ML20112D465
| ML20112D465 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 01/08/1985 |
| From: | Mittl R Public Service Enterprise Group |
| To: | Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8501140310 | |
| Download: ML20112D465 (22) | |
Text
-
r O PS G Company PutAc Serwco Electnc and Gas 80 Park Plaza, Newark, NJ 07101/ 201430-8217 MAILING ADDRESS / P.O. Box 570 Newark, NJ 07101 Robert L. Mitti General Manager Nuclear Assurance and Regulation January 8, 1985 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7920 Norfolk Avenue Bethesda, MD 20814 Attention:
Mr. Albert Schwencer, Chief Licensing Branch 2 Division of Licensing Gentlemen:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - HCGS PUAR HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION DOCKET NO. 50-354 Pursuant to Enclosure 2 of the NRC request for addi-tional information regarding the Hope Creek Generating Station Plant Unique Analysis Report (PUAR) (letter from A.
Schwence r, NRC to R.
L.
Mittl, PSE&G, dated November 16, 1984), Public Service Electric and Gas Company hereby submits the attached information.
Please note that the response to Item 4 regarding the analysis of drywell/wetwell and torus attached vacuum breaker valves also serves as the response to the commitment contained in FSAR Question 480.4. of the above NRC request for additional informa-tion, concerning hydrodynamic loads, is scheduled to be responded to by February 1, 1985.
A schedule for submittal of a response to Enclosure 3 of the above NRC request for additional information, concerning the CMDOF validation program, will be provided by February 1, 1985.
Should'you have any questions in this regard, please contact us.
Very truly yours, Q90 le su B501140310 850108 PDR ADOCK 0500035$
Sb A
SMhd 8 W*
y,W At tachmen t The Energy People 95r4B 2 OW 4 84
?*
Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 2
1/8/85 C
D.
H. Wagner USNRC Licensing Project Manager Mr. A. R. Blough USNRC Senior Resident Inspector 1-x 4
ME 16 01/02C i
l 1
J i
4
- Aw
.---w
-, +
y
-m-emv
-,y,-.
-.,,ey, a%agg
..w,__,,--i 9
9-9.,-4..
,,.%g-.,..mm.7TMT*7"'+'"'W""TT "T"1*1'"*9"*@W"TNT"N*'-
- C*M'""*-TP*h*WWWE" I~*"F'
0 9
et am
=
+
6 ATTACHMENT HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION PLANT UNIQUE ANALYSIS REPORT ADDITIONAL STRUCTURAL INFORMATION FOR NRC REVIEW i
4 t
i l
f i
HOPE t, EEK GENERATING STATION PLANT UNIQUE ANALYSIS REPORT ADDITIONAL STRUCTURAL INFORMATION FOR NRC REVIEW ITEM 1:
In Section 2-2.4.2 of the PUA report, the Licensee indicated that asymmetric loads on the torus are resisted by the horizontal restraints attached to the torus shell, causing shears and bending moments in the torus shell.
The stresses resulting f rom these shears and moments are evaluated by ratioing the shell stress analysis results in the FSAR.
Provide a detailed description of this procedure and justify it with respect to an analysis using a 180 model of the torus, as required by the criteria.
RESPONSE TO ITEM 1:
The suppression chamber analysis for lateral loads is based on the FSAR analysis results.
The FSAR analysis for lateral loads is performed using a 360 beam model of the entire suppression chamber and a 1/32 segment finite element model of the suppression chamber with local refinement near the horizontal restraint attachment.
These analytical models are shown in the attached Figures 1-1 and 1-2.
Use of these analytical models is in compliance with the NUREG-0661 requirements.
The 360 suppression chamber beam model consists of 0
beam elements with the properties of the shell cross section located along the horizontal centerline of the suppression chamber.
The vertical column members are pinned on either end and attached to the 2
i
HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION
~
PLANT UNIQUE ANALYSIS REPORT ADDITIONAL STRUCTURAL INFORMATION FOR NRC REVIEW suppression chamber shell beams with radial beams.
The added mass of water is lumped in the radial and vertical directions at the center of gravity of the water and is attached to the suppression chamber shell beams with vertical links.
The horizontal restraint members have end releases consistent with the restraint configuration shown in PUAR Figure 2-2.1-12 and are attached to the suppression chamber shell beams with radial beams.
The local stif fnesses of the suppression chamber shell, ring girders, horizontal restraint pad plate, 0
and stiffener plates are included in the 360 beam model.
The stif fnesses are derived f rom unit loads applied to the 1/32 segment suppression chamber model shown in the attached Figure 1-2.
The shell is modeled with plate bending and stretching elements with a general circumferential nodal spacing of 4.5 degrees at the boundaries.
The partial ring heam at midcylinder and the mitered joint ring beam, which is assumed to lie exactly on the miter, are modeled with eccentric beams.
Their properties correspond to those of the tea section formed by the flange and web.
To predict shell stresses adjacent to the pad plate, the mesh in that area is redefined to a nominal element size of about three inches.
Th e pad stif feners and pin plates are modeled with eccentric b eams.
The mid-cylinder column connection near the pad plate is modeled to account for local shell stiffening and to provide vertical restraint.
3
, 3; w. -
e-r]W:t *
, ~.']
HOPE ~ CREEK GENERATING STATION
- 23
-r PLANT UNIQUE ANALYSIS REPORT ADDITIONAL STRUCTURAL INFORMATION FOR NRC REVIEW Stresses in the suppression chamber shell and horizontal restraint components are also computed for the unit loads.
The 360 beam model is used to compute the 0
frequencies and mode shapes of the suppression chamber as well as the dynamic response due to seismic loads.
The fundamental lateral frequency of the suppression chamber is 12.15 Hz.
By evaluating the dynamic response results it is concluded that suppression chamber horizontal response is dominated by the fundamental mode and that the lateral and vertical responses are uncoupled.
Also, the distribution of lateral loads to the individual horizontal restraint members is very nearly sinusoidal with the maximum restraint load occurring away from the direction of the resultant total 90 lacetal load.
These results are reasonable since the sup.aression chamber support columns and horizontal restraints are pinned end members, and the horizontal cestraints utilize a slotted connection in the radial direction.
Us ing these characteristic results together with the load distribution and loading waveform, the dynamic anplification factor and the maximum horizontal support load are ccmputed for chugging and SRV discharge loads as discussed in P' JAR Section 2-in the vicinity of the horizontal 2.4. 2.
Stresses restraints are then calculated by factoring the 1/32 segnent model unit load stress results.
4
HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION PLANT UNIQUE ANALYSIS REPORT h
ADDITIONAL STRUCTURAL INFORMATION FOR NRC REVIEW ITEM 2:
Justify the value of 15.01 ksi for allowable stress for the ring beam to torus shell welds and the column connection to torus shell welds, presented in Table 2-2.3-1 of the PUA report.
RESPONSE TO ITEM 2 The ring beam to torus shell welds and the column connection to shell welds are partial penetration welds with cover fillets.
The ASME Code for Class MC components does not specifically provide allowable stresses for partial penetration welds.
Th e allowable fillet weld stress provided in paragraph NE-3356 of the ASME Code is 0.55 of the allowable tensile stress of the material being welded for weld stresses calculated across the minimum leg d imens io n.
An equivalent ratio of calculated weld stress to allowable weld stress for a fillet weld would be obtained by dividing the normal fillet weld allowable stress by cosine 4 5 and calculating the weld stress using the weld throat dimension instead o f the weld leg dimension.
In order to provide a common analytical basis and a factor of safety consistent with the Code allowables, the allowable -
stress and calculated stresses for the ring beam to torus shell weldt and the column connection to torus shell welds are based on the weld throat dimension.
Do ing so, results in an allowable stress of 0.5 5 Smc/cos 45 which is 15.01 ksi for SA-516 Gr. 70 0
material.
5
HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION f
PLANT UNIQUE ANALYSIS REPORT ADDITIONAL STRUCTURAL INFORMATION FOR NRC REVIEW ITEM 3:
With respect to Section 6-3.4c of the PUA report, indicate whether any small bore piping branch lines are excluded from evaluation because of the 10% rule of Section 6.2d.
Provide calculations demonstrating conformance to this rule.
If the 10% rule was not used, indicate and justify the specific criteria used to exclude any pipe from evaluations.
RESPONSE TO ITEM 3 Of the 139 small bore piping systems, 59 are excluded f rom evalution using the 10% rule defined in NUREG-0661.
Application of this rule requires calculation of stresses for the corresponding large bore piping system due to NUREG-0661 loadings and load combinations for each service level.
The resulting piping stresses are compared with allowable stress values at locations along the piping system beginning at the torus penetrations shown in PUAR Figure 6-2.1-1.
The location at which these stresses are less than 10% of their respective allowable stress value is designated as the "10%" point.
Small bore piping systems attached to large bore piping systems beyond these points are excluded from evaluation.
The distance f rom the torus penetration along each piping system at which the 10% point is located are tabulated in the attached' Table 3-1.
6
..r.
. _ _, _,... _. _ -, _., _ _ - _ _ _ _ ~..
Hope Creek Generating Sta t. io n Plant Unique Analysis Report Additional Structural In fo rma tion for NRC Review ITEM 4:
Provide a summary of the analysis of drywell/wetwell and terus a tta ch ed vacuum breaker valves and indicate whether they are Class 2 components as required by the criteria.
RESPONSE TO ITEM 4:
Both the drywell/wetwell and torus / Reactor Building vacuum breaker valves are classified as ASME Class 2 components.
The Torus / Reactor Building vacuum breaker valves are check valves pe rmitting air flow from the Reactor Building into the we twell only.
Since they are located in the Reactor Building and away from the significant zone of influence, they experience only negligible hydrodynamic loads (as determined under 10 percent rule of Se ction 6.2d of N EDO-24583-1).
Maximum resultant acceleration experienced by these valves under OBE excitation (Governing Load Case) i s 2. 3 7G.
Howe ve r, valves were analyzed for the acceleration level of 3.90G.
An equivalent static analysis was performed for the valve including the pallet, pallet hinge bracke t, hinge shaft, hinge arm studs and valve seat bolts and the stresses were found to be within the allowable limits.
A drywell/wetwell vacuum breaker valve is a check valve which pe rmits air to flow into the drywell only.
During a postulated loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA), the vacuum breaker will be ex-posed to a drywell/we twell pressure dif ferential.
This pressure transient is comprised of a number of different phenomenon which result in dif ferent loadings to the vacuum breaker valves and their com ponents.
The loads acting on the drywell/wetwell vacuum breaker valves include gravity, seismic and hydrodynamic loads.
The hydro-dynamic loads consist of direct fluid loads acting on the vacuum breake rs and hydrodynamically-induced vent header accelerations at the vacuum breaker penetrations.
The hydrodynamically induced pallet impa ct loads were also considered.
These loads were based on the Hope Creek unique pallet impact velocities previded in Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Report " Improved Dynamic Vacuum Breaker Valve Response for Hope Creek," Revision O.
t 7
I The drywell/wetwell vacuum breaker was evaluated by static or equivalent static analysis for gravi ty, seismic and hydro-dynamically-induced accelerations.
Stresses induced in the pallet, eccentric shaft, pallet hinge bracket by impact loading from chugging were evaluated by finite element analyses using the ANSYS c omputer program.
A detailed finite element model of the palle t, hinge arm, and hinge shaft was developed using plate and beam elements.
A transient analysis was pe rformed to compute the stresses in these components due to the impa ct load.
Stresses in the pallet hinge stud, hinge arm stud and pivot block bolts were evalua ted based on the corresponding response of the hinge arm and pallet to the static and dynamic induced loadi ng s.
The results of this evaluation for the most critical load combination are provided in Table 4-1, which shows that all components of drywell/wetwell vacuum breaker valves meet the structural acceptance criteria.
8
HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION PLANT UNIQUE ANALYSIS REPORT ADDITIONAL STRUCTURAL INFORMATION FOR NRC REVIEW ITEM 5:
Provide and justify all dynamic amplification factors used in the following equivalent static analyses:
torus evaluation for lateral SRV and chugging o
loads (Section 2-2. 4.2).
analysis of the vent system for torus shell o
interaction loads due to pool swell (Sectio n 3-2.4.1).
analysis for the ring girder and suppression o
chamber shell for loads due to the attachment of the vent system support columns and upper truss, T-quencher support, monorail, and catwalk (Se ctions 2-2. 4.1. 8 and 4-2. 4).
analysis of the wetwell SRV lines for SRV o
discharge and post-chugging loads (Sections 5-
- 3. 4.1.4.a & b and 5-3. 4.1.7b).
Also, justify using an equivalent static analysis for SRV discharge thrust loads.
The criteria (1) specify, in section 6.8c, that a time history analysis should be used.
RESPONSE TO ITEM 5
+
The dynamic load f actors for SRV and chugging torus o
lateral loads are shown in PUAR Table 2-2.5-6.
The dynamic amplification f actor for pre-chug loads is 9
HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION PLANT UNIQUE ANALYSIS REPORT ADDITIONAL STRUCTURAL INFORMATION FOR NRC REVIEW based on a single-degree-of-freedom harmonic loading which is given by:
DLr = ( (1-8 2)2 + (28q )2] -1/2 where 8 is the ratio of the supplied load and the structural frequency and c is the damping ratio.
Fo r the chugging load f req" _ncy of 9.5 Hz, the lateral torus f requency of 12.15 Hertz, and a 2% damping ratio, the resulting dynamic load factor is 2.56.
The dynamic load factor for SRV torus lateral loads is obtained by numerically integrating th equations of motion for a single degree of freedom system for the applied SRV transient loading shown in PUAR Figure 2-2.2-6.
The ratio of the maximum dynamic response to the corresponding maximum static response is taken as the dynamic load f actor (DLF).
DLF's are calculated for SRV load frequencies which range f rom 6.44 Hz to 15.02 Hz with a fundamental lateral torus frequency of 12.15 Hz.
Modal correction f actors are then determined from PUAR Figure 2-2.4-4 for each ratio of load to torus frequency and used to factor the DLF's for a given load frequency.
The resulting maximum DLF is 2.5.
A dynamic amplification f actor tor torus shell o
interaction loads due to pool swell are determined by 10 m.
]
.. },.,.
,,,.].
i;,i'
~
HOPE ' CREEK GENERATING STATION 1
~
ff h'?
..,-3.g
[2' PLANT UNIQUE ANALYSIS REPORT 4
ADDITIONAL STRUCTURAL INFORMATION FOR NRC REVIEW applying the net torus vertical load time history contained in the Hope Creek PULD to a single degree of freedom system.
The corresponding equations of motion are numerically integrated and the ratio of the maximum dynamic response to the static response determined.
The resulting maximum dynamic amplification factor in the range of the torus natural f requencies is 1.7 3.
Dynamic amplification factors are not required for the analysis of the ring girder and suppression chamber shell for loads due to the attochment of the system supports, T-quencher supports, monorail vent anc catwalk since the amplification ef fects of the torus are already considered in the response calculation of the individual structures.
As discussed in Sections 3-2.4.1 and 5-3.4.1 a finite element representation of the torus is included in the analytical model used to compute the response of the vent system and T-quencher for NUREG-0661 loadings.
The effects of torus stiffness are also included in the response calculations of the catwalk and monorail.
As a result the maximum reaction loads from these structures can be applied directly.
The dynamic amplification factor for the T-quencher o
and end cap thrust loads is based on a rectangular pulse loading with finite rise time.
For a T-quencher arm axial period of vibration of.0026 sec and a rise time of.04 sec, a dynamic amplification 11
Y '.5
.s-3: eye ~ s... (s..
2
~/.t;,9...' "~ r HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION j
-i v
PLANT UNIOUE ANALYSIS REPORT ADDITIONAL STRUCTURAL INFORMATION FOR NRC REVIEW factor of 1.1 is determined using the text Structurci.,
Dynamics _by J. M.
Biggs.
Dynamic amplification f actors for SRV air bubble drag loads for the wetwell SRV lines are based on Monticello test data as discussed in PUAR Section 1-4.2.4.
The Monticello bubble pressure time histories were applied to a single degree of freedom system for which the equations of motion were numerically integrated.
The ratio of the resulting maximum dynamic response to the corresponding static response is taken as the dynamic amplification factor.
Th dynamic amplification factor for structures with natural f requencies greater than 20 Hz, such as the wetwell SRV piping, are less than 2.0.
A dynamic amplification factor of 2.0 is conservatively used for the wetwell ERV piping.
Dynaric amplification factors for post-chug submerged structure loads for the wetwell SRV lines are based loading amplitudes listed in PUAR Table on too 1-c.'-14.
The loading transient is first construct <!
by s aaming the 50 harmonics f or post-chug.
Dy nami c an;1tfication factors are then computed for a single degree of f reedom system in a manner similar to that discussed above for SRV air bubble drag loads.
The maximun post-chug dynamic amplification f actor of 6.2 irrespective of the structural frequency is conservatively used for the wetwell SRV piping.
The analysis of the wetwell SRV lines for SRV o
discharge thrust loads is performed using a bounding 12
i... -
~
,.5. E G m -
.,.x,.. -. g p- -
' ' 7., ^
F
,p.-
-~
_-f,, L
~
.[..
HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION
..h PLANT UNIQUE ANALYSIS REPORT _
~ 7
'.A*h ADDITIONAL STRUCTURAL INFORMATION FOR NRC REV IEW 4:,.: -- equivalent static approach.
The maximum segment forces for any of the 14 SRV lines for each load case are shown in PUAR Table 5-3.2-3.
Dynamic load factors are computed by numerically integrating the equations of motion for a single degree of freedom system for the SRV discharge thrust loading.
The DLF is taken as the maximum dynamic response to the corresponding maximum static response.
The resulting maximum DLF for each load segment transient is used.
The envelope of the maximum segment forces shown in PUAR Table 5-3.2-3 for any one load case are conservatively applied irrespective of time phasing.
The responses obtained using this approach will bound those obtained from a time history a na ly s i s.
3 13
HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION PLANT UNIQUE ANALYSIS REPORT ADDITIONAL STRUCTURAL INFORMATION FOR NRC REVIEW ITEM 6:
With respect to the f atigue analysis of the torus, the vent system, and the torus attached piping penetrations (Se ctions 2-2. 4. 3, 3-2. 4. 5, a nd 6-6. 4 in the PUA repor t), justify the strength reduction f actors of 2.0 f or major component stress and 4.0 f or component weld stress.
RESPONSE TO ITEM 6 The f atigue strength reduction f actors used in the fatigue analysis of the containment are' determined in accordance with ASME Code Subsection NE subparagraph NE-3212.17.
Although the Code does not provide specific values for all conditions, some values of strength reduction factors are specified.
The value of 4.0 used for component welds is obtained from subsection NG paragraph NG-3352 where fatigue factors are specified for various weld configurations.
Th e value of 2.0 used for componoents is a representative value based on the f actors contained in Subsection NE subs ubparagraph NE-3 33 8.2 (c) for penetration nozzles and those contained in the text Stress Concentration Design Factors _by R.
E. Peterson for various geometries and loadings.
Use of the curves contained in Peterson requires that the notch size be known.
A maximum notch size of 6%
of the nominal plate thickness is assumed since inclusions larger than this value would require repair in accordance the ASME Code requirements 14
- ~
' k.Ti..,
[. ( *. ;
- e HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION
" { 'I'"
PLANT UNIQUE ANALYSIS REPORT
' ADDITIONAL STRUCTURAL INFORMATION FOR NRC REVIEW
.W-governing material, fabrication, and inspection.
For the torus shell which is normally 1.0" thick assuming notch radius of 0.06", stress concentration factors of about 2.0 are obtained from Figures 18 and 34 for r/D = 0.0 6 and d/D = 0.9 4.
Similar values can be obtained for other containment components and thicknesses.
A strength reduction factor of 2.0, therefore, is assumed for the fatigue evaluation of all containment components.
15
m.
? >,:iie3 -
.i :
g:..
e C.'-
HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION.,' p.,~
-.y,
.3 t
.. ',',1 PLANT UNIQUE ANALYSIS REPORT ADDITIONAL STRUCTURAL INFORMATION FOR NRC REVIEW ITEM 7:
With respect to Section 6-6.5 of the PUA report, provide the fatigue usage factors for the suppression chamber penetrations.
RESPONSE TO ITEM 7 A bounding f atigue analysis was performed for penetration P-201 which is the HPCI turbine exhaust line.
This penetration has the worst combination of NUREG-0661 hydrodynamic loadings, thermal loadings, and thrust loadings with the maximum number of load and operational cycles.
The maximum usage factors f or the nozzle and weld are 0.61 and 0.79, respectively, which are less than the allowable value o f 1. 0.
O 16
____,._____..,_-_,.r_
.-_.,m--m.
.....m
9 R 7%5
&e%
7 a
y y;= *
?,,
_s y
T ~t -.
- i Q
ta in
't v
a n
~
p.
3 Eg 34 Y
~
S 4,y,= ~e.
p g,I t,_,
9 s@'s n
- e. a u
v.g tg
-j 2
a
=
2r
?
2:p\\
,it, r i, N.
~s, @,
a
=-
s ;
'y
.,. c 2
f 1
,I s8 W
. 1 -= 6y t
t S-am w
~ ~ ' =..
P g.
A.g *
@ *3 5
pT*
_.; a
=
S 4,a Q
~ N,./ ;= c g
g
)
g 3
'4 3 -
,1 s
4 U
.I 3
s :
~
I I
"2 M
g -l*I.5 g
g-ijs Ji-2 g
s
/
J~-
G.
he n'
- ~
t T
Q 3 4
/
I 'kj
{ j.*,
=
g
=2 5
o E
~%
3 E
?.4 s (yg, f
t 2n N
e h.y
/
g.
j l
p'r,
l
,e r
.m 02.
-t is e
.z' d ~i J g s
s 4.
_ _ %V f,E l i u%, y ~.'x A
n R
J,' 3 3
b l s-f
!Y "A T.f,.
s g
., kl sJ s.1 ?
- 1.
- c. :;<..
u I'h, {
", 1.I.
j I
ti N
-r,$
s x
te t
?
,~ t 6? :
r,
fn-4~
yN
=
-'e N
s
{
e s A.-
8
$Y yI
~-,
~
N
-r s
s-
=
I i M
i8 8 d
L
,4
.,. j
=.
e-
.t f-t
.L
-t I'
I A
N If 's
/
I
(* q@l 3
~
3
_s f
s, S 8!
3_..
, e-
.3*
,13 g i,
,w s,
1
- bY
,,, 3., {,
t.
Q
{,,
g 7 ? $ 3 T
g' '
e/
s
\\
p,:,
i r-
- .r-s: 4 7g
- '+
r-. t
,s I
3)k
, g 4 9'
7~I s
ig. 't
.f 3
e.
, ?.
%.-'2
+
s-p
'q 5
J'
[',
p D
5' 4
i '.
?) p, g
F.,
N 5 ?
I 4
f I
s' g
w r
5 4
3 4 8 6 s a w
9 it 3
17
- - - ~
e" ^7/s#En N h" mxm NM M
N DW N
\\WG \\ DB\\
N
\\WG \\ DW
@N M<3
\\ D9
^
\\
/
^Y L
i g
~m thkN 1
Ti Ev&%\\/\\ \\ \\
U,J,S$ 4 N \\\\
WhESrA\\/\\ \\\\
RGM \\\\
M \\\\
W#"
/HG / DM M/M
\\
vt7 WS%w/ Z-M:V e s~
FIGU RE l-2 STARDYNE FINITE ELEMENT MODEL OF SUPPRESSION CHAMBER W 2. SEGMENT - ISOMETRIC VIEW l
nutech l
- . :. u. - - : ;: __. _ - _
E._._-.__-.....-..----.,...
9 4k O
$b
////p%j (f f&
- + +2 IMAGE EVALUATION 0
- 4,
\\\\\\\\;/g// 1[v'$75/
TEST TARGET (MT-3)
\\/
4
,/
,//"%'s$
4 y,,
<,. 4, 4
Y 1.0
'd M EM y ll H-M l.I l'" IIIM l
1.8 1.25 1.4 til I.6
!n 150mm 6"
- %z,,
/
4%
0;f5,',/;
8 %:?fO f
br// \\
V m
Table 3-1 DISTANCE FROM TORUS PENETRATION TO 10% POINT
^
PENETRATION SYSTEM DESCRIPTION NUMB ER (ft.)
P201 HPCI Turbine Exhaust 65.
P202 HPCI Pump Suction 77.
P203 HPCI Minimum Return 32.
P204 HPCI & RCIC Vacuum Breaker 101.
P207 RCIC Turbine Exhaust 67.
P208 RCIC Pump Suction & Discharge 82.
P209 RCIC Minimum Return 18.
P211A RHR Pump Suction "D" 30.
P211B RHR Pump Suction "B"
34.
P211C RHR Pump Suction "A"
43.
P211D RHR Pump Suction "C" 31.
P212A RHR Torus Water Clearing 51.
P212B RHR Torus Water Clearing 96.
P213A RHR Relief to Torus 93.
P213B RHR Relief to Torus 67.
P214A RHR to Torus Spray Header 18.
P214B RHR to Torus Spray Header 15.
P216A Core Spray Pump Suction "B"
33.
P216B Core Spray Pump Suction "D" 33.
P216C Core Spray Pump suction "C" 32.
P216D Core Spray Pump Suction "A"
33.
P217A Core Spray Test to Torus 38.
P217B Core Spray Test to Torus 38.
P219 Torus Vacuum Relief & Purge Oudet 24.
P220 Torus Vacuum Relief & Purge Inlet 24.
P222 Torus Water Cleanup Return 47.
P223 Torus Water Cleanup Supply 40.
19
TABLE 4-1 Stress Levels By Component For 24-inch GPE Drywell/Wetwell Vacuum Breaker ASME Allowable Calculated Material (l)
Stress (KSI)(2)
Stress (KSI)(3)
Component Palle t SA-705 GR. 630 52.5 46.0 Eccentric SA-564 GR. 630 52.5 20.1 Shaft Pallet Hinge SA-564 GR. 630 52.5 15.9 Bra cke t BOLTS -
Pallet Hinge SA-564 GR. 630 42.0 23.0 Stud Hinge Arm SA-564 GR. 630 42.0 20.0 Stud Pivot Block SA-564 GR. 630 42.0 23.0 Bolts Notes:
(1)
All materials are age hardened at 1100*F
( 2)
Allowable stress limits are for service level A condition, which equals 1.5xShe is the allowable stress obtained where Sh from Tables I-7.2 and I-7.3 of Appendix I, Se ction III of ASME Code, 1974.
(3)
Calculated stress includes stresses due to gravity, pressure and chugging.
Chugging stresses are evaluated for the pallet closing impact velocity of 6.17 rad /sec.
20