ML20084K323
| ML20084K323 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 12/11/1970 |
| From: | FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19289B371 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8305190279 | |
| Download: ML20084K323 (59) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:r a 1 e 4 . . 's . O O 2 FLORIDA P0'WER AND LIGHT COMPANY TURKEY POINT UNIT 3
. DOCKET NO. 50-250 PRELIMINARY DRAFT OF CONTAINMENT DOME REPORT llb lt.: ~ - f ', - c3
,J A,s % (, fj n, f , 'A 9 1
l
\:
\,,
fq,x 9, 3 ; Gl T.' (,% NgT ('
' 8305190279 710359 . ,
PDRADOCK05000g 3CQ'J s - s
..- . . .. . , ..... . z
_-_w.
r _
.'. e, , *, .
y) -'- Gr TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1-1 2.0 DOME AND CONSTRUCTION DESCRIPTION 2-1 2.1 Dome Description 2-1 2.2 Construction Description 2-1 3.0 FIELD OBSERVATIONS AND INVESTIGATION 3-1 3.1 Initial Observations 3-1 3.2 Dome Concrete Coring and Removal 3-2 (Before Detensioning) 3.3 Detensioning of Tendons 3-3 3.4 Results of Instrument Readings During 3-3 Detensioning 3.5 Dome Concrete Removal and Surface 3-4 Preparation 4.0 MATERIALS INVESTIGATION 4-1 5.0 ANALYTICAL INVESTIGATION 5-l
.5.1 Crane Loading 5-1 5.2 Temperature and Moisture 5-2 5.3 Sheathing Filler Pressure 5-2 5.4 Radial Tension Caused By Prestressing 5-3 5.5 Unbalanced Loads From Prestressing 5-4 5.6 Construction Joints 5-5 .
6.0 REPLACEMENT OF CONCRETE 6-1 1 l i s
' ' "'*I'
- .- . . - . . ... .. --...m .. ee i *. T-*w t e** A'F"O 's'+ F '"#. *' H ." TT 'Y % W "* ;I N ". 'D *#
d
g-- ,,...................s......n o o
. :1. ' : .'
LIST OF TABLES Table Title 3-1 Containment Structure Dome (Sheets 1 Coring Log Summary 2 & 3) (Before Detensioning) 4-1 Tabulation of Design Mix Quantities 4-2 Chemical and Physical Tests Of Cement In Accordance With ASTM C-150 4-3 Fine And Coarse Aggregates Tested In (Sheets 1&2) Accordance With ASTM C-33 4-4 Water Analysis 4-5 Ice Analysis 4-6 Air Entraining Agent 4-7 Water Reducing Agent 4-8 Concrete Physical Characteristics 4-9 Compressive Stength (Uniaxial Compression) 4-10 Tensile Strength (Split Cylinder Test) 4-11 Tensile Strength (Uniaxial Tension Test) 4-12 Uniaxial Tension Tests 4-13 Uniaxial Compression Tests 4-14 Biaxial Compression Tests 11 t,
_, , y ,- -,
~
o o
- . "
- l" .
LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title 2-1 Containment Dome Geometry 2-2 Construction Sequence 2-3 Tendon Layout 3-1 Dome Coring Results 3-2 Contours of Deepest Delaminations 3-3 Tendon Liftoff Values , 4-1 Concrete Specimens 5-1 Crane Location 5-2 Thermal Gradient 5-3 Radial Tension 5-4 Unbalanced Loads From Post-Tensioning 5-5 Loading Areas 5-6 Meridional Stress At The Outer Surface From Dome Post-Tensioning 5-7 Circumferential Stress At.The Outer Surface From Dome Post-Tensioning 5-8 Meridional Stress At The Outer Surface From Dome Post-Tensioning 5-9 Circumferential Stress At The Outer Surface From Dome Post-Tensioning 5-10 Nonuniform Bearing Case 1 5-11 Nonuniform Bearing Case 2 5-12 Plexiglass Dome Without Load 5-13 Plexiglass Dome With Load 5-14 Axisymmetrical Simulation Of The Meridional Construction Joint iii i -_ _._...._.__,m
,l
'l .
'}
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1 i This report describes the Turkey Point Unit 3 containment dome, delamination of the dome concrete during post tensioning of tendons, the subsequent in-vestigation and analysis of this phenomena, and the repair and test program. When about two thirds of the dome tendons had been tensioned, it was noted that concrete cracking and sheathing filler leakage was developing and that in some areas of the dome, the concrete felt springy when walked on. The dome was struck with a sledge hamm'er and, in some areas, it sounded as if it were hollow. The concrete was locally removed in some of these areas and shallow (approximately 1/2" to 4") delamination planes were found running almost parallel with the surface, but eventually intersecting it. A full investigation was begun to determine both the extent and'eause of the delaminations, and to cover the following: 1.. Construction Procedures
- 2. Core Sampling
- 3. Materials Properties
- 4. Analysis of Loads During Construction As a result of the investigation, it has been determined that inadequate contact in the meridional construction joint together with unbalanced post-tensioning loads, were the major cause of the delaminations. After the post -
tensioning was complete, there was no evidence that the dome was not capable of indefinitely resisting the applied loads. From detensioning there was no detectable loss in the tendon forces due to the delaminations. Concrete replacement procedures have b'een prepared and will include modifi-( cations to the original placement procedures shown to be desirable during ( the analysis of the delamination causes. l j The completed dome will meet performance requirements and the adequacy will be j demonstrated during structural tests. The firm of T. Y. Lin, Kulka, Yang and Associate, the consultant in the design of the containment, has participated in the investigation program and the concrete replacement method selection. 1-1 L_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . .., - -,. - m.w ._, ,-. - , _ , . - . - . . .
- 4. . . _
2.0 DOME AND CONSTRUCTION DESCRIPTION 2.1. DOME DESCRIPTION The containment is described in FSAR, Section 5.1.2 and shown in FSAR
, Figure 5.1-1 (2 sheets).
The dome design geometry and dimensions are shown in Figure 2-1. 2.2 CONSTRUCTION DESCRIPTION . Locations of const'ruction joints and dates of concrete placement are shown on Figure 2-2. Concrete placed between October 21,1969 and March 3,1970 inclusive consists of the top portion of the dome and the construction blockouts. These locations are where delaminations (discussed later) were found. A work stoppage of seven weeks duration resulted in the time lapse between the two largest pours. Expanded metal was used to form the construction joints. The concrete was placed with buckets and pumps and vibrated for consolidation. Some_of_the concrete _was_ pumped _through_ aluminum _ pipe, a practice subsequently discontinued. A white pigmented concrete curing compound meeting ASTM C-309 was applied on all exposed surfaces. However, a rainstorm occurred shortly ( after coating the east half of the dome, placed October 21, 1969, and washed away most of the curing compound. A work stoppage the next day, October 22, 1969 and lasting seven weeks, prevented reapplication of a curing compound., i The dome post-tensioning tendons are composed of 3 groups oriented as , shown on Figure 2-3. The tendons are arranged in five layers. The t I tendons in Group I are in a single layer and are spaced approximately I l'-6" from center to center, whereas the tendons in Groups 2 and 3 t l . 2-1
. - . . . . . __.r, . ,.._., ~..- . ._ . _ .
....1...
g f-d v. are .in 2 layers for each group spaced approximately 3 f t. from cent'er to center of tendons in a layer. Tensioning of tendons ultilized conventional equipment and techniques. Sheathing filler pumps, with a pressure capability of between 200 and 250 psi, were used to inject the sheathing filler for tendon corrosion protection. I b i L i I-4 s 2-2 *'
- l. ,
e .
.' . . . . n r@
,. p.
(o) ,R
\J
~
Mt t
% m jtt,-S ,979/
II 6
'k '5 '!,.(:1~.f: /
f I.:h.kj$ . .:f'G'l.$b.':[ k: ;)h
% 9.
.- [~ ::!: .; .h.c.:.
.; " * * * ;5.'} ~
~
Q s ,.;;M:-[. l.. $ -g:.':,5...
.-;.:U:
,',:s .
; , ;. .. ."..T .:: ::.4: ,r;.S.
.< .. :: .~ . :
-y.'.. %
%g Q ?! '... ~.\,$ r :'.'h!!;f.;- Y'.6
.0.$::*i. .....iihi%'it'.9.!k?? :: Okf (l.$'?'O'r:,+;." ?.65 * :l.Y ?
t
- Q % 9
* :. i? l!:N.Qb$ ' h$
?;*{Y $ '.'" .
j$ * ;- ' :i:.:.Y. .-' '
y 8 Q
\
g#g.. -l -
- ?'::
. :: A*~ ~w 0 l
'!. .S. <* ? .+ . d7/N
?n ::!+.y::::::!;p.$' :-
*E
?:h3 .::.- f:j.:
N}.: -h *
. t
. . . , . .:;.sl.-; :r- ::.f:: -. s
-. =
. . . . . .:r ' ::qiV'.:. vu k h W
' 6 a
);::.:g.~:lc:. .G.;y.:
.Y'h;t.:
.r ?. . . . .
s', , .;: *i.*:5' f.:i:;'% . Q:.;i' .'E.1.9 p& W. i .: - . > s E 1r knh-[.hN
'i V .h. , *:- .
p ...
- $'. ,S.. $k. '. ,,X
- :
3:* i
. .?.
4 ^ ,, s4l *N:*<
,~
s
. . . .s.'* S.*i %
.lif.sE;.'.:-[
. kit $i.S.
.*h;h.:h:..
~
- 47. :2.f <r
-1 : :;;:
.Q:::. .:- .'T$:'
k
- 8.W' ':
- ~-J::,$': s s3 g .. - 3.7.'
.::.9. %)
D G) i.:S.k: %S
%g 3 ;,g - 1
, en
-_ N hl . pi, p:I "
=
, \9 l:X:y:- Eqq li N fu f.N s %
- .::::t ; {
N m
, ; R-@ + 6'. y
- q . .y'
^ . g9 ' I x*.s . .
Y \
. .s N k e . ..: 'r i:: ; :
. .x. .- m
. . .:. :.k %,
- re.: ^-
SM. 3 g ag.p.(, -. _ . . ~ .. - - - . .
. 9.;. '
- :: h%
t is:..W: y
~e ss
% ?.R QLW . . - . _
I if
'dhr
%. lIl
~ .. e :.-.-,,,< - e.e -- w. --a-s,.
,t a h ohi e o nSI aY i* I$ '
a ? ' al
% 0-W '
CONTAINMENT DOME GEOMETRY FIG. 2-1
6 4 4 e o' - l
/,4
- U \ .
9-/G-G9
*'# O~**'*
2BG's
~ '
/O-21-9 9 p_ g _,3_ g g
-- + - .. _
B-22-G9 ~ 12-II- G 9 ~ +l * , I J f 3'3*70
'/0g=
Blockout
/
2 s' r e. g 8-/9-G9 130' e PL A N N I 6" 7-/G-G 9 .94G* 7-18-69 /GG 'To.gp* To IGG'h
" G G9 28G'To* 34G
- G-25-69 . 94G* Ta 4G*
S ~ _ _ , G- 2G - G.9 46'To/OG* 7 GD 22G' To 28G' 7.9-G9 /0G' To IGG" r7 G3 /GG' To 22G*
)
l S EC TION
-CO'iSTRUCTION SEQUE!?CE FIG. 2-2 I .
7- . . _ _ 9 9
. A){ ,
, e o, g
. c,.
9
~
/ , .
\<*
~
r
, . \/s i
'h[
I g New. GROU" PL A N ha t a d =n .
. e
. OM/3
~ U
'ut Geoyp# 2 n u
.SEC T/ON TENDON LAYOUT FIG.'203
~.' ',
m s
- h 3.0 FIELD OBSERVATIONS AND INVESTIGATION 3.1 INITIAL OBSERVATIONS On June 17,1970, when 110 out of 165 dome tendons had been tensioned, sheathing filler was observed leaking from a crack in the dome surface.
Nine sheaths had been filled on June 16, 4 were filled on June 17, and this work was considered to be the source of the sheathing filler leak. The leakage location was at azimuth 216 degrees and a radius of 35' from the dome center. A small amount of concrete was chipped away adjacent to the crack. A crack plane parallel to the surface (delamination) was found within an inch or so of the surface. There was evidence of sheathing filler flow on the surfaces created by the delamination. On June 22, 1970, a small bulge in the dome surfa'ce was noticed at azimuth of 296 degrees and radius of 25 feet. The concrete was broken through in one small spot with a hammer and a delamination was discovered at about. " depth. The exploratory chipping was expanded laterally and towards the center of the dome, revealing that the delamination became thicker as the dome center was approached. This stage of chipping was stopped at about 15 feet radius, at which point j the separated layer was about 4" thick. l The initial investigation to determine the extent of the concrete separ-l ation below the surface was. performed by soundings with a Swiss hammer and a steel sledge hammer. The steel hammer was found to be more effective in finding separations deeper into the concrete, and is considered reliabic up to a depth of about 10 inches. f Sonic investigations with a V-scope were considered. The pulse velocity i ! technique does not lend itself to a concrete mass with large numbers of l embedded conduits and a liner plate on the underside of the dome. 3-1 i
r -
' : . - , . . .. .. .. . :.T. . . .. '.~ :. . . - =.' ..' ,- ,
O q) Moreover, the presence of an intentional construction joint 8 inches f rom the liner plate further diminishes the reliability of the pulse velocity technique. The reflection method of ultrasonic examination used in metals has not been perfected for a heterogeneous mass such as cancrete. A method of sonic induced vibratory resonance of concrete surfaces was tried but proved unsuccessful. 3.2 DOME CONCRETE CORING AND REMOVAL (BEIVRE DETENSIONING) In order, to estimate the depth and extent of the delaminations 65-4" diameter concrete cores were removed from the Unit 3 containment dome prior to destressing the tendons. The percentages of cores to various depths are as follows: 77% to the 1st layer of tendons 71% to the 2nd layer 22% to the 3rd layer 17% to the 4th layer 11% to the 5th layer A summary of the information obtained from coring is given in Table 3-1. To help visualize the extent and depth of the delaminations inferred from coring, Figures 3-1 and 3-2 have been included. Figure 3-1 shows the core locations together with the depth to the delaminations and the core hole depth. Figure 3-2 is an estimate, from coring infor-mation, of the depth and area extent of the delaminations. Concrete in an area approximately 7' x 7', with its northwest corner near core 23A, was removed to determine the condition of the meridional construction joint. The concrete was removed to a depth of from 12" to 15" so that the difficulty of concrete removal could also be determined. l I 3-2
r , , The following. is a summary of the 'information obtnined from both coring and the 7' x 7' concrete removal arca: (1)- The ' depth. and extent of the delaminations has considerable symmetry about the meridional construction joint with major - delaminations occurring on the south. side of the dome. (2) The delaminations appear to have originated at the meridional construction joint and then progressed away from the joint getting closer te the surface with eventual outcropping or termination at a circumferential construction joint. (3) The adequacy of the meridional construction joint varied through-out the joint because of the small voids and other evidence of lack of proper consolidation found. Also sheathing filler was found-on the joint to within about 6" of the concrete surface. (4) Some of the core holes show multiple delaminations with gaps between delaminated surfaces of as great as 1". (5) Many of the. core holcs had sheathing filler in them af ter coring, indicating' that the delamination' plane is continuous over areas other than. those immediately around the sheath which was the source of sheathing filler.
- 3. 3 - DETENSIONING OF TENDONS Ute tendons ucre detensioned to allow safe concrete removal from around them and so that the replaced concrete will assist the remaining j concrete in resisting the prestressing forces.
A11~ but two tendons, out of 165, were tensioned and therefore detensioned. The liftoff readings for tensioning and detensioning verify that the i delaminated dome did indeed withstand the prestressing loads for over i 3-3
- l. *:
L
. . . I two months without greater than the normally anticipated losses in .!
tendon forces. The predicted prostressing force loss, with assumptions given in the FSAR, but for the period that the dome was prestressed, is calculated - l
-to be approximately 13% of the minimum ultimate strength of the tendons. - i The average actual loss was less than this value ~ as shown in Figure 3-3.
- The effective prestress at the time of detensioning was therefore equal or greater than calculated. The delaminations did not result in a detectabic effect on the prestressing forces. Further, the full pre-stressing force did not result in continuing delaminations attributable to the forces.
3.4 RESULTS OF INSTRUMENT READINGS DURING DETENSIONING (Later) 3.5 DOME CONCRETE REMOVAL AND SURFACE PREPARATION The dome concrete removal procedure is given in Specification No. 5610-C-60 (Proprietary). (This section to be completed after concrete removal.) 3-4 e
3-1 (Sheet 1 ) TURKEY POINT UNIT #3 CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE DOME Coring Log Summary (Before Detensioning)
/
Depth to Delamination Depth Sheathing Filler Examined Present at with Photograph
& Separation Distance of Hole Taken Comments Hole (in.) Delamination Boroscope Nc. Azimuth Radius (in.)
No Yes 1 233 0 -00' 17'-10" (84,b) (9k,l/8) (10h,l/8) (13,h) 16 Yes Hit Sheath h 13 Yes Yes No 2 700-00' 36'-3" (9, ) 3 16 - No No
? 35aO-30' 30'-2" None Yes Hit Sheath 16 Yes Yes 5 142 0 -00' 18'-3" (11 3/4,h) ,
Yes Yes No Hit Sheath, on 1530-50' 13'-11" (10, k) (llh, ) 24 9 C.J. 16 No Yes Yes G 270 0-00' 16'-10" (6 , 3/4) Yes No No (9,h) 16 7 830-00' 15'-4" 10 No Yes Yes Hit Sheath 7A 91 0 -00' 10'-0" (8, ) No Yes Yes 0 15 8 227 -30' 39'-10" None 27 Yes Yes No 9 243 0 -00' 8'-5" (12,%) No Hit Sheath 10 3/4 Yes No 10 1730-30' 35'-3" (10 3/4, ) No No Hit Sheath 10A 1700-03' 43'-10" None 26 3/4 -
- No No . On C.J.
5 Hit Sheath, on 103 1630 -04' 43'-0" None No 10C 1600 -19' 43'-0" None 21 - Yes C.J. Hit Shqath g' Yes No 17 11 290-30' 9'-8" None 29 3/4 - No No llA 98 -15' 5'-3" None Yes Yes 15 Yes 12 109 -30' 18'-0" (11,h) 11 Yes Yes No 12A 1160 -50' 20'-7" (9, ), (11, ) 15 3/4 - No No 13 3220-30' 41'-9" None Yes, No , 0 28 -30' 37'-0" None 'A Yes : l ?- 16 Yes Yes 0 24'-10" (llh, 1) No Hit Sheath, on'. 15 208 -00' 24 Yes Yes ' 15A 2130-20' 26'-1" (7 ,1 ) C.J. , e
. :)
6
- - - - m._ .. k
3-1 ( Sheet 2 ) . TURKEY POINT UNIT #3 . CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE DOME Coring Log Summary (Before Detensioning) Depth to Delamination Depth Sheathing Filler Examined
& Separation Distance of Hole Present at with Photograph -
Hole Taken Comments Azimuth Radius (in.) (in.) Delamination' Boroscope No. , 16 830 -30' 25'-0" (10\,3/4) (12, ) 15 Yes Yes Yes g 17 90 -09' 35'-10" (4, ) 11 Yes Yes No W 17A 780 -20' 36'-3" None 9 - No No Hit Sheath 18 1060-51' 30'-11" (7 ,3/4) (9%, ) 9 No Yes Yes 19 1210-51' 36'-2" (11 , ) 11 Yes No No 19A 118 -00' 43'-0" None 10 -- Yes No On C.J. 20 127 -30' 26'-4" (9 3/4, 3/4) 10 Yes No No 20A 122 0 -15' 23'-1" (10 3/4, ) (14, 1/8) 20 Yes No No (10 3/4, 1/8) 16 No No No 21 114 -06' 8'-3" 22 147 -11' 30'-6" (7, ) (9 , 1) - 10 3/4 No Yes Yes 23 177 0 -15' 24'-6" (14, ) (15, ) 29 3/4 Yes Yes Yes 10 No No On C.J. 161 0 -57' 23A 24'-1" None 23B 1610-37' 21'-10" (llk ,1) (12 , ) ~ 24 Yes Yes No (2nd Delam. Eas6 Side on C.J.) 24 191 -15' 33'-8" (14, ) 14 Yes No No 25 . 26 210 -54' 35'-11" (5 ) 29 3/4 Yes Yes No 1stDelam.hst 27 230 0 -03' 30'-1" (4 , 1/8) (6,3/4) 11 Yes Yes Yes Side _ 28 251 0 -42' 45'-11" None 18 - No No 243 -37' 36'-4" (3 ) 16 No Yes No 29 , 2540-40' 25'-2" (5 3/4, ) 5 3/4 Yes No No 4 30 Hit Sheath (1 3/4, ) 14 Yes Yes No 31 2640-4034'-9" 32 284 -54' 25'-3" (2, 1) 11 No Yes Yes 297 -06' 33'-7" None - 16 - Yes No 33 None 29% - No No 34 326 -00' 12'-10" e* 4 . ,
~
i ! . 3-1 ( Sheet' 3_.) l '
; TURKEY POINT UNf'f #3 l CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE DOME Coring Log Summary (Before Detensioninl g) l, . ;
Depth to Delamination , Depth Sheathing Filler Examined *
& Separation Distance of Hole Pr'esent'at with Photograph Hole ,
Comments No. Azimuth Radius (in.) (in.) Delamination Boroscope Taken ' 35 36 317 0 -35' 331*-00' 32'-1" 23'-8" None None 16 3/4 16 Yes Yes No No h 37 338 -19' 35'-11" None 17 - No No 18 359 -13' 18'-10" None 18 - No No Hit Sheath 3530-40' None 29 - Yes No Hit Sheath, on 38A 16'-4" " C.J. 39 18 -00' 28'-4" None 15 - No No - 40 10 -25' 40'-2" None 18% - No No 41 38 -30' 21'-6" None .
~.e 17 - No. No Hit Sheath 42 430-40' 31'-9" None h 16 -
No No No No 610 -13' 16% - 43 38'-5" None , 43A 49 -20' 43'-0" None + 29 --
.No No On C.J.
44 64 -08' 26'-4" (4 , ) ,. 16 No No No - 45 770-45' 40'-6" None 17 - No No $ ~ 324' -00' 16'-5" (5, ~) 18 3/4 No Yes - 1 A B 305 0 -18' 28'-6" None 12 19 Yes No Yes. No On C.J. On C.J. g B' 310 -30' 27'-7" None ' C 62 -50' ~17'-0" (5, ) 15 'No Yes No - i D 233 0 -46' 29'-3" (4%, ) (5 , ) 15 No Yes No
!E 294 -21' 13'-4" (6, ) 16 "N o Yes No F 270 -30' 20'-5" None 16 --
No No
= a ee S g
~
A ~' o 0 N ^
/
' s' N
/ N
/ o N
/ O* N
/
/ 4 R= 42.f' o-18j
@h O-IS 9~/7 .
@g,5f
@,- o-2es
- % 0 s @,,, na
~
,, 9.i.
B 0-19k @ WY by,g 0-/2 5.,g 629b d-/7
@# 4y-/G $-a
@, 0-29h
&0-irl , @cs.isk '7 270 2'II2
@f 6-/4 0 29 4 gO'I' j b, Q/2-/55 9 . _gg Gj.-/4 /0 .pf
/4-/4h' /2-27 -iG &jj-jgh s$-s'Jk, 4//-24 //-Il@3
, ' g.gf 0:2 941 /0$,B-/G /4.g Q
~ '
Q og-ia f[, q* ' 'n-
,;_g _,4 bi 0~ll . 'o jof lb-/Gb Q
.tsj
?Ob-lOb w Gh-29h
/4-/4
'l010 0h*/ 4
\ x, ' ' ' o-2/2
\ % /y-zsf: De/aminafion /
/80 g ) #~# /
\ Y 2nd De/ amination,Efc. o 2G 2 DepHi ofHo/e l _ ? VIfW ,/
o joc,
' is,,', if DOME CORING RESULTS FIG. 3-1
o o N
% y
)
1; . A / k JCONSTRUC7/CN. l
~ ;dO/NT ^
j -
.\
", ,N \ , "Toh ,
4'x I L! \
/80
. PLAN V/El1/
- g^a , ; CONTOURS Ol'IN.I. PEST j del,AMINATIONS l ,,
j f:g7, , L-M FIG. 3-2
o l O l 1 l 1 40-. 35:: Average of / : 109 Tendons = 66.3 'f l l So-- :
't g:: !
$ y.:. .
l
~
m:: .. l q .. o 20- .
>, t ..
g ..
-o /5-
/0--
-A . g::
o l So at 62 63 64 SS 66 G7 68 G9 70 Defensioning Liffoff Forces Expressed as a Percenfage of. . Ulfimefe (Average of Bo7h Ends) l* l TENDON LIFTOIT VALUES FIC. 3-3
- ai~
a9 ev-+ -+ww ww- wy. , - ,yp-p y>-- -----w--- -y .,,c--,-- - -- r -
~w ---ar .w*w---.,- -gw---w..-,, -
---r- -- -T ----w---r
. ' . ; M . ;... ...' :::: . . L ':....)
em
.. 9 b _
U
-4.0 ' MATERIALS INVESTICATION jui extensive study was made' to recheck the adequacy of, the Turkey Point concrete to perform its intended function. The study involved document-ing the physical and chemical properties of constituent materials,.
together with standard testing of specimens prepared with the concrete design mixes and tests not normally required. To establish a compara-tive basis, information on other concretes.within Bechtel's experience arealsoi.nfluded. Table 4-1 shows the concrete design mixes for Turkey Point and other structures. The 2P5 mix is applicable for concrete placed before October 21, 1969. The delaminated dome concrete was formulated to the 2P6 design mix. Table 4-2 shows the chemical and physical tests for the cements. The Turkey Point Cement conforms to the requirements of Type 'II cement. Low heat of hydration cement (combined limit- of 58% on tri-calcium silicate'and tri-calcium aluminate) was not specified for Turkey Point. (The ASTM' limit of 58% is optional and applies only when specifically requested by the user). However, control of the concrete placement temperature at 70 F was specified and "Retardwell" was used to slow down the rate of hydration of the cement. Table 4-3 shows the properties of the fine and' coarse aggregate for Turkey Point. The coarse aggregate was specified as 1" minus since larger sizes were considered too absorbtive. Tables 4-4 and 4-5 show the chemical analyses for both the water and ice used in the mixing of the concretes. In all cases the water and ice are suitable for their intended purpose. Table 4-6 lists the air entraining agents used in the various concretes and Table 4-7 lists the water reducing agents. All are within specifi-cation requirements. Table 4-8 shows the physical concrete properties based on initial testing which was performed to verify the adequacy of the design mixes for their k 4-1
I
"^ '
- p. g _i
- V V l l
intended use and to.obtain design data for_ creep, shrinkage, etc. With' i the exception of.the lowcr splitting tensile strength on Turkey Point all other properties are comparable. However all calculated tensile stresses _are considerably lower than the values given in Table 4-8. _ b Tabic 4-9 shows the comparison of uniaxial compression strength for concrete cylinders cast during dome concrete placement and also for concrete taken from the delaminated area of the Turkey Point Dome. All cylinders sampled from concrete when cast show strengths exceeding 5000 l psi. Table 4-10 shows additional splitting tensile strength results for.the various concretes. Comments are the same as for Table 4-8. Table 4-11 shows the results of direct tensile tests on concrete taken from the dome. The average of 8 tests was 352 psi. As is common, the direct tensile strengths are less than those_ calculated from the results of the cylinder splitting tests. Another series of tests were performed to determine the stress and strain values for uniaxial tension and compression given in Table 4-12 and 4-13. To provide evidence that a state of biaxial compressive strain would not lead to a condition more critical than that indicated by uniaxial com-pression tests, a series of. tests were performed. The tests were made by placing a concrete cylinder with a membrane around it in a pressure cham-ber. The chamber could apply an essentially frictionless pressure load to the cylindrical surface while the ends remained free of load. There was a test technique problem in preventing oil from causing a premature failure due to penetration of the membrane or collapsing of subsurface l voids and creating a longitudinal tension force. As shown in Table 4-14, it was difficult to cause a failure, resulting from radial tressure I- alone, however the results do show that the biaxial capability of the con-crete strength is equal or greater than the uniaxial capability. I In both biaxial and uniaxial compression the failure mechanism was by l' L formation of crack planes parallel to the applied loading direction for i 4 4-2 - c_
i 7--.
)
i the Turkey Point and other concretes. When loading a cylinder in uni-axial compression, first cracking would occur in the longitudinal direction. Individual columns would then form and eventually fail in shear on inclined planes with resulting multiple failure surfaces. The texture of the compression failure surfaces were much closer to , that of the dome delamination surface than were those resulting from-uniaxial tension. Figure 4-1 shows a delaminated surface of a core together with both a tension and compression failure specimen. This fact, together with the knowledge that multiple delaminations existed in the dome, confirms the conclusion that the dome delamination resulted from large compression forces essentially parallel to the surface. These large forces resulted in a concrete strain failure on surfaces parallel to the dome. The testing was for short duration loads, and strengths , for long term loads are typically 1cwcr. Therefore, it is reasone.ble to assume that the delaminations occurred because of long term loads that caused relatively widespread _ compressive stresses of approximately
.75 to .85 f' parallel to the surface. (For the Turkey Point concrete
.75 f cis typically equal to 4500 psi) .
Petrographic analyses of concrete.have been performed by 2 independent laboratories, namely: Erlin Associates of Northbrook, Illinois through Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory and by Dr. Richard C. Micienz, Vice Presi-dent of Research and Development, Master Builders Company of Cleveland, Ohio. The result of their examinations shows the concrete to be a competent material with: (1) A low water-cement ratio. (2) A good air void system. (3) No sign of alkali-carbonate reaction. (4) A good distribution of sound coarse aggregate. (5) No sign of metallic aluminum or hydrogen gas formation due to pumping through aluminum pipe. , i u 4-3 i J
g s l { O s f o
*e
'.". ~
. e
- T ) ,! .
C 2 I S )
. 2 0
!D P g f !
93 7 c
. ! A I 0 0
6 1 - I 3 W 8 9 9 2 20 3 6 h r 0 0 5 n ( 1 0 ( s C
- ) - s E I ) 3 3
o l S m' IC P e o
- 8 f
0 f 0 0 3 0 0 946 6 0 2 0 0 i s A 0 3 0 1 1 20 1 1 h T
- 0 1 1 1 (
0 t
- )
% 5 t
( ( c e f f o o t t n e m T e N c E ) M I f N S . . o I ) AB P Z 2 k 58 O 0 T r r 0 0 ,9 1 8 5 f 7 2 G9 49 9h. 2 4 4 a c
, o 0 u 2 9 0 20( 2 s c 5 1 1 j
( a R r t Z x a I t e W. n m r r B a u 0 h z 7 t A i U) & C w Q dr B I S ) Z 6 X a I O 2 I . O T 1 M Y J I 3 ) z k Nt e AA T. P 0 e2 5 3 9 f 0 1 7 3 43 (48 43 1 o 5 0 i x G b 0 3 2 9 0 20 1 1 m E I u 0 0 0 1 1 ( w I E 3 E C 5 e A D 1 ( n T d F r e O o t p N O (F o I d T A A I J . R d e A s T T u N ) . . I I
) Z 3 s O s 0 0 e P0 + P , f f !0 v 1 6 3 4 :s 0 f. 5 6 Y6 I5 a000 6 3 - 5 2
1 6 3 - 6 20 ( 3 1 1 p l t 5 1 w g U ( T e h t n e b v h t g e n e C
?
) .
t r I I
) Z . s C c O Z I0 1
- P 5 u f 0 !o 4 7
?4 5 0 I S
Y6 E$ K 3oon eS - 9 2 1 EI
- 7 20
( 6 2 5 1 P R S 1 0 ( 0 5
'K 1 y
l e t a i r x o t t r p n n p
) e e g a
) E h A A t t o s rc er t h
s e t e rt i 4 r g n l o b -r n A a t ea i i e y d n c s e tR c n J ut , c a u i P sr ce l C a Wc d e a r 2 xy in xr F t o m c
/
V ( R r t n ix A E M e 8 4" r 2 (
/
3 1" 1 t h-i
'A
a TAIC 4-2 . CEEMICAL & PHYSICAL ITSTS OF CE!CNT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C-150 A'.~t: RAGE OF U2 TE2T3 RUN ON TE SITE IXJBI!!G TE APPRCX. P!!tIOC OF TD2 TE DCMS WAS POLTC (EXCEPT TOR CA1, VERT CLIFFS). AIL UCER ww RUN ET wb z . .- 7"'CTING IADORA70 RIES.
. AO'N Tn* I' PrQUIFDT'.*3 LISTFD IN PAPr!THZSIS Ibfsical froN rties Cte:-ics1 Froiv'M.ies Soundness Tire of Setting Air Centent Ccup. StrenEth Tensile Otrert NO SO Ioss Insol. CA CA N cific Surface 3102 A1023 Fe2O3 E 3 on Res.
3 3
&C G Waper Blaine -Autoclave G111 core Vicat % ty Vol. 31 71 2S1 3d 74 Ign.
3 Expansion- Initiali Final h (1000 1800)(3500) (105) (2!O! (1(00 2 (2800 ( 6%) ( 5%) (2 5%) ( 3%) ( .75% (8%) (58%) CM/c) c42 /c) 0.80%) 60 Min)(10 nr 45 Min) (12% m .) ( rsI TcIX r31) (rsI) (rcI; (21%) ( 6%) (Min) (Min) Max ) Min ) Max ( Min ) (Min : l'.inX tan) (!*.in ) (nic: (Min) (Max) (Max) (Max) ( Max) (Max) (l'ax (Max) (Max) 1 Er. '12 mn rT. (5610 21 7 h.13 3 16 1.04 2.12 1.16 .22 5 57 *TO.9 ectro 3862 0.0075 2 ar. f5nr. 75% 3322 4456 6300 337 Sesult cf 2 13 Min. 26 Min. tests. Th!s II data not re-wested.
's: A!:=:T A 2 Er.
4.2k k.05 2.29 1 95 1.02 .25 4.39 47 0 -- 3500 .03% 40 Min. 8.0% 1517 2257 4291 TrrE II Ca r:T 22 9
<x: An.n:::T 3 3 Irr. 5 ar.
21.8 4.k1 2.00 2.22 1.15 10 5 7h 54 3 -- 3367 .02k% 55 Min. 56 Min. 8.05% 2383 3375 TnE II c:c::T h.98 2 Er. ry : TAI:2?Z'."" C . 5493 33 Min. 7 3% 2253 3390 43 36 2.k6 53 58.7 .0&% TYPE II CD Er? 22.2 2.27 1.23 .13 -- 3390 e . CC!CAI'O'Z:.*f D 0.8 4.2 0.06% - - 2 Er. 71% 1715 2923 4224 303 33 Tn2 II CE:r.I 21 75 43 4.25 3 05 23 0.25 52 - 3655 32 Min.
- Fach Ucer Test Value & Avg. of all Tests exceed maximum. Since moderate heat of Eyiration Cement was not repeated and the thermal co-efficient of expansion to lov in ec=;arison a to cther cixes,this is an acceptable value.
r 4 . a TAEIE 4-3 (ST!? 1) . FINE & COARSE AGCRECATES ESTED'TN ACCORDA':CE WITH ASTM C-33 Feat Table Dova AVERA~E CF USER ESTS SUIMM BY EACH JOB FPOM TcS*S PUN CN TEE SITE BY AN INDEFENDE:C TESTING IAB VITH TIC For Each Job EXCEPTION OF TIE FENCRAPHIC "TSTS. FI"30 GRAPHIC TESTS PUN BY BSCHTEL (DRFCEATION'S GEDIDGY DEPART:C:T. (ASN Peq't at Sight) AJ/N TEST "TP trITATIO*! WPTY FT. A5610 CO?OAITCW A T?CAITTO P COWAI?TO C C0!OAI?OT*C D FM'T. BY AS"*4 C-33 Its Acceles Atrasien C-131 36.8% 42.B'. S.8% 32.8% 36.0% r.ax. loss = SC% j F.s2. Friable Particles Clay Lt=ps Fine Agg. - None Fine Acc. - None Fine Acc. - None Fine Acc. - None iFine Agg. - None Fine Agg 11 by '='T. thtural Accepite C-142 Coarse Acc. Coarse Acc. Coarse Acg. Coarn Agg. Coarse Agg. Coarse Agg: .25% ty '="". Futerial Finer Fine Agg. 2.5% Fine Agg. 2% Fine Acc. 5 9% Fine Agg. No Data Fine Agg. 0.k% Fine Acc: 3-5% F.ax. tinn
- 200 Steve C-ll7 3A" Coarse Agg.15% 3/4" Coarse Agg. 1 1% 3/4" Coarse Acg. 0.6% 3/4" Coarse Acg. No yFo Fine Agg: 5-7J r.u.
1)" 1.C$ 1)" 0.1% Data 3A)" 1" :carse Agg.
* " C.5%
0.6% Coarse Acc: 1% Max. 1}" come Agg. No Cr .tshed Coarse Agg: 1 5% P.sx. Esta Nortar vakit.g Frc;erties C-87 Satisfactory Satisfactory Eatisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Net less than 95% Creute Irp:rities C-40 Lichter than STD. Lighter than STD. Lighter than STD. 1,1chter than STD. Lichter than STD. Darter than STD. - Fotentisl Peactivity Ecaetive when S e -P, Flot falls (Crnicsl) C-289 F.&C. Agg. - Innocuous F.&c. Agg. - Innocuous F.&c. Agg. - Innocuous F.&C. Agg. - Innocuous F.&C. Agg. - Innocuous to PT cf Curve F.&C. Acc. Sieve Anal F.&c. Steve Anal - CX F.&C. Sieve Anal - OK F.&c. Steve Anal - CK F.&C. Sieve Anal - CK Sieve An.Q sis C-136 - CX Fine Acg. F.M. = 2.51 Fine Acc. F.M. = 2.69 Fire Agg. F.M. = 2.68 Fine Acg. F.M. = 2 91 As listei in tables Fine Agg. F.M. = 2 51 3A" Acc. F.M. 7 26 for T&C Agg. 3/4" Acc. F.M. - 6.8 1)" Acc. F.M. = 7 76 3A)" Agg. 1 " Acc. F.M. F.M. = 7=866 953A)"Acc.F.M.=6.M 1 " Acc. F.M. = 7 93 3A)"1 " Acc.ACC. F.M. -F.M. 7 96 = 6.46 Scuntes s C-08 F. Acc. 8f, F. Acc. 6.4% F. Acc. 6.7% F. Acc. 3 9% F. Acg. h.5% F. Agg. - Sodiun Sul. - l' e Fe> C. Acc. 0% C. Acc. 6.k$ C. Acc. 6 7% c. Acc. 3 9% C. Acc. 4 5% C. - 12%
- Csee!!1e Grsvity and 3/k" Acc. S.G.-2.M 3A" Acc. S a.=2 72 3/4" Acc.
S.C.=2.82 3A" Acc. 3.c.=2.88 3A" Acc. S.C.=2 59 Spee. Gray - ::o Liit. AtcorTtion for Ocarse C-171 ALS=3.L% A33 1 5% ABS =0 33% ABS =0.k$ ABS =1.6% Absorption " i.mcate 1)" Acc. S.G.=2 76 11" Acc. S.J.=2.82 11"Acg.S.c.=2.BS l}" Acc. S.F.=2.58 ABS =0 9% ABS =031% ABS =0.k% ABS =1.6% i
e
.~
o t / TAETE 16-3pEEET 2) FI 2 & COAR2 AGCREGAES TrJ:ED IN ACC0FDA! ICE WITH ASTM C-33 RetL1 Table Dcna O For Each Job , AVEBAGE OF U3ER TECT3 SU3tITTED BY EACH JOB FPCM IEST"; PUN ON TIC SITE BY AN IIDEFE*CE';T AwMJ IA3 VITH THE (Ct Peg't at 31Ebt) EXCFFTION OF TII FET00CRAFHIC TECTS. FETTCGTAPHIO TESTS FU'I EY IECHTEL CEFTORATICN'S C201DGY DEFA!C1"!T. i En4 TT.GT j ' CO'iA DC"P C CorA YT T'"' S FEQ'T. PY AT4 C-M 5"? SE3IO!3 TION "t'EY.EY PT. 35610 rE:TA M 7"T A CCTAMr!T _1} Speific Orsvity and S.G. = 2.63 S.G. - 2.62 SIee. Gray - ;o Limit. C-120 S.G. = 2.52 S.G. = 2.69 S.C. = 2.83 " Atscrnion for Fine A33 = 1.8% A33 = 0 5% AD3 - 0 5% A33 = 0 7% Atserytien " I.c;;. A33 - 3 6% Itanufactured Alluvial Fine Agg: Alluvial Fire Agg: Ictrops;bi: Ar_rtlysis C-275 Knnufactured Alluvial Fine Acs: Fi::e Accregate: Alluvial Glacial Tiro ScgrcEates Quartz - 86) Calcite - 60% Lirestone-100% Crushed Dolcette- Alluvial Rier Sand Sar.istone - 5 5% Quartz - 2C) 100% Quartz - 50% Siltstone - 3.C$ Feldspar - 35% . Claystor.e - 5 5%
!kthod Caly Manufactured V.anufactured Matufactured Coarse Aggregate: Muscovite Fly:nitite Claystone cogrised Coarse Acgregstes Coarse AC3:
Crushed Quarried Kyr. nite, Actincliter l57 of Kaolin & Ment. Calcite - 67% cnrillecite Er;end-Quartz - 3C$ Eolccite - 10C% - sare - Csrr.ct & Expedite J Chalcadony - 3% fr.g Clays Manufactured
& Cisl Coarse Accregste: Alluvial Coarse Agg:
Quarried Oolomite-901 - same - Tale, Quartz , 21 Mscnitite
& He:notite s I ~w m
M
. ". f e a * . ^qQ
- L n 2 9 2 s
( 3 5 8 2 0 7 s 7 T r 7 y *
. t ri ud 3 Ti d
. R D
I o D ( 3 3
- 3
- 0sc 0 5 0 2 2
0Aa E 2 C E , 3
- I 3 0 T Dso o o S cAa 3 C 0
J H 3 C , O
- A E
gsC o oAa C Y B 9 5' 1 6 D C 1 1 4. E
, T N
M 0 g 8
+ 0 2
3)f S 2 Uo S DT 3
- 0
! P O 3
. AEC C 5 2 E 2 2 SX EE I
RM 3 VP IT 0 C o 0 A PN 0I 3 d *
- S AD es 8 4 0 I IE l vd 0 6 2 S S ali 5 3 4 2 1
- Y, GS t ol 2 k I NE oso A IP TsSi
- TP E A SX D I EE B T A E
- T N A
rR f
- A y 0 9 4 1 W E t 3 8 8 3 DS 1
!E iTM n
ia 1 Er PI lC EA a DV ks . N l aP 0 0 ILI A YA B( e
- N s 4 U
B ms03 dAC 4 2 0 2 1 S r a 2 2 T a C S E E T
- 8 O
F aX N& 5 82 2 E * . U 6
. L g k. 1 A M 2 V 8 e . .
, 2 a C 5 9 6 1 M E V *
. A e 6 5 4 6
F 3
)
_ r ho s . tt ) y _ nE d onde s a l eel y .D L rrl %' a $ 58 ctair uS rt e 6. D 2 ( _ a rst %7( _ noia
- e. i C D W t
t :s . l aCieosr an
- f -
__ Dt i O ine _ s F . row l it a uT d _ E de i t
- ngel -
anrl i f - uiai n T ftjytj I 0 - 1 6 5 t
# A 3 C D s T e O T l
;. 7, T
c: s c: I 0 O l : 1 1 :: : : I f Y I I A I A A o
- A :
E K n :: : t l R m m a n u V c s I e r I
\'
9
> + s1 I ,
).
m
.,
- I
~
A.k . 2 3 - D ( 4 - 2
- H k. 2 p
T k. e
. 7 7 y
.t 3 ri ud 2 Tib R -
D I
- O 2 C . 2-
< sO 3
- WA E C a
0 2
. C 3
3 I k' 0 0 S DAC a C D C 0 J H 3 C , D A HsC
- E OAa C 0 Y
. F *
. 1 5 D C 9 E
I 1 T I g ' M I) 0 S 0
. UH S9 DT 3
- r 0 4 Ai T. 0 2 C E SX EE I
RM 3 OF D
- TP C 0 A
RN OI B d S AD e 5 I S Y IC G , lvs ald t oi 3 0 2 k L N 'E osl 8 3 A IP Tso 7 N TP iS m R A SJ ES D A E T 7 T C E I CR A y 0 5 0 C t 3 1 DS i0M U1 T n0 ia I1 lC EA DV a k s . N lap O ILI A YA B( s N s
- U e 3 E nsD 0 dAC 2 S r a T
S a C H E
- T 2
. F aK O NL 4 T. 8 a L I g A M O' O V
'8 7
A C a
- 7 2
.- R
- E
- 7 V 2 A e 1 T 0 0 a t
)
s a d e y whd tel a T. gr l %
*D
. c nair epte 47 t
rr st ( u. c t o i a
.SC D W
- s. .
T.r : or s 1 r. g, cCiei i Dt F a umoW it l T d a , c geldeit ; 3 w_'et, siI rl ni vt [ t
, s e
0 1 A 3 0 D T 6 1
$ 7 ? O
! : " ! f Z M T o T
P Y. T I I T I t l
! I Y A A A A u s
2 T T T W C C P e C C J C C T C ITl : I'
= '-
s
..Q ]
I TABLE 4-6 AIR ENTRAINING AGENT Supplied in- . l JOB BRAND NAME - SUPPLIER Accordance with ASTM Specification ; TURKEY PT. #5610' "AIRECON" --UNION CARBIDE C-260 J G Containment "SIKA AIR" - SIKA CIIEMICAL CO, C-260 . A i Containment "M.B.V.R." . MASTER BUILDERS C-260 B l Containment - "SIKA AIR" - SIKA CIIEMICAL CO, C-260 C Containment "AIRECON" - UNION CARBIDE C-260 D (* i-
- i. _ ~
.*. . k. , ~,
y > %,,) b.-) TABLE 4-7 WATER REDUCING AGENT
, Supplied in JOB BRAND NAME - SUPPLIER Accordance with ASTM Specification TURKEY PT. #5610 "RETARDUELL" - UNION CARBIDE C-494 TYPE D l
Containment "PLASTIMENT" - SIKA CHEMICAL C-494 TYPE D A CO. Containment "POZZOLITH 8 " - MASTER C-494 TYPE D B IMPROVED BUILDERS i l Containment "PLASTIMENT" - SIKA CHEMICAL C-494 TYPE D C CO. Containment "RETARDWELL" - UNION CARBIDE C-494 TYPE D D nO ,
*'s
O TABLE 4-8 .. CONCRETE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS 1 Turkey Point
- Containment A i, Containment B Containment C Containment D Remarks Comp. Strength psi l* Mix 2P5 i 2SD 7780 5900 ! 7240 5617 i 6420 180D i 7760 i 8000 ! 8620 7925 i 70 365D j 6790 -
8720 7810 l l i tSplitting Tensile & > Comp. Tensile ' Comp. Tensile { Comp. Tensile Comp. Tensile! Comp. Tensile '+28 day test.in Comp. psi ,' 7000 473 7000 585 } 5980 555 6100 580 ' 5670 560 accordan with 390 7000 560 525 6100 563 5450 560
- AST'1 39 6
! 7000 l6140 7000 359 , 7000 515 '
5910 520 6100 - - 485 , i Elastic & Creep Strain l . j j ; x 10+6 in/in j
' i 1D i 272 j 277 175 245 336 1 180D -
388 1 372 , 224 332 , (Load applied . 14600D 543 - 387 i ?80 i 40s at 28 days) Reference to app 1 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.18 (28 days) Poissen Ratio f j l , g,d 0
,,E" x 10-6 psi i ! j .
l days,70 xcept as notec Inst. 1D 6.2 i 6.4 f 8.9 7.32 .l l* Sust. 180D 3.9 4.1 6.7 4.52 Sust. 14600D 2.8 ; 3.2 5.4 ; 3.70 i Auto. Vol. x10+6 180D -2 -15 -17 -120 l -2 070 F 365_D -4 -23 -32 -145 t -
+6 ! !
P* o 5.1 6.3 6.9 . 6.8 1 7.4 - {' F , t Spec. Heat BTU /"0F 0.268 No Data 1 0.257 No Data _ Diff. Ft. 2 /hr 0.0340 O.048 O.0513 0.0395 .067 "E" x 106 Static psi Reference to 1D 4.2 i 7.3 5.5 4.9 application of 5.8 180D 4.6 6.6 8.3 (Load applied ' load at 180 14600D ,j 8.8 6.5 at 28 days) days, 700 except as note.
. . o i ...
. . TABLE COMPRESSIVE STRENGTil ' (UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION) 4-9 h
A 3'
~~
Comp. Strength'
- For Cylinders _ Comp. Strength-Avg.~28 Day Comp. ' Cored From Dome For Cylinders-Strength For Test . Concrete-40 hr. Cored From-Dome
! Cylinders From Water Cure Prior Concrete-Tested Dome Concrete To. Testing In A Dry State (psi) (psi) (psi)
ASTM C-39 ASTM C-42 - Ave ~ Ave. Turkey Point 6724 (24 Tests) 6020 627C 9Mos I , 6 810 l.9' Mos . ( Unit 3 ) 4910 '5 5 70 'old 6710Jold 5280 5840] AVG.=6760
- AVG. = 5648 Containment #1 6968 (28 Tests)
L -A #2 7137 (32 Tests) Containmen't 5510; (28 Tests) B s Containment #1 5493 (36 Tests) jE .: +. ' C
~n Containment 6155 (7 Tests)
D From wall; dome not poured , 2 I' e 1
-
- v
^
J 9 t- e,-- -eww -w , w ,,-me--,--,, ,-,-m- ,-,---,.ne- ,w--arm,,-,w-,--,-e-.,,- r .- w,- - - , , , , , - - , , , , , - , - - - - e,,--,,r,- v , -- ~ r~~c w ,,--s y v v
.-(- .,
Q,, 9 TABLE 4-10' TENSILE STRENGTH (SPLIT CYLINDER TEST) ~ Tensile Strength Of- Tensile Strength Of-Cylinders Cored From Test-Cylinders-Made From Same Mix As
-Dome Concrete Dome Concrete (psi) - (psi)
ASTM C-496 ASTM C-496 l 743-W (7 mo.old) 390-W (20 days old) . 740-W (10 mo. old) 360-W (20-days old) ! nt 753-W (12 mo. old)- ~746-W (28 days old) !
" 'Y 652-D (9 mos. old) 473-W ( 73 days old) I.
Ui 3 719-D (9 mos. old) 785-D ( 28 days old) , 562 D (9 mos. Old) Avg. = 745 - W Avg..= 492 - W Avg. = 644;- D Avg.~= 785 D
! 585-W, 615-W )
, all 28
! 560-W,'620-W )
days Containment 515-W, 595-W ) old A , Avg. = 580 - W
- 575-W ) -
- 590-W )'all 28 Containment 610-W ) days old B 590-W )
Avg. = 590 - W 580-W ) 563-W ) all 28 ' 347-W ) days old Contai ment b 345-W ) ( ; Avg. = 459 - W i 560 ) I l 560 ) all 28 days Containment 485 ) old j D' . Avg. = 535 - W I i l l W = Tested Wet ( D = Tested Dry i l
~ - _ _.---c.
t- w -
-r - .--
^
, p.j p
uj - TABLE 4-11 TENSILE STRENGTH (UNIAXIAL TENSION TEST) - Maximum l Job Cylinder Tensile Tensile Source Number Strength Strain Age Remarks (psi) (x10-6in/ in i t i Turkov Point Test made on 2"x6" 1185-2 329 DaEs About 80% of aggregate broke I i I 3I f cylinders cored through; 20% pulled off j from 6x12 std. 1185-1 347 31 About 50% of aggregate broke
- test cylinders through; 50% pulled off .
- [ made on jobsite 1177-2 241 38 About 75% of aggregate broke l
! l' with same design through; 25% pulled off l mix as in dome. 1177-1 394 38 About 100% of aggregate broke t through i 1183-2 341 '33 About 90-95% of aggregate broket through; 5-10% pulled off ! 1183-1 392 112.5@ 33 About 90-95% of aggregate broke 371 psi through; 5-10% pulled off 1186-2 368 102.5@ 31 About 90-95% of accrogate brckej 340 psi j through; 5-10% pulled off i i i ! 1186-1 405 112.5@ 31 About90-95%ofaggregatebrokel 402 psi through; 5-10% pulled off j t AVG.=352 m L
s . a - O Ci TABLE 4-12 , UNIAXIAL TENSION TESTS i 1 l-Age oz - Stress c z - Strain l; c4 Strain' l Project days psi p in/in* p in /in* i 1 l i Turkey Point 28 i +405) +105 ) -20 ) 6" x 12" Cyl.' 28 ! +370) +392+ +110 ) +108 4
-20 ) -22 28 l +400) +110 ) -25 )
i i i i i 'i Turkey Point 11 mo, +330) +80 ) -22 ) NX core-From 11 mo +365) +347 +105 ) +93 -25 ) -24 Dome Concrete l Containment 42
+490) +90 ) -20 )
21 +4 2 0) +455 +125 ) + 108 -16 ) -18 A 6" x 12" j Containment B Containment 80 +404) +70 ) -15 ) C 75 +410) +408 +75 )+72 -16 ) -16 6" x 12" 73 +415) +72 ) -16 ) Containment 28 +340) +76 ) -08 ) t s D 28 +300) +321 +64 )+69 -08 ) -9 ! 6" x 12" 28 +324) +66 ) -12 ) !
- Smallest strain at ultimate load. Some specimens continued to strain while maximum load was held.
+ Average l
l
. , , - - + . --
r v r,,-
. , )
TABLE 4-13 UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION ' TESTS Project Age z -Stress C z -Strain C
&-Strain days psi p in/in p in/in Turkey Point 28 -5500 -2700 +450 0 5000 psi 6" x 12" cyl. 28 -6030 -2650 +400 @ 5000 psi Containment 2l 1 -6700 -2000 +350 @ 6000 psi
-2000 +475 @ 6000 psi 6" x^ 12" 21 -7000 Containment B
6" x 12" Containment 61 - 7050 -1850 +550 0 6000 psi C 56 - 6600 -1850 +400 0 6000 psi' 6" x 12" Containment 48 - 6550 -1850 +550 @ 6000 psi D 48 - 6800 -1750 - +400 @ 6000 psi 6" x 12" 1
*2 1
l v Q - Y uns==-- _ --- ---_.m
# . m ,-- e m e, mL 4eme , _a_._ m-m.m- m e t
.-.....~..,.......m
- 'r '
V V s TABLE 4-14 BIAXIAL COMPRESSION TESTS 1 Project Age dr -Stress cz -Strain c4-Strain Remarks i days psi 9'in/in p in/in l-t Turkey Point 26 -6000 +545 - Indicative 6" x 12" cyl. of ultimate biaxial con-crete stress 25 -5300 +300 - Possible failure due to hydraulic fluid in void 25 -4700 - - Cracked near end due to failure of membrane Turkey Point 11 mo -4700 - - Tensile NX core break,pos-From Dome , sible fluid Concrete penetration 11 mo -6000 +1200 - Good failure of concrete Containment 45 -4600 +700 - No failure A ' No cracks 6" x 12" 28 -7500 +1200 - No failure 4 l No cracks i Containment Membrane 40 -5550 +530 -1030 failure caused D crack .in con-6" x 12" , crete O <
< CF C~
f 4 <
.E
,D
-. 9' h 4 a A ai
O O e 5
, ,s? . .
l 0a o$US$z 22 585mxE
's W80
- A: - : , "x~3b82 se 7 gaggcm e
1 .
.. ~.
O O 5.0 ANALYTICAL INVESTIGATION In-order to determine why the containment structure dome delaminated various analyses were performed. These analyses covered all the known items which could have' caused the delaminations or been a contributing factor. 5.1 CRANE LOADING A 50 ton Bay City truck crane was set up at the apex'of the dome 1 month af ter completion of concrete placement and 4 months before the start of post-tensioning, for handling tendons and tendon' installation equipment. The crane location is shown in Figure 5-1. The crane loads were resisted by the outriggers. The dead load for a single outrigger is 13K. Considering the rated 5.5K lifted load'at a radius of 70 ft. an outrigger downward load of 17.5K results. The dead load, together with a 50% impact factor on the lifted load, yields a maxi-i mum downward load of 39K. " Local Stresses In Spherical Shells From Radial Or Moment Loadings" by Bijlaard, Welding Research Council Bulletin No. 34 was used to estimate the stresses from the 39K concentrated load. In the analysis the shell was assumed to be 31" thick with the initial 8" pour neglected. A dome radius-of 89' and a 2' diameter loading area was also assumed. The predicted stresses are as follows: Maximum Meridional Flexure: 86 psi Maximum Hoop Flexure: 26 psi Maximum Meridional Membrane: - 11 psi Due to the low magnitude of the calculated stresses the crane is not considered a significant contributor to delamination causes. e 5-1 +-
-l . /~')
v
/"'i V
5.2 TEMPERATURE tND MOISTURE An assumed worst temperature gradient (for compression on the outer surface) is shown in Figure 5-2. Using the following formula the peak sompressive stress on the outside face is predicted to be; AToE " 36(5.x10-6) (4.5x10+0) = -1080 psi o " l-v (1 .25) The stress distribution will be similar to the temperature gradient plot with a tendency to reduce to very small values within 4" from the surface. To simulate a condition of wetting for'a prolonged period of time, the following tests were performed. Four concrete specimens, approximately 10" x 10" x 4", removed from the dome were soaked in water. Using a Whittemore strain gage, 3 of the specimens were found to expand to a strain of 167 p in/in after 14 hours of soaking. After 40 hours of soaking the specimens remained constant. with an accumulated strain of 233 p in/in. One of the 4 specimens had very little change in dimensions. Converting the strain to stress yields cE , (233x10-0) (4.5x10 ) = -1400 psi - if-the specimen would have been fully restrained. The stresses from temperature and moisture do not peak simultaneously since one tends to reduce the other. Both are primarily surface effects and they would not cause delaminations 15" in depth. However there is a poss-ibility that these two items could have been a contributor in causing shallow delaminations. 5.3 SHEATilING FILLER PRESSURE i One of two pumps used for sheathing filling had a stall pressure of 250 psi with the other lower. With all vent valves closed the pressure in 5-2 7
.. G,,
the' sheaths would not.have exceeded 150 poi due to head losses. In a
'few isolated cases the vent valves were closed, however with only a few tendons affected, this is not of concern. Since the lowest known temperature of the filler during pumping was 90 F, it was assumed that the filler had zero pressure at 85 F. Thermocouple measurements have indicated a temperature of 97 F at an 11" depth when interpolating between the inside and outside . readings. -Through past testing the filler pressure has been found to' rise 8 psi for each 1 F change.
Therefore it is possible that a 96 psi pressure could have existed in the sheathing. A finite element analysis was performed subjecting a. portion of concrete with a 4" diameter hole 11" deep to a pressure of 100 psi. The analysis indicated that the peak radial stress would be 80 psi at the edge of the hole with the stress rapidly decreasing away . from the hole. The radial tension is not high enough to case delamina-tions and a direct tension load of this kind would not have caused the multiple and shallow delaminations actually found above the sheaths. 5.4 RADIAL TENSION CAUSED BY PRESTRESSING Since the tendons are not located on the outside surface, radial tension will exist near the outside face of the concrete. To estimate the magnitude of radial tension the analytical calculations were done in two parts and superimposed. The maximum radial-tensio'n should exist near the upper layer of tendons, which are 11" from the outer surface, because this is the maximum thickness of concrete without direct radial compression from the tendons. The first part of the solution considered the effects of all tendons other than the first layer. Since the prestressing essentially loads the shell with a pressure of 100 psi then the pressure from all tendons other than I the first layer will be 5/6 (100) = 83.3 psi. Due to displacement compat-ibility the following relationship must exist 2 2 PR y PR t y 2 ( 6= C " # 1 2 Et Et t 1 2 2 i 5-3
o
~ . -
t- [] e Where yP is the tension in the top 11" of concrete, P2 is the applied pressure, ti is the thickness of the top layer and t2'is the total thickness. Then the radial tension is Py = f(83.3)=23.5 psi. A finite element analysis of a small portion of the dome was made to evaluate the local effects of the top layer of tendons. The analysis indicated that the peak radial tension was +68 psi occurring near the edge of the tendon sheathing void. The radin1' stress reduced greatly a few inches from the holc. Superimposing the two results lead to the radial tension distribution shown in Figure 5-3. The analysis indicates - that radial tension is not a major concern due to the magnitude and distribution. In addition a failure from radial tension should not lead to multiple delaminations close to 'the surface as were found in the investigation of the structure. 5.5 UNBALANCED LOADS FROM PRESTRESSING
'A study was made to determine the force distribution on the dome due to the reported prestressing sequence. Each tendon group was divided into 2 zones giving a total of 6 zones. At various times, such as when 50%
of the total tendons were tensioned, each. zone was examined to determine the amount of normal pressure from the' tensioned tendons within a particular zone. The normal pressures from each zone were then super-imposed. Since the normal pressure from all the tendons being tensioned is approximately 100 psi, then the resulting pressure also indicates Figure 5-4 shows the the percentage complete for a particular area. !- results for 40, 50 and 60% completion of prestressing. When'50% of the
- total tendons were tensioned, one area had effectively 73.8% of its total load whereas another area only had 28.4%.
In order to determine the effect of these unbalanced loads an analysis was , performed for a homogeneous containment structure dome. The analysis did not include the effects of concrete cracking or construction joints. The dome was analyzed for the most severe case when the prestressing was 50% e 5-4 ,,
7 complete. The triangular areas shown in Figure 5-4 were further'sub-
-divided by using one large and three small circular areas as'shown in Figure 5.5.
Solutions were obtained by-loading a dome at the apex by loads distri-buted over the same areas as those shown in Figure 5-5. .After obtaining this data a final solution was obtained by superimposing the effects of' any loaded circular ~arca which appreciably affected the location under consideration. The following table shows the maximum calculated stresses on the outside; surface, together with the results of applying 100% of the prestressing load (100 psi pressure) distributed uniformly over the dome surface. Calculated Stresses (psi) Unequal 50% Uniform 100% Loading Loading Meridional Membrane - 727 -1389 Bending - 974 - 300 Combined- -1701 -1689 Circumferential Membrane - 876 -1450 Bending - 660 - 200 Combined -1536 -1650 As indicated above the bending stresses are great enough, so that when combined with. membrane stresses, the combined stresses at 50% loading are slightly higher than the stresses under full uniform loading. These loads are considered to be a contributor. 5.6 CONSTRUCTION JOINTS In the analysis of why the delaminations occured the construction joints deserved special attention because of the following: (1) As shown by the coring results, the delaminations reached a maximum depth adjacent to the meridional construction joint. 5-5
7- ,
-o
-Q.
s /: D
\ ,'
/
'(2) - The delaminations appear to have some degree of symmetry about
- the meridional construction joint with a tendency to approach the surface as they progress away from this joint.
(3). Shcathing filler is present in the meridional construction joint - indicating that separation existed. To establish a base case for the dome stress distribution and magnitude, , due to dome prestressing, a shell computer program was utilized. The . program handles axisymmetric loads and uses a classical- solution af ter- - ," + the shell has been divided into small cone frustums. The results of this e analysis for a homogeneous containment structure'are given in Figures.5-6 and 5-7. .The maximum combined meridional stress -was found uto be -1689 psi at the outer surface. And the maximum combined circumferential stress was found to be -1650 psi at_the outer surface. ,
.m To determine the effects of the'circumferential construction joints in conjunction with dome prestressing an analysis was performed using the shell program previously described. The ccastruction join _ts were simu-lated by hinges. The line of thrust was through the center'of the elements and therefore the.results do not consider the effect of an f 7- 1 eccentric thrust.
t*r . Figures 5-8 and 5-9 show the distribution and magnitude of stress at the outside surface. The analysis indicates that this case is even less ; severe in the meridional direction, than the base case since the stress at the outside surface of the dome is -1620 psi. Due to the assumed
~
hinges the circumferential stress increased considerably at a radius of 42 feet with a magnitude at the outer surface of -2600 psi. This stress . increase could have been a local contributor to the delaminations. As the field investigation progressed more evidence became available that many areas surrounding the meridional construction jojat,were not i t J
^
-! j' 5-6 y
/
,f ' '
iQ
; v .,
(% w i- y x of the quality necessary to resist th'e applied loads without considerabic
' redistribution o'f load. FiguEe '5-10 shows a' condition which could have resulted in the formation of delaminations. .Since expanded metal was-
~r ;
used as a form for the joint, voids or. sof t spcits could have resulted.
-As the~ structure was prestressed.high compressive stresses would result o n .
at localized areas. As shown in'Section 4 a high compressive stress will result in a strain failure in a plane parallel to the' load. If the joint area was effectively reduced to 1/3 of the -dome thickness then the resulting stress would bE 4,500 psi, ciiough to cause failure. Figure 5-11 shows another case which could result in delaminations. In this case, the joint had poor tensile capabili,t!y due to the lack of . bond. When the prestressing loads occurred the joint would rotate due to the. unbalanced loading. This condition would force the structure to carry high loads near the upper surface. Again high stresses would result and the strain failure would occur. Eventuh11y equilibrium would be obtained. '
. g.
f-- ._ Two plexiglass domes were obtained to help yisualize the phenomenon of the joint rotation. Oneofthedomeswasdhemisphereandtheotherwas a hemisphere cut in half and then tapdd tiagether so that only shear could
- be transmitted through the~ joint. Figurls5-12'and5-13'showthesplit r- plexiglass dome before and af tsr apply'ing a' load across the joint. Two '
i
-" plexiglass tabs were mo$hted normal to the surface, pointing inward, on
- s. C ~ .
, each side of the simul,ated joint. The photographs indicate that as the load is_ applied the joint rotates, opening at the bottom.
'- l l>- l: ,
An analysis was performed (using the shell p'rogram previously described) to simulate the effects of having the memb ane force d_istributed over a (. small area nead ihb surface with resulting eccentricity. In order to simplify the analysis a hemisphere was used with its equator as the y construction joint. The geometry of the shell together with its compar-E ison witir the real shell geometry are shown on .Figarc 5-14. The shell was loaded with 100 psi in the area included by the 52 angle. The re-
. r-sults which are also given in Figure 5-14 illustrate that both the
- I f ,
6
/
.l 5-7 ,,
i b_ , 4~ 7 ? ,7
- ,e. . -
s
- o. O
~
L reduced joint area and eccentricity of membrane load leads to large calculated stresses. This analysis illustrates how' faulty construction joints 1 cad to streusbs high enough to be considered one of the main contributors in causing the delaminations. :
?
e i I
\ i f
f i
/
l t a . 4
\
l i { c l i i i i A l I i I , i l 5-8 " e r
--=--v..-=.-m,...-.y. . , , _,____m_ , , . _ , , , , . . ..r.,_.___-_ _ _ , _ . _ , _ , ,,, . , , . . , _ , , _ ,, , _ , , , , , _ _ _ , , , _ _ _ , _ , ,_,..,_,. __...-.,_ ,,, _ y._ . _ , , _
*:. . C.
o O s 4
/
u. r ~l 7 5.s/r
, MN '..f_
^ r if/ / '// / k Qlt=3'g" R'=70' Il g O' / a' s
6'Yb'? u/,.;gpc _ T R=89' , s CIANE 1DCAT10N FIG. 5-1 l [Ou/ Side $USBCG
-% i,' w qaine unes
/ /ssumed q ~~
~A r ~= Ke~F _,
.. Una l Bala._._ nce
! '@ ^80 90 /00 //0 /20 /30 Tempemfure 'P i TilErd4Al. GRAl>IIAT Fly. ' 5-2 L. y
.. c .
(,') n G
; rIst Layer of 7endone
-Y T't u e 23.SPSI v a
' /
P 91.5 PD/
~
' RADIAL TENSION FIG. 5- 3 11 N
,d k&l4' .
N
, P 'N_ , /- 3 40% $ , gggg GS Ola gy_g .,,
E 73.87, t
\ 46.9%
, i>
xa7. 39.5'/*
' g.77*
a ey, 59.e7.
~w. ?
79.8f, . ,l 56.8f GOf 43.2 %
' UNBAIRICED LOADS FRO:1 POST-TENSIONING
~
FIG. 5-4
~
, yC/RCULAR
,) '/ LOADING AREA
~
cwren ofcouc l I
,! LOAD 11;G A!!i.AS nc. 5-5
. ... n , .. O G( Qs: + ~p,.
.. 1 s
., .o O .j 2
!&v u i@s >
';!L Q'
\ \\ ../ # ... L.L --
\
i a4o s. k;.
\./ /.
',v
\
q :.) Q l1 t,G13 w
~
1 /t \ j
-}/.A W/ \ \ -it?05 4' ts x
\ ,
u
/ sy\
s
/'-T
\ '
s
/ -
%x\
/
' / '
~
>s
\
N Membrane i % , I Membrane + Bending
~ .
. - -I. . -
~ t O
s ,r. 9s g11
)
my
%s9 L'
~
2n'(_l., . ._ ID'R11110.*;/,1 ':'I PE"O AT Tll: 0l!!: " SU"PAf,1; THO:1 l A':ff I'ilin - . ' ' W 'io l' I C . 5-0
~
O O n U :ss.
;s N M ,. b,,5 2:
,s
\ \ t t i r i
.-/;% .._Lw I
,- p6t'c, . p' W' \ If, [9...
/\ \ 0 t f$
\.//\/
\ ;.0 N
-- f /,
Meml>mne
~
ir
/ x\
N n l'I'
/
, efembmne + Benang f_[l,~ /
\ I
{iT
~
N N mmp 1'_- I
't
' i D f 1 ,I ei__t_
s r 'O y I s%)fl)it vLs .l-- I I ciumn:xemia smss ic wom SUni M: . rl:Oli l>JiME POST 'i t. !O111 - 1 iG. 5-7
7 ' q) O \[ s ; 9 i ri 3 bbss "9
*lf ftl(h E
g ..y
\ .. _._L..,_
I L__..L-M_,a . Li t
+
w
'fs s
\
g C/\ 40'9i @E5 D { 7 Astuinca' .//
/ \ \ '
f.
/ Mh79cs - ;
sy.,/\.m.- / \ .lg {,0
' ,s e 4
..\- g/ - - l Q
[ !/ ' ~ ~ i
\ \V p \
, /l
/ / (-Mentbrane
'\ .
s\ _ ._. . q/
' y/ \
~
- Membrane + Eendina
~ . .
I ' L -
.l l
f s
,u - -- -
P WJ l.9[!'l , s f i g; . t ._ i
.i
?iCRIDIO:;.',L S'J RCSS AT Y:m i;ci!T.
FUI'JACr. FRO:t DO:11. h)Si- t .NL N';i;g: J'IC, ix
s V ( V {.', ej j . : s .), a V '#
- p. ,
e.? 1 i3 s I
/
..- l g ,
~
# ~ "-
ic 1 %
,\
,/ '7p e
m, t;;. .~.
)s ..
,,/ ,
g )* I
- i. w u x - * $!N 00b' * }. $l 0ll
~
.w. ]9* .
f~ s\ I
- \s /
\
t' N/ llr
~
l,' - . . .
--.: V! -
o j ! ....I, 4 'p _(. I- I _ i_ ._ i a 4 i _ h ... l I
- - f it ws.% .
-i
s e
{L3.- .. _. i s .' me) l % .g* l b:S s
- m. ylh . _.
I l l . cli:cc m :,'srift. ST13SS K4 'M i OU !; ' g, p a c? - i ]:U- l'D? E l'O h T-l L * " 14 ' d -- 1 1 (: . 59
>+
,_)
1
- . - ' a
.. r., . .
w.% U., .
. /
o
- n. .
- 6. . .'
.1 .
g
. 1, y. .
c, .
...o.
o e
,,,g 8EFORE R257-7~E/VS/CiV//VG l
q C.J. i e . ' -
= = . w .- _- ___ __ _
g --DELAV1/WAT/ONS I ,;4 y
,y __ _ + .
=- _ __ _
- -r . o *l N
* .c,.
.o
.s .' %
/* .
v\ 5 k g ievswsvr
/* <
.e
' s ?. . , _
L '..*., Y
*x
'b~,l'_
s~. 9x,
/ *\
A/=772R /D67-TBVS/0lV/NG 9% 4 I % F i: ., ;il
< y, c, .. , s... v O
~.c . ..
.c. ,. . i u..
o..
. . c. .
. .,. r. .
- u. .
t... <e; ,, . .
,.s , . .
,.s* .
xc.).
. (> .
. . . % :. n : s :^ , . . :
.u
. s... c. s.
BEFORE POST-TENS /ON/NG 1 '
@ v v vy 5v v v v
- 4.- - . .. . .
,4
---s* , -l ., .
s.d: . ,
<~
+.
- s. .
ro-l
>f . 'i ..
'.'v'
.n.
- g--
.-* r .,. .-
yF ..b .y. & . . ' DUR/NG POST-TEN 6/OMNG
, .a:.. .
y . . y:.s,. i l' ' ' _ _ J' o ': , j_ '
- r'qf: ./-
~
'q
\f o-
- DELAMI^!A770NS N -; ' - 140VEMENi~ ,
b' S.
/~ .
.w y .;:,..
.a ;, ..., . .,.-
. . r> .. .- .. sg
/ AF7~ER POSF TENS /ON/NG <x NON1':ll P0iel : i.l FISC CASE
PJG. 5-11
.,. , ; ~., 'Q, .,. A, ,.1.3l
, h
? :w ks f ,M s* w h' N S' w a
.m; >
o w5-z ., hg-.,my .r 3y t
e a +y
.h, * %* T-+ el*W. ..
y; z ;J; n
?xyW'
~U
;Sv'-pV
\
?-~
,L,
- z e n *%w&
s
,,. ,~ ; F~. J, " w'
.$ p xs c.,
s, u
- b. dp ,? x, d ,
y
- V<y. ' . , . -. .
. , .i + .-pg" . . -- .S ' 7 % .p' o, .. >s .c __ s p % Q +.p4 , " , .g/ f 4 ,yym p ,m m./ j y 'y+<- 5 u . n. ' 4*g-.t .O O_O't' . a_ *.we . , s %: e-
._e.
r .. .-i .n4.
.,3
,, gi
,e t -
- %. 1
.A~ " g% . . . . - >1. % ,P+ [ 9,Q
.s ? ) ?; Yy,4 d y ? , (t i , p' p.+ ,m.
M'y :"- 4,, x .%" & (# c g '.
- r
, Nt .
- 3 m .' ..; c 4'
' '- .e.
4 . f : E M'@'hd kk. [.b QMb, o" S ~
- ? k
- D . > ~ , Y~
T '.kN '* ' , ' $ 3 a
,;M CM j k '
lF < > ^ < ' t% '. , b ' T k) '[M7 3y g "[ +
') ##
gg.p fp;vp-3..n n g nf;M " g y* e
% g '.
f t '
< c "_ '
* $ , fU pyy 5
g n . < n , ~ w
. y. , a . r>d) wt.. w r
n s.
~ .Q. o .. J. 3 c Ji a w
. , y. Tg' s J c
- s. w O_ . ---
y. o q7s.,
,. g ,
s qa. , Y W.. _,;. s c 11.
?
3' ' ;, m y:m po w.y Ax.f t . 3 9,, q ,., y
.w;;.g-.,a, h;x -m.
.v< ,
; ,- - ~ ~ < ,.
1 s< ' N.MM,p
'gy &, ..r.
y , .+ n ..,v..~ ,x,; .- s p.&s.e. , y., ,.r m
, , ,a, %:~ c . >
p p- s ;, .w y, ,...,s ,v. .i. - + .' . ,
.yy,ppg z,sgy-
-* b);g I g, ',
+. , d [^j . j'm g.,.<; ..n i,- +
s' d:.3 ' .3 ... , .Y . . i 4;'S .j w h " ' %de; 4 . N u. .7..12 ( "+ .
%. 1 y a ..
g 3 ,, . 4 ez
% 4 .y .e W.+
- a %w. , * ?. ".,'% .I. '
. %: A.h,! ^
6 [5l* ~k'f f;~*
.-C- . , - s=" **
- T .Y , (_x
- (2:w,v .w ,, + a
.w k f %' '
t
! % N M-M f,,Y \ ,_
i f' .ti: Fx h % k, 7;f,.4. j g, .e ,.' .QV '7.j.j7*g-v . g'. .;pl- ' Q 2-yt
+ li .
w, , yy. g df
.. y.,-
s..
% k h. ; ~
. ; " , -. ? g~, ,. yp; q, r
~
M
!.s .
f.a ,
%)f} %
- _ <
QJG ;*.' ,*' ' e.> nZ y p p yt R p Mt' Gs n '
- rr 4 MM
,p
[.9
. or.. -
.mN s
?
~
M- ' q, v n, - s t.a. Ooss suarscs A: .:.
>,,.,n..-~ . ',gy .;' e# . .p*A. e 4g..'..
o ."Yw ..,
.s -'
'.s s
,. ,; M. ?.,q . d, ,,. . h,%
- y,," .
s Q, . :ql X(. '.* W .,
,~V o.
yj-
-{,y x %e; - y -; ??. . f . s ' ' 4 i : - _.
'.' ~ . . my,, .,wl.S- . _- 2 . .,};;.ap sw
. J. ' e e . ' . p.e
- W . , ?:; :;Q.
3 ,,. . ;. . . . . - t.,
.y4 .. -g.;s.~ %w
.o ,
Wg %'.. pfq&,p'
,) #- ...,n. - . - u
, ; ; ~. ,s.- " >
%,z. . st. ,. . . . r, '. '.'.
~ - -
. .. 4. ' . ~ . 1.3. -
6
.g5. ~.M.:y
.f *
[ ,' h%l ^ * *
5 ' .? . ,
j' l (, * , , ( Y~ ._. , - f ..! .l h*W W V . .f ..' L *-A. { y ll ,
- s'- l
; N o
- < l?
'. - ' < , Y . ."~.
,h-[ *
- r '.Yi *. - . . . ' ' '" ~. . .
. lf ' ' A
~
.. . . , g,,, - . 6. '. ;, - 1. ~i '.e .l.
."q"' ~.4, I . .& 4h[* .< My ' '.I'g V.b. {- .. . * ,;' * * - , '. ,e ' ' ' ' . . * -
. r..T.f.ii I4 -
,-(,'".
'-* ?f n.-;.
4 'l, .' e.w >e ij '\
' ,4; g y" ' AW- . . . .- . . * * ," .'
- da u., ,h y. .',I ', . '.,;,. .. . %,-. Q5. ,=_;t. ; 4 rp ' (' ,,- . .' :. ~
y 's .,9 g ,.4
.v ,.
h y .*;..,,.'.x . . ., .- '. ~ ,' , P',+,.
*, -= ..
- P: .
...m .*
. .; , p",.hf4 t:, 7 m e
- .r.-
y
- %,.ap..' . t. i y- . .:n ;y s:
g;i e ., r
".y . . . *..
9
;,. w f .. ;e; w.u$ _. # ..,. . :w-
.^'
.- l ,'a..,.
.a..x :. w,a.~ v 4.~
p ,s
.. .. e:o- .y. 9 ng.a.c . n.',,e.
...s
+ .;
- y. ,-, ., -
. , , . .e ,,p. . ,
a s- ..*~,.7- : .<p. 1'_&.%.[ .f',w '.& . ,, /g. . .l . 4 ; J. f. :,Q[~'%, ( .'s,:
- . %' . 1.4. fsl I; e , .,l' ,# . .. . . , ' _ . =' ~ ' .. * *~..cy~=. . N. gl.l .
R . f.u.:;' 2 '.;;7
. ' l,
" . L.n n ? ; ; % ; $i i
_'l'. [_ .Q. . *
- ' ; '. . .l .. ? e .
q
- s...,.,g...,..- .sc. .***
n .'...d.._ . d.. h.c : - k."." ". ,,._ ; b ). % s .1
- g. .
N 3q,
- 2*
, T.h,.q %.g.. ,
db.'4 -- TABS FOR ROTATION h [E< r- I' ' 1 n e ; g . m. wm.
- . rcp f.. sw sensuResenT - -
Mi.y l
, ,. .:%, w.g...,r n . . , :. :. ~
.c .-n: g .. -
w.v:,.eg ?a w :
. .e a 3, v .,c : <; . -. + .-) :.i.
1: .... ;~. f p.3p..e .
. .. ;...Q
; . .< . g
+ : :, m. . ; 4. . .
. ~
. g m. r .
. . a- Q 3 ".p%%".[sk a \ ,< A 4 .
. ~[ '
% ,Ah, . ,. ,. : f I h h.
g j '..... n.: '.c .4.,..
,[vf L q. . :.e . %> *..
Wf~ .N. :).:;.QwM . ;nlQ.Q g
. 4 p+y.
>a ? %Q.
. [._ . **en n c A ;
- V M .,m 'y %+g,. r }., % .y". M 3 W.#: i ~ .
&G .~) A*h M ,
.; i %,, - . .
* .c y' % . ' . . ? .' -
4 . a' . A' ' ..
. . . . . 5. ' ,
R \- . O .. O \ \ .. \ I i 8
.\
.-4 B
\C
~
t E% gg
~
$g 05 -
i,8 .. % 2' v. G '
}}g$ '
p.; to
}
\ , c.
\%
394 l W
=
t
'~
l
'?
s,
.y 4
]
- v*%' -SEE Ci* TC},n)
~ ~ ~ '
lELOkI ~ ' to3?N ?'.US Toy *a4
~
/ gXCCP7 J
~
r
.g -
3 . --
.x f,
' ' 'Ririg G& der j
9 0/ ' l N
\
y n
\[ gp: ese vi/ -
r y, K' ' CONST. [ JOIN 7~ \q
.e --
ti rAxis ofSymmefry ' E' f_
' Y___.
1 _
$r .
<r_
/0. 8 "
- 12h * ;
Q G/MDUAL REOUCTIOt] 0FUSEFUL Tl/ICHNESS f-8000-- I STRESS C/GTRIDUTION 07/ CUTER SURr/lCE {Il '\ M8INED /dEMBRANG Q BENDING. I t - 4000'- O - < i &%-ndhf[h - s:.y ' Wy.- . 4000- - u o ". >.. j ,
-8000-- BENDING ,
'~ . ~'!; .
l
' 9.b DOME n 42..e ' i '_
rs f Wl;;;_
.,, g.p
. . .f.f:r.. .' ' ,
.g~'
- hk.: .
- .C; jY.;},;;.f' _
"B w
- 9?l .c.'
I!i AXISY1:1! Titl C41. S ilWLATID1 0F iii:' Mh lilDJ ONAL CONSTnUCTJ 0.1 J i>fST l'; G . S-J'
.. or ( ,
p
*tes ** Lj o \v) 6.0 R1;PLACEm:NT OP coNClu:Tl:
Af ter concrete removal and Init Inl surface preparation, cons t r ut.t l on will be completed by replacing the concret e in accordante with Speci fic-- ation 5610-C-61 (Proprietary) . The specification requires final treat-ment of the existing concrete surfaces in advance of and during the
, concrete replacement period.
The final surface treatment tuthod specified was tested prior to use. Its purpose is to provide bonding of the neu concrete to old with capabilities equal or better than nethods specified in ACI 318-63. The mix design quantitics for the replaced concrete are those used for the existing concrete. Type II, moderate heat of hydration cenent is specified as well as retarding and water reducing admixtures. Maximum temperaturcs for the concrete are specified. Concrete placement utilizes the " preshrunk" method which requires that the concrete be revibrated in relatively shallow lif ts. The concrete must have, at the time of restressing, a cylinder compressive strength equal or greater than the 5000 psi minimum specified for the containment concrete. The bonding and contact at interfaces between new and original concrete must provide for force transfer such that the replaced concrete provides assistance to the original concrete '< (which has a proven capability for resisting the prestressing forces) in sustaining the prestressing forces. The capability for providing such assistance will be demonstrated by measurements for comparisons with other measurements such as the strain values I;iven in the material 1 property test results contained in this report. A consultant on the concrete replacement plan was Mr. Lewis 11. Tuthill, retired, formerly of the California Departr:ent of Unter Resources, Division of Design and Cons truct. ion. 6-1
._ _}}