ML17059B658
| ML17059B658 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 07/07/1997 |
| From: | Agosta C, Alvi M NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17059B657 | List: |
| References | |
| S.0SEW210-1, S0.0SEW210-01, NUDOCS 9708070116 | |
| Download: ML17059B658 (12) | |
Text
LI% NlAGARA I
l% LIMOHAWK C4LCULATJON COVER SHEET NUCLEAR ENGINEERING ATTACHMENT C
Page 1 ( Next
'otal
~
Last bz-NINE MILEPOINT NUCLEARSTATION Unit(1, 2 or 0=Both):
1 Discipline:
STRUCTURAL TNe SCREENING EVALUATIONWORK SHEETS FOR FAN21041 Calculation No.
SO.OSEWS210-01 (Sub)system(s) 210 Building FktorElev.
IndexNo.
TB 300 S0.0 Originator(s)
CARMEN R.AGOSTA Checker(s) /Approver(s)
Rev 00 Descrl tlon INITIALISSUE Design Chan e No.
B Date Chk Date A
Date Computer Output/Microfilm Flied Separately (Yes / No / NA): NA Superseded Document(s):
NONE Safety Class (SR I NSR / Qxx): SR Document Cross Reference(s) - For additional references see page(s):
NA Ref No Document No.
Doc T
Index Sheet Rev NER-1 S-012 SO.OSQUGANCHOR NER CALC SO.O 00 00 General Reference(s):
- 3. GENERIC IMPLIMENTATIONPROCEDURE (GIP)
- 4. NMPC Letter to NRC, File Code NMP1L 1044, dated March 11, 1996 Remarks:
NONE Confirmation Required (Yes / No): No Final Issue Status File Location Operations Acceptance See Page(s):
(APPIFIO/VOI):APP (Cele/Hold): Gale Required(Yes/No): No Evaluation Number(s) I Revision: NR Copy ofApplicabilityReview Attached (Yes I N/R)?N/R Com ponent ID(s) I EPN(s) I Line Number(s):
FN-21001 Key Words: NMP-1, STRUCTURAL, SQUG, SEWS, SEISMIC VERIFICATION FORMATS NEP-DES48-FONS 9708070ii6 9707Si PDR ADOCIti'5000220 P
hl V NIAGARA ltU MOHAWK NUCLEAR ENGINEERING CALCULATION.CONTINUATIONSHEET Page Z-(Next~
Nine Mile Point Nuclear Stat/on Unit:
Disposition:
Originator/D e
Z$-7'7 ef.
Catcuhtion No Checker/Date Ivt A 7 7 I7 SO.OSEWS210-01 Revtaion 00 PURPOSE:
Document the Screening Evaluation Work Sheets (SEWS) forthe CRAG/EMER VENT FAN¹11, equipment number 210-01.
This SEWS has been prepared as part ofthe commitment to use the SQUG (GIP) methodology to document the seismic adequacy of SSEL components.
CONCLUSION: The 300 pound fan anchored with six ~/~" diameter cinch anchors is adequate based on engineering judgment, the cinch anchor capacities given in Calculation SO.OSQUGANCHOR (Ref. 2) and the bolt tightness check results confirming these type of anchors are tight. The existing structure constructed of scaffold components is adequate for seismic loads per Calculation SO.OTBSCAF01 Therefore, the SQUG outlier for210-01 is resolved.
ATTACHMENTS A. SEWS for Equipment ID Number 167A B. The Outlier Seismic Verification Sheet (OSVS) for Equipment ID Number 167A FORMAT¹ NEP-DE&48, Rev. 01 (F02)
ATTACHM9g CALC NO REVISION PAGE NO w
/
a SSEL Line No.
7303 AI SCREENING EVALUATION WORK SHEET (SEWS)
Status Y
N U
Sheet 1 of '2 Equip.
ID No.
210-01
~
~
~
Equip. Class 09 - Fans Equipment Description CRAG EMER VENT FAN IQI11 Location: Bldg.
TB Floor El.
300
- Room, Row/Col A15 Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended) graf miM~ no~
<Mu~m~ mal), S/a~i/, ~g
~/AL. l/-Zgg DMPc92.~ ~ p~~
. Pwo/
p/
grade Y
U 8Hz N
U N/A DOC BS COBB GERS GRS um AGS Spec.
- p. Spec.
C3I9 d in N
U+
1 SAllc NoSp
)
which e and U
N/A U
N/A U ~A U
N/A U
~ i'm~
U N/A U
N/A num.C~)
U N/A YCQU N/A
~cS OSIS Y
N N
Y N
N (P
N U
N/A Y 4P U
N/A HMC2$
N U
N/A Y
N QU N/A&~CÃ SEISMIC CAPACITY VS DEMAND l.
Elevation where equipment receives seismic input 2.
Elevation of seismic input below about 40'rom 3.
Equipment has fundamental frequency above about 4.
Capacity based on:
Existing Documentation Bounding Spectrum 1.5 x Bounding Spectrum GERS 5.
Demand based on:
Ground Response Spectrum 1.5 x Ground
Response
Spectr Conserv.
Des. In-Str. Resp.
Realistic M-Ctr. In-Str.
Res Does capacity exceed demand?
(Indicate at right (*) an COMMENTS if a special exception to enveloping of se demand spectrum is invoked per Section 4.2 of the GIP.)
CAVEATS - BOUNDING SPECTRUM (Identify with an asterisk (*) those caveats are met by intent without meeting the specific wording of the caveat rul explain the reason for this conclusion in the COMMENTS section below) 1.
Equipment is included in earthquake experience equipment class dP N
2.
Drive motor and fan mounted on common base (P
N 3.
For axial fan with long shaft between fan and motor, shaft supported at fan as well as motor 4.
No possibility of excessive duct distortion causing binding or misalignment of fan 5.
Base vibration isolators adequate for seismic loads 6.
Attached lines (electrical) have adequate flexibility 7.
Anchorage adequate (See checklist below for details) 8.
Have you looked for and found no other adverse concerns?
Is the intent of all the caveats met for Bounding Spectrum?
y$
o g
$/ ~
p QD ANCHORAGE ~ + ~ t ~of l.
Appjr6pria+ equipment characteristics determined (mass, CG, natural freq., damping, center of rotation) 2.
Type of anchorage covered by GIP 3.
Sizes and locations of anchors determined 4.
Anchorage installation adequate, e.g.,
weld quality and length, nuts and washers, expansion anchor tightness
Sat
')4 4
Oe>'ji!~l I
SSEL Line No.
7303 SCREENING EVALUATION WORK SHEET (SEWS)
ATTACHMBIT CAI.C NO REVISION PAGE go Sheet 2 of 2 Equip.
ID No.
210-01
~
~
~
Equip. Class 09 - Fans Equipmeht Description CRAG EMER VENT FAN ¹ll
~ARE R E
C
'd 5.
Factors affecting anchorage capacity or margin of safety considered:
embedment
- length, anchor spacing, free-edge
- distance, concrete strength/condition, and concrete cracking 6.
For bolted anchorages, gap under base less than 1/4-inch 7.
Base has adequate stiffness and effect of prying action on anchors considered 8.
Strength of equipment base and load path to CG adequate 9.
Embedded steel, grout pad or large concrete pad adequacy evaluated Are anchorage requirements met?
INTERACTION EFFECTS 1.
Soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures 2.
Distribution lines have adequate flexibility
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
3.
Overhead equipment or distribution systems are not likely to collapse 4.
Have you looked for and found no other adverse concerns?
Is equipment free of interaction effects?
IS E UIPMENT SEISMICALLY ADE UATE>
S N
U N
U QYN U
NU 9N U
N U
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A neSrCs'O
~Czar RI N/A I uo elrrle-N/A e
R.
L5 N/A N/A Q)N U
Y QNU COMMENTS (lg Rls/D, cd)7Y/.o5//l rAAo ~AJP~ /=/eeza a~ >. zo//e. ad~/~a /sly
~'Zgs Egcem
/->~BS ~~~~ 9-/S+e -: ~n/n.ozz /5 ygy~zg ~c~~c6
~WE, ~D c4R' D-~~~
(Z) ÃR /U
+C ZZN& NY En-/gcd'bUC//
(4&Den)///UC//mZ5. ~DE HnlC/////Z5 nNZe. /Nor /SN/l~ ZNY r//O OYZ/ ~ CrovS.
8'l5O, /NSrAln/r/onJ gp~gU/YCE/IS ON~A
('5) PR', ~
C, /Sf'-C~
A-AJCCK'S A'el T//EON@// 6'z."dean-E~ U'~ ZAZNNU-R
/A dedcR~
q) 5'CAfFINIS/&
4v88
( PD-A-Evaluated by:
FF Date:
HO-PE
jg jr/~)58 I~
ge3 Jwe4 0
ATTACHMNT CALC NO TV')<<"'-"'- t'.
REV)S)ON P
'AGE GO
)A
) I
)PP. i Revision 2
Corrected, 6/28/91 Sheet 1 of 2 Exhibit 6-1 OUTLIER SEISMIC VERIFICATION SHEET'OSVS) l.
OUTLIER IDENTIFICATION, DESCRIPTION, AND LOCATION Equipment ID Number
-o/
Equipment Class Equipment Location:
Building Room or Row/Column Base Equipment Description AA'C 7B Floor Elevation WO
'levation 2.
OUTLIER ISSUE DEFINITION a ~
Identify all the screening guidelines which are not met.
(Check mo}.e than one if several guidelines could not be satisfied.)
Mechanical and Electrical E ui ment Capacity vs.
Demand Caveats Anchorage Seismic Interaction Other Essential Rela s
Capacity vs.
Demand Mounting, Type, Location Other Tanks and Heat Exchan ers Shell Buckling Anchor Bolts and Embedment
~
~
Anchorage Connections Flexibility of Attached Piping'ther Cable and Conduit Racewa s
Inclusion Rules Other Seismic Performance Concerns Limited Analytical Review Other gl R/ukr tG.A I Shell buckling and flexibilityof attached piping only apply to large, flat-bottom, vertical tanks.
b.
Describe all the reasons for the outlier (i.e., if all the listed outlier issues were resolved, then the signatories would consider this item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy):
(DEdbr ~
a Sr.
(zJ5'J ezsz irus ~r~
e ~r cH A
5-10
> gird-br RI
)
efEE(~
ATTACHMENT CALC NO REVISION PAGE NO Revision 2
Corrected, 6/28/91 Sheet 2 of 2 Exhibit 5-1 (Cont'd)
OUTLIER SEISHIC VERIFICATION SHEET (OSVS)
Equipment ID Number ZG-0~
3.
PROPOSED METHOD OF OUTLIER RESOLUTION (OPTIONAL)
Define proposed method(s) for resolving outlier.
W~ rsmi~M& Bhaga b.
Al~S.
~ A E'o/&P'/
An'saYem rearm~
<rc mssaycm
- u. w pe~nr~wervr Ra+r~~
/Sf@/u/fr Provide information needed to implement proposed method(s) for resolving outlier (e.g.,
estimate of fundamental frequency).
ii isj'4 4.
CERTIFICATION:
The information on this OSVS is, to the best of our knowledge and belief, correct and accurate, and resolution of the outlier issues listed on the previous page will satisfy the requirements for this'item of equipment to be verified for seismic adequacy:
Approved by: (For Equipment Classes 80 -
ImI22, all the Seismic Capability Engineers on the Seismic Review Team (SRT) should sign; there, should be at least two on the SRT.
One signatory should be a
licensed professional engineer.
For Relays, the Lead Relay Reviewer should sign.)
/-gO-P5 Print or Type Name 1I, eo aSv.
Print or Type Name Si re ignature
, Date Date Print or Type Name Signature 5-11 Date