ML20042C474
| ML20042C474 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 06/21/1971 |
| From: | FACTORY MUTUAL RESEARCH CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20042C470 | List: |
| References | |
| 20166, NUDOCS 8203310431 | |
| Download: ML20042C474 (15) | |
Text
L s.
,,..3
- i....
r e.>.
o EXPLOSIC VENTING FASTENERS FOR Tile PRESSURE RELIEVING WALLS OF DAMAGE LIMITING CONSTRUCTION from ELWIN G. SMITil & CO' IPA'n*, INC.
100 WALLS STREET PITTSBURGil, PENNSYLVANIA 15202 SERIAL t'O.
20156 JUNE 21, 1971
^
hh'..%
r, re %
L.J y,p '
FACTORY Muit!AL E F S E A I:.' ai C O F'e O P. A ~ O ts B203310431 820322 PDR ADOCK 05000440 E
pop 1151 L O! T O'J.t c.0VID!!40E T U R!!'1 F.
GR"'OCO
..< /,1 ;
co; e
.ifd.d..
a 3 M.;g,p c,'v1F,y.ya,,;. n t,
- ,n;g,y e
, :.2,
,y, m....,,.., _,,,,,,,
h
..i 3
1-FACTORY M tJ T U A L RES E A RCH C O R P O R A T I O 1J 1851 BOSTON.rkOVIDENCE T UR NPIK E, NORWOOD. M A 55. 02C42 20166' J une 21, 19 71 EXPLOSION VENT 1!1G FASTENERS t
FOR Tile
-PRESSURE RELIEVING WALLS t
OF DAMAGE LIMITING CONSTRUCTION from ELWIN G. SMITH.6 COMPANY, INC.
100 WALLS STREET PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA 15202 I
INTRODUCTION 1.1 Dar.iage limiting construction having a pressure relie-ir.g wall
. is used to enclose hazardous occupancies supplementing other s z.f eguards i
normally provided to minimize the explosion hazard of such occ cpancies.
j.
When subjected to an explosive force the pressure relieving (et venting) wall.quickly vents the force before it causes major damage to :ther building
. areas.
1.2. The Elwin G. Smith & Company submitted a pressure relieving wall system f or examination using their specially designed explosic: venting fastener and their glass fiber insulated metal wall panel.to determine if the fas tener assembly wo'uld release their siding panel at the designed release pressure.
1.3 Six different sized fasteners were tested in shear, eight in tension and one E. G. Smith wall assembly.
1.4 As a -result of large and small dynamic pressure' test s and fire tes ts,
the submitted explosion venting fastener and insulated wall ps.el are suitable for Factory !!utual = approval subjei:t to the ' limitations noted d.n the CONCLUSIONS.'
i 11
- 11ATERI AL~ USED; f 2.1 C. GJ Smith Explosion Venting F;stener P
iThe fasteners ' are L/4 in.: dia.-20 threads /in. annes '.dd. aluminum,
- bex head cap screws with 'their sharyk' necked-dovn to o'ne of c! j h
- : 'dif ferent
-diameters. ranging f rom.0S0 in, to.126.in. uith : correspondir.; desi6 nations of 4
Gtoup 111'. Group X.
The f astenets tested were "of the ^ f ellt : ; ci r.ca :
-9 3-e
.m w.a_-,
t-
_m.,...
..y...
- m. m.-
- c. c.g,3..
7
.1 j
FACTORY MUTUAL E l. i[ ARCil CORPOR A1 TON Page 2
~20166 Group No.
Dia. (Necked-Down) in.
III
.080
- 1V
.085 V
.091 VI
.098 VII
.105 VIII
.112 IX-
.119 X
.126 When used in shear, the necked-down diameter of the Ecstener should be accurately positioned in the structural girts by grcmmets s o tha t the smallest. diameter of the fastener will shear.
The number of f asteners used to secure pressure relie ring panels.
is dependent upon the desired panel release pressure, the ultimate strength-of the bolt, the vertical spacing of the structural girts supporting the panels, the spacing of the fasteners along the girts, and the total weight of the panels.
In all tes ts the fasteners and nuts were installed finger ti gh t.
g.
2.2 E. G. Smith Insulated Itetal Wal'1 Panel
~
The following is a description of the E. G. Smi h insulated metal wall panel used in the 2 large scale dynamic tests:
a.
' Exterior Sheet; 22 gauge galvanized s teel
"'T-i-eall" panel,12 in, wide with Colorgard II finish.
+
^b.
Subgirt Sys tem:
E. G. Smith 18 gauge steel I';-130 hat shaped subgirting..
c.
Insulation; 1 1/2 in, thick by 12 in. wida g '.as s. fib e r i n-sulatien at 1.58. pef density.
d.
Interior Sheet; 22 gauge galvanized steel "C-Panel",.
12 in, wide with Colorgard Il finish.
This assembly covered the 35 sq f t opening of the e.vcplcsion chamber
~
and weighed 208.7 Ibs.
III TEST EQUIPilENT AND PROCEDURES.
3.1 Fi re Tes ts Two fire tests of the E. 'C.
Smith glass flber 1.s.: lated metal uall pancl_ vere run on the Construction 11aterials Cnlori:'+:cr. The wall assembly exhlhated nc. fire spread behavlor and is censidered.nf 'le - fi re ' iiazard. See Approvul Re;ma t nu,tJoer 20166.1 for~ the description cad r-: r.:' ts of the firc ~ tes ts.
',hl9)eb..*,-4. :,et.d
.* $ms.t. i.;,e ^ e., r.. 6.. s e i. v. L t %4 4.w,...v.......-...~.-,_...
q.,
- .. e FArf0RY MUIUAL RI <[ ARCH CORPOR AllON 20166 Page 3 4,9 3.2
_St ati c Tes ts
'g Static tension tests of the eight groups of faste Ters were run using a Tinius Olsen Testing Machine. Tes ts were conducte.d at the machine
,I speed of 2 in per minute.
- 3' 3.3 Small Scale Dynamic Tes ts
~
Dynamic shaar tests of six groups of fasteners cere conducted using a specially designed enclosure of 27 cu. ft.
Dynamic tension tests of the eight groups were.also evaluated on the same f t.
equip =ent.
.p C
Test equipment included a 3 f t x 3 f t x 3 f t reinforced aluminum box having a 1 sq. f t.. opening in the front wall. An 11 gage steel panel
'l was placed over the opening with provisions for explosion. anting fasteners.
.1 A pressure transducer was located at the. center of the back cf the chamber to sense the internal explosion pressure and was connected to a pressu're-
+
"q time recorder to note the pressure at release of each of the fas teners.
J The venting panel assembly weighed'12 lbs.
~
" In a typical tes t, the transducer and.the fasteners being tested 1
p
' vere wired to the pressure recorder. An explosive charge consisting of W
8 oz. of 4F black powder was ignited by an electr'ic match.
The pressure recorder recorded the internal-pressure in the chamber and the pressure at "3
which each.of the fas teners failed.
~
- . d,,
L'arge Scale Dynamic Tests in Shear i
3.4
- .n
- [k 1
Two large scale tests were conducted using the Factory Mutual Explosion Tes t Chamber. This.is 'a reinforced concrete st ructure, 30 ft long, 12 f t. wide, and l'2 f t. high (interior. dimensions).
One end was h'alf
]!
open providing a 4.ft. wide by 8 ft. 9 in. high vent oper.ing and _a venting W
ratio of I sq. ft. to 123 cu. ft.
The test ' setup was essentially. the same as that'for the small scale I
-dynamic tes ts in shear. In both tests, 4 of the f as teners used to' secure the venting test panel in place were used to represent the failure-tina cf all the -
f as tene rs t es te d.- The transducer, placed inside the charl::e r, and the 4 l g,'
f acteners uere wired to the pressure recorder. The expl:si ce charge ' for
' ' [.
cach test consisted of 12 lbs of plastic-molding poyder dispe rsed within the chamber by 6 f t ' f 'Primacord detonated by an electric blas ting cap. Ti o
i]
dust cloud thus for: red uus in turn ignited by '60 gr::ns of -F black pen s c
't ig')ited by an cIcctric.ma tch.
-IV TEST RP.SULTS 4.1 Static Tes ts 4
- .e '
- e it
=
.'l.
.,,.: i
.. c.......... ~..... G ^. : ~.. +..L.
~ n'
.......y,,.G..
...,~.......w...........
i
<l
~
- FACTORY MultlAL 4E SE ARCH CORPOR Af tDN
'Page 4 20166 A total of 48 static tension tests were condt eted on the 8 groups of fasteners. The streng,th of each fastener tested is recorded in Appendix 1.
From this data the average breaking strength of each fastener is.as follows:
Group No.
Ave. Ultima te St rength in Tension III 195 lbs.
~
IV 215 lb s.
V' 233 l': s.
VI.
269 lbs.
VII 344 lb s.
VIII 410 lb s.
IX 435 lb s.
X 479 hs.
t 4.2 Small Scale Dynamic Tests in' Shear Tl'irty small scale dynamic tests were conducted in' shear on the E. G. Smith explosion venting bolts. These consis ted c f 5 tes ts each.
of 6 'fas tener sizes (Groups V-X).
The average pressures at which the fasteners released and the average release force per f a.stener as computed f rom the pressure recorder data are tabulated on Appendi:. 2.
From this data the ultimate strength in shear of each fastener gr:tp was recorded as follows:
Fastener Group No..
Ave. Ultimate StrenRth in Sh'e'ar V-152 lbs.
VI 169 lbs.
VII 203 lbs.
VIII 222 lbs.
IX 248 lbs, X
295 lbs.
In all 6 groups of fasteners, the results were cocristent and fell'-
within the a110wabic.15% deviation for each group.
4.3 Small Scale Dynamic Tests in Tension A total of 20 small scale tes'ts were run in' tension en the E. C. Smi th f as teners for groups Ill-X.-
The average ch a:-be r pressure at fastener release and the average release force per fastener are :6ulated in Appendix 3.
From thece values the ultiniate strength in tensica of 1-a:h f astener group is as follows:
Fas tene r Group' N.o.
Ave. Ultimate Strenrthr Tens t en '-
III.
205 lbs.
IV 235 ibe..
,V.
265 lbs.
V1 315 ibs.
.VII 357 lbs.
Vill 365 lbs.
I' 409 '_ lhn.
'X 156 lbc.
f.
. t.,','t..
A** -
6,1 -lW h % v $* ' y -$' q,';J.!/*,.[ e ;'? 'r **.!* *f M*h
- ar**
Y va---
-.=
.a *me..
F AC10RY MUTUAL R t..t A R Cil CORPOR Allott 20166 Page 5 The ultiniate strengths stated above supersede values in Factory Mutual report numbers 16338 and 17965.
4.4 Large Scale Dynamlc Tes ts In both large scale tests the fasteners f unc_ tion e d prope rly, re-l 1 casing the panels and venting the explosion within the ac rep ed i 15%
range of the design pressure. The test results are as fol;: s:
~
Test #1 Test #2 Fastener Group No.
V X
Fastener Diameter
.091 in.
. 3.2 6 in.
Area Ex;.osed to Explosion 35 sq ft 3.5 s q f t Venting ratio-1 sq.ft.: 123 cu.ft.
1 sq. f t. : 123 cu.ft.
No. of Fas teners.
- 8 4
Designed Release Pressure 34.7 psf.
- 33. 7 psf.
Actual Release l'ressure 37.7 psf.
3 3. 7 ps f.
+
Weight of Wall Panel' 208 lbs.
2J8 lbs.
.V CCNCLUSIONS i
5.1 The small scale shear tests used a relatively se ecre explosion and n' rigid panel. With this rigid panel the resulting force at release e
represented the dynamic strength 'of the fastener.
These values were con-sistent and fell within the.1 15% alleuable deviation of group strength.
5.2 In the large scale tests the fasteners and thei;- s; acing were selected so that the explosion venting syster.s vould have ultimate strengths of 34.7 psf. and 33.7 psf.
The results, being withir. the 15% allouable deviation frc.i the design strength, indicate, if an E. G.
fr.i th insulated metal wall panel is used, the weight of the panel mus t.nnt c :cced the com-bined weights of the components of section. 2.2 or 6, lbs./s q.f t.
of area covered in order to avoid a pressure build-up due to mass.
5.3 The submitted E. G Smith explosion venting fas t.eners,- Groups V-X in shear and Groups 111-X in tension, and the - E.' G.
Smith ;12ss fiber insulated metal wall panel are suitable fior approval when designed to be the pressure relieving elements of damage limiting construction, b
~
5.4 Approval is ef fective.when the !!anuf acturer's Ag reement is signed
~
. and re turned to Factory Mutual.
Continuation of approval
.s ddpendent upon
~
satisfactory field experience.
5.5 The produs.ts meet the Factory flutual requi rement s and=when approved dill be listed in the Factory 'lhatual Approval Guide. ~
O 4
b t
e
,-,y.-
,s..,.v.,
_m y,
,.+n
..,,y.
y
,p
F AC.T ORY MUTUAL **5EARCH CO RTO R Ai!OP.'
~
Page 6 20166 MANUFACTURER'S RESPONSIBILITIES The manufacturer shall submit for review a copy of his advertising literature and recomended installation procedures for a _hieving the level of performance established by this examination.- To assure ronpliance with' this i
procedure in the. field, the manufacturer shall supply tc the installer such e
necessary instructions or other assistance required te p roduce the desired performance.
The manufacturer shall notify the Factory Hutual Re. search' Corporation
~
'of any change in the a,pproved product prior to general s ale or distribution.
RE-EXAMINATION A re-examination and manufacturing inspection will be conducted periodically on the approved product to determine that the quality and
. uniformity cf the product has been maintained and will provide the icvel of performance as originally approved.
TEST AND REPORT BY:
REPORT.U? ROVED BY:,
Pa. 9n ma P. A. Mortberg, W. F. Maroni, Project Engineer Chief Ms:crials Engineer 4
4
^
9 4
l t
D e
G 6
9 g
4
- y,+.).,
,.y,.
--~--'--~---~m-~
- ~. - - - - - -. * - - - - -
< ~ -
?
FACTORY MUTUAL RE5' SRCH CORPOR AllON 20166-Appendix 1
. STATIC TEST' RESULTS IN TENSION Group No.
Tes t No.
Machine Speed Breakir;; Strength
'in./ min.
l'e s. -
. III 1
2 153
?
~
e 2
2 -
20.
3 2
199 4
2 195 5
2
- 195, 1
2 215 IV 2
2, 111 3
'2 215 4
2 217 2
n _.
1-2
_~.,-
V 2
2 229 3
2 255 4
2 231 5
2 n--
6 2
233 1
2 sai VI 2'.
2 25:
3 2
255 4
2 17 :-
5-2 u-.
6 2
2_: 9 8
1 2
25 VII.
. 2 2
~
171 3
2 a.
4 2
1:-
5 2
=.
6 2
7 2
25; 4
1 2
L:-
VIII 2
2
-9 3
2 c'-
4 2
5 2
6 2
1 2
IX 2
2 3-2
- 2.2 4
2 b
2
-?-
6 2
Y 2
-:?
9
.* 5
...y...,
......s.~..
.,..-.....,.u.,....y....,,.....p
,,.,,.,,,,,....,...,,,, _, r ; ;.,, a,,-.,n,.,,,,,,,--.n.jm,
e e
FACTORY MUTUAL B F '.E AR CH CORPOR A f TON
.-e t
20166 ' Appendix 1
.l.
Group No.
Test No.
Nachine Speed Brea'og Strength in./ min.
Ibs.
,. f 1
2 '-
473
~ X 2
2 480 e
3 2
471 4
2 496
' e r'
5 2
.478 6
2 476 g
u
., M e
. s g
..l i
p s
t* m I
g e
g W
I s.
g
\\
e e
1WM h
M I.
.%*M e,
- e
- D g; I 9 *N
- - \\
\\
t *1 4
D
~
2-2,*: ~,Sen
- t::. G. !.%1:yL G N,.t].i} d i d 2 Q M % n c e ~.y - t-t -
s.<-
..uc.a. y-_ u-m _.
i,
?
~
L FACTORY MUTUAL RE SE.' aCH CORPORATION
~
~20166 Append 1x 2 SMALL SCALE SilEAR DYNA?i1C TESTS Group V Bolt _
Tes t No.
Release Pressure Force / Bolt Ave. Terce 2
4.44 psi 160 lbs J~
3 3.94 psi 142 lbs 152 lb s "
4
.4.45 psi 160 lbs 5
4.09 psi 147 lbs
~
~
Group _VL Bolt Tes t No.
. Release Pressure Force / Bolt
, Ave. Terce 6
4.87 psi 176 lbs 7
4.84 psi 174 lbs
.e 8
4.80 psi 173 lbs 169 lbs; 9
4.45 psi' 161 lbs 10 4.45 psi 161 lbs Group VII Eult Tes t No.
Release Pressure Force / Bolt Ave. ferce 11 5.05 psi 182 lbs 12 5.80 psi 208 lbs 13 5.68 psi 205 lbs 203 lb s 14 6.30 psi 226 lbs 15 5.60 psi 202 lbs Group VIII Bolt.
Test No.
Release Pressure Force / Bolt Ave. Frrce 16 6.46 pst 232 lbs 17 6.25 psi 225 lbs 18 6.20 psi 223 lbs 222 lbs 19 5,.90 psi 212 lbs 20 6.10 psi 220 lbs Group IX Bolt Test No.
Release Pressure Force / Bolt Ave. F-rce N,
21 6.85 psi '
247 lbs 22 6.68 psi 240 lbs 23 7.28 psi 263 lbs 245 lbs 12 4 6.86 psi 248 lbs 4
25 6.68 psi 240 lbs Group X Unit
' Tes t No.
Release Pressure Force / Bolt Ave. Irrce 26 8.15 psi 293 lbs 27 8.00 psi 288 lbs 18 7.85~ psi 233 lbs 292- 'bs 29 7.88 psi 28/. Ibs 30 9.00 psi 324 lbs D
9
C *...*.-e.
~
FACTORY MUTUAL RE$rARCH CORPORA 1 TON 20166 Appendix 3 i
SMALL SCALE TENSION DYNAMIC TESTS Group III Bolt (4 Bolts)
Test No.
, Release Pressure Force /Bol 5.36 psi 193 lbs 1
}L 2
5.55 psi 200 1bs s
Group Ill Bolt (3 Bolts)
Test No.
Release Pressure Force /Bol:
3 4.50 psi 216 lbs
~.
~
4 4.41 psi 212 lbs
'(
Croup IV Bolt' (4 Bolts)
J Test No.
Release Pressure Forec/Bol:
5 6.70 psi 241 lb.s 6
6.40 psi 230 lbs Group V Bolt (4 Bolts)'
Test No.
Release Pressure Force /Bol 7
7.58 psi 273 lbs
~
8 8.00 ~
,283 lbs
~ Group V Bolt (3 Bolts)
Test No.
Reicase Pressure Force / Bel:
9, 5.25 psi 252 lbs 10 5.13 psi 246 lbs.
Group V1 Bolt (4 Bolts)
Test No.
Release Pressure Force / Bel:
11 8.80 psi 317 lbs 12 8.70 nsi 313 lbs Crbup V11 Bolt (4 Bolts)
Test No.
Release Pressure Force /Bol:
13 9.7 psi
. 349 lbs 14
, 10. 7 psi 365 lbs Nbe-
.-.id Group Vill Bolt (3 Bolts) i Test No.
Release Pressure Force / Bel:
g 15 7.53 psi 361 lbs 16 7.67 psi
'363 lbs
~
Group IX Bolt (3 Bolts)
Test No.
Release Pressure Force /Be_-.
17 8.46 psi
'406 353 18 8.58 psi-411 lbs Crcup X Bolt ( 3 Bolt r.)
Tes t No.
Peli ase Pressure Force /S.
19 9.30 psi 46 1: :
20 9.73 psi 4h? I '-
e
.I
'5-AIR SEALS - REACTOR ANNULUS REGION The Reactor Vessel insulation incorporates a series of free-swinging panels above the elevation of the biological shield wall which are hinged at their upper edge and are held in their normal functioning pcsition merely by the weight of each separate panel itself. These panels have been referred to as a
" air-seals".
The use of the term " air seal" originated with the design effort directed to the forced air cooling scheme for the vessel side of the B-shield. That scheme utilizes a small portion of pedestal cooling air passing between the RV insulation and the B-shield, the gap for which varies from 1" to as much as 20" depending upon elevation. In order for that cooling to be reliably maintained leakages must be limited (1) from the cooling passages directly to drywell and (2) from the cooling passages to the RV annulus, through the seams in insulation standing above the B-shield and cut to drywell.
It is this second leakage path above, which consists ahmost entirely of gaps around the free-swinging panels at the top of the B-shield, which resulted~in these panels being referred to as air-seals in terms of that analysis. This is not meant to imply that these panels are designed to prevent or hinder the free venti.ng of the annulus in the event of a design basis pipe rupture within the annulus, but in fact the term originated precisely becauseof the leakage afforded even under the extremely low pressure differential of normal operation.
s Since the insulation panels were required to swing to allow free venting of the annulus during pipe rupture, a differential of 15 psi was conservatively assigned to be required for panel opening. This was done even though it can bg shown that the average pressure required to offset the uead-weight of the panel and begin lifting from its closed position is a fraction of an inch of water differential.
Details of the arrangement of these panels is provided in the attached Figures 1, 2 & 3.
t
_.___m.
w-
,_. +.
I -
2
.= ' ^
r
=
B F D.l.n O AV 1 23 Ol8 W
1.noAn.1n0AN'1 ino.w'1
,n DN O
\\
- Om ce ce=2 s,
=4
- 1. 3 V 8
y, o%
y g
ap i
, '.)
- t I
)-9 I
~
(
.Y
/
!<M Q j
\\
.-. L f
l'
}
g f
i s
\\
j
.~
I
=e-
- = =
e-g L.
.t j
l f
v
{g I
j s
s i
)
A I
g ',
s g
, s.
.w 1 th
~
' Q=
I x.
Cr--] lp l
h
\\
.. -)
- .=.T, i
\\
l I
Q ka i..--.-
x e.
s
^
-J e
4
=
l 2
i O
i
-J_
_i N
b, O
B-s9 6 -
)
FIGURE I 3
,g 1.
j 111 RV INSULATION INCLUDING
,J i
FREE-SWINGING PANELS
[
FROM:04-4549-42-04 i
4
~,,\\
-l
.e
.e Ig LR *%4 t Qs4.'If:p.
, Q.,.
mo.
EL. 56'- 4 #
HEE-C C
~.@4 ses vww
- u., :.-
u
~.,
c
- v.i v
.,y)
. p.. 4'.;
x-
.. Q. m,. Ti
<=-
\\
i l
5pceiD
- .;2A Gk.hVhsOWIAf4?kYNh S.G. sEI F.Jesm
.e t1".o.c:. ; -??@gn c;,.s,.w s
ct_osuge.w
?
ROLLED ~ /.74'4.3 %
..:.J'.O.~.7
~
. Ri i c:a '/ f :..
T:
n f
.q w j
i.
e n
- jp DETML~/h
'7?di$g.
.~
\\ g /..* 'f.7& 6 4
' 07.*
t.D q,,>
H1NGEd26MGFsd.;g y c v. " :3
(
' NORM AL.LYTC.L
+
n.T M o" GAP F h,. N, r
g
!g u
g!, Q!
. M L R y T Y f.g *
. j. i k\\0 COLD h
, t) 7-No Lpp gcgs_%
. M.:w.:. g
' l:
_ l.
?
t,.-;.
[ >
~~' REMovNELE PNk. Ei ;kl
--[
q)
..c
+
4 4 y..
e.
. oppu.
i;i 9 - 5.%. QUlc_K1 RELEASE.6;. '..
.g
) t 60CKLL.E. FASTC4Mgj. 3
.EL.So-4h 1.9 L- -E STREER (F.tE=LO. 9100NW?
9
- .,
- .c:.nsAt
~ Y *'
f g.
~
- p.m gM..n
., LAYOUT -- 67.i.Y, y
ae gy4.
c cavtuso accuuc iuumunnOCk
,],
Perry Nuclear Power Pferit Units 14. 2
,1
[
fAPPROVED
[ ate YseYg l
-FIGURE 2 a
o smssoas st? *esen as r
6 ApenovtD AS contmact oocusatuts asas RV INSUI.ATION
- N j NoTED oa< * '.=o.'.** c* 'a' .ca"T"'e=.
s SWINGING PANFL DETAIL bd va..
o s om CETURNED fOR as te nerna.s mn -
)coKRE TION ame eumosts.
FP.0M : 04-4549-42-011-3 i
EFJTgATr. ?. INC.
\\-l
-w-hF/Y,l $ *". n/a.is>
/
MS8).
- <.: ? q: Q
=
f W}bb'O'[
f-s~l$7,NU
]
^'
~
~~
^ '
o J
[
.R-141 1
k-t SWD b
~
~..
=
i
. ~,...:.
,p
.h-1
. i ~ '.~ '
- ~*
,g
- i..
'.. g g m o g y 4.........,.-
.J.
~
',,,, ' ~
e
.4 il y
~
FIELD UOUNT W D O 0 6 ~~~
270' 3%IW\\CE.;24.CA '
/
Ft. ASH \\t% MA. 60E.
.P 9/
W/A14.x.7g'AC.REWS o-
/
l.-
d
.a
/
g i
o/
s.,,
,/
n T
be#
h.
.\\o
_I
'T-g g
~
\\
. l s
N r
x r
x 2
1 N
l
'l
')
.\\
s N.
,Y.
a.
]
N._
/
~'
~~- Q s' j
~
'*}.-
3
{_ _. h 1s
/
l 5
s
-)
./
4
..e, s
l o-I'
\\
d
.:.g
-[
e-e
{
.c
- a....
N 2
1 n
\\.
W\\
4-l'
- r I
p s.
s*
~~
_\\
y 5
f
-. 4%s
.;...~
).
I n
s i
I I
FIGURE 3 i
~ '
[
RV INSULATION
~
SWINGING PANEL DETAIL i
b.
FROM: 4549-42-12 4
_7
. r.
-g
[-.
.j.
~
r 480.32 The response to question 480.5 was incomplete. Provide the following additional information:
a)
Transient loading on the major components and structure in the reactor annulus region that was used to establish the adequacy of the design.
This should include the load a
forcing functions (e.g., f(t), fx(t), fy(t)), and transient moments (e.g., M(t), Mx(t), My(t), as resolved
- about a specific, identified coordinate system.
b)
Provide the projected area used to calculate these loads and identify the location of the area projection on plan and section drawings in the selected coordinate system.
This information should be presented in such a manner that confirmatory evaluation of the loads and moments can be made.
c)
Provide plan and elevation drawings of the biological shield wall annulus region in enough detail to verify the nodalization model used in the analysis.
Response
The response to this question was provided in a submittal dated November 30, 1981, for question 480.05c and d. (copy attached) 4
-