ML19248C628
| ML19248C628 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png |
| Issue date: | 06/29/1979 |
| From: | Rachel Johnson PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| TAC-07551, TAC-11299, TAC-12369, TAC-7551, NUDOCS 7907030462 | |
| Download: ML19248C628 (59) | |
Text
.
June 29, 1979 Trojan Nuclear Plant Docket 50-344 License NPF-1 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ATTN:
Mr. A. Schwencer, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #1 Division of Operating Reactors U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555
Dear Sir:
Enclosed are responses prepared by Bechtel Power Corporation to an additional 14 of the 50 questions submitted in your letter of May 18, 1979.
In accordance with our discussion with your staff, we expect to transmit responses to the remaining questions by July 6.
Sincerely, R. W. Johnson Corporate Attorney Portland General Electric Company RWJ/4sb5816 Enclosure G
'2 B ;
13,
00l 8 1//
7 907 030Z/p,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY CCMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SALETY AND LICENGING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
Docke t 50-344 PORTilND GENERAL ELECTRIC CCMPANY,
)
et al
)
(Lontrol Building Proceeding >
)
(Trojan Nuclear Plant)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on June 29, 1979, Licensee's letter to the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation dated June 29, 1979 and an attachment entitled " Request for Additional Information, Trojan Nuclear Plant, Proposed Control Building Design", have been served upon the persons listed belew by depositing copies thereof in the United States mail with proper postage af fixed for first class mail.
Marshall E. Miller, Esq., Chairman Joseph R. Gray, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Counsel for NRC Staf f U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commis 'on Washington, D. C.
20555 Washington, D. C.
20555 Dr. Kenneth A. McCollos, Dean Lowenstein, Nev=an, Reis, Axelrad &
Division of Engineering, Toll Architecture and Technology 1025 Cocnecticut Avenue, N. W.
Oklahoma State University Suite 1214 Stillwater, Oklahosa 74074 Washington, D. C.
20036 Dr. Hugh C. Paxton Richard M. Sandvik, Esq.
1229 - 41st Street Asciscant Attorney General Los Alamos, New Mexico 87544 State m' Oregon Department c_ Justice Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 500 Pacific Building Panel 520 S. W. Yamhill U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Portland, Oregon 97204 Washington, D. C.
20555 William Kinsey, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Bonneville Power Administration Panel P. O. 3cx 2521 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Cocsission Portland, Oregon 97208 Washington, D. C.
20555 Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary
,s U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Co==ission
[ h _,
j ij ],
Washington, L. C.
20555
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Ms. Nina Bell Mr. Eugene Rosolie 728 S. E. 26th Avenue Coalition for Safe Power Portland, Oregon 97214 215 S. E. 9th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97214 Mr. John A. Kullberg Roure 1, Box 250Q Columbia County Courthouse Sauvie Island, Oregon 97231 Law Library Circuit Court Room Mr. David 3. McCoy St. Helens, Oregon 97051 348 Hussey Lane Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 Ms. C. Cail Parson P. O. Box 2992 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 l
e a
Ronald 4. J,nson Corporate torney Portland General mlectric Company Dated: June 29, 1979
')
r) -l'l C
4sb66.27B8
o.
3.
Page 1 of 4 pages Provide clear, detailed sketches and descriptions of the con-nection interfaces of the additional walls to the existing structure.
Additionally, describe the methods by which the effects of concrete creep and shrinkage (causing tension in
-he walls and/or a reduction in assumed dead weight) have been factored into the design of these additional walls.
Jescribe and justify in detail the design and the procedures fer the connections of the new walls to the existing structure.
Answer:
Detailed sketches of the connection interf aces between the new walls and the existing structure are attached.
The final casign may require some minor revisions to the actual sizes end spacings of the rebar and studs.
The sketches show repre-rantative connection details that will be used.
The connec-t.on interfaces are discussed below.
Typically, where steel beams occur at a horizontal interface, studs are used to transfer shear forces and vertical rebars are used to transfer tension forces.
At horizontal interfaces wbere steel beams do not exist, vertical rebars make the connection.
In some cases friction type A-490 bolts are also used in the connections between the new walls and the existing cancrete.
.- d m.
,f v.
- " ~ " '
({. QU..g f & d h,, u n. ;.
')
L.
00 d
ts o u d h ods c
2
, a, u
(
L
O.
3.
Page 2 of 4 pages Wu
't,,-
1 m
a u.
,1
"....i..,
The typical treatment for vertical interfaces is to expose the columns and weld studs on to them.
New rebars are spliced with the exposed horizontal existing rebars by cadwelding.
Drilled and grouted horizontal rebars are also used to make the connections.
The effects of the concrete creep and shrinkage have been considered in the design of the new walls.
Creep is a gradual increase in strain with time when concrete is under sustained stress.
The nature of the new walls for the modifications of the Complex is such that, except for their own weight, they will be under stress only during a seismic occurrence, which is of short duration.
Therefore, the creep effect on these walls is not considered to be significant.
The shear strength provided by the concrete, V is calculated c,
in accordance with equations (11-33) and (11-34) of ACI 318-77, where N represents the tension due to shrinkage.
Also in the u
same equations the beneficial effect of the dead weight of the new walls and the walls above them is neglected, resulting in a lower value of Vc.
The design for the connections of the new walls to the exist-ing structure is in accordance with ACI 318-77.
The tension connection provided by the rebars is calculated by the strength design method.
283 143
Q. 3.
Page 3 of 4 pages The shear connections are designed by one of the following means:
1)
Shear studs welded on to the structural steel members transmit shears between concrete and steel.
The design value for the studs is considered to be one-half the value given in Table 15 of the relson Division of TRW Inc. publication, " De s ign Da t a 10 -
Em.bedment Properties of Headed Studs."
(The design value of the shear studs is further elaborated in the answer to question No. 7 ),
ii)
ASTM A-490 f riction type bolts transfer shear from structural steel members to concrete, or from an exist-ing wall to a new wall.
They have the capacity of transmitting 52.5 kips of shear per bolt.
(This value is further elaborated in the answer to question ?)o. 6).
iii)
The design of the vertical shear transfer mechanism between the existing wall and the new wall poured against it is based on the provisions of' ACI 318-77.
2b]
[# ff!l(f,(h,,b 'g ' ' ffh
')
t O.
3.
Page 4 of 4 pages m,_
jp:0 G !? ? 114 n..
N;IIhhhgfNjf n
The procedures to be followed in the construction of the conSthr nections are:
a.
Surface preparation of the existing concrete will be in accordance with paragraph 11.7.9 of ACI 318-77 and paragraph 6.4.1 of ACI 349-76.
b.
Surfaces of the steel to receive studs will be cleaned and studs will be welded in accordance with the stud manufacturer's recommendations.
Reinforcing bar splices will be in accordance with c.
Sections 12.15 and 12.16 of ACI 318-77.
The splices will also comply with the requirements of Sections 7.5 and 7.6 of ACI 349-76, except as noted in Response to Question No.
4.
Mechanical connections will be made by the CADWELD method.
d.
All work will be performed in accordance with the specifi-cations listed in Paragraph 3. 2. 2. 4 of PGE-1020.
All of the work, including the above procedures, will be per-formed in accordance with the applicable Codes and Standards and with conventional construction methods.
Lbb
} /j E "1 r ?
d
.U 4/)
.L'.T..
j
.-x7 ih,ps(((.nhf,bff, Q
dNd Extsr "se t ' o. c.,
l r2- # 5 s se 24"
'~f$$
Q~~j~-
/
~
a sid<83lSruose i; / -l YJ i
r
,o
- /
<=pt Ace ex'IST
- 4. x,,7,py j
- 9
/,.-/ 9 f ?,/ A/
/
mzTeecA2s 8Y 4
- 9
~
~N CADwElD EX/Sr y
l
\\
s.
- 6 $ 24" 7 0 NGH/
J A f
I
- 9 m(e q./ /
. y,'
-f /
9 45*
l 1,
3 1
j s
____e
'h f
l YN c:
6
~
i c y
ey o
e~
rot e
\\ i _/
\\
I O'l MIN O ~~
L v
I I
283 1/4S DETAIL AT COLUMN L/WES 2 AAJO 4ti 8ETWEEAJ EL do" 4ND EL G 5 'd Figure 3-1
e 0 @ @ k R Q p c[ m c S
_f b.n l
~,.
41 auf M
EXIST 2 " 5 G 24
~,
T.,
T s
l
,e,
- 2. +s e es, oc.
n,,
W.! (
/ 'f
>'r)., '
i l
l
/
<2EPLM6 EXI6 ? V227~
t 4
ggung gogl Y,)^'
I
/
asene er 2 "a I
YE'ZT 258ARS
,. g.-
,,s-CADwEl.O SX/S1 q
')
t'
-/
"G e 2< m ^'E>
514 '9mq%S q
A
= \\\\
-- i 4,,
./ m....
w s
r o
i s
i n
n g **
Qf
.-- 6X/M,6 @
{
L-N l
'o, y
~ r, a,
-i, v u.
%\\
m i
CADwSLO EXIS7~ N I'
6s i
1 I
~
ise za' rc New"5h 'k
'@\\ \\
l_
/\\.
] './ /
i y L* '3 (e)
,/, l,,-
d' q;5-3 t'i l
/
.. ~
t f:
,s l l //
l{.
I p+
.u g
'o 1
J l
F/f'L'X4
'S ll.!,[.3 J
d l
J' F
g
\\
f,
/e t
/
i
-%+e%" sruos
\\i 3-0. LAP d 7 e c, r r e.
S l
283 10 CETA /L A T CL UMAl L/AIE5
.2 iGNO '41 3
8ETWEEN EL G5 'O' A AJD EL 77'd Figure 3-2
~
r.
y
,- exisn 2
- G e 48 '
/I /
h7!kkO iO /Et I{i';l? Gs,q
,I
/,.-/.;,/
r g: p.a' c s I g.W -(: >wi u
u.p u g,. :
s
/g/ j/
-- a s W a t AU
/vV
/r//
- 7xic Lc'4
'9
/ /
I
\\
i j
j i
- 9 L
t 1
=
.\\
I f
~
)
q==
R y -,
m
.l
\\
s
/s.
/
l C
/
,1
/
/
,e.
.g g.. s. 1.. f 1
'I l i
_f f
\\(
i
/
%"% dgsruos e Gl rye - ! !,, l fi
,,,,7,,,,,,,
,/
i S
-/
cso weto " 11 a s ' o' L
/ G.
Exist "S c 'e ro EXIST RE/NF.
^
=-
(Do NOT CL 2 L G' l
i 46 3Cbs-i 'l nJ DETA /L AT COLUMAl l /kmS 2 ' A A]D @
8E TWEEhl EL. 45 ' O'kA/O EL & 5 'd Figure 3-3
46 i
i l
L
- l t.
w/ -
L a L gg L
3 O' GM8EDMENT (620UT IN PL/T.2)!
?
/
/,/ l /,/ /
/
- / /
l,/
7,/
/
..f
- //
/ /
/
/
/
/I i
l/
f f;
l," y h
c R
7.e
- -y j
/
7,,.j,.
[
=~
,t
i..;
$Tr
.4 4!
1-
-L-1 I
i 7
,f
,l/, !
/
/
- 7--
L *7G Wa 6 C' y "SG 12" G LO'd
/
L x
S
\\
4b18%'sruos2 2 '- G '
e s', rYP.
DETAIL ATCOLUMN LINES 2 AND %
8ETWE&l El 65!O' A AfD EL 77 '0" ra m 3-4 ag ;
) <j 9
. ;. s yp. y,, p
,e g,,, r,~
.yg, 3
h
]jk[$b '
- 7e8'xTAO"
/ Y'
/
/
c /
/
v
/
/
A
' f
'u
/
l
/
g,
/
447
'A g b
/y-/ '/
\\
[gt. g5' O*
e 8
{
(
q *. -,g a.
e Vg'$,8/j{STUM /
3
.1 s0 ro mrca -
e 1
l i
VGR T.
R G/HF-l 9
t Q
_9 o
- .~*. o ;, = i Y
- 3 &
g e..:9.-i..' j.
h 0"OUT e
e a
Vg'$ / 6?g' STUDS /
e
- /
b 89 49
/
af v.
y-V-
2 8.;
l '. 0 pglC7/CN TYPE SCL7~5 Nor SHOWN 5EC TION AT LINE @
EL. G5'-O" Figure 3-5
I R
' m a gon c.
r.
di dilj'f i
/g/
l/
c
/
,/
/i/ :.
Af bllE
/(/
/
/[,'
/
/
c l
0 L
f 77 O' c.
7 gig', 7W 4
w N,
c *...,.
NON-SHRINK GROU7- ---
.(
W4 YY,-
- 5 D e /z'
- T i 1 ';: -
J
%'p > s W sruos
=
y 2 3 ll 4 --
E e
e
/
/
1 e
e
/
i
- 9 %
N f
/ /y)7
/.
28]
j'i a7 FRICr/CN TYPE BOL 7*.6 NOT SHOWN S EC T/ON A T UNE @
EL.
77 0" 1
Ficure 3-6
f
'b
^b 7G/2"r7-C"
/
/ /
h
/
/
o.'
.~
y/
/
n/
=tu
/
[
d,
/
g x
l' N
q n',"
t
,y'
/ /
M EL L
/
//
f
,G/ C a
,.5, g=
-=
l *G N \\nou-swaic aaou?
)
- 5 D e ez' NytrsYdeien L, g
~
/
'fE 4
4 a
/
% d7
- .- [
9 1
/
\\
~9
//
'9
///
/t
,,7_pO n
nic rion rype actis aor snown 285 1.i3 SEC770N A T LINE @
EL. Gl O" Figure 3-7
q.r'p9:r " >
y o j,, J P.3 1
490 41 EX16T W/4x/7G J
l ' 9 '5
=
... )
I,i o
$ 7"f) Q $ *g g
'I i ' ' L,' ?,k. _)
j).,.j}'
8h'&/f*OC.-
ti O$!)N[Tb hb{ lib (Qhab T
,, >;t
- A' f
)
'7' I
/
/
- 9 o
J' i
'4 3
j 4
5 4
l j
1
_ *9 -
E w
f g
r
(
,4 y
y 3LJG/7]
\\/ r 2:e f-f'
- h. a s* I
\\
l C
\\.
g bi 2EPLf,CE Ex/67
?
\\
a* # ' O,4 S N D S N dcy I
'43 ytey Stocg J-3
-V h,'
Y>
-f e d ' O. c, ryp u.N.o.
- 25B/12 BYdf 9
- [
- l
/.'.
1 CAD WEf.,3 "'f g g4
- r w
- 7@ 24
\\
2 I\\
2ETAth/ Ex'16f l h
N g, og /
x g g4 x x ^g ut EX/S 7 "G Q '24' I.
ExI'7' *4 @ 24'"
283 153 DETNL AT COLUMAl LtWE5 @ AMD @)
8E TWEEM EL 33 'd'AMO EL 65 O" Figure 3-8
I;;' p;4 'ip a.j
,t-
/
-4 r$s;9AP3
?
,a s,,?ll\\t1 9 7.
3 ; f. ' i '
f t ;; m^
";l U W0tl' hfuuN!l3 I NRI
- )
4l ua dL S '- G '
{
CAQWELO # S$ 2Y g9 3 'f @ l $ 'A-~
f #7 TO EXIST'fN6 y
s eey2S
//
\\
l s
~
Q j
- \\
+
+..
,P
~
/ /F I
^
(
i C
I{
f/ /
' / / j' /
/
j' N
l,
~
)
k h
I,/,l ' !,l f,/ l f f /'b
,%A>,($'
Uf,' l
/
,/, -
///
/ / /.' /,A Q
h \\ ",,,... ' ',/ /
d 9 '#~ ~ "^
']t 400
//,
/
// \\ )'9 9.* E- {
5/g$ s8,ts SruCS,,f *.
{
- 7@ l2',
/
e t' o.c., rYP
's '\\
)
Dowets 3 f
)
N,
/-,-
,/
t EXISTING l'/
^
.k O h & $k
- '=m_
Y. ',-
/
\\
~
/
/
, /
-~
,l
/
f
/
283 B4 DETA/L A T COL UMAI L/A/ES Al / AfD @
8ETWEEM EL 65:O' A AID EL 77 #0
- f Figure 3-9
-,;l p m tr "p>
- s. cp, -
a..
- a.,.
EX/ST Widx 4%
~
~
W/ % 18"cov22 PLA TES 4G LI Q* _.
l
$IIG /2EXlS7~,
- 9 i
b I l ?2 " I E i (7D 2<!$7 CAOW&l G 6G
/g 7", 7)g" j-l
\\ Re, BARS l
j,f;
/
/
l
\\4 l
.,,.. ]
t 1.
\\\\"
l
'_ __{
I I
k f
Ig y
e; a
\\
7Y,"E 8,,CAOv/ELOj U
C
_z
/
/
\\
4
'='
i
)
6
_~5'
't f
3 4
(cchit T20C *r/OAJ
/
l Y D'
)g f
- _ _. _ _ _ _ _ ng ]A=h; a'
s y
n e
s 4 l'x 7V2
\\
e/g"px 8 Ac'sruos
'/
gxts t "Se24 r
I
- 5 /
rc e 4 o.c., ryp.
2
-CADwEt.O
- 5s 2L /0" IL 2' 70 EXISTth 228AR6 l
W&
gS Qau b[hkkkhk ke 2[33 i g r
DETAll 4 7 COLUMM L/UES W AMD h) 8E TWEEM El 45 'd'4 k/D EL 55 'O
Figure 3-10
~.
i 'l
'/ ? M .
/ / ej, *. ' < s *%
% g/ff} Cy s,k n
/., '-
46 wgy,u:g ig p'h?h 'O n
'/a'p >0$5 STUDS e n ' o.c., ryp. \\\\
l' 8, EMBCDMENr 5{
(7YR) s
' 5 e G % 5-4" o.c. \\
--9,3
\\
N raawrw mce!)
- 9 N
\\
's
- 's s
Ni N
- M'4 t,
j g
j g<y
- ,A? )
i j ';; ' /
1 i
y y
?, !l'-
/
l 4*l _A I
e u,_-
p y7
' x
.u
.\\s.x
~\\.N
\\,
r-g N'
yx 283 156 22i'A/L ATCOL.UMAI LIAJE6 N) A LIO 46 BETK/EEAl EL 6/10" AAJO EL (o510" FicJure 3-11
n p_
('
, 'N 4
, x
.%~
s,wou swas
.s xs' s
e d' o.c.
Ks N.['
1~B'EMSGDMEN7'
~
- 5g d a. S '-4'
\\,
- 7-
\\
x
's 4 ]l Y
x \\, '
\\
.\\
\\.m
- , c
\\
=
t
_ a t_..!
i l
\\,
4 i
- a. 7
.e
?.r. /',
.o s
~,~~~s
,',/
/
- /
s'
,L f
f
~
Q x
,. l ll 7
/.
./
,f,/
->.g n
5
$ '~ % /~~
.f f3
{
y y,
- i G, '.i r
i kj Hin.'... -!!
f l,! ' '.;a'>j i
- 8 $$.U 1:!5 si a 'i E'2 C ~~
',i l. I
~
'2 8 ]
15/
DEML ATCOLUMM UNES W; AUD 1
8E TWEEA/ El G 5 D' A AIG EL 77 0" Figure 3-12
a} ?\\.3
..: ;x
'/
,Y N
<<;1 Val%,
^'
- Nh
'? 9 3
.IQ
" * **' ~
~vg, 4
q, u
6
/6 1
/
h !
//
g
/j
~
e eg. e s ' o'
//
A /A 2*5 j
., p. >.
e e
/
4 r
'r
),
y 5 Q ro MA 7 6
a ll
L i /
VERT' RE/NF
'v l
. IP..
l A
D i s i.
.s.
e
[r*
you-sumux aw_/"'}j'"%s
% y, 4,a V; e e o.c.
57~u C S
/
Y"9 *hgSTUDS 5
2
/
A 9
- 9
/
Y-1 283 153 SEC r/ON AT L/NE @
EL.G5'0" Figure 3-13
8@l :i,lh R.
3 A m, r-Y5 ),Jy,hi 7,(,, 0 h e!j!
7D. 7 N
f, "fv (Y,
, 7 'r,
/
.s 6
?
- ' r'=
/ l H
}{ l/
/
- J/
% y b/
l q
- 9..: /
/
N Lu
/ /
q
.'o-~ /
f 1
EL.77 0"
, l Y
f
- 7 gig, 7 'c g
--mm __
L_,NON-SHR/NK GK 3
9 c) f bb
-Tg"$78NG S7 h,,',
)
9 5
TO MA7
++/
_f i
VER7" REINF P
---4
,p f
1%.$ A 490 Y t
d MICTION 7~YPE 80475
~
l
/f/
/1
/ N
/
.A e
iNe y
e YY 47 283 159 5 EC 7"/ON A T LINE @
EL. 7'7 ' O "
Figure 3-14
e 4I f>B T
hlO(8) /[l 'l na m {$e _ Ql" y f
' t ! ;' '
gg L ll GW 04e;4fg;~gj('{
ja' MAX.
_~ _
j,
.\\
S s/g"p iafs"sruos x
t'smcur ';
H e 6 " o.c., rya
\\
(
/
LM r,
i, f.
crYPICAL)
EL S3 LO')
[a9 ;
1 i
f,$q 24's 610 f.,CA/G b
- I s
SEE A/0Ta *S) 0
,9 )
Ok (gept.pce seisr n,
e A
l
.l V2 2 T 2,5 8A 2 y
sy + -
9 a
Q
- m 1
v x
t p
ewrmw42 '
s as.
,c 49 e
o u
I u
G g
n us kat.
i
+
c EX/ST 4e 24' f
\\
\\
s 7
- "" E NNw'..;Qs acweto q a,7 r e z y-eosr.<a e 24' x
~"x A~ PROV/DE I"r 2 '/z
s
\\
gh
~ Q' VERR /CALLY SLOTTED N
x, note,=ce acese
>w w:
283 R0 DETAll ATCOLUMAl L/blES $ ANO @
8E TWEEU EL 45 D" AMO EL c; 5 'd Figure 3-15
4s sf?OD.s.1e.
i.m rp I
t o :m, '
n W UL)y U,g:,g;,1,.]; :n r, Q
%kyjl ;l nni. "t, nN i'SAWCU7
}
(7yp.)
G /Q"
- l. A P a
l l__, 9 _
EX/ST W/4xIG; t
. x
.,:.e,
/
--!6_
as ys I
k.
I(
'\\ \\
e, I
l g&
-E g/
-H y
l l
m
'm e
th 1
! q y
u' ps,
\\
L
.d;..,:
A.
m
-87 l
1
~
.~
,8 N-
\\
)J
.s,
\\
w u,n
=
x
.a ;
N N
s u-c v.
(6COUT s'.r 1 >4 \\
,.i
<y.
\\'
I I
\\
\\
Pt ACG,)
^
~
- 9 /
5/g'% x da S700C l su
/
N
\\
@ s"o.c. TyR N
("70 El. G,5 ' G")
I
& /O i^
h
~ wl.
2 fj.;
l ;' l DETAIL AT COLUMM UME5 U A AJD 4
BETWEEM EL 45 LO' AAlO EL (,5 LO" Figure 3-16
~
/h
.: ng ni3.,1 r
G. c.(i '-
1,9 ?
ys a.)
,y..
' C, h,[;.5[l:
.p ([/
7s 6
nx
&'frg,v,j I O
,0 Nf
.C DW m
-a 4
0 k
+
al i
e
_ d'b'i
_rff S '[7DPPIN6 I
~
(2:4 '67/NG s
i rr
+
. :o..:.
,.2 s
i kP26CA-
[ '(Ex/57-3
,4
}
s
. c, _ : v-l I
e e
MOH-6H2th/K I
GRour-n O
s'., -
[h /f 77a/MU Dd/
'c* / 9, s1s H QL& B !^/ SLAi e
o o
V l
09Gl2Ef2W 7
'?
28 na SECTIOAJ. A T L/ME. @ El G 5'0" Figure 3-17
Q. 11.
(a)
Page 1 of 6 pages Provide the shear capacities of the column connections vs.
the required shear resistance under the combined loadings to support your claim in Section 3.4.2.2 that the derived flex-ural capacities of the Trojan walls are conservative in that the building valls will not slide.
Answer:
Section 8 of the report "Trejan Control Building Supplemen-tal Structural Evaluation", September 19, 1978, describes the mechanism by which the shear forces carried by the walls of the Complex are transferred to the rock foundation.
Resist-ance to sliding is provided by friction at the grade beams to rock interfsce as well as friction between the steel columns and the concrete spread footings.
Table 8-1 of the above-referenced report lists the sliding resistances and the base shear forces and the factor of safety against sliding for each ma]or wall of the unmodified structure.
The modifications will not significantly change the total base shear forces.
Furthermore, the new walls will provide additional sliding resistance and hence factors of safety will be further increased.
Calculations are also made to obtain the sliding resistance as provided by the steel columns ar.d the shear f riction
@ @3 Fd J so s=E;p-( h Nkh$$
b "g
m f[
.v..
cU]
ln3
- c. 11.
(a)
Page 2 of 6 pages developed by the continuous vertical reinforcing steel cros-f sing the wall-slab interface at each floor level together with the dead load.
These two individual resistance mechanisms are calculated as follows:
1.
Column Resistance The shear resistance provided by steel columns is given by:
Vi=A c y
f 4 -
where:
,,, u y r
.a Ac = cross-sectional area of steel columns inches 2);
typically one end column and 50% arca e' other end column is neglected.
f
= yield shear stress (ksi) y The value of f is taken as (1/3)0.5f where for f = 36 kni, y
y y
f 20.78 ksi.
=
y The shear resistance of a steel column is checked against the bearing in core concrete.
Concrete bearing stress is assumed to vary linearly from 0 to 0.85fe' ver a height equal to twice the depth.of the column.
The lesser of the column resistance and concrete bearing governs.
ch) )br
- o. 11.
(a)
Page 3 of 6 pages 2.
Shear _ Friction by Vertical Reinforcina Steel Shear friction at the wall-slab interface as provided by the mechanism of shear friction is taken as:
sy+N) f.$,
'E, c3 V2 "u
(A f
f' where:
\\
u
= apparent coefficient of friction = 1.4 (See response to Quration No. 16)
A
= area of vertical reintuccing steel (inches 2) 3 f
= yield stress of rebar = 40 kai y
N
= direct dead load on wall reduced for the effect of vertical earthquake (kips)
The ultimate shear resistance against sliding at wall-elab interface is V=V1+V2 For the unf actored CBE condition the sliding resistance is obtained by multiplying V by the capacity reduction factor of 0.85 and dividing by the load factor of 1.4.
t
(
)
P Q. 11.
(a)
Page 4 of 6 pages Analysis of Test Result rhe above criteria for sliding resistance is applied to the data obtained from testing the specimen L2, described in Appendix A of PGE-1020.
Test parameters:
/ i r
- i as 3 y a r.
.I
'i 2x4- #4 bars = 1.60 in2
'U*' d 2 bl. L e c. Ou A
=
g 31 4 Psi ; N = 31.4 x 17.25 x 80 = 43.33 kips
=
on 2 nos. W 10 x 25 columns A
=
c
=2 x 7.30 = 14.72 in2 f
= S1.8 kai (See table A3-3 of Appe.ndix A, pCE-1020) y Vy = 14.72 x 20,78
= 305.9 kips V2 = 1.4(1.60 x 51.8 + 43.33)
= 176.7 kips 283 166 4
O 11.
(a)
Page 5 of 6 pages V=V i+V2 f,,2f, l
'!j f ' ['t '
'r g
~ - ~
,,n.
= 482.6 kips u U ULA!!4u. i M:
~
... a.;,3 u.
Shear resistance = 482.6 x 1000 17.25 x 80
= 350 psi The specimen did not fail in sliding.
The failure shear stress sas 367 pai which shows that che analytically obcained results provide for a realistic assessment of the resistance against sliding.
Table 11-1 shows the calculated resistances and also the CBE shear forces at various floor levels in the west wall along column line R of the Control building.
The factor of safety against sliding is also presented.
Similar results are ob-tained for other walls of the Complex.
The results of the analysis, therefore, confirm that an adequate amount of sliding resistance exists both at the foundation level and also at all wall-slab interfaces so that the walls will develop their flexural capacities as described in Section 3. 4. 2. 2 of PGE-1020.
i'i,7, 9 f ~,
Ld>
si
f e
t oy a
t 1
5 5
4 re t
of 6
5 4
7, rl ae t a 2
1 1
1 cS ed a
0 a
l F
2 s
0 c
1 ei
=
h E
t o t
I ld f
en o
vu 1
2 eo e
n lf s
=
o r
i td e
6 c
s an i
ha r
1 p
e.
v t
o 9
0 0
0 0
e i
f 5
5 8
6 r
t a r
1 1
6 4
2 at 2
2 2
2 a
0 y
a t
rg c
e ui t
i h
=
n ct S
a cs S
E c
oe 3
J I
m i
v I
K t
t n r
r oi N
o n
I f
n c
p' %
se S
c e
eo ot E :
c lt d
Cf r.
V ypn s
Y E t
8 a
5 4
n na I
i rh E N s
1 0
0 0
0 i
1 r
n I.
0 9
2 9
3 d
d,
i RI c
5 1
5 9
e ir 1
AEi t
=
5 4
3 3
d l e 1
t u
sv H
i Sn e.
I l
- k V
c e.
t I
f DO O
n co n
J i
rt A
C M
T i
0 e
s,
Gf L
l 2
' l o
7a e
NlA t
_ V t
1 w T
a e
1 SL r
=
0 0
0 0
nh I
i SN 1
8 2
7 n
ot E
r t
l 2
7 9
4 u
i a
9 6
5 6
r td R I lu _
t an b
n g
E va 1
h n
N e
n lb I
i ea D
d M
l I
i A
es L
l s
T l
E s
l z
a S
e t
e m 0
0 0
0 ih t
et 3
3 8
8 t
ct s
tl 7
7 0
0 s
n n
So 2
2 2
2 e
i n i
C t
e a
a t e s
g l
ow e
a g
nt f
e a
e o
st p
c e
n n
6 s
ou a
o t
ds t
ri 0
0 0
0 l
i f
s at u.
5 4
9 u
en o
i ec 0
8 3
s va a
hi 6
4 3
4 e
oh 6
k Sr R
b c i
F ae eg m
a e
P l r dfe n
t s
)a o
n i
ea
(
t
&' tr
'7 a
S 1
3 v
4 6
7 9
e 1
l 1
E E
T
.0 O
]3I t
C. 11.
(b)
Page 1 of 2 pages Additionally, for all walls discuss the causes of (e.g.
shrinkage) and the effects of the observed separation be-tween the bottom of the steel beams and the concrete along the west wall of the Control Building and limitations on the rotational restraint of the in-situ wall on the appropriate-ness of using the double curvature specimen test results.
- .nswer
rm,A (; D F'[''~~~1"'".'l}
h i,].
,Q.,
pp:
y} '
l
~-
A detailed survey of th sh N1 s o Contr'o1~Buf[ ding has been made to determine the locations and extent of any separation between the steel beams and the composite walls.
The only place where such a separation was observed is on the west wall along column line R between column lines 41 and 46 and below the bottom flange of the steel beam supporting the floor slab at elevation 77 f t.
The wall at this location is ccmposed of two wythes of grouted reinforced masonry blocks without any core concrete.
At other locations in the west wall and in all the other ma]or walls of the Control Building least a portion of the masonry, and.in some instances at the core concrete, continues beyond the floor steel beams.
But in this particula: location of the west wall the outside wythe stops 3ust below the steel beam flange.
Concrete was poured from the inside f ace of the wall to fill in the space between the top of the inside wythe of masonry and the bottom of the floor slab.
It was expected that the concrete would 283 169
[(n le) ;p{ ;i o
cS syn e.m Gr: y7 1
fy j
C. 11.
(b)
Page 2 of 2 pages flow to the outside face of the wall thus filling in the in-terspace between the bottom of the beam and top of the out-wythe.
This did not happen throughout the length of the panel and some amount of gap, especially in the center portion of the panel, remained open.
Physical examination shows that that the gap extends to a depth of about 8 inches, which is the thickness of the outside wythe.
There is no visual crack or gap on the inside face of the wall at the beam location.
It is there fore concluded that the unique geometry and cons-truction adopted to build this portion of the wall is the reason for the separation between the bottom flange of the beam and top of the outside wythe.
Shrinkage is thus not the cause of the separation, otherwise, not only the inside face of this particular portion of the west wall but the other walls would have exhibited separations of similar nature.
Limitations on the rotational restraint of the in-situ wall the appropriateness of using the double curvature spe-on eimen test results are discussed in cuestion 43, 28)
- 1. U
Q. 11.
(c)
Significant separation of the concrete away fecm the beams or tension induced in the walls where there is no separation could impact the consideration of the " box effect" or confine-ment as suggested by PCE-1020 thereby reducing the shear capacity assumed for the wall.
Quantify the extent of and effects of this unconded conoition for all walls.
Answer:
The separation between the beam flanges and the wall panels is acdressed in response to Cuestion No. 11 (b).
The " Lox effect," as it exists in the Complex, enables the side walls to act as webs while the cross walls participate in providing the flange action when the Complex is sub]ected to an over-turning mcment due to lateral load.
The " box effect" is realized when the mechanism exists to transfer the vertical shear forces from the side to the cross walls at their common interfaces.
This capability of shear transfer has been anal-yzed and found to be adequate as explained in response to Question No. 16.
.m., r m c. '. ?
]r,.
9 gs r3 p-f,,. f - >,,. s fa 5:.:
y
!c i f
if4 e
r&a b
Y.
283 171
Q. 11.
(d)
Also, in addition to considering the concrete strength of 5000 psi, discuss the effects of the interfaces with 3000 psi cesign strength concrete.
? -
Answer:
S :l d
'u w
, ~ ~.
s u;
~
The existing shear wall core concrete and the cencrete block wall cell fill grout are 5,000 psi design mixes.
In many areas, the concrete slabs are a 3,000 psi design mix.
The mechanism of shear transfer at the floor levels is described in response to Question No.ll (a).
The portien of the shear force which is transferred at the wall - slab interface is obtained from the shear-friction of the fully embedded vert-ical reinforcing uteel and the direct dead load stress.
Because the " coefficient of friction" along the joint is independent of the concrete strength, sc also is the shearing strength, frovided the shearing stressen do not exceed some limiting val'ue.
This limiting shearing stress, as suggested by Matteck, Johal and Chow in " Shear Transfer in Reinforced Cencrete with Mcment or Tension Acting Acrcss the Shear Plane," PCI Journal / July-August 1975, can be taken as 0.2f ',
c which for 3,000 psi slao concrete is 600 psi.
The ultimate shearing stress used in the analysis of the Complex shear walls is well below this limit.
10 i
7 c 0.;,
i <!
t.
Q. 14.
Page 1 of 2 pages Discuss in detail why the dead load acting for the SSE is greater than that acting for the OBE, thereby resulting in greater shear capacities for the SSE than considered for the CBE.
Answer:
Due to the construction sequence of the Complex, the dead load carried by the steel frame under static conditions con-sists of its own weight and the reinforced concrete floor slabs.
The walls carry their own weight.
During an earthquake event, however, when the structure undergoes any lateral deformation, the axially stif f steel column will tend to deform less than the ad]acent wall panel in the vertical direction.
The displacement compatibility between the encased steel frame and the concrete wall causes redistribution of axial loads in these elements, tension side of the wall will pick up additional vertical load thus unloading the precompressed column.
The actual vibratory motion during the SSE will be more severe than the CBE.
The lateral defor=ation for the SSE is greater tnan for the CBS. Therefore the precompressed columns will be unloaded more during the SSE than the 283 i73
Q. 14.
Page 2 of 2 pages OBE, thus resulting in a greater increase in the SSE dead load on the wall panel.
For the purpose of determining the capacities of the existing walls of the modified Complex, however, the increase in the dead load has been conserva-tively neglected for the OBE.
As indicated in PGE-1020, the CBE controls the design of the modified Complex and only the direct dead load is used for capacity determination.
"l G ',
3 ~l A L U.)
lI
t
Q. 19.
(a)
Page 1 of 2 pages Provide the basis for your claim that, in lieu of the test program results, there are no UBC requirements addressing the type of walls in the Trojan Complex since Sec. 2417 of UBC-1963 specifies that for combinatior of units, materials, or mortars, the maximum stress shall not exceed that permit-ted for the woakest of these.
Answer:
The ma]or shear walls of the Complex are constructed of high strength concrete core, both reinforced and unreinforced, (nonmasonry units) sc.ndwiched between two wythes of rein-forced grouted concrete blocks (masonry units).
The Uniform Building Code, Chapter 24, is devoted solely to masonry con-struction that employs the units, materials and mortars specified in Section 2403.
Section 2403 does not include the concrete core which is covered in a different chapter of the UBC.
Section 2417(a) places allowable limits on design and construction that uses a combination of the masonry units, materials and mortars specified in Section 2403.
How-ever, when the combination includes a non-masonry element such as the concrete core in the Complex walls then the allow-able stresses of Section 2417 (applicable solely to masonry) no longer apply.-
Thus the the major shear walls of the Complex are not addressed by Section 2417.
283 175
Q. 19 (a) Page 2 of 2 pages Since the FSAR did not specifically address the composite shear wall construction of the type used in the Complex, it is understandable that ambiguities could have arisen as to the intent of the ref erence in the PSAR as to the UBC.
Section 3.8.1.5.
indicates that " concrete block walls" in Category I structures are designed to the UBC requirements for masonry; and such requirements were in fact observed for those walls constructed solely of masonry. However, there was no intent to apply those requirements to the composite masonry-concrete wall construction of the type used in the Complex; and, as discussed above, those requirements would not be applicable to such construction.
3C7 L b.)
hiD
Q. 19, (b)
Page 1 of 2 pages Provide the basis for your statement that the UBC did not envision the use of a model such as STARDYNE, therefore, higher allowables are appropriate.
UBC Section 2417 merely states that fcrces be determined from the principles of con-tinuity and relative rigidity, which is what STARDYNE does.
Answer:
The Trojan FSAR went beyond the minimal requirements of the UBC by calling for response spectrum analysis to determine the dynamic loads for Category I structures.
As discussed in Section 3.6.3 of PGE-1020, the original evaluation of the Complex was done by performing a response spectrum analysis on beam-stick matnematical model which, was an adequate approxi-mate represent' tion of the physical structure.
In the re-evaluation stu?y, the detailed threa dimensional finite element modeling of th? Complex was a more accurate representation of the structural system, and therefore the SIARDYNE response spectrum analysis on this model more accurately determined the dynamic response of the Complex.
The Uniform Building Code, along with several other codes, while maintaining that the forces in the structural elements be determined from the principles of continuity and relative rigidity, does not specifically call for applying techniques as sophisticated as an extensive finite element analysis.
A simpler staric analysis based on relative rigidities of the 285 177 3
Q. 19.
(b)
Page 2 of 2 pages participating structural elements is adequate to satisfy the code requirement.
However the St\\RDYNE analysis, which is a rigorous finite element analysis, takes into consideration not only the rigidities of the structural elements for combi-nations of their deformation modes, but also provides a tool for evaluating structural discontinuities and their effect on the system behavior.
This ind of analysis, therefore, provides far better knowledge and consequently a higher level of confidence by eliminating analytical uncertainties that may be present in a relatively simpler analysis.
PGE-1020 did not state that higher allcwables are appropriate in light of SZ4RDYNE.
Section 3.6.3 indicated that, on the basis of the fact that such an improved analysis was per-formed and the better understanding it provided of the Complex, the need for design margin was reduced.
However, in PGE-1020 credit is not taken for this additional conservatism.
9G1 1 /0 LU; t iO 4
Q. 25.
In Section 4.2.5, reference is made to the tensioning of bolts af ter concrete has attained " adequate strength." Define
" adequate strength" and describe how it will be determined.
Answer:
Adequate strength is defined in this context as the design strength of the new concrete.
Determination of' when the con-crete has attained this strength will be made with cylinder tests conducted in accordance with ACI standards.
The bolts attaching the plate to the wall will not be fully tensioned until development of the design strength has been demonstra-ted.
Prior to this time, the bolts will be made snug to remove any play between the plate and the wall.
yo; tdJ i(v o,
Q. 26.
Verify that the static and dynamic effects of the rigging and the steel plate on the Turbine Building above elevation 93 feet have been considered.
Answer:
The structural elements that will be affected by rigging the steel plate on the Turbine Building above elevation 93' are the floor steel beams at elevation 93' and the crane girder at elevation 130'-11" to which the chain hoists will be attached for handling the place.
An analysis of these elements has shown that the static and dynaaic loads that will be imposed on them during the handling of the steel plate result in stresses below AISC code allowed values.
The eccentric loading on the crane girder has been considered in the investigation.
q c 8 >
.,0 Ie
Q. 27.
What strength concrete was used to model the new walls in the SI4RDYNE Analysis of the modified complex?
In Section 3.2.5 a concrete strength of f'c = 5000 psi at 90 days is specified for the new walls.
Will the qualification of the modified complex be affected while this strength is being developed after concrete placement considering both in plane and out of plane wall loadings?
Provide the basis for your response.
Answer:
The capacity of the walls is based on a design strength of 3500 psi.
The STARDYNE analysis used a stiffness based on a concrete strength of 5000 psi which is the expected long-term capacity of the new concrete.
The structural qualification of the modified Complex, as affected by the capacity of the new walls as their strength increases from zero to the full design values, is discussed in the response to Question No.
31.
'j r
idr-)
()!
8
Q. 30.
Page 1 of 2 pages Provide your evaluations of the effects of the proximity or configuration of hole patterns, including the effects of any cracking which is present in the walls.
Answer:
The capacity of the walls is controlled by flexure which is dependent upon the vertical reinforcing bars.
Since none of the reinforcing steel will be cut, the flexural capacity of the panels will not be reduced.
Except for the separation discussed in the response to Question No. Il(b), only hairline cracks are present in the walls where holes will be drilled.
For the same reason discussed above such hairline cracks will not affect the panel capacity.
In resisting either the horizontal or vertical shear forces along a line of bolt holes, there are three important factors to be considered.
First, the 3" diameter holes are spaced a minimum of 8 diameters which results in a small amount of material being removed.
If a bar is encountered while drill-ing, the hole will be abandoned and fully grouted before the replacement hole is drilled.
Since the reduction in shear area owing to any such abandoned holes would be insignificant, the replacement hole may be drilled even if the grout in the r
iOi
)
\\i
Q. 30.
Page 2 of 2 pages abandoned hole has not yet developed its designed strength.
Second, the resistance being relied upon is produced by the reinforcing steel and the encased column or the beam-column connection, none of which is sensitive to the small amount of concrete and block being removed.
Third, the reduction in area due to the bolt holes is less than 4% in the horizon-tal shear plane, less than 64 in the vertical plane and less than 5% in any diagonal plane.
These reductions in shear areas have been considered in evaluating the shear capacities of existing walls.
Along these planes, the row of bolt holes dc es not traverse the entire structure and any tendency for a crack to develop along the bolt holes will be resisted by portions of the wall without holes.
After the new structural eJements are bolted into place, they will bridge across the holes.
Q. 32.
~
Summarize the loads and load combinations ac.d corresponding acceptance criteria for which the diesel generator air intake will be designed.
Include a discussion of how the effects of the Turbine Building, a non-Category I structure har, been considered.
Answer:
The new diesel generator air intake through the north wall of the Turbine Building consists of a louvered opening in the wall.
The purpose of the louver is to keep wind, rain, and debris from entering the Turbine Build.ing.
The louvers need not be designed for abnormal loads since their collapse would not preclude air supply to the air intake located on the East side of the Diesel Generator Room.
In any event, the air intake on the north wall of the Turbine Building has been sized to allow blockage of 50% of the area.
The attached figure shows the location of the louver and the air supply path to the Diesel Generator Rocm.
The f act that the Turbine Building is not a Category I struc-ture has no effect on supplying air to the Diesel Generator Room because it has been designed to resist a Safe Shutdown Earthquake (FSAR Sec.
3.8.1.1.6).
The siding and the connec-tions have been analyzed and it has been determined that the siding will not beceme detached during a Safe Shutdown Earthqucke.
9 Q ~,
iO1
[. () J I
\\'
- n. ~
{ p}on,.a ~b,,,Vuhbygl [j g
f
~ r '-
l.,$
NORTil
/
g
/
=
g
+A
.)
uencwcreav,
_ _ ;_y,.
@)
'l
- .' _, j'. -
-. m i
~ L' '
L rNETAL 5IDING u
Y~~
~
Y I
ya 4
N l
l 1.
l l,
H 3
g
[.f P O
.l.:.
l 'j
(
2 M kMFi,.
l
~
p 1
1 l
I l
lh '
I
' AIR INTAK6 f
~
.J l""i{'I..rlI'
.. _; l DIE 6EL MCME =" g :
h.j
+.
ll GENE #A N 15 iEI ~ ~ E ' ;i l."[Ikil5kbb-h/h...l "'
. % LouVEM6
≫-34 w
.a.,
(_2M,
g N
\\
t m e
/
a Ne' CX/STi% CONCRCTE Av.Es
- M NET 9.9..#6%
v
^;
\\,
AWD SUR DF HETAL D04tS LDUW;ts)MTAL WN.L 1%WL.S 1f g.g.
)
4A
\\ anocArwa susratten.
Rott.-UP Z <4 I
PART/AL PLAN SHOWING V/ E W A-A
~, AIR SUPPLY PATH TO DIESEL GENERATDR 201M a
(ArrACHMMT TO RCAPONSE th 32)
Q. 33.
Provide the basis for your determination thct removal of the face masonry bJock and a portion of the concrete core at columns lines 41 and 46 on column line N'
will not s'gnifi-cantly affect the shear capacity of these walls.
Answer:
The sketches provided in response to Question No. 3 show the portions of the existing shear walls which will be removed during modification work and filled in later to make necessary connections to the new concrete walls.
All f
these existing walls, including those at column lines 21 and 46 and on column line N', have been evaluated to assess their shear capacities during such modification work.
The shear capacities have been calculated both on the basis of the criteria established in the report " Trojan Control Build-ing supplemental Structural Evaluation September 19, 1978' and also Section 3.4.2.2 of PGE-1020.
It has been found that the walls with the portions removed will be capable to with-stand an SSE level greater than 0.25 g, and also an CBE greater than 0.08g.
This demonstrates that the shear capacities of the walls will not be significantly affected during performance of the modifications.
! r i, 1 ! u5 ed i o
0 34.
Provide the capacity assumed for the dowels used to perform the wall modifications and the basis for this assumed capacity.
Answer:
The capacity of the dowels used to perform the wall modifica-tions is calculated in accordance with the requirements of ACI-318-77 and it in basically a function of the capacity reduction factor, yi<:1d strength of reinforcing steel, anc the amount of steel present, modified as required for the type of application (e.g., tension or shear).
The design of the connections between the new walls and the existing walls and slabs is discussed further in response to Question No. 3.
O7 o r ;'
)04 cd i
Q. 39.
Page 1 of 3 pages Define " representative" as used in defining the struts used in specimens El, F2 and H2.
Include a discussion of the similarity between the way in which the struts were anchored into the bulkheads, thus encasing the wall vs. the way the walls are encased in the frame formed by the columns and beams in the actual structure.
Expand this to include a sim-ilar discussion for specimens L1 and L2.
Also, discuss the similarities between the horizontal steel anchorage at the edges of the test specimens vs. that of the actual walls in-terrupted by openincs, and those which intersect cross walls (e.g.
the wall intrrsection at the intersection of Jolumn e
lines R and 55.)
Answer:
The specimens El, P2 and H2 had two s teel struts each, located externally on either side as shown in Figure A3-1 of PGE-1020.
The struts were attached to the top ead bottom beams through hinged connections with 3/4" A-325 bolts.
The rt~71 struts were used to simulate the axial resistance be~havior of the steel columns in the Complex valls where the columns would be assumed to act as external member 9 without any vertical shear trans-fer at the column-wall interface.
The struts also provided a deformation-controlled rotational resistance (as opposed to a force-controlled rotational resistance) at the ends of the specimens.
The external steel struts increased the shear capacity of wall specimens by inducing additional dead load.
283 138
Q. 39.
Page 2 of 3 pages The specimens L1 and L2 had the two steel columns fully embedded in the core concrete as shown in Figure A3-2 of PGE-1020.
These columns were anchored to the top and bottom beams by an embedment length of about 3'-0".
These steel columns in the test specimens simulated the embedded steel columns which are continuous through adjacent floors of the Complex.
The area of the steel column in.the test specimen was dimen-sionally reduced to simulate an average column size in the Complex.
The ratio of the column to the wall cross section was approximately the same between the test specimens and a typical wall panel.
It should be noted that the specimens El, P2 and H2 with steel struts and the specimens L1 and L2 with embedded col-umns were tested to investigate the behaviour of Complex walls with embedded stairl frames.
As explained, two extreme condi-tions for bond were simulated since the exact conditions of Complex walls are difficult to create in test specimens.
As shown in Figure A 3-2 of PGE-1020, in order to simulate interrupted reinforcement in the actual walls, the horizontal reinforcing bars of the test specimens were not anchored at their ends.
Only the horizontal reinforcing bars in the masonry blocks of L1 and L2 specimens had U ties simula-ting the continuity of block reinforcement in the actual valls.
Also, it can be seen from the test results that the 20) i
Q. 39.
Page 3 of 3 pages horizontal reinforcement is not an important parameter for the shear capacity of specimens enless the specimens failed in the classical shear mode.
The horizontal reinforcement helped to control the width of major diagonal cracks in specimens which had a shear mode of failure.
e
4 Q. 41.
Page 1 of 3 pages Discuss in detail the error band associated with each of the test results (e.g., stiffnesses, strengths, degradation, etc.).
Explain and justify how these were factored into your evaluation of the complex.
Answer:
Tables Al-1 and Al-2 of PGE-1020 list the test program and the specimen description respectively.
As can be seen, the test parameters were not duplicated, therefore restricting a direct assessment of error associated with the test results.
However, the following discussion provides the basis to esti-mate conservatively the probable erru. associated with the test results and the procedure to accoant for such error in the evaluation of the Complex.
The probable error from the quality of materials such as mort-ar, masonry blocks, grout, concrete and reinforcing steel and f rom the f abrication of test specimens was minimized by implementing a good quality control program.
The effect of such an error is negligible because the behavior and capacity of specimens were predominantly governed by the most reliable parameter, namely, the vertical steel reinforcement.
There-fore, the probable error from the quality of materials and from the fabrication of test specimens can be reasonably estimated to be i 1%.
283 19i
Q. 41.
Page 2 of 3 pages The specimens were loaded using calibrated hydraulic rams and pressure gauges.
The performance of hydraulic pumpa was con-tinually moni.tored to assure the steady applicacion of
.2 ten-ded load on the specimens.
The deform clon of specimens under load was measured using dial gauges, linear variable differen-tial transducers ( LVDT) and X-Y recorders.
The dial gauges and LVDTs can indicate deformations up to an accuracy of 0.0001' and 0.0005", respectively.There were duplicate pressure gauges, dial gauges and LVDTs to measure and monitor the important quantities such as ram pressure (lead) and lateral deformation.
There were at least two technicians to read and record gauge readings.
Also, at least two test engineers were engaged to check the test set-up and rocasurements.
Thus, adequate pre-cautions were taken to minimize t he probable error from test set-up and measurement.
A i 3% weald be a conservative esti-mate for such an error.
The accuracy and consistency in the test resulta are decon-strated in Figure 41-1 by the small scatter among the ultimate strength of all the 23 specimens.
This type of experimental scatter is com: son among the results of concrete test specimens.
Such a scatter can be attributed to various sources as discussed above and other probable sources such as the construction joint at the beam-specimen interface.
The consideration of error band associated with the test results is not applicable to the capacity evaluation because the test results were not used directly, as explained in Section 3.4 of PGE-1020.
30,
<u) eu; i
Q. 41.
Page 3 of 3 pages As explained in Appendix B of PGE-1020, the test results were used to evaluate the stiffness of the Complex walls as a function of axial stress, shear stress and vertical reinforce ~
ment ratio.
During this evaluation, the uncertainties associated Nith the test results are considered conservatively in response spectra oroadening, as explained in response to Question No. 47.
F. ~
- ; d:^ ?
t L
,)
O
7oQnyan'C:;a,n.3 1 '
1, ivc)nb
=gs:
2 t
i 4
- t. :
w:.eC5zj r;5 Fv gm
- tn0ag A
r c-i I
c cL tc J
s 0
- 5 3
~,
l F
S itEM 2
2 0
I
)
H n
L
- 0 C
2.g o
3 E
A g
P
+
S i
y L
L f
L o
A
(
W 8
4 0
0F g
- 2 A
2 5
R
[
1 E
l i
=
S i
H u
O
.h v
4
- A E
'n 0
l 3
- 2 a
G 0
T l
l
+
E 2
R 1p y T B
E f
S 1
p E
(
T 0
A 5
M 1
I I
T G*
LU i~g 1
0 1
0 4
1 5*
E 8
RUG 7
I F
(2
- 0
- 5 l
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 5
4 3
2 1
'D4
&Cv S'"
- o, h"-
E0ua u gc.
co2VE
_.~,
mqO" OL Q. 49.
Page 1 of 2 pages gg f.].T C,0
[ w!4 g 3. i f i t ' ~~ 3 "' 7 g[
[ Mfd bh00 bib Compare the slopes of the sides of the peaks in floor response spectra for t.he complex f requency shif t,vs. _ stress (therefore, ground acceleration) level as derived from the test data results to verify that the floor response spectra are conservative for all earthquake levels for both the CBE and the SSE spectra.
Justify any non-conservative deviations.
.L...,
?.o..
Answer:
In considering the adequacy of the OBE response Ep.ect.#a,_ a.
review of stiffness reduction factors was made to determine the largest earthquake that could occur before significant.
.e.
reduction in f r, equency r.esulted.
I t wa s e.s timat. ed.th.a t.f.o.r....
.r.
.w
~,
an earthquake of approximately 0.10g the stiffness reduction would be approximately 2% resulting in a 1% shift in frequency.
The response spectra associated with the 0.10 9 earthquake was estimated by assuming the same general shape as for the 0.159 CBE except the frequencies associated with the peaks are increased and the ordinates are "iuced.y the.,
z.
ratio of 0.10/0.15 = 0.67.
The estimate o t.he. increase in
' ~ ' ~
f requency was made by considering several of the-S1ARDYNE
~
analyses involved in the overall stiffness iteration process.
This resulted in an increase of 5 to 7 percent.
This is the shif t of the first mode in the N-S direction, and the shift associated with the other modes is less.
Since the peaks of the response spectra have sloping sides, the width
- c....
"\\
m 8
[
G y
. ~.
. s.
if
,: i,
- p. ~.
a
+-
P:s
' O. 49.
Psge 2 of 2 pages r?. ) < ' l' j':e ; TD
/i / q, y,,,.
p: ' r t a,. a 9. r;
.s
,n n
d I,
5 4
W, r,;, g~.
m of the peaks increases with decreasing acceleration.9 a shown in Figure 49-1: the width of the peaks of the cesponse spectra for an 0.15g CBE varies between 15 and 20 percent at 0.67 of the peak ordinate.
This will allow the frequency shift of 5 to 7 percent, plus approximately 10 percent curve broadening, with the resulting spectra for an 0.10g earthquake still being wi thin the 0.15g CBE response spectra.
As the earthquake level increases from 0.109 to 0.15g, the stiffness reduction factors decrease gradually which will result in a gradual transition to the 0.15g response spectra.
In the event of an earthquake greater than the OBE, there is expected to be a gradual transition from the 0.15g CBE res-pense spectra to the 0.259 SSE response spectra.
Designing safety-related components, equipment and piping to the OBE and SSE criteria provides a high level of confidence of being able to withstand an earthquake between 0.159 and 0.25g.
I o
r cd) l/0
&J-a 1)J aa 3
mlq5 =
J,
- i
=
w( SCrV pWh,c gr :fac'=e%b T.C
='
t
- c gg g
o n
o oi o
pi.
i l
I' i
8 6
j-l 1{ '
e
,L_p[d E
K
_4 B
l!
- /,
O 8,
G N
g 9
I
-i M
F P.
2 5
1 N"
A O
0
,!i
,. u ji i
i.
2 S
7
/
i 6
a f
d r
5 i
i 0
f,
(
\\
tc a T.
~
0 e
0 o
[ i jj
,j k
1 3
p 8
S 1
6 6
I e
,1 j
.![)
6 s
6 n
J V
N o
i"
.k; p
t
!f V,
/
M S
s 4
P e
JD C
R C
E i
Y r
,S i
l li r
! iI l
C o
S N
o D
E l
O
~
U F
l T:
?
{4 eII 1i l.
H Q
E E
e P
f v
i t
F it r-r a
t o
n r.T T
_/
3
[u.
t e
1 ll s
.a e
j '
_/
<\\L_
r
,1 p
_6 i;
e R
l i
/ '.
4 1
3.
l j
i
/.,
9 r
4 i
, i -
i
]
e y
r u
g 2
i F
r r
or 1
r 0
o a
6 5
4 3
2 1
i
.;y
$s4Ejtu gs0am
,3 s
'N w
'