ML18191A310
| ML18191A310 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 03/19/1974 |
| From: | Stein J Washington Public Power Supply System |
| To: | Anthony Giambusso US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) |
| References | |
| Download: ML18191A310 (29) | |
Text
.AEC D IBUTION FOR PART 50 DOCKET k (TEMPORARY FORM)
CONTROL NO:
2842 FILE:
FROM:
Washington Public Power Supply
- Rcihland, Wash.
J. J Stein DATE OF DOC 3-19-74 DATE REC'D
<<3 7
MEMO RPT OTlKR TO 0 A. Giambusso ORIG CC 40 OTHER CLASS UNCLASS PROP INFO INPUT NO C S REC'D DOCKET NO:
40 50-39 DESCRIPTION:
Ltr re our "ltr 11-20-73 trans the following...
PLANT NAME: WPPSS NUCLEAR PROJECT g2 ENCLOSURES:
Report: WPPSS-74-2-R1....Protection Against Pipe Breaks Xnside Containment A'CPRWLEDGED, DO(NOT REMOVE FOR ACTION/INFORMATION 4- -7 4BUTLER(L)
W/i Copies CLARK(L)
W/
Copies
,GOLLER(L)
W/
Copies KHIEL(L)
W/
Copies SCHWENCER(L)
W/
Copies STOLZ(L)
W/
Copies VASSALLO(L)
'/
Copies SCHEMEL(L)
W/
Copies ZIEMANN (L)
W/
Copies DICKER(E)
W/
Copies KNIGHTON(E) "
W/
Copies YOUNGBLOOD(E)
W/
Copies INTERNAL DISTRIBUTION REGAN(E)
W/
Copies W/
Copies W/
Copies W/
Copies REG FXLE'GC, ROOM P-506A MUHTZING/STAFF CASE GXAMBUSSO BOYD MOORE (L) (BWR)
J DEYOUNG(L)(PWR)
SKOVHOLT (L)
P, COLLINS DENXSE REG OPR FILE & REGION(3)
MORRIS STEELE TECH REVIEW HENDRIE SCHROEDER VMACCARY 4 KNIGHT PAWLICKI ZSHAO STELLO HOUSTON NOVAK ROSS IPPOLITO JTEDESCO LONG LAINAS BENAROYA VOLLMER DENTON GRIMES G&MILL KASTNER BALLARD SPANGLER ENFIRO MULLER DXCKER KNIGHTON YOUNGBLOOD REGAN PROJECT LDR LOOSE HARLESS LIC ASST DIGGS (L)
GEARXN (L)
GOULBOURNE (L)
EE (L)
MAIGRET (L)
REED (E)
SERVXCE (L)
SHEPPARD (L)
SLATER (E)
SMITH (L)
TEETS (L)
WADE (E)
WILLIAMS (E)
. WILSON (L)
A/T IND BRAITMAH SALTZ1fAN B,
HURT PLANS MCDONALD DUBE w/Input INFO C. MILES B.
KING 1 - LOCAL PDR RICHLAND WA dl - DTIE(ABERNATHY)
J1
<<NSIC(BUCHANAN) 1 - ASLB(YORE 416 -
CYS ACRS HOLDING
&%4 Uc~ ~+
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION (1) (2X 10).NATIONAL LAB S ANL I-ASLBP(E/N Bldg,Rm 329)
'-W. PE(NINGTON, Rm E>>201 1-CONSULTANT'S NEWMARK/BLUME/AGBABIAH 1-GERALD ULRXKSON...ORNL
~1"PDR~I/LA/tlat 1-GERALD LELLOUCHE GT BROOKHAVEN NAT. LAB 1-AGMED(Ruth Gussman)
HM-B-127, GT.
- 1<<RD..MULLER..F-309 GT
0 0
0 0
~
~,
0 0
'S;
,0 Washington. Public Power Supply Syste A JOINT OPERATING AGENCY P.O. BOX 968 301 FIFTH AVE.
RICHLAND,WASHINGTON 99352
>~i IP, RS)Eg
~ 3 7g7y I
RM Q(ORr k~l~ fS 3II4 O~
46OXL1 C(RR4 6'
TELEPHONE (509) 946 9681 March 19, 1974 GC2-74-39 Docket No. 50-397
/
Mr. A. Giambusso Deputy Director for Reactor Projects Directorate of Licensing Office of Regul ation U. S.
Atomi'c Energy Comission Washington D.
C.
20545 APR 3
>S74 LL goMIC EISA gIIIMINOI I8C8hbrl g8II QNoN
Subject:
WPPSS NUCLEAR PROJECT NO.
2 (FORMERLY HANFORD NO. 2)
TRANSMITTAL OF REPORT WPPSS-74-2-Rl POST CONSTRUCTION PERMIT ITEM
.PROTECTION AGAINST PIPE BREAKS INSIDE CONTAINMENT
Reference:
Ltr.,
WR Butler to JJ Stein, transmitting minutes of October 17-18, 1973 meeting on Post Construction Permit items, meeting agenda item 3, dated November 20, 1973.
Dear Mr. Giambusso:
The attachment to in the reference.
Forty (40) copies this letter provides the information requested are being submitted for your review.
. JJS:CLF:wv Attachment Very truly yours, J. J.
STEIN Managing Director,
'y0 ilj gPR 3 1S7 IISOcu ToOT ILAIL @ouch oca9T @NII,
. ~
y~aS, I
l
~
F* )')
j tl,l 1
H
~,
il
STATE Of" NASHINGTON
)
)
ss COUNTY OF BENTON
)
J. J.
STEIN, Being first duiy sworn, deposes and says:
That he is the Managing Director-of the 4'ASHINGTON PUBLIC POI'iER SUPPLY SYSTEM, the applicant herein; that he is authorized to submit the foregoing letter JJ Stein to A Giambusso, dated March 19, 1974 on behalf of said applicant; that he has read the foregoing and knows the contents thereof; and believes ihe same to be true to the best of his knowledge.
DATED:
1974 J. J.
E Subscribed and sworn to before me this~lb day of~~clg74.
otary ubl ic in and for e
S ate of I'lashington, residing at Miy Ccemission expires:
- PROTECTION AGAINST PIPE BREAKS INS IDE CONTAINMENT
.co@
+
glE~
Q aeR3'~
~ <eI<SS g])~ gfCll0%
Ob
'v Ogg 6
8 REPORT NO.
WPPSS-74-2-Rl Prepared by Burns and Roe, Inc.
Hempstead, N.Y.
11550 Prepared for WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM
- Richland, Washington W.
O.
2808 Prepared by:
~ K. Ronis C
)
Approv~-: ~~(
M. Hroncich Submitted by:
Z. Clapp y~'.
Murphy Approved:
H.D. Schoenwetter
- March, 1974
!gr
'I I
Protection Against Pipe Breaks Inside Containment Report No. WPPSS-74-2-Rl Table of Contents Preface l.
Systems In Which Design Basis Piping Breaks are Postulated 2.
Design Basis Postulated Piping Break Criteria 2.1 Locations 2.2 Sizes and Orientation 3.
Pipe Whip Restraints 3.1 Definition of Function 3.2 Pipe Whip'Restraint Features 3.3 Pipe Whip Restraint Loading 3.4 Material Properties 4.
Dynamic Analysis for the Effects of Pipe Rupture 4.1 Criteria 4.2 Analytical Models 4.3
,Simplified Dynamic 'Analysis Sheet 1 of 14
PREFACE This report describes the measures being taken to protect against pipe breaks inside containment on Washington Public Power Supply System Nuclear Project No.
2 (formerly Hanford No.
- 2).
'his report is in response to the statement made in the Hanford No.
2 Safety Evaluation Report in Supplement 1, page 3,
paragraph 2.2.
In addition, it presents the information discussed at the Post-Construction Permit Meeting with the staff held on October 17-18, 1973 as described in Agenda Item No.
3 of the attachment to, the letter from W. R. Butler to J. J. Stein dated November 20, 1973.
Criteria for protection against pipe breaks inside containment,
'as described in this report is in accordance with the intent of the following AEC documents, which were utilized as source material:
a.
USAEC Regulatory Guide 1.46 dated
- May, 1973 "Pro-,
tection Against Pipe Whip Inside Containment".
b.'etter from the AEC dated July 12, 1973 and attached Appendix A entitled "Criteria for Determination of Postulated Break and Leakage Location in High and Moderate Energy Fluid Piping Systems Outside of Containment Structures".
c..
USAEC Regulatory Staff (Mechanical Engineering Branch)
Position Paper No.'
entitled "Pipe Whip Analysis
~
WPPSS NP2 Burns and
- Roe, Inc.
Pipe Break I/S Cont't WPPSS-74-2-Rl March,"
1974 Sheet 2 of 14
0 II rtI
PROTECTION AGAINST PIPE BREAKS INSIDE CONTAINMENT 1.
S stems In Which Desi n Basis Pi in Breaks Are Postulated 1.1 Design Basis Pipe Breaks are postulated for those pressurized systems or portions of systems that have a
connected source of high-energy fluids during normal plant conditions, (Start-up, normal reactor operation and shut-down).
1.2 Portions of p'iping systems that are isolated from the source of the high-energy fluid during normal plant conditions are exempted from consideration of Design Basis Pipe Breaks.
This would include portions of piping systems beyond a normally closed valve.
Pump and valve bodies are also exempted from consideration of pipe break because of their greater wall thickness and their location in the low stress portion of the piping systems.
1.3 High energy fluid is defined as fluid whose maximum operating temperature exceeds 200oF or whose maximum operating pressure exceeds 275 psig.
1.4 The piping systems or portions of piping systems for which Design Basis Pipe Breaks are postulated are shown on Table 1 below.
WPPSS NP2'urnsand
- Roe, Inc.
Pipe Break I/S Cont't WPPS S-74-2-Rl
- March, 1974 Sheet 3 of 14
1 1
TABLE 1 SYSTEM Low Pressure Core Spray High Pressure Core Spray RHR/LPCI Mode (Loop A)
RHR/LPCI Mode (Loop B)
RHR/LPCI Mode (Loop C)
RHR Shutdown Cooling Ret.
(Lopp A)
RHR Shutdown Cooling Bet.
(Loop B)'HR Shutdown Cooling Supply Reactor Feedwater Lir A
Reactor Feedwater Lii.e B RHR Condensing Mode RCIC Turb.Stm.
Main Steam Loop A Main Steam Loop B Main Steam Loop C
Main Steam Loop D Standby Liquid Control Reactor Water Clean Up CRD-Pump Discharge Recirc.
Pump A Discharge Recirc.
Pump B Discharge RRC Recirc.
Pump A Suction RRC Recirc.
Pump B Suction RCC Reactor Pressure Vessel Drain Main Steam Valves Drainage Piping OPERATING TEMPERATURE
( F) 548 534 550 550 510 535 535 534 420 420 553 541 541 541 541 100 533 100/40 535-534 535-534 534 534 533 545 OPERATING PRESSURE (psig 1015 1000 1025 1025 1025 1242 1242 1015 1265 1265 1 49 955 955 955 955 1150 1100 1012 1261-1246 1261-1246 1015 1015 1100 1010 PORTION CONSIDERED FOR POSTULATED P IPE BREAK RPV To First Check Valve RPV To First Check Valve RPV To First Check Valve RPV To First Check Valve
,RPV To..First Check Valve Recirc.Pump Disch.
To First Check Valv Recirc.Pump Disch.
To First Check Valve Recirc.Pump Suet.- To Closed Valve No F009 Entire Run Within Primary Containment Entire Run Within Primary Containment Entire Run Within Primary Containment Entire Run Within Primary Containment Entire Run Within Primary Containment Entire Run Within Primary Containment Entire Run Within Primary Containment RPV To First Check Valve Entire Run Within Primary Containment RPV To First Check Valve Entire Run Within Primary Containment Entire Run Within Primary Containment Entire Run Within Primary Containment Entire Run Within Primary Containment RPV To Three (3) Closed Valves Entire Run Within Primary Containment M3;gO<W wg <o r.a 8 ~
0 5 '0 8 '0 8
Q M rt I 5 I g M 0)
CQ I Nt5 R
I >.880 o m I
9 Q
I H 0
~e M ~
I
'2.
Desi n Basis P
ulated Pi in Break Crit 2.1 Locations 2.1.1 Postulated pipe break locations are as follows:
a.
At terminal ends (a) b.
Any intermediate location where the following stresses derived on an elastically calculated basis under loadings associated with >~SSE; and start-up, normal reactor operation, and shut-down conditionsexceed the following specified limits:
l.
For ASME Section III Code Class 1 piping, the primary plus secondary stress intensities of 2Sm for ferritic steel and 2.4Sm for austenitic steel.
2.
For ASME Section III Code Class 2 and 3, either the circumferential or longitudinal stresses of 0.8 (Sh + SA), where Sh and SA are as defined in NC 3600 and ND 3600 of the ASME Code Section III, Winter 1972 Addenda.
C ~
/
For ASME Section III Code Class 1,
any intermediate location where the Cumulative Usage Factor (U),
derived from piping 'fatigue analysis under loadings associated with >>SSE; and start-up, normal reactor operation, and shut-down conditions, exceeds 0.1.
d.
Intermed iate locations of s ignificant change in flexibility( ) selected on a reasonable basis as necessary to provide protection.
As a minimum, two such intermediate locations shall be chosen for each piping run or branch run, exceeding twenty pipe diameter in length;a minimum of one location in piping or branch runs twenty pipe-diameters or less in length; except that no intermediate locations need to be postulated in branch runs that are three pipe-diameters or less in length.
(a)
Terminal ends as used herein are circumferential pipe weld attachments to vessels, equipment nozzles, and pipe anchor locations, as well as piping branch connections.
(b>
Locations of significant change in flexibility as used herein are elbows,
- tees, crosses, reducers and valve connections.
WPPSS NP2 Burns S Roe,Inc.
Pipe Break I/S Cont't WPPSS-74-2-Rl
- March, 1974 Sheet 5 of 14 V
- 2. l. 2 Alternate rules for determination of postulated pipe break locations are as. follows:
a.
At terminal ends (see footnote a, above).
b..All intermediate locations of significant change
, in flexibility (see footnote b, above).
2.2 Sizes and Orientations 2.2.1 At each of the postulated break locations, consideration will be given to the occurrence of either a longitudinal split *or circumferential break.
Examination of the state of stress in the vicinity of.the postulated break location described may identify the most probable type of break.
If no significant difference between the hoop and axial stresses has been determined or if the rules of 2.1.2 above are applied, then both types of breaks will be considered.
2.2.2 The following types of breaks are postulated at the locations specified in 2.1 above.
a.
Circumferential breaks in piping runs and branch runs exceeding 1-inch nominal pipe size.
b.
Longitudinal splits in piping runs and branch runs 4-inch nominal pipe size and larger.
2<~ 2 ~ 3 Longitudinal splits are parallel to the pipe axis and are oriented at any point around the circumference.
The break area is assumed to be 100/o of the cross-sectional area of the pipe.
The break blowdown thrust will be assumed to act perpendicular to the break opening.
2.2.4 For circumferential breaks, the free end of the moving pipe will be assumed to move within a plane formed by the free end segment and the pipe segment formed by the firs't change in direction (such as an elbow).
The reaction force will be assumed to be parallel to the free end segment axis.
WPPSS NP2 Burns and
- Roe, Inc.
Pipe Break I/S Cont't WPPSS-74-2-Rl
- March, 1974 Sheet 6 of 14
Pi e Whi Res
'nts 3.1 Definition of Function Pipe whip restraints, as differentiated from piping supports, are designed to function and carry load for an extremely low probability gross failure in a pipjng system carrying high energy fluid.
The piping integrity does not depend on the pipe whip restraints for any loading combination.
If the piping integrity is compromised by a pipe break, the pipe whip restraint acts to limit the movement of the broken pipe to an acceptable distance.
The pipe whip restraints (i.e., those devices which serve only to control the movement of a ruptured pipe following gross failure) will'be subjected to once in a lifetime loading.
For the purpose of design, the pipe break event is considered to be a faulted condition and the pipe, its restraints, and structure to which the restraint is attached, shall be analyzed accordingly.
Plastic deformation in the pipe is considered as a potential energy absorber.
Piping systems will be designed so that plastic instability does not occur in the pipe under design dynamic and static loads, if the consequences of such instability will result in loss of the 'primary containment integrity or loss of required plant shutdown capability.
3.2 Pipe Ship Restraint Features 3.2.1 The restraints are close to the pipe to.minimize the kinetic energy of impact and yet are sufficiently removed from the pipe to permit unrestricted thermal pipe movement.
Select critical locations inside primary containment will be monitored during hot functional testing to provide verification of adequate,clearanoes prior to plant operation.
3.2.2 To facilitate in-service inspection of piping, the restraints are ge'nerally located a suitable distance away from all circumferential welds, and are easily removable.
3.2.3 Pipe whip restrain structures fall into aao of the following two (2) categories:
a.
Energy absorbing members These are modeled as elastic, elasto-plastic or plastic springs in a dynamic analysis.
The required resistance of these structures is derived by application of the principles of structural dynamics.
b.
Load transmitting members These are relatively stiff components and are modeled as rigid members in the dynamic analysis.
Their function is to transmit, equivalent static loading from the source to foundation.
NPPSS NP2 Burns and Roe, Inc.
Pipe Break IgS Cont't WPPSS-74-2-Rl
- March, 1974 Sheet 7 of 14
~
0 3.2.4 Energy absorbing members are ductile structures such as simple beams, frames and ring girders, having the capability to def>ec t significantly in absorbing the energy imparted to them by a postulated broken pipe.
They may also take the shape of U-Bar straps as shown 'in Figure 1, which act as non-linear, non-rebounding plastic. springs.
3.2.5 Load transmitting members are rigid components such as
- clevises, brackets or pins, rigid pipe whip support linkages as shown in Figure 2, or similar linkages; as well as major structures such as Drywell diaphragm floor, the primary contain-ment vessel, reactor pedestal, reactor building and foundation.
3.2.6 It is presently contemplated, that the Recirculation Pump Discharge and Suction piping will utilize the U-Bar strap pipe whip supports, while all other systems listed in Table 1 will utilize the rigid type as shown in Figure 2 or similar configurations.
3.3 Pipe Whip Restraint Loading 3.3.1 For the purpose of predicting the pipe rupture forces associated with the reactor blowdown, the local line pressures are assumed to.be those normally associated with the reactor operating at 105 percent of rated power and with a vessel dome pressure of 1040 psig.
- 3. 3. 2 In calculating pipe reaction, full credit will be taken for any line restriction and line friction between the break and the pressure reservoir.
The following represent typical restrictions to flow which are specifically considered:
I Jet pump nozzles Core spray nozzles (inside internals shroud)
Feedwater sparger Steaml inc flow limiter a ~
b.
C ~
d.
3.3.3 The hydraulic bases and calculational techniques for'redicting unbalanced forces on a pipe associated with a postulated instantaneous pipe rupture are presented in Appendix B
of G.E. Document NED010990 dated September, 1973.
3.3.4 The dynamic loading on the pipe whip restraint commences at the effective time of impact of the pipe with the restraint.
It includes the following:
a.
Unbalanced force on the pipe, associated with a postulated instantaneous pipe rupture in the form of a suddenly applied force.
WPPSS NP2
~
Burns and
- Roe, Inc.
Pipe Break I/S Cont't WPPSS-74-2-Rl
- March, 1974 Sheet 8 of 14
K I >
4
b.
Dynam'ic inertia load of the moving section of pipe, which is accelerated by the unbalanced force associated with the pipe rupture and collides with the restraint.
This load is in the form of a kinetic energy of impact.
3 4 Material Properties 3.4.1 To account for the rapid strain rate effects, dynamic yield strength.is utilize'd.
This phenomenon is documented in published texts.
(
)
( ).
The numerical value of dynamic yield strength is assumed to be the lesser of the following:
a.
1.33 times "the minimum yield strength at operating temperature.
b.
Minimum yield strength at operating temperature plus 1/3 times the difference between ultimate strength and minimum yield strength at operating temperature.
3.4.2 Pure tension
- members, such as U-Bars shown on Figure 1,
which constitute pipe whip limit stops, will be permitted to deform a maximum. of 50/o of the maximum uniform strain during energy absorption, subject to verification by dynamic testing of materials.
3.4. 3 Deformation of energy absorbing flexural support members will generally be limited to 50/o of that deformation, which corresponds to structural collapse, except that deformations of members in direct contact with the primary containment vessel will be limited to 5% of that. deformation which corresponds to structural collapse.
3.4.4 The material and structural shapes for energy absorbing members will be in accordance with recommendations for dynamic member design as documented in published texts;
(
)
(
) or will have the adequacy verified by dynamic tests.
(1)
Air Force Design Manual Principles and Practices for Design of Hardened Structures U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Technical Services,,Publication, AD 295408 (AFSWC-TDR-62-138)
- December, 1962.
(2)
"Design of Structures to Resist Nuclear Weapons Effect" ASCE Manual of Engineering Practice No. 42, 1961.
WPPSS NP2 Burns'nd
- Roe, Xnc.
P ipe Break I/S Cont '
WPPSS-74-2-Rl
- March, 1974 Sheet 9 of 14
4.
D namic Anal sis for the Effects of Pi e Ru ture 4.1 Criteria 4.1.1 Analysis will be performed for each postulated pipe break.
4.1.2 The analysis includes the dynamic response of all components of the system including the pipe in
- question, pipe whip restraints and all structures re-quired to transmit loading to foundation.
The structures are analyzed for a suddenly applied force, in conjunction with impact and rebound effects due to gaps between piping and restraints.
C 4.1.3 The analytical model will adequately represent the mass/inertia and stiffness properties of the system.
4.2 Analytical Models 4.2.1 Lumped-Parameter Analysis Model; Lumped mass points are interconnected by springs to take into account inertia and stiffness effects of the system, and time histories of responses are computed by numerical integration to account for gaps and inelastic effects.
I 4.2.2 Energy-Balance Analysis Model; Kinetic energy generated during the first quarter cycle movement of the ruptured pipe as imparted to the piping/restaint system through impact is converted into equivalent strain energy.
Deformations of the pipe and the restraint are compatible with the level of absorbed energy.
Where pipe rebound may occur upon impact of the restraint, a suitable amplification factor (not to exceed 1.5) may be utilized.
WPPSS NP2 Burns and
- Roe, Xnc.
Pipe Break I/S Cont't WPPSS-74-2-Rl
- March, 1974 Sheet *10 of 14
4.3 Simplified Dynamic Analysis 4.3.1 In, order to simplify dynamic analysis the following conservative assumptions may be utilized:
a.
The entire structure including pipe, support linkage, support beams and major structure to foundations absorbs energy by e3.astic elasto-plastic, or plastic deformation.
In order to provide a simplified dynamic mathematical model, certain components of the structure will be assumed as infinitely rigid.
These will be classified as load transmitting members and designed accordingly.
b.
Time history of unbalanced forces on the ruptured pipe may be simplified to a suddenly applied, constantly maintained
- force, such as to envelope the actual force at any particular time.
c.
Dynamic loading on the pipe whip restraint" may be simplified to a suddenly applied constantly maintained force described above, in conjunction with a kinetic energy of impact.
4.3.2 Simplified analytical models such as simple beams, structural frames and ri.ng girders on assumed rigid supports can be modeled as single springs.
For these, the required member resistance (Rr) can be determined by application of the formula derived by Burns and Roe, as shown in Figure 3.
This derivation is based on published texts 4.3.3 Actual structural resistance for, the above structures is determined by methods of limit analysis using a dynamic yield strength as defined in paragraph 3.4.1 above.
(3)
"Introduction to Structural Dynamics" by John M. Biggs, McGraw-Hill, 1964.
(4)
"Structural Design for Dynamic Loads" by Norris, Hansen, Holley, Biggs, Namyet and Minami, McGraw-Hill, 1959.
WPPSS'P2 Burns S
Roe Inc.
Pipe Break,I/S Cont't
~j WPPSS-74-2-Rl
- March, 1974 Sheet 11 of 14
~
'l
O.E QRR A'(.-
h Ozus 7-I'rtEA 7S
~
~
(Rc vFRslole)OU7 (UuscRfw Q,e'VIS)
Zafcw P~ I a P-c srQI Q~a le TI-IAF. 0< RCc Yt~as oN Lf+
0/57/WCC OD pIPF 70 5ypuclu",F g/Pf/D INs Uc
/ITIOUS'lpF O.D.
0
'< PE VIJ P~FSTNiwED t)J Tgi5 D(EFc?<oQ I
A //0
~CLF YI aug c KE'7
~ / /<~ s6'ucruRE~
',~ /
/ /'///////'//I II',/, /
U-BAR STRAP PIPE WHIP SUPPORT Figure 1
WPPSS NP2 Burns and Roe,Inc.
.Pipe Break I/S Cont,'t WPPSS-74-?-Rl
- March, 1974 Sheet 12 of 14
0 1
~
I 4I
~
p ~
y/
f 1
i I
fl kM%
~
lg
.I il
~
l MR l
-ar>
~
)
ri
~
0 ~
~
~
~
I
~
~
~
l
~
~ ~ ~ e
~
~
~
~
I
~
v l
~
4 r
F, (3
L.
t= Lp f7ic(PR,<iic Co+.i/A~V7<<
Ja l NpULSP (A.)
Fs (6A).
l(iut=.~ic t-~st'-rg K -
t v t>>maUCa 2]1
)
'bda o
W orC J C.tait;.
Qu
~ ~0i S7 I T >Tt P Ci tj~
R, (pi- ~3- ~F; 0
+~ ov.vt ~ c g o A p pAol t"h.L<.f,'w F'i C~+- )
h (fl
()
REQUIRED RES ISTANCE OF STRUCTURES (R
)
Figure 3
Nppss NP2 Burns
& Rge XGc.
pipe BreaK I/s Cont't Wppss 74 2 Rl
- parch, 1.974 Sheet 1-4 of