ML021550398
| ML021550398 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 04/23/2002 |
| From: | Kim C, Lott R, Server W, Weakland D ATI Consulting, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co, Westinghouse |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| Download: ML021550398 (19) | |
Text
Application of Master Curve Fracture Toughness for Reactor Pressure Vessel Integrity Evaluation of BVPS-1 William Server, ATI Consulting Randy Lott / Charles Kim, Westinghouse Dennis Weakland, FENOC April 23, 2002 - NRC, Rockville, MD
Beaver Valley Master Curve Application
- Purpose Discuss the Submittal Approach Discuss Unirradiated Material Property Relevance to ART Discuss Uncertainty in ART at EOLE Discuss Margin Application 2
Goals
- Provide confidence of the Material Properties for all Beaver Valley Reactor Vessel Materials
- Provide Operational Flexibility in Current License Life
- Provide improved understanding of the irradiation effects on Beaver Valley Reactor Vessel Materials 3
350 300 250 200 150 100 0
0 2
4 6
Fluence (1019 n/cm 2) 4
FENOC Response It is clear that the BVPS-1 plate is a radiation sensitive material V The EOLE projections for RTPTS approach the PTS screening limit In this situation the technically responsible approach is to apply the best available technology:
Master Curve!
III OreICr to tLInICI'S18fnd Itis 8ppr'oac,
\\,\\,"C iccd to go back and 100lk 8t hOw tihe Various best estiimtes (whichl inIcude (iharpy bias) ol'the le\\Clerence lempe)CiatILIre were Conlr'tiCtCd.....
5
300 R.G. Chemistry (No S250
- 0 WData)
S.2.."Eason et al. Model S200 S
150 ASTM E 900 Model too Capsules U,V&W 50 5
Capsule Y 0
-Fit to U,V,W & Y
-50 0
2 4
6
- RTTo Fluence (1019 n/cm) 6
Two Options for Analysis of Master Curve Based RTTo
-Shift-Based Approach
/ Parallel to Charpy approach V' Method applied in Kewaunee & FENOC Submittals
/ Does not take advantage of ability to test irradiated material Excessive Margins (Jan Result!
i Direct Measurement V Takes advantage of testing irradiated material
/ Basis for proposed Margins in FENOC Submittal Presentation Focus: Direct Measurement is the Appropriate Analysis Method!
7
Shift-Based Approach to ART Determination ICurrent PracticeI ART Estimi AR T=CFcvN*ff(Ot)
CF(ýVN Determined from Surveillance Charpy Data IRT I RTTo Based on Shift IShif ART Best Estimate Measured nJi~l a'fyS A RT=CF.T*ff(Ot)
CFT( Determined from Surveillance To Data SR TTo(unirradiated) 8 MCr Note: No heat adjustment required for this plate M=2(A-2 +C2)1I/2
Possible RTTo Shift Definitions 0
E---------
F" I'21 (
1 2
L A lz..
l I (A'\\
3 Fluence (10 19 n/cm2) 300 250 200 IJ_
0 0
I-I-
150 -
100 50 0
-50 0
4 T
5 6
9
.-t
Uncertainty in Initial Value Can Cause Large Uncertainty in Shift 350 300 CF 205°F 250 CF =163 F
- o. 200 150
-PCVN 100 1T-CT & Average 112T-CT 50 0
0 L4.
5 6
0 Fl/)nc (1nm Fluence (1 019 nlcm2)
Uncertainty Associated With Fluence Projection is Relatively Small 300 13°F*
250-CF=2OF CF = 163"F 200 LL, 150 Measured Values 0
I--F 10 100 w RTTo
-I/2T-CT 50 1T-CT & Average
-PCVN 0
-50
.4 5
6 U
(101
-r Fluence (109 n/cm2)
Projection Does Not Require Unirradiated Data 300 250 200 U_150 1501I2T-CT S*ii:.*Average & 1T S100 PCVN Capsule Y Projection
-CapsuleY Pi 50 Measured RTTo 0
-50 0
1 2
3 4
5 6
Fluence (1019 n/cm2)
Summary of Projected Best Estimate RTTo Values adiated Capsule Y CFTo Projected T PT.. IOFI RTT,, I°F I ARTT,° (OF)
EOL I RTTo (OF)
EOLE bourceM T
IIn' '
In-Uk 1 11
'I
.I 112T-CT
-5 205 202 163 220 237 IT-CTIAverage
-22 205 227 185 224 244 PCVN
-44 205 249 205 229 250 CFCVN (OF)
PTS Rule Table 205 1
143 222 237 Unirradiated
@ Capsule Y Capsule Adj. Projected RTNDT (OF)
Source RTNDT (°F) RTNDT (°F) ARTNDT (OF)
CFCVN (OF)
EOL EOLE Charnv V-notch 27 182 155 149 225 241 13 Unirr;
Advantage of Direct Measurement
=RTTOBased on Shift ART ART=CFTO°*ff(Ot)
CFTo Determined from Surveillance To Data R TTo(unirradiated)
I I___________________________________
2((yMea
+ (y2)1/2 Measured 4
ý ea Irr. I Fluence Projection Eliminated by Direct Measurement Shift Based Approach Does Not Utilize the Primary Advantage of the Master Curve: The Ability to Directly Measure RTTofOr Irradiated Materials and Re-Zero the Starting Point for Extrapolation to EOLE RTAM
Margin Evaluation for Direct Measurement 300 250-"
200
£L 150 CD LimitAssumptions:
2*Meas = 24'F (error bars)
CF = +/- 20°F defines ct 50 Limit defines mean + 2u Margin 0
-50 0
1 2
3 4
5 6
Fluence (1019 n/cm 2)
Advantage of Using RTTo for the BVPS-1 Plate For the Irradiated BVPS-1 plate RTTo
- RTNDT 9 Consistent Best Estimates of EOL and EOLE Reference Temperatures are obtained v Little difference between Charpy-based and Master Curve-based projections V Thus, the main benefit is confirmation of the behavior of the material using two independent measures
.J The ART is determined by adding Margin to the Best Estimate value of Reference Temperature 16
Comparison of ART Calculations 300 280 260 240
"'220 EOL EOLE E4-200 --
PTS Screening Criterion 180 RTTo Submittal M=24 160
-- Capsule Y Projection M=24 to 27 140
-- Charpy-based M=17 120 100 0
1 2
3 4
5 6
Fluence (1019 n/cm2) 17
Future Testing and Summary
. An acceptable methodology to utilize for the supplemental surveillance program data (new Capsule M in BVPS-2) and future BVPS-1 Capsule X data is needed for EOLE V/Irradiated material from all beltline materials will be available in 2011 from supplemental Capsule M (being irradiated in BVPS-2) corresponding to maximum EOLE fluence for the limiting plate
,/Irradiated plate material (and surv. weld) from Capsule X will reach maximum EOLE fluence in 2017 J Confirmation of best estimate behavior between Charpy and Master Curve approaches has been achieved 18
Desired Outcomes
'.Acceptance of Direct Measurement of Irradiated To / RTTo
".Alternative:
Accept Master Curve as supplemental information demonstrating credibility of surveillance program data 19