ML17258A286

Advises That Assessment of Auxiliary Bldg Bracing at Northeast Corner of Bldg Has Been Completed,Per SEP Topics III-6 & III-11 Re Seismic Design Considerations.Structural Steel & Anchorage Will Be Upgraded as Necessary

ML17258A286
Person / Time
Site:	Ginna
Issue date:	10/28/1981
From:	Maier J ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP.
To:	Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
TASK-03-06, TASK-03-11, TASK-3-11, TASK-3-6, TASK-RR NUDOCS 8111040202
Download: ML17258A286 (8)

Text

~. i~

RKGULAA QRY IN ORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYST: (RIDS)

NBR: 8111040292! DOC ~ DA'TKl: 81/10/28 NOTARIZED:: NO DOCKEli'>> 0 FACILC50'"244 Robert" Kjnzpt Ginna>> Nucl cari Pl anti Unit 1i, Roch'estzi -

G 05000244 AUTH',NAMKl AUTHOR AFFIL'IATiION MAIER'iJ,E<, Rochester Gas L Electric Corp.

RECIP,'AMcl RECXPZENT AFFILiIAT'ION C R U7 C HF I E LO'i D Operating Reac'tors Branch 5 Topics'CCESSION(

SUBJECT:

Advises that>> assessmjent" of auxiliary bldg bracing, at<

northeast come'r of bldg, has. be'en>> completediper SEP T'opics III<<6 L IIX-11 re seismic design considerations,Structural st'eel 8 anchorage will>> be upgraded>> as necessary.,

DISTRlIBUT'ION CODEl: A03SS TZTLKl:I SEP CDPIES RECEEVED:I.lIR l ENCLl J SIZE".: Q iVOTFS::1 copy: SKP Sec t; Ldr., 05000244 RECIPIENTS COPIES RECIPIENT'D COP'IKe IO< CODE>>/blAMKl Li'TR ENC Ll CODE'/NAME') LG'ITRl KNCL(

ACTKON:: ORBl 05 BCl 01<< 7 7 INTERNALc CONT SYS A 07 1 IllEl 06" 2 2a NRR/DE'/ADMQE 13>> 1 NRR'/DE/HGEB 10 2 2"

' 12" NRR>> 11>> 1 1 NRR'/DL/SEPB 3>>

1: 1 EXTERNALc ACRG S'2i NRCI PDRl iV T'I 16" 1

1 16 1

1 LPDR iVS IC 03>>

05

,89

zzizzz (uzi uti7 z( zwsz I::P ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION o 89 EAST AVENUE, ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14649 JOHN E. MAIER TELEPHONE VICE PRESIDENT AREA COOK TIE 546.2700 A,

October 28, 1981

'gg/P@,

Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation  :) R,.

3 I88Io, Attn: Mr. Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief U. S.

Operating Reactors Branch 55 Nuclear Regulatory Commission r E~.

--br Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

SEP Topics III-6 and III-11, "Seismic Design Considerations" R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, Docket No. 50-244

Dear Mr. Crutchfield:

We have completed our assessment of the Auxiliary Building bracing at the northeast corner of the building, open issue gl in your letter dated January 7, 1981 and as indicated in our response dated March 23, 1981. A structural analysis has been performed in order to evaluate the adequacy of the bracing in question for resisting seismic forces. The resulting stresses were determined from a 0.2g peak ground acceleration (Regulatory Guide 1.60) and 7% damping (Regulatory Guide 1.61) seismic criteria rather than the less stringent criteria used in NUREG/CR-1821. Use of the site specific response spectrum and NUREG/CR-0098 damping would reduce stresses.

As indicated in the attached summary report, the conclusions of the evaluation are as follows:

1. The diagonal bracing in the upper panel and the horizontal bracing of bay L-L2 would be overstressed up to 35%.

2. Column L would be partially overstressed by 52% due to its embedment in the concrete shield wall at the operating floor.

3. Column connections of all bracing would not adequately resist resulting tensile loads.

4. The anchorage at column L2 would not be adequate in either shear or tension.

8111040202 PDR ADQCK 8ii028 05000244 PDR 5i(

P

E s,

k'l 1 I I9

'e I p tg

'i ll

ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORP. SHEET NO.

DATE October 9, 1 981 To Mr. Dennis M. Crutchf ield, Chief We will upgrade the structural steel, connections, and anchorage as necessary on a schedule consistent with any other SEP modifications as determined in the SEP Integrated Assessment.

Our assessment of bracing in the Turbine Building is nearing completion and will be submitted by November 16, 1981.

Very truly yours, J n E. Maier

ANALYSIS REPORT Evaluation of the Structural Steel Bracing In .the East Wall of the Auxiliar Buildin I. Anal sis Basis A. Model The framing between column lines "L" and "L2" in the east wall of the Auxiliary Building was modelled as a plane frame in the computer program STRUDL. Several different models were studied to predict the behavior of all components of the frame and include the effects of the reinforced concrete wall on column line "lla", which embeds column "L-lla" and some of the lower panel bracing in concrete. A sketch of the final STRUDL model is attached., The concrete wall was considered by restraining the rotation and horizontal translation of the column at the top of the wall (node no. 7). Additionally, only the braces that would carry tension loads were included in the model, since the existing bracing members are too slender to resist compression loads.

B. Loads The dead load used in the analysis from the Auxiliary Building roofing was 5 pounds per square foot. The live load from the roof was 40 pounds per square foot. The seismic loads were determined using the maximum SSE displacements from the "Ginna Station Seismic Upgrade Program Auxiliary Structures Seismic Analysis" report for 7% structural damping. These displace-ments were applied to the STRUDL model, and resultant seismic forces determined. The displacements used were:

North-South = 1.322 inches Vertical = 0.029 inches The model was analyzed for all combinations of seismic loads in conjunction with dead and live loads.

C. Stress Ratio The stress ratios were calculated by hand using the appropriate interaction equations of the AISC Code.

II. Anal sis Results A. Frame Members The following are controlling conditions and stress ratios for the STRUDL model.

STRUDL Member Tension Compression Moment Shear Stress* Loading Identification k ~Pt. -k ~k Ratio Condition 1 28.72 53.26 F 78 .04 0.39 Comp+Bend 2 31. 61 54.27 1.97 .14 0.81 Comp+Bend 3 26.5 3.38 0. 39 Bending 4 38.69 50. 96 23.58 1.10 0.89 Comp+Bend 5 46.38 54. 03 84.30 12.98 1. 52~'< Comp+Bend 6 73.73 .10 0.89 Tension 7 48.25 .15 1.35* Comp.

8 93.84 .10 1.13* Tens.

10 46.38 54.03 0.21 Comp.

B. Anchora e and Connections The anchor bolts for the base plate of column "L2" were found to be inadequate for the shear and tension loads. The stress ratio is 1.72 for shear alone and 1.51 for tension alone.

The connections between the diagonal braces and the wide flange sections in both the upper and lower panel were found to be inadequate for the tension forces caused by the SSE loads.

The stress ratio is 1.55 for members 8 (upper panel) and 1.22 for members 6 .(lower panel).

• Stress ratio is defined as the value obtained from the appropriate interaction equations of the AISC code. Stress ratios greater than 1.0 indicate overstressed members.

suorccT/trrrz C~/NkA zygo'oar C ISIO Gilbert Associates, Inc A B. BAWwrr'yg. /oa OF c Rending.Penneytveni ~

MICROFILMEO PAGES ANALYSIS/CALCULATION ORIGINATOR OATE t0v+2I

&gag 9/2D r'

g+

lr nl CO

~/

I3\

//

/ 3'4I tl

'll 3/ x2/ x s/Ig ~gay'. gP/.Zl, r cd oe~ WALt.

r lO r q+6)x+

/5 2 7/.4) ctwew r/A6'=/oo+

ZOC~rZD 0~x//I/Z//~

Lz L STRVDL MOOEL 0> - ~~~as~ ~usrs~e

',2 - NoDE PQvME MEMBERS c; ~Nb '~, SOON/A'WSHFD /<EPAESFN7 BUCKS'LZO eCVBEm I'IIOPIIII I AIIY Itll'OIIMhll<ttlOl I.II I>I ltl h".()i lh ll S IIII . - I tilt It(l I Rtlhl II'I l)lll Y <Ihl 44R I l<<III

ar ~a.

~ ~

V qA j

I

'v I 1