ML17249A907
| ML17249A907 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 05/13/1980 |
| From: | White L ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP. |
| To: | Ziemann D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17249A908 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8005210500 | |
| Download: ML17249A907 (38) | |
Text
REGULATORv NFORMATION DISTRIBUTION S '"TEM (RIDS)
~0/y'CCESSION NBR:8005210500 DOC,DATE: 80'/05/13 NOTARIZED:
NO DOCKET FACIL:50 244 Robert Emmet Ginna Nuclear Planti Unit 1P Rochester G
05000244 AUTH ~ NAME
),AUTHOR AFFILIATION HHITEPL,D.
')
B'altimore Gas 8 Electric Co.
RECIP ~ NAME
'RECIPIENT AFFILIATION Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ZIEMANNE0 ~ L ~
Procedures 8 Test Review Branch SUBJECT; Submits addi info re tendon insp 8 lift-off verificationgin response to NRC 800326 ltr.Also forwards revised pages 8
tables for GAI 2074'Evaluation of Prestressed Tendon Forces,"
OISTRISUTION CODE:
ASSIS COPIES RECEIVED:LTR ENCL I
SIZE: WZ 4 TITLE: General Dist~ibution for after Issuance of Operating'Lic NOTES:g+,'~Cl.lSOA'~ E',~Dgal~+IYJ RECIPIENT COPIES RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL ID CODE/NAME ACTION; 05 BC 6R8 W~
7 7
COPIES LTTR ENCL INTERNAL:
0 12 IEE 17 ENGR BR 19 PLANT SYS BR 21 EFLT TRT SYS OELD EXTERNAL: 03 LPDR 23 ACRS 1
1 2
2 1
1 1
1 1
1 0
1 16 16 02 NRC PDR 15 CORE PERF BR 18 REAC SFTY BR 20 EEB EPB~DOR STS GROUP LEADR 00 NSIC 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
o TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED ~
LTTR ~
ENCL
r 0
- P
~ n f
r
~
llr'l II f
1l I,P fI,'ir,g ~,r I
I 4 ~rl I '1 I, l f
e "~
~
>r rial r'
'f f
f l
l( f f Q ( ~ 4 N
rt 8
~
II f
$>g ~
)
fp 1
pwz uzm IIIII/ Ill
/III/IIIII///
////////
//////I//////
ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION gl
~ 0 IsaOq
, '1AEC I
~.
~ sv EAST AVENuE, ROCHESTER, N.V. ~iidr LEON O. WHITE, JR.
VICE PRESIDENT TELEPHONE AREA CODE 710 546-2700 May 13, 1980 Director of Nuclear Regulation Attention:
Mr. Dennis L. Ziemann, Chief Operating Reactors Branch 52 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Subject:
Tendon Inspection and Lift-OffVerification Ginna Nuclear Power Plant Docket No. 50-244
Dear Mr. Ziemann:
In response to your letter dated March 26,
- 1980, we have prepared the following information.
Also, revised sheets dated April 11, 1980 to be incorporated into the report "Evaluation of Prestressed Tendon Forces Robert E. Ginna Nuclear Power Station" are included as Attachment 1 to this letter.
Res onse to uestion No. 1:
Regarding the statement made in the first sentence, shrinkage is not, considered to be an important. factor contributing to loss of prestress.
As seen from Table 2 of the report, shrinkage accounts for only 2.8 kips (2.1%) of the total 40 yr. loss of 130.5 kips.
Shrinkage tests were conducted on various trial concrete mix designs.
The tests were in accordance with ASTM C-494, "Chemical Admixtures for Concrete."
The results were used for comparing the shrinkage of various mix designs.
Thm shrinkage values, which were in the neighborhood of 250 x 10 in./in. at 28 days, were based on 3 in. square by ll~ in. long specimens which were stored in air at 73'F and 50% relative humidity.
The shrinkage strains which these specimens experienced are not applicable to those occurring in the 3 ft.
6 in. massive containment walls.
These walls have a volume-to-exposed surface ratio of 42 in., versus 0.7 in. for the test specimens.
The information given in ref-erences (4) and (6) of the report indicates that 100 x 10 in./in. is a conservatively large 40 yr. shrinkage strain for V/S = 42 in.
r
~
t f
(
ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECT C CORP.
DATE May 13, 1980 To Mr. Dennis L. Ziemann SHEET NO.
2 Project documents identify the concrete miz design used for the containment wall as:
Cement (Type II)
Fine Aggregate Coarse Aggregate (N.Y.51)
(N.Y.82)
Water Admixtures 658 lbs.
(7 sacks) 1310 lbs.
1290 lbs.
440 lbs.
35.7 gals.
(298 lbs.)
Darez Plastiment 4.5 oz. per yard 21 oz. per yard The water-cement ratio of the miz is 0.45 (by weight).
Neither the Proposed Regulatory Guide 1.35.1 nor its referenced
- document, Reference (4), explicitly relates shrinkage to water-cement. ratio.
The shrinkage test specimens of Reference (4) contained 5.44 sacks of Type III cement per cubic yard, and some sealed specimens were included.
Although Reference (4) does not state the water content for the specimens, it would be expected that this concrete had a
water-cement ratio equal to or greater than that of the Ginna containment concrete which used a 0.45 water-cement ratio.
As stated in the report, the Mean Daily Relative Humidity for the Ginna site is in the 70% to 80% range.
This humdity is within the 40% to 8(% range of Proposed Regulatory Guide 1.35.1 for which 100 x 10 in./in. is specified.
Therefore, it is concluded that the shrinkage value of Reference (4) as applied to the Ginna containment concrete is conservative.
Res onse to uestion No. 2:
Two basic types of shrinkage occur in concrete:
drying shrinkage and autogeneous shrinkage.
Due to the massive nature of the 42" thick containment wall, most of the vertical shrinkage of the wall that is significant enough to cause a loss of prestress
- force, occurs over its interior and is due to autogeneous shrinkage.
It is generally accepted that autogeneous shrinkage is assumed to start as soon as the hydration process starts.
Thus, to simulate this condition, "one hour after concrete placement" was used to start the shrinkage strain curve in Figure 3 of the report.
As shown in Figure 2
of the report, the concrete placement in the containment wall started in April 1967 and was completed in June 1968.
Use of the average placement date for the shrinkage
l II
ROCHESTER OAS AND ELECT CORP.
DATE May 13, 1980 To Mr. Dennis Z. Ziemann SHEET NO.
3 strain calculation assumes that the lower half of the wall was constructed prior to this average date and the upper half was constructed after this average date.
Thus, at any point in time, concrete in the lower half of the wall would experience shrinkage strains greater than that predicted based on the average
- date, and concrete in the upper half would experience shrinkage strains less than that predicted based on the average date.
The total shrinkage shortening of the wall is the sum of the shrinkage strains for each concrete lifttimes the liftheight;
- however, the shrinkage strain is different for each lift.
Use of an average placement date for the concrete to establish an average shrinkage for all the lifts is a reasonable and sufficiently accurate approach.
Res onse to uestion No. 3:
The creep curve of Reference (6) of the report is included as. It was used to establish the specific creep values defined in the report.
Independent creep tests, were not rec{uired for Ginna and were, therefore, not conducted.
The concrete mix design used for the containment wall is given in the response to Question 1.
For the Ginna mix, the volume concentration of cement paste in the concrete is 0.34, and the water-cement ratio by weight is 0.45.
For Reference (6) these values were 0.30 and 0.50, respectively.
Because of the similarity of the two mixes, the specific creep data of Reference (6) is considered applicable to the Ginna concrete.
Res onse to uestion No. 4:
The design basis for the Ginna containment was ACI 318-63.
It does not contain a requirement to provide relaxation tests for the tendon wires.
Data used was provided by the tendon supplier based on typical wires produced at that time.
As stated in the report, the prestressing wire was specified to have a nominal 40-year stress relaxation of 12%.
Figure 3A of the report, is based on stress-relaxation curves from Armco Steel Corporation (See Attachment 3), the supplier of the wire for Ginna.
The curves for Specimens 1 and 2 were provided by Armco as being representative of the relaxation grade of wire provided for Ginna, but the specimens were not. taken from Ginna production wire.
The curve in Figure 3A of the report was constructed by multiplying the relaxation curve for Specimen 2 by the factor (12/11.5).
Note that the curve for Specimen 2 includes data from 1000-hour relaxation tests.
I'
ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECT C CORP.
DATE May 13, 1980 To Mr. Dennis L. Ziemann SHEET NO.
Res onse to uestion No. 5:
In the original design, a required minimum average tendon force of 636 kips was calculated.
This force resulted from the controlling load combination:
where 0.95 D + F + 1.5P
+ Ta D = Dead load F = Vertical prestress P = Accident pressure of 60 psig T
= Accident temperature, including operating temperature a
Res onse to uestion No. 6:
The principle cause of the loss of tendon prestress is the relaxation of the steel.
The results of the ten year retest in-dicate that, what appeared to be an increased rate of loss was in fact discrepancies in the acoustic lift-offreadings for the 8
year surveillance.
During the ten year retest.,
a visual observa-tion of the effect of complete detensioning on the connection between the rock anchor and the wall tendon was made.
No observ-able movement occurred (see page I-3 of Addendum 1 of the report).
The effect of detensioning one tendon, of a total of 160, on the elastomeric pad was not. addressed during the ten year retest since the change would have been too small to provide reliable data.
Res onse to uestion No. 7:
The use of 1/32 inch shims rather than the acoustical method to determine lift-offwas recommended by Inryco, Inc.,
who supplied and stressed the tendons and conducted the 10 year retest of the tendons.
A lack of reproducibility of lift-offreadings on some
- projects, as demonstrated by the differences between the 8 and 10 year Ginna tests, prompted a change to this procedure.
Note from Table I-1 of the report, columns (1) and (2), that there is not a significant difference in the lift-offpressures using the two methods.
The acoustic method of determining lift-offis highly dependent.
on the individual conducting the test while the ability to remove a 1/32 inch shim from the shim stack can clearly be demonstrated.
Res onse to uestion No. 8:
An inspection of the concrete around the tendon anchorages has not been required during tendon surveillance.
- Hence, docu-mentation, visual inspection or photographs are not available for past surveillances.
The concrete surrounding the rock anchor is inaccessible and has not been inspected.
~
ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECT CORP.
DATE May.13., 1980 To Mr. Dennis F. Ziemann SHEET NO.
5 Question 9 is in several parts which will be responded to as individual questions.
Res onse to uestion No. 9a:
Pages 5.1.2-20, 5.1.2-20a, and 5.1.2-21 of the Ginna FSAR (See Attachment, 2, part 6 of the report) give the design bases for the rock anchors and contain the basic references used to justify the criteria.
Res onse to uestion No. 9b:
Page 5.1.2-23 of the Ginna FSAR (See Attachment 2, part 6 of the report) indicates the capacities and safety factors for the original design.
Res on'se to uestion No. 9c:
RGB records indicate that the typical rock anchor length is 33'-6".
Individual records for each tendon are available if desired.
Res onse to uestion No. 9d:
Pages 5.6.1-4 through 5.6.1-5 of the Ginna FSAR (See Attach-ment 4) describe the scaled down tests performed to develop rock anchor criteria.
Res onse to uestion No. 9e:
Page 5.1.2-24 of the Ginna FSAR (See Attachment 2, part 6 of the report)describes the technigue used to install the tendon/rock anchor coupling device.
Attachment 5
is an assembly drawing of the tendon to rock coupling, and the manufacturer's drawings of the individual parts.
Res onse to uestion No. 9f:
The design assumption to utilize the weight of the rock (See response to question 9a) as the maximum force for the anchor takes into account all adverse effects of group action since the capacity of the anchor was based on.8 UTS or 847 kips which is a larger force.
Since the rock anchors were stressed to.8 UTS during initial installation, new loads to be applied during the re-tensioning program should have no adverse effects.
e I
W C
ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECT CORP.
DATE May 13, 1980 To Mr. Dennis L. Ziemann SHEET NO.
6 If there are any further questions regarding this information, please contact"us.
Very truly yours,
~Mp LDW:rb Attachments zc:
Mr. Boyce H. Grier, Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission w/attachments
t
Attachment 1
Attachment 2
/
k 7 isn't'n Planish rSO rp
"/so Has/ c Creep For $000 ps/
Concrete.
I 7/rriein Years Jd rr p rr lp s 9r I '
oz soWo so ~oOy//o rtg lo"=
Joo soo ooo rooo rsoo 7/'In2. /n D a
~
I Gi I
(
~l I
soooo gyes
.39 4
~.55
.e~4 p.ae
.dg c.d z~<
ZP >
U
/6 Ea I2 0.0 as~~
a<%
PO pJ Total epee/i 4D cgs..
~
~ ~...., pars //uenemc Test's; agceI roading t e dasie;.
/Orilejr4V7/lao OfeePp /OP /jape p
p p
)/
p tD p
5 I
i r
Es/'/mated
/pasic cpaesj~/cu- /oading ages 5 et g u days ancp /2,3,+id glrtpon/hS.
/ fcchnjbz4 Rupard R2/2, /IS. buss/ CivilEnr/rnm.in'aboratary, see also Append+ 8.
~JFc mu!a jrrbxrjprrrrp:
".ri'"rrp.r~~ r'jjrrjrrrP(rj,rri <.or onEPI,ApprmrjrA.'
DCHVPACX 5 5550C At?8 C055IILt hG
!I'Ih t*
CIRE.
ptpp ppp 5
ap:
ka 0
1 5'P'PttDIZ C
Attachment 3
P A
re $
Stroas-Rokam&,on Caves for Normal anl.fox-. Zntexmelia e
'2)Q" 5i,a. Lofti,ra Specimen;1 LEQH~iR Specime 2
1nktial Soec imen
~TQ k~5.
T,oad+ lr.sQ
~\\
U ~ aU4 tJC lg 1
2 3
252.6 2)3,8 259.2
?>r8,0
.Z68 3.68 170< g yrag
.66) 6
.660
.660 ll ~
.olid l1Aes roprosont actual data.
lin s~rs regent Gxtrqg>@ctrl cQyt;
~.
/ /nr
@riant Specime 3
I /'pecimen 4
~
~
~r r~
3.0 3.,000
~10,000
~
~
1
'I W
Type II cement, modified for low heat of hydration, is used to minimize shrinkage.
"Grab" samples are taken periodically at the batch plant, upon delivery of cement.
Each sample is tested by the Testing Laboratory for conformance to'ASTM C 150, and the results are also compared with the certificate supply with each delivery of cement.
Elastometer Bearin Pads Tests are performed on elastomer specimens to ensure compliance with requirements for (1) original physical properties including tear resistance,
- hardness, tensile strength and ultimate elongation, (2) change in physical properties due to overaging, (3) extreme temperature characteristics, (4) ozone cracking resistance, (5) oil swell and (6) shear modulus.
In
- addition, two full size'pads are tested, one for creep and one for ultimate load.
Specimen No.
1 is initially placed under essentially a constant compressive load of 1000 psi (the design pressure) for four days to measure creep.
This pad is then loaded up to 2000 kips (5.3 times design load) when the test was terminated without failure.
Specimen No.
2 was similarly loaded up to 2000 kips without failure.
The rebound of the pads after the 2000 kip load was removed is essentially complete.
A summary of the test results is shown in Figures 5.6.1 3 and 5.6.1-4.
Rock Anchor Tests Three scaled down test rock anchors were installed to demonstrate first the hold-down capacity of the rock and second the capacity of the bond between rock and grout.
5.6.1-4 4/69
2 1
J k
~'
Two tests were made on rock anchor "A" which was installed at the center of the proposed containment vessel.
The first test, called test A-1 was to determine rock hold-down capacity.
The set-up for test A-1 is illustrated in Figure 5.6.1-5.
The beam support piers were located beyond the assumed influence circle of rock having a
diameter of 23 feet 6 inches.
An independent frame was erected to obtain deflection measurements on. the concrete pier at. the anchor.
This placed all supports for lifting as well as measuring devices outside the influence circle of rock.
Dial gauges were used to measure the movement of the concrete pier and the anchor head.
The test load was applied with a 150 ton jack mounted on the beams spanning the test anchor.
Measurements of the jacking force were made with a dynamometer, calibrated immediately before the test.
The second test on rock anchor "A" (Test A-2) and the tests on rock anchors "8" and "C", also installed near the center of the proposed containment vessel, were made to demonstrate bond capacity.
The set-up for test A-2 and for rock anchors "8" and "C" was an arrangement whereby the jack was supported directly by the concrete pier adjacent to the test anchor.
5.6.1-4a 4/69
k
~
4 F
I 1I R
1
Rock anchor "A" consists of twenty-eight 1/4 inch diameter wires grouted for a length of 4 feet 5-1/2 inches in a 3-1/2 inch diameter hole.
All test rock anchors were oversized so that the test load of 100 kips would develop only about 30% of the ultimate capacity of tendon wires while developing a bond stress of 170 psi which is the design stress for the containment rock anchors.
This permitted testing bond stresses well in excess of design (170 psi) without exceeding ultimate wire stresses.
The test procedure for test A-1 was as follows:
The anchor was loaded in 20,000 pound increments to 100,000 pounds.
The load was maintained at each increment for 15 minutes prior to taking measurements for elongation of the tendon and clevations of the concrete pedestal and adjacent rock surface.
Because the anchor head appeared from visual observation to not have lifted off at the 100,000 pound load, the load was increased to 110,000 pounds at which point lift off was apparent.
Subsequent review of measurements on the movement of the anchor head indicate that actual liftoff occurred between 80,000 pounds and 100,000 pounds as would be expected.
In test A-2, "B" and "C", tendon was jacked from the concrete pier immediately adjacent to the tendon.
Table 5.6.1-1 lists measurements taken during test A-1.
figures 5.6.1-6,
.5.6.1-7 and 5.6.1-8 show plots of load vs. elongation deflection for all tests.
The application of a test load of 110 kips to rock anchor "A" (as indicated by the results of test A-1 shown on Figure 5.6.1-6) is equivalent to 137.5%
of the calculated hold-down capacity assumption used in the design is valid.
The plot of load vs. elongation deflection for rock anchor "A" tests A-2 (see Figure 5.6.1-6) and "B" and "C" (see Figures 5.6.1-7 and 5.6.1-8) indicate a factor of safety against slippage by the grout and rock of at least 2.0 (200 kip load vs.
100 kip design load) for rock anchor "B",. If slippage occurred within the grout the factor of safety against failure is even greater.
The plot of load vs. elongation for rock anchor "A" shows an apparent dis-continuity which is indicated by a dashed line on Figure 5.6.1-6.
This represents settlement of the concrete pier adjacent to the rock anchor when the load was transferred from the lifting frame used in test A-1 to the lock nut which bears on the concrete pier.
5.6.1-5
4 1
l P
W
Attachment 5
0 P
1
-l
Attachment 85 (Cont'd)
Tfpr'c'a ( Wiie Bush)'ny gVyhf incr'ho 7~@ '-'
8u'ffress 77'!
a r~n nc)",
a'nn He A'oc',A'nc 47Q Rich/ hanu'7hZ.
75""8 8'uffrcss 7hZ lOiz uO.
7pprcnc'rr~e Coup()ny rVufer <'a l iud SO a~S~ r~f< -CZO<a
~@shor b'ra a'oterr~ l:(zcy gvzrson p~. zg go-g I
~ark]ng
) or'ce Egj ~c6'vr Pres/ress Forge gal+ TENDON TO ROCK COUPLING FIG. 5.1.2-12
4 I
,f V
4 E
io. lo,-
I
'nsp"- i ot 4oQr YYYo.-'4iin,c. s-,.cl, ic 'oi-i o-,
l /44 4 j~'l I
I
~ Y ~ ~
T. cp C-'=MT-t
~l~ -(0
~" Dc" z SHO ~ l4
+.o o4 HiP-~ ~Gi.Qg ~rot'.oa t Dtb Vklit l ARoocH 5Pqe t=-
5s
. sH<QA J
Ot-> n 8'x =-r NOV3 jgg7 t~
QL.'c..........,::.t..
A1 GS 4
Gti. tL t 4G'~<
t it t2 Q 46 },
'Ot0 6-v C).0 060 QG-GG j'
0C)'iG C 0 C>
f.~
Q 4-4 Q
~
i r.
~
~ 4 lj
~ r
~
4 4 ~
t~: GGOO0860h.;.'
4 V t' LQ rr ~ ~
I
~
O, 4, ~ rg l.! 4,,
!I' liiloYI~ll444t
'. Gt G 0 6 O O C.';g bf.itt-ttic>
g 0 VGG Q>
Sit.~cr.e.
~ Ygt1ip ii eUCi
~ t~caiutyii~
.... j..
Cputn Get iQ'q Re.QCI
~Q C+ P~.
'n b G~t tlag S~,~. >c c.t Cip'. ( (.r(T QO v)([ZAN. p.t.->c 't-(&(~
, lv",r'i4Y, Pf<PR'tp T
RKr. tlat t VYP(Cw(
WC:J =
QP A, I".t t~h I 1 0 E 't ri, t t.
n Z.
2P bx'<
gOOrt.~ <c~
4 Il't t
4
~ r
~DK A<a
(
Dcgo,ii Z.
YYP'vt-v4%.t:-
Hat E'itADE BY i
DATE C'L.M4Y" I /0~I? o U 0 S C P YY Y'
R Y C R S 0 YY 4
S 0 YY, Y
YY C 0
~
'Lr ~
This draYYtng has not been published, il is tha sole piropell( Uf Joseph T.
Jy!Ysco T. S01, nc.
It is 'ient lo lh. rec,piert for:ii conti!erti4t us" Uilty. ard;osn lhe cnridii'Juris 2nd arre~erncnts fotto<<in".. In considc:allan of the !ron ol this der!inz.:ho rcrioienl prniees ard arises to return it upon re"ucsl, aod
't1at rt Sha!I rot hc rcplcduccd,
- copie, lent or other<<isc disrvsed of, direct.'y or ir.'iree'ithout Jo eph T. ityerson I Scn, inc. w;itten consent, nor be liscd in any way dehin:enact lo ll c interests of Joscpih T. ftyerson S Son, Inc.
Acr<<coo(os ts.ck)ei
')T(%
I MA,Tl=g.t k,r
'C (tt4> Spot~
i)P Pc, i, )C, A ea4 ~le.et'i( Quench 5 Tt.nper t.p a. P.pgh" gdl C'LPt kP C 33 Q t,H. Sea<<iwrj S'l,tt./~CD FORM 750,12 2
- PR4 44 Wol 44 Q4'g i0
~ ro (4 l-io.4)
/
~, (
F r (g
C4 v
IIII
TI;!
insl;c-t.cd pv~ i~cab;zinc 4kcirnp Hec:;0 k4'irnbt r G" dt Qn bc~
Spe+SiCc",%ion s n 5 7/27 /+ I I~~ herid bearing au< kt-~c-H r'3Ejl'jj.l}jp8 Nov 3
.19B7..
a. ~
9 AG -
'Bl kiYeSS TQV.eCGf j/6.!I L eaCl s'X4"i-GO O.,',
GOO:OOO.y
'.; 0 0 0 0 0 0 O C 0...'..
0OGO-O,'OOOC O ';
.'-f008 O
'.: -.--0 0 0-.:"" '.",
'/
'i,':-8 8 8: -/" r:.
.,'.- 0 0 0.'
'IOOOO
/
(
CO O 0OG',
'4/
,OOOO!
4
.OOO>>. CG OGO>>J;..
".'..OOOO G O BOG, E
,i':-OOOO OO,.-
- . OGO
/
I
~
~
i
. /Ig b/@ice L HoLe.
P&CIAC~
.I
, 90wiv'e hoLes.'
~.-
'~~"-"':I Ol spG'e Qs shown Quoi 'voted.
1 I
"Ogff AlC?A, Y. g 0
o
~o a)
~ra
~
~
0 3 C g 0~G 5$
HaieriaL.'Q cQ HP-cjl+l P 5i/z, BA.j~
I-l,rinkSa~a C~+ 'VO'3 P " iaLene!.Ta HQG(
I 7 I.f
~ 4 I G'I L +flan<( i"IC'i QACl. tCi> 1'p'P'f 50
.I O'C ~4tr. H.
C ) J
$ G C '3 Ct t. 8
~ i i: 8+'"'Y j'Acj gO ivirp A~c!"IGi I-'in='c<c!
( fGl'!',G'p BI.i4G>>laea..iii-Cj.}=r cl)
CLass T Fii
'I
~a
~ i I.
IU
~
~
~ e 08 V
Q..a
~ ~.
0 Q I/
Ij
+,spode 6OO g'I" id'.'n
~ncg - -.
Si.ir I">c", Skg Res lo(ze]I;7 DltAvtr OT DATK h.>j~
3/2G'/e 7 NOTICE this drawing hos not been pvblislicd, it is tho saio property of Joseph T. Ryetson 8 Soni inc. H is lent lo tho tecipient for his conliilential vso only, cnd vpon tha conditions ond ogreeraenra following. In conaiaerolion of Iho loon of Ihia drowing, Ihe rocipianl prolnlsos ond ograoa lo I~ twn it upon leqveatr ond thot il shaH not bo reproduced, copied, loni or'lherwiae disposoo of, directly ot indircCtly without Joseph I ~ Rycrson 6 Sonr Inc, writ.
~ an consent, nor ba ui ~ l in oay wov dotrlraentnl lo rha in)~roars ol Joaoah T. Ryeiaoal'V!'=FQaCE~Z 0 ~ c
~
ai T
ii Y a ii s 0 ar a
~ 0 N ~
I ai c CENVRAL RZIi4FQRCNG PRQDUGVG POST EYSIQYING. ERal;CZ Bec:hte I
Z$ 7)5 1
0 rl AvIra 0 Ir0, Ir.il/
0
~
C'
,P'
I
~ ~ tv~%
~ l
~
o
~
~
~ v'
~ r I ~vl
~
~
I
~
~
~
sr o
SiawI P Idion)
NOV 3 19 RH. Ku7 i WeOC
~
~
a
~!Lvr.,l bb;{..
)C.
4155 VDS'I"; "~t'. I'I I
I/
I:
\\
tt:I r
(
f,~i'1 YN I
~
I I
f!!
) I; I.'
r I
Qrxi'%~g<< tU
'W&R.'FC L ICIA
( /y p!
J o
to' tolji l
'L cia S
.~ 5ia NOES C0 g 0th> p Pt'=P t-A~WI-LV. Gt=te C g D I-c.f' YY6'I-p)f.:;.t..lt" g NOTICE; This drawing hos nat been pvbli hcd, it is thc ole property of Joseph T. Rycrson'IS Son, inc. If is tent to Ine recipient lor hi confiaenticl vsc only, cnd vpon the cot:ditions cnd agrecn ants following. In consiaeratian of the loan of this drawing, the recipient ptotnises and ogrees to retv n il vpon rcqvcst, cnd thot it sholi not be reproduced, copied, fcnt or utherwisa disposed of, oirectly or Indirect'y wilhovt Joseph T. Ryerson ve Son, lnc. wril.
~
Icn consent, nat be vsed in ony woy de'rirnentol to thc intert,sts ol Joseph T, Rycrson 8, Son, Inc.
4 0 5 c w oo t e v c 0 5 0 w 4
5 0 Io,
~ N c ~
CHILII RAL REINFORC)idG PRODUCTS POST-TE dSIONING SRRV'C'e
.Gt Q,D. 7k',I+
~;.)t.;-..- ~
ji,t;.).g yg
( ~
) rg III'.)~;IJI.I=.
OltAWN ItY OATK
/O ZD/(p
) )L)f ortnwIHG No.'tyP'IV lQ-A, fornyer r'~
qO-Vi'8
~
~
A 0