ML20090A028

Forwards Interim Rept on Status of Settlements of Diesel Generator Found & Bldg.Further Rept to Be Submitted by 781117

ML20090A028
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	09/29/1978
From:	Howell S CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
To:
References
TASK-AS, TASK-BN-78-27 BN--78-27, BN-78-27, HOWE-183-78, NUDOCS 7810060285
Download: ML20090A028 (8)

Text

..,n.

....--~a.-

am.

-.x

.( 9 l

~

M.

t

! i.. :

r.

i.

t r.... e...

si

\\~*..-

w, w,,,

e r..me.

e a

.u..

w nes.4,c mtwoas september 29, 1978 Nove-183-78 Mr J G Eeppler, Regional Director Office of Inspection and Inforcemen Region III V5 Fuclear Regulatory Cos=ission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Illyn, IL 60137 MD*.A!D hW12AR PLA.*:7 -

E:I! 21, DOCXI No 50-329 Wi:T NC 2, DCO Z: No 50-330 SITTI.D22C 07 DII3II. OCF.RAICE FOUCA'" IONS AD 3UII.3LTJ In a:ccedance with the require e=ts of 10 CTR 50 55(e), this letter car.stitutes as in eri= report on the status of the settle =e=t of the I

diesel generater foundations and buildi=g.

A descriptio= cf the conditions reistive to the settle =ents and "the investigative actions plar.ned are docu=ented in the enclosures t:

this letter.

An=ther report, either interi= or final, wi'd be ser.t on or before seve= der 17, 1973.

(*

. %.. d A Inclosures: 1) @.istity Assurance Progrs=, Management Corrective Actie:

Report, MCAR-1, Report 21., dated September 7, 1976.

2) Letter, 7 A Martines to G S Keeley, 3LC-6576, X"AR-2',

Interia Report (1, dated 9/22/78, with attached re;s.M.

CC: Director, Office of Inspection & Inforcement i

Att: Mr John G Davis, Acting Director, U5m (15) i I

Director, Office of Managezent Ir. formation and Progrea Control, USE (1) 150 a

I l

--~~

/

/

Q Dh Y

/

l

~- __.

d lltl

l

~ ' ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~

~~

QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM "4NAGEMtNT CORRECTIVE ACTION-RtPCe7 4ACAR.1 REPORT NO.

JQs NO.

7"6 O NO.

1 &&

DATE e/7I7s l *D65CRIPTlON (Insiwd.M sefseasent; The 3echtel " Foundation Data Survey Progras" has indicated that the settlement of the Diesel Generator hilding has been greater than expected. This has been documented in NCR-1481 dated (8/21/78). A preliminary evaluation df soil boring i

data from an investigatien being conducted by Project Engineering indicated that the magnitud*, of the investigative tests and analysis of test results makes this item reprtable under 10CTR5C.55 e. 1. iii.

"RtCOMMENQEO ACTION (Cetione0 1.

Determine the amount of settlement of the Diesel Generator Building (DOT.)

and increase the frequency of foundation survey measurements to find if the settlement is or will be excessive.

c 1

2.

Determine the cause of the settlement.

I 3.

If the settlement is or will be*azeessive, determine what actions are required to correct the condition and preclude recurrence.

8 RaptRRED TO I ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION CA MANAGEMENT,

W"

~ (,.

f u...y y D" v..,.s.es e m T.

i g

o..

n onta,,

TIPlED CLIENT

'V/ '7/ _f

. Il REPCRTABLE DISOREPANCY O NO

@YES

'* '// W.

J'.

f...

/ / /

fit CAUSE V

f l

CCRatCTIVE ACTION TAKEN

• * ~. *. *. '..

• g... c, c.'s l.la u.)

$i P d id73 QL'!.lliiII22.!3E i

Auff*omi280 SY o.

l e.'.'..t w. --

PORMAL.. REPORT TO CLifNT J.3. Violette l

e a.

S.I. Neisler os s n a w..I o.

f

(

I.7. '.*.** 4 ".*.'."

L.A. Deeisbech

• ';T.'.* * * *.*"." ",7, J. Asaral (Caithersbutg) CoRRaCTIVE ACTION IMP.EMENTED

*';* *1* %,

J.E. 3 ashore (Nervalk)

~.

M **'**

vtRipleo sY o

..w.

e e n n..t..

h*i+a ca aaca.=

8"'

2".kl.%'.8.$

i l

l

~.

- - - -- =

n ve.le3 7e M.

Bech' ' Power Corporation -

777 gas" TMt Pat' sway O

Ann Asbot.Mt.n.gan l

aansaassess P.C. ses100C.WArse u<n.gaadetx Sep'tember 22, 1978 ELO-4573 J

3tr. G. 5. Neeley Project Dnager.

C0K5U!dERS 70'.'11 COMPA%"!

1945 West Farnell Road Jackson, Michite: 452C1-M#dland paits 1 and 2 Consumers Power Compa=y Bechtel Job 7220 Fl.AR 24 1.1tTIF. M 72?c7.7 1 Files 2617/2501

Dear Mr.' Keeley:

s Attached is I=teri= Report 1 addressi=g the Deisel Generater Builli=g Settle =ent sa described in MO.A124 (issued Septenher 7.1971).

As agreed with W.1. Eird on September 21, 1978, the mest report vs.11 be issued November 3,1978.

Tory truly yours, l

.P W r 7. A. Wrtines 7 eject haager

~

7AX/W21/pp es: Mr. R. C. Bat.s:a=

Mr. V. 1. Bird l

Mr. J. L. Corley Mr. 3..W. D rguglio

/

• Attachs'est (3 pages).

3 U 2 5 1s7g f

!O GMTYnuan l

.e e..

s

..__mm._,.._ -.. -.. - -. _ -. _

__y

^

n t

• m m

• ameane

,e

.5.-

Bechtel A,ociates ProfessionalC rporation 3..

.i-Attachment to M.C-6573 l

j SU1 JECT:

MCAR f 24 (T: sued 9/7/73) settlemens of the diesel generator foundat, tens and buildi.g INTERIM RIFORT f 1 DATE:

September 22, 1973 PROJCCT:

Censumers Fever Ceapany Midland plant Units 1 & 2 Sechtel Jeb 7220 Introduction This report su=maris'es the project's actions relating to the settlement of the diesel generater f,eundations and building as described in MCAF.

1. 24 and NCR 1442.

The fill material in.this area was placed between 1973 and 1977.

Constructien was started en the diesel generater building in mid-1977.

The diesel generater building settlements were noticed to saceed anticipated velues in July 1973. The diesel generator building construction was placed on held on August 23, 1973. A diesel generator building soil boring program was started es August 23,1973.

• 3ased es preliminary i

soil bering data evaluation, MCAR #24 was issued.

The actions requested by MCAR #24 are being performed as fellows:

1)

The Teundation Data Survey 7togram, Specification 7220-C-76, has been expanded by increasing the aveber of data locations and the freguancy of measurements.

2)

The cause of the settlement and the corrective actions required to preclude the recurrence of this condition will be addressed after e

the testing and senitoring programs have been evolusted.

3)

The options available to resolve the existing settlement semdttiens

• ill be discussed in'the Correttive Actions secties.

v 1

i f.

1 I

h n

e "O

a ge g

-.._r

_..~.

. i-

'3..

Bechtel/ sociates Professional arporation

~s m a # 2t xx m u. uree 1.

1 Page 2 j

se,t..her 22. 1973 Attachment.to 31.C-6573 Deficience

% Bechtel Foundation Data Survey progras (Specification 7220-C-76) l

• generated data that indicated the settlement of the diesel generater j

l foundations and building was greater than anticipated. Nenconformance Report It:2 was generated on August 21. 1973, describing the settlements.

De general foundation and building settlements, as of Septesbar it.

1973, are shows en Tigure 1 (attached).

,Due to the sagnitude of the sett1ements observed, a soils bering progra=

was started. Based es the berings completed to dare. the fill under the building has variable strength properties ranging fres good to peer.

4 Turther clarification of the fill deficiency will,be made when the soil test results have been sospleted and evaluated.

An independent soils consultant has been retained to help in the data i

evaluaties and f easibility of the corrective actions.

Safetv Ira!!catiens f

large settlements can pese possible safety probless for buildings. A preliminary evaluation of soil boring data from the investigation bei=g i

senducted indicates that the magnitude of the investigative tests and analysis of test results sakes this ites reportable under 10 CTA 50.35 e.

1. iii.

• Dese structures are sonitored for settlement as part of the foundatten data survey program. Bence, any unusual settlesent of the structurs would be detected before the diesel generators would be rendered inepershle due to the resulting distortions.

1 Activities in procross Several estivities are in progress to generate tnformation needed to r

evpluate the feasibility of possible serrective actions. De activities aret i

1)

De Feuedation tat's Survey Progras has been expanded tg. include edditional settlenest data 1ecettees as well as monitoring these l

l data,1ecations meire frequently. Building time rate of settlement aurves are being developed based es this datus for a better under-l*/

standies.f the,r. 1..

p-l

[

Bechtel Arociates ProfessionalC rporation V

D ' McAR f24 1x;IRIM RIP 0A. 1 J

Fase 3 septenher 22, 1973 l

Att achment te M.C-6373 2)

A boring progras has been initiated to provide better definitten of the fill condittens under the building and to obtain sail samples for laboratory tests. Dutch cone penetration tests are aise being perferped under the building area to better define the variable i

strength properties of the fill satorial.

3)

Laber'atory tests being performed are s.

Shear strength tests to determine fill characteristic for bearing capacity evaluation

• b.

Censolidation tests to predict building settlement for the present fill material e.

Soil classifications h

d.

Mineralogy tests to evaluate the swelling potential of the fill material

/

/

This portion of th' 3echtel fleport is deleted.

e beesuse it eontains a preseture discussion of possible corrective action options. Specific options will be included ia subseguent reports following a sosplete evolustion of soil conditions.

I

=

1 I

t i

i

/

=

-.--,, g, 3 i

• '.Bechtel As.>ciates ProfessionalC poration i

3 scar f24 IN"IRDt RIFCF; 1

)

['

7ese 4 Sept enher 22. 1978 l

, Attachment to 3LC-6578 Detailed descriptions of the selected options vill,e presented in subsequent reports.

2 a x6LL

.. itt.d,,,

.,,...z,,,pfa-*::s

/- [

Centurrence %y1 2_

l' Ju/ cap 9/11/6

~

i O

4 i

+

ee 8

9 G

8 g

0 8

I

./

i t

e l

l s.

_._________.__..._.___..._.._m l

. d e. :

I,

. g.,...e se'ee. eat that.et ad'.r?'

. e..

.8 ste -*s.

36., s..w.e,.....

=

e

.w.

m %.

she deser. O e.w..,

e Ibe oevee.r i

1 a.,

~..

n

. ~.. ~. r.

.,..7-s, g*

i.f 1

. =

y

.a

{

"-4 4

t.

j i

g('

l j

1,

~ '

1. "me'N

M."..'

f.

Il

':.., J f

I

)

r'N,..

il

.. g.

~

o 4

g j

'o.d 1

F

': ' F*i.62*.-

c,eneAroR*...

2.0'2........?SY n

. ecossist.s

\\

g

=

nf c

c.

crie)

~

X !; 6 5

i l

i-O fi] ! 4

• ~1.:

I l

pog r

,c.

z it,., o, a

g, Jg

--r.,

t 4

.s r.

-n

=

j i

Mn m'{

le$ f YYI I

.e i

l t

i z.*x y.

y 1

i a

-b.

8 C7,3 i

7 M

h

$sN q

y t=.g l

. fT 3 tr 4

1 C

4 m

s ~....

~TDIESEL GENERATOR

. FA.Ds.

m 1 i !

l i

se.TR.EMEN1" DATA AG OF 9-N-18 t

. u l-l

[l>P*lW f. )

i i

L t

e a

~

ANTHONY J. CAPPUCCI, JR.

3 PROFESSIONAL Q'JALIFICATIO::S MECHANICAL ENGINEERIt!G BRANCH s

DIVISION OF ENGINEERING U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I am a Mechanical Engineer in the Mechanical Engineering Branch, Division of Engineering, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. In this position, I am responsible for the technical monitoring ot two technical assistance contracts at the Department of Energy National laboratories. One at the Energy Technology Engineering Center (ETEC) for the review of the adequacy of the Final Safety Analysis Reports tendered in application for an operating license and the other at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) for the review of Inservice Testing programs.

In addition to this work, I am responsible for the review of issues pertaining to operating reactors concerning inservice testing of pumps and valves and the adequacy of the testing programs concerning RCS pressure j

isolation valves for near term operating license applicants (NTOL).

I received an associate's degree in applied science in 1970 and an associate's degree in Aeronautical Engineering in 1971 from Wentworth Institute in Boston, Massachusetts. I received a Bachelor of Science degree in mechanical engineering from North Eastern University in 1974. While at North Eastern University, I 4

was a student member of ASME.

l Prior to entering Wentworth Institute in 1968 I was an enlisted man in the i

i U.S.Armyonactivedutyforthreeyears(October 1965toSeptember1968). I I

was honorably discharged in 1971.

l My employment upon receiving my B.S. degree conenenced with Bechtel Power Corporation in Gaithersburg, Maryland in July 1974 and terminated in September 1976. While at Bechtel, I was employed as a Mechanical Engineer assigned to the l

control systems group responsible for the design of safety-related instrument tubing and piping and their supports.' This work consisted of reviewing field run

,7 piping / tubing isometrics to determine if the support locations were consistent with the field specification requirements. In tnose cases where the field run

'dnQ/

r y// JJ. G7/ h/ L

/

pipir.g/tubin; was out of the specification scope, a stress analysis was performed using the Bechtel computer program ME-632.

In September of 1976, I joined Potomac Research, Inc. of Alexandria, Virginia as a Senior Mechanical Engineer responsible for supervising and per-forming engineering research, design, development and testing, I have performed analysis and conceptual design of toxic vapor removal system for the U. S.

Army and fault tree analysis of the electric power plant for the Patriot Missile System. This work included development and analysis of failure rate data, determination of failure modes and producing combinatorial logic diagrams depicting these failure modes. Directed and participated in joint Army / Navy program to design, fabricate, install and interface a " Rider Block Tagline System" with a 20, ton Bucyrus-Erie 38B crane. Analyzed design and associated design drawings, performed stress analysis, designed test apparatus, retrieved data, and wrote the final report.

In November of 1977, I became the Mechanical Engineering Department Manager with responsibility for the U. S. Postal Service hardware analysis and design project. My responsibilit'es included managing and supervising a staff of engineers, designers, checkers and draftsmen. Other duties included customer liaison, contract administration, personnel management, project staffing, task management, coordination of work processes and project progress reporting.

In June of 1979, I joined the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission as a member of the Mechanical Engineering Branch performing the work as previously described.

j l

~.

i,

Other employment held prior to receiving my bachelor's degree is described below:

DATES DESCRIPTIOf!

April 1973 to Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation. Boston, June 1973 Massachuseets.

(Coop term Engineering Aide in the design of pressure vess)els for Nuclear Power Plants, using ASME Section III and Section VIII.

June 1971 to Avco Everett Research Laboratory, Inc., Everett, September 1972 Massachusetts. Research Technician. Participated in an experiment to separate the uranium isotopes using lasers. Ran experimental apparatus, did datC reduction, maintenance, repair and design of con-trol equipment. Worked with high vacuum, electron beam evaporators, lasers, mass spectrometers and radioactive materials.

1 E

I i

i d'

i e

1

MIDLAND RESPONSE TO 10 CFR 50.54 REQUEST ON PLANT FILL: MEB COMMENTS 1.

With respect to buried and exposed piping subjected to differential settlement, the arglicant has profiled and analyzed a few sample piping runs already. It states that the evaluation of piping will be completed by June 29, 1979. We believe that at the conclusion of the preload program, the applicant can make a reasonably accurate prediction of the expected settlement during the plant life. The applicant must analyze its essential piping l

for the maximum expected differential settlement. This analysis I

must be at least as conservative as the criteria of NC/D-3652.3(b).

Additionally, periodic monitoring of the settling of these lines must be performed to detect any unexpected settlement. We will require that all essential piping runs be profiled initially and i

during the long term monitoring program. This includes adjacent i

lines located in a comon trench.

4 2.

The applicant must perform a more quantitative assessment to detemine if the nozzle loads transmitted from the settled pipes to the attached valves, pumps, tanks, etc., are still within ASME Code allowables. The effect of any increased nozzle loads upon the operability of active pumps and valves must be determined.

The effect of misalignment on essential equipment due to the i

settlement and tilting of buildings must be determined, i

3.

The applicant states that the soil properties of the l

• fill tend to increase and broaden the peaks of the seismic response spectra of the various buildings. Similarly, other factors under

/

/-N-8 g2/(/)

N active review by the staff (basic g level, shape of ground response spectra) affect the various building response spectra. The applicant

.must reevaluate its seismic Category I mechanical and electrical equipeent for these new and increased seismic loadings when the overall seismic issue is settled.

4.

Our early assessment is that the effect of settlement upon piping j

and other mechanical components may not be very severe. As discussed above, extensive analyses must be performed to demonstrate I

I this. If problems are found, we believe the piping and other 1

mechanical components can be fixed.

If the plant's seismic response spectra are substantially increased by the variation in soil properties or other issues under review, the reevaluation and requalification of equipment will take one or two years to

perform, i

i Y

1 4

I i

6 4

6 rv

h lIM Q. eve.c ci G GO@ Tl* G 50.S H(? ) queshs AGXCO t o. Pm-hi?.- ru 7ni :E~ c.Hhw I%LW.g A'.' oco A.w.v rH e

'~

D e u. Gevyas 8 Wows, hay 4&2 #&+4r hs

c. cr w t

n. 3?a ins., ti pt (cl iwH,67uJ H f*>t. j'b 7/u.s. zo ig

-u. : u n a. c, % a.

c,n,':stc B - na=eio ou ///4 o isi:s M G

,% w.. : :

e i

,s

-( j 12 m n 3./.m Tt a n e z.

c irx ls cc.

i

. +,.

.' fing* gf J,3, s.

f

ra sfeja-

' ll$. ', *[

.s

• y l/c: O /b

'th. " ~~ 'S 7Cist' ScT@bf27 i* 'N/C 41fi W *nYt }t4Alf

^

q e u -r a.aww.> w rn nemo nou. A sw...ns J

pori cf P,uS MK7 & wec utw nc 7%

ech.To l

74 W.

9 f

• Liz.un is scucc-dse x is AcagErc

- k^ri.ris AM8t:. 'To Ed 8p;4C ati &ns7i1G Ca/Vrf M q,

~

9 lbwiY /No cw/ic i%. cs#Aa.c /,v are.x.h.

0vd.tJr...) e,' /M1A)$

sh y Ait! !A R '/ W 4 M

.bkait: e e 'utiel cd /k.. oc i@ci g

g

& w riiv-Di/Scu.~r. e.

. krOfol I, o'. ' 'I'u %.:.f* l9-/ blT,6 6*~ hi.i s Ii/ f d

L o oxs arw.::.cs sw i ro g

eso me a, rr r-iTe,*

• i sc< C':M4 ff 's. ~ I? td.7, JerCr,r:i e( d CC ~D.)

\\

t

?

i.- yc ru u.s f?.<- i+r e namsu.

p m'&

9 J. w q

e a

g SuwsK www Dhn,tr fWaG M Ag r u cii. [,

[f $/d.:.'ic.h'..'

AfICCEO

& kNE,W TC, h i.... S

.5 d

l*,' 8

. $ I' i k{ $NT/44/Q lN

@ $ l 7,'

(o Nc 36sz. s

< zi jp.sa c.s. ww c,eac,uw I

i v ca a ti.. r,.c. ar > _m g

g r,.,: i u i 4,.n e o s c e e,u c,c i. n c,, m a m m.

L i

uIC$" l0 7

'16, A'~ lh

_ yoa Ap a-a,vAm cauma e twet, swu 7:ims c

. exo m a : r n w a y, a,. 197 it.:

fA cv. 20 r

l i

f t

L__

b b DJtM L h i +

w

. -o s a th ng Ltw :o Hs Cat 7 cd 6.' 6w o,;6 : l Ci3tn1

.. h A J '. ) - A$tiG NC-%6L3 (b)4 4wWA ba (,e1 (306W.(., Tet '.,

t,'

pv A C4 Mis.. A.c 5 A vAsE C H >,,, 63 6-CEV s 40 e

I-I *

t.. ii -1 e..

SmuMurCr CVi1 Ds Af?.t b ** T.

.l

/

L-b;*

c.'.t.. wr we.;e 5 t;~a,v4 - 580 i.' INcwx EliwM lin.u.ur cw ne s,,:s cF T-E P 3rri E.i i ;... u 17 ','[M Sc~w:it' DMC /h; <i. " :^ O(sit) ni h

E$b l*P J.. w Le hI

,g s IN/

(,6 d0 h

$I e

G 9Z ON

,'t

?)," $ fed, l 'NW.,a& fr Co #

0$A/C T$$M1 Zffit(/ b)

/f hj

~

/9AiW-s Mr N & / Art.50

, /. a e' 4 4 !'..I ( )./gs' gM[ hd* [A/7,.*

6W3I.7 Mg f[64 $

4 F

t. -

F h

7

.1 i

I t

s j

\\

I l

t i

N ris )

BM GW 2

i L ati OC ~~. />t:.-

~

Q) 0.*?.

.;~tt u f 15 N i b

( P l/ h Q 3 4 :f Aer.; SRV5 E A.. +.

p a a,.. a.

cf }-l,4p,;; 0; u-P flur.:.>:

m,i>r:ye,<,c n,;s i

I;.,

c.

e a. u s,

of db. - k b,~c O,rcs & A f Sgt' b't -

~^

2> G.. Era;. 1.u a y.ny

", M (. Day C

a r ':

\\C. n sab i' c.; pin. g;Srbv:cs (9.) 0,;; llic:: *TC Pr>&CM-t l

=

.i Ql Co,w. Je.: w id J26 /,/3/

s g)fhm,;-cA's&

c/ aseM RAnc, v ~...

II: :. '

15' 000 4 k s;p J c p 9 9.)

i r

de,i5un is* coun2;triid awl /T A*/hApuphp,JT,?

• & 4 ^ in M utpp O e arc

?

I

• /s*I 0. Y l+ CP $ h.

tgf Nu?

s

[

. / ?. <.., a Q V

~

a l

l(.y ~ a u s + % % o - M utt..] & o g) 5

$5 I

J J

I

\\

'/

4Mf*7 8

~

/-;.2. v. 4/ 'L9 i

~

1--.-

.1.._-_.~

t

~.

Me et b T>.em... o....a-p Pw& ws.c4 mr. wr nar -r#r Q>or

~ T..e M..i..'nb;Mo,impycp.m Mu wijoa t%r;+

c.u/.3 T-l C++ 65 mo1,tp.

F4fyiM THE 6 73 p t

~7 o" A kt 4 5 sywss:du g coo,~ amas no 70 vwy 7'N kwe.NwL.

C' e h T, $ 4 W jx 647wg cf A 46,c i %, k.

e< rea w awaw w unw /? pad-

,x isc

" a me pn.,w neix. cesod mna s%rms. Caie :s c

$ cawJcf ftMIA%r Gwocxd) 70 &c Desevt.

s k kdr!7 ' Cf $67.7/tc, [47'f hfjg }ym/$75$ AgeQ C4- -

y f

mc,c o sawmscrbewa% omeurk Nnwevr Mrw i.

Badr, norsw awa #0 M.s o.srssc. ire'+.s M e d s w:q#S'c Apr c Al14.e,ft.4)J+ 'mqY 8ew a

~J

+ sq

• L mL h a 2 L & A m 7'

_77 y'

s I

/

-*-,.-a

---

d=

,-.h..A.

a.

..m_

-_---.A--a m

__m

.e s Ys.

g',Q -

t G. _.

. a...

\\

pgr

(-

E

,[-

h..4 24W

$$) b, Nb.

1 C L G1w,v

• hc>ts.us O W W 2.

\\

h C.44 2. 3 MM w.m eg.m i

g 9

&%' 9,I

'79

~~'

If fib'l l

_cn H u w..w ve i,,9 L

lb

_ (. W c,. + P,.

k_.t,cA d_ 'm T. T i_4 TCT + ScTnvne"

' 9?3 ". M 4. L N.._.%. tvh#"

'w S e 5mAm

,, w I

e

,fu

('.. :rgr % s ra p.c _.. c a c._ _j : &. &.._

-] L 4.

. os s.38 ~~ p h.. n e.h,6 m z igSi 9

l k L1Muur6 fr.s tr@W /A' @ r++

& ='Yd45/

l

. i & C/n yri o Aa... l% wm.g

- ( O s,2.'I:.

't. g + O k t a w (r cl kN

.c,4 h 4..M} cuf

&' h'{\\

f.c 1

j

/.

l9 "l - h' G S.,

Lru U Q: vi[glog %R,

% s.

.ab,.R e a

j,,,,,p9%

'{

AyuAdf

..; w 'j ; '*.a

. S ih.,,

g.

N

- O '~~ ' ' % '?'A'l ' L'h-

-a

-,aw

.t.

s a s........

.t

(

i s

j

.?

o p

I 1

- ty

%g4p,a.nn Aw. % hW t y&. _ _

t

y. c. 4..._(b., /..-.

. a.-

.,r... r

^

. f.

. u.._

,0 1

1, f*

l9

'. f.i,.

)

M n..W cr zu.sper3.teunto esp.%.(l9-3) l f

t.

... a,, u i

Z e

1, i

McWkG.

Lp/CS A

t, 4c. Ast..a A M A_.Ct w

=..

i L'

L b

l, i

e e 4 e

s*,

.2.,

• 1 l

7*

Y J

l.,

=

e ;

,J..,

l I

b.

0

Y, g

N p Ker

'x s

/

o N

~

g UNITED STATES

[

g NUCLEAR REGULATORY \\ COMMisslON s

.t, 7,

f 5

W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

%, *... /

s FG '41980 Docket Nos.: 50-329/330

~

APPLICANT:

CONSUMER POWER COMPA 3,. L

~

FACILITY:

MIDLAND PLANT,1 UNITS 1 & 2

SUBJECT:

SL9 MARY OF'JAhUARY 16, 1980 MEETING ON SUPPLEMENTAL REQUESTS REGARDING PLANT FILL s

v On January 16, 1980 the NRC staff and its consultants from the U.S.

i Corps of Engineers met with Consumer Power, Company and Bechtel Corporation in Bethesda, Maryland. Attendees am listed in Enclosure 1.

The principal purpose of this meeting was to discuss the status of the staff's supplemental requests for ddditional infomation regarding plant fill settlement and effects.

These requests were issued November 19,g1979. Earlier ' requests issued March 21,.1979 were discussed t

to a lesser extent. Enclosure 2 'is' the meeting agenda.

The staff's renues's of March 21 and Novembdr t

19, 1979 were issued on the basis of Section 50.54(f) to 10 CFR 50, which is applicable to construction t

permits ~ by virtue of Section 50.55(c).

modification of the Midland =. construction peiinits hs subsequentlyThe issued December 6, 1979; mplies outstanding after Decenber 6,1979 were no longer needed in the 50.54(f) context, but that replies should be submitted nevertheless since the December 6 crder states that the absence of certain informa prevents the staff from reaching essential conclusions.

that the replies be submitted in the normal "Q-1, Q-2" context typicallyIt was associated with the radiological safety myiews of nuclear power plants.

The applicant also reported that the December 6 order, its subsequent mquest for hearing, and FSAR Amendment 72 provides the basis for concluding its 50.55(e) reports' regarding this matter, as further reporting would be by FSAR amendments and by hearing documents, as may be appropriat The applicant acknowledged its intent to further update the FSAR to reflect appropriate change's associated with the soils settlement matter at an appropriate point.in the future; in the~ interim, those FSAR sections which are subject to ' change will be flagged.

Staff coments based upon review of the' applicants reply to questions l

16 through 20 were provided as a handout (Enclosurt 3 hereto).

These-comments relate to mechanical engineering' effects of tfie soil settlement

~~W sg

/

q M/C GAtsg

(

\\ J J.,

L V n-W up

-f601rgoW3

~

~+

Y

%+V

~...

FEB 4 1980 0l 3 which are being myiewed with the assistance of a staff's consultant, Energy Technology Eagineering Center.

The proposed msponses to questions 24 through 35, 4 and 14 were sumarized by the applicant and Bechtel. Since these msponses will be submitted on the docket within two to thme weeks, no sumary of these presentations is provided in this report. The response to questions 25 and 26 involve seismic analyses which requim additional time to complete prior to submittal of a final mply. Copies of the vugraph slides used during these presentations are maintained by the staff's Licensing Project Manager and are available upon request.

1. 6 #8 Darl S. Hood, Project Manager Light Water Reactors Branch #4 Division of Project Management

Enclosures:

As stated cc: See next page

(.

\\.

Consumers Power Company

'J T ccs:

I Michael I. Miller, Esq.

Mr. S. H. Howell Isham, Lincoln & Reale Vice President Suite 4200 Consumers Power Company One First National Plaza 212 West Michigan Avenue Chicago, Illinois 60603 Jackson, Michigan 49201 Judd L. Bacon, Esq.

Mr. Larry Auge Managing Attorney Energy Technology Engineering Center Consumers Power Company Canoga Park, California 91304 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Mr. William Lawhead U. S. Corps of Engineers Mr. Paul A. Perry NCEED - T Secretary 477 Michigan Avenue Consumers Power Company 7th Floor 212 W. Michigan Avenue Detroit, Michigan 48226 Jackson, Michigan 49201 Myron M. Cherry, Esq.

One IBM Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60611 Mary Sinclair 5711 Sumerset Drive

(

Midland, Michigan 48640 Frank J. Kelley, Esq.

Attorney General State of Michigan Environmental Protection Division 720 Law Building Lansing, Michigan 48913 Mr. Wendell Marshall Route 10 Midland, Michigan 48640 Grant J. Merritt, Esq.

Thompson,-Nielsen, Klaverkamp & James 4444 IDS Center 80 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Mr. Don van Farowe, Chief l

Division of Radiological Health Department of Public Health P. O. Box 33035 Lansing, Michigan 48909 Resident Inspector / Midland NPS If c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission P. O. Box 1927 Midland, Michigan 48640

ENCLOSURE 1 LIST OF ATTENDEES

~

\\

JANUARY 16,1980 Name Organization Darl Hood DPM/NRR Joe Xubinski COE Detroit Dist.

William Paris, Jr.

Bechtel-Geotech Jo Wayzeck Bechtel - Geo Tech S. S. Afifi Bechtel W. R. Ferris Bechtel Morothwell Bechtel K. Wiedner Bechtel Gil Keeley Consumers Power i

T. C. Cooke Consumers Power F. Schauer NRC-SEB J. J. Zabritski Consumers Power Co.

S. Lo Bechtel T. E. Johnson Bechtel John F. Horton COE NC Division Chicago James W. Simpson Army Corps NCO Chicago William Lawhead U. S. Army COE, Detroit R. E. Lipinski NRC-SEB Gene Gallagher NRC Region III:IE

[_

Ross Landsman NRC Region III:IE Daniel M. Gillen NRC - NMSS 1

A. J. Cappucci NRC/ DSS /MEB R. O. Bosnak NRC/ DSS /MEB H. L. Brammer NRC/ DSS /MEB

(

l l

l

0 ENCLOSURE 2 I

s MEETING WITH NRC STAFF IN BETHESDA. ffD January 16, 1980 Agenda I.

INTRODUCTION : Gil Keeley, Purpose of reeting; background, ete II. WORK ACTIVITY UPDATE : Jim Wanzeck Summary of work activities and settlement surveys for all Category I structures and facilities founded partially or totally on fill III. 10 CFB 50.5h(f) REQUESTS

' Presentation of Infomation related to:

Question #h - Soils Engineerin6 and Civil / Structural P Afifi Supplemental Questions #27, 31, 33 and 35 - Soils Engineering s Supplemental Question #24 - Dewatering Question #1h - Civil / Structural Supplemental Questions #28, 29, 30 and 34 - Civil / Structural Ted Supplemental Questions #25 and 26 - Seismic Analysis Johnson IV. FORMAT AND SCHEIULE OF FUTURE RESPONSES (50 55(e), 50.5h(f), FSAR)

ATTENDEES:

Bechtel Consumers Power S Afifi G S Keel ey T Johnson T C Cooke S Lo J J Zab*itski W Paris M Rothwell J Wanzeck K Wiedner W Fen is 1

GSKeeley/ec 1/15/80 t

ENCLOSURE 3 COPHENTS ON 50.54(f) RESPONSES FOR MIDLAND (MEB)

$m 1.

GENERAL A review of the Response to Questions 16-20 of the subject document indicates that the applicant proposes to impose the 3.0 Sg criterion of subparagraph NC-3652.3(b) of the ASME B&PVC,Section III and the 5%

radial deformation limit of the AWWA. Additional criteria which address buckling of the piping should be imposed since neither of the two proposed criteria are based on this failure mode. Additionally, criteria compliance analyses should be based on maximum expected differ-ential settlement over the life of the plant.

2.

RESPONSE TO QUESTION 16, PAGE 16-1 The response addresses stresses based on representative pipes being

(

profiled, i.e. on current local settlements.

The response should be modified to include settlements over the life of the plant.

3.

RESPONSE TO QUESTION 17, PAGE 17-1, PARA.1 If all Seismic Category I piping is not to be profiled, criteria for selection of piping to be profiled should be documented.

l 4.

RESPONSE TO QUESTION 17, PAGE 17-2, PARA. 2 The calculation assumes that the curvature is constant over the length of pipe. In general, this condition will not be met.

Criteria for changes in curvature should be addressed.

l f

. ~.

~

~

.(

5.

RESPONSE TO QUESTION 17, PAGE 17-3, PARA. 2 If the settlement stresses are based on current profiles only, the analysis should be extended to include settlements over the life of the plant and effects of change in curvature (See item 3).

6.

RESPONSE TO QUESTION 17 The question regarding measures to be taken to alleviate conditions if settlement stresses approach code allowables or cannot be determined has not been addressed.

7.

RESPONSE TO QUEFTION 18, PAGE 18-1, PARA. 2 & 3 It is not clear that most of the anticipated differential settlement will occur by the time of final closure (Para. 2).

Provisions for effects of settlements occuring after final closure should be specified. The evaluations of Para. 3 addresses this issue partially.

8.

RESPON5E TO QUESTION 18, PAGE 18-2, PARA. 2 & 3 Criteria for assessment of the flexibility of piping to accomodate more than the expected differential settlement should be specified.

9.

RESPONSE TO QUESTION 19, PAGES 19-1 TO 19-3 The disposition of this response will be delayed pending receipt and review of evaluations based on the preload program (See last paragraph on Page 19-3).

10. RESPONSE TO QUESTION 20 The first paragraph of the response is acceptable. However, the remainder I

of the response requires clarification.

i

/

/ -

.N C0ilSUm2fS Q 'g. S

}4 POWBT g

i

/

C0mpBDy

/

s e. - c s n

.s,. i..

January 25, 1980 Mr. M. O. Rothwell Bechtel Power Corporation P.O. Box 1000 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 MIDIAND PROJECT GWo 7020 -

SOII.S RESPONSES TO 50.54(f) QUESTIONS File: 0485.16 UFI: 00234(S), 71*01 Serial: CSC-4763 After discussions in Bethesda, Maryland, with the NRC on January 16, 1980, and the CP/Bechtel discussions in Ann Arbor on January 22, 1980, the fol-lowing areas should be clarified and/or amplified in our responses to the 50.54(f) questions.

1.

J.

nzeck should clarify the slide shown in Washington to indicate the ay the tank foundation was placed and it should be noted that this is a six month settlement update only. This can be accomplished possibly via an MCAR update or old question response update.

2.

a11 edged quarter inch diesel fuel oil tank settlement needs to be erifief or deleted from wheravar it was supposedly reported to the NRC.

(J. Wanzeck) 3," S. Afifi, in the response to Question 4, should explain that table 4-1

/

is a projection (show totals only) and not what the structure can stand.

He will also relocate this table to Question 27.

S.

should verify that "to date" settlement plus additional future ettlement will cause no problems to the diesel generator structure in the response to Question 14.

l 4[. S.Afifi vill indicate how we arrived at the half-inch figure for settle-ment caused by vibration of the diesel generator pedestals due to opera-tion of the dissel generators. In response to Question 27 Dr. Woods analysis to include his method of calculation will be utilized.

~

5.

S. Afifi will delete the word " clay" from the third line under note on table 4-1.

(Renumbered 27-

).

He will also include the total settle-ment graph instead of only the portion utilized for predictions

'.5 @ se-~ g.

s*

O l{

p, e p s.,.

/-M N6ff

.g..,......

s 9; e ' ee l

• ~ ' '-*. s

..:h, 1

",g.,a__

___- P

_ - - - - g wp,g _ _ __ _,,,, _-aa - - --___

.2-

.s z..TrJ_... ; aN- '

'J

~.~'#*'

.Page 2 Mr. M. O. Rothwell File: 0485.16 Serial: CSC-4763 s

6.

T le 4-1 footnote 2 (Renumbered 27- ) - S. Afifi will explain how g

he settlement of the barated water storage tank is based on measure-ments of the Diesel Generator Building settlement here and in the response to Question 31.

7.

The individual best fit curves projecting diesel generator secclement al ow no margin for standard deviation on the best fit. Therefore, is appears to be unconservative. We need to amplify the fact that the curves assume the surcharge remains and that the worst data points 1

are utilized for total settlement. This also would, of course, include j

something on the worst settlement being utilized for differential settle-ment calculations and their affect on the structure and connections.

S. Afifi vill add some discussion to amplify the conservative aspects and a statement on the piezometer in response to Question 27.

8.

Our outline of response to Question 27 states: Iter B. basis'for accuracy.

The ou ine will be changed and one sentence will state that the basis for curacy is conservatism. We do not appear to be getting the response acr ss on the borated water storage tanks. It is necessary to show that e

soil is adequate in more concise terms.

S. Afifi vill add emphasis o the acceptable quality of the soil and that filling the tanks is only being done to verify the settlement prediction. It will be noted that this is not a soils problem; rather it is more like normal practice. We also have to verify that the tank foundation is adequate and that we will not have the problems which could arise if the foundation should somehow fail and you would have a subsequent stretching of the bottom membrane of the tank followed by a tear in the tank wall. All loads must be considered in this' analysis. We should also state that we do not have the same degree of randomness in the soil as was present in the Diesel Generator Building.

S. Lo will provide analysis to show that the tank foundation

, ill be able to withstand seismic events.

S. Afifi vill do more research w

on the overload test necessity.

9.

Ou response to Question 33 needs to be amplified to include the effect j

bouyancy on the load tests and what effect the lack of water (if any)

- from site devataring will have on the tank settlement..Possibly there will be a retest after dewataring (S. Afifi).

10.

B. Paris will address whethte or not there will be any effect on the ulti-mate heat sink pond seal due to site dewatering in response to 24. f. and note why we are using timers instead of float switches in the pumps in response to 24.

c., utilizing Loughney's input. The basis for the grada-tion of the gravel pack meterial will also be addressed by B. Paris in the response to 24. d.

The slide for the individual wells freeze protec-l tion on the riser pipes will be shown by B. Paris on the response to Question 24.

11.

S. Lo, K. Wiedner and T. Johnson will show tha all past loads have been accounted for in the analysis of the futuye ' settlements of the Category I structures in response to Question 28 and' 29. The NRC questioned whether 1

the stress induced by differential settlement in the past was now locked

. Peg 2 3 Mr. M. O. Rothwell File: 0485.16 Serial: CSC-4763 l

in the structure and additive to future loads, such as, additional settle-esnt, seismic, etc. Our response will include some crack investigative depth core drilling and analysis of relief of stress due to identified i

popitive remedial measures.

12.

A response on the Q-ducts has to include an analysis as a category one structure. It was noted that this may not have been used as criteria in 1970, however, in 1976 this was checked per BC-TOP 4.

This will be in-cluded in our response to Question 30.

(S. Lo)

13. The response for 24. c. will include an analysis for the concrete service water pipes in the cooling pond and any other concrete pipes embedded in

, the class one fill. In the 24. c. response, B. Paris will also note that

/

concrete pipes are generally away from critical structures and discuss probability failures.

14. j After considerable discussion, it appears that the NRC is desirous of

\\ / having Bechtel's proposed detailed method of analysis for the seismic

/ event (Question 25). Bechtel will provide their normel analysis for new soils conditions under affected category I structures.

(M. Rothwell)

Bechtel plans a lump mass analysis to include an envelope for settlement.

f n discussing Question 26, the NRC noted that they are not in a position I

to adopt new methods or codes at this point in time, however they (on their own) wish to compare the new methods with earlier analysis to estab-lish some level of margin.

S. Lo's analysis will be complete sometime in mid 1980.

15. Miscellaneous:

A.

General A review of the response to Question 16-20 of the subject document indicates that the applicant proposes to impose the 3.0 S criterion e

of subparagraph NC-3652.3(b) of the ASME B&PVC,Section III and the 4

5% radial deformation limit of the AWA. Additional criteria which address buckling of the piping should be imposed since neither of the proposed 2 criteria are based on this failure mode. Additionally, criteria compliance analyses should be based on maximum expected dif-i forential settlement over the life of the plant.

B.

Response to Question 16, Page 16-1 (Civil) response addresses stresses based on representative pipes being profiled, i.e.; on current local settlements. The response should be modified to include settlements over the life of the plant.

C.

Response to Question 17, Page 17-1, Paragraph 1 (Riat) i If all Seismic Category I piping is not to be profiled, criteria for selection of piping to be profiled should be documented.

,__________,______m

- - - - - - - - - - - - - ^ - ' " - * * *

• l l

.nr. n. u. nothweli File: 0485.16 Serial: CSC-4763 D.

Response to Question 17, Page 17-2, Paragraph 2 (Riat) i h

1 The calculation assumes that the curvature is constant over the length

{

of pipe.

In general, this condition will not be met. Criteria for t

chcages in curvature should be addressed.

E.

Respense to Question 17, Page 17-3, Paragraph 2 (Riat) l If the settlement stresses are based on current profiles only, the analysis should be extended to include settlements over the life of the plant and effects of change in curvature (See item C).

f i

F.

Response to Question 7 (Riat)

The question regarding measures to be taken to alleviate conditions if settlement stresses approach code allowables or cannot be determined has not been addressed.

C.

Response to Question 18, Page 18-1, Paragraph 2 and 3 (Riat)

It is not clear that most of the anticipated differential settlement will occur by the time of final closure (Paragraoh 2).

Provisions for effects of settlements occuring after final closure should be specified.

The evaluations of Paragraph 3 addresses this issue partially.

4 H.

Response to Question 18, Page 18-2, Paragraph 2 and 3 (Riat) criteria for assessment of the flexibility of piping to accomodate more than the expected differential settlement should be specified.

I.

Response to Question 19, Pages 19-1 to 19-3 (Civil)

~

The disposition of this response will be delayed pending receipt and review of evaluations based on the preload program (See last paragraph on Page 19-3).

J.

Response to Question 20 (Riat)

The first paragraph of the response is acceptable.

f the response requires clarification.

However, the remainder

/

a i

T. C. Cooke Project Superintendent TCC/ps

Attachment:

Attendees List CC: CAHunt KWiedner (Bechtel)

...hr (Bechtel)

GSKeeley SAfifi (Bechtel)

DBMiller LCurtis (Bechtel)

ABoos (Bechtel)

N. _. \\

-LDavis (Bechtel) l

... ~..

l l

I i

N Attendees 1/16/80 Name Organisation Darl Hood DPM/NRR Joe Kubinski COE Detroit Dist.

William Paris Jr.

Bechtel - Geotech Jo Wansack Bechtel - Geotech S. S. Afifi Bechtel W. R. Terris Bechtel M. O. Rothwell Bechtel Karl Wiedner Bechtel Cil Kaeley consumers Power T. C. Cooke Consumers Power F. Schaufig NRC-SEB J. J. Zabritski Consumers Power S. Lo Bechtel T. E. Johnson Bechtel John F. Norton COE NC Division Chicago James W. Simpson Army Corps NCD Chicago William Lawhead U.S. Army COE, Detroit R. E. Lipinski NRC-SEB Cene Gallagher NRC Region III:IE Ross Landsman NRC Region III:IE Daniel M. Gillen NRC NMSS A. J. Cappucci R. O. Busnak NRC/ DSS /MEB H. L. Braemer NRC/ DSS /MEB Ray Gonzales NRC/DSE/HMB J. P. Rnight NRC/ DSS R. E. Jackson NRC/ DSS /CSB J. C. Spraul NRC/NRR/OAB R. E. Shewmaker NRC/II/RCI 1/22/80 M. Rothwell Bechtel S. Afifi Bechtel J. Wanzeck Bechtel B. Paris Bechtel S. Lo Bechtel T. Cooke Consumers Power Company

(

- m- - -.

.. =..

}

N Preliminary Evaluation of 50.54(f) Responses for Midland (MEB) 1.

GENERAL A review of the Response to Questions 16-20 of the subject document indicates that the applicant proposes to impose the 3.0 Sg criterion of subparagraph NC-3652.3(b) of the ASME B&PVC,Section III and the 5%

radial deformation limit of the AWWA. Additional criteria which address buckling of the piping should be imposed since neither of the proposed 2 criteria are based on this failure mode. Additionally, criteria compliance analyses should be based on maximum expected differ-ential settlement over the life of the plant.

2.

RESPONTE TO QUESTION 16, PAGE 16-1 The response addresses stresses based on representative pipes being., Y '

,4 i

s

=

sp.

profiled, i.e. on current local settlements. The response should be g q, s.p modified to include settlements over the life of the plant.

2.*

4 h

)

3.

RESPONSE TO QUESTION 17, PAGE 17-1, PARA. I

j. 3

..~

If all Seismic Category I piping is not to be profiled, criteria for

,p-0 selection of piping to be profiled should be documented. # eft

'4-

.7 pt.Wt",

4.

RESPONSE TO QUESTION 17, PAGE 17-2, PARA. 2 The calculation assumes that the curvature is constant over the length of pipe. In general, this condition will not be met. Criteria for fusMb

. W '.

/4 changes in ct'rvature should be addressed.

t#Qr.l$

t.

I f?

l jkj-f j /- JJ-V W'd

\\

-n

,n,

~2~

S 5.

RESPONSE TO QUESTION 17, PAGE 17-3, PARA. 2 If the settlement stresses are based on current profiles only, the analysis

~' >. ?)M.

should be extended to include settlements over the life of the plant and g+"

,[

effects of change in curvature (See item 3).

6.

RESPONSE TO QUESTION 17 k

t The question regarding measures to be taken to alleviate conditions if W h ',.,

settlement stresses approach code allowables or cannot be determined has not been addressed.

7.

RESPONSE TO QUESTION 18, PAGE 18-1, PARA. 2 & 3 It is not clear that most of the anticipated differential settlement will (

a occur by the time of final closure (Para. 2). Provisions for effects ofg.t -

setticments occuring after final closure should be specified. The

,0#.

, ik s

,, r N'S evaluations of Para. 3 addresses this issue partially. *

,,.pe

,' f I,, '.2 A. p,.#<

-A

' ~ '

8.

RESPONSE TO QUESTION 18, PAGE 18-2, PARA. 2 & 3

'3, p.=

Criteria for assessment of the flexibility of piping to accomodate more I [y <

than the expected differential settlement should be specified[

).

N' 9.

RESPONSE TO QUESTION 19, PAGES 19-1 TO 19-3, l.a 'I.

1. d The disposition of this response will be delayed pending receipt a

1. s,'.T Q".

review of evaluations based on the preload program (See last paragraph

.k# pt on Page 19-3).

10. RESPONSE TO QUESTION 20 The first paragraph of the response is acceptable. However, the remainder h,,) [* ,

of the response requires clarification.

\\

D

% maai.E.w w w or 50.r9(1) agua fee M# nzc [Mc8) i KNERGY TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERINei CENTER rwww=wr aswaw consmamTs Ravrew#ec.

A 5. c nowe,.. %., M.L.4., b.s %,, u 9. C. (m 2.-,nb')

m

,,tg enav. tu D. c.u..a, t. T t c.

7,

SUBJECT:

DOCUMENT REvfEW Ce,w.umtt hu.att. C.ogetu.59 N aisis tat /MPAGE I

E' Of L opsuMt st. Totut e ( r REVfEW SUWECT _9.ti.tesit.a. 'To Qu 8.%tisk'A (4 / o Dt l

hste43tt To 10 C.I R. bo.a:J, lg ego, s, D,3 H,ng, 5,( g (Q,,

~

h,ea,'3u su 9, m w )

MD,P."

new con==s er mene i

G w.= = = t A hws be Tsw h taws.t % Que.s,..us, g re, 6, % t % s a s.c, b u u. w, tus,io., t s, w %s beues.n, bosts. T. Iw,.<4 '%s.

s,o % Cene.=u,u bs bwe,o r

• e,ww

)

14c - %s z.z. (.M D5 % t Att %

tg Wc.,

i

• '_e (, e u m.

A.n. %t E*/. bs b e:s.mA-I

/

7tbu bim, Dt- %- k hlW k.

kbtn't&JAL t

Centea b.a sw bus ev, b a.a... Os L ' b. u c. h ueu b. 6

.$. =, % ee h,at=. 6 %s M s.sa. 2. C,, nu, a ti,,,

I b o 6,, i,, s s. b i t.u,. W. ban'*w we.

~

Co.nc.e.w Cometsnutt be t.w s s but.s s

b ~ % :, % h w um hiave:'tm, h 5st.

cet b.,, s.a u, outs. % Ls o, %,

b.<t.

2, h =%

wa-b paw b e.ca ci, b m sas 4 *'S' *" u, he s 0,,a DEpp.ghwuu.

'* S - '

b w a,t.e. on c.u u.u.n L m g. s m _

w,w w., iar % >t,ut.t % uct %

Mstit se t.% Igactut>r. 9 t nts t4 t.sn s, Que k

{

IMt.

441L b '5t> r b u7 j

as 4*s' ena t7 \\s % "% te.' b t.st.n, C w.si t b A T e,t.

hLt c.it e,p DS

• • st. 30 D htst u.th

ATE DOctamm87 REVIEWCOMMENTE (CONT)

WEvfewseo.

PAet 1 08 A y aveswsuaJetr 88CL M

steas tessumarr ACTiers b outh h bed.uks.uh t.

Mt%9'DL%4.

int' CALCLALA1s Bu host.oVT L MAN 3 Pit m

4 t$,'au n c.u ux,un.

\\

L ws,$,n bon.' Tut lwa,u "4

u"s. 2

(), h, \\a GauttAL, %s C.e w u s,, o u b it.i. N trt Y r. N g,T, C t vtt.**tA \\ bk. C % MM'S b N

DPM A7 Q IE h N Qk.b I:.

D ST,$$E D,

• 5 b mu.T.,

h h %,,c= ns.u t

%sswa s.

A, =.

h umun bu t, ou cue,.

e % v.u.ts, buly, %

AhE U **

kuM.Mcw $yppp b (1734te) kucLtstt

% nes o su,s. Ns % tm b, %., bu, b.vt.

b$$SC;TS. DT C H A.M G R kW ( M R f A T u t.E f

(.% t WM s').

5 M

-=%2 m:

L

.e,

r.,m, hm i

A-

-. n bd L, b. a. n u m,

~

lius b stad.

I N INTRh a.

[ ",

II n b.

y

~1 la

. u h il, 1 r,_ = b C L h e m t b,

g,/ hwi.

Twk. huestiau Tsc-A.t. ben MtAsue s,

cta.w w n T o h % u T. A u.a.uiA.,. C w n io u s, 4 h s,conw, %e.xssen, hp,sa Ar.m

c.. A u. - w s. b o.= u., b % = =.-

%., b. a., % u Am m..,,

he.uuT.

h ts 6, GtAm. TwA r Mos.

bt b *

• h L,su *.n S b w.m. w,.At % s,,u.

ha. 4%-l pgu, g kami hu. Du.oe 'E% 7wt. but bs t

%%At Gas uht.(htA m).bimus, be.

tmc, tw

%,a u k.-nt

(,9AL C.A p enu t t $ % eistan, h

---www--m

-=,wmm2-

_,__,m-m___,________m_m_,,,,,, _ _ _.,,,

O

1. N etM e m m T N (temT) fimweesasse:

pause b

ey _D mavmwsus.ner s

M

'. eroe somew armm

% c.wis m,. Tat luAt uA te 6us D9 DAt.A. 3 -

~

Amams %ss,~I~wss Iuun. % stsAu_%.

g

%s

=5.c ca.mw M. Assssau., b Two 4oastie a'b iuntw6 tite e.g-hs.39 ut "T.

E %"'2-kc.ce M sb A \\qE

• 4.5 TM W Y%t h,493s.ga htA ~2 h hw= s,mx %, u usu, %e %

Stecstis n..

N u a b o o M i t o ss. D t T ws y. D.e s t e u t g y e

,E q

hutnuoi Aa i

%., ~

u u w-t_,..

T*'*'*

.' h w,b= 7.=~Dtou.Am % ec.=w

(%a_lAs, % RAAT.A,u C N h k a-Ut-%\\

[

p 't n = 9 M'

=.

J9 b

'b r "; a L W i e-y u.i o

a v,woue 4

D w ;.;,*..- s m w.

d.. b..

~

,g '

b,wTu 714 basv Me_AGD Abe DS ~TMe.

%sni tta w. m.

h, k c s a w.e.. b.<* *=..

% s T aexa m e_

b Twe hs,touse.

huo,r.s hs Mt<+ ta w b.. (A De

,1 l

g u, twe t guw i r, - " D ** EM

- % M t b.

".ou A C LAt o s nn,

~ -h o c g s, 4,,, c,

a Abqui2ES CLAAiNood.

4 I

fetarteemse,a ass'we

• *OOO$h&$$hh$$0 0$$

0 00 a $0C 6OOOOOOOO OOO O

OOOO

.. uhrh Dyb &&& Akopv ?

J.: b

., _. J = N A _ &. - a A.

(2 7

Q,fa~ y p-- A y Q i M _ M.

'N G

._ (

.-2hM M p.w.4. h. a,

.m. Ain Aw g e n._ % A AA a A_~3 7 & y.A..~..?.

f$

= W )

e e u 4-sA nc?

.N H m & f J4 Z~ a h.E.

. k sg. m a a + !_ p,. m e

.l.

J Q,8 MA~ m A y M & &.,

f.

.J w w cr A - p uu!

i

=wam

==

e e.e.

e,-

.w-

-e..

. +..

f.4, Y. A" &4,.MS

.ft-

~ < 4.g g.-. = x } a

- M M. d. i.._ _ _

1

& & 26A M M. _. -

b *

('

I I

l 4

i 9 '.

I 1

i p

t' a.

_.L_.

~

./

\\

___________,ww

-v--y

---

.-.---,.p..----

,7--

-p

,,,._,,p-.,-3

4 m

w A

.m e

s.,wJ a..:.

9 e

_h Kw__._ b...

RnLaw s3 i

$a & m,st,-s w y h 4

~

i Qwcrets v M Ju &noeq ifeNk % @Nk..f. AMj kWh N

www-f ey,-am,,ame ?

kmere e swrun /40 stear Taux-Ts %

swe. r, bn> n s

nw roy OqMnG /&n uacnAa,E 7aksy cc co rihy%Kf

.g

{.

pgg utL y LITIhM. 7 OfE fO cM BST SMR4G bwM"*^5.]_ -

1 1

l

'._/vx.51-77MT1.. M *V5k5i

' I4 M % sis 6 10 P oo6 M 5 fet NtSLTDJ W SH6 44 h Wrrew.cwerd.4wupis !.. Q Q

u.aak ik d=%d '

h 1'

k %(

A

_..e

J e&ms-L+ a.w [' [W" y$a

k. W h / 0 - 2 0 d#

1 2. + &wum%

n

/'

p.

e

\\

N, Y.c+ Mb

~ &:

nk Me+

. w M:4 L(.

?

j

~

WW oo Y

O d

/

o 7

m b'

l

/

i C00GTTGr._ cegThorto,os IV Sc Flu.- Syc /= 6ec be7,ws _

2 by wM A S-S.L. c4 DM Ca~ Bhd 1

- Edh w.HL-

• ^

2 r

0

.4

.-=e e

I

... -.b--

.y L

~

~ ~f

~~

W eb'

.i t

=

O

&4 m

e

. - J.,

)

x..

j VOL.106 NO.GT2. FEl!.1-i y; I

'h ij. g; ! i v r- - y -

i i

i i

i!

i; !: 1,'.

JU.k' d '.. I.. :

g,

i

i

. lu l iu. I'. '.

-- j g-j- l

• l.d l

I f

~

t.

i i

C L.

L i L. i.

l i

p,'amn-1g

']p 'iqc3 r'T Ik-l l

k.1

j' t. j. 'll.1lj. k l' J l

l r-7.

1 t-

.i I

I p

.:n o

),1. d."

i {;

/.[i C.16

- -- j--- T r

j-p,f-yv U, I lil!!

Li

!*:. 4 I

_I T ' i:

.J

1 3

,.1

.[

d.

J.

[a

i.,

77Il r yyjgy h, [3.,

{i n. - l. l i*\\..j

't 1

e'-

I lt l

t l

1. J i,

L J

,1 L4 I

PROCEEDINGS i

THE AMERICAN SOCI OF civil ENGINF I

i g

M l$

a w->;-w ayu 9

IS*.ta p -

l'

a

- wlive of.e,'ti.nted.uted by stacas histosy;

.ts a..:..t. t.s d i.y i m rpa,iias, cpu u m JOURN A1. Or y m

. a.,:c.

.a.t.d i,y.mti..n GEOTECl-li

/ J_

n,c.,t. ai..es p.d stem; E.,mn armti,c i...nop.a si,m:

ENGINEElllNG DIVISION 3..idst. m..tesc.al.siac; j

.as stic.s tisw.taisse),

i g,.

!.ar.tesucth; agg.g g,g,p.y g. g s

a angle of fan.teon in the slicstive sticss repsescntation; sN TANK-Fair.cne 3:uny f

4*

=

e' = m'imsic ancic of (settnin; tiue resklual ang".c of frittion; and s

,, y g,y A,, c,,

?.l. ASCE a:.tl Jun Iwakici 4'

ps..pusikmality cocificient h6 tween number of bonds and true i:ontact

=

a*

=

asca.

fannooucnom An investigation into the possihic causcs that Icd to the failure of Tank T-270, a 315,000 bbi (50,000 in') oil-storage tank in Japan, included a comparative study of the setticinent behavior of 33 large tants on sort ground sites in Japan and other countries. The compasative study included the evaluation of the measured tank shcIl and tank-floor setticments with respect to the tilt plane of the tank shclI. 'llic resuhs of these comparative studies provide empirical data on the behavior of many tanks that capesienccd large settlements yet contiimed to perforni satisfactorily and on a few tanks that failed. Some of the factors that were thought to have contiibuted to the failure of Tank T-270 are described. Many tanks that expesienced more severe settlements th.in Tank T-270 did not fail, yet some movements that occured in and below the floor of Tank T-270 psobably contributed to its failure.

It is hoped that the data presented in this paper will provide a basis of comparisce for others who snay want to evaluate the possible severity of the settlemcat behavior of tanks for which they are concerned. Acceptable tolerances of tank movements that have been suggested by othens are summariecd. These mcahods arc all cinpirical. They appear to be valid for properly designed and constructed tanks on the bases of these additional case stuJics.

Faauns or Taus T.279 On December 18,1974, the 172-ft (52.3 m) diam,78-It (23.7-m) high, hot-oil storage Tank T-270 at the Mitsubishi Oil Company Refinery in Mizushima, Nose.. Downwion open unsel July 1,19ft0. To calend the ching ifate one month, a wnise a scquesa enuss he fded wnh thc ktanager of Technical and rsofcwional Publ. cations, ASCE. This paper is part of the copynchicJ Journal of the Gcoseshnical facin<cring thrman, reaccedings of the Amaius Smicey of Cavd Engineces, V.d.106, No. O f 2, fcl.suary,19ao. htanuwsipt was submiticJ for scview for gmssitate puhhution en hfay 19J9.

29,Sr. I'ntr., Dames A kloose, San Tsant-isco, Cahf.

.fgr., riv. recrg. Dept., Chiyoda Chemical incrg. and Construction Co. I.ed, Yul+.ima, Japan.

e 153 i

l

~

' 'A ILitfttJAftY 1S00 G12 GT2 1 AtlK f Alt uist. SIUDY 155 "

.g.in. s ql.n e.

t he u.ntoits floodcJ much of the ecGnciy propcoty an I slowcJ of water lo.iJ aNvc tant. ftmr tievation.1he tsnter of the picn f. arca o the.idpu nt Infand '.c.e c.susing.cruc Jamage to the G hing im'usto y.

settled al.eut 35 in. (C9 sum) and the resimcter piution at the pbnncJ 1 nk is a es so?, t'.c 2 *ss. eve l.f.1/J.sy st rim sy was shut dow n for about 9 months, shtH totatien willed.sl.eut 212X in. (610 sum 711 mm) in a gwsiod of akut q.-!y I.s.au.c of put.bc seas tion. Ily she time the scfina y wr. pensaitic I to 2 """'ths. A :.Ls tsle of the 3.stload alu dule and ut:1cment is show n in l'ig. 2.

none opes.stk.n the a.siJtna had oest the esfinesy more than 5150.0H),000 The J.ms-J oof tant was c cticJ 1,y the tant aiihft (l'AI.) msthod in whith it.c fattuse instuJcd separation of schts along akut II.5 ft (3.5 in) of the fc 8""I and Ull'er comse of shcIl asc falnicatcJ fiest, then liftsd by air that

. p. in. (9 mm) thi(L. mdJ secci t. int floor; a 3.5 ft (1.06 m) I.mc tear thiough

!> 14own into the t. int s the tcmaining lower cousses of stccl shcIl are welJcd

-e 1/2 in. (12 sam) thict high siscucth stccl annular platc; and a.12.fi (17.R m) into g. late. The 1.ist wclJ w.is therefore at the Witom of the shcIl to annular mg scar thsouch the annular pl.ste al.mg the base of the inside shcil scid l f,* Q, s ^

. annnfar planc. The eJccs of the rupturcJ bottom plates were bcne down p,..

,,,g.

j r*",,,

f,*,.

• ,,o***.p..*,

? ft to it (2.5 m 3 in) into a cavity cioJcd into the tant paJ as the contents

• g g,g,,,,

l l

hwr.1 thsouch the ruptuscJ area. He f.edure occurcJ appros 7 anonths after

.he ont had been placed in service. The conscquences of the failure werc

'j7,,

..3;j

-; f77 ; ***,'.***,.'T"**,".;-.;. h;,....

• Q ecally aggrasatcJ by the cottagwe of a stair tower that had been constsucicJ

.e

'j unt to the tank.1hc stair tower and its foundatio'n were washed into the q

I

. e of the mnsacte.bbst fisc wall causing is to rupture, thus permitting the

[,,,,,. ' 'j' f ',.,. 7 ;

=

t g,. 1

.ne. sits to flow out into the refinery arca and beyond.

• l

'

• e......

i

}e f aw T.270 l'our.,a nnu ar.o I carwnc. Coi.runons

]*

l

'....s.i q}i.

.\\

s*

• • p ' #,p *'v **** s $ *,,i Ec tant was mnstructed on a site that had been Jeveloped by placing weak

,, e.

I e

s$

I i ydra.dic fill matesiah over wcat natural Jcposits that totaled about 50 ft (16

\\

\\.

...)in thickness. Psiot to tant c onstruction the site was preloaded with a sand-drain, l

,s * *j j,s l

g j

< sli point, carth fill wscharg program. The supposting soils were improved s

3 umtroficJ water testing of the tant. A cross section of the tant and subsuorace i,

(

d',,0**

• l i

t I

I

(

soil profile is show n in l'ig.1.

II,g I

l Approsimatcfy 3.000 sand drains, cach 4 3/4 in. (120 mm) in diameter, 56 I,

ft (17 m) long, and spaccJ 4 ft (l.2 m) C to C were instaHed below the tank I,

g 1

paJ piior to the prcloading, ogram. An carth fin preload about 15 ft (4.5 g

n) thick was placed on the tant site. Wc11 points I.I/2 in. (38.1 mm)in diameter, g

.l 27 ft (R.3 na) hmg, and spascd at 5-ft (1.5.m) intervals surroundcJ the pectoad g

g idl. Thice vacuum wctim were instal 1cJ near the center of the surcharge.

J*

'\\

8 He water talde was pumped down about 18 ft (5.5 m) so that together with l

the canth fill there was an effedive prebiaJ equivalent to about 43 ft (13 m)

J

.. h 1

1. • '. Q..*jyd...q.

FIG. 2.--Tank T 270 Pretord Schi. tute and Settiaments

..a-....

J

' ' 9 ' ' '"*. I

. un h.E.$[J",,

II""I P ate. %c poor quality of this wclJ was evaluatcJ as one of the primasy l

l.*.I,'

y ~ .'....i' ;M h,,gj;,

3 gQ.

,,I.1

. { 4

. ~.')

tq fatfors that contsil.uted to the cause of the friture.

1 n,.~~..,,,

7 d $d.'..; ;,I

,-.;f---H ! Y 6,.*.

1he p.ution of tant pad below the tant shcIl consistcJ of a sing of concrete bhwLs over a sing of csushed stone. %c remainder of the pad was compacecJ NJ..MjihI:h51,'

tr rJrt9dAg 2.

- * 'Th... -. '_auts.nt;1inblilb.!

_,,,_,4 3

s ut G:ntTen.i. -l u"

.,g (1 i;

,,39,ny,qi 6;l/2 ft (2 m) thicL. A cross section of the as-huilt tant pad Jctait sand al

,,, g.,g, 3, 1

p...~.....

he Dal was 6HtJ increment.,lly w. h sea water with increasingloading about I 17?.

' it t..

.fg-'" 72.

S 's, g,,,,an, cvcsy 10 days to a final Jcpth of 77 ft (73.5 m) over a period of 90 days.

l

.4. '

it

- gjayc.e-Dunng the water sc?. ting v. hen the water was 40 ft (12 m) Jeep C0 J.,ys 30 strb 1.

Cros. Smion et Tent. T 270 Stun.In) So!.inf.nn rn;;t.

Jap u fo the v.wict test) an evavati.m was m e.le for a R ft 1 y Ir ft (1 tm

- - =.

e l

a

• s Cm y -. t

- p 9 -c U M 2e

=C 2 'T l d

e a4= $;J 4

.i r.

• - G e

a e

..* *

• I g

C ".

.,:, 4 *. ~-

=

Cw C 1h

3. #::'=

Q*

• C 3

=

'f s

.a p* *

.: C e. w-u.

= 'h %

Y

.a I jj tt) g-m,,o =

g - f,/

.C t

=

.c g

.\\

u d

. ' *# e A =

es

,N uw u si i

b. g

• [ [y[I'-)f '~%., f,

- tJ

[ $

d,,.$ f Y

C' 'E O

'/ E 8

I w n

,.,c " -.

g

.m i.n..

.....c..t-u.=.

s

E, a.. e.>.q>...,.,ir,,.

u #m..o g.. -.-.r...-. 1.a.

.., 3

.2 3..-o.= o

.c2 s a.t-e e-

.s Qg w*

a ie C.

5,; j c. - -- a. + *

=

,a., D' y vp.N.\\ #

n= 2 7, f

a y

r=_TI ?., ~7

_.t

.g o p e.s 1./A., s 7

.S

.2 y y

.=. t

- i '.'.W.__

u r, - a a.

0 lf.It.,;

c

=j j>,

s, q

a 5 g I ~ g: ?

c

's'e-4. mu;Q4.' 7...

3 y;

.E 1

/

lE c u a

.=

.s 3

.c

.., \\< }

• c-f:i,,,,

i.s c

o

=

o I.

s.

o=a :;, ;.

ua a

.=2.a

n.

a t,

.s et $:

o a

.; s J.u.

< De s

9,E== =

r.

.[a

.c,

,a

,, =,, _?,, ta g.

vi

=

~ a... %.

. "8

. !!, t; u.t.

8 r

s s

a

g

,2,;

,I" 3

[a

]-X 3,.

c

• +

=

=

=.

s -,

3 -).,- ][.'

-5

]-[*

h^

k.5, h

a.: -f

(*k h

m s

,a o,

n 1, *f,'. {, I:

k. 3. $ 5 ~,.s.

a t.

3 o=

2 u s :.=.o 3

s

.i g

u.,h.

A 3====.,.

n

. f,l e

oyEe#

l u

f ;:!.

G x N(a

./ '.

g l' '.- * "-

3 Q

c s Ge s>

o s

.x

. l' R

" l

• / '..

h A h.5

,=.:= s =;==

E. 5u _v,,- /h/ q,,f,.h,4, $.

s.

.m t

"..s M

. M,;e3;y

g. 'jh;fg,.Vr. *. ]..

o9.

>u u

-- - =

/ ;.../

.c g

t

'r

/

g ;: w3 o - = 5 r,

a =.5 g

.-.-a..,--

e.,'*i...,g w e

a

.o w r. e-0==

=

l a..

4,.,,...'

c c

v.,

., c :; u

. g

,< sop

,g y, C.:'

-^

w c

v.= s : S

=.,

c -

=

2 g

1ll e <

=xv

. =, =. = =: a w.f

. -..i:

G:

^'s.,

A-$

T. 1"2 n

-.n

=-

~

• 5 *c. E. E:

a-

~

. e : 4 < ? :.

5-sv; a

sav

- a = e _. : -

xc e=,=sg =.3 nd d 3 e e,

~ a a.s a c 2 3.2 Q

.O

._--4 r..

~

5 I,!,$

C

.f.I. :.?. ?A?.... ?..;I L

s.

3

.c...

ir'u : :.:t w:

5 a

r.a p.p:..d* ?::j,

"e

\\

• ,.. 1% -. - s. - -.

g.

.s sr

• 5

. 8 5

pca.. p:b g:is; p

S s

m.

t g %.

=

~

+: o cs e

1, e,,,

yg. g

\\.

• f (-l((c!:;to.V,.4.. -.

.ak a

\\

i

{

c a

a e

t g ),.t

.- " f[E :.:.

h-e,_

Ts E'

• E 7 i:i *'

S

.c-tm. :.:

3

o., g o m.e v 4.. +

. xs:. :

3

.. s a..

=/.M;:.;::. i o

o-

,-S*

• 8

.4, 1 W =.,.

{

q2

ps ~

si y : :...

i.

i e

}, =....

,a gg1 o1

..::3 a

=

Yg F.@?:

9

=

95

~

go

'I p

.li..

e c:

5,a s,,5_

g (i

2 3

_d. - -

I i

4 c:

A r

I i'

1

{

agi 1

'I...

1 I

R i

sw5 t,

[

ca a

g ay; 9

y cs i

==

a I",.

6.

. i. '.

e

s.,

a-o~

r l

s.

s*

n 3..

W' cJ

.t.

g e

l a

ar g

- =- } ol a...

~ *

• L d'

o'

• o s. :.,.*,* s.

e.e e.. e is s e a. n s

-, e

.,e s

... =e... n

.e "e.

v -

t

I s'

c

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

_... _... ~ ~ -

y G12 GT2 TANK IAILURL SIUDY 153 FEBRUAfiY 1980 i.,g Tau T.270 fanums Invrsnc unn ano Courananvc Stum 2 an.1 after failure with ecspect to Ilie best-fit rigid-settlement tilt plane of the shcIl ase show n in l'ig. 6. *lhe values of 6' signify the out-of planc distortion Following the failuie of Tank T-270 a committee of experts on various aspat.,

j s.f each setticment sucasurement point as defined by licilon; et al. (1). (sce of tank and foundation design and const uction from industry and the academic Appendis I for solution of best fit rigid. settlement tilt plane and calculation communitics of Japan pciformcJ extensive investigations into the causes or failurs. prior to making these investigations and prior to identifying the vailous

, g,,4 Mc ' lank T.270 shell settlement was shout 20 in. (508 mm) and the center causcs that have aheady been mentioned, the committee issued a preliminary of ibor settlement was shout 2A in. (711 nim) during water testing plus another repost citmg the many possible things that could have contributed to the failure.

4 m. (102 nuni during product service. Both the total amounts and rates of Their preliminary report indicated the suspicion that a foundation failure (soil.

l sentement can he theoretically accounted for on the basis of settlement ana yses.

bearing failure) or enccssive foundation setticinent, or both, may have caused Sod tailure or plastic deformations are not needed to account for this settlementthe accident.

behavior. He meaststed settlement configuration of Tank T.270 at the time At this time, on behalf of the tank foundation designers and constructors, i

of wcter testms, when the highest loading was applied and when the support ng the writers conducted an evaluation of the foundation stability and settlement soih were still consolidating and gaining strength, shows no indication of behavior. Data on foundation soil properties, prcload settlements, water-test foundation soil failure. Aho, the fact that 20 other large-diameter tanks, of settlements, and foundation stability from Tants T-270 and T-271 were analysed t) out the same height and on essentially the same soil and foundation conditions and compared with simdiar data from other large tants at the kiirushima rcGncry I

and from other sites in Indonesia, puerto Rico, Iran, Canada, lingland, and the United States plus data taken froni the literature on nine other tants. A Ip tt total of 33 large storage tants on soft-ground sites were studied. Technical q

4

/

4:M6 g,c information for each tant: sire, toof type, floot crown, foundation soil properties, p8 1

4 S p (t gtd,

water test load, and settlement behavior is sununarized in Fig. 8.

g M

Tank Tilting.- Fig. E includes the best-fit rigid-settlement tilt angle for those nonctens{gA

• • '*' 'h"* '"rricieni edge sciiicmeni readings were available io mate such

,s E

a calculation. As shown, three tants, cases F, p, and k-4, iilied (0.s42,0.40s

{

I E-9 h.g

}

[

end 0.{lG, respectively) more than the T.270 tant (030%). These tanks remained 8

Si ses -

m service without relevchng. Othes tan's, Cases O and R-5, tilted twice as 3.

y ' seg much as the TM tant, but hecause of nu.se severe diffesential floor settlements

. Mk._j t;. l.. 5.

r. g e

these tants msrc sclevcled. It is the writers' opinion that the tilt experienced l

~. i: ggy4_... - eje -

1975 - -

by Tank 1-270 was insignificant from an operati<.nal standpoint. Greenwood 8

E'

p.. a..,. ac.nar. in pi. mt wr att e= 8't.

(10) sutr,csted that an average tilt of possil.ly more than 0.5% of the best-fit l

so rigid settlement tilt plane couki be experienced before the differential product ytc. 7.--Tenk T 270 Product Lead and Tesapeenture Elecos, storage heading, due to tilting, wouhl induce out-of-roundness at the top sing girden of a floating roof tant.

Differential Shril Sctilement.--Fig. E aho contains various shcIl settlement I

i at the klirushima Refinery, performed satisfactorily would tend to support the enformatu n, mtImling the maximum out of. plane cage sctilements as dcrincJ idea th st the failme of the Tank T-270 was not due to a sod bearms failure.

b Mm. o A @ In M medud, Ac madnmm change in slope ktween 1 ottowing the water test, the tant was in suWee N ah 7 wh h, g three adjacent setticment points on the shcIl is compute,I in eclation to the ehis period product loading cycled from near empty to near full about three l

best-fit nr.'d-sctilement tilt plane tierough all the shcIl-settlement measurement times each month. product temperature ranged from about 10*.30* C. A p ot pomts. Of the cases listed in Fig. 8, the only tant s that required rcleveling of she product load amt temperature is shown in Fig. 7. ne cyche natiere of the shcll because of out-of.planc settlement were T-16 in Case 5 and Case of h,a.I at high temperature was jmfred to have aho contritmted to the failure R-2. No dct.nled setticment accords were availahic to us for Case R-2, and by causinc humping of the floor plates and fatigue of the sucial en the annuhr

• • ""EW. nut >onie (aulty nection procedures in Case 5 may have been more pt.ac where failure took place.i coenp.mion tant, number T-271 of the same sire was constructed next out of phme diffuential scnlement of Tank T-16 in Case $ was 0.2%. 'the infleenn. l than the differential 51-1l settlcnients. Nevertheless, the snaximum a

d t

to lant T 27tl about the same time, by the same TAI, metho, was wa er matinmm out-of-pt ne differential setriement of the T-270 tant at the maximum d placed tev -d. escas ited umler for a stair tower foundation instalhtoon, an water-tcs load was O tEG mhereas it was 0.20;. at th: masimum water load mio ncanty identical service, it did not fail, but it was talen out of scevice for lant.12 71. Itcil.mi, et al. (1) surgest as a "wooli.: hypott. is" a v.il.w I~

fh h ll

___ _ N cagrienents invoicing strain measurcments o t e s c or s m,-

of an

-.m

i K

l

~

---

e j

I GT2 GT2 1Ang IAtLUIlf SIUDY nt FE8FlUARY 1980 82.4 Tann T-270 l anou love.ucanon ar.o Cowanunn 5:ums wl citer faiNre with respect to the best fit rigid-scitlement tilt plane of the sh..Q are shoma in l'ig. 6. The values of P signify the out-of planc distostion Followin ; the failmc of"IanL T 270 a comenittee of caperts on various asp:. is r,I each settlement measurement point as defined by ItcIlon:, et al. (I). (see of tant and foundation dcsign and constsuction Isom industry and the academic l

Appen tis I for solution of best. fit rigid-settlement tilt planc and calculation conununitics of Lpan performed extensive invc.stigations into the causes of failuie. psion to mating these investigations and psior to identifying the various of 6*.)

1hc Tank T-270 shcIl sctilement was shout 20 in. (508 mm) and the center causes that have aircady been mentioned, the committee issued a preliminary of noor settlement was about 2R in. (711 mm) during water testing plus another report citing the many possihte things that could have contributed to the failure.

(102 mm) during prmfuct service. Both the total amounts and rates of Their preliminary report indicated the suspicion that a foundation failure (soil-I 4 in

.citisment can he theoretically accounted for on the basis of settlement analyses.

bcasing failure) or cacessive foundation setticincnt, or both, may have caused s.,d failure or plastic deformations are not needed to account for this settlement the accidciit.

behavior. The sneasured settlement configuration of Tank T-270 at the time At this time, on behalf of the tank foundation designers and constructors, of w ter testing. when the highest loading was applied and when the supportin5the writers conducted an evaluation of the foundation stability and settlement soils were still consolidating and gaining strength, shows no indication of behavior. Data on foundation soil properties, prcload settlements, water-test foundation so'd failure. Aho, the fact that 20 other large-diameter tanks, of settlements, and foundation stability from Tanks T-270 and T-271 were analyicJ about the same height and on essentially the same soil and foundation conditionsand compared with similiar data from other large tants at the Mirushima refinery and from othcr sites in Indonesia, Pucrto Rico, Iran, Canada, England, and the United States plus data taken from the literature on nine other tants. A total of 31 large storage tanks on soft-grcund sites were studied. Tecimical A g' git..

information for cach tank: size, roof type, floor crown, foundation soil properties, D

otl&yE O

vt*h ei pitfg,s,cC 416 g v atcr icst load, and settlement behavior is summarired in I:ig. 8.

g6 Tant litting.- l'ig. 8 includes the best fit rigid-settlement tilt ant c for those g

i g

tua {#

• • *h"* '"ffid*"' 'dc* **"'c"ca' 'c8Jias5 *c'c available to make such T

E E V ' is a calculation. As shown, thace tants, cases F. P, and R-4, tilicJ (0.84%,0.40%

j lel and 0.1l1%, respectivcly) mot c than the T-270 tant (0.30%).1 hese tants remained i

'I "

th

[=.as en scruce without eclevchng. Other tants, Cases O and R.5, tilted twice as g!

I yi ng g an ch as the T-270 tant,but because of more sevcrc differential floor settlements

-~#}

I nurYt bE

- 1975 - -

these tants scre relevcicJ. It is the writcrs* opinion that the tilt experienced set --

by Tank T-270 was insignificant from an operational standpoint. Greenwood

. _. _ _ ggg - -. - -

' t,g

,,,,, q, p,,t,,,.,.,,s.,, e.

(10) surf.csted that an average tilt of possibly more than 0.5% of the best fit so rigid-settlement tilt plane coulJ be caperienccJ beforc the differential product HG. 7.-Tenk T-270 Product toed and Temperasure Itecord g;

ggg girder of a (kuting roof tant.

IUffesenti.d Shell Settheuent.- Fig. 8 also contains various shcIl settlement at the blirushima Refinery, performed satisfactority would tend to support the, formaswn, including the maximum out-of-planc cJge scitlements as defincJ idea ibt the failure of the Tank T-270 was not due to a soil bearing failure.

m by Itcth ni, et al. (1). In their method, the maximum change in slope between i

1ollowing the water sess, the tank was in service for about 7 nientha Dur,ing three adjacent setticinent points on the shcIl is computed in relation to the I

h this period, product loading cyc!cd from near empty to near full ahmt t ree beyt-fit siciduttlement tilt plane through all the shell-settlement measurement times cach nionth. Product temperature ranged from shout 70*- 90' C. A ph,tpointt of the cases listed in Fig. 8, the only tants that required releveling of the yroduct had and temperature is shown in Fig.1. The cyche nature of the shcIl because of out-of-planc sctilement were T-16 in Case 5 and Case l

of k a.1 at hi h temperature was judged to have ahn contribusci to the failure R-2. No detailc.I settlement records were available to us for Case R-2, and by causine humping of the floor plates and fatigue of the metal in the annular we understand some faulty crection procedures in Case 5 may have been more t

plaic.hcre failure took place.

, fluenti I slun el.c s.ffcrenti.d shcIl settlements. Nevertheless, the maximum e

A companion tant, number T-278 or the sarne sire was construcacJ nestout of planc differcotial settlement of Tant T-16 in Case 5 was 0.2M. The in to 14.t 1-270 about the same time, by the same TAI. sucthod, was water d placed seasimum out-of pl.m: differential settlement of the T-270 tank at the runimum to cJ. cicavated under for a stair-tower foninJation installation, an l

t of service wates-test I.u.I was 0.0SG mhcocas it was 0.20% at the suasimuni mater hud e

po., nearly ideneiral service. le did md fail, but it was ta en ouesgrimcc% invohing strain measuremrnes of the shril for Tini 1..'11. lirfloni, et al. (1) su*r.nl as a " wonting hypothesis" a vaine

- -..r ' = m nf o  ;,.,,.r-g,,n;m gy g g,9 g

s m

s#

e---

.3 7. =.u

,==

.3 r.

c:.a.s

=c -

e c wua oo

.=.

=

s u

ss.w e

a a

e e

a

.e

e 2 9 :, ;,== =.

9. T 3

.5

., e 3

e

.= u.=.: -= = = = e

.:.. =

=..,.s

=

-3 8 3.w

.3.:.? :: ; y I:

.J.

y -

i 8 3 :

9 T

n

=

e.a.a..

3.

.= 7 w *. = 3whu

• 9 9 2-2 O

1 i 9'd i S B N. - F,:- - -5W}:' = : r.==:,.:

3;

.i i s>i =i 4 i D. t-8

,,,,. = = - 3 se e g

.a.

C u s1 <

C -

C.

• a er A

u es u=

. = -

s : ;.e.=.=u q e

/-

u o

w u,-<

so e

8-I o

u

= n ww u

~

N. $ ti 'E. 6 "C u

7*

2"

.n,s5= 5.s i

o"

- (*

/.

o a y "2 s,e+

\\

.i 8 g.g

-==s'yec-e e 2=v2 a =. n d 5 y ': ;-

e as

.= 5,. "c.

..:; ~u c 5

u cu t

x 2

o

'g s

=. w c.,=.:

?s-.

.- 4 =

e c.=,.

8-a u,

6 ;.

• .. :i ':; 7

.x

=.

/

.O

( e

=u.

=

.g

'?

]

$3 9 0 tue

.o, : =? : u 8= r.g Il.=. :s.

,/

ast,

n i-

= ~; % !

g.a c.

t

=.s= === wc.r

.,.b

=

c-

==.:

.ya ::

n y

=

=

r

.= u

- r -

=

o.,

.N

-=

- i m-o

.. 3u. - 5 *z W.

5 53 -85g I=i

- g

.,. - - 9 3.g m r s.

ate 3"y;'E.C

.e

't 8 6,,*

"t t-5

;'. =. 6 2 if a w

,3

. a

- a "7.o j f r. f

• r 2<

2.s.r, ;

g.s

,. h r. 3

.=

= 3 E.3 e. 4 c n z

! 3 =* u o 5 ;,,*

j 7

a

}yy n g

j

,J 8-

= 4 g ;,= q w e=-

., :i r e:

=r

.-.=

=r

=

7 a

m u =

e-

=v

- YL l'6 ". # -

. o

~5[ 8's $ 1 la

-1*

"i e

• Td=S 5 r

C li 4, :' 2 Ta,,.,, -5 4 2.* -

0 Id

[ $#ao( d i x 3 I Ei 8

=.=, u 4 -- 2

?!

,I ;6

,e M: 5 5:

?

v.,. a.,; v, g

.o

.r.

- e

.=

a-

E

_ c; n=.:,. ew e = r.

2

=

= -

=1

.= y.,:.r :e.7 s u

-s s

t ;'. s e =

a

,=.,.,-,.=,oi.

.=-

=

v.u -==n *.2a Ia.

a.

w s.: g

= u 3

m

,/,

c_..n.=.2=*==*

r a-

"; i g

• a..

." u :

=. :

=.,o u-3 s

t

. m

-e 1

=- s. c:

=

3 c,

u-

.=

3

=

ceec=?em,

,-s l

\\.

['

.

s J :, s -

-}

E s - m=

s c

=a-m.

=u

~~

'I k

=, Y.. *E ',I ~ 'i h

• 8 5

\\% l 'u,i

=..

yi

".c avn w %.=..u. =

u. e

,5 v

=

~0

.= 2 e

e. g l

,E.! L 7 ~ e.5 :~ 7.2 +- h.

=.

C' !.u <

2. 3 v.,.

j/.) - /{

)

c.

'S 3

3 o y.. =,

,,, e. 9 * ;,,.

=

=

f.p

,,.s

=

2oC E" s w.,., =

,9ew=Y,f,2

=

e-e g

=

u *. 7.g 3,.: -

f x

s.. u. E. '

=

s.saa <

9.'.:g 4.,,d. j*.

.=u;j a

• • • • 8 e

2 9-a r

, =.9 = u

-=

so.=

e a

a a

a /a e's d =- w. ' Y 7.i

- u.2. y C

. =-

r 7y I=

s C 5; y 3 y C 7 Y.f y y 9 9 = 0 i; 3 r eme

• a

.n.n.,

~

o cwo a d' y 3 g

4:=

, e.,.,, w.= ;;; =.-.

-m ama e

.3

c. c w

e ::

ns.

.- =

4 ena =

.G es.1 e,.

i, u

~ Ta v sg es.w e

e e

e s

,,,3 ;, =,

3 i 'E $

5. ","

.j d = ;,

a 3._. :-- -..

,t-i 3 ! 3

.i 5..i.aa. 4 ?

8 3..:.

f.

I h.s.sk*4 i e

=

q!! D=, I i z, f.

-t.wt==En.

.,3 -

4

.a

.s

.=,:

.s

. =, =,

.s 9 s, '\\

se

=

.s

.s a

..-.a.

+s e.

a =: :,,s,.

= : -

a

,=,

9w vi

- 2 3:..-

y 4 : r,*a 3

4

=g

=.= =w.; g r. N c: -. ; ::

s

\\

\\

3 8l 3

i

=

,=<. :=

2. 3 '.

\\.

5 Jc e4 1. ?

• g 2 *-

e a 2:

\\. /.V 3- [

i. I. { %

• i..

u a.3

7 ;

r'

=-

I w - e e.,.

O J

./.

e u

-e 1,..=

c' t

e

-E

.g u

y :.

=

I. i

• E9 a,

.s s-

t

7. s: s J v.--

\\

g t,a 2

u

.e.

r

-g.,

v..-.

.e

.r. ; c a;;

.:.=

=c e

.=

y-

n

) 7 b *, ci i a.? -:

}3

• .f..t a \\

o *us

=:

3.g a

E 8*

3 i-4 2 % - s... -.., - -.

. li.

I

'I, d..lg,h..i

>.i.2 ?,

dC f, :

ggc

~

yu z,.

s.

., u

,s r

.,,,

., e s

.e :

• 3,. # ).

f4 i.

r, r

u

.e e

s s

-=

.3

'l.

a m c

~

3.

• w s.

3 u u.= f a.:

.. y

.a u

- 3.

r:<!

.c..,..

\\,.

.ji t t s.

tit.

e 3

m.= :.

e,

.=

- s.

-e

=

e-t y 8.g i

8

,.e

.N.c.

.: q

d. c

-c-

.=r-

.t.

arE...;

3 s

.a t S-

-:a

=

-4 y

..g j

<h r

=

a g 1 C -

C. -

..r**

=. 7...

=.a -

/ \\'*

g '

S:

7y 81 A.

/

g.

, g s, J

<=.

ss i,.e7 i

"" y u

.- e,.u=

x

'/

?

.t i e s.

s:

\\

9-2

/,.

..ga g g 4,4

=.a.

y

.a

.- s w.. :;

i

=

7

.e

.n

e...

e 5,.

=

e..

u *4 C i*

J0 rjeg f, =g,L 12 *,

4' s

s

- d p,2 3.-

,fw, 4

sq

.a/

e-g.

Jg.a m.

sa.4I a f i !. C.i 7*2 7

./.

...., =.

e.sa. %

q >

i

'J

-a e

83 N

2:

.; e

,t s o- =.

4 8

8

?

F

-=

,.g,

e,*..

i.

1

M

.g t..

I cj1. ll] u[1o,

r

ll: Il i!g, gj r

lk a

i 94 e

J

' i I F, I

a i!

F lj.ii lltI(j.'iiii!U,ip$'lIll!ll ii ( t [d It h I

i

\\

g in pi d L

[

A!

n 8

i g.i. !q]kl I II i

i-f 1 i#

d i

g

._,,,.__.__l_.

l th

[ g) {

/

28 N

\\

L

/

q Nd \\w ij[

j N e,!

/

a h

i Y.

Y sh

.,/

4 t

I j

i,

s.

a E

v, l

i-6' I

g;

+

..r.

,q=-

l I'

L-- J

.)6 rV,i.h is

-5 1...j ) =j

!!e].

i

)J4 m.m ii I

[l

(

L

?.^..

A-Reuwea

.}

i j

=

=.

II,71_.:

F

,Th, lir " Mk tr I !

' d,

'3;

==

ig

.g "e_,

h E ] '.4I a

!q

,ll" i

I

'p ;

'N

, e "E fg h

{

t.--------- ;

l '1 l

r g

6 8

1 II l1 I

i I

.I 1

1

[Il\\

M=

)

l l

l!

1 i

- y

, d, y$

yhi g]

\\

..)R la V..

f 1

.a

g s_.

=w w '

S-3 I4

't 1

4 p

(

s..i i

w i

.m s

eus i

l s

l 3.

M N.h SEISMIC ANALYSIS

~

~-

GENERAL c.

(1)

RESPONSE SPECTRA PRESENTED IN FSAR

?'T (2)

STICKMASSMODELSWITHh0bbATIONSPRINSS

-*8 (3)

PATERIAL DAMPlNG VALUES PRESENTED IN FSAR (EDAL DAMPING. LIMITED T010% EXCEPT RIGID BOD,Y EDES) e.4 hre

• A g

(11)

SPECTRUM RESPONSE AND TIME HISTORY MODAL ANALYSES DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING (1)~

ORIGINAL (V = 1360 fps) - ONE ANALYS!S E'QUIPENT

~

SPECTRAWID!NEDBYi15%

+

s

.s s

s (2)

~ NEW (V = 500 res)'- NEW SPECTRA WILL ENVELDRBOTH

~

Y=580FPsAND1360 fps,

~~

s i

g-1 g

, w

.e

'g e

h 9

4

.T,

-=g

\\

e o-,

p y

n;.,

w g-

\\

\\

s 4

m G.m y __

-- 4 -.

--gs.

4%,. o.*

'~

h, s-v%:

Y' _

0-w

,..n..

~

.. :.:~.. -

.L'l

..-l l

m

- c.

a w.

f 3

~

e l

}

SEISMIC ANALYSIS l

SERVICE WATER BUILDING 1

l j

G)

ORIGINAL (V = 1360 FPS BASE CASE) THEN G ' VARIED 4

BYi50%-[QUIPMENTSPECTRAENVELOP s

i; (2)

NEW (V = 1360 fps) - PILING IS fl0DEhED FOR ' VERTICAL DIRECTIONANDTORSION1SGONSIDERED 2

J' i

AUXILIARY BUILDING (INCLUDE GONTROL TOWER AND ELECTRI PENETRATION AREAS G)

ORIGINAL - ONE ANALYSIS USING COMPOSITE-FOUNDAT10 WITH EQUIPMENT RESPONSE SRECTRA WIDENED BY +

}

J (2)

NEW -

ONE ANALYSIS INCLUDING CAISSONS.UNDER BLECT q

PENETRATION AREAS, EQUIPMENT RESPONSE SPECTRA

~

WIDENED BY t 25%

l a

=

't

's

,_.i

,hv

'~

.YS. s&

OJ',

n w w w wn dmsen===

4$

'\\

8 A'=

a)L.

.J 3

4.

DAIGINAL GROUNO SURFACE I

ge i

NATE EXCAVATION

(.CONTAINENT

[

URING CONSTRUCTION DG-20 SO DG-11 PLANr GRADE DIESEL

/ ELEVATION 634

- 660 GENERATOR ((

1 A

A

]

A40 CL'A55 T-12 y

i

g,.-f-

. gje AUMILIARY BLB'$

TURelNE BLD'S

a

.T,A t

..a; :ty::. 's

. [;.,?.s _ j; g.:;.:.h* *c... 3y... -

p r N? f

% $: y;. ?:.

9

- u.

^

• a r a ~

YV:[.R; ' '?.h,

---

-. -- - x-,0.N{/////ju:dikith$

hh:.:

. w-hmw

.Y mk

y.

c:

p--

- S,.

' ((W

/14 f

1.t!-

n! '"iE' Y

V

/ I 31.5 PROJ 13't 26.5 e-43

+

i SGS.4 T.D.

604.4

- Sie I

y

/

le P OJ 53'W 4e.8 PROJ S'N I

$44.5 T.O.

T.S.

I I

PROJ S4 442.5 4

T.O.

PROJ 39'W 3

40.0 3g.3

. agg I

ggg,g i

73.5 T.D.

4(v3.0 PROJ 19'E VERY STIFF TO MAA0 e

85.8 PROJ 18'I T.O.

CLAY WITN DISCONTlf00WS MANS 1

T.D.

33.3 AND PGCKETS OF SILT

- 450 l

l 141.S

• d' RY DENS $ SAN 8Y MILO l

.*k.

r e:A

- ne

'[VERY STIFP CLAYtY $AND s

LEGEND l

Vff /

Y )

m y '**

...n ism

- n.

k h$7:' !!

I L

Y gg ci., icu (22:9 ci.,.,.... inei

->=

l (W: ;

g'f{%

i g3... imu E HD si'er s. * <*=>

-'a

~

ja

"*SA l

f f

,t sem s.nn isP) Q erevet

- sie

' " ~

.! -g'.

es..

-na ji' ly g

((

!5NALE-SAGINAW FnRNATiflN

- 313 l

4{-7 i i' J

y1f

- lea a

T-S T-1 T-13 T-Re SG-29 04-29 DC-11 P8-3

.I

[

b S39.0 811.0 824.8 427.8 434.8 829.0 628.8 814.0 e

}

h M-1A 3

T.O.

T.S.

T.D.

T.g.

T.O.

f.

T.S.

T.0.

T.S.

l h

47.S'-

87.S' 97.9' SS.S'

_.35' 11.l' 10' 59.S' I

[

605.4 q<,

a E-

.V

a 2

~.

J' w

(*.r.yo norsrat lN

M***

L

r-n A

_ \\

g i

i

+

3 f

I

}

_l g

l.

g

[

wi Iws we mar _4 in i

a#xt b

yyy c

s l

=

s l

~~-

..-l u

w

.v u

u b.

IPLA'N

.:... l

=

F' 1

l i

-1 1

l h

-l

^

a

.c I C"3 C3

?!.

!SECrTION

,m uaa.m i

i 1

h. j_j

'g m

~.

4 E

4 9

m I

O-d ir' i

b i

.t k b

IIAIOURND RLMit' LMITS 14 2 5'

'OONSUMERS FOnER COMPANY

~f SECTJON a

m uns,

m gs7 958816 'acrtcWE I

M BME. SIMtF9

,g:k-N._

e,,

7 't.

R, m

~3 ng.

~-

4,_

n

. h.

N+

+.,

b l M ??iRia w W4 5 % a -,.,,,:...--

...8--

m.... -

_..,-,,.__,-,--,,~,_n,.-n4igpe+ z

.;e,-.,-w---r----,-

-.. ~.

~

I

_.4 W

- =..

+..

. y

_. _ _ ;gg.. r, :.,

g,.. -,

g g

- =

<m,

.y_ -

_m 7

x 1

i l

E_L. 6 8 O'-O'.._ _ __

b,y (LUMPED ' MASS POINT) 4 (STATIC PT.)1 4 (MEMBER NUMBER) p EL 6.64'-O'

-).g, p

p T

L.

4 a.

p F

E L 6 4 7'.O'. _

y f

3 i

q k

E'

'M l

K' iK* WA 4

EL 6 30'-

I)--yk

. -c C

T Cg Kzy Cx p

"w/Awk 'VMx7##4 g

DIESEL GENERATOR IBLOG.

SEISMIC MODEL 9NIDLAND PLANT 0NfTS i & 2 CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY l

'1 m sc:. = =

SE!$MIC EDE2.

l Pt3Uf4 13-I DAM. 4/24/73 r.

~'L*2-M M. A, m,; % - -

d N ' j.

-e 2

% yyOS^A*}g,.

?"'

YN.N3 T.O..

~ ~"gfg["

"YM,--~ N g.:,iM.{ j$

NWSRM#MNtNT_^

dMh.

j

(.

~~ '

/

l CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY j

MIDLAND UNITS 1 & 2 - JOB 7220 i

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING

• ORIGINAL ANALYSIS

• Elastic Modulus (ksf) 22,000

• Poleson Ratio 0.42

• Unit Weight (pct) 135 j

l

• Sheer Wave Velocity (fle) 1,369 c

• NEW ANALYS18 e Based on a Lower Bound Shear Wave Velocity of $00 ft/sec. The Design Forces and Floor Metponses will l

Envelope the Original and New Analysis e Elastle Modulus (eff)(ksf) 2,646 o Poleson Ratio 0.42 e Unit Weight (pef) 120 I

e Shear Wave Velocity (fis) 800 0-1036 0s i

.. =

I!fi!'dW,,f!4' M

': ' '. ' 1 i '.m l, i l'

_.J.*,~. i i

'i i

i

'9 Mit(AeID PLAff? WellTS 14 $ _

FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRthe J*

OBE 6 IC CRouseD ACC[LERATION Mt te0 2220 MA55 POINT 1 AT ELEV. Agota"

' (SSE ESE Mul.TIPLil'R OF 2) 21ESEL er:ERAfot~

pt33, gnagg SOUTH DIRECTION DAMPING RATIO fS E i

s.v i

l l

II II ll

~

MIDUWO Pt. ANT UNIYS 14 2 1

~

- ~

CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY SITSEl. CfWERATOR Bl.DC I

)

FLont RESPose5E SPECTRUM nouMs __u-2 oAfe. 4 ma.re S.s i

/

III g

gg

-- l A a l

5

_I I I g

I

-m, m-o m

E E

- /

..Il,l

/

II i

i

/_ _.

-.lR

~

y,9

_ /

- ll[

=

, as l

j#

l ll 8.8 J

4

.8 A 1.0 2.

4 S., S. 84.8 38 40 50.

80 8(48 1

l l

c.

86'O'

=

v@

43'o-y-3,, p.s-sz. rfl%.

l Til l

f A.y e MocW63

, r s

s 5r 4

- -7 m

4 5

l N

u t

x...

a I

e

8 i

t

-i p

b g

i 3

i e

1

-t v g

l

-.~

i l,

I i

..e 3

oi

~

\\

m iii l

s I

i 1

W

(

g*

R i

a l

.t

.9,

~

Y SERVICE WATER STRlrTURE p

PLAN A T EL. 6M '-6 "

3 x.., /

t e

e..

...7 5~ci.%5L'"V'=%5;mhg f, __&sf' O' g

'~

i

.l 3

l n

4 i

3 4

~ TW Sr ACCE -.

• 4,

' d M As4 V. m.---.

i aprmWm'#N.

t t

l n

i a

l 1

a6ac l

MMhl.nytf f2017"'WRI-

~

j_W10//-T-"

v a

• t a%

y * '..

j L

'. K.

u.

.g i-4

ArRILL..

t

.W,..f i

b jf iig.

m,.

..e x

f t

w-_.

j ooT1: WMT i

ELEYSJ7'f f

TiMal N1xx1AL 4

4

• • I GBIOUND PLANT UNITS 1 & 2 TYPICAL SECTICfL

""'"5 '*" "

(LOOKING WEST)

~

I SERVICE WA"ER tai uneu.acna SERVICE WATER PUNF STRUC*

/

STRUCTURE e===

n uv.

i

-4 a.

38' 9.O' 9.O' 9.O' 9.O' M

'h EL 656* 0" 1p 26 (5) 6 (6) 5 11(7116 (8) 6

,,21 i r in 1

(P1)

(P4)

(P6)

(P8)

(13) 12 17 (1) 92) 22 I

y IPS)

P7)

(pg)

(14)

- r M

lP3)

'y

'L-EL 634*-6" 2

k 27 8

6 13 18 9, 623 a6 h

e 2

(P10) r y

IP13) _

(P15) j p17) (15) g K$ EW i

'9

' '14 19 (2)

IP11)

~

24 M SPN 1P14).

(P16); (Ple) b-I EL 620* 0" N

3 912) 7, i

1. qq

69) 10 (10) K (11.) 20 (12)y 3

28 (3)

M

< l d

EL 60S* O" e

verticai l

1%

4 (82): KtNS 3 ). gns (B6): K4EW (4) fBS). KEW j

'h EL 589' 6"

/-W.

GLOBAL AXES

-c Dp11 4/

. J,.

j K 2c8 ) Kt "c, cx.z /

Y

/.

/ /L.d3>/dseh / / / /

SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION

'l l

SPRINGS AND DAMPERS p eemem t

15)

-L Joim

-1 1)

MLsch m sww t,,

ww a::fT CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY P

. MIDLAND PUUIT UNITS 1 & 2 FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT E=_,

=',

Math===tical Model for "r

\\

)

Service Water F g 1-strincture Seismic Analysis

%- -l%3_.._ _

E-

7 J

^-

~

CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY l

MIDLAND UNITS 1 & 2 - JOB 7220

~

SERVICE WATER STRUCTURE

• ORIGINAL ANALYSIS 1

l e Elastic Modulus (ksi) 22,000 2 50%

i

• Poisson Ratio 0.42 e Unit Weight (pcf) 135

• Shear Wave Velocliy (fis) 1,359 i

I e NEW ANALYSIS e Elastic Modulus (ksi) 22,000

• Poleson Ratio 0.42 e Unit Weight (pcf)135 e Shear Wave Velocity (fis) 1,359

• Fnd Area 74 ft x 90 ft l

• Vetical Stiffness 30,000 k/ftlplie e E-W Rocking Pile Stiffness 25,000 klftlpile i

{

.... or I

j

+

' w g '. 7 T ' '.

g e g g. g v,

e B

. h

p. j' 99 9

oos o

ses o.o e o EL.695'- 6 g

l

'I i

3

-EL.614'- 6

--c u

u i

EL.659'- 0 C

EL.64 2'- 6 I

F i

i

_ Z. '

~

~ ~ ~ ~

P_.

EL628'- 6 1

1 EL.614'- D f

l

(

...m.

m

,U Nit I $ L$CTRICA L.'___T_OSTIiUL~fdWih.'.__'

UN. if. 2. E.LEC T.R IC A L l

PENETRAtlON ARsA A65DUATELY 00MF%CTED PENETRATION AREA BACKFILL i

SECIloN B-8 l

1

'4

., i : -

g

3

~

W.-

L 2..:

~

4 I lI

~'

R*M4' 0" N j

n.sge=

I 7 9 '- 6"

~ ^ ~

R.564-0~

R..N50' L __

~

~

1 AUXil/ARY

?

BullDiMG l

i MAgfek El.5GB'-O' MActeg

]

l aths.

\\.n BLbd.p.s(.8 l--

Q

_L

'L, i

I I

i l

Mlf 1

'=-

ONif$

~

ft. 593 6' A.493'-4" h-

~

A, Wininiaccess mn l

m mssseus kan

'd V

6 AMA c

4 aunt n o wwwt m m,,,

w l

N MN WW E SRAMSF aw Mr l

MWM 9/'d'

_49'46" -

49'- 5".

. _..__. 9 /'- d

• TURB/NE BVitDiM6 t

4 k

T \\

3 e

e t

?;

gy.,

s l

m

?.,

,y

.n

l

~

~

~~

~~

~

. k *f

- -2

.,s.-

--. 4,x.,d :'

~

l i

1 l

P i

l p.

k Y-h L h h

h h

h 5

I P

=

L L

["g

-E E

E a

=

=

a h

4 p.

s.

=

=

=

=

=

17 A

A A

55 6-g-+E w

w o

_ s-g 7

f

=

N as r

h

=

p,

.p

=-

I 2

=

1 g

c; g

2,,,

&%M f

F g3 2

J"j: r 1" t-4) i' m,... m u

[,

~.,I I.T.

,e-i 5

' r-X i.

i s W

+

e r_s L_

a

>~

\\?.

Y.

Y

_,?

?

y A.

+

e I

i

~

u sal louluca

~

~

sois ins niin L

E l

I i

I e

f.

g

=

an,.sols im MlVR 8

O.P l

us I

k 3

r E

3 N%%T E

ba i

p a

~

I E

1

\\"

P

=

I'

~

=

L L

L L L

E.

.L L

4'

) L 45 E

I 5

E 5

5

=

e **

a.

,e

• g.e.

j

/

e e

es p e

x*

.1

~

O'q

'El$1

+

y

~n L...

Jit.dT

...Wwc,

, y....

c.

M $_ '", ;s.

• • 5 7 4-4.

1 CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY MIDLAND UNITS 1 & 2 - JOB 7220 AUXILIARY BUILDING i

e ORIGINAL AN ALYSIS Natural Backfill

• Elastic Modulus (ksf) 22,000 7,650

• Poisson Ratio

.042

.042

• Unit Weight (psf) 135 120

• Shear Wave Velocity (ffs) 1,359 850

~

• NEW ANALYSIS Con'arol Railroad l

Natural Tower Bay Aree

• Elastic Modulus (ksf) 22,000 9,520 7,498

• Poissea Hatio 0.42 0.4 0.4

• Unit Weight (psf) 135 120 120

• Shear Wave Velocity (ffc) 1,359 955 848 i

j~

• Cassion Stiffness 4 x 10a km

• Foodwater Isolation Valve Pit 3

l 3:

~W

~

='

~

-w Jihdial l

~

i i

,J I

i i

=_

1 4

i w.....

m

)

m-1mtv L

)

. n

..v

=

.-- :::::::9P M

5 4

E C

E s

.me w

s 1

g.

i N

i

]

y w e.

(

,a 5

L

)

4 a

=

p m-

-_,w-,

, +. - - -. + - - - -, - -, - - -, - - - - - - - -

.a.--- - v

-m m-m.

- - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - ' - - - - - - -

_%ym r ;;; 2 ' -

=4.=~~~~'c ' '

f %eB, g

km f

.Y

_- w &u g_ d_'

..n

=

x,-

..m

..~

. K;f_gf- ]5_,_

??-Q

.w...

g.

,,a, z,-

pI

,5-g w

$4 g

g

,46*G d

l.1.

.h.

-..s.g

+

s E

i r mw. r, x

p31, s

a i

3 a i l u

i y

N e

o l 2 ], 3 i

}

l

\\N

_ _.].

... n.1' Ll '.

l l

i i

g I

/

L N

k

~

t%

iy f

g y

i f f.

f n

~

lg 1* i I'

_1 !

W

~

oi 3

1 y

w f3 k}

yk

[*]

~

% {i

uf, $$s:

3:.

t M

j W

fs2 I

.i i j.

II :hn W

\\

I t

i:

ll 5

M d

gi

)g

~

y

'l la g

M

?g...!

.h p.

.-#-~i= sin <?.

^ & c --:- a a

.e

V 1

WATER Tl HT.

MNtrnarfoM soar _

r r

r i

aggync.

, $ ' _~

i

^ f 1 6 0 '.

.. O4%..:.'

\\

- \\b' M, i, k' h i

e

_s-

-.- T. !.;.~

--_ s

_.sL

_ _ =

g pre p }

n

.\\_-

au raar e

3

,.j,.-

-_ _. 3),

- [ =

(

7 t

I..

_..x s-

---

f2 f..;

- i.

_ Q CMMIT W/PVC i, ['

\\ ' s.

AI6/0 STEfL CONDillT

' \\ V e _ /., **-'**:'****

WRAP,SO TAPi'

~

RIG 10 TO ABS OR (namp-(f C

WifM PLASTIBOND CONNUVA PVC AN PT0R M.

s 1

INTN I

k.

?

DUCT BANK 4 CONDUIT TERMINATION AT BUILDIN6 VALL i-1

}

3 3

)

o M);

e f a.<

~

3

~

• 'f/M/fNED GEADE u

d ' M /A/. //CM

• N LAK4fby

. 6*N/MffdM

~

aneh co"owir D xc<si cououtf jr.....,..

.o.,

1 vI j..

-a:

e.

3

' 70//C. 3000 PS/

O O /-

i.-

m xia. uuu.

ps era oewee AOO K}3H/M,(fYR)

?"*

'gy y

s, -

\\

i

'F**\\

ses ac pyc

~

T c okout7 1Eriar. sAA:(coy 7;)

UPJoturf 1AFLf//STH:

sak

.1;'o*-807. a Ax MI 7(o* -Tor BAK 6

.M 7 Y P/ M (fd$ff Ucf/0 W- ( h f H/(

}

em UNOFKeouca Duct 8 AUK

,\\

q 3a L

a

i DUCT BANK DEFLECTION l

s 1

i l

l l

d l

b t

U l

1 1

L s 10 0 ' 0" s

k' i

/' = 3000 !$4 t

i CONSTANT MADlus of Ee

• 4.734 KS/

i 2 CURVATUME 15 A55em50 (M00ffl[D FDM LCNG TERM i

MFLECTldN NM ACE J/8 TV l

SECTiew 9.3.2.5)

I 10M A DUCT BANK 43"s18' MEP b WHEN STEEL YlfLDS

• 43' FOR A 00CT BANK 54"x.15' MEP b WHEN STEEL YlELOS

• 15, l

a

..988

I

^-

r I

TABLE 30-1

(

FRIE FIELD DUCT BANK STRAINS FOR SHEAR WAVE

.AND COMPRESSION WAVE (SSE) l, Ratio of Strain in Reinforcing Steel to Yield Strain

, Duct Size Bending Axial Combined ta I

30 x 34 0.0007 0.082 0.0827 j

k

+10%

0.0008 0.082 0.0828 h.4

.i 0.0009 0.082 0.0829 p

+204

+50%

0.0012 0.082 0.0832 g

W E

1 Notes:

0.00207 in./in.

yield strain of reinforcing steel

E g

f', = concrete design compressive strength = 3,000 psi 4-5 F

= reinforcing steel yield stress = 60,000 psi 1

y l

C,

= shear wave velocity = 2,000 fps i

i I

t l

W Revision 5 30-4 2/80

,,f W*,

,p -

+..

l

[o '::.

., jv y., 4 ~.

R L,-

. 1.; 24l,.. _4f i

. g '..~,

+

c.

.c.

4,%..

~ 7.,. 9..

MTy -

g "".. 4:

j Y ) f,_,;,'

?%

.__q'.

s. m..

q r 3., y g, g:,.'.*,~'3. y;; ~i;qp, ; _,

y m.;Waq 3 '

a.

..w.. :. 4 g v;t. w wyrw 4.p

=-

,__ h, g

.a..g..;

g.,

is 1

TABLE 30-2 j

REDUCTION IN AREA FROM DIFFERENTIAL FOVEM1:NT (Auxiliary Building from El 593'-0* to 608'-0")

l

.E-6.

O&E SSE Percent Percent i

Differential meduction Difforential Reduction p

Direction Displacement in Area oisplacement in Area I

E-W 0.021" 8.7 0.042" 1.4 I

N-S 0.024' 0*

8.044*

0*

i l

l vertical 0.001" 0.03 0.002*

0.06 l

r i

e i

• Axial movement, no reduction in area for this direction i

. MA,.

t,.

h.

I I

i a

.e' l

W

~

p l

E.'

g-

..s

(

Revisioit 5 30-5 2/80

.. g

uSI

.~

TABLE 30-3 I

AUXILIARY BUILDING INTERFACE STRAINS (Differential Movement Due To SSE)

'.'.t Ratio of Strain in Reinforcing Steel to Yield Strain Direction of Earthquake

..g Vertical E-W N-S

{

Duct Size (Bending)

(Bending)

(Axial)

Combined 30 x 34 0.012 0.097 0.615 0.623 l

+10s 9.012 9.194 0.615 0.623 I

l

+20%

0.012 0.103 0.615 0.624 l

+50%

0.013 0.199 0.615 0.625

1. e' l

9 V

,..J

1. a.~.

.'.Gl21)lBo T j,j, b

,g -

v.., n

.e.,. s i,

p.. -

s A

, tph(p.

1

.fes i ha

, 56...'.

. M,. q 3

,,~3,....._. 1... _

Ware. % F5W,,.,,<is rest s 4.hd,31-h,Nfp (qtc, 50je#,

y c. s%si,pw ye hvChe sptd re%<h er (fam

\\

rmN m/Heg

&4i

, ente r.. -

W _-

S y :. a ;.<:: -

..a.-

m an d si b d,.: _

\\ sh1pT m U 1c ontcd:.-m 45 btu wt sm GE.S r30 is incomyMw i

of pp,Fre.sseJ

..... r

k...

...e.'eh.hh.hN$

Jccbnj.?eNedO Miq kcdd -N SW(sYtp\\..1 -& es. Q, 4(N cwkv.S n%M.To )YMuk NtWof..

N t

..u.;...

.f.,.

" ~.:.

.~

. _. _..,_~ _._ _.

mob.,_...x... s h

acw c es ado 9ts e 9knf ca_bicudre s

' km fe._nihu'p*e$10n)cwutn muuQMf pnf3...

o/4 R$.e(w>es wic suedw 4 ccordin S

.4 I..

a 3

- Ca1uc,d; O2.

'1419. 2. y g 7ad e 9".0

$--+-

.. = - 5, 2.M Bb p@w.. c g ':.-l.9%Eli~Gw%:)(tm c n

O ':-:p. au.&4T

w&. bi (,,

l t:

N

\\-

b.4

.j.?

s

~ - _a_.. :

A

.c:, 4.a.::.y4.,.... % s d tor (

.;].

.c...

..,,. g e,y,.

.m..

R s/.

0

.'.. n. 4. *..

• 4 0. Ca n.. %x..,.....,. w.;.,;

n.

g n v.

1

L!.l.':.. '.y,:.Ju[efwef

. :s_ _

.. s t.

,e

[ ;,.,:.%,.'

y }

(l'lc Gg.,<.g..

y 1

.'__j '.

' a:. x'.

.u !:

6...

-_s

^ '..,. '

'_..h._.?%': $.,h${-@k'.

.&._.:.t. i{

la. _. '....4 n,:. v,.c..

,_,'.c g,.,2.,.,

.r..

a..__r j._ _ :%,a.. a.~ ~

.w.

9-t

.s

. y.s,,','g.

.y.3......., l.,..

... %,,.,,., m.w.

=;...., y... _

w. c.

...... e..n;,..

.i. x.

.-.c.

.. A::.,.,.

.. 1..

.. c. ;. _.. /

y.. :...

6.M i,W:V'..y

.iji.n. l; $'.* & as..

}.

....;..---_~

'?JEiG.

..__,:.n...._M_.s.d,.

E:lll.fQ

-;,z. 7(.

n.

q..

l

.~,

.:..: w.w v

.,a >.,;..

>s.

u

. q u.... g 1.

..u..

y...

1 1.

._ _.*',.... s~,,f. y., h..! '.y. '

7.x.....:v..~ p;,,

.'l

,'. i.w..

.c.

I

. ~.,.

y.,

q -

_......i.c

.:..,,;. s.. ;,:..

I

_ - r: "l.

.;T.

x,.

i

.f.c*

?

.... p

.; 3. ;.

g

....: 4? 8:-, M t.14/,,*,,

.f.e.arti w..f.'.".

.h, b. _,Ma*

. sas D. w*.

- **[=*1 ar.*

• i

--a l

pm e

1 i

I d

{

i l

4

-L

/

v W M kcc+%-

kr NM b-

, r a. aus. s m,

NWAAA l', -- 0%; n,19 61

('

(

(

I l

l

_ -__.-