ML053050354
| ML053050354 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 10/17/2005 |
| From: | - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2010-0209 EC 355773, Rev 0 | |
| Download: ML053050354 (168) | |
Text
ATTACHMENT 6 Engineering Change (EC) Evaluation #355773, "Evaluation of Quad Cities Unit 1 Main Steam Line Vibrations at EPU Power Levels with Replacement Dryer," Revision 0
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Evaluation of Quad Cities Unit 1 Main Steam Line Vibrations At EPU Power Levels With Replacement Dryer Reason For Evaluation / Scope:
Purpose The Unit 1 Steam Dryer was replaced during Q1 M03 in order to ensure adequacy for long-term operation at EPU power levels. This EC EVAL, Revision 0, provides a technical evaluation for components previously evaluated, under the referenced EC EVALS, as acceptable for power levels up to 2957 MWth (EPU licensed thermal power) for continuous operation. This review was determined to be necessary due to potential changes in vibration response from the new dryer configuration.
The components evaluated are ERVs, Target Rock Valve, HPCI Limitorque operator, and MSIVs. The steam dryer is evaluated separately. Main Steam piping, both large and small bore is not addressed here as there were no identified vulnerabilities from the original assessments that warranted further evaluation, i.e. significant margin exists and the frequency content at low power levels did not change. The result of these evaluations is that all components were found acceptable for full cycle operation. Recommendations previously made for future inspections and PM activities remain valid as they were made to ensure continuing acceptable component performance.
Approach Vibration data throughout the range of power operation (See Attachment 2),
taken during ramp up to full power, from June 2 through June 5, 2005 on ERV B and C was compared to previously gathered in plant data in support of EC 346515, the recent Unit 2 evaluation documented in EC 355702 and test results documented under EC 348693 and 350691. Those two ERVs were chosen for monitoring due to their high measured values from the December 2003 Quad Unit 1 power ascension testing. The current evaluation utilizes this new Unit 1 data and compares it to the December 2003 data and the May 2005 Unit 2 data to extrapolate expected values for other ERVs and other MSL components. The evaluation methodology was to ensure that the maximum values previously evaluated through analysis or testing remain bounding for validating component acceptability for full EPU power operation. The data utilized is included in for the various power levels. For the HPCI 4 valve and the MSIVs the maximum change in values for the two Unit 1 ERVs and the Unit 2 components was utilized to multiply the previous Unit 1 values.
Page 1 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Evaluation of Quad Cities Unit 1 Main Steam Line Vibrations At EPU Power Levels With Replacement Dryer Results The data obtained from the power ascension to 2887 MWth has been assessed against the previously completed evaluations and no concerns were identified.
Details of the evaluation are provided below. Previous recommended actions are tracked under AR 194877194877and are not changed by this current evaluation.
Detailed Evaluation:
Component Damage Summary (Quad Unit 1)
Walkdowns of MSL affected components were performed during the recently completed Q1 R18 (April 2005) to identify any components that exhibited vibration induced degradation. These walkdowns were conducted even though the unit did not operate at EPU power levels since the original walkdowns in 2003.
Several IRs were initiated as a result of these walkdowns, for general loose nuts and bolts, The results are documented by the station and will not be repeated here. The MSL drain tie-back supports were found significantly damaged (see IR 315403). A failure analysis by Power Labs determined that the failure was caused by the installation of the c-clamps used to mount the accelerometers at this location combined with the vibration levels. Actions and resolution for that issue can be found in the AR documentation.
The minor discrepancies found on other components were attributed as the result of normal aging or were historical in nature.
Acceptability of ERV Component Operation at EPU Levels The four ERVs have virtually identical assemblies and are identical to the Unit 2 assemblies, which consist of the main ERV valve body, pilot valve, and solenoid actuator. The pilot valve is connected to the ERV by means of a turnbuckle and a pilot valve tube. Each valve has small diameter leak off piping that is routed back to the ERV discharge line.
Details of the testing and results can be found in the documentation package supporting modification EC 343933. It was determined through testing that an independent structural mode of the actuator plunger assembly was responding to input vibrations, causing premature wear degradation of the bushing, spring and guide rod assembly due to vibration in the frequency range of 70-90 Hz. The valve assemblies installed in Unit 1 were upgraded with hardened components of X750 material for bushings and guide rods and a modified spring, with chamfered edges. These components underwent testing prior to their use to ensure that they would perform at measured vibration levels without experiencing Page 2 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Evaluation of Quad Cities Unit 1 Main Steam Line Vibrations At EPU Power Levels With Replacement Dryer degradation. Comparison of the vibration values used for the modification evaluations are bounding for the Unit 1 measured values in the frequency bands of concern and therefore, these valves are acceptable for full EPU power operation, per Attachment 1.
Evaluation of HPCI 4 Valve Operator Based on comparison of the current vibration data to the data evaluated under EC 348316, the Unit 2 values in EC 355702 and testing results in EC 350691, the original evaluation and testing remain bounding and there are no concerns for acceptable long term operation of this actuator and limit switch. The maximum measure grms value was in the x direction at 1.3924, from channel 25 at 930 MWe on Unit 2, which bounded the HPCI location from the original component assessments. From page 7, section 4.2.1 of Calc- QDC-0200-M-1392 the testing input used was a grms value of 3.9, which related to a plant input of 0.45 grms equated to 21567 hours of operation. For the measured 1.3924 grms this results in approximately 6970 hours0.0807 days <br />1.936 hours <br />0.0115 weeks <br />0.00265 months <br /> of operation (or just over one year). However, since the principle component in this grms value was at the high frequency of 138 Hz, and no component response except some bolt loosening was seen after this duration, the Limitorque actuator is deemed acceptable for continuous full power operation. Also, the recommended inspections from EC 346515 (documented under ATI 194877-33) will ensure that loosened connections are detected so that appropriate repairs can be made, each outage until sufficient experience allows for extension. The next performance of this inspection on Unit 1 will occur during Q1 R19 in Spring 2007.
Evaluation of MSIVs Comparison of the current measured vibration levels at the B & C ERVs indicates that the original assessment of the MSIV acceptability in EC 346515 for the B, A
& D MSIVs remains bounding. For the C MSIV, the currently measured C ERV data is significantly less that the data taken in 2003 with grms value of 1.1007 versus the 2003 grms value of 4.16. Although this value remains higher than the other ERVs, it makes the extrapolation to the MSIV, by reduction factor of 3, produce a value of 0.333 grms. This places the values well below the values from the seismic aging test results used to evaluate these valves in EC 346515.
Therefore all MSIVs are considered acceptable, and no further corrective actions are required. Inspections already developed in response to EC 346515 remain as recommendations. The only exception is the need to monitor the C MSIV with accelerometers, which is no longer a requirement.
Evaluation of Target Rock Valves Page 3 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Evaluation of Quad Cities Unit 1 Main Steam Line Vibrations At EPU Power Levels With Replacement Dryer The Target Rock valve is evaluated in Attachment 1 and comparison to the original evaluation by comparing the measured data to the testing input values documented in EC 350693. Since the frequency domain of concern for valve response is between 20 - 100 HZ and the increased vibration response seen was in the domain of 100 - 200 Hz, there is no concern for long-term acceptability of the modified valve configuration. The hardened upgraded components were used in the replacement value installed during this outage Q1 M03.
Conclusions / Findings:
This EC EVAL provides an Engineering Evaluation of MSL components supporting operation up to 2957 MWth. It has been determined that this full EPU power operation will not result in imminent failure or unacceptable degradation levels of any components. The conclusion is provided by evaluation of the measured vibration data, previous evaluations and test reports from laboratory testing.
Attachments: : Structural Integrity Associates Letter report: "Assessment of Quad Cities Unit 1 Power Ascension Main Steam Line Vibration Frequency Spectra", SIR-05-198, dated June 15, 2005. (pdf file attached) : Vibration data for indicated power levels and components.
References:
- 1. SIR-04-023, Rev. 0, ERV Vibration Testing Assessment.
- 2. QDC-0200-M-1380, Rev. 0, "Evaluation of Components for vibration Effects"
- 4. SIR-03-136, Rev. 3, Evaluation of Main Steam Line Vibration for Quad Cities Unit 2 PORV Replacement
- 5. ECs 348316, 350691, 350693, 346515.
- 6. EC 355702, Unit 2 Post Dryer Replacement Vibration Assessment Page 4 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Evaluation of Quad Cities Unit 1 Main Steam Line Vibrations At EPU Power Levels With Replacement Dryer : SIA Letter report (pdf file embedded here) gm rO5198rO.pdf Page 5 of 113
Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.
6855 S.Havana Street Suite 350 Centennial, CO 80112-3868 Phone: 303-792-0077 Fax: 303-792-2158 www.structint.com kohara@structntcom June 17, 2005 SIR-05-198 KJO-05-003 Mr. Robert Stachniak Exelon Nuclear 4300 Winfield Road Warrenville, IL 60555
Subject:
Assessment of Quad Cities Unit I Power Ascension Main Steam Line Vibration Frequency Spectra
Dear Rob,
This letter report contains an assessment of the Quad Cities Unit I (QCI) June 2005 power ascension vibration frequency spectra and the acceleration versus power level vibration trends for the Electromatic Relief Valves (ERVs) and the Target Rock (TR) Three-Stage Safety Relief Valve.
BACKGROUND During the QC2 April 2004 outage, the ERV solenoid and TR pilot valve internal components were inspected and found to have sustained excessive wear. All valves were overhauled and/or repaired, then put back into service. During the power ascension immediately following the April 2004 outage, several main steam valves (ERV-3B, ERV-3C, ERV-3D, ERV-3E and TR-3A) were monitored to determine their vibration characteristics (frequency content and vibration magnitudes). The resulting frequency spectra at the ERV and TR inlet flanges indicated high accelerations (1.7 grms max). Most of this energy was concentrated at two discrete frequencies, 139 and 157 Hz. Since QC I and QC 2 are very similar power plants, both plants were evaluated for high vibration levels and the potential for ERV and TR component wear.
In order to assess the actuator wear and identify design features or materials which would eliminate or substantially minimize wear, vibration testing was performed at NVyle Test Laboratories (Wyle Labs) for the ERV and the TR valves (this testing applied to ERV and TR valve components for both QCI and QC2).
Austin, TX Charlotte, NC N. Stonington, CT San Jose, CA Silver Spring, MD Sunrise, FL Uniontown, OH Whittier, CA 512-533S9191 704-597-5554 860-599-6050 408-97H-200 301-445-8200 954-572-2902 330-899-9753 562-944-8210
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page 2 SIR-05-198/KJ0-05-003 ERV Vibration Testing - February 2004 Full-scale ERV vibration testing was conducted at Wyle Labs from February 7 through February 13, 2004. This included modal testing and extensive shaker-table vibration testing, which included sine sweep and random vibration tests. Sine sweeps were conducted from 5-200 Hz at 0.25 g, whereas, random vibration testing was conducted from 20-200 Hz with test profiles representative of the acceleration magnitudes observed during plant operation [1].
Valve random vibration testing revealed that the solenoid plunger became excited at 70-85 Hz range [4]. This observed solenoid plunger motion was the same type of motion that would have resulted in wear marks found on field ERV solenoid guide rods. Both material and design modifications were evaluated and all ERVs were modified to incorporate the recommended design changes.
TR Vibration Testing - July-October 2004 Full-scale TR vibration testing was conducted at Wyle Labs from July 12 through October 15, 2004. This included modal testing and extensive shaker-table vibration testing, which included sine sweep and random vibration tests. Sine sweeps were conducted from 5-200 Hz at 0.25 g, whereas, random vibration testing was conducted from 20-200 Hz with a flat-random vibration magnitude of 1.34 grms that resulted in accelerated component aging. It must be noted, that the Wyle Labs random vibration test levels were much higher than the measured plant random vibration levels [2].
Valve random vibration testing revealed that the bellows cap spring became excited at 70-90 Hz.
Post test inspection, revealed wear marks consistent with the wear found on field bellows cap. The bellows cap material and spring tolerances were evaluated during the accelerated wear tests and the TR valve was modified during the June 2005 outage to incorporate the recommended design changes.
OC I ERV and TR Vibration Monitoring - June 2005 The vibration levels of two ERVs (ERV-3B and ERV-3C) were monitored [6] during the June 2005 power ascension. These locations were selected because they had the highest amplitudes observed during the December 2003 outage [3]. Six accelerometers were mounted on each valve inlet in the x, y and z axes (two tri-axial mounts on either side of the valve inlet flange, Table I and Figures I through 3). These accelerometers were in the same location for both the December 2003 and June 2005 outages. Vibration data was captured and processed by Exelon personnel and Structural Integrity Associates received frequency spectra for each of 10 power levels [5]. This spectra data was captured from 89 - 930 MWe and RMS acceleration trend plots were generated.
For all ERV and TR valves, the June 2005 trend data were compared to the December 2003 trend data. It should be noted that ERV-3D, ERV-3E and TR-3A valves were not monitored, but their vibration levels were estimated based upon scaled data from the both the December 2003 and June 2005. This scaled data was used for comparative assessments only.
ERV-3D, -3E and the TR RMS accelerometer data was scaled by power level based on the December 2003 data to the representative June 2005 power levels and then scaled by the ERV-3B V SfrudctoraIlntegrityAssocates, Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page 3 SIR-05-198/KJO-05-003 and ERV-3C RMS ratios (June 2005/December 2003 RMS magnitudes). This technique provides an estimate of RMS vibration for ERV-3D, -3E and the TR valve RMS accelerations.
ASSESSMENT OF FREQUENCY SPECTRA Acceleration trend plots are shown in Figures 4-8. These plots show the RMS accelerations versus power level. Inspection of the frequency spectra [5] indicates that the data quality is acceptable, except for ERV-3C, y-axis, for data sets above 786 MWc (TC 11). This channel does show frequency content, but it also shows a "high DC shift" indicating that the time history has a large transient spike or poor signal quality, whereas, the alternate y-axis spectra data showed good signal-to-noise (S/N) quality. For conservatism, alternate y-axis data was used at the higher power levels (786 to 930 MWc). All other channels have good quality data.
Further inspection of all frequency spectra revealed the following:
- 3B ERV Inlet Flange, all channels have quality data based on spectra plots. Graphs showed similar amplitudes as the December 2003 vibration data, low-to-moderate amplitude (-0.5 grms max). ERV-3B Inlet Flange, y-axis had the highest amplitude, which ramped up between 700 and 900 MWe and reached a plateau at 900-930 MWe. All plant vibration amplitudes were below the levels of the Wyle Labs tests.
Frequency spectra show two discrete frequencies: 139 and 157.5 Hz (similar amplitudes, when compared to the December 2003 power ascension data).
- 3C ERV Inlet Flange, x and z channels have quality data based on spectra plots, whereas, the y-axis spectra plot had a "high DC shift" and the alternate y-axis spectra plot had good quality data. Graphs showed similar amplitudes as the December 2003 vibration data, except for the y-axis amplitude which was much lower in magnitude. ERV-3C Inlet Flange, alternate y-axis had the highest amplitude (1.1 grms), which ramped up between 700 and 900 MWe and reached a peak at 930 MWc. Most of this energy was concentrated at 139 and 157 Hz. ERV-3C, y-axis vibration amplitudes exceeded the x and z-axis test levels, but was equivalent to the y-axis test level the Wyle Labs testing when compared to the random floor and the sine sweeps of the Wyle Labs test.
Frequency spectra show two discrete frequencies: 139 and 157.5 Hz (similar in amplitude, when compared to the December 2003 power ascension data).
- 3D ERV Inlet Flange data channels were not recorded. The acceleration data was scaled using both the December 2003 and June 2005 data. Based on this scaled data, the ERV-3D vibration magnitudes were projected to be no worse than the December 2003 vibration magnitudes and below the Wyle labs test levels.
- 3E ERV Inlet Flange data channels were not recorded. The acceleration data was scaled from both the December 2003 and June 2005 data. Based on this scaled data, the y-axis data (maximum estimated amplitude) was projected to be no worse than the December 2003 vibration magnitudes and below the Wyle Labs y-axis test level.
- Target Rock Valve Inlet Flange data channels were not recorded. The acceleration data was scaled from both the December 2003 and June 2005 data. Based on this scaled data, all acceleration data was projected to be no worse than the December 2003 vibration magnitudes and well below the Wyle Labs test level.
SfructyrallnlegrltAssocates, Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page 4 SIR-05-198/KJO-05-003 Only ERV-3B and 3C inlet flanges [6] vibration levels were monitored, but inspection of Figures 5 and 7 (ERV-3C and ERV-3E y-axis RMS acceleration levels) show plant vibration levels did exceed the WMyle Labs x and z axis testing, but did not exceed the Wyle Labs y-axis vibration level. Note that ERV-3D, ERV-3E and the Target Rock-3A RMS vibration levels are estimated from December 2003 and June 2005 data and are only meant to bound the vibration levels that would have been expected. Additionally, it is assumed that current ERV-3D, ERV-3E and the Target Rock-3A valves would have seen the same discrete frequencies at 139 and 157 Hz based on ERV-3B and 3C spectra data and the December 2003 spectra data.
ER V'ASSESSAIEWT ERV-3B and 3C, June 2005 spectra (Figures 9 and 10) show the maximum vibration responses at two discrete frequencies, 139 and 157 Hz, but vibration amplitudes are low at frequencies below 120 Hz. Vibration magnitudes in the 70-90 Hz frequency range do not exceed <0.025 grms (considered very low). Therefore, most of the vibration energy is concentrated at the two discrete frequencies.
Based on the ERV testing performed at Wyle Labs, the largest response of the actuator occurred at a frequency of-85 Hz. From the Wyle Labs test results, the x-axis testing resulted in the largest contributor to actuator wear. Figure 11 from Reference [I] contains a frequency spectrum of the ERV actuator response to an input that consisted of a flat random vibration (20-200 Hz) with superimposed sine sweeps at 138-142 Hz and 154-158 Hz. The two sine sweep frequency ranges correspond to the acoustic frequency response that was observed in the plant data [3]. While the plant data (Figures 9 and 10) shows significant acoustic response between 139 and 157 Hz, the Wyle Test results show that the largest actuator response occurs at frequencies below 100 Hz.
The frequency spectra for ERVs 3B and 3C contain responses at discrete frequencies between 139-157 Hz, which would have no effect on either valve or solenoid components of concern. This was confirmed by two types of Wyle Labs vibration tests:
- 1) A sine sweep test from 5-200 Hz (Tests 2.A.X, 2.A.Y, and 2.A.Z; ERV with no tie-back support and with the actuator cover on); gave no response in the 139-157 Hz range on any axis. Sine sweep responses were at 35, 70, and 85 Hz only.
- 2) A flat random vibration from 20-200 Hz (Tests 2.B.X, 2.B.Y and 2.B.Z; ERV with no tie-back support and with the actuator cover on); gave no response in the 139-157 Hz range on any axis. Random vibration responses were at 70 and 85 Hz.
The results of these tests confirm that ERV discrete frequencies between 139-157 Hz have no effect on either valve or solenoid components of concern, since these valves components do not respond to this frequency range. Thus, the current vibration levels are acceptable and should not cause excessive actuator component wear.
TARGETROCKASSESSAIENT TR 3A, June 2005 vibration data was not recorded, but based on comparisons of the June 2005 ERV-3B and 3C valve inlet vibration spectra (Figures 9 and 10) to the December 2003 TR-3A valve inlet vibration spectra (Figures 12 through 14), it is estimated that the TR vibration SvRoctural Integrity Associates, Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page 5 SIR-05-198/KJO-05-003 magnitudes would have been equivalent or lower and the observed discrete frequencies would have been similar (139 and 157 Hz). December 2003 TR-3A spectra plots were inspected for magnitudes in the 70-90 Hz frequency range, these magnitudes do not exceed <0.04 grms.
Therefore, most of the vibration energy is concentrated at the two discrete frequencies.
Based on the TR testing performed at NVyle Labs, the largest response of the actuator (bellows cap and spring) occurred at a frequency of 79 Hz. Figure 15 from Reference [2] contains a frequency spectrum of the TR actuator response to an input that consisted of a flat random vibration from 20-200 Hz. While the plant data (Figures 12 and 14) shows high acoustic response at 139 and 157 Hz, the Wyle Test results shows that the largest actuator response occurs at frequencies below 100 Hz.
TR 3A discrete frequencies of 139 and 157 Hz would have no effect on the valve or solenoid components of concern. This was confirmed by four types of Wyle Labs vibration tests:
- 1) A flat random vibration from 20-100 Hz (Test run 2) had a response in the 70-90 Hz range.
- 2) A flat random vibration from 100-200 Hz (Test run 3), where there was no real response for either valve or solenoid.
- 3) Sine sweep tests from 5-200Hz (Test runs 21 and 23; baseline cap with field spring); gave no response in the 139-157 Hz range on any axis. Sine sweep responses were at 79 Hz only.
- 4) A flat random vibration from 20-200 Hz (Test runs 22 and 24; baseline cap with field spring); gave no response in the 139-157 Hz range on any axis. Random vibration responses were at 70-90 Hz range.
The results of these tests confirm that TR discrete frequencies between 139-157 Hz have no effect on the pilot valve components of concern, since these valves components do not respond to this frequency range. Thus, the current vibration levels are acceptable and should not cause excessive bellows cap wear.
CONCLUSIONS Based on the June 2005 frequency spectra and acceleration trend plots, the December 2003 vibration data, and the Wyle Labs shake table test results, all valve 'problem components' responded only to frequencies below 100 Hz. Thus, the ERV solenoid spring guides and the TR pilot valve bellows cap should not have sustained any significant wear during the June 2005 power ascension, since most of the vibration energy (80-90%) was in the 139-157 Hz frequency range at the maximum power level (930 MWe). Amplitudes in the 70-90 Hz range were less than 0.04 grms (at 930 MWe), which was well below the NVyle Labs testing. Therefore, continued operation at the current vibration level should not result in excessive wear of these valve components.
s StructuralIntegrity Associates, Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page 6 SIR-05-198/KJ0-05-003 If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (303) 792-0077.
Prepared By: Reviewed By:
lfa vc&~
Kevin J. O'Hara Karen K. Fujikawa, P.E.
Senior Consulting Engineer Associate Approved By:
Karen K. Fujikawa, P.E.
Associate kj o
REFERENCES:
- 1. Wyle Test Report No. 50584-01, dated 2/23/04, "Test Report - Vibration Endurance Test Program for a Dresser Electromatie Relief Valve Type 6" 1525-VX for Exelon Nuclear," SI File No. QC- 16Q-202.
- 2. Wyle Test Report No. 50947R02 Revision 0, dated 11/04/04, "Test Report for a vibration aging Test Program for a Pilot/Base Assembly of a Target Rock Three-Stage Safety Relief Valve for Exelon Nuclear," SI File No. QC-25Q-204.
- 3. Structural Integrity Associates Report No. QC-1 IQ-302, Revision 0, "Quad Cities Unit I Main Steam Line Vibration Data Reduction," SI File No. QC-1 IQ-302.
- 4. Structural Integrity Associates Report No. SIR-04-023, Revision 0, Quad Cities ERV Vibration Testing Assessment," SI File No. QC- I6Q-401.
- 5. Frequency spectra received from Exelon via ibackup.com, SI File No. QC-28Q-203.
- 6. ERV-3B and 3C Accelerometer Locations and Orientation Drawing, SI File No. QC-28Q-202.
cc: QC-28Q-402 V StructuralntegrfAssocdates,Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page 7 SIR 198/KJ0-05-003 Table 1: Accelerometer Locations from December 2003 Outage Quad Cities Tape Deck Location / Figure Identification Channel Axis Remarks ERV 3B Inlet Flange QCl-ID-MSI-3B-IA I X
/Figure 1I ng QCI-ID-MSI-3B-lB 2 Y Vertical
_ QCl-ID-MSl-3B-lC 3 Z ERV 3B Pilot Valve QCl-ID-MSI-3B-2A 4 X Same direction as channel 3 Figure I QC1-ID-MSI-3B-2B 5 Y Vertical QCI-ID-MSI-3B-2C 6 Z Same direction as channel I ERV 3E Inlet Flang QC14ID-MSI-3E-IA 7 X
/Figure 2 QC14ID-MS1-3E-IB 8 Y Vertical QCI-ID-MSl-3E-IC 9 Z HPCI-4 Valve / QCl-ID-HPCI-4-lA 10 X Figure 6 QCl-ID-HPCI-4-lB 11 Y Vertical QCI-ID-HPCI-4-1C 12 Z ERV 3B Pilot Valve QC1-ID-MSB-3B 13 X Same as channel 4 QC1-ID-MSB-3B 14 Y Same as channel 5 ERV 3B Inlet Flange QC1-ID-MSB-3B 15 Y Same as channel 2 Dresden Tape Deck Location Identification Channel Axis Remarks Target Rock 3A Inlet QCl-ID-MSl-3A-IA 1 X l_Y_________
/ Figure 4 QC1-ID-MS1-3A-IB 2 Y Vertical QCl-ID-MS1-3A-l C 3 Z ERV 3D ilot Vange QCl-ID-MSl-3D-IA 4 X Sae______ascane_
Figure 4 QCl-ID-MS1-3D-2B 5 Y Vertical QCI-ID-MSl-3D-IC 6 Z Sam_________scannl_
ERV 3D Pilot Valve QCl-ID-MSl-3D-2A 7 X Same direction as channel 4 Figure 4 QCI-ID-MSl-3D-2B 8 Y Vertical
__________QCI-ID-MSI-3D-2C 9 Z Same direction as channel 6 QCI-ID-MSI-3C-IC 12 Z QCl-ID-MSIVB-IA 13 X lB MSIV / Figure 6 QCI-ID-MSIVB-lB 14 Y QCI-ID-MSIVB-IC 15 Z Structurallntegrity Assocates, Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page 8 SIR 198/KJO-05-003 Date: 5/112003 Thue: 10:43:31 AN If
Title:
KARPORAVADW12nd emitDW.Awn Figure 1: ERV-3B Inlet Flange and Pilot Valve s Structural Integrity Assoclates, Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Pagc 9 SIR-05-1 98/KJO-05-003 Date: 5/1912=03 5 MA S% me: 10:43:31 Av
- - 1 -V TI -
utis: I\RPDRAADW1 2nd i1mR DW34.dwu Figure 2: ERV-3C Inlct Flange and Pilot Valvc s Structural Integrity Assoclates, Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page 10 SIR 198/KJO-05-003 B ERV Direction Label Cable ACcc5/N X BX _ TOD06 Par I 10537 Y BY TOD06 Pair2 10533 Z BZ TOD13 Pair 10445 AkX BAX TODI3 Pair2 10532 AkY DAY TOD12 Pair I 10594 AkZ DAZ TOD12 Pair2 JU564 C ERV Direction Label Cable fAcd SIN X CX TOD03 Pair I 10539 Y CY TODO3 Pair 2 10565 Z CZ TODIS PairI J 10S7 Aft X CAX TODOS Pair I 1050 Ah Y CAY TODOS Pair2 10551 AhZ CAZ TOD16 PirI 10562 X = Parallel To Flow Y= Vertical Z = Perpendicular To Flow x
Alnata Locmaon Figure 3: ERV Accelerometer Location - Tri-Axial Accelerometer Blocks [6]
5 SrcturalIntegrity Associates, Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page I 1 SIR-05-1 98/KJO-05-003 Quad Cities, Unit 1 ERV 3B, Inlet Flange - Vibration Trend Comparison through TC-15 1.60 1.40 1.20 1.00
.2 e
4- 0.80 co 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Power Level, MWe
_- 3E ERV Inlet Fig, X - 2003 - 3B ERV Inlet Flg, Y - 2003 - - 3B ERV Inlet FIg, Z - 2003 443B ERV Inlet Flg, X -2005 1E3B ERV Inlet Flg, Y -2005 + 3B ERV Inlet FIg, Z -2005
- Wyle Labs Test Level, 2BX Wyle Labs Test Level, 2BY Wyle Labs Test Level, 2BZ Figure 4: ERV 3B, Inlet Flange RMS Trend Plots ct It C3 wm&*uIvl /I*,#Amowlats, Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page 12 SIR 198/KJO-05-003 Quad Cities, Unit 1 ERV 3C, Inlet Flange - Vibration Trend Comparison through TC-15 5.00 4.50 4.00 3.50
_l u 3.00 2 2.50 I-c2 Qc \
-- 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Power Level, MWe
-4 3C ERV Inlet FIg, X - 2003 _ - 3C ERV Inlet Fig, Y - 2003 - - 3C ERV Inlet Fig, Z -2004
( 3C ERV Inlet FIg, X -2005 *3C ERV Inlet Flg, Y -2005 + 3C ERV Inlet FIg, Z -2005
- Wyle Labs Test Level, 2BX Wyle Labs Test Level, 2BY Wyle Labs Test Level, 2BZ Figure 5: ERV 3C, Inlet Flange RMS Trend Plots CSinwiurul finlerily ASOCiateS, Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page 13 SIR 198/KJO-05-003 Quad Cities, Unit 1 ERV 3D, Inlet Flange - Estimated Vibration Trend Comparison through TC-15 2.00 1.80 1.60 1.40
'A 1.20 P
e.=
1.00 cd 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Power Level, MV~e
-_-3D ERV Inlet Fig, X -2005 _ - 3D ERV Inlet Fig, Y -2005 - 3D ERV Inlet Fig, Z -2005
- *- 3D ERV Inlet Fig, X -2005 --- D3D ERV Inlet Fig, Y -2005 +3D ERV Inlet Fig, Z -2005 Wyle Labs Test Level, 2BX -Wyle Labs Test Level, 2BY Wyle Labs Test Level, 2BZ Figure 6: ERV 3D, Inlet Flange RMS Trend Plots SiNi ual h idlyAssociates, Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page 14 SIR 198/KJO-05-003 Quad Cities, Unit 1 ERV 3E, Inlet Flange - Estimated Vibration Trend Comparison through TC-15 1.60 1.40 1.20 (I,
1.00 C
Cu I-U 0.80 co 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Power Level, MWe
_-. 3E ERV Inlet Flg, X - 2003 _- 3E ERV Inlet Flg, Y - 2003 -- - 3E ERV Inlet FIg, Z - 2003 N 3E ERV Inlet Flg, X -2005 _*3E ERV Inlet Flg, Y -2005 +3E ERV Inlet Flg, Z -2005 Wyle Labs Test Level, 2BX - Wyle Labs Test Level, 2BY - Wyle Labs Test Level, 2BZ Figure 7: ERV 3E, Inlet Flange RMS Trend Plots VShctural Slontege*Associates, Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page 15 SIR 198/KJO-05-003 Quad Cities, Unit 1 Target Rock, Inlet Flange - Estimated Vibration Trend Comparison through TC-15 3.00 2.50 2.00 E
1.50 U
c) 1.00 0.50 0.00 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Power Level, MWe
_* -TR Inlet FIg, X - 2003 _ - TR Inlet FIg, Y - 2003 -_ TR Inlet FIg, Z - 2004
- TR Inlet FIg, X - 2005 NTR Inlet FIg, Y - 2005 -+--TR Inlet Fig, Z - 2005
- Wyle Test - TR Vibration Level Figure 8: TR 3A, Inlet Flange RMS Trend Plots V Sifura hit1g0rily ssOs, Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page 16 SIR-05-1 98/KJ0-05-003 Quad Cities U1 %- 6/5/05 14:50 PM -% 912 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot
'B" ERV - Alt Y Direction Max Sec: 153 Second Composite grms = 0.5265 0.35 - - - --- - - - - - - - - - --- - - - -
I - I- I I I I 0.25 --- ,
I----- 4 0.241-g-@57.5t I- -
0.35 ---- I I 0.3 --- --- r----F----n----4------r----n- ---- --- -- r---r--
0.150I F_ _ _
_ _ -_ t_ I O I 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Figure 9: ERV 3B, Inlet Flange, y-axis (maximum response June 2005 data)
Quad Cities U1 %- 6/5/05 14:50 PM -% 912 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C"ERV - Alt Y Direction Max Sec: 99 Second Composite grms = 1.1007 r S I r r I T I 0.6
_ _ __ _ _I_ _ _ _I__ _ _ _ _ L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
0.5 0.44011 g@'139.5I-0 I I I I I I E 0.4 -------- 1-------t-- __,_-r~~
- 0) I I I I I I I I CF 9 I I
.2 E 0.3 a,
. I I I I I I .I
.__'__I _ _ _I__
_I_ _ __I_______
I___
< 0.2 I I I 9 0.1 9 I I I I9 An U-L 4 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Figure 10: ERV 3C, Inlet Flange, y-axis (maximum response June 2005 data)
V Strmctiral IntegrityAssociates, Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page 17 SIR-05-1 98/KJO-05-003
- CTIU 1.M0 wyle T6t Lwv* -0O0 dB Leve eTW.
MMW On0 Al CORTROTI. TtYPEW! ' 1 8 -VALVE iA D.ft. FnPi. cMI 'pmw pf49mfflk"m U w nw" wwrwrml* af.t
- 1. ___- r ___.
ii -j __ i___H______..
. .... --. _ I
-t---
+___I.--__ _.__ _ _ ___
1W-~ -- 1------
=_ _. ______.
I -. __ _4____ ._L._._
ii .__ _ _.\_ -= - 1-\- _ -
a Pb Wt. >_.___.______ .--. i =-;_AL -_1 9-, i- - i11-HeW t-I N "O DOW omw" IELom s0u4 Y AXIS Figure 11: Wyle Labs ERV Actuator Aging Test V Structural Integrity Assoclates, Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page 18 SIR 198/KJO-05-003 2910 MW, DMT.Ch 1 Figure 12: Target Rock, Inlet Flange, x-axis (December 2003 data) 2910 MW. DTD, Ch 2 Frequency, Hz Figure 13: Target Rock, Inlet Flange, y-axis (December 2003 data)
V StructurallntegrityAssociates,Inc.
Mr. Robert Stachniak June 17, 2005 Page 19 SIR l 98/KJ0-05-003 2910 MW, DTD. Ch 3 0
f 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Figure 14: Target Rock, Inlet Flange, z-axis (December 2003 data)
V StncurallnfegrdtyAssocimes, Inc
Junc 17, 2005 Mr. Robert StachniakSRo598KO003 Pagc 20SIR-O5- 198/KJ0-05-00 3 Pagc 20 ..
wyte 7... v* dB mW RWlOOU V%"PIDTAME ASMBLY Al C0CTh0 AM UW
.a.---_--
I ; ; t s i I/
w S , , :
fi-
, i. _
C- zr l*2 Z _ _4 _ , _ . ___-
_4L_4
- =__
l-e-- '........-
- iii I I
-I--
I
..-..... I....-....i...-.
i I
. 1 i4
_____ ____ --i- £ ____ ___
tf- --- t4- --- v- - ----
- . ____ .4
. _ __ _ j - - _ ~ I
-_ _ - _ _ . .I" "I
D" a U D m No 2 AMt Figure 15: Wyle Labs Target Rock Actuator Aging Test V Structural integrity Associates, InC.
ATTACHMENT 2 EC 355773 Vibration Data
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data TC-2 = 412 MWth Quad Cities UI 6/2/5 @ 1515 MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "Bo ERV - X Direction x ib4%x Sec: 4 Second Composite grms = 0.0077221
. * , a
- 1 _
1.8 a, a a a _
a a a a a a --- a5~ -~ a ------- a~~l~~-n 1.6 a a a a a a a a a T~ n -. n n 594 g @2.$. ___,___ ___a___I__ a________a---_------
a a a _ a __ __ a__ __ a__ __ a__ _ a__ __a_ _
c 1.2 a a a a a ___J___J__________
a a___ a__
C 0
- _ 1 l a aaa a) 0.8 a . . . a
. .a 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 I 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 6 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/2/5 @ 1515 MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Y Direction x jtok Sec: 103 Second Composite grins= 0.058232 21 L -r -- L-1 -- r 865 g I I I2.5 22 I III 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 7 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/2/5 @ 1515 MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Z Direction x lbfx Sec: 36 Second Composite grms = 0.051051 I
I I I I I II II I I
I I I I I I I I I I
I 2.5 ----- I-----
t I I 489g @ 2.5 S I , - , - - - - - - t - - - - -
I II I I M I II I II I
II _ _
o 1.5 jI____ ------:------ - - - - - i-I I
I II I
I II I
I ---
0.5
--- L-:I- 4- -
AA 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 8 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul 6/2/5 @ 1515 MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt X Direction x Tbax Sec: 4 Second Composite grms = 0.0074562 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2LL-I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 876 g @ 2.5 - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
.5 ---- i-L-L-I I I III I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I to I I I I I I I I
- 0) I I I I I I I I I C} I I I I I I I I e I I I I I I I I I LL4I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I *1 I I I 0..5 L I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I v
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 9of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/2/5 @ 1515 MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt Y Direction x 1bx Sec: 76 Second Composite grms = 0.018265 I I I I I I I I 2.5 ----- 4 II
__L ___
I
___ I I
___ I-I
__J_
I
__4-I-4 I I I
I I I I I I I I I IIII j I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2 I I I S I I I I I I I I I I I I 759g @ 2.5 R I I I I I I I I I 0
cn1 1.e
_.2 I I I I S I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I a) I I I S I I I I I CI II I I I I I I I C- 1I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0.5 IJ I I I n I .
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 10 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities UI 6/2/5 @ 1515 MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot NB" ERV - Alt Z Direction X 16ax Sec: 4 Second Composite grms = 0.015815 2 . . . . . . .--
2.5 _--
2 ---
, a a a a , . ooi0a--r------,------,--,-
@ 178.5 -
Hz: --
- 0) , , , a a a
, a a a a a a a a 0)
._ 1.5 :
r~l9A ai) a)
U CD U
as ak a 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 11 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/2/5 @ 1515 MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "Cm ERV - X Direction x 1 bix Sec: 102 Second Composite grms = 0.013139 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
--- . I - -4 4----
1 0.9 - - - -t - ____t - - - -- ,_____s______ 4 -- - - - - - - - - -
0.8 ---- T-- r - -r - - - - - - - - - - - _- - -__r - - - - -
0.000728 n 0.7 _ _
r
~rI ~ ~~' I
~~
~ ~ ~~ n~
It'
~-
- - -~n- - --- -r I
c 0.6 -- - - 4 4---I -4 -- - -- -
c V 0.5 1I4 P I a) 0 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 n%
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 12of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 62/25 © 1515 MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Y Direction x ibfax Sec: 65 Second Composite grins = 0.034503 1 .5 - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - I--- - - - - - - -
- 0) e 0
U 2.5 -~-
U O.OO~Frequency, Hz IPage13 o 11 3
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul 6/2/5 @ 1515 MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Z Direction x lbX Sec: 94 Second Composite grms = 0.021925 2 - - - - - - -
- -- - -4 - ----
I
.O) 0145i3g9@f15:3.5 H 14age 1 o 113 E 1. I, I I l I I I 1.8 0.4 - - --
L--T-- --- - - - - - - - i- - - - - - - --- z-----t--
Frequecy, H 0.) FrequencyIHz I~Pg 140 113III
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/2/5 @ 1515 MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt X Direction x jikx Sec: 102 Second Composite grms = 0.0087282 0.8 -0.0006 58 g4 eons- ----- -l- -- - -n- - - - - n-- - - - - -- - - - - -r- - - - - r----
0o2I I I I I I I
. 1/ :r615iAdoti 80 100 120 140 160 180 Frequency, Hz Page 15 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul 6/2/5 @1515 MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt Y Direction x Iibax Sec: 30 Second Composite grms = 0.069437 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0.00t0135 9 6 56 W U) __ _ s_-_; 1 _ - - - - - - - - - - -___ ___ _L_ __
< 0.5 -------------- ---------------4------------------
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 16of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/2/5 @ 1515 MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt Z Direction x 1b'x Sec: 15 Second Composite grms = 0.016881 I I I a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a 3 I I I
- a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
-- - - - _ - ,- - -__- -____- a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a 2.5 0.00~2108 g '~ 60.5 !-~
Ca I I l r 2F- , I I I I I 0
I I a a a
._ I I a a a I I aI 1.51 - - - - - II - - - - - I - -
a) I I
U I I I a 1 - - - - - III -a --- I--- ----
I Ia aI I I I a a
-- a- a-- a- a-0 .5 -T- - I aI I
O 9 i 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 17of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data TC 2a = 527 MWth Quad Cities U1 %- 6/2/05 4:15 PM -% MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - X Direction 14aoec: 61 Second Composite grms = 0.0077015 3 ----- - - -- -
F--- - - --
F-- --
1- -- -- -- - -- -- i-- -- -*- -- - - -- -- -
2.5 I I I 1
,0.OO212>6g @1t12 Hz 2
to C
l l II
.2 II cmt 1.5 -
a, l l C.)
C.
1--
0.
- 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 18 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 %-- 6/2/05 4:15 PM -% MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Y Direction iMajec: 124 Second Composite grms = 0.056653 3
I I I I I I I I I 2.5 T r Ir ,- - Ir I 046g e W
2.5§ *~-r-~r---- --- ____-z--_----------
--- i----- i----- r--~--
I I I I I I I I I 2.5--
.° 1. r~~- --- --- -- - ~-~1~~n~~n~~n~ ----
~ -~l----
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 19of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 %-- 6/2/05 4:15 PM -% MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Z Direction Ijacec: 187 Second Composite grms = 0.059149 3.5 ,I , ,I , , , _
3 I I I I I I- - - - -I - - - - I- -- - - -I- -
I I I I I , I I I 2 ------ ----- ----- -------- - -- I r--
2.5 --- O494J.6.J-- ---- 2- -
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 20 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 %-- 6/2/05 4:15 PM --% MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt X Direction 14ao~ec: 91 Second Composite grms = 0.0075543 l
I II I I
II I I
2.5 -
I
- - - - - - I I I I II I
I I f I 2 j-I
- - - - - IL I I I II
- 0) I I II C I I I 0
1.5 I- - - - - I t I
II II I f I I I II
, .1.
ca, a) I I II U I I II U 1 I I I I I I 0.5 I n __-- - - - -I -o - - II - - - - -
Ii 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page21 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 %-- 6/2/05 4:15 PM -% MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV -Alt Y Direction kjl~jSec: 62 Second Composite grms = 0.01694
- 2. ---- T-----r-----r-----,-------- ----- ^--------
r----------
to Il ,,, I , I I , I 175 e 2.5 0 ) 1.5 -- - - - -L
- L X - - ---- -- -- -I-- - -- J - - ------ ----- I
.2 I -- - - - - I I I 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 22 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 %-- 6/2/05 4:15 PM --% MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "B ERV - Alt Z Direction KaoSec: 212 Second Composite grms = 0.015909 7 1------------ ---- --
6 ------------- r------------ ------ ---------------------------------
5 --- -- r-- ----- r -- - -- 4000482b8 g @-1,12-F- --n- -- --, -- -- - T- - - - - r----
6 J - - - - I 6- -
.2 3 20 40 - - - -
60 - - -10 10 14 160 1 0 1
0 2lF.eueny, .z Page 23 of 11 3
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 %- 6/2/05 4:15 PM -% MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Specctral Plot NCN ERV - X Direction 9dq)OSec: 38 Second Composite grms = 0.01297 I.i I.J- r- - ----- t- r --- --- i- --- i- --- i- --- i- - -- 7 -- -r- --
, a , , a . a a a a a a a a I a a a a I I I I I a a a a a a a I a
, a , , , , I a 0.0010558 g I I '22.5Nz IIa - -- a a -
a a a I I 1 a L L I .
II a a a a a a cm all al a a a a a I e0 a I I a a a a a a) a I
O j I a
'.5 -- - - - a I I n
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 24 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 %-- 6/2/05 4:15 PM --% MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "C"ERV - Y Direction yapb38ec: 38 Second Composite grms = 0.029886
., , , , , I I I I 4 - - , - I- - - - ,
3 .5- - - -- - - - - - - -- - - I-- - - - - - - - - - - -
3 -------I----- -4 ----- -----------
O .00:i8047 9 iO6.5 HzWl l 3.5 - - - -- II - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -I
- - - -rr - - - -- - - - - - - - - -
- 2) - -t-- -- -e- ----- -- --- - - -- -I-- - - - ----- ----- t-----t-----
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 25 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 %-- 6/2/05 4:15 PM --% MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Z Direction 9t1bSec: 9 Second Composite grins = 0.024184 l l l l
~I ~ II I I-v- -I-I I I
II II fI I
II I I I I
, I I I 21------r -- - -- r - ~---- r --- -- ~---
- ---- -- - - - - ~--- -- -ia-- -- - T-- -- -
1.001 6C la9 5a.5 F 'I I I I I on . . I I a a I a a a a a g 1.5 a a a a I
- a a
a-l a
cm a I a a I a l
a I I I I a a CF a a a a I a a a a a I I a a
._ a a a I a I a a a a am 1 I a a
a a
I a
a I
a a
I a
0 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a 0.5 I a a--
a I a a a a a a a a a a a a a i a a a a a a a a n
v 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 2)00 Frequency, Hz Page 26of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 %- 6/2/05 4:15 PM --% MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt X Direction t4aoec: 38 Second Composite grrns = 0.0089022 I ~~~-
1.5 - I ,--- - - - - ,L.
:------ I I I
I
. .I I
I I I I I I II 1 [ I I
I I
I I I I I I I en I I I I I I II CD 0) a, U)
U 0.5k-
I I --- l--I-- ----
n' 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 27 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 %-- 6/2/05 4:15 PM --% MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "Cm ERV - Alt Y Direction yapoSec: 38 Second Composite grms = 0.062086 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 28 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 %-- 6/2/05 4:15 PM -% MWth 412 MWe 89 Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt Z Direction VI1-:8ec: 9 Second Composite grms = 0.01592 I I I II I I I 2.51----
Sg 6 I6 I --- I-- I------ --- I- I-~
2b.001946o
_ . . . I . I I I I I
- I I Cn cm I I I I 0 I I 1.5 'I I
..J. ..
.) l I I I a, 1 I I I I I c)
- I I I I I~~ I I
° -I. - - -
- - 6 - 4 - I - - - - - - - - - -
n ) IU I I 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz I
Page 29 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data TC 3 = 1053 MWth Quad Cities Ul 6/2/05 @ 2344 296 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot I
"B" ERV - X Direction x lo-Wax Sec: 137 Second Composite grms = 0.013514 5 ----- T-----T------r----------- 1 I I I I I I I I I 4.5 - - - - - r--- ------------
- r- --------- m--------------
4 -----.----- r-----r-----l----- -- ---------------------------- r----
O.N.5 275 9 436H F2 2 5 ------------
--- -r------------ --------------------------------
- - - -- - r------
D 2 2 I I I 4I I
< 2 I I I 4I _ I 80 100 120 140 160 180 Frequency, Hz Page 30 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul 6/2/05 @ 2344 296 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Y Direction x 10 3Max Sec: 130 Second Composite grms = 0.0777 5 I I I I I I I I I
_ L_____L__________J 4.5 _ _ __ _ _ _ 1____ I I23. I 4
0.0036664 g c 3.5 --- _,4- --------1n---- ---I--44-------
235izI I I I I I I I E
CD e 3 0
i 2.5
_ I I _____I _ _ I_____ I_ _ _ I
.2 1.5 I Ikr I Ii I I 01 0.5 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 31 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/2/05 @ 2344 296 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Z Direction x i 0eMax Sec: 36 Second Composite grms = 0.061246 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3.5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3 T -- rO~~~~r~~~~
- ---- " .O10289O7g94-&162.5 + ~~~- - ---
I I I I I I I I I m 2.5 0
.o T 2 a)
, 1.5 - 1 i t r- if- i JA1 1
0.5 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 32 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/2/05 @ 2344 296 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt X Direction x 1o-Nax Sec: 137 Second Composite grms = 0.013011 4.5
,----- ----- r-----8------- ---- n----- n~-- ~~-r-----
4 I II I I I co. 247 D- -36s ,~~~~~'~~~~~'~~~~~i~~~~
, , I I I I 9 3 M ----- 4- -- ---- -- -- 4 --
e
.° 2.5 _ I _ _ _I_ _ _I _____J_ 4 _ _ I i i l l I Z 2 l 1 I ,
I
, , , , , ,1 I U I I I I I I 4 4 iI 1.5 4 4 1 l I 4 4 4 1
0.5 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 33 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul 6/2/05 @ 2344 296 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt Y Direction x lo-Wax Sec: 130 Second Composite grms = 0.022346 7-I - -f -I -
I I I I I I I / I 6 ----- T------f- ------- ------ ------ ----- f---V--
o, I I I I I I I I 0.0052276 9gr 21.5 Hi 1 1 1 1 F ;) ____ ------------------- ------ ------------ ------------- +---
6--
2j- 1 L - - -Ln -- - -- - - - - - -J-
-- -r - - - --
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 34 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/2/05 @ 2344 296 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt Z Direction x 10 Max Sec: 12 Second Composite grms = 0.021069
- n. . . . . .
I I I I I I II I I I II I I II I I I I Ir------ I jI I I I I I I I I I 1 5 I I I
-40g 785ih I-----I----- I--T----
I I ~ -I I I 0.004C I i 0 4 ----
E cm 3 [-- --- ;T-- - - -- -- -- r- -- ---;-- I a) I I 0) s 2 ~ ~- ~- ~+
- ~-~r-I--. - - z- - - - - -- ---- -- - -t~~s~
1 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 35 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul 6/2/05 @ 2344 296 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - X Direction x 1o-%/ax Sec: 126 Second Composite grms = 0.024177 4 r 8
7 -4z___n_--I--444.---------
.___ ___ I-- --- 4------- I~
-- - - , ----- 7-----T-----T---- I1 0)
. _I _ _ _
0 I , , , ,A C.) 4t
- I / Ii w.
1 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 36 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/2/05 @ 2344 296 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Y Direction x 10 7Wax Sec: 115 Second Composite grms = 0.033254
- 4. -----------r-~---'---~----- --- ,--- ----------------------------
4 T r - - r T 1 1
.2 2.5 - -- - ------------------ I---- I------I-----
I------
2 2- - r -- - - - - 1- - - - - - ---- - ---- -
< I I I I I I I I 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 37 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/2/05 @ 2344 296 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Z Direction x 1 0-3Max Sec: 118 Second Composite grmns = 0.02457 3 @ 233 Hz E
0)
.2 CD QC Q:
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 38 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/2/05 @2344 296 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt X Direction x 10io ax Sec: 126 Second Composite grms = 0.022257
, . . . . . .4 8 . , ,,, .. .
7 4 I 4 I I I 4 I I I 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0.005828T -43*- - - - F ----- 1------ * ---- t-----f 4 I
I 4I4 1
I III E I__r --- r- I-r--- I-- - 4 I-- -- I 4 4-~~-~
co I I I
I C.) I
___ 4 4 I 4 4- 4- 4 4~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
4 I
.2 I 4
I I I ' I I I L 4 J4 In l 1
4 4 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 39 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/2/05 @ 2344 296 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot NC" ERV - Alt Y Direction x 1ioVlax Sec: 105 Second Composite grms = 0.059762 I r I I I I I I I I I I I I
_I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 7 -- -H 6 I r-I
- -T- I I
'~~~
I I
I
- _I _
I I I I I I I I I 0.0047975 g Cn 3 - - - - - - - - - IrL- - - - - Ir I I I I I I 0M 4 _
e a,
C)
- 3 ---- , t-- I---'I- '---'I--'I -- '---'I -'-I -
I II I IIII 1 i k ttA u £--
I______L 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 40 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/2/05 @ 2344 296 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt Z Direction x 1 0-Wax Sec: 118 Second Composite grms = 0.019942 r , , , -
I I I 4 I I I I I I I I I 3.5 -~' 0.0034C 18 g @ 233Ft
- - - - I-
! - ---- T --- - - .04 3
U) 2.5 0
F __~~~~~~
__l_ j- _, _
2 a, I I I, It ~ I a I^J U
1.5 1
0.5 In 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz I
Page 41 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data TC 4: = 1639 MWth I Quad Cities Ul 6/3/05 @ 0935 487 MWe-11604 MWth Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - X Direction Max Sec: 102 Second Composite grms = 0.058086 0 .04 - - - - - -I - - - - -I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -_
I iI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0.035 0.04 ---- T - -- j- - - - 163.51 -
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I C)
_ ( 0.02 -- - - ------------------- ------ l- ------------- T------------
C 0
a2 0)
.025 0.01 - -I- - - ITI----- I-----I------ -----!-- - n--- r-20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 42 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 @ 0935 487 MWe-1604 MWth Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Y Direction Max Sec: 71 Second Composite grms = 0.085664 01 c
U a) 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 43 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 © 0935 487 MWe-1604 MWth Filtered Spectral Plot "Bo ERV - Z Direction Max Sec: 102 Second Composite grms = 0.090263
_ _ . . . I. . -
a I, ,a
-r---r---,---n---a---a---a----a-0.02 a . . . . . . I
4 ---
a I I I 1I I al a a ~~~ a 0.015 a a a a a aa aa a
I
,L _ _ _ _ _ I ___ a a a a aa a a a a a a C
0 0) a, 0.01 I I I I a a c) a a a 11 aa a U. a1 a 1 a a a L 1 a A J hAA L . .....
0.005 I
0 ia^ qt 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 44 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 a 0935 487 MWe-1604 MWth Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt X Direction Max Sec: 102 Second Composite grms = 0.055966 0.035 ---- , - , - - _
0.0 .
3
- I ,I , 3___
W I I I
' ' ' ' 0.025974 9 6 163.5 HZ '
0.025 -- - - I--- ~-r~~- r- - -- - -- - -- - - -- - - -- - -r - -- r-- -
o 0.03 --- -L- -------
CD 0.025 T r -- -- - - -- -- -- -4 3--6 5----I - - - - -
0.01 -- - - I- - - - -- - - - -
2 1 1 2 0 I 3 I , . e I, ,
Page 45 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 @ 0935 487 MWe-1604 MWth Filtered Spectral Plot "BN ERV - Alt Y Direction Max Sec: 71 Second Composite grrrs = 0.06777 0.03 .--.--- . , -
0.025 F I 6
, l ,- ,O. 2252g 4163.5I-
>, 0.02 -- - -- - - - -
C._
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 46 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 @ 0935 487 MWe-1604 MWth Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt Z Direction Max Sec: 45 Second Composite grms = 0.058455
, , , , , , 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
_ , . . . . . . .6 0.0 65 .
6 . , J _ _ _ 6 0.02 0.O22258g9 4163.5I,'
0)
)2 6
.20.
E 0.01 15 ---- 4---e--F---1 6 6 6 6
--- 6 6
-^----
6 6
-- 4 ____
a) 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 I 6 6 6 6 6 6 I 6 6 6 I 0.0 )1___
6
____L___
6 L _ _
6
_ 9.
6 I
_____J I 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 0.00 )5 --------- r--'6 6 6 I 6--A6--
J2 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 47 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 @ 0935 487 MWe-11604 MWth Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - X Direction Max Sec: 37 Second Composite grms = 0.066907 l
0.02[ - -- -- r--
I
-- -r-I -- ---- r1 I
I
- -- I-I -
-II I - - _
0.0151 - - t - - I I I I I I I I I 0)
F I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- 0) 0.01 I I
C)
I \__6__;__ I I I I Iw___J__
I, W i I I I /I< I tI II - _
0.005 I
I/
I 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 48 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 @ 0935 487 MWe-1604 MWth Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Y Direction Max Sec: 24 Second Composite grms = 0.028251
,I 0.015 I L _ L _ __ _ _
I I J_ __ _ I J _ _ _ _ I s __I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- 0) I I I I I I 0 I I I I I I I I 1.2 I I I I I I I I I I I I a) I I I I I I I I I I
< 0.005 I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- I I 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 49 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 © 0935 487 MWe-1604 MWth Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Z Direction Max Sec: 47 Second Composite grms = 0.038458 0.01 ----------- -- 4------
I I I I I I II I I I I I I I II 0 .00 9 - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - ---- - - - - - -- - - - ---- - - - ---- - - - - -
0.009 cn
, , , , , , , I
=00.007 ----- T--- ---- r---~-------~---~-4 .07514 ---- ---- r-0.0048 , - -
< I I I I I I I 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 50 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 @ 0935 487 MWe-1604 MWth Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt X Direction Max Sec: 37 Second Composite grms = 0.067 II I
I _____._____
I I , , I I I I _L _ _ l____
. - - - - I- - - - -
I I ___I__
I f
I I
a) I
, , I I I I _____
,I ,
I O~~o1'62~~g 6.5I l f
, ,I I 0
I e I -r - - - - , ,-----
I
._ I -I- -4 -I 4 CY) I I I II I I I I II I ax I I I I I.
I a) 0.01 ----- T----- I I
I I
II II I
I
- I I II I I I II I I
l I I I
- I ft L- - I A AI . 'I: IA I
I I
I
). ~ I V !
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 51 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul 6/3/05 @ 0935 487 MWe-1 604 MWth Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt Y Direction Max Sec: 112 Second Composite grins = 0.14619 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0.04 I I.I-4I.-----
I I I I I I I I I I I I 4 4 I I I I I I I I I I I 4 I I I I I I I I 0.035 ---- 4--I-44.44.-----
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I g I I I I I I I I I I I I I 4 I I I 4 I 0.03 I-I-I---- -- 4------.4--------
O.O28318g'ra'162.5I-
--- 4.-----
4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 ---- 44-I--.44-44------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- M 0.025 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
4.I-I.--I-I44.-----
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0.01 I I I 4-4--I-4-44------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0.005 4-4--I-444.-----
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II 4-I..J4 I II II I II I II -
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 .1 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 52 of 11 3
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data QuacI Cities Ut 6/3/05 @ 0935 487 MWe-1604 MWth Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt Z Direction Max Sec: 80 Second Composite grms = 0.10139 0.04 T T I I T I I I I a I I I I a a a a ' 0.29 2 a 16 .aL a4 0.035 T r r , a a a T l a- a--1l a a a a a a a a
_ _ 1 _ __ _ __ a aI aa a_--- aa----- a a-----M a a a a a a a a to 0.03 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a ,_____J_____ ____
) 0.025 O.287l l l 16. i-fz a a a 0 a~ a a a a a~~a a a a U 0.02 - - t -- -- - - -e-----f a a) a)
< 0.015 ,
l a-a-
I
.1l a
a a I a I I I I I
_ _ _ __ _ _ ja __l_____@_____ a g I 0.01 0.005 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz I
Page 53 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data TC - 8 = 2225 MWth I Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 @ 1815 MWe 691 MWth 2225 Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - XDirection Max Sec: 55 Second Composite grms = 0.052697 Frequency, Hz Page 54 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul 6/3/05 @ 1815 MWe 691 MWth 2225 Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Y Direction Max Sec: 103 Second Composite grms = 0.1529 I
.S 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 55 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 @ 1815 MWe 691 MWth 2225 Filtered Spectral Plot
'BB ERV - Z Direction Max Sec: 137 Second Composite grms = 0.1408
).016 - - - - - -
l r-l l r-l l l lI 0016E3 0.0 CF 0
< o0.oo
<: 0.004 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 56 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 @ 1815 MWe 691 MWth 2225 Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt X Direction Max Sec: 55 Second Composite grms = 0.051428 0.015 I I a a I I I I I a a a a a a a a a a22 a '
a_ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ __ _ _
, , . , , , , ,a 0.01 0287 g co 0.01 9
CM 0)
C0 U
a a a a t a' aA a,.
< 0.005 n
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 57 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 @ 1815 MWe 691 MWth 2225 Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt Y Direction Max Sec: 103 Second Composite grms = 0.093465 I
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 58 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul 6/3/05 @ 1815 MWe 691 MWth 2225 Filtered Spectral Plot B ERV - Alt Z Direction Max Sec: 69 Second Composite grms = 0.076153 0.012 --- I - - - L - - - - - I I--
- :- - - i- - I-- - - -I- - - I - -
, I I I I , I I I I I I I I - , - ,
0.01 ,
I I
I I
I I
I I
I II I II I
, , , I I , , , I I
0.0081585
'A 0.008 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
°0 0.006 141 c,
0 0
< 0.004 Ilk ' I 0.002 n
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 59 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 @ 1815 MWe 691 MWth 2225 Filtered Spectral Plot 1C" ERV - X Direction Max Sec: 76 Second Composite grins = 0.079741 I a 0.04 I I I I - I- I I I 15 - -- - l - - - - - -l~~~~~n~~- - - - - -
a aa aa a 0.0
,a a 0.0 a , I , , I
!5 - -r-- --- t-- --- - r--- -- 1-- -- -m- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- s - - - - -t-0) e 0.0212 ----- T- - -- r- r -i---- --- ~-- -- ~---- - --- T--
r
.2
.- a C) 0X a
) a I Ia - - -
F a I Ia II I I Ia a a a a a a Aa a
U
< 0.01 5S ----- )2--- -- - r-a- -- --
aa --- - ----
- - - - -- --- - - -- ---- - - -- - - a---- - -
0.c 0.00 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 60 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 @ 1815 MWe 691 MWth 2225 Filtered Spectral Plot "Cm ERV - Y Direction Max Sec: 79 Second Composite grms = 0.098355 I I I I I I I I I
, . . , . I . I 0.03 J. . L I LI I II I I I I
_ _____L ___ . ___ ____ ____
___ ___1 _____L I.269I I I I38.5,'I 0.025 I , , . I , I CF 0.02 0
C.2 a, 0.015 W
O.236g@_3.Hz 0.01 0.005 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 61 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 @ 1815 MWe 691 MWth 2225 Filtered Spectral Plot KCI ERV - Z Direction Max Sec: 119 Second Composite grms = 0.073842 I I I I I I I I I I I I I a I I I I I I I I 0.02 I I 7-----, ----- T-----
a a I a
I I -ia I I aI a I a I
I I a 6.0155449 @ 106-z a I I Ia a 0 0.015 a
~
r~~----
a a
a a a--- ----
a a a a F- a a a a a a I a a a a a a a a I_ ___a___ a_ _ a
_) 0.01 a a a a v)
U a a a a U a a a a a a a a
T ---l- t -- a a a a a a a a a a. ' a 0.005 o u 1; i I v u 'IV, j
II 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 62 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 @ 1815 MWe 691 MWth 2225 Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt X Direction Max Sec: 76 Second Composite grms = 0.076982 CD045 --- -- -- ------ -- F-- -- --- - -- -- 1-- -- ---- - - - -d- - --- ----- -----
a a a a a I I a a 0.045 ----
07 Ft I I I I I I , . . . . .
C 35 0.04-----r-----r------r-----~--l-----n~-T~-r--
-- -- .0 --
0 C
a)
II la) 0.02 ----- ency, L)
U C D0 I P' I 1 of '1 0.0 2 ; ufi j. - L -v%'-W 20 40 60 80 10 10 10 6 8 0 a FrequencyaHz C
a Pag 63 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/3/05 @ 1815 MWe 691 MWth 2225 Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt Y Direction Max Sec: 68 Second Composite grms = 0.19593 0.045 I I I I I I I I a a a a a a a a a a 0.04 a a a
- - - -- - - -a r---------------- a ----- n-----z-----r----
a a a a a.3 7 9 . ,'a a a3 0.035 a a L_
a L
I a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
__ _ __ _ _a a W a n 0.03 d 0.025 - _ a a n a¢~ a _-a a1 0.02
- ,,1.,j&, WO.O3O74g , ¢.5 Hz
< 0.015 0.01 0.005 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 64 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities UI 6/3/05 @1815 MWe 691 MWth 2225 Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt Z Direction Max Sec: 147 Second Composite grms -'0.079363 0.016 0.014 --l- -------------- - -----
e-----I-----t-----X-----l-----t-----l-----
0.01 2 - - - -I - -L_-____ --
0.0106E7 a 0°008l ---
0 0.014 - ----- r -,-- I a-0.012 -- i L L 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 65 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data TC-9 = 2414 MWth I Quad Cities Ul 6/4/05 @ 0005 755MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - X Direction Max Sec: 59 Second Composite grms = 0.0712 0.018 ----------- ----- ------ ----------
0.016 I I - - - - - - I- - - - - -I - - - - --I - - - - --I - - - - -i-I - -- - II 0.014 - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - -- - - - - - -
0.012442 6 @25.5 kt 0.012 ----- TI - - -I - - ------ ----I I --I-r ----r I-a 0.00 tI --- - - - - - - -I - - - - - - - - - - t--- -- - - -
0.0024 --- 55k I I------ I 0.012I I I I
< 0.014 - i-I.-L I
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 66 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities UI 6/4/05 @ 0005 755MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B"ERV - Y Direction Max Sec: 59 Second Composite grms = 0.21715 0.045 1 1 0.045 ---- a-----------------------
0.035 --- - .- l-0.03. ,I I a a a I I a a c 0.025 a a a a a a a a a aj 0.02 X . .- . .- .-
40 C.) , a a a a a a a
<0.015 ----- r ---- a- a- aa --- t~-T--
n- I---
0.005 a$S 40608 0 2 4 6 8 0 a
a araqueacyaHa aaa A Pag 67 af a1a
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul 6/4/05 @ 0005 755MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "Bo ERV - Z Direction Max Sec: 128 Second Composite grms = 0.20143 0.035 . ...- , -
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0.03 F.026t19@u14.5Hz H
c 0.025 I I I I II CY)
.o 0.02 ___I I I I
I I
I I
I I I I I _
L. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I OU0.015 I-~ I I-r--r~-l~~n~~n~~n~ I I I 1--
0.01 0.005 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 68 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/4/05 @ 0005 755MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt X Direction Max Sec: 59 Second Composite grms = C).068081 I
____L_____L @______@ I I
I I
I I I I
I t e - - - -IL - - _- -_ -,
_I_ _ _ I I
. _IA_ _ _ _
'2.5 r- aIz
I I
-~r----r--------------------~--
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 69 of 1 13
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities UI 6/4/05 @ 0005 755MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt Y Direction Max Sec: 59 Second Composite grms = 0.15967 0.03 0.025 a 0.02 0
.2 S 0.015 a) 0.01 0.005 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 70 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/4/05 @ 0005 755MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt Z Direction Max Sec: 58 Second Composite grmns = 0.10749 0) e
.2 a) a.)
U 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 71 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/4/05 © 0005 755MWe Filtered Spectral Plot ON"ERV - X Direction Max Sec: 126 Second Composite grmns = 0.098085 I I I I, I 9
-- - - -.I - - - .
I> I e I Il I e I II I
I I
I I
I I
I CD II 9
I I
- 0) I I
a1)
U U
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 72 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/4/05 @ 0005 755MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Y Direction Max Sec: 41 Second Composite grms = 0.31518 0.12 I I I II I I I
I I
0.1 k--- T I I __
II __----- 4------
I I ------------
I I I I I I I I I II I I I 2__ II___III_
I I I II I I I I I
I I I o.OE 10345 9 4139 A, , I 0.08 tI -
I
- - - - II-I
- - - - -I-I
- 0) I I II I I I
~I I I I
- 0) II 0.06 a,
a, O
0.04 I- - --
II II II II II I I II I I I I I I I 1 0.02 - - - - - I - - - A-- - - - -L- - - - - -:- - - - - - j- - - - - -4 4- - - - - S- - - - - -
I I I I I n
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 73 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/4/05 @ 0005 755MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Z Direction Max Sec: 83 Second Composite grms = 0.10017 0.02 0.018 L.. , . . 1 0.016
- I- - - - I - - - - - - - - I - - - -
0.014 I _I, . ,
I _,I _,I _0.0138879 I I
@156.5F.t I I~~r~ -r- -- r -l I--- In- ---
0) 9 0.012 l L I ... J 4 I 0
CF 0.01 i h I I: I I I ~ I a, t c)
U 0.008 -~~~r-~ -------------------- ,--------
U 0.006 0.004 0.002 n
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 74 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/4/05 @ 0005 755MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt X Direction Max Sec: 126 Second Composite grms = 0.095918 I
I I I I I I I I I II I I
0.031 - -- r - --
I
-- -- -,-- -- -- , -- - -- 11--_ _1_- 1--
I . I I I I
-- - -T - - - - -
0.025 , ,
I I
I I
.1 I
I I I I I 0.02; >202 9g 37 I mn 9
0) 0.02 i I I
I I
I
/
--- I - - - I I / , , , ,
CF / , , , , ,
0 LI I I I I I (3 -- - F --I 1 ----- 1 -=
0.015 a)
Z U
A A U.U I
, .h 0.005 A
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 75 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/4/05 @ 0005 755MWe Filtered Spectral Plot C" ERV - Alt Y Direction Max Sec: 42 Second Composite grms = 0.39576
, , , I I 0.18 0.16 ~~~-T----r ----- r----- --------------- T--r--
6 6 6 I 6 6 6 0.14 6 6 6 3236 6- 6 co 6 F e quecyH
.6 _
6 6 6 6 6 6 6 E 0.12 6 6 6 I 6 6 6 cm 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 T r r 6 6 6 __ -- - T
.2 eD 0.1 6 T- - - 6
- - - 6 r - - - 6- ----- I6 6 l6 ll -.
6 6 6 6 6 6
t-----F----------1-----I 20 40 -- 60 - 8 6 - 00 - 12 14 1606- - 6 0 Z 0.08 6 6 I l -6 l 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
_ _ _ __ _6 6 I I6
<0.06 0.04 6i . 6 6M . 6 . : . 6 1t0va 20 4 6 0L10 14 60 10 0 0.02 6 Frequency,6Hz 0
Page 76 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities UI 6/4/05 @ 0005 755MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt Z Direction Max Sec: 83 Second Composite grms = 0.10748 (n
C-0)
C.2 a.,
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 77 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data TC 11 = 2642 MWth Quad Cities U1 6/5/05 @1028 786MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - X Direction Max Sec: 46 Second Composite grms = 0.11991 o.a)7 - - -- L - - - - L _ -I - - - - -J_
I / / / I / / /
/ I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - -I5- - - - - -- - - - -I - - - - - - - - - - - -
o.a oX )6 + F -- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - -/-
- - - - - -- - - - - -/ +
I En a. -4 -.4 -.
0a C
.2O o.a I2~~~~~T~~~~ I I ~ I I I I - ~~-----r I -
I~~~~~n 12 ----- T-I1 I I
- ~-~~n-- - ---
,I , ,
- - T~---- -
I a,
a)
U o.a 0 o I IJ - lu I I I 20 40 60 80 10 10 10 6 8 0 I o~o9~Frequency, Hz o.a o.a o ae7 1
)3~ag 781 of 13
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/5/05 @ 1028 786MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Y Direction Max Sec: 113 Second Composite grms = 0.31624 I
0.12 , ,
I~
, I S
~~~, . .
I I
- - r -- - -- - , -I-----n-----T-----r----
I I I I I I I I I
_ _ 1 __ _ __ _ l 8 I 0.1w 0.08.4351g9& 139.5Hz n I I I I I I g 0.08 0 I I I~ ~~
I II I I I 11 I Ij I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ai I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 I I I I I I I I
< 0.04 - - r- - - - s ~~~~~n~~~~~----7-----r~--- I
, Wl-b--
0.02 I I; . Ii Ix I' I0 I 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 79 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/5/05 @1028 786MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Z Direction Max Sec: 66 Second Composite grms = 0.29446 0 .08 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
0.07 0.06- - - - - T- - - - - r-~ - - - -r -- -f - - --- - - - -4 - - - -
-7 r
' ' 0.054'156 9 @.',39.5 It:
(, 0.07 a a a a a a a ,a 0.05--4 - - -- -t- - - - -- t - - - - -l- - - - - - - - - ,-- - - - - - - - 4
=0.03 ---------- ------ ---------------- --. --
0.02 - -- - -- - r --- r --- -1~- -
r -----
r----~ l ~~~
-- - - 11------- ~~~ ~~f~- ---- rI- --- ~
0.01 ------ a-------------
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 80 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul 6/5/05 @1028 786MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt X Direction Max Sec: 20 Second Composite grms = 0.1124 I I I I I I I I I 0.06 --- -.- - - t----
- - - - --- - - - -- ----- -J- - - - - - - - -t - -- - - -t - -
0.06 ---- - --
.0 0 I 9 I 9 I I I I 0.05 ; O.O\ 4g@T57.5H 20 40 60 80 10 12 14 16 18 0 I I FrequencyIHz cn
~ ~ I I. ~ I, Page810f113 Pg 0.0of 3
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities UI 6/5/05 @1028 786MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt Y Direction Max Sec: 16 Second Composite gris = 0.29458 I I I I I I 0.15 T Ir I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I O.0.59g d 158 Z I I I - J II I - *-- - - - - , - -
0 . I II I I I
_ __ _ _ _ L _ _ _ I _ _
0 I I I a>
I I I I I I I
< 0.05 I--- - -r--- I - -r- I -- - - -- -- - -- - -I - ---
III I 8111 1 1I 1 I I,I I I I I n
U I . . . . .
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 82 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/5/05 @1028 786MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt Z Direction Max Sec: 23 Second Composite grms = 0.18282 0.1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0.09 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0.08 ---- 4- __^ -I __ _w
-I____ _4- __ 4 -----
4-_
r - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -4 - - I- - - -
c 0.07 I I I I I I I I I
- 0) I I I I I I I I
-- -- r-I c 0.06 I-------------- I -~~~~~~~
TI-U a, 0.05 , . .r. q .e.c.,.Hz a) I I I I I I I I O 0.04 I------~-~~~,~~~~~~l~~
I I I I
I I
'I~
I
,I I'
-rI I
I , , , I I' - - - I---I'
- 1 I --
0.03 _ _ L _ _ _I ._ _ _ _ _l '_ _ 8 0.02
W ai I I IJ ,Id I I 20 40 60 80 10 12 14I6 8 0 0.01 I FrequencyIHz 0
Page 83 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul 6/5/05 @1028 786MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C"ERV - X Direction Max Sec: 107 Second Composite grms = 0.13879 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 84 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/5/05 @1028 786MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "Cs ERV - Y Direction Max Sec: 124 Second Composite grms = 0.25316 E
0)
.2 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 85 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul 6/5/05 @1028 786MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Z Direction Max Sec: 77 Second Composite grms = 0.15117 0.04 I I I I I II I I I I I I I 0.035 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 9
0.03
- L
_ _I I-.
1 .089 I
l I I I Ola ll 3&gl T ii
__ _, _ _ __ _I _ l______
cn 0.025 --- 4 I I I-I I I
4 I
l I
I I I I I I I C- I , , , I . , I 0 I _ _I _ _ _I_ _L _
__ __ _I L ___I_
- V 0.02 I l
I L
I Ll I
l l I I I a, I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
a.)
0.0015 0.01 A I~nll a I .A i ei ' .\ _j- __
0.005 0 w11 20 40 60 80 I
100 WV V 120 140 160
- U '1k /UV 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 86 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/5/05 @1028 786MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt X Direction Max Sec: 107 Second Composite grms = 0.12878 0
C-0) a, C) 0 80 100 12 200 Frequency, Hz Page 87 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/5/05 @1028 786MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt Y Direction Max Sec: 94 Second Composite grms = 0.74771 0.4 - - - - - L-- -- -_-_-L- - --
0.35 - - - - L.- - -
0.3 .1 -L-L-: 8527 i14(Hz -
10.25 l- - - - - I- .
cFeqeny I. I--
- - - L - - - - -I- - - - - H-Iz 0.15 0.0 ---
-L- - of 1 I--'--'-----------
1-- I'--I'--
O _ - _ I_ I W I,_# I 20 40 60 80 10 12 14 I6 8 0 0.1equeL ,
Pag 88 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/5/05 @1028 786MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt Z Direction Max Sec: 77 Second Composite grms = 0.1547 0.07 - - - -- r I------
0.06 - - - - - Ir- - - - - --- - - - - -r- - - - -- - - - - m-0I2 - - - I - -I-I I - I-- - - - - - -
0.05 -- ---
0.06 ---
r-----------X-------s-~-0.------------ ~ --- r--
0.052- - -- FrequencyHz
- o.'1
,FrequencyI Hz O Page 8 o 3 I _
Pae8 o 1
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data TC-14 = 2854 MWth Quad Cities Ul 6/5/05 @1215 900MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - X Direction Max Sec: 129 Second Composite grms = 0.17914 40 .- I TL - - - -- - - - - - - - - T- - -- -
0.14 -.--- ,- - , .
0.12 --- - ----- -----
- 0. O.099741 921158 Hz-O 0.08 ----- ,- .- ---
0.04 - -- -- T- - - - - -r - --- - - - - -- - - - - -, - - - - - -- - - - - - - - T-----T----
C) I I I I I I I 0.06 &--r--r--r--l--n--n--
L---~ l--
I ~ ~~ I I 0
0.04 I I I I ~~~1 ~ I'~~ ~ ~'~~
I } _ I _ . A _ _I 1
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 90 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/5/05 @1215 900MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "Su ERV - Y Direction Max Sec: 11 Second Composite grmns = 0.46779 Il 0.3 - - - - - -l I-Il Il Il 0.25 ----
0.2b825 g 6 158 It I
0.2 ~- - - - - --- - -- - -r- -- -- ;--- -- - I- - - - - I C-0 0.15 F-aE
.T a)
U U
0.11-I I
I I I I I I I I Il 0.051---- --- I ----- I-----
I II I II I I
^.I-0 v v u . v v I v v m v v . .. . . . . , v 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 91 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul 6/5/05 @1215 900MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Z Direction
. Max Sec: 11 Second Composite grms = 0.39269 I i T I I II 0.25 I I I I
- - - - I
- - _- 4 -
II I I I I I I
I a I I a a l I a a 0.2 - - a , ,a
.1 I a 0.1h301 9 C 158 i-- i--
II II 15 ItI ce 0.15 k--- - - - - - -
I
- 0) I I
I I
U V- I
- 00) I I I I I I a) U.] F---------r-----r-----i--------
IL ll n rr I I I I I u.IJ I _-- - --------------------
-- - - - - - - -- - - - - I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I }
I I I I I-I V VAt%
L ~M _-
nI I NJ%.-4 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 92 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/5/05 @1215 900MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt X Direction Max Sec: 129 Second Composite grms = 0.16877 0.14 0.12 T - -- -- 6 9- 2 94 i EI- - -
II I I I I I I I 0.1 0.0935259 @158Hz co II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I a, 0.08 - - -t - - - - - 1 ----- v---------t-----t----
I c I I I I I I I I
.2 I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I I I I I I I I.-
.9 0.06 - - 20
- - - -- - - , 40 .requency,.Hz 60 8 I -v12 14 16 18 I----------v 0 ci) 0 0.04 I 1 I I I I I f I
4. I- I-. -I -I
- W 4 :: ::, 4.----,:
0.02 I~ ~~ ~ _
20 40 60 80 10 12 14I6 8 0 I FrequencyIHz 0
Page 93 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/5/05 @1215 900MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B"ERV - Alt Y Direction Max Sec: 11 Second Composite grins= 0.52024 0.35 0.2bT62 d 58Hz 0.3 W0.25 I - - - I - - L - - - - - - - - - - -
CD, 20 4 60 80 10 12 14 16 1 0
.2 0.1 I Frequency, Hz IU0.05 0
Page 94 of 11 3
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/5/05 @1215 900MWe Filtered Spectral Plot 5B* ERV - Aft Z Direction Max Sec: 117 Second Composite grms = 0.28048 I I I I , I 4 I 4 I I I
,-4-I. I I I 0.2 I I I I I I I. 3 I I I
, . . . -I-I I I 4 4 I 4 I II I I I I I I I I I
___ _ ____L_______ J__
0.15 ---- 4j --
- - - --- L I I I I
- 0) I I
- - r- - ,---4-- I I I I I I 42, 0.1 4 4 4 4 4 I
T- - -T I - -
- - - ------ I 4 44 4 4I U 4 4 4 4I 4 4 1 I I I 4 I I I I I I
,I 0.05
_I I I I 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 95 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities UI 6/5/05 @1215 900MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C"ERV - X Direction Max Sec: 96 Second Composite grms = 0.18716 0.08 - I I I I
-- I I I I I I I I S I I I I I 0.07 - - - - - - -__--_4 J_-_-_-
0.06
.0I
- - -. I I
- - - - - - - - - - I I I CF i5T.5 S
Fe4 I lI 0.07---
tm 0.05 -- -- - - -- -- -- _--_-__---- 4- - W -_ - -s - _
0.04 -- - - - - --- - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - -A --
- -- L_____--
0 .03 - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - ----- - - - - - - - - --- - - - - --- - - - - - - -
0.02 ---- , -I - - - - - - - - - - - - -__ _____L_____
0.01 ---- - _-
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 96 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/5/05 @1215 900MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "Co ERV - Y Direction Max Sec: 142 Second Composite grins= 0.47214 0.02 0.018 0.016 13782 g ft If Cn, cn 0.012 ---------4-----
CF 0
~0.01 Ca 20 40 60 80 10 12 14 16 1 0 LO 0.008 I IFrequency HzI 0.006 0.004 0.002 0
Page 97 of 11 3
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/5/05 @1215 900MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C"ERV - Z Direction Max Sec: 80 Second Composite grms = 0.19525 I I 0.06 --------- 11-----r1----- :------e--- I -
II I I I I 0.05 __ _ _ _I_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I--___ _ _ _ _ _
O.O403485 9 d 158 s:
Cn 0.04 +---- - -; III I I I I
E
- - -- - -i- -- I4 I
0a I I !
0.03 - - - . I I I II I I I I I ea) 0.02 III I II I I I I I I III I I I
- - - - - T-I - - - - - r-I - - - - I.r IIII - - - - -I- - - - - -- - - - - -I - - - -
0.01 -~- - 7 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 98 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/5/05 @1215 900MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV -Alt X Direction Max Sec: 96 Second Composite grns = 0.1832 0.09 I ------ Ir---r------I--- I-- I-----rI-
, . . . . . . . I
. I . , , . . 1 I 0.08 L. L . * .
0.07 0.0633839g@ 57.5F-z.
Cn I I I I g 0.06 _____1_____
I L
I
_____L I
I_
I J__.
I
__. J_
I I
___ I I
I I I I I I I I II I I II I S II I c 0.05
.2
--r--r--r--l---l--n--5--
T~~r~~
I II I I II I I I I I I I I I I
- I I I I I I GI 0.04 _
I L
I L__.__
I
_. I I
l_____J_____
I I I
____ 1 I
_____L I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
< 0.03 -- _------~-~-~-~-~-~--n I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- 0.02 i AI I I 1 1I_ _ _ __ t _ _
0.01 0 w;II - :
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 99 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul 6/5/05 @1215 900MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt Y Direction Max Sec: 131 Second Composite grms = 0.93753 II I I I Ii 7I l
0.5 F- _ _L L ----- L_____ l I I l
-les 4 I _ _ _ I___ _
0.4 I---- ---- I ----- I-----
I---
II
- J------
I Cn I -- -- l5594 -. 4 II l
I I 0
9 0.31---- - I-- - - - - -
tI 0
0.21-0.1 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 100 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 6/5/05 @1215 900MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt Z Direction Max Sec: 80 Second Composite grms = 0.23178 0.14 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I I I I I I I I
, I I I I I I I I 0.12 ------ ------
0.1 --- - L-* - - - - - -
~ 0.08 - .,-- i. .L 0.06 P of 113 0
0.04 . L. . .j.
0.2ir ,Frequenc, t_____L _ _ _I _ _ _ _
Hz
_____I_____4 O _ I I I ,
20 40 60 80 10 12I 4 6 8 0 Frequecy, H Pag 10 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data TC - 15 = 2887 MWth Quad Cities U1 %- 6/5/05 14:50 PM --% 912 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - X Direction Max Sec: 153 Second Composite grrns = 0.18568 0.12 --- - ------- ---- -- ---
I I I I I I I I I 0.1 _ _ _ - _ - L _-- _ L _ _I __ _ _ _ I_ _ _ _ _ _ _
0.01 _--L c 0.0 - -- - --- -- ------ I------ --- - ----
0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 102 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul %- 6/5/05 14:50 PM --% 912 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Y Direction Max Sec: 153 Second Composite grmns = 0.47877 IT 0.25 0.2 0t d0 0.15 ci) 6 0.1 0.05 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 103 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 %- 6/5/05 14:50 PM -% 912 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B* ERV - Z Direction Max Sec: 134 Second Composite grms = 0.40928 0.2 p -- - - .- - ----------------- ___
.04.4925 g @157 Ft 0.151K - - - -. I 0,
._2 a,
0.1 a)
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0.05 -~-----L I ----
I L --
r---I-----I~--~--,-------,----
I I I I I I t I I I I I l l l l l l l Iv I1\ I I, 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 104 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul %- 6/5/05 14:50 PM --% 912 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt X Direction Max Sec: 153 Second Composite grms = 0.17555 I I I I I I I I I - - I- -I- -I III - t -
I
- l I
I e _ _ F-II t _ _ 1 _ _
Il t - _ t - _
II II II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 0.086961 g 157z It I I I I I I II I I
- ---- - --- I - I - -
n 0
cm I _-_ _- _ __-_I
-_ _ _ _ _ -I,_I_
-_ _ _ _ _-I - _ I I_ _ _ _ _ _ , _I _
I I I _, _ _ _ _ ___ ,-----T---- I, I I I Il a) I II Il 0 I I I Il
- I--
- - - - I.
0.02 I I I
-I i- 1- L I I I I I I w
U . , . , , . ,
n 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 105 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 %- 6/5/05 14:50 PM --% 912 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B" ERV - Alt Y Direction Max Sec: 153 Second Composite grms = 0.5265
.35-- - - - T - - - - r- ------ - -- - -- - --i-- - - - I - - - - T 0 - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I - - - - - - - - -
0.25 . ,2 -- o tsg -@iS7.S tk 1 - - - - -
. I 0) 0)
a) c} ' 0.2 1 - - - - -e - - - - --- - - - --- - - - - - - - - -1~~~~*__
C.
0
.0.15 - -- - -L --- -L---- ~-
-'-- - --I- - - -- - ---- T- - - -- r-----
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 1060of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul1 % 6/5/05 14:50 PM --% 912 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "B"ERV - Alt Z Direction Max Sec: 134 Second Composite grins = 0.30494 0.16 ----- i ------ --- ------------------
02 -. - -I - - - - - I I 1 -
to 0.14 ---- :-- ------- ----I- ---- ---
0)
.2~
0 . 12 -- - - - - - - --- - - -I - - - -- - -
a)
U1 I I I 0
20 40 60 a0 a0 12 14 16 1 0 a Frequency, Hz 0.08----7-o--i---3
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 %- 6/5/05 14:50 PM --% 912 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot ECU ERV - X Direction Max Sec: 5 Second Composite grms = 0.20768 0.09 I I I I I I I I I 0.08 I I I I I I I II
_ ___ _ _ _ L I _-I0o689t1 -
I I 0.07 I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I I I
, , , , , , 1, 7Ril II I I 1 '
n 0.06 I II I I II 1 '
I I I I a a a 1 'I
--- r- - I------------- I----r----- --- -
I I I I I I I I I
.° 0.05 - - - - - I - -- -I - - iI - - I __ a
+_
I__ _ I-I__t__ L_________J__J__ I_____L___ ___
03 0.04
< 0.03 I I I a a i a 0.02 0.01 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 108 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities UI % 6/5/05 14:50 PM --% 912 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Y Direction Max Sec: 49 Second Composite grins =0.31 935
~ l'~
g z - - I59-- --- - -- L - - -- - I--- - I-- -- I - - -- L -
.0 03I I I I - - - - -I - - -I 0.025 ------ ---- I--
0.0 20 0 6 80 1I 12 140 16 I8 0 I Frequency, Hz C.)PageI 10 of 1 1
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 %- 6/5/05 14:50 PM --% 912 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Z Direction Max Sec: 128 Second Composite grms = 0.21874 0.07
- - - - - -,I-I - - - - -I-I - - - -_
0.06 0.05 III l97g 01 57:5 Hz -
a, II I I
- 0.04 --- - - :-----
I I CF 0 , _ _ _
I I 0, I I I I ZO 0.03 I I
I I I II I I I I I I C.)
I -- - - - IL : - - - - - I 0.02 I I I I 9 I I I I 0.01 I
II Il 9l I I
I I
L1 I f 0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 110 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul1 % 6/5/05 14:50 PM --%/ 912 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt X Direction Max Sec: 5 Second Composite grins =0.20451 0.107 51 gI I 15 Ft 06 . - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -- - - --- - ---- - -- - - - - -
0I2 - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - IIII I
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 111 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities U1 %-- 6/5/05 14:50 PM -% 912 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt Y Direction Max Sec: 99 Second Composite grrns = 1.1007 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0..6 - - - - - i-I I
I I
I O..5 - - - - - I- - - - -
I I I
II
- 0. I 0.4401 1 g @139.5 F I I I
01 .4 . - - - - L - - - - - I-j-I C .. I II
.2 I I
E O..3 - - - - - I- - - - -
a' I I I I I I a) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11I O. .2 L_____L _ _ _I _ _ _ _ _____I____ __
<0. .2- - - L - L - - - ..l-9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
.1- - - - r - ' -~~~n~~~----'-----r---- I
- 0. I II I IIiT I I I I I I J 1 -
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 112 of 113
EC # 355773 Revision 0 Attachment 2 Vibration Data Quad Cities Ul % 6/5/05 14:50 PM --% 912 MWe Filtered Spectral Plot "C" ERV - Alt Z Direction Max Sec: 139 Second Composite grins = 0.25037 D.1-- - - - - - -r - - - - - - - - - -I- - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - -
o.08 - --
2.09 . - - - - 065 g d .I Ft I 3.06 -r-----r-----r-----r----n-----n-- --- 5---- ------ r--
co I7I 2.06 , , , J C-0 a) 2.04 - - ----- -- - L --- -- - +/----
- - - - T C.
C.
0.03 - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - -F - - - - -j- - - - - I- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- F-----
0.02 L- - - - - L- -~- -- -- ~ ~~'~~
0.01 -_ I- -- --- Ir -- ---- I I 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Frequency, Hz Page 113 of 113
An Assessment of the Uncertainty in the Application of the Modified 930 MWe Acoustic Circuit Model Predictions for the Replacement Quad Cities Units 1 and 2 Steam Dryers Document NumberAM-2005-012 Revision 0 Nuclear Engineering Departnent Exelon Nuclear Generating Co.
Prepared by-. ;;' - a 2. /.KCevin Ramsden Date: IVI,2D L -
Re iewed by: L 4
/a 0 Guy DeBoo Date: (0/ Z /65-Approvod by: /&U, _ Roman Gesior Dale DIssued)
(Date Issued)
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 Abstract This report documents the evaluation of uncertainties associated with the use of the Modified 930 MWe Acoustic Circuit Model (ACM) to predict time histories for the application of unsteady loads to the Quad Cities Units 1 and 2 Steam Dryers.
2 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 Abstract .................................................... 2
- 1. Introduction ................................................... 4
- 2. Description of Uncertainties .................................................. 5 2.1 MSL Strain Gage Measurements ................................................. 5 2.1.1 Strain Gage Measurement Accuracy ........................................... 5 2.2 Limitations of the ACM .................................................. 5 2.3 QC2 Steam Dryer Pressure Measurement Uncertainty ......................... 8 2.3.1 Instrument Accuracy ................................................... 8 2.3.2 Phenomenological Considerations .............................................. 8 2.4 Uncertainty Associated with the ACM .................................................. 9
- 3. Calculations/Data Considerations .................................................. 10 3.1 Software Applications ............................................ 10 3.2 Comparison of Modified 930 MWe ACM to QC2 TC-41 Data .............. 10 3.3 Summary of Statistical Results ..................................... 17 3.4 Additional Statistical Considerations ................................. 18 3.4.1 Development of Bias Uncertainty .............................................. 18 3.4.2 Integration of 135-160 Hz PSD to Evaluate Frequency Content 19
- 4. Results .................................................. 23 4.1 Summary of Uncertainty Terms .................................................. 23 4.2 Combination of Uncertainty Terms .................................................. 23
- 5. Conclusions/Discussion ...................... ............................ 27
- 6. References.................................................................................................. 28 Appendix .............................................................. 29 3 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0
- 1. Introduction This report documents the evaluation of the uncertainty associated with the methodology used for the prediction of time history information for application of unsteady pressure loads on the Quad Cities (QC) Units 1 and 2 steam dryers.
The Continuum Dynamics, Inc. (CDI) Modified 930 MWe Acoustic Circuit Model (ACM) takes inputs from Main Steam Line (MSL) mounted strain gages and provides a detailed pressure time history for the steam volume of the reactor pressure vessel, with emphasis on the surfaces of the steam dryer. This methodology has been validated against in-plant measurements taken on the QC2 instrumented steam dryer during power ascension testing. The output of the ACM is used as input to the General Electric (GE) Finite Element Model (FEM), which is used to compute the stresses in the dryer for comparison against code allowable fatigue and stress limits.
A description of the QC2 Power Ascension Test and the associated instrumentation placement is provided in the Appendix.
Due to the complicated nature of the issue, this process has the possibility to be affected by uncertainties in a number of ways:
- 1) Measurement accuracy of the MSL strain gages
- 2) Limitations of the ACM
- 3) Measurement accuracy of the in-situ QC2 pressure measurements used for validation of the ACM
- 4) Accuracy of the ACM itself This report examines the individual components of uncertainty, then develops a recommendation for the treatment of uncertainty in the integrated application, exclusive of the structural analysis model uncertainty (FEM). The intent is to form a basis for the QC1 and QC2 applications, as well as for future applications of this methodology for the Dresden Unit 2 and Unit 3 steam dryers.
4 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0
- 2. Description of Uncertainties The individual parts of the application will be discussed.
2.1 MSL Strain Gage Measurements There are two key elements that apply to the results obtained from strain gages to determine breathing mode unsteady pressures for use in the ACM. The first concerns the ability of the strain gage to read the strain measurement correctly and the process of converting the strain measurement into a pressure term. The second involves the potential for strain gage measurements to include local pipe structural response, e.g., axial direction or pipe shell modes not related to fluctuating pressure, in addition to the breathing mode response. The second item was discussed in detail in Reference 6, with the conclusion being that strain gage failures lead to increased conservatism in the load predictions, both in frequency content and amplitude.
2.1.1 Strain Gage Measurement Accuracy The MSL pipe strain gage measurement uncertainty is composed of two major components. These are the instrumentation, cabling and data acquisition response and the conversion of hoop strain to pressure, i.e., the wall thickness of the pipe. To minimize uncertainty and yield the most accurate predictions possible, ultrasonic wall thickness measurements were made of the QC1 and QC2 MSLs at the strain gage locations. Reference 1 provides an assessment of the strain gage measurement accuracy. A value of +/-5.03% was determined to be the accuracy of the strain gage measurements.
In Reference 2, the error in strain gage readings was applied to the eight sets of strain gage data used to develop the unsteady pressure input into the ACM. The changes in pressure in the four dryer pressure transducers closest to the steam line nozzles was then computed to determine the uncertainty in the minimum error ACM predictions due to strain gage uncertainty. The pressure predictions were determined to be accurate to within +/-3.6%. This work was not repeated for the Modified 930 MWe ACM. While it can be expected that the model uncertainty would be comparable, it is conservative to apply a +/-5.03% strain gage uncertainty term directly.
2.2 Limitations of the ACM It has been noted that the ACM underpredicts loads below approximately 18 Hz.
This is largely a function of the spacing of the MSL strain gage pairs and the ability to discriminate long wavelength low frequency acoustic waves.
5 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 The strain gages are located at 651' and 621' elevation on the QC2 MSLs. If a quarter wave spans both detection points, it can be expected that signal discrimination will be affected. With a spacing of 30 feet and nominal acoustic speed of 1600 fps, a quarter wavelength associated with this distance yields a frequency of approximately 13.3 Hz. Review of ACM prediction data suggests a loss of low frequency signal prediction at 18 Hz or less, which is consistent with expectations. It should be noted that the phenomena described here is dependent primarily on the strain gage placement, and is not a function of any particular version of the ACM being used.
A reasonable way to determine the effect of omission of the low frequency load content is to separate out the low frequency signal content from the measured pressure data on the QC2 dryer and compare the effects on the RMS and peak pressures observed. This can be accomplished using a digital filtering operation on the FFT of the pressure time history and then recreating the time history minus the selected frequency components. The QC2 dryer pressure sensors are charge sensitive piezoelectric pressure transducers that have a flat frequency response between 2 Hz and 1000 Hz, which is consistent with the application under consideration.
This approach was applied for QC2 TC-41 data (at a 93OMWe/2884 MWt condition) for the 4 pressure sensor locations nearest the steam line nozzles (P-3, P-12, P-20, and P-21). The digital filter was set to remove frequency components from 0 to 20 Hz. The RMS and peak pressures were then computed for comparison, and are presented in the included table. As a check of the fidelity of the FFT process, an unfiltered transform was inverted back to the time domain and its statistics compared to the actual time history. Agreement in RMS and peak pressures was achieved out to 6 significant figures. Similar response is expected from the other dryer pressure sensor locations.
The results of this comparison support a conclusion that the loads omitted by the ACM in the 0-20 Hz range are negligible. The change in RMS pressure is less than 0.4% with the average of the change for the four sensors being 0.254%.
The change in peak pressures is less than 3% at most. Therefore, use of a bias term in the uncertainty analysis of 3%would conservatively bound the loss of 0-20 Hz loading components.
6 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 Table 1 Contribution of 0-20 Hz Components to Total Load, QC2 TC-41 Sensor RMS Pres I prese psi ressurepsi P.-3Base .060 '~~ 5ij 1.878 P-3 minus 0.6488 -1.9346 1.8767 0-20Hz (0.2307%) (0.9675%) (0.1013%)
components 1201' P-12 minus 0.7128 -2.1934 1.9655 0-20Hz (0.21%) (-1.696%) (-1.524%)
comronents 230 Base A§.0.5029 -1,707 .2"'I .'.7.;'; -'!.'=.-h's1 '752Evml P-20 minus 0.5009 -1.6964 1.7101 0-20Hz (0.397%) (0.621%) (2.442%)
components P-21 ,Base~ 0.8883 l i,;,!'i ;.
.. ~2.8669
', . i 2.;26 P-21 minus 0.8867 -2.3618 2.1965 0-20Hz (0.18%) (0.2155%) (2.8097%)
components 7 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 2.3 QC2 Steam Dryer Pressure Measurement Uncertainty The uncertainty in dryer pressure measurements consists of two components.
The first is the instrument accuracy and calibration results. The second is due to phenomenological effects that may induce error into the steam dryer-mounted pressure instruments.
2.3.1 Instrument Accuracy Reference 3 provides a detailed discussion of the expected instrument accuracy based on vendor supplied data and calibration results. The testing used two pressure instrument types with differing ranges for each. Two of the instruments used a larger range and had a slightly higher absolute error. The remaining 25 were of a smaller range and had a lower absolute error. The instrument accuracy is developed for both and yields a 3.9% absolute measurement uncertainty and a 2.9% relative measurement uncertainty for the limiting sensor.
The relative measurement uncertainty is the most appropriate value to apply for this assessment, since variations from the mean are of interest, rather than the absolute maximum values.
2.3.2 Phenomenological Considerations There are phenomenological considerations that are salient to the unsteady pressure measurements taken on the QC2 steam dryer. These include:
- 1) The effects of dome-mounted versus flush-mounted pressure transducers, with respect to measurement of incident acoustic pressure oscillations.
- 2) The potential for the nozzle entry vortices to induce unsteady velocity fields on the sensors nearest the nozzles.
Item 1 was the subject of considerable analytical work, as well as confirmatory testing in a wind tunnel. The results of this work are contained in Reference 4.
There were two important conclusions of this work:
a) The dome-mounted sensors will tend to overpredict the pressures by 3-8%. No correction was recommended in the test data reduction since the overprediction is conservative in application to structural analysis considerations. This will yield a 3% conservative bias.
b) The sensor domes had an extremely low sound signature as determined by wind tunnel testing. Therefore, the sensor domes could reasonably be expected to yield appropriate frequency content, unaltered by bluff body acoustic noise from the housing. It was also determined that downstream 8 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 sensors would not be affected by vortex shedding from upstream sensor mounts.
For item 2, following review of the data collected on QC2, it was determined that there was no evidence of vortex-induced unsteady components in the dryer pressure sensor responses opposite the MS nozzles, and therefore no additional factors were warranted. (Reference 6) 2.4 Uncertainty Associated with the ACM The validation of the ACM has been performed against QC2 in-vessel measurements. The initial efforts were directed at comparison predictions to measurements at six dryer pressure sensor locations. Two blind benchmark tests were performed and subsequent model adjustments were made. The resultant model, typically referred to as the "modified 930 MWe model," was then applied to develop dryer loads that were used to qualify the QC2 steam dryer. In this work, it was noted that the model generally overpredicted the loads, particularly in the steam dryer skirt region. The frequency content was found to be accurate, particularly at the dominant acoustic load frequencies (135-160 Hz).
This validation is provided in Reference 5.
This validation work was limited to comparisons with 6 dryer pressure sensors.
The criterion applied to the Modified 930 MWe ACM was that it be capable of predicting the 6 sensor responses to within 90% or greater. This criterion was met on 5 of 6. The sixth sensor measured very low pressures and was discarded.
An additional review of the Modified 930 MWe predictions of the QC2 TC-41 data has been performed and is included in this report. This review includes 22 of the 26 sensors and develops a basis to assess the uncertainty of the load prediction capabilities of this ACM. It should be noted that the ACM model is limited to frequency content from 0-200 Hz. The QC2 TC-41 data was sampled at a 2048 Hz rate. For this comparison, no filtering of the test data was performed, which is conservative.
9 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0
- 3. Calculations/Data Considerations 3.1 Software Applications The Mathcad-1 1 software package was used to support this evaluation. The statistical analysis features were used to calculate standard deviation (RMS pressure) along with minimum, maximum, and mean values. The spectral analyses presented were performed using complex Fast Fourier Transforms, to allow characterization of the frequency content and power spectral density (PSD) of the measured data. The data sets were reviewed to determine the data trigger point. All data after the trigger point was used from each data set. The PSDs were generated using sample groups of 2048 samples per group, based on the data time step. Intermediate computational results are reported to 4 significant figures to allow comparison. The final recommended results were rounded to 2 significant figures.
3.2 Comparison of Modified 930 MWe ACM to QC2 TC-41 Data The Modified 930 MWe model was used to develop a full set of pressures for comparison to the QC2 plant test data. For this comparison, the same data interval was employed in the prediction and the test data. This interval is approximately 65 seconds of plant data. The following tables provide a summary of the comparison of RMS and peak pressures.
Table 2 Statistical Comparison Sensors P-1 to P-5 Same Data Interval Sensor , RMS pressureps -' Mln 'pressure psl; i 1Max pressure P.-1 CDI ; 0.415; ' . .1264 ,.306:
P-1 Measured 0.431 1.299 1.407 P-2 CDI ;;i;: 0-.255 i i;-iil; 0.861 ': i i 0'896 : :
P-2 Measured 0.546 -1.533 1.417 P-3LCDII 0.682 , 262.
P-3 Measured 0.631 -1.887 1.817
_C1 P-4 Measured 0.313 -1.041 0.936 P-5 C0I: _ ! 0.185 i ;; ! 0.714 ;': ':;i;i0.785 :- 7 P-5 Measured 0.314 -1.127 1.184 Based on CD1 dataset: 930modbenchmarkl.txt time/dated 9/06/2005,1:18:58PM.
Based on plant data set:
P01_05_TC41_repeat.txt time/dated 5/23/2005 10:32AM 10 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 Table 3 Statistical Comparison Sensors P-6 to P-10 Same Data Interval Sensor RMS pressureP.I Ipressure psi 'Maxprssure P-6 Measured 0.43 -1.408 1.395 P-7 Measured 0.38 -1.217 1.081 P-CD] .0.23. -0.815 0.805 O
P-8 Measured 0.44 -1.268 1.178 P-9 ICDI, 0.57V'81 1.7 4 1.2 P-9 Measured 0.579 1.578 P-1 0.434 ,:!:i ;:;,,; ;i;, 3 . ' ,
P-10 Measured 0.356 -1.079 1.071 Based on CDI dataset: 930modbenchmarkl.txt time/dated 9/06/2005, 1:18:58PM.
Based on plant data set.
P06_10_TC4Lrepeat.txt time/dated 5/23/2005 10:33AM Table 4 Statistical Comparison Sensors P-11 to P-15 Same Data Interval Sensort.:: ;';RMS PressUMre',j6! w.Min pressure p~sl i~i.,s"~
x,,pressure
P-11 Measured 0.446 -1.37 1.38 P-12 Measured 0.69 -2.069 1.907 13 CDI. . 0.064 P-13 Measured 0.17 -0.624 0.657
'P-14Maue 0.075 -0.3247 0.4 P-14 Measured 0.294 09407 0-15C DI 0.8.. 7 :i6 1.13 P-15 Measured 0.547 -1.676 1.516 Based on CDI dataset: 930modbenchmarkl.txt time/dated 9/06/2005,1:18:58PM.
Based on plant data set:
P11_15_TC41_repeat.txttime/dated5/23/2005 10:34AM 11 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 Table 5 Statistical Comparison Sensors P-16 to P-20 Same Data Interval SenorRMS .. ; ^'~,t8.': prebssureo
- '4I
,P i ps7:~~ SS rssure-, psireI'm '
P-16 CDI, ;,,0.04,, , I ; '2
!8g'i -'~0'}.l !58 0.',',,,;iSl,"$i64t,!'i;,', it, ;
P-16 Measured 0.167 -0.585 0.571 P-17,CDI ;, '0.25,1 i , ;, 879"08 P-17 Measured 0.232 -0.808 0.742 P-18CDI Measud 0.498 ii 1.36 , ,13 P-18 Measured 0.398 -1.212 1.143
. . , , ,'l , . - ...... . . ," " I j I - I-- . -1. I . . ". I " .
-.-7-- - -. ::i,; ".
U ,L*I ---
'.- !UMbUiiO: a ,l ii'.:',..5e{
'il '! .............. 'I.::
YY;.
P-20 Measured 0.499 -1.613 1.588 Based on CDI dataset: 930modbenchmarkl.txt time/dated 9/06/2005,1:18.58PM Based on plant data set:
P16_20_TC41_repeat.txt time/dated 5/23/2005 10:35AM Table 6 Statistical Comparison Sensors P-21 to P-27 Same Data Interval Sensor RMS p, e 11 ,e pressure psi Mxre,,ssue.
ps P - 1 C I0 8 4; ;J ;.7 7 2 28 `,2.337 P-21 Measured 0.883 -2.261 2.099 P0.7022289 P-22 Measured 0.422 -1.379 1.243 P 2 C 100 ' ; ! , * ' ' - .10 9 ' 0T 1- 5 P-23 Measured 0.105 -0.456 0.378 P124 -CDI ' .'251" 1T.034 7' ',078 P-24 Measured 0.225 -0.764 0.831 CDI,, 0.'772 0P-225 ; .25 2 293 93"7 ,;;
P-25 Measured 0.344 -1.27 1.166 P-26 CDI 0.077 P-26 Measured 0.104 -0.334 0.337
'P-27CDI, ' 0.'03 3' 13 :' 0.124 P-27 Measured 0.218 -0.559 0.543 Based on CDI dataset 930modbenchmarkl.txt time/dated 9/06/2005, 1:18:58 PM Based on plant data set:
P21_25_TC41Lrepeat.txt time/dated 5/23/2005 10:37AM P26_27 TC41_repeat.txt time/dated 5/23/2005 10:37AM 12 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 Figures 1, 2, and 3 provide a graphical display of prediction vs measurement for RMS, peak positive, and peak negative pressures. These were generated by sorting the predictions and measurements, and then plotting the sorted files. The sensor locations P-13, P-14, P-19, P-23, P-26 were not included in these plots.
The P-13, P-14, and P-23 sensors are internally mounted to the dryer and measure the internal dryer pressure. P-19 had been determined to be malfunctioning during the power ascension testing. P-26 is on the mast in a non-meaningful location for structural load considerations.
A perfect match would lie exactly on the reference line. For pressure transducers on the outer dryer surface, values above the line are conservative, while values below the line are non-conservative.
13 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 Figure 1 RMS Comparison Mod930 Comparison RMS Press I I II 0.9 _
0.8 X 0.7 X ) 5 s0.6
- Crrsi.
j 0.5 _,_
0.4 X 'X 0.3 .'X 0.2 . X 0.1
- I X 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Qrmsr i measured (psi) 14 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 Figure 2 Peak Pressure Comparison Mod930 Comparison Peak Positive Press 3
I I I 2.5 t
)( 55 2
)(
5 c max
- t. f I 1.5 )(55
.I I
S 1 I 0.5 1 0
0 0.5 I 1.5 2 2.5 3 Qmaxli measured (psi) 15 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 Figure 3 Peak Negative Pressure Comparison Mod930 Comparison Peak, Negative Press 3 II I I I 2.5 t X X '
2
( mcmin) z 9 X i
.M X 1.5 I X."
XX" X X
_~ X.
lI* ,,xx 0.5 t 0
- 0 0.5 I 1.5 2 2.5 3 (F Qmini measured (psi) 16 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 3.3 Summary of Statistical Results Review of Figures 1 through 3 and the data tables provides the following observations:
- 1) The Modified 930 MWe ACM predicts the highest RMS pressures fairly well. This reflects the criteria applied in the model tuning, which ensured that the four sensors nearest the nozzles (P-3, P-12, P-20, and P-21) would be predicted at no less than 90% of the measured response. The locations on the horizontal midplane of the dryer face tend to be the most underpredicted (P-2, P-5, P-8 and P11). The skirt locations are significantly overpredicted (P-22, P-24, P-25).
- 2) The peak positive pressures show a similar trend as the RMS plot. Most of the highest peak pressures are conservative relative to the data. The midrange peaks tend to fall slightly below and the lowest peaks show the most non-conservative trend.
- 3) The peak negative pressures show a similar trend to the peak positive pressures, with the largest peaks overpredicted and the smaller pressure points underpredicted.
Based on these observations, one cannot conclusively state that the Modified 930 MWe ACM provides a conservative pressure response at all locations. It does generally overpredict the largest RMS and peak pressures while underpredicting lower pressure points. Therefore, it is appropriate to consider additional statistical evaluation for the purposes of assessing an ACM uncertainty term to be applied.
17 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 3.4 Additional Statistical Considerations In developing and applying evaluations of the Modified 930 MWe ACM, it is important to determine what parameter is most significant with respect to the overall process. If energy storage and buildup is observed in the structural model, which would be evidenced by the peak stresses building and reaching maximum values at or near the end of the analysis interval, RMS pressures would be the most appropriate choice. If the structure is being driven by the load, but not in a resonant response mode, the peak pressures are the most appropriate parameter to focus on. The frequency content of the load and the structural response provide a third possibility, that of ensuring the load content at a dominant frequency is conservatively determined. All three approaches will be examined.
3.4.1 Development of Bias Uncertainty An additional statistical treatment was performed for the 22 sensor locations selected. Specifically, the mean of the prediction-measured data was divided by the mean of the measurements to develop a global sense of the model performance.
Table 7 p(PredicteSd Meastrd). P Measured'tBias % of measured!
RMS .034 0.432 ;
Peak Pos. 0.04 3.2 Peak Neg. ; 0.036 -
1.319 9, ;>' <;
Based on the above results, one would apply a bias correction of 7.8% to the RMS values, and a -0.5% bias correction to the peak-to-peak pressures.
18 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 3.4.2 Integration of 135-160 Hz PSD to Evaluate Frequency Content A load ratio can be calculated based on the integrals of the predicted and measured PSDs for each sensor. The integrals are developed over the desired frequency interval and the ratio of the square roots of the integrals is compared.
A value of load ratio greater than 1 indicates that the predicted value exceeds the measured data in that interval. The formulas used to develop this table are provided below:
160 PSDsumP:= E PSD-D Ik k = 135 160 PSDsumM := Z PSDLDrfk k = 135 LoadRat :=
VPSDsumM Where:
PSDD1 k=Power Spectral Density Coefficients (psi squared) Prediction PSDDmk=Power Spectral Density Coefficients (psi squared) Measured PSDsumP=Area under the Predicted PSD curve in the frequency range of interest. The square root of this quantity is the RMS pressure.
PSDsumM=Area under the Measured PSD curve in the frequency range of interest. The square root of this quantity is the RMS pressure.
The predicted vs measured components of the Load Ratio are plotted in Figure 4 and provide comparable information to the Figure 1 RMS plot, but limited to the frequency interval of 135-160 Hz.
19 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 Figure 4 135-160 Hz RMS Comparison Mod930 Comparison 135-160Hz RMS 0.9 ,,, -
0.8
,, X 0.7 0.6 vo Pi
- Xx C.w X X' 0.5 e .....
c 0.4 X ,,
0.3
)( t)( I ,"'
0.2 0.1 0
) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 M1,i measured (psi) 20 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 Tables 8 and 9 provide the results obtained from this exercise as well as the global RMS and peak pressure ratios for comparison. In Table 8 the global RMS and peak pressure ratios are calculated by simple division of the predicted value by the measured value for each sensor location of interest. InTable 9, the interval RMS vs the global RMS are provided for comparison.
The following observations can be made:
- 1) The Load Ratio appears to correlate fairly well with the global RMS, particularly on the external hood locations. This would suggest that the differences observed in the frequency range of 135-160 Hz are likely responsible for the difference in global RMS observed.
- 2) The Load Ratio does not correlate as well with the peak pressure ratio calculated. This would suggest that peak pressures are not as directly affected as the RMS. This result is not unexpected, based on previous work to evaluate the distribution of pressures using histograms.
- 3) The interval and global RMS compare very favorably, with slightly more uncertainty resulting from the interval comparison.
21 of 33
AM.2005-012 Revision 0 Table 8 Results of 135-160 Hz Load Content Investigation
- Sensor , ! '4;41 ' lAiSdtis8o;ifl ;'.'i'.!
4,LsloadRatiol ; "Peakt.ositi~ave l;Ratio
- iji. .(Eli' ,n!ie,)
r!Fj, i Li reiuenlcies)
P-1jhood) 03939 i 0R963 ! ' 0.928 P-2 (hood) 0.409 0.467 0.632 p h3(0 1.028 .' 1 .1207j; P-4 (hood) 0.603 0.642 0.702 (hood)
P-S : 0.52 O589 !0.6 3 P-6 (hood) 1.067 1.081 1.186 "P-7;(hobd) .' 0.626;; ; ;5 ' ;,.732;'. .
P-8(hood) 0.465 0.523 0.683 h :~~ 0.956 ;ii '1i003 , ' :1157."' ;,'i' P-10 (hood) 1.205 1.219 1.234
[P-11( ood)f'E :',; '! 0.403 '
'^t+;fw7 I;l~; 'i08 i'e ;;itli!!,j P-12 (hood) 0.921 0.955 0.969 P15sde) ' 044 522 !' , ,, 747. '"
P-16 (exit plenum) 0.118 0.239 0.287 P-7 d) :;t.035 ,;l ;821i 0 ,: .! 1 164 !
P-18 (hood) 1.136 1.128 1.138
.. ?Q. hoo g L 1:7:83:,;i,!' !iF;S8,12 i,;',,
t.1 'i1 .256 ' 'i, P-21 (hood) 0.897 0.910 1.113 P-22 1skirt' i :, '1.55 .' , 4 2.082 P-24 (skirt) 0.791 1.116 1.186 P-25 s7irt5. .3 L 2 .966 :,' ;
P-27 (exit plenum) 0.05 0.151 0.228 Table 9 135-160 Hz Interval Statistics p(Predicted- Measured' 1Measlfirwd ,Blas'% of measured Global RMS -0.034 0.432 -7.8 22 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0
- 4. Results 4.1 Summary of Uncertainty Terms In Section 2, the uncertainties associated with measurement of steam line strain and components uncertainties of the dryer pressure instruments were developed.
The main steam line strain gage measurement uncertainty is 5.03%. No adjustment to this value is applied internal to the ACM, which is a conservative treatment. The pressure instruments were shown to have an uncertainty of 2.9%, with a phenomenological bias of -3%.
Section 3 developed a comparison of the Modified 930 MWe ACM to the QC2 measured data at Test Condition 41. The data was examined in multiple ways to cover the RMS predictions, the peak pressure responses, and to determine the relative load content at the key frequency interval of 135-160 Hz, where significant acoustic loads have been observed. The following were key observations:
- 1) The Modified 930 MWe ACM tends to overpredict the largest pressures, RMS as well as peak, while underpredicting the lower measured pressures.
- 2) Based on the distribution of over and under predictions, a net bias based on 22 key sensor locations was developed. This bias is 7.8% for the RMS pressure, and -0.5% for the peak-to-peak, and 13.1% for the 135-160 Hz interval based RMS.
- 3) Since the highest pressures tend to be overpredicted by this model, it could reasonably be argued that no additional uncertainty should be applied to accommodate the shortfall in the low pressure response comparisons.
- 4) An uncertainty term that was pressure dependent would be optimal, but virtually impossible to use in practice in assessing appropriateness of stress analysis results. Therefore, applying a bias term globally to represent the average amount of margin required is a conservative alternative.
4.2 Combination of Uncertainty Terms The uncertainty terms discussed are combined to develop an estimated uncertainty for the application of the Modified 930 MWe ACM to determining loads on the dryer. This combination does not reflect uncertainty or inherent conservatism in the Finite Element Model. Separate tables are provided, to reflect uncertainty calculated based on peak-to-peak pressure as well as uncertainty based on RMS pressure/frequency response. The uncertainty summaries are contained in the following tables. In the combination of the 23 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 uncertainty components, bias terms are treated algebraically, while true uncertainty terms are combined by SRSS and then added to the total. These summaries are applicable to both Quad Cities units as well as projected applications at Dresden Unit 2 and Unit 3 when developing pressure time histories using this Modified 930 MWe ACM.
Table 10 Uncertainty Terms in Dryer Analysis (Peak Pressure Based)
Uncertainty ;.'Absolutea; I Effecpt on Analyi?"s Meaurmet Strai hGag :' .efsehst Itij'W; ,.il; 5.30/~3%bWasiaon'OV- m,'
asmrpt.on o~Inear, ACM Low Frequency 3% bias on peak-to-Limitations peak pressure Measuremehnt!, 2.9i:.l, Pressure Sensor N/A -3 to -8%bias on Phenomenological sensor reading
~ACM n[aitta I 05%7biA§'bnpekt
'Net Effect ', ', X ;:etAsplus' 5,,1%~rss oif
-measurementerrors)
Tota1=600 24 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 Table 11 Uncertainty Terms in Dryer Analysis (RMS Pressure Based)
Uncertainty .' ;Absolute6'- ""',.:;.. ,- , , Effect onAnalysisl Term 1~ Effect% .
Strain Gage 03 +-5 base on:5E03 Measureen ,;assumptionlol 1inear~
ACM Low Frequency 0.4% bias on RMS Limitations pressure resure e + 9%
Meai su'r'ement 2.9~ Re1~
Pressure Sensor N/A -3 to -8%bias on Phenomenological sensor reading Uncertainy,
- ACM :: v etEfct 52%net biaspls NeH I
~ I5.89~(srssl mtueeri Sof ros I II
I I'~ I otai=IiAJ.%"
25 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 Table 12 Uncertainty Terms in Dryer Analysis (Interval RMS Pressure Based)
Uncertainty ' Absplue E mfe l ! ;
Strain Gage'50 +1 5,.03% aedo Measurement T- ' ssuptIonOf'IInar4 ACM Low Frequency 0.4% bias on RMS Limitations pressure ensor $ 3'.9 A.bIM !'-r j-Meadsureme nt , .9d e ',>ii.
Pressure Sensor N/A -3 to -8%bias on Phenomenolooical sensor reading ACMUncer3 as on'RM L : 581%
`Tbtal::16,3%
26 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0
- 5. Conclusions/Discussion A summary of the key uncertainties associated with the application of the Modified 930 MWe ACM has been developed. This development included a detailed review of the comparison of the Modified 930 MWe ACM to the QC2 Test Condition 41 in-vessel test data. This review focused on RMS pressures, peak pressures, and also included load content in the frequency interval containing the maximum responses. The following conclusions are made based on this work:
- 1) The ACM overpredicts most of the largest peak pressures and generally overpredicts the largest RMS values as well.
- 2) The ACM underpredicts the lower pressures, typically those situated on the horizontal midplane of the dryer face.
- 3) The ACM overpredicts the dryer skirt locations by a large margin, approximately a factor of two on RMS as well as peak pressure.
- 4) An uncertainty term based on net bias of RMS or peak pressure provides a simplified approach to defining margin requirements, and will yield compounded conservatism due to the ACM behavior noted above.
- 5) Uncertainties based on peak, RMS, and an interval based RMS have been developed. The selection between them should be based on review of the structural model results based on the observation of buildup in predicted strains in the analysis interval selected. If buildup is observed, RMS is the most appropriate, otherwise the peak pressure combination is recommended.
- 6) Use of the interval based RMS uncertainty would provide additional assurance of conservative application of the model.
Based on the development and consideration of uncertainties presented, a margin of 6.3% to 16.3% is recommended in the application of the Modified 930 MWe ACM. This uncertainty is independent of the structural finite element model, and any conservatism, inherent or designed, that are included in that model.
27 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0
- 6. References
- 1. Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. 2005. Quad Cities Strain Gage Evaluation. Calculation Package File No. EXLN-200-301, Project No. EXLN-20Q. Revision 0.
- 2. C.D.I. Report No. 05 Benchmarking of Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Steam Dryer Load Methodology Against Quad Cities Unit 2 In-Plant Data, Revision 0.
- 3. GE-NE-0000-0037-1951 -01, Revision 0, "Dryer Vibration Instrumentation Uncertainty," April 2005.
- 4. GE-NE-0000-0038-2076-01, Revision 0, "Summary of the Effects of the Sensor Cover Plates on Dynamic Pressure Measurement," April 2005.
- 5. "Acoustic Circuit Benchmark, Quad Cities Unit 2 Instrumented Steam Path, 790 MWe and 930 MWe Power Levels," AM-2005-002, Revision 0, June 2005.
- 6. "An Assessment of the Effects of Uncertainty in the Application of Acoustic Circuit Model Predictions to the Calculation of Stresses in the Replacement Quad Cities Units 1 and 2 Steam Dryers," AM-2005-008, Revision 0, August 2005.
28 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 Appendix - Test Description and Sensor Locations Two power levels were selected for the acoustic circuit benchmarking effort, 790 MWe and 930 MWe. These power levels correspond to pre-EPU full power and post-EPU full power conditions. A blind test was performed using 790 MWe data. Following this test, model adjustments were allowed prior to the 930 MWe blind test. Following the 930 MWe test, a final adjustment was made to the acoustic circuit model. For this report, only the 930 MWe data will be compared to the pressure predictions obtained from the acoustic circuit analysis described in the prior section.
The following descriptions provide details with respect to the vessel pressure instrument and MSL strain gage placement.
Eight main steam line locations were instrumented with 16 pairs of strain gages for the acoustic circuit analysis. Inthe first blind test, CDI used the first two locations off the reactor pressure vessel nozzle and only one strain gage pair at each location.
. MSL "A" Elevation 651 S1/3 pair Elevation 621 S5/S5a pair
- MSL "B" Elevation 651 S7/S9 pair Elevation621 S11/S11a pair
- MSL "C" Elevation 651 S31/S33 pair Elevation 621 S35/S35a pair
- MSL "D" Elevation 651 S37/S39 pair Elevation 621 S41/S41a pair Additional Strain gage pairs used in load development are as follows:
- MSL "A" Elevation 651 S2/S4 pair Elevation 621 S6/S6a pair
- MSL "B" Elevation 651 S8/S10 pair Elevation 621 S12/S12a pair
- MSL "C" Elevation 651 S32/S34 pair Elevation 621 S36/S36a pair
- MSL "D" Elevation 651 S38/S40 pair Elevation 621 S42/S42a pair Based on the results obtained in the first blind test, it was determined that using both pairs of strain gages at each location provides a better measure of the piping breathing mode and therefore would provide improved (better frequency 29 of 33
AM-2005-012 Revision 0 match) predictions. This approach continues to be applied to the maximum extent practicable.
Pressure Instrumentation:
Twenty-seven pressure instruments were mounted on the dryer surfaces. During the start-up test, measurements from P-1 9 became unreliable and it was declared to be non-functional. The drawings showing the locations of the sensors follow.
30 of 33
C")
CY) cw, I
ilI 1f
'1 111 0
LI I
0 m
0 0
it al N
'C
cY)
CO, C
0 re CM3 T-Lb 0
0 0~
"4
I- t. hJ 3 c~r)
CO)
E cf, I) D TABLE SENSUP MOUNIINC
'ENO !ETAIL DOUNT
,- 1 F (H171 S-4 F 4HOPT -
Pla H 0a) P20 P14 D IC., G AS I (H FT 0
04 TC.
Lad A A Z70' FACE ILO IW TOA"DS CENTER, DRYER SENSOR LOCATIONS - 2700 FACE l _ 0 1 5 I t 4 3 I AC-234CCUMI.I,.