ML043450353

Areva Document 32-5054699-00, Palisades CRDM Nozzle Idtb J-Groove Weld Flaw Evaluation, November 2004

ML043450353
Person / Time
Site:	Palisades
Issue date:	11/29/2004
From:	Grambau B, Killian D Framatome ANP
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
32-5054699-00
Download: ML043450353 (83)

Text

ENCLOSURE 2 FRAMATOME CALCULATION AREVA DOCUMENT 32-5054699-00, "PALISADES CRDM NOZZLE IDTB J-GROOVE WELD FLAW EVALUATION," DATED NOVEMBER 2004 (NON PROPRIETARY) 82 Pages Follow

20697-8 (411/2004)

Ak CALCULATION

SUMMARY

SHEET (CSS)

ARE VA Document Identifier 32 - 5054699 - 00 Title PALISADES CRDM NOZZLE IDTB J-GROOVE WELD FLAW EVALUATION - NP PREPARED BY:

REVIEWED BY:

METHOD: 0 DETAILED CHECK a

INDEPENDENT CALCULATION NAME D.E. KILLIAN NAME B.R. GRAMBAU SIGNATURE

/SIGNATURE TITLE ADVISORY ENGR.

DATE TITLE SUPV. ENGR.

DATE

///'C/

COST REF.

TM STATEMENT:

.JA CENTER 41629 PAGE(S) 48 REVIEWER INDEPENDENCE

,1,VI PURPOSE AND

SUMMARY

OF RESULTS:

This is a non-proprietary version of AREVA/FANP Document Number 32-5044161-02.

The purpose of the present analysis is to determine from a fracture mechanics viewpoint the suitability of leaving degraded J-groove weld and butter material in the Palisades reactor vessel head following the repair of a CRDM nozzle by the ID temper bead weld procedure. It is postulated that a small flaw in the head would combine with a large stress corrosion crack in the weld and butter to form a radial comer flaw that would propagate into the low alloy steel head by fatigue crack growth under cyclic loading conditions.

Based on an evaluation of fatigue crack growth into the low alloy steel head using ASME Section XI flaw acceptance standards for preventing non-ductile failure, a postulated radial crack in the [

] J-groove weld and butter would be acceptable for 27 years of operation.

• This document consists of pages 1, Ia, lb, and 2 through 80.

THE FOLLOWING COMPUTER CODES HAVE BEEN USED IN THIS DOCUMENT:

THE DOCUMENT CONTAINS ASSUMPTIONS THAT MUST BE VERIFIED PRIOR TO USE ON SAFETY-RELATED WORK CODENERSION/REV CODENERSION/REV

_YES X

NO J.

Framatome ANP, Inc., an AREVA and Siemens company Page 1

of 80*

22410-3 (5/10/2004) Page 1 of 2 V

DESIGN VERIFICATION CHECKLIST Document Identifier 32 - 5054699 - 00 Title PALISADES CRDM NOZZLE IDTB J-GROOVE WELD FLAW EVALUATION - NP

1.

Were the inputs correctly selected and incorporated into design or analysis?

0 Y

D N Ea N/A

2.

Are assumptions necessary to perform the design or analysis activity E

Y El N 0

N/A adequately described and reasonable? Where necessary, are the assumptions identified for subsequent re-verifications when the detailed design activities are completed?

3.

Are the appropriate quality and quality assurance requirements specified? Or, ED Y El N E

N/A for documents prepared per FANP procedures, have the procedural requirements been met?

4.

If the design or analysis cites or is required to cite requirements or criteria 0

Y E

N E

N/A based upon applicable codes, standards, specific regulatory requirements, including issue and addenda, are these properly identified, and are the requirements/criteria for design or analysis met?

5.

Have applicable construction and operating experience been considered?

E Y

E N

ED N/A

6.

Have the design interface requirements been satisfied?

El Y E

N ED N/A

7.

Was an appropriate design or analytical method used?

0 Y

E N

E N/A

8.

Is the output reasonable compared to inputs?

E Y ElN E

N/A

9.

Are the specified parts, equipment and processes suitable for the required E

Y E

N 0 N/A application?

10.

Are the specified materials compatible with each other and the design El Y Q

• N 0

N/A environmental conditions to which the material will be exposed?

11.

Have adequate maintenance features and requirements been specified?

E Y

E N

0 N/A

12.

Are accessibility and other design provisions adequate for performance of E

Y E

N 0

NIA needed maintenance and repair?

13.

Has adequate accessibility been provided to perform the in-service inspection E

Y E

N.0 N/A expected to be required during the plant life?

14.

Has the design properly considered radiation exposure to the public and plant E

Y El N 0 NIA personnel?

15.

Are the acceptance criteria incorporated in the design documents sufficient to E

Y 0

N 0D NIA allow verification that design requirements have been satisfactorily accomplished?

16.

Have adequate pre-operational and subsequent periodic test requirements El Y El N 0 N/A been appropriately specified?

17.

Are adequate handling, storage, cleaning and shipping requirements El Y El N ED N/A specified?

18.

Are adequate identification requirements specified?

El Y El N El N/A

19.

Is the document prepared and being released under the FANP Quality 0

Y El N El N/A Assurance Program? If not, are requirements for record preparation review, approval, retention, etc., adequately specified?

Framatome ANP, Inc., an AREVA and Siemens company la

22410-3 (511012004) Page 2 of 2 PA DESIGN VERIFICATION CHECKLIST ARE VA Document Identifier 32 - 5054699 - 00 Comments:

Verified By:

B.R. Grambau (First, Ml, Last)

Printed / Typed Name Signature Date Framatome ANP, Inc., an AREVA and Siemens company lb

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Revision Affected Pages RECORD OF REVISIONS Description of Revision Non-proprietary version of AREVA/FANP Document Number 32-5044161-02 Date 0

All 11/04 2

A ARE VA 32-5054699-00 CONTENTS Section Heading Page 1.0 Introduction.............

4:

.4 2.0 Analytical Procedure

.7 3.0 Material Properties.11 4.0 Stresses.13 4.1 Residual Stresses.13 4.2 Operational Stresses.16 5.0 Stress Intensity Factor Solution.17 5.1 Finite Element Crack Model.19 5.2 Stress Intensity Factor Influence Coefficients.19 6.0 Flaw Evaluations.21 7.0 Summary of Results.47 8.0 References.48 Appendix Heading page A

Development of Finite Element Crack Model.49 B

Development of Stress Intensity Factor Influence Coefficients.60 C

Comparison of Stress Intensity Factor Influence Coefficients for Uphill and Downhill Flaws.72 D

Verification of Computer Code ANSYS.75 E

Computer Files.76 F

Analysis to Address a Three Hour Hold during Cooldown at [

] F................. 77 3

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 1.0 Introduction Due to the susceptibility of Alloy 600 reactor vessel head partial penetration nozzles to primary water stress corrosion cracking (PWSCC), an ID temper bead weld repair procedure has been developed for Palisades CRDM nozzles wherein the lower portion of the nozzle is removed by a boring procedure and the remaining portion of the nozzle is welded to the low alloy steel reactor vessel head above the original [

] J-groove attachment weld, as shown in Figure 1. A lower replacement nozzle is attached to the remaining original nozzle by this same weld. The repair is more fully described by the design drawing [1] and the technical requirements document [2].

Except for a chamfer at the comer, the original J-groove weld will not be removed, as shown in Figure 2. Since a potential flaw in the J-groove weld can not be sized by currently available non-destructive examination techniques, it is assumed that the gas-left" condition of the remaining J-groove weld includes degraded or cracked weld material extending through the entire J-groove weld and [

] butter material.

Since it is known from analysis of the Palisades CRDM reactor vessel head nozzle penetrations

[12] that the hoop stress in the J-groove weld is greater than the axial stress at the same location, the preferential direction for cracking would be axial, or radial relative to the nozzle. It is postulated that a radial crack in the [

] weld metal would propagate by PWSCC, through the weld and butter, to the interface with the head material, where it is fully expected that such a crack would then blunt, or arrest, as discussed in Reference 4 for interfaces with low alloy steels.

Since the height of the original weld along the bored surface is about [

]", a radial crack depth extending from the comer of the weld to the low alloy steel head would be very deep. Although primary water stress corrosion cracking would not extend into the head, it is further postulated that a small fatigue initiated flaw forms in the low alloy steel head and combines with the stress corrosion crack in the weld to form a large radial comer flaw that would propagate into the head by fatigue crack growth under cyclic loading conditions. An ASME Section Xl fracture mechanics analysis is performed to evaluate this worst case flaw in the original J-groove weld and butter.

4

A 32-5054699-00 AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Figure 1. ID Temper Bead Weld Repair 5

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00

/

/

I

]

/

I I

Figure 2. Remaining Portion of Original J-Groove Weld 6

A AREVA 32-5054699-00 2.0 Analytical Procedure 7

A AREVA 32-5054699-00 Figure 3. Postulated Radial Corner Flaw Figure 4. Analyzed Radial Corner Flaw 8

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Figure 5. Finite Element Crack Model - Postulated Flaw 9

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Figure 6. Finite Element Crack Model - Large Flaw 10

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 3.0 Material Properties The portions of the reactor vessel head (dome and dome-to-shell transition sub-assembly) that contain the CRDM nozzles are fabricated from [

] plate material [2]. The welds in the dome-to-shell transition sub-assembly and the welds between the dome and the transition sub-assembly are considered to be equivalent to the base material [2].

Yield Strength From the ASME Code, Section 1II, Appendix I [8], the specified minimum yield strength for the head material is 50.0 ksi below 100 OF and 43.8 ksi at 600 "F. The value at 600 'F is used as a conservative lower bound for yield strengths at operating temperatures less than 600 "F.

Reference Temperature A reference temperature of [ ] 'F is used for the RTNDT of the [

]

reactor vessel head material [2].

Fracture Toughness The lower bound Kia curve of Section Xl, Appendix A, Figure A-4200-1 [9], which can be expressed as Kia = 26.8 + 1.233 exp [ 0.0145 (T - RTNDT + 160) ],

[7]

represents the fracture toughness for crack arrest, where T is the crack tip temperature and RTNDT is the reference nil-ductility temperature of the material. Kia is in ksivin, and T and RTNDT are in 'F. In the present flaw evaluations, Kia is limited to a maximum value of 200 ksi4in (upper-shelf fracture toughness). Using the above equation with an RTNDT of [ ] OF, Kia equals 200 ksilin at a crack tip temperature of [

] OF.

11

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Fatigue Crack Growth Flaw growth due to cyclic loading is calculated using the fatigue crack growth rate model from Article A-4300 of Section Xl [9],

da = CO(AKI "

where AK, is the stress intensity factor range in ksilin and da/dN is in inches/cycle. The crack growth rates for a surface flaw will be used for the evaluation of the corner crack since it is assumed that the degraded condition of the J-groove weld and butter exposes the low alloy steel head material to the primary water environment.

Fatique Crack Growth Rates for Low Alloy Ferritic Steels in a Primary Water Environment The following equations (from the 1992 Edition) may be used to represent the fatigue crack growth rates in the 1989 Edition of Section XI [9].

AKI =Klmax, Klmin R= KlrnnI Klmax 0

• R *0.25:

AK, < 17.74, n = 5.95 Co= 1.02x 10'1 2 xS S= 1.0 AK, 2 17.74, n = 1.95 CO= 1.01 X 10-7 S S= 1.0 0.25

• R < 0.65:

AK, < 17.74 [(3.75R + 0.06) / (26.9R - 5.725) ]025, n = 5.95 Co= 1.02x10-'2 xS S = 26.9R - 5.725 AK, 2 17.74 [ (3.75R + 0.06) 1 (26.9R - 5.725) ]O.25, n= 1.95 Co= 1.01 x10 7 xS S = 3.75R + 0.06 0.65 < R < 1.0:

AK, < 12.04, n = 5.95 CO= 1.02x 10-12 xS S = 11.76 AK, 2 12.04, n = 1.95 C0= 1.01 x10-7 xS S = 2.5 12

A AREVA 32-5054699-00 4.0 Stresses There are two categories of stress that need to be considered in the evaluation of J-groove weld flaws. When the original [

] partial penetration attachment weld was made between the nozzle and the buttered J-groove weld prep in the head, residual stresses were created in the weld, butter, and adjacent portions of the nozzle and head. Since these stresses are secondary in nature, they would tend to be relieved as the flaw propagated through the weld and butter, as discussed in Section 2. In the present flaw evaluations, residual stresses are addressed by increasing the size of the postulated flaw so that it includes the region of tensile residual stress, and then neglecting residual stresses as the crack propagates further into the head. The second category of stress includes operational stresses due to pressure and thermal loads.

4.1 Residual Stresses Three-dimensional elastic-plastic finite element analysis 13] was performed by Dominion Engineering, Inc. (DEI) to simulate the original welding of the Palisades outermost (45.50)

CRDM nozzle to the reactor vessel head, post-weld loading of the nozzle/head assembly, and modification of the original J-groove weld by the ID temper bead weld repair. The following steps were included in the analysis procedure to determine residual stresses in the nozzle, weld, and adjacent material:

• Deposition of the [

] butter material on the original J-groove weld prep, using two weld passes, followed by a thermal stress relief of the head and butter at 1100 0F

• Deposition of the J-groove weld using two weld passes (analysis time 9000)

• Simulation of the ASME Code hydrostatic test conditions

• Return to ambient conditions

• Simulation of steady state temperature and pressure loads (analysis time 9004)

• Return to ambient conditions (analysis time 9005)

Removal of the lower portion of the nozzle and simulation of the head boring and J-groove weld chamfering portions of the ID temper bead weld repair procedure (analysis time 9006). The stresses at the end of this step are the residual stresses considered in the present flaw evaluations.

The portion of the DEI finite element model shown in Figure 7 depicts the final simulated configuration of the repaired nozzle in the vicinity of the J-groove weld on the uphill side. Residual stresses are tabulated in Table 1 along the bored surface of the head, starting at the butter-to-head interface (node 82711). This location has been shown by finite element analysis to have the highest stress intensity factor along the postulated crack front (see Table A-1).

Although the residual hoop stress is still high at the butter/head interface (about [

] psi),

stresses decrease to zero at a distance of 0.640" into the head on the uphill side. As residual stresses would be relieved as a crack propagated through the weld and butter and past this distance into the head, the postulated flaw size will be increased by this amount so that it is not necessary to further consider residual stresses in the present flaw evaluations.

13

A AREVA 32-5054699-00 82711 82717 O.20 I

0.75' 81517 81515 /

81508'

{killed) 81506 (killed))

Figure 7. DEI Model of Uphill Weld Region for the Palisades Outermost CRDM Nozzle 14

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 1.

Residual Hoop Stresses Along Bored Surface of Head - Uphill Side Nozzle yield strength = 56 ksi File:

Time:

Pal-45B/CRDMcham.results.txt [3]

9006 Distance into Global Coordinates Hoop Node x

(in.)

z (in.)

Location Stress Head(')

(Dsi)

(in.)

82711 82811 82911 83011 83111 1.9779 1.9788 1.9799 1.9811 1.9826 62.938 63.122 63.339 63.594 63.894 Butter/Head Interface Head Head Head Head 0.000 0.184 0.401 0.656 0.956

(') Distance along a bore from the butter/head interface Note: By interpolation, the hoop stress becomes compressive at a distance of 0.640" into the head.

15

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 4.2 Operational Stresses Operational hoop stresses are obtained from the results of a three-dimensional linear finite element analysis [6] of the Palisades outermost CRDM nozzle penetration that models the final configuration of the nozzle after an ID temper bead weld repair. Hoop stresses are used since these stresses are perpendicular to the crack face and would therefore open the crack. Stresses are given in Reference 6 at fifteen locations' within the weld and adjacent material for the following transients:

1. Heatup and Cooldown (HUCD)

2. Normal Power Changes (NPCH)

3. Fast Power Changes (FPCH)

4. Normal Step Power Changes, or Plant Loading and Unloading (PLUL)

5. Loss of Load (LL)

6. Loss of Flow (LF)

7. Safety Valve Operations (SVO)

8. Leak Test (LT)

The operational stresses from Reference 6, calculated for the outermost CEDM nozzle location, conservatively bound the stresses at all other nozzle locations. Based on a review of stresses for the normal power change transient, the largest hoop stresses are found at the uphill side of the nozzle bore.

Stresses are tabulated in the flaw evaluations presented in Section 6.0, where the maximum and minimum hoop stresses are listed for each analyzed transient. These stresses will produce the largest stress intensity factor ranges and therefore maximize fatigue crack growth. The maximum stress is also used to calculate stress intensity factors at the final flaw size for comparison with the required Section Xl fracture toughness. Additional stresses are considered as required to address the low temperature condition that occurs at the end of the cooldown ramp.

These fifteen locations were selected to provide a good fit for the seven term bi-variant stress polynomial used to develop the stress intensity factor influence coefficient solution described in Section 5.0. Typical stress points are depicted in Figure B-5 for an uncracked finite element model.

16

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 5.0 Stress Intensity Factor Solution Finite element analysis is used to develop stress intensity factors for radial flaws in the J-groove weld prep area of the reactor vessel head, utilizing crack tip elements along a crack front.

I I

The stress intensity factor at position "j" on the crack front of a J-groove weld flaw is expressed.

as KJ =[

where [

I I

]

describing the bi-variant stress distribution over the crack face, and Ap is the pressure on the crack face. The x,y crack face coordinate axes are shown in Figure 8 for a typical J-groove flaw shape, along with the defining flaw size parameters, 'a" (J-groove width), and Mb" (J-groove height).

Plastic Zone Correction The Irwin plasticity correction is used to account for a moderate amount of yielding at the crack tip. For plane strain conditions, the increase in flaw size normal to the crack front is An = 1 KI(a,b) 67 cry

[ Ref. 5, Eqn. (2.63)]

where K,(a,b) = stress intensity factor based on the actual crack size (Ty = material yield strength A stress intensity factor, K,(ae,be), is then calculated based on the effective crack size, ae =a+Ane1 xenx1 1

be =b+Ane.9 and nxI is the x-direction cosine of the normal vector at position 1 (see Figure 5 or 6).

Additional details are provided in Table 3.

17

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 y

Crack Front with Plastic Zone Correction,

T A

A Afle. I be b

x l

a

. I-ae Figure 8. J-Groove Flaw Parameters (with Chamfer) 18

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 5.1 Finite Element Crack Model To obtain accurate stress intensity factors for non-radial nozzle penetrations, a three-dimensional finite element model is developed with crack tip elements along the entire uJ-shaped' crack front, extending from the inside surface of the cladding to the bored surface of the head. The original nozzle, J-groove weld and butter, and a portion of the bottom head and cladding are modeled with the ANSYS finite element computer program [10] and stress intensity factors are obtained using the program's KCALC routine.

Although a PWSCC flaw would only encompass the J-groove weld and butter, it is postulated that a fatigue flaw initiates in the low alloy steel head at the butter-to-head interface.

Furthermore, to account for the presence of residual stresses from the welding process, the initial combined PWSCC and fatigue flaw is sized so that it extends into the head to a point where the residual stresses are compressive. As shown in Section 4.1, this penalty on flaw size is 0.640" on the uphill side of the nozzle.

Two finite element models were developed to investigate flaws on the uphill side of the nozzle, as shown in Figure 5 for a flaw at the butter-to-head interface, and in Figure 6 for a larger flaw that bounds the flaw size adjustment to account for residual stress. In these models, the crack front is along the line connecting the wedge shaped crack tip elements.

5.2 Stress Intensity Factor Influence Coefficients Stress intensity factor influence coefficients are developed in Appendix B for a J-groove flaw in an arbitrary stress field. Table 2 presents influence coefficients for nine positions along the crack front, as indicated in Figure 5 for the postulated flaw and in Figure 6 for the large flaw. For other flaw sizes, influence coefficients are obtained by interpolation between.the values in Table 2.

19

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 2.

Stress Intensity Factor Influence Coefficients for J-Groove Weld Flaws Postulated (Small) Flaw:

in.

Iin.

Crack Stress Distributions Front X-direction Y-direction Position Uniform Linear Quadratic Cubic Linear Quadratic Cubic Go GG2 G3 G

54 6

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 Large Flaw:

a =

in.

b =

gin.

Crack Stress Distributions Front X-direction Y-direction Position Uniform Linear Quadratic Cubic Linear Quadratic Cubic GoGI G2 G3 G4 G5 G6 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 20

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 6.0 Flaw Evaluations Fatigue crack growth analysis is performed using operational stresses from Reference 6 and the stress intensity factor solution summarized in Table 3. The actual flaw evaluations, presented in Tables 4 through 11, include a comparison of the final stress intensity factor for each transient with the fracture toughness requirements of Section Xl. Article IWB-3612 [9] requires that a safety factor of J10 be used when comparing the applied stress intensity factor to the fracture toughness for crack arrest.. Calculations are performed for a postulated radial corner crack on the uphill side of the Palisades outermost CRDM nozzle penetration. It is shown in Appendix C for the case of pressure loads that J-groove weld stress intensity factors are higher on the uphill side of the penetration than on the downhill side.

Fatigue crack growth is calculated in one-year increments for each of eight transients, using the following basis for accumulating cycles:

Transient Cycles 140 Years Cycles / Year Heatup and Cooldown Normal Power Changes Fast Power Changes Plant Loading and Unloading Loss of Load Loss of Flow Safety Valve Operations Leak Test These cycles are distributed uniformly over the service life by linking the incremental crack growth between Tables 4 through 11.

21

A' AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 3.

Stress Intensity Factor Solution for Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw Evaluation Stress intensity factor:

Kl(a,b) = [

I where the stress distribution through the weld and head is described by:

cO(Xy) = I I

and AP = crack face pressure Stress intensity factor influence coefficients:

Flaw Size 1 Flaw Size 2 a =

in.

a =

in.

b__

_ =

n.

b =

in.

SIF Location:

Cladding Cladding Bored Cladding Cladding Bored Influence Surface Interface Surface Surface Interface Surface Coefficient Position:

. 1 3

9 1

3 9

Go G3__

G6.$1 Plastic zone correction to crack size:

Ane = 1/(67r)*[Kl(ab)/S ]2 where ne is the effective increase in crack size (normal to the crack front).

Effective crack size:

At position 1, ae = a + Ane x nx n, = DX / DIST (from FE model)

DX =

in.

DIST =

in.

nx =

At position 9, be= b+An, Effective stress intensity factor:

KI(a0,b.) = [

I 22

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 4. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw-Heatup/Cooldown INPUT DATA Initial Flaw Size:

Postulated J-groove width, Postulated J-groove height, Residual stress effect:

Effective flaw size:

ap = F 1 in.

(at stress point 3 of Ref. 6) bp = L J in.

(at stress point 13 of Ref. 6) ha =

0.468 in.

Ab =

.0.640 in.

a =

lin.

b = I in.

Material Data:

Yield strength, SY =

43.8 ksi Reference temperature, Upper shelf toughness RTndt = C

[

F

=

200 ksi4in Kla = 26.8 + 1.233 exp l 0.0145 (T - RTndt + 160) ]

Kla is limited to the upper shelf toughness.

Applied Loads:

Loading Conditions CD1*

HU**

CD2***

Temperature (F)

Pressure (ksi)

Kla (ksiWin)

Stress Points____

ID x

Hoop Stress (in.)

(in.)

(psi)

(psi)

(psi)

X 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 1 5

• Heatup/cooldown transient at 11.02 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> (during cooldown)

• • Heatup/cooldown transient at 2.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> (during heatup)

• • • Heatup/cooldown transient at 22.611 hours0.00707 days <br />0.17 hours <br />0.00101 weeks <br />2.324855e-4 months <br /> (low temperature at end of cooldown)

Pal CRDM HU-CD.xls 23

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 4. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Heatup/Cooldown FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH OF J-GROOVE FLAW Transient

Description:

[

I cycles over 40 years AN =

) cycles/year At cladding surface (position 1)

At bored surface (position 9)

Operating CD1 HU CD1 HU Time Cycle a

b Kl(a.b)

Kl(a.b)

AKI An,

&a(,)

KI(ab)

Kl(a,b)

AKI Ab=Anq (end of yr.)

(In.)

(in.)

(kslfin)

(ksWiAn)

(ksMin)

(in.)

(n)

(kslWn)

(ks Wn)

(kslin)

(in.)

0 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 1 1 12 13 14 15 16 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Note 1: Aa = An (at posltion 1) x N Pal CRDM HU-CDads 24

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 4. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw-Heatup/Cooldown FRACTURE TOUGHNESS MARGINS Period of Operation:

Time =

27 years Flaw Size:

Margin = Kla / KI(ae,be)

Loading Conditions CD1 HU CD2 Fracture Toughness, Kla At cladding surface (position 1)

KI (a,b)

Aneae At bored surface (position 9)

Kl(a,b)

Ane be At cladding interface (position 3)

KI(aebe)

[

Margin j

8.20

1. N/A 4.63 At bored surface (position 9)

K!(aebe)

I Margin 3.66

1. N/A 4.35 ksi'Iin ksi-4in in.

in.

ksivin in.

in.

ksiin ksi4in Pal CRDM HU-CD.xls 25

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 5. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Normal Power Changes INPUT DATA Beginning Flaw Size:

Material Data:

Applied Loads:

Width, a=

in.

Height, b=

J in.

Yield strength, Sy =

43.8 ksi Reference temp.,

RTndt = [

] F Upper shelf tough.

=

200 ksi-4in Kla = 26.8 + 1.233 exp [ 0.0145 (T - RTndt + 160) ]

Kla is limited to the upper shelf toughness.

Loading Conditions NPCDN*

NPCUP**

Temperature (F)

Pressure (ksi)

Kla (ksi'in)

Stress Points ID x

y Hoop Stress (in.)

(in.)

(psi)

(psi)

I 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 1 1 12 13 14 15

• Normal power change at 4.333 hours0.00385 days <br />0.0925 hours <br />5.505952e-4 weeks <br />1.267065e-4 months <br /> (down ramp)

• • Normal power change at 0.333 hours0.00385 days <br />0.0925 hours <br />5.505952e-4 weeks <br />1.267065e-4 months <br /> (up ramp)

Pal CRDM NPCH.xls 26

A AREVA Table5. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Faw - Normal Power Changes FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH OF J-GROOVE FLAW 32-5054699-00 Transient

Description:

C

] cycles over 40 years AN =

J cyclestyear At cladding surface (position 1)

At bored surface (position 9)

Year of NPCDN NPCUP NPCDN NPCUP Operation Cycle a

b Kl(a.b)

Kl(ab)

AKI MnI

&a("

Kl(a.b)

Kl(a,b)

AKI Ab=Ang (yr.)

(in.)

(in.)

(kslhn)

(ksl4in)

(ksl'in)

(In.)

(in.)

(kslZn)

(ksIln)

(ksl*n)

(in.)

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 1 0 1 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Note 1: Aa = An (at position 1) x n.

Pal CRDM NPCHxls 27

A A REVA 32-5054699-00 Table 5. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Normal Power Changes FRACTURE TOUGHNESS MARGINS Period of Operation:

Time =

27 years Flaw Size:

Margin = Kla / KI(ae,be)

Loading Conditions NPCDN NPCUP Fracture Toughness, Kla At cladding surface (position 1)

KI(a,b)

An, ae At bored surface (position 9)

KI(ab)

An, be At cladding interface (position 3)

Kl(a.,be)

I Margin J 11.49

1. N/A At bored surface (position 9)

KI(ae,be)

I Margin j

3.71 11.47 ksivin ksiqin in.

in.

ksi-4in in.

in.

ksiqin ksiqin Pal CRDM NPCH.xls 28

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 6. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Fast Power Changes INPUT DATA Beginning Flaw Size:

Width, Height, Material Data:

Yield strength, Sy =

43.8 ksi Reference temp.,

Upper shelf tough.

RTndt = C I F

=

200 ksihin Kla = 26.8 + 1.233 exp [ 0.0145 (T - RTndt + 160) l Kla is limited to the upper shelf toughness.

Applied Loads:

Loading Conditions FPCDN*

FPCUP**

Temperature (F)

Pressure (ksi)

Kla (ksi4in)

Stress Points ID x

Y Hoop Stress (in.)

(i.

(psi)

(psi)

I 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 1 1 12 13 14 1 5 7

• Fast power change at 4.143 hours0.00166 days <br />0.0397 hours <br />2.364418e-4 weeks <br />5.44115e-5 months <br /> (down ramp)

• • Fast power change at 0.143 hours0.00166 days <br />0.0397 hours <br />2.364418e-4 weeks <br />5.44115e-5 months <br /> (up ramp)

Pal CRDM FPCH.xls 29

A AR EVA Table 6. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Fast Power Changes FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH OF J-GROOVE FLAW 32-5054699-00 Transient

Description:

C I cycles over 40 years AN= C cycleslyear At cladding surface (position 1)

At bored surface (position 9)

Year of FPCDN FPCUP FPCDN FPCUP Operation Cycle a

b KI(a,b)

KI(a.b)

AKI An, Ada)

KI(a,b)

Kl(ab)

AKJ Ab=An (yr.)

(in.)

(In.)

(ksilin)

(ksilin)

(ksbin)

(in.)

(in.)

(ksilln)

(ksi'Iin)

(ksiM)

(in.)

2 3

4 5

6 7

28 9

10 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Note 1: Aa = An (at position 1) x nx Pal CRDM FPCH.xds 30

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 6. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Fast Power Changes FRACTURE TOUGHNESS MARGINS Period of Operation:

Flaw Size:

Time =

27 years a =

lin.

b = I Iin.

Margin = Kla / KI(ae,be)

Loading Conditions FPCDN FPCUP Fracture Toughness, Kla ksi4in At cladding surface (position 1)

Kl(a,b) ksivin Ane in.

ae in.

At bored surface (position 9)

Kl(a,b) ksilin

,n, in.

be in.

At cladding interface (position 3)

Kl(a,,b,)

ksiIin Margin 33.33

1. N/A At bored surface (position 9)

KI(aesbe)

I ks__in Margin 1 4.35 7.80 Pal CRDM FPCH.xls 31

A AREVA 32-5054699-00 Table 7. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Plant Loading/Unloading INPUT DATA Beginning Flaw Size:

Material Data:

Applied Loads:

Width, a=

in.

Height, b=L I in.

Yield strength, Sy =

43.8 ksi Reference temp.,

RTndt =[

] F Upper shelf tough.

=

200 ksi4in Kla = 26.8 + 1.233 exp 10.0145 (T - RTndt + 160) )

Kla is limited to the upper shelf toughness.

Loading Conditions PU*

PL**

Temperature (F)

Pressure (ksi)

Kla (ksiNin)

Stress Points ID x

Y Hoop Stress (in.)

(in.)

(psi)

(psi) 17 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 1 5

• Plant loading/unloading transient at 3.120 hours0.00139 days <br />0.0333 hours <br />1.984127e-4 weeks <br />4.566e-5 months <br /> (plant unloading)

• • Plant loading/unloading transient at 0.138 hours0.0016 days <br />0.0383 hours <br />2.281746e-4 weeks <br />5.2509e-5 months <br /> (plant loading)

Pal CRDM PLUL.xls 32

A AR EVA Table 7. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Plant Loading/Unloading FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH OF J-GROOVE FLAW Transient

Description:

C I cycles over 40 years AN = C I cycles/year 32-5054699-00 At cladding surface (position 1)

At bored surface (position 9)

Year of PU PL PU PL Operation Cycle a

b KI(a,b)

KJ(ab)

AKI An, aV1)

Kl(a.b)

Kl(a.b)

AKI Ab=Anq (yr.)

(in-)

(In.)

(ksl~in)

(ksin)

(kshhin)

(in.)

(in.)

(ksl'n)

(kshfln)

(ksiin)

(in.)

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Note 1: Aa =An (at positIon 1) x n Pal CRDM PLULxis 33

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 7. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw-Plant Loading/Unloading FRACTURE TOUGHNESS MARGINS Period of Operation:

Time =

27 years Flaw Size:

Margin = Kla / KI(ae,be)

Loading Conditions PU PL Fracture Toughness, Kla 200 200 At cladding surface (position 1)

KI(ab)

Ani ae, At bored surface (position 9)

Kl(a,b)

Ane be At cladding interface (position 3)

Kl(aebe)

I Margin

1. N/A

1. NIA At bored surface (position 9)

Kl(ae.be)

I Margin l

5.38 5.73 ksiin ksisin in.

in.

ksinin in.

in.

ksivin ksi-4in Pal CRDM PLUL.xis 34

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 8. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw-Loss of Load INPUT DATA Beginning Flaw Size:

Material Data:

Applied Loads:

Width, a =

in.

Height, b= L I in.

Yield strength, SY =

43.8 ksi Reference temp.,

RTndt = [

] F Upper shelf tough.

=

200 ksi4in Kla = 26.8 + 1.233 exp [ 0.0145 (T - RTndt + 160) ]

Kla is limited to the upper shelf toughness.

Loading Conditions LL1

• LL2^*

Temperature (F)

Pressure (ksi)

Kla (ksi'in)

Stress Points ID x

y Hoop Stress (in.)

(in.)

(psi)

(psi)

I 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 I11 12 13 14 15

• Loss of load transient at 0.138 hours0.0016 days <br />0.0383 hours <br />2.281746e-4 weeks <br />5.2509e-5 months <br /> (maximum thermal gradient)

• • Loss of load transient at 4.000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> (minimum pressure)

Pal CRDM LL.xls 35

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 8. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Loss of Load FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH OF J-GROOVE FLAW Transient

Description:

C

] cycles over 40 years AN =

] cycleslyear At cladding surface (position 1)

At bored surface (position 9)

Year of LL1 112 L1 LL2 Operation Cycle a

b Kl(a.b)

KI(ab)

AKI An, AaM' Kl(a.b)

Kl(a.b)

AKI Ab=Ang (yr.)

(in.)

(in.)

(ksih'in)

(ksiiin)

(ksi'in)

(in.)

(in.)

(kslin)

(kshlin)

(kslXln)

(in.)

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 2 8 Note 1: Aa = An (at position 1) x n Pal CRDM LL.)ds 36

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 8. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw-Loss of Load FRACTURE TOUGHNESS MARGINS Period of Operation:

Time=

27 years Flaw Size:

Margin = Kla / KI(ae,be)

Loading Conditions LL1 LL2 Fracture Toughness, Kla ksiin At cladding surface (position 1)

Kl(ab) ksi~in Ane in.

a, in.

At bored surface (position 9)

Kl(a,b) ksilin An, in.

be in.

At cladding interface (position 3)

KI(aebe)

[

ksiin Margin i

13.75

1. N/A At bored surface (position 9)

KI(a,,b,)

l ksi~1in Margin 1 3.98 6.64 Pal CRDM LL.xls 37

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 9. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Loss of Flow INPUT DATA Beginning Flaw Size:

Material Data:

Width, a]= [

in.

Height, b =

I in.

Yield strength, Sy =

43.8 ksi Reference temp.,

RTndt = C I F Upper shelf tough.

=

200 ksi4in Kla = 26.8 + 1.233 exp [ 0.0145 (T.- RTndt + 160) ]

Kla is limited to the upper shelf toughness.

Applied Loads:

Loading Conditions LF1

• LF2**

Temperature (F)

Pressure (ksi)

Kla (ksi4in)

Stress Points ID x

Hoop Stress (in.)

(in.)

(psi)

(psi) 1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 I11 12 13 14.

1 5

• Loss of flow transient at 0.138 hours0.0016 days <br />0.0383 hours <br />2.281746e-4 weeks <br />5.2509e-5 months <br /> (maximum thermal gradient)

• • Loss of flow transient at 4.000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> (minimum pressure)

Pal CRDM LF.xls 38

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 9. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Loss of Flow FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH OF J.GROOVE FLAW Transient

Description:

E

] cycles over 40 years A

AN = C

[

cycleslyear At cladding surface (position 1)

At bored surface (position 9)

Year of LF1 LF2 LF1 LF2 Operation Cycle a

b Kl(a,b)

KI(a,b)

AKI An1 Aa")

Kl(a.b)

Kl(a.b)

AKI Ab=An9 (yr.)

(in.)

(in.)

(ksl'Jin)

(ksl'1n)

(ksNin)

(in.)

(in.)

(ksin)

(ksl-in)

(ksiin)

(in.)

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 10 1I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28______________________

Note 1: Aa = An (at position 1) x N Pal CRDM LFixds 39

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 9. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Loss of Flow FRACTURE TOUGHNESS MARGINS Period of Operation:

Time =

27 years Flaw Size:

Margin = Kla I KI(a,,b,)

Loading Conditions LF1 LF2 Fracture Toughness, Kla ksi4in At cladding surface (position 1)

Kl(ab) ksi4in Ane in.

ae in.

At bored surface (position 9)

KI(ab) ksi4in Ane in.

be in.

At cladding interface (position 3)

KI(aebe) ksi4in Margin 13.75

1. NIA At bored surface (position 9)

KI(aebj) ksi-4in Margin 3.98 6.64 Pal CRDM LF.xls 40

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 10. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Safety Valve Operations INPUT DATA Beginning Flaw Size:

Width, Height, Material Data:

Yield strength, Sy =

43.8 ksi Reference temp.,

Upper shelf tough.

RTndt = [

3 F

=

200 ksi'Iin Kla = 26.8 + 1.233 exp [ 0.0145 (T - RTndt + 160) ]

Kla is limited to the upper shelf toughness.

Applied Loads:

Loading Conditions SVO1*

SV02**

Temperature (F)

Pressure (ksi)

Kla (ksi~in)

Stress Points ID x

Y Hoop Stress (in.)

(in.)

(psi)

(psi) 1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 I11 12 13 14 15

• Safety valve operation transient at 0.135 hours0.00156 days <br />0.0375 hours <br />2.232143e-4 weeks <br />5.13675e-5 months <br /> (maximum thermal gradient)

• • Safety valve operation transient at 4.000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> (minimum pressure)

Pal CRDM SVO.xls 41

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 10. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Safety Valve Operations FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH OF J.GROOVE FLAW Transient

Description:

C

] cycles over 40 years AN = C

[

cycles/year At cladding surface (position 1)

At bored surface (position 9)

Year of SVO1 SVO2 SVO1 SVO2 Operation Cycle a

b Kl(a.b)

Kl(ab)

AKI An, Aa°1)

Kl(ab)

Kl(a,b)

AKI Ab=An

()

(In.)

(in.)

(ksfin)

(kslln)

(ks-iAn)

(in.)

(in.)

(kshin)

(ksiJn)

(ksi'n)

(

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 I11 12 13 1 4 1 5 16 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 2 8_

Note 1: Aa = An (at position 1) x n, Pal CRDM SVOlds 42

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 10. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw-Safety Valve Operations FRACTURE TOUGHNESS MARGINS Period of Operation:

Time =

27 years Flaw Size:

Margin = Kla / KI(a,,b,)

Loading Conditions SVO1 SVO2

'Fracture Toughness, Kla At cladding surface (position 1)

KI(ab)

An, ae At bored surface (position 9)

KI (ab)

Ane be, At cladding interface (position 3)

KI(aebe)

I Margin j

11.95

1. NIA At bored surface (position 9)

Kl(a,,be)

I Margin j

3.87 6.64 ksi4in ksiilin in.

in.

ksi4in in.

in.

ksi4in ksivlin Pal CRDM SVO.xls 43

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 11. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Leak Test INPUT DATA Beginning Flaw Size:

Material Data:

Width, a=

] in.

Height, b =

I in.

Yield strength, Sy =

43.8 ksi Reference temp.,

RTndt = U

] F Upper shelf tough.

=

200 ksiWin Kla = 26.8 + 1.233 exp [ 0.0145 (T - RTndt + 160) ]

Kla is limited to the upper shelf toughness.

Applied Loads:

Loading Conditions LT*

SD**

Temperature (F)

Pressure (ksi)

Kla (ksilin)

____Stress Points____

ID x

Hoop Stress (in.)

(in.)

(psi)

(psi) 1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 1 1 12 13 14 1 5

• Leak test

• • Shutdown Pal CRDM LT.xls 44

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 11. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Leak Test FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH OF J-GROOVE FLAW Transient

Description:

E J cycles over 40 years AN =[

] cycleslyear At cladding surface (position 1)

At bored surface (position 9)

Year of LTI LT2 LT1 LT2 Operation Cycle a

b Kl(ab)

Kl(ab)

AKI An1 ta(1)

KI(a,b)

Kl(a,b) tKI Ab=Ang (yr.)

(in.)

(In.)

(kslin)

(kslin)

(kslin)

(in.)

(in.)

(ksllin)

(ksi-01n)

(kslin)

(in.)

11 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 1 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28______________________

Note 1: Aa = An (at position 1) x n.

Pal CRDM LTads 45

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table 11. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Leak Test FRACTURE TOUGHNESS MARGINS Period of Operation:

Time=

27 years Flaw Size:

Margin = Kla / KI(ae,be)

Loading Conditions LT1 LT2 Fracture Toughness, Kla At cladding surface (position 1)

KI(a,b) a, At bored surface (position 9)

KI(a,b)

An, be At cladding interface (position 3)

KI(a,,be)

I_

Margin 30.84

1. N/A At bored surface (position 9)

Kl(a.,be)

I Margin 4.52

1. N/A ksilin ksi4in in.

in.

ksivin in.

in.

ksiin ksi4in Pal CRDM LT.xls 46

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 7.0 Summary of Results A fracture mechanics analysis has been performed to evaluate a postulated radial crack in the remnants of the original J-groove weld and butter at the Palisades outermost CRDM nozzle reactor vessel head penetration. Results of this analysis are summarized below for the controlling transients.

Flaw Sizes Initial flaw size, ai =[

]in.

Final flaw size after 27 years, Flaw growth, bi =

af =

bf=

Aa =

Ab =

in.

in.

in.

in.

in.

During Cooldown (controlling operating condition)

Temperature, Fracture toughness, Maximum stress intensity factor, Margin:

T= [

] 0F Kla = [

] ksi4in K1 = [

] ksi4in (at bored surface)

Kla I Kl = 3.66* >

/10 = 3.16

• Minimum margin is 3.51 at 17 years.

End of Cooldown (controlling low temperature condition)

Temperature, Fracture toughness, Maximum stress intensity factor, Safety margin:

T= [ ] 0F Kla = I

] ksi~in KI = [

] ksi4in (at bored interface)

Kla / KI = 4.35> 410 = 3.16 47

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 8.0 References

1. AREVANFANP Proprietary Drawing 02-5038702E-3.

2.

AREVA/FANP Proprietary Document 51-5039171-04.

3.

AREVA/FANP Proprietary Document Number 32-5045855-00.

4.

AREVANFANP Proprietary Document 51-5012047-00.

5.

T.L. Anderson, Fracture Mechanics: Fundamentals and Applications, CRC Press, 1991.

6.

AREVANFANP Proprietary Document 32-5044089-03.

7.

Marston, T.U., "Flaw Evaluation Procedures - Background and Application of ASME Section XI, Appendix A," EPRI Report NP-719-SR, August 1978.

8.

ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Nuclear Power Plant Components, Division 1, Appendices, 1989 Edition with No Addenda.

9.

ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section Xl, Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components, 1989 Edition with No Addenda.

10.

"ANSYS" Finite Element Computer Code, Version 7.1, ANSYS Inc., Canonsburg, PA.

11.

Additional Drawings:

a. Combustion Engineering Proprietary Drawing E 232-118-9.

b. Combustion Engineering Proprietary Drawing E 232-120-3.

References 11a and 11b are not retrievable from the Framatome ANP document control system but are referenced here in accordance with Framatome ANP Procedure 0402-01, Appendix 2.

W.A. Thomas Project Manager

12.

AREVA/FANP Proprietary Document Number32-5046440-00.

48

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Appendix A Development of Finite Element Crack Model 49

Dz i

AE AR EVA 32-5054699-00 50

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 51

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 52

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 53

A

q9r, rnACZOO-nn

- AREVA ThAAOOAn J

54

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 55

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 56

A 47--ringRnoo-nn AR EV a9AfiM~QO.flf 57

A q?-5C0n54699Q-nn AR EA q-sAF14F.-QQ n 58

A 32-5054699-00 AR EVA 59

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Appendix B Development of Stress Intensity Factor Influence Coefficients 60

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 61

A ARE VA 32-5054699-00 62

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 63

A AREVA 32-5054699-00 64

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 65

A 32-5054699-On

- AR EVA 32-Sfl54A9Q..Afl

\\

66

A

,A) rqnvraq nn wAR EVA

'flJflAaonn U

67

A

• AREVA 32-5054699-00 68

AR A

32-5054699-00 AREVA 69

A AR E VA 32-5054699-00 1

70

A 32-5054699-00 AR EVA 1_

71

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Appendix C Comparison of Stress Intensity Factor Influence Coefficients for Uphill and Downhill Flaws 72

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 73

A 32-5054699-00 AR EVA 74

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Appendix D Verification of Computer Code ANSYS To verify that the ANSYS finite element computer program [10] is executing properly, two test cases the ANSYS set of verification problems that exercise the SOLID95 3-D 20-node structural solid element used in the present analysis. Test case VM148 analyzes a cantilevered, parabolic beam subjected to a static bending load. Test case VM143 calculates a stress intensity factor for a crack in a plate. Both test cases executed properly, as demonstrated below.

Verification Problem VM148 Bending of a Parabolic Beam File: vm148.vrt VM148 RESULTS COMPARISON End Displacement I TARGET I ANSYS I RATIO Y Deflection (in.)

-0.01067

-0.01062 0.995 Verification Problem VM143 Fracture Mechanics Analysis of a Crack in a Plate File: vm143.vrt VM143 RESULTS COMPARISON --

Stress Intensity Factor by Displacement Extrapolation I

TARGET I ANSYS I RATIO 1.0620 1.036 3-D ANALYSIS 1.0249 75

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Appendix E Computer Files Computer output files of all analyses contained in this report are stored in the AREVA COLD storage system*, as listed below.

File Name Description Date CRDMJgrooveCrack.output (used in Stress intensity factors for J-groove 04-29-04 Table A-1) weld (small) flaw CRDMJgrooveCrackUnitLoad.output Influence coefficients for J-groove 05-01-04 (used in Table 2) weld (small) flaw CrkStr9.cfs (used in Table B-1)

Uncracked model stresses for J-05-02-04 groove weld (small) flaw CRDMModel_2_Crack.output (used in Stress intensity factors for large J-05-04-04 Table 6-4) shaped flaw CRDM Model 2 Crack Unit Load.output Influence coefficients for large J-05-04-04 (used in Table 2) shaped flaw CrkStrl5.cfs (used in Table B-2)

Uncracked model stresses for large J-06-23-04 shaped flaw CRDMDownhillCrack.output (used in Stress intensity factors for J-groove 05-25-04 Table C-1) weld (small) flaw on downhill side vm148.vrt (used in Appendix D)

ANSYS verification problem for stress 05-20-04 analysis vm143.vrt (used in Appendix D)

ANSYS verification problem for stress 05-20-04 intensity factor

• Note: These files are stored under Document Number 32-5044161-00.

76

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Appendix F Analysis to Address a Three Hour Hold during Cooldown at [

] 'F F. 1 Introduction The purpose of this appendix is to document flaw evaluations for a three hour hold occurring at a temperature of [

] "F during the cooldown transient. Earlier revisions to this document included calculations for a three hour hold at [

] "F. Evaluating an upper limit of [

] OF and a lower limit of [

] OF should provide sufficient operational margin for performing the three hour hold between [

] 'F and [

] 'F.

F.2 Method of Analysis Applying the same influence coefficient based solution methodology utilized in the fatigue crack growth analysis of Section 6.0, stress intensity factors are calculated at times during cooldown that are influenced by the new three hour hold. The flaw size considered for this analysis is the final flaw size (reported in Section 7.0) after 27 years of service for the eight design transients listed in section 6.0. The hold during cooldown does not affect the stress intensity factor range used for the heatup/cooldown transient to calculate fatigue crack growth since the maximum stress intensity factor occurs during cooldown prior to the hold (at [

] OF), and the minimum stress intensity factor occurs during the heatup portion of the transient.

Stresses for the revised cooldown curve are provided in Reference 6. Three time points are evaluated to capture the effects of the three hour hold, as listed below.

Time (hr.)

Temperature (OF)

Pressure (asia)

Description 16.987

[

Start of three hour hold 19.987 End of three hour hold 21.987

[

End of [ ] 'F/hr cooldown ramp The additional flaw evaluations performed for the three hour hold are presented in Table F-1I 77

A 32-5054699-00 AR EVA Table F-1. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Cooldown with Hold at [

] F INPUT DATA Material Data:

Yield strength, SY =

43.8 ksi Reference temperature, Upper shelf toughness RTndt = [

] F

=

200 ksiain Kla = 26.8 + 1.233 exp [ 0.0145 (T - RTndt + 160) ]

Kla is limited to the upper shelf toughness.

Applied Loads:

Loading Conditions CD1*

CD2**

CD3***

Temperature (F)

Pressure (ksi)

Kla (ksiqin)

Stress Points ID x

Y Hoop Stress (in.)

(in.)

(psi)

(psi)

(psi) 1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 1 0 1 1 12 13 14 1 5

• Heatup/cooldown transient at 16.987 hours0.0114 days <br />0.274 hours <br />0.00163 weeks <br />3.755535e-4 months <br /> (start of 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> hold)

• • Heatup/cooldown transient at 19.987 hours0.0114 days <br />0.274 hours <br />0.00163 weeks <br />3.755535e-4 months <br /> (end of 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> hold)

• • • Heatup/cooldown transient at 21.987 hours0.0114 days <br />0.274 hours <br />0.00163 weeks <br />3.755535e-4 months <br /> (end of [ ] 0F/hr cooldown)

Pal CRDM HUCD-110.xls 78

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 Table F-1. Palisades CRDM Nozzle J-Groove Weld Flaw - Cooldown with Hold at [

I F FRACTURE TOUGHNESS MARGINS Period of Operation:

Flaw Size:

Time =

27 years a =

b =I in.

I in.

Margin = Kla / KI(aebe)

Loading Conditions CD1 CD2 CD3 Fracture Toughness, Kla At cladding surface (position 1)

Kl(a,b)

An, ae At bored surface (position 9)

Kl(ab)

An, be At cladding interface (position 3)

KI(aebj)

I Margin 4.86 29.96 4.69 At bored surface (position 9)

Kl(a.,be)

I Margin 3.71 9.12 4.40 ksivin ksi1in in.

in.

ksivin in.

in.

ksivin ksb~in J

Pal CRDM HUCD-110.xis 79

A AR EVA 32-5054699-00 F.3 Summary of Results Additional flaw evaluations has been performed for the case of a three hour hold during cooldown at [

] OF. Since stresses at the three hour hold are such that the corresponding stress intensity factors do not affect fatigue crack growth, the magnitude of the stress intensity factors at the previously calculated final flaw size is compared to the Section Xl required fracture toughness margin of 410 at the lower temperatures near the end of cooldown. The results of this analysis, summarized below, reveal that the minimum fracture toughness margin occurs at the start of the three hour hold.

Flaw Size at 27 Years of Service Final flaw size (from page 47),

af= [

]in.

bf= [

]in.

Start of Three Hour Hold (controlling low temperature condition)

Temperature, Fracture toughness, Maximum stress intensity factor, T= [

]OF Kla = [

] ksi4in KI= [

] ksi~in (at bored surface)

Margin:

Kla / Kl = 3.71 > 410 = 3.16 End of Cooldown Ramp (lowest temperature)

Temperature, Fracture toughness, Ta= [

Kia = I

] ksi'4in Maximum stress intensity factor, KI = [

] ksi4in (at bored interface)

Kla / KI =4.40 > '10 = 3.16 Margin:

80