ML20072K817
| ML20072K817 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 05/31/1983 |
| From: | Russell Adams, Mcinnes I, Shamszad P NUTECH ENGINEERS, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17194B616 | List: |
| References | |
| 64.305.1102, COM-02-041-3, COM-02-041-3-R00, COM-2-41-3, COM-2-41-3-R, NUDOCS 8307070211 | |
| Download: ML20072K817 (218) | |
Text
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 May 1983 64.305.1102 DRESDEN NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNITS 2 AND 3 PLANT UNIQUE ANALYSIS REPORT VOLUME 3 VENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS Prepared for:
Commonwealth Edison Company Prepared by:
1
/%
NUTECH Engineers, Inc.
)
t San Jose, California
{
Approved by:
SY -
kMS .
M. Shamszad, P.E. I. D. McInnes, P.E.
Project Engineer Engineering Manager
'2Ak-R. H. Adams, P.E.
Engineering Director Issued by:
G ,k I 140 N1eb A. G. Brnilovich RJ H. Buchholz Project Manager
_w[ .- Project Director l
I 8307070211 830627 QQfgQb P" ^" '" iPJ REEAATORY DOCKET FILECOPY
i i
- REVISION CONTROL SHEET TITLE: Dresden Station, Units 2 and 3 REPORT NUMBER: COM-0 2-041-3 Plant Unique Analysis Report Revision 0 Volume 3 .
N.G. Cofie/ Consultant I A> 4 C
! Initials I. D. McInnes/ Engineering Manager M Initials C. F. Parker / Technician II-Initials M. Shamszad/ Project Engineer b l Initials C.T. Shyy/ Senior Engineer SIM V Initials D. C. Talbott/ Consultant I [
Initials R. E. Wise / Consultant I.
Initials 3-ii nutagh
. . . - . . - . , - - . . ~ - . . . , . - < . , . - - . . , - - . , - . . - , . . ~ . . - . - . , , , - - - . . - , , - - - . . , . . , . . . . . , . . . . - - - . - . - _ _ . . . - , . , - - -
REVISION CONTROL SHEET (Continued)
TITLE: Dresden Station, Units 2 and 3 REPORT NUMBER: COM-02-041-3 Plant Unique Analysis Report Revision 0 Volume 3 ACCURACY CRITERIA PRS ACCURACY CRITERIA E REV PRE- E REV PARED CHECK CHECK PARED CHECK CHECK PAGE(S)
PAGE (S) 3-v 0 3-2.76 0 "4C @ CT6 through b M C T4 MSc cr4 3-vi 3-2.77 MS 3-vii 3-2 78 070 through $ g@ d f6 thrbugh ^# 4 ' T 3-xvi 3-2.84 h bugh 4 Td M h bugh 0T0 Y 3-1.7 3-2.92 3-2.1 3-2.93' d4C J'1.f through VII h[ 470
~ '
f,;*g*gu e ~gc cre (L 3-2.29 3-2*95 through g QM cr4 3-2.96 3-2.60 through MS crd (p 3-2.61 g g CT6 3-2.113 3-2.62 3-2.114 MS N4c c rp 74 i through g NGC through 3-2.64 3-2.116 3-2.117 3-2.65 through ^#G C dro through M crd %
3-2.67 3-2.137 3-2.68 3-2.138 NGC Cfd Nec OTO through T through 3-2.150 MS 3-2.70 3-2.71 3-2.151 through a/ 4 C y[g cTO through M4C 4 Cr4 3-2.72 3-2.161 1
3-2.73 3-2.162 through V g arqC cry through 3-2.178 V
0 ylg Gry IDM A 3-2.*/S 0 QEP-001.4-00 ,
3-iii i flutgQh 1
? - . . .
REVISION CONTROL SHEET (Concluded)
TITLE: Dresden Station, Units 2 and 3 REPORT NUMBER: COM-02-041-3 Plant Unique Analysis Report Revision 0 Volume 3
~
~
ACCURACY CRITERIA PRE- ACCURACY CRITERIA REV PRE- p r,y PARED CHECK CHECK PARED CHECK CHECK PAGE(S)
PAGE(S) 3-2.179 0 d4C crJ 3-2.180 through gg crJ @
3-2.181 3-2.182 "4 C CT4 through MS 3-2.185 3-2.186 through WC cr4 3-2.187 3-2.188 through f48 USC cro 3-2.189 3-2.190 through M crf M 3-2.191 3-2.192 through 14 8 cr4 lbM 3-2.196 V
3-3.1 0 Mg cr.5 \%
\
(G _
QEP-001.4-00 nutggli l
l
ABSTRACT C
The primary containments for the Dresden Nuclear Power Station Units 2 and 3 were designed, erected, pressure-tested, and N-stamped in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, 1965 Edition with Addenda up to and including Winter 1965 for the Commonwealth Edison Company (CECO) by the Chicago Bridge and Iron Company. Since then, new requirements have been established. These requirements affect the design and operation of the primary containment system and are defined in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) Safel.y Evaluation Report, NUREG-0661. This report provides an assessment of containment design loads postulated to occur during a loss-of-coolant accident or a safety relief valve discharge event. In addition, it provides an assessment of the effects that the postulated events have on containment systems operation.
This plant unique analysis report (PUAR) documents the efforts
' undertaken to address and resolve each of the applicable NUREG-0661 requirements. It demonstrates that the design of the primary containment system is adequate and that original design safety margins have been restored, in accordance with NUREG-0661 acceptance criteria. The Dresden Units 2 and 3 PUAR is composed of the following seven volumes:
o Volume 1 -
GENERAL CRITERIA AND LOADS METHODOLOGY o Volume 2 -
SUPPRESSION CHAMBER ANALYSIS o volume 3 -
VENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS o Volume 4 -
INTERNAL STRUCTURES ANALYSIS o Volume 5 -
SAFETY RELIEF VALVE DISCHARGE LINE PIPING ANALYSIS o Volume 6 -
TORUS ATTACHED PIPING AND SUPPRESSION CHAMBER PENETRATION ANALYSES (DRESDEN UNIT 2)
(O)
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-v nutggj)
- ~~
c , 9:-4 g . >
=f.'
~
' ' ~!f _%*"
- ~. +
3 'l r N- l., [ ~
. ? -,
x - .: .- n.: - .. ..
',a g a.
t e.
g ,,
-s"
- W-
- N, s g y - " e ._
- s .
j - - w
~
-o Volume' 7 - f0RUS 'e.TTACHED _ PIPING;l.ND ~
SUPPRESSION ~
.w ,
-p: -
~
< CHAMBER PENET.R AT. ION AN A,L.,YSIS- , - ( DRESDEN ' ~
^
I UNIT 3)
~ '
l s, .
q l j
~ j
. .A. -
s s, ,
- s. n .
This volumeJdocumenb$r s.- .:-. .-
the evaluation of the vent system. .. .
Volumes 1- throudh 4' and 6 and 7 have been, prepared by NUTECH
-s
, ( ~
i Engineers, Incorporated (NUTECH), acting as an agent to^ the u
Commonwealth Edison dompany. Volume 5 Lhas been pre'pa red by
!. , s ., .
Sargent and Lundy' ( also acting as;tan agent %to the Commonwealth
' . . . - . , _ . . _e Edisonv Company), who performed th) safety.rglief valv'e* discharge ,
s.:-
line (SRVDL)';pi' ping; analys is . ' Volume u .n 5 descrltes .n t;b,e d(thods of
+
analysis Tnd procedures used in the'SRVOL,pi^ ping analysis. ,
~
s c" .
s s ,:
~ r . s e-w -4 g,
a' *wr- 3N9 _ ) ,
.H ;,w < ;,s ,
s4 Y , . . X, 3 -- ,-
4 J .(.ws ,. -
~w y -s -
,s
.~s .
.- 9 .: / ,
n
{
_' ~ \
, _,~ . .
V .
\ -3 . ,
v.3 s s e , , ,, s v a** _
wQ , , K
_. (~#
R; s
w w[
+~ . (I .v. %. g ,
- s, *, -
, /,s,
~~
xJ a, s
- s. _
, , e
% ,1' s-
--2 . g, .
l -- m s
% ~~N
~
y n~
%ga ', ,
' s. s N - g *~4 s ,
- ,g , . , , - - _ _
- ~
g-( ,,...s,
__ s ',- ,
, N
- g, \ \ ,
g s - 3t -
s.
C 1,.,
b, : .x. .
,, u
?-
w .
s e
l l
m .
g ;
s
\% A s
e u N
< ,, ,N( .. b ,,
'a-- s s
~-
^~
x 5' Q ~,\'
A n \ ,. c>
y, y
\ u , x ;
- ,j +
f7G',, s
-, _, - s i %-# y
..g "a .
N w1 COM-02-041-3 ,
,': ,, .- s c -, .
Revision 0
.c
.~D \,
via,l - ( 5 1 .,
4 -
'\' ',
, . ',q , . .
,/ ,.
o t
, - . - . _ _ . , , _ - , - - . . , . , , ,,_,,,,._,.,,_.._.,,,,,,,,,_f , , . _ _ , - ,_, . , _ ,
TABLE OF CONTENTS k
Page ABSTRACT 3-v i LIST OF ACRONYMS 3-viii LIST OF TABLES 3-x LIST OF-FIGURES 3-xiii 3-
1.0 INTRODUCTION
3-1.1 3-1.1 Scope of Analysis 3-1.3 3-1.2 Summary and Conclusions 3-1.5 3-2.0 VENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS 3-2.1 3-2.1 Component Description 3-2.2 3-2.2 Loads and Load Combinati,ons 3-2.29 l
3-2.2.1 Loads 3-2.30 3-2.2.2 Load Combinations 3-2.96 O 3-2.3 Acceptance Criteria 3-2.111 3-2.4 Methods of Analysis 3-2.117 3-2.4.1 Analysis for Major Loads 3-2.118 I
3-2.4.2 Analysis for Asymmetric 3-2.162 Loads 3-2.4.3 Analysis for Local Effects 3-2.169 3-2.4.4 Methods for Evaluating 3-2.175 Analysis Results 1
3-2.5 Analysis Results 3-2.180 3-2.5.1 Discussion of Analysis 3-2.192 Results 3-2.5.2 Closure 3-2,195 3-3.0 LIST OF REFERENCES 3-3.1 COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-vii nutg.gh
=r+e -
c- . - - . - , - , - - e ~e-r . . - - - , ...--v- - + e - -, - , - - .... -- -- e ----A-...e--.---,,-v---,-w-+,,- ----,,--+w-- - - - -
~.. - - . . . . - - _ . . - . . - . . - _ _ - . . . . . . . . - _ _ -
LIST OF ACRONYMS ADS' Automatic Depressurization System ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers CO Condensation Oscillation i
DC Downcomer DC/VH Downcomer/ Vent Header
! DBA Design Basis Accident DBE Design Basis Earthquake 4-DLF Dynamic Load Factor i ECCS Emergency Core Cooling System FSI Fluid-Structure Interaction r FSTF Full-Scale Test Facility i IBA Intermediate Break Accident i
ID Inside Diameter l
IR Inside Radius LDR Load Definition Report
! LOCA Loss-of-Coolant Accident MB Midbay MJ Miter Joint NEP Non-Exceedance Probability I
l NOC Normal Operating Conditions NPS Nominal Pipe Size NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
! NVB Non-Vent Line Bay l OBE Operating Basis Earthquake O COM-02-041-3 3-viii Revision 0
l 1
I LIST OF ACRONYMS
- (Concluded) '
! OD Outside Diameter t
I 2 PUAAG Plant Unique Analysis Applications Guide 1 PUAR Plant Unique Analysis Report j i
j PULD Plant Unique Load Definition QSTF Ouarter-Scale Test Facility RPV Reactor Pressure Vessel
, SAR Safety Analysis Report SBA Small Break Accident SRSS Square Root of the Sum of the Squares l t
SRV Safety Relief Valve SRVDL Safety Relief Valve Discharge Line 4
SSE Safe Shutdown Earthquake i
i VB Vent Line Bay l 1
VH Vent Header VL Vent Line .
l VL/DW Vent Line/Drywell VL/VH Vent Line/ Vent Header i
4 J
4 i
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-ix
_..---,,..~._,m~..._-_,___ .,_,m,, , , _ . , _,_,__,_,__,,_m. , , _ _ , _ , , , . - , _ _ . , , ,,_.y._ , . , _ _ ,,__,_ , .. ,
r LIST OF TABLES v
Number Title Page 3-2.2-1 Vent System Component Loading Information 3-2.60 3-2.2-2 Suppression Pool Temperature Response Analysis Results - Maximum Temperatures 3-2.61 3-2.2-3 Vent System Pressurization and Thrust Loads For DBA Event 3-2 .62 3-2.2-4 Pool Swell Impact Loads for Vent Line and
- Spherical Junction 3-2.63 i
3-2.2-5 Downcomer Longitudinal Bracing and Lateral Bracing Pool Swell Drag and Fallback Submerged Structure Load Distribution 3-2.64 3-2.2-6 Support Column LOCA Water Jet and Bubble-Induced Drag Load Distribution 3-2.65 3 -2 . 2 -7 Downcomer LOCA Bubble-Induced Drag Load Distribution 3-2.66 3-2.2-8 Downcomer Longitudinal Bracing and Lateral O' Bracing LOCA Bubble-Induced Drag Load Distribution 3-2.67 3-2.2-9 IBA Condensation Oscillation Downcomer Loads 3-2.68 3-2.2-10 DBA Condensation Oscillation Downcomer Loads 3-2.69 3-2.2-11 IBA and DBA Condensation Oscillation Vent System Internal Pressures 3-2.70
, 3-2 .2 - 12 Support Column DBA Condensation Oscillation Submerged Structure Load Distribution 3-2.71 3-2.2-13 Downcomer Longitudinal Bracing and Lateral Bracing DBA Condensation Oscillation Submerged Structure Load Distribution 3-2.72 b COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-x nutagh
d i
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Number Title Page 3-2.2-14 Maximum Downcomer Chugging Load Determination 3-2.73 3-2.2-15 Multiple Downcomer Chugging Load Magnitude Determination 3-2.74 3-2.2-16 Chugging Lateral Loads for Multiple 1 Downcomers - Maximum Overall Effects 3-2.75 3-2.2-17 Load Reversal Histogram for Chugging Downcor.ser Lateral Load Fatigue Evaluation 3-2.76 3-2.2-18 Chugging Vent System Internal Pressures 3-2.77 3-2.2-19 Support Column Pre-Chug Submerged Structure Load Distribution 3-2.78 3-2.2-20 Downcomer Longitudinal Bracing and Lateral Bracing Pre-Chug Submerged Structure Load Distribution 3-2.79 3-2.2-21 Support Column Post-Chug Submerged Structure Load Distribution 3-2.80 3-2.2-22 Downcomer Longitudinal Bracing and Lateral Bracing Post-Chug Submerged Structure Load Distribution 3-2.81 3-2.2-23 Support Column SRV Discharge Submerged Structure Load Distribution 3-2.82 3-2.2-24 Downcomer T-quencher Bubble Drag Submerged Structure Load Distribution 3-2.83 3-2.2-25 Downcomer Longitudinal Bracing and Lateral Bracing T-quencher Bubble Drag Submerged Structure Load Distribution 3-2.84 3-2.2-26 Mark I Containment Event Combinations 3-2.104 3-2.2-27 Controlling Vent System Load Combinations 3-2.105 3-2.2-28 Enveloping Logic for Controlling Vent System Load Combinations 3-2.107 COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-xi
. nutagh
I LIST OF TABLES (Concluded)
Number Title Page 3-2.3-1 Allowable Stresses for Vent System Components and Component Supports 3-2.114 3-2.3-2 Allowable Displacements and Cycles for Vent Line Bellows 3-2.116 3-2.4-1 Vent System Frequency Analysis Results With Water Inside Downcomers, Based on Downcomers Braced Longitudinally 3-2.138 3-2.4-2 Vent System Frequency Analysis Results Without Water Inside Downcomers, Based on Downcomers Braced Longitudinally 3-2.139 3-2.4-3 Vent System Frequency Analysis Results with Water Inside Downcomern, Based on Downcomers Not Braced Longitudinally 3-2.142 3-2.4-4 Vent System Frequency Analysis Results without Water Inside Downcomers, Based
'~'
on Downcomers Not Braced Longitudinally 3-2.144
3-2.5-1 Major Vent System Component Maximum Membrane Stresses for Governing Loads 3-2.182 3-2.5-2 Maximum Column Reactions for Governing Vent System Loads 3-2.183 3-2.5-3 Maximum Vent Line-Drywell Penetration Reactions for Governing Vent System Loads 3-2.184 3-2.5-4 Maximum Vent Line Bellows Displacements i
For Governing Vent System Loads 3-2.185 3-2.5-5 Maximum Vent System Stresses For Controlling Load Combinations 3-2.186 l 3-2.5-6 Maximum Vent Line Bellows Differential Displacements for Controlling Load Combinations 3-2.188 3-2.5-7 Maximum Fatigue Usage Factors For Vent System Components and Welds 3-2.189
\) C OM 041-3 Revision 0 3-xii nutggb
LIST OF FIGURES Number Title Page 3-2.1-1 Plan View of Containment 3-2.11 3 -2 .1-2 Elevation View of Containment 3-2 .12 3-2.1-3 Suppression Chamber Section -
Midbay Vent Line Bay 3-2.13 3-2.1-4 Suppression Chamber Section -
Miter Joint 3-2.14 3-2.1-5 Suppression Chamber Section -
Midbay Non-Vent Line Bay 3-2.15 3-2.1-6 Developed View of Suppression Chamber Segment 3-2.16 3-2.1-7 Vent Line Details - Upper End 3-2.17
] 3-2.1-8 Vent Line-Vent Header Spherical Junction 3-2.18
['"3 3-2.1-9 Vent Line Spherical Junction Drain 3-2.19
'- 3-2.1-10 Developed View of Downcomer Longitudinal Bracing System 3-2.20 3-2.1-11 Downcomer-to-Vent Header Intersection Details - Dresden Unit 2 3-2.21 3 -2 . 1- 12 Downcomer-to-Vent Header Intersection Details - Dresden Unit 3 3-2.22 3 -2. 1- 13 Downcomer Longitudinal Bracing System i Configuration - Dresden Unit 2 3-2.23 3-2.1-14 Downcomer Longitudinal Bracing System Configuration - Dresden Unit 3 3-2.24 3-2.1-15 Vent Header Support Collar Plate Details 3-2.25 3-2.1-16 Vent System Support Column Details 3-2.26
- 3-2.1-17 Vacuum Breaker Locations 3-2.27 3-2.1-18 Vacuum Breaker Header Penetration Details 3-2.28 l
O COM-02-041-3
. Revision 0 3-xiii nutgrb
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Number Title Page 3 -2 . 2 - 1 Vent System Internal Pressures For SBA Event 3-2.85 3-2.2-2 Vent System Internal Pressures for IBA i Event 3-2.86 ,
3-2.2-3 Vent System Internal Pressures for DBA Event 3-2.87 3-2.2-4 Vent System Temperatures for SBA Event 3-2.88 3-2.2-5 Vent System Temperatures for IBA Event 3-2.89 3 -2 . 2 - 6 Vent System Temperatures for DBA Event 3-2.90 3-2.2-7 Downcomer Pool Swell Impact Loads 3-2.91
' 3-2 .2 -8 Pool Swell Impact Loads for Vent Header Deflectors at Selected Locations 3-2.92 3-2.2-9 Downcomer Longitudinal Bracing and
) Lateral Bracing 3-2.93 3-2.2-10 IBA and DBA Condensation Oscillation Downcomer Differential Pressure Load Distribution 3-2.94 3-2.2-11 Pool Acceleration Profile f or Dominant Suppression Chamber Frequency at Midbay Location 3-2.95 3-2 .2 Vent' System SBA Event Sequence 3-2.108 4
3-2 .2 -13 Vent System IBA Event Sequence 3-2.109 I
3-2.2 Vent System DBA Event Sequence 3-2.110 3-2.4-1 Vent System 1/16 Segment Beam Model -
Isometric View with Downcomer Longi-l' tudinal Bracing 3-2.146 i 3-2.4-2 Vent System-1/16 Segment Beam Model -
Isometric View without Downcomer Longitudinal Bracing 3-2.147 i
i I
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-xiv i.
l
[
\
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Number Title Page 3-2.4-3 Vent Line-Drywell Penetration Axisymmetric Finite Difference Model - View of Typical Meridian 3-2.148 3-2.4-4 Vent Line-Vent Header Spherical Junction Finite Element Model 3-2.149 3-2.4-5 Downcomer-Vent Header Intersection Finite Element Model - Isometric View 3-2.150 3-2.4-6 Harmonic Analysis Results for Support Column Submerged Structure Load Frequency Determination 3-2.151 3-2.4-7 Harmonic Analysis Results for Downcomer Submerged Structure Load Frequency Determination, Based on Downcomers Braced Longitudinally 3-2.152 3-2.4-8 Harmonic Analysis Results for Downcomer fg Submerged Structure Load Frequency Determination, Based on Downcomers Not
( /
Braced Longitudinally 3-2.153 3-2.4-9 Harmonic Analysis Results for Lateral Bracing Submerged Structure Load Frequency Determination 3-2.154 3-2.4-10 Harmonic Analysis Results for Longitudinal Bracing Horizontal Member Submerged I Structure Load Frequency Determination 3-2.155 1
3-2.4-11 Harmunic Analysis Results for Longitudinal Bracing Diagonal Member Submerged Structure Load Frequency Determination 3-2.156 3 -2 . 4- 12 Harmonic Analysis Results for Condensation Oscillation Downcomer Load Frequency Determination 3-2.157 3-2.4-13 Harmonic Analysis Results for Condensation Oscillation Vent System Pressure Load Frequency Determination 3-2.158 b
G COM-02-041-3 l Revision 0 3-xv l nutagh
. _ . . _ - - =
~% LIST OF FIGURES (Concluded)
Number Title Page 3-2.4-14 Harmonic Analysis Results for Chugging Downcom6r Lateral Loads Frequency Determination, Based on Downcomers Braced Longitudinally 3-2.159 3-2.4-15 Harmonic Analysis Results for Chugging Downcomer Lateral Loads Frequency Determination, Based on Downcomers Not Braced Longitudinally 3-2.160 3-2.4-16 Harmonic Analysis Results for Chugging Vent System Pressure Load Frequency Determination 3-2.161 3-2.4-17 Vent System 180* Beam Model - Isometric 3-2.167 View (Dresden Unit 2) 3-2.4-18 Vent System 180' Beam Model - Isometric View (Dresden Unit 3) 3-2.168 3-2.4-19 Allowable Number of Stress Cycles For Vent System Fatigue Evaluation 3-2.179 3-2.5-1 Vent System Support Column Response Due to Pool Swell Impact Loads - Outside Column 3-2.190 3-2.5-2 Vent System Support Column Response Due to Pool Swell Impact Loads - Inside Column 3-2.191 l
l l
COM-0 2-0 41- 3 Revision 0 3-xvi nutg.gb
1 l
l 3 -?. 0 INTRODUCTION In conjunction with Volume 1 o t' the PUAR, this volume documents the efforts undertaken to address the NUREG-0661 requirements which affect the Dresden Units 2 and 3 vent systems. The vent system PUAR is organized as follows:
o INTRODUCTION
- Scope of Analysid
- - Summary and Conclusions o VENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS Component Description Loads and Load Combinations Acceptance Criteria
- Methods of Analysis Analysis Results I
The INTRODUCTION section contains an overview of the scope of the vent system evaluation, as well as a summary of the conclusions derived fr i the comprehen-sive evaluation of the vent system. The VENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS section contains a comprehensive discussion of j the vent system loads and load combinations and a I description of the vent system components affected by
! these loads. This section also contains a discussion O
COM- 02 -041-3 Revision 0 3-1.1 nutgsh
of the methodology used to evaluate the effects of these loads, the associated evaluation results, and the acceptance limits to which the results are compared.
O COM-02-041-3 O
Revision 0 3-1.2 Qdg,t m
[ 3-1.1 Scope of Analysis The criteria presented in Volume 1 are used as the basis for the Dresden Units 2 and 3 vent system evalua-tion. The modified vent system is evaluated for the effects of loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA)-related loads and safety relief valve (SRV) discharge-related loads defined by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Safety Evaluation Report NUREG-0661 (Reference 1) and the " Mark I Containment Program Load Definition Report" (LDR) (Reference 2).
The LOCA and SRV discharge loads used in this evalua-tion are formulated using the methodology discussed in Volume 1 of this report. The loads are developed using the plant unique geometry, operating parameters, and test results contained in the Plant Unique Load Definition (PULD) report (Reference 3). The effects of increased suppression pool temperatures which occur during SRV discharge events are also evaluated. These temperatures are taken from the plant's suppression pool temperature response analysis (Section 1-5.1).
Other loads and methodology, such as the evaluation for seismic loads, are taken from the plant's design specification (Reference 4).
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-1.3
! nutggb
The evaluation includes performing a structural anal-ysis of the vent system for the effects of LOCA-related and SRV discharge-related loads to confirm that the design of the vent system is adequate. Rigorous analytical techniques are used in this evaluation, including the use of detailed analytical models for computing the dynamic response of the vent system.
Effects such as local penetration and intersection flexibilities are also considered in the vent system analysis.
The results of the structural evaluation for each load case are used to evaluate load combinations and fatigue effects for the vent system in accordance with the
! " Mark I Containment Program Structural Acceptance Cri-teria Plant Unique Analysis Applications Guide" (PUAAG)
I (Reference 5). The analysis results are compared with 1
the acceptance limits specified by the PUAAG and the applicable sections of the American Society of Mechan-ical Engineers (ASME) Code (Reference 6).
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-1.4 nut E h.
3-1.2 Summary and Conclusions
(']
The evaluation documented in this volume is based on the modified Dresden Units 2 and 3 vent systems described in Section 1-2.1. The overall load-carrying capacity , of the modified vent system and its supports is substantially greater than the original design described in the plant's design specification.
The loads considered in the original design of the vent system and its supports include dead weight loads, operating basis and earthquake (OBE) design basis earthquake ( DBE) loads, thrust loads, and pressure and g temperature loads associated with normal operating con-s ditions (NOC) and a postulated LOCA event. The addi-tional loadings which affect the design of the vent system and supports are defined generically in NUREG-l 0661. These loads are postulated to occur during small break accident (SBA), intermediate break accident (IBA), or design basis accident (DBA) LOCA events and during SRV discharge events. These events result in impact and drag loads on vent system components above the suppression pool, in hydrodynamic internal pressure
, loadings on the vent system, in hydrodynamic drag loadings on the submerged vent system components, and in motion and reaction loadings caused by loads acting on structures attached to the vent system.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-1.5 nutggb
Section 1-4.0 discusses the methodology used to develop plant unique loadings for the vent system evaluation.
Applying this methodology results in conservative values for each of the significant loadings using NUREG-0661 criteria and envelop those postulated to occur during an actual LOCA or SRV discharge event.
The LOCA-related and SRV discharge-related loads are grouped into event combinations using the NUREG-0661 criteria discussed in Section 1-3.2. The event sequencing and event combinations specified and evaluated envelop the actual events postulated to occur throughout the life of the plant.
l l
The loads contained in the postulated event combina-9 tions which are major contributors to the total vent system response include pressurization and thrust loads, pool swell impact loads, condensation oscilla-tion (CO) downcomer loads, and chugging downcomer lateral loads. Although considered in the evaluation, other loadings, such as internal pressure loads, temperature 1 cads, seismic loads, froth impingement and fallback loads, submerged structure loads, and contain-ment motion and reaction loads, have a lesser effect on the total vent system response.
COM-02-041-3 O
Revision 0 3-1.6 nutp_qh
i
' The vent system evaluation is based on the NUREG-0661 acceptance criteria discussed in Section 1-3.2. These acceptance limits are at least as restrictive as those used in the original vent system design documented it, the plant's Safety Analysis Report (SAR) (Reference 7). Use of these criteria assures that the original vent system design margins have been restored.
The controlling event combinations for the vent system are those which include the loadings found to be major contributors to the vent system response. The evalua-tion results for these event combinations show that all of the vent system stresses and support reactions are
' ~'N -
$ within acceptable limits.
AL a result, the modified vent systems described in Section 1-2.1 have been shown to fulfill the margins of safety inherent in the original vent system design documented in the plant's safety analysis report. The NUREG-0661 requirements are therefore considered to be met.
O COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-1.7
VENT SYSlEM ANALYSIS
( 3-2.0 Evaluations of each of the NUREG-0661 requirements I
which affect the design adequacy of the Dresden Units 2 and 3 vent systems are presented in the following i
sections. The criteria used in this evaluation are contained in volume 1 of this report.
Section 3-2.1 describes the vent system components
, examined. Section 3-2.2 describes and presents the loads and load combinations for which the vent system is evaluated. The acceptance limits to which the analysis results are compared, discussed, and presented are in Section 3-2.3. Section 3-2.4 discusses the analysis methodology used to evaluate the effects of these loads and load combinations on the vent system.
Section 3-2.5 presents the analysis results and the corresponding vent system design margins.
O COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.1 nutgsb b
. - - - - - - - - . , _ ,-,----.,,.,c -
. , , , , , , , , ,3 _,y, .. , , , , - ..----c.---, ,,- .v---m.- --,-.,----,--.,,-+-,---9, --=
3-2.1 Component Description The Dresden Units 2 and 3 vent systems are constructed from cylindrical shell segments joined together to form a manifold-like structure connecting the drywell to the suppression chamber. Figures 3-2.1-1 and 3-2.1-2 show the configuration of the vent system. The major components of the vent system include the vent lines (VL), vent line-vent header (VL/VH) spherical junctions, vent header (VH), and downcomers (DC).
Figures 3-2.1-3 through 3-2.1-6 show the proximity of the vent system to other containment components.
The eight vent lines connect the drywell to the vent header in alternate mitered cylinders or bays of the suppression chamber. The vent lines are nominally 1/4" thick and have an inside diameter ( ID) of 6'9". The upper ends of the ver t lines include conical transition segments at the penetration to the drywell (Figure 3 -2 .1-7 ) . The drywell insert plate around each vent line-drywell (VL/DW) penetration is 2-1/4" thick, with a 3-5/8" thick cylindrical nozzle. The vent lines are shielded from jet impingement loads at each vent line-drywell penetration location by jet deflectors which span the openings of the vent lines. The drywell/ wet-well vacuum breakers are nominal 18" units. There are COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.2 nut.e_qh
two vacuum breakers in each vacuum breaker header.
V There are six vacuum breaker headers on the suppression chamber (Figure 3-2.1-17). The headers originate as a 30" outside diameter (OD) vertical penetration at the upper outside quadrant of six different vent line bays. This penetration is reinforced by a 1-1/2" thick insert plate at each location (Figure 3-2.1-18). The header then leaves the 30" penetration as two separate, horizontal 18" OD lines where the vacuum breakers are contained. After the two vacuum breakers, the two 18" OD lines come toge:her again into a 24" OD line. A 2 4" diameter bellows assembly immediately follows this 4
intersection. The header continues as a 24" diameter line from the bellows to the vent line-drywell (N
penetration. This 24" diameter vent line penetration is reinforced with a 33" diameter by 3/4" thick insert plate (Figure 3-2.1-18). The eight vent line-vent header spherical junctions connect the vent lines and the vent header (Figure 3-2.1-8). Each spherical junction is constructed from six shell segments, with thicknesses varying from 1/4" to 3/4". The spherical junctions all have a 1" diameter drain line extending i from the bottom of the spherical junction to below the pool surface. The drain lines are reinforced with a 4", Schedule 120 pipe sleeve that surrounds the drain l line. The sleeve is attached to a 1" thick pad plate, l
l f
\
\
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.3 l nutg.gb i
which is attached to the bottom of the spherical junction. The other end of the sleeve is attached to a 1/2" thick collar plate that keeps the drain line centered inside the sleeve (Figure 3-2.1-9).
The SRV piping is routed from the drywell through the vent line and penetrates the vent line inside the suppression chamber. Volume 5 of this report presents the analysis of the SRV piping and vent line penetration.
The vent header is a continuous assembly of mitered cylindrical shell segments joined together to form a ring header (Figure 3-2.1-1). The vent header is 1/4" thick and has an ID of 4'10".
Ninety-six downcomers penetrate the vent header in j pairs (Figures 3-2.1-1 and 3.2.1-10). Two downcomer pairs are located in each vent line bay (VB); four pairs are located in each non-vent line bay (NVB).
Each downcomer consists of an inclined segment which penetrates the vent header, and a vertical seament which terminates below the surface of the suppression pool (Figures 3-2.1-11 and 3-2.1-12). The inclined segment is 1/2" thick and the vertical segment is 1/4" l
l COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.4 nutp_qh
m thick. The inside diameters of the inclined and vertical portions of the downcomer are 2 '0".
Full penetration welds connect the vent lines to the drywell, the vent lines to the spherical junctions, the spherical junctions to the vent header, and the down-comers to the vent header. As such, the connections of the major vent system components are capable of developing the full capacity of the associated major components themselves.
] The intersections of the downcomers and the vent header are reinforced with a system of stiffener plates and bracing members (Figures 3-2.1-10, 3-2.1-11, and 3-2 .1- 12 ) . In the plane of the downcomer pairs, the intersections are stiffened by a pair of 1/2" stiffener plates located between each set of the downcomers and a pair of lateral bracing pipe members at the bottom of each set of two downcomers. The stiffener plates are l welded both to the tangent points of the downcomer legs and to the vent header. The lateral bracings are i
welded to the downcomer rings near the tangent points.
The system of stiffener plates is designed to reduce local intersection stresses caused by loads acting in the plane of the downcomers. The system of lateral COM-02-041-3 l
fN Revision 0 3-2.5 l
l nutg.ph
bracing ties the downcomer legs together in a pair; therefore, separation forces on the pair of downcomer legs will be taken as axial forces in the bracing.
In the direction normal to the plane of the downcomer pair, the downcomers are braced by a loncitudinal bracing system. In Dresden Unit 2 these bracings are located in those vent line bays which house the SRV discharge line, and which extend to midlength of the neighbocing non-vent bays (Figure 3-2.1-10). In this manner, 62 % of all the downcomers are braced longitudinally. However, in Dresden Unit 3 all 96 downcomers are braced long i tud inally. Figures 3-2.1-13 and 3-2,1-14 show the longitudinal bracing patterns for the two Dresden units. The ends of the horizontal pipe members near miter joints (MJ) and centerlines of the non-vent bays are welded to the downcomer rings. The 3" x 1" diagonal members and their adjacent horizontal pipe members are connected to lugs which are welded ta l the downcomers.
l This bracing system provides an additional load path for the transfer of loads acting on the submerged portion of the downcomers and results in reduced local stresses in the downcomer-vent header intersection regions. The system of downcomer-vent header inter-COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.6 nut h
i h section stiffener plates and lateral bracings provides V a redundant mechanism for the transfer of loads acting on the downcomers, thus reducing the magnitude of loads passing directly through the intersection. The longitudial bracing also ties together several pairs of downcomers in the longitudinal direction, causing an increase in stiffness to the overall system. This stiffness increase minimizes the dynamic effect of several loads, including SRV loads on submerged structures. It also.results in load sharing among the downcomers for SRV loads on submerged structures.
A bellows assembly is provided at the penetration of the vent line to the suppression chamber (Figure I
3-2.1-7). The bellows allows differential movement of j
the vent system and suppression chamber to occur without developing significant interaction loads. Each t bellows assembly consists of a stainless steel bellows unit connected to a 2-1/8" thick nozzle. The bellows unit has a 7'5" inside diameter and contains five convolutions which connect to a 1/2" thick cylindrical
, sleeve at the vent line end and a 1" thick cylindrical sleeve at the nozzle end. A 1-1/2" thick annular plate welded to the vent line connects to the upper end of the bellows assembly by full penetration welds. The lower end of the bellows assembly is a 2-1/8" thick COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.7 nutggb
nozzle, already described, which is connected to the suppression chamber shell insert plate by full penetra-tion welds. The overall length of the bellows assembly is 3 '2-3/4" .
Vent header . deflectors are provided in both the vent line bays and the non-vent line bays (Figures 3-2.1-6 and 3-2 .1-12 ) . The deflectors shield the vent header from pool swell impact loads which occur during the initial phase of a DBA event. The vent header deflectors are constructed from 20" diameter, Schedule 100 pipe. The vent header deflectors are supported by 1" thick connection plates that are welded to the vent header support collar plates near each miter joint.
The vent system is supported vertically by two column members at each miter joint location ( Figures 3-2.1-4, 3-2.1-15 and 3-2.1-16). The support column members are constructed from 6" diameter, Schedule 80 pipe. The upper ends of the support columns are connected to the 1" thick vent header support collar plates by 2-3/4" diameter pins. The support collar plates are attached to the vent header with 5/16" fillet welds. The sup-port column loads are transferred at the upper pin locations by 3/4" thick pin plates. The lower ends of support columns are attached to 1" thick ring girder COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.8 nutg,gh
- _ _ _ _._.. _ . _ ___.. - _ _ _ _. _ _ _ . ~ . . . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . .
4 L ;
! [
i pin pla'tes with 2-3/4" diameter pins and 3/4" thick pin 4
l plates. The support column assemblies are designed to l transfer . vertical loads acting cn the vent system to i 1
j- the suppression chamber ring - girders, while simultane-
{
ously resisting drag loads on submerged structures.
! t
! t i
The vent system is. supported horizontally by the vent ;
lines which transfet lateral loads acting on the vent system to the drywell at the vent line-drywell penetra-1 tion locations. The vent lines also provide additional
}-
vertical support for the vent system, although the vent i -
system support columns provide primary vertical sup-port. The support provided by the vent line bellows is negligible since the relative stiffness of the bellows with respect to other vent system components is small.
! The vent system also provides support for a portion of i
! the SRV piping' inside the vent line and suppression i
j chamber ( Figures 3-2.1-3 and 3-2.1-7) . Loads acting on j the SRV piping are transferred to the vent system by the penetration assembly and. internal supports on the ,
l i vent line. Conversely, loads acting on the vent system i
j cause motions ' to be transferred to the SRV piping at L i
! the same support locations. Since the relative l stiffness of the SRV discharge line is small with
, i j respect to other vent system components, the support f \
I COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.9
provided by the SRV discharge line to the vent system is negligible.
The overall load-carrying capacities of the vent system components described in the preceding paragraphs provide additional design margins for those components of the original vent system design described in the plant's safety analysis report.
O COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.10 Oi' i
1 nutp_qb
+
N
. ,- , s
,', [
'~
.- s.
1 - .
' ~
' 0* v
" ?
c
., s. _.
.s 30'-0" n ~
/ , ; ~
VENT LINE - -
PENETPATION , O Q N- '
~
I
/
N/ 54'-6" ' #, J ^
DRYEE '
'j' -90 270 4-4
/ '
SPHERICAL - p JUNCTION (f A<
O I
~
MITER JOINT
/
VENT /
SYSTEM s
g VENT HEADER '
+-
NON-VENT ' '
SUPPRESSION LINE BAY CHAMBER DOWNCOMER VENT LINE BAY i VENT LINE l (8 TYPICAL)
Figure 3 -2.1-1 PLAN VIEW OF CONTAINMENT COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.11 nutg,gh
( CONTAINMENT i
EL 589'-2 1/2" g.
18'-6" IR I
33'-0" IR DRYWELL SHIELD BUILDING I ' ~
11 0" DIA VENT LINE SPHERICAL \\ l**
l 34 54'20" JUNCTION BELLCWS
}4 SUPPRESSION CHAMBER ~
~;
P.
~ '
- EL 502'-4,_"
-EL soo'-o" #3
%- ' w, a y f f -yy eCWNCcMzR, j 1
, 4.* EL 4es'-4" 7
I!
-EL 476'-6" m .S p A- g ..*'.
tir i Figure 3-2.1-2 ELEVATION VIEW OF CONTAINMENT COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.12 nutp_qh
t MEA R O NTA NMENT g HEACER VENT VENT L*NE-VENT HEADER
( '
LI'8E
\
SPHERICAL JUNCTION '
BELLOWS ASSEM8LY 2'-4 1/2*
2'-5* IR ,
w
' s 0.585* THICK l WALL A8(flE VENT 6'-9* ID , -
{ SRV
' *HEACER LINE HORI!ONTAL (
, /*
\
l - - ".
y 13'07'40*
h .M e , DOWNCOMER 6'-0*
EL 494'-0* j , ,
0.653* THICK WALL BELOW i
/ *DOWNCOMER/
VENT SRV DISCHARGE gggg T TENER SRV LINE SUPPORT BEAM
(^g} CATW1.LK , ,
VENT HEADER e CEF12CTOR _
- THERMOWELL ECCS
- HEADER T-QUENCHER 1.ATERAL RESTRAINT T* QUENCHER SUPPORT BEAM Figure 3 -2.1-3 SUPPRESSION CHAMBER SECTION - MIDBAY VENT LINE BAY f
I
- k. COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.13 nutggh
O 1
54'-6' To (
VENT HEADER OF CONTAINMENT 12'-10 3/4" IR IN PLANE OF RING CIRDER 15'-0* IR PERPENDICULAR "
TO SUPPRESSION -
CHAMBER SHELL SPRAY HEADER HEACER 2'-5' IR CEFLECTOR CATWAI.K I _
SUPPRESSION VENT SYSTEM CHAMBER SHELL o o SUPPCRT COLUMN t ; D ,
, n j i p L r
r; l l ll EL 494'-0"
- s T-QUENCHER f.
SRV LINE
! SUPPORT ECCS HEADER BEAM / "/
P
. . s oUTSIcE INStet
, 'u- or COLUMN e, . .
g CCLUMN
, s
--.i I
EL 476'-6' - ,
f ly' l l_T-QUENCHER-RING GIRDER "M\
SACDLEj SUPPORT BEAM STIFFENERS Figure 3 -2.1-4 SUPPRESSION CHAMBER SECTION -
MITER JOINT COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.14 nutggh
O
~
SPRAY HEADER -
OF CONTAINMENT DOWNCCMER/ VENT HEADER STIFFENER CATWALK 2'-5" IR SUPPORT
- 6 ' -0 "
/
Y '
- , m- ,
\' ,
g' a , .
l 10'-l 1/2"
/
/ Y l /
DOWNCOMER ~
_ q e e t l 4 '-0" 4*-0" THERMOWELL 15'-C" IR VENT HEADER ,
DEFLECTOR
. DOWNCOMER LATERAL
' BRACING HEADER EL 476'-6" 5 1*I i
Figure 3-2.1-5' SUPPRESSION CHAMBER SECTION - MIDBAY NON-VENT LINE BAY COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.15 nutg,g.h
q MITER JOINT q VENT LINE BAY q MITER JOINT l l f
. RING GIRDER
-+- VENT LINE
] *+~
\p /
5 '- 6" IR SPHERICAL l JUNCTION l VENT HEADER r
l l N m
, 4 3
( ?
J
(
' r )-
l 0 -
_a em
' L' em
_ _0 T i SRV VENT] LIE DOWNCOMERS HEADER DEFLECTOR I
L -
- m N l l VENT SYSTEM DOWNCOMER SUPPORT COLUMN LONGITUDINAL BRACING RAMSHEAD T-QUENCHER ARM
,, l ,-f ,,
- + <>
.p- , .
, I !!= es mid e s eis u 6
- T-QUENCHER SUPPRESSION SUPPORT BEAM CHAMBER SHELL l8 y SADDLE SUPPORT
- 'A EL 476'-6"
' *;^=*\
/*. . .=.="' ...
l l
Figure 3-2.1-6 1
DEVELOPED VIEW OF SUPPRESSION CHAMBER SEGMENT COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.16 l
nutggjb l
l _ . _ _ . _ . _ . _
O 3 5/8" THICK CYLINDER NOZ2LE DRYWCLL VACUUM BREAKER ,,
SHELL IIEADER 3/4" INSERT PLATE VENT LINE (
BELLOWS JET DEFLECTOR 2 1/8" THICK NOZZLE ,
\
\ -
\
6'-9" ID %
% I j. ( SRV LINE N \
\ .
\
\ ;
g y 2 1/4" TilICK
\ ' INSERT PLATC
' ~
1/2" THICK TRANSITION j
' SEGMENT U*
1/4" THICK
, . VENT LINE 1/4" TIIICK 1 1/2" TIIICK VENT LINE ANNULAR PLATE 1 1/4" THICK INSERT PLATE Figure 3-2.1-7 VENT LINE DETAILS - UPPER END COM-02-041-3
. Revision 0 3-2.17 4
nutggh
O 6'-9" ID _
3/4" THICK i
5/8" THICK ; -I 5'-6" IR (TYP) a VENT 4'-10" HEADER q -
ID O
1/4" THICK 1/4" THICK Q VENT LINE Figure 3-2.1-8 VENT LINE-VENT HEADER SPHERICAL JUNCTIO" COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.18 nutp_qh
O VENT LINE SPHERICAL JUNCTION SHELL
\
% \
\
NN \\ w
\\\\ 1" THICK 1/4/ - \g\\ PAD PLATE
\\g\ g
\
5/16 [ gg\\
\\ gg 4" DIA
\\\g PIPE SLEEVE
\(\\\\\
\
g\ \ \
\\\ 1/2" THICK COLLAR PLATE
\\\
\
o \\ \
3/16/ \\
1" DIA DRAIN PIPE
\
Figure 3-2.1-9 VENT LINE SPHERICAL JUNCTION DRAIN COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.19 nutp_g),)
6 B}
% 1*r f*) f*H+t)
, . - . +._.4 4 44 44441 Ap I VENT LINE BAY \ ',
-NON-VENT LINE BAY PARTIAL PLAN VIEW OF SUPPRESSION CHAMBER
( VENT LINE q MITER q NON-VENT I BAY I JOINT l LINE BAY
- - -l- -
O# i , ,
) -
t VENT HEACER r3 (S r i
~ ~ #
- DOWNCOMER i s /
(TYP) /
l 1
^
-3" DIA PIPE VIEW A-A VIEW B-B (OPPOSITE HAND)
Figure 3-2.1-10 DEVELOPED VIEW OF DOWNCOMER LONGITUDINAL BRACING SYSTEM COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.20 nutp_gh
\
t VE::T aEA:E7 1/4 \ l 1/4 / g 1/4" 2'-$" IR
-10'-1 1/2*
LEG
/ _ DOWNCQME R 1/2* THICK DOWNCOMER-VENT HEACER ,
STIFTENER '
(4 ( 9 I
i - + -
\\ L 2* NCM 2'-0" ID
/ l t
i l l VENT I
l HEACER t,._ Ll' cErI.ECToa 120 ;
l l l l >
2'-0* ID m E -
- l! Q 4'-0 l-
\*DOWNCOMER e
l LATERAL asAC:NG j SYMMETRICAL ABOUT q CLEVATION VIEW 1/4* THICK 3" DIA PIPE RING PLATE \
/1/4 / i
{
W ,
/
.,. , c w IA SECTION A-A Figure 3-2.1-11 DOWNCOMER-TO-VENT HEADER INTERSECTION DETAILS -
DRESDEN UNIT 2 O- COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.21 nutggh
['/ENT MEACE?
1/4 k l 1/4 / g f<4*l 2'-5* IR 10'-1 1/2"
_ DCWNCOMER o i LEG f
1/2" THICK 45 DOWNCOMER- "
VENT HEACER ,
STIFrENER '
, y 'Qg \ 9" 1/2'
\ JL2" NCM i
- + *
\ 2'-0* 10 l VENT l
l l HEACER , ol cErLECToP i l37 i tf .. l l i I l l l ! -- - 2'-0* ID
! Ty o fI - g 4'-o* -
ecwNCcxER '
, LATE RA:.
g BRACING SYMMETRICAL ABOUT {
ELEVATION VIEW 1/4" THICK 3" PIPE al'G PLATE 3* DIA PIPE i
- M 3@ h g(Gh g
/TYP 2 1/2" DIA l/ 4 k, \ PIPE SECTION A-A Figure 3-2.1-12 DOWNCOMER-TO-VENT HEADER INTERSECTION DETAILS -
DRESDEN UNIT 3 COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.22 nut.p_qh-
0 l C'
SUPPRESSION CHAM 8tR LONGITUDINAI.
DRACING (TYP
, , p to HALF SAYS)
\ //
T. QUENCHER ,
DEVICE (TYP 5 8AYS) s f
, g #
g SRV ' I LINE SUPPRESSION g,-6*
0 ~
270 OO O O - '
O Os, O I l'-l 13/16*
(TYP) w .'
O O
o / 1 VE"Y '*** ***
0 0 0 0 O -q sRv W O O O O O O 00 0 0
00 00 cowNCOMER (TYP) l 180' Figure 3 -2.1- 13 i
~
DOWNCOMER LONGITUDINAL BRACING SYSTEM CONFIGURATION DRESDEN UNIT 2 COM -0 2 -0 41-3 Revision 0 nutggb
O k 0*
a o
/
{ VENT LINE
, BAY q SRV LINE
~ \
b -
SUPPR g7ypg C m .ES.$10N \
E ts '
54'-6*
0 270 - ; y - -90*
' \
E i DOWNCOMER l
I LONGITUDINAL l T-QUENCHLR , . '", BRACING (TYP l DEVICE ,' '. 16 HALF BAYS) l
\ s, ,-
SUPPRES$10N CHAMBER DOWNCOMER a (TYP) l l
l l
Figure 3-2.1- 14
! DOWNCOMER LONGITUDINAL BRACING SYSTEM CONFIGURATION -
DRESDEN UNIT 3 COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.24 nut E h.
O !
( VENT HEADER 5/16N 1" THICK 5/161/ COLLAR PLATE i
1 0
- I SECTION THROUGH VENT HEADER SUPPORT COLLAR I
Figure 3-2.1-15 VENT HEADER SUPPORT COLLAR PLATE DETAILS COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.25 nutggb
3/4" THICK I I PIN PLATE (TYP) - l " "
5"
-(TYP) f "
[Q),-j T .
i o
dL I i 6" DIA P E m'V a / b'a m
v
__ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ g i I Y
-15'-9" D . .
l l Figure 3-2.1-16 VENT SYSTEM SUPPORT COLUMN DETAILS COM-02-041-3 -
Revision 0 3-2.26 nutgqh
l
\
0* 22*30' 0 I 337 30' /
\
e
\
\
292'30's ,67'30'
. _ . 4 \ /
~
270* - h - 90*
/
~, \ -
247'30 '112 030' I \
/ \
202*30' 157* 30' 180*
Figure 3-2.1-17 VACUUM BREAKER LOCATIONS
\,' COM-02-041-3 3-2.27 Revision 0 nutggh
( VACUUM BREAKER-SCPPRI5SION CHAMBER INSERT 9'-0* TO q CT SUPPRESSICN CHAMBER I
( ( /) q,VACOUM BREAKER HEADER 16'-6* TO q .0 CF SUPPRESSICN CHAMBER r
1* THICK 4'-10 1/2*
ARC LINCTH 1 1/2* THICK l INSERT PLATE 0.585* THICK SUPPRESSION CHAMBER SHELL SUPPRESSION CHAMBER PENETRATION 18'-4 5/16" TO q OF SUPPRESSION CHAMBER 9 1/4" (TYP) l 33' DIA,
\ 3/4* THICK 1/2" THICK
{ INSERT PLATE
{
1/4" THICK VENT LINE #
% 13*07'40" (TYP)
./'I !ni 1 \
t vRCUUM sREAxER-VENT LINE INSERT VENT LINE PENETRATION Figure 3 -2.1-18 7ACUUM BREAKER HEADER PENETRATION DETAILS l COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.28 nutgq. h
3-2,2 Loads and Load Combinations The loads for which the Dresden Units 2 and 3 vent systems are evaluated are defined in NUREG-0661 on a generic basis for all Mark I plants. Section 1-4.0 discusses the methodology used to develop plant unique vent system loads for each load defined in NUREG-0661.
The results of applying the methodology to develop ;
specific values for each of the governing loads which act on the vent system are discussed and presented in Section 3-2.2.1.
Using the event combinations and event sequencing defined in NUREG-0661 and discussed in Sections 1-3.2
\,
and 1-4.3, the controlling load combinations which affect the vent system are formulated. The controlling vent system load combinations are discussed and pre-sented in Section 3-2.2.2.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.29 nutagh
3-2.2.1 Loads The loads acting on the vent system are categorized as follows:
- 1. Dead Weight Loads
- 2. Seismic Loads
- 3. Pressure and Temperature Loads
- 4. Vent System Discharge Loads
- 5. Pool Swell Loads
- 6. Condensation Oscillation Loads
- 7. Chugging Loads
- 8. Safety Relief Valve Discharge Loads
- 9. Piping Reaction Loads
- 10. Containment Interaction Loads Loads in Categories 1 through 3 were considered in the original containment design as documented in the plant's containment data specifications (References 8 l
and 9). Additional Category 3 pressure and temperature loads result from postulated LOCA and SRV discharge events. Loads in Categories 4 through 7 result from postulated LOCA events; loads in Category 8 result from SRV discharge events; loads in Category 9 ere reactions which result from loads acting on SRV piping systems; loads in Category 10 are motions which result from loads acting on other containment-related structures.
COM-02-041-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.30 nutagh
O Not all of the loads defined in NUREG-0661 are evaluated in detail since some are enveloped by others or have a negligible effect on the vent system. Only those loads which maximize the vent system response and lead to controlling stresses are fully evaluated and discussed. These loads are referred to as governing loads in subsequent discussions.
Table 3-2.2-1 shows the specific vent system components affected by each of the loadings defined in NUREG-0661.
The tab.e also lists the section in Volume 1 in which the methodology for developing values for each loading is discussed. The magnitudes and characteristics of each governing vent system load in each load category are identified and presented in the following para-graphs.
- 1. Dead Weight Loads
- a. Dead Weight of Steel: The weight of steel used to construct the modified vent system and its supports is considered. The nominal component dimensions and a density of steel of 490 lb/ft3 are used in this calculation.
i v COM-02-041-3 a
~ Revision 0 3-2.31 n
- 2. Seismic Loads
- a. OBE Loads: The vent system is subjected to horizontal and vertical accelerations during an operating basis earthquake (OBE). This loading is taken from the original design basis for the containment documented in the plant's design specification. The OBE loads have a maximum horizontal acceleration of 0.25g and a maximun vertical acceleration of 0.067g.
- b. SSE Loads: The vent system is subjected to horizontal and vertical accelerations during a safe shutdown earthquake (SSE). This load-ing is taken from the original design basis for the containment documented in the plant's SAR, termed a DBE (Reference 4). The SSE loads have a maximum horizontal acceleration of 0.50g and a maximum vertical acceleration of 0.134g.
- 3. Pressure and Temperature Loads
- a. Normal Operating Internal Pressure Loads:
The vent system is subjected to internal pressure loads during normal operating conditions. This loading is taken f rom - the COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.32 nutg_ch E 5tS
l l
original design basis for the containment documented in the plants' containment data l l
specifications (References 8 and 9). The range of normal operating internal pressures specified is -0.2 to 1.0 psi.
- b. LOCA Internal Pressure Loads: The vent system is subjected to internal pressure loads during a SBA, an IBA- and a DBA event. The procedure used to develop LOCA internal pressures for the containment is discussed in Section 1-4.1.1. Figures 3-2.2-1 through 3-2.2-3 present the resulting vent system internal pressure transients and pressure magnitudes at key times during the SBA, IBA, and DBA events.
The vent system internal pressures for each event are conservatively assumed equal to the corresponding drywell internal pressures; reductions due to losses are negligible. The f net internal pressures acting on the vent system components inside the suppression l chamber are extracted as the difference in pressures between the vent system and suppression chamber.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.33 nutgq, b
The pressures specified are assumea to act uniformly over the vent line, vent header, and downcomer shell surfaces. The external or secondary containment pressure for the vent system components outside the suppres-sion chamber for all events is assumed to be zero. The effects of internal pressure on the vent system for the DBA event are included in the pressurization and thrust loads discussed in Load Case 4a.
- c. Normal Operating Temperature Loads: The vent system is subjected to the thermal expansion loads associated with normal operating conditions. This loading is taken from the original design basis for the containment documented in the plant's containment data specifications (References 8 and 9). The range of normal operating temperatures for the vent system with a concurrent SRV dis-charge event is 70' to 131*r (Table 3-2.2-2).
Additional normal operating temperatures for the vent system inside the suppression chamber are taken from the suppression pool COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.34 nutggj)
temperature response analysis (Reference 10). Table 3-2.2-2 provides a summary of the resulting vent system temperatures.
- d. LOCA Temperature Loads: The vent system is subjected to thermal expansion loads associ-ated with the SBA, IBA, and DBA events. The procedure used to develop LOCA containment temperatures is discussed in Section 1-4.1.1.
Figures 3-2.2-4 through 3-2.2-6 present the resulting vent system temperature transients and . temperature magnitudes at key times during the SBA, IBA, and DBA events.
(V Additional vent system SBA event temperatures are taken from the suppression pool tempera-ture response analysis. Table 3-2.2-2 summarizes the resulting vent system tempera-tures. The greater of the temperatures specified in Figure 3-2.2-4 and Table 3-2.2-2 is used in evaluating the effects of SBA i
event temperatures.
The temperatures of the major vent system components, such as the vent line, vent header, spherical junction, and downcomers, 1
O V
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.35 nutggb
are conservatively assumed equal to the corre spond ing drywell temperatures for the IBA and DBA events. For the SBA event, the temperature of the major vent system com-ponents is assumad equal to the maximum saturation tempera ture of the drywell, which l
is 2 73
- F.
The temperatures of the external vent system i
! components, such as the support columns, vent I
l header support collars, downcomer lateral l
1 bracings, downcomer longitudinal bracings, vent header deflectors, and downcomer rings and downcomer stiffener plates, are assumed equal to the corresponding suppression chamber temperatures for each event.
. The temperatures specified are assumed to be representative of the major component and 1
external component metal temperatures throughout the vent system. The ambient or l
initial temperature of the vent system for all events is assumed equal to the arithmetic mean of the minimum and maximum vent system operating temperatures.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.36 nutp_gh
- 4. Vent System Discharge Loads
- a. Pressurization and Thrust Loads: The vent system is subjected to dynamic pressurization and thrust loads during a DBA event. The prccedure used to develop vent system reaction loads due to pressure imbalances and to changes in linear momentum is discussed in Section 1 - 4 .1. 2 . Table 3-2.2-3 shows the resulting maximum forces for each' of the major component unreacted areas at key times during the DBA event.
The vent system discharge loads shown include p the effects of the zero drywell/wetwell and the operating drywell/wetwell pressure differential. The vent system discharge loads specified for the DBA event include the i effects of DBA internal pressure loads discussed in Load Case 3a. The vent system discharge loads which occur during the SBA or IBA events are negligible.
l l
- 5. Pool Swell-Related Loads
- a. Vent System Impact and Drag Loads: During the initial phase of a DBA event, transient impact and drag pressures are postulated to l / COM-02-041-3 l Revision 0 3-2.37 nutggb
act on major vent system components above the suppression pool. The major components affected are the vent line inside the suppression chamber below the maximum bulk pool height, the spherical junction, the unprotected vent header, and the inclined portion of the downcomers. The major part of the vent header is shielded by the vent header deflectors and receives a relatively small amount of the pool swell impact and drag loads. The loads are developed based on the operating drywell/wetwell pressure differential condition except those applied to the vent header deflectors. These loads are defined in the plant's PULD for a zero drywell/wetwell pressure differential cond i-tion. Multiplication factors are developed to adjust operating t.P condition loads to the zero drywell/wetwell pressure differential condition.
The procedure used to develop the transient forces and the spatial distribution of pool swell impact loads on these components is discussed in Section 1-4.1.4. Table 3-2.2-4 and Figures 3-2.2-7 and 3-2.2-8 summarize the COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.38 nu b
resulting magnitudes and distribution of pool swell impact loads on the vent line, the unprotected portion of the vent header, the spherical junction, downcomers, and the vent .
header deflector. The results shown are based on plant unique Quarter-Scale Test Facility (OSTF) test data contained in the PULD (Reference 3) and include the effects of s the main vent orifice tests. Pool swell loads are considered negligible during the SBA and IBA events.
1
- b. Pool Swell Drag Loads on Other Structures:
During the initial phase of a DBA event, I transient drag pressures are postulated to i
act on submerged components of the vent system. The components affected are the downcomer longitudinal bracing members, and the SRV piping and supports.
The procedure used to develop the transient forces and the spatial distribution of pool swell drag loads on these components is discussed in Section 1-4.1.4. Table 3-2.2-5 and Figure 3-2.2-9 summarize the resulting COM-02-041-3
[
\
Revision 0 3-2.39 nutggb
magnitudes and distribution of pool swell drag pressures on the downcomer longitudinal bracing. The pool swell drag loads on the SRV piping and supports located beneath the level of the vent line are presented in Volume 5 of this report. The results shown are based on plant unique QSTF test data contained in th~e PULD, which are used to determine the impact velocities and arrival times. Pool swell loads are considered negligible during the SBA and IBA events.
- c. Froth Impingement and Fallback Loads: During the initial phase of a DBA event, transient impingement pressures are postulated to act on vent system components located in spec-ified regions above the rising suppression pool. The impacted components located in Region I include the vent line and the vent header. The impacted components located in Region II include the spherical junction and the vent line.
I COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.40 l
nutggj)
The procedure used to develop the transient O forces and -spatial distribution of froth impingement and fallback loads on these com-ponents is discussed in Section 1-4.1.4.
. Froth impingement and fallback loads do not occur during the SBA and IBA events.
4
- d. Pool Fallback Loads: During the later por-4 tion of the pool swell event, transient drag pressures are postulated to act on selected vent system components located between the maximum bulk pool height and the downcomer exit. The components affected are the vacuum breaker, the downcomer rings, the downcomer lateral bracings, the downcomer longitudinal bracing, and the SRV piping and supports I located beneath the level of the vent line.
The procedure used to develop transient drag pressures and spatial distribution of pool fallback loads on these components is dis-f cussed in Section 1-4.1.4.
{
l l
Table 3-2.2-5 summarizes the resulting magni-i tudes and distribution of pool fallback loads l on the downcomer rings, the downcomer lateral l
l bracings, and the downcomer longitudinal l
l COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.41 nuteq, h
bracing members. The pool fallback loads on the SRV piping and supports located beneath the level of the vent line are presented in Volume 5 of this report. The results shown include the effects of maximum pool displace-ments measured in plant unique OSTF tests.
Pool fallback loads do not occur during the SBA and IBA events,
- e. LOCA Water Jet Loads: Water jet loads are postulated to act on the submerged vent system components during the water clearing phase of a DBA event. The components affected are the vent system support columns.
The procedure used to develop the transient forces and spatial distribution of LOCA water clearing loads on these components is discussed in Section 1-4.1.5. Table 3-2.2-6 shows the resulting magnitudes and distribu-tion of LOCA water jet loads acting on the support columns.
- f. LOCA Bubble-Induced Loads: Transient drag pressures are postulated to act on the submerged vent system components during the air clearing phase of a DBA event. The COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.42 nutggh
("] components affected are the downcomers, the downcomer lateral bracings, the downcomer rings, the downcomer longitudinal bracing members, the support columns, and the sub-merged portion of the SRV piping. The proce-dure used to develop the transient forces and spatial distribution of DBA air bubble-induced drag loads on these components is discussed in Section 1-4.1.6.
Tables 3-2.2-6, 3-2.2-7, and 3-2.2-8 show the resulting magnitudes and distribution of drag pressures acting on the vent system support columns, the downcomers, the downcomer
, lateral bracings, the downcomer rings, and the downcomer longitudinal bracing members
, for the controlling DBA air clearing load case. The controlling DBA air clearing loads on the submerged portion of the SRV piping are presented in Volume 5 of this report.
The results shown include the effects of velocity drag, acceleration drag, and inter-ference effects. The LOCA air bubble-induced drag loads which occur during a SBA or an IBA event are negligible.
l i
i l e COM-02-041-3 Y Revision 0 3-2.43 nutggb
- 6. Condensation Oscillation Loads
- a. IBA CO Downcomer Loads: Harmonic interna' pressure loads are postulated to act on the downcomers during the CO phase of an IBA event. The procedure used to develop the harmoric pressures and ' spatial distribution of IBA CO downcomer loads is discussed in Section 1-4.1.7. The loading consists of a uniform internal pressure component acting on all downcomers and a differential internal pressure component acting on one downcomer in a downcomer pair. Table 3-2.2-9 shows the resulting pressure amplitudes and associated frequency range for each of the three harmonics in the IBA CO downcomer loading.
Figure 3-2.2-10 shows the corresponding dis-tribution of differential downcomer internal pressure loadings.
The IBA CO downcomer load harmonic in the range of the dominant downcomer frequency for the uniform and the differential pressure components is applied at the dominant downcomer frequency. The remaining two downcomer load harmonics are applied at COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.44 nut _ec_h
=--
p frequencies which are multiples of _the l V dominant frequency. The results of the three harmonics for the uniform and differential IBA CO downcomer load components are combined by absolute sum.
- b. DBA CO Downcomer Loads: Harmonic internal pressure loads are postulated to act on the downcomers during the CO phase of a DBA event. The procedure used to develop the harmonic pressures and spatial distribution of DBA CO downcomer loads is the same as that discussed for IBA CO downcomer loads in Load Case 6a. Table 3-2.2-10 shows the resulting
( pressure amplitudes and associated frequency range for each of the three harmonics in the DBA CO downcomer loading. Figure 3-2.2-10 shows the corresponding distribution of differential downcomer internal pressure loadings.
- c. IBA CO Vent System Pressure Loads: Harmonic i
internal pressure loads are postulated to act on the vent system during the CO phase of an IBA event. The components affected are the vent line, the spherical junction, the vent COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.45 nutggh
header, and the downcomers. The procedure used to develop the harmonic pressures and the spatial distribution of IBA CO vent system pressures is discussed in Section 1-4.1.7. Table 3-2.2-11 shows the resulting pressure amplitudes and associated frequency range for the vent line and vent header. The loading is applied at the frequency within a specified range which maximizes the vent system response.
The effects of IBA CO vent system pressures on the downcomers are included in the IBA CO downcomer loads discussed in Load Case 6a.
An additional static internal pressure of 1.7 psi is applied uniformly to the vent line, vent header, and downcomers to account for the effects of downcomer submergence. The IBA CO vent system pressures act in conjunction with the IBA containment internal pressures discussed in Load Case 3a.
- d. DBA CO Vent System Pressure Loads: Harmonic internal pressure loads are postulated to act on the vent system during the CO phase of a DBA event. The components affected are the COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.46 nutechENGINEERS
l I
Iq \
vent line, the spherical junction, the vent b header, and downcomers. The procedure used to develop the . harmonic pressures and the spatial distribution of the DBA CO vent system pressures is the same as that dis-cussed for the IBA in Load Case 6c. Table 3-2.2-11 shows the resulting pressure amplitudes and associated frequency range for the vent line and vent header. The effects of DBA CO vent system pressures on the down-c comers are included in the DBA CO downcomer loads discussed in Load Case 6b. The DBA CO vent system pressures act in addition to the DBA vent system pressurization and thrust
, loads discussed in Load Case 4a.
- e. IBA CO Submerged Structure Loads: Harmonic pressure loads are postulated to act on the submerged vent system components during the CO phase of an IBA event. In accordance with NUREG-0661, the loads on submerged structures specified for pre-chug are used in lieu of IBA CO loads on submerged structures. Pre-i chug submerged structure loads are discussed in Load Case 7c.
i i
b COM-02-041-3
, V Revision 0 3-2.47 i
- 11Utg,feb
- f. DBA CO Submerged Structure Loads: Harmonic drag pressures are postulated to act on the submerged vent system components during the CO phase of a DBA event. The components affected are the downcomer lateral bracings, the downcomer rings, the downcomer longi-tudinal bracing members, the support columns, and the submerged portions of the SRV piping. The procedure used to develop the harmonic forces and spatial distribution of DBA CO drag loads on these components is discussed in Section 1-4.1.7.
Loads are developed for the case with the average source strength at all downcomers and the case with twice the average source l
strength at the nearest downcomer. The results of these two cases are evaluated to determine the controlling loads.
Tables 3-2.2-12 and 3-2.2-13 show the result-l ing magnitudes and distribution of drag l
l pressures acting on the support columns, the downcomer lateral bracings, the downcomer rings, and the downcomer longitudinal bracing COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.48 nuteJ'ERS E
h
] members for the controlling DBA CO drag load case. The controlling DBA CO drag loads on the submerged portion of the SRV piping are presented in Volume 5 of this report. The effects of DBA CO submerged structure loads on the downcomers are included in the loads discussed in Load Case 6b.
The results in Tables 3-2.2-12 and 3-2.2-13 include the effects of velocity drag, accel-eration drag, torus shell FSI acceleration drag, interference effects, and acceleration
- drag volumes. Figure 3-2.2-11 shows a typi-cal pool acceleration profile from which the FSI accelerations are derived. The results of each harmonic in the loading are combined using the methodology discussed in Section 1-4.1.7.
- 7. Chugging Loads
- a. Chugging Downcomer Lateral Loads: Lateral loads are postulated to act on the downcomers during the chugging phase of a SBA, an IBA, and a DBA event. The procedure used to 4
develop chugging downcomer lateral loads is discussed in Section 1-4.1.8. The maximum i COM-02-041-3
[ Revision 0 3-2.49
! nutggh
_..,._.-,__,,,,,_...._,.__,..__.y.,_ . - . . , , _ , . , _ _ _ . . _ _ . . . . _ . . _ . _ . - , . - _ . - _ _ , _ - , _ _ . . . . , _ _ . - _ . , , _ , , . _ _ , . _ . , , . . , _ . , . - , . _ . , _ - - . . _ . , ..._r...-,
lateral load acting on any one downcomer in any direction is obtained using the maximum downcomer lateral load and chugging pulse duration measured at the Full-Scale Test Facility (FSTF), the frequency of the tied downcomers for the FSTF, and the plant unique downcomer frequency calculated .for both longitudinally braced and unbraced conditions. Table 3-2.2-14 summarizes this information. The resulting ratios of Dresden Units 2 and 3 to the FSTF dynamic load factors ( DLF) are used in subsequent calcula-tions to determine the magnitude of multiple downcomer loads and to determine the load magnitude used for evaluating fatigue.
Section 3-2.4.1 discusses the methodology used to determine the plant unique downcomer frequency.
1 The magnitude of chugging lateral loads act-ing on multiple downcomers simultaneously is determined using the methodology described in l
Section 1-4.1.8. The methodology uses the value of 10-4 as the probability of exceeding a given downcomer load magnitude once per LOCA. The chugging load magnitudes (Table COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.50 l nutechENG4NILERS
3-2.2-15) are determined using the above eO value of non-exceedance probability (NEP) and the ratio of the DLF's from the maximum down-comer load calculation. The distributions of chugging downcomer lateral loads considered are those cases which maximize overall effects in the vent system. Table 3-2.2-16 summarizes these distributions. The maximum ,
downcomer lateral load magnitude used for evaluating the local ef fect on the downcomer-vent header intersection is obtained using both the maximum downcomer lateral load measured at the FSTP and the ratio of DLF's
% from the maximum downcomer load calculation.
V)
The maximum downcomer lateral load magnitude used for evaluating fatigue is obtained using both the maximum downcomer lateral load mea-sured at the FSTF with a 95% NEP and the ratio of DLF's from maximum downcomer load calculations. The stress reversal histograms provided for FSTF are converted to plant unique stress reversal histograms using the postulated plant unique chugging duration (Table 3-2.2-17).
( COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.51 nutg_qh
- b. Chugging Vent System Pressures: Transient and harmonic internal pressures are postulated to act on the vent system during the chugging phase of a SBA, an IBA, and a DBA event. The components affected are the vent line, the spherical junction, the vent header, and the downcomers. The procedure used to develop chugging vent system pressures is discussed in section 1-4.1.8.
The load consists of a gross vent system pressure oscillation component, an acoustic vent system pressure oscillation component, and an acoustic downcomer pressure oscilla-tion component. Table 3-2.2-18 shows the resulting pressure magnitudes and character-istics of the chugging vent system pressure l
( loading. The three load components are i
evaluated individually and are not combined with each other.
l The overall effects of chugging vent system pressures on the downcomers are included in the loads discussed in Load Case 7a. The l downcomer pressures (Table 3-2.2-18) are used to evaluate downcomer hoop stresses. The chugging vent system pressures act in l
l COM-02-041-3 l Revision 0 3-2.52 l
l nut.e_c_h
1 3.
addition to the SBA and IBA containment t
N internal pressures discussed in Load Case 3a and the DBA pressurization and thrust loads discussed in Load Case 4a.
- c. Pre-Chug Submerged Structure Loads: During 4 the chugging phase of a SBA, an IBA, or a DBA event, harmonic drag pressures associated with the pre-chug portion of a chugging cycle are postulated to act on the submerged vent 4
system components. The components affected are the downcomer lateral bracings, the downcomer rings, the downcomer longitudinal bracing members, the support columns, and the submerged portion of the SRV piping. The procedure used to develop the harmonic forces and spatial distribution of pre-chug drag loads on these components is discussed in l
Section 1-4.1.8.
Loads are developed for the case with the
- average source strength at all downcomers and the case with twice the average source strength at the nearest downcomer. The results of these two cases are evaluated to determine the controlling loads. Tables O COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.53 1
nutggh
3-2.2-19 and 3-2.2-20 show the resulting magnitudes and distribution of drag pressures acting on the support columns, the downcomer lateral bracings, the downcomer rings, and the downcomer longitudinal bracing members for the controlling pre-chug drag load case.
The controlling pre-chug drag loads on the submerged portion of the SRV piping are presented in Volume 5 of this report. The effects of pre-chug submerged structure loads on the downcomers are included in the loads discussed in Load Case 7a.
The results shown include the effects of velocity drag, acceleration drag, torus shell fluid-structure interaction (FSI) accelera-tion drag, interference effects, and acceleration drag volumes. Figure 3-2.2-11 shows a typical pool acceleration profile from which the FSI accelerations are derived,
- d. Pos t-Chug Submerged Structure Loads: During the chugging phase of a SBA, an IBA, or a DBA event, harmonic drag pressures associated with the post-chug portion of a chug cycle are postulated to act on the submerged vent COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.54 nut.ech
system components. The components affected N- are the downcomer lateral bracings, the downcomer rings, the downcomer longitudinal bracing members, the support columns, and the submerged portion of the SRV piping. Section 1-4.1.8 discusses the procedure used to develop the harmonic forces and spatial dis-tribution of post-chug drag loads on these components.
Loads are developed for the cases with the maximum source strength at the nearest two
, , downcomers acting both in phase and out of phase. The results of these cases are evalu-ated to determine the controlling loads.
Tables 3-2.2-21 and 3-2.2-22 shows the resulting magnitudes and distribution of drag pressures acting on the support columns, the downcomer lateral bracings, the downcomer rings, and the downcomer longitudinal bracing members for the controlling post-chug drag j load case. The controlling post-chug drag i
l loads on the submerged portion of the SRV
- piping are presented in volume 5 of this report. The effects of post-chug submerged structure loads acting on the downcomers are
( -
'A COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.55 nutggh
included in the chugging downcomer lateral loads discussed in Load Case 7a.
The results shown include the effects of velocity drag, acceleration drag, torus shell FSI acceleration drag, interference effects, and acceleration drag volumes. Figure 3-2.2-11 shows a typical pool acceleration profile from which the FSI accelerations are derived. The results of each harmonic are combined using the methodology described in Section 1-4.1.8.
- 8. Safety Relief Valve Discharge Loads
- a. T-quencher Water Jet Loads: Water jet loads from the quencher arm holes are postulated to act on the submerged vent system components during the water clearing phase of a SRV discharge event. The quencher water jet does not reach the downcomer and the downcomer bracings. The componer.ts affected are the vent system support columns. The procedure used to develop the transient forces and spatial distribution of the SRV discharge water jet loads on these components is dis-cussed in Section 1-4.2.4. Table 3-2.2-23 COM-0 2-0 41- 3 Revision 0 3-2.56 nutech ENGINEERS
O provides the resulting magnitudes and distri-bution of SRV water jet loads acting on the support columns.
- b. SRV Bubble-Induced Drag Loads: Transient drag pressures are postulated to act on the submerged vent system components during the air clearing phase of a SRV discharge event. The components affected are the downcomers, the downcomer lateral bracings, the downcomer rings, the downcomer longi-tudinal bracing members, support columns, and the submerged portion of the SRV piping. The procedure used to develop the transient forces and spatial distribution of the SRV discharge air bubble-induced drag loads on these components is discussed in Section 1-4.2.4.
Loads are developed for the case with four bubbles from quenchers located in the bay containing the structure or in either of the adjacent bays. A calibration factor is applied to the resulting downcomer loads
! developed using the methodology discussed in Section 1-4.2.2. Tables 3-2.2-23, 3-2.2-24, 4 V COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 -
3-2.57 nutg_qh
and 3-2.2-25 show the magnitudes and distri-bution of drag pressures acting on the support columns, the downcomers, the down-comer lateral bracings, the downcomer rings, and the downcomer losigitudinal bracings for the controlling SRV discharge drag load case.
These results include the effects of velocity drag, acceleration drag, interference effects, and acceleration drag volumes.
- 9. Piping Reaction Loads
- a. SRV Piping Reaction Loads: Reaction loads impact the vent system because of loads acting on the drywell and wetwell SRV piping systems. These reaction loads occur at the vent line-SRV piping penetration and at the safety relief valve discharge line (SRVDL) supports inside the vent line. The SRV piping reaction loads consist of those caused by motions of the suppression chamber and loads acting on the drywell and wetwell portions of the SRV piping systems. Loads acting on the SRV piping systems are pressur-ization loads, thrust loads, and other operating or design basis loads.
COM-0 2-0 41- 3 Revision 0 3-2.58 nutesERS EA h
l l
The effects of the SRV piping reaction loads on the vent system are included in the vent system analysis. 'These reaction loads were taken from the analysis of the SRV piping
. system described in Volume 5 of this report.
- 10. Containment Interaction Loads
- a. Containment Structure Motions: Loads acting on the drywell, suppression chamber, and vent system cause interaction effects between these structures. The interaction effects result in vent system motions applied at the attachment points of the vent system to the drywell and the suppression chamber. The effects of these motions on the vent system are considered in the vent system analysis.
The values of the loads - presented in the preceding paragraphs envelop those which could occur during the LOCA and SRV discharge events postulated. An evalua-tion for the effects of the above loads results in conservative estimates of the vent system responses and leads to bounding. values of vent system stresses.
i
[
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.59 L
nutaq,h
i i i .i, .: : . i
- ! i O
i- ,
l I rn..Iiidl g:3 - - I l4l 3
tl s- !s iii;iO!al=:
>c! ".= = ; ;=ja , e. :
!s s i;
- - n; i
=
i
.- !s ! =.=' i s;<;i e 'E _"! .1 :l 1 l:
.;g 4
g: u.
n;j;i_
3l 1
- s: .
i s ,s : t
- 1>
.1 5's :a : :
- . i e
_3
- s. >:
a 5
g:a :lgie;:c : : :: :! sg :: 3 , g: ;:_:s 3, >s s*
!, , g
- i :. -
s
. .. . . g,24-m:sjs s
.pisl, . ! s :
s a s
.. .:e _s .:. .'d si
- giss a:: e : -3 ser,g:sfst :
l-lt1:..; n- :r
! =
. ,; =.1 -: !.:. .ii e ..
.:.-lls;s's
-l r;_: E !
> a e .
=
aa . 2
- c.s ..: : : 2 at ti
. 2 E ! ; *; l ; a ' :e i:;-e.
ftul: ! E;a 1 :ni s.s i 5 ll$~5? l-i 1 ; !-l i I II l-l-l ! 1 I i-i-! ; !-i-l--ll-M CalI;Vit t .
- -- - - - - - se
.c .m2- I
. um iE o,
8 "2" g ,m .m
-l-l l I"l-l l l l l.= l l-l l l l l-l-l l l-l ,l ',-l i l z
- : "O" -l=1-1-1 1-l l=l-l i I I l-1-1 1 Ii l l I-l 1 I i-l 1 e
i m.m
'2:!" "l-!=l l I"l-l l=I l l l l l l l l l llllIl1 ll
~
o i
m
'50" -l-l-I-I-lal-l-l ! l I I I I I l-l l i l l-i : I I i-l I
o 5
a mazu
~ ~^
-l-l-l-l-l-l- -ll-lllllllll . llll ll W 4 iTJL -l-1-1-1-l-I l i I l l l l l l l i i l I I I I Ii l l-A 8 z "U -l -l -I -l l - l -I-I I II I I i 1-1 l i I l-1 i iI i- l
-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l l l l l ' ,,l l l-l-l l ll-l lll ll-o EQ
~ -1Nd.mku I i
~ , , , , , , .
a - - , 3 , . . .
m 2 .!8 --
,,;;,,,,,,- . .. . ;; , ~.
E4 x it: ; ; ; ; ; 7 ; ; - - - -
- ; - - - - - - - - 4 ; _
o :. . - - - -
1 A : : _? _T T _- T _T
- : s 3
o .T ___ _ _ _ _ _ _
x .:
- : 2 2 2 : i :
r.a ytI A 2 A 2 3 3 $ : $ 3 : i Ed M .
i
= .
m .
- - - a : =
a 2 : 3 E e
z a :
a
- .i
= = c c :
g i
I W I= =:t I c E s a :3 . s =
> ! . g E. . :. s . . : : . . # 5 , =
=
ge =, g
=
< :< Su= g 5 . -
- - .n .
- t :. s. a a
e a
5 si ;
!- E. ja: iUE !
g g : : ! 3 i: !- !. !
la a g - E t l
g
- . . . . _i n
. . 1 8
j ;
. r. =
i, : .
n
. t la 3 3 > .i 5
i > - -
!g.= - -
l as 8 1 :: c'. 2 a . -g
- i sw w4 E- !- 5 gi : ! E $ $ $
I 3 i i i i -
. . . t. s: . . -
g ; e w g
2 i 5 g-iE $
g 2 s E i 13 g e iss !. i ! i ! ! alyi,l ! y j l is !* ! !! !! !" !!
- 3
! ,! =
v!
ls!
- 4
- - 2
- =t 1: a =c W
=
- ! a E5
- gi
=
- : sa 5 ls c l
l l
l COM-02-041-3 l Revision 0 3-2.60 nutqtch E ERS l
l g ,
I Table 3-2.2-2 SUPPRESSION POOL TEMPERATURE RESPONSE ANALYSIS RESULTS - MAXIMUM TEMPERATURES NUMPER MAXIMUM E (1) OF SRV'S BULK POOL CONDITION NUMBER ACTUATED TEMPERATURE ( F) 1A 0 131 1B 0 129 NON 2A 1 113 OPERATING 2B 1 122 2C 2 115 SBA EVENT Os 3B 5 147 (1) SEE SECTION 1-5.1 FOR A DESCRIPTION OF SRV DISCHARGE EVENTS.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.61 nutp_qh
Table 3-2.2-3 VENT SYSTEM PRESSURIZATION AND THRUST LOADS ;
FOR DBA EVENT l
l l
I i i p' 3 I g F /
7 l "C' A t k,
,/-
/%:::=dN@
/ ,
- f F
+
\
7 F j
- + -
, 5
'4 F l
6 F - - j A 4 PLAN SECTION A-A )
l - KEY DIAGRAM 1
I TIME DURING MAXIMUM COMPONENT FORCE MAGNITUDE (kips) i l
DBA EVENT J
(sec) p p F F 4
F 5
F 6
1 2 3 l
l l POOL SWELL -171 10 -39.10 63.80 25.70 1.30 -4.70 0.0 TO 5.0 ]
l l
CONDENSATION OSCILLATION -97.29 -22.23 33.39 14.61 0.61 -2.24 5.0 TO 35.0 l l
l CHUGGING 6.78 5.36 0.15 -0.56
-18.53 -4.24 35.0 TO 65.0 l
- 1. LOADS SHOWN INCLUDE THE EFFECT'S OF THE DBA INTERNAL .
PRESSURES IN FIGURE 3-2.2-3.
- 2. LOADS SHOWN INCLUDE A DLF OF 1.1. l l l l
I COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.62 O ,
l l
1 nut.ec..h.
- \
l I __
l
Table 3-2.2-4 POOL SWELL IMPACT LOADS FOR VENT LINE AND SPHERICAL JUNCTION p .__ _
\ s \ '
I g
\ \ \4\ -9. "T LINE =
\ g 3 \s m P ~~ ~
\2 i \ a ' d' 1
\ j \ %
A 1l i
/
1 k/ MAXIMUM POOL SWELL HEIGHT tg g
t,,x KEY DIAGRAM PRESSURE TRANSIENT A
/
N.J)
TIME (sec) PRESSURE (psi)
SEGMENT NUMBER IMPACT MAXIMUM POOL IMPACT i) DURATION (T) HEIGHT (t x) (P max DRAG (Pd) 1 0.2198 0.1970 0.5210 27.81 5.11 2 0.2707 0.1461 0.5210 22.38 5.60 3 0.3581 0.1108 0.'5210 14.23 5.92 4 0.5130 0.0400 0.5430 10.06 0.00
- 1. SEE FIGURE 3-2.1-8 FOR STRUCTURE GEOMETRY .
- 2. PRESSURES SHOWN ARE APPLIED TO VERTICAL PROJECTED AREAS IN A DIRECTION NORMAL TO VENT LINE AXIS.
- 3. LOADS ARE SYMMETRIC WITH RESPECT TO VERTICAL CENTERLINE OF VENT LINE.
A- COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.63 nutsb
Table 3-2.2-5 DOWNCOMER LONGITUDINAL BRACING AND LATERAL BRACING POOL SWELL DRAG AND FTLLBACK SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION UP I
r TIME (SEC)
't at 7, DOW Tm T end OPERATING i.0 ZERO aP LONGITUDINAL I FRESSUE I BRACING TIME (sec) MAGNITUDE (psi) TIME (sec) MAGNITUDE (psi)
MEMBER T end P, P g3 T,,x T P, P max end fb
@ 0.521 1.341 7.4 5.4 0.577 1.387 5.4 5.3
@ 0.521 1.341 9.3 5.8 0.577 1.387 6.8 5.7
@ 0.521 1.341 11.0 5.8 0.577 1.387 8.0 5.7
@ 0.521 1.341 9.3 4.5 0.577 1.387 6.8 4.3 +
@ 0.521 1.341 6.2 3.5 0.577 1.387 4.5 3.5
@ 0.521 1.341 6.2 3.5 0.577 1.387 4.5 3.5 LATERAL 0.521 1.209 N/A 4.9 0.596 1.336 N/A 4.4 "8ER STIFFENER RINGS 0.521 1.232 N/A 4.5 0.596 1.336 N/A 4.2
- 1. SEE FIGURE 3-2.2-9 FOR BRACING MEMBER DESIGNATION.
2 PRESSURES SHOWN ARE APPLIED TO VERTICAL PROJECTED AREAS IN THE DIRECTION NORMAL TO THE STRUCTURE.
- 3. PRESSURES SHOWN ARE SYMMETRICAL WITH RESPECT TO VERTICAL CENTERLINE OF VENT HEADER.
4 AVERAGE PRESSURE ON STIFFENER RING IS USED.
- 5. T end BASED ON MAXIMUM AT VALUES.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.64 nut _e_c_h
m
) .
Table 3-2.2-6
(%)
SUPPORT' COLUMN LOCA WATER JET AND BUBBLE-INDUCED DRAG '.OAD DISTRIBUTION T.
OUTSIDE% N M y INSIDE
" y
= p*
L l _1 o n y
h'* h '2 A
5 5 SECTION A-A E
3 ""*" I E 21 21 22 22
.g. .p.
T4" ' T4 O O V V
~
EI.EVATION VIEW - MITERED JOINT LOCAFOR (OPERATING AP)I1I LOCA JF't (OPERATING AP)I I SECMENT AVERAGE PRESSURE (pst) AVERAGE PRESSURE (psi)
NUMBER INSIDE COLUMN OUTSIDE COLUMN INSIDE COLUMN OUTSIDE COLUMN P, P, P, P, P, P, P, P, N 1 0.02 -0.05 0.02 -0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 g
2 0.05 -0.14 0.05 -0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 0.08 -0.25 0.09 -0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 0.12 -0.40 0.14 -0.17 9.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 0.17 -0.60 0.20 -0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6 0.24 -0.87 0.26 -0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7 0.34 -1.20 0.35 -0.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8 0.47 -1.60 0.43 -0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 0.62 -2.01 0.51 -0.30 1.45 2.38 0.59 0.12 10 0.75 -2.30 0.56 -0.32 1.82 2.93 0.70 0.12 11 0.78 -2.37 0.58 -0.34 1.82 2.81 0.64 0.12 12 0.73 -2.17 0.56 -0.36 0.85 1.47 0.40 0.12 13 0.61 -1.78 0.52 -0.38 0.79 1.22 0.27 0.12 14 0.49 -1.37 0.45 -0.40 0.92 1.45 0.31 0.12 15 0.40 -0.99 0.39 -0.42 0.99 1.67 0.36 0.12 16 0.34 -0.68 0.34 -0.43 0.80 1.58 0.40 0.12 17 0.30 -0.45 0.29 -0.43 0.57 1.31 0.38 0.11 18 0.28 -0.28 0.26 -0.43 0.38 1.01 0.32 0.11 19 0.27 -0.17 0.24 -0.43 0.26 0.74 0.26 0.10 20 0.27 -0.08 0.22 -0.42 0.18 0.54 0.21 0.10 21 C.27 -0.03 0.21 -0.40 0.14 0.38 0.17 0.09 22 0.26 0.00 0.21 -0.39 0.37 0.86 0.44 0.27 23 0.84 0.05 0.64 -1.20 0.33 0.60 0.36 0.27 24 0.83 0.08 0.62 -1.15 0.30 0.40 0.31 0.29 (1) LOADS SHOWN INCLUDE A DLF OF 2.0.
N s ) COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.65 nutp_qh
Table 3-2.2-7 DOWNCOMER LOCA BUBBLE-INDUCED DRAG LOAD DISTRIBUTION 1 vi iu 1m I I I l @ l @ .,
_@ _ l lr i-
--i--i
- j ELEVATION VIEW-DOWNCOMERS i vs
/ ie i we e
d '. I e p 4 6.. j
+. ! S .
i sk.9
/4..! G. .. O .. j l--
i .
SECTION A-A
- PRESSUPI MAGNITUDE (psi) II ITM SEGMENT (OPERATING AP)
NUMBER x z 1 0.27 -0.44 2 0.82 -1.34 1 0.69 0.24 2 2.21 0.72 1 0.48 -0.49 DOECER C 2 1.46 -1.62 1 0.31 0.07 D
2 0.90 0.23 1 0.04 -0.48 2 0.09 -1.44 1 0.02 0.44 F
2 0.C5 1.34 ,
(1) LOADS SHOWN INCLUDE A DLF OF 2.0.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.66 nutqqh E RS
4 Table 3-2.2-8 DOWNCOMER LONGITUDINAL BRACING AND LATERAL BRACING LOCA BUBBLE - INDUCED DRAG LOAD DISTRIBUTION AVERAGE PRESSURE (psi)( }
ITEM OPERATING AP ZERO AP P P Pg P P P x y x y z
@3) 0.00 3.14 -0.45 0.00 3.95 -0.56
@I3) 0.00 6.13 -2.34 0.00 7.72 -2.94 LONGITUDINAL BRACING h3) 0.00 4.81 -3.76 0.00 6.01 -4.70 MEMBER 4 (3) 0.00 4.33 -0.35 0.00 5.46 -0.44
@ 8.82 12.59 -1.48 11.13 15.89 -1.86
@ 10.13 12.25 -1.86 12.77 15.44 -2.34 LATERAL (3)
BRACING 7= 1.56 3.96 0.00 1.97 4.98 0.00 (N MEMBER STIFFENER 21.90 27.60 0.00
@ 0.00 0.00 0.00 (1) SEE FIGURE 3-2.2-9 FOR BRACINGS IDENTIFICATIONS.
(2) LOADS SHOWN INCLUDE A DLF OF 2.0.
(3) AVERAGE PRESSURE MAGNITUDES EXCLUDE PRESSURE OVER END CONNECTIONS .
l O
l V COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.67 nutggh
Table 3-2.2-9 IBA CONDENSATION OSCILLATION DOWNCOMER LOADS '
[
/
F uw V
MF u y F
d A
^% $
~
UNIFORM PRESSURE DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE 9
}
DOWNCOMER LOAD AMPLITUDES FREQUENCY INTERVAT. (Hz)
UNIFORM (Fu) DIFFERENTIAL (F d}(2)
[
ESSUE, FORCE (lb) 3b FORCE (lb)
(psi) (psi) 6.0 - 10.0 1.10 218.00 0.20 40.00 12.0 - 20.0 0.80 159.00 0.20 40.00 18.0 - 30.0 0.20 40.00 0.20 40.00 l
(1) EFFECTS OF UNIFORM AND DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURES SUMMED TO OBTAIN TOTAL LOAD.
(2) SEE FIGURE 3-2. 2-10 FOR DOWNCOMER DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION.
l 1
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.68 nutgqh
Table 3-2.2-10 DBA CONDENSATION OSCILLATION DOWNCOMER LOADS l l 6 e y J
sy s <
' .h_']{
x< e x.
U% , '< ,
- QifM # U '. +> # d Mr a y
.h YYQ, *< *i <
.n yg.
MIM -d$ 5>
g4 s >
~ -
s UNIFORM PRESSURE DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE DOWNCOMER LOAD AMPLITUDES FREQUENCY INTERVAL (Hz) UNIFORM (Fu) DIFFERENTm (Fd} (2)
. FORCE (lb) (psi)
FORCE (lb)
(psi) 4.0 - 8.0 3.60 714.00 2.85 566.00 8.0 - 16.0 1.30 258.00 2.60 516.00 12.0 - 24.0 0.60 119.00 1.20 238.00 (1) EFFECTS OF UNIFORM AND DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURES SUMMED TO OBTAIN TOTAL LOAD.
(2) SEE FIGURE 3-2. 2-10 FOR DOWNCOMER DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.69
l l
Table 3-2.2-11 IBA AND DBA CONDENSATION OSCILLATION VENT SYSTEM INTERNAL PRESSUPIS COMPONENT LOAD CHARACTERISTICS IBA DBA IBA DBA TYPE HARMONIC HARMONIC HARMONIC HARMONIC DE 2.5 2.5 2.s 2.5 (psi)
DISTRIBUTION UNIFORM UNIFORM UNIFORM UNIFORM FREQUENCY 6 - 10 4-8 6 - 10 4-8 RANGE (Hz) l
- 1. DOWNCOMER CO INTERNAL PRESSURE LOADS ARE INCLUDED IN LOADS SHOWN IN TABLES 3-2.2.10 AND 3-2.2-11.
- 2. LOADS SHOWN ACT IN ADDITION TO VENT SYSTEM INTERNAL PRESSURES IN FIGURES 3-2.2-2 AND 3-2,2-3.
- 3. ADDITIONAL STATIC INTERNAL PRESSURE OF 1.7 PSI APPLIED TO THE ENTIRE VENT SYSTEM TO ACCOUNT FOR NOMINAL SUBMERGENCE OF DOWNCOMERS .
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.70 nutggh
l N
(a i SUPPORT COLUMN DBA CONDENSATION OSCILLATION Table 3-2.2-12 l
SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION EW CUTSICE %N M g INSIDE 1 l 1 $*
b '= h '=
h 5 y h 5 SECTION A-A eW -
~3 eE 21 21 22 22 23 23 TT ' 24 O O V V ELEVATION VIEW = MITERED JOINT AVERAGE PRESSURE (pst)(1) 5E CUTSIDE COLUMN g INSICE COLUMN 3
P, i P P, P, 1 0.20 0.17 0.20 0.21 2 0.63 0.52 0.58 0.47 3 1.10 0.91 0.96 0.65
}/ 4 1.66 2.31 1.36 1.89 1.35 1.72 0.78 0.86 6 3.00 2.47 2.07 0.90 7 3.67 3.02 2.36 0.93 8 4.13 3.40 2.55 0.93 9 4.23 3.51 2.60 0.92 10 3.96 3.30 2.52 0.92 11 3.41 2.88 2.32 0.94 12 2.77 2.38 2.05 0.96 13 2.18 1.92 1.76 0.98 14 1.69 1.54 1.44 1.00 15 1.30 1.24 1.23 1.01 16 1.01 1.03 1.02 1.02 17 0.79 0.86 0.84 1.02 18 0.63 0.75 0.70 1.02 13 0.51 0.64 0.58 1.01 j 20 0.42 0.61 0.49 1.01 21 0.38 0.56 0.42 1.00 22 0.36 0.53 0.36 1.00 23 1.06 0.97 0.94 1.76 24 1.03 0.89 0.83 1.73 (1) LOADS SHOWN INCLUDE FSI EFFECTS AND DLF'S.
(^s
\' COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.71 nutggb l
m - _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ . . . , _ . - _ _ , _ -, - _ . _ . , _ . _ . . , . . _ , _ , _ , _ _ _ . . , . . _ . _ _ _ _
Table 3-2.2-13 DOWNCOMER LCNGITUDINAL BRACING AND LATERAL BRACING DBA CONDENS ATION OSCILLATION SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION (1) AVERAGE PRESSURE (psi)
P P P
@(3) 0.00 1.46 1.30
@( ) 0.00 3.03 1.14 LONGITUDINAL @I3) 0.00 2.48 1.28 BRACING MEMBER @( 0.00 4.41 0.56
@ 6.58 10.57 2.41
@ 4.80 6.84 2.40 LATERAL (3)
BRACING 7 2.31 2.19 0.00 MEMBER G @ 0.00 3.88 0.00 1 (1) SEE FIGURE 3-2.2-9 FOR BRACING IDENTIFICATIONS.
(2) LOADS SHOWN INCLUDE FSI AND DLF'S.
(3) AVERAGE PRESSURE MAGNITUDES DO NOT INCLUDE PRESSURE OVER END CONNECTIONS .
l l
l COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.72 nut.ech l
i
{
g Table 3-2.2-14 MAXIMUM DOWNCOMER CHUGGING LOAD DETERMINATION MAXIMUM CHUGGING LOAD FOR SINGLE DOWNCOMER FSTF MAXIMUM LOAD MAGNITUDE: P1 = 3.046 kips TIED DOWNCOMER FREQUENCY: fi = 2.9 Hz PULSE DURATION: td = 0.003 see DYNAMIC LOAD FACTOR: DLF1 = Uf ti d = 0.027 DRESDEN UNITS 2 AND 3 (DOWNCOMER BRACED LONGITUDINALLY)
DOWNCOMER FREQUENCY: f = 9.277 Hz(1)
DYNAMIC LOAD FACTOR: DLF = uftd = 0.0874 MAXIMUM LOAD MAGNITUDE (IN ANY DIRECTION) :
4 Pmax " P1 (o y = 3.046 ( 0 '. 0 2 7 ) = 9.86 kips 0
DRESDEN UNITS 2 AND 3 (DOWNCOMERS NOT BRACED LONGITUDINALLY)
DOWNCOMER FREQUENCY: f = 9.170(2)
DYNAMIC LOAD FACTOR: DLF = vftd = 0.0864 MAXIMUM LOAD MAGNITUDE (IN ANY DIRECTION) :
4 max =P 1 ( = 3.046 ( 0 ". 0 2 7 ) = 9.75 kips P
0 (1) SEE FIGURE 3-2.4-13 FOR FREQUENCY DETERMINATION.
(2) SEE FIGURE 3-2. 4 14 FOR FREQUENCY DETERMINATION.
a COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.73 nutggh
l l
Table 3-2.2-15 MULTIPLE DOWNCOMER CHUGGING LOAD MAGNITUDE DETERMINATION N l e7 15 e4 =c4 mE C cc 10 -
Be mt d5 5-22 -
O So 0 , , , ,
$r 0 '20 40 60 80 100 NUMBER OF DOWNCOMERS LOADED CHUGGING LOADS FOR MULTIPLE DOWNCOMERS (kips)( }
NUMBER OF FSTF LOAD UNITS 1 & 2 LOAD DOWNCOMERS PE{t DOWNCOMER PER DOWNCOMER 5 3.05 9.75 10 2.10 6.75 20 1.42 4.54 40 1.00 3.20 60 0.72 2.30 80 0.58 1.86 120 0.54 1.73 (1) BASED ON PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE OF 10-4, IN ACCORDANCE WITH NUREG-0661.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.74 nut.e_qh
i Table 3-2.2-16
)
CHUGGING LATERAL LOADS FOR MULTIPLE DOWNCOMERS -
MAXIMUM OVERALL EFFECTS LOAD NUMBER OF LOAD (1)
CASE DOWNCOMERS LOAD DESCRIPTION MAGNITUDE NUMBER LOADED (kips)
ALL DOWNCOMERS, PAPALLEL TO N-S PLANE, SAME 1 96 DIRECTION, MAXIMIZE OVERALL LATERAL LOAD ALL DOWNCOMERS, PARALLEL TO ONE VL, SAME 1.80 2 96 DIRECTION, MAXIMIZE OVERALL LATERAL LOAD ALL DOWNCOMERS, PARALLEL 3 96 TO VH, SAME DIRECTION, 1.80 MAXIMIZE VL BENDING ALL DOWNCOMERS 96 PERPENDICULAR TO VH, 4 1.80 SAME DIRECTION, MAXIMIZE VH TORQUE DOWNCOMERS CENTERED ON 5 12 ONE VL, PERPENDICULAR TO 4.16 VH, OPPOSING DIRECTIONS, MAXIMIZE VL BENDING DOWNCOMERS CENTERED ON 6 12 ONE VL, PERPENDICULAR TO 4.16 VH, SAME DIRECTIONS, MAXIMIZE VL AXIAL LOADS ALL DOWNCOMERS BETWEEN TWO VL'S, PERPENDICULAR 4.16 7 12 TO VH, SAME DIRECTION, MAXIMIZE VH BENDING NVB DOWNCOMERS NEAR MMR , P M M TO VH, 7,4g 8-10 4 PERMUTATE DIRECTIONS, MAXIMIZE DC BRACING LOADS
,3 (1) MAGNITUDES OBTAINED FROM TABLE 3-2.2-16.
I b COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.75 nutp_qh
Table 3-2.2-17 LOAD REVERSAL HISTOGRAM FOR CHUGGING DOWNCOMER LATERAL LOAD FATIGUE EVALUATION N
h 0 22.5 337.5 315 8 1 45 7 2 292.5 6 3 67.5 0 3 4 0 p 270 '
90 + E 247.5 3 6 112.5 A A 225 1 8 135
.5 180 ELEVATION VIEW SECTION A-A KEY DIAGRAM P NT ANGULAR SECTOR LOAD REVEPSALS (cycles)III MUM LOAD RANGE I21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 5 - 10 4706 2573 2839 3076 3168 2673 2563 4629 10 - 15 2696 1206 1100 1104 1096 1052 1163 2545 15 - 20 1399 727 653 572 709 708 679 1278 20 - 25 676 419 452 377 370 398 368 621 25 - 30 380 250 252 225 192 255 197 334 30 - 35 209 187 139 121 97 114 162 208 35 - 40 157 62 84 ,86 62 60 90 150 j
40 - 45 113 53 28 39 48 44 58 86 45 - 50 83 33 32 26 19 23 33 67 50 - 55 65 26 14 11 9 7 16 40 55 - 60 51 26 11 5 11 11 23 28 60 - 65 44 9 2 4 0 5 9 26 65 - 70 32 16 7 5 0 2 9 21 70 - 75 12 9 11 5 0 4 7 19 26 4 2 0 2 4 7 18 75 - 80 80 - 85 7 5 2 0 0 0 0 12 85 - 90 4 11 0 0 0 0 5 11 90 - 95 7 4 0 0 2 0 0 9 4 7 95 - 100 2 5 0 0 0 2 (1) VALUES SHOWN ARE FOR CHUGGING DURATION OF 900 SECONDS.
(2) THE MAXIMUM SINGLE DCWNCOMER LOAD MAGNITUDE RANGE USED FOR FATIGUE IS 3.936 X 3.2 = 12.6 KIPS (SEE TABLE 3-2.2-15) .
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.76 nut.e_ch
s Table 3-2.2-18 O% CHUGGING VENT SYSTEM INTERNAL PRESSURES LOAD TYPE COMPONENT LOAD LOAD MAGNITUDE ( p s 2. )
T DOW-NUMBER DESCRIPTION LINE HEADER COMER GROSS WNT TRANSIENT PRESSURE S ESSURE 2.5 12.5 t5.0 UNIFORM DISTRIBUTION OSCILLATION ACOUSTIC VENT SINGLE HARMONIC IN 2 SYSTEM PRESSURE 6.9 TO 9.5 Hz RANGE 02.5 3.0 t3.5 OSCILLATION UNIFORM DISTRIBUTION ACOUSTIC SINGLE HARMONIC IN DOWNCOMER 40.0 TO 50.0 Hz 3
PRESSURE RANGE. UNIFORM N/A N/A
' t13.0 OSCILLATION DISTRIBUTION n 4 j LOADING INFORMATION a 2-
- 1. DOWNCOMER LOADS SHOWN gg USED FOR HOOP STRESS 0- CALCULATIONS ONLY.
to 2. LOADS ACT IN ADDITION TO g INTERNAL PRESSURE LOADS I c; SHOWN IN FIGURES 3-2.2-2
! 4 -4 , , , , AND 3-2.2-3.
0 1 2 3 4 TIME (sec)
FORCING FUNCTION FOR LOAD TYPE 1 b
k COM-02-041-3 3-2.77 Revision 0 nutg,gh
Table 3-2.2-19 SUPPORT COLUMN PRE-CHUG SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION E va OUTSICE gg a < g INSIDE
" P P*
1 e 1 <[ n P, P,
~
g [
- === -
Y 1
== :
SECTION A-A H
-z W -
21 21 22 22 23 23 W I Y
O O V
V EI.EVATION VIEW - MITERED JOINT AVERAGE PRESSURE (psi) 3 INSIDE COLUMN OUTSIDE COLUMN N E
[
P, P, P, P,
' 1 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.04 2 0.05 0.11 0.06 0.09 3 0.08 0.19 0.09 0.13 4 0.13 0.29 0.13 0.15
( 5 0.18 0.40 0.16 0.17 6 0.25 0.52 0.20 0.17 7 0.32 0.63 0.23 0.17 8 0.37 0.70 0.25 0.17 9 0.38 0.72 0.26 0.18 10 0.35 0.67 0.25 0.18 11 0.31 0.58 0.23 0.18 12 0.26 0.47 0.21 0.18 l 13 0.22 0.37 0.18 0.19 14 0.19 0.28 0.16 0.19 l 15 0.16 0.22 0.14 0.19 16 0.15 0.17 0.13 0.18 17 0.14 0.13 0.11 0.17 18 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.17 l 19 0.12 0.09 0.10 0.16 I 20 0.12 0.08 0.09 J.16 l 21 0.11 0.08 0.09 0.15 I 22 0.11 0.07 0.08 0.15 23 0.33 0.11 0.26 0.39 24 0.32 0.11 0.25 0.38 COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.78 nut _ec_h.
Table 3-2.2-20 DOWNCOMER LONGITUDINAL BRACING AND LATERAL BRACING PRE-CHUG SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION AVERAGE PRESSURE (psi)
P P P
@ 0.00 0.11 0.05
@ 0.00 0.22 0.04 LONGITUDINAL g(3) 0.00 0.20 0.05 BRACING MEMBER
@) 0.00 0.30 0.02
@ 1.25 1.84 0.08
@ 0.82 1.17 0.08 LATERAL BRACING @ 0.20 0.16 0.00 MEMBER FENER 0.00 0.35 0.00 RINGS (1) SEE FIGURE 3-2.2-9 FOR BRACINGS IDENTIFICATIONS.
(2) LOADS SHOWN INCLUDE FSI AND DLF'S.
(3) AVERAGE PRESSURE MAGNITUDES EXCLUDE THE PRESSURES OVER CONNECTIONS.
Ci COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.79 nutggb
Table 3-2.2-21 SUPPORT COLUMN POST-CHUG SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION
- t. VH OUTSIDE % N < g !NSIDE 1 l 1 P, P, 4 4 ,,
5 y 5 SECTION A-A MC E ~8 E h
23 h
23 v v ELEVATION VIEW - MITERED JOINT AVERAGE PRESSURE (psi)(1) 8,E INSIDE COLUMN OUTSIDE COLUMN E
P, P, P, P, 1 0.23 0.17 0.18 0.05 2 0.71 0.51 0.55 0.13 3 1.24 0.88 0.92 0.19 4 1.82 1.30 1.29 0.25 5 2.47 1.77 1.66 0.29 6 3.14 2.27 2.00 0.33 7 3.76 2.72 2.27 0.36
(
8 4.18 3.03 2.46 0.38 9 4.28 3.11 2.52 0.38 10 4.05 2.94 2.46 0.38 11 3.57 2.59 2.30 0.36 l 12 2.99 2.17 2.07 0.33 1 13 2.42 1.76 1.81 0.31 14 1.93 1.41 1.55 0.23 15 1.52 1.12 1.31 0.26 16 1.21 0.90 1.10 0.24 17 0.96 0.73 0.93 0.22 18 0.77 0.60 0.78 0.20 19 0.63 0.50 0.66 0.19 20 0.51 0.43 0.56 0.18 21 0.43 0.37 0.48 0.18 22 0.36 0.32 0.41 0.17 23 0.98 0.83 1.15 0.31 24 0.85 0.74 1.02 0.30 (1) LOADS SHOWN INCLUDE FSI EFFECTS AND DLF'S.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.80 nut.e,_c_h
Table 3-2.2-22 DOWNCOMER LONGITUDINAL BRACING AND LATERAL BRACING POST-CHUG SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION AVERAGE PRESSURE (psi)
E x y z
@(3) 0.00 3.52 0.96
@ 0.00 1.09 0.39 LONGITUDINAL BRACING
@ 0.00 5.96 1.01 MEMBER @ 0.00 1.81 1.10
@ 1.23 2.08 0.88
@ 1.47 2.09 ,
0.86 LATERAL 3) l BPACING 4.48 2.61 l 0.00 MEMBER A STI FENER
[ @ 0.00 4.01 0.00 (1) SEE FIGURE 3-2.2-9 FOR BRACINGS IDENTIFICATIONS.
(2) LOADS SHOWN INCLUDE FSI AND DLF'S.
(3) AVERAGE PRESSURE MAGNITUDES EXCLUDE THE PRESSURES OVER CONNECTIONS.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.81 nutp_qh
Table 3-2.2-23 SUPPORT COLUMN SRV DISCHARGE SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION T. VH
' M OUTSIDEN T y INSIDE l "' , L P*
a P*
n P: Pz
[
- === "
y [
SECTION A-A W -I 20'
- 2. 21 22 22
.g. .g.
I R E O O V V EI.EVATION VIEW - MITERED JOINT T-QUENCHER WATER JET (psi)ll) T-QUENCHER BUBBLE DRAG (psi)(1)
NT INSIDE COLUMN OUTSIDE COLUMN INSIDE COLUMN OUTSIDE COLUMN 8,E Ep P, Pg P, P, P, P, P, P, 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.10 0.29 0.10 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.28 0.86 0.28 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.01 0.34 1.01 0.34 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.13 0.39 1.13 0.39 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.23 0.43 1.23 0.43 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.37 '0.49 1.37 0.49 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.56 0.56 1.56 0.56 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.67 0.60 1.67 0.60 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.58 0.57 1.58 0.57 10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.67 0.61 1.67 0.61 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.01 0.73 2.01 0.73 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.27 0.82 2.27 0.82 13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.42 0.87 2.42 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.76 1.00 2.76 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.26 1.18 3.26 1.19 16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 1.33 3.70 1.33 17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.03 1.45 4.03 1.45 18 -2.42 12.18 2.42 -12.18 4.52 1.64 4.52 1.64 19 -2.95 14.82 2.95 -14.82 5.62 2.03 5.62 2.03 20 -2.95 14.82 2.95 -14.82 6.66 2.40 6.66 2.e0 21 -2.95 14.82 2.95 -14.82 6.56 2.38 6.56 2.38 22 -2.95 14.82 2.95 -14.82 5.03 1.88 5.03 1.88 23 -2.95 14.82 2.95 -14.82 6.41 2.64 6.41 2.64 24 -2.37 11.93 2.37 -11.93 9.85 4.35 9.85 4.35 (1) LOADS SHOWN INCLUDE DLF OF 2.0 FOR WATER JET LOADS AND 2. 5 FOR DRAG LOADS.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.82 nut.e_c._h_
Table 3-2.2-24 DOWNCOMER T-QUENCHER BUBBLE DRAG SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION t ra iu tm l I l i ,- _L - j L ;_L -i lI!. ; _! .
l*I' ;
ELEVATION VIEW-DOWNCOMERS i vi j tu tm
- 6 *s I r r I. 's
!* % , n. P, ,+ ,, . .
/ 4'. .! O'. G ,, .j- i- -
l .
SECTION A-A PRESSURE b.AGNITUDZ (psi)(II g;gg SEGMENT NUMBER x z 1 1.62 -0.82 2 3.76 -2.13 1 1.62 0.82 B
2 3.76 2.13 1 -0.43 -0.48 DOWNCOMER C ,
1 -1.15 0. 19 2 -3.21 0.63 1 -0.47 -0.05 E
2 -1.57 -0.14 1 -0.47 0.05 l
2 -1.57 0.14 (1) LOADS IN X AND Z DIRECTIONS INCLUDE DLF'S OF 2.5.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.83 nutp_qh
Table 3-2.2-25 DOWNCOMER LONGITUDINAL BRACING AND LATERAL BRACING T-QUENCHER BUBBLE DRAG SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION AVERAGE PRESSURE (psi)( )
)
P P Pg y 1
@ 0.00 0.71 0.32 i
@ 0.00 0.49 0.00 j LONGITUDINAL @ 0.00 0.41 0.00 BRACING MEMBER @ 0.00 0.50 0.00
@ 1.27 1.78 0.00
@ 1.24 1.77 0.00 LATERAL BRACING MEMBER
@ 2.31 2.27 0.00 l
l STIFFE}ER RINGo @ 0.00 1.54 0.00 l
l (1) SEE FIGURE 3-2.2-9 FOR BRACINGS IDENTIFICATIONS.
(2) LOADS SHOWN INCLUDE A DLF OF 2.5.
l l
l COM-02-041-3 9
Revision 0 3-2.84 I
I ammas
o = 1.0 psi P
40 DRYWELL/ VENT SYSTEM ABSOLUTE PRESSURE 3
@ 20 -
5 h VENT SYSTEM /
E SUPPRESSION 10 CHAMBER DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE 0 , , ,
1.0 10 100 1000 10,000 TIME (sec)
O sed NSW (ps @
EVENT PRESSURE DESCRIPTION DESIGNATION t min t,,x P min 0 min P,,x AP max INSTANT OF BREAK TO ONSET OF P t 0.0 300.0 1.0 1.0 13.3 2.0 CO AND CHUGGING ONSET OF CO AND CHUGGING TO P 2 300.0 600.0 13.0 2.0 23.3 2.0 INITIATION OF ADS INITIATION OF ADS TO RPV P 3
600.0 1200.0 23.3 2.0 28.0 1.6 DEPRESSURIZ ATION I
Figure 3-2.2-1 l VENT SYSTEM INTERNAL PRESSURES FOR SBA EVENT I
l COM-02-041-3
, Revision 0 3-2.85
. nutggb
P = 1.8 psi 40 DRYWELL/ VENT SYSTEM 30 - ABSOLUTE PRESSURE
.9 y 20 -
=
10 -
VENT SYSTEM / SUPPRESSION CHAMBER DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE O , ,
- 1. 0 la 100 1000 10,000 TIME (sec)
O
- E*
EVENT PRESSURE DESCRIPTION DESIGNATION t t P AP P SP min max min min max max INSTANT OF BREAK l TO ONSET OF P 1 0.0 5.0 1.8 1.8 4.2 1.5 l CO AND CHUGGING ONSET OF CO AND CHUGGING TO P 5.0 900.0 4.2 1.5 28.0 2.0 2
INITIATION OF ADS l
INITIATION OF ADS TO RPV P 900.0 1100.0 28.0 2.0 36.0 2.2 3
l DEFRESSURIZATION 1
i l
Figure 3-2.2-2 1
VENT SYSTEM INTERNAL PRESSURES FOR IBA EVENT COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.86
, nut.e. ch
'O .
P = 0.0 psi 40 -
DRYWELL/ VENT SYSTEM ABSOLUTE PRESSURE L'
ac4 CO o 20 - VENT SYSTEM / SUPPRESSION u) y CHAMBER DIFFERENTIAL m PRESSURE C.
0, , , ,
0 10 20 30 40 TIME (sec)
\
TIME (sec) PRESSUPI (psig)
DESCRIPTION DESIGNATION p p INSTANT OF BREAK TO TERMINATION OF P t
0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 37.0 27.0 POOL SWELL TEPJ1!'tATION OF POOL SWELL TO P 2
1.5 5.0 37.0 27.0 35.0 16.0 ONSET OF CO 5.0 35.0 35.0 16.0 29,8 1.6 OfSET OF CHUGGING 3 ONSET OF CI!UGGING l
TO RPV P 4
35.0 65.0 29.8 1.6 29.8 1.6 i DEPRESSURIZ ATION
- 1. DBA VENT SYSTEM INTERNAL PRESSURE LOADS ARE INCLUDED IN VENT SYSTEM PRESSURIZATION AND THRUST LOADS SHOWN IN TABLE 3-2.2-3.
Figure 3-2.2-3 VENT SYSTEM INTERNAL PRESSURES FOR DBA EVENT
'N\
COM-02-041-3 l Revision 0 3-2.87 l nutggb
T = 70 F 400 DRYWELL/ VENT SYSTEM COMPONENT TEMPERATURE (T g 300 - C) ]g O_
e 5 200 -
d g VENT SYSTEM EXTERNAL A COMPONENT TEMPERATURE (T )
100 - _
0 , ,
1.0 10 100 1000 10,000 TIME (sec)
- 1. SEE FIGURE 3-2.2-1 FOR ADDITIONAL SBA EVENT TEMPERATURES.
EVENT TEMPERATURE DESCRIPTION DESIGNATION t . T T T T t
max C E C E min min min max max INSTANT OF BREAK i TO ONSET OF CO T i
1.0 300.0 273.0 90.0 273.0 Iv3.0 AND CIIUGGING l ONSET OF CO AND CHUGGUNG TO I 300.0 600.0 273.0 100.0 273.0 108.0 l 2 l INITIATION OF ADS INITI ATION OF ADS TO PPV T 600.0 1200.0 273.0 108.0 273.0 134.0 3
DEPRESSURIZATION Figure 3-2.2-4 VENT SYSTEM _ TEMPERATURES FOR SBA ' EVENT COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.88 nut _ec__h.
1 I
i D
o T = 70 F '
o 400 DRYWELL/ VENT SYSTEM COMPONENT TEMPERATURE (Tc )
- 300 -
0 N
$ 200 -
I VENT SYSTEM EXTERNAL g COMPONENT TEMPERATURE (TE )
Ei 6 100 -
0 . . ,
1.0 10 100 1000 10,000 TIME (sec)
TIME (sec) TEMPERATURE ( F)
EVENT TEMPERATURE DESCRIPTION DESIGNATION t t T g g C E min min max max INSTANT OF BREAK TO ONSET OF CO Tg 1.0 5.0 210.0 95.0 220.0 95.0 AND CilUGGING ONSET OF CO AND T
CHUGGUNG TO 2 S.0 900.0 220.0 95.0 271.0 130.0 INITIATION OF ADS INITI ATION OF ADS TO RPV T 3 900.0 1100.0 271.0 130.0 283.0 164.0 DEPAESSURIZATION l
! Figure 3-2.2-5 VENT SYSTEM TEMPERATURES FOR IBA EVENT COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.89 nutggh
_ _ . _ ~ - . _ _ _ . - . . _ _ _ . - _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ . . . _ , .
T = 70 F DRYWELL/ VENT SYSTEtt (T
300 - C
[COMPONENTTEMPERATURE E
O
{$!
o b
t $ VENT SYSTEM EXTERNAL l r4 150 -
$ COMPONENT TEMPERATURE (T E u
6 l
1 0 , , ,
0 10 20 30 40 (
l l TIME (sec) ;
i
(
EVENT TEMPERATURE DESCRIPTION DESIGNATION T T t t Cmin E Cmax E min max min max
[ INSTANT OF BREAK T l TO TERMINATION OF l 0.0 1.5 135.0 83.0 270.0 85.5 POOL SWELL 1
l TERMINATION OF POOL SWELL TO T 1.5 5.0 270.0 85.5 277.0 90.0 2
ONSET OF CO U" T 5.0 35.0 277.0 90.0 275.0 120.0 ONSET OF CHUGGING 3 ONSET OF CHUGGING TO RPV T 35.0 65.0 275.0 120.0 275.0 120.0 4
DEPRESSURIZATION Figure 3-2.2-6 VENT SYSTEM TEMPERATURES FOR DBA EVENT
! COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.90 nut.e_c._h.
O O O m 4 A P N # 50 P
max SECTION A-A ELEVATION VIEW PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION O -
2 B.0 3 (P max s
8 8
2 0.240 0.522 TIME (sec)
PRESSURE TRANSIENT
- 1. PRESSURES SHOWN ARE APPLIED IN A DIRECTION NOFFJ.L TO DOWNCOMER'S SURFACE.
Figure 3-2.2-7 DOWNCOMER POOL SWELL IMPACT LOADS COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.91 nutggb
l l
l q VB q NVB O
I I L
N n n d, W W 3 O
A .
t F(t) - ~
DEFLECTOR Z
i 0.0 0.5 1.0 SECTION DEVELOPED VIEW KEY DIAGRAM 4800 4000-3100- z/L = 0.0
$ 2400-U g 2/L = 0.5
'" 1600-800-320 360 4b0 440 4b0 520 560 TIME (msec)
- 1. LOADS AT DISCRETE LOCATIONS ALONG DEFLECTOR OBTAINED BY LINEAR INTERPOLATION.
Figure 3-2.2-8 POOL SWELL IMPACT LOADS FOR VENT HEADER DEFLECTORS AT SELECTED LOCATIONS COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.92 nutggh
O I h
\j ( VENT LINE BAY
/
/ '
(MITER k BAY JOINT s
Y m a(y -
, 5 / Zn I
+ --- - L -
i 4
/
PLAN VIEW 1
I N
G I l
D R f ;
e L _b i G G
-s -s -s h_{ ' rB Bi r' f -Q- '
sECTION s-a O oEsIcNATEs BRacINo (TYPICAL AT MEMBER NUMBER ALL DOWNCOMERS)
VIEW A-A Figure 3-2.2-9 DOWNCOMER LONGITUDINAL BRACING AND LATERAL ERACING Ib l COM-02-041-3 -
Revision 0 3-2.93
' nutggh
C VL C VL I g C NVB I q NVB I
o i
\
\ o i \\
A \
s ,
l
< n ,
< n J U J U i i l I
CASE 1 CASE 2 C VL q VL I i
\qNVB G,NVB
\
i 2 i , ,
i < n < n
\ r --
\ s
> u g / u \
l I CASE 3 CASE 4 l
- 1. SEE TABLE 3-2,2-10 FOR IBA PRESSURE AMPLITUDES AND FREQUENCIES.
- 2. SEE TABLE 3-2. 2-11 FOR DBA PRESSURE AMPLITUDES AND FREQUENCIES.
- 3. FOUR ADDITIONAL CASES WITH PRESSURES IN DOWNCOMERS OPPOSITE THOSE SHOWN ARE ALSO CONSIDERED.
1 Figure 3-2.2-10 l IBA AND DBA CONDENSATION OSCILLATION DOWNCOMER l
DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION COM-02-041-3
{ Revision 0 3-2.94 nut.ech
(Q
%d
/ TO ( DRYWELL (D / j / \ 8 '
i \ I . \D\
s, i
us"/ \ f \
\. I
- s'%. N.
s's i
. N N'r' - ~s
)
\, %. y C %g' ,%,
N g e .~ .E
\ .
(
.D; .. ,\ , \. -
I N \. g D.% ' ,
./ ~ , ,,,, '
- m. \
C \,
NORMALIZED POOL ACCELERATIOUS PROFILE POOL ACCELERATION (ft/sec )
B 155.0 C 115.0 D 75.0 E 35.0 F 15.0 l 1. POOL ACCELERATIONS DUE TO HARMONIC APPLICATION OF TORUS SHELL PRESSURES SHOWN IN FIGURE 2-2.2-12 AT A SUPPRESSION CHAMBER FREQUENCY OF 16.53 HERTZ.
Figure 3-2.2-11 POOL ACCELERATION PROFILE FOR DOMINANT SUPPRESSION CHAMBER FREQUENCY AT MIDBAY LOCATION COM-02-041-3 v Revision 0 3-2.95 nutg,gh i . - . . - - - - . . . - . - . . - . - - - - . . - . - - - , , , - - - - . . . - - - - - , - . - - -- ---
3-2.2.2 Load Combinations The load categories and associated load cases for which the vent system is evaluated are presented in Section 3-2.2.1. The general NUREG-0661 criteria for grouping the respective loads and load categories into event combinations are discussed in Section 1-3.2 (Table
- 3-2.2-26).
[
The 27 general event combinations shown are expanded to
- form a total of 69 specific vent system load combina-i i tions for the Normal Operating, SBA, IBA, and DBA i
events. The specific load combinations reflect a l
I greater level of detail than is contained in the 1
general event combinations, including distinction between SBA and IBA, distinction between pre-chug and i
post-chug, and consideration of multiple cases of particular loadings. 'The total number of vent system load combinations consists of 3 for the Normal Operating event, 18 for the SBA event, 24 for the IBA event, and 24 for the DBA event. Several different service level limits and corresponding sets of allowable stresses are associated with these load l
combinations.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.96 l
nut _ech I
Not all of the possible vent system load combinations are evaluated since many are enveloped by others and do not lead to controlling vent system stresses. The enveloping load combinations are determined by examin-ing the possible vent system load combinations and comparing the respective load cases and allowable stresses. Table 3-2.2-27 shows the results . of this examination. Here each enveloping load combination is assigned a number for ease of identification.
The enveloping load combinations are further reduced by examining relative load magnitudes and individual load characteristics to determine which load combinations r
lead to controlling vent system stresses. The load combinations which have been found to produce control-Q.<
ling vent system stresses are the SBA II, IBA I, DBA I, DBA II, and DBA III combinations are used to evaluate stresses in all vent system components except those associated with the vent line-SRV piping penetrations.
1 1
An explanation of the logic behind these controlling i vent system load combinations is presented in the following paragraphs. Table 3-2.2-28 summarizes the controlling load combinations and identifies which load combinations are enveloped by each of the controlling combinations.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.97 nutgq,h
1 I
Many of the general event combinations (Table 3-2.2-26) have the same allowable stresses and are enveloped by others which contain the same or additional load cases.
There is no distinction between Service Level A and B conditions for the vent system since the Service Level A and B allowable stress values are the same.
Except for seismic loads, many pairs of load combina-tions contain identical load cases. One of the load combinations in the pair contains CBE loads and has Service Lerel A or B allowables, while the other contains SSE loads with Service Level C allowables.
Examining the load magnitudes presented in Section 3-2.2.1 s. hows that both tht. C3E c.ud SSE vertical accel-erations are small compared to gravity. As a result, vent system stresses and supr, ort column reactions due to vertical seismic loads are small compared to those caused by other loads in the load combination. The horizontal loads for OBE and SSE are less than 60% of gravity and result in small vent system stresses compared to those caused by other loads in the load combinations, except at the vent line-drywell penetra-tions which provide horizontal support for the vent system. The Service Level C primary stress allowables for the load combinations containing SSE loads are 40%
to PO% higher than the Service Level B allowables for COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.98 nutechENGINEESHE
x the corresponding load combination containing OBE loads. Therefore, for evaluation of all vent system components except the vent line-drywell penetration, the controlling load combinations are those containing OBE loads and Service Level B allowables.
For the vent line-drywell penetration, evaluation of both OBE and SSE combinations is necessary since seismic loads are a large contributor to the total lateral load acting on the vent system for which the penetrations provide support.
Application of the above reasoning to the total number of vent system load combinations yields a reduced O
number of enveloping load combinations for each event.
Table 3-2.2-27 shows the resulting vent system load combinations for the Normal Operating, SBA, IBA and DBA events, along with the associated service level assign-ments. For ease of identification, each load combina-I tion in each event is assigned a number. The reduced
( number of enveloping load combinations (Table 3-2.2-27) i consists of one for the Normal Operating event, four for the SBA event, five for the the IBA event, and six for the DBA event. The load case designations for the loads which make up the combinations are the same as i
- those presented in Section 3-2.2.1.
O COM-0 2-0 41- 3 Revision 0 3-2.99 nutggh i
, - . ~ _ ~ . - - _ _ _ _
l l
An examination of Table 3-2.2-27 shows that further reductions are possible in the number of vent system 1
load combinations requiring evaluation. Any of the SBA l
or IBA combinations envelop the NOC I combination since 4 l
they contain the same loadings as the NOC I combination i 1
and, in addition, contain CO or chugging loads. The l
NOC I combination does, however, result in local thermal effects in the vent line-SRV piping penetration when the pcnetration assembly is cold and the c3rresponding SRV piping is hot (during a SRV dis-charge). The SBA ano 1BA comoinations, therefore, envelop the NOC I combination for all vent system componenta except the vent line-SRV piping penetration.
The effects of the NOC I combination are also con-sidered in the vent system fatigue evaluation.
The SBA II combination is the same as the IBA III combination, except for negligible differences in internal pressure loads. Thus, IBA III can be eliminated from consideration. The SBA II combination envelops the SBA I and IBA II combinations since the submerged structure loads due to post-chug are more severe than those due to pre-chug. According to the reasoning presented earlier for OBE and SSE loads, the SBA II combination envelops the SBA III, SBA IV, COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.100 nut _ech_
IBA IV, and IBA V combinations, except when the effects j of lateral loads on the vent line-drywell penetration are evaluated. Similarly, the SBA II combination envelops the DBA V and DBA VI combinations; these combinations, however, contain vent system discharge loads which are somewhat larger than the pressure loads for the SBA II combination. This effect is accounted for by substituting the vent system discharge loads which occur during the chugging phase of a DBA event for the SBA II pressure loads when evaluating this load 1
combination.
a Examination of Table 3-2.2-27 shows that the load combinations which result in maximum lateral loads on b
i the vent line-drywell penetration are SBA IV, IBA V,
\
and DBA VI. All of these contain SSE loads and chugging downcomer lateral loads which, when combined, result in the maximum possible lateral load on the vent system. As previously discussed, the SBA II combina-tion envelops the above combinations, except for seismic loads. The effects of seismic loads are accounted for by substituting SSE loads for OBE loads when evaluating the SBA II combination.
The DBA I combination is evaluated based on normal operation, drywell-to-wetwell pressurc differential conditions, with Service Level B limits assigned.
~
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.101
.m , + . - - ,- , -- --- , , . - - - - - -
- , - - - , ~ ~ , , , , - - - ,n- ~ - - - - - - - - , - - ,-----,,--~,..,--,--n, ,,,-o,,---- , - - - - -
However, the effect of the loss of this differential pressure in the DBA I combination (with Service Level D limits), was also investigated and found not to be as critical as in the operating pressure differential condition.
The DBA II combination envelops the DBA IV combination since the S RV discharge loads which occur late in the DBA event have a negligible ef fect on the vent system.
The DBA II combination also has more restrictive allow-able3 than the DBA IV combination.
The controlling vent system load combin.itions evaluated in the remaining sections can n:w be summarized. The SBA II, IBA I, DBA I, DBA II, and DBA III combinations are evaluated for all vent system components except those associated with the vent line-SRV piping penetra-tion, which are evaluated in Volume 5 of this report.
As previously noted, SSE loads and the vent system discharge loads which occur during the chugging phase of the DBA event are conservatively substituted for OBE loads and the SBA pressure loads when evaluating the SBA II load combination.
To ensure that fatigue is not a concern for the vent system over the life of the plant, the combined effects COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.102 nut.e._c_h.
l 3 :
.of fatigue due to Normal Operating plus SBA events and !
l Normal Operating plus IBA events are evaluated.
Figures 3-2.2-12, 3-2.2-13 and 3-2.2-14 show the rela-tive sequencing and timing of each loading in the SBA, IBA, and DBA events used in this evaluation. The fatigue effects for Normal Operating plus DBA events I
{ events since the combined effects of SRV discharge loads and other loads for the SBA.and IBA events are '
i I
more severe than those for DBA. Table 3-2.2-27 summar- ,
izes additional informa t ior. used in the vent system
{ fatigue evalwaation.
l'
! The load coctbinations and event sequencing described in the preceding paragraphs envelop those. which could j actually occur during a LOCA or SRV discharge event.
) An evaluation of these load combinations results in a conservative estimate of the vent system response and leads to bounding values of vent system stresses and i fatigue effects.
l 1
k i i
i i
, COM-0 2-0 41-3 i Revision 0 3-2.103 nutagh
NO Table 3-2.2- 26 (D O
[$fQ F*-
MARK I CONTAINMENT EVENT COMBINATIONS O I UO b
s pA a r.av,- w.A , ;&V
- E0 DD4 DBA
- EQ 18 A
- CO,CH PS PS CD, OH e
! 00, N
- PS
- TYPE OF EARTHQUAXE O S 0 5 0iS 0 lS 0 S 0 S 0 5 0 S 0 S COMBINATION NUMBER I 2 3 4 5 6 3 0 10 li 12 19 14 15 16 17 I8 19 20 21 22 21 24 25 26 27 NoltMA L N X X X X X X X % X X h t h X X X X X X X X X X X X X X EARTHOUAXE EQ X X X X X X X h X X X X X X X X X X SRV DISCHARGE SRV X X X F 'N T. K X X X X X X X X IDCA THERMAL TA X X X X F A X 4 X X. X X X X X X X X X X X X X X IDCA REACTIONS Rg X X X X X , A in X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7,j^g,l^' ' ^* ' C rA X X X X lx X X s X X x X X X X X x X X X X X X X LDCA PonL SWELL rps I X X X X X (DCA CONDENSATION w oSCai.LAfroN rCo X X x X X X X X X X X X 1 _ _ __ __ _ __ _ .___ ___
IV tDCA CHuGGlNG Pcn X ,I X X X X X X X X X X O
a (1) SEE SECTION 1-3.2 FOR ADDITIONAL RVENT COMBINATION INFORMATION.
(2) WITil THE LOSS OF NORMAL OPERATING DRYWELL/WETiiELL PRESSURE DIFFERENTIAL, LEVEL D SERVICE LIMITS ARB ASSIGNED.
U l
C n
im
- O O O O
/
o . /m
/
\
s s ( v <)
s E'@ Table 3-2,2-27
< 3:
e- s un O CONTROLLING VENT SYSTEM LOAD COMBINATIONS H* M Ol DO A
OH l
w _.
CONDITION / EVENT NOC SBA IB4 I>BA SECTION , j 3-2.2.1 InAD VOLUME 3 14AD COnBINATION NUMBER - I:
i I h-$
II $ III II
+jN N.[
II l
III IV V
[J rM I ..
I[
A 'v '.
[III Y IV V VI DESIGNATION 5 M14 + "'
' ' .' 4#.-
TABLE 3-2.2-24 LOAD ? '
8" N'-
j,j o A,.i .o ir a s COMBINATION NUMBER 'k'f /.
~
I4
.Nn:;{.
15 15 u-14 le 15 IS $8f a
- 1. 30 );
,r 3$p
+
27 27 27
- * :.y y ,
i DEAD NEIGHT ',. 4 4. . la OBE ' 2a 2 [ 2N3 32eg 2a l Na? [$hl SEISMIC ~~ --- --
SSE f(
f.g. 2b 2b ( 2b 2h h, } )tp r 2b N
PRESSURE I kPII! E 2'#3 h[3 P 2' 3 2* I
' '# I '23 #2 'I E2'#3 <PN' UE Y lb P 3 P4 I'4 H
TEMPERATURE 4!; 2' 3 30 3 2' 3 2' I h 2 2' 3 2' ) 2' 3 i
[f)f [fg Tj Tg T4
- [" h O, VENT SYSTEM DISCHARGE -d:[8 I 44 : - 4a u .
~ <
PUOL SHELL
- ik 4
.?.. Sa-St tC Seilt CONDENSATION OSCILLATION [jy j e fl ,. p . v 6f 6' PRE-CHUG /sg.y 7a-7c Nh 7a-7c la 7c 7a.7c *
- d
~-
- y *, . i$ ' ya.7c CHLKM;ING
?*dIV I'*Ih Sm&$ I'*Ib I'*Ih 9 ': - ' %
- v ;; - In,7b POST-CnUC "s y
.*74 S 74 '*
c: l Pd 7d + , + > - * ! tL 7J SRV DISrHARGE YSb,.; 'I M r 8b h < [" i. ab tS) eb sb PIPING REACTIONS 2 $h c r i L-_. 9, CONTAINMENT INTERACTION l10ah _
- 104 sERvlCE LEVEL . 's ' o lal C C f6: a a C e n!6.7) -.ejil) y c ', C c C j
NUMBER Or EVENT OCCURENCESI8I [l%0: I -- - - I Numm.R Or sRv ACTuATIONs"I L 550 - So a : 5. $5
, - 25 Jo} j.'g l /3? : = a
! )
C
gQ NOTES TO TABLE 3-?.2-27
- 1?
E Oo (1) SEE FIGURES 3-2. 2-1 TIIROUGII 3-2.2-3 FOP SBA, IBA, AND DBA INTERNAL o$ PRESSURE VALUES.
b (2) THE RANGE OF NORMAL OPERATING INTERNAL PPESSU"ES TS -0.2 TO 1.0 PSI AS SPECIFIED BY TIIE SAR.
(3) SEE FIGURES 3-2. 2-4 TIIROUGli 3-2.2-6 FOR SBA, IBA, AND DBA TEMPERATURE VALUES.
(4) Tile RANGE OF NORMAL OPERATING TEMPERATU;tES IS 70.0 TO 131.0 F AS SPECIFIED BY TIIE SAR. SEE TABLE 3-2.2-2 FOR ADDITIONAL NORMAL OPERATING TEMPERATURES.
(5) Tile SRV DISCilARGE LOADS WIIICII OCCUR DURING THIS PilASE OF TIIE DBA EVENT llAVE A NEGLIGIBLE EFFECT ON TIIE VENT SYSTEM.
(6) EVALUATION OF PRIMARY-PLUS-SECONDhR'? STRESS RANGE OR FATIGUE IS NOT REQUIRED; SilELL STRESSES DUE TO Tile LOCAL POOL SWELL IMPINGEMENT PRESSURES DO NOT EXCEED w SERVICE LEVEL C LIMITS.
l
." (7) TIIE ALLOWABLE STRESS VALUE FOR LOCAL I-RIMARY MEMBRANE STRESS AT PENETRATIONS g IS INCREASED BY 1.3.
(8) Tile NUMBER OF SEISMIC LOAD CYCLES USED FOR FATICUE IS 1,000.
(9) Ti!E VALUES SIIOWN ARE CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATES OF THE NUMBER OF ACTUATIONS EXPECTED FOR A BWR 3 PLANT WITII A REACTOR SI7E OF 251~
3 C
.-e Id) 10 O O O
,C \
tx \ '
~
i t
l gQ Table 3-2,2-28
< :r l 7o e ra ENVELOPING LOGIC FOR CONTEOLLING O I _ VENT SYSTEM LOAD COMBINATIONS Do _
.r.
or
! I w
CONDITION / EVENT NOC SBA IPA DBA TABLE 3-2.2.24 ENVELOPING 2 LOAD COMBINATIONS 14 14 15 15 14 14 14 15 15 18 20 25 27 27 27 i
TABI.E 3-2.2-24 14AD COMBINATIONS ENVELOPED 4 ' ', ' ,' 9' , ' 9' , ' **',' 4',' 4',' 9' , ' 9' ,
16 17 II 27',
I23I ', 23', 2 3 ',
10-12 10-12 13 13 10-12 10-12 10-12 13 13 24 26 26 26
~
COMBINUSDr$cNATION I I II III Iv 8 I II III IY Y I II III IY v vI III X X X X X X X X X X SBA II IBA I X CONTROLLING SYSTEM
, COMB ATIONS D g EVALUATED SUPPORTS o DBA II X 4
] DBA III i
1 1. SSE IAADS AND DBA PRESSURIZATION AND THRUST LOADS ARE SUBSTITL" RED FOR OBE LOADS AND SBA II INTERNAL PRESSURE IAADS NHEN EVALUATING THE SBA II LOAD COMBINATION.
4 1
i 4
I 4
I i
i t
C l
1
l l
l l
l O
l l (la) DEAD WEIGHT LOADS.
l 5 (2a,2b) SEISMIC LOADS 5
l 2 c
M
$ (3b,3d) CONTAINMENT PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE LOADS C
C C,
l
\ ] (7a-7d) CHUGGING LOADS i
7 '
" (8b) SRV DISCHARGE ICADS 8 (8b) SRV DISCHARGE LOADS l 2 (SET POINT ACTUATION): ( ADS AC"UATIOt')
o -
l I '.
(3a) PIPING REACTIONS LOICS '
i I
3 1
9 I
(10a) CONTAINMENT INTERACTION LOADS l l 0 300 600 1200 TIME AFTER LOCA (sec)
Figure 3-2.2-12 VENT SYSTEM SBA EVENT SEQUENCE 1
l l COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.108 nutech ENGINEEREiB
4 (la) DEAD WEIGHT LOADS
$ (2a,2b) SEISMIC LOADS E
5 E
o.1 (3b,3d) CONTAINMENT PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE LOADS C =
C 8
j ,
ka,6c,6e) CONDENSATION l (7a-?d)
OSCILLATION LOADSi CHUGGING LGADS ca i
i l k l (Ob) SRV DISCIARCE LCALS l (8b) SRV DISCHARGE LOIDS l 5 __
(SET POINT ACTUATION) : (ADS ACTUATION) _
y ? I (9a) PIPING REACTION LOADS
- i a l l t I i (10a) CONTAINMENT INTERACTION LOADS 8
I I
I I i 0 5 900 1100 TIME AFTER LOCA (sec)
Figure 3-2.2-13 t
VENT SYSTEM IBA EVENT SEQUENCE COM-0!-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.109 nutggb I
- _ . . - . -. - _ __..,_.._.-__.,__,.._._.-_-..._,,_..___mm., . . , , ,.._,,_____,-,.r__,,-..--,v.-,_,. . - . . . . .
O (la) CEAD WEIGHT LOADS (2a,2b) SEISMIC LOADS g (4a) VENT SYSTEM DISCHARGE LOADS T.
k z
$ (3d) CONTAINMENT TEMPERATURE LOADS m
- a O
c (Sa-5f) POOL j SWELL LOADS l 4 . i
.- i i s' l t (6b,6d,6fi CO LOADS
. I 7
m l, i i e, . _
i 8 I (71-7d)
' 8 CHUGGING IOACS 3
l
- , i l ,
g i 1 1
- a (8b) SRV EE NOH 1
- DISCHARGE LOADS (9a) PIPING REACTION LOADS I i g i e , , i (10a) CONTAINMENT INTERACTION LOADS
, i , i e I 8 1 0.1 1.5 5.0 35.0 65.0 TIME AFTER LCCA (sec)
Figure 3-2.2-14 VENT SYSTEM DBA EVENT SEQUENCE COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.110 nut _ec_h :
~ "
e - r
3-2.3 Acceptance criteria The NUREG-0661 acceptance criteria on which the Dresden Units 2 and 3 vent system analysis is based are dis-cussed in Section 1-3.2. In general, the acceptance criteria follow the rules contained in the ASME Code, Section III, Division 1, including the Summer 1977 Addenda for Class MC components and component supports (Reference 6). The corresponding service limit assign-ments, jurisdictional boundaries, allowable stresses, and fatigue requirements are consistent with those con- i tained in the applicable subsections of the ASME Code a t:d the PUAAG. The following paragraphs summarize the acceptance criteria used in the analynis of the vent system.
The items evaluated in the analysis of the vent system are the vent lines, the spherical junction, the vent header, the downcomers, the downcomer ring plates, the support columns and associated support elements, the drywell shell near the vent line penetrations, the vent header deflectors, the downcomer-vent header intersec-tion stiffener plates, the downcomer bracing systems, the vent header support collar, and the vent line bellows assemblies. Figures 3-2.1-1 through 3-2.1-16 identify the specific components associated with e'ach of these items.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.111
,.,,..n., . . _ , . . , . . . , , , , - _ _ . . . , , , , _ . _
. . , , , , , . _ . . . . ~ . . . , . , ,
The vent lines, the vent line-vent header spherical junctions, the vent header, the downcomers, the drywell shell, the downcomer-vent header intersection stiffener plates, the downcomer ring plates, and the vent header support collars are evaluated in accordance with the requirements for Class MC components contained in Subsection NE of the ASME Code. Fillet welds and partial penetration welds joining these components or attaching other structures to them are also examined in accordcnce with the requirements for Class MC welds contair.ed in Subsection NE cf the ASME Code.
The support columns, the downcomer bracing members, and the associated connecting elements ar.d welds are '
evaluated in accordance with the requirements contained in Subsection NF of the ASME Code for Class MC component supports. The vent header deflectors and associated components and welds are also evaluatec in accordance with the reqairements for Class MC component supports, with allowable stresses corresponding to Service Level D limits.
l l
The NOC I, SBA II, IBA I, DBA I, and DBA II combina-tions all have Service Level B limits, while the DBA III combination has Service Level C limits (Table 3-2.2-27). Since these load combinations have somewhat COM-0 2-0 41- 3 Revision 0 3-2.112 O1 ,
nutgqh l 1
different maximum temperatures, the allowable stresses for the two load combination groups with Service Level B and C limits are conservatively determined at the highest temperature for each load combination group.
! The allowable stresses for all the major components of the vent system, such as the vent line, the spherical junction, the vent header and the downcomers, are determined at the maximum DBA temperature of 284'F.
i Table 3-2.3-1 shows the allowable stresses for the load combinations with Service Level B and C limits.
4 shows the allowable displacements and
( Table 3-2.3-2 k' associated number of cycles for the vent line bellows. These values are taken from the design specification, as permitted by NUREG-0661, in cases
[
where the analysis technique used in the evaluation is the same as that contained in the plant's design specification.
The acceptance criteria described in the preceding paragraphs result in conservative estimates of the existing margins of safety and assure that the original vent system design margins are restored.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.113 nutggb
Table 3-2.3-1 ALLOWABLE STRESSES FOR VENT SYSTEM COMPONENTS AND COMPONENT SUPPORTS MATERI AL(1) ALLCWASLE STRES3 (ksi)
II ITEM MATERIAL PSCPERTIES (kal)
TYPE SERVICEg ); SERVICE (3)
LEVEL 8 I2 VEL C s,, = 19.30 Locag pagxxgy DRYWELL SA-516 s SHEIA. GRACE 70 al = 22.61 p ,ggggy ,(4)
= 33.37 SECONDARY 67,83 N/A s> STRESS RANCE PRIMARY 19.30 33.87 s ,= 19.30 MEMBRANE
- # 28*95 VENT SA-516 s 50*81 LINE GRADE 70 al = 22*61 K'Ma m t s = 33.87 PRIMARY +(4)
I SECCNCARY. 69.83 N/A STRESS RA1CE P PI.WY 18*38 33.47 MEMB m E VEn N 'm . 19.30 VEM REACER $4-516 s EM8 m7' 28.95 50.81 SPHERICAL GRJfE 70 21 = 22.61 -
M CTICM 33,g7 pggxApr .(4)
,Y 3ECONDARY 67.83 N/A STRESS RAN W PRIfAkY l'* *8?
= 19.30 MENIIANE LOCAL PRIMARY 28*99 50*81 VENT SA-516 MEM8"ANE HEADER GRACE 70 *si
- 22*81 mRNT3 PRIMARY +(4) s = 33.87 SICCNCARY 67.83 N/A Y
STRESS MNGE PRIMARY MEMBRANE 19.30 33.87
, ,g,,3g LOCAL PRIMARY DOWNCCMER SA-516 s MEMB m E
.H 50.81 GRACE 70 al
- 22.61 P RIMARY + ( 4 8 s
y = 33.87 SECONDARY 67.83 N/A STRESS RANGE PRIMARY MEMBRANE U*U U*87 SUPPORT s" = 19.30 LOCAL PRIMARY 5 I s, = 22.61 MEMBRANE 28.95 50.81 COLLAR c
s = 33.87 PRIMARY +(4)
Y SECONDARY 67.83 N/A STRESS RANGE SENOING 18.66 24.88 TENSILE 16.96 22.61 CCMPONENT SA-333 1.00 SCPPORTS COLUMNS (7) GRACE 1 8y
- 8* 7 COMBINED 1.00 COMP RESSIVE 11.84 15.79 INTERACTICN 1.00 1.00 SUPPORT 15.01 26.42 8 = 19.30 P RIMARY COLLAR SA-516 mc ggg PLATE TO GRACE 70 S = 33.87 VENT READER Y SECONOARY 45.03 N/A COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.114 nut 9ch
1 NOTES TO TABLE 3-2.3-1 4
L (1) MATERIAL PROPERTIES TAKEN AT MAXIMUM EVENT TEMPERATURES.
(2) SERVICE LEVEL B ALLOWABLES ARE USED WHEN EVALUATING NOC I, SBA II, IBA I, DBA I, AND DBA II LOAD COMBINATION RESULTS.
(3) SERVICE LEVEL C ALLOWABLES ARE USED WHEN EVALUATING THE DBA III LOAD COMBINATION RESULTS.
(4) THERMAL BENDING STRESSES ARE EXCLUDED WHEN EVALUATING PRIMARY-PLUS-SECONDARY STRESS RANGE.
(5) EVALUATION OF PRIMARY-PLUS-SECONDARY STRESS INTENSITY RANGE AND FATIGUE ARE NOT REQUIRED FOR LOAD COMBINATION DBA I.
, (6) THE ALLOWABLE STRESSES FOR LOCAL PRIMARY MEMBRANE STRESSES AT PENETRATIONS ARE INCREASED BY 1.3 WHEN EVALUATING LOAD COMBINATIONS DBA I AND DBA II.
(7) STRESSES DUE TO THEFRAL LOADS MAY BE EXCLUDED WHEN EVALU- '
ATING COMPONENT SUPPORTS .
m 1
\ COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.115 nutqqh
Table 3-2.3-2 ALLOWABLE DISPLACEMENTS AND CYCLES FOR VENT LINE BELLOWS ALLOWABLE TYPE VALUE (INCH)
COMPRESSION 0.075 AXIAL EXTENSION 0.375 PERIDIONAL 0.625 LATERAL LONGITUDINAL 0.625 NUMBER OF CYCLES OF MAXIMUM 1000 DISPLACEMENTS O
i l
i CCM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.116 nutgqh
3-2.4 Methods of Analysis Section 3-2.2.1 presents the governing loads for which the Dresden Units 2 and 3 vent systems are evaluated.
Section 3-2.4.1 discusses the methodology used to -
evaluate the vent system for the overall effects of all loads except for those loads which exhibit asymmetric characteristics. The effects of asymmetric loads on i the vent system are evaluated using the methodology discussed in Section 3-2.4-2. The methodology used to examine the local effects at the penetrations and intersections of the vent system major components is discussed in Section 3-2.4.3.
t V Section 3-2.4.4 discusses the methodology used to formulate results for the controlling load combina-tions, examines fatigue effects, and evaluates the analysis results for corparison with the applicable acceptance limits.
l l
l
(
l i
i l
\
COM-02-041-3 i Revision 0 3-2.117 nutggh
3-2.4.1 Analysis for Major Loads With the exception of a few minor differences, the Dresden Units 2 and 3 vent system geometry is identical to that of Ouad cities Units 1 and 2. These differences are:
o The vent line angle of inclination at Dresden is approximately one degree higher than at Quad Cities.
o The Dresden units drywell-vent line penetrations include a 1/2" thick conical transition segment connected to a 3-5/8" thick cylindrical nozzle at the drywell ends. The Ouad Cities penetrations include a 1/2" thick spherical transition segment connected to a 3" thick nozzle at the drywell ends.
o The inclined portion of the downcomer is 1/2" thick in the Dresden units, whereas in Quad Cities it is 3/8" thick.
o The vacuum breakers in the Dresden units are located outside of the suppression chambers, and
' their headers penetrate the vent lines near the COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.118 nutp_qh
i i
! drywell ends; in the Ouad Cities units they are attached to the vent line-vent header spherical junctions.
The effect of these differences in the overall vent system analysis were investigated and found to be insignificant. Therefore, the analyses were performed on analytical models which are based on Quad Cities Units 1 and 2 plant unique geometry. Various models used in the analysis are described in the following paragraphs.
With the exception of the non-repetitive pattern of the downcomer longitudinal bracing system in Dresden Unit 2, the repetitive nature of the vent system geometry is such that the vent system can be divided into 16 identical segments which extend from midbay (MB) of the vent line bay to midbay of the non-vent 'line bay (Figure 3-2.1-1). To account for the non-repetitive pattern of the longitudinal bracing system in Dresden Unit 2, two conditions may be idealized. First, it is t
I assumed the bracing system is included in the 1/16 l
segment. In this assumption, all 96 downcomers are assumed to be braced longitudinally (100% bracing condition). Second, it is assumed that the 1/16 segments do not include any bracing system. With this b
O COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.119 l
nutggb
assumption, a no bracing condition is developed. These two idealized conditions will bound any particular bracing condition which might exist in any particular 1/16 segment . of the two Dresden vent systems. The governing loads which act on the vent system, except for seismic loads and a few chugg ing load cases, exhibit symmetric or anti-symmetric characteristics (or both) with respect to a 1/16 segment of the vent system. The analysis of the vent system for the majority of the governing loads is taerefore performed for the two 1/16 segments described above.
Two beam models of the 1/16 segment reflecting the above conditions are used to obtain the response of the vent system to all loads except those resulting in asymmetric effects on the vent system. The resulting responses from the two models are compared and the more severe of the two is selected for Code evaluation (Fig-ures 3-2.4-1 and 3-2.4-2 ) . The models include the vent l line, the vent header, the downcomers, the support l
columns, and the downcomer lateral bracings. The longitudinal bracing is also included in one model.
l The local stiffness effects at the penetrations and j
intersections of the major vent system components (Figures 3 -2 .1 -7 , 3 -2 .1 -8 , and Figures 3-2.1-10 through 3 -2 . 1- 12 ) are included by using stiffness matrix COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.120 nutp_qh
~
elements of these penetrations and intersections. A matrix element for the vent line-drywel'1 penetration, which connects the upper end of the vent line to the transition segment, is developed using th'e , finite '
difference model of the penetration (Fig $ie 3-2.4-3).
A matrix element which connects the lower,end o,f the vent line to the beams on the centerline 'of the vent -
header and to the beams on the centerline-of the Quad Cities vacuum breaker nozzles, is developed using .the finite element model of the vent lihe-vent , header spherical junction (Figure 3-2.4-4). . ".,',
Finite element models of each downcomer-vent header; intersection, similar to the one shown in Figure
- O) t V 3-2.4-5, are used to develop matrix elements which connect the beams on the centerline of the vent header ,
to the upper ends of the downcomers at the downcomer miters. The length of the vent header segment in the .
analytical models usad for downcomer-vent header intersection stiffness determination is increased to ensure that vent header ovaling effects are properly accounted for. Use of this modeling approach has been verified using results from FSTF tests. Additional in forr.ation on the analytical models used to evaluate ,',
the penetrations and intersections of majo'r vent system components is contained in Section 3-2.4.3.
(m) COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.121 nutggh
The 1/16 beam model with longitudinal bracing contains 217 nodes, 214 beam elements, and 5 matrix elements.
The model without the bracing contains 205 nodes, 192 beam elements, and 5 matrix elements. The node l
spacings used in the two analytical models are identi-cal and are refined to ensure adequate distribution of mass and de t.ermina t ion of component frequencies and l
mode shapes and to facilitate accurate application of loadings. The stiffness and mass properties used in l the two models are identical and are based on the l
l nominal dimensions and densities of the materials used i
l to construct the vent system. Small displacement linear-elastic behavior is assumed throughout.
O The boundary conditions used in the two 1/16 beam j models are both physical and mathematical in nature.
The physical boundary conditions consist of pins provided at the attachments of the support columns to the suppression chamber r ing girder. The vent system columns are also assumed to be pinned in all directions at their upper ends. Additional physical boundary conditions include the elastic restraints provided at the attachment of the vent line to the drywell. The associated vent line-orywell penetration stiffnesses
! are included as a stiffness matrix element; its COPI-02-041-3 l Revision 0 3-2.122 I
nutqqh E RS
O development is discussed in the preceding paragraphs.
\b The mathematical boundary conditions consist of either symmetry, anti-symmetry, or a combination of both at the midbay planes, depending on the characteristics of the load being evaluated.
Additional mass is lumped along the length of the sub-merged portions of the downcomers, support columns, and bracings to account for the effective mass of water which acts with these components during dynamic load-ings. The total mass of water added is equal to the mass of water displaced by each of these components.
For all but the pool swell and CO dynamic loadings, the
] mass of water inside the submerged portion of the downcomers is included. The downcomers are assumed to contain air or steam (or both) during pool swell and condensation oscillation. The mass of this mixture is considered negligible.
A modal extraction analysis is performed using the two I
1/16 beam models of the vent system for the case with water inside the downcomers and for the case with no water inside the downcomers . All structural modes in i
the range of 0 to 60 hertz and 0 to 200 hertz, respec-tively, are extracted for these cases. Tables 3-2.4-1 through 3-2.4-4 show the resulting frequencies and mass CNl
\U COM 0 41-3 Revision 0 3-2.123 nutggb
participation factors. A comparison of the two 1/16 beam models' frequency analyses indicates that the two models have very similar dynamic behavior. As a result, in the remaining portion of this section, the results presented are based on the model which yields the higher magnitude of loads and stresses, where applicable.
Dynamic analyses using the two 1/16 beam models of the vent system are performed for the pool swell loads and CO loads specified in Section 3-2.2-1. The analyses consist of a transient analysis for pool swell loads and a harmonic analysis for CO loads. The modal super-position technique with 2% damping is utilized in both the transient and harmonic analyses. The pool swell and CO load frequencies are enveloped by including vent system frequencies to 100 hertz and 50 hertz, respec-tively.
The remaining vent system load cases specified in Sec-tion 3-2.2.1 involve either static loads or dynamic loads, which are evaluated using an equivalent static approach. For the latter, conservative dynamic ampli-fication factors are developed and applied to the maxi-mum spatial distributions of the individual dynamic loadings.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.124 nutg,gh
A The effects of asymmetric loads are evaluated using the two 180* beam models (discussed in Section 3-2.4,2).
Inertia forces due to horizontal seismic loads and con-centrated forces due to chugging downcomer lateral i
loads are also applied to the 180* beam model. Addi-tional information related to the vent system analysis for asymmetric loads is provided in Section 3-2.4.2.
The two 1/16 beam models are also used to generate loads for the evaluation of stresses in the major vent system component penetrations and intersections. Beam end loads, distributed loads, reaction loads, and inertia loads are developed from the two models and the O critical cases are applied to the detailed analytical models of the vent system penetrations and intersec-tions (Figures 3-2.4-3 through 3-2.4-5). Additional information related to the vent system penetrations and i
intersection stress evaluation is provided in Section 3-2.4.3.
The specific treatment of each load in the load catego-ries identified in Section 3-2.2.1 is discussed in the following paragraphs.
I t
Q COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.125 l
nutggh
l I
- 1. Dead Weight Loads
- a. Dead Weight of Steel: A static analysis is ,
I performed for a unit vertical acceleration ,
l applied to the weight of vent system steel.
- 2. Seismic Loads
- a. OBE Loads: A static analysis is performed for a 0.0679 vertical seismic acceleration applied to the weight of steel included in the 180' symmetric beam model. An additional static analysis is performed for the associ-ated inertia loads generated for a 0.25g seismic acceleration applied in each horizon-tal direction using the 180* symmetric and anti-symmetric beam model, respectively. The results of the three earthquake directions are combined using the square root of the sum of the squares (SRSS).
- b. SSE Loads: The procedure used to evaluate the 0.134g vertical and 0.50g horizontal SSE accelerations is the same as that discussed for OBE loads in Load Case 2a.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.126 nutgg.hh
,a a e4.a-w-4----. m A 4c JrA_m -mJ__ .-2.2.h..4 -- - 4 e-J Am+u.C+.4 ---o- h- - .-ma l-
,i
- 3. Pressure and Temperature Loads
, a. Normal Operating Internal Pressure Loads: A
> static analysis is performed for a 1.2 psi internal pressure applied as concentrated i
forces to the unreacted areas of the vent i
system.
4
- b. LOCA Internal Pressure Loads: A static anal- i ysis is performed for the SBA and IBA net i internal pressures applied as concentrated forces to the unreacted areas of the major components of the vent system. Figures 3-2.2-1 through 3-2.2-3 show these pressures.
The effects of DBA internal pressure loads are included in the pressurization and thrust loads discussed in Load Case 4a.
4
\
The movement of the suppression chamber due a
, to internal . pressure, although small in magnitude, is also applied.
- c. Normal Operating Temperature Loads: A static analysis is performed for the maximum normal operating temperature (Table 3-2.2-2). This
! temperature is uniformly applied to the por-
. tion of the vent system inside the suppres-l COM-02-041-3
- Revision 0 3-2.127 O
sion chamber. Corresponding temperatures of 70'F for the drywell and vent system components outside the suppression chamber and 131'F for the suppression chamber are also applied in this analysis,
- d. LOCA Temperature Loads: A static analysis is performed for the SBA, IBA, and DBA tempera-tures, which are uniformly applied to the major components and external components of the vent system. Figures 3-2.2-4 through 3-2.2-6 show these temperatures. Initial displacements are induced at the support I colum7 attachment points to the suppression chamber to consider the thermal expansion of I
the torus.
Concentrated forces are applied at the vent line-drywell penetration to account for the thermal expansion of the drywell during the SBA, IBA, and DBA events. The greater of the l
temperatures specified in Figure 3-2.2-4 and Table 3-2.2-2 is used in the analysis for SBA l temperatures.
l l
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.128 nutp_qh
- 4. Vent System Discharge Loads s DBA Pressurization and
- a. Thrust Loads: An equivalent static analysis is performed for the DBA pressurization and thrust loads.
Table 3-2.2-3 shows these loads. The values of the loads include dynamic amplification factors, which are computed on the basis of methods described in Reference 11 and through use of the dominant frequencies of affected components. The dominant frequencies are derived from harmonic analyses of these components. Figures 3-2.4-6 through 3-2.4-8 show the results of these harmonic analyses.
m
- 5. Pool Swell Loads
- a. Vent System Impact and Drag Loads: A dynamic analysis is performed for the vent line, the vent header, the spherical junction, down-comers, and the vent header deflector pool swell impact loads (Table 3-2.2-4, Figures 3-2.2-7 and 3-2.2-8).
- b. Drag Loads on Submerged Structures: A dynamic analysis is performed for pool swell drag loads on the downcomer longitudinal bracing. Table 3-2.2-5 shows these loads.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.129 nutg_qh
- c. Froth Impingement and Fallback Loads: A dynamic analysis is performed for froth impingement and fallback loads on the vent line and spherical junction.
- d. Pool Fallback Loads: Dynamic loads associ-ated with pool fallback loads are calculated for the downcomer lateral bracings, the down-comer ring plates, and the downcomer longitu-dinal bracing. For these dynamic loads, equivalent static loads are obtained which are applied to these components. Table 3-2.2-5 shows these loads.
- e. LOCA Water Jet Loads: An equivalent static l
- analysis is performed for LOCA water clearing i
I submerged structure loads on the vent system j support columns. Table 3-2.2-6 shows these loads. The values of the loads include dynamic amplification factors which are computed on the basis of methods described in Reference 11 and through use of the dominant frequency of the support columns. The domi-nant frequencies are derived from harmonic COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.130 nutp_qh
1 d
analyses of these components. Figure 3-2.4-6
! O- shows the results of these harmonic analyses. ,
- f. LOCA Bubble-Induced Loads: An equivalent static analysis is performed for LOCA air clearing submerged structure loads on the downcomers, the downcomer lateral bracings, the downcomer ring plates, the downcomer longitudinal bracing, and the support columns. Tables 3-2.2-6, 3-2.2-7, and i
j 3-2.2-8 show these loads. The values of the loads include dynamic amplification factors computed using the dominant frequencies of the affected structures. The dominant frequencies are derived from harmonic analyses of these components (Figures 3-2.4-6 through 3-2.4-11).
t
- 6. Condensation oscillation Loads f a. IBA CO Downcomer Loads: A dynamic analysis is performed for the IBA CO downcomer loads (Table 3-2.2-9). The dominant downcomer I frequency is determined from the harmonic 4
, results. Figure 3-2.4-12 indicates that the i
dominant downcomer frequency occurs in the frequency range of the second CO downcomer R
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.131 nutggb
load ha rmor.ic . The first and third CO down-comer load harmonics are therefore applied at !
I frequencies equal to 0.5 and 1.5 times the value of the dominant downcomer frequency.
- b. DBA CO Loads: The procedure used to evaluate the DBA CO downcomer loads (Table 3-2.2-10) is the same as that discussed for IBA CO downcomer loads in Lcad Case 6a.
- c. IBA CO Vent System Pressures: A dynamic analysis is performed for IBA CO vent system pressures on the vont line and vent header.
Table 3-2.2-11 shows these loads. The domi-nant vent line and vent header frequencies are determined from the harmonic analysis results (Figure 3-2.4-13). An additional static analysis is performed for a 1.7 psi internal pressure applied as concentrated l forces to the unreacted areas of the vent system.
i
- d. DBA CO Vent System Pressure Loads: The procedure used to evaluate the DBA CO vent system pressure loads (Table 3-2.2-11) is the COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.132 h
nutp_qERS
q same as that discussed for IBA CO vent system pressure loads in Load Case 6c.
- e. IBA CO Submerged Structure Loads: As previously discussed, pre-chug loada described in Load Case 7c are specified in lieu of IBA CO loads.
- f. DBA CO Submerg'ed Structure Loads: An equivalent static analysis is performed for the DBA CO submerged structure loads on the downcomer lateral bracings, the downcomer ring plates, the downcomer longitudinal bracing, and the support columns. Tables 3-2.2-12 and 3-2.2-13 show these loads, which include dynamic amplification factors computed using the methodology described for LOCA water jet and air bubble-induced drag loads in Load Cases Se and 5f.
- 7. Chugging Loads
! a. Chugging Downcomer Lateral Loads: A harmonic analysis of the downcomers is performed to determine the dominant downcomer frequency for use in calculating the maximum chugging l COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.133
- nutash 1
load magnitude. Figures 3-2.4-14 and 3-2.4-15 show the harmonic analysis results. Table 3-2.2-14 shows the resulting chugging load magnitudes. A static analysis using the 180' beam model is performed for chugging downcomer lateral Load Cases 1 through 10. Tables 3-2.2-15 and 3-2.2-16 show these load cases.
A static analysis is also performed for the maximum chugging load (Table 3-2.2-17) applied to a single downcomer in the in-plane and out-of plane directions. The results of this analysis are used in evaluating fatigue.
O
- b. Chugging Vent System Pressures: A dynamic analysis is performed for the acoustic vent system pressure oscillation applied to the unreacted areas of the vent system. Table 3-2.2-19 shows these loads. The dominant vent line and vent header frequencies are determined from the harmonic analysis results (Figure 3-2.4-16). Gross vent system pressure oscillation with a frequency of 0.7 hertz is bounded by acoustic vent system COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.134 nutp_qh
pressure oscillation with a frequency range V of 6.9 to 9.5 hertz. Therefore, no separate analysis was performed for this case.
- c. Pre-Chug Submerged Structure Loads: An equi-valent static analysis is performed for the pre-chug submerged structure loads on the downcomer lateral bracing, the downcomer ring plates, the downcomer longitudinal bracing, and the support columns. Tables 3-2.2-19 and 3-2.2-20 show these loads. The loads include dynamic amplification factors which are computed using the methodology described for 4
s LOCA air bubble-induced drag loads on submerged structures in Load Case 5f.
- d. Post-Chug Submerged Structure Loads: The procedure used to evaluate the post-chug sub-merged structure loads on the downcomer lateral bracings and the downcomer ring plates, the downcomer longitudinal bracing members, and the support columns is the same as that discussed for pre-chug submerged structure loads in Load Case 6c. Tables 3-2.2-21 and 3-2.2-22 show these loads.
a
) COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.135 nutggb
- 8. Safety Relief Valve Discharge Loads
- a. T quencher Water Jet Loads: An equivalent static analysis is performed for SRV dis-charge water clearing submerged structure loads on the vent system support columns.
Table 3-2.2-23 shows these loads. The values of the loads include dynamic amplification f actors which are calculated on the basis of methods described in Reference 11 and use of the dominant frequency of the support columns.
- b. SRV Bubble-Induced Drag Loads: An equivalent static analysis is performed for SRV dis-charge drag loads on the downcomers, the downcomer lateral bracing, the downcomer rings, the downcomer longitudinal bracing members, and the support columns. Tables 3-2.2-23, 3-2.2-24, and 3-2.2-25 show these loads. The loads include a DLF of 2.5, as discussed in Section 1-4.2.4.
- 9. Piping Reaction Loads
- a. At the vent line-SRV piping penetration, the reaction loads are developed using the proce-dures described in volume 5. These loads are COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.136 nutR9h
applied to the vent system model to evaluate the overall vent system response.
- 10. Containment Interaction Loads
- a. Containment Structure Motions: The motions of the drywell and the suppression chamber due to internal pressure and thermal expan-sion are applied to the 1/16 beam model. The ,
motions caused by loads in other load cate-gories acting on the drywell and suppression chamber have been evaluated and found to have a negligible effect on the vent system.
N The methodology described in the preceding paragraphs results in a conservative evaluation of the vent system response and associated stresses for the governing loads.
\
COM 0 41-3 Revision 0 3-2.137 nutggh
Table 3-2.4-1 VENT SYSTEM FREQUENCY ANALYSIS RESULTS WITH WATER INSIDE DOWNCOMERS, BASED ON DOWNCOMERS BRACED LONGITUDINALLY MASS PARTICIPATION FACTOR (lb)
MODE FREQUENCY NUMEER (Hz)
X(II Y C1I III Z
kkk kNhIN khs$Nh 12.319 57.89 kkkbNM! IbhhINIb 0.45 1014.07 2
3 12.336 0.86 0.00 7.63 4 12.336 1243.89 0.01 25.93 5 12.340 0.00 0.00 0.00 6 13.928 263.21 13.37 2204.80 7 23.065 170.21 263.75 2804.29 8 24.905 0.07 877.91 3260.09 9 26.'78 7.19 8558.96 192.09 l 10 29.490 57.09 2826.57 148.13 11 30.484 63.54 86.51 211.65 i 12 31.153 101.72 89.42 2118.27 l 13 31.333 0.64 0.03 20.14 14 33.251 9.16 3248.48 466.12 15 42.011 20.92 3882.26 35.86 16 45.379 17.18 0.17 2.11 17 45.428 52.94 19.41 13.46 18 45.450 0.00 0.09 0.00 l
19 45.591 20.52 9.89 8.82 20 46.140 1974.73 347.75 186.46 21 49.788 51.46 12.76 12.50 22 50.384 138.71 63.57 9.30 l
23 50.763 5.22 4.88 19.92 24 51.855 6.68 0.52 4.39 25 51.910 0.27 0.00 0.02 26 51.915 34.42 1.48 2.18 27 51.969 0.23 0.06 123.16 l 28 54.878 190.32 67.57 906.60 29 60.750 5969.17 0.20 53.36 COM-02-041-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.138 nutp_qh
Table 3-2.4-2
\
VENT SYSTEM FREQUENCY ANALYSIS RESULTS WITHOUT WATER INSIDE DOWNCOMERS, BASED ON DOWNCOMERS BRACED LONGITUDINALLY MODE FREQUENCY
^ " ^
NUMBER (Hz)
X (1) Y (1) Z( }
l 11.251 3.57 0.17 13949.57 2 12.335 164.26 G.06 51.08 3 12.336 1127.06 0.02 14.63 4 12.340 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 12.369 1.80 0.35 122.94 6 17.326 209.78 43.66 2137.90 7 24.396 58.24 944.14 4900.36 8 26.767 1.71 8719.36 136.36 9 29.276 126.63 889.58 124.81
/N 10 29.693 5.66 2206.97 0.01 kss 11 30.571 8.64 1.73 13.20 12 31.331 0.25 0.86 2.60 13 31.791 88.29 19.47 2245.28 14 33.374 0.04 3188.73 838.22 15 42.107 0.29 3896.08 22.69 16 45.378 3.55 0.26 0.36 17 45.447 10.08 8.03 5.73 18 45.450 1.08 1.03 0.43 19 45.710 0.93 0.49 1.49 20 46.661 1693.78 297.06 108.40 21 49.914 0.20 19.63 12.18 22 50.522 12.67 69.14 18.07 23 51.005 5.26 5.90 43.99 R.
s OA COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.139 nutg,gh
Table 3-2.4-2 VENT SYSTEM FREQUENCY ANALYSIS RESULTS WITHOUT WATER INSIDE DOWNCOMERS, BASED ON DOWNCOMEFS BRACED LONGITUDINALLY (Continued)
MODE A ON FACTOR (lb)
FREQUENCY NUMBER (iiz) ,, ( 1)
X (1) Y (1) a 24 51.866 1.79 0.31 2.02 25 51.910 0.06 0.00 0.00 26 51.921 20.18 2.15 5.08 27 51.976 0.70 0.07 130.22 28 57.026 11.64 87.73 1037.09 29 72.082 1696.91 52.28 133.79 30 75.320 2592.92 11.49 23.99 31 81.639 3676.24 1.87 1.21 32 86.984 147.08 10.37 0.03 33 98.983 77.87 62.28 20.44 34 104.056 33.16 87.25 0.33 35 106.916 331.12 13.88 0.18 36 117.093 468.25 7.21 1.71 37 119.289 117.48 0.02 3.38 38 122.180 2399.03 0.76 44.96 39 123.984 84.18 1.86 0.02 40 124.575 7.25 0.03 22.95 l 41 124.605 0.00 0.00 5.79 l 42 124.621 0.00 0.00 0.00 l 43 124.939 86.47 0.18 0.35 l 44 128.17C 196.78 38.45 16.42
! 45 131.974 371.66 77.83 5.03 46 135.544 409.87 16.26 0.27 l
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.140 9
nutp_qh
k Table 3-2.4-2 VENT SYSTEM FREQUENCY ANALYSIS RESULTS WITHOUT WATER INSIDE DOWNCOMERS, BASED ON DOWNCOMERS BRACED LONGITUDINALLY (Concluded)
MODE FREQUENCY MASS PARTICIPATION FACTOR (lb)
NUMBER (Hz)
X (1) Y (1) Z( }
47 138.842 141.08 65.09 4.66 48 142.816 48.30 0.03 9.73 49 144.294 14.10 4.57 1.38 50 148.277 34.36 0.08 0.06 51 151.016 626.81 12.51 11.86 52 155.896 108.64 0.17 5.43 53 156.475 406.52 2.81 7.48 7-^ 54 156.850 626.25 2.79 11.57
(/ 55 157.193 99.69 0.58 1.98 56 158.028 23.70 0.00 0.81 57 158.456 52.55 0.22 6.45 58 163.809 368.44 17.50 2.31 59 166.077 58.27 0.05 0.03 60 170.558 38.68 1.93 10.84 61 171.660 2.39 31.03 0.98 62 181.975 62.99 0.16 1.25 63 188.423 0.00 7.41' 8.92 64 191.721 109.35 11.93 8.50 65 194.756 0.00 0.48 0.07 66 197.158 10.61 1.47 2.49 (1) SEE FIGURE 3-2. 4-1 FOR COORDINATE DIRECTIONS .
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.141 nutp_ql)
Table 3-2.4-3 VENT SYSTEM FREQUENCY ANALYSIS RESULTS WITH WATER INSIDE DOWNCOMERS , BASED ON DOWNCOMERS NOT BRACED LONGITUDINALLY MASS PARTICIPATION FACTOR (lb)
MODE FREQUENCY NUMBER (Hz) X Y Z l 9.170 6.28 0.25 13100.91 2 12.272 140.88 0.75 2416.99 3 12.334 1279.56 0.13 10.87 4 12.335 241.29 0.00 24.73 5 12.340 0.00 0.00 0.00 6 12.519 63.14 0.34 804.25 7 13.576 7195.09 29.14 366.76 8 13.824 271.25 0.99 63.70 3 14.195 2170.71 0.89 930.28 10 14.579 615.18 2.51 118.02 11 15.228 1315.30 1.13 1.67 12 15.781 223.59 58.44 217.42 13 16.138 1.07 0.44 3.08 14 25.228 7.01 686.17 3958.61 15 27.125 0.66 5617.46 79.05 16 29.828 0.04 2836.92 88.31 17 30.362 51.78 0.08 44.15 18 31.171 0.87 5.60 1.40 l
l 1
COM-02-041-3 O
Revision 0 3-2 .142 nutp_qh
Table 3-2.4-3 VENT SYSTEM FREQUENCY ANALYSIS RESULTS WITH WATER INSIDE DOWNCOMERS , BASED ON DOWNCOMERS NOT BRACED LONGITUDINALLY (Concluded)
MASS PARTICIPATION FACTOR (lb)
NUMBER (Hz) X Y Z 19 32.214 42.56 229.04 2158.29 20 34.126 175.26 2810.08 1169.38 21 43.495 353.89 3077.73 127.05 22 45.993 757.12 1357.12 235.52 23 50.737 264.49 83.29 60.38 24 51.844 4.90 0.70 3.18 25 51.910 0.01 0.00 0.00 0 v 26 27 51.928 51.975 3.96 0.00 4.99 0.06 5.86 106.17 28 54.649 0.07 68.04 1121.59 l
l
\
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.143 nutggh
Table 3-2.4-4 VENT SYSTEM FREQUENCY ANALYSIS RESULTS WITHOUT WATER INSIDE DONFCOMERS , BASED ON DOWNCOMERS NOT BRACED LONGITUDINALLY MODE
^ ^ ^ ^
FREQUENCY NUMBER (Hz) 1 11.330 9.25 0.16 10659.42 2 12.335 652.53 0.10 27.88 3 12.336 694.98 0.01 53.33 4 12.340 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 12.358 1.02 0.25 234.09 6 15.563 131.70 3.55 1853.38 7 16.973 4843.07 81.76 277.84 8 17.740 488.26 1.64 318.58 9 18.004 1141.53 0.01 613.86 h 10 18.547 131.06 6.45 0.24 11 19.267 837.61 3.00 0.99 12 19.926 87.64 153.07 147.35 13 20.777 0.00 1.56 16.39 14 25.733 19.89 781.12 2911.46 15 27.152 1.31 5372.76 90.24 16 29.873 0.11 2809.01 67.07 17 30.470 84.46 16.55 44.42 18 31.177 1.70 5.39 1.07 l
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.144 nutp_gh
Table 3-2.4-4 VENT SYSTEM FREQUENCY ANALYSIS RESULTS WITHOUT WATER INSIDE DOWNCOMERS , BASED ON DOWNCOMERS NOT BRACED LONGITUDINALLY (Concluded)
^ ^ }
MODE FREQUENCY NUMBER (Hz) 19 32.567 14.57 578.17 2009.90 20 34.494 248.99 2614.05 1605.61 21 43.654 315.11 3292.51 73.98 22 46.503 764.21 1036.62 149.28 23 50.960 288.89 84.47 71.92 24 51.853 3.07 0.54 1.92 25 51.910 0.01 0.00 0.00 (M. 26 51.935 1.67 6.56 12.47 27 51.989 0.00 0.28 111.18 28 55.554 5.46 86.55 1135.12 29 73.252 45.99 101.36 152.91 30 85.032 0.47 0.02 0.79 21 94.307 35.00 1.01 8.99 32 100.893 29.66 177.38 8.13 l
l l
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.145 nutggh
(K)VL/DW Y
VENT LINE l
[Kl VENT HEADER DEFLECTOR SUPPORT VENT HEADER T VH/DC l
VACUUM BREAKER (1)
/ (TYP) h
( VENT HEADER j
! DEFLECTOR -
1
-~ _
A O 1
i
/ DOWNCOMER LATERAL BRACING (TYP)
DOWNCOMER SUPPORT LONGITUDINAL COLUMN BRACING (TYP)
(TYP) o il (1) BASED ON QUAD CITIES UNITS 1 AND 2 CONFIGURATION.
l Figure 3-2.4-1 VENT SYSTEM 1/16 SEGMENT BEAM MODEL - ISOMETRIC VIEW WITH DOWNCOMER LONGITUDINAL BRACING COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.146 nutg,gh
I l
(KhvL/DW n
VENT LINE X-III VENT HEADER (Kj VL/VH DEFLECTOR SUPPORT VENT HEACER lVH/DC (TYP)
VACUUM #
BREAKER
\ .
VENT HEADER DEFLECTOR l
DOWNCOMER LATERAL BRACING (TYP )
SUPPORT COLUMN (TYP)
{
(1) BASED ON QUAD CITIES UNITS 1 AND 2 CONFIGURATION.
Figure 3-2.4-2 VENT SYSTEM 1/16 SEGMENT BEAM MODEL - ISOMETRIC VIEW WITHOUT DOWNCOMER LONGITUDINAL BRACING b
\ / COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.147 nutgg])
r l
C VENT LINE-DRYWELL W
{ PENETRATION - -
0 1
396.0" IR 368.5" IR JET DEFLECTOR 3
Z DRYWELL SHELL 17.75*] --+
4
" '4 INSERT PLATE NOZZLE 49.25" IR 40.6875" 49.5*
(1) BASED ON QUAD CITIES UNITS 1 AND 2 CONFIGURATION.
Figure 3-2.4-3 VENT LINE-DRYWELL PENETRATION AXISYMMETRIC FINITE DIFFERENCE MODEL - VIEW OF TYPICAL MERIDIAN COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.148 nutggh
r\
!'")
.Mk4GW
~
- g. -_ - _E/r I I If \
r , '
Nm \ '
\\
,M i 6
,/,Nl ,
.. p ~
i
@ $%s s
I :g
~
j
~
m .
mu op s
y 4,Y N l
' ,d f
f
/ .I .g;
-~ ~
d_ ,
{
f _.
f - 1
-::7J14 j
, , k '
r ,
[ Q s[-- -sL --
I _ _
/ / lit d
- l. ih g ' '
(~
j' G D i I
\ \ d ,
/ \
\/ Q _
r ' ,- -
4 s
_w+ _p .
(1) (1)
- (1) BASED ON QUAD CITIES UNITS 1 AND 2 CONFIGURATION.
1 Figure 3-2.4-4 VENT LINE-VENT HEADER SPHERICAL JUNCTION FINITE ELEMENT MODEL 1
{
\
COM-02-041-3 i
l
'\_ . '
j Revision 0 3-2.149 1
nutggh l
O
\
\w s 'l
\
)( hN
'1
\
N\
/ i,
\
.s -;
\ '.
\
, 'h s
[ l
\
js 'gsix
\ ' '
.? ..\ .
ja ,
l N
. ,\
/M [W j \
," ' / \.
/ "
W s '
A\//
N;; / @
Figure 3-2.4-5 DOWNCOMER-VENT HEADER INTERSECTION FINITE ELEMENT MODEL - ISOMETRIC VIEW COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.150 nutggh
SUPPORT COLUMN, f = 12.33 Hz cr
$ 0.06 -
5 8
Q 0.04 -
A n
" 0. 0 2 -
5 8
e z
0- , , , , ,
v 10 20 30 40 50 60 FREQUENCY (Hz)
- 1. RESULTS SHOWN ARE OBTAINED BY APPLYING UNIT DRAG PRESSURES TO SUBMERGED PORTION OF THE COLUMNS IN IN-PLANE AND OUT-OF -PLANE DIRECTIONS RELATIVE TO MITERED JOINT.
- 2. RESULTS SHOWN ARE TYPICAL FOR INSIDE AND OUTSIDE COLUMNS IN EITHER DIRECTION.
l l
l Figure 3-2.4-6 HARMONIC ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR SUPPORT COLUMN SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOAD FREQUENCY DETERMINATION i
COM-02-041-3
\ 3-2.151 Revision 0 nutggh l
O IN-PLANE, f = 9.277 Hz OUT-OF-PLANE, f > 60.000 Hz E4 0.003 5
g IN-PLANE M
OUT-OF-PLANE
- A c.
Q 0.002 -
N x
N
$ 0. 001 -
m 8 l E
0 0 j
^ - , - = =
s-50 60 10 20 30 40 FREQUENCY (Hz)
- 1. RESULTS SHOWN ARE OBTA'NED BY APPLYING UNIT PRESSURES TO DOWNCOMER SUBMERGED PORTION IN IN-PLANE AND OUT-OF-PLANE DIRECTIONS.
- 2. FREQUENCIES ARE DETERMINED WITH WATER INSIDE SUBMERGED PORTION OF THE DOWNCOMERS .
- 3. RESULTS SHOWN ARE TYPICAL FOR ALL LONGITUDINALLY BRACED DOWNCOMERS.
Figure 3-2.4-7 HARMONIC ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR DOWNCOMER SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOAD FREQUENCY DETERMINATION, BASED ON DOWNCOMERS BRACED LONGITUDINALLY COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.152 -
nutp_qh
f \
V IN-PLANE, f = 9.170 Hz cr OUT-OF-PLANE, f = 13.576 Hz 0.002 IN-PLANE
__ OUT-OF-PLANE a.
O C
A y 0.001-U i 5 i !!
% j iI E l1.
8 ill m ) / \!\
o 8 0
J' .
.. ,5 "~~ "
10 20 30 40 FREQUENCY (Hz)
- 1. RESULTS SHOWN ARE OBTAINED BY APPLYING UNIT PRESSURES TO DOWNCOMER SUBMERGED PORTION IN IN-PLANE AND OUT-OF-PLANE DIRECTIONS.
- 2. FREQUENCIES ARE DETERMINED WITH WATER INSIDE SUBMERGED PORTION OF THE DOWNCOMERS .
- 3. RESULTS SHOWN ARE TYPICAL FOR ALL LONGITUDINALLY UNBRACED DOWNCOMERS .
Figure 3-2.4-8 HARMONIC ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR DOWNCOMER l SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOAD FREQUENCY DETERMINATION, l BASED ON DOWNCOMERS NOT BRACED LONGITUDINALLY COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.153 nutggj]
O VERTICAL f cr = 31.15 Hz TRANSVERSE f = 31.15 Hz 0.002 VERTICAL / TRANSVERSE a
13 5
m 0.001 -
E n
v1 G
! 0 , , , , ,
10 20 30 40 50 60 FREQUENCY (Hz)
- 1. RESULTS SHOWN ARE OBTAINED BY APPLYING UNIT FORCES TO LATERAL BRACINGS MIDSPAN IN THE VERTICAL AND TRANSVERSE DIRECTIONS.
- 2. RESULTS SHOWN ARE TYPICAL FOR ALL LATERAL BRACINGS.
Figure 3-2.4-9 HARMONIC ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR LATERAL BRACING SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOAD FREQUENCY DETERMINATION l
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.154 nutg,qhh
x VERTICAL f = 50.09 Hz TRANSVERSE f = 50.76 Hz 0.003 VERTICAL y TRANSVERSE E
$ 0.002-5 ,
Ce I 3
O z
$ 0.001-a '
E l
,/
~
~ ~ ~
0 f 3 , ,
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 FREQUENCY (cps)
- 1. RESULTS SHOWN ARE OBTAINED BY APPLYING UNIT FORCES TO MIDSPAN OF THE LONGITUDINAL BRACINGS IN THE l
VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL DIRECTIONS.
- 2. RESULTS SHOWN ARE TYPICAL FOR ALL BRACING COMPONENTS EXCEPT DIAGONAL BRACINGS.
Figure 3-2.4-10 HARMONIC ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR LONGITUDINAL BRACING HORIZONTAL MEMBER SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOAD FREQUENCY DETERMINATION
% ,/ COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.155 nutggh
O MINOR AXIS f cr = 45.45 Hz MAJOR AXIS f > 60.00 Hz 0.006 MINOR AXIS y .____. MAJOR AXIS ca 5
U 0.004-5 c.
3 Q
5 0.002- l ti
- c. I 8 lsi E
l\
0 0
" j ,_
10
___ , ' s - ,
20 30 40
'^'s _
50 60 g
FREQUENCY (Hz)
- 1. RESULTS SHOWN ARE OBTAINED BY APPLYING UNIT FORCES TO MIDSPAN OF THE DIAGON... BRACING IN THE MAJOR AND MINOR AXES DI RECTIONS .
l
- 2. RESULTS SHOWN FOR MAJOR AXIS ARE MAGNIFIED 100 TIMES.
l
- 3. RESULTS SHOWN ARE TYPICAL FOR ALL DIAGONAL BRACINGS.
i I
l l
Figure 3-2.4-11 HARMONIC ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR LONGITUDINAL BRACING DIAGONAL MEMBER SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOAD FREQUENCY DETERMINATION COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.156 nutp_qh
\
)
/
f = 11.25 Hz r.c 5 0.0006-8 en o
0.0004 -
C 5
g 0.0002 -
N O
n u s
o 0 . , , ,
10 20 30 40 50 FREQUENCY (Hz)
- 1. RESULTS SHOWN ARE OBTAINED BY APPLYING UNIT INTERNAL PRESSURES TO ONE DOWNCOMER IN A DOWNCOMER PAIR.
- 2. FREQUENCIES ARE DETERMINED WITHOUT WATER INSIDE SUBMERGED PORTION OF DOWNCOMERS .
- 3. RESULTS SHOWN ARE TYPICAL FOR ALL DOWNCOMERS .
Figure 3-2.4-12 HARMONIC ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR CONDENSATION OSCILLATION DOWNCOMER LOAD FREQUENCY DETERMINATION COM-02-041-3 v Revision 0 3-2 .157 nutggh
O VENT LINE f = 42.10 Hz VENT HEADER f = 24.40 Hz VENT LINE AXIAL DISPLACEMENT l .06- 4
--- DC/VH VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT lt Il s I\
z I\
$ .04- 1 i y i I I \
< \
a l f $ / \
I 5 .02-
/
\
\
I / \
l 't
\ / \
_ ,a - t#
, \
i e 4 0 10 20 30 40 50 FREQUENCY (Hz)
- 1. RESULTS SHOWN ARE OBTAINED BY APPLYING A 2.5 PSI INTERNAL PRESSURE TO UNREACTED AREAS OF THE VENT SYSTEM.
l Figure 3-2.4-13 l
HARMONIC ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR CONDENSATION OSCILLATION VENT SYSTEM PRESSURE LOAD FREQUENCY DETERMINATION COM-02-041-3 ,
Revision 0 3-2.158 nutggh
/ 1 V
f = 9.277 Hz E
c.
m 2-C N
2 A
1 c:
8 s
O O A 0 , , , , ,
10 20 30 40 50 b)
( FREQUENCY (Hz)
- 1. RESULTS SHOWN ARE OBTAINED BY APPLYING UNIT FORCES TO DOWNCOMER ENDS IN THE IN-PLANE DIRECTION.
- 2. FREQUENCIES ARE DETERMINED WITH WATER INSIDE SUBMERGED PORTION OF THE DOWNCOMERS.
- 3. RESULTS SHOWN ARE TYPICAL FOR ALL LONGITUDINALLY BRACED DOWNCOMERS .
! Figure 3-2.4-14 HARMONIC ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR CHUGGING DOWNCOMER LATERAL LOADS FREQUENCY DETERMINATION , BASED ON DOWNCOMERS BRACED LONGITUDINALLY COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.159 nutg,gh l .. . _ - - _ .
O f = 9.170 Hz cr 0.002 b
E 5
5 m
O Q
A y0.001-N 5
C E
8 E
8 0
10 20 30 40 i FREQUENCY (Hz) l
- 1. RESULTS SHOWN ARE OBTAINED BY APPLYING UNIT FORCES TO DOWNCOMER ENDS IN THE IN-PLANE DIRECTION.
- 2. FREQUENCIES ARE DETERMINED WITH WATER INSIDE SUBMERGED PORTION OF THE DOWNCOMERS .
- 3. RESULTS SHOWN ARE TYPICAL FOR ALL LONGITUDINALLY UNBRACED DOWNCOMERS .
l Figure 3-2.4-15 HARMONIC ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR CHUGGING DOWNCOMER l
LATERAL LOADS FREQUENCY DETERMINATION, BASED ON DOWNCOMERS NOT BRACED LONGITUDINALLY COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.160 nutggh
l VENT HEADER f = 42.01 Hz cr VENT LINE f r = 54.878 Hz DC/VH VERTICAL 0.06 - '
VENT LINE AXIAL f
s z
m M
A 0.04 --
C.
N
- A i 's 0.02 - 1 s l \
O ,
4
s n
/\
~
/'
i \
\*
.--- - R .,^g s ' 's, ,r' "",,,
O e i i i i 10 20 30 40 50 60 FREQUENCY (Hz)
- 1. RESULTS SHOWN ARE OBTAINED BY APPLYING 2.5 AND 3.0 PSI INTERNAL PRESSURES TO UNREACTED AREAS OF THE VENT LINE AND VENT HEADER, RESPECTIVELY.
Figure 3-2.4-16 HAPRONIC ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR CHUGGING VENT SYSTEM PRESSURE LOAD FREQUENCY DETEPRINATION COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.161 nutggh
3-2.4.2 Analysis for Asymmetric Loads The asymmetric loads acting on the vent system are evaluated by decomposing each of the asymmetric load-ings into symmetric or anti-symmetric components (or both) with respect to a 180* segment of the vent system. The analysis of the vent system for asymmetric loads is performed for a 180* segment of the vent system.
l A beam model of a 180* segment of the vent system (Fig-
! ure 3-2.4-17), based on the Dresden Unit 2 downcomer longitudinal bracings configuration (Figure 3-2.1-13),
j is used to obtain the response of the vent system to asymmetric loads. The plane of symmetry due to the uniqueness of the bracing pattern is at a 45* clockwise
- rotation from true north (Figure 3-2.1-13). Another l
l 180* beam model (Figure 3-2.4-18) based on the Dresden i
Unit 3 downcomer longitudinal bracing configurations l
(Figure 3-2.1-14) is also used to obtain the response i
of the vent system to asymmetric loads. The resulting 1
responses from the two beam models are compared and the more severe of the two is selected for Code evalua-tion. The two models include the vent lines, the spherical junctions, the vent header, downcomers, downcomer lateral bracings, the downcomer longitudinal bracings, and the vent header deflector.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.162 nutggb
\s Many of the modeling techniques used in the two 180*
beam models, such as those used for local mass and stiffness determination, are the same as those utilized in the 1/16 beam model of the vent system discussed in Section 3-2.4.1. The local stiffness effects at the vent line-drywell penetrations, vent line-vent header spherical junctions, and the downcomer-vent header intersections are included using stiffness matrix elements for these penetrations and intersections. The pin conditions are assumed at the attachments of the support columns to the suppression chamber.
The 180* beam model, based on Dresden Unit 2 downcomer longitudinal bracing configuration, contains 747 nodes, 749 elastic beams, and 34 matrix elements, whereas the 180* beam model, based on Dresden Unit 3 downcomer longitudinal bracing configuration, contains 701 nodes, 738 elastic beams, and 32 matrix elements. These models are as refined as the 1/16 beam model of the vent system and they are used directly to characterize i
l the response of the vent system to asymmetric I
loadings. They include those components and local stiffnesses which have an effect on the overall response of the vent system. The stiffness and mass i
properties used in the model are based on the nominal
! C/ COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.163 nutggh
dimensions and densities of the materials used to con-struct the vent system. Small displacement linear-elastic behavior is assumed throughout.
The boundary conditions used in the two 180' beam models are both physical and mathematical in nature.
The physical boundary conditions used in the models are similar to those used in the 1/16 beam model of the vent system. The mathematical boundary conditions used in the model consist of either symmetry, anti-symmetry, or a combination of both at the 0* and 180* planes.
The specific boundary condition used depends on the characteristics of the load being evaluated.
Additional water mass is lumped along the length of the submerged portion of the downcomers and support columns in a manner similar to that used in the 1/16 beam model. The mass of water inside the submerged portion of the downcomers is also included.
The asymmetric loads which act on the vent system are horizontal seismic loads and asymmetric chugging loads, as specified in Section 3-2.2.1. An equivalent static analysis is performed for each of the loads using the 180' beam model.
l COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.164 nut.e,_qh
The magnitudes and characteristics of governing asym-metric loads on the vent system are presented and discussed in Section 3-2.2.1. The overall effects of ,
asymmetric loads on the vent system are evaluated using I the two 180* beam models and the general analysis techniques discussed in the preceding paragraphs. The specific treatment of each load which results in asymmetric loads on the vent system is discussed in the following paragraphs.
1
- 2. Seismic Loads
- a. OBE Loads: A static analysis is performed for a 0.259 horizontal and 0.0679 vertical
\ seismic acceleration applied to the weight of steel and water included in the 180' beam model. Horizontal seismic loads are applied in the direction of both principal azimuths.
- b. SSE Loads: The procedure used to evaluate 0.50g horizontal and 0.134g vertical SSE i accelerations is the same as that discussed for OBE loads in Load Case 2a.
(,j COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.165 nutggb
. , - - - - , . . , - - - - , . , ~ . - - . , - . - - . . , , - . - .,,,,.,-,..-.-,.---------,-n.n,.----.-,-.. ..,--,,,n. . - . - - - , , , - , . , . . - - . . _ . - - - . .
- 7. Chugging Loads
- a. Chugging Downcomer Lateral Loads: A static analysis is performed for chugging downcomer lateral Load Cases 1 through 10 (Table 3-2.2-16).
Use of the methodology described in the preceding paragraphs results in a conservative evaluation of vent system response to the asymmetric loads defined in NUREG-0661.
O l
l l
l COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.166 nutp_ql)
\
v)
'N
'x x
..N s 3
O
'N_ s m
\
W' , %' N
, e
,( " =>"" '
'N '
\
~
/
[Elg(1) N f (TYP) \
v ..
SUPPCat S s counes tI Q cr (TYP) 8YMM
\
k oCWNCOMED (TYP)
(1) g @ ,u aEn
("'
o -cowuccxza anacruc ( m ) My ,n,3 i
l l (1) BASED ON QUAD CITIES UNITS 1 AND 2 CONFIGURATION.
Figure 3-2.4-17 VENT SYSTEM 180 BEAM MODEL - ISOMETRIC VIEW (DRESDEN UNIT 2)
Of COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.167 nutQfeb
WO fs
/ 'N
- a '
~~
'\
O s' . /
'N N \.
"U _ _ . -
- - - - __ m N
^ - ,
[Kj Y
,s VL/DW / N.
~
ls ,
% VENT LINE '
L
\ .,
j M V rVENT IIEADER
.k ' '
SUPPORT COLUMN (TYP)
,\/,
r 7 l," (,
si ;" .-
[ , DOWNCOMER (TYP)
LO G D NAL VACUUM (
BRACING (TYP) BREA ER NR C G (TYP)
(1) BASED ON QUAD CITIES UNITS 1 AND 2 CONFIGURATION.
Figure 3-2.4-18 VENT SYSTEM 180 BEAM MODEL - ISOMETRIC VIEW (DRESDEN UNIT 3) e o e
I l
l 3-2.4.3 Analysis for Local Effects The penetrations and intersections of the major compo-nents of the vent system are evaluated using refined 1
analytical models of each penetration and intersection.
These include the vent line-drywell penetration, the I vent line-vent header spherical junction, and the downcomer-vent header ~ intersections. Figures 3-2.4-3 through 3-2.4-5 show analytical models used to evaluate these penetrations and intersections.
Each of the ' penetration and intersection analytical models includes mesh refinement near discontinuities to facilitate evaluation of local stresses. The stiffness
/"'s properties used in the model are based on the nominal dimensions of the materials used to construct the pene-trations and intersections. Small displacement linear-elastic theory is assumed throughout.
The analytical models are used to generate local stiff-nesses of the penetrations and intersections for use in the 1/16 beam models and the 180' beam model, as dis-cussed in Sections 3-2.4.1 and 3-2.4.2. Local stiff-nesses are developed which represent the stiffness of the entire penetration or intersection in terms of a i few local degrees of freedom on the penetration or
. \ COM-0 2-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.169 nutggh
_~
intersection. This is accomplished either by applying unit forces or displacements to the selected local degrees of freedom or by performing a matrix condensa-tion to reduce the total stiffness of the penetration or intersection to those of the selected local degrees of freedom. The results are used to formulate stiff-ness matrix elements which are added to the 1/16 beam models and the 180* beam models at the corresponding penetration or intersection locations.
In order to account for the ovaling behavior of the shell segment of the vent header, the shell segment of the vent header at the downcomer intersection is extended at least to the location of the first circum-ferential collar for the intersection stiffness calcu-lation.
The analytical models are also used to evaluate stresses in the penetrations and intersections.
Stresses are computed by idealizing the penetrations and intersections as free bodies' in equilibrium under a set of statically applied loads. The applied loads, which are extracted from either of the two 1/16 beam model results or from either of the two 180' beam models results, consist of loads acting on the penetra-tion and intersection model boundaries and of loads COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.170 nutggh
r acting on the interior of penetration and intersection models. The loads acting on the penetration and inter-section model boundaries are the beam end loads taken from the vent system at nodes coincident with the pene-tration or intersection model boundary locations.
The loads which act on the interior of the penetration or intersection models consist of reaction loads and distributed loads taken from the 1/16 beam model results. The reaction loads include the forces and moments applied to the appropriate penetration or intersection at the attachment points of the downcomer, the vent header, and the vent line. The distributed loads include the pressures and acceleration loads applied to penetration and intersection models to account for internal pressure loads, thrust loads, pool swell loads, and inertia loads. By the application of boundary loads, reaction loads, and distributed loads to the penetration and intersection models, equilibrium of the penetrations and intersections is achieved for each of the governing vent system loadings. The ine r-tia loads are found to be insignificant for most of the load cases.
Loads which act on the shell segment boundaries are applied to the penetration and intersection models COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.171 nutggb
through a system of radial beams. The radial beams extend from the middle surface of each of the shell segments to a node located on the centerline of the corresponding shell segment. The beams have large bending stiffnesses, zero axial stiffness, and are pinned in all directions at the shell segment middle surface. Boundary loads applied to the centerline nodes cause only shear loads to be transferred to the shell segment middle surface with no local bending effects. Use of this boundary condition minimizes end effects on penetration and intersection stresses in the local areas of interest. The system of radial beams constrains the boundary planes to remain plane during loading, which is consistent with the assumption made in small deflection beam theory.
Section 3-2.4.1 discusses the methodology used to eval-uate the overall effects of the governing loads acting on the vent system using the governing 1/16 beam model. The general methodology used to evaluate local vent system penetration and intersection stresses is discussed in the preceding paragraphs. Descriptions of each vent system penetration and intersection analyti-cal model and its use are provided in the following paragraphs.
COM-0 2-0 41- 3 -
Revision 0 3-2.172 nutgqh
g o Vent Line-Drywell Penetration Axisymmetric Finite Difference Model: The vent line-drywell penetra-tion model which is based on the Quad Cities Units 1 and 2 configuration (Figure 3-2.4-3) includes a segment of the drywell shell, the jet deflector, the cylindrical penetration nozzle, the annular pad plate, and the spherical transition piece.
The analytical model contains eight segments with 105 mesh points. The reaction loads applied to
' the model include those computed at the upper end of the vent line. The distributed loads applied to the model are internal pressure loads.
1 o Vent Line-Vent Header Spherical Junction Finite Element Model: The vent line-vent header spheri-cal junction finite element model which is based on the Quad Cities Units 1 and 2 configuration (Figure 3-2.4-4) includes a segment of the vent
- line, two segments of the vent header. The model contains 1,956 nodes, 3 12 beams, and 1,816 plate bending and stretching elements. The only difference between the Quad Cities Units 1 and 2 spherical junctions and those of Dresden Units 2 and 3 is the existence of two segments of the vacuum breaker nozzles in the Quad Cities plants. Boundary displacement and rotation loads 4
. N COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.173 nutggh
are applied at the end of the vent line shell segment and at each end of the vent header shell segment. The distributed loads applied to the analytical model are internal pressure thrust, pool swell, froth impingement, CO vent system pressure, and chugging vent system pressure loads, o Downcomer-Vent Header Intersection Finite Element Model: The downcomer-vent header intersection finite element model ( Figure 3-2. 4-5 ) includes a segment of the vent header, a segment of each downcomer, and the stiffener plate. The analy-tical model contains 453 nodes, 26 beam elements, and 712 plate bending and stretching elements.
Boundary loads are applied at the ends of the vent header segment and at the ends of the downcomer segment. The distributed loads applied to the model are internal pressure loads, pool swell loads on the downcomers, and pool swell inertia loads.
Use of the methodology described in the preceding para- ,
graphs results in a conservative evaluation of vent system local stresses due to the loads defined in NUREG-0661.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.174 nutp_qh
3-2.4.4 Methods for Evaluating Analysis Results v
The methodology discussed in Sections 3-2. 4.1 and 3-2.4.2 is used to determine element forces and compo-nent stresses in the vent system components. The following paragraphs discuss the methodology used to evaluate the analysis results, determine the control-ling stresses in the vent system components, and examine fatigue effects.
To evaluate analysis results for the vent system Class MC components, membrane and extreme fiber stress inten-sities are computed. The values of the membrane stress intensities away from discontinuities are computed
_fV fm) using the governing 1/16 beam model and the governing 180* beam model results. These stresses are compared with the primary membrane stress allowables (Table 3-2.3-1). The values of membrane stress intensities near discontinuities are computed using results from the penetration and intersection analytical models.
i These stresses are compared with local primary membrane j stress allowables (Table 3-2.3-1). Primary stresses in l
vent system Class MC component welds are computed using maximum principal stresses or the resultant forces acting on the weld throat. The results are compared to primary weld stress allowables (Table 3-2.3-1).
l k COM-02-041-3 l Revision 0 3-2.175 nutggb
Many of the loads contained in each of the controlling load combinations are dynamic loads which result in stresses which cycle with time and are partially or fully reversible. The maximum stress intensity ranges for all vent system Class MC components are calculated using the maximum values of the extreme fiber stress differences which occur near discontinuities in the penetration and intersection analytical models. These stresses are compared to the secondary stress range allowables (Table 3-2.3-1). A similar procedure is used to compute the stress range for the vent system Class MC component welds. The results are compared to the secondary weld stress allowables (Table 3-2,3-1).
To evaluate the vent system Class MC component supports, beam end loads obtained from the governing 1/16 beam model or the governing 180* beam model (or both) results are used to compute stresses. The results are compared with the corresponding allowable stresses (Table 3-2.3-1). Stresses in vent system Class MC component support welds are obtained using the governing 1/16 beam model or the governing 180' beam model (or both) results to compute the maximum resultant force acting on the associated weld throat.
The results are compared to weld stress limits discussed in Section 3-2.3.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.176 nutmh
L 4
1 U Section 3-2.2.2 defines the controlling vent system load combinations. During load combination formulation, the maximum stress intensities in a particular vent system class MC component at a given location are conservatively combined by the absolute sum method for the individual loads contained in each combination. For the vent system class MC component supports, stress components at a given location are conservatively combined by the absolute sum method for i
the individual loads contained in each combination, i
However, in a few combinations where the absolute sum method does not satisfy the structural acceptance criteria, the stress components of the individual dynamic loads are combined by the SRSS method as an alternative.
l i
The maximum differential displacements of the vent line
- bellows are determined using results from the 1/16 beam l model or the governing 180' beam model (or both) of the 1
i vent system and the analytical model of the suppression l
l chamber discussed in Volume 2 of this report. The l'
displacements of the attachment points of the bellows i
l to the suppression chamber and to the vent line are determined for each load case. The differential dis-placement is computed from these values. The results COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.177 l
t l
for each load are combined to determine the total differential displacements for the controlling load combinations. These results are compared to the allowable bellows displacements (Table 3-2.3-2).
To evaluate fatigue effects in the vent system Class MC components and associated welds, extreme fiber alter-nating stress intensity histograms are determined for each load in each event or combination of events.
Fatigue effects for chugging downcomer lateral loads are evaluated using the stress reversal histograms (Table 3-2.2-17). Stress intensity histograms are developed for the most highly stressed area in the vent system, which is the downcomer-vent header inter-section. For each combination of events, a load combination stress intensity histogram is formulated and the corresponding fatigue usage factors are determined using the curve shown in Figure 3-2.4-19.
The usage factors for each event are then summed to obtain the total fatigue usage.
Use of the methodology described above results in a conservative evaluation of the vent system design margins.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.178 nutggh
f E = 27,900 ksi 1000 C
m m
$ 100-e 3
E w
. O5 6 10' 10 lb lb4 1f5 10 NUMBER OF CYCLES l
l l
l Figure 3-2.4-19 ALLOWABLE NUMBER OF STRESS CYCLES FOR VENT SYSTEM FATIGUE EVALUATION COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.179 nutggh l
3-2.5 Analysis Results The geometry, loads and load combinations, acceptance criteria, and analysis methods used in the evaluation of the Dresden Units 2 and 3 vent systems are presented and discussed in the preceding sections. The results and conclusions derived from the evaluation of the vent systems are presented ,in the following paragraphs and sections. As discussed previously, the results of the two 1/16 and the 180' beam models analyses are compared and only the governing results are reported, when applicable.
Table 3-2.5-1 shows the maximum primary membrane stresses for the major vent system components for each of the governing loads. Tables 3-2.5-2 and 3-2.5-3 show the corresponding reaction loads for the vent system support columns and vent line-drywell penetra-tion. Table 3-2.5-4 shows the maximum differential displacements of the vent line bellows for the governing load cases. Figures 3-2.5-1 and 3-2.5-2 show the transient response of the vent system support columns for pool swell loads.
Table 3-2.5-5 shows the maximum stresses and associated design margins for the major vent system components, COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.180 nutp_qh
component supports, and welds for the SBA II, IBA I, DBA I, DBA II, and DBA III load combinations. Table 3-2.5-6 shows the maximum differential displacements l and design margins for the vent line bellows for the SBA II, IBA I, DBA II, and DBA III load combinations.
1 Table 3-2.5-7 shows the fatigue usage factors for the l
controlling vent system component and weld for the Normal Operating plus SBA events, and the Normal Operating plus IBA events.
l l
Section 3-2.5.1 discusses the vent system evaluation results presented in the preceding paragraphs.
O COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.181 nutggb
Table 3-2.5-1 ,
MAJOR VENT SYSTEM COMPONENT MAXIMUM MEMBRANE STRESSES FOR GOVERNING LOADS LOA DESIGNATION PRIMARY MEMBRANE STRESS (ksi)
OAD CASE WNT WNT I LOAD TYPE DOWNCOMER NUMBER LINE HEADER I DEAD WEIGHT la 0.241 0.802 0.162 2a 0.788 1.260 0.271 SEISMIC 2b 1.576 2.520 0.542 PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE 3d N/A N/A N/A NT SYSE M 4a 5.430 6.960 2.420 DISCHARGE Sa-5d 0.737 6.483 3.077 POOL SWELL Sf 0.473 3.756 3.034 6a+6e 1.192 1.657 0.498 CONDENSATION 6b+6d 5.325 7.633 2.591 OSCILLATION 6f 0.418 1.633 1.151 7a 4.220 4.340 2.360 7b 1.340 4.340 1.570 CHUGGING 7c N/A N/A N/A 7d 0.3'50 1.241 0.919 SRV DISCHARGE 8b 0.339 1.025 1.515 I IN 9a 12.530 8.250 0.980 7ONS
- 1. VALUES SHOWN ARE MAXIMUMS IRRESPECTIVE OF TIME AND LOCATION FOR INDIVIDUAL LOAD TYPES AND MAY NOT BE ADDED TO OBTAIN LOAD COMBINATION RESULTS.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.182 nutgqh
l
) Table 3-2.5-2 MAXIMUM COLUMN REACTIONS FOR GOVERNING VENT SYSTEM LOADS COLUM EACTION LOAD Gips) !
A DESIGNAT[ON LOAD LOAD TYPE CASE DIRECTION INSIDE OUTSIDE TOTAL NUhBER DEAD WEIGHT la COMPRESSION 10.100 9.170 19.270 TENSION 0.724 3.810 4.534 OBE 2a COMPRESSION 0.724 3.810 4.534 SEISMIC TENSION 1.448 7.620 9.068 SSE 2b COMPRESSION 1.448 7.620 9.068 INTERNAL PRESSURE 3b TENSION 30.520 29.960 60.480 TEMPERATURE 3d COMPRESSION 26.150 5.385 31.535 D CHARG 4a TENSION 34.500 33.900 68.400 TENSION 66.830 61.710 128.540 POOL SWELL Sa-5d COMPRESSION 22.860 24.200 47.060 TENSION 2.694 8.185 10.879 ,
IBA 6a+6c
. . O.879 CONDENSATION OSCILLATION TENSION 16.957 27.116 44.073 DBA 6b+6d COMPRESSION 16.957 27.116 44.073 TENSION 21.700 37.500 59.200 CHUGGING 7a+7b COMPRESSION 21.700 37.500 59.200 TENSION 35.470 9.410 44.880 PIPING 9a
^ COMPRESSION 35.470 9.410 44.880 (1) REACTIONS ARE ADDED IN THE TIME DOMAIN FOR DYNAMIC LOADS.
0 COM-02-041-3 ,
Revision 0 3-2.183 I
nutggh
Table 3-2.5-3 MAXIMUM VENT LINE-DRYWELL PENETRATION REACTIONS FOR GOVERNING VENT SYSTEM LOADS CIRCUMFERENTIAL AXIAL A AXIAL DRYWELL d
~2 _ =
DRYWELL MERIDIONAL -
A SECTION A-A PENETRATION REACTION LOAD AD DESIGNATI LOAD FORCE (kips) MOMENTS (in-kip) 14AD TYPE CASE NUMBER RADIAL MERIDIONAL CIRCUMFERENTIAL RADIAL MERIDIONAL CIRCUMFERENTIAL DEAD WEIGHT la 0.9 0.0 1.6 0.0 59.1 0.0 OBE 2a 23.0 4.3 0.9 201.0 423.0 449.')
SEISMIC SSE 2b 46.0 8.6 1.8 402.0 846.0 898.0 89.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 394.8 0.0 3b P SU TEMPERATURE 3d 65.8 0.0 17.9 0.0 5558.3 0.0 V'.NT SYSTEM 344.0 DISCHARGE 4a 75.3 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 POOL SWELL Sa-5d 13.6 0.0 9.4 0.0 549.5 0.0 IBA 6a+6c S.3 0.0 0.6 0.0 45.5 0.0 CONDENSATION OSCIMION DBA 6b+6d 22.5 0.0 5.1 0.0 188.5 0.0 CHUGGING 7a+7b 51.7 27.0 11.2 4928.0 262.9 2937.0
' 821.7 1877.6 9a 42.7 20.9 48.6 1195.5 RE IONS
- 1. VALUES SHOWN ARE IN ABSOLUTE TERMS.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.184 nutg,qh h
l l
s Table 3-2.5-4 l MAXIMUM VENT LINE BELLOWS DISPLACEMENTS FOR GOVERNING VENT SYSTEM LOADS VENT AXIAL LINE VENT SUPPRESSION HEADER Af }A CHAMBER
\
l '
BELLOW
, __ ,,, ' IONCITUDINAL l LONGITUDINAL ,,, ,,.-
\,.,"# LI'JE SECTION A-A 8 ' l L0A DESIbATION DIFFERENTIAL BELLOWS DISPLACEMENTS (in)
LOAD AXIAL LATERAL f\ LOAD TYPE CASE NUMBER COMPRESSION EXTENSION MERIDIONAL LONGITUDINAL
(
DEAD WEIGHT la N/A 0.003 0.037 0.000 OBE 2a 0.005 0.005 0.003 0.009 SEISMIC SSE 2b 0.009 0.009 0.006 0.018 INTERNAL PRESSURE 3b 0.025 N/A 0.035 0.000 TEMPERATURE 3d 0.473 N/A 0.018 0.000 VENT SYSTEM 0.015 0.000 DISCHARGE 4a 0.059 N/A POOL SWELL Sa-5d 0.046 0.046 0.128 0.000 A a . . . 0.000 CONDENSATION DBA 6b+6d 0.064 0.064 0.057 0.000 g l CHUGGING 7a+7b 0.038 0.038 0.028 0.011 PIPING REACTIONS 9a 0.044 0.044 0.139 0.153 i
- 1. THE VALUES SHOWN ARE MAXIMUMS IRRESPECTIVE OF TIME FOR INDIVIDUAL LOAD TYPES AND MAY NOT BE ADDED TO OBTAIN LOAD COMBINATION RESULTS.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 1 3-2.185 nutggh
$' o Table 3-2.5-5
< 3 ei f/8 c) eN MAXIMUM VENT SYSTEM STRESSES O$ u FOR CONTROLLING LOAD COMBINATIONS OH I
w thAD COH83NATIOss STRESSES (kell ITEM STRESS SDA II I.41 88I dea I III dea 3lIII DBA gg3 III TYPE CAREUR.ATED CAlfulATED CAIEULATED CAREULATED l2) CALCULATED CAREULATED' #
CAIATLATED CAREULATED' I CAIEURATED '
}d2MAtti C AREUR.A.TF D' STmESS STRESS 'iUfhASt[ STpgSS it.IlmA&L8 ST9ESS kl.lhWAbuf STRESS 'Ai.84 M A lf tac nE,AL,reAe Et,MApr B7. 7 . 59 82.6. . 44 s. 56 . 49 .7.39 . 46 2. 35 . 4.
DeVWELL -
SHELL PRIMARY AND SECONDAar 68. 9 ..t. 47.44 . 7. u/A m/A S. 26 .. 6 m/A m/A sTmE8s aAncE PatMApt MEManAmE I..ts . 94 16.3. .. 4 17. 3 .... 16.94 .... 25.57 . 75 vtNT tDCAL PRIMARY g,I nE MEMaaAmE 9. 6 . 34 ..es ..). s.3s . 34 s. 9 . 24 a. 23 . 2.
W l palma 9Y AND N SEcowcAnf 3.. 2 . 45 26.98 . 4. M/A N/A 27.75 . 48 m/A m/A
. STRESS BANGE
$; ;;a;; .. o . 4. 7... . 4i 7.n .. n .. n .. o ...., ..
O VEw? LiNE/'
,gg, ioc;Jl;;- n.n ..u n.n . 4. n.o ..o it.u .... n.u .. n SPMERICAL IUp6CTIW );
PRIMAR
-Co .V AN.D4..n ..n n.n ..u .in ia n.n ..u ./A .,A g ,g,93 STitESS RAssGE
- a^14 , n.. ..n n.u ..n ..... ..., n... .... n.n ..n
,,gg, iac;Jt;;" n... ..n ..n .. n .... ... ..... . 4, n... ....
PatMAav Amo
-c-Dm n.o .. n n.n ..u .,A .,A u.= ..n .,A .,A STRESS RANGE
,la;;; ..u .. 4 .... ..a n... ..u ..o ..n ...n . 4.
to co,,E. iac; J :i,;, ' n . .. . 6, . . . .. n ...o ..u .6.n . 4, i... ..n PRIMANT AND SECTMIDART 34.7P . 51 l.. 5 ..i6 E/A F/A >4..! . 58 N/A N/A STRESS SANGE
- aat; i.., .... i.n ... i.n .. . i.u ..., 3. a ...,
3 =;;U; 'ac;Jla;- .. a ...a g a=
..n ..n .. . .. n .. a .... ...n .. n M ,,,SEciN.oA m , A,D si.s. ...s i.4i ..s. i.in .ii A 4,.1. . 13 .ia mea STRESS BANG O O O
v
') (w/~') 3 J
gQ Table 3-2.5-5
< 3:
Y l un o MAXIMUM VENT SYSTEM STRESSES PN
@$.s. FOR CONTROLLING LOAD COMBINATIONS oe (Concluded) a w 4
sano amussmatson svenssas sessa 4
,,,, stessa s.a a g,88 8 una 3 883 esa :"8 esaas"8 oma a n "'
tres cas.cus.atro g%nes.atso"8 casruurse tygus.arso"' casruuts. caaruurso cai.cuurrou, sisass as.aossnasa stmass an.aonsassa stmass c.angut.a.tso"'
as.aoun am seness cassuu.rro_t airossa a.s cassmutse a'
stesss an.amuasu
.smosmo 9.7. . 5. . 13 . 3s 3..P .... 38.7s .... ...n ..n n.s u .... .. n .... ..n n.n ..n .. n .. n n. ...,
c=;
s :"J'::: a-... .. n .. n .. . ..., .... .... .. .. .... ....
a
_---.- .. . .. n .... .... .... ..n .... .... ..u .. n w . .m io,, .... .. .... .... .... .... ... .... .... ....
n o
, , ,,=,, .. . .a.T .. n .... .... .. n ..... ..n .. .. ..... .. n
~ ;s,=,,; s- T n.n ..n .... .. . .,a .,. ... ..n .,a .,a m
-a (1) REFERENCE TABLE 3-2.2-27 FOR LOAD COMBINATION DESIGNATION.
(2) REFERENCE TABLE 3-2.3-1 FOR ALLOWABLE STRESSES (3) LOCAL STRESSES J.RE REPOItTED AT THE VENT LINE-VENT HEADER JUNCTION, i FOR LOCAL STRESSES AT THE VENT LINE-SRVDL AND VACUUM BREAKER 2
PENETRATIONS, SEE VOLUMES 5 AND 6 RESPECTIVELY OF THIS REPORT.
a 4
d 4
4 i g b
@Q Table 3-2.5-6 bY ao MAXIMUM VENT LINE BELLOWS DIFFERENTIAL DISPLACEMENTS e- u
@ FOR CONTROLLING LCAD COMBINATIONS ow I
w SBA II IBA I DBA II DBA III DI "
C ONENT CALCULATED CALCULATED CALCULATED CALCULATED CALCULATED CALCULATED CALCULATED CALCUIATED (in) ALLOWABLE (in) ALIDWABLE (in) ALLOWABLE (in) ALLOWABLE COMPRESSION 0.659 0.75 0.574 0.66 0.613 0.70 0.504 0.58 AXIAL TENSION N/* N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A MERIDIONAL 0.427 0.68 0.422 0.68 0.350 0.56 0.431 0.69 LATERAL LONGITUDINAL 0.163 0.24 0.171 0.25 0.119 0.18 0.167 0.25 w
1 N 1. Tile DBA III BELLOWS DISPLACEMENTS ENVELOP TIIOSE OF DBA I SINCE
'e DBA III CONTAINS SRV DISCIIARGE LOADS IN ADDITION TO TIIE OTilER
$ LOADS IN DBA I,(TABLE 3-2.2-25).
3 C.e.
c e o e
1 V V i
g@ Table 3-2.5-7
< :s .
$o eN MAXIMUM FATIGUE USAGE FACTORS FOR VENT SYSTEM
@0 8 COMPONENTS AND WELDS ,
< oH I
A CASE CYCLES CONDENSATION EVENT USAGE FACTOR EVENT (1) (4) j SEQUENCE OSCILLATION CHUGGING SEISMIC PRESSURE TEMPERATURE SRV(3) (sec) (sec) VENT (5) WELD ( '
DISCHARGE HEADER 1 NOC N/SRV DISCHARGE O 150 150 550 N/A N/A 0.00 0.00 1
i SBA
- 0. TO 600. SEC 0 0 0 50 N/A 30a 0.31 0.10 l
i SBA 600.TO 1200 SEC 1000(2) 1 1 2 N/A 60& 0.61 0.16 I W
- 1 IBA l
M
- 0. TO 900. SEC 0 0 0 25 900. N/A 0.59 0.01 a g 1
co IBA W, 900. TO 1100. SEC 1000 I2I 1 1 2 N/A 200, 0.23 0.06 NOC + SBA 0.92 0.26 l MAXIMUM CUMULATIVE USAGE FACTORS ,
! +
(1) SEE TABLE 3-2.2-27 AND FIGURES 3-2.2-12 AND 3-2.2-13 FOR I4AD CYCLES AND EVENT SEQUENCING INFOIStATION.
i t
(2) ENTIRE NUMBER OF LOAD CYCLES CONSERVATIVELY ASSUMED TO OCCUR DURING TIME OF MAXIMUM EVENT USAGE.
j (3) TOTAL NUMBER OF SRV ACTUATIONS SHONN IS CONSERVATIVELY ASSUMED TO OCCUR IN SAME SUPPRESSION 4
CHAMBER BAY.
, (4) EACH CHUG-CYCLE HAS A DURATION OF 1.4 SEC. SEE TABLE 3-2.2-17 FOR CHUGGING DONMCOIER LOAD
. HISTOGRAM. THE MAXIMUM FATIGUE USAGE FACTOR FOR CHUGGING DOWNCOMER LOADS AT THE DONNCOMER-VENT j HEADER INTERSECTION IS 0.103
! (5) THE MAXIMUM CUMULATIVE USAGE FOR A VENT SYSTEM COMPONENT OCCURS IN THE VENT HEADER AT THE DONNCOMER-
} VENT HEADER INTERSECTION.
(6) THE MAXIMUM CUMULATIVE USAGE FOR A VENT SYSTEM COMPONENT WELD OCCURS AT THE CONNECTION OF THE f ) DONNCOMER STIFFENER PLATE TO THE VENT HEADER.
1 C
60.0-DUE TO IMPACT LOADS ON UNPROTECTED AREAS (OPERATING AP) 40.0 -
E h h w
~
20.0 - g 0
8 0.0
-20.0n . . . . .
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 TIME (SECONDS)
DUE TO IMPACT LOAD ON VENT HEADER DEFLECTOR (ZERO AP) g 20.0-5 1
0.0
-20.0 . . . . i '
O.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 TIME (SECONDS) l l Figure 3-2.5-1 l VENT SYSTEM SUPPORT COLUMN RESPONSE DUE TO POOL SWELL IMPACT LOADS - OUTSIDE COLUMN ,
1 COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2,190 nutp_qh
60.0-
'N DUE TO IMPACT LOADS ON UNPROTECTED AREAS 1
(OPERATING AP) 40.0-ac.
i E
20.0- /
e ;
e f 0.0
^=^=-
-20.0 , , . , , ,
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 TIME (SECONDS) 40.0 O DUE TO IMPACT LOAD ON VENT HEADER DEFLECTOR (ZERO AP)
$ 20.0-G 0.0
-20.On . . . . .
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 TIME (SECONDS)
Figure 3-2.5-2 VENT SYSTEM SUPPORT COLUMN RESPONSE DUE TO POOL SWELL IMPACT LOADS - INSIDE COLUMN COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.191 nutggj)
3-2.5.1 Discussion of Analysis Results The results (Table 3-2.5-1) indicate that the largest vent system primary membrane stresses occur for internal pressure loads, vent system discharge loads, pool swell impact loads, DBA CO downcomer loads, chugging downcomer lateral loads, and SRV discharge loads. The remaining loadings result in small primary stresses in the major vent system components.
Table 3-2.5-2 shows that the largest vent system support column reactions occur for internal pressure loads, vent system discharge loads, pool swell impact loads, chugging loads, and DBA CO loads. The distribution of loads between the inner and outer support columns varies from load case to load case.
The magnitude and distribution of reaction loads on the i drywell penetrations also vary from load case to load l
l case (Table 3-2.5-3). Table 3-2.5-4 shows that the 1
l differential displacements of the vent line bellows are small for all loadings, except for thermal loadings.
The results (Table 3-2.5-5) indicate that the highest stresses in the vent system components, component supports, and associated welds occur for the SBA II and the DBA I load combinations. The vent line, spherical i
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.192 l nutp_q_
1 I
m
(' junction, vent header, and downcomer stresses for the D} SBA II and DBA I load combinations are less than the allowable limits with stresses in other vent system components, component supports, and welds well within the allowable limits. The stresses in the vent system components, component supports, and welds for the IBA I, DBA II, and DBA III load combinations are also well 4
within the allowable limits.
The results (Table 3-2.5-6) indicate that the vent line bellows differential displacements are all well with!.n allowable limits. The maximum displacement occurs for the SBA II load combination.
The loads which cause the highest number of displace-ment cycles at the vent line bellows are seismic loads, SRV loads, and LOCA-related loads such as pool swell, CO, and chugging. The bellows displacements for these loads are small compared to the maximum allowable dis-placement, and their effect on fatigue is negligible.
Thermal loads and internal pressure loads are the largest contributors to bellows displacements. The specified number of thermal load and internal pressure load cycles is 150. Since the bellows have a rated capacity of 1,000 cycles at maximum displacement, their i
adequacy for fatigue is assured.
O COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.193 nutggh
The vent system fatigue usage factors (Table 3-2.5-7) are computed for the controlling events, which are Normal Operating plus SBA and Normal Operating plus IBA. The governing vent system component for fatigue is the vent header at the downcomer-vent header inter-section. The magnitudes and cycles of downcomer lateral loads are the primary contributors to fatigue at this location.
The vent system welds are checked for fatigue, except for the SRVDL penetration, which is evaluated and discussed in Volume 5. The governing vent system weld for fatigue is at the downcomer-vent header inter-section. Condensation oscillation, chugging, and the number of SRV actuations are the major contributors to fatigue at this location.
Fatigue effects at other locations in the vent system are less severe than at those described above, due primarily to lower stresses.
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.194 nutggh
l 3-2.5.2 Closure The vent system loads described and presented in Section 3-2.2.1 are conservative estimates of the loads postulated to occur during an actual LOCA or SRV discharge event. Applying the methodology discussed in Section 3-2.4 to examine the effects of the governing loads on the vent system results in bounding values of stresses and reactions in vent system components and component supports.
The load combinations and event sequencing defined in Section 3-2.2.2 envelop the actual events postulated to occur during a LOCA or SRV discharge event. Combining
' the vent system responses to the governing loads and evaluating fatigue effects using this methodology results in conservative values of the maximum vent system stresses, support reactions, and fatigue usage factors for each event or sequence of events postulated to occur throughout the life of the plant.
The acceptance limits defined in Section 3-2.3 are as restrictive (in many cases, more restrictive) as those used in the original containment design documented in the plant's safety analysis report. Comparing the resulting maximum stresses and support reactions to n
COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.195
! nutggb i
these acceptance limits results in a conservative evaluation of the design margins present in the vent l l
system and its supports. As demonstrated in the results discussed and presented in the preceding sections, all of the vent system stresses and support reactions are within these acceptance limits.
As a result, the vent system components described in Section 3-2.1, which are specifically designed for the loads and load combinations used in this evaluation, exhibit the margins of safety inherent in the original design of the primary containment as documented in the plant's safety analysis report. The NUREG-0661 requirements are therefore considered to be met.
l l
l COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-2.196 nutggh
l 3-3.0 LIST OF REFERENCES f
- 1. " Mark I Containment Long-Term Program," Safety Evaluation Report, NRC, NUREG-0661, July 1980; Supplement 1, August 1982.
- 2. " Mark I Containment Program Load Definition 4 Report," General Electric Company, NEDO-21888, Revision 2, November 1981.
- 3. " Mark I Containment Program Plant Unique Load Definition," Dresden Station Units 2 and 3, General Electric Company, NEDO-24566, Revision 2, April 1982.
- 4. " Containment Vessels Design Specification,"
Dresden Station Units 2 and 3, K-2152, Sargent &
> Lundy, Inc., March 19, 1966.
- 5. " Mark I Containment Program Structural Acceptance Criteria Plant Unique Analysis Applications Guide, I
Task Number 3.1.3," General Electric Company, NEDO-24583-1, October 1979.
- 6. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, O Division 1, 1977 Edition with Addenda up to and 5%, ,) including Summer 1977.
- 7. " Safety Analysis Report (SAR)," Dresden Station Units 2 and 3, Commonwealth Edison Company, November 17, 1967.
- 8. " Containment Data," Dresden Unit 2, General Electric Company, 22A5743, Revision 1, April 1979.
l I
! 9. " Containment Data," Dresden Unit 3, General
{ Electric Company, 22A5744, Revision 1, April 1979.
- 10. "Dresden 2 and 3 Nuclear Generating Plants Suppression Pool Temperature Response," General Electric Company, NEDC-22170, July 1982.
- 11. Biggs, J. M., " Introduction to Structural Dynamics," McGraw-Hill Book Company, N.Y., 1964.
l . ,V l COM-02-041-3 Revision 0 3-3.1 l nutggh
-