ML20044G613
| ML20044G613 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris, Brunswick, Robinson  |
| Issue date: | 05/11/1993 |
| From: | CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20044G611 | List: |
| References | |
| DG-II.20, NUDOCS 9306040012 | |
| Download: ML20044G613 (28) | |
Text
. - -,-
n.
~..
i i
i:;
1 i
a Coeb
{
i A
CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPAtrl-NUCLEAR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT-4 I
DESIGN GUIDE FOR f
CIVIL / STRUCTURAL OPERABILIT'l REVIEWS l
DESIGN GUIDE NUMBER DG'II.20 i
.I I-l Revinion Submitted AnnroO d
.k i
/'
5 s // 'J3 co;oy 9306040012.930528 PDR ADDCK'05000324 PDR p.
. Design Guids No.-DO-II.20' Civil /Strue..Oper Reviews LIST.OF EFFECTIVE PAGES Pace Revision i
5-ii 4~
l
- 4'
- 2
- 4 3
4' 4
4 5
4 6
4 7~
-5 8
5-9 5
10 4
11 4'
12 4
13 4
14 4
15 16 4
4 17 4-18 4
.19 4
20' 4-21 4
22
-- 4 23 4
24 4
25 4
E+V-5
'Page II.00-i; c--,,_,-
~
_.... _ _ _, -...~..,... -;.
~. - - -.
+
Design Guide No. DG-II.20 Civil /Strue. Oper. Reviews TABLE OF CONTENTS-i Pace No.
i t
I.
INTRODUCTICN i
1 i
A.
Purpose 1
B.
Applicability II.
GENERAL
.I 1
A.
References 1
f B.
Responsibilities
'r C.
General Design Criteria e
1 III.
PRACTICE 3
A.
Acceptability 3
B.
Operability 11-C.
Reportability l
IV.
Attachments A.
Flow Chart - Procedure to Evaluate 12 Operability'of Systems Other than Piping 13 B.
Operability Review Cover Sheet 14 C.
STSI List Format D..
Brunswick STSI Criteria for Existing Pipe Supports 15 t
V.
Appendices 1.
Basis for Recommended Piping.
25 f
Operability Criteria i
~I 1
s i
l l
l l
i ll-I Fev. 4 Page II.00-li-I.
+
~
Design Guide No. DG-II.20
. Civil /Strue. Oper< Reviews I.
INTRODUCTION A.
Purpose i
The purpose of this design guide is'to establish technical criteria to be followed by Civil Structural Discipline personnel
- BNP, when performing operability /reportability reviews.for HNP, These reviews / analyses relate strictly to the structural and RNP.
aspects of steel structures / components / piping as related to post-seismic operability inclusive of all other loading conditions..
I These criteria are consistent with operability criteria used by ether. utilities.
Specific seismic input'to be utilized for operability reviews of. piping at BNP, HNP,'and RNP has been provided by Stevenson & Associates, as summarized ~in Appendix 1, in Sections 3, 4,' and 5.
l B.
Applicability This guidance is applicable to all Civil Structural Discipline i
personnel (direct and contract) involved in nuclear plant steel structures / components / piping operability reviews.
Deviations from this design guide shall be with the approval of the Chief Civil i
Engineer only.
It is the responsibility of the Responsible Engineer to inform the Project ~and Principal Engineers of
{
deviations existing in any submitted calculation..
Deviation from these criteria for operability shall be individually justified and 4
approved by the Chief Civil Engineer.
II.
GENERAL A.
References 1.
NED Procedure 3.18 2.
3.
BNP 01-04, 01-4.1 4.
RNP Memorandum RNPD/89-3551, 10/25/89 5.
BNP M-20, M-21 Documents 6.
ASME Section III, Division 1, Appendix F 7
ASME Section III, Division 1, Appendix U 8.
Responsibilities Lead Engineer Perform appropriate evaluations as directed by the Principal Engineer.
Project Engineer Upon approval of structural operability using either the Specific Analysis or Structural Review Panel method, it is the Project Engineer's responsibility to
' ensure steps are taken to document the evaluation in accordance with MED Guideline E-4 utilizing the Operability Review Approval Sheet (Attachment B).,.,,,
Also, the Project Engineer-shall be responsible for scheduling plant activities restoring the condition to long-term acceptable status as soon as possible.
This.-time frame is normally within one refueling outage unless specific action is taken in accordance with Generic Letter 91-18 (Reference'8).
Each Civil Project Engineer shall' track temporary conditions in their associated area and may use previously established 1
Page II.20-1 rev.
2 1
e r-+
- - - + e r-e*
r---
m
+ - - ' *-
- - + - + - - <
--e' 4---- - - + +i
=
Design Guide No. DG-II.20 Civil /Struc. Oper. Reviews methods within plants (such as BNP Facts, NED ACRs, etc.).
In addition,-for BNP the project engineer shall report the l
condition to the STSI list coordinator and-include the STSI list coordinator on the i
distribution list for the operability j
assessment EER prepared to-document the evaluation in accordance with Engineering j
Procedure ENP-12.
However, it is
(
imperative for each area of Civil to remain aware of the total scope of such conditions such that possible accumulative affects may be considered in future reviews or re-reviews of conditions whose specified time limit is exceeded.
Principal Engineer Ensure evaluation is performed.in i
(Lead Section) accordance with plant guidance and this document.
concurrence with operability /reportability Chief Civil Engineer evaluations. Assists in informing plant of conditions per Reference A l'.
l 1
C.
General Design Criteria i
Issues which are identified either by plant personnel.or i
l internally through the design process may require operability review if the condition is considered to deviate from the analyzed
~
design basis.
A determination whether operability review is l
required per 10CFR50.72 will be the joint decision of plant management and NED and should consider such1 factors as:
Plant condition at the time the issue is found.
Whether the issue is covered by other Technical Specification contingencies.
Required condition of the system in question.
j When notified that an operability review is required, the time frame in which the review must be done and the notification process shall be per Reference A.1 (i.e., administrative This design guide establishes technical criteria to activities).
be followed in the course of the evaluation consistent with As stated in requirements specified in NRC Generic Letter 91-18.
GL 91-18, the use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment (FRA) or is probabilities of the occurrence of accidents or external events not acceptable for making operability decisions.
The recent issuance of NRC Generic Letter 91-18 gave clear regulatory l
direction on the expected time a temporary condition is to remain j
in the field.
In keeping with the intent of GL 91-18, future l
civil temporary conditions shall designate a specified time limit, t
scheduled
)
on the validity of the evaluation not to exceed the next I
RFO.
The time limit may be shorter if:
l' The condition evaluated is such that design assumptions could change prior to the next RFO.
This would include assumptions made on:
O Cperating cenditions, (temperature, pressure. etc.)
O Corrosion allcwances, tincluding pipina, support or f
support allcwancesi-Fage II.20-2 f-Rev. 4 l
1
e f.
Design. Guide No. DG-II.20 i
civil /Strue. Oper. Reviews o
Fatigue Considerations (structures, piping, or supports) insured that these_ parameters will remain If provisions cannot be an immediate check on the temporary stable until the next RFO, If the next RFO is ccndition status will be required.
appropriate, list the limit by the RFO number, and the current scheduled date (which is subject to change). Any condition be reviewed to verify that t
exceeding the specified time limit must Fixes which cannot be the original evaluation is-still valid.RFO should be discussed with Engineering and made by the next Plant Management and should be brought before the Plant PNSC Ccmmittee and the NRC.
III.
PPACTICE The evaluation of an existing civil field condition which does notoperability, acceptability,
-comply with design consists of three stages:
and reportability.
A.
Acceptability Once the conditien is identified, the first issue to be reviewed
< hether or not the condition is acceptable "as-is" with no l
is
(
physical modification. This is defined as meeting:
l (AIGC, ACI, AWS, i
All applicable code allowable stresses ANSI, ASME, etc.).
Expansion anchor Factor of Safety of 4 or 5 as required.
l Use of design basis damping ratio.
I i
FSAR and technical specification commitments.
~
Utilizing accepted industry practice for analysis.
If the condition meets the acceptability criteria, the analysis l
verbally I
may be documented by standard calculation and the plant If the condition does not meet acceptability criteria, notified.
based on the issue and upon management concurrence, generate an Adverse Condition Report (ACR) per Reference A.1 and proceed to the operability review.
B.
Operability l
Civil / structural operability is defined as the ability of a to perform its required safety function j
structure / component following a design basis event without gross permanent deformation or detrimental effect on adjacent safety-related All civil / structural operability reviews components /etructures.
f or BNP and RNP and on PCRs for HMP.
shall be documented on EERs This evaluation shall contain, at a minimum, all critical
. J__
assumptions and docimentation supporting the operability determination.
In addition, for EUP the condition shall be 4
renorted to tha STSI list coordinator and the STSI list coorcinator sha11 be included en the EER distribution 1ist.
This to be tracked by engineering so that shall enable these conditions identified will be documented.
the total scope of such conditions Items mey be added to the STSI list prior to issuance of the OA I
l EER to facilitate tracking of these conditions and scheduling of l
required fixes. The STSI list shall have the format as shown in
)
Attachment C and b+ distributed quarterly. Conditions that are not deemed to be f urther review or invest'igation, but require cperabilit/ concerns based en available informatien chall be Page.II.20-3 L
Eev 4
Design Guide No. DG-II.20 Civil /Strue. Oper. Reviews (EFIsl. These conditions tracked as Engineering Follow-up Itemscoordinator.and issued as an shall be reported to the STSI list i
addendum to the STSI list, Every ef fort will be made to field verify critical assumptions made in any operability review.
If a. structure / component is not the' assumptions accessible due to plant operating status, requiring verification shall be clearly noted.within the. body of the calculation and also noted as a required field follow-up as an The engineer performing the evaluation is action item to the EER.
Also,'with the. exception of responsible to ensure this occurs.
under the existing-DTOP ENP pipe support short term evaluations, conditions must contain a 10CFR50.59_
all temnorary The practice or documenting operability reviews on EERs
followed. These evaluations should now be included.in EERs.or is met.
ENP pipe PCRs to insure the 10CFR50.59 requirement 10CFR50.59 requirement supports are the only exception to this because STSI allowables contained in this design guide had a 10CFR50.59 review performed on them, and the STSI philosophy was documented by CPLL to the NRC as part of.the IE Sulletin 79-14 procedure and in the UFSAR Section 3.9.1.4.
evaluated under Historically, operability of BNP pipe supports, was determined using the acceptance the existing DTOP program, Effective October 21, 1992, all criteria found in Attachment D.
(BNP, HNP, RNP) shall utilize the operability evaluations specifically acceptance criteria found in Section III.B.1 unless noted otherwise in this design guide.
This specific operability evaluation may be accomplished in either of two ways:
Specific analysis or testing using the structural / mechanical limits established in this guideline, as acceptance This method is preferred and may be used in appropriate.
i all cases.
A review and approval by an established " Senior Structural Review Panel."
This method may only be used with the
. concurrence of the Chief Civil Engineer or designee and only under specified conditions.
Other documented criteria not incorporated into this in Section II.A.
document may be used if listed by reference 1.
Snacific Analysis:
a.
Structural Items (nonpipe support)
This includes all component type support systems including cable tray, conduit. HVAC, miscellaneous and miscellaneous steel structures.
l equipment,
Specific evaluations of conduit using CDG-013 critaria l
shall be documented as a Senior Structural Review (Section B.2).
In general, l
Panel Evaluation structural ecmponents shall be considered operable if, all based on either computer or hand calculations, less than 1.6 times normal material stress limits are AISC allowables for tension, bendino, shear, and compression.
For shear, an additicnal check shall be made to ensure the stress limit in shear due to dead Neight only does not exceed 1.4 times ncrmal AIGC limits in memberc and bolts.
l Page II.20-4 i
L Fev. 4
c
. Design Guide No.-DG-II.20.
1 Civil /Struc..Oper.' Reviews l_
i l-l I~
'Other Provisions:
The-plastic section modulus of steel. shapes may--
l
[
be used in calculating material; stresses.
Welding' stress limits shall not exc'eed.l.6: times AISC allowables.
Factor of safety for expansionfancnors should be
' greater than 2.
For embedded plate Nelson concrete l
studs,1 factor of safety > 1;4 against
. ultimate capacity 1shall be maintained.
Damping ratios may be increased based on l
l increased stress levels or test data.
~
No gross component / structure' deformation is
[
l introduced resulting.in: questionable component /
+
[.
structure performance. '
No excessive deflections arenintroduced resulting in an unevaluated spatial: interaction i
(
with adjacent component / structure.
I seismic-block wall' issues 1shall be addressed'in accordance'with approved IEB 80-11 SER and existing.
calculations.
Equipment. foundation issues shall be addressed using L
standard structural techniques (overturning, anchorage l
i check, etc.) or using approved A-46 Generic Implementation procedure, Mechanical discipline components / structures _(i.e.,
i b.
in question may-be-piping and pipe supports) considered operable based on specific computer or; hand calculations utiliting elastic analysis techniques' provided'the following conditions are satisfied:
following material stress limits for ductile The l
structural' steels are not exceeded unless noted otherwise t
shall not exceed lesser of' Tensile Stress -
1.2 Sy and 0.7 Su*
t Shear Stress - shall not exceed lesser of l
0.72 Sy and 0.42 Su (0.55 Sy f or dead weight loads)
Bending Stress--
shall not exceed (f) Sy for compact sections where the plastic shape factor (f) = Z/5 Z.= plastic section modulus S = elastic section modulus and 1.11 Sy J 0.7 9 - 0.002 (by / 2t. ) (Sy) ']
for noncompact sections Compressive Stress
.shall not +xceed 0.67 times the critical buckling load determined by a comprehensive stability analysis Weld Stress -.485u Special consideratien required for pin-connepted memoers and threaded parts..
l' rage II.00-5 Eev. 4 i
r
- -. -, +
w
.,*,~w
-%e er
-w w
r-
-w--
v-r
m _
l
~
'l
~
Design ~ Guide 1No. DG-II.20 l
Civil /Struc.-Oper. Reviews.
I' For bolts in' bearing type connections,.the following material stress limits are not exceeded:
Tensile Stress - shall not exceed: lesser of Syfand l
0.7 Su shall not exceed-lesser of 0.6 Sy Shear Stress and 0.42 Su standard supports, vendor-'specified
- ' For component faulted allowable loads'shall be used, if available. Otherwise, normal allowable loads-shall be increased by the' appropriate design factor.
l t
D.F. = 1.2 (Sy/Ft) not_to exceed 0.7 (Su/Ft),
where:
i
.sy = material yield stress l
Su = material ultimate' tensile stress' Ft = material allowable tensile stress i
allowable load shall not exceed'O.67-L In addition,
}'
times-the critical buckling strength of the l
j component.
t Operability of-the following components shall'be I
evaluated against the STSI limits' established in Attachment D:
HSSA Snubbers f
U-Bolts-EA3 off-Axis Clamps 1
Pipe movements / load directions'shall'be reviewed-l to ensure that support function is maintained, for example:
spring support shall not top or bottom out' no uplift on' rods
. vertical only restraints shall not resist j
lateral loads Factor of. safety for' expansion. anchors is greater than 2.
For embedded plate. Nelson:
-studs, factor of safety > 1.4 against concrete ultimate capacity.
Damping ratios increased based on increased stress levels or test data, - (See Piping Section for acceptable pipe ~ damping ratios for i
operability.)
~
No gross component / structure deformation in i....
introduced resulting in questionable component / structure performance.
J No excessive deflections are introduced resulting in an unevaluated. spatial interaction with adjacent safety-related
)
components /struerures i
The riirind. in question nay be Lconsidsred operable t
c.
provioed the following conditions.are satisfi,ed:
' ?.ev Page II.20-6 I
l - --,
m,...
. m.--
._,..,,..,-s.~
-. -, -- ~_-
Design Guide No. DG-II.20' Civil /Struc. Oper. Reviews The following load combination will be used in the evaluation:
J Po + D Tr ) u2 2
2
.D+
(DBE,x
+
Po
+
and Po + D + DBE',x Operating Pressure Po
=
Deadweight D
=
Maximum resultant loading at a piping location considering DBE,3
=
all design basis seismic-t inertia analysis case runs Maximum resultant seismic DBE'ux
=
anchor motion loading Thrust or transient due to l
Tr
=
safety. relief valve. discharge.
valve trip, or fluid flow l
For the initial evaluation, the piping shall be judged capable of meeting operability with a one time occurrence of DBE, requirements, if the following equations / criteria are met:
2
[Sj + 4S 31/2 8
- 2. 0 S _ (1)
Po [df/ (D - df)]
2
+
y and (S,2,# 4 g,2) 1/2 8
- 2. 0 Sy (la) and i
[ S,y + 4g
] 1/2 8 0.9 S (1b) 2 o [d / (D* - df)]
2
+
e y
P
[(i M3p) 2 + { j gbe) 2) 1/2
[2 t 1. 0]
S
=
3 Z.
Mi S'
=
2Z (j gi e) 2) 1/2
[(i M'3p)2
{.1 t 1. 0 ]
f l
S 3=
Z
~ "**~
M
S=
22 I.
Applicable stress intensification i
=
factor (i 2 1.0)
Bending moment in plane of member M,,
=
due to absolute summation of deadweight and the CRGS of seismic and any applicable transi-nt, load (in-lb)
Paae II.20 'T l
E+V
I Design Guide No. DG-II.20
{
Civil /Strue. Oper. Reviews
- i
= Bending moment transverse plane of member due to absolute summation of deadweight l
Mn j
and the SRSS of seismic and any l
applicable transient-load (in-lb) r due to abs. summation of
= Torsional moment M.
deadweight and the SRSS'of seirmic and l
any applicable transient load,in-lb) 1 M' m = Bending moment in plane of member due to seismic anchor motions.
I transverso plane'of member.
M's - = Bending moment due to seismic anchor mo-';ons M',
= Torsional' moment due t' seismic anchor motions
= Elastic section w:.dulus of the pipe - (in')
3 d,
'= Nominal insidc diameter of the piping l
'(in) f
= Nominal outside diameter of the piping
'i D,
(in)-
-r
= Operating Pressure.(psi) which occurs co-P.
incidently with the DEE'
= Specified minimum material yield stress I
S,.
at normal (minimum tensile yield) operating. temperature (psi)
[
t D, + di l
r.,
=
l
= Nominal pipe thickness (in) t above,.
l l
For any points which exceed Equation-(1) acceptance of operability can be demonstrated by l
meeting the followina equation:
Pp
.7 5 i ' M" s 2. 0 S
\\ (. 7 5 2 ) t 1 -. 0)
(2)
+
Y 4C Z
and i M '8 s. 2. 0 Sy {i t 1. 0]
(2a)-
l
~ * * * ~
Z i
and 1 0.9 S 12b>
i 4Swg) U2 (Slcu o (df / (Dl - dl) }
y
+
P (Mlp + Mlt + Ml) U; M
=
o l
Page II.20-3 i
Rev.
L a
. - -. ~.
Design Guide.No. DG-II.20 civil /Strue. Oper. Reviews (M '*p + M,2,e g,2) U2 '
M '3 r
=
i, P.,
D,,
t, M,, Mn, M, M' g, M'n, M'.,
S, Z
y 1
defined per above.
If isolated locations exceed the criteria of (1) and (2) above, acceptance of Equations operability may be demonstrated by meeting the j
follcwing:
Demonstrate the locations are in the non-Q 0
4 portion of the system.
Demonstrate the piping in t.e vicinity of 6
0 the location meet Equations (1), 'lla), and i
l (1b) or (2), (2a),:and (2b)'above.
O Meeting the following' equations:
Pp
,75i M
+
s3
[(.75 2) h 1.0)
(3) 8 sc z
r and iM'a (3a) s 2.0 Sy Z
= the greater of 2.0 S or.7 S,,
y
= minimum spe-cified ultimate material S,
strength (psi)
P-,
D.,
t, M,, M',,
2, i, S, defined per above.
Additional operability considerationstrequirements:
For ASME Code defined parameters not otherwise identified herein, the 1975 Edition of the ASME Section III Class 2 - 1975 edition will be used.
l for short-term Dynamic response spectra analysis operability evaluations.will use broadened response spectra curves with piping equipment damping values of 2% or less of critical damping for RMP.
For BNP and HUP, approved pipe damping shall be used. [Ref. Appendix'l.]
Secondary loads (including SAMs) have been considered in the support design.
Mo excessive deflections are' introduced resulting in an unevaluated spatial interaction with adjacent safety-related components / structures.
Page II.20-9 Eev
i r
Design Guide No.'DG-II.20 Civil /Struc. Oper. Reviews
=
t a.
Other evaluation conditions may be imposed at the discretion of the Chief Civil Engineer.
In lieu of.
analysis, a test (static or dynamic) may be used and the component deemed operable if the test shows it can
. meet its intended function following a seismic event.
t 2.
Structural Review Panel l
is to be This method of evaluation of operability concerns used only with the concurrence of the Chief Civil Engineer or his designee.
Considerations to be' addressed when using.
l l
this method include.
i Complexity of problem-being evaluated.
j Similarity of the problem with other designs 'or I
l l
evaluations.
Availability of industry data directly relating to 'the issue.
Experience et engineers involved with related issues.
l The purpose of the struct' ural review method of operability determination.is to utilize engineering judgement, 1
experience, and evaluation of only those quality attributes which significantly limit the ability of the structure to function to its design. requirements post-earthquake.
It l
will be used as'an interim measure only.
Long-term acceptability will be based on meeting the design bases defined for the plant.
The method consists of the two primary parts:
a.
System Walkdown The' system whose operability is in question will be walked down and reviewed by two experienced structural engineers.
These engineers shall have a minimum five' i
years of nuclear structural engineering experience.
The walkdown shall review and identify critical areas of potential failure and gather enough field data for j
an evaluation.
Examples of critical attributes include the effects of seismic anchor movements or spatial interactions as well as anchorage adequacy.
The appropriate Project or Principal Engineer will outline to the Walkdown Team critical' attributes which must be considered but will not limit the Team's.
judgement.
b.
Evaluation and Approval 1
The evaluation of system structural operability will.
consist of enough information to convey the logic upgi to determine that the system will perform all necessary safety functions post-earthquake. This could be a simple write-up of the conditions considered with simplified calculatiens on critical-attributes.
This evaluation will be signed by both Walkdown Team members. Ttv minimum approval of the evaluation will be three Civil Discipline supervisory personnel to include the Chief Civil Engineer.
Rev. 4 page II.20-10
~.
~
'4 b
Design Guide Wo..DG-II.20
~
Civil /Strue. Oper. Reviews If'the' condition does not meet the operability criteria, the following steps should be taken:
The Chief Civil Engineer should be notified for concurrence with the evaluation.
, Provisions of Reference A.1 should be invoked to notify the plant to determine responsibility for performing JCO j
(Justification for Continued Operation).
~
Work with the plant to determine if fixes can be made within system LCO (Limited Condition of Operation) window per.
Technical. Specifications.
Work with other NED discipline personnel to determine if component is necessary for safe shutdown fi.e., Mechanical, Electrical Discipline personnel may determine the component need not operate post-earthquake)..This evaluation shall require a 10CFR50.59 review.
Document operability calculation in accordance with NED Guideline E-4 utilizing the Operability Review Approval l
Sheet (Attachment B)..
~
The criteria contained herein are for general conditions, i
Specific criteria cited for specific conditions will supersede this document.
C.
Reportability Reportability calls to'the NRC per Technical Specification guidance and 10CFR50.72 is the responsibility of the plant For Civil / Stress / Structural items, the. plant will request assistance
.i in determining reportability once an item is. determined to be.
inoperable. Various plant procedures are involved, however, a typical situation puts the plant in a condition whereby it could potentially not shut down. safely post-earthquake.
Criteria to
-perform reportability evaluations for Civil are as follows:
Advanced evaluation techniques, such as analysis time history, or system analysis (support and piping) may be used to determine the actual mode'of failure of the component.
I Testing may be used on the component as a whole or critical parts.
Additional criteris may be imposed by the Civil Principal Engineer or Chief Civil Engineer as conditions warrant.
Results of the evaluation should allow determination of whether actual gross structural failure of the component is expected and i
if that failure would put the plant in an unsafe condition. The 1
reportability evaluation documentation should include cause, I
corrective actions required, and address any similar plant conditions.
l Fev.
Page II.20-11 i
.~
i DG-II.20 Design Guide No.
Civil /Strue. Oper. Reviews l
l l
ATTACHMDTP A PROCEDURE TO EVALUATE OPERABluTY OF SYSEMS OTHER THAN PIPING identificanon of lr.-
,by M
' eue m
Start
, or docarnentation review
'r Does Yes condition Crttena (see -
inset Section Ill.A).
critetta?
l No 1r 1r Prepare desion g
danciency report.
i 1r i
i l
Complete documentabon Does for operability and Yes the systern
.' Crtteria (see schedule actr'1 ties to meet structural Sechon 111.B).
t l
restore the system to an operability i
acceptable conditiort crteria?
l l
No ir Notty the plert of Determine fixes Addraes similar to
=
N condulons (if any)
Teaponsib.
I 1r Criteria (see Secten Ill.C).
1st Screen - Declare reportable !!
there a no benefit in dong tre evaluabon.
Yes is the 2nd Screen - Do you expect prepare NRC report.
reportabk?
structural failure in any form Notih the plant to conditkn ony considering the local effects of the conditiort 3rd Screen - Will tre condttion prevent safe shutdown or endanger the general public (mectarucal, g
e4ectncal, systems determnehon).-
I
.Page II.20-12
~
l Design Guide No. DG-II.20 i
Civil /Struc. Oper. Reviews l
ATTACHMENT B l
CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CCMPANY OPERABILITY REVIEW FOR I
tPlant)
}
l t
(System)
{
l i
j EVALUATION ID MUMBER:
I 6
l t
l SAFETY CLASSIFICATION:
i SEISMIC CLASSIFICATION:
j METHOD OF EVALUATION UTILIZED:
METHOD 1:
SPECIFIC ANALYSIS / TESTING i
METHOD 2:
SENIOR STRUCTURAL REVIEW PANEL-
.l WA'LKDOWN TEAM:
l l
f APPROVALS:
Rev.
By Checked Project Approved (Method'2 only)
Engineer Principal
. Discipline' Manager J
l
-l l
i l
Eev. 4 Page II.20-13
Design Guide No. DG-II.20 Civil /Strue. Oper. Reviews--
ATTACHMENT C FCRMAT OF STSI LIST
' l Date:
STSI Item:
Status:
Contact:
Title:
Unit:
System:
Iso. No.
EER No..
Calc. No.:
Outage Required? (Yes/No):
l
.PM1:
PM2:
t Ref.
)
l Deseription:
i r
s I
I t
i l
e I
a F
t i
(
i i
I l
i
)
1 I
1 l
l
]
g.
Rev 4 Page II.20-14 l
\\
I i
y 3
t i
.m
.,,,~.e.,~-
e,--~,
-,-w
.m-
-,e r-4,-
t
~
i Design Guide No. DG-II.20 Civil /Struc. Oper. Reviews ATTACHMElfl' D l
l Brunswick STSI Criteria for Existing Pipe Supports (Ref. Report No. 7865-007-s-M-021)
Allowable anchor loads shall be 1/2 ultimate published loads.
Adjustment of published allowable loads for concrete strengths other than those provided by vendor shall be made in accordance with vendor's recommendations.
Limits provided below shall not be exceeded:
Tension -
Yield l
Bearing -
Yield
[(F Allow)1 s
Bending -
Yield x Shape Factor x (21.6) l Shear -
Yield x.625 Compression - (Yield x AISC) - 21.6 Weld Joints - Controlled by Base Metal at Joint Factory Supplied Components - 3 x catalog load
- Note:
Shape factor used in the above bending equation is the ratio l
of the plastic section modulus to elastic section modulus.
For example:
Plastic Section Modulus Shape Factor
=
j Elastic Section Modulus (Fs Allow)
- Also, s 1 (21.6)
Typical Shape Factors Rectangular Shapes (Plates) 1.5 Wide Flange Shapes 1.14 Circular Shapes 1.7
+
Hydraulic Snubber Allowable Loads (Bergen Paterson Model " HSSA")
Size w/ Standard w/JHeavy-Duty-9 Max.1 Pin to Relief Valve Reliaf; Valve-Pin Dim.
Spring Spring-
'(Model ~ 252) 1 i
-3 4500#
5010#
7'-2"
-~
-10 15000#
16700*
6*-7"
-20 30000#
33400#
6'-4"
-30 45000*
50100#
6'-6" Fev. 4 Page II.20-lE i
i
l Design Guids No. DG-II.20 Civil /Struc. Oper. Reviews l
Strut Allowable Loads (Bergen Paterson Model "RSSA")
i l
. Size:
CAllowable: Load:
'9 Max 5 Fin-to-PinEDim.;-
l
-3 5010#
7'-2" i
-10 16700#
6'-7" l
-20 33400#
6'-4"
-30 50100#
6'-6" l
Loese U-Bolt Capacity Loads Pipe Size
.Dia.
.. ; Pi...
. l Pi.
Stock.
~ Tension-Esideload
- (in.)-
(in.)-
(1bs.)-
5;(1bs. )
1/2 1/4 900 300 3/4 1/4 900 300 l
1 1/4 900 300 1M 3/8 2280 740 1M 3/8 2280 740 2
3/8 2280 740 2M 1/2 4225 1390 3
1/2 4225 1390 3M 1/2 4225 1390 4
1/2 4225 1390 5
1/2 4225 1390 i
6 5/8 6770 2220 8
5/8 6770 2220 10 3/4 10135 3320 12 7/8 14100 4630 14 7/8 14100 4630 16 7/8 14100 4630 18 1
18550 6110 20 1
18550 6110 e..
24 1
18550 6110 30 1
18550 6110 Mote: Uce straight line interaction for cases with loading in both P. and P directions.
Materials:
SA-36, SA-307, Gr. B Oesign Temperature:
65voF a
Eev. 4 Page ::.20-16
i l
i 1
Design Guide No. DG-II.00 Civil /Strue. Oper. Reviews j
i l
Single U-Bolt Capacity Loads (Tight Condition)
I System Preload a 20% of Yield Stress Material Allowable Stress, S = 15000 psi Material Yield Stress = 36000 psi Mn Torsion-Nominal P,
Pu ~ Side -
'Prn Axial i
Pipe Size-
.. Tension..
Load.
Load:
. Load.
(in.):
-Load-(1b)'
(1b)J (in-lb),
~(1b)-
1/2 2192 537 247 252 3/4 2192
.t B7 247 315 1
2192 435 247 395 1 1/4 4950 1059 555 1120 l
1 1/2 4950 995 555 1285 2
4950 907 555 1605 2 1/2 8810 1671 989 3455 3
8810 1545 989 4207 3 1/2 8810 1472 989 4808 4
8810 1418 989 5409 5
8810 1330 989 6687 6
13800 2110 1546 12440 Notes:
1.
capacity indicated is for the load acting alone.
2.
Preload must produce at least 20% yield stress for results'to be applicable.
Page 11.20-17 Eev
m._
Design Guide No. DG-II.20 Civil /Struc. Oper. Reviews
- 1 Double U-Bolt. Capacity Loads.(Tight Condition) l System Preload = 20% of 'tield Stress
[
Material Allowable Stress,.S = 15000 psi Material Yield Stress = 36000 psi I
5.'diAa. Loddp
)TensiLoad-Mie L A
3
):. Fffi.o
. Nominal'.-
- -; PR
_f? Pg
' Pipe.Siza>
Tensionh Sidei Axialf
._. Couplei;
- Couple..
Torsionali
'(inp);
(Load.:
?.Loadi (Load 4 My.
' 37:
' Loadi j
- (1b)s
.(Ib);
- 0 (1b);
- dam ds ^-
L(in-lb)?
- l?.
- (1b)A f(1b)?
{
1/2 4384 1074 494 537 2192 504 3/4-4384 974 494 487 2192 630 1
4384 870 494 435 2192 790 1 1/4 9900 2118 1110 1059 4950' 2240 1 1/2 9900 1990 1110 995 4950 2570 2
9900 1814 1110-
~907 4950 3210
?
2 1/2 17620 3342 1978 1671 8810 6910 3
17620 3090 1978 1545 8810 8414 e
l' 3 1/2 17620 2944 1978-1472 8810 9616 l
l I
4' 17620 2836 1978 1418 8810 10818 f
5 17620 2660 1978 1330 8810 13374 6
27600 4220 3092
-2110 13800 24880 t
I i-dB = Distance'between U-Bolts l
Motes:
1.
2.
Capacity indicated is for the load acting alone 3.
Preload must produce at least 20% yield stresc for results-l to be applicable.
?
I i
~r-..
I l
i l
I i
Page II.20-18 l
Fev. 4..
l
~
_.,c,.._.._
.. _.., -........ c _
I Design Guide No. DG-II.20 Civil /Struc. Oper. Reviews Figure 1 of 6 j
Bergen-Paterson (Standard) EA-3 Clamp i PV N Max. i AllowableI GS 6500F '--
NominallRating; STSI
f 3k 5010#
16700#
10k 33400#
20k 50100#
30k I
f Values based on maximum capacity of snubber units'(HSSA1-for level These allowables are derived from mechanical function of the indi. cced.
for temperature sn soer relief valve spring,no increase of allowable i
l is permitted in excess of these values.
l 4
4 n
u
- 0..
S,1 /
87 /
a I
==a==s=,
1s... -a i
I K}
I g, p.
r u
y
~
- 4. r.
s t:
enanas a
%*w l
,m L
.3-i
/
?
s b
2 ts.
J W;L'
.JLa Pace'II.20-19 Fev, ;
i i
' l Design Guide No. DG-II.20 J
Civil /Strue. Oper. Reviews l
j Figure 2 of 6 EA-3 Clamp for HSSA-3, RSSA-3 1
i M
j Pg d
g 1
!e at 1;
I:
o i.
't i
T l','l 4llll3
- PH-:kilowable-l9 6500F
. :~ (1bs. ) ~
' Pips:
. 7 Ri:
lL E?;
.: Stock'J lsTSI' size-
- EIn.
un.;
.' t e r-b '-
1 1/2i 0.95 4 3/4 5/16 2
590 j
2 1.19 5
5/16 2
590 i
2 1/2 1.44 5 3/4 3/8 2
735 3
1.75 6
3/8 2
745 i
t t
4 2.25 7
3/8 2 1/2 850 5
2.78 7 1/2 3/8 2 1/2 855 l
6 3.31 8
3/8 2 1/2 860 1
8 4.31 9 1/2 1/2 2
1045
- 1 10 5.38 11 1/2 2
970 12 6.38 12 1/2 2 1/2 1240 14 7.0 13 1/2 3
1425 16 8.0 14 1/2 3
1425 18 9.0 15 1/2 3-1425 20 10.0 16 1/2 4
1940 24 12.0 18 5/8 3
2155-I 1
21 5/8 3
2155
.30 q -15.0 r
36 1 18.0 24 5/8 4
2955 1
Page II.20-20 Fev. 4 r+-
W*
'T 1r ep y.
Design Guide No. DG-II.20 Civil /Struc. Oper. Reviews j
Figure 3 of 6 EA-3 Clarnp f or HSSA-10, RSSA-10 i
)
i Pg T,
4"'l h
!as!
11 1:
o is i
l e
i 4lllll3
[PH Allowable 9;650*F.
(1bn. ).;
.I. Pipe -r
}Rn
. E:
?Stocki s
.; STBX.!
Bize:
In.
- 52n, to:
7 b.-
3 1.75 7 3/4 1/2 4
1940 3 1/2 2.0 7 3/4 1/2 4
'2020 4
4 2.25 8 1/4 1/2 4
1940 5
2.78 8 3/4 1/2 4
1950 6
3.31 9 1/2 5/8 4
2865 i
8 4.31 10 1/2 5/8 4
2865 r
10 5.38 12 3/4 4
3780 12 6.38 13 3/4 4
3780 14 7.0 14 7/8 4 1/2 5425 16 8.0 15 7/B 4 1/2 5425 9
18 9.0 16 7/8 4 1/2 5425 20 10.0 17 1
5 7790 i
24 12.0 19 1
5 7790 i
28 14.0 21 1 1/8 6
11815 t
30 15.0 22 1 1/8 6
11810 l
l^
i Pace !!.20-21
? e':
Design Guide No. DG-II.20 Civil /Strue. Oper. Reviews-l Figure 4 of 6 f
EA-3 Clatup for HSSA-20, RSSA-20
)
l 1
1 M
Pg r,
41 f a af 8.
o n
t 4:"3 1
?
!.PHfAllowable 9--650*r-i (1bs. ) '
Pipee
. :R'.
1 E :!
TStonk::
STSIb I
size-In.:
-; In.-
- b
.. te r 4
l 2 25 8 1/4 5/8 4 1/2 3350 5
l 2.78 8 3/4 3/4
- 4 4165 s
6 3.31 9 1/2 3/4 4 1/2 4575 8
4.31 10 1/2 7/8 4 1/2 6090 10 5.38 12 7/8 4 1/2 5715 12
)6.38 13 1
5 8210 l 7.0 14
'l 5
7790-14 16 l 8.0 15 1
5 7790 18 l 9.0 16 1 1/8 6
11815 20
! 10.0 17 1 1/8 6
11815 i
22 J 11.0 18 1 1/8 6
11815 f12.0 19 1 1/8 6'
'11815 24 26 13.0 20 1 1/8 6
11815 1
28 l14.0 21 1 1/4 6
14330 30 15.0 22 1/2
-1 1/4 6
13440 f
33 l16.5 24 1 1/4 6
13440 36 l18.0 26 1 1/2 6
17630 l18.0 26 1/2 1 3/4 7
26155 36 F479' !I 20-22
?+v.
i
Design Guide No. DG-II.20 Civil /Struc. Oper. Reviews Figure 5 of 6 EA-3 Clamp f or HSSA-30, RSSA-30 M
WC r,
4 o
3
!a n!
o e
!I I
e4 I
blll3
'yP'n' Allowable 9 650*F.
? (1bs. ).
Pipe-RI
. E[
~ Stock'
-STSI-Sizex
-In.
. In k
..'b.
'.tc -
4 2.25 9 1/4 3/4 5
4565 5
2.78 10 7/8 4
4625 6
3.31 11 7/8 5
5570 8
4.31 12 1
5 7130 10
,5.38 13 1/2 1
6 8265 12 6.38 14 1/2 1 1/8 6
10280 14
) 7.0 16 1 1/4 5
9250 16 8.0 17 1 1/4 5
9250 18 9.0 18 1 1/4 6
11330 20 10.0 19 1 1/4 6
11330 22 11.0 21 1 1/2 6
14320 24
,12.0 22 1 1/2 6
14320 26 13.0 23 1 1/2 6
14320
+--
28 14.0 24 1 1/2 6
14320 30 15.0 25 1 1/2 6
'14320 34 17.0 27 1 1/2 7
17000 36 18.0 28 1 1/2 8
19695 38 19.0 29 1 1/2 8
19695 Pace II.20-23 Fev 4
Design Guide No. DG-II.20 Civil /Strue. Oper. Reviews Figure 6 of 6 Interaction curve for Bergen-Paterson (Standard) EA-3 Pipe Clamps Pv A cr /
Y f2-.--Ph I
e
)
(-
()
()
l FV/ F V gAx l
- 1. 0.
N k
99 _ _
N s
0.8 - -
4
,x x n
0.6 -
~2 t
Ph Pv
,h 1.0 284
" ~
~
Ph Pv
-- c j
g3x j MAX 4
PEF. UE&C C ALC. 9527-9-PSSS-74-F i
i l
l l
I 4
i1 I
I I
j t
i T
I I
f f
4 Ph/Ph M A X, 0.1 02 0.3 04 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
!!c t e : F H_,m PV..,,. are the maximum capacit ies of the clamp for the service condition investigated.
race 11.20-24 F;
_ _ _ _ _ _ - - ~ ~ - " - " - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ _ _.., _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. _ ~..,.
Design Guide No..DG-II.20 Civil /Struc. Oper. Reviews J
l l
2 1
i 1
i 1
i APPDIDIX 1 Basis For Recommended Piping Operability Criteria
+
(See following 11 pages)
I I
I
+
f 1
i i
l
=
\\
I i
1 t
.k t
'I a
l
.I I
t i
1 l
1 1
1 i
I F + */
Fage ::.00-25
~ l i
. ~, -.,,..,.,.. _.. _..,, _.,,,
'---r