ML19326D015
| ML19326D015 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 04/05/1968 |
| From: | Hall W NATHAN M. NEWMARK CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES |
| To: | Morris P US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19326D010 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-AT(49-5)-2667 NUDOCS 8004300638 | |
| Download: ML19326D015 (8) | |
Text
1 Wkl[*MdWNW
'[8'NA W Na2 & ~
Yf 8004300$ N i
g, NATHAN M.
NEWMARK J) dONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES 1114 CIVIL ENGINEERING BUILDING URBANA. ILLINOIS 61801 5 April 1968 2
Cr.
r ter A.
Morris, Cirector e
Divis ion of Reactor L icens ing U. S. Atomic Energy Cc mission Washington, D.C.
205L5 Re:
Contract No. AT(49-5)-2667 Russellville Nuclear Unit Arkansas Dowar and Light Ccmpany AEC Document No. 50-313
Dear Cr. Morris:
As a result of the review of the Sreliminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR) for !Fe Russellville Nuclear Unit by Dr.
N.
M.
Newmark and myself, we have prepared the folicwing comments and questions.
We have been in contact with your staff and expect that some of these ques tiens may already have been discussed with the applicant.
The Russellville Nuclear Unit will contain a pressurized water reactor nuclear s team sys tem to be suoclied by the habcock and Wilcox Comoany.
The niant is to be des igned f or a t herma l power output of 2452 MWt.
The reactor containment structure will consist s
of a f ully cont inuous re inforced concrete s t ructure in the shape of cylinder with a thallcw domed roof and a flat foundat ion s lab.
The cyl;ndrical portion cf the structure is pres tressed by a cos t-tens ioning 5 ys tem cons is t ing of ho r i.? cn t a l and vertical t e ndo ns.
The dome has a 3-way cos t-t ens ioni ng s ys tem.
The foundaticn slab is convent ional ly reinfarced wi:b b,h-strength reinforcing steel.
The facility is located on a penins ula in the Dardanelle Reservoir of the Arkansas River, Pooe County, Arkansas, two miles SE of London, Arkansas 4
s m
- fffMl$.WhhSS TI W ~** T M Y ~ K q-w. #
i{kS$;
e
>M} ^
.ur "A
2 a nd s i x miles WNW of Russellville, Arkansas.
The geology and foundation is describec as consisting of stiff clay and silty clay of 13 to 23 foot thickness overlying hard and cens..
- lack horizontally becded shale (Mc A l e s t e r ) f or ma t i on.
The reactor structures are to be founded on the shale.
No active or recent faulting i; known to exist in the site area.
The cicsest faults are the l.ondon and Crairie View faults some five or six miles fecm the site.
The earthquake design cri teria croposed by the acolicant called for a design earthquake based on 1 9 maxi um horizontal ground acceleration and a ma s imum ear t houake based on 0.20g maximum horizontal ground accelerat ion.
Thase earthquake cesign levels are still under review by the U.
5.
Coast and Geodetic Survey, the U.
S.
Crological Survey, anc curselves.
We ask that the followina quastiens be transmi t ted to the aoolicant for study and answer.
1.
- ith regard t o t he damo i ng va l ue s t o be emo l oyed in the seismic a na l ys i s, it i s no t ed in the tatlo on oage 5-A-5 of tre 35AR that da mo i ng for rock ing mot ion of the containment structure on i ts foundation is not i nc l uded in the l is t presented.
If rocking is to be included in the ana lys is,
a statement as t o t he a mou n t of damoing to be permittec for t h i s mode o f mation for both the des ign and ma x imum ear thquak e is requested.
2.
The descript ion of the method cf dynamic analys is is given on pages 5-31 and 5-32 of the PSAR.
It is indicated there that the resocnse of the modes af vibrat ion would be combined on a root-mean-square bas is to l
obtain the most probable value of t he max imum res nons e.
This approach is generally sat is factory if the number c f inc luded moces is s uf f ic ient.
s
T5W5&}f. -.~l5%' %WNM?$W?MWW""'
-~
gE
~.. - -
p, 4;. ? l eyy r
K&r-y+ $
p 3
For a srell number of modes it is of ten aporopriate to add the maxime direct iy.
In fo r ma t ion is requested as to the number of modes that will be i nc l uded i f the root-mean-square bas is of combining modes i s emp loyed.
3 No ment ion is noted in the PSAR as to the nethod by which the vertical and horizontal earthquake stresses will be combined with other applicable s tresses aris ing f rom coerat ing loads, live loads, etc.
It is customary for the vertical and horizontal earthquake stresses to be combined directly and linearly with the other applicable stresses.
Clarificaticn of the manner in which the stresses will be combined is requested.
L.
It is noted on page 5-A-L of Apoendix 5A that Class II s tructures will be designed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code.
Clarification is required as to the applicable Zone for which the des ign is to be nede.
5 On page 5.4 of the PSAR it is noted that the design will be made for tornado loads possess ing a peripheral ta ;ential veloc i t y of 300 mph and a forward progression of 40 mph.
Clar i f ica t ion is required as to the bas is of the select ion of the 40 m;h forward progress ion velocity s ince this is somewhat less than the forward orogression velocity often associated with tornado loadirg criteria.
4 On pages 5-16 and 5-17 are described the two des ign acoroaches that are to be eroloyed, nanely the design load accroach involving '%crkir-s t ress" des ign, and the approach involving factored loads.
In the first case the forces will be compared with code stresses except for certain exceotions which have been described in immediately creceding sections.
Howeser, it is noted that the design load accroach does not i nclude a comb inat ion involving earthquake, pioe rupture, etc.
The factared load acorach involves a quite different set of load combinations which are compared with the yield strength of the structure.
In this case the load ing combinat ions
- h. -
A
). g Qggp @-W r6 M M M 5 " N 'M W W
- .3 3 ;< ~ 1
.~
zW -
,??k.
R%h, h
q; g
include the design and naximum earthquake loadings, pipe ruoture, etc.
The ques t ion arises then as to whether the factored load analys is aporoach is to provide any for ai of a check agains t the design load aoproach?
If so, it is hard to visualize how the check can be neaning ful s ince the same loadinos ara n*
e,ns dered a the two cases ; c lar i f icat ion of this i
.questec.
poert
=
iso ;n+: nar m s reques!*d as to the basis 0- evaluatins he margin of safety f rom toth des egn aporoaches in terms of des ign compar ison.
Stated another way under,what conditions is it decided that one or the other des;gn aonroach is to control the design' 7.
In loading condition (e) on ooge 5-16 there aooears to be an error and c:a stication is reques ted as to whether one of the terms s'hould be omitted or whether one of the terms i nvolv ing ef fect ive pres t ress should be omitted and an additional load combination i nc luded.
With regard to the load comb i na t i ons (a) through (f), and in particular i n compa r i ng l oad i ng cond i t ions (e ) a nd (f) with those preceding it, under wh ich condi t ions, or at what locations, is it expected that loading conditions (e) and (f) will control the des icn?
?.
In the d scus s ion of the stress criteria associated with the factored load approach and particularly that presented in paragraphs 3, L, and 5 on pa9e 5-19, it is noted that the steel will be allowed to attain but not excaed yield, the concrete will be allowed to acoroach 0.85 f',
yet C
no redistribution of < tress will be allowed beyond yield, and yet again the liner strains will be limited to ).005 inches per i nc h.
TFe acoroach of not parmitting tbe factored load cesign to exceed yield appears satifactory.
l
j
\\C&IWFw&T'm#ef f't'5'b'S * ' '
~
y o.
,.; w % f '
t y..,&
g f
z4 L2
.:s' 5
y Hcwever, in view of the slight difference in the criteria that are presented, c la r i f ica t ion 's reques ted as to how the limitat ion on liner strain compares with limiting the reinforcing steel and concrete to yield without subsequent deformation.
The liner s tra in value would sugges t s ignificant deformation beyond yield, s
Moreover, clarification is requested as to whether limitation on liner strain is a general membrane strain in the liner or whether it corresponds to localized yielding around penetrations, etc.
With regard to the reinforcing steel, it is indicated in paragraph 4 on page 5-19 that the reinforcing steel forming the load carrying system will not be allowed to go beyond yield.
Paragraph 5 states that nonores t res sed re inforc inq s teel woulc be allowed to exceed yield.
Specific cornent on this particular situation is requested.
9 On page 5-24 the liner plate anchor spacing and t h ick nes s is described to be such that the critical buckling stress of the liner will be higher than the proportional limit.
Additional information en the design of the liner agains t buckling is reques ted and should include an i nd ica t ion of the boundary condit ions assumed - for liner buck 1;ng, the aporoach used in calculating the buckling stress, the buckling s tress so calculated, and deta iled 'informat ion concerning the method of at tachment of the liner to the anchors.
10.
The des ign of the equiccent and personnel access hatches is described on page 5-34 of the PSAP.
Add it ional inforret ion is requested as to the nature of these personnel locks and the design criteria that will be employed to insure that the seismic loading of these locks will not lead to d i f ficul t ies wi th-conta inment.
t Cotris
- g*f5M-4.wA
%&ry67 i e$4 f
s C
u.m r
a
[.
~*
y-
.IliIC
'h?,
b ge II.
With regard to the des ign of the containrent structure and 4, -.
associated structures nearby, what are the max mum expected values of relative
+
displacer nt in any direction that might occur during se:smic or static loading? What provis ions are incorporated into the des ign to handle these relat ive mot ions ?
12.
No mention of cranes, which may be Class I items, was noted in the PSAR.
Informat ion is requested as to the des ign of these cranes to insure that they cannot be dislodged during an earthquake or otherwise cause damage which might impair safe shutdown and containment.
13.
No ment ion was noted in the PSAR concerning cathodic protection.
Will cathodic orotect ion be necessary?
If so, what is the nature of the s
protection sys tem to be emoloyed and for what structures or portions of
+/
structures will it be used?
Ik.
The many reactor internals, reac tor vessels and succorts,
and many portiens of tFe piping constitute Class I equipment and s ys tems.
Lit t le or no ment ion of the des ign criteria for these i tems was noted in the DSAR.
A comorehens ive presentation of the des ign critaria f or these i t ems is required.
This oresentat ion should include at the very minimum a detailed discussion of the following items:
(a) the loading combinat ions for which these i t ems a re to be designed; (b) the methods of anal ys is to be employed f or operat ing condi tions,
accident conditions (including seismic loading), etc. ;
)
(c) the allowable stress and deformation criteria for all acclicable loading conditions including those involving the des ign and i
maximum earthquake, and the margin of safety implied by the criteria.
i sahawm2 -
t
eaw: 4-.;drewy ~p.Mr yySmyw -%, '
M p;
n yw -'.*;*,.
p" V~
- . 'E:
jr(
7 m.
X45 15.
A description is reques ted of the seismic des ign criteria
-ee.
1 for cc: t ical.contrels, ins trumentat ion, bat teries, bat tery racks and other items of this type which are essential to safe shutdown.
.j 16.
The anal ys is reported in the PSAR of the Cardenelle Dam L
E which forms the cooling water pool for this plant indicates that this dam could withstsnd the maximum earthquake of 0.29 without losing its functional integrity.
Additional informat ion is requested concerning the analysis of this dam.
More detail is reques ted concerning (a) the possible modes of fa ' i ure, (b) as to whether pore pressure ef fects were cons idered in the analysis and (c) as to whether vert ical earthquake exc itat ion was included concurrently with lateral excitation.
If for some unforeseen reason the dam were to fail and/or leak, is the topography such that there would remain in the area of the reactor cooling water intake a basin of water which could serve the purposes of cooling?
Alternatively are there.other sources of water which could be used for cooling?
17.
Additional information is requested concerning possicle f lood i rg of t he s ite area.
The following information is reques ted with regard to the flooding and the possible effect on structures:
(a)
Li t t le or no informat ion was noted in the PSAR concerning the des ign of the water intake structures, particularly with reference to the elevat ion of. pumps in relation to flood levels.
(b)
It appears that the area of the s ite can be flooded and information is recuired as.to what effect this will have in terms of design 1
4 N
>:t ss~
t
[A-6 @ M >A
?W!$D>??rW"D*** ' ^
~~-
4 s
+ i.
$4tN
?.%4 ',
.u,-
97 3
[j
of the buildings of the nuclear fac i l i t y, including the auxiliary 4C buildings.
(c)
In the event that flooding at the site shoulc occur, will protection exist for all those items which would be required for sa fe shutdown?
(d)
Informatic is reques ted as to the he ights of the proposed dikes and other flood protection. to be incorporated around the plant with re ference to the expected flood heights, the location of such cikes with resoect to plant fac ili t ies, and the nature of the ir des ign.
15.
A detailed outline of the quality control, inspection and acceptance organization is requested in order to be clear as to who has the res oons ib il i t y for the various asoects of the construction.
Respectfully submitted,
\\ ).,r.n U
J W.
J.
Hall bj w cc:
N.
M.
Newmark I
.g-
-