ML19241A405
| ML19241A405 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | NuScale |
| Issue date: | 08/22/2019 |
| From: | Bergman T NuScale |
| To: | Office of New Reactors |
| Cranston G | |
| References | |
| NUSCALESMRDC, NUSCALESMRDC.SUBMISSION.8, NUSCALEPART02.NP, NUSCALEPART02.NP.3 | |
| Download: ML19241A405 (137) | |
Text
cale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design cale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design cale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design cale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design cale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-99: Example ISRS from CSDRS compatible Time Histories for Soil Type 7 Tier 2 3.7-351 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-100: Example ISRS from CSDRS compatible Time Histories for Soil Type 8 Tier 2 3.7-352 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-101: Example ISRS from CSDRS compatible Time Histories for Soil Type 11 Tier 2 3.7-353 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-102: Example Combined and Enveloped ISRS Tier 2 3.7-354 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-103: Exampled Broadened ISRS at Multiple Damping Ratios Tier 2 3.7-355 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-104: Comparison between Standalone Reactor Building Model and Triple Building Model, ISRS at Northwest Corner, Top of Basement Tier 2 3.7-356 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-105: Comparison between Standalone Reactor Building Model and Triple Building Model, ISRS at Northwest Corner, Top of Exterior Wall Tier 2 3.7-357 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-106: Comparison between Standalone Reactor Building Model and Triple Building Model, ISRS at Corner or Roof Slab Tier 2 3.7-358 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-107: Reactor Building ISRS for Floor at El. 24 0 Tier 2 3.7-359 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-108: Reactor Building ISRS for Floor at El. 25 0 Tier 2 3.7-360 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-109: Reactor Building ISRS for Floor at El. 50 0 Tier 2 3.7-361 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-110: Reactor Building ISRS for Floor at El. 75 0 Tier 2 3.7-362 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-111: Reactor Building ISRS for Floor at El. 100 0 Tier 2 3.7-363 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-112: Reactor Building ISRS for Floor at El. 126 0 Tier 2 3.7-364 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-113: Reactor Building ISRS for Roof at El. 181 0 Tier 2 3.7-365 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-114: In-Structure Response Spectra at Reactor Building Crane Wheels at El. 145 6 9HUWLFDO = ,656(QYHORSHRI&UDQH:KHHO1RGHVDQG1RGH
&6'56,QSXW
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +]
Tier 2 3.7-366 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-115: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-367 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-116: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-368 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-117: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-369 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-117a: CRB - ISRS at El. 50-0 (Z=405), 5 CSDRS Inputs Tier 2 3.7-370 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-117b: CRB - ISRS at El. 50-0 (Z=405), CSDRS-HF Inputs Tier 2 3.7-371 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-118: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-372 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-118a: Control Building - In-Structure Response Spectra at El. 63-3 (Z=570), 5 CSDRS Inputs 6WDQGDORQH 7ULSOH(QYHORSH&5%)ORRU=,656 (O
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +]
Tier 2 3.7-373 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-118b: Control Building - In-Structure Response Spectra at El. 63-3 (Z=570), CSDRS-HF Input Tier 2 3.7-374 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-119: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-375 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-119a: Control Building - In-Structure Response Spectra at El. 76-6 (Z=720), 5 CSDRS Inputs 6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J Tier 2 3.7-376 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-119b: CRB - East - West (X) ISRS at El. 76-6 (Z=720), CSDRS-HF Input Tier 2 3.7-377 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-120: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-378 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-120a: CRB - ISRS at El. 100-0 (Z=1020), 5 CSDRS Inputs Tier 2 3.7-379 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-120b: CRB - ISRS at El. 100-0 (Z=1020), CSDRS-HF Input Tier 2 3.7-380 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-121: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-381 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-121a: CRB - ISRS at El. 120-0 (Z=1260), 5 CSDRS Inputs Tier 2 3.7-382 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-121b: CRB - ISRS at El. 120-0 (Z=1260), CSDRS-HF Input Tier 2 3.7-383 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-122: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-384 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-122a: CRB - ISRS at El. 140-0 (Z=1518), 5 CSDRS Inputs Tier 2 3.7-385 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-122b: CRB - ISRS at El. 140-0 (Z=1518), CSDRS-HF Input Tier 2 3.7-386 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-123: Comparison of 12 NPM and 7 NPM Model Results at Northwest Corner on Top of Basement (EL. 24-0)
Tier 2 3.7-387 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-124: Comparison of 12 NPM and 7 NPM Model Results at Mid-Span of North Wall on Top of Basement (EL. 24-0)
Tier 2 3.7-388 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-125: Comparison of 12 NPM and 7 NPM Model Results at Northeast Corner on Top of Basement (EL. 24-0)
Tier 2 3.7-389 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-126: Comparison of 12 NPM and 7 NPM Model Results at Northwest Corner on Top of Roof Slab (EL. 181-0)
Tier 2 3.7-390 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-127: Comparison of 12 NPM and 7 NPM Model Results at Mid-Span of Roof Slab (EL. 181-0)
Tier 2 3.7-391 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.2-128: Comparison of 12 NPM and 7 NPM Model Results at Northwest Corner of Roof Slab (EL. 181-0)
Tier 2 3.7-392 Revision 3
of Pool Water for SAP2000 Model to Account for 3D FSI Effects 2 3.7-393 Revision 3
Cracked Model 2 3.7-394 Revision 3
Cracked Model 2 3.7-395 Revision 3
Cracked Model 2 3.7-396 Revision 3
Cracked Model 45 X-Direction TF for Node 03996 due to X-Input 40 No Separation Soil Separation 35 30 TF Amplitude 25 20 15 10 5
0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 14 X-Direction TF for Node 03996 due to Y-Input 12 No Separation Soil Separation 10 TF Amplitude 8
6 4
2 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 20 X-Direction TF for Node 03996 due to Z-Input 18 No Separation Soil Separation 16 14 TF Amplitude 12 10 8
6 4
2 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-397 Revision 3
Cracked Model 8 Y-Direction TF for Node 03996 due to X-Input 7 No Separation Soil Separation 6
5 TF Amplitude 4
3 2
1 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 35 Y-Direction TF for Node 03996 due to Y-Input 30 No Separation Soil Separation 25 TF Amplitude 20 15 10 5
0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 18 Y-Direction TF for Node 03996 due to Z-Input 16 No Separation Soil Separation 14 12 TF Amplitude 10 8
6 4
2 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-398 Revision 3
Cracked Model 16 Z-Direction TF for Node 03996 due to X-Input 14 No Separation Soil Separation 12 10 TF Amplitude 8
6 4
2 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 10 Z-Direction TF for Node 03996 due to Y-Input 9 No Separation Soil Separation 8
7 TF Amplitude 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 70 Z-Direction TF for Node 03996 due to Z-Input 60 No Separation Soil Separation 50 TF Amplitude 40 30 20 10 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-399 Revision 3
CB-E at El. 63', Capitola Input Node 34380 X-Direction ISRS 1.6 No Soil Separation 5% Damping 1.4 With Soil Separation 1.2 S pectral Acceleration (g) 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0
0.1 1 10 100 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-400 Revision 3
CB-E at El. 63', Capitola Input Node 34380 Y-Direction ISRS 1.6 No Soil Separation 5% Damping 1.4 With Soil Separation 1.2 S pectral Acceleration (g) 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0
0.1 1 10 100 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-401 Revision 3
CB-E at El. 63', Capitola Input Node 34380 Z-Direction ISRS 8
No Soil Separation 5% Damping 7
With Soil Separation 6
S pectral Acceleration (g) 5 4
3 2
1 0
0.1 1 10 100 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-402 Revision 3
Slab Between Grid Line CB-D and CB-E at El. 63' for Soil Type 7 50 X-Direction TF for Node 34380 due to X-Input 45 No Soil Separation With Soil Separation 40 35 TF Amplitude 30 25 20 15 10 5
0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 5 X-Direction TF for Node 34380 due to Y-Input 4.5 No Soil Separation With Soil Separation 4
3.5 TF Amplitude 3
2.5 2
1.5 1
0.5 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 60 X-Direction TF for Node 34380 due to Z-Input No Soil Separation With Soil Separation 50 40 TF Amplitude 30 20 10 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-403 Revision 3
Slab Between Grid Line CB-D and CB-E at El. 63 for Soil Type 7 7 Y-Direction TF for Node 34380 due to X-Input 6 No Soil Separation With Soil Separation 5
TF Amplitude 4
3 2
1 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 90 Y-Direction TF for Node 34380 due to Y-Input 80 No Soil Separation With Soil Separation 70 60 TF Amplitude 50 40 30 20 10 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 100 Y-Direction TF for Node 34380 due to Z-Input 90 No Soil Separation With Soil Separation 80 70 TF Amplitude 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-404 Revision 3
Slab Between Grid Line CB-D and CB-E at El. 63 for Soil Type 7 35 Z-Direction TF for Node 34380 due to X-Input 30 No Soil Separation With Soil Separation 25 TF Amplitude 20 15 10 5
0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 14 Z-Direction TF for Node 34380 due to Y-Input 12 No Soil Separation With Soil Separation 10 TF Amplitude 8
6 4
2 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 70 Z-Direction TF for Node 34380 due to Z-Input 60 No Soil Separation With Soil Separation 50 TF Amplitude 40 30 20 10 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-405 Revision 3
cale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design cale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design cale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design cale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design cale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design cale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design cale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design
'Ž ^ ŽŽWŽ 'Ž ^ ŽŽWŽ
&ŽŽ ŽŽ &ŽŽ ŽŽ
? = 17° ?
= 0° y y
&DVH=0° &DVH
'Ž ^ ŽŽWŽ
&ŽŽ ŽŽ
= 30° ?
y
&DVH=30°
2 3.7-413 Revision 3
Free Field Uncoupled East-West (X) ARS at Surface, Capitola Input
- UHVSRQVHDWVXUIDFHGXHWR69ZDYH6$66,,QOD\HU
5HVXOWV6RLO7\SH &RQWURO 3RLQW DWVXUIDFH
&$3,72/$
'DPSLQJ
- 69DOSKD
- 69DOSKD
- 69DOSKD
6SHFWUDO $FFHOHUDWLRQ J
&6'56+RUL]RQWDO
)UHTXHQF\ +]
2 3.7-414 Revision 3
Free Field East-West (X) ARS Depth 85', Capitola Input, Alpha = 30 degrees
+RUL]RQWDO UHVSRQVHDWGHSWK GXHWR69DQG 3
ZDYHV6$66,,QOD\HU 5HVXOWV6RLO7\SH &RQWURO
3RLQW DWVXUIDFH &$3,72/$
7RWDO;DOSKD 'DPSLQJ
- 69DOSKD
- 3DOSKD
6SHFWUDO $FFHOHUDWLRQ J
- 69DOSKD
)UHTXHQF\ +]
2 3.7-415 Revision 3
Comparison of Combined Free-Field East-West (X) ARS at Depth 85', Capitola Input, Alpha = 0 Degrees, 17 Degrees, 30 Degrees
&RPELQHG KRUL]RQWDO UHVSRQVHDWGHSWK GXHWR
69DQG 3ZDYHV6$66,,QOD\HU 5HVXOWV6RLO7\SH
&RQWURO 3RLQW DWVXUIDFH &$3,72/$
'DPSLQJ 7RWDO;DOSKD
7RWDO;DOSKD
6SHFWUDO $FFHOHUDWLRQ J 7RWDO;DOSKD
)UHTXHQF\ +]
2 3.7-416 Revision 3
Uncombined East-West (X) ISRS, Node 3996, Top of Basemat, NW Corner, Capitola Input 1RGH 8QFRPELQHG ;,656 5;% &UDFNHG 36RLO'%6&DSLWROD DOSKD FRQWUROSRLQWDWVXUIDFH DOSKD FRQWUROSRLQWDWVXUIDFH DOSKD FRQWUROSRLQWDWVXUIDFH
,656IRU)ORRUDW(O )6$5 1RGH $YHUDJHG(QYHORSHG:LGHQHG
&6'56+RUL]RQWDO
'DPSLQJ
6 SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +]
2 3.7-417 Revision 3
Uncombined North-South (Y) ISRS, Node 3996, Top of Basemat, NW Corner, Capitola Input 1RGH 8QFRPELQHG < ,656 5;% &UDFNHG 36RLO'%6&DSLWROD DOSKD FRQWUROSRLQWDWVXUIDFH DOSKD FRQWUROSRLQWDWVXUIDFH DOSKD FRQWUROSRLQWDWVXUIDFH
,656IRU)ORRUDW(O )6$5 1RGH $YHUDJHG(QYHORSHG:LGHQHG
&6'56+RUL]RQWDO
'DPSLQJ
6 SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +]
2 3.7-418 Revision 3
Uncombined Vertical (Z) ISRS, Node 3996, Top of Basemat, NW Corner, Capitola Input 1RGH 8QFRPELQHG =,656 5;% &UDFNHG 36RLO'%6&DSLWROD DOSKD FRQWUROSRLQWDWVXUIDFH DOSKD FRQWUROSRLQWDWVXUIDFH DOSKD FRQWUROSRLQWDWVXUIDFH
,656IRU)ORRUDW(O )6$5 1RGH $YHUDJHG(QYHORSHG:LGHQHG
&6'569HUWLFDO
'DPSLQJ
6 SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +]
2 3.7-419 Revision 3
Containment Vessel Skirt of NuScale Power Module 1, Capitola Input (DVW:HVW
9HUWLFDO =;,6561RGH &$3,QSXW 1RUWK6RXWK <,6561RGH &$3,QSXW
,6561RGH &$3,QSXW
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +]
2 3.7-420 Revision 3
Containment Vessel Skirt of NuScale Power Module 6, Capitola Input (DVW:HVW
9HUWLFDO =;,6561RGH &$3,QSXW 1RUWK6RXWK <,6561RGH &$3,QSXW
,6561RGH &$3,QSXW
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +]
2 3.7-421 Revision 3
East Lug of NuScale Power Module 1, Capitola Input 1RUWK6RXWK
(DVW:HVW
9HUWLFDO =;,6561RGH&$3,QSXW
<,6561RGH&$3,QSXW
,6561RGH&$3,QSXW
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +]
2 3.7-422 Revision 3
North Lug of NuScale Power Module 1, Capitola Input 1RUWK6RXWK
(DVW:HVW
9HUWLFDO =;,6561RGH&$3,QSXW
<,6561RGH&$3,QSXW
,6561RGH&$3,QSXW
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +]
2 3.7-423 Revision 3
West Lug of NuScale Power Module 1, Capitola Input 1RUWK6RXWK
(DVW:HVW
9HUWLFDO =;,6561RGH&$3,QSXW
<,6561RGH&$3,QSXW
,6561RGH&$3,QSXW
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +]
2 3.7-424 Revision 3
East Lug of NuScale Power Module 6, Capitola Input 1RUWK6RXWK
(DVW:HVW
9HUWLFDO =;,6561RGH &$3,QSXW
<,6561RGH &$3,QSXW
,6561RGH &$3,QSXW
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +]
2 3.7-425 Revision 3
North Lug of NuScale Power Module 6, Capitola Input 1RUWK6RXWK
(DVW:HVW
9HUWLFDO =;,6561RGH&$3,QSXW
<,6561RGH&$3,QSXW
,6561RGH&$3,QSXW
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +]
2 3.7-426 Revision 3
West Lug of NuScale Power Module 6, Capitola Input 1RUWK6RXWK
(DVW:HVW
9HUWLFDO =;,6561RGH&$3,QSXW
<,6561RGH&$3,QSXW
,6561RGH&$3,QSXW
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +]
2 3.7-427 Revision 3
due to X, Y, and Z Inputs of Capitola Excitation for Soil Type 7, Uncracked Condition X-ISRS, Z-ISRS, Y-ISRS, Node 6328 1.43 4% Damping 4% Damping Z-ISRS due to X-INP X-ISRS Y-ISRS X-INP 1.2 Z-ISRS due to Y-INP X-ISRS Y-ISRS Y-INP 2.5 Z-ISRS due X-ISRS Y-ISRS due to to Z-INP Z-INP 1 SRSS of of X-ISRS Z-ISRS due SRSS Y-ISRS due to to Spectral Acceleration (g) 2 X, Y, Z Inputs X, Y, Z Inputs 0.8 1.5 0.6 1
0.4 0.5 0.2 0
0.1 1 10 100 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-428 Revision 3
due to X, Y, and Z inputs of Capitola Excitation for Soil Type 7, Uncracked Condition X-ISRS, Z-ISRS, Y-ISRS, Node 6329 1.4 3.5 4% Damping 4% Damping Z-ISRS due to X-INP X-ISRS Y-ISRS X-INP 1.23 Z-ISRS due to Y-INP X-ISRS Y-ISRS Y-INP Z-ISRS due X-ISRS Y-ISRS due to to Z-INP Z-INP 2.51 SRSS of of X-ISRS Z-ISRS due SRSS Y-ISRS due to to Spectral Acceleration (g)
X, Y, Z Inputs X, Y, Z Inputs 0.82 0.6 1.5 0.41 0.2 0.5 0
0.1 1 10 100 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-429 Revision 3
due to X, Y, and Z Inputs of Capitola Excitation for Soil Type 7, Uncracked Condition X-ISRS, Z-ISRS, Y-ISRS, Node 6330 1.4 1.6 3.5 4% Damping 4% Damping Z-ISRS due to X-INP X-ISRS Y-ISRS X-INP 1.4 Z-ISRS due to Y-INP 1.23 X-ISRS Y-ISRS Y-INP Z-ISRS due X-ISRS Y-ISRS due to to Z-INP Z-INP 1.2 2.51 SRSS of of X-ISRS Z-ISRS due SRSS Y-ISRS due to to Spectral Acceleration (g)
X, Y, Z Inputs X, Y, Z Inputs 1
0.82 0.8 0.6 1.5 0.6 0.41 0.4 0.2 0.5 0.2 0
0.1 1 10 100 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-430 Revision 3
due to X, Y, and Z Inputs of Capitola Excitation for Soil Type 7, Uncracked Condition X-ISRS, Z-ISRS, Y-ISRS, Node 6331 1.43 1.6 4% Damping 4% Damping Z-ISRS due to X-INP X-ISRS Y-ISRS X-INP 1.4 Z-ISRS due to Y-INP 1.2 X-ISRS Y-ISRS Y-INP 2.5 Z-ISRS due X-ISRS Y-ISRS due to to Z-INP Z-INP 1.2 1 SRSS of of X-ISRS Z-ISRS due SRSS Y-ISRS due to to Spectral Acceleration (g) 2 X, Y, Z Inputs X, Y, Z Inputs 1
0.8 0.8 1.5 0.6 0.6 1
0.4 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.2 0
0.1 1 10 100 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-431 Revision 3
due to X, Y, and Z Inputs of Capitola Excitation for Soil Type 7, Cracked Condition X-ISRS, Z-ISRS, Y-ISRS, Node 6328 1.6 2.5 1.4 4% Damping 4% Damping Z-ISRS due to X-INP X-ISRS Y-ISRS X-INP 1.4 Z-ISRS due to Y-INP 1.2 X-ISRS Y-ISRS Y-INP 2
Z-ISRS due X-ISRS Y-ISRS due to to Z-INP Z-INP 1.2 1 SRSS of of X-ISRS Z-ISRS due SRSS Y-ISRS due to to Spectral Acceleration (g)
X, Y, Z Inputs X, Y, Z Inputs 1
1.5 0.8 0.8 0.6 1
0.6 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.2 0
0.1 1 10 100 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-432 Revision 3
due to X, Y, and Z Inputs of Capitola Excitation for Soil Type 7, Cracked Condition X-ISRS, Z-ISRS, Y-ISRS, Node 6329 1.63 1.4 4% Damping 4% Damping Z-ISRS due to X-INP X-ISRS Y-ISRS X-INP 1.4 Z-ISRS due to Y-INP 1.2 X-ISRS Y-ISRS Y-INP 2.5 Z-ISRS due X-ISRS Y-ISRS due to to Z-INP Z-INP 1.2 1 SRSS of of X-ISRS Z-ISRS due SRSS Y-ISRS due to to Spectral Acceleration (g) 2 X, Y, Z Inputs X, Y, Z Inputs 1
0.8 0.8 1.5 0.6 0.6 1
0.4 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.2 0
0.1 1 10 100 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-433 Revision 3
due to X, Y, and Z Inputs of Capitola Excitation for Soil Type 7, Cracked Condition X-ISRS, Z-ISRS, Y-ISRS, Node 6330 1.63 1.4 4% Damping 4% Damping Z-ISRS due to X-INP X-ISRS Y-ISRS X-INP 1.4 Z-ISRS due to Y-INP 1.2 X-ISRS Y-ISRS Y-INP 2.5 Z-ISRS due X-ISRS Y-ISRS due to to Z-INP Z-INP 1.2 1 SRSS of of X-ISRS Z-ISRS due SRSS Y-ISRS due to to Spectral Acceleration (g) 2 X, Y, Z Inputs X, Y, Z Inputs 1
0.8 0.8 1.5 0.6 0.6 1
0.4 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.2 0
0.1 1 10 100 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-434 Revision 3
due to X, Y, and Z Inputs of Capitola Excitation for Soil Type 7, Cracked Condition X-ISRS, Z-ISRS, Y-ISRS, Node 6331 1.6 2.5 1.4 4% Damping 4% Damping Z-ISRS due to X-INP X-ISRS Y-ISRS X-INP 1.4 Z-ISRS due to Y-INP 1.2 X-ISRS Y-ISRS Y-INP 2
Z-ISRS due X-ISRS Y-ISRS due to to Z-INP Z-INP 1.2 1 SRSS of of X-ISRS Z-ISRS due SRSS Y-ISRS due to to Spectral Acceleration (g)
X, Y, Z Inputs X, Y, Z Inputs 1
1.5 0.8 0.8 0.6 1
0.6 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.2 0
0.1 1 10 100 Frequency (Hz) 2 3.7-435 Revision 3
cale Final Safety Analysis Report 5;%)/225;,656$7(/ = 5;%)/225<,656$7(/ = 5;%)/225=,656$7(/ =
'DPSLQJ 'DPSLQJ 'DPSLQJ
)XOO'U\'RFN &$3 )XOO'U\'RFN &$3 )XOO'U\'RFN &$3
(PSW\'U\'RFN &$3 (PSW\'U\'RFN &$3 (PSW\'U\'RFN &$3 6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J 6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +] )UHTXHQF\ +] )UHTXHQF\ +]
Seismic Design
cale Final Safety Analysis Report 5;%)/225;,656$7(/ = 5;%)/225<,656$7(/ = 5;%)/225=,656$7(/ =
'DPSLQJ 'DPSLQJ 'DPSLQJ
)XOO'U\'RFN &$3 )XOO'U\'RFN &$3 )XOO'U\'RFN &$3
(PSW\'U\'RFN &$3 (PSW\'U\'RFN &$3 (PSW\'U\'RFN &$3
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J 6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +] )UHTXHQF\ +] )UHTXHQF\ +]
Seismic Design
cale Final Safety Analysis Report 5;%)/225;,656$7(/ = 5;%)/225<,656$7(/ = 5;%)/225=,656$7(/ =
'DPSLQJ 'DPSLQJ 'DPSLQJ
)XOO'U\'RFN &$3 )XOO'U\'RFN &$3 )XOO'U\'RFN &$3
(PSW\'U\'RFN &$3 (PSW\'U\'RFN &$3 (PSW\'U\'RFN &$3 6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J 6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J 6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +] )UHTXHQF\ +] )UHTXHQF\ +]
Seismic Design
cale Final Safety Analysis Report Comparing Full and Empty Dry Dock Conditions
- ,656$7&5$1(12'( '$03,1* <,656$7&5$1(12'( '$03,1* =,656$7&5$1(12'( '$03,1*
)XOO'U\GRFN )XOO'U\GRFN )XOO'U\GRFN
(PSW\'U\GRFN (PSW\'U\GRFN (PSW\'U\GRFN
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J 6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\ +] )UHTXHQF\ +] )UHTXHQF\ +]
Seismic Design
1RUWK6RXWK
(DVW:HVW
9HUWLFDO =;,6561RGH&6'56,QSXW
<,6561RGH&6'56,QSXW
,6561RGH&6'56,QSXW
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\
)UHTXHQF\ +]
+]
2 3.7-440 Revision 3
(DVW:HVW
9HUWLFDO =;,6561RGH&6'56,QSXW 1RUWK6RXWK <,6561RGH&6'56,QSXW
,6561RGH&6'56,QSXW
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\
)UHTXHQF\+]
+]
2 3.7-441 Revision 3
High Frequency (DVW:HVW
9HUWLFDO =;,6561RGH&6'56+),QSXW 1RUWK6RXWK <,6561RGH&6'56+),QSXW
,6561RGH&6'56+),QSXW
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\+]
)UHTXHQF\ +]
2 3.7-442 Revision 3
High Frequency 1RUWK6RXWK
(DVW:HVW
9HUWLFDO =;,6561RGH&6'56+),QSXW
<,6561RGH&6'56+),QSXW
,6561RGH&6'56+),QSXW
6SHFWUDO$FFHOHUDWLRQ J
)UHTXHQF\
)UHTXHQF\+]
+]
2 3.7-443 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design 3.7.3 Seismic Subsystem Analysis Seismic subsystems are structures, systems, and components (SSC) for which the seismic forces are transmitted through the building structure as opposed to being imparted through the soil. The following are considered subsystems:
- structures, such as floor slabs, walls, miscellaneous steel platforms and framing
- equipment modules consisting of components, piping, supports, and structural frames
- equipment including vessels, tanks, heat exchanges, valves, and instrumentation
- distributive systems including piping and supports, electrical cable trays and supports, heating ventilation and air conditioning ductwork and supports, instrumentation tubing and supports, and conduits and supports. These distributed systems are predominantly Seismic Category II In general, subsystems are evaluated as part of the detailed design using the analysis methodology described herein. Piping systems and their supports are further described in Section 3.12.
There are four seismic subsystems that are included in the certified design and specifically evaluated.
Each NuScale Power Module (NPM) is a subsystem. The seismic analysis of the NPMs is provided in Appendix 3A. The NPMs are included in the Reactor Building seismic model as beam elements as discussed in Section 3.7.2.
The fuel storage racks are a subsystem. The design of the racks is discussed in Section 9.1.2 and the details of the seismic analysis are provided in technical report TR-0816-49833 (Reference 3.7.3-1). The fuel storage racks are included in the seismic analysis of the building as a weight only.
The Reactor Building crane (RBC) is a subsystem. The design of the RBC is discussed in Section 9.1.5. The RBC is included in the Reactor Building seismic analysis as a beam and spring model as discussed in Section 3.7.2.
The bioshields are subsystems. The bioshields are included in the building model as weights only. The bioshield design and analysis is discussed in Section 3.7.3.3.1.
3.7.3.1 Seismic Analysis Methods Subsystems are generally evaluated using response spectrum analysis. Simple substructures may be evaluated using the equivalent static load method. These methods are described below. The NPMs and fuel storage racks were evaluated using time histories as described in Appendix 3A and technical report TR-0816-49833 (Reference 3.7.3-1), respectively.
3.7.3.1.1 Response Spectrum Analysis Method In the response spectrum method of analysis, loads, stresses, and deflections are determined for each mode of the SSC being analyzed from the in-structure Tier 2 3.7-444 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design response spectra (ISRS). The ISRS are developed from the building analysis for each of the three directions (east-west, north-south, and vertical) as described in Section 3.7.2.5.
Modal responses are determined by accelerating each mode with the spectral acceleration corresponding to the frequency of that mode. The representative maximum response of interest for design is obtained by combining the corresponding maximum individual modal responses.
Equipment and components in some cases are supported at several points by either a single structure or two separate structures. The motions of the structures at each of the support points may be quite different. Two approaches (uniform support motion method and independent support motion method) are discussed in Section 3.7.3.9 to address multiple supported equipment and components with distinct inputs.
3.7.3.1.2 Equivalent Static Load Method This methodology is available for the analysis of simple SSC. The equivalent static load method may be used to evaluate:
- single-point-of-attachment cantilever models with essentially uniform mass distribution, or other simple structures that can be represented as single degree-of-freedom systems.
- cantilevers with non-uniform mass distribution and other simple multiple degree-of-freedom structures.
To obtain an equivalent static load for an SSC, a factor of 1.5 is applied to the peak spectral acceleration of the applicable ISRS. This force is applied at the center of mass of the SSC being evaluated. Results (loads, stresses, or deflections) are adjusted to account for the relative motion between all points of support.
Because the equivalent static load method is a simplified approach, each analysis contains justification that the use of a simplified model is realistic and the results are conservative.
3.7.3.2 Determination of Number of Earthquake Cycles The operating basis earthquake (OBE) is defined to be one-third of the safe shutdown earthquake (SSE). As such, the OBE is eliminated from explicit design or analysis per 10 CFR 50 Appendix S. Therefore, the OBE is not used for primary stress evaluations and is not included in load combinations for the design of standard plant SSC.
However, the effects of the OBEs are accounted for in the fatigue analysis of SSC.
During plant life one SSE and five OBEs, with 10 maximum stress cycles per event, are assumed. To meet this requirement, earthquake cycles included in the fatigue analysis for the standard plant are normally composed of two SSE events, with 10 maximum stress-cycles each, for a total of 20 full cycles. This is considered equivalent to the cyclic load basis of one SSE and five OBEs.
Tier 2 3.7-445 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Alternatively, the number of fractional vibratory cycles equivalent to that of 20 full SSE vibratory cycles with an amplitude not less than one-third of the maximum SSE amplitude may be used when derived in accordance with IEEE 344 (Reference 3.7.3-8).
3.7.3.3 Procedures Used for Analytical Modeling For the decoupling of the subsystem and the supporting system, the following criteria are used:
- if Rm < 0.01, decoupling can be done for any Rf
- if 0.01 Rm 0.1, decoupling can be done if 0.8 Rf 1.25
- if Rm > 0.1, a subsystem model should be included in the primary system model where, total mass of supported subsystem R m = ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
total mass of supporting subsystem fundamental frequency of supported subsystem R f = ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
dominant frequency of support motion The Reactor Building (RXB) structural weight is greater than 500,000 kips (see Table 3.7.2-13). As such, a subsystem can be decoupled if the weight is less 5000 kips.
The larger subsystems, the NPM and the RBC, have weights on the order of 2000 kips and could be uncoupled. However, they are both coupled in the RXB model. The fuel storage racks have a loaded weight less than 2000 kips, and each bioshield is less than 230 kips. Therefore these SSC are decoupled.
Distributed systems (cable trays, piping, heating ventilation and air conditioning) and individual components will not have significant weights that would challenge the Rm < 0.01 criterion.
3.7.3.3.1 Bioshields The bioshields are nonsafety-related, not risk-significant, Seismic Category II components that are placed on top of each module bay at the 125-ft elevation to provide an additional radiological barrier to reduce dose rates in the RXB and support personnel access. Bioshields are removed while a NPM is being detached and refueled. During that time, the removed bioshield is placed on top of an in-place bioshield. The bioshield lifting slings meet the requirements described in Section 9.1.5 under "Lifting Devices Not Specifically Designed."
COL Item 3.7-16: A COL applicant that references the NuScale Power Plant design certification will determine the means and methods of lifting the bioshield. A COL applicant will demonstrate that bioshield components and connections can withstand the bioshield loads and approriate load factors.
Tier 2 3.7-446 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design The bolts used for securing the horizontal portion of the bioshield to the operating bay and pool walls are safety related, and designed in accordance with ACI 349 as they anchor into a concrete structure. The bioshield is designed as a Seismic Category II structure, which is analyzed and designed to prevent its failure under SSE conditions, such that the bioshield will not collapse or fail and strike or impair the integrity of the safety related or Seismic Category I SSC under it.
Each bioshield is comprised of a horizontal slab supported by the bay walls and a hanging vertical assembly attached to the horizontal slab. The horizontal slab consists of 23.5-in. thick reinforced 5000 psi concrete. The concrete is encapsulated in 1/4-in. stainless steel plates for a total thickness of two feet. The vertical assembly is constructed of a stainless steel tube framing system and a series of radiation shielding panels. The radiation shielding panels are designed to help ensure occupational radiation exposure is as low as reasonably achievable as described in FSAR Chapter 12. Radiation shielding panels are composed of 4-inch borated HDPE panels with 5 percent boron content. The HDPE is encased in stainless steel plate and angle assemblies clamped together with bolts. The clamped assembly restricts flame and adequate oxygen from causing combustion of the HDPE panels.
Off-gassing of the HDPE panels during operation is allowed as the clamped assemblies are not hermetically sealed. The encasement of the HDPE eliminates it as a fire load. The vertical assembly is vented for heat removal during normal operation as well as for heat and pressure mitigation in the event of a high energy line break and slow leak, high temperature event above the NPM. The vents are arranged on the vertical portion of the bioshield in a staggered manner, providing a minimum ventilation area of 52.8 ft2 to allow continuous ventilation of the operating bay.
The bioshields are attached to the bay walls and outer pool wall using 2-in.
diameter removable anchor bolts. Figure 3.7.3-1 shows 12 installed bioshields.
Figure 3.7.3-2a shows an isometric view with the single bioshield configuration and Figure 3.7.3-2b shows an elevation view with the stacked bioshield configuration.
Reinforced Concrete Properties and Slab Capacity Table 3.7.3-8 contains the section dimensions used for the design of the bioshield.
Table 3.7.3-9 shows the concrete and reinforcement design values used for capacity calculations. The values are obtained from ACI 349 (Reference 3.7.3-4). The minimum concrete cover for cast-in-place members is based on Section 7.7.1 of ACI 349.
The capacities for the bioshield slab are shown in Table 3.7.3-10 and are calculated based on the provisions of ACI 349. The individual equations used for out of plane moment and shear capacity are referenced in Table 3.7.3-10. The anchor bolt capacities for tension and shear are developed using the equations from Appendix D of ACI 349.
Tier 2 3.7-447 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Structural Steel Material Properties The vertical assembly of the bioshield is constructed from steel tube members of HSS 5x5x1/2" in the horizontal and vertical directions. The tube steel material is SA-564 Type 630 condition H1150 high strength stainless steel with yield strength of 105 ksi and a tensile strength of 135 ksi. The stainless steel liner plate that protects the horizontal bioshield from corrosion and the radiation panels 1/4 closure plate is made from A240 Type 304. The framing members of the bioshield radiation panel are made from A276 stainless steel. The yield strength of A240 Type 304 is 25 ksi and the tensile strength is 70 ksi. A276 stainless steel has a yield strength of 25 ksi and a tensile strength of 70 ksi.
The welded connections between the vertical and horizontal component of the bioshield are designed based on the provisions of Chapter J of AISC 360 (Reference 3.7.3-5).
In-Structure Response Spectra In-structure response spectra were developed for multiple locations in the RXB in Section 3.7.2. Two nodes from that model were selected to use for the design of bioshields. These nodes are shown in Figure 3.7.3-3. Plots of the ISRS with 4 percent damping at these nodes are shown in Figure 3.7.3-4a through Figure 3.7.3-4c.
These figures envelop CSDRS and CSDRS-HF curves and include the effects of any sensitivity analysis cases such as considering the effects of soil separation and different soil-structure analysis (SSI) methods, i.e., the 7P Extended Subtraction Method (7P ESM) and the Direct Method (DM). The ISRS with multiple damping ratios for these nodes are shown in Figure 3.7.2-176a through Figure 3.7.2-176d also considering same effects.
3.7.3.3.1.1 Evaluation The self-weight of the bioshield was calculated using material densities and the dimensional properties. There are two structural components of the bioshield:
the horizontal slab and vertical assembly. The horizontal slab rests on the interior pool walls as shown in Figure 3.7.3-1. The vertical assembly is attached to the front edge of the horizontal bioshield through eight pins. Table 3.7.3-11 summarizes the weight of the slab and Table 3.7.3-12 summarizes the weight of the assembly. The bioshield slab is anchored to the NPM bay walls with four 2-inch vertical bolts on each wall. Two bolts are needed, at each corner of the bioshield slab, for both stacked and unstacked configurations.
The total weight of the bioshield used for design is twice the total calculated weight of each bioshield because they can be stacked on one another during refueling and maintenance. In addition, a 50 psf live load is included to account for the load due to plant personnel bolting and unbolting the bioshield during refueling and maintenance. The bioshield area is not expected to be a high traffic area during normal operation.
The structural analysis and design of the horizontal slab and vertical assembly was performed by generating two sets of SAP2000 finite element models. A Tier 2 3.7-448 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design time history analysis is performed for both model sets. The time histories are based on the synthetic time histories that were matched to the corresponding 4-percent ISRS in the same direction given in Figure 3.7.3-4a through Figure 3.7.3-4c.
The models incorporate compression-only gap elements to model concrete slab sitting on bay walls and tension-only elements to model anchor bolts. In the horizontal directions, friction forces between the slab and bay walls are conservatively ignored, and it is assumed that the only anchor bolts resist the shear. Thus, the only restraints in the horizontal directions are at the bolt locations. The north and south edges of the slab are free in all directions. Both cracked and uncracked concrete conditions are evaluated. The weight of the vertical bioshield is applied to the free edge of the slab.
For the horizontal slab model, stacked configuration of the bioshields during refueling is considered in addition to the single bioshield. Since the two horizontal bioshields are anchored together during the stacked configuration, there will not be any sliding between the two slabs; therefore, no friction forces are developed. Because the two slabs are only pinned on the two edges, they will not act as a composite section even though they move together in the vertical direction. The two slabs are compatible in all directions without acting as a composite section because there are no shear studs between the two slabs to resist the shear force. To model the stacked configuration, only one slab is modeled but the mass and stiffness of the slab is doubled to account for both slabs. To double the slab stiffness, the modulus of elasticity is doubled. For the stacked configuration, the weight of the vertical assembly applied to one edge is also doubled.
The analysis models for the vertical assembly are developed by incorporating the vertical bioshield finite element model to the previously defined horizontal bioshield model to accurately simulate the boundary conditions of the vertical bioshield. This model uses the same boundary conditions at the interface of the horizontal slab and bay wall. Compression-only gap elements are also used at the bottom corners of the vertical bioshield in the east-west direction where the structure is guided through C-channel supports. Both cracked and uncracked concrete conditions are evaluated for the horizontal slab. The stacked bioshield is also restrained to the wall with C-channel supports.
Stacked configuration effects for the vertical bioshield show the same dynamic characteristics as a single bioshield configuration. There is no interaction between the stacked bioshields.
In all cases, the results of individual load cases are combined per applicable load combinations, and appropriate checks are performed per AISC and ACI standards for both members and connections.
3.7.3.3.1.2 Demand-to-Capacity Ratios Table 3.7.3-14 shows the summary of demand-to-capacity ratios for the bioshield without any reduction for steel strength due to temperature. AISC N690 requires the decrease in steel strength to be taken into account when the Tier 2 3.7-449 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design structural component or system is exposed to sustained temperatures in excess of 250 degrees Fahrenheit. While this strength adjustment is not mandated by code as the maximum temperature of the bioshield will be 212 degrees Fahrenheit, the highest D/C of 0.88 for steel structural members would increase to 0.92.
3.7.3.4 Basis for Selection of Frequencies When practical, components are designed (or specified) so that the fundamental frequencies of the component are less than one half or more than twice the dominant frequencies of the support structure. However, equipment will be tested or analyzed to demonstrate that it is adequate for design loads considering the fundamental frequencies of the equipment and the support structure.
3.7.3.5 Analysis Procedure for Damping Damping values used for seismic analysis of SSC are in accordance with Table 3.7.1-6.
Component modal damping of piping systems is described in Section 3.12.3.2.2.
3.7.3.6 Three Components of Earthquake Motion Seismic demand is obtained for the three orthogonal (two horizontal and one vertical) components of earthquake motion from the ISRS. Each component of the earthquake motion is considered in the seismic analysis of subsystems. When the total response of the substructure is needed, it is normally obtained by combining the three directional responses using the SRSS method. The 100-40-40 rule, which typically produces higher demand, is an acceptable alternative to the SRSS method.
3.7.3.7 Combination of Modal Responses For the response spectrum method of analysis, the maximum responses such as accelerations, shears, and moments in each mode are calculated regardless of time. If the frequencies of the modes are well separated, the SRSS method is used; however, where the structural frequencies are not well separated, the modes are combined in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.92 "Combining Modal Responses and Spatial Components in Seismic Response Analysis," Rev. 3.
3.7.3.8 Interaction of Non-Seismic Category I Subsystems with Seismic Category I SSC When non-Seismic Category I SSC (or portions thereof) could adversely affect Seismic Category I SSC, they are categorized as Seismic Category II and analyzed using one of the methodologies described in Section 3.7.3.1.
For non-Seismic Category I subsystems attached to Seismic Category I SSCs, the dynamic effects of the non-Seismic Category I subsystems are included in the modeling of the Seismic Category I SSC. The attached non-Seismic Category I subsystems, up to the first anchor beyond the interface, are designed in such a manner that the CSDRS does not cause a failure of the Seismic Category I SSC.
Tier 2 3.7-450 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design 3.7.3.9 Multiple-Supported Equipment and Components with Distinct Input Two methods are utilized to address multiple-supported equipment and components:
the uniform support motion (USM) method and the independent support motion (ISM) method. The USM method is a simpler approach, but produces larger forces.
For USM analysis, a single response spectrum is created that envelopes the ISRS of all the support locations. This single response spectrum is then used at all locations to calculate the maximum inertial responses of the equipment. In addition, the relative displacements at the support points are taken into consideration in the analysis using conventional static analysis procedures. The support displacements are then imposed on the supported equipment in the most unfavorable combination. The modal and directional responses are combined using the methods described in Section 3.7.3.6 and Section 3.7.3.7.
The ISM method may be used in lieu of the uniform support motion method when systems are at multiple levels or spread between diverse locations. For ISM analysis, the guidance and criteria given in NUREG-1061, Volume 4 "Evaluation of Other Loads and Load Combinations" is used.
The responses caused by each group are combined by absolute summation. The modal and directional responses are combined using the methods described in Section 3.7.3.6 and Section 3.7.3.7.
3.7.3.10 Use of Equivalent Vertical Static Factors Equivalent vertical static factors are not used in the design of the Seismic Category I and Seismic Category II structures. Vertical seismic loads are generated from the soil-structure interaction analysis.
3.7.3.11 Torsional Effects of Eccentric Masses Torsional effects due to the presence of significant eccentric masses connected to a subsystem are included in the subsystem analysis. For rigid components (natural frequencies greater than 50 Hz), the lumped mass is modeled at the center of gravity of the component with a rigid link to the appropriate point in the subsystem. For flexible components, the subsystem model is expanded to include an appropriate model of the component.
Torsional effects of eccentric masses affecting the piping design are included in the analysis described in Section 3.12.4.2.
3.7.3.12 Buried Seismic Category I Piping, Conduits, and Tunnels The design does not include buried Seismic Category I piping, or conduits. The tunnel between the Control Building and the RXB is analyzed as part of the Control Building.
3.7.3.13 Methods for Seismic Analysis of Category I Concrete Dams The design does not include nor require the presence of a dam.
Tier 2 3.7-451 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design 3.7.3.14 Methods for Seismic Analysis of Aboveground Tanks The design does not include any Seismic Category I aboveground tanks.
3.7.3.15 References 3.7.3-1 NuScale Power, LLC, "Fuel Storage Rack Analysis," TR-0816-49833, Revision 1.
3.7.3-2 ANSYS (Release 14.0, 15.0, and 16.0) [Computer Program]. Canonsburg, PA:
ANSYS Incorporated.
3.7.3-3 American Society of Mechanical Engineers, "Rules for Construction of Overhead and Gantry Cranes (Top Running Bridge, Multiple Girder)," ASME NOG-1, 2004, New York, NY.
3.7.3-4 American Concrete Institute, "Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety-Related Concrete Structures and Commentary," ACI 349-06, Farmington Hills, MI.
3.7.3-5 American National Standards Institute/American Institute of Steel Construction, "Specification for Structural Steel Buildings," ANSI/
AISC 360-10, Chicago, IL.
3.7.3-6 American Institute of Steel Construction, Steel Construction Manual, 14th edition, 2011, Chicago, IL.
3.7.3-7 SAP2000 Advanced Version 18.1.1. (2015). Walnut Creek, California:
Computers and Structures, Inc.
3.7.3-8 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, "Standard for Seismic Qualification of Equipment for Nuclear Power Generating Stations," IEEE Standard 344-2004, Piscataway, NJ.
Tier 2 3.7-452 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Table 3.7.3-1: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-453 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Table 3.7.3-2: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-454 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Table 3.7.3-3: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-455 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Table 3.7.3-4: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-456 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Table 3.7.3-5: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-457 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Table 3.7.3-6: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-458 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Table 3.7.3-7: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-459 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Table 3.7.3-8: Bioshield Nominal Dimensions Parameter Length Gross section width (east-west) 24 ft 6 in Gross section length (north-south) 20 ft 6 in Vertical bioshield height 30 ft Vertical bioshield width 22 ft 6 in Bioshield distance between slab anchor bolts 22 ft 6 in Clear distance between supports (NPM support walls) 19 ft 7 in Depth of horizontal bioshield 2 ft Tier 2 3.7-460 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Table 3.7.3-9: Bioshield Concrete and Reinforcement Design Properties Design Value Parameters Value Concrete compressive strength fc (psi) 5,000 Rebar yield strength fy (psi) 60,000 Strength reduction factor for flexure M 0.90 Strength reduction factor for shear V 0.75 Steel modulus of elasticity ES (ksi) 29,000 Concrete strain c 0.003 Coefficient defining the relative contribution of concrete strength to nominal wall c 2.00 shear strength Tier 2 3.7-461 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Table 3.7.3-10: Moment and Shear Capacity of Horizontal Slab Description Parameters Value Out-of-plane moment capacity MN (kip-ft/ft) 246 MN = MMN Shear capacity provided by concrete vVc (kip/ft) 25 Vc = v2bd(fc)
Shear capacity provided by stirrups1 vVs (kip/ft) 32 Vs = v((Ast(s)fyd)/ss)
In-plane shear capacity by concrete2 vVconc(kip/ft) 31 Vconc=Acv(c(fc))
In-plane shear capacity2 vVin-plane (kip/ft) 122 Vin-plane=minimum of Acv(c(fc)+tfy) or v8Acv(fc)
Note:
- 1. Section 11.5.7.2 of ACI 349 (Reference 3.7.3-4)
- 2. Section 21.7.4.1 of ACI 349 (Reference 3.7.3-4)
Tier 2 3.7-462 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Table 3.7.3-11: Bioshield Slab Self-Weight Material Density (pcf) Thickness (in) Area (ft2) Weight (kips)
Concrete 150 23.5 502.25 147.5 Steel 490 0.25 1175.5 12.0 Misc. N/A N/A N/A 8.4 Total 167.9 Tier 2 3.7-463 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Table 3.7.3-12: Bioshield Vertical Assembly Self-Weight for Structural Analysis Component Quantity Weight (lbs) Total (lbs) 3 Radiation panels (HDPE density = 63 lb/ft ) 9 4,700 42,300 Frame weldment 1 16,132 16,132
- - Total 58,432 (60,000 used)
Tier 2 3.7-464 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Table 3.7.3-13: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-465 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Table 3.7.3-14: Summary of Bioshield Demand to Capacity Ratios Component Capacity Check Demand Capacity Unit D/C Ratio Concrete slab Rebar in the E-W direction 1.728 3.142 2 in /ft 0.55 Concrete slab Rebar in the N-S direction 0.843 3.142 in2/ft 0.27 Concrete slab Out-of-plane shear 34.1 54.559 kips/ft 0.63 (E-W)
Concrete slab Out-of-plane shear 19.3 54.471 kips/ft 0.35 (N-S)
Slab anchor bolt Tension + shear See note below See note below 0.66 Bioshield connection Shear (double-ended) 114.0 191.0 kip 0.60 between horizontal and vertical piece - pin Bioshield connection Bearing 114.0 154.0 kip 0.72 between horizontal and vertical piece - pin Bioshield connection Tension + shear See note below See note below 0.71 between horizontal and vertical piece - hinge plate on vertical piece; headed studs Bioshield connection Weld 8.1 31.5 ksi 0.26 between horizontal and vertical piece - hinge plate on vertical piece Bioshield connection The two hinge plates each 1" thick, are acceptable by comparison to N/A OK between horizontal and the one 2" thick vertical hinge plate. The base of the horizontal vertical piece - hinge hinge plates are wider than the vertical hinge plate.
plate on horizontal piece Bioshield connection Weld 16.4 31.5 ksi 0.52 between horizontal and vertical piece - hinge plate on horizontal piece Bioshield connection Bending 576.0 1080.0 kip-ft 0.53 between horizontal and vertical piece - edge plate on horizontal piece Steel structure member, Von Mises Stress 88.82 96.6 ksi 0.92 HSS tube Steel structure member, Weld 7.25 31.5 ksi 0.23 HSS tube Vertical bioshield panels Von Mises Stress 16.95 22.0 ksi 0.77 Vertical bioshield seismic Weld 21.4 31.5 ksi 0.68 restraint Vertical bioshield seismic Tension 216.6 353 kip 0.61 restraint- concrete studs Vertical bioshield seismic Tension 102.1 132.5 kip 0.77 restraint- concrete studs (stacked bioshield)
Note: The D/C ratios are determined in real time and for each time step.
Tier 2 3.7-466 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.3-1: Cutoff View of Reactor Building to Depict Bioshields Tier 2 3.7-467 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.3-2: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-468 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.3-2a: Bioshield Conceptual Design (Isometric View)
Tier 2 3.7-469 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.3-2b: Bioshield Conceptual Design (Elevation View During Stacked Configuration)
Tier 2 3.7-470 Revision 3
Tier 2 NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Figure 3.7.3-3: Location In-structure Response Spectra Nodes for Design of Bioshields 3.7-471 Revision 3 Seismic Design
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Figure 3.7.3-4: Not Used Tier 2 3.7-472 Revision 3
Tier 2 NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Figure 3.7.3-4a: In-Structure Response Spectra at the Bioshield in X-Direction for Nodes 25826 and 26345 and the Enveloped ISRS using 4% Damping y > Zd/KE y > Zd/KE y,& > Zd/KE y,& > Zd/KE
Ž
Es >KW y > Zd/KE 3.7-473
&,
Revision 3 Seismic Design
Tier 2 NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Figure 3.7.3-4b: In-Structure Response Spectra at the Bioshield in Y-Direction for Nodes 25826 and 26345 and the Enveloped ISRS using 4% Damping z > Zd/KE z > Zd/KE z,& > Zd/KE
Ž
z,& > Zd/KE
Es >KW z > Zd/KE 3.7-474
&,
Revision 3 Seismic Design
Tier 2 NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Figure 3.7.3-4c: In-Structure Response Spectra at the Bioshield in Z-Direction for Nodes 25826 and 26345 and the Enveloped ISRS using 4% Damping
? > Zd/KE
? > Zd/KE
?,& > Zd/KE
?,& > Zd/KE
Ž
Es >KW ? > Zd/KE 3.7-475
&,
Revision 3 Seismic Design
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design 3.7.4 Seismic Instrumentation Appendix S to 10 CFR 50 requires a timely shutdown of a nuclear power plant if vibratory ground motion exceeding that of the operating basis earthquake occurs or if significant plant damage occurs. In addition, Appendix S requires that suitable instrumentation be provided so that the seismic response of nuclear power plant features can be evaluated promptly after an earthquake.
Conformance with these aspects of 10 CFR 50 Appendix S is provided by the seismic monitoring system (SMS).
The SMS is not safety-related or risk-significant. It has no interconnection to safety-related or risk-significant systems. The SMS consists of seismic instrumentation at various locations on the plant site, and data recorders and a controller located in a cabinet in the Reactor Building (RXB). The data recorders maintain a record of the seismic activity. The SMS is Seismic Category I. This includes the sensors, wiring between the sensors and the control cabinet, and the instrumentation in the control cabinet. The controller processes the data and provides alarm notification to the main control room (MCR) via the plant control system (PCS). Because the PCS is not a Seismic Category I system, additional Seismic Category I annunciation equipment is located in the MCR to alert operators of a seismic event. This annunciation is part of the SMS.
The SMS is a site-specific system.
COL Item 3.7-7: A COL applicant that references the NuScale Power Plant design certification will provide a seismic monitoring system and a seismic monitoring program that satisfies Regulatory Guide 1.12 "Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation for Earthquakes," Rev. 2 (or later) and Regulatory Guide 1.166 "Pre-Earthquake Planning and Immediate Nuclear Power Plant Operator Post-earthquake Actions,"
Rev. 0 (or later). This information is to be provided as noted below.
3.7.4.1 Comparison with Regulatory Guide 1.12 The NuScale design requires a deviation from the guidance in Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.12 "Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation for Earthquakes," Rev. 2 in that seismic instrumentation cannot be included inside containment. There are twelve NuScale Power Modules (NPMs), each with an integral containment. The containments are flooded as part of the refueling process. The NPMs are all located within a single pool in the RXB, and are all at the same elevation in the building. Instead of locating seismic instrumentation in containment, it is located in the RXB.
The COL applicant will discuss site-specific conformance with RG 1.12 as part of the response to COL Item 3.7-1.
3.7.4.2 Location and Description of Instrumentation Sensors are located in the free field, in the RXB, and in the Control Building (CRB). In the RXB and CRB, they are placed at locations that have been modeled as mass points in the building dynamic analysis so that the measured motion can be directly compared with the design spectra.
Tier 2 3.7-476 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design Exact sensor location is site-specific and will be discussed by the COL applicant as part of the response to COL Item 3.7-1.
In the selection of the exact sensor locations, the COL Applicant shall adhere to the following criteria to ensure the site, the RXB, and the CRB are adequately instrumented for a seismic event:
- 1) Two sensor units are located in the free field. One sensor is located at the free ground surface consistent with the site conditions and properties used to determine the site-specific GMRS. The second is a downhole instrument located at the foundation level as close as being directly over the first sensor as practical.
- 2) Two sensor units are located in the RXB on the basemat at elevation 24'-0". One sensor is located near the intersection of Grid Lines RX-1 and RX-A. The other sensor is located near the intersection of Grid Lines RX-7 and RX-A.
- 3) A fifth sensor unit is located in the RXB at elevation 75'-0" on the east face of Grid Line RX-6, between RX-B and RX-C.
- 4) A sixth sensor unit is located on the RXB roof near the intersection of Grid Lines RX-4 and RX-C.
- 5) A seventh sensor unit is located in the CRB on the basemat at elevation 50'-0" near the intersection of Grid Lines CB-4 and CB-A.
- 6) An eighth sensor unit is located in the CRB at elevation 100'-0" on the east face of Grid Line CB-1 between CB-B and CB-C.
Sensor type is site-specific and will be discussed by the COL Applicant as part of the response to COL Item 3.7-1.
3.7.4.3 Control Room Operator Notification The SMS provides Seismic Category I annunciation in the MCR. Separately, the SMS provides information to the MCR via the PCS.
The COL applicant will discuss alarm levels based upon the site-specific operating basis earthquake as part of the response to COL Item 3.7-1.
3.7.4.4 Comparison with Regulatory Guide 1.166 The COL applicant will discuss site-specific conformance with RG 1.166 "Pre-Earthquake Planning and Immediate Nuclear Power Plant Operator Postearthquake Actions," Rev. 0 as part of the response to COL Item 3.7-1.
3.7.4.5 Instrument Surveillance The SMS is expected to be operable during all modes of plant operation, including periods of plant shutdown.
Tier 2 3.7-477 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design The COL applicant will discuss inservice inspection, calibration, and maintenance requirements as part of the response to COL Item 3.7-1.
3.7.4.6 Program Implementation COL Item 3.7-8: A COL applicant that references the NuScale Power Plant design certification will identify the implementation milestone for the seismic monitoring program. In addition, a COL applicant that references the NuScale Power Plant design certification will prepare site-specific procedures for activities following an earthquake. These procedures and the data from the seismic instrumentation system will provide sufficient information to determine if the level of earthquake ground motion requiring shutdown has been exceeded. An activity of the procedures will be to address measurement of the post-seismic event gaps between the fuel racks and the pool walls and between the individual fuel racks and to take appropriate corrective action if needed (such as repositioning the racks or assuring that the as-found condition of the racks is acceptable based on the assumptions of the racks' design basis analysis). Acceptable guidance for procedure development is contained in Regulatory Guide 1.166 "Pre-Earthquake Planning and Immediate Nuclear Power Plant Operator Post-earthquake Actions,"
Rev. 0 (or later) and 1.167, "Restart of a Nuclear Power Plant Shut Down by a Seismic Event," Rev. 0 (or later).
Tier 2 3.7-478 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design 3.7.5 Computer Programs Used in Section 3.7 Seismic Design Only commercially available software packages were used for the analysis and design of the site-independent Seismic Category I and Seismic Category II structures. The primary software packages used are SAP2000 and SASSI2010.
The software validation and verification summary tests those characteristics of the software that mimic the physical conditions, material properties, and physical processes that represent the NuScale design in numerical analysis. It covers the full range of parameters used in NuScale design-basis seismic demand calculations including the discretization and aspect ratio of finite elements, Poissons ratio, frequencies of analysis, and other parameters pertinent to seismic system analyses.
3.7.5.1 ANSYS 3.7.5.1.1 Description ANSYS is a commercial, general use finite element analysis (FEA) software. ANSYS is used to determine demand loads and stresses in structures, supports, equipment, and components/assemblies. ANSYS Mechanical software offers a comprehensive product solution for structural linear and nonlinear and dynamic analysis. The product provides a complete set of element behavior, material models, and equation solvers for a wide range of engineering problems.
3.7.5.1.2 Version Used ANSYS Computer Program, Release 14, 15, and 16.0, January 2015. ANSYS Incorporated, Canonsburg, Pennsylvania.
3.7.5.1.3 Validation and Verification Software validation and verification was performed in accordance with the NuScale Quality Assurance program. This included confirmation that the software was capable of addressing the NuScale design conditions and performance of the ANSYS-provided verification testing package.
3.7.5.1.4 Extent of Use ANSYS is used for fluid structure interaction applying input motions from SASSI2010 and using fluid elements to assess the fluid pressures on walls and sloshing heights. Factors are applied to SASSI2010 results to adjust for these effects.
3.7.5.2 SAP2000 3.7.5.2.1 Description SAP2000 is a general-purpose, three-dimensional, static and dynamic finite-element computer program. Analyses, including calculation of deflections, Tier 2 3.7-479 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design forces, and stresses, may be done on structures constructed of any material or combination of materials.
It features a powerful graphical interface which is used to create/modify finite element models. This same interface is used to execute the analysis and for checking the optimization of the design. Graphical displays of results, including real-time animations of time-history displacements, are produced. SAP2000 provides automated generation of loads for design based on a number of National Standards.
The software can perform the following types of analyses: static linear analysis, static nonlinear analysis, modal analysis, dynamic response spectrum analysis, dynamic linear and nonlinear time history analysis, bridge analysis, moving load analysis, and buckling analysis.
3.7.5.2.2 Version Used SAP2000, Version 18.1.1, Computers and Structures, Inc., Berkeley.
3.7.5.2.3 Validation and Verification Software validation and verification was performed in accordance with NuScale Quality Assurance program. This included confirmation that the software was capable of addressing the NuScale design conditions and performance of the Computer and Structures Inc. verification problems.
3.7.5.2.4 Extent of Use SAP2000 is used to develop the finite element models of the RXB and CRB and to perform general structural analysis of the building.
3.7.5.3 SASSI2010 3.7.5.3.1 Description SASSI, a System for Analysis of Soil-Structure Interaction, consists of a number of interrelated computer program modules which can be used to solve a wide range of dynamic soil-structure interaction (SSI) problems in two or three dimensions.
3.7.5.3.2 Version Used SASSI2010 Version 1.0, Berkeley, California 3.7.5.3.3 Validation and Verification Software validation and verification was performed in accordance with NuScale Quality Assurance program. This included confirmation that SASSI2010 was capable of analyzing a model as large and complex as planned for the RXB, the CRB, and the RWB, and capable of using the earthquake profiles with the accelerations Tier 2 3.7-480 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design and frequency range of the CSDRS and CSDRS-HF. In addition, test problems were evaluated to confirm the adequacy of the program.
3.7.5.3.4 Extent of Use SASSI2010 is used to obtain seismic design loads and in-structure floor response spectra for the Seismic Category I buildings accounting for the effects of SSI.
3.7.5.4 SHAKE2000 3.7.5.4.1 Description The computer program SHAKE2000 computes the free-field response of a semi-infinite, horizontally layered soil column overlying a uniform half-space subjected to an input motion prescribed as the object motion in the form of vertically propagating shear waves. SHAKE2000 is used for the analysis of site-specific response and for the evaluation of earthquake effects on soil deposits. It provides an approximation of the dynamic response of a site. SHAKE2000 computes the response in a system of homogeneous, viscoelastic layers of infinite horizontal extent subjected to vertically traveling shear waves.
3.7.5.4.2 Version Used SHAKE2000, a module of GeoMotions Suite, Version 9.98.0, Gustavo A. Ordonez.
3.7.5.4.3 Validation and Verification Software validation and verification was performed in accordance with the NuScale Quality Assurance program. Sample problems were designed to test SHAKE2000 major analytical capabilities.
3.7.5.4.4 Extent of Use SHAKE2000 is used to generate strain-compatible soil properties and free-field site response motions for use in seismic SSI analysis of the site-independent Seismic Category I and Seismic Category II structures.
3.7.5.5 RspMatch2009 3.7.5.5.1 Description RspMatch2009 is used to generate spectrum-compatible acceleration time histories by modifying a recorded seismic accelerogram. The RspMatch2009 program performs a time domain modification of an acceleration time history to make it compatible with a user-specified target spectrum.
3.7.5.5.2 Version Used RspMatch2009, Version 2009 Tier 2 3.7-481 Revision 3
NuScale Final Safety Analysis Report Seismic Design 3.7.5.5.3 Validation and Verification Software validation and verification was performed in accordance with the NuScale Quality Assurance program. The program was validated by comparing the response spectrum calculated by RspMatch 2009 for an arbitrarily selected acceleration time history with one calculated by SAP2000 for the same acceleration time history.
3.7.5.5.4 Extent of Use RspMatch2009 is used to generate the five CSDRS-compatible acceleration time histories by modifying the recorded seismic accelerograms of five different earthquakes and to generate the CSDRS-HF-compatible acceleration time history by modifying the recording of the time histories of a sixth earthquake.
3.7.5.6 RspMatchEDT 3.7.5.6.1 Description RspMatchEDT is used to generate spectrum-compatible acceleration time histories by modifying a recorded seismic accelerogram. The RspMatchEDT Module for SHAKE2000 is a pre- and post-processor for the RspMatch2009 program, which is part of SHAKE2000.
3.7.5.6.2 Version Used RspMatchEDT, a module of GeoMotions Suite, Version 9.98.0, Gustavo A. Ordonez.
3.7.5.6.3 Validation and Verification Software validation and verification was performed in accordance with the NuScale Quality Assurance program. The program was validated by comparing the response spectrum calculated by RspMatchEDT with the spectrum calculated by RspMatch2009.
3.7.5.6.4 Extent of Use RspMatchEDT is used to confirm the adequacy of the CSDRS and CSDRS-HF compatible time histories produced with RspMatch2009.
Tier 2 3.7-482 Revision 3