ML19264E494
| ML19264E494 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry, Catawba, Grand Gulf, Comanche Peak, Rancho Seco, Midland, 05000000, Shoreham |
| Issue date: | 01/24/1984 |
| From: | Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Gilinsky V, Palladino N, Roberts T NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19264E495 | List: |
| References | |
| TASK-AS, TASK-BN84-013, TASK-BN84-13 BN-84-013, BN-84-13, NUDOCS 8401190012 | |
| Download: ML19264E494 (10) | |
Text
cp January 24, 1984 Docket Nos.:
50-416 50-312 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Chairman Palladino Connissioner Gilinsky Commissioner Roberts Comissioner Asselstine Comnissioner Bernthal FROM:
Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing Office of fluclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
BOARD NOTIFICATION 84-013:
TDI RESPONSE TO NRC QUESTIONS CC'NCERNING TRANSAMERICA DELAVAL EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATORS, BOARD fl0TIFICATION In accordance with the procedures for Board Notifications, the following information is being provided directly to the Commission. The appropriate boards and parties, for all facilities with TDI diesel generators, are being informed by a copy of this memorandum.
This information, which supplements that provided in Ecard Notifications83-160 and 83-160a, is relevant to all facilities that have diesel generators marufactured by TDI, including Rancho Seco, which is before the Conmission, and Grand Gulf (an uncontested case),
which is scheduled to come before the Commission for full power authorization in the near future.
On Decenber 1, 1983, the NRC staff sent a list of questions (Enclosure 1) to TDI regarding the design and fabrication of diesel generators it had supplied for nuclear service. TDI responded on Decenber 16, 1983 (Enclosure 2). The staff will review this rasponse as part of its overall assessment of the reliebility of TDI diesel engines.
en.2%
Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
1.
Letter from T. Novak (NRC) to C. S. Matthews (TDI), dated 12/1/83 2.
Letter fron C. S. Matthews (TDI) to T. Novak (NRC) dated 12/16/83 8401190012 ct" ee next page DL SA2/PM DL:TA/DIR D
1R N005 RCiruso:pt GEdison DG senhut 1/g/84 1 gE4 Q /84 I
tA7)
cc: SECY (2)
Shoreham 50-322 (Brenner, ferguson, Morris, Laurenson, Kline, Shon)
Perry 50-440/441 (Bloch, Bright, Kline)
Comanche Peak 50-445/446 (Bloch, Jordan, McCollom)
Midland 50-329/330 (Bethhoefer, Cowan, Harbour)
Catawba 50-413/424 (Kelley, Purdom, Foster)
ASLAB FOR:
Shoreham 50-322 (Rosenthal, Edles, Wilber)
Rancho Seco 50-312 (Rosenthal, Buck, Kohl)
DISTRIBUTION LIST FOR BOARD NOTIFICATION ASLB -Catawba Units 1&2, Docket Nos. 50-413/414 Dr. Peter F. Riehm ASLB -Comanche Peak Units 1&E, Docket Nos. 50-445/446 Mr. Jesse L. Riley ASLB -Midland Units 1&2, Docket Nos. 50-329/330 Ken Robinson, Esq.
ASLB -Perry Units 1&2, Docket Nos. 50-440/441 Alan 5. Rosenthal Esq.
ASLB/ALAB -Rancho Seco Nuc Gen Station, Docket No. 50-312 Cherif Sedkey, Esq.
ASLB/ALAB -Shoreham Unit 1, Docket No. 50-322 Ralph Shapiro, Esq.
Mr. Frederick J. Shon Jay Silberg, Esq.
Martin B. Ashare, Esq.
Mr. Marc W. Goldsmith Ms. Mary Sinclair Edward M. Barrett, Esq.
Robert Guild, Esq.
Mr. Lanny Alan Sinkin Thomas A. Baxter, Esq.
Dr. Jerry Harbour Mr. Jeff Smith Charles Bechhoefer, Esq.
Mr. Bruce L. Harshe Ms. Barbara Stamiris Ms. Lynne Bernabei Samuel A. Haubold, Esq.
Mr. Robert G. Taylor Howard L. Blau, Esq.
Mr. Wayne Hearn Howard A. Wilber, Esq.
Peter B. Bloch, Esq.
Ms. Susan Hiatt Mr. Donald R. Willard Ms. Nora Bredes Dr. Walter H. Jordan Frederick C. Williams, Esq.
Lawrence Brenner, Esq.
David S. Kaplan, Esq.
Ricnard P. Wilson, Esq.
Mr. Glenn 0. Bright Mr. James R. Kates Herbert H. Brown, Esq.
Frank J. Kelley, Esq.
James E. Brunner, Esq.
James L. Kelley, Esq.
Dr. John H. Buck Dr. Jerry R. Kline MHB Technical Associates Mr. Ronald C. Callen Christine N. Kohl, Esq.
Palmetto Alliance John G. Cardinal, Esq.
Stephen B. Latham, Esq.
Gerald Charnoff, Esq.
James A. Laurenson, Esq.
Myron M. Cherry, p.c.
Dr. J. Venn Leeds, Jr.
Atomic Safety and Licensing John Clewett, Esq.
Mr. Howard A. Levin Board Panel Hon. Peter Cohalan Steven Lewis, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Dr. Richard F. Cole Terry J. Lodge, Esq.
Appeal Panel Mr. John T. Collins Karen E. Long, Esq.
Docketing & Service Section Barton Z. Cowan, Esq.
Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke Document Management Branch Dr. Frederick P. Cowan Mr. Wendell H. Marshall Mr. T. J. Creswell Mr. Brian McCaffrey Gerald C. Crotty, Esq.
Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom James B. Dougherty, Esq.
J. Michael McGarry III,Esq.
ACRS Members Mr. Jay Dunkleberger Janine Migden, Esq.
Dr. Robert C. Axtmann Anthony F. Earley, Jr, Esq.
Marshall E. Miller, Esq.
Mr. Myer Bender Gary J. Edles, Esq.
Michael Miller, Esq.
Dr. Max W. Carbon Mrs. Juanita Ellis Dr. Peter A. Morris Mr. Jesse C. Ebersole Christopher Ellison, Esq.
Chris Nolin Mr. Harold Etherington Peter 5. Everett, Esq.
Fabian G. Palomino Dr. William Kerr Donald T. Ezzone, Esq.
Spence W. Perry, Esq.
Dr. Harold W. Lewis Mr. Jonathan D. Feinberg William L. Porter, Esq.
Dr. J. Carson Mark Dr. George A. Ferguson William C. Potter, Jr.,Esq.
Mr. William M. Mathis Dr. Richard F. Foster David J. Preister, Esq.
Dr. Dade W. Moeller Leon Friedman, Esq.
Dr. Paul W. Purdom Dr. David Okrent Eleanor L. Frucci, Esq.
Mr. Paul Rau Dr. Milton S. Plesset Steve J. Gadler, P.E.
James S. Reed, Esq.
Mr. Jeremiah J. Ray Mr. R. J. Gary Harold F. Reis, Esq.
Dr. Paul C. Shemon Stewart M. Glass, Esq.
W. Taylor Reveley III,Esq.
Dr. Chester P. Siess Mr. Jesse L. Riley Nicholas S. Reynolds, Esq.
Mr. David A. Ward 1
CATAUDA (for BNs)
Mr. H. B. Tucker, Vice President fluclear Production Departnent Duke Power Companv 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 cc: North Carolina MPA-1 P.O. Box 95162 Raleigh, North Carolina 27625 Mr. F. J. Twocood Power Syctems Division Westinghouse Electric Corp.
P.O. Box 355 Pittsburch, Pennsylvania 15230 Mr. J. C. Pl nkett, Jr.
NUS Corporation 2536 Countryside Boulevard Clea rwater, Florida 33515 fir. Pierce H. Skinner Route 2, Box 179N York, South Carolina 29745 North Carolina Clectric Menbership Corp.
3333 North Boulevard P.O. Box 273C6 Raleich, North Carolina 27611 Saluda River Electric Cooperative, Inc.
207 Sherwood Drive Laurens, South Carolina 29360 fir. Peter K. VanDonrn Route 2, Box 179N York, South Carolina 29745 James P. O'Reilly. Regional Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regalatory Conmission, Reginn 11 101 tiarietta Street, Suite ?100 Atlante, Georgia 30303
COMANCHE PEAK Spencer C. Relyea, Esq.
Worsham, Forsythe & Sampels 2001 Bryan Tower Dallas, Texas 75201 Mr. Homer C. Schmidt Manacer - Nucleer Services Texas Utilities Services, Inc.
2001 Bryan Tower Dallas, Texas 75201 Mr. H. R. Rock Gibbs and Hill Inc.
393 Seventh Avenue New York, New York 10001 Mr. A. T. Pa rker Westinchouse Electric Corporation P. O. Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230
MIDLA"D (For BNs)
Mr. J. W. Cnot Vice President Consuners Power Conpany 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, Michigan 49201 cc:
Stewart H. Freeman Jares G. Keppler, Regional Assistant Attorney General Adninistrator State of Michigan Environnental U.S. Nuclear Reculatory Commission, Protection Division Recion 111 720 Law Building 799 Roosevelt Poaf Lansing, Michigan 48913 Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 Ms. Julie Morrison Pr. Ron Cellen Midland Daily News Michigan Public Service Comnission 124 Mcdonald Street 6545 Fercantile Wav Midland, Michican 48640 Lansing, Michican 48909 Mr. R. B. Borsun Geotechnical Encineers, Inc.
Nuclear Power Generation Division ATTN:
Dr. Steven J. Doulos Fabcock & Wilcox 1017 Main Street 7910 Wcodnont Avenue, Suite 220 Winchester, Massachusctts 01890 Bethesda,*aryland 20614 Billie Pirnrr Garde Mr. Don van Farrowe, Chief Director. Citizens Clinic Division of Radiological Health for Accountable Governnent Departnent of Public Health Government Accountebi'ity Project P. O. Box 33035 Institute for Fnlicy Studies Lansing, Michigan 4E909 1901 Oue Street, N.W.
UasMnaton, D. C.
20:39 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cornission Resident inspector's Office Commander, Naval Surf ace Weapons Ctr.
Route 7 ATTN:
P. C. Huana Midland, Michican 48640 White Oak Silver Spring, Marylar.d 20010 Mr. Paul A. Perry, Secretary Consuners Power Coroany Mr. L. J. Auce. Vanaae r 212 W. Michican Avenue Facility Desion Enaineerina Jackson, Michigan 43201 Energy Technolocy Encineering Center P. O. B o y.
1449 Mr. Walt Apley Canoga Park, Californ'a 91304 c/o Mr. Max Clausen Battelle Pacific North West Labs Mr.
Neil Gehrino Battelle Blvd.
U.S. Corps of Engineers SIGMA IV Building NCEED - T Richland, Washinaton 99352 7th Floor 477 Michican Avenue Detroit, Michiaan 48226
Mr. J. W. Cook
-?-
cc:
Mr. 1. Charak, Manager fiRC Assistance Project Arconne National Laboratory 9700 South Cass Avenue Argonne, Illinois 60439 ATTft:
Clyde Herrick Franklin Research Center 20th & Race Streets Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 Mr. Patrick Bassett Enerav Division Norwe'st Bank Minneapolis, N.A.
8th and Marauette Minneapolis, Minnesota 55479
PERRY Mr. Murra.- P. Edelman Vice President, Nuclear Group The Clevelarid Electric 111uminating Company P. O. Box 5000 Cleveland, Ohio 44101 Donald H. Hauser, Esq.
The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Ccepany P. O. Box 5000 Cleveland Ohio 44101 Resident Inspector's Office U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission Parnly at Center Road Perry, Ohio 44081 Mr. James G. Leppler U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Reuion III 799 Poosevelt Rcad Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137
Rancho Seco Sacramento County Board of Supervisors 827 7th Street, Room 424 Sacrsmento, California 95814 Mr. John B. Martin, Regional Admini s t ra tor U.S. f.uclear Regulatory Corrission Recicn V
~
1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Walnut Creek. California 94596 Regional Fadiaticn Representative EPA Region IX San Francisco, California 94111 f1r. Robert B. Borsun Eabcock & Wilccx Nuclear Power Generation Divisinn Suite 220, 7910 Woodmont Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Helen Hubbard P. O. Box 63 Sunol, California 94586 Ms. Eleanor Schwartz Califorrie State Office 600 Pernsylvania Avenue, S.E., P.r.:. 201 Washington, C.C.
20003 Resident inspector / Rancho Seco c/o U.S.N.R.C.
14410 Twin Cities Road Herald, CA 95638 Joseph 0. L'ard, Chief Rcdiological Health Branch State Departnent of Health Services 714 P Street, Office Building *8 Sacranento, California 95814
SHOREHAM Mr. M. S. Pollock Vice President - Nuclear Long Island Lighting Company 175 East Old Country Road Hicksville, New York 11801 cc: David Gilnartin, E:, quire Ezra I. Bialik, Esquire Suffolk County Attorney Assistant Attorney General County Executive / Legislative Bldq.
Environmental Protection Bureau Veteran's Memorial Highway New York State Department of Law Hauppauge, New York 11788 2 World Trade Center New York, New Y0rk 10047 Resident Inspector Lawrence Coe Lanpher, Esquire Shorehan NPS, U.S. NRC Kirkpatrick, Lockhart, Hill, P. D. Box B Christopher & Phillips Rocky Point, New York 11778 1900 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D. C.
20036 Energy Research Group, Inc.
Karla J. Letsche, Esquire 400-1 Totter Pond Road Kirkpatrick, Lockhart, Hill, Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 Christopher & Phillips 1900 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D. C.
2003; Mr. James Rivello Dr. M. Stanley Livingstone Plant Manager 1005 Calle Largo Shorehan Nuclear Power Station Sante Fe, New Mexico 87501 P. O. Box 628 Wading River, New York 11792
ENCLOSURE 1
}fp "< og),
UNITED STATES y yg j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- q w
- ,,, /
e ussiscTow.o e mss i.i DEC1 E3
(
Mr. Clinton 5. Mattnews, Vice President and General Manager Transanerica Delaval, Incorporated 550 E5th Avenue P. O. Box 2161 Oakland, California 94621 Cear Mr. Matthews:
The purpose of this letter is to follow up on an agreemer.t between "r. Bixby and Mr. Denton that tsriers of their respective staffs meet, possibly as early as the week of December 12, 1983, at cur of# ices in Setnesda, Maryland, to discuss several technical issues regarding the it,asarerica Delaval, Inc.
(TDI) diesel cenerators which are installed at nuclear power plants in the United States. The reeting would be publicly noticed, and an NRC staff reeting sumary woulc be placed on the docket of al nuclear power plants usinc TDI diesel generators. The Enclosure to this letter consists of a list cf cuestions whi:% we ;-r:Ose to use as an agenda #cr the eetire
'f seme of ite c estiers.cil re:Lirs accitirnal tire te a swer, tren a la:et.ritten rescense woulc te acteotable.
If prcprietary information must ce discussed, tne eeting may be cicsed and the information ma, be withheld from cublic cisclosure, in accordar.ce with the provisions of Section 2.790 of tne Comission's regulaticns.
Please contact Mr.
P.. Caruso (301) a92-8292, of my staff, to discuss the details of the meeting.
Sincerely, Thomas M. hovak, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear,eactor Reculation
Enclosure:
As stated
- w/ e nt '. c s u re :
See r. ext occe go
/
/,
/,
a 3
D
Enclosure i
3 Describe the history and evolution of the crankshaf t design of DSP-48 diesel generators.
2.
The original Shoreham crankpins were 11 inches in diameter, but the replacement crankshaft has 12 inch crankpins.
Please discuss the reasons for the change in size, and the reesons for any other changes in getretry, retallurgy, or fabrication of the cranksnaf t.
3.
Other vendo-s who supply ccmponents or services to the nuclear power irdustry have femal r.etneds of infor-ing their cus:c ers cf ;r blems er procuct irgro\\erents.
Please Describe TDI's prcgram for such notification.
4 In its re; ort on the crankshaft failure, LILCo's consultant ncied that the forcing function used by TDI in its torsional analysis changed significantly between 1975 and 1983. Describe the history and develccrent of the forcing fuctions used by TDI in assessing the adecuacy of its V-16 and straight-S engines.
Please explain how the effects of changes in the forcing functions have been evaluated to ensure that these chances can be accomodated by the various parts of the entines.
E.
Descr:ce C :s efferts in uncerstanding tte ca.ses cf the Snorenam c anisnaft failures.
Incluce in your response any conclusions you have reached after consicering the report by LILCo's consultert, and a descriction of any acticns you have taken or plan to take as a result of these failures.
6.
Design calculations for r.ajor pieces of equipment are usually independently checked and verified.
Explai., hc this process was carried out fcr the original anc re;1acerent crarishafts.
Ircluce, 4 possible, exar;les of actual calculations or tests wnich were done to verify the design.
7.
LILCo has also identified problems with failures of the diesel engine ccnrecting red bearings.
We understand that they have provided you witn a ctpy of their initial repcrt on the subject.
Please describe the history C the design and manufacture of the ccnnecting roc bearings in TDI e,gines.
Discuss hcw the bearinc material specifications have ceveloped, including any changes since tne Shoreham engires were built enc the bases for such changes. Also describe the processes by anich TD: ensured that the material ret the sceci'ications.
If you have experientec eny other bearing probir ms in other TDI er.gines, please discuss them.
E.
Discuss the history and evolution of the design of the pistons used in TDI engines.
Transamenca 7'"""'3%',;*,'4",b ion enCt0suar 2 gglgggl 55o 85th Avenue P.O. Box 2161 T
Oakland, California 94821 (415) 577 7400 December 16, 1933 Mr. T. M. Novak Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Subjec t: Standby Diesel Generators at Nuclear Power Plants
Reference:
Mr. T. M. Novak's Letter of December 1,1983
Dear Mr. Novak:
The Users' Group gave us a copy of the three-page list of nine questions at the November 30, 1983 meeting.
This is the same list sent to us on November 29. 1983 by your Mr. R. Caruso. We are today sending the Users' Group answers to the nine questions. Since the content of the nine questions is essentially the same as the list submitted by the referenced letter, we are sending you a copy of our answers to the nine questions asked by the Users' Group.
We trust that these nine answers are responsive to the list submitted by the referenced letter.
However, if there are any additional auestions, please don't hesitate to call. We intend to cooperate fully with the NRC and the Users' Group to answer all your questions.
Very truly yours, j'
/
-;l/?! 2CCr,
C. S. Mathews Vice President and General Manager CSM/WVD/pn 4312200154-0312iL k
C F SJBJs CF
\\
a tLRG_ M EIIME Describe the history and evolution of crankshaft design of DSR-48 G #1 diesel generators.
The DSR-48 diesel engine crankshaft was developed from the DSR-38 A #1 engine which has been in production since the early fif ties.
The DSR-38 was developed from the "Q" engine which was in production since the thirties.
The "G" engine had a 10" diameter crankpin and 11" diameter main journal and was rated at 260,327 and 360 rpm. The R-8 engine started with an 11" diameter crankpin and 11" diameter main journal (11* x 11")
and changed to 11" x 13" and 12" x 13" during the course of evolution, from 300 rpm originally to 327, 360,
- 375, 400, 425 and 450 rpm. The first DSR-48 engine was built and shipped in 1969.
It was rated for 400 RPM operation. The first 450 RPM DSR-48 engines were built in 1975.
0 #'2(a) - khat prompted ' you to change the size.-of the crankpin after the -
Shoreham engines were built?
A #2(a) - TDI changed the erankpin ditmeter to achieve higher torsional stiffness.
This change to the engine was made to give broader capabilities as a driver for different applications, such as pump snd marine drivers.
- Further, the change is a part of the evolutionary process.
For example the crankpin of the "RV" had been changed from 12" to 13" the previous year for the same reasons and not because of a problem with the 12" pin shaft.
G #2(b) - When was the decision made to change the crankpin size?
A #2(b) - The drawing for the 12" erankpin erankshaft no. 03-310-05-AD was dated 2/4/75.
Q #2(c) - Why was the crankpin fillet geometry changed?
A #2(c) - The "RV" erankshaf ts have a 3/4" fillet. When the change was made to the erankpin diameter of the "R" engine, TDI made the fillet radius change to again commonality in design between the R-48 and "RV".
The commonality is desirable from a manufacturing standpoint.
G #2(d) - When was LILCO informed of the change in erankpin size?
A #2(d) - Immediately following the erankshaft failure at LILCO.The requirement for a quick supply of new crankshafts dictated the 12" diameter pin shaft be supplied because it was the only shaft immediately available.
What is the TDI mechanism for anioreir., it: ::htomers of problems of Q #3 product improvements? Does TDI use a technical information letter approach or its equivalent?
The TDI mechanism for informing it's customers of problems or product A #3 improvements is the Service Information Memo (SIM) program.
The SIM is to a Technical Information Letter with the additional advantage of an index system, which allows the collected SIMs to form a fourth volume of the Instruction Manuals.
Additionally, TDI informs nuclear plant customers of " potential defects" as required by Federal Law 10 CFR 21.
G #4 4 - In its report on the crankshaft failure, LILCO's consultant noted that 4 (a) the forcing function used by TDI in its torional analysis changed significantly between 1975 and 1983.
A #4 &
The torsional analysis for LILCD used the forcing functions which were 4(a) in the TDI computer program data base in 1974. We made two changes to the forcing functions values in 1975. The second change made in 1975 was used until 1977. In 1977, we made minor refinements to the forcing functions'and these remain in use today.
O #4(b) - Why did this change occur?
A #4(b) - The analytical results from the torsional analysis are verified by torsiograph tests.
Since the intention of the analysis is to
.ecurately predict the natural frequencies and stress levels of the diesel generator syst em, input data to the computer program is
- adjusted, so that the calculations result in agreement with the test results.
The changes to the forcing functions are steps taken to satch calculated or predicted values with those obtained from tests Our current forcing functions predict slightly higher stress levels than measured.
G #4(c) - What effect does this chagne have on any other components of DSR-48 engines?
A #4 (e) - None.
The changes to the forcing functions were made to get the computer assist ed computation to accurately predict the actual behavior of the en2ine generator shaft mass elastic system.
Q #4(d) - What forcing functions were used in the cesign of other TDI engines (sucW as the DSRV-16-45) in nuclear service?
A #4(d) - The following tabulation shows what forcing function groups were used for all the TDI engines for nuclear service.
CONTRACT CONTRACT TORSIONAL HARMONIC NUMBER NAME REPORT COEFFICIENT DATE 6ROUP 74010 LILCD 7/18/74 1
75841 S.C.E.
6/27/75 1
75005 -
KU0SHENG 4/25/75 1
74046 CP&L 1975 2
74033 MP&L 9/15/75 3
75017 DUKE-CATAWBA 3
75051 C.E.I.
7/9/76 3
75084 WPPSS 8/16/76 3
75BSO TVA-BELLEFDNTE 4/27/76 3
76001 T. U. S. I.
1/5/7C 3
77031 CONSUMERS 4/26/Ts 3
74039 GULF STATES 5/3/77 3
77024 TVA-STRIDE 8/16/77 4
8/1/78 4
78006 MAANSHAN 6/22/78 4
81015 S.M.U.D.
9/10/81 4
HARMONIC CDEFFICIENT GROUP 1
1974 TV 1975 HARMONIC COEFFICIENT GROUP 2
1975 HARMONIC COEFFICIENT GROUP 3
1975 1V 1977 HARMONIC COEFFICIENT GROUP 4
1977 TO CURRENT HQRMONIC CDEFFICIENT LISTING PER"1D 74 - 75 75 75 - 77 77 LISTING FROM LILCD CD&1 MP&L STRIDE HORMONIC GROUD 1 GROUD 2 GROUD 3 GROUD 4
.5 11.00 90.88 97.60 155.45 1
20.62 89.78 94.36 94.21
- 1. 5 19.00 94.88 100.70 129.21 2
24.06 45.43 42.53 42.61
- 2. 5 20.20 62.38 65.61 71.51 3
19.97 14.84 16.57 16,52
- 3. 5 16.70 38.91 48,61 42.72 4
13.30 29.04 30.25 27.62
- 4. 5 9.85 12.48 12.73 12.72 5
7.30 9.21 9.39 9.38
- 5. 5 5.65 7.01 7.14 7.14 6
4.18 5.55 5.68 5.68
- 6. 5 3.29 4.39 4.49 4.49 7
2.66 3.60 3.69 3.68
- 7. 5 2.23 2.98 3.05
- 3. 64 8
1.87 2.46 2.52 2.52 B. 5 1.61 2.20 2.26 2.26 9
1.42 1.92 1.97 1.97
- 9. 5 1.25
- 1. 50 1.53 1.52 10 1.11 1.25 1.27 1.27 10.5
- 1. 00 1.13 1.14 1.14 11
.91 1.01
- 1. 82 1.01 11.5
.82
. 88
.89
.89 12
.74
.78
.79
.79 Q #4(e) - Have these forcing functions changed?
A #4 (e) - The current Tr. values have tseen in use since 1977.
Q #4(f) - Please describe ths development of the forcing functions for each TDI diesel in nuclear service.
A #4(f) - The forcing functions are derived from Fourier analysis of the torque vs erank angle diagram for one cylinder. These forcing functions are subsequently adjusted to correlate the analytical results with test resulte as already noted.
Since all the TDI engines for nuclear service are rated at 225 beep and 450 rpm, (except for S.C.E.) which has a lower rated RV-20-4, the forcing functions are similar.
O #5(a) - What does TDI view as the reason for the Shoreham crankshaft failure?
A #5(a) - Site operating stresses approximately equal to the endurance limit caused high cycle (10.
66 to 10.
07) fatigue failure of the crankshaft.
G #5(b) - What conclusions has TDI drawn from the LILCD failure report?
A #5(b) - The operating stresses in the 11 x 13 eranksaft were essentially equivalent to the endurance strength and results in high cycle (10 E 06 to 10 E 97) fatigue failure.
The failure is effectively an unfortunate endurance limit test. Even a small reduction in stress (perhaps only 2 or 3 percent} would have resulted in unlimited life.
Since the 12" x 13" crankshaft is subjected to significantly reduced stresses it will result unquestionably in a shaft that will give unlimited life.
In these satters we are in complete agreement with the LILCD/ Failure Analysis Associates -eport. However, we do not feel that the FaAA analytical analysis, particularly the finite element model (Sec.
6 of report) is necessarily satisfactory. It fails to predict the actual state of stress measured by Stone & Webster (Sec.
4) and it fails to satisfactorily predict the crack location and direction. The crankshaft stress analysis is inadequate and therefore does not fully explain the reason for failure.
TDI is currently engaged in its own. stress analysis progras, which is ex pect ed to yield a more accurate ar.alyt ical model and a clear understanding of the stresses which caused the failure.
Q #5(c) - What actions has TDI taken or does TDI plan to take for Shoreham and other plants as a result of the Shoreham crankshaft failure?
A #5(c) - TDI plans to continue its investigation into the reason (s) for the Shoreham crankshaft failure in accordance with the outline given in the discussion presented by Mr. Greg Beshouri (attached). The results of these investigations will be published at the appropriate time 'and made available to all interested parties.
D #5(d) - Does TDI plan to prepare a report of its own regarding the Shoreham crankshaft failure?
A #5(d) - TDI will develcp a formal report containing it's views on the reasons for the failures.
Much of the report will be developed using understandings gained from the R&D studies outlined above.
O #5(a) - Describe how TDI design calculations are reviewed and independently verified?
A #E(a) - Calculations performed by cesign engineers are reviewed, signed and dated by the Manager of Design Engineering.
Designs which rely on calculations in which assumptions cannot be verified are subject to experimental testing by the Research and Development group. In some instances the Manager of Applied Mechanics will also review the result. Some components are subjected to testing on a shaker table, if practical.
Q #6(b) - What detailed stress analysis of the crank web and pin were performed?
A #5(b) - No detailed analysis were done on the crankshaft other than the crankshaft was designed to American Bureau of Shipping Rules, as detailed in the attached excerpt from the rule book.
TDI has successfully used such rules as a design standard for 45 years. The R-48 crankshaft was developed from the "Q" engine with 10" x 11" (10" diameter crankpin and 11" diameter mais, journal) to the first "R" engines with 11" x 11" erankshafts then 11" x 13" to the current 12" x 13" configuration.
0 #7 Could the problem with the crankshaft have been detected during initial torsiograph testing at the factory?
A #7 -
No.
The total vibratory amplitude measured was only + or
.50 deg.
which equates to a stress of 5314 psi. The portion attributed to the fourth order was + or
.43 deg. or 4570 psi, well within the 5000 psi allowed by DEMA for single order contribution. (The stress required to break the erankshaft was more on the order of + or - 30 to 35 ksi.)
D #8(a) (i) -LILCO has also identified problems with failures of the diesel engine connecting rod bearings. We understand that they have provided-
=
you with e copy of their initial report on the subject. (a) What does TDI view as the reason for the Shoreham bearings failure?
A #8(a) - Four of the forty bearing shells were reported to be cracked, only one of which had a significant crack through the edge of the top shell.
The small piece 4-7/16" long and 11/16" wide at the thickest point was Jacked apart from the main oody of the bearing shell for st udy.
None of these shells had failed to the extent that the clearances were opened up nor did any of the shells result in damage to the erankpin.
A photo-micrograph of this broken bearing showed porosity ranging from 0.01 to 0.03 in diameter. In addition, the material was found to be below st andard for elongation.
An examination of the fracture surface with scanning electron microscopy identified some of these voids es the apparent crack initiation locations.
In compression the porosity would not pose a problem.
~
- Hewever, the overhung bearing arrangement resulting from a 1/4" chamfer on the connecting rod as shown in Figure 1.1 (attached) in conjunction with the normal yawing of the crankshaft, put the I.D. of the bearing into t ens ion.
The surface porosity, acted as stress intensifiers and with the poor material elongation characteristics, initiat ed a crack.
This nas clearly a saterial rather than design problem as evidenced by the fact that more than 308 eylindres of this connect ing rod arrangement are in operation, many of which have operated for more than 25,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> without bearing problems.
G #8(b) - What action has TDI taken to ensure that new bearing will not fail in a similar fashion?
A #8(b) - In regard to LILCO and other R-48 engines installed in emergency standby service, the crankshaft is fitted with a connecting rod which has a smaller 1/16",
chamfer on the edges. Figure 1.2 (attached) shows the bearing is fully supported. Even though there may be some porosity in the bearing shell material, the shell is in compression and therefore minor porosity would not be detrimental.
Chemical and physical properites of casting Icts or heats are tested to verify compliance with requirements.
In addition, TDI does a visual inspection for porosity of each shell during manufacture.
G #8(c) - What other TD1 engines in nuclear service use similar bearing material?
A #8(c) - All of the nuclear and commercial engines which TDI manufactures contain bearings using identical B-850-T5 bearing material. This material is a 6% tin content aluminum alloy. We purchase castings from Aluminum Company of America and perform all machining and plating operations at the Oakland facility.,
Q #9(d) - What action has TDI taken for other engines to preclude their failure in a similar fashion?,
A #8(d) - The bearings in all other engines in nuclear service have connecting rod and bearing arrangements shown in Figure 1.2 and 1.3 (attached).
Each provides full support for the bearing shell. The bearing shell is in compression, both from crush and operating
- forces, with no portion of the shell in tension. There fore, if bearing material contains minor porosity, as all castings do, the loads present will not act with the stress intensifiers and result in cracks.
O #8(e) - What controls has TDI provided on bearing material in the past?
A #8(e) - The purchase order for bearing material has required the supplier to furnish a Certified Me erial Test Report (CMTR). This was a requirement in 1974 and still is. The CMTR is reviewed for complia.ee to the meterial requirements. All bearings are inspected visually for porosity during the manufacturing process.
O sS(f) - How did and does TDI ensure that bearing material meets its specifications?
A #S(f) - In 1975 TDI initiated it's own bearing material sample testing program to check cheemical and Physical properties against specification and the CMTR supplied by the vendor. This program remains TDI's standard practice.
Q 66(g) - What other experience has TDI had with connecting rod bearing failures, of any kind, in any nuclear or non-nuclear installations?
A #8(g) - TDI customers have encountered occasional babbitt fatigue. It has the appearance of small worm holes in the surface of the babbitt. In addition several users have suffered the results of faulty reinstallation, dirt ingestion and abuse which have resulted in bearing failure.
D #S(h) - knat procedures does TDI use to ensure that bearings and journals are properly designed and manufactured?
A #B(h) - TDI has been designing, developing and building engires since before 1938. The intervening years have provided considerable experic-~= and knowledge regarding what constitutes a properly designed trankshutt journal and eating bearing, such as L/D ratio, surface finish, babbitt thickness, etc. In addition, we work closely with the bearing material vendors-regarding the bearing design.
All of this information culmanat es in a design that is translated into detail drawings for manufacturing. The QA department ensures confo-mance to the drawing requirements through TDI's 10CFR50B rrogram. The bearing material vendor provides Certified Material Test Reports (CMTR's) for each casting heat
%.1 c5 are review for conformance to the drawing requirements and are verified by TDI's own Chemical & Physical test for each casting heat.
O #8(i) - Describe any probleas you or any of your customers have encountered with the use or manufact ure of aluminum bearings with babbitt A GB(d) - The bearings in all other engines in nuclear service have connecting rod and bearing arrangements shown in Figure 1.2 and 1.3 (attached).
Each provides full support for the bearing shell. The bearing shell is in compression, both from crush ard operating
- forces, with no portion of the shall in tension. Thsrefore, if bearing material contains minor porosity, as all castings do, the loads present will not act with the stress intensifiers and result in cracks.
G #Ste) - What controls has TDI provided on bearing material in the past?
A #B(e) - The purchase order for bearing material has required the supplier to furnish a Certified Mat erial Test Report (CMTR).
This was a requirement in 1974 and still is. The CMTR is reviewed for compliance to the material requirerents. All iearings are inspected visually for porosity during the manufacturing process.
G 8B(f) - How did and does TDI ensure that bearing mat erial meets its specifications?
A #9(f) - In 1975 TDI initisted it's own bearing saterial sample testing program to check eneemical and Physical properties against specificat ion and the CMTR supplied by the vendor. This program resains TDI's standard practice.
C 4B(g) - What other experience has TDI had with connecting rod bearing failures, of any kind, in any nuclear or non-nuclear installations?
A #8(g) - TDI customers have encountered occasional babbitt fatigue. It has the appearance of small worm holes in the surface of the babbitt. In addition several users have suffered the result s of faulty reirstallation, dirt ingestion and abuse oshich have resulted in bearing failure.
0 #Bth) - What procedures does TDI use to ensure that bearinDs and journals are properly designed and manufactured?
A 48(h) - TDI hac been designing, developin2 and building engines since before 1938. The intervening years have provided consicerable emperience and krm ledge regarding what constitutes a properly designed crankshaft journal and sating bearing, such as L/D ratio, surface finish, babeitt. thickness, etc. In addition, see work closely with ther bearing saterial vendors-regarding the bearing design.
All of this information culmanates in a design that is trans:sted into detail crawings for manufacturing. The QA department ensures conformance to the dra. wing requirements through TD1's 10CFR50B program. The bearing material vendor provides Certified Material Test Reports (CKTR's) for each casting heat which are review for conformance to the drawing requirements and are verified by TDI's own Chemical & Physical test for each casting heat.
D 68(i) - Describe any problems you or any of your customers have encountered with the use or manufacture of alusinum bearings with babbitt overlays.
A #8(i) - Users have occasionally encountered babbit fatigue in the bearing overlay. This may occur if the tin content in the babbitt is too low, resulting in a weaker babbit.
The composition of the babbitt is monitored quite closely.
TDI has initiated a change in the babbitt composition to further ieprove the fatigue resistance. This calls for the inclusion of 2.73 - 3% copper in the S. A.E. - 19 babbitt. With the TDI bearing design, babbitt fatigue or even complete babbit overlay loss does not result in any sort of catastrophic berring failure that might cause the engine to stop functioning properly. TDI has also occasionally encountered porosity and low elongation charact eristics in the aluminum castings used to manuf acture the bearing shells.
C #5 LILCO as also identified problems with cracks in almost all of the piston skirts at Shoreham.
A e9 This statement is incorrect. There has been only one piston at LILCD which has been identified as having a crack. The examinations being conducted at tne site are using an " eddy current" inspection process which TDI and it's Metallurgy Consultant considers not suitable for examination of cast nodular iron surfaces. This eddy current process has predict ed linear indications in the piston skirts which in most cases may be nothing more than the grain boundaries within the nodular iron structure.
Q #9(a) - Describe the stress analysis and testing that has been done by TDI in the development of type AF, AN and AE pistons.
A #9(a) - AF, AN, and AE pistons have been subjected to many experimental test programs te reveal the patterns of stress and temperature existing in the assembly.
The tests included studies of thermal distortion, effects of combustion pressure and inertia forces. Finita element analysis (FEM) was attempted on a crown, however the technique proved to be less than adequate.
Piston assemblies of the AN and AE type were successfully run for 687 hours0.00795 days <br />0.191 hours <br />0.00114 weeks <br />2.614035e-4 months <br /> in the experimental R5-V12 engine at 514 rpm and a power level of 937 bhp per cylinder to support the results of the static and ar.alyt ical st udi es.
Nuclear standcy generator diesels are rated at A50 rpm and 609 bhp per cylinder. Therefore the test work subjected the pzstons to considerably higher, operating stresses than the pistons used in any standby engine.
Q #9(b) - Has TDI or any of its customers encountered siuilar or different problems with piston cracking?
A #9(b) - The crack report ed by LILCD is the first such erack identified and modified ("AF" style piston skirt which has been reported on the manufactured in accordance with design requirements. There are 252 eodified "AF" piston sRirt t operating, which have accumulated in excess of 1,772,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of successful operation. e
The "AN" style piston has experienced several field failures, which have been attributed to high rirsidual stresses not removed by a stress relief process.
There have been no reported failures of the d'AN" style piston which have been stress relieved and properly eachined.
Tnere are 1374 "AN" style pistons opeataing which have accumulated in excess of 2,760,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of successful operation.
The "4E" style piston is the lat est TDI R-4 piston design and incorporates prior R-4 design and operau ng experience and rxu design knowledge we have gained through our R-5 engine test program. The "AE" piston design has been successfully tested in our R-5 test engine at 514 rpm and 302 Br.EP and has acquired in excess of 7000 operating hours in a 16 cylinder 7000 kw engine in the field.
G #9(c) - Has TDI modified its piston skirt design to improve stress levels in the area of the bolt holes?
A #9 (c) - As part of a continuing program of product performance and reliability improvements, TDI has modified the piston skirt design to improve stress distribution in the area of the festener holes and in the circumferential aid rib blend to the wrist pin boss.
D #9(d) - How and when were these modifications made?
A #9(d) - Primarily as a result of the studies referred to in the answer to question 9a, TDI concluded that a more massive boss around the bolthole would better diffuse forcee to the piston pin area.
Calculations also verified that the protection afforded the fasteners against cyclie Icading could be tehieved with only 13 ballsville washers instead of the original 26 washers.
On August 10,
- 1982, piston skirt B2-341-04-AE was released fo:-
production. It required that a change be made to the corebox in which the mold for the piston skirt interior is formed. This change provided the more cassiva bosses ar1;>und the boltholes and precluded the manufacture of earlier designs.
O
49 CRANKE-ATT STEC55 ANALY51g_PR2Q305 Greg Beshouri, Reset-en Engineer iG 55EJCIlO3 With tne failure of the 11" x 17" cranksnafts in tne LILCD D5R-48 (5/N 74010/ iller.gine, TDI initiated it *4s analysis program (incluaing physical t
testing and analytical moceling) witn the oejective cf determining tne stresses anc their sourecs in an 6 throw 11" x 13" crankshaft in orcer to identify the actual causes of tne failure af tne LILCO snafts. In acJition, this prograra is interccc to orovice a more sopnttticated input for future c w :shaf t stress eralysis anc cesign.
EEEEEEJ5E w$$CC2tJre Revith O'r i c r to tne initiation of onyt ical testing, an extensive review of tne avalistle literature was concuctec.
From this review we cetermanec, as c r:rcrec, ina; a crar vsnaf t in service is sucjected to a complex, cynamic state
<> coe.Ine: stre:Ecs. Tne key to successful stress analysis is an understanding
- a' t.e Ecurce of ercn stress component and how tnise incividual compenents aco
. r.t c the comoinec stress state.
The literature indicated the necessity of si-3:n i ;e tactin;.
Tn; tecnnical pape-s also were a good source of i t ' uT.s t : c r-en what cther recearchers had used an regard to Ev.ge type, length s1. : c et i on.
EED C al 2* flEtl_~_f11 AL not ed, tne literature review confirmed the need for strain page t e :: 1r.;.
At the me;2r.nin; of our investigation, Stone a.td Webster (L1LCO ccra. tant:) na already committed tnemselves to concucting dynaraic strain gage t es.1 r.;, a path #elt to te very cifficult to follow because of tne myricd of it.:t r 2 rte v. ct 4 or.
secolems associate with freceeney modulated (FM) telemetry (a n ; *.oc~
cf t rar.s:..i t t i ng strain information via radio waves from the opptrating c: e sac f t ).
-acrefore, we electe: to perform static strain page tar,ti. g on an av.:.aa.c e r.; ; r.e at our fec112;y u.
the hope it would complement the S&W
~
- yr.an : ;c; ting.
Tnis static testing was des a griec to provice information r:t:e:sery to interarci ar.d verify the feasibility of the cynamic test data.
Tne testing was cone on a TDI Researen and Development engine with a 11" x
- 2" erar.kshaft. The crankshaft is similar to but not icentical to tne 11" x 13" s.S af t w91cn failed at.ILCD. The cranashaft of tnis unit was statically loaced c simulate cynamic forces in tne 5th through 8th tnro.* of an R-48 engine rated
<.. Ei! ::1 E.9E? at 4f 4 R?.v..
~he cr anv.snaf t loads from gas cressure (less inertia), torcue transmission en: t or s i c t.a l vibration were first simulatec incepencently. They were tnen Lt:tc in severs: cifferent combinations to determine tne resulting stress. From
is data a general solut tor. was obtained Dy which it is possible to credict
.c.m i t.1 x cren<snaft stresc for any comosnaticn of Dending and torsional
< t r e::cs.
Test Aopargges The crankshaft was subjectec to torque in such a manner as to simulate t:.rsienul stresses from transtaitted torque and from torsional vibration, and to bencing forces simulating gas pressure (less inertia).
The necessary torque was generated by fitting cylinders No.
2&6 clearance volumes witn spacers and 0-ring seals (see Figuras 1 & 2), and then or e:curir.; them with oil with tne two pastons located at "-c
- eg. and 120 deg.
ATLC respectively.
S i mi l.ar: 1y, bending force was ger.eratec ey sea.ing and pressurizing cy.ir.ctr No. 3 with the picton at TDC and 10 cegrees and 20 ATDC.
_EiLees #ea vrements Ine stresses generated by torque and bending forces were measured by rc:istance ty;e, strain gages located on ine No. 3 crankpin fillet and on tne cranks:n (see Figures 3 L 4).
Rosettes B tnt ou;n E located in tne fillets zcatured maxieue strains anc tncir principle cirection. Rosettes A & F measureo S_<t:cn ard beneln; on t,e surf ace of tne free part of tne pin. uomparison of A L F (free-part of t r.e a i r.)
with B tnrough L (fillet), yielos the stress ccrrer.1 ration effec: of the eranrain fillef-wed configurations.
1::e'tc n (one'.y outer two ga;es usec) located on the cy1'indrical surface of tne No. 5 main journa". veriftet t9e actual torcue inducec in tne system.
A..
rosttte; were rect an;ular three gage tyoe of 0.125" (3 mm) effective
.c ngt h, r.'anufact ured by Micro-Measurement s (P/N CE4-06-125UR-126),
Ikii_itr.' erg Pure.orsion was first simultte: by pressuring cylinders 2 & 6 only in 300
- . in
- rerer.t c from 0 to 1300 psi yielcing torcues up to 2,360,000 in.1Df.
Dure :encing c-TDC wac taen strulatec cy pressuring cylinder No. 3 only, i r.
/- 2 ?
- s.
Incrrrentt from 0 to '600 psi, representing a maximum peak firing 3-es cre in er.cers of I?23 psi, ( Aote tnat tne primary and seconcacy inertia forces of the piston anc connecting red assembly oppose tne firing pressures c.nc nave t,c etuivalent effect of lowerirg the firing pressures by 377 osi wnen crestir.g at 450 r m.
Tn e r.,
my cressuring cylinders 2, 3 and 6 approorlately, combined torsion ar.: ocnd.r.; representing the actual stress state was simulatec.
Tne pare sending anc comoined bending anc torsion tests were repeated watn
- yl t r.:c e Nc. 3 piston locatec at 10 and 20 ecu1 valent cegrees ATDC.
ye.g ab."
~'EL.zar Tne strain gage ceta were reduc 6d to maximum and minimum principle strette; and cranciple directions.
From bencing load and torque data, general matnematical expressions were cerived for nominal stresses in the free part of tha pan due to bencing loads and torque.
In aceition, stress concentration factors were calculated for various fillet locations.
From tne combined stress data, a general analytical technique (using
- :nr' s circle) for calculating combined stress cue to a given bending load and t orq ue was generated.
It was then confirmed tnat this technicue could be ec:1:ed in reverse, i.e.,
given a certain combined streso state, the bending l u a-and torque creating this stress could be calculated.
Usin; this technique the cyr.amic stress data taken by Stone & Weoster on n.t
'C1.
D1 S/N 74011, at LILCO were tnen croken cown into comoonents of c f n at... e c e r.c i ng load anc cynamic torcue creating tne stress, resulting in a
- lear uncerst a ncing of tne cynamic state of stress components. had the static testing not been concucted, it woulc not have been possible to battr'actorily cec;cner the dynamic stress data taken by S&W.
2 -?!33 c:03 Ov iccoure vf the #ailure of tne LILCO cranksnafts and a recuirement to clee 'y uncerstant tne reasons for the failure and given tne success to date of the seve al vetnocs of cran snaft stresc ar.alysis acplied to tne 11" x 13" t *.a ' t,
we nave committet ourselves to an on-going cranashaf t stress analysis
?
gram.
?ntr program will crotecc in two comalimentary directions, analytical and
.:ceriacnta. (F:;. 5).
- Fitat, stat ac t ests will se concucteo on all crannsnaf t configurations to ceterrine strecs co-centration factors :n torsion anc bending. Concurrently, a cynzm.c vezel wnich pre:1 cts torcue and eending loac will De gereerated. Tne t; cLs co nc ent r a t ic.n f actors and cynamic bencing loac and torcue calculations will
'en 0 ov:ce inout for a second mccel wnien will calculate erannshaft
- t res vc crar.rangle. Tnts calculation will tnen ce vertfsed by dynamic strain
,.;e tests on selectes cran-snaft configurations. Once tne stress calculation p. :et.r e is ver:'let.
exact ncx:mc: stre s and exact operating factors of E afe ;y 4r any cran.5.af t c nfi;.: ration can ce calculated.
In acciticn to provicing cesign infcemation for new engine programs, the ccdculation procecure will De used to confirm and refine tne less so:51st cate:,
more conservative stress calculation procecures currently usec on
-4 series engines in nuclear service.
!bv:0ucly, tne cynamic test on tne 12" x
12* cranksnaft, currently
- estal'ec :n DER-46 eng:nes, will ae an important step in this program. Static t e:: : r.;
must &lso oe con:ucted on tnis snaf t in order to properly dectoner tne cyara.-:c cats expectcc to accrue from tests planned for late this year.
d O
O NkI kk ie Et$
s.d
/
O
/
L/Y k
w t
g q)"
)
k 1
\\>\\
0 c
N E
\\
\\
w
()
)
\\
f x
t)
J
\\
g u
t a
a u
e:
)
o O
E t
6 i
g,,6-/'
a a I.k4_
o
- a
. ~
~
^
l AEcMc 2
/
D L T P
l-c-
7 O
p R
c L A t
c, y -
A t
g 4
/s N r 'O A w e O
r 1A
/8 c
v h
0 4
A/g5 A.
t 3
/.
p f V O.
N k 5Ot g
E T
s, f
A1~
- s. A T o C r
t' q., O I
s.
G n
g L.
r r
o e
c l
i c
5, F ;
Nt$
E s
xS V ra
- tc T G 3
cE O v 'o-A. 9 o4nl RsJ l.
i3 f
rAui c
t lO
%N
. ~
G" N. R D 6
Lo i
U/
E A
- f. vf C
d A
f !
c
% 4
/
e l.
fog
/N EC
/tN F GN O
I NE R
oA OV-
,PH M/>O p
P sArrt pa i cw L
,5C 4
2 D
/T E
x6O4 S
n6 i
a L 9 9
P f
C c
1 R
O To U
A5 LAr 4 t *T G
p A
.1 A
A N W4 A
/F D
40 i. 5 C
/6 P
0 A
fAA 5 c
E 5 cJ 4 P$7 N
/
TQ 10 &
\\
'^
jD. N
~
F/Gt/RG 3 - GAGE LOC 4 7/0A/ N O.3 C A 4A'k A14', VIE W EO fn o m gjwogpr.ssOE OF MM 43 CRANAPir4 1
onc=9 oF A- -
Rosettes N
towTrom g
qlt E
^
I FRtE.
ano 1,.
. OF-p y
(
1M, c.ammuee et g hF' s
!I I
/
I L run J
J
)
J W.
%ua
~ter GAOLS TY PICAL. N D. TRIP /M i '..;,, ',
/o/o/83
me -
,'%i f ~.
l
/ f
~R
///
4 4,,
,,/
- ~ ~ - - - - -.,
r c
~ %.-
m JL Z s./,/
hh sF*W
/ /
j :a s
e
<. ell l
,/
w i i
~
5
'/<
t i,7. e. ! z n sh i
tw t
u h
k tw
. y 0
U R
W y
s 4
g w
h s/
~ ~c '
O W
/
e 1
5 q
sa 2 /. --
...y.,---------.
v
- ~
~ ~T p N
v7/ o.
Q X
C-4.g
\\,
\\
ci r
/
~
/ cs' g
A
- DDD C
tV AF E
o I
4 g
Ee i w
$. $* Gu.$a s a kO ET g
Y e
o W
E N
,o m
W
.b ea s
R
@uk J
Z E
2 EF d h.8 S K ao s
1l 6
F 4
CRANKSHAFT STRESS ANALYSIS PROGRAM EXPERIMENTAL ANALYTICAL 4 Perfore a 8 Generate i
4 Statae s
i Dynamac e
4 Torque &
8 a Tests e
6.....
..a e Rendang 71odel e
8....
.... _.. 8 0
0 y T.M vs
- 4 s Any Crankshaft a Stresa Concentrataon 6
i Fectoro Xt. Ea e
e m
-. ~
.....e y
All Crankahafts I
Nodel e
a
_e t
y F vs 6 6 Any Crankahaft a
F vs e e
i
. a Predact Nanteum e i Stress & F.S.
e I
Select Crankshafts I.
.e t
e f
I a
e i Verafacetion i
Proven Analytacal i Dynamac Testo I Calculataan Procedure-e i
For Stress Analysas of Any Caankahaft.
case..a 12/S/A3 Ft& c//.E S-FLOW C MAM c.g44p:sH97.s7 FESS H4473/S 9
Ti c,. 5
BEARING, COM PARISON CONNEC TING ROO 03-340 - 0 3-O C
,fx4S'CHFN\\
\\\\
x 45
- C H F.
B RG. SHELL o
03 - 3@ -0 3 -0 A N
N A = 69.62 IN5 1 A (SUPPCPTEDJs 65.50 lN$
B EA Rt wG L oAC = 4 215 P.
7 p (II" CRANKPIN)
Fis i. i c0NNECTING ROD 03-340 A A
,{ s 4 5* C H F.
BRG. SHEL L y
'03 -340 A E
% s 75.95 INS * (185.%')
r ^- -
A
.'2*D IA.
"bEAe tWG Lc4 0 ' 5615 Ps Q (I2" CRANKPIN) n Fic.i.2.
CONNECTING ROD 02-340-8 I-AJ
, s45 *CHT.K A
BRG. SHELL O2-34 0 AG
\\
l bA s 78.F.7 /NS I(ll9.57.)
BCARING LOAD
- E970 PSI
.g.
R V i ~ '* * """)
Fic. i.3