ML031120661
| ML031120661 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 10/18/2002 |
| From: | Williams P Oak Ridge |
| To: | Robert Tregoning Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2003-0018 | |
| Download: ML031120661 (15) | |
Text
IRobert Tregoning - OB Analysis Status report for October 18, 2002 Page. 1 From:
"Paul T. Williams m <williamspt ornl.gov>
To:
<RLT@nrc.gov>
Date:
10/18/02 9:01 AM
Subject:
DB Analysis Status report for October 18, 2002 Rob:
Attached is a brief status report for the week ending October 18, 2002, on the Task 9.1 stress analysis of the Davis-Besse problem.
I'm still working on Task 9.1 D and have completed six of the nine models in the Case matrix. (see Table 1 in the status report) I hope to have all nine models finished by the end of next week.
I've developed these flaw models in such a way that they could also be applied to the Case matrices needed for other subtasks in Task 9.1.
Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this material.
Thanks Paul Paul T. Williams, Ph.D., P.E.
Computational Sciences and Engineering Div.
Oak Ridge National Laboratory P.O. Box 2009,Bldg. 9204-1,MS-8056,Rm.213A Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-8056 USA lnternet:williamspt@ornl.gov FAX: (865) 574-0651 Phone:(865) 574-0649 CC:
mark Kirk <MTK@nrc.gov>, <NCC1 @nrc.gov>, <bassbr~ornl.gov>,
<williamspt@ ornl.gov>
Jeannette Torres - Fwd: DB Analysis Status report for October 18, 2002 Page From:
Robert Tregoning To:
Jeannette Torres Date:
11/27/02 8:28AM
Subject:
Fwd: DB Analysis Status report for October 18, 2002
JeannetteTorres - DB Analysis Status report for October 18, 2002 Page 1 From:
"Paul T. Williams" <williamspt~ornl.gov>
To:
<RLT~nrc.gov>
Date:
10/18/02 9:01 AM
Subject:
DB Analysis Status report for October 18, 2002 Rob:
Attached is a brief status report for the week ending October 18, 2002, on the Task 9.1 stress analysis of the Davis-Besse problem.
I'm still working on Task 9.1 D and have completed six of the nine models in the Case matrix. (see Table 1 in the status report) I hope to have all nine models finished by the end of next week.
I've developed these flaw models in such a way that they could also be applied to the Case matrices needed for other subtasks in Task 9.1.
Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this material.
Thanks Paul Paul T. Williams, Ph.D., P.E.
Computational Sciences and Engineering Div.
Oak Ridge National Laboratory P.O. Box 2009,Bldg. 9204-1,MS-8056,Rm.213A Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-8056 USA Internet:williamspt@ ornl.gov FAX: (865) 574-0651 Phone:(865) 574-0649 CC:
mark Kirk <MTK@nrc.gov>, <NCC1 @nrc.gov>, <bassbr~ornl.gov>,
<williamspt@ornl.gov>
[Jeannette Torres - ORNL_D_B_status_10_18.doc Page M_E_MO DATE:
18 October 2002 TO:
M. T. Kirk and Robert Tregoning FROM:
P. T. Williams and B. R. Bass
SUBJECT:
Status Report on Davis-Besse Analyses The attached Figs. 1-6 provide a summary of the Davis-Besse analyses performed to date under the new Task 9 of JCN Y6533. In Fig. 1, the cladding properties used in the current study are presented:
(a) true stress versus true strain and (b) thermal expansion coefficient versus temperature. The remaining figures address a specific sub-task described in the workscope for Task 9.
Sub-task 9.1D requires an estimate for crack driving forces as a function of flaw size and applied membrane stress in cladding. Table 1 shows the Case Matrix developed for this subtask.
Figure 2 depicts the first step carried out in preparation for the J-integral analyses, i.e.,
calculation of an updated estimate of the exposed cladding "footprint" based on the recent "dental mold" cast from the D-B cavity. That footprint area was estimated to be 28.23 in'.
Comparisons of the latest "footprint" statistics with previous ORNL interpretations are given in the table of Fig. 2(b). The newly calculated "footprint" area was used to define a burst disk having the same cross-sectional area.
Table 2 presents ductile tearing data for three-wire series-arc stainless steel weld overlay cladding published in NUREG/CR-551 1 [1]. The ductile-tearing data presented in Table 2 are plotted as a function of temperature in Fig. 3.
Figure 4 presents six finite-element models developed so far for this phase of the analysis.
Surface-breaking flaws were centrally located in each burst disk with the three relative flaw depths: alt = 0.5, 0.25, and 0.05. The models for two flaw lengths of 2.0 inches (50.8 mm) and 1.0 inch (25.4 mm) have been developed to date. The remaining three models in the case matrix of Table 1 will apply a flaw length of 3/8 in. (9.525 mm)
Each models were loaded with an increasing lateral pressure. The resulting J-integral loading paths for these six models are shown in Fig. 5. Figure 5 also presents a value of J., for a temperature of 318.3 0C (605 0F) estimated by extrapolating from the data in Fig. 3a using a 4th order polynomial curve-fit.
Figure 6 compares the critical pressures (determined from the results shown in Fig. 5) for two potential failure modes of the burst-disk models. The ductile-tearing critical pressure is calculated from the point at which the load path for each flaw crosses the J1, line in Fig. 5 and represents the pressure at which stable ductile tearing initiates. The plastic-collapse critical pressure was estimated from the load at which each model began to approach a numerical instability in the analysis. From the curves in Fig. 6, the controlling failure mode for the two larger flaws in the current study was ductile tearing. The shallow flaw (alt = 0.05) was close to the J1, line when it began to fail by plastic collapse. Decreasing the flaw length produces a slight I
F jeannette Torres -ORNLDB-status-10 1 8.doc Paae.
JeannetteTorres-ORNL DBstatus_10_18.doc Paae increase in the ductile-tearing critical pressure.
Estimates of the applied tearing modulus shown in Fig. 3b were calculated using the data (see Fig. 5) from the three flaws with 2L = 2.0 in. at a pressure of 6.4 MPa (0.928 ksi) and the three flaws with 2L = 1.0 in. at a pressure of 8.2 MPa (1.19 ksi). As indicated by the comparison in Fig. 3b, this estimate of the applied tearing modulus indicates a stable ductile tearing for the larger flaws, thus implying stable tearing for the smaller flaws as well.
References 2
I Jeannette Torres - ORNLD_B-status_1 0_1 8.doc Paae.
I Jeannette Torres - ORNL DBstatus_10_18.doc Paae Table 1. Case Matrix for Task 9.1D g ;^iumber 4-'(1 t
(tces 3<
lt
(&"t; 9.IDI 0.1250 2
0.50 16 9.1D2 0.0625 2
0.25 32 9.1D3 0.0125 2
0.05 160 9.1D4 0.1250 1
0.50 8
9.1D5 0 0625 1
0.25 16 9.1D6 0.0125 1
0.05 80 9.1D7 0.1250 0.375 0.50 3
9.1D8 0.0625 0.375 0.25 6
9.1D9 0.0125 0.375 0 05 30 Table 2. Ductile Tearing Data Extracted from Table 13 of NUREG/CR-5511.
Unirradiated Specimens Al 3G H2 A15Ba A13D Al OG AlOE H5 H3 Al 3Fa H6 H4 Al 5D Al 3C H1
-75
-75 20 20 20 120 120 120 120 200 200 288 288 288 117 137 165 134 171 128 119 120 159 90 111 77 66 82 64 49 270 209 176 246 229 232 359 240 231 267 170 192 Irradiated Specimens A15F
-75 78 40 A15G
-75 56 36 A13A 30 144 177 A15C 50 124 146 AlOF
- 120 -
94 175 Al5A 288 25 191
'Specimen was not side-grooved, while all other specimens in table were side-grooved 20%.
3
l, Jeannefte Torres - ORNILDB-status_1 0_1 8.doc
. Page Jeannette Torres - ORNL 0_Bstatus_10_18.doc Pacie l
80 -
70 60 -
(n 50 -
a)
L.
W 40 I-o U
30, w
a= 94.36 s '9 500
- 400 2
' (ksi)
S
- 300 to 0,
U
- 200 t:
.100
a0 0.15 0.2 09127,2002 K3 ptv 20 1 E= 25570.85 ksi v = 0.295 10 0
0 0.05 0.1 Total Strain (-)
(a) 1.5 o's il.
0 Mi 0
0 EU 0.
.w a
x 1.4104
- 1. 105 F 1.2 10 1.1 10 i
o -' I 0
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 0912712002 K2 prw (b)
Temperature (KF)
Fig. 1. Cladding properties used in the current study: (a) true stress vs true strain and (b) thermal expansion coefficient.
4
- tJeannetteTorres-ORNL_D_Bstatus_10_18.doc Page
- R31.712 (a)
I= I 111 5<,
7u Tr=
Sah" Fw T.
,A
'. 3 i, 11.5 "I,__7
, -I_4 I
o
- i.. AX h
s
^ r.i ^.Q.w M rr 4 G F I
4 1,
. f.I,
,;g Pr-qW Db
i, -, "K,.,
1
,, N
--.-
+ -
4 -'----i-4
'(^J ^ - hIM I
u
-If.1 z1fu
(.
)I
^l, fl.,
S <^ "
-1 I,
Al F-apd o 3536 3036 16.4122 401194 98.89 969933 -11716 7526 19741 c09004 404351 ~ 694351.09004, AdMjoadF Fw M
0.2 2m 4006 31 7 164301 401255 12902 1103181 -14135 9900 24571
<0.c9434.4476,
<04476,0 8943
- o. B..d.S C.1-U...
A. FoadFtp.alt 1
2123 2435 15332
-041 9556 670863
.3032 5401 11307 10.55 0.2301
[-0.=0s558 9s2nl2 I'Mpru1 crd u. Sbb.1 -
GI.W coordme.yg.
ha. IU ah..
t hlhgaod t e ual ca.eohoo o( Iheo e.aL 1 he. -y pl.
l it. Slob6. C-dm.,..01m i.. honao.
pbne (b o-6g 2.L ates footl belntn d e omtdfs ooNmdnaa 3 andm 11 Fig. 2. Latest footprint estimated from "dental mold".
5
L t Jeannette Torres - ORNL_DB-statusl 0_1 8.doc
- Paaen r p
nJ g
Temperature (°F) 0 200 400 600 180 -
160 Data from Table 13 (unirradiated)
NUREGICR-5511
-Y.
140 120 a
0 96
-- 0.88 a
I0.8.2-0.72 d
- 0.64 -)
0.56 0.48
,; 0.4 100 80 60 -
-100 a
_. - ~
0 100 200 Temperature (°C)
Temperature (IF) 300 400 IC104'2002 K2 phw (a) 0 200 400 600 400 350 Data from Table 13 (unirradiated)
NUREGICR-5511 U,
0
'a 0) 0)
C 300 1_
250 200 [
Applied Tearing Modulus at 6.4 MPa (0 928 ksi)
/2L
= 50.8 mm (2.0 inches)
/
t = 6.35 mm (0.25 Inches)
/Applied Tearing Modulus--- -
at 8.2 MP. (I la ksl) 150 1 100 50 k 2L = 25.4 mm (1.0 Inches) t = 6.35 mm (0.25 Inches)
-10 0
0 100 200 300 1011712002 K3 ptw 400 (b)
Temperature (°C)
Fig. 3. Ductile tearing data for three-wire series stainless steel weld overlay cladding from Table 13 of NUREG/CR-5511: (a) Jc, data from unirradiated specimens and (b) tearing modulus data from unirradiated specimens 6
1, Jeannette Torres - ORNL-DB-statusl 0-1 8.doc Paae -,
Jearinette Torres - ORNL 0 Bstatus_10_1 8.doc Paoe Fixed-Grip Boundary on Outer Edge
-1 I
- Effle, go 190
II P-927"M (0.1251. )
II - ! 1..
4a2_1
- 1. )
L - 25 I
,,, 7
=
,,I "976 h. )
A-
- 18.226A 6.')
V(
Fixed-Grip Boundary on Outer Edge (a)
(b)
Fig. 4. Finite-element models used in calculating applied J1-integrals produced by pressure loading of burst disk: (a) Model 9.11D1 (alt = 0.5, 2L/a = 16) (b) Model 9.1D2 (alt = 0.25, 21Ja = 32), and (c) Model 9.1D33 (alt = 0.05, 2LJa = 160) (Task 9.1D) 7
IJeannette Torres - ORNLDB-status 10 18.doc raye t Fased-Gnp Bound-, 1 on Outer Fd2e (d)
(e)
F-d-C.np Brr.d.y wf Outer EdM (f)
Fig. 4. (continued) Finite-element models used in calculating applied J-integrals produced by pressure loading of burst disk: (d) Model 9.1D4 (alt = 0.5, 2Lfa = 8) (e) Model 9.1D5 (alt = 0.25, 2LIa = 16), and (f) Model 9.1D6 (alt = 0.05, 2L/a = 80) (Task 9.1D) 8
I ~Jeannette Torres -ORNLDB-status_10_1 8.doc I-I
~. - ~.
.. P age !
I.JeannetteTorres-ORNLDBstatus_10 18.doc Page
Pressure (ksi) 3.2 2.8 N
-S E
-1) 0)
ax C
2.4
'r C,
2 1.6 m
Cn 1.2 C
0.8 0.4 20 30 40 0
0 10 50 60 Pressure (MPa) 10/17/2002.K1 ptw Fig. 5. J-integral driving forces from three finite-element models as a function of applied pressure.
9
IJeannette Torres -ORNL_0_B_status_10_18.doc Page 1 60t
=6.35 mm (0.25 inches) tLI7~
~ 40 Plastic Collapse 6 o
&L30-E 2L 2.0Oin.
4 a
20 3
C 2
-Set-point pressure V
10 2L 1.0inj 2L=2.0*~ in Ductile Tearing 0
'0 0
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 alt 10/1 8/2002 K4 ptw Fig. 6. Comparison of critical pressures for two failure modes as a function of relative flaw depth. Two flaw lengths ( 2 in. (50.8 mm) and 1 in. (25.4 mm)) were used in the current analysis.
I I] F. M. Haggag, W. R. Corwin, and R. K. Nanstad, Irradiation Effects on Strength and Toughness of Three-Wire Senes-Arc Stainless Steel Weld Overlay Cladding, NUREG/CR-551 1 (ORNLUTM-1 1439), Oak Ridge National Laboratory, February 1990.
10
Form NM~2 2001 SECTION XI. DIVISION I FORM NIS-2 OWNER'S REPORT FOR REPAIR/REPLACEMENT ACTIVITY As Required by the Provisions of the ASME Code Section XI (1) 1 Owner Name Address 1,11 Date (2)
(3)
Sheet ______of_________________
Unit (5)
(6) 2 Plant 3 Work Performed by_
- 4. Identification of System_
Name Address (7)
Name Repair/Replacement Organiatbon P.O. No., Job No, etc Type Code Symbol Stamp (8)
Authorization No (9)
Expiration Date (t10)
/r Address (11) 5
{a) Applicable Construction Code
)
- Edition, A
, Addenda, Code Case (b) Applicable Edition of Section Xl Used for Repair/Raplacernent Activity 1`
AP Wc) Applicable Section Xl Code Case(s) 6 Identification of Components ASME Code Corrected, Stamped Name of Name of Manufacturer 0
Other Year Removed, or 1Yes Component Manufacturer Serial No G
o Identification Built Installed or No)
(13)
(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)
(19)
(20)
(21)
- 7. Description of Work
- 8. Tests Conducted Hydrostatic D Pneumatic a Nominal Operating Pressure [3 Exempt Q (22)
Other 3 Pressure psi TestTemp
- F NOTE Supplemental sheets in form of lists, sketches. ordrawgngsmay beused,provided (1)size is 8'h in.x t1 in., (21 informa-tion in Items I through 6 on this report is Included on each sheet, and (3) each sheet is numbered and the number of sheets is recorded at the top of this form This Form (E00030) may be obtained from the ASME Order Dept. 22 Low DOrr. Box 2300. Fairfield. NJ 07007-2300 276
APPENDIX n-MANDTORY Forlin NIS 2
'-N FORM NIS-2 (Back)
(23)
- 9. Remarks, Applicable Manufacturer's Data Reports to be attached CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE I certify that the statements made in the report are correct and that this conforms to the requirements of the ASME Code,Section XI.
Type Code Symbol Stamp (25)
Certificate of Authorization No.
(26)
Expirationj Signed (27) 19e 1
9 Owner or Owner's Designee, Title CERTIFICATE OF IN NSPEC N
1, the undersigned, holding a valid coimmission Issued Nat oard of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors and the State or Province of 28, and e by (29 of (30) have inspected the components described in this Owner's Report during the period to (32)
, and state that to the best of my knowledge and belief, The ner has pNL7ed examinations and taken corrective measures described In this Owner's Report in accordance with the r ts offe ASME Code,Section XI.
By signing this certificate neither the Ins'Ct s employer makes any warranty, expressed or implied, concerning the examinations and corrective me
- descri d in th s Owner's Report. Furthermore, neither the Inspector nor his employer shall be liable In any manner for ny pers I inj or property damage or a loss of any kind arising from or connected with this inspection.
_33_
Commissions (34)
Inspector's Signature National Board, State, Province, and Endorsements Date (35)_
19 277