ML120100540
| ML120100540 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 12/05/2011 |
| From: | Entergy Nuclear Operations |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML1200100495 | List: |
| References | |
| EA-11-241, EA-11-243, PNP 2012-06 EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-11-06, Rev. 0 | |
| Download: ML120100540 (41) | |
Text
EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 n Lucius Pitkin, Inc.
ConsultingErp;-7eers AdvancedAna//ysis Fitness For Service Failure & Materials Evaluation Ls^.tass Nondestructive Engineering METALLURGICAL AND FAILURE ANALYSIS OF SWS PUMP P-7C COUPLING #6 Report No. F11358-R-001 Revision 1 December, 2011 Prepared For ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.
PALISADES NUCLEAR PLANT Boston Area Office, 36 Main Street, Amesbury, MA 01913 Tel: 978-517-3100 Fax: 978-517-3110 www.luciuspitkin.com NewYork,NY Boston,MA Rd land,WA "Ensuring the integrity of today' s structures for tomorrow's world
, TM
EA-P SA-SDP-P 7 C-11-06 Lucius Pitkin, Inc.
Consulting Engineers Advai?cedAnaJysis Fitness-For-Se, vice Failure & Materiels Evaluation esp. sss Nondestructive Engineering METALLURGICAL AND FAILURE ANALYSIS OF SWS PUMP P-7C COUPLING #6 Report No. F11358-R-001 Revision 1 December, 2011 Prepared For ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.
PALISADES NUCLEAR PLANT Boston Area Office, 36 Main Street, Amesbury, MA 01913 Tel: 978-517-3100 Fax: 978-517-3110 www.luciuspitkin.com NewYork,NY Boston,M/\\
Richaid,WA "Ensuring the integrity of today's structures for tomorrow's world" TM
EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 n
'Lsi.l9$
DOCUMENT RECORD Document Type:
q Calculation q Report q Procedure Document No:
F11358-R-001 Document
Title:
Metallurgical and Failure Analysis of SWS Pump P-7C Coupling #6 Client :
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
Client Facility :
Palisades Nuclear Plant Client PO No :
10325528 Quality Assurance :
Nuclear Safety Related ?
[] No Yes Computer q No' 1.Check NO when EXCEL, MathCAD and/or similar programs are Software Yes2 used since algorithms are explicitly displayed.
Used :
.Include Software Record for each computer program utilized Instrument Used No Yes3
- 3. Include Document Instrument Record Revision Approval D
t Preparer Checker Design Approver' a e Verification S. Yim John Mills, Ph.D 0
10/17/ 11 Ryan Chen B. Elaidi (Section 4.3
( Section 4.3 )
P. Bruck P. Bruck 1
12/5/11 4? Aly
/' ^
^? Q S. Yim John Mills, Ph.D P. Streeter P. Bruck The Approver of this document attests that all project examinations, inspections, tests and analysis (as applicable) have been conducted using approved LPI Procedures and are in conformance to the contract/purchase order. Individual tests and inspections as documented in the attachments were performed and reviewed by various LPI personnel, not reflected in the document record.
Page 2
of 230 Total Pages Include any Title Sheet and Attachments in page co unt This report is rendered upon the condition that it is not to be reproduced wholly or in part for advertising or other purposes over our signature or in connection with our name without special permission in writing.
Be advised that all materials submitted for evaluation will be retained for six months.
After such time, all material will be discarded unless otherwise notified in writing to retain beyond six months.
[Rim EA-P SA-SDP-P 7 C-11-06 1101 DESIGN VERIFICATION CHECKLIST Document No(s)1:
F11358-R-001 Rev.:
Review Method:
X Design Review Alternate Calculation Test Criteria DV2 1
Were the inputs correctly selected and incorporated into design?
rt.1' 2
Are assumptions necessary to perform the design activity adequately described and reasonable? Where necessary, are the assumptions identified for subsequent re-verifications when the detailed design activities are completed ?
If applicable, has an as built verification been performed and reconciled?
3 Are the appropriate quality and quality assurance requirements specified?
Are Are the applicable codes, standards and regulatory requirements including issue and addenda properly identified and are their requirements for design met?
f v 5
Have applicable construction and operating experience been considered, including operation procedures?
6 Have the design interface requirements been satisfied?
`'"
7 Was an appropriate design method used?
8 Is the output reasonable compared to inputs?
9 Are the specified parts, equipment, and processes suitable for the required application?
10 Are the specified materials compatible with each other and the design environmental conditions to which the material will be exposed?
N'l ^!
11 Have adequate maintenance features and requirements been specified?
12 Are accessibility and other design provisions adequate for performance of needed maintenance and repair?
^1 T
13 Has adequate accessibility been provided to perform the in-service inspection expected to be required during the plant life?
14 Has the design properly considered radiation exposure to the public and plant personnel ?
15 Are the acceptance criteria incorporated in the design documents sufficient to allow verification that design requirements have been satisfactorily accomplished?
16 Have adequate pre-operational and subsequent periodic test requirements been appropriately specified?
17 Are adequate handling, storage, cleaning and shipping requirements specified?
J/
=1 18 Are adequate identification requirements specified?
l'j(/3c 19 Are requirements for record preparation review, approval, retention, etc., adequately specified?
20 Has an internal design review been performed for applicable design projects ? Have comments from the Internal Design Review been appropriately considered /addressed?
(1)
Include any drawings developed from reviewed documents, or include separate checklist sheet for drawings (2)
Design Verifier shall initial indicating review and mark N/A where not applicabll DV Completed By:
Printed Name P. Streeter Signature Date 121511 Page ED of EJ Total Pages Include DV Checklist and Comment Resolution sheets in page cc !nc Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 3 of 83 Revision 1
DO RECORD OF REVISION EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 Revision No.
Date Description of Change Reason 0
Original Issue 1
Changes are denoted by a revision bar.
Incorporated comments provided in Attachment X See Document Recorci Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 4 of 83 Revision 1
[Rim EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 DOCUMENT SOFTWARE RECORD (Include Separate Sheet for Each Software Package Utilized) 1 Computer Software Used ANSYS Version 11 0 (Code/Version) 2 Software Supplier ANSYS, Inc.
3 Software Update Review Error notices; describe:
Reviewed error reports for elements used q Other; describe:
4 Nuclear Safety Related q NO 1.
If YES:
Software
Hardware identification # used for execution:
YES1 Desktop Serial #: J2WTBMI Basis for V & V: [17]
5 Input Listing (s) q Input listing(s) attached:
Not attached; identify File/Disc ID":
Coupling Pump Bearing & Bending.txt Coupling Pump Bearing.txt Coupling Pump No Bearing.txt
- A CD with input listings and output data to be provided on project completion.
6 q Output results attached:
Not attached; identify File/Disc I D*:
- A CD with input listings and output data to be provided on project completion.
7 Output Identifier(s)*
(see 6 above)
- e.g., run date/time; use for reference, as appropriate, within body of calculation 8
Comments 9
Keywords
SOLID45, Static
- For use in describing software features used in this calculation ; use common terms based on software user manual.
10 Project Manager S. Yim Name:
If computer software was used on project, complete form with required information.
Update the LPI Computer Software Use List per LPI Procedure 13.1 requirements.
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 5 of 83 Revision 1
14N EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-11-06 DOCUMENT INSTRUMENT RECORD Instrument Used Instrument Description Serial No.
Calibration Due Date 1
Tensile Testing Machine (120 kips)
Baldwin 37205 4/7/12 2
Extensometer (1 in) 2620-824/1033 4/7/12 3
Charpy Impact Tester Satec Model SI-1 K/1306 6/17/12 4
Hardness Tester Wilson 5YR/58 4/7/12 5
Thermocouple Omega 650 J/8320 7/12/12 6
Caliper Fowler 6"/7082002 6/21/12 7
Magnetic Yoke Magnaflux Y-6/43530 Per use calibration 8
Caliper Starrett 6"/09324754 6/24/12 9
Caliper Mitutoyo 12"/06535451 6/21/12 10 Caliper VME 6"/2-12005 6/21/12 11
SEM/Oxford EDS 17218-118-01 Per use calibration 12 q
13 q
14 q
Project Manager Name:
S. Yim For instrument(s) used on the project, identify instrument and include the instrument calibration due date.
Update the LPI Instrument Use List per LPI Procedure 13.1 requirements.
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 6 of 83 Revision 1
EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 VI -IN TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No.
DOCUMENT TITLE PAGE 1
DOCUMENT RECORD SHEET
..................................................................................... 2 DESIGN VERIFICATION CHECKLIST..........................................................................
3 RECORD OF REVISION................................................................................................
4 DOCUMENT SOFTWARE RECORD.............................................................................. 5 DOCUMENT INSTRUMENT RECORD........................................................................... 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS..................................................................................................
7 LIST OF FIGURES 8
LIST OF TABLES 9
1.0 INTRODUCTION
/BACKGROUND...................................................................... 10 1.1 Scope and Purpose.......................................................................................... 11 1.2 Evaluation Timeline.......................................................................................... 12 2.0 INPUTS/ASSUMPTIONS.................................................................................... 18 2.1 Inputs............................................................................................................... 18 2.2 Assumptions..................................................................................................... 18 3.0 TESTING AND EXAMINATION........................................................................... 22 3.1 Visual and Stereomicroscopic Examination..................................................... 22 3.2 Dimensional Examination................................................................................. 24 3.3 Magnetic Particle Examination (MT)................................................................ 25 3.4 Metallography................................................................................................... 26 3.5 Scanning Electron Microscopy.........................................................................26 3.6 Physical and Mechanical Properties................................................................ 27 4.0 Discussion of results/EVALUATION.................................................................... 57 4.1 Susceptible Material......................................................................................... 57 4.2 Corrosive Environment..................................................................................... 60 4.3 Tensile Stress.................................................................................................. 62 4.4 SCC Process.................................................................................................... 66 5.0
SUMMARY
/RECOMMENDATION...................................................................... 80
6.0 REFERENCES
.................................................................................................... 82 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Total Pages A: MISC INPUTS 6
B: RECEIPT INSPECTION REPORTS......................................................................... 10 C: VISUAL INSPECTION.............................................................................................. 33 D: MAGNETIC PARTICLE TESTING.............................................................................. 9 E: HARDNESS SURVEY DATA.................................................................................... 28 F: TENSILE TEST DATA.............................................................................................. 26 G: CHARPY TEST DATA................................................................................................
8 X: REV 0 COMMENT & RESOLUTION........................................................................ 27 Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 7 of 83 Revision 1
EA-P SA-SDP-P7 C-11-06 E
f 16 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1: As-Received 09-P7C-7F............................................................................. 13 Figure 1-2: As-Received 11-P7C-6F............................................................................. 14 Figure 1-3: SWS Pumps Shaft Assembly [3b]............................................................... 15 Figure 1-4: PLP SWS Pump Rendering........................................................................ 16 Figure 1-5: Coupling Drawing [20]................................................................................. 17 Figure 2-1: P-7B Run Time........................................................................................... 19 Figure 2-2: P-7C Run Time........................................................................................... 20 Figure 2-3: SWS Basin Level and Lake Temp Data...................................................... 21 Figure 3-1: As-Received 11-P7C-7............................................................................... 37 Figure 3-2: Hardness Indentation and Values Written on 11-P7C-7............................. 37 Figure 3-3: 09-P7C-7F Fracture Surface Showing Elliptical Feature............................. 38 Figure 3-4: Coupling Dimensioning Scheme................................................................. 39 Figure 3-5: Visual of Fracture Surface on Coupling 11-P7C-6F.................................... 39 Figure 3-6: 11-P7C-6F showing Corrosion Deposit....................................................... 40 Figure 3-7: Ends of Shaft 5 and 6 Coupled by 11-P7C-6F............................................ 41 Figure 3-8: As-Received Coupling No. 11-P7A-7.......................................................... 42 Figure 3-9: Contrast Thread Coating (As-Received) on P-7C Failed and Cracked Couplings to P-7A Coupling.......................................................................................... 43 Figure 3-10:
Visual Observation of Coupling No.
1 1-P7A-5......................................... 44 Figure 3-11: As-Received Couplings 11-P7B-4 through 11-P7B-7............................... 45 Figure 3-12: As-Split Coupling 11-P7B-4......................................................................45 Figure 3-13: As-Split Coupling 11 -P713-5...................................................................... 46 Figure 3-14: As-Split Coupling 1 1-P7B-6......................................................................46 Figure 3-15: As-Split Coupling 1 1-P7B-7......................................................................47 Figure 3-16: MT Highlighting Un-Opened Fracture on Coupling 11-P7C-6F................. 48 Figure 3-17: MT Highlighting Crack on Coupling 11-P7C-7K........................................ 49 Figure 3-18: MT Highlighting Crack on Coupling 11-P7B-7K........................................ 50 Figure 3-19: General microstructure of coupling material.............................................. 51 Figure 3-20: As-polished (left) and Etched (right) Microscopy....................................... 52 Figure 3-21: Pitting observed in couplings with cracks or fractures............................... 53 Figure 3-22: Representative Image of P-7A Coupling Showing No Pitting.................... 54 Figure 3-23: EDS of Coupling 11-P7C-6F Surface Deposit - Spectrum 2.................... 54 Figure 3-24: EDS of Coupling 11-P7C-6F Surface Deposit - Spectrum 4.................... 55 Figure 3-25: SEM of Coupling 1 1-P7C-6F Surface....................................................... 56 Figure 4-1: Hardening Heat Traces...............................................................................69 Figure 4-2: Tempering Heat Traces.............................................................................. 69 Figure 4-3: MTS1: Shaft Not Bearing............................................................................ 70 Figure 4-4: MTS2: Shaft Bearing................................................................................... 70 Figure 4-5: Half FEA model of coupling......................................................................... 71 Figure 4-6: Cross-section of half FEA coupling model.................................................. 71 Figure 4-7: Load application Sketch of loading condition in no bearing case................ 72 Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 8 of 83 Revision 1
EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 L
Figure 4-8: Sketch of loading condition in shafts bearing case..................................... 72 Figure 4-9: Sketch of axial force result from bending moment...................................... 73 Figure 4 - 10: Resultant stresses for LC1........................................................................ 74 Figure 4-11: Resultant stresses for LC2........................................................................ 75 Figure 4 - 12: Tensile Stress Distribution Across Wall Thickness of Coupling - LC2...... 76 Figure 4-13: Resultant stresses for LC3........................................................................ 77 Figure 4 - 14: Time to Failure vs Applied Stress [23]...................................................... 77 Fi g ure 4-15: SCC Process
[28 ]
............................................. 78 Figure 4-16: Crack Growth Rate (da/dt) versus stress intensity w/Three Stages of Crack Growth [23]....................................................................................................................
78 Figure 4-17: Effects of Tempering Temperature and Applied Stress-Intensity factor on Velocity of Stress - Corrosion Cracking [22 ].................................................................... 79 LIST OF TABLES Table 1-1: Test Matrix...................................................................................................
11 Table 2-1:SWS Pump Coupling Life.............................................................................. 19 Table 3-1: Measurement of Coupling Outside Dimensions........................................... 29 Table 3-2: Measurement of Coupling Wall Thickness................................................... 30 Table 3-3: MT Detected Crack Dimensions................................................................... 31 Table 3-4: Tensile Test Results..................................................................................... 31 Table 3-5: Metal Composition of Couplings (Wt. %)...................................................... 32 Table 3-6: Surface Hardness Survey of Couplings....................................................... 33 Table 3-7: Through Thickness Hardness of Couplings.................................................. 34 Table 3-8: CVN Impact Test Results............................................................................. 35 Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 9 of 83 Revision 1
EA-P SA-SDP-P7C-11-06 E
1.0 INTRODUCTION
/BACKGROUND Two failed Type 416 stainless steel (SS) couplings along with other intact couplings and shafts extracted from service of the Service Water System (SWS) pumps at Palisades Nuclear Plant (PLP) were submitted to LPI (Lucius Pitkin, Inc.)
for material and failure assessment, as documented in the receipt inspections provided in Attachment B. One of the two failed couplings was from a failure event in September 2009 as documented in CR-PLP-2009-04519 [1]' and the other was from a failure event in August 2011 as documented in CR-PLP-2011-03902
[2].
The failed couplings from the 2009 and 2011 failure events are herein referred to as "09-P7C-7F" and "11-P7C-6F",
respectively (refer to coupling identification convention in Section 2.1). Photographs of couplings 09-P7C-7F2 and 11-P7C-6F are presented in Figure 1-1 and Figure 1-2, respectively. The majority of intact couplings (22 in total) and two (2) shafts were from all three SWS pumps following the 2011 failure event and remaining couplings (3
in total) were extracted from pump P-7C following the 2009 event.
The SWS is comprised of three motor driven vertical multistage pumps, tagged P-7A, P-7B and P-7C, supplying water from Lake Michigan to three service water headers. All three SWS pumps are similar in design in that they are comprised of two stage stainless steel impellers coupled to the motor by six line
- shafts, a
packing shaft and a motor shaft for a total height of over forty (40) feet from suction to discharge. Figure 1-3 shows the shaft and coupling arrangement for the SWS pumps and identifies the location of couplings 09-P7C-7F and 11-P7C-6F.
As can be seen in Figure 1-3,
09-P7C-7F is coupling #7 and 11-P7C-6F is coupling #6 in the assembly. A rendering that identifies the pump components (excluding the motor ) is provided in Figure 1-4.
P-7A and P-7C are Layne and Bowler Model 25RKHC pumps while P-7B is a Johnston Model 25NMC pump. Each pump is driven by a 350 horsepower (HP) motor providing a rated 8000 GPM at 140 ft total developed head (TDH), which is 50% of the service system capacity [1].
The specified material of all shaft couplings on the three SWS pumps, including 09-P7C-7F and 11-P7C-6F, was ASTM A582 Type 416 stainless steel (SS)
[4].
The material specification for the shaft couplings on all three pumps was changed from carbon steel to 416 SS and specified with a Rockwell C hardness (HRC) value of 28 to 32 under engineering change EC-50000121762
[4]
in December 1 Numbers in brackets (e.g. [5]), indicate references listed in Section 6.0.
2 Only the bottom half or impeller end of 09-P7C-7F was available for examination. The other half had been utilized in support of failure analysis in 2009.
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 10 of 83 Revision 1
VIN EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 2007. The couplings were also redesigned to incorporate an alignment hole that allows verification of proper shaft installation. The shaft couplings for P-7A were replaced on April 4, 2009 per Work Order (WO) 51637416 (see
[2]).
The shaft couplings for P-7C were replaced on June 12, 2009. The shaft couplings on P-7B were replaced during a rebuild of the pump and installed in June of 2010 [2]. A detailed drawing of the line shaft coupling is provided in Figure 1-5.
1.1 Scope and Purpose The scope and purpose of this report is to provide results of the metallurgical examination and tests performed in accordance with LPI Procedure F11358-P-001
[5], and provide a probable root cause of the 2011 coupling failure.
The scope of tests and examinations performed are provided in the Table 1-1 Test Matrix.
Table 1-1: Test Matrix Test/Exam Cou p lin gs 2011 2009 P-7C P-7B P-7A P-7C Visual & Photog ra phic 1 thru 8 4 thru 7 4 thru 7 Surface Hardness 1 thru 8 4 thru 7 5 thru 7 7
Dimensional Exam 1 thru 8 4 thru 7 4 thru 7 Comp Analysis of Surface De p osits 6 and 7 MT Exam 4 thru 7 4 thru 7 4 thru 7 Tensile Test 5 thru 7 5 thru 7 5 thru 7 CVN Test 5 thru 7 5 thru 7 5 thru 7 7
Thru Thick Hardness 5 thru 7 5 thru 7 5 thru 7 7
Com p Analysis 5 thru 7 5 thru 7 5 thru 7 Metallog ra p h y 6 and 7 5 thru 7 6
SEM 6
7 Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 11 of 83 Revision 1
EA-P SA-SDP-P 7 C-11-06
[Ila 1.2 Evaluation Timeline This section discusses the evaluation and testing timeline of the above scope. Coupling 11-P7C-6F failed on August 9th, 2011. Following the failure, LPI was contracted by Entergy's PLP to provide metallurgical and failure assessment of failed coupling 11-P7C-6F and provide on-site metallurgical support to the root cause evaluation (RCE) team. LPI received couplings 11-P7C-6F, -5, -7K, and shaft 5 and 6 from P-7C as documented in LPI receipt inspection dated 8/17/11. On 8/17/11 following visual examination of 11-P7C-7F, LPI provided a preliminary verbal assessment of the failure mechanism as being typical of stress corrosion cracking (SCC). Based on this preliminary observation, LPI recommended that in the short term PLP should consider replacing (at a minimum) couplings subjected to wet/dry cycles (i.e. couplings 5, 6, and 7) on pumps P-7A and P-7B with available spare couplings. For the long term, LPI advised that a permanent replacement material should be investigated for the service environment but suggested Nitronic 50 or AL-6XN as possible replacement material for the subject SWS pump couplings.
The verbal assessment and recommendation were directed to the RCE team and the NRC's special inspection team (SIT).
On 8/18/11, LPI received coupling 09-P7C-6F and remaining couplings 11-P7C-1 through -4 and 11-P7C-8 for testing and evaluation. On 8/19/11, LPI issued two (2) preliminary interim reports, F11358-IR-002 which summarized the finite element analysis model of a typical coupling and F11358-IR-003, which summarized the VT and MT findings of couplings 11-P7C-5, -6F and -
7K and hardness testing of 11-P7C-6F. On 8/23/11, Revision 0 of F11358-IR-003 was transmitted to PLP via LPI letter F11358-L-003. F11358-IR-003 summarized the VT, MT, and hardness values of couplings 11-P7C-5, -6F and -7K and Charpy results of couplings 11-P7C-5 and -6F. Based on these results, PLP implemented plans to replace the existing 416 SS couplings on P-7A and P-7B with 17-4PH recommended in [19].
On 8/24/11, the 416SS couplings on P-7A were replaced with 17-4PH couplings. LPI received extracted couplings 11-P7A-1 through -8 on 8/30/11, as documented in the receipt inspection in Attachment B.
Preliminary LPI F11358-IR-004 was issued on 9/1/11 which summarized the VT, MT, hardness, tensile and CVN impact test results.
On 8/31 / 11, the 416SS couplings on P-7B were replaced with 17-4PH couplings. LPI received extracted couplings 11-P7B-4 through
-7 on 9/2/11.
Preliminary LPI F11358-IR-005 was issued on 9/12/11 which summarized the VT, MT, hardness
, and tensile test results.
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 12 of 83 Revision 1
EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 Elevation View LUCIU S I'IFKIN, INC Top View Figure 1-1: As -Received 09 -P7C-7F (Only the bottom half or impeller end of 09-P7C-7F was available. Scale in units of inches; typical throughout)
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 13 of 83 Revision 1
oa
I EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-11-06 Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 14 of 83 Revision 1
Figure 1-2: As-Received 11-P7C-6F
KNO IC A C4 b,
c.
I he P^
^ C L
,P:X^
'E NOT ES :
........^I
., 5 5
^Li G Jc E<'.
r r,U 1
`^'
E i
rPB t VES t '
C F
ll
^^
(
rE Fc; f.i 1 1-P7C-6F EA-P SA-SDP-P7 C-11-06 Pu L18AOES f
^F.lfA:Y^
E/^R viwrai SERVICE VATEB PUMP ROTATING ELEMENT ASSEMSLV FDR PUMPS P-7A, 70 0.y]
7C VEN-Mil
- 45 2
Figure 1-3: SWS Pumps Shaft Assembly [3b]
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 15 of 83 Revision 1
Motor Sh, Gland Follow Stuffing &
Stuffing Box Beari^
Packing She Coupling #
Spider #6 Line Shaft A Coupling #
Spider #5 Line Shaft #
Coupling #i Spider #4 Line Shaft #
Coupling #d Spider #3 Motor Support Discharge Head ow Out EL. 590'-7" ounting Bracket ap Column pe EL. 580' rater Level ange EL. 576' ile Column C
LL Spider #6 Line Shaft Bearing Line Shaft Bearing Sleeve Line Shaft #6 Middle Column Coupling #6 Spider #5 Line Shaft #
Coupling #
Spider #2 Line Shaft #.
Coupling #:
Spider #1 Line Shaft #
Coupling #-
Pump Shag Split Thrust Rini 2nd Stage Impeller Split Thrust Rini 1st Stage Impeller Flow In Suction Nozzle Suction Nozzle Bearing Note: Spider refers to intermediate shaft guidance bushing.
Figure 1-4: PLP SWS Pump Rendering EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06
- Packing Shaft Coupling #7 Top Column Line Shaft #5 Middle Column EL. 580' Top of Water Level Range Coupling #5 Spider #4
- Middle Column Line Shaft #4 Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 16 of 83 Revision 1
MW b
.5 4
J 7047117 EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 3
z E
^t *.
^
1 1..
I.tY
't.'r 4F
_.-_._OFF.
. R
?°-.........._-..l
- 31. _.
10 0
......,.st._
D S_Cl ION A -A L ^A ij H I/d oA re rnc rporoted E:44 6
'od :wn I
f 1 C Cu p
110607 L*
SHAFT CUP r*
A o
y
- 114, Figure 1-5: Coupling Drawing [20]
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 17 of 83 Revision 1
EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 L
2.0 INPUTS/ASSUMPTIONS The following inputs and assumptions are utilized for this report.
Inputs and assumptions requiring verification are identified as such.
2.1 Inputs 1.
Specified hardness for the couplings is in the range of 28 to 32 HRC [4].
2.
Coupling loads are taken from [15] with hydraulic thrust equal to 8000 lb, torque of 18,694 lb-in and preload of 42,335 Ib.
3.
Table 2-1 summarizes the SWS pump coupling service history at time of extraction.
4.
Based on data provided by PLP and presented in Figure 2-3, the service water basin elevation ranged from 576 ft to 580 ft for the period from January 2009 to August 2011.
For the same
- period, the water temperature ranged from 32°F to 76°F.
5.
The SWS pumps are vertical turbine pumps that take suction from the bottom and discharges through the column and out the discharge header pipe. Therefore, line shafts, couplings and components below the stuffing box are exposed to service water when the pumps are on.
Based on the service water basin elevation, couplings 1 through 4 are constantly submerged and couplings 5 through 7 are subjected to wet and dry cycles depending on pump state (i.e. on or off). Also depending on water elevation, coupling 5 may be submerged when the pump is off.
Refer to Figure 1-4 for a
sketch of the service water pump with illustration of water flow and relationship of couplings to basin water elevation variations.
6.
The convention used in this report to reference couplings is as follows:
YY-Pump-CN with Optional F or K Where:
YY= two digit year when coupling was extracted from pump.
Pump = P7A, P713 or P7C CN = Coupling Number Optional F = Identifies a coupling that has failed.
Optional K = Identifies a coupling that exhibits a crack.
For example:
09-P7C-7F is the failed coupling extracted from Pump 7C in 2009.
2.2 Assumptions 1.
There are no assumptions utilized in this report.
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 18 of 83 Revision 1
Table 2-1:SWS Pump Coupling Life EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 Installed Run Date Date Pump Installed Extracted Time Time Start/Stops Notes (hrs)
(hrs)
P-7A 4/4/09 8/28/11 21,024 16,259 148 1
P-7B 5/12/10 9/1/11 11,391 9,073 70 2
P-7C 6/12/09 9/29/09 2,616 2,414 13 3
P-7C 10/1/09 8/8/11 16,224 14,115 95 4
INoies:
1)
Run hours and stops and starts based on total presented in Palisades response to NRC RFI 43 [6] plus average monthly hours from 4/10 to 9/10 times 6 months.
2)
Information provided in Figure 2-1.
3)
Information provided in Figure 2-2.
4)
Run hours and stops and starts based on total presented in Palisades response to NRC RFI 43 [6].
Sontra Yim From:
DeBusscher. Derek [ddebuss@entergy.com]
Sent :
Wednesday, September 28. 2011 8:02 Ala1 To:
Sontra Yim Cc:
Forehand. James M Subject :
RE: Palisades comments on LPI report F11358-LR-001 Attachments RFI 43 Responsedoc Sontra.
P-7B
.,as put into service with the new couplings on 5/12110 as stated by the WO 20082. From that date I calculated the approximate run time hours to be 9072.5 and the pump start.stops to be 70 since that time. Total installed hours are approximated 11.391 hrs.
I have attached the RFI that was revie.ved. Note that the times only include up to 8`9111. P-78 ran for 703 hrs during August not 204 ). and had one additional start.
If there is any other information you need please let me kno,., so':.e can get this minor issue hashed out as soon as possible.
Thanks.
Deiek DeBUSicher BOP Sv, ieuts Ensineetxn2 Palisade, Nuclear Power Plant ddebassd enrer
- neon, Figure 2-1: P-7B Run Time Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 19 of 83 Revision 1
EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 Data Souce PaI.ades PI Datalink Time Start 6112/09 0 :00 Update highlighted ce/s Time Stop 1011/09 0 :00 and click 'Update Sheet" Update Sheet (must have Pi add-in installed) button Service Water Pump P-7C None None Total Run Time:
2414.44 hrs 6112/0912.22 Started 1
6112/M 12 23 Stopped 61121 09 15 03 Started 2
6112/09 15.33 Stopped 611009 15 34 Started 3
6119109 3:44 Stopped 6119/09 16 17 Started 4
7117109 10.52 Stopped 711710911.42 Started 5
7117/ 0912. 02 Stopped 7117/0913:22 Started 6
7/23109 5 03 Stopped 7123109 9.04 Started 7
8/81092138 Stopped 818/09 21 39 Started 8
8/13/09355 Stopped 8/13/09356 Started 9
8!28+09 10.40 Stopped 8128109 10 41 Started 10 912109 13 06 Stopped 9/91091115 Started 11 9122109 20 32 Stopped 9122!09 2338 Started 12 9129/097.34 Stopped 9129/09 7.35 Started 13 9129/099.11 Stoeoed 14 Figure 2-2: P-7C Run Time Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 20 of 83 Revision 1
SWS Basin Level and Lake Temperature 5x5.1) 1 583.0 31
^
581.0
}
c m
i 3
580.0 579.0 577.0 EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 584.0 582.0 578.0 t
576.0 9/9/2008 3/28/2009 10/14/2009 5/2/2010 11/18/2010 6/6/2011 Date Figure 2-3: SWS Basin Level and Lake Temp Data 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 3
40.0 E
30.0 20.0 1
10.0 0.0 Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 21 of 83 Revision 1
EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 L! L U
, " :-:^,
3.0 TESTING AND EXAMINATION The submitted components, including couplings 09-P7C-7F and 11-P7C-6F, were examined and tested in accordance with LPI Procedure F11358-P-001
[5] and the Test Matrix presented in Table 1-1.
The result of testing and examination is discussed in the following sections.
3.1 Visual and Stereomicroscopic Examination 3.1.1 P-7C Components 3.1.1.1 2011 Intact Couplings In all, seven (7) intact couplings (# 1 through 5, 7 and 8 ), disassembled from pump P7C following failure of 11-P7C-6F, were shipped to LPI for examination. Couplings were labeled to indicate the orientation of shafts that connected to the respective coupling. A representative example of an intact coupling is shown in Figure 3-1. The outer diameter of each intact coupling exhibited wrenching marks, which likely occurred during removal of the couplings. Indentations, which are evidence of previously performed hardness tests, were present on both the outer diameter and ends of many couplings with values written adjacent to the indentations of coupling 11-P7C-7 (see Figure 3-2).
Each coupling exhibited a single alignment hole at its center, 0.125 in. in diameter.
The coupling ends were chamfered at 45° on both outer (0.187 in.) and inner diameters (0.125 in.).
The inner diameter of each coupling is fully threaded.
Visual examination of received intact couplings did not reveal significant signs of corrosion or degradation on the exterior surfaces (unthread surfaces). Some corrosion deposits were noted near the 1/8" diameter alignment hole and at the ends of some intact couplings, however not to the degree exhibited on coupling 11-P7C-6F.
3.1.1.2 Coupling 11-P7C-6F The fracture surface of 11-P7C-6F is located near the mid-length of the coupling.
The fracture surface on the impeller end of coupling 11-P7C-6F was sectioned for analysis, as shown in Figure 3-5.
Approximately half of the fracture surface exhibited a smooth
" flat" appearance and was aligned perpendicular to the coupling axis.
The flat fracture surfaces occur in two regions that both display an elliptical shape emanating from the thread root at the inner diameter and extending to the outer diameter, as shown in Figure 3-5. The elliptical features are typically Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 22 of 83 Revision 1
EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 associated with cracks that initiate at the thread root (and in this case propagated from the inner to the outer diameter of the coupling). The remaining portion of the fracture surface consisted of slanted fracture, indicating an overload event.
The overload event occurred after the flat fractures propagated through the wall thickness.
The thread roots exhibited red/brown corrosion products, as shown in Figure 3-6.
Corrosion deposits are visually apparent on the facture surfaces, threads and at the alignment hole of coupling 1 1-P7C-6F.
The corrosion deposit streak at the bottom of the 1/8" diameter shaft alignment hole suggests that the coupling underwent wet and dry cycles (Figure 3-6).
The tips of fracture surfaces on both pieces of fractured coupling 11-P7C-6F exhibited signs of impact from mechanical
- contact, likely occurring post failure.
3.1.1.3 Coupling 09-P7C-7F Fractured coupling 09-P7C-7F measured between 2.06" to 3.43" in length.
Visual examination of coupling 09-P7C-7F revealed similar fracture surface characteristics to 11-P7C-6F. The fracture surface has a relatively flat region with an elliptical shape emanating from the thread root and extending to the outer diameter (see Figure 3-3). The elliptical feature reveals that the crack initiated at the thread root and propagated to the outer diameter. The remaining portion of the fracture surface was
- slanted, which indicates a
subsequent overload of the remaining ligament. Corrosion deposits are also evident on the facture surface.
3.1.1.4 2011 Shafts Two shafts (shaft #5 and 6) from pump P-7C were shipped to LPI for visual examination (see 8/17/11 receipt inspection in Attachment B).
Visual examination of shaft #5 and #6 showed damage on the ends coupled by coupling 11-P7C-6F (see Figure 3-7).
It is postulated that this damage was most likely caused after the initial failure of coupling 11-P7C-6F by repeated impact between the fractured coupling and the shaft ends.
This postulate is supported by the blunted fracture surfaces exhibited on the 11-P7C-6F halves.
3.1.2 Couplings from P-7A Visual inspection of as-received P-7A pump couplings 11-P7A-4 through -7 identified the threads to be well coated with Neolube. A photograph of the as-Report No. F11358-R -001 Page 23 of 83 Revision 1
EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-11-06 ti i
received coupling 11-P7A-7 is provided in Figure 3-8. No significant signs of corrosion or degradation on the exterior of couplings were observed.
This was in contrast to observations of the P-7C couplings in the as-received condition, where lubricant was not observed to be as well coated on the threads. A comparison of this is shown in Figure 3-9.
Visual inspection of the as-split P-7A couplings revealed them to be well coated with Neolube. The mid section of the couplings contained little to no corrosion products, however some sand - like deposits were present within the middle two-to-three threads of the couplings.
The split and cleaned couplings,
in preparation for MT, did not reveal any visible indications, as shown in Figure 3-10 for 11 -P7A-5.
3.1.3 Couplings from P-7B A photograph of the as-received couplings 11-P7B-4 through 11-P7B-7 are shown in Figure 3-11. Visual examination of these intact couplings revealed wrench marks on the exterior of all couplings and the presence of Neolube on the interior threads of couplings 11-P7B-5 to -7. No significant signs of corrosion or degradation on the exterior of couplings were observed. The interior of 11-P7B-4 appeared to have been cleaned in the as-received condition.
Couplings 11-P7B-4 though 11-P7B-7 were split longitudinally for fluorescent magnetic particle inspection (MT). The as-split coupling 11-P7B-4 appeared to have been cleaned and exhibited a dye liquid penetrate residue on the threads (see Figure 3-12). The presence of the liquid penetrate on the thread surface is consistent with efforts by Palisades to examine this coupling for possible re-use due to procurement issues with the replacement couplings fabricated from 17-4PH material.
As-split couplings 11-P7B-5 through 11-P7B-7 are shown in Figure 3-13 through Figure 3-15. Neolube is present on the threaded surfaces of coupling 11-P7B-5 to 11-P7B-7.
- However, an apparent band of corrosion product was observed at the center two-to-three threads of couplings 11-P7B-6 and 11-P7B-7.
Coupling 11-P7B-5 also exhibited some corrosion at the center threads but not to the extent of couplings 11-P7B-6 and 11-P7B-7. A layer of sand-like material was also present over the corrosion products.
3.2 Dimensional Examination A dimensional examination of couplings was performed and presented in Table 3-1. Measurements of wall thickness (from the outer diameter to the thread crown) of couplings to evaluate eccentricity are given in Table 3-2.
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 24 of 83 Revision 1
EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 L
The dimensioning scheme is shown in Figure 3-4.
All intact couplings (i.e.
those that did not fail) were found to have outside dimensions within the specified dimensions and tolerances of HydroAire drawing 1047237 [20].
Coupling 11-P7C-6F was received in two halves that each exhibited a
circumferential fracture surface. The bottom half (impeller end) of 1 1-P7C-6F measured between 3.03" and 4.29" in length.
The top half (motor end) of the same coupling measured between 1.200" and 3.148" in length.
3.3 Magnetic Particle Examination (MT)
Fluorescent magnetic particle testing (MT) was used to determine if intact couplings contained cracks or other discontinuities. MT was performed on all intact couplings exposed to wet and dry cycles (coupling Nos.
5, 6, and 7) and coupling #4 which is always submerged for all three service water pumps. Couplings were split longitudinally to facilitate access to the inner diameter threaded region for MT inspection.
Result of the inspections is provided in Attachment D.
3.3.1 P-7C Couplings 3.3.1.1 Coupling 11-P7C-6F Visible cracks in coupling 11-P7C-6F were readily observed upon MT examination, as shown in Figure 3-16.
The nearly 45 degree MT indication is consistent with torsional loading of the coupling.
3.3.1.2 Intact Couplings 11-P7C-4, -5, and -7 MT did not reveal any indications on couplings 11-P7C-4 and 11-P7C-5.
MT revealed an indication, observed as a well-defined bright fluorescent line, at the thread root near the shaft alignment hole of coupling 11-P7C-7K, as shown in Figure 3-17. The MT indication in coupling 11-P7C-7K is approximately 0.86" in length and located along a thread root. At the sectioned location, the indication is a quarter through the thickness.
3.3.2 P-7A Couplings Following cleaning,
couplings 11-P7A-4 through 11-P7A-7 were MT inspected.
No indications of linear flaws were observed from the MT inspection of couplings 11-P7A-4 through 11 -P7A-7.
3.3.3 P-7B Couplings Following
- cleaning, couplings 11-P7B-4 through 11-P7B-7 were MT inspected. MT inspection of couplings 11-P7B-4 through 11-P7B-7, revealed indications at the center (location of corrosion products) of couplings 11-P7B-Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 25 of 83 Revision 1
EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-11-06 E
Figure 3-18 presents photographs highlighting the crack at the center of 11-P7B-7K revealed by MT. Two relatively small indications were also found at the motor end of coupling 11-P7B-5.
No indication was found on coupling 11-P7B-4.
A summary of the as-found crack dimensions on MT inspected couplings is provided in Table 3-3.
3.4 Metallography Longitudinal specimens were prepared from the coupling material, mounted in
- plastic, ground,
- polished, and etched for metallographic examination.
General views of the microstructure for one coupling from each pump are shown in Figure 3-19.
The microstructure shows prior austenite grain boundaries with colonies of commonly oriented martensite lath inside the grains. This structure is characteristic of a martensitic stainless steel.
Longitudinal specimens were prepared through cracks from fractured and cracked couplings,
mounted in
- plastic, ground,
- polished, and etched for metallographic examination.
Metallographic images are shown in both the as-polished and etched conditions, as shown in Figure 3-20.
All cracks displayed a similar appearance of a branching network of cracks along the prior austenite grain boundaries,
which is characteristic of intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC). This cracking mechanism is common for martensitic stainless steels exposed to chloride-containing aqueous and other corrosive environments.
From the metallographic images in Figure 3-20, it appears that IGSCC cracks originate from pits. The thread roots of coupling Nos. 4 to 7 for all pumps were visually examined by stereomicroscopy for pitting.
It was observed that pitting occurred at the thread roots of couplings that exhibited cracks, as shown in Figure 3-21. Couplings without cracks exhibited some general corrosion, however contained no readily observable pitting.
A representative image of a P-7A coupling showing general corrosion but no pitting at the thread root is presented in Figure 3-22.
3.5 Scanning Electron Microscopy The fracture surface morphology and composition of the corrosion product were evaluated for the two fractured couplings, 09-P7C-7F and 11 -P7C-6F.
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 26 of 83 Revision 1
EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 The fracture surfaces of 11-P7C-6F and 09-P7C-7F were examined in a
scanning electron microscope (SEM) to evaluate the crack initiation and propagation mechanism. Deposits on the fracture surfaces of couplings 11-P7C-6F and 09-P7C-7F were analyzed by energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDS) in the SEM. As shown in Figure 3-23, the spectrum contained large peaks for
- iron, chromium, manganese, and silicon from corrosion products of the base material. The high chromium level in the spectrum, shown in Figure 3-23, is likely attributed to a local concentration of chromium carbides in the X-ray sampling volume.
An additional EDS spectrum, taken over a larger area of the fracture surface, is provided in Figure 3-24. Also exhibited was a large peak for oxygen and smaller peaks of chlorine and sulfur, indicating the presence of oxides, chlorides and sulfur species.
Chlorides and sulfides from the environment are known to cause corrosion and SCC in martensitic stainless steels.
The fracture surface was cleaned in an ultrasonic bath containing an acetone /methanol mixture prior to examination in a
SEM at 20 kV accelerating potential.
SEM examination revealed the fracture surface morphology to exhibit a
rock-candy appearance, characteristic of intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC),
as shown in Figure 3-25.
This cracking mechanism is common for martensitic stainless steels exposed to chloride-containing aqueous and other corrosive environments.
3.6 Physical and Mechanical Properties 3.6.1 Tensile Test Tensile specimens were prepared from couplings as indicated in the Test Matrix (Table 1-1). The results of the tensile test on the specimens are included in Attachment F and summarized in Table 3-4. The tensile test results were in the approximate range for Type 416 stainless steel with an intermediate temper based on specified hardness values in ASTM A582 [7].
Yield strength values ranged from 108 to 142 ksi and the elongation ranged from 12.8 to 17.9 %.
3.6.2 Composition of Base Metal The base metal compositions of all couplings within the Test Matrix (Table 1-1) were evaluated by chemical analysis and the results are provided in Table 3-5. The results indicate that the chemical composition of all tested couplings conform to the chemical requirements of ASTM A582 Type 416 stainless steel [7].
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 27 of 83 Revision 1
EA-P SA-SDP-P 7 C-11-06 1412 flT 3.6.3 Hardness Surveys Surface hardness surveys were performed in accordance with the requirements of ASTM E18-07 [8] with the results presented in Attachment E and summarized in Table 3-6. Unless otherwise noted, surface hardness was measured on the ends (motor and impeller ends) of each coupling.
Through thickness hardness of couplings extracted in 2011 were measured near the center of each coupling from the outer diameter (OD) to the inner diameter (ID) of tested couplings at two diametrically opposite locations.
Hardness measurements on coupling 09-P7C-7F were taken at the mid-wall along the length of the coupling from the center to the end of the coupling.
Results of the through thickness Rockwell C hardness measurements are presented in Table 3-7.
3.6.4 Charpy V-Notch (CVN) Impact Testing Charpy V-Notch (CVN) impact test specimens with radial notches facing the inner diameter were machined and tested in accordance with ASTM Standard E23 [10] over a temperature range of 32°F to 152°F.
Results of impact testing are given in Table 3-8.
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 28 of 83 Revision 1
EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-11-06 Table 3-1: Measurement of Coupling Outside Dimensions Coupling Length ( in.)
OD (in.)
11-P7C-1 6.000 3.186 11-P7C-2 6.002 3.190 11-P7C-3 5.998 3.187 11-P7C-4 5.995 3.189 11-P7C-5 6.000 3.187 11-P7C-6 F (a )
3.186 11-P7C-7 5.997 3.187 11-P7C-8 5.998 3.187 09-P7C-7F
( b )
3.187 11-P7A-4 6.000 3.187 11-P7A-5 5.999 3.189 11-P7A-6 6.000 3.188 11-P7A-7 6.000 3.188 11-P7B-4 5.995 3.189 11-P7B-5 5.996 3.189 11-P7B-6 6.001 3.188 11-P7B-7 6.000 3.188 Notes: (a) coupling 11-P7C-6F was fractured near the center of the length and measurements of fractured pieces are described in the text, (b) only one half of the fractured coupling 09-P7C-7F was sent to LPI and the measurements of this piece of coupling are described in the text.
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 29 of 83 Revision 1
EA-P SA-SDP-P 7 C-11-06 Table 3-2: Measurement of Coupling Wall Thickness Cou lin Wall thickness Motor End )
Wall Thickness (Im peller End p
g tI t2 tg U
ti t2 tg U
11-P7C-1 0.566 0.566 0.565 0.567 0.568 0.566 0.565 0.566 11-P7C-2 0.567 0.568 0.567 0.569 0.566 0.565 0.567 0.567 11-P7C-3 0.567 0.567 0.568 0.567 0.571 0.566 0.570 0.569 11-P7C-4 0.574 0.567 0.569 0.569 0.568 0.569 0.571 0.569 11-P7C-5 0.571 0.570 0.570 N/A 0.568 0.570 0.572 N/A 11-P7C-6F (a )
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.568 0.569 N/A 11-P7C-7 0.572 0.571 0.569 0.568 0.568 0.570 0.569 0.570 11-P7C-8 0.563 0.566 0.567 0.567 0.567 0.566 0.564 0.566 09-P7C-7F
( b )
N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.569 0.569 0.568 0.567 11-P7A-4 0.565 0.567 0.567 0.567 0.568 0.567 0.567 0.568 11-P7A-5 0.566 0.566 0.566 0.567 0.568 0.568 0.566 0.567 11-P7A-6 0.566 0.567 0.566 0.566 0.568 0.567 0.567 0.567 11-P7A-7 0.568 0.568 0.567 0.566 0.567 0.568 0.568 0.568 11-P7B-4 0.568 0.569 0.571 0.569 0.568 0.568 0.568 0.568 11-P713-5 0.566 0.567 0.567 0.567 0.568 0.566 0.566 0.568 11-P7B-6 0.569 0.568 0.568 0.567 0.568 0.569 0.568 0.567 11-P7B-7 0.565 0.566 0.566 0.566 0.566 0.566 0.567 0.567 Notes :
( a) the top portion of fractured coupling No. 6 was not removed from shaft,
( b) only the bottom half of fractured coupling 09-P7C-7F was available.
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 30 of 83 Revision 1
[Rim Table 3-3: MT Detected Crack Dimensions EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 Coupling Crack Location Crack Length Along Thread Root (in.)
Crack Depth (in )
11-P7C-7K Center 0.86 0.125 11-P7B-5K Center 1.25 0.065 Motor End 0.25 and 0.19 (a) 0.02 11-P7B-6K Center 0.50 0.132 11-P7B-7K Center 0.50 0.043 Note (a): These two indications were located close to each other and toward the motor end of the coupling. All other indications were found at the center of couplings.
Table 3-4: Tensile Test Results Coupling Specimen Identification Yield Strength
( ksi )
Tensile Strength
( ksi )
Elongation 11-P7C-5 5-1 134 148 17.9 5-2 131 147 16.2 11-P7C-6F 6-1 139 155 16.7 6-2 142 155 15.7 11-P7C-7K 7-1 138 151 13.3 7-2 137 152 15.5 11-P7A-5 A5-1 132 146 14.1 A5-2 136 153 14.6 11-P7A-6 A6-1 112 126 16.2 A6-2 108 123 16.1 11-P7A-7 A7-1 136 151 12.8 A7-2 136 150 15.4 11-P713-5K 5-1 118 136 17.9 5-2 118 136 14.6 11-P7B-6K 6-1 131 144 14.2 6-2 126 140 15.2 11-P7B-7K 7-1 114 129 17.3 7-2 115 129 16.5 Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 31 of 83 Revision 1
14,12 ff,11)6 EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 Table 3-5: Metal Composition of Couplings (Wt. %)
Element Standard C
Cr Cu Mn Mo Ni P
0.15 max 12.00-14.00 ns 1.25 max 0.60 max ns 0.060 max 0.15 min 1.00 max Cou p lin gs 11-P7C-5 0.1 12.93 0.16 1.09 0.03 0.14 0.007 0.51 0.23 11-P7C-6F 0.12 12.9 0.16 0.85 0.03 0.14 0.015 0.36 0.23 11-P7C-7K 0.11 12.92 0.16 0.68 0.03 0.14 0.02 0.34 0.25 09-P7C-7F 0.12 12.38 0.12 1.13 0.05 0.19 0.041 0.32 0.46 11-P7A-5 0.14 13.06 0.071 0.74 0.07 0.22 0.018 0.35 0.42 11-P7A-6 0.10 12.16 0.077 0.83 0.12 0.43 0.021 0.22 0.34 11-P7A-7 0.13 12.97 0.073 0.65 0.06 0.22 0.017 0.35 0.42 11-P7B-5K 0.13 12.1 0.082 0.72 0.08 0.28 0.02 0.37 0.37 11-P7B-6K 0.12 12.0 0.079 0.7 0.078 0.27 0.02 0.29 0.37 11-P7B-7K 0.12 12.0 0.078 0.72 0.078 0.27 0.02 0.34 0.37 ns - not specified Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 32 of 83 Revision 1
VIM EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 Table 3-6: Surface Hardness Survey of Couplings Coupling End Average HRC Measurements (Rc) 11-P7C-1 to p 30.5 30.1, 30.6, 30.2, 30.4, 30.7, 31.1 bottom 27.3 29.1, 29.8, 25.0, 26.0, 26.1, 27.7 11-P7C-2 to p 27.6 29.7, 25.5, 27.0, 30.2, 25.9, 27.1 bottom 27.0 25.8, 26.0, 27.6, 27.5, 29.0, 26.0 11-P7C-3 to p 27.9 26.5, 28.0, 26.0, 28.6, 29.8, 28.2 bottom 31.3 32.1, 31.5, 32.0, 29.9, 31.0, 31.0 11-P7C-4 to p 31.5 30.0, 33.6, 29.4, 31.5, 30.6, 33.8 bottom 30.8 29.7, 28.1, 30.8, 31.8, 32.1, 32.1 11-P7C-5 to p 29.7 31.1, 29.6, 29.6, 30.0, 29.0, 29.0, 29.1, 30.0 bottom 29.6 28.9, 29.5, 29.4, 29.0, 29.9, 30.9, 30.5, 27.9, 30.2 11-P7C-6F to p (a) bottom 33.3 33.1, 33.0, 33.1, 33.0, 33.1, 33.5, 33.6, 33.6 11-P7C-7K to p 32.2 31.5, 31.9, 32.0, 32.2, 32.6, 32.2, 32.2, 32.6 bottom 30.6 30.6, 31.1, 31.3, 28.7, 30.0, 31.4, 31.0, 31.0 11-P7C-8 to p 32.2 32.0, 31.8, 31.4, 32.0, 33.0, 32.7 bottom (b) 09-P7C-7F to p (c) bottom 32.1 33.7, 33.1, 32.8, 32.0, 30.2, 31.8, 31.2 11-P7A-5 to p 32.5 32.5, 32.0, 32.5, 32.0, 33.0, 33.0 bottom 29.9 28.0, 31.5, 31.5, 30.0, 30.5, 28.0 11-P7A-6 to p 25.3 25.5, 25.5, 25.0, 25.5, 25.0, 25.5 bottom 23.8 24.5, 23.5, 23.5, 25.0, 22.0, 24.0 11-P7A-7 to p 31.5 31.0, 31.5, 32.0, 32.0, 32.5, 31.0 bottom 28.7 28.0, 28.0, 27.0, 30.0, 29.0, 30.0 11-P7B-5K to p 27.6 28.0, 28.0, 27.5, 28.5, 26.5, 27.0 bottom 26.1 25.0, 27.0, 26.5, 25.0, 27.0, 26.0 11-P7B-6K to p 29.9 30.0, 30.0, 30.5, 30.0, 30.0, 29.0 bottom 28.5 27.5, 29.0, 28.0, 28.5, 28.5, 29.5 11-P7B-7K to p 28.3 28.0, 28.0, 28.5, 29.0, 28.5, 28.0 bottom 26.1 25.5, 27.0, 26.0, 27.0, 24.5, 26.5 Notes: (a) top side of coupling No. 6 was kept in its as-received position on shaft No. 6, (b) deposits on the bottom of coupling No. 8 were kept intact and prevented hardness testing of the underlying base metal, (c) only bottom section of coupling 09-P7C-7F was received.
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 33 of 83 Revision 1
00 EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 Table 3-7: Through Thickness Hardness of Couplings Coupling Location Measurements from OD to ID (Rc) 11-P7C-5 1
27.2, 28.0, 28.0, 27.7, 28.0, 27.1 2
31.5, 30.9, 30.4, 30.2, 30.2, 30.7 11-P7C 6F 1
31.5, 32.7, 32.0, 32.1, 32.2, 32.0 2
31.5, 32.2, 31.9, 32.1, 31.5 11-P7C 7K 1
31.2, 32.0, 31.7, 31.9, 31.3, 31.8 2
32.0, 32.0, 32.0, 31.9, 32.6, 32.0 11-P7A 5 1
33.0, 29.9, 33.2, 33.0, 33.6, 32.2 2
32.9, 32.9, 33.0, 32.6, 32.8, 33.1 11 P7A 6 1
24.0, 24.0, 24.0, 24.0, 24.0, 24.0 2
24.5, 24.0, 24.0, 24.0, 24.5, 24.0 11-P7A 7 1
31.0, 31.5, 31.0, 31.5, 31.0, 31.0 2
32.0, 31.5, 32.0, 31.0, 31.0, 31.0 11-P7B 5K 1
27.0, 27.5, 27.5, 28.0, 27.9, 27.5 2
28.5, 28.0, 28.6, 28.0, 27.7, 28.1 11-P7B 6K 1
28.8, 29.0, 29.1, 29.4, 29.8, 29.8 2
29.2, 29.9, 30.0, 30.0, 30.1, 30.2 11-P7B 7K 1
28.2, 28.0, 27.9, 27.9, 28.0, 28.5 2
28.1, 28.8, 28.7, 28.5, 28.4, 28.6 09-P7C-6F
( a )
34.8, 35.9, 35.2, 36.0, 36.3, 36.8, 37.1 Notes : (a) Hardness measurements on 09-P7C-6F were taken at the mid-wall along the length of the coupling from the center to the end of the coupling.
Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 34 of 83 Revision 1
Sample through thickness hardness test specimen.
Table 3-8: CVN Impact Test Results EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 Coupling Specimen Identification Test Temperature (OF )
Absorbed Energy (ft-lb )
Lateral Expansion
( in. )
Percent Shear M
5-C2 32 9
0.005
<10 5-C4 32 9
0.006
<10 5-C 1 70 10 0.007 10 11-P7C-5 5-C6 70 10 0.007 10 5-C8 70 10 0.007 10 5-C3 100 11 0.007 20 5-C5 100 10 0.006 20 5-C7 150 15 0.011 50 6-C2 32 6
0.003
<10 6-C4 32 8
0.006
<10 11-P7C-6F 6-C1 70 9
0.005 10 6-C5 70 10 0.006 10 6-C3 100 11 0.007 10 6-C6 153 14 0.008 50 7-C2 32 7.5 0.003
<10 11-P7C-7K 7-C1 75 10 0.008 10 7-C3 100 11 0.008 10 709-C3 32 4
0.004
<10 709-C4 32 3
0.004
<10 09-P7C-7F 709-C1 75 5
0.005
<10 709-C2 75 6
0.002
<10 709-C5 100 6
0.003
<10 709-C6 152 6
0.006
<10 5-A3 32 7
0.003
<10 5-A4 32 7
0.002
<10 11-P7A-5 5-Al 75 8
0.006 10 5-A2 75 9
0.005 10 5-A5 100 13 0.009 30 6-A3 32 3
0.002
<10 6-A4 32 3
0.002
<10 11-P7A-6 6-Al 75 6
0.006 10 6-A2 75 6
0.008 10 6-A5 100 9
0.012 10 7-A3 32 11 0.005
<10 11-P7A-7 7-A4 32 9
0.004
<10 7-Al 75 12 0.009 20 Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 35 of 83 Revision 1
o EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 Coupling Specimen Identification Test Temperature
°F Absorbed Energy ft-lb )
Lateral Expansion
( in. )
Percent Shear 7-A2 75 12 0.010 20 7-A5 100 18 0.015 50 B5-9 0
9 0.006 10 B5-10 0
10 0.007 10 B5-1 32 14 0.013 20 B5-2 32 16 0.014 40 11-P7B-5K B5-7 32 12.5 0.011 20 -
B5-8 32 13 0.011 20 B5-3 76 22 0.018
>90 B5-4 76 29 0.018
>90 B5-5 100 28 0.016
>90 B5-6 150 26 0.017
>90 B6-9 0
5 0.004
<10 B6-10 0
5 0.004
<10 B6-1 32 8
0.004
<10 B6-2 32 5
0.005
<10 11-P7B-6K B6-7 32 6
0.005
<10 B6-8 32 5.5 0.003
<10 B6-3 76 11 0.008 10 B6-4 76 10 0.009 10 B6-5 100 21 0.015 80 B6-6 150 21 0.015
>90 B7-9 0
8 0.007 10 B7-10 0
9 0.007 10 B7-1 32 12 0.008 20 B7-2 32 11 0.009 20 11-P7B-7K B7-7 32 11 0.009 10 B7-8 32 13.5 0.013 20 B7-3 76 11 0.015 50 B7-5 100 22 0.016
>90 B7-6 150 32 0.022
>90 Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 36 of 83 Revision 1
00 EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 Coupling 11-PC-7 in as-received form.
Shaft numbers engraved on the ends.
Coupling exhibited wrenching marks on outer diameter.
Figure 3-1 : As-Received 11-P7C-7 14 tic
.^Jt^
Hardness measurement indentations are present on both ends. Measurement values were 34.9, 30.7, 29.5 and 29.4 on motor end and 33.5, 32.2, 32.0 and 32.5 on impeller end.
Figure 3-2: Hardness Indentation and Values Written on 11-P7C-7 Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 37 of 83 Revision 1
Motor End Impeller End
Report No. F11358-R-001 Revision 1
DO EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-11-06 Page 38 of 83 Figure 3-3: 09-P7C-7F Fracture Surface Showing Elliptical Feature
[IN Cross seotion (viewed from motor end)
Outer Diameter Thru hole Q
f Crest of Thread Thru hole location Cross section (viewed from motor end)
O[
Crest OD Charmer ID Chamfer Motor End Impeler End EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 Figure 3-4: Coupling Dimensioning Scheme (a) Fracture surface was sectioned from the coupling for analysis.
Tip exhibited blunting from mechanical damage (arrow).
Figure 3-5: Visual of (b) Elliptical pattern of crack on flat fracture surfac(
relative to coupling axis. Also, red/brown corrosion product found on the insides of coupling threads (arrow)
=racture Surface on Coupling 11-P7C-6F Report No. F11358-R-001 Page 39 of 83 Revision 1
0
- WP EA-PSA-SDP-P7C-1 1-06 Figure 3-6: 11-P7C -6F showing Corrosion Deposit Report No. Fl 1358-R-001 Page 40 of 83 Revision 1