ML20033D166

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Summary of Plant Design for 0.17 G.Reg Guide 1.60 Spectrum,Including Soil Properties Considered,Methodologies Used & Results Obtained.Plant Is Capable of Withstanding Seismic Input of 0.20 G Reg Guide 1.60 Spectrum
ML20033D166
Person / Time
Site: Clinton 
Issue date: 12/03/1981
From: Geier J
ILLINOIS POWER CO.
To: John Miller
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
U-0374, U-374, NUDOCS 8112070324
Download: ML20033D166 (57)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:+b y U-0374 /LL/NDIS POWER 00!vfPANY L30-81 (12-03)-6 500 SOUTH 27TH STREET, DECATUR, ILLINOls 62525 December 3, 1981 5, Mr. James R. Miller, Chief ff[ f3 Standardization & Special Projects Branch I Division of Licensing /2 1 0604 7' Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation f, Es,kbIO81A 4 k U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission {r Washington, D. C. 20555 S o

Dear Mr. Miller:

4 y Clinton Power Station Unit 1 Docket No. 50-461 In order to address the issues raised by Questions 220.14, 220.15, 220.121, and 220.26 we met with the NRC staff on October 15, 1981. It was agreed in that meeting that a site specific spectrum for the Clinton site will be developed and used for a new soil spring SSI-analysis. The effort to develop the site specific spectrum is in progress and is expected to be completed by early January 1982. Based on our initial evaluation it was determined that a 0.17 g Regulatory Guide 1.60 spectrum will envelope the site specific spectrum for Clinton. In a meeting on November 19, 1981 with the staff we presented our evaluation of Clinton plant design using a 0.17 g Regulatory Guide 1.60 spectrum. We showed that the new soil spring SSI responses including soil properties variation, when combined with SRV and LO"A loads, yield responses which are within code allowables. The enclosure summarizes our evaluation of the plant design for 0.17 g Regulatory G61de 1.60 spectrum,, including soil properties - considered, methodology used and the results obtained. It is also our judgment that when advantage is taken of the inherent conservatisms in the present seismic design of Clinton, the plant is capable of withstanding a seismic input of 0.20 g Regulatory Guide 1.60 spectrum. h1 \\ (- 9112070324 8112037 {DRADOCK 05000461 ja

l December 3,1981 Page Two Sincerely, Ob d.D. Geier Manager, Nuclear Station Engineering Attachments cc: J. H. Williams, NRC Clinton Project Manager H. H. Livermore, NRC. Resident Inspector N. C. Chokshi, NRC/SEB i ~~ 'L' '~ K- -x_ _ _ _. -.._ _. ~.. -__ _ _ _. -.A

Ouestion 220.14 Our' examination of Figures 3.7-12 through 3.7-27 indicate that at come frequency rhe free-field foundation level spectra is considerably less than the sign response spectra as defined in FSAR, Section 3.7.1.1. Such reduction in design response spectra at foundation level' is not acceptable to the staff. Either provide justification or use free-field motion at foundation level. Question 220.15 Indicate how this motion accounts for variation in the soil proper-ties at the site. Question 220.21 You have stated that strain-compatible chear modulus and damping values for each layer for both OBE and SSE carthquakes are obtained from "SIIAKE" analysis. Indicate, for each layer, to which strain-levels these values correspond to. In addition,'give numerical \\ values of these soil properties and corresponding strain levels. Provide this information for both vertical and horizontal an?lyais. In the staff's opinion, the soil properties used in the soil-struc~ ture interaction analysis should be those corresponding to the low strain levels, which are consistent with the realistic soil strain developed during the design earthquake. Use of high strain para-meters need to be adequately justified. Discuss, how did you account for variation in material properties in your soil-structure interaction analysis. s Question 220.26 The current position of the Regulatory staff regarding the-scil-structure interaction is contained in Attachment 2. Note that this-position, in addition to the finite element method, requires the-use of clastic half space approach. Provide your preocedure imd results from the clastic helf space approach for the staff's review.- Also, indicate whether you u111 comply with the rest of ithe require-monts of this position or_not. y l= r y

RESPONSE

The Clinton design basis SSI analysis was based on a 0.269 RG 1.60 spectra specified at the grade elevation. A one dimensional deconvo-lution analysis was used to detesmine the base rock motion for use in the finite elemeqt soil structure interaction analysis. This 6 deconvolution analysis resulted in the free field foundation elevation spectra lower than the RG 1.60 spectra in several frequency ranges. The NRC staff has stated that this reduction in ground motion with r depth is not acceptable and that in the new soil spring analysis, the wide band response spectra shculd be applied at the foundat(on elevation. In our opinion the reduction in motion with depth is supported by measured data, Seed (1). In addition, the application of a 0.26g RG 1.60 spectra at the foundation elevation together with the consideration of soil properties variation will be an extremely conservative definition of the coismic hazard at the Clinton site. To resolve these issues, we met with the NRC Staff on October 15, l 1981 and it was agreed that the 0.269 RG 1.60 spectra is very con-servative and a site specific spectra consistent with the scismic hazard and site conditions at the Clinton site'will be developed use.for use with the new soil spring soil structure interaction analysis including the variation in soil properties. The effort to develop the site specific spectra is in progress and is expected to be completed by January 4, 1982. Based on our initial evaluation it was determined.that the site specific spectra at Clinton may be approximated by a 0.179 RG 1.60 spectra. This 0.179 HRG 1.60 spectra specified at the foundation elevation was used in evaluation performed as part of this response. 2

-~ Based on the evaluation presented here it can be concluded that the stresses in plant structures and piping using the new seismic responsa when combined with SRV and LOCA loads are well within code allowables based on minimum specified strengths. When advantage is taken of actual measured material strength, the present evaluation also shows that the plant structures 3333355555 can be judged to be capable l of withstanding a 0.20g RG 1.60 spectra input. The following paragraphs provide the details of the soil properties considered, the method of determining soil impedances, the method \\ of soil structure interaction analysis and the cbmparison of new responses to the design basis responses. Soil Properties Typical Subsurface profiles underneath the plant structures is shown in Figure 220.15-1. It can be seen from this figure that the plant structures are underlain by 20 feet of structural fill followed by 105 feet of Illinoian Till. The Illincian Till layer.is under-lain by Lacustrine Deposit and the Pre-Illinolan Till followed by bed rock. The dynamic soil properties considered for the design basis analysis is presented in FSAR Tabic 2.5-48. To determine the appropriate upper and lower bound of dynamic soll properties for use in the now soil spring soll structure interaction analysis, the dynamic.trianial test results on samples from each of the deposits underlying the plant were replotted and evalauted. Based on this VM evaluation - the upper and lower bound soil dynamic shear modulus,wSTE . determined and are presented in Figures 220.15-2 through 220.15-5 .for the sturctural: fill, Illinoian Till, Lacustrine Deposit and Pre-Illinoian Till layers respectively.. These upper and lower 3

bound properties were used in the soil spring soll structure inter-action analysis (SSI). The soil shear modulus is dependent on the maximum effective shear strains expected during the SSE. The range of soil strain expected during strong motion earthquakes is presented in Figure 220.15-6 ~ which is reproduced from Reference (2). This range varies from 1.5x10-2 to 1.5x10~1 percent strain. For the Clinton SSI analysts -2' strain level is considered. As lower strain levels 1 a low 2.0x10 lead to higher shear modulus values and higher shear modulus valu'es lead to higher structural response, the 2.0x10-2)lshearstrainlevel is considered to be conservative. Based on the above considerations and data presented in Figures 220.15-2 through 220.15-5, the upper bound,mean and the lower bound soil properties used in the soil spring soil structure interaction analysis are presented in Table 220.15-1..It can be observed that is a wide variation in soil shear modulus values man considered. No variation in the soil damping values was considered because the 6% to 10% of critical damping values used'are considered to be con-servatively low soil damping values when compared to 7% of critical damping recommended for reinforced concrete at or near yield in RG 1.61. Soil Impedance Function Computation The soil media is modeled by a visco-elastic layered half space. The soil spring and dashpot constants are obtained in terms of fre-quency dependent impedance functions. These impedance functions are computed using Sargent'& Lundy's DIMFU program. The DIMFU program computes the impedance functions for a rigid' circular 4

foundation placed on the surface of a layered visco-elastic half space using Luco's (3) method. To validate the program, the impedance functions for vertical (k +icyy), yy rocking (K +iC,) and Horizontal (Kgg+iCHH) motions were obtained by DIMFU for the two example problems for which impedance functions were presented in the original papet by Luco (3). In the first example, a soil medium of uniform visco-elastic half-space with volgt-type damping was considered. The impedance. functions 1 and 4; are obtained. These impedance, functions are shown for a = g in Figure 220.15-7 for rocking, Figure 220.15-8 for horizontal and Figure 220.15-9 for vertical vibrations for c = 1/3 and a'/a = 0.3, where a'/a is the relative viscosity coefficient of the medium. The impedance. functions obtained by DIMFU compare well with those obtained by Luco (3) and Veletsos and Vebric (4). In the second validation example, a hysteretically damped soil medium consisting of a viscoelastic layer of thickness t (=150 f t.) and properties @y,0},P (mass density) and$ (hysterestic damping 1 1 constant) resting on a viscoolastic half-space with properties (, was onsidered. The radius of the rigid disc is p2, 02, and P 2 a (=50 ft). The impedance functions are obtained for a 1 and = g 5 for S = 0.8F ' F = 0.85F ' 'l " #2 = 0.25; $ = 0.05; 1 2 1 2 1 2 6 a = 3. These impedance functions are shown in Figure 220.15-10 / for rocking, Figure 220.15-11 for horizontal, and Figure 220.15-12 for vertical vibrations. The results obtained from DIMFU compare well with those obtained by Luco (3). Based on these two asimples, it can be concluded that DIMFU cor-rectly computes soil impedance functions. 5

I t I s j Soil Structure Interaction Analysis l An extension of the component mode substitution approach suggested drude l by Benfield and M*ede [5] is used to compute the soil structure l interaction-response. .The soil medium is one substructure and the structure represeny the other substruc ture. The structure is repre-sented by its fixed base modal characteristics, whereas the soil medium is represented by frequency dependent impedance functions. The two substructures are then coupled to obtain the structural - response, including the effects of soil-structure interaction. The response is obtained using the. frequency response method.[7). Figure 220.15-13 shows the schematic details of the Clinton Unit 1 model. This model is consistent with the one unit model used'in the design basis Finite Element Method Soil Structure Interaction analysis. The Main Building is modeled by shear beam-slab system and the Containment, Drywell, Pedestal, Shield Wall and RPV are modeled by beam elements. The masses are lumped at slab locations for'the main building model. For the portions of the structure modeled by the beam elements, the-locations um the lumped masses Arc dershown in amt Figure 220.15-13. The soil is modeled by-frequency dependent'snring dash 2 pot system for horizontal, rocking and-vertical motions. These soil springs are connected to the: structural model at the common boundary inter-- face node labeled 12. i. For the soil-structure system shownLin Figure 220.15-13, the equations! of motion for a given earthquake excitation $' (t) are: 9 6 = L '

kg ii ib k-7 Wii E 4 x,- '~C' C ~ Wi o 1 ((- {.. m(; O F ~ i S, + gN %_,.( + Ni b% % ~- ,m L o +C 5s (O where the subscripts i, and b refer to the structure interior and 5 the common boundary interface and the subscriptea refers to ^ the soil respectively; m, c, and k are the mass,Jhe damping, and the stiffness matrix components, respectively; and E, Ic, and x are the acceleration, velocity, and displacement vectors relative to the base motion. p ri,andk re the rigid body vectors with rb components equal to unity in the direction parallel to the support motion, and zero otherwise. y(t) is the prescribed acceleration motion. The equations of motion for free vibration of the substructure repre-senting the structure are given by: 0 R k k "il 1 g1 ib

  • i

(.2)

  • +

=0 O m b b,, b, [bi bb,

  • b For linear problems, the displacement of an internal degree of free-dom can be expressed as:

{x } = {xg}c

  • I&c $*b}

I3) I g where[x}c is the displacement of innternal degrees.of freedom when i common boundary nodes are. assumed fixed and'[pc] are;the constrained -modes for the substructure representing the. displacement of internal-degrees of freedom induced by a unit displacement of the cc.wnon 7 E-g

boundary degrees of freedom with all other boundary freedoms fixed. The constrained modes are computed by solving for each substructure a set of linear equations given by [kyg][9l " "I ib I I4) c Thus, for free vibrations, it] {x } c = 0 (5) l 5 I"il k 1 c + [k f Expressing {x;{g in terms of normalized mode shapes of equation 5, {x }c = It][P} (6a) 1 where [02] (6b) [4]T[k11] [5] = and [4]T[m g)[9] [I] (6c) = i [p} represents the generalized normal coordinates and O is the frequency of the constrained substructure in mode n. Based on equations 3 and 6, the displacement in the soil-structure system can be expressed as [*1 hc j Pf l =. x O Iy (x (7) b, b. Transformation of equation 1 by equation 7 yields the equations of motion in terms of the generalized coordinates, as follows: I "ib j_ P f,Pg,e2 , p 0 c c gg ib , "bi "bb, (* bi cbb J c *b 0 k C bb,

  • bj Q ?,..

(8) = _ q d y (+ ) Q 8

where "ib " "T " Y "iibc T T bi I "bb " *bb + kc"ii c I k c i g@c + ibi bb = kbb - li e + ss; cib = cbi = c ig@c + gy p Ebb = cbb 11 = c c i ss Eg = [mtg@ri b"

  • ii ri + "bbkrb I

od The soil spring and dash pot constants k Ac re frequency-depen-ss ss dent. The structural damping is specified in terms of modal damping, Under these conditions, equation 8 is best solverl using the frequency response method (7). The following formulation for the damping matrix greatly reduce the computations: 2. yg = gg@ = [2 f (9") c n ib " i=0 (96) c 20k cbb " E bb (9c) where k is the modal damping ratio for mode n of the structure n and JL is the' frequency for which the response is being computed. bb is the damping matrix of structural elements which connect to c the common. interface nodes having a modal damping ratio of f>. Expressing the input motions and response in terms of a truncate'd Fourier Series yicids N/2 y (t) .= Re 2. y(1) exp (i.fl t) (10a) 3=0 j N/2 x (t) = Re x (A ) exp(i.Il3 )- (10b). t 3 9

L' where N is the number of digitized points in the input motion. The amplitudes y'(D ) and x (A.$ ) can be found by the Fast Fourier r Transform algorithm (6). Substitution of equations 9 and 10 into 8 yields (-Af[5]+[K*]) x(3 ) = - [Q}h (R. ) (11) 3 3 where l' yc) I

  • ib (Q] : $

L b, m m bi bb j N 2 [(0(1+12bn)] 0 -,,K ] = E*b ~ 0 b in which T k Ebb = -4 (1+2i@n)kii e + (1+2if) kbb + (kss+I'flj ss) e The linear set of equations represented by equation 11 determines the displacement amplitudes x (E ) at each f requency J1, j=0,1...N/2. 3 The equations can be solved by Gaussian elimination. The displace-ments in the time domain follow from equation 10 by the inverse Fast' Fourier Transform. In the design basis Finite Element Method (FEM) SSI analysis, analysis was performed for.one unit and two unit configurations. In the soil spring analysis presented here only the one unit con-figuration was considered based on our experience with the FEM SSI analysis which showed that the one unit and-the two unit responses are very close with the one unit configuratien.giving a slightly . higher response at;many locations. It is our,iedgment'that the; two unit soil spring -SSI result.will_ also lead to similar results.- 10

r l As stated.carlier, the horizontal and vertical models used in the soil spring analysis are consistent with those used in the design basis FEM SSI analysis. However, for the design basis response more 44WM %,u calculation, the interacted base nat wr--ern together with a decoupled n ) fixed base structural model was used to compute design responses. As shown in our response to Question 220.25 the responses obtained from the SSI model and the decoupled model are very close. Based on this, for the soil spring response presented here are based on the SSI model. The decoupled model responses were not computed because they are expected to be very close to th*ose obtained Irom the SSI model. Comparison of Structural Responses Table 220.15-2 presents a comparison of shear wall forces from the design basis FEM analysis and the new soil spring analysis. This response comparison is typical of forces in major structural ele-ments. It can be observed from this comparison that the new forces are 1% to 10% lower than design basis loads with an average margin of approximately 5%. Clinton design criteria for reinforced concrete member requires that the robar stresses be limited to 0.9 f, where f is the mini-y mum specified yield strength. Table 220.15-3 presents the actual average material strength at the Clinton plant. It can be observed that this provides an additional 17% load carrying capacity. Based on the above it'can be concluded that the structures have a capacity. Sher.tvwm to resist an earthquake at least l.17 tices the 0.179 RG 1.60 considered A J i.e., 0.20 RG 1.60. spectra when elastic analysis is used A advantage 11 L

is taken of actual material strength h - h - 4 rut 6 The A:i:me ultimate capacity, however, will be even higher because of significant yielding which would occur prior to failure. Comparison of Floor Response Spectra The floor response spectra defines ~"the input excitation for piping and equipment supported within the plant structures. To assess the effect of the soll spring SSI analysis, the floor response spectra from the new SSI analysis are compared to those obtained from the design basis FEM analysis at typical locations throughout the struc-L ture. These responses are compared for the two horizontal (North-South and East-West) and one vertical response component at each selected location as follows: a. Base Mat Elevation 712' for all buildings: comparison is shown in Figures 220.15-14, 220.15-15 and 220.15-16. b. Main Building Floor Elevation 762': comparison is shown in Figures 220.15-17, 220.15-18 and 220.15-19. c. Containment Shell Elevation 803': comparison is shown in Figures 220.15-20, 220.15-21 and 220.15-22. d. Sheild Wall and Pedestal at RPV Support Elevation 743': comparison is shown in Figures 220.15-23, 22015-24 and 220.15-25. These Figures,220.15-14 through 220.15-25,present the comparison of unwidened floor response spectra obtained from the new soil spring SSI analysis to the design basis FEM analysis widened spectra for 12

^ / ~ c t' f a 2% oscillator damping. It can be observed that-the design basis responses ih general, envelope the r.ew soil spring responses. The design of Clinton piping and equipment are based on the combin d' SRV+SSE+LOCA loadings. Thus, a comparison of the floor response spectra for the. combined SRV+SSE+LOCA loading using the FEM and r, the soil spring SSE is more indicative of the gffect of the new SSI analysis on piping and equipment. This comparison for the two horizontal and one vertical response.componants at each selected location is presented as follows: a. Base Mat Elevation 712' for all buildin~gs: comparison of ./ 1 combined spectra is shown in Figures 220.15-26, 210.15-27 and 220.15-28. b. Main Buiiding Floor Elevation 762': comparison of the combined spectra is shown in Figures 220.15-29, 220.15-30 and 220.15-31. c. Containment Shell Elevation 803': comparison the combined spectra is shown in Figures.220.15-32, 220.15-33 and 220.15-34. d. Shield Wall and Pedestal at RPV Support Elevation'743': com-parison of the combined spectra is shown in Figures 220.15-35 220.15-36 and 220.15-37. The above Figures,220.15-26 through 220.15-37,present the comparison of the combined SSE+SRV+LOCA floor-response spectra obtained from the new. soil spring SSI analysis to the combined spectra used for design.. The spectra are for a 2% oscillator damping and are widened + 15%. From these comparisons it can be concluded that: 13

/ sre a. The new combined spectra for the vertical component:25 enve-loped by the design basis spectra. b. For the Containment :-' 5 the horizontal

==' .E, . __ :r - ch.asseN. butoM % tk ^ com bined new spectra andadesign basis spectra. --- -- :.: 11; 4 p,. 1 L4. main Bu41 k d h M eS M g b. L_ r ' g phe new combined horizontal spectra 44 A higher than the design basis in the 2-6 Hz frequency range by approximately 10%- 2o%. Based on the above comparison it can be judged that the new soil n spring responses will not have any significant affect on design. To confirm this judgment, four affected subsystems were analyzed to the new combined spectra. The four celected subsystems were A,v4. chosen so that _u -e the new spectra 4 higher than those corres-ponding La_ t' 2 design basis spectra at the subsystem vibration a frequencies. The results can be summarized as follows: a. Subsystem LP-3: The input response spectra are: Auxiliary Building at Elevation 712' and Elevation 737' and Containment Building at Elevation 720'. Although some of the directional input response accelerations are higher for the site specific (Elevation 737') the envelope response using all the applicable a locations is lower for the site specific response spectra Dr.sig n B asis compared to the P.cgu.atory Cuide response spectra, and the resulted stresses, support loads and equipment reactions are also lower. The piping stresses, support reactions and equip-ment reactions are summarized in Table 220.15-4(. 14

b. Subsystem SX-16: The input response spectra are, Auxiliary Building Elevation 712' and Control Building Elevation 737'. The site specific response spectra are higher than the Same-Desien E-4:s a " response at some of the subsystem vibration mode frequenc'ics. The results show that the new stressas (due to the site specific responses) are higher at one location by 6% and one support load increased by 21%. However, the in-creased stresses and support load values are still below the allowables and support rated capacity. The rest of the subsystem stresses and support loads are lower for the site specific response spectra. The piping stresses, support reactions and \\ equipment reactions are summarized in Table 220.15-5. j[ c. Subspstem RT-1: The input response spectra are, Containment Elevation 755', Drywell Elevation 737', Sheild Wall Elevation 759' and the RPV Elevation 743'. The envelope of the site

/

specific M response spectra are higher.at some of the ' subsystem vibration mode frequencies. The analysis results show thmk both increase and decrease in the stresses and support reactions throughout the subsystem. However, in the case of. load, increase, the site specific response spectra analysis. producedless than 5% increase in the stresses and support ? :J . loads, and the new values remain very much below the'allowables N and the rated capacities. The piping stresses, support reactions and equipment' reactions are summarized in Table'220.15-6.

d., Subsystem RH-34:

The input response spectra are,. Containment Elevation.755', Drywell Elevation 755', Shield. Wall Elevation m. > Of r 7 / n-7 15 11. g'.. e

h 743' and RPV Elevation 759'. The site specific response spectca 1 are higher at very few tummaninumannut the subsystem vibrar. ion mode frequencies. However, the analysis results show that, l the site specific spectra gives lower stresses and support i loads at all the subsystem locations. The piping stresses, support reactions and equipment Ic.autions are summarized in Table 220.15-7. Circulating Water Screen House No soil spring SSI analysis for the circulating water screen house was performed because the founding conditions and the design basis analysis at the screen house are very similar to that in the main plant area. It is our judgment that the comparison of the new soll spring and the design basis responses at the river screen hbuse would lead Lto the same conclusions as tor ' the main plant i.e.,tyat'thedesignbasisisconsLtc.tive. Conclusions New analysis based on a 0.179 RG:1.60 spectra together with soil ,? ~ spring-SS1: analysis,3 soil' properties variation and a foundation -16

Y r level input of the wide band spectra leads us to conicude that the new forces and stresses are well below design allowables. Baseed on this new analysis it is our judgement that Clinton structures 6 can withstan6 earthquakes defined by a 0.20g RG 1.60 when advantage is taken of actual measured yield strength and cections are stressed to the theoretical ulliamte capacities. The true ultimate capacity '4owever, will be higher because of the significant yielding which would occur prior to failure. References 1. Seed, N. $. and J. Lysmer, "The Significance of Site Response in Soil Structure Interaction Analyses for Nuclear Facilities", Droceedings of the Second ASCE Conference on Civil Engineering and Nuclear Power held September 15-17, 1980, Knoxville, Tennessee. 2. Soil Behaviors Under Earthquake Loading Conditions, prepared by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commisssion by a Joint Venture of Shannon and Wilson, Inc., (Seattle) and Agbabian-Jacobsen Associates (Los Angeles), 1972. 3. J. E. Luco, " Vibration of A Rigid Disc on A Layered Visco-clastic Medium," Nuclear Engineeric.g and Design, No. 35, 1976, pp. 325-340. 4. A. S. Veletsos and B. Vebric " Vibration of Viscoelastic Foundations," Report 18, Department of Civil Engineering, Rice University, Houston, Texas, April 1973. S. Benfield, W. A. and Hruda, R. F., " Vibration Analysis of Structures by Component Mode Substitution," AIAA Journal, Vol. 9, No. 7, July 1971, pp. 1255-1261. 6. Cooley, J. W. and Tukey, J. W., "An Algorithm for the Machine Calculation ~of Complex Fourier Series," Ma*hematics of i Computation, Vol. 19, April 1965. 7. Hurty, W. C., and Rubinstein, M'. F., Dynanics of Structures, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey,-1964. 17 u

.r l, 4 j i.J~y c ep n i" r c. g ~ cc l g) O 0 c3 Q,' i g , ar -i 0 0 o .=) l C h e-O. Dr' O C l O c ,a =p QJ i -/ I l i,- ' O; -Q D D O C, N {j p B LO Q O ( ?. g. t ' + - - .s 9 1 o, s-c -- c.) cD S ~.N rq 1 e i d,i { i o l _1 'Z j l:T. i e n O l L. '\\ cp + i ':- 0) 9 o-' i i._ to '5 i% D o O .J 5 T' ,' ( i' f. O O i'.) 7 4 a g g.-._._ ___-.____...._,.-..y "i i G E 7 '-{t-g o o o. D rs 2.- i N D l.fi ' c./ V H 9 id i $I Y N N I .6 m, N a 1 _i N 0: j -yi R ,^ f

(o l

Q ?I D ?. T D \\ 3E. O l__.. y n l r j,. 1 ,-4 ,. 7 Nen E{ m' 'y a o D. N- ~ C: C c3 o ,b. ,l O D-J O l 0 M l C T 3 mp m .g m ; g a: <2 o o a o e ac N l O e, i 1 1t. . n-v@ 2 O e

u. s _

o .i v o o o cs ' j 4 m u ,) O,' @3 d 6t O CQ a t H

.i--

_-4 O g o ~ O .O. o o 01 0 d .J.- ? .O O j Lei LB D; m wS O hI M MI U Q ' a. - I 2 .n y-r x r et. i ey .d 6 kI~ o f - 03 l O'!. t. -Q h-l T-l.: n y.) -)- O' O O n -., g ~ b . k., k __ _. .W '77 D \\ W' ml O -i-so l' p <9 m1 c c. 1-- n _m - # y T 'k 1 d y 'y. tu y .l l 3 ( O .O O i o c y o

s..,

H n .o o I ~ l-O. '-~ M r 4 o I u) <l p-- g u,.- m-v o r O Q -Q-a % -y W 1-3 - 6 v. eQ. _o_. A-M l IM, C o tu d cci g .w o r- - ci - p _ '3 L Z. 'W A ) J '(.. s

TABLE 220.15-2, COMPARISON OF SHEAR WALL FORCES FROM FINITE ELEMENT AND SOIL SPRING APPROACHES i .4 G E!. M J : A T-f 0 Scil 6?Riirli '-C C ' = !.

  • J

~ t.\\jl Q CC>Qj;)q f.jm

s. ~

.. - -,. -. -.~ ' p-h n

p. w

,...w I 1 _ X -Ifc l o o 3 7t'G G 7,3 G I

3. _ _

t a c 7I i X - '.I O ! O O b _._.." '.-.. _._.. _... _ i 7' 9 "'.L g-1Io(oo3 I o,o o S ').&25 I I l.3 +G lo.G 34..- -- X--ltoJoil X -lloI o (p l3,427 l2235 )(- 1 I o I o 2] l B.++9 l394) j T-1 I o I o I.l l l.19 9 l I,o 8 o L . (- 1 I o I o-l8 14.2.98 13,15o l. j 1 - ; l o l 0 22 I o,9 (o G l o, o f. 7. i

'f
-Ol'o

-002 .I L,4F l o,G 25 '[-l101 096 r l l},9 % .l J.23 7 - g-. l.1 o 2.0 l o.

) 11,0L 2 a 1 o,3 76 c.

_p ~ <

a 3 TABLE 220.15-3 ACTUAL AND MINIMUM SPECIFIED YIELD STRENGTH GRADE MINIMUM SPECIFIED KSI ACTUAL AVERAGE KSI a A36 36.0 44.3 A572 Grade 50-50.0 60.1 A588 Grade 50 50.0 58.2 Rebars Sizes #8 60.0 70.3 thru #18 p 1 6 .g ~ h C

7 f TABLE 220.15-4

SUMMARY

OF STRFSSP3, SUPPORT REACTIONS, AND EQUIPMENT REACTIONS FOR SUBSYSTEM LP-3 STRESSES / NODE SITE SPEC. RS DESIGN RS % CHANGE 17 UPr 10,356 10,727 -3.46 33 UFP 12,043 12,760 -5.62 35 UET 11,646 12,331 -5.56 5 1,956 2,034 -3.83 30 4,018 4,205 -4.45 65 UET 14,347 14,842 -3.34 AOB 3,192 3,315 -3.71 175A 2,026 2,240 -9.55 R5 2,875-2,937 -2.11 180 UET 3,765 3,925 -4.08 SUPPORTS / NODE SITE SPEC. RS DESIGN RS % CHANGE 5 Y-DIR 18,378 '19,399 -5.26 5 Z-SKEW 23,223 23,287 -0.28 19 Z-SKEW 4,995 5,177 -3.52 40B Y-DIR 6,165 6,593 -6.49 50 Y-DIR 12,193 12,400 -1.67 52 Z-SKEW 8,147 8,242 -1.15 67 X-DIR 8,102 8,391 -3.44 70B Y-DIR 5,408 5,476 -1.24 C75 X-SKEW 3,661 3,783 -3.22 76 X-SKEW 4,981 5,027 -0.92 175A X-SKEW 12,833 12,947 -0.88 175A Z-SKEW 2,773 2,959 -6.29 80A Y-DIR 9,499 9,549 -0.52 EQUIPMENT / NODE SITE SPEC. RS DESIGN RS % CHANGE F M F M AF ~M y y g g 120 4,717-17,809 4,769 17,872 -1.09 .35

TABLE 220.15-5'

SUMMARY

OF STRESSES, SUPPORTS REACTIONS, AND EQUIPMENT REACTIONS FOR SUBSYSTEM SX-16 STRESSES / NODE SITE SPEC. RS DESIGN RS % CHANGE 7 3102 3594 -13.70 18 4516 5585 -19.14 25B 6532 9059 -27.89 42 4230 4939 -14.36 75A 5395 6838 -21.10 127 3699 4187 -11.66 135B 6301 5965 + 5.63 156 3420 3914 -12.62 190 3659 4178 -12.42 203 5839 7415 -21.25 SUPPORTS / NODE SITE SPEC. RS DESIGN RS % CHANGE Ry 18 6388 8089 -21.03 Rx 30 1477 2008 -26.44 Sz 60 1247 2105 -40.76 Ry 73 6919 9056 -23.'60 Ry 77 5363 8783 -38.94 Sy 80 2737 4662 -41.29 Sx' 90 3906 6279 -37.79 Rz 103 2632 4115- -36.04 -Ry 165A 4486 5619 -20.16 Rx 170 2986 2488 +20.02 Ry 190 6539 8383 -22.00 _ EQUIPMENT / NODE SITE SPEC. RS DESIGN RS % CHANGE F M F M AF 'M 1 y g g No_ Equipment M t .i

Tablo 220.15-6: Summary of Stresses, support Reactions and Equipment Reaction for Subsystem RT-01 Service Stresses Site Spec. Design Change Level Node No. R.S. R.S. 4 C 65A 6945 6773 +2.5% C 140B 6808 6741 +1.1% C 390B 11142 11404 -2.3% C 440 5830 5836 -0.1% C 596 3955 4026 -1.7% C A660 7597 7645 -0.6% D 265A 18454 18167 +1.6% D 470 6000 6369 -5.6% D 627 5904 G339 -6.9% Service Supports Site Spec. Design Change Level Node No. R.S. R.S. C 70B 1271 1248 +1.8% C 156 1294 1283 +0.9% C 395 3811 3839 -0.7% C 463 1286 1277 +0.7% C 490 306 299 +2.3% C 535B 1894 1902 -0.4% C 607 429 430 -0.2% DD 247 131 138 -5.1% D 490 207 -223 -7.lr D 620 567 543 +4.4% Service Equip. Site Spec. Design Change Level Node No. R.S. R.S. F M P M AF AM y y g g C 665 401 1072 404 1073 -0.7%' -0.1%' D 665 92 118 119 129 -22.1% -8.5%

' Table 220.15-7 Sumamry of Stresses, Support Reactions and Equipment reactions for Subsystem Ril-3 4 Strosses Site Spec. Design Change Node No. R.S. R.S. 215 8475 8550 -0.88 250A 7669 7717 -0.62 g 295B 6316 6359 -0.68 h 315 5890 5918 -0.47 190 11677 11781 -0.88 a j 250B 8019 8079 -0.74 295A 6110 6182 -1.16 'j 2959 7149 7193 .-0.61 Supports Site Spec. Design Change Node No. R.S. R.S. 200 4712 4834 -2.46 205 4124 4237 -2.67 g 3 220 8823 9029 -2.28-T 240 10234-10569 -3.17 3 263 8444 8720 -3.17 220 9697 9840 -1.45 225 10696 10846 -1.38 o j 240 5623 5920 -5.01 { 300 14244 14825 -3.9 303 18330 19009 -1.57 Equip. Site Spec Desicn Change Node No. R.S. R.S. F M F M AF ~AM y y o g NONE .o

.O sf.' I cl .s ^ b.

e..

b. . e. n o t R 4. s., l. M % r.we

  • erec e F, q

.,,, d ? i g v: r.3..W.*: '

  • t; s..

y 3. f.4 h, -. > x..).'.'.. s s g. d.*.'.....,..=....,. *.;.y. S j., .t i . u. -:. a y e s a.s v : '.::8.1, :'. '. v:':.s M c qce p .s w a: s ..s u.. J.,2;.. %. O:[ . + ; s 1., wg. art.:y

t...

a x 3.,.. s ~. -

o. l;.

.., L.. t.L.,e,. n..F..;-j. w.. :r.: + .v- ..y. . u. I .3 n. Y ,a n. , p... .. 3 U. +f. i.Y' f,..?. h W<.. 4. r,' 9 G i S,'.': .' 4 ~; W.. u I. M-:. e t ~ < s m, s.,+i~:$."v:J'*-

i. M. ?.'.-

m~ ..a r' u a a., .> a \\ M:&a..,.,... ea . 3 ; h... q.,a. a u wt :.. 4.-. 3.s -<.t.. w...c \\[j -.....d.,.,3.:.-e n..e..j).}/SM,. y,'

  • M...

lM ': :f...N., 3- . 1 s.r.,

r. M

.s . 4.a... o s ,y. _. ~. c ...I- . s.- S n d y,@"l'.>).a. t. O9 y ll y -a t

a-
  • r l3s.c. e.)

i - t*- ...e t s N /)X. :.'*%., ::.i@;. - s .R;.n ;.. 1 *'**:+.* .z* *

a<..-

x s. / ' j. s.<x .m..t. g .3

s..W....,

...,,.e..r -g; p;g~.6.,.!_..,... .f p; th. m .,. -. l -....,.. .$..,6.,:.n. M *. e. ;.':~. < @...'.. s t, :., . 7.u.s - ; \\ ..:,.. r 5 ..m... i.. --, g. .i.. -' - t r; >. - q: u I is .k L y! y a l., .2 .u 4 o J) 2 2 .,q... g u . /r/ 1 a - :n3 y.

y ;,f. :

r &,.t' yg s p r.4. Q t

-am u :.

,9,.-. r-c

:2 n

..g in* a.s a v.,.,.... ; :... > :. .n

.a...

~ -..h..;.:o..

3..,... I....~.
r. f, ~>.

.* A te a,.. s... tt. ~,,. e g v u. a ~.: f Ii N, 5 g M. f.,' ' ' h M $ V88*.M'O.I.N*. A. - N y ; " 'g. H'

s a

a % ;*. z 1;. - .4 r, }C.$ N -s. 5. : '.I R,y ; de. s-.e w i.h':t. ~ ,,.5,c-a st.a n., te. o a ,oa .f 4 g n,< 3 M 2l 2 y- .,a.* 1 ? n$ A , 4 p. 2 y . ',: 6,',7,h =...., r.* -t e. v ef.,,j.$' '.f,Q CI. I ?- .,y.. 9 :"'d. $") m :3 c:- 4.? l f .w.: fro Y L t.. .' oM _N2

4. S.

a . 't'.u . ;0'M> "a. LW. b 4( L.d ' ' eM yi.,. - p. oM s.1 -I - 4 -.w N J ,.. Y. ".*:.

  • ) -

... '.-u, 2 :. 4,%....G W 1,1.2l a...<,.,6 ut. ..3 n 3- .. s.... _ n r .r m ( ,,c.O.,.2.,.,r..-... ~.:. y. $

j. x.I c7, *...

ga e ..s. N w2 .o. q ,o $ $E $l 'd h$ G to ~ ', a 1 $ 1 . 1.m aQ = i e u 4,&... t: ...-c m. .,,Q-. ;.,.it. itmp ff-i ous.. . <<. m 43 .y/* .y CD o .b ,g L...,...

q.... # p -

.. c. - .I .4 H . g. -...c o o... n... I4 C-* ~; >l. .... spT"r ..m.....,i c. w s I. s,' 'J4 o w ',*sts l 4 s[3.n ej w '. H. ? e. .n s f'. 7% e.-,'-- a... L r 3 2dv a l 2"v u , g. i A- ./ \\ ***.* k.h M.,/...- Ja 3* 2 s 8 [..T7. Q l'.. . T'. N --w

.CL

-t .N-ej N p .e 3 g o?. N,,.' N W.- .*. ). g. .,..-:m,-.~.~ f~., ..s.. .j<f;t.u.,:.;;.,st,@.-

.I. I..

4 A '...- rg e i vf.x. f b )..t.:..X.. :; ,.. i n

  • h ).'

Q ...., 7. ,, '.' % A. D. i .s s.

  • ,.b..e.,..4..

4 )- e a, g 1e. 3 .u ,<. ;., p .;lju., l. - ( t n. ~:tp; 1.G cc,.. ;q.

n... wi..,

. ' p.,J <,;,

  • tj 'l; w m :=en.7.

m. . f.. .. s, cw. ;.1, .e ya .3 2(. ;e n.yp::...ta: Qh. _.. p,y..-

~

....c. 31. .% *p g.t r - < s

,.. f.$.w...s '....v.

i.3 u. ;. Ya b... .ga.' 3!. ,:.-Al v ..e m. ..s <~ .'i y(l.*i'..'M.<'wge.ikd,'.[h) ef.I e. t y;<f. d N* +. - s

w...u.m... -l 6

i..- ~ ep i..... [.. i i F. e...$.*. ^.1: ~ ;:1 J !.%..,%.. i .,...p.a,. M,.. * < A. y p+r v3 p.'\\ -e

c

,.s .e.,4. t. -e 5 Y ? *E l * ._.hI. g). 42 .y ['I n.' ' t. e c. e.d .J. I t .I-g = .g., j w Ja l-l 'g. - J/1/ M A<vir.e,7;J J

l N I c-Ln r-e--.c-

  • La. m C

O N - -- N rd 4J L L 0 3 O L 4J Q. '3 OO CD 3 L

  • e-L Q.

LL. +J ' * ' - - ~ ^ ----***-'}"-*-~ q ; V} .Q g, -4 _ _.M. C 4 3 [ w kJ I 4- -f m O _ _.y. p._.q 1_ _t..,_;_ ,r i o } . 4 g., M 9 p -- m p 8 f, - Z

  • /.

O H __.__.u'- r-U4 M: M-N M' .l

_r a:

j +_ if_. __ u.. g aa .,y wy a% '~ ~ ~ - - - o a o O .c. ..--- ;t ....I .t.. g,;,.

.z_.

y m . ;. -.. / '.j.:-".'.-- us uy- -*Oi ~~O'.' l -- -

7. 7 --. ;

- l -[C - ' i T. : ~' f; '2'*

  • _.L.

Hd . - -.-_. V. ' fl - - J _. _* ff. l. _ ___ _; - _ _ 4- _. b, : -. -. _ ; :. ;-.-

J-g g c:

n ;... b .1-~--~~------- f-f, Jy. L ..L l,, ,_.___.____._ l._, _ ... _i I 1.._ t -r" O f. 4, o-6 -- p-p. _._J.._ _ _. _.*f -t m .3 p g _j___ _.y _nv g,3 -7_.. 3 O t4 - M - -- 1 .g { -- - q ___.. ~.. } _-.) {.'~- _ _._;.1__ 1-i p I l.,,_ ~ ~ 4: q.* - -._q c J C ,,s. m: .m4_;. v 4______.,. o.- u -. ?. -,..w. _.__p.__2_ ..___._4.____ _ _ _n - p j . [. _ -. _ M. ~~-._T,___._t . _._ _ l, _ _ g.. _ 4..__----- r.._._.____. T-7 -'~ .L ie -g -y .rc_ y) i- ._..l_- L

k.:

^U' ^^Li^- I.=_: '--~ ~~ G=_ _W-Qg g a.; - - _. -- h _1, - ~ h ic ~ ! _j.__ {:g-i{ } ,_j T- {

b. _....___

_ l-N 'E.- f-51.".. = _._ [.... _... 2- ~~ b i~-' %-g=- SE~p 'C-~;~yg. G ~~-r.- . ---7--L---- m_w 4-U ' - * - ~ ~ G ^':.. D ~-- T. ( u -. _L___ N -

+- -

L_--_ g g 1 a/ i CH .sa - ~ ^ ' - ~ ~ i - .T. .;-_1 i g - * [4-. - i - - ~. ., t-. O 7 __r_.m_' _.._ ; __ /. o c. s.:. .L 3 I qm - .t m m.- _.7 .g_Q_

w... w p

- H-y .q -q _ y. g.-g g p. _. _q _f

5... _ __ u.

g _ __ _.c_. a._ e .fa -_._2._- ._.:. n -- - 1_ _g .. _../.:_ - ~.. _ m. .n z H ._ ;g gj. ..y- .. p =.- --. : z.. _ k -6 'n.'-- g ;_ __g N _.. - _ _ _ ~.. 3_ r., n --1..g i g_.gyg-j +ir._ -q g } g, p =Q- =.._. j =_.- _ =y- _. Q g 7- _- _: g(_-- -- -. r..._. g _..._ _ 3_ - -i.g = q_ g g3-- - g- -___-._-_:- _- - :- - g - y.-.--_ -- ; = = =-- - --. -- = - - - - _ = _ - -. _. - =.- :-_. = _ _ -. _==-- .w e----- 5 E 5 S _3' ' 55 C 1:4 9 ~- " -~~ ~-^-------.-~-.__'o H i { M -i---Q g _C' ~'}'~'~~ . f~_iT_T T- - = u 4 {s ,t-m_ 6 -+

- r+

--c s s i -t --. d. __ f- -- "- ~~ i. T (.x ' -'.._'- m- - j -i--- -. -- $ ~ - _ ; _ _ ) ;-, .f 2.. ^ + 1_ T y ___l j 9 _y_.. _. a 1-w= +a -- u '-- y. . _ _ -_.._ g..=.. _. _ = e= _y-_ _.._L, a .}. _u g ,f- .jg 2 _.~. ) -l- '[ -Q _3,

. _q _ __; _

L_ - 4_ _ _ y ._.L._ a s. .. ~i -7 -- J t --.! h. ,,l. _-:r .. c. =

===l=..,....___,__= =T=. x.. i ~-~ - l - _.. -. - ! _:.. _ _ _ x-.-. - # =- 7 - T.J9

m. E. disa.=

- _= = H.u. : : p - - - mu. ;_m e o c - < m u u - - - -={:=:-p=.L. p._: 7:_ .=:==--. u- - f = y-. = f - s ::. = =- __;.. _.. s --.

= 3

-. :- p-- - z... - _-. r_:.._ _.. y _ y_.. --,..f.- __ : -~_ 2 :. r_.__^: z,__:..~._.._;--._-- v. t--- --- ;-- g

1, _ _.

g c3 o +- s w -- +._ .,g_ a .c a o o o o o o o n .a o. o o o n m s o m ua s o n e n n o e-4 s e-4 e-A D 'SWIGGON HV31!S G3ZrlVIO10N sumens a moons b,.- '$ [ _, ' : N P ,f . 1..l- '., [ 4-4 s ? g

,.., 4.,. e m. o <c. e. m mmmes-~~~ NH rw CC f*1 f.Y,

  • CS o. m N r-cc m c m en cc c e/% e-4 N M CO 6 O cw.h n 5 rw m N m m o ces eeee.n-em-eeeeeeeem

&J 40 e Q U LJ U U U U U U ob U sh U U kJ 4J U C C C 0 C U C C u C C C C nC C C C C C 4 N N e CD CC 4CF C C n e.a e-e ~ ~ n, n, m, n, m e,,, e, , c,. m, - m m, e, n, m i ~~~~~ o c o O > @ c d u O k % G ;;o 00 4 w n o 4 -,/ & (-Q O O N' e it ~ gO g m. 4 4, O s, j? gg'. _[ o 4D 3 E w >. 4 b.-V* _A em _.g g ,,_ s G f 4 L._...(.________.- f C b I, / 4/ p h . D: - ,:- 1 q: 4 g c., . rs g g 8 ,s L ' _ _. _ r gj Q .>___.I ^ C oN % _g.-. g. r-i s ._I-. d..._,._. f yy g I: i.: bo __?. ..._ 4... ,_.__...__b a._._ e _ - i O m 8_ ,v& m., I_ _ ___.._ . m _.- U o ^V. s g g g % 4',60% p i; ij.g__ 4 d . 1: .H w _d. _ _ __ n, g 5 " 8., mm k&c 'S S 6 g E O gw (- v p ~ 'f N QO Ng-

m.. _ - -

.g _. (, g' _ _ _. _ _ ~ gg _ _. _ y. Q.- __ _. y___y _ gg g s 3 O~~~ ^ o s-p C. e- ~, 4_. .___.___N..._ ps.. J O t: -. n Q. w N. ta. .z. ._f. 9.__ v. a l ;, _. H a e, _ _ _..h {: H i .rc y s p,. a f, ~ g l9 s e. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _.. g; -.____..__. 7 n-.. c _._.g g. g .g-___ .., -.... _..... _... _ _. ~ O i. l. to \\, y-r i ~a i .l e 3 o L. t :. 9 a J-u o u ..L.... oo o ._,4 _..., ....4. _t.. _,a 9 o M G g.x e c., e. e. -e.. .c ASN 'O S.TUGOW HV311S namme a moons

REV!SICitS 't i I. / 7 _ pn ;- I f / ) '. gy L CHECfED M

  1. -i"'"'<

FILE BY DATE /N ', 2>'; ( FIGUFI: 220.15-4 LACUSTRINE DCPOSIT M.0PERTIES .av>. s 2 .e 1 ? 3 4

  • C 769.

7. ,,. 7., j 8 , i i ? r t i i ..i l' t a s 1 I 6 3 # * ' ,i : i + g '; l; i ' O P-33 at 573.9 r j j J' j ; - -

7. 1..

1 j t r ! i, '

i..,.
t. i. -...

l - 3.. ! !I' l t i l i l = I i 'l I l i l t. i. 1 i I ,, i j t l. l-i. ' i 1 t g t l l v3 i t - '. ; i l Il'l lll-

4

t 1', ' '[l ' ' y FSAR' DESIGN CURVE o" 5 i ,1.[lt;- i i.... (UPPER: BOUND) tocco L 1 un a l pl p i 2 i i r. ea 9 j i t i i i ~~ .a j I i fl ' i[ -~ h j d L.O*4ER LOUND. O n = { { 6 O e V3 i 6 l l i i t' '/. s j i ; cs l ? I seco i 1 i 1 t N i l s i' i i C l j ) ,iI l { i 3 I f '3-e i t a y t i I 1 l;i, f O i i O gg - l -4 -3 -2 -1 0 I 10 10 10 10 10 g sit'CI,E AMPLITIfDE SilEAP. STR AIli, (7.) 2 N

j [n i Ii( l l 0 C ,\\ O~ 0 Y u A. + -, N,,r-4 9 i 7 s 4 7 9 8 4 1 5 a 5 5 5 .i t t t i' N C b l .s a a i t n6 Y V S 2 6 8 3 3 3 P P P . f> I C / - t j. H 'o f x, 'l 7 ' .s ) O 4 i E t S V U E R O A U B Q .I C T R R ) N N E G I E G P A P I P Q D O R S U T P -, E ( S 5 D ';1l:. jt l. 2 x 5 - R T 1 S R oA I A E 1 .\\ 0 S H O 2 F S P 2 E i ~ C E D -r D R f,,% N t '.ii,;,.e T U N U A G F:0 I. I I 4 I s P s I I N ? Z L A s-L L . N' \\.. .E i I /i ~* L r ' ,.' i- ,.,.'? > i I-G E R A N I P S 3 ~~ D ~ N 0 .~ 1 ~ U O B e. _.. R

r. e 1

e EW -== O 4 L

r.
  • ev N'

'i , U r 'r-t ! *k

i ;l T b

,.t. 0

  • I

+ l a .e h c 6-7',. i:.',**,,i ,s I' c 0 . o 0 l o '4 l'. b C l ~ 1 s s ( u?Sc $. :3... <,a 'A ) t l,:.a 3 6 . r h i.,

~ I ~ GEOPilYGICAL-- 1 I + SURFACE VIERATOR+ 1 Vf BRATOFY STATIC - PLATE BEARit1G l'['PL AT E DEARING F-St.1-E o#'---i EARTHOUld'ES" >{ [=1 I i lo ' 10-4 10-3 10-2 go-i to s Sheer Strain-7,p:;rccat

a. FIELD TESTS I

I CYCLIC TRIAXIAL l --CYCLIC S!!/.PLE SHE ARH TORSlollAL SHEAR d -* RESONANT COLUMN-SHAKE TAD I.E *i 3 W StA-EQ% l< - - CARTHOUARES[ M, 'l i 10 10-4 10-3 10-2 30-1 go Shear Stroin-7, percer.t ' IJote: Rcnge cd :,hter strain denoted os "Eart hquakes"

b. LABORATORY TESTS tepresents an extreme ton;e for me f t er ihRuukes,

"!;M - C Q ** dC n..M i,t r oins induced by strong notion-cor thquo kes. FIGURE 220.15-6 SOIL STRAIN RANGE FOR STRONG MOTION EARTHQUAKES 7 1

l-1.0 s i 4 s As N A N 0.0 ~ N X\\

VELETSOS B VEBRIC N

= 2 N A LUCO x N X DN \\ - 1.0 A ^ N N \\ N i \\ t i i -2.0 O 2 4 6 8 10

  • e 1.0

. s .8 " a,, - I -K- .6 2 a" - 3 4 o sk ,jk .4 -ja 4 .2 i i t i i i 0 2' '4 6 8 10 FIGURr. 220.15-7 ., s . ROCKING IMPEDANCE FUFCTION FOR ? 'VIEC0 ELASTIC IIALF-SPACE (VOIGT MODEL) I'I'TU VS. FES. 3 M.'D 41 O

f 1.0 - - 4 'A s. s db s N %A N-0.0 \\ g VELETSOS & VEBRIC Z ' Y* I A LUCO x \\ X DI!!FTT \\ s \\ A -2.0 O 2 4 6 8 10 1.4 ~ I ,- 'a 1.2 -l A i.0 'X ____,A A ga'( A I I o e G8 0.6 O i O 2 4 6 8 10 O., l' FIGURE 220.15-8 FIGURE 220.15-8 I:CRIZG::TAL IMPED.L'CE FUNCTION FOR i VIEC0 ELASTIC !!ALF SPACE '(VOIGT MODEL) lDIMFU VS. REFS. 3 AND 4 I ^ w 6 s ,e 4 8'

  • 1 P

y

m h l.O s l', ~ s N& \\ > 0.0 \\ - --- VELETSOS & V58RlC \\ 4 LUCO a \\ DIMFU \\. - 1. 0 N .\\ \\ \\ i i i O 2 4 6 8 'l0 l.4 s .( /4 1.2 4 .. g 1.0 u" ~ Q8 06 -f i i i 0 2 4 6 8 10 . FIGl!RE 220.15-9 VERTICAL IMPEDANCE FUNCTION FOR VISCOELASTIC HALF SPACE (VOIGT MODEL) DIMFU VS. REFS. 3 AND 4 g ' -/T_.

t . g r i 1,5 - O.8 F LOCO U ' l.0 - 8 s 8 s 1 2 4 0.6 -i s I s s I l -X----- 2 0.5 (g4.i -M ~~ 2 x o s t o t e ~ ~f' t O.O 01 b O 8 a g 9 4 s s-oj i a -0.5 4 6 8 2 L O 220 15-10 FICUR? UNCTION FOR A nocKINGDjijUg,g,cgfgtnypepgpMEDWM g LMERED FU vs. RgFs. 3 MD 4 D O V e s = D g 4 e o

  • g e

p 6 s t e ,e h, e-e e e e 1 k _a______.__________.'. ________________z__

A C j" d I 1 i 2.0 8.0 _ LUC 0 l 7 DIMFU 0 1.5 t' x, .. ~......*f....... 3 I.O l'. E. I O.6 .~ ~.. x 3 x o '.. '..\\..,*. - - X i O.5 r O. 2 ! O.O 6 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 f 8 e O o I FIGURE ::20.15-11 -HORIZONTAL IMPEDANCE FUNCTION FOR A LAYERED HYSTERETICALLY DA'! PED MEDIUM 3 g 1 c l S g _ g. 0 O- -r ,a r-+

/

l.,

. ~. 2.0 - 2.0 gg-X o1xeu I.5 8 l 3C U l f.O - ~, - i i 'X '~' 4,-~..~~'~.x*~~.~'~ ~ s,-.s,., s.O s -K. \\ o, 1 s.,o 0.0 O.5 ~ I.O 0-0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8 4 FIGURE 220.15-12 VERTICAL IMPEDANCE FUtiCTION FOR A LAYERED llYSTERETICALLY DANPED MEDIUM DIMFU VS REFS 3 AND 4 v. i 6 e e 9 g g e e A a

h t L LA W LA D T L S E E V I D P H E R S P i g h' o f-TN E l 7 M s 1 f / t N / h {d' ){c. e I L / { A L T E N W O Y C R 7 D 2 { L E ghhgh DO 3 M 5 I. 2 3 s 0 1 1 L 3 3 3 3 2 A e

  • a 0

R U O. h g e. T 3C 1 G t 5i q'l 7 1 T .S 0 y, 2 L p 4'. 2 A ET R N l U 7 O G I Z FI R GN OH I D g 9 L I B t l U N I A M s ~ ~ ~

1 . SOIL SPRING SSI NORTH-SOUTH S/R SRD SARGENT 4 LUNDY ENYeterED SeECTaR = EN0!NEER8 CALC No. 8 11 4-1 12 NOV 81 PROJECT CLINTON-1 REY 0 PROJECT NO. 4536-29 A523JK DRnPINo 2 000 PAGE 8F FREQUENCY IN CP8 500.0 200 0 100.0 50.0 20.0 10.0 50 2.0 10 0.5 20.0 s'iis ' ' ' 's'i ns e'si a'i s' s'ii s a's i l "a ' 'i s s e's ' a' i i s' a's i s ' ' ' 's' e's' 's i, i i s i ,',3 520.0 _iisi i i isi i iii ists i i 2 15 0 ~15 0 10.0_ 10 0 O.00 . 00 8 00 '.00 ~ 5 00

.00 4 00_

_4.00 2 ~3.00 3 00 v> ' .~. ~ D 2.00_ = 2 00-O o 1 50 _. _1.50 ' m 1 00 1.00 =0.80 3 80 v- \\N\\/ ) w . J, .J 0.80 Ce' - N A 'X-3.80-a "."0_ ,g y y f50 g 04 3 40' ) 0.30 3.30 ^ [ ~ o e e q4 0 20 i a i 13.20 2 ~. 2 ~ 0 15 ~ i. -3 15 7 0 10 _31C t-t- 0 00 3.C5 I ~. ~ 00S 3 08 - ' 3 05 0.00 002 ~ 0 004 0 008 ' 0 010 0 020 0 040 0.080 0 100 - 0 200 0 400 0 800 s 10 '20 PERI 80 IN~8EC8HD8 1 e WIDENEDSSE' -DESIGN BRSIS SSE INPUT HID

A.NEN88E

'NEN'SSE LORD 4836-29 FIGURE'220.15-14 ' .RUX-FUEL'BLDO-ELEY'712-'H8RIZ8NTAL NRLL 1712H8

1 SDILSeRINGSSIERST-WEST S/R SRD SARGENT 4 LUNDY cuvEteeEo SeECTRn > ENGINEEAS 01LC NB. 8.11.4-1 12 NOV 81 eReaECT CLtHTeN-1 REY o fR8 JECT NB. 4536-29 R522JK nuserNo 2.c00 PAGE ef (REQUENCT IN CPS 500.0 200.0 100 0 50.0 20.0 10.0 5.0 2.0 1.0 0.5 20.0.4 s'a i' c'u i' a ' "i ' 's'f 'n'i' ' s'i g' i o n ' i l i i, s'i n ' 1 " ' 'e's' t' ' n' ' a' s'e s' s'i n ' a' s'e s' s'u i '"a' 's' a'is i a ' i i c i' ' ' ' ' ' 's i ti0.0 i i i i i i 15 0 - 15 0 10 0 10.0 t 0.00 3 00 ^ 0.00 g.00 5.00 ~ 5.00 4.00 4.00 ~ 3.00 3 00 ~ m 'b 2.00 - 2.00 m 3 I o 1 50 t.50 2 [ 2100 1.00 0 00 3 80 /" \\ ) u.i J 0.80 ^ 0 .50 /if X A '\\- 3'90 ca 0 J.50 e -p '*\\/\\ h 0 40 l _3 40 r 0 30 b 3.30 4 0.2q{ 3 C O P T 1 c W _ 3 20 ] 0.15 -3 15 0 10 3 10 E 0.08 _ 'O.08-0.05 3,03 ' "'.004 0.008 ''"'""''"'"'I.05 0.05 3 0.002 0 .0.010 0.020 0.040 0.060 0.100 0.200 0.400 0 800 10 ~2.0 PERIOD IN SECONDS e WIDENEOSSE DESIGN DASIS SSE INeUT WID a NEWSSE NEW SSE LOAD 4536-48 FIGURE 220.15-15 AUX-FUEL BLDG ELEY 712 H9RIZ8NTAL WALL 1712H6

2 .60ll SPRING SSI ERST-WEST S/R SRD SARGENT & LUNDY anEt0eEo SeEcrRR D OINr. R8 CALC N O. 8.11.4-1 FROJECT CLIH10N-1 R e.V O 12 NOV 8 fROJECT N0 4Ss8-23 RS22JK mnPINO 2.000 PAGE OF FREQUENCY IN CPS BOO O 2JO O 100 0 50.0 20.0 10 0 5.0 2.0 1.0 0.5 i' 20*0 ' 5 i i a' l u i' s " s' ' 'a' a's' 's i 6' ' ' 's i ' ' ' s' a 'u i' 's'I s' 'u's ' i s'a s' s'i n ' : i i s' i s i t' ' a '"s' 'i i s 'a i s ' s' i a s' s'iitd.0 ii isii i I i 15.0 - 15.0 ~ 10.0 ~ _10.0 8.00 ~3.uu 0.00 0 00 5.00 0.00 4.00 4 00 3.00 3 00 ~ n C 2.00 2 00 ~ 2

s o 1 50 1.50

~ g ~ ~ 1 00 C 4 1.00 b b E q 0.80 i w 3 80 k k e W it %% Q j ji \\ U 00 0.s0 \\ 0.50 ^ 3.50 gj U.40 _ \\ g.40 .30 0 d } f ^ d e c 0.2Q _~. a _._ --02 ^' ( ; D. 5 35 l 0.10 3.'c i 0.09 3 05 - 0 06 3 06 ' ".00 4 0.006 1" '""I.0E 0.co 3 l 0.002 0 0 010 0 020 004000S0 0 100 0 200 0 400 0.600 10 20 l PERIOD IN SECONDS O N10ENEOSSE DESIGN BRS.S SSu INPUT WID A NEWSSE NEW SSE l0RD 4536-29 FIGURE 220.15-16 i RUX-FUEL BLCG ELEV 712 NERTICAL HALL 1712VW

c 5 l S0IL EPRING SSI NORTH-SOUTH S/R SRD SARGENT & LUNDY EttveteeED SeECTRR iENGINEERS CRLC NO. 8.11.4-1 PROJECT CLINTON-1 REV 0 12 NOV 81 PROJECT NO. 4S38-29 R523JK DRMPINO 2 000 PROE OF FREQUENCY IN CPS 500.0 200 0 100 0 50.0 20.0 10 0 50 2.0 1.0 0.5 20*0"-i l as' s'iti 'e' l i' ' ' a' ii s'i a' i n ii ' ' 'si 'e' 'a'l l i i l s' s'i i 6 e' i t s' l e i l ' ' ' ' a' l l' ' ' s' i 's ig'20 0 i i t ei liii i ill i i i61: i 2 15 0_ 2 16 0 10.0_ ,,, 3g73 8.00~ ~,co ~ 1.00 0.00 3 5.00 ~c.00'. f. 4.00_ ,4,00 ' ~ s ~ 3.00 -3.00 s s, ~ v> U 2*00-2 2.00

)

o 1 50, 1.50 ~ 3 = 1.00 I ~ ^ 0 / I' E.00 / v^' \\\\\\/' 1

~* 1 '

/ 4 U 0.00 ~ r7 x 'g p 50 w U 8 0 50 M50 0: [ N \\ h t. ((L / W \\ E,,[.2 / fx

)--

e v 2 Y 1 y 1 1 0.201. 0 20t-2 1 I ~ 0.15 3 15 ~ 0 10,_ _3 10 0 03 3 08 N s] 00; 3 03' 3 0 5 O.0; 0 002 0 004 0.006 0.010 0.020 0.040 0.080 0.100 0 200 0 400 0 600 sl'.3 2.0 ' PERIOD IN SECONDS e e WIDENEDSSE DESIGN BRSIS SSE INPUT HIDs jig 1,. { A NEWSSE NEW SSE LORD 4536-29 FIGURE 220.15-17 g- 'u RUX-FUEL BLDG ELEY 762 HORIZBNTAL WRLL U 176,2H9 [

5 SSIL SPRING SSI ERST-WEST S/R SRD SARGENT 4 LUNDY a m teeEo SeECTRA om ucas ote No. 8.ii.4-2 MBJECT CLINTON-i REV 0 12 NOV 81 fROJECT NB. 4536-29 A522JK mMPIND 2 000 PAGE OF FREQUENCY IN CPS ~ 600.0 200 0 100 0 50.0 20.0 10 0 50 20 10 05 l 20 o d i s i - f fff f f l' f I f f f f f f f 'f f f I I f f f f f f f f f f f I IllI f f I f I f f f f f f f f f f f f 6 f f. f iiif 20.0 in in nu n o-i i in in sisi no iii no e i in in sin int ini i i ~ 15.0 , 15.0 10.0 4 _ 10.0 l ' ~ 8 00 , 9.00 ~ 6 00 6 00 l 5.00 5.00 s 4.00 _ 4 00 '=- ~ 3 00 ~ 3.00 4 m b 2,.00 _ 2.00 bb 3. ~ f;1.GC f~ _ 1 50 b 3 ~. I I D i.00 '~

  • 2't.00 EE

/ (/7f %0,\\ p \\ E { s toa-y o so J 0.00 0 60 / h w. d.8 - 0'.00 [ %l 3 O.50 ' e 0.40 4 0.40 ) O) ~ 0.30 gs p 0.30 4 C M ( 6-0 20 _0.20 i x - ^ t 0 15 ( 4 3.15 2 i 0 10_ _0 10 O. 83 3 1-0.09 ~ 0.0S 00S .020 '.0"005 0.DE _0 002 0 004 0 006 0 010 0 0.040 0 060 0.100 0 200 0 400 0 600 1 20 s.- k PERISD IN SECONDS w-t q -- ( s._ e WIDENEDSSE -DESIGN BRSIS SSE INPUT WID '( * - A NEWSSE NEW SSE LORD 4S36-29 FIGURE 220.15-18 ~ u: s, s 6 b {y 7 -, '6UX-FUEL BLOG ELEY 762 HORIZONTRL WALL -1762H8-

6 S0IL SERING SSI ERST-WEST S/R SRD I SARGENT 4 LUNDY cuYEteeEo SeEcrRR i ENGINEERS GLC HO. 8.11 4-1 l (R6 JECT CLINTON-1 REY 0 '2 NOV 81 fROJECT NB. 4S36-29 R522JK mnelNo 2.000 eAGE OF FREQUENCY IN CPS 500.0 200.0 100.0 50.0 20 0 10.0 60 20 10 05 ie i i nii s t i i ei e rii e i i lei e s ii n i e i e i e iei e i e inl ais i s i t i i ii

20.0 l

20 0 i,ut i i s,i _siis siis i s iig sii iiis sisi inii i e sig iii sei issi initisie i i:: sie insi siig I 15.0 - 15.0 ~ I' ~ 1060 _ - - - _ 10.0 I 8.00 ,S.00 ~ S.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 4.03 -1; 4.00 3 00 ~ ~ _3 00 ~ v2 b 2 00 _ 2 00 .z ~ D 2 1.50 1 50 ~

  1. 4

= 1;00 'O 1 00 w E 0. 5' i ). 3.80 >- 0 00 3 0.- i a tm y g 0.~_ ~ 3.50 o 0.50 ~ d y j gf3j \\3 \\ g ~ ji -3.40 0.,40 j f 0 ^/ Q g y _c y [ T -O.30 0.30 u l l O.23 ,i'0 20 N l - e~ g :- 0 15 i 0 15 l. r- / ,.,, a01c[ 0 10 l F O[0? [ [3.03 O ~ ~ t 0 0C 3 05 c'*0 05 '".010 '".100 .0' " '.3. 0 5 0 0 020 0.040 0.0S0 0 0.200 0 400 0.600 1 20 , 0 002 0 004 0 006 PERIOD IN SEC8HDS,, ~ g WIDENEOSSE DEC10N BRSIS SSE INPUT WID 'NEWSSE NEW SSE LORD 4S36-29 FIGURE 220.15-19 G ,A a p i. ?,,. ~ ~ ' t:t.EV 762 VERTICRL -WRLL 1702VW' 3 RUX-FUEL BLDG v

/ 7 l S0IL SPRING SSI NORTH-88UTH S/R SAD SARGENT 4 LUNDY ENyen eEo SeECTRA = EN0!NEER8 CALC N8. 8 11.4-1 12 NOV.81 $*fCrNo. 4h's"78N-1 REV 0

  1. 7 2s A523JK DAMPING 2 000 l

PAGE OF FREQUENCY IN CPS 0.sy j' 600.0 200.0 300.0 50 0 20.0 10.0 50 20 20 . ' g' g g g'. g g g g '"H' i ie e i tie r t t # i eie t 00 0 'lill '"?' 20 0 - Illi i 8 ill til Illi lill Illi till i I I gggg gggg g g ggg ggg gggg ggg4 15.0~ U 50 10 0 1 0.0 ,I O.00_ t.00 ll E 0.00 T 00 6.00 1.00 +' ~ ~ 4.00 . 00 g, d 3 00[ Ei.00 i to -[ 2 00 l.00. b b I o 1 50 t.50. 2

c.

l r 1 00 N'. .00 k' \\ h @ 0 80 g V 1 00 w .J 0.00 a s 11 00 l 0 50 k,S \\T.50 \\ 0 40 AM+ .40 -- C' C C W ~ Q 0 30' t.30 )N/ [% e 2 ^ 0.20 A i i.20 ~ ~ 01E{ 5;.15 0 10 1.10 00S[. .._;;..h E.08 ~ 0.00 T.es 005"' isin inn inin inn i e nei in ions n. .05 0.002. 0.004 0 008 0 010 0 020 -0 040 0 080 0 100 0.100 0.400 0.000 10 20-2 PERIOD IN 8ECOND$ e.WIDENEOSSE .DESION BASIS ~SSE INPDT HID FIGURE 220.15-20 + A NEWSSE: NEW 88E LORD 4836-29

7 SSIL SPRING SSI ERST-WEST S/R SRD SARGENT 4 LUNDY a;vEteeED SeECTRA . CNGINEERS CALC N O. 8 11.4-1 PROJECT CLINTBN-1 REV 0 12 NOV 81 PROJECT NO. 4F38-2? A522JK mMPING 2 000 PRGE OF FREQUENCY IN CPS 600 0 200 0 100 0 r0 0 20 0 10 0 5.0 2.0 10 05 1 20.0 a' i s i' ' s 'i i s ' : " ' ' 's' e' is a'i' ' s'i n' i o n i' ' 'si' 'n : ' ! " ' 's'i' ' ' s' t' ' s'i a' i n i' ' ' s' s'i n ' s "a' 's'i a' 's u' ' s' a'i s' i n s t'20.0 i ' i i i i i i i iit i i 15.0 - 15.0 10.0 _ 10.0 8.00 3.00 6.00 6 00 5.00 ~ 3.00 4.00 i . 4.00 3.00 3.00 n g,2.00 _ 2.00 s } o 1.50 - 1.50 z I d'k- - ~ "A 2 1.00 O.00 g A[ \\ ) -0.80 w r l J -,00 K 0 d \\. b \\' @ 0.50 / '" g( 3 0.50 4 0.40_ p 4 g,4g = ([ 3-C O s 0.30 s -0.30 f fA 0.2$- 0.20 1 0 t [0.15 0 15 l 1 0 10L _0 10 l 0.00 0.08 0 00 0.0S '"''i.05 0 05 ' ' ' ' 'W 0 0.002 0.004 0 006 0 010 0.020 0 040 0.060 0 100 0 200 0 400 0.600 10 20 PERIOD IN SECONOS O WIDENEOSSE DESION BRSIS SSE INPUT HID A NERSSE NEW SSE LORD 4SS6-29 FIGURE 220.15-21 CONTR!NMENT WRLL ELEV B03 H8RIZONTRL WRLL 2803H3

_= w B S3!L SPR!fl0 SS! ERST-WEST S/R SRD SRRGENT 4 LUNDY aivEteeEo:SeECrRR ' ENGINEERS CR.C NO. 8.!!.4-2 )g g gy PRadECT CLINT8N-1 REV O fR8 JECT N8. 4S36-29 R522JK mneINo 2 000 PAoE 8F FREQUENCY IN CPS 500 0 200 0 100 0 50 0 20 0 10.0 50 20 1.0 05 t s i et, 20.0 ' s' I e e'a's s i s'l 'a' 3 :' ' 's i s' ' ' e's i' ' u ' s' s ': i ' s " aa':' a' 'n'i' e' a's e' I s o ' a' s's a , t, e,, t,, 20.0 3 - e it 3:38 up i s asi s oi ,,g 15.0 - 15.0 10.0 ~ _ 10.0 8.00 8 00 0' ~ 8.00 5.00 5.00 } 4.00 4 00 ~ l 3.00 -3.00 { us .~ U 2 00 2.00 2 i o o 1.50 - t.50 2 I k 2 = 1 00 J 1 00 e N 0 00 ~ Aa T _3 80 w 7J%}* .J 0.60 N kA bk \\ 0.50 3.50 ua: g / V'J \\3 g d s 0.40 _ 3.40 h \\ 0~ 0 2 0 0.30 4 \\ ~ p 3 3.30 - -s e a 1-q 0.2 'h O.20 0 10 [ {-3,3, U*IO [3 10 2 ~ 0.M 3.08 0.( 3.05 ,,,7 0,0, 0 002 0.004 0.006 0.010 0 020 0 040 0 080 0 100 0.200 0.400 0 600 10-2 0' PERIOD IN SECONDS O WIDENEDSSE DES!ON BRSIS SSE INPUT WID i NEWSSE NEW SSE LORD 4SSS-29 -FIGURE 220.15-22 -CONTAINNENT WRLL ELEV 803 YERTICRL-WRLL 2803VW

f 1 1 SS!L SPRING SSI NORTH-SOUTH S/R SAD SARGENT 4 LUNDY EnvEterED SeECTRR . uGWEUS CRLC N8. 8.11 4-1 PR8 JECT CLINTBN-1 REV 0 l L 13 NOV 81 PROJECT NS. 4S38-29 F1017JK DRMPING E.000 Y RAGE 8F i FREQUENCY IN CPS I 500.0 200.0 100.0 50.0 10 0 10.0 5.0 2.0 10* 05 20.0_,i,e,, ,i H 8'It' n' 0*0 nitestie ie ii eei n einiinii t i e i ia in 't i n i s is sup in i i sia in sisi sin sisi ini i i ses au sisi un siis inn e i ins i 1 15.0 [ 15.0 ~ i 10.0,, _10.0 8.00 ).00 1 ~ ~ s.00 .00 5 00 0 00 4.00- _4.00 3 00, -3,gg io ~ F,.00 ' y 2 0% ' E = 5 ~ 1.50 c l *30_ ~ .x 1.00 g 1 00-M \\ k I 0.80 [ g 3.80 cc T U 6 a 0 80 \\ b k O.50 g b 0 40 ~ 0.5*" g' r 3 30 A i )) .d e 3.20 0.tf_ l ~ 3.15 0.lE 3,3 g 0 10,_ b -3.03 0.C O.03 3.08 - ~ nT I8 8'n i e ins sei ei.i .0.05 ' ".004 0 038: ' ".100 ' t$' t O.COR 0 0.010 0 020 0.040 0 050 0 O.200. 0 400 0 600 ~ - 1 0 PER180 IN'SEC8NOS' ' e NEDENEOSSC ' DESIGN SASIS SSE INPUT NED A' WENSSE LNEN SSE LORD 4S36-28 FIGURE 220.15

  • i-i 7

SNSELD HALL

  • ELEY.743 N8RIZ6NTAL HRLL 47_ 43M8 _ '

1 l GBIL SPRING SSI ERST-WEST S/R SRD SARGENT 4 LUNDY ENvEleeED SPECTRR = ENGINEERS CRLC HB. 8.11 4-1 I PR8 JECT G.!NTBN-1 REV 0 13-NOV'81 PR8 JECT N8. 4S38-29 A954JK DRMPING 2 000 PROE 8F FREQUENCY IN CPS 500.0 200.0 100 0 50 0 20.0 10.0 50 20 10 05 20 ** -i i i s' s'u i " " ' 's' 's i e s i s'i i s'i n " ' ' ' a'i s i t i s'i i' s'i i s ' s'i e' i n n " ' ' 's' 'i n' i s'i i' s'iig 20.0 i it iis iii i i t i i i ii [ [15.0 15.0 .10 0_ _10 0 ~ ~ 8.00 ,0.00 8 00 -0 00 r 1 5.00 eg - :.00 4.00 _:.00 s + ? 3.00 3.00 - i c3 f C 2.00_

2.00-2
a

~ cn 1 50 [1 50 i E 2 1 00 1.00' \\ O 80 3 30 l -E. 7' \\ ) } ia J 0.00 3.60 ~ 0.50 3.50 1 = jy N \\ 0 40-3.40 I ~ zr g e" -3 30'- 1-0 30 - ~ j / j a e a l 0.2C _ -/ i' 3.20 t ~3 15' ~ O.15 l 0.10m _3.10 i p 0.00 ]3.06' [ i. 0.00 3.06- ' ' ' ' " 'I.06 ' ".020 8' 0.C 5 ' ' ' ' 3 0 002~ -0 004 0 000 0 0 040 0 060 0 100 . 0.200 ' O.400 0 000 1.0 2.0 - 0 010-i ~PERIBD IN SEC8N06 e WIDENEOSSE ' DESIGN BRSIS SSE INPUT.NID FIGURE 220.15-24'- A 'HEWSSE. NEN SSE L8ADl4S36-29 i- . SHIELD NRLLl ELEY 743~ H8RIZ8NTAL NRLL l4743H8 y a s y e v + e -1 e

2 SBIL SPRIND SSI ERST-WEST 6/R SRD SARGENT & LUNDY ENvELeeED SeECTRR = EHOINEER8 CALC NB. 8.11.4-1 13 NOV 81 PROJECT CLINTON-1 REV D PRBJECT NB. 4836-29 fl954JK DRneINa 2 000 PRDE OF FREQUENCY IN CPS 600 0 200.0 100 0 50 0 20.0 10 0 5.0 20 10 05 20.0" i s'i n' i s u " ' sin' i s'i n' s'i n i i i s' u' s i " "s'e'ss ii i s'a i' s'iti i s'i e' s'i n " ' 's' i e' 'i n' s i s i s'iis20.0 ? ' ' i i ii i i i i 2 15.0 - t5.0 ~ ~ 10.0 10.0 800[ ~0.00 0.00 3.00 ~ 5.00 S.00 4.00_ _ 4 00 3 00~ ~3 00 m Z 2 00_ ) 2 _2.00 D e 1.50, , 1 50 2 ~ 2 1 00 1 00 0 3 ^h 4 E F 0 80 ( 3 80 j k x N J 0.60 m 3 60 W d M ([ \\ 8050 J O.C0 'D y cc [ 0 40. j j _3 40 0 30, N 3 30 3 C C }^ 0.20 -^ ~ V h -0 20 0 15 0 16 4 1 0.10,_ 0 10 0 0C _ 3 08 0.00 3 06 " ".004 0.000 ' ' ".040 0 060 ' ".200 '"'.0-' $ .05 I3' 0.05 0 0 0 010 0 020 0 0.100 0 0 400 0 600 1 20 0 002 PERIOD IN SEC8HDS O WIDENEOSSE DESIDN BASIS SSE INPUT HID A NEWSSE NEW SSE LBRD 4636-29 FIGURE 220.15-25 SHIELD WALL ELEY 743 VERTICRL WALL 4743VN

1 8 8""'" 88' """"-80um S/R sRo SARGENT 4 LUNDY ENVELOPED SPECTRR > ENGINEER 8 CALC NO. 8 11.4-1 PRBJECT CLINTON-1 REV O 12 NOV 81 PROJECT NO. 4536-29 R523JK DRMPIND 2.000 PROE OF FREQUENCY IN CPS 500.0 200 0 100 0 50 0 20.0 10.0 5.0 2.0 10 05

  • o.0 _,'ii,'

iii,,i's'ii iii i n i i e' i s i s'iii ' ' ' ' 's'i as i i a' i s i s'i i s ' ' ' 's' a' i s i e S0 t i i iisi i :: i iisi iai ~ _15 0 15 0- ~ ~. 10.0 _ 10 0 _0 00 8 00 t 0.00 0 00 -4.90 5.00 ~ 4.00 _4 00 3 00 ~ 3.00 ~ en _~ [ 2 00_ _2.00 z ~ ~ 3 1 60 o 1 50 _ 2 ~_ 1 00 z 1 00 [ k b O h 5 3 00 g 0.00, f ) 3.60 ia 0 00 3.50 0 50-M' k A 0 i 3 40 0 40_ \\_- g y 3.30 0.30 y -Y We i 4 m 0.20 _ _3 20 3 15 ~ 0 15 ~ 3 10 0 10 ~ 0 03" 3.C3 3 06 0.00 ' ' 3.05 0 050.002 0.004 0.008 0.010 0.020 0.040 0.0S0 0 100 0 200 0.400 0 000 1.0 20 PERIOD IN SECONDS O 'DBLEVELC LEVEL C A NEWLEVELC . LEVEL C FIGURE 220.15-26 RUX-FUEL BLDO ELEY 712 HORIZONTAL WRLL 1712HB

1 \\ 'SSIL SPRING S3! ERST-WECT S/R SRD SARGENT & LUNDY cNvEteeED SeECTRa = ENGINEERS mLC NB. 8 11 4-1 12 NOV 81 f'ROJ ECT CLINTON-1 REY 0 fROJECT N3. 4538-29 RS22JK mne!ND 2 000 PAGE OF FREQUENCY IN CPS 500.0 200.0 100.0 !?.0 20.0 10.0 5.0 2.0 1.0 0.5 20 0 ' 6 6 e' u' i t 'e's'i s u' ' s'isi' ' 'TT:,' e' s's a' u' n ' i '"a' 's'i i i n' ' i n'e s' s'e u ' s' i s i' ' s 'i t t " ' ' ' 's'.' 'e u' ' ' :' ' u' s i 0 0 i i i i i 15.0 ~ 15.0 -1 10.0 10 0 8.00 [ ~S.00 8 00 3.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 [ ~ -3.00 c) b 2.00 [ -2.00 m O o 1.50 3 50 ~ 2 = 1 00 1.C0 5 00 0 3.80 /' ) w 8060 3.80 0.50 3.50 4 = ,/ - \\ h 4,s 0.40_ _0.40 5 /' kf 5 I 0 30 y 3 30 'r; g F 1 0.20 _ ^ _3 20 - [ 0.15 ~3 15' ~ 0 10,, _'s,10 0.03 ~ ~ -3 08 0.C0 3.08 ".004 0.008 ' ' ' ' ' ' 5 3.05 0.05 0 002 0 0.01:1 0.020 0.040 0.080 0.100 0.200 0.400 0.800 1.0 20 PERIOD IN SECONDS e DBLEVELC LEVEL C A. NEWLEVEM LEVEL C FICURE 220.15-27 RUX-FUEL BLD0 ELEV 712 H8RIZ8NTAL WRLL 1712H6

2 SOIL SPRI.10 SSI EAST-HEST S/R SRD SARGENT & LUNDY aiveteeEo SetCTRA w ENGINEDt3 QLC H O. 8 11.4-1 fROJECT CLINTON-1 REY 0 I2 OI tROJECT H8. 4536-29 RS22JK ORMP I NG 2 000 PAGE OF TREQUENCY IN CPS 600.0 200.0 100.0 50.0 20.0 10.0 5.0 2.0 t.0 0.5 t i f I f li f ' f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f If f f I f f f f I f f f f f f f I fff ffffIff f f f f i 20 0 ZO.0 -sist lui e i til sia sisi sisi s '. i s assi i i las asi sisi assi inii isu i e iis in sisi nil 15.0 [ [ 15.0 10 0 _ , 10 0 8.00 [ ~3.00 c 8.00 3.00 5 00 0.00 4.00_ _ 4.00 3.00 ~ ~3 00 to D 2.00. , 2.00 E j o 1 50 [ .50 ~ l = i p 3 E g 0.80 _ 3 g - -) u 3.30 M a: w 2 gj000 j_f y g 3 60 l O O.50 f h'h - 3.50 m \\ 0.40 3.40 / 0 30, s 3.30 m t a, m v a O.2 3.20 r 0 15 3,15 ~ 0 10 ,3.10 0.08 ~ ~ 3.08 ~ 0.0S 3.btf g 0.0 5 ' ' ' ' 2"I .05 '".100 ' ' ' '. "1.0 3 0.002 0.004 0.008 0.010 0.020 0.040 0.060 0 0.200 0 400 0.800 2.0 PERIOD IN SECONDS. e DBLEVELC LEVEL C A. NEWLEVELC LEVEL C FIGURE 220.15-23 RUX-FUEL BLDG ELEY 712 VERTICAL WRLL 1712VN

5 SOIL SPRING SSI NORTH-SOUTH S/R SRD SARGENT & LUNDY . EnVEt0een SeeCrRR = D0!NEEN8 CALC No. 8.11.4-1 12 NOV 81 PR JECT CLINTON-1 REV O PROJECT NO. 4538-29 A523JK DRMPIND 2 000 PROE OF FREQUENCY IN CPS 600.0 200.0 100.0 50 0 20.0 10.0 5.0 20 1.0 05 20.0-' :': ' a's u " "s'i i p 'u's a' s'i s' i s l a ' s' i i s' i n i' e ' "iI ' ' 's' 't a'i i n'si, isnt s' i l i' 'a's s i ' " ' ' 'sn i s' i i s' s'e igh0.0 1 a i il e i it 15 0_ ~~ 25 0 I t-10.0- _ 10 0 8*00_ ]:.00 ~ 8 00 0.00 5.00 ~

.00 4.00-

-4 00 ) 3.00_ 3.00 ~ I ~ i w ~ '~. 2.00-2 00 h ~ 5 5 ~ 0 o 1.50, 1 5r, 2 2 i ~ 2 1 00 I >9 ~ 1 00 $.002 /6-0 V V ) I J 0.00 3 60 e U.50 \\ \\~ 0 3 g pv 3 50 e r%h 3 0.40_ j) _ 3 40 3 / ~3,3g ,I 0 30-f -O C Y l 0.2 C'_ ~ 3.20 i ? 0.15 ~ -3 15 L _I o 0 10 - 3 10 ~ 'O.08 3 08 0 00 ~ 3 08 0.05 ' I "" ' "I .0g s 0.032 0 004 0.t:08 - 0 010 0.020 0 040 0 060 0 100 0 200 -0 400 0.800 10 20-PERIOD IN SECONDS C) DBLEVELC LEVEL C A NEWLEVELC LEVEL'C FIGURE 220.15-29' . AUX-FUEL-BLDO-ELEY-762-HORIZ8NTRL_ WALL. 1762H6'

n' 5 r i SBIL BPRING SSI ERST-HEST S/R SRD SARGENT & LUNDY mvEteeEo SetCTRa I ENGINEERS CALC N8. 8 11.4-1 n0 JECT CLINTON-1 REV O 12 NOV-81 PROJECT NS. 4536-29 .R522JK MMPING 2 000 i l-PAGE BF i REQUENCY IN CPS 500.0 200.0 100.0 50.0 20.0 10.0 5.0. 2.0 1.0 05 f f I f f fff fIf(ffff f f f f f I f f I fff fffffff f f f f f f f f f f fft'ttII1if f f f f 20 0 'sisi 20.0, aiu i sia in sisi un esas sin a sie su siis sin siis sin iti asi su siis sess ~ ~ 15 0 15.0 4, 10 0,_ _ 10 0, ~ ~ 8.00 0.00 6 00 0 00 i. 5 00 0 00 4.00 _4.00

  • r 3 00 [

~ 3.00 l ~ I t> r l [ 8'.00 _2.00 ' = i o 1 50 [ [ 1 50 z m i 2 1.00 f D 1 00 ~ ? .f,# \\ P \\ E 2 = }o ** ( y y _

  1. .co J 0.80 k

3 00 l 8'J [ V } \\- s o So_ py

  1. 50 y

3 l O.40 - 4

3 40 i

./ / l 0 30_ g 3 30 (- 3 c w 0.20- , 3 20 ~ 0 15- ~ 3.15 ~ ~ 0 10_ 3 10 ( .0 09 ~ [3 08 0.06 3.09 I ".004 0.006 '"'.200 '."1.0' ' ' ' " ' 3.05

0. 0.002 0

0.010 0.020 0.040 0.000 0 100 E 0.400 0 600 2.0 PERIOD IN SECBNDS e D8LEVELC LEVEL C A NEWLEVELC . LEVEL-C FIGURE 220.15-30 ^IAUX-FUEL 8LDG .ELEY 762. HORIZ8NTAL WRLL 1782H6 e a ,,,,m.

6-SBIL SPRING 881 ERST-WEST 0/8 ggg SARGENT & LUNDY 01VELOPED SPECTRR . ENGINEERS CTLC N O. 8.11 4-1 fROJECT CLINTON-1 REY 0 12 NOV 81 fROJECT N3. 4536-Z9 R5Z2JK I M INO 2.000 PAGE OF FREAUENCY IN CPS 500.0 200.0 100.0 50.0 20.0 10.0 5.0 2.0 1.0 05 f tilffff f f f f f f f I f f I fit fIf f f f f f f I f I f f I f I fff ffffIfI f f f f 20 0_,i fi s,f ifi i n s i i n si,'M.O

iii, i

sei sie inii iis i i s i-i i sii soi isii sisi ei. inii i i sie s i n- ~ 15 0 15.0 ~ 10 0 _ 10 0 8.00 _3 00 - ~ 9.00 8.t. ~ / 5 00 5.00 .l 4.00 4.00 ~ 3 00 40 ~ ut C 2.00 E _3.00 E E e,1.50 sv w ,1 50 - m m 'O _1 00 g 100 J r^m # w 3 g 0 00 q 3 _0 80 E I / A )--i 3.00 \\ 2 g 0.00 b --4J 3.50 - p-g g s 8050 h \\ cc O.40 0 40 ~ 4 %' '\\'5 j _3 30 0 30 ? ~ 3.23 0 02 0.15 - 0.15 t 3 10 0 10 ~ 0.08 _3 08 ~ 0 0S 3.05 ' ' ".004 0 000 .400 0 600' '.0' ' ".3. 03 ' 0.05 0 0.010 0.020 0.040 0.060 0.100 0.200 0 1 20 l 0.002, PERIOD IN SECONDS I DBLEVELC LEVEL C e A NEHLEVELC LE, VEL C FIGURE 220.15-31 l RUX-FUEL BLDG ELEV 76Z YERTICAL WALL 1762VW

? 7 Still SPRING SSI NORTH-SOUTH S/R SRD SARGENT 4 LUNDY ENvet0eeD SeECTRR = EH0!HEERS CRLC NO. 8.11.4-1 PROJECT CLINTON-1 REV O g g g, g g PROJECT NO. 4S38-29 A523JK DRMPINO 2.000 PROE OF FREQUENCY IN CPS 500 0 200.0 100 0 50.0 20 0 10 0 50 2.0 10 05 i i e e i e niin i s t i e ii ei i 'nie n t i r e i ,i e,i,i,,y 20 0_,e i s,i ti,o,n e n i i,i,,i i,i,,i ei.. i i s,i 20 0 iii

iii, i

sei iiii sisi i sii sie iisi iisi i i sii ii 15.0~ 15 0 ~ _10.0 10.0_ I' .00 8 00 - ~. 6.00, 0 00 I_ 5.00~ 0.00 4 00_ _4 00 -3 00 3.00 ~ v> C 2 00_ _2.00 = D _ 1 50 i 330 o >4 x [** Lc.s NYN 4 ~ 5 .5 l ~ \\{ \\ ;r M y3 E g 0 80, j 7 f _3.80 w @ 0.00 // ~ 3 60 La la /j/ Y } \\-- 3.50 8 0 50' g7 \\ \\ b a a: 3 40 0 40_ y \\_ .7 1 ~ '~ 0.30 3.30 _3 20 0.20_ I 0.15- -3 16 0 10 _3 10-0 08~ 2 _3.Ca 0 06 3 05 0.05 ' ' ' 3.05 0 002 0.004 0.006 0 010 0 020 0.040 0.000 0.100 C.200 0 400 0.600- 10 2.0 PERIOD IN. SECONDS e DBLEVELC LEVEL C A NEWLEVELC LEVEL C FIGURE 220.15-32 CONTRINMENT WRLL ELEY 803 HORIZONTAL W6LL 2803HS

7 601L OeRING SSI EAST-WEST S/R SRD C SARGENT & LUNDY mveteeEo SeECraR > EN0lHEERS CALC N B. 8 11.4-1 i fROJECT CLINTON-1 REV O { 12 NOV 81 fR8 JECT NO. 4538-49 RS22JK mMP INO 2 000 l PROE OF I FREQUENCY IN CP8 500.0 200.0 100.0 50 0 20.0 10.0 5.0 c.0 10 05 i s'i e' e i ' ' ' a' e's o ' i a'i s' a's u ' a "i' 'sa'i' 's i i' ' s' i t i' ' s'i n g40 0 e i n, vii s i e i i e .t it it e i fit 20.0., i,i sii iii _i i i iiii i i ses sii essi sin sesi asii a ~ 15 0 15.0 _10 0 8 00 b.00 10 0 ~3 0 00 ~ 0 00 5.00 ~ 5 00 4.00 4.00 _ 3 00 _ _3.C0 ~ [ 2 00 _2 00 en z 1 50 a ~ e 1.50 ~ 2 P k' 37 5L e& a 5 oo / ~ yr \\y g\\ p g 3 7 ) ,3 00 a g 0.80 \\ ( - u: y 3 00 na 7 g0.60 3.50 3 8 0.50 f V AJ .3 40 0.40k A [ 3.30 0.30' i ~ ~ 0.20 _3 20 ~ 3.15 0 15 _3 10 ~ 0 10 0.08 0.CS ~ -l ' ' ' ' " ' ' ' ' ' ' 5 0.C5 0 06 ' ' ".00 4 0.000 " '.10 0 0 0 010 0 020 0 040 0.CSO 0 0.200 0 400 0.600 10 20 0 050 002 PERIOD IN SEC8NDS 08LENELC LEVEL C FIGURE 220.15-33 O A NEWLENELC LEVEL C fcWiTRINMENT WRLL ELEV B03 HSRIZONTRL WRLL E803H8

B 681L SPRING SSI EAST-WEST S/R BRD SARGENT & LUNDY mytteeED SrECTRn ~1 ENGINEERS CFLC H B. 8 11 4-1 fROJECT CLINTON-1 REV 0

g gy g3 fROJECT N8.

4536-29 RS22JK tmPIN9 2 000

PAGE, 8F FREQUENCY IN CPS 500.0 200.0 100.0 50.0 Z0.0 10.0 5.0 E.0 10 0.5 f f I I I f f I f I f f I f fIf f f f f f f f f f I f f I f f f f

fff Iffffff I f f f %tl.0 20 0 fff'IffIi!b.I -sisi seu a i sai ni eis l iso sisi ini e iis ni assi ini siis sui i e its or assi sii 15 0 [ [ 15.0 10 0 _10 0 I 8 00 _ C.00 0 00 0.00 5.00 0.00 4.00 _ 4.00 b b k 3 00 , 3 00 i 2.00 [ _~ S.00 e 1 50 ~ [ ~1.50 5 [ -h s 3 3 [*,y/ ~6 3 b E*0 \\g 4- -1 00 H 0 80 0.80 2 // 't' .\\. E ts 0.00 3 00 y g\\ W l jj b y 0 *** O.46-3 40 E - A-a 0.3d 3 30 0 20 _3 20 0.15 3 15 0 10 _ 3 10 0.08 [ [3.08 0.0S 3 08 ' ' ' ' ' ' '5 3.05 ".004 0.006 0.05 0.00R 0 0.010 0.020 0.040 0.0S0 0 100 0.200 -0.400 0 600 10-20 PERIBD IN SECONDS e DBLEVELC LEVEL C A NERLENELC LEVEL C FIGURE 220.15-34 CONTRINMENT WRLL ELEY 803 VERTICAL WRLL R803VW L

1 S8IL SRRING SSI NORTH-S80TH S/R SAD SARGENT 4 LUNDY EnVEteeEo SrECTRR = EH0!NEEAS CALC N8. 8 11 4-1 13 NOV 81 PR8 JECT CLINT8N-1 REY 0 i PR8 JECT NB. 4538-29 l R817JK DAl1PINO 2.000 PROE 8F FREQUENCY IN CPS 600.0 200.0 100.0 50.0 20.0 10.0 5.0 20 10 0.5 20*0' i s's a' s'u s "a ' 's' e's' 'u's s' i e s'u' n i s's :' s'u i 's" 's'i s' 'o's s' e'a s' s's ua' s's a' s u s ' " 's'e's' 's u' s' a s s' u s 20 0 i i s 4 ~ 15.0 15.0 10 0_ 8 00$- _ 10 I l ~ -;.00 ~ 6.00 .00 5 00 0 00 4.00_ , 4.00 i 3 00 ~ 1 3 00 c3 U 2.00_ 2.00 ~ x

a

~ o 1 50, { t.50 m 7 A k b ,o .J 0.00 3.60 d ~ y.0 50_ yw 3.50 g 0.40 lp 3,40 fW 5 I ~ 0.30, 1 3,30 0.20_ 3 20 2 0 15 ~3.15 \\- ~ 0 10. [3 10 - .0.09 t -3.09 t l 0 06 3.0g 0.05 18E'3" ' ' ' ' ' "I. 05 -3 0.002 0.004 0.005 0.010 0.010 0.040 0.060 0 100 0.200 0.400 0.600 10 E.0 l PEREOD EN SEC8HDS e DBLEVELC LEVEL C FIGURE 220.15-35 NEWLEVELC LEVEL C A .,SH& ELD WRLL -ELEY 743 'NORIZSNTRL WHLL . 474SM8.. - r w

1 S8!L SPRING SSI EAST-WEST S/R GRD SARGENT 4 LUNDY ENveteeED ceECTRA j 13 NOV 81 PR EC CI O REV 0 PROJECT NB. 4S38-29 i A954JK oAne!NO 2 000 PAGE SF FREQUENCY IN CP? C00.0 200.0 100.0 50.0 20.0 10.0 60 2.0 1.0 05 j iif I f fiti f i f 1 f I I I i f f 1 I 'lf P 111 i f f f i t f f f f f if f f f Il t i f I I t 20.0 20.0 isii iiss i i sie ni siis visi iusi issi i i sis its iis isis ssus reis i i sai ni

isi sis 16.0 16.0 i

10.0 _ 10 0 8.00 4 ~0.00 6.00 ~ 0.00 5.00 t 0.00 1 } 4.00_ 4.00 r E I 3 00 a.00 9 ~ b = C 2.00.. 2.00 I z => e 1 60_ 1.50 2 ~ ~ i. .5 / f$ f2% 913 5 t f ll [ _3*90 0 00 ^ o.00 a7 { 0.50 0.50 t-0.40_ gi 3 40 L w 0 30_ N:_ ~3.30 f \\ i 0 20-3.20

r

.r. b 0 15 3.15 i 0.10 _3 10 f 0 0D ~ 3.08 0 06 0.00 O.05 IE' I'" 121 11! L 115 .06 0 + O.002 0.00? 0 006 0 010 0.020 0.040 0.000 0.100 0.200 0 400 0 600 1.t 20 PERIOD IN SECSNDS /' DBLEVELC LEVEL C O. }i A NEWLEVELC LEVEL C FIGURE 220.15-36 8HIELD-NALL-ELEV 743 H8RIZ8NTAL WALL 4743H8 u i

2 SARGENT & LUNDY - SBIL CPRING -SSI EAST-WEST S/P SRD , ENvElerED seECTRa C3 Clo1NEERS CALC NS. 8.11 4-1 PRBJECT CLINTBN-1 REV O 13 NOV 81 PRBJECT NB. 4536-29 A954JK DAMPING 2 000 PROE 8F FREQUENCY IN CP8 2.0 10 06 600.0 200.0 100.0 60 0 20.0 10.0 5.0. t t If fIf f i t i i t iR 9 it i iIIf f I t t i f 1 9 i t i i f ItIi t 1 i t 1 i t ii 'f I -l3II IIll I I III IEl iIII Illi lIii i138 I I III Ill iIII IIll iIII IIEl I i liI Ill iIIf i134 ~ I 15.0 18.0 O .~ 10 0 10 0_ 8.00[ [0 00 8.00 0.00 G.00-0 00 4 00 4.00,_ L: 300[ }1.00 to C ~ C 2.00 --2 00 P4 5 o o 1.50_ f 1 50 j i- [ l ~ ~ j g100. t y 1.00 C 0 00-P e- ~ 3 80 = ia f x g 0.00_ 3.80 gy-y*- n y%/ f y 9 Q' g l g a O.301 3.30 E NE .h 0.20_ _3 20 - 5 0.16_ 3.18 0.10 3.10 ~ ~ 0 08_ 3.08 f ( 0 06 3.08 "'"'''''''"'"'"''''''''''I.06 0 06 3 0 002 0 004 0 006 0 010 0 020-0 040 0 060 0 100 'O.200 -0 400 0 600 10 20 ( PERIOD IN SEC8HDS ( g) DBLEVELC LEVEL C t' A -NEWLEVELC LEVEL C l FIGURE 220.15-37 a -. SHIELD WALL ELEY 743 VERTICAL'..WRLL 4743VM ,}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20033D166&oldid=4587539"