Text

Brown Ferry Steam Electric Station Unit 2 Vessel Surveillance Matls Testing & Fracture Toughness Analysis
	ML18038B481
Person / Time
Site:	Browns Ferry
Issue date:	06/30/1995
From:	Branlund B, Carey R, Oza C; GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
To:	;
Shared Package
ML18038B480	List: B110063, Brown Ferry Steam Electric Station Unit 2 Vessel Surveillance Matls Testing & Fracture Toughness Analysis; ML18038B479;
References
	GENE-B1100639, GENE-B1100639-0, GENE-B1100639-01, GENE-B1100639-1, NUDOCS 9510230407
	Download: ML18038B481 (143)
	v • d • e

GE Nuclear Energy Technical Services Business General Electric Company, 175 Curtner Avenue, San Jose, CA 95125 GENE-B 110063 9-01 June 1995 BROWNS FERRY STEAM ELECTRIC STATIONUNIT2 VESSEL SURVEILLANCEMATERIALSTESTING AND FRACTURE TOUGHNESS ANALYSIS Prepared by:

Chandra Oza, Prin rpal Engineer Engineering Services Verified by:

R.G.Carey, Engineer Engineering Services Approved by B. J. Branlund, Project Manager RPV Integrity 9510230407 951018 PDR ADOCK 05000260 P

PDR

G~-31100639-01 IMPORTANTNOTICE REGARDING CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT PLEASE READ CARFFULLY This report was prepared by General Electric solely for the use ofTennessee Valley Authority {TVA). The information contained in this report is believed by General Electric to be an accurate and true representation ofthe facts known, obtained or provided to General Electric at the time this report was prepared.

The only undertakings ofthe General Electric Company respecting information in this document are contained in the contract between the customer and General Electric Company, as identified in the purchase order for this report and nothing contained in this document shall be construed as changing the contract.

The use ofthis information by anyone other than the customer or for any purpose other than that for which it is intended, is not authorized; and with respect to any unauthorized use, General Electric Company makes no representation or warranty, and assumes no liabilityas to the completeness, accuracy, or usefulness ofthe information contained in this document.

GENE-B 110063 9-01 TABLEOF CONTENTS

~Pa e

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

l. INTRODUCTION

2.

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS 2.1

SUMMARY

OF RESULTS

2.2 CONCLUSION

S

3. SURVEILLANCEPROGRAM BACKGROUND..

3.1 CAPSULE RECOVERY 3.2 RPV MATERIALSANDFABRICATIONBACKGROUND.

3.2.1 Fabrication Historv...

3.2.2 Material Pro tties ofRPV at Fabrication 3.3 SPECIMEN DESCRIPTION.

J 3.3.2 Tensile S

'mens..

4. PEAK RPV FLUENCE EVALUATION.

4.1 FLUXWIRE ANALYSIS 4.1.1 Procedure.

4.1.2 Results.

4.2 DETERMINATIONOF LEADFACTOR 4.2.1 Procedure 4.2.2 Results.

4.3 ESTIMATEOF 32 EFPY FLUENCE.....

5. CHARPY V-NOTCHIMPACTTESTING.

5.1 IMPACTTEST PROCEDURE.

5.2 IMPACT'I%ST RESULTS 5.3 IRRADIATEDVERSUS UNIIUbG)IATEDCHARPY V-NOTCHPROPERTIES 5.4 COMPARISON TO PREDICTED IRRADIATIONEFFECTS 5.4.2 Change in USE

6. TENSILE TESTING.

6.1 PROCEDURE 6.2 RESULTS 1X

....18

....... 18

... 18

....... 19 19

...... 19

.......20

.....21.

28 28

. 29 30 30

....30

....31

.50

....50

....51

~ ~

" 111-

h

~

GENE-B 1100639-01 6.3 IRRADIATEDVERSUS Ul&VMDIATEDTENSILE PROPERTIES

7. DEVELOPMENTOF OPERATING LIMTSCURVES

7.1 BACKGROUND

7.2 NON-BELTLINEREGIONS 7.3 CORE BELTLINEREGION.

7.4 EVALUATIONOF IRIUQ7IATIONEFFECTS 7.4.1 ART Versus EFPY 7.4.2 U r Shelf Ener at 32 EFPY.

7.5 OPERATING LMITS CURVES VALIDTO 32 EFPY

8. REFERENCES APPENDIX A - CHARPY SPECIMEN FRACTURE SURFACE PHOTOGRAPHS APPENDIX B - EQUIVALENTMARGINANALYSIS

.....51

....58

.......58 58

...........58

.....59

....60

....61

.......73

.......75

.....81

GENE-31100639-01 LIST OF TABLES

~Pa e TABLE'1 CHEMICALCOMPOSITION OF RPV BELTLINEMA'TRIALS TABLE3-2 MECHANICALPROPERTIES OF BELTLINEAND OTHER SELECIZD RPV MATERIALS........9 TABLE4-1 SUMh1fARYOF DAILYPOWER HISTORY

....23 TABLE4-2 SURVEILLANCECAPSULE FLUXAMP FLUENCE FOR IRRADIATIONFROM START-UP TO 10/1/94.

24 TABLE5-1 VALLECITOSQUALIFICATIONTEST RESULTS USING NIST STANDARDREFERENCE SPECIMENS TABLE5-2 IREE)IATEDCHARPY V-NOTCHIMPACTTEST RESULTS TABLE5-3 UNIIUVJDIATEDCHARPY V-NOTCHIMPACTTEST RESULTS TABLE5-I SIGNIFICANTRESULTS OF IRRADIATEDAND UNIRRADIATEDCHARPY V-NOTCH DATA TABLE6-1: TENSILE TEST RESULTS FOR IRRADIATEDRPV MATERIALS.

TABLE6-2: 'ENSILE TEST RESULTS FOR UNIRRADIATEDRPV MATERIALS TABLE6-3 COMPARISON OF UNIIGM3IATEDAND IRIM3IATEDTENSILE PROPERTIES ATROOM 32 33 34 35 52 52 53 TABLE6-4 COMPARISON OF UNIRIVJ3IATEDAND IRIMDIATEDTENSILE PROPERTIES AT550'F...53 TABLE7-1 BROWNS FERRY 2 P - T CURVE VALUES TABLE7-2 BELTLINEARTVALUES TABLE7-3 UPPER SHELF ENERGY ANALYSISFOR BELTLINEMATERIALS 62

.66

.67 TABLEB-1 EQUIVALENTMARGINANALYSISPLANTAPPLICABIL1TYVEIUFICATIONFORM FOR, BROWN FERRY UNIT2 - BWR 4/MKI..........................................................................

82 83' TABLEB-2 EQUIVALENTMARGINANALYSISPLANTAPPLICABILITYVERIFICATIONFORM FOR BROWNS FERRY UNIT2 - BWR 4/MKI.

GEiiE-B1100639-01 LIST OF FIGURES P~ae 57 FIGURE 3 1. SURVEILLANCECAPSULE HOLDER RECOVERED FROM BROWNS FERRY UNIT2..........10 FIGURE 3-2. SCHEMATIC OF THE RPV SHOWING IDENTIFICATIONOF VESSEL BELTLINEPLATES AND WELDS

. 1 1 FIGURE 3-3. FABRICATIONMETHOD FOR BASE METALCHARPY SPECIMENS

................... 12 FIGURE 3-4. FABRICATIONMETHOD FOR WELD METALCHARPY SPECIMENS

.13 FIGURE 3 5. FABRICATIONMETHOD FOR HAZMETALCHARPY SPECIMENS

.14 FIGURE 3 6. FABRICATIONMETHOD FQR BASE METALTENSILE SPECMENS 15 FIGURE 3-7. FABRICATIONMETHOD FOR WELD METALTENSILE SPECIMENS

.16 FIGURE 3-8. FABRICATIONMETHOD FOR HAZMETALTENSILE SPECIMENS.....

.17 FIGURE 4-1. SCHEMATIC OF MODELFOR AZIMUTHALFLUXDISTRIBUTIONANALYSIS...................25 FIGURE 4-2. RELATIVEVESSEL FLUXVARIATIONWITHANGULARPOSITION...................................26 FIGURE 4-3. RELATIVEVESSEL FLUXVARIATIONWITHELEVATION.

............27 FIGURE 5-1. BROWNS FERRY 2 UNHUVJ3IATEDBASE METALIMPACTENERGY..........................36 FIGURE 5-2. BROWNS FERRY 2 IRRADIATEDBASE METALIMPACTENERGY

.37 FIGURE 5-3. BROWNS FERRY 2 Huber)IATED ANDUNHNADIATEDBASE METALMPACTENERGY38 FIGURE 5<. BROWNS FERRY 2 UNHNADIATEDBASE METALLATERALEXPANSION.-----------39 FIGURE 5-5. BROWNS FERRY 2 IRBADIATEDBASE METALLATERALEXPANSION.............................40 FIGURE 54 BROWNS FERRY 2 UNIRRADIATEDWELDMETALIMPACTENERGY.........""-"--".-""41 FIGURE 5-7. BROWNS FERRY 2 RADIATEDWELDMETALIMPACTENERGY..............42 FIGURE 5-8. BROWNS FERRY 2 IRRADIATEDANDUNHNADIATEDWELD METALIMPACTENERGY43 FIGURE 5-9. BROWNS FERRY 2 UNHNADIATEDWELDMETALLATERALEXPANSION......................44 FIGURE 5-10. BROWNS FERRY 2 HulADIATEDWELD METALLATERALEXPANSION..........................45 FIGURE 5-11. BROWNS FERRY 2 UNHGMDIATEDHAZMETALIMPACTENERGY................................46

'IGURE 5-12. BROWNS FERRY 2 RADIATEDHAZMETALIMPACTENERGY

.47 FIGURE 5-13. BROWNS FERRY 2 UNHNADIATEDHAZMETALLATERALEXPANSION........................48 FIGURE 5-14. BROWNS FERRY 2 IRRADIA'HZ)HAZMETALLATERALEXPANSION........-- --------49 FIGURE 6-1. TYPICALENGINEERING STRESS-STIVJN CURVE FOR HGVd3IATEDRPV MATERIALS.54 FIGURE 6-2. FRACTURE LOCATION,NECKINGBEHAVIORANDFRACTURE APPEARANCE FOR IRRADIA'IZDBASE METALTENSILE SPECIMENS 55 FIGURE 6-3. FRACTURE LOCATION,NECKINGBEHAVIORANDFRACTURE APPEARANCE FOR IRRADIATEDWELD METALTENSILE SPECIMENS

.56 FIGURE 6P. FRACTURE LOCATION,NECKINGBEHAVIORANDFRACTIJRE APPEARANCE FOR IRRADIA'IZDHAZMETALTENSILE SPECIMENS

0

GEiiE-B1100639-01 FIGURE 7-1. PRESSURE TEST P-T CURVES FOR UNIT2 FIGURE 7-2. HEAT-UP/COOLDOKVNP-T CURVES FOR UNIT ~

FIGURE 7-~. CORE CRITICALOPERATION P-T CURVES FOR UNIT2 FIGURE 7A. COMBINEDP-T CURVES FOR UNIT ~

FIGURE 7-5. BROWNS FERRY 2 ART VERSUS EFPY FOR PLATE AND %VELD MATERIALS.....

.68

.69

....... 70

.71

....72

GENE-B 1100639-01 ABSTRACT The surveillance capsule at 30'zimuth location was removed from the Browns Ferry Unit 2 reactor in Fall 1994.

The capsule contained fluxwires for neutron fluence measurement and Charpy and tensile test specimens for material property evaluation.

The fluxwires were evaluated to determine the fluence experienced by the test specimens.

Charpy V-Notch impact testing and uniaxial tensile testing were performed to establish the properties ofthe irradiated surveillance materials.

Unirradiated Charpy and tensile specimens were tested as well to obtain the appropriate baseline data.

The irradiated Charpy data for the plate and weld specimens were compared to the unirradiated data to determine the shift in Charpy curves due to irradiation. The results are within the predictions ofthe Regulatory Guide 1.99 Revision 2.

I The irradiated tensile data for the plate and weld specimens were compared to the unirradiated data to determine the efFect ofirradiation on the stress-strain relationship ofthe materials.

The changes shown in the materials were consistent with the irradiation embrittlement efFects shown by the Charpy specimens.

The fluxwire results, combined with the lead factor determined from the last fuel cycle, were used to estimate the 32 EFPY fluence. The resulting estimate was about 43% lower than the previous estimate used to develop pressure-temperature curves.

Therefore, new pressure-temperature curves were generated.

"vlu-

GENE-B 1100639-01 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author gratefully acknowledges the efforts ofother people towards completion ofthe content.'f this report.

Charpy testing was completed by G. P. Wozadlo and G. E. Dunning. Tensile specimen testing was done by S. B. Wisner. Flux wire testing was performed by R. M. Kruger and R. D. Reager.

Lead Factor calculations were performed by D. R. Rogers.

I

G~-B 110063 9-01

1. INTRODUCTION Pwt ofthe eQ'ort to assure reactor vessel integrity involves evaluation ofthe fracture toughness ofthe vessel ferritic materials.

The key values which characterize a material's fracture toughness are the reference temperature ofnil-ductilitytransition (RTt,~i) and the upper shelf 0

energy (USE). These are de6ned in 10CFR50 Appendix G [1] and in Appendix G ofthe ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI [2]. These documents contain requirements used to establish the pressure-temperature operating limits which must be met to avoid brittle fracture.

Appendix H of 10CFR50 [3] and AS'185-66 [4] establish the methods to be used for surveillance ofthe Browns Ferry Unit 2 reactor vessel materials.

Capsule removal and testing were don per the requirements ofASTME185-82 [6] to the extent practical.

The first vessel surveillance specimen capsule required by 10CFR50 Appendix H [3] was removed from Unit 2 in Fall 1994. The irradiated capsule was sent to the GE Vallecitos Nuclear Center (VNC) for testing.

The surveillance capsule contained Qux wires for neutron Qux monitoring and Charpy V-Notch impact test specimens and uniaxial tensile test specimens fabricated using materials &om or representative ofthe vessel materials nearest the core (beltline). The impact and tensile specimens were tested to establish properties for the irradiated materials.

Unirradiated Charpy and tensile specimens were sent from site to GE Vallecitos Nuclear Center (VNC) and tested using the same testing methods.

The results ofthe surveillance specimen testing are presented in this report, as required per 10CFR50 Appendices G and H [1 2 3]. The irradiated material properties are compared to the unirradiated properties to determine the efFect ofirradiation on the tensile properties, through tensile testing, and on material toughness, through Charpy testing. Flux wire results and updated lead factor analyses are used to determine the need for changes to the pressure-temperature (P-T) curves.

GENE-B 1100639-01

2. SUii'IMARYAND CONCLUSIONS 2.1 SUiziMARYOF RESULTS The 30'zimuth surveillance capsule was removed and shipped to VNC. The fiuxwires, Charpy V-Notch and tensile test specimens removed from the capsule were tested according to ASTME185-82 [6]. The methods and results ofthe testing are presented in this report as follows:

a.

Section 3:

Surveillance Program Background b.

Section 4:

Peak RPV Fluence Evaluation c.

Section 5:

Charpy V-Notch Impact Testing d.

Section 6:

Tensile Testing Section 7:

Development ofOperating Limits Curves The signi6cant results ofthe evaluation are below:

The 30'zimuth position capsule was removed from the reactor.

The capsule contained 9 flux wires:

3 copper (Cu), 3 iron (Fe), and 3 nickel (Ni). There were 36 Charpy V-Notch specimens in the capsule:

12 each ofplate material, weld material and heat afFected zone (HAZ) material.

The 8 tensile specimens removed consisted of3 plate, 2 weld, and 3 HAZmetal specimens.

The chemical compositions ofthe beltline materials were determined from data obtained from GE QA records.

The copper (Cu) and nickel (Ni) contents were determined for all beltline heats ofplate material. The values for the limiting beltline plate are 0.16% Cu and 0.52% Ni. The limitingbeltline weld values are 0.28% Cu and 0.35% Ni.

The purpose ofthe fluxwire testing was to determine the neutron flux at the surveillance capsule location. The Qux wire results show that the Quence (fiom E >1 MeV Qux) received by the surveillance specimens was 1.52x101 n/cm at removal.

GENE-B 110063 9-01 d.

A neutron transport computation was performed, based on the performance ofthe last fuel cycle. Relative fluxdistributions in the azimuthal and axial directions were developed.

The lead factor, relating the surveillance capsule fluxto the peak inside surface flux, was 0.98.

The surveillance Charpy V-Notch specimens were impact tested at temperatures selected to define the transition ofthe fracture toughness curves ofthe plate, weld, and HAZmaterials.

Measurements were taken ofabsorbed energy, lateral expansion and percentage shear.

From absorbed energy and lateral expansion curve-fit results (for plate and weld metal only), the values ofUSE and ofindex temperature for 30 ft-lb, 50 ft-lb and 35 mils lateral expansion (MLE)were obtained (see Table 5-4). Fracture surface photographs ofeach specimen are presented in Appendix A.

f.

The curves ofirradiated Charpy specimens and unirradiated Charpy specimens established the 30 ft-lb index temperature irradiation shift and the decrease in USE.

~ The surveillance plate material showed a measured 38'F shift and a 6 ft-lb decrease (4% decrease) in USE. The weld material showed a 1'F shift and essentially no decrease in USE.

g.

The measured shifts of38 F for plate and 1'F for weld, for a fluence of 1.52x1017 n/cm2, were within their respective Reg. Guide 1.99 [7] range predictions (dRT~+2a) of-20'F to 48'F, and -39'F to 73'F.

The irradiated tensile specimens were tested at room temperature (70'F), reactor operating temperature (550'F). The results in comparison to unirradiated data were tabulated (see Tables 6-3 and 6-4) for each specimen including yield and ultimate tensile strength, uniform and total elongation, and reduction ofarea.

The results generally showed increasing strength and decreasing ductility, consistent with expectations for irradiation embrittlement.

The 32 EFPY fluence prediction of6.05x1017 n/cm2, based on the fluxwire test and lead factor results presented here, was about 43% lower than that previously established (1.1x1018 n/cm ) for development ofP-T curves.

I 0

r GENE-B1100639-01 As a part ofthe development ofthe pressure-temperature (P-T) operating limits curves, the adjusted reference temperature (ART = initialRT<~Y+ dZTq~T+

Margin) was predicted for each beltline material, based on the methods ofReg.

Guide 1.99.

The ARTs for the limitingmaterial, weld ESW, at 32 EFPY is 92.1'F.

The beltline material USE values at 32 EFPY were predicted using the methods of Reg. Guide 1.99, with initial beltline USE values based generic USE values (see Table 7-3). It is expected that the actual 32 EFP YUSE willbe in excess of 50 ft-lbs for all beltline plated and welds. In addition, the results ofthe USE

'esting for the surveillance materials show that the BWROG equivalent margin analysis is applicable.

P-T curves were developed for three reactor conditions:

pressure test (Curve A),

non-nuclear heatup and cooldown (Curve B), and core critical operation (Curve C). The curves are valid for 32 EFPY ofoperation. The beltline curve is more limitingfor curve A. For curve B and curve C, the non-beltline curves are limitingfor pressures less than approximately 1100 psig. The P-T curves are shown in Figures 7-1 through 7-3. Figure 7-4 shows the combined Curves A, B, and C P-T curves.

2.2 CONCLUSION

S The requirements of 10CFR50 Appendix G [1] deal basically with vessel design life conditions and with limits ofoperation designed to prevent brittle Gacture.

However, based on the evaluation ofsurveillance testing results, and the associated analyses, the following conclusions are made:

a.

The 30 ft-Ib shifts and decreases in USE measured were within Regulatory Guide 1.99 Revision 2 predictions.

b.

The values ofART and USE for the reactor vessel beltline materials are expected to remain within limits in 10CFR50 Appendix G [1] for at least 32 EFPY of operation.

4

GENE-B 1100639-01 I

3. SURVEILLANCEPROGRAM BACKGROUND 3.1 CAPSULE RECOVERY The reactor pressure vessel (RPV) originally contained three surveillance capsules at 30; 120', and 300'zimuths at the core midplane.

The specimen capsules are held against the RPV inside surface by a spring loaded specimen holder.

Each capsule receives equal irradiation because cfcore symmetrv. During the Fail 1994 outage, the 30'ositioned capsule was removed.

The capsule was cut from its holder assembly and shipped by cask to the GE Vallecitos Nuclear Center (VNC), where testing was performed.

Upon arrival at VNC, the capsules were examined for identification. The drawing number 117C406)G001 Part P6 isstamped on the Browns Ferry Unit 2 30'urveillance capsule basket.

The general condition ofthe basket as received is shown in Figure 3-1. The capsule contained three impact (Charpy) specimen capsules and four tensile specimen capsules.

Each tensile specimen capsule contained two tensile specimens.

Each Charpy specimen capsule contained 12 plate, weld or HAZ Charpy specimens and 3 flux wires (one iron, one copper, and one nickel) in a sealed helium environment.

3.2 RPV MATERIALSANDFABRICATIONBACKGROUND 3.2.1 Fabrication Histo The Browns Ferry 2 RPV is a 251 inch diameter BWR/4 design.

Construction was performed by Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries Co. (IHI)to the Summer 1965 Addenda of the 1965 edition ofthe ASME Code.

The shell and head plate materials are ASME SA 302, Grade B, MOD. 1339 Class 1 low alloy steel (LAS). The nozzles and closure flanges are ASME SA 508 Class 2. The vessel plates were heat treated as follows:

f

)

~ ~

~

~ 0

~

~ ~

~ '

s

~

I

~

~ ~

I

~

o

~

\\

l>

GENE-B 1100639-01 The base metal specimens were cut from Heat A0981-1. The test plate received the same heat treatment beltline plates, see Section 3.2.1.

The Charpy specimens were removed from the test plate and machined as shown in Figure 3-3. Specimens were machined from the 1/4 T and 3/4 T positions in the plate, in the longitudinal orientation (long axis parallel to the rolling direction). The base metal Charpy specimens from the surveillance capsule were stamped as shown in Figure 3-3; the stamp code is taken from GE Drawing Number 921D277.

a The weld metal and HAZ Charpy specimens were fabricated by welding together two piece ofthe surveillance test plate Heat C-2884 and C-2868.

The two plates were electroslag-welded (BOW Weld Procedure WR-12-4) and heat treated the same as the core region plates.

The weld specimens and HAZ specimens were fabricated as shown in Figures 3-4 and 3-5, respectively.

The base metal orientation in the weld and HAZ specimens'was longitudinal. The specimens were stamped on one end as shown in Figure 3-3; the stamp code is taken from GE Drawing Number 921D277.

3.3.2 Tensile S ecimens Fabrication ofthe surveillance tensile specimens is also described in the GE purchase specification f8]. The materials, and thus the compositions and heat treatments for the base, weld and HAZ tensiles are the same as those for the corresponding Charpy specimens.

The specimens were stamped on one end as shown in Figure 3-6; the stamp code is taken from GE Drawing Number 921D276.

The base metal specimens were machined &om material at the 1/4 T and 3/4 T depth.

The specimens, oriented along the plate rolling direction, were machined to the dimensions shown in Figure 3-6. The gage section was tapered to a minimum diameter of0.250 inch at the center.

The weld metal tensile specimen materials were cut &om the welded test plates, as shown in Figure 3-7. The specimens were machined entirely from weld metal, scrapping material that might include base metal.

The fabrication method for the HAZtensile specimens is illustrated in Figure 3-8. The specimen blanks were cut &om the welded test plates such that the gage section minimum diameters were machined at the weld fusion line. The finished HAZ specimens are approximately halfweld metal and halfbase metal oriented along the plate rolling direction.

GENE-31100639-01 TABLE3-1 CHEMICALCOMPOSITION OF RPV BELTLINEMATERIALS Identilication Lower Shell Plates:

6-127-14 6-127-15 6-127-17 E

Com osition bv Wei ht Percent'eat/Lot C

Mn P

S Si No C2467-2 0.20 1.36 0.008 0.013 0.20 C2463-1 0.21 1.33 0.008 0.015 0.16 C2460-2 0.21 1.29 0.012 0.014 0.17 Ni Mo Cu 0.52 0.47 0.16 0.48 0.47 0.17 0.51 0.45 0.13 Lower-Intermediate Shell Plates:

6-127-6 6-127-16 6-127-20 Surveillance Plate:

Welds:

Axial'ircumferential Surveillance Weld A0981-1 0.20 1.35 0.007 0.011 0.19 0.55 C.49 0.14 C2467-1 0.20 1.36 0.008 0.013 0.20 0.52 0.47 0.16 C2849-1 0.21 1.30 0.010 0.015 0.23 0.50 0.46 0.11 A0981-1 see above for the plate with the same heat number ES Weld

0.016

0.35

0.28 D55733 0.08 1.70 0.014 0.005 0.40 0.65 0.45 0.09 0.15 1.49 0.010 0.011 0.09 0.33 0.49 0.20 Data Rom the 92-01 response [9] except where noted.

'etter from J.Valente to T.R.Mcintyre [11]

G~-B 1100639-01 TABLE3-2 MECHANICALPROPERTIES OF BELTLINEAND OTHER SELECTED RPV liATERIALS Locati n Beltlinea &b.

Lower Shell Plates Lower Intermediate Shell Plates Welds:

Longitudinal Circumferential Non'-Beltlinea + b:

Head Dome Top Head Flange Closure Head Segment ID.

'hfo 6-127-14 6-127-15'-127-17 6-127-6 6-127-16 6-127-20 ESW D55 733 Heat Number C2467-2 C2463-1 C2460-2 A0981-1 C2467-1 C2849-1 B5524-2 AKU75 C2426-2 C2426-3 C 1717-3 C 1722-3 Initial RTmv

~F

-20'F

-20'F O'

-10'F

-10'F 10'F

-40'F

+10

+10 Bottom Head Dome Bottom Head Upper Torus Jet Pump Nozzle C-2669-2 B-6747-1 B-6776-2 C-2369-1 214484

+42

+40

+54 a Test data information from GE-NE-523-A65-0594 [15]

" CMTRs

GENE-B 110063 9-01

. ~ggf@diljp r

Ci FIGURE 3-1. SURVEILLANCECAPSULE HOLDERRECOVERED FROMBROWNS FERRY UNIT2 GENE-B 1100639-01 Vessel Range Upper Shell

~

Longitudinal Welde-Girth Welds ~

Upper Intermediate Shell Shell Course 5 MK-60 Shell Course 4 MK-16 Intermediate Shell Shell Course 3 MK-59 Core Beltline Region I

Lower Intermediate Shell Lower Shell Shell Course 2 MK-58 Plate Heats: 40981-1 C2467-1 C2849-1 Shell Course 1 MK-57 Plate Heats: C2467-2 C2463-1 C2460-2 Bottom Head Enclosure FIGURE 3-2. SCHEMATIC OF THE RPV SHOWING IDENTIFICATIONOF VESSEL BELTLINE PLATES ANDWELDS GENE-B I100639-01 PLATE, HEAT A0981-1 STAMP CODE NUMBER 1.0S2 0.010 2.'l65 0.015 0.01~.001R 45'+1'394a0.001 0.394%.001 FIGURE 3>>3. FABRICATIONMETHODFOR BASE METALCHARPY SPECIMENS

GENE-B 110063 9-01 ROLUNG DIRECTION PLATE

~+, f44

."!i~~4iah SCRAP THE WELD ROOT MATERIAL "iCR45'o~

VESSEL WALL THICKNESS MACHINEDAS SHOWN ON BASE METAL CHARPY SPECIMEN FIGURE 4

FIGURE 3-4. FABRICATIONMETHOD FOR WELDMETALCHARPY SPECIMENS GENE-B 1100639-01 I

VESSEL WALL THICKNESS ory <o>>

+o~

~o~

+~o c'r~>>

'=" 4,+o~g

!e o>o ~

VESSEL WALL THICKNESS VESSEL WALL THICKNESS p>>

.1 8.

,p(QQ 449 MACHINEAS SHOWN ON BASE METAL CHARPY SPECIMEN FIGURE SCRAP FIGURE 3-5. FABRICATIONMETHOD FOR HAZMETALCHARPY SPECIMENS 0

GENE-B 1100639-01 PLATE VESSEL WALL THICKNESS 1/4T rr/r OA375-14 UNC-2A BOTH ENDS STAMP CODE NUMBER 30 deg+

TV~P 0.~.02 0.375R iTYP)

Dl 1.$XH).005 GAGE LENGTH 1/2 +

GAGE MARKS 1-1/4 REDUCED SECTION 3 1/16 D'OTES:

1. D ~ 02508).001 0 ATCENTER OF REDUCED SECTION 2

D'~ACTUAL "D 0+0.002TO0.005ATENDSOF REDUCED SECTION, TAPERING TO "D"AT CENTER FIGURE 3-6. FABRICATIONMETHODFOR BASE METALTENSILE SPECIMENS L

GENE-31100639-01 WELD CUT WELD OUT OF TEST PLATE MACHINEAS SHOWN IN BASE METALTENSILE FIGURE C."w4~zlt

?

@+~ ~

r VESSEL WALL THICKNESS SCRAP THE WELD ROOT MATERIAL Q&'s ~X@.

py+p IRM FIGURE 3-7. FABRICATIONMETHODFOR WELDMETALTENSILE SPECIMENS GENE-B 1100639-01 PLATE 6

+pa PLATE WELD VESSEL WALL THICKNESS DIMENSIONS AS SHOWN IN BASE METALTENSILE FIGURE VESSEL WALL THICKNESS SCRAP THE WELD ROOT MATERIAL FIGURE 3-8. FABRICATIONMETHOD FOR HAZMETALTENSILE SPECIMENS

GENE-B 110063 9-01

4. PEAK RPV FLUENCE EVALUATION Flux wires removed from the 30'apsule were analyzed. as described in Section 4.1, to determine flux and fluence received by the surveillance capsule.

The lead factor. determined as described in Section 4.2. was used to establish the peak vessel fluence from the fluxwire results.

Section 4.3 includes 32 EFPY peak fluence estimates.

4.1 FLUXWIRE ANALYSIS 4.l.l

~Pr cpu g The surveillance capsule contained 9 flux wires: 3 iron, 3 copper, and 3 nickel. Each wire was removed from the capsule, cleaned with dilute acid. weighed, mounted on a counting card, and analyzed for its radioactivity content by gamma spectrometry.

Each iron wire was analyzed for Mn-54 content, each nickel wire for Co-58 and each copper wire for Co-60 at a calibrated 4-cm or 10-cm source-to-detector distance with 100-cc Ge(Li) and 170-cc Ge detector systems.

To properly predict the flux and fluence at the surveillance capsule from the activity of the fiuxwires, the periods offulland partial power irradiation and the zero power decay periods were considered.

Operating days for each fuel cycle and the reactor average power fraction are shown in Table 4-1. Zero power days between fuel cycles are listed as well.

From the fluxwire activity measurements and power history, reaction rates for Fe-54 (n,p) Mn-54, Cu-63 (n,u) Co-60 and Ni-58 (n,p) Co-58 were calculated.

The E )I MeV fast fluxreaction cross sections were determined Rom past testing at Browns Ferry 3 [10], also a 251 inch, 764 bundle plant, using multiple dosimeter and spectrum unfolding techniques.

The cross sections for the iron, copper and nickel wires are 0.213 barn, 0.00374 barn and 0.274 barn, respectively.

These values are consistent with other measured cross section functions determined at GE's Vallecitos Nuclear Center from more than 65 spectral determinations for BWRs and for the General Electric Test Reactor using activation monitors and spectral unfolding techniques.

These data functions are applied to BWR pressure vessel locations based on water gap (fuel to vessel wall) distances.

The cross sections for E )0.1 MeV flux were determined &om the measured l-to-0.1 MeV cross section ratio of 1.6.

GENE-31100639-01 4.1.2 Results The measured activity, reaction rate and full-power fluxresults for the 30'urveillance capsule are given in Table 4-2. The E >1 MeV Qux values were calculated by dividing the wire reaction rate measurements by the corresponding cross sections, factoring in the local power I

history for each fuel cycle. The fluence result, 1.52xl017 n/cm (E >1 MeV) was obtained by multiplying the full-power fluxvalue for copper, iron, and nickel by the operating time and full power fraction, shown in Table 4-1.

The accuracies ofthe values in Tables 4-2 for a 2cr deviation are estimated to be:

+ 5% for dps/g (disintegrations per second per gram)

+ 10% for dps/nucleus (saturated)

+ 20% for flux and fluence E >1 MeV

+ 20% for Qux and fluence E >0.1 MeV 4.2 DETERh'GNATIONOF LEADFACTOR The fluxwires detect Qux the location ofthe surveillance capsule.

The wires willreQect the power Quctuations associated with the operation ofthe plant. However, the Qux wires are not at the location ofpeak vessel Qux. Alead factor is required to relate the fluxat the wires'location to the peak Qux. The lead factor is the ratio ofthe Qux at the surveillance capsule to the Qux at the peak vessel inside surface location. The lead factor is a function ofthe core and vessel geometry and ofthe distribution ofpower density and voids in the core. The lead factor was generated for the Browns Ferry geometry, using a typical fuel cycle to determine power shape and void distribution. The methods used to calculate the lead factor are discussed below.

4.2.1 Procedure Determination ofthe lead factor for the RPV inside wall was made using a combination oftwo separate two-dimensional neutron transport computer analyses.

The Qrst ofthese established the azimuthal and radial variation ofQux in the vessel at the fuel midplane elevational.

-"19-

GENE-B 1100639-01 established the azimuthal and radial variation ofQux in the vessel at the fuel midplane elevational.

The second analysis determined the relative variation offiuxwith elevation.

The azimuthal and axial distribution results were combined to provide the ratio offlux, or the lead factor, between the surveillance capsule location and the peak flux locations.

The DORT computer program, which utilizes the discrete ordinates method to solve the Boltzmann transport equation in two dimensions, was used to calculate the spatial Qux distribution produced by a fixed source ofneutrons in the core region.

The azimuthal distribution was obtained with a model specified in (R,B) geometry, assuming eighth-core symmetry with reflective boundary conditions at 0'nd 45'. Calculations were performed using neut-,on cross-sections from a 26 energy group set, with angular dependence ofthe scattering cross-sections approximated by a third-order Legendre polynomial expansion.

A schematic ofthe (R,B) vessel model is shown in Figure 4-1. Atotal of 132 radial intervals and 90 azimuthal intervals were used.

The model consists ofan inner and outer core rey'on, the shroud, water regions inside and outside the shroud, and the vessel wall. The core region material compositions and neutron source densities were representative ofconditions at an elevation 75 inches above the bottom ofactive fuel, which is near the elevation ofthe wires. Flux as a function ofazimuth and radius was calculated in order to establish the azimuth ofthe peak Qux and its magnitude relative to the Qux at the wires'ocation of30'.

The calculation ofthe axial fluxdistribution was performed in (R,Z) geometry, using a simplified cylindrical representation ofthe core configuration and realistic simulations ofthe axial variations ofpower density and coolant mass density.

The core description was based on conditions near the azimuth angle of25'here the edge ofthe core is closest to the vessel wall.

The elevation ofthe peak Qux was determined, as weH as its magnitude relative to the Qux at the surveillance capsule elevation.

4.2.2 Results The two-dimensional computations indicate the Qux to be a maximum 25.75'ast the RPV quadrant references (0', 90', etc.), at an elevation about 77 inches above the bottom of active fuel. The peak closest to the 30'ocation ofthe surveillance capsule removed is at 25.75',

as shown in Figure 4-2. The relative Qux distribution versus elevation is shown in Figure 4-3.

The calculated Qux at the capsule (R,B) position along the midplane was modified by an GENE-B 110063 9-01 position. Theresultingsurveillancecapsulefluxis 8.8x10 n/cm2-s. Thepeakfluxatvessel surface from the transport calculation, incorporating the axial adjustment factor obtained from the (R.Z) calculation is 9.0x108 n/cm2-s.

Therefore the lead factor is 8.8/9.0=0.98.

The transport calculation ofsurveillance capsule flux. 8.8x108 n/cm"-s, is about 49%

higher than the dosimetry result of5.9xl08 n/cm=-s. This is attributed to conservatism incorporated in the transport calculation model and may, in part. result from the use ofnominal rather than as-built radius. A difference in vessel radius has little, ifany, effect on the calculated lead factor. since the difference would affect both capsule radius and vessel radius and would not significant;y alter the ratio offluxes at the two locations.

The fracture toughness analysis is based on a 1/4 T depth flaw in the beltline region, so the attenuation ofthe fiuxto that depth is considered.

This attenuation is calculated according to Reg. Guide 1.99 requirements, as shown in the next section.

4.3 ESTIMATE OF 32 EFPY FLUENCE The inside surface fluence (fs~) at 32 EFPY is determined from the fluxwire fluence for 8.2 EFPY of 1.52x1017 n/cm-", using the lead factor of0.98. The time period 32 EFPY is based on 40-year operation at an 80% capacity factor. The resulting 32 EFPY fluence value at the peak vessel inside surface is:

fsurf= 1.52x10 7*(32/8.2)/0.98 fsurf= 6.05 x1017 n/cm2 The peak inside surface fluence of6.05 x1017 n/cm2 is about 43% lower than that used in previous analyses (1.1x1018 n/cm2 ) [11]. Therefore, the previous numbers were quite conservative.

The 1/4 T fluence (f) is calculated according to the followingequation &om Reg. Guide 1.99 [7]:

f= fs~e-0.24x)

(4-1) where x = distance, in inches, to the 1/4 T depth.

GENE-B 1100639-01 For a vessel beltline lower-intermediate shell and lower shell of6.13 inches thick, the corresponding depth x is 1.53 inches.

Equation 4-1 evaluated for these values ofx gives:

f= 0.6923 fs~, or f= 4.19x1017 nicm2 The impact ofthese revised fluences on the P-T curves is discussed in Section 7.

GENE-B 1100639-01 TABLE4-1

SUMMARY

OF DAILYPO%'ER HISTORY Cvcle C cle Dates 'perating D~ss Full Power Fraction Days Between

~Ccles 7/20/74 - 3/18/78 1338 4/28/78 - 4/27/79 365 0.355 0.723 41

+4 6/1/79 - 9/30/80 11/1/80 - 7/3 1/82 3/18/83 - 9/15/84 488 638 548 0.759 0.784 0.759 31 229 2478 7/1/91 - 1/31/93 581 5/31/93 - 10/1/94 489 4447 (total) 0.849 0.972 0.743 (average) 121

TABLE4-2 SURVEILLANCECAPSULE FLUXAND FLUENCE FOR IRRADIATIONFROM START-UP TO 10/I/94 Wire Element dps/g Bement at end ofIrrad>at>on Reaction Rate Ld s/nucleus saturated Full Power Flux Fluence Fluence (n/cm2 s)

(ll/cm2)

(n/cm2)

E >1 MeV L >1 MeV E >0.1 MeV Iron Nickel Copper Average 6.05E+04 1.07E+06 5.62 EH 03 1.23E-16 1.67E-16 2.15 E-18 5.80E+08 6

1 1E+08 5.75 E+08 1.48E+17 1.52E+17 2.37 E+17 2 43E+17 1 49E.].17 2.39EH. I 7 1.57E+17 2.52 r<<17 a Full power flux, based on thermal power of3293 Mwt

Average values ofthe tests reported.

tb C)

C)

Ch

'4J

e

~

I s

~

~ l

~ '

e

I I I

'. I I

e I I

I I +I I

I I

l I

I I

I I I

0

~

I

~ 8

s

~

I 1

I 'I I

o I I

I I

~ I I

l I

I I

I I II

~ 0

"~

GENE-B 1100639-01

5. CHARPY V-NOTCHIMPACTTESTING The 36 Charpy specimens recovered from the surveillance capsule were impact tested at temperatures selected to establish the toughness transition and upper shelf ofthe irradiated RPV materials. In addition, unirradiated base, weld, and HAZ metal specimens recovered from the Browns Ferry site were tested for baseline data.

Testing was conducted in accordance with ASTME23-88 [12].

5.1 lMPACTTEST PROCEDURE The Vallecitos testing machine used for irradiated and unirradiated specimens was a Riehle 5'Iodel PL-2 impact machine, serial number R-89916.

The pendulum has a maximum velocity of 15.44 ft/sec and a maximum available hammer energy of240 ft-lb.

The test apparatus and operator were qualified using NIST standard reference material specimens.

The standards consist ofsets ofhigh and low energy specimens, each designed to fail at a specified energy at the standard test temperature of-40'F. According to ASTME23-88 [12],

the test apparatus averaged results must reproduce the NIST standard values within an accuracy of+5% or+1.0 ft-lb, whichever is greater.

The qualification ofthe Riehle machine and operator is summarized in Table 5-1. The calibration tests are valid for one year.

Charpy V-Notch tests were conducted at temperatures between -80'F and 300'F. The cooling Quid used for both irradiated and unirradiated specimens tested at temperatures below 70'F was ethyl alcohol. Attemperatures between 70'F and 200'F, water was used as the temperature conditioning Quid. The specimens were heated in silicon oil above 200'F.

Cooling ofthe conditioning Quids was done by heat exchange with liquid nitrogen; heating was done'by an immersion heater.

The bath ofQuid was mechanically stirred to maintain uniform temperatures.

The fluid temperature was measured with a calibrated thermocouple.

Once at test temperature, the specimens were manually transferred with centering tongs to the Charpy test machine and impacted within 5 seconds.

For each Charpy V-Notch specimen the test temperature, energy absorbed, lateral expansion, and percent shear were evaluated.

In addition, for the irradiated specimens, photographs were taken offracture surfaces.

Lateral expansion and percent shear were measured

GENE-B 110063 9-01 according to specified methods [12]. Percent shear was determined using method number 1 of Subsection 11.2.4.3 ofASTME23-88 [12], which involves measuring the length and width ofthe fracture surface and determining the percent shear value from Table 2 ofASTME23-88 [12].

5.2 IMPACTTEST RESULTS Twelve Charpy V-Notch specimens each ofirradiated base, weld, and HAZmaterial were tested at temperatures (-80'F to 300'F) selected to define the toughness transition and upper shelf portions ofthe &acture toughness curves.

The absorbed energy, lateral expansion, and percent shear data are listed for each material in Table 5-2. Plots ofabsorbed energy data for base and weld materials are presented in Figures 5-2 and 5-7, respectively.

Plots ofabsorbed energy and lateral expansion data for HAZ material, Figures 5-12 and 5-14, did not fita hyperbolic curve because ofthe scatter in the data. Lateral expansion plots for base and weld materials are presented in Figures 5-5 and 5-10, respectively.

The irradiated curves are plotted along with their corresponding unirradiated curves in Figures 5-3 and 5-8. The fracture surface photographs and a summary ofthe test results for each specimen are contained in Appendix A.

Twelve Charpy V-Notch specimens each ofunirradiated base, weld and HAZmaterial were tested at temperatures (-80'F to 300'F) selected to define the toughness transition and upper shelf portion ofthe &acture toughness curves.

The absorbed energy, lateral expansion,'nd percent shear data are listed in Table 5-3. Plots ofabsorbed energy data for base and weld metals are presented in Figures 5-1 and 5-6, respectively.

Lateral expansion plots for base and weld metals are presented in Figures 5-4 and 5-9, respectively. Plots ofabsorbed energy and lateral expansion data forHAZmaterial, Figures 5-11 and 5-13, did not fita hyperbolic curve because of the scatter in the data.

The plate and weld data sets are fitwith the hyperbolic tangent function developed by Oldfield for the EPRI Irradiated Steel Handbook [13]:

Y=A+B*TANH[(T-T0)/C],

where Y= impact energy or lateral expansion T = test temperature, and A, B, T0 and C are determined by non-linear regression.

GERS-B 1100639-01 The TANHfunction is one ofthe few continuous functions with a shape characteristic oflow alloy steel fracture toughness transition curves.

Typically the curve Gts were generated by setting both shelves free with a default lower shelf energy of5 ft-lbs or lateral expansion of4 mils.

5.3 IRBADIATEDVERSUS UNIKRADIATEDCRAPPY V-NOTCHPROPERTIES As a part ofthe RPV surveillance test program, extra Charpy V-Notch specimens were fabricated,and delivered to the site.

Specimens were recovered from storage at the site and forwarded to GE for impact testing.

This was done because GE had no records ofunirradiated baseline test results for this surveillance program.

The irradiated and unirradiated Charpy V-Notch data curves were used to estimate the values given in Table 5-4: 30 ft-lb, 50 ft-lb and 35 MLEindex temperatures, and the USE for the sets ofbase and weld metal irradiated material data and for the base and weld metal unirradiated material data.

Transition temperature shift values are determined as the change in the temperature at which 30 ft-lb impact energy is achieved, as required in ASTME185-82 [6]. The resulting shifts in Charpy curves are discussed in the next section..

5.4 COMPARISON TO PREDICTED IRRADIATIONEFFECTS 5.4.1 Irradiation Shift The measured transition temperature shifts for the plate and weld materials were compared to the predictions calculated according to Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2 [7]. The inputs and calculated values for irradiated shift are as follows:

Plate:

Copper =

0.14%

Nickel =

0.55%

CF=

98 fluence =

1.52x1017 n/cm2 Reg. Guide 1.99 dRT~ = 14'F Reg. Guide 1.99 bRT~+ 2czg(34'F) = 48'F max., -20'F min.

Measured Shift = 37.9 'F

GENE-B 1100639-01 Weld:

Copper =

0.20%

Nickel =

0.33%

CF =

120 fluence =

1.52x1017 n/cm2 Reg. Guide 1.99 MT~q = 17'F Reg. Guide 1.99 MT~z + 2'(56'F) = 73'F max., -39'F min.

Measured Shift = 1.3'F The weight percents ofCu and Ni are based on Table 3-1. CF shown above is the chemistry factors from Tables 1 or 2 ofReg. Guide 1.99. The fluence factor is 0.141.

The measured shift of37.9'F for the plate is above the predicted shifts of 14'F and mea"ured shift of 1.3'F for the weld is below the predicted shift of 17'F. The measured shiQs for the plate and weld are withinthe bounds (-20'F to 48'F for the plate material and -39'F to 73'F for the weld material; respectively) ofthe Reg. Guide 1.99 uncertainty of2a.

5.4.2 Change in USE Using the copper and fluence data above with Figure 2 ofReg. Guide 1.99, decreases in USE of9% are predicted for the plate and decreases in USE of 13% are expected for the weld.

i The measured decrease in the USE value of4% for the plate is below the predicted value. The weld material shows essentially no change in the USE value, which is less than the 13% decrease in USE predicted by the Reg. Guide 1.99.

GENE-B 1100639-01 TABLE5-1 VALLECITOSQUALIFICATIONTEST RESULTS USING NIST STANDARDREFERENCE SPECIMENS Specimen Test Energy Acceptable Temperature Absorbed Range Vallecitns Riehle hfachine (tested 6/28/94)

HH-40 229 HH-40 384 HH-40 980 HH-40 1152 HH-40 1172 Alcohol Alcohol Alcohol Alcohol Alcohol

-40 Q0

-40

-40 75.0 74.5 70.5 72.5

~7 LL-39 080 LL-39 095 LL-39 631 LL-39 775 LL-39 930 Average Alcohol

-40 Alcohol

-40 7

Average 73.5 13.5 13.0 13.5 13.5 13.3 74.9+ 3.7 pass 13.2+ 1.0 pass V

l'

GENE-B 1100639-01 TABLE5-2 IRRADIATEDCHA3G'YV-NOTCHIMPACTTEST RESULTS Base:

Heat A0981-1, Longitudinal, f=1.52xl017 n/cm~

Weld:

Heats D55733 f=1.52x1017 n/cm'pecimen Identification ESC ESY E7Y E7K E71 E7D E64 ESU E72 Esl QE57 ESS EB7 EBS EBK EAP EBD EBB EB1 EAM EBE EB4 EB2 EBA Test Temperature

~oF

-80

-40

-20 0

40 60 80 100 120 160 200 300

-80

-40

-20 0

20 40 80 100 120 160 200 300 Fracture Energy

~ft-1b 10.5 17.0 33.0 38.5 60 82.5 94.5 121.0 120.5 130.0 136.0 131.5 2.0 13.0 37.5 50.0 59.5 59.5 59.0 76.5 87.0 107.0 107.5 113.0 Lateral Expansion

~mils 10.0 13.5 30.5 33.0 50 61.0 70.0 91.0 88.0 91.0 94.0 88.0 5.0 12.5 31.0 42.0 52.0 50.0 52.0 64.5 65.0 87.0 84.5 88.5 Percent Shear (Method 1) 3ll 13 19 40 59 68 85 100 100 100 100 2

4 9

15 22 30 42 50 68 100 100 100 HAZ:

ED6 f=1.52x10 n/cm'J3 EEY EJS EJC EJ1

-80

-60

-40

-20 0

20 40 60 80 120 200 300 3.5 37.0 54.0 30.0 43.5 106.0 93.5 107.5 82.0 97.5 107.5 143.0 6.0 30.0 44.0 22.5 36.5 81.5 67.0 86.0 73.0 78.0 82.0 92.0 1

12 24 7

19 65 48 75 60 100 100 100

GENE-B 1100639-01 TABLE5-3 UMFQhG)IA.TEDCXKARPYV-NOTCHEVlPACT TEST RESULTS Base:

Heat A0981-1 Longitudinal Specimen Identification ESJ E7A E61 E66 E7M E56 E6U E76 E77 E7L ESE E6T Test Temperature

~f%

-80

-60

-40

-20 0

20 40 80 100 120 200 300 Fracture Energy

~fi-Ib 8.5 17.5

""35.5 40 97 68 73 104.5 137 134.5 146.5 133 Lateral Expansion

~mils 5.5 14 29 37 69 56 56 77 89 93.5 90 84 Percent Shear (Method 1) 2 9

17 19 47 37 47 86 100 100 100 100 Weld:

Heats D55733 ED6 EJ3 EEV'DB EJJ EJS EJC EJl EDC EJB EJD EEC

-80

-60

-40

-20 0

20 40 60 80 120 200 300 3.5 37 54 30 43.5 106 93.5 107.5 82 97.5 107.5 143 6

30 44 22.5 36.5 81.5 67 86 73 78 82 92 1

12 24 7

19 67 48 76 60 100 100 100 ED4 EDD EE1 ED7 EE7 EDE EJ4 EEB EES ED2 EDL EDM

-80

-60

-40

-20 0

40 60 80 100 120 200 300 13 44 53 25.5 104.5 120.5 121.5 139.5 130 121 126.5 110.5 11.5 34.5 42.5 24.5 79 84 74.5 88.5 88 92 88 89 3

12 25 30 55 74 84 100 100 100 100 100 GENE-B 1100639-Ol TABLE5-4 SIGNIFICANTRESULTS OF IRRADIATEDANDUNIRRADIATED CHARPY V-NOTCHDATA

~Q~e PLATE: Heat A0981-1, Longitudinal f=1.52x1017 n/cm'nirradiated Irradiated Difference Index Temperature

('F)

F&lfiJh

-48.4 37.9 Index Temperature

('F)

~F=

>~1

-14.'1 35.9

-25.2 82 33.4 141.8/92.1

'>lEU.

6.3/4 0 (4%)

Index Upper ShelP Temperature Energy DfLU)

Reg. Guide 1.99, Rev 2 dRTgprb:

14 1.99, Rev 2% Decrease in USE:

(9%)

Reg. Guide 1.99, Rev 2 (d+2a)":

-20 to 48 WELD: Heat D55733 f=1.52x1017 n/cm'nirradiated Irradiated Difference

-26.9 1.3 10.9 2RE 15.9

-7.7 10.5 112.0 3 3 (-3%)

Reg. Guide 1.99, Rev 2 dRT>prb:

17 1.99, Rev 2% Decrease in USEc:

(13%)

Reg. Guide 1.99, Rev 2 (b+2cz)h:

-39 to 73 a USE values &om Longitudinal/Transverse oriented Charpies; values are equal for weld metal.

Longitudinal USE from data shown in Figure 5-2.

Transverse plate USE is taken as 65% ofthe longitudinal USE, per USNRC MTEB 5-2 [16].

" Determined in section 5.4.1 c See section 5.4.2

UN IRRADIATEDCHARPY Base Energy 160 140 120 100 So 60 8

40 20

-200

-100 0

100 Test Temperature, 'F 200 300 I

4oo C)

C)

CO Figure 5-1. Browns Ferry 2 Unirradiated Base Metal Impact Energy

II II

~, ), ),

~

il I

II

I sl I I I I I

I II II II

~ 0 s

~

e

I

~

o

~

II s I

I I

W

~

s

~

0

~

t s

~

J II

I i I I

tl II I J tl II

~0 s

~

I I

I

~

'h

IRRADIATEDVERSUS UNIRRADIATEDCIIAI(PY Weld Energy 180 160 140 Unirradiate 120 100 80 Irradiated 60 40

-2 9% USE Deer 6'F RTndt Sh 30 ft-lbs ase ft Qa 20 0

-200

-50

-100

-150 150 0

50 100 200 Test Temperature, 'F Figure 5-8. Browns Ferry 2 Irradiated and Unirradiated Weld Metal Impact Energy 250 td ED C) 300

~'

IC)

UNIRRADIATEDCIIARPY Weld Lateral Expansion 90 80 70 60 8

So 40 30 20 10 0

-200

-100 0

100 Test Temperature, 'F 200 300 400 C)

C)

Ch IC)

Figure 5-9. Browns Ferry 2 Unirradiated Weld Metal Lateral Expansion

i

I l

I I ll il I

I I I I I I I II II II r ~

I a

~

I

~

I I

II t,

I il

~

I II II II I II II II I I

~t I

s

~

g, g,

~

il I

II a I il I

II II II II II II tS a

~

0

~ ~

II II II

~

I

~

~ i I

~

GENE-B 1100639-01

6. TENSILE TESTING Eight round bar tensile specimens were recovered &om the surveillance capsule and six were tested.

Uniaxial tensile tests were conducted in air at room temperature (70'F)'and RPV operating temperature (550'F).

Six unirradiated specimens, sent from the Browns Ferry site to GE-~K San Jose, were tested at the same temperatures.

The tests were conducted in accordance with ASTMES-89 [14].

6.1 PROCEDURE Alltests were conducted using a screw-driven Instron test frame equipped with a 20-kip load cell and special pull bars and grips. Heating was done with a Satec resistance clamshell furnace centered around the specimen load train. The test temperature was monitored and controlled by a chromel-alumel thermocouple spot-welded to an Inconel clip that was Giction-clipped to the surface ofthe specimen at its midline. Before the elevated temperature tests, a profile ofthe furnace was conducted at the test temperature ofinterest using an unirradiated steel specimen ofthe same geometry.

Thermocouples were spot-welded to the top, middle, and bottom ofa central 1 inch gage ofthis specimen.

En addition, the clip-on thermocouple was attached to the midline ofthe specimen.

When the target temperatures ofthe three thermocouples were within+5'F ofeach other, the temperature ofthe clip-on thermocouple was noted and subsequently used as the target temperature for the irradiated specimens.

Alltests were conducted at a calibrated crosshead speed of0.005 in/min until well past yield, at which time the speed was increased to 0.05 inch/min until fi'acture.

Crosshead displacement was used to monitor specimen extension during the test.

The test specimens were machined with a minimum nominal diameter of0.250 inch at the center ofthe gage length. The yield strength (YS) and ultimate tensile strength (UTS) were calculated by dividing the measured area (0.0491 in>) into the 0.2% offset load and into the maximum test load, respectively.

The values listed for the uniform and total elongations were obtained Rom plots that recorded load versus specimen extension and are based on a 1.5 inch gage length. Reduction ofarea (RA) values were determined Rom post-test measurements ofthe necked specimen diameters using a calibrated blade micrometer and employing the following formula:

RA = 100% * (Ao - Ag/A GENE-B 1100639-01 After testing, each broken specimen was photographed end-on. showing the fracture surface, and lengthwise, showing the fracture location and local necking behavior.

6.2 RESULTS Irradiated tensile test properties ofYield Strength (YS), Ultimate Tensile Strength (UTS), Reduction ofArea (RA), Uniform Elongation (UE), and Total Elongation (TE) are presented in Table 6-1; all but UE are presented in Table 6-2 for unirradiated specimen's.

A stress-strain curve for a 550'F base metal irradiated specimen is shown in Figure 6-1.

his curve is typical ofthe stress-strain characteristics ofall the tested specimens.

The surveillance materials generally followthe trend ofdecreasing properties with increasing temperature.

Photographs ofthe fracture surfaces and necking behavior are given in Figures 6-2 through 6-4.

6.3 IRRADIATEDVERSUS UNIRIVQ)IATEDTENSILE PROPERTIES Unirradiated tensile test data was tested to provide direct comparison with the irradiated data at room temperature, shown in Table 6-3. The unirradiated and irradiated plate and weld data at 550' was compared to determine the irradiation effect, shown in Table 6-4. The trends ofincreasing YS and UTS and ofdecreasing TE and for the weld decreasing RA, characteristic ofirradiation embrittlement, are seen in the data.

GEiiE-81100639-01 TABLE6-1: TENSILE TEST RESULTS FOR IRRADIATEDRPV MATERIALS Specimen N~1~e Base:

EKA EKJ Test Temp.

~O 70 550 Yielda Strength

~k~~

71.2 68.9 Ultimate Strength MiC 92.5 90.1 Uniform Elongation

~0/

9.3 7.6 Total Elongation

~0/

19.5 16.8 Reduction ofArea

~0/

71.4 72.2 Weld:

EL1 ELC 70 72.4, 550 67.5 92.2 87.0 9.0 7.3 18.7 15.0 68.7

'1.2 HAZ:

EMB EM3 70 550 70.9 65.9 97.6 86.8 8.3 7.0 17.5 14A 64.5 63.9 a Yield Strength is determined by 0.2% offset.

TABLE6-2: TENSILE TEST RESULTS FOR UNIRRADIATEDRPV MATERIALS Test Yielda Ultimate Uniform Specimen Temp..

Strength Strength Elongation 19umh:c. ~

dml lksD EKC 70 66.9 88.9 EKK 550 60.6 83.3 Total Elongation

~0/

19.7 17.0 Reduction ofArea 70.3 67.9 Weld:

ELB ELA 70 64.2 550 62.3 84.4 81.9 20.7 15.1 70.5 62.5 HAZ:

EM2 EM7 70 64.6'50 63.1 84.9 83.9 16.3 13.9 68.3 64.6 a Yield Strength is determined by 0.2% offset.

GEiiE-B110063 9-01 TABLE6-3 COMPARISON OF UNIRRADIATEDAND IRRADIATEDTENSILE PROPERTIES ATROOM TEMPERATURE Yield Strength

~Q Base:

Unirradiated 66.9 Irradiated 71.2 Difference a 6.4%

88.9 92.5 4.0 19.7 19.5

-1.0%

71.4 1.6%

Ultimate Strength Total Elongation Reduction of

~o/

Area

~o/

70.3 Weld:

Unirradiated 64.2 Irradiated 72.4 Difference a 12.8%

84.4 92 2 93%

20.7 18.7

-9.7%

70.5 68.7 a Difference = [(Irrad. - Unirrad.)/Unirrad.]

100%

TABLE6A COMPARISON OF< UNIRRADIATE<DANDItuMDIATEDTENSILE PROPERTIES AT 550 F Base:

Unirradiated Irradiated Difference a Yield Strength

~k~i 60.6 68.9 13.7%

Ultimate Strength Qksi}

83.3 90.'1 8.2%

Total Elongation

~0/

17.0 16.8 1.2%

Reduction ofArea

~0/

67.9 72.2 6.33%

Weld:

Unirradiated 62.3 Irradiated '7.5 Difference a 8.3%

81.9 87.0 62%

15.1 15.0

-0.7%

62.5 61.2

-2.1%

a Difference = [grrad. - Unirrad.)/Unirrad.]

100%

f

100.0 T5.0

~~

CO tO 50.0 I

Ul C

~~

8 25.0 F

N Base EKJ 550 F 0.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 Engineering Strain, %

15.0 20.0 tb C)

CO Ch

GEiiE-B1100639-01 l ~

I t

EKA 70'F g

~

550'F FIGURE 6-2. FRACTURE LOCATION,NECKING BEIIAVIORAND FRACTURE APPEARANCE FOR IRRADIATEDBASE METALTENSILE SPECIMENS I

~

GENE-B 110063 9-01 ELI 70'F P

~k!'.

P ELC 550oF I

FIGURE 6-3. FRACTURE LOCATION, NECKING BEHAVIORAND FRACTURE APPEARANCE FOR IRRADIATEDWELD METALTENSILE SPECIMENS GENE-B 110063 9-01 Sg.

I ~

)

70'F EM3 550'F FIGURE 6A. FRACTURE LOCATION,NECKING BEHAVIORAND FRACTURE APPEARANCE FOR IRRADIATEDHAZMETALTENSILE SPECIMENS

GENE-B 110063 9-01

7. DEVELOPMENTOF OPERATING LMITSCURVES P-T cur ves for Unit 2 were previously developed in GE report 523-A65-0594 [15].

Therefore. only the aspects ofthe curves which have changed, as a result ofthe testing presented here and as a result ofASME Code changes are discussed below.

7.1 BACKGROUND

The revised fluence value in Section 4 (6.05x10'/cm ), which is about 43% lower the fluence used in the previous report (1.1x10" n/cm ), is used in this section to revise the adjusted reference temperatures (ARTs), which are subsequently used to revise the beltline P-T curves.

The P-T curve revision includes consideration ofthe change to the aHowable &acture toughness equation in ASME Code Section XI, Appendix G, which occurred in 1992. The coefBcient 1.233 in the KIR/Klaequation in Figure G-2210-1, became 1.223.

The result ofthe revision is an increase ofabout 1/2'F to the calculated temperature for a given pressure on the P-T cur ves (i.e., all curved portions ofthe P-T curves shift 1/2'F to the right).

7.2 NON-BELTLINEREGIONS The non-beltline Curve B curves are developed for two regions:

the upper vessel region, governed by the jet pump nozzle limits, and the bottom head region, governed by the bottom head dome limits. Table 3-2 has the limitinginitialRT~r values which are: 54'F for the jet pump nozzle and 42'F for the bottom head dome.

The 1/2'F adjustment was made to the curved portions ofthe non-beltline curves, but not to the straight line and step portions, which are based on 10CFR50 Appendix G.

Although bottom head Curve B is not limiting,it is included in Figure 7-2, as there may be transients where the bottom head is cooler than the upper vessel regions.

GENE-B 1100639-01 7.3 CORE BELTLZNEREGION C

..he decreased fluence has an impact on the beltline P-T curves, by decreasing the ARTs ofthe beltline plates and welds. Figures 7-1 through 7-4 show the beltline curves at 32 EFPY.

Table 7-1 shows the beltline curve data points. As with the non-beltline curves, the 1/2'F adjustment was made to the curved portions ofthe beltline curves.

7.4 EVALUATIONOF IRRADIATIONEFFECTS The impact on adjusted reference temperature (ART) due to irradiation in the beltline materials is determined according to the methods in Reg. Guide 1.99 [7], as a function ofneutron fluence and the element contents ofcopper (Cu) and nickel (Ni). The speciflc relationship &om Reg. Guide 1.99 [7] is:

where:

ART = InitialRT~r+ ZEST~~+ Margin

~T~ [CF]*$0.28 - 0.10 log f)

Margin=2 (crP+ag )

(7-1)

(7-2)

(7-3)

CF =

chemistry factor 6'om Tables 1 or 2 ofReg. Guide 1.99 [7],

f=

1/4 T fluence (n/cm2) divided by 1019, cq =

standard deviation on initialRT~q, ag =

standard deviation on MT~z, is 28'F for welds and 17'F for base material, except that vg need not exceed 0.50 times the MT~q value.

Once two sets ofsurveillance capsule data are available, the CF values in Reg.

Guide 1.99 [7] can be modifled to reflect the results.

However, this is only the &st set of surveillance data &om Unit 2, so only the results ofthe fluxwire tests are factored into beltline ART calculations.

Each beltline plate and weld BATED~value is determined by multiplyingthe CF 6'om Reg. Guide 1.99, determined for the Cu-Ni content ofthe material, by the fluence factor for the EFP Ybeing evaluated.

The Margin term and initialRT~q are added to get the ART ofthe GENE-B 1100639-01 material.

The 32 EFPY ART values are shown in Table 7-2. Results for all ofthe beltline plates and the electroslag weld are shown.

7.4.1

.ART Versus EFPY The results in Table 7-2 show that the most limitingbeltline plate is C2467-1 at 32 EFPY. The resulting ARTs at 32 EFPY are 49.7'F for the plate and 92.1'F for the weld.

Figure 7-5 shows the ART as a function ofEFPY.

7.4.2 U er Shelf Energy at 32 EFPY Paragraph IV.Bof 10CFR50 Appendix G [1] sets limits on the upper shelf energy (USE) ofthe beltline materials.

The USE must be above 50 ft-Ib at all times during plant operation, assumed here to be up to 32 EFPY. According to the BAW-1845 report the initialUSE ofthe plates was not tested during fabrication, as there was no requirement to do so at that time.

Therefore, USE was determined for surveillance material plate and the same USE was applied to corresponding vessel plate material. For the other plates a generic USE value was estimated based on four surveillance plate material USEs.

Calculations of32 EFPY USE, using Reg. Guide 1.99 methods, are summarized in Table 7-3.

The equivalent transverse USE ofthe plate material is taken as 65% ofthe longitudinal USE, according to USNRC MTEB 5-2 [16]. Although the plate surveillance data show the decrease in USE to be considerably less than the prediction for the corresponding copper content (see Table 5-4), the USE decrease prediction values &om Reg. Guide 1.99 were used forthe beltline plates in Table 7-3.

'ccording to the BAW-1845 report the weld metal initialUSE values were determined Rom a generic USE value based on three surveiHance weld values. Unlike the plate, the weld metal USE has no transverse/longitudinal correction, because weld metal has no orientation e6ect.

The weld surveillance data also show the decrease in USE to be considerably less than the prediction for the corresponding copper content, however, the USE 'decrease prediction values lrom Reg. Guide 1.99 were still used in Table 7-3.

Based on the results in Table 7-3, it is expected that the beltline materials willhave USE values above 50 ft-lb at 32 EFPY, as required in 10CFR50 Appendix G [1]. Since USE and ART

GENE-31100639-01 requirements are met, irradiation e6ects are not severe enough to necessitate additional analyses or preparations for RPV annealing before 32 EFPY. Moreover, TVAis a participant in a BWR Owners'roup program to perform analyses to demonstrate equivalent margin [17j in cases as low as 35 ft-lb. Tables B-1 and B-2 in Appendix B show a decrease in surveillance plate and weld USE less than what is predicted in RG 1.99 and that the conclusions ofthe equivalent margin analysis are fullyapplicable.

7.5 OPERATING LIMITSCURVES VALIDTO 32 EFPY Figures 7-1 through 7-3 show P-T curves valid to 32 EFPY. The P-T curves are developed by considering the requirements applicable to the non-beltline, beltline and closure flange regions.

The beltline curve is more limitingfor curve A. For curve B and curve C, the non-beltline curves are limitingfor pressures less than approximately 1100 psig. Curve B for the bottom head has been included to provide the appropriate limits for any transients where some bottom head stratiflcation might occur.

tt I'I

GENE-B 110063 9-01 TABLE7-1 BROWNS FERRY 2 P - T CURVE VALUES

+ + + + + + > + + '+ + ~ + + + > + + '+ + + '+ + 4 + + + + + + + + + +REQUIRED T EMPE RATU RES + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 4 + + 4 + + + + +

32 EFPY NON-PRESSURE BELTLINE BELTLINE CURVE A CURVE A BOTTOM 32 EFPY HEAD BELTLINE CURVE B CURVE B UPPER VESSEL CURVE B 32 EFPY NON-BELTLINE BELTLINE CURVE C CURVE C 0

10 2Q 30 4Q 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 312.5 312.5 320 330 340 350 360 370 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 107.2 114.3 115.3 115.3 118.2 121.8 125.2 128.5 131.6 134.6 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 88.1 96.3 103.3 109.4 115.0 119.9 124.7 129.3 133.6 137.5 140.9 143.9 146.7 149.4 152.1 154.6 157.0 159.3 161.5 163.6 165.6 167.6 169.5 171.3 173.1 173.5 173.5 174.8 176.4 178.0 179.6 181.1 182.6 81.2 91.4 100.4 108.3 115.3 121.8 127.6 133.1 138.1 142.8 147.2 154.3 155.3 155.3 158.2 161.8 165.2 168.5 171.6 174.6 82.0 82.0 82.0 82.0 94.6 107.6 118.6 128.1 136.3 143.3 149.4 155.0 159.9 164.7 169.3 173.6 177.5 180.9 183.9 186.7 189.4 192.1 194.6 197.0 199.3 201.5 203.6 205.6 207.6 209.5 211.3 213.1 213.5 213.5 214.8 216.4 218.0 219.6 221.1 222.6 GENE-B 1100639-01 Table 7-1 Browns Ferry 2 P - T Curve Values (Continued) 1 1 0 >i*1 1 0 8II1 0 4 ~ 0 0 4II0 0to 0 0 ~ 1 0 4t 0 1 1 4 REQUIRED TEMPERATURES 0 0 0 0 0 0 lit0 '4i0 0 0 1 0 0t PRESSURE 32 EFPY BELTLINE CURVE A NON-BOTTOM BELTLINE HEAD CURVE A CURVE B 32 EFPY BELTLINE CURVE B UPPER VESSEL CURVE B 32 EFPY BELTLINE CURVE C NON-BELTLINE CURVE C 380 390 4CO 410 420 430 440 450 460 470 480 490 500 510 520 530 540 550 560 570 580 590 600 610 620 630 640 650 660 670 680 690 700 710 720 730 740 750 760 770 780 87.0 91.2 95.2 99.0 102.5 105.9 109.2 112.3 115.2 118.1 120.8 123.4 126.0 128.4 130.8 133.0 135.2 137.4 139.4 141.5 143.4 145.3 147.2 149.0 150.7 152.4 154.1 155.7 157.3 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0

'112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 114.0 116.2 118.3 120.3 122.3 124.2 126.0 127.8 129.6 131.3 132.9 134.6 136.1 137.7 139.2 140.7 142.1 72.6 81.6 88.6 94.6 99.6 103.6 107.1 110.2 113.1 115.9 118.6 121.3 123.9 126.5 129.0 131.4 133.7 135.9 138.0 139.8 141.6 143.3 145.1 146.7 148.4 149.9 151.4 152.9 154.4 155.8 157.2 158.6 159.9 161.2 162.4 163.6 164.7 165.8 166.9 137.4 140.2 142.8 145.4 147.8 150.2 152.5 154.7 156.8 158.9 160.9 162.9 164.8 166.7 168.5 170.3 172.0 173.7 175.3 176.9 178.5 180.0 181.5 182.9 184.4 185.8 187.2 188.5 189.8 191.1 192.4 193.7 194.9 196.1 197.3 198.4 199.6 200.7 201.8 202.9 204.0 184.1 185.6 187.1 188.6 190.0 191.4 192.8 194.1 195.4 196.7 197.9 199.1 200.3 201.4 202.5 203.6 204.6 205.6 206.6 207.5 208.4 209.3 210.1 210.9 211.7.

212.4 213.1 213.7 214.4 215.0 215.5 216.1 216.6 217.1 217.5 218.0 218.4 218.9 219.3 219.7 220.1 177.4 180.2 182.8 185A 1873 190.2 192.5 194.7 196.8 198.9 200.9 202.9 204.8 206.7 208.5 210.3 212.0 213.7 215.3 216.9 218.5 220.0 221.5 222.9 224.4 225.8 227.2 228.5 229.8 231.1 232.4 233.7 234.9 236.1 237.3 238.4 239.6 240.7 241.8 242.9 244.0 224.1 225.6 227.1 228.6 230.0 231.4 232.8 234.1 235.4 236.7 237.9 239.1 240.3 241.4 242.5 243.6 244.6 245.6 246.6 247.5 248.4 249.3 250.1 250.9 251.7 252.4 253.1 253.7 254.4 255.0 255.5 256.1 256.6 257.1 257.5 258.0 258.4 258.9 259.3 259.7 260.1 GENE-B 1100639-01 Table 7-1 Browns Ferry 2 P - T Curve Values (Continued) 1 11 ~ 1 ~ 1111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1111 1 1*111 1111 1 1 1 1REQUIRED TEQPERATURES1 1 1 1 1 1 111 1 11 11111 11 11 1 1 11 1111 1 11 32 EFPY PRESSURE BELTLINE CURVE A NON-BELTLINE CURVE A 32 EFPY BELTLINE BOTTOM HEAD CURVE B CURVE B UPPER VESSEL CURVE B 32 EFPY BELTLINE NON-BELTLINE CURVE C CURVE C 790 800 810 820 S30 840 850 860 870 889 890 900 910 920 930 940

, '50 960 970 980 990 1000 1010 1020 1030 1040 1050 1060 1070 1080 1090 1100 1110 1120 1130 1140 1150 1160 1170 1180 1190 158.9 160.4 161.9 163.4 164.8 166.2 167.6 168.9 170.2 171.5 172.8 174.0 175.3 176.5 177.6 178.8 180.0 181.1 182.2 183.3 184.3 185.4 186.4 187.5 188.5 189.5 190.5 191.4 192.4 193.3 194.2 195.2 196.1 197.0 197.8 198.7 199.6 200.4 201.3 202.1 202.9 143.6 144.9 146.3 147.6 148.9 150.2 151.5 152.7 153.9 155.1 156.3 157.4 158.6 159.7 160.8 161.8 162.9 163.9 165.0 166.0 167.0 167.9 168.9 169.9 170.8 171.7 172.6 173.5 174.4 175.3 176.2 177.0 177.9 178.7 179.5 180.3 181.1 181.9 182.7 183.5 184.2 168.0 169.1 170.2 171.3 172.3 173.4 174.4 175.5 176.5 177.6 178.6 179.7 180.7 181.7 182.7 183.7 184.7 185.7 186.7 187.7 188.6 189.6 190.5 191.4 192.2 193.0 193.8 194.6 195.4 196.2 196.9 197.7 198.4 199.1 199.8 200.5 201.2 201.9 202.6 203.2 203.9 205.1 206.1 207.1 208.1 209.1 210.1 211.1 212.0 213.0 213.9 214.8 215.7 216.6 217.5 218.4 219.3 220.1 220.9 221.8 222.6 2H.4 224.2 225.0 225.8 226.6 227.3 228.1 228.8 229.6 230.3 231.0 231.7 232.5 233.2 233.9 234.5 235.2 235.9 236.6 237.2 237.9 220.5 220.9 221.3 221.7 222.1 222.4 222 8 223 I 223.5 2~&.8 224.2 224 5 224.8 225.2 225.5 225.9 226.2 226.5 226.9 227.2 227.6 227.9 228.2 228.6 228.9 229.2 229.6 229.9 230.2 230.5 230.9 231.2 231.5 231.9 232.2 232.5 232.9 233.2 233.5 233.8 234.1 245.1 246.1 247.1 248.1 249.1 250.1 251.1 252.0 253.0 253.9 254.8 255.7 256.6 257.5 258.4 259.3 260.1 260.9 261.8 262.6 263.4 264.2 265.0 265.8 266.6 267.3 268.1 268.8 269.6 270.3 271.0 271.7 272.5 273.2 273.9 274.5 275.2 275.9 276.6 277.2 277.9 260.5 260.9 261.3 261.7 262.1 262.4 262.8 263.1 263.5 263.8 264.2.

264.5 264.8 265.2 265.5 265.9 266.2 266.5 266.9 267.2 267.6 267.9 268.2 268.6 268.9 269.2 269.6 269.9 2702 270.5 270.9 271.2 271.5 271.9 2722 272.5.

272.9 273.2 273.5 273.8 274.1

GENE-B 110063 9-01 Table 7-1 Browns Fenv 2 P - T Curve Values (Continued)

~ + + '~ 'i + + '~ + + + + + + + + ~' i'i +ie e + + +i+ i'

+ < '~REQUIRED TEMPERATURES + '" +'>> + + +'i+ 'i + + + +i+ + + + e e e e e4>> 4'

+ 'i PRESSURE 1200 1210 1220 1230 1240 1250 1260 1270 1280 1290 1300 1310 1320 1330 1340 1350 1360 1370 1380 1390 1400 32 EFPY BELTLINE CURVE A 203.7 204.5 205.3 206.1 206.9 207.6 208.4 209.1 209.9 210.6 211.3 212.0 212.7 213.4 214.1 214.8 215.5 216.2 216.8 217.5 218.2 NON-BELTLINE CURVE A 185.0 185.7 186.5 187.2 187.9 188.7 189.4 190.1 190.8 191.4

]92.1 192.8 193.5 194.1 194.8 195.4 196.1 196.7 197.3 197.9 198.6 BOTTOM HEAD CURVE B 204.6'05 2

205.9 206.5

')07 2 207.8 208.5 209.1 209.8 210A 211.1 211.7 9]'7 4 213.0 213.7 214.3 215.0 215.6 216.3 216.9 217.6 32 EFPY BELTLINE CURVE B 238.5 2392 239.8 240.5 241.1 241.7 242.3 242.9 243.5 244.1 244.7 245.3 245.9 246.5 247.0 247.6 248.2 248.7 249.3 249.8 250.4 UPPER VESSEL CURVE B 234 4 234.8 235.1 235.4 235.7 236.0 236.3 236.6 237.0 237.3 237.6 237.9 238.2 238.5 238,8 239.1 239.4 239.7 240.0 240.3 240.6 32 EFPY BELTLINE CURVE C 278.5

'779 2 279.8 280.5 281.1 281.7 282.3 282.9 283.5 284.1 284.7 285.3 285.9 286.5 287.0 287.6 288.2 288.7 289.3 289.8 290.4 NON-BELTLINE CURVE C 274.4 274.8 275.1 275.4 275.7 276.0 276.3 276.6 277.0 277.3 277.6 277.9 278.2 278.5 278.8 279.1 279.4 279.7 280.0 280.3 280.6

Table 7-2 BELTLINEART VALUES FOR BROWNS FERRY 2 Low-Int Shell Thickness =

=

6.13 inches Low-Int Shell:

32 EFPY Peak I.D. fluence =

32 EFPY Peak 1/4 T fluence =

6.05E+17 4.19E+17 Lower Shell Thickness =

6.13 inches Lower Shell:

32 EFPY Peak I.D. fluence =

32 EFPY Peak 1/4 T fluence =

6.05E+17 4.19E+17 COMPONENT I.D.

HEAT

%Cu

%Ni CF Initial RTndt 32 EFPY Del ta RTndt Margin Shift ART 32 EFPY 32 EFPY PLATES:

Lower Shell Lower Shell Lower Shell 6-127-14 C2467-2 0.16 0.52 112.4

-20 6-127-15 C2463-1 0.17 0.48 116.8

-20 6-127-17 C2460-2 0.13 0.51 88.3 0

29.9 29.9 59.7 39.7 31.0 31.0 62.1 42.1 23,5 23.5 46.9 46.9 Low-Int Shell Low-Int Shell Low-Int Shell 6-127-6 6-127-16 6-127-20 A0981-1 0.14 C2467-1 0.16 C2849-1 0.11 0.55 97.8

-10 0.52 112.4

-10 0.5 73

-10 26.0 26.0 52.0 42.0 29.9 29.9 59.7 49.7 19.4 19.4 38.8 28.8 WELDS:

Long.

ESW'ircumferential D55733 0.28 0.35 154.5 10 0.09 0.65 116.7

-40 41.0 41.0 82.1 92.1 31.0 31.0 62.0 22.0

" ESW chemistry based on (average+

1 sigma) of several qualification weld chemistries.

tb C)

CO Ch

0

GENE-B 1100639-01 TABLE7-3 UPPER SHELF ENERGY ANALYSISFOR BELTLINEMATERIALS Location Initial Initial Test Longit. Trans.

Heat Temp.

USE USE

%CU 32 EFPY 32 EFPY 1/4T Fluence

%DECR (x10~17)

USE 32 EFPY Trans.

USE Lower Shell C2467-2 USE 120 78 C2463-1 USE 120 78 C2460-2 USE 120 78 0.16 0.17 0.13 4.2 12 4.2 13 42 10 68.6

'7.9 70.2 Int Shell A0981-1 USE 142 92.3 0.14 C2467-1 USE 120 78 0.16 C2849-1 USE 120 78 0.11 4.2 4.2 4.2 ll 12 9.5 82.1 68.6 70.6 Welds:

Axial AllESW USE Circumfer-ASA ential weld USE 95 0.28 145 0.09 4.2 19 76.0 129.1 89 g prrg ~op so~ng g-g gsoL o~nssug pg o~n5rg 4.) aVnXmZdnm ave@ aaSSaA ZOXOma WnWINIIN 0'009 0'00t008 0'OOZ 0'001 0'0 NOLLVHHdOd0 hdd2 SI H03 GI IVAHA%13 HNI'LL'IHH-NON NOLLVH2dO30 bc'E 'H03 GI IVASI HAHl13HNI'LL'HH daZ8 dllLIOH OOZ MIHS So I 'Z8 'BNI11128 SIlhlMH

'D ddV 098900I CINV SJllhll t 3NI1J.138 NON OISd ZIC 000

'IGSSHA HELNI13MKLM LINIILSD.OHCKHNKLShS - V I

I I

I Il II I

I I

///

0 XIill 009 z

O 008 0(fll CO OOOL x m

O GVHHNOLJ.OH '803 doZt'NV,

'HSSPA H2ddll H03 dokS

'HNI'LLTIH303 doOI HHV SHll'IVA>PULH IVLLINI OOZED V HA%13 00>l Z >tul1 Xrrog mmozH I

0091

G~-B 110063 9-01 1600 l Browns Ferry Unit 2 I

I 1400 CURVE B 1200 (3

CI z

n-1000 0

Ill) 800 8O tu Q:z I-

600, UJKD 400

///

I I

INITIALRTndt VALUESARE 10'F FOR BELTLINE, 54'F FOR UPPER VESSEL.

AND 42F FOR BOTTOM HEAD B - NON-NUCLEARHEAT-UP/

COOLDOWNLIMIT

UPPER VESSEL LIMITS AND 10CFR50 APP G REQ'MTS BELTLINE,82;1'F SHI

- - BOTTOM HEAD LIMITS 200 BOLTUP 82 F CURVES ARE VALIDFOR 32 EFPY OF OPERATION EXCEPT WHERE THE NON-BELTLINECURVE IS NOT LIMITING.

INTHIS CASE THE NON-BELTLINECURVE IS VALIDFOR 20 EFPY OF OPERATION 0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 500.0 MINIMUMREACTOR VESSEL METALTEMPERATURE ('F) 600.0 Figure 7-2. Heat-up/Cooldown P-T Curves for Unit 2

\\1 fl

GENE-B 110063 9-01 1600 Browns Feny Unit 2 1400 I

CURVE C I

1200 D

z 0

1000 I-

)K0 800 O

UlKZ I-600 ltlK D

(0tllK 400 XIINIMUM CRITICALITY WITH NORMALWATER LEVEL 820F

///

1 I

I I

I INITIALRTndt VALUES ARE 10'F FOR BEL'lIINE, 54OF FOR UPPER VESSEL.

AND42'F FOR BOTTOM C - NUCLEAR (CO K CRITICAL)LIMIT

NON-SELTLINE LIMITS AND 10CFR50 APP G REQ'MTS BELTLINE,82.1'F SHIFT 200 NO IN CURVES ARE VALIDFOR 32 EFPY OF OPERATION EXCEPT WHERE THE N-BELTLINECURVE IS NOT LIMITING.

THIS CASE~ NON-BELTLINECURVE IS VALIDFOR 20 EFPY OF OPERATION 0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 500.0 MINIMUMREACTOR VESSEL METALTEMPERATURE ('F) 600.0 Figure 7-3. Core Critical Operation P-T Curves for Unit 2

GE1lE-B 110063 9-01 1600 I

I I

BROWNS FERRY UNIT2 I

I I

f 1400 AA' B'I CC'200 I

T, k

I I

II I

I(

I A', B', C' CORE BELTLINE AFTER ASSUMED 82.1oF SHIFT FROM ANINITIAL WELD RTndt OF IO'F 0

x 1000 I-Lll tO Lll)0' 800 O

LllKz I-600 LLI tLD (0to LLI LL 400 312 PS IG

///

I I

I I/

II/

I I

A. B, C - NON-BELTLINELIMITS WHZJET PUMP NOZZLE RTndt OF 54'F FOR B&C BOTI'OMHEAD DOME RTndt OF 42'F I

I I

I A-SYSTEM HYDROTEST LMIT WITHFUEL IN VESSEL B - NON-NUCLEARHEATUP/

COOLDOWNLIMIT C - NUCLEAR (CORE CRITICAL)LIMIT 200 BOLTLIP 2oF I

S A',B',C'RE VALIDFOR 32 EFPY OF OPERATION 0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 500.0 MINIMUMREACTOR VESSEL METAlTEMPERATURE ('F) 600.0 Figure 7<. Combined P-T Curves for Unit 2 100.0 80.0 60.0 I

40.0 20.0 0.0

-20.0 EFPY (Years)

Plate Material Wetd Matertat 0

I 2

3 4

5 6

7 9

10 II 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 AIITol'late C246 I~I

-10.0 48

-0.8 2.6 5.6 83 10.9 13,2 15.4 17.5 19.5 21.4 23.2 24.9 26.6 28.2 29.8 31.3 32.8 34.2 35.6 36.9 38.2 39.5 40.7 41.9 43.1 44.3 45.4 46.5 47.6 48.7 49.7 IVcld FSIV 10.0 17.1 22.6 273 31.4 35.2 38.7 41.9 45.0 47.8 50.6 53.2 55.6 58.0 603 62.6 64.7 66.8 68,8 70.7 72.6 74.5 76.2 78.0

'79.7 81.4 83.0 84.6 86.2 87.7 89.2 90.6 92.I Figure 7-5. Browns Ferry 2 ART Versus EFPY for Plate and Nfeld Materials

II I

GENE-B 1100639-01

8. REFERENCES

[1]

"Fracture Toughness Requirements." Appendix G to Part 50 ofTitle 10 ofthe Code of Federal Regulations. July 1983.

[2]

"Protection Against Non-Ductile Failure." Appendix G to Section XIofthe 1992 ASME Boiler dc Pressure Vessel Code.

P]

"Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Program Requirements," Appendix H to Part 50 ofTitle 10 ofthe Code ofFederal Regulations, July 1983.

J

[4]

"Surveillance Test for Nuclear Reactor Vessels," American Society for Testing and iVfaterials. Philadelphia, PA, (ASTME185-66).

[5]

"Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Section 4.2,"

Tennessee Valley Authority.

[6]

"Conducting Surveillance Tests for Light Water Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Vessels," Annual Book ofASTM Standards, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, July 1,1982, (ASTM E185-82).

[7]

"Radiation Embrittlement ofReactor Vessel Materials," USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2, May 1988.

[8]

"Reactor Pressure Vessel Purchase Specification, Rev. 9," GE-NED, San Jose, CA, (21A111 1).

[9]

Letter &om Ralph H. Shell to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN), Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SQN), and Watts Bar Nuclear Plant (WBN) - Response to Generic Letter 92-01 (Reactor Vessel Structural Integrity),

Tennessee Valley Authority, Chattanooga, Tennessee, July 7, 1992.

[10]

G. C. Martin, "Browns Ferry Unit 3 In-Vessel Neutron Spectral Analysis," GENE, Pleasanton, CA, August 1980, (NEDO-24793).

GENE-B 110063 9-01

[11]

Letter from J. Valente (Restart Engineering Manager - ATH3A-BFN) to T. R. McIntyre, "Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant - Units 1, 2, and 3 Pressure Temperature Limits Calculation

- Attachment 1 and Attachment 2." (Attachment 1 is Branch / Project IdentiGer ND-Q0999-900054 RO, RIMs Accession Number B22 '90 1227 102, Rev. 0 page 4 of9).

[12]

"Standard Methods for Notched Bar Impact Testing ofMetallic Materials," Annual Book ofASTM Standards, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, (ASTME23-88).

[13]

"Nuclear Plant Irradiated Steel Handbook," Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, September 1986, (EPRI Report NP-4797).

[14]

"Standard Methods ofTension Testing ofMetallic Materials," Annual Book ofASTM Standards, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, (ASIME8-89).

[15]

G. W. Contreras, "Tennessee Valley AuthorityBrowns Ferry Nuclear Plant Units 1, 2, and 3 Pressure Temperature Operating Limits," GENE, San Jose, CA, June 1994, (GENE-523-A65-0594).

[16]

"Fracture Toughness Requirements,"

USNRC Branch Technical Position MI'EB 5-2, Revision 1, July 1981.

[17]

H. S. Mehta, T. A. Caine, and S. E. Plaxton, "10CFR50 Appendix G Equivalent Margin Analysis for Low Upper Shelf Energy in BWR/2 through BWR/6 Vessels," GENE, San Jose, CA, February 1994, (NEDO-32205-A, Revision 1).

GENE-B 1100639-01 APPENDIXA - CHARPY SPECIMEN FRACTURE SURFACE PHOTOGRAPHS Photographs ofeach Charpy specimen fracture surface were taken per the requirements ofASTM E185-82.

'l'he pages followingshow the fracture surface photographs along with a summary of the Charpy test results for each irradiated specimen.

The pictures are arranged in the order of base, weld, and HAZ materials.

GENE-B 1100639-01 BASE:

E71 Temp:

40 'F Energy:

60.0 ft-lb MLE:

50.0 mils Shear:

40 %

\\

I BASE:

Temp:

Energy:

MLE:

Shear:

E7D 60 'F 82.5 ft-lb 61.0 mils 59%

BASE:

E64 Temp:

80 'F Energy~:

94.5 ft-lb MLE:

0.0 mils Shear:

68 %

BASE:

Temp:

Energy:

MLE:

Shear:

ESU 100 F 121.0 ft-lb 91.0 mils 85%

BASE:

E72 Temp:

120 'F Energy:

120.5 ft-lb MLE:

88.0 mils Shear:

100 %

vij ter BASE:

ES1 Temp:

160 'F Energy:.

130.0 ft-lb MLE:

91.0 mils Shear:

100%

BASE:

E57 Temp:

200 'F Energy:

136.0 ft-lb MLE:

94.0 mils Shear:

100 %

BASE:

ESS Temp:

300 'F Energy:

131.5 ft-lb MLE:

88.0 mils Shear:

100%

GENE-B 110063 9-01 BASE:

Temp:

Energy:

MLE:

Shear:

ESC 80 oF 10.5 ft-Ib 10.0 mils I

-' i BASE:

ESY Temp:

-40 'F Energy:

17.0 ft-lb MLE:

13.5 mils Shear:

11%

BASE:

E7Y Temp:

-20 'F Energy:

33.0 ft-lb MLE:

30.5 mils Shear:

13 %

~

BASE:

E7K Temp:

0 oF Energy:

38.5 ft-Ib MLE:

33.0 mils Shear:

19%

WELD: EB7 Temp:

-80 'F Energy:

2.0 ft-lb MLE:

5.0 mils Shear:

2%

'A

~

h M~

WELD: EBS Temp:

-40 'F Energy:

13.0 ft-lb MLE:

12.5 mils Shear 4 o/o WELD:

Temp:

Energy:

MLE:

Shear:

EBK 20 oF 37.5 ft-Ib 31.0 mils 9%

WELD: EAP Temp:

0 'F Energy:

50.0 ft-Ib MLE:

42.0 mils Shear.

15 %

GENE-B 1100639-01 WELD: EBD Temp:

20 'F Energy:

59.5 ft-lb MLE:

52.0 mils Shear:

22%

Q3 I

WELD: EBB Temp:

40 'F Energy:

59.5 ft-lb MLE:

50.0 mils Shear:

30%

WELD: EB1 Temp:

80 'F Energy:

59.0 ft-Ib MLE:

52.0 mils Shear:

42 %

WELD:

Temp:

Energy:

MLE:

Shear:

EAM 100 'F 76.5 ft-Ib 64.5 mils 50%

WELD: EBE Temp:

120 'F Energy:

87.0 ft-lb MLE:

65.0 mils Shear:

68 %

WELD: EB4 Temp:

160 'F Energy:

107.0 ft-lb MLE:

87.0 mils Shear:

100 %

WELD: EB2 Temp:

200 'F Energy:

107,5 ft-Ib MLE:

84.5 mils Shear:

100 %

WELD: EBA Temp:

300 'F Energy:

113.0 ft-Ib MLE:

88.5 mils Shear.

100% !

GENE-B 1100639-01 HAZ:

Temp:

Energy:

MLE:

Shear:

ED6 80 oF 3.5 ft-lb 6.0 mils 1%

HAZ:

EJ3 Temp:

-60 'F Energy:

37.0 ft-lb MLE:

30.0 mils Shear:

12%

HAZ:

EEY Temp:

-40 'F Energy:

54.0 ft-lb MLE:

~4.0 mils Shear:

24%

HAZ:

Temp:

Energy:

MLE:

Shear:

EDB

-20 'F 30.0 ft-lb 22.5 mils 7%

HAZ:

EJJ Temp:

0 'F Energy:

43.5 ft-lb MLE:

36.5 mils Shear:

19 %

HAZ:

EJS Temp:

20 'F Energy:

106.0 ft-lb MLE:

81.5 mils Shear:

65 %

HAZ:

Temp:

Energy:

MLE:

Shear:

EJC 40 'F 93.5 ft-lb 67.0 mils 48%

HAZ:

EJ1 Temp:

60'F Energy:

107.5 ft-lb MLE:

86.0 mils Shear:

75%

v

~

~I

GENE-B 1100639-01 HAZ:

EDC Temp:

80 'F Energy:

82.0 ft-Ib MLE:

73.0 mils Shear:

60%

HAZ:

EJB Temp:

120 'F Energy:

97.5 ft-lb

%LE:

78.0 mils Shear:

100 %

HAZ:

E3D Temp:

200 'F Energr:

107.5 ft-lb i~E:

82.0 mils Shear:

100 %

4 b1

', ~

HAZ:

EEC Temp:

300 'F Energy:

143.0 ft-lb MLE:

92.0 mils Shear:

100 %

1'

GENE-B 110063 9-01 APPENDIXB EQUIVALENTMARGINANALYSIS

GE1'K-B1100639-01 TABLEB-I EQUIVALENTMARGINANALYSISPLANTAPPLICABILITY VERIFICATIONFORM FOR BROWNS FERRY UNIT2 - 8%'R 4/MKI BWR/3-6 PLATE Surveillance Plate USE:

%Cu = 0,14 Capsule Fluence =1.52 x 10'~ n/cm-Measured % Decrease = 4 (Chatpy Curves)

RG. 1.99 Predicted% Decrease = 9 (R.G. 1.99, Figure 2)

Limitin Beltline Plate USE:

%Cu = 0.1/

32 EFPY 1/4T Fluence M.2x 10'/cm-RG. 1.99 Predicted% Decrease ~ 13 (R.G. 1.99, Figure 2)

Adjusted % Decrease = N/A(RG. 1.99, Position 2.2) 13 % < 21'/+ so vessel plates are bounded bv eauivalent marmn analvsis Q~

4

GENE-B 1100639-01 TABLEB-2 EQUIVALENTMARGINANALYSISPLANTAPPLICABILITY VERIFICATIONFORM FOR BROWNS FERRY UNIT2 - BWR 4/MKI BWR/2-6 WELD Surveillance Weld USE:

%Cu = 0.20 Capsule Fluence = 1.52 x 10'/cm Measured % Decrease = -3 (Charpy Curves)

R.G. 1.99 Predicted% Decrease = 13 (R.G. 1.99, Figure 2)

Limitin Beltline Weld USE:

%CU = 0.28 32 EFPY 1/4T Fluence = 4.2 x 10'/cm R.G. 1.99 Predicted % Decrease = 21 (R.G. 1.99, Figure 2)

Adjusted % Decrease = N/A(R.G. 1.99, Position 2.2) 21 % < 34%, so vessel welds are bounded by equivalent margin analysis i Q

B110063, Brown Ferry Steam Electric Station Unit 2 Vessel Surveillance Matls Testing & Fracture Toughness Analysis

Contents

Text

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

2.2 CONCLUSION

7.1 BACKGROUND

2.2 CONCLUSION

SUMMARY

7.1 BACKGROUND

Navigation menu

B110063, Brown Ferry Steam Electric Station Unit 2 Vessel Surveillance Matls Testing & Fracture Toughness Analysis

Text

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

2.2 CONCLUSION

7.1 BACKGROUND

2.2 CONCLUSION

SUMMARY

7.1 BACKGROUND

Navigation menu

Search