ML120100506
| ML120100506 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 01/05/2012 |
| From: | Entergy Nuclear Operations |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML1200100495 | List: |
| References | |
| EA-11-241, EA-11-243, PNP 2012-06 CR-PLP-2011-03902 | |
| Download: ML120100506 (26) | |
Text
Atta hment V:
LPI ReportM in n
UCIUS VItKIf, inc.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service Failure
& Materials Evaluation EVALUATION ering Metallurgical analysis of the 11-P7C-6F coupling, documented in Section 3.0, identified the failure mechanism to be intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC ). Stress corrosion cracking is defined as a failure of a material subjected to tensile stress in a corrosive environment in which the material is susceptible.
Each of the three criteria 1 ) susceptible material, 2) corrosive environment and 3) tensile stress ; considered to be necessary for SCC to occur is discussed in the following subsection.
Susceptible Material The coupling material was specified to be ASTM A582 Type 416 SS with hardness in the Rockwell C range of 28 to 32 (HRC). ASTM A582 Type 416 SS is a
martensitic stainless steel that has excellent machining characteristics and has generally low corrosion resistance due to its relatively high sulfur content.
Based on heat traces provided in Attachment A for the couplings currently installed in P-7A, P-7B and P-7C and the couplings extracted from P-7C post 2011 failure event, the couplings were hardened by quenching from approximately 1870°F using nitrogen and then air cooled. Tempering to achieve the desired hardness of 28 to 32HRC was performed at temperatures ranging from 1025°F to 1090°F.
In some cases, a second temper was required to achieve the desired hardness.
Plots of the SWS pump coupling heat treatment (hardening and tempering) are provided in Figure 0-1 and Figure 0-2.
The tempering temperature of the material can have an adverse effect on the toughness and corrosion resistance of the material. Based on tempering curves for the batch of couplings installed in P-7A, P-7B and P-7C (Figure 0-2), the tempering temperatures are in the range to be avoided between 400°C and 580°C (752°F to 1076°F) for 416SS.
These tempering temperatures can lead to low toughness and susceptibility of the material to SCC. In fact, low impact toughness values (indicated by the CVN) are seen in the couplings that have failed with most CVN values in the single digits at the temperature range of the service water (refer to Table 0-7).
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 126 of 136 Revision DRAFT G
Atta hment V:
LPI Report I
MI-al U C I U S F l t K I Cl, inc.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service COrroS 0jVj
^jf1neerination 1`y 9
The Service Water System (SWS) takes cooling water from Lake Michigan via pumps P-7A, P-7B and P-7C for the removal of waste and decay heat.
For the period between January 2009 to August of 2011, service water basin level ranged from elevation 576' to 580 '. For the same period, the water temperature ranged from a minimum of 32°F to a maximum of 76°F.
Chlorination occurs on a daily basis and consists of the addition of sodium hypochlorate (i.e.
bleach) upstream of the traveling screens to control microbial species in the SWS. A water sample was taken by the Palisades chemistry department on 8/19/11 downstream of YS-0134 in the Chemistry cold lab prior and post chlorination of the Service Water System. The chemistry water sample data is presented below.
Pre Post Chlorination Chlorination Date/Time 8/19/2011 14:10 8/19/2011 18:48 Chlorination in Pro gress No Yes Temperature 22.8 C 22.5 C PH 8.30 8.21 Dissolved Oxygen 9 ppm 10 ppm Chloride Concentration 9.72 Win T 10.2 ppm This data indicates there is sufficient chlorine and dissolved oxygen in the service water for SCC of 416 SS to occur, even when chlorination is not in progress.
Also due to the intermittent nature of the pump service the couplings above the normal water basin will experience wet /dry cycles that will leave a higher chlorine concentration on the couplings as the coupling dries out with pump stopped.
Visual examination of the failed coupling shows corrosion products staining the area below the vent hole and are present on the fracture surface and on the internal threads.
Tensile Stress The fracture surface revealed that the 11-P7C-6F failed due to stress corrosion cracking from the inner diameter at the thread root to the outer diameter from two initiation sites traversing the thickness in an elliptical manner. To support this failure mechanism, an evaluation of the coupling stresses was performed to determine the tensile stress in the coupling.
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 127 of 136 Revision DRAFT G
Atta hment V:
LPI Report I
ruin UCIUS VItKI rl, inc.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service Failure
& Materials Evaluation Nondestructive Engineering The function of the couplings is to couple the various segments of shafts (i.e. line shafts, packing shaft and motor shaft ) together in order to transmit the motor torque to the impeller approximately 40 feet below. The design of the couplings enables the shaft ends to bear against each other that could lead to both tensile stresses and shear stresses across the coupling.
To determine the stresses across the couplings, a
finite element analysis (FEA) model of the coupling was created in ANSYS
[12]. ANSYS is a multipurpose finite element analysis software program and is verified and validated in accordance with LPI Procedure 4.1
[15], as documented within
[16].
FEA Model Description A half FEA model of an intact coupling was developed using ANSYS and consists of the steel body, alignment hole and threads. The model was constructed of the eight-node brick element, SOLID45 (see Figure 0-5). The symmetric boundary condition, U,,=O and Ue=O, is applied on the inner surface as shown in Figure 0-6.
ASTM A582 Type 416 stainless steel material property for the coupling FEA model is as follows:
Young's modulus: 29.2 x 106 psi Poisson's ratio: 0.3 Coupling threads are 2-3/16, 8 TPI (see Figure 0-5) which is not a common thread form. Specific thread properties are not available in the Machinery's Handbook [13]. Therefore, internal thread properties of the coupling is taken to be the average internal diameter of 2-1/4, 8 TPI and 2-1/16, 8 TPI in the Machinery's Handbook [13].
Loading Condition Loading on the coupling model consists of the weight of components below the coupling, hydraulic thrust and motor torque. These loads are extracted from HydroAire calculation NQ5940 [14] as follows:
Two motor torque loading scenarios (MTS) are considered for transmittal of the motor torque across the coupling; 1) motor torque is transmitted across the coupling by shaft to coupling purely by thread friction (MTS1; see Figure 0-3) and 2) motor torque is transmitted across the coupling by bearing of Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 128 of 136 Revision DRAFT G
Attac hment V:
LPI Report min U C I U S V I t K I Cl, inc.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service theF i^
rfdsM ilh^isekl ldt1+
rlvithin the coupling (MTS2 ; Figure 0-4).
Non es ruc i
n sneering To simulate uneven shaft alignment within the coupling, a bending moment is also considered as a load. These loads are combined as follows for evaluation of the couplings.
Load Combination 1 (LC1) = Weight + Thrust + MTS1 For this load combination, component weight and hydraulic thrust is combined with the motor torque loading scenario 1
(MTS1) in which motor torque is transmitted across the coupling purely by friction. Axial thrust, F=8780lb, is evenly distribute on the nodes on the inner surfaces of each thread (see Figure 0-7).
Torque, T=18694 in-lb
[14],
is first converted into circumferential force, F by T= F*R where R is the coupling friction radius and then evenly applied on the same nodes that the axial thrust load is applied.
Load Combination 2 (LC2) = Weight + Thrust + MTS2 For this load combination, the weight and axial thrust is applied in the same manner as in LC1. Bearing of the shafts within the coupling will induce tensile stress across the coupling. The tensile force of 42 kips is evenly distributed to the first three threads from the contact plane of the two shafts (see Figure 0-8). Typically with threaded connections, the first few threads near the plane of induced load carry the majority of this load
[17].
For this assessment, the first three threads were considered to carry the load.
Load Combination 3 (LC3) = Weight + Thrust + MTS2 + Moment For this load combination, loads are applied in the same manner as LC2 with the addition of a
moment on the coupling to account for misalignment or other postulated scenarios that can induce bending across the coupling. A bending moment equivalent to 20% of the stress induced by MTS2 of approximately 4,962 in-lb (see below) was also applied to the coupling. This moment was converted into axial force, Fz, and applied on the nodes on the end cross-section based on the nodes' y direction distance from center (see Figure 0-9).
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 129 of 136 Revision DRAFT G
Atta hment V:
LPI Report I
r!ri UCIUS VitKin, inc.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service OD := 3-iS7-in (2.125 + 2. 5)-in ID 2
Sp Fp := 42335-lb FP Q=-
Sp Ip =_ (
-(oD4 - ID4 Out diameter of coupling Internal diameter of coupling Area of crass-section of coupling Clamping force Area moment of inertia of coupling Mom- 0 -2xT 1P OD y
Mom = 4-962 x 143 in-lb Moment can result in 20% stress result from clamping force FEA Results 1)
LC1:
In this
- case, the circumferential
- stress, axial stress and first principal stress are relatively low due to the even distribution of loads on the coupling (see Figure 0-10). Axial tensile stresses at the thread root are on the order of 3.5 to 5 ksi. This result indicates that if the motor torque is transmitted across the coupling purely by thread frictional resistance, then the coupling tensile stresses are relatively low.
2)
LC2: This load combination results in high stress concentrations at the thread root of the coupling at the contact plane of the two shafts. Axial tensile stresses at the thread root are over 10 times greater than LC1 with stresses on the order of 50 to 60 ksi.
3)
LC3: This load combination does not significantly increase stresses at the thread root of the coupling from LC2.
The additional bending moment on the coupling produces additional stresses on the outside diameter of the coupling however does not appreciably increase stresses at the thread root where SCC initiation and propagation is postulated.
Average tensile stresses at the first thread root for each load combination is summarized in the matrix below.
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 130 of 136 Revision DRAFT G
Atta hment V:
LPI Report I
mine UCIUS F'ItKICl, IflC.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service L5 1l a
T il St 1oQ L g uc veEngfo eerie verage ens e
ress (p si)
LC1: No Bearing 3790 LC2: Shaft Bearing 58250 LC3: Bearing Shaft and Bending 58220 The stress tabulation above indicates that the failure was not a single overload event since the average yield and tensile strength are approximately 136 ksi and 151 ksi (see Section 0), respectively. The typical stress intensity required to initiate a crack at a notch due to SCC is on the order of 15 to 20 ksz,' dependant upon material and environment. Clearly from the FEA, sufficient tensile stress is present to facilitate crack initiation for the load combination involving shaft end bearing.
Crack Propagation Given the tensile stresses for the three load combinations evaluated in Section 4. 3 above, a crack propagation evaluation is performed in this section to estimate the amount of time to propagate a
crack through coupling 11-P7C-7.
WORK IN PROGRESS Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 131 of 136 Revision DRAFT G
Attac hment V:
Figure 0-1: Hardening Heat Traces Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 132 of 136 Revision DRAFT G LUCIUS I'ItKCI11, inc.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service Failure
& Materials Evaluation
Atta hment V:
LPI ReportrNr.7 U C I U S V I t K I rl,
I Yl C.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service Coupling Tempering Heat Trace 1200 E
500 W-_-_-_.-_.___.
400 h--+--y--t--r-+--^
r-i--+-1 1:00 2 :00 3:00 4 : 00 5:00 6 ;00 7:00 8:00 9:00 100011 :00 12 :0013: 0014 :0015:00 16:0017:0018 :0019:00 20 :00 21 :00 22:00 23:00 "0 R.Mtiv. Time (h:m)
Figure 0-2: Tempering Heat Traces "AP BETWEEN SHAFTS COUPLING HOLE HAFT Figure 0-3: MTS1: Shaft Not Bearing lloo loon
-^
^.-_--
^P-7A 4/23/0811:30
-P-781st 3/17/10 02:10
--P-7C W0:0031st 9/30/09 17:00
.-P-7C W0:003 2nd 9/30/09 22:20 P-7C W0 0171st 10/1/09 01:01 P-7C WO:017 2nd 10/1/09 04:30
-P-7C WO:0671st 10/1/09 18:23
+P-7C WO:0672nd 10/1/0923:46 700 600 Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 133 of 136 Revision DRAFT G
Attac hment V:
LPI Report rin U C I U S V I t K I 11, I Cl C.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service Fa.
No, COUPLING IN TENSION Figure 0-4: MTS1: Shaft Bearing Figure 0-5: Half FEA model of coupling COUPLING HOLE IAFT Report No. Fl 1358-R-001 Page 134 of 136 Revision DRAFT G
Atta hment V:
LPI Report I
F.I-a7 U C I U S V I t K I Cl,
I f1 C.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service ELEY= S 1
1 l L
- t:'`r t** t*
^
1
{1 r
Y Symmetric boundary condition: U,=O U,=O X
Lo al coo em nu bered 1L i cylindrical coordinate system Figure 0-6 : Cross-sec,on of At coup ing mode Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 135 of 136 Revision DRAFT G
Atta hment V:
LPI Report I
r.I-01 UCIUS VItKIn, in c.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service Figure 0-7: Load application Sketch of loading condition in no bearing case F
ii n
Figure 0-8 : Sketch of loading condition in shafts bearing case Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 136 of 136 Revision DRAFT G
Attac hment V :
LPI Report U C I U S F' I t K I f1, I f1 C.
Consulting Engineers l LE3 ETITS AN
,u.:^1;
^J^
7',7{Irr>
i^^7 ri 7" it
^i!
f V
^
- C,
^.1\\1
^
vl^I `l
,yi, '^µrli,
.+tM17^r fi'
^^^ll^!
^!1
^7ii, 7i X17
^^n"
^v^., ;^.i,^*,
^S.
^
1 ^
1..^_
IjJ..,
^
^t^
01k4
]-y^Y^t
^'?i
- `";`,'iti^^y12 vV r{ {(J t<1^**'
r
^L ^-,
u^ Sew IMF"ri,++++-r^wN+rCrl.
tiwl'.....
\\\\ynot i
Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service Figure 0-9: Sketch of axial force result from bending moment Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 137 of 136 Revision DRAFT G
Atta hment V:
LPI Report I
resin U C I U S V I t K I Cl,
I rl C.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service Failure
& Materials Evaluation Axial Stress Report No. Fl 1358-R-001 Page 138 of 136 Revision DRAFT G Circumferential Stress 1st Principal Stress
Atta hment V:
LPI Report I
rEIno UCIUS VitKin, inc.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service Figure 0-10: Result
]#Ffse#f&
Fi a l s Eval ua tion Nondestructive Engineering Report No. Fl 1358-R-001 Page 139 of 136 Revision DRAFT G Circumferential Stress 1s` Principal Stress
Atta hment V:
LPI Report I
rn U C I U S V I L K I rl, inc.
Consulting Engineers Nona Advanced Analysis Fitness -For-Service Fa
'i 1
`N= SOLUiw
/\\M STEP-
=
I IIx=1 5Z (AY`v)
MY :11 I!
I
(
Y13.(
^1j 4Z 03 SARI
-3510 !
1
^^I f;
^,^,I 1
S:X -79595 I
III 1^1'Il 17171 II^^I^^111^
1 1
^I^I II^II 111 I
(.
WIN-
-35701
-22091 273:
2,352 53973 79595 Axial Stress Figure 0-11: Resultant stresses for LC2 Figure 0-12: Resultant stresses for LC3 Axial Stress Report No. F11358-R- 001 Page 140 of 136 Revision DRAFT G Circumferential Stress 1st Principal Stress
Atta hment V:
LPI Report rir7 UCIUS VItKICl, inc.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service Failure Materials Evaluation SUMMARWRECOMMENDATION Palisades SWS pump P-7C coupling #6 (identified herein as 1 1-P7C-6F) failed in August, 2011. The failure is determined, based on metallurgical evaluation, to be the result of intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC). The 2009 failure of the #7 coupling (identified herein as 09-P7C-7F) on the same pump (P-7C) was determined in [18] to also be a result of IGSCC. LPI's independent examination of the 2009 failed coupling 09-P7C-7F concurs with the failure mode as documented in [18].
For SCC to occur three criteria to promote SCC must exist; 1) susceptible material, 2) corrosive environment and 3) tensile stress. The specified coupling material, ASTM A582 Type 416 stainless
- steel, is a martensitic steel that is susceptible to SCC at low toughness. Charpy V-Notch (CVN) testing of the 2011 failed coupling (11-P7C-6F) resulted in toughness values in the range of 6 to 10 ft-lbs impact energy for test temperatures of 32 and 70F. CVN testing of the 09-P7C-7F coupling resulted in impact toughness values in the range of 3 to 6 ft-lb for test temperatures of 32°F and 75°F, respectively.
These low impact toughness values make the couplings susceptible to SCC in the presence of chlorides and sufficient tensile stress to initiate and propagate a crack.
The couplings are subjected to tensile stresses during normal operation by the weight of the components below the coupling and hydrodynamic forces due. to pump operation. In addition, the design of the couplings results in the shaft ends bearing against each other that likely led to sufficient tensile stresses (with a maximum value near the center where the two shafts bear against each other) in the coupling to initiate and propagate a crack.
The majority of the pump couplings below the packing (couplings #1 through #4) are submerged below the water level in the intake structure at normal basin levels. Couplings #5 through #7, above normal basin water levels see intermittent cycles of wet and dry depending on whether the pump is operating. When the SW pumps are on, all couplings below the stuffing box are wet and when they are off, couplings #52, #6 and #7 begin to dry. Chemistry samples of the service water indicate that there are low levels of chlorine in the raw water of Lake Michigan on the order of 9 ppm. Chlorination of the service water increases the chlorine level slightly to approximately 10 ppm. Even these relatively low levels of chlorine combined with a high humidity oxygen rich environment (as is the case for the couplings #5, #6 and #7 when the pump is off) can lead to a local 2 Unless the service water basin level is above coupling #5. In which case, coupling #5 would be submerged in water.
Report No. Fl 1358-R-001 Page 141 of 136 Revision DRAFT G
Attaqhment V:
LPI Report ur U C I U S V I t K I fl,
I Cl C.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service breakdo p'flfie&
S dr 16VW^dU can nucleate at these locally damaged on estru Live n
i e
ring
- sites, deve lo p and propagate under sufficient tensile stress to form highly branched network of fine cracks, as can be seen in Figure 0-8 and Figure 0-9.
REFERENCES 1.
Entergy Palisades Root Cause Evaluation for CR-PLP-2009-04519, "Service Water Pump P-7C Failure to Provide Discharge Pressure" 3/4/2010, Rev. 1 2.
Entergy Palisades Root Cause Evaluation Report for CR-PLP-2011-03902, "Service Water Pump 7-C Line Shaft Coupling Failure" 3.
Entergy Palisades Drawing a.
Entergy Drawing No.M-213, Rev. 93 "Piping and Instrumentation Diagram Service Water, Screen Structure and Chlorinator" b.
Entergy Drawing No. VEN-M-11-Sht 45, Rev. 2 "Service Water Pumps Modified Line Shaft Components For Pumps P-7A, P-7B and P-7C" 4.
Entergy Engineering Change (EC)-50000121762 5.
LPI Procedure F11358-P-001, Rev.
0, "Procedure for Metallurgical Examination of SW Pump P-7C Coupling Components"
- 6. ASTM A582/A582M, "Standard Specification for Free-Machining Stainless Steel Bars", 2005.
- 7. ASTM E 18-07, "Standard Test Method for Rockwell Hardness of Metallic Materials"
- 8. ASTM E8/E8M-09, "Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials"
- 9. ASTM E23-07ael "Standard test Methods for Notched Bar Impact Testing of Metallic Materials" 10.ASTM E3-11, "Standard Guide for Preparation of Metallographic Specimens" 11.ASTM E407-99, "Standard Practice for Microetching Metals and Alloys" 12.ANSYS Mechanical Software, ANSYS Inc.,
Southpoint, Canonsburg, PA 15317 13.OBERG E, et al. "Machinery's Handbook" 25th Ed. Industrial Press
- 14. HydroAire Calculation NQ5940, "Maximum combined shear stress calculation for threaded coupling", Rev. 3
- 15. LPI Procedure 4.1, Rev. 2 "Software Control" 16.ANSYS Inc.,
LPI Report No.
V&V-ANSYS-11, Rev.
3,"Verification and Validation of ANSYS
- 17. Shigley's, "Mchanical Engineering Design" McGraw Hill 18.Structural Integrity Report 1100112.401, "Additional Review of Palisades Service Water Pump Couplings", Rev. 0 March 2011.
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 142 of 136 Revision DRAFT G
Atta hment V:
LPI Report I
M inn U C I U S F' I t K I Cl,
I n C.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service
- 20. Flowserve Materials Newsletter Volume 3,
Number 4
"Embrittlement of Martensitic Stainless Steels ", September 2004.
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 143 of 136 Revision DRAFT G
Atta hment V:
LPI Report I
r.1M U C I U S F' I t K I rl,
I f C.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service Failure
& Materials Evaluation Nondestructive Engineering Attachment A Misc. Inputs Report No. F11358-R-001 Attachment A Revision 0 Page Al of Axx
XXV 10 7W a2L'A a0 A N O O orn m
rn^
^o O
nC) 0 F
S N
O m
l^q N
,^
t7t
° 2070 Tamp:
°F 1400.0 600.0 800.0 1000
, 0 1240.0 14000: 0 1600.0 1 800.0 2000.0 2400.01
^---
j I
I i-
^ ^
f i
1 i
04/22/0 118:40:0
^------;--.-
f
' 042210 4 T
(
-^
- y __--_
I I
19:20:0
^I 04/2210 20:00:0 t
- - ^-
04/22/01 20:40.0
---^ --
2070 Te p:
0$$
122/0 I
I
_...--^
J_
04122/0
-~ 22:oa:a
^
ill I
2240:0 2
Ka x
0 Entergv - Palisades Nuclear Job# N.Q 5604 P.O. 00019919 Model: 25 NMC 2 St4-Johnston Pane 53 of 123 as TAsaE-TO,3-SOO U3 r,3 STSJTeuy paauenpy sI u15uu6uJ/nsuo)
- u
'u f
snIJn ON jzoda-j WIM podell Id-1
- A ;uewq a;;'d
Attaqhment V:
LPI Report rum U C I U S v I t K I rl, inc.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service COM:K 90/EZ/60 1-----i I,
-^
^
r oOV:U f
"d al SUO 000= Zt I
^
'oszzTT __osz6^ogas-o-z^a©
- o' za o
' Z9 o-odieo sz^
A.
- dwal gto z C)o C) CL 0
0 O O N V' O
Report Enterqv
- Palisades Nuclear Job# N.O.5604 P.O.00019919 Model: 25 NMC 2 Stq. Johnston Page 54 of 123 Revision 0 Page A3 of Axx
Attachment V:
LPI Report riri
_ U C I U S V I t K I Yl, inc.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For - Service ID 28546 S/N #'s 1 thru 8 o^-
C,; m cv
`L 00 Oti 6Z _
01i9l/EG GoLoo zz Gl/91/00 00 OE : t z 01191rFO-C, 001 01, : 07, a;
d co i-o N
C, 0
00-00:0 z n ---
Q O1/9L/EO oN
^^
^
n Q
-LZ^
o
-^
or 0
_N 0 OO8'z 0 0006 0 0091 0 0091 O 00 L
0 0061 0 000 0'009 0 009 ooov dw21 0L06 Report Customer En? ergy - Palisades Nuclear Jobs NO 5885 Po5 10246213 Rev.004 Paae 232 of 295 Revision 0 Page A4 of Axx
Attachment V:
LPI Report Minn L U C I U S N I t K I n, inc.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service ID 28546 S/N #'s 1 thru 8 ODGZtrO N
occ i:dwal ytrDZ Op:0tr:E0 OLizFle0 OO;G'Z: E.O a
00.D0'£0 O(L I J£o f -
OO otrr£o U
c ft u
O N
O
^
(U 01 T
m
^p r pE t pD L CD601 6606 C ^^8 D JOL 0 00° 0 OOS OGt 0 00£ stomer: Entergy
- Palisades Nuclear Jobs NQ 5885 PO0 10245213 Rev 004 Paw 233 of 295 Report N. _ _ _ - _ - -- c-' - _
Revision 0 Page A5 of Axx
Atta hment V:
LPI Report Minn UCIUS VItKll1, inc.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service Failure Materials Evaluation Nondestructive Engineering Attachment B Tensile Test Data Report No. Fl 1358-R-001 Attachment B Revision 0 Page B 1 of Bxx
Atta hment V:
LPI Report I
r!n UCIUS FItKIrl, inc.
ConsultingEngineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service Failure Materials Evaluation Nondestructive Engineering Attachment C Hardness Survey Data Report No. F11358-R-001 Attachment C Revision 0 Page Cl of Cxx
Attaqhment V:
LPI Report rirn UCIUS VItKI 11, inc.
Consulting Engineers Advanced Analysis Fitness-For-Service Failure Materials Evaluation Nondestructive Engineering Report No. F11358-R-001 Attachment C Revision 0 Page Cl of Cxx