ML20113D625

Rev 1 to Pressure Locking Analysis for 23MOV-19

ML20113D625
Person / Time
Site:	FitzPatrick
Issue date:	10/20/1995
From:	Jamnes Cameron, Gallogly B, Swinburne P POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK
To:
Shared Package
ML20113D609	List: ML20113D617 ML20113D625 ML20113D634
References
[[::JAF-CALC-HPCI|JAF-CALC-HPCI]], JAF-CALC-HPCI-0, JAF-CALC-HPCI-02194, JAF-CALC-HPCI-2194, NUDOCS 9607030239
Download: ML20113D625 (15)

Text

1 CALCULATION CONTROL COVER SHEET CALC.NO. JAF CALC-HPCI-02194 REV. 1 IP3 [ JAF(1]

. MOD / TASK NO. N/A QA CATEGORY OF CALCULATION: I l CALCULATION TYPE: PRELIMINARY FINAL X 1

l PROJECT / TASK: _ PRESSURE LOCKING AND THERMAL BINDING ,

SYSTEM NO. / NAME: 10 / RHR l TITLE: PRESSURE LOCKING ANALYSIS FOR 23MOV-19 1

1 NAME SIGNATURE DATE DESIGN ENG.: B. Gallogly g,cg% t ggg n -gv PREPARER: B. Gallogly ff,1(W ,,fggg ,

I CHECKER: P. Swinbume h{([ fo/u/e r VERIFIED: N/A [ P. Swinbume k. h __ f./u/, c ,

l APPROVED: J. Cameron

, m yh lD/2e/gg--

l PROBLEM / OBJECTIVE / METHOD The objective of this calculation is to d ine the required thrust to open 23MOV-19 under pressure locking conditions. The method used for this calculation is described on Page 1 of the calculation.

l DESIGN BASIS / ASSUMPTIONS The design basis for this calculation may be found in References 2 and 3. Assumptions are listed on Page 1 of the calculation.

Revision 1 changes the valve factor to reflect changes in reference 2.

=}

l

SUMMARY

/ CONCLUSIONS FOR RgggggGE L The existing valve actuator is capable of opening the valve under pressure locking conditions.

~ '

REFERENCES See page 1 for a list of references used for this calculation.

AFFECTED SYSTEMS / COMPONENTS / DOCUMENTS 23MOV-19 9607030239 960627 I VOlDED OR PDR ADDCK 05000333 p PDR

. [ SUPERSEDED BY:

(CALC. NO.)

NYPA FORM DCM-2. ATTACHMENT 4.1 (REVislON 4) PAGE 1 OF 1 Distnbution: NED (WPO); Technical Services: ___ IP3_ JAF; Site Engineering: _ IP3_ JAF; CMEP/DBD (WPO); Other _

New York Power Authority Calculation No.: JAF-CALC-HPCI-02194 Revision 1 Project: GL 89-10 MOV PROGRAM Page 1 of 5

Title:

Pressure Locking Analysis for 23MOV-19 Preliminary: Prepared By B. Gallogly & Date 10/20/95

, Final: X Checked By P. Swincurnedts Date <e/2./v OBJECTIVES:

Determine valve actuator capability and the required thrust to open the valve when the bonnet is pressurized to design basis line pressure.

METHODS:

The force required to open a flexible wedge gate valve with bonnet pressurized consists of several components.

From the static condition clesing thrust there is a residual seat force which together with the seat angle and friction coefficient determines the unwedging force. His residual force remains if the wedge is " locking" (that is the friction coefficient is greater than the tangent of the wedge angle). An additional force requirement comes from the bending load on the wedge halves due to internal pressure. His force consists of a bending component, a shear component and a hub stretching component. Because the wedge halves are not parallel a third force component results from the vertical component of the differential pressure load acting on the seat area. The stem end load or

" piston effect" results from the internal pressure action on the stem end area. His force helps to open the valve.

And finally, the packing drag load resists stem motion.

ASSUMirTIONS:

1. Reaction loads and the friction coefficient at the seat surfaces are equal both upstream and downstream and for opening (unwedging) and closing (wedging).

2. HPCI pump discharge pressure is O psig when opening valve. Downstream pressure is assumed to be at min operating pressure of 150 psig.

3. Young's modulus of elasticity (E) and Poisson's Ratio (v) for the A-216 WCB steel wedge are 27660000 psi and 0.3, respectively.

4. Valve stem / stem nut coefficient of friction = 0.15.

REFERENCES:

1. Young, Warren C., Roark's Formulas for Stress & Strain,6th Edition, McGraw-Hill,1989.

2. Calculation No. JAF-CALC-HPCI--01757, Brust and Torque Limits Calculation For 23MOV-19, Rev.2,

3. Operating Conditione-Evaluation 23MOV 19, Rev. NYPA 1 4 Altran Calculation No. 93179-C-33, Valve Arust Assessment 14" Powell Gate Valve 23MOV-19 & 20, Rev. I

5. VOTES Test #2 performed on 4/23/93

6. Inspection of spare wedge in warehouse. 9ock No. J0271103, Location 55-116.

7. NMAC NP-6660-D, Application Guide for Motor-Operstad Valves in Nuclear Power Plants, March 1990.

8. JAF-CALC-HPCI-02094, Reduced Voltage Analysis for 23MOV-19

9. Technical Specifications.

f Now Yors Power Authority l . . Calculation No.: JAF-CALC-HPCI-02134 Revision 1 l Project: GL 89-10 MOV PROGRAM Page 2 of 6 I

^.

Title:

Pressure Locking Analysis for 23MOV-19 Preliminary: Prepared By B. Gallogly di Date 10/20/95

. Final: X Checked By P. SwinburneM5 Da t e . A, /, s-ANALYSIS: l Input data: -. 1 1

Parameter Symbol Value Units Ref.

Hub Length L 1.75 in 6 Hub Radius b 1.875 in 4 Disk Radius a 5.84375 in 4 Disk Thickness t 1.625 in 4 Stem Dia, at Packing Dst 2.25 in 2 l

Bonnet Pressure q 1138 psig 3 Upstream Pressure Pup 0 psig 3 Downstream Pressure Pdo 150 psig 9 Open Valve Factor VF 0.62 -

2 Poisson Ratio v 0.3 - -

Modulus of Elasticity E 27660000 psi 4 l l

Disk Angle 0 5 deg 4 Motor Start Torque MTQ 240 ft-lbs 8.

Motor Derste Factor MDF 1 - 2 l Stem Factor SF 0.0274 ft-lbs/lbs 2 Overall Actuator Gear Ratio OAR 50.02 -

2 Pullout Efficiency POE 0.4 -

2 1

Pullout Force F. 35857 lbs 5

, Pscking Imd , F% 4231 lbs 5 l

l l

l l

i l

New Yor< Power Autnority Calculation No.: JAF-CALC-HPCI-02194 Revision 1 Project: GL 89-10 MOV PROGPAM P a.gs 3 of 6 2

Title:

Pressure Locking Analysis for 23MOV-19 , _ ,

Preliminary: Prepared By B. Gallogly 12' Final: Date 10/20/95

, X Checked By P. SwinburneFJ Date e/s/, e Coefficient of Friction between disk and see; (Reference 7) p, VF x COS(0). I 1 - VF x sin (0)

= 0.653 Averane differential oressure across disk:

DPm =q-Pup + M DP.., = 1063 psig Disk Stiffness Constants: (Reference 1, Table 24)

D= E

• U' 12 x (1 - v2)

D = 10869001.1 "2x 1-v)

G = 10638462 Geometry Factors: (Reference 1, Table 24)

C2=j x (1 -( ) x (1 + 2 x 1rfj)))

C2 = 0.1657

1. 2 * # * * ~

4 a l

C3 = 0.0286 C, = j x {1 + v + (1 - v) x { j']

C, = 0.686 C, =

x { 1 * " x In((} + 1 4- " x {1 - { )*))

C, = 0.2874 For line loads evaluated at the disk edge a = r.

New York Power Authority l Calculation No.. JAF-CALC-HPCI-02194 Revision 1

. Project: GL 89-10 MOV PROGRAM

Title:

Pressura Locking Analysis for 23MOV-19 Page 4 of 6

Preliminary: Prepared By B. GalloclyJV' Date 10/20/95

, Final: X Checked By P. SwinburnefM Date fe /a. /, r U3

• 4 x a f (( )

• 1]

• 1"( )*( ) - 1]

L, = 0 b" *( 2

• 1"{ )*1-v 4

• 1~

)

For line loads evaluated at the disk edge a = r.

L. = 0 l

h [1 + 4 x (h)* - 5 x (h)' - 4 x ( j'x(2+(

L it =

)') x 1r ))

For distributed loads starting at b. r, = b in the above equation.

Ln = 0.0058498 L , = f x (1 4 " x (1 - ( )') - ( )' x (1 + (1 + v) x in( a )))

1 l

For distributed loads starting at b, r, = b in the above equation.

~

Ln = 0.142943 Moment: meference 1. Table 24. Case 2L)

M,3 =

x( b * (# ~ #' } ~ L '] i For distributed loads starting at b, r, = b in the above equation.

M. = -13695.6 lbe -

Q=3 '" x (a3 - r')a For distributed loads starting at b, r, = b in the above equation.

Q = 8683.7 lbs/in Deflection due to cressure and haadian: meference 1. Table 24. Case 2L)

M,3 xa 2 x C, , 30 x a 3 xC3 , DP,y x a' x L tt D D D y, = .0.00324 in

j New Yor< Power Autnority 1

l , Calculation No.: JAF-CALC-HPCI-02202 Revision 0 l . Project: Powsr Uprata Page 5 of 6 I

Title:

Powar Uprate Precsure Locking Analysis for 23MOV-:.2, Preliminary: Prepared By _B. GalloglyWM Date 10/20/95

, Final: X Checked By P. SwinburnmMC8 Date _m/,/g i '

l l

j Deflection due to creasure and =haar stress: meference 1. Table 24. Case 2L)

I K,, =

-0. 3 x (2 x In(j) - 1 + { )*)

1 K,, = 0.4129 K,, x DP,, x a 2 y** , CxG l

l y, = -0.0009 in Deflection due to hub stretch (from center of hub to disk): (Reference 1. Page 77) l Pf ,,,, = n x DP,y xa 2 P%= 110482.2 lbs ,

l Prozee ** L Yacrecca * ,,ya,g<g y = 0.0003164 in l

Total deflection due to oressure forces:

Ye

• Yaq

• Yse - Ysezecca y, = -0.0047 in Deflection due to seat contact force and shear stress (oer Ib/in) (Reference 1. Table 25. Case IL)

~

' 1. 2 x ( ) x in{h) x a Yev

• c,a 1

y = -0.00000046 in/lb/in Deflection due to sent c-M force and handian (oer iblin) meference 1. Table 24. Case IL) l Yev *

• ff )

• ff *)-E]-ff)*C]*L]s 2 3 l

I t

! y , = -0.00000234 in/lb/in Deflection from c='a of hub to diale due to hub comoression (ner Ib!ja);

'2xaxxxL

• • n x ba x2xE I

l y, = 0.0000001052 in/lb/in

New York Powar Authority

, . Calculation No.: JAF-CALC-HPCI-02194 pevision 1 Pro]ect: GL 89-10 MOV PROGRAM Page 6 of 6 l

Title:

Pressuro Locking Analysis for 23MOV-19 ,,.

2 Preliminary: Prepared By B. Gallogly110' Date 10/20/95

, Final: X Checked By P. swinburnegy Date , ./a. /g Total deflection due to seat ca-e--* force (oer Ib/ inh Yw

• Yaw *. Yse ~ Yecap l

Seat contact force for which deflection is eaual to oreviousiv calentatad deflection from orassure forces:

F, = 2 x n x a x E Yu i

l 1 F. = 55609.4 lbs l l

Unseatina Forces.

l I F % = 4231 lbs l l

F,i,e,,, = } x D*, x q F = 4525 lbs j j

Fu ,e = (n x a2 x sin (0) ) x (2 x q - P, - Pe) 2 l

F,,,, = l9879 lbs F,,uj,,, = 2 x F, x (p x cos(0) - sin (0))

l j Fm = 62656 l

F = 35857 lbs Fe ,ca = -F pi,eaa + Png , + F,,,,j,a + Pgga,+P,,m, p 1

! Fu = 118098lbe Motor Capabthty: .-

y , M70 x NDF x OAR x POE SF MTH = 175253 lbs CONCLUSION:

The valve actuator is capable of opemag the valve at design basia conditions with the valve bonnet prescurized to design basis line pressure. From References 2 and 4, the valve weak link (MOV Test Conditions) h 123150 lbs.

Therefore, opening the valve under these circumstances will not cause any valve or actuator damage.

j I

IP3 0 INDEPENDENT DESI2N VERIFICATION JAF 0 CONTROL SHEET VERIFICATION OF: JAF-OALC-HPCI-02194, Rev.1 l Document Title / Number i

SUBJECT:

PRESSURE LOCKING ANALYSIS FOR 23MOV-19 ,

MOD / TASK NUMBER (If Applicable): N/A QA CATEGORY: 1 FIRE OTHERS DISCIPLINE: ELEC MECH C/S I&C PROTECT (SPECIFY)

Check as required: I T I I C I U

METHOD USED (1):

VERIFIER'S NAME: P Swinbume VERIFIER'S INITIALS / DATE: $ inledf.

APPROVED BY:

~ v 1% % DATE: - lC f 2.0!9.5' 6 ,

REMARKS / SCOPE VER ICATION:

\J (1) Method of Verification: Design Review (DR), Attemate Calculations (AC),

Qualification Test (QT)

NYPA FORM DCM-4, ATTACHMENT 4.1 (NOVEMBER 1992) PAGE 1 OF 1

1-1

m c.u v.es.o, ,, wmmis ..,. ,

, ,, Q PRESSURE LOCKING VERIFICATION for 23MOV-19 This Methcad Program is designed to calculate the estimated opening force under pressure locking

] scenerloc for flex-wedge gate valves using a calculational methodology that accounts for wedge j stiffnees reesting pressure locidng forces.

j INPUTS:

l Bonnet Pressure bonnet :: U38 Ps Reference 3 j Upstream Pressure Pup := 0 pal Reference 3 Downstream Pressure p  := ggp, Reference 9 i Disk Thickness t := 1.625 in Reference 4 j Seat Radius a := 5.84375 in Reference 4

Hub Radius b

= 1.875 in Reference 4 i

Hub Length L := 1.75 in insp. of S/N J0271103 j Seat Angle theta := 5 deg Reference 4 i Poisson's Ratio (disk) v := .3 Typical of Carbon Steel Mod. of Elast. (disk) E := 27.6610' psi Typical of Carbon Steel (also Reference 4)

I Static Pullout Force Reference 5 l j FPo := 35857 lbf (Test 2) j F peclang := 4231 lbf Packirag Force Reference 5 Open Valve Factor VF := 0.62 Reference 2 (increased from 0.8) i j Stem Diameter Reference 2 D stem := 2.25 in l 1

4 i

PRESSURE FORCE CALCULATIONS i

I Coefficient of friction between disk and seat (Refsrence 7) mu := VF-I

{

- mu = 0.653 1 - VI' sin (theta) i j Average DP across disks:

P up + P

, DPavg := P w DPavg = 1063 psi

- 2

Disk Stiffhees Constants (Reference 1, Table 24)

D := (t)3 7 D = 1.0869*10 !bfin

$ 12-(1 - v*)

0 ;= 0 = 1.06385 10' psi 2-(1 + v)

AC1R2310.MCO Page 1 of 4 1FM96

Amaman cahnessen verenamen For JAF CALC HPCHI2194, Rev.1 37, p, %

i Geometry Factors: (Reference 1, Table 24) 1 (bi 2 f. f, t t C 1- '

1 + 2 In .

2 := 4- (aj i ib lj, C 2 =0.1657 i 'f b32 r, t b i2 C -

- l +1 In + - .-1 3 := 4 a ,ta) (bj aj C 3 = 0.0286 g f b3 2 C I + v + (1 - v) , C g = 0.686 g := 2- taj C9  :=b *Eln, "- + ' - ' l-1 1 a 2 (bj 4 (aj C 9 =0.2874

, 'f2 f,3 f,t 2 L - -

- +1 Ini -

+1 -  : -1 3 := 4 a ,is taj (sj L3=0 L9 :=a- * ' In -

1+ 1-l L9=0 2 taj 4 (a) f t2 tbid t 2' f ,3 L g'.:= g - 1+4b 1 -51 -4i Ib32 2+b In i

L i g = 5.8498 10',

64 (aj tal inj aj tbj.

I 1-v 1 , fbid fbt2- f ,3 -

L 1  :

-!-l- 1 + (1 + v) In l L g7 =0.142943 g7 := 4- 4 (aj tal (bj ,

Moment (Reference 1, Table 24, Case 2L)

'8' '

Mtb := Cg

-- -(a - b 2)- L 37 Mrb --l.3698610* lbf

,2 a b Qb 2b

'(- b 2) Q b =8 683710 h 3

in Deflecton due to pressure and bending: (Reference 1, Table 24, Case 2L) y bq ;"Mtb- .C 2+Q b C 3- L; g y bq --3.239 10' in

, .c_._ ~2.. _

er p.se h Aa nus ceamassenvennemmen ForJAra:: Ate-wecH 1N.new.1

. DeGecdon tNo to pressure and shear stress: (Reference 1, Table 25, Case 2L) fta fb32' K ,, : = - 0.3- 2 in ,-I+i -

K ,, = -0.4129 L b tj tal 3

KgDPavg a y ,q:= y,q =-8.671 10', in DeAec6on due to hub stretch (from center of hub to disk):

Pr .= s.(a2 - b 2) DPavg Pg = 1.02301910 8 lbf Y stretch

• b ~

Y strach = 2.93013 10 ' in Total DeSection due to pressure forces:

yq := y bq + Y sq - Y M Yq--0.0044 *in Deflection due to seet contact force and sheer stress (per ibfAn.): (Reference 1, Table 25, Case 1L) fta fai 1.2. ! -

1 In. la

'b4 y ,:=. '*/

y ,, =-4.611 10' tO ,lbfi 1-(perIbfAn) t in j Deflection due to seet contact force and bending (per IbfAn.): (Reference 1, Table 24, f,31 .(C21.fa C 91 Case 1L)

'ft a

Y bw ;*- C 3 +1,3 ,

( bj

,9 h Y bw =-2.337 10' 1

(peribfAn) t i nj Deflection due to hub compression (per IbfAn), (from center of hub to disk):

Y compr

• 2 5 yg = 1.05166 10' -

(porItdAn), ,

fin;

\

Total denecton due to seat contact force (per IbfAn.):

y , := y b, + y ,,- y oo.p, y , --2.903 10' ,1.

(P*rinfan) ,p Seat Contact Force for which deflection is equal previously calculated deflection from pressure forces:

F,:=2 s ab F, =55637.1 lbf

, y, Acinaste.uco Peo.3 er 4 1W20ss

1 Am msmceisummenvesenha Fw jar. calc 44PcHaates, nov.1 er: P. s%k UNSEATING FORCES Fpg = 4231 lbf ,

i Fp;go, := D ,,,2P Fp =4525 lbf 2

Fvert :=

• a sin (theta)-(2 P w- Pup - P%) Fvert = 19879 lbf

F g

= 2 F ,-(mucos(theta)- sin (theta)) F4 = 62679 lbf l

l Ftog g :=-p F ;ma,y + F ,,,+ F4+F po+F p g F po =35857 lbf Ftotal = ll8121 lbf MOTOR / GEARING CAPABILITY INPUTS:

) Motor Torque: MTQ := 240 A lbf Reference 8 i

Motor Derate Factor: MDF := 1 Reference 2

}

j Stem Factor: SF :=.0274 A Reference 2 I i j Overall Ratio: OAR := 50.02 Reference 2 Pullout Efilciency: Effpo := 44% Reference 2 l

l \

i l l

i 1 MOTOR CAPABILITY:

i P . actuator motor thrust available, l MTH:= MTH = 175253 Ibf i SF l

3 Note: Per teleoon o(10/20/95 with Brian Bunte at Commonwealth Edison (Comed) the applicadon fador doeg not need to be included in the above calculation for me".or capability.

Tests performed by Comed have shown that pull-out efficiency alone provides sufficiently conserva$ve results for the transient loading associated with pressure locking unwedging.

Ac1R231s.MCo Page 4 er 4 1N

IP3 0 DESIGN VERIFICATION CHECKLIST JAF E DESIGN REVIEW METHOD VERIFICATION OF: [[::JAF-CALC-HPCI|JAF-CALC-HPCI]] 02194, Rev.1

~

Document Title / Number

SUBJECT:

PRESSURE LOCKING ANALYSIS FOR 23MOV-19 MOD / TASK NUMBER (If Applicable): N/A DESIGN VERIFIER: P. Swinbume , & jf y , 4 / gg' Signature / Title / Date  !

FIRE OTHERS i DISCIPLINE: ELEC MECH C/S I&C PROTECT (SPECIFY) l Check as required: I E I I I I Yes NA 1

1. Were the inputs correctly selacted and incorporated into the design ? R C l l

l

2. Are the physical and functional characteristics of the proposed.. design within K I~

the approved design basis of the system (s) structure (s) or component (s) ?

I

3. Does the proposed design incorporate license commitments ? R C

4. Are assumptions necessary to perform the design activity adequately described K f~

and reasonable: Where necessary, are the assumptions identified for subsquent reverification when the detailed design activities are completed ?

5. Are the appropriate quality and quality assurance requirements specified ? K I e.g., safety classification.

l

6. Are the applicable codes, standards and regulatory requirements including issue I~ R and agenda property identified and are their requirements for design met ?

7. Have applicable construction and operating experience been considered ? C K l

l NYPA FORM DCM-4, ATTACHMENT 4.2 (NOVEMBER 1992) PAGE 1 OF 3 1

l

1 DE512N VERIFICATliN CHECKLIST DE512N REVIEW METHOD Yes NA

8. Have the design interface requirements been satisfied ? C F l

9. Was an appropriaIe design method used ? R C

10. Is the output reasonable compared to inputs ? IR F

11. Are the specified parts, equipment and processes suitable for the required l~ R I application ?  !

l l

12. Are the specified materials compatible with each other and the design environmental I R conditions to which the materials will be exposed ?

13. Have adequate maintenance features and requirements been satisfied ? I R 1

l

14. Are accessibility and other design provisions adequate for performance of needed C E maintenance and repair ?

l

15. Has adequate accessibility been provided to perform the in-service inspection I E expected to be required during the plant life ?

16. Has the design properiy considered radiation exposure to the public and plant C R personnel ? (ALARA / Cobalt Reduction)

17. Are the acceptance enteria incorporated in the design documents sufficient to allow R C venfication that design requirements have satisfactorily accomplished ?

18. Have adequate pre-operational and subsequent periodic test requirements been C R appropriately specified ?

19. Are adequate handling, storage, cleaning and shipping requirements specified ? C R NYPA FORM DCM-4, ATTACHMENT 4.2 (NOVEMBER 1992) PAGE 2 OF 3

r DESIGN VERIFICATION CHECKLIST DESIGN REVIEW METHOD Yes NA

20. Are adequate identification requirements specified ? E R

21. Are conclusions drawn in the Safety Evaluation fully supported by adequate I F discussion in the test or Safety Evaluation itself 7

22. Are necessary procedural changes specified, and are responsibilities for such C~ K changes clearly delinated ?

23. Are rec;uirements for records preparation, review, approval, retention, etc., adequately I F specified ?

I

24. Have supplemental reviews by other engineering disciplines (seismic, electrical, C E etc.) been performed on the integrated design package.

25. Have the drawings, sketches, calculations, etc. included in the intergrated design K C package been reviewed ?

26. Have review been performed to identify any effect on the Check Valve Maintenance C  %

Program ?

27. Does the design for check valves meet the intents of INPO SOER 86-03 ? I R l

l

28. Is the plant reference simulator physical and functional fidelity affected and it's I E I design change been factored into the cost ?

l

29. References used as part of the design review which are not listed as part of the C  %

design calculation / analysis ?

l g_ g3, w (,c..cd a4 9 La*= (br*) ~C -<*res ,

o9 Qgm  % $s Moou Foe VM** M W O"* ' ", l m /= /,s.

NYPA FORM DCM-4, ATTACHMENT 4.2 (NOVEMBER 1992) PAGE 3 OF 3 i

,