ML20071B062

Forwards Revised Responses to Mechanical Engineering Branch Items 26 & 70 Re Low Temp Components.Info to Be Included in Next Amend to PSAR

ML20071B062
Person / Time
Site:	Clinch River
Issue date:	02/24/1983
From:	Longenecker J ENERGY, DEPT. OF, CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PLANT
To:	Grace J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
HQ:S:83:224, NUDOCS 8302250314
Download: ML20071B062 (10)

Text

_ - _ _ - - _ . _- _ _ _ _

O Department of Energy Washington, D.C. 20545 FE8 2 41983 Docket No. 50-537-HQ:S:83:224 Dr. J. Nelson Grace, Director CRBR Program Office Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.- 20555

Dear Dr. Grace:

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ON' MECHANICAL ENGINEERING BRANCH (MEB) LOW TEMPERATURE ITEMS 26 AND 70

References:

(1) Letter HQ:S:83:182, J. R. Longenecker to P. S. Check,

" Additional Information on MEB Items 4, 26, 64, 68, 69, and 72," dated January 11, 1983 (2) Letter HQ:S:83:192, J. R. Longenecker to P. S. Check,

" Additional Information on MEB Items 50 and 70,"

dated January 24, 1983 (3) Letter HQ:S:83:215, J. R. Longenecker to J. Nelson Grace, " Additional Information on MEB Low Temperature Questions 26 and 70," dated February 15, 1983 Enclosed are revised responses to MEB Questions 26 and 70 previously submitted in the references. The enclosed pages provide additional information requested by the MEB staff in discussions with the Project Office and will be included in the next amendment to the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report.

Any questions concerning enclosed pages may be directed to Mr. D. Robinson

, (FTS 626-6098) of the Project Office Oak Ridge staff.

Sincerely, b

John R. Longenecker Acting Director, Office of Breeder Demonstration Projects Office of Nuclear Energy cc: Service List Standard Distribution Licensing Distribution 8302250314 830224 PDR ADOCK 05000537 A PDR

. , J .' '

Enc 1csure The NRC expressed concern at the November 22-24, MEB Item 26:

1982, meeting at Walts Mill that no specificcr It was induced vibration suggested that a limiting (FIV) test results.

valug of 50 percent of

- the code endurance limit at 10' cycles would be appropriate.

The information presented at the same meeting fcer

Response

MEB Item 64 indicated that for load controlled conditions the high cycle loadings for CRBRPto 1010 cycles.

require evaluation at about 108 Since the endurance limit decreases by 6 to approximately a factor of 2 in going from 10 low cycles, the CRBRP procedures are equivalent toIn an the suggested limiting value.

M 'lArd on ass. rc}ults must be within the compo .

noted in PSAR section 3.9.1.

l l

l 6

• The component design limits are less than 1/2 the 10 cycle limit. Test result acceptance shall be based

' on observing measurement corresponding to less than the above defined design limit.

__ 7 ---- ---- - - . - _ _ _ __

• • '"w'y--,_ ,_-

3.9.1.6 Analvtiem1 unthade fer AME Pnda Pl=== 1 cmn aants and enqponent armorts*

'Ihe design transients for these components are described in .Mpendix B of this PSAR. h analytical methods and stress limits will be discut,ed in the FSAR.

h evaluation of ASME Code Class 1 components will comly with the requirements of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Subsection 2 , supplemented by the foll wing:

(1) Low Temperature Camponents (below 9000F) for anatentic steeln and below 720oF for ferritic steeln)e RDF Standard E5-22-T, 06 tober 1975.

EREG-0800, Section 3.9.3, ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3 components, component supports, and core support structures.

(2) Elevated Tenperature Components:

(a) Interpretations of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Case 1592, " Class 1 Components in Elevated Temperature Servico Section III".**

(b) RDP Standard F9-4T, " Requirements for Design of Nuclear System Components at elevated Temperatures" Jan.1976.

(c) RDr Standard ES-22-T, or+ahal 1975.

(d) EREG-0800, Section 3.9.3.

h inelastic and limit analysis methods having the stress and deformation (limits) established by the ASME Code,Section III, and Code Case 1592 (elevated temperature design) for normal, upset and emergency conditions may be used with the dynamic analysis. For these cases, the limits are sufficiently lw to assure that the dynamic elastic system analysis is not invalidsted.

For the case of elevated temperature components designed in accordance with Code case 1592, conservative deformation (or strain) limits have been formulated to help ensure the applicability of the other rules of the Code Case; i.e. the strain limits in Code Case 1592 are set conservatively lw such that they effectively ensure that small deformation theory is applicable for most structural analyses of elevated temperature components. h small deformation assumptions, which have been the cornerstone for anal'rses of structures at l w temperatures, are retained by the majority of current compiter structural andals being used for elevated temperature aralysis.

• • 'there are no deviations at present. All supplemental criteria will be fully identified and justified in the FSAR.

• 'Ite code editions and addenda are those shown in Table 3.2-5 for the agropriate components l

3.9-3 Amend. 76 Feb.1983 rrL._- .L - - - - - - . -- - - - _ r r::._T : -_: r :-_-- . _ - _ - . - - _ -

i 1

Se elevated temperature Code Case places the following limits on '_ne maximum amumlated inelastic strain for parent material (Section P-1310 of Case 1592):

1. Strains averaged through the thickness, 14

2. Strains at the surface due to an equivalent linear distribution of strain through the thickness, 24 -

%ese limits are consistent with the NRC Standard Review Plan, Section 3.9.1, which states that anali deformatica methods of analysis typically tend to have acceptable effective strain limits in the range of 0.5 to 1.5 percent.

For components designed in accordance with the 1m temperature rules of Section III of the ASME Code, the 3 S limit on primar ensure the applicability of small defEruation theory: y-plus-secondary stress 1.e., the 3 S, limit ensures shakedown and precludes ratchetting.

For faulted conditions, the plastic and limit analysis stress and deformation limits are specified in Appendix F of the ASME Code,Section III. hese limits are established in terms of an equivalent adopted elastic limit which can be used with a dynamic elastic system analysis. Ihrticular cases of concern will be checked by use of simulated inelastic interr:als properties in the elastic system analysis.

At the component level, use of plastic or ine10stic stress analysis or application of inelastic stress and deformation limits may be used with the elastically calculated dynamic external loads provided that shakedown occurs (as opposed to continuing deformation) or deformations do not exceed specified limits. Otherwise, readjustment to the elastic system analysis will be required. A list of components for which inelastic analysis has been performed or is planned is shown in Table 3.9-11.

Complete system inelastic methods of flexibility analysis combined with inelastic stress techniques may be used if there is justification.

Design loading combinations to be used for ASME Section III Class I components j are those as given in Appendix 3.7-A with the additional combinations given below.

I Normal und Bnergency Conditions: Dead + Live + Operating

+ 2ermal + Transients he complete set of load combinations for ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3 components is sunmarized in Tables 3.9-Sa and 5b. Active components will be qualified for operability on a component by component basis in accordance with Reference 12, PSAR Section 1.6.

ASME Class 1 Component Supports will be designed and analyzed to the rules and requirements of ASME Section III Subsection NF, h e methods for analysis and )

associated allowable limits that are used in the evaluation of plate and shell  :

4 type and linear supports for faulted conditions are those defined in ASME Code,Section III, Appendix F. l l I i

i

3.9-3a Amend. 76 i

. - . ~ _ . _

Feb.1983 _

he load conbinations for ASME Class 1 Component Supports are given in Table 3.9-5a and 5b for normal, upset, emergency and faulted plant conditions. h stress limits to be used in the design of the Class 1 supports for the various service loadings are provided in Table 3.9-5c.

Component supports may be designed using the following three design procedures: (1) Design by Analysis, (2) Experimental Stress Analysis, and (3)

Imed Rating. Plate and shell type supports shall'be designed and analyzed in accordance with the rules of Imragra$ W-3220 of Subsection W. Elastic analysis based on maximum stress theory in accordance with the rules of W-3230 and Appendix XVII-2000 (Section III) shall be used for the design of linear type supports. For component support configurations where compressive stresses occur, the critical buckling stress shall be taken into account. %

avoid coltsan buckling in compression members, local instability associated with compression in flexual members and web / flange buckling in plate members, the allwable stress shall be limited to one-half of the critical buckling stress for plate and shell type supports and to two-thirds of the critical buckling stress for linear type supports. Se calculation of the critical buckling stress shall account for the menber slenderness ratio, width-to-thickness ratio of member flange, depth-to-thickness ratio of the member web and laterally unsupported length. Dynamic buckling as well as static buckling shall be considered when calculating critical buckling stress. H e critical buckling is defined as the CRC curve (Column Research Council).

W design of bolts for ASME Class 1 Component Supports for normal and upset plant conditions will be in accordance with paragralb W-3280 of ASME Section III, Subsection NF. For emergency and faulted plant conditions, bolts will be treated as linear supports, and the methods for analysis and associated allwable limits are those defined in paragra@ W-3230, subsection W and

paragra@ F-1370, Appendix F of ASME Code,Section III, respectively.

%e stress limits for the anergency Conditions may be increased by one-third over the values for the normal / upset conditions. For the Faulted Conditions, the allwable stresses obtained for the normal conditions may be increased by a factor of 1.2 (Sy/Ft). In no case shall the allwables for the Dnergency/

Faulted Conditions exceed the yield strength of the material at temperature.

AMItional Material- nanian Cemnideraticrm o h ASME Code, Winter 1982 Addenda, reduced fatigue design curves for austenitic materials cycled beyond 106 cycles will be evaluated, o h design curves being developed by ASME Code Committees, Winter 1982, regarding the 2-1/4 Cr - 1 Mo elevated temperature fatigue design will be evaluated.

o Wherever the simplified elastic-plastic method of the ASME Code has been used, an evaluation of a conservative or actual plastic strain concentration and the resulting fatigue design life will be performed.

3.9-3b Amend. 76 Feb. 1983

~:. m ,- .. - - . ~ . - - _ - _-_ = - _ r w . z.::. r _ - - T

3.9.2 AME ce clann 2 and 3 er-mnants and Premnent- krmrts*

3.9.2.1 fr=mnent Ooeratino Canditions and Desian rnadina ermhinations Design pressure, temperature, and other loading conditions that provide the design basis for fluid system . Code Class 2 and 3 components are described in -

Appendix B of this PSAR and referenced in the sections that describe the system functional requirements. -

3.9.2.2 N tiGDE Design loading combinations for ASME Code Class 2 and 3 components, and piping, are given in Appendix 3.7-A which are the same as for Class 1 components. Corresponding stress and pressure limits for each case are specified in Section 3.9.2.3.

For ASMD-III Class 2 and 3 components which are not sodium-containing and high temperature, the CRBRP will fully conform with the requirements of ASME-III Code. %e load combinaticms given in Tables 3.9-Sa and 5b will be utilized.

ASME Class 2 and 3 Component Supp rts will be designed and analyzed to the rules and requirements of ASME Section III Subsection W. % e design and analysis of Class 2 and 3 component supports shall be as discussed in Section 3.9.1.6 for Class 1 supports.

%e load combinations for ASME Class 2 and 3 Component Supports are given in Table 3.9-Sa and 5b for normal, upset, emergency and faulted plant conditions.

W e stress limits to be used in the design of the Class 2/3 supports are provided in Table 3.9-5d.

% e design of bolts for ASME Class 2 and 3 Component Supports for normal and upset plant conditions will be in accordance with paragra@ W-3280 of ASME Section III Subsection W. For energency and faulted plant conditions, bolts will be treated as linear supports, and the methods for analysis and associated allowable limits are those defined in paragra@ W-3230, Subsection of ASME Section III. In no case shall the allowables for the anergency/

Faulted conditions exceed the yield strength of the material at temperature.

• The code editions and addenda are those shown in Table 3.2-5 for the a gropriate components.

1 i 3.9-3c Amend. 76 Feb.1983

Table 3.9-5a Imd Combinations for Seimnic Category I Vessels, Piping and Non-Active Raps and Valves and Associated Component Supports (Class 1, 2 and 3) .

ASME System Service Stress Operating Condition Inad Combination r.imi ts Normal Dead + Live + Operating Normal (or Level A)

+ ' thermal + Transients Upset Upset (or Level B)

Dead + Live

+ ' thermal + Operating

+ Transients (1) 4GlE Bnergency Dead + Live + Operating anergency (or Level C)

+ ' thermal

+ D6L

+ ]L Jpsients Faulted (a) Dead

+ + Live + Operati+ Transients 3) Faulted (or Level D)

+ DSL + SSE l

(b) Dead + Live + Operati+ ' thermal + Transients 4) Faulted (or Level l + 2E 1

(c) Dead + Live + Operating Faulted (or Level D)

+ ' thermal + Transients (1) Includes worst normal operation transient with four CBEs and worst upset l operation transient with one CBE, independently.

(2) Includes only those dynamic system loadings associated with sodium water reactions.

(3) Dynamic system loadings and transients associated with ex-containment IBTS design basis leaks and water / steam pipe rupture events.

! (4) Includes only normal operating transients.

I i

3.9-9ha Amend. 76 Feb.1983

- 7T - . .~r ~ ' ~ * ~

Table 3.9-5b Load Combinations for Seismic Category I Active Rap and Valves and Associated Congonent Supports (Class 1, 2 and 3) ,

ASME System Service Stress Operating Condition Inad Combination r.imits Normal . Dead + Live + Operating Normal (or Level A)

Thermal + Transients U5 set Dead + Live + Operating Upset (or Level B)

Thermal + Transients (l)

+ WE Bnergency Dead + Live + Operating Upset (or Level B)

Thermal + pusients

+DSL i Upset (or Level B)

Faulted (a) Dead + Live + Operating Upset (or Level B)

Thermal + Transients (2i

+ DSL(2) + SSE (b) Dead + Live + Operating Upset (or Level B)

Thermal + Transients (3)

+ SSE (c) Dead + Live + Operating Upset (or Level B)

Thermal + Transients l (1) Includes worst normal operation transient with four OBEs and worst upset j operation transient with one WE, independently.

(2) Dynamic system loadings and transients associated with ex-containment IHTS design basis leaks and water / steam pipe rupture events.

(3) Includes worst nominal operatim transient with the SSE.

(4) Includes only those dynamic system loadings associated with sodium water reactions.

l 3.9-9bb Amend. 76 Feb. 1983 I :: ~ --. J: .L:^:L_ . - - - -. . - . D~. --  :-- - --- --- -- - - - - - -

Table 3.9-5c Stress Criteria for All ASME Code Class 1 Cump sit Supports of Plate and Shell Type Condition Stress Limits (1) (2)

Design Rn 1 Sn Rn + Pb I 1.5 Sm Normal / Upset Bn i Sn (or level A/B) Rn + P 1.5 Sn n l

h 13 Bn + bP + h 13 Sn i

i Bnergency Bn I 1.2 Sn

! (or Level C) Bn + Pb i [1.8 2n (0.8 Cg Faulted an I [1.5 Sn (or Level D) (1.2Sy l

Rn + PbI 2.25 Sn 1.8 Sy

( Notes:

(1) Terminology is as defined in the ASME Code, Subsecti m NF.

(2) For linear supports the stress limits given in NF-3231 of Subsection NF and Appendix xvii of Section III may be used, s

3.9-9bc Amend. 76 Feb.1983

. . - _ . . - - . . _ -. - - . - . - _ . - -. = - _ - . = - -

9 Table 3.9-5d Stress Criteria for All ASME Code Class 2/3 Cm d. Supports of Plate and Shell Type Cmdition Stress Limits (1) (2)

Design di & S We + @2 1 1.5 Normal /UIset 6, I S (or Level A/B) e, + F2 1 1.5 Bnergency 1.2 x Normal Condition Limits (or Level C)

Faulted 1.5 x Normal Condition Limits (or Level D)

Notes:

(1) Termimlogy is as defined in ASME Code, Subsection NF.

(2) For linear supports use same limits as for Class 1.

3.9-9bd Amend. 76 Feb.1983 ,

_. .