accomplished in the process of performing the preliminary tests.

I e

This result is typical of what is expected to be found j

in the Grand Gulf equipment seismic tests.

l E

MPL-02-032 21 nutech t

4 10 M

I O

M I

O U

PJ I'

103 m

5 N.

o s

{

~

m 2

x

-- s

~

.g N

--,~N A

s.

2

%J 10 w_

.m s'Zs

~

- ~g ND m, %_

_, y

=

~.x%

~

m A N

"'======,,,,,

~%

= = = =..,

==. %,;

,~~~

~

10 10 102 3

4 5'

/

10 10 10 100 AOTE: E = 30 X 106 g,;

Number of cycks,N f,.,

-- UTS < 80 0 hsi c

+

s

=

UTS 115.0130.0 ksi

~

/

'I

+

Interpotere for UTS 80.0-115.0 ksi

?

1

) /

')

/.

e, e

"3 C

FIGURE 1 APPROXIMATION OF SN FAGITUE CURVE (From.ReEere'nce 5)

~

N

/.

DESIGN FATIGUE CURVES FOR CARBON, LOW ALLOY, AND IIIGII

^^

~

b TENSILE STEELS FOR METAL TEMPERATURES NOT. EXCEEDING 700 F s.:

()

c't.~

3

-r-f.

1-4

_e 1,

.--/..-

w

. ~..

~

.. - -.. ~,, _.

n

_ q 's v.

2 1

~

'I.

t is M

a i

NOtt:

o ao SEC. DECAv

&g T

O 1

1. Pmft9Unt 0

VREOutNCY M

RANGE S - 12 CYCSEC.

PMAX

.326 3

\\

SEC.

P i

3M emax en P.,

f

=

g I

w W

l

\\

1 In P

'M'N

+

+ o os sEC. livPI eUset,e f urts Poos.

=

o 75 SEC. DUM AtION O

U FIGURE 2 IDEALIZED QUENCIIER BUBBLE PRESSURE OSCILLATION C

IN SUPPRESSION POOL (From Reference 2) i G

o

'I

.l

(

e s

Mt A

AW

-::= MWP'.f j ~

&s

/

8 g

Z

=0 y

-L ---

b. C WL e

l 8

t mu 8

• ~.,

i

.g a

~W~ ~e p

CD 3 g

-4 C I

f ('

O

.O s

2JD I h In 25 W M'-

1 N

N

~

l

\\

's

\\

\\

]

j l

j Je D

I L

L

)

M @ k-Q

~ ' ~ -NgN 'g W

E"

=

l 05 7 tN',

aa M

Y

\\

j i

\\sNA co s 2

x, aQN m

O f-<

w ZZ e

EEEEEE_

H t.

CL Z MM O

ZU99CCOM C.D Q = ca M A e

M j

J l

I M

3 t,

t e

8 8*

u

}

t 8

8 1,,

-d i

he 5

3 h

8, g

3 g

(PC) NOIIWnc3W nutech MPL-02-032 24 j

l '

5 l

6 g

l '

L C-dU T

\\

(4

~,.

RR b-EO VT 9_

\\._

C 1

S 7A E

1F P

_,'j Ds~

O I,I 2E g,

L 8L

,,\\,

V

\\

- s' \\ '

E 1A i

\\

\\

.C N

)

i;'\\

dLS i

E P

cE

[

t A

7 e,el I), l,

L

r R

,ii'!

,'l ls t

h, l*,

-,l-LE T

ES/

C f

WA 0 f,

E

}

P L

YC3 R

/

S DEV V

E

1. E L

S A

N 8V OP DY S

OT E

NN R

E RH GGGGGG RT NNNNNN I I I I I I PPPPPP T

MAMAMM CR M

N DDDDDD EV PR TTTTTT SS CCCCCC DPPPPPP NE 50000.5 G 012 3 71 E

L 4

_A u

e.

r e.

e, s,

i.

e.

e S

e e

a e

e a

s.

l e

l 1

8g 3e G@-

4ta" g"

~u, i

l

r -

i

6.0 REFERENCES

1.

IEEE-344 (1975), "IEEE Recommended Practices for I

i Seismic Qualification of Class lE Equipment for iluclear Power Generating Stations".

I 2.

GE Document 22A4365, Rev. 4, " Containment Loads Report (CLR) - Mark III".

j 3.

M.A.

Miner, " Cumulative Damage in Fatigue", J.

Appl. Mech. SERA, Vol. 12, No.

1.

l' i

4.

R.

W.

Clough, J.

Penzien, " Dynamics of Structures",

l

{

McGraw-Hill.

I t

5.

ASME, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division I, Appendices, 1980 edition.

t-r 6.

Westinghouse Document 9645-M-lSS.0, "Requalification of Westinghouse Model B Electric I

Hydrogen Recombiner", October 1980.

I s

E w

I i

I

~

MPL-02-032 26 nutech

s

a 4'

Attcchment 2 ; to AECM-81/483 -

~

Discussion of Control Room-Panel H13-P601 1..

Mode Switch As_ pointed out in an earlier; statement given to NRC SQRT on Control Room

~PanelLH13-P601, the mode switch is not located'on Grand Gulf-Control' Room.

. Panel H13-P601.- It is located on Control Room Panel H13-P680. 'The mode-

-switch was tested on prototype panel H12-P870-(prototype for' panel-

> H13-P601) only as a matter of convenience.

Since the NRC:SQRT is reviewing Grand Gulf' Control Room Panel H13-P601 and the devices nounted thereon, the mode switch qualification is not a formal subject of review.

Nevertheless, the test report for prototype panel H12-P870 mentioned the

~

mode switch, and some anomalies encountered during the test. The anomalies involved contact chatter-at-less than 1 msec, and section -

warping.

The contact chatter at less than 1 msec is of no safety significance.

T".te chatter. requirement'for the mode switch contacts is in excess of 20 msec. As stated in the test report for prototype panel.H12-P870, no chatter was detected when the chatter detector was reset to 1 msec.

Subsequent tests' described in DRF A00-696 used a chatter limit' of 20 'msee with acceptable results.

The problem related to section warping has. been addressed by modification of the mode switch design. A modified switch has successfully passed seismic qualification as described in DRF A00-696. Grand Gulf uses the modified switch as documented in. Field Disposition Instruction WADZ, Revision 0.

2.

Controller Movement of several controllers and recorders was observed during the test of prototype panel H12-P870 (prototype for panel H13-P601). These various components were tested on prototype panel H12-P870 only as a matter of convenience. Grand Gulf Control Room Panel H13-P601 has only one of these components, Controller 163C1392.

This controller continued to function during the test of. prototype panel H12-P870, in spite of-the movement observed.

It was concluded that no additional requirements necd be placed on production panels since normal procedure following a seismic event requires inspection of all safety related equipment.

Nevertheless, in view of the NRC SQRT's continued concern, a Field Deviation Disposition Request will be~ issued to modify the controller

. mounting bracket to provide added assurance that the controller will not move out of position during'a seismic event. This modification will be

~

similar to the adjustment made during the test.

B36phl-

'{p,g Attachment;3 to AECM-81/483 t

W r I; t-Ts;.Q nNrm ed"" #2'#2D no

' fh L*l * ' $% sws:.. s '-

f,c r1ENtSpA*Ci I

% o' *- is - 2.

n a r. * ~

FIE LD Dispos! TION INsTFLUCTION SHEET or I

8 PpoJE CT X'm v 0Mf

__ UNsT EouirvENT RCIC Turbine. IEEE Urcrade Ecr.is 0o:. 50o7

1. lp q q,g, EST-Co?'

vo;. No.

D<.

nip rios Or T As..

Purpose of Instruction Two qualificatio'n test prograns have been conducted nn the GS-2N RCIC turbine assembly provided by Terry Corporation. The first program was a seismic qualifi-cation test in accordance with IEEE-344-1975, with test results and report retrievable fro. Vendor Print File (VPF) #3622-79(1)-2. The second prograr was a corplete en./ iron ar.tal qualification test in accordance with IEEE-323-1974, with test results and report retrievable fror. VPF F3622-527-1.

l The first progran identified several areas where design changes were required in order to positively assure that the turbine assembly could withstand the cor.-

servative seistic test requirenents. The adequa:y of thesc design changes was j

successfully demonstrated during the second test program.

However, the second I

progran identified an additional potential probler. area, specifically with regard l

to the arrangenent and support of the turbine oil piping.

The purpose of this FDI is to specifically address each area of potential concern, l

and define the necessary inspection and possible corrective action reqJired. The items identified in this FDI do not affect GE documents, and ECA/ECN's are not applicable.

Required Documents e

RCIC Turbine Instruction Manual, at site Vendor Drawing 111904C, Lockplate Assembly, attached Vendor Drawing L-2041-A,B, & C, Oil Piping 1.ayout, attached Paterial Requirements The material required for this instruction is specifically identified in the follow-ing procedures for each task. The mater %l can be obtained locally by site l

personnel, purchased directly from Terry Corporation, or ordered through the l

General Electric Company.

l

<sA QV.ALS -

,,g.g s., ev v, v ev.c

.s.', c, c 0 DATE APPR ?VALS DATE T as touwwt ev is Sa rty actaur ;

ts Gw

.u o.:

Q' g'g $,",'T

l FIELD WORK. ORDER NO.

,m bb (P $av-9 I E.

vosE NoO mu%.,

l N!b 214/n O

DISTRIBUTION CODE FDI TASK COMPLETED DATE g

g

c. a t...

..a, s.

. j j-

-..- ~ 1N T E R N A L-3.

.-EXTERNALr e=

-m re

--w ew,. w i,,m w.

..,~._

- J. C.- Kel

/ -/e/98/

s aa'.<;-'--

.s n.1 e.,....y l

= = -

r-v-

-x.,.

-, rw xw; v

--r,

- or bb S

~

g FIELD DisPoslTION INSTRUCTION 2

f SMEET CF oEscsmTrosoFTA$K Procedure Detailed infornation follows, defining each area of potential concern, the rQJire::

inspection, and the necessary corrective acticn,,if applicable. There are no I

special tools or handling equipment required in implerenting these instructions.

If vendor assistance is desired, arrangements for a service representative can be made through the Proiect Manager, or directly with:

Terry Corporation P.O. Box 555 Windsor, CT 06095 Attn: Robert Theroux, Service Manager Tel. (203) 6SS-E211

~

Item 1 - RCIC Turbine - Trip and Throttle Valve Latch Spring (Refer Drawin; =89521E in Section 14-M-10 in the Turbine Instruction Manual)

During the first (seismic $ 1ification) test program, the initial test activity 3

resulted in inadvertent, unafceptable closure of the trip and throttle valve.

The attached photograph identifies the partial separation of the latching lever assembly at the completion of one of the seismic tests.

The original latching spring was replaced with one having a higher spring coefficient. The operability of the solenoid trip mechanism and the mechanical overspeed trip mechanism were verified after the installation of the stiffer latch spring, and proved to be acceptable. The seismic qualification test program was then successfully completed. The second (environmental qualification) test program, including dynamic testing, was also successfully completed.

Corrective Action Remove the latch spring from the trip and thr spring constant, which should be 25 lb/ inch, pttle valve assembly, and measure its

-10%.

If the installed spring does not satisfy this value, it must be replaced. The appropriate replacement spring is Terry piece number 105594A10, a 0.845 inch diameter spring with a free length of 2.75 ir.ches. The installed spring, resting ogainst the " jam nut" on the valve body and the washer in the latch lever, will have the proper compression. No adjustment is necessary. The spring " load" in the valve latched position is 32.5 pounds.

4

- v w a.e-w e.,.v.,emo.av.c w

w

-w eeper..,.r,w m

_.,g.,%%,,___.,___

m, y

=me.==*e..=.ee es.

_we==-

r-

]

t 6

c W,m. --

Y$ fa) h _;>

k$

~

~~

L

_%.-1 m.<w.i54 m.

m.

_m S i v 'S '0**

FIELD DisPOslTION ANsTRUCTION 3

f sstET or oE$0R6PTION OF T AS A Iter 2

'RCIC' Turbine - Coupling End Pedestal Assembly Duringthefirst(seismicqualification)testprograr.,t$eentireturbitsasse-tly was subjected to a total of 33 tests with an accumulated test time of S Z secer.:1.

Approximatel'; one-third of the way through the test program, turbine structurEl belting becan te loosen. The test facility did not have adequate tools to properly retorque the turbine bolting.

Finally, after 31 tests with-an accue.ulated test time of 875 seconds, one of the alignment dowel pins in the coupling end bearing pedestal failed, and the second pin had an offset distortion of approximately 1/16 inch.

Both conditions were attributed to bending loads or, the dowel pins due to loosened pedestal bolting.

The design of subsequent turbines was modified to use #9 tapered dowel pir.s in liea of the original #8 pins for alignment control, and to use a positive

" lock tab" for the pedestal bolting. The second (environmental qualification) test program, utilizing these design improvements, was successfully completed.

Cerrective Action With reference to vendor drawing ll1904C, attached, inspect the turbint esser.ily for installation of the *9 taper pins and use of the positive lock tabs on the coupling end bearing pedestal holddown bolts.

If not in compliance, the follow-ing corrective action is required:

Material:

Flat washer, 2 each, Terry Piece #75778A07 Locking Plate, 2 each, Terry Piece # m 903S

• Threaded Taper Pin, 2 each, Terry Piece #111284B Taper Pin Nut, 2 each, Terry Piece #7523EA05 Hote:

(a) To avoid ponible disturbance of the turbine alignment, the following procedure is to'be carried out on one side of the coupling end bearing pedestal at a time.

(b) Should it be necessary to realign the turbine, this should be accoralished before fitting the new dowel pins.

(Refer to Section 4 of the Turbine Instruction Manual foralignmentdefinition.)

(c) Numbers in ( ) are the item numbers identified on assembly drawing lil904C.

• Caut.fon: This is a specia.1 17-4PH stainless steel pin -

D0 NOT SUBSTITUTE!

0

' F* t%'Wh

• N%M'D ID W MM W,%M M M.

E^

+ __., - -.. -,., -.- -h 8M M M'

,%%W M MM QW, ME5 (WW*gNFgg "

1. mSM e

- - =

i s

"re'.~1.h...&9,un..%

~

• In gy g

/0 J - $2][Q-R E VISIO'.

O L ; E.s R$ @l.I O * 'A _ _

FIELD DisPOslTION INSTRUCTION b

O SHEET Or DESCRIPTION or T A$N i

1.

Remove the existing tapered dowel pin (3).

If fhis pin is smaller than #9, drill 1/2 inch diameter pilot hole and reat for fitting the required 49 pin.

2.

Remove the pedestal holddown bolt (5).

3.

Locate flat spacer washer (1) on the machined spot facing around the pedestal holddown bolt hole. The washer must sit flat with full face-to-face contact. Any rocking or interference must be eliminated, i

I 4.

Place locking plate (2) on top of the flat washer (1), and align holes for the dowel pin (3) and the holddown bolt (5).

It may be necessary to enlarge the holes in the locking plate to assure no i

interference with the dowel pin or the holddown bolt.

5.

With the holes in the locking plate aligned, install the #9 tapered dowel pin (3) firmly in position. Assure that the pin extracting nut (4) is threaded back sufficiently to allow the pin to seat fully into its hole. The shoulder of the installed tapered dowel pin should -

be approximately 1/16 inch below the edge of its reamed hole (refer Dwg. 111904C).

6.

Apply Fel-Pro "Hi-Temp" C5-A lubricant (or equivalent) to the threads of the pedestal holddown bolt (5), install, and torque to 310 to 340 ft-lbs, such that one flat of the bolt head is aligned to facilitate lock plate bending (refer to Section A-A of Drav ing 11190*C and the attached photo for acceptable orientation).

7.

Using a blunt-ended tool (brass or wood), tend the end of the locking plate (2) against the flat of the pedestal holddown bolt (5). The bending line should have a small radius, as opposed to a square edge which could result in cracking.

Item 3 - RCIC Turbine - Oil Piping The oil piping for the RCIC turbine is defined by the piping schemati contained in Section 9 of the Turbine Instruction Manual. Unfortunately, the piping arrangement and its supports are not controlled by detailed arrangement drawings.

Therefore, there are piping variations and support variations from one turbine to another. During the " resonant search" portion of the second (environmental qualification) test program, excessive displacement was observed in the oil supply line to the coupling end bearing. Additional support was provided for this piping and for other areas which appeared to be marginal. The test program was thu successfully completed.

f*-

e Mhg6M g*p e

NN N. - '--

m

=

. e m m m e,

~-

"-~

~

A

4 7

$ T,;i d, a,_,- M. fT H t

s co. %v

/0 9 ~ $ 2.]22 -

k -* <dvd WM h S

.m H E V'SIO**

O FIE LC DisPOslTION IMTHUCTION b

SHEET OF OESC8tlPTION OF T ASK Corrective Action The turbine vender has prepared oil piping layaut drawings L-2041-A, -B, and -C, attached, defining the piping arrangement and support locations as fabricated on the turbine assembly used during the second (environmental qualification) test program.

Using these drawings, the RCIC turbine oil piping must be inspected for compliance with the defined arrangement and the defined support locations.

Field modifications must be accomplished as necessary to obtain the required compliance.

Caution: Previous turbine inspections revealed that the vender used " conduit clamps" for T ping support i

at some locations. These clamps are unacceptable, and must be replaced with 1/4" diameter U-bolts.

Quality Control Reauirements Star.dard site quality control procedures shall be used in implementing this FDI.

Particular emphasis shall be used in assuring that adequate procedures are used in conducting the inspections defined above, and assuring proper completion of thc defined corrective actions.

Schedule for Imple entation This FDI should be completed prior to the startup test activity on the RCIC system.

9 M s.e MCyapwwW 9w..

A-wWMN"9tNSW81WFNMN9eS9

__r i M ht**F*W4 984F S 9'on -

o

...ut***

J

• ~

Page 6 of 8

. " ' s.',.T

,.Y

[,

kg

.S* '#

yby

. g.::... v. w. e m. e a.<.

i

.p.

y,

v. '...-;; :p.s. 4

.,c =-- ::... -

h

.,f

.h..

E W.) * %*. EN'

'~

.I.*dh.*= -

.t 6

J s}~-

'*y*.Jy i

j

,:h.

[. i-t p

',. 7:.(

.'. t ' $

w

• ' )"

s ',, M.$m I

\\,

- * /*

s Qr'rh Y/>f Ebf e'

N

.]I :'. P kd..,8lk) '.

g f4%M&&usthgpkM:$Rg

+

t,.

?

=e.g., a - --

i m.

n vn z.:-

.., s~em%JiQ$$$p7h$;2 -

e 5U.

7 T

3 b.m w, <,,w s.

( L..,

(

e..

'., b sys.k.

~:.

i v-4,

.,. y I

p;. '.

~r WM : $-.

d

~

'.c,

,~~

..v.m : -

,. < -:- e

. N e' f*h.

s'Y.# fj$d

• sb i

y 11 c..

~

Y~

, $ffth*.; *

,...o hs

. $ he y

o, m.m. - -

' 1)L Mi$1M$$OJ$$$M'

'*'S* f"'4%. -

..aiS$minavu ME9&tu N W. %

TY?%W?5Vm > I 44.ws g e w w ;r d $. $...... W @......

..g.g.,E.. m.

%+.':sK+12 ~*

ga w.

. %;q... -

.,w 7..<..,.m...s.

Q.hiff _.

N l-

.m

n.....

w l

$1 "Y.Y.

Y

~

s e n. s t a s a p i a m '

~

n 1

,x VALVE LATCH SPRING e

-ae-n..._.

. -, i.gsse _ -.. _. ; _.., - *s-seeme..

__._..m_

..___,,ew,p,.,w_

e

~

~

l... n i :..._, __.,.g o.

3l..

s n. n - n.

}

....s.....,. t..:. :

,, /,.,

,,s g

l

.i D

PFiJD TAR OvFR ONE

)

FLAT OF SCREW

~

l

/

7

}

r l

J/A

/A

(

l

[

l

\\Y 9

\\

l i

3 G

c l

O l

mm r

y y_1 l

[

I V16 APPROX.-

• COUP. PED. f I

t i

/

,f8 I

/

I 1

i l

I i

i l

l I

i 1

10 7 Jt"**~--Iti--

l

.O.T Y. j Pif C E ilO.

I' s'.' fiPTli N

. ~ <

• ITF M

(, gJ... 7g,qy

_2 7_2fietA0]_ pf.*:4',;.,) L r 1 f.

SECTION /A./A

_2

• 2 1.II"f lj B f_LA'f LO..*:b,__

....~.C1.

=~.

' w':H

~,3 2

ill;:f. J ti pin.li':..L. ?

A..*~~~"'"'

• ~

A

• 2 Y ?.'

. i?S Nu 1 I..'...

5 0

, ;,f.,i,5'r Li k'.

' t1' W.I.l..

4

. s HIf. GP at SY.CCUr.PTD.SCR.LCCK PLA i

• II EMS l EF te I.Iei n'r F. il 6E

-I1. I i e.

N lli-I & 10tJ

....J,,..,,.,,,,~~~

g IMiwovEMENI kil '~i l THli UNilS l'.

' I TD IN 168" i liLD

...i, ci.I t c. -r. Tr.c.

a. a. 4 -

.i..

,........i.,,.s;

. ai vi, A-

" - ~-

r...

s,

'~

,f i

FDI 109-42382 Rev. O c;.n I';.

Page 7 0f 8 l i i '.'.o b. '

111904 C s:

Page 8 of 8 v

D.I. NO. 3

/

l

~

,,.9

. w h.. s v

. '1 %. t ifv. C N.

. P

,j f

,374h * *y -

/.,.

.y

-oW.t.> 3.A..

bs.Ws t.;.wi % c

,f g.

1,.;--.

3 t

a:<%~?") \\

f

~

5.l?$Y f.~.. -

~

W:5%p. b.'i

\\

1 v.

Zi.,. N

~

t.* i, YCvis

WM,#

+

.a. :4 s a ~ d e,:, i,...yr.F4 &n;;;m w m s-w _

1-2_ _

FIG.1. LOCKING PLATE IN POSITION ON COUPLING END PEDESTAL FOOT BEFORE LOCKING 4

m..7 w-y

~

k k'c..

I.

((

t r ee-*+--- %._,.

u;+. I~..,y p h.

h5 fY.,

1.m

(,N'f:

l

't.{ If: /

e p

,4. -4 i

i +::

Rfds M..

~

.*'.:c; c J

.g.. ?

5y l

r.

x

.y

}$ inn'.

i..

m.

..%M d

i

%. u d.-

. n.,.- -, ak.._3*u.'

..,.m_,-

l

_ h.

FIG. 2. HOLD DOWN BOLT FULLY TORQI,'ED AND LOCKING PLATE TAB BENT TO FULLY CONTACT ONE I

SIDE OF BOLT HEAD.

- = = - -

w-

-,--_r

---

r.

._____y,,_7--y-,.-

.,,---..-,_.,yp.,

_s

.g,

, a e.

l g

ri

t

~

r 1

_1

,k (q_s..

=. - % 2.

i p

el p

/_[.

l' l

t l

A

[4.

]

' *g l

i 1

g; i

.a 4

i

\\

gM I

j

[

Y~

g g

g

[-

t

[

k' l :.l t

.,p l

g-

.g

-- g i

4

] __L

%. r 7t

.3, L---'.a"_

g n

f 4

G(-Q

--. -.p As a

dt.

L g

I

-i -

-l g

{

4

- -Y w

t

.I e

i a

K Ih I

]

LTLG i

F-9,

,b l

'3}d/

lM4

\\

g) l e.

a e

l' p

o r..

o I

3

m A

'4

..a n

d

\\\\

f

)

y 4-

~~

[,,

~ /%

_g==

%=g(

l :;

[

g

~

o J

e 3

e t

_B

.i e

e

• 9 g

S

_z..,.,m,..,,,,,_

jM,,,_, __,

D.)

e e.*

O *,

g

)

p.

l_1 I7 4

1 le guy' 3

7 r ae l

$l 4l J.a i

h,

=

/

i g*g 4-e..

g 3

x

,N t: g I

s

.f.

.I

=

-s,.

4 1

=

c.,3

~

[

5 e

8 i

g\\

tt

~

1\\ __'.m..

J n:

- Wl

((

9

.l

-1 l,~ D#

^

i t

t O

e 4

g I

a

+

j l.

e

• l

.e I

i e

~

}, A:-L:[*

\\ f.

(j '

if t

.1 1 "~l

! a )'

-8 321

\\ )

l

• l.

g 3

a !. D_ r.

A g-I:r

/

9

- 4'.

~

j 2.

l t-

_,:r \\ m.-

.g

\\

j g

a-x j

o

. l'

]*

{

g

' J.,

.1,*

~

l g

t '.

1

~

i

~

,\\ 4/

i

~

1

$ }7 4-)

4..

h g

\\

3 v

n=,-.,_-

_.---..__,,,,ww

l w o.

' r, l ' < I' s

III'* O'

$)

• },

• g-,

,a e

n 1

f a

.11

,q y

}

.p,jy}l((

}.aise

.Ilij

~' g'.l d

p iI 2

4 i.$$.a 3M 2

• yy! ; i

[

1 a

t

?I2)

A l

1 dJ.,

I 4

-j u

ls.

i b

s

[

id!! 1 lt t sisil iH u=*

u.m..

n_

4*

j,-

---la h fx.

w

.. D

k--.

s

'a; e

e

/

1 e

l M

.3 1

'g -

-l l j ';

d N

/

p i

t 8

s 1

.I

,I,

s

-r_

l c_.

6

,~

j k

i

[{.

-.-h.

~

a I

3

-4 2

[.

'I 2

E

[f e

a i

L==

_ N.

g s

a

\\

==li.

a l_

e

, __m_-__.,

y I

i 1*

g

,I

. g-5 3i i

k g

-S-e

.I b

'E k

4 I

- __...-__-=,---..-o----------~r......._~...-~--..

1

.