ML072770701
| ML072770701 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 09/21/2006 |
| From: | Horton J, Nickerson T, Tamburro P Exelon Nuclear |
| To: | NRC/SECY |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| 50-219-LR, AmerGen-Applicant-18, OCLR00014537, RAS 14225 C-1302-187-5320-024, Rev. 1 | |
| Download: ML072770701 (118) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:`OAS~ Iqg,5 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Inthe Meft of AK a ~ CI.UJ r) txi .Docket
. Nab0-fficial OFFER ED Applicant/Li xhibitN0....
nsee Interven or _R APPLICANT'S EXHIBIT 18 evi si on_2 hlo n. N Staf Other Raei8ion 2 Nca IDOIlRED Onk Witness/Panel P Page 28 of6 ActonTslcur 0TEWITHORA4. Design Analysis Cover Sheet Pape I of 117 Design Analysis (Major Revision) Last Page No.' 117 Analysis No.:' C-1302-187-5320-024 Revision: I
Title:
' OC Drywell Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed DOCKETED ECIECR No.:' 0* - 0 0 to 3 Revision:' 0 USNRC Station(s):' Oyster Creek Component(s): ' October 1, 2007 (10:45am) Unit No.: " /67 Discipline:. Mcchardcal/Structural Eng. OFFICE OF SECRETARY RULEMAKINGS AND Descrip. CodelKeyword: UT Data Assessments ADJUDICATIONS STAFF Safety/QA Class:" Q System Code:" 187 Structure:" Drywell Vessel CONTROLLED DOCUMENT REFERENCES" Document No.: From/To Document No.: From/To GE # Index 9-4 From GE # Index 9-3 From GE LUtter Report: "Sandbed Local Thinning From and Raising the Fixity Height Analysis" Is this Design Analysis Safeguards Information?" Yes [] No R Ifyes, see SY-AA-101-106 Does this Design Analysis contain Unverified Assumptions?" Yes El No 0 Ifyes, ATI/AR#: This Design Analysis SUPERCEDES:" Wv/A In its entirety. Description of Revision (list affected pages for partials): " Revised Calculation to clarify methods used to evaluate UT Measurements of the external Drywell Shell. Also, reformatted portions of the calculation to bring it inline with the existing calculation procedure at Oystr Creek Generating Station. Rz oa
,.- add t%..'
,,. ,% ,;bpagsl 3, 4, 6, 8,,10, t, ,I, 12, 13, 14, li, 16, 7,11, ALL PA4,62 Preparer:" Jeffrey H. Horton (Enercoa)
,FrW Name Method of.Review:"
- Detailed Review g Alternate. alcubat'dns (attached) -7. Testing C]
Reviewer: Oiesh Abhat (Enercon) ( " "
- 07/24/06 Prim Name S~gnName 0aze Review Notes:" Independent review [ Peer review El Review of the revised part of the calculation has been performed and is acceptable. The review(Rev. ])
addresses clarification of the original calculation only as described above under Description of Revision. Analytical buckling inputs are taken from References 3.3 (Table 4.1) and 3-5. They are assumed
. acceptable inputs for this calculation as provided by the client.
(For ExletWe Am"=sc 0*my External Approver: 24 Don Shivas (Enercon) *07/21106 Exelon Reviewer:" t- - ,, X3 Is a Supplemental Review Reaquired?" Yes El No ID If yes, complete Attachment 3 Exelon Approver. I A,_rAe9s,3 #-aj C,, 9A16 Prim Nme Stn Nam 4Ac:.T~IW4 lwAJM 41ýtZ FiZ r11- (,,.4 14: C-U OCLROO014537 112hQ IAL~et =5-.EcYý_ a&'
CC-AA-309 Revision 5 I Page 16 of 16 ATTACHMENT 2 Owners Acceptance Review Checklist for External Design Analysis Page 1 of I IA.o~j DESIGN ANALYSIS NO. /0 REV:' Yes No N/A
- 1. Do assumptions have sufficient rationale? El Are assumptions compatible with the way the plant is operated and with the
- 2. .. licensing basis? El E3
- 3. Do the design inputs have sufficient rationale? El El
- 4. Are design inputs correct and reasonable? 0:
Are design inputs compatible with the way the plant it operated -and with the. El licensing basis? C1
- 6. Are Engineering Judgments clearly documented and justified? im El El Are Engineering Judgments compatible with the way the plant is operated and with the licensing basis?. 19 El 0l
- 8. .Do the results and conclusions satisfy the purpose and objective of the Design Analysis? ig El 0.
Are the results and conclusions compatible with the way the plant is operated and with the licensing basis? Z El 0l Does the Design Analysis include the applicable design basis documentation?
.Fl* [
0. 1 1. Have any limitations on the use of the results been identified and-transmilted to the appropriate organizations?
- 12. Are there any unverified assumptions?
- 13. Do all unverified assumptions have a tracking and closure mechanism in
'place?
Have~all affected design analyses-been documented on the Affected
- 14. Documents List (ADL) for the associated Configuration i3hange?.
Do the sources of inputs and analysis methodology used meet current Im .El 0l technical requirements and regulatory commitments? (If the input sources or
- 15. analysis methodology are based on an out-of-date methodology or code, additional reconciliation may be required if the site has since committed to a more recent code)
- 16. Have vendor supporting technical documents and references (incduding GE.
DRFs) been reviewed when necessary? EXELON REVIEWER 461Jef J 44-/1
/Print I Sign DATE:.
OCLROO014538
Ameren A men er~ 'C-1302-187-5320-024 ocUMENTO TITLE: OC Drywell Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed REV 0 j Initial Issue
SUMMARY
OF CHANGE APPROVAL GPU Nuclear DATE 04/16/93 Signatures on File 1 " Revised Calculation to clarify methods used to evaluate UT Measurements of the external Drywell Shell. Also, reformatted portions of the calculation to bring it inline with the existing calculation procedure at Oyster Creek wiwrHorton 07/24/06 Generating Station. ,ar add 'he fz11~wing sagcs: Enercon Services ALL 4.- 22 5,2 , 32, 3 30, 3413, 2, 34, 37, 39, , 47, I 3,,-t7'd. aý-f -45 Also added Appendix D, NDE Inspection Sheets 07/24/06 Enercon Services iDLV-00 Don Shis 07/24/06 Enercon Services A ((ecyt Al4f O~r,3,q,<4s lo d iv,ýe,/ v* of tk.o Tor. of -17,5,r3 11-~- I2 6V7#-- c-~'e ~ ~ 4,',o.- iSol.-i/ P C,,-edo3 A.4-y~ A ,r AY 4 Page 2 of 1.44/1'1
- OCLROO014539
Table of Contents Section Page 1.0 PROBLEM STATEMENT: ........................................................................................................... 4 .22.0
SUMMARY
OF RESULTS;.........o....... s......................... *........... ..................................................... 4 3.0
REFERENCE:
......................................................................................... .6.................................. 6 4.0 ASSUMPTIONS AND BASIC DATA: ....................... ........................
......... . 6 5.0 -DESIGN INPUTS: ....................................................................................... .................................. 6 6.0 METHODS OF ANALYSIS: ..................................................-..................................................... 7 UT EVALUATION BAY # I"............................................................................................................... 14 UT EVALUATION BAY #3: ...................... . . ................ 22 24 3 .............
5..... UT EV A LU ,ATIO N B A Y E.U......................................... UTEVALATION BAY #7:...................................... . ....... ...................... 26 UT EVALUATION BAY #79: ........ ................................ I.............................................. 28 UT EVALUATION BAY #11: ........................................................................................................ 30 UT EVA LUATION BAY #13: ................................................................................................................. 33 UT EV ALUATION BAY #15: .................................................................................................................. 41 UT EV ALUATION BAY #17: ........................................................................................... .................... .44 UT EVALUATION BAY #19: ....................................... .................................. ................ 47 Appendix A: Summary Of Measurements Of Impressions Taken From Bay #13 (3 pages total) ............... 49 Apperidix B: Buckling Capacity Evaluation For Varying Uniform Thickness Through The Whole Sandbed Region Of The Drywel) (5 pages total) ................. : . ............................................ 52 Appendix C: Pictures Showing Condition Of The Drywell In The Sandbed egion (9 pages total) ....... 57 Appendix D: NDE Inspection Sheets for the Drywell Sandbed Region 2rpages total) ............................ 66 7.. L ,', S. - _.-- OCLROO01 4540
1.0 PROBLEM STATEMENT: The purpose of thi~s calculation is to evaluate the Ultrasonic Test (UT) thickness measurements taken in the sandbed region during the 14R outage in support of the O.C. drywellIcorrosion mitigation project. These measurements were taken from the outside of the shell. Access to the sandbed region was achieved by cutting ten holes completely through the shield wall from the torus room. 2.0
SUMMARY
' OF RESULTS: This calculation demonstrates that the UT thickness measurements for all.bays meet the minimum uniform and local required thicknesses.. The evaluation was performed by evaluating the UT measurements for each bay and dispositioning them relative to the uniform thickness of 0.736 inch* used in the GE structural analysis reports References 3.2, 3.3 and 3.5. Additional acceptance criteria was developed to address measurements below 0.736 inch. The results are summarized in Table 2-1.
. UT measurements for bays 3, 5, 7, 9, and 19 were all above the 0.736 inches and therefore acceptable.
UT. measurements for bays 11, 15, and 17 were all above 0.736 inches except for one measurement. for each bay. After further evaluation of these three measurements "including an examination of adjacent areas, it was determined that they were acceptable Sasshown on Table 2-1. UT measurements for bays 1 and 13 were evaluated using detailed criteria described in this calculation and the results are summarized in Table 2-1 below: OCLROO014541
GPU Nuclear
SUMMARY
OF UT EVALUATIONS TABLE (2-1) Drywell ... Gneal SandbedShell Thickness" . Local Sqndbed Thickness"Z . . Comments "Bay Thic1h~ss.., . Actual r Acceptable . Thickness .Actual Acceptable Criteria :, . Thickness. Yes/No Criietia Thickness. Y'"es/No Inches, ini:hes Inches . ._'_.____._ 1 0.736" whole Bay UT,,.R"0.822 Yes 0,636" . T,,== 0.69'2" Yes See Pages 14 throuigh 21 for delails aver a 12"xl 2" area Over a 4"x4" area of e)aluation 7 TFvpIu0. 66 Yes Yes. 3 - 0.736V whole Bay UTA,.=0.868 Yes 0.636" N/A N/A. No locations in bay are below
....... __.._over a 12"x 12" area 0.736". See Pages 22 & 23 5 0.736" whole Bay UTA,j-0.986 Yes 0.636" N/A N/A No locations in bay are below
*overa 12"x1 2"area 0.736". See Pages 24 & 25 7 0.736" whole Bay.: UTA,*1.()01 Yes 0.636" N/A N/A No Locations in bay are below over a 12"x 12" area 0.736" see Pages 26 & 27 9 0.736" whole bay UTA,=0,.915 Yes 0.636" N/A N/A No Locations in bay are below over a 12"x 12" area 0.736" see Pages 28 and 29 I1 0.736" whole bay UTA,1=0. 7 92 Yes 0.636" N/A . N/A One location with a thickness less TF.,.a1=0. 7 51 over a 12"x 12" area than 0.736" but not greater .than 2" in Dia. See Pages 30 to 32 13 0.736" whole bay UTAII=0.810 Yes 0.636", TE,,1=0.693"over a yes See pages .33 through 40 for details
*3 o T*ýr0.767 over a 12"x1 2" area 6"x5" area oftevaluation 15 0.736" Whole Bay UTA,.=0.816 . Yes 0.636" N/A N/A One location with a thickness less TE,1=-0.859 over a 12"x 12" area than 0.736" but not greater than 2" T-7' 0.736" Whole Bay in Dia. See Pages_41 to 43 UTAI=0.9- 8 Yes 0.636" NiA N/A One location with a thickness less TE,.;,)O.871 over a 12"x t2".area than 0.736" but not greater than 2" 00 ,______ in Dia. See pages 44 to 46 19 0.736" Whole Bay UA=0.885 Yes0.636" N/A N/A No Locations in bay are below over a 12"x 12" area ' . 0.736" see Pages 47 and 48 Notes: 1. UTAvg are the average shell thicknesg readings using a D-Meter in local areas not less than the buckling design thickness of 0.736" these areas do not exceed 2" in diameter. TE,1 is the average calculated Thickness of the shell surrounding areas not exceeding 2" in diameter that have UT D-Meter shell thickness readings less than 0.736". See. Section 6, Methods of Analysis, Acceptance Criteria - General Wall 0 (Sandbed Region) for details.
- 2. Small Areas of reduced thickness 2&/2" or less indiameter have a negligible effect on shell buckling. See Section 6 Methods of Analysis,.
C) Acceptance Criteria -Very Local Wall (2/2 Inches in Diameter) for details. 0 r" o-y
GPU Nuclear Subject Caic No. Rev. No. Sheet No. O.C. Drywel. Ext. UT Evaluation inSandbed C-1302-1.87-5320-024 I 6 of 117 Originator Date Reviewed by Date Mark Yekta I 01/12/93 S.C. Turruninelli 3.0
REFERENCE:
3.1 Drywell sandbed region pictures (Appendix C). 3.2 An ASME Section VIII Evaluation of the Oyster Creek Drywell for Without Sand Case Performed by GE - Part I Stress Analysis, Revision 0 dated February, 1991 Report 9-3. 3.3 An ASME Section VIII Evaluation of the Oyster Creek Drywell for Without Sand Case Performed by GE - Part 2 Stability Analysis, Revision 2 dated November,
*1992 Report 9-4.
3.4 ASME Section III Subsection NE Class MC Components 1989. 3.5 GE letter report "Sandbed Local Thinning and Raising the Fixity Height Analysis (Line Items I and 2 In Contract PC-0391407)" dated December 11, 1992. 3.6 GPUN Memo 5320-93-020 From K. Whitmore to J. C. Flynn "Inspection of Drywell Sand Bed Region and Access Hole", Dated January 28, 1993. 3.7 Theory of Elastic Stability, by Stephen P. Timoshenko and James M. Gere, Second Edition, Engineering Societies Monographs, McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, 1961 4.0 ASSUMPTIONS AND BASIC DATA: 4.1 Raw UT measurements for each bay are presented in Appendix D and summarized in the body of calculation. 4.2 References 3.2, 3.3 and 3.5 have been design verified and are assumed correct. 5.0 DESIGN INPUTS: 5.1 Observations of the outside surface of the drywell. shell indicate a rough surface with varying peaks and valleys. In order to characterize an average roughness representing the depth difference of pieaks and valleys, two impressions were made at the two lowest UT measurements for bay 13 using Epoxy putty. Appendix A presents the calculation of the depth of surface roughness using the drywell shell impressions taken in the roughest bay. Two locations in bay 13 were selected since it is the roughest bay. Approximately 40 locations within the two impressions were measured for depth and the average plus one standard deviation was calculated. A value of 0.200 inch was used in this calculatipn as a conservative depth of uniform roughness for the entire outside surface of the drywell in the sandbed region. This is defined as Tr.,,h.. OCLROO014543
GPU Nuclear Subject. Calc No. Rev. No. Sheet No. O.C. Diyweli Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed I C-1302-187-5320-024 1 7 of 117 Originator Date Reviewed by Date MarkYekta 001/12193 S.C. Tumnminelli 5.2 Drywell Design Pressure= 44.0 psig, Oyster Creek, UFSAR Revision 13, Section 318.2.8, Page 3.8-61 Drywell Design Temperature 2920F, Oyster Creek, UFSAR Revision 13, Table 3.11-1
.5.3 The required sandbed shell thickness for the Design Pressure and Temperature is defined in paragraph ASME B&PV Code, Subsection NE, paragraph NE-3324.4, Spherical Shells, as:
t= .," PR Where:P = Design Pressure 2S-0.2P R Inside Radius of the Shell = 420 inches S = Maximum Allowable Stress, SA 212 Grade B 19,300 psi (From ASME B&PV Code Section VIII 1962 Edition and Reference 3.2, Section 2.2) Substituting values in the equation we have: L (44°psig-42°") _= 0.4789 inches 2(19,300psi)- 0.2(44.Opsig) - 5.3 Drywell Sandbed .buckling design thickness is 0.736 inches. Taken from References 3.3, and 3:5 5.4 Analytical design inputs are taken from References 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5 6.0 METHODS OF ANALYSIS: Development of "Evaluation Thickness".
'-This detailed evaluation is based, in part, on visual observations of the shell surface plus a knowledge of the inspection process. The first part of this evaluation is to arrive at a meaningful value for the general sandbed shell thickness- for use in the structural assessment. This meaningful value-is referred to as the thickness for evaluation. It is computed by accounting for the depth of the spot where the thickness measurement is taken considering the roughness of the shell surface. The surface of the shell has been characterized as being "dimpled" as in the surface of a golf ball where the dimples'are about one half inch in diameter (Appendix C). Also, the surface contains some depressions 12 to 18 inches-in diameter not closer than 12 inches apart, edge to edge (Ref 3.6). Appendix A presents the calculation of the depth of surface roughness using the. drywell shell impressions taken in the roughest bay. Two locations in bay 13 were selected since it is the roughest bay. Approximately 40 locations within: the two impressions were measured for depth and the average plus one standard deviation was calculated to be at 0.186 inches. A value of 0.200 inch wasused in this calculation as a conservative depth of uniform dimples for the entire outside surface of the drywell in the sandbed region.
OCLR00014544
GPU Nuclear Subject . Calc No. . Rev. No. Sheet No. O.C. Drywell Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed C-I 302-187-5320-024 1 8 of 117 Originator Date . Reviewed by Date
-Mark Yekta . 01/12/93 S. C. Tumminelli I The inspection focused on. the thinnest portion of the drywell, even if it was .very local,
.i.e., the inspection did not attempt to define- a. shell thickness suitable for structural evaluation. Observations indicate that some inspected spots are very deep. They are much deeper than the normal dimples found, and very local, not more than I to 2 inches in diameter. (Typically these observations were made after the spot was surface prepped for UT measurement. This results in a wide dimple to accommodate the meter and slightly deeper than originally found by 0.030 to 0.100 inches). The depth of these areas was measured with a depth gauge and straight edge at 00, 450, 90' and 135' around these inspected dimples. The depths obtained were averaged with respect to the tops of the locally rough areas. These depths are referred to herein as the AVG micrometer measurements. As these AVG micrometer measurements are very local in nature their effect on the structural response of the drywelI to applied loads is very limited. A more meaningfulpshell thickness- for the drywell structural response to applied loads is. the general shell thickness near the UT measured indications. This can be obtained on a smooth shell exterior surface by adding the UT measured thickness at the bottom of the indication and the AVG micrometer measurements of the indication depth. But because the exterior of the drywell shell in the sandbed region is very rough -and dimpled -the measurement described above would give optimistic general shell thicknesses near the indications (See Figure 6.1). To determine a conservative general shell thickness at the locations of interest Design Input 5.1 of this calculation is subtracted from the combination of the UT measurement and the depth micrometer readings. This thickness is then used to determine the drywell shell susceptibility to buckling by comparing this
- thickness to the buckling design thickness of 0.736 inches. This thickness is referred to as the evaluation thickness which as described above is computed as:
T (evaluation) = UT (measurement) + AVG (micrometer) -,T,,gh, where: T (evaluation) General shell thickness used for the evaluation UT (measurement) = thickness measurement at the area (location) AVG (micrometer) = average depth of the area relative to its immediate-surroundings To,,gh- 0.200 inches a conservative value, of depth of typical dimple on the shell surface. See Design Input 5.1. .
*After this calculation, if the thickness for analysis is greater than 0.736 inches; the area is evaluated as acceptable.
OCLROO014545
GPU Nuclear Ca No. RvNo Sheet No. Subject OC. Drywell Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbcd I C-1302-187-5320-024 N 9 of 117 Originator S IDate. IrReviewed by
- Date Mark Yekta
- 01/12193 S. C. Tumminelli
.4 00 AVG Corroded Drywell 7?ci40:
- -e Shel] Surface UT +AVG Micrmt FIGURE 6.1 OCLROO01 4546
Sandbed GeneralWall Criteria: The acceptance criteria used to evaluate the measured drywell thickness is based upon. GE reports9-3 and 9-4 (Ref. 3.2 & 3.3) as well as other GE studies (Ref.3.5) plus visual obsenwations of the drywell surface (Ref.3.6 and Appendix C)I The GE reports used a projected uniform thickness .of 0.736 inches in the sandbed area taken from References 3.3, and 3.5. This area is defined to be from the bottom to top of the sandbed, i.e., El. 8'- 112" to El. 12'-3" and exrtendingcircumferentially one full bay. Therefore, if all the UT measurements for thickness in one bayare greater than 0.736 inches the bay is evaluated to be acceptable. In bays where measurements are below 0.736 inches, more detailed evaluation is performed. Local Wall Criteria: If the thickness for evaluation is. less than 0.736 inches, then the use of specific GE studies is employed (Ref. 3.5). The studies in Reference 3.5 do not reflectactual drywell shell conditions but are used as assessment tools for areas of the sandbed region that have reduced thicknesses. The methodology used in these studies is provided in reference 3.3 with a excerpt provided here. The studies contain a two step eigenvalue formulation procedure to perform linear elastic buckling analysis of the drywell shell with local areas of reduced thickness. The first step is a static analysis of the structure with all the .anticipated loads applied. The structural stiffness matrix, [K], the stress stiffness matrix, [S], and theapplied stresses, raP], are developed and saved from this static analysis. A buckling pass is then run to solve for the lowest eigenvalue or. load factor, A, for the whole structure at which elastic buckling can occur. This load factor, or eigenvalue is a multiplier for the applied stress state or applied load at which the onset of elastic buckling will theoretically occur. All the applied stresses in the structure are scaled equally by the load factor. This analysis technique is applied to the drywell pie slice finite element model, with a reduction in thickness of 0.200 inches (below the design buckling thickness of 0.736") in a local area of 12 x 12 inches in the'sandbed region, tapering to the original thickness over an additional 12 inches, located to result in the largest reduction in load -factor possible. This location is. selected at the point of maximum deflection of the eigenvector shape associated with the lowest buckling load. The theoretical load: factor/ eigenvalue for this case was reduced by 9.5% from 6.14 to 5.56. It should be noted that this reduction of 0.200 inches is over a 144 squareinch area of the shell while the actual surface area including the tapering of the thickness is 36 by 36 inches or 1,296 square inch area with thicknesses that are below the 0.736 inch buckling design thickness. This additional tapered area and its reduced thicknesses also. contributed to the 9.5% reduction in load factor, OCLROO014547
- QPU Nuclear' Cak No. Rev. No. Sheet No.
Subject O.C. D well Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed .C-1302-187-5320-024 I 1 11 Of 17 Originator I Date I Reviewed by I Date Mark Yekta 01/,V93 S. C. Turnnminelli In addition, to the reported result for the 0.536" or a 27% reduction in thickness buckling analysis, a second buckling analysis was performed for a wall thickness reduction of 13.5% or a thickness 0.636 inches over a one square foot area. The results of this case reduced the load factor and theoretical buckling stress by 3.9% in Reference 3.5. The center of the thinned area was located close to the maximumn displacement point in the buckling analysis with uniform thickness 0.736" as per Reference 3.5. Again, although this reduction of 13.5% or 0.636 inches is over a 144 square inch area of the shell, the actual surface area' including the tapering'0f the thickness is.a 36 by 36 inch or 1,296 square inch area with thicknesses that are below the buckling design thickness. This additional tapered area and its reduced thicknesses also contribute to the 3.9% reduction in load factor stated previously. Very Local Wall Criteria (21/2z Inches In Diameter or Less): All inspected locations with UT measurements below 0.736 inches have been determined to be in isolated locations less than 2V2 inches in diameter. Primary Membrane Plus Bending The acceptance criteria for these measurements confined to an area less than 2 V2 inches in diameter experiencing primary membrane plus bending stresses is based on ASME B&PV Code, Section 111, Subsection NE, Class MC Components, Paragraphs NE-3213.2 Gross Structural Discontinuity, NE-3213.10 Local Primary Membrane Stress, NE-3332.1 Openings not Requiring Reinforcement, NE-3332.2 Required Area of Reinforcement and NE-3335.1 Reinforcement of Multiple Openings. The use of Paragraph NE-3332.1 is limited by the requirements of Paragraphs NE-3213.2 and NE-3213.10. In particular NE-3213.10 limits the meridional distance between openings without reinforcement to 2.5-t . Also Paragraph NE-3335.1 only applies to openings in shells that are closer than"2 times their average diameter. The implication of these paragraphs are that"shell failures at these locations from~primary stresses produced by. design pressure cannot occur provided openings in shells have sufficient reinforcement. The current design pressure of 44 psig for the drywell requires a thickness of 0.479 inches in the sandbed.region of the drywell. A review of all the UT data-presented in Appendix D of the calculation indicates that all thicknesses in the drywell sandbed region exceed the requited pressure thickness by a substantial margin and there are no openings in the sandbed region of the drywell shell that do not contain the required design pressure reinforcement for the design code of record. Therefore, the requirements specified by the referenced code sections in the previous paragraph are not required for the very local wall thickness evaluation presented in the calculation. OCLROO014548
- GPU Nuclear Buckling The effect of these very local wall thickness areas on the buckling of the shell requires some discussion of the buckling mechanism in. a shell of revolution under an applied axial and lateral pressure load.
To begin the discussion we will describe the buckling of a simply supported cylindrical shell under the influence of lateral external pressure and axial load. As described in Chapter 11 of Reference 3.7, thin cylindrical shells buckle in lobes in both the axial and circumferential directions. These lobes are defined as half wave lengths of Sinusoidal functions. The functions are governed by the radius, thickness and length of the cylinder. If we look atla specific thin walled cylindrical shell both the length and radius would be essentially constants and if the thickness was reduced locally then this reduction would have to be signiificant and over a majority of the lobe so that the compressive stress in the lobe would exceed the critical buckling stress under the applied loads, thereby.causing the shell to buckle locally- This is demonstrated in Reference 3.5 where a 12 x 12 square inch section of the drywell sandbed region is reduced by 200 mils and. a local buckle occurred in the finite element eigenvalue extraction analysis of the drywell. Now reviewing the stability analyses provided in both References 3.3 and 3.5 and recognizing that the finite elements in the sandbed region of the model are 3" x 3", it is. clear that the circumferential buckling lobes for the drywell are substantially larger than the 2 Y2 inch diameter very local wall areas. This combined with the local reinforcement surrounding these local areas and the spherical. shell being close to the constraint provided by the concrete supporting structure indicates that these areas will have no impact on the buckling margins in the shell. It is also clear from Reference 3.5 that a uniform reduction in. thickness of 27% over a one square foot area followed by a transition zone would only create a 9.5% reduction in the load factor and theoretical buckling load of the drywell. Although this reduction of 27% is only over a 144. square inch area of the shell, the actual surface area including the transition zone to the 0.736 inch buckling design thickness is a 36 inch by 36 inch or 1,296 square inch area. This area of reduced thickness was located in the portion of the sandbed considered most susceptible to buckling, the midpoint of a bay between two vents. In addition, a second -buckling analysis was performed (Reference 3.5) for a wall thickness reduction of 13.5% or a thickness of 0.636 inches over a one square foot area followed by a transition zone from 0.636 inches to 0.736 inches. Again, although this reduction from 0.736 inches to 0.636 inches is over a 144.square inch area of the shell, while' the actual surface area including the transition zone to the buckling design thickness is a 36 inch by 36 inch or a 1,296 square inch area. This second buckling analysis. resulted in a 3.9% reduction in-the load factor. To bring these analyses results into perspective with the inspected very local areas, a review of the NDE Reports (Appendix D) indicates there are twenty UT measured areas OCLROO014549
GPU Nu c le a r S h eetN o. ISubject Calc No. Rev. No. Sheet No. O.C. Drywell Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed ReC-1302-187-5320-024"Cu ilb 13 ofl I7I Originator .. Date Reviewed by. Date Mark Yekta .01/1U/93 S. C. Tumminefli all less than 21'/" in diameter or less than 4.9 square inches each in area isolated throughout the entire sandbed region that have thicknesses less than 0.736". Compared to the analyses presented in Reference 3.5 the twenty areas would have to have a minimum area of reduced thickness of 144 square inches with a thickness of 0.636 which represents.a 13.5% reduction in wall thickness that equates to a 72.0 cubic inch loss of material located in the portion of the drywell sandbed region most susceptible to buckling to produce a 3.9% reduction in the theoretical buckling load and load factor for the drywell. The review of the NDE Reports also indicated that the average wall.thickness of the twenty areas is 0.703 inches which represents a 4.5%.reductibn in.wall thickness that equates to a 3.2 cubic inch loss of material and a total maximum area of 98 square inches if the twenty measured areas where contiguous with each other. This indicates that the twenty isolated areas with thicknesses less than the buckling design thickness would.not have a significant effect on the buckling of the OC. Drywell Shell. OCLROO014550
GPU Nuclear
7.0 CALCULATIONS
UT EVALUATION BAY .1: The outside surface of this bay is rough and full of dimples similar to the outside surface of a golf ball. This observation is made by the inspector who located the thinnest areas for the UT examination. This inspection focused on the thinnest areas of the drywell, even if it was very local, i.e., the inspection did not attempt to define a shell thickness suitable for structural evaluation. The shell appears to be relatively uniform in thickness except for a band of corrosion which looks like a "bathtub" ring, located 15. to 20 inches below the vent pipe reinforcement.plate, .i.e., weld line as shown in Figure 1. (Figure 1 and other like figures presented in this calculation are NOT TO SCALE). The graphical presentation in Figure I of measured indications is. extracted from. Appendix D, Calculation Pages 71 to 76. Based on the inspectors observations the bathtub ring is 12 to 18 inches wide and about 75 inches long located in the center of the bay. Beyond the
*bathtub ring -on both sides, the shell appears to be uniform in thickness at a conservati ve value of 0.800 inches. Above the bathtub -ring the shell exhibits no corrosion since the original lead primer on the vent pipe/reinforcement plate is intact. Measurements 14 and 15 confirm that the thickness above the bathtub ring is at 1.154 inches starting at elevation I '-00". Below the bathtub ring the shell is uniform in thickness where no abrupt changes in thicknesses are present. Thickness measurements below the bathtub ring (Locations 6, 7, 8, 9, 16, 17,18; 19, 22 and 23) are all above 0.750 inches (See Table l-b) except location 7 which is very local area.
Bay #1-General Wall (Sandbed Region) Thickness Evalution Therefore, taking the average of the UT measured thicknesses of locations 6, 7, 8, 9, 16,. 18, 19 and 22.gives a average thickness of 0.81.6 inches for the shell below the bathtub ring. Based on this a conservative mean thickness of 0.800 inches, is estimated -to
. represent the evaluation thickness for this bay outside the bounds of the-bathtub ring.
Given a uniform thickness of 0.800 inches for these areas of the bay, it is concluded that these areas are acceptable based on the thickness exceeding the buckling design thickness for the sandbed region of 0.736 inches using the results of Reference 3.3.. Locations 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 20, arid 21 are confined to the bathtub ring as shown in Figure 1. To determine the general shell thickness in the bathtub ring area of this bay the evaluation thicknesses for each of the locations defined. above are averaged together. An example of a typical calculation ofthe general wall thickness defined as the evaluation thickness is presented below for clarity: OCLROO014551
GPU Nuclear Sabject Calc No No.No. Se _2C. Dr well Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed C-1302-187-5320-024 .1 15 of 117 "riginator Date Reviewed by Date Mark Yekta 01/12/93 S. C Tumnwinelli
+ DI_450 1- D1-90a + DI-135o (AVG Micromneter), = D=--
4 Where:D.o0° Micrometer Depth Reading for location I at 0 degrees taken from Appendix D, Calculation Page 74, etc. 0.7'!020"0.0" +0 185I (AVG Micrometer) , = 0.272 +0,204"+0.206"+0. 85" =0.217" 4 T(Evaiuaiion)1= UT(McasuCMee)it +(AVG Micrometer)1 - Trough Where:UT(Mesueuent)f = 0.720" Taken from Appendix D, Calculation Page 71, Location I Trough = 0.200" See Design Input 5.1 and Section 6, Acceptance. Criteria, General Wall. T(Evnluation)l 0.720"+0.217"-0.200" 0.737" Bay 1 AVG Mlicrometer Calculations Table I-a NOTES: 1. AZIMUTH DATA TAKEN FROM APPENDIX D, CALCULATIONq PAGE 74. OCLROO014552
An average value of the evaluation thicknesses presented in Table I-c for this band is as follows; Location Evaluation Thickness 1 0.737" 2 0.659" 3 0.852" 4 0.760" 5 0.823" 10 0.839" 11 0.726" 12 0.825" 13 0.792" 20 0.965" 21 0.737" Average - 0.792" An average evaluation thickness of 0.792 inches for the bathtub ring may raise concern given that the bathtub ring is noticeable and that the difference between its average evaluation thickness (0.792 inches) and the average thickness taken for the entire region (0.800 inches) is.only 0.008 inches. This results from the fact that average micrometer readings were generally not taken for the remainder of the shell since each reading was greater than 0.736 inches. In reality, the remainder of the shell is much thicker than 0.800 inches. The appropriate evaluation thickness cannot be quantified since no micrometer readings were taken. Again given that the average evaluation thickness of the shell in the bathtub ring area exceeds the buckling design thickness of 0.736 inches the shell area within the bathtub ring is also acceptable using the results of Reference. 3.3. Bay #1 Local Wall and Very Local Wall Thickness Evaluation The individual measured thicknesses must also be evaluated for compliance with the local wall thickness criteria. Table 1-b identifies 23 locations of UT measurements that were selected to represent the thinnest areas, except locations 14 and 15, based on visual examination. These locations are a deliberate attempt to produce a minimum measurement. Locations 14 and. 15 were selected to confirm that no corrosion had taken place in the area above the bathtub ring. Eight locations shown in Table 1-b (1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 12, and 21) have measurements below 02736 inches. Inspectors observations indicate that these locations were very deep and not more than I to 2 inches in diameter. The depth of each of these areas relative to its immediate surroundings was measured at 4 locations around the spot and the average is. shown in Table I-a. Using the general wall thickness acceptance criteria described OCLROO014553
GPU Nuclear Subject Cale No. IRev. No. No-Sheet O.C. Dr!vell Ext: UT Evaluation in Sandbed C-1302-187-5320-024 1 17 of 117 Originator Date Reviewed by Date Mark Yekta 01/12193 S. C. Tumminelli earlier, the evaluation thickness for all measurements of very local areas below 0.736 inches were found to be above 0.736 inches except for two locations, 2 and 11, as shown in Table .1-c. Locations 2 and II are in the bathtub ring and are about 4 inches apart. This area is characterized as a local area 4 x 4 inches located at about 15 to 20 inches below the vent pipe reinforcement plate with an average thickness of 0.692 inches In order to quantify the effect of this local region and to address structural compliance, thieGE study on local effects was used (Ref, 3.5). This .tuidy contains an analysis of the drywell shell using the pie slice finite'element model. The study reduced the thickness of a] 2" by 12" area by 0.100 inches (0..636 inches) and included a transition zone of 12 inches all around from 0.636" to 0.736". When compared to -a similar area with a bmckling design thickness of 0.736" the total reduced area of 1,296 square inches represents a. 13,5% reduction in local shell thickness and a material loss of 72.0 cubic inches. The center of the thinned area was located close to the calculated maximum displacement point in the buckling analysis with uniform thickness of 0.736 inch as per Reference 3.5. For this case the theoretical buckling load factor was reduced by 319%. Based on the buckling design thickness of 0.736inches the "as found" 4" by 4" area with a thickness of 0.692" represents a 6_3% reduction" in local shell thickness and a material loss of 0.7 cubic inches. This volumetric consideration provides a quick visualization,.: while shell buckling depends on various parameters as discussed in Reference 3.3 and 3.7. Comparison of the ."as found" area of 4" x 4" with the "as analyzed" criteria of 0.636" over a 12" x 12" area, with an additional transition zone of 1.2", and its associated 13.5% reduction in shell wall thickness and a material loss of 72 cubic inches leads to the
*conclusion that the effect on the theoretical buckling load factor is negligible. Also based on the location of this4" x .4" area, is almost directly below the vent and vent header assembly (between 12 to 17 inches to the right of the vent centerline and between 22 and 23 inches down from the vent -weld line). This is in the area where buckling of the shell islimited due to the stiffening effect.of the vent and vent header assembly. This effect can be clearly, seen in the buckling analyses presented in References 3.3 and 3.5.
Remaining Very Local Areas: A review of Appendix D, Calculation pages 71, 73 and 75 indicates the.remaining very local areas of reduced thickness are isolated from. each other and therefore, have a negligible effect on the shell buckling. See Section 6, Very Local Wall Criteria (2 Y2 inches in diameter or less) for details.. Furthermore, the remaining local areas are centered about the vent which significantly stiffen the. shell. This stiffening effect combined with the restraint provided by the concrete support structure limits the shell buckling to a point in the sandbed region which is located at themidpoint between the two vents.
.OCLROO014554
GPU Nuclear Conclusion In. summary, using a conservative estimate of 0.800 inches for evaluation thickness for the entire bay (except the bathtub ring).and a 0.792 inch evaluation thickness for the bathtub ring , plus the acceptance of the local 4" by 4" area with an evaluation thickness of 0.692" based on the GE study, it is concluded that the bay is acceptable. 3. OCLROO014555
GPU Nuclear Bay # 1 UT Data Table 1-b Location D-Meter Appendix D Average UT Measurement Micrometer Ipage (iFhs on Calculation (See Table l-a) (inches) (inches) 11 0.720 71 0.217 2 0.716 71 0.143 3 0.705 71 .0.347 4_ _ _ 0.760 71 --- 5 _U.710 71 0.313 6 0.760 71 _ ___7 0.700 71 0.266 8 0.805 71 --- 9 0.805 71 --- 10 0.839 73 --- 11 0.714 73 0.212 12 0.724 " .. 73 0.301 13 0.792 73 -- 14 1.147 73 --- 15 1.156 73 --- 16 0.796 75 17 0.860 75 --- 18 0.917 75 ....
- 19. 0.890 75 _ --
20 0.965 75 --- 21 0.726 75 0.211 22 0.852 75 -- 23 0.850 75 OCLROOD14556
GPU Nuclear Summary Of Measurements Below 0.736" Table 1-c I..4ocation '. T TMeasurement . *.AVG
, (
Micrometer V.i
- Mean . '.
TI(Eviluationi) Remarks
*(.20 2) .: -pth/Valley (4)=(1)+(2)--3) 0.720" 0.217" .01200" 0.737" Acceptable 2 0.716" 0.143". 0.200" 0.659" ACcepable 3 .f 0.705- 0.347" 0.200 0.852- Accepable 5 0.710" 0.313" 0.200" 0.823" Acceptable 7 0.700" 0.266" 0.200" 0.766" AccepLable I1 0.714" 0.212" 0.200" 0.726" Acceptable 12 0.724' 0.301" i 0.200" .0.825" Acc-e 21 021" l0.726" 0.200" 0.737" Acceptable OCLROO01 4557
GPU Nuclear Subject' Calc No. Rev. No. Sheet No. O.C. Drywell Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed C:1302-187-5320-024 21of]fj. 17 Originator Date Reviewed by Date Mark Yekta 01112/93 S. C. Tununinelli BAY #1 DATA NOTES:
- 1. All 'Location" measurements from intersection
.-of he DW shell and vent collar fillet-welds.
- 2. Pit depts are average of four readings taken at 01450190'1135W within I" band surrounding ground spots. Only measured where remaining wall thk.
was below 0.736". 15; DW SHELL 422 9
, .19 18, 7.
23o*-7 1 FIGURE (1) OCLROO014558
UT EVALUATION BAY #3:
.The outsidesurface of this bay is rough; similar to bay one,full of dimples comparable to
- the outside surface of golf ball. This observation is made by the inspector who located the thinnest areas for the UT examination. The shell appears to be relatively uniform in thickness except for a bathtub ring 8 to 10 inches.wide approximately 6 inches below the vent header reinforcement plate. The upper portion of the shell beyond the band exhibits no corrosion where the original red lead primer is still intact. Eight locations were selected to represent. the thinnest areas based on the visual observations of the shell surface (Fig. 3). These locations are a deliberate attempt to produce a minimum measurement. Table 3 shows measurements taken to measure the thicknesses of the drywell shell using a D-meter. The results indicate that -all of the areas have thickness
*greater than the 0.736 inches.
Bay #3 General Wall (SandBed Region) Thickness Evaluation Given an average of the UT measurements presented in Table 3 equal to: 0:868 inches, a conservative mean evaluation thickness of 0.850 inches is estimated for this bay. Therefore, it is concluded that the bay is acceptable based on the bay evaluation thickness exceeding the buckling design thickness for the sandhed region of 0.736 inches using results of Reference 3.3. Bay # 3UT Data Table 3 Location D-Meter.UT
- Appendix D Average Measurement on Micrometer Calculation (inches) Page (inches)
______ _ 0.795 77--
.2 1.000o 77--
3 0.857 77 -- 4 0.898 77 -- 5 0.823 77 6 0.968 77 7 0.826 77 8 0.780
- 77 --
OCLROO014559
Q .4-FIGURE (3) OCLROO014560
(PU Nuclear Subject O.C. Dr'ywell Ext. UT Ev UT EVALUATION BAY #5: The outside surface of this bay is rough and very similar to bay 3 except that..the local areas are clustered at the junction of bays 3 and 5, at about 30 inches above the floor. The shell surface is full of dimples comparable to the outside surface of a golf ball. This observation is made by the inspector, who located the thinnest areas for the UT examination. The shell appears to be relatively uniform in thickness. Eight locations were selected to represent the thinnest areas based on the visual observations of the shell surface (see Fig. 5). These locations are a deliberate attempt to produce a minimum, measurement. Table.5 shows readings taken to measure the thicknesses of the dr>well shell using a D-meter. The results indicate that all of the areas have thickness greater than the 0.736 inches. Bay #5 General Wall (Sandbed Region) Thickness Evaluation
.Given an average of the UT measurements presented in Table 5 equal to 0.986 inches, a conservative mean evaluation thickness of. 0.950 inches is estimated for this bay..
Therefore, it is concluded that the bay is acceptable based on the bay evaluation thickness exceeding the buckling design thickness for the sandbed region of 0.736 inches using the
.results of Reference 3.3.
Bay # 5 UT Data Table 5 Location D-Meter UT Appendix D Average Measurement on Micrometer (inches) Calculation (inches) _ __Page ...... _.... 1 i 0.970 80 -- 2 1.040 o .80 -- 3 o1.020 80 --
- 4. 0.910 80 ---
5 0.890 80 . --- 6 1.060 80 --
.7 0.990 8 80 --
8 1.010 80 -_ _ OCLROO014561
- GPU
'Subject Nuclear" CNlCNo. Rev. No. Sh~et No. O.C. Drywel! Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed C-1302-187-5320-024 1 25 of 117 Originator Date Reviewed by Date Mark Yekta 01/12/93 S. C. Tumminelli . FIGURE (5) OCLROO014562
GPU Nuclear UT EVALUATION BAY #7: The observation of the drywell surface for this bay showed uniform dimples in the corroded area, but they are shallow compared to those in bay 1. The bathtub ring seen in the other bays was not very prominent in this bay. This observation is made by the inspector who located the thinnest areas for the UT examination. The shell- appears to be relatively uniform in thickness. Seven locations were selected to represent the thinnest areas based on the visual, observations of the shell, surface (Fig. 7). These locations are a deliberate attempt to produce a minimum measurement. Table 7 shows readings taken to measure the thicknesses of the drywell shell using a D-meter. The results indicate that all of the aieas have thickness greater than the 0.736 inches. Bay #7 General Wall (Sandbed Region) Thickness Evaluation Given an average of the UT measurements presented in Table 7 equal to 1.001, a mean evaluation thickness of 1.00 inch is estimated for this bay. Therefore, it is concluded that the bay is acceptable based on the bay evaluation thickness exceeding the buckling design thickness for the sandbed region of 0.736 inches using the results of Reference 3.3. Bay # 7UT Data Table 7 Location D-Meter UT Appendix D Average
*Measurement on Micrometer (inches) Calculation (inches)
, Page 1 0.920 84-e 2 1.016 84 --
3 0.954 84 --
*4 1.04l0 84--
5 1.030 84 _ 6 1.045 .84 L 1.000 84 -- OCLROO14563
GPU Nuclear FIGURE (7) OCLROO014564
GPU Nuclear Subject Calc No. Rev. No. Sheet No. O.C. Dywell Ext.UUT Evaluation in-Sandbed C-1302-187-5320-024 1 28 of 117 Originator. . Date Reviewed by Date Mark Yekta .. .. I 01/12/93 S. C. Turnminelli UT EVALUATION BAY #9: The observation of the drywell shell for this bay was very similar to bay 7 except that the bathtub ring was more evident in this bay. The shell appears to be relatively uniforn in thickness except for a bathtub ring.6 to 9 inches wide approximately 6 to 8 inches below the vent header reinforcement plate. The upper portion of the shell beyond the band exhibits no
.. corrosion. where the original red lead primer is still intact. Ten locations wer e selected to represent the thinnest areas based on the visual observations of the shell surface (Fig. 9). These locations are a deliberate attempt to produce a minimum measurement. Table 9 shows readings taken to measure the thicknesses of the drywell shell using a D-meter. The results indicate that all of the areas have thickness greater than the 0.736 inches.
Bay, #9 General Wall (Sandbed Region) Thickness Evaluation Given an average of the .UT measurements presented in Table 9 equal to 0.915, a conservative mean evaluation thickness of 0.900 inches is estimated for this bay. Therefore, it is concluded that the bay. is acceptable based. on the bay. evaluation thickness exceeding the buckling
.design thickness for the sandbed region of 0.736 inches using the results of Reference 3.3.
Bay # 9 UT Data Table 9 Location 1 lD-Meter UT Appendix D Average I Measurement on Micrometer I "Calculation (inches) Page ,inches) 1 0.960 85 -- 2 0.940 85 --- 3 0.994 85 --- 4 I !.020 85 -_- 5 0.985 85 -- 6 0.820 85 -- 7 0.825 85 -- 8 0.791 85 --- 9 0.832 85 10 0.980 85 +/- OCLROO014565
BAY #9 DATA NOTES: I. AN mafmasummol from intuuuection of fhe DW Shd (butt) arnd veat toiler (flilet) weld. 2 DW 9 :.7
- SHELL 10 5
a FIGURE (9) OCLROO014566
S.GPU Nuclear Subject I Calc NO. No. Sheet No. O.C. Drywell Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed C-1302-187-5320-024 1 30 of 117 Originator Date Reviewed by Date Mark Yekta 01112/93 S. C. Tumminelli UT EVALUATION BAY #11: The outside surface of this bay is rough, similar to bay 1, full of uniform dimples comparable to the outside surface of a golf ball. The shell appears to be relatively uniform in thickness except for local areas at the upper right comrer 0f Figure 11, located at about. 10 to 12 inches below the vent pipe reinforcement plate. Eight locations were selected to represent the thinnest areas based on the visual observations of the shell surface (Fig. 11).. These locations are a deliberate attempt to produce a minimum measurement. Table 1 -a shows readings taken to measure the thicknesses of the drywell shell using a D-meter. The results indicate that all of the areas have thickneg,ý greater than the 0.736 inches, except one location. Location I as shown in Table 1I-a, has a reading below 0.736 inches. Inspectors observations "indicatethat this location was very deep and not more than I to 2 inches in diameter. The depth of area relative to its .immediate surrounds .was measured at 4 locations around the spot and the average is shown in Table lI-a. As described in Section 6, Methods of Analysis, Very Local Wall Acceptance Criteria, areas of reduced thickness equal to or less than 2 V2 inches are too small to reduce the shell critical buckling load. This combined with the location of the very local indication near the vent reinforcement (See Appendix D, Calculation Page 87) indicates that this area would have a negligible*. effect on the shell buckling response. Bay #.11 General Wail (Sandbed Region) Thickness Evaluation Given an average of the UT measurements presented in Table 11-a equal to 0.792 inches, a conservative mean evaluation thickness of 0.790 inches is estimated for this bay- Therefore, it is concluded that the bay is acceptable based on the -bay evaluation thickness exceeding the buckling design thickness for the sandbed region of 0.736 inches using the results of Reference 3.3. The calculation of the average depth for Bay 11, Location 1 is as follows:. D._D+D 1i-45 + D 10+D111
.(AVG Micrometer), D°
- D 5O D-90° + -13?
4 Where:DD0 0 = Micrometer Depth Reading for location I at 0 degrees taken from Appendix D, Calculation Page 91, etc. (AVG Micrometer), - -0.246" 4 OCLROO014567
GPU Nuclear. Subject Cale No.. Rev. No. Sheet No. O.C. Drywell Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed C-1302-187-5320-024 1 31 of 117 Originator Date Reviewed by Date Mark Yekta 01112/93 S. C. Tumminelli Bay# 11 UT Data
"'Table.11-a Location UT Appendix D Average Measurement Presented on Micrometer Calculation
_ (inches) Page (inches) 1 0.705 .87 0.246 2 0.770 87 --- 3 0.832 87 ---
- 4 0.755 87 --.-
5 0.831 1 87 --- 6 0.800 87 . 7 0.831 87 --
*8 0. 1I ' 87- - .,
Summary of Measurements Below 0.736 Inches Table 1 -b Loation LUTMeasurement AVG Mirmee Mean tDepth/Vraliey T (Evaluationu) Remark 10.705" 0.240" 0.200" .5' 1 Acceptable OCLROO014568
GPU Nuclear BAY #11 DATA NOTES:
- 1. All measuremernts fom interwCtion of the DW 6hell (butt) lind vent collar (Itl.et) welds.
- 2. Ph1 depths are average of four readlngs taken at 0a'45"900/135Y within V band surrounding the ground spots. This moasurement was only taken when wall thickness was below 0.7360, D
DW 3 I0 02 SHELL 8
.7.
FIGURE (11) OCLROO014569
UT EVALUATION BAY #13: The outside surface of this bay is rough and full of dimples similar to bay I as showln in .Appendi& C. This observation is made by the inspector who located the thinnest areas in deep valleys'thereby biasing the remaining wall measurements to the conservative side. This inspection focused on the thinnest areas, even if very local, i.e., the inspection did not attempt to define a shell thickness suitable for structural evaluation. The variation in shell thickness is greater in this bay than in the other bays. The bathtub ring below the vent pipe reinforcement plate was less prominent than was seen in other bays. The corroded areas are about 12 to 18 inches in diameter and are at 12 inches apart, located in the middle of the sandbed. Beyond the corroded areas on both sides, the shell appears to be uniform in thickness at a conservative value of 0.800". Near the vent pipe and reinforcement plate the shell exhibits no corrosion since the original lead primer on the vent pipe/reinforcement plate is intact Measurement 20 confirms that the thickness above the bathtub ring is at 1*.154 inches. Below the bathtub ring the shell appears to be fairly uniform in thickness where no abrupt changes in. thickness are present. Thickness measurements below the bathtub ring (Locations 3, 4, 9, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, and 19) are all 0.800 inches or better (See Table 13-b). Bay #13 General Wall (Sandbed Region) Thickness Evaluation Therefore, given an average of the UT measurements of the locations below the bathtub ring is equal to 0.884 'iches, a conservative mean thickness of 0.800 inches is estimated to represent the .evaluation thickness for areas of shell -in this bay outside the bathtub ring. Given a uniform thickness of 0.800 inches for these areas of the bay it is concluded that these areas are acceptable based on the thickness exceeding the buckling design thickness for the sandbed region of 0.736 inches using the results of Reference 3.3. Locations 5, 6,.7, 8, 10, 11, 14, and 15 are confined to the bathtub ring as shown in Figure 13. To determine the general shell thickness in the bathtub ring area of this bay the evaluation thicknesses (See Table 13-c) for each of the locations defined above are averaged together. An example of a typical calculation of the general wall thickness defined as the evaluation thickness is presented below for clarity: OCLROO014570
GPU .Nuclear Subject Calc No.' Rev. No. Sheet No. O.C. Dr)ywell Ext. UT.Evaluation in Sandbed C-1 302-187-5320-024 i 34 of 1.17 Originator Date Reviewed by Date Mark Yekta 01/12/93 S. C. Tumminclli D (AVG Micrometer)s D5- +D +5-D4-9°°+ 0 D-- 1 35 4 Where: D- 0 0 - Micrometer Depth Reading for Bay 13, location 5 at 0.. degrees taken from Appendix D, Calculation Page 98, etc. (AVG Micrometer) 5 = .0 +0.I93"+0.230"+0.298' 0.217" 4 T(Eyaluaion)5 = UT(MMU.,ment,) + (AVG Micrometer) 5 - Tgh Where:UT..mcsumroent)5 = 02718" Taken from Appendix D, Calc Page 93, Location 5 Trou = 0.200" See Design Input 5.1 and Section 6, Acceptance, Criteria, General Wall. T(Evaluation)5. 0.718"'+02217"-0.200" = 0.735" Bay 13 AVG Micrometer Calculations Table 13-a Notes: 1. Azimuth data taken from Appendix D, Calculation Page 98. OCLROO014571
GPU Nuclear S~b, ec, tCale No. !16v..No. Soe . 0.u.Drje lxt Tvaluation in Sandbed C-1302-187 '-532.0-024 Sheet5No. 1 Originator IDate , Reviewed by [Date Mark Yekta 01/12/93 "S. C. Tumin-nelli An average value of the evaluation thicknesses presented in Table 13-c for this band is as follows;. Location Evaluation Thickness 50.735" 6 0.756" 7 0.675" 8 0.796" 10 0.739" I1 0.741" 12 0.885"
- 14. 0.868"
- 15. .0.756".
16 0.829" Average = 0.778" The inspector suspected that some of the above locations in the bathtub ring were over ground. Subsequent locations with suffix A, e.g. 5A, 6A, were located close to the spots in question and were ground carefully to remove the minimum amount of metal but adequate enough for UT examination as shown in Table 13-b. The results indicate that all subsequent measurements were above 0.736 inches. The average micromeler measurements taken for these locations confhm the depth measurements at these locations. In spite of the fact that the original measurements were taken at heavily ground locations they are the ones used in the evaluation. Again given that the average evaluation thickness of the shell in the bathtub ring~area exceeds the buckling design thickness of 0.736 inches the shell area within the bathtub ring is also acceptable based on the results of Reference 3.3. Bay #13 Local Wall Thickness Evaluation The individual measurements must also be evaluated for compliance with the local wall thickness criteria. Table 13-b identifies 20 locations of UT measurements that were select6d to represent the thinnest areas, .except location 20, based on visual examination. These locations are a deliberate attempt to produce a minimum measurement. Location 20 was selected to confimi that no corrosion had taken place in the area above the bathtub ring. Nine.locations shown in Table 13-b (1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11,Iand 15) have measurements below 0.736.inches. Inspectors observations indicate that these locations wee very deep, overly ground, and not more than. 1 to 2 inches in diameters. The depth of each of these areas relative to its immediate surroundings was measured at 4 locations around the spot and the average is shown in Table 13-a. Using the general wall thicknaess acceptance criteria described earlier, the evaluation thickness for all measurements below 0.736 inches were found to be above 0.736 inches except for two locations, 5 and 7, as shown in Table 13-b. In addition, subsequent measurements close to the locations identified above, were taken and they were all above 0.736 inches. OCLR00014572
G PU Nuclear Subject Calc No. j Rev. No. Sheet No. O.C. D well Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed C-1302-187-5320-024 I . 36 of 117 Originator Date Reviewed by Date Mark Yekta 01/12/93 S. C. Tumminelli Locations 5 and 7 are in the bathtub ring and are about 30 inches apart. These locations are characteri7.d as local areas located at about .15 to 20 inches below the vent pipe rein forcemnent plate with an evaluation thicknesses of 0.735 inches mad 0.673 inches. The location 5 is near to location 14 for an average value of 0.801 inches and therefore acceptable. Location 7 could conservatively exist overan area of 6 x 6 inches for a thickness of 0.673 inches. In order to quantify the effect of this local region and to address structural compliance, the GE study on local effects is used (Ref. 3.5). This study contains:an analysis of the drywell shell using the pie slice finite element model. The study reduced the thickness of a 12" by 12" area by 0.100 inches (0.636 rinches) and included a transition zone of 12 inches all around from 0.636" to 0.736". When compared to a similar area with a buckling design thickness of 0.736" the modeled area represents-a 13.5% reduction in local, shell thickness and a material loss of 72.0 cubic inches. The center of the thinned area was located close to the calculated maximumr displacement point in the buckling analysis with uniform thickness of 0.736 inch as per Reference 3.5. For this case the theoretical buckling load factor was reduced by 3.9%. Based on the buckling design thickness of 0.736 inches the "as found" 6" by 6" area with a thickness of 0.673" represents a 8.6%.reduction in local shell thickness and a material loss of 2.3 cubic inches. The volumetric consideration provides a quick visualization. While shell buckling depends on various parameters as discussed in References 3.3 and 3.7. Comparison of the "as found" area of 6" x 6" with the "as analyzed". criteria of 0.636" over a 12" x 12" area, with an additional transition zone of 12", and its associated 13.5% reduction in shell -wall thickness and a material loss of 72 cubic inches leads to the conclusion that the-effect on the theoretical -buckling load factor is negligible. Also based on the location of this 6, x 6" area, is almost directly below the vent and vent header assembly (between 20 to 26 inches to the left of the vent centerline and between 14 to 20 inches down from the vent weld line). This is in the area where buckling of the shell is limited due to the stiffening effect of the vent and vent header assembly. This effect can be clearly seen in the buckling analyses presented in References 3.3 and 3.5. Remaining Very Local Areas: A review of Appendix D, calculation pages 93, 94, 95 and 96 indicates the remaining very-local areas of reduced thickness are isolated from each other and therefore, have a negligible effect on the shell buckling. See Section 6, Very Local Wall Criteria (2&Y2 inches in diameter or less) for details. Furthermore, the remaining local areas are centered about the vent which significantly stiffen the shell. This stiffening effect combined with the restraint provided by the con'crete support structure limits the shell buckling to. a point in the sandbed region which is located at the midpoint between the two vents. OCLROO014573
G'PU Nuclear Conclusion In summary, using a conservative estimate of 0.800 inches for evaluation' thickness for the entire bay (except the bathtub ring) and a 0.778 inch evaluation thickness for the bathtub ring , plus the acceptance of the local 6" by 6" area with an evaluation thickness of 0.673" based on the GE study; it is concluded that the bay is acceptable. OCLROO014574
Bay # 13 UT Data Table 13-b Location D-Meter UT Appendix D Average Measurement presented on Micrometer*' (inches) Calculation (Table 13-a) Pag~e (inches) i/lA. 0.672/0.890. 93/95 0.351 2/2A 0.722/0.943 j 93/95 1 0.360 3 0.941. 0 4 0.915 .93__- 5/5A 0.718/0.851 93/95 0.217. 616A 0.655/0.976 93/95 j 0.301 7/7A 0.618/0.752 93/95 0.255 8/8A 0.718/0.900 93/95 0-278 9 0.924 93 - 10/10A 0.728/0.810 93/95 0.211 U/11A 0.685/0.854 93Y95 0.256 12 0.885 93 13 0.932 93 --- 14 .0.868 93 -- 15/15A 0.683/0.859 93/95 0.273 16 0.829 93. 17 0.807 93 18 .0.825 93 19 0.912 93 20 1.170 93 (1).(1) Average values provided in this column are for locations 1, 2, 5, etc. (1) (without suffix A) and not for IA, 2A, 5A, etc. The values*.are compiled in Table 13-a OCLROO014575.
GPU Nuclear Subject O.C. Drywell Ext. UT I Originator Mark Yekta Summary of Measurements Below 0.736 Inches Table 13-c Location UT Meas 0.6 2 0.7: 5 0.7: 6 0.6. 7 0.61 8 0.71 1.0 0.7, II 0.6* I15 0.61
, (.
OCLROO014576
GPU Nuclear O.C. Dr)ywall Ext. UIT Evaluati on in Subject in Sandbed Caic No. C-1302-187-5'320-024 Rev.
"I No.
Originator Date Reviewed by Mark Yekta 01/12/93 S. C. Turnmineli BAY #13 DATA NOTES: I. All measurements from intersection of the DW shell (butt) and vent collar (fillet) welds.
- 2. Spots with suffix (e.g. IAor 2A) were located cos-e to the Sspots in question and were ground carefully to remove minimum amount of metal but adequate enough for UT.
- 3. Pit depths are average ot four readings taken at 0/45/190"/135° within 1' *distance around ground spot. Taken only where remaining wall showed below 0.736".
/4," '20
ý,0DW 17 16' *7 '15 .14 SHELL 5 -18. 3 8 6 12, "*.11
*10 .9
.19 Figure (13)
OCLROO014577
-GPU Nucle~i~r UT EVALUATION BAY #15:. The outside surface of this bay is rough, similar. to bay 1, full of uniform dimples comparable to the outside surface of golf ball (Appendix C). The bathtub ring seen in the other bays, was not very prominent in this bay. This observation is made by the inspector who located the thinnest areas for the UT examination. The upper portion of the shell beyond the ring exhibits no corrosion where the original red- lead prirmer is still intact The shell appears to be relatively uniform in thickness. Eleven locations were selected to represent the thinnest areas based on the visual observations of the shell surface (Fig. 15). These locations -are a deliberate attempt to produce a mninimmrt measurement. Table 15-a shows readings taken to measure the thicknesses of the' drywell shell using a D-meter. The results indicate that all of the areas have thickness greater than the 0.736 inches, except one location. Location 9 as shown in Table 15-a, has a reading below 0.736 inches. Inspectors observations indicate that this location was very deep and not more than I to 2 inches in diameter. The depth of area relative to its inmnediate surrounding was measured at 4 locations around the spot and the average is shown in Table 15-a. As described in Section 6, Methods of Analysis, Very Local Wall Acceptance Criteria, areas of reduced thickness equal to or less than 2 1/2i inches are too small to reduce the shell critical buckling load. This combined with the location of the very local indication near the vent reinforcement (See Appendix D, Calculation Page 99) indicates that this area would have a negligible effect on the shell buckling response. Bay #15 General Wall (Sandbed Region) Thickness Evaluation Given an average of the UT measurements presented in Table 15-a is equal to 0.816 inches, a conservative mean evaluation thickness of 0.800 inches is estimated forthis bay. Therefore, it is concluded -that the bay. is acceptable based on the bay evaluation thickness exceeding the buckling design thickness for the sandbed region of 0.736 inches using the results of Reference 3.3. The calculation of the average depth for Bay 15, Location 9 is as follows: (AVG Micrometer) 9 D- g-01 + D94 + D9-90P + D9-13'0 4 Where: D_00 Micrometer Depth Reading for location 9 at 0 degrees taken from.Appendix D, Calculation Page 100, etc. (AVG Micrometer)) 0.356"+0.350..+0.359"+0.282' = 0.337" 4 OCLROO014578
GPU Nuclear C2lc No. "Rev. No. Sheet No. Subjectt O.C. Drywell Ext. UJT Evaluation in Sandbed C-1302-187-5320-024 i 42 of 1 17 Originator - .[ Date Reviewed by -Date Mark Yekta[ 01/12/93 1.S- C. Tununinelli Bay 15 UT Data Table 15-a Location D-Meter UT Appendix D Average Measurement on Micrometer Calculation (inches) Page (inches) 1 0.786 99 --- 2 0.829 99 "
- 3 0.932 99 -_-
4 0.795 99 5 0.850 99 --- 6 0.794 99 --- 7 0.808 99 --- 8 0.770 99 9 0.722 99 0.337 10 0.860 99 .--
"I1 0.825 99 --- _
Summary of Measurements Below 0.736 Inches Table 15-b Location UT Measurement AVG Micrometer Mean Depth/Valley T (Evaluation) Remarks Lt A (2) l (3) (4)=(I)+(2)-(3) 9 0.722" . 0.337" 0-200" 0.859"
- Acccppable OCLROO014579
GPU Nuclear Subject Calc No. Rev. No. Sheet No. O.C. Drywell Ext. Ur Evaluation in Sandbed - C-1302-187-5320-024 . I 43 of 117 originator Date Reviewed by Date Mark Yekta 01/12/93 S.C. Tumminelli BAY #15 DATA I NOTES:
- 1. All measurements from Intersection of the DW shell and vent collar (fillet) welds.
- 2. Pit'depths are average . four readings taken of 0/45*90/I 350 within 1' dlstance around ground.
spots, Taken only when remaining wall thickness shown below O.736". 6 1SI DW 5 2 SHELL 11 1 .8 7 4 3 9 4 0 FIGURE (15) OCLROO014580
GPU Nuclear
- UT EVALUATION BAY #17:
The outside surface of this bay is rough, similar to bay 1, full of uniform dimples comparable to the outside surface of golf ball. The shell appears to be relatively urtiform in thickness except for a band 8 to 10 inches wide approximately .6 inches below the vent header reinforcement plate. The upper portion of the shell beyond tdie banid exhibits no corrosion where the original red lead primer is still intact.
"Eleven locations were selected to represent the thinnest areas based on the visual observations of the shell surface (Fig. 17). These locations are a deliberate attempt to produce a minimum measurement. Table 17-a shows readings taken to measure .the thicknesses of the drywell shell using a D-meter..: The results indicate thit all of the areas have thickness greater than the 0.736.
inches, except one location. Location 9 as shown in Table 17-a, has a.reading below 0.736. inches. Inspectors observations indicate that this location is. very deep and not more than .1 to 2 inches in diameter. The depth of area relative to its immediate surroundings was measured -at 4. locations around the spot and the average is shown in Table 17-a. As described -in Section 6, Methods of Analysis, Very Local Wall Acceptance Criteria, areas of reduced thickness equal to or less than 2 & ' 2 inches are too small to reduce the shell critical buckling load. This combined with the location of the very local indication near the vent reinforcement (See Appendix D, Calculation Page 103).indicates that this area would have a negligible effect on the shell buckling response. Bay #17 General Wall (Sandbed Region) Thickness Evaluation Given an average of the UT measurements presented in Table 17-a is equal to'0.918 inches, a conservative mean evaluation thickness of 0.900 inches is estimated for this bay. Therefore, it is concluded that the bay is acceptable based on the bay evaluation thickness exceeding the buckling design thickness for the sandbed region of 0.736 inches using the results of. Reference 3.3. The calculation of the average depth for Bay 17, Location 9 is as follows: (AVG Micrometer) 9 - 9°-D 9_ + D9 _900 + D9 _135 4. Where:D19 00 = Micrometer Depth Reading for location 9 at 0 degrees
**taken from Appendix D, Calculation Page 105, etc.
(AVG Micrometer),l= 0.368"+0.407"+0.289"+0.342"t =031 0.351" 4 OCLROO01458.1
Bayv # 17 UT Data Table 1.7-a Location D-Meter UT Measurement .Appendixon D j.Average Micrometer (inches) Calculation (inches)
.. ,- i- Page" 1 0.916 104 ---
2 1.150 104 3 0.898 104 __---
... 4 0.951
- 104 5 0.913 .104 ---
.6 0.992 104 7 0.970 104 __
-.8 0.990 104 9 0.720 "1 03 0.351 10 0.830 103 _ ---
11 0.770 . 103 -,-_ Summary of Measurements Below 0.736 Inches Table 17-b
- Location UT Measurement AVG Micrometer Mean Depth/Valley T (Evaluation) Remarks I(I) . 1 (2) ... (3) (4)=(!)-(2)-(3) 9 0.720" 0.351" 0.200' 0,871" Acceptable OCLROO014582
GPU Nuclear Calc No.. Rev. No. Sheet No. Subject O.C. Drywell Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed C-1302-187-5320-024 . 46 of 117 Originator j Date Reviewed by Date Mark Yekta , 01/12/93 S. C. Tumminefli BAY #17 DATA NOTES:
- 1. All mmazursmntoit Irom Inlar4cliafl *1Jh4. DW (butt) shiftl and vorn cofisr (1111u0) wilde, 7-Pit depth&are Baverag of four reading. taiimn at
~~atv35h,~i within I I diBtance inound ground upoti. Takenl oily when rowmmIn~vg whill thickiloss was btWO9.W ,
'2 DW 11 10 SHELL 7 *1 6a 4*.
FIGURE (17) OCLROO014583
GPU Nuclear .. Subject
- Cal No. Rev. No. Sheet No.
O.C. Drywcll Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed C-1302- 87-5320-024 1 47 of117 Originator . . Date Reviewed by . Date Mark Yekta .01/12193 S. C.:Tumminelli UT EVALUATION BAY #19: The outside surface of this bay is rough and very similar to bay 17. Locations I through 7 as shown in Table 19, were ground carefully to minimize loss of good metal. The shell surface is full of dimples comparable to the outside surface of a golf ball. This observation is made by the inspector who located the thinnest areas for the. UIT examination. The shell appears to be relatively uniform in thickness. Ten locations were selected to represent the thinnest areas based on the visual observations of the shell surface (Fig, 19). These locations are a deliberate attempt to produce a minimum measurement. Table 19 shows readings taken to measure the thicknesses of the drywell shell using a D-metern The results indicate that all of the areas have thickness greater than the 0.736 inches. Bay #19 General Wall (Sandbed Region) Thickness Evaluation Given an average of the UT measurements presented in Table 19 is equal to 0.885 inches, a conservative mean evaluation thickness of 0.850 inches is estimated for this bay. Therefore, it is concluded that the bay is acceptable based on the bay evaluation thickness exceeding the buckling desigii thickness for the sandbed region of 0.736 inches using the results of Reference 3.3. Bay"# 19 UT Data Table 19 Location D-Meter UT j"Appendix D Average Measurement on Micrometer Calculation ___________I finches) Page (inchcs)
- 1 . 0.932 109 --
2 1 0.924 109 3 0.955 109
*4 1 0.940 109 --- _-
5 0.950 109 --- 6 0.860 109 -- 7 0.969 109 ---
.8* 0.753 [ 108 --
9 0.776 108 __ --- _ 10 0.790 108 J -- OCLROO014584
B3AY #19 DAT-A NOTES:.
- 1. All moestueu;nus frvn IffltrseciDrn ol th, OW atltmI [butt) And oent CowiI111110) walda.
DW 10.,r ýq SHELL
,1 7", a4 .3 FIGURE (19)
OCLROO014585
- GPU Nuclear Subject Caic No. Rev. No. Sheet No.
O.C. Drywell Ext. UT Evaluation in Sanadbed C-1302-1 87-5320-024 1 . 49 of117 Originator Date Reviewed by* Date Maik Yekta 101i2/93 S.. C. Tumminelli Appendix A: Summary Of Measurements Of Impressions Taken From Bay #13 (3 pages total) OCLROO014586
GPU Nuclear I Subject Caic No. Rev. No. Sheet No. O.C. DrelI Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed. C- 1302-187-5320-024 I .50of117 Originator Date Reviewed by Date Mark Yekta 01/12/93 S. C. Tumminelli The purpose of this appendix is to characterize the depth of typical uniform dimples on the shell surface. This depth is used in acceptance criteria to quantify the evaluation thickness for an area where the micrometer readings are available. Two locations in bay 13 were selected'since bay 13 is the roughest bay. Impressions of drywell shell surface using DMR_503 Epoxy Replication Putty manufactured by Dyna Mold Inc were made. Thiese impressions were. about 10 inches in diameter and about 1 inch thick. The UT locations 7 and 10 in bay 13 were identified in each of these impression as the reference points. This is a positive impression of.the drywell shell surface. The depth of the typical dimples were measured as follows; READING DEP'nJ#10 DEFPH #7 (Location) (inches) inches) 1 0.150 0.075 2 0.000 0.110 3 0.200 0.135
.4 0.140 0.200 5 0.150 0.000 6 0.040 0.000 7 0.150 0.170 8 0.010 0.205 9 0.134 10 0.145 0.145 i1 0.118 0.064 12 0.105 0.200 13 0.125 0.045 14 0.200 0.180
*15 0.135 0.105 i6 0.100 17 0.175 0.035 18 0.175 0.015 19 0.155 0A190 20 0.175 .0.055 21 0.175 0.305 22 0.135 OCLROO014587
GPU Nuclear Subject CAiC No. Rev. -No- Sheet No. O.C. Drywell Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed C-1302-187-5320-024 . 1 51 of 117 Originator Date Reviewed by Date Mark Yekta 01/12/93 S. C. Tumminelli Location #10: Mean Value = 0.131 Standard Deviation 0.055 Mean Value + OneS.D. = 0.186 Location #7: Mean Value 0.118 Standard Deviation 0.082 Mean Value + One'S.D. = 0.200" Therefore, a value of 0.200 inches was used as the depth of uniform dimples for the entire outside surface ofthe drywell in the sandbed region. OCLROO014588
GPU Nuclear I Subject Cale No. Rev. No- Sheet No.. O.C. Drywell Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed C-1302-187-5320-024 S 52 ofJI7 Maigttor Date Mark Yekta
- I Date 01/12193 Reviewed by S. C. TummineIli
.1 I
Appendix B: Buckling Capacity Evaluation For Varying Uniform Thickness Through The Whole Sandbed Region Of The Drywell (5 pages total) Based Upon GE Buckling Analysis (Reference 3.3) Note: Tables on sheets 53 to 56 are not used in this calculation and are provided for historical purpose only from Rev. 0. OCLR00014589
GPU Subject Nuclear Ca1c No. [Rev. No. ]Sheet No. OC.-Drywell Ext, UIT Evaluation Ln Sandbed C-1 302-187-5320-02 1 53 of I710 Originator IDate Review'ed by **Datet Mark Yekta 01112/93 'S. C. Tunuminallii CALCULATION OF BUCKLING MARGIN - REFUELING CASE, NO SAND - GE OYCR1S&T - UNIFORM THICKNESS t--0.736 Inch LOAD ITEM PARAMETER UNITS VALUE FACTOR
*** .DRYWELL GEOMETRY AND MATERIALS 1 Sphere Radius,. R (in.) .420 2 Sphere Thickness, t (in.) 0.736 3 Material Yield Strength, Sy (ksi) 38 4 Material Modolus of Elasticity, E (ksi) 29600 5 Factor of Safety, FS 2
*** BUCKLING ANALYSIS RESULTS.
6 Theoretical Elastic Instabifity Stress, Ste (ksi) 46.590 6.140
***STRESS ANALYSIS RESULTS 7 Applied Meridional CompreSsive Stress, Sin (ksi) 7.588 5.588 8 Applied Circumferential Tensile Stress, Sc (ksi) 4.510 3.300
- CAPACITY REDUCTION FACTOR CALCULATION 9 Capacity Reduction Factor, ALPHLAI 0.207 10 Circumferential Stress Equivalent Pressure, Peq (psi) 15.806 11 'X' Parameter, X= (Peq/SE) (d/t)A2 0.087 12 Delta C (From Figure -) 0.072 13 Modified Capacity Reduction Factor, ALPHA, 1,mod 0.326 14 Reduced Elastic Instability Stress, Se (ksi) 15.182 2.001
* ** PLASTICITY REDUCTION FACTOR CALCULATION 15 Yield Stress Ratio, DELTA=SeISy 0.400 16 Plasticity Reduction Factor, NUi 1.000 0 17 Inelastic Instability Stress, Si = NUi x Se (ksi) 15.182 2.001 o
I-
*** ALLOWABLE COMPRESSIVE STRESS CALCULATION o 18 Allowable Compressive Stress, Sall = SI/FS (ksi) .7.591 1.000
- o. 19 Compressive Stress Margin, M-(SalVSm -1) x 100% (%) 0.0 0d (0
CALCULATION OF BUCKLING MARGIN.- REFUELING CASE, NO SAND - GE OYCRFSTOI - UNIFORM THICKNESS t=- 0.776 Inch LOAD ITEM PARAMETER UNITS VALUE FACTOR
- DRYWELL GEOMETRY AND MATERIALS I Sphere Radius, R (in.) 420 2 Sphere Thickness, t (in.) 0.776 3 Material Yield Strength, Sy (ksi) 38 4 Material Modolus of Elasticity, E (ksi) 29600 5 Factor of Safety, FS 2
*** BUCKLING ANALYSIS RESULTS 6 Theoretical Elastic Instability Stress, Ste (ksi) 49.357 6.857
***STRESS ANALYSIS RESULTS 7 Applied Meridional Compressive Stress, Sm (ksi) 7.198 5.588 8 Applied Circumferential Tensile Stress, Sc (ksi) 4.248 3.300
*** CAPACITY REDUCTION FACTOR CALCULATION 9 Capacity Reduction Factor, ALPHAT 0.207 10 Circumferential Stress EquivalentPressure, Peq (psi) 15.697 11 'X' Parameter, X- (Peq/SE) (d/t)^2 0.078.
12 Delta C (From Figure -) 0.066 13 Modified Capacity Reduction Factor, ALPHA, 1,mod 0.316 14 Reduced Elastic Instability Stress, Se (ksi) 15.583 2.165
- PLASTICITY REDUCTION FACTOR CALCULATION.
15 Yield Stress Ratio, DELTA=Se/Sy 0.410 16 Plasticity Reduction Factor, NUi 1.000 0 17 Inelastic Instability Stress, Si = NUi x Se (ksi) 15.183 2.165
) *** ALLOWABLE COMPRESSIVE STRESS CALCULATION C)18 Allowable Compressive Stress, Sall = SI/FS (ksi) 7.592 1.082 19 Compressive Stress Margin, M-(Sall/Sm -1)x 100% (%) 8.2 0'1 rC .
GPU Nuclear Subject Calc No. Rev. No. Sheet No. O.C. Dr'well Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed C-1302-187-5320-024 I 55 of 117 Originator -Date Reviewed by Date Mark Yekta 01112193 S; C. Tumminelli CALCULATION OF BUCKLING MARGIN - REFUELING CASE, NO SAND - GPUN EVALUATION FOR UNIFORM THICKNESS t=0.800 Lich USING THICKNESS RATIO LOAD ITEM PARAMETER UNTPS VALUE FACTOR
*** DRYWELL GEOMETRY AND MATERIALS 1 Sphere Radius, R (in.) 420 2 Sphere Thickness, t (in.) 0.800 3 Material Yield Strength, Sy (ksi) 38 4 Material Modolus. of Elasticity, E (ksi) 29600 5 Factor of Safety, FS 2
** BUCKLING ANALYSIS RESULTS 6 Theoretical Elastic Instability Stress, Ste (ksi) 50.884 7.288
***STR.ESS ANALYSIS RESULTS 7 Applied Meridional Compressive Stress, Sm (ksi) 6.982 5.5.88 8 Applied Circumferential Tensile Stress, Sc (ksi) 4. 120 3.300
*** CAPACITY REDUCTION FACTOR CALCULATION 9 Capacity Reduction Factor, ALPKAI 0.207 10 Circumferential Stress Equivalent Pressure, Peq (psi) 15.697 1 X' Parameter, X= (Peq/8E) (d/t)^2 0.073 12 Delta C (From Figure -) 0.063 13 Modified Capacity Reduction Factor, ALPHA, 1,mod . 0.311 14 Reduced Elastic Instability Stress, Se (ksi) 15.824 2.266
- PLASTICITY REDUCTION FACTOR CALCULATION 15 Yield Stress Ratio, DELTA=Se/Sy 0.416 16 Plasticity Reduction Factor, Nti . 1.000 0 17 Inelastic Instability Stress, Si = NUi x Se (ksi) 15.824 2.266
*** ALLOWABLE COMPRESSIVE STRESS CALCULATION C0 18 Allowable Compressive Stress, Sail = SI/FS (ksi) 7.912 1.133 19 Compressive Stress Margin, M-(Sall/Sm -1)x 100% (%) 13.3 co,,
(.0 N)2
GPU Nuclear __ Subject Calc No. Rev. No. Sheet No. O.C. Dr2=11Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed C-1302-187-5320-024 1 56 of 117 Originator Date Reviewed by Date
- Mark Yekta "_ 01/12/93 S. C. Tumminelli CALCULATION OF BUCKLING MARGIN - REFUELING CASE, NO SAND -
GPUN EVALUATION FOR UNIFORM THICKNESS t- 0.850 Inch USING TIUCKNESSRATIO LOAD ITEM PARAMETER UNITS VALUE FACTOR
*** DRYWELL GEONETRY AND MATERIALS 1 Sphere Radius, R (in.) 420 2 Sphere Thickness, t (in.). 0.850 3 Material Yield Strength, Sy (ksi) 38 4 Material Modolus of Elasticity, E (ksi) 29600 5 Factor of Safety, FS 2 BUCKLING ANALYSIS RESULTS 6 Theoretical Elastic Instability Stress, Ste (ksi) 54.063 8.227
***STRESS ANALYSIS RESULTS 7 Applied Meridional Compressive Stress, Sm (ksi) 6.571 5.588.
8 Applied Circumferential Tensile Stress, Sc (ksi) 3.878 3.300
*** CAPACITY REDUCTION FACTOR CALCULATION 9 Capacity Reduction Factor, ALP1AI 0.207
*10 Circumferential Stress Equivalent Pressure, Peq (psi) 15.697 11 'X"Parameter, X- (Pecq/gE) (d/t)"2 0.065 12 . Delta C (From Figure -) 0.057 13 Modified Capacity Reduction Factor, ALPHA, 1,mod 0.300 14 Reduced Elastic Instability Stress, Se (ksi) 16.257 2.474
- PLASTICITY REDUCTION FACTOR CALCULATION 15 Yield Stress Ratio, DELTA=Se/Sy 0.428 16 Plasticity Reduction Factor, NUi 1.000 o .17 Inelastic Instability Stress, Si = NUi x Se (ksi) 16.257 2.474 r- ALLOWABLE COMPRESSIVE STRESS CALCULATION 0 18 Allowable Compressive Stress, Sail = SI/FS (ksi) 8.128 1.237.
19 Compressive Stress Margin, M-(SallI/Sm -1) x 100%. (%) 23.7 to
.GPU Nuclear Subject Calc No.. Rev. No. Sheet No.
O.C. Drywell Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed - C-1302-187-5320-024 L . 57 of.117 Originiator - Date Reviewed by Date " Mark Yekta 1. 01/12/93 S. C. Tununinelli Appendix C: Pictures Showing Condition Of The Drywell In The Sandbed Region (9 pages total) I OCLROO01 4594
.GPU Nuclear Subject Calc No. I Rev. No. Sheet No. O.C. Drywell Ext. IJT Evaluation in Sandbed .C-1 302-187-5320-024 1 58of 117 Originator Date Reviewed. by Date Mark Yekta 01/I;2/93 S. C. Tumiinelli I Sand Bed Regioni - Typical ronditinn found o in iia: Pnhy. Cofrisi~on PrOdcIIt on drvcwll vessel OCLROO014595
Bay 913 - D.W snell showing plug The plug is.located in the micddle of the worsl cry-roded arq.a of Ih-e shell The plug showed no Eign Oi cofrosion. Bay 913 - D.JW she.1 shoWler las .s pr~ominent 'Tub Ainp- than what was Seen' in oth-er I OCLROO014596
GPU Nuclear The are3 on shell near ient tube collarring. Bay 91 - I-ook-rig a' the worst cnorde4C ttn LJ1 SCOT 20:.2 '2.'3 ground spots seen here corrcspnnd
"-A---
UT spot 5.6 ani 0 . This close Bay #13 - Lower Mid portion o1. the DAW shell showtng of the corfuded surfzce',and now each UT spot has been up photo shows the roughness readings to the con picked up in the deep valleys :t-ereby biasing the ren.amnmg -al; s rip 5rt; OCLROO014597
II II - .I
.. C' G)
C zC t
-I CAI CLJI, 00 0
p 0 Bay fil 37- Lookingilowards Say#ll Upper right cnrnpr of DtvV shell. Note (0. Grinding deplh on Ut I pot hl & 2, q~)- A part o' ft
-&-ili TA, R~ing".as delinealted by nritrking and V.ocations of UT sPois 3,4.13 - ft 0 & 17. Ihe p~holo onl rtglhl (although blujrred by flash reiliedion.) shows I/8" rojection of piug.
co Co 0, I1- Z)
GPU Nuclear I Cale No. Rev. No. Sheet N o. Subject C-1302-18.7-5320-024 I1 62 of 117 O.C. Drywell Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed Daie Reviewed by Date Originator Mark Yekta 01/12/93 *S. C. Tummineli
\.....
hAl - '-- - S Bay 9'15 Looking "owa ds Bay#17 which has been .!osed wAi'-loam for coating work ze Bay #17. Note lte typical soriace of the D. . .,,.--ii1:,A7nd.corroded %poI UT spot 47,.2 & 16. Bay #13 - Looking ioviard Bay 015 - Lowe.( let? Cornet showing in Vivid detail. This close up has captured .*epeaks and valleys of the corroded shell n;; :lh h -P..er, oe-kA s arnd valleys in the 0.25- 0.40" Later NDF. inspe-hrl * , ., OCLRO01i4599
I . * .1
.0 C)
Ga -o A C r zC a cm) U' 0' c-1 ci
'-ft I.
Ai
.9.-
ft
?~ ftS.
ft H.. a ii. CA Bay #15
- Note Ihe oriqinal lead primer on ,vent tube 00 *Bay #15 iookingllorvar_ Bey 13. sonwing portions Of z 0 DfW shell arid conc.rnle hloor, efter removal of loose debis W' surfice. The "Tub Ring was less prominent on the shell in I-- I sand I rust. The crrmrc'ete flnor in this bay is one of Ifit this bay except a portion in lower left corner. Also ncte C *better ores. Howe.ver- No.-tep1 no draetrace cha nnel aid pre*sence of tend primer on veri mlli*fring plain.
- 0) C) cratered holes ri.Ar Mhnill c..n.r 0
0
- -~ - -
~
.~.- .'- 2" - Bay #13 Looking toward Bay #11 - Lower right corner oi DJW shel; showing UT spots
- 9. 1tI. 18 & 19 Note the location of these spols-- ail are Iccated ir, the valleyi o.the.cOi-toded surface This photo also sliows the condition ot the concrete floor. Itappears Bay#13 condition Bay.,*13 -.Looking toward Say #IS - This ph~olo captures the concrete "floor
.nl n [or0i0n o? io-er she'l cofroded s*,rraca in very gteat! dtail. The floor in !hi. area OCLROO014601
GPU Nuclear Subject O.C. Drmwell.Ext. UT Evaluatii Finishied flooi. vessel with Iwo top coats - caulking malterial appi~ed. Diain aftet Iioog has been (eeurbisheie OCLROO01 4602
Appendix D: NDE Inspection Sheets for the Drywall Sandbed Region (52 pages total) OCLROO014603
I =,. Nuclear OyE Request Oyster Creek OC Charge No.-- "'&- Requevt No. Job Order No, Short Form No. BA NO. [Date ol Request Job ............ Location ___. ______._ I.'Applicable,
-/ Cod*e.Speclf"..atjon Type of NOE requested:
0 Visual ' Lkiuid Penetrant 0 Eddy Current .. Ultrasonic C. Leakage M Magnetic Particle 0 Alloy Separator 0 Acoustic Emitsions Z) Video 0C Radiographic E3 Ferrite ND Requste No.: 1 Date.~, Rermarkr NDE.Coordinalor Date InstrucliOn UT PT MT RT VT E-0.. Type Dry Isotope C Disect _ Probe L:' 45" A-1 r--. Red Z Ills" D Weld Insp C Double D 60°0 A-2 D Blaeck Cost INDIRECTNIDEO C. Single D70- DA-3 . Grey X-Ray M Mirror C oil O ther C' 5-1 0 OOlher C: 151 KV C Boroscope I-, Double.
. Acouslic -B-2 Wet C 250 KV C Fiberoplic 0 SiNle Emissions -3 Black D Binocular C Alloy Sep.
Flourescentl C Camera L- Ferrite Remarks Flesutl% XNCR iF-sopen/closelcorid. gel. I Proc. No. Proc. No. I.
*~IecI i-VPwoc. N o.
Job staui Cate )Jobst=p date I -
-- ~D~Cordmlor j~le loed. 1 Date lo DOC veo ..ginuo. lF'ral C-vj Gow - &0piatoui iilmawCool068-.0V OCLROO01 4604
M~ OySterF Cretk - C uclear. .N AIRp"iq Nf Rime. P: ~ ~lest: Q P7 rOMT ý(QT OAT 0UT 0 . SvstemJvLocatO4: Item: _____________________
-. ~ ~ V Resuhs Repo;,' Dto elRmrs r`27p
_____ ~l 1711-7 15~r W-.07144, ILL V~)I 1FT 1 aa?2
- IIF
-v 31 I1109 IiA 921p .
OCLROO014605
GPU Nuclear Subject
.O.C. Drywell Ext UT E 0[2 Nuclear Ov-ster CIeek - OC N RG P!:z Trest: LPI DMI D VT .0 R7j i1 SysI.Locatiofl 10 ' "5& ý . i'tem R~esumt ag R.p I yles) I ype 1 Dait O 1e7 " I "Remors:
9::-O_
'-7;-67-u '
07 117 ______-9*
!! i 8Y
/7 oil7,-0; -C) U-7 6...
_<__-___-i //7 1 MY _______1 _____-__ ______ ______- t.<* ___________"_ __ _ _ ' 1 " I i _ _ __ _ __
,;.U7,' ;7 it-i I _ __,
.07_ .. *-NY V I le .7 -. ! ,.' s -
$-.a? fi'j)ýADM7JI-VCI v L-.?j ^DOMCl.*1 537*
OCLROOO014606
GPU Nuclear Subject Caic No. Rev. No. Slbee!No. O.C. Drywell Eit. UT Evaluation in Sandbed "C-1 302-187-5320-024. 1 70 of 117 Originator Date Reviewed by Date
. Mark Yekta 01/12/93 S. C. Tumminelli
'AX(Jce,-
/ .1 .
~.ZS~7/~ % Skv/4 t-~z
.~ fif 14 Af.52:76
& ~E~L 4~~i~,4*b . .p," " -
ss I
.2C,-/,r 4 ~ I 7 *~fJ I,
A11?A/t
/9 76' A~4 A~ ~/ 0,'
1 2" 6;,- /~---'
*1
- I OCLROO014607
I I I* I I - I o C ImflucIear Ultrasonic Thickness Data Sheet I z C ttr~NOE ]iy Reclues: C Data Shet t4 o:.4 C., i1OC EI 'tMf-' 1 TMI-.1CIMlas - >4 Task Description- ,,,7' ZX 4,) 4$ r TakNo.,. .0I A, Dt: p /l oc. Ct15p Sstem: 1/9.2 _7____________r C t:1
-- 7dir/te. 9f #1'o rwtngN0.fR0V.:.6-'oi 0'4. _ _ _ _ _ _ _
S. ThestSrmame:e ExI.al.Tmine Isg eI Cat. Examiner f0 B'. /N I sign
~2.Y46 Cal Out:
Pl it
'thi_____
r~LAM eIf10N..l, Lvl L 0Uer b. Dra wing ?~ ~. I,
*,** -,' / fl~
4, I
......... .......tz ~
S" ;2"4 ' [2. I , 14C. -' 0
.3 4 24 0 0 ..6 con
~. 0 !i'*4
. , .22 ,
dL-*" i 2: 0. q 0* p o *.. . i. , .. bc s I 8 6 0 0 0 0* i 0 00"
* .SA.4~ Aý 00 I Rview~~ act Date: J~5*~3.. ~age~J.,o-~tL Level:
Zý7 I 'Big: j 1 A.
~. 1 I .1 0
-U C
"-I z
C M~udearUltrasonic Thickness'Data Sheet 0 w t'rt Test Surface..Tikes: ~ 5. E~am~nr ~ 8Igv: -Print, ,~4~ IODNoaj.:5s ',,4,LsveK;r
- ft Thermometier SIN 66-G'61 Pan Temiperature_24 F b-Metor SIN V777It" Callbrallan "eadngs "nhs) Techrrq'es Gal. 1k, SfN 21,' Cat. Ina: 4)A AM ItitP 0'JCR~T 0 Meilet Gal~lk. ep .. Cal. Out: .J~AM. ,)ýP D.Met4r * .S /0 ~S j~ Othier 4A ft C,
~,, S.
ft 1Aq& / V f ILIJ I 00 l{J,~a' LA I.'.) 1.311. M 0 i I i I l~t1 0
.3 0 0 if.'
0I 0 ~
?
~7-A5 C
iE { ~7I 4~v 4 0 q e bi i I ~-U 1 0
.~ 0 *~'k,~ ~ I i ~I-'c4 0 e U, 0 I, 0 ft r--
C) i 0. ~ 0
-1
/ . . a I ,,
A -J CD (D, jpqVFr.%YaJ b,;,: X .. r-t 00.1 iLevel. 4: E Coale: / 7,page o2TfJ.+/-
*1 I: i.:~ I.. I I I. I I o G)
I )"Y we "0 C gmtfIuclear Ulirasonic Thickness Data Sheet z 0_ Talsk Descripilon;
~ ~TM.2 0 E TI~
ITi. _l las
~laa fIIi jAME 4AIlm- J, ti iem pA NOE Reques TaskNo.:
et;;-1,7-
'4/A
_ _ _ -I._ Dale: Data Sheet No.~ 14q
~..
tyl
~.
Camp. Dest.: i) -11. 6L L L i E(Z 4,f System: 167 -= ,do/Sper-: l~t44. ft4Fr_,
- 5~
Procedtife/Rev. :ý -- (.4 AP 7,1 C' 01v Draw)ng NoMle'. '7 - -L 18* ______CO___I Test Surface; Thteknest: i8Mlra:c 0 m cI~ r~amIner Isig -Print:;f~ir r.~ B~Cý Level I0o3~ j 5. 3 SN~2ok~Part Tempuriturff it? P 0-Meter SIN. Thrmmte CsbrtolFednsr'h) Techniiques Cat. alk1 §1N Wy4 cs ~ Cal. I:' JAM AlvlLP ____ Ir r CRT a 0 Metor Cal. 0(k, Teop .L Cal. Ot.A: 4j1Ai 3PM Cl L ii2L r Poito
. /e n IQInhs I DlMetr 1 i
15, .15110 .2-6 1*
- 1. A, Other fri/A Drawing ~.,
'5 AE A irisPmN DO i4 0
'4b O 10 ILI W24!
&I 13!24 L Ak Iir C; IC ~ o ~'1 V t7 P
0 i.4u-rA Arv j.
& eAL ia,~ 'A ~ Ct C) * .I U
- -.5 '5
'5 15 0 I-' ~
-I 0Y)
CD Reviewed l ILevel:,jL. atD7.T3 1Page./ofj
*'t,*~ $A~¶4I
I I I I I .1 *I* ~i I I. MIJNuoIear CD 00 . TMI F] OTHER______SethFr(whgr) Sketch Form (with grid) Cn. tv 00 0-0 0 0)
I **i. I. I~ iI . I no *1 Z, a;. C: 0 0i2J~c~eurUltrasonic Thickness D~ata Sheet zC
-E0 OC !- Ml-i 0 M. cas:rJ NOE Requeti: £2. ,T2 Date Shee~t No.:
~0 -_
.Task Doscription: (LI Task No.: ole;~
D3~. -~ trt Comnp. !esc.;- ý~-),7 y L j-( _*~p SyNem., 14% G60ods/pec.: E t4Aet- 4r PrIorduro/rBv.: r- 0 -0
'P7:2C . '. Drawing No./Rev2 :5 V.7'k:-cCtý Test Surtace: L., Thickness: Maei L: . M, EW2Miner Sign: Print."(: ~ IN./y~ ~ ~S~.Z Emier ~ .Print: zq~~itNo.:55 P ~ bi -1 Levet:- -4 ThetmotneerrS/NSE. 4ý8 Part Terniparatuyelf. D.)aner S/ C alibration Readinegs (inches) Tachniques5 Ca'L 8k. S/N. NiAVAd4 n:+/-.AM21
.C]t A3P 4 ll~QCT~DOG NJ Col. Slk. Temp. 72 JJ Fcal. OUL: ý k{AM .nyPM O-M aef ..* l .75 ,1 1 .1 -Z 5i,.l-{.' I°M
- I- ' - - .
Drawing ~ 2. IHe.
~
b~L4 26 b i ... i .I.i .. *
*vi .*R.i.÷.*i:-,* !
0 10. 6"1 Ia
.~ I Z IN' C P 0,
13 0 0 I'- ~ .3
;0 ~ 0 h0 O >.- ' . I Datey- C, -,73- 1 Page-.L-01 /-
-J Reviewed by ..
W303S Ml3.1Aj
GPU Nuclear I Subject Cale No. Rev. No. Sheet No. OC: Drywell Ext. UT Evaluation in Sandbed C-1302-1 87-5320-024 J 76 of 117 Originator Dote Reviewed by Date
- Mark Yekta 01/12/93 S. C. Tumminelli C->
0ýý 5-' 4-ii. 2.
.3
.0 9 0 7
.*. q..
REIIMW4L u-P ý24LL 114E OCLROO014613
I I ~. I I I - I I. I
'~. ,~:*.
f~Nu tear ____Ultrasonic Thickness Dat~l Sheet z
~ LI1 I~OC!I .2~ts~ Irumn n) ID oie 7 -i JDain Sheet N~o.: 124 ~. .Tnsl4 friftcrplInh:y 7 .. ITask No.. dýZ 0 Onto: / -
Test.Stwfaice; .-. -- JThlckness: ~ tra:,. C .-- E~r~nr ~g~6~~~ -Pfinf: ~,/* ~~ .]IONoa/:5g3 aLevel:~ Exnie'Sl ~ /~fIIO c.s...I. ivl -C Callbrallon Readings plches) ohnrm Cal. 8Bfl.SIN VGal. IM; '(L~A-AM I PMit.-PM F~ Ca. 3k.rm_ ta!.01:.y AMA w;;P al lk ~ ~~r Ffl[J.mEtc~i r~ o~ 7)' . '
~1 4.4
* ,fII6~4 7tY)
A ~- 1-i ' ~*9 ~ k1t;7
)
J0 0 ~' ~ L
~ L 8 F,0 0 ~. ~ LSC 62 6' 7 7 4- 2 A 0
e ~-2/ h' 0 0* 0u 07 4I-
.rvls,-Owaby I - luale: 1--T-ri3 I Pago -kýlaf *j~j.*q
ý'ký j.~)
1* I. *.i j I 1. 1 1 I i ... I 1. I. I I C) Ulirasonic Thickness Dala Sheol C [ONuclear I OC J TMI I 1MI*2 ias jk) v.. Itm ti. . OSfaCs: 9 '2 Da S lta N O-st . S~ Tastko.: t AOata:, Comp.~~Sstm ~.Codo/Spac
/6 j :~. .,cei
<2thickness; Tes S~d.~e:~ Mg at 181:
E~arr~nr~ Sign: Ph ii: fl64ok 6,4'sNoN.: /,-j.r ~v I ~ Pill":.-4 I,-*- ExltiO STi: C > I -Pirt_"\1 ~.E I qp1ft 10' No.vs: SS[,, 1: Thermormetar SPN 6.1 c'E Pali T@mper81?-? F______nc")Tchkr Cat ON. S/N _6,, 4- Cat. fir :Ljh__..AM lv1 PM. Cal .- - --. CatlT. Tnp L Cat~Out: .41AAM w"PM .- F1OTI Mo k%\ ,,i /1 'A a3 IM 4I~A
-'I
.7 4-~, 4,-~
/ ~
C3 0 ~ IAK 6 V 4 4~'~8i 46' 0 AC 0
~ 'r iL SC I 7 IV o -? d.~
g o ~Y e. 0 0
.L!
0 .0c-- 0) 1r
~,
jLev~I:cj7~ T.. j~ut:
- 15. '~ fPage.Io
I .... I.... I. I I. I I I . I. 1 I II II 1 [IlNucbenv . Liltlrasonic Thickness Data Sheet . 4. Task C eflesfploa; 4 r' 1 m Task No,: V- Data; Comnp. Dese.; /~ - ~Syir:/67 1fd J Coda/Spec-.. ,j4iZ 4 TetSifae . Ilckness: -MiRerfai: c E~'dn~S91
.<__ Pilovt J4/2- 1'&16 'e1 ',11tID No.:,~~
e5 Laral; jZ Era 'or S~u~ v~Pfunt:t~~ ~ =& lo:+/-.~.~Lvt I Th.'tmormeIr StN 6,( _!je2 Fort Temperatturo2-4f D-Melor S/N %'.:7-It.",1 Otulbhuallon Aad[Iigs (lnchcs) Technlques, RWk. Cal. 8h cal. elkTem.
.0. _2Z
& .. Cat OIA: CVA AM .-
Cat In;: -LLý'A K PM 4ý P eL9 [ I Cn,1 Drewino I/I ,4*~ fd4/ v-i. 6A V tl 4 I I I LI 8 fi4L~ C 4, 4-'- i 6i AC ~ (ii. a 7 I
<7 e y I
Level: 1 JDateA Page.-4ý6L 04j I.3.~ 114#44 M% 1
2tiD~ucI~rUltrasonic Thicknbss DOtM Shaeet crp0lonMI-t 4 0n:M.v jWO lei2s Data Sheet NO . TaskDm~cipl~n! :7' alu: C'ornr. l3esc.: Ir , ju,.Syer: . .O Ipo. j*tJ...- Tesi Bisrlace: ~ Thtk~ness: ~~.. . . . . i;a1nci'1r . ., Pr 11): :;):6 4.1,784e a:/ Yf. <V,1 Ljevel: LEj Evrint:e flp,( Islow~. AW '1-l ThermnmIaIey Sirl -0, c~.o PBKtTemputLure P. F P*Meter SIN ~ U.i?61k. S/N ~ Catl n: 4/AI&AM J-1:-5PN*M --
~1.=[~ . ~I- I~ 1crn rI Dmeter Col. elk. lum-p. . JF Cal. o0nEA: j~P I.Bk
_ýAM-0 %k, Mae I
.Kz t~tjt
-,V . Ie a*:
I q G f4 Z4"% I t-'&)C' z oJ ~ycs 0 0 0C-) I'- 0Z
".4, lllý,/i frlrM'wfrclty: A Level- Oaf&5- page'.21l~r.
K~503 W.wl
I.. . I 1. I I 1 1 I ..I. *1 Si.
~C:
z (0
'.l'dNuwuar OC fl TMI.f r-7 T-f2 Tnsk ninsraplei~i, er' jCIUSS -dj Ul(rasonic Thickness Data Sheet Itemr: %,) Ilko~isI Task No.ý
. I Doe samh~lo:~2&~
v I Crimp. Dese..: 17jy.*/,~, t/v. SywaIv /.IoeSo:(.i L r.0 rc... tTI Fproced;,rmofle.; C7 0 . CVP. ;7 it, 6 7 e .( Drrw1ing Nd./ROV.; 31 - 1 2- z cc)/ ehl,. C' TetSurface:-...-- Thiklness: Mateial 0r.
~xarnInev INInt A*VjrL j3,kq,-,pjj Tnermometler s(N~ es,<%, PallTepeaturpe. Fwe D-M Irr9/NlI37-11, I Calibrailon Readingz gncheB) .Techfllqttos
-e Go[ elk. SIN~ Col.ii .jJIn _Alv 3a21' PM IJ C-tn~T V Meter NJ Olk. Temp.* Cal, Oiw: 41&IAM jl-,PM I '0elOllt F!- F'1 -Z-vJ DrsMng 41~d41 4 A,,
-1 ei 1 d '
510L 1. 7A&. .?j ~d 'i~Yf'~.~ ~ a
~ ,~. 4 ~ 1 (i
/0 1 O~'6 i'- 00 I 0Ž 0 g, o-~&
S
- 0) .~) '/8 ~
.c1~
e 4VC ~ 0 C:) .'.*~ C:
., r 00 rv~ N~i~7P77C~Q Dale: /1, 33 5:3 FDO"O', F3 1Page~*
1:1age, 7 of-,8'/ at
- 1 *~ I I* I I*. 1.1 I*** I I ts w I e-.
CDC
. , I. I I I I .1 I. I. I .1 1 I. .1 0
0.1*1 1,46,C Ir*m Nuclear Calibration Sheet GaoSt ll S~L et V. C Sysiem r ornivonent e //i Procedure . Rev
..- Y.
F. omint~~ ..yPrint. Srg~tuo Evatrlin r: 'I-n Print:- ~~~O '7Z Love, ' Inirim~~renf S.otllrngt C&f slard,2,d jSerc Ud Seatch Uni Cable U) _.7-L -. ION ... 10JON Type Length .. sZa L 7 ModelfManut ' 2 r-; Size 6.A..Sch. _4~i. Type ej Thic~neass $' z-LtZ Fr~q--Z MHZ Couiplent CAain G15cs I Size- Iv I- ..- TIAMP...2 Angle t-7_Mode 114 Fame . .. -F Thermamaelr -I, System Chteck. CaDretn Swpmrsr Circuit . Coarse . . - .(n IJAngie * .2 nCirc. 9110rmnal 1004 CAC Pflo Fine ... Screen Depth ... LLcze- Date -. Refleteeor 9y JAmnplitudeTm of FGW . Screenm 'Reading In Inches 70- ?' +/- IC IC 0nur~onNormal 'I,
*Reject: 1..<1i ..
........ -4lo J11111IL111 N.J Dnmrnl'ig; I101 i.. on .....OP AI Reie Remarks:
2 2.2' f /.?2.T Pellerare
% .FSH Inches % FSH. Inches %4FSH Inches Y7tctt &2 .2L Reviewsie e2::_.. ":"-.z" ..2gv.LL 06 0 3-IR~ W, 0 ft Level-.oae Comp~onents Eturnned:
0 HOE Requestil: -1~.9.2A 03 NHOW? fiO5.90 K) C:)
I I I I I I .1 1 I I - 1. l2INvucfear Ultrasonic Thickness Data Sheet C. I~ 0 1JThui,L~ [ ~ TMI2: Cass.
,.'// NE~aqnsi '2. ~Data Sheet No.:
1 Task
Description:
,-4S- J., Task~ No.: D0ate: / -5 Comp.:Og I2-'@/ ... y'_ ___jSystem: 1'eCoeSpc: ..
Procedora/Rev.: 'n -'2c'.CA ' Drawing No~j~ev.: r,'- - Teat S~urf aco: /ny1 Thickness. atta Evarniner Sign:rn~;/ 9
&,.' */ ~ D~ . ~Lvl
~knminr -. -Print: L L. 4 , ION. 1 1 Level.
Th&,nwornewr 911i4- Part Teprature _a
-~, 0-Metef SI/N -!c'rCalibration Raditngs (Inch-s)Tohk's Cal. 81k, S/IM ' .. Cat In; C.fA _P r-i 0 Malei Cat, Olk. Temp, .z F CAL Out: oeAM -P.M ~lj~-/. El]c- 01 ne
-............................ ljt,.-I q Ca,. j Drawing Other iv 'g I 6 3P 21 6.
~. *-2. /r 0
0 0CY) I-j
,J.
Reviewed by:, ILevelf: zi-- I at.
/ 6-11ý Page --- L-Of /
I I **I. I I.;.. *~I I I I*. I
-j E~mulearUltrasonic Thickness Data Sheet 0 00 E0 TM.14 M TMI.2 jClass: 4I Itsr: ~ / aSheet 140.: (0 Ta~kOescripiian: / e *4,TsNo: ,/4' .. at / %.-
Comp.fOesr.-__' ~ systemn: Cdlpc. ~*, KAY r!Z Orrwtng en.. 6.7 V 9 ~,~'#; ,#47 I. -A a-
/ .: 4 , K.i '
40 7 6 0l 3 a T7,'
.1 C1 ED Li/ 4/ /v-Li 00 C
-J tO0 0
- F I..
0 9 ~.3 Z f w fO 0 I'. I 0 K.,. K) Il, a 3Y.0 I Levl: ,*;-7 Oale: -1.1, 1jP11g8 0
I. .1* I.~**I I I I *l I I *I I I 0~
- E~1MuceurUltrasonic Thickness Data Sheet
ýT3OC El*I-1.1 fl WtM-2 ICIOS!11 tem: ,P1, TNIE Rocq'sti: 13 ,2 lot z
t',7Aý Xb Taskc
Description:
/ . skN. t:.';/!.<
Camnp. Oesc.:, /'Iy~q' ~~'/ytm: a~.. r'CdSpc 4; iP Test Surfana. r' 'Thickness: / Material: c/
-xm~o
-8gn ~ DNo.,-,..
Orn: [Level: 21g* Evarriiner 19M." j'\.,ý Print: N\O! (k r ~~~ M No.:!>-5 . z Level: Theymanetter-S/N ,'o -~. Palt Temperature ý' ID.Peter S1N,'W~ i)caibr~ation Readings Onhs Techniques Cal 131k.$IN z . Col.tIn: __4t AM '.5,PM F T1 tRT D-Meter Cal. 1W.Temp. I .r Cal. but: AM 3jP ' ' xv Drawhig - 06 Ct I.J. 00 A, PY '-3
.LJ
*1 0 C71
.0.
0 ft z 0 ?We by: . - . -, 0 0 .W" -4 CF)
/t N3855 103-96
S"* .IF I t . EME]flNucde*r Ultrasonic Thicknoss Data Sheet
~i~Oasvr¶ton.
,.:~ ~ -Task M:.. 5.
s u I..,Z No.:
... _ .c ./p , .- - na ,""
- Camp*. DosC.: '.y ,;... *'<_ ¢,
P r o ~ dI,fe f v: .:, i***..: ,e' x,," ;' *: . - 9<" ? . _,j____ __, raw ing N o* . ,~.: ._ _ _ _ _ __. _ __ _ __ _ __ __ t.lSjrat~e:! ,.I.." . T~hlcknass: / 7 " " Material: ,,. Fyrvmlner ISIgnK fv(*.- . rn10~ 4 .~ 7 ~ I. ~ No.,,551 t I velt E 5..r ?,, ' ' Print: .... . e,, - -. - ' r ' ' ... . Thermometer S{N
- Petl "rnturi .. F ..- Melter SN~ 4 ' Caiitation Fleadrngs (inhtS) Techniques lI.elk, SiN Temp.
PCal CiOul. Ca In: 94AM 2. 2PM f 17 C'iL Wk.i---t---V A { -i 1]0CFIT j2'0!?eter Cal. ONk. K- I' . Orawrvn U fl f z 7-7. S Level. T 1077. i .0 0 0 0 C) I4.6 Iuviewedy:. , Page
.2y
GPU Nuclear
* ;- - - ; _ -- -* = .. ...--
r PA 1*"
..- m-.:
QT -
-I.O-
.A ..
FOR, F - .
- . 44 Q--g.MD*
I:_ OCLROO014625
- 10 4---_-____ ___
*1 I -1* -..-..-- .--.-.. . - -. -. -- __________________________
I-.. . --
- p.-. -
.4-.
~AY-1I -
- G-~L-~'i.9 O7'JE ________
1~L ~ _ ___ _______ OCLROO01 4626
I. .1 I. I .1 I I I I.) .*I *I I I 1.1 0 t~c I ITMI Mo EMlNuclear Catibration Sheet. Cal Sheet#. L* *;' C. Sysoirn *.jcaa~ompoent. Pocedure ev Fl~.,
. n~m irioa ig at re Print: In ta , 10 eve 0
e-m4 .. Inlre rn Initial I09 Leve I~ (DI o.. ai f Inslitjmnii? Setlings .. Cal Sfandard Search Unt~r Search Unit Cblo egt ~rs t
.,ý- Siz 9:Sch -
Gai . .icns/s 1- 2 ..e-*Z....~.- Copareillc,~~! :* 67 _ sizeemta Coarse . ~ . . ~ n e ~ lIO *~.2Oie 4 ma M ake ~ & P 0a Speralrn Chc .iecio Cal~. -V SIN:___ _jL..= u SweepNoma cicii on It Aa .JW p
'c SrerpencyDet Amltd Swee Readin o eject: Rellcao %19of F-. In..Inches I _anip S--.--. 06 TIivaU. Il;ilU .11 Fiii Tilt lii lime/Dalis- . Re&k:[ AlRve A, erfor r SH inches 4%IF Inchoe % F~ Inches 0 .. ... ..
r-L 7 -.J 4t~ A/ .'~/
- 0) NOE Request~f:
O) -4h 1,20;27 (M6.001
I I. I I .1 I C MIJNuelear Iv41 Sketch Form (with grid) VI Osta Sheet o.: 92-0O72 -31 Component: DRYhell~/ lle Locaton: . S,-o~e Ay / Aee. Dawing No.: Tev. AL f 7ý .5L....
-s qcOde 4,
ACIA 4 r' ~I, I, ifA 3~ .~ I, 4 a 0 .~~~ ~ . M C~) 1rec 6 4~i 6Atgceir4- 7~ C0
~ a 00)
N)
~ ~v~ewod%~y:
/YLevel:.~OI: - 3 'P pageJof_ jNDERequest No.: 7V7, 02454 MI-Va
- 1. 1 .1. *i.
I 1.~ I I **I MoiNuclear Ultrasonic Thickness Data Sheet 20 00 TMI.f10 TMI.2 Classi ,)A Iftem: A)4 NOERequest: ., , .aaSheetNo..1-o-L*- Insk Dascfipfionl btw tz%, ccos~ c- ;.) FT.140.: ý Date 1/Y/:/ COMP. ese.: D LIJL i 13 V 1I DP W . ........ ... 2 Procedute/Re.,; (,oo .1'1PA -ZDrawingNo./Rev.;
-. o., 7 I ,. 3.P?2 1 -oo00 T o st St 0rice: C Thickness 7la:
Zy Examinenr Sign: Print: ef, /i, f 4p~~ 6 Ae~
/It7 1 1 Exan~iner SI 8fn: JA. nt. AJ*-10N, AJ,4 Level:A)
Thermomaetr S/Nl.f'.-_ P t 1Tomle lure J.. DMete tS/N9'o q CahbretlonRtaClgs (j't ) Tachniquo Ca. BIk. GIN LI CaLt : Olg AM /Lto PM . ... Cal,8 N,T em p , 4 F Ca .t. : ,-A M A 30 PM C 811 Z{ W_ _q-__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ O.MeteL A F. Ot,0her ALA.
/1*O~
1 (i711 )k5
.. NI. ~~ f .. I~L1 4b , ai . " . * " '1 It,` R .b -
n 0" L,*.*. ,. , : a 11 .
* . !,.! * * , . . . . ! , :-. !16:.- 5 A -
bOft pas;,*
Im~utlsa Ultrasonic Thickness Dala Sheet 0Q Md0T-2Ias: jtm ~~~~~~~~~~~~D NEAuquest: ýi.... - -,,Data Sheet o.,~'..,~ Cd 4 hkNo:Dl:/ /- Task Descriptibn: Cr;d'6 4 i'. '~ sysem odelS pe.: OJr~ t37 Camnp. Desc.: 4-T~/..i 7 -_____ V,9 ProCerfrirelflo.: K-*""C.' j54,x'. 47 0' 74- et Drawing No.IAlV.: 3-11-14 p7 - 2 V___ 1 ___,___C__ TestSutivico C),4'. ThlckhOal atral Exorninor Sign: >ilnt: r<(> lN:. 4 5 Level-Thor mometer 91ti $72 . A*Part Tom~,ratlute F p-DMeter SIN_'o cj 5 Ga~lbrall~im Flangs Pnoches) Techniquesm t Cal. 81k SIft. m Cal In: AM ýýS-p
'A -R.gb-a C.
CalOBiTermp. _;e, f Ca Out; .lk : Poe Z.3,n,,-:-.: J RT) T. Dray~ng 14N 4l1-I __
., r j
;; '0 %
0 0 Level Dae ae o
ýt ,
-by \
I.... f I... .1 I I , I -' I 0 C)
-U S.
,BA J3 eIIJr MARKO~
C z 1<
*,r~j kboVt -SPOTS fo3 eb n
CAkFU LL% AS A3 OT-TZ (i~ .;)~ Q.~TALL SPOTS (iriiePU 15)oi
~1 co t4 U,
CA 0 - I ~ -
- 0 1w * ~m* *tt-. o - LoAiI Ab (I E l .
- C') k Tull D-s f~ govir I
I C)
*S ~ . ~ I . *U- ,* -
W-cý
1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 Ifl o tniflNuclear Ultrasonic Thickness Data Sheet ,F.F. Ellt0 TMI-1 0 -2Cla~ss: A~' tm IND Eivoqst: -52'2 ,Dt he o~/ot 7i~k M2~rp~n ;7*~ThkN. - .' -i-jo ala: //,I PiocucdureflRev.: 7zePeP AP., Drawhig H0rAev-.: is/6 Test Suirface: , hcns:. %" I Ii 4 Exemlnef i :Pn:p~__i o:~~jee:i E;amtnieu sign, nf: i {ID No.: Lvl ~- Ttiefmnoninef S/NJ Part ToMeratUrb 7ok F O-Metpr $IN ' oiCalibration Roadngs (IncheS) TochnIiqies calI. elk. 904t __ _ Ll. . cal. In: AM /0- P- -- 5 R -Mater S ~ ~ ient~ ~ '~Other____
"'Swing A'
J-4 M ,we t, t4 4a. Pfv'we by:I IQqj 3 145AS4 Os "
I~~~F 1 7
.. flNuoluor UIrasonic Thickness Data Sheet I0OO0.0 TMI. Q. T&M-2 Ofass9# Item:n V14 lqoI_~ DOata Sheol Ccwip. Domc: ~ ~ 4, iesen _ oeSe.
Test Stifto": C' 10 ThIckness; 'IAinil: Eynmfier Sign: , . ... rlft:. In Nm.,-.~. te;.2 Examinerrint S~a... 44ID No.: *q. 1e:6i . Thermmmeier 8IWN7z-jf Cpl._____SI Tam,ep 22 cid. 131k. Part Temperatiree qO F b Meiier S/Ntw-,1.t CaL in: __/M Cal. Out: ALm,
-P IP 1Cal. elk 4:J77 Caftrafion Rleadings (Inches)
~z:J~p>~J1 j.OIL chI rifr(HS I --
t7rawl,1Q ZA /,d
'3.'
it le 6,4 ,cA M.
.47, -/
0 I-- 0 V . 0 n...o~ 1 P~nn Pace // of oi/ - I
- 0) Mo 44 Mi MW V
I* I I I .I* I. ***I I *I I M1 Nuclear Calibration Sheeo Cal heL 4 K'__ G) r_ Sy.oen O n l 1 Proceduife 61c, ;:ýV 0. Rev 0 0. Z E't Slgnituvto: Prf t.............. 9 Lw-_ Fvnmnmý "igstunn 0 Pint ;4 f0 41ý1 Level 4 4 1IqI1P) Settlints .. Cal Standarnd Seavch Unit Searth Unit Cable IDO 21-9 IOU yetngith LeI~~ Th~cknes .. r Ffaq 1.MZCOUPlanl S/S 521: sie 2..... maks- ~ai ., Btc
.. z~Temp _..,A _ ' Angle _C_~a _r . ........
______- , Thermometer 5. Z . 1~ans C (Angle 0-. 2 Ci00ro IO~maAC Plo Data jimZ -tov - Si~te" Deph .. Amplitude Scieeri Reading in Inches
. .~ol FSH Orm.
cy: -.-. MHz 143fletn' hI rfe I IC omt!A 9.6 R Pemarks. RelleC~, FS Inhs%_)F I Nch7' FsH Inches ~f/~C)//
-vt
,..-r 0 AeoviewerS fly r- Lovel 01310~i?~
Commilintns Examined: .. - . - 0 .c) 0") Iqw(05,90)
I.. .. I. I I...I I I*.I* I I I C)
-D C
0U[]fTMlN uOHear z Sketch Form (witý glil. C Component: OA Y Aa 4) /M Oata Shoet No.. ?-* 72 0 acmiam 8 3 .. ... _., 4 Drawhig Nw. Pv.:4 0* ND:,v'
. . : ~/i 5' IC p35" CPO17 ;,z 3 W
(o -. 3;7 31? .AW Z
* . : . * : , ! 10* *$. , (7tl3!
Z q5 ,*75
- 20.7 .3*,ct Z~h cr P04 Dpt/9 AN/CROW7-SR Vý5D6) y4V oA t7 BAtOCN .0/9 20 0 Prpoby:
0 0 TECHWU 9 Ao
'$FSvsD 0I'- OriVIE~tlJ D DSTHt OF G'W&J'D MCiA$9 0
A Po :I __________ IuI V.
- D .* t.p 0')
CA) 0 *evewodo? ,. * * *. c Page-L o / .ND. Request No.: Ci54~~ 401 001 0-i W594544as oni
I.. .1 r I I:
~1 I Wu6~a
~Ultru~onle Thicknois bata Sheet L,~~~~~~~~71 '~te:g [1'i~i~l1I2Cig No&a.iuwt: 4;;;e. cP auimSheet No.,. ~,
le4'7
=Ey6lem 1wP&A Teo1str Ge4raln edn mf
/A it- I 0 V1. e.7. n 41T.
z 7~ PageP. 0-C) 0 0) 0) I'. . . NF-M
*1. *i. I*..**i~. j I. ~1.
0 G)
-U
- uEl-rmiE rfl z
-0 fc TE
.. Sketch Form (With grid) componord: Dg,,sd/l 1l,, SAW'1461( 4e.-,4e D&WvIu~SfvatNo.: 9Ze-07c! 0)
-i Location: 6q / 7Drawlng No.; 'Rv:4J 6rwomig Io 1 6, ryA LA 4! 34'.9
-S13 -Fb 00 I4 TO' 1 iI Al$
I..) LA 0* 0 C, 0 C) 00
-3 0* i
;Preparod by: L CA) Raviowed bfrV/ ILmCZET Ioatb/i?')'31 Pag -Iof_oL I OE Request No.: 9740
I ii I: 1
.1 I .. I* I. 1. 1 j.. Ii K.**L**I*
Ef~fluc~ear .Ulfrasonlc Thickness Data Sheet 0 00 10 ThtIA 0 TMI-2 jtsv . fm:/NDE~tociuWt, 9Zc'o ata Sh oetNo.: 9--r.- Tesic OescrIpfkmn:" 1 ;rD as N.: '
* . - Dh~ko~.MeAp a te ,rlakthr~~~
gxaine ,-.-- Prnt. O U.SI 51k
ýý!Z Ca.In ./ M.l k
Cal 181 7F~ DVjete
- -M. m K. Al he RovwwedbVL ~~Pgo otLvl SIS451 (os-w
I I I I. I I I I I 1 1. I l I jflNucIear Ultrasonic Thickness Data Sheet _______ 00 Elj TMt-1 C1 TMI.2jClass: jitom:. 5 INDE Pequest;__7,,. r, ,- Data Sheet No.: . ZL7z f
*Task~ Descripifonn:, Yv.~ -. ____ at~. / Date: / /S ProcOdUte/Rcov.: 6'c z/Y- / rawlr'gNo./Heyv.:.3- d'2-Cc.' ' _____
Eixamirier Stgn ID.,1j ýLvl Thermometer S/N q! -'~T Part Temperature _Ai F -Mate SI'N,.~.%.~,
/,ebato Aeadings (¶nches) TechnJques.
Gal. 131k.rehmp. Frq Cal. Out: A AM .LPM Cal. 81k.I2 ~ C-7 9 i I 0 Dae ?z7A97 X 0 0) HS456 If's-20)
Ultrasonic Thickness Data Sheet M OC 0 TMi-1 0 TM?-2 lClass: A Item: A1'4 NOEt~equest: 9e. Data SheetN.9.~e4 Task
Description:
,7____ TskN. S:~ Cap. Dow.e /'--~/4' ~ z sytem: Cdopa: 7 P'roc(1(1ure/Rev.Dr IgN /Py. Test Surface: Thickness: Aserel Examiner ISiger' Pl: v iNo.:Lve 10 Thermometer S(N _2~ý Part Temparatute ýký 0Me~toe#.S o, 7? Calibration Fleedltlg6 Inches) TI'h~tCII*s Col. 81k, SIN _ _r, CO. In: -./, AM /-Or-PM Cal. Bk. Tem np.6 F C ol.OuL: A'ý AM -PM ( ar / .0 1f~ r Oete e~ r 0 0 I. (I. . / ý-F, r-N5459 (OSon) 0 0 0
I I I tE!Jiucisar Ultrasonic Thickness Data Sheet
~ C~1TIi ITM. claw. tea
- O Ieet 7.~ t Sheet No.: %0, Task DescrIptlan: '7ý( 44.~ jff/jff Task4rw1*
NO.Dte:21, Camp. oesc. 4::24e.11,11rI: le7 ___ g ode/Spec.;.j~~____ Procoeduie/Rev,: a-00 zj4,a 7Z9 7 C2 _ Drawing No./Rev.: c'- 7- Z P- C701 'Oh, V Test Surf ace: ThiCkneSS; ,.1"materiat: Exminer Sign N.:~- Levtel Examiner I Sig K. ~ Pint' h4j- HA~k CýýA 0No.~i Si tOLý ~ Level, j, Thermometer SIN~pc5Pgv#. Pan Ten~pqrsbure_2_LJ OMeler tU-e Calibration Peaclngs (Inches) Techniques Col. Blk. SIN 491 cal. In! CjAM Col, Blk. Temlp._2 F CAL Out: LAM Z22&M Cat. 091k7
~
Je.Y 0Ir R .ee 4 4j6 7r'" Dr;94 Li,
? ~.?
0 oz -] Lee:- 4 ae o I-0 0 -p. CF) fNsass 405s.I
I I I I I I I A'o~ C)
.~- C z.
000 [:) TM El OT-H_____E__ Sketch Form (with grid) b9 (~ m 0 S. sn Z 45 9 Iir o ~ a,,
-I 0
Sf
-z.0 0 f t I-" W, C)
C) 0 SPrepared by,: 'r//Z$ate:4,~ Dre C,
.140v owed by: .2,- .aLv! Dt:/ JI9~dgIj NOE RequOst MW:
*"i** 1 I . 1 E[fl1uclear Ultrasonic Thickness Data Sheet ED OC Cj TMI.1 0 TMI-2~es 101853 *4NE IDmRequest ;!..., Sheet Na:'
D______ata Task~ Oscripibn: u7- ask No.,
'.'i~ ' ~e:/!'-4 COMP. DeSC.: t'.r#g 46AY V' I'syslemn: ,i7 ~odernpec.: 4A's-Test Surface: I~~~~Materila: /
Exam~re vin: tv ~~~.: - Ptin IQN.:ss: O:-~I -A-8 LeOya:. Thermomete~r SIN 4:!ý Part Teriverotuie _4A O.ee SN/? -/ Catlbrallon teadings Onches) TechNiques caLl.8k. SIN - 'ChLn krr.
-7ae AMA Ad P Cal, 81k, Temp._~~ &Ial FF CaL. Ow;/a.AM j ýppm k.19s /V ý 2 CRT (a D ~l~
'Psto ignnns ID-Meter lev.r' 11:9.2d /0 Drawing 1 1 1 i OuvrSr,,&ý 'J"
~/ Z'/v 9 ,*r A$C.'J
* £4'J7 0< F J
- r,t, A!fJ'rg 1.9 ~!?
IL-',
,0 I Li L]
./
0 0 o Oae:,~P ago / of-/ I 11I
I. 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 is I I Ultrasonic Thickness Data Sheet.________ 12 00 C3 f4I.1 0 TMI-2 lClaWs Req~uest: Slotte;~iD Oats Shooat No.:,,7
.Com. 00C.: sysem:Code4Spoo.:.
PrQCodI)?e/Rov.: C Ofawfrg No/IRev.: e - 'C-.ýZc> er.- Thermometer S/N Part Tamperalure _.~jL D.M for SINJ- " Collbrafton floodirigs (inche) Techniqueos Cal, Slk,.SiN S£- Cal. I: "e AM r.-PM [-JR -ee Cal, D1k. Temp. 4W Pal. Out: _,LMjr,>P j Orw~~ng
)7 0
0m C: 0 0) Rvwcb: 42.- ~ tvt 1ate,'~/~~, P-Ag ofJ k454s WWI.3f
I 1.. I I. I 1. .1. I I I r Ultrasonic Thickness Data Sheet Thormomnetet S/N 9.2'-e.r Part Temporafura. gý61 4 D-MAers/N~'e-po,c f Cbration Readings (Indhos) Techn)iques I0-meterI 'If 1.71- /C- "l "'I7 IOther
*
- I
/0 <~ / t72(
ci: A/)~.Al~'c/A'AI/A' ~ A ~ I 4
*~4I 0 ..j.
0-00 0 N~. 0 RGviewedN:v I LevO Lý ~~aB//,~ ae L t
I I I I.i** I...! 2~J~ueI~r . Ultrasonic Thickness Data Sheet LL0 baia as~heet No.:9-7.~ C, in 600 (TMIr-ui CL-T7.jCas m: haA ., NE~eqUOSP Task Description- tA~.~(~E~TsNo.- --4fA Oate: 12 11 w P r ciiqtx - C e-e up- /Ri' Ao l ( 1 K V 3D r wn N o raw fng 2. IS 1 -2 1 ,c 1 9 L
.trie Prft tI'rC.A I' ?,6 LL E0* 61 i Ur~n BA,' 1 11-A C ~ a 'IIt 0
X-0 0)
Y0 IiTMI
?4uctear Calibration Sheet Esnsinei SI __- 1 Renv-~
E rnro; Sg ture. Priti: k nI ee Iimsliurmtn Seltinq9 Cat Standardi Search Unitl -SearAl Cq4'able Thickness SC*' Coupimniq Gi SIS Fraq.. Size . .E..... MHz
... make. s4.. Batch#.-' /_
~~
~ - ~ Thnm .... Y Anale .C2...ode4.
Fine Al,* ~~___ Thermomnete tin......... . System Check
- Cal DirectionSIN .L 2 .. fiColDe$~ -
S~weep~ Cireull . rExii Point liAvial LDBoth.. . .- Ceiars" .Fd /-'& ange
-~2"~')(R UAngle.t I- 2 / oC *§% lo Fieitr . ..... ýZ Time V/5 2o Sc~reen, Depith Amplitude Scefen Reading £ --------------
Reiieclor ciFSH 0 in Inches ' .- --. - - - Nuinc:tormal z:: 10* ..---------
.... % I- !Oi.arnping 0110 ~S
- ~ __
_ .,..~-,, merr7 ANI Revisw Time,/jere 691f1Z--FL u4'~&P 1/2 Reflectof 11/oFSH inchei % FSH Inlchas % FSH Inches 2_. dc' eAr L.. TechnIcAl R VIAW ComIponentrs Examitned: NOE Requvesti:.. 7-, Z. 0 NOS7I tns.9* 0 I-- 0 0
WO iTMI to Calibration Sheet. Cal Sheetll.Z 0 C Sv~~~~iem~~ .~uv
............- z e
'Prce Signatue: ... P~In--Initial- ID# 'ee W~. C, Si. .. VAimf' Print-/~. Inil) I"[
rInr-urnernt Saii~ngs .Cal Slrndard Search Unrit Search tiril Cobt~
-a IDN~~ IO ~ ~ II y Thickness FreqZo'T MHZ 17cupvian 0
. B/S .... Size MakeŽL..S'h 9.~~
Cirs i ot0 . Z..A Anrgie C:Mod;e ;.4 tj Sy~rr Cek. .Cal Direction Sf4d~L..Cal Swnep circuit . DE-11t Point,~ pAlAllt ov0h Coarse . ....__4ange) fJAnq~Ie 41 OCtrc; L onmal ~ ca one .la7uz:..Dt ,/y~z Time 2 3 4 qr~rrnn t~~i " . .. .. Am01liudii Screen Readi~ng - Refltevor % o FSHi~ In Inhe . ... ... .... Ojwr 0 n S* 44 ~q- -*- 0 . F'rr~ue'y: ~ .~..4Z ~ . ~4o-Normal.-~ 0 t. Reet I foil 0 --. 0 1 3 z p 0o ANI Review 00 Rlemarks: ipiImrlon' %' FS4 inhps FiSH Inches % FSH inches z
.-. .7S-L .......
Tech Ial11 Reviewe d By 711.1711 LevL...... ~.Date:.2Ai.+/-6.?.! 53;P; Components Examined:
,-e/ 7 - , NVE Pateqest 9:
Au' 0 -F p4o.j7 rri5 go 17-0 0 C1ý OD
1146C lirIMI E-'Nuclear Calibration Sheet Cal Sheeif ef&:*; Sysiery) .omponent .~/ ~Procedure ~A*?w ~ 9 Rev F~nnip~:. i~r~~r:print:~Iile~/ Level Evnminer: Sign Ie Print: InVil LS rv t,4 lr~srurmpr¶i ettings CtSadr Search Unit Search Unit Cable ./- toaI toP 101 ?~pe Ty~. ~
.rn......
Uod~tMnu
*.~{2~ Tt~e!s .SCh 524 . Type . ~~-.-
Gain Thckes .- /0 Freq= -M.....jHZCouplant . v/ S'sSli Size MakeC'..S Batch;.s.,- Fineeet - Unral Syste Check Ca Direction The7t,.41ý. Ca Due -.4. Sweep 1rc1ifif 175'. Pointi '~': C4 lAxiel tJaoth ~ P Cnsrsq. __(2Flange) 4- L1Cgl ire. VMgwynial q0646 OAC P"e eph..i .. S'ee~ ...... ~
.I~II Reflecto~r 44of FSH Screen Readin'1 In Inches 7 i-Fri._Iunny .t__0H do D~rnrIng: I~f .i0n,.V................... . .. .
.71 j-Z3-/IrA i flemape ANI Fta-ew Rntic~i~ 'i 1SH Inchtoa FSH- Inches %V FSH 7'0 Inilia7s. Reviewed BY/,
Comporerits lExarrnirrbd.
.y/ ;7z, 19 NOE Roquegifi: 70 7;.
0 A1 M0927 015-MI I-C) 0:) Q0
. .I I
.1 .
.1: I .1 I I I .
3/4>' S[M HNucmlear Calibration Sheet CalSiel. - Syslem . rocedure Rev 0 EXRam W~f Sigrnalt re: Print; oe~ tv 0)
~1 Insirurneni Setting& Cal Siandard Search Unit Search Lrint able- rD 1DM. .iO .... 6.. IONDIV. Type A, !~_ Length.
MMOe/Mentil ! L Sire -e4 Sc.! Typa4AVY 4 Thickness .f FIe M-ZCutn Fine Age..Mode _~It 41-Sweetp Cirrijii .EI t~r~~I
......- System Check flelpnint
--. ~-~----.-Thermometer Cal Directon 171Aoisl cisath
~uuo.. - - . .
F
._(Range) ~Angle Cl'~ 41 2 LlCirc. ao~rmaI N DAC$no
'0 Finn Delay,. .o -
..... T _m ..~, 7- T Scrp.tr, Depth .. ?. ~Amplitude Screen Reading
- Fragurncy:
Reject: Oneralion N.ormal MMz eflector
....~.0
%of FSH IA...
In Inches 3,.. 7 so-~- 3D6i Xi~ 1..... Pr... y~ C C eO
~0 0 C4 4 5. a Z'1IF i 0
Remarks:ANI Rpvlew Refecor %FSM Inches FSH inchies % sH inches w-f,.,A/ Tferhnlcal flovie CI Reviewed ey ... . . W m 0 0 S~ .. ~. *. Cmponenlts Evarined:-. . 0" 0 _____al DEi Request$:*?.~ 00)o 01 NOOfl jOS~I¶( 0
~!J~u~earUltrasonic Thickness Data Sheet (K00 0: TMI-1 01 TMI.2 101aOSS: ien v~~ IDE Floques1: Data 6heat No:.,V~-
TakDescription: [)R LSAjlL ILf.Jr A..,4o0- Task No.; Df41le~ . COMP. Dese.: WFIZn L)CRAvY 1~r Pg eIY:S:j oaI PtO6dlrIoV. OAP 2*2.0f. 07 .i0 Drawing No.fflev.; _ -gA - Test Scirface: Thbcknm;:Mara LEiam lner Sion: [E'ia minon Sig : fPint: j Print: ID N . / o. JI~ -y,.--o3 p Level: Leivel: r Thernqrvtr SW ar Tmpervuhwe& F D-Molor SIN ?2- 01 Calibration Readngs (Iflhes) Tuo~quas Col. Blk. S/N _ Z/ Cal. In: A _AM L-21Mt Cal, 81k. Temp, 49* F Cal Oul:.IAq jqyopM Coili.1.561 . 752. 1joa, 1J AT2 .Mt 00
.l~ter "O 2 7,$ / 1.250 Other ýJ p
Dfawing
, *
- l . .: : .J r A IE
*i, ,!,- ,
i i:* *
- i. '~iI. i i. .
1PA.%r 7j 0 oeiwd y o -LI _ __ _
- mmluclear Ultrasonic; Thickness Data Sheet 9 OC0 9 AlTM-1 HDERequst: ia Shoot No.:-9tý7. '
Task Description; LJ .$4O iATslo. ,',!)le Date: 16 -qI Prcoi6e/ev00~o - 6 _7a.0? 0 Drawing Na./Rev. -MA Test Surface: ~ aterilt: Mhcns: Es~amine; 51g.. 4r1ntP;P,.y~l~ Level: to
- Thatimmmotir SIN 4'i1-bS Parn Temporature Ft 0 -Moter S/N9~1 Calibratlon Readings (Inches)' Tehnhfiq1 ues Cal. 9ik. $IN __
ICal Blk. Temp.
/ Cal. In:.A, A jLQ,2PM TA 'I A CRCTD.er C,9 F *Cal. Out:111 AM i/q40PM a.5.
- P.251 *
-... .VMet~er 1*.501 751 t j Oo i50 Other -IA -.
Drawingn I PArA2 I A i ft 0 0
- 4. Rviwe b Lee.?e Pg 0)1
I. *J..* I I I . . *1 I& IrIMI
.G~
Nuclear -U. Calibratlon Sheet Cal Shaet#./ye9L-'-r1- ~ C
/97......-..- r
[Pcedtrr z 6200-nQAP )20t 0- 0
. . Print
.PrI:#jLevel I-.
lnsr~men ShlligCalC
- SIPenrard Search Unit Search Unit Cable
*D ~. ic.~LL_
lot- 10# 52+/- . Type ) ength ModelUmanul 7 Slze.,kd. Sch.-L.. type 1L*- -- *-- . Cgi'Thickness *Sf/L ~eq-2. 00MHZ Couptenl. S CnQr2 Tam Ai- . Angle .0ModeiS ___ I:,) Fine . ...-,
-- dA - - System Chac Cal Direct'~ .8 :j...61i3 A (Axll
~
.0 Sweeap Clrcull ,Cl Etir P ClBolh . . . . ..- . . -
Coarse i- 2
#.1__ . fcoc. ]KNormal 10004 VACNoat Fine ime Al 1 Scrach Depth .. Amplitude Screen, fleadng 3/4of FS14 . inches
.7 ~
a 4
~. ~.
WlF Normal Freqiienn.y:, ~ .~ .MHz 2 0 Filler: IOh $on h. ____Ok 12 . 0 1+ O AI 0N eve 0 T~irneDale ~ jf1j. f PSH inch-es % FSH Inches ~*Fý1`4 rI,
..470- ;7s z P
flevtewed By - - - 0 C-)
.~ ~ ..... I I * ~.
0 NDE FAequesWE Z -I 0
. P$09.17tft Vol I (A)
z 0 Instrlument Sqttinqs Coil Slandard Search Unit Search Unit Cable ~ MeUenu
- .~:J~~An(t~4 52aVIGAA Sci,. W.A., Type ~ Z
~ C iT2 C)
Foinse Temnp Angflo .. td g.6 . . - S----Thermometer
.. 4/A Sytem he~. . ~ Direction . SIM: Cal ue.. hi Sweep Gifcuilt flEPIi fl:v-AxIal fl~oh ______. .
0 Delay nme.:~D5TFGJ41.s -
- Sr.'Rnn Deth.~h Amplitude Screen Rowding so -- . -
Raffotetr %of FSH l inIchms D - Cd, TArevny - .M..... ....... Damleot: 11on rj0n a % b2
.... ...... d.. .ji Ij t.ri Ior ./111.1.11. 'l il. '
- 20. 7 a 0
-A WIRevkew 1-120 112-19-1 IWO 11140o
~
Relire,frtn 4h FSHl inches % F54 Inches Inch 6
~ 14
'TachniaI IR AJ.-JL Cornpohne rigExamined- -
Initals NOE RequesWe .2/'-.&,Ž ...... 0 102Ž rOS-n*
.~ CI,
- lb f2~.ft 0
0 0 0 4b)}}