ML20027B547

Forwards Addl Info Re Masonry Walls at Facility in Response to IE Bulletin 80-11

ML20027B547
Person / Time
Site:	Zion  File:ZionSolutions icon.png
Issue date:	09/10/1982
From:	Lentine F COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:	Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
REF-SSINS-6820 4973N, IEB-80-11, NUDOCS 8209210233
Download: ML20027B547 (10)

Text

._

Comm:nw cith Edison

- ) One First National Plaza. Chicago, Illinois C'

T 7 Address Reply to: Post Office Box 767 Nj Chicago, litinois 60690 September 10, 1982 Mr. Darrell G.

Eisenhut, Director Division o f Licensing U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555

Subject:

Zion Station Units 1 and 2 I.E.

Bulletin 80-11, Masonry Walls NRC Docket No s. 50-295 and 50-304 Re ference (a):

July 12, 1982, letter from S.

A.

Va rg a t o L. O. De lGeo rge.

Dear Mr. Eisenhu t :

In response to NRC's request of reference (a), this is to provide additional information regarding masonry walls at Zion Station.

The Attachment to this letter provides the information requested.

Please address questions regarding this matter to this Very truly yours, b

~

/

F.

G.

Lentin e Nu 1 ar Licensing Administrator 1m Attachment cc:

J.

G. Keppler D. L. Wigginton Region III Inspector - Zion 4973N SEP 141982

/EH 8209210833 q

.._=

i

.i l-1 1

ATT AC HMEN T COMMONWEALTH E0ISON COMPANY ZION STATION UNITS 1 and 2 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON MASONRY WALLS e

4973N-

=

. 1.

The SEB Criteria (8) indicatt : hat for operating plants the load combinations provided in the plant FSAR should be used in re-evaluation o f masonry walls.

Explain and justify the ' difference (if any) between the load combinations provided in the plant FSAR and the load combinations given in Table 5-1 o f Reference 1.

Response

As pointed out in Section 5 of Reference 1, Masonry Walls at Zion are not subjected to loads such as wind, tornado, tornado missile, thermal loads, loads generated by a postulated pipe break, and loads due to presssure differential.

There f ore, the combinations in Table 5-1 of Reference 1 are consistent with those provided in the Zion FSAR Volumes 2 and 8.

2.

Provide the boundary conditions and modeling techniques used in the re-evaluation of masonry walls at Zion plant.

Response

The Boundary conditions ano modeling techquies used in the re-evaluation of masonry walls at Zion are discussed in Section 6.0 o f Re ference 1.

3.

Indicate how earthquake forces in three directions were considered in the seismic analysis of masonry walls.

Response

The Masonry Walls at Zion Units 1 and 2 are non-load bearing, interior partition walls which are not part of the shear wall system.

All concrete masonry walls have been designed for out-o f-plane seismic loadings.

Vertical seismic acceleration is less than 1.0g for all these walls, thus causing no net tension on the walls.

In-plane inertial loads have also been considered in the design for each wall.

In accordance with the Zion FSAR, one horizontal earthquake component is combined with the vertical component.

Any effects of combined horizontal and vertical excitation were summed using SRSS techniques.

4.

Provide the number of unreinforced walls and a sample calcula-tion illustrating the analytical approach used for single-wythe and multiple-wythe wall.

Response

There are a total of 130 safety-related walls at Zion, 100 o f which are single-wythe construction.

Of these, 86 walls are unreinforced.

A sample calculation illustrating the analytical approach is attached for your reference.

. 5.

With reference to Section 4.1 of Reference 1, justify the increase factor of 1.67 applied to allowable stresses for abnormal / extreme environmental loading combinations involving DBE.

The SEB criteria (5) allow increase f actors of 1.5 f or tension parallel to the bed joint and shear in the reinforce-ment, and 1.3 for tension normal to bed joint and masonry shear.

If the Licensee intends to use any existing test data to justify this increase factor, the Licensee is required to discuss the applicability of these tests to the masonry walls at the plant with particular emphasis on the following areas:

boundary condition, type of load, size of walls, and type of masonry construction (block type, grouted, or ungrouted).

Response

The Zion plant masonry wall criteria in Reference 1 were estab-lished prior to the existence of the SEB criteria.

Table A (attached) provides a comparison o f the Zion and SEB interim criteria allowable stresses for unreinforced concete masonry design.

A survey of all safety-related walls subjected to out-o f-plane loads indicates the 100% of the horizontally spanning walls fall within the SEB allowable stresses.

Tension perpendicular to the bed joint is neglected for these walls.

Vertically spanning walls incorporate vertical reinforcement to carry the tension perpendicular to the bed joint.

For in-plane loading, shear stresses under SSE load combinations for all walls except one fall within the SEB allowable stress of 43 psi.

The remaining wall is stressed to 44 psi which is within 3% of the SEB allowable and, therefore, acceptable.

Tension perpendicular to the bed joint was neglected for overturning and stability calculations.

6.

Provide sample calculations to indicate how the effects of higher modes of vibration are accounted for in the masonry wall analysis.

Response

A sample calculation has been provided in the response to question number 4.

As illustrated in that calculation a 1.05 amplification f actor is used to account for the participation of higher order modes of vibration.

The 1.05 f actor is based on a parametric finite element study to determine the effect of the participation of higher modes.

The walls were modelleo as plate elements and were subject to a uniform Ig response spectrum.

The study bounded all wall aspect ratios, boundary conditions and openings typical at the Zion station.

When considering the first eight modes of vibration it was determined that 99% o f the response was from the 1st mode.

The 1.05 factor is an upper bound and is, therefore, adequate to include the e f fect of higher modes for concrete masonry walls at Zion.

-4 7.

Indicate the mode of f ailure of each wall not qualified under the working condition.

Provide details o f proposed modifica-tions for each wall with sketches and demonstrate through sample calculations that the wall will be qualified aft-modification.

Response

The information regarding walls originally found to be not qualified is on file with our Architect Engineers and is available for your review at their offices.

A sample calcula-tion has been included in response to Question Number. 4.

8.

Provide a status report for the proposed modifications to the walls that do not meet the acceptance criteria described in Re ference 4.

Response

The masonry wall modifications and their completion schsdule have been reviewed and approved by the NRC Region III (Reference 2).

As of this date, all modifications but one have been completed.

One nonconforming wall remains in an of fice area:

that is presently undergoing modification to house computer equipment for support of our Emergency Response Facilities.

Completion of the modifications of that wall is tied to the completion of the computer modifications, which is presently scheduled for December 31, 1982.

REFERENCES 1.

November 6, 1980, letter from J. S. Ab el t o J.

G. Kepple r, trans.mitting 180-day response to I.E.

Bulletin 80-11.

2.

March 2, 1982, letter from C. E. Norelius to Cordell Reed transmitting I.E.

Inspection Report Nos. 50-295/82-06 cnd 50-304/82-06/

s 4973N

TABLE A COMPARISON OF ALLOWABLE STRESSES IN PSI (INSPECTED WORKMANSHIP)

FOR UNREINFORCED CONCRETE MASONSRY DESIGN TYPE N MORTAR f5i = 900 psi Mo, = 750 psi i

Type SSE Load Combinations' of (a)

(b)

Masonry Criteria Used SEB Interim No.

Stress Unit on Zion Criteria Rev. 1 1

Tension Perpendicular H

19 17 to Bed Joints Ft1 S&G 36 35 2.

Tension Parallel to II 45 41 Bed Joints F tll S&G 69 62 I

3.

Shear II 50 43

'S&G 50 43 4

Flexure Compressive Stress ' m All 600 1

• 50 s

5.

Bearing:

On Full Area All 376 563 On 1/3 Area All 563 843 or less 6.

Bar Reinforcing Fy=40,000 0.9 Fy 0.9 Fy psi 7.

Continuous Wire Reinforcing 0.9 Fy 0.9 Fy Fy=70,000 psi 4

(a)

Criteria used on Zion is compatible with NCMA-1974 II = IIollow Concrete Masonry (b)

SEB Interim Criteria Rev. 1 is compatible with S = Solid Concrete Masonry ACI 531-79 G = Grouted Concreto fiasonry

r l I l I '

' I f*l l l,

-1 i-7 *:? mm+-* Pu J

J

_i 3 3 i

i 3 le r-a' le t

9

=

i,, i i

i-I I

I I I i

j l d

+

l h *a p i ; lIl le j,.

+

' ll l

. l*

I I

i d

{ ;+

J l

l I la' js 4

i It!i i la c' i,o l

I.

i

'+, s i

i is i nce i,j i l; i

• $ e * *,,

l

'm I '

(*!

M.*

i j i

5: 4 c.'

1 l iv i

w iI ii V*

l l

i i

l t 8'

U, f. I..~d jl

, w M

g f[ !

E t

I 6

= l2 l l I,I i

iR

j ',

.:', jti i i 3

2 l

T,I i

q*

l !i

[f @j;$

y s '.hl l g 's :>r'#

i.,.

3

i v' lg,r \\; i

=_

si l8 l ?;

3 l$

l 4

l s'

a i

w a

.r g

IE I

. I 5

,I IiI g

j

.l l!

[

$ l

-l '-l a i

-ll

~ l l 1 I i

l i

lilij I

l '

,I i

l i

3 3

f ', lllj III_

f j I-l-I l l j Jl I

II :

I I Il j i j-1 7

I's iaid'a hl d i 1 ' 1 ' 1 l 1.1 1i..i lli i

9l

l 3i!I

= 12 19 i

j' g l' 9 1 9 ig i L 3 I

l !

.i I 4 o

'.1

.* lI.d.

!~*

--l l

c I

.I i

0 IC P

i.'.J i,3 I

l i

e e

e i

i ig, 4,,

i'to a.

i

,s i a-

.+

i-i a

1 w

Ls

!,p k $. $.

-l*.l

}

J.'

ul o

l

i l ':*. eit,2 l. ' g E 9 w m i *l ' si lp1r l, i i-;

2; i

I J[*

e 4 eX i

e L, i i i i t j'l::

I_; ;

0y i-a i 4 i

q V L-

%c ef yl 1

a ']

5 5IQjgiig' i r

+

l J.1,7d I1

-l I

' l1 ; a ','.; e 99 f)l

, 3.'

l la

' +i.

1l l

y -}

, x

'L 8

~

j }

El '

--. - - --j

~

..AE}1B

~'

? % 4

=V -1,,A ] l T l

j o

l V IN a

a k p

B^ d-8,

__ l

- J,,

m

.c u.

_n _.

. g.. q y

_q q,,...

J

-y7 h

d J;l8 [ I-l i

i; dm

~

t$

? -l ? i ;

i i

I I l-I

'! r-- }

~

a 3

4.-

. a 99 i3, w

gi g!

a i.

i.

1; y

p W

_y D M l

I i

~

N Olt 0

lE 5

E {! ;:n f

+

-)[

+

a ^t

- l l-g d

< 3 c

=

5 y;,

g f

-w

.?

Z m ". O h l~f 5

R

• -j 2

8

+

4 m'il B

33 E

p M

.? -$0i 4-8 3 a

my 2

ci r i...' Q'A 6

3 i u

.n e

n

=

a i1"iM-8h

1. a51

- 0 3.E E 3 t

it i*lgi P

b) )y c

} ! t

- -r. i.)?

? j. /},i ij,

d 'F1

>p 8

E Z

l-I

=

.i l 7,j g

,,t.i

.:- J,.,

W 4 pr-e i

q i

+.i'y m

r 4..

t..,

e f

.T g

g ga tn-

.q-W

-- d. qI.,

q 3

7 9

• si

g. ge 6

=>

i

)

W xy I

a. ;.f

o. t,5 3

a_

.2 5,.

e s

3 g

.l 9

n q-E Z

f --

A c

m

.t

. f

.5 e

_ j.

g

____.._81_..__

't

.9

._ 8L..

s.ss o.

I s.

. ~ <, -

_.,_-e~

L

- ~

~

OdT-OF-PL AM E ANA. LYSIS I

l i sui el i

" AT Acie: s

' ' m.t tWs vet A - s71 - 9

't cassiu ;;.w p,t!,, 31 !,, y,g gg,g,,,p fg e,c, I

its' g;#

o g3 6

sPG Si.fy S u.s a r te d ; f **- 1'/

• S I48

• N 39' TRiyVEN 't 6 C -h'."I s j

(

M

" 8 4' r'so.t */g +

• • --84*

i I

'l

- m.s x,J.,12*.-

2-3.7 ca.

i 8

I

~

as

_ s +.

'l _.- s4*

~

i J

r...

m.s 4./,y; tti. <>=

[-

ie iWF b CALC *aT i

11

'CBE - ISI ID!f t s

5l V

"ost - Sil f t -It,',

MOIO: C-TALUts FOR A33VI F1ttQUtNCY IL EE:

.,s l

.n

-183

,, 05! 7 2*. Damples = 0.f G w f.e 6

• c.lfe i

l'I,

ATTAfyNTs

TOTAt, gtry.gg WALL 2L sst ? 27. Dew 1ns - 0.So X f.05

• o.3L h,

.$~

.$s.%

• St*

1.__ si*

V k

I:.tv.s,2*-o* eBE @ 2% Da,p *rs = o.20 r f.e5

• o.28 M

,g e

- si,

- a i, 4

g Sst # 27 Damping

• o.1 A jf f.cs

• o.40

• [

+-- s i,

,.--. ei*

g-

~

WALL srLT LOA 31%

e q

'*E ~,

I

, car.

8au 8".. O.sl x e. t.

1b/rs.

, o. +

S, Cc_c *. : ***-

'sst - 2s f t-1b[

• • f*

2ao P'f sst * "w

_,o.to_ _ _

8

>. +1. 6 as asst - 414 ssr-V 2'

ATT Ac w:- (,-verr s :

• 4%

f

.g ItIV. 592* p*

spg

_ g.o 31't, D r*.i3

-res

- ets

__._{

18 % 133.

/

'ont '05t WALL:

0.30

' 1. 0 s

o T'

'a 2.7. Dampb3 sst

'sst/'sst 215/1516

c. 0 9

< 1. 0 t

WALL PDfCC & sMLG CA'Ar1 Tit $

'01t[051 I'Y51*&

0.16

• 10 E

8

=

15.'03t 873Z l It h

[ 872.

c. 7 2.

41.o ssti sst g lbilt V,

e

=

1 swroar 1:

if st2.*16/

'ont/"oss. ISI/43G o.41

< 1.0 6,

" oat fc t

• s st 37dI'#ft

'ssr/*sst 21#/717 o.38

<! 0

~

=

cAmcm65 BAsesP *d Au SFFacTive. wieTH oF 1 FT.

sarcar 2:.,,tfv,e. sonwtieo my gewaneso mensre 4.au.

< 1. o

'ss I'st'

' 3.0 c.

Ct Co e...

c. uAtt c.4 n. e:is-re

- NMQ.

i~,.1.'

zis c.

le...

..,,.2

. c.,.

s..........

.._s.......,

5 r...

+:13-o.-

li... :.:-e

,p

. i*

=

i W

f

?

e t

1 2

es 43l o

e 8

s M

e ae C

R P

I' se tee R

iv e

E

'e L

l B

A ae

<i T

h S

l D

A O

b L

L L

AW s

K

.ee C

8 e

O B

9O.

L L

te

'e e

L f

S A

s W

k l

a C

6266 0

6. G.

62 0

G. 9 172 6. G D.

K = _:E.

71f7 9

79 97 t

7 23 s

2 3

_8 23 8

m m

e

• Ekt, D

O D

e e

ve 6

6 6

a E " 5y.

7 7

1

y. _

5EO t-E tE _

E-

• Ekt<

6. 7z. 6 6 1. L.

0 26 4

=* SS.

7 71 7

7 791 2 3 3

2 2 3 E:.<

e y

n t

b e

d d

e e

P5 =e5 _

r e

e w

v e

4++

+ ++

4++

o w

e e

p 05a _

b n

A 5= d m

184

.l'. s. t.

?. 8 1 e

ts:e

(. 12 c1z 612 g

w E* Ek:<

t ic o

2 t

6 se

:!

1 t

l d

• _ wf a 37 4

U m'#

Ccc ccc cC C nn a f :_

IIi II IIX I

0 C

0 F

1 C

21 2

4'l

't 'l w<

(

a

• 2 d 'l 2

.'2 2

I a :.

e v1: uc s

m i

h a

im e

e l I I

.ll I

.l 1 I C

h P

r

=2E, l

I D

~

aE

~

N U

L

~

d J = g<=

IN IG

=a5s N

A i{<C<

I 2.

3 f

1 1-I g

w rJ.

~^-~

~

3

._ _ _. 7. g] __ _ _

y'4' Q

8 6

- -11N tN' M

~

~

~

j a,

~._EL53I-O '

pet-Is92id_

~

~

t+

~~

~

f &g

_- _ n, 4.

- )g

_ I my

)_

l L

u

_.i._._g mj 3

i i

p-1 9 f

'o

~~

~

~

~~

~

g~~

l 0

0

(-

j. __

I g.__

1 EL 579 O

{E*C319.O '.

I 2:6 1l%s' CONCRETE BtDCK I

II / CCNCRETE Bl.oCK.

• f 8 ' - 4" T

3...

~~~

~

WALL A-579-9A south ELEV. '

~

M ALL A-57 J- ) NORTH ELEV.

~. J.

Y4' = l' - C -

SCALE I I ", l '-D9

_.._.__..L___...__..

.. SC A1.E :

4 EXAMPLE CALCULATION !

.1 J Z Z._.:

J.'l. ~C~_~_~

,_.,._r......_.

' i i

..._.i t.

ma-W." y~

,b

!__{ 1 ;.

eeco w

a lese A"!

seen 2fch! STAT lON f &f.

a mmes.,

n l m-a.miin I! l n..- w -n mus pian as

% m Af.tS *OO 't4 m ww ain

• ~~"**

,