ML20094H509
| ML20094H509 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 08/09/1984 |
| From: | Garner L, Kanakaris G, Kankaris G, Parsons R CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO., EBASCO SERVICES, INC. |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20094H487 | List: |
| References | |
| OL, NUDOCS 8408140027 | |
| Download: ML20094H509 (156) | |
Text
_ __ _ ________ _ _ _____
l o
RELATCD CC", . ; FOND'INCE.
August 9g)44 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA I3 A10:14 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION u
hcfjf]):Lu;P'.'
- .c
~'
,V
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD --
In the Matter of )
)
CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY )
and NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN ) Docket No. 50-400 OL MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY )
)
(Shearon Harris Nuclear Power )
Plant) )
APPLICANTS' TESTIMONY OF GEORGE A. KANAKARIS, ROLAND M. PARSONS AND LARRY F. GARNER IN RESPONSE TO EDDLEMAN CONTENTION 65 (CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE)
T A O [oo PDR
O 1
Q.1 Please state your names.
2 g,2- George A. Kanakaris, Roland M. Parsons and Larry F..
3 Garner.
4 Mr. Kanakaris, by whom are you employed, and what is Q.2 5 your position?
6 .A.2 I have been employed by Ebasco Services Inc., the ar-7 chitect/ engineer for the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, 8 for 27 years. My current position is Manager of Civil Engi-9 neering.
10 Q.3 Please summarize your professional qualifications.
11 A.3 (GAK): I have over 25 years of experience in the 12 civil engineering and design of nuclear, fossil-fueled and hy-13 droelectric generating stations. As Manager of Civil Engi-14 nearing (and previously as Chief Engineer), I am responsible 15 for direction of all civil engineering and design of Ebasco 16 power plant projects. I received a Bachelor of Science degree 17 in Civil Engineering in 1951 from City College of New York, and 18 a Master of Science degree in Civil Engineering in 1964 from 19 Columbia University. I am a registered Professional Engineer 20 in 14 states. In addition, I am a member of the American Con-21 crate Institute and the American Society of Civil Engineers. I 22 served on the ASCE Committee on Nuclear Power from 1972 to 23 1980. A complete statement of my professional qualifications 24 is appended as Attachment 1 to this testimony.
25 Q.4 Mr. Parsons, by whom are you employed, and what is j 26 your position? ,
i
1 A.4 (RMP): I am employed by Carolina Power & Light Com-2 pany as Project General Manager, Harris Plan Construction Sec-3 tion of the Harris Nuclear Project Department.
4 Q.5 Please summarize your professional qualifications.
5 A.5 I received a Bachelor of Science degree in (RMP):
6 Civil Engineering from Fresno State College in 1959. I am a 7 registered Professional Engineer in five states, and a member 8 of the American Society of Civil Engineers. I have worked on 9 the construction of nuclear power plants for over 17 years, and 10 I have been at the Shearon Harris site since major construction 11 activity was undertaken in 1976. My primary responsibility is 12 the construction of the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant. A 13 complete statement of my professional qualifications is ap-14 pended as Attachment 2 to this testimony.
15 Q.6 Mr. Garner, by whom are you employed and what is your 16 position?
17 A.6 (LFG): I am Senior Construction Specialist in the 18 Harris Plant Construction Section of the Harris Nuclear Project 19 Department, Carolina Power & Light Company.
20 Q.7 Please summarize your professional qualifications.
21 A.7 (LFG): I received an Associate degree in Applied 22 Science, Civil Engineering, from the W. W. Holding Technical 23 Institute. I have been employed by CP&L at the Shearon Harris 24 site since 1974. In 1978 I became the Construction Inspection 1
I 25 l 26 ,'
l
.i 1
(CI) Supervisor-Civil. In that position my responsibilities 2
included: the review of specifications, standards and work 3 procedures'in the civil areas; development of inspection proce-4 dures for'the civil activities; and the training and supervi-5 sion of CI inspection personnel. My responsibilities involved 6 all areas of the power block, including the Containment Build-7 ing.
8 With regard to the Containment Building concrete place-9 ments specifically, I have been involved in pre-placement, 10 placement and post-placement inspections and construction ac-11 tivities, and I worked with engineering personnel on issues 12 surrounding placements in this area. I attended numerous pre-13 placement meetings with inspection and craft personnel on 14 placement procedures, inspection requirements, placing configu-15 rations, manpower and materials requirements, and inspection 16 items necessary to allow placement of the concrete. I have 17 conducted placement surveillance of the inspectors during 18 placement operations to ensure their understanding of placing 19 requirements, including slump / air requirements, drop heights, 20 consolidation, and attention to the more difficult areas of the 21 placement where placing problems could occur. I have also been 22 involved with post-placement inspections to determine necessary 23 repairs, cure requirements, and the adequacy of inspection doc-24 umentation.
25 26 .
l l
l
1 o
b 1 A complete statement of my professional qualifications is 2 appended as Attachment 3 to this testimony.
3 Q.8 What is the purpose of this testimony?
4 A8 (GAK, RMP, LFG): The purpose of this testimony is to 5 respond to Eddleman Contention 65, which states:
6 Inspection of CP&L concrete pour packages has shown that numerous instances of im-7 proper concrete placement have occurred in the basemat and containment structure. In 8 view of this, a complete examination of the basemat and containment structure must be 9 conducted using ultrasonic techniques or, where use of such techniques is not feasi-10 ble, other appropriate tests.
11 The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board has held that the con-12 crete pour packages at issue are those discussed in " Wells 13 Eddleman's Response to Summary Disposition Motion on Eddleman 14 65 (Concrete)," June 14, 1984, and the accompanying Affidavit 15 of Charles C. Stokes, with the exception of matters related to 16 the waterstop, which the Board excluded. In short, we under-17 stand the issue to be whether, based on the identified po>tr 18 packages, there are extensive voids in the containment ba emat, 19 exterior walls or dome due to out-of-specification slump, inad-20 equate vibration or inadequate concrete strength.
21 Q.9 How is your testimony organized?
22 A.9 (GAK, RMP, LFG): In order to provide a framework for 23 understanding the allegations, we first describe the concrete ;
24 containment structure and the concrete placement process, ,
t 25 l 26
-4 I
1 followed by a description of the inspections involved and the 2 relevant documentation of these activities. Next we address 3 one-by-one the alleged deficiencies revealed by the concrete 4 pour packages. We then address the honeycombing discovered in 5 the basemat and assess the potential for significant, 6 unidentified honeycombing or voids elsewhere in the concrete 7 containment structure. Finally, we demonstrate that further 8 testing of the concrete containment structure, beyond that 9 planned by CP&L, is unwarranted.
10 Q.10 Please describe the concrete containment structure 11 at the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant.
12 A.10 (GAK): The concrete containment structure, which 13 was designed by Ebasco, is fully described in Final Safety 14 Analysis Report section 3.8.1, which is Applicants' Exhibit __.
15 To summarize, it is a steel-lined reinforced concrete structure 16 in the form of a vertical right cylinder with a hemispherical 17 dome and a flat base with a recess beneath the reactor vessel.
18 The cylindrical wall of the structure is 4 feet, 6 inches thick 19 and measures 160 feet in height from the liner on the base to 20 the springline of the dome. The dome is 2 feet, 6 inches 21 thick, and the basemat consists of a 12-foot thick structural 22 concrete slab and a metal liner. The base liner is covered 23 with concrete, the top of which forms the floor of the contain-24 ment.
25 26 1 The containment structure, basemat and walls provide pres-2 sure and temperature protection, biological shielding, and mis-3 sile protection for the Nuclear Steam Supply System. The con-4 crete walls protect the inner liner plate from internal 5 pressures, external environmental effects and provide missile 6 protection. The NRC Staff has concluded that the design of the 7 concrete containment at Harris is acceptable and meets the rec-8 ommendations of sectio.t 3.8.1 of the Standard Review Plan, and 9 the relevant requirements of 10 C.F.R. $ 50.55a and General De-10 sign Criteria 1, 2, 4, 16 and 50 of Appendix A to 10 C.F.R. 11 Part 50. NUREG-1038, Safety Evaluation Report related to the 12 operation of Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 13 (November 1983), at 3-29, 30.
14 Q.11 What guidelines are employed on the Shearon Harris 15 project for concrete placement?
16 A.11 (RMP): All concrete placements are closely con-17 trolled by methods prescribed in site work procedures, techni-18 cal procedures and administrative procedures. These procedures 19 were developed by engineers, using the architect / engineer's 20 specifications, and relevant industry standards as guidance.
21 We will describe or identify the significant procedures used in 22 the placements for the concrete containment structure.
- 23 The control of concrete placed begins with the purchase l
l 24 and testing of concrete constituent materials. The batching 25 26
1 process is also-closely monitored, with each batch of concrete 2 being accepted or rejected by a qualified QC Inspector, follow- l l
3 ing procedure QCI-13.2 (Batch Plant Inspection), to assure 1 4 proper mix proportions and homogeneity of the mix. The con-5 crete is further inspected at the placement by a qualified Con-6 'struction Inspector who verifies the mix design identification 7 number for each truck and, using procedures Mr. Garner will de-8 scribe next, follows all aspects of the placing operation 9 including transporting, placing, consolidation and final fin-10 ishing.
11 (LFG): Procedure WP-05 (Concrete Placement) describes 12 operations incidental to and including placement of concrete.
13 It covers operations involving procurement and placement of 14 concrete and certain inspections prior to, during, and after 15 placement. It discusses height of drops of concrete, equipment 16 used in placing, preparation of placement surfaces, rate of 17 rise of concrete within the forms, thickness of placed layers 18 of concrete, consolidation, special provisions in placing, 19 reinforcing steel ("rebar") repositioning, hot and cold weather 20 placing conditions, temperature control of mass concrete and 21 bulkheading pours. It discusses the Concrete Placement Report 22 and the information it supplies for the placement -- location, 23 quantity, temperature and slump requirements, and proposed 24 placement methods. It designates required signatures necessary 25 26 1
for placement of the concrete. It also describes operations 2
related to scheduling the placement, preplacement installation 3 and craft responsibility on embedded item installation such as 4 rebar, penetrations and plates. The procedure discusses re-5 lease of the placement, control of the placement and personnel 6 responsible for inspection of the placement operation.
7 Procedure TP-15 (Concrete Placement Inspection) estab-8 lishes guidelines for the inspection of concrete pre-placement, 9 placement, and post-placement activities to assure that materi-10 als and workmanship entering into the placement comply with ap-11 plicable standards. It lists items requiring inspection and 12 quality verification prior to the Placement Report sign-off by 13 the inspector. It lists placement items to be checked 14 throughout the placement, and it identifies post-placement 15 items that must be monitored and verified to meet procedural 16 requirements. While the placement is in progress the concrete 17 being placed is tested by QC, as I discuss below, and the re-18 sults are recorded. These results are given to the Construc-19 tion Inspector. When "out of specification" conditions are 20 found in either the slump or air content, the placement is con-21 trolled until further testing is conducted and the "out of ,
22 specification" condition resolved. The condition is reported 23 on a Non-Conformance Report (NCR) for engineering evaluation 24 and disposition if any of the out-of-specification concrete was j 25 placed in the placement.
26 i
1 Procedure-WP-17 (Concrete Curing) sets forth the require-2 ments.for concrete curing to ensure that concrete.will be in 1 3 compliance with the specifications,- and that finished concrete 4 will be of specified strength and free from damage. It states ,
5 cure and protection requirements for concrete placements in 6 hot, normal and cold weather conditions, and how this cure and
-7 protection is to be achieved. This procedure describes who is 8 responsible for maintaining the cure and the documentation'of 9 cure activities on the cure card.
10 Field sampling and testing of concrete during placement 11 i,s performed by the QC organization, in accordance with test 12 frequencies-specified by Ebasco, utilizing procedure QCI-13.3 13 (Concrete Field Tests). After sampling the concrete at the 14 point of discharge, the following tests are performed:
15 Slump.
(A) The slump test is peformed in accordance with 16 ASTM-(American Society for Testing and Materials)-C-143 for 17 consistency and workability.
18 (B) Temperature. The temperature of the concrete is 19 taken with a suitable calibrated thermometer.
20 (C) Air Content. The air content is determined in accor-21 dance with ASTM-C-231 for entrained air content.
22 (D) Unit Weicht. The unit weight is determined in accor-23 dance with ASTM-C-138.
24 25 26 l
1 i
(E) Concrete Test Specimen. The concrete test specimens 2
are made in accordance with ASTM-C-31.
3 Procedure QCI-13.1 (Concrete Compressive Strength Tests) 4 governs the handling, curing and testing of concrete cylinder 5
test specimens delivered to the concrete laboratory at the 6 Harris Energy and Environmental Center. There they are cured 7
in accordance with ASTM-C-511. After 7 days of curing, one 8
test specimen is tested for compressive strength, and two spec-9 imens are tested after 28 days. A fourth (and spare) cylinder 10 is maintained for 90 days to assist in dispositioning any non-11 conformance found in, and in performing any strength evaluation 12 as a result of, the 28-day tests. QA/QC will include the re-13 sults of these tests on a Concrete Test Report (form QA-24),
14 which will be included in the concrete pour package before it 15 is transmitted to the QA vault by Quality Assurance. The Con-16 crete Test Report cannot be included in the package until the 17 28-day compressive strength testing is complete and the results 18 are recorded on the Report.
19 Q.12 What is included in a concrete pour package?
20 A.12 (RMP, LFG): The required itens for a concrete pour 21 (or placement) package are: (1) Concrete Placement Report; (2) 22 Placement Checklist; (3) Field Inspection Reports necessary to 23 document inspection of placement of embedded items; (4) Post-24 Placement Checklist; (5) Concrete Batch Tickets; and 25 (6) Concrete Test Report.
26 I
l l
1 Q.13 Please elaborate on the Concrete Placement Report.
2 A.13 (RMP, LFG): Attachment 4 to this testimony is the 3 Concrete Placement Report form. This report is the concrete 4 construction record initiated by the Area Engineer and Area Su-5 perintendent. It contains information describing the placement 6 area, pre-placement sign-offs by crafts, CI and QA/QC, place-7 ment methods, and post-placement acceptance of the placement 8 methods and inspection. The upper one-third of the form is 9 completed in advance of the placement.
10 Q.14 What are the placements challenged by Mr. Eddleman 11 for the containment basemat, exterior walls and dome?
12 A.14 (LFG): Attachment 5 identifies those placements, 13 and provides information on the mix requirements (including 14 slump) and the design compressive strength.
15 Q.15 What were the results of the compressive strength 16 tests?
17 A.15 (RMP, LFG): Test results were as follows:
18 Compressive Strength (Average)
Location Actual (psi) Design { psi)
Basemat 5812 4000 20 Exterior Wall 6065 5000 )
Dome 4910 4000 4 22 '
Dome 6112 5000 23 Actual strength exceeds design strength for containment con-24 crete placements by an average of 27.9 percent. (Note: While 26 I
the design called for 4,000 psi strength in the dome, a 5,000 2
psi mix was used on the dome placement beneath the hub plate to 3
ensure a workable mix in that area.)
4 Q.16 What happens if a specimen fails to meet the design 5 strength?
6 A.16 (RMP, LFG): In the event that 28-day compressive 7
strength concrete cylinders fail to attain the required design 8 strength, the QC-Civil Supervisor performs a strength evalua-9 tion in accordance with Ebasco specification CAR-SH-CH-6, and 10 if the evaluation and/or 28-day compressive strength does not 11 meet specification criteria a Non-Conformance Report is issued 12 by the QC-Civil unit. Disposition of the NCR is performed by 13 the Resident-Civil unit of the Harris Plant Construction Sec-14 tion, which prepares a Field Change Request or Permanent Waiver 15 which is forwarded to the Harris Plant Engineering Section for 16 evaluation. Engineering evaluation determines if the existing 17 concrete strength is adequate per the 28 or 90-day compressive 18 strength determination, or if drilled core samples are needed 19 to determine the adequacy of the in-place concrete.
20 Q.17 Mr. Parsons and Mr. Garner, have you read the Stokes 21 Affidavit which challenges the concrete pour packages at issue 1
22 in Eddleman Contention 65? l 23 A.17 (RMP, LFG): Yes.
24 25 26 1
Q.18 Please respond to each of the relevant points raised 2 by Mr. Stokes.
3 A.18 (RMP, LMG): Before addressing each package, we note 4 as a general matter that Mr. Stokes to a great extent has 5 misunderstood the format of these reports. For example, 6 throughout his affidavit, Mr. Stokes has equated the notation 7 " exposed aggregate" to evidence of honeycombing or voids in the 8 concrete. The only references to exposed aggregate are in the 9 upper portion of the various CPRs which indicate the type of 10 contact surface preparation required for a particular place-11 ment. As is clear from the face of the CPRs, this portion of 12 the report is completed well in advance of the actual place-13 ment, for planning purposes, in accordance with the require-14 ments of WP-05 and TP-15. Further, a concrete scarification 15 exposing aggregate is a common concrete construction practice 16 which allows a successive lift of concrete to be more securely 17 bonded to previous lifts. As such, an exposed aggregate does 18 not indicate either inadequate vibration practices or the 19 potential for concrete voiding.
20l We will now proceed to address each placement package dis-21 cussed by Mr. Stokes and which is relevant to the contention.
22 23 24 25 26
~
1 (A) Placement ICBXW219001 (Applicants' Ex. )
2 Mr. Stokes claims that the slump for this placement was 3 out-of-specification. Affidavit at 3. This is incorrect --
4 the requirement of four inches shown on the concrete test re-5 port is the maximum slump allowed. The lower slumps shown on 6
the CPR are not out-of-specification and, indeed, lower slumps 7
are encouraged by the governing Ebasco specificatic n.
8 Mr. Stokes next asserts that the compressive strength cyl-9 inders are not in compliance with the governing specification.
10 However, as can be seen from the CPRs, the three sets of sam-11 ples were all above the required strength. Mr. Stokes further 12 misunderstands the section of the quoted specification; this 13 specification requires that samples from the same set be within 14 5% of their average (which these clearly are). The specifica-15 tion does not require the different sets to be within the 5%
16 criterion.
- 17 (B) Placement ICBXW242001 (Applicants' Ex. )
18 As to Mr. Stokes' allegation of inadequate vibration, as 19 discussed above, completion of the upper portion of the CPR was 20 made prior to concrete pre-placement inspection (see left-hand 21 side of Attachment 4) in accordance with WP-05 and TP-15.
22 Statements made in this portion of the report are anticipated
. 23 weather conditions, preposed placement methods, anticipated 24 curing requirements, etc., as indicated on the report.
25 26 O l l
1 Monitoring of anticipated weather conditions, along with actual l 2
weather conditions, is required to control the placement and 3 curing per WP-17, which is based on ACI (American Concrete In-4 stitute) 359, 308, 306, 305 and Ebasco specification CAR-SH-5 CH-6.
6 Mr. Stokes next attempts to raise questions regarding cos-7 metic repairs to this placement. As a consequence of pre-8 placement review, it was determined that steel slick rods (vi-9 brator probes) would be used to properly vibrate concrete.
10 Following concrete formwork removal, as indicated in the pour 11 package, these rods were cut off below the concrete neat line 12 and the concrete was cosmetically patched in accordance with 13 applicable work procedures, as stated on the concrete defects 14 sheets.
15 (C) Placement ICBXW256004 (Applicants' Ex. )
16 Mr. Stokes here attempts to draw some negative inference 17 from the fact that workers were warned by the Construction In-18 spector regarding vibration techniques. However, since the 19 maximum slump by design was eight inches, the Construction In-20 spector was performing his duty by reminding the concrete 21 placement workers of their consolidation techniques. The In-22 spector found consolidation practices satisfactory.
23 Mr. Stokes next claims that the slump variance shown on 24 the Concrete Test Report does not meet the requirements of the 25 26 '
1
l i
1 1
ACI code, citing.ACI 349 sections 4.2.2 and 4.2.3. In fact, 2
ACI 349lis.not applicable to Concrete Containments; rather, the 1
3 applicable code is ACI 359. In addition, the sections cited by
.4 Mr. Stokes, as well as idse companion section of ACI 359 (sec-
~
, 5 tion cc-2230), address qualification tests for a concrete mix 6
design rather than testing of production batches, as was the 7 case here. Furthermore, subsection cc-2232.2 of ACI 359 re--
8 quires that proportions be selected to produce an average 9
strength at the designated test age exceeding design strength 10 by at least 1200 psi when slump is the maximum permitted by the {
11 specifications. The fact that the variance of slump for pro-12 duction concrete was such that the established values for each 13 concrete design mix were not exceeded and the strength met the 14 requirements of this subsection, means that the resulting r
15 placement would lead to a higher strength concrete. This, in 16 fact, was the case and demonstrated the good quality control 17 that was implemented in the construction.
18 Mr. Stokes next attempts to equate a notation that the 19 weather was " overcast" to a greater potential for concrete 20 voids. Weather conditions recorded on QA-24, " Concrete Test i
21 Report," are personal observations of the QC concrete tester 22 and do not control the inspection responsibilities of Construc-23 tion Inspection and Quality Assurance personnel who are 24 observing the concrete placement. We fail to understand the 25 basis for Mr. Stokes' statement.
26 l
1 (D) Placement ICBXW276002-(Applicants' Ex. )
a 2
-Mr. Stokes again asserts that the slump for this placement-3 is out-of-specification. The indicated slump is three and 4 three-quarters inches, which is less than the maximum allowable 5 of four inches. Maximum slump repesents the highest value, not 6 the only permissible value of slump. Mr. Stokes states that
-7
~ the weather has not been indicated on the-test report. While 8 .this is true, we point out that on the Concrete Placement Re-9 port weather is noted as " normal."
10 (E). , Placement ICBXW290001 (Applicants' Ex. )
11 The first issue raised on this placement by Mr. Stokes is 12 the notation that a worker was warned about vibration tech-13 niques. However, the Construction Inspector was merely per-14 forming his job by observing and correcting any unceeptable 15 concrete placement techniques. The same Inspector also stated 16 " Placement was very smooth and sat. [ satisfactory]."
17 Mr. Stokes next claims that the low strength for specimen 18 9323 renders this placement unacceptable. This specimen, how-19 ever, was not taken from the concrete batch used for this 20 placement -- as the pour package clearly indicates. Laboratory 21 specimen numbers 8176, 8381, 9323 (referenced by Mr. Stokes),
22 and 9397 represent concrete mix design number 72 which was 23 placed in other placements prior to and following this contain-24 ment wall placement. Ebasco specification CAR-SH-CH-6 and ACI.
l 25 l l
26 l
1 214 require concrete strength evaluation based on consecutive 2 batches of a specific concrete mix design. Lab specimen number 3 9265 was the only concrete specimen (as indicated on the QA-24 4 Concrete Test Report) which was placed in this containment ex-5 terior wall placement. Engineering evaluation of core samples 6 tested on August 8 and August 23, 1983, in accordance with ACI 7
359, ACI 214, and PW-C-3769, included in the pour package, 8 found the placement to be acceptable. The strength evaluation 9
and engineering evaluation of PW-C-3769 was adequate to resolve 10 the low strength of 4865 psi for specimen 9265 in accordance 11 with governing specifications.
12 (F) Placement ICBXW308001 (Applicants' Ex. )
13 As stated in the placement package, the strength evalua-14 tion of specimen number 10664 was performed in accordance with 15 Ebasco specification CAR-SH-CH-6 and ACI 214, and was found to 16 be acceptab]e. Mr. Stokes has not pointed to any data to indi-17 cate that the criteria set forth therein are somehow 18 unacceptable for performing such evaluations.
19 We are unable to determine Mr. Stokes' basis for finding 20 " inadequate vibration" and the possible existence of voids.
21 The placement checklist indicates consolidation was satisfacto-22' ry.
23 24 25 26
.~ 6 .
1 Placement ICBXW336003 (Applicants' Ebc.
(G) )
2 We are again unable to determine Mr. Stokes' basis for 3 . stating that " vibration problems'still not corrected." No such ;
4 statement appears in_the pour package, and the placement check- l l
5 list indicates consolidation was satisfctory.
6
~
As was the case with (F) above,1the placement package
-7 strength evaluation of specimen number 10719 was performed in 8 accordance with Ebasco specification CAR-SH-CH-6 and ACI 214 9 and was found to be acceptable.
10 (H) Placement-ICBXW386001 (Applicants' Ex. )
11 Mr. Stokes' assertion of " documentation problems with the 12 mix code" is an attempt to exaggerate changes.made to the des-13 .ignated mix (i.e., from one mix type to another) prior to the 14 placement. In accordance with WP-05 concrete mix design can be 15 - changed prior to placement operations to suit the placement 16 conditions, as determined by the Area Engineer. The notations 17 on the CPR are merely reflective of this revision, 18 As to Mr. Stokes' " concern" regarding the fact that the :
19 required strength is only 4,000 psi, we note that, by design, 20 the required concrete strength above elevation 326 fest on con-t l
21 tainment is 4,000 psi, as opposed to the exterior wall below 22 elevation 326 feet and above the basemat, where 5,000 psi was 23 required. From 326 to 376 feet, however, 5,000 psi concrete l 24 was used pursuant to a Field Change Request, approved by 25 26
_19 l
F 1 1 Ebasco, to facilitate early removal and repositioning of forms 2 for the next placement.
3 (I) Placement ICBXW396002 (Applicants' Ex. )
4 As with similar previous allegations made by Mr. Stokes, 5 we are unable to determine his basis for stating that " vibra-6 tion problems" exist. The placement checklist indicates con-7 solidation was satisfactory.
8 (J) Placement ICBXW425001 (Applicants' Ex. )
9 Mr. Stokes again makes the totally unsupported statement 10 that a " vibration problem" exists. Contrary to this allega-11 tion, the placement checklist indicates consolidation was sat-12 isfactory and further notes that the placement was " smooth 13 [and) satisfactory."
14 (K) Placement ICBXW444001 (Applicants' Ex. )
15 Mr. Stokes' statements regarding this pour evidence his 16 r'fusal to accept written documentation of the acceptability of 17 any concrete placement. Rather, Mr. Stokes continues to make 18 unsupported assertions that " vibration problems" exist. In-19 deed, as noted in the Affidavit, the placement checklist indi-20 cates consolidation was satisfactory. A careful review of 21 placement checklists for each placement shows that the Con-22 struction Inspector observed consolidation and found it was 23 satisfactory.
24 25 26 P
]
i-1
.Mr. Stokes' next statement that this is the only placement 2
=for which it was noted th'at the vibrators worked well incor-3 rectly-implies unacceptable vibration techniques in the other 4 pours. The reference to " form vibrators-and head box arrange-5 ments" was a response to a special concrete placement technique 6 approved by the design engineer, Ebasco. Thus, the fact that a 7 special vibration technidue was noted to have worked well does I
8 not mean that the " normal" vibration techniques used in other 9 placements were not equally satisfactory.
10 As to Mr. Stokes' finding regarding low air content, as 11 indicated in the pour package, a Discrepancy Report was issued 12 by Construction Inspection personnel. Subsequently the Dis-13 crepancy Report was answered with an engineering resolution.
14 (L) Placement ICBSL216001 (Applicants' Ex. )
15 Mr. Stokes asserts that 29 of 64 concrete samples had out-16 of-specification slump. However, Ebasco specification CAR-SH-17 CH-6 Section I, paragraph 11.9 clearly states that the slump 18 requirement for containment basemat concrete was a maximum of 19 four inches, with a tolerance of plus one inch. Therefore, the 20 subject slump values are clearly not cut-of-specification.
. 21 Finally, reference is made to inadequate vibration.
22 Again, we are unable to determine Mr. Stokes' basis for stating 23 that inadequate vibration exists, when the Construction In-
. 24 spector noted consolidation was satisfactory on the placement 25 checklist.
26
- l 1
(M) Placement ICBSL216002 (Applicants' Ex. )
2 We incorporate by reference our response to (L), above, on 3 the issues of slump specification and vibration, which are 4 equally applicable to this second basemat pour.
5 Mr. Stokes attempts to imply that the discovery of a void 6 in this pour is a previously unrecognized safety concern. How-7 ever, Applicants have previously provided extensive information 8 regarding the discovery and repair of this void, and addressed 9
it in the Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 65. We 10 address it again below.
11 Q.19 Mr. Kanakaris, how and why does honeycombing or void 12 formation occur in concrete?
13 A.19 (GAK): Concrete must be proportioned and mixed as a 14 ralatively stiff material to assure good strength, durability 15 and density of the hardened concrete. This requirement, on the 16 other hand, inhibits its flow characteristics while in the 17 unhardened state. The flow characteristics of the fresh con-18 crete mixture are improved, however, when exposed to vibration 19 (consolidation) during placement. In addition, a concrete mix 20 with a super plasticizer added to the basic mix may be used 21 when placement conditions require a highly workable mix. If 22 adequate consolidation is not achieved, air pockets or voids 23 are present in the hardened concrete, especially around 24 embedded items and congested area. Current concrete industry 25 26 I
)
i l
1 procedures (pre-placement, placement, and post-placement) are 2
written to preclude honeycombing/ void formation problems with 3
concrete placements. Further, current industry standards uti-4 lized for Harris concrete mixes.and placement procedures 5
optimize the desirable properties of fresh and hardened con-6 crete. If honeycombing nevertheless occurs, visual inspection 7
during the inspection phases of concrete construction would 8
identify any areas of honeycombing or voids.
9 Q.20 Can measures be taken to minimize the potential for 10 honeycombing?
11 A.20 (LFG): Yes. Measures are taken before a placement 12 begins to prevent formation of honeycombs and voids. Construc-13 tion Inspection personnel, the Area Engineer and Concrete 14 Superintendent review design drawings and/or the placement area 15 to determine the difficulty of the placement. Placements which 16 are determined to be difficult are identified and the Area En-17 gineer then selects an appropriate concrete mix design that 18 will perform adequately under the given placement conditions, 19 while still meeting design strength requirements. In some 20 cases, a super-plasticized concrete mix design is used when 21 placement conditions require use of a highly workable mix to 22 preclude formation of honeycombs or voide. In preparation fok-23 the placements at the top of the containment dome, plywood 24 mock-up forms were used in advance of the actual placement to 25 test for honeycombing/ void formation.
26 O
1 A preventative program is also used during the actual 2 placements. Construction Inspection personnel constantly watch 3 the placement to insure that adequate consolidation is being 4 used to effect a dense and homogeneous concrete placement.
5 Special attention is given to vibration of concrete around 6 dense reinforcing steel areas to prevent honeycombing. Craft 7 personnel are instructed as to the importance of adequate vi-8 bration. In addition to the use of pencil-type vibrators, vi-9 bratory rods were used in areas of congestion to facilitate 10 consolidation. In the area around the equipment hatch (the 11 largest containment penetration), plexiglass forms were em-12 ployed so that the flow of concrete into congested areas could 13 be observed visually.
14 After each placement is completed, a Post Placement In-15 spection is conducted by Construction Inspection personnel who 16 examine the exposed concrete surfaces for honeycombing and 17 voids. Honeycombing or voids found are chipped out until sound 18 concrete is encountered in the entire area. The area is then 19 repaired and cured with proper concrete temperature and mois-20 ture conditions maintained.
21 Q.21 Did honeycombing nevertheless occur in constructing 22 the concrete containment structure?
23 A.21 (LEG): Only one of the 106 concrete placements for 24 the concrete containment structure basemat, exterior walls and i
25 26 4
1 dome was identified as having honeycombing or voids. The l
2 honeycombing ocurred in a basemat placement of August 17, 1978, )
3 and following form removal was reported by a QC Inspector on a 4 QC field report of September 13, 1978, and an Inspection Post-5 Placement Report of September 18, 1978. The area in which the 6 voids occurred was highly congested with reinforcing steel and 7 was next to exterior forms. To determine the extent of the 8 nonconformance and to facilitate repairs by providing satisfac-9 tory surface preparation, the area was chipped to sound con-10 crete. Following the chipping operation, the excavated area 11 was 6 feet in width, a maximum of 3.5 feet in height, and a 12 maximum of 3 feet in depth. I took the initiative to view this 13 area personally before it was repaired.
14 A repair procedure was written by CP&L Construction Engi-15 neering, and approved by Ebasco, which designated repair meth-16 ods employing a combination of replacement mortar and replace-17 ment concrete. An approved epoxy bonding medium was designated 18 to assure proper bonding in all affected areas. In accordance 19 with these and other applicable quality control and work proce-20 dures, the repair replacements were completed by October 9, 21 1978, and field reports written by the QC Inspector ve:.ified 22 placement inspection and accepted the repairs.
23 Q.22 Mr. Kanakaris, Mr. Garner just indicated that the 24 area in which the voids occurred was highly congested. Would 25 you elaborate on the design in that area?
26 l
1 A.22 -(GAK): Yes. -There are two pairs of valve chambers 2 (located at azimuths 225* and 315*) in the basemat, and the 3 honeycombing occurred in the area of one of these pairs of 4 va'lve chambers.
5 Due to the configuration of the basemat construction in -
6 the vicinity of th'e valve chambers, additional reinforcing 7- steel at narrower spacings between bar centers was required by 8 the design engineering evaluation. By design, upper and lower 9 layer radial reinforcing steel in this area has center-to-10 ~
center spacing which ranges from 6 to 11 and 1/4 inches. Upper 11 and lower layer circumferential reinforcing steel has center-12 to-center spacing which ranges from 6 to 13 and 1/4. inches. ,
13 Additional reinforcing steel between the upper and lower layer 14 rebar mats surrounds each valve chamber in a circular and lon-
~
15 gitudinal manner. Center-to-center bar spacing in this area 16 generally is 6 to 12 inches. In the basemat, the reinforcing 17 steel itself has nominal diameters of 2 and 1/4 inches (number 18 18 size bars) and 1 and 3/8 inch (number 11 size bars).
19 In short, there is a relatively dense cross-hatch pattern 20 of reinforcing steel in the area of these valve chambers, with B
21 little-distance between bars. Consequently, if there was going 22 to_be any significant honeycombing in the concrete containment i 23 . structure, I would expect it to occur in this area where con-24 solidation would be difficult to achieve.
25 26 I
l
l 1
0 1
Q.23 Mr. Parsons, what is your assessment of the place-2 ments for the concrete containment structure?
3 A.23 (RMP): We have excellent concrete in the Harris 4 concrete containment structure basemat, exterior walls and 5 dome. The single instance of honeycombing identified was re-6 paired in a manner which leaves the basemat as good as the 7 original design requirement. This is the result of: (1) using 8 material for repair which equaled or exceeded the quality and 9
strength requirements of the original design, and (2) utilizing 10 procedures that provide for proper placement and bonding. The 11 repair procedures were written by a CP&L discipline engineer 12 and reviewed by the design engineer Ebasco to assure that the 13 repaired area meets or exceeds original design requirements.
14 The repair methods were written utilizing current concrete in-15 dustry standards and procedures. Further, the replacement con-16 crete and mortar used in the repair were tested during the re-17 pair placement, and subjected to pre-placement, placement, and 18 post-placement inspections by qualified QC personnel.
19 Q.24 Is anyone on the panel concerned that there may be 20 undiscovered significant honeycombing?
21 A.24 (GAK, RMP, LFG): No. We are confident that there 22 are no other instances of significant honeycombing (i.e., capa-23 ble of influencing the strength capabilities of the structure) 24 in the basemat, exterior walls and dome of the concrete 25 26 l
l 1
containment structure at the Harris plant. First, the honey-2 combing which took place was in an area of unique sus-3 ceptibility to void formation, and is therefore not, indicative 4
.of any programmatic deficiency in mix design or placement pro-5 cedures. Second, the use of a small aggregate concrete miti-6 gates the consequences of honeycombing by naturally 7
. facilitating the flow of the fresh concrete into congested.
8 areas. Third, areas of concentration of reinforcing steel, 9 where honeycombing is more'likely to occur, were identified in 10 the planning of.the concrete placements, and special care was 11 taken to maintain more accurate control of placing requirements 12 and vibration of the concrete. Fourth, any significant honey-13 combing would create a visible indication on the concrete sur-14 face. Because of the thorough inspection program implemented 15 in association with these concrete placements, any such visual 16 indication would have been observed by inspect 6rs, as occurred 17 in the one instance discussed earlier.
18 Q.25 Will further confirmation of the integrity of the 19 structure be available prior to plant operations?
20 A.25 (RMP): Yes. Prior to plant operation, the concrete 21 containment structure will be subject to a structural proof 22 test, with liner, concrete structures, all electrical and 23 piping penetrations, equipment hatch, and personnel locks in 24 place. The internal test pressure will be increased from 25
~
26 r
1 atmospheric pressure to 1.15 times the containment design pres-2 sure. This test is to confirm the adequacy of the strucure 3 with respect to quality of construction and material.
4 Mr. Kanakaris, the Board has indicated that the sec-Q.26 5
ond sentence of Eddleman Contention 65 -- on the need for ul-6 trasonic or other additional testing of the containment con-7 crete -- will not become an issue unless the first sentence, on 8 improper concrete placement, is proven. Nevertheless, I would 9
like to explore briefly the potential need for and utility of 10 such tests. Are ultrasonics and other such non-destructive ex-11 amination techniques normally used for concrete structures?
12 A.26 (GAK): No. Industry codes and standards do not re-13 quire or recommend such examinations, and they are not a rou-14 tine part of prudent civil engineering and design practices or 15 construction procedures. Reliance is placed, instead, on the 16 design of the concrete mix, development of sound placement pro-17 cedures, and on the diverse and numerous placement inspections 18 described by my colleagues.
19 Q.27 Is there a generally accepted threshold of deficien-20 cies for which your profession recognizes the need for such ex-21 aminations?
22 A.27 No.
(GAK): And such examinations are not warranted 23 in the absence of observed, significant concrete deficiencies.
24 25 26 l
I
1 Q.28 Do you believe the deficiencies described by Mr.
2 Parsons and Mr. Garner fall into that category?
3 A.28 (GAK): Absolutely not. Some honeycombing in a 4 structure of this size is not unusual. Here, where only one 5 inst &nce of honeycombing, in a highly congested area suscepti-6 ble to void formation, has been identified in concrete place-7 ments involving approximately 25,800 cubic yards of concrete 8 with approximately 106,000 square feet of surface area, such a 9 special-investigation is unwarranted and would be a needless 10 expenditure of funds and resources.
11 (RMP): I should add that it would be impractical to per-12 form a soniscope examination of the basemat at this point in 13 the construction process. Except for one small portion of the 14 basemat perimeter at elevation 190 feet, access is available 15 only to the inside horizontal surface. The top of the mat has 16 been covered with the steel liner plate and an additional five 17 feet of concrete, and installed supports and structural steel 18 seriously limit access even to that surface.
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 l
I l
, Attachment 1
. . GE0 FEE A. KANAKARIS Manager Civil Engineering EXPERIENCE SLNMARY Manager of Civil Engineering with over twenty-five (25) years experience, responsible for direction of all civil engineering and design of nuclear, fossil-fueled and hydroelectric generating stations.
As Assistant Chief Civil Engineer, responsibilities included the technical direction and management of the Civil Engineering staff and activities of 1
l Ebasco's Jerido ' and Lyneurst branch offices, engaged in the design of !
nuclear and fossil-fueled power projects.
As S@ervising Concrete-Hydraulic Engineer, was responsible for the technical direction of engineering.and desip for both nuclear (BWR and PWR) and fossil fueled power plants and for conventional hydro and pumped storage bydroelectric projects totalling over 20,000 MW installed capacity.
Technical direction of staffs approaching 40 to 50 engineers, included the desir for reinforced concrete buildings and structures, containments, turbine and boiler area foundations, circulating water pump intake and discharge structures, coal handling foundations and sub-s tructures, bydraulic structures, embankments, concrete dams, spillways, power conduits and hydroelectric power houses. Also directed analyses of nuclear plant structures for earthquake loading and responses, and the development and inplementation of computer programs for waterhammer analysis of circulating water systems for steam power plants and power conduit systems for hydroelectric projects.
As Project Engineer for the Peixoto Hydroelectric Extension in Brazil, directed the design and engineering of the powerhouse, related structures and
^
auxiliary mechanical systems for domestic and European desi@ ed Francis units. Reviewed hydraulic model tests for optimization of units into existing i
powerhouse cavity and fa'cilities.
As a Desimer, up to a Lead Discipline Engineer, Civil Engineering and Design responsibilities for nuclear, fossil and hydroelectric power projects varied from performing desirs, checking desi@s, to directing the design of other 4
engineers and designers.
REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE Client Project Size Fuel Washington Public Power WNP Units 3 & 5 1300 MW Nuclear S@ ply System es. (PWR)
Houston Licfting & Allens Creek 1200 MW Nuclear c Power Co. (BWR) 1 9
wea-,ww w--e s a
1 GEDRGE A. KANAKMIS REPRET.NTATIVE EXPERIENCE (Cont'd)
Client Project Size Fuel Houston Lighting & Limestone Units 750 MW ea. LicJ11te Power Co. 1&2 1
New York State Electric Somerset Unit 1 600 MW Coal
& Gas Com . 1 Comision Federal de Laguna Verde 675 MW ea. Nuclear Electricidad (TE) Units 1 & 2 (BWR)
Genera 3 Public Utilities Seward Unit 7 650 MW Coal Service Com.
Arizona Public Service Cholla Unit 4 350 MW Coal Company Florida Power & Litfit St. Lucie Unit 1 890 MW Nuclear Company (PWR)
Potomac Electric Power Douglas Point 1100 MW Nuclear Company Units 1 & 2 (8WR)
(Cancelled)
Japan Atomic Power Co. Tsuruga Unit 1 310 MW fOclear (8WR)
Japan Atomic Power Co. Tokai Unit 2 1100 MW POclear (BWR)
Tokyo Electric Power Co. Fukushima Unit 6 1100 MW Nuclear (BWR)
Consumers Power Co. Ludington Pumped 1875 MW Hydro Storage, 6 Units (Total)
CIA Paulista de Forca e Peixoto HED 402 MW Hydro Luz (Brazil) Extension of 6 (Total)
Units Nevada Irrigation Yuba-Bear River 60 MW Hydro District Development (2 Units)
- - - - . - - - , ,- ,v , , _ .-,~,m-- .--
GEORGE A. KANAKARIS REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE (Cont'd)
Client Project Size Fuel Public Service Electric Yards Creek 1-3 330 MW Hydro
& Ga s Co. (Total)
American Electric Power (5per Smith 400 MW Hydro Mountain 1-5 & (Total)
Leesville 1-2 . 40 MW D.S.I. , Turkey Gokcekaya 300 MW Hydro (Total)
Public Power Com. Kastraki Units 300 MW Hydro 1-3 (Total)
Taiwan Power Co. Linkou tkilt 1 300 MW Coal TATA Power Co. Trorrbay Unit 4 125 MW Coal Tokyo Electric Power Co. Kashima SES, 1000 MW ea. Oil Units 1 & 2 EWLOYENT HISTORY Ebasco Services Incorporated, New York, NY; 1957-Present o Manager of Civil Engineering,1983-Present o Chief Engineer, 1980-1982 o Assistant 011ef Engineer, 1976-1980 o Stpervising Engineer, 1968-1970 o Principal Engineer, 1967-1968 o Engineer, 1963-1967 o Senior Designer, 1960-1963 o Desigler, 1957-1960 United States Air Force (Active Duty); 1954-1957 U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers (Bridge Desigler); 1952-1954 U.S. Navy, Brooklyn Navy Yard (Structural Engineer); 1951-1952
- - - - - .-- - - -- -, w.,--,.- ., , , , -
GEORGE A. KANAKARIS EDLCATION ;
Columbia thiversity - MSCE - 1964 City College of New York - BSCE - 1951 Catholic thiversity - Graduate Courses University of New Mexico - Graduate Courses EGISTRATIONS Professional Engineer -
Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia and Washington PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS American Society af Civil Engineers American Concrete Institute United States Committee on large Dams TECINICAL PAPERS
" Analysis of Structures for Tornado, Jet Loads and Impact" - ASCE Specialty Conference, December 1972, University of Pittsburgh
/
i l
l 9
i
- - - , > - - - + - - - , - - - -
,m,- ,
. Attachment 2-Roland M. Parcons
' ~
Project General Manager I. Date of Birth: March 13, 1936 II. Education:
A. BS Degree in Civil Engineering from Nresno State College, 1959 III. Experience:
A. August, 1964 to November, 1966
- 1. U. S. Forest Service, Nevada City, California
- a. Forest service representative on hydroelectric developments built on forest service land by others.
B. November, 1966 to September, 1973
- 1. Ebasco Services. Inc., Hartsville, South Carolina; and Jensen Beach, Florida
- a. November, 1966 - Field Engineer on construction of H. B.
Robinson Unit No. 2 (700 MW Westinghouse PWR nuclear power plant).
- b. November, 1967 - Resident Engineer responsible for site engineering and quality control for construction of H. B.
Robinson Unic 2.
- c. April,1971 - Senior Resident Engineer responsible for all site engineering for construction of St. Lucie Unit No. 1 ',
(810 MW combustion engineering PWR nuclear power plant).
- C. September, 1973 to May, 1974
~
- 1. Daniel Construction, Jenkinsville South Carolina i a.
Site Manager of Engineering responsible for all site engi-neering for construction of V. C. Summer Nuclear Power Plant.
D. June, 1974 to September, 1976
- 1. Ebasco Services. Elma, Washington
- a. Senior Resident Engineer responsible for all site engineering on 1300 MW PWR nuclear power plant.
E. September 20, 1976 to Present
- 1. Carolina Power & ight Company
- a. September 20, 1976 - Employed as Site Manager in the Nuclear Construction Section of the Power Plant Construction Depart-ment. Located at the Harris site, New Hill, N. C.
Roland~M. Perstns -
- b. . April 27, 1979 - Reclassified as Site Manager (Harris) in the Harris Site Management Section of the Power Plant Construction Department. Located at the Harris site.
New Hill, N. C.
- c. May 3, 1980 --Reclassified as Site Manager - Harris Plant.
-Construction in the Harris Site Management Section of the Power Plant Construction Department. Located at the Harris site New Hill, N. C.
- d. January 31, 1981 - Reorganization - Site Manager - Harris 1
Plant in che Harris Site Management Section of the Nuclear Plant Construction Department. Located at the Harris site, New Hill, N. C.
- a. March 22, 1982 - Title changed to Project General Manager.
f.
September 3, 1983 - Reorganization - Project General Manager -
Nuclear Generation Group, Harris Nuclear Project Department.
Harris Plant Construction Section.- Located at the Harris site New Hill, N. C.
IV. Societies, Memberships and Publications:
A. American Society of Civil Engineers B.
4 Registered Professional Engineer in North Carolina - No. 7634 C. Registered Professional Engineer in South Carolina - No. 3422 D. Registered Professional Engineer in California - No. 16379 4
E. Registered Professional Engineer in Washington - No. 15111 F. Registered Profaasional Engineer in Florida - No. 16700 C. Publication: System For Control of Construction Quality; Proceedings of The American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal of The Construction Division, March, 1972.
H. Publication: System for Material Movement to Work Areas; !
Journal of The Construction Division, March, 1980.
I. Publication: Is Total CPM Really the Answer for Super Projects; Civil Engineering Magazine, November, 1983.
Rev. 12/21/83 -
~ w --,-,,,-r- - - -
- ~ , , - . , . , - - - - - ~ - - - , - , , - , , . , . - - - - - , ,.,-,~..,..,e- - , , - - , , - ----w--,e --r w v-. .-r--- -- ,-,
.. Attachm:nt 3 Larry F. Garner
'}
Senior Construction SpecialiJt I. Date of Birth - April 20, 1947 II. Education A. W. W. Holding Technical Institute - Civil Associate in Applied Science.
B. Campbell College - Business Administration - three years.
III. Experience f
A. May, 1969 to May, 1971
-1. U.S. Army, Fort Gordon, Georgia
- a. Military Police.
- 2. McLamb Builders, Dunn, NC
- a. House construction. Wanted to further education. Was interested in civil engineering.
C. March, 1972 to May, 1972
! 1. NC State Highway Commission l
- a. Surveying, cross-sections, asphalt paving, concrete analysis, roadway construction.
First Co-op work period.
D. August, 1972 to November, 1972
- 1. NC State Highway Commission
- a. Surveying, bridge building, culvert and catch basin layout. Second Co-op work period.
E. March, 1973 to May, 1973
- 1. Kenneth D. Close, Raleigh, NC t
- a. Surveying, timber cruising, property surveys.
Third Co-Op work period.
F. March, 1974 to Present i
i
- 1. Carolina Power & Light. Company
- a. March 4, 1974 - Employed as Engineering Technician II~1n the Nuclear Construction of the Power Plant Construction Department.
Located at the Harris site, New Hill, NC.
Duties Included:
- 1) Field Surveying and Construction layout.
- 2) Cross sections for earthwork and pay quantities.
- 3) Computations of earth quantities from field notes and plotted cross sections.
- 4) Soils Inspection to include:
a) Soils Field - Inspection of excavated material and areas; soils compaction; testing using sand cone, drive tube, and rubber balloon methods; construction of ,
test fills to determine compaction criteria using various compaction equipment and perform large scale density and permeability tests in the test fills; soils classification and documentation of all daily inspections for record and control.
b) Soils Laboratory - Performed soils tests on field samples to include moistures, proctors, check plugs, sieve analysis, liquid and plastic limits using laboratory equipment. Documentated testing and results for record and control.
- b. February 28, 1976 - Promoted to Engineering Technician I in the Nuclear Construction Section of the Power Plant Construction Department. Located at the Harris site, New Hill, N.C. Duties Included:
- 1) Field Surveys of Plant building, roads and l drainage, make-up water line, site '
facilities.
- 2) Soils placement and compaction for building foundations and substructure.
- 3) Contractor surveillance during construction of plant buildings which consisted of foundation preparation, reinforcing steel placement, concrete placement and building frame mm--
e ' erection, contractor time and manhours.
, 4) Special projects / assignments, i.e.
Sutton Plant'- Precipitator Outage
+
Brunswick Plant - Cooling Tower Construction Cape' Fear Plant - Topographical Surveys
.5) Performed inspections on surfaces excavated to grade in the Power Block in preparation for geological mapping and placement of concrete.
- 6) Helped develop mix designs for shoterete mix to be used on the vertical shapes of the Power Block excavation to include testing and_ mix qualification and qualifying of application personnel. i Inspected the application of the shotcrete for conformance to specifications and design drawings and insured proper cure achieved. Cored and tested samples of the completed work to insure proper mix strength and proper application.
7)- Perform pre placement, placement, and post
'; placement inspections of concrete for construction of the plant.
, 8) Peform inspections of.rebar fabrication-and placement, embed and penetration-installation to insure conformance to procedures.
4
- 9) Documentation of inspections for record and control.
- 10) Trained incoming. inspectors in Concrete
, and Reinforcing Steel placement.
- c. May 19, 1979 - Promoted to Construction
^
Specialist in the Nuclear Construction Section of the Power Plant Construction Department.
Located at the Harris site, New Hill, NC.
Duties included those of the Construction Inspection Supervisor - Civil to:
- 1) Develop inspection procedures from
- codes, specifications and work procedures for inspections of the following items
- Placement, Drilled-In-Anchors, Masonry Block Walls Soils Field and Soils Laboratory inspections at the Plant Areas, Main and West Dams.
- 2) Hire, train and supervise inspectors !
in the performance of inspections on the above items.
! 3) Review documentation of above
- - inspections for completeness, accuracy and conformance to established l
.. specifications, and audit inspectors
, in the performanced of their assigned duties.
- 4) ~ Assist Engineering in resolution of field problems and work with the Construction Inspection Unit; Supervisor in performing job assignments.
d.- October. 31, 1981 - Promoted to Senior Construction Specialist in the Harris Site
' Management Section of the Nuclear Plant Construc-tion Department. Located at the Harris site, New Hill, N.C. Continue to perform duties of the Construction Inspection Supervisor in the activities noted above with the addition of Structural Steel and Nuclear Coatings inspection.
Duties:
- 1) Continue to perform activities of the Civil Construction Inspection Supervisor in Concrete, Reinforcing Steel and Embedded Items, Grout Placement, Drilled-In-Anchors and Masonry Block Walls, Soils Field and Soils Laboratory, Structural Steel and i
Coatings Application Inspection.
- e. September 3, 1983 - Reorganization - Senior construction Specialist in the Harris Construction Section of the Harris Nuclear Project Department, Carolina Power & Light Company, located at the Harris site, New 4 Hill, N.C.
l l
i e
4 D
l l
l l
l
. Attachment 4 PORM NO.1737 EXM101T I i
, REV. 9 WP-06 i g c/as CONCRETE
- PLACEMENT SWPP RLE REPORT PLACEMENT NUMBER gggl ll l gl l LOCATION (INCLUDE ELEY. IF M SLDS.) SCHEDULED DATE:
Ii 1 TYPE PLACEMENT ESTIMATED (RANTITY TEMR LIMIT SLUMP LIMIT YES NO l 5 SEISMIC CLASS I )
g i I .
PROPOSED PLACEMENT METHOOS (CHECK APPUCABLE SPACES) CMRLett i I M M M M P0lMD S4RF unrommo SvRe WATER O BUGGY O CHUTE O INTERNAL O STEEL TROWEL O FORMS ALONE OWET suRLAP O l EUCxET O THEMIE O PORM O WOOD FLOAT O TARPS O g O POLYETHLENE p CONVEYOR O DROP O O HAM BRUSH O INSULATION O CuRINe CouPouNo:
- PUMP O O aROOM FINISH O FORMS & WATER O KUREz O .
l TRuCx 0 g SERVICE CONQ RuseER rLoAT O O
O NUTEC 10 uAo CURE O
O g PROTENN G ALLONS REQUIRED _
5 $ $ E . WEATHER COMMENT & CLARIFICATION TO PROPOSED METHOOS CURE (OAYS) w PRIMARY MASOtStY DWG NO. RATE OF RISE E
DES, STRENGTH NAME/ TITLE, PERSON SUBMITTING ALL THE ABOVE 1
lllll .BY: TITLE : DATE:
l PRE-PLACEMENT CONSTRUCTOR CONST. INSPECTION QUALITY CONTROL CHECKOUT REE PROC. E,T h. DATE INSPECTOR Q.C. SIGNOFF DATE I CONTACT SURFACES [
2 FORMS
[
3 REINFORCING STEEL 4 EM8EDS g S MECHANICAL h 6 ELECTRICAL
%1 k N Y\h M N hY\3 % % h 5 T CADWEtoS I y 5 MNYNNNNhN%Nk 8 BOP WELDING L ' '
$ CODE WELDING U SEISMIC WELDING n h, 10 Ct.E AN - UP '
NNYsb4N\\N%d\\%NM5$hN N W
' l CONSTRUCTOR SIGNOFF (AREA SUPT) TIME : C.I. SIGNOFF TIME:
DATE: DATE:
DESIGN APPROVAL TIME OF START 1 naTE:
DE PUE I I I L
YDS. CONCRETE YDS PLACED IN DELIVERED YARDS WASTED ll l THIS PLACEMENT GROUT
$ YDS. GROUT CONCRETE YDS PLACED CONCRETE E DEUVERED l GROUT ELSEWHERE GROUT ACCEPTANCE OF PLACEMENT METHOOS & COMPLETENESS OF ABOVE INFORMATION d NAME: TITLE QATE:
REM ARKS ( ATTACH RELEVANT REPORTS) 2 j
e .~
Allowable Allowable Air Unit Weight Placement Date of Mix Design Mix Design Slump, In. Content Quantity Post Placement of Concrete, Ibs/cu.f t.
Number Placement Used Strength, psi (Tolerance) % Placed (cu.yd.) Date (28 day air dry weight)
ICBSL216001 7-18-73 M-56 4000 0-4 4-8 2999 7-25-78 137
(+1)
ICBSL216002 8-17-7 8 M-56 4000 0-4 4-8 4792 9-13-7 8 137
(+1)
ICBXW219001 12-6-78 M-72 5000 0-4 4-8 225 12-14-7 8 14 0*
ICBXW242001 9-25-80 M-97 5000 0-7 3-5 81 10-3-80 14 0*
. ICBXW256004 8 8 1 M-80 5000 0-8 4-8 66M 8-25-81 14 0*
ICBXW276002 5-16-80 M-72 5000 0-4 4-8 32 5-28-80 14 0*
ICBXW290001 7-23-82 M-72 5000 0-4 4-8 42 8-16-8 2 14 0*
ICBXW308001 8-29-83 M-80 5000 0-8 4-8 56M 9-22-83 14 0*
ICBXW336003 9-20-83 M-80 5000 0-8 4-8 87 10-24-83 14 0*
ICBXW386001 3-12-82 M-81 4000 0-8 4-8 349 3-26-82 14 0* p rt w
ICBXW396002 4-15-82 M-81 4000 0-8 4-8 11 3 4-26-82 14 0* O k.
ICBXW425001 10-6-82 M-81 4000 0-8 4-8 120 10-18-8 2 14 0* $
oi ICBXW444001 12-21-8 2 M-97 5000 0-7 3-5 14 1-5-83 14 0*
- Required for biological shielding l
.~
r.
'D
^h 4
/
. J 'g; &L.
Applicants'-Exhibit.
. W,.s F }
Eddleman Contention 65 Docket No. 50-460 DGCKETE0 UShRC
'84 AGO 13 Af0:
LFFICE 37 gg:,;q ,,,,,
GCChF.itM g 55pg;;
BRANCH Final Safety Analysis Report Section 3.8.1 Concrete Containment 6
e
]
, a *
.,. } ,
SENFF FSAR
" ~
3.8 DESIGN OF CATEGORY I STRUCTURES ,
3.8.1 CONCRETE CONTAINMENT u q. g 3.8.1.1 Description of the Containmene 3.8.1.1.1 General Description The Concrete Containment Structure (CCS) is a steel lined reinforced concrete structure in the form of a vertical right cylinder with a hemispherical done and a flat base with a recess beneath the reactor vessel.
The structure, shown on Figure 3.8.1-1, consists of a cylindrical wall '
amasuring 160 ft. in height from the liner on the base to the springline of the done and has an inside diameter of 130 f t. The cylinder wall is 4 f t. 6 in. thick. The inside radius of the 2 fr. 6 in. thick done is equal to that of the cylinder so that the discontinuity at the spring line due to the change 2 in thickness is on the outer surface. The base met consists of a 10 fr. thick structural concrete slab and a metal liner. The liner is welded to inserts embedded in the concrete slab. The base liner is covered with concrete, the top of which forms the floor of the containment. The base sat is supported by
, sound rock.
! The basic structural elements considered in the design of the containment i structura are the baseast, cylinder wall, and done. These act essentially
- as one structure under all loading conditions. The liner plate is 3/8 in.
! thick in the cylinder,1/4 in, thick on the botton, and 1/2 in. thick in the done. The liner is anchored to the concrete shall by means of anchor studs j fusion welded to the liner plata so that it foras an integral part of the l' containment structure. The liner functions primarily as a leaktight membrane.
An impervious plastic waterproofing membrane is placed between the containment foundation met and the ground. Before laying the membrane, a concrete
- leveling surface is placed on the rock. Af ter installing the membrane, a
- i. concrete protective layer is installed before placing reinforcement for the foundation sat. The waterproofing membrane for the Containment Muilding is continuous under the containment foundation met and terminates into.waterstops at the joints with adjacent structures.
The arrangement of the Containment and the relationship and interaction of the shell with the interior compartment shielding walls and floors are shown on Figures 3.8.1-1, 3.8.3-1, and 3.4.3-2. .
2 p
The containment wall is independent of adjacent interior and exterior i structures; sufficient space is provided between the containment wall and adjacent structures to prevent contact under any combination of loading.
The interior grating platforms and concrete slabs are supported on steel beane which span between the secondary shield wall and the containment wall.
These beses are independently supported, near the containment wall, by steel columns resting on the concrete ast.
The circular polar crane runway girder is supported by a series of uniformly spaced steel place brackets which extend from the inside f ace of the w
- 3. 8.1- 1 Amendment No. 2
r-- .
j-SENPP FSAR. ;
l l
l The entire sat is scructurally independent of adjacent -Seismic Category I.
foundations. The sat has a recess in the central portion to house the reactor pressure vessel, and in the engineered safety features (EST) area, there is a recess to house the ESF systes sumps for the containment spray header water which exits the Containment through two collection sumps and embedded drain ,
pipes.
The foundation aat, inside the Containment and including the reactor cavity, is covered with 1/4 in. thick carbon steel liner place, except at the connection with the wall liner place, where a 3/8 in. thick liner place is provided. A five f t. thick concrete internal sat is provided over the liner for protection and support of internal primary and secondary shield walls.
In order to protect the sat liner plate against groundwater hydrostatic pressure, an impervious waterproofing membrane is placed continuously below the foundation sat and terminates into waterstops at the joints with adjacent structures. The seismic gaps between adjacent structures are cut off from groundwater by double rows of horizontal waterstops. As described in Section 3.4.1.1, any leakage through the waterproofing membrane will be drained through porous concrete drains placed between the membrane and the concrete anc.
The primary and secondary shield walls are supported by the internal foundation est which in turn is resting on the external foundation mat. No anchorage of the interior structures through the liner place and into the O external sat is provided.
d !
The reinforcing steel of the foundation aat, shown on Figure 3.8.1-2; consists of radial and circumferential reinforcement placed at the top and bottom of the mat. Radial bars have no splices; circumferential bars utilire the longest length possible so that the number of splices is minimL(ed. Splices are staggered whenever practical. Shear reinforcement is provided whenever required by design. The base sat is considered a circular flat' slab resting on an elastic foundation and the finite element approach was used for
-- analysis. The sat is designed to withstand the loading defined in ,
Section 3.8.1.3. . ;.
3.8.1.1.3 Cylindrical Wall .
3.8.1.1.3.1 Reinforcing Steel Arrangement The reinforced concrete cylindrical wall is designed to withstand the loadings and stresses anticipated during the operating life of the plant,'as defined in Section 3.8.1.3. The steel liner is attached to, and supported by, the
-concrete. The liner functions primarily as a gas-tight membrane and also transmits loads to the concrete. During construction, the steel liner serves as the inside form for the concrete well and done. The containment structure does not require the participation of the liner as a structural component.
Hoop tension in the cylindrical concrete wall is resisted by horizontal reinforcing bars near both the outer and inner surfaces of the wall.
3.8.1-3 l
o
- SENPP FSAR Ny Figure.3.8.1-6 shows the reinforcement in the equipme~nt hatch area of the containment structure.
Figures 3.8.1-7 and 3.8.1-8 show the reinforcement in the personnel air lock, emergency air lock, and MVAC penetrations areas.- In all of these areas, the anchorage of the steel penetration into the concrete wall is provided by steel anchorages welded to the penetrations sleeves. For all penetration sleeves designed in accordance with requirements of- the ASME Code Section III Division 1. - such 'as the equipment hatch,L personnel air lock, emergency air -
lock, and Type I penetration sleeves, special anchorages were provided using ASME Code material and manual welding. For all penetration sleeves designed
- ,in accordance with requirements of the ASME Code Section III Division 2, in l-the portion backed by concrete, such as Type II and Type III penetration i sleeves, double headed machine welded Nelson Studs were provided.
Figure 3.8.1-9 shows the reinforcement in the main steam and feeduster 4 penetration area. In addition to the main circumferential and vertical reinforcement bent around penetrations, additional circular reinforcement is provided around each individual penetration and radial interconnecting reinforcing bars. In order to provide for sufficient resistance against
! excessive rupture loads and to accommodate the interaction between' the
! concrete structure and steel penetrations, the attachments of the penetration j sleeves are directly connected with the radial reinforcing bars transferring the loads into the concrete wall.
i
'O
.V Figure 3.8.1-10, Section.p-p, shows the 6 in. attachments shop welded to the penetration sleeve. No.18 radial reinforcing bars are c,onnected through a cadweld mechanical connection to 9 in. attachments, which in turn are field
[j welded to the 6 in. attachments connected to the sleeves.
4 3
The reinforcement arrangement ,around penetrations smaller than 18 in. is shown on Figure 3.8.1-11. Structural built-up steel members are provided to l
transfer the forces from the main circumferential and vertical reinforcing bars to special bars, closely spaced, or reinforcing bars were bent around openings. , Additional inclined reinforcement is provided when required.
f 4
3.8.1.1.3.2 Liner Plate ,
l A continuous welded.. steel liner plate is provided on the entire inside face of
- the concrete containment cylindrical well to limit the release o,f radioactive materials into the environment. The thickness of the liner in 'the cylindrical
( well area -is 3/8 in. A one inch thick liner plate is provided at the crane girder brackets elevation. Ring collars up to 2 in. thick are provided around all penetrations and shop welded to the penetration sleeves, as required by ASME Section III Division 2/ACI 359 Code, Section CC4552.2.1.
Figures 3.8.1-12 and 3.8.1-13 show liner plate ' details. An anchorage system, consisting of Nelson Studs 5/8 in. diameter by 4 in. long, is provided to prevent instability of the liner for all load combinations described in Section 3.8.1.3.
In order to minimize liner stresses, strains and deformations under the design loading condition 1 described in Section 3.8.1.3, the cylindrical wall liner 3.8.1-5 .
. _ _ . c _._ _.___u,__,
- e . . , ,.
SENPP FSAR d) Verification of liner strains due to containment pressurization is I4 obtained from the liner strains measurements made for the containment building i structural _ integrity test.. The test is described in Section 3.8.1.7.1. The liner strain gage locations are shown in Figures 3.8.1-47, 48, and 49.
3.8.1.1.3.3 Containment Penetrations ,
Access into the Concrete Containment Structure is provided by an equipment
- hatch, a personnel air lo'ck, and an emergency air lock.
6 The equipment hatch is a welded steel assembly having an inside diameter of 24 f t. O in. with a weld-on cover with suf ficient material to allow for six removals and rewelding. A 15 f t. O in. inside diameter bolted cover is provided in the equipment hatch cover for passage of smaller equipment during plant operation. Provision is made to pressurize the space between the gaskets of the bolted hatch cover to 36.7 psig. Figure 3.8.1-14 shows the equipment hatch.
One breech-type personnel air lock (Figure 3.8.1-15) and one personnel emergency air lock (Figure 3.8.1-16) are provided. Each lock is a welded steel assembly having two doors which are double-gasketed with material resistant to radiation. Provisions are made to pressurize the space between the gaskets. The doors of each lock are equipped with quick acting valves for equalizing the pressure across each door and the doors are not operable unless
'~'
, pressure is equalized. There is visual indication outside each door showing whether the opposite door is open or closed and whether its valve is open or closed. Provisions have been made outside each door for remotely closing and latching the opposite door so that in the event that one door is accidently lef t open it can be closed by remote control. Interior lighting and communications systems were installed. These systems are not capable of operating from emergency power supply.
_ s,.
g Mo 4
. A 7
l SEfFF FSAR
& ~
Two pressure gages are' place'd at each end of the personne1' locks, one reads from outside the lock and measures lock pressure. The other reads free inside -
the lock and measures containment pressure.. Mozzles are installed which
- permit pressure -testing of the locks , st anytime.
The breech-type personnel air. lock has a 9f t.-Oin. inside diameter with - full diameter breech doors to open outwardly from each end of the lock. Doors for the lock are hydraulically sealed and electrically interlocked. During plant shutdown,- it will be necessary to open both doors at the same time; therefore, a key-operated electrical interlock defeat system which is taider strict administrative control is provided. Opening of the doors af ter unsealing will be' done with a hydraulic socor, as will closing before sealina. - Manual (hand
. pump) operation 'of the sealing ring and door swing mechanism is - provided in case of a power fsilure.
All leakage and pressure testing on the breech-type personnel air lock will be done without the use of the test clamps since sealing is accomplished by forcing the doors against the seals when the rotating third seal ring is rotated into the breech locked position. Since the pressure applied to the double seals of the lock during testing is exerted by the third ring, the effectiveness of the seal cannot be increased beyond that seen during operating or accident condition. Test connections are provided for continuous testing between the double seals of each door for leakane.
The personnel emergency air lock has an outside disseter of $ ft. - 0 in. with O a 2 f t. - 6 in diameter door located at each end of the lock. The doors of the lock are in series and are mechanically intericcked to ensure 'that one door cannot be opened until the second door is sealed. Violation of the interlock can only be made by use of special tools and procedures under strict administrative control.
Test clamps are provided for leakase and pressure testing of the personnel emergency air lock. This set of clampe fits either door and is designed to withstand, as a minimum, the full peak containment internal pressure.
Compression of the double seals on each of the doors is limited ca,that which occurs before a metal to metal seat is achieved between the door 'and the protruding metal flanze adjacent to the seals on the lock harrel. The internal containment pressure (or pressure exerted by the test clames) necessary to achieve the metal to metal seat is approximately 3 PSI over the surface of the door. F.ffectiveness of the seals during tes ting .. ,there f o re ,
cannot be artificially increased beyond that seen during operatina or accident conditions by overtightening of the clamps. Mechanical and electrical penetrations are provided in the cylindrical wall of the containment structure to provide access for mechanical piping and electrical cables.
Mechanical penetrations are divided into two general types a) Type 1 - Righ pressure, high temperature piping (above 200 F).
b) Type II - General piping (penetrations which are subject to only '
relatively small pipe rupture forces and temperatures up to 200 F) . l O l 3.8.1-7 Amendment No. 1 -
- e.
SENPP FSAR A fuel transfer penetration is provided to transport fuel assemblies between the refueling canal in the Containment and the fuel transfer canal in the Fuel
-Handling Building. This penetration consists of a 20 in. diameter stainless steel pipe installed inside a 26 in. pipe. The inner pipe acts as the transfer tube and is fitted with a double-gasketed blind flange in the refueling canal and a standard gate valve in the fuel transfer canal. This arrangement prevents leakage through the transfer tube in the event of an accident.
The penetration sleeve is welded to the steel liner and anchored into the concrete wall.
Provision is made for testing welds essential to the integrity of the liner.
Bellows expansion joints are provided to compensate for any differential movement between the structures, due to operating thermal expansion and seismic movements.. -
The fuel transfer tube expansion joints are not part of the containment pressure boundary. Rather the transfer tube is rigidly attached to the containment penetration sleeve. Two bellows type expansion joints are installed, the first forming a flexible joint between the transfer tube and the transfer canal inside the Containment; the second forming a flexible joinc
, between the transfer tube and the Fuel Randling Building fuel transfer canal.
Figure 3.8 1-20 shows the design of the fuel transfer tube.
The expansion joint inside the Containment is accessible for visual inspection at say time. The expansion joint in the Fuel Mandling Building is also accessible for inspection at any time excispe when the transfer canal is flooded during the actual fuel transfer period.
Also included are four nive chambers and their appurtenances. The valve chambers and their app .rtenances , shown on Figure 3 8 1-21, are 4 ft - 0 in.
diameter by 10 ft. - J in. long airtight enclosures which function as a secondary containment boundary to completely enclose the containment sump lines and isolation valves.
3 8 1 1.4 Containment Dome '
The containment dome is a lined reinforced concrete hemispherical cloroet of 2 ft. 6 in. uniform thickness. A continuous velded steel liner place, one-half inch thick, is provided on the inside face of the dome. The arrangement of the studs in the does is shown on Figure 3.8.1-12'.' Nelson l2 studs 5/8 in. diameter by 4 in. long are used to connect the liner to the concrete.
The reinforced concrete dome is designed to withstand the loads anticipated during the operating life of the plant and postulated accidents and events ,
described in Section 3.4.1.3. Meridional and circumferential reinforcing bars are provided to resist the resulting tensile forces and bending moments.
Figures 3 8 1-22 and 3 91-23 show the arrangement of the reinforcement in the dose.
v -
l I
3.8.1-9 I Amendment No. 2 i l
l
T
-> . .,. 3 J
- SENPP FSAR characterized' by such loading conditions which for therconcrete containment -
can be shown to be functionally acceptable.
c)- Parts and appurtenances specified to meet the requirements of Section III Division 1 and furnished before April 29, 1977, meet the-requirements of Subsection NA of Division -1. Parts and appurtenances furnished after April 29, 1977, meet the requirements of Subsection NA of Division 2. The parts and appurtenances which are designed under the jurisdiction of Section'III Division 1 are presented in Table 3.8.1-1. .
1 The boundaries of the Containment Building and the different parts and appurtenances are shoun on Figures 3.8.1-24 and 3.8-1-25.
For the design of the Equipment Hatch, Personnel Air Iack, Emergency Air Lock, and all penetrations, at the transition portion from concrete to steel, the following aspects are considered:
. a) Metal sections not backed by 6.oncrete meet the requirements of Division 1 and consider the concrete confinement except that proof testing is in accordance with CC-6000 of the ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ACI-359 Code.
b) . Metal sections are attached to concrete sections by one of the f ollowing:
- 1) Tension attachment to the primary reinforcement of the concrete O containment.
- 2) Anchoragt system attached to the metal shell and extended into the concrete. The metal shall is noc reduced below the minimum thickness required for primary mechanical loads for a distance of 25 t from the point where the concrete-to-metal junction occurs, where t is the chickness of the metal penetration sleeve at the transition section.
Where the penetration sleeves or the liner is backed by compressible material to provide local flexibility, the penetration sL eves or the liner. meet all requirements for material, design, fabrication, and examination of the AStiE ,
Code,Section III, Division 1 in the region. where compressible material is present. Where penetration sleeves or liner are attached to concrete directly or to embedded members, only the requirements for liner apply.
j 3.8 1.2 Applicable Codes, Standards, and Specifications
] The structural design, materials, fabrication, construction, testing, inservice surveillance, and quality assurance for the Containment conform to the codes, standards, regulations, and specifications listed below, except l where specifically stated otherwise.
j General Codes and Standards
! OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Federal
- Safety Regulations (1975 listing) l 3.8.1-11
. . - ...-. - -.-- - .- .-.- -.- - - - . - - . - _ ~
SHNPP FSAR Section IX 1971 Edition with Summer 73 Addenda.. Welding and Brazing Qualifications. Field welding is pe'rformed to 1971 Edition with Winter 1976 Addenda, Welding and Brazing Qualifications.
AWS American Welding Society D 2.0 Welded Highway and Railway Bridges with 1967 and 1970 revisions, for services performed prior to 4/29/77 D 1.1-75 Structural Welding Code, with Revisions 1 (1976) and 2 (1977) for services performed after 4/29/77 D 12.1-75 Recommended Practices for Welding Reinforcing Steel, Metal Inserts, and Connections in Reinforced Concrete Construction SSPC' Steel Structures Painting Council, SP-6 Commercial Blast Cleaning USNRC United States Nuclear' Regulatory Commission
. The following NRC Regulatory Guides as identified in Section 1.A are /
applicables -
1.10 Mechanical (Cadweld) Splices in Reinforcing Bars of Category I Concrete Structures
. 1.15
- Testing of Reinforcing Bars for Category I Concrete Structures 1.18 Struct'ral u Acceptance Test for Concrete Primary' Containment 1.19 Nondestructive Examination of Primary Containment Liner Welds e.
1.54 Quality Assurance Requirements for Protective Coatings Applied to Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants 1.55 Concrete Placement in Category I Structures ',.
1.57 Design Limits and Loading Combinations for Metal Primary Reactor Containment System Components 1.60 Design Response Spectra for Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants 1.61 Damping Values for Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants 1.63 Electric Penetration Assemblies in Containment Structures for Water-cooled Nuclear Power Plants 3.8.1-13
3 SENPP TSAR ht /- b) ~ 2asco Specification _ CAR-SR-AS-7 " Structural Steel" c) nasco Specification CAR-SH-M-54 " Mechanical Penetrations"
'd)~ ' Dasco Specification CAR-SR-E-30 " Electrical Penetrations"
' e) Dasco Specification CAR-SR-CH-6 "_ Concrete"'
f) Dasco Specification CAR-SH-CH-7A " Concrete Reinforcing- Steel"
- 3) Basco Specifi scion' CAR-SH-CR-7 " Weldable. Concrete Rainforcing Steel" h) hasco Specification CAR-SH-CH-12'"Waterscope" i) hasco Specification CAR-SM-CH-13 " Waterproofing" i
j) Dasco Specification CAR-SH-CH-15 " Mechanical Splicing of Concrete Rainforcing Steel" k) ~
Dasco Specification CAR-SR-CR-16 " Dose Hub Places and Rainforcing l Steel Splice Assembly" l 1) Dasco Specification CAR-SM-CH-22 " Structural Integrity Test of
- Concreto Containment-Building
- i
- 3. 8.1. 3" Loads and Loading Combinations j 3.8.1.3.1 Definitions *of toads The following- nomenclature and definitions apply to all loads encounte' red
! and/or postulated for the design of the Containment:
, a) Dead Loads, (D) - Dead load consists of the weight of the concrete umil, does, base slab, equipment deadweight, and all internal concrete, including hydrostatic loads. Uplif t forces which are created by the i displacement of groundwater, assumed to be at Elevation 251 f c.,,are I accounted for in the design of the structure. Included are the weights of
! piping, cable trays, and ductuork.
A reinforced concrete density of 143 pef, with a possible minimum of 137 pet, I
j was used in the design. The density of the steel reinforcing and liner plate' '
used in the design was 489 pcf.
i
{ The deadweight of the crane bridge and trolley was also considered in the design. Equipment permanent operating loads as specified by the equipment l
j aanufacturers were included in the dead loads of the structure.
Live Ioads, (L) - Live load consists of loads on the dome which are l b) i uniformly applied to the top surface of done at an assumed value of 20 pet of horizontal plan projection to assure a strength adequate to support snow 1
loading. A randon temporary loading condition during construction or maintenance as assumed to be 50 psf. The design also accounts for a load of
' ?, 250 tons supported by the polar crane during construction and maintenance 3.8.1-15
'..n--.~,.,n-,-,.,-,n ,,-,-,.snn ..,,..,m----,ne. ,,-,,,nn.,.,..m_,,r-,,.nw _,m,,n.m.-r-mm,m-,,.,,
, .,y-
.7,; ,
c SHNFF FSAR
[ P
-Containment. To.neet this requirement, an internal pressure of 51.75 psig was
't used.in.the design.
n g) -Tesc Thermal Load (Tt) - Thermal loads during pressure tests, including-liner ' expansion and temperature gradients in the wall and done, are considered
_ in the design of .the Containment.
h). Design Basis Accident Pressure Loads (F) The design basis accident pressure loads,'due to a. loss of coolant accident or other postulated pipe breaks, are considered in the design of the Containment. An equivalent static design pressure of 45 psig was used in the design of the Containment Structure. The use of an-equivalent -static load in the design of the containment for LOCA loadings is justified. Comparison of the time of LOCA pressure rise to the initial peak value, and the. natural period for the first circumferential (" breathing"), mode indicates that the ratio of the time of .
LOCA pressure rise to the first period of vibration is on the order of about 500:1. Therefore,~ the load can be considered to be statically applied, and 14 the dynamic load factor for the LOCA pressure loading is essentially unity.
Axisymmetric dynamic analysis studies indicated that the contribution of the higher (oval), modes to the asximum responses are relatively small. Therefore, these modes were not considered in the dynamic analysis of the containment building.
' i) Design Basis Accident Thermal Loads. (Ta) - Thermal stresses due to an internal temperature increase caused by the design basis accident are considered.
The containment liner design temperature under the design basis accident is assumed equal to 233 F, associated with 1.0,1.25, and 1.5 times the accident pressure, as described in Section 3.8.1.3.2. Accident temperatures mainly af fect the liner, rather than the concrete and reinforcing bars, due to the insulating properties of the concrete. By the time the temperature of the concrete within the interior of the concrete begins to rise significantly, the internal pressure and temperature in the Containment due to the
accident have been drastically reduced from their maximum.
The concrete wall is designed for a steady-state temperature gradient, with the interior face subjected to a normal operating temperature of 120 F and the exterior face subjected to summer or winter operation tiemperature,, as
.specified in Section 3.8.1.3.1.C). In addition, due to the interaction between the liner which is subjected to the containment design accident temperatures of 233 F, and the concrete wall which is subjected to a steady-state temperature gradient, increased stresses induced in the reinforcing steel and concrete are considered in the design.
j) Earthquake Loads (E, E') - Earthquake loads are computed using
- the following: i
- 1) Operating Basis Earthquake (E) horizontal ground acceleration is 0.075g.
- 2) Safe Shutdown Earthquake (E') horizontal ground acceleration is
- 0.15g.
3.8.1-17 h adment A M
~,~-
a SHNPF FSAR 2)- Rrj = Jet impingement equivalent static' load on a structure y, ens. rated by or during the postulated break, including an appropriate dynamic load factor to account . for the dynamic nature of the load..
s .~
s
'.sJ .
(..
3.8.1-18a Amendment No. 14
r:
, t. M" SElfPP FSAR 9
.h)
- 3) Rrm = Missile impact equivalent' static load.on a structure generated by or during the postulated break, as 'from pipe whipping or
'small' pieces of equipment travelling at high velocities, including an appropriate dynamic load factor-to account for the dynamic nature of the load.
o) Post-LOCA Flooding (Rq) - Post-LOCA flooding of the Containment for the
. purpose of fuel recovery is not a design condition.--When access to.the Containment is required following a IDCA, all necessary repairs will be made to permit fuel recovery.
3.8.1.3.2 -Load Combinations The design of the concrete Containment Structure incorporates two general loading categories, the Service Load Category and' the Factored Load Category.
3.8.1.3.2.1 Service Load Combinations Service'1oad combinations are any conditions encountered during construction and normal operation of the plant. Included in such conditions are any saticipated transient or test conditions during normal and emergency startup and shudown of the nuclear steam supply, safety, and auxiliary systems. Also included in this category are those severe environmental conditions (operating basis earthquake and wind load) which may be anticipated during the life of the facility. The service load combinations are presented in Table 3.8.1-2.
3 . 8.1.3 . 2. 2 Factored Load Combinations Factored loads include loads encountered in the life of the facility such as severe environmental loads (wind loads, operating basis earthquake), extreme environmental loads (tornado loads, safe shutdown earthquake), and abnormal loads (loads generated by- the. design basis accident, P Ta, Ra, and Rr) . The factored load combinations are presented in Table 3.8.1-2.
3.8.1.4 Desian and Analysis-Procedures 3.8.1.4.1 General Considerations The analysis of the containment shell is based on the classical theory of thin elastic shells of revolution in accordance with Section CC-33,00 of the ASME Code,Section III, Division 2. The shell is assumed to be ide' ally elastic, homogeneous, and isotropic. ' Reinforcement and the steel liner are neglected in calculating the neeber stiffness.
The design of the Containment demonstrates that, for factored load conditions, the following requirements are sets a) The summation of external and internal forces and moments satisfies the laws of equilibrium and does not bring any structural section to a general yielding state.
3.8.1-19
. l
3
.- ..- . _,7 ,
. SWFF FSAR-J F b). he 130 f t.: I.D. and 160 ft.' high cylindrical .nali.
c) $ Se circular foundation sat.
Mathematically, the done and cylinder are considered. as thin-walled shells in
'the form of surfaces of revolution.. Se classical theory of thin shells is used to. determine both membrane and bending stress resultants due to each s
individual!1oad, but redistribution of moments and forces is considered due to the cracking' of concrete of: these statically-indeterminate structures, as described. in Sections 3.8.1.4.4.4.. . .
.3.8.1.4.3 t Cireular Foundation Mac Analysis
. The concrete foundation mat which supports the Concrete Containment Structure '
and the internal;structu,res is designed in accordance with the ASME
- Section III,. Division 2/ACI 359 Code,. Winter of 1975 Addenda.
The analysis of. the: foundation is concerned primarily with the determination of shear.and acaent in the reinforced concrete foundation mat and the determination of the interaction of the sat with the underlying bearing material.. ,
For this foundation supported by rock, the pertinent requirements of the design-are the maintenance of bearing pressures within allouable limits, particularly due to overturning soments, and the assurance that there is adequata. resistance to sliding of the structure if it is subjected to lateral loads. . Se stability of. the. foundation aat 1s. further discussed in Section 3.8.5. . . . .
Se design loads considered for the analysis of the foundation sat are the nazimum resulting forces from the superstrature due to static and dynamic load combinations and those loads. directly applied on the base- slab, such as dead, live, hydrostatic, internal pressure, temperature, and equipment Loada.
In the analysis, the foundation sat is treated as a plate supported on. an elastic foundation; the finite element method of analysis is used, employing proven, industry accepted comput'er programs. Se subgrade modulus considered in the analysis is determined by using appropriata correlations with the engineering ' properties of the foundation _ esterials used se the site, as. described in Section 3.7.2.4..
- f he contalianent and internal structure unlis supported by the foundation sat are represented by force. boundary conditions and appropriate nodal
, displacement restraints, in, the finite element mathesatical model.
Se rock foundation is simulated by discrete springs acting at the grid points of the sat elements. yor the initial step of analysis all springs are assumed :
active. Se resulting foret.s in the springs for the critical load combinations indicate.which springs 4re under tension and should be eliminated. ; ,
/ j[
t I
)(
- ,3' F ,$.-21
)
i 3' / /
) j' Si
, i , ,
- w. ,
.-..*^s 1 .;*=+1 51DIFF FSAR
.. .- s. . . . . .. . .
. n.$ _ The Concrece_ Containment Structure loading cases under non-axisymmetric loads are analysed by. the finite element method, using a three-dimensional finite element model and industry proven computer programs, as described in
- Section- 3 8.1.4.444.
3.8.1.4.4.2 Treatment of Transient. toads As presented in Section 3.8.13.1 c), during normal. operating conditions of the plant a 11asar temperature gradient across the containment wall thickness develope,+ with the inside face of the all. subjected to an operating
-temperature of 120 F and the outside' face of the umil subjected to a temperature of 90 F and 20 F in summer and winter conditions, respectively.
LThe normal operation thermal loads are determined considering the thermal gradients in summer and winter which are adjusted by subtracting the construction temperature from the surface temperatures for the thermal input -
into the containment analysis.
The design accident thermal loads consist of normal operation thermal gradianc
. and. the temperature increment generated by the postulated accident.
As' described in Section 3.8.1.3.11), the accident temperature mainly affects the liner, rather than the concrete and reinforcing bars, since the concrete has a much lower thermal conductivity than the steel liner and the accident temperature drops off very rapidly. Therefore the accident thermal increment cannot penetrate very far into the concrete, as evidenced by numerous O transient thermal analyses. Thus, at the moment of the higher accident.
temperature, the Containment is subjected to a " skin temperature effect" imposed by the liner place._ . Due to the interaction between the concrete wall, subjected'to a steady-state temperature gradient, and the liner place, subjected to a cesperature of 233 T, increased stresses induced into the reinforcing steel and into the concrete are determined.
3.8.l.4.4.3 Treatment of tocalized toads The Concrete Containment Structure is designed for localizing loads, such as jet impingement loads and cornado generated missile loads.
The Concrete Containment Structure is designed to withstand, without loss of function or perforation, a representative tornado-driven missile spectra as described -in Section 3.5.1.4, using the combinations of loads 1,isted in .
Section 3.3.2.2.4 and in Table 3.8 1-2. '
An impactive dynamic analysis is performed in order to investigate the following aspects of the problems a) The penetration of the target by a missile, local damage to the impact area, estimation of the depth of penetration, and the potential generation of secondary missiles by spalling or scabbing, as described in Section 3 5.3.1. '
O i
3.8.1-23 I
);
~,
. - * ', SENPP FSAR i
\
1
.(.(;, ,
- 2) .The radial displacements are calculated by..the membrane. theory, with a free boundary condition and completely cracked section.
df ,= P/Ki (3) 4 Kr. = (4)
Wheru di = free boundary rhdial displacement.for ith element.
E = Young's modulus .
t t'= Equivalent thicknee's of the. reinforced steel for i th element.
Kt = Shell equivalent. modulus of elastic foundation.
- 3) .At the vicinity o'f the. boundary, where discontinuity moments and radial shear- develop, the axisymmetrical bending theory is used and its closed form solution (see Reference 3.8.1-45) is employed to construct the ffexibility matrix. It is shown on Figure 3.8.1-27 that a finite number of elements can be subdivided, each of which may be assigned different sectional properties based on the presumed compression i
uncracked zone.. The equation is written in matrix form;
!~
(fl { F) = { d} (5) where: -
s 4
[fj is the flexibility matrix size 2N x 2N'(detailed in Appendix 3.8.8)
{ l'} is the generalized forces,. including 2N elements. ,
{ d} is the relative incompatible displacement, which is obtained as described in equation (3) above.
?.
- 4) After the shears and moments are computed from equation (5), the total. moments and maridianal membrane forces for each specific loading combination are obtained by summing up all. the moments and meridianal membrane forces due,to the individual factored loads. ..
- 5) When the total meridianal membrane forces and moments at each node are determined, the compression zone at each node point is computed to check with the presumed compression zone at each node point. If they are sufficiently close, the iteration process is completed and the final stresses are reached. If they are not - close, another trial is attempted. ,
+
l ..
l 6) . Superposition is not valid in this process; complete cycle iteration is performed for.each load combination case.
b) .. Analysis for Unsymmetric Loads - When the Containment is subjected to unsymmetric loads'.(seismic and wind loads), the stress resultants of major 3.8.i-25
.i \-
r_._ _
SHNPP FSAR
- . * , . . - . .. . ., p , .. .- , . , . . , . . .. , ,,,, . , . . .,,. , , , , , , . , ,, , ,,
i for both the vertical and horizontal directions, using" the cracks determined
. ' v?
{.
from the cracking analysis by the SHELL computer program. For the vertical direction, the wall was divided into zones, and the average. crack size for 14 zone was used for the zone.
Figure 3.8.1-27 illustrates the wall finite element. model and modeling of cracks.
Fistures 3.8.1-29 through .3.8.1-31 show the cylindrical wall and dome shear forces, bending moments, and displacements from the most critical load combinations, which govern the design.
..The Concrete Containment Structure is a conventionally reinforced concrete structure in which shrinkage tends to develop stresses in a reverse direction from tha't developed by the -design basis accident; therefore shrinkage is not considered in the design. During. construction of the containment structure,
, construction techniques, as described in Section 3.8.1.6.3 (a), are used in order to minimize the effects of shrinkage.
~
.3.8.1.4.4.5 Description of the Computer , Programs Utilized Descriptions of the computer. programs utilized in the analyses and design of the Concrete Containment Structure are presented in Appendix 3.88. Basically
+
./,
s u
3.8.'l-26a ~
~
. Amendment No. 14
. . A . . ., ,f, .
s "' '
, . . , .3g,,, iFSAR" " " * '
~
.(
A2 they are industry proven computer prograns, such .as STARDYNE, NASTRAN, and
-ANSYS. For the dynamic analy' sis of the containment structure, the STAROYW computer program was used for the three-dimensional dynamic model and an Ebasco computer program was used for the two-dimensional dynamic model. The Ebasco computer program is described in Apoendix 3.AB.
The finita element computer program used to account for the effects of concrete cracking is an Ebasco computer program, which uses the heam on elastic foundations approach to represent the real cylindrical shell: it is described in Appendix 3.88. In order to demonstrate that the results obtained by using this computet progrse are substantially identical with the results
. obtained by using industry proven computer programs, a comparative study was performed, as described in Section 3.8.1.4.4.4; the results are presented on
- Figure 3.8.1-28.
3.8.1.4.4.6 Treatment of the Effects of Induced Shears
~
a), Tangential Shear - The tangential shear force, 7 , is due primarily to earthquake, vind, 'or tornado loading. For earthquake loading, the tangential shear force is determined from the square root of the staa of the squares of the multiple components of earthquake loading. For wind or tornado loading, the tangential shear forces are determined based on the direction of loading under consideration sad are compatible with the deter:rination of Mhe and My ,,
defined in this Section.
The criteria for tangential shear are as follows
- 1) All membrane forces, including thermal effects, Mht and N yg, are considered.
~~
- 2) The allowable tangential shear force, V e, is defined in Section 3.8.1.5.1.1.C)2).
- 3) The meridional and hoop reinforcing with or without diagonal reinforcing is proportioned for the vertical and horizontal forces respectively plus that portion of the shear force not carried by the diagonal reinforcing.
- 4) When diagonal reinforcing is required by Section 3,8.1.5.1.1.C)2) the following equations are used for a four (4) way reinforcing system
. with 45' inclined bars, for factored load combinations presented in Table 3.8.1-2. .
A sh
- h+(k+<}"
.9f 7 . (6) 7 A,y = .$ + (N + } (7) l
.9f 7 .
i 3.8.1-27 Amendment No. 1 l
i __ , __ , - __. . . _. ._ _ , .
' , , .- , gg 4* ** * *
> : h m-
.A =N v *N +V (9b) sv ve u 0.9f 7
- 6) For ' service load combinations presented in Table 3.8.1-2, the -
equations (6) through (9) are used to design the meridional hoop, and inclined reinforcing steel, but 0.9 f, is replaced by the reinforcing stress allowable listed in Section 3.8.1.5.2.2 and vu is replaced by 7, the applied shear load at the section under consideration.
~b) Radial Shear - example of this type of shear is the shear force caused by self-constraint of a cylinder and base slah during pressurization of the Containment, 7. g
- 1) Factored Ioad Design - The nominal shear stress, v u, is computed by:
Y V = u (10) 0.85bd where: d = Distance from the extreme compression fiber to the centroid of the tension reinforcement,, in, b = Unit length of section.
, When shear reinforcement perpendicular to the containment surface is used, the required area of shear reinforcement is not less than:
A ,= (v ,- v e)bs (11) fy where: s = Spacing of shear reinforcement. in a direction parallel to the longitudinal reinforcement. The perpendicular shear reinforcement is not spaced further apart than 0.50d.
v = Nominal permissible shear stress carried by concrete, psi, as defined [n Section 3.8.1. 5.1.1 ( C) . . t.
- When inclined stirrups are used, the required area is not less than A, = (v -~ v )bs (12) f 7 (sin a t cos n) 'f tihen shear reinforcement consists of a single bar or a single group of parallel bars, all bent upward at the same distan'ce from the support, the required area is not less than .
A, = (v - v )bs g (13) f7 (sina)
.in which (vu - V )c does not exceed 3/f' g ;
1 i n I
l- I l Amendment No. 1 3.8.1-29
F l, i .
SENPP'FSAR
....,..,) . f. - ,. 7.. v . . , ..,. 3.l g. . ; , t.s].( . .' . . ,
l %s. , ' Variations in:the foundation rock parameters have a negligible effect on the l
overall analysis of the structure for combined loads since the seismic loads i used in the' analysis are. based on the most critical rock properties.
l l
Concrete' temperatures do not exceed the values indicated in the ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code, Section CC-3440 (a), for normal operation and Section CC-3440 (b) for accident condition.
3.8.1.4.4.8 Treatment of Large Thickened Penetration Regions
< Large openings are provided for the equipment hatch, personnel airlocks, main steam penetrations, and 'feedwater penetrations. In all of these areas, the thickness of the wall.is increased from 4 ft. 6 in. to 6 ft. 6 in..in order to accomodate the concentration of stresses and to allow the introduction of additional reinforcement required by special analysis.
All of the large penetrations are incorporated.into a three-dimensional finite i element model in which a finer mesh around the penetrations is provided in order to obtain reliable stress information. The effect of eccentricity due to the fact that the increase of' wall thickness' is extended only on the outside face of'the wall is considered. The STARDYNE computer program is used for this analysis and the investigation is performed for all load combinations listed in Table 3.8.1-2.
As. described in Section 3.8.2, the interaction between the cylindrical i
concrete well and steel penetrations is considered and the interaction forces are' introduced at the nodal points around the openings To account for the effects of concrete cracking, the cracking pattern determined in the finite element analysis described in Section 3.8.1.4.4.4 is used as an input in the finite element analysis used for the large openings.
l l
The results of'the analysis include biaxial bending moments and shears, axial force, and torsion. These are used in the design of the reinforced concrete around the penetration openings. Conventional reinforcement, consisting of circular bars around the openings for moments and censions and stirrups
for shear and torsion, is provided.
3.8.1.4.4.9 . Liner Plate Analysis and Liner Anchorage Systen The purpose of the lizier place is to provide a leak-tight membrane. As such, it is not designed as s' component of the Containment to resist design loads, but the stresses and strains in the liner are determined considering the wall and liner as a composite section to assure that the leak-tight integrity of the Containment is not jeopardized.
~
l-An anchorage system consisting of headed studs is used to retain the liner and concrete shell as a composite section. The studs are fusion-welded to the liner plate. The headed studs are.5/8 in. diameter by 4 in. long. -The mat liner is anchored by welding it to embedded steel members which are anchored in the concrete mat. At the mat-wall intersection, the vertical wall liner is continuously welded to the mat liner.
3.8.1-31
f ., ,. -
SHNPP FSAR
...n...:..'.
' ~
M. i . . :> 1 .* . , _ M .y . .
- i .
. . . .~ .
- s , . . < v
- 'n.'. .: ..
O other areas may have outward curvature. H e variations result in shear load l
../ and displacement at the anchor; b) Liner thicker than nominal due to the rolling tolerances given in SA-20. % e thicker plate may impose greater forces and displacements on'the anchorage system than'a nominal thickness' liner; '
l c) Yield strength higher than the minimum specified due to the rolling 1 processes and biaxial loading; d) Weld offset, structural discontinuities, and concrete voids behind the ,
liner; e) Variation in anchor spacing;
~
f) Variation in anchor stiffness due to variations of the concrete l
-modulus; 1
g) _ Local' concrete crushing in the anchor zone; and h)- Stud anchors that.are designed to fail before tearing the liner.
Due to the nature of the loading and the types of components, the allowable capacity of the- components is specified in terms of stresses and strains for liner plate and in terms of forces and displacements for the concrete
,q anchorages. -
In order to determine the ultimate capacity (force and displacement) and the spring constants of the anchorages, which are required in the analysis of the liner and anchorage, tests were performed at Tahigh University's Fritz Engineering Laboratory in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. H e anchor studs were embedded into a concrete disc, which was subjected to bending in order to create biaxial tension similar to the actual state of. stresses that would exist in the actual containment wall during an accident condition. he anchorages were tested in tension and shear both.in the region where there is biaxial tension and in the region where there are no stresses. '0-The results of the tests are shown on Figures 3.8.1-32 through 3.8.1-35. l Figures 3.8.1-32 and 3.8.1-33 show the results for studs subjected to tension and shear, respectively, with concrete in biaxial tension; Figures 3.8.1-34 and 3.8.1-35 show the results for studs subjected to tension and" shear, ,
respectively, with the' concrete unloaded. %e tests show that the . ultimate I capacity of the anchorages is not. influenced by biaxial tension. The slope of )
the curve for the anchorages tested in the region with biaxial tension is '
smaller than the slope of curve for the anchorages tested in the region with no-stresses. Although the ultimate force and displacement capacity is not changed for concrete in biaxial tension or unloaded, the biaxial tension state has an important impact on the analysis, since the slope of the load deformation curve determines the spring constants used in the analysis.
~
~3.8.1-33 1
_ ~ . _ . .. . __ _ _ . _ . . _ . , . _ _ . ___ . _ . . . __ ,
-)
. SENPP FSAR
,., : .. q *
,[ ' . . .. r .* .*>d'
,m.
'(..,l. .
. The yield strength of the liner is not exceeded during.the test pressure load
'J*
combination. However, in-accident conditions, even without mechanical loads,
-the combined membrane and bending stresses due to a.LOCA associated with the SSE exceed the yield strength capacity of the' liner plate.
w n ..e .,y m . ,. ,,, _ , , , . , ., , ,,. . , , ,,.
. If the yield strength capacity of the liner is not exceeded, the analysis. is a linear problem and the superposition. principle is valid. Therefore the stresses induced into the liner plate by the containment structure loading and the stresses induced by the mechanical loads-are determined separately and
. superimposed after_that.
When the yield strength' capacity of the liner .is exceeded, the analysis becomes a nonliner problem and superposition of stresses is not allowed; a.
unique nonlinear analysis is performed-by combining the loads from the containment structure with the mechanical loads induced into the liner, using the plastic theory method.
Using the common practice procedures of plastie design for combined axial load and bending, special diagrams, such as membrane force versus strain, bending moment versus strain, and axial force versus. moment capacity were developed for various moment-force ratios (eccantricities). Figures 3.8.1-41 through 3.8.1-43 show the diagrams used in the design of the liner in the inelastic range.
3.8.1.4.4.10 Containment Penetrations Analysis The. penetration assemblies are analyzed using the-same techniques and procedures used. for metal containments,. as described in ASME " Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code"~Section III, Divisioa 1, Subsection NE, " Class MC Components". The analysis considers concrete confinement of the penetration sleeves, as described in Section 3.8.2.4.1.
- Each penetration is provided with an anchorage system capable of transferring pressure loads and other mechanical loads, such as piping restraints, into the concrete. The design allowables for the penetrations are the same as those used in ASME Section III, Division 1. For penetration nozzles which.are not continuous through the liner, the liner stress in the through-thickness direction is taken as one-half of that in the as-rolled direction.
l The analysis of containment penetrations, designated as Class MC Components, "
is presented in Section 3.8.2. f 3.8.1.4.4.11 General Design Considerations Design details of the Concrete Containment Structure for flexure, axial, and shear loads, reinforcing steel design. requirements (splicing, development length, and anchorages), reinforcing steel fabrication and construction requirements (spacing, cover, tolerances, and bending), and concrete crack
~ control are in accordance with the requirements of ASME Code Section III, i Division 2/ACI 359 Code.
O
,~ ,
3.8.1-35
- . , - - . , ., _ . . - - - - . . , , , . e-, m. .- - - . , . -. , , ,,.,- - -.. , , ,. -.c, -_,,,,,--..p, . . ,- , --,
m- ,.
,e ? .
. . a. SENPP FSAR.
f.% .-
'3. 8...1 5 1 Allowable Stresses for the Factored Load Category
.. . 3.8.1.5.1.1 .. Co.ncrete Allowable Stresses
.. - s a) Concrete Compressive Stresses
- 1) ' Primary compressive stresses:
Membrane stress = 0. 6 f'c Membrane plus bending =
0.75 i'c .
- 2) Primary-plus-secondary compressive stresses:
tumbrane stress =
0.75 f'c Membrana plus bending =
0.85 f'e with a. limit of 0.002. s train The stresses given above in items 1 and 1 are reduced, if necessary, to maintain structural stability.
b) Concrete Tensile- Stresses - Concrete tensile strength is not relied upon to resist flexural and membrane tension.
[ Tabla 3.8.1-4 shows the strength redue:1on factors for concrete.
c) Concrete Shear Stresses - Radial, tangential, peripheral, and torsional shears are considered in the design of the containment structure.
- 1) Radial Shear - An example of the shear caused by self-constraint of the cylinder and base slab during pressurization of the Containment.
~_.
(a) The nominal shear stress, v e, does not exceed clie lesser of:
v = / 3.5f ' (15a)
- c. c.
1.99 5e/0.15 + 2504 (V ud/M )
v =
/ (15b) c u for p < 0.015 where Mu is the applied design load moment at the section under construction.
v c
=
1.9 G + 2504 (V d/M ) (15c) c u u forp[0.015 where (V d/M ) does not exceed 1.0 u u 3.8.1-37
s
- 4. -'
..: ,.: G:
~
? :*.
. . i. '.i. '. . . M
- a %. . ,: .:
~
^5HNPP TSAR -
- u! '
- M-5 ? ; * '"
.~ !. .
i
' O reinforcing system may be used provided that v udoes not exceed 8 5 /F. If v exceeds u this limit a diagonal reinforcing system is provid$d.
+,u c), .
- The' cangencial- s~ hear'steess',' 7,3 carried"by 'the ' concrete ' does' not '
- exceed 80 psi for service load combinations presented in Table 3. A.1-2. For these load combinations a meridional and hoop reinforcing system may be used provided that vudoes not exceed 4 2 .T".
If vu exceeds this limit a diagonal reinforcing is .
provided.
/
- 3) Peripheral Shear (a) Tb1 peripheral or punching shear stress taken by the concrete on the mssumed failure surface does not exceed ve as obtained below:
v (21) ch = 4/F e /1 +- (f a/ 4/F) e 2
ve , = % /I + (fh/4/ (22) where:
7ch = the- allowable shear stress on a failure surface perpendicular to a meridional line.
l c = the allowable shear stress on a meridional failure
' Tsur ,f ace perpendicular to the plane of the shell .
f, = membrane stress in the meridional direction, compression is positive.
f3 = membrane stress in the hoop direction, compression is positive. -
s.
(b) The value of v eis calculated as a weighted average of v and ve ,. For a circular failure surface, w eis the ayerage okhveh and ve ,.
The failure surface for peripheral shear is considered to be perpendicular to the surf ace of the Containment and l'ocated so that its periphery is at a distance d/2 from the periphery of the j concentrated load or reaction area.
l
' ~
For failure due to impact loads, local areas for missile impact l are defined as having a maximum diameter equal to 10 times the l mean diameter of the impacting missile, or 5 6 plus the mean diameter of the impacting missile (where e is defined as the total section thickness in feet), whichever is smaller.
h.
3.8.1-39 Amendment No. 2
,4,, ,m, __, ---y- - - + - . . - , , ,.y,--, - . , . - - , , . , w _- y ,.-q p.,-%v.-- g --q -.~,,-,-,...w
e:
.L. ; .
- . SHNPP FSAR-
- O* ' .
- .~, - , , b.- .
.x _
..,.~>,:.;< . _, .
, s. - a- s., . . .. .
pyramid or. cone contained wholly within the support, with its upper 4.;m ,g)
'" base as the loaded area and side slopes of one' vertical to two ,
horizontal.
3.8.1.5.1.1 Rainforcing Steel Allowable Stresses
.~. -Q .c -
a) ~ Reinforcing Steel Tensile Stresses
- 1) Average tensile stress is 0.9-f .y
- 2) Th's design yield. strength of the reinforcement is 60,000 psi.
- 3) The tensile strain may exceed yield when the effects of thermal gradients through the -concrete section are included, provided that the temperature-induced forces and moments reduce as yielding in the reinforcement occurs and the increased concrete cracking does not cause deterioration of the Containment. Maximum tensile strain is limited to twice the corresponding yield strain.
b) Reinforcing' Steel Compressive Stresses ,
- 1) For load-resisting purposes, the al1' owable stress is 0.9 fy .
- 2) The strains may exceed yield when acting in conjunction with the concrete if the concrete- requires strains larger than the reinforcing l yield to develop its capacity.
! Table 3.8. L-4 shows the allowable stresses for reinforcing steel.
3.8.l.5.2- Allowable Stresses for'the Service Load Category 3.8.1.5.2.1 Concrete Allowable Stresses a) Concrete Compressive Stresses
- 1) Primary compressive stresses (as defined in Section CC-3136 of the ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 code) ',-
Membrane stress =
0.3 f'e Membrane stress for load combinations including wind or earthquake =
0.40 f'c ,-
- 2) Primary plus-secondary compressive stresses (as defined in Section CC-3136 of the ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 code)
Membrane stress =
0.45 f'c Membrane plus bending =
0.6 f'e .
- 3) Local compression at discontinuities and in the vicinity of liner
- ' anchors =
0.6 f'c l
. 3.8.1-41 l Y
n,-
g - -,, - -w-vr - - - , , , ,
~
.I', d*:f.. .. f,,:"*5 .,$ :.;.,,,J..,,,, 4 g jp3g p - -
,f . , . , , , ,3 , ,,
. s, .
,q
.l, j .
. .s Reinforcing steel requirements regarding splices, development length, hooks, anchorages, and cover are in accordance with . the requirements of . ASME Code Section III, . Division 2/A.CI 359 Code, Section CC 3530.
The requirements for crack control'are in accordance with Section CC 3534 of ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code.
Concrete temperatures,do not exceed the values indicated in the ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ ACI 359 Code Section CC 3430(b) for accident- or short-term loading.
Corrosion protection for the reinforcing -steel in the containment" structure is provided by positioning reinforcing steel to allow clearance between the steel and any concrete face on the containment vall in accordance with ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code. The alkaline environment of the concrete adequately protects embedded steel parts from corrosion. .
Exposed surfaces of the liner walls, domes,-air lock, and hatch are protected against corrosion. .Af ter suitable surface preparation, a rust-inhibiting base coat is applied. Finish costs are nonmetallic with smooth nonporous surf aces suitable for loss .of coolant accident conditions. Surf aces in contact with I
concrete are not painted because of the alkaline environment of the concrete.
The radiation source's used for design and analysis of the shielding 1
f requirements are based on the. core power level (2900 W) for each Unit. These l2 are given in Section 12.2.1 and include radiation sources for all phases of j plant operation including full power operation, shutdown conditions. and
- refueling operations, and for various postulated accidents. They include the neutron and gamma fluxes outside the reactor vessel, the reactor coolant ,
t activation, fission and corrosion product activities, deposited corrosion product sources on reactor coolant equipment surfaces, spent fuel handling sources, and postulated core meltdown sources. In addition, radiation sources l
for various auxiliary systems are also tabulated.
The C5Helinsent is a reinforced concrete structure with a cylindrical vall 4-1/2 feet thick and a 2-1/2 feet thick dome. In conjunction with.the primary and secondary shields, the concrete containment structure linics the radiation level outside the Containment from all sources inside the Containment to no more than 0.25 meem/hr. at full power operation.
The concrete containment structure provides protection to plantfpersonnel from' radiation sources inside the Containment following a Design Basis Accident (DBA).
3.8.1.6 Materials, cuality Assurance, and Soecial Construction Technieues 3.8.1.6.1 Materials
! The meteria's I for the Concrete Containment Structure and foundation mat are in accordance with Article CC-2000 of the ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code, and as specified hereunder. The materials are selected so that they are compatible with both the normal operating 3.8.1-43 Amendment No. 2
, . . - - - - , . , ,,-- ,,e. - - . .-..~,,,,v,,, y .,-,-vww. ,e- .- - ,-,,-
.,--y-.,,-,,----,---r-
(
. 'V.. .
i
. .:i:. .h.h 'i
. l: - '
. . . ~
.; . .. - - : O h...'L %
m.
-(v./;
c during concrete production for the requirements and espective frequencies tabulated below:
l
. Requirements _ Test Method Frecuency . .
I
- 1) Gradation ASE C136 Once daily during I production (*)
2). Moisture Content; ASM C566 Twice daily during ;
production ;
- 3) Material finer than ASIM C117 Daily during production
- 200 Sieve
- 4) Organic Impurities ASTM C40 Daily during production
- 3) Friable Particles ASE C142 Monthly during production
- 6) Lightweight Particles ASM C123 Monthly during production
- 7) Specific Gravity and ASM C127 and/or Monthly during l *'
Absorption ASTM C128 production
,/ '
- 9) Potential Reactivity ASM C289 Every 6 months
- 10) Soundness ASTM C88 Every 6 months
- 11) Water Soluble Chlorides ASE D1411 Monthly during production
(*) Twice daily during production if more than 200 cu. yds. of con' crete are placed.
- Sunniaries of in-process test results of aggregate appear in Tables 3.8.1-6 through 3.8.1-11. .
c) Water - Mixing' water conforms to the requirements of Article CC 227.3 of the ASME Section III, Division 2/ACI-359 Code.
l2 Water used in concrete mixing is sampled, tested, and analyzed initially for use in trial mixes and monthly thereaf ter for use in production concrete by CP6L, or an organization designated by CP&L, to assure conformance with the following limits and tests: -
- 1) The mixing water, including that contained as free water in aggregate, does not exceed more than 250 ppa of chlorides as Cl- as 4
3.8.1-45 Amendment No. 2 *
+ - , - - < ,. , -.,, , , ,- , .,.,- - . , . ,
- , - - . , - , - - , ,- ., y, . .,
3 a ..: '.,-c...
. .:):} sl. J i. .;s .. .. ~'.s . ' .: .. ,4
. .a.. .. f. . j. , . lyy .)gg r .J .: ...: ii :s a . ;e.
W. . +
, ,. .. . -1 f%
}w.P.0) used in the work. A set retarding, water reducing agent is used during hot weather in accordance with ACI-305.
Flyash, if used in concrete, conforms to ' ASE-C-613, Class 7, and is tested in accordance with ASM C-311 for every 100 tons of flyash utilized. Flyash does not exceed 25 percent, by weight, of cement in
-the. final mix. Concrete produced with flyash meets all of the requirements specified for standard concrete.
Table 3.8 1-13 sho:ss a summary of in-process test results for preliminary acceptance tests of the adnixtures.
e) Cement Grout - Cement, aggregate, water, and admixtures for grout conform to the requirements stipulated above. . %e proportions of materials are based upon trial mixes using the same type and brand of ingredients as is used for construction to meet the,specified requiraments of consistency, shrinkage, and compressive strength. Me tests are performed in accordance with ASM C-109 and Corps of Engineers methods CRD-C-79 and CRIH:-588-76..
f) Concrete - Structural cancrete for the Containment and foundation nat is specified to have a minimum design compressive strength of 5000 psi (Class X), or 4000 psi (Class AA), at 28 days af ter placing. We concrete mixes yield a unir air-dry weight of ar least 137 lb. per cu. f t. at .
28 days, in accordance with ASM C-642.
^(- The design of concrete mixes is in accordance with ACI 211.1-74 " Recommended Practice for Selecting- Proportions for Normal and Heavy Weight Concrete," and
' in accordance with Articia CC-2232 of the ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code. The previously specified ingredients are used to-obtain material proportions for the specified concrete.
During construction, minor modifications of design mixes may be necessitated by variations in aggregate gradation or moisture content.
Concrete construction procedures, including stockpiling, storing, batching, ~
. mixing, conveying, depositing, consolidating, curing, and construction joint preparation are in accordance with the provisions of Article CC-4200 of the i
ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code SMNPP complies with the requirements of NRC Regulatory Guide 1.55, with the clarifications described l.
in Section 1.8. .
- 3) Rainforcing Steel
- 1) Rainforcing Bars - Reinforcing bars are new billet steel in accordance with ASU A-615 Crade 60 (60,000 psi minimum yield strength). 9 hen called for on the design drawings, weldable grade 7
reinforcing steel in accordance with ASM A706 is used. The i reinforcing steel and Cadweld splice material conforms to the requirements of Article CC-2300 of ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code, vich the exceptions listed in Appendix 1.8A.
.%n 3.8.1-47 l
l 3 . . . .;..r . ,,. .
- fg
- . 4.>$.J 4 5. ......,.>.SBNP7:.ESAR,p., ,
. . . , ,,, ) , 7 r , ; .,.., , , , , , , ,:.
. - ~
- Q:.; '
> s'_) f*' (2) 1 out of next 90 splices (3) .'2 out of the next and each subsequent unit of 100 splices (b) . Test. frequency where combinations of sister and production-
. splices are tested:
. (1) 1 production splice of the first 10 production-splices (2) I production and 3 sister splices for the next 90 production splices -
(3) 1. splice, either a production or sister splice, for the next and subsequent units of 33 splices. At least one-fourth of~. the total number of splices tested are production splices.
Straight sister splices are substituted for production samples for splicing sleeves are welded to structural steel elements.
To be acceptable, sound nonporous filler metal must be visible for the full circumference at both ends of the splice sleeve and at the tap hole in the center of the splice sleeve. Filler metal is usually recessed 1/4 in.. from the end of the sleeve due to the packing material. Such indentation-is not considered as a poor fi11. -
The following reasons constitute cause for visual rejection of splices:
- 1) Slag in the tap hole where the slag exceeds the thickness of the sleeve's wall.
- 2) Spongy appearance of the filler metal caused by gas ,b,lowout.
, 3) Void areas for each end of splices in any position exceeding the allowable values tabulated below:
. Allowable Void Area .
4 Bar Size (Sq. In.)
9 1.02
~
10 1.03 1L 1.53 l
14 2.15 l l
18 3.00 l
- -'s \
3.8.1-49
~
[ Ac. * .- i : 4,. .
. ,. . - .- N .. .. s.'....". .W .s. $3 gyp.F5h:..J' ..' '
.\ '. M . >; y- '
. .!<*' . . 4 '- ? . '?
!- u) : -,
i 3) Welded Splices - Calded Splices, if used, comply vich Regulatory Cuide 1.94.
h). Steel Lin'ar' Place - The fabrication, testing, _ and examination of the steel liner is in conformance with Articles CC-4500 and CC-5500 of ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code, with the excepcions listed in.
Appendix 3.8A.
The steel liner plate is ' carbon steel conforming to ASTM A.516 Crade 70. This l steel has a minimum yield strength of ,38,000 psi and a minima ultimate
- strength of 70,000 psi with minimum elongation of 21 percent. Liner places. comply 2 with- the requirements of the applicable ASME Code material specification for low temperature service. The impact testing minimum requirement is as follows
- 1) As , specified in ASE Code Section III, Division 1, paragraph NE-2320,. for procurement performed prior to April 29, 1977.
- 2) As specified in ASME,Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code, paragraph CC 2520, for procurement performed af ter April 29, 1977.
- Charpy 7-notch specimens (SA-370 Figure 11 Type A) are used for all impact testing at a maximum temper'ature of 0 F.
t Welding materials (electrodes, filler metals, and/or inserts) are I
selected in conformance with the code requirements. .Only those types of. low, hydrogen electrodes and combinations of wire and flux that l produce welds that at least meet the impact values of the parent material, as specified, are permitted in the construction.
All velding materials are certified ( Actual Test Results) to maec the impact test requirements of ASME SFA-5.1. Weld antal test places are 2
certified to meet impact tests in accordance with the applicable Subsection of the ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ ACI 359 Code, employing a maximum temperature of 0 F and using the same material and thickness range as defined by the ASE Code Section III, Division 2/ACI-359 Code. .
In manual shielded metal arc-welding, the electrodes are of the low-hydrogen type, are analytically compatible with the base metal, and are such that the mechanical properties of the resulting velds meet the
- - full requirements for mechanical properties of the base metal.
Electrodes conforming to ASE STA 5.5, Classification E 7010, are permitted for making test channel attachment welds only. All low-hydrogen electrodes are stored in ovens at 200 to 300 F for approximately 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> immediately prior to use. F.lectrodes removed
- from storage ovens are not exposed to ambient temperature for more than l 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />. Electrodes removed from ovens and not used 'sithin a '4 hour4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> period are returned to the ovens for 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of redrying at 200 to 300 temperature. The electrode manufacturer's recommended practices are acceptable as an alternate, provided they are proven to yield a
. '3.8.1-51 Amendment No. 2
, . . , , _ , - ,- ,- ,. . . , - - - - - + - . , , . - - , - r-4, . -----,-----------------m- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
. +.
.s SHNPP FSAR~
t- . ,.:4-:.;.11-lL.;,,:... L U.
,.; . ' . : .': t , . . . .; . , . . , , . ;g . :. 2 . . .,,.,,..,.
. 3
- ~
~, -
- j- l., ,..
.Q N ,i welds are subject to spot radiographic inspect 14n in accordance with ASME Section III, Division 2/ ACI 359. code, paragraph CC-5531. Butt welds are examined per ASME Code Section III' Division 2/ACI 359 Code,
. paragraph.CC-5521. Radiographic examination is performed in accordance
'with the? techniques prescribed in Section V, Article 2 of the ASME .
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, . Winter 1971 Addenda for services rendered prior,to April 29, 1977, such as the shear key and sump pit assemblies of Units 1 and 2. For ~ services rendered subsequent to
' April 29, 1977,~ radiographic examination is performed in accordance with the techniques prescribed in Section 7,-Article 2 of the ASME Boiler.and Pressure Vessel Code, Winter 1975 Addenda.
In addition to seem welds with back-up bars, all non-butt and attachment welds to the Containment, except those welds for the leak chase system, non-load bearing plates,-and temporary erection attachments..are examined by the magnetic particle'or liquid penetrant test per ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code, paragraphs ;
CC-5521, CC-5522, and CC-5523. For magnetic particle or liquid >
penetrant inspections performed prior co April 29, 1977, the procedures and acceptance criteria conform to Appendix VI and VIII of ASME Boiler and. Pressure Vessel Code, Winter 1971 Addenda. For magnetic particle or liquid penetrant' inspections performed af ter April 29, 1977, the procedures . conform to Section V, Articles 7 and 6, respectively, ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Winter 1975 Addenda. LAcceptance criteria. for the magnetic particle or liquid penetrant examination is in accordance. with ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ ACI 359 Code, O -Paragraphs CC-5545 and CC-5544, respectively.
The root pass and final weld layer for attachments to the Containment using full penetration tee welds are examined by the magnetic particle or liquid penetrant method. In addition, the completed tee weld, where accessible, is ultrasonically inspected in accordance with ASME Section III, Division 1, Paragraphs NE-Sill and NE-5330.
Those areas of liner plates which are loaded during service by load
-bearing plates (loaded in the through thickness direction as'. defined in Paragraphs CC-3740 and.CC-3750 of Section III, Division 2) are examined by the straight-beam ultrasonic method in accordance with SA-578 and ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code, Paragraph CC-2533.
The criteria for woric'sanship and visual quality of welds i's. in accordance with code requirements, as well.as the following; i
- 1) -. Each weld has the minimum specified size throughout its full
. length. Each weld is free of linear defects such as slag, cracks, pinholes, and excessive undercut and rounded indications such as pinholes which exceed the acceptable limit as permitted by Paragraph i CL-5544.2. ' In addition, the layer of welds is free of coarse ripples, are strikes, irregular surface, non-uniform bead pattern, high crown, and deep ridges or. valleys between beads. Controlled peening, except l for the root pass and final weld bead layer, has been reviewed and
,z approved.
f 3.8.1-53 L.*
m, >
); -, . .
- ~*
SENPP FSAR~
',~~.:f. w.~..'.", [.. '
^ ; r.. l
.....),,
.. , . , ... . :, . , . ; . f, r.c,. . .,,.,.3q. ,
._..~. . . . - . . . . . .s .. , . . . , ,
Test results, as. indicated-in the following documents, were utilized in 2-the selection of these paint systems:
(a) ORNL-3589 " Gamma Radiation Damage and Decontamination Evaluation. of' Protective Coatings," By' G. A. West and C D. Watson - -
Februaryi 1965. '
r (b) .ORNL Log Book.A7562, 6/27/77.
(c) bENL-TM-2412'."DesignConsiderationofRaactorContainment Spray-Systems - Part V,' Protective Costing Systems,"
J C. Griess; T. H. Roco, et al, October,1970.
(d) Keeler and Long;.Inc., Publication 78-0810-1.
The areas in which the above coatings meet specified criteria are as fallows:.
- 1) Radiation Rasistance - The' protective coating systen used on the containment- liner is resistant to radiation exposures which would
- result fron-40 years of normal plant operation followed by the radiation exposure resulting from a postulated Loss of Coolant Accident 4
with TID-14844 source terms assumed. ANSI Standard N-512-1974-Table 2.1 lists as a. guide more than 4.5x109 rads for " severe exposure
- radiation resistance. Test'results submitted by the above mentioned manufacturer indicate that their referenced coatings. have radiation resistances.which fall in these ranges.-
- 2) Decoatsa h tion Ability - A total. decontamination factor of'440 with a percentage activity removal of 99.8 (Ref: ORNL A7562) was .
achieved by the protective coating system used for the containment liner. Coating systems indicated above meet this criteria using appropriate procedures.
- 3) Heat Transfer Characteristics - Protective coating systems are required to have a heat. transfer coefficient range of 1,000,co 3,000 BTU-m11./hr.-ft.1 F. The systems indicated above meet this requirement. Effects of the liner coating systems on containment post-LOCA transients are not significant.
, 4) Hydrogen Generation.- Coating-systems indicated above have no zinc
!- in their composition. Consequently no hydrogen generation 'will result .
from contact between the containment spray solution and the coatings.
- 5) ~ Temperature,-Pressure, and Humidity Conditions - Qualification Leesting of the: coating systems are performed for the coating i
) manufacturer by an independent laboratory. The procedures used in the -l qualification tests and the evaluation standards applied to the test are specified in.ANSL Standard N-101.2-1972.
i
.Y i
3.8.1-55
.f .. -
SENPP.-FSAR
'..,.y.. y, ,
d 12.: , :l V g g , . , .<.
.. .; 4 .,2,:, u . , ,., ,, . ,
,.,.t.,.
. ;., 3,.
, , ,i.,,,, ,,,,.y.,,, .. , ,., , . , , ,
. n . .. . . . . . . < . ,- ... . ,. . . .. ., , ,, ,
' E 1)
During construction, the following requirements for testing and inspection Ne -
are. observed:
Prior to the' start of the stud _ welding' operation, two studs
~
1) are welded'in the same general position to' separate pieces of material that are'of similar thickness and material as the member. After cooling, each stud is bent at an angle of 30 degrees from its original axis by striking the stud with a. hammer. If failure occurs in the weld zone of 'aither stud, the procedure is corrected and . two additional studs are successfully welded and tested before any studs are. welded to the member. The' foregoing testing is performed af ter any change in the welding procedure. If failure occurs in the stud shank, .
an investigation is made to ascertain and correct-the cause before more studs are welded.
1
- 2) Studs bent in testing that show no signs of failure are straightened inr hammer blows without heating.~ - Studs attached to the
- embedded. angles, structural tees, and liner plate forming the bottom-
~
i section of the liner are noc straightened af ter being bent for testing.
- 3) Studs on which a full 360 degrees . weld is not obtained are repaired by adding a 3/16 in. fillet weld in place of the lack of weld, using the shielded metal are process with low-hydrogen welding electrodes.
- 4) -If- the reduction in the height of studs as they are welded becomes less than normal, welding is stopped immediately and not resumed until the cause has been corrected.
- 5) If visual inspection reveals any stud in which the reduction in
. height due to welding is less than normal, such stud is struck with a lead ba==*r, or an appproved alternate method, and bent 15 degrees off vertical. Studs that crack in the weld, the base metal, or the shank,
- under inspection or subsequent straightening, are replaced.
/.
- 6) For studs fastened to penetration sleeves, the first two studs welded to each sleeve, after being allowed to cool, are bent 30 degrees by striking the stud with a lead hammer or an approved alternate method. If failure occurs in the weld zone of either stud, the stud is
< removed, the procedure ~is corrected, and two additional studs are successfully welded and tested on a sister plate before. fur'ther studs
! are attached to the sleeve. Two consecutive studs are then welded to the member,. tested, and found satisfactory before any more production studs are welded to the sleeves. Subsequently, a 10 percent random sample of the studs on each sleeve-are bend tested.
j) Penetration Anchorages and Attachments - For all Type II.and Type III' penetration sleeves designed in accordance with ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code, in the portion backed by concrete, the concrete l
anchorages used to connect the sleeve into the concrete wall are double headed Nelson studs 7/8 in. diameter by 8 in. long.
I' 3.8.1-57
- , - , , - , - m. y.,--..m,. y y , , , --.,,e -.--y v4,-4., -y - . .m-- n--,-.-,.-.,_ ., - --. ..,-.,-_ ._ . . +.
- . 4 .E,.u,-.'{...,..i:....3...
~;. .'... :. .. : .i.. ru : ., i m vSanPP iSAn ' , :. G.-:-
. .. ., .s ; 4 . W , % '. : : n O w & t :n .
')
~
- 2) All full penetration tee welds are tested by nagnetic particle or liquid penetrant test of root pass and final' weld layer; ultrasonic tests.are performed on completed welds where accessible. ,
- 3) Finet welds joining structural members in which either :nember is greater than 5/8 in. nominal thickness are inspected by liquid .
penetrant or magnatic particle methods af ter the final veld layer is applied. All other fiMet welds are inspected visually-for
- unacceptable defects using SI magnification.
- 4) The above am4ations are performed 15 accordance with the AWS Code..specified in Section 3.8.1.2. As an alternate, the above required
' emination may be performed in accordance with the ASE Code, as fonows:
(a) Radiographic, magnetic particle, and/or liquid penetrant examinations may be performed in accordance with the requirements of the ASE Code,Section V and Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code, as specified in Section 3.8.1.6, for services after April 29,. 1977.
(b) Ultrasonic examination may be performed in accordance with the requirements of the ASE Code,Section III, Divisions 1 and 2 as . described in 3.8.1.6.1 h)2) above.
l' 5) All welders, welder operators, and welding procedures are qualified.in.accordance with either the requirements of the AWS Code or the ASE Code,Section IX, whLchever is applicable.
3.8.1.6.1 quality Assurance The overan quality assurance program is in accordance with the F.ngineering and Construction QA program which was approved by the NRC during the
' Construction Permit review. Materials testing, fabrication, construction, and construction testing and examination are in accordance with applicable i provisions of Articles CC-4000 and CC-5000 of the ASE Code Section .III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code. The test methods and frequency of testing'for concrete and concrete ingredients conform to the requirements stipulated in j the ASE Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code, with the exceptions listed in Appendix 3.8A.
t .
The services of an independent laboratory were obtained prior to c'ommencing concrete work. This laboratory or CP&L produced control mixes with consistencies satisfactory for the work, u_ sing the proposed nacerials, in
- order to determine suitable mix proportions that are necessary to produce
' concrete conforming to the specified type and strength requirements .
'- Proportions for concrete mixes are based on laboratory or CP&L trial batches sade of materials specifically approved for use and from which individual -
water / cement ratio curves were developed. liix proportions were selected to ensure maximum workability and conformance with the concrete compressive
- strength requirements.
3.8.1-59
_ ,y 9 g. ,, . . . , _ . _ _ - , - - . - - . - , . , . - - - - - - . . ym--, ,,,,,y-,.. -----,,,---,. , , , . , , - - - , - - . , - ___ _ , . , - _ m __m--, -__- _-._ m
+ ~
, )
...e
, n..l , .; ' .*
, l .; J . . ~ .- .
_g y '
=; t - '.' L v :
r-- .--
qqW _
R. Coefficient of CRD-C39 24 As per CRD-C34 Thermal F.xpansion
Compressian (*)
'10. ' Shrinkage (*) ASTM C157 4,7,14, & 24 As per ASTM C157 Coefficient days & 8,16, (Length change 32, & 64 weeks t of cement mortar-and concrete)
- 11. Density ASTM C642 28 As per ASTM C642 (Specific Gravity)
- These tests. are concurrent with construction.
l2 Concrete slump,. temperature, air content, and mechanical properties examinations are performed on a common sample to establish conformance with the provisions listed above.
Concrete is sampled at the point of delivery into the forms.
\~ .
The methods used in sampling, making, curing, and testing the concrete samples, either in the field or in the laboratory, are in accordance with the appropriate ASTM Standards and include, but' are not necessarily restricted to, the following standards:
ASTM C172 - Standard method of Saapling Fresh Concrete
/
ASTM C 31 - Standard method 'of' Making and Curing Concrete Compressive and Flexural Test Specimens in the Field.
J ASTM C192 - Standard Method of Making and Curing Concrete Test Speci:nens in the Laboratory.
ASTM C39 - Standard Method of Test for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Speci:sens.
I
\
. ASTM C567 - Standard Method of Test for Unic Weight of Structural I,ightweight !
Concrete. -
i ASTM C138 - Tentative Method of Test for Unic Weight, Tield, and Air' Content (Gravimetric) of Concrete.
Three-day, seven-day, and 23-day tests are made on 6 x 12 in. cylinders. For each design mix, 'a correlation between three-day, seven-day, and 28-day strengths is made in the laboratory. Soon af ter a job starts, a similar correlation evolves for samples of concrete taken from the mixer. After that <
- correlation has been established, the results of the 7-day tests may be used
]Q l t
as an indicator of the compressive strengths which should be expected at 23 4
. 3.8.1-61 Amendment No. 2
. - . = - - --
- h. : .*. ; . . g. , .n . . ; c .t y .?v:,;
- .'
- Tv n a m .. ."' ' v , j. '. '
.- . . ? ^- Y & * ',
h *. ~.y
...,.g
, .. i. .g .SENPP FSAR,.c* . . - , ... ,. , ,
.k.,J . ---
The slump costs are performed as follows:
.a)- One slump test is performed for the first batch placed each day, and .
thereafter for each 50 cubic yards of each blass of concrete placed. j 1
. b). Slump tests are made on each concrete batch used for test cylinders.
c) Slump tests are made at any time the inspector has reason to suspect that the concrete slumps are not within the allowable tolerances.
The concrete air entrainment content and temperature is taken with each slump -
test.
The concrete unit weight is determined daily during production, in addition to the sluvap, air content, and temperature..
The batch plant scales are calibrated to ASTM C 94 standard on a :nonthly basis.
Mixer uniformity tests to the ASTM C 94 standard are performed initially and every six months.
The evaluation of the test results for concrete are in accordance with ACI 214 and ASE Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code.
( During concrete operations, inspectors at the batch plant witness the mix proportions ,of each batch delivered to construction, and periodically sample and test the concrete ingredients. The inspectors ensure that a ticket is provided for each batch, which documents the time loaded, actual proportions of the mix, amount of concrete, and the concrete design strength. The 7 , cleanliness of trucks and the handling and storage of aggregate are checked by the batch plant inspectors The concrete batch plant complies in all respects, including provisions for storage and precision of reessurements, with ASTM C-94, and National Ready Mixed Concrete Association (NRMCA) -
l Certification of Ready Mixed Concrete Production Facilities. Water and ice additions, if necessary, are modified as required based on measurements of i che moisture content and gradation changes of the aggregate.
Other inspectors at the construction site. inspect reinforcing and form placement, make slump tests, maka. cast cylinders, check air content, check
- concrete temperatures, record weather conditions, and inspect concrete placing
- and curing.
- The requirements 'of Regulatory Guide 1.55 are followed 'with .
clarifications described _in Section 18. .
3 The reinforcing steel bars comply with the requirements of Articles CC-4300 i and CC-5300 of ASE Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code, with the exceptions 2 listed in Appendix 3.8A. The requirements of Regulatory Guides 1.10 and 1 15, with clarifications in Sec' tion 18 and Appendix 3.8A, are also followed.
l 3.8.1-63 Amendr.ent No. 2 i
-SENPP F *
- +,:n.h.
m
. -% ~ ..w. & .;..:;r::/::: :e, :Sc.n.ny: .f.n.W w.SAR":. ' cw :n.- .c.nM .~a. :.
..u..., .. .
n.. .
.y-
..m... .. x. .. .
s, b) . Temporary Construction Openings. - Temporary construction ~ openings .are i provided'in the cylindrical wall of_the containment structure. Construction joints are provided around the openings and_the. concrete surface is sufficiently roughened for proper interlocking of the concrete. The reinforcement extends.into the opening for sufficient length to enable.
- ' # "' *5 - .' '
' splicing of bars. -
l
'The wall around the opening is' designed to prov'ide the necessary reinforced concrete beam-section to span the opening, and to provide the necessary column '
section on either . side of the opening- to transfer-the loads to the foundation mat.
- 3. 8. L . T Testing and In-Service- Surveillance Requirements i
3.8.1.7.1 Structural Integrity Pressure Test.
The Concrete Containment Structure is subjected to a preoperational structural
. proof test af ter the Containment. is complete, with liner, concrete structures, all electrical and piping penetrations, equipment. hatch, and personnel locks in place. ,
~
While the SMNPP's Containment is a non prototype Containment, the structural acceptance test is performed in accordance with the procedures outlined in Article CC-6000 of the ASME: Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code for a prototype Containment as augmented by the provisions delineated in Regulatory 15 Guide 1.18.- ,
The internal test pressure is increased from atmospheric pressure to 1.15 times the containment-design pressure in five approximately equal pressure increments. The Containment is depressurized in the same number of increments. Measurements are recorded at atmosphric pressures and at each '
pressure level of the pressurization and depressurization cycles. Concrete
- crack patterns are recorded at atmospheric pressures and at. each pressure level of the pressurization and depressurization cycles.- Concrete crack patterns are recorded at atmospheric pressure both before and immediately after the test and at the maximum pressure level achieved during-t,he test.
Instrumentation for these' tests consists.of taut wire extensometers' for l'onger distance and LVDT-(linear variable differential transducers) for shorter -
distances, with automatic data logging systems to measure deflections.
Vertical displacements are measured with Invar tapes. The environmental !
conditions during the test are measured in a manner and to an extent that permits evaluation of their contributions to the response of the ' Containment. t The test is not conducted under extreme weather conditions such as snow, heavy rain, or strong winds.
In order to determine the complete picture of the overall deflection pattern of the Containment, radial and vertical deflections of the Containment are measured in accordance with ASME Code Section III, Division 2/ACI 359 Code,
~
Article CC-6232. The radial deflections are measured at several points along four meridians spaced around the Containment, including locations with varying stiffness characteristics. Vertical deflections of the Containment are jy measured at the apex and the springline of the dome.
i l -
i 3.8.1-65 Amendment No. 15
f '
y .
TARI.E 3.S,I-l- . . .
', l .i 1)ES IGN, PROCHNEHElff, FABRICATION ANI) ENECTION STATilS '
3 4 .J
,a OF CONTAINHEffr COMPONENTS, PARTS Ale) APPilRTENANCES . t Report Procurement, Fabrication, Erection Ehasco Stamp Required Data St resse.
Prior to After construction ASE Sect III Report. Nepdirt;f Design April 29, 1977' April 29, 1977 Specification Div.2/ ACE 3'i9 + Div.2 Div.I .
m .L Components Reinforced ASE Sect III NA ASME SECT til CAR-Sil-Cll-6 .NA Yes .
Concrete Hat Div.2/ACI 359 I)!v 2/ACI 159 1
Reinforced ASHE S3ct III NA ASHE Sect III CAR-Sil-Cll-6 NA Yes concrete Walt Div.2/ACI 359 Iliv 2/ ACE 359 2 Sn .
Reinforced ASHE Sect III NA ASME Sect III CAR-Sif-Cll-6 NA Yes
{ Concrete Dome Div.2/AC[ 3 59 I)(v 2/ACI'359
?%.
i Parts Steet I.iner ASHE Sect III CAR-Sil-AS-1 Yes -
$ Iliv.2/ACI 359 b **
Anchor Stude ASME Sect III * ** CAR-Sil-AS-l NA / Yes Div.2/ACI 359 . '.
Crane AISC 1970 AISC 1970 ** CAR-Sil-AS-1 NA Yes Supports &
[
Brackets *
..~
Esgui pmen t ASHE Sect III * ** CAR-Sil-AS-1 *** .
Yes. ;*
g Hatch Div.I 5 Subsect NE . .' ,
R. .
s .
N Personnel ASHE Sect III * ** CAR-Sil-AS-1 *** Ye s . - /
N Air I.ack Div.I ;-
- v. Subsect NE C ,
, U l
. ~,'
p Emergency ASHE Sect III * ** CAR-Sil-AS-1 *** Yes .
Air I.ock Div.I .
f i i
Subsect NE ' . -
i .
i .
c '. : 1 ~ I ' t.- -
. ?l s '-
,. = . , ..+. . ..
s TABLE 3.8.5-1 (Cont'd) < .
., . i .
DESIGN, PROCUREMENT, FABRICATION AND ERECTION _ STATUS _
OF CONTAINHENT COMPONENTS, PARTS AND APPilRTENANCES 9 '
Report ~
Procurement, Fabrication, Erection Ebasco Stamp Required' Data Stfeps Prior to After Construction ASME Sect IT! Re port Repoft
, Design April 29, 1977 April 29, 1977 Specifcatton Div.2/ACI 359 . Div.2 Div.T-Valve ASHE Sect III * ** CAR-Sit-AS-1 *** -
Parts * ~ , YesI (ccat'd) Chamber Div.1 Subsect NE .' ~ I '.
- I'
. l '.
ASHE Sect III ***
. Type I ASHE Sect III N4 CAR-Sit-N-54 Ye's ','
Penetration Div.! Subsect NE ,
Sleeves- Subsect NE , ;
. m j w Type II ASME Sect III * ** CAlt-Sil-AS-1 **4 ,
Yes ' h..h ' '8 j . Penetration Div.!
'g Sleeves Subsect NE ,' ' ' , ; g l
i * .%
- Type III ASME Sect III * *9 CAR-Sil-AS-1 *44 Yes
) Div,1-
,- s
~
Penetration ,,
Sleeves Subsect NE ,
f
'. i. . :,
^
- Electrical ASHE Sect III N4 ASME Sect III CAR-SH-E-28 *** Yes Penetrations Div.! Div.I Subsect NE
[* .,.
Subsect NE *
. '9 7
Fuel Transfer ASME Sect III * ** CAR-Sil-AS-1 *** Yes Yqs.
Tube ,Pene- Div.! ,
tration Subsect NE * .
Sleeve t
' f 4 .
34
?
s ;
.l !
l1 .
.q , ,<.
', h .
VN ,'. ' ; *
~
>. .I
' ~ .
' /. ..
~~
TARI.E ').8 5-I (Cont 'd) . A t '2 '
DESIGN, PROCllREHENT, FABRICATION AND ERECTION STATIIS ;- ,.
i 0F CONTAINHElff COMPONENTS, PARTS AND APPilRTENANCES
' k'
.5
. Report 3 Procurement, Fabrication, Erection Ebasco Stamp Required Dara St ress;'*
Prior to After Construction ASW Sect III) .' Repo rt Report-
' Design April 29, 1977 April 29, 1977 Specification Div.2/ACI 159' .'Iliv.2 Iliv.t g-
. Sump Rectreut. ASHE Sect III '* ** CAR-SH-AS-1 *** .. .Yes RilR Sleeve Div.! ,', * - !
(Sleeve Nos.
Subsect NE C' '. '
47 & 48) i
, 2
< r. .
] Sump Rectreul. ASME Sect lil * ** CAR-Sit-AS-1 *** Yes .7 '.'
y Cont Spray Div.! .~ . i 88 Sleeve Seibsect E *
' ~,
- or
- 'i' (Sleeve Nos. -
.g 49 & 50)
. gg .
Attachments Spray Piping, AISC 1970 AISC 1970 ** CAR-SII-AS-1 ll .:
to I.iner flVAC Pads , , ., .
^; ...r s
' Test Channels AISC 1970 AISC 1970 ** CAR-Sil-AS-I '
aiul Angles '
. P .,.
Materials Concrete NA ACI 318-71 ASHR Sect III CAR-Sil-Cll-6 Produced and , - ',4 I
Div.2/Act 359 certified in [ .,
accordance with :
f u
. s CC 2000 witti exceptions j
(
u Iiated isi Appendix
.e 2:
1.8A ts Matert.nla Reinforcing NA ACI 118-71 ASHE Sect ((I CAR-Sil-Cll-7A
" (cont'd) Steel Div 2/ASI 1 59 ,
2 Concrete Hanuf.Recomm.
\
NA ASHE Sect it! CAR-Sil-AS-7 and -
Emliedmen t a Dtv 2/ ACI '159 CAR-Sil-Cll-l 6 ', .-*
2 .-
~ .
- 3. . (, - .L.,
< ,; ':i. a- ,. .
TABI.E 3.8.1-1~(Cont'd) -
DESIGN, PROCUREMENT, FABRICATION AND ERECTION STATUS 1. [f '
- z. -i OF CONTAINHENT COMPONENTS, PARTS AND APPHRTENANCES ., - , .k.
f .
Report ' ' . . '
Procurement, Fabrication, Erection Ebasco Stamp Requir&d,. Data StTess Prior to After Construction ASHE Se c t l {I .' - Report Re'poirt Design April 29, 1977 April 29, 1977 Spectication Div.2/ACI 359 Div.2 Div.l*
r '. i Heasuring NA Manuf.Recome. Manuf.Recome. u,
'* i - .y Devices (strain,
?... . 7, stress,etc.) .r .,
J.
4 Waterproofing NA Hangf.Recomm. Manuf,Recome, CAR-Sit-CII-12 '.
Membrane s
,i ! '.
Water Stops NA Hanuf.Recomm. Manuf,Recomm. CAR-Sil-Cit-13 ef
((
Hechanical NA Hanuf.Recomm. ASHE Sect III CAR-SIl-CH-15 ; .c . y_
Splices Div.2/ACI 359 ;, . ' , *y; y.
4 o
5 ,' N
- Prior to April 29, 1977 for all these items the procurement, fabrication and erection were perfobsed in accordappt with ASHE Code Sect III Div.1, Subsection NE, Winter 1971 Addendium. .
J.
- Af ter April 29, 1977 for all these items the procurement, shipping, erection, shop painting, tesiing and Inspect 1:en are performed in accordance with ASHE Code Sect. III Div.2/ACI 359, Winter 75 Addendum and Associated Sections of,tlie-ASME Code Sect. III Div.1, Winter 75 Addendum. . .
3,.
- s. ..
- No Stamp; Acceptance based on the Structural Integrity Test. Materials, fabrication and construction, testing:fand examination in accordance with the Engineering and Construction QA program which was approved by the.'NRC during thE ,;..
construction permit review.
For status of procurement, fab'rtcation and erection of parts as of April-29, 1977 see Table 3.8A-1 in Appendix 3.8 .
- .c t..
{ -
O 0
e 9
i .-
].
-* ( * ,
.(p, ", g. . .; , *, ,.,,a.y . ,-... + g ., .. .ey t . , y . , . 's ..U...,,., ,
,.r, , ,
. .; 9- 9
. , **. 4., *g ,, , ,s .
,....,.. ,s, . .. ....,...,..,....s. .-
, . , w . :, 7.
, , . .;, . . . ., ... .cf ,
~,
C' l TABLE 3.8'.1-2
.6 '
CONTAL'O!ENT STRUCTURE LOAD COMBINATIONS
. .>. AND LOAD FACTORS
..~. ~ t ,;. ,. u; e m :ys*g.a::,y u; . A..o :y 1; .r.:.+;t. .,y.3. y.;s :n. a;.m ,. xq ..;. ;
...y.
. , s. eq.. 4, .:, g., . . , ,,y.,, .cc ., . ;. 7 a) Service Load Combinatic,as
- 1) -Test ~ Pressure -
C.= 1.0 (D + L + Pt & Tt)
- 2) Construction C = 1.0 (D + L + To + Hu)
- 3) Normal Operating C = 1.0 ' (D + L + To + Ro + Pv)
- 4) Operating Basis Earthquake C = 1.0 (D + L + To & Ro + E. + Pv) #
- 5) Hurricane f
'Y C' = I .0 -(D +- L +- To + Ro + Hu +- Pv)
- b) Factored Load Combinations ,
C = 1.0D + 1.3L + 1.0(To + Ro) + 1.5E + 1.0Pv
- 7) Hurricane ,.
C = 1.0D + 1.3L + 1.0(To + Ro) + 1.5Hu + 1.0Pv
C = 1.0(D + L + To + Ro + E' + Pv) '
- 9) Tornado C = 1.0(D + L + To + Ro + W + Pv) l I
'10) Loss of Coolant Accident 1
a) C = 1.0(D + L) + 1.5P + 1.0(Ta + Ra) l l
C = 1.0(D + L) + 1.0P + 1.0Ta + 1.25Ka b) 3.8.1-71 1
I
'".'?-,'.
s~ . , ' ' . .~ ~s . . , ' ' . , , ~ . ' ' % . '-
-l>. .
?
..,...c.
."r.
- ,.' ' *
- C. . ~ <-' ' 'I
., , 0 , .:~: . s : v , ~:s . ~ . . r '. ; .*. ~ .>::.'. '.5101PP iSAKe. .~' .. . .
. . - . : . a.,
. V.3;.
TABLE 3 8.1-2 (Cont'd)
. a a. .,s.. , .... ,w.r a c. ;s 4. ...s .n .s, :n. r ..w . . .. .u . w,# . .r.e... v ....e.,. :e .,+ ,.< . . ( . . . c. ., , ...
b) . Yactored Load Combinati ons cont'd) . ' - '
- 11) Loss of Coolant Accident with OBE C = 1. 0(D' + L) + 1 25P + 1.0(Ta +- Ra) + 1 2 5E
- 12) Ioss of Coolant Accident with Hurricane
~
C = 1 0(D + L) + 1.25P + 1 0(Ta + Ra) + 1.25Ru
- 13) Operating Basis 15arthquake, Murricane, and Flooding C = 1. 0(D + L + To + E + Hu + Rq)
- 14) Loss of Coolant Accident with SSE C = 1. 0(D + L + P + Ta + Ra + E' + Rr)
I In all combinations, the live load, L, is considered either with full value or completely absent.
.s In load combinations 10 through 14, the maximum values of P, Ta, Ra, and Rr, including an appropriate load factor to account for the dynamic nature of the load, are used or a time history is performed.
Load combinations 9, 10a,10b, and 14 are first satisfied without the 2
i impulsive loads (P, Rrr, Rrj) or the impactive loads (*4m and Rrm); yield strain and displacement may be exceeded, providing that the energy absorption capability or the resistance function of the structure, limited by .one-thir1 or two-thirds of the ductility at f ailure, are not exceeded when considering the impulse or impact loads, respectively.
In all factored load combinations used for the analysis of the liner, all load l2 factors are taken equal to 1.0. ,.
i
- E' g
3.8.1-72 Amendment No. 2
- , , , --g.+ - . , - , .- . , - , - - - , - - , -n.----,-a, , , . ~ , - - , --
y
. . , c, ,
t T
..SENPF TSAR-} c, , .3 .. e . -:
- l
. e v. . . . ; . . . w . .~. . . , ~ . . . . .:. . . .; . . . ~. , g.
. m. . ..
.. .y:. :.r-:.. . 4 m. .. . 5:,~ .: ,
, . . s. : y . .9,
, s
,- .a .-
TABLE 3.8.1-3
,. . . . , . 'STRESSANDSTRAINhtLOWABLESFORLINER.ANDLINERANCHORS_ )
a . .e 9.t * ;ex:aWik. sAh>n.n. .o.*: int m ? . G". ww' fD % '*%WQ~?'* ^ *'!"' c" ~**' ' " ' ' ' ' ' W '
t, LINER PLATE ALLOWABLES
~
1
, St.ress/S' train . Allowables
- s Load Combination Membrane- Meinbrane Plus Bending Construction f,g=f,e=2/3 py f- fst"Ise"2/3 fpy ,
Service E,g=E,e=0.002 in/in, E,g=E,e=0.004 in/in Factored E,e=0.005 in/in E,e=0.014 in/in
, E,g=0.003 in/in I,g=0.010 in/in t
s I
- The types of strains limited by this table are strains induced by deformation or constraint.'
LINER ANCHOR ALLOWA3LES Force / Displacement Allowables Load Combinations in Tabi'a 3.8.1-2 Machanical toads ** Displacement Limited Loads ***
I through 9 Lasser of Fa= 0.67Fy da = 0.25 du Fa= 0.33Fu 2
10 through 14 14sser of Fa= 0.9Fy da = 0.50 Su Fa= 0.IFu
/,
- Mechanical loads are chose which are not self-limiting or self-relieving with load application.
- Displacement Limited ~ loads are those resulting frem constraint of the structure or constraint of adjacent material . tad, are self-limiting or self-relieving. . .
Legend: f,g, f,e = allowable liner' place tensile or compressive stress, respectively f = specified ter.sile yield strength of liner p
. E,y g, E,e = allowable liner plate.: tensile or compressive strain, respectivelys Fa ' = allowable liner anchor force capacity Fy = liner anchor yield force capacity Fu ,
= liner anchor ultimate force capacity 6a ,= allowable displacement for liner anchors 2 du = ultimate displacement capacity for liner anchors 3 8 1-73 Amendment No. 2
SHNPP.FSAR m .>..s..,.
,. . .i. ....- , .
. : . e . . :r.- ,. y su s, . . : . ..p .. y,_ , . g, , , . . . . ; , . : . ; ;; . .. , . . ... :. .
,_ . p ....:,.
. . . ; ,. . .. g 1
_Q -
l D TABLE 3.8.1-4 l
CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTORS
.:. - ~
v . . .
... . .y ;. . >
Item and Stress Service Load. _.Factored Load Category Combinations Combinations 4 4 Concrete Compressive Stresst s
Primary Loads: Membre.ne . 0.30 or 0.40* 0.60 Membrane plus bending: 0.45 0.75 Primary Plus Secondary:
Membrane ~ 0.45 0.75 Membrane plus bending (Note 1) 0.60 0.85 Concrete Tensile Stress: 0 0 Reinforcing Steel Tensile Stress 0.50 or 0.66** 0.90****
Rainforcing Steel Compressive Stress 0.50*** or 0.66** 0.90*****
- Applicable only to load combinations which include either Hu or E loads.
- - For load combinations in which temporary pressure Ioads or temperature effects loads- are combined with other loads.-
- The others may exceed 0.5 fy for compatibility with the concrete but this stress will not be used for load resistance.
- The tensile strain may exceed yield when the effects of thermal gradients through the concrete s'ectisu are included.
- The strains may exceed yield when acting in conjunction with. the concrete if the concrete requires strains larger than the
reinforcing yield to develop its capacity.
NOTE:
(1) The maximum allo wble primary-plus-secondary membrane and bending compressive stress of 0.85 f'e ~coresponds to a. limiting strain of 0.001 in./in. as required by ASME Section III, Division 2/ ACI 359 Code.
3.8.1-74
- a. ._ .- ,-
SENPP FSAR.
.; ... . : ., . .. -y . ~. - s . .-
.. - . . . ~..~;- - ~- * ;- . **
_. . g, . .. y ':c a h e e .~>yu p'.
n,... - ? , t~.r. w .ca.:~~:r -r~.v..r:C P:,'<. 4; h :: id ' - '
' ' + ' - -" * ' '-^- '?
. s. . . . . . . . . .. -. . - .- . . . . . ..
.. s .
. i, 3/ TABLE 3.8.1-5 --
SUMMARY
OF IN-PROCESS TEST PRESULTS CEMENT-
- . . .- .: . . . . .,. ,: y e, ... . . . . . , ,
, ; e. >
Range Compound / Property Max. Min. Avg.
Autoclave-expansion %~ +0.02 -0.02 0.00
~
Initial set hr. 3:54 1.53 2:43 Fina.t set hr. 5:26 2:45 3:54 day strength psi ~ 2930 1975 2453 day strength psi 4390 3290 3878 Air content of mortar %' 9. 0 7.6 8.3 Blaine min. 4040 3819 3864 SiO2 % 22.8 21.3 21.8 Al 023 I' 4.35 3 37 4.05 Fe203 % 4.15 3.47 3.81 MgG % 2.02 1~. 28 1.65 S03 %' 2 72 2.35 2.59 Loss on ignition % 1.64 0.90 1.23 Insol. residue % 0.48 0.27 0.38
- 1. Preliminary acceptance tests e
$e l
1 l
e 3.8.1-75
. , - , . m - , ,. . - _ , , - . - ,.- , ~,
SENP2 FSAR <
. ... .. : .: , ,. ~ . . z s. . e .
i
. '. . i .' - -
~
r: ll
,;; .4 .l. c t-&,./. ;,- .'.k .+4:5..m M<.e - a :N .7; > =:< :i v. ,' .,p ' "-r .' ~ . . '- ' - >}
- u~~~- ^ ' ' ~ ;-
.n i
[ . -
'\ .
TABLE 3.8.1-6
~
SLHMARY OF IN-PROCESS TEST RESULTS
~"
.. SIEVE ANALYSIS AND FINENESS MODULUS FINE AGGREGATE (3AND) ~
Sieve Cumulative' Percent Passing-Siza- Coarsest Finest- Average Initial,1, 3/8 100 ' 100~ '100- 100 No. 4 96 100 100 100 No. 8 83 100 .100 95 No . 16' 51 89- 77 70 No .'30 26 59- '44 37 No. 50 5' 28 11 10 No. 100 ~ 0 8 1 3.3 No 200 .L' 2.8 l'. 00' 1. 3 F . M.. 2.8[5' Number of Tests -
J I
Preliminary acceptance test g .- .
i
~3.8.1-76 ;
.- . ... I SENPP FSAR l
. : r. . .: . , , . . . . , . . . .
u .... : . . .. . . . : . s . , , . i. .. ., z. . , , . 3 . " . .- ; . .
. ., .a.r . w ,..,,e...r,
.. a. ...:'g...
.. . ; . . . ; .. , . _ . v .,
.. .s
- 5 i-) -
TABLE 3.8.1-7 -
SLHMARY OF IN-PROCESS TEST RESULTS
. FINE AGGREGATE (SAND)
Property- Max. Min. Avg.
Friable particles (%) 0.70 0.0 0.34 Lightweight particles (%) 0.70 0.0 0.16 Absorption (%)' O.96 0.44 0.66 Specific gravity (SSD) 2.67 2.57 2.62 Reductiott in alkalinity m./1 78.L 29.8 54.5 Dissolved silica m./1 29.8 22.4 27.0 NASO 4 soundness (%) 7.5 1. 6 4. 5~
(
Five cycles f .
i 3.8.1-77
5 l
.e ,.e- ,
,7 , .!
. -SENPP FSAR
.. . , . . . . . < . . . - . 1 . - . . . ... ...
. & ;: " 9.- '. s:-/
. O,y,.*. g,y. f.: W, -~ ~ * ~ *. ~? :.:n Tu ;
. .% . c. ~: : L s, f ...y.*. . i..:;q. . .
- , ,a.-
r ;
- 3. . . ~. .. :. ; l i
I v TABLE 3.8.1-8
. -:.v ;'
~ SI2! MART OF. IN-PROCESS TEST RESULTS. -
SIEVE ANALYSIS ~
COARSE AGGREGATES (1-1/2" GRAVEL' Cumulative Percent Passing Sieve Size Range Average Initiall 2.*~ 100- 100 100 1-1/ 2"~ 90-100 . 95
- 96 L* 20-50 46 35~
- 3/4* 0-15 14 6 3'/8* 0-5 3 15 Number of Tests ,
1 Preliminary acceptance tests
=m Y $
e e
O l
l 1
t s'
3.8.1-78 f
.- .;- SENPP FSAR-
. . . , . f
, ., . .c . ... .. . .,;, .s. .,
.:<, . f . . ,, . .e . .v c . . ..
. . . q ,.,., .., 7e..., ,
3,,... . , , ..g.. 1.... ..,:.. ,c ... ...,,.s... ,. f,,.,.,.,s,,..,,,,,,
, . , , , , , , , ., 3,,,,,.,,,
g .
.! ' TABLE 3.8.1 .
SUMMARY
OF IN-PROCESS TEST RESULTS SIEVE ANALYSIS COARSE AGGREGATES (3/4" CRAVEL)
Cumulative Percent Passing Sieve Size Range Average -Initiall l' 100 100 100 3/4'90-100 94 98 3/8* 20 25 35 No. 4 0-10 8 -
8 No. 8 0-5 2 3.5 Number of Tests 1 Preliminary acceptance tests
- .Iv...
3.8.1-79
,-r- vs-, < ,,w-- -- y , -
ne-r
. . - -j,..
SENPP FSAR
. . .. = , ,
. '..e. .. -, .
. . . . .. . ,.f,: ,. ,;.
- ,,;,..,,.r.,...
, ej..eg .
,.,..s.,, y .. , . . . t ,u;.
.,s.e . .. ,, s .:. .. .., . , p .: . y . g,.
, ;. ..y.,.,,;...
I TABLE 3.8.1-10 -
SUMMARY
OF IN-PROCESS TEST RESULTS AGGREGATE NO. 4 (1-1/4 IN. GRAVEL)
Range Standard No. of Property Max. Min. Avg. Deviation Tests Initial 4 s
Flat and Elongated (%) 3.18 1.0 1.86 N/A 4 Friab'le particles (%) 0.39 0.03' O.19 N/A 4 Lightweight particles (%) 0.01 0.00 0.00 N/A 4 Soft Particles (%) 0.90 0.06 . 0.61 N/A 4 Absorption (%) . 0.56 0.40 - 0.43 N/A 4 Specific gravity (SSD) 2.75 2.67 2.70 N/A 4 L. A. abrasion (%)
Reduction in alkalinity Dissolved silica MgSO4 soundness (%)3 N/A N/A N/A-NASO 4 soundness (%)3 4
lInsufficient data 2Potentially deleterious 3Five cycles 4 Preliminary acceptance tests .
I .
3.8.1-80
,,,.-,-m-p
- - , . , , , ,- --,-,,-,,,--m, y ,,-
7 ,-
- . p. ~ .:- !
)
SENPP FSAR i I
- -:: , a., . ..y; y 6%, :.*., -g ,..c.:: y.;n,s.k~..,.. ;. :
y - ;4. . . . .m. . , ..yr s. ,y :. . . ,, ... a - .<
. . . .. 7
.;..;g.p.
.,..c., .
-y 1(,C 1 TABLE 3.8.1-11 -~
SUMMARY
OF IN-PROCESS TEST RESULTS AGGREGATE No. 67 (3/4 IN. GRAVELT Range Property Max. Min. Avg.
Flac and Elongated-(%) 22.0 1.0 3.8 Friable particles (%) 0.44 -0.0 0.14 Lightweight particles (%) 0.23 0.0 0.02 Soft Particles (%) 1.00 0.0 0.71 Absorption (%) 0.98 0.29 0.57 Specific gravity (SSD) 2.85 2.67 2.76 L..A. abrasion (%) 15.0 11.6 13.5 -
Reduction in alkalinity 78.4 28.3 53.7 Dissolved silica ,
41.3- 21.6 29.0 NASO 4 soundness (%) ,
7.6 0.2 3.0 Five cycles 3.8.1-81
,+'_. .
. SHNPP FSAR , - . . .
r . . ,
. **,~. . a.: . . , .r . .. s. . . . . . ...
. . .., . a . : . . ..: .
. .' ; < ~ e. ~ ,.J p;s . : py:o. ; *;*
. , { ,s;, ;*,. .: e. , :.,,. , . . . , ... g;.. - p ,.. . .:.. r:,.,; y 5..g. . *, . . . . ., ;. , 4 . ., 4 J' TABLE 3.8.1-12
SUMMARY
OF IN-PROCESS TEST RESULTS WATER Variancel
' Range No. of Property Max. Min. Avg. Tests Initial time of set, vicat (min) 9 L 5.5 20 Final' time of set, vivicat (min) 21 0 11.6 20 Autoclave expansion +0.02 -0.04 -0.01 24 7-day compressive strength (%) 16.8 0.2 3.6 20
' Range No. of Max. Min. h Ta'sts Chlorides (ppa) 243 0.2 43.9 40 Solids (ppm) 825 18 265.9 40
[
Sulfates (ppm) 55.6 0.8 6.3 40 1 Comparison of test water with control water
./.
8 4
- c. ~.
3.8.1-82
. _ _ ~ _ , ,,
'f
,qd .c.-
?
. 'i I
.s \ ;{/ . * ,-
- .x:-
TABLE 3.8.1-13 a
SUMMARY
OF IN-PROCESS TEST RESULTS ADMIXTURES . ; *,
y Range Range Range , .- ~
Property Max. Min. Avg. Max. Min. Avg. Max. Min. Am ;j' ~
1' 42,8 41.7 42.2 43,3 40,6 42,2 27.1 27,2 27.3 Solids (%) ,
Specific gravity 1,193 1.190 1,192 1.254 1.192 1,200 1.083 1.081 1.082 '{['
7.6 7.2 7.4 7,4 6,4 6.8 12.9 12.8 12.9 pil ,,
6 2 .c Chloride (ppe) 3 va u ~ *
- . ;, . Y
.8m
- a. >
~M' B
I Preliminary acceptance tests .g M 2}
r t.
'.. T.
5
'\
., 1 I .5 s .
, ,' r :. . .. t
. ; 'l
.*rs 's e
d.
. .n
- d .
- k
~ ~ - - - - - - -
- SENPP FSAR
~.
, . ,_ .;.,,,.. ....,.p..,,.,.....
s .
3.co., ...;, _ ,
<.k . W .w.< g.<., i 3 3 j.; .. ,.: ., m.3.: y .. . . y p, .,.n .s p g .. ,
t y s-.J...< -g,y-. . ; -. .,..y, . .
., v . . > . .
' s '., J TABLE 3.8.1-14 .-
SUMMARY
OF IN-PROCESS TEST DATA CONCRETE (5000 PSI)
M-72 M-71 CLASS AAA CLASS AAA MIX ID No. Samples 60-85 A Avg. Temp Range Plastic- Avg. Slump Range 2 1/4-33/4 A Data Avg. Air Cont. Range 5.0-7.5 A 141.8-147.2 A Avg. Unic Wt. Range Avg. Strength 4420 4810 Avg. Range A A 7-Day A A Strength C/V Wichitt Std. Deviation A
C/V Overall A.
Avg Strength 6530 28-Day Avg. Range >
Strength C/V Within Std. Deviation C/V Overall No. of Tests 90-Day Avg. Strength Strength Avg. Range f ..
C/V 'Within Std. Deviation C/F Overall A-Insufficient Data
.3.8.1-84
(n .:;.t .,.. .
,r - :
- f. .
- w. ' ' '
3, TABLE 3,8.1-15 ' .s
-.e.
t-
. VI ' ,
SUM 4ARY OF IN-PROCESS TEST DATA
't CONCRETE (4000 PSI) ._
1 -
d.
H-57 M-58 [,"
M-44 M-41 M-63 M-56 CLASS AA CLASS AA CLASS AA CLASS AA- CLASS AA 6*
MIX ID CLASS AA ..-
No. SAMPLES A 57,86 76-86 A .-
Avg. Temp Range 60-85 -A 4' ,
Avg. Slump Range 2 1/2-4 1/2 A A 2 1/2-4 1/2 2-3 1/2 A Plastic A 4 4-8 4.4-7.8 A 'l. .
Data Avg. Air Cont. Range 3-6.0 e
Avg. Unic Wt. Range 14 1/4-148.6 A A 141,8-148.2 142.3-148.3 A 9..
3810 3560 3270 ' #. "
3550 2950 3960 ,.
y Avg. Strength y 7-Day ,,
m Strength :, M$
t h
4600 5790 5565 5450 5220 '.* ';.
Avg. Strength 5701 A A '. -/
166 A A 165 .
Avg. Range 2.57 A A 2.63 A. A k 28-Day Strength C/V Within 'j A A 11 A A .1 C/V Overall 8 ,
i Mixes M-41, M-63, M-57 & M-58 are seldom used mixes. Although data on these mixes exists the Jj '
A. -
quantity of data is too low to meaningfully calculate these values. ,
s e.
\
i
's'
g_7 ._ _ _.
,, ' 'i
.. SENP.P FSAR. ..,
. . c; ,
. . . , . , . . ,...r.., ..e . .,
~ ,,. 5 c.. .;.,<..,.. . :, s,, ~ a : ;~sa. ~- .:.
y,.,....:; ; ..a~.'.gb ;:,-~.... ..
. ..,; -..,:< 9
. vc t..;.'e, 0;. ~
TABLE 3.8.1-16 SQfMARY OF IN-PROCESS TEST DATA CONCRETE (3000 PSI)
MIX ID M-54 M-55 ,
No. Samples Class B Class B Avg. Temp 61.77 61-81 Plastic Avg. Slump 11/2-31/2 2-4 Data Avg. Air Cont. Range 4.8-7.8 4-6 Avg. Unic Wt. Range 141.0-147.2 143.2-148.6 Avg. Strength 3300 3400 7-Day Avg. Range A A Strength C/7 Within A A Std. Deviation C/V Overall A A Avg. Strength 4978 4905 28-Day Avg. Range 126 136 Strength C/V Within 2.25 2.46 Std. Deviation C/V Overall 8 9 No. of Tests 90-Day Avg. Strength Strength Avg. Range ,,
~'
C/V Within Std. Deviation C/V Overall A Insufficient Data e
3.8.1-86
m r . c_p_ _ .
I v ,
SENPP.FSAR- .. . ..
- ,,,i
. .* i- , .y . . , . ,
,+ .. ,, , ;,j v, .j: j. ,, g ,: ,.. . ,. .. ; ,, ,. . ; , , , , ,
-y*
- ,r+kt ',t *4,,t.s;';
- ; r
, ... * ,. ., .: .y . J 3 :# j.r , ..e :.. . ., j.. ,., s, .
.s ;!.
'* TABLE 3.8.1-17
SUMMARY
OF IN-PROCESS TEST DATA
-CONCRETE (2000 PSI)
M-45 MIX ID Class D No. Samples Avg. Temp Range 60-80 Plastic Avg. Slump Range 2-3 3/4 Data Avg. Air Cont. Range 4.5-7.8 Avg. Unic Wt. Range 141.9-145.7 Avg. Strength 2400 7-Day. Avg. Range A Strength- C/V Within A Std. Deviation C/V' Overall~ A Avg. Strength 4156 28-Day Avg. Range 118
( 2.53 Strength C/V Within Std..Deviat' ion 12 C/7 Overall No. of Tests 90-Day Avg. Strength Strength Avg. Range ,,"
C/V Within
- Std. Deviation C/V Overall.
A Insufficient Data i
( ' ,*
s 3.8.1-87
..m. ,.-. - .-,.,._.-e.. . , . - , . - . - . - . - - - . - , . - _ , _ . . _ _ . -_ , _., , , _ , , , - . , -, . . . . . - , , _ - - - . , . - - . . - , , . . . - . - , - -
.m.__--- _
... .. l
. l
)
. ~. ....r .
1 u..SENPk TSAK . .. . ., .'. ...; ; ., y .. . . ; . :_,. ; ,
- c. , , , ., . a. . ,. ..;
v .-r.r. ; -:q: . ., .r.s .a;;ig.... v. -,< m.v ;-. .:q p.; .
'w .
REFERENCES:
SECTION 3.8 l
3.4 1 ASME Section III Division 2/ACI '359-75 " Code for Concrete Reactor !
vessels and Containments." l
-3.8.1-2 ACI 314-71 "3uilding Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete."
3.8.1-3 ACI 349-75 " Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety Related Concrete Structures." Appendix C "Special Provisions for Impulsive and Impactive Effeets."
3.8 1-4 BC Regulatory Guide 1.10 " Mechanical (Cadweld) Splices in Reinforcing Bars of Category I Concrete Structures.*
38.1-5 NRC Regulatory Guide - 1.13 " Spent Tuel Storage Facility Design Basis." 2 3.8.1-6 NRC Regulatory Guide 1.15 " Testing of Reinforcing Bars for Category I Concrete Structures."
3.4 1-7 NRC Regulatory Guide 1.18 " Structural Acceptance Test for Concrete Primary Reactor Containments.*
3.4.1-8 NRC Regulatory Guide 1 19 " Nondestructive Examination of Primary Containment I.iner Welds.*'
3.4.1-9' NRC Regulatory Guide 1.54 "ouality Assurance Requirements for Coatings Applied to Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants."
3.4.1-10 NRC Regulatory Guide 1.55 " Concrete Placement in Category I Structures."
3.8 1-11 NRC Regulatory Guide 1.57 " Design-I.imits and Inading Combinations for Metal Primary Reactor Containment System Components."
3.8 1-12 NRC Regulatory Guide 160 " Design Response Spectra for Seissig _.
Design of Nuclear Power Plants," Rev. 1, Dec. 1973. ., ,
3.8 1-13 NRC Regulatory Guide 161 " Damping values for Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants,* Oct. 1973.
3 8 1-14 NRC Regulatory Guide 192 " Combining Model Responses and Spatial Components in Seismic Response Analysis" Rev 1 Feb. 1976.
3.8.1-15 NRC Regulatory Guide 163 " Electric Penetration 'Assemolies in
. Containment Structures for Water-cooled Nuclear Power. Plants."
3.4.1-16 NRC Regulatory Guide 176 "Desigt Basis Tornado for Nuclear Power Plants."
j 3 4 1-17 NRC Regulatory Guide 170 " Standard Format and Content of Safety
! Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants.
2
.y*
. Amendment No. 2 t
.~- -r > - , , - --
. ,--,.,----_,--.-----.-,,.-~,,-.-,w-,.,,,-s --
,, , , - .n,.,,,.----...-,r----- ,,-.---~-,.v--,--,--,-,---s-.n. e --, - - - , -
i
, ,=, * .1-
+
..l , . . SIBIPP FSAR.
- .. . .r.. .
. . +
- :;.. . . ..:. .. .. ... :q : 2 . . . : .,if. r ; .,.: v .x , ; . . r : .'.:d ".e,a . . . .. .. s :.. . , , ~. . . . . y..w % . .; , y r e . - a. . y;
. v . , q.+ . , ,
~
.' 3.8.1-13 NRC Regulatory Guide 1.94 *0uality Assurance Raquirements for 5
U Installation, Inspection, and Testing of Structural Concrete and Structural Steel during the Construction Phase of Nuclear Power Plants.
3.3.1 NRC Regulatory Guide 1.122 " Development of 71oor Design Response Spectra for Seismic Design of Floor Supported Eculpment or Components ."
3.8.1-20 NRC Branch Technical Position AAB-3-2 " Tornado Design
- Classification.*
3.8.1-21 " Concrete Manual" - Bureau of Reclamation, 8th Edition, 1975, P. 45.
3.8.1-22 NRC Standard Review Plan Sec. 2.3.1 " Regional Climatology."
?
3.8.1-23 ' NRC Standard Review Plan Sec. 2.3.2 "I.ocal Meteorology."
3.8.1-24 NRC Standard Review Plan Sec. 3 3.1 " Wind Ioading." .
3.8.1-25 NRC Standard Review Plan Sec. 3.3.2 " Tornado I.oading." ,
3.8.1-26 NRC Standard Review Plan Sec. 3.5.1.4 " Missiles Generated by Natural Phenomena."
3.8.1-27 NRC Standard Review Plan Sec. 3.5.2. " Structures , Systems and Compononents to be Protected from Externally Generated Missiles."
3.8.1-28 NRC Standard Review Plan Sec. 3.5.3 "Earrier Design Procedures."
3.8.1-29 NRC Standard Review Plan Sec. 3.7.1 " Seismic Input." ,
3.8.1-30 NRC Standarti Review Plan Sec. 3.7.2 " Seismic System Analysis."
3.8.1-31 NRC Standard Review Plan Sec. 3.7.3 " Seismic Subsystem Analysis." ,
3.8.1-32 NRC Standard Review Plan Sec. 3.7.4 " Seismic Instrumentation."
3.8.1-33 NRC Standard Review Plan Sec. 3.8.1 "Concreta Containment" (11/14/75). ,
3.8.1-34 NRC Standard Review Plan Sec. 3.8.2 " Steel Gutainment."
3.8.1-35 NRC Standard Review Plan Sec. 3.8.3 "Concreta and Steel Internal Structures of Steel or Concrete Containments (11/24/75).
3.8.1-36 NRC Standard Review Plan Sec. 3.8.4 "Other Seismic Category I Struecures."
3.8.1-37 NRC Standard Review Plan Sec. 3.8.5 " Foundations."
3.8.1-38 ASG " Manual of Standard Practices for Design of Nuclear Power Plants."
Amendment No. 1
- -.m - ,
l
' ~ '
~
,s- ,... . . , . . ,. . .
. . g. . , c. . ,. ,
- ; . . . . . . . ._,. . a. . a..,
' ' W,:he .-??<r.w +.);f s; r-u g .nj.;;mp y:.t . -: m.;,jg y..L . h y :..; . y ,.v.;p ,., ;gs n. . q.;
() -
.- 3.8.1-39 ANSI
- Building Code Requirements for Minimum Design Loads in Buildings and Other Structures A38.1-1972".
3.8.1-40 " Wind Forces on Structures", Task Committee on Wind Forces, Transactions, ASCE, Vol.126, Part 2, Paper No. 3269, 1961.
3.8.1-41 Maher, 3. J. , " Wind Loads on Dome-cylinder and Dome-Cone Shapes,"
Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 92, No. STS. Proc. .
Paper 4t '3, October 1966.
3.8.1-42 Timoshenko S. and Woinowsky-Krieger S. , " Theory of Places and Shells," McGraw Hill 1959.
3.8.1-43 Fugge W., " Stresses in Shells," Springer-Verlag 1960.
3.8.1-44 Billington D. P., " Thin Shell Concrete Structures,"
McGraw Kill 1965.
3.8.1-45 Recenyt M., " Beam on Elastic Foundation," Un rersity of Michigan Press 19u4.
3.8.1-46 Arshain Amiridian, " Design of Protective Structures," Bureau of Yards and Docks, Department of the Navy, Washington, D. C. , August 1950.
3.8.1-47 Recht R. F. and Ipson T. W. , " Ballistic Perforation Dynamics" Journal of Applied Mechanics, Transactions of ASME, Vol. 30, Series E, No. 3, September,1963.
3.8.1-48 Biggs J. M.,* Introduction to Structural Dynamics," McGraw Rill 1964.
3.8.1-49 Norris C. R. et. al. , " Structural Design for Dynamic Loads" McGraw Rill 1969.
3.8.1-50 Williamson R. A. and Alvy R. R. , " Impact Effect of Fragments Striking Structural Elements" Holmes and Narver, Inc.1973.
3.8.1-5L Suarez M. A. ,"Impactive Dynamic Analysis" ASCE National Structural Engineering Meeting, Baltimore 1971. ,
3.8.1-52 Newmark N. M., "An Engineering Approach to Blast-Resi[ tant Design" ASCE Transactions Paper No. 2786.
3.8.1-53 Blume T. A., Newmark, N. M., and Corning L. R., " Design of Multistory Reinforced Concrete Buildings for Earthquake Motions" PCA 1961.
3.8.1-54 Kennedy R. P., "A Review of Procedures for the Analysis and Design of Concrete Structures to Resist Missile Impact Effects" Holmes I
and Narver, Inc. Anaheim, California.
i c 3.8.1-55 Winter G. , " Design of Concrete Structures" McGraw Hill 1964 l
l
. a ~. -. - , ,,_ . - - . - -- ~ . - - - - - -
SENPP FSAR l
~~
. . . ' ' . . ..a
.f. , -. . .:. .. . ,. . . ...:. . ,. .,..,..y, ,.,;.,. . ^.! ,. . ,, ,,, l C : , w ; . ;:,,.
..#. f . : net , . 4...pw: ..g.: : :.s . .. e. e.g.y .m:;f, n.... . ,c . . . . .
3.8.1-56 . Wang C. K. and. Shlmon C. G. , " Reinforced Concr.ete' Design"' Intext '
Q Educational Publishers N.Y. -
.Q 3.8.1-57 Dunham C. W. , " Advanced Reinforced Concrete" McGraw Hill 1964.
j Peterka J. A. and Cormak J. E., " Adverse Wind loading Induced by
~
3.8.1-58 '
Adjacent Buildings" ASCE J. Structural Div. March 1976.
3.8.1-59 Doan P. L., " Tornado Considerations for Nuclear Power Plants Structures" Nuclear Safety Vol.11, No. 4,1970.
3.8.1-60 Dunlop F. A., and Wiedner K., " Nuclear Power Plant Tornado Design Considerations" ASCE J. Power Div. March 1971.
3.8.1-61 Burket F. E. , "Ef fects of Tornado on Buildings" Civ. Eng. Jan.
1963.
3.8.1-62 ACI Publication SP 17 (1973) " Design Handbook in Accordance with the Strength Design Method of ACI 318-71."
3.8.1-63 Jacobsen, L. S. and Ayre R. S., " Engineering Vibrations" McGraw Hill 1958.
3.8.1-64 Harris C. M.., Crede C. E. " Shock and Vibration Handbook" McGraw Hill 1961.
3.8.1-65 Langharr H. L., " Energy Methods in Applied Mechanics" John Wiley &
Sons 1962.
3.8.1-66 TRW Nelson Division "Embedment Properties of Headed Studs". .
3.8.1-67 TRW Nelson Division, " Construction Applications - Bent Concrete Anchors".
3.8.1-68__ _.PCI " Manual on Design of Connections for Precast Prestressed.
Concrete". f;.
3.8.1-69 AISC " Manual of . Steel Construction" 7th Ed. 1970.
3.8.1-70 Fritz Engineering Laboratory-Lehigh Univ.," Ioad-Deformation Graphs". ,.
3.8.1-71 Timoshenko-Goodier, " Theory of Elasticity" McGraw Hill 1951.
3.8.1-72 ASME Boiler & _ Pressure Vessel Code Sect. III Div. 1, Subsection NA 1975.
3.8.1-7'3 ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code Sect. III Div.1, Sabsection NE 1975 Class MC components.
3.8.1-74 Savin B. N., " Stress Distribution Around Holes," NASA 1970.
.I 3.8.1-75 Peterson, R. F., " Stress Concentration Design Factors ,"
John Willey 1966.
N
. . l
. .~
"1 ' . . . . ' , , .,: *
', f . . -J SHNPP FSAR.. ; .
?.6,4. i.n :a.m.;pf.py y %p
- m.p-; n:, v. A.;.+. y .. -:a.e 9.,g.: ,. .:9..;r,:y. ...: . . A
.e.s.:
. .h. a. e n s.s , . .
- O. s..
V- 3.8.1-76 Brush, Alaroth, " Buckling of Bars, Plates, and Shells" McGraw
, Hill.
1
.3.8.1-77 Doyle, mu, "Some Structural Considerations in the Design of i Nuclear Containment Liners"~ Nuclear Engineering and Design 1971.
Winstead, Burdett, and Armentront, " Linear Anchorage Analysis for 4
3.8.1-78 Nuclear Containments" ASCE J. Structural Div. , Oct. 1975.
3.8.1-79 Bofaut, Carreira, and Walser, " Creep and Shrinkage in Reactor Containment Shells" ASCE J. Structural Div. ,. Oct. 1975.
3.8.1-80 Hardington, Parker, and Spruce, " Liner Design and Development for the Oldbury Vessels" Paper 56, Conference on Prestressed Concrete Pressurc Yessels, Inndon,1967.
- 3. 8.1-8 L Young, Tate, " Design of Liner for Reactor Vessels" Paper J57, Conference on Prestressed Concrete Pressure Vessels, Iondon, 1967..
3.8.1-82 Otapaan, Carter, " Interaction Between a Pressure Vessel and Its 1
Liner" Paper J58, Conference on Prestressed Concrete Pressure Vessels, Inndon, 1967.
l
~
3.8.1-83 Bishop, Horseman, and White, " Linear Design and Construction"
< Paper J59, Conference on Prestressed Concrete Pressure Vessels, Iondon, 1967.. ,
i
! 3.8.1-84 Parker, " Stress Analysis of Liners. for Prestressed Concrete .
Pressure Vessels" Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology, Paper H6/1, 1971.
j l 3.8.1-85 _ . Yang, "A Matrix DLsplacement Method on Pre and Post-Buckling
- Analysis of Line,rs for Reactor Vessels" Proceedings of, the 1st International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology, Paper H6/2, 1971
, 3.8.1-86 Salvatori, R., " Failure Angle of Disc ~ Westinghouse 1971.
1 3.8.1-87 Bush, S., " Probability'of Damage to Nuclear Component's Das to i Turbine Failure" !&aclear Safety 14 November 1973.
- 3.8.1-88 " Full-Scale Tornado Missile Impact Tests," EPRI NP-148, April
! '1976.
3.8.1-89 Russel, C. R. , " Reactor Safeguards," Pergsamon Press ,1962.
j 3.8.4-1 Winterhorn, H. F. and Fang, H., "Youndation and Engineering Handbook," Van Nostrand Reinhold,1975. 5 j
[
.4 3.8.5-1 TVA, Technical Report No. 13 "The Kentucky Project," Appendix D, Design of Kentucky Structures Against Earthquakes.
j I
Amendment No. 5'
. ~
AIR TEOMINALg JLCDNTAlHME.NT B@
- r. m
\
j$g C (DOME ge 'iLINER %
Y
- STAIRS
,tn l HJt.g & de, '
,e H.R JPpfUg LADDER _ ,
(SPRIH6 LlHE R %, , ,
l l'
N ,
'a EL 376.00 ?
! [^d$g,a W
$. CRANE RAIL .
CIRCULAR. CRAME ACCESE RING GIRDER. PLATFORM 38' LINER k CYLINDER 7 H4V WALL
, ; PIPE DUCT q
&) 'l - - - -
L CC F MAIN STEAM / .
PIPE FE - l-FEEDW6TER _ [
Ptps = _= -
w - it c
s AUE FEED I30, 0 e
_ 4*. G WATER PIPE. . .
I.D. OF STEqL LlHER rWATER STOP T/ BASE MAT e /-lLINER Ib. I EL 2.lG.CO y / -
EL 210.00 g 4, -:@. o' ' E .3 :.
t n l
~ ~ ' '
~Q , q:,' ?.*v *
' N .N l'
l +
^
If/ -
AL El 1
iwoexlNG\\\ (BASE W l
9 ; si.Aa SECTION MEMBRANE WATERPROO-FING e SEAL MAT SHEARON HARRIS FIGURE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE -
Carolina GENERAL ARRANGEMENT 3.8.1 1 Power & Light Company FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT
- 19 RADtAL REINF C19CUMF. BAR5 M8 v12-1 LArER TOP n OFCDNTAlHMENT BLDG ,, 9 , g 4,W I"*^"*
NNN M 4D.LATER5 BOT 5H N M S (sruas.sPucts) i feta.sDo ..'*
p .
- lsBARS p
- -1 -
y waAsa MA,T it, ts.co ; t Mt!CH SPUCE i ' . u 1
--'m - _M 2: 1__
SLEEVEL(TYP) l
, IVBASE MAT i i 1 ol
--j m'*V i .E1. 204.cos . ' --- ,
l ,,
$pwwrew -- -- :h ,d -5I- ,. w- e i-
- ia cieuur. Re:NF ,
- 4, .o i s s
- 3
,s. S E CT A- A '
s
[ s' \,, g .3oto Q>
~ e.,
p.d ./... , , , , ,
,- ,#1 C} \,
SHEAR BARS Q ( ,, ~
s, 7"d l
- ::::::(.! - *
' l }
T/ BASE MAT (EL EK.OO
/
f,$ ._____f, i.
" ~, ~ , y. . :. .=. . . ~. . . . .~. '
U l FOfL MAT REINF
, g__. -
r A
.p 7- g
=yec ,q v=5'=' t, y --tf-A
.L ,, 'l :[ ' . r*
sea sect A- A b
a : -u 'l I*" S/ BASE MAT h
t
\..: =:3'.] i - g ,-
y .r e.- r et 2o4.0o
.~ 4e 8
_ - - %s_ .- - - I J ,y
-g-v ~,x 6.h-
'm - vg j ,-?,j , j.
sN N , ;i ~ _-- l-- - --
A s MeeB e ,
,MS$ ' ,# .
, i =
W Y-
- a 1< \ >, ,N. , IT(B EW
. ,/
.-< ~ s,. a
- ,[. f ,
..n..
s ,
ys,,,y,'g
' \ 1 33 C ,' e 6 -
,6...
- ,D/ 's ND ' (W'::
, ,= Q) i.
4'-.3, f',O
-, A h' -[,'yl ,lk S ,
f- , NN , ; - 6
- -- + - T - " ' ' 8 '
_7[ s ,': r .- q A &e
/ / , ,n~;, g '.:A' x
~v fm*(. _B7 -
c,'.s w m y/; n F7
/ kg
' .] .- g sect B-a 5.s2. . t -o f
s PLAN OF FOUNDATION MAT
- l' a 20'O SHE ARON HARRi$ NOCLE AR, POWER PLANT Carolina Power & t ight Company FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPOR1 CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRLN'TURE -1 MAT. MASONRY & REINFORCING l FIGURE 3.8.1-2!
l
. NOTE: CADWELD STAGGER SPACING VARIES.
{;j' 9" ROW '.
. 4* ROW Al 10" ROW ., ,
, . 3 ** ROW r f8PRI UWE.
._i _ ._ ,
i C7 'N
-y n U U r ; , ! ,, ,, m m ,,
a -
Sp @ ioxit- _ _ io EL 357.00 , " '
j TYMCAL p
SPalOx6 EL 346.00 o
i '
, in a
g f
, h r
_t s gg f 1 o i
- i r _ T . TYPICAL o i e 1
f .,
7'" ROW Istgow
-- -j >
818 BAR (TYP) 8* ROW , , 2."* ROW 7 1 ,,, 5. ,
~ - - ~
S m -
,k s,,/ hm "
m *l8 b4R CT1R)
- '::" - N/ SEISMIC Rf!#
~
- -v t(
u n a m ,, -
g'fW gg IF-- m y g , , i, n.
S* Wow ,
W
- l8 BARS "18 BAR(TYP)
O 'G SHEAR -LINER BAR $ -( CADWELD (Typ) ou (,TYP) s :;; .
n -n H. U 1 U-EL 2.37.50 r i w
{
r . i .
q-v 2 In 1--O ts b
OUTSIDE ROW 1 - El 216.00 ONW ,.
'Ae.
. w :,
. J: f i Ti> ' S y, , c i 4 ,-
Ap'
, [. c . . ., J:
4.,'[,.,$.,,$.L;',,,F.,S 7 ,
i AJ l SECT A-A CYL WALL DEVELOPED ELEV HTS FIGURE
.k[ SHEARON HARRIS NUCLE AR POWER PLANT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE Carolina CYLINDER WALL REINFORCEMENT 3.8.1 3 Power & Light Company FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT f
w I i si
- n, er l,'
- l .= 13 l
. c; 4 g3 t II BI s
8
-1. ,
jd Ud a E
31 S [+ gi 0
- . e :
$ bh h 5 5: h; n
. - - - _ _ _ _ - , _ . - - _ . _ . - - - - , . , ~ . . ~ ,. --, -...-. m --,_-~_.--y,, , .---- *y,-v.- - - - --e- - - -- - - - - - - - = - = ~ -
--6 e a .
. , , , _ _. __ ~*--% .'
x -
6 t; s il$ 2 $ EE
/
i e
ill!!!
ii=i i., +
d * '
d ,
N le y
< NN ,
m2 58b
~ s. %
d}
& o%
[ % ., y O x. O e a 1 g
s
( .
C "g
/
\
/
/ ,
l
,l l ii s
e T
N -
l
- . A E
- L yT RG m
i P n R I
- a p PO UN TI CC o E W mE UR
. n i O oK RO
- t. PC S TF l S c e sR S . R t A gh i
s Y
SN TE 1 I
4 R c eA -
E iL NR 8 A ,
fs nB E L L A E
'M, & A MH 3 i
B C N Em o aR T U NTC E T 5 N r IA R N
E I
Er s iu t mW ,W m S I
e Y wT oE A
TH U _
Sn .S b R NT G V R P F ON I e_n %,r M si A
H a
~
gse' '
.wyboa;3, E.
Y N
O r iloA R Ca F N
TPt Eu R
- CO I
WW .
,. 5 -
g, T{- E A NE ps !'ld, 3a pg E E O
l
- H w w RR ~ L S C o o zs g. {?,.a y f 11,'- S
= a * * [.
= '
t s t
s *g e 6 c'
/OO ;
4 "9 d , ls "
+tn a
'3 sa es _ go Nr>=
pih '
~-
>4 L
m .oo '.'
,m oo o E1 p' o o ,
g h,
5 ']fl1 ."l
.o -
o o , , o <
.:: :o<y no " "
d i-, <""
ion
, on o n ll
, l i' 3
,i
,l n
. l i -
10.?
, , , l
,ni" 6 - I nn ;
- l, u n ,il i
" h, ,, s
) ,
nn ' , o ,
e 33 , , ,
- ,. d
- 3 iT'qos -H o
B o n ' , , ,
n ,o,ll
'a, , - l c" o ,, , o ,,i'
,+, m
,, n , ,
.i i
l o<<i' ,
o 1,
.i i
_vv,-
i I
i o,a i o o o o '":olp B
,i
- ; , o o ll e o o ll 2 ,, l' i mai -
ego n
oo "
o , ,2 1, a a m n i - nI ,,
o',o_e. ,s q_.Too ,-
' o r, o p<o 1 3 T-r Cw w m s 6 y wo a s /l '
- t -
E f
t w g E 1S L i g v n _
t 9o _
g y
n m's n a o s
$6b l )"' g ._ S
'Em is s s D
- p =o s
u $A
- t
"_a %.
7e i o (R
..a .n o gn f. , _ ;-
- ~ ; _
ar' r
- e. n8h
, 3.B 3 , *S O i
- .h T w $ 9)I aWg , $ ,y, g-(o E c
up )
P sY u T q
c s
us il .s.s5 a,'} =
ha6s. a i S
- . .' :.:.',.I .
E
- : ,[ .-
r.X
, \; -
1\
aiW M s g x
ee, J ew ii s n r t i m uuUs1LV1u g uu1" 1\ n
\
ls p m ,3
! s F '
- r
- k- mu wuu1\ m uu11\ u 1\
uu \\\\
\
\
- 33 N un \\
t rER I t s
u n2m n
i uL L b N a
o&
i h -
n O M .
- I T
e i u
.T .-
R kp s p
V A -
/
-iEV . .-
- ::;e -
A s.
E L
., ~ :
G5 ge ES
~
l"9k l sW *g +s DN T
yg l i _
'n R = _
E mB uA nEN m P m 4S s. O L
a)p W f -
AE V E
D w
T s
. l4) ,I,;;) 1
,,) ,);' ,
y h- --
o e . e > - 52
- = $ I I p5 - e ME l.o
- g g
K 8
g 2
3 I '!
5 w
a!
8 !
$ C .5 di-t- 4 o3 gg
..sg M5 8 h.}!
5 jai
!!Eigh c
I go"*
$f!!!I M a .I i 1 5 M P$g p*
9 '.: kA 4 e !}s l5 j!
L L t j ( )
4 i .g 3
' ~ ~
t 4.,.:.y jr
_.m ~y gj;,!
l ' U. = ---Wkl ,I P. l 5 w.. . ...+ ., y s,
7..... : -
4
+-
,. . w ., . .w.n . m.- ..+.. - -. . =..- -
-3,t O d -4 i
= "b 2 C$
k.) k _b_
Nf IVUW TI T N 4
- u. a 1 7W s 5 9Ma 3 9
- cs5 Pt D
. . . . . . . .. '9 *SLTalarvA lII 9 MASN31 Toad ?;ti 454 ANtBB S W A ' M 7TadRi19 z ess, jg EE
,.......<a
, du
, r l
/ -
1 . / .. e
/
i s / 191
- l l / A ll l 9 : 1 i .rr W
\
i }n l l ll(( k i N g F .* N y le j %* yM .*5 c' .
~ ~ ~ ~El Okhh 9')Cs\ !
.\ g
- z'. , ,k
$ b ,
I O, % h y ,g 0, in. e vi, 4,*/
\ h p f p. . # W d
ME i!
2
') ..
uJN.
- - i . x
- ) -
l4 s x
y
- a) 4 f "o
=
ge 1
I y
g 9 1 m
( RW G 7 '
- ([
.. --: x ' ') L N a
\ V NS ,
,. s.
g**.
A N,l3 3, ,i,1,y,M ,
, [ ,
..21.10H 43 7 a) Sis. ,
I
. l.e.oyvor
"E" 4*- s,
%f,, ~
,l _ z* o ,
's rut uns
- s . , _ . _
5" mow
+ *,*r
--' 'N \ ". * -9 -
2".*.R ow s ; 1 . ,o,
\
as E s=now 4-mow 4
(TrP) l l
\ ' , ,
se wacmes**
t srvowM4,L :\ \,i: .-
- l .A .
.A.
io =ow q
. n n.
s~ao-Ja'a=>
4-nowen o 3 pi ~
p R f "' .
T, $ Af. s1 izw .. v, p, -
,s d . . ., 7
,s
~ ,, _?) <, -
o
- - x . ri , , a .,,., as , -
. x~-. ,.
_ i...o ar v .r
-f 4
.~,
qA 1 E -. ' N -*o 1 WALL PElHr 148 -o o ->
,s rus was L
RC N s- O t m- -" D' 94 *** <' U;s +e o ->
< - {
w
/-g g SPLICE
'f, g' SgggyE "'
{ C* " L9' *
~ - "
o % *5 ., f ;. p> ye-oo e o; H p, x g - g.. o roo <t. otg l AMENos t [i 's % : an y g.~ . w m t (TYP) L \ _- g g2sa
\ - g .s .
\ O SLEEVE t
g- e iis 8
. HELSONtSTuoS I i i .- at je
- .%.t'.1 7 pdfa .
c- . s'. 1 729. i (IN PN Rb) _ g ggg , O NorES* 1. ~e' INDICATES set $ Met Rttgep 1.*o* lNDICATES fa88SHEAE BAE \
, - HostlZ BARE
\
.- SECT A A 3. sTuos OWTTED NTS FoR CLARITY y
s 4.9 INDICATES j ,
~ l'ad SIIEAR BAR j
DEVELOPED ELEVATION (outsios Face) SHE ARO98 HARRIS NUCLE AR POWE R PLANT NT5 Carolina Power & Light Company FielAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE PERSONNEL ESCAPE LOCK AND PEN.S58' REINFORCING ! FIGURE 3.8.1-8 g i i
. l
?E o
. s 5 e gg na r E &
T.?OM
'e a$ m j vv3MS 9, /W2 32nC Gbv9 BYEMS S, 5yy g ,-'
.g .
0"5 3 4 < I; " z,w
@ k !hD kN b p i.s o as a q ,,,. - a s
3 e al . m!!
!am s
~
e e @=
~
E 5 ' Sarft ItaoH 1sIV
~
,, .Q li .. jl =$ tiL i f;9 l j O.* d'.; g
^
l '7dil ' I!ll! ;
;8 I h
[. ~y, [ Z1
^
lIllW $ll) - _;iii
.} [ i1 .i . p mn u w ua a w ^
* *^
=:ne ii ii lll o i i 2 g-iiiiii' d 5 $ ,' ,' :.;.,
y _s .',%-
.n i io n -. . .. .a e-- .c 3a .
~
0;f. tarys _j # 1P;9 9% "e S ,4 O ,2
'im s., ' g l ,
ANmu ZlwCH 91, w N ,,,. . .. . . . . .... . , ....
./ _
1 a e
*> g '
l! 8
~
l'
~
- r. !
E
'f ff
, ls a .g ;
)
)/M stily. r..--an*e$
d g y e g g r
=-
~
l-
-r
- :" !j i [ i' !
,f
- l
;l ;
. - s e u m 2
-: -h.Ji O ,
/, *ll' ' i
^
h{ Q Q* !$ 4 (:.V, ' a N a p-g= ,f, o l I 1 ew ti D
, L 1 : 1 1
,yQ i l u.
4' 6 f R * . 4
- II I i1:sl.'liil: 4 ^W ~
! g
- U E N k' h -
( # * #j :# I - p
~
^ -
~
g 's pj
~
/ ! _
e *Y if m r
- ,,, o _ _
h ll II
\h Ve &l i3 2
[l36.\G $j v ' e
.~
gn o x ,
's. EHCLOe>URE It. ~*l5 REl%R UNLESS ICTED IMLE56 MNED i
I' , '[ ~ CADWELD ELEEVE.
.4 N l ,I '
(AISI lotG STL. ASTM A stS) i , g6* ' f. ---t TAP HOLE
,D '
( g f
' i l rMATERIM.:5A SIG GR 70
/ TACK p k "
Ps NWELD i 4 k. < i PL l'a n 5 eO'SLfa , ] p 4- 4 se.
' C ,
, p, PL l't. u S =0!G LE MMATERIAL:5A E16 GR 70 l45' L
g WELDTO BE RAD 60A t w (
*4 EL 2.74.50 e
, _ y _
GRArtED Bf FIELD / Q.[] l 3,f , 4 My u LESS D stu fyE . I f>/ / / M - l* g 8s ETHAF0AM 120 ggg7 p,p I E7 NTS i fff w ' d I { L , f# ' EL 271.00* , _ M , _y LlHER i, 4 l l 1111 . .
,r l' IS4 *_*J_[h_ 11 l'4
- g. j , u,,
De " g"ggy$^"" Ictlrdt =' eh-is,
'sn_ _ =_ _
y DEVELOPED ELEVATION AT M.S. ( F.W. SLEEVES ,r. (( ' NTS I i
-Q,it ,
SECT S -S NTS i
\ ' SHE ARON HARRIS NUCLEAfl POWER PLANT Carolina Power & Light Company FINAL SAFETY ANALY$tS REPORT i
(X)NCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE - MS & FW PENETRATION ATTAOtMENT FIGURE 3.8.110 '
l. l l .-
,s - .
, *gg .
*~ #
l 8 DIAGONAL [ 2. # 4 CORNERS I N1 s I fl
- ,'s ,,;'e'
,. _U U
$kq-- UU 77 l s - ,
[s,
~
' [
4 g j \ E r N / _ , . IB
,BL
'c
~
= = \\ // = me---- M HI lA9 W/ in O "i a --J -
^' //W'. '
A i REBAR BUI LT- U P A[ n n
~[ MEMBER
}s i sig g 1:LANGEkI'+xG ELEVATION <
( {-f \$ r WEB R. I'4 x17'2. FLANGE 19. l'eG
.- ww .
l
. h Il SECF A-A 7-SECT B B (ROTATE SO*) l' SHEARON HARRIS FIGURE
- NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURES -
SMALL PENETRATION REINFORCING 3.8.1-11 Power & L g t ompany FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT
-v
,[g . La m .
6eS e g'.g d dw) gh4 $'uo 1*
,. Sgtiggg(
p1
. A __,
a gTH A FQ44 M
, [ .:4 -' y 1
s.. % EAcar UP 6Ag _68tDE R '_ 8*. C$ t"/51 afgg __t m g, - N.. ,
"81 t eTwAFoAM Jis_ i A _, Q 3 _ a A/_sh f. (
MDEE 6NUIf [ 4 gd' t
,M
; J [ I ETH& . cr.m a
FOAM r u-Rs n a -M~ ct run p '; . .
=
.=. ri .C w- -
e -%
-#L ,m, _
;;.- ,\ 2 v-on- ..y. -
...eu,:.
c
- t; -<- <e <-,-
o L,- -
,., ,.- -% , .1-,.
g2o._ _,; y sk 1wo - __} u.-w. -- -,
-- [S
. g.
e DETAIL Y 4 =%, gtme( -, n_ $s._ - - 4.._
- n; "'
tl* [ i ersAroAn -t geae.wnNour -,-4, - . __ q _. tg . 1 ucun --- m l--- 3w ). t DETAll T ' d' g 1 -~ u *. s*Liutt ( y[ g (C i
.C p
[ g- y_g - i 6 g gg ti u w{ }_. {,p
.YM,,s.,V DER "a s MW 4 4 EETAtL *2" zoM e ~9 Je EMM A-A ' " ###
,. [ .,'*5 _g . It-- -
g33 _ips,4 C 7 '" - s/ - I WN i -> M , 4. , ,y 945 tar Ibbsww # (' /F l's STIFF. R.(TYP) pT wr4 U -- =r g- l t i . . a. . . ..
/teasc e. 4oua . 1.
.y
*Td '250#)
o
-_% g L . . ., _ _
P 4308
.C ' , _ -
y wygt, 6 e'- .-- -_o j .( " g pao g
- ~
(4h.ig.f.4, i I26 TIFF iRiot
~
, f.W8(k
-y j (.3 (.3 - 4_ -. . p- .
-I i - -
I STIFF lt. 1 i ,Y_ (TYP) 6.S. '\.wf4 sagI ,g g >
*3*i \ . ftl a to ' '
) f k i'leh wyy,16 * ,
e , , - 1m >d GgtSSET 4-7I s - 4
,,.- '(s Amv ., ss. v - <
~. y' ,
s o o
'US ME %
* *L=N L yf-, ,--- ,
4[ -
""J8'a.*4it4 f TEsfE0 82 64fS5tf g
, /
)'7)
.2&', t -b-WT1-7 d 4%=s) 6AY '2'.'2( ., f.ej h ~ DETM *Z*
' SII'Y- b
- E)
ELEVATION OF UAIER.sidDS - DETAIL Y-AND Ah!CHORs Noit. StuPS AWo Stud $ SPAcW65 SYMMETRICAL AttouT { OF SHEARON HARRIS NUCLE AR POWER PLANT COHfANMeuf PauloiNG Carolina Power & Light Company FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE - LINER DETAIL , . - FIGUllE 3.8.1 12., ! e
D* oeLeft Att tao w. sToos g y } CLOSLST %TUOb
*J 53LdE *Al-seurT Att sTes mn #2 te" OSEAM -, ARRA4GEMENT Tn4A4 7 FR0 4 ( SEAM (TYP)
++ 4 + + + + + 4- f*yy
+ 1
+ t + + +4 th 1 f++ % 4 S Y
*)'g l
- h. h, s
. ~, '
4gA_a _ # r+ j$ tag /f Y_ . ..
' ' /ELT850 '
t 4 + 5' i7 y d' re g E' Mwid)tso 4 CUTER E06f 0F 4* i [' " t+ + ' caLAe tryP.) A
' it t t + 4 + t f *. , ,__ ; (-
- g_,
*ys QETPArionM P) ,
4 cparAL AseAdGEMedT $nos(trry TYPICAL SPACfE DETAIL FOR TYPICAL SFhclNG DETAIL AT , TYPICAL SPMtNG DET FOR TYPICAL SFMCl4G DETALS FOR LARGER THAN l*4*PEuETRAfio45 4' 8
- M.i PEHETRAllONS TRAN5itioH BETWEEN RADIAL- A90 10*+ 10 l'-(, o PENETRATIONS CitJERAL ARRANGEMENT STLIDS (uwLiss worn)
. 12 EOu1L VAcrtr.cf
! LocATiOH OF EADIALW STUDS SYMMETRl(AL '
, .G_
AbouT {'4 OPopHG < t
' J Loc AThot RADULL _4 Yshu YTb
, e t") E at& L 9 AC,ES " LocAfl04 0f RAotAL '
8 /s. L, . i
$r005 SYMMETficAL L l
___3d( .. A6out ts or oPN6 EAoius vAmts - PERsouwel ESCAPE l SM. 7% /sv p, ieren LOCK PENETRATIOM N '
' P E R s o W E L l.o c K l PENE.TRATICM l
N EQtJtPMENT 14TCH PEHETRATioH SHE ARON HARRIS NUCLE AR POWER PLANT Carolina Power & Light Company FINAL SAFETV ANALYSl$ REPORY CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE - LINE R DETAILS FIGURE 3.8.1 _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - -
,II
. - T '
- N E A 2 N L yT UO P nR TI R apP O CT E UO WmE O oR RR TT ,
~ .
P C S t SE TN 1 4 *
. R t s
A h Y NE E ig L EP 1 y L L A C N MH NC 3 8 6 U& A T E r N re Y IAA NH R
. T n .
o g- ' - S wT I OT U CN G R oE e 6 R P FA A a E E F I
~ a S M H n LS TM EPI
,n M N iloA RU o D A
O O r N R Ca F CO NE I b' Q A TI O V s E C
; s
. !, u s G.
C H S l l
! I
'8 E S
4!:.. : I s L7 Q'e L n A
- l c,
[ o
- c. W,
. l - - L
;-e I
! t 2 A
C l
. f R
E V _ _9 9Y ^ e lf
' 4 k" I
- 4,g k"
l d
~ " g i
c b l l jd
" /
w M
,TE%
D R
' kT M g.- iE A DAL
- P '2 U I e.*
J A
' L Y
O
\1 p38 -
C ibA s-
/
t N ' H T T
-o M ll u
c s A
- y& ,1%
, o
- 0 Q
l 2 1k E . l 1 lA T kkM8h T"', E O
~ '
n (r n L o
.' ' ,y u o u 2s T L'. 0= S t
tA s: E T o% t A An S
'o v
;i
-uisors .-
6*-lo' %'/(lYP ) A v ,
.:'..{
, ..v.
. , . x ,. ,
sp:wtu.T
. . . o.r e eo.<s . 44 stao* -
,- L . . .
L, t a..: -
- :: . - t l
l 6 s ,
... u .
r a st.24i.ts
..a i .... g- , ,__
l ll t .e j , i , , 8 i e a
-% lill~lllL.L A . . ,
Y. HOR:7.OSTA' SECT.0M sect A __8)L', N' '
- wu twMwwaA.
<, A -
is y # # #,;[ # # # ;- 6 ACE UPPaA2 Igak . . s... g.T. IT ll -/
,,,%.- g, ,
g b cipt.448 MATERIAL t .it j
..., I'.,
$e souAL -h .
E " C L *" " '"
- i: ' ;
/ u -L4 4 A
- t. .:. :
J . 1,/sssssn,
..s. . ,
: ;;;; ' ; 4h
. . DETAl'.'A' .
*: :: ll COLLA.R. OETAll srtlp DETAIL N ;:. .
1111~1111~
.....r- \ w o.wsi. T 4 -W.. .e -
SHE ARON HARRIS NUCLE AR POWER PLANT VERTICA. SECTION
' Carolina Power & Light Company FINAL SAFETY ANALYS43 REPORT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUC1URE PERSONNEL LOCK PENETRATION FIGURE 3.8.1-15 ,
.o g i _
- AT.lMuf ad r . . T. ' . . T. s '. ea'.co-(ne) t .. ..* r ; .* , .., 4-
. g
<> <, q e nous or 4Tuos FA < .
,4 ,,
4osilktoW x s FM.. , ,i\ _ _5l .- . . .) S s W l',
, , = . ' . .
. . . . ' ! h. 4o y ,-- ___
A w %. - - -8L Moo l 1 . . y$. .,.<> . , .- ... , .-- g..;: y, ji 7 10.1, < a o - tu.--- e
-3 j_;"_
4 ,_$
, \ _, ,
.t -
u y
.' \fc.4 sloos . *. ': .* mo-
.. .. L f k. s- SE CT A, HOR:20.NTN. SICT@N '
A A, i, '. 'A.
;,,,, , , , ,;,g t
..,.I"...,yA,>s',
c,v.o aoios v y euw.ue un 4.ih j e , s ,
* ,* *'. s
[- CIk a l.44
- .~(Y,- __St.t DETAIL'M ] 'f ..
g
. : k'I ,-,j:r ' .~; W,os w -
--h- ,
e r,
- i i sprovso souAL -
, t
_ L ik.,g. s,3 o . . ,
- V. /////// //
ll .- . .
>,..' - l pr .
/-cotLAt sie ll
.'.. DETAIL 'A' n _ _ _ _____'_ . _ _ . ---
COLL AR DETAtt. t
..? .
O
.. Is,'. o
.s .. - '
- . yt- , ST40 DETM.
OUTSIDE , COMT bulLDsNG INSEDE F AC f. WALL ' FACE SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT
"' " **' * "' ' ""*"Y VERT! CAL SECTION FIN AL SAFETY ANALYSl$ REPORT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE ESCAPE LOCK PENETRATION
- FIGURE 3.8.116 ;'
i 4
.1km j!strava '4 8e ,.
cowTAmeesNT Sloa.VALL - _ _outsion iN5ct *
.T* .
-v-fr 7siv 4 ^
a>, - Al wrenw : %
.1. p-. ,,
cowTAn64edT LINER g ,,.,;.,..,<. ,.
,.o
.r,.,,,
an ms ow. i - < .
'Arrown souAi.
_aea navAst. A, Iq. , , , . .,,
- 4. g . . .
stuurs . #
.p.~+: 4 6y } ;. } ... r - i' t if.:.h
----. / i e
---~ 1-----------
atuava l en +11e-----1---------1111-11s- i ( 4's l SEC, TION A A SEC, TION A-A
- penist(it f susevas con is p staavus TYP STUD DETAIL i
w .finfisfissisisessifissifsie> sa , Vrra1-1111z---11 --<z1z, M eAoc.u, M . ,* ,~' = .:', t
]t .v. . j." . . . .
e-,.
** .. i. ..;;t 3 A
~
3 g; , re 4 " 5s if /anset ? 5 r /-I
. , m
... .t'. a* T_ gg.ura ?.
l I
- -- ' c1'a s t.44 f oam w ra J [ c-t's a s.44 _ #, li W4 .. 9 Algy a
^
.,-* _m+. tj :
g gJ ccL Anammii , I, .
- ELEVATION (lo p,it*g6 4 ts*f SLEEVE) l .
m
.-_-- ~m o
- J C 'L " ""8 E - !!'.
Co,f ' ~gr $ + - -' ~
]$
i mas onTAIL*a" " b .:b. ;;!f k I gos. 3"' = s 95 t-c.e. - @ A M b c.$. % '
' i 2 .72 -
pmsnm
%.;. 8 2 i
.di. mmu -,,
a_&':' d1) H 6 -
/.f:X ,)
,-- . w.... - ...... m .b I, SLERVE s'aTHKK siirr m Ar s c.T.C.(u.s.ouw)
DETAIL'A* . r7 i#visiesfrisierir-ssiis-2 TYP COLLARDETAIL DETAIL *B* , DETAIL *C' COLLAR DETAILS AT MS ( FW PEN. ONLY , y ,1 n z -- -- - - 1 11 - 1 1-12 FOR ANCHORAs E l D*T *** Y M*
/J - a 11 r r-z---- . z 1<-
1 - MW
- cowfAsuMENT UNES N,
( j, , f..
*l l
g l l l t M OE l Iggl_Dg_ _
, l sh l[_v l MllltNi v SHE ARON HARRIS NUCLE AR POW'ER PLANT 1
l ELEVATION M.S. 4 F.W. PEHETRATION glina Power & Light Company d FINAL SAFETY ANALV$l$ REPOfti CONCRETE CONTAINMENT BUILDING
. . .. . .., e . . MECHANICAL TYPE I PENETRATION 4 -
FIGURE 3.8.117
1 6=
- a n fE i ** y R$'y tz-Cit 9
-8W I- 2 f .e C{ E gD-e E = l g .g 3
- y2 9- <
.i I 15 Y hl lg 3
i , . i, d i c $ J , a xa 4 ~
.,.
- gS :- . -_ .. : -~ .
t b . *k,
.'.. . . .. %. O,.o O .
..e
,g &
y g gs v. ,., N
.s g e l- 1 : >--
., .. ' . , ' .3. -> Q
..I
l J '$
** ij.Q 9g , 7 a :
.; 21 . . ,.
- f
- 11 I .i I ,
1 S'
.i, i
V d
. .]I, - '
t J' E h :h '
.: i >
.. : u v ;, . .
- i.
,?..:
=l . .: .
I 5 i. . .... -: , I
.. L
- g*'
*r:- , ;;
g # g' I . .'
- l
.7 g b" .'
- l%'- 'o*, g . een.
I
,now g g, -
) = l l
s m n 1
**"' * ' ' ' ' l I ,
I
; rMS j
%*** ',M , %*"*
I
**"' . , L .
' * *"*"'I . I YT g ess h !
W *. *
- I J .
.L p I . . - gL @
]
l
.f.* %;m ekgj *
.**.....e I p ,
== LP y
>" g '
p .' s
; ' '*~
. l e , -]
- yI 8 * . ', ' l
' l- f
- B i
j f i l y3 1 gM - mLN i lt - { -k , w l i tid i y ,, 1- - -t . t 1
- f. '
MMW W l SkM16 WW l. 1
--, , e -
\ l T
.
- N
, . A L y T GN P n f; NO 2 ap OP I
DT I E WmE O oR LA I UR
- P C 3 l BTE 9 1 R t S TN A gh YL NE 1 EP 8 E
L iL A Mei 3 C & N Nl
. U A IE E N re Y A T P R S wT I N TY U R oE O G R P F A CLA F I A a S E TI C H in L ER N loa RT O a N r
CC R C F A I NE -
' -
- k!
-( ** ' . .
OL E H CE _ S _
' i,i.
g _ I t v '" . l
. t s E
L e r
- A\ p S . .
u f T t s C
' i j '
E s o. S , s-
~.,. t-u n E o. e o C +
v l L s
,ry-e SS %- t do I ou Mts L
N O@ Ry 4g iy \g i. e s fr A T E-
.m D i .i
,~
. D
" U il ;
,4' T S
~
'~._
'A _.
l.
'A T
I h . E D E i ' -
~
. / ' .1u
~-
L , l
'es a S
/
g c t ll. w A ,/ . P O s
<11
!. s - N 4
@'ir I
l
~[
, .' R E
bi
~
) n
= _
A. 4 JF
- a 4_ l'. g v O 't. .
] -
s L. C l A j: A - E a. .i 28 9 t, XT Es .E c. p t P k
# .\
Yc M'R. D L [.l - < V I T t. . II y s' ( TA E
- I. *>
~
i: A D '.'. o
- i ,
C f i t C n 4r f - E ot E S C .r- .e, L I ,, u A T ,- c F ,, i gi i g W. .
.E ,
. y 25 t>
g rg "gg(=255
. ss ... ...
< 5 => :n rr a,
d a ga' 0 *-\u ;p .'o :si j=g, p A G" - 'a E:." p W
'[ a) gi ge g a
E C BE % Q 85 9 go --- !E3 1E #
- e. = g s i :5
- TN_ !, ;_. . $.. ,:,.:c.g :
. , . sg .
[5 E ls l- -
.v e . .*
.g 5
, s 5 h5
= 4 3 v
4 t _ _ . . .1 -- a 7' , g .
' . e de a
- _2 E_ g a W 56 v i . , iii e E 2
s"
,p \' l s 9a sw,
( I N $$a. 7
.Je s_g s s
I s \% JF l
!e A k g{
, - a2s i a (( ts m
{,
, ~ s o
\\
5 %~ s t' g
#J~
*a
~
I . ,,e "Mf/ . j y b ' / % 15 A z s W
! 1 = % -l.
z _; T' E- 91 y
' * % .E 4 '.
!E . Ia I s -:
g . _4 ,
+ . 2 4
*- %>64- -+4
-ft
% N I
-a I,. .
s {- v 0 4 -
.........t :* /
d) l
.. 5 %. s d .
- < 4
! lWy -
E 5'=\ ,S v : 4 h.
- 8 w O
# W
$ M u Y O b m 8
I Tm *
. V s
J b n a+ a win.= 1 4
g_n i E ei.G = ;; e
.. b 5
3gLEs I ss< t (
) .
[ l *t e -
!2 5 $ =j >E ss $.s <
# ni-
/ ,/ gig *
,..,e..
.. .S.., . a. <
j f . J , ,,, .. z,
~
y , , . .
]4C l s.
a
. x
* .Np Q d',/
_ ,. s N._w) wz _ ._.
"s Q t
i \ v - y!')FN a.
</.. --
<\.
4,t ; g - wwp --- ( l g.
-3 N .s Y b I w...
~
m 5 i k , 14
)
g ,
/
l
~
. ~~llii~.~
.. m. ] 3 -
{g 3 6 -
.' y 83f. (w- l e -
fG e g F-L.g , [k% A. t ef.l$l3s x
.j , -
y + - z me A "^ .f -p P:
., t
_yg 2.1 N :s 8 f, . s.q .__._ . _ g
. . Y^.
1 J' . 2 3. E_.m= o ., y/J)hL) ld
~
._/,.)& ID R
[<y c ' : '-4 [, c ; 'j! e
> I * ;9 h3
;.l >!* {
+! ild
__ _ - 3u, s .
..., er*+_ _ g
- , - -- - . - ,-w. r ,-e. ,,-.,~m- , , , - - - - - , , - - , , , , - - - -_ _ _ _.._ _ _ - - _ .
. g
,-g
- 8 s
s ,
!$ gE$g!.E c)' ,
g" g gg ;
. s i H" Eit $5 5
! r if 5 85 E
- e .! : *8 z2< a
,3 $ [-
.<i. .
< i+ , / ( ,
,.....,.., ,.j. , ,,
l f ge yg i l lli
.s*
st
~
g 81 g g.
)
' 'i gu Od
'l '
5 ',g . .= =<. . . . - , I g s"U e
.,0(,3 f.5" 2
k ..a
'NJ $$ -
-~ Yk ,
Ne.r - rw __ _ . - - o e 2_ m
~
d sog a - - xx. lEg g' - g
.i gp uga \)\ 1 $
C l~ d ' '
.or.z o
.s .e na 10. lli <s o .p
#f [ ,fj L _
,,,.jf Z
w e.
'O
z TOP HUB 19.
. _f 8dCURVEDlt.
h
.-BOT HUS It.
O* 8'$ POURING / d/ IICONT BLD6 SCURYE0 ft , HOLE ( TV P )
-- /
SYM ABOUT & 1[ # j ,0 c
.y.
/M J.' i d i 4-i
= ' iso B . ej' .55P@ Sto = 251 0 14* O sf.. : F(%e* f/* k e-
#) 9 S"2 ---
3.. .
,e
,sf '
.- r 24*C d SECT A-A hsH i) 700'"' h'/fttg g) e ~ -
*,. a t Pl.AN YlEW(TDE1) .
BAR6 il DOME ' SEPAWOR 2 e- 8 5s, CURVED It- . 86 SHEARBARS SYM ABOUT &
' t $
- tt' HR1 [ H
~ *
- M O # - %m e .
' s
* -= -
rs - E*CURvtb se 1-IsmARs 50/li j 9 y 'g in - y g_ / y ,f,k e y y :
. y[ 'I . 1jl;f 5
. - -, 8 L x.
h
' " ' ^
y o -- -<at -.-_
~~ .--4 3-"* ,.,,,, 7 = % 5 -
7: !! , , , ,
- E u S*O p it. ~
. [d'~ 9- ,I,3 * '
'e Z'3J."# If T 2 w,
, tt. : ::-s== ==AR=
EF RING BARS
-l I
fY. a h
',e s
Y a(# 1 3 .e -* Its TCIRCUMIr ## ss/HELSON WALL RElHF . ! STUD 5 POURING HI HOLP ~ - fog*3#e5 R.
'at 8" m 4
mLsm.Oo . SECT B .B e-n 6 -. !!f,I
- MeCnsrug
~ EL 567.50 [3 ~ "
01- N , j ( EL 366.15 foTE'. G g=L 354 Oo n' C.7. EL 3cs.co PLAN VIEW (BOT ft.) y;5;k8 s: VERT WALL REINF SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Carolina Power & L;ght Company
- IF.
FINAL SAFETV ANALYSIS REPORT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE - DOME REINFORCEMENT . FfGURE 3.8.123 l
l 6 CONTAINMENT BLDG l
, ,. < . -. + .
'O, (y i
*h Sr y
'ELINER FP ~ '~
o4 J-SPR1HG LINE -
@+ . -
.. "Py l
.; . r, .
4-4 .;
.. t.'
.S. . 5 NSa~ UNER %.
u
't
- .t
$ AG O , f
- 130 -O r.D. OF STEELLINER t
l . _ r Sr _.a _ s ALL CONCRETE REINFORCING STER CADWELd5 AND STRUCTURAL. ' ETIE 5HAPE E A - h e
*[ LINER llL -
p- . .
'\.
$t.,- v:n; >.-. '~ 9 J l 'o.
' h :?.y.. Rs ;.y
,,. a e. o. o .
n .*..*x
~
_a , ; o . e >' '*>.
'l'p:y,'$ *
~'
\ .
l U WLYE > BASE MAT CHAMBER i!jf/ SECTION SHEARON H ARRIS FIGURE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Carolina CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTU R E BOUNDARIES 3.8.1-24 Power & Light Company
- FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT
ASME CODE 3SECT 3E DlV 1 FOR CONC
. ANCHOR STUD 5 FOR EQUIR HATCH, LOCKS TYPE I ,
. , . .y
. vi ;,.w.- 2., ..
./q;... ..g.#. ;: .. < w..;PE N EIRAT AN.4LEEVE5. .... . j. ,,:, .. 3,.. , .., ,.3,,..
<.. ~- - ' ' ~ -
A SM E'C " SECT E DIV 2 (CAR SH-AS 1FOR CONC.. ANCHQR ST S FOR TYPE I (M PEN. SLEEVES ha 1
-CONTAINMENT DESIGN BOUNDARY FOR TYPEI, (FORMEW 4 29-1977L MATERIAL 4 SERVICES FURNtSHED AFT CAR-SH AS-l FOR CONC ANCHOR STUDE FOR TYPE E
L 0(ECPEN. k S ...SLEEVES,J
, ,, ,,,_ ,, ,. . - E(MPEN. SLEEVES (FOR MATERIAL SERVICEE ' '
FURNISHED BEFORE "4-29-1977 2-G ifil[/ r ,. , 3'
?-
+--CONTAINMENT DESIGN BOUNDARY FOR i
4 EQUtR HATCH, LOCKS E [l*l' : - _ . 9. f. d'l im m m s m ss m m m s s m m l lJf N e . m -. w
> d d
A . B_ ,,B A , y C4D , O A -DN BOUNDARY FOR ASME C@E, SECT M,Div i WITH SUBSECTION CA (FOR NEW MATERIAL 4 SERVICES FURNISHED AFTER 4-291977) FOR TYPE E 4 E PENETRATION SLEEVES. B - DIV. BOUNDARY FOR ASME CODE SECTM DIV 2 (FOR NEW MATERIAL 4 SERVICES ' FURNISHED AFTER 4-2919Y7)FOR TYPE.E 4M PENE. SLEEVES C- DIV. BOUNDARY FOR ASME CODE SECTE DIVI WITH SUBSECTCN N A ~ FOR EQUIR HATCH, LOCKS TYPEI PEN SLEEVES. ! D- DIV. BOUNDARY FOR ASME CODE 3 SECTM3 DIY.1 WITH SusSECTION i NA FOR TYPE E 4 E PEN SLEEVES l FURNISHED BEFORE 4 29-1977) (FOR MATERIAL 4 SERV E; ATTACHMENT WELD BETWEEN A&ME CODE SECTION E DIVISION i ITEMS AND LINER ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ASME CODE SECTION M DIVISION 2, DM BOUNDARIES FOR THE TYPE H 431 PENETRATON SLEEVES LOCKS AND EQUIPMENT HATCH I 1 1 SHEARON HARRIS FIGURE l NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTU RE
^ "
Power & L g t ompany ' FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT
. 4 ,
L . C. #11 L. C. 'l 4 L.C. *10 s LOSS OF COOLANT ACCIDENT WITH S.S.E. LOSS OF COOLANT ACCIDENT ' V - e. LOSS OFCOOLANT ACCIDENT WITH 0.EE. I.O (D + L) + LO P + t.O (Ts+ R a.) + LO E*+ t.Ot + Ry C s 1.O (D
- L) *l.5 P + 1.O ( T*
- R a) + Lo # LO(D
- L)+1.ES P+LO(k+R.)+ LES EtLO R T CY1 '"" "' . -
G CyLtHOER W Att 1993 ' d MAT f CYL8 HOER *^Lt-E7M e MAT SOIS nK
' iti. >
I w. - 368 5 27 , g7, j I '
,e
- s N N N i a ,
-5's
-lS4 -C E . .'A. .'gs, ,
RADIAL MOMENT, DIAC. RAM O * .. ,
..H43 -1355
*1M8 ## 896 5 - y, ,
f'_ l' D - g
'i ,T 1339 RADIAL E RAM -
. A ,. '
. %,,gg , RADIAL WOMENT DIA& RAM -
. N _
r
^
-477 -584.-s51 690 .
% -10 5 9 -8168 -1Ho -1055 -80E .- jgg4 .,4gg .gggf ,ggg ,,4g TANGENTIAL MOMENT DIAGRAM -le_ fS' .
- I
'TANGENTEL. MOMENT N
-ses 167 ?*l 'JY M ; n TANGENTIAL MOMENT DEGRAM ,
I '
-80 '
,3g g g . 66 78 p 8 '
& I RADIAL SHEAR DIACnRAM -
RADIAL SNEAR DIAtidtAM . RADIAL SHEAR DEGRAM 339 i 284 . 2M i -84, , , I -51 t'
- 13 0 43, 44 47 -' 77 46 78 63.' .
.g -
16
+ 1' CIRCDMFERENTIAL SHEAR DIAGRAM CIRCUMFERENTIAL SHEAR DIAGRAM CIRCUWEREl4IAL SHEAR DIAGRAM i .
3 I
',20 0 ,M ,10 ,60 ,50 - 40 ' ,30 ,20 ,10 3 ,M ,10 ,60 50 ,40 ,30 ,2D JO . O
.M ,10 ,GO 50 ,40 ,30 ,10 f ~
RADtub (FT) RADIUS (FT)' + RADIUS (FT),
- s f UNITS : MOMENT IN PT KIP' e f SHEAR IN
- KIP * -
SHEARON HARRi$ NUCLEAR POWER Pt. ANT l Carolina Power & Light Company i FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE MAT STRUCTUR AL RESPONSES
. FIGURE 3.8.1-26 !
i .
~
- T N
A E T L yT R TT P n R UNS T EK NN i I R pP E a O CMCA' oo PP l WmE O UER L oE TRE C j' PCS SEF NA L Rt S I TO 72 Y TIG1 OO A hg NN
~ Ei L EIN8 OO LL A MFIL 3 NN
- C U & NA NLE IL D E h th N re V AA O R LL S wT TWMU I
N i R oE TA T RP F A CA G OLD I A a CNF ATN HnSi L EIA TR L PE N loa ED RN E O ra N CID AM E R A CF I NLO
.?.
I H O , ' I- -: ' ; - ' ,, l . 4 I E OYM 5M H CC S 5S 1 g 3 l
- a I L
i g T T T T T E g N N N N y SM E N E E E E D o M M M M M O y
- E E E E E M L L L L L
- E E E E E T N
e a g E M 4 M M M v=dym%hMW % ym n y, E. l E g E s g , T 54 3 S O s I N I F
)D E '
M T C N A R E T M N I (C N O N I P . O A p I , TL E) E SE T NL DP w NN 'A OA OY u EO C W N (T TZ M
's
.. s '
S
/c.. I K
, g C s,
- A e , c
\
L N4 S I R C
. _.;y ,,
W..- ;- %.,hG
~
f
'- ly
* *f y .
F
.e L '
=.., I- O
* ' g't 3, -
r ' . h' 1 M d
- h. f. .
l
.+
[ ** . -
\
G, N
.' . . " ,. ;. 4 ' '
. ,#d
,f.'
'e- -
J / ,/6W:k2 I L E
. D g O
. M N) ,
OD I T SE _ SK _ N EC E RA _ M )P PR E N E LY MCNO O E (T C(U Z
} I)l I lI{I \ll!llll' , ;,I
' ., T 4 5 N E A R
- L yT U
.
- P n R T S t " a T p PO t
C n s E U SL
- WmE R SLU
_eec
- O oR P C S SADE8 TDES
' t si d" R t S I TOOR2 -
h YL NLMY1 r "
' . . ~
t u. i < ,
- A ig ECTD
" E U 8 s
. 'c ow uoHr* ^ L C L A MINT N NTRE U & A AIE M ER SE 3
ct e N re V TMEV o .Ni.r s wT NMEIU i oE OYEAI L TG MwIe. t i R RP F A a S CSTRF A EXII n TAINA sm w sr N loa H O R rcF iL aN# E R FM-C P O
,g Nee
, ,. v N C -
t A r E O C - H g A 3 er S - g- -
' ' g' -
L 2 1 4 4,1 o o 0 o m 1 t e, 8 8 o 0 0 M o 0 o W
' G G % G
=
1 S G 9 % R t t 1 S 1 1 1 I L M. E' t E L E t L I E L t E L Y Q y l - e o 4 N M
-)
L - M11' t TK 1
' 8 -
g
~
'M 4
- ~
eE 61@ /M@ :l.
- - NTF E
g t I 5 7 s M(H 1WM' . t@- si O E I M N O TIT SA EN TIB RM O FD C
,' ED RA t AD I i.
SE s MR
*.AU
- u. (e 2 ERS TGS m /. E 1 OIA R 4 NDP
._ - A
, , W
- vr k ~
~ - s o o o o o o o o
o o o o E N* c. c. o. o. o o. o. o M
! - a.
G G 6 r,- s G o x n o e 3 7 5 5 S B i 5 m 1 7 s i n q u E )s m A 3 i i L L
/
su t E E L L s E !' ( L E t L t L E a c w u A u Wai - ' l t t 1 4 u I 1 l 1 7 i s s 0 5-s w
- u e M
/ s. 4 o G- c.
b /',, A A w N v. d i i 4 d(
- n. h 5'FI * ,
i'.',
. h i.;- '. .-,. i D
" g l
- V. ' i ,
l ;'
-3 #i, T -'*
N E r A R L yT r P n R UE - o R a o TM c T E pP COS - a
/ ,
N E M WmE O oe PCs R th sy t i UDE R S T D N '9 SNO T APS1 - 2
//- '
L E AIC A igL E NLE ELR MA L 38 f'_ L L A 7 DAL ak( C N _ 4 1 1 4 1 2 4 1 4 1 0 A P U N re y
& A NW ILRR AA AE 0 4 4 0 0 RS
- T UU 0 0 0 t s wv n R o e NIC T
0 0 o. 0, 0 i\ I D i ORCG R P r A CDUIF n gA A a s H iL n ENR TIT 4 2' o. o g N loa O , N E LS RY CC M R c, r i f/ 9 N o, L6 R A E H S N O C o
/ 5' 4
.\
1
- AIA I D D
AR
. s
. i o 1 s. t.
s 3 RA E 0 1 H S . M L AM V'// I TA MR EG
' (' RA I ED t _
F T n o
~ L f a
t a oi t _tNo MN U, E
~
l C M RO 2 I 8 , CM
'a M f ,
z s 3_' LC A A
, // ( . .
AIA ID DT T _ . (,,' s_ , 6 t s t 3 o 6 s 1
,.-' ~_
Lo AN RE M EN) O DR I Ea I 8 a s 4 s1 o
- i 1 2 3 s 3_ M IC C +a f/
2 N A (T OI T O L
. TN
- 8 3
M A T F A A+ N LP 4 R I 6 5
- 8 LG N BOE.e 3 MC)Ol
/ AI A I
7 _ 1 o l 2 - _ I i
- TD u O FL
/ nI t
U f C O*D
/_
EP u
, / _
3 7 7 _pf _ GA NE E C A D AS S (O.
, 1 A
TSH OO 1 5 i _ 5 L P LLC f/ l S E EV 2g i1 I D
. L ,YI1T A
P 7A I 1G _. il M A 5E _ y, N EEW RN C K- OH T PS g EAI A _ I ( FR D FSNOID I 3_l MBE DMC INNI OS SN S
/'** R I C T SE
_ w IR E O NNRO
. CMF P S I
/ r4
- 3_
EEM MTO N f o 6 s s s a - O:C E 5 s G. 5 6 e G c E N MWHNT - A , O O [ / n_ _ RM SH PS N B _ _ MA f K W
~
ER O - _ l;
, MG A NE I C H S
H/ s _ _ . MI E R AD
~ C O S
I _ - DE R F
/' l .d T DC R OE T I
- r. 3 A 4 E FM
. " ~ 4 x2 s E 3 2 :
. s k h
i; g MF O
- R A NE
. 3' SB M
'5 T M O 2 INE M 6
'c 'ol o UM 2 o o, o, 'o 6' 'o h .'0 'oG s ' ao c "S '2
. I
' * ' .T 1 t i
I , st 4 : o l 8
! I l i ,
n ..... "> 1 -D= -o. 1 A A' i,.. ~x/ ^ / ./ -r W / / f
.. ~U "'h / / -f ~l/ / l f.
M "O#
; i70* 3'I 26 .tas ,_
.,___,,___f____ ,
411 ssa as i7s , 3o7 f ., _ . _ . . _ ts,. o.oss !, 16 0* '_._ _ _ _ , . _ . _ le-o
- _ _ _ _ 188_ ,
.. , . _ _ . . < o.o's '
.~ -* . . 3% . _347
- 30 - l I to' 4s3 70s GE **. , o o't l
2't 281 IS ,0 056 10 0'. . . . _ _..__m. 307 , GSI Is7 .N 1 0 051 C O' * ._. . , _ _ . , _ , ___ _, _ _ ,
! y/ 199 .
73 .J _ _ _
,,0.o 47 .
(aoss '_ ' a+ 4o' saa iot . zm zi 20' *ML ,_ __ Jr 5.* __ _.. L . _ . . 335 1 1o8 ' ~ ~~ i L-11 "E 20' stL .- 380- -
*st . ___'"' pe .
_to'- are los .__ t p7 3se !, 4s 4 iss o s sos b4 us_ -ags
- 4ce [ _
j MERIDIAN MEHIIRAME CIRCUMFERENTIAL TANGENTIAL RADIAL CIRCUMFERENTIAL RADIAL RADIAL FORCE DIA6 RAM MEMBRANE SHE AR DIAGRAM' MOMENT DIAGRAM MOMENT DIAGRAM SHEAR DIAGRAM DISPLACEMENT i r FORCE DIA68 TAM ; I iJNITS: FORCE IN KIP $, MOMENT IN FT - KIP. DISPLACEMENT IN FT. i MEMBRANE FORCE SHOWN: TENSION IS POSITIVE
~ COMPRESSION IS NEGATIVE SHEARON HARRtS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT l
LOAD COMBINATION NO 11 Carolina Power & Light Company 4ADMENT IS SHOWN ON TENSION SIDE LOSS OF COOLANT ACCi1ENT WITH OBE FINAL SAFETY ANALYSl$ REPORT.
,' c- 1.0 (0+Li + 1.25P + 1.0 (To + Rei + 1.25 E
- CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE - ! I CYLINDRICAL WALL AND DOME ;
STRUCTURAL RESPONSES ; l ~ I FIGURE 3.8.130 i ! l
T -
. N E A
S t L yT P nR R apPO R U TM E 6
" / ! . ..; ? , .
T N E M E WmE O P C S oR RDN1 t COS UDES T S NO3 AP - R t S
. /!. /
L E AC IA A hgLY E LUAN MA T NLSE 18 EL R 3
/ .
~ _
D A PL RS C U N re Y NWL E
& A ILRA R AAUU l T
= _ t I s wT i C NIT G o_ 6 c D noE ORCI
.~ i s 1-4 9
4 , 3 a _ R P F A CDUF
= ko .-
a o. o 0 0 0 0 o a o a _ A an S ENR nil N loa E Y IT T LS O ra N RC
- M R C F I C N
L A A E O
/~/~/'_-
s 4 R u C
- ~ s- - LG s AIA
~
I D D s ,_
- 5
~~ g AR A oj 0 4
1
~ s RE
, ~ o H s
S 2 L AM f~ I TA NR E G RA gl
~
; * , . ED F
E! S
= f - ~ e7 ;\ t MT N S
+ 0 S 7 1
w U 7 0 S C E
~
i 1 I
. e r
5 1 0 2 7 ~ 1 RM H T 1 . a 1 O I u .
~ QM W J ~
J T
.N f
f/ ~ ~
~
E I S LG MA R y E l fIC R D )r
.AU C+
C
~ // / If -
~ ID DT AN N
O AE ITNTeR
=
RE 1I i 4 6 r0 4 4 0 s 7 7 0 4 9 t s_ ~ _
.M
.O AAi NLa 61 o
1 32 0 2 s 2 1ts $a .M OT IB Ot P _~ eMC+ OE
.M CF f
T i A f L,.R F . 0. (D
= //" /
/3 I s
s AV II TD MR E GA HE MI T N E 4 L D A5L OD LLC 5O 4
. 7 ; 41 el E
3 6 4 AH S E C 3 s i 1 i A v 9 k 1. - 3 L L E
~
P EV S YlT I L~ - DTA I A ~- M I S G I T- .A Mf/ O E E ~ER N G PPN RHA I KSI p Ss EAI FRD TNINi FO Os MBE mA
.e \ UMt . H ES C
C IS N 0
&[L tEiD T ER f
se *t i i HE15
- 7 G 1 os 0" l
C M.F M TP N
- 4* /
8 4 s, s 7 s s 5 5 5 1 5 5 t 7 s.k4 3 1
~
E '-
~
~
E M HD T O WC N
!W E E- MO ,H O
W- H Mf NM SS P W
/ [
MIA ER MA G I KEC Nt l D H 4 s e P" ' ' 7 3 3* 5 5 2. 6 3 2 s 4 s 1$ ND A IE D L Jo E F C RE S S I
/ '* 4 7 a I RR C
DN T
/I S 3 1 ;
4_ $ EO FA L B R N E MF
~_ S TM M
. I E O
. N M J M
. ,-u ,ov6'0
- I o .
. V 'o * '0 'F00
. o 0 '0 o. *o 'o ,, . A 4 . . ...- j. , '
3 ' mo G 4 h' 2 0 1 , - d_. 4 i 1
,1 ,
e > l U' ' - q C'UR.YE. ULTiH5Tr. l.06DK OEFORMATouIM . K/IW. , I 400 IG,50 .04G t 5t! !6.16 .070 3 750 15,5 0 .037
.l7 b )
4 US 13.75 20 \
-S" SPEC 1MEM i
-1sr SPEClM EM
; Zwo SPECJMEM
- -4" SPECIM EM '
@CL
_._ o.
/Q od C z -
o< O <,
<I. g o<
O- _J m i l! qP I ' f En H , ll
\ \
O o.! o.2 0.3 DEFORMATIOhl N NCHES FIGURE (! SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE -- Carolina TEST OF S/8" DIAMETER X 4" LONG HEADED Power & Light Company STUDS IN TENSION-CONCRETE IN TENSION 3.8.1 32 j FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT .
. CURE MME x ULTIMATE.
ULTIMATE tcno DEFCIU%TIOWlu - K/lL.' ' 1 355 4.0.0 d.SG7 , 1 1G7 19.9 0.415 3 171 16.1 0.4G9 4 100 %5 0.54G l rf" SPECHELj 1"SPECIMSJ i 7 4*SFEclHE1J
, . !. --J
- C g s - ' :. -
, S 3== specimen IG
, fp-, ,
I i i
- n. , !
-a lg ;
Z !
t y>I t i > >q i
> l t <> i ! q - L 4 > 1, i ; J '
- I I
o.1 oc O.3 a+ 0.5 cG DE. FORMATION IN INCHE.8 i FIGURE V SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE TEST OF 5/8" DI AMETER X 4" LONG HEADED j Carolina Power & Light Company STUDS IN SHEAR CONCRETE IN TENSION 3.8.1 33 I FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT * '" u ..: . :, . . . . . ~ . ,: . . ' ' . ' . . ., tuaye 5 i" ., . '":gj g?S. .t.ax..i.t.uge.usd . . m . .. . ^ .04 l 700 19.1 _- .0 % ~ t MO ' 1AO 5 3 794 EO .0% .09& 4 480 18.G - tsT SPECIMEM . e go . , . -. s . - ...... j .. TWO SPEClHEM -45 SPECHEM . IG -- -- -- , l C ! -S** SPECHEN ! o_ - tl Y tilti f2 gi q. . '"2 i - c,. . , . ~ ( , g 4 ' it i <lNi $ $lq r <l+ ql >1 > al1> d,alo . . . .4 . . . _ . l jin O' c.2 o.5 c.4 o.1 DEFORMATioFJ llJ ILlCHES. (' SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE TEST OF 5/8" DI AMETER X 4" LONG HEADED FIGURE 1 Carolina Power & Light Company STUDS IN TENSION-CONCRETE UNLOADED 3.8.1-34 FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT utrisas- - g: t n . g q:y.j c,.y.w.:.;._ . .; 7. ; M+2 CultVE. spe.: ; uc ccusisu,ULUMMELCuDg - . s..: . p 3, 2.,s
- gg,. .
n.: t led 10 . 4 11 e t 490 %7 . 410 a 4o0 140 .417 4 47 %7 .1% 45 SPECIME)J 'L" SPEClMEM r .- I i, 20 . .S** SPECJME.W 16 - t.st SPEClHEW . 1 (f) Q- __ ( W Jg . . ., t i 1 > . o - O 48 . O ; l , g$ g, . i l > O O.1 0.2 0S O.4 0.5 DEFORMATIOlJ Ikl ihjC H E S. .<*.g SHEARON HARR:S FIGURE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE Carolina TEST OF 5/8" DIAMETER X 4" LONG HEADED --- - Power & Light Company STUDS IN SHEAR-CONCRETE UNLOADED 3.8.1-35 FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ *. .e~ .; , . - , ,... . '. . ,i ..: , . , .t .d:A ...? * * .,.. ...v;. . . g. .. , ..+ i. ~ . v : = vi7:. .'. :. ::uf . ry.m .'..;. ... ~.;Jf...s. . . . . .y . ;~ , ;a,.,,.f.l;.-7. r,. .. .4,, , ,Ls . . . . .s: .; .:. . ,; ,, 9 ._ . .c # e 4 u w e st wrewc3 - couSTAur (TTf') a v h' .s ' A * @ awcwoe O-T85M4HCN d>PP CouSTAuf (TTP / o 4 AMCMM tree SA S" - %P G t MQ cousraur (. fir) GL. %1G.O EL ~!r7G d / ' ' i* AP i> ~~.~ " / <I. r .. a
- T I :
o m Lanen' +9tMk {n;* CouSTauf (TTft) # .s 92 e /'
- I AMc, Mot Sweaa- t
- 89. PD GI N h t .
Cou6Tauf (TYP) .. s 4. e L 2 5<..o s ' l l lt J . c: 2 .* , , oP f a L .i '4 8' P. E L.229.9 ~ /l % ; ; Us 'pe n tts_.o - -- -- - FIGURE ~ d SHEARON HARRIS CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FINITE ELEMENT MODEL FOR 3.8.W Carol.ina LINER ANCHORAGE ANALYSIS Power & Light Company FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT l. . '.1 9 . ...,. j.. ....,,,-.,...,,,,. .., ,., .. ..,,,g. , . , , . , - <: . : -:a ,~ r. .. :. >, c , .c : . p>r .h: gr:. -: > ., .. . s.y , *.~ y w w. ',C; .:fsm:i ~ n.: 4.
- a : w . >. ~s . .v .v.'r.? ..
.- ~ . . r py .. s._.Q'. . c.ooe ti Outt ./~'h -r - 1 W.- W . I M- _ LEGEMD l w.. . JJ. TEMSaou 4 COMPRESSICN SPRtuG. ' b--- N'.- - ""--C'D~"~~ C " '"ES6'C" *"'* G ~ 0 Y , , .,- ~. - tousv. stuo
- j-4 anc.io saa g .
m 4-- - f w- - w )! , e. g;- ,~ w A : ., ~~ m.& f I w I .s g y . .. - i -.- ) ',
- n--t
-- - e: s :n---J d .Sl
- t--< W '
3 (iugg g M ;y gD ~ ^ ^ ^ 3,1 wM w-(k ; wJ 2 ':n---$ - i I pD .Mst0$ 2 3l,,, > n %$ %: 21 h. H' y* v71 M -j z 'ID--I
- w. /
.g' 8s! u ; ~ ,a.s- =D-i e 6 d }---* .i r s.J so--{ , 14444.4 l s 1 gi 9 S! 1 ^^ E H.j :D--i i .er, ,- # o cn g *- I .r .J. 'e l g
- p. 2 w s .
} s z ' 2, - . i **' 8- # AA H ga k J. [ [. , . ,3 .i e ,i. .l I.=i *1 , , 5 . , . 4' . 4 i # pet %f *Me G Ad, 9 *npe nf
- ch' ,
49 nhposs.tcP c4t,# .'.").. w % g utt put wat e top ,._@ jug it a bul3"t ,., FIGURE hi SHEARON HARRIS _______.. NUCLEAR POWER PLANT , , _ _ _ . CONCRETE CONTAINMENT BUILDING Carolina FINITE ELEMENT MODEL OF WALL MAT. LINER CONNECTION 3.8.1-37 Power & Light Company FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT y _ _ . . , . .'- - >. ,;-- f ,c . -: ;m: . . , , , . * . , . 1 3 ,.,' . ,,, ,, , -i:k ' ' ~-: ' ~ ki ' LdCATION- .*t-,..;,.,,...,' ..'.-? ' E - :7 -l.'s,\ yQ jggg. * / <; " . . 'LOCAftChi .
- 3,..
* *F MCMENT'lH ,..Mtp INCHES ' J ,, * ? w :.: 3 LM INCHEt ,.. .IN )NCHEE . , .\> . . >. 5. , $0016 - 14 lt.C ; 16 io.C H it . le . I 9 0.33 . 3 j; ~ . - 2.fJS . c.67,-i,6 4.0K .04 i kq. - 3 08 MDMENT IN f g as a.34 1.15 3 3 MIP-INCHES g ": .56 4*II 17: ~ 1.45 a SHRAK IN KIPS n _ . ; ._. .g, i. ' 4.55 0% _ a C' C - 1 -A 4 8 to 1 . 1 4 6 7 8 9 to il 11 L LOCATlON QLCCATION 4 55 , 3.96 ININCHas su lNcNn 7.7 M MMM TMY DElrC RMATICH LOCATfCN IN INCHE% ININCHE% -00575 - jM LOCATION ^ l STRESSES ? IN K.S.L IMlHCNES 0.0445 - 14 ./ . 4015G it L M -c ot t7 .Q* f . o T.159G ' ' T4 (d Cn E s.ms < - it -C.0015 - 3 h *o 8 .- - , o? re w sreN 9, PIN INCHES 4.9175 ' l9 i , t 4 g_A i 4.9273, ,Q - QLOCATA IN INCHES o ~ gingssgs c.sGss 4 5g IN k S.L DEFORMATION DIAGRAM m j @C "Ed4~ h NOTE: - DIAGRAMS ARE FC84 TEST PRESSURE --- LCAC COMBINATICH
- y. ' 4 - c, L OC ATl*,r4 18. 5 8 %.
184 tNCHF' -- MA:X. STRESS dlAGRAr1 (,K.S. l.) 4 FIGURE SHEARON HARRIS ~ ~ ~ NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTU RE - Carolina WALL MAT LINER CONNECTION 3.8.1-38 Power & Light Company STRUCTURAL RESPONSES FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT 1 e^ . l . . ..j. ., ,.s.. .G- : ;i al i .:n *:.9 .::. . : : i' .6 :.s ',?. .: ' < .x g.:lh p j'4 ,p .;. : .:y f g4;y.f,*. >fo' 'g. .'. . .. *t. + . < . .- ~ ?- .- - s .. . .. . h ^ } l : .
- k. . . . t O!
- l. .,
.7 I p ._ l 01 o y .1 *G; 13 4 LEGEND - a g e.+ eruos w=o i N. 7 0 Ve.e(stuos m s tw p uo g M) ,f,_ o D'*b " *
- e j -
--:= j u , U C ~ ,, Wr. ee.wiuo ) l - e , , V. N , o 4 J c . ~ a t c, . , , ') y.. . r ~ ~ w- - - -2. I - *di ei + i f , v - . 9 .- \ , o . \ na l 4 4-0 ' -a i ei s m.
- s. -c _ - -. _
FIGURE
- SHEARON HARRIS -
NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE . Carolina FINITE ELEMENT MODEL OF LINER Power & Light Company PLATE ATCRANE GIROER BRACKET 3.8.1-39 FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT I - -. . -. ,-y - . . m I i 9 j i
- \
Mp 1.0 (1=1.00 , /...----------=- g -. OD ~ C' (M - = 0.5 HP P /6 , AWOlOR. STUDS _ LIMER m n / ph 1A he ]a V PAD ' STRUCTURAL MEMBER O - / - O 1.0 t.0 S.O 40 5.0 G.o l @ - g, g, f4- M . STRESS PATTERH OM A, -.@y. g, g, M N N H .. uP CROSS SEQlOu ELEMENT ~ AS THE lOHENT luCR. EASES j[ z DEVEL.oPMEWT OF ADolTioNAL lbE.NoluG SfRESS DUE To MECHAMicAL casoiflous 3%a kl g% ' ,. - MOMEMT duPVATURE REl.ATloW5 HIP, tor.REcTAWGulAR SECTl04- e PLASTIC DESIGlJ \ SHE ARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Carolina Power & Light Company FINAL SAFETY ANALYSl5 REPORT CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE ANALYSISOF LINER ATTACHMENTS FIGURE,3.8.140 l , lI . .i i! ; T N ~E R M
- j. 1 A -
UA i L yT _ P n R TR v'9 3 a O CG O 0 0 0 0000 5 5 E pP WmE UA': RD I M~ 0 0 5 7 7 O oR T 0 0 0505 1 P CS SN G. . 8 1 122 8 3 . R t I S TA 4 I t p ,
- s , [a .. . ?.
~1 1 1 11t c~ .1 'h .$ ' :' .: . A h Y E ig L NRT 81 E
- s. .o O 0 000O 0 L L A MS 3
- i. C N N-e s c = ===* s s *
- U &A I E e e eee2 e e N r e Y AE TC R Y e s wT NR U T G i R oE OO,I t R P F A CF F C A a n S ER TE m bt N H iL loa E RIN T a* O r N R a I CL N b . A C F N O/"8 E o. E C3 H C S C o. , E e '~ 9 e. i9 eO yoo N E E wo9 M t N 4 A R R 6 - T M S E wo9 M L R U P ,o9 v \( w6o. wo9 a8, # .B9 ~m _ ,' o, 0_ 0- 0 0 0 0~ 0 0_ 0- 0
- 0. ' 0. - 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 31 2 s 5 4 3 2 1 7
^ 5I 1 1 i t 9 8 6 s 3%* O mooou. u2%e3"3 c .-n . . . .. a > ..._ e -' y .. ,-. k $Ne ?O E Rg ut -pro- "y e " 8 5 .- m , , 'm_ f o00 000 f . ,@ w Ed. ..,a Gj,yn , . ~ ., ,m on omo ., . . . .. ' , s . ,~ a 6g y 8
- O NN~ '
- k D, 9 $.sa<} # 1 C R ~ o ' ' "
ecc o oo o d- ~ 88i e -- - .- - -rio- za> 5 a: e - o o y { ll1- 2 x 0 o ves c't * =6 8, g_ s ~ szo< =aa a s. mm v mz i . ;. ... s . e :.92 7w; .< . ... .j .n;ca , . y. . , , . . . z. ; , . _ , , ,, ,, .f.3 ,s. . . . . _210, . g ggz o; 8 J k y okn 2 a u4 v v w ~l10- -Olo-Too-T:00-C w 2 o . 2 00 % 2 ~ = < co Gl. w s W 3 ~900-Q. Too-100-Too* I 2 00-7sloo- l ~100* j d o' d d o' ' o' . ,- o' of ' o' o' o o- . ., ... , . . f e m ~ f 8' .o' 8' - 4 = e ~ o ~ C S : : < ~ w w d c d 6 Cf o o o- . It!/ pg.x W JNEWON OivIGH39 , o . x . b t; $ 'l s 012 Ew SE ew - 5 6 0 na n s v - - + ~. -? -- - , , . .. g .g'%.a 3 $ $y z d*sEan - < a8tg '- ou e i ? E' 2 5 2 5 8$ E isa es / / zii O - e' 2 o c u . .;:- . . : u p . n: ..,. g . < , . t. _ m ., . . - -: y .+., . / / ..s..- . ., id c w z 8 / '011 il3 / / / / / -cri p / / / wi - o,a / . / 5$ o e i w / .o o.'G f .g. m / w 9 j > / oe-0 // / / / ! ! ,.! / .o. / ot j 7 / / / / 9 / / / , _o* / .p. / v' /[ ' ./ / V / / w. / / l / / I / / l / M / / / / / / / / ov j ,/ - j / / / / - i / ~0t' j f _/ / / / / cr ? / / / / / . . 6 - oot 8 8 8 8 g 8 8 o 8 8 8 8 < e 8 ,8 e n 8 a , 9 a. o- e n - 1 s. - (-/,) 4 somos ,vi x v 1 g ,. .P - A.NGLE
- s. .: . .
w.- .. p.... . g g.s ap x 2't ' B OLT S a. * ~ I r* ' * *r ,i o o _,; _ _ _(- WIND 6fRt?Er4
- a. ~ .r.: e nw w.. . ; c .,..g;,., . ,. , . ; ;. ,_ _.,;, . , , .
, CHANNEL -.,_,, > V- > i 'e 0; ~, g LINER PLATE s i $: 2-h p x f 34 l BOLTS ' ]. CHANNEL WCCD SHIM (TYP) <- / g 'a & Eda # *14 UPPER BOLTE TIE RCD Ig ~
- =. y
- = -
- Q __
u , f- C. J. O q , . s .i; e g.s ep ,ge2. 7 N1 'g i00' SCLTS ^ CHANNEL O 7 } v I ly .1. .i. (s E- 5ad w l % ( 1 g g SCLTS - O d A L CHANNEL ( ha A ,e " E W n o u u W ' >4 ANGLE { U , f ' 2 0 ' , 3 & 2 5a# x14 i
- O
' 'F BCLTt LOWER, d ; 8 ; TIE RQD c- , n Q \ .: [ O' I' -- I g.sgpxgog 80'T5 b EXlST. COHc 2.,f[ '.'k',' f !!el * &m.~g"l '; ** t;. p. &^ CHANHEL ~ I I f' FIGURE V SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT LINER REINFORCEMENT Carolina 3.8.1-44 Power & Light Company FOR CONCRETE PLACEMENT FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT __ - ,4- --yw,, ,. .,--w,+. , - ,,w-.,. . + . , -e -.y----,-v --g mm r l
- S
" LN y0, * # EAO RII 0 ' yT ' R UDT TAA 8 j O CRC _ 9 P O _ ,1 E R ULl R T T T 5 S _ L . S I SEN4 - - * ,E (1.- . ' .-
- S TTE 1 1 1 .' ' , ' ' #" Y N YM L E T E 8
~ A MIR 3 N g A IGS E NRU " Y AEA R TTE U ) T E NNM G - " OI I " p F A CLT F - ^ S EAN TR E " L "gi A EU EM - RT CCC
- s. h. p :2 ': %
" - ,f o, . d q 4 ;~ ' * ~ ,i.;~ 't ~, N I F NUA OR L P O. *, H " CTS SI f 1 C T ' D - # 4H . A - C T -2. H -
- o. 6
'4 LT ['q 1H A N I T E . I . i 4 8 d' $ l0P.I . i. . EM 5U DIP 5 Q ' 1 E U Q E l o 0 . 0 G l i L . E ' c m g o x c,o c. o 7 oo@ 7& L w,_ S S m s g2U 32 L . L 3 g 2 - g L A '0 ? E E g E E EE W 0 0 '0 0 xc , a o- o 9 ,'[ ' j F 5 1 O 0 S 7 E 9 1 C 7 U L A g L F E E r ( s E D IS / ' \ R E T U 3 S "" G 0 S~5 o40 g i 1 T A W *h, o o a , i q N O N ) .3U yY f g D E E ls l O I T 2 F- . A V 5 0 gf 3,S'l A' E I % [F>%5'$ S 3 oo i g AT! M A E T 7AA x*RE /L ET AD ~ L E D N }'hc. O # %/1)s,oe f S N I A M g _ E O P # $% gjY i D 'l '0 . u. f ,T L E _ ~ 1 o ' 8 V _ M1\ s , L 2 I n E P A T (( H D R "1 3 . 5 R ST4MR_ 8 5 E D 6d'IA e s e L W OH C SC A7 : - TTTE RI v5 : N 7 ME E D EW P H5 ,8 - ,@ 0 S G 2 *M/, ., jE[ 3* 1 f MM _ k5h p g( L E ' l I T LS o- N AN A ECO RII L yT UTT P nR TaA R apPO CEC o E UVO o .o, ? + WmE R - Ll k 2 t, - e'. e O PC oRS T STSN4T8 -. . , v;3
- a 6
n m. QI 2 D D ?, - . ; - [ il , ( 4P g tP,oE . k 2 .gs or 4e 4P P W 'C.. /: '- , R t S Ah YL i E iL A L C I N TEE NTM E YE38 MTR NIU 1 l}'l' W= U& A i I [ A I RS E -- il ,ill ,,t. A - N reY AGAR TEE U G1 A S I wT NTMG - g T. . . R oE ON T I - P T R P F CILN F a A i . , ' D C A E hG - t:. fd k, {.,, . 5$A (,a,,L { #s ' - V*!p . :ye 1,, .; r ;: E S H n SL TA N iloA ERM RUE E . )r k ./ CTC h O r N ' . s, C ? f ;;- .,, R Ca F I NCAL i , ' . i; ' .; ':[W' 'r S i' s.: . *. .I i .:* . A OU P
- f>v*. ,<
c, " . ' gsHY c a -. . , u.- i ,' .r : 3 'J: . d*t ' E' CRS 3! ?.: M (c "- f H S Tl SO M I ,]. j *o. m t. L 1 N E O . I - - T 51l, ' , C .- - E . _ S 1 ,A < ~ s o o o ol S. c c. S a & 4 3 o N 1 2 , 4 a 4 a L u t e E s s f r I 4 L. I t A cx t W
- 8 w**P 0 n c E 5
A N * $j - A S v u %. C A F N *S I a c S T ,s N K\
- 3
*N1 %/ 7g / U C. N 3 1 0 ~ 8 T A v E. E *5 2 D 2 E P [j s o_
- gQ%*
. v g s *m - o 2 *M l 3, T) b>n* 2 r>$ - o 6l
- t. g e p [ ( _.
%j(( J *gQyeA 3 .v. t Az.no- 4 ,. Tl _savo* ' tS E5b sTarN AqEs % 2ci . o .m . o .c3 tro o .s_. . GY) A / I UNER 1 1 1 1 1~ l 1 1 1,-uwen r cJ1 r7. d.2 g t/ *, ?- _ <m,-- ,4jg<,-4,<, t-4,<,)f<,<r<,4 - ggg , i ., . ' . 'j. 4 _ ,,_ .,, o<,,,_ < ,3 < ,<,<, <, o . _ :: = , g = - 2 , , , , --.g g,rg, , g.-. .. z. , s ...es.o gsgee .e . o I o
- I CJ 2GG -- -CJ 2G1 [ c3,gg
.Y \ L_ m - , _ ,< g e__e ,<, - - 7 QA [STRAllJ GAGES (ifR)CJ1- n . DET. A
- dQ~ ;7 c3 lti - ~
V % \\ Y(6PRIN IN( .. STRAIN GAGES 04 KA08AL BHEAR g-SARS (TWO ROvrS AT Tn4E f#46 LDCATION wtTH THE _ ..;, ; ^[ . ~. . - STRAlH 4AG ES i 04 VERTICAL 4 640Rl20NTAL VERTICAL MRS. *... = . . REINF.(TWO ROWS AS SHOWN '2 ' ,, 1H OET. 2 At,OVE) - - '. 3 / / -UlJ E R EL 570.OO g. g , STQAi4 GAGES ou REllJF. STEEL ( TWO ' N .s
- l. r r ROWS. AS SHOWu
-. f ' * (' -- tu OET.A ABOVE. 4 [ Kh. N' 3,_ EL.17sO' 4 MECH. SPLICE r - > EL. 2t f.O* [R.AlH G8GES Ou H - I * -- LeuER PLATE (TWO , 7 LINEN , R0WS AT THis stE . , UO NN . S' / LOCATION witTH THE TWO STRAIN G'iAC3ES AitG. F - M ICAL g D EL.3G4.00 ~ s '; yJ- ~' l l INSTALLED CH THE LINER PL ATE AT _'I' " # "_, .. l a. moo __ _:;. g;3'j,25 c ^"D ^murs 2TO 4T ApAox. mat NumeER or sTRXiN ages: ' * = SECT.A-A REINFORCING 116 y h s'-o .. WALL - DOME JUNCTION LINER : 2 l TOT AL NUMBER OF sTRAsH 'g . GAGES: - REINFORCING . 36 y , SECT. A- A LINER : 14 - s WALL - MAT JUNCTION SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Carolina Power & Ligh't Company FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT - CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE -
- STRUCTUR AL INTEGRITY TEST -WALL I STpAIN MEASUREMENT L,0 CATIONS I
- FIGURE 3.8.1-47 l k P e , , e l F a 4 , L':. 9.. . . *s' b \: l l .---- ..--- s ,gg . .6. ' . & ~" ' -- . - - - . , , . , /'/ - - hb .: : ;E555E 2 __ u fMN V --:: -: :-EEEE EE :- : ; c' , i M g ,g d
- O ,:\
-\ a$EE 5 E M c - 55:SN~.v:---- p- E Qp s 9.I.'.~_f_k, .~ . g ,' 09n# - ..... . . y- ,g o-a_ ?..****......f/g , , . ~ < B N, s b : j > [ f- -g \- suuu u\uuu \u\\u\M i
- 1
(' nuuumu : : -f : : ' ; .. . , . . . . . s susmumm r, mmumm m v . 9er . . + . . .c,,; . .s* .STR. AN * .C. *AGE. - - mmmmu a/ - u , . , . . , , . r , < umom : . ; . . . . :c cTvey. - 1 5 - 4~cocin mTcw E~es *{f "i ~ jM i j , ii ee SECT. A-A .t '- '. /Dlllllllllllll - - - 1.- - - millllllllll = ;- ; 4 n.i.o % ~ f* ?. ;*nl.P ../IT/fffI : : - - N I- . . s . 6 (
- r. };3 .n.::.
FP . - . m W. _ s n woTe: .- :. INSTALLep OH d:' . ; :M ';f ^h [*f_ "L* * . STRAIN C S AGES . Att THE _qF.ER PLATE AT THE SAME. LOCATIONS lEEEl : g
- ?:
~ I C.ZE:iEis [3 ;- _; BPECIFIED IN DEVELOPED ELEVATIOH, C:::- y_- ;: E ::- ---:-g:::, r-._ ;-Em - r- --"-,'-: TOTA . NUMBER OF ,STRAle4 QAQEM R EIN FORCING li47 g g 7 $.g- L:NER *: 7 "TS
- DEVELOPED ELE.VATION AT i
- EQUIPMENT HATCH -
~n N.T.S. 4 t SHEARON HARRIS NUCLE AR POWER PLANT . Carolina Power & Ught Company * ' FINAL SAFETY ANALYSl$ REPORT C('NCRETE CONTAINMENT - INTEGRITY TEST - PENET R ATION ST R AIN MEASURE LOCA1 NNS FIGURE 3.8.148 { ..e b a g d E , , - l 1 t !- a e ~. .a,-_ .p , o u o u , u o g' . .; i' ' i, 4 i, i. ' I i + 3 i. . r\_ r f - ; : r ijjj; .f, 0 '- 3!Y px ij l j' ,- t y * - 2: [ ' i ( - Si'% t'. S " N' mr - ~ '- ~~ist. tis m C ~jd$ ~ *Z ' I : Hoest.tems 2 3n - hl M i STR&l4 G&GE J. c _ y 4 - 7 g* trTR> . STRAIN G6GE (TYR) c Q O ,,uG ,,, e - 7 ., .- e u-u <EL.ttioo SECT 9A-A c'_ .. . 3 \ W .T. 6. ~ DEVELOPED ELEVATIO;J AT H.S.,EW.4 AEW. SLEEVES. - !!II) s MTS SECT B-b 1- '.- -' o7 vo- uoTe: u r.S STRatu C&GES ARE.luSTALLED Elu THE LINER c 1
- J -SYe4H. AbouT T AT THE SAME LOCATIONS SpeceFito su ?
f WLSS TED DEVELOPED ELEVATION. 'E.. rotat uuM6ER. OF STRAlu GAGES: ' ~. ' . . nesuroncauG :sto
- uuER : 29 Ji' '
i18550 H$gSL st' ~ " ' (c d M ii(~ ' C) . g. q f~ go',o N UEN ; !. ~ fl \ t g O ~ i M SIEEAM SRVE ! .'h' ' -- Ad i % _{UNEE I ll ll ll ll l t' - 4EL178.m' f); , 3 } N
- A5'gv =
6 h c c DEVELOPED ELEVATION AT MS4 EW. SLEEVE /]r \ 2 STeasu GsGL + (TYP) n s i i 1 "'r ur.S. SECTL PLAH C-C . z. NOTE: NO.18 REiNF. BARS ARE PREPARED PRIOR TO WELDING IN PLACE: SECT D D SNEARON NARRIS NUCtEAR POWER PtANT AIN GAGES ARE INSTALLED IN PLACE AFTER THE WELDING OF H.T. S - Carolina Power & Light Company FI'NAL SAF ETV ANALYSIS REPORT TOTAL NUMBER OF STR AIN GAGES: REINF -24 ' Cord: RETE . TEST - PENETRCONTAINMENT-ATION STR AIN IN " MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS ~ - FIGURE 3.8.149 a e Y 4 . _ _ _ . _ - _ - _ - - - - _ _ _ _ _ . _____- _ _ J 7 - >=- 5 rp t!E agd" =12 ~ . . . - w. ,e. . gov, sos;-o- Nciw^s7s cum ..^3C , .. l..$. .$g,!g $3= . .... . . .: , :. . ... .e- . ----an .:: - - - @%G IG W - 8ei E572= CC'Ct~vP1. hd v. 10
- ,a 5%# hs b- '
" 0 g'5' 6z '*a'> -h l l' .):. <; s;2:3f %. :, - u . ,? e g ., cc.i.t :r.1;s ~ . [ , ' O ' * : - '~f ' , sen os a = .3A *'
- JA;. .
",L. ====- i *S m 3 WMJ CC'CIE 7 , g Q I'D -t- -4 4 .4-3N#9 N'**"* ~ .W. ." . ,e. , ,c m .ca N.\/ . ---.y m sc 3 ;yg idlSN NClkVTE~3 C3dC~I A~SC y StygO qqq "v4 "9HL N1W;.'% eycin;=c itPLWTdW3a 13NY;919E2: -JC NC11W 3Cd'g, j \i COUC ~9 k X X co g; 3 ~ n M y w.csa 8;p:;w" wa, m/ E} OYAM cc ec > = inCd] bc "YM] _ g7gg./ , ] ~l s 't12,vn C55d y nViL9 NIW - N) s , i d 11 -- -- I
- saw w
, 't u v snnce % MM' l CC GUC ~3 f T NI" , cc.ggq - q E f 'N6Ni3cv ,, y .Cil SI eCC
- CC'Ot*r M N ,
I e m ,.---- - - - - _ - - - -}}