ML20090H501

Discusses Contract W/Franklin Research Ctr to Provide Technical Assistance for Underpinning & Remedial Soils Work Review & Plan for Communications Among Parties Involved

ML20090H501
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	11/11/1983
From:	Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
Shared Package
ML17198A223	List: IR 05000329/1981014 IR 05000329/1982013 IR 05000329/1983008 ML20090A052 ML20090A064 ML20090A067 ML20090A071 ML20090A076 ML20090A080 ML20090A090 ML20090A103 ML20090A106 ML20090A110 ML20090A367 ML20090A377 ML20090A397 ML20090A403 ML20090A447 ML20090A451 ML20090A456 ML20090A465 ML20090A481 ML20090A487 ML20090A491 ML20090A500 ML20090A504 ML20090A514 ML20090A517 ML20090A543 ML20090A547 ML20090A559 ML20090A590 ML20090A594 ML20090A600 ML20090A613 ML20090A614 ML20090A623 ML20090A626 ML20090A631 ML20090A637 ML20090A642 ML20090A656 ML20090A658 ML20090A673 ML20090A698 ML20090A703 ML20090A733 ML20090A741 ML20090A748 ML20090A751 ... further results
References
CON-BOX-08, CON-BOX-8, FOIA-84-96 NUDOCS 8312020060
Download: ML20090H501 (3)

Text

s g

_1

.m

/ a Reag#'o UNITED STATES 8y

',g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g.'-

.E WASHINGTON, D. C 20555 s

E

/

NOVE!:BER 1 1 1983

_ J.

, [ ~.. M up i vgy >>

m.,

MEMORANDUM FOR:

James G. Keppler [

N INio A Regional Administrator Region III FROM:

Darrell G. Eisenhut Director Division of Licensing, NRR

SUBJECT:

SUPPORT FOR MIDLAND PLANT UNDERPINNING EVALUATION In response to your request, a contract is now in place with Franklin Research Center URC) to provide technical assistance for the Midland plant under-pinning and remedial soils work review. The purpose of this memorandum is to explain the plan for communications among the various parties involved in providing this technical assistance.

The objective 5 of the contractural effort are to provide technical assistance (1) for review of the remedial soils work at Midland, and (2) for the evaluation of design changes to the approved underpinning plans and their effects on structural adequacy. The contractor's work will, to a large extent, provide the technical basis for associated SSERs. To accomplish these objectives, a team of engineers from the Franklin Research Center (FRC) and its subcontractor, Geotechnical Engineers, Inc. (GEI), has been o ganized. The contractor's deliverables are trip reports for all travel and technical evaluation reports to support these objectives.

l The enclosed chart illustrates the desired lines of communication among the contractor and subcontractor, NRR Offices, and your staff. Because of the need for DL and DE to be fully cognizant of actions on Midland and their status, all technical communications are, at least initially, to be through or coordinated with J. Kane, SGEB (or_ D. Hood, LB#4, if Mr. Kane is unavailable). As the project evolves, we expect that working arrangements will be agreed upon which will allow less formal communication procedures with the contractor. However, any requests which could change the scope of work, project costs, or schedules, or which require contractor travel must be processed through TAPMG, DL, and the contract Project Officer, M. Carrington, j

Contact:

M. Carrington, DL 492-8460 00' 2 3

/

1333 D/JoJdod>d JA

~

C

~

4

)

'N James G. Keppler NOVEL'BER 1 1 1983 l

If you have any questions on these procedures or their purposes, please call

+

Jack Donohew, Acting Chief, TAPMG, on FTS 492-7230.

_qm

[DivisionofLicensing Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director

Enclosure:

As stated I

cc w/ enclosure:

R. Vollmer J. Knight G. Lear L. Heller J. Kane T. Novak E. Adensam D. Hood F. Miraglia J. Donohew M. Carrington i*

1

(

l i

L i

i 8

[

i i

i

~

+

g

._._____m.

.. = _. -. - _ -

- ----+ - - -

- - - - - - - ~ -

MIDLh N.D PMorse T - EvALlt A Tl*lt OF LLNDERPINNING N

• V*"'btr i 4 9 3

[eMMUNIckT70N PLA W Division of Licensing OL' L B 4 -h Hood co n trac 1**

FT2 2491-9474 tuvel ad requesfs fe,.

E;SGEB j,'",f

• DL: ThPM G SC$ l* M E

.r.a,e u.-

=

,.,,e,

,r. x,,-

,. ia,,

n. a.+, t ~

FTJ 399-CC3C FT3 Y9 Z-31F3 sehe dule,s PT3 491-SWo A

e ver r il i

da y-to-day.N trek. directi on, to c h nie ai sc op e/s ch.adule.

3 % M "' "\\

'A'"2*'s A""'%

>rryn t con 1ro),

\\

tesvel Arrrovst N

FRC (2 rr)

S.rav da y 99g-ty2 n V. Co n f*49-//6 2 directio n F

GEI

s. Powles

n h

,L, i

_,W L

[0.n at %,\\

8 g4 l nl. '_~'~ ][3_

UNITED STATE 3 J-- p p3cfj NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION J

i

. >c,tp y

eassiscroa. o c.20sss j

t NJE,, e 7_

gy _

2 3

Docl.'. /

trovember 1,1983 J

~~~j~-

5,

~

L.3 -

~;

t_..m#p; et Nos: 50-329 OM, OL La and 50-330 OM, OL i

i APPLICANT: Consumers Power Company FACILITY:

Midland, Units 1 and 2

SUMMARY

OF TASK FORCE VISIT ON THE MIDLAND DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING On August 24 and 25, 1983, a task force consisting of NRC staff and its con-sultants from Brookhaven National Laboratory, visited Ann Arbor and the Midland site to cbtain informatinn related to rereview of the diesel generator building (DGB). The participants are listed in Enclosure 1.

The August 24, 1983, neeting was held in Ann Arbor and provided background information to the task force. Consumers and Bechtel representatives discussed design and construction of the DGB including the building's settlement. The remedial program was explained with detailed discussinn of the surcharge, dewatering, and settlement monitoring efforts. The final meeting topic was the structural reanalysis performed on the OGB, particularly including details of the finite element analysis. CPCo consultants addressed cracking effects and concluded that the DGB cracks have no effect on the strength of.the building.

The agenda and meeting slides are provided as Enclosures 2 and 3, respectively.

The Diesel Generator Building Executive Sumary, distributed at the meeting, is included as Enclosure 4.

i Late August 24, and August 25 was spent viewing the actual cracks in the build-ing. Also, the applicant's crack maps were used by the task force to better l

see the crack pattern of the building.

i

' f i 'Qw 0. Y Melanie A. Miller, Project Manager Licensing Branch No. 4 Division of Licensing

Enclosures:

As stated cc: See next page

'NOV g 1983 f M'Oall /

. =.

. ~..

- ~. - -

..\\-

A 7

i

,~

I s

i MIDLAND i

Mr. J. W. Cook Vice President Consumers Power Company i

19t3 West Parnall Road j

Jackson, Michigan 49201 cc: Michael I. Miller, Esq.

Mr. Don van Farrowe, Chief Ronald G. Zamarin, Esq.

Division of Radiological Health Alan S. Farnell, Esq.

Department of Public Health

[

isham, Lincoln & Beale P.O. Box 33035 Three First National Plaza, Lan,ing, Michigan 48909 Sist floor

Chicago, Illinois 60602 Mr. Steve Gadler e

2120 Carter Avenue James E. Brunner Esq.

St. Paul, Minnesota 55108 i

Consumers Power Company

[

212 West Michigan Avenue U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Jackson, Michigan 49201 Resident Inspectors Office 6

Route 7 F

Ms. Mary Sinclair Midland, Michigan 48640 e

E711 Summerset Drive Midland, Michigan 48640 Ms. Barbara Stamiris 5795 N. River Stewart H. Freeman Freeland, Michigan 48623 Assistant Attorney General 2

State of Michigan Environmental Mr. Paul A. Perry, Secretary Protection Division Consumers Power Company 720 Law Building 212 W. Michigan Avenue Lansing, Michigan 48913 Jackson, Michigan 49201 Mr. 'Wendell Marshall Mr. Walt Apley Route 10 c/o Mr. Max Clausen Midland, Michigan 48640 Battelle Pacific North West Labs (PNWL)

Battelle Blvd.

r Mr. R. B. Borsum SIGMA IV Building

=

Nuclear Power Generation Division Richland, Washington 99352 E

Babcock & Wilcox 7910 Woodmont Avenue, Suite 220 Mr. I. Charak, Manager Bethesda, Maryland 20814 NRC Assistance Project Argonne National Laboratory Cherry & Flynn 9700 South Cass Avenue E

Suite 3700 Argonne, Illinois 60439 Three First National Plaza E

Chicago, Illinois 60602 James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region III 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 e?

M 1

w

._e

+4

+.

s Mr. J. W. Cook 2-cc: Mr. Ron Callen Michigan Public Service Commission 6545 Mercantile Way P.O. Box 30221 Lansing, Michigan 48909 Mr. Paul Rau l

Midland Oatly News 124 Mcdonald Street Midland, Michigan 48640 Billie Pirner Garde Director, Citizens Clinic i

for Accountable Government Government Accountability Project Institute for Policy Studies l

1901 Que Street, N.W.

Washington, D. C.

20009 Mr. Howard Levin, Project Manager TERA Corporation 7101 Wisconsin Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Ms. Lynne Bernabei Government Accountability Project 1901 Q Street, N.W.

Washington, D. C.

20009 l

i i

4

-, ~, - -.. -.

,.. +

~

Supplemental page to the Midland OM, OL Service List Mr. J. W. Cook l cc: Commander, Naval Surface Weapons Center ATTN:

P. C. Huang White Oak Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 Mr. L. J. Auge, Manager Facility Design Engineering l

Energy Technology Engineering Center i

P.O. Box 1449 Canoga Park, California 91304 Mr. Neil Gehring U.S. Corps of Engineers i

NCEED - T I

7th Floor 477 Michigan Avenue

=

Detroit, Michigan 48226 4

Charles Bechhoefer, Esq.

Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Canmission Washington, D. C.

20555 Dr. Frederick P. Cowan Apt. B-125 6125 N. Verde Trail Boca Raton, Florida 33433 l

Jerry Harbour, Esq.

Atanic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissior.

Washington, D. C.

20555 Geotechnical Engineers, Inc.

ATTN: Dr. Steve J. Paulos 1017 Main Street Winchester, Massachusetts 01890

s, E=

t PARTICIPANTS

=

DGB TASK FORCE F

F AUGUST 24 AND 25, 1983 2

k r

NRC Consumers P. T. Kuo*

J. Schaub*

M. Miller

• J. Mooney*

i T. Thiruvengadam Brookhaven K. Razdan N. Ramanujam i

A. Philippacepaulos*

E. Koepke*

I C. Miller

• F. V111alta C. Costantino*

D. Budzik M. Reich

• M. Capicchioni**

Structural bbchanics Assoc.

Bechtel

(

b R. Kennedy N. Swanberg M. Sozen E

Portland Cement Assoc.

P. Shunmugavel S. Afifi G. Corley

7. Kumbier

[

D. Reeves TERA Corp.

C. Dirnbauer i

B. McConnell H. Levin D. Nims J. Martore G. Tuveson n-l

=

E b

• Attended both meeting and site visit I

i

• • Attended site visit only

=

b E

E 2

f-

F e

')

AGENDA NRC PRr.SENTATION ON DIESEL CENERATOR BUILDING August 24, 1983 Ann Arbor, Michigan I

!. Background j

A. Site Plan B. Construction Milestonce I

C. General Layout of Diesel Generator Building 4

'I D. Original Design i

II. Diesel Cenerator Building Construction History

. f A. Construction Sequence 5.' Building Settlement III. Remedial Program A. Soring Program B. Surcharge Program i

C. Results _ of Remedial Program IV. Structural Reanalysis A. Analytical Techniques B. Settlement Input.

C. Imposed Loadings D. Analytical Results E.. Ef fects of. Cracking.

F. Seismic Hargin Review

'V.

Summary.

c.

a e.'r.

,s -l 4 y<)

U 9

+

a

. J2

~ -

a

= i q-r u

pir l

,q<l l

,3 ql r

ei re-l r

i ri u

i

.-r, l

.i r,

i i

i i

J ENCLOSURE 3 i

I I

i m

~~___-

..._..= - -.

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

{

MIDLAND SITE PLAN TITTABAWASSEE RIVER COMBINATION\\

d SHOP EVAP AND

[

AUX BOILER-BLDG N

BORATED WATER COOLING TOWER

\\

TANK V

O SOLID RADWASTE AUX BLDG "fx D

REACTOR BLDG REACTOR BLDG

=

ADMINISTRATION AND-+

^

SERVICE BLDG TURBINE BLDG PUMP STRUCTURE J

L

~

DIESEL GENERATOR s________

BLDG CIRCULATING WATER

~

s O

INTAKE STRUCTURE N

s' OE

's

\\

EMERGENCY COOLING

\\

[

\\

WATER RESERVOIR

\\

• BAFFLE DIKE N

___,~%_/

G 1529 35 COOLING POND j

' ~ = +

+a--4

.r-w

.....u..

_m._...,#

m._.

1 l

l DIESEL' GENERATOR BUILDING i

i.

e FOUNDED ON 30-FEET OF FILL l

e FILL PLACEMENT FROM 1975 TO 1977 i

i l'

e CONSTRUCTION FROM SUMMER 1977 TO l

SPRING 1979

'l l

i l

Tlffdaua % 0.r l

Aapyqu i

[ It I tufut u tura.

.a. n.-

u maaem 2

e e

C 5

M T

M h e

e J

8 W k h

h Z.

b Q

l~

/

.J

/

=

CD l

l C

y 1

E 4

i W

6 l

l C

=

/[

.J W

Q 5

e 5a N

$5 h

-n-,

s

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING BAY 2 N

6 5'-0" BAY 1 BAY 3 BAY 4 34'-10" s

=

(TYP) m m

PLAN r-4 7 '-0" TOP / SLAB

~

EL 634'-6"--

)

=

=

=

I a

a a

a a

r, a

SECTION (Looking North)

SECTION (Looking West) t G-1534 59 a

%4sWNe emir Nm-Emmmmm.W-

-eam-+

mai-

-me.

>+--g-4 4+@h e s. e Du ama e

m Memem d-e -=3a++e-4 re

--nam >

im

a. m W l

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING SIZE e LENGTH = 155'-0" (outside face to outside face of walls) e WIDTH = 70'-0" (same) e HEIGHT = 47'-6" (above grade)

= 51'-0" (above top of foundation) e EXTERIOR WALL THICKNESS = 30" e INTERIOR WALL THICKNESS = 18"

.a e ROOF THICKNESS (slab) = 18" I

e FLOOR THICKNESS (slab) = 21" j

e FOUNDATION THICKNESS = 30" G-1530 0:1

)

i

~~' -** ~' " ~~~~~*' ~ ^#~ ~ ~~"~ ' ' * ^~

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

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING t

i MATERIALS i

i e CONCRETE STRENGTH fc' = 4,000 psi (walls, foundation, and floor)

= 5,000 psi (roof) e REINFORCING STEEL STRENGTH i

fy = 60,000 psi

. STRUCTURAL STEEL - ASTM A 36 G IS30 of 6

g-an e&h4 Awe dee e4 M

he.

gems.

=

w>4 m.de.ow,$a m.sw ee. s e w gw e i.

eem a

68 l

l DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING l

CODES AND STANDARDS ~

e AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE ACI-318, 1971 CODE 1

I e AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL l

CONSTRUCTION, AISC 1969 EDITION j

f G IMo os i;

c v

I.

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING

~

LOADS e NORMAL OPERATION

. Concrete U = 1.4D + 1.7L U = 1.25 (D + L + E)

U = 1.25 (D + L + W)

U = 1.4 (D + L + E) (for shear wall only)

U = 0.9D + 1.25E U = 0.9D + 1.25W

. Structural Steel 1

D+L

)

D+L+E D+L+W ra^s"?a"S ' ^"

mm3.,

I DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING LOADS (cont'd) e ACCIDENT CONDITIONS

. Concrete U = 1.0 (D + L + E')

U = 1.0 (D + L + W')

. Structural Steel D + L + E' J

D + L + W' Tornado wind loads include missile effects when applicable

,j

c. is3o in v

L DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING TORNADO ANALYSIS e Vu = 360 MPH i

e Ru 150'-0" e VELOCITY PRESSURE = 332 PSF

~

e DIFFERENTIAL BURSTING PRESSURE = 3 PSI = 432 PSF l

?

IEu*s"[iE' ' ^"

• ao a aossoa

/o 4

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE o WALLS North Wall Computer analysis Plate analysis All Other Walls

• Moment distribution 4

Plate analysis e FLOOR AND ROOF Moment Distribution - Slab on Steel Beams Plate Analysis (roof only)

^

e GROUND SLAB Computer Analysis, Finite Element Method

)

e i

e DIESEL GENERATOR FOUNDATION Manual Analysis i

e BUILDING FOUNDATIONS

• Statics and Moment Distribution G 153013 I

//

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING DUCT BANK ELEVATION-SECTION OF DIESEL c1____ _ _ _ __7________

,_______ ____________----- 1__n---]l GENERATOR BUILDING i

ll LOOKING WEST 3 1 8 1

' l l r_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _- _ _ _ _- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _1 l l,_ $ 8 Ii ii

')

's si lI l '- J 8 l

((s,1 i l r--- - I ei ll GENERATOR i

,i l

PEDESTAL ll N

ll 7&d h_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ L _.,b:==& ::::======. =

ll TURBINE

'---~~~

BUILDING MUD mkt

= = +. : = =L

't TOP OF SLAB DUCT

/EL 614'-0"

~

BANKS j

l MINIMUM DUCT

' DESIGN ENVELOPE

ll I-- J l

gi ge g

l I

(4._ _.i (l

I I

((i I

I I

l:

1 t _ -.1 8

- i (__ a

__a i

l i

g--- 1 g---

1

-- 7 g---

1 1

i i

I i

1 i

i l

l l

l l

l l

l l EL 634'-0" ' )

I

'w/4/rkfr/

\\

\\

\\

CONSTRUCTION i

JOINT FEBRUARY 1978 I

MIOLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 AUGUST 1983 30 G-306305 I

/3 1

7

,m

(

l 4

i C

w 8

T l

co W e

o R

x m

/-

,7-----

/i s'/!".

I C

,s' l ls,.--,

I

/

l o

i '

l'ul N

//';I' lIt.,1--,

,o' l g lIfs e

s' s '

l l t

/~

)

g o

lN

/

, \\ 1 }- ----.pl l l, t,,o

,l a

_3 l ll L

l i

G lll llr- '

I t il Ie I

j i

/j i.7 _ L _ __,

t

. i, 8 :i

, /,j g

8 s

i I

e i a

j-l lI

/

a }. --- - )

g 0

l lI (

/

8 l it-----

/

i ll,',-

o>

1 i el-p g

i,1

lip, 1 1 Is e

d l

t ll a le e

C ie

/;

,i. c, A -,

g t

e,l

/

, ar s

a

~

g

.,ii <,

i,3-----s

-/-

k I

a m

I

'g 4

4

,i, <

--- s i (/

ll W

i i I-- I I

I I!.( ~ b ~~l I I A

I g

/ l I

I lr I,I n,l,

n

,, s\\ s'/s'

) es>----4 i

/ ' Jh===='-

(

e,l

~

8 W

l ll ", #

i e i,,

z i

Il lp '

Q l e //

==

n b

c i

/

'/

O b-5 u -- - - - - -

mz E-E

b. O zg y) ""3 ln-z i

i C

o g8 l

o 5e

=

=

i r

I If) l 1

f I

i

.~

r

.v c-y

=-'"M*A& f W> m M.-e-amem m ema mw,,

.mw _s s_,

,qme

,s,,s,emy,, wm,w, 4

,m,_

a,,,

~

DIESEL GENERATOR BU LD NG f

155'-0"

=

i 70 '-O '

t s

\\

=

- D '%

~~~~~~~~~~~

I\\T

- - - - - ~ - - ~ - - ~ -

g\\

Q I

sN s-m y-s em e

,s I

s\\

s s

s s

s s

s s

% \\

s s

s l

\\\\

s s

s s

g s

s

\\

s%s g

N s

i s

1 s

s s

s s

s s

s s

s s

s s

s s

s s

51 '-0 '

\\s ON sN LL ti L_s

's _ga c

eN u

s s,u_______________________________us s,w--

r _ _'4< - - ',

c, y- _'-g<- -,,

4 y __,

, y _..

i i

i i

is i

i i

si

___J l1 L__J lI t_-_.I a

8_ - _ J l

i la 1l t

ii e

1 i

I e

li s i:

ll 8

ia e

i N___]

\\1 1

NI I

Tl I

d Li EL 634'-O' wwow

\\

\\

\\

\\

l CONSTRUCTION JOINT I

AUGUST 1978

.omuouuns,

~o, AUGUST 1983 30 G 3063 07 l

1 r

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING

~

~

i EL 680'-0"

.p.,..

~:v.-

EL 664'-0" RETAINING WALL APPROXIMATE

\\

SLOPE 20' j

[-- (MIN) -

EL 654'-0"7

- APP 19'~l],

TURBINE vi

_........g.

1 W' SURCHARGE A BUILDING

/

~

r.n. -

u. g

\\

-- ~winwirr,~7,~wn y

7yy-,:,,,,

,,;, _,,e,,

r ;.1 r_ _._g..

o T-' 7 i

m-

_ r r-L., )

GENERATOR TOP OF SLAB EL 614'-0" PEDESTAL MUD MAT

g., -

\\)

E,..h

.,.7 l

i i

I MIDLAND UNITS I AND 2 DIESEL GLtdHA10H ButDING 2/3'82 G.1948 10 b

1

a DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING DUCT BANK LAYOUT I

DUCTBANKS \\

w,-

h-

~-

TURBINE BUILDING 88 8'si

\\\\

!! s e

\\r s u J

s, ss 8'is

/,

in ss I 8 l%

g\\

/s

[.

C

/i

...r.

i/

\\\\

gs

\\

\\

t p

p

\\

\\

d

• e I

t.

4 4

N g

i l

BAY 1 BAY 2 BAY 3 BAY 4 i

(;.

8 t

l

! : dSA.

s) k

}u Cu 6

td tS

, \\

FOOTING f~

~

REMOVED DUCTBANK TYPICAL SECTION MIOLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 DIESELGENERATORDUILDING 2/3/U2 G 1948 09

/7 7

~~ ^

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING TREND OF MEASURED SETTLEMENT PLANE A 7

~~~

,k PLANE B Q

,f' f l ~'

}'

4' PLANE C

/

i f

i

/s

/

/

d& _ _ -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ s ' 7 I

~ ~ ~

Plane A Nominal reference plane g~

l Plane B Settlement plot as of 11/16/78 j'

before cutting duct banks loose Plane C Settlement plot as of 12/28/78 approximately a month after cutting duct banks ra^e ="* ' ^""'

mom

/9

,, ~,.... _.,

s----

~ ~

l REMEDIAL PROGRAM l

I EXPLORATION

)

i i

ll EVALUATION OF OPTIONS AND DECISION TO SURCHARGE i

}

lli PERMANENT DEWATERING

!l IV RESULTS

!i

')

l V

FUTURE MONITORING s

i i

MIDL AND UNITS I AND 2 2&G 305901 l

4

wA+

Su-*'s6 h ewe hess.-

, =, - - _

am

-e

,-e ee-hw

..+..-

ump 1w:

• W e=r W

i i

I. EXPLORATION PROGRAM e BEFORE SURCHARGE 3

j

. 32 Borings

.14 Dutch Cone Soundings

. Laboratory Testing i

e AFTER SURCHARGE 4

. 6 Borings With Cross-Hole Shear Wave Velocity Tests

.11 Borings With Undisturbed Sampling d

. Laboratory Testing

=?:r"" - >

umom

?

DC-29 t

e t

~DCP-13 #,DG-32 DC-28

,DC-31 e

7 F

DC-18 e DC'19 e DC-30 e

[iG~l i

TEST PIT I DC-20 DCP-8 DCP-7 DC-10 DCP-4 gja.27 e DCP-11

• 8

)

DG-218 eh-8 1b

[~~~~~'9 DCP-120

[ ~

~"I DG-13 I

j l

8 i

e I

I I

I e

i I

,-23 DC-22 i

e l

1 I e j

i 8

8 I

a a

a

/

\\

/

I s ix:- 15 l

i 24

)

3 D'G-26lg l DCP-6 e DCP- %

-3 1 Dj-12 s

DC-7 p,

i-DG-11*l

~

l Dg_

e 1

pCP-5 DG+17 g

L---

4 L--

J o__4 s....!

l

_J

- 1 I Li Li L_

s Drg2

,DC-3 i

DG-5

"~ 4

• j DC-6I i

DG-25e BORING LOCATION PLAN DG SERIES, DCP SERIES AND TEST PIT 1

1 d

p

./

I t

l co m

L.

_d -, J' i

e.us aus i

a i

a e

4 8

4 1

3 s--___e-h-'

a0

-.i r

I e m me--

3 t

l l

I Z

6 - - -... e _ _. a o,ma bM t

CE

~

j 8mW J

\\- -.

U

.q e

m E

g i

g

,---____,....a J

'k f

c I*

9

.====.

_I 6

EU.

M Wq

. I e

e g I

e

.m o v i

~

e

=O L---..e~~~~d m

U l

]

i N

L w,u'

.w.n s,.

,,.., 4 a.. _.

5

I I

o l

1 8'

v-mm

{.

. M.

C

~

vv g

s _ _ _ _ M.

i a

6 8

m as a

l I

MM g

iM i

6_ _ _ _ _ c - - a Me Uo t

= = e _ m ao i

e 1

J MN I

8 v

i a-

=m

., 4 m._____---J o-.x.

m bM 8*

w j

<w b

a au l

g - - - -

g- - - 9 m

o 8

3 i

cu 8

i e

i I

v y

i I

O t---____/----

o l

6 6 6 mg I

8 all 3

s 6

- __a a

u === -.m _, -

w U

M sm.

I U

l i

i I

. - ~.

I

9

'f i

i II. SURCHARGE PROGRAM

.s i

e PURPOSE e GEOMETRY l

e INSTRUMENTATION l

l

}

i M AND UNilS I AND 2 26 G-305903 b

A O

l A+

'I TURSINE SLDG WALL m s

A A i \\

,y Tiss - <q

________a_____..____._

t i

m TRANSFORMER

~

in ij PAD 8l It it i

,i m

10 i

il

'I il 3l1 BAY 3 ltIl BAY 4 BAY 1 BAY 2 l

I I I/

ll g

l I

20*

18 le I

A

'l

.,3 m

2.0* mui N

i

~

I i

I A+

PLAN I

l l

APPROX l

19' _

TIED RETAINING

]

STRUCTUR E APPROX 1%-2 El 064.0

, g=

v4

,c--

t SURCHARGE GR AD E E L. 634.0'- #

l r

r -,

TURBINE BLOG.

SECTION A-A f

0 50 W

SCALE IN FEET GENERAL LAYOUT OF SURCHARGE LOAD DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING L

i f

a

$ad a

w 3

E

$32m i

82 E

WE ws gm ER o Ed w

gE 38 EE So 5$ 23 d

$EE5 WE 2x 2 Emaf a

3 e

)

3x w-2.2

~

/

/////

///,

2 E"

IDEC.l JAN.lFEB.iMAR) APR.I MAYl JUN.i JULI AUG.3 SEP.IOCT.l NOV)DEd.

S 78

-79 TIME I

(A) IDEALIZED SURCHARGE LOAD HISTORY n

E,h e

a dQ

^

Eaa i

I C

l w 2.2

.0 d

I DEC.i JAN.iFEB.l MAR.l APR.I MAY I JL N.1 JUL. l AUG.I SEP. l OCT.INOVJD EC.

E 78 79 TIME (B) IDEAll2ED STATIC SUlLDING LOAD HISTCRY DAESEL GENERATOR' BUILDING IDEALIZED SURCHARGE AND BUILDING LOAD HISTORIES

p

~

m i 1

e i

e o

N f.*

O Cm C

0 c

r

=

____g o

i 1

I g

y 53_ _ _ _ _ _, " - ~ - *d5 vs C

c Q

w 3C g

w 5"

8 1

c g

e sy______, ---- gg=

i 3

i e

i

=

'z l

d e

o t

a A

r UI I

3 h

8 d$.______,"----

U,dC W

me a

c us O.

O' C p

C 3C 0

<g f

3h JC z

['

y a

k w

1 y

=

m o

C o

ex-----

w--_

i

.a Q

c3 i

0 w

i 3

Q W

l I

W A

I l-o O

el i~

g gl25_ _ _ _ _ _,- - - - - ".ia, o

m d):

$4 N

a 8

C 6a

~

a s

W,_______- _ _ _ _ _,.

gi 58 i

I I

I l

I K

_____/-~~-

EL 1

N NcQ li k

i i

,s.

m y,,e m.-

0

r i

l 9

O s-r-

3

=

3 a

s o

8 r

s-E

_h b

E F

i bz E-WE i

Em E 4 EB

, ~

mm llL Q E

5 F

M M

k M

Y r

y s

i<

5 f

E$

i r

m l

m..

-.mu w-

- - =

• e-***

~"*

• IV. RESULTS OF REMEDIAL PROGRAM e St: IILEMENTS si

. Predictions

. Observations e FOUNDATION MATERIAL PROPERTIES

. Settlement Calculations

. Bearing Capacity 3

. Dynamic Properties

. Surcharge Effectiveness

=^,"a""" ' ' *""

,,,.3,,,,,

//

]

e e

h n

s n

f o

e n

u s

e s

5 a

e e

e P

s

=

5 s

a y

h e

e a

e s

e e

s e

7

=

e Gs g*

ete a

e e

ns 5

s e

o t

a is

=

n 6

a 5

l I ai*l/,

V a s ET e

f E

As wt s

Y a

e tG

=

i V

m

,R Dt t

T e

c LO

.t e

4 e

4O ' l E

a 0

s t

a s

e OI 4

e l

EI E

VS T

5 s

t e

V e

S8 i

D se LI o

V 6

I 8

l i

O A

A v YA ee l

v O A l

e s

5 V

t a

s E

s GNA DG t

a e

o DD h

a A

s e

s A

L E

s G t

~

8 L

t A

a I PL 0

NOO 4

t L

a M e i

e 1

T O

t H

I

&E s

e e

D e

e c

s o

n e m LGE 0

I i

i e

s S

o u

a 6

a A

5 rt t

I I NG

=

l e

s I

DLA l

l D

UIR e

cs Ol s

1. l 8

5 i

e ROC i

d e

OCR s

s T

U A

,S RT e

a I

a n END

=

e 5

e s

e NEN EMA GE LL e

E 5

no LTE h

s a

a ETV s

~

SEE RA*

IESL eA*

e a

r2*

B Igi*7 e

DLR u

g,E e e

3 s

AE CT I E PM

• e B -

a e YO w'

I s

5 s

TZ 2

a E

P n

s e

s 2

8 5

a ao A.

eg e

e gTl s

s 5

e t

s i

s a

Gp m

e s

RA*

E s

es 5

I e

e e

a

, e t

s s

A h

e i

5 /.

e c

e sa n

i a

s e

i t

a s

s e

e n

e s

5 a

t a

L a

T a

T r

t N4'8 s

~

e e

e s

e e

8 e

a.

o g

3 s

a e

6 s

a s

g 0

e

.*l 5i3Ck g :3e e E g g >*a" cI t

s g,,* l x 46}

4 e'

i' i

s

O

')

~

t

>=

2 m

c z

d Z

=<Ca TIME (LOG SCALE)

(A) LOAD HISTORY i

i i

1 a

29 4

9a 8zCU D

1 z

q i

w i

2 E

w i

e d

iI t

n oH= -C log g

__q__

'100 1

z r g

IoM i

Si z =i i

C 1 i

sI u

C w

i I

i I

t t

2 TIME (LOG SCALE)

(B) TIME SETTLEMENT CURVE TYPICAL LABORATORY LOAD HISTORY AND TIME - SETTLEMENT PLOTS

-r O

3 r

N r

g i

s i

n D.

i

}

it

/

!'til i

m

'i ! J 1

L F

r s' ~m og T

il a li:

/

ja;1'a r

i firI

^

,[

i:elil t

t

':]43 I l

E I'

I

/~

1. t r i

-f

. E e::n }s i t ge ! * :1

a

• i E

1 m

ja a

e i

p g ~"

/

se t

i Oh g -

2

Z

=

/

I bN E

wem

/

I 6

i t

<Om e

epc l

/

i o

l amm

=

L

/

=

m :0

$)k

>N<

[

s l

N E-r l

/

NM e

t

/

2;

~/

ld Z j

c EO

/

d x.

3%

1

d r

-l J

t/3

'c i

e l

J E

1 1

d 3

rl 1

r s

'I 8!

2

=

2

' Eg o D

m.i lig h$

E l

2 t

t

l'

=

"g 3

N, i

i i

i 3

5 8

3 8

2 3

3

{

ONNI $%IA$M N a

6

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

-0.2

=

0

==

=

==

==

v-d=%AA'kq tn

0. 2 w,

s LL3 t

'E

=>

L) 4,4

' =, = g

= = e 4.s.g z

s 0.6

• A'... -

F Z

aA i

0.8 p..

)

6 J

1.0 I-

SETTLEMENT PER LO" d.2 CYCLE C,,= 1.25" l.4 I

l.6 xW l.3 9/14/79 W

6/29/83 -

4 q

'R:

I I

I I

I I

I 4

O^

ZF

--) w 630. 0 OW

=

=

=

=

=

=

g u 620.0

=

ov

,,a 610.0 i i wZ F O 600.0 s

- 's

=

4"

,

2 H 590.0

=

_4

.....=

>< > 580. 0 OW E 8 570.0 1

-I l

I OW Q.

CUAAJL AllVE Tine (DAYS) 1,000 f.500 4

SETTLEMt.dT vs. LOGARITitM OF TIME SINCE 9/14/79 MARKER DG-3

/5

l L

)

3

=

e ;.

A D

8 R

E

/

U T

9 0

=

TGC 2

I 0

ANA

/

5, NI R 6

'p

( RT

^

1 EB W

TTU OAS LW g

PET DN D

E ELM

~

TI E COL q.

EST s

R T

l. s

="

R E

O S

C 0

=

0 0

g,'

r_

I s

I l

P 9

l

'h I

/

7 A

4 1

/

m 9

'a E

I J

l s

C N

a I

,s' SE P

EO I

S ML I

e I

i Y

IS A

D T

D3

(

FE -

E OTG M

CD s

I ME I

T RR I

s l

i TRE E

V IOK RCR I

T A

A A

GGM K

ON

=

G ut LI

=

W U

I O "5 I

I sl

. O L

C 2

vS i

=

R a

E1

=

P

'l f

T f

N u E

EC M

M E

EE L

LL TC T

TY T

=

EC E

I

=

I S

S

=

9 7

=

/

41

/9

..0 0

0 0 8

0 0 0

0 8

2 4

6 2

2 0

4 6

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

_ 0 0

4 0

0 1

1 3

I l

a 3 2 l

0 9 8 7 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 LL-zO~8g>Ws lW

^FwI

^m oz " ez J J. -

L a.

a a

L 66L EW6tWOZ3Ogo gs 42 XOE$

tt l

FL 7 m

- - i" -

E-

[

2=L. I k

y b-

" z _ r-P _

t i

f.

Dit SL 1. GL NL HAIOH HUILDING

• *2 9 ""

Gil*"

89 *u*"

3r n

n 10 00' 101

' '-- 101 10 0

'~

)

am a

a94 Q 0.82 0.86 i.05 O K - Rias7 i

i

,8R--- Rlase V-~~ R,Io 87 p(~-- MIan l

.l l

l l

l xi.06 1

i i.06 3 :

i i

i

(

J

(

t 1

.i 1

(

)

1

.t

.e i

l 1

i I

8 3

l l

t i

e l

g g

'i

.[x x

---

'i.ug gl[x--- asi_ l g lj_x---j xl

.u k y.j x

i i.ag ig

' 'a L 6i.iG W

W W

i.=6 J"

i.20 3.22 i.4e y

n LMEND O

DEEP HORROS ANCl#0H X

BUILDING / PEDEST AL SETTLEMENT MARKER i.20 SETTL EMENT IN INCHES 4

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING ESTIMATED SECONDARY COMPRESSION SETTLEMeerrS FROM 12/31/a1 TO 12/31/202s ASSUMING SURCIIARGE REMAINS (7

i I

1 Dil5t' L GL Ni lt ATOi! ilulLDING 0.51)

(0.39 n

1 i o r-] O ioi i

1, i-io r-].

)

0 55

~

0.47

-0 50 0.51

~~

,k~~~~

h" ~ ~ ~

0.Si

,9 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0.54 j

0.52 0.49 i

i aSo :

i

ua4, i

(

)

i

(

j

(

)

(

)

(

i.

l, r

t l

g g

I e

g e

i i

R51,X, _ _,8j o.55

'O.48

-- a4 0.4 a42 X '

'~

O 7 Y

W l

0.47 0.49

,j i

t.

LEGENO X

BUILDING / PEDESTAL SETTLEMENT MARKER 0.42 MEASU,tED SETTL EMLNT BETWEEN 9/14/79 AND 12/31/88.

I DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING MEASURED SETTLEMENT FROM 9/14/79 TO 12/31/81

i

- - - - - - ~ ~ - - - ~

~ ' ' "

~

I i-I DIESEL GEIERATOR BUILDING i

1.33 1.15 1.19 1.18 1.29 T

]p y

y v

r,g

.)

g- -- - - 3 I

l 8

i i

i i

s 1

8 l

8 i

i i

1 e

s 1

1.59:

a e

i l

e I 1.46 g

\\

/

g

/

g

/

I 8

)

I g

g i

l

)

e i

8 I

e I

l I

I I

I 8

8 i

e e

i t

l i

e a

s L---J L___J L___J L__.!

JJ 151 LX1 LXI L_J;

+

1.62 1.67 1.69 1.98 1.89 s) s 4

Silti 0F BEASURED SET 1utENT 9

i FROH 9/14/79 to 12/31/81 Als PREDICTED sETTLEsENr FRon 12/31/s1 to 12/31/2025 (cROUNDWATER ELEVATIDW TO 595')

i i

/1

et B

l PRESSURE (KSF)

I O

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 l

628 g

DEAD t.OAOS 9EFORE SURCHARGE REMOVAL

/

/

622 l

(1)

(2)(4)(5) (6)

(3)

/

/

/

O 618 t

d

/

1 1

/

i 5

I jl OEAD LOAD f

3 A00ED AFTER I

a 613 SURCHARGE I

4 R EMOVA L---*

• ~

j i

LtVE LOAD M

=

~

IN-SITU EFFECTIVE STRESS I

I DEWATERING OURit G SURCHARGE I_

LOAO P

\\

SURCHARGE 603 l

t EXPLANATIONS (1) In-situ effect:ve overburden pressure (GWT at 627),

(2) Total effective pressure before surcharge removal due to in-situ effective overburden pressure and structural dead loads present dunng surcharge.

(3) Total effective pressure at the end of surcharge due to in-situ effective overburden pressure, structural dead loads, and surcharge toads.

(4) Totas effective pressure due to In-situ effective overburden pressure and total structural dead loads (loads present during surenarge plus dead loads added after surcharge removell.

(5) Totai effective pressure dua to in-situ effective overburden pressure, total structural dead loads, and expected live loads.

(6) Total of fective pressure during the life of plant ooeration due to in-situ ef*ective overburden pressure, structural dead loads, Jewatenng loacs, and expected live loads.

l COMPARISON OF EFFECTIVE STRESS BEFORE AND AFTER SURCHARGE

' SOUTHWEST CORNER DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING l.

k i

d i

l i

V. SETTLEMENT MONITORING

)

i l

e PRESENT F

eFUTURE i

i l'

1 1

l t

I 4

t k

MIDI AND UNil$ l AND 2 JULV 8383 26 G-305906 I

4 4

er*-

-WM*

ene e

,y-'.

m a

s.ge-e dier e.6 MWee-*"

a et ev-eemd+4he*MW h ' 6W* = ' = " * =

• 4 l

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING FINITE ELEMENT MODEL FOR ZERO SPRING i

CONDITION DETAll A

)

BUILDING

/

FOOTING 15 ft

/

~

/

(typ) 1 e ;....

~/

lii?

7 p,;'

/

,-, na u

f x

p NQ

% [

[

3;>

x J

s-

1. f;f f

'Q N

v o

/

/

N N

s

>'40

'.g$>'

<N Y SEE DETAIL A N

N x NN 4

y 3

N N NORTH N

i

\\

APP 15' (typical) l

}

Jutvi 30 G-3057 31

. ~ - - _.

~

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING FORCES REQUIRED TO DEFORM BUILDING TO GEOTECH'S 40-YEAR ESTIMATES i

3,081k 961k 1,330k

.)

PLAN OF l

DGB l

FOUNDATION 3,632k 1,740k l

NORTH 65k 4,384k d

j 56k 3,003k 1,390k Juty ses gggy t

.=

o 3

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILD ING KEY ISSUES i

i 1.

DISTORT.10N OF BUILDl_NG DUE TO SETTLEMENT MEASURED PREDICTED I

l 2.

CONCRETE CRACKS DUE TO HANG-UP ON DUCT BANKS OTHER CRACKING 3

)

3.

STRUCTURAL REANALYSIS ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

~

ADDITIONAL ANALYSES i

CONSERVATISM

-i I

4 ou-e g

a

..w*+

m b

~

~_

(

i Hidland Plant Units 1 sci.!

"~

Seismic Analysis Repos

- P h ;e

• Generator Building ~ and Pe<lest s l' DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING MATHEMATICAL MODEL ELEVATION LOOKING WEST i

i 71 v(.-) -... ~.. <. -

m s..

.o.

,. y-

'l EL 680'-0*

M (LUMPED i

MASS POINT)

)

1 EL 664'-0"+

M2*

• ' ' '. l 1.

o L s.J

^* **

-o EL 647'-0* + () M 3

K GRADE EL 634'-3" l M

/

Kw\\

p' 4

mwe C

?

EL 630'-6".y

%p l r. -.' m

+w l c r. : 4.:1

< c WB

-s--

i,-

s y

Cw UCy: r C

l x

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, m,,,,,/

K y

FIGURE 9 88 G 2043 83 o

O 9

= =:== = v:== = a = i:=

0;i0:i0..= 12 ::

T..p-t -

C.

el 00=c:=tC: Ouildin

==d P:d::::1 I

TABLE 2 MASS PROPERTIES OF DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING i

For Horizontal Earthquake:

Mass Moment of Inertia (K-FT2)

North-South East-West Elevation Node Mass (kips)

Earthquake

_ Ea r thquak e 680'-0*

1 (M1) 5,338 2.8955 x 10' l.2247 x 10' I

664'-0*

2 (M2) 7,642 4.5120 x 10' 1.8476 x 10' l

647'-0" 3 (M3) 4,185 2.9140 x 10 1.0012 x 10' 8

630'-6" 4 (M4) 12,155 3.0670 x 10' l.0528 x 10' l

4 = 29,320 I = 1.3 3 8 8 x 10 ' I = 5.126 3 x 10 '

For Vertical Earthquake:

Elevation Node Mass * (kips) 680'-0" 1 (M1) 5,338 664'-0*

2 (M2) 7,642 I

647'-0*

3 (M3) 4,185 I

i 630'-6" 4 (M4) 4,274 I = 21,439

• In weight units N

9 h

k t

0810a e.

~,

=

m--V-

^'eu a

r'

,m

.: :. :.....:. r ; e. :.,....

.:..: t.

G - ::--t + i. v t E.: :1d::. :::v Eedve 1

1 i

TAELE 3 MEMBER PROPERTIES OF DIESEL GE::ERATOR BUILD ::G tiorth-South East-West Earthquake Earthquake j

Effective Mocent Effective Moment i

i Shaar Area of Shear Area of i

Beam (ftz)

Inertia (ft')

(ft z)

Inertia (ft')

1 799.4 1.143 x 10 '

863.1 3.926 x 10' 2

799.4 1.143 x 10 '

863.1 3.926 x 10' 4

4 3

799.4 1.143 x 10' 863.1 3.926 x 10' 4 -

t I

it 1

e

\\

0810a

. e J g

s aw,

y a

l' '

~'~

Midland Plant Units 1 and 2 Scisa.ic Analysis Report - Diesel

/

Generator Building and Pedestal TABLE 4 SOIL SPRING AND DAMPERS FOP DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING NORTH-SOUTH EARTHQUAKE i

Cx Cy V

p G

E K

Ky (k-sec/

(k-sec-ft/

s (k/xft)

(k-ft/ rad) rad) rad)

(ft/sec).(pcf)

(ksf)

(ksf) v 471 115.6* 7,965.0 2,310.0 0.45 2.491 x lo 6.3614 x 10' 17,603 2.1234 x 10'

()

s 5

7 500 125.0 971.0 2,719.0 0.40 2.9451 x 10 7.1052 x 10' 19,501 2.2391 x 10 5

7 i

666 115.6* 1,593.0 4,618.0 0.45 4.9805 x 10 1.2719 x 10' 24,892 3.0023 x 10 s

796 115.6* 2,275.0 6,598.0 0.45 7.1150 x lo 1.8170 x 10' 29,750 3.5882 x 10' s

816 115.6* 2,390.0 5,931.0 0.45 7.4746 x lo 1.9087 x 10' 30,493 3.6779 x 10' t -

• Values from weighted average method 0810a o

l

^

a f.

Midland Plant Units 1 and 2 Seismic Analysis Report - Diesel Generator Building and Pedestal l

TABLE 5 SOIL SPRING AND DAMPERS FOR DIESEL GENERATOR DUILDING EAST-WEST EARTHQUAKE Cx cy Vs p

G E

Kx K

(k-sec/

(K-sec-ft/

(ft/sec)

(psf)

(ksf)

(ksf) v (k/ft)

(K-fE/ rad) rad) rad)

])

5 7

471 115.6 796.5 2,310.0 0.45 2.4623 x 10 1.3006 x lo' 18,887 4.54 x 10 5

7 500 125.0 971.0 2,719.0 0.40 2.9130 x 10 1.4524 x 10' 21,022 4.76 x 10 l

666 115.6 1,593.0 4,618.0 0.45 4.9237 x lo 2.6000 x 10' 26,706 6.4182 x 10' s

5 796 115.6 2,275.0 6,598.0 0.45 7.0338 x 10 3.7150 x 10' 31,920 7.6723 x 10' 5

816 115.6 2,390.0 6,931.0 0.45 7.3894 x 10 3.9025 x 10' 32,717 7.846 x 10 7 E

t 0810a l

e

l

____w_

~'

Midland Plant Units 1 and 2 Seismic Analysis, Report - Diesel Generator Building and Pedestal

{

TABLE.6 SOIL SPRING AND' DAMPERS FOR DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING VERTICAL EATHOUAKE V

p G

E KY Cy s

(ft/sec)

(pcf)

(ksf)

(ksf) v (K/ft)

(K-sec/fE) 471 115.6 796.5 2,310.0 0.45 3.3349 x 10 s 25,638 500 125.0 971.0 2,6'09.0 0.40 3.7247 x 10 s 26,979 8

666 115.60 1,593.0 4,618.0 0.45 6.6676 x 10 36,251 8

796 115.60 2,275.0 6,598.0 0.45 9.5252 x 10 43,303 8

816 115.60 2,390.0 6,931.0 0.45 1.0007 10 44,410 i

A 0810a e

l l

~

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING l

STRUCTURAL REANALYSIS l

e BEHAVIOR i

l e LOADS AND LOAD COMBINATIONS

]

l l

e MATERIALS

\\

e ALLOWABLES i

e SEISMIC MODEL i

e FINITE ELEMENT MODEL J

)

i e EVALUATION AND RESULTS i

e CONCLUSION am neu 25 G 305741

• • -+

=='h6Mh me we m -- e

,ee 6---

e -

-e g =

-m

=6 eppe hW

• NM DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING FLOOR PLAN AT EL 6345-6" 155'-0" f) n.

.'E

.........;,4 u

{,

1 I

I I

I I

11 '-6 "

l BT I

I I

I I

I T

I

\\ -)

l I

I I

I I

I I

l l

1 l

l l

l 1

l l

1 1

I I

I I

70'-0" I

I I

I I

I I

I i

i l

i i

i i

i_

2'-6" 5

I

'I i

I I

I I *

~

_~

5 N

l I

I I

I I

I I

I 1

i l

i I

I I

I

)

l I

I I

l l

l l

i b -

o Jut m G 305742

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING SECTION B 155 '-0" -

18" EL 680'-0" 0

c EL 664'-0" 21" EL 634'-0" W

P

%?

W R

P V

W t_3 r,

r, r,

r,

-EL 628'-0" J

l i

10' E%"" ' " 8 25 G-305703

.w-..

~~

I l

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING REINFORCEMENT i

1. 8 A

s J

EXTERIOR

\\',_2 ' -6 "

WALL l

/

.l. ' '18, INTERIOR f

. $/.

WALL

'=

1. 8

1. 7

/

/

s I.*

fs

• /

( :.18" ROOF l

1. 6 A

((.

ol.

6'.

1 SLAB 21,

s EL 664' i

+-

i

1. 6

1. 6

/

7 j

FOOTING I

2,-6, t

i u

~~

\\gg b

10' q

d' 25 4 305744 v

ae x

,4

.y m.-

, - - - ~ - -

.,_....wg

,w,>-

m.

i DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING l

l MAJOR LOADS J

l e DEAD LOAD AND LIVE LOADS t

i eEARTHQUAKE l

e TORNADO i.

l e St1 iLEMENT

.)

eTEMPERATURE 4

I u%"~ '*

• I g w.wsres 4

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

7._.____.

I 1

l l

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING l

LOAD COMBINATIONS i

l ePSAR 3

e QUESTION 15 i

e ACI 349

{

CRITICAL LOAD COMBINATIONS i

1.4 (D + T) + 1.7 L + 1.9 E + To D + T + L + W '

+ To D + T + L + E ' + To r.,-'" ->

m m,.

i i

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING MATERIALS e CONCRETE f'c = 4000 PSI f'c = 5000 PSI e REINFORCEMENT GRADE 60 e STRUCTURAL STEEL A-36 e SOIL STlFFNESS umts e asso 3 25 4305707 1

..x-..

i l

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING DESIGN CRITERIA 4

s ACI ~318 AND 349 0

i fs = 54 KSI =.9 Fy t

Eu = 0.003 e AISC 1969 i

e BEARING l

4.67 KSF (STATIC)

J l

7KSF (STATIC AND DYNAMIC) i f 8083 254 3()S7M I

O 7

m DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING HORIZONTAL DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA - SSE 100 80

\\

/

!! "?g,,

,N

/

~

20 l

l 0.0 0.5 J

K 2.0 36 10.0

$4 P$RCENT b3 CRITICAL oh DAMPlNG

\\.

9 1

8 K

l

/

/

/

\\,

\\,

\\,

01 02 03 04 06 08 0.2 0.30.4 0.60.8 2

3 4 6 8 10 PERIOD (seconds)

= " " " " '

sowa.

=vw-1

+

-9

-e*

T--

-W "M

l DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING SEISMIC MODEL EL 680'-0". (-) M (LUMPEQ MASS POINT)

.w.

.u.

3 M (MEMBER NUMBER) d

. e.< -

EL 664'-0" - ( ) M 2

EL 647'-0"+ ( ) Ma a

i i

i f r' M

K x

'y/Av/,3 y//W//yj Y-

K, 4

a s,

s x

1-QB),

r i

EL 630'-0" $,,,,,,,,,,,y K,.'i C,

r' l C C

,,,,, i s 1

i 7,* ' ** 8 25G-3057-10

1 DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING l

SEISMIC ANALYSIS i

SOIL g

l DYNAMIC SPECIAL WEIGHTED FSAR

{

PROPERTIES ORIGINAL 10 CFR50.54 AVERAGE NOMINAL V

(FPS) 1,359 500 796 666 s

j G (KSFl 7,750 971 2,275 1,593 i

ll p

0.42 0.40 0.45 0.45 J

l p(PCF) 135 125 115.6 115.6 l!

=

27 o aosi 25 lI

,y,, _m en,

m4 9

=-

-A'W-eem owm o

4em 5

-W-

'H**

9 I

l i

i, j

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING SEISMIC 0

i ANALYSIS 1

t

. TIME-HISTORY l

l j

. RESPONSE SPECTRUM l

J l

l I

t maue.csimen j

mesua 25 G 3057.I1 (U

i

I DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING

~

FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRUM 3.0 OBE 6% G GROUND ACCELERATION i

- 796 hIsec (SSE USE MULTIPLIER OF 2) s V, = 666 ft/sec DAMPING RATIO (PERCENTAGE ( % )

g5

--- V = 500 ft/sec OF CRITICAL DAMPING) 1 %

s MASS POINT 1 AT ELEVATION 680'-0"

- 1'359 Him

_a s

NORTH-SOUTH DIRECTION l

S d

z 2.0 Op 4

.i i

et 31.5 S

i

!~

i m

7 O

i i

O

!.I!g i

4 i

t 1.0

,i

'i l li r i

d 1/'i i

{

0.5

!/'

V5.

fIM M*dp --.-.

f 0.129 G p

0.1 1.0 10 100 FREQUENCY (CPS)

~ ~.

" "8 G 3057-12

(

l$

-- J

i

?

I DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING SEISMIC ANALYSIS i

RESULTS i

1380k l

0.26g i

)

3100k i

0.23g i

1 3900k l

0.20g

\\

l 4

J l

i 0.16g l

5800k 1 64000 k-ft j

SHEAR MOMENT

= = - -

North-South Earthquake (SSEl I

m m,,,

l l7 i

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING FINITE ELEMENT MODEL

,./

49'-10.5" CENTERLINE OF ROOF

[

)

SLAB TO CENTERLINE OF FOOTING g

/

-s V

+ /

g

/

c>' ',

/

~

Z

'Qs

']:

$4;<

/

$ghx

-L'Ef I;' p', $;$'$

j h

N

?>

N

- x /

//,/

TYPICAL VERTICAL N

NN I'

N m

/

TRANSLATIONAL J

\\

N D>/

i N

SPRING

'M N x /

I#

152'-6" k

'r x /

(CENTERLINE TO CENTERLINE) x J

67'-6" (CENTERLINE TO CENTERLINE) m--

m mu.

(4 1

. - ~.

1.

2.

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS 1

PLATE ELEMENTS 901

.)

BEAM ELEMENTS 1 41

..l es x,.' s -

NOUNDARY ELEMENTS 252 n'

2 TOTAL 1,294

.i

p.,

1 NODES 853 e._

a

'}

s.

~

1>'

BSAP PROGRAM l

l li

/

-LINEAR ELASTIC STATIC ANALYSIS

' \\

I'

[,'

?f y I

t s

l I

~

, 2^"&#!'f_***

2s a.aosi.,s

./

' i

^j./

l

(

s

._,.....-.....w.

- - - ~

" ~

' ^ " ~ '

~

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS e DEAD LOAD - GRAVITY g

e LIVE LOAD - PRESSURE t

i, e EARTHQUAKE - ACCELERATIONS i

l i

e TORNADO - PRESSURE, CONCENTRATED LOADS l

l e St: 1ILEMENT - SOIL SPRINGS g

1 i

I.

L L?a ""**

2sc.or...

I l

l

w.

.*-a-

=.----=a-k DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS i

J e SOIL SPRINGS (BOUNDARY ELEMENTS) l No Settlements (Approximately 16,000 KSFIFt) 4 Short Term Loading (Seismic)

Long Term Loading (Settlement)

J.

l f.

t%

--...-ws e.=_..

. ~ ~ -

......au..

. -. ~..... - -.,.. -.

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING SETTLEMENT 4

i I

ERROR MEASURED / PREDICTED NW SE BAND 1

[

{

A) 3/78 - 8178 1.19" 1.99" 1/8" B) 8/78 - 1/79 0.77" 2.21 "

1/8" l

t I

2 i

C) 1/79 - 8179 1.50" 3.24" (118 i

+ 0.1) l!

0 i

D) 9179 - 12/2025 1.33" 1.89" 0.2" 4.78" 9.33" 9

1 l

Jut en 25 G-3057-24 6

1 e...,.a 2..

.~. -. _. - ~

...m

...g.

e e-

=.

-~--=e--

~ * ~ ~. -

i DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING ERROR IN SETTLEMENT VALUES i

e PRECISION OF SURVEY INSTRUMENTS J,

l e READING AND RECORDING ERRORS

~

e SYSTEMATIC ERRORS (SCRIBE MARK

> MARKER SUBSTITUTED MARKER

> MARKER) e EXTRAPOLATION ERRORS 0

l TOTAL ERROR = 2 (118 + 0.1")

I

'"3 25G-305717 i

L p

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING MEASURED SETTLEMENT ALONG SOUTH WALL 1/79 I

)

e l

d a

4; i

3.00" 2.92" 3.16" 3.37" 3.24" 8179

,3 4, J

L 1 r RIGID-BODY N"

MOTION

-0.04

-0.19 J

L e

3 25G-305718 M

- - + _ -

- - + = * * = - = = = * ~ +

~

l DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING SOUTH WALL SETTLEMENT -

l SURCHARGE CONDITION Node i

Number 1 198 395 592 789 2.92 C

h'.hh2 %" '

' ' ^'s' ['s Measured Values

% =.=3.0 4 6 Best-Fit Line 3.00 cece.

3.138 3.05 =.** 4. -@

3.15 3.14 3.23

.g,'= g 3.1 3.24 3.24 s

3.28 s's'

.*%.*'45; 5C

• 3 324 s

a:

s

.cas.

s s

3.33 3 43 3.37 initial Trial Final iteration 3

3.57 3.71 Deflection in inches View Looking North K+1 =K^'

i i A sp 7"',"J3*"$ ' ^"o

• 32 0-3057 34 4

,g

yer.*

..m+-

%y.

pa, y e

e e

_.m.

e, a-p se

,ge c-DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING-l 1

i SETTLEMENT REFERENCE SURFACE DURING PRELOAD

/

/

NORTH

+

1.48 1.51 1.72 1.8 31 s).

1.50;l:f. =5.Mo@N?:iss.

'.f_ ' =tp 3,93 BAY 1 1.60

~~~~ " " W *

=:

1 94 1.78 1 86 BAY 2 BAY 3 BAY 4 I

r i

i f

)

2.92 3

... m.og.;+:ei h^~~ a 1 5 2.95 3.24 3.24 1.:

1 y q.,....

3.00 3.05

~ ~ ~ ^"? x + w:* + +' " ~+ -=.; ~ -~

3.16

~ =

~'

i CALCULATED' 3.33 MEASURED'3 37 SETTLEMENTS.

l

= = ~.-~

SETTLEMENTS s o.mi..

'lM

me noe.

4 DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING DUCT BANK LAYOUT 1

DUCT BANKS M;\\

l TURBINE BUILDING //

ll,l')

' 's,

\\

//

llli

\\,\\

/p illI

\\

i

\\,\\,

)) ((

/ '-

is s,

..s.v...'

\\'...,%

. M.....

..s.c.:

.s..c..

\\

'/

//

\\,

\\, N

/

/

\\s

\\,N s

l J

f f

g J

a h -'

I i 1-1 4.@ < WALL :i NORTH I

i i

a:

'1 f

BAY 1 BAY 2 BAY 3 BAY 4 4

l i

1 1

s

.se:.

'$$'.i@.i.$iti!

M" a

4 j

'l

.3.t.7.::

g :..

..<.v.

z.g mg

.g z.y r.

..x. m.

m.

FOOTING REMOVED 4\\ DUCT BANK TYPICAL SECTION ab Jut 27G3057 26

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING ANALYSIS i

L e CONCRETE WALLS AND SLABS

)

ij, Axial Load + Moment - OPTCON l

(Thermal Gradient)

Out of Plane Shear l.

.j:

e SPREAD FOOTING l-Bending and Shear l

Bearing Pressure il i

i UYea 25 4 3057-20 N

t DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING MAXIMUM STRESSES iN REINFORCEMENT (KSI)

LOCATION STRESS ALLOWABLE LOADING South Shield 47 54'

( D + T + L + E ' + To )

l Wall in Bay 2 South Wall 34 54 1.4 ( D + T ) + 1.7 ( L ) + 1.9 ( E )

Footing 37 54 1.4 ( D + T ) + 1.7 ( L ) + 1.9 ( E )

Slab @ 664' 34 54 1.4 (D) + 1.7(L) g Roof Slab 45 54 (D + W

)

T i

yS 28 G-3057 27

.... - ~. - -..

. ~ -. -... - -.

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING TYPICAL STRESSES IN REINFORCEMENT (KSI)

MIDLAND POSITION ACI349

)

l l

LOCATION STRESS LOADING STRESS LOADING l.

l Exterior Wall 14 FSAR Tornado 15 Tornado i

interior Wall 11 FSAR Tornado 16 Tornado Roof Slab 45 FSAR Tornado 45 Tornado I

I l

)

l Slab e El 664' 34 Dead & Live 34 Dead &

Live i

]

Footing 35 FSAR Tornado 37 Seismic i

= ~ " " ~ ~

l 11

l' t

i DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING l

CONCRETE STRESSES (PSI) l-l TYPE LOCATION LOADING STRESS ALLOWABLE i

J; Flexural Roof Tornado 1560 3400 l-Compression i

Shear Exterior Tornado 45 126 (Out-of-Plane)

Wall l

l Shear Slab @ 664' Dead & Live 79 126 l

i l

Shear Roof Slab Tornado 36 141 Shear Footing Dead & Live 47 126 l

28 G 3057 28 c

l l

l 1

l DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING l

STRUCTURAL REANALYSIS 1

i i

.)

CONCLUSION t

l e DGB MEETS ACI 318 AND ACI 349 CODES t

e CONSERVATISM t

Elastic Analysis i

Peak Stress

)

l Tornado l

l l

i j

$^$"'8 ' ** #

25-G 3057-22 1

P een - -

e as ymie

'e

-me**+

e aemm-

&-hup @um ee e Mv.c.

ae es s t 4

w "-

m e

e e==-

e i

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING e ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS e MONITORING l

Settlement i

Cracks e CRACK REPAIR

~

)

j fa I

$0

\\

m o

I,,,,,

t,,,

L,,

m

.e e

\\

2

.e e

3 I

X m

.=

l a

1 i.

-a w

u E

l g

z g

I c

w I.

o 3

S; i

.~

z a

I c

2 l

M M

l 2

/a e

0

=

ja g

/w f

l 0 N

m w

l

/

-* z w

e.

.i, f

y, l

m I

E e>

i

\\

u q z w

\\

b fM af% 3 C o i

'"\\

w g

z 6

i b

a 3

1 w

g i

.e.

e j

g C

W i

i i

w 5

1

.~

e u

'o l

l p i s a.,..,

,,, c

?

0ts..,,.ats s a c z

0t

t. s s a c z

,.0/s..s49 5 h l

l (3)

N O [ ltd W 3 'l3))ti 310705E0 0003Sd i

)

i I-2-7 i

i 4

--e

-e==--

....s.

e 4

e-e r-----ve e-y#

y-*gt W =mr 3-

--e'+

w

( ? '=-

-e--em-*

y-n-*D*b*$-

g e

T-

-yNWe-F-g

n 4

l O

I.,

I,,,,

s

.e l

.e ooao

.e u~ o a a a-%

-e y

oaaa

-=

4 a

.m g

z S

c.

e-.

j m

.~

r ww C

o g

4 c.

4 m

i

-a wx w

5 L

i e

)

a 3

.e

- w r

N 3

- m

-a x a

u.,_

_a

.m u

me i

=

_,., >- e

~

u zy w <

mg

.~ a

~

w =

g < u t.

-, a 5

i._-

g i

a a,

-e s-

.~

wa

_2 I

w u-

\\

s.

-=

I

\\

?

~.

I u

1g

_u i

i i

t

=

r l

i i.

.c f 63: a s e c 2

.Gthat.95F E-7

..G f 6 5 I s i 6 i ' ?

.C:

(9)

NCilbb313336 3101CSEb CGD35e oj e

I-2-5

?

e r

e i

I l

l i

5 t

i 1

680'-0" l

l I

Current FSAR Response I

SME g

664'-0" e

I 8

I g

g

-w I

647'-0" i

I i

8 8

l 630'-6" O.

1.

2.

3*

4 3-6.

(Kips x 10'3) l I

I I

FIGURE V-3-9.

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING N-S SHEAR COMPARISON I

l 1

Y-3-26 i.

I "9'*t' Y

ti'

+

f M

W y

i I

i 1

1 l

680'-0" Current FSAR Response s

SHE 664'-0"

_5 i s s

5

's 640'-0"

's N %

630'-0" A

0.

3.

6.

9.

12.

15.

18.

j (Kip ft x 10~4) i l

FIGURE V-3-8.

DIE $EL GENERATOR BUILDING MOMENT ABOUT N-S AXIS COMPARISON I

V-3-25 l

9 yye

+p Y"""'@***

D

/m l1 i

ji g30*-0=

Current FSAS

Response

SME 664'-0" I

E U

l 8

2 I

• C I

I 647'-0" i

I g

I I

l I

8 n

e 630'-6" i

0.

1.

2.

3.

4 5.

6.

(Kip x 10~3) i FIGURE V-3-7.

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING E-W SHEAR COMPARISON t

!I i

i l

i 1

i y-3-24 i

e

~ -, -, -

,s

\\

r e-y I

I i

i

g. 0" l

Current FSAR Response SME t

s s

664'-0*

T E

's 3

's '

N l

647'-0" t

l l

i a.,

's 630'-6"

'A 0.

3.

6.

9.

12.

15.

18.

(Kip ft x 10~4)

. FIGURE V-3-6.

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING MOMENT ABOUT E-W AXIS COMPARISON I

V-3-23 i

i e

~

+-

-, pen.-

a

--.e-

. _. ~ _,

l

\\

l l

l l

680'-0" I

l x

l x-x-x Lower Bound Soil l

Intennediate Soil i

l l

f 664'-0" I

I 8

g

.I l

U l

Y l

647'-0" I

I I

I i

4 4

I 630'-6" l

1 C.

0.5 1.0 1,5 g,n gg 3.0 (Xips x 10'3) l l

f FIGURE Y-3-5.

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING AXIAL FORCE l

l

?

l V-3-22 l

t

'4*'

er w -.

e m y

--m

=

r-

-w y

4 4

y,-

r l

s 1

l 1

I t

i 680'-0" I

x-x-x Lower Bound Soil x

\\\\

---

Intermediate Soil

\\\\

Upper Bound Soil i\\

664'-0

\\%

8

\\ \\

s

.2 s\\ \\

w 647'-0"

(

\\

\\t N

f g

N \\

N

\\

\\

630'-6" i

0.

3.

6.

9,.

12.

15.

18.

?

(Xip ft x 10-4) f FIGURE V-3-3.

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING MOMENT ABOUT N-S AXIS l~

i 4

Y-3-20 f

1. • • 'm4w.-

4

O.

O, I

i. I

!l

[

680'-0" 1

I l

x-x-x Lower Sound Soil i

I Intermediate Soil Upper Bound Soil I

664'-0" I

M

.E l

I 1

C H

i i

I 647'-0" is i

X l

I i

I x

j I

630'-6"0.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

l (Kips x 10-3)

'l i

FIGURE V-3-1.

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDIf4G N-S SHEAR I

i I

v-3-is l

~ - -

. - - ~....

'W T-M

O Elevation 634 628 6

Fill W, = 120 pcf

(, = 1.2 x 10 psf 6

v = 0.42 G,,

= 1.87 x 10 p,f 6

V, = 570 fps GSME = 0.75 x 10 p,f 615 6

Fill W, = 120 pcf G,,, = 2.7 x 10 psf 0

i v = 0.42 G

= 3.28 x 10 psf as 6

l V = 850 fps GSME = 1.7 x 10 p,f s

596 5

Glacial Till W = 135 pcf G,, = 22.2 x 10 psf s

v = 0.42 f

V, = 2300 fps GSME = 17.3 x 10 p,f 6

463 6

Glacial Till W, = 135 pcf G,,, = 37.8 x 10 p,f v = 0.42 6

V = 3000 fps GSME = 32.5 x 10 p,f s

363 0

i Dense Cohesionless W

• I33 PC#

O

= 37.8 x 10 psf s

mx Haterial v = 0.34 0

V = 3000 fps GSME = 0.3 x 10 psf I

s 263 Bedrock W, = IE0 pcf Y, = 5000 fps v = 0.33 1

i I

FIGURE Y-1-4 UPPER BOUND LAYERED S0IL PROFILE BASED ON STIFF SITE DATA V-1-9

r Elevation

~

~

634 628 6

)

y Fill W, = 120 pcf G,,, = 0.9 x 10 6

1.40 x 10 psf 1

3 v = 0.42 G,,

=

V, = 490 fps GSME = 0.30 x 10 psf 615 6

Fill W = 120 pcf G,, = 2.0 x 10 p,f s

6 2.50 x 10 psf v = 0.42 G,,

=

0 Y = 730 fps GSME = 0.70 x 10 psf s

603 f

Fill W, = 120 pcf G,,, = 2.7 x 106,,f 6

3.16 x 10 psf v = 0.42 G,,

a l

V = 850 fps GSME = 0.85 x 10 psf s

l 596 6

Glacial Till W, = 135 G,,, = 7.0 x 10 p,f

{

v = 0.47 V, = 1290 fps GSME = 1.2 x 106,,f 550 l

Glacial Till W, = 135 pcf G,, = 12 x 10' psf v = 0.47 V, = 1690 fps GSME = 2.5 x 106,37 410 Dense Cohesionless W, = 135 pcf V, = 2540 fps G,,, = 27 x 10' psf l' Elevation N tarial 6

v = 0.34 GSME = 10.7 x 10 psfL 410 37 x 105,3f V, = 2970 fps G

=

max 6

tGSME = 15.1 x 10 psf Elevation y

260 260 Bedrock W, = 150 pcf V, = 5000 v = 0.33 I

/.'

t s

FIGURE V-1-3.

LOWER 800N0 LAYERED 50!L PROFILE I

SA$ED ON SOFT 51TE DATA a

8 s

)

V-1-8

-*r

,v-

{

Yir

{-

A Elevation

~

634 628 6

l Fill W = 120 pcf G,, = 0.9 x 10 psf s

1.40 x 10 psf v = 0.42 G,3

'l

=

y V, = 490 fps G3gg = 0.30 x 106,,f 3

615 6

Fill W, = 120 pcf G,,, = 2.0 x 10 6

2.50 x 10 psf v = 0.42 G

=

ms V, = 730 fps GSME = 0.70 x 106,,f -

603 Fill W, = 120 pcf G,,, = 2.7 x 106,,f 3.16 x 106,3f v = 0.42 G,,

=

V, = 850 fps GSME = 0.85 x 106,,f 596 6

Glacial Till W, = 135 G,,,= 7.0 x 10 p,f v = 0.47 V = 1290 fps GSME = 1.2 x 106,,f s

550 l

Glacial Till W = 135 pcf G,, = 12 x 105,,f 3

v = 0.47 6

V = 1690 fps GSME = 2.5 x 10 p,f s

410 6

~

n e Cohesionless W, = 135 pcf V, = 2540 fps G,,, = 27 x 10

,f p Elevation v = 0.34 GSME = 10.7 x 10 psfp 410 5

V, = 2970 fps G

= 37 x 10 osf ;

max 6

t GSME = 15.1 x 10 psfj' Elevation l 260 260 Bedrock W = 150 pcf V, = 5000 s

v = 0.33 I

I FIGURE V-1-3.

LOWER SOUND LAYERED SOIL PROFILE l

8ASE3 ON SOFT $1TE DATA i

V-1-8 4

y,,,

n

)

^

l August 24, 1983 1

J i

MIDLAND PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 4

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

f 3

l l

i 0284yle

.. _. ~

m__

,~

i x

.x,

~

.. -... -. ~

- Q-p..

-m 9

\\

i a

MIDLAND PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2-N DIESEL GEMERATOR BUILDING'~.,

l EXEcthTIVE

SUMMARY

D, l

s s

s TABLd'OF CONTENTS I

/

.N ',

I

\\

i Pace j

i

)

.T i

3 s

t I.

BACKGROUND

,a 1

A.

GENEOL 1

s-B.

LAYOUT 1

s l

C.

ORIGINAL DESIGN'-

1 i

1.

Philosophies 1

2.

Str.ucturai Systens U

1 s

3. [Conserv'a'tisms 2

II.

DIESEL GENERATOR CONSTRUCTION HISTORY 2

1 III.

REMEDIAL PROGRAM,

3 A.

SURCHARGE PROGRAM 3

B.

PERMANENT DEWATERING SYSTEM 4

C.

SETTLEMENT PREDICTIONS 4

1.

Settlement Predictions Based on 4

Surcharge P,tttgram u

2.

Settlemend Predici, ions Based on 6

' Laboratory Data k,'

i j

j D.

FOUNDATION K4TERIAL PROPERTIES 6

1

~%

.i 1.

Beaifing. Ca pacity 6

j 2.

Dynamic Properties.of, Backfill 6

..~

E.

SURCec>GE EFFECTIVENESS 7

F.

SETTLEMENT MONITORING 7

l

_ l l

IV.

STRUCTURAT.,REANALYSfS s

7-v

(

A.

DESIGN CRITERIA 7

i s

f

",,4

-}-

0284yl3

- ^ 11

[

i.

. 4;5

/*

e' Midland Diesel Generator Building Executive Summary TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Fioure No.

Title l

ES-4 Typical Settlement. Cooling Pond Level.

Piezometer Level, and Surcharge Load Hictory ES-5 Settlement vs Logarithm of Time from 1/26/79 to 9/14/79 Marker DG-3 i

i ES-6 Settlement vs Logarithm of Time Since 9/14/79, Marker DG-3 ES-7 Estimated Secondary Compression Settlements from 12/31/81 to 12/31/2025 Assuming Surcharge

{

Remains I

ES-8 Measured Settlement from 9/14/72 to 12/31/81 l

j ES-9 Average Settlement After Surcharge Removal, i

BA-8 and BA-53 ES-10 Settlement vs Logarithm of Time Since 9/14/79 Showing Corrected Slope Marker DG-3 ES-ll Shear Wave Velocity Profile f

l ES-12 Comparison of Effective Stress Before and After Surcharge - Southwest Corner ES-13 Finite-Element Model ES-14 Summary of Actual and Estimated Se'ttlements ES-15 Comparison of Sattlement Values, Presurcharge

],7 Period. August 1978 - January 1979 ES-16 Comparison of Settlement Values, Surcharge Period, January 1979 - August 1979 ES-17 Comparison of Settlement Values, Postsurcharge Period. September 1979 - December 2025 e

I s

l 1

i 0284y21 iv i

i t

i O

O MIDLAND PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

i.

j I.

RACKGROUND i

A.

GENZRAL A construction permit for Midland Plant Units 1 and 2 was l

issued by the Atomic Energy Commission on December 15, 1972.

Soils-related problems were first identified in July 1978 when the settlement monitoring program detected excessive settlement of' the diesel generator building (DGB).

The DGB has a shallow foundation and is located at the southern end of the main power block as shown in the site plan (Figure ES-1).

The building had settled more than was predicted for this stageaof construction.

Shortly thereafter, the applicant verbally reported the matter to the NRC site inspector, and formally reported it under 10 CFR 50.55(e) in September 1978.

B.

LAYOUT The DGB is a two-story, reinforced-concrete structure with three crosswalls that divide the structure into four cells; each cell contains a diesel generator unit.

The building is supported on continuous footings that are founded at el 628' and rests on fill that extends down to approximately i

el 603'.

Plan dimensions of the DGB are approximately 155' x 70' with a total' internal height of approximately 44 feet as shown in Figure ES-2.

Each diesel generator rests on a 6'-6"-thick, reinforced-concrete pedestal that is not structurally connected to the building foundation.

}

C.

ORIGINAL DESIGN 1.

Philosophies l

l The DGB is a Seismic Category I, safety-related structure designed to protect the diesel generators and associated equipment and to protect this equipment from extreme environmental conditions such as reismic events and tornado and wind loads.

As a result of these requirements, a box-type, reinforced-concrete structure with thick walls and roof was chosen.

The building is supported by strip or continuous footings.

The diesel generators,' supported on separate foundations, isolate

~the building from any potential-vibration problem.

2.

Structural Systems In general, conventional and standard calculations were-used to analyze and design the various components of the

~

structural system.

Computer analysis using the finite-element method was used in.some cases:such as the 0284y 1

l l

7.i., _.

y

-. ~. -.-

r Midland Diesel Generator Building Executive Summary i

settlement monitoring program detected settlements of 3.5 inches I

at the point of greatest settlement, compared to the design predictions of 3 inches for the 40 years of expected plant operation.

It appeared that the building was settling due to the consolidation of the underlying fill and was being partially supported along the north portion by four electrical duct banks acting as vertical piers resting on the natural soil below the fill.

Shortly thereafter, the applicant verbally reported the matter to the NRC site inspector, and formally reported it under 10 CFR 50.55(e) in September 1978.

I l

Construction of the DGB was voluntarily stopped in August 1978 and a soil boring program was initiated to determine the quality of the backfill under the foundation.

Drs.

R.B.

Peck and A.J. Hendron, Jr. were retained a's consultants to advise on the

{

selection and the execution of any remedial action.

The etploration program confirmed that the fill did not meet the i

I specified compaction requirements and that it consisted of both i

cohesive soil and granular soil.

Lean concrete was also used locally as backfill.

The fill ranged from very soft to very

^

stiff for cohesive soil and from very loose to dense for granular soil.

At the time of the exploration, the groundwater level j

ranged from el 616' to el 622', and the cooling pond, located i

about 275 feet south of the building. had a water level at approximately el 622'.

On the basis of the consultants' recommendations and after a review of various alternatives, it was decided to surcharge the DGB and the surrounding area to accelerate settlement and i

consolidate the fill material.

During November 1978, the duct I

i banks (see Figure ES-2A) entering the DGB were isolated from the l

building so additional settlement due to surcharging and the l-i additional deadweight of the structure to be constructed would 1

not overstress these areas.

Construction oe the building was also resumed in November 1978 with the remainder of the concrete work on the building being essentially completed by the end of I'

March 1979.

Before the surcharge program began in January 1979.

the utilities entering the DGB were isolated from the DGB so that settlement during surcharging would not overstress these areas.

The utilities were reconnected after the surcharge program was completed in August 1979.

j III.

REMEDIAL PROGRAM A.

SURCHARGE PROGRAM The purpose of the surcharge was to accelerate the settlement so that future settlement under the operating loads would be L

/

within tolerable limits.

Furthermore, this' procedure would permit a reliable estimate of'the future settlement. -Before the surcharge was placed, soil instrumentation was installed-l

.(see-Table ES-1).

The instrumentation was directed at l

1 monitoring settlement and pore water pressure in'the fill.

0284y 3

- ~ ~

. - ~.

4J Midland Diesel Generator Building Executive Summary i

building showed a maximum settlement of about 0.1 inch.

This is less than the range of 0.2 to 0.5 inch, which was j

predicted on the basis of the previously mentioned straight-line extrapolation.

4 i

Following the start of dewatering activities in September 1980 up to December 31, 1981, the building settled 0.4 to 0.5 inch (see Figure ES-8) primarily due to lowering the groundwater table from approximately el 620' to el 595'.

Between December 31, 1981, and June 1983, the building settled an additional 0.3 inch primarily due to further lowering of the groundwater table to approximately el j

587'.

As shown in Figure ES-6, these settlements display relatively steep slopes on the settlement-versus-log-time plot.

However, when these data are compared with the observed settlements of the two Borros anchors BA-8 and BA-53 (see Figure ES-9) embedded in the natural soil i

below the structures, it is seen that most of the observed settlement of the building was due to deep settlement of the underlying natural soil caused by dewatering.

When the uniform, deep-seated settlement of the natural soil (below el 603') due to dewatering is subtracted from the total building settlement, the resulting backfill settlement-versus-log-time plot (see l

Figure ES-10) displays a slope less than the one used for j

secondary consolidation settlement prediction.

Therefore, the predictions of secondary consolidation settlement given in Figure ES-7 are conservative.

Furthermore, any future dewatering settlements should be small because future drawdown would exceed the present magnitude by only small amounts.

Concern about liquefaction of the loose sand portions of the backfill is eliminated by permanent groundwater lowering.

The settlement of the unsaturated sand because of ground shaking caused by earthquakes (shakedown settlement) was calculated on the basis of the approach described by Silver and Seed (Reference 2) and the 1

recommendations on multidirectional shaking by Pyke, Seed, and Chan (Reference 3).

The estimated shakedown settlement is approximately 1/4 to 1/2 inch for ground l

acceleration up to 0.19 g.

The north side of the 1

building will settle the maximum of 1/4 to 1/2 inch during the 0.19 g earthquake, whereas the south side will l

settle a negligible amount because there is a smaller thickness of sand under the south side of the DGB.

Thus, the building will tend to rotate slightly toward the

~

north during seismic shaking.

To date,-it has tended to rotate south during static settlement under the surcharge load due to the higher percentage of clay under the south side of the building.

i 0284y 5

.n

~ ~ - - -

=

.v.

s ow e

~w

..~

r p

1 Midland Diesel Generator Building Executive Summary i

l surface to el 615' and by a value of 850 ft/sec from i

el 615' to el 600'.

These numbers were used to determine the shear wave velocity value used in the seismic analysis of the DGB.

E.

SURCHARGE EFFECTIVENESS i

Figure ES-12 presents a comparison between the pressures that existed during surcharge and those expected during the j

operating life of the structure.

This' comparison shows that l

at all depths in the fill, the pressures that existed during

, surcharge exceeded those that are expected while the l

structure is opegational.

Furthermore, all settlement-versus-log-time plots show that secondary consolidation has been reached.

Therefore, the settlements predicted on the assumption that the surcharge remains in place for 40 years (see Figure ES-7) are conservative based on the fact that all loads added after surcharge removal, including those due to 1

permanent dewatering, will be less than the surcharge loading j

at all depths, i

e F.

SETTLEMENT MONITORING The settlement of the diesel generator building will be monitored during plant operation.

Survey measurements will be taken at least every 90 days during the first year of plant operation.

Survey frequency for subsequent years will be established after evaluating measurements taken during the first year.

Allowable total settlements, which are based on i

the predicted values, have been established for each of the l

settlement markers on the structure and pedestals.

If 80% of the allowable settlement (settlement action limit) is reached, survey frequency will be increased to at least once every 60 days and an engineering evaluation will be performed.

If the allowable settlements are exceeded, the plant will be shut down until the structure's safety can be i

established.

i i

IV.

STRUCTURAL REANALYSIS A structural reanalysis was performed on the DGB to determine the settlement and surcharg).ng effects on the building.

A.

DESIGN CRITERIA 3

The DGB is predominately made from 4,000 psi concrete (except the roof slab, which is 5,000 psi concrete) reinforced with Grade 60 steel bars.

The building was originally designed for the ACI code allowables.

l l

The load combinations employed for the original analysis and design of the DGB are provided in FSAR Subsection 3.8.6.3.

The effects term (T).-

Four additional load combinations were original FSAR load combinations did not contain a settlement j

{

l 1

-t j

0284y 7

L n

i

Midland Diesel Generator Building Executive Summary the boundary condition.

Figure ES-13 illustrates an isometric view of the finite-element model.

j 2.

Load Re6tesentation The dead load is represented in the finite-element model by the acceleration due to gravity.

The live load is represented by pressures applied to plate elements modeling the floors.

Wind loads are represented by pressures on plate elements and concentrated nodal loads.

Seismic loads are represented by accelerations and settlement effects are represented by the soil j

springs explained below.

3.

Soils Sorinos 4

a)

Short-Term Load Analysis The overall translational soil impedances from the r

dynamic model are used to calculate soil springs in l

the finite-element analysis for short-term loads (i.e., wind, tornado, and seismic).

b)

Analysis Without Settlement Effects k

The analytical model for dead load and live load case 4

{

without settlement effects was constructed by using large values for the soil springs.

c)

Analysis for Settlement Effects For long-tern loadings with settlement effects, the structural reanalysis addresses four distinct time l

periods.

A unique set of measured or estimated settlement values that corresponds to each of the following periods are used:

1)

March 28, 1978, to August 15, 1978 The first scribe mark was placed on the structure on March 28, 1978.

August 15, 1978, represents.

the closest survey date before halting DGB construction.

The structure was partially i

completed to 26 feet-(el 656'-6") above the top of the foundation.

A long-hand analysis was used

{

for calculating stresses.

'2)

August 15, 1978, to January 5, 1979 ThJ duct banks were separated from the structure, and DGB construction activities resumed during this period.

January 5, 1979, is the last survey date before the start of surcharge activities.

?

t j

0284y 9

• %w.,

d

• .e # 4 4+

e- # <

--eg-Q-

9

--e--

we

-es9w-

-s-

-qw--

+9w,-

g w

4--g,

• wm m-

O l

Midland Diesel Generator Building Executive Summary i

l j

4.

Analysis of Survey Data An analysis of the survey data reveals that the data are not accurate enough to reflect the exact changes in the structural shape due to the settlement.

The results of a review of this survey data can be summarized as follows:

a)

The difference between consecut'ive measurements at a building location reveals both positive and negative f values.

The negative values indicate that the structure moved up or a potential inaccuracy in measurement existed.

Because the structure cannot easily move up against its own weight, it is likely that a negative value indicates an inaccuracy in measurement.

b)

Review of relative displacements of the north and 3

l l

south walls show that the data vary irregularly.

It cannot be concluded from these data that the structure developed differential settlement in the period considered.

c)

Angle Variation Analysis t

During the settlement period considered, tandom changes in algebraic sign exists for the vertical angle formed by three markers along-the south wall of i

the DGB.

Therefore, it can be concluded that the settlement of the structure during this period was mainly rigid body motion.

d)

Warpage Analysis The warpage across the structure was found to vary with time between positive and negative' values.

It can be concluded that the survey data are not sufficiently accurate to prove that the structure has developed differential settlement (warpage) across the corners, t

Summarizing, the survey data analysis concludes that the existing data were not accurate enough for direct use in structural analysis and need to be modified, error bands were established to be between 0.125 inch and 0.225 inch for the four settlement periods.

By smoothing the settlement vs time curves to compensate for the survey inaccuracies, the data reflect that the structure was experiencing mainly rigid body motion in the: Period during which settlement was measured.

d A

l 0284y 11 i

-._n

-.i n.-

~-

rr.

wi-

-e--

y g--

y T

~

w-'

T-h*-9P-'

l

,]

Midland Diesel Generator Building Executive Summary l

junction of the south wall and the interior wall separating bays 3 and 4.

Soil spring values were then linearly varied in the north as well as the east-west directions so that they returned to their original 40-year value within a distance of approximately 15 feet from the zero spring.

It can be concluded from this analysis that the DGB can successfully span the assumed soft soil spot introduced without significantly increasing the stress levels.

E.

EFFECTS OF CONCRETE CRACKS 4

4 A set of electrical duct banks located beneath the building foundation initially acted to restrain the even movement of t

the structure during fill settlement.

A systematic crack i

pattern was observed in walls resting on the duct banks.

Cracks in walls that do not rest on duct banks are

.I attributable to the effect of restrained volume changes l

during curing and drying of the concrete.

Cracks were first mapped after the duct banks were separated from the DGB and j

prior to surcharge placement.

Another crack mapping of the

+

i DGB was performed after surcharge removal to acertain the I

effect of surcharge.

The concrete cracks within the DGB were formally addressed in the response to Question 29 of the NRC Requests Regarding Plant Fill.

In this response, the cause and significance of the concrete cracks in all structures were presented.

Subsequently, during the NRC structural technical audit of l

April 1981, further discussion was held concerning the effects of the cracks and the additional stresses resulting l

from the concrete cracks.

To evaluate the additional stresses associated with the concrete cracking, a number of l

analytical approaches have been used and the results forwarded to the NRC in the response to Question 40 of the 1

NRC Requests Regarding Plant Fill.

These results indicated-that because these stresses are strain-induced secondary I

stresses, they do not affect the ultimate strength capacity i

of the cracked member.

t In response to an NRC request for a nonlinear, finite-element analysis to evaluate the effects of cracks on the integrity of the DGS, an additional computer analysis of the DGB was performed.

This analysis was performed using a finite-element program, Automated Dynamic Incremental Nonlinear Analysis (ADINA), which is a three-dimensional, nonlinear program capable of considering concrete crushing, cracking, j

crack widening, and reinforcement yielding.

The east wall of the DGB was selected for the ADINA analysis.

A crack was modeled into the east wall, and the ADINA analysis was performed for two governing load combinations.

The' analysis indicated that the effect of concrete cracks was localized and minor in nature.

The results of this ADINA analysis were l

submitted to the NRC, followed tar meetings with the NRC staff to discuss these results.

-i I

0284y 13 y-.

a g

m

-erag

-w

• --.a

,%.c,-=

a..g..

.w.

.,-.v~.

.y3.---

,m-yg y-.g,-s

-e-9

,, -e.'.i.*ee 9

e j

Midland Diesel Generator Building Executive Summary the load distributions to the individual walls.

walls and diaphragas were evaluated for seismic loads The shear 4

t combined with loads due to normal operating conditions predicted by static analyses.

Capacities for the shear walls were developed in accordance with the ultimate strength design provisions contained in ACI 349-80.

in-plane shears and overturning moments. Shear walls were checke i

i i

determined for the selected walls based on comparisons of theMargin factors w

{

loads due to seismic and normal operating conditions and the code ultimate strength capacities.

{

i found to be governed by overturning moment.The selected walls were margin calculated was found to be 1.8.

The lowest code i

increased by at The SME must be j

for any wall would be exceeded.least a factor of 2.2 before the code margin 4'

Diaphragm capacities were determined using ACI 349-80 criteria developed for shear walls.

i were found to be governed by shear.

The diaphragms evaluated i

for the diaphragas was found to be 2.0.The lowest code margin For any diaphragm to

'l reach code capacity, the SME must be increased by a factor of 2.1.

t Code margins for the selected structural elements were all and maximum seismic load cases. conservatively based on minimum s Reductions in loads to account for-inelastic energy dissipation were not used for the DGB.

All code margins were determined to be greater than unity.

Before code capacity is reached for any DGB element investigated. the SME must be increased by 2.1.

It can.

therefore, be concluded that the DGB has more than sufficient l

structural capacity to resist j

and significantly higher capacity before failure-is expectedthe SME b V.

CONCLUSIONS The original design of the DGB.

produced a structure with a great deal of reservebased on its overall g

layout, strength.

and during the surcharge program did not cause any unusualT distress or significant loss of structural strength.

caused the fill to now be under secondary consolidation. re The i

settlement can be conservatively predicted and will not beFuture excessive.

It has been shown through the soil exploration program that reserve in bearing capacity to resist all the imposed loads wit l

the proper safety factor.

This area of the site is being that could occur in the sand backfill below the DGB during i

seismic-event.

1

, _ __0284v...

- - ~

-~

_.,_,n:-----

' * ~~

im J

Midland Diesel Generator Building Executive Summary REFERENCES 4

i 1.

H.B.

Seed, ' Soil Liquefaction and Cyclic Mobility Evaluation for Level Ground During Earthquakes," Journal of the Geotechnical Enoineerino Division. Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol 105 No. GT2 (February 1979), Pages 201 through 255 l

2.

M.L. Silver and H.B. Seed. The Behavior of Sands Under Seismic Loadino Conditions. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, College of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, California, December 1969 3.

R. Pyke B. Seed, and K.C. Chan, " Settlements of Sands under Multidirectional Shaking," Journal of Geotechnical l

Encineerina Division, GT4, April 1975. Pages 379 through 397 i

t

)

I 1

l I

0284y.

17

3 O

TABLE ES-2 l

LOADS AND LOAD COMBINATIONS FOR CONCRETE STRUCTURES OTHER THAN THE CONTAINMENT BUILDING FROMhMEFSARANDQUESTION15OFRESPONSESTO NRC REQUESTS REGARDING PLANT FILL Responses to NRC Recuests Recardine Plant Fili. Question 15 i

l a.

Service Load Condition U = 1.05D + 1.28L + 1.05T (1)

U = 1.4D + 1.4T (2) i j

b.

Severe Environmental Condition l

l U = 1.0D + 1.0L + 1.0W + 1.OT (3)

U = 1.0D + 1.0L + 1.0E + 1.0T (4)

FSAR Subsection 3.8.6.3 i

l a.

Normal Lead Condition I

U = 1.4D + 1.7L (S) b.

Severe Environmental Condition U = 1.25 (D + L + No + E) + 1.CTo (6)

U = 1.25 (D + L + Ho + W) + 1.0To (7)

U = 0.9D + 1.25 (No + E) + 1.0To (8)

U = 0.9D + 1.25 (No + W) + 1.0To (9) c.

Shear Walls and Moment Resisting Frames U = 1.4 (D + L + E) + 1.0To + 1.25Ho (10)

U = 0.9D + 1.25E + 1.0To + 1.25Ho (11) d.

Structural Elements Carrying Mainly Earthquake Forces. Such as Equipment Supports U = 1.0D + 1.0L + 1.0E + 1.0To + 1.25Ho (12) l 0204y23

l

.m J

l t

TABLE ES-3 i

4 LOADS AND LOAD COMBINATIONS FOR COMPARISON ANALYSIS REQUESTED IN

- QUESTION 26 OF NRC REQUESTS REGARDING PLANT FILL i

ACI 349 as Sucolemented by Reculatory Guide 1.142 I

a.

Normal Load Candition U = 1.4 (D + T) + 1.7L + 1.7Ro

)

U = 0.75 (1.4 (D + T) + 1.7L + 1.7To + 1.7Ro]

i b.

Severe Environmental Condition U = 1.4 (D + T) + 1.4F + 1.7L + 1.7H + 1.9Eo + 1.7Ro l

U = 1.4 (D + T) + 1.4F + 1.7L + 1.7H + 1.7W + 1.7Bo U = 0.75 (1.4 (D + T) + 1.4F + 1.7L + 1.7H + 1.9Eo + 1.7To

+ 1.7Ro]

U = 0.75 (1.4 (D + T) + 1.4F + 1.7L + 1.7H + 1.7W + 1.7To

+ 1.7Ro}

c.

Extreme Environmental Conditions

{

U = (D + T) + F + L + H + To + Ro + WT U = (D + T) +

F + L + H + To + Ro + Egg d.

Abnormal Load Conditions U = (D + T) + F + L + F + Tg + Rg + 1.5PA U= (D + T) + F + L + H + Tg + RA + 1.25Pg + 1.0(YR+YJ

+ Yg) + 1.25Eo U = (D + T) + F+L+H+TA + Rg + 1.0PA + 1.0(YR+YJ

+ Y ) + 1.0ESS 1

M l

where Normal loads are those loads encountered during normal plant operation and shutdown, and include:

T

= settlement loads i

m e

m.

e +

r

_R Table ES-3 (continued)

YJ

= jet impingement load on a. structure generated by a postulated break Yg = missile impact load on a structure generated by or during a postulated break, such as pipe whipping 1

i, 1

I h

E

.0204y27 i

i e

I

=

s 95 et 5'

23 S

x8 a

=3 y'

=

2

=

is

~

=

8 i

%=

22 s

38 4

~

E' a

5 h

• s O

.r-l l

w' e

/<

tg

_ _- t

,2,

e

.. ', L E.%,-

-is

4. -

4 v.

?i m

e....-

s t

1....

g I

q p-

's '. b -

i-

• ys ;

i-

- <.' li 1.-

t

^% -: +..

.:[;j/]/.;>-

I-w.

,. ? s..

I e...,;se Q.'

4.

-,; fr/,,3 na NI!

s

/

l-

, __. p

?:

\\

3 f

.-#,f

/ i' / l' y --

~

7 l:

4 il t

- l --

i '1

,. c,

6 r.

i-5 G'r

-1.

g.

_ fs_,,5

?~.

~

p(, [lf

/.,,,, '*

,1

'~'

g e

ll' jy l l f.

,.r

- o I

3

,//

\\

i 3.-

3 I

?

.a

. ? >

=

1, fi, -

5

\\ s itY/

, ll w-Y I '~f

.::::>-l lfti f

..O f lI i%wQ y,i

,f ~'7 '

L' yQ s

}i f

l

.v,

/ N. j @.,o.1

,i %.a_

y o

~

,[ri-Ay' i

I

, >, - 1 n[OlkI.

'"I'D di N

lll

- N Q

h:7 ) i1hQ V'

Y Ii!

l*

_ ml

',I j

w cin 7 e!

u g{9.el!!,h'l i Il, i il l-Ipe l[)"

l p u w,,

r, 4

.Mj ;i, h.

i st

• t,k'.,-

i l

t,..

S.i

.i li a;.ro *kl..

.',l,"p A E

.(g$..

l l

i ual 14 ',y

._.4

.4

, - +.c' gr:- ~ m.....:.J..z -

t.

, =

i

• C

..m Vs

. sa s

[

rl 3 Ch'! j l4 s

&$ N a

i

-i m

-l T l

I

/

f 1

. 1

[.

f g s'., '-

-t o..

.[

. f r1 -

2 1_

ll

• ,, -._j.

-i q

~

,y

~. _.

---i i ip b,._

,f

%e-g

_.--~,1...,..

,r 3

-.---e

.ne..

~.

n i

O

'J t

5_,.

31 E

e 85

="

c si es

_8 3:

2

.2 G;

5 a

5 a-Q e..

i.

+

n

+1 r.4=L

]

s-me

i...

i

.8

.I;n,,

=

F L

1 t

\\",,

i, i

- - - - - --. _ _y @

r n

r t

3 "1

i' l

%-r.,,, 1

• I J

l 6

M 5

i i

i y:

s-

,;, =!

t a

.i s

I A_

li}i l

!! ?!

M 3

s.

l r;

i l

.I,.

q

! (_,_.._.

i i I...

e i

ii j! LJ

.m i

r-

. 7-id7 F. ! n 4-i i

.-U l

!!'f

• S u

.Ie ii,

=,n wI iy M/e

' t_

C '! sl

1.,, l...,.

g..

,1 :

=

.i a

i i' r r;,r '

g'3, i:

i r

l l ~

ig.) ! g-n

" " 2.

2 s.

L r~,

'c -

1, l

16'*:5-I-

.J i i.

i.'iL l

g,p l,' __

il i

j#

n r_

i. i-p II I l !! I i

f!i -

s m

t, M !

l 6:

'I

.I.

.ij i

a 8i l

Ii l

I f.

I i

1 i

!a l' l

l i

?.!

' r I,

I l _]! l l l

i s,-

i

,r i

'n'P q N,

.,1;

+

r,.Q3 J

v u

c :.,

.. o

.i a e

... i i i.i

.m.

_r.4, j

-,;f..

., e.* 7

. - ;i, II -, ;

g y-

.., -. ;a._.u, g. - rla- :.

6 i l...

.s

=.

i n up 2

g :-

i li>

J

'W i

i g

I

^

F 6

+h I" !*!

- - (""""

l 4 I !!IR

>lj t

6 1

.i.

.'r

.1 l....- -.

8!

I I

t r H.-

9 I

-l d

./

a i,

h'8

.-L u

a

(

W.

• ~

a 4 -

[.

J l

g F

! -i'L e -.-

.!c i

.{

T BANKS O

l o

en,e n

TURBINE BUILDING ss ieie

\\\\

i

\\\\

si ggg sa

\\\\

s\\

pf ll li g\\

is esea rs is J) ((

\\\\

l

// \\g g g i

mya

//

\\ \\.

m i

_s?L". '

4

" "

• N8)

Il l

• a. *.

_X'L". I

_E?L".

o s' p~/

'g j j'g E 1

\\

g

,l

\\, g

's

\\

g g

\\

s t /

i /

i ';

\\ ';

(ffe y ALL i

l i

l i

• ?.i NORTH t

j '

l l

l il N

BAY 1 BAY 2 BAY 3 BAY 4 5

3 I

I i

)

i g3:.'

• .I. hii 8'

' 24h7.:4

i "

['

4

z,n !

so.ue:.

x. w. -

-z,n.x x,w.

z,n.--

. x. w.

zn.x

..x. w. -

GJ tie tsu tse tsi

~

00 TING MM

..)

DUCT BANK DIESEL GENER ATOR BUILDING TYPICAL SECTION EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

DUCT BANK LAYOUT a

FIGURE ES-2A

A+

TURSINE SLDG. WALL m d

4 l

m g g g.

T66s %

4 T

e-TRANSFOResER pl PAD 8

18 p

I at m

88 gg 10 g

0 I

Il s

3l EAY3 l BAY 4 BAY 1 BAY 2 l

1 T T T/

as s'

8 1

20*

18 ll fl i

x n

i, is i.

)

~' 5 g

s.)

20' min N

A k

PLAN APPROX

, 1 B* _

TIED RETAINING Arenox in-2 Et. 864X STRUCTURE 1

SURCHARGE GRADE E t. 634s-.#

I TURBINE BLOG.

y DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

SECTION A-A I

i GENERAL LAYOUT OF SURCliARGE LOAD 0

50 W

FIGURE ES-3 SCALE IN FEET

m m.

-~,.4--

ts t spAV54 e

to ten 998 3ee 25e 3me the ese see tas gne 6es she 3ee 7he

.E.

ehe

-a e

e u

a s

T s

s e

T

~I 5

e a

v

.u

.. e I to y

s

. =

?

i-r e.

g g

x, g,,.. m..

e..e k.a%

,,,,,,l.

.-4

__ l. +-+ ++ + -+ - 1 8

.e unite.u vsums g-e e

u s

a a

e u

a s,

s e

e g-J _ 1_M C

,3 _y.

~

_J.

s seisonosaavatum vs :=.s E

M 5

s a

5 5

Ig 5

s g

E s

I s

e 5

5 E

neanmene n s e

g l

'Y.. w*~*^%

L

\\.

-}

a[4PetJom.sIta ea8wapwi.s ws ten.t e

a e

a a

s s

e s

s s

a s

e s

a an e

p II u

e

,e

,s e

se een me aan su ase une ese me ese au eu ese ne see me w

36 5ultCHAeG4 &OAD eellunT lia.a enavsg DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

TYPICAL SETTLEMENT, COOLING POND LEVEL. PIEZOMETER LEVEL AND SURCIIARGE LOAD Ill STORY l

FIGURE ES-4

s_

.~

l l

i

_ hs

'NN f

e.

L)

J.

.L s

.t s

a s

N s

N w nie

.e ic,6 cm e..

c. e n-s i

i x

s see

-x

'N '%e s.

IwN' m on s3580 l

.4.

s.'%

,, /

e

==

5 she.

E.msang &Iswg Dev5

'U

.m.ee sn n.

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING

~

C "

,".' ** ~, "l**~4 EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ -

esw nemenascaveneum 8"',,,,,J "

SETTLEMENT VS. LOGARITIIM OF TIME PROM 1/26/79 TO 9/14/79 MARKEH DG-3 FIGURE ES-5

o o

C2 g

_h$

2,

.s.

m3 4-m w

I

u '

?!

i a-i

.o.

o

=m e.

s.

==.

/

mm e,..a 00

/

a.

x m-5e

=

w J

~:&

a t:

W

=

,.s'.=

E

=

t 3

,t a

y

=

a l

s, g.:

l 4

y k

t e

s n

n s

--9 n

n 5533RIE

?

1 (S3H3NI) IN3M3'1113S (1333) NO!1VA373 W31VMON00WO 31YMIXOWddV I.

i

l Dit SL t. GL NL liAT OH HUILDING

• *'r Cil ""

Cil""

Gil" "

Gi L *x**

I

)

m I

Q I

I

' '- l

- I I

Q an ase

$(-Q-Riasi R82 0 85 i.Os O

. 94 i

K - - - R ',a s4 R---- daar

,5(--- go.is i

i tax l

l

-l l

l l

l ni.m i

t) i i

i t,

(

)

i

(

t.

1 1

c n.

i I

i e

3 i

i g

g 1

I 8

I i

a[x-- gj -

lX-xl l[--))LX---j i.uk yj x

i.4sj i.Q i.nj

- asi

' '* ) U 6im W

H'

'X' i.ae6

(*

i.20 i.22 i.49 LEGEND O

DEEP 80HROS ANCHOH X

BUILDING / PE DEST AL SETTLEMENT MAHKER i.20 SETTLEMENT IN INCHES t

i DIESEL GENER ATOR BUILDING EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

ESTIMATED SECONDARY COMPRESSION SETTLEMENTS FROM 12/31/81 TO 12/31/2025 ASSUMING SURCIIARGE REMAINS FIGURE ES-7

. Ull hl L Gl NLilATOlt HUILDING 0.51) P C O.39 i

F-]

'---I l

i'--l I

i~

IO F-]

0.55

~~

0.47 0 50

~

0 51

~

h 52 h

0.49

,k" ~ ~ ~ ~9,0.51

,7 ~ ~ ~ko.54 0.54 ) l 3(0.4 I i

1 I

i I

l

\\

)

L k

i 1

r 1

(

)

(

l r

8 i

s t

8 8

l 1

I I

I I

I I

l l

8 1

1 i

e g

8 8

I I

I 3

s E5 t y,,,,,,$g K,,_ Kj 0- *- - -

0.4 0.4 0.45 0.42) [

d (0.43 a

y 0.47 0.49 i

J l

I

^

LEGEND

\\

X suiLDWG / PEDESTAL SETTLEMENT MARKER 0.42 MEASURED SETTLEMENT BETWEEN 9/14/79 AND 12/31/81.

a I

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING s

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

i

?

1

{

MEASURED SETTLEMENT FROM j

9/14/79 TO 12/31/81

.,i FIGURE ES-8

- ~ ~ - - - ~ ~

~~~

~

5 5

5 I

I I

I 5

I y -- SA b3 AVE RAGE Of SA A Asen SA 63 -

n,

==

A Si lIL E AAL NI y*

o.2 s

Iy e4

=

V

$as 9f14/79

(

g M

U e

i e

i M

3 5

5 8

5 5

8 3

5

' ' ~

y..\\ _

~

S10 W

IE m g.

OE a8

~c a.>,,,

t 4

e e

i e

t I

I I

I JWB 3t10 400 GWB 800 3.000 2.000 1seeE GCubeULATIVE DAYS)

DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

AVERAGE SETTLEMENT AFTER SURCilARGE REMOVAL BA-8 AND BA-53 FIGURE ES-9

J 3

a 60 e

o5 I

sg 3_m> P=

-me k]

N e b* m O

I

[{

Q -*-

-(.

a;a."E a

gn s

-. -8 8a

.nH.E!

E.

o.

w

<w

.-c e s,,i

=>

m.s==

=

t=

s<.

w

=

w-

>===

=

@su,

=8 Wig 2

0 el i W

-Q b

-g

-[*

.a5

.8 au 8.

e au

• 4'..

E.

w3

-O l-i L

2

=

P i

\\

i 4

i

)

j

-}

g i

i w:

i y

5 h

.~

r-j

=

8 i

E __

E.,

8 y

n n_

3 a 5 8 3 3.,

(S3H3NI) 1ND311135 (1333) NO!1VA3'13 W31VMONn0W0 31VMIXOWddV

==

p

}-

SIEAR M&VE VELDCITY Vs. (FFS) 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 6M 6M l

A

~

su o

a A

)

i 6u a

A Open and closed eyuhele represent 3

teste at differest locations.

6 18 C

A g

E w

604 A

j

- AFFREDGITE BOTTOM Gr FILL A

3 DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING EXECUTIVE SUt4 MARY 399 SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY PROFILE A

FIGURE ES-11 2:

PRES $URE (KSF) e i

2 3

4 5

a 7

323 DEAD LOADS DEFORE SueCHAAGE REtaOVAL

/j j

/

/

/-

623

/

433 (2M4M64 is (33

/

/

/

~

/

= eis m

t j

N..

g

(/

p-y j-DEAD LOAD as ADDED MTER 413

,3 NnGE aseavA2.-=

l LI LIVE LOAD W 4h

'sN-SaftlCf FECTWE STRESS l

t$

~

~

DuasseG SuSC9AAGE.

t r

g s

L SURCHARGE W

Exs= Aat T:Osss se3" til ae-wee effecuse esertasrusen pressure lGaWT at 5271.

r2 nam eenco e - tekee marcs-, renie.e e ao le-sms ettocasse ouerteween pressure and strsetural omne noen pressie ennas macswrom.

(33 Tes.a ettacnee presasre as me and of ents.aw ese to so-mes ee%co.e o.orennema nneewre.ser casraa deed DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING sossa, and one anse-EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

set Tasas seesemme psemane ese ta no-pes eMactus emertanden poemene and esans sensassas emed seeds giseen swomane ening COMPARISON OF EFFECTIVE

• N" STRESS DEFORE AND AFTER

($1 Tosas eseecs.e esemane she se le-ons e##scese emedanden SURCHARGE SOUTIMEST CORNER sweeswe. essas sanscasras deed tesen, and espected is e aceda, est Tosas eHecs e pseemse durame some kk of smaae operaeien ese so an-was enecame o.ortineen seenswe. sirucanas esad loads-FIGURE ES-12 r

-sloses,and especsse s noesm.

67 M" centeriIne to

~

centerIine "3E531.x..

152'-6*

725=...

~d EiNEE centeriIno to centertIne y

a h$u.x.

"4@hm eji[/

i

/

--3 73 f

g /

/

..)

I

/ ' / W -

'$n#

gr,

~ja p

/ dd

/

gliiirm

\\ /

!!ssssist P

i gm /

f

=e=s -

L ait

/

75Pii /

/

/ ?sd#) !

/

\\

T

- N

/

sy

.c p

a s

q h #

\\

\\

/

.... /

/

isHEHid

\\

N/

=i

/

4s -non-N n /

j-

\\

lsig=g/

s s

lei

/

N /

/

(conterIino of N

\\

M /

g_.!! / I p

\\\\

/

roof sie to s

\\

\\

\\ \\

N / iff g;6M j

/

centertine of k/

/ hy[

\\

\\

futin03 N

\\

\\ 7 p,

)

U NORTH J

$f y:

s xv 4

6 x -

\\

/

1 DIESEL GENER ATOR BUILDING typical vertIcol EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

tronelatIonal sprino FINITE-ELEMENT MODEL j,#

(for ease of presentation.

only vertical translational springs have been depicted)

FIGURE ES-13

0.90 0.85 0.76 LINE A 1.19 1.02 LINE B 0.77 l.09 1.54 1.98 2.41 LINE C 1.50 1.51 1.78 1.86 1.91 LINE D 1.33 1.15 1.19 1.18 1.29 TOTAL 4.79 4.77 5.41 S.87 6.37 O

w.

w:..u

.r j

3 3

3 3

I

- f f

)

f 1

i f-NORTH M

..a a

..a.

]

1 1

l t.1.

t.,

t, t.

~

, BAY !

BAY 2 4

BAY 3 i

BAY 4 4

5 y

a V

41 '

f

?

Y

?

?

h b#

I d

"(I

, gp

....Pignr.:rc..r.ifia g.. asee:1. r..xy.:.s c.w.2. M f O

O O

O O

LINE A 1.67 -

1.42 1.28 1.44 1.99

<\\

LINE B 1.!4 l.12 1.46 1.92 2.21 h,,

LINE C 3.00 2.92 3.I6 3.37 3.24

~)

LINE D 1.62 1.67 1.69 1.98 1.89 LECEND

, TOTAL 7.43 7.13 7.59 8.71 9.33 O

DIESEL GENERATOR DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING BUILDING SETTLEMENT MARKER EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

SETTLEnENT IN INCHES FOR

SUMMARY

OF ACTUAL AND PRE-SURCHARGE PERIOD (3/78-8/78)............LINE A ESTIMATED SETTLEMENTS PRE-SURCHARGE PERIOD (8/78-1/79)............LINE B SURCHARGE PERIOD (1/79-8/79)

...............LINE C 1

POST SURCHAR".,E PERIOD 19/79-12/2025)........LINE D FIGURE ES-14 ASSUMING SURCHARGE REhAINS IN PLACE

__m..

REFERENCE SURFACE

/

NORTH

/

N 1.09 0.77 1.54 I 1.14 1 II.97 I I 1.55 1 1.98 M

.)

8AY l BAY 2 BAY 3 BAY 4 2.41 WEASURED SETTLEENTS

/

l.12 N-

!. 46 i

8 15 I 2. t 7 1 CAL ATED 3

p ACCURACY SETTLEENTS 1.92 2.21

./

1 D:ESEL GENER ATOR BUILDING EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

1 COMPAllISON OF SETTLEMENT VALUES i

PRE-SURCIIARGE. PER IOD AUGUST 1978 - JANUARY 1979 PIGURE ES-15

REFERENCE SURFACE NORTH

/

~

I 1.481 1.51

1. 50 ' C

^^YtY^* W S40.-

!l.721

g,g3g 1.91

- e-M r

/

I I.601

, _ _M ?N-r7'..T 69.7 r.-~

I l 941

-^

=

1,78 l.86 BAY t BAY 2 BAY 3 BAY 4 i

MRROR BAND CONSISTS OF

{

aiGX4+$N I 3.241 3.24 RVEY 3*00

= -: 4 ~-

.'4%

I3.05 l

N-ppg:g+,.- rz..

2.

G T

A D N 3,37 1 3.331 0.10 INCH CARRIED CALCULATED SETTLEENTS IN THE SURVEY SETTLEENTS DATA FOR THE PERIOD 3-20-79 TO 9-6-79 DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

COMPARISON OF SETTLEMENT t

VALUES l

SIlI!.C. l!ARGE PER IOD JANUARY 1979 - AUGUST 1979 FIGURE ES-16

O 3

0 E.

2 2

h2 Cl O

E 01 dy W

-- e g

.2 mt i

p4

=!**

CD E La b N D

Og

%2 W

im o

$g" 5m_3 Op in th Wt w N a'

we

-m

m. = zi = =

w e a

<m N.

m z,- -

CD D-

• es eWU E>

O J di n2 W w

at: :::' CD CC M

i o

-e I

m 2o<

-Q '

Oe es eg Z e-2>OZZ

\\l' R

b e.e N Jos p

wy O

cr.! W i 2 D

1 i

m to Dt Ea O V

• wu 3

gy l

Ez mfa W w

,(

EQ Oomu

- 4s WW

+4 6-Q. 4 W

d J x tr.

slWQ b

x w.

sW v:.

O c.

Ent

-;5 e

e

't!

E Of

.g m-o o

at 1

e-I e.

I O

mm

-e g

1 e

-.E

,s-

-.W

n..

e e,

~

.i n,

n., w o n.

O w

O j[

gU C

\\

g 8

oWW S5 N

=

'- 5 o

. 3 a.

N.

-g C

.: i;:;

e-e-a: z e-x mwm

@ C s

• ,- m W

. r m

g _o e

U

- a:

a.

.z z om w

EkW w *n"*

Wg A:. m g

C m

~

ty g

.w

.w w

m

.o

,w

... i G.>- a:

>= t 8G. E =

mw8 M

Nw

j :

w wH o,s o

w z N.

.. i o

m r

EE w

W a:

3 a: m a:8 5 I.:

.o w N:

w 6

w<=W wm, r.

4 w

W a:

mm Eg5 o

0

i :

98 b

t yb.g yIg l

r:

d

1 :

n;::r.:

w w

O E

u2 Hwa

p. 3, 3 m

N p3 g

O,

= = '.j, N

O* NU$

NEN NI

~

tw obSW o N

=

e A

N w

we O

I d

gZ gN k >* 4 4

l

' f:I 5

P-u$gh go-

[:.)

M e

k 6-O

...'a

• =

w4 Jdu g

..'..n P=

wg M3w m

a wg

.g;.n p

W

-8 P-

'J.*<

4 UZ m

uwo O.

f. A>.

g 4 >-

w 4 W >=

q O

0 9,

}

x..

w 3

N N

y W

.o

!