ML20054C392
| ML20054C392 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 04/14/1982 |
| From: | EQE, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20054C391 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8204200496 | |
| Download: ML20054C392 (33) | |
Text
7 I
I
, g i
I i h il INCORPORATED g
A\\ EA7TFQUA<E ENG \\ EE7 NG COV 3ANY I
SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF TiiE 75-10N CONTAINMENT CRANE l
BIG ROCK P0ltiT NUCLEAR P0klER PLAtlT CilARLEVOIX, MICillGAtl I
I April 14, 1982 lI I
Prepared for:
Consumers Power Company 1945 W. Parnall Road Jackson, Michi(pn 49201 I
EQE INCORPORATED,466 GREENWlCH STREET. SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94133 (415)981-8492 g
mu: + ~. :.
I
' SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF lHE i'
75-TON COIITAlflMENT CRANE I
BIG ROCK POINT flVCLEAR POWER PLAtlT CHARLEV0lX, MICHIGAfl April 14, 1982 Prepared for Consumers Power Company 1945 W. Parnall Road Jackson, Michigan 49201 Prepared by EQE Incorporated 466 Greenwich Street San Francisco, California 94133 l
l
CONTENTS Page 1.
INTRODUCTION.....................................................
1 2.
DESCRIPTION OF CRANE STRUCTURE...................................
3 3.
ANALYSIS CRITERIA................................................
4 3.1 General................................................
4 3.2 Va r i a bl es Ad d re s s ed....................................
4 I
3.3 Stress Allowables Used in Evaluation...................
6 3.4 Seismic Inputs.........................................
7 3.5 Mo d e l i n g P a ra m e t e r s....................................
9 4.
ME T HOD O F A NA L Y S I S...............................................
10 5.
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS............................................
11 6.
SUMMARY
14 l
l 7.
REFERENCES.......................................................
15 t
l TABLES Page.
1.
FREQUENCIES OF VIBRATION AND EFFECTIVE MASSES, UNLOADED CASE.....
17 2.
MAXIMUM DISPLACEMENTS, UNLOADED CASE.............................
18 3.
MAXIMUM MEMBER FORCES, UNLOADED CASE.............................
19 4.
MAXIMUM STRESS RATIOS, UNLOADED CASE.............................
20 l
S.
FREQUENCIES OF VIBRATION AND EFFECTIVE MASSES, LOADED CASE.......
21 6.
MAXIMUM DISPLACEMENTS, LOADED CASE...............................
22 7.
MAXIMUM MEMBER FORCES, LOADED CASE...............................
23 8.
MAXIMUM STRESS RATIOS, LOADED CASE...............................
24 I
_d)J L' Eu
- m. m
FIGURES Page 1.
Il0RIZ0tiTAL RESP 0tlSE SPECTRA, ll0RTil-SOUTH (X) DIRECTION........... 25 2.
It0RIZ0ilTAL RESP 0f4SE SPECTRA, EAST-WEST (Y) DIRECTI0ft.............
26 3.
VERTICAL RESPONSE SPECTRA (Z) DIRECTION.......................... 27 4.
EASE 2 MODEL, POSITION OVER SPENT FUEL POOL 28 a.
Dimensions..............................................
b.
Nodal Points............................................
29 c.
Beam Elements...........................................
30 t
I f -' 8
,13 Muh g
1.
INTRODUCT10fl This report summarizes the seismic (earthquake) analysis of the 75-ton con-tainment crane of the Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant.
The report also summarizes additional studies that address several variables, such as (1) the different locations of the crane, (2) the different locations of the trolley of the crane for various operating conditions, (3) the loaded and i
unloaded operating conditions (i.e., with and without the fuel transfer cask, which weighs 24 tons), (4) the vertical position of the cask (up and down with respect to the spent fuel pool operating deck), (5.' the amount of damping (energy loss mechanism) in the crane structure, and (6) the effects I
of two dif ferent levels of earthquake motion.
l i
The two levels of earthquake motion are (1) a Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) l having a zero period horizontal ground acceleration equal to 0.129 and con-fonning to the spectral shape requirements of the U.S. Iluclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) Regulatory Guide 1.60 (References 1, 2, 3, and 4), and (2) the Big Rock Point site specific response spectra (SSRS), as defined by the USNRC in Reference 5, with a zero period horizontal ground acceleration of 0.119 The two earthquakes are described in detail in Chapter 3 of this report.
l The crane is located inside the reactor building.
It is a single-leg, modified gantry-type crane (with a single pair of legs) and is supported on 1
rails at two different elevations within the reactor building on the contain-ment enclosure.
The crane travels on rails running east-west along most of the width of the reactor building and containment shell.
The crane, designed for ind.;r use, is used for handling of the fuel transfer cask, fuel con-tainers, reactor vessel shield plug, reactor vessel head, and other equipment.
j i
The reactor building is a critical safety-related structure which was recently analyzed by D'Appolonia (References 1 and 10) and was determined to be capable of sustaining the seismic loads imposed by the two different earth-quakes.
The major objective of this study was to ensure that the crane would i
also sustain the motions that would be imposed by the same two earthquakes.
The study was also conducted to ensure that structural integrity of the crane hh m
)
1 1
- -. -. -.. - -- - I
?
I and its support system would be maintained during the postulated earthquakes, j
with or without operating loads during refueling operations above the spent l
fuel pool.
The maximum operating load is that due to the fuel cask and is i
24 tons.
The crane was evaluated using a modal superposition response spec-trum dynamic analysis, as described in Chapter 4.
A finite element model representation of the structure was utilized.
This report contains a description of the salient structural features of the 75-ton containment crane and a presentation of the analysis criteria, mathe-matical mode ing, and results for the most critical condition during the l
operations of the crane in the general vicinity of the spent fuel pool.
l 1
r fyra 7
p Ma ai.'2
. - ~..
3 2.
DESCRIPTIO!! 0F CRANE STRUCTURE The 75-ton containment crane is a welded steel single-leg gantry crane with trolley.
On the north side of the containment enclosure structure, the wheels are supported by the crane rail at elevation 632'-6", the spent fuel pool operating deck.
The full height of the crane legs on the north side is approximately 28 ft.
On the south side, the crane wheels are supported by the crane rail at elevation 660'-6", the emergency condenser deck, There are l
no legs at the south side.
The crane is 32'-6" tall (on the north side) and 28 ft. in overall length, spanning 36 ft. 4 in. between the rails running east-west.
The trolley is supported on two 51-in. deep steel plate box girders at 12-ft. centers. Both the lower and upper trucks contain two wheels each. One of the wheels on each level has brakes.
The crane has a 75-ton capacity main hook. The hoist mechanism includes a 12-parts tackle I
of 1 in diameter improved plow steel wire ropes.
The crane rails are supported on the concrete decks at elevations 632'-6" and 660'-6".
The west ends of the rails are supported by braced steel struc-tures at both elevations.
The east end of the crane rail at elevation 660'-6", above portions of the spent fuel pool, is also supported by a steel framed structure which extends about 23' past the concrete spent fuel pool operating deck.
I I
ns I
tb 1'
'-E 21
4 i
3.
ANALYSIS CRITERIA 3.1 General The seismic analysis of a crane involves the analysis of a series of mathe-matical models that represent the different positions of the crane during operation, the loaded and unloaded conditions, and other variables as des-cribed below.
This analysis follows the seismic analysis principles used by O' Appolonia for the analysis of the Reactor Building, as outlined in Reference 1.
3.2 Variables Addressed Crane location:
During refueling operations, the crane may be located any-where between the centerline of the reactor vessel and the extreme east end of the rail supporting structures over the spent fuel storage pool. All possible locations were reviewed.
It was determined that two positions are most critical and envelope the range of seismic responses that controls stresses within the components of the crane. The two positions are:
e The crane is located in the extreme eastern position over the spent fuel pool.
In that case, the easternmost wheel of the upper truck of the crane is positioned on the braced steel structure supporting the crane rail.
The other wheel is posi-tioned on the concrete emergency condenser deck.
The two wheels of the lower truck are supported on the concrete spent fuel pool deck.
This position induces the greatest amount of eccentricity between the center of gravity and the center of rigidity of the crane, producing twisting or torsional struc-tural response.
This case represents the lower bound for structural frequencies of the crane structure in the vicinity of the spent fuel pool and produces the highest possible earth-quake-induced displacements (or movements).
e The crane is centered over the reactor vessel or over the southwest corner of the spent fuel pool.
In both of these cases the upper and lower elevation crane wheels are fully supported by rails resting on concrete structures. This position represents the upper bound for structural frequencies of the crane struc-ture.
In this case, the torsional response of the crane is minimized.
q, g
ko M
5 All other crane positions result in frequencies and resultant displacements and stresses that fall between the two described crane positions.
Trolley _ Location: During refueling operations, the trolley, which is located on the upper elevation of the crane at the elevation of the emergency condenser deck, may be located anywhere above the crane brid g girders.
llonnally, the critical positions are as follows:
e The bridge girders are subjected to the highest possible bend-ing moments when the center of mass of the trolley is located near the middle of the bridge girder.
For refueling, the maxi-mum operating load is the weight of the fuel transfer cask, which is 24 tons (48 kips).
The rated capacity of the crane is 75 tons.
The preliminary seismic analyses indicated that the earthquake-induced vertical loads from the cask never exceeded the weight of the cask.
Therefore, the static design condition for the bridge girders with a full design load of 75 tons governs over the seismic design condition.
This condition was not in-vestigated further.
e The trolley is located at either the north or the south end of I
the crane. Locating the trolley on the north end produces the highest overturning forces in the legs in the east and west directions.
Locating the trolley on the north end also induces the highest torsional forces in the crane.
This re7 ort addresses only the second, most critical position of the trolley over the north end of the crane.
The trolley was not modeled in intermediate positior.s because they are less critical to the entire crane structure.
Locally, other positions would induce higher vertical accelerations of the I
suspeaded load.
The latter would induce higher bending moments in the crara girders.
However, even the amplified suspended load would be lower (for refueling operations involving the cask) than the rated load of the crane.
I Suspended Load:
Two separate mathematical models of the crane were analyzed.
The first model simulated the unloaded crane directly over the spent fuel pool.
The second model included the 24-ton fuel transfer cask suspended I
6 from the 75-ton book.
The presence of this operating load increases the vertical stresses in the legs because of the higher downward-acting vertical loads.
In all of the analyses, the vertical acceleration at the 75-ton hook l
support never exceeded 1.0g in either the up or down directions.
Thus, the cable always remain in tension.
l The presence of this operating load ac% ally increases the stability of +"e crane during an earthquakr because the operating load increases the overail weight of the crane.
In addition, numerous past studies of cranes have indicated that the suspended load does not contribute significantly to the lateral seismic forces on the crane. The load is supported by a flexible cable.
During operation, the bottom of the fuel transfer cask is never more than a few feet from the spent fuel pool deck.
Therefore, the cask is suspended on long cables that have a natural frequency outside the range of significant earthquake acceleration and the cask and cable will not be excited in the horizontal direction.
Since, in the vertical direction, the acceleration I
does not exceed 1.09 up or down, the highest tension load in the cable cannot exceed the 24-ton weight of the cask plus the 24-ton load due to a 1.0g acceleration, or 48 tons -- less than the 75-ton capaci ty.
In summary, the critical seismic condition for overall stability of the crane occurs when the crane is unloaded.
The loaded condition governs local stresses in the crane structure.
3.3 Stress Allowables Used in Evaluation All specific results and allowable stress values are based on calculations perfonned using ASTM A7 grade steel properties with a minimum yield strength equal to 33 ksi.
Stress evaluation for steel members was undertaken accord-inq to AISC Specification (Reference 6), Part 1.
The 33 percent increase in allowable stress in steel due to seismic loadings pennitted by AISC (1970) for earthquake loading conditions has been included in establishing the allowable stresses.
This is a very conservative assumption because, in essence, the evaluation criteria becomes an elastic strain criteria.
The assumed allowable stress is [(0.6)x(1.33)x(33 ksi)] 26.3 ksi which is 20 less than the yield stress of A7 grade steel.
According to reference 7, a%
7 significant credit can be taken for locai yielding in the structure.
That was not necessary in any of the analyses of the crane.
The structural stability criterion was that the seismic loading should not produce instabilities such as uplif t or overturning.
Uplif t was defined, for the purposes of the analyses, as vertical separation between the wheels of the crane and their supporting rails. Uplif t can occur when the overturn-ing forces (lateral seismically induced forces) are of sufficient magnitude to exceed the weight of the crane.
Even when uplif t occurs, failure of the crane is not imminent because the uplif t would have to be large, i.e., several feet.
The analyses actually indicated that uplif t does not occur.
Therefore, it was not necessary to perform any analyses involving such behavior.
3.4 Seismic Inputs Two levels of earthquake motions were used in the analyses of the crane.
Response spectrum analyses were conducted. Because all analyses were linear, time histories of acceleration were not needed and were not used. The two earthquakes were represented by response spectra, as follows:
e The first series of analysis used floor response spectra derived by D' Appolonia from their analyses of the reactor building for an SSE having a zero period horizontal ground acceleration (in both orthogonal directions) equal to 0.129 and confonning to the spectral shape requirements of USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.60.
+
(References 1 through 4).
e The second series of analyses used floor response spectra I
derived by D' Appolonia (Reference 10) from their analyses of the reactor building for Big Rock Point site specific response spectra, as defined by the USNRC in Reference 5, with a zero period horizontal ground acceleration of 0.11g (in both ortho-gonal directions).
The vertical seismic input was also vertical response spectra as defined by I
the D'Appolonia analyses.
The spectra were consistent with the spectra for the horizontal direction in both of the above cases.
p p' ;, Ah i~s
8 The 75-ton containment crane is supported on rails at two different elevations, as described in Chapter 2 of this report. Therefore, it was necessary to decide which response spectra would be used for the analyses.
The legs of the crane, which are supported at elevation 632'-6", would be excited by spectra as obtained for nodal point 657 of the D' Appolonia model (Reference 1).
The upper wheels and the main body of the crane, however, would be excited by a different level of motion because they are supported at a dif ferent eleva-tion (660'-6") on the same structure (nodal point 650).
Conventional linear response spectrum analyses typically utilize only one set of spectra for all supports.
In order to be conservative, it was decided to use the spectra for the higher elevation for all of the analyses.
These spectra envelope the lower wheels spectra in the entire frequency range.
Thus, the analyses used accelerations that are significantly higher than the actual accelerations that would be experienced by the crane at the lower truck elevation and within the 28'-high legs. A more reasonable analysis would employ spectra that are derived from the spectra at both elevations.
The seismic forces in the lower members of the crane would be reduced by approximately 10 or 15 percent.
The overturning forces would also be reduced by a similar percentage of forces.
The forces derived using the floor response spectra for the 0.12g zero period ground acceleration SSE were higher than the forces derived using the site specific spectra in all ccses.
Therefore, in the following, only re-sul ts for the former analyses are reported.
The floor response spectra for the SSE (Reference 1) that were used are those in Figures 1 through 3 for the level of crane damping that was used.
I Because of its overall geometry, the crane would experience very substantial twisting, or torsion, during an earthquake.
This torsion is much greater than the typical accidental torsion that is assuiiied in structures.
The models used in the analyses automatically account for the torsion; in fact, the torsionally induced displacement controls the seismic response in the horizontal directions.
q A[c '
?
9 3.5 Modeling_ Paranjeter_s The critical modeling parameter is the damping that was used in the analyses.
A large gantry-type crane is a steel structure that typically incorporates welded, bolted, and riveted connections and has numerous moving parts.
Some of the most important contributors to damping are rattling of the hoist Cables, moveinents its the wheels of the crane and of the trolley, dif ferential movements and responses of supported equipment, slippage of the wheels on the rails (this situation occurs in all examined cases), various and numerous couplings, the driver's cab structure, geering, material damping, etc.
The crane experiences high accelerations under the assumed criteria.
The pre-liminary and the final analyses indicated that, typically, the stresses within the structure are between yield and 50/ of yield levels.
it is ex-pected that high levels of damping would be induced in the crane. A reason-able assumption for damping would be on the order of 15 to 205 of critical damping.
The crane may experience near-critical damping in the east-west direction because of the slippage of the wheel on the rails that occurs for the assumed levels of motion.
For the input motion due to the SSE, modal damping equal to 71 of critical damping was used, in accordance with recom-I mendations from Reference 7 (flUREG/CR-0098) for steel structures.
This is a very conservative assumption because, as was deterinined iri the analysis, I
the crane is subjected to high seismic loads which cause soine minor sliding of the crane and the trolley on the rails.
Such behavior not only limits the induced shear forces but causes high damping.
The 7J daniping assumption is further substantiated by conclusions of a study made for the Pacific Gas and Electric Company for the Diablo Canyon fluclear Power Plant (Reference 8).
It should be noted that if a Poi damping is used, the seismic forces on the crane would be reduced by 25 to 50J lhe breaking strength for each wire rope was 34.6 tons.
The elastic modulus I
was 11,000 ksi.
il 2
(( [ _
t$
I
10 4.
e1ETH00 0F ANALYSIS Linear three-dimensional finite-element response spectrum analyses were undertaken using the EASE 2 structural analysis computer code (Reference 9).
The model consisted entirely of beam elements, and mass was applied at appropriate nodes (Figure 4).
The model was subjected to dead and seismic loading, with and without hook loads.
The high theoretical inertial forces caused by the seismic motion exceed the frictional forces between the wheels and the supporting rails.
Thus, the crane may slide a few inches on the rails in the east-west di rec ti on.
The possible induced crane inertial forces are actually limited in the east-west direction by sliding responses with a coefficient of fric-tion of 0.30 for each braked wheel (one per side).
A coefficient of fric-tion of 0.30 is conservative; normally, a coefficient of 0.25 would be assumed.
Studies were made of the pendulum motion of the suspended load. The resul t-I ing horizontal loads were insignificant.
The vertical inertial forces on i
the load were lower than the weight and uplirt of tha load does not occur.
The resulting north-south and east-west responses and the vertical seismic resul ts were combined on a square-root-of-the-sum-of-the-squares (SRSS) l basis.
The total effect was, in turn, combined algebraically with dead load and hook load.
The inertial forces on the trolley also exceed the resistance provided by friction in the north-south direction.
Thus, the trolley may slide a few inches.
This behavior would also reduce the induced inertial forces on the crane structure and its supports and would f urther increase the damping in the structure.
l
..y
11 5.
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS As described in the previous discussion, several different analyses of the Crane were Conducted and numerous peripheral studies were conducted in order to assess (1) the overall behavior of the crane and (2) the behavior of its critical components during the imposed earthquake motion.
Several consist-ently conservative assumptions were made for critical parameters that are needed for the mathematical modeling of the crane.
The two controlling cases are reported in detail in this report.
I The two controlling cases are (1) the unloaded, and (2) the loaded crane, which is located over the extreme east end of the spent fuel pool and is supported partly by the steel structure that extends beyond the concrete emergency condenser deck.
The trolley is located at its northernmost posi-tion.
That is the case when the supports of the crane are most flexible and the crane experiences the highest torsional displacements.
The results of the other analyses are rather similar, with no large differences in the forces and the resulting stresses in the structure.
The natural frequencies of vibration and the effective mass participation factors for the north-south, east-west, and vertical response spectrum analyses of the unloaded and loaded crane are summarized in Tables 1 and 5, respectively.
In accordance with accepted requirements only those modes with associated frequencies of vibration equal to or less than 33 Hz are considered significant for response computations.
Actually, all modes up to about 50 Hz were considered to assure a sufficiently high modal mass participation.
In all cases the summations of the modal effective mass fractions exceed 80:.
I The north-south, east-west, and vertical fundamental frequencies of the unloaded system are 2.2 Hz, 4.1 Hz, and 10.4 Hz, respectively; the comparable frequencies for the loaded system are 2.2 Hz, 4.1 Hz, and 6.0 Hz.
The horizontal response is controlled by the first two frequencies, lhe spectra, Figures 1 and 2, indicate that the accelerations in the range of 2 to 4 Hz are in the steeply inclined portion of the curve.
That implies that small variations in computed frequencies would produce significant variation in forces.
The models that are used assume that all crane connections are rigid.
In fact, numerous vital connections throughout the crane structure
[L, Oj gh,
h j
12 dre not rigid.
Some ar e sliding ConneClions, suCh as the wheel-rail connec-l tions.
Thus, the modeled crane is stiffer than the real structure.
There-fore, in all cases, the real crane f requencies would be lower than the ana-I lytically obtained frequencies.
Then, the forces in all cases would be lower i
I than these computed because the frequencies of interest are in the steeply l
climbing range of the spectra.
In addition, these are already broadened I
spectra that have been modified to account for possible variation in fre-quency.
Thus, the results that were obtained are affected by two additional conservative assumptions which further contribute to higher forces.
The predicted seismically induced displacements for the unloaded and loaded system are summarized in Tables 2 and 6.
The element and node numbers shown in the tables correspond to the computer model shown in Figure 4.
fhe maxi-mum estimated (seismic only) displacements, relative to the wheels at the I
lower base, are approximately 0.6 in. east-west and north-south.
Most of the motion is due to torsion.
Considering the overall height of crane, which exceeds 30 feet, the seismically induced displacements are small.
Sliding of the crane and the trollev occurs in all cases because the computed base shear forces exceed the restraining forces provided by friction between the wheels and rails.
Sliding of a few inches is expected.
The only possible complication due to sliding is when the crane is positioned near the end of the crane runway over the spent fuel pool.
In that case, the crane would I
impact the end crane stops that are provided on the runway.
The crane itsel f is provided with bumpers.
The operating velocity of the crane is similar or I
greater than the east-west velocity of the crane during an earthquake.
A detailed analysis of the impact was not conducted, but it is expected that the induced forces of impact are similar to or smaller than the forces expe-rienced of ten during operation when the crane impacts its stops.
Maximum bending moments and axial loads for the crane legs, girders, and eint ties resulting f rom the addition of the SR55 combined ef fects of the I
separate response spectrum analyses were added directly to the dead load effects.
Summaries for the unloaded and loaded cases are shown in Tables 3 and 7, respectively.
The ratios of the computed bending moment and axial stresses to allowable values are shown in Tables 4 and 8.
For any member, the ratios are additive to obtain the combined stress effect.
If the ra tio U*
I
13 exceeds one, the stress criteria is exceeded. flo combination exceeds one, indicating that all members of the crane remain elastic and none are over-stressed.
Shear stresses were also checked and were found to be low in all members.
l The only potential overstress occurs in the upper crane rails and their anchorages.
The rails receive a high localized shear load from the wheels.
Preliminary analyses of this localized phenomena indicate that the rail and the anchorages may be overstressed. Additional analyses and field inspection of anchorage details are being conducted to check for possible overstress.
If significant overstresses are found, the anchorage will be strengthened.
The analyses show that the crane structure itself is stable in all directions for all possible loading conditions during operation near and above the spent fuel pool.
Uplif t and overturning do not occur.
When the crane is in the operating position, sliding of a few inches can be expected along both the crane runway and the trolley runway.
The sliding has no impact on the safety of the crane.
I! !
II '
klT l(-;
14 6.
SUMWiRY The results presented in this report are intended to provide infonnation regarding the seismic adequacy of the 75-ton containment crane under the postulated safe shutdown and site specific earthquake motions.
A series of conservative estimates were made in modeling the various critical parameters tFat control the behavior of the crane. Nuitierous operating conditions were addressed in the analysis. The results show that the crane is stable during the postulated motions and all structural stresses are within the allowable stresses.
The crane does not affect adversely the safety of any structure or equipment item.
An additional confirmatory field inspection and an analysis is being con-ducted to check a possible overstress of the upper crane rail and its anchorages.
The detail will either be shown to be adequate by analysis, or it will be strengthened.
I 1
I e
s,.
~a,
15 7.
REFEREilCES 1.
D'Appolonia Consulting Engineers, l'nc., "eport Volume il - Appendix A, Seismic Safety _flargin Evaluation, Reactor BuildinMi_g Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, August 1981.
2.
D' Appolonia Consulting Engineers, Inc., Derivation of Floor Responses, Reactor Building, Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, June 1981.
3.
D' Appolonio Consulting Engineers, Inc., Report-Volume _I, Seismic Safety Margin Evaluation, Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, August 1981.
4.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Damping Values for Seismic Design of liuclear Power Plants, Regulatory Guide 1.61, October 1973.
5.
Letter from D. M. Crutchfield (USNRC) to Consumers Power Company, Site Specific Ground Response Spectra for SEP Plants Located in Eastern United States, Washington, D.C., June 17, 1981.
I 6.
American Institute of Steel Construction, Specification for the Design, Fabrication, and Erection of Structural Steel for Buildings, New York, 1970.
7.
Newmark, N. M., and W. J. Hall, Development of Criteria for Seismic Review of selected Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG/CR-0098, Washington, D.C., May 1978.
8.
Blume, J.
A., and A. F. Kabir, " Data on Damping Ratios," Section LL-9 of Final Safety Analysis _ Report, Units 1 and 2, Diablo Canyon Site, Amend-ment No. 50, " Seismic Evaluation for Postulated 7.SM Hosgri Earthquake,"
Pacific Gas & Electric Company, San Francisco, 1977.
m 9.
Control Data Corporation, Cybernet Services, EASE 2 User Information Manual, Revision A, October 12, 1979.
l f [ $['
~
I G
16 REFEREtlCES (Continued) 10.
D'Appolonia Consulting Engineers, Inc., Derivation of Site Specific Floor Response Spectra, Seismic Safety Margin Evaluation, Big Rock Point fluclear Power Plant, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (to be issued).
I I
I y
3:).dl($
h I
I l
I l
k TABLES 1
I I
l t
i I I I
[0E
17 TABL E 1 1
75-T0fl C0!11 Alfif4EflT CRAllE FREQUErlCIES OF VIBRAT10t1 AtlD EFFECTIVE MASSES UtkOADED CASE Modal Effective Mass (%)
Frequency florth-South East-West Vertical Mode (Hz)
Direction Direction Direction 1
2.24 9
62 2
4.10 62 8
3 9.46 1
4 10.4 60 5
11.1 2
5 1
6 15.1 5
3 7
17.8 13 1
8 21.8 4
l 9
22.8 3
10 27.2 2
8 11 29.2 1
12 31.3 1
13 33.2 8
14 35.4 2
15 36.3 1
1 16 38.8 3
17 42.1 18 44.8 19 47 5 1
20 50.4 TOTAL:
97 80 90 I
18 TABLE 2 75-TON C0f4TAINMENT CRANE MAXIMUM DISPLACEMEllTS UflLOADED CASE North-South East-West Vertical Nodal Direction Direction Direction Point (in.)
(in.)
(in.)
2 0.00 0.01 0.00 7
0.06 0.01 0.01 24 0.36 0.07 0.00 25 0.47 0.20 0.00 26 0.55 0.37
.01 27 0.60 0.50 0.01 29 0.62 0.55 0.01 44 0.52 0.55 0.01 46 0.52 0.52 0.03 47 0.52 0.51 0.04 49 0.52 0.44 0.06 50 0.52 0.29 0.05 51 0.52 0.13 0.04 54 0.56 0.00 0.01 62 0.52 0.00 0.01 63 0.56 0.00 0.01 68 0.52 0.52 0.02 71 0.35 0.52 0.02 72 0.52 0.52 0.02 73 0.00 0.00 0.02 76 0.02 0.00 0.01 78 0.00 0.00 0.00 NOTES:
1.
All displacements are measured relative to the base of the crane.
2.
All nadal points refer to Figure 4b.
3.
The deflections are due to seismic loads only.
I ME l
19 TABLE 3 75-T0ft C0llTAlf1MEllT CRAtlE MAXIMUM MEMBER FORCES UflLOADED CASE Axial Moment Moment Load M
N E
~
(kip in.)
(kip-in.)
Element (kips) 5 63.94 632.54 854.28 8
44.98 695.4 811.75 13 66.35 427.55 1428.78 17 48.48 748.56 939.03 22 45.96 3102.60 1859.10 23 47.11 3520.27 1816.70 26 52.66 2468.32 2476.50 30 3.21 2714.83 1311.68 31 18.16 2745.98 1320.36 32 8.33 3374.15 1291.28 35 12.57 2100.11 1515.90 39 13.84 2530.36 312.99 50 11.49 1283.24 1701.12 60 33.24 30.40 116.11 79 0.48
20 TABLE 4 75-TON CONTAINMENT CRANE MAXIMUM STRESS RATIOS UNLOADED CASE Element f /F
[b !
[h !
h b
Total a a a
a y
y 5
0.142 0.133 0.449 0.724 8
0.099 0.146 0.427 0.672 13 0.097 0.055 0.495 0.647 17 0.107 0.157 0.494 0.758 22 0.060 0.192 0.447 0.699 23 0.061 0.218 0.436 0.715 26 0.069 0.153 0.595 0.817 30 0.004 0.168 0.315 0.487 31 0.024 0.170 0.317 0.511 32 0.011 0.209 0.310 0.530 35 0.016 0.130 0.364 0.510 39 0.014 0.217 0.075 0.306 50 0.009 0.100 0.409 0.518 60 0.184 0.100 0.146 0.430 79 0
0.000 I
Bs!5
21 j
TABLE 5 l
75-T0fl C0flTAINt1ENT CRAtlE FREQUEllCIES OF VIBRATION AND EFFECTIVE MASSES LOADED CASE Modal Effective flass (%)
frequency North-South East-West Vertical Mode (Hz)
Direction Direction Direction 1
2.24 9
62 2
4.10 62 9
3 5.49 40 4
9.46 1
5 10.8 1
28 i
6 11.1 2
a 4
7 15.1 5
2 j
8 17.8 13 2
9 21.9 3
10 22.9 3
~
1 11 27.2 2
6
~
12 29.2 1
l 13 31.3 1
1 14 33.3 6
15 35.4 1
16 36.3 1
1 17 38.8 3
18 42.1 19 44.8 20 47.5 1
TOTAL:
97 84 94
l 22 TABLE 6 I
75-T0fl C0flTAlflMLilT CRAtlE MAXIMUM DISPLACEMEllTS LOADED CASE florth-South East-West Vertical flodal Direction Direction Direction Point (in.)
(in.)
(in.)
2 0.00 0.01 0.00 7
0.06 0.01 0.01 24 0.37 0.08 0.00 25 0.48 0.23 0.01 26 0.56 0.42 0.01 27 0.61 0.56 0.01 29 0.63 0.63 0.01 44 0.53 0.63 0.01 46 0.53 0.59 0.02 47 0.53 0.57 0.03 49 0.53 0.48 0.05 50 0.53 0.32 0.04 51 0.53 0.14 0.03 54 0.58 0.00 0.01 62 0.53 0.00 0.01 63 0.58 0.00 0.01 68 0.53 0.59 0.02 71 0.36 0.59 0.02 72 0.54 0.59 0.02 73 0.00 0.00 0.14 76 0.02 0.00 0.01 78 0.00 0.00 0.00 fl0TES:
1.
All displacements are measured relative to the base of the crane.
2.
All nodal points refer to Figure 4b.
3.
The deflections are due to seismic loads only.
23 TABLE 7 75-T0!! C0ilTAlf[MEllT CRAllE MAXIMUM MEMBER FORCES LOADED CASE Axial Moment Moment Load n
n, Element (kips)
(kip"in.)
(kip-in.)
~
5 87.69 722.26 1009.40 8
64.75 793.24 948.12 13 92.22 477.23 1690.88 17 71.07 877.32 1099.63 22 48.56 3792.95-1884.96 23 48.47 4013.00 1839.68 26 54.11 2664.66 2509.97 30 3.80 3396.04 1337.23 31 21.80 3417.23 1348.94 32 9.13 3737.04 1317.72 35 13.06 2155.64 1546.83 39 16.34 3094.70 316.11 50 12.02 1333.62 1733.01 60 37.74 35.08 130.89 79 72.94 BGE
24 4
l TABLE 8 75-T0fl C0tlTAlllMErlT CRAtlE MAXIl1UM STRESS RATIOS LOADED CASE Element f /F
[b /#
I /#
b b
b Total a a y
y n
n 5
0.194 0.152 0.531 0.877 8
0.144 0.167 0.499 0.810 13 0.134 0.061 0.585 0.780 17 0.158 0.184 0.578 0.920 22 0.063 0.235 0.453 0.751 23 0.063 0.249 0.442 0.754 26 0.070 0.165 0.603 0.838 30 0.005 0.211 0.321 0.537 31 0.029 0.212 0.324 0.565 32 0.012 0.232 0.317 0.561 35 0.017 0.134 0.372 0.523 39 0.016 0.266 0.054 0.336 50 0.009 0.104 0.402 0.515 60 0.210 0.115 0.165 0.490 79 0.110 0.110 I
I I
BSE
I I
I l
l 1
il I
FIGURES I
I I
I I
I
[G
25 i
48 giiijiiii iiiijiiii siiijiiii iiriliiii iiiijiiii iiii;iii t 4.00 3.20 l
?
o
_Z
~
_~
z O
P 2.40 g
DAMPING (% CRITICAL) w U
T l.60
- 7. 0
.e 0.80 ooo'l'Il'Ill lilll'
IIIlllll' III'lIll' l'llilll' II'llIll 00 40 0 200 30 0 40 0 50 0 600 FREoUENCY IN HERTZ Figure 1.
llorizontal Response Spectra,fiorth-South (X) Direction From Reference 1 at flode 650.
pE)f dM(a
- sF (Ge
i 1
26 4 80 1111 1311 lilllIlli lilllIlli lillllIII lilllIlli lill till 4.00
~
I 3 20 e
7 a
E DAMPING (% CRITICAL) g 240 5
d 8
r 1,60 I
N I
~
1 lIII IIII IIIIlIIII IIIllIIIl IIIIlIlII IIIIllIII fill lllI 0.00 00 10 0 200 30 0 40 0 50 0 600 FREQUENCY IN HERTZ Figure 2.
Horizontal Response Spectra, East-West (Y) Direction From Reference 1 at Node 650.
F T s#1
[9Th%
27 48 gliijiiii iiiijiiii iiiiliiii iiiijiiii iiiijiiii iiii j iii t
~
4 00
~
me l
3 20 I
.e z
5 g 2 40 g
DAMPING (% CRITICAL) 0 d
I60 l
l r '-
1 o.ao
ifl'llllllllli'll lilllIll IIIIlll' l'
'll'
'll' ll 000oo 10 0 20 0 30 0 40 0 50 0 600 FRf QUt NCY IN HERT 2 I
Fiqure 3.
Vertical Response Spectra (Z) Direction From Reference 1 at Node 650.
I (K_:
l EN$
.I
a 28
/
/
I 1.
O
\\
5 i
s I
r j
s
/
N.
'a i
~
l f
C' i
x s-
\\
/
H O
t -
s o".
tu h.
g e
ty i
[
s s
s s
' \\.s I
Ms.
.Cd g.
Z
- s e4 9' y
L.
\\
\\
s V
s,
/
.,+s
/
l
%s v
z
\\
s
/
1-4 _.._ -....
b _ ___, /
t:
,I
, \\
g.
i w
~
l R
r f
\\.,
,/
s-
\\. -, -
ao E
\\
s-O W
9,....
g a
.. - /.,
,=
\\
a m a.
.\\
+
\\
rJ s.
w a*
m s
0<x
/-
\\,s
- u. x <
s uw
--a-esd
/
m=0 OWZ t--,-
WE I\\
m ":
s s
'\\
Q
'G w <.z.
g u,
?
e>>O a
m c) O 7" Q N
O V
O i
,2 o
o :: u 2 j
g
.- a EO U
+- -
t@
x,
m
- -a ?! O Mr Z
N&OM w
y.
p
.f E
WW l O m
<t O Ln m g
a m a. ~ m I
'/
a
\\
\\
s,..' \\ \\
s I ;g.
s g
/-
'j
.---w
\\
k 6
N, g-
'g s
g s
- i. -
I, +x..
.s s
e
-~rm-
/
vs I/
^/
.i. _,
.--_4.
g
'g s
(
~y n
Ig_ '
g M
w... - - g K'
s y
-\\
m s
29 of)
- T'
>~
s-Vy
[
S
\\
~
/
s
/
w s
f) l
~
.g M
f-N
, I f
3 s
'd
/
O.
sb r-i'..
\\,
d 4
LA k
e s -
WI j
/
,?
g-
?
E
/
/
4 i
e g
\\
/
Z
.. s WG
\\
r O.,
s s
aO N
J O
LAJ f
M
\\
a 3
s O
J LiJ Q.
Ls1 Z i
D at N I
LA. E af U LA)
H J
/
s Z F-U r
h T
4 WZD
/
Q. LAJ Z
,/-
,g 8
w-z N
-_ \\,3
- e g H, s.----
e K
e
\\
h.
e.f-y 4
W LAJ >- O s
g q; O g a_,
4' w
~
V O
sp 4 s
es
'i O
0 7 O './
/
Q.
EO O
I)-
.\\
ev-
-7O A
m oJ F-O e
/
4 tst et LAJ m H
-. g
e O
wm aO
/
O af C L A *-*
g.
Z LAJ Q. Tw CD I
e3,
/
a
- z
/
$F
,/
o s
i P,
g l'
b r, -
3 e, X
N 44)
\\,
i
.M
'e
'O
?.
T
\\
eb l
/
/
4 I
30
/
/
/
['
/- -.
-- 2
\\
/
h.
(TN) h
/
s e
f YT
.3 d
/
Ci
./
gp j
g
, \\@ -
g
\\
/
(p
..,i g
H, y
i' m/
,+
g s
v
/
a.
g
/
U e
y
', /-
/
O Q'
../
s g
y
/
\\.
O a w a.
\\-
/'
WEx wa-
.\\
/
/
\\
gw
\\
I H
a C&O
\\
/
- r s
WZD f'
, 'tg-g
> v.
ca M
s zn a ;
a m
a-=
H W4M
~
z e->HO
- D.,C) d[ -
d(
[
b EzO:
7
~ +
, - + - - * - -
y *A cr *,
w e o z g.
./~N
- 'C,l
- ~$l 4
a zo O
W W 2O N H. o a E
w >- H
\\ /
a-4h.
h
)
NoEO w
m m m. s m A
g-
- \\
7 a
.x /
e e r g
j '.
g @@
g l
\\.
. g.
N.
x
\\
,/
\\
l l
1 l
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _,