ML20052B796
| ML20052B796 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 04/19/1982 |
| From: | Clagett C, Kumar S CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.), NUS CORP. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20052B793 | List: |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OLA, NUDOCS 8205030582 | |
| Download: ML20052B796 (14) | |
Text
l i
d 19'32-UNITED STATES OF AMERICA II NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD in the Matter of D
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY S
F 5 ool (Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant)
Modification)
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY'S ANSWERS TO NRC STAFF INTERROGATORY 9 Pursuant to 10 C.F.R., Paragraph 2.740b, Consumers Power Company
(" Licensee") hereby submits answers to NRC Staff Interrogatory 9.
INTERROGATORY 9:
Explain how the crane design complies with the guidelines of CMAA Specification 70 and Chapter 2-1 of ANSI B30.2-1976, including the demonstration of equivalency of actual design requirements for instances where specific compliance with these standards is not provided. Specifically the following items should be addressed.
9a)
IMPACT ALLOWANCE: CMAA -70, Article 3.3.2.1.1.3
Response
EPCI-49 required a max 25% of rated capacity as impact allowance. CMAA-70 requires an impact allowance of K% of the load per foot per minute of hoisting speed, but not less than 15%. The hoist speed for the Big Rock crane is 6.5 fpm, thus the 15% impact allowance requirement is applicable which is less restrictive than EOCI-49.
A 15% impact allowance was used in the original design.
(Reference 1).
589-8205030
'1 9b}
Torsional Forces: CMAA-70, Article 3.3.2.1.3
Response
For the reactor crane at Big Rock plant, the bridge girders used are welded box girders. The box girders, being a closed section, have a very high torsional rigidity. The torsional moment due to starting and stopping of the bridge motor are quite small when compared to the torsional capacity of the girders. The twisting moments due to the overhanging loads are distributed over the full length of the girders and are also small. There are no large torsional moments due to lateral loads. Since the allowable stresses in EOCI-49 and CMAA-70 are similar, the design of bridge box girders is considered to be adequate for torsional effects of the loads.
9c)
Bending Stresses: CM AA -70, Article 3.3.2.2
Response
The design of the girder has considered the dead load, weight of the trolley, rateo ioad and impact allowance per CMAA-70, Article 3.3.2.2.1.
The bending stresses due to the dead weight of the trolley, rated load and impact allowance are within allowables. The second design case per CMAA-70, Article 3.3.2.2.2 requires consideration of lateral loads due to wind and the acceleration or deceleration of the crane. Since the crane is located indoors, no wind loads are applicable. The lateral loads due to the acceleration or deceleration are to be taken as 2.5% of the live load and the crane bridge.
The original design calculations (Reference 1) based on EOCl-49 used lateral loads to be 0.33% only.
However, the bending stresses due to the lateral loads were less than 200 psi and even with the increased percentage requirements of CMAA-70, these stresses will still be less than 600 psi. When combined with the bending stresses due to vertical loads, the total bending stresses are less than 12,000 psi which is well below the allowable stress of 16,000 psi. Thus the combined bending stresses per CM AA-70, Article 3.3.2.2 are within allowable limits.
l l
i
- l. -.
9d)
Longitudinal Stiffness: CMAA-70, Article 3.3.3.1
Response
Longitudinal stifferners were not used on the box girders for the reactor crane at Big Rock. The CMAA-70 does not require longitudinal stiffeners, however, the allowable web depth to thickness ratio increases when transverse and longi-tudinal stiffeners are used. For the reactor crane girders the ratio of web depth to thickness is 200 versus the EOCI-49 allowable value of 240. According to CMAA-70, this ratio varies from approximately 162 to 240 without longitudinal stiffeners, but requires use of vertical stiffeners. Considering the fact that the reactor crane at Big Rock Point was designed to EOCI-49 and the girder proportions are well within the limits of this specification, that the max comprensive stresses based on the rated load capacity are below the allowables, and the loads as high as rated capacity are not likely to be handled, the deviation from CMAA-70 is not expected to be critical.
9e)
Allowable Compressive Stress: CM AA-70, Article 3.3.3.1.3.
Response
For the crane girders the b/c (distance between web plates) / (thickness of top cover plate) is approximately 17 which is less than CMAA-70 allowable of 60.
Also, since it is less than 38 no reduction in basic allowable compression needs to be considered. The allowable compressive stress in CMAA-70 and EOCI-49 are similar and thus CMAA-70 compliance is assured.
9f)
Fatique Considerations: CM AA-70, Article 3.3.3.1.3.
Response
No significant stress reversals are expected in the crane girders because the hoisting speed is low and the dynamic and impact stresses are quite small. The handling of loads as high as the rated capacity is very rare. The total number of loading cycle is expected to be less than 100,000.
Thus for the bridge box girders, f atique is not a potential mode of failure. y
9g)
Holst Rope Requirements: CM AA-70, Article 4.2.1
Response
For Big Rock reactor crane per Whiting Corporation Operation and Maintenance Chart I, (Reference 3) the main hoist uses 1" dia. special flexible improved plow steel wire crane rope 6 strands,37 wires, hemp core. A 12 parts reeving is being used. Safe working load for such a rope is given as 7.9 tons with a factor of safety of 5., i.e., breaking strength = 7.9 x 5 = 39.5 tons.
Assuming that the weight of the load block is approximately 2% of the rate load, (Reference 4).
Breaking Strength (tons) =
1.02 (Rated Load Tons)
.20 x nc. of Parts of Reeving 1.02 x 75 = 31.875 Tons
.20 x 12 VS. 39.5 Tons Available 9h)
Drum Design: CM AA-70, Article 4.4.1
Response
The required material for the drum and housing as per purchase spec. 3159-M-49 (Reference 5) when made of cast iron is ASTM A-48, Class 35 with 35000 psi minimum tensile strength. CMAA-70 required the material to be A48-64 or later, class 40 cast iron or equal. Also CMAA-70 requires the stresses due to crushing and bending to be combined while EOCI-49 did not specifically require.
to combine these stresses. The bending stresses in the drum are usually quite l
small. The difference in material and design requirements are not expected to be critical.
i 1
91)
Drum Design: CMAA-70, Article 4.4.3
Response
The CMAA-70 has no requirements and only recommends certain good practices.
The drum grooves are machined and are right and left hand. The groove depth and the pitch meets the intent of CMAA-70. Due to the frequent maintenance and inspection requirements for rope, the drum grooving does not pose a safety risk.
9J)
Gear Design: CMAA-70, Article 4.5, Para. 4.5.1
Response
CMAA-70 requires that all gears and pinions be constructed of steel or other material of adequate strength and durability to meet the requirements of the intended class of service.
CMAA crane service classifications identify the reactor crane to be Al (standby service). Investigation of the power transmis-sion components of the crane with regard to strength and durability confirms that they are of steel construction and indicate that good engineering practice was employed in the selection of the herringbone and worm gear designs.
CMAA-70, Para.
4.5.2 requires that gearing horsepower rating be based on certain American Gear Manufacturers Association standards and provides a method for determining allowable strength and durability horsepower ratings.
EOCI-49 provides no similar guidance. All gearing is provided with means to insure adequate and proper lubrication. All gearing except the final reduction at the hoist drum and bridge and trolley wheels, is lubricated by the splash method.
9k)
Bridge Brake Design: CMAA-70, Article 4.7.2.2
Response
CMAA-70 requires that bridge brakes for cranes with cab control and the cab on the bridge have a minimum torque rating equal to that of the bridge drive motor.
The reactor crane bridge drive motor full load torque is 66 lb. ft. and the bridge drive brake located on the motor output shaft is rated at 90 lb. ft. (Reference 2).
f
91)
Hoist Brake Design: CM AA-70, Article 4.7.re.2
Response
CMAA-70 requires that minimum torque ratings of holding brakes, at point of application, be 100% of motor torque when used with mechanical control braking means or 100% of motor torque if two holding brakes are provided. The reactor crane hoist is equipped with an eddy current brake at the motor thru shaft, a mechanical control brake on the inotor shaft input to hoist drum gearbox and a second mechanical control brake at the hoist drum gearbox output shaft. Also, the hoist is equipped with a Weston type mechanical load brake as an integral component of the power transmission train in the hoist gearbox. The Weston load brake functions to prevent the load at the hoist hook from overhauling the hoist drive motor in the event of hoist break failure. The rating of the magnetic shoe brake located at the hoist drum is 400 lb. ft.
9m) Bumpers and Stops: CMAA-70, Article 4.12
Response
CMAA-70 provides substantial guidance for the design and installation of bridge and trolley bumpers and stops for crancs which operate near the end positions of bridge and trolley travel. Normalload handling functions of the reactor crane do not require the bridge or trolley to operate in the area of the maximum travel positions. Limit switches are provided on the bridge and trolley rails prior to the mechanical bumper and stop contact locations.
The limit switches interrupt power to tne bridge and trolley drive motors in the event of crane operation at this location. The capacity of the bumpers is sufficient to stop the crane when travelling at full speed with the power off. The stopping distance would be approximately 1-K", Because of the very slow bridge speed, very little energy is required to bring it to a stop. The maximum force on each bumper during the deceleration period is expected to be approximately 11,300 pounds, which can be safely absorbed by the bumpers.
9n)
Static Control Systems: CMAA-70, Article 5.4.6
Response
With regard to the reactor crane compliance to CMAA-70, Article 3.4.6, the controls of the crane are not static but are magnetic type.
Based on the assumption of a low failure rate, the sizing of the control components is suitable for the service. Primary reversing of the A.C. motor drives is accomplished thru magnetic contactors. Current and torque limiting is accomplished by overload protection. The bridge and trolley drives are equipped with holding brakes. It is not evident that a control component failure will cause er.cessive speed of the hoist. Complete loss of the power source voltage, while the crane is being operated, will set the holding brakes of the bridge, trolley and hoist. Loss.of a phase should not permit excessive hoist motor speed in the lowering direction.
9o)
Restart Protect on: CMAA-70, Article 5.6 i
Response
CMAA-70 requires that cranes not equipped with spring-return controliers, or momentary contact push buttons, shall be provided with a device which will disconnect the motors from the line on failure of power and will not permit any motor to be restarted until the control handle is moved to the "off" position, or a reset switch or button is operated.
The reactor crane is equipped with momentary contact push-buttons, a foot operated " dead man" type of power disconnect switch and a device to disconnect all motors from the line in the event of power failure.
1 I
l
REFERENCES:
1.
Design calculations dated 02/08/61, " Girder Stress and Deflection" for 75 ton crane for Consumers Power Company.
2.
Whiting Corporation calculations, dated 02/21/61.
3.
Operation and Maintenance Manual for Whiting Crane, No. 3577 for Consumers Power Company.
4.
" Whiting Crane Handbook," Fourth Edition, January,1979.
5.
" Specification for Furnishing and Delivery of 75 Ton Reactor Semi-Gantry Crane for Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant," Specification 3159-M-4, dated 11/15/60.
6.
Whiting Corporation Drawings, U-44465, Rev. 4, General Arrangement of Single Leg Gantry Bridge, a.
b.
U-44466, Rev. 2, General Arrangement of Single Leg Gantry Bridge, Plan View, U-44520, Rev. 2, General Arrangement - 2 Motor Type "RH" Trolley.
c.
7.
Specification Comparison Report by Whiting Corporation for Consumers Power Company, dated 3/2/32.
l l
l l l L
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
Docket No. 50-155 CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
)
)
(Big Rock Point Nuclear
)
Power Plant)
)
STATE ^OF MARYLAND
)
ss.
COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY
)
AFFIDAVIT OF SHYAM KUMAR I, SHYAM KUMAR, of lawful age, being first duly sworn, do state as follows:
1 I am employed by NUS Corporation as a Principal Engineer in the Structural Engineering Department.
I have primary responsibility for the response to NRC (i).
Staff Interrogatory 9 Parts (a)
To the best of my knowledge and belief, the statements in this affidavit and resume and the responses to the above inter-rogatories are true and correct.
6 kom ko wo; o
Shyam Kumar Subscribed and sworn to before me this 19 day of April 1982.
o]
/
_~ f Wb/
b" o* r _ Y _L/
l
/(JoyceConway fj/I Notary Public, Montgomery County MyCommissionExpires:{],,Je/
/ 9 /3
/
f l
r
SHYAM KUMAR EDUCATION University of Rhode Island, M.S., Structural Analysis,1970 University of Roorkee, India, B.E. (Civil),1964 West Virginia University, graduate courses in vibrations, solid and fluid mechanics, 1979-1981 Carnegie Mellon University, graduate courses in solid mechanics, elasticity, finite elements, structural stability, and shell theory, 1975-1977 Westinghouse Education Department, courses in fracture mechanics and finite element structural analysis REGISTRATION Professional Engineer, State of New Jersey,1974
' Professional Engineer State of Pennsylvania,1977 EXPERIENCE NUS CORPORATION,1981 -Present Byron Jackson Pi mp Division,1981 West Virginia University, 1979-1981 Bechtel Power Corporation,1980 Westinghouse, Advanced Reactors Division, 1974-1979 Burns and Roe,Inc., 1973-1974 University of Rhode Island, 1968-1970 Government Polytechnic, Faizabad, India, 1965-1968 Irrigation Department U.P. Government, India, 1964-1965 NUS - As a principal engineer in the Engineering Mechanics Department, responsible for structural evaluation of nuclear power plant equipment and components. Performed brittle fracture analysis for heat exchanger components. Provides coordination, planning, and evalua-tions for seismic qualification of electrical and mechanical components for use as Class 1E components in nuclear power plants. Participates in preparation of technical proposals and reviews or checks calculations performed by other engineers.
Byron Jackson Pump Division - Analyzed elevated ternperature components of sodium service pumps for use in breeder reactors. Provided support in extraction and use of thermal hydraulic data from SINDA Code (stored on magnetic tapes) for thermal / stress analysis models utilizing ANSYS computer code.
West Virginia University - As a lecturer in the Mechanical Engineering and Mechani:s Depart-ment, provided instruction to engineering students. Taught courses in statics, dynamics, and strength of materials.
Bechtel - Analyzed small bore piping systems for BWR plant. The systems were evaluated for new loads (in accordance with NRC Bulletin IE 7914) caused by safety relief valve actuation (SRVA), pool swelling, and chugging, as well as for thermal, seismic, and dead loads.
S NtJS CCAPCPATIC}
i SHYAM KUMAR Page Two Weetinghouse - As a senior engineer, performed stress analysis of reactor internals and primary and intermediate sodium piping loops of the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project. Analyzed system flexibility (under thermal, seismic. and dead ! cads) and thermal transients. The analysis included code evaluation in accordance with ASME Section ill and Elevated Temperature Code Case 1592 for the Class I nuclear piping. Both load controlled and deformation-controlled stresses were considered. Also performed evaluations of pump-induced vibrations of primary piping and crack-growth calculations for assessing primary piping integrity.
Contr buted to the development and coding of ELTEMP, an elevated temperature structural evaluation computer program that is to be used by all Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project participants for evaluation of ASME Class I piping, in accordance with the ASME Section ill, Elevated Temperature Code Case 1592, and RDT standards.
Burns and Roe - As a stress engineer, performed detailed stress analysis for thermal, seismic, and fatigue effects on PWR piping systems, pressure vessels, and components of nuclear power stations. Reviewed vendor equipment analysis reports for components such as valves, pumps, and fans.
Foster Wheeler Energy - As a design engineer / senior design engineer / design leader in a stress analysis group, analyzed steam generator components for fossil fired central stations, pressure vessels, and heat exchangers. Developed and applied computer codes for design and stress analysis. Some of the computer programs used included STRUDL Wilson's finite-element analysis program for plane and axisymmetric solids, NASTRAN, and piping flexibility analysis programs. Maintained and developed computer programs for design o' headers according to the ASME Section I code, for design and checking of condenser tube bundle support plates, and for numerically controlled tube bending machines.
University of Rhode Island - As a research assistant in the Department of Civil and Environmen-tal Engineering, assisted in testing of curved beam and diaphragm model of curved bridges and in development of computer program to analyze flat slabs for these bridges using finite-element technique.
Government Polytechnic - As a lecturer in civil engineering, provided classroom instruction to engineering students. Subjects taught included land surveying, highway engineering, strength of materials, and statics.
Irrigation Department, U.P. Government - As assistant engineer for the Yamuna Valley hydroelectric project, provided construction supervision and was in charge of the topographical and triangulation survey for the construction site of a dam, intake structure for hydraulic tunnels, and a power house.
PUBLICATIONS CRBRP. Firstinterim Stress A nalysis Report for Heat Transport System (SDD-51) Piping, Wa rd-D-0120, Westinghouse Advanced Reactors Division, Madison, Penn.,1975.
" Stress Analysis of the CRBR Primary Cross-over Piping Due to Pump induced Vibrations," paper delivered at Fourth WECAN User's Colloquium, Westinghouse R&D Center, Pittsburgh, Penn.,
1979.
NtJS CORPORATION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
Docket No. 50-155 CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
)
)
(Big Rock Point Nuclear
)
Power Plant)
)
STATE OF MARYLAND
)
ss.
COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY
)
AFFIDAVIT OF C.
ROGER CLAGETT I, C. ROGER CLAGETT, of lawful age, being first duly sworn, do state as follcws:
I am_ employed by NUS Corporation as a Staff Engineer in the Mechanical Engineering Department.
I have primary responsibility for the response to NRC Staff Interrogatory 9 Parts (j)
(o).
To the best of my knowledge and belief, the statements in this affidavit and resumd and the responses to the above inter-rogatories are true and correct.
[.
CCR h ( $G n'>
b.Rogerblagett Subscribed and sworn to before me this 19
. day of April 1982.
/,Y
- viCG / M % i & -l otary Public M [ontgomery Coun
/
J, ce Conway t
My Commission Expires:q, L / /9/3 Maryland i
I a
C. ROGER C1.AGETT EDUCATION Umversity of Maryland. Engineering. 1955-1957 Columbia Technicai School Machme Design.1956 USAF Technical Schools:
Advanced Olesel School.1951 Power Gereration. Distribution, and Diesel Scncol,1951 EXPERIENCE NUS CORPORATION.1977-Present American Chain & Cable. 1975-1977 Neotec. Inc., 1973-1975 Washington Technological Associates. Inc., 1964-1973 Paul H. Werras Co., 1961-1964 USI Western Design and Electronics, 1957-1961 USI Robodyne, 1955-1957 NUS - Developed conceptual and detailed designs to meet waste container handling require-monts in the radwaste processing and storage area for Detroit Edison Co. Developed container flow path and work station hancling requirements. Prepared designs for a new storage and loadout building with required material handling equipment for container transfer from storage to truck-mounted shielded casks. Developed all material handling requirements. including special equip-ment such as container handling attachments, rotating biccks, lifting strongbacks, and slings.
Prepared equipment and system specifications. system descriptions. and cost estimates.
O n a similar assignment. developed the conceptual design of handling methods for the storage and retrieval of various types and sizes of high-and low-level radioactive waste containers in the radwaste storage facility for Boston Edison Company. investigated methods of container handling, including lifts. cranes, monorails, powered and gravity conveyor systems, ball transfer tables, special design transportation dollies with tow motor drive units, and roadable transportation methods for container transfer. Also prepared the design of over packs for the various types and sizes of containers used for shielding during transportation and storage.
American Chain & Cable - As a mechanical design engineer, had responsibility for all phases of mechanical design of special equipment applied to autcmated material handling systems. Was responsible for concept, layout, supervision of drafting support personnel, and liaison with shop personnel during fabrication and testing. Types of equipment included automatic tripper mech-anisms, induction units, overhead power and free handling systems power transmission drive units. and automatic sorting systems.
Neotec. Inc. - Had project resconsibility for conceptual and detail design of quality / quantity control equipment in the food science field. Duties included the develocment of crototype and preproduction units, supervision of support design and drafting personnel, liaison with fabrication shoos, inspection of vendor supplied components. testing and acceptance. and coordination with c
production engineering.
td
' Washington Technological Associates. Inc. - Design assignments covered a wide variety of protects, from miniature scace-oriented components to large handling equipment with cacacities rangmg up to 80.000 counds.
Mc@fardEEkb>Em
J C. ROGER CLAGETT Page Two Assignments required stress analysts of load-bearing structures and components analysis and design of pneumatic and/or electromecnanical crrve systems, soeed and braking requirements for both static and cynamic conditions, and pneumatic cr electrical schematics for power supply and control systems.
Project resconsibility included preliminary layout to fabrica tion and testing. This included ccm plete detailed design, direction of assigned design and drafting succort personnel, fcilow-up tnrougn planning and estimating, liaison with Fabrication Oeoartment, and coordinaticn during final testing and acceptance.
Paul H. Werras Co. - Project engineer responsible for the design of equipment and material handling systems. Duties covered all phases of work from stock ccmconent systems to basic conceptuel and detailed design of ecmponent for scocial automatic systems. Cesigned in-house shop equipment for the fabrication of special curved-rail sec tens of ccnveyors diverters, escape-ment meenanisms, and stcrage and retrieving systems.
USl Western Design and Electronics - Project assignments inc!uded the design of servo-controls. optical systems, autofocus cam systems. gear trains mechanisms, power transmission systems, and the packaging of electromechanical centrol circuitry.
USI Robodyne - Projects included the design of intricate mecnanisms. gear trains, cams and servo systems used in automation equipment designed to perform automatic assembly coerations, and conveying and feed systems. Designs required careful attention to low-friction s!! des and screws as well as structural design for hign sceed and accuracy. While assigned to the R & D department, assumed pnme responsibility for the design and development of new concepts in feeding devices for automation equipment and new concepts in vibratcry exciting units fer feeding equipment.
l l
L NUS CCFACPCCN