ML18059A481
| ML18059A481 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 10/22/1993 |
| From: | Wong J CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18059A477 | List: |
| References | |
| EA-SC-93-087-04, EA-SC-93-087-04-R00, EA-SC-93-87-4, EA-SC-93-87-4-R, NUDOCS 9311030065 | |
| Download: ML18059A481 (13) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:PALISADES NUCLEAR PLANT EA-SC-93-087-04 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS COVER SHEET Total N""*>er of Sheets 9 Title Acceotabilitv of Partial Severino of TE-0101 Nozzle INITIATION AND REVIEW Calculation Status Preliminary Pending Final Superseded a 16 a a Initiated In it Review Method Technically Reviewed Revr Rev Appd Appd CPCo I Description By Detail Qual By Appd By Date Alt Caic Review Test Bv Date 0 Original Issue ~ ~ 10/22/93 SSOverwr;J"
}JW.f I Ji~~
w~ c (D-2!-f)
)1
- 1.0 OBJECTIVE This Engineering Analysis (EA) is written to document the justification for performing a partial severing operation on Palisades Pressurizer Temperature Nozzle for TE-0101.
This EA is an analysis of the maximum nozzle wall thickness that can remain and still have the nozzle meet the ASME Code required stress and fatigue allowables. This EA is also written to incorporate the above analysis, which was performed by ABB/Combustion Engineering, Chattanooga, Tennessee, into the Palisades administrative filing system. 2.0 ANALYSIS INPUT 2.1 Vendor Supplied Calculation ABB/Combustion Engineering Calculation No. CR-9417-CSE93-1122, Rev 0, dated 10/21/93 - Attachment 1. 3.0 ASSUMPTIONS None. 4.0 ANALYSIS The attached analysis was performed for Consumers Power Company by ABB/Combustion Engineering, Chattanooga, Tennessee (ABB/CE). Attachment 1 has been prepared and approved by ABB/CE in accordance with the ABB/CE quality assurance program using checklist 2 of ABB/CE procedure QAM-101. (TbJs_an aJ_v_s_i_s_doc uments_t he . _wner's
'h review of the ABB/CE design calculation.
9311030065 931027 . *. *i 1I i ~- .PDR ADDCK 050002 55 r1_:___! _ _ _ _ __ p
PALISADES NUCLEAR PLANT EA-SC-93-087-04 M<<'"E'~ NSIRDS ANALYSIS CONTINUATION SHEET Sheet __L_ Rev # _...:::O__ Reference/C011111ent
5.0 CONCLUSION
The analysis detailed in Attachment 1 to this EA demonstrates the adequacy of the modification design, including the partial severing of the TE-0101 nozzle, to the Palisades Pressurizer Temperature Nozzles in meeting the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code stress and fatigue allowables.
EA-SC-93-087-04 Attachment 1 REPORT: 7 Pages APPENDICES: 0 Page OTHER ATTACHMENTS: 0 Pages ADDENDtrM TO STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS of TBMPBRATURS NOZZLE WELD RBPAIRS for CONS'DMBRS POWER PALISADES PUSSlJ"RIZD CR-9417-CSB93-1122, RBV. 0 This document is the property of ABB/Combustion Engineering, Chattanoo1a. Tennessee, and i.J to be used only for the purposes of the qreemmt with ABB/CE putSUaDt to which it is* furnished. PREPARED BY: _j_._w_.&_s_.s__Y4-fl&--=.i!?---4_4__ DATE: ,o/i.1 /Cf!
- VER!fICATIQI STATUS: COOLETE The Safety-Related design information contained in this document ha& been verified to be correct by m*ana of Design Review using Checklist(s) '"- of QAM-101. .
Name Af.,il* *.B~'- Signature ~ 4 fi~* nate iei.hr/23 Independent Reviewer ABB COMBUSTION ENGINEERING CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE
CR-9417-CSE93-1122, REV. 0 Page* 2 of 7 JtBCORI> OF REVISIONS PARAGRAPH (s) PR!PAlUW INDEPBNO!NT APPROVEO NTJ?Gli:R DATE INVOLVED BY RIV? EWER SY J.W.Balillil a.A.Bell J.A.Amburn Cf.~1d) Original Issue 0 10/21/93
~!!:1L93 10/:21/.93 a.o.A~
v I CSE-93-389
CR-9417-CSE93-112~, REV. 0 Pa.ge 3 of 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS
- 1. 0
SUMMARY
4
2.0 REFERENCES
. 4 3:o EVALUATION OF PARTIALLY UNSEVERED NOZZLE . 5
- CSE-93*389
CR-9417-CSE93-1122, REV. O Page 4 of 7
- 1.0
SUMMARY
The structural integrity of repaired Consumers Power pressurizer temperature nozzles established in the original report CR-9417-CSE93-l121, REV. l is reverified for the condition where the top head nozzle is only partially severed. The temperature nozzles in the top head and lower vessel shell were found leaking and the repair was to apply a weld build-up pad to seal the nozzle at the o. D. of the pressurizer. Results of the original analysis showed that the top head nozzle must be severed to relieve thermal stresses. This addendum justifies a partial severing (leaving 0.06 to O.ll inches of remaining nozzle wall, depending upon inspection tolerances) of the top head nozzle by the EDM process . For all these alternatives, ASME Code requirements are met for all stress and fatigue allowables to allow operation until the next scheduled outage.
2.0 REFERENCES
- 1. ABB/CE Report No. CR-9417-CSE93-1121, REV. l, Analytical Report for Consumers Power Pressurizer, dated October 18, 1993.
- 2. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, l96S Edition with Addenda. through Winter, 1966.
CSE-93-389
CR-9417-CSE93-ll22, REV. O Page 5 of 7 -* 3.0 EVALUATION OF PARTIALLY SEVERED NOZZLE If the EDM machining process does not fully sever the nozzle, the axial strain will accumulate in the weakened nozzle at the EDM slot. This will relieve the stress at the weld pad. If the slot is sufficiently deep, the nozzle will sever before the stresses at the weld pad become unacceptable. - *.-I The severed nozzle has been shown acceptable for a primary plus secondary stress intensity range of 51.8 ksi (Reference 1, page 10). Note that this was for sx-S 0
- The unsevered nozzle restraint produces an axial stress which was shown to be unacceptable because the s .. -sr range became excessive. .* ' . *.).
However, the severed nozzle s .. -s, range is only 26. 27 + 2. 84 -.-*' ~ ksi - 29.1 kai. Thus, there exists a margin of 51.8 - 29.l = *-
- 22. 7 ksi on s .. -s, for additional stress due to axial restraint. If this margin is selected as the allowable stress in the nozzle/pad, the remaining wall thickness at the slot that allows the nozzle to sever can be calculated as follows:
/ L.... *- - 2 '"
!<'<; - .)'\<;----::---
,( _;
1-, -r-.
- ~. ;
Where: S 111, .. 80 ksi ultimate strength of nozzle
~ = Area remaining at EDM slot wall
*K CR!-R!l S111ow m 22.7 ksi margin on axial stress
~ ~ Area of unsevered nozzle
=n (R~-Rf}
CSE-93-389
CR-9417-CSE93-1122, REV. O Page 6 of 7
- Therefore,
~ - 0.5973 inches Therefore, the EDM slot is acceptable if the remaining thickness of tmmin = Ro - R.
- 0.6575 - 0.5973
- 0.06 inches Note that additional margin exists in this value because the allowable stress in the weld pad could be higher and still be acceptable, i.e., the allowable was picked to give the same evaluation as a severed nozzle which has considerable margin on acceptability.
Another choice for the allowable can be developed using the limiting alternating stress intensity allowed by the Code fatigue curve (Reference 2, Figure N-415 (B)), i.e., Sa*- 650 ksi.
- Using the equations in Reference l, page 16, the allowable primary plus secondary stress intensity range, Sn can be calculated as follows:
2.S., Sn* K.SP The safety factor SF is 5.0 (Reference l, page 15). The Ke value is an iterated value based on the above equation for the appropriate value of Sn. Carrying out this iteration results in an allowable Sa of 102 ksi. The margin on axial thermal restraint becomes: S111ow
- 102 -29.1
- 72.9 ksi and the allowed remaining thickness becomes tl'tlmbi - 0.22 inches. Note that this value should have a safety factor applied because of the non-linearity involved in the CSE-93-389
- OCT 22 '93 7:43
CR-9417-CSE93-ll22, REV. O Page 7 of 7
- calculation, the uncertainty on measuring the remaining thickness, and the use of the upper limit on allowable alternating stress intensity. A safety factor of 2.0 is recommended; therefore, an allowed nozzle EOM slot thickness would be trrmain m 0.11 inches.
Based on the two choices for allowable stress, a reasonable value of allowable remainin~ slot thickness would be between 0.06 and 0.11 depending on inspection tolerances . CSE-93-389
--*tn i IJIRfU Document Title NUCLEAR OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT Document Review Sheet
* .I Document Number I I
,A~L-e'P+"'b; (;-1' {) +: Parf':A/ S'ev e r~!Nf o{ TG-0101 No-nl.e c;A-S"c-93-og 7- O Cf Re111s1on Number C> Page I of s Item P*ge*nd/or Number Section Number Comments Response or Resolution I /t sl.iou IJ k "1o+e& -tltt~ -tw. o.ob ~11\C.ke Ci: tvel\\Ai't. ht> r.e ~po r-. '>'e. re1 tA I" "'e-l C..it { C.CA. l 4tteol IV\ Fl>"~ e & ,s l-'\b+ a des:'t:tV\ l (-ll\'\~-t *
~e Jer; Vec:ol tYe"'a;'>>oo i.-Va.s ba~ec{ ~,,,
Pr~rn 11rv
<!.DptP,14+.c -t:-o~
p1 ...... ~ ~et:. O'Yl J.o. ,-y s+re~s ':t: C:* 11 *~I"'* QI') ' e.v hk.~ was
,Jc..--
t"IDt a , .'V>'\
. '4:'I \ V1c=J COY! d't' OY'\
I '
.\ l'\ ~e S4..h 1'c c:t d~tt>~~ n *
"'~' p ~e ~~s -lo ~ lloc.u To U..~eY~ of EA
-The alll~l\J s~s I .so>>"" e ";'V\"p c..i.+ ~ra "'°' e4-ers A,._ol ~VI a l+erV'~"t~'-1 e a. Y'I .....ty s 'Is a:p,.-,ro ~ c.l, i~ s-u..ppl~ the~-te..L jlA ~e a.-tl-o.c::.kcl s~eef
...,If\.
2 ner~ ";"s a .... ~ he_irJJC.--.e ~I'\ Sert).;)~~Stlt\ ~e. Y\O re c:;po-nse r-e 1 u. i're.cl e.lGtsf~c..~. C-~l_Mf4te,t ~~**q,£_ s-fr..e-ss '"" -+k~ PAr-t~ ~'/ s~ ve v--e.ct. no 2-2..le . Tke CJ.MJts:s o.f
-tk "EA w~ b44.ec:i Ull\ ~ e-s+1 ca.PLy c.a.R. c.tt.P~ i sf re.~s Iii-I -t'-'e. -thi"""'e~ ~J.t S 41! c..-t ~ 0'-' Cl"'-c:.l
-1k -tel;\~~ l t; t..-c.11\q+k 0, ~e ~-tc. r-';-.J. t\o~~I w'-'.e...t;. ~'>~d-<<..V:' nG -t~ rv-.A-i-~cJl. p(a~-l ~c..,'Ly, ~e.
~~~""ect c. re c.s Sec...-\:~o~ Y'eA c.. l,_ ~ts <:.c:i l l Cl.?S~
Reviewer J.c.w~ I Organization l\J&c..o IIO-Date nr.c...;
'"2-""l- -13 Itt-o Re111ew Coordin*tor IDate (0 - c). ,:) - '1 .i' IDocument Sponsor I Date
~
[/ form 3110 10*91
00<ument Title . NUCLEAR OPERATI Document Review Sheet S DEPARTMENT I Document Number I
*I Revrsron Number 6 ~ ot 3 Acc..eP+-~l:.: u-t-1 b.{ ~r-f :J .>eue~"-'l ~ TE-0/01 tJ.o-:i.'2.-{e FA-sc-'13-og7-- 0$£'. P.tge I
Item Page and/or' Number Section Number Comments Response or Resolutron V'
.... Ccn-.. -t; "'Y-eo< )
/f>o..ot lu~e ~ ~~y fl,. J Ge.of.
I.(_ / .:>e;id fu...et.1 cl-ever o peof . --rh~t 'Is, (vaol carvyl'l.'t.q c4P"b: /.-iy e-f' ~e -ti. ~"' \\ e ...(_ c..ross Sec.-t~n ~~ I~""'\ -teot -fc:.
-ll..-c Vh'l.te . . ~o.1 v~e J,l\111 't c.r~i"er ~ OY\
- lh. --tl.e..
e\J'~t o{- lttr41e ~~o.ll /oo.. .J. /
-f{Q. fYl a K j'm u."""
rea c:t:o"" (u~.J 6"' -fl,_e. pr'i!S'S"'-~ ho~Javy Is I;~ -..t-e.ot "t -tt.a a WIO/Mllt of ;.,, e /ct s-t~c. .sf~s
,...., -+L.. -ti.:'ntteo! '>ec..--t :-~vi .
The :;~ ~l~Qc.t *~ -tk "E-A ING14_ qbo'3-72-. " (f. 7 - 'IS. z... f:::.5;
.Cav. S"; J.e.,-;-v.J -flu. ~,,,,. tlape ( C> c:t."'- l~~t 1-la ho~e A.41..~J.. e Sx - 'A
~o
- cr;(q,<,;t~c:.
T~':'l'\l\CO'- A ~"""'I<"' 1\0'2.a.\e ~ I I (,~ -t re:W>Ai}. =- * /Io
~
A """"'-t\..~ ...~c..l z. s )( .,.
"' -'-Sc 2..
lC-s ~ < 4-B. ~ fi: ~l~1t.-<..
~~. -t~ 72A °1'2f>Y-o<>..c:..~ ~ c.. zr-nc;~v-vei.-t-~.
Reviewer _J. c. w~1 I Organization
,AJECO Ira-22-r.3 I Date R~w Coordrnetor
. ;~
I Dete IU .. ,.l) - 'l*J.... IDocument Sponsor IDate Forml110 10.91
.Attt\.~~~"t -to EA- SC-Cf3-oS 7 - 0 '/--
..DRS J/3
(]) P~qe ; R_.< = . 4ocS
- ,4.., afte~ ......-tt~ o.pprotLc. ~ -f- -Ike i:. ..-.. ""l"" """'-~ sl, ,..., /><<res 2- '( b l.S pro"~.J~- _ ~V"Q..... i"' ~1 ~ ~u~eWQ't' ~ ~~S ~A.
~
l k ~AY~ rri""~ a.)('.'"' ( ~"r~.::J.. stress 1~ -tke p~r-t:~a.ll!
~e.Ve.\'"~ V'lo "2.."2..le C~h he -es-+: l'V\~+eo( by :
~ >< = u.n seveY"eci. V\o 2L..le Sy. - Les-f~~e;:teJ.. n-i ~r1 *'~
d~r~..r c-t. fro~ -+he U.V\'!ti!ye_ re~ q.14o{ se ue.reol... no22le sfyess: atA. .J...y~e s j Per p<<q.e - d~'iCLA.~~cr., -tke tna..r~~n ~~ 2 2, 1 ~~ ,' . 1 I p~..- Re.(. I av..J.yt;~S, ~e L4~$e1,.1crec:Q. s'I( = 'S\~ l<c;.': S"-1' :: bS'". 3 ks,* - 2.2-,l kcq = '/-2.., (, ~-s.' R'> " J * ,~,5 2.
- To42 . " (. l.>lt..-. 4t>1t.. ) .53>?
-tveM~°:"" ~ * ~~l~- . S'3'f =
- ll 'i
-n ~s a.l+ern~-+~"'e t<M.~s~s de ~o., ~+t"Q~ -1L* ~ a.M ~(+~U:Jl a.p.p r" ~c '-' o.( -flu. -e A &..J "'- 'S c.
- n s e l-9 ua.-t ~L) ~ *
(i'J pa~e L 1 ~e._ _____ K-e-- \J'a.\~ -f<r('- ~ sh. = to ~ k~ . . tuo.a. 2. s.
-~-b~& 151' Ke c:- l + I- ~
Y\tM.-1J (_ S"' as~
- t "'\
J
Proc No 9.11 TECHftJCAL REVIEW CHECgLIST Attachment 5 EA - S~-Cf'3-o8..,-t/ REV. __19_ _ Revision 5 Page l of l
- This checklist provides guidance for the review of engineering analyses.
Answer questions Yes or No, or N/A if they do not ipply. Document all co11111ents on i 3110 Form. Satisfactory resolution of conments and completion of this checklist is noted by the Technically Reviewed signature on the Initiation and Review record block of Form 3619. ~ Y N, N/A)
- 1. Have the proper input codes, standards and design _ _ _ __
principles been specified?
- 2. Have the input codes, standards and design principles been properly applied? y
- 3. Are all inputs and assumptions v1lid and the basis for their use documented?
- 4. Is Vendor information used as input addressed correctly in the analysis? '/
- 5. If the analysis argument departs from Vendor Information/Reconaendations, is the departure justification documented? VI/ /Ji
- 6. Ara assumptions accurately described and reasonable? y
- 7. Has the use of engineering judgement been documented and justified? y
- 8. Are all constants, variables and formulas correct and properly applied? y'
- 9. Have any minor (insignificant) errors been identified? If yes; Identify on the 3110 Fon1 an<ljust1fy their N insignificance. \
- 10. Does analysis involve welding? If Yes; verify the following info~tion is accurately represented on the analysis drawing (Output document).
*TM-of Veld
- St&of Veld
*8!-s Being Joined of Materhl Being Joined
- Loc1fion of Weld(s)
- Appropriate Weld Symbology
- 11. Has the objective of the analysis been met? 1
- 12. Have adll1nistrat1v1 require11ants such as numbering ind fon1at been satisfied? '/}}