ML20101K932
| ML20101K932 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cooper  |
| Issue date: | 02/29/1996 |
| From: | NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20101K928 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9604030152 | |
| Download: ML20101K932 (14) | |
Text
.- -
Attachment to -
NLS960040 Page1 of13 DETERMINATION OF THE LIMITING OPERATING
CONDITION FOR THE COOPER FEEDWATER NOZZLE FRACTURE !
MECHANICS EVALUATION February 1996 hk DO O O 8
1 A}tachment to NLS960040 Page 2 0f l3 l
l TABLE OF CONTENTS l
SECTION PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
& BACKGROUND 3 j 2.0 FRACTURE MECHANICS EVALUATION 3
)
2.1 LEVEL A (NORMAL) CONDITION EVALUATION 4 ;
2.2 LEVEL H (UPSET) CONDITION EVALUATION 4 2.3 LEVEL C (EMERGENCV) CONDITION EVALUATION 5 )
2.4 LEVEL D (FAULTED) CONDITION EVALUATION 5 i
3.0
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS 6 l i
I
4.0 REFERENCES
7 TABLES 8 l !
i i
4 k
t i
A}tachment to NLS960040 Page 3 of 13
1.0 INTRODUCTION
& BACKGROUND References 1,2 and 3 documented a fracture mechanics evaluation in accordance with L ASME Code Section XI (1989 edition) for indications found in the feedwater nozzle to shell l junction region during inspections conducted at Cooper Nuclear Station (CNS). These analyses l assumed the most limiting loadings for Normal (Level A), Upset (Level B), Emergency (Level ,
C) and Faulted (Level D) operation. These analyses also stated that,"...the hydrotest was assumed to be the most limiting condition from the fracture viewpoint... because among all the -
l Level A, B, C and D operating conditions, the hydrotest condition represents the most limiting combination of high stress and low temperature." The objective of this report is to provide documentation supporting our conclusion.
The approach used in this evaluation was to first determine a Haw that is allowable based on hydroust conditions. This means, the applied Ki is equal to the allowable Ki , for the hydrotest condition for this flaw geometry. In other words, the ratio of the applied K, to the I
allmvable K i, for the hydrotest condition is 1.0 for this Daw geometry. The applied K i and allowable K i, calculations for the same flaw geometry were then conducted for the Level A, B. C and D conditions and similar ratios were calculated. If this ratio is greater than 1.0 for other l operating conditions, then it will clearly show that the hydrotest condition was noverning in the determination of allowable flaw sizes. ,
2.0 FRACTURE MECilANICS EVALUATION l A circumferential flaw was postulated along the length of the weld. Now, consider a flaw with an aspect ratio of 1:6 or 0.166. This aspect ratio was chosen because this is the typical aspect ratio used in fracture mechanics evaluations. Setting the applied K equal to the allowable K value for the hydrotest condition, the flaw depth and a/t ratio was calculated. Thus, based on i the hydrotest temperature of 190"F, the values are the following:
)
Allowable crack depth: 0.88 inch (aspect ratio =l:6, a/t =0.15) !
l K, applied = Ki allowed: Approx. 48.5 ksi/m.
l l
The K, applied was calculated based on a membrane stress of 28 ksi resulting from an applied pressure of 1150 psi applied to the nozzle to shelljunction region. The safety factor used was /10 or 3.162. Thus for the hydrotest condition, the ratio of allowable K to the applied K is 1.0 by the above convention.
i i
1 1 i
b i
I i
Attachment to NLS960040 Page 4 of 13 2.1 Level A (Normal) Condition Evaluation For this operating condition, the additional loading is the contribution from the 100"F/ hour rate during startup and shutdown. The Ki from this loading is positive at the inside surface during shutdown. Reference 5 provides an analysis technique for evaluating the stress intensity factor due to a thermal transient. This technique will be used here for comparative approximations to demonstrate that the impact of thermal stresses for conditions other than hydrotest are in fact bounded by hydrotest conditions. The stress intensity factor Kn was calculated using the following expression from Reference 6:
Ka = [(CR)/l000] t23p, where CR = Cooling rate in F/hr '
t = Vessel thickness F3 = 0.690 + 3.127 (a/t) - 7.435 (a/t)2 + 3.532 (a/t)'
Using a cooling rate of 100 F/hr, thickness of 5.88 inches, and a=0.88 inch, gave a Kn of 8.4 ksi/in. Thus, K applied i during the Level A condition is conservatively estimated as (48.5+8.4) or 50.9 ksi/in. This value is conservative because the internal pressure assumed in arriving at the 33 ksi/in value was 1150 psi (corresponding to the hydrotest pressure versus the operating pressure of 1000 psi during Level A condition).
l The temperature at the start of shutdown (when the pressure is highest) is such that the )
Ku value is 200 ksi/in. This gives an allowable Ki value of(200/3.162) or 63.2 ksi/in. This value is larger than the applied value of Ki . The ratio of allowable Ku to applied K, for this condition is then (63.2/56.9) or 1.1.
2.2 Level B (Upset) Condition Evaluation All of the thermal transients during the upset condition involve cooling rates no greater than 100 F/hr. This case was already covered in the Level A condition evaluation. The only other loading is the seismic. The Reference 4 analysis performed for other plants indicated that the effectis e internal pressure increase corresponding to a maximum OBE event was negligible (less than 3% of operating pressure). Since the evaluation for Level A already considered a l150 psi internal pressure versus a normal operating pressure of 1000 psi, the applied Ki of 56.9 ksi/in calculated for Level A condition is also a bounding number for Level B conditions including seismic events. The allowable Ku for level B conditions is the same as that for Level A conditions. Thas, the ratio of allowable Ku to applied K, for this condition is also 1.1.
l t
i
A,ttachment to NLS960040 Page 5 of 13 1
2.3 Level C (Emergency) Condition Evaluation The thermal cycle chart for the CNS [ Reference 7] does not classify various thermal transients into Level C and D categories. Nevertheless, as was discussed in Reference 5, the improper Start of Recirculation Loop transient is the limiting Level C transient fbr this plant.
Figure I shows the pressure temperature conditions during the transient. Figure 2 shows the plot of calculated values of K for a 1:6 aspect ratio flaw. Table 1 from Reference 5 shows the calculated values of K for various loadings as a function of crack depth. Since we are considering an indication in the nozzle to shell weld where the pressure stresses are predominantly membrane (References 1,2,3, and 8), the results of Reference 5, which were calculated for RPV flaws, can be reasonably extended to evaluation of the nozzie to shell weld.
The purpose here is to provide an adequate appre.ximation of the applied K for comparative purposes.
The K values in the second row of the axial flaw ca , - (Table 1) are relevant for this ec'uation. l The K, and Kea are 26.2 and 1.9 ksi/in, respectively. For the pressure loading, the K value calculated for the hydrotest case (@ l150 psi) can be conservatively used. The applied total K for Level C condition can then be calculated as:
Kai = K p+ K, + Kaa
= 48.5 + 26.2 + 1.9
= 76.6 ksi/in.
Since the magnitude of Kp(due to internal pressure) is approximately twice that of K,(due to thermal stress), any minor errors in approximating K, should be considered insignificant for the purposes of this evaluation.
l Since the temperature during the thermal transient is high enough, the K i , value is 200 ksi/in. The safety factor for the Level C condition is /2 or 1.414. Therefore, the allowable l value of K i, is 200/l.414 or 141.4 ksi/in. As can be seen, this value considerably exceeds the l applied value of 76.5 ksi/in. The ratio of allowable K ,i to applied K, for this condition is then (141.4/76.7) or 1.8.
2.4 Level D (Faulted) Condition Evaluation l The transient used for Level D condition evaluation was the Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) Event as shown in Figure 3. Figure 4 shows the calculated values of K as a function of crack depth for a 1:6 aspect ratio flaw. Table 2 shows the calculated values of K total as a function of crack depth. The values in the second row of this table (a=0.88 inch) are relevant Ihr this evaluation. As can be seen in this table, the dominant contribution to total K essentially comes from the thermal K. The K,,,,o is shown as 63.3 ksi/in.
e
Attachment to l '
NLS960040 l Page 6 of 13 l
The safety fhetor for the Level D condition is also /2 or 1.414. Therefore, the allowable value of Ki , for Level D conditions is (200/l.414) or 141.4 ksi/in. Once again, the applied K value is significantly lower than the allowable value of K. The ratio of allowable Ki , to applied K, Ihr this condition is then (141.4/63.1) or 2.2.
3.0
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS l
In References 1,2, and 3, hydrotest conditions, which involve the combination oflow ;
operating temperatures and high safety factors, were found to be the most limiting operating conditions fbr vessel welds. The objective of this report is to provide documentation supporting our conclusion.
I l
l For the purpose of this evaluation, a circumferentially oriented surface flaw with an l aspect ratio of 1:6 at the nozzle to shell was considered. An allowable flaw depth based on the hydrotest condition as limiting, is 0.88 inch. Essentially, the applied Ki value for this flaw geometry was equal to the hydrotest condition allowable Ki , value. The applied and allowable l K i , values for the same flaw geometry were then calculated and are summarized in the table
- below:
i Operating Applied Allowable K, Ratio, i Condition Ki K,i Allowable /
(ksi/in) (ksi/in) Applied Ilydrotest 48.5 48.5 1.0 Level A 56.9 63.2 1.1-Level B 56.9 63.2 1.1 Level C 76.6 141.4 1.8 Level D 63.3 141.4 2.2 The table above clearly shows that the allowable flaw depth based on the hydrotest condition is governing. The applied K ivalues for other operating conditions ihr the same flaw geometry are less than the allowable values even considering various conservatisms in the calculation. This means, the allowable flaw depth based on other operating conditions such as Level A/B/C/D would have been higher than that based on the hydrotest condition.
I 3
f 1
e i
i._- _ _ - . _-_ _ - - . - _ _ , . _ - _ _ _ . _. __
l l
I l A,ttachment to NLS960040 l Page 7 of 13
4.0 REFERENCES
l
[1] GE Report No. GENE-523-133-1191, Revision 1," Fracture Mechanics Evaluation of the UT Indications in the Cooper Feedwater Nozzle to Shell Weld," November 1991
[2] GE Report No. GENE-523-134-1191, Revision 2," Fracture Mechanics Evaluation of UT Indications Found per Reg. Guide 1.150 in the Cooper Feedwater Nozzle to Shell Weld," !
December 1991. !
[3] GE Report No. GENE-523-Al28-1195, Revision 1," Fracture Mechanics Evaluation of UT Indications Found During 1995 Re-examination of the Feedwater Nozzle to Shell Welds at Cooper Nuclear Station," December 1995.
[4] GE Report No. GENE-523-Al20-1195,"An Evaluation to Determine the Limiting Operating Condition in the BFN 111 RPV Flaw Handbook," November 1995.
[5] Mehta,II.S., T.A. Caine and S.E. Plaxton,"10CFR50 Appendix G Equivalent Margin ;
Analysis for Low Upper Shelf Energy in BWR/2 Through /6 Vessels." GE Report No.
NEDO-32205-A, Class I, Rev.1, Febmary 1994.
[6] ASME Code Case N-512," Assessment of Reactor Vessels with Low Upper Shelf Charpy impact Energy Levels," Approved February 12,1993.
[7] GE Drawing No. 729E762, Rev. O, Thermal Cycle Diagram.
[8] G.L. Stevens, DRF #B13-01541, vol. 3," Cooper Automated Monitoring."
i l
i l
l
1
)
Aitachment to l NL,S960040 t
l Page 8 of 13 ;
Table 1 l Applied K and J-Integral Values for BWR/3-6 Case for Level C Limiting Transient )
I 1
l 1
EMERGENCY CON 0! TION EVENT 24 PRESSURE (PSI)= 1050 Kt FIT COEFFICIENTS CLAD STRESS VESSEL Ri (!N)= 126.7 as 8.831288 VESSEL TH (!N)= 6.19 b= 74.92595 5 (KS!)= 6 CLA0 THICKNESS = 0.19 c= 107.681 !
! a0 (IN)= 0.809 d= 63.6289 '
l E(KSI)= 27700 e= 14.3416
. YS (KS!)= 69 ,
l l
AXIAL FLAW a F1 Kt Kp K, clad ae F18 Kt' Kp' K', clad Ktotal Japp 0.81 1.00 26.52 35.91 1.98 0.86 1.00 26.28 36.99 1.92 65.19 139.62 0.86 1.00 26.26 37.08 1.91 0.91 1.00 25.98 38.18 1.86 66.01 143.15 l 0.91 1.00 25.96 38.23 1.85 0.96 1.01 25.65 39.34 1.80 66.79 14.S4 ,
l 0.96 1.01 25.64 30.37 1.80 1.01 1.01 25.30 40.48 1.75 67.53 149.82 l i 1.01 1.01 25.30 40.48 1.75 1.06 1.01 24.94 41.60 1.70 68.25 153.02
! 1.06 1.01 24.95 41.59 1.70 1.11 1.01 24.57 42.72 1.66 68.94 156.16 1.11 1.01 24.58 42.68 1.66 1.16 1.02 24.19 43.82 1.62 69.62 159.25 1.16 1.02 24.21 43.76 1.62 1.21 1.02 23.79 44.91 1.58 70.29 162.29 l
1.21 1.02 23.82 44.83 1.58 1.26 1.02 23.39 46.00 1.55 70.93 165.27 '
1.26 1.02 23.43 45.89 1.55 1.31 1.03 22.96 47.07 1.51 71.54 168.15 t 1.31 1.03 23.01 4 .95 1.52 1.37 1.03 22.50 48.14 1.48 72.13 170.91 1.36 1.03 22.57 48.00 1.49 1.42 1.03 22.01 49.21 1.45 72.67 173.49 i 1.41 1.03 22.09 49.04 1.46 1.47 1.04 21.46 50.27 1.43 73.16 175.83 '
1.46 1.04 21.56 50.09 1.43 1.52 1.04 20.85 51.33 1.40 73.58 177.86 I l 1.51 1.04 20.97 51.13 1.41 1.57 1.05 20.15 52.39 1.38 73.92 179.50 l 1.56 1.05 20.30 52.17 1.38 1.62 1.05 19.36 53.44 1.35 74.15 180.64 1.61 1.05 19.54 53.21 1.36 1.67 1.06 18.44 54.49 1.33 74.26 181.18 1.66 1.05 18.66 54.25 1.34 1.72 1.06 17.38 55.S4 1.31 74.23 181.02 1.71 1.06 17.64 55.30 1.32 1.77 1.06 16.16 56.58 1.29 74.03 180.05 1.76 1.06 16.45 56.34 1.30 1.82 1.07 14.74 57.62 1.27 73.64 178.15 1.81 1.07 15.08 57.39 1.28 1.87 1.07 13.12 58.66 1.26 73.03 175.22 WORKSHEET: BWR00US2.WK1 CIRCUMFERENTIAL FLAW a F1 Et Kp K, clad ae F1' Kt' Kp' K', clad Ktotal Japp 0.81 0.92 26.52 17.33 1.98 0.83 0.92 26.40 17.60 1.95 45.95 69.36 0.86 0.92 26.26 17.90 1.91 0.88 0.93 26.12 18.17 1.88 46.18 70.06 0.91 0.93 25.96 18.47 1.85 0.93 0.93 25.81 18.74 1.83 4.38 70.66 0.96 0.93 25.64 19.03 1.80 0.98 0.93 25.48 19.29 1.77 46.55 71.18 l
1.01 0.93 25.30 19.58 1.75 1.03 0.93 25.13 19.84 1.73 4 .70 71.64 l 1.06 0.93 24.95 20.12 1.70 1.08 0.94 24.77 20.38 1.68 46.83 72.04 i'
- 1.11 0.94 24.58 20.65 1.66 1.13 0.94 24.40 20.91 1.64 4 .95 72.41
! 1.16 0.94 24.21 21.17 1.62 1.18 0.94 24.02 21.43 1.60 47.05 72.74 i
! 1.21 0.94 23.82 21.69 1.58 1.23 0.95 23.63 21.95 1.57 47.14 73.02 i
- 1.26 0.95 23.43 22.21 1.55 1.28 0.95 23.22 22.46 1.53 47.22 73.24 l 1.31 0.95 23.01 22. 72 1.52 1.33 0.95 22.79 22.97 1.50 47.26 73.39
- 1.36 0.95 22.57 23.22 1.49 1.33 0.95 22.33 23.47 1.47 47.28 73.43 i 1.41 0.96 22.09 23 . 72 1.46 1.43 0.96 21.83 23.97 1.45 47.25 73 .34
{ 1.46 0.96 21.56 24.22 1.43 1.48 0.96 21.27 24.47 1.42 47.16 73.07
! 1.51 0.96 20.97 24. 72 1.41 1.53 0.96 20.65 24.96 1.39 47.00 72.58 j 1.56 0.97 20.30 25.21 1.38 1.58 3.97 19.94 25.45 1.37 46.76 71.83
- 1.61 0.97 19.54 25.70 1.36 1.63 0.97 19.13 25.93 1.35 46.41 70.75 i 1.66 0.97 18.66 26.18 1.34 1.68 0.97 18.19 26.41 1.33 45.93 69.31 1 1.71 0.98 17.64 26.67 1,32 1. 73 0.98 17.11 26.89 1.31 45.31 67.44 1 1.76 0.98 16.45 27.15 1.30 1.78 0.98 15.86 27.37 1.29 44.52 65.10 1,81 0.98 15.C8 27.63 1.28 1.83 0.98 14.42 27.84 1.27 43.53 62.24 L
~ ..
Attachment to NLS960040 Page 9 of 13 Table 2
- Applied K and J-Integral Values for BWR/3-6 Case for Level D Limiting Transient f FAULTED CONDITION EVENT 27 l PRESSURE (PSI)= 20 Kt FIT COEFFICIENTS CLAD STRESS i VESSEL Ri (!N)= 126.7 a= 14.00964 VESSEL TM (IN)= 6.19 b= 130.9087 5 (KS!)= 16.5 CLAD THICKNESS = 0.19 c= 155.726 l a0 (!N)= 0.809 d= 89.8447 l E(K$I)= 27700 e= 20.6397 YS (CSI)= 69 i
I AX!AL FLAW a F1 Kt Kp K, clad ae Flo gge gpa K', clad Ktotal Japp 0.81 1.00 56.72 0.68 5.44 0.85 1.00 57.20 0.70 5.28 63.19 131.17 0.86 1.00 57.26 0.71 5.26 0.90 1.00 57.67 0. 73 5.11 63.51 132.53 0.91 1.00 57.72 0.73 5.10 0.95 1.01 58.08 0.75 4.96 63.79 133.67 0.96 1.01 58.12 0.75 4.95 1.00 1.01 58.42 0.77 4.82 64.02 134.63 1.01 1.01 58.45 0.77 4.81 1.05 1.01 58.72 0.79 4.69 64.20 135.42 1.06 1.01 58. 74 0.79 4.68 1.10 1.01 58.97 0.81 4.58 64.35 136.06 l 1.11 1.01 58.99 0.81 4.57 1.16 1.02 59.17 0.83 4.47 64.47 136.53 1.16 1.02 59.18 0.83 4.46 1.21 1.02 59.32 0.85 4.36 64.54 136.83 1.21 1.02 59.33 0.85 4.36 1.26 1.02 59.42 0.87 4.27 64.56 134.93 i 1.26 1.02 59.42 0.87 4.26 1.31 1.03 59.45 0.89 4.18 64.53 136.78 l 1.31 1.03 59.45 0.89 4.17 1.36 1.03 59.41 0.91 4.10 64.42 136.34 i
1.36 1.03 59.41 0.91 4.09 1.41 1.03 59.28 0.93 4.02 64.23 135.55 1.41 1.03 59.27 0.93 4.01 1.45 1.04 59.05 0.95 3.94 63.94 134.33 i 1.46 1.04 59.02 0.95 3.94 1.50 1.04 58.69 0.97 3.87 63.53 132.60 t 1.51 1.04 58.65 0.97 3.87 1.55 1.05 58.18 0.99 3.81 62.98 130.29 l
1.56 1.05 58.11 0.99 3.80 1.60 1.05 57.49 1.01 3.74 62.25 127.31 1.61 1.05 57.40 1.01 3. 74 1.65 1.05 56.61 1.03 3.69 61.33 123.57 1.66 1.05 56.47 1.03 3.68 1.70 1.06 55.51 1.05 3.63 60.19 119.01 1.71 1.06 55.30 1.05 3.62 1.75 1.06 54.15 1.07 3.58 58.79 113.56 1.76 1.06 53.84 1.07 3.56 1.80 1.07 52.51 1.09 3.52 57.12 107.19 1.81 1.07 52.05 1.09 3.51 1.84 1.07 50.55 1.11 3.48 55.14 9V.87 i
WORKSHEET: BWR00US2.VK1 CIRCUMFERENTIAL FLAW a F1 Kt Kp K,cted ae F18 Kt' Kp' K', clad Ktetal Japo 0.81 0.92 56.72 0.33 5.44 0.85 0.92 57.20 0.34 5.28 62.82 129.65 0.86 0.92 57.26 0.34 5.26 0.90 0.93 57.67 0.35 5.12 63.14 130.96 0.91 0.93 57.72 0.35 5.10 0.95 0.93 58.07 0.36 4.96 63.40 132.05 0.96 0.93 58.12 0.36 4.95 1.00 0.93 58.42 0.37 4.82 63.62 132.96 1.01 0.93 58.45 0.37 4.81 1.05 0.93 58.72 0.38 4.70 63.79 133.70 1.06 0.93 58.74 0.38 4.68 1.10 0.94 58.96 0.39 4.58 63.93 134.29 1.11 0.94 58.99 0.39 4.57 1.15 0.94 59.17 0.40 4.47 64.04 134.71 1.16 0.94 59.18 0.40 4.44 1.20 0.94 59.32 0.41 4.37 64.10 134.97 i 1.21 0.94 59.33 0.41 4.36 1.25 0.95 59.42 0.42 4.27 64.11 135.02 1.26 0.95 59.42 0.42 4.26 1.30 0.95 59.45 0.43 4.18 64.07 134.84 l 1.31 0.95 59.45 0.43 4.17 1.35 0.95 59.41 0.44 4.10 63.95 134.36
- 1.36 0.95 59.41 0.44 4.07 1.40 0.96 59.29 0.45 4.02 63.76 133.54 1.41 0.96 59.27 0.45 4.01 1.45 0.96 59.C5 0.46 3.94 63.46 132.29 1
1.46 0.96 59.02 0.46 3.94 1.50 0.96 58.69 0.47 3.87 63.04 130.54 1.51 0.96 58.65 0.47 3.87 1.55 0.97 58.18 0.48 3.81 62.47 128.21 1.56 0.97 58.11 0.48 3.80 1.60 0.97 57.51 0.49 3.75 61.74 125.22
! 1.61 0.97 57.40 0.49 3.74 1.65 0.97 56.63 0.50 3.69 60.81 121.49 1.66 0.97 18.66 0.50 3.68 1.66 0.97 56.35 0.50 3.67 60.52 120.32
, 1.71 0.98 17.64 0.51 3.62 1.71 0.98 55.16 0.51 3.61 59.22 115.44 a
1.76 0.98 16.45 0.52 3.56 1.76 0.98 53.64 0.52 3.56 57.76 109.60 i 1.21 0.98 15.02 0.53 3.51 1.81 0.98 51.89 0.53 3.51 55.93 102.75 i
l Attachment to WLS960040 l
- i Page lo of l3 l
l l
l EVENT 24 Emergency Condition .
l 600 -
cz.
550 -
528 ,
o ,
i e 500 -
l 6 3 450 -
, e '
l c 400 -
L
& 350 -
o h 300 -
268 250 -
1 e --* 26 sec ~
65 C-1100 -
l 0 1050 -
1050
=
$ 1000 -
o 6
c l
l l
i i
Figure 1 Pressure and Temperature Conditions During improper Start of Cold Recirculation Loop Transient i
4 1
I 1
i Attachment to NLS960040 Page 11 of 13 I
I I
l I
t 30 .i .i I 3 8 8 !
27*5 . . . . . . . . . . . ...............
i 8 8 I t t 2 5 - - - --- +. - ~ ~ ~ .i - --~ ~ + . ---- .: - ~ ~ ~ + - - - ~~.~~~ ~~-
tn : : : :
I i t i I I a
i 22.5- --- ---- ' ~ ~ - - j - - -- ~~ i-- ---- -l ~ ~ ~ ~ -- i- - ---t-----
C 8 8 8 8
8
..i..............6.............4.............4...------.G.......4.-
v . . .
. .e 8 8 8 8
\
i y .
e a
.t l ,y - -- -.
8 8
.I .I i 17.5- --- -- r --
t.
r - -
. - -1. -
.r - - -(
s . . .
i
, y .
t I I I
{ . ............*..............I..............q..............9..............q...............g.....+.........
i i I g
i 8 8
.t !.
1 I 8 8 I.
12.5- -
--- t- ---- -i--- i - ~ ~ t -- --- -- ~ ~ ~ ~ -- t -- ~ ~ -- * - - - " - '
.i .
l t. 8
- t. S.
10 . . . .
- 0. 25 0.75 L. 25 1.75 A, in l
Figure 2 Calculated K values for Level C Transient in Figure 1 (a/l = 1:6)
J e
1 4
7
- - - - - - . - - . . _. - - = - .
Attachment to NLS960040 r Page 12 of 13 1
EVENT 27 Faulted Condition l
l 600 -
,ta. 550 -
528 o 500 -
r 2
- a 450 -
E o 400 -
c.,
, E 350 -
1 o
t-300 -
l 259 l 250 -
l
> 15 sec 4 1200 -
2m 1000 -
1 800 -
8 600 -
z E 400 -
t I c 200 -
20 0 -
Figure 3 Limiting Level D Transient (LOCA) n i
l a
4 i
i 1
Attachmt:nt to NLS960040
! Page 13 of 13 1
J I.
4 s
i i
70 4 1 l 1
. 1 8 8
+.----.'---+.:--:--=---':----2------
D'O - k .-
t 3 :
.I .s t (D 50- ------i.------- - - ---- t -
t
- i ----
-- i - -- - <
^ : :
a I C 1 s s
..e
.s .s v . . . . . . . . . . . ........ -
. . . . . . . . . . . . . ..............6...............i..............4.........-
t g .
" .t a
.M : 3 I
y
- 30 ......................s............t...............s.............4...............s...............
3 t
1 3 1
4 8 8
. 8
- t. 8 8 8 8 8 20- ............&.........s,...............a,......s.............4...........s..............<
.r .
I. l 3 3
10 3 8 D. 25 O.75 L. 25 1.75 A, in Figure 4 Calculated K values for Level D Transient in Figure 3 (a/l = 1:6) l f
I I
l
f LIST OF NRC COMMITMENTS ATTACHMENT 3 Correspondence No: NLS960040 The following table identifies those actions committed to by the District in this document. Any other actions discussed in the submittal represent intended or planned actions by the District. They are described to the NRC for the NRC's information and are not regulatory commitments. Please notify the Licensing Manager at Cooper Nuclear Station of any questions regarding this document or any associated regulatory commitments.
COMMITTED DATE COMMITMENT OR OUTAGE If leakage in excess of 0.3 gpm is identified following startup from the 1997 refueling outage, the District will Subsequent to 1997 perform an updated fracture mechanics analysis for the refueling outage N4C nozzle to RPV shell weld to account for the effects of this leakage.
I l
I J
i l
l 1
i i
1 0
l PROCEDURE NUMBER O.42 l REVISION NUMBER 1 l PAGE 9 OF 11 l