ML20054F113

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Response to Questions CS 220.2,6,20,21,22,24,27 & 39 Re Structural Engineering.Responses Wil Be Incorporated Into PSAR Amend 69
ML20054F113
Person / Time
Site: Clinch River
Issue date: 06/08/1982
From: Longenecker J
ENERGY, DEPT. OF
To: Check P
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
HQ:S:82:044, HQ:S:82:44, NUDOCS 8206150225
Download: ML20054F113 (62)


Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Department of Energy Washington, D.C. 20545 Docket No. 50-537 HQ:S:82:044 JUN 0 81982 Mr. Paul S. Check, Director CRBR Program Office Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Dr. Mr. Check:

RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING

Reference:

Letter, P. S. Check to J. R. Longenecker, "CRBRP Request for Additional Information," dated February 26, 1982 This letter formally responds to your request for adaitional information contained in the reference letter.

Enclosed are responses to Questions CS 220.2, 6, 20, 21, 22, 24, 27, and 39 that will also be incorporated into the PSAR Amendment 69; scheduled for submittal later in June.

incerely, e

J n R. Longen er Acting Director, Office of the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Project Office of Nuclear Energy Enclosures cc: Service List Standard Distribution Licensing Distribution 00(

8206150225 820608 DR ADOCK 05000537 PDR  ;

' ' ' ~ ~ " "'~~" '"~~^~'~~~ '~

~P;g3-3I82-0'184)[8,22j~-IP5E Ouestion CR770.2 (3.5.4.1 1 3.5.4.2)

The revised Petry equation for penetration depth as a function of velocity seems to have been copied incorrectly in that the term in the exponential is

.dimensionally incorrect and the term V', which is a logcrithm, is given with a dimension (the velocity dimension should be incorporated in K). Further the K in the text does not agree with the K in Figure 3.5-1. It is requested that corrections be made. Indicate how you calculate d ,for a noncylindrical or nonsphe.-Ical projectile?

Also Indicate if the wall thicknesses you determined meet the requirements as shown in Table 1 on Page 3.5.3-6 of the revised SRP Section 3.5.

Resoonse:

PSAR Section 3.5.4.1 wilI be revised to show that the term V' does not have the dimension ft/sec and that the term a should be equated to Tg/KApV'. The value of K in PSAR Figure 3.5-1 will be corrected to 2.76 x 10 to agree with PSAR Section 3.5.4.1.

For a noncylindrical or nonspherical projectile or missile, d is calculated by determining the equivalent diameter of a noncircular misslie:

d, =

where A = cross-sectional area of missile The wall thicknesses determined in the CRBRP design are consistent with the requirements shown In Table 1 on page 3.5.3-6 of the revised SRP. For concrete strength of 4000 psi, the minimum wall' thickness designed is 27" which is greater than the required minimum thickness of 20". The minimum roof thickness of 27 as designed is more than the required minimum thickness of 16".

I l

l l

l l

QCS220.2-1 Amend. 68 l May 1962

3.5.4 Barrier DesIon Procedurgg Missile resistant barriers and structures wilI be designed to witnstand and cbsorb missile impact loads without being fully perforated in order to prevent -

damage to protected compo~ents. In addition, the overalI structural respon,se will be evaluated to assure the structural Integrity due to missile impact loads. For concrete missile barriers, the possibility of generation of secondary missilips due to spelIing or scabbing w11I also be taken into consideration so that protective measures can be provided.

The design procedures are described below.

3.5.4.1 Penetration into Concrete Target Structures To arrive at a method for computing the penetration into concrete walis, formulas reviewed in ORNL-NSIC-22 (Ref. 1) were studied. Four equations were

t J::.J :.; 0.T1-NSIC-22. Two of these, the Army Corps of Engineers formula and the National Defense Research Committee formula, do not apply for impact velocities under 500 ft/sec. The remaining two equations are the modified 15 Petry formula and the Ballistic Research Lsboratory fccmula. These two formulas were compared by determining the depths of penetration for a 6-inch-diameter missile of 100 pounds and a 16-inch-diameter missile of 2,500 pounds 61 with velocities in the range of 0 to 500 f t/sec. As seen in Figures 3.5-1 and 3.5-2, the Petry formula is the mcre conservative for velocities greater than 6] 150 and 200 ft/sec. respectively.

Theref ore, the depth of a concrete wall or slab to whIch a missile can g penetrate is estimated by use of the modified Petry fccmula: j D' = KApV' [1 + e-4(a-2)]

where .

D' = depth of penetration (ft.)

61l K, a material constant = 2.76 x 10-3 (ft2 - sec.)

lb missile weicht (psf)

Ap , maximum cross-sectional area V = impact velocity (ft./sec.)

V' = log 10 (1 + Y2 )

ZlDUUU 61l T

p = wall or slab thickness (ft.)

For design purpose, all Category I concrete structures wil l satisfy tiis requirement; Tp ? 2D' I

3.5-10

r 20 MODIFIED PETRY (x= 2.76 x 10",

7 15 E

c f

~.

O

. . O e

t ts

=>

10 .

m

/' / -

3 .

N

_5

?

E a

5 5 f

BALLIS1tC RESEAPCM ,

LABOR ATORY EQ.

6 IN. CYLINDRICAL Mi! ILE WEIGHT = 100 LB. -

0 0 100 200 300 uq0 500 VELOCITY (f t/sec)

Figure 3.5-l. Comparison of Minile Penetration Fnrmula" for concrete I

I 6656-1 3.5-19

70 60

('

MODIFIED PETRY (x = 2.76 x 3 7 '

.E

.E 50 ,

/

S 0

5 W

40 ,

E

" I$$

o

" 30 0

5 .

2 5

5 m ,

BALLISTIC RESEARCH I LABOR ATORY EQ.

10 16 IN CYLINDRICAL MISSILE WElGMT = 2500 LB.

O O I 00 200 300 400 500 VELOCITY (ft/sec)

Figure 3.5-2. Comparison of Missile Penetration Formulas for Concrete 1 6656-2 3.5-20 O

Question CE770.6 (3.7.1.1)

It is stated that for a lumped-mass-spring type of models the seismic design response spectra will be applied at the foundation. The mathematical models as shown In Figures 3.7-16, 3.7-16A, and 3.7-16B are the lumped-mass-spring type. Indicate how the springs and dashpots representing soll are derived from a static finite element model. Provide a description in detail.

Further, the mathematical models in Figures 3.7-16, 3.7-16A, and 3.7-16B lack numerical details. No one could judge the adequacy of plans for a plant model based on the material given on these diagrams. A full discussion with tables should be provided delineating the numbers, their meanings, etc.

Resoonse:

A detailed description on how foundatin springs and dashpots were calculated is given in Section 3.7.1.6 of the PSAR (Pages 3.7-3a, 3.7-3b, 3.7-3c, and 3.7-4.)

The attached diagrams are the updated mathematical medels used in the seismic analysis of.the Nuclear Island buildings. Figures 3.7-16, 3.7-16a ._ and 3.7-16b show respectively the mathematical models for the analyses in the North-South, East-West and Vertical directions.

The mathematical models consist of four main parts:

1) The Reactor Service Building
2) The Confinement Structure
3) The Reactor Containment Building
4) The Steam Generator, Electrical Equipment and Control Buildings The Reactor Vessel and the polar crane are coupled by means of simplified lumped-mass models.

The nodes or mass points correspond to the locations of centers of mass and ,

were selected in general, at the floor elevations. For each of the horizontal analyses (North-South or East-West) tnree dynamic degrees of freedom per node ,

were allowed (translation, rotation and torsion). For the vertical analysis, l one dynamic degree of freedom (translation) was allowed. The beam elements which connect the different nodes vertically are located at the shear centers of their sections and are characterized by areas, shear areas and moments of I

QCS220.6-1 Amend. 68 May 1982 cswanno J

e Inertle (for bending and torsion) of the members and by the modulus of elasticity and Poisson's ratios of the material. The ends of beam elements are connected to the mass points by horizontal rigid members. The four parts of the model are supported by the foundation met which 13. assumed to be rigid.

This assumption is justified because the met acts as a diaphragm and is stif fened by the vertical walls of the buildings. The buildings :,bove the mat are Interconnected by flexible ties which include cross-coupling between the Interconnected nodes. The Reactor Containment Building is connected to the other elements c nlAt the mat and operating floor levels. In the analysis for the vertical direction, the steel containment dome was idealized by using equivalent springs which account for the " breathing" of the dome during a vertical vibration. " Breathing" is a shell mode of vibration that the dome experiences under a vertical motion.

Figure 3.7-16c shows a plan of the Nuclear Island and the system of coordinates. Table 3.7-7 gives the coordinates of the mass points (nodes).

PSAR Section 3.7.2.1.1 and the ref erenced tables and figures have been updated to include the design Information discussed above.

1L 1

~.

QCS220.6-2 Amend. 68 May 1982

_____ m _ . ___

N ge 9 LU,ZZJFJV 3.7.2.1 Seismic Analysts Method 3.7.2.1.1 Category I structures A complete analysis will be performed on each of the Seismic Category I structures to predict its behavior during an earthquake. The SSE and OBE will be considered; each of two orthogonal horizontal directions and the vertical direction will be treated separately and the results combined. The input actions are described in Section 3.7.1.

~

3.7.2.1.1.1 Nuclear Island A lumped-mass formulation, with direct integration of the coupled equations of motion will be used.

The Buildings of the Nuclear Island: Reactor Containment (RG), Conf inement, Reactor Service (RSB), Steam Generator (SGB), Electrical Equipment (EEB) and Control Building (CB) have a common foundation mat with the bottom at l Elevation 715'-0"; f Inished grade is at El. 815'-0".

Except for the RG interior structure, the Category I structures are tied together up to the roof level. The RC8 Interior structure is tied to the adjacent structures at the mat level and at the operating floor level (Elev.

,816'-0").

The structures and foundation materials will be represented in terms of

. lumped-masses amd massless springs and dashpots.

The inertial properties are characterized by the masses and mass moments of inertia which will be lumped at points selected to assure proper representation of the dynamic behavior of the structures.

The mass points will be, in general, at the elevation of the floors and will be located at the center of mass of the contributing elements.

The stif f ness properties are characterized by the areas, shear areas and moments of inertia (for bonding and torsion) of the members and by the modull

  • of elasticity and Poisson's ratios. The flexible members (beam elements) between floor levels will be assumed located at the shear center of their sections and their ends are defined by the elevations of the mass points. The ends of beam elements are connected to the mass points by horizontal rigid elements, l

The soll (rock) structure interaction will be represented by equiulent springs and dashpots. The stiffnesses of the foundation springs will be calculated as described in Section 3.7.1.6.

4 The damping values to be used f or the structures in terms of percent of critical damping are given in Table 3.7-2; the combined damping ratios for the structures (steel containment and concrete buildings) will be calculated based

! on the equation:

4$ bN k -

~

[Wcn)[$J -

l 3.7-5 Amend. 68 ')

May 1982

Where:

1 (K) = assembled stiffness matrix for fixed base structure 1

4 = equivalent modal damping ratio of the jth mode for the fixed base structure (5)=modifiedstiffnessmatrixforthefixedbasestructureconstructedfrom element matrices formed by the product of the damping ratio for the j element and its stiffness matrix.

f = Jth normalized model vector for the fixed base structure These damping ratios together with the damping coef ficients associated with the foundation dampers will be used in the formulation of the damping matrix for the soil-structure system.

The damping coefficients for the foundation dampers (translational, rocking and torsional) will be calculated based on the equations f or geometrical damping in an elastcl half-space using equivalent half-space dynamic properties-derived f rcm the spring stif f ness.

The equations of Appendix 3.7-A, Sections C.3.~1 and C.3.2 will be used.

Three basic mathematical models will be used, one for each directional

' component of the earthquake. Figures 3.7-16, 3.7-16A and 3.7-168 respectively show sketches of the mathematical models for the North-South, East-West and Vertical directions. Figure 3.7-16c shows a plan of the Nuclear Island and '

the system of coordinates. Table 3.7-7 gives the coordinates of the mass I points (nodes). l The mathernatical model consists of four main parts:

1) The RSB; 2) The Confinement; 3) The RSB; 4) The EEB, CB and SGB.

The four parts of the model are supported by the foundation mat which is assumed to be rigid. This assumption is justified because the mat acts as a diaphragm and is stiffened by the vertical walls of the buildings.

The buildings above the mat are interconnected by flexible ties which inclhde cross coupling between interconnected nodes. .

The stiffness of the flexible ties that interconnect the nodal points of the four main parts of the structure will be calculated by finite element analysis' ~

wIth the computer progrzrn MRl/STARDYNE.

Three dynamic degrees of freedom per node will be allowed on the mathematicle models for the two horizontal ' components of the earthquake: 'translational and rotational along the directica of the earthwuake and rotational (torsional) about a vertical axis. -

Each of the models for the horizontal components (North-South and East-West',

has three foundation springs: translational and rocking along the direction of the motion and torsional about 1he vertical axis through the mat centroid and the corresponding dashpots (dampers). .

3.7-6 Amend. 68 May 1982 -

l The model for the vertical direction will allow one dynamtv degree of freedom per node and has only one foundation spring and dashpot (vertical); in this model the dome of the steel containment has been idealized using equivalent springs which account for the " breathing" (shell type of vibration) of the dome during a vertical vibration.

To account for " breathing," a stif f ness matrix of the dome with cross-coupling terms was derived from an axiasymmetrical shell model of the dome, 'using the KALNINS computer program the equivalent springs represent the terms on the stiffness matrix.

The Reactor Yessel has been coupled to the models.

Two computer programs: HETHA for horizontal motions and VETHA for vertical motions, will be used to calculate the structural responses. Using a formulation for the equations of motion similar to that proposed by TSAI (Ref erence 5), the programs solve the coupled equations of motion by direct Integration to obtain acceleration time-histories at each one of the mass-points for the dynamic degress of freedom assumed in the model.

With the acceleration time-histories, floor response spectra will be calculated.

Spectral values will be computed f or the set of f requencies given in Table 3.7-1. In addition, spectral values will be calculated at the natural frequencies of the structures.

Response spectra will be computed for critical equipment dampings of 25, 3%,

4%, and 7% for the SSE and 1%, 2%, and 4% for the OBE.

In addition, to account for the effect of possible variations of the

. structural material properties and damping, and for the relative accuracy of the dynamic calculations, the computed floor response spectra will be smoothed and peaks will be widened within a 110% band.

The responses will be calculated for the upper and lower bounds of the range of foundation material properties; the design response spectra will be the envelope of the corresponding widened spectra for the upper and lower boun,ds.

The responses will be calculated f or nodal points which correspond to centers of mass. To find the response at points away from the nodal points, -

additional linear accelerations caused by rotational and torsional accelerations will be added.

The ef f ects of the three earthquake directions will be combined by the rule of the square root of the sum of the squares.

t 3.7-6a Amend. 68 May 1982 _

l l

l The time-history of the forces acting on the structures (shears and moments) were calculated using the computer program STARDYNE using mathematic!a models similar to those of HETHA and YETHA. The soll spacings and dampers were eliminated and teh acceleration time-histories calculated by HEATHA and YETHA at the foundation met were used as imput. The spectra at dif ferent locations were calculated to check against those calculated by HEATHA and VETHA. Peak values of the f orces are Identified and envelopes of maximum forces. were constructed f or the design of the structures. The envelopes will be based on the results of the enlayses for the upper and lower bound of the range of the foundation material properties.

i 1

I t

3.7-6aa Amend. 68 May 1982

I 3.7. 2.1.1.2 Emeroenev Cooline Tower Another Category I structure Independent of the Nuclear Island and founded on rock is the Emergency Cooling Tower (ECT). A description of this structure is given in Section 3.8.4.1.5 of the PSAR.

The conditions of the foundation material under the ECT are similar~ to those under the Nuciear Isiand, I . e. , inctIned Iayers of siistone and Iimestone, with slitstone directly under the foundation mat.

A lumped mass analysis of this structure will be performed. Since the analysis of the Nuclear Island showed a good correlation between the spring constants for the rock / structure Interaction calculated by the static finite element method and elastic half-space theory (with the properties of siltstone), the springs and dampers for ECT will be calculated by elastic half-space theory in a similar manner. Analysis will be performed for the Upper Bound and Lower Bound of the rock properties and also for a " fixed" base and the results for the three cases will be enveloped. The embedment springs will be connected at appropriate nodes of the structural model. The three input motions, (North-South, East-West and vertical) will be applied simultaneously on the three-dimensional, lumped mass model with six degrees of freedom at each node. The mass points will be located at the center of mass of the corresponding sections (in general, at floor locations). The beam elements, between mass points, will represent the axial, bending, shear end torsional stif f ness of the structure and will be located at the corresponding shear centers. Time-history modal super-position analysis will be used with composite modal dampings calculated by the equation:

= TC} b $${

- 5 f&f where:

(K) = assembled stiffness matrix for structure jS = equivalent modal damping ratio of the jth mode -

(@ = modified stif f ness matrix constructed f rom element matrices formed ,

by the product of the damping ratio for the element and its stif fness m atr i x.-

f = Jth normalized model vector The fluid in the ECT will be treated in accordance with Housner d theory (Ref.

12).

3.7-6b Amend. 68 May 1982

The analysis will result in acceleration time histories at the different nodal points, forces in the structural members and floor acceleration response spectra. (One for each of the six degress of freedom). Analysis will be done f or both OBE and SSE conditions.

3.7.2.1.1.3 Diesel Generator ButIdtngs

The Diesel Generator Building (DGB) is the only major Categdry I structure founded on soll. This structure is described in Section 3.8.4.1.4 of the

"- PS AR. The soil-structure interaction will be treated as described in Section 3.7.1.6 using the computer program FLUSH. A three-dimensional lumped mass model of the structure will be generated using the computer program STARDYNE.

Condensed mass and stif fness matrices consistent with the two-dimensional formulation of FLUSH, will be calculated from this model and used as superelements in FLUSH. Two separate mathematical models for the North-South and East-West directions will be used. The FLUSH analysis will provide seismic responses at dif ferent points in the structure. A range of soll properties will be used in the analysis and these responses will be enveloped.

The enveloped response spectra at the foundation level will also envelops the design response spectra for the site.

Since FLUSH is two-dimensional, to do a more detailed analysis of the structure, the acceleration time-histories calculated by FLUSH at the DGB foundation will be used f or a three-dimensional analysis with six, degrees of freedom per mode using the STARDYNE model. The acceleration in the STARDYNE model. The responses from this calculation will be-verified against those produced by FLUSH. Design response spectra and forces on the structure wIll ,

be. produced from this STARDYNE analysis. Analysis will be done for both OBE and SSE cond.itions.

3.7.2.1.1.4 Miscelfaneous Categorv i structures Other Category I structures supported on soll are as follows:

Diesel Fuel Storage Tanks (described in Section 3.8.4.1.6), Electrical Manholes (described Ir,Section 3.8.4.1.7)

Emergency Plant Service Water (EPSW) Pipes (described in Section 9.9.4) and Class 1E Duct Banks (described in Section 3.10).

The seismic design of these buried structures will be in accordance with the method described in Section 3.7.3.12.

l l

3.7.2.1.1.5 Cateoorv III Structures Two Category lli structures, the Turbine Generator (TGB) and Radweste (RWB) bu!! dings, because of their proximity to the Category I structures, were designed to withstand the effects of the SSE. The TGB and RWB are supported on soll, and the soil-structure Interaction approach is described in Section 3.7.1.6.

3.7-6c Amend. 68 May 1982

i Three dimensional models of the buildings were constructed using the computer program STARDYNE. Condensed mass and stiffness matrices consistent with the '

two-dimensional formulation of FLUSH were calculated f rom the models and used as supplements in FLUSH. FLUSH analyses were performed with mode'Is for the North-South and East-West directions, for upper and lower' bound of soll properties. Response spectra at the foundations were produced and enveloped.

With enveloped response spectra applied at the foundation and using' the three-dimensional STARDYNE models, the forces on the members of the structure were calculated by the response spectrum model analysis method.

The response spectra used in the three-dimensional analysis were the envelopes of the spectra at the foundation level from 1) . FLUSH analysis of the buildings

2) Seismic analysis of the Nuclear Island. The latter was done to account for the ef f ects of the motions of the massive Nuclear Island on the adjacent buildings.

The spectral envelopes were above the Design Response Spectra for the site.

Accelerations at the buildings calculated by the spectrum analysis were compared with those of the FLUSH analysis as a verification of the analysis.

o .

4 3.7-6d Amend. 68 May 1982

TABLE 3.7-2A DAMPlNG RATIOS FOR FOUNDATION MATERIALS (internal Damping)

CLASS I FILL Shear Strain Damping T-In./In. $

5 x 10 -6 5.6 1 x 10 -5

-5 5.6 2 x 10

-5 5.6 5 x 10 -4 5.6 1 x 10 5.6 '

2 x 10 -4 5.7

-4 5 x 10 6.7  !

1 x 10 -3 8.0 4 x 10

-3 14.8 1 x 10 -2 . 17.2 ECCE SSE: 25 Damping OBE: 1% Damping l

i 1

[

l 3.7-24a Amen'd. 68 May 1982  ;

TABLE '3.7 _7 ,

. LOCATION OF NODE POINTS Corresponding Distance from Center Node No. for of Containment Building Node No. Elevation for Horizontal Vertical (Ft.) * ** "

Directions Direction x (E-W) y (H-S) 1 2 0.0 0.0 965.72' Reactor Contairment 2 3 0.0 0.0 948.57 Reactor Contairment i 3 4 0.0 0.0 931.43 Reactor Containment l 4 5 0.0 0.0 915.21 Reactor Containment 5 6 0.0 0.0 899.00 Reactor Containment 6 7 0.0 0.0 876.00 Reactor Containment 7 8 0.0 0.0 856.00 Reactor Containment 8 9 0.0 0.0 842.00 Reactor Containment s 7, 9 10 0.0 0.0 836.00- Reactor Containment ,

10 11 0.43 2.78 ' 816.00 Reactor Contairment 11 ' 12 1.57 -

2.22 800.00 Reactor Containment 12 13 1.52 -

2.06 783.75 Reactor Containment 13 14 0.67 6.8 774.00 Reactor Containment 14 15 2.38 -

3.11 766.00 Reactor Containment 15 16 4.62 - - 1. 48 752.66 Reactor Containment .

23 24 26.37 -161.64 884.00' Reactor Service I 24 25 40.28 -157.55 869.00 ' Reactor Service I 25 26 39.87 -157.86 857.00 Reactor Service 26 27 42.35 -170.03 840.00 ' Reactor Service 27 28 15.39 -160.41 816.00 Reactor Service -

28 29 10.69 -160.57 797.00 Reactor Service 29 30 12.40 -159.35 779.00 , Reactor Service e

g 4

~ '

TABLE '$f{-7 (Continued) .

l l.0 CATION OF NODE POINTS -(Certt,) . ,

', ' 'j Corresponding Distance from Center .

Mode No. Node No. for of Containment Building Elevation for Horizontal Vertical (Ft.) -

(Ft.) Applicable Nuclear Is' land Building

Directions Direction x (E-W) y (N-S) i
30 31 18.13 -156.74 765.00 Reactor Service '

i j 31 32 4.23 -150.01 755.00 Reactor Service -

l 32 33 20.72 209.78 886.00- Steam Generator i 33 34 -162.79 132.76 883.00 Steam Generator 34 35,60 - 26.68 155.13 873.00 Steam Generator 35 36 - 34.93 112.82 857.00 Steam Generator l 36 37 -103.75 129.68 846.00 Steam Generator

37 38,61 - 47.77 127.34 837.00 - ' Steam Generator 38 39 - 53.74 119.41 816.00 Steam Generator g

I 39 40,62 - 13.01 148.39 806.00- Steam Generator 40 41 - 38.68 117.15 794.00 Steam Generator 41 42.63 - 21.94 131 ~.55 787.00 Steam Generator 42 43,64 - 21.58 -

127.52 765.00 -

Steam Generator 43 44 - 37.29 139.32 746.0C J Steam Generator 59 (N-S) 67 - 18.11 30,78 733.00 Co m a Base Mat 60(E-W) 67 - 18.11 30.78 733.00 Common Base Mat 9

I I

i i

t!l

. . . I

CONCRETE CONFINEMENT g Conmmz suzazsc g_

,g oO

@- , ,@ O

@- @g , men EOL= @, i ZL "O @

nuzum g @

@-=

@D g

@'9, 4 @- 23 ,

= _ 24 h.^; @ '

g;' ,

< 4 '-

1 e,= = =

39 53 . 7

~

h II -

16

~

,, g4 28 40 54

,,, 2, h >

18 "

- '2 T

4, ,,, is g6 0 I4

<a ss n

2, @

g .. S

'=

N a <

> e , , , -@ -

s'7 6s

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\%\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\%\\\\\\\\\%

% l--REACTOR BEAM ELEMENT bs9 VESSEL c RIGID LINK CRBRP BUILDING MATHEMATICAL MODEL FOR THE N-5 EARTHQUAKE ,

FIGURE 3. 7~- 16 FLEXIBLE TIES BETk'EEN NODAL i

POINTS INCLUDING CROSS-COUPLING n, FOUNDATION SPRINGS NOT SH0k'N

CONCREZE CONFIKEMENT .

'O REACTOR CONTAINMENT

< ,@f BUILDING

,,D @

>@ @ row mNE

, ,g @ , ,@

sTw aE m 0a O.,,

crNr m o, summ g 4'

,,,vzc, sum =

g @g

=. <

y g g .,

, =@g e q,, ,, ,,  ; ,, 49 eg

_ -@ g, ,

-@ "D bb 3, s s3

$@' v $',g@

to ,, -

c g.==

  • s

-@ W @@c@g

@ 3' 40 s6 @ O @i 4i ,7,, 29 gg @o goog g,!:

e-

n 4 #= Art

////////////////////////////////////////N/////////////////////////////f///////>

IREACTOR BEAM ELEMENT VESSEL CRBRP BUILDING MATHEMATICAL'MODEL O niss to x1 roa '"t e-w t^ataouaxt BEAM ELEMENT '

FLEXIBLE TIES BETWEEN NODAL . , _ ,

POINTS INCL.UDING CROSS-COUPLING > Tf' f FOUNDATION SPRINGS NOT SHOWN

'.' CONCREIE REAC~CR CONFINE S!: coNTAINE NT ,

BUILDINU g, , ,,

u e it , 'Q O o KDd

@ o

-e  !! L s iin<

li g g srr,

-@ 1 CEERATOR

@ o REACTOR 1 @i _

BUILDING __

SERVICE g

^~

,Uzzvia <

@ 9=, o SGB EQUIPW NT SUFFORTS g 50 y

+@ @

o g

q ,',-

y

,g G 2s Tc . @_ ,

6- , y"' se u [,e ,

9,,@,, " , 'O @ . ,@

@b -

,, , , y

/ "

,g g O

@ ^I "#

8' s, n ,g @@@o , @

g 2, 4i se o g %@ g

" g

@" '

  • g g =

,@ ,, @,,g s.

ga - < 43 ig 43 Sa a

g g, -@ g g ,,e >@ go .,

g a $

y @ @

LEGEND 7 ggjgjgg/gp((g(([f((((((((((((((((((/k((/ REACTOR VESSEL BEAM ELEMENT @

RIGID LINK CRBRP BUILDING MATHEMATICAL MODEL O x^ss ro1n1 FOR THE VERTICAL EARTHQUAKE FIGURE 3.7-16b -

FLEXIBLE TIES BETWEEN NODAL T"b POINTS INCLUDING CROSS-COUPLING M'

FOUNDATION SPRINGS _ NOT $E@%8. - '

l _

IUlIll (Pl#lD l

REACTm CMTAltfBT REACTM WIWif6 S1FlN SEINICE

' y GBERATM PAIWIf6 WIWirG k

I 4 1 P

~

\ .

X FIGURE 3.7-16e CRBRP BUILDIliG tlPDES COORDINATE SYSTEM - PLAN

Page - 17 (82-0184) [8,22] #38 Ouestfon CS 220.20 in Section 6.1 on page 3.7-A.8, your def inition of significant dynamic modes is not consistent with that In SRP Section 3.7.2 and should be revised.

Further, the sentence before the last sentence in the third paragraph stated that dif ferent response spectra will be applied for the particular support location. An explanation should be given to this statement.

Response

The definition of significant dynamic modes has been revised, as shown marked on PSAR Page 3.7-A.8.

The different response spectra are the spectra derived and applicable to the various supports of structural systems (such as piping) which are not at the same location. The spectrum at the first support may not be the same as the spectrum at an Intermediate support or at the last support in this case, all the dif ferent support response spectra are superimposed to yleid an envelope response spectrum for input to the response spectrum analysis.

QCS 220.20-1 Amend. 63 May 1982

l 6.1 Dvnamle Analvaan Seismic Category I and il structures, systems, and components shall be

- analyzed by a detailed dynamic analysis using either time history methods or the response spectrum method. Other methods of dynamic analysis whl.ch provide

en acceptable solution may be used but the justifications and procedures shall i be submitted to W-LRM for review and approval. A simpilfled analysis such as j that bated on an equivalent static load method may be used If it can be i

demonstrated that the simplified method provides adequate conservatism.

I j Analytical procedures of the detailed dynamic analysis and of a simplified l

analysis are given In Attachment A.

The analysis will include the effects of the dynamic coupling between major

components of the system and the soll-structure Interaction ef fects. A suf fIctent number of modes of the mathematical model which represents the

{'

structural system shall be included in the analysis to assure participation of alI signifIcant modes. The erIterion for suffIclency is that the inclusion of

additional modes does not result In more than a 10% increase in responses.

Where the response spectrum method is used, the Individual modal responses shalI be combined by the square root of the sum of the squares, except for closely spaced modes (frequencies 10% or less apart) where the modal responses shalI be combined by the absolute sum (see Attachment A). Supports of j structural systems (such as piping) may be subjected to dif forent I accelerations; i.e., different response spectra for the particular support

location. In this case, the dif forent response spectra should be super Imposed to yleid an envelope response spectrum to be used in the response
spectrum analysis.

The system will also be analyzed to determine the ef fects of the relative displacements at their supports.

The reIatiye displacoments shoutd be imposed on the mathematical modeI as i separate static displacements unless other conservative methods of analysis are employed or a time history analysis is performed. In the latter case, the appropriate time histories are used at each anchor point location so that the l dif forential of f acts are inherently included In the analysis. The relative j

1 displacements are imposed in the most unf avorable manner to satisfy input

! motions which may be out of phase from each other. The offects resulting from I the separate analysis for relative displacements should be' combined absolutely j

with those resulting frun the seismic-induced inertial loadings.

Time history analyses of the supporting structure are required to determine j the response motin at the location on the structure of the supported j component. This motion is used as input to the analysis of the supported

~

component and may be in the form of motion time history or floor response spectra.

l 1

l i

! 3.7-A.3 Amend. 68 j May 1982

~ Page - 19 (82-0184) L8',22J #38 Ouestion C O70.21 in Sections 8.1.1.1 and 8.1.1.2 on page 3.7-A, the listed load combinations contai n the term " operating." Def ine specif ically what are the Iceds included l

in th i s term. .

Response

The loading components included in the term " Operating" are given in its def Inition in Section 7.1.1, Page 3.7-A.11 of the PSAR.

QCS220.21-1 Amend. 68 Y

~

~~~~ " ~~~- '

Page-19i824184)[8,223#38 Question Cs770.22fal There are a number of misprints, unclear statements and typographical errors which need your correction and/or clarification.

~

o Section 3.7.1.6 page 3.7-3C misprints in both items 2) and 3).

f Response l

t The word "p[rocedure" should be " procedure".

The word "axlaymmetrical" should be "axisymmetrical".

f PSAR Page 3.7-3C has been revised.

i i.

I j

.l l

l l

l l

r QCS220.22(a)-1 Amend. 68

_May 1982

n .,

2 (3)

Vertical spring constant k' a v w( y) i

~ Horizontal spring constants k' = 2 I'+V) 6 88 I'N) (4)'

y y Rocking spring constants k' = ## (5)

W (T-V)

Where G = shear modulus of soll y = Poisson's ratio of soll TheparametersB,B,Bdareafunctionoftheratio[andaregivenin Figure 10-16 of Itefefence 11.

c) The ratios between the values calculated in (b) and those of (a) were calculated (k'/k).

Table 3.7-6 shows the results of (a) and (b) and (c) for the horizontal translational spring and Figure 3.7-22 shows a plot of k'H/kH as a function of the aspect ratio of the foundation, (W/L).

approaches ItcanbeseenthatastheratioW/LIncreases,theratiok'HkNditionofthe Since a large W/L ratio approaches the plane strain co unity.

finite element calculation and for large W/L ratios the two methods give similar result, a good correlation has been proven.

From the curve of Figure 3.7-22 for the aspect of the foudnation X = 0.67 the 1.33. This value gives the correction f actor for three ratio dimensiok'M =ef fects to be applied to the previous calculated stif fness kH*

Similar calculations were performed for the rotational and the vertical springs.

2) Model "B" (East-West direction)

This Is a plano straln model simiIar to "A" but based on a sectIon through an East-West plane (Figure 2.7-23) and was used to calculate the horizontal translational and rocking springs for the East-West direction and the vertical translational spring. The procedure was similar to that described in (1) above.

3.7-3c Amend. 68 May 1982

~

Pege - 20 I62-0184) [8,22] #38 Ouestion 220.22(b)

The equation for the dampi'c is in error.

ues [j'In Section 3.7.2.1.1 1 (Probably misprint)

Response

The correct equation is:

~

)@ b {0}

4" f9F00fv1 There is a misprint in the PSAR. (k)in denominator should have been (k).

PSAR page 3.7-5 has been revised.

QCS220.22(b)-1 i Amend. 68 i May 1982 j

. . . . . P@ 9 U; 22.w 3 9 - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

3.7.2.1 Selsmic Analvsts Method 3.7.2.1.1 Categorv l Structures A complete analysis will be performed on each of the Selsmic Category I structures to predict its behavior during an earthquake. The SSE arid OBE will be considered; each of two orthogonal horizontal directions and the vertical direction will be treated separately and the results combined. The input motions are described in Section 3.7.1.

3.7.2.1.1.1 Nuclear Island A lumped-mass formulation, with direct integration of the coupled equations of motion will be used.

The Buildings of the Nuclear Island: Reactor Containment (RCB), Confinement, Reactor Service (RSB), Steam Generator (SGB), Electrical Equipment (EEB) and l Control Building (C8) have a common foundation mat with the bottom at Elevation 715'-0"; finished grade is at El. 815'-0".

Except for the RT Interior structure, the Category I structures are tied together up to the roof level. The R W Interior structure is tied to the adjacent structures at the mat level and at the operating floor level (Elev.

816'-0").

The structures and foundation materials will be represented in terms of lumped-masses amd massless springs and dashpots.

The inertial properties are characterized by the masses and mass moments of i inertia which will be lumped at points selected to assure proper representation of the dynamic behavior of the structures.

l l

The mass points will be, in general, at the elevation of the floors and will be located at the center of mass of the contributing elements.

4 The stif fness properties are characterized by the areas, shear areas and moments of inertla (for bonding and torsion) of the members and by the moduli of elasticity and Poisson's ratios. The flexible members (beam elements) between floor levels will be assumed located at the shear center of their sections and their ends are defined by the elevations of the mass points. The ends of beam elements are connected to the mass points by horizontal rigid elements.

The soll (rock) structure Interaction will be represented by equivalent j springs and dashpots. The stiffnesses of the foundation springs will be calculated as described in Section 3.7.1.6.

l The damping values to be used for the structures In terms of percent of I critical damping are given in Table 3.7-2; the combined damping ratios for the structures (steel containment and concrete buildings) will be calculated based on the equation:

! ~

Yk N ~~ ((hW(x)TsJ 3.7-5 Amend. 68 May 1982

-~ ^ ~~~ ~~ ~^

~

P;ge - 21 (82-0184) [8,22] #38 I

Ouestion CR770.22(c) in Section 3.7.2.6.1 on page 3.7-9, it is stated that each node has three degrees of freedom in the horizontal directions. This is a wrong statement, since each node should have six degrees of freedom. A correction of,this statement should be made.

Response

The first paragraph of Section 3.7.2.6.1 has been revised to clarify the statement.

i 5

4 QCS220.22(c)-1 Amend. 68

__. _ ~~ --- --. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

May 1982 - --.

3.7.2.2 Natural Frecuencias and Resoonse Loads This section will be discussed in the FSAR.

3.7.2.3 Proceduras Used to Lumn Masses .

This will be more completely addressed in the FSAR, consistent with Reg. Gulde

! 1.70. However, the following preliminary Information is provided at this j time.

in a lumped mass seismic system analysis, the uniform masses of the elements

! are concentrated at a series of mass-points, or nodes. The nodes are selected at change of sections, at locations of equipment support where the equipment's mass is lumped, at locations where the dynamic responses is desired, and at intermediate locations to limit the length of the elements so that the mathematical model will adequately represent the actual system. Consideration is also given to a lower limit for the element's length, so that a convergent solution will be obtained without requiring a prohibitively small value of the integration time interval in a time history analysis. Along with this procedure, the total number of masses chosen will be such that additional masses, or degrees of freedom, do not result in more than a 10% increase in responses. Alternately, the number of masses, or degrees of freedom, will be j

taken equal to twice the number of modes with frequencies less than 33 H,.

3.7.2.4 Rocking and TransIatIonaf Resoonse Snemar v l

This section will be discussed in the FSAR.

3.7.2.5 Methods Used to Couple Soll With Seismfe-System Structures Seismic Category I structures supported on soll as identified in Section 3.7.1.5 wilI be analyzed in accordance with the procedures described in Section 3.7.1.6.

3.7.2.6 Develooment of Floor Resoonse Snactra j Section 3.7.2.1.1 describes the method for calculating floor response spectra 1

which shalI be based on direct integration of the coupled equations of notion.

1 2 3.7.2.6.1 Dailgn Resoonse Soectra for Major f%nnonents l

The building analysis for the Nuclear Island gives floor response spectra at nodes located at the center of mass of the applicable floors identified in the mathematical models on Figures 3.7-16, 3.7-16A and 3.7-168. Since each node has three degrees of freedom (translation, torsion, rotation) in each horizontal direction (East-West, North-South) and one degree of freedom in the vertical direction (translation) seven response spectra are developed at each node for each of the two earthquakes (OBE and SSE). These are:

1 i

) i 3.7-9 Amend. 68 May 1982

' ' ' ' Pig)- 22 i82-0184i [8,22] #38' l

l l

l Ouestion cs 220.22 (d. )

There are a number of misprints, unclear statements and typographical errors which need your correction and/or clarification.

d) Section 3.7.2.7 on page 3.7-9b, the last three sentences need s6me correction or clarification in order to be understandable.

Response

d) A missing word has been properly inserted in Section 3.7.2.7, Page 3.7-9b of the PSAR. This wl!I clarify the meaning of the last three sentences.

I i

j l

1 QCS 220.22(d)-1 Amend. 68 May 1982

^~ ~ ^ ~ P2 ge I B LU ,22J F 3 9 ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ' ' - -

Two methods of combining the seven spectra are given in Appendix 3.7-A. The general formulation requires all seven resulting spectra to be applied Individually, and the similar effects, such as deflections and stresses, which result from the Individual application of the seven spectra are combined by

.the square root of the sum of the squares. This combinatin is performed as a last step af ter the modal combination for each of the three earthquake directions. The other method utilizes a simplified procedure which combines the seven response spectra and reduces them to three response spectra (two horizontal and one vertical). However, when this simplified procedure is used, the similar ef fects obtained f or each of the three spectral input directions are combined absolutely. The full details of these two methods of spectra combination and application are given in Appendix 3.7-A.

3.7.2.7 Dif ferential Selsmic Movement of Interconnect rnanonents The ef f ects of dif ferential seismic movements of support points and of Interconnected components between floor are considered in the analysis. The relative displacements are imposed on the seismic mathematical model as separate static displacements unless other conservative methods of analysis are employed or a time history analysis is performed, in the latter case, the appropriate time histories are used at each anchor point location so that the dif ferential ef f ects are inherently included in the analysis. The relative displacements are imposed in the most unf avorable manner to satisfy input motions which may be out of phase f rom each other. For effects resulting from j the separate analysis for relative displacements are combined absolutely with those resulting f rom the seismic-induced Inertial loadings. The loading combinations and stress critoria shall be those given in Tables 3.9-2 and 3.9-3, respectively l

l l

l l

i 3.7-9b Amend. 68 May 1982 l

PCge' '- 23 (82-0184) [8,22] #38 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~

Ouestton CR770.22fa)

Section 3.7.2.14, misprint in the fourth paragraph.

Response: .

The word "requesented" should be " represented". PSAR page 3.7-11 has been revised.

I i

l l

l l

l l

l l

i l QCS220.22(e) i Amend. 68 l May 1982

P ge 24 [8,22]i39 The most severe load combination will be considered.

The maximum soll (rock) pressure under foundation met will be calculated under the assumption that the soll pressur6s vary linearly and that the soli cannot aevelop tenslie stresses. if tension is obtained in thc original c=!culation, the soll pressure distribution will be adjusted such that an all compressive linear distribution which balances the applied forces and moments is obtained.

3.7.2.14 Analvsts Procedure for Da=nino The damping ratios of Table 3.7-2 will be used for structures, systems and components; the damping coef ficients for the dashpots associated with the soll-structure interaction will be calculated as described in Section 3.7.2.1.1.

For structures with dif ferent elements, the composite damping will be calculated based on the modes of vibration f or a fixed base condition with modal damping ratios evaluation by a weighted average based on the relative strain energy of the dif f erent elements as described In Section 3.7.2.1.1.

The damping ratios f or the fixed base structure and damping coef ficients of the foundation dampers are used to formulate the damping matrix of the equations of motion.

For seismic system analysis utilizing response spectrum techniques the applicable response spectrum for the appropriate damping value of Table 3.7-2 is used in the analysis. For the time history analyses, the damping matrix is represented as proportional damping with a linear combination of the mass and stiffness matrices. The mass and stif fness matrices coef f!clents are calculated as a function of frequency by establishing a predominant frequency

range of the system. In a coupled system with different structural elements, either the lowest damping value is used for all nodes or Individual modes are l

Identified and associated with a particular element and damping value for the el ement.

3.7.3 Selsmic Subsystem Analysts 3.7.3.1 Determination of Number of Earthauake Cveles During the design life of the plant (30 years) the occurrence of approximately one to five operating basis earthquakes and one SSE, each having 12 to 15 seconds average duration of strong motion excitation, is postulated.

For fatigue analysis of mechanical systems and components, a total of 50 earthquake cycles will be used f or the OBE. This number is the product of 10 squivalent maximum peak response cycles for one seismic event and a conservative number of 5 OBE occurrences. Seismic response time histories contain a very small number of maximum peak cycles and several other cycles of smaller ampl itude. These may be derived f rom the seismic response of the

.3.7-11 Amend. 68 I --- - - - - -- _

May 1982

' ~

Pags - 24 (82-0184i [8,22] #38'

OuestIon CR770.22(f)

Section 3.7.3.1, in the last sentence, is the word " assured" used for

" assumed"'t Resoonse:

The word " assured" should be " assumed". PSAR page 3.7-11a has been revised.

l l

QCS220.22(f)-1 Amend. 68 May 1982

~ ~~~~~~~~~~ "'~~~ ~ ~~'

~P ge 25 [8,223f39 particular structural system, which is damping dependent. The smaller cycles may be converted into a smaller number of equivalent maximum peak cycles with the old of fatigue curves. For the postulated marthquake characteristics given above, a total of 10 equivalent maximum peak response cycles are considered sufficient for each OBE and SSE occurrence. (See Appendix 3.7-A I

for condiflons under which the OBE and SSE are assumed to occur). l- f 3,7.3.2 Basis for Selection for Forcing Frecuanelas Forcing f requencies are not selected. The frequency content of the selsmic motion is reflected in the design ground-time histories and in response-time histor8,es as modified by the structure and component characteristics.

l l

l 3.7-11 a Amend. 68 May 1982

P;ge - 26 (82-0184) [8,22] #38  ;

i l

l l

l OuestIon C070.22(n) l Section 3.7.4.2, next to last paragraph under 1, on page 3.7-17, the wwd

" Time-Hi story".

Rassonse: l The wwd " Time-hisotry" should be " time-history". PSAR page 3.7-17 has been l revised.  !

i I

l QCS220.22(g)-1 Amend. 69 May 1982

~ ' ' ' ~ '

~~~~~~~~ ""' ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~~ Pcge 28 [8,'223#39 c) On the structure of the Reactor Containment Building, at a higher elevation and as near as practicable vertically above the sensor in b) above.

d) At the most pertinent location on one of the Independent seismic Category I structures where the response is dif ferent from that of the Reactor Containment Structure.

The strong motion triaxial sensors will have a dynamic range of 100:1 from zero to peak, a flat frequency range from 0.1 Hz to 30.0 Hz and velocity proportional damping adjustable tatween 55% and 70% critical. They will not have spurious resonances within the frequency range of Interest and the sensitivity to acceleration of components orthogonal to the sensitive axix shall not exceed 0.03 g/g.

The triaxial seismic trigger will be placed near the " free field" acceleration sensor; it will simultaneously activate all recording instruments of the Time-History Accelerograph when a threshold ground acceleration is reached. The triaxial seismic trigger will be adjustable f rom a minimum of 0.005 g to 0.02 g; with a flat f requency range from 1 Hz to 10 Hz.

The multi-channel recorder and control unit will be located in the Control Room; it will be battery operated and will record the time-correlated acceleration f rom the four (4) triaxial acceleration sensors on magnetic tape. It will have suf ficient number of active channels to record the data of the acceleration sensors plus at least one separate timing reference trace. The recording speed will be suf ficient to resolve a f requency of 30.0 Hz; the timing marks will consist of at least two pulses or marks per second with a +0.2% internal timing accuracy; the dynamic range will be 100:1 for combined record and playback.

Upon activation by the seismic trigger the time-history accelerographs will achieve full operational status within 0.1 seconds; the system will continue to operate for at least 5 seconds af ter the strong motion acceleration f alls below the trigger threshold level. The recording time will not be less than 25 seconds. The design will provide for annunciation on the control room panel, upon activation of time-history accelerographs.

The tape playback unit will be designed to transcribe the signals recorded on magnetic tape by the central recorder and control unit into graphic form for a quick look analysis of the earthquake.

2. Triaxlaf Seismic Switches 3.7-17 Amend. 68 May 1982

Pcg3 - 26 '(82-O'185i [8,22] #38 ~~~ ~'

Ouestfon CR770.22fh)

In Table 3.7-5, you used a polsson ratio of 0.3 for both limestone and slitstone. Indicate how this value is obtained and why it Is the same for

.both. ,

Response

The derivation of Poisson's Ratio for slitstone and limestone has been based on detailed analysis of a significant number of geophysical measurements as obtained from cross-hole, up-hole and continuous velocity methods. Similar ranges were obtained by flee dif ferent methods for each rock type, resulting in the selection of 0.3 as the design value. Details are provided in Section 2.5.4.2.2 of the PS AR.

J l

l l

l l

QCS220.22(h)-1 Amend. 68 May 1982

Page - 28 (82-0184) L8,22J #38 l

Ouestion CS 270.22 (I)

There are a number of misprints, unclear statements and typographical errors which need your correction and/or clarification

1) The Figures 3.7.17D and 3.7.18 have the same title, but it is not clear how they are related. Clarify.

Response

I) The title of Figure 3.7.17D has been changed to " Schematic of Reacter System Finite Element Model." In addition, an introductory sentence has been added to Section 3.7.3.15.2 to identify this figure.

QCS 220.22(I)-1 Amend. 68 May 1982

a SHIELD AND ' .

SEISMsC SUPPO4RT , SCaS LRP }

RISERS

  1. *O

gn, WECM <-a === a BE ARING ,,

A CE ACTf,A VIESE L SUPPOR T LRP IR' CG CG ERPCC THERMAL LINE R

/  ; .. ,

SMROUD TUBE UPPE R = > - - a'

  1. NTERNALS _,_,,

l ST RUCTUR E r aEACTO .

VE$5EL EVTM

\ .

_ _ _ .... .( IVTM lj l g

,(-_ _g._---; _ _ _ - - . _ - - -__.

___ it-ALL .

. . .g__ _ s',_ _ - y _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _.

" ' \ rimed SHIELDING


 ;- n;,,

AND FUEL

'/ ASSEMBLIES '

, RE MOV ABL E , , .

~~~~

m SHIE L DING L___.__ = CORE $UPPOdi PL Af g CENTR AL MODULES CORE SUPPORT BV PASS MODUL E S CONE t

Fi.gure 3.7-17D Schematic of Reactor System Finite Element Model 9859 5 .

(

3.7-43c k

~ '

~ ~

P2ge-29('82'-0184)'(8,22]#38 Ouestion CR??0.22(l)_

j) Appendix 3.7 in " Attachment A", the equation for a simplified analysis appeers to have incorrect units. Also the transf ormation equatioas appear to be incorrect. .

Response

The corrections to the errors In the transformation operations sited above appear In the revised PSAR page 3.7-A-A1. The errors were primarily typographical in nature.

With regard to the simplified analysis equation, (Equation 19) It should be noted that the spectral accelerations are given in "g" units. The multiplication of the weight by "g" gives a force. Theref ore, the equation is dimensional ly correct. A revision will be made to clarify the units for "A"s.

l l

l QCS220.22(J)-1 Amend. 69 f May 1982

[ _

.....Pcge 3 [8,22]i39 ATTACHMENT A ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES .

~

'A.1 Detailed Dynamic Analvses Two of the methods used to perform a suitable, detailed dynamic analysis of a structural system are the time history analysis and the response spectrum analysis. The equations of motion are solved either by direct integration or modal superposition. Using modal superposition th normal modes of the system are obtained along with the natural frequencies, mode shapes and participation factors. For the time history analysis, the forcing function consists of the earthquake motion as a function of time. For the response spectrum analysis, the input excitation is provided in the form of response spectra which give the spectral response motions (displacement, velocity, acceleration) as a function of the natural frequencies for the appropriate damping values.

A. I .1 Eaustions of Motion The equations of motion of a multi-degree-of-free, dom discrete-mass damped system subjected to an arbitrary support motion Y,(t), can be written as:

(1) d(t)+Ci((i)+KX(t)=-Mi 3(t) where:

M = Mass matrix C = Damping matrix which can be expressed as a linear combination of the mass and stiffness matrices K = Stiffness matrix I = Unit vector in direction parallel to support motion Y(t)=Timedependentsupportacceteration s

X(t), f((t) and X(t) = Time dependent displacement, velocity and l acceleration vectors, respectively.

In the direct integration approach, the coupled equations of motion are solved directly. In the modal analysis, using the orthogonality relations and ations 1,n normal expressing coordinates;the displacements, i.e., X(t) = pA(t), velocities gnd acceleg/(t)

X(t) = 4A(t), and = $,A(t), the above l

coupled equations of motion (Eq.1) may then be rewritten as the following uncoupled, normal equations of motion:

IT)

M[dIII*2N"rrr r r E II) + K A III * -Mrrs rr I 3.7-A-Al Amend. 68 May 1982

F, = Equivalent static force distributed proportional to the mass of the system.

W = Weight of the system includling liquid contents.

A = Maximum peak acceleration of the response spectra which apgily at the points of support of the structural system. (in "g" units)

A f actor less than 1.5 in Equation 19 may be used if adequate justification is provided.

/

/

'l l

l i

l 1

3.7-A-A6 Amend. 68 May 1982

~~

Pcge - 30' (82-0184i [8,22] #38 ' ' ~ ~ ' ' ' ' ~^

Ouestion CS 720.24 The containment description should include basic shell thickness and state if the shell is stiffened. The containment vent and purge system should be mentioned in the list of components. ,

Ba5ponse Horizontal ring stif feners are provided at elevations 856 and 839. In ,

addition the crane girder also functions as a horizontal ring stiffener in the elevation 070 to 890.

The PSAR has been augmented with the requested Informat!on in 3.8.2.1 and also Figure 3.8-3.

The containment vent and' purge systems are features provided to manage the hypothetical event beyond the design basis. These systems are discussed in CRBRP 3, Vol. 2, Figure 1-1. Only the penetrations for the vent and purge systems are a part of the conte.nmont boundary and these penetrations are designed to the same criteria as all other penetrations. The vent and purge system is not a part of the containment system and therefore should not be included in the list of containment system components, f

4 l

t QCS 220.24-1 Amend. 68 May 1982

E

~'

~~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Page ' 21 LB ,22Jf3 9 ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ' ~ ,

8 i

a 3.8 DESIGN OF CATEGORY I STRUCTURES j

3.6.1 concrete containment (Not Anollcable) 1 3.8.2 Steel Containment System .

, g 1

3.8.2.1 Descriotion of the Containment . ,

3 The Containment Vessel is a low leakage, free-standlag, all welded stoel' _.

vessel anchored to the base mot with a steel lined concrete bottom in tha form j of a vertical right cylinder having an inside diameier of 186 feet ano with - _

side walls extending approximately 169 feet from the flat bottom liner at the ]

base to the spring line of the ellipsoidal-spherical dome. The cylindrical ,

f shell is embedded in concrete up to the elevation of the operating floor. On i the inside of the Containment Vessel, there is the continuous reinforced x concrete wall comprising the peripheral boundary of the Internal concrete structure. Butting against the outside f ace of the steel shall from elevation 733 feet up to the elevation of the underside of the operating floor, there is ,

another reinforced concrete wall of sufficient thickness designed to pr U ent buck!Ing of the steel shelI. Nelther of the two concrete walIs are co.1stdered ,

part of the containment vessel. Alumina-silica insulation Is attached to the _

inside surf ace of the Containment Vessel from elevation 816 feat to elevation I' 823 feet. The Insulatin is 3 Inches thick and has a vlue of 0.0267 Ste/ M - 3 ft- F. Its purpose is to limit the shell temperature at. .slovation 81$1 feed during Design Basis Accidents to less than 130 F. y s g>

g ,

The vessel includes: Its shell, one horizontal gland girder, two hortrontal stif feners, a 1/4" bottom liner plate, one access airlock, one emergency egress airlock, vacuum relief system, one equipment hatch, penetrations, j

L" Inspection ladders, miscellaneous appurtenances end attachments; ,(The configuration of the Containment Building is shown in figure.: in baction 1.2 i

' 2 and the configuration of the shelI is s,hown in Figure 3.8-3. The design '

l '

i lif etime of the containment vessel shall be 30 years. \  % . ,

A J

3.8.2.2 Acollcable Codes. Standards and Soecifications I N ' '

3.8.2.2.1 Codes '

\a -

The Containment Vessel will be designed, material procured, f abricated, "

2 Installed and tested in accordance with the requirements of the ASME ESPV, - '

Code, Section li t, Division 1,1974 Edition with Addenda threugh Moter 1974 h and Coda cases 1713,1714,1809,1682 and 1785 and ASME-1,lI, Divistor(2,1977 ,

d Edition, Subsection cc, for the steel lined concrete centsinme3t bottcnn. Tha design shall also meet the requirements of the Class MC Siction of RDT I N i Standard E15-2T, " Requirements for Nuclear Compononts". T i s

N ,s

'\ .

t-s

=.

1 s i

s N

N l s

3.8-1 gs kind. 68 - s i

=

24'- 5'7 t ace

~

. . o*

  1. I 4 " 4 d

+

, ,o rc -

W '

g 4 .'

o m -

o 4

o e -

I o tr)

_ n ., n o i

- O ~5 h "$ 'n k bh 0' 0,C<

n ,

9:

d x$2- I -

_v m -

Lu o e TANGENT LINE . EL 899'-O' M iO 4 o 3, 48' EL 889' lOl d N 33* -m f

+-CRANE GIRDER W

- -d in "o

=E-

'i' b *l' h ; ,+ a cd 1 ' ' "

0 "

_. s N SHELL EL 85G'-On 8 STIFFENERS dD H 839' & 85G' IR = 93'-O"

~

ELg39' o.

8 .

M -

~O F.

N s- .

__I L __ EL 81G'-O' OPERATING FLOOR

--.q i r- EL807'"

Ml I l -

l l l

l 1

I W -

l SHELL & STIFi EMERS =_.

I MATERIAL: SA SIGG m 70 I I I I 1 , I r[Lj _

l

+-

riOP OF I4' UNER lt

' e ' '= ' - o'

_ t ,, ,,

TOP OF BASrE R f et 727'- 2'2.-

FIGURE 3.8?3~, ' CRBRP CONTAlf4 MENT VESSEL

POge - 34 (82-0184) [8,22] #38

. Question CS 220.27 The design temperature of 2500F must not apply to the complete containment including that portion embedded 1.1 concrete. The PSAR should define the design temperature distribution f or the complete containment. -

Also the Symbol "W" used in Table 3.8-1 is not def ined in test.

Resoonse The Design Tenperature of 2500F is a conservative value, well above the maximum temperature of the shell calculated under DBA. For Dest s.; Conditions (Load Canbinations 4 to 9, Table 3.8-1) the material properties of the steel shel I were based on 2500F. Secondary stress (thermal) verif Ication is not requi red under Design Conditions (PSAR Tabl e 3.8-3) . Theref ore, temperature distributions are not required. Thermal buckling was verified based on the temperature distributton (axisymmetrIcal) given in Figure 6.2.11. This temperaturo distribution accounts f or the ef fects of the Insulation blanket between Elevations 825 feet and 816.0 feet and the embedment in concrete below El evation 816.0 feet.

The def Inition of "W" wind l evel was erroneously omitted f ran the PSAR. 'H "

i s now def ined in the modif ied PSAR 3.8.2.3.1 attached.

QCS 220.27-1 Anend. 68 May 1982

  • - - - - - ~ ~ Pc ge ~ 22 LB ,22_In v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ - - - - - ' - ~ ~ -' - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~ ~ ~ - - -

l l

3.8.2.3 Loads and LondIno r%nh InstIons L

3.8.2.3.1 del I gn Loadh l

.The following losds shall be used in the design of the Containment Vessel and '

l Appurtenances.

D - Dead Load, including the weight of the steel containment vessel, penetration sleeves, equipment and personnel access hatches, and 9ther attachments supported by the vessel, plus loads due to 1 concrete shrinkage.

L - Live Loads, as applicable, including:

1. Penetration Loads (including seismic), as applicable
2. Floor Loads - 100 PSF
3. Walkways - 200 lbs. per linear foot
4. Equipment and Personnel Airlock Floor Load - 300 PSF or 40,000 lbs.

moving concentrated load

5. Emergency Airlock Floor Load - 200 PSF or 10,000 lbs.
6. Poler Crane Loads (Ref. 1)
7. Construction Loads *
8. Painters Line Anchor - 2,000 lbs. In any horizontal direction l 9. Interior Scaffold - 2,000 lbs. each on any 2 adjacent clips Support Clips - combined with a Dead Load on all clips of 200 lbs.

each.

W - Wind Loads at 80 mph ( ANSI A58.1-1972)

P,- Internal Design Pressure (or Transient Pressure Loads)

P, - External Design Pressure P

9

- Testing Pressure T, - Thermal loads due to temperature gradient through walls under normal operating conditions.

T' - Thermal loads due to temperature gradient through walls from accidents, such as major sodium ffres.

T 9

- Thermal load under testing temperature conditions.

E - Loads resulting f rom an Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE)

E' - Loads resulting from a Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE)

  • A concrete placement load, resulting f ran using the vessel shell below operating floor elevation as the formwork for placing the reinforced concrete walls, and loads that are imposed by concrete forms when constructing the confinement shell. A snow load will be considered also during the construction period.

3.8-5 1 Amend. 68 May 1982 - _.

e M IAfMEhl7" VEssGL AXIAL TEMP. P@ PILE '

4

. ir l

  • l

$2$

9

. n l

V s

l

~

4 )  :

420' -@

N l; t

l I s ,

_ 1 ,

1 i .

A > l u L a t:(-d' y <

sis, - 4' 'P . .

., ,. ,, t 4 v,

._% e* a.

, l .,

w .

h  :

+

bt O' ~ '

,e I

e l

I i - ", a

- 14 0 13 0 t20 l1 O 800 '

i ao4' I I 't il1 1 I I l 't i f I II I i I i e i i!  :

7 emf 4DCATURE(*F) *

- M#E 7 amp. egosse uu, se egntApourrso /,jgeogty re ZGD 7: av- EZEVNrWJ 855'# .

hi{ine., 4.Z-ll

~~"'~~~~~~~ ~

' ' ' ' ~ ~ ~ ~P;ge - 2B (82-0184) 1.B,22J 738 ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' '

l Ouestion CS 220.39

+

information detailing the current version of the DMil computer code must be i provided along with benchmark information for validation of the code and its

.use in this particular application.  ;

Response

WHIisacomputerprogram'thatcalculatesmoment-curvature (M-[)

relationships for reinforced concrete sections under thersal gradients, and with an axial force P. The axial force P may be zero. The program has capabilities to account for non-linear material properties, verlation of material properties with temperature, r.onelihear thermal gradients, tens 11e cracking, and compressive crushing. The M-# relationship provides information on the capacity of a section under a temperature gradient. The moment corresponding to zero curvature is also of interest beca9se it represents the ,

thermal moment for a section restre.!ned against rotation.

For a given axial force P 6nd temperature distribution, the moment-curvature relationship is determined using a numerical proccdure that involves the following:

1. The section under consideration (Figure Q220.39-1) is divided into a number of elements by nodal points. The tnermal strain (, is calculated at each node, I, as:

(Eg ) , = (T, - Tref) A(T )

where T, is the nodal temper 6 tyre l

T is the reference teaperature

, ref '

l

is the average coeffIclent of thermal expansion d(T ) at T,
2. A plane section is passed at a curvature f with strains &E and 6 at the two edges of the section. At node I the strain Et Is:

81 : b{ + 66 where l H is the total ibpth of the section hg is the coordinate of node i The mechanical strain at node I is:

(Es = E; - Ge) t 1 QCS 220.39-1 Amend. 68 May 1932

~~-~

- ~ ~ * * * * *P;g o "19 ' I BZ-U 18 4 ) LU ~,22J PSB ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ' ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' - ~ - ~ ~ ~ "' '

3. Stresses,Crg, are calculated at each node based on (Ei) I and a stress-strain relationship which is defined in the input of the problem.

Element forces are calculated based on the average of the stresses in the two nodes defining the element.

14 . The axial force, P , and the moment, M, are calculated by summation of the element forces and their moments about the centroidal axis.

5. The value of P' is compared with the force under consideration (P), and if different the plane section is moved to a new position maintaining the same curvature y and the process is repeated untII convergence.
6. A new curvature is selected and steps 2 to 5 are repeated.
7. In this manner a p versus M relationship is developed for a given P.

The program has options to develop the moment-curvature relationship for the following axial force, P, or restraint conditions.

a. Axial force specified in the input.
b. No exlal restraint (P = 0, displ. f/ 0)
c. Full axial restraint (P / 0, displ. = 0)

The last two options are special cases of the first and provide the capability to develop moment curvature relationships for two extreme cases of axial restraint. The first option may be used for specific axial force values.

Tensile cracking of the concrete is accounted f or automatically by the input G -if relations. Compressive crushing of a concrete element is assumed to occur in the part of the section where the strains exceed a limiting value which is

input to the program. Degradation of a concrete element is assumed to occur in the part of the section where the temperature of the element exceeds a limiting value specified in the program. The part of the section where the strain or the temperature exceeds the limiting value is automatically removed from the section.

Availability i The MPHI program was developed by Burns and Roe and is available as a Burns and Roe in-house program in the Burns and Roe computer and in time sharing CDC computers.

i j Verification The program was verified by hand calculations. For this purpose a reinforced l concrete section was considered under a temperature distribution and was l

l l

QCS 220.39-2 Amend. 68 May 1982

' ' " '~" '"~~~~'~~~ '

" ~ ~ P[ge - 64 iEE-iO5d)~ Ib[25]' 55

divided into elements (Figure Q220.39-2). Material properties, for the purpose of this calculation, were assumed to be those shown in Figures Q220.39-3 to Q220.39-5. The N-Q5 relationship was developed for the case of full axial restraint and then, selected points on the relationship were

-calculated by hand. The moment curvature points obtained by hand calculations are in complete agreement as shown in Table Q220.39-1. It should be pointed out that in addition to the values in Table Q220.39-1 the hand calculations provided a detailed check for the intermediate steps of the computer program such as strains and stresses to ensure that there are no errors that might affect the results under a different set of variables.

Further verification of the program was performed using the computer program ANSYS (Ref erence Q220.39-1). Limited analysis by ANSYS provided information for the moment corresponding to zero curvature (thermal moment) for the section in Figure Q220.39-2 under full axial and no axial restraint. The model is shown in Figure Q220.39-6 and the properties in Figures Q220.39-3 to Q220.3 9-5. A comparison of the MPHI and ANSYS results is given in Table Q220.3 9-2.

Anollcation MPHI is used to calculate the moment-curvature relationship of reinforced concrete sections under temperature distribution and axial force. The moment capacity may be obtained f rom the M-d relationship.

$ In addition the thermal moment of a section restrained against rotation may be obtained as that corresponding to zero curvature. (Figure CSQ220.39-7)

Reference QCS 220.39-1 Computer Program ANSYS, Revision 3, Swanson Analysis Systems, Inc., Houston Pennsylvania.

QCS 220.39-3 Amend. 68 May 1982

1 TABLE QCS220.39-1 I

MPHI VERIFICATION RESULTS I I

Curvature Computer Results Hand Calculations 1/In. Force Moment Force Moment lbs lbs-in Ibs lbs-In i 0 -53,725 -27,327 -53,725 -27,327

+.00002 -53,892 +27,268 -53,892 +27,268

.00002 -52,879 -76,738 -52,879 -76,738 Moment is positive when it creates tension on top (Node No.1).

Negative axial force causes compression on the section.

l i

l, i

i 4

l l

l QCS 220.39-4 Amend. 68 May 1982 f _ _

~

- ' ' * ' ~ ~ ~ Pcge ~32 182-U184 T LB ; 22.1 736 - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~'- ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ' ' ' ~ ~

TABLE QCS220.39-2 COW ARISON OF RESULTS FROM FHI AND ANSYS WHI RESULTS ANSYS RESULTS CASE FORCE MOENT FORCE MOENT KlPS k-in KIPS k-in Curvature d=0 -

Fuii Axlal Restraint -53.7 -27 -53.2 -31 No Axial Restraint 0 -193 0 -188 1

1 1

l l

l 1

1 1

QCS220.39-5 Amend. 68 May 1982

_ E. _

/

2 d o

^ " 'j+.s/ne/

_ . Z_Z l

\ _ e .- __\

^7'd i , J l

bItII JT-s)/_\

l_ _f ~ \ s

.*l -

PLANE SECTION l' \ - - - .

% FREE THERMAL STRAIN Y - - - -

E t

G 9 m ene e 9

m 6

^

. i ,- d i

2 b -

ens MODEL 0F STRAIN DIAGRAM CONCRETE SECTION P

l l

i FIGURE Q220.39-1 TYPICAL MPHI MODEL AND STRAIN DIAGRAM Q220.39-6 l

l l

l

. TEMPERATURE DISTRIQUTION 9009F g Element d.,:

O '

.T.

O 6 9 5 m r<e #

_. 500 F -

  • Rebar /. 480 F T

'C _- .) - l"_' 450 F O

P 9

m

,e q Elevrt

.$ we __ 250 F G

@ h i :.

@ \

4 8

- *? - 180 F CD I U a

6e <: 3 e #

.L '170.0 F.

_m_Rebar 170.0 F O ..

i

+

@ g e

\ o U

, -:4 _ 170 F l

l FIGURE Q220.39-2 MODEL AND TEMPERATURES FOR VERIFICATION PROBLEM i

j Q220.39-7 I

4 e'

20000 ,

I AT 100 F _ .

2 i

sooooo _ ,

' AT 5 0 0 F S [

t I

I i 20000 lAT1bOOfg i

EE Gb

/  !'  !

I i

60000 '

l 4 ,

I i

e i i I 4

l l 4 I i

8 I

l Aoooo -

I i i I i I 1 6

l i i i I

l Cooco l I i _

e i i

i I g

i I l l 1 i i I e

i I e

i l i

^ O.' o 1 0 01 0.o3 0 04 a.o$ o. o g STRAIN I

FIGURE Q220.39-3 STRESS-STRAIN CURVES FOR REINFORCING BARS -

VERIFICATION PROBLEM I

Q220.39-8

4000 , ,

I h

3500 , ,

8 I

I i I i 3 I I 1 3000 I i _

i i

I l AT 100 F i l ..

I i i J i  ! ..

I e I i i l 1 i 2500 ,

I I I l t i ,

I l s C 1 l I AT 300*F 10

- I i l m 2000 .

l 1

g _

!O l I i 5

  • i i i i l

" i i  !

I 'ATSOOF l I E I i

I i

m  ! l w 1 500 .

i  !

E i  ! AT 700'F

$ i i

i N! ,

I . l  :

I I I I ,

2000  ; I .

l g AT 900 F -

I i

1

, i ,

I i l i  !

I a l I- i

. 500 l l g e . . . _ __.

l ' '

AT 1100'F i

! [!

l ._

, i

' ' ' AT 12 00 F i

o

/

l 0 0 001 0 002 0 003 0 00%

STRAIN 1

NOTE: Stresses in concrete are zero for tensile strains FIGURE Q220.39-4 STRESS-STRAIN CURVES FOR CONCRETE -

VERIFICATION PROBLEM Q220.39-9

l 14,,o -

l I

f l. c - l I

^ l L

O c

N .

C

  1. 0 c -

g6 I g4 e s

^

w c,0 i

o m

x v

=

O 60 -

m c.

x STEEL =~~~,_____.

" _______~

a g ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

M 5~C

=

P-A o

=

_u u.c A

L w

o u

w c.3 at 2

g  :.o .

<C i

80 0 :OC -

500 330 roCO 'IO C TEMPERATURE (UF)

FIGURE Q220.39-5 C0 EFFICIENT OF THERMAL EXPANSION -

VERIFICATION PROBLEM Q220.39-10

i l

l l i

- / r/

o
  1. 4 1 0 12

- o 4  :

f Sr 14 c "

EN* */

gg  %

y q  % lv ,

b

-/

9 ST ,

/ ,/

n de s /

. I /

// $$ /

s .

/t it R.,

4 y s,,y /' ' i '

/3 CJ ar.>rs4skt i /

i /

/d Sl s 4 '(

/////- n

.I /f $$

l B00MDo9 Af

, -> si d' Q'<

  • ' a e oxss r se a j i

<3<.., 7 .. 9 IB gg 4 4

/J (f  %

20 YO a, ,, c l

~

l FIGURE Q220.39-6 ANSYS MODEL OF REINFORCED CONCRETE - c = 0 Q226 39-11

i e

i 6

'4, #+s 4

v y 4

r e  %

rp +

+ e i MOMSMT W o

i

)

i

.I l I

k 4 n l h

, t

.' 4 1

t ,

h h

) MOWN Y

% ,c m cary -

A #,

f l

' - Momuur c 4 ra cery _

FIGURE Q220.39-7 TYPICAL M0 MENT-CURVATURE DIAGRAMS Q220.39-12 l

l 1

(