ML20080P783
| ML20080P783 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 01/31/1984 |
| From: | Edwards N, Quinn R, Yin Y NUTECH ENGINEERS, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20080P730 | List: |
| References | |
| BPC-01-300-3, BPC-01-300-3-V03-R00, BPC-1-300-3, BPC-1-300-3-V3-R, NUDOCS 8402230113 | |
| Download: ML20080P783 (189) | |
Text
-
s BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 January 1984 HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION PLANT UNIQUE ANALYSIS REPORT VOLUME 3 VE NT SYS TEM ANALYS IS Prepared for:
Public Service Electric and Gas Company
-w Prepared by:
NUTECH Engineers, Inc.
San Jose, California Prepared by: Reviewed by:
B AAL~ Mc.&
R. D. Quinn, P.E. Y. CIYiufP.E.
Senior Engineer Group Leader l
,[ Approved by: Issued by:
i N. W. Edwa rds , P.E. R. A. Lahnert, P.E.
President Project Manager A
DOCKOOh3h4 PDR O k
REVISION CONTROL SHEET c.,
TITLE: Hope Creek Generating DOCUMENT FILE NUMBER: BFC-01-300-3 Station Revision 0 Plant Unique Analysis Report Volume 3 Ah!M H. Fatehi/ Specialist kef Initials
.8 6 MCP _
MCH M. C. Hsieh/Conspitant I Initials Lu PW L. R. Hussar / Engineer wInitials
. A /t $4Y7 A. z.
A. Imandoust/ Consultant I Initials u 0Y R. A. Lehnert/ Project Manager Initials
&@er HI,{
/
(%
G. "S. Ma/ Consultant II Initials l 88@
l R. D. Quinn/ Senior Engineer Initials l
.4_f M.
d s1J Shamszad/ Senior Engineer
<s Initials l _. A}% {t Of J.N. beiber/ Associate Engineer Initials h $- Q [3 C. S. Wu/ Consultant I Initials l
t (O
,J t
4].& . pita. .c w
- v. C.' nu) Group teader Initials
REVISION CONTROL SHEET e Hope Creek Generating P t nique Analysis Report, Volume 3 (CONTINUATION)
COCUMENT FILE NUMBER: BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 AFFECTED OCC PREPARED ACCURACY CRITERIA CHECK BY / QATE CHECK BY / OATE AEMARKS PAGE(Si AEV SY / OATE 11 0 EM//. Jo. 04 /i-3-g4 gpt/f.3o.gI9 iii 0 iv 0 v 0 vi 0 vii 0 vili 0-ix 0 x 0 xi 0 xii 0 3-1.1 0 3-1.2 0
/N 3-1.3 0 ,.
(
\s' 3-1.4 0 g /,.3,p ggg,/f.30,gy 3-2.1 0 fft(l.39.g4 q*jfH, .s+
3-2.2 0 3-2.3 0 3-2.4 0 3-2.5 0 3-2.6 0 3-2.7 0 3-2.8 0 l 0 l 3-2.9 1 3-2.10 0 3-2.11 0 3-2.12 0 3-2.13 0 3-2.14 0 3-2.15 0 3-2.16 0
(~N, 3-2.17 0 s' 3-2.18 0 <r ? ,,
3-2.19 0 RM //- 3o - 8 + [fj/[_3o.f4 ,
/g-3,.gf ,,c, 1 c, 6 CEP 3-3,1.2 AEV 1
REVistON CONTROL SHEET Hope Creek Generating (CONTINUATION)
DOCUMENT FILE NUMBER: BPC-01-300-3 a nique Analysia Revision 0 Report, Volume 3 AFFECTED CCC PR EP AR ED ACCURACY CRITERIA EmMS DAGE(St REV SY / DATE CHFCK SY / OATE CHECK SY / OATE 3-2.20 0 AM/s- k-64 LSW,l/-10-84 p/I-s -1 3-2.21 0 3-2.22 0 3-2.23 0 3-2.24 0 3-2.25 0 3-2.26 0 3-2.27 0 3-2.28 0 4
3-2.29 0 3-2.30 0 3-2.31 0 3-2.32 0 3-2.33 0 3-2.34 0 3-2.35 0 3-2.36 0 3-2.37 0 3-2.38 0 3-2.39 0 3-2.40 0 3-2.41 0 3-2.42 0 3-2.43 0 3-2.44 0 3-2.45 0 3-2.46 0 3-2.47 0 3-2.48 0 3-2.49 0 3-2.50 0 y Y v 3-2.51 0 3-2.52 0 RMl1- so- 6 4 l.S$ 84- yl:-so-p RAGE CF CEP 3-3.1.2 REV 1
2 REVISION CONTROL SHEET S Hope Creek Generating TITLE: Station Plant Unique Analysis Report, Volume 3 (CON TINUATION)
OOCUMENT FILE NUMBER: BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 AFFECTEC OCC PREPARED ACCURACY CRITERIA REMARKS PAGE(S) REV SY / OATE CHECK BY / OATE CHECK SY / OATE 3-2.53 0 AM/s*30-04 (?l[//~30-04 % l-3*-of f
-r 3-2.54 0 ,,
3-2.55 0 R0QlI- 50
- 6+ LEN ~50~84 3-2.56 0 (E/Sf/~3D-E4 UWf'***** '
3-2.57 0 HRF//-30-78 LEN[/-30-81 ff)3..st 3-2.58 0 @/I-3.-sf ff M [8-3*-W (4g, / t-W- ft 3-2.59 0 / S[/-fo./1 ffM/ -so -% g f , ,3,,g 3-2.60 0 +1AG /t-3s 84 L}E////--Jo-Sq. (g,3,, p 3-2.61 0 H Af [f-To-M 3-2.62 0 fvf/s-3o - 64 ,
r 3-2.63 0 4tl4 ft-3o-14 fAHf/-Jef4 3-2.64 0 f.A//l/-Jo-f+ HKflf*3*-G<t 3-2.65 0 t#4 /' - 3* l-EN!/-kif 3-2.66 0 &#/8 - 3* - 84 <
r
[U] 3-2.67 0 WV [8-3O N[/-30-/f g / .3 .st 3-2.68 0 g[g,3 . st HM[f-la-W /#t /I-30-d 3-2.69 0 gat, /;-30-74 WF/' -3* ~D g /t-3. 84 3-2.70 0 84/'-5*-# N -M#
3-2.71 0 3-2.72 0 3-2.73 0 3-2.74 0 l 3-2.75 0 l
3-2.76 0 3-2.77 0 l 3-2.78 0 3-2.79 0 3-2.80 0 3-2.81 0 3-2.82 0 3-2.83 0 1 ; i 3-2.84 0 o Y ,-
3-2.85 0 ItMls- 30 O + LEff.3o.f4 AM/t-Ja- Of 6 PAGE OF
' CEP 3-3.1.2 REV t
REVISIT]N CONTROL SHEET Hope Creek Generating (CONTINUATION)
~
TITLE: " " ~ ~
an Unique Analysis e sion 0 Report, Volume 3 AFFECTED OCC PREPARED ACCtJRACY CRITERIA REMARKS PAGE!S) ACv SY / DATE CHECK SY / DATE CHECK SY / DATE 3-2.86 0 Rpd/s - so- e+ LE//[/-30-f4 /f3,.g4 3-2.87 0 3-2.88 0 3-2.89 0.
3-2.90 0 3-2.91 0 3-2.92 0 3-2.93 0 lEl{/h-3c.g4 3-2.94 0 h[f yo.pg.
3-2.95 0 Lygf.,yg 3-2.96 0 3-2.97 0 3-2.98 0 3-2.99 0 3-2.100 0 3-2.101 0 3-2.102 0 3-2.103 0 3-2.104 0 3-2.105 0 3-2.106 0 3-2.107 0 3-2.108 0 3-2.109 0 3-2.110 0 3-2.111 0 3-2.112 0 3-2.113 0 3-2.114 0 if 3-2.115 0 4ff[/[.30.p4 3-2.116 0 44 f /'i . '!.-a 4 V
3-2.117 0 y ,
'7#p[1-J a-54 3-2.118 0 R Af/s-so - e4 40tf[t-to-24 PAGE OF CEP 3 3.1.2 REV t
)
REVISION CONTROL SHEET
/n't Hope Creek Generating (CONTINUATION)
TITLE:p S ation OOCUMENT FILE NUMBER: BPC-01-300-3 ev sion 0 Report, Volume 3 AFFECTED OCC PREPARED ACCURACY CRITE RI A EMARG PAGE(S) REV 8Y / DATE CHECK SY / 0 ATE CHECK SY / D ATE 3-2.119 0 Afd/s -1o- 84 M f {t-3o-tte y(/t-h-St 3-2,120 0 3-2.121 0 3-2.122 0 ,,
3-2.123 0 gpg /s- so-44 ,,
3-2.124 Lyg[_go.gp ## gp /s,3..rq 0
3-2.125 0 ;qgpfg.3,,yy (_gjgl_Q__gf 3-2.126 0 gg/s.so.g4 3-2.127 0 3-2.128 0 ,,
3-2.129 0 XME/s - 1*- 84 3-2.130 0 M /g. F4 3-2.131 0 4 #4 s - 3* -8$
(n') 3-2.132 0 3-2.133 0 3-2.134 0 3-2.135 0 3-2.136 0 y [ 88 -3d-P4 3-2.137 0 gde/r 6 + htt/ft.1.-M.
3-2.138 0 CM /14'-15 /f/((/-50-84 3-2.139 0 t#/ *- Jo - 8 +
3-2.140 0 3-2.141 0 3-2.142 0 y u 3-2.143 0 AJte/s - Jo - 84 77[I-h-89 3-2.144 0 p [14*-89 ##4/i-70-64 3-2.145 0 /zd$/s-30-84 fy//-Jo-8<f 3-2,146 0 3-2.147 0 3-2.148 0 3-2.149 0 F
[ ') 3-2.150 0 "
3-2.151 0 g94/*1o-M LNb-l'-M ,
3-2.152 0 HlU[Mo-W g47/i,3o,g4, M-Jo-g pace 5 c, 6 CEP 3-3.1.2 REV 1
l l
REVISION CONTROL SHEET Hope Creek Generating (CONTINUATION) l TITLE. S tation OOCUMENT FILE NUMBER: EPC-01-300-3 I
Plant Unique Analysis Revision 0 W Report, Volume 3 OFFECTED 00C PAEPARED ACCURACY CR:TE RI A REMARKS PAGE(S) REV BY / OATE CHECK BY / QATE CHECK SY / QATE
(
- ~ 3*#
3-2.153 0 AI[~3#~N g/1-3 -ft 3-2.154 0 M/f "38-M #!I' # ~
3-2.155 0 6sd [ I'A's IIII /# ~3* '# N 3-2.156 0 M //,y ,P4 M !I'3D 3-2.157 0
/~> # 'N McH /t -M-*+
3-2.158 0 /_b/// ~30-f4 HHI[1-3*-#4 3-2.159 0 RM/in..e / R////-3o-84 l
3-2.160 0 fily/l-3-89 3-2.161 0 ##4/t 8 4 3-2.162 0 3-2.163 0 3-2.164 0 3-2.165 0 y F v 3-3.1 0 RQdlI ~ 3* ~ 6' (ENf40-84 p {t -3.-$q l
l l
l l
pace 6
or 6
O CEP 3 3.1.2 AEV 1 I
fm ABSTRACT The prima ry containme nt fo r the Hope Creek Ge nerating Station was des igned , erected, pressure-tested, and N-stamped in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Ve ssel Code,Section III, 1974 Edition with addenda up to and including hinter 1974. These activi ties we re pe rfo rmed fo r the Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G) by the Pit tsburgh-De s Moines Steel Company. Since then, new requirements which affect the design and operation of the primary containment system have been established. These requirements are defined in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) Safety Evaluation Re por t ,
NUR EG-0 6 61. The NUREG-0661 requirements define revised contain-ment des ign loads postulated to occur during a loss-ef-coolant acc ident or a safety-relief valve discharge event which are to be evaluated. In addition, NUREG-0661 requires that an a ssessme n t of the effects that these postulated events have on the operation of the containment system be performed.
IV] This plant un ique analysis report (P UA R) documents the e f fo r ts undertaken to address and resolve each of the applicable NUR EG-0 6 61 requ ireme n ts for Hope Creek. It demo nstrates , in accordance with NUREG-0661 acceptance criteria, that the design of the primary containment system is adequate and that original des ign safety margins have been restored. The Hope Creek PUAR f is composed of the following six volumes:
! o Volume 1 -
GENERAL CRITERIA AND LOADS METHODOLOGY o Vo lume 2 -
SUPPRESSION CHAMBER ANALYS IS o Volume 3 -
VENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS
! o Volume 4 -
INTERNAL STRUCTURES ANALYS IS o Volume 5 -
SAFETY RELIEF VALVE DISCHARGE PIPING l
l ANALYS IS i
o Volume 6 -
TORUS ATTACHED PIPING AND SUPPRESSION CHAMBER PENETRATION ANALYSES BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-ii nutggb
Major portions of all volumes of this report have been prepared by NUTECH Eng ineers , Incorporated (NUTECH), acting as a consultant re spo nsible to the Public Service Electric and Gas Company. Selected sections of Volumes 5 and 6 have been prepared by the Bechtel Power Co rpo ra tion acting as an agent responsible to the Public Service Electric and Gas Company.
This vo lume , Vo lume 3, documents the evaluation of the vent system.
NOTE: Id e nti f ication of the volume number precedes each page, section, subsection, table, and figure number.
O l
l i
~
BPC-01-300-3 3-iii G
Revision 0 na I{
m sta ,,
. . ._ .. . - _- . . . . . - -- _ ~ _ _ . ._
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT 3-ii LIST OF ACRONYMS 3-v LIST OF TABLES 3-viii i LIST OF FIGURES 3-x 3-
1.0 INTRODUCTION
3-1.1 3-1.1 Scope of Analysis 3-1.3 3-2.0 VENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS 3-2,1 3-2.1 Component Description 3-2.2 3-2.2 Loads and Load Combinations 3-2.24 4
3-2.2.1 Loads 3-2.25
< 3-2.2.2 Load Combinations 3-2.73
, 's 3-2.3 Analysis Acceptance Criteria 3-2.88 i.
3-2.4 Method of Analysis 3-2.95 3-2.4.1 Analysis for Major Loads 3-2.96 3-2.4.2 Analysis for Asymmetric Loads 3-2,126 3-2.4.3 Analysis for Local Ef fects 3-2.131 3-2.4.4 Analysis of Vent Header for 3-2.141 Local Ef fects of Pool Swell Impact Loads 3-2.4.5 Methods for Evaluating 3-2.145 Analysis Results 3-2.5 Analysis Results and Conclusions 3-2.150 3-2.5.1 Discussion of Analysis 3-2.161 Results 3-2.5.2 Conclusions 3-2.164 3-3.0 LIST OF REFERBNCES 3-3.1 O) t w/
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-iv g{
I-
. . ~ , _ _ _ - - .m._ . . . . . , . . .__ , ,.
LIST OF ACRONYMS ACI American Concrete Institute ADS Au tomatic Depressuriza tion System AISC American Institute of Steel Construction ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ATWS Anticipated Transients Without Scram BDC Bottom Dead Center BWR Boiling Water Reactor CDF Cumulative Distribution Function CO Condensation Oscillation DB A De sig n Basis Accident DC Downcome r DLF Dynamic Load Factor ECCS Emergency Core Cooling System FSAR Final Safety Analysis Report FSI Fluid-Structure Interaction FSTF Full-Scale Test Fa cili ty HNWL High Normal Water Level H PCI High Pressure Coolant Injection IBA Intermediate Break Accident I&C Instrumentation and Control ID Inside Diameter IR Inside Radius LDR Load Definition Report LOCA Loss-of-Coolant Accident B PC 3 0 0 -3 Revision 0 3-v nutegh
l LIST OF ACRONYMS l
,/ (Continued)
LPCI Low Pressure Coolant Injection LTP Long-Term Program MC Midcylinder MCF Modal Correction Factor MJ Mitered Joint MVA Multiple Valve Actuation NEP Non-Exceedance. Probability NOC Normal Operating Conditions NRC Nuclear Regulatory Ccmmission NSSS Nuclear Steam Supply System NVB Non-Vent Line Bay OBE Operating Basis Earthquake ,
OD Outside Diameter PS D Power Spectral Density PS E&G Public Service Electric and Gas Company PUA Plant Unique Analysis PUAAG Plant Unique Analysis Application Guide PUA R Plant Unique Analysis Report PULD Plant Unique Load Definition QS TP Quarter-Scale Test Facility RCIC Reactor Core Isolation Cooling RHR Residual Heat Removal RPV Reactor Pressure Vessel O BPC-01-3 0 0-3 3-vi Revision 0 nutagh
LIST OF ACRON YMS (Concluded)
RSEL Resultant Static-Equivalent Load SBA Small break Accident SBP Small Bore Piping SER Safety Evaluation Report SORV Stuck-Open Safety Relief Valve SRSS Square Root of the Sum of the Squares SRV Safety Relief Valve S RVD L Saf ety Relief Valve Discharge Line SSE Safe Shutdown Earthquake STP Shoit-Term Progran SVA Single Valve Actuation TAP To ru s Attached Piping VB Vent Line Bay VH Ve n t He ad er VL Vent Line ,
VPP Ve n t Pipe Pe netration ZPA 2ero Period Acceleration B PC-01-3 0 0 -3 Revision 0 3-vii nutp_qh
1 LIST OF TABLES Number Title Page 3-2.2-1 Vent System Component Loading 3-2.54 Information 3-2.2-2 Vent System Internal Pressures and 3-2.55
- Temperatures for LOCA Events 3-2.2-3 Vent System Pressurization and Thrust 3-2.56 Loads for DBA Event 3-2.2-4 Maximum Pool Swell Elevated Structure 3-2,57 Loads 3-2.2-5 Typical Vent Header Pool Swell Loading 3-2.58 Transients i
3-2.2-6 Maximum Vent System Submerged Structure 3-2.59 Loads 3-2.2-7 IBA Condensation oscillation Downcomer 3-2.60 Loads 4
3-2.2-8 DBA Condensation Oscillation Downcomer 3-2.61 Loads 3-2.2-9 IBA and DBA Condensation Oscillation 3-2.62 [
Vent System Internal Pressures
. 3-2.2-10 Maximum Downcomer Chugging Load 3-2.63 Magnitude Determination 4
3-2.2-11 Downcomer Chugging Lateral Loads 3-2.64 3-2.2-12 Load Reversal Histogram for Chugging 3-2.65 Downcomer Lateral Load Fatigue Evaluation 3-2.2-13 Chugging Vent System Internal 3-2.66 Pressures 3-2.2-14 Mark I Containment Event Combinations 3-2.81 3-2.2-15 Controlling vent System Load Combinations 3-2.82 3-2.2-16 Enveloping Logic for Controlling 3-2.84 Vent System Load Combinations BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-viii g
LIST OF TABLES (Concluded)
Number Title Page 3-2.3-1 Allowable Stresses for Vent System 3-2.92 Components and Component Supports 3-2.3-2 Allowable Displacements and Cycles 3-2.94 for Vent Line Bellows 3-2.4-1 Vent System Frequency Analysis Results 3-2.116 with Water Inside Downcomers 3-2.4-2 Vent System Frequency Analysis Results 3-2.118 without Water Inside Downcomers 3-2.4-3 Structural Frequencies for Harmonic 3-2.124 Loads Analysis 3-2.5-1 Major Vent System Component Maximum 3-2,152 Membrane Stresses for Governing Loads 3-2.5-2 Maximum Column Loads for Governing 3-2.153 Vent System Loadings 3-2.5-3 Maximum vent System Stresses for 3-2.154 Controlling Load Combinations 3-2.5-4 Maximum Vent Line-SRV Piping 3-2.155 Penetration Stresses for Controlling Load Combinations 3-2.5-5 Maximum vent Line Bellows Differential 3-2.156 Displacements for Controlling Load Combinations 3-2.5-6 Maximum Fatigue Usage Factors for Vent 3-2.157 System Components and Welds 3-2.5-7 Maximum Vacuum Breaker Accelerations due 3-2.158 to Dynamic Loads BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-ix gg
l LIST OF FIGURES Number Title Page 3-2.1-1 Plan View of Containment 3-2.10 3-2.1-2 Elevation View of Containment 3-2.11 3-2.1-3 Suppression Chamber Section - 3-2.12 Midcylinder Vent Line Bay 3-2.1-4 Suppression Chamber Section - Mitered Joint 3-2.13 3-2.1-5 Suppression Chamber Section - Midcylinder 3-2.14 Non-Vent Bay 3-2.1-6 Developed View of Suppression Chamber 3-2.15
. Segment 3-2.1-7 Drywell Vent Line Penetration Details 3-2.16 3-2.1-8 SRV Piping Vent Line Penetration 3-2.17 De tails 3-2.1-9 O 3-2.1-10 Vent Header-Downcomer Intersection Detail Downcomer Bracing System Details 3-2.18 3-2.19 3-2.1-11 Column Connection Details - Midcylinder 3-2.20 Non-Vent Bay 4 3-2.1-12 Vent Header Mitered Joint Support Ring 3-2.21 Details 3-2.1-13 Column Connection Details - Midcylinder 3-2.22 Vent Line Bay 3-2.1-14 Support Column Details 3-2.23 3-2.2-1 Pool Swell Impact Loads for Vent Header 3-2.67 at Selected Locations 3-2,2-2 Maximum Poo2 Swell Impact Pressures on 3-2.68 Vent Header at Bottom Dead Center
! 3-2.2-3 Typical Pool Swell Pressure Transients 3-2.69 l
!O BPC-01-300-3 Reviston 0 3-x gg
1 I
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Number Title Page 3-2.2-4 IBA and DBA Condensation Oscillation 3-2.70 Downcomer Dif ferential Pressure Load Distribution 3-2.2-5 Pool Acceleration Profile for DBA 3-2.71 Condensation Oscillation Torus Shell Loads at Quarter-Bay Location 3-2.2-6 Pool Acceleration Profile for Post-Chug 3-2.72 Torus Shell Loads at Quarter-Bay Location 3-2.2-7 Vent System SBA Event Sequence 3-2.85 3-2.2-8 Vent System IBA Event Sequence 3-2.86 3-2.2-9 Vent System DBA Event Sequence 3-2.87 3-2.4-1 Vent System 1/16th Segment Beam and 3-2.125 Finite Element Model - Isometric View 3-2.4-2 Vent System 180* Beam Model - les.netric 3-2.130 View 3-2.4-3 Vent Line-Drywell Penetration 3-2.137 Axisymmetric Finite Difference Model -
View of Typical Meridian 3-2.4-4 SRV Piping-Vent Line Penetration 3-2.138 Finite Element Model - Isometric View 3-2.4-5 Vent Line-Vent Header Intersection 3-2.139 Finite Element Model - Isometric View 3-2.4-6 Downcome r-Vent Header Intersection 3-2.140 Finite Element Model - Isometric View 3-2.4-7 Vent System 1/32 Segment Finite 3-2.144 Element Model for Pool Swell Impact Analysis - Elevation View 3-2.4-8 Allowable Number of Stress Cycles 3-2.149 for Vent System Fatigue Evaluation BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3 *i g{
l i
i i
LIST OF FIGURES :
(Concluded)
Number Title Page 3-2.5-1 Vent System Support Column Response 3-2.159 Due to Pool Swell Impact Loads -
Column at Midcylinder Non-Vent Bay 3-2.5-2 Vent System Support Column Response 3-2.160 Due to Pool Swell Impact Loads -
Outside Column at Mitered Joint l
t i
I BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-xii nutggb
3-1.0 INTRODDC TION In conj unction wi th Vo lume 1 of the Plant Unique Analysis Report (PUAR), this volume documents the
! ef forts undertaken to address the requirements defined in NUREG-0661 which af fect the Hope Creek vent system.
The vent system PUAR is organized as follows:
o INTRODUCTION
- Scope of Analysis o VENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS
- Component Description 4
Loads and Load Combinations Analysis Acceptance Criteria Method of Analysis 1 - Analysis Results and Conclusions The INTRODUCTION section contains an overview discus-sion of the scope of the vent system evaluation. The VENT S YSTEM ANALYSIS section contains a ccmprehens ive discussion of the' vent system loads - and load combina-o tions, and a description of the component parts of the vent system affected by these loads. The section also contains a discussion of the methodology used to evaluate the effects of 'these loads, the associated
[
\._ B PC-01-3 0 0-3 Revision 0 3-1.1 4.,~ --.-e- - ,- .---w..v--%= n --e , , .m,.._e-m.,,w.--,,,,,,,-,,m,- ,,.m.,.,.9py,ww,,---m-..e.,-my wg.----,y-er--em-fyre-t-e-t'-
evaluation results, and the acceptance lim i ts to which the results are compared. A summary of the conclusions d e rived from the vent system evaluation is also included.
O BPC 01-3 00-3 3-1.2 O
Revision 0
3-1.1 Scope of Analysis V
The general criteria presented in Volume 1 are used.as the basis for the dope Cre~ek vent system evaluation.
The vent system is evaluated for the effects of LOCA related loads and SRV discharge related loads discussed in Volume 1 and defined by the NRC Safety Evaluation Report NUREG-0661 (Reference 1) and the Mark I Containment Prog ram Load De finition Repo rt (LDR)
(Reference 2).
The .LOCA and SRV discharge loads used in this evaluation are developed using the plant unique g e ome t ry , . ope rating parameters, and test results contained in the Mark I Containment Program Plant Unique T.o ad De f inition' (PULD) (Reference 3). The effects of increased suppression pool tempe rature s which occur during 3RV discha rge events are also evaluated. . There temperatures are taken from the plant's suppression pool tempe ratur e response j analysis. Other loads and methodology, s uch as the evaluation fo r seismic loads, are take n from the plant's original design basis evaluation documented in the Final Safety Analysis Repcrt (FSAR) (Re ference 4 ) .
G B PC-01-3 0 0 -3 Revision 0 3-1.3 nutagh
The eva lua tion include s a structural analysis of the vent system for the ef fects of LOCA and SRV discharge related loads to confirm that the desig n of the vent system is adequate. Rigorous analytical techniques are used in this evalua tion, including use of detailed analytical models for computing the dynamic response of the vent system. Effects such as local penetration and intersection flexibilities are considered in the vent system analys is.
The results of the structural evaluation for each load are used to evaluate load combinations and f a t igue effects fo r the vent system in accordance with the Mark I Containment Prog ram Structural Acceptance Criteria Pl an t Unique Analysis Application Guide (PUAAG) (Reference 5). The analysis results are compared with the acceptance limi ts specified by the PUAAG and the applicable sections of the American Society of Me chanical Engineers (ASME) Code (Reference 6).
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-1.4 nutp_qh
3-2.0 VENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS G
An evalua tion of each of the NUREG-0661 requirements which affect the design adequacy of the Hope Creek vent system is presented in the sections which follow. The criteria used in this evaluation are contained in Vo lume 1 of this report.
The compo nen t parts of the vent system which are examined are described in Section 3-2.1. The loads and load combinations fo r which the vent system is evaluated are described and presented in Section 3-2.2.
The analysis me thodology used to evaluate the effects of these loads and load combinations on the vent system V is discussed in Section 3-2.4. The acceptance limits to which the analysis results are compared are dis-cussed and presented in Section 3-2. 3. The analysis results and the corresponding vent system des ign margins are presented in Section 3-2.5.
i l
! 3
~.)
B PC 3 00 -3 Revision 0 3-2.1 nutggh
3-2.1 Compo nent De sc ription The Hope Creek vent system is constructed from cylindrical shell segments joined together to form a ma nifo ld-like struc ture which connects the drywe ll to the suppression chamber. The configuration of the vent system is illu st ra ted in Figures 3-2.1-1 and 3-2.1-2.
The major components of the vent system include the vent lines, vent header, and downcomers. The proximity of the vent system to other components of the contain-ment is shown in Figures 3-2.1-3 through 3-2.1-6.
The e ight vent lines connect the drywell to the vent header in alternate mitered cylinders of the suppres-sion chamber. The vent lines are nominally 9/16" thick and have an inside diameter of 6'-2". The upper ends of the vent lines are 2" thick and include a conical transition seg me nt at the penetration to the d rywe ll ,
as shown in Figure 3-2.1-7. The drywell shell at each vent line-d rywe ll penetration is re in fo rced by a 3" thick insert plate. The vent line is connected to the d rywe ll by f ull penetration we lds. The vent lines are shielded from jet impingement loads at each vent l ine-drywe ll penetration location oy je t deflectors span the openings of tne vent lines. The which of the vent lines within the suppression portions BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.2 nut.e_qh
4 fG chamber, as shown in Figure 3-2.2-3, are 1-1/2" thick, except for the lower 7 '-3" of the vent lines which are 2" thick. The end of each vent line is capped with a 3" thick flat plate.
The vent header is an assembly of mitered cylindrical shell segments joined together to form a ring header, as shown in Figure 3-2.1-1. The vent header is nominally 9/16" thick and has an inside diameter of 4'-3". The vent header is continuous between adjacent vent lines. The vent header is connected to each vent line by a 3/8" partial penetration weld with a 1/2" cover fillet weld outside the vent line and a 1/2" O
] fillet weld inside the vent line.
A total of eighty downcomers penetrate the vent header in pairs, as shown in Figures 3-2.1-1, 3-2.1-3, '
and 3-2.1-6. Two downcomer pairs are located in each vent line bay and three pairs are located in each non-vent line bay. Each downcomer consists of an inclined segment which penetrates the vent header and a vertical i
! segment which terminates below the surface of the suppression pool, as shown in Figure 3-2.1-9. Each
'downcomer is nominally 3/8" thick and has an outside diameter of 2'-0". The downcomers are attached to the
\ /
i BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2,3 gd
vent header by 1/2" fillet welds inside and outside the vent header.
The intersections of the downcomers and the vent header are reinforced with a system of stiffener plates and bracing members, as shown in Figures 3-2.1-6, 3-2.1-9, and 3-2.1-10. In the plane of the downcomers, the intersections are stiffened by a 1-5/8" thick crotch plate located between downcomers in a pair. The connection of the top side of each downcomer to the vent header is reinforced by 1-5/8" thick outer stiffener plates. Downcomer ring plates which are 1-5/8" thick connect the associated crotch plate and the outer stiffener plates. This system of stiffener plates is designed to reduce local intersection stresses caused by loads acting on the submerged portion of the downcomers.
In the direction normal to the plane of the downcomer pair, the intersections are braced by 4" diameter Sche-dule 120 pipes. One pipe member is located on each side of the vent header. The upper ends of these pipe members are connected to a 1-5/8" thick built-up tee-section and 7/8" thick pad plates attached to the vent header. The lower ends of the pipe members are connected to the downcomer ring plates. The ring BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.4 g{g L
F
N plates are stif fened locally with a 3/4" thick gusset plate and pad plate assembly. In addition, the adjacent downcomer pairs in the non-vent line bay are ,
joined by 2-1/2" diameter rods, one on either side of the vent header. The ends of these rods are connected to the downcomer rings. The bracing system provides an additional load pa,th for the transfer of loads acting on the s ubme rged portion of the downcomers and results in reduced intersection local-stresses. The system of downcomer-vent header intersection stif fener plates and bracing members provides a highly redundant mechanism for the transfer of loads which act on the downcomers, thus reduc ing the mag n itud e of loads which pass directly through the intersection.
.I Q]
A bellows as sembly is provided at the penetration of the vent line to the suppression chamber as shown in Fig ure 3-2.1-7. The bellows allow differential movement of the vent system and suppression chamber to occur wi thout developing sig nificant interaction loads.
l The bellows assemblies consist of a tandem bellows unit with a nominal outside diameter of 6'-8". A 1/2" thick annular plate connects . the upper end of the bellows .
assembly to the vent line. The lowe r end of the i
bellows assembly is connected to the suppression l
j chambe r by a 2-1/2" thick nozzle. Each of the two I
\
b B PC 3 0 0 -3 Revision 0 3-2.5 nutggh
bellows units in the assembly contains a section with five convolutions which are alternately connected to 1/2" thick cylindrical sleeves. The total length of the bellows assembly is 4'-2 1/2". The annular plates are attached to the vent lines by 1/2" fillet welds.
The SRV piping is routed from the drywell down the vent lines and penetrate the vent lines inside the suppres-sion chamber, as shown in Figures 3-2.1-3 and 3-2.1-8.
The vent lines and SRV piping nozzles are reinforced at each vent line-SRV piping penetration location by a 2-1/2" thick insert plate and four 2" thick gusset plates. The vent line-SRV piping penetration assembly provides an ef fective means of transferring loads which act on the SRV piping to the vent line.
The drywell/wetwell vacuum breakers (not shown) are twenty-four inches in size and extend from mounting flanges attached to the vacuum breaker support nozzles.
The 2'-0" diameter, 0.438" thick support nozzles penetrate the vent line end plate, as shown in Figure 3-2.1-3.
The vent system is supported within the suppression chamber by two column members at each mitered joint location, one column member at each midcylinder BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.6 g{
location, and by an overhead truss system, as shown in Figures 3-2.1-3 through 3-2.1-6. The support column and overhead truss members are constructed from 10" diameter Schedule 120 pipe with built-up clevis assemblies attached to each end, as shown in Figure 3-2.1-14. The upper ends of the mitered joint support columns are attached to 1-1/2" thick vent header support rings, shown in Figure 3-2.1-12. The support rings are attached to the vent header with 5/16" fillet welds. The lower ends of the mitered joint support columns are attached to 2" thick ring beam pin plates.
Each vent line is supported by a single support column member and two overhead truss members. The supp rt eclumn is connected to a 2" thick pin plate on the vent
\
line and a 1-3/4" thick pin plate on the midcylinder ring beam. The overhead truss members in the vent line bay are connected to a 2-1/4" thick pin plate on the vent line and to 1-3/4" thick pin plates at top dead center on the mitered joint ring beams. Details of the support column and overhead truss member connections on the vent line are shown in Figure 3-2.1-13.
The midcylinder non-vent bay location is reinforced by two 1-1/2" thick vent header ring plates each located l'-10" from midcylinder. Two 1-1/ 2" thick longitudinal plates span between the two ring plates. Two 1-3/4" O
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.7 Qd
thick pin plates are attached to the lower longitudinal plate, and a 2-1/4" thick pin plate is attached to the face of each vert header ring plate at top dead center.
The details of the connections at midcylinder non-vent bay are shown in Figure 3-2.1-11. The midcylinder non-vent bay support column is attached to the two 1-3/4" thick pin plates at its upper end and to a 1-3/4" thick pin plate on the midcylinder ring beam. The two overhead truss members in the non-vent bay are each attached to the 2-1/4" thick pin plates at the vent header ring plate and to a 1-3/4" thick pin plate at top dead center on the mitered joint ring beams.
The support columns and overhead truss members provide an effective means of transferring vertical loads acting on the vent system to the suppression chamber.
The overhead truss members also effectively trans*er horizontal vent system loads to the suppression chamber. The vent lines provide additional support for the vent system, although primary vertical suppott is provided by the vent system support columns and overhead truss members. The support offered by the vent line bellows is negligible, since the relative stiffness of the bellows with respect to other vent system components is small.
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.8 gg
The vent system also provides support for a portion of the SRV piping inside the vent line and suppression chamber, as shown in Figure 3 -2 .1-3 . Loads which act on the SRV piping are transferred to the vent system by the penetration assembly on the vent line, and by 4" i
diameter Schedule 80 support members attached to pad i
plates on the vent header near the mitered joint.
Conversely, . loads acting on the vent system cause 4
motions to be transferred to the SRV p iping at these same penetration and support locations.
O i
i i
B PC-01-3 0 0-3 Revision 0 3-2.9 o
@ O INT 1DtSECTICN CF o.
VENT UNP. ANC i SUPPRESSION [MIDCYuNCER CHAMBER (TYR / uiTange aciNT a m) /
/ -s 'N
/0 c. '
a,o
~
/
5 r-)\ <o\
y ge*
(_
W Q
N v '__^
L y / '
i VENT NEADER HC Rl'1 CNI.iL REST RMNT l80
- Figure 3-2.1-1 PLAN VIEW OF CONTAINMENT BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.10 @{
1 l
% REAcicR ,
i EL. 477'-4" 10 '.1"!. 4.
l l
34'- c' :. A.
ORYW ELL DRYWELL SHIELO WALL '
- W -- +g ,,,,.ig O ExPANsicN BELLOWS 37.i' l f,23.S*
G l r. , .n 1 M T CEFLECTom VENT LINE % v. . ~; ~.
N . . -
StJADRESSION NN '
.? ,
7*
EL, 77 '. g Ig"
~
_E ,. . , 2 '. a* ll .. . :. , - f$D.v.*:.{
pr- __Uw' 'q t
l;'a wcRit. MESTRAINT l OcWNCOMER #. # .
- ~
N cctyMN i EL. 54'- C" w A f. l
! ...g.
. ;$ V .' "
l i
h* - 8 ASEM AT I l 1 Figure 3-2.1-2 ELEVATION VIEW OF CONTAINMENT l
BPC-01-300-3 h Revision 0 3-2.11 nu4sEu l _ . __- . . . _ _ . . . - . - - . - - . - - - - - . - --
I l
i l
l SPMA7 HEACER MCNCRA46, HEMM Vacuum SREM3R ,
VENT LINE SRV Pl#1NG pfMETRMICN CATWALK 3 ir Suppef5SICN 9,& 1 j
p ..
cwAween syns \ '
H CRI1CNTAa.
,a yu, , GF Smast=Amr
/
l l
- 5. ', . ,
17 i m '
l 6
ocwNccuum EL. "!t'. 4"-
h i O ,
wwwt ,
/. -(/ _ ~ bh) m
^
,P EL . 7 i '. 4 V1' \ Suc 10N
~
T k STRAmER-
\ -vfNT SYsisu
/ comuw /
RING SEAM
/ --
T.QUENCHEM , p AIN G SEAM svissENER
/ 3 .1
.b!
c= w.v N ./
/ ,
/
i l;l
- =>msc~cu l AS SY- .
t . .
ccwMw 6 -
[ *. ', .*. >1 " ',
,. ' 91.' , ?U e. ".' **.')
Note: BASE puTE As5EMsLY
- 1. Downcomer stiffener plates not shown for clarity.
Figure 3-2.1-3 SUPPRESSION CHAMBER SECTION - MIDCYLINDER VENT LINE B AY BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.12 @{p
l' C:lllN STRU C*1CN Pt.ATPCAM -",'\ _SPFAY meAcER McNCMAIL
\u SpV PISING CATW ALK g
/ gyppcRTS
./ ,
'N miss saAM l
4\
/ .
/ \
Ng,/
~
c:. . '
1 1 at n'. t ' ' ,'8 ^
i .
-d} -
NNWL p _l-- VENT SYSTEM C"#bMM N El. 71 4V7' \
\ y SPAaGER ,
\"\ \
s '
/
/
/
pS*V P:RN4 /
y\
N //
/ ,
(
fMAMSHEAD . ,
j - R twG S EAM g{ _
j sTipaf.ME;:t CC lum N g [ gu tN CH E R i suracat
- Cuws crtCu Assy. -
s C
-tNTERNAL pt PING SOPACET
- Cwuw- e
, ;, .<...s *
\ ,.. .
e.*1 N
-5ASE PLATE ASSEMBLT Figure 3-2.1-4 SUPPRESSION CHAMBER SECTION - MITERED JOINT U
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.13 g{
O SPRAT HEACER McNCRAIL VENT HEACEM CATWALK 3
-;;r
/ CowNccM EM 1 A A
l3/ i p HCRl1CNTAL T \ R ESTRAINT a . .
e s _s
=% E l EL. M'.4" \ I MNwt p\ *, -
g- / \ --h-
.- = =
u w.ac /
, \
x VENT SYSTEM RING SIAM G
l \ CCWMN T.QU ENCHER f
x ,
N =
CO WM N ,
' \
I CONN ECT:cN l QuSNCmEM ASSy .-- SuppcAT m
~
INTERNAL *t#1NG SuppcRT g.
- . .;.9 wa.;
l
\eass pu..g:. T2 Asstus T cm ELaow Note:
t 1. Downcomer stiffener plates not shown for clarity.
l Figure 3-2.1-5 SUPPRESSION CHAMBER SECTION - MIDCYLINDER NON-VENT BAY BPC-01-300-3 nutag"h Revision 0 3-2.14 L
.- 5 mere 56iCN CHAMBER SHEL'.
/
) t /
I lo e Truss MEMBERS
_,/ \
/
/
? -
f ij
,s
. L i '/ t" Te <. V E NT K Eac ER
- ' R I N G pt.aT ES U ,
s'. 1' .3.
N l VENT LIN!!
- i. 's* ,
i A'.31.3 VENT HEADER 3 b l !
/ N h
( w- :
l .
? iL _ _
W
'. I1
/._. t i 1/4 ?? rt 9N 'l .
i, 4 i NT@l 4' N.. i
.
- C./ . .
a ( 7. p1.,C RCO 3" TH <. l l l l l l j -l ,
END Di A*E l M 90 { !
'll!
ll
/
'l n .
l ; l BRACING l 'r i
l !
m ' d
,l' to d
-l -SRv pip! SuppcRT I
'[6UPECRT
' -24 o coWNCOMirR DAC E pin PLATE '
- I .i CC' M i
. [T- QUENCHERg . . .
( M P)
- ... -c -
- m. _ -D : !
l . 1. ,
n.
I k Y -
h I ,< N n
- i .s .]' M--
. a <
7 l l . IC ufNCHER l l l l SUFocR Siam I i y RING SEAM l '
1 d'" VENT LINE SAY ;
{ 3'/ " q NCN.yENT kMITEREDJOINT UNE B AT l
Figure 3-2.1-6 i
DEVELOPED VIEW OF SUPPRESSION CHAMBER SEGMENT
, v I
BPC-01-300-3 3-2.15 Revision 0
. _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ - - _ _ . _ , . _ . , _ , - ~ _ . _ , . _ _ . _ ,
O r ORYWELL segLL dET CEFLECTCR 1" TH n. CCN ICAL T RANsitioN Gusset B ELLows AATE
\ .
t l s' TH K.
g IN SERT
, \ PLATS 9/lG'fMK.
VENT LIN E l
Figure 3-2.1-7 DRYWELL VENT LINE PENETRATION DETAILS
\
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.16 nut.ach h
O e vEN LIN5 (vfATICAL)
~
I ~
,k . VENT L!NE
? * ( MRt"&cNTAQ h
4 SRV LINE -
i =
k
-SRv OISCW, LINE to'd SCH. IGC NC11LE a - ?' THK. GUSSET mLATE l
. 7. E7 TW 4. IN S ERT AL ATE l k THK. VEN" LINE I
Figure 3-2.1-8 SRV PIPING VENT LINE PENETRATION DETAILS 4
BPC-01-300-3 MUk Revision 0 3-2.17
O 9/lG"TH K.
VEMT*EACEA
-l kg THK.
OUTER STIFFENER PLATE
.- + -
/
/
/ ,.
/
, y \
/
t' /g's goe '
e
, l ks TWK,
,f ,
CoWNCCMER AING CLATE
, .' tN.S W 4- '
CRCTCH s
f t'.o" o. C . , 3/g" 7a g, l PLATE l
=cwuccM ER i 3
l l !
i i
, .1 l
f '
I Figure 3-2.1-9 VENT HEADER-DOWNCOMER INTERSECTION DETAIL B PC-01-3 0 0 -?,
Revision 0 3-2.18 9
g{
O g ;, - - .
_ -v. w m - _
p
/
ih" micx suit.T-up Tra
/
1 I I N____ _ _ -
,' 4" p otAsoNu. Pips g- \ss N ccam n V s
x ,
i l
t
'! \
wen =% ptAra i ,, !
i TU il i 'I Y WICK SUSSET PLATE I ll 11 11 il 11 sy4' Pao PLATa Figure 3-2.1-10 DOWNCOMER BRACING SYSTEM DETAILS O
BPC-01-300-3 O Revision 0 3-2.19
l l
O l '/g' tw( l '/q" T H A.
UAPER LONGlTUCINAL
-VENT HEADER RING pta,TE PLATE j
' NITRONIC SUSHINS 2 '/4 T H K,,
l PIN ALATE 1
s , \, !
- g. \
l' -
i h _ A VENT HEADER 1 ,
k-_-__ --___. _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _
. /*
i
/
, yq'THK. Low E A LONGITUDINAL PLATE Q MIOCYLINDER l
Figure 3-2.1-11 COLUMN CONNECTION DETAILS - MIDCYLINDER NON-VENT BAY BPC-01-3 0 0- 3 Revision 0 3-2.20 nut.e_qh
l'/t' W. vhT sacam su==omt =wo I
9 s' g d
[witmewie suss No
'O'
~
O r
l
/ \
r u 7 8[g 9/iG TM.
vse -seem s sw Figure 3-2.1-12 j
VENT HEADER MITERED JOINT SUPPORT RING DETAILS l
SPC-01-300-3 N Revision 0 3-2.21 1
O
- N t""RC NI C SUSWIMG
\
k, - 7,' 4'
/ ?' iClf.m FIN P.A"E.
'N
/' "
\
N' '
t " w ic ,< co us s e-PLAT E 1 TM<. p 3.g 7, g ex =gt =_
var usa. 3 UPPER CONNEC* ION O
l' Tw <.
VENT yyg
- l'/g* WICK DI- O D' AT E i
j N acsi e s-%s l
w T- 2. * - 0 4 ='s :' - A E I
i 1,0WER CCNNECTICN Figure 3-2.1-13 COLUMN CONNECTION DETAILS - MIDCYLINDER VENT LINE BAY O
BPC-01-300-3 nutp_q.h Revision 0 3-2.22
UppsR wiracunc SUSHING
-UPPY,R PIN UPPER AIN ,
I~
"'_an r--- A
~
l 7
~l UP9ER P1PE
\
l i l I : _I
- i ; i 10"# pips i i r
i
-- Q ,
Q
- l
- ,; n ; i-l ll 1 l
t iz"e Pip /a .l_ _ _ _ _ l_ _ _ _ _ [. , ,!
l survE
, i i dli I i I I I I a .
LowSR pipt ,/ l 1cwgg atN No 'um ptec n .. ___ J.,
'" ~ '"
T LOWER PIN LowEn --
NITRONIO SUSNING Figure 3-2.1-14 SUPPORT COLUMN DETAILS O BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.23 pdg
3-2 . 2 Loads and Load Combinations The loads fo r which the Hope Creek vent system is O
evaluated are defined in NUREG-0661 on a generic basis for all Mark I plants. The me thodology used to develop plant unique vent system loads for each load defined in NUREG-0661 is discussed in Section 1-4.0. The results of applying the methodology to develop specific values for each of the gove rning loads which act on the vent system are discussed and presented in Section 3-2.2.1.
Us ing the event combinations and event sequencing defined in NUREG-0661 and discussed in Sections 1-3.2 and 1-4.3, the controlli ng 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.
{
B PC 3 0 0 -3 Revision 0 3-2.24 nutp_qh
3-2.2.1 Loads The loads acting on the vent system are categorized as follows:
- 1. Dead he ight Ioads
- 2. Seismic Loads
- 3. Pressure and Temperature Ioads
- 4. Vent System Discharge Loads
- 5. Pool Swell Loads
- 6. Condensation Oscillation Ioads
- 7. Chugging Ioads
- 8. Safety Relief Valve Discharge Loads
- 9. Piping Reaction Loads
- 10. Containme nt Interaction Loads Ioads in categories 1 through 3 are defined in the original containment desig n as documented in the plant's FSAR. Revised category 3 pressure and tempe ratur e loads resul t from pos tulated LOCA and S RV d ischa rge events. Loads in categories 4 through 7 result from postulated LOCA events; loads in category 8 result from SRV d ischa rge events; loads in category 9 are reactions which result from loads ac ting on SRV piping systems; loads in category 10 are motions which result from loads acting on other containment-related structures.
Os
(
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.25 nutggb
l l
No t all of tM loads defined in NUREG-0661 are evaluated in detail since some are enveloped '." others or hase a negligible ef fect 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 which are affected by each of the loadings defined in NUREG-0661. The table also lists the section in Volume 1 in which the methodology for developing values for each loading is discussed. The mag nitudes and characteristics of each gove rning vent system load in each load category are identified and presented in the parag raphs wh ich follow.
- 1. Dead Weight Loads
- a. De ad he ig h t of Steel: The we ig h t of steel used to construct the vent system and its suppo rts is consid e red . The dead we ig h t of steel is determined based on nominal c ompo nent dime nsions and a density of steel of 490 lb/ft3, BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.26 nute_qh
V 2. Seismic Ioads
- a. OBE Ioads: The vent system is subjected to horizontal and vertical accelerations during an Ope rating Basis Earthquake (OBE). This loading is taken from the o rig inal desfqn basis fo r tne containment documented in the plant's FSAR.
- b. SSE Loads : The ve nt 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 O\
FSAR.
- 3. Pressure and Temperature Loads
- a. Normal Operating Internal Pressure Loads:
Tne ve n t system is subjected to internal pressure loads during No rmal Operating
, conditions. This loading is taken from the original des ign basis for the containment documented in the plant's FSAR. The range of normal operating internal pressures specified is 0.0 to 2.0 psi.
1 O
t i B PC- 01-3 0 0-3 Revision 0 3-2.27 nutggb
, c.--. .,m. --
. , , ,--n.-- c,.,c---.y ., ,.y- -w-. y- -
,-,-3.--,--y,- ,-..,ev gg,- g amme-,ww *--,ewwm,g,, -- , g--inwg-
- b. LOCA Internal Pressure loads: The vent system is subjected to internal pressure loads dur ing a Small Break Acc ident (S BA) ,
Intermediate Break Accident (IBA), and Design Basis Accident (DBA) event. The procedure used to develop LOCA internal pressures for the containment is discussed in Section 1-4.1.1. The resulting vent system internal pressure mag ni tude s at key time s during the SBA, IBA, and DBA events are presented in Table 3-2.2-2.
The vent system internal pressures fo r each event are conservatively as'sumed to be equal to the corresponding drywe ll internal ,
pressures, neglecting reductions due to losses. The net internal pressures acting on the components of the vent system inside the suppression chambe r are taken as the difference in pressures between the vent system and suppression chamber.
The pressures specified are assumed to act uni fo rmly ove r the vent line, vent header, and downcomer shell surfaces. The external or secondary conta imne nt pressure for the B PC 3 0 0 -3 3-2.28 Revision 0 nu
vent system components outside the suppres-sion chamber for all events is assumed to be
- 0. 0 p s ig . ' The ef fects 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 Ioads : The vent I system is subjected to the thermal expansion j
loads associated with normal ope rating conditions. This loading is taken from the original design basis fo r the containment documented in the plant's FSAR. The range of normal ope rating tempe ratures fo r the vent system with a concurrent SRV discharge event
, Q _.
is 50 to 150*F . The temperature of the SRV piping with a concurrent SRV discharge event is conserva tive ly taken as 380*F for the submerged portion of the piping and 407'F for the po rtion in the suppression chamber airspace.
Additional normal ope rating temperatures for the vent system inside the suppression chamber are take n from the suppression pool temperaturc response analysis contained in the plant's FSAR.
k B PC-01-3 0 0-3 Revision 0 3-2.29 Qd
- d. LOCA Temperature Loads : The vent system is subjected to thermal expansion loads associ-ated wi th the SBA, IB A , and DB A events. The procedure used to develop LOCA containment temperatures is discussed in Section 1-4.1.1.
The resulting vent system ten.perature magni-tudes at key times during the SBA, IB A , and DBA events are presented in Table 3-2.2-2.
Additional vent system temperatures are taken from the suppression pool temperature response analysis contained in the plant's FSAR. These temperatures are enveloped by the maxim um LOCA temperatures and are not considered further.
The temperatures of the major compo nents of the vent system, such as the vent line, vent header, and downcomers, are conse rva tive ly assumed to be equal to the corresponding dry-well temperatures for the IB A and DBA events.
For the SBA event, the temperature of the major compo nents of the vent system is assumed to be equal to the maximum saturation tempe rature of the drywell, which is 266*F.
B PC 3 0 0 -3 3-2.30 Revision 0 nutggh
1 ,
1 f 1 7
.i .
The tempe ratures of the external components j-
- of the vent system such as the support column s, downcomer bracing, and associated ;
j: ring plates and stiffeners are assumed to be f equal to the correspo nding suppression
- chamber temperatured for each event.
4 i
. t
- The temperatures specified are assumed to be i
! representat ive of the major component and
( ,
?
1 j external component metal tempe ratures i throughout the vent system. The temperature
< i l of the SRV piping for those SBA, IB A, and DBA events which include SRV discharge loads is
'i-take n as 380*F for the subme rged portion of j
, the piping and 407*F for the portion in the suppression chamber airspace. The ambient
- temperature of the vent system for all events _
! is assumed to be 70*F.
i
- 4. -Vent System Discharge Loads l-
- a. Pressuriza tion and Th ru s t Ioads: The vent i
, system is subjected to pseudo-static pressurization and thrust loads during a DBA I event. The procedure used to develop vent system pressuriza tion and thrust forces, l
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.31
!^
_...__.____..._._.,_._...,,-,_,__._..-____.m.,___._,~,_.., _ . - _ _ , _ ,
applied to the unreacted areas of the maj or components of the vent system, is discussed I
in Se ct ion 1-4.1.2. The resulting maxim um forces for each of the major component unreacted areas at key time s during the DBA event are shown in Table 3-2.2-3. The pressurization loads acting on the vent line-drywell penetrations are obtained by mul t iplyi ng the corresponding drywe ll internal pressures for the DBA event by the penetration unreacted area.
The vent system d ischa rge loads shown in Table 3-2.2-3 correspo nd to a ze ro drywe ll/
wetwell pressure differential. The vent system discharge loads specifled for the DBA event include the effects of DBA internal pressure loads as discussed in load case 3a.
The vent system d ischa rge loads which occur during the SBA or IB A events are negligible.
- 5. Pool Swell Loads
- a. Ve nt Sy s tem Impac t and Drag Loads: During the initial phase of a DBA event, transient impact and d rag pressures are postulated to act on maj or components of the vent system B PC 3 0 0 -3 Revision 0 3-2.32 nutegh
above the suppresswn pool. The maj or components affected include the vont line inside the suppression chamber below the maximum bulk pool height, the vent header, and the inclined po rtion of the downcomers below the downcomer rings. The upper portion of the downcomers is shielded from pool swell i impact loads by the downcomer rings.
The procedure used to develop the transient forces and the spatial distribution of pool swe 11 impa ct loads on these compo nents is discussed in Section 1-4.1.4. The resulting maximum pool swell impac t and drag pressures d on the vent line and downcomers are sum-marized in Table 3-2.2-4. The resulting mag nitudes and distribution of pool swell impact loads on the vent header are summarized in Figure 3-2.2-1. Typical vent heade r loading transients at selected locations on the vent header are provided in Table 3 -2. 2-S. The maximum pool swe 11 5 pact pressures at bottom dead center of the vent header are shown in Figure 3-2.2-2. Typical vent line and downcomer pool swell pressure transients are shown in Fig ure 3 -2. 2-3 . The D BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.33 nutggb
results shown are based on plant unique OSTF test data contained in the PULD (Reference 3) and include the effects of the main vent orifice tests. Pool swell loads do not occur during the SBA and IBA events.
- b. Impact and Drag Loads on Other Structure :
During the initial phase of a DBA event, transient impact and drag pressures are postulated to act on the components of the vent system other than the major components.
The components affected include the downcomer bracing members and ring plates, the vacuum breakers and vacuum breaker supports, the vent header support columns, and the SRV piping and supports.
The procedure used to develop the transient forces and the spatial distribution of pool 1
- swell impact loads on these components is discussed in Section 1-4.1.4. The resulting maximum pool swell impact and drag pressures on the downcomer bracing members and ring plates, and the vacuum breakers and vacuum breaker supports are summarized in Table 3-2.2-4. Typical pool swell pressure BPC-01-300-3 O
l Revision 0 3-2.34 gg
{
n transients are shown in Figure 3-2.2-3. The-pool swell impact loads on the SRV piping and supports are presented in Volume 5 of this report. The results shown are based on plant unique OSTP test data contained in the PULD which are used to determine the impact velocities and arrival times. Pool swell loads do not occur 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 components of the vent system located in V specified regions above the rising suppres-sion pool. The components located in Region I which are affected include the down-comer bracing members, the vacuum breakers and vacuum breaker supports, and the SRV piping and supports. The components located in Region II which are affected include the vacuum breakers and vacuum breaker supports, ,
the downcomer bracing members, the overhead truss members, and the SRV piping and supports. The plant unique OSTF test results adjusted for the vent line longitudinal v BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.35 n h
location show that froth impingement loads on the vent line are negligible.
The procedure used to develop the transient forces and spatial distribution of froth impingement and fallback loads on these com-ponents is discussed in Section 1-4.1.4. The resulting maximum froth impingement pressures on the downcomer bracing members, and the vacuum breakers and vacuum breaker supports are summarized in Table 3-2.2-4. Froth fallback pressures are negligible. Typical froth impingament and fallback pressure transients are shown in Figure 3-2.2-3. The froth impingement loads acting on the SRV piping and supports are presented in Volume 5 of this report. Pool swell loads do not occur during the SBA and IBA events,
- d. Pool Fallback Loads: During the later portion of the pool swell event, transient drag pressures are postulated to act on selected components of the vent system located between the maximum bulk pool height and the downcomer exit. The components affected include the downcomer bracing BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.36 nutec..h
==
members and ring plates, the support columns, -
and the SRV piping and supports. The procedure used to develop transient drag pressures and spatial distribution of pool fallback loads on these components is k
discussed in Section 1-4.1.4.
The resulting maximum pool fallback loads on the downcomer bracing members and ring plates are summarized in Table 3-2.2-4. A typical pool f allback pressure transient is shown in Figure 3-2.2-3. The pool fallback loads on the SRV piping and supports 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 swell loads do not occur during the SBA and IBA events.
- e. LOCA Air Clearing Submerged Structure Loads:
Transient drag pressures are postulated to act on the submerged components of the vent system during the air clearing phase of a DBA event. The components affected include the downcomers, the support columns, the submerged portion of the SRV piping, the O BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.37 nutggh
T-quenchers, and the T-quencher supports.
Tne procedure used to develop the transient forces and spatial distribution of DBA air clearing drag loads on these components is discussed in Section 1-4.1.6.
The resulting maximum drag pressures acting on the downcomers and the vent system support columns for the controlling DBA air clearing load case are shown in Table 3-2.2-6. The controlling DBA air clearing loads on the submerged portion of the SRV piping, T-quenchers and supports are presented in Volume 5 of this repo rt . The results shown include the effects of velocity drag, acceleration drag, and interference effects.
The LOCA air clearing submerged structure loads which occur during the SOA and IBA events are negligible.
- 6. Condensation Oscillation Loads
- a. IBA Condensation Oscillation Downcomer Loads:
Harmonic internal pressure loads are postu-lated to act on the downcomers during the condensation oscillation phase of an IBA event. The procedure used to develop the BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.38 ggh.. .,,-
l
. . - - - _ - _= _ _ _=- -- --. -. .__.__- =.-- - _ _ _ _ -
i g harmonic pressures and spatial distribution of IBA condensation oscillation downcomer ,
j loads is discussed in Section 1-4.1.7. The loading consists of a uniform internal i L pressure component acting on all downcomers and a differential internal pressure com-ponent acting on one downcomer in a downcomer pair. The resulting pressure amplitudes and associated frequency range for each of the i
three harmonics in the IBA condensation oscillation downcomer loading are shown in Table 3-2.2-7. The corresponding distribu-tion of differential downcomer internal pressere loadings are shown in Figure '
3-2.2-4.
The IBA condensation oscillation downcomer load harmonic in the range of the dominant downcomer frequency for the uniform and the differential pressure components is applied I
at the dominant downcomer frequency. The remaining two downcomer load harmonics are applied at frequencies which are multiples of the dominant frequency. The results of the three harmonics for the uniform and differ-BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.39 gg l
,~ -.-_- _ . . _ . _ . _ . . . . _ _ _ - _ . . , - ~ . _ . _ - _ . . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . . _ , _ _ _ _ . ~ _ _ . _ - ,
ential IBA condensation oscillation downcomer load cc.iponents are combined.
- b. DBA Condensation Oscillation Downcomer Loads:
Harmonic internal pressure loads are postu-lated to act on the downcomers during the condensation oscillation phase of a DBA event. The procedure used to develop the harmonic pressures and spatial distribution of DBA condensation oscillation downcomer loads is the same as that discussed for IBA condensation oscillation downcomer loads in load case 6a. The resulting pressure amplitudes and associated frequency range for each of the three harmonics in the DBA condensation oscillation downcomer loading are shown in Table 3-2.2-8. The correspond-ing distribution of differential downcomer internal pressure loadings are shown in Figure 3-2.2-4.
l l c. IBA Conder.sation Oscillation Vent System Pressure Loads: Harmonic internal pressure loads are postulated to act on the vent system during the condensation oscillation phase of an IBA event. The components BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.40 g
affected include the vent line, the vent
~/ header, and the downcomers. The procedure used to develop the harmonic pressures and spatial distribution of IBA condencation oscillation vent system pressures is dis-cussed in Section 1-4.1.7. The resulting pressure amplitudes and associated frequency range for the vent line and vent header are shown in Table 3-2.2-9. The loading is applied at the frequency within a specified range which maximizes the vent system response.
The effects of IBA condensation oscillation vent system pressures on t'.te downcomers are included in the IBA condensation oscillation downcomer loads discussed in load case 6a.
An additional static internal pressure of 1.5 psi is applied uniformly to the vent line, vent header, and downcomers to account 1 for the effects of nominal downcomer sub-mergence. The IBA condensation oscillation vent system pressures act in addition to the IBA containment internal pressures discussed in load case 3b.
O i
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.41 gg
- d. DBA Condensation oscillation Vent Syrtem Pressure Loads: Harmonic internal pressure loads are postulated to act on the vent system during the condensation oscillation phase of a DBA event. The components affected include the vent line, the vent header, and the downcomers. The procedure used to develop the harmonic pressures and spatial distribution of DBA condensation oscillation vent system pressures is the same as that discussed for IBA condensation oscillation vent system pressures in load case 6c. The resulting pressure amplitudes and associated frequency range for the vent line and vent header are shown in Table 3-2.2-9. The DBA condensation oscillation vent system pressures act in addition to the DBA vent system pressurization and thrust loads discussed in load case 4a.
- e. IBA Condensation Oscillation Submerged Struc-ture Loads: Harmonic pressure loads are-postulated to act on the submerged components of the vent system during the condensation oscillation phase of an IBA event. In accordance with NUREG-0661, the submerged BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.42 gg
. - - = , .. _ _ - - -. - .. . -- =-
s struc ture loads specified fo r pre-chug are t
V used in lieu of IBA condensation oscillation subme rged struc ture loads. Pr e-chug sub-t merged structure loads are discussed in load case 7c.
- f. DB A Condensation Oscillation Submerged Struc-ture Loads: Harmonic drag pressures are postulated to act on the submerged components of the vent system during the condensation osc illation phase of a DBA event. The components affected include the support I columns , the subme rged portions of the SRV piping, the T quenchers and the T-quencher s uppo rts . The procedure used to develop the harmonic forces and spatial distribution of DBA condensation oscillation drag loads on these components is discussed in Section I l-4.1.7.
Loads are deve loped for the case with the i
average source strength at all downcomers and l
the case with twice the ave rage source 7
strength at the nearest downcomer. The
! results of these two cases are evaluated to i determine the controlling loads.
j O BPC-01-3 0 0-3 Revision 0 3-2.43 1
nutggb 1
, , , - , , . _ , , , , _ _ , , _ , - , , _ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , _ _ . - - - - - ~ , , - - . - - , - , _
The resulting maximum drag pressure acting on the support columns for the controlling DBA condensation oscillation drag load case are shown in Table 3-2.2-6. The effects of DBA condensation' oscillation submerged structure loads on the downcomers are included in the loads discussed in load case 6b.
The results shown in Table 3-2.2-6 include the effects of velocity drag, acceleration drag, torus shell FSI acceleration drag, and interference effects. A typical DBA con-densation oscillation pool acceleration profile from which FSI accelerations are derived is shown in Figure 3-2.2-5. The results of each harmonic in the loading are combined using the methodology discussed in Section 1-4.1.7 l
- 7. Chugging Loads
- a. Chugging Downcomer Lateral Loads: Lateral loads are postulated to act on the downcomers during the chugging phase of the SBA, IBA, and DBA events. The procedure used to develop chugging downcomer lateral loa:1s is discussed in Section 1-4.1.8. The maximum BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.44 g
i
- y lateral load acting on any one downcomer in I'
any direction is obtained using the maximum downcomer lateral load and chugging pulse l duration measured at FSTF, the frequency of l the tied downcomers for FSTF, and the plant unique downcomer frequency calculated for Hope Creek. This information is summarized in Table 3-2.2-10. The resulting ratic of Hope Creek to FSTF Dynamic Load Factors (DLF's) is used in subsequent calculations to determine the magnitude of multiple downcomer loads and to determine the load magnitude used for evaluating fatigue. The methodology i
used to determine the plant unique downcomer i
O frequency is discussed in Section 3-2.4.1.
i
- The magnitude of chugging lateral loads acting on multiple downcomers simultaneously 1 is determined using the methodology described in Section 1-4.1.8. The methodology involves using 10-4 as the probability of exceeding a l
given downcomer load magnitude once per LOCA.
The chugging load magnitudes, shown in Table l 3-2.2-11, are determined using the above non-exceedance probability and the ratio of the DLF's taken for the maximum downcomer load l
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.45
calculation. The distributions of chugging downcomer lateral loads which are considered include those cases which maximize local effects in the vent system and those cases which maximize overall effects in the vent system.
The maximum downcomer lateral load magnitude used for evaluating fatigue is obtained using the maximum downcomer lateral load measured at FSTF with a 95% NEP, and the ratio of DLF's taken 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 as shown in Table 3-2.2-12.
- b. Chugging Vent System Pressures: Transient and harmonic internal pressures are postulated to act on the vent system during the chugging phase of the SBA, IBA, and DBA events. The components affected include the vent line, the vent header, and the down-comers. The procedure used to develop chugging vent system pressures is discussed BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.46 flute
l 4
in Section 1-4.1.8. The load consists of a t
gross vent system pressure oscillation component, an acoustic vent system pressure oscillation component, and an acoustic downcomer pressure oscillation component.
. The resulting pressure magnitudes and I
characteristics of the chugging vent system pressure loading are shown in Table 3-2.2-13.
The three load components are evaluated
- individually and are not combined.
The overall effects of chugging vent system pressures on the downcomers are included in the loads discussed in load case 7a. The Os downcomer pressures shown in Table 3-2.2-13 are used to evaluate downcomer hoop stresses.
The chugging vent system pressures act in addition to the SBA and IBA containment internal pressures discussed in load case 3b and the DBA pressurization and thrust loads discussed in load case 4a.
t l
- c. Pre-Chug Submerged Structure Loads: During the chugging phase of SBA, IBA, and DBA events, harmonic drag pressures associated with the pre-chug portion of a chug cycle are
)
V
! BPC-01-300-3 l Revision 0 3-2.47 gg
, ,,- - .. ----,,c,- ..,.,,...,y. e ,--w- p,wy, e- 7y-- .y.,
y -,v., ,
postulated to act on the submerged components of the vent system. The components affected include the support columns, the submerged portion of the SRV piping, the T-quenchers, and the T-quencher supports. The procedure used to develop the harmonic forces and spatial distribution of pre-chug drag loads j on these components is discussed in 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. The result-l ing maximum drag pressures acting on the i support columns for the controlling pre-chug drag load case are shown in Table 3-2.2-6.
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 PSI acceleration drag, and interference BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.48 g{
m effects. As can be seen by examining Table b
3-2.2-6, the submerged structure drag pressures due to pre-chug are bounded by post-chug. Therefore post-chug submerged structure loads (Case 7d) are used in the analysis in lieu of pre-chug submerged structure 1.oads.
- d. Post-Chug Submerged Structure Loads: During the chugging phase of SBA, IBA, and DBA events, harmonic drag pressures associated with the post-chug portion of a chug cycle are postulated to act on the submerged p components of the vent sistcm. The com-
,l
\
l -
ponents affected include the support columns, the submerged portion of the SRV piping, the T-quenchers, and the T-quencher supports.
The procedure used to develop the harmonic forces and spatial distribution of post-chug l
drag loads on these components is discussed in Section 1-4.1.8.
l l Loads are developed for the cases with the average source strength at the nearest two l downcomers acting both in-phase and out-of-phase. The results of these cases are l
O BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.49 Qd
_ . . . . _ . , - , . . . . _ ..-.._ _--. -- ~_ ~ _ ..
evaluated to determine t'o. controlling loads.
The resulting maximum drag pressures acting on the vent system support columns for the controlling post-chug drag load case are shown in Table 3-2.2-6. The controlling post-chug drag loads on the submerged portion of the SRV piping, the T-quenchers, and the T-quencher supports are presented in Volume 3 of this report. The effects of post-chug submerged structure loads acting on the downcomers are 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, and interference effects. A typical post-chug pool accelera-tion profile from which the FSI accelerations are derived is shown in Figure 3-2.2-6. The results of each harmonic are combined using the methodology described in Section 1-4.1.8.
- 8. Safety Relief Valve Discharge Loads
- a. SRV Discharge Air Clearing Submerged Struc-ture Loads: Transient drag pressures are BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.50 g
.. _ _ - - .-. - = ,_ - . , .- . . - _ _ - . - - _ - _
d j
a T postulated to act on the submerged components i
of the vent system during the air clearing phase of an SRV discharge event. The components affected include the downcomers, support' columns, the submerged portion of the SRV piping, the T-quenchers, and the T-quencher supports. The procedure used to develop the transient forces and spatial dis-
-tribution of the SRV discharge air clearing
, drag loads on these components is discussed in Section 1-4.2.4.
i Loads are developed for the case with three
.\
or four quenchers in consecutive bays acting in-phase and the case with three quenchers in adjacent bays acting out-of-phase. These results are evaluated to determine the con-
! trolling loads. The maximum drag pressures acting on the downcomers and the support columns for the controlling SRV discharge drag load case are shown in Table 3-2.2-6.
These results include the effects of velocity drag, acceleration drag, and interference effects.
O BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.51 gg
4 Piping Reaction Loads
- a. SRV Piping Reaction Loads: Reaction loads are induced on the vent system due to loads acting on the drywell and wetwell SRV piping systems. These reaction loads occur .at the vent line-SRV piping penetrations and SRV piping support on the vent header. The SRV piping reaction loads consist of those caused by motions of the vent system and loads acting on the drywell and wetwell portions of the SRV piping systems. Loads acting on the SRV piping systems include pressurization and thrust loads, elevated structure loads, sub-merged structure loads, and other operating or design basis loads.
The effects of the SRV piping reaction loads on the vent system are included in the vent system analysis. The reaction loads from the drywell portion of the SRV piping are taken from Volume 5.
- 10. Containment Interaction Loads
- a. Containment Structure Motions: Loads acting on the drywell, suppression chamber and vent system cause interaction effects between BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.52 gg
I these structures. The interaction effects result in vent system motions 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 evaluation 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.
O i
(-
l ts BPC-01-300-3 Reviticn 0 3-2.53 Qd
Table 3-2.2-1 VENT SYSTEM COMPONENT LOADING INFORMATION Component Part roaded O
Volume 3 Load esignation gg, 5 j e, , )
e saetion :: e 3 ge , p g g; y
1 I
Category I
l 244 Type Case Number
[3 y2 1
g g3 T$
gj_
3 h
_ y .( ) J .:
he h
'** "",' lceed weight of steel la 1-3 1 * * *' "!* * *I*
es ,,1 .le lo.d. 2a 1-3.1 x x x x x x x x Seismic 55* Seismic roads 2b 1-3.1 x x x x x x x x Normal @ rating Internal Pressure 3a 1-3.1 x x x x x x
'Q,***,, *^d :sa internal Presure 3b 1-4.1.1 x x x fx x lx Loads Normal operata.nq Temperature toads je 1-3,1 x x g ,lg , , fg
- ocA Temperature loads 3d 1-4.1.1 x x lx xlr x lx lx 8'Y Pressurization and Thrust toads 4a 1-4.1.2 x x l lxlxl !x Vent system Impact and Drag toads ha 1-4.1.4.1 x x x tapact and Drag toads on otner Structuree $b 1-4.1.4.2 l l 2 xl Pool swell Froth tapingement & Fallback Mads Sc 1-4.1.4.3 l x x x toads Pool Fallback Mads $d 1-4.1.4.4 x X LOCA Water Clearir.g Su2amerged Structure 14 ads N/A 1-4.1.5 x LOCA A*r Clearing Suknerged Strw ture toads $e 1-4.1.6 x x
- 3A C.O. Downcomer Loads 6a 1-4.1.7.2 x OBA C.O. Downemer Mads 6b 1-4.1.7.2 x Oondensation 12A C.O. Vent System Pressure Imada 6c 1-4.1.7.2 x x x +
Oscillation Loads . OSA C.C. Vent system Pressure toada 6d 1-4.1.7.2 x x x lx ISA C.O. Submerged Structure Mads 6e 1-4.1.7.3 x 08A C.C. Submerged Structure toads 6f 1-4.1. 7. 3 x Chugging Mwr. comer Lateral toads 74 1-4.1.8.2 l xl l Sugging &agging vent Systes Pressures 7b 1-4.1.8.2 x x x x x loads g Pre-Chug sutmerged struture Loais 7e 1-4.1.s.3 r
[ l Post-Chug Su2neerged Structure toads 7d 1-4.2.4 x SRV Oischarge Water Clearing sRV Oischarge su1 merged structure Imads N/A 1-4.2.4 x toads Sav Discharge Air Clearing summerged structure roads sa 1-4.2.4 xl lx l
'ista*jeacttaa sri Pipin , n. action a .ds ,a vet 3 x x
, l l N Contair. ment structure Met.ons 1:a vol. 2 x x x BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.54 nut.e9.h. -
Table 3-2.2-2 j l
VENT SYSTEM INTERNAL PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURE __S_ l FOR LOCA EVENTS II) o Pressure (psig)I I temperature .C?) 8 '
Pressure, Time (sec)
Des r ion Temperature Outside Torus Inside Torus components Externals Designation
" min " max P ain P,,, P ain ' max T,g, T,,, T sin max 58A L0CA Instant of Break to Onset of P,T g g 0. 300. 0.75 12.0 0.0 2.0 266. 266. 95. 101.
Chugging Onset of Chugging to Initiation of 300. 600. 12.0 21.3 1.4 2.0 266. 266. 101. 103.
ADS P2' T2 Initiation of ADS to RPV P,T '00. 1200. 21.3 24.3 1.4 1.5 266. 266. 103. 135.
3 3 Depressurization IBA L0CA Instant of Break to Onset of Pg, Tg O. 5. 0.75 3.5 0.0 1.5 210. 220. 95. 95.
CO and Chuqqing Onset of CO and Chugging to P2, T2 5. 300. 3.5 22.1 1.4 1.5 220. 262. 95. 112.
Initiation of ADS Initiation of ADS to RPV P,T3 3
300. 500. 22.1 33.7 1.4 2.0 262. 279. 112. 167.
Depressurization i t' f A L0CA Instant of Break to Termination PgTg 0, 1.5 0.75 39.0 0.0 31.4 135. 270. 80. 82.
- of Pool Swell Termination of Pool Swell to P2' T2 1.5 5.0 39.0 47.4 31.4 32.6 270. 292. 82. 87.
Onset o f CO Cnset of CO to Onset of Chugging P3, T3 5.0 35.0 29.0 46.0 4.4 32.6 273. 292. 87. 118.
Onset of Chugging to RPV P,T 4 4 35.0 65.0 29.0 29.0 4.4 4.4 273. 273. 113. 113.
Depressurization Notes:
- 1. LOCA pressure and temperature transients are contained in Hope Creek PULD (Reference 3) .
- 2. Pressures for vent system components outside the torus are equal to absolute drywell pressure. Pressures for vent system components inside the torus are equal to the difference in drywell and suppression chamber absolute pressures.
Initial pressures are assumed to be 0.0 psig.
- 3. Temperatures for the vent system components including the vent line, vent header, and downcomers are equal to the drywell temperatures. Temperatures for the vent system externals including the supporta and downcomer bracing system are equal to the suppression chamber temperatures. Initial temperatures are assumed to be 700F.
- 4. DBA vent system internal pressure loads are included in the vent system pressurization and thrust loads shown in Table 3-2.2-3.
3 J
BPC-01-300-3 3-2.55 g{
Revision 0
Table 3-2.2-3 VENT SYSTEM PRESSURIZATION AND THRUST LOADS FOR DBA EVENT Fy y F R #
. - ,4 F ., 5 x r. a
\
x > s .
t r-2
, e *4 5% d'I5
-, .4 h
v
) f( % s U'
y i
F
\ ^ES 3 5 F Kev Diacram 5
Time During Maximum Com=onent Force Magnitude (ki=s)
' ~
DBA Event (sec) Ff?d F 2
F 3
F 4
F 5
Pool Swell 67.45 139.89 19.70 19.16 3.93 l
0.0 to 1.5 j .
l l Condensation
- Oscillation 81.98 129.61 17.74 17.44 3.52 l 5.0 to 35.0 1
Chugging 50.16 19.95 2.87 2.62 0.51 35.0 to 65.0 l
l Notes: _
- l. Loads shown include the effects of the DBA internal pressures in Table 3-2.2-2.
- 2. Values shown are equal to product of penetration unreacted area and DBA internal pressure.
1 BPC-01-300-3 9
i Revision 0 3-2.56 Nted.
- ==
Table 3-2.2-4 MAXIMUM POOL SWELL ELEVATED STRUCTURE LOADS Maximum Pressure (psi)I 2)
Component Nder o pool pool Pool Froth Segments Impact Drag Fallback Impingement (P ,,x) (Pd) I ofb) f' Vent Line 2 13.21 2.649 - 1.388 Downcomer 4 - 8.0 - -
Vacuum Breaker y , _ _ ,774 and Support Vent Bay Ring 1 563.1 10.095 1.264 -
Ocwncomer Plate Bracing 4"Q 3 14.21 2.44 .306 2.539 Pipe i 2 42.67 7.312 .682 -
Non-Vent Bay n p t 1 563.1 10.095 1.264 -
s Downcomer
) Bracing 4"O 3 14.21 2.44 .306 2.539 d Pipe Notes:
- 1. See Table 3-2.2-5 and Figures 3-2.2-1 and 3-2.2-2 for vent header pool swell impact and drag loads.
- 2. Number of segments correspond to nodalization of structures for loads calculations.
- 3. See Figure 3-2.2-3 for typical pressure transient definitions.
- 4. Pressures are applied to vertical projected areas in a direction normal to structure.
- 5. Loads on vent line and vacuum breaker are symmetric with respect to the vertical centerline of the vent line.
Loads on downcomers and downcomer bracing are symmetric with respect to the vertical centerline of the vent header.
n
%J BPC-01-300-3 L Revision 0 3-2.57 UU II
Table 3-2.2-5 TYPICAL VENT HEADER POOL SWELL LOADING TRANSIENTS C MC Mitered Joint a
cowncomer (t , P,)
[ Openings
~
k 5 ,
- 1; - BDC 4 3 w
a (t3, P3)
(t., P)
' 4 y (t3, 0)
(t , 0) Tine Develoced view o f W3 Vent Header Typical Leading Transienc Location t t, ty Py 2 P4 tg P7 4 1 0.366 2.194 174.3 3.369 23.6 27.17 1.99 107.2 2 1.975 3.532 115.5 6.119 32.8 25.31 1.96 88.3 l
3 4.201 6.064 87.7 8.376 29.1 27.65 1.86 95.9 4 8.950 10.981 30.0 13.971 25.3 34.04 1.57 103.6 l
l l 5 4.020 S.155 60.3 14.120 13.4 38.76 1.03 100.4 l
l 6 6.43 9.390 38.5 15.0 1 14.9 35.74 1.04 101.7 Notes:
- 1. Pressure (p) in psi.
- 2. Time (t) in msec.
O BPC-01-300-Revision 0 3-2.58 nut *ech
Table 3-2.2-6 d MAXIMUM VENT SYSTEM SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOADS Maximum Pressure (psi)
Loading (1)
Downcomer(2) Support Column (3)
LOCA Air 1.63 1.68 Clearing DBA Condensation Oscillation N/A I4) 12.13 Pre-Chug N/A 1.47 Post-Chug N/A 44.61 g
SRV 20.13 37.24 Notes:
- 1. Loads shown include DLF's.
l
- 2. Downcomers are subdivided into two segments for '
loads calculations.
- 3. Support columns are subdivided into 13 segments for loads calculations.
! 4. Condensation oscillation loads on downcomers are l provided in Tables 3-2.2-7 and 3-2.2-8.
- 5. Chugging loads on downcomers are provided in Table 3-2.2-11.
(' BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.59 nutg,gh
Table 3-2. 2- 7 IBA CONDENSATION OSCILLATION DOWNCOMER LOADS r
{ l
+
F g pF yF d u
Uniform Pressure Differential Pressure O
Downcemer Load Amplitudes Interva zi Uniform (Fu) Differential (F d Pressure (psi) Force (lb) Dressure(psi) Force (lb) 6.0 - 10.0 1.10 241.75 0.20 43.95 12.0 - 20.0 0.80 175.82 0.20 43.95 18.0 - 30.0 0.20 43.95 0.20 43.95 Notes:
- 1. Effects of uniform and differential pressures sunced to obtain total load.
- 2. See Figure 3-2.2- 4 for downcomer differential pressure load distributions.
BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.60 nut.e._9.h
Table 3-2.2-8 m
DBA CCNDENSATION OSCILLATION DOWNCOMER LOADS I
l
+ >,
F u% 'h # u #d L'
Uniform Pressure Differential Pressure O Frequency Downcomer Load Amplitudes (1)
Uniform (F,3) f2)
Interval (H2) Differential (FdT Pressure (psi Fcree (lb) Pressure (psi) Fcree (lb) 4.0 - 8.0 3.60 791.16 2.85 626.34 8.0 - 16.0 1.30 285.70 2.60 571.39 12.0 - 24.0 0.60 131.86 1.20 263.72 Notes:
- 1. Effects of uniform and differential pressures summed to obtain total load.
- 2. See Figure 3-2.2-4 for downcomer differential pressure load distribution.
O BPC-01-300-3 nutp_q=h
, Revision 0 3-2.61
Table 3-2. 2- 9 O
IBA AND DBA CONDENSATION OSCILLATION VENT SYSTEM INTERNAL PRESSURES I
Component Load Load Characteristics Vent Line Vent Header IBA DBA IBA DBA Single Single Single Single Type Harmonic Harmonic Harmonic Harmonic Ma ni ude 2.5 1 2.5 1 2.5 1 2.5 Distribution Uniform Uniform Uniform Uniform Frequency Range (Hz) 6 - 10 4-8 6 - 10 4-8 Notes:
- 1. Downcomer CO internal pressure loads are included in loads shown in Tables 3-2.2-7 and 3-2.2-8.
- 2. Loads shown act in addition to vent system internal pressures in Table 3-2.2-2.
- 3. Additional static internal pressure of 1.5 psi applied to the entire vent system to account for nominal submergence of downcomers.
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.62 Ilu
1
(
V Table 3-2. 2- 10 MAXIMUM DOWNCOMER CHUGGING LOAD MAGNITUDE DETERMINATION Maximum Chugging Load for Single Downcomer FSTF Maximum Load Magnitude: Py=3.046 kips Tied Downcomer Frequency: f y =2.9 Hz Pulse Duration: t=d 0.003 sec.
Dynamic Load Factor: DLF y = if tid =0.027 Hope Creek Downcomer Frequency: 13.92 Hz
\_ Dynamic Load Factor: DLF=ift d= .131 Maximum Load Magnitude (In any direction):
P ) = (3.045) (4. 8) = 14.62 kips max *El(
Note:
- 1. See Table 3-2.4-3 for Hope Creek downcomer frequency.
n BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.63 nutmh
Table 3-2.2-11 DOWNCOMER CHUGGING LATERAL LOADS O
Case Number of . . Magnitude Number Downcomers Description / Distribution (ki Es)
Loaded Downcomers centered on 1 10 one VL, perpendicular to 6.99 VH,, opposing directions, maximize VL bending Downcomers centered on one VL, perpendicular to 2 10 6.99 VH, same directions, maximizeTUL axial load All downcomers between two VL's, perpendicular 3 10 to VH, same direction, 6.99 maximize VH bending MC NVB downcomers, 4 2 Perpendicular to VH, 13.49 opposing directions, maximize DC bending MC NVB downcomers, .
Perpendicular to VH, !
13.49 5 2 same directions, maximize DC swinging MC NVB downcomers, parallel to VH, opposing 6 2 directions, maximize DC 13.49 bracing loads MC NVB downcomers, 7 2 parallel to VH, same 13.49 directions, maximize DC bracing loads MC NVB downcomers, 8
Parallel to VH, maximize effects on single DC 14.62 MC NVB downcomer, perpendicular to VH 9 1 4 maximize effects on sincle DC BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.64 IllII(3()tl.
num.na
s Table 3-2. 2- 12 LOAD REVERSAL HISTCGRA't FOR CHUGGING i DOWNCOMER LATERAL LOAD FATI'UE EVALUATION Jk 337.5 0 3 22.5C 3150 3 1 45C
-\
292.5 0 6 3 67.50
,..e 5 \ 4
_ 90c + Z N # 4 3 247.5 C 6 ll2.5C
[A A 22g 3
2/.
i 7
ug 202.50 1300 Zievation View Section A-A KEY DIAGRAM Percent of AngularSectorLeadReversals(cyclash Maximum 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 leadRanhe' _
4706 2573 2839 3076 3168 2673 2563 4629 5 - 10 2696 1206 1100 1104 1096 1052 1163 2545 10 - 15 1349 727 653 572 709 708 679 1278 I v 15 - 20 l
676 419 452 377 370 398 368 6:1 j
20 - 25 250 252 225 192 255 197 334 l 25 - 30 380 187 139 121 97 114 162 208 I 20 - 35 209 62 84 86 62 60 90 150 35 - 40 157 53 28 39 48 44 58 36 40 - 45 113 83 33 32 26 19 23 33 67 45 - 50 65 26 14 11 9 16 40 50 - 55 26 11 5 11 11 23 28 55 - 60 51 2 4 0 5 9 '6 60 - 65 44 9 32 16 7 5 0 2 9 21 65 - 70 12 9 11 5 0 4 7 1) 70 - 15 s 4 2 0 2 4 7 13
- 5 - 30 26 7 2 0 0 0 0 12 30 - 35 5 11 0 0 0 0 5 11 85 - 90 4 0 0 2 0 0 9 90 - 95 7 4
- o "
- J 95 - 100 2 5 0
( Notes:
- 1. Values shown are for chugging duration of 900 sec.
- 2. The maximum single downcomer load nagnitude range used for fatigue is
! 3.936 x 4.8 = 18.9 kips (see Table 3-2.2-14) .
I \ )
l V i
BPC-01-300-3 3-2.65 nutech m Revision 0
I Table 3-2.2-13 CHUGGING VENT SYSTEM INTERNAL PRESSURES Load Type Component Lead Magninde (psu Load Description Vent Vent Dcwncemer Number Description Line Header Gross Vent Transient pressure.
1 System Pressure M fe m distr h en.
- 2.5
. + 2.5
- -+ 5.0 Oscillation Acoustic Vent Single da m ic in 2 System Pressure 6.9 to 9.5 Hz range. + 2.5
+ 3.0
+ 3.5 Oscillation Chiform distributian.
Acoustic Sirale rut' :cru.c m Downcemer 40.0 to 50.0 Hz + 13.0 3 Pressure range. Unifem N/A N/A Oscillation t8 is-dntien.
4.
l l . i i Leadinc Information i i , i
, a , i n i n 9
~~
i
/ i .. ./i\ 'it 1. Downcemer loads shcwn
-- . /
, r
, ,i.
,* i,8
/.ii '. .
. ! / .\
- f. i 1 used :.or hoop stress
' calculations only.
3 0. f i .( ' ; if l .\ !'l'\
f
! I' f l\ L ". \ fi'!' '\ 2. Loads act in addition to A '
',,A l internal pressure loads
'3
-2.- 7 t , ,
. . . i . i .'
shown in Table 3-2.2-2.
! ! ! i .. i i , , , . 4
-4. .
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 Ti=e (sec)
Forcinc Function for Lead Type 1 BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.66 nutegh ;
g VB g NVB I i L
n o r su _ t
\
7 F(t) F ( t) 0.0 0.5 1.0 Z/L Section Developed View Key Diagram g-
_ 20000
[g d ! Z/L = 1.0
\ N F/
O h o l'
'E sf 0 0 g "O 10000- ,
l f *.
ee-Z/L = 0.5
- c. If e
E Ili\
< ~
d h ', ii o I i '
~ Z/L = 0'2 8 ! 1 i( A N O I 'y
- N, /' \
l i
l N
. %--,_ ___-- N__.-
I
' 10
. 500 550 600 Time (msec)
Figure 3-2.2-1 POOL SWELL IMPACT LOADS FOR VENT HEADER AT SELECTED LOCATIONS O
v BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.67 nut Eh
g VB C NVB t i ,
L i l -
" r '
'_ L _
4\
Z Pmax l
(
\ Pmax l
l l
l 0.0 0.5 1.0 l Z/L Section Developed View l
Key Diagram 200 Y
l
)
{
j
/-N /
i
/ \ / $
o 10v-
/ N /
$ s_
i i E /
/ v n._ _
/
! O j .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1.0 Z/L Figure 3-2.2-2 MAXIMUM POOL SW.:LL IMPACT PRESSURES t ON VENT HEADER AT BOTTOM DEAD CENTER BPC-01-300-3 O
I Revision 0 3-2.68 nut.e_qh
i I
~
d n
P P m ,,,,
m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
-(
i
\ s 1 U ig p !a P ** I
' d'"**T- .
E e *A '
? -
To! _
i
- max
- i *1 max Time Time ,
Poot Swell Iscact . Pool Swell Imoact -
Cylindrical Structures Flat structures 46 "P
' max"* t m
t d
E E i a
.t
- max #
- 1 pfb l Time (msec) Down Pool Swell .gact - Pool Fallback Downcemers Pool Swell I= pact and Pool Fallback
\
I,egend t = Arrival time t
Up UP
,g T = Impact daration 4
100.0 t ,,, = *1me of maximum pool height D
9, 1^ en'n -I
~ '
3 *
- t = Time at end of pool fallback j p,'
g end
} j 1 P,,, = Peak bpact pressure
' =
P d Drag pressure
_ P,. - - - - - . -
t '
, _1CC0 3, Pg = Froth pressure i
Down Time (msec) Time (mseh P gg = f roth fallback pressure Peq1on_I Transient Region II Transient P = Pool fallback pressure pg3 Froth Impingement and fallback i
l Figure 3-2.2-3 TYPICAL POOL SWELL PRESSURE TRANSIENTS BPC-01-300-3 g Revision 0 3-2.69
E VL b
'C \ ,C \
\ ! \
t , - +
l i
C A
U
\M i J
C nM U
4
\
Case 1 Case 2 EE 3 'O
'C \ 'C ,
\
i i J
C U
\ \ J f
U
\M g Case 3 Case 4 Notes:
- 1. See Table 3-2.2- 7 for IBA pressure amplitudes and frequencies.
- 2. See Table 3-2. 2- 8 for DBA pressure amplitudes and i frequencies.
3.
Four additional cases with pressures in downcemers l opposite those shown are also specified.
Figure 3-2.2-4 IBA AND DBA CONDENSATION OSCILLATION COWNCOMER DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE LOAD DISTRIBUTION BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.70 nutech.
=c=ama I
l
\
Tc s Drywell :
A
/ B
/
B A C D E
-3 D
Key Diagram Normalized Pool Accelerations O' Profile Pool Acceleration (in/sec2)
A 50.0 3 200.0 C 500.0 D 1000.0 E 1500.0 Pool accelerations due to harmonic application c torus shell pressures shown in Figure 2-2. 2- 3 and the Alternate 4 amp (litudes Table 2-2.2-4 see PUAR shown Volumein 2) .
Figure 3-2.2-5 POOL ACCELERATION PROFILE FOR DBA CONDENSATION OSCILLATION TORUS SHELL LOADS AT QUARTER-BAY LOCATION
(
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.71 nut 9_ .h
To s Drywell e d k A E C F G A
B B ,/
,G E
H Kev Diagram Normalized Pool Accelerations Profile Pool Acceleration (in/sec 2)
A 20.0 B 50.0 C 100. 0 D 150.0 .
I 200.0 F 400.0 G 600 0 H 800.0
(
Pool accelerations due to harmen c applicatien of torus shell pressures shown in Figure 2-2. 2- 3 and the amplitudes shown in Table 2-2.2-5 (see PUAR Volume 2).
Figure 3-2.2-6 POOL ACCELERATION PROFILE FOR POST-CHUG TORUS SHELL LOADS AT OUARTER-BAY LOCATION O
BPC- 01-3 0 0-3 Revision 0 3_2.72 gggg t --
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 and presented in Table 3-2.2-14.
The- 27 general event combinations shown in Table 3-2.2-14 are expanded to fo rm . a total of 69 specific vent system load combinations for the Normal Operating ,
e SBA, IBA, and DBA events. The specific load com-s binations re fl ect a greateL leve l of detail than is
- k contained in the general event combinations, including i
distinction be twe e n SBA and IB A, distinction be twe en pre-chug and po s t-c hug , and consideration of multiple cases of particular loadings. The total number of vent system load combinations consists of 3 for the Normal Ope rating event, 18 for the SBA event, 24 for the IBA event, and 24 for the DBA event. Several different service leve l limi ts and corresponding sets of allowable stresses are associated with these load combinations, o
1.) B PC-01-3 0 0-3 Revision 0 3-2.73
No t 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 respec t ive load cases and allowable stresses. The results of this examination are shown in Table 3-2.2-15, whe re each enveloping load combination is assigned a number for ease of ide ntif ication .
The enveloping load combinations are reduced further by e xamining rela tive load mag n itude s and individual load characteristics to determine which load comoinations lead to controlling vent system stresses. The load combinations which have been found to produce control- ,
l ing vent system stresses are separated into two groups. The SBA II, DBA II, and DBA III combinations are used to evaluate stresses in all vent system components except those associated with the vent line-SRV p iping penetrations. The SBA II and DB A III combinations are used to evaluate stresses in the vent line-SRV p iping penetrations. An explanation of the logic used to conclude that these are the controlling vent system load combinations is presented in the paragraphs which follow. Table 3-2.2-16 summarizes the contro lling load combinations and identifies which load B PC 3 0 0 -3 Revision 0 3-2.74 nutggh
combinations are enveloped by each of the controlling h combinations.
Ma ny of the general event combinations shown in Table 3-2.2-14 have the same allowable stresses and are enveloped by others which contain the same or additional load cases. There is no distinction between Se rvi ce Level A and B conditions for the vent system, since the Service Level A and B allowable stress values are the same.
Many pairs of load combinations contain identical load cases except for seismic loads. One of the load combi-nations in the pair contains OBE loads and has Service Level A or B allowables, while the other contains SSE loads with Service Level C allowables. At the dominant vertical suppression chamber frequency, both the OBE and SSE vertical accelerations discussed in Section 3-2.2.1 are small compared to gravity . As a result, suppression chamber stresses and vertical suppo rt reactions due to vertical seismic loads are small compared to those caused by other loads in the load combination. The horizontal seismic accelerations for OBE and SSE at the dominant horizontal suppression chamber frequency are less that 50% of gravity and also result in small suppression chambe r stresses compared A
i B PC-01-3 0 0 -3 Revision 0 3-2.75 nutagh
with those caused by other loads in the load combinations. The Service Level C primary stress allowables for the load combinations containing SSE loads are 33 to 75% higher than the Service Level B allowa bles fo r the correspo nding load combination containing OBE loads. It is apparent, therefore, that the controlling load combinations fo r evaluation of vent system components are those containing GB E loads and Service Level B allowables.
By applying the above reasoni ng to the total number of vent system load combinations, a reduced number of enveloping load combinations for each event is obtained. The resul t ing vent system load combinations for the Normal Operating , SBA, IBA, and DBA events are shown in Ta ble 3-2. 2-15, along with the associated service level assignments. For ease of iden tif icatien ,
each load combination in each eve nt is a ssig ned a number. The reduced number of enveloping load combinations shown in Table 3-2. 2-15 consists of 1 for the Normal Operating event, 4 for the SBA event, 5 for the the IB A eve nt, and 6 for the DBA event. The load case des ig na tions for the loads which make up the combinations are the same as those presented in Section 3-2.2.1.
B PC 3 0 0 -3 Revision 0 3-2.76 nut.e_c_h.
It is evident from an examination of Table 3-2.2-15 i O Q' that further reductions in the number of vent system load combinations requiring evaluation are possible.
l Any of the SBA or IBA combinations envelop the NOC I combination, since they contain the same loadings as the NOC I combination and, in addition, contain
( .
condensation oscillation or chugging loads. The effects of the number of load cycles specified for the NOC I combination are considered in the vent system f atigue evaluation.
The SBA II combination is the same as the IBA III l
combination except for negligible differences in n internal pressure loads. Thus IBA III can be
. eliminated from consideration. The SBA II combination
- e nve lop s the SBA I and IB A II combinations , since the subme rg ed structure loads due to post-chug are more severe than those due to pre-chug . Sim il a r ly , the SBA II combination envelops the IBA I combination, since the down come r lateral loads due to chug ging are more severe than the downcomer loads due to IBA condensation osc illa tion. It also follows, from the reaso ni ng presented earlier for OBE and SSE seismic loads, that the SBA II combination envelops the SBA III, SBA IV, IBA IV, and IBA V combinations. Similarly, the SBA II combination envelops the DBA V and DB A VI combinations,
\ /
BPC-01-300-3 i Revision 0 3-2.77 nut 9_Ch l
except that these combinations 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 the SBA II load combination is evaluated.
The DB,A II combination envelops the DBA IV combination, since the SRV discharge loads which occur late in the DBA event have a negligible effect on the vent system. The DBA II combination also has more restrictive allowables than the DBA IV combination.
The DBA III combination envelops the DBA I combination since the DBA III combination contains SSE seismic loads in addition to SRV loads, while the DBA 1 combination contains OBE seismic loads. However the DBA I combination has more restrictive allowables than the DBA III combination. Therefore the DBA III combination is evaluated using the allowable stresses associated with the DBA I combination for all com-ponents except the vent line-SRV piping penetration.
The SBA II combination envelops the DBA I combination at the vent line-SRV piping penetration, since the DBA I combination does not include SRV discharge loads BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.78 gg
which are a large contributor t.o loads on the d penetration. The DBA III combination is evaluated using Service Level C allowables at the vent line-SRV piping penetration.
The controlling sent system load combinations evaluated in the remaining report sections can now be summarized.
The SBA II, DBA II, and DBA III combinations are evaluated for all vent system components except those i associated with the vent line-SRV piping penetration.
The DBA II combination does not need to be examined when evaluating the vent line-SRV piping penetration, since it does not contain SRV discharge loads which are a large contributor to loads on the penetration. Thus, p)--
\
L the SBA II and DBA III combinations are evaluated for the vent line-SRV piping penetration. As previously noted, the vent system discharge loads which occur during the chugging phase of the DBA event are conservatively substituted for 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 l of fatigue due to Normal Operating plus SBA events are evaluated. The relative sequencing and timing of each loading in the SBA, IBA, and DBA events used in this O
V BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.79 gg l
evaluation are shown in Figures 3-2.2-7, 3-2.2-8 and 3-2.2-9. Since SBA combinations envelop IBA combina-tions, the fatigue effects for Normal Operating plus IBA events are enveloped by Normal Operating plus SBA events. The fatigue effects for Normal Operating plus DBA events are also enveloped by the Normal Operating plus SBA events, since the combined effects of SRV discharge loads and other loads for the SBA events are more severe than those for DBA. Additional information used in the vent system fatigue evaluation is summarized at the bottom of Table 3-2.2-15.
The load combinations and event sequencing described in the preceding paragraphs envelop those which could 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 fatigue effects.
BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.80
@{
i Table 3- 2. 2-14 21RK I CONTAINMENT EVENT COMBINATIONS SRV
+ SSA SBA + EQ $8A+$RV SBA+SRV+EQ SRV OSA CSA + EQ. CSA*SRV DBA+SPV+EQ EQ ISA IBA + EQ 15A*SRV 15A*SRV+EQ EarthquaAa Type l0lSl l0 S O' $l l0 S 0 S i O S 0 $l 0 $ 0 S l
- AOS 1l2 3l4 5 6 '7 0 3 l 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 la 19 20 21l 22 73 24 25 26 27 Nstmal xlx x !x x x x x xl x xi x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Earthquake x x tx x xl xl s x x x x x x x x x x x SRV Discharge x x xl I l x x x x x x x x x x x x t.0CA Therwal '
lxlxIx'x x x x xlx x x x x x x x x x x x x x xlx
- CCA Reactions 'x'x x x t' x x x x x x x x; X X X 't x x x xl x x _x _
Loc ,^ g ,-5tatic x r x x x x x x x x x x x'x x x x x x x x x x x LOCA Pool Swell x x x x x x LOCA Caidensation * * * *
- CN l T Oscillation
~ I*
- .m:A Chueving x lx x x x x- x x x lx x; x
\v/ l Note:
- 1. See Section 1.3.2 for additional event combination information.
(O w)'
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.81
I ll'
)
b I 7 a b P 4
r 4 , 0, a a U
O 4 g 9 0 1 1 Y 2 l 2 4 1 7
a = . l 1 ;
- 5
(
4 V 7 P -
- .4 ' a 2 ' s j
d 3 3 6, 6f a V 7 P 7 b S I 2 6 A
0 0 s 5
I 5 b g g -
h 1 I 2 2 P T 'a I S ~
l 4 .
I '0 a ) 3 6,6 f 0
I 2 2 F 7 b 6 '
, e 5
a g g , - 0 I 8 2 P T q a 1 S S
i r 3 3 b P, 7, a O v 5 1 2 b y y a S C - 2 5
I P T 7 -
T " -
A J
3 3 c 7
t P, T. C 1 v I
5 1
b 2 y 2 s
1 I P T 7 M
O A B
3 3 b C I I I
4 a P, T, B I 1 2 y 2 a 5 D P T 7 a
1 A 3 3 c
- O P, Y 7 2 L I 4 - B I 1 y '2 a
. P T 7 2 M "
O
- E :
3 3 0 3 T I 4 a P, 7, 6,6e D 5
2 S 1 2 y y a e Y P T 6 l S 3 3 b b I T, 7 a T Y 5 b 2
j C 0 T N I 1 E
2 T
2 5 E
V 3 3 e I 5 b E 7, 7 2 * - C G I I
1 2 2 a N P T 7 I A B
L S 4 E 3 3 L I I 1 4
2 ' 7, j B O p 2
T 2
7" R
L T 3 3 c N 4 P, T.
7 O- I 1 3 a
- B 1 0 5
C- p T T I
C 2 a a a 0 6 O I 2 a a 8 9 0 D 5 9 N l IP T 1 1 5 2- '
(
r n n s I
9 o g o e I t i 9 u c s n m e t u h i n n e u g a h C t v lo p E E r ! C - c e o E D S a ! - t a r i
/ 3 n O S h i e s r l u t n 9 c c r o s e e c a o i s s P P n t v c u i I l o o n e. O t t I a e i I 1 c i I n g t t A d 1 t I e n o r c t e n n h r e l i a a n c e V o g I u t l t h e e i v H C i e t s e a g c R m v E S e c r a y w s n s n r W i u r S S n i g i e f f m s e e ig D n a S o o d r. s p t l d g i t r
a e n o n u V n r 1 i m ip O
e e r e e o o h R o e e 2 d D S P T V P c C S P C b. d a n a u u 2- o l ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) N N 3 ! 2 3) 3 4 5 6 7) 8 91 O L
C+, T I
moOIoHI a t W mo:<PtaYO3 : o W8N.Cy D
) llll
O Table 3-2.2-15 (Concluded)
Notes:
- 2. The range of normal operating internal pressures is 0.0 to 2.0 psi as specified by the FSAR.
- 4. The range of normal operating temperatures is 50.0 to 150.0 F as specified by the FSAR.
- 5. The SRV discharge loads which occur during this phase of the DBA event have a negligible effect on the vent system.
- 6. Evaluation of primary-plus-secondary stress range or fatigue
] not required.
- 7. The allowable stress value for local primary membrane stress at penetrations increased by 1.3.
- 8. The number of seismic load cycles used for fatigue is 1000.
- 9. The values shown are conservative estimates of the number of actuations expected for a BWR 4 plant with a reactor vessel diameter of 251 inches equipped with low-low set logic.
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.83 Qd
Table 3-2.2-16 ENVELOPING LOGIC FOR CONTROLLING VENT SYSTEM LOAD COMBINATIONS Condition / Event NOC SBA IBA DBA Table 3-2.2-24 Enveloping 14 14 15 15 14 14 14 15 15 18 20 25 27 27 27 2
- 1. cad Combinations 4-6 4-6 3,7 3,7, 4-6 4-6 3,7, 3,7, 3,7, 19, 21, 21, 21 Table 3-2.2-24 Load 8, 8, 9, 9, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 16 17 22, 23, 23, 23, Combinations Envaloped 1 10 13 13 10 10- 13 13 24 26 26 26 12 12 12 12 12 I II II Combi n s nation E SBA II X X X X X X X X X X X
" Vent 7$ System DBA II X
% Components Su ports DBAIIk' X SBA II X X X X X X X X X X X ec SRV Piping dj Penetration 2 0
Notes:
- 1. DBA pressurization and thrust loads are substituted for SBA II internal pressure loads when evaluating the SBA II load combination.
- 2. The allowables associated with the DBA I combination are used when evaluating the DBA III load combination.
- 3. The number of load cycles associated with the NOC I combination
' are used with SBA II stresses when evaluating vent line SRV piping penetration fatigue effects.
BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.84 nut h
s (la) DEAD WEIGHT
=
0 E (2a,2b) SEISMIC LOADS U
3 m
'n
[ ( 3b ,3d) CCNTAINMENT PPISSURE AND TEMPERATUP2 LCADS E
(7a-7d) CHUGGING LOADS s i m :
5 (8a) SRV DISCHARGE LOADS l (8a) SRV DISCHARGE LCADS
[ ISETPOINT ACTUATION 1 : I Ars se-et'semii y a i
- .; I M ! l (9a) PIPING REACTIONS LCADS
- l i i i i (10a) CONTAINMENT INTERACTION LCADS l l
- 0. 300. 600. 1200.
TIME AFTER LCCA (sec)
Figure 3-2.2-7 VENT SYSTEM SBA EVENT SEQUENCE BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.85 nUtech. un
O (la) DEAD WEIGHT z
O E (2a,2b) SEISMIC LOADS 0
E
- a C ( 3 b ,3d) CONTAINMENT PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE LOADS c
Q (6a,6c,6e) CONDESSATICti n
OSCILIATION IfADS l (7a-7d) CHUGGING LOADS n' I I i i l M i t
= (8a) SRV DISCHARGE LOADS l' (8a) SRV DISCHARGE L'; ADS 3 (SETPOINT ACTUATION) (ADS ACTUATION)
E I (9a) PIPING REACTION LOADS I
I i I (10a) CONTAINMENT INTERACTION LOADS i I i I I
- 0. 5. 300. 500.
TIME AFTER LOCA (sec)
Figure 3-2.2-8 VENT SYSTEM ISA EVENT SEQUENCE BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.86 nut.e_qt!
(la) DEAD WEIGHT (2a,2b) SEISMIC LOADS z
C E (4a) VENT SYSTEM DISCHARGE LOADS k
z c
d (3d) CONTAINMENT TEMPERATURE LOADS c
^
q
~
(Sa-Se) POOL SWELL LOADS i
d i 8
4 l l (6b,6d,6f) CO LOADS A : l i a l l (7a-7d) y l g ', i CHUGGING LOADS e
o.
. , , I i e
- (8a) SRV r3 DISCHARGE LOADS SEE NOTE 1 (Q' ,
(9a) PIPING REACTION LOADS i
i e i
, s j 1 (10a) CONTAINMENT INTERACTION LOn.DS i i i
<,. i i i 0.1 1.5 5.0 35.0 65.0 TIME AFTER LOCA (sec)
Note:
Figure 3-2.2-9 VENT SYSTEM DBA EVENT SEQUENCE BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.87
3-2.3 Analysis Acceptance Criteria The acceptance criteria defined in NUREG-0661 on which O
the Hope Creek vent system analysis is based are discussed in Section 1-3.2. In general, the acceptance criteria follows 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 contained in the applicable subsections of the ASME Code and the Mark I Containment Program Plant Unique Analysis Application Guide (PUAAG) (Reference 5). The acceptance criteria used in the analysis of the vent system are summarized in the paragraphs which follow.
The items examined in the analysis of the vent system include the vent lines, vent header, downcomers, the l support columns and associated support elements, the overhead truss members, the drywell shell near the vent line penetrations, the downcomer-vent header intersec-tion stiffener plates and bracing system, the vacuum breaker supports, the vent line-SRV piping penetration assembly, and the vent line bellows assembly. The specific component parts associated with each of these bPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.88
items are identified in Figures 3-2.1-1 through (n) v 3-2.1-14.
The vent lines, vent header, downcomers, the suppo rt column ring plates away from the pin locations, the d rywe ll shell, the down come r-vent header intersection stiffener plates, the vacuum breaker support, and the vent line-SRV piping penetration assembly are evaluated in accordance with the requirements for Class MC compo nents contained in Subsection NE of the ASME Code. Fillet welds and partial penetration welds j oining these compo nent parts or attaching other structures to these parts are also examined in accordance wi th the requirements fo r Class MC we lds O
+ contained in Subsection NE of the ASME Code.
The suppo rt co lumn s , the overhead truss members, the downcomer bracing members, and the associated connec t-ing elements and welds are evaluated in accordance with
) the requirements for Class MC component supports contained in Subsection NF of the ASME Code.
As shown in Table 3-2.2-15, the SBA II, and DBA II combinations have Se rvice Level B limits. The DB A III combination has Service Level C limits, but is evaluated against the allowables specified for DBA I as V B PC 3 00 -3 Revision 0 3-2.89 nutggb
discussed in Section 3-2.2.2. Since these load com-binations have somewhat different maximum temperatures, the allowable stresses are conservatively determined at the highest temperature of the three load combinations.
The allowable stresses for all the major components of the vent system, such as the vent line, vent header and downcomers, are determined at the maximum DBA tempera-ture of 292*F. The allowable stresses for the vent line-SRV piping nozzle and adjoining component parts are determined at 407'F. The allowable stresses for the remaining vent system component parts are determined at the maximum IBA suppression chamber temperature of 167'F. The allowable stresses for the
. load combinations with Service Level B limits are shown in Table 3-2.3-1.
The allowable displacements and associated number of cycles for the vent line bellows are shown in Table 3-2.3-2. These values are taken from the FSAR, 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 FSAR.
BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.90 g{
I t i
l '
i
- t
! The acceptance criteria described in *he
. precedit.J I i
t i paragraphs result in conservative estimates of the i 5
! existing margins of safety and ensure that the origirial l 1: .
l vent system design margins are maintained. [
i i
- L
[.
I 1
!~ [
i I
l i
VO f
4 6
i 1
i t
l-i i
O 1
4 BPC-01-300-3 9
Revision 0 3-2.91 nutgsb I
.+wewe.=+, . = - . . - * - - - - . - .,----.w.i-r-r.--_ -s %w +w ww _,-ww www w .p'
Table 3-2.3-1 ALLOWABLE STRESSES FOR VENT SYSTEM COMPONENTS AND COMPONENT SUPPORTS (1) (2)
Material , S tress
^ ""
- Item Material Properties Stress Type (ksi) (ksi)
COMPONENTS Local Primary 28.95 S = O Membrane h Drywell SA-516 mc Primary + (5)
Shell Gr* 70 Secondary Stress 67.64 Sml= 22.55 Range r mary Membrane 19.30 S = 19.30 -
Vent SA-516 L cal Primary 28.95 Line Gr. 70 S = 22.55 Membrane ml Primary + (5)
Secondary Stress 67.64 Range _
Primary Membrane 19.30 S = 19.30 Vent SA-516 mc Local Primary Membrang 28.95 Header Gr. 70 S ,7= 22.55 Primary + (5)
Secondary Stress 67.64 Range Primary Membrane 19.30 SA-516 S mc
= 19.30 L 'e7 comer Gr. 70 Local Primary 28.95 Membrane S = 22.55 Primary + (5)
SecongaggStress 67.64
~
l Prir.ary Membrane 22.00 Support S = 22.00 Local Primary mc 3.00 Column SA-537 Membrane Ring C1. 2 S = 6.70 Primarv + (5) m1 Plates Seconda^ry Stress 80.10 Range (8) = 16.50 Primary Membrane 16.50 S
SRV Piping mc Penetration SA-333 L cal Primary 24.75 Gr. 6 Nozzle S = 19.92 Membrane Primary + (5)
Secondary Stress 59.76 Range O
BPC-01-300-3 nut,O_qh ""
Revision 0 3-2.92
Table 3-2.3-1 (Concluded)
O I (2)
(1) All wable Material Stress Item Material Properties Stress Upe si)
(ksi) ,
l l
C0MPONENT SUPPORTS l Bending 18.61 Tensile 16.92 Columns (6) SA-333 S = 28.20 -
Gr. 1 Y Combined 1.00 Compressive () 14.33 Interaction 1.00 WELDS Downcomer Primary 15.01 t
SA-516 S = 19.30 f-~N Vent Gr. 70 SC Secondary 45.03
( Header i N l
' (8)
GRV Piping Primary 11.58 Penetration Nozzle SA-516 S mc
= 19.30 Gr. 70 to Insert Secondary 34.74 Plate l
1 E2tes:
- 1. Material properties taken at maximum event temperatures.
- 2. Allowables shown correspond to Service Level B stress limits. The DBA III combination is evaluated with DBA I allowables, except as noted.
- 3. Thermal bending stresses are excluded when evaluating primary-plus-secondary stress ranges.
- 4. The allowable stresses for local primary membrane stresses at penetrations are increased by 1.3 when evaluating the DBA III load combination.
- 5. Evaluation of primary-plus-secondary stress iratensity range and fatigue are not required for the DBA III load combination.
- 6. Stresses due to thermal loads may be excluded when evaluating component supports. ,
- 7. Allowable compressive stress based on maximum column length.
l l 8. For the DBA III combination, the SRV piping penetration nozzle and nozzle to insert plate seld are evaluated with the following Service Level C allowables:
l Nozzle - Primary Membrane = 29.88 ksi, Local Primary Membrane = 44.82 ksi, Weld -
i Primary = 19.4 8 ksi .
BPC-01-300-3 nutp_qh=
Revision 0 3-2.93 l
Table 3-2.3-2 ALLOWABLE DISPLACEMENTS AND CYCLES FOR VENT LINE BELLOWS ;
Allowable Value Type Normal Accident Operating Conditions conditions Compression 0.75 in. 1.25 in.
Axial Extension 0.75 in. 0.75 in.
w/ Axial 0.50 in. 0.75 in.
Compression Lateral w/ Axial 0.75 in.
1.25 in.
Extension Number of Cycles of Maximum 230 10 Displacements BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.94 nut.e_qh
p 3-2.4 Method of Analysis The gove rning loads fo r which the Hope Creek vent system is evaluated are presented in Section 3-2.2.1.
4 The methodology used to evaluate the vent system for l 1
the overall effects of all loads, except those which exhibit asymme tric characteristics, is discussed in Section 3-2.4.1. The effects of asymmetric loads on the vent system are evaluated using the methodology dis-cussed 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 Seetion 3-2. 4. 3. The me thodology used to evaluate the local effects of pool swell. impact loads i d on the vent header is discussed in Section 3-2.4.4.
The methodology used to formulate results for the controlling load ccanbinations, examina f atigue ef fects, and evaluate the analysis results for comparison with the applicable acceptance limi ts is discussed in l
Section 3-2.4.5.
l l
l l
B PC 3 0 0-3 3-2.95 Revision 0 nutggh l
,. _x ., - , _ _ . , , _ . _ . _ __ , . , - , _ _ . , , ,,_,,___.._,y, -
,_-_,,_.,yy,,_ , - . _ _
3-2.4.1 Analysis for Major Loads The repe ti tiv e nature of the vent system geometry is O
such that the vent system can be divided into 16 iden-tical segme nts which extend from mid bay of the vent line bay to midbay of the non-vent line bay, as shown in Fig ure 3-2.1-6. The governing loads which act on the vent system, except for seismic loads and a few chugging load cases, exhibit symmetric and/or anti-symmetric characteristics with respect to a 1/16th segme n t of the vent system. The analysis of the vent system for the majority of the governing loads is therefore performeo for a typical 1/16th segment.
A beam and finite element model of a 1/16th segment of the vent system and suppression chamber, as shown in F ig ure 3 - 2. 4 - 1, is used to obtain the response of the vent system to all loads except local response of the vent header to pool swell impact loads and the response of the vent system to those loads which result in asymmetric effects. The model includes the vent line, vent header, downcomers, the suppo rt co lumns , the overhead truss members, and the suppression chamber shell and ring beam s . The model also includes the downcomer bracing system and the vacuum breaker and vacuum breake r support. The po rtion of the SRV p iping ,
B PC 3 0 n -3 Revision 0 3-2.96 nut _ec._h.
i
,S T-que nche rs , and their associated suppo rts in the suppression chamber are also included to account for the interaction ef fects of these structures.
The local stiffness effects at the penetrations and intersections of the major vent system components, shown in Figures 3-2.1-3 and 3-2.1-7 through 3 -2.1- 9 ,
are included using stif fness matrix elements of these penetrations and intersections. A matrix element for I the vent line-d rywe ll penetration, which connects the upper end of the vent line to the conical transition segment, is developed using the finite dif ference model of the penetration shown in Figure 3-2.4-3. The finite s
element model of the vent line-SRV piping penetration,
)
i d shown in Figure 3-2.4-4, 'is used to develop a matrix e leme nt which connects the beams on the centerline of 1
the vent line to the SRV piping penetration nozzle. A beam eleme nt wh ich connects the vent header to the
(
beams on the centerline of the vent line is developed us ing the finite eleme nt model of the vent line-vent header intersection shown in Figure 3-2.4-5.
The finite elcment model of the downcomer-vent header intersection, shown in Figure 3 -2. 4 - 6, ' is used to develop matrix elements which connect the beams on the centerline of the vent header to the upper ends of the l /
B PC 3 0 0-3 Revision 0 3-2.97 l
downcome rs at the downcomer ring locations. Additional in fo rmation on the analytical models used to evaluate the penetrations and intersections of major vent system components is contained in Section 3-2.4.3.
The finite element model of the SRV piping ramshead is used to develop matrix elements which connect the SRV discharge line to the T-quenchers. Additional information on the ramshead analytical model is contained in Volume 5 of this report.
The local stiffness effects at the attachments of the downcomer bracing , vacuum breake r supports, vent system support columns, overhead truss members, and SRV piping pad plates located on the vent header are also included. Beams which account for the local stiffness of the support rings and pad plates are used to connect the associated component parts to beams which model the vent line, vent header, and downcomers.
The 1/16th segment model contains 539 nodes, 441 beam e leme n ts , 264 plate bending and stretching elements, and 6 matrix elements. The node spacing used in the analytical model is refined to ensure adequate dis-tribution of mass and determination of structural frequencies and mode shapes, and to facilitate accurate BPC 3 0 0 -3 Revision 0 3-2.98 nut.e_qh I
~ application of loadings. Small displacement linear-
[
V elastic behavior is assumed throughout.
The analytical model includes a corrosion allowance of 1/8 inch subtracted from the nominal thicknesses and diameters of the torus shell, ring be ams , downcomers, vent system support members, and T quencher supports.
^
A corrosion allowance of 1/16 inch is subtracted from the vent line, vent header, anc SRV pipirig supports.
The SRV p iping and T-quencher are nominal size . These corrosion allowances are in accordance with the ociginal design requirements documented in the plant's FSAR. The mass densities used in the model are adjusted to account for the we ight of the vent system k and suppression chamber with nominal material d ime n-sions as shown in Figures 3-2.1-1 through 3-2.1-14.
The boundary conditions used in the 1/16th beam model are both physical and mathematical in nature. The physical boundary conditions include the elastic restraints provided at the attachment of the vent line to the drywell, and the suppression chamber attachments t
to the reactor building as defined in PUA R Volume 2.
The associated vent line-drywell penetration stiff-nesses are included as a stif fness matrix element, the development of which is discussed in the preceding V BPC-01-3 00 -3 Revision 0 3-2.99 nutggb
pa rag raphs. 'Ih e ma thema tical bounda ry conditions consist of either symmetry, anti-symmetry, or a combination of both at the midcylinder planes, depending on the characteristics of the load being ev&luated.
When computing the response of the suppression chamber and vent system to dynamic loadings, the fluid-a truc t ure interaction effects of the suppression chamber shell and contained fluid (water) are con-s id e red . A finite eleme nt model of the fluid is used to develop a coupled mass matrix which is added to the subme rged nodes of the suppression chamber analytical model to represent the fluid. The approach used is similar to the one docume nted in Section 2-2.4.1 of PUAR Volume 2. Additional mass is lumped along the length of the subme rged portions of the down come rs, support columns, SRV piping, and T-quenchers and suppo r ts to account for the e f f ective mass of wa te r which acts with these components during dynamic load-ings. Fo r all but the pool swe ll and condensation oscillation dynamic loadings, the mass of water inside the subme rged po rtion of the downcomers is included.
The downcomers are assumed to contain air and/or steam during pool swe ll and condensation osc illation , the mass of which is neglected. The mass of water inside BPC-01-3 0 0-3 3-2.100 Revision 0 nutggh
s the submerged portion of the SRV piping and T-quenchers is also included for all dynamic loadings. An addicional mass of 600 pounds to account for the weight of the drywell/wetwell vacuum breaker is lumped at the center of gravity of the vacuum breaker.
A frequency analysis is performed using the 1/16th .
segment model of the vent system and suppression chamber for the case with water ins ide the downcomers and the case wi th no wa ter inside the downcomers. All structural modes in the range of 0 to 35 hertz and 0 to 100 hertz, respective ly , are ext racted fo r these cases. The resulting frequencies and modal weights are shown in Tables 3-2. 4-1 a nd 3-2. 4-2.
O A dynamic analysis is performed for the pool swell loads and condensation oscillation loads specified in Section 3-2.2-1, using the 1/16th beam and finite e leme nt model of the vent system and suppression chamber. A dynamic analysis to assess the local ef fects of pool swe ll im pact loads on the vent header is also performed, using the 1/32 segment pool swell impact finite eleme nt model discussed in Section 3-2.4.4. The analysis consists of a transient analysis f o r pool swe 11 loads, and a harmonic analysis fo r con-densation oscillation loads. The modal superposition O B PC 3 0 0 -3 3-2.101 Revision 0 nutggb ,
technique, including modes to 100 hertz with 2%
damping, is utilized in both the transient and harmonic analyses.
The remaining vent system load cases specified in Section 3-2.2.1 involve either static loads or dynamic loads, which are evaluated using an equ i va.1.e n t static approach. For the latter, conservative dynamic amplification factors are developed and applied to the maximum spatial distributions of the individual dynamic loadings.
The effects of asymmetric loads are evaluated by applying these loads to the 180* beam model.
Additional information related to the vent system analysis for asymmetric loads is provided in Section 3-2.4.2.
The 1/16th segment model is also used to generate loads for the evaluation of stresses in the major vent system component penetrations and intersections. Beam end loads, distributed loads, and reaction loads are developed and applied to the analytical models of the vent system penetrations and intersections shown in BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.102 g{
Figures 3 -2 . 4 -3 through 3-2.4-6. Additional in fo rma-(
v tion related to the vent system penetrations and intersection stress evaluation is provided in Se ction 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 parag raphs which follow.
a- 1. Dead Weight Loads
- a. De ad We ig h t of Steel: A static analysis is performed for a unit vertical acceleration applied to the weight of vent system steel.
O
- 2. Seismic Loads
- a. OBE toads : A static analysis is pa rfo rmed for a vertical seismic acceleration applied to the we ig h t of vent system steel included in the 1/16th segment model. The vertical acceleration used in the analysis is obtained from the original design basis documented in the plant's FSAR at the lowe s t vent system frequency of 13.9 hertz. The effects of N-S and E-W horizontal seismic accelerations are evaluated using the 180' beam model as d iscussed in Section 3-2. 4. 2. The results of A
3 PC 3 0 0-3 Revision 0 3-2.103 nutggb
- - _ _ - - - -- - - -- i
l the three earthquake directions are combined using SRSS.
- b. SSE Loads: The procedure used to evaluate the vertical, N-S horizontal, and E-W horizontal SSE seismic accelerations is the same as that discussed for OBE seismic loads in load case 2a.
- 3. Containment Pressure and Temperature Loads
- a. A static analysis is performed for a 2.0 psi internal pressure applied as concentrated forces to the unreacted areas of the vent system.
O
- b. LOCA Internal Pressure Loads: A static anal-ysis is performed for the SBA and IBA net internal pressures applied as concentrated l forces to the unreacted areas of the major j components of the vent system. These pres-sures are shown in Table 3-2.2-2. The effects of DBA internal pressure loads are included in the pressurization and thrust loads discussed in load case 4a.
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.104 g ma
Concentrated forces are also applied at the vent line-drywell penetration location using the SBA and DBA drywell internal pressures.
These forces account for the pressures acting on the vent line-drywell penetration unreacted area and for the movement of the drywell due to internal. pressure.
- c. A static analysis is performed for the maximum normal operating temperature listed in Table 3-2.2-2. This temperature is uniformly applied to the portion of the vent system inside the suppression chamber.
i
- Corresponding temperatures of 70*F for the drywell and vent system components outside the suppression chamber, 150*F for the suppression chamber, 380*F for the submerged portion of the wetwell SRV piping, and 407'F for the SRV piping in the suppression chamber airspace 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. These temperatures are shown in Table 3-2.2-2. A 380*F temperature BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 . 3-2.105 0
is uniformly applied to the submerged portion of the wetwell SRV piping, and a 407'F temperature is uniformly applied to the wetwell SRV piping in the torus airspace.
Concentrated forces are applied at the vent line-drywell penetration to account for the thermal expansion of the drywell during the SBA and DBA events.
- 4. Vent System Discharge Loads
- a. The DBA pressurization and thrust loads are
. shown in Table 3-2.2-3. These loads are enveloped by the mh.timum DBA pressure loads shown in Table 3-2.2-2. Therefore the maximum DBA pressure loads are used in lieu of DBA pressurization and thrust loads in the analysis.
- 5. Pool Swell Loads
- a. Vent System Impact and Drag Loads: A dynamic analysis is performed for the vent line, vent header, and downcomer pool swell impact loads shown in Tables 3-2.2-4 and 3-2.2-5. The local effects of pool swell impact loads on the vent header are assessed using the 1/32 segment finite element model, as discussed in Section 3-2.4.4.
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.106 nuteg_h
A
- b. Impact and Drag Loads on Other Structures: A dynamic analysis is performed for pool swell impact loads on the downcomer bracing members and ring plates. These loads are shown in Table 3-2.2-4. The pool swell impact loads acting on the SRV piping and supports are also applied.
- c. Froth Impingement and Fallback Loads: A dynamic analysis is performed for froth impingement loads on the downcomer bracing members, overhead truss members, and the i vacuum breaker and vacuum breaker support.
These loads are shown in Table 3-2.2-4.
t Proth fallback loads are negligible. The froth impingement loads acting on the SRV piping and supports are also applied.
l l d. Pool Fallback Loads: A dynamic analysis is I
performed for pool fallback loads on the l downcomer bracing members and ring plates.
l These loads are shown in Table 3-2.2-4. The pool fallback loads acting on the SRV piping and supports are also applied.
i I
!O l BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.107 1
- e. LOCA Air Clearing Submerged Structure Loads: An equivalent static analysis is performed for LOCA air clearing submerged structure loads on the downcomers. These loads are shown in Table 3-2.2-6. LOCA air clearing submerged structure loads on the support columns are negligible. The values of the loads include dynamic amplification factors which are computed using first principles and the dominant f requency of the downcomers. The dominant frequency of the downcomers without water inside is obtained from the structural frequency analysis. The resulting dominant frequency is reported in Table 3-2.4-3.
- 6. Condensation Oscillation Loads
- a. IBA Condensation Oscillation Downcomer Loads:
A dynamic analysis is performed for the IBA condensation oscillation downcomer loads shown in Table 3-2.2-7 using the most severe cases of those shown in Figure 3-2.2-4. The dominant f requency of the downcomers without water inside is reported in Table 3-2.4-3.
It is apparent that the dominant downcomer frequency occurs in the frequency range of the second condensation oscillation downcomer BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.108 mt h
i load harmonic. The first and third condensa-tion oscillation douncomer load harmonics are therefore applied at frequencies equal to 0.5 and 1.5 times the value of the dominant downcomer frequency.
- b. DBA Condensation Oscillation Downcomer Loads:
The procedure used to evaluate the DBA condensation oscillation downcomer loads shown in Table 3-2.2-8 is the same as that discussed for IBA condensation oscillation downcomer loads in load case 6a.
- c. IBA Condensation Oscillation Vent System Pressures: An equivalent static analysis is performed for IBA condensation oscillation vent system pressures on the vent line and vent header. These loads are shown in Table 3-2.2-9. The dominant vent line and vent header frequencies used in the analysis are summarized in Table 3-2.4-3. An additional static analysis is performed for a 1.5 psi internal pressure applied as concen-trated forces to the unreacted areas of the vent system.
1-BPC-01-300-3 Revision' 0 3-2,109 gg I
e r e v - --
--e. --- ---,-+,-------,--,--------------e. - - - , - - - - * , - - - - -
l
- d. DBA Condensation Oscillation Vent System Pressure Loads: The procedure used to evalu-ate the DBA condensation oscillation vent system pressure loads shown in Table 3-2.2-9 is the same as that discussed for IBA conden-sation oscillation vent system pressure loads in load case 6c.
- e. IBA Condensation Oscillation Submerged Structure Loads: As previously discussed, pre-chug loads described in load case 7c are specified in lieu of IBA condensation oscillation loads.
- f. DBA Condensation Oscillation Submerged Struc- -
ture Loads: The DBA condensation oscillation loads on the support columns are shown in Table 3-2.2-6. The loads include dynamic amplification factors which are computed using first principles and the dominant frequencies of the support columns. The dominant frequencies of the support columns are obtained using manual f requency calcula-tions for simply supported beams. The resulting dominant frequencies are summarized in Table 3-2.4-3. The DBA condensation BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.110 gg
l oscillation submerged structure loads are bounded by post-chug submerged structure loads (Case 7d). Therefore post-chug sub-merged structure loads are used in lieu of DBA condensation oscillation loads in the analysis. ,
- 7. Chugging Loads
- a. Chugging Downcomer Lateral Loads: The dominant downcomer frequency for use in calculating the maximum chugging load magnitude is obtained from the structural frequency analysis results for downcomers
. with water inside. The resulting dominant
, g,f frequency is shown in Table 3-2.4-3. The resulting chugging load magnitudes are shown in Table 3-2.2-10. A static analysis using the 1/16th beam model is performed for 4
chugging downcomer lateral load cases 4 through 9. These load cases are shown in i
Table 3-2.2-11. An additional static analysis using the 180* beam model is
'~
performed for load cases 1 through 3, as discussed in Section 3-2.4.2.
i b) BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.111 l.-
A static analysis is also performed for the maximum chugging load shown in Table 3-2.2-12, applied to a single downcomer in the in-plane and out-of-plane directions.
The results of this analysis are used in evaluating fatigue.
- b. Chugging Vent System Pressures: An equiva-lent static analysis is performed for the chugging vent system pressures applied to the unreacted areas of the vent system. These loads are shown in Table 3-2.2-13. The dominant vent line and vent header frequen-cies used in this evaluation are summarized in Table 3-2.4-3.
- c. Pre-Chug Submerged Structure Loads: As discussed in Section 3-2.2.1, post-chug submerged structure loads are used in lieu of pre-chug. Therefore this load is not evaluated further.
- d. Post-Chug Submerged Structure Loads: An equivalent static analysis is performed for the post-chug submerged structure loads on the support columns. These loads are shown in Table 3-2.2-6. The loads include dynamic BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2,112 mM h l
p)
\V amplification factors which using the methodology described for DBA CO are computed submerged structure loads in load case 6f.
The post-chug submerged structure loads acting on the submerged portion of the SRV piping, T-quenchers and supports are also applied.
- 8. Safety Relief Valve Discharge Loads
- a. SRV Discharge Air Clearing Submerged Struc-ture Loads: An equivalent static analysis is performed for SRV discharge drag loads on the downcomers and support columns. These loads O are shown in Table 3-2.2-6. The loads include a dynamic load factor as discussed in Section 1-4.2.4. The SRV discharge submerged structure loads acting on the submerged portion of the SRV piping, T-quenchers and supports are also applied.
- 9. Piping Reaction Loads
- a. SRV Piping Reaction Loads: As previously discussed, the wetwell SRV piping, T-quenchers, and T-quencher supports are included in the 1/16th segment model of the vent system. Loads in categories 1 through 8
!- p O BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.113 gg
which act on the vent system, wetwell SRV piping, T-quenchers and supports are applied to these . structures and the interaction effects are evaluated.
Additional equivalent static loads caused by SRV discharge line clearing pressurization and by thrust loads acting on the wetwell SRV piping and T-quenchers are also applied. The conditions which cause the maximum reaction loads on the vent line-SRV piping penetration are evaluated.
- 10. Containment Interaction Loads
- a. Containment Structure Motions: The motions of the drywell due to internal pressure and thermal expansion are applied to the 1/16th segment model. The motions caused by loads in other load categories acting on the drywell have been evaluated and found to have a negligible effect on the vent system.
The containment interaction effects of the suppression chamber on the vent system are accounted for by the finite element represen-tation of the suppression ch6mber in the BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.114 g
1/16th segment model. Suppression chamber steel and water dead loads and vertical seismic loads, torus internal pressure and temperature loads, and pool swell, condensation oscillation, chugging, and SRV torus shell loads are included in the 1/16th segment model analysis. These loads are discussed in Volume 2 of this report.
A dynamic analysis is performed for condensation oscillation, chugging, and SRV torus shell loads. An equivalent static analysis is performed for pool swell torus shell loads using conservative dynamic load
. factors.
The methodology described in the preceding paragraphs results in a conservative evaluation of the vent system response and associated stresses for the governing loads.
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.115 gg
Table 3-2.4-1 VENT SYSTEM FREQUENCY ANALYSIS RESULTS WITH WATER INSIDE DOWNCOMERS Mode Modal Weight (1b)
Frequency Number (Hz) X Il)
Y(l) Z(
1 13.9 49342.31 4067.67 42876.50 2 14.7 63485.52 1608.54 108403.11 3 15.0 24.97 18.91 12.21 4 16.5 158719.14 7345.39 167888.71 5 16.9 223.80 7.59 476.47 6 17.0 295.77 6.82 7159.09 7 18.7 26.81 73.82 1216.08 8 18.7 538.00 0.02 2285.36 9 19.2 11.82 93.03 0.10 10 19.3 1759.47 160.61 4223.32 11 19.7 39.37 4.13 0.62 12 20.2 2655.43 187.09 11596.20 13 20.4 206.60 0.39 3.' . 81 14 20.6 236.25 3305.05 9.98 15 21.4 5.53 102.84 550.26 16 22.2 154.68 476.35 11923.97 17 22.6 1146.36 1120.12 7131.61 l 18 22.7 46.15 61.09 163.23 19 22.8 0.43 173.58 6588.69 20 23.3 198.40 1199.04 185.19 21 23.4 40.91 257.59 17.82 22 24.0 1091.32 3.73 2746.79 23 24.5 23.47 0.99 2277.46 24 24.6 2.19 44.63 12.68 25 24.7 1.02 224.83 4.68 26 24.7 58.68 C.02 1563.75 27 24.8 1123.09 18.11 25475.07 28 25.6 389.52 70.26 10.87 1 29 25.9 324.91 474.73 5.98 30 25.9 6.64 84.61 l 2383.86 l 3PC-01-300-3 [](((gb(j']
Revision 0 3-2.116
l Table 3-2.4-1 (Concluded)
Modal Weight (lb)
Mode Frequency Number (Hz) X(l) Y (l) Z Il) 31 26.6 7087.28 19.12 10642.49 32 27.5 44.00 2691.27 11.44 33 27.6 3593.52 212.64 38807.91 34 27.7 319.95 51.37 370.94 35 27.9 1926.33 287.19 9390.75 36 27.9 1932.74 239.62 2079.55 37 28.2 296.83 6.44 59.07 38 28.5 5.59 153.73 13767.48 39 28.8 2626.03 25.59 49994.24 40 29.1 535.44 572.78 22072.50 41 29.7 671.61 1968.71 7883.50 42 30.3 1328.90 4.92 2376.30 O)
(
t/
43 30.4 4465.43 51.55 8441.00 44 30.6 1349.06 29.66 23183.00 45 31.1 462.91 13.11 725.51 46 31.5 15.75 75.37 45.98 47 31.6 5653.37 43.99 211.99 48 32.6 12249.00 336.32 730.29 49 33.5 160.96 402.44 831.79 59 33.7 75.31 49.72 1214.92 l 51 34.0 298.47 68.80 , 1141.85 52 34.4 0.75 5.11 24.39 53 34.8 32.17 81.60 19.66 l 54 35.6 154.35 14.75 278.39 55 35.8 24/.75 231.40 18.19 Note:
l
- 1. See Figure 3-2.4-1 for coordinate system directions .
l f%
lV BPC-01-300-3 [Iljkl}()hl = " - - -
Revision 0 3-2.117 l
\ --
Table 3-2.4-2 VENT SYSTEM FREQUENCY ANALYSIS RESULTS WITHOUT WATER INSIDE DOWNCOMER Modal Weight (lb)
Mode Frequency Number (Hz) (1) (1) z(1) 1 14.5 105620.43 4696.21 157063.24 2 15.0 18.92 18.53 7.40 3 16.1 31856.67 408.78 28438.84 4 16.6 132558.92 7650.07 131854.86 5 16.9 480.35 0.93 799.22 6 17.0 80.60 0.22 8479.32 7 18.7 21.90 62.08 1229.42 8 18.7 531.57 0.27 2262.19 9 19.2 24.09 40.05 0.16 10 19.3 2367.10 214.78 4717.52 11 19.7 29.65 5.74 1.46 12 20.2 2850.30 180.95 11856.41 13 20.4 270.74 4.38 296.95 i 14 20.6 267.52 3044.55 12.56 15 21.4 26.05 147.43 531.61 16 22.3 137.96 111.08 21830.82 17 22.7 0.27 0.57 42.26 l
18 22.8 41.41 40.27 4792.77 19 22.9 252.45 9.83 143.98 20 23.4 23.69 141.40 32.14 21 24.5 13.40 0.01 2262.47 22 24.5 37.27 0.67 56.87 23 24.6 1.39 3.35 151.08 24 24.7 68.79 3.89 1788.51 l 25 24.8 1135.55 69.54 26115.92 l
26 25.6 397.44 277.96 59.86 27 25.9 0.99 24.23 2314.42 O
l BPC-01-300-3 MUI Revision 0 3-2.118 l
l
Table 3-2.4-2 (Continued)
Modal Weight (lb)
Mode Frequency Number (Hz) (1) (1) (1) 28 26.6 2405.16 0.72 2721.01 29 27.1 140.40 1283.96 15777.09 30 27.7 12.36 223.45 18754.40 31 27.8 137.06 157.67 25476.54 32 28.1 9082.14 57.57 257.59 33 28.2 860.26 22.17 24.63 34 28.6 1111.18 432.37 27896.49 35 28.8 891.05 14.68 36215.49 36 29.5 9184.05 775.33 551.09 37 29.5 458.34 18.42 34801.83 33 29.9 148.45 2209.11 730.35 h
's /
39 40 30.4 30.6 15.56 4663.20 0.36 55.05 63.72 3215.11 41 30.6 310.87 107.83 21717.91 42 31.1 193.60 0.33 1909.14 43 31.4 3020.39 90.54 0.50 44 31.5 458.77 133.99 0.22 45 31.9 761.20 126.74 145.39 46 32.7 10749.45 653.99 683.09 47 33.5 102.72 270.49 808.01 48 33.8 185.48 28.66 1372.06 49 34.2 428.85 0.04 1026.38 50 34.5 109.14 1958.58 341.21 51 34.8 32.66 153.02 56.76 52 35.1 54.67 0.25 96.94 53 35.8 369.18 250.64 174.50 54 35.9 28.16 313.91 45.78 l
v) BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.119 nutach
Table 3-2.4-2 (Continued) 11 dal Weight (lb)
Mode Frequency Number (Hz) X Y I) zII) 55 36.3 4657.94 130.38 130.31 56 36.6 3.51 0.09 862.99 57 37.1 8.84 17.04 72.04 58 37.7 18.96 300.71 1.19 59 38.8 6934.50 651.28 39.13 60 39.1 24.40 342.94 43.18 61 39.5 410.13 13.06 232.30 62 39.6 379.18 1928.59 2.93 63 39.9 2953.26 609.59 77.66 64 40.9 161.11 224.17 4.92 65 41.5 979.91 1.92 95.34 66 41.7 7112.19 86.79 370.73 67 42.3 1.03 22.29 3.13 68 42.4 247.19 2625.21 8.77 69 43.2 54.39 37.43 511.73 70 43.6 2.56 0.13 448.55 71 43.8 77.07 92.90. 17708.89 72 44.1 1805.77 51.67 105.81 73 44.9 2654.88 167.55 683.04 l 74 45.2 149.38 12.68 172.16 75 45.3 821.75 2.72 12.17 76 45.8 13.99 462.33 530.19 77 46.1 54.50 187.50 581.28 78 46.1 26.99 45.55 436.15 79 46.2 33.94 165.64 331.53
(
80 46.2 265.97 222.07 331.73 91 46.5 387.82 2466.27 1991.08 l
BPC-01-300-3 3-2.120
Table 3-2.4-2 (Continued) w/
Modal Weight (lb)
Mode Frequency Number (Hz) X (l) Y (l) Z II) 82 47.1 207.55 141.49 1157.66 83 48.2 0.06 29.02 37.66 -
84 49.0 7.00 11.88 5.59 85 49.5 49.77 5.63 31.60 86 50.2 13.74 798.07 0.44 87 50.6 93.05 99.11 37.43 88 51.5 663.79 180.59 5.86 89 52.0 933.91 21.16 77.07 90 52.6 102.95 81.19 283.46 91 53.0 149.14 72.68 62.25 92 54.1 28.20 635.88 16.76
) 93 54.1 46.49 855.43 1.05 sI 94 54.2 2.12 11.25 13.18 95 54.2 0.00 0.00 639.57 96 54.2 0.00 0.00 639.57 97 54.3 17.20 1.24 8.07 98 54.5 2.97 114.11 39.17 99 55.1 38.91 480.01 125.40 100 55.0 1.17 383.32 2.15 '
101 57.4 163.92 328.41 28.50 102 57.6 588,49 95.05 44.43 103 60.1 2.33 20.05 129.83 104 60.4 45.34 122.75 1778.10 105 61.6 0.03 0.11 35.40 106 62.1 0.70 2.84 6.20 107 52.5 33.80 14.04 163.04 108 63.3 63.98 322.23 0.08 U
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.121 t h
Table 3-2.4-2 (Continued)
O fi dal Weight (lb)
Mode Frequency Number (Hz) X (l) Y(l) Z(l) 109 63.9 1.12 100.41 147.14 110 64.4 44.20 17.89 694.94 111 64.7 1.24 3.40 314.51 112 65.0 87.88 290.09 1462.63 113 65.2 10.94 13.44 250.90 114 65.7 225.93 200.10 120.91 115 66.2 29.29 307.51 8.43 116 66.7 42.81 14.15 254.53 117 67.2 1.13 1292.01 9.65 118 67.8 0.01 1404.02 57.79 119 68.2 0.57 956.14 125.02 120 71.6 69.37 43.25 1850.05 121 72.6 86.57 240.37 397.08
! 122 72.9 0.20 1.32 1340.95 123 73.6 7.15 172.93 0.62 124 74.7 17.57 107.29 380.90 l
i 125 76.0 49.96 218.07 149.35 1
126 76.4 63.40 22.31 8246.23
! 127 77.4 3.99 57.05 15.35 128 78.8 18.30 50.10 30.00 l
129 79.5 63.12 15.44 233.49 130 79.8 14.15 2.86 7.96 131 80.8 19.28 60.54 3.32 132 80.9 49.55 27.17 10.31 133 81.3 14.77 106.00 133.48 134 82.5 401.07 9.79 0.21 135 83.4 151.82 7.10 6193.34 BPC-01-300-3 3-2.122
Table 3-2.4-2
( (Concluded)
Modal Weight (lb) '
Mode Frequency Number (Hz) (1) Z( }
Y(1}
136 84.4 40.53 ,
226.88 369.81 137 85.4 0.03 96.64 1440.60 138 87.1 19.97 39.22 1484.18 139 88.4 69.50 8.04 2724.94 140 89.7 11.21 24.77 1025.43 141 90.1 2,06 0.17 351.24 142 90.5 0.03 84.91 15.26 143 92.1 7.14 85.09 390.39 144 92.5 0.01 29.73 23.15 145 94.2 1.70 100.69 78.34 146 95.9 3.94 8.06 0.01 O 147 97.5 4.03 3,16 0.35
'% / 148 98.6 34.48 195.46 21.51 149 98.9 4.40 78.20 47.56 150 99.2 13.16 225.76 100.63 Note:
- 1. See Figure 3-2.4.1 for coordinate system directions.
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.123 g{
Table 3-2.4-3 STRUCTURAL FREQUENCIES FOR HARMONIC LOADS ANALYSIS Vent System Dominant Type of rrecuency Component Load (Ez)
Downcomer (with water)
Lateral 13.92 Downcomer Lateral 16.06 (without water)
(1)
Vent Line u 13.92 Internal Vent Header Pressure 13*92 Midcylinder NVB Submerged Support Column Drag 39.63 Mitered Joint Submerged 23.85 Support Column Drag Midcylinder VB Submerged 38.22 Support Column Drag Note:
- 1. Dominant frequency for vent system pressure load is taken as the lowest structural frequency obtained from the 1/16th segment model frequency analysis.
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.124 gg
J Vent Line X Overhead Truss Member Vent Header -
L_ I. ___
N N N
/
- ' j .
Support Column / Downcomer
(
b ; . ;
/ - -
N
<x y '
O zg
/ \
b
()h % ] s l l T Nu E
Beam element Matrix element Figure 3-2.4-1 VENT SYSTEM 1/16th SEGMENT BEAM AND FINITE ELEMENT MODEL
- ISOMETRIC VIEW
/
BPC-01-300-3 n Revision 0 3-2.125 " h
3.2.4.2 Analysis fo r Asymme tric Ioads The analysis of the vent system for asymmetric loads is 9
perfo rmed for a typical 180* segment of the vent system cut along the plane of a principal azimuth. A beam model of a 180* segiae nt of the vent system, shown in Figure 3-2. 4-2, is used to obtain the response of the vent system to as ymme tric loads. The model includes the vent line, vent header, downcomers, support c olumn s , and overhead truss members.
Many of the modeling techniques used in the 180* beam
- model, suc h as those used for local mass and stif fness determination, are the same as those utilized in the 1/16th seg me n t model of the vent system discussed in Section 3-2.4.1. The local stiffness effects at the vent line-d rywe ll penetrations are included using stiffness matrix elements for these penetrations. The local stiffness effects of the vent line-vent header intersections and vent ne ade r-downc ome r intersections are included using beams which account for these local stiffnesses. The local stiffness effects at the attachments of the suppo rt columns and ove rhead truss members to the vent system are included using beams which account for the local stiffnesses at the attachment locations.
B rC 3 0 0 -3 Revision 0 3-2.126 nute_qh
i 3 e (V The 180* beam model contains 302 nodes, 325 beam elements, and 4 matrix elements. The model is less refined than the 1/16th seg me nt model of the vent system, and is used to characterize the overall response of the vent system to asymmetric loadings. It includes those component parts and local stiffnesses which have an effect on the overall response of the vent system. The mass properties used in the model are based on the nominal dimensions and densities of the materials used to construct the vent system. The stiffness properties are based on corroded thicknesses.
Small displacement linea r-elastic behavior is assumed w throughout.
d The boundary conditions used in the 180' oeam model are both physical and mathematical in nature. The physical boundary conditions include elastic restraints which represent the suppression chamber stiffnesses at the a t tachme nts of the suppo rt columns and overhead truss members to the ring beams. Additional physical boundary conditions include the elastic restraints provided at the attachment of the vent line to the d rywe ll . The ma thematical bounda ry conditions used in the model consist of a symmetry boundary at the O'-180' plane.
O
( '.)
~
B PC-01-3 0 0-3 Revision 0 3-2.127 nutggh
1 Additional 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 1/16th segment model. The mass of water inside the submerged portion of the downccmers is also included. An additional mass of 600 pounds is lumped at the center of gravity of the d rywe ll/we twe ll vacuum breake r. The masses or other vent system component parts are also lumped at the appropriate locations in the model.
The asymmetric loads which act on the vent system include horizo ntal se ismic loads and asymme tric 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.
The mag n itude s and characteristics of gove rning asymm7tric loads on the vent system are presented and d iscus sed in Sect ion 3-2. 2.1. The overall effects of asymmetric loads on the vent system are evaluated using the 180* beam model and the general analysis techniques discussed in the preceding paragraphs. The specific trea tme nt of each load which results in asymme t ric loads on the vent system is discussed in the paragraphs which fo llow.
B PC-01-3 0 0 -3 Revision 0 3-2.128 nutegh l
1
- 2. Seismic Loads i
OBE Loads: A static analysis is perfo rmed V a.
for 'a N-S horizontal and an E -W horizontal seismic acceleration applied to the weight of steel and water included in the 180' beam model. The horizontal accelerations used in the analysis is obtained from the original des ig n basis documented in the plant's FSAR at the dominant suppression chamber horizontal frequency of 12.15 hertz.
- b. SSE Loads : The procedure used to evaluate N-S horizontal and E-W horizontal SSE accelerations is the same as that discussed for OBE loads in load case 2a.
- 7. Chugging Loads
- a. Chug ging Downcomer ' Lateral Loads: A static analysis is per f o rmed for chugging downcomer lateral load cases 1 through 3, shown in Table 3-2.2-11.
Use of the methodology desc ribed in the preceding paragraphs results in a conservative evaluation of vent system respo nse to the asymme tric loads defined in NUREG-0661.
B PC 3 00 -3 Revision 0 3-2.129 nutagh
Overhead Truss Member
-Vent Line l
/
3 Y Z h h \
' l Am x !
- p .
. 3s
/ \
/ \ ;
Support !
Cozumns Downcomer ,
i Vent Header Figure 3-2.4-2 I
VENT SYSTEM 180 BEAM MODEL - ISOMETRIC VIEW l
Revi 0
- 3-2.130 i
- -2.4,3 Analysis for Incal Ef fects t
The penetrations and intersectior.s of the maj or compo-nents of the vent system are evaluated using refined analytical models of each penetration and intersection.
These include the vent line-drywell penetration, the vent line-S RV p iping pe netration, tha vent line-vent header intersection, and the downcome r-vent header intersection. The analytical models used to evaluate these penetrations and intersections are shown in Figures 3-2. 4-3 through 3-2.4-6. An additiunal analysis is performed to evaluate local effects of pool swe ll impact loads on the vent header, which is discussed in detail in Section 3-2.4.4.
t
.%J Ea ch of the pe ne t::a tion and intersection analytical models includes mesh refinement near discontinuities to f acilitate evaluation of local stresses. The stiffness properties used in the model are based on corroded thicknesses of the materials used to cons truc t the penetrations and intersections. Small displacement linear-elastic theory is assumed throughout.
The analytical models are used to generate local stif f-nesses c! the penetrations and intersections for use in the 1/16th segment model and the 180* beam model as
. )
s /
BPC 3 0 0-3 Revision 0 3-2.131 Il
discu ssed in Sections 3-2.4.1 and 3-2.4.2. Incal stiffnesses are developed which represent the stiffness of the entire penetration or intersection in terms of a few local deg rees of freedom on the penetration or 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 eleme n ts or beam eleme n ts which are added to the 1/16th beam model and the 180* beam model at the corresponding penetration or intersection locations.
The analytical models are also used to evaluate stresses in the penetrations and intersections. The applied loads, which are extracted from the 1/16th model and 180' beam model results, consist of loads acting on the penetration and intersection model boundaries and of loads acting on the interior of pena-tration and intersection models. The loads acting on the pe ne t ra tion and in t.e rsec tion model boundaries are the beam end loads taken from the 1/16th segment model and 180' beam model analyses at locations coincident with the penetratior. or intersection model boundary locations. The distributed loads include the pressures B PC 3 0 0-3 Revision 0 3-2.132 nut _ech.
l and acceleration loads applied to penetration and i i
\d intersection models to account for internal pressure loads, thrust loads, pool swe ll loads, and inertia loads.
Ioads wh ich act on the shell segme nt boundaries are applied to the penetration and intersection models through a system of radial beams. The radial beams extend from the middle surface of each of the shell 3 segments to a node located on the centerline of the corresponding shell segment. The beams have la rge f bending stiffnesses, ze ro axial stiffness and are pinned in all directions at the shell segment middle surface. Boundary loads applied to the centerline
\j nodes cause only axial and shear loads to be transferred to the shell segment middle surf ace with no local bending ef fects. Use of this boundary condition j minimize s end ef fects 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.
A description of each vent system penetration and intersection analytical model and its use is provided in the paragraphs which follow.
O
(#l B PC 3 00 -3 Revision 0 3-2.133 nutggh
o Vent Line-Drywell Penetration Axisymmetric Finite Difference Model: The vent line-drywell penetra-tion model shown in Figure 3-2.4-3 includes a segment of the drywell shell, the jet deflector and gusset plates, the insert plate, the conical transition piece, and the vent line. The analytical model contains 9 segments with 126 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 include internal pressure loads.
o Vent Line-SRV Piping Penetration Finite Element Model: The vent line-SRV piping penetration model shown in Figure 3-2.4-4 includes a segment of the vent line, the penetration insert plate, the penetration nozzle, and the associated nozzle stiffener plates. The model contains 822 nodes, 86 beam elements, and 925 plate bending and stretching elements. Each end of the vent line shell segment is effectively restrained against translation and rotation. Both symmetric and antisymmetric boundary conditions on the vertical l
plane through the vent line centerline are used in the analysis. The boundary loads applied to the BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.134 gg t I
l, analytical model include the drywell and wetwell
.(q SRV piping reaction loads.
o Vent Line-Vent Header Intersection Finite Element Model: The vent line-vent header intersection finite element model shown in Figure 3-2.4-5 includes a segment of the vent line, a segment of the vent header, and the vacuum breaker support.
The model contains 864 nodes, 87 beam elements, and 1114 plate bending and stretching elements.
The end of the vent line shell segment is restrained .against translation and rotation.
Boundary loads are applied at each end of the vent header shell segment, at the end of the vacuum V breaker support, and at the vent system support column and overhead truss member attachment
~
locations. The distributed loads applied to the analytical model include internal pressure loads, thrust loads, and inertia forces from dynamic loadings.
o Downcomer-Vent Header Intersection Finite Element Model: The downcomer vent header intersection finite element model shown in Figure 3-2.4-6 includes a segment of the vent header, a segment of each downcomer, the crotch plate, the downcomer b
V BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.135 gg
- - - _ _ - - - - - _ - - _ - - - - - - - - )
l rings, the outer stiffener plates, the vent header ring plates, and the upper and lower longitudinal plates. The analytical model contains 1137 nodes, 161 beam elements, and 1400 plate bending and stretching elements. Restraints are provided at each end of the vent header shell segment.
Boundary loads are applied at the ends of the downcomer segments, and at the vent system support column, the overhead truss, and the downcomer bracing attachment locations. The distributed loads applied to the model include internal pressure loads and thrust loads.
For the SBA II combination, stresses in the downcomer-vent- header intersection- due to SRV discharge loads, chugging downcomer lateral loads, and seismic loads are combined using the SRSS method. Use of SRSS is appropriate since the combination of the maximum chugging downcomer lateral load, which is impulsive in nature, with the maximum SRV discharge loads and seismic loads is a low-probability event.
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.
BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.136 g{
I L,
O g Crywell-Vent Line i Penetration o 11.6176 Z --
n s- s
. c Ja t. ::e flector 9 s / l'/ /
1
, I
- Drywell Shell t Insert Plate q Gussets "37.0625"R (No Circumferent's1 Stiffness) q , Conical Transition Vent Line Figure 3-2.4-3 VENT LIN5-DRYWELL PENETRATION AXISYMMETRIC FINITE DIFFERENCE MODEL - VIEW OF TYPICAL MERIDIAN O BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.137 0
i O
Vent Line u '
\
/
/
2 SRV Piping Nozzle Figure 3-2.4-4 SRV PIPING-VENT LINE PENETRA. TION FINITE ELEMENT MODEL - ISOMETRIC VIB4 BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.138
1
( )
'w/ Vent Line s
l' Vent Header ,,/ /
h Nb y -
s
,Y ' R A s ,
s \
.g -
. ! \-
, N
/ / .
% ,'0 ,
/
/
, s
. , s
(' \
7 j
/
Vent Line ' - '
End Plate s x4 .
s s
- 1. .
q' s '
'Tl Vacuum Breaker Support Figure 3-2.4-5 VENT LINE-VENT HEADER INTEuSECTION FINITE ELEMENT MODEL - ISOMETRIC VIEW l \
( '"' ) BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.139 nutp_q.h_
Outer Stif fener Plate Uppcr Longitudinal Plate Vent Header _
j
\ y v v -w ees v m \ N
\
/
\[\)( // //\ AAAAD k h[\
t avmu wu
\l\ v \ b\ nD%MIXXX\
g.
i
- 9<
g r; r ivv v
' ~
MWT
,c ~
p
/. j ~ \WN w D'1d k/ h\\NN 2tk/\9W
\^NH Mk WN M'
\NU s \W NN1 -'
'?W
- 3-
\ / V [g \Md_.i $ C 72D.
s
' y t / / 'WT 5
x sg e E
//!/ JEMMQDTdh.
5533W\546
=
cMIX6 MK W A'
? ( i ( WH Downconer Ring Mi1 $N_ Wb i MMkNN r
_.-am 9XLY (X1 nP Plate :- y g g
$sc FIP' L *1 }' rii\\J Q
~
Crotch Plate Downcomer :
c _
% d_ 1: Lower Longitudinal Mm'16x. mr
% Plate Figure 3-2.4-6 DOWNCOMER-VENT HEADER INTERSECTION FINITE ELEMENT MODEL - ISOMETRIC VIEW BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 h 3-2.140 0 blI L <
3-2.4.4 Analysis of Vent Header for Incal Ef fects of Pool Swell (g \
Impact Load s The analysis for the overall effee s of pool swe ll impact loads on the vent system is performed using the 1/16 s egme nt model discussed in Section 3-2. 4.1, The analysis of the vent header for local ef fects of pool swe ll impact loads is pe rfo rmed using a detailed 1/32 segment finite element model of the vent header in the non-vent bay. The 1/32 s egme nt model is shown in Fig ure 3-2. 4-7.
The 1/32 s egme nt model contains 1684 nodes, 163 beam elements, and 1812 plate bending and stre tching Ch k elements. The vent header, the angled segments of the downcomers, the downcomer ring plates, the crotch plates, the outer gusset plates, the vent header ring plates, and the lower lon'g itudinal plate are modeled using finite elements. Beam elements are used to model the upper longitudinal plate, the support columns, the 9
overhead truss member, and the vertical segments of the downcomers. The stiffness properties used in the model are based on corroded thicknesses. The mass densities used in the model are adjusted to simulate the we ight of the s t ruc ture with nominal material dimensions.
O
> \
BPC-01-3 0 0-3 Revision 0 3-2.141 nutggb
Small displacement linear - elastic behavior is assumed throughout.
The boundary conditions used in the 1/3 2 segment model are both physical and mathematical in nature. The physical boundary conditions include a beam model {
representation of the vent line bay, which includes the vent header, vent line, and suppo r ts , alcached to the 1/32 model at the vent header mitered joint. This beam representation of the vent bay accounts for both mass and stiffness effects. The flexibility of the drywell is included at the vent line penetration location. The mathematical boundary conditions consist of symmetry boundaries im posed at the centerlines of the vent bay and non-vent bay. The support columns and overhead truss mem be rs are assumed to be fixed at the suppression chamber.
Additional mass is lumped along the length of the s'ubme rg ed portions of the downcomers and support columns to account for the e f f ec t ive mass of water which acts with these structures during dynamic loadings.
A frequency analysis is pe rfo rmed using the 1/32 segment model and the first 100 structural modes, up to B PC 3 00 -3 Revision 0 3-2.142 nut _e_c_h.
342 hertz, are computed. A dynamic transient analysis
( is per fo rmed for the pool swell impact loads on the vent header. The maximum pool swe ll impact pressures applied to the vent header at bottom dead center are shown in Fig ure 3-2.2-2. Selected pool swe ll impact pressure transients are provided in Table 3 -2. 2- 5. A total of 99 independent vent header .' aading transients are used in the analysis.
An equivalent static analysis is performed for the pool swell impact loads on the downcomer ring plates and the angled po rtions of the downcome rs. These loads are defined in Table 3-2.2-4.
The methodology described in the preceeding parag raphs results in a conse rvat ive evaluation of the local respo nse of the vent header to the pool swe 11 impact loads defined in NUREG-0661.
BPC-01-3 0 0-3 Revision 0 3-2.143 nutggb
O Overhead Truss Member Vent Header Ring Plates
')
I i
/I
/ktT I I
Wit /\ \ / N 9 / l I l l l l
, ( )QpC ' " , (' ' ( NJ fN b., 252ps>Inger<
- kg 1:h y ic/ gA msa Vent Header Supp t
/ ; Downcomer Bracing Downcomer
/
/ Ring Plate Downcomer l
l Figure 3-2.4-7 VENT SYSTEM 1/32 SEGMENT FINITE ELEMENT MODEL FOR POOL SWELL IMPACT ANALYSIS
- ELEVATION VIEW 9
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.144 mt h
3-2.4.5 Methods for Evaluating Analysis Results b \
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 component parts. The methodology used to evaluate the analysis results, determine the controlling stresses in the vent system compo nents parts, and examine fatigue effects is discussed in the paragraphs which follow.
To evaluate analysis results for the vent system Class MC components, membrane and extreme fiber stress intensities are computed. The values of the membrane
, stress intensities away from discontinuities are com-(j puted using 1/16th segme nt model and 180" beam model results. These stresses are compared with the primary membrane stress allowables contained in Table 3-2. 3-1.
The values of membrane stress ' intensities near d iscontinuities are computed using results from the penetration and intersection analytical models. These stresses are compared with local primary membrane stress o all'wables contained in Table 3-2.3-1. Primary stresses in vent system Class MC compo nent we lds are computed using maximum principal stresses ,
or the resultant forces acting on the weld throat. The results are compared to primary weld stress allowables
(~'\/
(
U B PC-01-3 0 0-3
- Revision 0 3-2,145 nutggh
contained in Table 3-2. 3-1. Secondary we ld stresses are computed in a similar manner, and include the effects of thermal loads. The results are compared to the secondary weld stress allowables contained in Table 3-2.3-1.
l 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 contained in Table 3-2.3-1.
To evalua te the vent system Class MC component supports, beam end loads obtained from the 1/16th seg me nt model and 180* beam model results are used to compute stresses. The results are compared with the co rrespo nding allowable stresses contained in Table 3 -2. 3-1. Stresses in vent system Class MC compo ne nt supp(srt we lds are obtained using the 1/16th segment model and 180' beam model results to compute the maxim um resultant force acting on the associated B PC-01-3 0 0 -3 Revision 0 3-2.146 nut _ec_h.
weld throat. The results are compared to weld stress V limits discussed in Section 3-2.3.
The controlling vent system load combinations are defined in Section 3-2.2.2. During load combination formulation, the maximum stress components in a particular vent system part at a given location are combined for the individual loads contained in each combination. The stress components for dynamic loadings are combined so as to obtain the maximum stress intensity.
The maximum differential displacements of the vent line bellows are determined using results from the 1/16 k/ segment model and the 180* beam model. The displace-ments of the attachment points of the bellows to the suppression chamber and to the vent line are determined for each load case. The differential displacement is computed from these values. The results 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 in Table 3-2.3-2.
v BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.147
i To evaluate f atigue ef fects in the vent system Class MC components and associated welds, extreme fiber alternating stress intensity histograms for each load in each event or combination of events are determined.
Fa tig ue effects for chugging down come r lateral loads are evaluated using the stress reversal histrog rams shown in Table 3-2.2-11. Stress intensity histograms are developed for the vent system major components and welds with the hig hest stress intensity ra nge s .
Fa t ig ue strength reduction factors of 2. 0 for maj or compo nent stresses and 4.0 for component weld stresses are conservatively used to account for peak stresses at all locations. For each combination of events, a load combination stress intensity his tog ram is formulated and the cor re spo nding f atig ue usag e factors are determined using ~ c he curve shown in Figure 3-2.4-8. The usag e factors for each event are then summed to obtain the total f atigue usage.
Use of the methodology de sc ribed above resul ts in a conse rva t ive evaluation of the vent system de s ig n margins.
B PC 3 0 0 -3 Revision 0 3-2.148 nutgch
"3 E = 27,900 ksi 1000.
. l ll
- x ! i n 1 N I ti!
$ \ .
l -
i s< l' i e l
" % i d
M
\ !,
- p. -
m 10 0 ,-- '%,- ' '
p w ,% ,,
Q V e xi
\?'4...
3 ViIIiTT 10.
- 10. 10 2 10 3 10' 10 5 10' Number of Cycles Figure 3-2.4-8 ALLOWABLE NUMBER OF STRESS CYCLES FOR VENT SYSTEM FATIGUE EVALUATION BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.149 ==.
3-2.5 Analysis Results and Conclusions The ge ome t ry , loads and load combina tion s, acceptance O
criteria, and analysis methods used in the evaluation of the Hope Creek vent system are presented and
~
discussed in the preceding sections. The results and conclusions de rived from the evaluation of the vent system are presented in the paragraphs and sections l which follow. l l
The maximum prima ry membrane stresses for the major componente of the vent system are shown in Table 3-2.5-1 for each of the governing loads. The corresponding loads for the vent system support columns are shown in Table 3-2. 5-2. The transient response of selected vent system support columns for pool swell loads are shown in Fig ures 3-2. 5-1 a nd 3-2. 5-2.
The maximum stresses and associated design margins for the major vent system components, component oopports, and welds for the SBA II, DBA II, and DBA III load combinations are shown in Table 3-2.5-3. The maximum stresses and associated des ig n margins for the compo nents and welds of the vent line-SRV p iping pene-tration for the SBA II and DBA III load combinations are shown in Table 3-2. 5-4. The maximum differential B PC 3 0 0-3 Revision 0 3-2.150 nut.e_qh
displacements and desig n margins for the vent line bellows for the SBA II, DBA II, and DBA III load combinations are shown in Table 3-2.5-5. The f atig ue usage factors for the controlling vent system component and weld for the Normal Operating plus SBA events are shown in Table 3-2.5-6. The maximum vacuum breaker accelerations due to dynamic loads on the vent system and suppression chamber shell are summarized in Table 3-2.5-7. ,
4 The vent system evaluation results presented in the preceding paragraphs are discussed in Section 3-2. 5.1.
m I
I i
o I
B PC 3 00 -3 Revision 0 3-2.151 nutgqh
I Tablo 3-2.5-1 MAJOR VENT SYSTEM COMPONENT MAXIMUM-MEMBRANE STRESSES FOR GOVERNING LOADS
{
Secti 3- 1 Load P Mehne Suess M)(1)
! Load Type Load Case Vent Vent Downcomer Number Line Header Dead Weight la .51 .94 .16 2a .21 .40 .17 Seismic 2b .32 .61 .23 3b 4.53 2.79 2.82 Pressure and Temperature 3d N/A N/A N/A Vent System 4a(3)
Discharge 4.53 2.79 2.82
(
i l Sa-5d 0.68 2.56 2.65 l Pool Swell Se .01 0.12 0.92 6a+6c 0.56 0.57 0.57 1
Condensation Oscillation 6b+6d 0.74 2.41 3.18 l 6f (2) 0.21 1.62 0.02 7a 0.33 2.73 12.00 7b 0.46 0.45 0.81 Chugging 7c(6e) - - -
7d 0.21 1.62 0.02 l SRV Discharge 8a 0.41 1.90 11.61 Notes:
- 1. Values shown are maximums irrespective of time and location for individual load types I and may not be added to obtain load combination results.
- 2. Post-chug loads substituted for condensation oscillation loads.
- 3. DBA internal pressure loads are substituted for vent system discharge loads.
BPC-01-300-3 O Revision 0 3-2.152
Tablo 3-2.5-2 MAXIMUM COLUMN LOADS FOR GOVERNING VENT SYSTEM LOADINGS N
)
J Section 3-2.2.1 Load Designation Maximum Support Load (1) Load (kips)
Load Type Case Direction Number Dead Weight la Compression 6.84 OBE 2a Tension / 4.60 mpression Seismic SSE 2b Tension / 11.80 Compression Internal Pressure 3b Tension 33.97 Temperature 3d Compression 83.06 Vent System '
Discharge 4a Tension 33.97 Tension 107.40
(
Pool Swell Sa-5d Compression 31.10 Tension 27.94 IBA 6a+6c Condensation Compression 27.94 Oscillation Tension 27.94 DBA 6b+6d -
Compression 27.94 Tension 64.45 Chugging 7a+7b Compression 64.45 Tension 60.54 ,
SRV Discharge 8a compression 60.54 Notes:
- 1. The effects of containment interaction are included.
- 2. DBA internal pressure loads are substituted for vent system discharge loads.
BPC-01-300-3 OUk Revision 0 3-2.153
Table 3-2.5-3 MAXIMUM VENT SYSTEM STRESSES FOR CONTROLLING LOAD COMBINATIONS I
Load Combination Stresses (ksi)
W DBA II I1I DBA III Stress SBA II Item p, Calc.(2) Cale. (2) Calc. Cale!2)
Cale. Calc.
Allow.
Stress Allow. Stress Allow. Stress COMPONENTS Local Primar7 23.40 C.81 25.00 0.86 24.80 0.86 Drywell Membrane Shell Pri + Se 63.85 i 0.94 65.85 0.97 N/A N/A g,n Primarl 5.13 0.27 6.69 0.35 9.21 0.48 Membrane Local Primarl 6.59 0.23 6.19 0.21 8.55 0.23 Membrane Prim. + Sec* 15.95 0.24 14.34 0.21 N/A N/A Stress Rance
- {, 14.05 0.73 10.58 0.55 17.83 0.92 Vent Local Primary 26.17 0.90 15.56 0.54 37.66 1.00 Header Membrane 60.42 0.89 30.41 0.45 N/A N/A s Ran e
$, 17 .60 0.91 8.94 0.46 18.28 0.95 h*
Downcomer ' LOC #Y 25.90 0.89 16.25 0.56 28.10 0.75 8
56.47 0.83 33.20 0.49 N/A N/A s Ra 7-COMPONENT SUPPORTS 10.41 0.56 9.20 0.50 7.01 0.38 Bending 6.00 0.36 2.24 0.13 8.05 0.48 Tensile Support 0.92 0.92 0.63 0.63 0.86 0.86 Combined -
Columns Compressive 5.83 0.41 2.24 0.15 5.79 0.38 0.97 0.97 0.65 0.65 0.76 0.76 Interaction WELDS 9.94 0.66 h
Vent Primary 9.16 0.61 5.75 0.38 Header Secondary 19.97 0.44 1 1.74 0.26 N/A N/A Notes:
- 1. Reference Table 3-2.2-15 for load combination designations .
- 2. Reference Table 3-2.3-1 for allowable stresses.
- 3. Allowable compressive stress based on length of most highly w stressed column.
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 =
3-2.154
Table 3-2.5-4 l
MAXIMUM VENT LINE-SRV PIPING PENETRATION STRESSES FOR CONTROLLING LOAD COMBINATIONS .
SBA II DBA III Stress Item Type Calc. Calc. (2) Calc. Calc.I3)
(ksi) Allow. (ksi) Allow.
COMPONENT Primarv Membrane 15.35 0.93 27.63 0.93
('
Penetration Local Nozzle Primary 24.39 0.99 43.90 0.98 Membrane Primary +
Secondary 60.01 1.00 N/A -
ha$$$
WELDS Primary 9.30 0.80 16.74 0.86 to Insert Plate Secondary 28.93 0.83 N/A -
Notes:
- 1. Reference Table 3-2.2-15 for load combination designations.
- 2. Reference Table 3-2.3-1 for allowable stresses.
- 3. Service Level C allowables used. Reference Table 3-2.3-1 for allowable stresses.
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.155 g gg
O Table 3-2.5-5 MAXIMUM VENT LINE BELLOWS DIFFERENTIAL DISPLACEMENTS FOR CONTROLLING LOAD COMBINATIONS SBA II I1I DBA II DB A III Displacement Component Calc. Calc. Calc. Calc. Calc. Calc.
(in) Allow. (in) Allow. (in) Allow.
Compression 0.63 0.50 0.66 0.53 0.67 0.54 Axial Extension N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.18 0.24 0.12 0.16 0.15 0.20 Camp s ion Lateral .
!^ "!^ "!^ "!^ "!^ "!^
Ext sion Notes:
- 1. Reference Table 3-2.2-15 for load combination designations.
- 2. Reference Table 3-2.2-2 for allowable displacements.
O BPC-01-300-3 i
- visi a 3-2.156 nut @
f% \
V Table 3-2.5-6 MAXIMUM FATIGUE USAGE FACTORS FOR VENT SYSTEM COMPONENTS AND WELDS Load Case Cycles Event Usage Facter Event condensation Sequence SRV I33 Ceci11ation Chugging I4I .feng ( 5 )
Seismic Pressure Temperature (sec.) (sec.) Header *e d(6)
, Discharge W/SRv cnarge 0 150(2) 150(2) 596 N/A N/A .207 .235 SSA
- 0. to 600. sec 0 0 0 50 N/A 300. .215 .265
~
/%
SB 1000(2) 1 1 2 N/A 600. .208 .241 l 600. t 00 m
%/
Maximum Cumulative Usage factors NOC + SBA .629 .791 Notes:
- 1. See Table 3-2.2-15 and Figure 3-2.2-7 for load cycles and event sequencing information.
- 2. Entire number of load cycles conservatively assumed to occur during time of maximum event usage.
- 3. Total number of SRV actuations shown are conservatively assumed to occur in same suppression chamber bay.
- 4. Each chug-cycle has a duration of 1.4 sec. See Table 3-2.2-12 for chugging downcomer load histogram. The maximum fatigue usage factor for chugging downcomer loads at the downcomer-vent header intersection is .054.
- 5. The maximum cumulative usage for a vent system component occurs in 'the downcomer at the downcomer-vent header intersection.
- 6. The maximum cumulative usage for a vent system component weld
,- occurs at the downcomer-vent header intersection.
m' }
\.
BPC-01-300-3 0 Revision 0 3-2,157
Table 3-2.5-7 MAXIMUM VACUUM BREAKER ACCELERATIONS DUE TO DYNAMIC LOADS Maximum Acceleration Load (g's)
Vertical Resultant Pool Swell Vent 2.19 2.25 System Impact Condensation Oscillation Torus Shell 1.35 1.65 Post-Chug 0.36 0.44 Torus Shell SRV Discharge 2.66 2.76 Torus Shell BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.158 nutggh
100.0 g
E 2
5 50.0 0
O i I s -
T
- e4 h I'I( P.PW
^
.~ 0- --
,'j ^p,Afy m-- -' ' -- - -- -
' ~
(J '
4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 Time (sec) i Figure 3-2.5-1 VENT SYSTEM SUPPORT COLUMN RESPONSE DUE TO POOL SWELL IMPACT LOADS - COLUMN AT MIDCYLINDER NON-VENT BAY f^ ' ,, ,
t 1 BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.159 nutech -- ~
l 9
40 n
D
~
20 i
0 i u
L\ \ n i
h {
x < v 0 ~
y- ^d l yh g_,A,/fy %,'
O 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 O
Time (sec)
Figure 3-2.5-2 VENT SYSTEM SUPPORT COLUMN RESPONSE DUE TO POOL SWELL IMPACT LOADS - OUTSIDE COLUMN AT MITERED JOINT SPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.160 ==
N 3-2.5.1 Discussion of Analysis Results The results shown in 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 condensation oscillation .
downcomer loads, and chugging downcomer lateral lcads.
The remaining loadings result in small primary stresses in the vent system major components. Table 3-2.5-2 shows that the largest vent system support column reactions occur for thermal loads, pool swell impact loads, chugging loads, and SRV discharge loads.
N The results shown in Table 3-2.5-3 indicate that the highest stresses in the vent system components, component supports, and associated welds occur for the SBA II and the DBA III load combinations. The vent line, vent header, and downcomer stresses for the SBA II and DBA III 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 DBA II load combination are also well within the allowable limits.
Oi U
~
BPC-01-300-3 Revision 0 3-2.161
1 l
(
l 1
The results shown in Table 3-2.5-5 indicate that the vent line bellows differential displacements are all well within allowable limits. The maximum displacement occurs for the DBA III 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, condensation oscillation, and chugging. The bellows displacementa for these loads are small compared to the maximum allowable displacement 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 230 cycles at maximum displacement for Normal Operating conditions, their adequacy for fatigue is assured.
The vent system fatigue usage factors shown in Table 3-2.5-6 are computed for the controlling Normal Operating plus SBA events. The governing vent system component for fatigue is the vent header at the downcomer-vent header intersecti.on. The governing vent system weld for fatigue is the downcomer to vent header weld. The magnitudes and cycles of downcomer lateral BPC-01-300-3 O
Revision 0 3-2.162 g a
l j ..
p ,
1 4
loads are the primary contributors to fatigue at this 5
location. l i .
Fatigue effects at other locations in the vent system '
i j are less severe than at those described above, due i
i primarily to lower stresses and a lesser number of
?
l Stress Cycles. !
i ,
l l
- i r
4 i !
l ,
i i.
i i
i i :
1 l
! i i t f' f
+
7 l
l t
i-t
,. l
!. l t
feviso
[
3-2.163 Qd ;
3-2.5.2 Conclus ions The ve nt system loads desc ribed and presented in O
Section 3-2. 2.1 are conservative est imates of the loads postulated to occur dur ing an actual LCCA 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 seque ncing defined in Section 3-2. 2. 2 envelop the actual events postulated to occur dur ing a LOCA or SRV discharge event. Combining the vent system responses to the governing loads and evalua ting f atigue effects using this methodology results in conse rva t ive values of the maximum vent system stresses, suppo rt reactions, and f atig ue usage factors for each event or sequence of ever.ts postulated to occur throughout the life of the plant.
The acceptance limits defined in Section 3-2.3 are at least as re s trict ive , and in many cases more restric-t ive , than those used in the original containment desig n docume n ted in the plant's FSAR. Compa ring the resulting maximum stresses and support reactions to B PC 3 0 0 -3 Revision 0 3-2.164 nutggh
t these acceptance limits results in a conse rva tive evaluation of the des ign margins present in the vent system and vent system suppo rts. As is demonstrated from 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 re sul t , the components of the vent system described in Section 3-2.1, which are specifically des ig ned fo r the loads and load combinations used in this evaluation, exhibit the margins of safety inherent in the original desig n of the primary containment as documented in the plan t 's FSAR. The intent of the NUREG-0661 requireme nts, as i
- relates to the desig n I
ig adequacy and safe operation of the Hope Creek vent system, is therefore considered' to be met.
,/
/%
\%
~
. B PC 3 0 0-3 F Revision 0 3-2.165
3-3.0 LIST OF REFERENCES
[^#ji 1. "Ma rk I Containme nt Io ng-Te rm Program," Safety Evaluation Report, NRC, NUREG-0661, July 1980.
- 2. " Ma rk I Co ntainme nt Prog ram Io ad De f inition Report," General Electric Company, NEDO-21888, Revision 2, December 1981.
- 3. " Mark I Containment Program Plant Unique Load De f ini tion ," Hope Creek Generating Station Unit 1, General Electric Company, NEDO-24579, Revision 1, Ja nua ry 198 2.
- 4. " Final Safety Analysis Repo rt (FSAR)," Hope Creek Generating Station, Public Service Electric and Gas Company , Section 3. 8, Oc tobe r 19 8 3.
- 5. " Mark I Containment Program Structural Acceptance Criteria Plant Unique Analysis Application Guide, Task Numbe r 3.1. 3," General Electric Company, NEDO-24583-1, Oc tober 1979.
- 6. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Div is ion 1, 1977 Edition with Addenda up to and including Summer 1977.
B PC 3 0 0-3 Revis10n 0 3-3.1 nuteqh
_ _ - - - - -