ML053620348
| ML053620348 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 11/28/2005 |
| From: | Gustin H, James Smith Structural Integrity Associates |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| P305817 PBCH-14Q-302, Rev 3 | |
| Download: ML053620348 (28) | |
Text
ENCLOSURE 2 Analytical Evaluation of Steam Generator A Upper Shell to Transition Cone Weld Indications 27 pages follow
StructuralIntegrity CALCULATION FileNo.: PBCH-14Q-302 Associates, Inc. l PACKAGE Project No.: PBCH-14Q PROJECT NAME: Point Beach Unit 1 Flaw Evaluation Fall 2005 Contract No.: P305817 CLIENT: Nuclear Management Company, LLC PLANT: Point Beach Nuclear Plant CALCULATION TITLE: Steam Generator B Flaw Evaluation Project Mgr. Preparer(s) &
Document .. . . Approval Checker(s)
Revision AffecteRevision evision Descrption Signature & Signatures &
Date Date 0 1-7 Initial Issue H. L. Gustin H. L. Gustin Appendices 10/26/05 10/26/05 A, B,C S. S. Tang 10/26/05 1 2, 5 Corrected typo H. L. Gustin H. L. Gustin Added discussion on 10/27/05 10/27/05 applicability to flaws S. S. Tang accepted by standards 1027/05 2 3, 5 Corrected typo, client H. L. Gustin H. L. Gustin comment 10/28/05 10/28/05 S. S. Tang 10/28/05 3 5 Modified Reference 5, added H. L. Gustin H. L. Gustin Appendix C e-mail reference to Appendix 11/28/05 11/17/05 C T6-t J. E. Smith 11/28/05 Page 1 SI Form F2001R2a
1 INTRODUCTION The 2005 inservice inspection of steam generator B at Point Beach Nuclear Plant Unit 1 identified several indications in the transition cone to upper shell weld region of the steam generator. The indications were assessed per the flaw proximity rules of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section XI, IWA-3300
[1]. Following assessment of flaw proximity, indication dimensions were compared to the flaw acceptance standards of Section XI, IWC-3510 [1] by the plant [4]. Three indications (two simple or individual indications, plus one composite indication that resulted from proximity-based flaw combination) did not meet the flaw acceptance standards of Section XI, IWC-35 10 [1]. It is therefore necessary to conduct a flaw evaluation per Section XI, IWB-3600 (since IWC-3600 is in preparation) for these three flaws. This calculation evaluates a flaw that bounds the three unacceptable flaws per the guidelines of Section XI, IWB-3610, which include acceptance criteria based on linear elastic fracture mechanics and consideration of potential flaw growth. This calculation does not apply to other flaws which may be identified, without further evaluation. Conservative assumptions have been used in this evaluation to demonstrate flaw acceptability per IWB-3610. This calculation has been design reviewed in accordance with the requirements of the Structural Integrity Associates Quality Assurance Program.
2 TECHNICAL APPROACH Fracture mechanics methods consistent with the requirements of ASME Section XI have been applied in this flaw evaluation. The acceptance criterion is that the applied stress intensity factor due to the observed flaw, with consideration of flaw growth over the remaining life of the plant, remains below the material toughness, including applicable margins from Section XI. The flaw acceptance criteria, based on applied stress intensity factor, was determined based on Paragraph IWB-3612 of ASME Section XI [1]. The material toughness for the carbon steel steam generator shell material at operating temperature is taken to be 200 ksi-1inch, consistent with Figure A-4200-1 from ASME Section XI Appendix A for K1c. A safety factor of 410 is applied, as required by IWB-3610. This gives an allowable stress intensity factor of 200/410 = 63.25 ksi-4inch.
A conservative bounding flaw was defined that envelopes the dimensions of the three unacceptable indications. The fracture mechanics analysis was performed using this enveloping flaw, and this analysis effectively evaluates all three of the unacceptable flaws.
3 FLAW CHARACTERIZATION A total of 28 flaw indications were observed. These flaws were compared to the flaw proximity rules of IWA-3300. Table 1 (which is based on data in [4]) lists all 28 flaw dimensions and their locations, and summarizes the results of the proximity rule assessment. Of the 28 indications, only one pair had to be combined by the proximity rules (numbers 10 and 11 in Table 1). Plant personnel assessed all flaws to the IWC-35 10 acceptance standards, and determined that only two individual flaws (numbers 7 and 20 in Table 1) plus the one composite flaw (10 and 11) required further evaluation. A bounding flaw with the maximum length and through wall dimension of any of these three flaws was used for the IWB-3600 jSructuralIntegrity File No.: PBCH-14Q-302 Revision: 3 VAssociates, Inc. Page 2
evaluation in this calculation. This bounding flaw had length = 11.5 inch (from flaw 7), and depth = 0.24 inch (from flaw 20). It is located 0.74 inch below the outside surface (corresponding to flaw 20).
The observed unacceptable flaws are entirely subsurface and not exposed to any fluid chemistry.
4 DESIGN INPUTS The as-measured wall thickness is 3.84 inches in the transition cone region (from plant UT reports [41).
The transition cone material is SA-533 Grade A, Class 2 [6] with specified yield stress = 70 ksi. The Upper Shell material has a yield stress of less than 50 ksi.
From [5], the combined membrane, bending and secondary stress (PL+PB+Q) at the affected weld location is 64.7 ksi.
Welding residual stresses at the flaw location are negligible since the vessel is a thick walled shell that has been stress relieved. Residual stresses are steady state secondary stresses.
5 ASSUMPTIONS
- 1. To be conservative, the limiting stress value reported in Section 4.0 is used, and treated as an applied membrane stress. This is conservative because membrane stresses are more severe than bending stresses at equal magnitude.
- 2. The service life is assumed to be 60 years.
- 3. The material toughness K1c is taken as 200 ksi- 4inch, from Section XI Appendix A [1].
6 CALCULATIONS 6.1 Fracture mechanics evaluation Linear elastic fracture mechanics and fatigue flaw growth evaluations of the bounding flaw were performed. The flaw was modeled as a subsurface semi-elliptical flaw in an infinite plate subjected to membrane and bending stress as illustrated in Figure 1. This is a common fracture mechanics model applied to subsurface flaws in thick shells. Figure 1 refers to the 1986 Edition of ASME Section XI. This is the Edition to which the SI fracture mechanics program pc-CRACK [3] was developed. However, the flaw definition in that figure remains the same in subsequent Editions of the Code, including the committed Edition and Addenda for Point Beach [1]. For this subsurface flaw model, the flaw depth is defined as 2a. Therefore, the flaw depth, a, is half of the measured flaw depth as reported in the UT reports.
StructuralIntegrity File No.: PBCH-14Q-302 Revision: 3 V Associates, Indc. Page 3
For the indication the flaw parameters were calculated as follows:
Depth [4] 2a = 0.24 inch Length [4] 1= 11.5 inches Aspect ratio: a/l = 0.01 a/t = 3.13%
Eccentricity ratio: 2e/t = 0.552 The applied stress intensity factors for the indication above were calculated using pc-CRACK, [3]. The aspect ratio of 0.1 was used in the evaluation for the indication (limit of the model). The applied stress intensity factor Kapplied at the limiting location on the flaw face was compared to an allowable value of KxJ410, where K1c is the material toughness (assumed to be 200 ksi-4inch for the steam generator shell material at the service temperatures, from Section XI, Appendix A, Figure A-4200- 1), and the factor of 410 represents the factor of safety that is imposed by ASME Section XI, IWB-3610 for Normal and Upset conditions. The allowable K is therefore 63.25 ksi4inch. As long as the applied stress intensity factor remains below the allowable value for the flaw size, the flaw remains acceptable by Section XI criteria.
pc-CRACK output for the fracture mechanics analysis is contained in Appendix A.
6.2 End of Life Fatigue Flaw Growth Calculation Since the indications are subsurface and therefore not wetted, the end of life flaw size due to fatigue growth was calculated using the fatigue growth curves for carbon and low alloy ferritic steels exposed to air environments, Figure A-4300-1 of Appendix A of Section XI [I]. The flaw was conservatively assumed to experience cyclic stresses corresponding to a stress range from 0 to 64.7 ksi [5]. This is conservative because the latter value corresponds to the sum of the highest reported membrane plus bending plus secondary (PL+PB+Q) stress..
Fatigue growth results are contained in Appendix B.
7 RESULTS OF ANALYSIS The fracture mechanics analysis shows that the bounding flaw is acceptable per the criteria ofASME Section XI, IWB-3612. The calculated maximum stress intensity factor for the observed flaw is 42 ksi-linch, as compared to the allowable value of 63.25 ksi-4inch, which includes required safety margins (410) as noted in Section 2 of this calculation. In fact this flaw could grow to slightly more than twice the current size and remain acceptable. All actual flaws are smaller than this assumed bounding flaw.
The fatigue growth calculation demonstrates that over more than 3900 cycles from 0 to 64.7 ksi, the resulting flaw growth of the assumed bounding flaw remains below the allowable flaw size. Most transients experienced by the component are much less severe than this transient, and would lead to negligible growth. Therefore, growth of the flaw to an unacceptable size over the remaining life of the plant is not predicted.
Strucural Integrity FileNo.: PBCH-14Q-302 l Revision: 3 4.- Associates, Inc,,, Page 4
The bounding flaw analyzed in this calculation is much more severe than are any of the flaws in this weld that were accepted under the Acceptance Standards of IWC-35 10. Therefore, although fracture mechanics evaluation of such acceptable flaws is not required, the fracture mechanics analysis in this calculation could conservatively be applied to such flaws, if necessary.
8 DEGRADATION MECHANISMS The observed flaws are subsurface flaws that are remote from any surface (either the wetted inside surface or the air outside surface). Such a flaw is therefore not a result of chemistry-driven mechanisms such as stress corrosion cracking or corrosion. These factors lead to the conclusion that the observed flaws are in fact artifacts of original fabrication, and not due to an active degradation mechanism. The evaluation of the hypothetical flaw growth by a fatigue mechanism is therefore conservative.
9 CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSIONS Based on the results of the evaluation presented in this calculation package, the indications found during the inservice inspection of the steam generator B transition cone weld are acceptable and meet the requirement of ASME Code,Section XI, IWB-3610 [1].
The total of all indication areas is about 9.2 in2 . The area of the steam generator weld is about 2012 in2 ,
assuming a circumference of 524 inches [4], and a wall thickness of 3.84 inches. The transverse area reduction is less than 0.5% of the original area. This area reduction will have no significant affect on the hoop stress in the weld. Thus, the steam generator stress analysis based on ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III is not affected. Therefore, the requirement of IWB-3610 (d) (2) is satisfied.
10 REFERENCES
- 1. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, 1998 Edition with Addenda through 2000.
- 2. Steam Generator Design Summary, E-mail from Brian Kemp (NMC) to Hal Gustin (SI), dated 10/19/05 SI File: PBCH-14Q-220
- 3. pc-CRACK for Windows, Version 3.1-98348, Structural Integrity Associates, 1998.
- 4. Point Beach Ultrasonic Examination Reports, SI File: PBCH-14Q-218
- 5. E-mail from Brian Kemp (NMC) to Hal Gustin (SI) dated 10/22/05, supplemented by e-mail from Brian Kemp (NMC) to Hal Gustin (SI) dated 11/10/05. SI File: PBCH-14Q-220
- 6. Telecon, Russell Turner (NMC) to Hal Gustin (SI) 10/25/05 SI File: PBCH-14Q-220 InF Filetructura No.: PBCH-14Q-302 Revision: 3 v Associates,'Inc. I ; Page 5
I j> Cy = C+C 1X
- l =
- CalculatedKisnaxium ofK at pointsl &:.2
- Model assumes that .
the center of the crack ispositionedattxit/2 A
4L Li C~o fC, =
=e
-a6+:i06f: y:; : ' iection A-A
(;U = Co + C@) (niebrane stress)
Cyb:
EiEE -c 102) (bending stress)
REQURED INPUTS:
t: wall thickness a:: mamlim crackl depth.
(u,6,.cmin[(O.95 - 2e/t)2. 0.325tJ) mateialOyiEldstress m;
a/t aa cakaspecta0tio(l 5all *1 /5.5) 2et: eccentticty ratio (I) *2 et O .6)
Figure 1: ASME B&PV Code Section XI Subsurface Crack Model Structural integrity HFileNo.: PBCH-14Q-302 I Revision: 3 V Associats, Inc. Page 6
STEP3IN3 Table 1: ASME CODE, SECTION XI, IWA- 3300 PROXIMITY CHECK INPUT INSPECTION DATA FOR c:\proxtest\step3in3.dat NO. START END LENGTH UP. T IP LW. TIP D EPTH 1 24.000 27.000 3.000 2.7 50 2.870 .120 2 16.000 18.250 2.250 2.5 70 2.700 .130 3 19.750 20.750 1.000 1.440 1.600 .160 4 24.250 25.250 1.000 1.5 10 1.630 .120 5 30.380 33.000 2.620 1.2 50 1.350 .100 6 43. 380 45.000 1.620 1.160 1.250 .090 7 47.500 59.000 11.500 2.810 3.020 .210 8 61.500 63.000 1.500 2.8 10 2.930 .120 9 67. 500 74.500 7.000 2.4 80 2.630 .150 10 82.000 85. 500 3.500 1.050 1.150 .100 11 78.500 82.000 3.500 1.130 1.260 .130 12 86.500 88.000 1.500 2.120 2.250 .130 13 133.630 134.380 .750 .740 .820 .080 14 130.130 130.750 .620 .950 1.120 .170 15 165.250 165.500 .250 1.950 2.100 .150 16 227.880 228.380 .500 1.4 10 1.480 .070 17 255.250 257. 500 2.250 2.5 50 2.610 .060 18 295.250 295.750 .500 1.2 80 1.370 .090 19 384.750 385.250 .500 .950 1.050 .100 20 377.250 381.500 4.250 .740 .980 .240 21 408.000 409.000 1.000 2.7 70 2.890 .120 22 465.500 466.500 1.000 1.7 60 1.830 .070 23 474.250 475.250 1.000 1.5 60 1.630 .070 24 476.000 478.000 2.000 1.5 30 1.590 .060 25 496.000 498.500 2.500 1.280 1.360 .080 26 509.750 512.500 2.750 1.180 1.280 .100 27 513.500 518.000 4.500 1.180 1.280 .100 28 519.500 524.000 4.500 1.110 1.200 .090 PROXIMITY RESULTS FOR THE ABOVE FLAWS:
FLAWS 10 AND 11 MUST BE COMBINED.
END OF OUTPUT-Page 1
APPENDIX A pc-CRACK OUTPUT FILES: ALLOWABLE FLAW DETERMINATION StructuralIntegrity FileNo.: PBCH-14Q-302 I Revision: 3 2 Associates, Inc.
SGBREV1 tm pc-CRACK for windows Version 3 .1-98348 (C) Copyright '84 - '98 structural Integrity Associates, Inc.
3315 Almaden Expressway, Suite 24 San Jose, CA 95118-1557 voice: 408-978-8200 Fax: 408-978-8964 E-mail: pccrack~structint.com Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics Date: Thu Oct 27 13:21:11 2005 Input Data and Results File: SGBREV1.LFM
Title:
PBCH-14Q: Steam Generator B Flaw Evaluation Load Cases:
stress coefficients Case ID CO Cl C2 C3 Type PL+PB+Q 64.7 0 0 0 Coeff
Through wal 1 Stresses for Load Cases With stress Coeff-------
wall Case Depth PL+PB+Q 0.0000 64.7 0.0400 64.7 0.0800 64.7 0.1200 64.7 0.1600 64.7 0.2000 64.7 0.2400 64.7 0.2800 64.7 0.3200 64.7 0.3600 64.7 0.4000 64.7 crack Model: Elliptical subsurface cracked Plate under Membrane & Bending stresses
Reference:
ASME Boiler and Pressure vessel code,Section XI, '86 Ed.
WARNING: The stress i ntensity factor (K) is the maxi mum of K at point 1 and K at point 2 as identified in section XI.
crack Parameters:
wall thickness: 3.8400 Max. crack depth: 0.4000 crack aspect ratio: 0.1000 Eccentricity ratio: 0.5520 Material yield strength: 70.0000 Co = si ma(membrane) + Sigma(bending) cl = -2?sigma(bending)/thickness
Stress Intensity Factor--------------------
Page 1
SGBREV1 crack case Size PL+PB+Q 0.0080 10.6473 0.0160 15.0756 0.0240 18.486 0.0320 21.3714 0.0400 23.9226 0.0480 26.2373 0.0560 28.3734 0.0640 30.3687 0.0720 32.2493 0.0800 34.0342 0.0880 35.7379 0.0960 37.3713 0.1040 38.9435 0.1120 40.4615 0.1200 41.9313 0.1280 43.3577 0.1360 44.7449 0.1440 46.0964 0.1520 47.4154 0.1600 48.7044 0.1680 49.9659 0.1760 51.2018 0.1840 52.414 0.1920 53.6041 0.2000 54.7734 0.2080 55.9235 0.2160 57.0554 0.2240 58.1701 0.2320 59.2687 0.2400 60.3521 0.2480 61.421 0.2560 62.4763 0.2640 63.5185 0.2720 64.5485 0.2800 65.5666 0.2880 66.5735 0.2960 67.6868 0.3040 68.7931 0.3120 69.8926 0.3200 70.9858 0.3280' 72.0729 0.3360 73.1544 0.3440 74.2304 0.3520 75.3012 0.3600 76.3672 0.3680 77.4285 0.3760 78.4854 0.3840 79.5381 0.3920 80.5868 0.4000 81.6317 Material fracture toughness:
Material ID: SG Plate Depth K1C 0.0000 63.2500 Page 2
SGBREV1 1.0000 63.2500 3.0000 63.2500 4.0000 63.2500 Load combination for cri tical crack size:
Load case scale Factor PL+PB+Q 1.00 00 crack Total size K K1C 0.008 10.6473 63.25 0.016 15.0756 63.25 0.024 18.486 63.25 0.032 21.3714 63.25 0.04 23.9226 63.25 0.048 26.2373 63.25 0.056 28.3734 63.25 0.064 30.3687 63.25 0.072 32.2493 63.25 0.08 34.0342 63.25 0.088 35.7379 63.25 0.096 37.3713 63.25 0.104 38.9435 63.25 0.112 40.4615 63.25 0.12 41.9313 63.25 0.128 43.3577 63.25 0.136 44.7449 63.25 0.144 46.0964 63.25 0.152 47.4154 63.25 0.16 48.7044 63.25 0.168 49.9659 63.25 0.176 51.2018 63.25 0.184 52.414 63.25 0.192 53.6041 63.25 0.2 54.7734 63.25 0.208 55.9235 63.25 0.216 57.0554 63.25 0.224 58.1701 63.25 0.232 59.2687 63.25 0.24 60.3521 63.25 0.248 61.421 63.25 0.256 62.4763 63.25 0.264 63.5185 63.25 0.272 64.5485 63.25 0.28 65.5666 63.25 0.288 66.5735 63.25 0.296 67.6868 63.25 0.304 68.7931 63.25 0.312 69.8926 63.25 0.32 70.9858 63.25 0.328 72.0729 63.25 0.336 73.1544 63.25 0.344 74.2304 63.25 0.352 75.3012 63.25 0.36 76.3672 63.25 0.368 77.4285 63.25 0.376 78.4854 63.25 0.384 79.5381 63.25 0.392 80.5868 63.25 0.4 81.6317 63.25 Page 3
SGBREV1 critical crack size = 0.2619 End of pC-C RACK Output Page 4
APPENDIX B pc-CRACK OUTPUT FILE: FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH Structural integrity FileNo.: PBCH-14Q-302 I Revision: 3 V Associates, Inc.
FCG302 tm pC-CRACK for windows Version 3 .1-98348 (C) Copyright '84 - '98 structural Integrity Associates, Inc.
3315 Almaden Expressway, suite 24 San Jose, CA 95118-1557 voice: 408-978-8200 Fax: 408-978-8964 E-mail: pccrack~structint.com Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics Date: Thu Oct 27 13:27:16 2005 Input Data and Results File: FCG302.LFM
Title:
PBCH-14Q: Steam Generator B Flaw Evaluation Load cases:
Stress coefficients Case ID Co C1 C2 C3 Type PL+PB+Q 64.7 0 0 0 Coeff Through Wal 1 stresses for Load Cases with Stress coeff-------
wall Case Depth PL+PB+Q 0.0000 64.7 0.0400 64.7 0.0800 64.7 0.1200 64.7 0.1600 64.7 0.2000 64.7 0.2400 64.7 0.2800 64.7 0.3200 64.7 0.3600 64.7 0.4000 64.7 crack Model: Elliptical Subsurface cracked Plate under Membrane & Bending Stresses
Reference:
ASME Boiler and Pressure vessel Code,Section XI, '86 Ed.
WARNING: The stress i ntensity factor (K) is the maxi mum of K at point 1 and K at point 2 as identified in section XI.
crack Parameters:
wall thickness: 3.8400 Max. crack depth: 0.4000 crack aspect ratio: 0.1000 Eccentricity ratio: 0.5520 Material yield strength: 70.0000 Co = Sigma(membrane) + sigma(bending)
C1 = -2*sigma(bending)/thickness
Stress Intensity Factor--------------------
Page 1
FCG302 crack Case size PL+PB+Q 0.0080 10.6473 0.0160 15.0756 0.0240 18.486 0.0320 21.3714 0.0400 23.9226 0.0480 26.2373 0.0560 28.3734 0.0640 30.3687 0.0720 32.2493 0.0800 34.0342 0.0880 35.7379 0.0960 37.3713 0.1040 38.9435 0.1120 40.4615 0.1200 41.9313 0.1280 43.3577 0.1360 44.7449 0.1440 46.0964 0.1520 47.4154 0.1600 48.7044 0.1680 49.9659 0.1760 51.2018 0.1840 52.414 0.1920 53.6041 0.2000 54.7734 0.2080 55.9235 0.2160 57.0554 0.2240 58.1701 0.2320 59.2687 0.2400 60.3521 0.2480 61.421 0.2560 62.4763 0.2640 63.5185 0.2720 64.5485 0.2800 65.5666 0.2880 66.5735 0.2960 67.6868 0.3040 68.7931 0.3120 69.8926 0.3200 70.9858 0.3280 72.0729 0.3360 73.1544 0.3440 74.2304 0.3520 75.3012 0.3600 76.3672 0.3680 77.4285 0.3760 78.4854 0.3840 79.5381 0.3920 80.5868 0.4000 81.6317 crack Growth Laws:
Law ID: SG subsurface Model: ASME section XI - ferritic steel in air environment da/dN = C
- S
- dKA3.07 where Page 2
FCG302 S = 25.72 * (2. 88 - R')A(-3.07)
R = 0 for R < 0 R'= R for R >= 0 dK = Kmax - Kmin R = Kmin / Kmax where:
C = 1.99OOe-010 is for the currently sel ected units of:
force: kip length: inch Material Fracture Toughness KIc:
Material ID: SG Plate Depth KIc 0.0000 63.2500 1.0000 63.2500 3.0000 63.2500 4.0000 63.2500 Initial crack size= 0.1200 Max. crack size= 0.4000 Number of blocks= 1 Print increment of block= 1 cycles Calc. Print Crk. Grw. Mat.
subblock /Ti me incre. incre. Law K1C FCG302 10000 100 100 SG subsurface SG Plate Kmax Kmin subblock Case ID scale Factor case ID scale Factor FCG302 P L+PB+Q 1.00 00 PL+PB+Q 0.0000 crack growth results:
Total subblock Cycles cycles DaDn
/Ti me /Ti me K max Kmin DeltaK R /DaDt Da a a/thk Block: 1 100 100 4.19e+ 001 0.OOe+000 4. 19e+001 0.00 1. 91e-005 1.91e-00 3 0.1219 0.03 200 200 4.23e+ 001 0.OOe+000 4. 23e+001 0.00 1. 95e-005 1.95e-00 3 0.1239 0.03 300 300 4.26e+ 001 0.OOe+000 4. 26e+001 0.00 2. OOe-005 2.OOe-00 3 0.1259 0.03 400 400 4.30e+ 001 0.OOe+000 4. 30e+001 0.00 2. 05e-005 2.05e-00 3 0.1279 0.03 500 500 4.33e+ 001 0.OOe+000 4. 33e+001 0.00 2. lle-005 2.lle-00 3 0.13 0.03 600 600 4.37e+ 001 0.00e+000 4. 37e+001 0.00 2. 16e-005 2.16e-00 3 0.1322 0.03 700 700 4.41e+ 001 0.OOe+000 4. 41e+001 0.00 2. 22e-005 2.22e-00 3 0.1344 0.04 800 800 4.45e+ 001 0.00e+000 4. 45e+001 0.00 2. 28e-005 2.28e-00 3 0.1367 0.04 900 900 4.49e+ 001 0.OOe+000 4. 49e+001 0.00 2. 34e-005 2.34e-00 3 0.139 0.04 Page 3
FCG302 1000 1000 4. 53e+ 001 0.OOe+000 4. 53e+001 0.00 2. 41e-005 2.41e-00 3 0.1414 0.04 1100 1100 4.57e+ 001 0. OOe+000 4. 57e+001 0.00 2. 48e-005 2.48e-00 3 0.1439 0.04 1200 1200 4.61e+ 001 0. OOe+000 4. 61e+001 0.00 2.55e-005 2.55e-003 0.1465 0.04 1300 1300 4.65e+ 001 0. OOe+000 4. 65e+001 0.00 2. 62e-005 2.62e-00 3 0.1491 0.04 1400 1400 4.69e+ 001 0. OOe+000 4. 69e+001 0.00 2. 69e-005 2.69e-00 3 0.1518 0.04 1500 1500 4.74e+ 001 0. OOe+000 4. 74e+001 0.00 2. 77e-005 2.77e-003 0.1546 0.04 1600 1600 4.78e+ 001 0. OOe+000 4. 78e+001 0.00 2. 85e-005 2.85e-00 3 0.1574 0.04 1700 1700 4.83e+ 001 0. OOe+000 4. 83e+001 0.00 2. 94e-005 2.94e-00 3 0.1603 0.04 1800 1800 4.88e+ 001 O.OOe+000 4. 88e+001 0.00 3. 03e-005 3.03e-00 3 0.1634 0.04 1900 1900 4.92e+ 001 0. OOe+000 4. 92e+001 0.00 3. 12e-005 3.12e-00 3 0.1665 0.04 2000 2000 4.97e+ 001 0. OOe+000 4. 97e+001 0.00 3. 22e-005 3.22e-00 3 0.1697 0.04 2100 2100 5.02e+ 001 0. OOe+000 5. 02e+001 0.00 3. 32e-005 3.32e-00 3 0.173 0.05 2200 2200 5.07e+ 001 0. OOe+000 5. 07e+001 0.00 3. 42e-005 3.42e-00 3 0.1764 0.05 2300 2300 5.13e+ 001 0. OOe+000 5.13e+001 0.00 3. 53e-005 3.53e-00 3 0.18 0.05 2400 2400 5.18e+ 001 0. OOe+000 5. 18e+001 0.00 3. 65e-005 3.65e-00 3 0.1836 0.05 2500 2500 5.24e+ 001 0. OOe+000 5. 24e+001 0.00 3. 77e-005 3.77e-00 3 0.1874 0.05 2600 2600 5.29e+ 001 0. OOe+000 5. 29e+001 0.00 3. 89e-005 3.89e-00 3 0.1913 0.05 2700 2700 5.35e+001 0. OOe+000 5. 35e+001 0.00 4. 03e-005 4.03e-00 3 0.1953 0.05 2800 2800 5.41e+ 001 0. OOe+000 5. 41e+001 0.00 4. 16e-005 4.16e-00 3 0.1995 0.05 2900 2900 5.47e+ 001 0. OOe+000 5. 47e+001 0.00 4. 31e-005 4.31e-00 3 0.2038 0.05 3000 3000 5.53e+ 001 0. OOe+000 5.53e+001 0.00 4. 46e-005 4.46e-00 3 0.2082 0.05 3100 3100 5.60e+ 001 0. OOe+000 5. 60e+001 0.00 4. 62e-005 4.62e-00 3 0.2129 0.06 3200 3200 5.66e+ 001 0. OOe+000 5. 66e+001 0.00 4. 79e-005 4.79e-00 3 0.2177 0.06 3300 3300 5.73e+ 001 0. OOe+000 5. 73e+001 0.00 4. 97e-005 4.97e-00 3 0.2226 0.06 3400 3400 5.80e+ 001 0. OOe+000 5. 80e+001 0.00 5. 15e-005 5.15e-00 3 0.2278 0.06 3500 3500 5.87e+ 001 0. OOe+000 5. 87e+001 0.00 5. 35e-005 5.35e-00 3 0.2331 0.06 3600 3600 5.94e+ 001 0. OOe+000 5. 94e+001 0.00 5. 56e-005 5.56e-003 0.2387 0.06 3700 3700 6.02e+ 001 0. OOe+000 6. 02e+001 0.00 5. 77e-005 5.77e-003 0.2444 0.06 3800 3800 6.09e+ 001 0. OOe+000 6. 09e+001 0.00 6. Ole-005 6.Ole-00 3 0.2505 0.07 3900 3900 6.17e+ 001 0. OOe+000 6. 17e+001 0.00 6. 25e-005 6.25e-00 3 0.2567 0.07 4000 4000 6.26e+ 001 0. OOe+000 6. 26e+001 0.00 6. 51e-005 6. 51e-00 3 0.2632 0.07 4100 4100 6.34e+ 001 0. OOe+000 6. 34e+001 0.00 6. 78e-005 6.78e-00 3 0.27 0.07 End of pc-C RACK Output Page 4
APPENDIX C DESIGN INPUT MEMOS (E-MAIL) FROM NMC 5trUctUralIntegrity FileNo.: PBCH-14Q-302 - Revision: 3 lAssociates, Inc.
V l
Hal L. Gustin From: Kemp, Brian [Brian.Kempenmcco.coml Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2005 11:08 AM To: Kemp, Brian; Hal L. Gustin
Subject:
Additional PBNP Design Input
- Hal, The following information should be used as a design input for the UlR29 SG structural evaluation that SIA is performing.
This information is an exerpt from the Westinghouse Report titled "PBNP Power Uprate Project NSSS Engineering Report Volume 1."
The PBNP Unit 1 Steam Generators (Westinghouse Model 44F) calculated stress for normal and abnormal conditions (PL+PB+Q) in the flaw region (upper shell to upper head weld) is 64.7 ksi.
Brian Kemp 1
Page 1 of 1 Hal L. Gustin IS -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. e_...........
_i_..........
.on From: Kemp, Brian [Brian.Kemp~nmcco.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 9:21 AM To: Hal L. Gustin Cc: Turner, Russell Attachments: design paramters rA.doc
- Hal, As described in my email to you (dated October 22, 2005), the calculated stress for normal and abnormal conditions (PL+PB+Q) that should be used in the SIA analysis for the PBNP-1 SG flaw region (upper shell to upper head weld) is 64.7 ksi. This value was selected because it represented the highest stress values in the Model 44F SG transition cone region and is clearly referenced in the text of LU the Westinghouse SG Analysis . This is a conservative value that is appropriate to use for the SIA analysis of upper shell to transition cone weld.
Additionally, the file that I forwarded to you October 19, 2005 titled "design parameters.doc" has a *.pdf to *.doc conversion error in it's note 1. The correct note should read "Parameters reflect Model A47 replacement steam generators but also bound operation with Model 44F in Unit 1." The note is corrected and the revised file is attached to this email.
Please call with questions.
Brian Kemp
[1]
"PBNP Power Uprate Project NSSS Engineering Report Volume 1."
Brian Kemp NMC Fleet Lead - Materials 715-426-6960 (office) 612-202-9286 (cell) ui "PBNP Power Uprate Project NSSS Engineering Report Volume 1."
11/17/2005
Hal L. Gustin From: Kemp, Brian [Brian.Kempenmcco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 9:30 AM To: Hal L. Gustin
Subject:
PBNP design input Attachments: design paramters.doc; load cycles.doc; Pzr Fatigue Usage.doc; SG Design Information.doc; Transition Cone Region Figure.doc; Transition Cone Region Figure - Thicknesses.doc design
- El load cydes.doc (68 Pzr Fatigue SG Design a El Transition Cone El Transition Cone aramters.doc (70 KE KB) Usage.doc (43 KB) iformation.doc (37. Region Figure.... Region Figure ...
Hal, The attached information should be used as design inputs for the U1R29 SG & PZR structural evaluations that SIA is performing.
This information is non-proprietary exerpts from the Westinghouse Report titled "PBNP Power Uprate Project NSSS Engineering Report Volume 1."
Please call with questions.
Brian Kemp 1
II I - 2 (weld) 3 1 ~4.
-Ij 6 (weld)
.I7 I.
Transition Cone Region
PBNP Unit 1 Model 44F And A47 Steam Generator Loading Cycles Number of Load Cycles Description of Loading 44F Design A47 Design 60-Year Conditions Spec. (Ref. 1) Spec. (Ref. 2) Sect. 3.1 Transients Heatup/Cooldown 200 200 200 Hot Standby at No Power -
Feedwater Cycling at HSB 25,000 10,000 25,000 Loading/Unloading @5% PWR/min 14,500 18,300 18,300 Steady-state at Full Load - -
10% Step-Load Increase 2,000 2,000 2,000 10% Step-Load Decrease 2,000 2,000 2,000 Large Step-Load Decrease 200 200 200 (50% Step-Load Decrease)
Reactor Trip 400 400 400 Loss of Load 80 80 80 Partial Loss of Flow 80 80 80 Loss of Power (Power Blackout) 40 40 40 Inadvertent Auxiliary Spray 10 10 Primary Hydrotest @ 3106 psig 1 5 5 Primary Pressure Test @ 2485 psig 50 120 94 (100) 100 Secondary Hydrotest @ 1356 psig 1 10 10 Secondary Pressure Test @ 1085 psig 50 10 50 Prim-to-Sec Leak Tests 5 27 (30) 30 Sec-to-Prim Leak Tests _5 120 128 (130) 130
PBNP Power Uprate Project (Bounding 10.5% Core Power Uprate)
NSSS Design Parameters(12 ) Used for Systems, Components & Accident Analyses Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Low Ta', Low T, EHigh T.2 High T.,,
Parameter 0% SGTP 10% SGTP 0% SGTP 10% SGTP Steam Generator Steam Pressure (psia) 662(4) 637(34) 764(4) 737(3,4)
Steam Temperature (F) 496.8(3) 492.7(3) 512.9 508.8(3)
Steam Flow, Total (106 Ib.hr) 7.37 7.37 7.39(5) 7.39(5)
Feedwater Temperature (TF) 442.9 442.9 442.9 442.9 Tube Plugging (%) 0 10 0 10 Notes:
- 1. Parameters reflect Model A47 replacement steam generators but also bound operation with Model 44F in Unit I
- 2. Systems and components analyses have been performed using the parameters identified in Table 1-1.
0
- 3. Steam pressure/temperature must be greater than 745.7 psia/510.0 F due to the steam generator design pressure differential requirements.
- 4. Steam pressure at the outlet of the steam generator nozzle.
- 5. A maximum moisture carry over of 0.10% was assumed; however, this value cannot be warranted at this high power level and low steam pressure. The maximum moisture carry over for the Model 44F steam generators is 0.25% and the maximum steam flow associated with this value is 7.40x106 lb/hr.
Structural The critical steam generator components that were evaluated for structural adequacy are:
Primary side: Primary chamber, tubesheet, primary nozzles, primary manway, divider plate, and tube-to-tubesheet weld. The primary side of the replacement steam generators was evaluated as a whole through a review of the uprating transients that affect the primary side of the steam generator, i.e., RCS transients.
Secondary side: Upper shell, transition cone, lower shell, junction of tubesheet and stub barrel, main and auxiliary feedwater and spray nozzles, secondary manway opening and bolts, inspection ports, and minor shell taps.
These components were evaluated for the effects of the uprate on the steady-state and transient conditions for the normal and upset loads in the design specifications, References I (Model 44F) and Reference 2 (Model A47). The test, emergency, and faulted loading conditions are unaffected by the uprate. The structural acceptance criteria for both steam generator models are given in the 1965 Edition through Summer 1966 Addenda of the ASME B&PV,Section III, Reference 3. Details of the actual acceptance criteria employed in the structural evaluation of both the 44F and A47 are given in Section 4 of Volume I of Reference 4.
Secondary Shell - Model 44F Summary stress results for the secondary shell transition cone are given in Table 7-44 of Reference 5 for current power rating. These results, shown in Table 5.6-9, remain bounding for the uprated conditions since a reduction in secondary pressure will reduce the stresses in the shell. Citical sections in the transition cone region are depicted in Figure 5.6-3. The results in Table 5.6-9 show that all stress limits are satisfied. For fatigue, Section BB, shown in Figure 5.6-1, is the overall governing location for the secondary shell and has been considered above in the evaluation for the channel head, the tubesheet and the tubesheet to shell junctions. The structural evaluation of the relocated PBNP Unit I level taps in the secondary shell is discussed below.
Upper Shell Remnant - Model 44F The upper shell (along with its manway) and the steam outlet nozzle are remnant components from the original 44 Series steam generator. The remnant components were evaluated for continued use in Model 44F replacement steam generators in Section 7.20 of Reference 5.
Figure 5.6-5 shows the locations in the upper shell remnant evaluated in Reference 5. Section DD in Figure 5.6-5 refers to the manway pad. The feedwater nozzle is evaluated above as a separate item. As discussed previously, the power uprate results in reduced secondary (steam) pressures and temperatures. Therefore, the specified loads, considered in Reference 5, bound the structural evaluation. The calculated fatigue usage factor for 40 years
is less than 1.0 at the limiting location, Section BB in Figure 5.6-5. Since the maximum usage in the remnant based on 40 years is very low, extension to 60 years and ASME Code compliance within the usage limit of one are obvious.
Body Meridional Thickness CUT BODY No. length, in. in.
3.50 1,
2,3 8.43 3.50 2
4 5.15 3.62 5 1 .00 2.50 6-8 7.24 3.62 3 3
9 7.29 3.62 /4 5
10-15 7.24 3.62 6 7 6 16, 17 6.38 2.62 8
18 2.62 8 9
.10
- 1' 12 t '11 13tC 12 1 )
1i4.
4 15 16 I .. 16 D17 17 D18 Transition Cone Region - Model 44F