Text

Enclosure 8 - Tn Calculation NUH32PHB-0212, CCNPP-FC Transfer Cask Structural Evaluation - Accident Conditions, 75G Side Drop and 75G Top End Drop Cases
	ML12006A137
Person / Time
Site:	Calvert Cliffs
Issue date:	11/09/2011
From:	Huan Li; AREVA, Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, Transnuclear, Calvert Cliffs
To:	; Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
References
	NUH32PHB-0212
	Download: ML12006A137 (61)
	v • d • e

A I ENCLOSURE 8 TN Calculation NUH32PHB-0212, CCNPP-FC Transfer Cask Structural Evaluation - Accident Conditions, 75G Side Drop and 75G Top End Drop Cases

A Form 3.2-1 Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AR EVA Calculation Cover Sheet Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC. TIP 3.2 (Revision 5) Pagel of 60 DCR NO (if applicable)-009 PROJECT NAME: NUHOMS 32PHB System PROJECT NO: 10955 CLIENT: CENG - Calvert Cliff Nuclear Power Plant (CCNPP)

CALCULATION TITLE:

CCNPP-FC Transfer Cask Structural Evaluation - Accident Conditions, 75G Side Drop and 75G Top End Drop Cases.

SUMMARY

DESCRIPTION:

1) Calculation Summary The Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Transfer Cask (CCNPP-FC TC), part of the NUHOMS 32PHB System for Storage, constitutes a minor modification of the licensed design of CCNPP transfer cask (NUHOMSO 32P system). The design modification consists of the new top cover plate design with vent openings around the plate periphery and added spacer disk mounted to bottom cover plate that allow for forced convection cooling of cask interior.

The calculation documents results of the new design stress evaluation for accident conditions, for two accident scenarios: 75G Side Drop and 75G Top End Drop.

2) Storage Media Description Secure network server initially, then redundant tape backup (Same as Rev. 0)

If original issue, is licensing review per TIP 3.5 required? N/A Yes El No El (explain below) Licensing Review No.:

Software Utilized (subject to test requirements of TIP 3.3): Version:

ANSYS 10A1 Calculation Is complete:

Originator Name and Signature: Huan Li Date:

Calculation has been checked for consistency, completeness and correctness:

Checker Name and Signature: Raheel Haroon Date:

Calculation is approved for use:

Project Engineer Name and Signature: Date:

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 2 of 60 REVISION

SUMMARY

REV. DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES AFFECTED AFFECTED PAGES Computational 1/0 0 Initial Issue All All 1 Update some of the references in the calculation 1,2,6,10 None

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AR EVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 3 of 60 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. P u rp o se ............................................................................................................................................................................. 6

2. R eferen ces ........................................................................................................................................................................ 6

3. ANSYS Run Documentation ............................................................................................................................................ 7

4. A ssu m p tio n s ..................................................................................................................................................................... 8

5. S tress C riteria ................................................................................................................................................................... 9

6. M o d el Descrip tio n ........................................................................................................................................................... 11 6 .1. G eo m etry ............................................................................................................................................................... 11 6.2. M aterial Com ponents ............................................................................................................................................ 12 6 .3 . M ateria l P rop erties ................................................................................................................................................ 13 6 .4 . M ateria l M o d e ls ..................................................................................................................................................... 15 6 .4 .1. Stee l P late s ........................................................................................................................................................ 15 6 .4 .2 . L e a d ................................................................................................................................................................... 15 6 .5 . In terfac e s ............................................................................................................................................................... 15 6 .5 .1. W e ld s ................................................................................................................................................................. 15 6.5.2. Surface Contact ................................................................................................................................................. 15 6.5.3. Top Cover Plate Bolts ....................................................................................................................................... 16 6 .5 .4 . L o ad s ................................................................................................................................................................. 19 W eig h t L o ad ............................................................................................................................................................... 19 D S C L o ad .................................................................................................................................................................. 19 Cosine Distributed Pressure Loading ......................................................................................................................... 20 6.5.5. ANSYS M odel Specifications ........................................................................................................................... 23 6.5.6. Boundary Conditions ......................................................................................................................................... 24

7. A cc id ents A n aly zed ........................................................................................................................................................ 25 7 .1. 7 5 G S ide D rop ....................................................................................................................................................... 25 7.2. 75G Top End Drop ................................................................................................................................................ 25

8. Stre ss R esu lts .................................................................................................................................................................. 26 8.1. Stress Classification Paths ..................................................................................................................................... 26 8.2. Stress Qualification M ethod .................................................................................................................................. 27 8.3. Analysis of Results - Discussion ........................................................................................................................... 28 8.3.1. Summ ary of Results .......................................................................................................................................... 28 8.3.2. Stress Evaluation Details ................................................................................................................................... 30

9. Conclusions .................................................................................................................................................................... 33 10 . A p p en d ix ........................................................................................................................................................................ 34

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 4 of 60 LIST OF TABLES Page Table I Files Used in Calculation..............................................----------------------------------------------------------- 7 Table 2 Acceptance Criteria for Steel Components ----------------------------------------------- 10 Table 3 Material Components................................................------------------------------------------------------------ 12 Table 4 Material Properties of Stainless Steel SA 240 Type 304 -------------------------------------- 13 Table 5 Material Properties of Stainless Steel SA 182 Type F304N ------------------------------------ 13 Table 6 Material Properties of Carbon Steel SA 516 Type 70 ---------------------------------------- 13 Table 7 Material Properties of Lead - Static Properties -------------------------------------------- 14 Table 8 Material Properties of Lead - Dynamic properties ----------------------------------------- 14 Table 9 Mechanical Properties of Neutron Shielding Materials -------------------------------------- 14 Table 10 Lid Bolt Input Data [8], [9], [10] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16 Table 11 Specification of COMBIN39 Elements in Tensile Direction ---------------------------------- 17 Table 12 Specification of COMBIN39 Elements in Shear Direction [10] -------------------------------- 18 Table 13 Mass of Cask Components............................................-------------------------------------------------------- 19 Table 14 ANSYS Elements Specifications ---------------------------------------------------- 23 Table 15 ANSYS Elements Specifications - Contact elements -------------------------------------- 24 Table 16 Stress Paths ------------------------------------------------------------------ 26 Table 17 Stress Results - 75G Side Drop Case ------------------------------------------------- 28 Table 18 Stress Results - 75G Top End Drop Case ------------------------------------------------------- 29

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 5 of 60 LIST OF FIGURES Pagge FIGURE I SCHEMATIC OF THE NUH32PHB CASK -------------------------------------------------------------------------- II FIGURE 2 CIRCUMFERENTIAL COSINE PRESSURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION ----------------------------------------- 20 FIGURE 3 NUHOMS 32PHB MODEL - MESH - GENERAL VIEW -------------------------------------------------------- 35 FIGURE 4 NUHOMS 32PHB MODEL - MESH DETAILS - TOP & BOTTOM OF CASK ------------------------------ 36 FIGURE 5 NUHOMS 32PHB MODEL - MESH DETAILS - TOP COVER PLATE AREA ----------------- 37 FIGURE 6 TOP COVER PLATE INTERFACE - CONTACT ELEMENTS & TARGET ELEMENTS ---------- 38 FIGURE 7 LEAD SHIELDING CONTACT ELEMENTS ---------------------------------------- 39 FIGURE 8 NS-3 SHIELDING CONTACT ELEMENTS ----------------------------------------- 39 FIGURE 9 SIDE DROP BOUNDARY CONDITIONS ------------------------------------------ 40 FIGURE 10 SIDE DROP PRESSURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION ----------------------------------- 41 FIGURE II TOP END DROP PRESSURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION & BC --------------------------- 41 FIGURE 12 75G SIDE DROP RESULTS - OVERALL STRESS DISTRIBUTION ---------------------- 42 FIGURE 13 75G SIDE DROP RESULTS - DEFORMATION MODE ------------------------------- 43 FIGURE 14 75G SIDE DROP RESULTS - DEFORMATION MODE (CD) --------------------------- 44 FIGURE 15 75G SIDE DROP RESULTS - TOP COVER PLATE INNER SIDE - SURFACE STRESS -------- 45 FIGURE 16 75G SIDE DROP RESULTS - TOP COVER PLATE BOTTOM SIDE - SURFACE STRESS ----------- 46 FIGURE 17 75G SIDE DROP RESULTS - TOP COVER PLATE - PLASTIC STRESS NLSEPL ------------ 47 FIGURE 18 75G SIDE DROP RESULTS - CASK BOTTOM ASSEMBLY - SURFACE STRESS ------------ 48 FIGURE 19 85.48G SIDE DROP LIMIT ANALYSIS RESULTS - TOP COVER PLATE - DEFORMATION MODE ----------------------------------------------------------------- 49 FIGURE 20 85.48G SIDE DROP LIMIT ANALYSIS RESULTS - TOP COVER PLATE - SURFACE STRESS ---- 49 FIGURE 21 75G TOP END DROP - SURFACE STRESS DISTRIBUTION - OVERALL VIEW ------------ 50 FIGURE 22 75G TOP END DROP - TOP COVER PLATE - DEFORMATION MODE ------------------- 51 FIGURE 23 75G TOP END DROP - TOP COVER PLATE - PLASTIC STRESS NLSEPL ---------------- 51 FIGURE 24 75G TOP END DROP - TOP COVER PLATE - SURFACE STRESS ---------------------- 52 FIGURE 25 75G TOP END DROP - TOP COVER PLATE - SURFACE STRESS ---------------------- 52 FIGURE 26 75G TOP END DROP - CASK BOTTOM ASSEMBLY - SURFACE STRESS ---------------- 53 FIGURE 27 STRESS CLASSIFICATION PATHS - SYMMETRY PLANE - TOP END OF CASK ----------- 54 FIGURE 28 STRESS CLASSIFICATION PATHS - SYMMETRY PLANE - BOTTOM END OF CASK ------- 54 FIGURE 29 STRESS CLASSIFICATION PATHS - TOP COVER PLATE --------------------------- 55 FIGURE 30 STRESS CLASSIFICATION PATHS SECTIONS AT TOP COVER PLATE ----------------- 56 FIGURE 31 TOP COVER PLATE - WALL AVERAGED STRESS AT PREDEFINED SECTIONS ----------- 57 FIGURE 32 TOP COVER PLATE - SURFACE STRESS INTENSITY AT PREDEFINED SECTIONS -------- 58 FIGURE 33 TOP COVER PLATE - STRESS INTENSITY AT PREDEFINED SECTIONS ---------------- 59 FIGURE 34 TOP COVER PLATE BOLTS (LEFT PLOT) - BOLTS TENSILE FORCE (RIGHT PLOT) ------- 60

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 6 of 60

1. Purpose The CCNPP-FC transfer cask constitutes a minor modification of the licensed design of CCNPP transfer cask. The design modification consists of the new top cover plate design with vent openings around the plate periphery that vent out forced air that is injected at the bottom of the cask, and of the added spacer disk with wedge shaped protrusions mounted to the bottom cover plate to facilitate air flow coming through ram access opening to the annular space around the DSC.

Calculation documents results of CCNPP-FC on-site transfer cask stress evaluation for the design accident scenarios: 75G Side Drop and 75G Top End Drops. These two accident scenarios are deemed the most appropriate accident scenarios to conservatively assess modified stress magnitudes and patterns due to the new design of Top Cover Plate. The bounding 75G inertia load magnitude is chosen based on Ref. [3], Table 7.1 specification.

2. References

1. Transnuclear Calculation NUH32PHB-0201, Revision 0, "NUHOMS 32PHB Weight Calculation of DSC/TC System."

2. ANSYS Release 10.OA1, UP20060501. Release 10 Documentation for ANSYS.

3. Transnuclear Document NUH32PHB.0101, Revision 2, "Design Criteria Document (DCD) for the NUHOMS 32PHB System for Storage."

4. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division 1, Subsection NC, 1992.

5. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section II, Part D, 1992.

6. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Appendix F, 1992.

7. Transnuclear Calculation 1095-15 Revision 0, "NUHOMS 32P - Dynamic Stress Strain Lead Properties at Different Temperatures."

8. Machinery Handbook, Edition 24, Industrial Press, 1992.

9. Baumeister T. "Marks' Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers," Seventh Edition.

10.Warren C. Young, Richard G. Budynas, "Roark's Formulas for Stress and Strain," Seventh Edition, McGraw-Hill.

11.Gordon, J. L., "OUTCUR: An Automated Evaluation of Two-Dimensional Finite Element Stresses" according to ASME, Paper No. 76-WA/PVP-16, ASME Winter Annual Meeting (December 1976).

12.ORNL/M-5003, "Radioactive Materials Packaging Handbook, Design, Operations, and Maintenance," 1998.

13.Transnuclear Calculation NUH32PHB-0401, Rev. 0, "Transnuclear Calculation Thermal

,Evaluation of NUHOMS 32PHB Transfer Cask for Normal, Off Normal, and Accident Conditions (Steady State)."

14. Not used.

15.Transnuclear Calculation NUH32PHB-0211, Rev. 1, "Reconciliation for Transfer Cask CCNPP-FC Structural Evaluation.".

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 7 of 60

3. ANSYS Run Documentation (All runs use ANSYS Version 10.0 on Opteron Linux Platform)

Table 1 Files Used in Calculation File ID 1 Description Date I Time(1 )

Input Model and Macro files input file for 3D model generation 11/23/2009 nuh32phbcaskmod4.inp (stress analysis) 20:38:54 nuh32phbcaskmod4lim.inp input file for 3D model generation 11/23/2009 (limit analysis)) 20:38:54 nuh32phbcaskmod4.db 3D model database 11/23/2009 (stress analysis) 21:29:27 3D model database 11/23/2009 nuh32phbcaskmod41im.db (stress analysis) 21:29:07 agennuh32phbcaskmod4.macro macro file used in generation of 11/23/2009 nuh32phbcaskmod4.db database file 21:13:39 macro file used in generation of 11/23/2009 agennuh32phbcaskmod41im.macro nuh32phbcaskmod4lim.db database file 21:15:16

/ 07/30/2009 arunnuh32phbcaskmod4[lim,sd].macro macro files used in analysis runs 23:11:01 23:11:01 10/12/2009 postqnuh32phbcaskpathmod4. macro macro file used in stress post-processing 10:27:01 10/12/2009 postqnuh32phbcaskpathmod4.inp input file used in stress post-processing 11:26:41 Horizontal Side Drop nuh32phbcaskmod4g75sd6.[ext] 75G side drop stress analysis 11/24/2009

[ext]={inp;out;db;rst,macro} 75Gsidedropstressanalysis_ 01:29:54 nuh32phbcaskmod4limgl 2Osdl 2.[ext] Side Drop Collapse Limit Analysis 12/08/2009

[ext]={inp;out;db; rst, macro} SideDropCollapseLimitAnalysis _ 07:04:49 Top End Drop nuh32phbcaskmod4top8.[ext] 75G Top End Drop Stress Analysis 11/24/2009

[ext]={inp;out;db;rst,macro} 03:28:03 Note:Date &Time for main runs are from the listing at the end of the output files. For other files (e.g., .db files), dates

&times are reported by the OS on the report issue date, these values may be changed by windows depending on time of the year (e.g., daylight savings time) and time zones.

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 8 of 60

4. Assumptions

1. For all accident cases, material properties of cask components are evaluated at temperature 400 OF. Stress criteria are evaluated at temperature of 400 OF. These temperatures constitute conservative estimation of anticipated temperature range [13].

2. The DSC structure impact is not modeled explicitly but simulated as a profiled contact pressure load. Load modeling details and assumptions are presented in 6.5.4. The use of contact pressure loads maximizes bending deformation of cask structure. In result, it is adding an additional conservatism in ASME code stress evaluations.

3. The weight of payload was conservatively enveloped by 96000 lb. The assumed value exceeds payload weight magnitude assessed in calculation [1].

4. The effect of outer shell assembly components is not modeled explicitly in the analysis. The impact of the weight of the major outer shell components (neutron shield, outer shell) encompassing structural shell component is accounted for by modeling 16000 lb surface weight distributed uniformly over the outer surface of structural shell. The assumed value exceeds outer shell assembly components weight magnitude assessed in calculation [1].

5. The effect of neutron shield assembly secured on top cover plate is not modeled explicitly in the analysis. The impact of the weight of the assembly is accounted for by modeling 1400 lb surface weight distributed over the outer surface of top cover plate. The assumed value exceeds neutron shell assembly components weight magnitude assessed in calculation [1].

6. The lead shielding is assumed to fill completely the lead cavity such that deformations of the inner shell immediately load the lead. Steel to lead interface contact is modeled assuming friction coefficient 0.25. This assumption is deemed the conservative approximation.

7. The impact properties of lead are modeled using stress-strain data, referring to strain rate of 100 in/in/sec. This strain rate value was assessed as the legitimate one for postulated drop conditions of transfer cask. Details of that assumption are discussed in Section 6.3.

8. RAM Access Cover Plate is not taken credit for. The assumption reduces conservatively the stiffness of the ram access penetration assembly and maximizes stresses in the RAM Access Penetration Ring.

9. The small longitudinal offset (=0.1") of the Bottom End Plate (relative to the Bottom Support Ring forging) is not explicitly modeled. This modification required small adjustments in the geometry of the Ram Access Ring. However, the offset has been taken credit for in Bottom End Drop analysis through the specification of 0.1" gap distance between Bottom End Plate and impact surface. This model simplification is deemed not to affect results therefore.

10.The half-inch thick aluminum spacer disk, placed between DSC and bottom cover plate is not credited in the analysis. Modeling of this aluminum part is not needed when DSC load is modeled conservatively by means of uniform contact pressure.

11 .The model assumes bolt hole diameter 1.88", instead of 1.92", in the Top Cover Plate. Such the difference is assessed insignificant for the results.

12. Detail assumptions referring to simulation cask drop events in the framework of static nonlinear elastic-plastic approach are delineated in Section 7.

13.Welds are not qualified in this calculation. Weld qualification for Service Level D conditions is addressed in Reference [15].

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 9 of 60

5. Stress Criteria The CCNPP-FC on-site transfer cask is designed to meet the criteria of ASME Code Subsection NC for Class 2 components [3].

The acceptability of the design for Service Level D conditions is assessed by stress criteria stated in Reference [3]. The criteria are based on Appendix F, Section F-1341.2 (Plastic Analysis) of ASME code, or Appendix F, Section F-1341.3 (Limit Analysis Collapse Load) [6]. For accident conditions (Service Level D), the ASME code criteria are intended to affirm structural integrity of the design but to allow for the loss of operability of components during or after postulated accident. In particular, the bearing stresses need not to be evaluated except for pinned or bolted joints (F-1341.6).

The code imposes stress limits on

1. general primary membrane stress intensity (PM),

2. maximum primary stress intensity (PL, PL+PB),

3. average primary shear across a section loaded in pure shear.

The ASME code limits are 0.7*Su (max(0.7Su,Sy+(Su-Sy)/3 for austenitic steel, high nickel alloy steel, copper-nickel alloy steel) for general primary membrane stress intensity , 0.9*Su - for maximum primary stress intensity, and 0.42*Su for average primary shear. The first two criteria are determined to be bounding for this calculation and are used in the assessments. The third criterion applies only to special situations. It will be automatically satisfied when wall averaged stress intensities do not exceed 0. 8 4 "Su.

In lieu of above three stress criteria, cask design integrity can be assessed by means of limit analysis collapse load. Per F-1341.3 of ASME code, static load shall not exceed 90% of the limit analysis collapse load using a yield stress, which is the lesser of 2 .3Sm and 0.7S,. In order to qualify design for 75G drop load, the limit analysis collapse load is required to exceed value 75G/0.9 = 83.3G. This criterion was employed in 75G side drop case to eliminate potential ambiguity in ASME code stress qualification of top cover component.

Per ASME code, the general primary stress PM is interpreted as an average stress across the solid section of structural component, must be controlled only by external loads, shall not account for local effects of geometric or material discontinuities and stress concentrations, and have to be produced only by pressure and/or mechanical loads.

The local membrane stress PL is the same as PM, except that it takes also into account the effect of gross discontinuities in locations where force redistribution may lead to excessive deformations.

Primary bending stress PB is a variable part of stress across the solid section, must be controlled only by external loads; shall not account for the local effects of discontinuities and concentrations, and have to be produced only by pressure and/or mechanical loads.

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AR EVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 10 of 60 Qualification sections comprise of all sections of the packaging structure that potentially can contribute to design collapse or excessive plastic deformation of the structure. For each component, ASME code stress classification is conducted for all shell and plate sections, and for all significant stress paths of more complicated geometrical shapes. Section 8.1 describes stress classification paths employed in stress screening evaluation.

Stress path data information and visual stress results, obtained for each component, were analyzed and compared against the applicable stress allowables.

Table 2 shows applicable acceptance criteria for cask steel components.

Table 2 Acceptance Criteria for Steel Components Allowable SA-240 Type 304 SA-182 Type F304N Stresses Austenitic Stainless Steel Plate (18Cr - 8Ni) Austenitic Stainless Steel Forglngs (18Cr - 8Ni - N)

Temperature Properties Level D Allowables Properties Level D Allowables SY 20.7 ksi PM 45.1 ksi SY 22.7 ksi PM 51.2 ksi 400 OF Su 64.4 ksi PL 58.0 ksi Su 73.2 ksi PL 65.9 ksi Sm 18.7 ksi PL+PB 58.0 ksi SM 20.3 ksi PL+PB 65.9 ksi Allowable SA-516 Type 70 Stresses Carbon Steel Plate Temperature Properties Level D Allowables Sy 32.6 ksi PM 49.0 ksi 400°F Su 70.0 ksi PL 63.0 ksi Sm 21.7 ksi PL+PB 63.0 ksi Per Reference [3], no weld strength limits are imposed on the cask design for Plastic Analysis, for Service Level D conditions.

The stress criteria for top cover plate bolts are [3]: average tension - min(Sy,0.7S,)=87.5 ksi; tension plus bending - S, = 125 ksi; average shear - min(0.6Sy,0.42Su) = 52.5 ksi, and interaction equation of Appendix F (F-1335.3) of ASME code.

The bounding 75G inertia load magnitude is chosen based on Ref. [3], Table 7.1 specification.

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AR EVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 11 of 60

6. Model Description 6.1. Geometry The schematic of structural components of the 3D model of NUH32PHB cask is presented in Figure 1. Additional plots of the model are presented in Section 10 (Figure 3 through Figure 5).

Materials of the design used in model specifications are documented in Section 6.3.

1. Structural Shell ....... B. '

2. Inner Shell.......

3. Top Cover Plate.......

4. Top Flange.............

5. Bottom Support Ring

6. Bottom Cover Plate...

7. RAM Access Ring.....

8. Bottom End Plate ......

9. Lead Shielding ..........

10. Bottom Neutron Shield L.

NUH32PHB Cask - Components L Figure 1 Schematic of the NUH32PHB Cask

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 12 of 60 The 3D FEA model is designed to represent 180-degree symmetry sector of cask body. The model is suitable to analyze cask assembly structure for 1800 symmetry loads and boundary conditions.

The model represents NUH32PHB cask by ten structural components: Structural Shell, Inner Shell, Top Cover Plate, Top Flange, Bottom Support Ring, Bottom Cover Plate, Ram Access Ring, Bottom End Plate, Lead Shielding, and NS-3 Bottom Neutron Shield.

6.2. Material Components The following structural components are evaluated in this calculation (TABLE 3):

TABLE 3 Material Components

Components Material Specification 1 Structural Shell SA-516Steel Carbon TypePlate 70 SA-240 Type 304 2 Inner Shell Stainless Steel Plate SA-240 Type 304 3 Top Cover PlateSA20Tp34 Stainless Steel Plate SA-182 Type F304N 4 Top Flange Stainless Steel Forging SA-182 Type F304N 5 Bottom Support Ring Stainless Steel Forging 6 Bottom Cover Plate SA-240 Type 304 Stainless Steel Plate 7 RAM Access Ring (1) SA-182 Type F304N Stainless Steel Forging SA-240 Type 304 8 Bottom End PlateSA20Tp34 Stainless Steel Plate 9 Lead Shielding ASTM B29 Chemical Copper Lead NS-3 10 Bottom Neutron Shielding Bisco Products Inc Note 1: Reference [1] uses name RAM Access Penetration Ring for this Component.

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 13 of 60 6.3. MaterialProperties Steel Plates Material The following tables, Table 4 through Table 6, list stainless steel or carbon steel material properties available in the model material database. The material properties are based on ASME BPV Code,Section II, 1992 [5], pertinent for NUH32PHB cask stress evaluations [3].

Table 4 Material Properties of Stainless Steel SA 240 Type 304

~~ Stainless Steel SA 240 Type 304 (18cr-8ni) -ASME 1992~

Temperature [IF] 0 70 200 300 400 500 600 700 Sy [psi] 30000 30000 25000 22500 20700 19400 18200 17700 Su [psi] 75000 75000 71000 66000 64400 63500 63500 63500 Sm [psi] 20000 20000 20000 20000 18700 17500 16400 16000 E 2.87E+07 2.83E+07 2.76E+07 2.70E+07 2.65E+07 2.58E+07 2.53E+07 2.48E+07 Table 5 Material Properties of Stainless Steel SA 182 Type F304N

____________- __ _ Stainless Steel SA 182 TypeF304N *(8cr-8ni-n)-ASME 1992 Temperature [IF] 0 70 200 300 400 500 600 700 Sy [psi] 35000 35000 28700 25000 22500 20900 19800 19100 Su [psi] 80000 80000 80000 75900 73200 71200 69700 68600 Sm [psi] 23300 23300 23300 22500 20300 18800 17800 17200 E [psi] 2.87E+07 2.83E+07 2.76E+07 2.70E+07 2.65E+07 2.58E+07 2.53E+07 2.48E+07 Table 6 Material Properties of Carbon Steel SA 516 Type 70

_______ ~~Carbon Steel!SA516-Type 70 - ASME 1992 ________ ____

Temperature [IF] 0 70 200 300 400 500 600 700 Sy [psi] 38000 38000 34600 33700 32600 30700 28100 27400 Su [psi] 70000 70000 70000 70000 70000 70000 70000 70000 Sm [psi] 23300 23300 23100 22500 21700 20500 18700 18300 E [psi] 2.98E+07 2.95E+07 2.88E+07 2.83E+07 2.77E+07 2.73E+07 2.67E+07 2.55E+07 Poisson's ratio for steel components is 0.3; density is equal to 0.29 lb/in 3 (501.12 lb/ft3).

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 14 of 60 Lead Material Table 7 and Table 8, below, list lead material properties available in the model database. The properties are taken from Reference [3]. Dynamic properties, provided in the Table 8, were set up in Reference [7]. Reference [7] established the stress-strain relation presented in Table 8 for strain rate of 100 in/in/sec. This strain rate corresponds to dynamic impact velocity of dropping body about 50 ft/sec that envelops dynamic impact velocity of 30-foot drop of the cask [7, p. 1].

Table 7 Material Properties of Lead - Static Properties Lead'ASTM B29 - Chemical Lead - Static Propertie~s_____

Temperature [OF] 70 100 175 250 325 440 620 E [psi] 2.34E+06 2.30E+06 2.20E+06 2.09E+06 1.96E+06 1.74E+06 1.36E+06 Sy (*) [psi] 512(*) 490 428 391 320 241 (*) 11 0()

Notes: (*) Values obtained by an extrapolation; (**) Compression.

Table 8 Material Properties of Lead - Dynamic properties

______________ ~<j;.Lead ASTM 13iý .Chemical

- Lead- Dynamic Properties______

Temperature [OF] 0 100 230 300 350 500 E [psi] 1140/0.000485 11140/0.000485 1060/0.000485 11000/0.000485 970/0.000485 860/0.000485 Stress Strain Table Strain [in/in] 0.000485 0.03 0.10 0.30 0.50 1.0 Stress @ 0 IF [psi] 1140 2200 3300 4900 5600 5600 Stress @ 100 OF [psi] 1140 2200 3300 4900 5600 5600 Stress @ 230 OF [psi] 1060 2000 2800 3200 3600 3600 Stress @ 300 IF [psi] 1000 1700 2380 2720 3060 3060 Stress @ 350 IF [psi] 970 1500 2100 2400 2700 2700 Stress @ 500 IF [psi] 860 1100 1260 1440 1620 1620 Poisson's ratio for lead is 0.45; density is equal to 710 lb/ft 3 [7].

Neutron Shield Material NS-3 The properties of neutron shielding material NS-3 are presented in Table 9. NS-3 material properties are taken from Reference 3. The density of 150 lb/ft 3 bounds conservatively values supplied in Reference [3].

Table 9 Mechanical Properties of Neutron Shielding Materials Elastic Compressive Poisson's Density Material modulus Strength coefficient 3 (psi) (psi) Ib/ft3 NS-3 160000 3900 0.2 150

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 15 of 60 6.4. MaterialModels 6.4.1. Steel Plates Steel material is modeled by means of bilinear kinematic hardening method (TB, BKIN). The material behavior is described by a bilinear total stress-total strain curve starting at the origin and with positive stress and strain values. The initial slope of the curve is taken as the elastic modulus of the material. At the specified yield stress, the curve continues along the second slope defined by the tangent modulus [2]. It is assumed that the tangent modulus amounts to 5% of elastic modulus.

6.4.2. Lead Lead material is represented by the ANSYS multi-linear kinematic hardening material model (TB, KINH). The method belongs to family of multi-linear kinematic hardening models. The "total stress-total strain curve", is starting at the origin, with positive stress and strain values. The slope of the first segment of the curve corresponds to the elastic modulus of the material [2]. The slopes of the subsequent segments are derived from stress-strain data provided in Table 8.

6.5. Interfaces 6.5.1. Welds The component interfaces in cask design include welded joints. Cask components and all its weld joints are under ASME code NC-Subsection jurisdiction [1]. Per ASME code requirement (Ref. [4],

NC-3355), the cask component dimensions and shape of the edges shall be such as to permit complete fusion and complete joint penetration of weld grooves. Per NC-4245, complete joint penetration is considered to be accomplished when the acceptance criteria for examination specified in Subsection NC have been achieved.

Full penetration groove welds are designed and fabricated to transfer all loads (including bending) of part they are connecting. That is, if the base metal at weld location is shown to be qualified -

then these welds are also qualified. All locations of full penetration welds are addressed in stress screening procedure described in Section 8. In consequence, this calculation does not require a separate evaluation of full penetration welded joints.

ASME code NC-Subsection requires partial penetration welds localized in an area of low stress.

Per Reference [3], for Service Level D conditions, weld qualification should to be addressed via elastic analysis methodology. Partial penetration welds are qualified via elastic analysis methodology in Reference [15].

6.5.2. Surface Contact Boundaries between the steel and lead Gamma Shielding, between Top Cover Plate and the Top Flange, and between NS-3 Bottom Neutron Shielding and encasing it steel components are modeled with surface-to-surface contact elements CONTA1 73 and TARGE 170.

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 16 of 60 Top Cover Plate interface (contact and target elements) is presented in Figure 6. Lead Shielding contact elements, and contact elements encasing NS-3 Bottom Neutron Shielding are presented in Figure 7 and Figure 8, respectively.

For Top Cover Plate and NS-3 Bottom Neutron Shielding closure interface no credit is taken for steel-to-steel friction (parameter MU=O). At Gamma Shielding component interface with encompassing steel, steel-to-lead friction factor MU=0.25.

6.5.3. Top Cover Plate Bolts The Top Cover Plate bolt response to the imposed loads is modeled with nonlinear springs (COMBIN39) in tensile and shear directions. Because bolt holes in Top Cover Plate have been modeled explicitly, the top end nodes of bolt elements are coupled with Top Cover Plate interface be means of RBE3 ANSYS constraint equations. RBE3 constraint equations are allowing for more realistic modeling of shear interaction between bolts and plate interface by means of distributed forces/moments on nodes of top cover plate.

Spring specifications are based on bolt material and geometrical data summarized in Table 10, below.

Table 10 Lid Bolt Input Data [8], [9], [10]

i BOLT MATERIAL SA193 Gr B7 NUH32PHB Top Cover Plate Bolts 1 75-5UNC-2A 5.5"LG MATERIAL SA193 Gr B7 1CR+0.2MO @400 -F Su 125000 psi Sy [ksi] 91500 psi E '2.790E+07 psi bolt diameter Db 1.75 in minimum diameter at shank Dbh 1.75 in

of threads per inch N 5.0 Esmin - min pitch diameter Esmin 1.6085 in minor diameter -conservative Droot 1.4900 in

<diameter for tensile stress Dba 1.5435 in bolt length Lb 5.5 Aten 1.8712 in2

icross sections Aroot 1.7437 in22 Anom 2.4053 in cover thickness at bolt location tbc 2.5000 Effective length Lbm tbc+1/2*Db 3.375 in Slength of thread (Min) 4 in length in Plate 3.0000 in Note: Aten =iT*(Esmin/2-0.16238/N) 2 (for Su>100 ksi), Aroot =t/4*(Db-1.3/N) 2 (conservative)

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation RevisionNo.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 17 of 60 Axial Direction:

In the axial (tensile) direction, the springs are soft in compression since the bolts will carry no compressive loads (compression is carried by contacts between the top cover plate and the Top Flange). Tensile stiffness in the elastic range is as shown below in Table 11. After stress reaches yield, stiffness is reduced arbitrarily by a factor of 100 to account conservatively for softer bolt response in plastic range.

The evaluation worksheet of the spring specification is provided below in Table 11.

Transverse direction:

Shear stiffness is modeled in three parts: (1) initially, for displacements less than the radial clearance between the nominal bolt diameter and the bolt hole, the spring is soft. (2) Stiffness in the elastic range is then calculated as the stiffness of a shear beam. (3) After reaching shear yield, stiffness is reduced arbitrarily by 100.

The evaluation worksheet of spring specification for transverse (shear) directions is provided below in Table 12.

Table 11 Specification of COMBIN39 Elements in Tensile Direction TENSILE DIRECTION Bolt yieldingSy @400 -F 9.150E+04 Kaxial=Atensile*E/L=Aten*E/Lbm 1.547E+07 lb/in Tensile force at yielding tFy=Sy*Atensile 171219 lb displacement for yielding 5=Fy/Kaxial 0.0111 Tension - adjustment for final slope xl= 0 fl 0 x2= 0.0111 f2 1712191 x3= 1.0111 f3=f2+(x3-x2)*k3 f3=f2+(x3-x2)*k3 k3=k2/100 f3= 325908 curve points speqific~ation~ ~ tension with yielding 7point F~

2 0 4 1 0111Y 325908Y

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 18 of 60 Table 12 Specification of COMBIN39 Elements in Shear Direction [10]

SHEAR DIRECTIONS (Roark's formulas ... 7Ed, Section 8.10) deflection Ys due to shear load P:

Ys=F*(P*L/A*G)

F=10/9 (for cylindrical solid) 1.1111111 G=E/(2*(I+NI)) 1.07E+07 Kshear=PYs=ArotG/(FL) 4.99E+06 bolt hole .1.88 bolt radial clearance 0.065 low stiffnesss for radial displacements lesser than bolt clearance 0.065 Scurve points 8 F 1 -1.065 -4.99E+06 2 -0.065 -1000 3 0 0 4 0.065 1000!

5 1.065 4.99E+06i Bolt Shear Yielding Assume Sys=0.577* Sy 5.28E+04 psi Fys=Sys*AIroot 92057.5 displacement for yielding 5=Fys/Kshe ~ar 0.018450 in total displacement for yielding 5ys=gap +6 0.0835 in Shear- adjustment for final slope F=Kshear*x k2=Kshear 4.99E+06 xl 0.065 f1=1000 1000 x2 0.0835 f2=fl+(x2-xl)*k2 x3 1.0835 f3=f2+(x3-x2)*k3 f2=fl+(x2-xl)*k2 k2=Kshear f2= 93058 f3=f2+(x3-x2)*k3 k3=k2/1 00 f3= 142953 j I

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212

/A AR EVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 19 of 60 6.5.4. Loads Weight Load The mass of components modeled and total mass of the package are presented in Table 13 below.

Outer castable NS-3 neutron shield (located outside of cask shell) and top castable NS-3 neutron shield (located outside of top cover plate) are not included in the model. Because these components contribute noticeably to the overall mass of the cask, the masses of these components are conservatively estimated as 16000 lb (outer shield) and 1400 lb (top end shield and modeled as surface masses.

Table 13 Mass of Cask Components ELEMENT MATERIAL INPUT COMPONENT TYPE TYPE COMPONENT DENSITY NUMBER NUMBER MASS

[ib/in3] [lb]

Structural Shell 1 1 0.29000 9369 Inner Shell 2 2 0.29000 3950 Top Cover Plate 3 3 0.29000 1938 Top Flange 4 4 0.29000 1542 Bottom Support Ring 5 5 0,29000 1765 Bottom Cover Plate 6 6 0.29000 841 RAM Access Ring 7 7 0.29000 147 Bottom End Plate 8 8 0.29000 403 Lead Shielding 18 18 0.41088 30671 Bottom Neutron Shielding 19 19 0.086806 570 Side Neutron Shield Assembly 14 14 3.8829 8000 Top Neutron Shield Assembly 21 21 3.7684 700 Cask Weight (Half Symmetry Model) 59896 Cask Weight (Total) 119792 Payload 96000 Total Weight of Package Analyzed 215792 DSC Load DSC impact is applied to cask model based on the assumption of DSC weight of 96 kips. This value of DSC weight envelops DSC weight value calculated in Reference [1]. The DSC structure impact is not modeled explicitly but simulated as a profiled contact pressure load.

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 20 of 60 In case of side drop accident simulation the load is imposed as a pressure load distributed uniformly in axial direction over the effective length of inner shell and as the cosine shaped function in circumferential direction over the +/-450 angle span (450 angle in 180-degree symmetry model). The specification of cosine shape function is provided in the section below.

In the case of top end drop the contact pressure load is defined as distributed uniformly over the contact area of DSC top end area with cask body.

Cosine Distributed Pressure Loading 0

The circumferential cosine distribution of pressure over a pressure load half angle, max, is calculated as follows:

2 Pi = Pmax COS (ro, / 0,max) where:

P, = Pressure load at the angle 9,.

PMrax Peak pressure load, at the base of the interface (0j-0).

0, = Circumferential angle corresponding to location of interest.

The circumferential distribution of pressure is illustrated in following sketch:

Figure 2 Circumferential Cosine Pressure Load Distribution The peak pressure load, Pmax, can be determined by setting the integral of the vertical pressure components, Q,, equal to the net force in transverse direction, F(:

Ft = (Transverse Component of G-load)x (Imposed Weight Load)= Gt x W as follows:

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AR EVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 21 of 60 GtxW=Ft= fQiLRdO. = Pfcos(0,)LRdOi, = f Pmax Cos 20 acos(O,)LRdO,

-- , Y. 0ma)

P,-' 0- °LR s 7W., + Cos os+ 0ol- 0i]dO0 'maxLRi 2 -OL ( 20m.x ) 20max 7 In above formulas:

0, = Position angle of circumferential distribution

-+/-Omax = Circumferential span of pressure load Ft = Net force in the transverse direction L = Axial span of pressure load R = Radius of pressure load surface Gt =Acceleration in the transverse direction of cask Rearranging terms gives the peak pressure, Pmrx, as follows:

-1

= ~W Gma + 0m-LxR 2 Oj Therefore, the pressure at any circumferential location is given by:

=i [~f(2~0 +

(____,

cosi-20m,,x (20m,,

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 22 of 60 For example, the internal pressure due to payload applied for the 75G Side Drop case, distributed over +/-450 angle circumferentially, with axial span 168.25 inch and inner shell radius 34.0 inch can be calculated as follows:

P=75x96000 x1 180x0 Pi = 75 x900x Cos( 18)x01335psi 168.25 x 34.0 sin(90 + 45) + sin(90 - 45) 2x45

(-*-180 )+1 (*-180 -)

2x45 2x45 Pressure value calculated above is the peak pressure load Pmax at interface base (circumferential angle 00). Magnitudes of peak pressure Pmax are calculated by ANSYS.

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 23 of 60 6.5.5. ANSYS Model Specifications Table 14 shows ANSYS element types used to represent in analyses structural components of cask design.

Table 14 ANSYS Elements Specifications MATERIAL ELEMENT 3D MODEL COMPONENT TYPE TYPE NUMBER NUMBER Outer Shell. 1 1 SOLID45 Inner Shell 2 2 SOLID45 Lid 3 3 SOLID45 Top Flange 4 4 SOLID45 Bottom Flange 5 5 SOLID45 Bottom Plate 6 6 SOLID45 RAM Access Ring 7 7 SOLID45 Bottom End Plate 8 8 SOLID45 Top Cover Plate Bolts (Radial Shear Interaction)

Top Cover Plate Bolts (Tangential Shear Interaction)

Top Cover Plate Bolts 9 393 COMBIN39 (Axial Interaction)

Outer Neutron Shield Assembly 14 14 SURF154 Gamma Shield 18 18 SOLID45 Bottom Neutron Shield 19 19 SOLID45 Top Neutron Shield Assembly 21 21 SURF154 RBE3 Sustaining Element 99 99 MASS21

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AR EVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 24 of 60 Table 15 shows specification of the contact interfaces between material components done by means of surface contact elements (elements CONTA1 73, TARGE1 70).

Table 15 ANSYS Elements Specifications - Contact elements Target Contact Element Element Element Real Material Type Contact Interface Description Constant Type Type Number Number Number Number.

Top Cover Plate and Top Flange 1101-1108 101-108 101-108 11 Chamfer Interface (Figure 6)

Top Cover Plate and Top Flange Interface 1111-1118 111-118 111-118 11 Clamping Interface (Figure 6)

Bottom Neutron Shield Encasing Surface 1121 121 121 12 (Figure 8)

Bottom Cover Plate to RAM Access Ring 1131 131 131 20 (between grove welds)

Lead Shielding Contact Surface 1201-1210 201-210 201-280 13 (Figure 7) 1201-1210_201-210_201-280_13 6.5.6. Boundary Conditions The model was adapted to represent 180-degree part of cask structure with symmetrical boundary conditions.

Supplementary boundary conditions refer to specific load case scenario. In the case of 75G side drop cask structural shell is fixed for a small arc 150 (180-degree model) in circumferential direction to simulate semi-rigid impact conditions and minimal boundary conditions in z direction are applied to avoid rigid body motion of model. Boundary conditions for side drop case are illustrated in Figure 9.

In case of 75G Top End Drop analyses, the cask model is fixed minimally in lateral direction to avoid rigid body motion of model, while contact with impact surface is simulated by means surface contact elements with fixed rigid impact target plane.

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation RevisionNo.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 25 of 60

7. Accidents Analyzed 7.1. 75G Side Drop The weight of the DSC is imposed as a pressure load distributed uniformly in axial direction over the effective longitudinal span of inner shell and as the cosine shaped function in tangential direction over the +/-450 angle span (450 angle in 180-degree symmetry model). The maximum of pressure is modeled at cask bottom (model symmetry line) is reaching 1335 psig at 75G inertia load.

The cosine distribution of contact pressure constitutes the standard, conservative approach used in side drop cask analyzes [12].

In the case of 75G side drop cask structural shell is fixed at the small 150 arc in circumferential direction to simulate semi-rigid impact conditions and minimal boundary conditions in z direction are applied to avoid rigid body motion of model. Such method of modeling of impact interface constitutes valid simulation semi-rigid interface of impact interface in static analyses.

The boundary conditions and DSC load distribution are shown in Figure 9 and Figure 10.

7.2. 75G Top End Drop The weight of DSC is imposed as a pressure load distributed uniformly on inner surface of Top Cover Plate. The area of inner surface amounts 3588.6 in2 (taken from ANSYS model). In result pressure for 75G top end drop as 75x96000/3588.6 =2006.35 psig.

Top end drop impact interface is modeled by means of surface contact elements with rigid flat surface target. The boundary conditions and DSC load distribution are shown in Figure 11.

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 26 of 60

8. Stress Results 8.1. Stress ClassificationPaths Per ASME code requirements, stress classification sections or lines (paths) should comprise all sections of the steel structure that potentially can contribute to the design failure.

The path locations are described in Table 16 and illustrated in Figure 27 through Figure 29.

In order to achieve an adequate amount of information regarding each category of ASME code primary or secondary stresses for all cask components, stress information is collected for a comprehensive, pre-structured set of stress classification lines (paths).

Table 16 Stress Paths Component Stress Paths Structural Shell Paths are defined using all nodal points on the inside shell surface (shell ID) to the corresponding point on the shell OD.

Inner Shell Paths are defined using all nodal points on the inside shell surface (shell ID) to the corresponding point on the shell OD.

Paths are defined using nodal points on the inside face of the plate to the corresponding point on the outside surface.

Paths are defined from nodes on the inner surface to the Top Flange corresponding nodes on the outer surface of cylinder and cone segments of flange for all meaningful stress flow routes Paths are defined from all nodes on the inner surface to the Bottom Support Ring corresponding nodes on the outer surface of cylinder and cone segments of flange for all meaningful stress flow routes.

Bottom Cover Plate Paths are defined using all nodal points on the inside face of the plate to the corresponding points on the outside surface.

Paths are defined using all nodal points on the inside face of the plate to the corresponding points on the outside surface.

Paths are defined from nodes on the inside surface to the Ram Access Ring corresponding nodes on the outer surface of the ring cylinder For shell and plate sections of the cask structure, the ASME code stress classification paths are predefined at all section locations as the across the wall thickness paths, normal to the cylinder or plate section mid-plane.

For more complicated shapes of cask components, the stress paths are also defined for most surface-node-to-surface-node trajectories, across the wall thickness, in locations and orientations meaningful for anticipated stress flow routes.

Path locations include all structure sections expected to provide meaningful information about stress flow.

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 27 of 60 In specification of path locations, no consideration is taken to separate paths defined at structural discontinuities from paths remote from structural discontinuities. Therefore, the average stresses over wall thickness can potentially represent equally the general primary membrane, or local primary membrane stresses; or can have features of secondary stresses. All wall averaged stresses taken from such broad collection of paths are assessed against the general primary membrane stress (PM) - as primary screening criterion to secure conservatism of stress screening methodology. The complete description of applied stress screening methodology, based on collected information about path stresses, is provided below.

Identification and qualification of primary stresses for Top Cover Plate in the side drop event required a more refined and laborious approach. Stress data interpretation for the plate required additional sorting out of local bearing stresses and stresses induced by local discontinuities that do not represent the primary stress designation in the ASME code. The stress qualification procedure for Top Cover Plate is described in detail in Section 8.3.

8.2. Stress QualificationMethod Stress information collected at predefined paths and/or stress qualification procedure is based on the method employed in the ANSYS code. The method used in ANSYS is based on Gordon methodology [2], [11]. Stress result data are mapped onto a path by first interpolating individually stress components (ax, ay, az, ay, yxy,z,) to the path. Then, stress averaging through the wall path and the linearization are done independently for all six stress components.

Principal membrane stresses and membrane stress intensities are derived from membrane parts of the individual stress components. Similarly, linearized principal stresses and linearized stress intensity at the path section surface are derived from linearized individual stress components of that surface.

In the case of elastic-plastic stress analysis, the stress path evaluation in ANSYS brings the information about the membrane stress for the path (classified conservatively as PM stress), as well as the maximum stress intensity (classified conservatively as the primary stress) for the classification path, derived from the path total (not linearized) stresses.

Conservatively no distinction is assumed between paths located at gross or local discontinuities and areas remote from these discontinuities, and all path averaged stresses (including general primary stress intensities, PM, and local primary stress intensities, PL) are classified conservatively and reported as PM stresses and assessed against PM stress allowable.

Stress path evaluation in ANSYS brings also an information about the maximum stress intensity at the classification paths (classified conservatively as the primary stress), derived from the total (not linearized) path stresses. These values of maximum stress intensity are assessed against maximum stress intensity allowables, (PL+PB), as well as reported conservatively as the upper bounds of primary local stresses PL (PB=O), and assessed against PL stress allowables. Such approach secures both, the conservatism of assessments, as well as the efficiency of stress qualification procedure.

In case when obtained stresses exceed conservative criteria, the detail examination of stresses and the qualification of stress category is initiated. In the last resort the limit load collapse analysis is performed and studied to ensure that overall failure due to plastic hinge does not occur.

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 28 of 60 8.3. Analysis of Results - Discussion 8.3.1. Summary of Results Table 17 and Table 18 show primary stresses obtained by means of automated, conservative stress screening procedure described in Section 8.2. Table 17 shows stresses obtained for 75G Side Drop case, while Table 18 shows stress results for 75G Top End Drop case. Both tables compare obtained stresses against stress allowable values delineated in Section 5.

Table 17 Stress Results - 75G Side Drop Case Side Drop - 75G Load CCNPP FC Transfer Cask Side Drop-_75_Loa Max Stress [ksi] Allowable [ksi] Material Properties [ksi

_ _ _ _ _ _ Stress Ratio r_

compnentMaterial Component Specification PM PL PL+PB PM PL PL+PB Sy Su Sm I Structural Shell SA-516 Type 70 39.9 51.2 51.2 49.0 63.0 63.0 32.6 70 21.7 Carbon Steel Plate 81.5% 81.2% 81.2%

2 Inner Shell SA-240 Type 304 42.0 44.3 44.3 45.1 58.0 58.0 20.7 64.4 18.7 Stainless Steel Plate 93.1% 76.4% 76.4%

3 Top Cover Plate SA-240 Type 304 35.3N' 45.4(* 47.9(*) 45.1 58.0 58.0 20.7 64.4 18.7 Stainless Steel Plate 78.3% 78.3% 82.6%° 4 Top Flange SA-182 Type F304N 36.5 51.6 51.6 51.2 65.9 65.9 22.7 73.2 20.3 Stainless Steel Forging 71.2% 78.3% 78.3%

5 Bottom Support Ring SA-182 Type F304N 41.0 44.2 44.2 51.2 65.9 65.9 22.7 73.2 20.3 Stainless Steel Forging 80.1% 67.0% 67.0%

6 Bottom Cover Plate SA-240 Type 304 39.4 45.1 45.1 45.1 58.0 58.0 20.7 64.4 18.7 Stainless Steel Plate 87.4% 77.8% 77.8%

7 RAM Access Ring SA-182 Type F304N 29.0 42.6 42.6 51.2 65.9 65.9 22.7 73.2 20.3 Stainless Steel Forging 56.6% 64.7% 64.7%

8 Bottom End Plate SA-240 Type 304 41.1 53.4 53.4 45.1 58.0 58.0 20.7 64.4 18.7 Stainless Steel Plate 91.2% 92.1% 92.1%

Note (*): Stresses for Top Cover Plate are qualified individually based on the separate, detailed qualification of the path stress data that sorted out data that do not have mandatory characteristics of the ASME categories of primary stress. (See Section 8.3.2 for discussion of Top Cover Plate stress evaluation).

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation RevisionNo.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 29 of 60 Table 18 Stress Results - 75G Top End Drop Case CCNPP FC Transfer Cask Top End Drop - 75G Load Max Stress [ksi] Allowable [ksi] Material Properties [ksil

___________Stress Ratio [%]_ _

CompnentMaterial Component Specification PM PL PL+PB PM PL PL+PB Sy Su Sm 1 Structural Shell SA-516 Type 70 16.3 17.2 17.2 49.0 63.0 63.0 32.6 70 21.7 Carbon Steel Plate 33.2% 27.3% 27.3%

2 Inner Shell SA-240 Type 304 20.3 23.0 23.0 45.1 58.0 58.0 20.7 64.4 18.7 Stainless Steel Plate 45.1% 39.6% 39.6%

3 Top Cover Plate SA-240 Type 304 21.5 23.8 23.8 45.1 58.0 58.0 20.7 64.4 18.7 Stainless Steel Plate 47.6% 41.1% 41.1%

4 Top Flange SA-182 Type F304N 17.5 21.3 21.3 51.2 65.9 65.9 22.7 73.2 20.3 Stainless Steel Forging 34,1% 32.3% 32.3%

5 Bottom Support Ring SA-182 Type F304N 2.8 13.6 13.6 51.2 65.9 65.9 22.7 73.2 20.3 Stainless Steel Forging 5.5% 20.7% 20.7%

6 Bottom Cover Plate SA-240 Type 304 2.6 14.7 14.7 45.1 58.0 58.0 20.7 64.4 18.7 Stainless Steel Plate 5.7% 25.4% 25.4%

7 RAM Access Ring SA-182 Type F304N 4.5 10.5 10.5 51.2 65.9 65.9 22.7 73.2 20.3 Stainless Steel Forging 8.8% 15.9% 15.9%

8 Bottom End Plate SA-240 Type 304 3.3 6.8 6.8 45.1 58.0 58.0 20.7 64.4 18.7 Stainless Steel Plate 7.3% 11.7% 11.7%

The standard, conservative stress screening procedure, described in Section 8.2, shows that all component stresses pass stress criteria, except of stresses at the Top Cover Plate component in the side drop event. In 75G side drop case, the original, automated stress screening procedure described in Section 8.2, has led in Top Cover Plate to stress magnitudes: 67.9 ksi - for the maximum wall averaged stress intensity, and 84.0 ksi - for the maximum surface stress intensity.

Therefore, the more thorough stress qualification for Top Cover Plate, based on the collected stress data, has been carried out that sorted out data that do not have legitimate characteristics of the ASME categories of primary stress.

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCL-AR INC.

Page: 30 of 60 Values of PM and PL stresses, and value of maximum stress intensity stress, PL+PB, obtained in the detailed stress qualification procedure pass stress criteria. These values were tabulated in Table 17, while the method used in the stress qualification is described in the following section.

In order to evade indistinctness in ASME code stress classifications due to provisional character of stress classification in case of the Top Cover Plate component, and to determine whether factual, observed stress pattern can lead to not acceptable failure mode, the collapse-load-limit-analysis was performed in accordance with rules of Appendix F of ASME code for side drop event.

The collapse-load-limit-analysis limit load value, for the side drop accident, also passed ASME code criteria (83.3G inertia load). The collapse-load-limit-analysis for the side drop accident scenario run was not showing any abnormal behavior and deterioration of solution convergence until 85G load.

8.3.2. Stress Evaluation Details Visual presentation of stresses, in particular stresses of Top Cover Plate, is enclosed in the Appendix (Figure 12 through Figure 26). Plots show that all distinguishably higher surface stresses are localized in close proximity to the top-cover-plate-to-flange contact interfaces, as well as in the area adjacent to the side drop impact interface (150 arc with boundary conditions at lid bottom).

These stresses can be classified as the bearing stresses caused by the contact pressure load imposed on the contact interfaces, or reaction forces on impact interface. ASME code does not put a cap on bearing stresses for Service Level D conditions. Therefore, the observed stresses are deemed acceptable as the local bearing stresses as long as they do not contribute to not acceptable failure mode of Top Cover Plate, like excessive plastic deformation, or plastic hinge.

The deformation mode of Top Cover Plate is documented in Figure 13 and Figure 14. The plate deformation is showing regions of local bending near bolt heads as well as very moderate whole lid component bending. The most deformed section is the 1.5 thick bottom section of the plate in close proximity to the boundary condition region.

In order to classify obtained stresses and set up the justifiable method to sort out stresses that do not contribute to gross failure of the whole component, the Top Cover Plate stress has been analyzed separately for the following Top Cover Plate sections (Figure 30):

1.5 inch thick outer sections, numbered 1 through 9, representing vent opening segments,

2.5 inch thick outer sections, A through H, representing bolt fastening segments,

3.0 inch thick Central Section; main part of lid for which deformation and stresses are of primary concern to overall failure.

Figure 31 through Figure 33 show the wall averaged stresses and the surface stresses, collected from all qualification paths (Figure 29).

One can note that all distinguishably high stresses for Sections 1-9 are bearing stresses, occurring at the impact-boundary-conditions area (Section 9), or the stresses induced by structural discontinuity at the close proximity to the onset of boundary conditions area (Section 8). These stresses and deformations are deemed very local and are transferred directly to the central part of the lid, while bearing stress magnitudes are not limited for Service Level D conditions.

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AR EVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 31 of 60 The stresses for sections A through H are also moderate, except for the bearing load areas (Sections A, B and H). The highest stress level is observed in section H. These high magnitude stresses are localized around the region of bottom bolt hole and are caused by bolt hole deformation due to its proximity of impact interface.

The deformation and stresses can be deemed local and do not contribute directly to gross deformation of the lid. The presence of a bolt hole close to the impact interface is softening the lid structure at its bottom. Therefore the deformation and stresses at lid concentrate at its bottom section H in the vicinity of the bolt hole.

Detailed examination of collected stress data indicate that the effect of the bolt hole deformation starts at circumferential area 0 = 163.2 and ends at 0 = 173.7. Therefore, stresses generated in Central Section at this angle sector, at its vicinity to Outer Section H (radial coordinate 33.2 through 34.9), should not be considered in the classification of primary general membrane stress intensity PM, although they need to be reviewed as the potential local primary stresses, PL.

Therefore using wall averaged stress data, illustrated on Figure 31 through Figure 33, one can obtain realistic estimation for primary general membrane stress PM=35288.9 psi, and using surface stress data one can obtain maximum stress intensity, PM/PL+PB = 47904.6 psi.

The postulated envelope for primary local membrane stress is PL=45429.0 psi. That magnitude is based on the wall averaged stress for lid Central Section obtained at the interface of Central Section with Outer Section H, that is deemed characteristic and dominated stress level at that interface.

The table below documents path information data for stress values PM, PL, and PL+PB described above:

Stress Stress Value Circumferential Vertical Radial Category [psi] Coordinate 0 (*) Coordinate X Coordinate R (*)

[deg] [in] [in]

PM 35,288.9 162.0 9.6 32.0 PL 45,429.0 167.3 7.3 33.5 PM+PB 47,904.6 180.0 9.2 30.8 Note (*): ANSYS coordinate system.

Due to provisional character of the determination process of ASME code primary stress values, and to expose definitively whether primary stress pattern can lead to not acceptable failure mode, the collapse limit load analysis was performed in accordance with rules of Appendix F of ASME code for the side drop event.

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 32 of 60 The collapse-load-limit-analysis for the side drop accident scenario run was not showing any abnormal behavior and deterioration of solution convergence until 85G load. At 85.48G, last saved converged solution has been obtained. Such magnitude of collapse load secures sufficient safety margin with regard to postulated nominal 75G load. As it is estimated in Section 5, collapse load for cask design needs to exceed 83.3G inertia load to pass ASME code criteria.

Obtained estimation of 85G for collapse load is deemed conservative, because the observed cause of convergence failure of collapse-load-limit-analysis at loads exceeding 85G appeared the local deformation of bolt hole at close proximity to impact interface, exceeding application range of RBE3 type of constraints equations.

The stress and displacement status during collapse load analysis is documented in Figure 20 and Figure 19, respectively. The plots confirm that even the high local stresses do not cause Top Cover Plate collapse.

The effect of the prying action of Top Cover Plate (due to its deformation) onto the plate bolts in the result of 75G side drop can be estimated by analyzing magnitudes of axial forces in the bolts. The table below presents bolt forces (output quantity SMISCI for COMBIN39 elements) of all bolts of the Top Cover Plate. Pictorial presentation of the tabulated forces and bolt elements is provided in the Figure 34. The table shows also bolt average tensile stresses (per Table 10, bolt tensile cross section Aten = 1.8712 in2 was used in the stress determination) and compares these stresses to bolt stress allowable.

Bolt Bolt Circumferential Bolt Element Bolt Tensile Average Tensile Stress Ratio (1)

Number Coordinate Number Force Stress [%]

1 11.25 125664 87113 46554 53.2%

2 33.75 125668 74701 39921 45.6%

3 56.25 125672 49011 26192 29.9%

4 78.75 125676 24894 13303 15.2%

5 101.25 125680 14356 7672 8.8%

6 123.75 125684 8191.9 4378 5.0%

7 146.25 125688 43010 22985 26.3%

8 168.75 125692 163170 87199 99.7%

Note 1: Ratio of average tensile stress to average tensile stress allowable min(Sy,0.7Su)=87.5 ksi [3].

One can notice that the particularly high force is exerted onto the bottom bolt (bolt number 8),

generating bolt stress magnitude close to the stress allowable (stress ratio 99.7%). It is presumed that this bolt can fail. Tensile forces of all other bolts are significantly lower. One can anticipate, therefore, that growing local deformation of Top Cover Plate can cause no more than two bottom bolts to fail under prying loads and in result that Top Cover Plate can locally separate from the flange at the impact region. Such consequences of the 75G impact are deemed acceptable.

Due to the oversized 1.88 inch bolt holes, the Top Cover Plate does not depend on bolts to resist transverse shear loads. Therefore bolts are not loaded in shear and, as the result, shear loads and bending are not the design consideration.

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 33 of 60

9. Conclusions The calculation has been construed to validate the design of NUH32PHB cask for the accident condition 75G side drop and 75G end drop scenarios. The detailed results and stress qualification discussion is documented in Section 8.3. The calculation shows that new design version of Top Cover Plate, allowing for vent openings, satisfies ASME code criteria for the analyzed events.

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 34 of 60

10. Appendix

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 35 of 60 II AN Figure 3 NUHOMS 32PHB Model - Mesh - General View

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 36 of 60 NUH32PHB Cask Model- Mesh Inuh32phb cask 3D model - hac Figure 4 NUHOMS 32PHB Model - Mesh Details - Top & Bottom of Cask

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

Calculation RevisionNo.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 37 of 60 AN NLH32 II Figure 5 NUHOMS 32PHB Model - Mesh Details - Top Cover Plate Area

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation RevisionNo.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 38 of 60 AN REAL N nuh32phb - top cover plate to top flange contact interface - contact elements AN nuh32phb -top cover plate to top flange contact interface -t Figure 6 Top Cover Plate Interface - Contact Elements & Target Elements

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AR EVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 39 of 60 l eJ nuh32phb - lead shielding contact elements Figure 7 Lead Shielding Contact Elements Figure 8 NS-3 Shielding Contact Elements

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AR EVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 40 of 60 nuh32phbcaskmod4975sd6 load=75g & payload U mm ELEMENTS AN MAT NUM nuh32phbcaskmod4g75sd6 load=75g & payload Figure 9 Side Drop Boundary Conditions

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation, Revision No.:

TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 41 of 60 ELEMENTS MAT NUM 14 1333 nuh32Dhbcaskmod4a75sd6 load 75o & payload Figure 10 Side Drop Pressure Load Distribution mN ELEMENTS MAT NUM 2CF nuh32phboaskmod4g75top8 load=75g & payload Figure 11 Top End Drop Pressure Load Distribution & BC

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation RevisionNo.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 42 of 60 AN NODAL SOLUTION SUB =37 TIME=75 SINT (AVG)

DMX =,651506 SMN =7.282 SMX =136589 7.282 30359 60710 15183 45534 75886 106237 136589 nuh32phbcaskmod4q75sd6 load=75g & payload I m NODAL SOLUTION kAN STEP=3 SUB =37 TIME=75 SINT (AVG)

DMX =.651506 SMN =7.282 SmX =136589 7.282 30359 60710 91062 121413 15183 45534 75886 106237 136589 nuh32phbcaskmod4975sd6 load=75g & payload Figure 12 75G Side Drop Results - Overall Stress Distribution

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AR EVA Calculation, Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 43 of 60 NODAL SOLUTION STEP=3 SUB =37 TIME=7 5 UZ (AVG)

RSYS=0 DMX =.414387 SMN = 013973 SMX = .28214

.013973 .073566 .133159 .192751 .252344

.04377 .103362 .162955 .222548 .28214 nuh32Dhbcaskmod4a75sd6 load=75a & oavload II U.

NODAL SOLUTION AN STEP=3 SUB =37 TIME=75 USUM (AVG)

RSYS=Q DMX =.414387 SMN =.050927 SMX =.414387

.050927 .131696 .212465 .293233 .374002

.091311 17208 252849 .333618 .414387 nuh32phbcaskmod4g75sd6 load=75g & payload Figure 13 75G Side Drop Results - Deformation Mode

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: I TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 44 of 60 NODAL SOLUTION AIUM STEP=3 SUB =37 TIME=7 5 UX (AVG)

RSYS=0 014X =.414387 SMN =.384063 SMX =.01223 223 nuh32Dhbcaskrnod4a75sd6 lod=5 &186 Davl80 Figure 14 75G Side Drop Results - Deformation Mode (cd)

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 Calculation RevisionNo.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 45 of 60 NODAL SOLUTION STEP=3 SUB =37 TIME=75 SINT (AVG)

DMX =414387 SMN =921.375 SMX =136589 921.375 31070 61218 91366 121515 15996 46144 76292 106440 136589 nuh32phbcaskmod4g75sd6 load=75g & payload Figure 15 75G Side Drop Results - Top Cover Plate Inner Side - Surface Stress

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 46 of 60 ODAL SOLUTION STEP=3 SUB =37 SINT (AVG)

TIME=75 DMX =.414387 SMN =921.375 m SMX =136589 155136589 AN SOLUTION STEP=3 SUB =37 TIME=75 (AVG)

=.414387

=921.375

=136589 921. 375 31070 61218 91366 121515 15996 46144 76292 106440 136589 nuh32phbcaskmod4g75sd6 load=75g & payload Figure 16 75G Side Drop Results - Top Cover Plate Bottom Side - Surface Stress

In Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation RevisionNo.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 47 of 60 NODAL SOLUTION AN STEP=3 SUB =37 TIME=75 NLSEPL (AI RSYS 0 DMX =.41438 SMN =20700 SMX =125358 U'

NODAL SOLUT]

STEP=3 SUB =37 TIME=75 NLSEPL (A\

RSYS=0 DMX =.41438' SMN =20700 SMX =125358 20700 43957 67215 90472 32329 55586 7884 3 nuh32nhbcaskmod4a75sd6 load=75a & Davload Figure 17 75G Side Drop Results - Top Cover Plate - Plastic Stress NLSEPL

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation RevisionNo.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 48 of 60 NODAL SOLUTION AN STEP=3 SUB =37 rINE=75 DMx =615567 SMN =372.947

\L 372.947 12459 24545 36631 48717 6416 18502 30588 42674 54760 nuh32phbcaskmod4q75sd6 load=75q & payload I m NODAL SOLUTION AN STEP=3 SUB =37 TIME= 75 SINT (AVG)

DMX =.615567 SMN =372.947 SMX =54760 48717 36631 372.947 12459 24545 54760 6416 18502 30588 42674 nuh32phbcaskmod4q75sd6 load=75q & payload Figure 18 75G Side Drop Results - Cask Bottom Assembly - Surface Stress

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 49 of 60 AN p

NODAL SOLUTION STEP=8 SUB =15 TIME=85.481 UZ (AVG)

RSYS=0 DMX -1.275 SMN =-.59203 SMX =1.052

.59203 226633 .138763 .50416 .869557

-409332 >043935 .321462 .686599 1.052 nuh32phbcaskmod4liniql20sdl2 load=90Q & payload Figure 19 85.48G Side Drop Limit Analysis Results - Top Cover Plate - Deformation Mode NODAL SOLUTION AN STEP=8 SUB =15 TIME= 85.481 SINT (AVG)

DMX =1.275 SMN =1092 SMX =64603

-I 1092 15206 29319 4 34 32 57546 8149 22262 36376 50489 64603 nuh32phbcaskmod4liin1g20sd12 load=90q & payload Figure 20 85.48G Side Drop Limit Analysis Results - Top Cover Plate - Surface Stress

A AREVA Calculation TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

NODAL STEP=3 SOI**M SUB =37 DMX =.684 SMN =11 ,

11.535 5481 8216 10951 16420 21889 n1uh32phbcaskmod4675too8 load8756 & pavload n

PA M 1u.h5 3 5 "hI'll" 21"46 54t81 8216 10951 13685 16420 19155 21889 24624 nuh32phbcaskmod4975top8 load=75g & payload Figure 21 75G Top End Drop - Surface Stress Distribution - Overall View

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 51 of 60 NODAL SOLUTION AN STEP=3 SUB =37 TIME=75 USUM (AVG)

RSYS=0 DMX =.006572 SMN =.480E-03 SMX =.006572

.480E-03 .001834 ,00251 .004541 .005895

.001157 .002511 .005218 .006572 nuh32phbcaskmod4q75top8 load=75q & paylo Figure 22 75G Top End Drop - Top Cover Plate - Deformation Mode NODAL SOLUTION AN STEP=3 SUB =37 TIME=75 NLSEPL (AVG)

RSYS=O DMX =.006572 SMN =20700 SMX =21422 j

20700 20861 21021 21182 21342 20780 20941 21101 21262 21422 nuh32phbcaskmod4g75top8 load=75g & payload Figure 23 75G Top End Drop - Top Cover Plate - Plastic Stress NLSEPL

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 52 of 60 NODAL SOLUTION AN STEP=3 SUB =37 TIME=75 SINT (AVG)

DMX =. 006572 SMN =640.43 SMX =24624 ii 640.43 5970 11300 16630 21959 3305 8635 13965 19295 24624 nuh32phbcaskmod4q75top8 load=75q & payload Figure 24 75G Top End Drop - Top Cover Plate - Surface Stress NODAL SOLUTION AN STEP= 3 SUB =37 TIME=7 5 SINT (AVG)

DMX =.006572 SMN =640.43 SMX =24624 16630 21959 3305 86 13965 19295 24624 nuh32phbcaskmod4q75top8 load=7 Load Figure 25 75G Top End Drop - Top Cover Plate - Surface Stress

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 53 of 60 NODAL SOLUTION AN STEP=3 SUB =37 TIMES75 SINT (AVG)

DMX =.115479 SMN =220.545 SMX =14719

~~aaaaaa~

220.545 3442 6664 9886 13108 1831 5053 8275 11497 14719 nuh32phbcaskmod4q75toi8 load=75a & pavload NODAL SOLUTION IN STEP=3 SUB =37 TIME=75 SINT (AVG)

DMX =.115479 SMN =220.545 SMX =14719 220.545 3442 6664 9886 13108 1831 5053 8275 11497 14719 nuh32phbcaskmod4q75top8 load=75o & payload Figure 26 75G Top End Drop - Cask Bottom Assembly - Surface Stress

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 54 of 60 AN nuh32phbcask - paths at symmetry plane - top end of cask Figure 27 Stress Classification Paths - Symmetry Plane - Top End of Cask 1k,141JIlsIpajij Iif151~ I ik I 1~I 45kne14ija~ifIieji I.i n Uh32phb cask - paths at symmetry plane - bottom end of cask Figure 28 Stress Classification Paths - Symmetry Plane - Bottom End of Cask

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation RevisionNo.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 55 of 60 nuh32phb cask - paths at top cover plate nuh32phb cask - paths at top cover plate Figure 29 Stress Classification Paths - Top Cover Plate

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation RevisionNo.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 56 of 60 AN

-)

0.

x 18D0*900 r 0.- 'oa top cover plate stress postprocessing sections Figure 30 Stress Classification Paths Sections at Top Cover Plate

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 57 of 60 Side Drop - Top Cover Plate - Wall Averaged Stress Across 2.5&3.0 Inch Thickness Sections 80000 70000 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Circumferential Coordinate (0) [dog]

Side Drop - Top Cover Plate - Wall Averaged Stress Across 2.5&3.0 Inch Thickness Sections 80000 A Outer Section A (2.5in)

Sx- . Outer Section B (2.5in) 70000 L-0 Outer Section C (2.5in)

Outer Section D (2.5in) 60000 o, 6 Outer Section E (2.5in)

Outer Section F (2.5in)

_ _ ______ ______ ______ _____ Outer Section G (2.5in)

, 7.3. Outer Section H (2in) 45429.0 ** Center Section (3.Oin) 40000 M 096,35288.9 __p-_

30000 -]__,.____

20000 _____ii_____

10000 0

0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 90.00 Vertical Coordinate (X) [in]

Figure 31 Top Cover Plate - Wall Averaged Stress at Predefined Sections

A Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 AREVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 58 of 60 Side Drop - Top Cover Plate - Surface Stress Intensity at 2.5&3.0 Inch Thickness Sections 90000 Outer Secin A (25in)

A Outer Section B (2.5in) 0 8 00a Outer Section C (2,5in) a x Outer Section D (2.5in) 70000 -'-* ) Outer Section E (2.5in)

Outer Section F (2.5in) 60000 0 Outer Section G (2.5in) 13Outer Section H (2,5in)

Center Section (3.Oin) 50000 40000

A*

20000 10000 x

0 ,

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Circumferential Coordinate (C) [deg]

Side Drop - Top Cover Plate - Surface Stress Intensity at 2.5&3.0 inch Thickness Sections 90000 -[ Section A (2.5in) __Outer M Outer Section A (2.5in)

A Outer Section B (2.5in) 8000070000 6& Outer Section C (2.5in) x Outer Section 0 (2.5in)

70000

Outer Section E (2.5in) - - -

Outer Section F (2.5in)

Outer Section G (2.in) 6 0 0 0 Outer Section H (2.5in)

CenterSection (3,0in) 540000 - *9.2, 47904.

40000 .

30000 .1 00 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 90.00 Vertical Coordinate (X) [in]

Figure 32 Top Cover Plate - Surface Stress Intensity at Predefined Sections

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AREVA Calculation RevisionNo.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 59 of 60 Side Drop - Top Cover Plate - Wall Averaged Stress Across 1.5&3.0 Inch Thickness Sections 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Circumferential Coordinate (0) [dog]

Side Drop - Top Cover Plate - Surface Stress Intensity at 1.6&3.0 inch Thickness Sections 90000 - w Outer Section 1 (1,5in)

A Outer Section 2 (1.5in) 80000 - A Outer Section 3 (1.5in) x Outer Section 4 (1.5in) 70000 7 !.qk

Outer Section 5 (1.5in) *_

Oil t

Outer Section 6 (1.5in)

O -

0 Outer Section 7 (1.Sin) 60000 a Outer Section 8 (1,5in, w Outer Section 9 (15in) r_50000 _* Center Section (3.0in) 30000 I

30000 it.^.* -- -'

All 20000 4 A 10000 A 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Circumferential Coordinate (0) [dog]

Figure 33 Top Cover Plate - Stress Intensity at Predefined Sections

Calculation No.: NUH32PHB-0212 A

AR EVA Calculation Revision No.: 1 TRANSNUCLEAR INC.

Page: 60 of 60 ELEMENTS AN LINE STRESS AN ELE NUMh STEP= 3 SUB =37 TIME=7 5 SMISI SM[ISI YEN =8192 ELEMd=125684 MAX =163166 ELEM=125692

.125668 125664

,125672 125676

,125680 125684

,U25688 125692 j

9 8192 42631 77069 111508 145946 25411 59850 94288 128727 163166 nuh32phbcaskmod4g75sd6 load=75g & paylo d Figure 34 Top Cover Plate Bolts (left plot) - Bolts Tensile Force (right plot)

ML12006A137

Text

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search