ML11154A141
| ML11154A141 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Watts Bar  |
| Issue date: | 04/14/2011 |
| From: | Tennessee Valley Authority |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| TAC ME3945 RSOGENROGCDX00033320110002 | |
| Download: ML11154A141 (21) | |
Text
ENCLOSURE 3 CALCULATION RSOGENROGCDX00033320110002 "SEISMIC EVALUATION OF HESCO BASKETS"
TVA Calculation Package Page: i of 19 Title Seismic Evaluation of HESCO Baskets L Location
Description:
Total Pages: (including (Optional) appendices & attachments) 19 Calculation ID (All parts required to form a Unique Ij):
Location/
Alphanumeric Part = Discipline Code (1) + Type Code (1) + "X" +
Org Code Plant Code Branch Code Unit Field (3) + Sys.Code (3) + Year (4) + Sequence No. (4)
RSO GEN ROG CDX00033320110002 NOTE: When referencing the calculation ID, include'all parts without spaces or dashes between them.
Unit(s), Spill gate(s), or Voltages (PSO):
Key Nouns (For CTSICCRIS):
Unit 0 Stability Analysis, Temporary,Modification, Seismic Applicable Design Document(s):
Rev RIMS/EDMS Accession Number (Optional)
None Ro R
UNID System(s):
R 333 R
RO R
R R
DCN,PCN,NA N/A Prepared:
Sign-.+,
Print Name Mark C. Lowe Checked:
Sign4 Print Name J. Justin Long These calculati.
contain Unverified assumption(s) that must be verified later? 0 Yes 0 No These I
s; contain special requirements and/or limiting conditions? [- Yes 0 No Approved:
Sign,+_
Print Name Kepdal Lennon Approval Date_________
T ee calcu ations contain a design output attachment? E] Yes 0 No Revision 0 Entire calc 0 Entire calc
[] Entire calc EJ Entire calc Applicability EJ Selected pgs Q Selected pgs 0 Selected pgs Computer output Microfiche generated? 0 Yes 0 No Number:
Purpose of the Calculation: To evaluate the stability of Hesco Bastion Concertainers during a seismic event resulting in horizontal accelerations of 0.1 8I and vertical accelerations of 0.12q.
Abstract: Hesco Bastion Concertainers will be used to temporarily raise the elevation of the top of the dam while a permanent modification can be implemented. Several configurations of the Concertainers were evaluated for sliding and overturning stability during a seismic event.
This calculation is applicable for the Concertainer flood wall system at FLH, CRH, TEH, and WBH.
0 Electronically file and return calculation to Calculation Library.
0 Electronically file and return calculation Mark Lowe Address:
TVA Calculation Coversheet CTS Input Form Page: 2 of 19 Preparer Preparer Login ID Date Mark C. Lowe mclowe 4/14/2011 Checker Checker Login ID Date J. Justin Long ijlong 4/20/2011 Update Code:
Z Add El Change LI Delete
[] Rename El Supersede F-1 Duplicate El Verify The following section applies if a calculation is being renamed, superseded, or has a duplicate.
Org Cur New Code Plant Branch Number Rev Rev Current Calc ID:
The following section applies to all calculations.
Calc ID:
RSO GEN ROG CDX00033320110002 0
Firm: (TVA or Contractor)
Cross-References Xref Org AIClD Code Type Code Plant Branch Number Rev A
A P
A P
A P
A P
A P
A P
A P
A C
CN RSO FLH ROG CDX00033320090003 0
+/-
I 4
1 +
4
+
4 I
+
1 t
I 4
1-
+/-
I
.4 4 +
- 4-4
.4 I.
I.
-I-
.4
.4 4
4 TVA 20156 [8-2007]
TVA Calculation Record of Revision Page: 3 of 19 Calculation Identifier:
Title RSOGENROGCDX0oo3332O 110002 Seismic Evaluation of HESCO Baskets
- Revision, No.
Description of Revision 0
Initial Issue i
-I.
TVA 20156 [8-2007]
TVA Computer File Storage Information Sheet Page: 4 Of 19 Calculation Identifier:
RSOGENROGCDX00033320110002 Rev.-
o Plant:
GEN
Subject:
Seismic Evaluation of HESCO Baskets Software Name:
NA Revision Level:
NA Vendor Name:
NA Address:
NA Executable Files Z
No TVA developed executable files were used in this calculation.
Comments:
FD TVA developed executable files used in this calculation have been stored electronically and sufficient identifying information is provided below for each executable file. (Any retrieved file requires re-verification of its contents before use.)
Input Files Z
Electronic storage of the input files for this calculation is not required.
Comments:
Dl Input files for this calculation have been stored electronically and sufficient identifying information is provided below for each input file. (Any retrieved file requires re-verification of its contents before use.)
TVA 20156 [8-2007]
TVA Calculation Table of Contents
. Page: 5 Of 19 Calculation Identifier:
RSOGENROGCDX00033320110002 Revision:
0 Table of Contents Section Title Page 1.0 Introduction and Purpose 6
2.0 References 6
3.0 Assumptions 6
4.0 Concertainer Weight 7
5.0 Stability Analysis 7
5.1 Single 4-Foot Concertainer Flood Wall 9
5.2 Single 3-Foot Concertainer Flood Wall 11 5.3 Double Concertainer, 3-Foot Concertainer and 4-Foot Concertainer 13 5.4 L-Shaped Concertainer Configuration 15 6.0 Summary and Conclusions 17 Att. 1 Vertical and Horizontal Seismic Accelerations 19 I.
+
I.
+
t
+
t 4
4 4
4 4
4 4
4 4
TVA 20156 [8-2007]
Plant: GEN CALCULATION SHEET Page:6 Calc #:ROGCDX00033320110002 TITLE Prep: MCL Date:4/14/11 Rev: 0 Seismic Evaluation of HESCO Baskets Check: JJL Date:4/20/11 1.0 Introduction and Purpose The HESCO Bastion Concertainers, hereinafter referred to as Concertainers, will be used as a flood wall to temporarily raise the elevation of Fort Loudoun, Tellico, Cherokee, and Watts-Bar Dams to meet the impoundment requirements during the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) event.
Concertainers are a wire basket measuring 3-feet wide by 15-feet long by either 3 or 4-feet deep filled with sand or other fill material. Each 15-foot unit is divided into 5 equal compartments, each lined with a polypropylene nonwoven geotextile liner.
Concertainers were previously subjected to a hydrostatic loading to examine their performance for sliding and overturning stability as shown in Reference 2.5. This calculation will evaluate the sliding and overturning stability of the Concertainers under a seismic loading only with water elevations below the top of the dam embankments and below the base of the Concertainers. Therefore, hydrostatic and hydrodynamic effects were not included in this evaluation. Both typical Concertainer configurations and the atypical Concertainer configurations unique to Fort Loudoun Dam were evaluated. As shown in Attachment 1, the Concertainers are subjected to a horizontal acceleration of 0.18g and a vertical acceleration of 0.12g since the baskets are located at the top of the embankments.
2.0 References 2.1 "Engineering Evaluation of Hesco Barriers Performance in Fargo, ND 2009." Wenck Associates, Inc., May 2009 (Wenck File #2283-01).
2.2 "Flood-Fighting Structures Demonstration and Evaluation Program: Laboratory and Field Testing in Vicksburg, Mississippi." US Army Corps of Engineers: Engineering Research and Development Center, ERDC TR-07-3, July 2007.
2.3 "Engineering and Design: Stability Analysis of Concrete Structures." EM 1110-2-2100.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. December 1, 2005.
2.4 Terzaghi, Karl et. al.,"Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice," 3rd ed., John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY, 1996.
2.5 TVA Calculation "PMF Temporary Modification Analysis." Fort Loudoun. Calculation Identifier RSOFLHROGCDX0003320090003.
3.0 Assumptions There are no unverified assumptions.
Plant: GEN CALCULATION SHEET Page:7 Calc #:ROGCDX00033320110002 TITLE Prep:
MCL Date:4/14/11 Rev: 0 Seismic Evaluation of HESCO Baskets Check: JJL Date:4/20/11 4.0 Concertainer Weight The Concertainer units bulge when they are filled and properly compacted. The deformed shape of the Concertainer unit allows the unit to hold more weight than in its square shape. Therefore, the additional weight per Concertainer is computed below based on a single 3-foot square unit. Since the Concertianers will be in a continuous line, only one or two sides of the unit will be able to bulge depending on the configuration. For the purposes of increasing the weight, the deformed shape is idealized as a circle with a circumference equivalent to the perimeter of the undeformed unit. The idealized shape will then be compared to the test data provide in Ref. 2.1.
Length of Unit Face, Lface := 3ft Perimeter of Undeformed Unit, Pundeformed := 4 Lface Pundeformed = 12ft Area of Undeformed Unit, Aundeformed := Lface 2 Aundeformed = 9ft2 Pundeformed Radius of Idealized Shape, ridealized._
- 2. 7c Area of idealized Shape, Aidealized := 7c ridealized2 Aidealized Volume Increase Factor, Fvolume - Aundeformed ridealized = 1.91 ft Aidealized = 11.459 ft2 Fvolume = 1.273 Therefore, the volume of the 3' x 3' x 4' unit tested in Ref. 2.1 would be 1.70 CY. Based on the data included in Table 4 of Ref. 2.1, the average volume of the unit was 1.78 CY. Therefore, the volume increase factor is slightly conservative for the purposes of this stability analysis. Since only one or two faces of the unit are able to deform in the flood wall, the volume increase will be evenly distributed to each face of the unit.
Fvoiume - 1.0 Volume Increase Factor per Face, fvolume :=
4 fvolume = 0.068 5.0 Stability Analysis The minimum factor-of-safety for sliding stability will be calculated for several Concertainer configurations in accordance with USACE EM 1110-2-2100 and EM 1110-2-2200. The analyses will be performed for a unit length of the flood wall and the Concertainers will be assumed to act as a rigid bodies.
The fill material weight and friction coefficients used in the analyses are based on the data collected during Wenck Associates, Inc. field testing and published values.
Design Input Unit Weight of Water, yw := 62.4pcf Concertainer Width, W := 3ft Concertainer Height, H4 := 4ft or H3 := 3ft Unit Weight of Lightly Compacted Fill Material, Yfil_L := 102pcf (Ref. 2.1, Table 4, Compacted Sand)
Unit, Weight of Dry Dense Uniform Sand, YSand-dry:= 109.43pcf (Ref. 2.4, Table 6.3)
Plant: GEN CALCULATION SHEET Page:8 Calc#:ROGCDX00033320110002 TITLE Prep: MCL Date:4/14/11 Rev: 0 Seismic Evaluation of HESCO Baskets Check: JJL Date:4/20/ 11 Unit Weight of Saturated Dense Uniform Sand, YSandsat := 130.43pcf (Ref. 2.4, Table 6.3) 7Sand dry + YSand sat Unit Weight of Heavily Compacted Fill Material, 7fill_H :=
7fillH = 119.93 pcf (See Moisture-Density Relationships for Sand Utilized in the Temporary Dams Modification Project in Attachment 7 of Ref. 2.5)
Coefficients of Friction, Concertainer on Grass-Muddy/Saturated, l~grass := 0.65 (Ref. 2.1, Table 4)
Concertainer on PCC Street, tPCC :=0.57 (Ref. 2.1, Table 4)
Uniform Concrete Slab Thickness on Earth, IL-slab := 0.6 (Ref. 2.2, Section 8.8)
Minimum Sliding Factor of Safety, FSmin := 1.1 (Ref. 2.3, Table 3-2, Extreme Condition)
5.1 Single 4-Foot Concertainer Flood Wall LIGHTLY COMPACTED FILL WEIGHT F
IC.H F
IF 5.1.1 Sliding Stability Concertainer Weight, Fc W.H4 'YfillL (2. volune + 1.0)
Fc 1391.223 plf Vertical Seismic, FS: FC* 0.12 FSV = 166.947 plf Horizontal Seismic, FSH := FC-0.18 FSH = 250.42 plf Normal Force, FN :=FC - FSV FN = 1224.276plf Resisting Force on Grass, FR grass := gIgrass*FN FR grass =795.779plf Resisting Force on Pavement, FR pCC : [tpCCFN FRPCC =697.837plf Factor of Safety on Grass, FSgrass :
R~grass IFSgrass =3.178 FSH Factor of Safety on Pavement, F,,--FR PCC IFSpcc =2.787 FSH
Plant: GEN CALCULATION SHEET Page: 10 Calc#:ROGCDX00033320110002 TITLE Prep: MCL Date:4/14/11 Rev: 0 Seismic Evaluation of HESCO Baskets Check: JJL Date:4/20/11 5.1.2 Overturning Stability Compute the location of the resultant force under the Concertainer considering the Concertainer installed without any unit tilt loaded with the full horizontal and vertical accelerations. This analysis assumes that the unit acts as a rigid body.
H4 Overturning Moment About Point A, M0 := FSH* -2 Mo = 500.84 lbf-ft ft Resisting Moment About Point A, Overturning Factor of Safety, W
Ibf.ft MR := FN'--
MR = 1836.414 2
ft MR FSoverturn :=
-FSoveurn
= 3.667 Mo MR - Mo Distance of Resultant from point A, x :=-
x = 1.091 ft Resultant within base FN
Plant: GEN CALCULATION SHEET Page: 11 Calc#:ROGCDX00033320110002 TITLE Prep:
MCL Date.4/14/11 Rev: 0 Seismic Evaluation of HESCO Baskets Check: JJL Date:4/20/11 5.2 Single 3-Foot Concertainer Flood Wall LIGHTLY COMPACTED FSH FILL WEIGHT FR A
V - 6"
,/s FS 5.2.1 Sliding Stability Concertainer Weight, Fc := W.H3.Yfill_L.(2.fvolume + 1.0)
Fc = 1043.417plf Vertical Seismic, FSV := FC.0.12 FSV = 125.21 plf Horizontal Seismic, FSH := FC.0.18 FSH = 187.815plf Normal Force, FN := FC - FSV FN = 918.207plf Resisting Force on Grass, FR grass : lPgrass.FN FR grass = 596.834plf Resisting Force on Pavement, FRPCc ppcC'FN FR_PCC = 523.378plf Factor of Safety on Grass, FSgrass := FR-grass FSgrass 3.178 FSH FRPCC Factor of Safety on Pavement, FSpcc :=
FSH IFSpcc 2.787 1 FSH Fp~
2.8 Plant
GEN CALCULATION SHEET Page: 12 Calc#:ROGCDX00033320110002 TITLE Prep:
MCL Date:4/14/11 Rev: 0 Seismic Evaluation of HESCO Baskets Check: JJL Date:4/20/11 5.2.2 Overturning Stability Compute the location of the resultant force under the Concertainer considering the Concertainer installed without any unit tilt loaded with the full horizontal and vertical accelerations. This analysis assumes that the unit acts as a rigid body.
H3 Overturning Moment About Point A, Mo := FSH*-
2 w
Resisting Moment About Point A, MR :=FN*-
2 lbf-ft Mo = 281.723-ft Ibf.ft MR = 1377.31-ft MR -Mo Distance of Resultant from point A, x:= -
x = 1.193ft Resultant within base FN MR Overturning Factor of Safety, FSoverturn := M FSoverturn = 4.889 Mo
Plant: GEN CALCULATION SHEET Page: 13 Calc#:ROGCDX00033320110002 TITLE Prep:
MCL Date:4/14/11 Rev: 0 Seismic Evaluation of HESCO Baskets Check: JJL Date:4/20/11 5.3 Double Concertainer, 3-Foot Concertainer and 4-Foot Concertainer
.3-0" I
HEAVILY COMPACTED FILL WEIGHT HEAVILY COMPACTED FILL WEIGHT FR A
ý&IS#¢,
1'- 6" 5.3.1 Sliding Stability Concertainer Weight 7 foot combined basket, FC7 := W.(H4 + H3)"Yfill_H'(fvolume + 1.0)
FC7 = 2690.57plf Vertical Seismic 7 ft basket, Fvs 7 := FC7.0.12 FVS7 = 322.868plf
Plant: GEN CALCULATION SHEET Page: 14 Calc #:ROGCDX00033320110002 TITLE Prep:
MCL Date:4/14/11 Rev: 0 Seismic Evaluation of HESCO Baskets Check: JJL Date:4/20/11 Horizontal Seismic 7 ft basket, FHS7 := FC7.0.18 FHS7 = 484.303plf Normal Force, FN := FC7 - FVS 7 FN = 2367.702plf Resisting Force on Grass, FR grass := ýtgrass' FN Resisting Force on Pavement, FRPCC := pPCC' FN FR Rgrass Factor of Safety on Grass, FSgrass '- F HS7 FHS7 FR PCC Factor of Safety on Pavement, FSpcc:=
F HS7 FRgrass = 1539.006plf FR_PCC = 1349.59 plf FSgrass = 3.178]
FSpc C
2.787 5.3.2 Overturning Stability Compute the location of the resultant force under the Concertainer considering the Concertainer installed without any unit tilt loaded with the full horizontal and vertical accelerations. This analysis assumes that the unit acts as a rigid body.
Overturning Moment About Point A, Mo := FHS7" 3.5ft W
Resisting Moment About Point A, MR := FN'--
M 2
Ibf.ft Mo = 1695.059--
ft lbf. ft.
R = 3551.553 ft Distance of Resultant from point A, x
MR x = 0.784ft Resultant within base FN MR Overturning Factor of Safety, FSoverturn 7=-
Mo JFSoverturý- ý2-095
5.4 L-Shaped Concertainer Configuration The L-shaped double stacked Concertainer configuration shown below is utilized at Fort Loudoun underneath the US321 bridge.
5.4.1 Sliding Stability Concertainer Weight Single 4 foot basket, FC4:= W. H4 yfill_H(fvolume + 1.0)
FC4 = 1537.469plf Concertainer Weight 7 foot combined basket, FC7:= WfiII_H.[(H4).(fvoIume + 1.0) + (H3).(2.fvolume + 1.0)]
FC7 = 2764.302plf Concertainer Weight total, FC:= FC4 + FC7 Fc= 4301.771 plf
Vertical Seismic 4 ft basket, FVS4 FC4.0.12 FVS4 = 184.496 plf Vertical Seismic 7 ft basket, FVS7:= FC7.0.12 Fvs7 = 331.716plf Horizontal Seismic 4 ft basket, FHS4 FC4" 0.18 FHS4 = 276.744plf Horizontal Seismic 7 ft basket, FHS7 := FC7.0.18 FHS7 = 497.574plf Width of Base, Wbase:= 2W Wbase = 6ft Resisting Force on Grass, FRgrass := Pgrass.(Fc - FVS4 - FVS7)
Resisting Force on Pavement, FRPCC := ýIPCC'(Fc - FVS4 - FVS7)
FR-grass = 2460.613plf FRPCC = 2157.768plf FR-grass Factor of Safety on Grass, FSgrass := FHS4 + FHS7 FRPCC Factor of Safety on Pavement, FSpcc.-
FHS4 + FHS7 FSgrass 3.178 1 IFSpCC = 2.787 5.4.2 Overturning Stability Compute the location of the resultant force under the Concertainer considering the Concertainer installed without any unit tilt loaded with the full horizontal and vertical accelerations. This analysis assumes that the unit acts as a rigid body.
Overturning Moment About Point A, Mo := FHS4.2ft + FHS7.3.5ft Ibf* ft Mo = 2294.999--
ft Resisting Moment About Point A, MR (FC4 - FVS4). 1.5ft + (Fc7 - FVS7).4.5ft Ibf. ft MR = 12976.095 ft Overturning Factor of Safety, MR FSoverturn := MR Mo FSoverturn = 5.654 MR -Mo Distance of Resultant from point A, x:=
x = 2.822ft Resultant within base.
Fc-Fvs4 - Fvs7
Plant: GEN CALCULATION SHEET Page: 17 Calc #:ROGCDX00033320110002 TITLE Prep:
MCL Date:4/14/11 Rev: 0 Seismic Evaluation of HESCO Baskets Check: JJL Date:4/20/11 6.0-Summary and Conclusions Evaluation of the four configurations indicates that the baskets are stable when subjected to a seismic.event with a horizontal acceleration of 0.18 and a vertical acceleration of 0.12. The sliding factor of safety for sliding was 3.178 for Concertainers installed on grass and 2.787 for Concertainers installed on pavement which is higher then the required Factor of Safety of 1.1.
Also, the overturning factor of safety ranged from a minimum of 2.095 to a maximum of 5.61 which is higher then the required Factor of Safety of 1.0.
Vertical and Horizontal Seismic Accelerations
PACr4Q APf7~
~s.
401516;1a! 6? 0
/4 lg 9,p 2A 0O I AAV&y4 WJS MO!* 4VV4V '%
UFSAR Amenmem.
WAT BA ULCPAT TYDCAZ eMAOOWA,(e&W S4eCT/O
ENCLOSURE4
SUMMARY
OF PROBLEM EVALUATION REPORT 154477 The hydrology issues at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant are being tracked through a single Problem Evaluation Report (PER), PER 154477. PER 154477 was initially written to address the assumptions made on Tellico Dam with respect to stability during the Operating Basis Earthquake. As other issues were identified during the hydrology analysis input reconstitution, additional PERs were written to address the specific issue and to address operability and functionality of that issue. As these additional PERs were closed, they were added to PER 154477 as the single tracking document. Currently, the open corrective actions remaining for PER 154477 are for documentation corrections.
Upon completion of the hydrology analysis for probable maximum flood (PMF), one of the additional PERs, PER 211722, was written to address the higher than original licensed PMF level (0.7 feet increase). Equipment required for flood mode was evaluated for impact of the increased PMF level. The review concluded that all equipment was adequate for the PMF event with margin except for the Unit 1 Thermal Barrier Booster (TBB) Pump motors. The base of these motors is located within 1/4" of the revised design basis flood level inside the structures.
The Unit 2 pumps are at the same elevation as the Unit 1 pumps. Since these components have reduced margin, a Unit 1 temporary alteration control measure was implemented to provide protection around the equipment through the use of a barrier. This protection is implemented as part of the flood mode preparations as described in Abnormal Operating procedures. The barrier is not required to deem the pump motors functional but is recommended to provide assurance of additional margin. Unit 2 is implementing a permanent design change to protect the pump motors.
To date, the only issue identified in the additional PERs is protection of the TBB pump motors as described above.