ML20041D635
| ML20041D635 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 03/03/1982 |
| From: | Berkowitz L, Gonzalez A, Tikoo S FRANKLIN INSTITUTE |
| To: | Wang A NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17194A532 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-NRC-03-79-118, CON-NRC-3-79-118 TER-C5257-430, NUDOCS 8203080090 | |
| Download: ML20041D635 (112) | |
Text
--
TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT QUALITY GROUP CLASSIFICATION OF COMPONENTS AND SYSTEMS COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY DRESDEN NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 2' NRC DOCKET NO. 50-237 FRC PROJECT C5257 NRC TAC NO. 41596 FRC ASSIGNMENT 17 NRC CONTRACT NO. NRC-03-79-118 FRC TASK 430 1
Preparedby S. Ttkoo Franidin Research Center Author:
A. Gonzalez L. Berkowitz 20th and Race Street F ailadsiphia, PA 19103 FRC Group Leader: A. Genzalez
)
\\
Prepared for Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Lead NRC Engineer:
A. Wang March 3, 1982 I
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Govemment. Neither the United States Govemment nor any agency thereof, or any of their employees, makes any warranty, ex-1 pressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for any third party's use, or the results of such use, cf any information, apparatus, product o'r process disclosed in this recort, or represents that its use by l
such third party would not infringe privately owned rights.
l l
a%
'~
N
[t.. Franklin Research Center i
A Division of The Franklin Institute 3g g
k The Ben >arrun Franen Pernway. Phela Pa. 19103 (215)445-1000 w
TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT QUALITY GROUP CLASSIFICATION OF COMPONENTS AND SYSTEMS COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY DRESDEN NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 2 NRC DOCKET NO. 50-237 FRC PROJECT C5257 NRC TAC NO. 41596 FRC ASSIGNMENT 17 NRC CONTRACT NO. NRC-03 79-118 FRC TASK 430 Preparedby S. TLkoo Franklin Research Center Author:
A. Gonzalez 20th and Race Street L. Berkowitz Philadelphia, PA 19103 FRC Group Leader: A. Gonztlez Prepared for Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Lead NRC Engineer:
A. Wang March 3, 1982 This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, or any of their employees, makes any warranty, ex-pressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for any third party's use, or the results of such use, of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed in this report, or represents that its use by such third party would not infringe pnvately owned rights.
s:%
d _ J Franklin Research Center A Division of The Franklin Institute The Sentarrun Frannan 7arkway. hila. Pa 19103(2131448-1000
i i
TER-C5257-430 i
CONTENTS Page Title Section 1
1 INTRODUCTION.
2 2
SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION.
5 3
METHOD OF REVIEW.
6 QUALITY CLASSIFICATION OF SYSTEMS AND COMPONENTS.
4 27 5
EVALUATION OF SPECIFIC COMPONENTS 27 5.1 General Requirements 37 5.2 Pressure Vessels 38 5.3 Piping.
40 5.4 Pumps 41 5.5 Valves.
42 5.6 Storage Tanks 44 6
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
46 7
REFERENCES APPENDIX A - REVIEW OF CODES AND STANDARDS iii AU FranWin Research Center a h.a.ern.e r
s l
TER-C5257-430 i
FOREWORD This Technical Evaluation Report was prepared by Franklin Research Center under a contract with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Connaission (Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Division of Operating Reactors) for technical assistance in support of NRC operating reactor licensing actions. The technical evaluation was conducted in accordance with criteria established by the NRC.
Mr. L. Berkowitz contributed to the technical preparation of this report through a subcontract with Innovation Technology, Inc.
.d5nidin Research Center a w
- m n - m,u.
.i TER-C5257-430 1.
INTRODUCTION Systems and components in nuclear power plants should be designed, fabricated, installed, and tested to quality standards that reflect the
^
This is the concern addressed by the importance of their safety functions.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Consnission (NRC) Regulatory Guide 1.26 (1), " Quality Group Classifications and Standards for Water, Steam, and Radioactive-Waste-Containing Components of Nuclear Power Plants," which classifies components into four Quality Groups, A, B, C, and D, and gives the standards applicable to each group.
The systems and components of plants being reviewed as part of the were designed, f abricated, installed, and Systematic Evaluation Program (SEP)
This report is the tested to standards different from those applied today.
result of work that addresses the safety margins of these systems and components in light of the changes that have taken place in licensing criteria.
The work is part of SEP Topic III-1, " Classification of Structures, NRC has divided this topic Systems, and Components (Seismic and Quality)."
Seismic review, which will be performed by the into two technical areas:
(1)
Quality Group review, which this report addresses for the Dresden NRC, and (2)
Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2.
under NRC This report was prepared by the Franklin Research Center (FRC)
Contract No. NRC-03-79-ll8.
. 4 Jddd5nklin Research Center
% wn.r-m
4 TER-C5257-430 2.
SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION The SEP concerns a review and assessment of the safety of older nuclear plants on the basis of current licensing criteria. Topic III-1 is one of 137 SEP topics. Of the 11 SEP plants, the following 10 are being reviewed:
Plant Name Docket No.
FRC Task No.
Palisades 50-255 17428 Ginna 50-244 17429 Dresden Unit 2 50-237 17430 Oyster Creek 50-219 17431 Millstone Unit 1 50-245 17432 San Onofre Unit 1 50-206 17433 Big Rock Point 50-155 17434 Haddam Neck 50-213 17435 Yankee Rowe 50-29 17436 Lacrosse 50-409 17437 Specifically, Tcpic III-l entails a review of standards in effect from 1955 to 1965 used in the design of syn..ams and components in older plants, and the 1977 American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel (B&PV) Code,as supplemented through the Susmer 1978 Addenda [2,3].
The objective of the present evaluation is to assess the ability of systems and components in the Dresden Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2 to perform their safety functions as judged by current standards. This involves two steps:
(1) com -
parison of current codes and standards with those used in the design, fabrict.-
l tion, installation, and testing of the plant's systems and components to identify significant differences that might affect structural integrity, and (2) assessment of the effect of these differences on the safety margins of the systems and components.
The scope of this evaluation is limited by or to the following:
1.
Table of Systems and Components, compiled by the NRC, corrected and completed by Commonwealth Edison Company. This table contains the 3
1.
Plant discussed in this report. UDEnklin Research Center 4 m.a.e w r n m
=
i t
t TER-C5257-430 Quality Group Classification, the current code, and the code used for the listed systems and components when the plant was designed.
When the information in the table was incomplete, FRC completed it as well as possible (see Table 4-1) [4].
2.
Information in the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) or a similar document (5].
3.
NRC Regulatory Guide 1.26, Revision 3 [1].
4.
Standard Review Plan 3.2.2 (6].
5.
Major older codes and standards: American Standards Association (ASA) B31.1 (1955), " Code for Pressure Piping" (7]; ASME 1965 Boiler ar.d Pressure Vessel Code,Section I, " Rules for Construction of Power Boilers" [8),Section III, " Rules for Construction of Nuclear Vessels" [9), and Section VIII, "Unfired Pressure vessels" (10]; and applicable Code Cases for ASA B31.1 and ASME VIII.
6.
Current code: 1977 ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel (B&PV) Code,Section III, Diviuion 1, to include the General Requirements (articles with "NA" subscript), Subsection NB, NC, and ND, and Appendices, supplemented through the 1978 Sammer Addenda (2].
Quality Group D components are not considered in this evaluation.
7.
Although discussed in this report, quality assurance for design and 8.
construction is outside the scope of the SEP.Ill Also, the following subjects are explicitly excluded because they have been addressed under other SEP topics:
Descriotion Toolc Effects of Pipe Break on Structures, III-5.A Systems and Components Inside Containment III-5.B Pipe Break Outside Containment Seismic Design Considerations III-6 Inservice Inspection, Including III-7.A Prestressed Concrete Containments with Either Grouted or Ungrouted Tendons l
1.
Letter f rom S. Ba3wa to S. Carf agno, dated Decemoer 10, 1981. 4 h-au Franklin Research Center
=D=wmw nereoneau.
TER-C5257-430 Topic Description III-7.B Design Codes, Design Criteria, Icad Combination, and Reactor Cavity Design Criteria III-7.D Containment Structural Integrity Tests
^
III-9 Support Integrity V-3 Overpressurization Protection V-6 Reactor Vessel Integrity V-8 Steam Generator Integrity IX-6 Fire Protection l
i i
l N Ldu Franklin Research C. enter s % w ne re.n n
.u
j TER-C5257-430 I
3.
METHOD OF REVIEW To accomplish the objective of this evaluation, FRC performed the review as follows:
Components from the Table of Systems and Components (Table 4-1) 1.
referred to in Section 2 were listed in three tables according to Quality Group. For example, all Quality Group A vessels, piping, valves, pumps, and storage tanks are listed in one table. Table 4-2 (a) contains Quality Group A components, Table 4-2(b) Quality Group B components, and Table 4-2(c) Quality Group C components.
Within each table, the components are arranged according to type.
Major older codes identified in Table 4-1 were compared against the 2.
current code. Results of the review are given in Appendix A.
The results in Appendix A were used for a comparative analysis which 3.
formed the basis for an engineering judgment of the safety margins exhibited by the systems and components by current quality require-ments. Details are given in Section 5.
Appendix A lists all the requirements of the current code (the 1977 ASME B&PV Code,Section III with Addenda (2]) and indicates which requirements are considered applicable and significant for structural integrity (designated as "A"), which are not considered significant (designated as " "), and which are outside the scope of this review (designated as "O"). For each significant requirement in the current code, a similar requirement was sought in the older codes. The major older codes for the Dresden plant are ASA B31.1 (1955) [7]
and the 1965 ASME B&PV Code, Sections I, III, and VIII (8, 9,10]. Differences between significant requirements, such as additions to the older codes, were reviewed, and recommendations were made for assessing their impact on the safety margin of the particular component.
Knowledge of the historical development of the codes and-the reasons for the changes was an important element in making effective comparisons.
A literature survey, supported by consultation with experts in the field, helped to identify certain changes for special attention, e.g., changes in design criteria, analytical methods, load combinations, quality assurance require-ments, f abrication techniques, and testing requirements. IN M; Franklin Researen Center 4 Ommon of The F ennas eschte
TER-C5257-430 4.
QUALITY CLASSIFICATION OF SYSTDIS AND COMPONENTS Systems and components are Quality Group classified according to the safety functions to be performed. Table 4-1 contains the systems and components for the Dresden plant, the code required for current licensing criteria, cased on NRC Regulatory Guide 1.26 (1] and Section 50.55a of the Coce of Federal Regulations (3), and the codes and standards used when the systems and components were originally built. The table also contains information regarding the Seismic Classification of the systems and components.
The following systems are listed in Table 4-1 with their respective components:
Reactor Coolant System Recirculation System Isolation Condenser Standby Liquid Control System Core Spray System Low Pressure Coolant Injection System High Pressure Coolant Injection System Stancby Coolant Supply System Automatic Pressure Relief Subsystem Standby Gas Treatment System Safety Valves Relief Valves Containment Penetration Valves and Piping Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Isolation Valves Control Rod Drive Housing Control Rod Drive System 1
Spent Fuel Storage Facility Reactor Vessel Heac Cooling System Condensate /Feedwater System Main Steam System Condensate Storage Tank Reactor Water Cleanup System Reactor Shutdown Cooling System Reactor Building Closed Cooling Water System Compressed Air System Stancby Diesel Generator System Service Water System Structures (for information only, not in the scope of this review). E_nklin Res,earch_ Center
TER-C5257-430 l
Table 4-2 (a) lists all Quality Group A components, Table 4-2(b) lists all Quality Group B components, and Table 4-2(c) lists all Quality Group C components. Components in Tables 4-2(a), (b), and (c) are grouped as pressure vessels, piping, pumps, valves, and storage tanks. The major code used when the component was built is also provided. Table 4-2(d) provides an index of the abbreviations used for the systems and their definitions.
Additional information on the review procedure for System Quality Group Classification can be obtained from Section 3.2.2 of the Standard Review Plan
[6).
. Mbnklin Research Center 4 h w N re.n m
i l
Tatale 4-1 I:2 ')
- m[
Classification of Structures, Systems, and Comtonente 5E brusden Niaclear Power Plant Linit 2 e, 3 Yy Quality Clamelfication codes and Codes and Seismic Classification
- {
V titsuctures, Systems, StanJasda Stasmiards Used Used in h
asul Cosumanent s W. 1.26 (R in Plaset Design (2) kG l.29 Plant Design Itema r k s
- ?,
4 6 EActuH (mt.Attr SYSTEM koactor Vesse! Incl'edis>J ASME !!!
ASME !!! (1965)
Categogy 1 Class I NAI3) 4A34 ale Sete Ends Class 1 Class A unactos Vamme! Suppost Categosy I Class I teh keectos Vessel Internals ASME III ASME III (1965)
Category 1 Class I MA as Class 1 Class A 4
HECIHCill ATION SYSTEM Pipts J ASME 111 ASME I (1365)
Category I Class !
Class 1 ASA B31.1 (1955)til Valven MME 111 ASMd 1 (1965)
Category 1 Class I Clems 1 ASA B31.1 (1955)(5)
Pumps MME III ASME III (1965)
Category I Class I Clems 1 Clems C ASME III stands for the thaller aimi Pressure Vesmal Cude Section III isavision 1, published 1sy the American' Society 1.
of Mechanical EwJineers, 1977 Edition with AJJemia through Summer 1978.
3 2.
When plant des:gn is in accordasece witne Sections I, III, asmi Vitt ut ASME Boller amt Pressure vessel Code, 1965 Edition with t-JJende thsough Sun.mer 1965 is imp!!ed.
[
3.
NA indicates addition.nl information psovided in this tatale that is outsLJe the scope of this repost.
un 4.
Plant pipis 3 was Jesigned accusdiwJ to ASA B31.1 (1955) 3 piping insta!!.stion, sepair, esmi replacement 44s carried y
4 out to the r uideliswa of LuiAS 331.1 (1967).
5.
ASA B31.1 (1955) with Cude Cases N-7, N-9, N-10, MSS-SP-66, armi MSS-SP-61 psovided guidance for design of valves.
).
s.s O
e
/
~
p
- - - - - -.j,.. '
.-y
,4 r
d
/
1 r.
c i
p
-l s
C.U J pf*
Tatste 4-1 (Cont.)
"Tl B
[
Oualitw Classification g 5' Codes and Codes asul Seimmic Classificat lose ff Structuses, Systems, Standards Stas 44rds Used teG 1.29 Plant Eksisin Demarks used in M
mini Comannentu NG l.26 ( Q in Plant DeJian ( Q #
Y h
IJ4EHGE.HCY SYSTifts w
30
/
/
($
Issolat l<m Onplenser c
,[
,q Shell Side ASME III ASME VIII t h%M Categosy I Class I f
Class 3 e
Tutae Side AbME III ASME III (1965)
Category I Class I Class 2 Class 7 Pipise, Fittiruja, and ASME III ASME I (1965)
Category I Class I ASME I to Valves (Tute Side)
Class 2 ASA 4831.1 outeraua.t E
(1955)(4,5) isolation
,f 8
-j ld valve armt B31.1 from 4-7
/
7_
outesmont isolation 11
~
e valve to -
isolation cormlenser e
~ St arwatey 1.1<suid Cont aul 1 ~
y
. SY.81C
,1 p
o PipisrJ'es.d Valves ASME III
- ASA B31.1 Category I Class !
/,,
Class 2 (1955)(4,5)
^
Starwitsy Liquid Coadso!
ASME III API-650 (1964)*
Category I Category I
," ~
H Tank Class 2 h
r f
i r Clasmsli a
7 I
'~
M
[
j g'
t w
i Pumps ASME III ASME Ill,!!965)
~, Cate*Jory I
-jy a
/*
un r
~
elass 2 J,. Class C ui
- Information assumed teecause it is suat available at tinis time.
f
-,f' ' [f j p s <*
.y
- s, g y
?
i
dh 1
i i
k
--4I 'l Telste 4-1 (Cunt.)
{0 [
>m
/
y3 5E esality Classif icat tam Codes asul Codes amt Saibnic Classification J
Structures, Systems, Statalasda Starmlards Used Used in and Camminent s I<G l.26 (It in Plant Natan (2L leg 1.29 Plant Design Isema r s e gg g3 s
Cose Sosey g utem ty Pumps ASME Ill ASME Ill (1965)(6)
Category 1 Class !
Class 2 Class B or C Pipisej, Fit L AspJs, aim!
ASME !!!
ASA Bll.1
ategory 1 Class !
Valves Class 2 (1955)I4*53 Spray tiender asmi MME !!!
ASME Ill (1965) UI Category 1 Class !
Spargurs Clans 2 Class B l
lasw Pressure C(malent M ectlon/ Containment i
I Coolant Sul,systy Pumps ASME !!!
ASME !!! (1965)(6)
Category 1 Class !
Class 2 Class B Pipirm3, Fittis>Js, asul ASME !!!
ASA B11.1 Category 1 Class !
Valves Class 2 (19S5)(4,5)
Containment asel ASHE III ASA B11.1 Cate.jory 1 Class !
Suppressiusi Sprmy Class 2 (1955)(4,5) tiendur a lleat Exctsasejus s-ASME !!!
ASHE !!! (1965)
Categosy 1 Class 1 Tutm Side Class 2 Class C g
tiest Euctiawjurs -
ASME !!!
ASME !!! (1965)
Category 1 Class 1 b
St><.!! Side Class 3 Class C um N
Un 4
e.
Class B la related to contaisinuait vessels. It besas more likely that Class C requirements would have Iseen used.
1 7.
It is more likely that ASA Bll.1 (1955) would have Iseen used for, design purposes than ASME 111.
y e-
t:
Tatole 4-1 (Cont.)
If q g-1 U
3 E
Ouality Clasmitication Cax$cs and Codes ashi Seismic Classification g
Stauctuses, Sy=tems, Standasds Standards Umed used in anil Camponent a teil 1 1 11[
in Plesit Dealen (2) l<G l.29 Plant De s itjtt itemar k a 5
=
5'J Containinusat Coolant ASME !!I ASHE III (1965)III Category 1 Class I y
hh Sulenyutem Class 3 Class C
-R N
ti t ute Pressure Coolant M eetian Fumps ASME 111 ASME III (1965)
Category I Class 1 Class 2 Class C PipimJ, Yittiwja, and ASME III ASA B31.1 Cate4Jory 1 Class !
Valves closa 2 (1955)(4,5) 4 5
Spasgers (Feedwates ASME !!!
ASME Ill (1965) III Category I Class I I
Spargess Usud)
Class 2 Class A Stamitay Coolant Supply System Interconnecting Pipir>J AHSI uJ1.1 ASA B31.1 Non-seismic Class !
It credit is i
anal Assuctated valves (See remaska)
(1955)(4,5)
Category 1 t aken for Detween tlie Service (GBE) system in Water System asul time m analysis, Condenser liutwell then ASME III, Class 3 classification azul Seismic Category I are appIfcable A
un Autinatic Psessure ASME III ASA D31.1 Categosy 1 Class I N
helief Sut>svate=
class I (1955)(***3 (ADSL 1
ta O
4
I i
1.T Table 4-1 (Cont.)
.3lg Gaality classification 13 Codes aral Codes and Sethnic clasaltication
[a" Stsuctures, Systems, Stasulardo Stasulards Umed Used in
?$
ment Ccaponents Ba' l. 6 (1) in Plar.t Design (2)
M2 1. 9 Plant Deslun kaarks R
g.T STAtelluY GAS THEATMuff ASME III ASME III (1965)(6)
Category 1 Class I See FSAR SYSTh>4 Clasm 2 Class a Sec. 5.3.3 gQ 2.k Pipi a>J, Fittings, amt ASME III ASME III (1965)III Category I Class I valves Class 2 Class B
~ SAFETY VA1.Vui ASME !!!
ASME III (1965)I8I Category 1 Class !
Discharge Class 1 ASA m31.1 (1955)(8) pipirmj not evaluated in FSAk HEl.lEF VAI.Vth ASME III ASA D31.1 (1955)(8I Category 1 Claes I C4 ass !
e N'
Os4TAllatut! /E!JETHATIOtti ASME E!!
ASME III (1965)III Category 1 Class 1 See FSAR val.VES Alan PIPING class 2 Claus B Sec. 5.2.3) j ICACB)H Ok)t. ANT PkESStikl#
B10 lit 4DANY (lcrPts[
Pipla>J tsus A actor Vemmel AsME 111 AsME 1 (1965)
Category I Class I Up to an1 law:!udia.j First Clans 1 ASA B31.1 51955)I'I luolation St.utut t Valva j
ISot ATlalN val.VES Valves teot Identitled ASME 121 ASA Bil.1 (1955)(5) Category 1 Class 1 Usular Containment Cicas 1 P1 Penetrativan Valves h
A un DJ tn u.
It is not clear wtaicta speuttic section ut ASME III is referenced leere.
4 9.
Saf ety maal selten valves designed in accordaam:e witla ASA B31.1 willa Code Cases N-2, N-7, N-9, and M-10 taken 1
into consideration.
y
Tatele 4-1 (Cont.)
/
is it s Osulity Classification p
j
- Q Codes and Ca*as and Seismic Classification _
j$
Structuras, Systems, Starmlards Stard erds Used Used in l
aiwt Cemitax.ent s leg l. 2 6 (1)_
in Plant Desten (2)
NG 1.29 Plant Design Remarks h
0)ttrkOt. ROD tuelVE ASME !!!
ASA bl1.1 (1955)
Category I Class 1
- h skMIS ItG C1 ass 1 l
I OstifHut. HOD DH LVE ASME Ill ASME !!! (1965)
Category 1 Class I SYSTtM Cle'ss 2
- lass A SPtarr FUEL. S1uHAtiE FACI t.lTI ES I
[
Spent Fuel Pool ASME III Category 1 Class I MAI3I I
Class 3 Pump ASME III
.ASME VIII (1965)
Category I class I Class 3 ticat F.neta.nejer ASME III ASME III (1965)
CatenJory 1 Class !
Clams 3 Class C PepiwJ. Fallings, aski ASME III ASA B11.1 Categosy 1 Class !
Valves Claa.s 3 (1955)(4,5)
Filtes ASME 111 ASME V111 (1965)
Category I class 1 Class 3 H
HEAcn)k VESSEI.IIEAD O Mt.ING SYSTtM
[
w Pipir>J, Fittis>Js and ASME Ill ASA Ull.1 hvan-selbmic Valves Class 3.
(1955) I4
- SI Category I Y
(ODE) o
m._
1, I
i d
?
i b;
Totale 4-1 (Cont.)
l Quality Classification 5
In Codes and Codes and Seismic Classification gh Stsuctures, Systems, Standasda Standards used used in p*3 arvt Camponent s HG l. 26.1R in Plant Deslan (2) leg 1.29 Plant Dusien kemarks 3
Coe40EuSATE/rEEtuhTut 5
gy!I!.M, m
Pipir*J from Outuamont ASME Ill ASA B31.1 Category 1 Class 11 Containment luolation Class 2 (1955)(4,5)
Valva up to assi ins tud t ryj tt u Shututt Valvo palance ut Fuudwater ANSI b31.1 ASA B31.1 Wn-Seismic class 11 Portions of i
System tsom St.utut t (See kemarks)
(1955) H,5)
Category I condensate a
Valve to ttus coendenser (OBE) feedeater syste.
- I required to satisfy reactor vessel reflooding
. design ot2)ectives should tae ASME !!!,
Class 3 MAIN STEAM SYSTtM i
Pipisvj inom Outermust ASME !!!
ASA tt31.1 Category 1 Class !!
Containment Isolatiosr C ass 2 (1955) (4
- SI d
Valva up to Tuttaine h
Stup asal hypass
[
Valves and Cosu ucted in PiptwJ up to anst U
including First Valve 4
4e i
L.a 5
O i
e
I :.
gn.
>,1h/
Table 4-1 (Cont.)
IE IL DN Qualit y Classi f icat tien
?M Codes and Codes ars!
Seismic Classif icat iosi Structures, Systems.
Stasslards Stasslards Used Used in f%
5 :5 arma Caeia=n.ent s HG 1.2b (Q in Plant Desien (R.
HG 1. 29 _
Plant Des M hearks
- n k
Ctps*t4 SATE S'!uMAGE TANK ASME III ASME III (1963)
Category 1 Class 11-4 Class 3 Class C witta 1964 Addessla HEAC10H WATEM CI EANUP ASME III ASME I!! (1965)
Non-seismic Class II SYSTEM Cimas 3 Class C Category I (OtsEl P ip t s>J, Pit tissjs, ASME III ASA till.1 Non-Seismic Class !!
and Valves Class 3 (1955)(4,5) cat,9ogy g (OuE)
M Ui 8
hEAC10H Sittrilit LJN COOI.itki SYST128 isaat Escleas> Jet s -
Category 1 Class 11 Tubu Side class 2 class C tacat Escliangers -
Category 1 Class 11 Stiel! Side Class 2 Class C Pipliej arid Valves ASME III ASA B31.1 Category 1 Class II class 2 (1955)(4,5)
HEAC1UH UUll. DING CIDStD Ct 01 ING H
WATEH SYSTtM A
Pumps ASM.1 111
?
Category 1 Class II un Clas. 3 y
w 5
h L.4 O
l
{.
i 5.2 t?'
Table 4-1 (Cont.)
2 2[
!L E Qu.ality Classificatiosa Codes anal Codes and Selamic Classification M
?$
Stauctuses, 8tstems, St asalan ds Stanatards used used in amt Cima=ments INI 1.2 d Q ten Plant Design (2[
kG 1,2 9 _
Plant Design item ar k s f:T A
Heat Emet 64 pjer m ASHE !!!
ASME Vit t (1965)
Category 1 Class II 3$
Cimas 3 5
PipimJ, rittierja, ASME III ASA B31.1 Category I Class I asms Valves Class 3 (1955)(4,5) n_ mPHESSED Ask SYhTtM Pipisoj, rittiseja, Quality Group D ASA B31.1 Hon-seismic Class II Portions of air and Valves (See senarks)
(1955)(4,5)
(See kemarlis) system required to perform safety 4
function should H*
tse Category I I
asal Class 3 STAHi>ur tit ESt.s.
Gt;i4EHA10R SYSTEM PipimJ. Fittis>Js, ASME !!!
ASA B31.1 Category 1 Class I rSAR does alkj Valves CImNs 3 (1955)(4,58 mt identity aum111ery systems required for diesel genierator SEkVICE WATEM SYSTkN PiplepJ, rittispJs, asui ASHE 111 ASA B31.1 Category 1 Class !!
VaIves C1 ass 3 (1955)(4,5)
A sn
>J t#5
-4 9
b tae o
.. _ ~ _. -
,J Li' Q!vu Ia; EL 3 Talate 4-1 (Cont.)
3 3
53 iA 5
Ouality Classification Codes and Codes and Seismic Classification gg Stsuctures, Systems, Stashlards Stanwlards Used Used in arm! Com&>nents HG 1.2b (11 in Plant Design (21 teG 1.29 Plant Des taan Remarks STimCTtiHES kcactor Buildis>J Category 1 Class I HAIII a
Daywell, Turus, vents, AMtE III ALME III (19f5)
Category I Class !
MA mud tactistsetions HC Class b h
(l's imary Containmunt) w I
Cositaul aksoin Cate9ory I Class I MA 4
Stack Non-seismic Class 1 NA Tusbine butidin9 Non-seismic Class II MA Category I (OtbE)
Hadioactive Waste Host-seismic '
Class II NA buildi>J Category I (OtlE)
Isetake aral Dimchas9e Category I Class 11 NA i
(Cs its lluuma) a.
v DJ l
Ut
- 1 8
6 o
J
m m-I 1
A TER-C5257-430 Table 4-2(a) quality Group Components (1)
Code: ASME III-Class 1(2)
Code Pressure Vessels None Piping ASME I (1965)(3)
Recirculation System Piping (RCS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (4)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (4)
Automatic Pressure Relief Subsystem Piping (ADS)
ASME I (1965)(3)
Piping f rom Reactor Vessel up to ASA B31.1 (1955) (4)
First Isolation Shutoff Valve (RCPB)
ASA B31.1 (1955)
Control Rod Drive Housing (CRDS)
Pumps ASME III -(1965) (3)
Recirculation System Pumps (RCS)
Class C Valves ASME I (1965) (3)
Recirculation System Valves (RCS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (5)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (5)
Automatic Pressure Relief Suosystem Valves (ADS) a P.t. der to Taole 4-2(d) for abbreviations.
1.
ASME'III-Class 1 stands for Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, 2.
Division 1, Subsection NB, 1977 Edition, and Addenda through Summer 1978.
3.
Plant design is in accordance with Sections I, III, and VIII of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, 1965 Edition with Addenda through Summer 1965.
Plant piping was designed according to ASA B31.1 (1955). Piping installa-4.
tion, repair, and replacement were carried out according to the guidelines in USAS 831.1 (1967).
with Code Cases N-7, N-9, N-10, MSS-SP-66, and MSS-SP-61 5.
ASA 331.1 (1955),
provices guidance for design of plant valves. Ah
.3d Franklin Research Center 4 Cmteon of D.e Fretuen m
l l
TER-C5257-430 i
Table 4-2(a) (Cont.)
Valves (Cont.)
Code Safety Valves ASME III (1965)(3,6)
Class ?
ASA B31.1 (1955) (7)
Relief valves ASA B31.1 (1955) (7)
First Isolation Shutoff Valve (RCPB)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (5)
Isolation Valves not Identified ASA B31.1 (1955) (5) 4 under Containment Penetration Valves (IV)
Storage Tanks (Atmospheric and 0-15 psig)
None l
l 6.
It is not clear which specific section of ASME III is referenced here.
7.
Safety and relief valves were designed in accordance with ASA B31.1 (1955),
with Code Cases N-2, N-7, N-9, and N-10 taken into consideration. N nklin Research Center s m e n vv.m m.aue
i l
TER-C5257-430 Table 4-2(b)
(
Quality Group B Components (1)
Code: ASME III-Class 2 (2)
Pressure Vessel Code Emergency System Isolation Condenser-ASME III (1965)(3)
Tube Side (IC)
Class ?
Low Pressure Coolant Injection System ASME III (1965)(3)
Heat Exchangers - Tube Side (LPCI)
Class C Control Rod Drive System (CRDS)
ASME III (1965)(3)
Class A Reactor Shucdown Cooling System ASME III (1965)(3)
Heat Exchangers - Tube and Shell Sides (RSCS)
Class C Piping Emergency System Isolation Condenser ASME I (1965)(3)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (4)
Piping (IC)
Piping for Standby Liquid Control ASA B31.1 (1955)(4)
System (SLCS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (4)
Core Spray System Piping (CSS)
ASME III (1965)(3,5)
Core Spray System Spray Header and Spargers (CSS)
Class B ASA B31.1 (1955) (4)
Low Pressure Coolant Injection System i
Piping (LPCI) 1.
Refer to Table 4-2(d) for abbreviations.
2.
ASME III-Class 2 stands for Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division 1, Subsection NC, 1977 Edition, and Addenda through Summer 1978.
l 3.
Plant design is in accordance with Sections I, III, and VIII of ASME Boiler l
and Pressure vessel Code,1965 Edition with Addenda through Summer 1965.
4.
Plant piping was designed according to ASA B31.1 (1955). Piping installa-f l
tion, repair, and replacement were carried out according to guidelines in l
USAS B31.1 (1967).
j 5.
Class B is related to containment vessels.
It seems more likely that l
Class C (9] (for pumps) or ASA B31.1 (for piping and valves) requirements would have been used. ? "J Franklin Research Center
% w th Franen in u.
c W
TER-C5257-430 i
Table 4-2(b) (Cont.)
i Code 1
Piping (Cont.)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (4)
Containment and Suppression Spray Headers (LPCI)
ASA B31.1 (1955)(4)
Hign Pressure Coolant Injection System Piping (HPCI)
ASME III (1965) (3,5)
Spargers for High Pressure Coolant Class A Injection (HPCI)
ASME III (1965)(3,5)
Standby Gas Treatment System Piping (SGTS)
Class B ASME III (1965)(3,5)
Containment Penetration Piping (CS)
Class B ASA B31.1 (1955) (4)
Piping from Outermost Containment Isolation Valve up to the Shutoff Valve (C/FWS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (4)
Piping f rom Outermost Containment Isolation Valve up to the Turbine Stop and Bypass Valves and Connected Piping up to the First Valve (MSS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (4)
Reactor Shutdown Cooling System Piping (RSCS)
Pumps ASME III (1965) (3)
Standby Liquid Control System Pumps (SLCS)
Class C ASME III (1965)(3,5)
Core Spray System Pumps (CSS)
Clasa B or C Low Pressure Ccolant Injection Pumps (LPCI)
ASME III (1965)(3,5)
Clara P 4
High Pressure Coolant Injection Pumps (HPCI)
ASME III (1965)(3)
Class C
- A S
nidin Research Center sc m atmv m mowe
.m
4 TER-CS257-430 Table 4-2(b) (Cont.)
Code Valves ASA B31.1 (1955) (6)
^
Emergency System Isolation Valves (IC)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (6)
Stanoby Liquid Control System Valves (SLCS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (6)
Core Spray System Valves (CSS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (6)
Low Pressure Coolant Injection System Valves (LPCI)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (6)
Hign Pressure Coolant Injection System Valves (RFCI)
ASME III (1965) (3,5)
Standby Gas Treatment System Valves (SGTS)
Class B Containment Penetration Valves (CS)
ASME III (1965)(3,5)
Class B ASA B31.1 (1955) (6)
Shutoff Valve in Condensate /Feedwater System (C/FWS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (6)
Valves f rom the Outermost Containment Isolation Valve up to the Turbine Stop anc Bypass Valves Including the First Valve (MSS)
Reactor Shutdown Cooling System Valves (RSCS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (6)
Storage Tanks (Atmospheric and 0-15 psiq)
Standby Liquid Control Tank (SLCS)
API-650 (1964)(7)
ASA B31.1 (1955),,with Code Cases N-7, N-9, N-10, MSS-SP-66, and HSS-SP-61, 6.
provides guidance for design of plant valves.
7.
Information regarding this edition of the Code is an assumption because the information is not available at this time. O MJ5nklin Research C. enter 4 cm.on w n re..
i N
i TER-CS257-430 t
Table 4-2 (c)
Cuality Group C Components (1)
Code ASME III-Class 3 (2)
Pressure Vessel Code Emergency System Isolation Condenser -
ASME VIII (1965)(3)
Shell Side (IC)
Low Pressure Coolant Injection /
ASME III (1965)(3)
Containment Coolant Subsystem Class C Heat Exchangers - Shell Side (LPCI)
Spent Fuel Storage Heat Exchangers (SFSF)
ASME III (1965) (3)
Class C Spent Fuel Storage Filters (SFSF)
ASME VIII (1965)(3)
Reactor Building Closed Cooling Water ASME VIII (1965)(3)
Heat Exchangers (CCWS)
Piping Containment Coolant Suosystem Piping (LPCI)
ASME III (1965) (3'4)
Class C Piping Between Service Water System ASA B31.1 (1955) (5) and the Concenser Hotwell (SCSS)
Piping Associated with Spent Fuel ASA B31.1 (1955) (S)
Storage Facility (SFSF) 1.
Refer to Table 4-2(d) for abcreviations.
2.
ASME III-Class 3 stands for Boiler and Pressure Vessel. Code,Section III, Division 1, Subsection ND, 1977 Edition, and Addenda through Summer 1978.
3.
Plant design is in accordance with Sections I, III, and VIII of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, 1965 Edition, with Addenda through Summer 1965.
4.
It is more likely that ASA B31.1 (1955) would have been used for design purposes than ASME III.
5.
Plant piping was designed according to ASA 331.1 (1955).
Piping instal-lation, repair, and replacement were carried out according to guidelines in USAS 631.1 (1967). &A MJ Franidin Research Center 4c = #ni,r - au.
~..
TER-C5257-430 Table 4-2 (c) (Cont. )
t Code Piping (Cont.)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (5) t Reactor Vessel Head Cooling System Piping (RVHCS)
ASA' B31.1 (1955) (5)
Balance of.Feedwater System From Shutoff Valve to the Condenser (C/FWS)
ASA 331.1 (1955) (5)
Reactor Water Cleanup System Piping (RWCS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (5)
Reactor Building Closed Cooling Water System Piping (CCWS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (5)
Compressed Air System Piping (CAS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (5)
Standby Diesel Generator System Piping (SDGS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (5)
Service Water System Piping (SWS)
Pumps ASME VIII (1965)(3)
Pumps for Spent Fuel Storage Facility (SFSF)
?
Pumps for Reactor Building Closed Cooling Water System (CCWS)
Valves ASME III (1965) (3,4)
Containment Coolant Subsystem Valves (LPCI)
Class C ASA B31.1 (1355) (6)
Associated Valves Between Service Water Syste.m and l
Condenser Hotwell (SCSS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (6)
Valves for Spent Fuel Storage Facility (SFSF)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (6)
Reactor Vessel Head Cooling System Valves (RVHCS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (6)
Valves in Balance of Feedwater System (C/FWS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (6)
Reactor Water Cleanup System Valves (RWCS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (6)
Reactor Building Closed Cooling Water System Valves (CCWS) 6.
ASA B31.1 (1955), with Code Cases N-7, N-9, N-10, MSS-SP-66, and MSS-SP-61, l
j provides guidance for design of plant valves. O
$bij Franidin Research Cer.ter t
ac== awn.F=.nm u.
a 1,
TER-C5257-430 Table 4-2 (c) (Cont.)
Code Valves (Cont.)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (6)
Compressed Air Syst5m Valves (CAS)
Standby Diesel Generator System V' lves (SDGS)
ASA B31.1 (1955) (6) a ASA B31.1 (1955) (6)
Service Water System Valves (SWS)
Storage Tanks (At:nospheric and 0-15 psig)
Condensate Storage Tank (C/FWS)
ASME III (1963)
Class C with 1964 Addenda I M
$dJ Franklin Research Center A Ommon of N Fratman msonde
l TER-C5257-430 Table 4-2(d) j Index of Abbreviations of Systems Abbreviations Definitions ADS Automatic Pressure Relief Subsystem CAS Compressed Air System Reactor Bidg. Closed Cooling Water System CCWS Control Rod Drive Housing CRDR Control Rod Drive Systim CRDS Containment System CS CSS Core Spray System Condensate /Feedwater Systems C/FWS High Pressure Coolant Injection System HPCI Isolation Condenser IC Isolation Valve IV Low Pressure Coolant Injection System LPCI Main Steam System MSS Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary RCPB Recirculation System RCS Reactor Shutdown Cooling System RSCS Reactor Vessel Head Cooling System RMICS Teactor Water Cleanup System RWCS SCSS
- standby Coolant Supply System SDGS Standby Diesel Generator System SFSF Spent Fuel Storage Facility SGTS Standby Cas Treatment System SLCS Standby Liquid Control System SWS Service Water System i
t h
. Da fSJ Franklin Research Center h e. rw=n m.w.
9 i
i TER-C5257-430 5.
EVALUATION OF SPECIFIC COMPONENTS 5.1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS The purpose of this section is to evaluate, for the specific compocants of the Dresden Nuclear Power Plant, how the general code requirements of the current code' affect the safety margin to which these components were originally designed.
General code requirements are those requirements that apply to all the components discussed in this report (i.e., piping, pressure vessels, valves, pumps, and tanks). The following topics were identified in Section 4.1 of Appendix A to be general requirements that have changed from older codes to fracture toughness, quality assurance,III quality group the current code classification, and code stress limits. They will be discussed herein.
5.1.1 Fracture Toughness As indicated in Section 4.1.1 of Appendix A, the current code (2) requires that pressure-retaining material be impact tested, but there are exemptions from this requirement. Tables A4-4 through A4-6, developed in Appendix A, are used as a guideline in evaluating whether it is necessary to impact test the material used for each specific component of the Dresden Nuclear Power Plant.
The results of this evaluation are compiled in Table 5-1.
Data on nil e
erent materials can be ductility transition temperature (T NDT found in References 11,12, and 13.
Of the 62 components reviewed in Table 5-1:
o six components (10%) do not require impact testing the type of stainless steel used (most probably austenitic) was not o
specified for 9 components (15%)
the material used was not specified for 43 components (694) o acditional data are required to assess 4 components (694).
o 1.
Quality assurance is outside c'.e scope of the SEP according to the letter from S. Bajwa to S. Carfagno dated December 10, 1981. _nklin Rese_ arch _ Center y
,.,.. ~.. -
m
-c.
r--
~>~
-.._.,..w.
m__...
t' t
i I
e
&,;. J y'a '
Table S-1 p3 BE seview of Fracture Toughness usquirements g 5-Dresden Nuclear Power Plant IJnit 2 pm O
$0 En Structures, Systems, Quality Group Impact Test kaason for 2n and Cimininents Classification Material Hequired?
Esesotion(l)
Rarmarks y
[a kt:cIhct18ATION SYSTkJ4 Hecirculat t'ssa Systese Class A Stainless Steel Insufficient.
Protaably austenttic Data stainless stee!
Pipisnj Hecirculatiosa System Class A NL Given WL discussed in FSAN V.aivua Hecirculattun System Class A Not Given I&2t discussed in FSAR y
Pumps t
co I
kJthH.%EY SYSTtJ4S Isolat ion Cosmienser Shell Side Class C mt Given Not discussed in FSAR T.abe side Class in At Given Not discussed in FSAR Interconnectity Class is Not Given ht discussed in FSAR Papise asal valves tee t weest Henctor g
Core Cooling and g
Isolation Condenser un bJ un Huf er to Tables A4-4 tieruu.J n A4-6 of Appesatis A for esplanatiosa of eseshptioens.
y t
1.
b LJ O
5A Table 5-1 (C nt.)
!; E tt 3 N
Structures, Systems, Quality Gsoup Impact Test Heason for 7
an$ Cwposeents Classification Material.
Hequired?
Esempt ion (l) perma r ks j$4 gR Staiuttry B.89uld contaul
, :r lQ EHlE".
a ?,
f.;
Pum.pa Class b Stainless Steel Insufficient Probably austenitic Data stainless steel Tank Class b Not Given Hot discussed in FSAR Paping and Valves Class B Hot Given Not Jiscussed in FSAk b
Core Spray Systeisi w
I Pumps -
Casis>J Class o Cast Steel Insufficient No information on Data Typy available Impe!!er Class b bronze Ho Nf See &SAR Table 6.2.3 Shatt Class u Stal less Steel Insufficient Probably mustenttic Data stainless steel Pipts*J true the Class B Casbon Steel Insufficient Sizes and steel Suppresalon Chamber Data type not given to the Outer g
Ibulation Valve Q
A Pipisej from Outer Class H Stainless Steel Insufficient Probably austenitic g
Isolation Valve Data stainless steel N
N.
auto ties Heactor 6
4.J O
b
._...m.,
~..
....._..i...__
G..G.~
..... ~. ~....
I I.
h l
I L'
Ej-u-
om.
Table S-1 (Cont.)
yg g3 5b IL 3 i
9 23 Structures, Systems, Quality Group lapact Test Ewason for d
.and Cusaponent s Classification Material kequired?
Exumpt ion (l)
Hemarks N
5h Sprey Spar 9ers asiti Class B Statistess Steel tu Be
.i Spray W aales 304
[n a
e3ft 14*w Pressure Conn art Idectlon/ Cont 4iumS L Coolan* Sutssystem Pump -
Casiruj Class B Cast Steel Insufficient N2 information on Data TNDT available 1
Impeller Class B Bronze Ib St See FSAR Table 6.2.4 C) i Staa t t Class b Stainless Steel Insufficient Probably austenitic Data stainless steel P a pii>J from isolation Class u Stainless Steel
. insufficient Probably mustenitic valve to heactor Data stainless steel System Cuntaisument aski Class B Hot Given Not discussed in FSAM Suppresslun Spray tleader s tie 4L Exclier> Jets -
Class b Wt Given Hot discussed in FSAM Tutas Side Shull Side Class C Nut Given WL discussed in FSAR
[
un N
Contansament Coolanat Class C WL Given WL discussed in ui FSAR 4
Sutmystem 8
b ta C) 9
ga Tatste 5-1 (Cont.)
ga SE 13 Structuses. Systems, Quality Group Impact Test Heanon for
',U avul C.wataneesits Classification Matessel Heautred?
Exesi4>t ion {ll, itema r k s H
N tt Psessure Cixatant
}ble njection g9g Pumps Class D Hut Given NL discussed in FSAR Fipis>J, Fittings, and Class B Hot Given Hot discussed in FSAR Valves Spaggers (Feedwater Class u Stainless Steel Insutticient Protal21y austenific Spargets Usud)
Data stainless steel i
St andtsy Cixilant Supply, p.
pystg3 Pipir>Ja, Fittis>Js asal Class C Not Given Hot discussed in FSAR Valves Aut<maat ic Pressiste Class A Not Given Hot discussed in FSAR Helief Sut>systesa STANDisY GAS THEATMEtif Class B Nt Given Hot discussed in FSAN SYSTIM Pipiarj a, FittiswJs and Class u Hot Given NL discussed in Valves FSAR SAFETY VAINES Class A Hot Given Hot discussed in N
FSAR HEl.It-y VAINL:S Class A WL Given Hot discussed in
[
Ft'AR in N(n
-J
.h (sb O
,.J.....
-- --~ - -.
- ~ '~
'- ~ - - - - ~
' - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~* " ~ ' ~ ~ ~" ~ ~ ' ~ ' ' '
~~~
u I
i
)
g d
Table 5-1 (Cont.)
I'
- r
^5 1
'a E
Structures, Systems, Quality Group Impact Test Reason for g
asal Components Cl assi t icat lawn mterial heqeilted? _
Esemptiontil Remarks y
b*,
CastrTAINMt.arr pet;ETkATIONS n
[#
itydraulic Llanes to the Class D Stainless Steel Insufficient Probably austenitic Data stainless steel ik C mtsol akal Drivus 53 N
Valvus Class is At Given Mt discussed in FSAR i
p.Acnm contre Psessone pOinmANY Pipir>J, FittismJs, Class A ht Givun Not discusse1 in FSAit aikt valves I
N ISOIATIO44 VAI.VES Class A N L Given W t discussed in w
VSAR I
CidtriMM. DOD E*IVE Class A Nt Given Hut discussed in FSAR IKMISitKi Ciw4Tian. MOD DHIVE SYSTLM Vuiucity Limiter Class b Stainless Steel Insuftielent Psobably austenitic Castisuj Data stainless steel Guido Tut =s Class B Stainless Steel N
8e SPt.arr ruEL S10HAGE h
FACII.ITIES un sh SpenL Fuel Poul Class C Stainless Steel N
Se un Linimj-3/16 inch Y
thick w
O e
e
.~.
."V 19' y* I/
lh Totale b-1 (Cont.)
e 5' 9:u g
Structures, Systems, Quality Group Iaispect Test Heason for an 4
as.J C4mpiment s Classificattori Keterial_
ketais i s ed ?
gesption(Q ltemarks
. :r gA Pump Class C WL Givess Not discusseI in rSAR 5[
Not discussed in Bleat Excleanijer Class C Not Given FSAR Fipi rmj, FittisvJs, asal Class C t4ut Given Not discussed in DU Valves Filter Class C Stainless Steel No 18 4 Wbts w
Y HEAC1dH VESSEI. ItEAD CO(M.ING SYSTEM J14ss C 34ot Given WL discussed in FSAR P ipiipJ, Fitti>Ja, Class C Not Giveen Not discussed in FSAR alld VaIvets Cotu)ENSATE/FEELMATEk SYsTi>i Piptivj trom Outesmust Class B Not Given Not discussed in Cont.s isament Isolettos FSAM Valve up to and incluo-i >J Liso st.utof t Valve H
Pipisej trom Stautoft Class C Not Givers Wt discussed in g
Valves to thus kW f
Co..iu nse r m
DJ n
(JR wais.
w 1
O
_._u..
........s
. L..
/. _
t t
i 4
!=.n.
c fig Table 5-1 (Cunt.)
e3 BE e 5' ga Stsuctusen, Systumn, Quality Gsoup Impact Test Heaton tor
- 3-and Compisnent s Classification Material Re<1uised?
Exentation(Q Memasks 44 lr HAlte STtiAM SYSTkN An g as ripisej isum Outesmont Class B Ca s tm2sa Insutticient Size of pipe and
- h Cont a isumasat Isolation Steel Data steel type not Valve up to Turbine Stop given and bypass Valves asmi Consiscted PipisvJ up to amt includiskJ Fisst valve ont4,Et4 SATE stuHAGE TA!4K Class C Not Given Not discussed in FSAR 4
kt.Actt)H idAThH Cf. eat 4tM*
Clama C Nut Given Not discussed in SYSTEM FSAR I
i P i p i a >J, FittisyJs, Claus C Not Givun Not discussed in med Valves FSAR HEACluk Silll19%dte QMLIt4G SYSTEM s
liuat Excharajass -
Class b Hot Given Not unentioned in Tube Side FSAR Heat Exclaaspjesu -
Clems B Not Given Not mentioned in Staa11 Side FSAR Fipis>J, Fit tis >Ja, asus Class B Not Given Hot mentioned in Valvus FSAit b
httActuH bLill.DitK2 CIDSED e.
a,n.i : N m n SYa m u
Pumpa Class C Not Given Not discussed in Y
FSA.
c j
O l
a 4
-~- ' -
~ ~ ~ ~ '
~
~~
^
4 I
4 l
1 l*
c r,
" 'P fa Table 5-1 (Cont.)
gg i so Y"3 Stsuctures, Systems, Quality Groeip Impact Test.
Reason for j
3 j$
and thmanents classification teat er ial keesu t r ed ?
Exe inct ion ll)
Re: mar k s
! t o, 5
tseat Excteanwje n s Class C s4ot Given Not discussed in 1n FSAR g
n P ip t s>J Class C Not Given Not discussed in 4
FSAR i
6 Valves Class C Not Given Not discussed in FSAk 4
i
~O H P HESSt2) AIH SYStkM J
w in PipiseJ, Fittiseja, ased Class D Nos Given Not discussed in I
Valves (See remarks)
FSAR Portions required to perform safety functions should be class 3 STAtaatsY DIESEI, GENERA 10H SYSTtM Pipis>J, Fittin93, Class C Not Given Not discussed in and Valves 4
SEMVICE WATEH SYSTEN F3 Pipis>J, Fit t isuja, class C tot Given Not discussed in asu3 Valves FSAR b
tn t
DJ un 4
i la.
W O
I
~
l 1
i 4
l TER-C5257-430~
III 5.1.2 Quality Assurance The quality assurance requirements for the design and construction of-Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3 components as per the current code [2] are outlined in Section 4.1.2 of' Appendix A.
Most of these requirements were not considered in past codes (7, 8, 9,10]. Nevertheless, quality assurance was
]
considered in the Dresden Nuclear Power Plant, as illustrated in Appendix E of the Final Safety Analysis Report (5).
5.1.3 Quality Group Classification As indicated in Section 4.1.3 of Appendix A under,the title " Quality Group Classification," classification of components was not considered in the old 1965 Edition piping code (7] cc in the ASME B&PV Code, Sections I and VIII, (8,10).
Tne ASME B&PV Code,Section III, 1965 Edition (9] classified pressure vessels as Class A, B, or C.
Class A is equivalent to Class 1 of the current code (2].
Class B is concerned with containment vessels, which are outside the scope of this report. Class C may currently be classified as Class 2 or 3 of the current code.
Note in Taole 4-2 3) that current Class 2 pressure vessels v+re constructed to Class C requirements except for the control rod,.r e system, which was designed to Class A, and the emergency system isolation condenser -
tube side, for which the class used for designing is not known (it is logical to assume Class C).
In Table 4-2(c), all current Class 3 pressure vessels were constructed to Class C (9] or ASME B&PV Code,Section VIII (10]
requirements. Class 2 pressure vessels constructed to Class C requirements should be evaluated against current Class 2 requirements, especially for radiography requirements. See discussion on full radiography requirements in Section 5.2 of this report.
5.1.4 Code Stress Limits Methods of calculating stress limits have changed in two major respects:
the use of different strength theories and the additional consideration of l 4 JSJ Franklin Research Center
^ cm.an as ne smu m.aue
i TER-C525~-430 f'
service levels C and D as possible loading conditions with different stress i
limits.
Design based on the old piping code [7] and ASME B&PV Code,Section VIII (10) is more conservative, but less exact, than design based on the maximum shear stress theory of failure and stress limits given in the current code (2) for Class 1 components. The theory of failure used in ASME B&PV Code,Section III,1965 Edition (9) for Class A pressure vessels is similar to that of the l
current code. The current code for Class 2 and Class 3 components uses the same theory of failure as past codes.
Consideration of service level D, although not required in past codes, is t
included in the Dresden FSAR (S}. The stress allowable set in the FSAR for this service level is conservative compared to the current stress limit, as shown on page 12.1-7 of the FSAR.
Although discussed in the previous paragraph, the coismic portion of this topic is outside the scope of this report. Seismic review of the systems and components is performed by the NRC.
5.2 Pa*tESSURE VESSELS As discussed in Appendix A, Section 4.3, major differences between current i
requitements (2} and old requirements (9,10] for the construction of pressure vessels appear in four areas: fracture toughness, quality group classifica-tion, design, and full radiography requirements.
Fracture toughness is discussed in Section 5.1.1 of this report. Quality j
group classification is discussed in Section 5.1.3.
The basic difference in design requirements concerns stress limits and consideration of service level C and D loading conditions. This topic is addressed in Section 5.1.4 of this report.
Full radiography requirements for pressure vessels are discussed in Section 4.3 of Appendix A.
The conclusion to be drawn from this discussion is that, in general, past full radiography requirements for vessels were more conservative than current requirements, with the exception of Category C welds
! D Ub Franklin Research Center 4
a, ee w r aviimwe
TER-CS2 57-430 of vessels currently classified Class 2 which were designed to Class C [9]
1 l
For this exception, the current full radingraphy requirements 1
requirements.
Information regarding the are more restrictive than past requirements.
radiography requirements imposed on the welds of the following vessels should be provided emergency system isolation condenser - tube side, low pressure injection system heat exchanger - tube side, and ;eactor shutdown coolant This information should cooling system heat exchangers - tube and shell sides.
be compared with the current requirements given in Section 4.3 of Appendix A.
Information is missAng regarding the class used in designing the emergency isolation concenser - tube side.
5.3 PIPING In addition to the general requirements previously discussed, the following items are considered when designing Class 1 piping for f atigue stresses basea on the current code [2] that were not considered or were considered differently in the past code (7):
gross discontinuities in tne piping systems are accounted for o
loading due to the thermal gradient L rough the thickness of the pipe o
indices used in calculating secondary stresses are equal to or less o
than twice the corresponding stress intensification factors in the past code.
The last two items pose no problem as far as the structural integrity of the system and are discussed in detail in Section 4.2 of Appendix A.
When consicering gross discontinuities of piping systems, two loading cases can prove to be potentially unconservative designs when evaluated to Two examples are given in Section 4.2 of Appendix current coce requirements.
A in order to assess the potential problems of temperatura loading for a large namner of cycles and temperature loading for a medium range nuncer of cycles.
These examples are based on Palisades specifications ['14].
Stresses for both examples indicata tnat no problem exists.
the thermal and From Tacle 4.2.1 of the FSAR [51, it can be seen that loacing cycles given for the Dresden plant are similar to those given in the O
..Enidin Researca Center a om.ea ae w--.
i 1
i TER-C5257-430 examples of Appendix A.
Data concerning the drop in temperature from 100%
power to 0% power were not given in the FSAR. Assuming that the drop in temperature is 100*F (see Section 3.4.1.4 of NUREG-0123 (15]), the previous conclusion given in examples in Appendix A also applies to the Dresden plant.
The Licensee has informally indicateo (16] that the temperature drop is ll'F.
Confirmation and documentation regarding this value are required.
Piping designed only to Section I of the ASME BEPV Code (8] should be evaluated for the thermal stress and cyclic loading requirements as discussed in Section 4.2,cf Appendix A.
Information regarding the thermal stress and cyclic loading imposed on the isolation condenser piping systems up to the outermost isolation valve should be provided (see remarks on page 9).
For Class 2 and Class 3 piping systems, the requirements of past and current codes are very similar.
Full radiography requirements for piping, valves, and pitmps are discussed in Section 4.2 of Appendix A.
The conclusion to be drawn from *.nis discussion is that, currently, full radiography is required for Class 1 and Class 2 welded joints, whereas it was not required in the past code (7]. However, Provisions 2 and 3 of Code Case N-7 to Reference 7 required full radiography for circumferential and longitudinal welds. If these provisions or the code case were applied, then current requirements are met.
Using Table 4-1, the Licensee should provide information indicating if Provisions 2 and 3 of Code Case N-7 were invokea, bearing in mind that this code case is only applicable to austenitic stainless steel. Code Case N-7 is invoked for many of the f
valves listed in Taole 4-1.
The same type of information is needed for piping i
systems.
Some piping systems at the Dresden plant were designed to ASME B&PV Code Section I (1965) [8] in conjunction with the piping code (7].
Section I requires full radiography for circumferential and longitudinal welds.
Therefore the piping syatems designed to this code comply with current full radiography requirements.
The Licensee has indicated that the following piping systems were designed to codes not usually related to piping design: core spray system spray header
_nkiin Rese_ arch _ Center
l TER-C5257-430 and spargers, spargers for high pressure coolant injection, standby gas j
treatment system piping, containment penetration piping,III and containment j
coolant subsystem piping. Clarification of this information is requested.
I 5.4 PUMPS Class 1 recirculation system pumps were designed to ASME B&PV Code Section III Class C, 1965 Edition (9] as indicated in Table 4-2(a).
Table 4-2(b) shows that Class 2 pumps are designed according to Section III of the 1965 ASME Code [9]. Table 4-2 (c) shows that Class 3 pumps are designed to Section VIII of the 1965 ASME Code (10].
I Pumps designed to Section III or VIII should be checked for requirements outlined in the Pressure Vessel Section (Section 5.2). Recirculation pump casing which belongs to, Class C Category of ASME B&PV Code Section III, 1965 Edition [9] does not experience pressure and temperature transients; there-fore, it is not necessary to design it by Class A of ASME Section III, 1965 Edition [9] as mentioned in the FSAR (5]. However, it is essential to fully radiograph Category C welded joints on the pump casing.
Items to be revi.ewed regarding p aps are general requirements and full radiography requirements, discussed in Sections 4.1 and 4.2, respectively, of this report.
Information on the radiography requirements imposed on the welds of the Class 1 and 2 pumps listed in Table 4-2(a) and (b) should be provided and compared with current requirements given in Section 4.2 of Appendix A.
Of seven pumps reviewed in this report, six were designed to ASME B&PV Code Section III or VIII. No information on the code used in designing the reactor building closed c.ooling water system pump was provided. The Licensee indicated that the core spray system pump and the low pressure coolanc j
injection pump were designed according to Class B requirements. However, l
since Class B is related to containment design, it seems more likely that Class C requirements were used (see Section 5.1.3 of this report).
1.
Penetrations can be designed according to Section III Class B, but not l
I piping or valves. Mn) Franklin Research Center
- f. m ame v~ a.
u.
I
TER-C5257-430 5.5 VALVES Major differences between current requirements (2] and past requirements
[7] for valves are discussed in Secticn 4.5 of Appendix A.
Class 1 valves designed in accordance with past requirements should be adequate when judged by current standards except for 1.
fracture toughness requirements stress limits might not be satisfied for valves that differ 2.
significantly from the body shapes deacribed in the current code i
3.
stress limits for service level C might not be satisfied 4.
full radiography requirements (Class 1 and Class 2).
The following recommendations should be Jollowed in order to evaluate the adequacy of Class 1 valves (see Table 4-2(a)) in the Dresden plant:
See Table 5-1 for the fracture toughness requirements evaluation.
1.
Compare actual body shape of valves with body shape rules of Section 2.
NB-3544 (2].
If significantly different, the Licensee should provide calculations based on alternative rules in order to prove the adequacy of the valve.
Show that valve has been subjected to service level C conditions and 3.
no replacement was necessary. If this is true, the previous item need not be investigated.
The following recommendation should be followed in order to evaluate Class 2 and 3 valves:
The pressure-temperature rating of Class 2 and 3 valves in the Dresden plant (s' Tables 4-2(b) and 4-2 (c)) should be compared with current pressure-temperature ratings (17].
Full radiography requirements for piping, valves, and pumps are discussed in Section 4.2 of Appendix A.
The conclusion to be drawn from this discussion is that, currently, full radiography is required for Class 1 and Class 2 welded joints, whereas it was not required in the past code (7]. However, Provisions 4
2 and 3 of Code Case N-7 to Reference 7 required full radiography for M
..UU Frankhn Research Center a w ona n.n.aoamau.
i t
TER-C5257-430 circumferential and longitudinal welds. If these provisions of the code case I
were applied, then current requirements are met.
According to the information provided in Table 4-1, Code Case N-7 was invoked for most Class 1 and Class 2 valves. A confirmation that Code Case N-7 wac used, bearing in mind that this code case is only applicable to austenitic stainless steel, would indicate that current radiography require-ments were met for Class 1 and Class 2 valves.
The Licensee indicated that the following valves were designed to codes that are not usually related to valve designs safety valves, standby gas a
treatment system valves, containment penetration valves, and containment coolant suosystem valves. Clarifiction on this information is requested.
Information on the radiography requirements imposed on the welds of previously 4
mentioned valves should be provided.
5.6 STORAGE TANKS As discussed in Section 4.7 of Appendix A, atmospheric storage tanks cesigned to the 1965 Edition of ASME B&PV Code,Section III Class C or Section VIII, should be checked to see if the current compressive stress requirements are met.
Class C atmospheric storage tanks currently classified as Class 2 anould be checked against current quality assurance requirements.I As also discussed in Section 4.7 of Appendix A, O to 15 psig storage tanks aesigned to Class C requirements may not satisfy current tensile allowables for tne biaxial stress field. Zero to 15 paig Class C storage tanks currently classified as Class 2 may not satisfy current quality assurance requirements.I I Storage tanks designed to the American Petroleum Institute API-650, 1964 Edition (18} should be investigated to determine if they meet current requirements.
The condensate storage tanx and standby liquid control tank are reviewed in this report. The condensate storage tank was designed to ASME B&PV Code, 1
1.
Although discussed in this report, quality assurance is outside the scope of the SEP according to the letter f rom S. Bajwa to S. Carfagno dated Cecember 10, 1981. f4 JO.Enklin Research Center
$>.=nenwrmmmmau.
9 I,
t TER-CS257-430 Section III (1963), Class C with 1964 Addenda and the standby liquid control tank was designed to API-650 (1964). Stress allowables for the tank walls were lower in API-650 than in current standards. Stress allowables for the roof satisfy current standarda. The use of A-7 plate :naterial permitted by API-650 is no longer accepted by the current code. Calculations on the standby liquid control tank should be provided in order to deter:nine whether
~
they satisfy current standards.
1 I
I i
t I
i l
l 5
i 1 j'. J Franklin Re. search C. enter
- c-e Th r,.n in
- a..
l l
TER-C5257-430 I
6.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A comparison of the standards in effect during-the design and construction of the Dresden Nuclear Power Plant against current standards indicates i
differences in the following areas: fracture toughness requirements, quality assurance requirements,I ' quality group classification, code stress limits, full radiograpny requirements, and fatigue analysis of piping systems.
Although the requirements for code stress limits and fatigue analysis of piping systems have changed throughout the historical development of the current code, the changes in these areas have not significantly affected the safety functions of the systems and components reviewed in this report.
Recommendations are given in Section 5 of this report with regard to the necessity for additional infcrmation to permit an adequate assessment of the impact of tne new or changed requirements of the current code (2] on the safety functions of the systems and components reviewad in this report.
A summary of conclusions and recommendations is as follows:
1.
Fracture toughness - 62 components were reviewed in Table 5-1 to determine if impact testing was required. From the information in this taole, it is fcund that 10% of the components do not require impact testing,15% of the components require confirmation that austenitic stainless steel was the material used, 694 of the components did not specify the material used, and 4% of the components require more data in order to be assessed. The missing information snould be provided by the Licensee and, using Tables A4-4 through A4-6 in Appendix A, an evaluation should be made for each component to indicate if impact testing is required or exempted.
2.
Full radiography requirements - information should be provided regarding the radiography requirements implemented for (i) Class 2 pressure vessels, (ii) Class 1 and 2 piping and valves, and (iii)
Class 1 and 2 pumps. Confirm that Coce Case N-7 of B31.1 was invoked for valves.
Indicate whenever Code Case N-7 was invoked for piping.
Vessels ano pumps designed to Class A requirements (9] and current 1.
Altnough discussed in this report, quality assursnce is outside the scope of the SEP according to the letter frcm S. Bajwa to S. Carfagno dated December 10, 1981. M-a-D Franklin Research Center a r= as Tw. renamin a,.
f a
4 TER-C5257-430 Class 3 vessels, piping, pumps, and valves meet current full radiography requirements. Tables 4-2(a), 4-2(b), and 4-2(c) should be used in providing the required information.
3.
Quality group classification - Class A (9) vessels are equivalent to current Class 1 vessels. Class C vessels may currently be classified as Class 2 or 3.
In the Dresden Nuclear Power Plant, recirculation system pump casing, currently classified as a Class 1 vessel, was designed to Class C requirements. Radiography requirements imposed on the welds of these pumps should be provided and compared to current Class 1 requirements.
I 4.
Valves - in addition to the impact testing and full radiography requirements previously discussed, information should be provided by j
the Licensee, on a sample basis, regarding the design of valves in order to evaluate if they meet current body shape and pressure-temperature rating requirements as discussed in Section 5.5 of this report.
5.
Pumps - pumps designed to standarcs other than ASME B&PV Code Sections III or VIII, 1965 Edition should be checked to determine whether they meet current standards. Seven pumps were reviewed in this repcet. Information on the code used in designing the reactor building closed cooling water system pump was not provided.
6.
Storage tanks - (i) atmospheric storage tanks should be checked to determine whether they meet current compressive stress requirements; (ii) O to 15 psig storage tanks should be checked to determine whether they meet current tensile allowables for biaxial stress field condition; (iii) storage tanks designed to API-650 (1964) (18]
(standby liquid control tank) should be investigated to determine whether they satisfy current stress allowables and material standards. Calculations for the two storage tanks discussed in this report should be provided.
4 Missing information - (i) information missing from Tables 4-2(a),
4-2(b), and 4-2 (c) of this report regarding the code or code class I
used in designing 3 of 70 components should be provided; (i i) i l
l
}
assumptions on code editions that were made in order to complete Table 4-1 should be confirmed; (iii) information provided regarding the temperature drop (ll'F) from 100% power to 0% power should be confirmed and documented; (iv) clarification should be provided of j
the codes used in the design of valves, piping, and pumps in cases where the codes indicated by the Licensee are not applicable to the referenced components (see Sections 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5 for list).
I r
l l
l l JJL Franklin Rese:rch Center i
A >= man a m vraman umue
Ana.-
-- mar w mm me. w~
g k
4 i
TER-C52 57-43 0 7.
REFERENCES i
1.
NRC Regulatory Guida 1.2 6 i
l
" Quality Group Classifications and Standards for Water, Steam, and Radioactive-Waste-Containing Components of Nuclear Power Plants" 1
l Revision 3, February 1976 f
2.
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
" Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,"Section III, Division 1 New York 1977 Edition and addenda through Summer 1978 4
3.
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Section 50.55a, " Codes and Standards" Revised January 1,1981 4.
RIDS Accession No. 8107020158, docket date 81/06/26, contains letter from T. J. Rausch (Commonwealth Edison) to D. M. Crutchfield and one attachment Telephone memorandum A. Gonzalez (FRC) to A.
1 Wang (NRC) dated October 19, 19813 information provided to A. Wang (NRC) via telephone conversation November 30, 1981 by Commonwealth Edison representatives 5.
Final Safety Analysis Report for Commonwealth Edison Company, Dresden Nuclear Power Station Unit 2 (3 Volumes)
Docketed USAEC, January 10, 1966 Docket No. 50-2 37.
4 6.
NRC Stancard Review Plan Section 3.2.2, " System Quality Group Classification" Of fice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation NUREG-75/087 7.
American Standards Association "Coce for Pressure Piping" Published by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers,1955 ASA B31.1-1955 8.
American Society of Mechanical Engineers f
Boiler and Pressure Vessal Code,Section I, " Rules for Construction of Power Boilers" 1965 Edition I
i 9.
American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure vessel Code,Section III, " Rules for Construction of Nuclear Vessels" 1965
- $c--
i MJ Franidin Research Center i
4 cm a w Th ma. a m u.
li TER-C5257-430 10.
American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section VIII, "Unfired Pressure vessels" 1965 11.
Snaider, R.
P.,
Hodge, J.
M.,
Levin, H.
A.,
and Zudans, J. J.
" Potential for Low Fracture Toughness and Lamellar Testing on PWR Steam Generator and Reactor Coolant Pump Support" NUREG-0577, Published for Comment, October 1979 12. Electric Power Research Institute
" Nuclear Pressure Vessel Steel Data Base" Prepared by Fracture Control Corporation Palo Alto, CA: December 1978 NP-933, Research Project 886-1 13.
American Society for Metals
" Metals Handbook" Metals Park, Ohio Ninth Edition, 1979 14.
Final Safety Analysis Report for Consumers Power Company, Palisades Plant (3 volumes)
Docketed USAEC, November 5, 1968 Docket No. 50-255 15.
" Standard Technical Specifications for General Electric Boiling Water Reactors" Of fice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Rev. 3,1980 NUREG-012 3 16.
A. Gonzalez (FRC)
Telephone memorandum to A. Wang (NRC)
January 19, 1982 t
l 17.
American National Standards Institute
" Steel Valves" l
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1977 ANSI B16.34-1977 i
[
18.
American Petroleum Institute
" Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage" Second Edition, April 1964 l
API-650 I
I l
i I
- 4.,. -
Mbnklin Research Center a om a a n rrmen. u.
APPENDIX A REVIEW OF CODES AND STN OARDS APPLICABLE 'IO OYSTER CREEK, MILLSTONE, MO DRESDEN PL,tNTS 1
l l
l l
A N.
. Franklin Research Center A Division of Tne Franklin Institute The Berdamm Franen Parmway. PNa.. Ps 19103 (215)448 1000
i CONTENTS Title Page Section A-1 1
INTRODUCTION A-3 2
SL%4ARY OF RESULTS OF CODE COMPARISON A-3 2.1 General A-3 2.2 Piping.
A-3 2.3 Pressure vessels A-28 2.4 Pumps.
A-28 2.5 Valves.
A-28 2.6 Heat Exchangers A-28 2.7 Storage Tanks.
A-29 3
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
4 CCMPARISON OF SIGNIFICANT CURRENT CODE REQUIREMENTS A-30 AND PAST REQUIREMENTS A-30 4.1 General Requirements A-61 4.2 Piping.
A-80 4.3 Pressure Vessels A-84 4.4 Pumps.
A-84 4.5 valves.
A-90 4.6 Heat Exchangers A-92 4.7 Storage Tanks.
5 BASIS FOR SELECTING REQUIREMENTS MOST SIGNIFICANT TO A-97 CCMPONENT INTEGRITY.
A-98 6
REFERENCES.
iii
.LM Franklin Research Center 4 tw w m n.mm m.
o t
4 1.
INTRIODUCTION The purpose of this appendix is to compare the code currently used in the design, ractication, erection, and testing of systems and components for nuclear power plants against the codes and standards used in the design of The plants being reviewed under the Systematic Evaluation Program (SEP).
current code is the American Society of Mechanical Engineers' Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (B&PV),Section III,1977 Edition as supplemented by the Summer 1978 Addenda (1, 21 The three major older codes being compared against the current code are the B&PV Code,Section III,1965 Edition (3]; the j
" Code for Pressure Piping," American Standard Association 331.1, 1955 Edition (4]; and B&PV Code,Section VIII,1965 Edition (5}.
Table Al-1 groups the SEP plants according to the major codes used to design them.
In order to take advantage of the similarities in each group, d2is appendix applies only to the Group I plants: Palisades, Ginna, Millstone Unit 1, Dresden Unit 2, and Oyster Creek.
The B&PV Code,Section I, 1965 Edition (5] 'is also discussed in this appendix at it applies to Oyster Creek, Millstone Unit 1, and Dresden Unit 2.
The older requirements are evaluated to identify differences from the current code requirements and to assess the impact of these differences on.the structural integrity of the systems and components. The current code require-ments are discussed in Section 2.
The major identified differences are discussed in Section 4.
f The scope of this comparison is limited to quality classification of systems and components as discussed in Regulatory Guide 1.26 [6] and Secticn l
I 3.2.2 of the Standard Review Plan (7]. The reactor vessel, steam generators, and supports are outside the scope of this appendix, as is the seismic classification of systems and components. All the se subjects are addressed in other SEP topics. Qua.ity assurance has also been determined to be outside i
the scope of this comparison, but has been included for informational purposes only.
l 1.
Letter f rom S. Bajwa to S. Carf agno dated December 10, 1981.
A-1 l
/
4;) Franidin Research Center
- cem.on n. n.a.n mm.
)
t Table Al-1 Major Codes and Standards Used in Design of Systems and Components of SEP Plants Commercial Plant Operation Maior Codes Group I (1969-if71)
Palisades Dec. 1971 1.
ASME III (1965)
Millstone 1 March 1971 2.
ASA B31.1 (1955) and Code Cases L
Ginna July 1970 3.
ASME VIII (1965) and Code Cases Dresden 2 July 1970 4.
ASME I (1965)
(Oyster Creek, Millstone 1, Dresden 2)
Oyster Creek Dec. 1969 Group II (1968)
Lacrosse Nov. 1969 1.
ASME I & VIII (1962) and Code Cases San onofre Jan. 1968 2.
ASA B31.1 (1955) and Code Cases Hacdam Neck-Jan. 1968 Group III (1961-1963)
Big Rock. Point March 1963 1.
ASME I & VIII (1959) and Code Cases 2.
ASA B31.1 (1955) and Code Cases Yankee Rowe July 1961 1.
ASME I & VIII (1956) and Code Cases 2.
ASA B31.1 (1955) and Code Cases A-2 LL.J Franklin Restarch Center w e. v =.an e,ana.
I 1
i i
2.
SCMMARY OF RESUL".S OF CODE COMPARISON i
2.1 GENERAL The current code requirements for the construction of nuclear power plant components [1] are outlined in Table A2-1.
For each article or subarticle, the applicability to Code Class 1, 2, or 3, corresponding to Quality class A, B, or C, respectively, is noted. Requirements considered especially signifi-cant from the viewpoint of pressure boundary integrity are indicated by an "A" in the "Significant" column. The basis for selecting significant items is discussed in Section 5 of this appendix.
t i
2.2 PIPING Table 12-2 presents a comparison of the current and past code require-ments for the materials, design, f abrication, examination, and testing of piping systems and components for nuclear power plants. The past code for piping is the B31.1 (1955) power piping code. The ASME I (1965) [5] power boiler code may have been invoked for piping between the BWR vessel and the first set of shutoff and check valves in the line. A comparison of signifi-cant past and current piping requirements may be found in Sections 4.1 and 4.2 of this appendix.
2.3 PRESSURE VESSELS Tables A2-3 and A2-4 compare the current and past code requirements for 1
{
the materials, design, f abrication, examination, and testing of pressure vessels for nuclear power plants. Table A2-3 compares the current code t
against ASME III (1965). Table A2-4 compares the current code against ASME
)
VIII (1965).
Note that past Class A vessels were built in accordance with ASME III (1965), which would be equivalent to the current Class 1 classification.
s Past Class B vessels were defined as containment vessels, which are outside the scope of this review.
i
_nklin Rese_ arch _ Center
Table A2-1 Current Code Remstrements [1]
l ibm}
Article
- y Class Class Class Signi-
[
Sut>a r t icle De nic r ipt ion 1
2 3
ficant Remarks 3
or 1 5' A
A A
NA-1000 SCOPE OF St:CTION Ill g
R NA-2000 CIASSIFICATION OF COMEONENTS A
A A
A f'$
1 5 9r NA-3000 RESPONSIBILITit:S AND DUTit:S A
A A
Q r
-a 4
NA-4000 QUALITY ASSUHANCE A
A NA A
NA-4100 Quality Ashurance kequirements NA-5000 INSPECTION NA-5100 General Hequirements for Authorized A
A A
A Inspection Agencies and Ingectors A
A A
A NA-5200 Duties of Inspector s T
NA-6000 QUALITY CONTHOL SYSTtHS FOR CLASS 3 CONSTHUCTION J-NA NA A
A NA-6100 General kequirements HA NA A
A NA-6200 Organization and kehponsibilities NA NA A
A NA-6300 Control of Operations NA NA A
A NA-6400 kecords and Forms NA-8000 CERTIFICATES OF AUTHORIZATION, A
A A
NAMEPLATES, STAMa*1NG, AND REPORTS 1000 INTRODUCTION A
A A
A 1100 Scope 2000 NATERIAL A
A A
A 2100 General 2200 Naterial Tebt Coupons and Specimens A
A A
for Ferritic Steel Naterials Addressed in the Code for the specified class or considered
,nificant for this review.
A-Not considered significant for this review.
Outside the scope of this review.
ONA Not applicable to this review or not addressed in the Code for the specified class.
Article number in current Code will be preceded by NB for Class 1 component, NC for Class 2 component, and No for Class 3 convonent.
. ~ -. _ _ _ _.,. _. -
1
$1; qp/
Table A2-1 (Cont.)
3iE Article
- O Class Class Class signi-or Psy Su>.rticie De a:r ipt ion 1
2 3
escant Remarks In 2300 Fracture T&aghness hquirement A
A A
A for Nterial 2400 W 1 ding and Brasing A
A A
A g
- g 2500 Esamination and Repair of Pressure A
A A
Retainiry Materials 2600 mterial knuf acturers' Quality A
A A
A System Program 2700 Dimensional Standard A
A A
3000 DESIGH 3100 General A
A A
A 3200 Design by Analysis (C1. 1)3 Alternate A A
NA A
p a
Design Rules for vessels (C1. 2) 3300 Vessel Design A
A A
A 3400 Pump Design A
A A
A 3500 valve Design A
'A A
A 3600 Pipisq Design A
A A
A 3700 Electrical and Mechanical Penetration MA A
A A
Assemblies 3M00 Design of Atmospheric Storage Tanks MA A
A A
3900 0-15 pai (0-103 kPa) Storage Tank NA A
A A
De sign 4000 FABHICATION AND INSTALLATION 4100 General A
A A
4200 Forming, Fitting, and Aligning A
A A
4300 Welding Qualitications A
A A
A 4400 Rules Governing Nking, Examining, A
A A
and Repairing Welds 4500 Braxi>J A
A A
4600 Heat Treatment A
A A
. _=
_ ~.. -... _.
~
l I
i M
cn>
Table A2-1 (Cont.)
3E Article
- Class Class Class Signi-13 or Sut>ar t icle Desacription 1
2 3
ficant Remarks 2[
4700 Mechanical Joints A
A A
s '#
4800 Empension Joints NA A
A bg 5000 EXAMINATION 5100 General Aguirements A
A A
A 5200 hequired Examination of Welds A
A A
A (C1.1) s Esamisution of Wolds (C1. 2 aimi C1. 3) 5100 Acceptarwen Standard A
A A
A 5400 Final Emmaination of Items (C1. 1):
A NA A
A Sp>L Emanination of Welded Joints (C1. 3) p e
5500 Qualif1 cations of Nondestructive A
A A
A Examination Personnel 5600 NA NA NA 5700 Examination pequirement of NA A
A Expansion Joints 6000 TESTING 6100 General A
A A
6200 Hydrobtatic A
A A
6100 Pneumatic A
A A
6400 Pressure Test Gages A
A A
6500 Atmospheric and 0-15 psig NA A
A Storage Tanks 6600 Hydrostatic Testing of Vessests NA A
NA Designed to NC-3200 6700 Pneumatic Testing of Vessels NA A.
NA Designed to ;C-3200 6800 6900 Proof Tests to Establiski NA A
A Design Preseire e
9
4 9
Table A2-1 (Cont.)
!,E Article
- Class Class Class Signi-g or y@
Subarticle De ac r ipt ion 1
2 3
ficant Remarks g
g3 i [
- 7000, PROTt.CTION AGAINST OVERPRESSURE
,fg 7100 General A
A A
(
7200 Definitions Applicable to A
A A
Overpressure Protection Devices 7300 Overpressure Protection Report A
A NA (C1.1) s Analysis (Cl. 2) 7400 Relieving Capacity Requirements A
A A
and Acceptable Types of Overpressure Protection Devices 7500 Set Pressures of Pressure Relief A
A A
Devicea p
4 7600 Operating Design Requirements for A
A A
Pressure hellef Valves 7700 Requirements for Nonteclosing A
A A
Pressure Relief Devices 7800 Certification kequirements A
A A
7900 Marking, Stamping, aant keports A
A A
8000 NAMEPI.ATES, STAMPING, AND kEPOk1$
8100 General A
A A
MANDA10HY APPENDICES I
Design Stress Intensity Values, A
A A
A Allowable Stresses, Material Properties, and Design Fatigue Curves 11 Experimental Stress Analysis A
A A
III Bauls for EstablishimJ Design A
A A
A Stress Intensity Values.uus Allowable Stress Values O
......:.~..
- i,.
y-.
[h o
s f
Table A2-1 (Cont.)
f 2"
pQ Article
- Class Class Class Sign!-
a or h
Sutia r t icle De wriptton 1
2 3
fIcant kemarka In
[$
IV Approval of New Materials Under A
A A
the ASHE Doller arti Pressure Vessel I
Code for Section III App!! cation V
Certificate lloider's Data kuport A
A A
Forms arul Application Forms for Certificates of Authorization for Una of Code Systcl Stamps VI Hounded 1:alications Charts A
A A
VII
- Charts for DeterminiwJ Shell A
A A
I 3'
Ttilcknees of Cylindrical and Spherical Components Usuler f
External Pressure XI kules f or Bolted Flange NA A
A Connections for Class 2 arms 3 Components and Class MC Vessels XII Design Considerations for bolted A
A A
A Flange Connections XI!!
Design based on Stress Analysis MA A
NA f or Vessels Designed in Accordance i
with 8C-3200 XIV Design Basud on Fatigue Analysia NA A
NA tog VesseIs Designed in Accordance with NC-3200 i
XVI 4A>salestructive Examination A
A A
O Mettwds Applicable to Core Support Structures XVil Desi<Jn of Linear Type Supports by A
A A
0 Linear Elastic and Flastic Analysis t
+
I FD ]'
z> n 2lE su
$N f !:
tg Table A2-1 (Cont.)
Article
- Claus Class Class Signi-or Subarticle De a:r ipt ion 1
2 3
fIcant Henarko NONHANDA'IURY APPENDICES A
NA NA A
B Owner's Design Specification A
A A
C Certificate lloider's Stress Report A
NA NA a
D Nonmandatory Pretaedt Procedurou A
A A
E Ninimum Dolt Cross-Sectional Area A
NA NA F
kules for Evaluation ot Level D A
A A
A Service Limits G
Protection Against Nonductile Failure A A
A A
Capacity Conver sions for Claus 3 NA NA A
Safety Valves J
Owner's Design Specifications for A
NA NA O
Core Support Structure K
Hecommesuled Maximum Deviations asul A
A A
O Tolerances tor Component Supports I
9
... ~. -. -... _
I t
t 1
i e
j f
lL a
'G*
Table A2-2 1
yf Comparison of B31.1 (1955) 14] Aga in st ASME Section III (1977) [M
'I 2E Cor re sponding Article
- Class Class Class Signi-Article in j
or g'
Sut>a r t icle Description 1
2 3
ficant all.1 (1955)
Remarks g3 NA-1000 SCOPE OF SECTION 111 A
A A
NA-2000 CLASSIFICATION OF COMPONENTS A
A A
A Not Addressed NA-3000 MESPONSIBILITIES AND DUTIES A
A A
NA-4000 QUALITY ASSURANCE HA-4100 Quality Assurance Requirements A
A NA A
Not Addressed NA-5000 INSPECTION NA-5100 General Requirements for Authorized A
A A
A Not Addressed y
In@ection Agencies and Insipectors e
NA-5200 Duties of Inwector s A
A A
A Not Addressed NA-6000 QUALITY CONTHOL SYSTtNS FOR CLASS 3 CONSThuCTION HA-6100 General Hequirements NA NA A
A Not Addressed NA-6200 Organization and Responsibilities NA NA A
A Not Addressed NA-6300 Control of Operations NA NA A
A Not Addressed NA-6400 Records arw! Forms NA NA A
A Not Addressed NA-8000 CERTIFICATES OF AUTHORIEATION, A
A A
NAMEPIATES, STANPING, AND REPORTS A Addressed in the Code for the avecified class or considered significant for this review.
- Not considered significant for this review.
O Outside the acope of this review.
NA Not applicable to this review or not addressed in the Code for the apecified class.
Article number in current Code will be preceded by NB for Class I component, NC for Class 2 component, and NO for Class 3 component.
E, w.
/
Table A2-2 (Cont.)
3 Corresponding
' ; g; Atticle*
Class Class class Signi-Arti'cle in 5L D or N
Subarticle Demcription 1
2 3
ficant 831.1 (1955)
Remarks N
1000 INTidXAJCTION 1100 Scope A
A A
A 101, Table 2a, Note 2 h
I
?.
to 2000 MATERIAL 2100 General A
A A
A 105, Table 1, See Sect. 6 Sect. 7 2200 mterial Tent Coupons and Specimens A
A A
for Ferritic Steel h terials 2300 Fracture Toughness Hequirement A
A A
A Not Addressed for m terial 2400 Weldisv3 and Brazing A
A A
A Sect. 6: Chapter p
4 and Appendices a
2500 Examination and Repair of Presbure A
A.
A Retaining Nterials 2600 Material Manufacturers' Quality A
A A
A Not Addressed System Program 2700 Dimensional Standard A
A A
3000 DESIGN 3100 General A
A A
A Not Addressed 3200 Design tsy Analysis (C1.1) 3 Alternate A
A NA A
NA posign Rules for Vessels (C1. 2) 3300 Vessel Design A
A A
A NA 3400 Pump Design A
A A
A esA 3500 Valve Design A
A A
A 107,100,124, 129,134,139 3600 Pipisvj Design A
A A
A Sect. 1 3700 Electrical and Mechanical Penetration NA A
A A
NA Assemblie s 3800 Design of Atmogheric Storage Tanks NA A
A A
NA 3900 0-15 psi (0-103 kPa) Storage Tank NA A
A A
NA Design
-~~...-x---
- 7..
{
<a
- pf Table A2-2 (Cont.)
fE Cor ce sponding E
AttIcle*
Class Class Class Signi-Article in 13 or N
Sutta r t icle Deseription 1
2 3
ficant B31.1 (1955)
Remarke M
im Sect. 6 3
4000 YAbHICATION AND INSTALLATION
[#
4100 General A
A A
Not Addressed
{h t
4200 Forming, Fitting, and Aligning A
A A
- h 4300 Welding Qualifications A
A A
Appendix A to Sect. 6 4400 Rules Governing Nking, Examining, A
A A
and Repairing Welds.
A A
A i
4500 brazing 4600 Heat Treatment A
A A
4700
&chanical Joints A
A A
Chapter 2 of Sect. 6 4800 Expansion Joints NA A
A Not Addressed p
4 C
5000 E XANINATION
$100 General kequirements A
A A
A Not Addressed 5200 Required Examination of Welds A
A A
A Not Addressed (C1. 133 Examination of Welds (C1. 2 and C1. 3) 5300 Acceptance Standard A
A A
A Not Addressed 5400 Final Examination of Items (C1. 1)3 A
NA A
A Not Addressed Spot Examination of Welded Joints (C1. 3) 5500 Qualitications of Hondestructive A
A A
A Not Addressed Examination Personnel NA NA NA 5600 5100 Examination Requirements of NA A
A Expansion Joints 6000 TESTING 6100 General A
A A
6200 Hydrostatic A
A A
6300 Pneumatic A
A A
w
~
fi, ay Table A2-2 (Cont.)
Article
- Cor re sponding gh Class Class Class Signi-Article in or ym htarticle De a:r i pt ion 1
2 3
ficant B31.1 (1955)
Rema r k s
.b 6400 Presouru Test Gages A
A A
ro 6500 Atmoa4>heric and 0-15 psig NA A
A
,j Storage Tanks Q
6600 Mydrostatic Testing of Vestiels NA A
NA I
besigned to NC-3200 6700 Pneumatic Testing of Vessels NA A
NA Designed to NC-3200 6800 6900 Proof Tests to Establiah NA A
A NA Design Pressure y
7000 PHOTtX3 ION AGAINST OVERPRESSURE r
1100 General A
A A
NA 7200 Definitions Applicable to A
A A
NA Overpressure Protection Devices 7300 overpressure Protection Helert A
A NA NA (C1.1) a Analysis (C1. 2) 1400 b lieving Capacity A quirements A
A A
HA and Acceptable Types of Overpressure Protection Devices 7h00 Set Pressures of Pressure Helief A
A A
NA Devices 7600 OperatisyJ Design Mequirements for A
A A
NA Pressure Helief Valves 7700 Hequirements for Nonteclosing A
A A
NA Pressure Relief Devices
=
7800 Certification Requirenwinnts A
A A
NA 1900 Harking, Stamping, and Reports A
A A
NA 8000 NAMEPl.ATES, STAMPING, AND REPORTS 8100 General A
A A
I i
L E
cu T.sble A2-2 Acont.)
r,h]
Cor ea.ponding
[$E Atticle*
Class Class Class Signi-Art 1cle in tL I or N
Sut, article De scr idion 1
2 3
ficant B31.1 (1955)
Wamarks
?$
NANDAtukY AFPt;HDICES
,0, 1
Design Straus Intensity Valaes, A
A A
A Tables 1 arkt 2, Sect. I
- y Allowable Stresses, Materist Properties, ash! Design Fatigue Cur vu a II Experimental Stre ss Analysis A
A A
III Basis for Establishing Design A
A A
A Not Addressed Stress Intensity Values and Allowable Stress Values IV Approval of New DLaterials Under A
A A
ti e ASHE Doller asid Pressure Vessel p
Code for Section 111 App!! cation V
Certificate lloider's Data kelaott A
A A
Forms and Application Forms for Certificates of Authorization for Use of code Symbol Stamps V1 Itounded Irmlications Cliasts A
A A
VII Clearts for betermininj Shell A
A A
122 Thickness of Cylindrical arwl Spherical Components Usuler External Prestanto XI Rules for Dotted Flange NA A
A 106,111,138, 143 Connections for Class 2 and 3 Components asal Class NC Vessels XII Danign Consideratiosas for Bolted A
A A
A Flaaje Connections Xill Design L'amed on Stress Analysis NA A
NA Fat Addressed for Vesa.els Designed in Accordance with NC-3200 XIV Design Based on Fatigue Analysis MA A
NA NA for vessels Designed in Acco: dance with NC-3200 s
4 p
@j omp anG e3
$N
+N Table A2-2 (Cont.)
l' :g r
Cor re sponding fQ Article
- Class class Class Signi-Article in aR or 4
Sut>a r t icle Description 1
2 3
ficant B31.1 11955)
Remarks XVI Hondestructive Examination A
A A
O 14A Methods Applicable to Cose Support Structures XVII Design of Linear Type Supports by A
A A
O HA Linear Elahtic and Plastic Analysts I
HLHJKANDA10HY APFENDICES A
NA NA A
B Owner's Design Specification A
A A
C Certificate lloider's Stress Report A
NA NA D
Hosumandatory Preheat Proceduces A
A A
E Hinimum Dolt Cross-Sectional Area A
NA NA F
kules for Evaluation of Level D A
A A
A Service Limits G
Psutection AgainmL Nonductile Failure A
A A
A il Capacity Conversions for Class 3 NA NA A
Safety Valves J
Owner's Domign Specifications for A
NA NA O
HA Core Support Structure K
14ecommended Nazimum Deviations erw!
A A
A O
NA Tolerasses f or Comtonent Suptwrts t
i Table A2-3 L.
Eis Comparison of ASME R&PV Code Sect ton III
[h G
1965 Edition 131 Against the 19 H Edition [1]
g IL:3 Corre avow 1ing
/y Article in
?%
Article
- Class Class Class Signi-ASME B6PV Sect.
f%
3 Subarticle De scr iption 1
2 3
ficant III (1965)
Sema r k s or 3
h '?.
N-110 A
A A
NA-1000 SCOPE OF StrTION III 4
NA-2000 CLASSIFICATION OF (D841004138T3 A
A A
A N-130 NA-3000 RESPONSIBILITIES Ate DUTIES A
A A
N-140 NA-4000 QUALITY ASSURANCE A
A NA A
Appendia VII NA-4100 Quality Asaiurance Requirements Articles 6,14
>I MA-5000 INSPECTIOed NA-5100 General Requirements for Authorized A
A A
A N-610 Inspection Agencies armt Inspectors A
A A
A N-610 NA-5200 Duties of Inspector s NA-6000 QUALITY OM4TieOL SYSTtatS FOR CLASS 3 (DNSTkUCTION NA NA A
A Mot Addressed NA-6100 General kequirements NA-6200 Organization and Bemponsibilities NA NA A
A Not Addressed MA NA A
A ht AJJtessed NA-63C0 Control of Operations MA NA A
A Not Addressed NA-6400 Eccords armi Forms NA-8000 CEkTIFICATES OF AUTHOR 13ATIOel, A
A A
MANEPLATES, STAMPIteG, AND REPORTS Addressed in the Cale for the teecified class or considered significant for this review.
A-Not considered significant for this review.
- Outside the scope of this review.
0NA ht applicable to this review or not addressed in the Code for the specified class.
Article number in current Code will be preceded by MS for Class 1 component, NC for Class 2 component, and MD for Class 3 component.
~ ~ - - - - -
~
~
Table A2-3 (Cont.)
g, lE' Correspunding
- 7:
Arkicle la
[3 Article
- Class Class Class Sign!-
ASME B6W Sect.
3 BE
, or O
Subasticle De her ipt Ion 1
2 3
tleant III (1965) hemarks j
Art. 2, 11, 21 See hte 1 1000 IN1140 DUCTION A
A A
A N-210, N-2110
!!00 Scope s#
Articlus 3,12 f
2000 NATt*IAL g
2l00 General A
A A
A N-310 2200 hterial Test Coupons and Specimens A
A A
A l
tor Ferritic Steel h terials l
2303 Fracture Toughness Requirement A
A A
A N-330 l
tog h terial l
2400 Helding and Brazing A
A A
A Mot AJJtessed l
2500 Examination and Repair of Pressure A
A A
N-320 lietaining h terials
/
2600 hterial knuf acturers' Quality A
A A
A M-614 p
8 System Program Ua 27JO Dimensional Standard A
A A
Articles 4,13 3000 DESIGN 3100 General A
A A
A N-440 Only Class 1 3200 Design by Analysis (C1.1) 3 Alternate A A
NA A
N-430 Only C1. 1, see ak>te 2 Design flules for vessels (C1. 2)
A A
Articles 4, 13 3300 Vessel Design A
A 3400 Pump Design A
A A
A ht AJJtessed 3500 Valwe Design A
A A
A ht AJJressed 3600 Piping Design A
A A
A N-150/Nostly ht AJJtessed 3700 Electrical and Mechanical Penetration NA A
A A
ht AJJtessed Assemblie s 3poo Design of Atmo@eric tetorage Tanks MA A
A A
ht AJJtessed 3900 0-15 pal (0-103 kPa) Storage Tank NA A
A A
ht AJJtessed De sign htes:
1.
For requirements of class 3 vessel, reference is made to Section VIII of the Code.
2.
Use Tat;1e I-1.0 (1977 t:Ji' ion) inhen designisag pressure vessels by Alternative Design Analysis (NC-32003
I 15.
p{!
Totale A2-3 (Cunt.)
q 8
Corresgaonding h
Article in G3 trticlee Class Class Class Signi-ASNE B6PV Sect.
N or S{
Subarticle Description 1
2 3
ficant III (1965)
Remarks la Article 5 Only Class 1 4000 FABRICATION A3G INSTAIJATION h
4100 General A
A A
A W-510 Only Class 1
- h 4200 Formirpj, FittismJ, asmi Aligning A
A A
4300 Nelding Qualifications A
A A
A N-520, N-540 Only Class 1 4400 kules Gowersalasj MakirmJ, Examinisvj, A
A A
and ReparirvJ Wids 4500 Br asis,J A
A A
4600 Heat Treatment A
A A
W-530 only Class 1 4700 Wchanical Joints A
A A
Not AJdressed 4800 Espansion Joints HA A
A Not Addressed 3*
Articles 6,14 Only Class 1, 2
[
5000 EXAMINATION co 5100 General Requirements A
A A
A N-610 Only Class 1 5200 Mequired Emanination of Nelds A
A A
A N-620 (C1. 133 Examination of W lds (C1.2 arul C1. 3) 5300 Acceptance Standard A
A A
A N-626.5, N-627.7 Only Class 1 5400 Final Examination of items (CI. 1)3 A
NA A
A N -620 Only Class 1 Spot Esamissatiosi of Wident Joints (C1. 3) 5500 Qualificatiosas of Nundestructive A
A A
A Not AJJressed Examination Personnel 5600 MA NA NA
$100 Emanination kesquirements of NA A
A Expansion Joints 6000 TESTING Article 7 6100 General A
A A
6200 Hydrobtatic A
A A
6300 pneumatic A
A A
6400 Pressure Tabt Ga.Jes A
A A
6500 Atmosg4seric and 0-15 psig NA A
A Stora<Je Tanks N
~
~
11 oga Q
9 2E 15 Table A2-3 (Cont.)
2 <"=
?E Corresponding N
Article
- Article in 3
or Class Class Class Signi-ASME B6PV Sect.
IQ Subarticle Dencription 1
2 3
ficant III (1965) haa r k s a
K 6600 NyJrostatic Testing of Vessels MA A
NA Designed to NC-3200 6700 Pneumatic Testing of Vessels NA A
NA Designed to NC-3200 6600 6900 Proot Tests to Establish NA A
A A
Not AJJtessed See Table A2-4 Design Pressure for Class A or a for Class C
>t 7000 PROTt:CTION AGAINST CVEkPkESSURE U
7100 General A
A A
NA 7200 Definitions Applicable to A
A A
NA Overpressure Protection Devices 7300 overpressure Protection Deport A
A NA NA (C1. 1) Analysis (C1. 2) 7400 Relieving Capacity Requirements A
A A
NA and Acceptable Types of Overpressure Protection Devices 7500 Set Pressures of Pressure Bellet A
A A
MA Devices 7s00 Oprating Design diequirements for A
A A
NA Pressure kellet Valves 1700 kequirement a for Monteclosing A
A A
NA Pressure Relief Devices 7800 Certitication kequirements A
A A
NA 1900 Marking, Stamping, and Reports A
A A
MA 8000 NANt.PIATES, STAltPING, AND REPUNTS Articles 8, 15 h100 General
.A A
A
~. -- - - -~ ~ - ~ '
"~ " * - * ' ~ - ' ~
~
^ ~
Table A2-3 icont.)
- )';
Correaponding Article
- Article in 3
93 or Class Class Class Signi-ASeeE B&PV Sect.
Sut. article De scr it>t ion 1
2 I
fleant III (19H)
Remarks g
no g
NANDA10kY APPENDICES 4
I Design Stress Intensity Values, A
A A
A Article 4 Table N-421 Sr Allowable Stresses, Material fp Properties, and Design Fatigue s3 Curves Q
Emporinental Strese Analysis A
A A
III Basis for Establishirq Design A
A A
A Appendia II Stress Intensity Values and Allowable Stress Values
[
IV Approval of h w Materials Under A
A A
the fliME Boiler arm 3 Pressure Vessel Code for Section III Application V
. Certificate Holder's Data Repor t A
A A
T Forms asmi Application Forms for y
Certificates of Authorisation for Uma of Code Symbol Stamps VI ikwanded Indications Charts A
A A
VII Charts for Determining Shell A
A A
Article I-1 of Thickness of cylindrical and Alvesklix I, N-431 Spherical Components Osmier External Pressure XI kules for Bolted Flange NA A
A Article I-12 c2 Connections for Class 2 arms 3 Appendix I, M-471, Coeponents ard Class NC Vessels Table N-422 XII Design Considerations for bolted A
A A
A Article I-12 of Flarge Connections Apperh51s I, N-471 XI!!
Design based on Stress Analysis NA A
NA Article I-10 of for Vessels Designed in Accordance Appendix I, N-430 with NC-3200 XIV Design Based on Fatigue Analysis NA A
NA Article I-10 of for vessels Designed in Accordance Apperulix I, M-430 with NC-3200 XVI Naskiestructive Examination A
A A
O A
Nthods Applicable to Core Support Structures XVII Design of Linear Type Supports by A
A A
0 NA 1.inear Elastic armi Plastic Analysis
. ~ - -
J 15-?
"31 $'
h I =;
asN vn in Table A2-3 (Cont.)
le Cor,re sponding
- j Article in Article
- Class Class Class Signi-ASME B6PV Sect.
or Sut>a r t icle Description 1
2 3
ficant III (1965)
Remarks NOt44ANDA10kY APPENDICES A
NA NA A
p 8
Owner's Design Specification A
A A
[
C Certificate Nolder's Stress Report A
NA NA Appendia III P
D Nonmandatory Preheat Procedures A
A A
2:
Ninimum Bolt Cross-Sectional Area A
NA NA Y
Rules for Evaluation of Level D A
A A
A Not Addressed Service Limits G
Protection Against HonJuctile Failige A A
A A
Article N-330 Only Class 1 11 Capacity Conversions for Class 3 NA NA A
Safety Valves J
Owner's Design Specifications for A
NA NA O
NA Core Support Stgucture K
Hecommanded Maximus Deviations and A
A A
O NA Tolerances for Component Supports
_.__.__._-.._._.m.
- - - - - - ~ - -.
i h
h Table A2-4 l
cosaparia42n of ASMt Vlli (1965) 151 with ASNE 111 (1977) [1]
ulC Corressending
>][
Article
- Class Class Class Signi-Article in U
or sut, article De act ipt ton 1
2 3
ficant ASNs vill (1965)
Remarke y
/g NA-1000 SCOPE OF SIETION III A
A A
n NA-2000 CLASSIFICATION OF COMPONENTS A
A A
A NA
> ; ;I
- Q NA-3000 RESPONSIBILITIES AND DUTIES A
A 4
ia N
NA-4000 QUALITY ASSURANCE HA-4100 Quality Assurance Requirements A
A NA A
NA J
NA-5000 INSPECTION HA-5100 General kequirements for Authorized A
A A
A UG-90 Insipection Agencies and Inag>uctors NA-5200 Duties of Inspectors A
A A
A UG-91 Y
NA-6000 QUALITY CON 1*OL SYSTEMS FOR CLASS 3 y
(DNSTRUCTION NA-6100 General kequirements NA NA A
A NA NA-6200 Organization a >l Meaitonsibilities NA NA A
A NA NA-6300 Control of Operatiosas NA NA A
A NA NA-6400 kecords and Forms NA NA A
A NA i
NA-8000 CERTIFICATES OF AUTHOkI1ATION, A
A A
UG-Il6 NAMEPLATES, STAMPING, AND REPORTS 1000 IrritODUCTION A
A A
A U-1 1100 Scope 2000 MATERIAL 2100 General A
A A
A UG-5 2200 Haterial Test Coupons and Specimens A
A A
for Ferritic Steel katertals A Addreshed in the Code for the nipecified class or consLJered significant for thin review.
- Not considered significant for this review.
O Out side the a. cope of this review.
HA Not applicable to this review or not addressed in the Code for the specified class.
and ND for Article number in current Code will 12e preceded by Na for Class 1 component, NC for cimas 2 component, Class 3 contenent.
t t
j FL s
4
- *TI Sable A2-4 (Cont.)
I Yj la Cor'semponJ1:9 Article
- N Class Class Class Signi-Article in g
or Sub.:ticle De act ipt ton 1
2 3
ticant ASNE v111 (1965)
Bemarka 2300 Fracture Toughness hquirement A
A A
A UG-84 g
for h terial
,tg 5
2400 WldiscJ azul Brazing A
A A
A UW 2500 Examination an.1 Repair of Pressure A
A A
Retaining mterials 2600 hterial knuf acturers' Quality A
A A
A UG-93 System Program
^
2700 Dimensional Standard A
A A
3000 Ut: SIGN p
3100 General A
A A
A NA
[a 3200 Design by Analysis (C1.1) 3 Alternate A A
NA A
W Design kunea for Vesaasls (Cl. 2) 3300 Vessel Design A
A A
A UW-8,IF-12 3400 Pump Design A
A A
A NA 3500 Valve Design A
A A
A NA 3600 Piping Design A
A A
A NA 3700 Electrical and &chanical Penetration NA A
A A
NA Assemblie s j
j 3000 Design of Atmospheric Storage Tanks MA A
A A
NA 3900 0-15 psi (0-103 6.Pa) Storage Tank NA A
A A
NA De si gn 4000 FAbklCATION AND INSTALLAT1DN 1
4100 General A
A A
A UG-75 4200 Foraisuj, Fitting, dahl Aligning A
A A
4300 W1dinj Qualifications A
A A
A UW-28, uw-29 4400 kules Cuvernity AkispJ, Examining, A
A A
and kepairls>J Weld s 4$00 Br aa ts>J A
A A
4 BOO Heat Treatment A
A A
. ~ ~~--
. - 7_
i 6
L[
M Table A2-4 (Cont.)
u I
hl?t Cor re sponding Article
- Class Class Class Signi-Article in t3 or
/g Subarticle Dee.cription 1
2 3
ficant ASME VIII (1965)
Remar k s 4700 Nachanical Joints A
A A
UR-19 7
4800 Expansion Joints NA A
A NA h
y 5000 EXANINATION 5100 General kequirements A
A A
A UG-90 5200 Required Examinatiosa of Welds A
A A
A W-46 (C1.1) s Examinatiosa of Wolds (C1. 2 and C1. 3) 5300 Acceptance Standard A
A A
A UW-51 (1) 5400 Final Examination of Items A
NA A
A NA UG-99 (g) require s inspection after (C1. 1): Spot Examisaation of hydrostatic but does Welded Joints (C1. 33 not specify 11guld T
penetrant or annetic particle inspections UW-50 requires LPE or
.agnetic particle inspection before pneumatic testing.
5500 Qualifications of Hondestructive A
A A
A NA UG-91 gives requirements for Examination Personnel qualification of inspectors, but not NDE personnel 5600 NA NA NA 5700 Examination Requirements of NA A
A Expasision Joints 6000 Tt: STING 6100 General A
A A
6200 Hydrostatic A
A A
6300 Pneumatic A
A A
i I
n e
n
~~~
' ~ ~ ~ ~
Lih
'?a '5 un f,
Table A2-4 (Cont.)
- 3
. l i'E as Cor rdsponding pp Article
- Class Class Class Signi-Article in or
- k Sut>a r t icle Deucription 1
2 3
ficant ASME vlII (19651 Remarks 0
IQ 6400 Pressure Test Gages A
A A
3 6500 Atmospheric and 0-15 psig NA A
A 14 Storage Tanks 6600 Hydrostatic Testing of Vessels NA A
NA Designed to NC-3200 6000 Pneumatic Testing of Vessels NA A
NA Designed to NC-3200 6800 6'J00 Proof Tests to Establish NA A
A A
UG-101 Design Pressute a
N 7000 PROTECTION AGAINST OVERPkESSUME 7100 General A
A A
7200 Detinitions Applicable to A
A A
- Overpressure Protection Devices 7300 Overpressure Protection keport A
A NA (C1. lig Analysis (C1. 2) 7400 kelieving capacity Requirements A
A A
and Acceptable Types of Overpressure Protection Devices 7500 Set Pressures of Pressure Helief A
A A
Devices 7600 Operating Design Hequirements for A
A A
Pressure kellef Valves 7700 kequirements Cor Nunreclosing A
A A
Pressure Relief Devices 7800 Certitication Huquirements A
A A
7900 Marking, Stamping, and keports A
A A
8000 NAMEPLATES, STAMPING, AND REACkTS 8100 General A
A A
t Ik..
Table A2-4 (Cont.)
!="
Correnhonding
-lE Article
- Class Class Class Signi-Article in Q
Subarticle De is:r ipt ios.
I 2
1 ficant ASME VIII (1965)
Rema r k s or
/g 10 MANDA10RY APPENDICES gg In Design Stress intensity Values, A
A A
A Subsection C Fatigue Curves I
not included in gg Allowable Stresses, Nterial Sect. VIII O
Properties, and Design Fatigue Curves A
A A
Emperimental Stress Analysis 111 Basis for Establishing Design A
A A
A Appesklices P60 Stress Intensity Values arw1 Allowable Stress Values A
A A
IV Approval of New N terials Under the ASME Boiler asal Pressure Vessel p
,e Cdle for Section III Application m
V Certificate Holder's Data Heport A
A A
3 Forms and Application Forms for certificates of Authorization for Use of Code Symbol Stamps VI Rounded Irklications Charts A
A A
VII Charts for Determinisq Shell A
A A
UG-28 & Appendix V Thickness of Cylindrical and Spherical Components Under External Pressure XI Rules for bolted Flange NA A
A Appendix II Connections for Class 2 and 3 Components asal Class MC Vessels X11 Design Considerations for bolted A
A A
A NA Flasse Connections X111 Design habed on Stress Analysis HA A
NA for Vessels Designed in Accordance with NC-3200 XIV Design habed on Fatigue Analysis NA A
NA for Vessels Designed in Accordance with NC-3200 m
4
1 o
e f
Past Class C vessels were built in accordance with the requirements of and (1965), except for inspection and the longitudinal (Category A)
ASME VIII Past circumferential (Category B) welding requirements noted in Section 4.3.
Class C vessels could be classified in accordance with current requirements or Class 3 (Quality Group C).
j (1) as either Class 2 (Quality Group B) i l
2.4 PUMPS See Section 4.4 of this appendix.
2.5 VALVES See Section 4.5 of this appendix.
2.6 HEAT EXCHANGERS Heat exchangers were usually designed to the ASME Boiler and Pressure vessel Code,Section III,1965 Edition (3), and Section VIII (51, which are discussed in Sections 2.3 and 4.3 of this appendix, and to the Standards of 1959 Edition [8).
the Tubular Exchanger Manufacturers Association (TEMA),
f Discussions regarding TEMA may be found in Section 4.6 of this appendix.
2.7 STORAGE TANKS Storage tanks that must withstand pressures above atmospheric were usually designed to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, 1965 Edition (3), which is discussed in Sections 2.3 and 4.3 of this appendix.
Aluminum tanks might have been designed to " USA Standard Specification for l
Welded Aluminum-Alloy Field-Erected Storage Tanks," USAS B96.1-1967 (9].
i i
Storage tanks were also designed to the American Petroleum Institute (API)
+
\\
USAS B96.1 and API-650 are discussed in Standard 650 (10], 1964 Edition.
l Section 4.7 of this appendix.
4
-- -- _ Center nklin Research
f a
g,
[7 s
E a 5'
'$a b
Table A2-4 (Cont.)
y 13 Correa$onding Q
Article
- Class Class Class Signi-Article in or Subarticle De ser ipt ion 1
2 3
ficant ASNS Vill (1965) memark e XVI Nondestructive Examination A
A A
O Nethods Applicable to Core Support Structures XVII Design of Linear Type Supports by A
A A
O Linear Elastic and Plastic Analysis l>
a tJ 4
Not44At4DA10RY APPENDICES A
A NA NA in Owner's Design Specification A
A A
C Certificate Holder's Stress Report A
NA NA D
Nonmandatory Preheat Procedures A
A A
B Ninimum Bolt Cross-Section Area A
NA NA F
Rules for Evaluation of Level D A
A A
A NA Service Limits G
Protection Against Nonductile Failure A A
A A
NA H
Capacity Conversions for Class 3 NA NA A
Safety Valves J
Owner's Design Specifications for A
NA NA O
Core Support Structure K
Hecommended Nazimum Deviations and A
A A
O Tolerances for Component Supports O
1
{
3.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS f
I l
Nuclear components and systems for SEP " Group I" plants were designed in accordance with the following codes:
i 1.
ASME III (1965) - Class A or Class C vessels 2.
ASME VIII (1965) - Vessels 3.
B31.1 (1955) and ASME I (1965) - Piping and Valves 4
TEMA (1959) - Heat Exchangers 5.
ASA B16.5 (1961) - Steel Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings 6.
Hydraulic Institute Standards (1965) - Pumps 7.
USAS B96.1 (1967) - Aluminum Field Erected Storage Tanks 8.
API 650 (1964) - Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage Current requirements are centained in the following:
j 9.
ASME III (1977) - Div.1 Nuclear Components 10.
ANSI B16.34 (1977) - Steel Valves The following broad conclusions can be made regarding components built to past codes and evaluated against current requirements:
1.
components currently classified as Class 3 would satisfy basic current requirements 2.
components currently classified as Class 1 or Class 2 may possibly not satisfy current fracture toughness and full radiography requirements 3.
piping currently classified as Class 1 would satisfy current requirements except possibly high cycle fatigue, fracture toughness, t
I and full radiography requirements. Piping currently classified as class 2 may not satisfy current fracture toughness and full radiography requirements.
The following is recommended:
1.
Component materials should be evaluated for fracture toughness as l
i described in Section 4.1.1 of this Appendix.
2.
Standard class rated valves should be carefully checked against current pressure-temperature ratings.
3.
Atmospheric and 0 to 15 psig storage tanks should be carefully reviewed against current requirements.
I i
4.
Unless Code Case N-7 to B31.1 has been invoked, Class 1 and 2 piping j
should be checked to see if full radiography of welded joints was specified.
I l
~
i l
A-29 l
.ggg,
.;.J Franklin Research Center
- cm.oa.# m r mm
-~
9 4.
COMPARISON OF SIGNIFICANT CURRENT CODE REQUIREMENTS AND PAST REQUIREMENTS f
1 4.1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS I
Section 4.1 compares the significant general requirements of the current l
code (1) with past requirements. In addition, where feasible, an approach is formulated which f acilitates the review of nuclear components and systems designed and built in accordance with past requirements to be evaluated from the viewpoint of current requirements. The general requirements discussed herein are fracture toughness, quality assurance, quality group classification, and code stress limits.
4.1.1 Fracture Toughness Requirements Class 1 Components The current code requires that pressure-retaining materials for Class 1 i
- by the drop weight test components shall be impact tested to determine TNDT and RT
- by the Charpy V-Notch test, except for materials whose nominal g
thickness is 7/8 in or less; bolts 1 in or less; bars with nominal sectional area 1 sq in or less; pipes, fittings, pumps, and valvos with nominal pipe size 6 in or less; austenitic stainless steels; and non-ferrous materials.
required for martensitic high alloy chromium (Series Drop weight tests are not 4xx) and pr'ecipitation-hardening steels listed in Appendix I (le); however, otner requirements of NB-2332 (lb) do apply.
I Class 2 Components s'
Pressure-retaining materials for Cl;2ss 2 components are required to be Also impact tested with exceptions as outlined for Class 1 components.
exempted are commonly used plate, forging, and casting materials listed in j
Table NC-2311(a)-1 of Reference ic when used in Class 2 components whose
}
service temperature (LST)
- exceeds the tabulated nil ductility I
lowest transition temperature (TET) by at least the thickness-dependent value A,
- See Table A4-1 for definitions of commonly used terms and symbols.
4 A-30 N
LO Franklin Research Center 1-
= om.on om. 9.nnan emu.
j.
i l
For determined f rom the curve in Figure NC-2311(a)-1 f rom Reference lc.
a convenience, the table and the figure are reproduced as Table A4-2 and Figure A'4-1, respectively. Materials for components whose LST exceeds 150*F are also exempt f rom impact testing.
Drop weight tests are not reqaired for martensitic high alloy (Series and precipitation-hardening steels listed in Appendix I of Reference le.
4xx)
Charpy V-Notch testing or alternative testing as described in NC-2331 (ic]
For nominal wall thicknesses applies for these steels in all thicknesses.
greater than 2.5 in, the required C values shall be 40 mils lateral expansion.
1 l
l
}
}
+
t A-31 4
Md Franklin Researc,h Center
% w ne r, i.n. u.
s l
l Table A4-1 Definition of Commonly Used Fracture Toughness Terms and Symbols Definition Symbol A temperature at or above the nil ductility temperature as TNDT
' determined by a " break, no-break" drop weight test in j
accordance with ASDt E208.
(The nil ductility temperature is j
that temperature above which cleavage fracture can be j
initiated only after appreciable plastic flow at the base of the notch and below which cleavage will be initiated with is 10*F below little evidence of notch ductility.) TNDT the temperature at which at least two specimens show no-break performance.
i The higher of TNDT or (T
- 60*F).
RTNDT ey at which three specimens made and T
A temperature above TNDT ey tested in accordance with SA-370 Charpy V-Notch testing exhibit at least 35 mils lateral expansion and not less than 50 f t-lb absorbed energy.
LST Lowest Service Temperatures the minimum temperature of the fluid retained by the component or the calculated minimum metal temperature expected during normal operation whenever j
the pressure within the component exceeds 20% of the preoperational system hydrostatic test pressure.
4 i
1 I
i i
h i
t A-32 N
I Franklin Researcn Center
- h d "* F= **aa 2
1
1 l
Table A4-2 t
TABLE NC-2311(a) 1 EXEMPTIONS FROM IMPACT TESTING UNDER NC-2311(a)-8 Material 7,,,adeg.F Material' Conditiona t
i SA-537-Class 1 N
-30 SA-516-Grade 70 Q&T
-10 SA.516-Grade 70 N
0 SA-508-Class 1 Q&T
+10 SA.533-Grade B Q&T
+10 SA-299*
N
+20 SA-216, Grades Q&T
+30 WCB,WCC SA-36 (Plate)
+40 SA-508-C ass 2 Q&T
+40 NOTES:
(1) These materials are exemot from toughness testing when A or LST T.oris acove the curve in Fg. NC-2311(a)-1, for the thickness as defined in NC 2331 or NC.2332.
(2) Material Condition letters refer to:
N. Normalize Q & T - Quench and Temper HR - Het Rolled
- 13) These values for T.or were established from data on heavy section steel (thickness greater than 2% in.). Values for sections less than 2% in. thick are held constant until additional data is 4
obtained.
i (4) Materials mace to a fine grain metting practice.
I f
I 4
6 A-33 JCJ Franidin Research Center e
'd a o ca as n. r a.nn in.oiwie
i 6
j I
s 1
1
\\
n-l 4
W g
-l 3
'?
+<
=.
w a.
a o
s y
>=
WP
+
=
w W
Q M
a b
M 9
w 3
i.
oa W
e5 a
=
i E
e-m 3
1 a
2 2
a A
=w 2
I o
1 wo a
zo 3
G i
z 6
1=W C
o n
.';;i.
A i
o i
z r
d i
c e
l 1
2 8
8 S
?
a2 i
i
- d 'S*p '((20N23_ (1333j. y Figure A4-1 A-34 O, ~
Jdd Franklin Research Center 4 % orn r - m an.
s
r Class 3 Components s.
Pressure-retaining materials for Class 3 components are required to be tested, except as outlined for Class 1 components and the materials listed in Table ND-2311-1 (ld) in the thicknesses shown when the LST for the component is at er above the taculated temperature. For convenience, Table ND-2311-1 nas been reproduced as Table A4-3.
In addition, materials for components for whien the LST exceeds 100*F are exempt from impact testing.
The evaluation of materials based on past codes for which fracture toughness requirements may not have been specified or limited is facilitated by the survey forms shown as Tables A4-4, A4-5, and A4-6 for Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3 components or systems, respectively.
I Example Tables A4-2 through A4-6 and Figure A4-1 will be used to evaluate the resistance to brittle fracture of components whose design is based on past codes for which impact testing may not have been required. The following is an example of how the tables and the figure will be used.
Consider the 42-in primary pipe line between the reactor vessel and steam generator in the Palisades plant. These pipes were fabricated from 3.75-in-thick ASTH 516, Grade 70 plate with a rolled bond 1/4-in nominal cladding of 304L stainless steel. The design temperature is 650*F.
The safety injection system is designed to cool the primary system to 130*F in 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> with a maximum pressure of 270 psig as noted in Reference 11.
The LST is taken as 130*F.
From Table A4-3, T g = 0*F for SA-516 Grada 70.
From Figure A4-1, A = 48* for material 3.75 in thick:
(LST - TNDT) = 13 0 * - 0 * = 13 0
- F > 48'F = A so that this material, if it were a Class 2 or 3 component, would be exempt from impact testing. The fact that the primary coclant piping is Class 1 would not exempt it from impact testing based on present code requirements. However, the fact that the LST exceeds the TNDT by more than 150% of A allows us to conclude that the primary coolant piping i
material used in the construction of the Palisades plant is adequate, provided that exposure to radiation does not induce an increase of the NDT sufficient to require the fracture mechanics approach outlined in T
Appendix G [4e].
In this regard, note that paragraph NB-2332(b) [lb]
indicates that if the LST exceeds the reference nil ductility transition temperature (RTNDT) by 100*F, then the fracture mechanics approach of Appendix G is not required. In this examples (LST - TNDT) = 130*F > 100*F so that tne material for the Palisades primary coolant piping is considered adequate.
i mW f3 e
uJ Frankhn Research C. enter a cum a w w n
.n
(
Table A4-3 i
i i
TABLE ND.23111 EXEMPTIONS FROM IMPACT TESTING UNDER ND.2311(a)(8) 1 Lowest Service Temperature for the Thickness Shown Over % in.
Over % in.
Over 1 in.
Over 1% in.
to % in, incl to 1 in., incl.
to 1% in., inct.
to 2% in., incl.
Material (Over 16 mm (Over 19 mm (Over 25 mm (Over 38 mm Material Condition' to 19 mm, inci.)
to 25 mm, incl.)
to 38 mm, inct.)
to 64 mm, incl.)
SA 516 Grade 70 N
-30 F (-34 C)
-20 F (-29 C) 0 F (-18 C) 0 F (-18 C)
SA.537 Class 1 N
-40 F (-40 C)
-30 F (-34 C)
-30 F (-34 C)
-30 F (-34 C)
SA 516 Grade 70 Q&T (2)
(2)
(2)
-10 F (-23 C)
SA.508 C! ass 1
.Q&T (2)
(2)
(2) 10 F (-12 C)
SA 50s Class 2 Q&T (2)
(2)
(2) 40 F (4 C)
SA 533 Grade 38 Q&T (2)
(2)
(2) 10 F (-12 C)
Class 1 SA 216 Graces Q&T (2)
(2)
(2) 30 F (-1 C)
(2)
(2)
(2) 20 F (-7 C)
NOTES:
(1) Material Condition letters ref er to:
N - Normalize Q & T - Cuenen and Temcer (2) The icwest service temperature shown in the cotumn "Over 1% In. to 2% in.** may be used for these thicknesses.
(3) Material made to a fine grain melting practice.
.i 1
I t
a A-36
..t.') Franklin Research Center ac w w rr.n.n -
Table A4-4 1
Evaluation for Fracture Toughness of Pressure-Retaining Material for Class 1 Component / System Nuclear Power Plant FSAR Page f
I.
Component / System Data I
1.
Description of Component / System:
2.
Material Description and Thickness: P No.
'F 3.
Design Temperature:
4.
Design Pressures psi 5.
Lowest Service Temperature (LST) :
'F 6.
Pre ssure at LST:
psi 7.
Fracture Toughness Requirement? Yes No II.
Evaluation Material is exempt (
from impact testing because:
8.
(a) Nominal thickness 5/8 in or less (b) Bolts 1 in or thinner Bars with nominal 1 sq in cross section or less (c)
(d) Pipes, fittings, pumps, and valves, nominal pipe size of 6-in diameter or smaller I
i I
NOTES:
l l
1.
Lowest Service Temperature (LST) is the minimum temperature of the l
fluid retained by the component or, alternatively, the calculated j
minimum metal temperature whr.never the pressure within the component exceeds 20% of the preoperational system hydrostatic test pressure
[1].
i i
2.
Welding material used to join materials with ? Nos. 1,3,4,5,6,7, 9, and 11, which are exempt from impact testing because of 8 (a) through 3(f), is likewise exempt from impact testing. However, or the exemption 9 does not exempt either the weld metal (NB-2430) welaing procedure qualification (NB-4335) from impact testing. See i
paragraph NB-2431 of Reference Ib.
The current code does not exempt Class 1 components from impact f
3.
testing on the basis of tabulated TNDT and A values as it does Item 9 is not an exemption listed in paragraph Class 2 components.
for Class 2 l
NB-2311 but a conservative adaptation of NC-2311(a) (8) components to f acilitate the SEP review.
i A-37 O
ULbnklin Research Center A Des.on of The Frarwen insomme
'}
J e
Table A4-4 (Cont. )
}
(e) Austenitic stainless steel (f)
Non-ferrous material
]
Fracture toughness of material ( '
9.
4 l
appear s does not appear i
to be adequate on the basis of the following evaluation:
for material other than bolting and up to 2-1/2 in thick:
(a)
- E TNDT *
(See Table NC-2211(a)-1)
(
Other reference usedI4):
)
- and,
=
'F which exceeds 90*F (LST - TNDT) which does not exceed 90*F for material other than bolting in excess of 2-1/2 in thick:
(b)
'F f
RTNDT =
(Reference usedI4):
)
e
- and,
'F which exceeds 120*F (LST - RTNDT)
=
which does not exceed 120*F gJting material in excess of 1-in diameter, reference i
10.
For data has been available has not been available and found to satisfy not satisfy the raquirements of NB-2333 (4(b)]
11.
Fracture toughness cannot be evaluated because of insuf ficient information.
1 5
Material is not exempt from impact testing.
12.
J 1i NOTE:
When using references other than the current code to obtain TNDT and 4.
RTNDT, be sure that the data have been obtained f rom specimens whose condition matches the material being evaluated (e.g., normalized or quenched and tempered) and that have designation such as "SA-516 Gr. 70".
A-38 O
dbnklin Research. Center a w es n r-u
Table A4-4 (Cont.)
I j
III.
Conclusions l
l Fracture toughness appears to be adequate.
Adequacy of f racture toughness not establishedt request supplemental test data and supporting documents.
3 Welding material is is not exempt from impact testing on l
the basis of foregoing data and Note 2.
i i
i l
4 l
l t
i i
t
(
i A-39 jhu Franklin Research Center A W of The Franeninsense l
.I
---,u_
~-
Table A4-5 Evaluation for Fracture Toughness of Pressure-Retaining Material for Class 2 Component / System Nuclear Power Plant i
l l
FSAR Page i
i I.
Component / System Data 1
-)
1.
Description of Component / System:
2.
Material Description and Thickness: P No.
- F 3.
Design Temperature:
4.
Design Pre ssures psi III 5.
Lowest Service Temperature (LST) :
'F 6.
Pressure at LST:
psi 7.
Fracture Toughness Requirement? Yes No II.
Evaluation II 8.
Material is exempt from impact testing because:
(a) Nominal thickness 5/8 in or less (b) Bolts 1 in or thinner Bars with nominal 1 sq in cross section or less (c)
Pipes, fittings, pumps, and valves, nominal pipe size of (d) 6-in diameter or smaller (e) Austenitic stainless steel (f) Non-ferrous material NOTES:
j 1.
Lowest Service Temperature (LST) is the minimum temperature of the fluid retained by the component or, alternatively, the calculated l
minimum metal temperature whenever the pressure within the component
}
exceeds 20% of the preoperational system hydrostatic test pressure 1
[1].
t j
2.
Welding material used to join materials with P Nos. 1,3,4,5,6,7, 9, and 11, which are exempt from impact testing because of 8(a) t l
through 8(f), or 8(h), is likewise exempt from testing. However, or the i
8(g) exemption does not exempt either the weld metal (NC-2430) l weld procedure qualification (NC-4335) from impact testing. See paragraph NC-2431 of Reference ic.
r A-40 m
tEJ Franklin Researc.h.C. enter a o==a v n r
Table A4-5 (Cont.)
i r
?
LST of material listed in Table NC-2311(a)-1 (see Table i
(g)
A4-2) exceeds TNDT by at least "A" (A depends on thickne ss). (2)
LST
- F (from FSAR)
- F (Table NC-2311(a)-1, Summer 1977 Addenda)
TNDT A
'F (Figure NC-2311(a)-1, Summer 1977 Addenda)
(Reproduced on p.
)
'F is is riot greater than A.
LST - TNDT =
(h)
LST exceeds 150*F.
Fracture toughness cannot be evaluated because of insufficient 9.
information.
10.
Material is not exempt from impact testing.
III. Conclusions f
Fracture toughness appears to be adequate.
Adequacy of fracture toughness not established reque st supplemental test data and supporting documents.
Welding material is is not exempt from impact testing on the basis of foregoing data and Note 2.
e i
i A-41 kW Franklin Re. search Center 4 % w n Fr.n
i Table A.4-6 4
Evaluation for Fracture Toughness of Pressure-Retaining Material for Class 3 Component / System Nuclear Power Plant i
FSAR Page I.
Component / System Data 4
1.
Description of Component / System:
2.
Material Description and Thickness: P No.
- F 3.
Design Temperature:
4.
Design Pressures psi 5.
Lowe st Service Temperature
-(LST):
'F 6.
Pressure at LST:
psi 7.
Fracture Toughness Requirement? Yes No a
II.
Evaluation 8.
Material is exempt from impact testing because:
(a) Nominal thickness 5/8 in or less (b) Bolts 1 in or thinner (c) Bars with nominal 1 sq in cross section or less (d) Pipes, fittings, pumps, and valves, nominal pipe size of 6-in diameter or smaller (e) Austenitic stainless steel (f)
Non-ferrous material NOTES:
1.
Lowest Service Temperature (LST) is the minimum temperature of the fluid retained by the component or, alternatively, the calculated minimum metal temperature whenever the pressure within the component exceeds 20% of the preoperational system i
i hydrostatic test pressure [1].
i Welding material used to join materials with P Nos.1, 3, 4, 5,
)
2.
6, 7, 9, and 11, which are exempt f rom impact testing because of 8(a) through 8 (f), or 8 (h), is likewise exempt from testing.
However, exemption 8(g) does not exempt either the weld metal (NC-2430) or the weld procedure qualification (NC-4335) from impact testing. See paragraph NC-2431 of Reference ld.
A-42 MJ Fracidin Research Center
- ow on ce n. Fr.n.na wwnui.
I
i 1
Table A4-6 (Cont.)
in Table NC-2311(a)-1 for the LST equals or exceeds TNDT (g) material and thickness being evaluated. (2)
(h) LST exceeds 100*F.
Fracture toughness cannot be evaluated because of insufficient 9.
informatica.
10.
Material is not exempt from impact testing.
III.
Conclusions Fracture toughness appears to be adequate.
Adequacy of fracture toughness not established; request supplemental test data and supporting documents.
Welding material is is not exempt from impact testing on the basis of foregoing data and Note 2.
1 i
A-43 d Franklin Research. Center a cm.on w n. re.n n
~
I 4.1.2 Quality Assurance Requirements The current code (11 requires that activities in connection with the design and construction ( ' of ASME III nuclear power plant components and systems be performed in accordance with a quality assurance program that 3
The provides adequate confidence in compliance with the rules of Section III.
program is to be planned, documented, controlled, managed, and evaluated in j
I3I for Class 1 and 2 items, and in accordance with Article NCA-4000 I3I i
accordance with NCA-4135(3) and NCA-8122 for Class 3 items. The l
quality assurance program is to be established and documented prior to the I
issuance of a Certificate of Authorization by the American Society of i'
Mechanical Engineers af ter the program has been evaluated and accepted by the l
society.
For Class 1 and 2 items, the program is to be documented in detail in a quality assurance manual which should include policies, procedures, and instructions which demonstrate provisions fer:
an ' organization with sufficient authority, freedom, and independence a.
from cost and schedule considerations to:
s.
1.
identify quality problems '
2.
initiate, recommend, or provide solutions 3.
verify implementation of solutions 4.
limit and control further work on nonconforming items until proper disposition, and with direct access to appropriate levels of management to assure proper execution of the program b.
indoctrination and training of qualified personnel notification of the authorized inspection agency of significant c.
l changes in the program t
l
)
l
(
1.
Quality assurance requirements have been determined to be outside the scope of SEP Topic III-l according to the letter fecm S. Bajwa to S. Carfagno dated December 10, 1981. This discussion is provided as general j
information.
}
2.
Construction under Division 1 includes materials, design, fabrication, examination, testing ~,' installation, ' inspection, and certification.
3.
See Summer 1977 and Summer 1978 Addenda to ASME III (1977) General Requirements.
A-44
i d.
control of the design to assure compliance with the design specification of Section III design review and checking by individuals or groups other than those e.
who performed the original design f.
documentation for procurement of materials and subcontracted services requiring compliance witn Section III document control with provisions for review of changes g.
h.
identification and traceability of materials 1.
the control of construction processes examination, testing, and inspections verifying the quality of work l
j.
by persons indepencent from supervisors immediately responsible for the work being inspected, and using measuring and test equipment calibrated against measurement standards traceable to national standards (wnere such standards exist) at intervals sufficient to maintain accuracy within necessary limits proper handling, storage, shipping, and preservation of materials and k.
components 1.
identification of items with suitable marking to indicate the status of examinations and tests, including conformance or non-conformance to the examination and test requirements m.
prompt identification and corrective action of significant conditions adverse to quality, with documented measures to preclude repetition maintenance of quality assurance records as specified in NCA-4134.17 n.
of Reference 1, including maintaining for the life of the plant as a minimum, the following: a permanent record file, certified design and construction specifications, drawings and reports, data reports, certified stress reports, certified as built drawings, material test i
reports, non-destructive examination reports, and test treatment reports a comprehensive system of planned and periodic audits with o.
documentation of results, follow-up action, and re-audit of deficient areas.
Class 3 items are to be designed and constructed in accordance with the quality' control requirements of NCA-4135 of Reference 1, wnich include:
an organization chart which reflects the actual organization a.
b.
a quality control system suitable to the complexity of the work and size of the organization A-45 Os Mbnklin Researen Center m at w m u.nane
_ _ _ ~ _ _ _.
l persons who perform quality control functions with sufficient c.
j responsiblity, authority, and independence to implement the quality identify problems, and initiate, recommend, and control system, provice solutions.
The quality control system for Class 3 construction is evaluated for i
compliance with the requirements of Section III (1) by the authorized inspection agency and either a representative of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers or the jurisdictional authority at the construction site j
-l as required by NCA-8122. If the jurisdictional authority also performs duties as an authorized inspection agency, a representative of the National Board of I,
Boiler and Pressure vessel Inspectors or a representative of the facility will part.cipate in the evaluation.
4 If jurisdictional laws do not require inspection or permit inspection personnel to participate in the evaluation of the quality control system, then the evaluation will be performed by a representative of the National Board or the Society.
Past codes did not provide for a quality assurance program for Class 1 2
and 2 construction, nor for a quality assurance system for Class 3 construc-tion, as required by the current code. Although an integrated program or system was not required by past codes, many quality assurance featt'res were.
required.
Although the program or system was not specifically required, neverthe-less, construction organizations typically did operate under "in-house" quality assurance programs which provided for the inspection, testing, and surveillance of components and construction activities.
Design organizations did not typically operate under an integrated Two nuclear plants were reviewed by the author as part of the design program.
adequacy task of the Reactor Saf ety Study.*
Approximately 20% of the items reviewed for one plant either did not fully couply with the FSAR criteria or were not adequately documented for assessment. Similarly, 40% of the items examined for the other plants could not demonstrate full compliance with FSAR criteria.
- Appenalx X to the " Reactor Saf ety Study - An Assessment of Accident Risks in U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants," WASH-1400, USAEC, Draf t August 1974.
2 A-46
?@
MJ Franklin Research Center
. cm.o., am. e.n a mana.
It is recommended that the quality assurance program used in both the design and construction phases for each SEP plant Class 1 and 2 item should be compared with the current requirements previously outlined. If the comparison shows a weak or non-existent program with desi7n and/or construction phases, then the operating history of the plant should be examined to determine the frequency and origin of incidents in which the pressure boundary has been breached.
If subsequent repairs or replacement of the breached boundary have not provided a permanent fix, then it is reasonable to conclude that a design deficiency exists. The following would then be recommended:
1.
a design review of the deficient area with design change recommendations a technical audit to determine design adequacy of selected Class 1 2.
and Class 2 items for the complete plant.
4.1.3 Quality Group Classifications (61 Nuclear power plant components are currently classified as Class 1, 2, 3, MC, or CS.
Class MC and CS are for metal containment vessels and core support structures and are outside the scope of this study. Current classification standards are as follows:
Quality Group A (Class 1)
A component of the reactor coolant pressure boundary is currently designated as a Class 1 component.
Quality Group B (Class 2)
Components are currently designated as Class 2 provided that:
1 They are not part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary, but part 1.
of:
i emergency core cooling systems, post-accident heat removal a.
systems, post-accident fission product removal reactor shutdown or residual heat removal systems o.
A-47 fSis toi.%nklin Research Center
%ca as n. r-n wi m.a,..
BWR main steam components described in Reference 2:
I c.
main steam line from second isolation valve to turbine stop valve main steam line branch lines to f acst valve main turbine bypass line to bypass valve first valve in branch lines connected to either main steam lines or turbine bypass lines d.
PWR steam generator steam and feedwater systems up to and including outermost containment isolation valves and connected j
piping up to and including the first valve that is normally closed or capable of automatic closure during normal reactor operation systems connected to the reactor coolant pressure boundary not e.
capable of being isolated f rom the boundary by two valves normally closed or capable of automatic closure during normal reactor operation.
They are part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary, but are not 2.
is not needed for designated as Class 1 because either the component.
safe shutdown of the reactor in the event of an a:cident or the component can Le isolated by two valves as described in footnote (2) of Section 50.55a of Reference 2.
Quality Group C (Class 3)
Class 3 components are not part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary, nor designated Class 2, but are part of:
1.
cooling water and auxiliary feedwater systems important to safety, such as emergency core cooling or post-accident heat removal 2.
cooling water and seal water systems that are designed for functioning of components important to safety, such as cooling water systems for reactor coolant pumps, diesels, and control room systems connected to the reactor coolant pressure boundary that are 3.
capable of being isolated from the boundary by two valves normally closed or capaele of automatic closure dur ing normal operation l
systems not previously defined, other than radioactive waste 4.
systems that contain or may contain radioactive material, management and wnose postulated failure would potentially result in off-site doses that exceed 0.5 rem.
A-48 g
MU Franklin Research Center
- >.aa as m r,
Comparison with Past Codes The past 'B31.1 (1955) piping code does not designate quality classes for piping or valves.III Comparison of the component classification designa-tions in the FSAR with the standards previously described for each SEP plant is required before a comparison with current code requirements can be l
initiated.
I The past pressure vessel code, ASME III (1965), designates Class A vessels which are essentially equivalent to currently designated Class 1 vessel. Class B vessels designated in accordance with the past code would currently oe classified as MC vessels, which are outside the scope of this review. Previously designated Class C or ASME Section VIII vessels may be currently classified as Class 2 or Class 3 vessels. vessels previously classified as Class C but currently classified as Class 2 should be evaluated carefully against current Class 2 requirements such as the quality assurance program.
4.1.4 Code Stress Limits Strength Theories Past codes (4,5], except ASME III (1965) for Class A vessels, have been based on the assumption that inelastic behavior begins when the maximum principal stress reaches the yield point of the material, S. It has been commonly accepted that both the maximum shear stress theory (Tresca criterion) and the maximum distortion energy theory (Mises criterion) are much better than the maximum principal stress assumption in predicting yielding and fatigue failure in ductile metals. Although most experiments show that the Mises criterion is more accurate than the maximum shear stress theory, the present code [1] uses the maximum shear stress theory of strength for Class 1 components because (1) it is more conservative, (2) it is easier to apply, and II (3) it facilitates fatigue analysis. Class 2 and Class 3 components continue to be designed in accordance with the maximum principal stress assumption.
1.
Code Case N-1 classifies piping into two categorie<. nuclear piping, designed to contain a fluid whose loss from the system could result in a radiation nazard to either the plant personnel or the general public; and conventional steam and service non-nuclear piping.
2.
Except for Class 2 vessels designed in accordance with the alternative i
rules of NC-3200.
A-49 4
d Franklin Research Center
= o.m.on or ne re.n a i,.inie t
~ ^ '
7, then If the principal stresses at a point are 01) og >
3 yielding occurs i
whens (1/2) Sy Taum = (1/2) (at - e3)
=
according to the maximum shear stress theory. For convenience, the present code uses the teta " stress intensity," which is defined ass 2Tmax = the largest algebraic difference between any of 1
two of the three pri.ncipal stresses.
I Example _: Consider a thin-walled cylindrical pressure vessel or pipe, away from any discontinuities and subjected to an internal pressure, p, The three which induces a hoop stress a and an axial stress 1/2a.
principal stresses in descending magnitude would be 03a a 12 = (1/2)c 03 = -p According to the current code, the " stress intensity" is:
4 (a + p)
(al - a3)
=
which together with the stress limit controls the design. According to past codes, the design would be controlled by the maximum stress together with the stress limits used in the past codes.
i Stress Categories The current code recognizes the advances in computer-aided structural analysis capability which enable a more comprehensive and detailed determina-tion of stress and strain fields, in both the elastic and plastic states due to thermal as well as mechanical loads, gross structural discontinuities, and j
local structural discontinuities such as small holes and fillet radii.
l l
Accordingly, the current code recognizes various stress categories defined in III NB-3213 of Reference Ib and briefly summarized as follows:
I 1.
Primary Stresses Any normal or shear stress induced by an imposed load which is necessary to satisfy equilibrium between the external and internal 1.
See Figure NB-3222-1 (lb].
I l
LJ Franklin Research Center m
- a. r-I
forces and moments. A primary stress is not self-limiting. The l
existence of primary stresses in excess of the yield strength across the thickness of the material will result in failure due to gross inhibited only by the strain hardening i
distortion or rupture, characteristics of the material. Primary stresses are further categorized as a.
General Membrane Stress. The average primary stress across a solid section excluding the effects of grors and local discontinuitie s.
The six stress components associated with a primary general membrane stress are symbolized by Pm*
b.
Local Membrane Stress. The average stress across any solid section induced by a combination of mechanical loading and gross discontinuity which may produce excessive distortion when transferring the load from one portion of the structure to
- another, e.g., in the crotch region of a piping tee due to internal pressure. The stress components associated with a primary local membrane stress are symbolized by P.
L c.
Bending Strens. That component of a primary stress which is proportional to the distance from the centroid of a solid section, excluding effects of gross and local structural discontinuities, e.g., the bending stress across the thickness of the central region of a flat head of a vessel due to internal The stress components associated with a primary ore ssure.
bending stress are symbolized by P '
b 2.
Secondary Stresses Secondary stress is a normal or shear stress induced by an imposed strain field necessary to satisfy compatibility and continuity l
requ.irements within the structure. Secondary stresses are I
"self-equilibrating" and limited by local yielding and minor distortions so that f ailure due to secondary stresses induced by the application of one load will not occur. Secondary stresses are further categorized as follows:
a.
Secondarv Expansion Stresses.
Induced by the constraint of free such end displacements due to gross structural discontinuities, as the stresses in a piping element of hot piping system whose l
j ends are constrained; does not apply to vessels. The stress components of the expansion stress are symbolized by P.
e b.
Secondarv Memorane and Bendine Stress. Occurring at gross structural discontinuities and caused by mechanical loads, pressure, or differential thermal expansion, symbolized by Q.
l i
i A-51
@r.::
i
$2 Franklin Research Center
% e n. rm u.
I i
3.
Peak Stresses Peak stresses are induced by local discontinuities such at notches or thermal loads in which the expansion is completely suppressed, such as the local thermal expansion coefficient of the austenitic steel cladding of a carbon steel component.
i i
l Code Stress Limits for Material Other Than Bolting Class 1 Components i
Current code stress limits depend on the code class and service levels being considered. Design stress intensity values, S,, for Class 1 compo-nents are given in Tables I-1.1 and I-1.2 of Appendix I of Reference le for ferritic and austenitic steels, respectively. For materials other than bolting, the design stress intensity value S s essentially the lower of m
at design temperature for ferritic steels.I I For 1/3 (UTS) or 2/3 (YS) austenitic steels, S, is the lower of 1/3 (UTS) or 0.9 YS at design tempera-ture or 2/3 (YS) at room temperature.I I Assuming that S, is essentially the lower of 1/3 (UTS) or 2/3 (YS),
then the stress limits for the various service level loads and stress category combinations for materials other than bolting may be summarized as follows:
1.
Design Condition (See Figure NB-3221-1 (lb])
Stress Category Limit of Stress Intensity Primary Stresses Tabulated YS UTS 4
]
P, S,
1 2/3 (YS) j, l/3 (UTS)
P 1.5 S,
1YS 11/2 (UTS) 1.5 S, 1YS 11/2 (UTS)
P
+P b
1 1.
See III-2110 (a) of Reference le.
2.
See III-2110(b) of Reference le.
A-52
$~
ALU Franklin Research Center A Chwan of The Frannha inscrute
2.
Level A and B Service (Operating and Upset Conditions)
(See Fig. NB-3222-1 (1b])
Limit of Stress Intensity Stress Categor,r (a) Expansion Stress Intensity Tabulated YS UTS Pe (not for vessels) 3 Sm f.2 YS 5,UTS (b) Primary and Secondary (1)
PL + T'b + P, + Q 3 Sm
$2 YS f,UTS (c) Peak f, tresses (2) g3)
PL+Pb + P, + Q + F S
(See fatigue curves, a
Fig. I-9.0, Reference le) 3.
Level A and B Service Limits for Cyclic Operation (NB-3222.4)
Unless the analysis for cyclic service is not required by NB-3222.4(d)(1) through NB-3222-4 (d) (6) [1], the ability of the component to withstand cylic service without fatigue failure shall be demonstrated by satisfying the requirements of NB-3222.4(e) as follows:
Determine the stress difference and the alternating stress intensity, a.
Sa, for each condition of normal service.
b.
Use stress concentration factors to account for local structural discontinuities, as determined by theoretical, experimental, photoelastic, or numerical stress analysis techniques. Experimental methods shall comply with Appendix II-1600, except for high strength alloy steel bolting, for which NB-3232.3(c) shall apply. The fatigue strength reduction factor shall not exceed 5, except for crack-like defects and for specified piping geometries given in NB-3680.
Design fatigue curves in Figure I-9.0 for the various materials shall c.
be used to determined the number of cycles Ni for a given alterna-The alternating stress determined ting stress value (Saltl i.
from the analysis should be multiplied by the ratio of the modulus of elasticity given on the design fatigue curve divided by the modulus l
of elasticity used in the analysis before entering the design fatigue curve.
L i
1.
3 Sm may be exceeded provided the conditions of NB-3228.3 are satisfied.
2.
For cyclic operation.
3.
2 Sa for full range of fluctuation.
l I
i A-53 I
.4% Franklin Research Center i
- cm on w n. re.a in.=iu.
i
\\
.i Cumulative usage for multiple stress cycles is be determined from d.
U = Sum of (M /N )
i i is the expected number of cycles associated with where Mi is the corresponding number of cycles from the (Salt)i and Ni The cumulative usage factor U shall not exceed design f atigue curve.
1.
i
-1 i
4.
Level C (Emergency Conditions)
(See Fig. NB-3224-1 (1b} }
Tvoe of Analysis Limit Stress Category Primary Stresses III Elastic 1.2 S or YS Pm (pressure and m
mechanical)
Pa (pressure - only 1.1 Sm or 0.9 YS(1)
Elastic for ferritic material) 1.8 Sm or 1.5 YS(1)
Elastic PL 0.8 (collapse load)
Limit 1.8 Sm or 1.5 YS(1)
Elastic PL+Pb 0.8 (collapse load)
Limit Triaxial Stresses (2) 4.8 Sm Evaluation not Secondary / Peak required Boltino Material Stress Limits - Class 1 Components (NB-3230)
Desian Conditions Pressure-retaining bolts are designed in accordar.ce with the procedures of Appendix E (le], which account for gasket materials and design as well as bolting material stress allowables given in Table I-1.3 of Reference le, which are based on the lower of:
'l/3 (YS) at room temperature 1/3 (YS) at design temperature (up to 800*F).
1.
Whichever is greater.
2.
Based on sum of primary principal stresses.
A-54 dh L3 Franidin Research C. enter 4 %.ca er n. r-u.
Level A, B, and C Service Limits (NB-3232)
Actual stresses in bolts produced by a combination of preload, pressure, and differential thermal expansion may exceed the allowables given in Table f
I-1.3 as indicated belows i
- a. Average stress (neglect',y 3ress concentrations) chall not exceed 2.
times the Table I-1.3 (le] values, (S )
i 2 (YS) b avg 3
- b. Maximum stress at bolt periphery (or maximum stress intensity if tightening method induces torsion) due to direct tension and bending shall not exceed 3 times the value given in Table I-1.3 (le],
(S )
1 (YS) b max Fatigue Analysis of Bolts Fatigue analysis of bolts is required unless all the conditions of NB-3222.41(d) [1] are satisfied. Suitability for cyclic service of bolts shall be determined as described in NB-3222.4 (e) and as follows (NB-3232.3):
a.
Use the design fatigue curve of Figure I-9.4 (1] using the appropriate' fatigue strength reduction f actor described in NB-3232.3 (c) for bolting having less than 100 ksi tensile strength.
b.
For high strength alloy bolts, use Figure I-9.4, provided that (1) the nominal stress due to tension and bending does not exceed 2.7 Sm for the upper curve or 3.0 Sm for the lower curve, (2) the minimum thread root radius is not less than 0.003 inches, and (3) the ratio of the shank fillet radius to the shank diameter is not less than 0.060.
l For bolting having less than 100 ksi tensile strength, use a fatigue c.
strength reduction factor of 4.0 unless a smaller factor can be justified by analysis or test. For high strength alloy bolts, use a fatigue strength reduction factor not less than 4.0.
l i
A-55 O-J'$U Franklin Research Center A Onneen of The Franen esutute
?
I
l Code Stress Limits - Class 2 and Class 3 Components Design Allowable Stress values III for Class 2 Design allowable stress values are given in Table I-7.0 and Class 3 and in Table I-8.0 for Class 3 component materials. These design i
allowable stress values are limits on maximum normal stresses rather than the l'
stress intensity values for Class 1 components.
1.
Ferritic Steel Non-Bolting Materials Design allowable stress S for Class 2 and 3 components as detailed in i
III-3200 [lel for ferritic steel non-bolting materials is the lowest of:
1/4 (UTS at room temperature) 1/4 (UTS at temperature) 2/3 (YS at room temperature) 2/3 (YS at temperature).
2.
Austenitic Steel Non-Bolting Materials The stress allowable for austenitic steels is the lowest of:
1/4 (UTS at room temperature) 1/4 (UTS at temperature) 2/3 (YS at room temperature) 0.9 (YS at room temperature).
3.
Bolting Materials Design stress allowables for bolting materials are based on the same criteria as for non-bolting materials, except that for heat-treated bolting i
j materials, the allowable shall be the lower of:
1 1/5 (UTS at room temperature) l 1/4 (YS at room temperature).
1.
Except for Class 2 vessels designed in accordance with the alternative design rules of NC-3200, where stress intensity limits are based on Table I-1.0, i.e.,
the same as for Class 1 components.
A-56
~
MJ Franklin Research Center
% o.non.mam j
l
.=
Level D (Faulted Condition) (Appendix F of Reference le) l The rules for evaluating level D service conditions are contained in Appendix F of Reference le.
Only limits on primary stresses are prescribed; thermal stresses are not considered. When compressive stresses are present, component stability must be assured. The potential for unstable crack growth should also be considered.
Component design limits on primary stress intensities for level D conditions depend on whether the system has been analyzed elastically or inelastically.
Ela stic System Analysis For an elastic system analysis, the component design limits for level D conditions permit plastic deformations based on loads or stresses determined by:
a.
Elastic Analysis:
in which the computed primary stress appears to exceed the YS by as much as 60% but remains within 70% of the UTS, except for piping in which the pressure does not exceed two times the design pressure, in which case the primary stress computed by Equation 9 of NB-3652 should not exceeed 3Sm (2 x YS).
Collapse Load Analysis:
in which the level D loads do not exceed 90%
b.
of the collapse load determined by either a lower bound limit (1) analysis (which assumes an elastic-perfectly plastic material), a plastic analysis which accounts for the strain-hardening characteristics of the material, or by experiment.
c.
Stress Ratio Analysis: which is a pseudo-elastic analysis method utilizing the techniques and curves given in Appendix A-9000 [le], in whicn the apparent stre ss(2) is limited to the lesser of 3 Sm or 0.7 S except when the methods of A-9000 (le] permit higher limits n
when the type of stress field is taken into account.
Inelastic System Analysis When a system is analyzed inelastically, the level D primary stress or load limits for components permit plastic deformation depending on the component analysis method as folicws:
i 1.
A load which is in equilibrium with a system of stresses which sati sfie s equilibrium everywhere, but nowhere exceeds the YS at or below the collapse load.
2.
Computed value of stress assuming elastic behavior.
A-57 SJ Franklin Researe.n Cen.ter A dm.a w n. ne..
I
. ~ - -.
1 l
a' in which the computed primary stress intensity is a.
Elastic Analysis:
limited to the greater of 0.7 UTS or YS + ((UTS - YS)/3),
i b.
Collapse Load Analvsis in which the load is limited to 90% of the collapse load. The collapse load may be determined by one of the three methods previously described, c.
Stress Ratio Analysis: as described previously.
d.
Plastic Instability Analysis in which a plasticity analysis is used to determine the load, Py for which the deformation increases or YS + (Sg - YS) /3
}
without bound. The load P is limited to 0.7 Pg is the true effective stress associated with plastic where SI instability.
Strain Limit Load Analysis: in which the load P is limited as e.
described in (d) but not to exceed Ps associated with a specified strain limit.
f.
Inelastic Analysis in wnich primary stress is limited as in (a).
Comparison with Pa st Codes The fundamental differences between current and past codes with regard to stress limits are ="mnarized as follows:
The current code for Class 1 items is based on the maximum shear 1.
stress theory of failure. ASME III (1965) is based on the same theory for Class A (equivalent to Class 1) ve ssels. B31.1 (1955) piping code is based on maximum normal stress theory of failure.
2.
The current ccde for Class 2 and 3 items is based on the same theory of f ailure as past codes.
3.
The current code for Class 1 items considers primary as well as secondary stresses and peak stress categories, as does ASME III (1965). B31.1 (1955) power piping code does net consider peak stre sse s.
ASME I (1965) considers (for piping) primary membrane-stresses due to pressure only, except for mitered bends where the reqaired thickness for a straight pipe is multiplied by a factor, (k - 0.5)/ (k - 1.0), where k is the ratio between the radius of the bend (from center of curvature to center of pipe) to the inside radius of the pipe.
t, The current code for Class 2 and 3 vessels considers primary stresses
}
4.
for size selection, as does ASME III (1965). III The current code for Class 2 and -3 piping considers primary and secondary stresses, as does the past piping code.
Unless tne vessel is designed in accordance with the alternative NB-3200 1.
rules whicn are based on primary, secondary, and peak stresse s.
A-58 4&
.JJ Franklin Research Center 4 cm a ae ne n.a.a n.nu.
5.
The current code gives stress limits for the design condition as well as for service levels A and B which are equivalent to past code requirements.
6.
The current code gives stress limits which permit large deformations in the region of discontinuity that may require repair for service level C and overall gross deformations that may require replacement for service level D.
The equivalent of service levels C and D was not specifically considered by past codes. The FSAR, however, does consider a design basis accident which would be the equivalent of service level D and the stress limits given in the FSAR may be conservative, when compared to current stress limits. Stress limits for the equivalent of service levels C and D should be examined and evaluated based on the information given in the FSAR for the plant being evaluated.
4.1.5 welding Requirements Welding materials must currently satisfy the qualification requirements of Section IX of the ASME B&PV Code as well as the mechanical property and enemical analysis test requirements of NB/NC/ND-2430 [1].
A determination of delta ferrite shall be performed for A-No. 8 weld material (see QW-442 of ASME IX) except for SFA-5.4, Type No. 16-8-2 and filler metal to be used for weld metal cladding.
A-No.8 weld material would typically be used to join chrome-nickel austenitic stainless steels such as SA-312 Grade TP 316. The minimum acceptable delta ferrite shall be SFN and re sults shall be included in the certified material test report.
Full radiographic examination of vessel welds is currently required, l
depending on thickness of materials joined, weld joint category (see NB/NC/ND-3351 (1]) and code class as discussed in Section 4.3 of this Appendix.
Full radiographic examination for piping, pumps, and valves based on current and past codes, depends on weld joint category, pipe size, and code class as discussed in Section 4.2 of this Appendix.
It is concluded that past welding requirements for vessels were more severe than current requirements, but past code requirements for piping, l
pumps, and valves were not as revere as current requirements for Class 1 and 2 components.
l l
A-59 g~,
l
.4U Franklin Research Center j
i om.on er 3. r,.n n eina.ie
j It is recommended that the FSAR be carefully examined for radiography requirements for pipes, pumps, and valves which would currently be classified as Class 1 or 2.
It is also recommended that welded components and systems in SEP plants made from austenitic stainless steel be spot-checked to determine evidence of hot short cracking in the weld region unless evidence of the use j
of A-No.8 welding rod with at least SFN delta ferrite can be provided.
i 4.1.6 Design Considerations for Bolted Flange Connections Appendix XII of the current code [1] provides supplementary information to prevent leakage in bolted flange connections with unusual features such as i
a very large diameter or under unusual conditions such as high pressure, high temperature, or severe temperature gradients. Appendix XII permits analysis of the joint which considers changes in bolt elongation, flange deformation, and gasket load that can take place upon pressurization and that may indicate a required bolt prelcad greater than 1.5 times the design value. This practice is permitted provided that excessive flange distortion and gross crushing of the gasket is prevented. Bolt relaxation under high temperatures should also be investigaced. Methods for assuring adequate bolt tightening 4
for large diameter bolts are discussed in Appendix XII.
Past codes did not consider special situations as described above. The i
current considerations of Appendix XII may be useful in evaluating problem connections.
i i
1 l
+
i i
i A-60 4,. ~
?
2.d Franklin Research Center 4
j
=c - e.r e.au.
t
i 4.2 PIP 1NG The current Class 1 piping design requirements are given in NE-3600 of Reference ib.
The fundamental differences between current and past require-ments are that:
1.
The current code explicitly considers and evaluates the margin against fatigue damage by a formulation for peak stress which accounts for local as well as gross dis-con tinuities. The secondary stress indices C in the current code are equivalent in principal to the stress intensification factor i of the past code [4]. The current code magnifies gross discontinuity stress by The past code (y) multiplying C by a local stress index Kg considers the effect of cyclic loading bf reducing the allowable expansion stress by a factor f which varies between 1.0 for less than 7,000 cycles and 0.5 for more than 250,000 cycles.
Figure A4-2 shows a plot of the allowable expansion stress based on the past code and labelled past " fatigue" curve super-i= posed against the design fatigue curves for carbon, low alloy, and high tensile steels (Fig. I-9.1 of Reference le) of the present codes, labelled current fatigue curve.
The past " fatigue" curve is based on a 70 ksi ultimate tensile strength (UTS) material whose allowable stress range, S,(2) is f (1.5)(UTS)/(4) (0.9) where 0.9 accounts for A
the efficiency of a welded joint, and f depends en the nu=ber of cycles'as shown in Table A4-7.
The figure also indicates a value K (cycles), which is the ratio of the present over the past fatigue allowable alternating stress for a given number of cycles. K varies between K(10) = 25 and the K (1,000,000)
= 1.0.
Notice that K is the allowable local stress index for a design which is based on the past code.and being evaluated in light of the present code, all other things being equal.
Assuming that for most piping systems the eaximum local stress i
I index is not likely to be higher than 5, but higher than 1.4, we conclude from Figure A4-2 that piping systems designed in I
accordance with the past and the present code:
l I
a.
are conservative for services with less than 500 cycles l
b.
possibly are unconservative for services with cycles greater than 500 but less than 100,000 c.
are probably unconservative for services with more I
than 100,000 cycles and significant load changes.
1.
331.1 (1955) only; ASME I (1965) does not explicitly consider cyclic loads.
l 2.
Sa = f (1.25 Se + 0.25 S ).
Using Sc approximately equal to Sh and h
Sh f.0.9(1/4 UTS) gives SA 1. f (1.5(UTS)/4)0.9.
A-61 b
4==
- e. r..-.h Center nklin Researc
^
t 10' IA j
^
';[i dh PAST CODE MAY yw h
4 PAST CODE cot 1SEHVATIVE' p
4 BE UNCOtJSERVATIVE PAST (L ESS TilAtt 500 CYCLES) g3 COD $ PROBABLY
- UNCONSERVATIVE -
i f.9
=
8 (DETWEEtt 500 Atl0100.000 CYCLES)
FOR SIGNIFICAt1T l
10 Q
K g
. 7 (10) - 25
^D NGES j
CliRRE NT F ATIGtlE CtlRVE_.
gyo A
g 100.000 CYCLES) 0 N. N
[ K(100) = 8 r K(500) = 5.0 s#
~
5 K(10. - l.4 1
j f-K(1000) - 3.75 N
% ~%
N f
s
~ j
~
K(10*) = 1.8 K(10*) = 1.0 PAST "FATIGilE" CtlHVE
~
s'%
s~
I 24 22 30
/
~
P
.'b
\\
20
~
10' I
I I LLL11 l
I l_1 LLL1 1
1 I I II11 1
1 1 I l l Li i
i i i tj.
10 10 10 30 jo 10' 2
8 4
s Humber of Cycles' t10iE: E - 30 x 10' kal UTS 4 80.0 ksi
--- UTS 115.0-130.0 ksi interpolate for UTS 80.0-115.0 ksi Figure A4-2.
Design Fatigue Curves for Ca 1.on, I.ow Alloy, and liigli Tensile Steels (For lietal Teruperaturca : lot Exceeding 700*F) (Reference 4c) i e
O
T
~
2.
The current code considers the influence of thermal gradients through the chickness of piping elements, together with the effects of the range of pressure and moments due to changes in service teraperature and pressure, when determinir s the peak stress intensity S.
3.
The current secondary stress indices C are either equal or g
less than twice the corresponding stress intensification factor i of the past code. This implies that expansion stress computations based on the past code are conservative from the viewpoint of margin against excessive distortion.
NB-3653.2 gives a simplified expression for S which conservatively p
estimates the sum of primary and secondary and peak stresses as follows:
PD D
S
=KC
+ K.,C M,
p 11 2t
_22I
+ 2(1 - v) 3 1
+KCE3 3 sb
- aa - "b b (1)
+ (1 - v) Ea l aT l 2
where:
K,K 'K
= 1 cal stress indices 2 3 AT = linear portion of ther=al gradient through the thickness AT,, = non-linear portion of thermal gradient through the thickness resultant range of moment due to service changes M
=
g in temperature ( AT l or mechanical loads such as g
earthquake C,C.,,C
= secondary stress indices 7
3
? = range of service pressure v = 0.3 Es = modulus of elasticity times the =ean coefficients of thermal expansion D = outside diameter of the pipe o
A-63 4
PJi Franklin Research Center ac e n.Fr. w.nana
(
I t = nominal wall thickness I = sectional ruoment of inertia i
T,(T ) = range average temperature n sMe aN of b
gross structural or material discontinuity.
I f
Values of stress indices for the various piping elements are given in Table l
NB-3682.2-1 of Reference Ib and reproduced as Table A4-8.
For the purpose of i
the discussion which follows,(1) the fo'urth term in the expression for S is 3
p l
neglected since it is atypical.
The past piping code [4] sets limits on the first two terms in the i
expression for S which will be derived herewith. Equation 13 of Section 6 of Reference 4, neglecting contributions due to torsion, is given by:
S
=-1
100) i Intenes Wesuet Thorvum i
Pressure Laselses Laaning i
Pipeg Prossets amo m C.
K.
3, C,
K, C,
C, K,
i Straent poe. remets from weiss or otner esconunwuss 0.5 La LO' LO La La LO LO Girta butt med tetween strasent pas or between
+
u poe ane butt weeng components e
+
(a) fkan OJ La L1' La La L1 LO 0.5 L1 (b) as wease t>3/16 a (and 8/ts04]
04 La L2' Le LO La LO QJ L7 (c) as weesee tS3/16 in. [or 3/t>0.1]
04 L1 L2' 1.0 Le 2.5 La DJ L7 Gaeta finet weed to socket weed fittings, sus on flanges, or secast weseng fiensen 0.75 2.0 3.0 L5 2.1 2.0 La 1.0 3.0 s
Longituanes butt wouts in stragat poo (a) fbsn OJ La L1' La La L1 LO L1 (b) as amese t>3/16 an.
0.5 L1 L2'.
LO L2 L3 L3 L2 (c) as weseed t$3/16 irL OJ Le 2J' La L2 L3 LO L2 faserve tranation ;ents per NS442S ane Fig. NS42331M (a) fban or no garth weet closer then yri OJ
or MSS SP44u Sutt weieing-tees per AN5151k9 or M55 5P44=
La LS 4.0 La,
1.0 1.5 1.0 Sutt weeng eveucers per AN5! S1k, or M55 5744'=
's Lo
'8 1.0 0.5 Lo NOTES:
its les The muss of r, snown 'or tnese corneenene are
- el if D.se - Om, is not yeseer taen 048 0,. and ae.
cootsoie wasus on X, mov os coteines by naeuoswing sne aeos.comee for comoonents with out at rouneneen not taounatee vesnes et X, ty the toeror 7,c:
yeeser tnen 0.C8r. enere out of rounonens is eetinse as C=se - Om ane M 3,.
- se*I* Q G.,,es a mesuviurn outseos earneter of cross seeuen,in.
D
- nunwnusn ours ae emneter of crou sortion. in.
[
- nommes vise snienness..n.
.n,o at. 2 for tervene steses and noncernsus r.wier ase J
6 emesse mesmotornanron miove ane blif ene cross section s out of round such tnet tne trous mcam,omome annove wcoon.e accromwneessv emonces, an acceeemene vous of W = 2.7 for suerenetie stems necu:~- _
_n 4, mov De notawise by mustioivme the tacusesse vmuss miows, ane neem: =. _ -- um aslovs of T Dv tite factor 7,a 3,
y.see seremin at deugn terneerature, see tTaoses 4 2.00
~
a.. - o,,,
is p=on.,a hees.re,em s mie, me amines in in ene <ta.
'.e-**
1*o.ssa (g) '.
(23 we.es aemoreane.
.n :n ene riouwensais or in.s o
N' suosecoon.
cm pnen w.a are am nee.e inase mas an.cn nae. noen anm a. norn.nm own.e.a.anwier..n.
o arouae on ooin in. enc,r ano emerior ivruce to reino p -.merem oreuvre. c w e.cre,u. anon aaa suruus enerse
.mprour eue in c
mm nue.
we ee oreuuru.a ine iose Cveio te ett Cartssoerettonf
, -. _. In.chn*4s at we.d reestforcefnent (totas C-_
n s mnomos os ceuicir, os meer.es a room *=n.
.ns.oe saa outs oes inaa nos.meo o tr. No concaview on sne roon we carenistee. Tne + a.snes contour snes permure. om e nownm nave a sioce ungie,eaused from tangent to Otner symouss me connes we tal.
W A-66
, 7.~ -
& Fmnklin Research Center 4 omenon es The F.un.on==nse
1 i
i l
i Table A4-8 (Cont.)
NB *a000- DESIGN Table N8 3682.* 4
\\
I surface of peos or, on racerod tranession sede of weeed.to ForMg the nomenas trenetioes usatassi greater then 7 det ase saaeen m.
g9, vyaes,,. s,,,.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,g,,,,,
r f
S **b ****
- Form, M, = vM',.at'y,rM*,, a rum stant moment on two 7 det men.
g I
venere M,p My, and My are determined as foslause:
{
7 If M, and M, neve the same a6guerees s gn thea M;,=0. If 4
f
/
fI det. mme.
) 7 de$ mas.
and Mi, nave dsf ferent a*georaes sogne, tne.IW,.e tne 8
4 Mg, N,
J ene&ar of M, or M;, wunere i
- 8. v. E.
/
n
/
for tronen connecnone of tees.tne Mi term of foueuens f
W." -
<s de9aed as vueeds not meenne om sesosa f31. (10) 1115. or (121 snest be reoeces av ene fossownn,
- mersof terns:
reewrements 'or even messa. At tne.nterinunon os a ionotua.nen butt v ma.n sers ent o co watn a ortn auft w,
vues or yrts hiles vuod.
tousaan i91 3,eMy.3,,--
Ze 3,eQAande,*tA
.ou.t.ons no, Li:
C,, p. e,, e T, e,.,,. e,. <,-,, : o e ~...e o,-
~
of re e.nv. ~.e.,or.e -e ma.
a gertn cuand. Pgy euerngee. at me intertectmon of an b C,fg,, I, aMuerded girtn ourt veeed suetn an argoeseed lonmaadenes Eouchon (Ill C,gg,g to butt vused. C, is 1.1x 1.1 *1 *1. C, for a pren hilet veed meursumong e aanytudines vased snasa he ramen as 2.0.
13)The stree wieces even are saaneeense onay to erencn anere conn===as in struegnt poe unen brenen ame norrres to me laa eV.)'Ta pas surtens ano ven cn meet ene enenmonas reewrenants ene IL of Necess and 74 Ns4684.11.
E,a*Am'Tr (43 A = eareas asce or enese,ressus,in.
r = mean ressus of crees sacnon in.
= (0,- et/2.. snare r a nemones visse tm.cnnees For tronen connessmens per N64643 see footnote 3 apose t51 The esuus of moment. Mr. sness be ootomed from an r'm. Ta Age. and T, are defined m fig. NS4684.1+1 i
anevess of me poeng system a assereance==en N64672.
Eor Duft4messling less per ANS8 8163 or MS $P 48:
We it oefened as tne eartge of frenesset loadang acossed sluttaq t',,, = mean remus of cenignated Drancn osoe me esamfies ooerenne cvas, M
Te
- non*a88 **'s (n.caneus at eas.gneted arenen fy o 00 l
L A
A, e meen ressus of oes gneted run o.oe l
j wy T, e nonunes ess mecanoes os ces.gnates run o.oe gare,,w rn,ouge es, J
Mr
- momen at Poent A I
(6)lnesicas are asesicame to raceree tranetson reents v an a prin Mr
- v M ' 'M ' **8 y2 gute v ese et tne men one of ene trane.non.
r e
s C, a 1.3 e 0.00310,79 + 1.51841 M, A nut not yester trian 2.3
- 8' N08*
/
C, e t.4 + 0.004 (Opts
- 3.0 to/rt y3 out not yester span 2.1 7""/
C,
- 1J + 0.008 (0,rs
,,.,,M,..M,..M,.
f,*
l (71 sis = 0.75 C enut not less trian 13 i
s,,
- 0.75 C,, out not ieus enan 10 g,,. gs fr,3 ss a ym. Am)"8 (TyTr3 V,,,,r,3. but not samen Ass ieus snan 13 T. and rp we defineel in f.g.
Montents ce6cusatse v r onent as wiseriesnan of two and p,,,
- r. em, 3
o Necess.t.
brenen conter isaes K,3
- 1.0
&My3 C,, e 02 lAm*Tel V'er Aml. but not '*ea then 1.0 K,,
- 2.0 The groeuct of C,r#,, anssa ne a nennnuniof 3.0
^ "s3
& yI AWy2
- 8) C, *
.Due not less enan 1.5: g,
- 0.75 C, W
rA 3, *, vunare r a nornense nice weasl inicanoes A = oond receus of curves o.on or estee 3
- y'2 i e mean poe radius C'
/
0 k/
WaI
- '88 - 'u2 a v,,
a y,,
125 A-67 8 Fran> din Research Centen 4 c on of the e,en.a. seemas I
i Table A4-8 (Cont.)
SECUCN !!!. DIVISION I - SUBSECTION NB Table N5.us2.2 3 i
<cs noeue s en on.n,, and,,, aio,
<si s,ee s., us e,.
C.e. c.,. asun
,7,r'. not not ie= mea 2.0 4,,,
- meen receus of aes gnates run ese C,
- 1 e 40054 ev o,re o
Tr e nessunae ones inecaneus of esempsese 'run shoe K,g
- K,pe1D C, = 1
- 428 e' tD,,,td 'E'*U' ~ EII (10) De K neces p*en 'er fitt'ags one Aksi StS.S. ANSI 818 '3. or hs33 spa 4 sesev onry to seensees fettsngs usan no enero 0,,,te.a une n.,ar of Det, and Opt,.
l carinernene. attacnnects, or otner estreneous serem roers on tne bos.es eneross. For hetengs esta longewennes Iguet visses.tw K inecos sno n in a ne mws. ohne av ene 3.1, fo' tes neousers we waan r, aneler r, <&t0, even asses as eefsee a Note 2; tv 1.3 for asees not
- et*e me reewarvaeats for Nues ames.
C, = I + 0.00e86e** %t4***
(11) De sween ne. css green oreens serenes an.cn oseur we me tsee, of a tuting. It s not reeuered to taae tne coomssa et c,. i. Q.0185e v ae,r, areas inences for eve sie.no orooucts cuen sa a tee and a
'eeucer, or a tee ano a petn ourt wee wnen woese tooseer waere 0,te.e the (myr of O,,t. ares Ogt*.
sacess 'or tne case se curwe o.ae er aunt meeng stove weiaea togemer or sowise av a sece of straigne sees (1st ne <.ne.ees s=en a lae N. ane !ca anniv for reassers me tengtn of anien e less enan 1 : sos manneer. For taes nacifw case tne strees inoes for tne curwoe o.co or butt artsaries e tne conneenne *oe unm nwas or a:
vueiene eatsome must ce mwties.ee av enat 'or ene girin ewet prtn weies as aer nee e roernote 12). Note tfies tne
.ume. Escsvees from tn.e muenonceteen are une A, ane C'.
connecting pren mee enues see ne enecaea samerstwv for neces. Der weswo e to her A
- I 4. C*s
- 0.50.
conesiense.
is) por ensucms --
to osos a.m # vet girm swet (123 4 e dehned es rae meannwn oorwassanne neenesen as sne,,,
"esos:
e Pig. Ned2231. A. eve os 4 tous than 2/22 wi. mov oe weed crewisse see sneuer eveneten
.s sonofies ter to K.
- t.1 - 41
. Inst not wasinese 1.0 fearicatmen. For Nues meser. oohnee e footnote G.4 mov v'Gesp4se no tamen as tere.
L
. (123 fad C K,
- 1.1 - 41
. but not less name 9.0 Mosm L9
' 'Gege e me ernmaer of L,/v$ ene e-os venerecL L.~
e
.Di por reeusers connected to oeos ann ae. esses gare ewet=='os **= o r.. r. > 2n * 'a aaa 8.<t. 8. '. '
i fl/.
f er e
,/
I 0.1:
tg ( eg
/,N
e s
agit t
s l
Le t
l K, a t.:-42
. but net leus inan 1.0 0 I r2 2
Le 9
t,
- 1.3 - 0.8
. aus not less inni t.0 e
vDwm aaore st' O,4, e the one aer of L ATE ans r, e nom.am.ma m censes. tarve wie L,,'v J r,.
i e, a aam.nm e micenses, ones one O,
- nern am outsede earneter, targe one icJ For reewcars connectee to a.co one as meese girtn
- 3.
- nomens outs.oe owne'er, ynsee one twtt weece, venere r, or r, 6 3/16 we. or 4, tr, or a gr, >
ee cone angie, ceg 11:
b g,,
' = @J he inentes g=en in.cl ana 'el acery.I ene loseenne
(,
- 1.2 - 42
. nut nos 6ees teen 1.0 coneteens see enet.
NOWm ffACane ancie. 4 does not escoes 60 oog. ane the coeweer esconcentre.
12J he sued insanoes as not lege trien r, m tproweneut tne K.
- 2.5 - 1.5 g]
- aus aos see inan 1.0 boer of me reeucar, esceot e ane emenomassey i
achacent to tne cyt norcat oortiose est trie snee one, enere ?ne miettnee snae not ce ese tnan r,m. hae "d'a' O '*
i tascanesses r, m and r,m are to be octawise av E eM Ei'e*
Eowasson t11. NS *641.1.
!*6 A-68 q,, ~.
4 Franklin Research Center 4 ch=.on ome Fren.en inseene
e 1
4 Noting that M = Ag and conservatively assuming that a nuclear puwer plant g
and recalling that designed in accordance with past codes is such that SE" A 1.9 1, the second term in the expression for S becomes:
C :
p 2
D
/ D
\\
if 22fM "A
K 1*9 KC i
21 2 E)=
0.657 A E2 (UTS)
(2a)
= 1.9 S3 (A21 2 21 for ferritic steels 0.63f A K3 (UTS)
(2b) 3
~
for austenitic steels Past piping codes detemine pipe thickness in acccedance with the formula (II PD
[4p)+C (Equation 1, Section 1 of Reference 4),
t, =
g where:
P = design pressure D = outside pipe diameter C = allowance for corrosica S = all wable stress at tempe rature h
c = minimum pipe wall thickness When C is small compared to the thickness and 0.4P is snall compared to S, the minimum thickness is approximated by PD0
=
em 2S Since the actual pipe thickness, c, is not less than e,, we have 1
PD, I
- (UTS)(0.9) ferritic steel 2t h
h (UTS)(0.9) austenitic steel 3
1.
3ased on y = 0.4 for ferritic =aterials below 900*F.
A-69 g
JU nidin Research Center acm nwNr - -
I,
of the design Assuming that the range of se vice pressure P, is a fraction At pressure, we have 4
P,D A PD 1/4 A (UTS)(0.9) ferritic steels g
I \\Sh " 1/5 1 (UTS)(0.9) austenitic steels 2c 2e 1
s o that the firs't term in the expression for S may be put in the form PD A (UTS) K C7 (0.9) ferricic steel (3a) k 1( 2t j
~
7yA7 (UTS) gCy (0.9) austenitic steel
,(3b).
Substituting Equations 2a and 3a on Equation 1 and neglecting the fourth term in Equation 1, we obtain:
= f (0.9) A K C (UTS) + 0.65f Ag 2 (,UTS)
K S
", y ) laTl (la)
+ (t 9) Eclat l~+K 3
3 y
for f erritic steels.
Similarly substituting Equations '2b and 3b in Equation 1 and neglecting the fourth term in Equation 1, we obtain:
At (UTS) K C7 3 2 (.UTS)
- 0.63f A K
S
=
p fy)EalaTl+K laTl (1b)
+
2 3
- v) 7 for austenitic steels.
These expressions can be further simplified by noting from Tables I-5.0 and
./
I-6.0 (111 (Winter 1978 Addenda) that:
-6 E3 27.9 x 1 x 7.3 x 10 for ferricic steels l
= 0.291 Es
, 28.3 x 10 x 9.4 x 10
= 0.380 for austenitic steels (1-v) 0.7 ey t
A-70 i
O ShJ Franklin Research Center
%.m r a-
a Substituting appropriately in Equations la and lb and multiplying the second term by 1.3 to account for movements of pipe ends attached to equipment, we have:
S = 0.23 A (LTS) K C + 0.8Sf A K2 (UTs) 7 21 i
+0.291laTl+0.145K3 laT l.
(la) 2 1
for ferritic steels S = 0.13 A7 (UTS) K C77 3 2 (UTS)
+ 0.82f A K
+0.380laTl+0.190K3laTl (lb) 2 y
for austenitic steels where:
p
= (range of service pressure)/(design pressure) = y A 1 a
UTS = ultimate tensile strength of material at 70*F f = stress-teduction factor (see Table A4-7) ch A
= [ Change in temoerature for i service cycle] divided 3
by (maximum operating temperature - 70*F]
=laTl/l(T)
-70*Fl g
g l
p 7,K '10T l'K iOT l = previously defined.
C K
2 2
3 1
j The alternating stress intensity, Sg, is one half of the peak stress e
intensity, S ; that is:
=l S S alt 2 p f
For a g1ven value of alternating stress corresponding to actual n service cycles, g
the number of such cycles N allowed may be found from the applicable design g
e service fatigue curve, Figure I-9.0 [le). IThe usage factor for the given n cycles is defined as:
.a 1"Ti f,'
A-71 jdl Fran, din Research Center a m a m vm e.nue g
1-- _;
- g.. _
g i
f The cumulative usage factor, U = IU shall not exceed 1.0 as required by t
~!
IB-3222.4(e)(5) of Reference Ib.
~I Equations la and Ib may be used ed evaluate Class 1 piping designed 'in i
accordance with past code requirements frem the viewpoint of present code re-quirements. Some examples will be used to 111usttate use of the formulae.
q Example 1 Consider tse 42-in ID pri=ary coolant piping between the rea: tor vessel and steam gen.erator for the Palisades plant (11]. These p'ipes were fabricated from 3-3/4-in thick ASTM 516, Gr. 70 place with a rollad band 1/4-in nominal cladding of 3041. stainless steel. A review of transient conditions given in Section 4.2.2
.of Reference 11 indicates the following step' power change service cycles:
r.
l 15,000 cycles of '10% full lond step power changes increasing from 10% to 90% of full power and de-creasing frca 100% to.,20% of full power 2.
1500 reactor trips.fr'on 100% power.
Examination of Figure 4-8 of Reference 11 show the reactor coolant temper-ature as a straight line function of IISSS power. Considering the hot temperature-
- futetion, note that this full power T = 59s*F and at 5 power T = 532*F. This indicates that the temperacure change associated with the reactor trips is 62*F.
Tor each AT, we' shall assume that at = 0.75 AT and AT2 = 0.25 aT.
t A more accurate detarmination of AT and ST may be obtained from Reference-i y
2
[
- 12. se that:
y, 1
ST of Service Cycle 1 = 62*F g = 15,000 Service Cvele - 1 n
4 at = O.75 x 62 = 46.5*F j.
'i' 1
f = 0.3 2
aT = 0.25 x 6.2 = 15.5*F s
2 j.-f ~
A-72 h
T_ranklin Rese_eren Center
%.)
..i i
i e
.Q
4 i
Service Cycle - 2 n = 500 AT of Service Cycle 2 = 62*F 2
1 AT = 0.75 r. 62 = 46.5'T 1
f = 1.0 2 = 0.25 x 62 = 15.5'T AT Elbow Consider an elbow in which the bend radius R is 5 times the pipe diameter 2r 2r = 42.5 + 3.75 = 46.25 r = 23.13 R = 5 x 46.25 = 231.25, 2k = 462.5 From Table A4-8 for curved pipe or a butt welding elbow K = 1.0 1
C = (2R-r)/[2(R-r)]
1
= (462.5 - 23.13) /[2 x (231.25 - 23.13)]
= 1.06 K = 1.0, K = 1.0 2
3 Lentitudinal Butt Weld-Straight Pipe A longitudinal butt weld flush in a straight pipe would be a more critical element to investigate since for this element:
j K = 1.1, C = 1.0, K2 " 1 l' K3"l1 1
1 i
3 ranch Connections A branched connection which may possibly have been used to connect the 12-in Schedule 140 316 stainless steel surge line from pressurizer to the hot leg would have stress Ladices as follows:
K = 2.0, K = 1.7, K = 2.2, C = 1.5 3
1 1
and obviously would be most critical. These K and C values are taken from the y
7 Summer of 1979 Addenda (1].
nklin Research Center
~ ~ - -.
. ~
~ ~ ~ ~
'~
i 4
Determination of Usage Factors l
UTS = 70 kai (ASTM 516 - Cr. 70) ch For the i service cycle:
1 (S ) = 0.23A x 70 x K C + 0.85 x 70 f K A 7
yg 2n
+0.291lATl+0.145KlaTl 2
3 y
Assuming that the pressurizer maintains pressure within + 50 psi during these sertice cycles, then:
100
= 0.04 so that A
=
t 2500 (S ) = 0.644 K C + 59.5 1 fK +0.291laT,l*0.145KlaTl p
g7 3
2 3
1 i
AT i
Determination of A,1 for each service evele
\\
=
21
!(T ) max-70* ]
o (T )
= maximum operating temperature = 594*F a! of Service Cycle 1 = 62*F AT of Service Cycle 2 = 62*F 1
= 62/(594 - 70) = 0.12 21
)
1,, = 62/(594 - 70) = 0.12 1
finally (Sdt)1 * ~ (S )1 p
i A su: mary of the results for each of the two s'ertice cycles as it affects the usage of the three elements is giver in Tables A4-9 through A4-11.
It is apparent from the usage factors calculated in these tables that cumulative damage from cycles 1 and 2 is negligible.
A-74
- n Franidin Research Center 4 > w w r en.n.
o 1
f 4
Table A4-9 j
Usage Factors Due to Thermal Gradient Through Thickness t
l Example: Hot Leg of Palirades Primary Coolant Piping 1
}-
i Piping Element: Elbow 1.06,
'g = 1.0, K = 1.0 K = 1.0, C
=
3 7
y I
Service Cvele - 1 n = 15,000 f = 0.8 1
= 0.12 21 AT., = 13.5'F-AT = 46.5'F 1
4 S = 0.644 K C1 1 + 59.5 f K 1,1
- 0. 291laT,l + 0.145 K,laT l = 13.7 ksi p
2.
1
=1 S
= 9.3 ksi Salt 2 p 6
"1 N > 10 (See Figure A4-2)
U = 7 = 0.02 y
1 1
Service Cvele - 2 n = 500 f = 1.0 1
= 0.12 2
22 AT = 15.5'F AT = 46.5 'F 2
1 4
1 1 + 59.5 f K,1, + 0.291laT,l + 0.145 K l4T l = 19.1 ksi S = 0.644 K C
. 2.
3 1
p
=I S = 9.5 ksi Salt 2 p
= p"2 6
N., > 10 (See Figure A4-2) ' '
U
=0 2
i, U
+U
= 0.02 2
5 A-75 d' hranklin Researen Center h
a c a e N rreann==enne
[
r Table A4-10 l
Usage Factors Due to Thermal Gradient Through Thickness I
l Example: Hot Leg.of Palisades Primary Coolant Piping i
4 l
Piping Element: Lontitudinal Butt Weld-Straight Pipe t
K = 1.1, C = 1.0, K2 " 1*1' K3 " 1*1 4
1 Service Cycle - 1 n = 15,000 f = 0.8 1
= 0.12 g
3 iT = 15.5 7 4T = 46.5 r 2
1 S = 0.644 K C + 59.5 f K A
+ 0.291laT ] + 0.145 K (aT l = 18.9 kai p
gt 2 21 2
3 y
9 S
=2S
= 9.5 kai alt 2 p 0
= 0.02 Ny > 10 (See Figure..-2)
.U
=
1 i
Service Cycle - 2 n = 500 f = 1.0 1
= 0.12 2
aT, = 15.5 r 4T = 46.5 r 1
+ 59.5 f K,A,,, + 0.291laT l + 0.145 K laT l = 20.5 kai S = 0.644 'gC1 2
3 1
p
=1 S = 10.2 kai Salt 2 p 3
U' 6
=0 N, > 10 (See Figure A4-2) p'2 i
U
+U
= 0.02 3
A-76 i
26 Franklin Resea.rch Center aweww a==m.=
4
1 i
I Table A4-11 i
i
[
Usage Factors Due to Thermal Gradient Through Thickness Example: Hot Leg of Palisades Pri: nary Coolant Piping i
Piping Element: Branch Connection (K and C from Summer 1979 Addenda (1})
ii y
7 l
K = 2.2, C = 1.5, K = 2.0, K = 1.7 1
2 3
Service Cvela - 1 a = 15,000 f = 0.8 A,1 = 0.12 t
aT, = 15.5 F AT = 46.5 F 1
S = 0.644 K C + 59.5 f K A
- 0.291laT l + 0.145 K bT l = 29.5 M 1
3g 2
3 y
=1 S ~= 14.3 kai S alt 2 p "1-6
- 1 > 10 (See Figure A4-2)
U = - = 0. 02 7
y 1
Service Cvele - 2 n = 500 f = 1.0 A
= 0.12 2
22 AT = 15. 5 ' ?
AT = 46.5'F 3
1 S = 0.644 K C + 59.5 f K,1, + 0.291laT l + 0.145 K laT l = 25.2 kai p
11
.3 2
3 1
1 S = 12.6 'a i S
=
alt 2 p U, = p"., = 0. 0005 6
21., = 10 (See Figure A4-2)
U
+U
= 0.0205 1
2 A-77 IM Ad Franklin Research Center 4 c as w en n m aw.
~
i_. _ _ _
~_
1 1
i Example 2 The same Palisades primary coolant piping will be considered as in Example 1, except that only a branch connection will be considered for service cycles in which there is a more significant change in average metal tempera-j ture as follows:
Service Cycle Eri
~
12i j
1-ng
(*F)
(laT j/(524))
i 1-15,000 (10% to 100% full power) 59' O.113 2-15,000 (50% to 100% full power) 31*
0.059 3-15,000 (104 to 90% full power) 55' O.105 4-15,000 (100% to 20% full power) 49' O.094 with the value of 0.12 obtained in Comparing the above values 121 Example 1, the usage factors associated with the above four additional cycles are negligible.
Comparison With ASME I (1965) Requirements Piping from a 54R reactor vessel up to and including the first isolation valve external to the crywell could have been designed and built to the following requirements:
a.
ASME I (1965) b.
ASME I (1965) and 331.1 (1955).
If requirement (a) was invoked, expansion stress limits due to cyclic thermal loading are not specifically imposed. However, ASME I (1965) does l
require consideration of loads other than working pressure or static head, i
wnich " increases the average stress by more than lot of the allowable working stress."
For example, the allowable working stress for welded alloy steel j
SA-250-Tl at 600*F is 11,700 psi. Expansion stresses would typically be in excess of 1170 psi and should be considered. Licensees that designed their piping based on ' ASME I (1965) criteria should furnish details as to how thermal stresses were considered.
nkhn Research Center a cm a mia a m.ou.
i It requirement (b) was invoked, then paragraph 102(b) of Section 1 (4) requires that valves, fittings, and piping for boilers as prescribed in ASME I,
are within the scope of B31.1, but provisions of ASME I shall govern where tney exceed corresponding requirements of B31.1.
Accordingly, piping built to i
requirement (b) would have to satisfy the specified expansion stress limits of B31.1 due to cyclic the; mal loads as well as the full radiography requirements for all longitudinal and circumferential fusion welded butt joints of ASME I.
Welding Requirements Full radiography of welded joints in piping, pumps, and valves as stipulated in past (4) and current codes [1,13] depends on weld joint category, pipe size, and code class as shown in the following tables Full Radiography Code Requirements for Welded Joints in Piping, Pumps, and Valves 1
Current Codes ASME III (1977)
ANSI B16.34 (1977)
Past Codes (l)
Description of class Class ASA B31.1 (1955)
Welded Joint 1
2 3
Standard Special
& ASME I (1965)
A. Longitudinal Yes Yes No No Yes No B. Circumferential Yes Yes No No Yes No C. Flange connection Yes Yes No No Yes No f
D. Branch and piping I
connections to f
pipes, pumps, and i
valves of nominal pipe size exceed-l ing 4" as follows i
l (1) Butt-welded Yes Yes No No Yes No 1
(2) Corner-welded Yes Yes No No Yes No full penetration (3) Full penetration Yes Yes No No Yes No i
i l
1.
Full radiography of butt-welded joints may be specified under B31.1 (1955)
~
but it is not mandatory. Full radiography is required for all longitudinal and circumferential fusion welded butt joints for pipes built to ASME I (1965) requirements.
2.
Except when specified by material specification for piping in excess of 2 l
in nominal diameter.
l 3.
When either member thickness exceeds 3/16 in.
A-79
- W lJ Franklin Research Center A om.aa as N Fren a menne.
i In conclusion, full radiography was not required by the past code, but it is a current requirement for Class 1 and Class 2 welded joints for piping, pumps, and valves. It is recommended that welded Class 1 and Class 2 components and systems be checked to learn what radiography requirements were enforced.
l 4.3 PRESSURE VESSELS 4
The past code requirements for pressure vessels are given in one or more of tne following ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Codes depending on the SEP nuclear plant group as defined in Taole Al-1.
Group Pressure Vessel Code I
ASME III (1965)
ASME VIII* (1965)
II ASME VIII* (1962)
III ASME VIII* (1956, 1959)
The current code r,quirements [1] and the past ASME III (1965) code are essentially the same with regard to significant items with the following exceptions:
Fracture Toughness - Class A Vessels The current code, except for exempt materials as noted in Section 4.1, requires greater toughness than the past code. A comparison of current and past Charpy V-dotch acceptance levels at temperatures at least 60*F below the temperature at which the vessel is to be pressure tested is as follows:
Past Current Minimum Absorbed 15 to 35 ft-lb 50 ft-lb Energy depending on yield strength Mimimum Lateral Not specified 35 mils i
I Expansion
- Plus nuclear code cases.
A-80 5 Franklin Research Center 4cm aw n.r= = a
i I
is recommended that past Class A vessels should be evaluated from the It viewpoint of current Class 1 fracture toughness requirements as outlined in Section 4.1.
Fracture Toughness - Class B Vessels (Outside Scope)
The impact test requirements for Class B vessel materials built in accordance with Subsection S of ASME III (1965) are the same as for Class A vessel materials', except that the maximum test temperature should be at least 30*F lower than the lowest service metal temperature (LST). The current code permits Charpy V-Notch testing at temperatures up to the lowest service metal The acceptance standard for the C, test of the current code, temperature.
however, requires a lateral expansion between 20 and 40 mils and sets no absorbed energy requirement. The current code provides for exemptions from impact testing. Where the exemption does not apply, drop weight testing for materials exceeding 2.5-in thickness shall demonstrate a nil ductility transition temperature below the LST by 30'F for 2.5-in thick material, and increasing to 87'F for 12-in thick material as show in Figure A4-2.
Class B vessel materials built according to the past code and evaluated 1
I in accordance with the current fracture toughness requirements:
1.
would satisfy current requirements provided the material thickness is less than 2.5 in may not satisfy current requirements for thicknesses in excess of 3 2.
in (exclusive of cladding) for those materials not otherwise exempt from impact testing as noted in Section 4.1.
Fracture Toughness - Class C Vessels Materials for Class C vessels built in accordance with ASME III (1965) were required to satisfy impact testing provisions of ASME VIII (1965) [5].
Paragraph VCS-66(c) of Reference 5 exempts materials whose LST is -20*F or Apparently, impact testing was intended primarily for outdoor greater.
The current code exempts materials for vessels whose LST exceeds vessels.
i
(
A-81
..O Franklin Research Center 4 Cennom of 'he F*ennan insonae
- =
I l
100*F.
Therefore, all Class C vessels built in accordance with the past code should be evaluated in accordance with Section 4.1 Class 3 criteria to determine if current Class 3 requirements would be satisfied, f
I Design Requirements Class A vessels designed in accordance with ASME III (1965) are based on an analysis which determines the stress distribution in the vessel. Stre sse s were combined, categorized, and limited in the same manner as is currently required for Class 1 design condition as well as the equivalence of service levels A and B, i.e., for expected operating and upset conditions which the vessel must withstand without substaining damage requiring repair. The basis for establishing design stress intensity values, S, as noted in Appendix II a
[3] as well as the basis for establishing fatigue curves is the same as current code requirements. In conclusion, Class A vessels designed in a
accordance with ASME III (1965) would satisfy current Class 1 vessel requirements for the design condition as well as service levels A and B.
Class A vessels were not, however, required to withstand loading conditions which may produce large deformations in the areas of gross structural discor.tinuities (service level C) or conditions which may produce gross general deformations (service level D) requiring removal of the vessel f rom service for repair.
Tne past codes do not specifically consider loading conditions, other than design, operating, and test. The FSARs for specific SEP plants may, A
however, constder the equivalent of emergency and faulted conditions.
discussion of the evaluation of the FSAR stress limits for these loads against current limits is presented in Section 4.1.4 of this appendix.
Class B vessels, as defined by ASME III (1965), are containment vessels, which are outside the scope of this study.
Class C vessels are designed in accordance with ASME VIII (1965) except i
that:
1.
Class C vessels currently designated as Class 1 or Class 2 should be evaluated against Section 4.1 Class 1 or Class 2 criteria.
A-82 O
.d2 Franklin Research Center w an n, rm m
t.
- 1. the exemptions from inspection defined in U-1(g) of Referenca 5 are not applicable
- 2. longitudinal and circumferential welds for those Class C vessels which are or may be connected to the reactor coolant or moderator system during operation and Class C chambers in a multi-chamber vessel having at least one Class A chamber shall be full penetration welds and shall be fully radiographed, and shall satisfy the requirements of N-462.1 and N-462.2 of Reference 3 for Category A and B joints, respectively.
4 Stress limits for Class C vessels which would currently be classified as Class 3 vessels are essentially the same as for Class 3 vessels designed in accordance with the current code. The past code allowable normal stress was the lower of 1/4 (UTS) or 0.625 (YS) compared with a current allowable of the lower of 1/4 (UTS) or 0.677 (YS). The past code is at least as conservative as the current code.
The current code does set limits on combinations of primary membrane and bending stress at 3/2 S = YS.
Class C vessels which would currently be classified as Class 1 or Class 2 vessels should be evaluated against current Class 1 or Class 2 code require-ments, with special attention being given to current radiography requirements.
Evaluation of past vessels for the equivalent of service levels C and D for stress limits set in the FSAR should be compared to current stress limits for these service levels.
Example The Palisades FSAR classifies the pressurizer as a Class A vessel and defines the stress limit for the design basis accident (equivalent of service level D) as 10% above YS based on an equivalent elastic stress. Current reQJirements permit computed stress levels to exceed the YS by as much as 20%
for an elastic analysis. We conclude that Class A Palisades vessels satisfy current requirements for level D loads.
^~0
.v7333 J Frankhn Research Center
= > eaa n.n.n a u.
Welding Requirements The following table provides a comparison between current and past code P
requirements when radiographic examination of butt-welded joints is mandatory.
The values given are thickness limits above which full radiographic examination i
of butt-welded joints is mandatory.
I From the table, it can be seen that:
1.
vessels built to ASME III (1965) Class C requirements and currently classified as Class 2 or Class 3 would more than satisfy the current radiography requirements for joints of Category A or B.
(Refer to NB-3351, NC-3351, and ND-3351 for definitions [1].)
2.
Joints of Category C (Refer to NB-3351, NC-3351, and ND-3351 for definitions [1]) in a Class C vessel currently classified as Class 2 would have been examined in accordance with ASME VIII (1965) requirements, which do not satisfy current Class 2 requirements.
3.
Vessels built to ASME III (1965) Class A or ASME VIII (1965) would satisfy current requirements for Class 1 and Class 3 vessels, respectively.
It is concluded that current Category C joints in Class 2 vessels built to past Class C requirements do not satisfy current radiography requirements.
4.4 PUMPS Pumps furnished under the requirements of the Hydraulic Institute Standards (14) were designed to satisfy functional requirements.
Integrity of the pressure boundary was not covered by this standard. The design of the pump pressure boundary should be evaluated in accordance with the current requirements of NB/NC/ND-3400 (1].
See Sections 4.1.5 and 4.2 of this Appendix for discussion of pump weld-ing requirements.
4.5 VALVES Class 1 valves current design requirements are given in Subarticle NB-3500 of Reference Ib.
All Class 1 valve materials must meet the fracture toughness requirements of NB-2332. All Class i listed pressure rated valves should have a minimum body wall thickness as determined by ANSI 316.34 (13],
A-84
.rfy;3
...J Franklin Research C. enter ao oaa#N r..n a n.
~
i I:,
!?,
d ai '
V en Current Code Requirements Pa st Code Requirements P-Ho.
e5' haterial Code Class ASME B&PV Sect. III (1965) ASME VIII (1965)(6) gg Cla ssi f icat ion 1
2 3
Class A Class CIII II I'I L
O 3/16 in 1 1/4 in O(2,4)
O 1 1/4 in
{3 3
0 3/16 3/4 0
0 3/4 sn 4
0 3/16 5/8 0
0 5/8 5
0 3/16 0
0 0
0 7
0 3/16 5/8 0
0 See Note 3 R
0 3/16 1 1/2 0
0 See Note 3 9
0 3/16 See Note 3 0 0
5/3 p
10 0
3/16 5/8 0
0 0
h 11 0
3/16 5/8 0
0 See Note 3 1.
ASME B&PV Code Section III, 1965 Edition, Class C may currently be classified as Class 2 or 3 of the current code.
2.
All thicknesses require full radiography when "0" is indicated.
3.
Requirements not specified for this P-No.
These requirements are for full penetration welded joints of Categories A, B, or C (N-463 4.
(3)).
5.
These requirements are for full penetration welded joints of Categories A or B (N-2113
[3]).
Butt-welded joints of other categories shall satisf y the requirements of ASME B&PV
- Code Section VIII, 1965 edition.
6.
Vessels containing lethal substances shall have welded joints for materials ot all thicknesses f ully radiographed.
i e
s except that the inside diameter, d, will be thi larger of the basic valve body inside diameters in the region near the welding ends. Class, valves may be designed in accordance with either the standard design rules of NB-3530 through NB-3550 or the alternative design rules of NB-3512.2.
Alternative design rules require either computer analysis or experimental stress analysis procedures.
Listed pressure rated Class 1 valves should be hydrostatically tested to assure integrity of the pressure boundary (leakage through the stem packing is not a cause for rejection) at not less than 1.5 times the 100*F rating rounded off to the next higher 25-psi increment as required by Reference 13, except that valves with a primary pressure rating of less than Class 150 will be subjected to the required test pressure for Class 150 rated valves.
Class 1 valves may be suojected to normal duty within the cyclic load limits of NB-3550; otherwise the valve may have to be designed in accordance with the alternative design rules for severe duty applications.
Clasa 1 valves are to be designed for service levels A, B, C, and D with stre ss limits of NB-3525 through NB-3527 [lb]. Stress limits for level B loads are based on 110% of operating limits. Level C pressures are limited to 120% of operating limits. Pipe reaction stresses for level C loads are limited to 1.8 S, for the valve body material at 500*F, with S taken at 1.2 YS for the pipe at 500*F.
Primary and secondary stresses for level C loads are based on C = 1. 5, Q = 0, and limited to 2.25 S,. Level D Ioads p
T may be evaluated in accordance with Appendix F [le}.
A design report for Class 1 valves will be prepared in accordance with the requirements of NB-356C (1b].
Class 1 valves designed in accordance with the standard rules must satisfy the body shape rules cf NB-3544 which are intended to limit the local stre ss index to a maximum of 2.0.
Primary and secondary stress intensities may then be calculated by the formulas given in NB-3545.1 and NB-3545.2 [lb],
re spectively, and sub]ect to the stress limits described in Section 4.1.1 for Class 1 items. Fatigue evaluatica is performed by the rules and formulas of NB-3545.3.
A-86 Jh) Franklin Research Center w aon.n.n neau.
l I
i Comparison With Past Requirements The past code (4) required that steel valves for power piping systems:
1.
be recommended for the intended service by the manufactJrer be made from code materials suitable for the pressure and temperature 2.
have a minimum body metal thickness as required for ASA B16.5 3.
fittings (151 shall be hydrostatically tested as required by Reference 15, i.e.,
4.
1.5 times the 100*F rating rounded off to the next higher 25-psi using water not above 125'F, with no leakage through the increment, shell.
the minimum body thickness of valves based on the current code sould Note that be based on ANSI B16.34 (13].
As an example, consider a 2500-lb valve designed in accordance with the past code (15]. Body thickness would be based on Table 33 (15]. Comparison with current requirements may be obtained from Table 3 [13] as shown in the following tablas Minimum Wall Thickness Based on Past and Current Codes 2500-lb Class Minimum Wall Thickness Nominal Pipe Inside Past Code Current Code size (in)
Diameter (in)
Table 33 (151 Table 3 [131 4
2.88 1.09 1.09 5
3.63 1.34 1.34 6
4.38 1.59 1.59 8
5.75 2.06 2.06 10 7.25 2.59 2.59 12 8.63 3.03 3.03 Notice that past valves would satisfy current thickness requirements.
It is concluded that Class 1 valves designed in accordance with past requirements would satisfy current requirements with the following possible exceptions:
i A-87 l
v..; Franklin Research Center
- %.a.e n. rw %.
~
t l
1.
Fracture toughness requirements may not be satisfied. Evaluate as recommended by Section 4.1 of this appendix.
2.
valves may not satisfy the primary, secondary and peak stress combination limits if body shape dif fers significantly from the rules of NB-3544 (lb].
i 3.
valves may not satisfy the primary plus secondary stress limit for service level C.
It is recommended that SEP Class 1 valves be evaluated on a case-by-case basis as follows:
1.
Use fracture toughness evaluation forms given in Section 4.1 of this appendix.
Compare actual body shape with body shape rules of NB-3544 (ibl. If 2.
not significantly different, the valve would be considered acequate.
If significant differences are found, the Licensee should be asked to provide calculations and an evaluation based on alternative rules for the valve in question, unless it can be shown that the valve has been subjected to level C conditions and did not have to be replaced.
Class 2 and 3 valves are currently designed to Ehe requirements of subarticle NC-3500 (lc] and ND-3500 (1d), re spectively. Class 2 valves satisfying the standard design rules comply with the standard class requirements of ANSI B16.34 except that valves with flanged and butt welded ends may ce designated as Class 75 in sizes larger than 24-in nominal pipe size provided that NC-3512.l(a) is satisfied. Valves with flanged ends in sizes larger than 24-in nominal pipe size may be used provided that NC-3512. l(o) is satisfied. A shell hydrostatic test satisfying ANSI B16.34 is required. Class 2 and 3 valve stress limits for service limits A, B, C, and D are as given in Table A4-12.
Class 2 and 3 valves with butt welding or socket welding ends conforming to the requirements of NC-3661 and ND-3661 should satisfy the special class requirements of ANSI B16.34 except that:
a.
the nondestructive examination (NDE) requireme'nts of ANSI B16.34, special class, shall be applied to all sizes in accordance with NC-2500 for Class 2 valves and ND-2500 for Class 3 valves.
b.
stress limits for service levels B, C, and D shall be as shown in Table A4-12.
A-d8 JJ FranrAn Researen C. enter o on s m r-. u.
i I
i t
Table A4-12 b
Level B, C, and D Service Limits for Class 2 and 3 Valves TA8LE NC 35211 LEVEL B, C, AND D SERVICE LIMITS Service Umit Stress Umitsid ps e,$ 1.1 S Level B (e, or )+e,$ 1.655 1.1 s,$ 1.5 S Level C (e, or ej+,g 1.3 S 1.2 e,$ 2.0 S Level 0 (e, or eJ+e,$ 2.4 5
1.3 NOTES
(1) A casting quality f actor of I shall be assumed in satisfying these stress limits.
(2)These requirements for the acceptaoility of valve des.gn are not. intended to assure the functional accouacy of the valve.
(3) Des.gn recuirements listed in this tscle are net acchcaele to valve oisks, stems, seat rmgs, or cther parts of the vatves wnich are contained within the confines of the occy and connet.
( )These rules do net accry to safety retief vaives.
(5)The maumum pressure snail not exceed the tatutated factors listed uncer P times the Design o
Pressure or times the rated pressure at the acoticacte sennce temperature.
A-89 AJ Franklin Resceren C. enter 4 oman e. n.=a in
i t
openings for auxiliary connections shall satisfy ANSI B16.34 and the c.
reinforcement requirements of NC-3300 and ND-3300.
Comparison With Past Requirements Class 2 and Class 3 valves designed by past code requirements would have t
the required minimum body thickness but may not comply with pressure-tempera-ture ratings of B16.34, which depend on material group and a rational formulation as compared to the empirical basis of B16.5.
is recommended that the pressure-temperature rating of Class 2 and 3 It SEP valves be compared with the current pressure-temperature rating of For example, the isolation valves of engineered safeguard system of B16.34.
the Palisades plant would be considered Quality Group B (Class 2) components by current standards. These valves are 150 lb rated valves designed to withstand 210 psig at 300*F by Table 2 of the past standard ASA B16.5 for The current standard ANSI B16.34 gives an allowable flanged fittings.
pressure at 300*F which depends on the material group as shown in Table A4-13.
is apparent from Table A4-13 that the engineered safeguard isolation It valves for the Palisades plant would satisfy the current standard provided that the valve material was in one of the tabulated material groups other than 1.12, 2.1, or 2.3.
4.6 HEAT EXCHANGERS Heat exchangers are currently designed and constructed in accordance with the rules of ASME B&PV Code Section III, 1977 Edition [1]. The design requirements for the pressure boundaries of the heat exchanger are found in the following sections of the current code Section l
Shell Side 3300 Tube Side 3600 Tube Sheet 3300 Shell Flange 3200 (Class 1); Appendix XI (Class 2 and 3)
Heat exchangers designed to ASME III (1965) or ASME VIII (1965) are compared as pressure vessels with current requirements in Section 4.3 of this Appendix.
I s
A-90 42 JC Frannlin Research Center 4 om an as The r-m.au.
i Table A4-13 l
Allowaole Working Pressure (1) for a 150 lb Standard Class Valve at 300*F i
Material Group Allowable Pressure (psig)_
l.1 230 1.2 230 1.3 230 1.4 210 1.5 230 1.6 215 1.7 230 1.8 215 1.9 230 1.10 230 1.11 230 1.12 205 1.13 230 1.14 230 2.1 205 2.2 215 2.3 175 2.4 210 2.5 225 2.6 220 2.7 220 1.
Based on ANSI B16.34 (1977) o 0
f A-91
.LJJEnklin Research Ce.nter
=om.anw n r - m.
~..
Heat exchangers designed to the standards of the Tubular Exchanger Manufacturers Association (TEMA) 1959 Edition [8] require that "the individual TEMA vessels shall comply with the ASME Code for Unfired Pressura Vessels."
Class R heat exchangers are for the more severe requirements of-petroleum and i
chemical processing applications. TEMA Class C heat exchangers are for the moderate requirements of commercial and general process applications.
f' The TEMA standards give design rules which " supplement and. define the code for heat exchanger applications."- Allowable stress values, identical with Tables UCS-23 and UCS-27 of the 1959 edition of the ASME Codi for Unfired Pressure Vessels, are reproduced in TEMA as Table D-8 for carbon and low alloy steels and as Table D-8W for carbon and low alloy pipe and tuces of welded the stress values are one-fourth the specified minimum tensile manufacture; strength multiplied by a quality f actor of 0.92.
Group I heat exchangers designed to TEMA (1959) would be governed by the code requirements of ASME VIII (1965). Comparison of ASME viII (1965) with current requirements is as follows:
Class 1 heat exchangers shell flanges would have to be designed by 1.
computer analysis to determine primary, secondary, and peak stress intensities, rather than design formulas as previously used.
Materials for Class 1, 2, and 3 heat exchangers must comply with 2.
current fracture toughness requirements outlined in Section 4.1.1 of this Appendix.
Radiography requirements for vessels designed and constructed to ASME 3.
III (1965) or ASME VIII (1965) are compared with current requirements in Section 4.3 of this Appendix.
4.7 STORAGE TANKS Storage tanks may currently be classified as Class 2 or Class 3 and are designed in accordance with the rules of NC/ND-3900 (1] for atmospheric tanks or 0 to 15 psi tanks, respectively. Atmospheric tanks may be within building structures or above grade, exposed to atmospheric. conditions. Storage tanks of 0 to 15 psi design are normally located above ground within building structures.
A-92 gwp 4 Franklin Research Center 4cm on.en.n.a u.
j e
I 4
}
I Atmospheric Storage Tanks Atmospheric storage tanks are currently required to satisfy the general cesign requirements of NC/ND-3100 and the vessel design requirements of NC/ND-3300 except that a stress report is not required. Stress limits on the maximum normal stress for Service Levels A, B, C, D is as shown in Table A4-12.
Minimum size of fillet welds should satisfy NC/ND-4246.6, i.e., 3/16 in for 3/16-in thick plate, and at least 1/3 of thinne.r plate thickness for plates greater than 3/16 in but not less than 3/16 in.
Nominal thickness of shell plates should be at least 3/16 in for tanks of nominal diameter less than 50 f t or 1/4 in for tanks of 50 to 120 f t nominal diameter, but not greater than i 1/2-in thick.
Roof s shall be designed to carry dead load plus a uniform load of at least 25 psf for outside tanks or at least 10 psf for inside tanks. Minimum roof plate thickness is 3/16 in plus corrosion allowance. Allowable stresses are summarized as follows:
a.
tension - for rolled steel, net section:
20 ksi; full penetration groove welds in thinner plate area: 18 ksi.
b.
compression - 20 ksi where lateral deflection is prevented, or as determined from column formulas of NC/ND-3852.6 (b) (3).
c.
bending - 22 ksi in tension and compression for rolled shapes satisfying the shape requirement of NC/ND-3852.6(c) (1) ; 20 ksi in tension and compression for unsymmetric members laterally supported at intervals no greater than 13 times the compression shape width; and for other rolled shapes, built-up members, and plate girders: 20 ksi in tension and compression as determined by the buckling formulas of NC/ND-3852.6(c) (4).
d.
snearing - 13.6 kai in fillet, plug, slot, ano partial penetration groove welds across throat area,13 ksi on the gross area of beam wees where the aspect ratio (h/t) is less than 60 or:
19.5 (h/t)*
7200
.g
^
Af
.;.s Franklin Research Center o m.onatN n.n a = m
e f
1 0 to 15 esi Storage Tanks Storage tanks which may contain gases or liquids with vapor pressure above the liquid not exceeding 15 psig are currently designed in accordance l
with the requirements of NC/ND-3920. Maximum tensile stress in the outside tank walls is as given in Table I-7.0 of Reference le if both meridional and latitudinal forces are in tension, or this value multiplied by the tensile I
stress factor N (less than 1.0) determined from the Biaxial Stress Chart, Fig.
NC/ND-39222.1-1 (1) if one of these forces is compressive. Maximum
+
compressive stress in the outside wall shall be determined by the rules of NC/ND 3922.3 (1). Maximum allowable stress values for structural members shall be as determined from NC/ND-3923. The O to 15 psi storage tank shall be designed in accordance with the detailed rules of NC/ND-3930.
Comparison with Past Code Requirements Storage tanks in Group I SEP plants were designed either in accordance with A/E specifications, USAS 396.1 (1967) (9), API-650 (1964) (10], ASME III (1965) Class C, or ASME VIII (1965). Stress allowables for ASME III (1965)
Class C vessels are as given in ASME VIII (1965). Examination of the ASME VIII (1965) allowable stress valves for carbon and low alloy plate steels indicates that the values do not exceed 20 ksi except for SA-353 Grade A and B, with allowable stresses of 22.5 and 23.75 ksi, respectively. ASME VIII (1965) does not consider biaxial stress fields with associated reduction in tensile Stress allowables for roofs in Reference 10 are the same as for allowables.
current atmospheric storage tanks.
A comparison of API-650 (1964) roof design requirements, including stress allowables, shows agreement with current requirements; shell material and The tensile stress allowables may, however, not satisfy current requirements.
past code allows the use of A-7 plate material not currently listed as an l
acceptable material. The past code permits an allowable tensile shell stress 21,000 psi times the joint efficiency. Assuming spot radiography of a double welded butt vertical shell joirt made from A-283 Grade C or A-36 plate material, the allowable stress would be 17,850 psi based on 0.85 joint efficiency, which exceeds the current 12,600 psi allowable.
l A-94 t
h i
id FranWin Researen Center 4>
- Nr- -
t
\\
l l
USAS B96.1 (1967) for welded alwminum alloy field-erected storage tanks cannot be used for Class 2 storage tanks since aluminum alloy is not a permitted Class 2 material as listed in Table I-7.0 [1]. However, allumimcm alloy can be used for Class 3 storage tanks since aluminum alloys are listed in Table I-8.4, which is currently used for aluminum shell design, and in Tables ND-3852.7-2 through ND-3852.7-6 for aluminum roof design. A comparison of allowables based on past and current codes is shown in the following table Aluminum Specified Min.
Allowable Stress Structures Material Streng th Past Current (Type of Stress)
(Temper)
TS/YS (USAS B96.1) (ASME III (1977))
Shell (Tension) 5050 (0) 18.0 k31/6.0 ksi 4.8 ksi 4.0 kai Shell (Tension) 6061 (T4rT6) 24.0 ksi/ -
7.2 ksi 6.0 kai 18.0 kai 18.0 ksi Bolts (Tension) 6061 (T6)
Roof Support 19.0 19.0 (Axial Compres-6061 (T6) sion, L/r 3,10)
Roof Support 20.4-20.4-(Axial Compres-6061 (T6) 0.135 L/r 0.113 L/r sion 10 3,L/r 3,67)
From this table, it can be concluded that:
1.
shells designed to USAS B96.1 (1967) may be overstressed by as much as 20% compared to current allowaoles l
l 2.
bolts designed to USAS B96.1 (1967) satisfy current requirements 3.
roof supports with slenderness ratios up to 10 satisfy current requirements i
i roof supports with slenderness ratios between 10 and 67 more than satisfy 4.
current compression allowables by as much as 13%.
i Therefore, aluminum alloy storage tanks built to USAS B96.1 (1967), when evaluated against current requirements:
f 1.
At temperatures to 100*F.
I I
A-95 4
i may not satisfy materials requirements in Table I-7.0 if the tank is 1.
a Class 2 component may be unconservatively designed when compared to current stress 2.
allowables, by as muca as 204 for the shell.
In conclusion, Tanks designed to A/E specification should be carefully compared to 1.
current code requirements Atmospheric tanks designed to ASME III (1965) Class C are likely to 2.
satisfy current requirements with regard to e.lloweble tensile stress, Class C but may not satisfy current compression stress requirements.
atmospheric tanks currently classified as Code Class 2 may not satisfy the current quality assurance requirements as discussed in Section 4.1.2 of this Appendix.
O to 15 psig tanks designed to ASME III (1965) Class C requirements 3.
may not satisfy current tensile allovables for biaxial stress fields These tanks in which one of the stress components is compression.
should be examined carefully in light of current requirements. Class C (0 to 15 psig) tanks cur:ently classified as Code Class 2 may not satisfy the current quality assurance requirements discussed in Section 4.1.2 of this Appendix.
4.
Atmospheric storage tank roofs designed to API-650 (1964) satisfy current stress allowables.
Atmospheric welded steel storage tanks designed to API-650 (1964) may 5.
not satisfy current requirements with regard tot use of A-7 plate material not currently acceptable a.
b.
shell tensile stresses may exceed current code allowables 6.
Atmospneric storage tanks designed to USAS 596.1 (1967) may not satisfy current requiremerts.
I O
A-96
e 1
5.
BASIS FOR SELECTING REQUIREMENTS MOST SIGNIFICANT TO COMPONENT INTEGRITY I
The selection of code requirements most significant to component integrity has been based on the experience of the author and colleagues in industry, government, and academia. Codes pertaining to the design and construction of nuclear power plants have been modified and expanded. The changes reflect new
" state of the art" knowledge, new techniques of fabrication, examination, testing, and methods of achieving quality that have been " filtered" and accepted by the technical community.
It is the author's view that current codas represent a consensus of what is best for achieving both economy of construction and puolic safety. Accordingly, changes in stress limits, full radiography requirements, and fatigue evaluation for piping, as well as more conservative requirements for f racture toughness, have been given special attention.
i 4
4 A-97
{
4
.WJ Franklin Research Center amemvm m
e
'~
~
g 3
I 6.
REFERENCES
~
- 1. American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, " Nuclear Power Planc l
Components"
~,,
New York: 1977 Edition with Addenda through Summer 1978 t
s a.
Division 1 and Division 2 General Requirements l
b.
Division 1, Subsection NB, Class 1 Components
/
c.
Division 1, Subsection NC, Class 2 Components
/
d.
Division 1, Subsection ND, Class 3 Components
~
e.
Division 1, Appendices
- 2. Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Revised January 1,1981
- 3. A.netican Society of Mechtnical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, " Rules for Construction of Nuclear Vessels" 1965
- 4. American Standards Association
" Code for Pressure Piping" American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1955 ASA B31.1-1955 N-
- 5. American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section VIII, "Unfired Pressure Vessels,"
and Section I, " Power Boilers" 1965
- 6. " Quality Group Classifications and Standards for Water, Steam, and Radioactive-Waste-Containing Components of Nuclear Power Plants," Rev. 3 NBC, February 1976 Regulatory Guide 1.26
- 7. Standard Review Plan Section 3.2.2, " System Quality Group Classification" NRC, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, July 1981 NUREG-75/087
. t i
~
- 8. Standards of Tubular Exchanger Manuf acturers Assoc 1ation New York: Fourth Edition, 1959
'l I
A-98 aj) Franklin Research Center
= om.an er N rr.n.en
,! ~ s "
m-
,E, J
- ~ -
- 10. American Petroleum Institute en
,[
- Weldeo Steel Tanks for Oil Storage" I tiew York: Second Edition,-April 1964
.' ' API-650 i
i
- 11. Final Safety Analysis Report for Consumers Power Company, Palisades Plant (3 Volumes) i
~
November'5, 1968 ~
USAEC. Docket No. 5o-2 55 II. Brock, J. E.
"A Temperature Chart and Fo::nules Useful with USAS B31.7 Code for Thermal stress in Nuclear Power Piping" Nuclear Engineering and Design, Vol. 10, pp. 79-82 Austries.tiorth Holland Publishing Co., 1969 i
13.' American National Standards Institute j
" Steel valves"
'~
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1977 ANSI E16.34-1977 l
l g.
+
- 14. Hydraulic Institute Standards
-r Cleveland: Eleventh Edition, 1965 1
7
- 15. American standards Association
" Steel Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings" American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1961 j "
ASA B16.5-1961
/
c' s
/
ys
/
/
.y l
t; q
1 j
L
/
4 A-99 p
' u Franklin Research Center M
mm