ML20082E469
| ML20082E469 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 11/15/1983 |
| From: | Riccardella P STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSOCIATES, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20082E377 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8311280207 | |
| Download: ML20082E469 (50) | |
Text
_. . _ _ _ - - . - . ..
DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF REC lRCULAT10N SWEEP 0LET OVERLAY REPAIRS FOR BROWN'S FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT 1 PRESENTED BY:
PETER C. RICCARDELLA STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSOCIATES SAN JOSE, CA
.I NOVEMBER 15, 1983 4
8311280207 831117 DR ADOCK 05000 ,
STRUCTURAL
) INTEGRITY .w ..e s w -,-g w v .-----,,_,-,-,-,.,,,--ym, ,-. --e -,n_-,,%,.-,wy._,,,,,,-,-w.---,,,--w,,a ,,--.y, ,- - , , , we. -, ,- .-,-ww wv.,--w,m m v. - vwm-,#-
OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION e RESIDUAL STRESS ANALYSIS SOLUTION ANNEALING / QUENCHING WELD OVERLAY COMPARISON WITH EXPERIMENT e PRESSURE AND BENDING MOMENT LOADS e FRACTURE MECHANICS EVALUATION END-0F-CYCLE ALLOWABLE FLAW SIZE
- CRACK PROPAGATION ANALYSIS e SAFETY MARGINS STRUCTURAL I N TEG RITY .... es.
~ . ,
i
- , v, - --
-.-,-,c,- .,n,,- +,,,..,.,y-,.+v., ew- ,--e. -a, ,,ag,- , ,---e.- - . - , . .v,._, ,.nn,, -n-_ m.~,,., -.,veen - - - - -y,,, e-m,-,,_-----,vp,-e,g.,,-._-e
A&, 3Ed -
4% g 9 0 8 4 '
RESIDUAL STRESS ANALYSIS
-I STRUCTURAL h INTEGRITY ***= ***
y -
---..-7 _ _ _ _ , , , ,-,,_%_. .-.____- ,_n,,,,- -,- . . _ -. ,y-,_.y., ,. - , ,,--,w,y - -- -
% , gm_ ,,,,c~w,m.y---,c_,y,-,, ,.c.r.-_.,,.,.,w..,w,,_,_.,_-,e
W'
+ +k/ IMAGE EVALUATION 84f k/f7Yh>?
\- $>/ y TEST TARGET (MT-3)
/ (([gfNY <
4 [ [f[4 g, fr
+ %
l.0 l$ 2 M 5 5 HE ii !!2 t:
NE 1.25 1.4 1.6 150mm #
6" #
- k;f $*//
% ,, / 4%
5,// '%+Q{b y
//
~
)
, _7,73 -
0
~~
~~
~
Outside Surface E
O o
E 800 -I ~
400
-b- I I
E i I
- I I I I, t
30 t_
33 35 Time (min)
(not to scale)
I 1900 Inside Eurface
~~
E 800 g
t i -
c L-400 l l I E. I i
6 l I
t- i _
1 50 t 40 30 Time (min)
(not to scale)
Solution Quenching Thermal Transient Loadings Figure 2-4 For The Recirculation Sweepolets STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY .w. ..a i
I i
l 5 4-- 12.8 5"
- 4-- 12.85" ---+
1 s s n Y 411.0 0 " % 11.0 0 " %
i i i J t- 1 i .
I n
- L i
l i
- -+-
19.75" 19.75" 22.00" i
o I l
]
)
Longitudinal Section (0 ) U
- Transverse Section (90 )
1
, Figure 2-1 Sweepolet Longitudinal and Transverse Sections
! s for Two-Cimensional Modeling
- r"l b E (D N5 OC 3
1 3h Qc
! ?
r _
l 1 i
a
e
)
e e e
I /
- musummm
/////////////////////////// ////// //////
< -t-4
/
I'Z ' b em D B s s
.T 9
\.dl.
s
\
N T 1h 4
D B Figure 2-2 Finite Element Grid for the Longitudinal (0 degree) r- ^ l Sweepolet Section
?9 8E a0
?5 t? -
i
99 , g S 8
. . [ ,
5 If' Li\ \ -
G b
8 8
Ne @
u W
" p
- a h
b o
\W A k w
g d \
q "t 0c0
- 5 cv
% *G?n us
, o V8 st
.s s w cn 9
e b
o
.Y
~
g7puCTURE
\NTEGRID "" ,,,
a Current Location of Are Path of Arc -
v
(
x f /
l l
1sotherms Plane of Interest Figure 2-12 A Point Heat Source Moving on the Surface of an Insulated Half-Space i
, STRUCTURAL lNTEGRITY soc as
~
r r
- a. -- -- ~ ,,8. ,, - -- we- n--- --, a - ,.- -
,.,,--n-- -,.e--, ,,,...,--,---,e.--..,,--. . . - - . .
2,000 -
1 g ,
X = 0.1 l /
1800 I k
Rat
} Input Speed Efficiency l'600
' (kJ/in) (in/ min) (%)
{
58 1.75 75 23~ 3.5 75 I
1400 -
g
\
\
(200- -
.i l
OT g I (OF) 1000 . \ j
\
800 -
\$ X = 0.66 g
X= .53 \
600 . k l
< \\
\\ measured maximum
~
400 . \ \ inner surface AT from mock-up
! \ '
l \ N 200 - \ \
N %
O ,
f ,
- > ~--- ~ _
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 Normal Distance to Path of Arc, r, (in.)
i Figure 2-13 Analytical Solutions for Temperatures in an
! Insulated Half-Space _
. STRUCTURAL t -
k INTEGRITY *ssoc. is
~
30 - - ~~ ' s initial anneal stress
's
~
~._ _ _/. - - -
le overlay :
20
,- weld 10 _
og o O (ksi) ,
~'
-20
~
, W
-30 .
1
-40 - 4 (e) hole-drilling l
. . method 3
-50 -
-60 ' ' !! ' I t . I
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 4 , (deg)
Figure 2-16 Inner Surface Stress from the Transverse Section (90 degree) Model Ntcr Each Overla Layer STRUCTURAL
' L in7copiTy . ,, ..,
- - , , , . - - , - , . , , . - . . ,, - ,..,n, ,,. ,,
F 40 -
~
initial annen1 stress 30 - - 'T
. , , - g-
. \
\
20 1
g
\ 3.
10 \ 4 hole-drilling \
method \
a4 (ksi) 0 3 \
0
- 2 \
\
-10 -
3
\
-20 -
(
's s
-30 - - g
.- overlay -+
-40 __
inner surface
-50 -
l . I ! -
10.0 10.5 11. 0
. p , (in)
Figure 2-19 Through-wall Stress from the Transverse Section (90 degree) Model at Section B (4 = -26) After Each Overlay Layer STRUCTURAL
, - L INTEG RITY .s.was
- g- . . - , . - - ~ - -
, - , . ,- ,,,we , , . . , . . , ,- .- , , , , . , . _ , ,
40 - < overlay ?
30 -
/
N [ Initial stressanneal s /- . -~
j %
1,
/
20 - /
,' - weld +
k 10 -
/
ar
- 0
. I e
/
2
-10 4
'3 1
" 4 .\
3 2
-20 >4 2
1
-30 -
-40 --
-50 -
(#) hole-drilling method' 40 I ' I ' I I ' '
8 10 12 16 14, radius, (in)
Figure 2-20 Inner Surface Stress From the Longitudinal Section (0 degree) Model After Each Overlay Layer STRUCTURAL
[' '
l NTEGRITY .wx .u
~ . ,-
4 l
40 initial anneal
, ' stress 30
\ \ i
^
\ ,
\
\
20 -
t i *
\
10 -
hole-drilling method .
/
0
'l e z e
or 3
-10 -
4 (ksi) -
4 . 4 g
-20 -
)* \N 1
'~ s
-30 -
-40 -
i f
- i overlay
-50 _ inner surface .
-66 < . > > l 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 Distance from manifold centerline, (in)
Figure 2-22 Through-wall Stress from the Longitudinal Section (0 degree) Model at Section B (r = 10.5 in.) After Each Overlay Layer
[ C,TRUCTURAL
} INTEGRITY .w....n ,
t 4
l r e o d f o e
- f. _ _
M pd noel o;
oI t d_.______
i t l e
_ cep ehmo
_ St
_ _ l gc an nig m__ _
it dul aid n) t uld e gimed t <_
i nS w lu c
o l n Lrl i
_ _ oa t ef( o h gl t sd n rnf g o
_ _ 5 f oi rinni p al S
X l
t o l Mena
_ Pa en
_ nh a eiot pt o
_ aifd o t
_ h d
_ _ S e
_ At nu
_ d id
_ et a
_ rrn mot rh si o
ot nt
_ _ fi oo
, D eWCm 4
2
_ 2
, e r
g u
_ _ i
_ _ F
_ _ \
lL .
- mw2C cxf r wPC E4 .{ :.
1)
I .
3 i .
- l I ,l, i!i- i ; !l j!,. -1
50 without hoop
\
constraint t
~
40 30 -
. 1 l
/
20 -
~
l l 10 '
s I
- r o I '
(ksi)
O
\ I f
\ l '
-10 -
l i
~ !
-20
-30 h'
) i N with hoop constraint l
~
-40 overlay l
. inner surface ,
-50 -
(e) hole-drilling method a I 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 Distance from manifold centerline, (in)
Figure 2-25 Comparison of Through-Wall Stress from the Longitudinal Section Models (with and without hoop constraint) and the Hole-Drilling Method (Section B, r = 10.5 in.)
STRUCTURAL L INTEGRITY .w. ,... .
b PRESSURE AND BENDING MOMENT STRESSES I ~ STRUCTURAL gL INTEGRITY .=a= = n
.o
16 h - -
14 '
12 _ ._.
u . .. ! Outside 10 8
5 8
t S
io
'N/
k<
1 w 2
'aW, \ i 5 10 i
U
- s. I I Projected Surface M 4 I I Inside i I 6
l 1 h
I I 8
, _ _ , J L. i Maximum N
's
- -Q x
- '
.i f &~ '
4-
)
)
/
- p. .
I FIGURE 3-2. STRESS CONCENTRAT10tl AT THE lti1ERSECT10N FOR M0t',EtiT l.0ADIMG tl '
y
$TRUCTURAL L INTEGRITY .se a'<*
~
- - _ - _ _ . _ _ _ . ..,___.-, . - ,_m . , - . . , , _ , , , , _ _ , . . _ . . . , __ _-m _ _ p. , , , , __,_. _ _ , _ _
. e .. . .. . - . . . . _ . . . . . . , . . . - _ . . .
0+ u g = .
, u .
.: . ,. ) . [ ~ ~
=Lj _ .l
- - e .j . :
a p 3-i -
e 82-e o
u
, 1-m -
L M
m . >
i., . . . .
1 3 15 ; 7 9 11 13 Projected Surface i i
, I i
, I ;
- I maximun i
I i
< ! I
' . .Y__ . - - ?
/
4 i
a L '
I
+
P .. '
.. ._( _.
!-- FIGURE 3-6.STRESSCONCENTRATIONATTHEINTERSdCTIONFOR
.. .j . '
INTERNAL PRESSURE i .
i I
i i:
STRUCTURAL L INTEGRITY .sw .2.
~ -
~ , . - ~ - , , - . , . , , - . ,-.. -.- , , ,. - - _ -... , _., ,.,-__ ,. ~~. -_.- _. - ,_ _._ -... .,. .. ...,=-----..,2, ~ , . - - _
p+z 2 3
a 3=
b 1
where a = 0.6 Z (900) and b = 1.0 h
85 1.0 -
75 0.8 -
I t
0.6 .
j 45 0
. I ,f s ,j i ,
cIl /
lg $// /
0.4 -
6/ ./
/
30 0
/
& h /
0.2 .
.I'
/
@,$, '/ o 7 f 15 j ,, '
hj'- n- Y (0 )
0l 0.'2 0.4 6.6 FIG. 3-7. Distribution of Stress Concentration Factor Around Weld for 00 to 900 Orientation for the Pressure Loading 1
T STRUCTURAL
. l ,;
lN TEG RITY ..=-en i
, - . . . , , . . - . . , - . . - - - .m-,- -.--.-,---.. .--, ,- ,,----
-~, . . , , - - , - - - . - , , . - , . ,
-+ - =z2 Y2 1 a2 b2 where a = 1 0
Z (90 )
d 85 I
3-75 2 _. g 9 60 g
.g o w 48 6 /
s 1_ g: ,f f /
30 4
' 9 {c
- /
Y (0 )
1 i
FIG. 3-4. Distributiog of Strgss Concentration Factor Around Weld for 0 to 90 Orientation for Moment Loading f
1 f
I i
d
~
i ~
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY .,m . n
~
4
, -- -.----,.n. ---
.r--, , , , . , . - - , ,,.---....n,-.- - . - _ , ,n-,,n., ..-..,.---,,-...,,.-,-w,.,,.,_ .nn,nn-.. ,,,,,..,e,.- , , ..,,_.n-
l l TABLE 3-1. STRESSES AT WELD KR-1-14 OF THE RECICRULATION SYSTEM SWEEPOLET WELD NO. KR-l-14
====
LOCAL COORDINATE LOAD MYY MZZ i
CASES (PT-LB) (PT-LB)
===============
DEAD WT. 3505 7634 SIGMA PRE 6321 PSI THERMAL 9110 26893 COORD ROT .5235988 RADIAN
! OBE XY 2459 2463 Z RISER 64.45 IN**3 2
OBE YZ 3375 3789 T RISER .579 IN.
SSE XY 4102 4075 R RISER 6.35 IN.
SSE YZ 4916 5540 PRES LOAD 1153 PSI SHRINKAGE 8241 9611 T HEADER 1.03 IN.
R HEADER 11.00 IN.
i LOAD STRESSES NORMAL TO WELD (PSI)
CASES 0 DEG 15 DEG 30 DEG 45 DEG 70 DEG 75 DEG 80 DEG 85 DEG 90 DEG
======================================================u=======================
DEAD WT. 1421 1542 1822 1980 2419 2446 2535 2283 1958 THERMAL 5007 5276 6066 6399 7274 7189 7239 6272 5089 OBE XY 459 561 733 875 1292 1374 1512 1463 1374 OBE YZ 705 844 1082 1273 1830 1934 2113 2028 1885 i SSE XY 759 931 1216 1453 2150 2289 2519 2440 2291 SSE YZ 1031 1233 1581 1858 2668 2820 3079 2955 2746 4
SHRINKAGE 1789 2126 2711 3173 4519 4766 5192 4969 4603
{.j [} PRESSURE 7380 7634
! 8250 8989 11242 11575 12190 12252 12314 BE na 5
<$ m 3
j
FRACTURE MECHANICS ANALYSIS
{
l i b- l$TRUCTURAL N TEG RITY ...o.m l
l <
l
TABLE A-11. STRESS PROFILES FROM APPLIED LOADINGS FOR WELL KR-1-14 (AT 11:20)
WITH WELD OVERLAY LOCATION: MANIFOLD SIDE CRACK SIZE: A/T= 19%
L = 9" T= 1.12IN (W/O OVERLAY) 1.366IN (W/ OVERLAY)
STRESSES ( AT 70 DEG )
(PSI)
LOAD CASES INSIDE OUTSIDE PRESSURE 9217.452 9217.452 DEAD WT. 1982.548 -1321.70 THERMAL 5964.041 -3976.03 SHRINKAGE 3705.183 -2470.12 TOTAL 20869.22 1449.605 MEMBRANE STRESS = 11159.41 PSI BENDING STRESS = 9709.810 PSI RESIDUAL STRESS:
, AFTER OVERLAY C0 = 5.751 C1 = -209.295 C2 = 483.78 C3 = -242.32
\.,
1 Prepared B a 1 2kM
~
Checked By _ 4 is!rk3 s . ' B:
STRUCTURAL
'L IN TEG RITY .wr..w s
~
w i
r .
\
30 -
\
-[ .
\\
\
\
20 -
g i -
\ . .
. /
\\ f 10 k A
e 0
5 0.25 gt gg 0.75 1, 0 1. c X/T G / \ ,
N \
M \ a O
-10 4 \ >. -
\ I E
/
t a w
1*
CC * >
\ i Z O 5 o
- - -- - annealing \ '\\. m w
-20 -
weld overlay \, 3 -
- curve fit for anneali g curve fit for weld s overlay y ,
-30 - -
I l ti Figure 4-2 Curve Fit Residual Stresses Used in Crack Propagation Analysis Longitudinal, Section D I STRUCTURAL L
,; INTEGRITY . ...es
g-3 Upper Bound (Furnace Sensitize d) da/dt = 5.65x10-9(K)3.07
_ 7
/
, -A - .
g @ Best Estimate (Weld Sensitizec )
.A da/dt = 2.27x10-8(K)2.26 7 Y SENSITIZED AT ilS0*8 2 h. 0 2 eom d 02INE AT 0d90414GE - T11618
/ A Sth5tti2ED AT 1150*F. 2 h,0 2 eom
{ [ / O2(ME AT 03b80s IGE - T1181)
=2 ,,. s _
/m D sE=sm2ED AT tiso*F. 24 n.
0.2 som 02 (GE - T118 II
/ y Q sE%5sta2ED SEVERELv. 0 2 aom O2 g
T g IGE - mP1332 2. REF M 351 5 - Y O stssmzED AT isso'F.24 h.s .om 4 08 5 Y Y
@ GE - T1161
@ WANG. 0LAmat - GENED
@ SOLCuow. GECAD 10
@ sa Asacci- MiTACMt mt.
@ PAmt - ARGONNE N AT LAS
- IREF M 36) d SENSitsZED BY WELDING LTS AT 932*F. 24 h. e com2 C IIS "I' ** 3#3
,,-t i e i i e i e to so an *o so so 70 i
sTatss i=TE=sirv.a twKi Figure 4-5 Crack Growth Rate Curves Used in Analysis And Supporting Data (from EPRI NP-2472) %
STRUCTURAL L INTEG RITY .sm-u
~
r
TABLE 4-2.
SUMMARY
OF RESULTS OF CRACK GROWTH ANALYSIS OF RECIRCULATION PIPING SWEEPOLETS (WITH WELD OVERLAY)
INITIAL CRACK SIZE CARCK AT END OF WELD SIZE ONE FUEL NO LOACTION (IN) A/T CYCLE (IN) A/T KR-1-14 AT 5:30 .1113 .081 .187 .14 AT 6:20 .1113 .081 .25 .18 AT 11:20 .2128 .16 .26 .19 KR-1-20 AT 2:00 .3254 .24 . 3254 .24 KR-1-36 12:00 TO .2783 .203 . 2783 . 203 3:00 8:00 TO .311 .21 .311 .21 9:00 KR-1-42 AT 4:00 .4226 .31 . 4226 .31 AT 10:00 .2224 .16 . 2224 .16 i
l L [ NTEGRITY STRUCTURAL
. .=wn
~
e
- . _ . . . . _ . . _ , _ _ _ ~ , ,,
Table 4-5 AL BLE END-OF-EVALUATION PERIOD FLAW DEPTH -TO-THICKNESS RATIO FOR CIRCUMFERENTIAL FLAWS, NORMAL OPERATING (INCLUDING UPSET AND TEST) CONDITIONS pm +Pb -------- Bag,g{,[}aw (gngth,((fl,39,g![ggm{gggngg,fff,,,,,,,,, S m 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 or more 1.5 (4) (4) (4) (4) (4) (4) 1.4 0.75 0.40 0.21 0.15 (4) (4) 1.3 0.75 0.75 0.39 0.27 0.22 0.19 1.2 0.75 0.75 0.56 0.40 0.32 0.27 " 1.1 0.75 0.75 0.73 0.51 0.42 0.34 1.0 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.63 0.51 0.41 0.9 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.73 0.59 0.47 0.8 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.68 0.53 0.7 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.58 0.6 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.63 Notes: (1) Flaw depth = an for a surface flaw
=2an for a subsurface flaw t = nominal thickness linear interpolation is permisible (2) Circumference based on nominal pipe diameter (3) p ,= Primary Membrane Stress p = Primary Bending Stress s,a ASME Code Allowable Design Intensity (4) IWB-3514.3 allowable flaw standards shall be used STRUCTURAL L INTEG RITY .wom
- . , . . ~ . , , . . - . , , - .
, ,c .
c
Primary Membrane and Bending Stresses For Allowable Flaw Size Determination PD P, + Pb*El 2to ,B2~fI- M ' i where: B,B2 1 = NB-3600 Stress Indices P = Design Pressure Do = Outside Diameter t = Wall Thickness I = Section Moment of Inertia M=ResultantMoment/M x 2+M y 2+M z (Seismic + Dead Weight)
. ! $TRUCTURAL L INTEGRITY x.. ,
~
-- . . - , - ..--;,. - . - , n. ---,..,e- . - - , - . , - - . - , , - - - - . , . ,,,..--,.,,..,,r.-,. --. - ,--- -
o TABLE 4-4. FLAW SIZE AT END OF ONE FUEL CYCLE (WITH WELD OVERLAY) WELD PM+PB ACTUAL ALLOWABLE NO (PSI) PM+PB/SM LOCATION L/ CIRC A/T A/T KR-1-14 13333 .8032 AT 5:30 .03 .14 .75 AT 6:20 .0309 .18 .75 AT 11:20 .1324 .19 .75 - KR-1-20 10549 .635 AT 2:00 .0144 .24 .75 KR-1-36 14374 .87 8: TO 9: .0868 .21 .75 12: TO 3: .26 .21 .73 KR-1-42 11815 .718 AT 4:00 .0144 .31 .75 AT 10:00 .0145 .16 .75 i l i i i STRUCTURAL l INTEGRITY .,w en l l \
a SAFETY MARGINS STRUCTURAL L INTEGRtTY ae'" h _ = - -T" "
TA3LE-5-1
SUMMARY
OF RESULTS OF CRACK GRO%TH ANALYSIS OF THE RECIRCULATION SYSTEM (WITH WELD OVERLAY AND TWICE THE INITIAL CRACK DEPTH) INITIAL CRACK SIZE CARCK AT END OF WELD SIZE 'ONE FUEL NO LOACTION (IN) A/T CYCLE (IN) A/T KR-1-14 AT 5:30 .2226 .16 .25 .18 AT 6:20 .2226 .16 .29 .21 AT 11:20 .4256 .31 .44 .32 KR-1-20 AT 2:00 .65 .47 .66 .48 KR-1-36 12:00 TO .5366 .41 .5366 .41 3:00 8:00 TO .622 .42 .622 .42 9:00 KR-1-42 AT 4:00 .8452 .62 1.237 .90 AT 10:00 .4448 .32 .4448 .32 I s i i S TRUCTURAL j L INTEG RITY .im.,.
\s.
m. s
+,
v4
-d
.W o
i
~
1.0 1 F i Leak Before -x. , Net Section Break Collapse 0.8 - - n Q
~
0.6 Collapse With -
@ Safety Margin of 3 j (Sect. III) o P
= ,
y 0.4 - o E O Initial Crack
' 8 Sizes E CA
$ 0.2 - 6 g' 'g a Final Crack _
Sizes g i ,..s . b,
~
'l- 1 I I 0 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.8 1.0
" Fraction of Circumference (6 /7r)
Figure 5-2 Locus of the Allowable Flaw Sizes and the Actual Indication Sizes
. ,' STRUCTURAL M t- INTEGRITY . *rm
~
q -. f
.t- , , . - ... ~ = -, r- . . . . . - - . - - - - - - . - - - - - - . _ - - . . - - . + . - . . , - - - - . , - - . -- , , , . - , , - - . .,,,w., -a, ~ - - - , , , _ , - - - , - - ,
2 0 ' 1.0 i i i 8 Net Section Collapse h I 0.8 - i n I
< l 5 r Collapse With 0.6 O Safety Margin y 12 e
j of 3
._ (Sect. III)
= k i
0.4 - b b - O Initial Crack Sizes 5 6 h
's a Final Crack g
- Sizes 0.2 _A -
n O
, i t 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Fraction of Circumference ( 6 /77 )
Figure 5-3 Locus of the Allowable Flaw Sizes and the Observed Indications Assuming Twice the Actual Crack Depth STRUCTURAL IN TEG RITY .s-a. 7
.,,,,,,_,,.---,,-,....-.,.c..,
CONCLUSIONS e STRUCTURAL ADEQUACY OF SWEEP 0LET WELD OVERLAY REPAIRS DEMONSTRATED
. - RESIDUAL STRESSES FAVORABLE
- CRACK GROWTH ACCEPTABLE (WITH INITIAL FLAW DEPTHS
- DOUBLED)
- DESIGN MARGINS MAINTAINED EVEN IF FLAWS ASSUMED TO PROPAGATE ENTIRELY THROUGH ORIGINAL PIPE WALL e RESIDUAL STRESS ANALYSIS OF SOLUTION ANNEALING PROCESS OFFERS POTENTIALLY PLAUSIBLE EXPLANAT10N FOR OCCURRENCE OF IGSCC IN SWEEP 0LET WELDS STRUCTURAL L lNTEGRITY.so..u
~ -
. . - . . . . _ _ . _ . _ , ., - , . . . - _ . _ - _ . . - - ._. , _ _ . . - _ . ~ - _ , _ , - - _ . - , . . , ,y-
m VII. DESCRIPTION OF RWCV SWEEP-0-LET TO VALVE WELD OVERLAY (DRWC-1-1A)
== , , . .
- - , , , - , - - - - - - - - - -~ - - - -
..o .
DESCRIPTION OF RWCll SWEEP-0-LET TO VALVE WELD OVERLAY (DRWC-1-1A) PINHOLE LEAK DISCOVERED DURING VISUAL EXAM: WELD PT EXAMINED; NO OTHER INDICATION FOUND , FULL STRUCTURAL OVERLAY DESIGNED ASSUMING 3600 THRUWALL CRACK (SEE FIGURE 1 ) CONTRACTOR (WSI) SEALED LEAK WITH SMALL STICK ELECTRODE AUTOMATIC OVERLAY BEGAN; 7 PINHOLE LEAKS OPENED UP, APPROXIMATELY 1200 AROUND PIPE; ALL PINHOLES APPROXIMATELY 1/8" BELOW DUTCHMAN TO VALVE FIELD WELD CON DUTCHMAN SIDE) i RWCU VALVE CLOSED AND SERVICE AIR BLOWN THROUGH TEST CONNECTION INTO 20" RHR LINE SHIELDED METAL ARC WELDING USED TO APPLY ONE LAYER OF WELD METAL OVER ENTIRE DUTCHMAN SURFACE; ENTIRE LAYER PT EXAMINED AUTOMATIC TIG LAYER APPLIED COVERING 3/4" AB0VE AND BELOW EXISTING , FIELD WELD AND SHOP WELD AIR DISCONNECTED, LINE VENTED AND REFILLED WITH WATER UT WALL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FULL STRUCTURAL OVERLAY APPLIED; OVERLAY DIMENSION 0.300 X 3-1/4" OVERLAY PT EXAMINED FOR SURFACE DEFECTS AND UT EXAMINED FOR DEFEC AND BOND; NO INDICATIONS FOUND N
-,,.e, .- ,-,,_, - - - - , . , , - , , . - , -~,,-_-n -w . , -,-,--~-.w, n . - w,- , , --,-- ew r -- -~,
l VA LVE 4 3
/4 i ,r i
3g l( FIELD WELD ) 3/4 4 30C y *- DUTCHMAN 7 -- ! I/2
+ l[ SHOP WELD / ) W i 3
e /4 I PLANE OF LEAKS OVERLAY , SWEEP-0-LET s [ i<' . . .
, _ - , , ., - . . _ - - . . , , _ - , -,,,, ..,.__-a . -,__-.. ,-- - -
Overlay Sizing For Weld DRWC-1-1A Stress Ratio Without Overlay Pa + Pb/Sm = 17,571/16,675 = 1.05 Stress Ratio With 0.300 Inch Overlay Pm + Pb /Sm = (0.432/0.732)1.05 = 0.62 Allowed Flaw Depth to Thickness Ratio a/t = 0.62 (IWB - 3640) Allowed Flaw Depth ~ a = 0.62 (0 732) = 0.454 in. Actual Flaw Depth a = 0.432 in. Allowance for Fatigue Crack Growth O.454 - 0.432 = 0.022 in. Conservatively Assumed Fatigue Cycles 10 heatup - cooldowns/ year 2 hot isolations/ year 3 seismics/ year Crack Extension Rate 0.0052 inch / year Fatigue Crack Growth Will Not Infringe on Required Structual Margins for 4 years (i.e., 0.022/0.0052 4 years) Therefore, 0 300 inch overlay is adequate t mm
, . . , . --- - . , - --, . - , . , . . - - -,n.,,--- . . . , - - . , - -.. - - ~ - . - . - - - - . .. --
Vill. RESULTS OF CLASS 2 CORE SPRAY INDICATIONS
I. UT INDICATIONS 35% THROUGHWALL 3500 INTERMITTENT
- 11. WELD DCS-1-2 (PIPE TO VALVE) REMOVED FOR METALLURGICAL EXAMINATION 111. WELD WAs SECTIONED AND EXAMINED METALL0 GRAPHICALLY l IV. NO CRACKING WAs FOUND V. REMAINING PARTS 0F WELD WERE RE-UT'D AND CR0ss SECTIONED VI. NO CRACKING WAs FOUND 4
,+a ,- -m-- - .,s- - , , -_y- . - , , , . _ , , . - - - _ _ . _ _ - , ,w-- --- g- - , , - --, -rg -
l 9 6 g 'l
. i M
gh n
)
. W~b.9!'$b- %
?& ' b.]:. .
l e.-. w .. .u. r ra. u.: ,pin-., m4gae.
**- ,? kf.
y 9 n C[ h
* - .p, +
.._ s?,% ' $N ,\
R _- . g?t . ;-_ ' t
- .kj ' .;y-f _- . [ .f ' c f: ;Ui t],
, ., ..';; ;- - .,.~M ) 4 ','8 L O ,
,, .l ,
^. , , .- ,-_
~ <' .. ~l
. ,, .w .
Qg 3. ,p ,r -. _ .. 7
. . 't I f: -.y'.
r=
,,s...
'. , . i
' < g . ,.z . _- :, .,'f . _ . , __
Nr l . , , , % . s- . f
? . , v' ' ; - . f. . ' > . T. .
T "* s'.= y d +..*. ; s~ c<*,, f o-- y .
- ~ . . .
<1
.. ,.i. ';;_ ' , .-
% *M
. ,",:..,,q 4 ) . ,7 .< ye,.?u' $. : I' .. -.? .,,.d.;e.t
'.'.c..- .. ,.
i ;;, ;. , '..') g, .[* t
. . . . ., , ,. s.. . .,,$., , g.,
. . .. /( c . .
9 1 t 4 9 l
~
4
,4 6 I GRT Disan y il 1,. . L y '! - 1
!l !l l
4s- 60" '
/
N 32'
\ /
f
/
4g W
// -
,/
' /, / . '/
/
(
/ h
'/ /
L i/
\
b
\
IX. RESULTS OF BASELINE EXAMINATION OF OVERLAYS
U. T. Examination of Backlay Weld Repairs BFNP, Unit 1 Summary: Ultrasonic examinations were completed on 41 welds which had been rejected for linear UT indications indicative of IGSCC and repaired by backlay welding. Examinations were also performed on one weld which was previously acceptable but inadvertently repaired and one weld which was rejected for thru-wall cracks detected during PT examinations. Examination after backlay weld repair revealed indications in 14 of the 41 welds previously rejected; however, only four welds exhibited one or more indications after repair which could be identified with indications noted before repair. Problems with sound beam redirection in the material precluded accurate thru-wall measurement or confirmation of indications with available equipment and techniques. Procedure: Examinations were conducted using two procedures, N-UT-28, revision 0 with PRC-3, and BF-UT-29, revision 0 with PCR-4 (attachments 1 and 2). N-UT-28 examinations were conducted to ensure the quality of the additional weld metal and the heat affected zone below the repair. This procedure included a dual transducer, longitudinal wave, 00 beam angle examination based on 1/8 inch flat bottom holes and a dual transducer, longitudenal wave, 700 beam angle examination based on a 1/16 inch side-drilled hole. BF-UT-29 examinations were conducted to attempt to reestablish the UT baseline on the repaired welds. This procedure used a dual transducer, longitudinal wave, 450 beam angle examination based on jl/16 inch side-drilled holes and I. D. notches. Calibration blocks were fabricated from 12-inch and 20-inch NPS stainless pipe and overlayed to provide thicknesses equal to or exceeding 90 percent of actual welds. The sweepolet to header welds ware examined using a calibration block fabricated from a 900 segment of an actual weld. Examination: Examinations were conducted on a best effort basis and may be considered marginal. Signal to noise ratios were generally low ranging down to less than 2 to 1 and precluded use of strip chart recorders in a significant number of examinations. Significant changes in the beam angle in the base material were also noted on all axial scans, which precluded thru-wall measurements and accurate plotting. Signals which could not be proved to be resulting from beam redirection were plotted using the nominal beam angle, recorded, and are included in the indications reported. It should be noted that the thru-wall defects in the 6 inch reactor water cleanup weld were not detectable using the N-UT-28 procedure. Examination results are tabulated on Attachment 3 by pipe size. Future Work: TVA is pursuing alternatives in the fields of overlay examination and fabrication techniques.
)
t
..)....
51 5 4cm
- Recire.oladien See S ue : : 26" .
F 16 h J u. r, LJiea4,.s mMA,$ . ._.
.... .... WeM Mom bcc: twd sea 4;ons : . o ngi,,61 oce4s : _ .
. Ge+3 -
I o -.. _. .. i G R - t - a '? -
! o ..
# 16 . . - . . .
GR-t-66 - S - c C, R - I - 5'? - ;2 - O GR-I-68 . _ _ . . O . M/6 ._ . . _, _ GR-I - 6o - C -
/JJA .. _ ...
GR -l - 6 t - O - Mll7 G R -l - 6+ - O - U /A . .. -..
--. .-.. . X. R - I - 'i 6 ..- .. . .
- O -
M/A . .. K. R 98 .. ...
- 0 -
N JA . . . - . . . x R-l - 62 .... O M1A
& .Oa ee.- .W6 ee m* - .. +..g. -. . - '+8.. u.# . b.e. . ..W .e.u M .g
- 4. .f .Oc Pa :-b 6 x 3 p r3 E d !
II
. _ . . . . _ . . .o . . . _ .
.. . . _.. .T... 4.41 .I. n.. dica 4 init A/o.-led. :.
(. . . . _ _ . _ Deb 4s Ib lificJ : o l ... .. .._...._. .To +a I .ori s mal . [
.g % .
l l
.*9 e.. . . , yy 1 .. . . . . . . . . . _ .
a.
. < . m . ... .o.: .A, . . . .
gf.g.ggg , , ..... .. ..,. .. I _ - _. . _ _ ~_____ _ _____. , ___ _. _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. .___ _ _____. _ _ _ _ _ _ .
S')skeim'. R HR Kee he : :n" . Flo ne.J U r, Lhea4 ions Ma.feb,$ . .. :
. --. .Weld Mo,n bcr~ ' 'Ind sc.a 4 mns : . Oriynai Oc-Re4s: --
'Ok H R-t -s .
O T. .. HIR . OR HR-t- F; - I' .- _ o _ . . . _ _ _
. _ D RH R t 7 . . . . . . _ . _ .
O - N)A ... ORHR-l-lO - 0 - MJA OSR H R - l -
'l O 0 5 p v P l 8i R -
1 O O spw p-I- S - 1 - O - - - . _ - _ . . ___.. .. . . . O S R H P = l
- 5 f.;
O - U)R ......i. __ . OPu9-I-IC - C -
/b _ . . .
I t
. _ __ ....... _o.T 4a. l .L.p'ai,-5 hamina J ; 9 . . . .. ,i
.. --_T*. 4. .s. I... rn d s ed 4 :eng bio... .l ed. .:.
W . . _ _ . __.
. . _ . . ;... . O O... IIbIOd C 1*. 6 S 1 C'e IT f C .' . . . . . .
.* ,e t
. . - ~ . . .
* '~-=
e . .. . . . . . . . _ _ 4 ~ 4 - s: o.d*J c.Tm/.43;.. . . ~ . . j Z ., A ,.;,. g ' w 'y . , ,,
- . . - ~ _ _ . _ . _ _. _ _ . _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ . . . . _ . . . _ . _ . . _ . _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ .
Sy . 4vrn : Rewe M % See be : un"= . ..
. . . _ _ ;._ F lo .M e.J u. r, skealic,,3 ma4eb,9 .
i _ . . . _ _ .Weid Main beri Ind sca bons : . Original Oesce4s : ,
, KR-1-3 -
O . A//A ! VR-\*\f . .
.I l .. ..
0 .- . . _ .
- R-t-3 ? - 0 -
^//4 .
K R- I- t4 - 0 . . . . . . A>)g ... - K R -l-R o ._._.. O . ._._.. M/S . _ . . _ . . . . . V R - t - 3 L, - C - AIR
'._._ K. R - l - 4 2 -
O - M19 _ .. t
.--...o T 4a.I . Reg'a;.-6 haminad*.
7 . . . - - . .. i, T. As I rn dses fin,s Mo-1ee! : I To +a I o r , 'a m, ) . De.nd s rL {if,ad : o . ..
~*
. . . ..%.......~.._.... .; . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
r
- - < ~ . . s s.w ~ - . u.:. m w .. .
Sy s 4em : RHR
, 6pe 5 ne : :2d" .
P 1 6 R e. d U . r, Lijica-brons Mafche.g . . _ . .
. _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . We\d Alain ber" Iwd sc.a 4-ions : . oripaI Oc G 4s: _ . . _
.___ -.. O'R H R - l- 2 0
- 1 o _ _ _., _ . ! .
OSRM R -l - 9 - IC '
't 5
D3R HP-!- to - I O i osespel-II -- 4- .. _.- - - I
.. _ . 7 I .
t
. . . . . . _ . . . . . T o_4. 6. I._. h e'.;c5 ha mina J : . .
9 . . _ . . . _ .
'T. 4.a. l_.In d i ca lims .
M_o....l e.c! : 16
.- . ..... . .. To +s L.D r n :s ma i beM4s 1L kiford :
S . . ,
.. .. i .
ee=.- -.4m*e 6 . , . , . l-- - -
.h.5 M -..eGe- . g. ,
*=he 6 W-4+g.6 *. . b.e . _
~ ~ ~ . . . % ~ - . -..
K' - ~ - - ...- .. -- . .
*._.. :t,g;;2 A g.,.
L ' - cm.L;6 G rh.. -
.-- , , - . - - - - - -.,. , - - - - , , ...-.--..-,---,n-
& s 4 cms; Reeirgidan , C6rc Sg,,3 Bee he : 1a .
P l o 4 c. d U . r, Inkealenh Ma-feb,a3, . .___. I _ . .Wcid Mom ber! - Ewd se a f son s :
. . orspal OcTee.4s : .
GR-t-4 t - o . .
^'h9 ._ _. . !_
t
. ?.. .. .. ._ ..
Cm.R-\-54 . . _. O - b) )f) ... WR-t-l6 . 4 ..-_ 2 .. - K R -i- 18 - 1
- I -
W R - t -E l - O - MIR . . . . _ . . . . x R - I -22 - O - d 19 .... _ _ . . . _ _ . . _ ~ Des - i - 7 . 0 - CIA ..... . . . ... 1.
.._.__._. D C.s -I - 8 __ . . . ..
O ' Ul6 ._ C 3-f -L9 , c - u le .
. iy . . . . = . ..
. . . .e+ . m... .. _
t
. . . . _ _ _ _ . ..~I~ . o. 4. 6. I .. &p' air 5 ha men; J ; Io .
. ..._ ..--T*. .4.s. I - .rn.. eh ca f .ws bi.o _1 e. d. :. S . .
.. . ._._.__ Zo Ea I._Or i s ma I .
DeicEds I ch Eihd 3 ._. . .__ ,.
. . , , . . i t . . . . . . . _ . .' *" ~ ' **
i 7-- - , . . - . O OD*.. e e .6. h.e-M. g- g w .m.@M w . . - . .g , yg, p.. gG-+6 m
- d h.*48.*W T* '
A c. - . . v. .ss - ,.. ., . Ag,i;. .,ggg :, , , y.
X. VERIFICATION OF PIPING SYSTEMS DUE To OVERLAYS i l l l t l i l l . . -- . _ _ . .
FINAL VERIFICATION BY EN DES
- PIPE SHRINKAGE STRESSES CAUSED BY WELD OVERLAYS A. CONSIDERED TO BE SAME NATURE AS THOSE THAT OCCUR DURING CONSTRUCTION B. CLASSIFIED AS SECONDARY C. CONSIDERED AS ONE TIME RESIDUALS D. WILL BE DISSIPATED DURING SYSTEM SHAKEDOWN
, , STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE PIPING SYSTEMS INCLUDING VESSEL N0ZZLES, PUMP N0ZZLES, AND PENETRATIONS IS NOT COMPROMISED e ADDITIONAL WEIGHT ON SYSTEM DUE TO OVERLAYC IHE EFFECTS ON THE SEISMIC ANALYSES ARE INSIGNIFICANT
, ,THE SEISMIC ANALYSES ARE NOT INVALIDATED
~ . , -}}