Text

Results & Evaluation of Tests on Phillips Red Head Self- Drilling Expansion Anchors for CPC Facility in South Haven, Mi.
	ML18044A540
Person / Time
Site:	Palisades
Issue date:	01/31/1980
From:	Kapur S, Rotz J, Solanki N; AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:	;
Shared Package
ML18044A534	List: ML18044A533; ML18044A536; ML18044A539; ML18044A540; ML19296B317;
References
	NUDOCS 8002200404
	Download: ML18044A540 (86)
	v • d • e

Attachment 2, Inspection and Testing Program, Rev 0 RESULTS AND EVALUATION OF TESTS ON PHILLIPS "RED HEAD" SELF-DRILLING EXPANSION ANCHORS FOR CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY PALISADES PLANT SOUTH HAVEN, MICHIGAN

8002200 '{O'/~':,

- **~

RESULTS AND EVALUATION OF TESTS ON PHILLIPS 'RED HEAD' SELF-DRILLING EXPANSION ANCHORS FOR CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY PALISADES PLANT SOUTH HAVEN, MICHIGAN January 1980 Prepared by Reviewed by Approved by Surinder Kapur, Group Supervisor

RESULTS AND EVALUATION OF TESTS ON PHILLIPS 'RED HEAD' SELF-DRILLING EXPANSION ANCHORS TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

1. 0 GENERAL 1-1 1.1 Introduction l=l 1.2 Summary 1-2

2.0 DESCRIPTION

oF TESTS. -*- - . 2-1 2.1 Anchor Installation 2-1 2.2 Test Arrangement 2-2 2.3 Materials 2-3 2.4 Calibration 2-3 3.0 TORQUE-TENSION TEST RESULTS 3-1 4.0 RELAXATION TESTS 4-1 5.0 ULTIMATE LOAD TESTS ON PARTIALLY EXPANDED ANCHORS 5-1 5.1 Test Results 5-1 5.2 Comparisons With Other Tests 5-1 6.0 CRITERIA FOR UNDEREXPANDED ANCHORS 6-1 6.1 General 6-1 6.2 Expansion Limit for Unreduced Allowable Loads. 6-1 6.3 Reduced Allowable Loads 6-2

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)

REFERENCES APPENDIX A A-1.0 EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION A-1 A-1. .l Equipment Identification

A-1 A-1.2 Pressure Gauge and Torque Wrench Calibration A-1 A-1.3 Ram Calibration A-1 A-1.4 Calibration Data A-2 A-2.0 RAM CALIBRATION DATA A-3 ii

RESULTS AND EVALUATION OF TESTS ON PHILLIPS 'RED HEAD' SELF-DRILLING EXPANSION ANCHORS LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1 Anchor Installation Data Table 3-1 Torque-Tension Test Results Table 3-2 Comparison of Induced Tension With Test and. Reinstallation Torque Values.** . -

Table 3-3 Comparison of K Values With Anchor Size for Test and Reinstallation Torque Values Table 4-1 Summary of Relaxation Tests Table 4-2 Estimated Preload After Losses Table 5-1 Summary of Ultimate Strength Tests on Anchors Installed in Turbine Building Floor

Table 5-2 Table 5-3 Ultimate Strength Test on Partially Expanded Anchors Installed in Auxiliary Building Wall Sections (1)

Summary of Ultimate Strength Tests on Partially Expanded Anchors (From Reference 2) (1)

Table 6-1 Average Ultimate Loads for Unreduced Design Allowable Loads Table 6-2 Maximum Shoulder-to-Cone Dimensions for No Reduction in Allowable Design Load Table 6-3 Allowable Design Loads for Underexpanded Anchors Cl)

Table A-1 Cross Reference Between Tests and Calibrated Equipment Identification Table A2-l Calibration Data for Ram CP-072 Table A2-2 Calibration Data for Ram CP-276 Table A2-3 Calibration Data for Ram CP-364 iii

RESULTS AND EVALUATION OF TESTS ON PHILLIPS 'RED HEAD' SELF-DRILLING EXPANSION ANCHORS LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1 Location of Anchor Tests in Turbine Building Fig1.lre 2-2 Anchor Geometry Figure 2-3 Test Arrangement Figure s~1 Ultimate Load Vs. Underexpansion Distance,E; for 1/4 Inch Anchors Figure 5-2 Ultimate Load Vs. Underexpansion Distance, E, for 3/8 Inch Anchors Figure 5-3 Ultimate Load Vs. Underexpansion Distance, E, for 1/2 Inch Anchors Figure 5-4 Ultimate Load Vs. Underexpansion Distance, E, for 5/8 Inch Anchors Figure 5-5 Ultimate Load Vs. Underexpansion Distance, E, for 3/4 Inch Anchors Figure 5-6 Ultimate Load Vs. Underexpansion Distance, E, for 7/8 Inch Anchors iv

1.0 GENERAL 1.1 Introduction

'Ibis report cxntains the results and evaluaticn of tests on Phill;i.ps Red Head Self-Drilling shell type ~ion anchors conducted at Palisades plant. The tests were undertaken to provide test data :in support of criteria used for reinstallatian, test:ing and capacity evaluation of this type of anchor :in the pipe hanger anchor fusFectian and testing program currently :in progress at Palisades Plant (to satisfy the requirercents of NRC Bulletin 79-02).

Specific item; investigated :include torque-tension relationships, relaxation under preload and the effect of partial expansion on the ultimate load capacity of the anchors *

'lbrque-tension and relaxation tests were ronducted to assess the adequacy of the specified reinstallation and test torque values.

The partial expansion tests were conducted to obtain additional data for definition of expansion limits without loss of design load capacity.

The torque-tension test data :in canbination with current job proof tension test loads and anchor reinstallation to:rque criteria provided a basis for recxmrendations of design allowable loads for unde:rexpanded anchors

1-1

1. 2 Sumnacy

'!he torque-tension tests sh::Jw that the torque values sp=cified for testing and reinstallation of shell type anchors are conservative.

The specified torque, required tension test values and measured tension values are sumnarized in Table 3-2.

The specified torque values for testing were found to induce average tension loads in the anchors in excess of two tines the allowable tension design load (2D) for all anchor sizes tested. The minimum measured values also exceeded the required 2D values for all andlor sizes except 1/4 inch.

'!he torque values sp=cified for reinstallation of anchors were found

to induce sufficiently high tension loads to ccnclude that after losses (as indicated by the relaxation tests) the average preload in anchors subjected to these torques ~uld exceed the allowable tension design load. (See Table 4-2).

~laxation losses over a two week period varied fran 12.5 to 50% with an average of 26% (see Table 4-1).

The ultinate strength tests on partially expanded anchors indicate that these anchors retain average ultinate strengths in excess of the required SD values for ex>nsiderable degrees of underexpansion as illustrated in Figure 5-1 through 5-6. 'lhe data fran these and other similar tests enabled definition of expansion limits without loss of design load capacity *

1-2

These limits are defined in terms of iraximum shoulder-to-cone d:i.mensions which are given in Table 6-2 for each anchor size. For anchors with shoulder-to-cone dimensions exceeding these values reduced allowable design loads are rea:::mrended.

The recx:mrended reduced allowable design loads (based on pi:oof tension .

test loads and average tension loads induced by reinstallation torque) are given in Table 6-3

1-3

2.0 DF.sCRJPI'ION OF TFSl'S 2.1 Anchor Installation These tests were perfomed on anchors installed. in the floor of

Rxan 131 of the '!'Urbine Building (see Figure 2 .1)

The concrete in this area had a specified. 28 day canpressive strength of 3000 psi.

Test on cores raroved fran this area in:iicate an average present canpressive strength on the order of 7500 psi.

All holes were drilled to the nanufacturer' s miniimlm depth (Ref. 1) using the self-drilling anch:>r shells (driven by a 747 'Roto-Stop' hanmer).

Anch:>r sizes tested varied fran 1/4 inch to 7/8 inch (in 1/8" increments)

Am:i.ninu.lm of 8 anchors were installed for ea.ch size group.

The anch:>rs were installed with vacying degrees of expansion by vacying the shoulder-to-cone dimension (see Figure 2. 2)

Full expan-sion is defined as when the shell of the anchor is driven O'Ver the cane such that the base of the cone is flush with the end of the ancl:xlr. The corresp:>rrling shoulder-to-cone dimension was detennined.

fran the manufacturer's fabrication dimensions.

The degree of partial expansion is measured. in terms of the dimension, E, which is the difference between the installed. and the full expansion shoulder-to-cone dimensions. For canparison purposes, the zero 2-1

expansion shoulder-to-cone dinension (with the cone inserted finger tight in the anchor) was also recorded. These data along with other installation dimensions are sunmarized in Table 2.1~

2. 2 . Test Arrangement The test arrangarent far torque-tension am. pullout tests is shown

.schanatically in Figure 2. 3.

For the pullout tests,a pump (1) was used to apply pressure to a hollow-core ram {2). The ram applied a tension load to the anchor (3) through a threaded rod (4)

The ram was supi;:orted by a beam (5) which t:ransferred the reaction load outside the p::>tential failure cone area of the concrete. A pressure gauge (6) was used to nonitor

the pressure delivered to the ram. 'llle pressures were later oonverted to loadS using pressure-load calibration data.

For the torque-tension tests, torque was applied to the mit on the threaded rod using a calibrated torque wrench. The resUlting tension in the rod produced a canpression load on the ram which was nonitored by pressure gauge readings. A reaction bar {7) was utilized to prevent rotation of the ram piston in its cylinder. TO force rotation of the mit .on the rod, the rod was bottaned out in the shell. To obtain rotation of the rod.in the shell, the rod was backed off 2 to 4 turns fran the bottaned out "Position am. a jamb mit was used on the top an of the rod to prevent rotation of the mit on the rod.

All threaded rods were thoroughly cleaned with solvent prior to installation to renove any lubricant that may have been present.

All tests were perfonned using washers under the mits.

2-2

For the relaxation tests, conventional anchor installations (with base plates, threSded rod studs, nuts and washers) were used. Care was taken to ensure that the anchor shells would not .bottan out on the base plates.

2.3 Materials Materials used in the tests are sunmarized as follows:

Concrete: Specified 28 day strength 3000 psi At time of test 7560 psi Threaded Red: AS'lM A36, Al93 Gr B7, A307 Anchors: Phillips Red Head ~*

Self Drilling Shell Type Materials are typical of that at palisades Plant. The concrete is

considered typical of that used elsewhere in the plant.

A threaded rod material was taken fran the same stock as used for reinstallation of pipe hangers at the plant.

2.4 All pressure gauges, rams and torque wrenches 'llsedin the tests were Identification of calibrated equipnent and calibration data for the

rams are contained in Appendix A*

2-3

Table 2-1

Anchor Size I.D.

Anchor Installation Data Shoulder-to-Cone Dim.

Zero E:xp.

Full Exp.

(in)

Installed E Distance (in)

Zero Exe.

Installed 1/4 2A 28/32 18/32 18/32 10/32 0 2B 27/32 18/32 21/32 9/32 3/32 2C 26/32 18/32 19/32 8/32 1/32 2D 26/32 18/32 18/32 8/32 0 2E 27/32 18/32 22/32 *9/32* 4/32 2F 29/32 18/32 23/32 11/32 5/32 2G 28/32 18/32 24/32 10/32 6/32 2H 28/32 18/32 20/32 10/32 2/32 3/8 3A 1 5/32 25/32 21/32 12/32 -4/32 3B 1 8/32 25/32 26/32 15/32 1/32 3C 1 8/32 25/32 30/32 15/32 5/32.

3D 1 2/32 25/32 25/32 9/32 0 3E 1 8/32 . 25/32 31/32 15/32 6/32 3F 1 7/32 25/32 1 1/32 14/32 8/32 3G 1 10/32 25/32 1 3/32 17/32 10/32 3H 1 9/32 25/32 26/32 16/32 1/32 1/2 4A 1 19/32 1 5/32 l 3/32 14/32 -2/32 4B 1 20/32 1 5/32 1 6/32 15/32 1/32 4C 1 18/32 1 5/32 1 10/32 13/32 5/32 4D 1 17/32 1 5/32 1 2/32 12/32 -3/32

Page 1 of 3

Table 2-1 Continued Anchor. Shoulder-to-Cone Dim. (in) E Distance (in)

Size I.D. Zero Full Installed Zero Installed

Exp. Exo. ExP.

4E 1 20/32 1 5/32 1 11/32 15/32 6/32 4F 1 21/32 1 5/32 1 12/32 16/32 7/32 4G 1 5/32 4H 1 18/32 1 5/32 1 5/32 13/32 0 5/8 SA 2 1/32 1 13/32 1 11/32 20/32 -2/32 SB 2 3/32 1 13/32 1 14/32 22/32 1/32 SC 2 3/32 1 13/32 1 18/32 22/32 5/32*

SD 2 1/32 1 13/32 1 12/32 20/32 -1/32

SE SF 5G 2 3/32 2 3/32 2 2/32 1 13/32 1 13/32 1 13/32 1 19/32 1 21/32 1 23/32 22/32 22/32 21/32 6/32 8/32 10/32 SH 2 3/32 1 13/32 1 14/32 22/32 1/32 3/4 6A 2 13/32 1 31/32 1 30/32 14/32 -1/32 6B 2 13/32 1 31/32 2 2/32 14/32 3/32 6C 2 13/32 1 31/32 2 6/32 14/32 7/32 6D 2 14/32 . 1 31/32 1 30/32 15/32 -1/32 6E 2 13/32 1 31/32 2 5/32 14/32 6/32 6F 2 12/32 1 31/32 2 7/32 13/32 8/32 6G 2 13/32 1 31/32 2 9/32 14/32 10/32 6H 2 14/32 l 31/32 l 31/32 15/32 0

Page 2 of 3

Table 2-1 Continuei

Anchor Size I.D.

Shallder-to-Cone Dim.

Zero Exp.

Full E:xo.

(in)

Installei E Distance (in)

Zero E:xo.

Installed 7/8 7A 2 30/32 2 9/32 2 12/32 21/32 3/32 7B 2 30/32 2 9/32 2 13/32 21/32 4/32 7C 2 30/32 2 9/32 2 15/32 21/32 6/32 7D 2 29/32 2 9/32 2 10/32 20/32 1/32 -

7E 2 30/32 2 9/32 2 17/32 21/32 8/32 7F 2 30/32 2 9/32 2 19/32. 21/32 10/32 7G 2 30/32 2 9/32 2 21/32 21/32 12/32 7H 2 30/32 2 9/32 2 11/32 21/32 2/32

Page 3 of 3

~::..._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___J ~*

. 'C .b

.0-'7-~__.:._;_;~--------*....:;* *~.~:-~~*

-- 6-o o o --e-e---e 0 6

--e-.e 0 -0 O- * *() 0 e--o---O --

--? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

-_;Pooo o o.oeoo Test Anchors_/ ;

Room 131 PARTIAL PLAN - TURBINE BLDG. EL. 590'-0"

FIGURE 2-1 LOCATION OF ANCHOR TESTS IN TURBINE BUILDING

~b I I

I r

j .§ I

I I

Shell

-~

!ii

~ I I

*~ Q I

Cone i Full ExpanSion E Partial ExpanSion t

Figure 2-2 Anchor Geanetcy

1 4

7 2

11 11 5 11 3 3

1. Pump 5. Reaction Beam

2. Ram 6. ~essure Gauge

3. Anchor 7. Reaction Bar

4. Threaded Rod Figure 2-3 Test Arrangarent

3.0 'roR(UE TENSIOO TEST RE.SUI.TS A sumnary of the torque-tension test results is contained in Table 3-1.

The torques selecte:i for the tests ranges fran one-half to the full test torque values used .for testing pipe hanger anchor bolts in the plant.

Torques corresponding tO the reinstallation torque values for shell type anchors and in sane cases other intennediate values were also included *.

A sunmary of the minimum, max.inu.Im and average tension values corresponding to the pipe hanger anchor reinstallation and test torques are contained in Table 3.2 along with a carparison of required test tension (at two times the allowable design load).* As can be seen, the torque values used in the pipe hanger anchor program are conservative. The average iniuced tension exceeds the required tension value for all anchor sizes. Also, the m:i.nimum measured tension exceeds the required tension value in all sizes except 1/4".

The test data in:licate sanewhat higher friction in the smaller dianeter anchors (rcxis). This is illustrated by carparison of K values sham in Table 3.3.

The K values were detenni.ned fran the test data usinj the following relationship *

3-1

K = 12'1' PD K = friction index T = 'lbrque (ft-lbs)

D =Anchor (rod} diameter (in)

P = Tension load in anchor (lbs)

AK value of 0.48 was use:l to deteDnine upper* limit test torque values correspoming to require:l test tension values (of 2 times design allowable tension) for all anchor sizes. Ccxrparisons of this value with the values in Table 3.3 accounts for the variations between measured tension and require:l tension values shown in Table 3.2.

It is al.so noted that in rrost cases (sizes 3/8" through 7/8") the

average tension induce:l by reinstallation torque values excee:ls two times design allowable (20) values. For these sizes, the load induce:l by reinstallation torque would constitute a rrore severe test

/

load than the direct tension test at 20.

Since the anchors are being installe:l using all thread rod studs instead of bolts, rotation during torquing could occur either by

the rut turning on the red or the rod turning in the shell. Data for these two conditions. (designated as N or R in Table 3.1) indicate no significant or consistent differences in torque-tension values.

3-2

- For the few cases where the rmt was observed to turn on a cadmium plated extension rod (anchors 6E, 6H, 7A & 7D) the in:licated friction appears to be slightly higher than for unplated carton steel rod. Since only unplated rod is used for reinstallation of anchors, the. data on cadmium plated rod was not included in the caaparison contained in Tables 3.2 an:1 3.3

I

. I i

- 3-3

Anchor Size TABLE 3-1 Anchor Ram ID Torque-Tension Test Results Torque (ft-lbs)

Rotationl)

N or R Pressure (psi)

Tension (pounds) 1/4" 2A 3 N 140 398 072 5 N 180 516 6 N 200 575 1/4" 2B 3 N 100 280 i

072 5 N 160 457 6 N 200 575 1/ 4" 2C 3 N '100 280 072 5 N 150, 427

,, 6 N 170 487 1/4" 2D 3 N 120 339 072 5 N 170 487 6 N 210 604 1/4" 2D 3 R 160 439 364 5 R 275 796 6 R 325 945 1/4" 2F 3 R 103 267 364 5 R 170 470 6 N 238 680 3 N (

218 617 5 N' 265 764 6 N 283 821 1/4" 2G 3 R 88 227 364 5 R 115 303 6 R 125 334 3 N 200 561 5 N 262 755 6 N 270 780 1/4" 2H 3 R 192 537 364 5 .R 245 702 6 R 250 718 l) N signifies rotation of nut on rod Page 1 of 8 R signifies rotation of rod in shell

Anchor Size TABLE 3-1 Anchor Ram ID Torque-Tension Test Results (Cont'd)

Torque (ft-l:n"S)

Rotationl)

Nor R Pressure (psi)

Tension (potmds) 3/8" 3A 7 N 280 807 072 12 N 460 1320 15 ' N 580 1659 7 R 260 749 12 R 480 1378 15 R 580 1659 3/8" 3B ... 190 546 7 N 072 12 N 410 1179 15 N 420 1207 7 R 240 691 12 R 370 1065 15 R 420 1207 3/8" 3C 7 N 370 1065 072 12 N 540 1547 15 N 630 1802 7 R 280 807 12 R 460 1321 15 R 540 1547 3/8" 3D 7 N 250 720 072 12 N 420 1207 15 N 54"0 1547 7 R 280 807 12 R 450 1293 15 R 540 1547 3/8" 3E 7 R 260 749 364 12 R 430 1243 15 R 590 1695 7 N 235 671 12 N 480 1387 15 N 550 1584 3/8" 3F 7 R 190 531 364 12 R 350 1016 15 R 470 1358 7 N 235 671 12 N 395 1143 15 N 445 1286 Page 2 of 8

Anchor Size TABLE 3-1 Anchor Ram ID Torque-Tension Test Results (Cont'd)

Torque (ft-Ibs)

Rotation!)

N or R Pressure (psi)

Tension (pounds) 3/8" 3G 7 R 180 500 364 12 R 445 1286 15 R 510 1472 7 N 225 639 12 N 335 973 15 N 450 1300 3/8" 3H 7 R 235 671 364 12 R 480 1387' 15 R 555 1598 7 N 275 796 12 N 455 1315 15 N 515 1486 1/2 II 4A 20 N 940 2697 072 30 N 1380 3904

40 50 20 30 40 N

N R

R R

1620 1840 780 975 1180 4586 5202 2233 2804 3328 50 R 1450 4105 1/2" 4B 20 N 850 2433 072 40 N 1900 5370 I 50 N 2000 5650 20 R 900 2575 40 R 1750 4950 48 R 2150 6100 1/2" 4C 20 N 950 2727 072 40 N 2000 5650 40 N 1800 5090 50 N 1950 5510 1/'i." 4D 20 N 840 2404 072 30 N 1220*: 3443 40 N 1320 3732 50 N 1660 4698 20 R 660 188-9 30 R 10~,5 2882 40 R :P60 3559 so R 1410 3990 Page 3 of 8

Anchor Size TABLE 3-1 Anchor Ram ID Torque-Tension Test Results (Cont'd)

Torque (ft-ibs)

Rotationl)

Nor R Pressure (psi)

Tension (pounds) 1/2" 4E 20 R 780 2256 364 40 R 1280 3638 50 R 1560 .4418 20 N 760 2197 40 N 1600 4530 50 N 1980* 5594 1/2" 4F 20'. R 610 1754 364 40 R 1350 3833 50 R 1630 4614 20 N 690 1992 40 N 1590 4502 50 N 1730 4894 1/2" 4H 20 N 750 2168 364 40 N 1700 4810

1/2" 4I 364 (shell fractured 20 (shell fractured)

R 610 1754 S/8" SA 35 N lSOO 4250 072 60 N 2300 6S50 80 N 2550 7282 3S R '1350 3818 60 R 19SO 5S10 80 R 2300 65SO S/8" SB 35 N 1400 3962 072 60 N 2000 S650 80 N 2800 7943 35 R 1100 3098 60 R 2000 56SO 80 R 2800 7943 S/8" SC 3S N 1200 3386 072 60 N 17SO 49SO 80 N 24SO 7000

3S 60 80 R

R R

850 lSOO

2000 2432 42SO S6SO Page 4 of 8

Anchor Size TABLE 3-1 Anchor Ram ID Torque-Tension Test Results (Cont'd)

Torque (ft-lbs)

Rotation 1 )

Nor R Pressure (psi)

Tension (potmds)

S/8" SD 3S N 1000 2880 072 60 N 1900 5370 80 N '2200 62SO 35 R 1250 3530 60 R 21SO 6100 80 R 2850 8075 5/8" SE 35 R 960 2774 364 60 R 1470 4167 80 R 1880 5314 35 N 840 2428 60 N 1180 3360 80 N 1510 4278 5/8" SF 35" R 960 2774 364 60 R lSlO. 4278 80 R 1930 S4S4 3S N 1000 2891 60 N 1960 S538 80 N 2740 77S9 5G 3S R 860 248S 364 60 R 1360 3860 80 R 1760 4978 35 N 980 2832 60 N 1500 4250 80 N 1900 5370 SH 3S R 1060 3026 364 (shell fractured) 3/4" 6A 60 N 1350 3818 072 110 N 1950 5Sl0 14S N 25SO 7282 3/4" 6B 60 N 1500 4250 072 110 N 2400 68SO 14S N 2700 7678 Page S of 8

Anchor Size TABLE 3-1 Anchor Ram ID Torque-Tension Test Results (Cont'd)

Torque (ft-lbs)

Rotation1 )

Nor R Pressure (psi)

Tension

{pounds) 3/4" 6C 60 N 1400 3962 072 90 N 1800 5090 llO N 1600 4530 (shell star ed -

to slip) 3/4" 6D 60 N 1250 3530 072 llO N 2300 6550 145 N 3300 9160 3/4" 6E 60 R 900 4371 276 llO R 1425 6829 145 R 1800 8610 cadmium 60 N 650 3ll6 plated rod llO N 1375 6583 145 N 1600 7670 C.S.rod 60 N 1000 4861

3/4" 6H 276 llO (shell sta tted to slip) 60 110 N

R R

1600 850 1900 7670 4121 9080 145 R 2575 12352 cadmium 60 N 1050 4979 plated rod llO N 1800 8610 145 N 2300 11020 C.S. rod 60 N 1250 5967 110 N 2050 9795 145 N 2400 ll510 7/8" 7A 90 R 700 3371 276 160 R 2150 10285 210 R 2700 12941 cadmium 90 N 1000 4861 plated rod 160 N 1400 6707 210 N 1650 7905 C.S. rod 90 N 1250 5967 160 N 2200 10530

210 N 2800 13411 Page 6 of 8

Anchor Size TABLE 3-1 Anchor Ram ID Torque-Tension Test Results (Cont'd)

Torque (ft-lbs)

Rotation 1 )

Nor R Pressure (psi)

Tension (pounds) 7/8" 7B 90 R 750 3621 276 160 R 1100 5226 210 R 2300 11020 90 N 1000 4861 160 N 1800 8610 210 N 2550 12235 7/8" 7C 90 R 1200 5720 276 160 R 1550 7435 210 R 2100 10040 90 N 1400 6707 160 N 2250 10775 210 N 2750 13176 7/8" 7D 90 R 1050 4980 276 160 R 1825 8727 210 R 2700 12941

cadmium plated rod C.S. rod 160 210 90 90 N

N N

N 1000 1550 1900 1500 2400 4861 7435 9080 7200 11510 160 N 210 N 2550 12235 7/8" 7E 90 R 1050 49.80 276 160 R 1650 7905 210 R 2125 10162 90 N 1550 7435 160 N 2400 11510 210 N 2900 13882 7/8" 7F 90 R 1025 4856 276 160 R . 1500 7200 210 R 1700 8140 90 N 1400 6707 160 N 1950 9315 (anchor stc: rted to slip)

Page 7 of 8

Anchor Size TABLE 3-1 Anchor Ram ID Torque-Tension Test Results (Cont'd)

Torque*

(ft-iB,s)

Rotationl)

Nor R Pressure (psi)

Tension (potmds) 7/8" 7G 90 R 1100 5226 276 160 R 1350 6460

160 R 1700 8140 210 R 1700 8140 7/8" 7H 90 R 1050 4980 276 160 R 1925 9198 210 R 2400 11510 90 N 1150 5473 160 N 2000 9550 210 N 2500 12000

Page 8 of 8

TABLE 3-2 Comparison of Induced Tension With Test and Reinstallation Torque Values Required Anchor Torque Induced Tension (lbs) Tension Size Value at 2D Application (in.) (ft-lbs) Min. Max. Ave. (lbs.)

Torque 1/4 6 334 945 652 600 Tests on 3/8 15 1207 1802 1497 1000 Anchors 1/2 50 3990 6100 4979 2400 5/8 80 4278 8075 6418 3200 3/4 145 7282 12,352 9432 4800 7/8 210 8140 13,882 11,560 6000 Reinstalla- 1/4 5 303 796 567 tion of 3/8 12 973 1547 1254 Anchors 1/2 40 3328 5650 4429 5/8 60 3360 6550 4963 3/4 110 4530 9795 7102 7/8 160 5226 11,510 8898

TABLE 3-3 Comparison of K Values With Anchor Size for Test and Reinstallation Torque Values Anchor K Value Size Torque Application (in.) I (ft-lb) Max. Min. Ave.

Torque Test 1/4 6

892

305 .442 on Anchors 3/8 15 .398 .266

321 I

f 1/2 50 .301 .197 .241 5/8 80

359 .190

239 3/4 145 .319 .188 .246 7/8 210

354 .207 .249 Reinstallation 1/4 5

792 .302 .423 of Anchors 3/8 12

395 .248

306 1/2 40 .288 .170 .217

5/8 3/4 7/8 60 110 160

343

389

.420

.176

.180

.191

.232

.248

.247 12T K = PD T = Torque (ft-lb)

P = Tension Load (lb)

D = Diameter (in)

4.0 RELAXATION TESTS These tests were perfonned to obtain data on the relative anount of relaxation (loss of preload} that can be expected in shell type anchors.

'!WO anchors in each size group were installed with base plates, washers and nuts on studs (or conventional bolts) and torqued to the specified reinstallation torque values. After a pericxi of two weeks, the anchors were re-examined to detennine the relative loss of preload. The position of the nut am stud (or bolt) was marked am breakaway and return torque measurements were taken.

Breakaway torque is the torque required to start to loosen the

anchor. Return torque is the torque required to return the nut and stud (or bolt} to its initial installation position.

Breakaway torque maasurarents were taken to check for possible lock-up in the threads.

The difference between the initial installation torque and return torque values is indicatOr of the relative anount of relaxation.

The recorded torque values am the indicated percent relaxation are sunmarized in Table 4 .1. These data shc:M relaxation to :vary between 12.5 and 50 percent with an average value of 26 percent *

4-1

'nlese values are considered representative of the relaxation that can be expected over a longer period of tine since nearly all the relaxation usually occurs (as for waige type anchors) within the first seven days after torquing.

An estimate of the average anount of preload ranaining in the anc:hors after losses is oontained in Table 4. 2. These values were obtained by subtracting the average percentage relaxation loss fran the average tension values corresporxling to the reinstallation torque values oontained in Table 3.2.

The average estima:ted preload after losses is shcMn to exceed

the design allowable tension for all anchor sizes

4-2

Anchor TABLE 4-1

Summary of Relaxation Tests Anchor Torque (ft-lb)

Percent Size ID Installation Breakaway(l) Retum(l) 1/4 2D s 3 3 40 2H s (2) (2) -

3/8 3D 12 8 8 33.3 3H 12 10 10 16.7 1/2 4D 40 3S 3S 12.S 4J 40 30 20 so

. I I

S/8 SD 60 70 S2 13.3 I SH 60 so S2 13.3

3/4 7/8 6D 6H 7D 110 110 160 7S 80 120 7S 80 120 31.8 27.3 2S 7H 160 110 120 2S Average Percent Loss 26.2 (1)

Readings taken two weeks after initial installation.

(2)

Anchor was found loose - anchor obviously disturbed after initial installation *

TABLE 4-2 Estimated Preload After Losses Estimated Average Preload Allowable Reinstallation Measured After Design Anchor Torque Tension Losses (1 ) Tension Size (ft-lb) (pounds) (pounds) (pounds) 1/4 5 567 418 300 3/8 12 1254 925 500 1/2 40 4429 3260 1200 5/8 60 4963 3660 1600 3/4 110 7102 5240 2400 7/8 160 8898 6560 3000

(1)

Based on average short term (2 weeks) loss of 26% *

5. 0 ULTIMATE IOlID TF.5TS ON PARI'IALLY EXPANDED AN:HORS 5.1 Test Results These tests were perfonned to detennine the* effect of partial expansion an the ultimate load capacity of the Phillips Red Head self-drilling anchors. The degree of partial expansion is measured in tenns of the distance "E" which is the difference between the installed and fully exparrled shoulder-to-cone dimensions (see Figure 2.2). The results of these tests are surcmarized in Table 5-1.

These tests show that the anclx>rs retain a significant portion

of their basic ultimate strength with considerable degrees of un:lerexpansian.

5-6.

This is illustrated in Figures 5-1 through .

5.2 Ccirparisons With Other Tests The results of these tests canpare favorably with other similar tests such as the preliminary tests run at Palisades Plant on anchors installed in concrete wall sections raroved. f ran the auxiliary building and tb:lse run at the University of Tennessee and rei;:orted in Reference 2. The data fran these tests are sumnarized in Tables 5-2 and 5-3.

These tests were perfonned on 1/2, 5/8 and 3/4 inch anchors in

a similar fashion as reported herein.

5-1

The data fran Reference 2 was reported in tenns of expansion ratio (ER), which is the ratio of the distance the shell was driven onto the cone to the total expansion distance, L 0 ,

{difference between zero and full expansion shoulder-to-cone dimensions which would be equivalent to distance E for zero expansion). 'lb provide a camcn base for carparison, the expansion ratios were.converted to un:1erexpansion distances, E, as shown in Table 5-3 by use of the following relationship:

E = L0 {1-ER)

L = un:1erexpansion distance, E',

0 for zero expansion ER = expansion ratio Average values of L of 17/32, 41/64 and 17/32 inches were 0

used in detennining E and ER values for 1/2, 5/8 and 3/4 inch anchors respectively.

'!he data fran Tables 5-2 and 5-3 are also plotted in Figures 5-3, S-4 and 5-5.

Figure 5-3 shows that the 1/2 inch anchors do not sustain signi-ficant loss of strength for E values unier 9/32 of an inch. The one inordinately low value (for anchor 4I at 5/32 of an inch) was due to a pranature shell failure which is not related to

degree of underexpansion and can be ignored .

S-2

Figure 5-4 shows no sudden drop off in strength for 5/8 inch anchors. However, the general trend in:licates no significant loss in strength for E values un:ler 10/32 of an inch.

Figure 5-5 shews 3/4 incl+ anchors to sustain considerable strength loss at E values in excess of 6/32 of an inch.

It is seen that at E values below these critical values (for 1/2, 5/8 am. 3/4 inch anchors), the average ultiroate strength exceeds S times the allc:mable load (SD) used in design of the pipe hangers. The SD values are shown as horizontal lines in

the Figures.

For 3/8 inch ancmrs (Figure S-2} the test data in:licates ultimate strengths in excess of SD for E values up to about 10/32 of an inch.

For the 7/8 inch anchors (Figure 5-6) a significant drop in strength is indicated at an E value of 12/32 of an inch. Test points at 8/32 and 10/32 show strengths only slightly below the SD value. The general treni of the data in:ilcates that the average strength of SD would be reached at an E value of about 8/32 of an inch *

5-3

Figure 5-1 shc.'Ws that the ultinate strength in all tests on 1/4 inch anchors was well al:ove the SD line for E values up to 6/32 of an inch. Testing was discontinued at this E value since the average E value for zero expansion for these.small anchors would be on the order of.9/32 of an inch *

5-4

TABLE S-1 Summary of Ultimate Strength Tests on Anchors Installed in Turbine Building Floor Under-Anchor Expansion Ultimate Size Anchor Dist. E Pressure Load (in) ID (in) (psi) (pounds) Remarks 1/4 2A 0 1000 2678 (4) 2B 3/32 1000 2678 (4) 2C 1/32 .. 720 1893 (2 ,3) 2E 4/32 1000 2S8S (1) 2F S/32 900 2238 (1) 2G 6/32 900 2238 (1) 3/8 3A -4/32 2000 S400 (4)

3B 1/32 2000 S400 (4)

3C 3E 3F 3G S/32 6/32 8/32 10/32 17SO 1600 1300 970 4712 4270 346S 2481 (1)

(1)

(1) 1/2 4A -2/32 3200 8632 (1) 4B 1/32 2900 7858 (2) 4C 5/32 3000 8123 (1) 4E 6/32 2700 7329 (2,3) 4F 7/32 2300 6220 (1) 4H 0 1900 5370 (2,3,5) 4I 5/32 680 1962 (2 ,3,S)

S/8 SA -2/32 4800 13090 (2,3)

SB 1/32 4000 108SO (2,3)

SC S/32 4SOO 122SO (2 ,3)

SE 6/32 2300 6220 (2 ,3)

SF 8/32 2740 77S9 (l,S)

SG 10/32 1900 S370 (1,S)

SH 1/32 1400 3972 . (2' 3, S)

Page 1 of 2

TABLE 5-1 Summary of Ultimate Strength Tests on Anchors Installed in Turbine Building Floor (Cont'd)

Under-Anchor Expansion Ultimate Size Anchor Dist. E Pressure Load (in) ID (in) {psi) *,

{pounds) Remarks 3/4 6A -1/32 5900 16080 (1)

- 6B I 3/32 3500 9464 (2) 6C 7/32 1800 5090 (2,5) 6E 6/32 1800 8610 (2,5) 6F 8/32 680 3112 (2) 6G 10/32 500 2204 (2) 7/8 7A 3/32 5300 24510 (2) 7B 4/32 5300 24510 (1) 7C 6/32 3500 16073 (2)

7E 7F 7G 8/32 10/32 12/32 2900 2800 2000 13882 13032 9250 (2 ,5)

(1)

(2)

(1) Concrete cone out Page 2 of 2 (2) Anchor slippage (3) Shell fractured (4) Threaded rod broke (5) Ultimate load reached tmder,torque load

TABLE 5-2 Ultimate Strength Test on Partially Expanded Anchors Instal~ed in Auxiliary Building Wall Sections(l)

Ancmr Shoulder-to-Cone Dist. E Pressure Load Size Di.m:nsion (in} (in) (psi) (pounds)

Installed Full ExP.

1/2 1-8/32 1-5/32 3/32 1500 7090 1/2 1-10/32 1-5/32 5/32 1800 8500 5/8 1-16/32 1-13/32 3/32 2000 9450 5/8 1-18/32 1-13/32 5/32 2100 9920 5/8 1-20/32 1-13/32 7/32 2000 9450

3/4 3/4 2-4/32

. 2-11/32 1-31/32 1-31/32 5/32 12/32 3000 2000 14170 9450 (1) These preliminary tests were perfonrei on anchors installed in reinforced concrete sections raroved fran the auxiliary building at Pali sades Plant (Average Concrete Can-pression Strength based on core samples -

7000 psi) *

TABLE 5-3 Surrmary of Ultimate Strength Tests on Partially Expanded Anchors (Fran Peferenre 2) (l)

Anchor Anchor Expansion Under Exp. Ultimate Size I.D. Ratio-ER Dist. E Tensile !Dad (in) (in) (TY'llims) 1/2 B-1 1.00 0 5597 B-2 1.06 -1/32 6388 B-5 1.00 0 7347 B-6 0.942 1/32 7222 B-7 .530 8/32 4930 B-8 .706 5/32 5763 B-9 .471 9/32 4638 B-10 .471 9/32 3638 B-11 .471 9/32 2350 B-13 .706 5/32 6472 B-14 .706 5/32 5972 5/8 C-8 .731 11/64 8972 C-9 .975 1/64 12,013 C-11 .438 23/64 7430

(

C-12 .975 1/64 8263 C-14 .439 23/64 6263 C-15 .488 21/64 9222 C-16 .341 27/64 6430

Page 1 of 2 I

I

TABLE 5-3 Sunrna:cy of Ultimate Strength Tests on Partially Anchor Expanded Anchors (Fran F.eference 2) (l) Cont'd Anchor Expansion Under EXp. Ultimate Size I.D *. Ratio-ER Dist. E Tensile load (in) (in) ( . .. ~ )

3/4 A-4 1.00 0 14,760 A-5 .942 1/32 12,350 A-6 .824 3/32 12,347 A-9 .883 2/32 13,388 A-14 .647 6/32 ll,388 A-15 .589 7/32 10,513 (1) Tabulation includes only direct tension test

.data. Data where failure was in:luced by torque not included.

Page 2 of 2

3000 (l) Rod broke - anchor did not fail (1) 0 (1) 0 2500 G 8 2000 0

0 2 4 6 8 10 32 32 32 32 32 DISTANCE, E, (inches)

FIGURE 5-1 Ultimate Load Vs. Underexpansion Distance, E, for 1/4 Inch Anchors

1""!I 6000

-4 (1) Rod broke - Anchor 32 (1) 8(1) did not fail 5000 GJ Q

4000

- f ll

't:S

§ GJ p.,

0 3000

~ SD 8

i::i:.:l

~

H 2000

~

s E

m 1000 0

0 2 4 6 8 10 32 32 32 32. 32

DISTANCE, E, (Inches)

FIGURE 5-2 Ultimate Load Vs. Underexpansion

Distance, E, for 3/8 Inch Anchors

0 Turbine Bldg 12,000 0 Auxiliary Bldg 0 Reference 2 (1) Shell Broke 10,000

-2 32 8000 G

8

- 8 0 0 l

CD "Cl

§ 0

~

SD 0

6000

=a 0

...:i (1) r.::I 0

~

H 0

~

s 4000 E m

0 2000 G c1>

0 0 2 4 6-* 8 10 32 32 32 32 32 DISTANCE, E, (Inches)

FIGURE 5-3 Ultimate Load Vs. Underexpansion Distance, E, for 1/2 Inch Anchors

2000 0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14.

32 32 32 32 32 32 32 DISTANCE, E, (Inches)

FIGURE 5-4 Ultimate Load Vs. Underexpansion Distance, E, for 5/8 Inch Anchors

0 Turbine Bldg 0 Auxiliary Bldg 20,000 0 Refel;'ence 2 El 16,000 0

- I ll "C

§ 0

SD 0

-=il 12,000 0

p..

0

0

~

IJ;.1

~

H E-4 8000 8

8 0

o~

12 s E m

GJ 4000, 8

Q 0

0 2 4 L 8 10 32 32 32 32 32 DISTANCE, E, (Inches)

FIGURE 5-5 Ultimate Load Vs. Underexpansion Distance, E, for 3/4 Inch Anchors

28,000 24,000 0 0 20,000 16,000 G SD

- t ll

'tl

§ 0

0 0

Po. 12,000

~

0

...:i r:.l E m 8

~

H 8000

~

4000 0

0 2 4 .L 8 10 12 32 32 32 32 32 32 DISTANCE, E, (Inches)

FIGURE 5-6 Ultimate Load Vs. Underexpansion

Distance, E, for 7/8 Inch-Anchors

6. 0 CRITERIA FOR UNDEREXl?l\NIED ANCX>R:>

6.1 General

'llle allowable design load for expansion anchors is usually detemi.ned by dividing the average ultimate strength (as detennined fn::m manufacturer's tests) by a safety factor.

'llle NRC in IE Bulletin 79-02 specifies a safety factor of 5 for shell type anchors.

The allowable design loads for expansion anchors used at Palisades Plant is sarewhat less than 1/5 of the average ultimate values given in Iefereno= 1 for Phillips Red Head Self-drilling anchors. The lower values were cwsen to satisfy safety factor criteria for a wider variety of anchor

t.yr:es Which oould be used at the plant.

The allowable design loads (lD) for shell type anchors cur-rently used are listed in Table 6-1 along with the required average ultimate loads oo:rresp:>nding to a safety factor of five (5).

6.2 Expansion Limit for Unreduced Allowable !Dads The ~red average ultirrate load values (SD) *OJntained in Table 6-1 were corrpared with the test data OJntained in Section 5 and maxi.nuJm un~sion distances, E, were selected to

6-1

define acceptable expansion for each anchor size to retain an average ultimate load equal to or greater than SD. These values, when added to the shOul.der-to-rone dimension for full expansion, results in the maxinu.Jm allowable shoulder-to-cone dimension for unreduced allowable loads. The selected E values arrl resulting maximJm allowable shoulder-to-cone dimensions are contained in Table 6-2.

These criteria are illustrated graphically in Figures 5-1 through S-6. The requ.i.re:1 ultimate strength values are illustrated as horizontal lines identified as SD. The selected naxirmJm E values are sham. as vertical lines identified as ~*

6.3 Reduced Allc:Mable loads The reduced alla-1able load capacity for anchors with shoulder-to-rone dimensions in excess of the max:inUlln. values shcMn in Table 6-2 are based on proof loads applied to the anchors as a part of the testing am inspection pro;iiam to satisfy the requirarents of NOC IE Bulletin 7902. E'.ach anchor examined is subjected to essentially two proof loads, a direct tension load of two times the basic design allowable load (_2Dl and a tension load in:iuced by reinstallation toi:que which in m::>st cases exceeds the direct tension load. Anchors sustaining these loads ~uld have a mi.nlmum ult.irrate load capacity greater than the larger of the imposed .loads. The ult.irrate load can be expected to be

well above the larger imposed load since defonnations during 6-2

testing or reinstallation are limited to about 1/16 inch (to maintain shell to plate clearance} and defonnatio~ for un:ier-expamed anchors are typically on the order of 1/4 to 1/2 inch at ultimate load (Pefei:enee 2).

Since an extrare lc:Mer limit of ultimate capacity is defined by the 2D proof loads, a safety factor of 3 is considered appro-priate for defining allowable design load capacities based on these loads.

To account for typical scatter in toiqUe-im:uced tension loads

(on the order of +25%} a canparable safety factor of 4 is con-sidered appropriate for detennining design allowable loads based on average tension loads induced by reinstallation torqUe.

'llle recc:mrended reduced allowable design loads based on these safety factors and the direct tension and torque-induced tension loads are given in Table 6-3.

These loads are* applicable for anchors which have shoulder-to-cone dimensions in excess of the maximum values shown in Table 6-2 and which have been subjected to the required direct tension loads of ~ times the basic design load and reinstall.ation torque loads as given in Table 6-3 *

6-3

TABLE 6-1 Average Ultimate Loads for tm:educed resign Allowable Loads Anchor Allowble Required Size Design I.oad-lD Average (pcY.lms) Ultimate load-SD

{'oourrls}

1/4 300 1500 3/8 500 2500 1/2 1200 6000 5/8 1600 8000

3/4 7/8 2400 3000 12,000 15,000

~

TABLE 6-2 Maximum Shoulder-to-Cone Dimensions for No Reduction in AllowaJ::?le Design IDad Shoulder-to-Cone Dim. (in)

Ancl:x>r Maximum Full Exp. Max. Allc:Mable Size E Value for No IDad Reduction 1/4 6/32 9/16 3/4 3/8 8/32 25/32 1-1/32 l 1/2 7/32 l-S/32 1-3/8 5/8 8/32 1-13/32. 1-21/32 5/32 1-31/32 2-1/8 3/4 7/8 8/32 2"" 9/32 2""17/32

TABLE 6-3 Allowable Design !Dads for Unierexpan:led Anchors (l)

Tension Allowable Anchor Tension Reinstalled Due to (2) Design I.Dad Size Test I.Dad Torque TOrque Tension (3)

(in) 2D {lbs) (ft-lbs) (lbs) {lbs) l/4 600 5 567 200 3/8 1000 12 1254 330 l/2 2400 40 4429 1100 5/8 3200 60 4963 1240 3/4 4800 110 7102 1770 7/8 6000 160 8898 2220 (l} These values are applicable to anchors which have been subjected to the indicated tension test and reinstallation torque loads.

(2} Average tension due to reinstallation torque - Values obtained fran Table 3-2.

(3) Based on the larger of one third of the direct tension or .

one fourth of the torque-irrlucecl tension load *

1. Red Head Anclx>rs Systans I catalog F-1000 Phillips Drill Division of I'IT, 1976

2. Burdette, _E.G., Tests on Self-Drilling Anchors, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Tennessee, J'uly 1979

3. Pipe SUppart Base Plate Designs Using Concrete Expansion Anchors I m Bulletin No* 79-02 (Rev* 2)

I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory carmission, Office of Inspection and Enforcareit, Washington D .c.

November, 1979 .

APPENDIX A EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION

A-1.0 ~ CALIBRATICN A-1.1 ~pnent Identification The calibrated equipnent used for each test is identified in Table A-1.

A-1.2 Pressure Gauge am. Torque Wrench calibration Pressure gauges were calibrated to read within 2% of irxlicated pressure. TOrque -wrench cal ihration checks indicated that these -wrenches were accurate within about +5% of irxlicated t:mque

A-1. 3 Ram Calibration Rams were cal.il:>rated using a testing machine with certifierl accuracy of +1/2% of indicated load using pressure gauges calibrated to within +1% of indicated pressure. The ram calibrations are therefore ex>nsidered accurate to within

!:. 1-1/2% of indicated load.

P.ams were calibrated in both the active am. passive rn::::des.

In the active rn::::de, the rams were activated by a punp to exert load against the testing machine. In the passive rn::::de, the testing machine exerted external load on the ram with the ram punp inactive. The active node calibration data was_ used

/

A-1

to convert ireasured pressures to loads for the direct tension tests where the load was appliei using a hydraulic p.mtp. The passive m:x:le calibration was used for the torque-tension tests since the ram was loaded externally by the torque-in:iuced tension (without using a pump)

A-1. 4 ca 1i bration Data Ram calibration data utilized to convert rreasured pressures to loads are included in Section A-2. These data arrl pressure gauge arrl torque wrench calibration docmnentation are inclu:led in the onsite OC file *

A-2

~ ---- - -- -- -- - -----

A-2.0 RAM CALIBRATICN DATA The ram calibration data utilized to cx:mvert pressures to loads are ccntained in Tables A2-1, A2-2 and A2-3.

The rams were calibrated in toth the active and passive nodes using pressum gages with ranges of zero to 1000, 3000 and 10,000 psL Pressum gages with these ranges were utilized to maintain oonsistant reading accuracy over the full range of pressures used in testing

A-3

Table A-1 Cross Reference Between Tests and Calibrated Fquii;:ment Identification Bquii;:ment I.D. Type o:t Test RAM Press Torque D Torque Pull Relaxation Anchor Remarks Gauqe Wrench Tension Q.it I.D.

CP-072 CP-304 CP-143 x 2A CP-072 CP-304 x 2A CP-072 CP-304 CP-143 x 2B CP-072 CP-304 x 2B CP-072 CP-304 CP-143 x 2C CP-072 CP-304 x 2C CP-072 CP-304 CP-143 x 2D I

CP-364 CP-232 CP-142 x 2E CP-364 CP-232 x 2E CP-364 CP-232 CP-142 x 2F CP-364 CP-305 x 2F CP-364 CP-232 CP-142 x 2G CP-364 CP-232 x 2G CP-364 CP-232 CP-142 x 2H CP-072 CP-304 CP-143 x 3A CP-072 *CP-304 x 3A CP-072 CP-304 CP-143 x 3B CJ?-072 CP-304 x 3B

Table A-1 Continue:l

RM-1 B:!UipISlt I.D.

Press*

Gauge Type Wrench Tension Qlt Cl?-072 Cl?-304 Cl?-143 x of Test Torque . TOrque Pull Relaxation Anchor Remarks I.D.

3C Cl?-072 Cl?-304 x 3C Cl?-072 CP-304 x 3D CP-364 CP-232 CP-142 x 3E CP-364 CP-305 - x 3E CP-364 CP-232 CP-142 x 3F CP-364 CP-305 x 3F CP-364 CP-232 CP-142 x 3G CP-364 CP-305 x 3G CP-364 CP-232 CP-142 x 3H CP-072 CP-304 CP-267 x 4A CP-072 CP-319 x 4A CP-072 CP-319 CP-267 x 4B CP-072 CP-319 x 4B CP-072 CP-319 CP-267 x 4C CP-072 CP-319 x 4C CP-072 CP-304 CP-267 x 4D CP-364 Cl?-302 CP-142 x '4E Cl?-364 CP-302 x 4E CP-364 CP0302 CP-142 x 4F CP-364 CP-305 x 4F CP-364 c;p-;302 CP-142 x 4H CP-364 CP-302 CP-142 x 4I

Table A-1 Continued.

~

F.qui~t Press Ga.uqe I.D.

Torque Wrench CP-072 CP-319 CP-267 Type of Test Torque Pull Relaxation Anchor Rararks Tension Q.it x

I.D.

SA CP-072 CP-319 x SA CP-072 CP-319 CP-267 x SB CP-072 CP-319. x SB CP-072 CP-319 CP-267 x SC CP-072 CP-319 x SC CP-072 CP-319 CP-267 x SD CP-364 CP-30S CP-142 x SE CP-364 CP-305 x SE CP-364 CP-305 CP-142 x SF CP-364 CP-30S x SF CP-364 CP-30S CP-142 x 5G CP-364 CP-305 x 5G CP-364 CP-30S CP-142 x SH CP-072 CP-319 CP-267 x 6A CP-072 CP-319 x 6A cP-072 CP-319 CP-267 x 6B CP-072 CP-319 x GB CP-072 CP-319 CP-267 x 6C CP-072 CP-319 x 6C CP-072 CP-319 CP-270 x 6D

Table A-1 Continued

RAM

~pnent Press Gauge I.D. Type of Test Torque Torque Pull Relaxation Anchor Ranarks Wrench Tension Olt CP-276 CP-299 CP-314 x I.D.

6E CP-276 CP-299 CP-314 x 6F CP-276 CP-299 x 6F CP-276 CP-299 CP-314 x 6G CP-276 CP-299 x 6G CP-276 CP-299 CP-314 x 6H CP-276 CP-299 CP-314 x 7A CP-276 CP-299 x 7A CP-276 CP-299 CP-314 x 7B CP-276 CP-299 x 7B

CP-276 CP-299 CP-314 CP-276 CP-299 CP-276 CP-299 CP-314 CP-276 CP-299 CP-314 x

x x

x 7C 7C 7D 7E CP-276 CP-299 x 7E CP-276 CP-299 CP-314 x 7F CP-276 CP-299 x 7F CP-276 CP-299 CP-314 x 7G c;:p;-276 CP-299 CP-314 x 7H CP-143 x 2D Initial Torque CP-143 x 3D Initial Torque

Table A-1 Continued

Rli.M Fquipnent I.D.

Press Gauge Torque Torque Type of Test Wrerx::h Tension Pull Relaxation Anchor Remarks Cllt I.D.

CP-270 x 4D Initial Torque CP-270 x SD Initial Torque Cl?-270 x 6D Initial Torque CP-359 x 2D Breakaway Torque CP-359 x 3D Breakaway Torque CP-359 x 4D Breakaway Torque

CP-359 CP-359 x

x SD 6D Breakaway Torque Breakaway Torque CP-359 x 2H Initial Torque CP-359 x 3H Initial Torque CP-359 x 4J Initial Torque CP-359 x SH Initial Torque CP-359 x 6H Initial Torque CP-359 x 7D Initial Torque CP-359 x 7H Initial Torque

Table A-1 Continual

RAM F.quipnent I .D.

Press

.Gauqe

'IY1?e of Test Torque 'lbrque Pull Relaxation Anchor Remarks Wrench Tension out I.D.

CP-335 x 2H Breakaway

- Torque CP-355 x 3H Breakaway Torque CP-355 x 4J Breakaway

'lbrque CP-355 x SH Breakaway Torque CP-355 x 6H Breakaway

'lbrque CP-355 x 7D Breakaway

'lbrque CP-355 x 7H Breakaway

'lbrque

TABLE A2-l calibration Data for Ram Cl?-072 lOOOpsi 3000psi 10,000psi Pressure Gage Pressure Gage Pressure Gage I.oad I.Dad IDad Pressure Active Passive Pressure Active Passive Pressure Active Passive (psi) (lbs) (lbs) (psi) (lbs) (lbs) (psi) (lbs) (lbs) 100 216 280 500 1296 1392 1000 2626 2677 200 473 575 1000 2662 2810 2000 5327 5477 300 747 865 1500 4025 4250 3000 8077 8328 400 1014 1150 2000 5400 5650 4000 10,850 11,100 500 1287 1435 2500 6800 7150 5000 13,650 13,950 600 1559 1715 3000 8123 8472 6000 16,350 16,800

700 800 900 1834 2129 2404 2005 2290 2595 7000 7500 19,050 20,500 19,600 21,100 1000 2678 2880 - - - - - --

TABLE A2-2 calibration Ia.ta for Ram CP-276 lOOOpsi 3000psi 10,000psi Pressure Gage Pmssm:e Gage Pmssure Gage load load !Dad Pressure Active Passive Pressure Active Passive Pmssure Active P:ressure (psi) (lbs) (lbs) (psi) (lbs) (lbs) (psi) (lbs) (lbs) 100 363 414 500 2208 2352 1000 4444 4545 200 815 907 1000 4585 4733 2000 . 9196 9296 300 1274 1387 1500 6900 7200 3000 13,746 14,147 400 1740 1872 2000 9250 9550 4000 18,400 18,900 500 2204 2366 2500 11,650 12,000 5000 23,100 23,750 600 2673 2861 3000 13,953 14,352 6000 27,800 28,600

700 800 900 3222 3672 4172 3371 3871 4371 7000 8000 9000 32,600 37,400 42,000 33,600 38,500 43,200 1000 4613 4861 - -- - 9500 43,900 -

TABLE A2-3 calibration lOOOpsi Data 3000psi for Ram CP-364 10,000psi Pressure Gage Pressure Gage Pressure Gage

.load IDad .load Pressure Active Passive Pressure Active Passive Pressure Active Pressure (psi) (lbs) (lbs) (psi) (lbs) (lbs) (psi) (lbs) (lbs) 100 196 258 500 1296 1392 1000 2626 2778 200 454 561 1000 -2662 -2859 .. 2000 . ~

5377 5578 300 712 874 1500 4000 4250 3000 8127 8328 400 919 1157 2000 5350 5650 4000 10,850 11,200 500 1237 1444 2500 6800 7100 5000 13,600 13,950 600 1502 1724 3000 8123 8472 6000 16,350 16,750 700 . 1765 2022 - -- - 7000 19,150 19,600 800 2028 2314 -- -- -- 7500 20,500 21,000

'900 2238 2599 - -- - 8000 - 22,400 1000 2585 2891 - -- - - - -

Attachment D February 7, 1980

1.

NRC BULLETIN I/E 79-14 INSPECTION & ANALYSIS PROGRAM INTRODUCTION NRC I/E Bulletin 79-14 requires that the as-built conf igura-tion of seismic Category t piping systems be checked to ensure that agreement exists with the original designs.

Unacceptable variations must be resolved by re-analysis of a system and/or modifications to the piping and/or pipe supports.

2. I/E BULLETIN PROGRAM A total of 73 "Piping Stress Systems" (i.e., portions of total systems routed between fixed anchor or terminal con-nection points), have been identified as applicable within the scope of this program. This covers all seismic Category I piping, 2 1/2" and larger in diameter. A functional piping system, then, may consist of more than one piping stress system because of the actual physical location of anchors. The primary loop piping is one of the systems included in this total. This piping is short of large diameter and is supported only by vessel nozzles in a high radiation field. Due to its uniqueness of erection control, a walkdown and re-analysis was judged unnecessary.*

In this effort, is was decided that new isometric drawings would be prepared that reflect the as-built condition of all piping system components. These drawings were prepared based upon the information gathered during inspection walkdowns of the seismic Category I piping systems.

For this work, it was decided that complete re-analysis of all computer analyzed seismic Category I piping systems would be made in compliance with the original FSAR and/or code requirements. The re-analysis included not only the re-calculation of piping stresses but re-analysis of ali pipe supports and restraints as well. Procedures for piping stress analysis and pipe support design analysis were prepared based upon the governing documents referenced in the FSAR. A program was established for producing "as-built" piping isometrics, stress analysis, pipe support evaluation, review of the overall systems, and for documenting and record keeping of drawings and calculations for future reference. The following exhibit, Figure 1, displays a flo~ diagram for this work

I WORK FLOW DIAGRAM IE BULLETIN 79-14 & 79-02 ANALYSIS AS-BUILT . STRESS -. PIPE STRESS &

RECEIVED r ISOMETRIC SUPPORT LOADS FROM SITE I

N I -,,

COMMENTS f.

G) . I c

n m

~ - IDll -REANALvSis - 6a - .. "

I !

I I SUPPORT ~

I ANALYSIS I

RELEASE ~

FINAL . ~

TO FIELD REVIEW ~

BASE PLATE & ~

ANCHOR BOLT EVALUATION G*0836*16

PALISADES PLANT JOB 12447-033

DESIGN CRITERIA (FSAR)

ALLOWABLE STRESS QBE SSE

(.1 g Earthquake) (.2g Earthquake)

PIPE 1967 Power Piping Code 1.1 Sy PIPE SUPPORTS Struct Members .6 Sy 1.1 Sy Catalog Items (Rods, clamps, etc.) .2 Su .4 Su Sh ~ Allowable Hot Stress Sy = Minimum Yield Stress Su = Minimum Ultimate Stress

FIGURE 2 3

G-0836-17

Although the intent of this program was to use the original project criteria and assumptions contained in the FSAR, some comparisons of results were made using updated accep-tance criteria, the most important of these being 1) consi-deration of the lateral strength of u-bolt type restraints and 2) uplift compression loading on rigid hangers. Pro-ject FSAR stress criteria are tabulated in Figure 2.

3. COMPLETION OF WORK TO DATE There are 26 piping stress systems inside containment of which 18 systems have been analyzed for pipe stress and for the acceptability of associated pipe supports. There are 47 stress systems outside of containment of which 12 systems have been completed as well. The results of the analyses and evaluation of these 30 stress systems are as follows:

a) The piping systems and their associated supports and restraints were adequately designed for thermal expansion and dead loads (normal operation).

b) Six of these systems did not meet the 1967 Power Piping Code stress criteria with respect to OBE/SSE requirements.

c) 16% of the existing supports did not meet the pipe support criteria for seismic requirements. Of these, more than 85% (of the 16%) are due to the updated acceptance criteria (in the last paragraph of Article 2 above), which were not considered in the original project design.

4. CAUSE OF THE DEFICIENCIES A. Pipe Stresses Four of the six stress systems that failed to meet B31.l requirements (in Para 3-b), can be directly attributed to the generic limitations (in scope) of seismic computer programs in use at the time of the original design of this project. The computer pro-gram limitations resulted in analyses which included decoupling, overlapping and non-conservative assump-tions in mass point selections for portions of some systems. In addition, some of the systems were analyzed using an insufficient number of dynamic modes. Under this program for these several combined stress systems showed the early calculation approaches to be less conservative.

One of the six system inadequacies is related to a

subsequent piping system design modification. It has been determined, however, that by adding 29 new sup-ports to these 6 piping stress systems, the criteria of the FSAR and the 1967 Piping Code will be satisfied.

B. Pipe Supports Thirty-two of the 220 existing pipe supports on the 6 pipe stress systems may require some rework in the field for compliance with the FSAR. Thirty-one of the 32 suggested modifications are due to the changes required by the updated design criteria for pipe supports noted in Article 2 (last paragraph).

5. PROPOSED INTERIM CRITERIA It was indicated earlier that the piping systems analyzed to date are adequately designed for normal operation of the plant. In the event of an earthquake, 6 piping systems of the 30 analyzed could exceed FSAR allowable stresses.

However~ 5 of- thes~ systems do meet the allowable stresses in the ASME Section III Subsection NC, 1976 Winter Addenda of the code. Based on this information, acceptable interim criteria are proposed which will assure operability of the safety systems and thus allow the plant to return to opera-tion. Figure 3 displays the proposed interim allowable stresses for both pipe stress and pipe supports. Figure 3 also shows a comparison with the original design criteria.

6* JUSTIFICATION FOR THE INTERIM CRITERIA

There are a number of considerations developed in the analyses of these systems that, given the several immediate modifica-tions discussed in later paragraphs, justify an interim criteria for short term acceptance of these piping systems.

These include:

A. For the Piping

1. The 1967 edition of the B31.l Power Piping Code produces higher stresses for components, such as elbows and tees, as compared to later editions of the Code; subsequent Code editions introduced criteria that relaxed the more conservative requirements in the 1967 edition.

2. In a later addendum of ASME Section III, the allowable stress values for the faulted condi-tion (SSE, 0.2g earthquake), were established as 2.4Sh. Prior to that date, there was no such recognized criterion. The Palisades FSAR lists l.lS as the allowable stress limit.

y B. Pipe Supports

l. For an OBE condition, (O.lg earthquake) a piping system and its supports are designed to be within the elastic limits of materials. For an interim criteria, then, the differences are academic with PALISADES PLANT JOB 12447-033

DESIGN CRITERIA (Interim vs FSAR)

ALLOW ABLE STRESS QBE SSE

.. ~

(.1 g Earthquake) (.2g Earthquake)

PIPE A. Interim 197 4 ASME code* 1.2 sh 2.4 sh*

B. Long term 1967 pipe

code FSAR 1.2 sh 1.1 Sy

/

PIPE SUPPORTS Struct Members A. Interim .75 Sy 1.1 Sy B. Long term .6 Sy 1.1 Sy Catalog Items (Rods, clamps, etc.)

A. Interim .3 Su .5 Su B. Long term .2 Su .4 Su Sh = Allowable Hot Stress Sy = Minimum. Yield Stress Su = Minimum Ultimate Stress

1976 Winter Addenda of 197 4 Edition ASME Section Ill, Subsection NC Figure 3

FIGURE 3 G-0836*11 l_

respect to design allowables of 0.6S or 0.75S ,

for structural members, and 0.2S orY0.3S forY catalog items. The higher limit~ remain ~ithin the elastic range of materials and no permanent strain will occur due to an OBE event.

2. For an SSE condition (0.2g earthquake), no increase in allowables has been considered for the structural members but for the catalog items, the allowables have been increased from 0.4S to O.SS for the interim operation. The inte¥im allow~ble of OoSS is lower than the yield stress and providesua safety factor of two *

.J

For the interim operation, "U" bolts are assumed to be as strong in the lateral direction as in the normal direction. This was the original assumption used in the design of this plant.

4. An uplift load on rigid hanger rods was con-sidered insignificant during the interim opera-tion if the net uplift force was no greater than 25% of the vertical loads in the downward direction. This consideration is justified because:

a) Spring hangers supporting a piping system will have a restraining effect against displacement and tend to reduce the loads.

The stress analyses have assumed no such effect in the seismic calculations, which is a conservative approach.

b) Existing clearances between the different elements in a rod hanger assembly will limit the effect of uplift loads.

7. MODIFICATION REQUIRED TO MEET INTERIM CRITERIA Application of the interim criteria for the 30 stress sys-tems now completed (18 inside containment, 12 outside) will require that some degree of modification be accomplished to ensure that 6 of the 30 systems satisfy the requirements for interim operation prior to startup. This will necessitate the addition of 3 new supports (or restraints), and the modification of 10 others in the 6 systems noted above.

This work is in progress and will be completed prior to startup. Additional modifications may be required as the review and analyses of the remaining 43 stress systems are carried forward to completion .

8. CONCLUSIONS It is evident from the analysis of the 30 stress systems completed to date that a majority of all deficiencies identified relate to one, or a combination of, the fol-lowing affects:

a) The early-generation calculation techniques used in performing dynamic seismic calculations resulted in a combination of effects as discussed in Article 4.

These efforts were not 'incorrect', but simply non-conservative, given present practices.

b) The use of updated acceptance criteria in this current work. (See Ar.tic le 2.. ) ..

c) Other variations from design noted in the as-built walkdown data.

It is apparent that the root cause of support deficiencies is attributable to the non-conservative analytical techniques used in the original design. A review of the project records for the systems which are as yet unanalyzed 1 will be made relative to the analysis parameters discussed

above. This review and appropriate corrective action will be accomplished prior to startup.

' 9. BULLETIN 79-14 AND SMALL PIPING Small piping in the Palisades plant was designed and sup-ported using simplified techniques (chart methods) and standard support components, as was the existent practice at that time. No formal calculations w~re produced for this piping. Given this consideration, these systems 2" in diameter and smaller, are not within the scope of I/E Bulletin 79-14

ATTACHMENT E February 13, 1980

0 Q) rd I'll 1j 0

H 0

+>

......... i:::

DES CRI P T I 0 N H

~

Q) *rl rd Ill

rl +>
rJl i:::
i::: 0 HU 03311 CCW PUMP SUCTION PIPING OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT 0 x FROM PEN & SDC HX (HB24 AND HBD8), CCW RM AND W. SFGDS 03312 CCW SUPPLY OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT FROM CCW HX 0 x TO CONT PEN & SDC HX (HB24 AND HBD8), CCW ROOM, E AND W SFGDS CCW PUMP OUTLET TO CCW HX 0 x x x (HB24), CCW ROOM ESS PUMP COOLING - COOLING H20 OUTLET - 0 x INCLUDES CCW & CRIT SERVICE H20 CROSSTIE (HB23), ENG SFGDS 03315 ESS PUMP COOLING - COOLING H20 SUPPLY - 0 x INCLUDES CCW & CRIT SERVICE H20 CROSSTIE (HB23 AND HB24), ENG SFGDS 03316 CRITICAL SERVICE H20 RETURN/OUTLET FROM 0 x CONT PEN & CCW HX TO EMBEDMENT POINT (HB23), CCW ROOM 03317 CRITICAL SERVICE H20 SUPPLY - FROM EMBEDMENTS 0 x TO CONT PEN & CCW HX & TO ESS ROM CHILLRS (HB23), CCW ROOM, D.G. ROOM, ESS AND DG HX 03318 CRITICAL SERVICE H20 SUPPLY HEADERS FROM SERV 0 x H20 PUMPS TO EMBEDMENT (HB23), INTAKE STRUCTURE 03319 ESS PUMPS SUCTION FROM SIRW & CONT SUMP 0 x (HC3, GC4, GC8), ESS ROOME AND W 03320 ESS PUMPS DISCHARGE THRU SDC HT EXCHANGERS 0 x x
TO CONT PEN #22/23/30/31/32 (GCl, GC6, DCl, SC3), ESS E AND W
0
(!)
rd
..-1 rn
~
0 f-t 0
.p
-s::
D E S C R I P T I ON .
H (!)
.._, ~
(!) *n rd al
n .p fJl s

:
HO s:: 0 03322 ESS PUMP DISCHARGE RECIRC & CONTAINMENT 0 x x SPRAY RECIRC PIPES BACK TO SIRW
. (HC23, GClO, GC9, DC2), ESS THRU CCW, MSIV RM 03323 CBA PIPING FROM SIRW, CBA TANKS, VCT TO 0 x CHARGING PUMP SUCTION (HC6, HC16, HC7, HC20), CBA & CHG RMS, 602 PI 03324 SFP COOLING PUMP SUCTION PIPING FROM SFP, 0 x SFP SKIMMERS, SIRW, & .CONT PEN #72 (HC4), SFP COOLING & 602 PIPEWAY 03325 SFP PUMP DISCHARGE TO SFP, SIRW, SFP HT 0 x
. EXCHANGERS , CONT PEN #64 ETC (HC4), SFP COOLING & 602 PIPEWAY 03326 SIRW RECIRC SUPPLY TO SIRW HT EXCHANGER 0 x x x (HC23), MSIV ROOM & SIRW TANK 03327 T2 & T81 CROSS TIES & CONNECTION TO NEW 0 x MAKEUP SYSTEM TO DESIGNED ANCHOR T2 TANK PIT 03328 COND STOR TK (T2) TIE TO (T81) TO EMBEDMENT 0 x x x TANK PIT 03329 CWRT RECIRC PUMP P70 TO OUTLET RETURN TO CONT 0 x PEN #67 (HC2), 602 PIPEWAY 03330 .CWRT RECIRC PUMP P70 SUCTION FROM CONT 0 x PEN #49 (HC2 & HC6), 602 PIPEWAY INTO CWRT PUMPRO 03331 HEATING BOILER & MISC WAST RETURN TO COND 0 x x x STORAGE TANK T2 (HB26), T2 TANK PIT
0
(!)
lrj
{fl
.c::
.p
s i::
0 Ul
rl f.-1
.c::
.p i::
0 Ul
rl f.-1
'°cD i::
'° H
(!)
l tll O'l CJ b{).
i:::
al al (!) ;:;:
~
0 §' Pl al s *.-i
.p al
<U 1-<
0 0 f.-1 rl ~
0
~
f.-1 0 cD (!)
0 .,; .p >::
.p i:! f.-1 >:: *.-i 0 0
--i:: *.-i (!) *.-i f.-1 () *.-i
.p DE S C R I P T I 0 N H ID .p lrj
()
ro ro
-~
lrj *.-i Q) *.-i ID f.-1 NO Q)
N s
.-i
.-i C)
Ul *.-i al :>, H :>>
~~
lrj G-<
.-i .p rl Q) rl *.-i CJl >:: ro .P ro re i:: 0 HO ~~ ~~ ~~
03332 CONDENSATE STORAGE TANK - MAKEUP & REJECT 0 x x x (HB26), T2 TANK PIT 03333 CONDENSATE STORAGE TANK OUTLET~ AUX FD PUMP SUCTION 0 x x (HB35), T2 TANK PIT 03334 OLD PMW PUMPS (P79A/B) RECIRC BACK TO PMW 0 x x TANK T81 (HCll, TURBINE BLDG
.3335 PMW PUMP SUCTION FROM.T8i TO.P79AiB 0 x x x (HCll), T2/T81 TANK PIT
03338 WASTE GAS FROM WGS SURGE TANK TO WGS 0 x COMPRESSORS AND TO STACK MONITOR (HB20), 602 PIPEWAY 03339 WASTE GAS SURGE TANK INLET FROM VACUUM 0 x x DEGASIFIER AND CONT PEN #46
( HBl) , 590 EL AUX BLDG VAC DEGASIFIER ROOM 03340 CONTAINMENT SuMP DRAIN TO DIRTY WASTE SYST 0 x FROM CONT PEN #52 (HC12), ESS ROOM 03341 A S/G MAIN STEAM PIPING FROM CONT PEN #2 0 x THRU MSIVS INTO TURBINE BLDG (EBl), AUX BLDG AND TURB BLDG 03342 AUX FDWATER PMP DISCHARGE TO EMBEDMENT PT 0 x x x
( EBl 0 ) , AUX FEEDPUMP ROOM 03343 LAUNDRY WASTE/DIRTY WASTE DISCHARGE TO 0 x MIXING BASIN (HC2), 590 AUX BLDG
.3344 SI BOTTLE & CWRT VENT FROM CONTAINMENT 0 x PEN #25 TO ISOLATION VALVES (HBl), 602 PIPEWAY
0 rd Q)
-ri Ul
.s::
+'
s s::
0 Ul
.-l H
.s::
+'
-ri
~
s::
0
[/J
.-l H
rd r:n s::
cd
'd H
Q) ti) ti) to.
s::
al al ~
~
Q) p, cd +' aS 0
H 0
~ cd 0 s
0
.-l H
Q)
Q) ;...
rl 0 p,
0 S:: H
-ri s:: +'
r-i s0 0s::
. . . . . +'s:: *.-l Q) *r-i H u *r-i u
D E S C R.I P T I 0 N H QJ
~
+'
rd *r-i 'd i:n
.D (IS Q) -ri QJ NU H Q)
N s
r-i
r-i ()
t'l *r-i
>, rl :>, '+-<
~~
rd ell
-ri +' rl Q) rl *r-1 Ul s:: a:i +' al 'd s:: ~ :@
HU 0 ~ y'.l
~ ~~
03345 PRIMARY SYSTEM DRAIN TANK T74 OUTLET FROM 0 x x CONT PEN #47 TO DRAIN TANK PUMPS P71A/B s (HCl), 602 PIPEWAY 03346 FROM PCS DRAIN TANK PUMPS P71A/B DISCHARGE 0 x TO CONT PEN #37 RECIRC BACK TO DRAIN TANK (HCl), 602 PIPEWAY 03347 VACUUM DEGASIFIER PUMPS P68A/B DISCHARGE 0 x TOWARD CWRTS UP TO* CONT PEN #41
( HC2) ' 602 PIPEWAY AND . VAC -DEGAS ROOM 0334/:l EQUIPMENT DRAIN TANK T80 VENT TO WASTE GAS
0 x SURGE TANK (HBlJ, AUX BLDG 602 PIPEWAY 03351 CWRT OUTLET FROM CONTAINMENT PEN #69 TO 0 x X' x CWRT PUMPS P69A/B SUCTION (HC2), AUX BLDG 602 PIPEWAY 03353 CONTAINMENT PURGE SUPPLY CV1807/8 - 0 x CONT PEN #1 (JB16), STEAM DUMP ROOM IN AUX 03354 CONTAINMENT PURGE EXHAUST CV1803/5/6 - 0 x CONT PEN #4 (JB16), STEAM DUMP ROOM 03355 CONTAINMENT AIR ROOM PURGE SUPPLY CV1813/4 0 x CONT PEN #68 (HB16), STEAM DUMP ROOM 03356 AUX FDPUMP SUCTION PIPING FROM EMBEDMENT 0 x x TO PUMPS P8A/B (HB35) , AUX FEEDPUMP ROOM
.03357 CONTAINMENT HEATING STEAM SUPPLY FROM 0 x SPOOL PIECE TO CONT PEN #36 03358 B S/G MAIN STEAM PIPING FROM CONT PEN #3 0 x THRU MSIVS INTO TURBINE BLDG
( EBl AND EB6) , AUX BLDG AND TURB BLDG
0 4l rd (J'.l
..c::
+>
~
s::
0 Ul i:-,
<ti
..c::
+>
!?:
s::
0 Cll
ri i:-,
aj rd s::
rd H
ro s::
<V
J rn rn Ol bG
rl 4l ::>:-
~ P< al +> al 0 ~
0 ..
s .,.;
0 H Q) rl ~
~
0 al 0 Q) 0 *ri +>
s:: .,.; s::
-s:: +> S:: H
ri Q) *ri ;...
0 0 0-ri H QJ +> u +>
D ESCRI PT I 0 N rd *ri rd oo ro
-~ QJ ;... Q)
N s
.,.; CJ Ul .,.;
Q) .,.; NU
~;.. ~,......
~~
rd al
.,.; +> rl Q) rl .,.;
Cll s::
s:: aj +> ro '° HU 0
~~ ~~ ~~
03359 PRESSURIZER SURGE - FROM PZR TO HOT LEG I x x x (CC2) CONT BLDG 03360 SHUTDOWN COOLING DISCHARGE FROM P~S TO I x x x CONT PEN #35 (GC8), CONT BLDG 03361 PRESSURIZER SP.HAY - FROM COLD LEGS TO PZR I x x tCC9), CONT BLDG
.3362 SAFETY INJECTION FROM T8.2A TO COLD LEG lA I x x (CC4), CONT BLDG 03363 SAFETY INJECTION FROM T82B TO COLD LEG lB I x x x (cc4), CONT BLDG 03364 SAFETY INJECTION FROM T82C TO COLD LEG 2A I x x x (cc4), CONT BLDG 03365 SAFETY INJECTION FROM T82D TO COLD LEG 2B I x x x (cc4), CONT BLDG 03366 HPSI HEADER FRM CONT PEN #23 TO INDIVIDUAL I x x x LOOP TAKEOFFS (DCl), CONT B;r,;nG 03367 LPSI/SDC FROM CONT PEN #32 TO EACH SI I x x BOTTLE LOOP INJECTION PIPING (GCl AND cc4), CONT BLDG 03368 REDUNDANT HPSI HEADER FROM CONT PEN #22 TO I x x x INDIVIDUAL LOOP TAKEOFFS (cc6), CONT BLDG 03369 CONTAINMENT SPRAY FROM CONT PEN #30 I x x (HC44), CONT BLDG
0
(])
rd
.i::
.µ
s
~
0
[/J
.i::
.µ 0
~
~
00
rl
<d Ul
~ bO.
ro rd H
CV
j ti}
ti}
i:::
~
Ill $-t al
$-t al p, al
(])
+> m 8' E 0
~~
s::l *rl 0 0 $-t
$-t 0 al 0 (]) p, 0 *rl +> s ~
....... +>~
~ $-t ~.,..; 0 0
rl GJ .,..; $-t 0 *rl DES CRI PT I 0 N '-' s H
Q)
<l.l
rl rd *rl Q)
NU
.µ
$-t
<d Q)
N 0
s
.-1 1:Jl
r-i
+>
01 *rl aS 0
rd >., H >.. '+-<
~~
aj
rl .µ rl Q) rl *r-1 1:Jl ~ ro +> d rd
~
HU 0
.§! ~ .§! ;; .,§]£ 03370 CONTAINMENT SPRAY FROM CONT PEN #31 I x x
( HC44) , CONT BLDG 03371 MAIN FW PIPING TO A S/G FROM CONT PEN #7 I x x x (EB9), CONT BLDG 03372 MAIN FW PIPING TO B S/G FROM CONT PEN #8' I x x x (EB9), CONT BLDG
.3373 r-:r.Al~ STEAM FROM A S/~ TO CONT PEN #2 I x x x
( EBl) , CONT BLDG .
03374 MAIN STEAM FROM B S/G TO CONT PEN #3 I x x x (EBl), CONT BLDG 03375 PRESSURIZER RV PIPING FRM PZR TO QUENCH TK I x (CCll AND GCll), CONT BLDG 03376 PRIMARY COOLANT SYSTEM MAIN COOLANT LOOPS I N.OT I (B) E COPE (CCl), CONT BLDG 03377 CHARGING PUMPS SUCTION FROM VOL CONTROL 0 x TANK T54 CHARGING PUMP ROOM 03378 HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION PUMP DISCHARGE 0 x x 03379 MAIN FEEDWATER FROM CONT PEN #7 &. 8 THRU 0 x FW CHECKS BACK TO FW HEATING AND FW PUMPS TURBINE BLDG AND CCW ROOM 03380 AUX FEEDWATER FROM WEST SAFEGUARDS EMBEDMT 0 x TO MAIN FEEDWATER CONNECTIONS (EBlO AND EB14), ESS ROOM AND CCW ROOM 03381 ccw & SFP H20 - CROSSTIES BETWEEN SFP HT 0 x x x EXCHANGER (HB24 & HC4), SFP COOLING ROOM
0
<lJ
'°
..-I IJl
..t::*
+>
s s::
0 Ul
..-I H
,.t:l
+>
. *r-l 0
~ ..
s::
IJl
.-i H
'°s::
al
'C1 H
n
<lJ
l IJl IJl U2 bli s

:
al al (!) :::i:
1j P< td +> al 0 ~
0 s0 *r-l H ~ t)
S... 0 al 0 (!) P<
0 -n s:: +> s0 0s::
+> S:: S... *r-l
-s:: *ri Q) *ri H 0 *r-l D E S C R I P T I ON H II> +'
'° -n '° 0
m ro
+'
-~
Q) -n II>
l>J 0 H Q) s l>J *r-l
r-l C)
U2 *r-l
'° +'s:: ~~
..-I Ill al
?-> !'.-<
rl a:l Q)
+>
m "Cl
'+-<
rl .,..;
s::
~ ~~ ~~
0 HO &:
03382 CRITICAL SERVICE H20 DISCHARGE FROM I x x x CONTAINMENT. AIR COOLER.VHX-3, ONE SIDE 6" TIE IN (ISO MlOl-147)
( HB-23) ,. CONTAINMENT 03383 CONTAINMENT AIR COOLER DISCHARGE I x x x 03384 CRITICAL SERVICE H20 DISCHARGE FROM I x x x CONTAINMENT AIR COOLER VHX-4, ONE SIDE 6 11
. TIE IN (ISO_MlOl-135)
.3385 CONTAINMENT AIR COOLER DISCHARGE I x x x 03386 CRITICAL SERVICE H20 SUPPLY TO CONTAINMENT I x AIR COOLERS VHXl-4 FROM CONTAINMENT PENET #12 (HB-23), CONTAINMENT 03387 CRITICAL SERVICE H20 DISCHARGE FROM I x CONTAINMENT AIR COOLERS VHX-1, VHX-2, AND (ONLY ONE SIDE PER COOLER) TO CONTAINMENT (HB-23), CONTAINMENT 03388 REACTOR CAVITY FILL LINE I x (CONTAINMENT TO CAVITY) 03389 REACTOR CAVITY DISCHARGE LINE I x x (CAVITY TO CONTAINMENT)
ATTACHMENT F PROPOSED ADDITION TO LICENSE NO DPR-20 February 13, 1980 Consumers Power Company proposes that the following modification to the Palisades Plant License No DPR-20 can be incorporated if the Nuclear Regulatory Commission finds such a requirement necessary:
A. Prior to start-up following the refueling outage at the completion of Cycle 4, the licensee shall complete any necessary plant modifications and analyses to demonstrate that seismic Category I piping systems are in compliance with the FSAR criteria presented in licensee letter dated February 14, 1980. In the interim, the seismic Category I piping systems will be in compliance with the "Interim Criteria" specified in licensee letter dated February 14, 1980 .
mi0280-0238a-48 soo22 00 l/O"I

ML18044A540

Text

2.0 DESCRIPTION

Navigation menu

Search