ML20129F180

Sanitized Version of Info Supporting GESSAR-II Seismic Fragility Analysis.Portions Withheld (Ref 10CFR2.790)

ML20129F180
Person / Time
Site:	05000447
Issue date:	01/19/1984
From:	GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20127A304	List: ML20127A299 ML20127A656 ML20127A913 ML20127B126 ML20129E349 ML20129E390 ML20129E431 ML20129E458 ML20129E530 ML20129E822 ML20129E869 ML20129E916 ML20129E954 ML20129E965 ML20129F022 ML20129F068 ML20129F107 ML20129F180 ML20129F201 ML20129F233 ML20129F249 ML20129F286 ML20129F358
References
FOIA-84-175, FOIA-84-A-66 NUDOCS 8506060697
Download: ML20129F180 (138)

Text

. ~..

d

,e

• %PhjO Te n S. y,n.m 'st:t.1.

p 4

,st ;.,

• ., -l

.-..a.

s.s

......,. s. :... o.

l i

j l

C o PE MAFGmtJ5

(

I l

l

~~,,

's

}

8506060697 841203 i

PDR FOIA l

CURRANB4-A-66 PDR

.e w

~;. r,,.

..,14' gr.

C'h[ W e

, c WK nw n,"#,,.,W ;-_

\\

• Y A *%erge w J*

(_) pi; s 4 Yt

~

f le M 4. " %,s,rn i December 19D

[,.s.u ce\\\\

U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION

1. ' 4

1. 'c # 4' '

i I @ REGULATORY GUIDE

\\

DIRECTORATE OF REGULATORY STANDARDS 4til O' REGULATORY GUIDE 1.60 DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA FOR SEISMIC DESIG.'

OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS A. INTRODUCTION extensne study has beer de..nbed by Newma i 2 ;

Blume in references 1. 2. and i Af ter reuewir.g w

' Cntenon 2. "Desp Ba+es for Protection Agairst referenced dveuments. the AEC Regu!atory sta:

.u Natural Phen mena." of Appenda A. " General Design determined as a:eeptable r'.e fellewing procedau Criieru for Nuclear Power Pl.nts." te 10 CFR Part 50.

defimng the Desier Rewese See::ra ree e >~ -

" Licensing of Proda.tien and Utibzaimn Facihties."

effects of the ubratm -- - " the SSE j 2 the Bi requnes. m par:. that nuclear power plant stru:ture..

and the Oce. me Bm E2"%une 80B0 x 5-syst ems. and compenents impor tant to safet y be underiam 5 e ther to:= " M dents 2.d che e:

fre"

-an H:weser. tor unusuath 50:: s e.

designed to withstand the effects of canhquakes Proposed Appenda A. "Seismi. and Geologie Siting modineatior to ttus pro,.edure w di be reqmreJ.

Cntena." to 10 CFR Pari 100. "Resetor Site Critena."

6 would requae. m par: that the Safe Shutdown in thu proceda e.

the :enGgs.irations of C e Earthquake (SSEi be defined by response spect ra horizonta' comp:ner.: Deug-Response Spe:tra for ea:"

correspondmg to she expect ed ma.umum ground of the two mutua!!) pe pend.eular her:zental ase re a c c elera tions. This gmde describes a procedure shown m Figare 1 of tha guide These shapes agree acceptable to the AEC Regulatory staff for denmng those deseloped by Newrnark. B!ume, and Kap response spectra for the seismie desig:: of nuclear power reference 1. In Figure I the base cag am cons:sn a plants. De Adnor) Committee on Rea: tor Safeguards three parts the bottom hne on the left part represe s f

has been consalted con:ernint this guide and has the ma.umum ground dap!acement, the bottom hne :-

concurred m the regulatory position:

the right pa : represents the mammum ac:eleration a-d the middle pan depends on the maumum selocity The B. DISCUS $10N honzontal ecmponent Design Response Spectr. :-

Figure I of thn cuide corremnd to

,-w-In order to appreumate the miens:t> and thereb)

Tror roin:' r* ud acceler:r:--e, M'Oe TN w _-

estimat e the maumam ground acceleration' of the stroua d dC e-e - " m- ~ m *.W t:

e e

u.--

expected strongest F cund motion (SSEi for a gnen sue.

mav-u-ex-r- > en. and n set proposed Appenda A to 10 CFR Pari 100 specifies a for a e,cu-f a::e!c st- M ' S e The numen:af sa:.e5 number of required irnestigations. It does not,howeser.

of design dap'a:ements selo:. ties, and accelerations.-

gne a method for defining the response spectra' the honzonta! component Design Response Spectra a e correspondmg to the expected mammum ground obtamed by mulupl>mg the correspondmg sa!ues of ne acceleration.

mammum ground displacement and acceleration by the factors gisen in Table 1 of this gmde. The dispbcen e-:

The recorded ground accelertions and response region knes of the Design Response Spectra are paraMe:

spectra of past earthquakes provide a basis for the to the maumum ground displacement hne and re rational design of structures to resist earthquakes. The shown on the left of Figure 1. The velocity region bre:

Design Response Spe:tra.' spe:ified for design purposes.

SICPe downward from a frequency of 0.25 cps (cor.:.

can be developed statistically from response spectra of Point D) to a frequen:) of.5 cps (control pom Cla-d past strong-motion eaahquakes (see reference 1). An are shown at the top. The rematmng two sets of trei between the frequencies of 2.5 eps and 33 cps (cor :

'See definmons at the end of the ruide pomt A), with a break at a frequency of 9 cps (cor":

C,...'.

h. spas.i e

.,. awn,gg,.,9 %..

e.

USAtC RtCUs.ATORY GUIDE $

D.certe.e t,, c

.,,..,oc m..g

. y3 a.

e,'..e.a.

• a.av..* N.,

e

.rv.au r

e.a.C

=w

.p e.,, s,.. o.

.ms

.w e-A a

• • • .o

..e,.a...rv.C

a.,ne a

,..nen.e.a. a.. e

.i.....

. net c

..p,

..,.i.-.t.mp.a -,.ag.o.ed r.es..'

e

.. De.eae

,n. ser...

.','%. C.mm

w. m

.c. s..

.e.-

c

... ! a..a E== tv C.m.a.u...a w

WW.9.ag

a. Dr. Wt p.-

.a c.

a n.

.,,me

...eee

..ca aa

...~....t.

C.me

..e.

..>.i a.

t

u..

(

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

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

.a,....

.. ~.,.

..-....a

_... ~...,

..,.;,.g.;,

t ; g.,,,,,

c- -

2.

~

s...

e.

~

point Bs. constitu:. the acceleration region of the eart hquake or (2) hase phy sical characteris:::s tha-honzental Design Response Spectra. For frequencies could significantly affect the spectral pattern of ep.:

lugher than 33 er* the mnitrum ground oc.e:em, -

motion. such as being underlam b3 poor soi! depos.t.

Tine represents the Design Response Specia the procedure des.cnbed abose wtli not app!> In thne cases. the Design Respense Spectra should be dese!epe:

The verneal component D sign Resynse See:ta indmdually accordmg to the site charactenstics correspondint to the maimu. h.er.mro' rr wr.!

decc/cranmr of 1 O g see shm e m Fie ce : ef thn cu de.

C REGULATORY POSITION The numental values of deugn displacements.velecitiet and accelerations m the>e spectra are obtained by 1.

The honzentai omponent pound Des:gr. Resperte multipl>mg the correspond:ng salues of the maimum Spe:tra. without sot! >:'ucture mteraction effects. of the hon:nnia! gr.wid motion (acceleratien = 1.0 g and SSE. !!! the SSE. or the CBE on sites underiam by to:-

disp!.;ement = 3t in i by the factors gnen m Table !! of or by soil should be hnearly scaled from Figre 1 ir ilus guide. The dispiacement region hac> of the Desist pr oportion to the ma.umum hortzontal p e..d Response Spectra are parallel to the maumum ground acceleration specified for the earthquake :hosen iFig. e displacement hne and are hown on the left of Figure 2.

I corresponds to a maumum ~ honzenta' gro..:

The veleetty region bnes slope downward from a acceleration of 1.0 g and accompany mg disp'atemen :'

frequency of 0.25 cps (control point D) to a fregaency 36 in.) The apphcable multiplication factors and con: :

of 3.5 eps (control pomi C) and are shown at the top pomis are gnen in Table 1. For dampmg ranos n:

The remanung two sets of Imes between the frequencies included in Figure 1 or Table 1. a linear mterpe'a:.:.-

of 3.5 cps and 33 cp> (control pom A1.with a break at should be used.

the frequene) of 9 cps (control pomt Bl. constitute the acceleration repen of the vertical Design Response 2.

The vertical componen: ground Design Resp: se gykh Spectra le thouM be noted the the s *"m' rw Spectra, without soti. structure mtera: tion effe:ts. of :he Resmnse See:tra values are P2 those or the ha,ror.11 SSE.1/2 the SSE.or the OBE on sites underlain by re:,

N or by soil should be bnearly scaled from Figure F :n Dee Response See:tra fe, u

,- w

'm m-ou

• Q> gb for frecuea ei h1che +h3a 2 c. thes are the u-e while propothon to the mammum horuontal grognd

/

the ratto vanes between O'3 and I for frecuencie3 acceleration specified for the carthquake chosen.(Fig. e between 0.25 and 3 5. For frequencies higher than 33 is based on a mammum hon:ontalgrourrd accelera :c-

[.

eps, the Design Response Spectra follow the maamum of 1.0 g and accompanying displacement of 3e m.) Thr ground acceleration line.

applicable multiplication factors and control pomts are given m Table 11. For damping ratios not included in The horizontal and vertical component Design Figure 2 or Table 11, a linear interpolation should be Response Spectra in Figures I and 2, tespectively. ofilus use d.

guide correspond to a maximum horizontal ground acceleration of 1.0 g.

Fer sites with diffe'ee; 8h h not aMs to sites which (In are rela neh r' r v acceleration values see ified for the design earth.:uake.

the Dese Resense Spectra shouic be tirem scaled

((,....m [ [,{" j[,,',,

, ' ',i

~

from Figures I and 2 m propertion to the soc-6d sm..s, m_

. s r,,.,...~ The Desp. Respc rie titammum honzontal ground acceleration. For sites that Spectra for such stes should be desetoped on a case becaw (1) are relauvely close to the epicenter of an expected busts.

A sc A N 14 4 us p % <t D%S u

w.ch W e.t v b 4,

Jh, Mpeved M w

ca.4 4c q

GENEEL EESTF.3

~

PROPRIETARY !NF02,MTiE 1.60 2 7

--.-y

---

m

.,y

I DEFINITIONS Response Spectrum means a plot of the mwmum relationsh:p obtained by analyzing. eva!uating art response (acceleration, velocity. or displacement) of a sutistically combining a number of indmdua! respe :e family of ideahzed single degree-of. freedom damped spectra derned from the records of sagruficant par i

oscillators as a function of natura: frequencies (or earthquakes.

periods) of the oscillators to a specified vibratory motion input at their supports. When obtatned from a Maximum (peak) Ground Acceleration specified fc. a recorded earthquake record. the response spectrum pven site rneans that value of the acceleration wh.:-

tends to be irregular, with a number of peaks and corresponds to zero penod in the design response spec ra valley s.

for that site. At zero period the design response spe: j accelerat:0e is ideat,cil for 2H dampine salues an:

equal tc the maximum f peak t ground accelerat.:-

Design Response Speerrum is a relatnely smooth specitied :or that site.

TABLEI M DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA RELATIVE VALUES OF SPECTRUM AMPLIFICATION FACTORS

(

FOR CONTROL POINTS 9

J Amplification Factors for Contros Points Acceleration' '

Dsolaceewat' 8 Crit

• • "8 Al33 coal St9 cos)

Cl2.5 casi Oto.25 casi 0.5 1.0 4.96 5.95 3.20 / '.

2.0 1.0 3.54 4.25 2.50 5.0 1.0 2.61 3.13 2.05 7.0 1.0 2.27 2.72 1.88 10.0 1.0 1.90 2.28 1.70

' Maximum ground displacement is taken proportional to maxirnum yound acceleration, and is 36 in. for ground acceleration of 1.0 gravit).

' Acceleration and displacement amplification factors are taken from recommends tions given in reference 1.

i

,Q iiy i ilh;.Wb p g p g g g i. - n r u %

B{gs

. e :-

wr su -

1.60 3 4

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

...--, n,

,.n--,,-,,

TABLE il VERTICAL DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA RELATIVE VALUES OF SPECTRUM AMPLIFICATION FACTORS FOR CONTROL POINTS AmDI l. Cat *09 E SClof t IC' Control PC'*ts y

O.s piac e-se at' 8

1. """ ai.ca Ce. cat Demcmag ag33,g,

gig c,,,

Ct3 5 cost Dic 25 cos' O5 1.0 4.uvi

$ o' '

. l.s 0

1.0 2.54 40.8 i e-5.0 1.0 2.ril 46 1.3"

~.0 1.0 2.27 2.5')

1.25 10.0 1.0 1 00 2.17 1.13

' \\f,um um aircund di.p!..ement taken propr'stie?a' to rnaurt;m I 't grase.

cre.i?J 4..cf erat h r and i.to i.i f..r,:.iund...elerat hit:.**

' 4..elerat en amph: a.ati.'"

fa. t.*t. for the s et t i. 4' design respc..

spc.*; are equal te th 5** fe'- h.'rt!On!JI debipn respe nw '7et'r, 2: a siter fregagna, w hereas dispt.cmen* amp!g sa: en ext. r, are

.1 those for h. ire ront.1 de ipn respon e spee:r Thes raties between the ar r!gi;ation factors for th tuo design re$rne spectra att in apeement with these recommended in reference I.

'These salue mere changed te rmke this tat'le (Onustent u tth the da..

cu en.is setti;al.omp.snent. m Secten B of thi guide REFERENCES 1.

Newmark. N. M. Johi: A. Blume. and Kanw s K.

Spectra." Urbana. Illinois. US AEC Co. ra N;.

Kapur."Desige. Response Spe:tra for Nuclear Power AT(49 5 > ee". WASH 1055, April 1C*3.

Plants." ASCE Structural Engineering Meeting. San Franets:o. April 1973.

3.

John A. Blume & Associates. "Re:ommendatiers for Shape of Earthquake Response Spe:tra." Sa-2.

N. M.Newmark Consulting Engineering Services. "A F r ancisco. Cahfornia. USAEC Cor. tract S Study of Vertical and Horizontal Earthquake AT(49 5).30ll. WASH 1254. Februar> 10 3.

GENERAL ELECTR:0 PRDPRETMi ! DON.TU l.60.-l

.I

' s, ob

=a P2S?fdETARY IEFCF2..diQ N

\\

\\

\\

/

I

\\

0.5 A, geNj e

/

N-t OF 9 3 b b,i s

l,5

/'OO

^'

?

i/

\\

x nc:

C' s

o' sM:w m M>

M&6 M

5

^

M ~%^

9_

\\

/

'o \\

/

\\

/

[Ob 3DbMl b U)fg k5 k0 20 50 100 0.1 0.2 (75 0.5 1

2 FR EQUENCY, eps FIGURE 1. HORIZONTAL DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA - SCALED TO Ig HORIZONTAL GROUND ACCELERATION l

e4

!i [. 'L..s..

b]

$$bE [

D PING F CTOR.%

N D

0-500 9

7'

\\/

p

• 1

\\

/

N

/

s

\\

\\ 2 s-fp

\\

/\\

$_'s /

u s

i X /

s

's / +^

s

,0(OY/

/TOb 6('>666& \\&6

~

^

j< As, >m!

. N/

'o N/

N/

e,

(/>(^)A

'+

^s[/( '\\ /'N

/

\\

/

/

\\

/

.g j

0.2 g_

[,g 5 0.5 1

2 0

20

{}

50 100 0.1 F REQUENCY, cps h

FIGURE 2.

L DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA - SCALED TO 1g HORIZONTAL GROUND ACCELERATION

@N 97h - 7f32 u

GEI"2.?.I.I'..,7Tpm M

,,,,.1 J k b,,.

p +y s..a p[dJ,,, y ;[a = -$NN

[j p,r.

u s aJ.

h DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS by Na t ha n M. Newma r k, John A. B lume, a nd Ka nwa r K. Ka pu r INTRODUCTION Statistical studies made recently of a number of earthquakes under the sporisorship of the Directorate of Licensing, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, are reported herein with c. view tcuard developing recommendations for design respo-se spectra to be used for nuclear pcwer plant facilities.

The studies were made independently by the f<rm of John A. Blume and Associates, Engineers, of San Francisco, and the firm of Nathan M. Newmark, Consulting Engineering Services, of Urbana, Illinois.

The contract monitors for the Atomic Energy Cconission were, to begin with, the late David F. Lange, and recently, Dr. Kanwar K. Kapur.

The work for John A. Blume and Associates was conducted by Dr. Blume,.

Roland L. Sha rpe, and Jaga t S. Da la l.

The work for Nathan M. Newmark, Consulting Engineering Services, was carried out by Dr. Bijan Mohraz, Dr. Villiam J. Hall, and Dr. Newma rk.

The authors make grateful acknowledgment to their asscciates for their major part in the development of the calculational techniques and the generalizations of the results of the analyses which enabled pertinent conclusions and recommendations to be made as a result of the studies.

The recommendations made herein are preliminary and are the results o' discussions ameng the participants in the program, but represent the eersonal views of those conducting the work and are not to be construed as stating an_

official AEC positioni This report describes the general nature of the studies, lists the earthquakes considered, and describes some of the significant features of the results of the studies.

Recommended criteria and design spectra are given

GENE W.. D. w. e, 2

L- ? m m.-

r.-

herein which differ s w at fi' n')hl: io'uk* 'r~e c ommenda tion s 5b u t whi ch a re i n general accord with current practice based on previous recomendations.

NATURE OF STUDY When the ground moves in an earthquake, the maximum responses of a dynamic system founded on the ground can be computed by standard methods of analysis (see, for example, Ref.1).

One of the most convenient ways of portraying the maximum responses of the elements in a dynamic system involves the " response spectrum".

In the studies reported herein, the response spectra used present data for 'baximum pseudo relative velocity", designated hereaf ter as " velocity"; 'haximum relative displacement", designated hereaf ter as

" displacement"; and 'baximum pseudo absolute acceleration", designated hereaf ter as " acceleration".

In general these three quantities are plotted on a single chart against frequency in a so-called tripartite logarithmic plot.

In making the calculations for a response spectrum, it is sometimes necessary to adjust the strong motion recording of acceleration to account for baseline shif ts or other irregularities that give, for the unadjusted record, a velocity at the end of the input ground motion, or a terminal displacement that is unreasonably large because of the accumulation of small errors in the process of Integration of the record.

In general, however, for responses at intermediate and high frequencies, minor or no adjustment of the record is required. As an Illustration, Fig. I shows the unadjusted response spectrum for the motion recorded at Castaic in the San Fernando earthquake of 1971, compared with the response spectrum for the adjusted record.

The results are typical in that the difference between the two response spectra is significant only for f requencies below about o.5 hertz.

In some few instances, discrepancies arise in other spectra at slightly higher frequencies.

MMC U

"i.QT. 7. 0>

t.

m...: m.. _

3 n -.. -

I bNN[J h a &.N [ h i)I D L'.

'. 5 IY t In the calculation of response spectra, the Influence of the interval in the frequency range over which calculations are made af fects the fine.

structure of the response spectrum.

In general, however, this influence need not be large,rovided that a reasonably small interval in f requency is used.

This is Illustrated by Fig. 2 where the response spectrum for the 1940 El Centro earthquake, as computed by the California Institute of Technology Earthquake

~

Research Laboratory, is compared with a calculation made with a much coarser frequency interval, involving only 38 f requency points between the limits of 0.C5 to 30 hertz.

The discrepancy shown in the low frequency part of the record is due to a difference in the manner of adjustment of the record to account for baseline shif ts and other similar matters.

Another comparison is shown in Fig. 3, where the results of calculations are compared for 38 f requencies and for 81 frequencies over the range considered, for nearly equal geometrical spacing of frequencies over the range.

It can be concluded that the various calculations reported herein, based on dif ferent numbers of points in the f requency scale, are comparable in accuracy, in genera l.

From both sets of studies spectra similar to those in Figs. I to 3 were determined.

In general, however, the processing of these records led to the general conclusion that.the important features of the response spectra, for i

design purposes, could be represented by a conventionalized or simplified curve having the shape shown in Fig. 4.

In this response spectrum the various regions are represented by straight lines on a tripartite logarithmic plot, and the Control Frequencies A, 8, C, and D designate the transitions f rom one straight line segment to another.

Further comments on the design spectrum will be made I

l later.

l l

A 9 4 5 P.*i l 5 "hWh

$H C,

*.1.

.8MJ 4

'~

y y. g w. ;.

y'w a i a d C G V,..

A

aa g

Soth of the studies involve independent calculations of response spectra for a number of earthquakes, and then processing of these results by statistical methods.

In general, the statistical processing involved calculatico for selected f requencies, over the entire f requency range, of the mean and the standard deviation of response spectrum values scaled or normalized to some predetermined parameter in such a way that the results could be compared.

In the studies made by John A. Blume and Associates, all comparisons were based on values normalized to the same value of maximum ground acceleration.

In the Nathan M. Newmark Consulting Engineering Services study, the normalizations were made either to maximum ground acceleration, maximum ground velocity, or maximu.

ground displacement, in general, for each of these, over the whole range of f requencies; but primary consideration was given to the normalization relative to maximum velocity for Intermediate frequencies, and relative to maximum displacement for low frequencies.

The various studies indicate that the distribution function for the normalized spectral values or for the amplification factors relative to the maximum ground motion is of a type that can be characterized as either a normal or a log-normal probability distribution.

As a matter of fact, comparisons made of the relative order of rank of the amplification values at a particular f requency were made also in some instances, and the results Indicated that the normal or log-normal distribution functions checked quite accurately with the relative rank of the numerical values.

Although various partitions of the data were made for study of factors such as geologic conditions, l'ntensity of motion, and the like, valid statistical inferences about the nature of these dif ferences could not be made f rom the data, and in general all of the data were considered in drawing the conclusions reported herein.

SENERAL ELECTRIC

. u. Q.lE"i m o ia!rar,7: A.e ~e.]i 5

j.. CQ re i v.a u.v t

G O'1 O

EARTK)UAXES CONSIDERED The earthquakes used in the Blume study are described in Table 1.

Two components of horizontal motion for each of 16 earthquakes, with one component for an additional earthquake, gave a total of 33 dif ferent earthquake records that were processed.

The maximum ground acceleration for these earthquakes ranged f rom 0.119 to 0.519 The data concerning these earthquakes were compiled from Refs. 2 through 6 inclusive.

The earthquakes considered in the Newmark study are described in Table 2.

Fourteen earthquakes were considered with two components of horizontal motion and one component of vertical motion being used for ea'ch earthquake.

The maximum ground acceleration varied f rom 0.16g to 0.718g in the vertical direction and f rom 0.036g to 1.25g in the horizontal directions.

Fourteen vertical records and 28 horizontal records were used in the calculations.

Pa r t of the data for these earthquakes were taken f rom Ref s. 7 and 8.

Although an attempt was made to characterize the site descriptions as rcck, alluvium, or otherwise, these descriptions are not completely dependable owing to a lack of satisf actory information about the geologic conditions at r ost of the sites where strong motion instruments have been located.

GENERAL NATURE OF RESULTS OF 9LUME STUDY l

Details of the John A. Blume and Associates study are given in Ref. 9 Reproduced from that reference is Table 3 which gives recorr. ended spectral sha::e f actors corresponding to the sketch shown in Fig. 4.

Va lues are given, however, only for amplification factors relative to maximum groundacceleration at Control Frequencies A, B, and C in Table 3 The control f requencies are dete'rminable f rom the period, in seconds, given in Table 3, using the relation that the frequency is the reciprocal of the period.

Two probability levels are considered; namely the 50% probability level

3

... i T'1 T."* P O I Ot-w 6; 0 W C

gE.P 91 i

g -.

pn0 MET 23Y INFaiiMAN, 2.

\\

s.

or median of the distribution, and the 84.17, probability level, or the level at one standard deviation f rom the median.

The median value is approximately the same as the mean or average value.

For the log-normal distribution It would be calculated f rom the parameters determined for the distribution rather than f rom the ranking of the numerica l va lues, in general.

GENERAL NATURE OF RESULTS OF NEWMARK STUDY The results of the study made by Nathan M. Newmark, Consulting Engineering Services, are reported in Ref.10 in detail.

From that study, tables and figures are selected to present the data in a form useful for comparison with the results of the Blume study.

Table 4 gives the horizontal design spectral values for the two probability levels corresponding to the mean or median, and one standard deviation from the mean.

In this study a normal distribution was used, in which the mean and the median are taken as the same.

The results are stated in terms of separate amplification factors for the average value over particular frequency ranges of the amplification factors for ground displacement, ground velocity, and ground acceleration, Individually, to lead to the response spectral values determined in the calculation.

There are also given in Table 4 the spectral bounds for alluvium and for rock, based on the observation that for alluvium the values of maximum ground velocity generally average about 48 in/see for a 1 g maximum ground acceleration, and for rock about 28 In/sec for I g maximum ground acceleration.

The max imum displacement values used were, respectively, for 1 g maximum ground acceleration, 36 in for alluvium and 12 in for rock.

The rock values are for competent crystalline rock, and should not be used for shale or other sof t rocks.

The horizontal acceleration spectral bounds for alluvium and rock are the same as the amplification factors for acceleration for the I g acceleration, and are not reported separately in the table.

GENEML ELECTRIC

~

Pi!SPR!ETMiY INFORMAT:0N f

Table 5 Is essentially the same as Table 4 but summarizes the vertical spectral values.

The ground motion values for the spectral bounds, however, are given for ground motions of 2/3 g for acceleration for both alluvium and rock, velocities of 29 in/sec for alluvium and 17 in/sec for rock, and displacements of 33 in for alluvium and 17 in for rock, in determining the spectral bounds in Table.5 The data summarized in Tables 4 and 5 are based on the simplification that the spectral bounds for acceleration, velocity, and displacement, in the various regions of the spectrum for which they are applicable, are pa,rallel to the lines of constant value of acceleration, velocity, and displacement, respectively, in the tripartite logarithmic spectrum.

However, the bounds are really not parallel to these lines, and for this reason, and in order to have a better understanding of the way in which the amplification values vary with frequency, Figs. 5 through 10 are shown.

Figure 5 shcws the mean value and the mean plus one standard deviatier.

value of the complete horizontal response spectra normalized to a 1.0g maximum horizontal ground acceleration.

Figure 6 shows the complete spectra normalized to a 1.0 In/see maximum horizontal ground velocity and Fig. 7 shows the complete spectra normalized to a 1.0 in maximum horizontal ground displacement.

Figures 8, 9, and 10 reproduce the same pattern but are for vertical motions and vertical response spectra.

The observation can be made that normalization to the maximum ground acceleration gives a standard deviation that Increases rather uniformly f rom hig5 l

f requencies to low f requencies, whereas normalization to maximum ground displace-ment shows a standard deviation that increases practically uniformly f rom low frequencies to high frequencies.

Normalization to maximum ground velocity shows a nearly constant standard deviation over the whole range of f requencies.

?

O

GENERAL ELECTRIO TEC: 2!ETARY INFDPMAT GN The smallest standard deviations are obtained in each region when the normalization Is pude to the particular ground motion parameter for which the response spectrum bound is most nearly parallel to the coordinate.

This j

suggests, therefore, that perhaps the most consistent set of data would be obtained by normalizing to maximum ground acceleration for high f requencies, normalizing to maximum ground velocity for intermediate frequencies, and normalizing to maximum ground displacement for low frequencies.

However, since the relations among maximum grour.d velocity, displacement and acceleration also are statistical variables, some complications are involved in the selection of a normalization parameter.

In general, it would be expected that better data could be obtained if one were to use maximum ground velocity as the single parameter describing an earthquake Intensity rather than maximum ground acceleration, however.

DISCUSSIONS OF RESULTS OF CCM PUTATION It is interesting to note tha t, in spite of the differences In the procedures used in the studies, the results of the calculations made by the twc organizations are In substantial agreement.

The procedures involved differences in number of points or number of frequency Intervals used, in arrangement of these and the ways in which the calculations were conducted, including the f act that the Blume studies 'used unadjusted Input motions, and normalization of all responses to maximum ground acceleration, while the Newmark studies involved adjusted spectra and normalization to one of the several maximum ground motion parameters.

An example of the general agreement is Indicated in Fig. II, in which the data f rom Tables 3 and 4 are compared for horizontal ground motion values.

The solid line marked 'Reconsnended" In Fig. 11 Is based essentially on the data in Table 3 The dotted line marked " Sediment" In Fig.11 Is the value for

p..as. [.p-mom vm

.m. a PEM!STARY INFORMTIO!i alluvium in Table 4.

These results are in good agreement, taking note of the fact that the Mohraz-Hall-Newmark Study attempted to keep the segments of the design spectrum parallel to the coordinate system of the tripartite logarithmic plot, whereas the Blume study considered a more general shape.

The values labeled " Competent Rock" In Fig. Il are substantially twer for the same maximum acceleration, but this does not imply tha t response spectra In iock are lower than in s'ediments.

In general, the maximum acceleration in competent crystalline rock would be higher than in sediments and the response spectra should be ecmpared on the basis of the actual maximum values corresponding to the proper values of maximum ground acceleration rather than on the amplification factors.

Based on the general nature of the agreement in the results, it was concluded that a single recommendation could be made, using the design spectrum shape shown In Fig. 4.

It was concluded that the transition f rom amplified acceleration to the grcund. acceleration value at Control Frequency A, should be taken as 33 hertz.

similarly, it was concluded that the beginning of the transition region, at Control Frequency 0, should be taken as 9 hertz.

The Control Frequency C, where the transition occurs f ror. an amplification of nearly constant velocity value to one of nearly constant acceleration value, was taken as 2 5 hertz.

At points A, 8, and C, acceleration amplification factors were used.

However, at Control Frequency D It was inconvenient to use such a factor and the decision was made to use a displacement ampilfication factor, assuming that the maximum ground displacement was 36 Inches per 1.0g maximum ground acceleration.

Control Frequency D was taken as 0.25 hertz.

l-One further point involves the probability level recommended for use as a design value.

The nature of the calculations, involving a distribution of the various amplification factors at a single f requency, implles that at any probability level, portions of different spectra control the design level.

1.

.. +

b,

wmn w c: :LLinMilDH nm.wnne

• -6 6aJ3 ditssw Lne For example, if one were to use a 97 percentile value, this would be very nearly the same as using the upper bound,cf the amplification values of all of the spectra as a' design spectrum.

Therefore, any si.ngle spectrum will have substan*ial regions in which it lies well $5 low such an upper bound level, or i

even below any selected probability level f or the. rlesign spect ral value.

Consequently, the actual, safety factor is considerably larger, on the average, than that which corresponds with the probability level assigned to the design spectrum selected.

For this reason, it appears appropriate not to base the design recomendations on a level that is near the upper bound of the various distributions.

It is also not appropriate to use the average amplification value

- over each range of f requencies since this level would obviously be exceeded about half the time. For these reasons, it was censidered desirable to use the one

i standard deviation value, or the 84.1 percent pechability level, as the design spectrum probability level.

p RECOMMENDED DESIGN S PECTRA AND DESIGN CRITERIA Figure 12 and Table 6 summarize the recon c,ded amplification factors for the design spectrum Frequency Control points.

The values in Fig. 12 a re ve ry nearly those found in Table 3, with a slight modification to permit plotting as stra ight lines the values for points 8 and C on a semllogarithmic plot, t.ine O t

is taken f rom Table 4, also with slight modificatJons to permit drawing it as a straight line.

To permit Interpolation for damping values other than those in Table 6, one can use either a IIncar Interpolation in Table 6, or the chart of Fig. 12, or, alternativel, the following equations:

f I

l Point 8, 9 hertz l

A = 4.25 - f.02 Ins 0) g

n n

c E x.. m a L d. bn e. L

.m m.

ii PROPRIETARY IU9pMAT!0:1 Point C, 2.5 hertz A = l.2 A, = 5. I - 1.224 Ins (2)

C Point D, 0.25 hertz D = 2.85 - 0.5 InB (3)

D where A = acceleratI n amplification at point 8 B

A = accelerati n amplification at point C C

D = displacement amplification at point D D

3 = damping factor, in percent of critical value An = natural logarithm The design spectra obtained by use of these amplification factors, using the shape for the design spectra shown in Fig. 4, are plotted in Fig. 13 for damping factors ranging from 0.5 to 10 percent critical.

It should be noted that the validity of Eqs. (1), (2) and (3), as well as Fig. 12, is limited to the range f rom about 0.5 to 10 percent damping values.

Obviously, the amplification factor may become less than I for high values of damping, but It cannot become negative under any circumstances.

Data are available from Table 5 to indicate the relationship for vertical response spectra compared to horizontal response spectra.

Thevertica{

response spectrum is drawn, as indicated in Fig. 14, by taking two-thirds of the

(

horizontal design spectrum f rom very low f requencies through points D' and C',

e both of which lie at the same f requencies as points 0 and C, but at two-t h i rd s of the values of amplification.

Line D'C' is extended to point C", at which the vertical design spectrum becomes equal to the horizontal design spectrum.

Hence the complete horizontal design spectrum is given by line DCBA and then merges into the horizontal ground acceleration value.

The complete vertical design spectrum is given by line D'C"BA and then merges into the value of vertical

SENEML ELETR!C

'2

-. ~..m..

... : %o=x i ma te y v n nnm...> 3,y horizontal ground e

g us

~ o-thf r.ds ground acceleration oi appr acceleration at line C, which it intersects at a frequency of 50 hertz.

It is Interesting to compare the present recommendations with previcus design spectra.

Figure 15 shows such comparisons for 2 percent damping, in which the current recommendations are shown as a solid line.

The reconsnendations made by Newmark and Hall in the I%7 conference sponsored by the Internat fonal Atomic Energy Agency in Japan, and printed in substantially the same form in the 4th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (Ref. 11), is shown by the dashed line, and the previous AEC minimum criteria is shown by the dotted line.

The ground motions consistent with the Newmark-Hall criteria are shcun as a light solid line in Fig. 15.

The differences between the spectra are not negligible but they are relatively small.

In genera l, th,e Newma rk-Ha l l 1967 provisions are

~

mo e than t_recommendatiens, except foj a ht ranoc_o.f e

frequegom about 8 to 25 hertz, but even here the dif ferences are practically negligible.

The previous AEC minimum criteria are only apparently slightly less conservative in the range of frequencies f rom about 2 to 25 or 30 hertz, and below about 0.4 hertz.

In the latter region, the difference is of no concern in general for nuclear reactor facilities.

For 'the othe r region, the e

difference is essentially proportional to the difference between the acceleratien l i

amplification factor in the previous AEC criteria, which implied an amplification i factor of 3 5, instead of the Newmark-Hall recernmendation over the same regien of 4.3 However, the previous AEC criteria were generally used with more conservative (i.e. lower) damping values than the Newmark-Hall criteria, and in actual design the three sets of design curves lead to very nearly the same results.

Similar comments can be made about spectra for damping factors other than 2 percent.

However, in general all the previous reconrnendations are

~

-,,. _ _ _ ~ _, -

GENEinL ELETR'S

'3 somewha t less co I9!

a e

n c

nd t ons for high values of damping, say 7 percent and greater, and were based on less extensive evidence.

Since design response spectra are highly dependent on damping values, it is desirable to consider values to be used for damping factor for the various elements, structures, or. equipments in a nuclear reactor f acility.

Guidance iny be obtained from Table 7 with regard to damping values.

These are generally consistent with the values recomended for use in Ref s. 11 and 12, but are restated in what is believed to be a more useful and less ambiguous form.

The studies indicate that the design spectrum has an equal probability of occurrence in any horizontal direction, and the records show that earthquake motions occur in all three directions simultaneously, without consistent rela tic.s among the motion's in the various directions.

Hence it is recomended that the effects of earthquakes on structures, components, or elements be computed by taking the square root of the sum of the squares of the particular effects or responses at a particular point caused by each of the three components of motion (two horizontal motions at right angles to one another, and one vertical motion).

If time histories of motion are used for the computation of response, such time histories should lead to response spectra that are consistent with the design spectra recommended herein.

However, the time histories used for each of the three directions of motion should be statistically independent.

It is believed that the current recommendations are more rational than previous recommendations in that they are consistent with the'results of a larger number of observations, and will generally tend to agree with response spectrum calculations made for the same earthquake history with different levels of damping more uniformly than was the case with previous recomendations.

~

~

GENERAL El.ECTRIC

~

FRURIETARwspMAT10H 1.

Newmark, N. M. and E. Rosenblueth, Fundamenta ls of Eart hquake Enoineerina, Prent ice-Ha l l, Inc'., Eng lewood C lif f s, New Je rsey, 1971.

2.

" Strong Motion Earthquake Accelerograms, Digitized and Plotted Data,"

Vol. I, Parts A (July 1969) and B (Oc t. 1970), Earthquake Engineering Research Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California.

3 Ambraseys, N. N. and S. K. Sarma, " Response of Earth Dams to Strong Earthquakes," Geotechnique, Vol. 17, No. 3, Sept. 196 7, pp. 181-213 4.

Housner, G. W., " Intensity of the Ground Shaking near the Causative Fault,"

Proc. Third World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. -1, New Zealand, 1965, pp. III-94 -- 11I-115.

5 Lomn i t z, C. and R. Ca b r e, S. J., 'The Peru Earthquake of October 17, 1966,"

Bulletin Seis. Soc. America, Vol. 59, No. 2, April 1968.

6.

'The Tokachi-Oki Earthquake, Japan, May 16, 1962, A Preliminary Report on Damage to Structures," Rept. No. 2, International Institute of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, Japan, June 1968.

7

" Strong-Hotion Instrumental Data on the San Fernando Earthquake of Feb. 9, 1971," edited by D. E. Hudson, Earthquake Engineering Research Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, Calif ornia, 1971.

8.

Wiggins, J. H. and W. J. Hall, "Ef fect of Sof t Surficial Layering on Earthquake Intensity," Civil Engineering Studies, SRS 216, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois,1%I.

9 Blume, John A., Roland L. Sharpe and Jagat S. Da la l, "Eva luation and Recomendations for Shape of Earthquake Ground Motion Response Spectra Based on Statistical Analysis of Thirty-three Earthquike Records," John A. Blume and Associates, Engineers, San Francisco, California, USAEC contract No.

AT (49-5 )-30 l l, 1972.

10. Mohraz, B., W. J. Hall and N. M. Newmark, "A Study of Vertical and Horizontal Earthquake Spectra," Nathan M. Newmark, Consulting Engineering Services, Urbana, Illinois, USAEC Contract No. AT(49-5)-2667,1972.

II.

Newmark, N. M. and W. J. Hall, " Seismic Design Criteria for Nuclear Reactor Facilities," Proc. 4th Vorld Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. II, Santiago, Chile, 1969, pp. 85-1 to 85-12.

12.

Newma rk, N. M., " Earthquake Response Ana lysi s of Reactor St ructures,"

Nuclear Engineering and Design, Vol. 20, No. 2, July 1972, pp. 303-322.

w

~

GENERAL ELECTRIC Table 1.

h acik i ek of se e t sa Accelerograms - I Peak Greand Acceleration' Earthquake Year Recording Station Macnitude coroonent g units El Centro 1940 El Centro, 7.0 NS 0.33 California EW 0.22 El Centro 1934 El Centro, 6.5 NS 0.26 California EW 0.18 Kern County 1952 Taft.

7.7 N21*E 0.18 California 569'E 0.16 Olympia 1949

Olympia, 7.1 N4'W 0.19 Washington 586*W 0.31 Helena 1935

Helena, 6.0 NS 0.13 Montana EW 0.16 San Francisco 1957 Golden Gate Park, 5.3 N10*E 0.11 California N80'W 0.13 Parkfield 1966 Cholame-Shandon # 2, 5.6 N65'E 0.51 California 525'W Not Recorde Parkfield 1965 Cholame-Shandon # 5 5.6 N5'W 0.40

. California N85*E 0.47 Tokachi-Oki 1958 Hachinohe, 7.8 NS 0.19 Japan

~EW 0.23 Liina 1966 Lima, Peru 7.5 N8'E 0.42 N82'W 0.27

~

San Fernando 1971 Castaic, ORR, 6.6 N21*E 0.34 California 569'E

.0.29 San Fernando 1971 Bank of Calif.,

6.6 N11*E 0.23 California N79*W 0.14 San Fernando 1971 Universal-6.6 NS 0.18 Sheraton, Calif.

EW 0.13 San Fernando 1971 V.N. Holiday 6.6 NS 0.28 Inn, California EW 0.15 Eureka 1954

Eureka, 6.6 N79'E 0.26 California N11*W 0.18 Olympia 1965 Olympia.

6.5 54*E 0.20 Washington S86*W 0.16 Parkfield 1966

Temblor, 5.6 N65'W 0.20 California.

N25'E 0.33 NOTE:

Infonption presented in the above table is compiled from

(E.NE3AL ELECTillC

~

FR0rRIETARY INFOREiTION

~

Table 2.

Characteristics of Selected Earthquake Accelerograms - !!

Max imu.n Maximum

- Maximum R m rd g

gy gr und acc.

ground vel.

ground displ.

3 description Remarks drscription a, g v, In/sec d, In v

• acolma Dam, 2-9-71, 0600 PST (Record IC 041)

Highly jointed Small bulldIng diorite gneiss houses the S 74 W l.250 22.49 5.11 4.88 4 km from Instrument S 16 E I.241 43.70 23.18 5.82 surface faulting vartical 0.718 23.06

13. 75 7.17 Ref. (7)

Ostelc, 2-9-71, 0600 PST (Record ID 056)

Sandstone Small building houses the N 21 E 0.333 6. 73 2.05 5.82 Instrument N 69 W 0.281 10.55 3.22 3.14 Vartical 0.181

2. 75 1.42 13.13 Ref. (7) 311dsy Inn (First Floor), 2-9-71, 0600 PST (Record IC ' 48)

Alluvium Instrument on the 0

8 km from first floor of a NS 0.258 12.13

8. 70 5.90 surface faulting 7 story RC building EW 0.13 7 9.68 6 37 3.60 structure Vertical 0.177 12.8I 6.37 2.66 Ref. (7) 5250 v:ntura Boulevard (Ba sement ), 2-9-71, 0600 PST (Record IH 115)

Alluvium Instrument in the water table at 55' basement of a N 11 E 0.234 10.96 7.07 5.32 12 story RC building N 79 W 0.154 7.88 4.48 4.29 structure Wrtical 0.108 4.77 3.09 5.67 Ref. (7)

ICentro, 3-10-40, 2037 PST (Record IA I)

Alluvium to Instrument on the about 5000 f t first floor of a I:S 0.352 13.88 4.74 3.35 2 story massive EW 0.223 11.72 6.58 4.13 concrete, heavily vertical 0.280 3.95 4.41 30.58 reinforced structure,

Ref. (d) 1 E'

BB!ERAL ELECTRIC PRSPf:lETARY INFORMATiOU Table 2 - continued Site R;cerd Maximum Maximum Maximum g

p description d2scription ground acc.

ground vel, ground displ.

2 V

v, In/sec d, in a, g El Centro, 2-9-56, 0633 PST (Record IA II)

Alluvium to Instrument on the about 5000 ft (Irst floor of a NS 0.036 1.52 1.27 7.65 2 story massive EW 0.055 3.II 2.48 5.45 concrete, heavlly Vartical 0.016 0.75 0.55 6.05 reinforced structure Ref. (8) r.I Centro, 4-8-68, 1830 PST (Record IA 19)

Alluvium to Instrument'on the about 5000 ft first floor of a NS 0.142 10.49 3.68 1.84 2 story coulve EW 0.058 4.72 4.68 4.7I concrete, heavily Vartical 0.036 I.16 I.36 14.06 reinforced structure I;c f. (8) iollywood Storage Basement, 7-21-52, 0453 PDT (Record IA 6) 700' i of alluvium Instrument in the basement of a NS 0.059 2.58 1.41 4.83 14 story RC building EW 0.046 3.74

2. 73 3.47 Vertical 0.023 1.12 0.85 6.02 Ref. (7) iollywood Storage PE Lot, 7-21-52, 0453 PDT (Record IA 7) 700' i of alluvlum l

NS 0.063 2.60 1.26 4.54 l

Ey 0.043 4.11 2.89 2.84 0.023 1.22 0.81 4.84 Vartical Ref. (7 )

hn Francisco Golden Gate Park, 3-22-57, 1144 PST (Record IA 15)

Siliceous sandstone Instrument in a I-2 miles from small shack used to N 10 E 0.106 1.09 0.20 6.90 San Andreas Fault house electrical S 80 E 0.127 1.26 0.18 5.56 equipment vertical 0.051 0.41 0.16 18.76 Ref. (g)

~3

Table 2 - concluded Maximum Maximum Maximum ad

$6 R c rd R ' ** 'k '

gr und acc.

ground vel, ground displ.

7 dwiption d2scription v, in/sec d, in v

a, g Forndale, 10-7-51, 2011 PST (Record IA 2) 40-80 ft of Instrument on the alluvium over ground floor of a N 46 W 0.120 2.86 0.95 5.39 100 ft of 2 story frame S 44 W 0.123 1. 73 1.07 16.99 sandstone over structure-Vartical 0.032 1.02 1.24 14.74 slitstone

)

Ref. (8)

Forndale, 12-21-54, 1156 PST (Record IA 9) 40-80 ft of Instrument on the alluvium over ground floor of a N 46 W 0.209 9.79 4.92 4.15 100 ft of sandstone 2 story frame N 44 E 0.166 14.10 8.09 2.61 over siltstone structure Vartical 0.045 3.13 2.49 4.42 P.e f. (8)

Eureka, 12-21-54, 1156 PST (Record IA 8)

?

3 100' sandstone Instrument in the

?

(poorly consolidated) basement of a brick N 11 W 0.189 5.92 8.45 17.61 over 360 ft of and stone building N 79 E 0.2 71 9.23 3 14 3.86 siltstone over Vartical 0.110 2.64 2.22 13.54 sandstone Ref. (8)

Hollister, 4-8-61, 2323 PST (Record IA 18) 500 ft of alluvium Instrument on the over cenozoic rock first floor of S 01 W 0.076 3.10 3 03 9.26 water table at 50 ft the public Ilbrary, N 89 W 0.189 6.45 1.97 3.46 a 2 story structure vartical 0.056

1. 73 1.03 7.45 Ref. (8)

GENERM.EECTUy g' PROFEifE E a

e l@

er_ 7 pit ELECT 2iG s.

e

[hh$g'\\ f 0'

,- E Table 3 Recommended Spectral Shape Factors - H,orizontal Blume-Sharpe-Dalal Study "I #

"I O nt C Probabi iity

Damping,

level, percent Pe riod Ampl.

Pe r iod Ampl.

Pe riod Ampl.

percent critical see factor see factor see factor

^

0.5 0.03 1.0 0.12 32 0.35 4'. 0 1.0 0.032 1.0 0.12 2.8 0 35 35 2.0 0.03 4 1.0 0.12 2.5 0 35 2.9 50 5.0 0.03 6 I.0 0.I2 2.0 0.35 23 7.0 0.038 1.0 0.12 1.85 0.35 2.0 l

10.0 0.040 1.0 0.12 1.7 0 35 1.75 0.5 0.028 1.0 0.11 t' 4 5.1 0 35 6.2 i

1.0 0.029 1.0 O.Il 4.1 O.35 5.0 2.0 0.03 0 1.0

0. ll n :4; 3.5 0 35 4.2 5.0 0.031 1.0 0.11 ' >. 2.6 0 35 3.1 7.0 0.03 2 1.0 0.1 I O ~ '12.2 0 35 2.6

~ ~ ~

10.0 0.033 1.0

0. I 1 '

2.0 O.35 2.3 t

.-c

.,. ~

i.

'1

.p (

a t

b

.~

g y

.,~

.T A*

~

~

b e

.pr 5.'

11

-(

i 10 l

3 oc.e

,}

1

'a t' r

• f N*'

j-N

20 GENERAL ELECTPJC

?TOIRIEIARY iiiFORiAIlO..

Table 4 Horizontal Design Spectral Values Mohra z-Ha 11-Newma rk S tudy Damoing, percent cH tical Probability Quantity level. %

0.5 2.0 5.0 10.0 Amp).

D 50 1.97 1.68 I.40 1.15 Factor 84.I 2 99 2.51 2.04 1.62 V

50 2.58 2.06 1.66 1.34 84.1 3.81 2.98 2.32 1.81 A

50 3.67 2.76 2.11 1.65 84.1 5.12 3.65 2.67 2.01 Spectra l D, in 50 71 60 50 41 Bounds Alluvium 84.1 108 90 73 58 V, in/sec 50 124 99 80 64 84.1 I83 143 11I 87 Spectral D, in 50 24 20 17 14 Sounds Rock 84.1 36 30 25 19 V, In/sec 50 72 58 46 38 84.1 107 83 65 51 Trensition from amplifted to ground acceleration begins'at 6 hertz for all damping values and ends at 40, 30, 20, 20 hertz, respectively, for damping values of 0.5, 2.0, 5.0, and 10.0 percent.

4

GE.:ERE ELEimC 2

FROPR!ETARY iNF0FMATION Table 5 vertical Design spectral values Mohra z-Ha i l-Newma rk 5 tudy Probability Damping, percent critical Quantity.

level, t 0.5 2.0 5.0 10.0 Ampl.

0 50 1.86 1.65 1.40 1.16 Factor 84.1

2. 78 2.41 2.01 1.62 V

50 2.52 1.97 1.51 1.17 84.I 3.81 2.91 2.18 1.64 A

50 4.02 2.80 2.05 1.59 84.I 6.15 4.13 2.82 2.08 Spect ra l D, in 50 61 54 46 38 Bounds Alluvium 84.1 92 80 66 54 V, In/sec 50 73 57 44 34 84.1 110 84 63 48 A, 9 50 2.68 1.87 1 37 1.06 84.1

.4.10

2. 75 1.88 1.09 Spectral 0, in 50 20 18 15 13 Bounds Rock 84.I 31 27 22 18 V, In/sec 50 43 33 26 20 84.1 65 49 37 28 A, g 50 2.68 1.87 1 37 1.06 84.1 4.10 2. 75 1.88 1.09 Transition f rom amplified to ground acceleration begins at 10 hertz and ends at 50 hertz for all damping values.

O a

22 0wlly=E.?ns m "U^TOlQ may LW=

a

$/ h5C il'.r 7.nc-r Mj a... 3I ~5 D 'l'14..s 2 4-

• d

.e-y"j.i

'.' c Table 6.

Recommended Ampitfication Factors for Design Spectrum Control Points Amplification Factors for Control Points

Damping, Acce le ra t i on*

Displace ent

• percent critical A (33 hertz)

B (9 hertz)

C (2.5 hertz) 0 (0.25 hertz) 05 1.0 4.96 5. 95 3.20 2.0 1.0 3.54 4.25 2.50 5.0 1.0 2.6l 3 13 2.05 7.0 1.0 2.27 2. 72 1.88 10.0 1.0 I.90 2.28 1.70

• Maximum ground displacement is taken proportional to maximum ground acceleration, and is 36 In. for ground acceleration of 1.0 gravity.

e I

23

/

GEERAL B.ECTRIC PRgyEETAir! EF0E!AIiC::

Tablef.

Recommended Damping Values Damping, perceiit crit ica l, ('}

for combined fluctuatine stress item, Eculpment, or Structure Belcw I/2 vield At or rear vield Equipment and large diameter piping systems,(2) pi,pe diameter greater than 4 in.

2 3

Small diameter piping systems,(3}

diameter less than or equal to 4 in.

I 2

Welded steel structures 2

4 Bolted steel structures 4

7 Prestressed concrete structures 2

5 Reinfore ?d concrete structures 4

7 Notes:

(I)

Reduced damping values should be used when combined stresses are considerably below 1/2 yield point.

Slightly larger damping values may be used when combined stresses exceed yield.

(2)

Includes both material and system damping.

If piping system comprises only one or two spans, with little system damping, use values for small diameter piping.

(3) Assumes damping is composed primarily of material damping with negligible system damping.

t'

-.--g-

O m c.. y n... t s.,p m.

- r..

s.... r..... m _

FESWiiETE.fiY [NFORMATiOW

/

/

/

/

/

E N

N S

s!

u

/

'e

/

/ %. /

R

/

/

/

/

e.

,A/

/

/

/

/

/

j,.,

_ o N

.e m

1 c-

/

, */

/

DT o

gN

)

N N

N N 5 {UE

/

oh

/

\\*

N/

/

\\

N/

c d

/

/

/

/

Y

/

/

s.

u 6"

p

\\

% 8'

'\\

E' 2

c e

c

/

}

• /

N f

/

/

/

/

u

/

/

/

b

/

N d

c*

hE

- s EU

/

/

/

i..

B

\\

/

/

/

/

/

/8 u

d o

e o

e o

o o

e m

C e

o Lt$

N M

d d

d 335/NI *1113073A

OENERA!. El.ECTE!C PF.Di silETARY !!iF02AiiCli o

l l

l l

/

l

..s >3

%., /

/

j s

o

/

/

x^Gd_CK%<^<'4<^ :

y 3

'a

].

23

/

vf' t.*

/

X c

/

/

/

<'C.M, x^GC<'G<^ :!l

^'

b,,

d f

N

/

<'GOCG<^<'G<^.

l t

x-

/

/

2

/

/

o o

o a

o o

a w

~

o g

a d

d d

J d

6 d

335/NI *1110073A

GE!EE."1 E!50TEC PROPMEUIiY ilECEh!SIlUN c.

/

/

/

/

/

/

s s

1.

e z

a e

/

/

%j c

y

/ o.

<'GeX'G<^<Xb<^ :

v y-e s

/

n)

I E

c

/

e

/

/

/ c

<'N,XX'f<'x'b<^:i!!

s w

/

/

f N

k Ykk Y/

<'G<^<'WX'Gd 1

<^

N x/

/

e C )(X:<>C C< K :

33S/NI *11I3073A

XA^

^

7 q\\g,4/

x[

\\/ D' j

\\

g j

g

[ bE X

I

\\

A

\\/

Wm\\/

\\

/\\

/

N/

\\

/

\\/

T fD D

y

/

A

\\

g-p 4

43'O 4

n ae

\\

/$ s

\\

\\

/

\\

/

\\

\\

/ +o q, \\- /

\\

i

/

(

x i

\\

/\\

/\\

/

/\\

/

i

/\\

\\

/

\\

/ $3 0

/

\\

/

Q

\\

/

\\

/

\\

2OOb ObOO-boob i

O.1 0.2 0.5 1

2 5

10 20 50 10 0 200 500 1000 l

FREQUENCY, cps F IG. 4 SKETCH OF DESIGN SPECTRUM SHOWING CONTROL FREQUENCIES

/

EINERAL ELECTRID PROPRIETAP?l iiiF09.MATiG 9

/

/

/

=

s E

/

/

/

o

/

/

+

/

Od& /<^x^x3<^x^ :

Hn x-EE

)

v

, /

/

e

=w

/

/

/

x^t,T,x^G.e^x^G<^x^:!!!

e o-3 4

m

's

/

/

~

/

xVx^N^Y'x^GCC ii s

s vs

/

/

/ y Y

/

C C

C C

C C

C C

O DC 33S/N! *11!0013A

G.1222AL ELIDT2 0 PROPri!E7ARV iiUDPEim!

o

/

/

N

\\

\\ 8

]a E

/

/

./

./

/ *.

/

/

/

1 Od<'GMRX%<^<' :

i N

'o vi

{

),

6

• i 4.

/

/ o

/

/

O<'X'ACK'G<^C i iL a

C' f

0- /

• /

/ ci m.

/

/

/

/

/

$ls'

/

/

/ B

/

/

o o

e o

o o

o m

oo d

d d

N d

d d

f 33S/N! 'Ai!3073A l

I Ti ?7 ION p U.'" '".'. n '.!

T

..- J n m 2.b

,.., w 3 r - _

z~'. ~ m,

7'c

,... s J; p y :.-~ ~ '1 s-

,.u.s,-.

o

/

/

/

/

/

)"

3

$l 6

C

/

/

J. /

_ Y0$kk"h

~

/

c

<'GCfWXX'x' (6

\\

d E

3 o-h a

,y E

/

s,*

/

o

/

/

/

/ o

<'GDCGCKX'x^:!!

+

c

^

p3 d

I8 3

i.o e

E

/

/

• 7

~

m z

<'G<'X'G<^EGC

\\

\\

d E

/

/

/

ex x

x x

x x

x x

x-6 s

/

/

/

./

./

/5 e

e e

o e

o e

e m

o 6

g d

d d

J d

d 33S/N! *11[OO73A

8 e

.e

.,a c. ;7{ [6;;7 i;J O E M N t.

/

/

/

/

/

m

/

./

/

h

/

Y

/

OdC#5D G.<^< :

^

n 7

h/

/ o

~Y

~

/

o ofCGe^x^G<^C i!!

y e

o G-g o-e

% bn Cd c

6/X%<^<GCC s

a Q

n

/

/

/. B

/

/

/

J35/NI *11!3073A n

,w

e

.",9 C D ".,

1 C15 a u..,, a m" ~ N f a

l F2LHiMis7/!;;dOPMAT;;:

/

/

/

/

/

/

N 8 6

?

/

/

/

/ *

.~'

/

Od<'GMXVXXi N

' o' d

d-c-

9.

1 o

z

/

=

• /

4, /

/ o

/

/

./

O('<'x00<'O('C i~i G

o e-

• ,/

N/

o 2

l

<%#X'G<^4GCC i

i

\\ d E

V i

/

/

/ 8

/

/

/

o g

g o

o m

e o

o 335/Ni *11f30734 4

e

~~

waTm'O

.c "'.M 3 P M m ". V I h #

f,

- e,.,,,

t, t. m -- -

i

. P E b ;* n l g i r? M ! { (;;g..r...;iu ;..... o '"* 4

.,. n L ma o

8 t,,3 2o

/

/

/

l

_ /

/

/

• s

/

/ ?

A

\\

'e S

5 t;.

o P.

o

/

/

E'o. A R

'4.

5 ~

.N X

N

/i N

N !S o

s 4

/

/

Eu 7

/

/

/,

0, /

/

/

/ R yE x

r x

x o

e, o.

N Mi o

_i c

/

/

• /

/

/>

/

/

/

/

9, CJ o

x a.

J'

=H o

2 v.

v --

/

4, */

/

o

~u

.-c N

N.

N o.-

N N

N N

N d E' E-

~

o v

>c

/

0. /

./

/

/

/ o b

G

\\

\\

\\ ~~ s S d o.

-c

• y s+-

8 au'

/

/>

/

/

/

J7

/

/

/

E E~

s

~

3 gr N o

?. C P

d o-N

+

w 2 i e.<

C

/

/

• /

e4 mC N

N N

N N

N e *'

N N o 55

/

c. 2o

/

/

/

/

/_

fQ

-~

N N

N o

wa tu i

/

/

/

/

/

/

\\

/

/ $

2 1 a)

N g

M EE

/

ww I>

/

/

/

8 l

N N

N N

N N

N N d S

/

/

N/

N/

N/

\\

/

~

o o

o o

e o

o e

4 o

d d

d d

d d

d d

l 335/Ni 'Al!0013A l

O e

e

'"#'<f')ddOddOd Oh Mf/(A/X

%g4

^^

As./

'4 %

t/\\f

\\

[c\\_ SE

{

RECOMMENDED'O-O.

\\D n.3

/

\\w

^ x-

\\

I" bhf" $"h'55.bb 3\\ bb h!!$

\\

/

s A

^

X,\\

Xp(O

^

^ eki e

/

\\

/

s

/

\\

/

\\

• " /^x^j<'^\\[/

f3eO^\\y x^,x^x 5i5

^

l

\\

/

\\

/

\\

/

\\

/

\\

/

rej -J E5

/o\\

h

/

\\

/

\\

/

d

\\

/\\

/ N

/ \\

/\\

/ 0 O

\\/

\\

/

\\

/

)

/

\\

2 j.

\\/

\\

/

/

\\

/\\

/

\\

/ \\

/,

\\

/

O.1 0.2 0.5 1

2 5

10 20 50 10 0 200 500 1000 l

FREQUENCY, cps l

FIG. Il COMPARISON BETWEEN DESIGN SPECTRA : PRESENT RECOMMENDATION AND Mohraz-l 5-f ri l 1 - hione mnr ir C Tl IIW

....x..nd.ELETill0

r. mura :;K2EQ e

,o

\\T

\\

I

\\

\\

e 7

\\

\\

\\

S 3

3 s

i

\\

\\

5

\\

\\ \\

\\ \\

s x

2 i

\\

2 g

b N

2 e

Q.

k I

o

\\

\\

\\

l a9 E

O.s

\\

\\

\\

I I

\\

\\

l O.7 l

\\

\\

\\

O.s 0.5

\\

\\

\\

O.4 B\\

C\\

D

'O I

2 3

4 5

6 Tate 4 AMPLIFICATION FACTOR FIG,12 AMPLIFICATION FACTORS AT CONTROL FREQUENCIES FOR DESIGN SPECTRUM

,jg c

2.r v i'

9. _ _.0. 2f _ _[__,

t

[d

/

e D

ING CTOR

[-tj 500 0.5

1. +7 5

N

/

'4

/

7

/

\\

\\

" A

' S NfQ N

1 PM

\\

/\\

/

\\

/

\\

l j

,\\dh\\/\\[%

A[/ [.!l a

N

/

/

\\

/ *7\\

\\

/

i e

i A

^

^y

^

^ u!d

'S

\\/

\\/

A

\\/

20

/

/

IO

\\

\\

'W

^Q%f/Qo'%.^sQYQ%

Y; h/\\ d A

[\\ n\\,h %

d

^ d

%/

\\

\\

/

\\/

N

/

\\

/

\\ ^

'\\

/

/\\

'\\

\\

\\

"b3 Og 5

'b o

/

\\

/

\\

/

/

\\

2

\\

N

/

N/

\\

/

/

\\

/ \\

/

\\/

\\

/

\\

/

O.1 0.2 0.5 1

2 5

10 20 50 10 0 200 500 1000 FREQUENCY, cps FIG.13 DESIGN SPECTRA FOR VARIOUS DAMPlNG FACTORS

~

fb e

o X ga

^^

x

\\/

e

'4

/

N/\\/

/

\\

\\

s f

@\\f f

D d/

\\

/\\

/

N/

\\

/

\\

/ 9 ers

'\\

4

/

\\

\\

f j

D sd N O[s% Oh/ Ei$

C.

/\\

/\\

/

/\\

\\

/

A e

/\\

/

/\\

/

m B

/

0

/

\\

/

s'

\\

/

'o

\\

/

\\

OObOObs "DYObNI x

' ^^ ^6/Am^

6^o^

r A

9i

/\\

/

0 5

3 0

N b

b b

b o

/

\\

/

\\

/

\\

2 A-

-\\/

\\

/

/

\\

/\\

/,

G I

\\

/

\\

/

l 0.1 0.2 0.5 1

2 5

10 20 50 10 0 200 500 1000 FREQUENCY, cps

~

FIG.14 RELATION BETWEEN VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL DESIGN SPECTRA

s I.

h ?' &

H Art (c y s P

GENERAL Ei.ECTRIC FRGERIETARY INFORMATON i

GEE E EMCTRIC

m., _...........= p [m' Mf;m e v

" -- v-h:,r...

~

wi,.4

... f.q ljkj c

.n

\\ ).4*v] y

.f'> %.

.y ' %

• 'M I,M.

s%~. * " a

. t"~

l 1

C n

J e

e i o

yels, T.,,,-

' - 4.)) s r,

.s h

i....j,.

6

, 5, N,e s ' f t.

i

~,

l v

1 l'

r. k u

e m

1 -v :,,..

[1

'( w,

C)

,. ~.

'p ' p

• -C l.

g_

lb -

[.

', u.' f;..-

I' l.

c-1,

)

~

&p q L,.

Q,... :..

- r-#,

..p,,.

(, uc. f..

) _ f A l. K.

s-t s.1, i

i

/

r.

p

,I *r 5

/ ' N - g.

, '(

i g*

.,1 I

'I 7'

' 'A ;

s> L,J"

\\\\% W g.

( ~ !,'

[-f ly I

q,....

a...,

.c.

.~ -

s..,

1-... :

i..

'\\jh <

5 ~ 's i

l i

l ~

l l

r

..hM-6

.e p.

e O

I

.e*

'e 8

Many nuclear power plants have equipment wHen were designed and qualified before the new dyneetc APPLICATION OF NON. CONSTANT 20AL DAPPINC loads, such as hydrodynamic loads for SWR power plant i were defined. Many such pieces of equipment and the RATIO FOR RESPONSE 57tCTRUM ETN00 0F ANALYs!S piping support structures may have been subjected to overload problems because of the added new loads. Th '

changing of hardware and reduction of conservati$* in the response spectrum method by, the nuclear indsstry has drawn major concern; it is a general practice foe piping seismic analysis to use a single-point tra's.

lation enveloped response spectrum. i.e., all su;oort N. Y. Wu E. O. Swain are subjected to the same translation excitatio*s in deterinining the maximum response. Due to the ceaser-General Electric Company watism present in the enveloped response spectre San Ase. Cllifornia approach, much attention g been given to the as1 tic response spectre methods to reduce the excess con servatism; however. little attention has been givem t the application of non. constant modal damping foe the

\\f response spectrum method of analysis. In the respons g,M y[l \\[

spectrum analysis, andal damping must be specified first, then the spectral acceleration correspondirg t each natural mode of vibration can be selected. For piping andal analysis, because it covers a large rang of natural modes. it is impractical and uneconoMeal to generate each response spectrum with tens of spect rum curves according to the nodal damping ratio for each piping system; norina11y there are only a fe.

A85 TRACT spectral damping or predefined constant nedal da :ing provided for each response spectrum. Since there is In the response spectrum method of analysis, the lack of method in applying the non. constant neda' dar j model damping values must be specified first, then the ing to interpolate the spectral acceleration free a spectral acceleration corresponding to each natural limited spectral damping response spectrum, it is ses mode of vibration can be selected. For piping model practical to use cons tant modal damping for the resc-analysis, because it covers a large range of natural onse spectrum method of analysis, modes if the system is composited with different ele.

It should be mentioned here that a piping syste*

ment damping values, then the modal damping of the sys.

may have different diameters of pipes and other pipe tem is no longer a constant. It is impractical and mounted equipment, such as snubbers, valves and pum:s uneconomical to generate each response spectrum with with each component having a different element dampin tens of curves according to the non constant model It has been established from tests or recorded data, damping value fbr each piping system, therefore only a (the acceptable values have been ainerized in haclea few spectral damping or predefined constant model damp.

Regulatory Comunission Guide 1.61 pJ), that if the con I

ing value provided for each response spectrum. Since stant modal damping approach is used for response there is a lack of method in applying the non. constant spectrum analysis, then for conservative reasons, the

- model damping from the given constant spectral damping lowest element damping ratio in the system may have t response spectrum, fer conservative reasons. It is nor.

be used. For example, if a pipirg system is a co-cos mally the constant medal damping approach, which is ite model comprised of pipes of diameters which are used for the response spectrum method of analysis. The both greater and less than 12 inches, the OBE insat application of non. constant nodal damping to the spectra at the supports of small diameter (< 12 inche '

response spectrum method of analysis, is the first pipes will correspond to 11 oscillator damping weile study using a numerical integration approach, to devel.

those at the supports of large diameter (> 12 incnes) oping a methodology of interpolation or entrapolation will correspond to 21. Thus, the asdal contributions the spectral acceleration according to the non. constant for the large diameter piping supports input spectra 1

edal damping of the piping system with composite ele, will correspond to 21 damping anO those for the small l ment damping. The interpolation and extrapolation also piping supports to 11 dancing. However, the proble i can generate sore response spectrum curves when the is that the sodal damping ratio for all modes must be original structure time history data is no longer less than 21 and greater than 11 Thus, the da-:ing available.,

are either 2% over damps same modal contributica are. '

der demos other. It is quite possible that the result i

INTRODUCTION may not be conservative for the large diameter, i.e in over damped responses. In this paper, the ner-con ;

For dynamic response analysis of piping systems stant sodal damping corresponding to each natural roe ;

due to base support action in nuclear power plants, the of a composite piping model has been used to inteapoi -

response spectrian method is preferable to the time his.

ate the spectral acceleration corresponding to tae tory method. Response spectrian method provides an different modal damping from two spectral curves for l efficient and economical means for determining the max.

each response spectrum. The advantages of the nea.co inum effects produced in any given natural mode of stant modal damping over constant modal damoing for vibration of a piping system by a real or a designed response spectrue analysis have been assessed and a dynamic load. Givin the maximum effects in each sede, numerical example has also been carried out. They ar the response for a multimode system can be obtained by reported here for a tyDical BWR piping system, i

combining the sodal maxima, i.e.. by close spaced mode method.

GENERA!. ELECTR!D 2

PROPRIETARY INF0PIMil0N

e e

MCDAL DAMP!NG RATIO 5,(C,o)

• u d,,,[A(t) sin t - B(t)coswt]m,

(a u

The model damping ratio. C corresponding to each where natural sede produced by strain-energy weighing pro.

A(t)=atfo,gt),-Ew(to)cosetdt (5a t

portion to element dampin atio for different type of components, are given by W

• at M

sMt N

'm em m g g O a

a C".

(1)

"fO m m Fig.1 illustra tes the apr>rosima tion o' the eva' a tica

=g O

n n

of integ'41 A( t). b.v using Composite integ'a tio' 80*.

mulas to subdivide the interval of integration. t '.

into smaller, constant, equally spaced inteavals, aad C = sodal damping ratio of nth sede then using the fomula separately on each subinteava!

n 8" = element damping ratio of oth elesent, as defined in MRC Reg. Guide 1.61 4"" = sede shape of oth element corresponding to pn, nth sede K" 5 stiffness constant of oth element From the solution of the eigen value of the probler with input of. 8". a modal damping can be calculated

,M t.C

,,n, for each mode.

If using the same element damping for different types of components, then Eq. (1) can be re.

duced to Cn = 8 which is the constant pedal damping l

l r'

ratio for all sedes, g,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,-

OBTAIN THE SPECTRAL ACCELERATION BASED ON THE MODAL po.,

eMSC DAMP!NG FROM THE PRECT FINED CRITICAL DAMP!NG RATIO

• an RE5e0NSE SPECTRUM In the response spectrur method of analysis. pip-p.

ing systems are normally treated as subsystems. Since piping has negligible interaction effects on the pri-Fig. I Form,tettea of noencat sa.sttea mary structure, the decoupled analysis approach is Pr*<*st fe' lat*f'el A(s) applied, and the response spectra required generated at those decoupling points for piping response analy-N aru e W en M is tu apprpNth of sis. The floor response spectetsn generated from a given support action at the decoupling point can be ob-the intensity of load P(t acting at time t = t.

The tained by evaluating the response it would produce in esponential decay, which takes into account the a'fec*

a sisele oscillator. The maximum response of the of doping dtMn each constant time interval 4 is steple oscillator at a defined undamped frequency to a e

The numerical procedure performed by simple specified support acceleration may be expressed by sumation is as follows:

means of:

A(t) 4 at (y,+yg

• y2 * ~~*

• I -1}

('

5,(C,m) = uf,t "g(t)e-Cw(t-t) sine (t-t)d t h, (2) n V

For convenience of expression the surt ation o' !:. (6 where in incremental forv is:

5,(C,m) = spectral acceleration at a specified 4t) E M I' htM + p(t 4)coMt 4)h*C'#-T I 7' damping and undamped frequency L

Vg(t) = support motion at the piping restraint The values inside the parenthesis a$e entirely eca r

point lent to the undasced analysis and (t at) represent The evaluation of the definite integral of Eq. (2) the value of the sumation determined at the pre:eed.

by formal integration is at best difficult or often ing time t-at.

The evaluation of B(t) can be calcul-impossible, even when Yg(t), the support motion. is of ated by expressions identical to Eq. (7a) but wit". 51 a relatively simple analytical form. An obvious alter-functions replacing the cosine functions.

native is to find a fungtion P (t) that is both a suit-able approximation of Vg(t) and simple to solve by B(t) = ST(

(tit)+P(tat)sinw(tStf'E"0T-(7 numerical integration.

Substituting A(t) and 8(t) into Eq. (a) leads te tae ig(t =i

'(t) in Eq. (2) leads to

,]'tm[***

5,(C,e) =

5,(Cge) a twU,,, (( (t at) + P(t-at)cosu(t-at))s*N,.t mU manf P(t)e sinw(t-t)dtl max (3)

(t-ST) + P(t-ST)sinw(t atDcoset] e' (9

If the solution to Eq. (3) is evaluated by numerical The ratio of two spectral accelerations at the sane u processes, the numerical equation. which expresses the damped frequency with different damping ratios fr

• t response acceleration of a damped system to any arbi-same support rotion is:

trary dynamic loadjng P (t) for equally spaced time 4:

intervals at. is.L 1

GENERAL. El.ECTRIC PR0iRIETARY INF0EMATLO'b

b ~ b, g,;3, 3N 5,(Ep)

,4 g

$a(g),gg,{in$a(g).3g a i j

(9) n i

1 (3,, (,

5*ft*)

2 c":-cC -C' In TT(7)l Taking Natural Log of Eq. (g):

$a(g ). ExpI1n 5 (( )-u

" 3e 1

n L

a C, - C, " p (In 5,(C,,m) - In 5,(C,,m)]

(10) e a i where g = 9; To obtain any spectral acceleration corresponding to IK 2*&

IK Knl its modal damping ratio, one can simply ratio the Kn2 differences of modal damping and predefined spectral Since Eq. (134) and (llb) must ce equal. =t t* t"s damping from the relation of Eq. (10):

condition, the spectral acceleration correspo*: ; ::

any damping can be obtained by using iterative :-::e-C, - C, In 5,(C,,e ) - In 5,(C,,e )

dure. The entropolation error correction proce:. e n

n (11) can be used to generate more response spectum c,es I

~C n

In 5 (C,e ) - In 5 (C,Wn) when the original primary structure time historf cata a

n a n is no longer available.

C - C, MAXIMUM TOTAL RESPONSE DUE TO MULTIPLE RESPONSE SsE:-

n S (E '

1'"n) * (a - (t "I

TRUM INPUT a n a

5,(C',,e )'

The maximum modal amplitude produced in t*e ate n

X In (12) mode due to multiple response spectrum inout is ;'ver 5 (C,s )-

a 2 n by following equations:

C,, C,, 5,((,e ) and 5,(C,e ) are spectral damping xSg(C g) n n

n ratios and spectral accelerations from a given res.

n ponse spectrum, (n is the modal damping corresponding a

ation corresponding,(o,(n.,)A series of analyses with An j,,, = "i, I 5,3(C *"n)

Y to the nth nede, 5 C m is the spectral acceler.

n t

n"n input of different piping support motion time hi}ggr.

1es and dampings were made by a computer programi l,

where which used closed-form solutions and damped frequenc-Ani = modal amelitude (generalized coordinates' its to calculate the acceleration response spectrum.

of nth mode due to ith support excitat'ot The results of spectral accelerations calculated from Pn1 = nth mode ith support eodal participat*:n Eq. (12) and Ref. (5) were almost identical, if the factor difference in damping were small. As an example of the spectrum given in Fig. 2, Pp. 5, which was gen-

"M IN n

i ersted from the El Centro earthquake for a selected BWR piping attachment point from the primary struct-

{H)g

• ith column of the pseudostatic inflwe :e ure: The difference shown in the comparison table in astrix M*

= generalized mass of nth mode Fig. 2 is within 31; as we.know, it is impossible to obtain an identical result by using two different numerical integration methods. For piping response In working with the multiple support resperse spectrum method of analysis, this slight difference spectrum met *iod of analysis, stochastically it is in-can be neglected. It should be stated here that Eq.

evitable that we will have to deal with the cross (12) applied to the interpolation compared with Ref.

correlation relationships between the piping su::r.*ts (5), always gives a slightly conservative value. One Since the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Con-ission does not of the reasons is that for the high damping ratio the deal with the combination of modal amplitude due :

spectral peak will shift slightly, but in equation (9) multiple response spectrum input within each mode, tP l

the frequency was assimmed to be undamped.

responsibility for choosing an acceptable method c' combination rests with the engineers; unfortunate *y MINIMIZING THE MAXIMUM ERROR FOR EXTRAPOLATION there is no generally accepted method by the nuclear industry or the NRC. At the present time the co~e-It is, of course, impossible to compute the spectral lation relationships between the piping supports, acceleration, 5,, exactly from Eq. (12) without an either in the form of cress correlation functiers in estimate of its error. There are methods available to the time domain, or in the form of cross power see:-

reduce the nwnerical integration error for interpola, tral density function in the frequency doman, a*e not readily available in practice for g e multiple res-tion applications, but there is lack of a method avail, ponse spe:trum method of analysisI. So in the a:t-able to reduce the numerical integration error for extrapolation applications. However, in this paper a ual design a conservative approach may inevitably oe method of minimizing the maximum error from Eq. (12) used, and it will be discussed in the numerical esa -

for extrapolation will be presented, if an additional, ple of this paper. The mathematically rigorous c: -

third response spectrum curve is available, then, the cepts for combining the modal ampli.tude within es:-

i l

error term of Eq. (12) applied to extrapolation may mode,.due to multiple response spectra input are ve*y be estimated, and can reduce the error to a minimum simple, since the arguments of the correlation re'at.

by iteration procedure with following assumption.

fonships between the piping supports are doe to t*e From Eq. (10) assuming the error between the damp, assumption that the maximum modal amelitude of es:-

ing difference is K.

With three given spectral damp-mode for each different support excitation may n:t ings Eq. (12) can be rewritten into two equations:

occur simultaneously; superposition comeination we.1d I

yield a very conservative prediction. On the otne-l 3

l GENEML ELECTPdC "POWFTaPV INFfTMATif.

e hand, SRSS combination may yield a nonenservativ2 re-spectrum meth:d of analysis to determine the :-sst sult. To satisfy both conditions, the maximum nth correlation relationships among the pioing sue:r. ts, pq$al amplitude may be written in the following form For the purpose of demonstration: a non consta-t moda" ill, which is obtained by combining the correlated and the uncorrelated support excitation modal ampli-damping for response spectrum analysis will be ased; O conservative assumption was made, it was assuev: t at tude in a combination of algebraic and SRSS fashions:

if the supports were at different structures it sold

{dAni)2,g gn))2,,,,,,

(35) be considered an uncorrelated support escitat*:-

I' An

=

mas the piping suoports are attached to the sa*e St,:tw e e

Knowing the manimum modal amplitude of the nth mode, then it will envelop the response spec trum, a : -i ta-the mesimm modal displacement response of nth mode is assume the support excitation as correlated.

• *s given by:

interesting to point out, by using the non-c3*:ts t modal damping for response spectrum analysis, "at it y )1,2,3,,1,2,3 X An) max (16a) has been found that the response of the esa-D'e :':iq n max system has a very locally effect. For esa mle. ? e for the system main steam isolation valve was using 21 el e e t da *:

ing, since it has a very flexible top structure =* tm

{Y,)

= k )3 3

low frequency and low modal damping value. The -esult X Any,,,

(16b) of the analysis with 11 constant damping and ec:r' n

where 1, 2, 3

• X, Y, Z directions.

damping differs by less than 4t.

On the othea a-d, Having obtained the maximum response in each the area at and around node number @ has a $1;* 'e-mode, the maximum displacement r onse can be evalu-quency, it is heavily supported by snubbers. =- :*

sted by double sum superpositiongt are considgd as bolted structures with gaps a :.se:

4% damping

, the dif ference between the two a a,fsit I

1 l

h is up to 60%, as shown in the comparison Table I, Dp.

R'2'3 = '*a,1{ Y 2.3 gy).2.3 x,mn (17)

SUMMARY

REMARES n

max m )ma n n max In this paper, the applic'ation of non-corste-t

-1 modal damping for response spectrum analysis '--- t*e 3, {en - ariC*n "n * ($ "m )2 p-edefined damping response spectra are develo:e: aM g,n,

evaluated. The method of selecting the spe:t a* a:ce' g,,g g eration according to the non-constant modal daa:- ;

not only provides better answers for the resoc se spe:

2

,, n,,n[ 3, g )

trum method of analysis, but may well save hace.t-e n

changes in the future. The relative increase " :om-p puting costs for a coriolicated piping systea by esing

('

= (n

• t modal damping is negligible. Since the equatic" pre-d "n sented in this paper for spectral acceleration "ter-es is the damped modal frequency of the nth mode, polation are relative simply, it can generate a: e (n"is the model damping ratio of the nth mode, and response spectrum curves with constant damping 7:2t td is the duration of the earthquake at maximum without going through a costly time history ana fsis.

response.

RE FERENCES MAy! MUM TOTAL RESPONSE DUE TO $1NGLE RESPONSE SPEC.

TRUM INPUT 1.

Wu, R.W., " Seismic Response Analysis of Ste-:t ral System Subjected to Multiple Support Escitat : ".

[ Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technolo resented at the 4th International Can'eee-:e :n For a multiple supported piping system subjected to different excitation at each of the support points, the single response spectrum method of analysis can ancisco, CaH fornia, U.S. A., August 15-15. '977 be made to follow the same procedure as the multiple 2.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Regulat: -

response spectrum method. Once the enveloping res.

Guide 1.61.

3.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatery Commission, Standa*: 3e-ponse spectrum is defined, the rest of the analysis can be carried out in a straightforward manner. The view Plant 3.7.2 - PP, 3.7.2-13.

method of applying non-constant modal damping ratios 4

Citugh, R.C., and Penzien, J., " Dynamic of St ac-to interpolate the spectral acceleration from the pre-tures, McGraw-Hill Inc., New York,1975, P: 103.

defined spectral dampling response spectrum curves 5.

General Electric Company, "$PECA04 User's Ma.al",

can also be applied to any enveloped response spec-6.

Gen ral I ct mean e:onda y Resot-se Spectra Calculation Code Incorporating " ult *:*e NLPiERICAL EXAMPLE AND DISCUSSIONS Support / Time History Input Analysis Technic-e.

User s Manual,1982.

As an illustration of the application of the 7

General Electric Company "P!$YS User's w aa t' methods using non-constant sodal damping for response Static and Dynamic Analysis of Piping Como: e ts spectrum analysis as discussed in the previous sec-by Finite Element Method". Usee 's Manual, Re. 05, 8.

$1ngh, " Influence of closely Spaced Mc:es in s

ing f ne ma n e

I and SR bra ch lines. They are subjected to three-directional Response Spectrum Method of Analys's, See:*a ty support excitation inputs of three sets of different Conference on Structural Design of Nuclear 8 a-t response spectrum at the piping attachment points.

Facilities December 17-18, 1973, Chi ca go,.

which the reactor pressure vessel, shield well and primary containment. As mentioned before, a methodo-9, "PVP 42 "WW be MM - W *- '

logy is not readily available for multiple response Application and Testing".

4 C E K A1. ELECT E l

m=venu mMTm

e i

74LE 1

,e i==..me *

• OAM81NG VALUES 8 FRE7)E' CIES OF Tl4E EIAMPLE 900s* Ew e

-q ; ; ; ;.

Structure or Element Mo de Modal rrecaen:y

=.,_,,_m..,.,m,.7.zr,.,m.._

," 7*i Component Damping Os mei n g IWeett)

.m for OBE

.le.

e.

t e.;g' !O '!"

!" fj:'

!" l1!

~",'

f--

Small-diameter pip-1 1

n.10gE-1 7,0EE 1 1%

! "l *."

!= 8."

(2 I

ing syste'es. diameter 2

n.131E-1 5.g-:-

u,...-

equal to or less than 3

0.10 7E-1 9.42E:

y 2"

I '-

12 in.

4 0.le9E-1

.13!!

.. 5.*; ;;;;

'. ' ' ' ! =. l' '.=>!:::

.i 5

0.211E-1

1. 25 E *.

en i

i=

-. }

diameter piping sys-7 0.126E-1 1.at!:

e Equipment and larce-2 6

0.199E-1

'.34E a.-.=*

=

p.

a.-==.'.a*==='*=

tems. pipe diameter 8

0.199E-1 1.5:!:

IN greater than 12 in.

9 0.132E-1 1.57!!

Bolted steel structu-4 10 0.151E-1 1.64!!

e ures 11 0.183E-1

!.74!!

so -

80 88 -

80

• 12 0.146E-1 1.t!!'

M*"'

13 0.187E-1 1.95E:

FIG. 2 Comparison of Results From Eq. (12) 14 0.126E-!

2.07I:

and (13) With Ref. (5) 15 0.23CE-1 2.15!! j 16 0.212!-1 2.24!! -

17 0.152E-1 2.34 ;

18 0.149E 1 2.4-E 19 0.141E-1 2.43E; ap "OyM 20 0.169E-1 2.56E:

21 0.171E-1 2.58E!

22 0.161E 1 2.BII:

23 0.181E-1 2.!9*:

24 0.173E !

3.

• 3 E *.

25 0.153!-1 3.34E b,

25 0.189E-1 3.12!!

27 0.120E 1 3.24!!

L,

28 0.187!-1 3.39E isaiw STrans uset n..

' D ift

} **

tute r es g

appensle lemss Pas : or timets ett.

e.a

==. a S

. s.,a o i s e ii iit.,n i,. il n..

1.... !

1

,, A.,

.i... l c.. u..a...i... c..

n... I.

.f

. u.i i

...1 2...

..u...

4

-..i s

EA R 3152 3s13 It ' ofM test

!?, SM"

'; *L I j

SAF flH 6f17 147 Itte M42 23 73S?'

0 ** t e g

S43 tec; 3s22 144 1868 1968 32 44W l'4 ; 6 las l?ac taal to 2464 ttte M

3743a 30.na f

>3 546 4WC

$393 led I!?!

IMI l

ISFW' IHe *2 4'

r LA4 mal esse nel IM3 2307 547 3153 Sul le leta 1277 9

s4 SA4 Ap4 11003 33 9ea 1876 g

SA9

!??S 5364 17 gee till f

,g. g,, g,,

Sale 3364 70sa 23 964 1997

!!77 1790 49 843 1873 Sall.

I F

J

,3

,,7 7,7 7,

i.

, 76 m

7.

lio 1809 last 3

633 5 52 il

!?!!

2113 Il 631 647 in u?

il rees 3nce e.

-(

g u

noc im lx m

e

'[M, l

s 1

FIG. 3 8WR Main Steam and Safety Relief Lines m.v.u.sen n a.. 7 N a -. J

.... u.. m,..,.,

l.-

.=

4.:.. b "

_3 u.'.s L==

• • .**S

". = :.a s r

• g r, t "me 3;.) R wt

. $*.N f bl a 8 dhaab S

5'

I)UCTt U HNn4-ifs m m no,

. c, r... :,,.- -.... 1.. ~.i..a tw.

s tier,-,. h,ar 2 ed., b.e... -... A. -.-

~ nin itt

-m-,,,.

e

Sh

)

bb )N r

i There are a few exceptions to the above criteria for the case of a heavy wall run with a small diameter branch.

If the calculated component espacity for the run or branch is greater than the capacity of the corresponding butt weld, then the butt weld capacity governs.

Alsc, in the ose of the run, with a run to branch diameter ratio greater tha-3, the ~run butt weld is considerco to be governing.

4.2.5.6 Miter Joints There were no test data available for miter joints. Miter joints deform much in the same manner as elbows and probably have static limit moment capacities similar to elbows of equal size.

Miter joint stress intensification gf tors are greater than for elbows of equivalent dimensions.

Stress intensifii:ation factors are a better indication of f atigue strength reduction than limit moment reductions but, lacking static test data on mitesjoints, it was elected to scale miter joint capacities in the same manner as for elbows, using as a reference, the 6" Schedule 80 long radius carbon steel elbow, the same reference fitting used for scaling elbow capacities.

4.2.6

_Ductilities of Pipe Elements The carbon and stainless steel materials from which piping are constructed are very ductile in themselves.

However, if stress-strain ard moment rotation relationships are examined for the test data, the ductility at instability is not necessarily as high. A review of the strain gage data from Ref. 46 indicated that the strain at instability of elbows was about 1%, corresponding to a ductility of about 5.

From the tests of ANSI B16.9 tees, reported in Ref. 30, it was observed that f ailure was ductile fracture of the branch pipe to tee weld joint in the heat affected zone rather than collapse of the fitting.

Examination of the moment rotation diagrams from all tests indicates a ductility of 2.1 to 2.75 with an average of about 2.3.

It was indicated previously, in deriving limit moment capacities for straight pipe and butt welds, that a lower strain limit value would be considered for batt welos than for straight pipe. This assumption is hC iI M

4 cr~k rmN g2.qM[ p CGTRJC "S

mQ w.

u L

D

.j E2EEE M M E M E t_am,A

^

- q consistent with the observed differences in ductility stated above for f

1. elbows and butt welds on a branch pipe.

There were no dynamic test data available to support the selection of ductilities for piping elements, consequently the ductilities were selected based on observed stress-strain and moment rotation relationships at static instability.

The following ductilities and associated ductility factors were selected.

5 Ductility Factor Element Ductility F, = /2u-l Straight pipe 5.0 3

Butt welds 2.5 2

k Elbows 5.0 '

3

%A1 Miter joints 2.5 2

Branch connections 2.5 2"

4.2.7 Load Scale Factors The static. load capacities derived for each pipe element were-multiplied by the ductility f actors to result in a dynamic load capacity l

for comparison to the reference dynamic load capacity. The load scale f actors, F, described as:

p n

Capacity of Reference Pipe Elenent (4 4) p p

Capacity of Pipe Element Under Consideration l

^

were then derived for all pipe element types, materials and temperatures defined for the risk model. Table 4-1 sunnarizes the resulting load scale f actors.

]-].yj-]-[gI lbfb !

4-21

Capacities for components in this classification are derived from the following relationships:

F F3 F, (4-5)

=

C where F is the strength f actor of safety and F is the ductility 3

y f actor.

The strength f actor, F 5 is derived from the equation:

PCPN YY F3 (4-6)

=

PTPN where P is the median collapse load or stress, Py is the normal C

operating load or stress, PT is the total normal plus seismic load or _

stress and P is the code design allowable load or stress.

D In many instances, design mports provided the exact values for use in Equation 4-6.

Some ' variability is assigned to each value in the above equation to account for the range of material properties and the uncertainty in actual loading.

l The logarithnic standard deviations on strength,8 R3 and 8 U, 3

are derived considering the random and uncertainty variability of each of the variables making up the strength f actor.

For structures that respond in the amplifted response region of the design spectrian, the dJctility.f actor, F, introduced in Section 4.1, y

is:

i b

FEPR!ETARV iNF0BisAT;G 4-23

where u is the ductility and e is a variable of median equal to unity with a logarittunic standard deviation of about 0.15 to 0.2, which repre-sents the uncertainty in the use of Equation 4-7 For equipnent that is considered rigid, the &ctility f actor is 1.0; i.e., the earthquake 4

loading behaves the see as a static load and no credit can be taken for inelastic energy absorption.

i Due to the large ntsnber of components, not all derivations are mporteo in detail. Major components of the NSSS system are included to portray the procedure. Fragility descriptions for other safety-related equipnent wert developed in a similar manner and all fragility descriptions are simnarized in Table 4-2.

4.3.1.1 Reactor Pressure Vessel The reactor pressure vessel is relatively insensitive to seismic

~

Ioading since the governing design loads are nomal operating pressure and blowdown twe loading. The most critically stressed portions of the RPV, as reported in Reference 51, art the safe ends of the outlet nozzles.

This area can be treated as piping just as well as RPV, since the most highly stressed area of the MSSS piping is also at the RPV outlet nozzle.

A slightly different approach is taken for the RPV outlet nozzle safe end than for piping, however.

For the RPV, thermal expansion loading is considered in the nomally applied loads but for piping, themal expansion stress has not been considered as a contributor to failure loading. This approach for piping is consistent with the ASE code and is conservative for the RPV, i

since the ASE code does not consider thermal expansion loading as primary outside of the limits of reinforement. The design margin is so large, l

however, that the conservatism would not appear to contribute signifi-cantly to calculated risk. Also, since the themal expansion plus i

pressure stresses are less than yield, self-springing muld not occur until a seismic event increased the stress beyond yield; thus, the thermal expansion load is present at the initiation of a seismic event.

(

i GEEEEL ELECTRIC

[

pHIETARY INF0%" ail %.2.

(UATEruAL-pptwW3 p 7..--

r- -

.,,7,.13

=

....... =... =, =..

...s g

PROHilETARY ENFORidTICE J

O en

-+

= - -

=e---

APPENDIX D:

(

NUC1.EAP FLANT SEISMIC MAR It.

GEiiEPX Ei. ECTR!C

~

PRDERiETARY INFOCMATION (h* Y k 5

~

w- --

note: Appendix D is an unedited copy of the report submitted by consultant R. L. Cloud on June 8,1979, and a follow-up lette e dated Sept. 17, 1979.

3 3 pe.M +d W el N S.

p cW <db ca n.}-

\\. n W

,.<r) pac g.A) NNN>

- gp j.djs,m %.

bcb ",

p

(. v i

"(

M f

t. m o

I.v.

b uri

%'^^

u W

RNf'sO N Y & & bc5 Q,. W h u,si.u).

&a G J m

m r.s1

=

_s ' e g mAfw% N MAW WA a

w

,.7 to.

r.T

& MR w nW h McM ib

v NUCLP'AP PLANT SEISMIC MARGIN ROBERT'L. CLOUD J"NF 8, 1979

.Srepar ed for Lawrence Liverts. ore Laboratory by Robert L. Cle.ud Associates 640 Menlo Av.2nue, suite 8 Menlo Par.4, Ca. 94025 1

1 o

O

c INTRODUCT30%

3 v' t ' l t -

This re-rt cer.tcinr a discurrier. ef rercrt l

the seisrsc des: r preccer ir nucI c r. r f er.tr t!rt v r-f ern.c 3 by the Lavrence liverrmre LaPerot r; (LL:

!r werk was donc to study the r.argir. ir. the seit-i de r i

:

pre:crs.,

conclusions and reco:...cndatic.r re:ative t, the r;R: Regulatcry Guides (RGs) and the F andard Fevic. Flan (SRT) arc prescrted that are ba sed ir, part on the L*.I.

rer:rts and in p:.rt er. the prerent vriter ' r e::pe-icr:r.

The first sceticr. contairr a brief refcr r.r-t.

t?:

evclution of seis-ic design, and acr.t:. :. cf the er.tc ::-

les of design margin.

Genere.1 reco:..end a tier.r are g:. ect here.

The LLL reports are discussed in the ne.':t secti:n and senc justificatitn is developed for the gencral r e co=.c r.d a t i e n t.

Then a short discussien in giver. rcla-tive to the seistic perforr.ance of power ri-ing in act;f.

earthqushes.

This section protides additional technics backgrcund for the recornendstions presented.

GENERAL ELMlM pggg;ngay isFkMME.q 173

~

u O.

GENEHL ELECTRIC PF5alETARY IWORMATiC,.1

'UCLEAR PLAMT SEISMIC DFSIGN

- : - tC::D

.7ble 1 shcws the chronological development of sone

f the. sin features of scismic design and analysis metheds f::.uclesr plants.

The first plants were designed with 3 2:ic methods using lateral force coefficients as static 1:sds in the r.anner of various building crdes.

These plants were in the ain built in regions cf icw scis.i-

ity.

Cynamic considerations were intreduced at ahout the ti.e plants were built in regions of higher seismi:ity.

In

cegnitien cf the amplified response possible when shaking =ctions have frequencies at or near the natural frequencies ef' buildings and equipment, design grcund

s :nse spect n.-cre intreduced fer design.

Sev:ral

. pers that describe the derivation and applic:tien c f

spense spectra metheds are contained in the section on

.i:nic Analysis of P.cf (1].

This reference vas cceptied

,.r:vif e technical backgrcund for the advances and

hs.. es of various ccdes for design and construction Of uro.es cis 2..d ? iring, especially includ i..7

.uclear.

r;;h

'.c ?.cy papors that influenced the de.elep ent f r..:

1r.scismic tecPnclogy by set:mic cp.'etalists r; : m.-.a r <, Ma ll, C '.c u-h, C: r..e ll and c the r s are

.r.ri..tc! conveniently in one place.

I MO

o Te obtain the scisr.ie response c,f crui;r" t at '

.r..

it is necessary te study the passagc of gro.:nd motsc.:

t hre.: g h the s; ;l. F;;; d e r.:: c !..: cc.is cit. c:: efW. {

ecure r.ed facrt:-.r cf the r* tar.n referc at rc+:5 r i piping.

Origirr*:y, dcri

r. rcrr:nsc tr. etre s e r e.

a te pirirg in the sirplert vsy censaderir.g t'.-

f:rti r '. C -

of eart span and takir.; tFc rc rpor.sc d:rcet:

f: cr trc grcund spectru..

This approximatier. war er Jr.rtverent over rurely static r.ethods, but is cuite s:r:1:f:c0 corr: red tc later reth:dr.

Eut (:;uently in the Ic(0

• s the ef f c et e f r : : C :, r,

metion on e uirrent and raping was ine:rr:ratef inte the desigr. process er an industr wide hcs.s,cith: ugh th' con =ert had beer. devc.?oped much earlier [2].

Ccncertuall,.

this is d:r.e by analyzing the buildir.; fer the effe : ef ground e.: tion and devcicping nev socetra at the ficers and walls of the buildirg where riping is supp:rted.

In practice this was d:nc at first using re:Ords of actual equrthquakec, Taft, El Certre, etc., nerealizcd to the design acceleration level chosen for the site.

The accelerations were applied to lurped :.:ss building mede'.s in a tine history fasN en.

At first, very fev masses would be used for the building, say less then 10.

Als:

approximate methods were devised to obtain the effect cf building amplification on the design spectra directly without a time-history analysis of the building.

Design ne. -n,h;., Ed.CO.,mt.:

s th.ht#d-dad

%31ETAliY li1FGPMATICi 2"

~

GEEEAL ELECiniB

?EG' iiETARY IHFORMATION d

ficor srectra were developed by these means and used for several plant designs.

In the 1970's several major changes in methods of nuclear plant seismic analysis were made.

The key changes were a standardization of d.esign ground spectra, a requirement for 3 directional analysis and use of increased damping values.

The net ef fect was a more rational approach.to seismic analysis, but in any given case, computed seismic stresses tended to be comparable to those obtained by the more approximate metheds, since the increased damping tended to ecmpensate for the addi-tional imposed' motion.

?.:TrTY :'_APo t :s

is possible to organize the seismic design precess into certain major categories or phases.

One categcry Of activities consists of the steps involved in assessing the earthquake risk at the chosen site.

Considerable effert is involved but the final results are design basis earthquakes in the form of a g level and spectra for the s afe shat dcwn and operating basis earthquake.

The g

'.:vels, spectra, and time histories if apelt:ahle,are

. :sen to that a certain positive margia exists between the gnitude of the design basis events and the seisnic events expected to occur at the site during the f acitity's D

s-l lifetir.c.

It is not the present purpose tc d:reur.s tti-rergin, but rather to note it exists.

It sh.11 be r c f c r e te as the " Des:gn Earthquake Margin" and it w:22 he nrted that it consiste of margin ir. the g levci, frc.

centent, ar.d duratier. of stror.g retier er evert: ; e

<r,,

Ic eci.

With the design earthquake established the ne>.

sequence of steps in the design process cer.siste of the actual design and analysis of the plant.

In conceptual terms, this cor.sists of establishing a cor. figuration a..d determining if the respense of that cleront er syste-tt the design earthquake is satisfactory accordir.- tc the design criteria.

In practice of ccurse the process is lengthy and complicated.

The motion must be carried through the soil to the buildings and ther on to the piping and equipecr.t.

The chain is so long that as a practica*.

matter internediate criteria are frequently established; the equipment manufacturer e.g. might apriori set accept-able floor spectra outlines based on previous work.

I r.

deternining the response of the basic plant eierents, buildings, piping, and equipment, certain additional margins are developed.

The response calculated for a given pump say, is greater than that pump Smuld actually experience if the design earthquake were te occur.

The study of this margin which is quite complicated has been GEE 1 ELECTRIC FR&nEVARY INF0FiMTIGii 2"

r u

GWUQ $h J

pq/s$iM IMODiMlU the purpose of several of the LLL research reports in.the current effort.

This category of margin which is denoted 23 02':ulatiensi :*argin" *, rill be di scussed further.

As :he : sponse of different elements of the plant s r21:uisted it is c:= pared to design criteria.

The main fesign criteria are the various allowable stresses in Ie:pien III of the A5ME Soiler and Pressure Codo (ASME

de).

In addition to these mainly strength. criteria

-hare are Other criteria relative to Operarill:y.

These 1.33:.;n criteria all centain varicus levels and types cf

r g in.*. :h. i.11 be d e no t ed a s " 0 e s ig n Cr :.:e r i a Ma rg in".

Certain :f the *

• L repcrts in the current af fert are lev :ed to the study of aspects of the Design Criteria r.rg:.n,e.g. (11 studied the dif ference het,reen Ocde

- 2:;f;3d attrial strengths and actual stre..gths and

.: 2.rprisin;1y f:2..d an svorage 171 argin fer this rticular cc: penent of the Design Criteria Margin.

g FICO:'.:'.E::: AT:C::S ON FArrTY v?.?GI::S establish :ptimum, proper, or ccreect saf ety

-..s it :.s useful to have an oversil philcsophy cf.iesign.

..... ui-t:.:n :f su:h a philescphy 7:es to the very c: cts f:nction -f angi.neering in society.

If 'E..gineering

.:t o f hrecting the great source s o f pc zer i.:

..2 tu re it: -he ;se 2nd convenience o f nan" (4), then this is only t

a o

pessibic with nuclear pover if on the er.c har.d it i.e ri f c.

and on the ether of it,does not becor.e priccd cut of t: r r.: r k e t.

The currer.t effer: te rati r.c 2ze ci-f r r--

refety margirr 2r err n:n ; c s i c p i t. tre r:-Pt (. : r c e.. :..

The view ade-tcf. hctr.ir. i.* that a r.v:1c:: ::e renair safe in ar.y seismic ever.t t whi:h i t r e y ! c e:-:i p: sed, and that margin beycnd this obje:tive is c:;r.to:-

productive. If this vier is directed at the three cate-geries of desigr. mcrgin as delineated or. the rc:ci:r.g pages, ther. it seers reasenable to chosc the des c..

earthgut*:e conservatively since the eartheuakes that v *1 cc ur cannet he know.., ar.d te have centervative desigr criteria so design stress will not cause failure.

Eevever, it would seer to be enough to be abic te accurately assess the structural resper.se to the desigr. ever.t.

Stated dif f erently, the writer 's experier.ce suggests that Calculaticnal Margir. is no longer ne:essary due te improved knowledge, althcugh re.*icr. Farthcuche and Desfer.

Criteria Margin should be retained.

k In the last ten years seismic technology has advar.:cd at a remarkable rate.

In 1969 Berkowitz [5] described the state of the art of what has come to be thought of as conventional response spectra technology.

This paper was sufficiently advanced and yet representative that it was t

reprinted in the ASME " Decade of Progress" Volunes [1].

I i

l GE!EAL ELECTRIC FR G Rii n g tiW OFiaAilG..u u,

Q.W,..a 2.

J an a -l34. {.b N Y, -. q m

5?

N V Q*l:

a saw

' The ad'vance'of the technology may be seen by noting that Cicud (41, writing in 1977, described a coupled, three directional, non-linear time history analysis of a

..uclear plant.

The basic thought is that, early in the 7ame, the meaning of seisnic response calculations was more epaque than at present and Calculational Margins tere reasonable and necessary.

With current large sys-tem computer ccdes and the accumulated experience of ra:ent years, Calculational Margins are no longer neces-3ary.

The correctness and physical interpretation cf seismic response calculatiens are or can be kncen.

This c.ppecach is in the successful tradition of the nuclear plant design process as exemplified by the treat-rent of other categcries of design loads.

For example the A3ME 0:de requires a design specification, and exptteit

idelines are given to ensure all thermal cenditions are included therein.

A great deal of thought has been given to the allewable valaes of the thermal' stress and especial-ly the cyclic stress (71 It is clear that the design criteria for thernal a..d pressure conditions are conserva-ti.e.

wever n: <here is it suggested that stresses

'igher than asacciated with the design conditions should

c2'eulated.

In the case of thers.al stress, the use of f

t r t i f 8.

Lal conductivitios or f t'm coef ficients to obtain conservative thermal stresses is not advocated (except of

a course in the absence of data).

Nuclear plant desigt.

practice har bec-to spec 2fy conservatively, calculat-f accurately, and use conservative allowable stresser, def orma tions, an:' nu:-bers of cycles.

3 tu.

v. n *J.a...J u

EhLc'n2h!AS,thPUHMuunO,d

,,. ~..,

m.

181

E C.ZRAL ELE 50

. a u p...

j k, p 7 -ltdb ?..,;. a atrtni t68g a

3

,9 n

SEISMIC SAFETY MARGINS Li*

-orts The series of reports sponsored,or in r.ost cases, r:.-:cn by the LLL staff have been most helr.ful in clarifying

in :spects of safety margins in nuclear plants.

This 3: ries :f rercets which are listed below, discuss a rafor ef fers that has '=een c nducted for the s ecific purpose of pantifying 'tarious c mponents of :Pe safety.~nrgin in

..:'. ear plants.

The authers of the rep:::s a.-d directors Of

.. -2

.:rk are c he ec..onded not c.ly f:: the 2 :unt of crk

-- ;.eted but also for the rescurcefulness exh;hited in ic e'.:p:...; ecth ds to study or test for conser. a tis.m.

The *LL ::-orts reviewed are:

1.

Elasti:-Plas-i 3 e i sn ic.. 2 '. / s i s o f T- :ce ?'.2.t E-2:cd Trs. es, : els:.,

T.

turray,

?..

C.,

Cec.

4,

• F 3.

2.

The Eo'.e of the 0:erating 2s sis ar th:u.a.P.e in Centrclling Oesign, Du. pus, S.,

.-ith, P.

S..,

• ay 21, 1979.

1.

alinear Structural Oynsmi: ?...s'ysis Pr:codurcs fer Category 1.::ruercees,

• ? :,' It hn A. 31ure f. ? s.sec i.a te s, Engineers, 1::t--52r, 1371.

7 1:*/:n rt pers : * '. ",

r e a r t s I'/

r-. n <

f " : *. *. ' T . ? c t r m ic C :. s c r /1 t ; ;m

- r m:

. ttions of tho ::nscrest':n in ~~:

c *. s. ; : 0 a s :. in r

. :. : 2 r F :.. o

.' L a n t.: ".

O

O f

4.

Tart IV:

Tiructura2 Da rir., Srith, T.

UC'r-II'?2.

5.

F:rt V:

Sci 2-F:ructurc Irtcre: tier at t ? '.

Hu.ht. 2 d t B..; Power Tl ar.t, Masict.:htv, C.

E.,

S-ith, F.

D., UCIO 1E105.

6.

Part VI:

Respor.se to Three Ir.put Cer cr.cr.tt, Smith, P. D.,~Bumpus, S.,

Masler.iicv, C.

T.,

UCIO 17959.

7.

Part VII: Broedening of T1ccr T.es :.rc Spc:tra, Srith, P.

D.,

Burpur.,

S., Masler. h 7,

C.

R., UCID 1E1C4 E.

Fart VIII: Structural and."c;har. ice! Pesirt-c r.e c, Eunpur, S., UCII 179CS.

9.

Part IX:

N:r. linear Structural Rest:r.rt,

Bumpus, S., UCID 16100.

Calculatier of.c bsyster Respor.se, 10.

Pe.rt X:

u Maslenikev, O. R.

Smith P.

D., UCID 18110.

11.

Scirmic Analysir Methods fer the Syste atic Evalua ticn Program, Nels:n, 7. A., UCR*

52525, July, 1976.

Ir. additier. tc the abcVe rep:rts, several rece..t reports en the TERI seil-structure interacticr. prograr (8 10] previded by Dr. Conway Chan of EPRI were reviewed.

The last of this series [10), " Applications in Soil-Structure Interactier.",URS/ John A Elume & Asscciates, Engineers, EFE!

NF-1091, 1970, is especially interesting since it denis with physical data.

The report contains a description of a large scale nodal test and the correlation of analytical predictions with test results.

t....._. J. L. a i..

p., 3 = a e-p.

w, r"* p.*

• p w grs.**

m gy b b..#'l i El!

l d k '4 k- [ I*.

Jj k

ass

.t g GENERAL ELECTRIC FR0rBIETARY INFORMATION The reports listed above may, be grouped acccediag to the category o f argin addressed.

None of the reports were addressed to Oesign Carthquake Margin; 4,5,6,7 &

.0.cere addressed to calculational argin; 1,3,8,9,

& 11 were

..ddressed to Design Criteria Margin, and 2 was addressed to a separate e,uestion.

These categories of margin and the inplications f ecm the work are discussed in the folicwing.

I?.y EA3TV-"*FF **AROIN This categcry of nargin is not addressed by the werk discussed abcve, nor is it really a subject for review by this repcet.

There are sone remarks however that can be

.'. d e.

The use of a tread har.d design spectra is clearly 1

ry ::r.servative practice si..ce r.c real aarthcuakes pr:du:e 32ch spectra.

The..eed for such spectra arises because the real carthquake could fall anywhere wLthin the

pecified fecquency band.

A dif ferent overall acrecach

hich wculd pr:bably be suitable but much less conserva-tivo eculd be to qualify the plant for a series, say three, ter:w har.d spectra that ucuid, in the a77:egate, blank-

.;7 resent bread band spectr2.

A sac:nd feature

....:/.4 to be r.orhaps core conservitivo than ecessary

--)

racetce

! cor.siderir.g tPo strcnq o:icn to jersist thecu;heut che Length of the earthquake.

Actual earthcuakes am

o

..;.-- m 3

--.., - - m p L L...' a.....

......;.. ~. o E$fa,aI th(be

.N$WJ a. s=

--=m e-

= 3.- 7 fM a s.

lL:

have only 3 to 6 seconds of strong motion, not 20 or 3C.

I r.

a time history analysis, this can make a bic differc: : 6 I

CALCULATIONAL MA*tCIN The first paper devoted to this margin is UC 3 I E 11; e r damping.

The main ef fort consisted of para..ctric rtu d2 c:

on effects of damping.

Ir. a relatively little known ca;.ct,

sehm [ 11] published data on damping from full scale tits: s on the Indian Point plant, data,from San Onofre in thir sa n Ternando earthquake and certain other data.

B:h. cer: ela"c:

the total composite measured damping with levels of di sfic: t-ion cf the equiprnant.

His data, which is ouito consit ste.t.

is reproduced herein as rig. 1.

The 3% of criticci da te;:in; allowed in the SST. occurs at an amplitude of 0.02 inct ies.

Extrapolating to 0.5 inches deflection gives a dampin; factor of Idt which is more probable.

If this were tr ue, it can be seen from figures 3 - 14 of UCID 18111 that the re would be a factor of conservatirm (TOC) of at least 1. 25 in going to 10% damping.

UCID 18105 studied the SSI analysis of the Fernda:.e earthquake at the Numboldt say power plant.

This app 12 ca-tion was an important finding since it originally confi rred the SMAXT-TLUSH approach.

The re-study also generally confirms this approach.-

It is difficult at the moment te discuss margins in various SSI analysis, although it is rea'sonably certain the regulatory approach is not uncons serva-185

_.., n k g.t. a

'A f-$.A.4;.p3,udVphW,,IC3d

g w vvn

• ;j,..::a= --

,,,.j tive., Thi s topic is discussed further in a later section.

The study on thr ee component' input,UCID 17959, is a clear and. interesting cxample of the development of margin si. p' y b y choice of :.e thod of calculation.

An average TOC Of 1.2 a id 1.4 was found for horizontal and vertical direct-i:ns wh a n simultaneous 3-D time history analyses with actual recordrs were compared to analyses ::erformed one direction et a time: with an SRSS direction combination.

In the latter

ase syrithetic time histories were used.

Results of this natu ce.tre very useful and should prove invaluable in fur-

her: as sassment of design criteria and perhaps even more helpful in assisting engineers to decide on specific ar preac has to analysis tasks.

This kind of data has never 5 ereto f 6rs been available.

It may 'cy noted that whereas in this work all records ere nc :: 2:.ized to 1.0 g except the subsidiary horizental dh. recti.on of the natural records, in actual practice a 11 tsht.'.y dif ferent approach is followed.

The spectra assec-isted

• sith the synthetic time histories must envelope the i

design spectra.

This requirement imposes an additional

irnif icant TOC that is not considered in CCID 17959.

This type c f calculational margin is better eliminated.

Concur-1:nt t.imo history analysis should be encouraged'and artific-

'si t. e histories should have spectra that natch tha target

ct ca en the average.

l 1

nfv1

g t

The study on broadening of ficcer rpcetra de r:ribc-I in UCIr 16104 is'an ingenioue arrroach tovard understand:n-tre censcrvatis of the crcrati0r..

'Jh:/ rrr:rt,'er ir.

t'<

c: r-ncv er0 rig.:f::r.

c f UCID.17 9: 9 T.t ri d: rrur r e d, conta i r.r re.tults.

The T N cf 1.17 fcund at the r,atur!.

f r o -; <. r.: : t. :

is the Arnper tor.t farter sir.:t the higher: rtresscr oc:ur a:

a result of this tretien.

At other fre uen:str where thc TOC is icver the stresses arc als: Icwcr and the Ic.: 700 becorce irrelevant.

This study i's imp:rtant because it covers the r.inirur facter c' conservatis..

The censer,vetirr th.=t ariscs due to the applicatien of brcadene:. spe:tra is nc.t dis:us scc.

The significant event occurs when a cor.:or.:r.t or pi.ang syster. is of f the peak of the spe:tra but f alls on the peak of the broadened spectra.

When the syster or component has its own natural frequencies in this range, then the conservatisr. has now increased to the p int where unne:essary hardware in the forr of snubbers fer exarple, is added t: the plant.

When it is considered that there F.ight bc 90 to 100 safety class piping systems so that in the aggregate the totality of natural frequencies is very closely space?. indeef, ther. clearly the situation in which systems fell onte broa?.-

ened peaks at the natural free:uency of the syriter will be the rule rather than the exception.

The result can be a great deal of unnecessary hardware that can and sonetimes does

~

cause trouble.

(77 RJ

• gS w;yc[a..uu

--~.a F

-'Dp.: *i=."

p n, Og?!$,6ggg-,,. l 2

4 i. : i k th' n 187

u 3

l

.o. a.. ac 1

• ~ ~

• m y) f YK rr:i

~~-

. ; d 6.

• J = =

The study on co.

.;f fects described in UCID 18110 upling e also centains ef fects of time history versus response spectra analysis.

The conclusions are very interesting with a rean.FOC of 1.44.

Hewever, the results are worth closer study when it is..oted that the highest FOCs occur at points of hig.7.est s:ress.

In terms of' design controlling parameters the higher FOCs are more significant.

It is possible in the design of certain safety ecuipment for the FOC of the various studies to ecmbine.

Consider, for example, the pressurizer surge line in a FWR.

This is a line that cecars high in the containment buildi..g with support at different elevations.

Suppose the plant has been qualified by s

execution of three one directional, time history analyses of the building, ccebining directional ef fects by SRSS, forming ficor spectra, broadening the peaks, then analysing the line

th the spectra frem the highese elevation.

In this bypc:heti-cal example which is a close description of the analysis peccess for.any piping systems in many plants, the FCC f rom "JCID repcrts 18104, 17959, 18110 might ccebine to, give FCC = 1.17 x 1.44 x 1.3 = 2.2 hich s an average TOC and considers only Calculational Margin.

he other two entire categories of cargin are not part of the 2.2 2nd even Calculational Margin on damping and SSI were s

l no?ejtad.

In the writer's view, our '<nowledge o f seismic rc: pence has advanced to the point where no Calculational Margin is required.

ISS

e a

l

= = = = m,i. n we r= n-m

........s ; 3 n

- a n,...J I L.

.s r.. -

e:.

a

,a 5 - -

-== p :,7 9 r DrSIGN CRITrE 1 Mt.RGIN - ~. s

. a.d ~. 1:. M i ' dt) Dids I = ^

a.

The basic conservatism that results f ro: the actut; strength of material beine norrally Ficher ther spe:2f:cf.

values ir doeurenter ir. UCID J 7 9 C i.

The avera;c T; results f rer this c f f e.- t is 1.27 fer rtec: crf I.*T reinforced cor.cretc.

The rele of cual:ty cer;r.

-r. ::

grams is maintaining thir TCT is diteur.sef.

I: uc u: e:

r*-

appear unreasonable to expect this TO tc dar:r.is? retart:

ly as manufacturing facilities across the ccur.try and e".:

arcuni the world be:one more uniforr and delivered m rc

.c fc" k

uniferm produ:ts.

On the other hand there a,rctr t:

advar.tages to artificially J ewering this tra ditier.-1 ar.d easily understcod source of conservctirn.

UCID 18100, in a nice piece of w:rk, sh:..cd that cla5;;;

floor spectra may be expected to be generalli higher tha.

floor spectra generated from motion containing sere plastic actien.

In particular, peak responses verc Iccer ar var expected.

In some respects this conservatirr is Desig.-

Criteria Margin and in some respects it is Calculatienc!

Margin.

In any event, if other sources of Calculational Margin were e3iminated, it would be comforting to know that in an extra severe earthouake the plar.ticity darpens the floor spectra.

The work reported in " Elastic-Plastic Seisr.ic Analyrir of Power Plant Braced Frames" by Nelson and Murray is an exploration of another aspect of the plastic reserve strength in nuclear structur'es.

This study is particularly 189

v i

h.E'.M. u.O ]

~

t@r.;- U I n@TDlO

-i.

DU ~h. FFS PU C irnDRF A"l i'M1 8 UI. 2 atuw :.%I J is'if'Ufhs : M Os3 interes tir.g in tha t it shows the real strength of a typical braced steel f rame was over five times the design level, but

.f :rerability of ccuipment is censidered (in a conservative sy) the reserve capacity is still 2.8 tiras the <*.csign

.....3..

22

.'9 is al o.'. s."'v.

a..'

-.-"..."..-2.

- n..e a..- ". a.

.. s. e.

1 2

a a.

r a s c :. tv..

This re :cet examines certain cf the : etheds 2..d 2..21ytical 2pproaches that can be used to assess the structural reserve capacity.

In a related ' rut expa.-d ad s tu d.y,

.. o.. l.'.. a. a r S '. ' c... -a l ' ", r. a...i c z... a l "i., i s :.-.. e. '...' a-.'. r. 1.....- j

...a.s"..v. ""J.e./ 31 u..o,

-. - "..."..d.

.. ' a a..' -

..-*.-".=.-=.a-a.

.. t s o.,-. "..d. i a. d a r.d ", a r.' c..

.=.

.-..<.i.

.3.

a - a..'-. d.a-

. - =.

a

.1

....a.d.

It is cicar that nucicar structures posres sub s :n..tia l

s. ~.

.*.s o'.

.'as.ic.'

s'-".a.

s..- a.... 5 e ". a. n. +.. ^. n... s-c.

". i... o... *.

a.

,.. '... =. r s k. i '. '. '. :-

a.'. a.

.is.-...-.'a.-=..'..

- '.. =.. '. '.. -...or...= s a.sa

..o.

a.w a,,... a.

...,........4

.a...

w

...... a3 e

....us.

'.a..c

• ..... a c h.. ~..'.,d ". ^..

... a.

'"11

.a

..,a,,...

... '.. e. t r e - r. ". '. 1 ".'. r..i...... t

.. - 2....

a

...i.,.

.. 2.,

.3 a.

3

4...e.a s..:

n

..a.w a'..'..*..s

...5 aw e

,.3u.t i.o.-ia.

. 5.i s ". c '.'..'.'

r.a.. " e ' n "..- a..'.-....' ' '. a.

.... y 3 [.. s.

4., A S... 3 4.

. 4

..n L..

.1

.3. 4. a.

3,

6....

..a

.a

.......w e.

.a a......

2.:

. 21,

.w3

.....at

,.a.....

.a.

....g

. a. y. [ 3.g g j,.,.

c..g

.. r..

?.

,44..

w.

i,....

p,,

3

...,w,

...,...w n the otice h2r.d, if it ts censi!ct:d that natiu.al e......,.

...r;.3 w

. 3 e.../

2.it t cr.,_s,

.., 4,.

,... ' d ". e

..a 190

r -'. g,,,

,k: aQ Q e h1D

=wn V.

n......,

.~.u r--

t's thherlbuhv[..,n g,., w jikNNabi.52gEr[h2 scussci preferable to efibfh t

car 12 er and continue to study appropria te approachc r te.:ard plast 2e des 2gn cer.s;dering a!I arrectsofp::*.(

des 1gr. in 1;C a r..~ e =u i rr o..t.

I::HrRr*:7 STR ::37H OT FITI :G SYFTE::F P.ecently a review was conducted cf the perfc:.ar.:e cf power piping in actual earthcuaker.

The review war done on short notice and there was ne tire avcilatle te visit the sitas involved or to discuss observctions wit?

witnesses.

Notwithstanding these shcrt:crings ccrt::r interesting results were obtained.

Table 2 c:ntains c summary of the finding.

Observrtions fro.- five major cartheuakes are ncted fr:r 8 sites.

There are multiple units at some sites, sc results frer 15 power plant units and I refinery are reported.

None of the facilities were designed fer mere than 0.25 g, and so far as is known all cualifications werc done statically, with one exception.

Even though ground accelerations were in most cases greater than the design value, there were no failures of piping.

The Kern Steam Station was the one ecsc that dynar.::

analysis was performed.

The main steam and feedvater lines were analysed according to the Biot response spectrur in 1948 (2).

The first natural frequency of each span cf piping wa s determined and a corresponding g value frer the spectrum was applied statically.

This was the first 191 e

O V

n =~ m O m u, l E. E D 7 E C

~

- un.j'T M y f', g s.'y.,g g

..... f }3 ] k g.,.= rn r-m u p:1, g.s m.f 8

• -6.

1 instance of dynamic seismic analysis in power plant design as far as known to the writer.

The ENALUF pover plant is an expecially interesting exa:ple.

This facility was located either immediately ad-3a ent to er else rigb.t en ene o? the major faults that caused the earthquake.

Althcugh the seismic design basis is not kncwn, it is unlikely to exceed static UBC requirements.

The 0.6 g level was estimated from the location of the fault, the magnitude ~of the earthquake, and the seismic

.ree:rding at the ESSO Refinery sc=e 3.8 niles away [12].

There were no significant structural failures ner fa'ilures o f piping -or pressure boundaries.

Scre of the worst damage..as less of turbine hearings hich failed when

e. ergency cil pump D.C. pcwer supplies were lost when the hatteries ta.-bled out cf their racks.

T.e r7asen for including this discussien in the present rep rt is to cephasize that the great reserve strength which

2s st_ died analytically and discussed in the previcus

ection does in fact exist.

The piping in these plants (and t'..e structur2s generally) did net fail because of the

rte strength or Oosign Criteria *targin.

It is perfectly

t'o excellent.rerfer ance was not f.ue to either

' i '. 7 :11-Lun21 '* argin or Oesign Tarthqulke Margin.

The

.:]

1. ds ecce rudinentary a t be s t cc.~. pared to current i

.r.:....

l l

1 1

L92

e-a.

Sl'.".**ARY Aim Co. OLt S:0!:S M

{

In th r paper an ctterpt war mest te criar. ire a-categorize the differcrt ty; es of ce r.s crva ti r-ir. r..:r:< -

power plant desigt.

Three categcries of der:-- r:r ;r v--

defined:

Design Eartheuake Margin Calculational Margir.

Design Criteria Margin The specific studies of different type r cf r.argir.r done by LLL were revies.ed.

It was shevr. that rest cf the margins that were quantified were Calculati ral Mcrgin, although sor.e of the papers dealt with Design Criteria Mar;.r.,

particularly those on reserve strength.

The concept of upgrading and ir. provir; the seisr.i design rationale is endersed on the basis that our knowlef ge of scisr.ic design has irproved significantly sir.ce,the present desigr. practice evolv ed.

The elcrentary " fact:r cf safety" should be proportional to the overall le.el cf ignorance.

A general approach to the improvement of outmoded practice was suggested.

Following establishef traditicnal design philosophies, it was proposed to initiate steps th7-ir will ultimately lead to the elimination of conservatisr the calculational process.

Retain that of the critcria and design earthquake, but establish the goal to calculate ac-curately, not conservatively.

e_

E.c.= -..

-,^- = 1..1 $UM 3g j),. y 4

=

r= n -=% i n 5G;:937:2 r,a t sp v

Ai d v D i d:. n m.

.4)b$

• ' '"

• 8 E3 G d 193

o.

u A, brief summary of a recent paper on power piping seisnic performance was presented to show that the reserve margin anticipated on the basis of analytical studies, is defiritely confirmed 'cy the bebavior of conventional 7:wer plants in severe natural earthquakes'.

If the technical philosophy proposed herein is accepted, it is believed that specific changes to US NRC Regulatory Guides and the Standard Review Plan can be developed censistent with the proposed philosophy.

Although the lavelopment of such changes =ay not be easy, when inple-

.ented it is scobable that nuclear plants designed by the

i. proved rules will b even safer, due to better kncwledge.

0'9ERAL El.EDIill0 d?Tgf! INFORMATi0H

...m l

l h:

\\

I l

w

RTTTRTNCTS 1.

Pressure Vessels ar.d Piping, Derigr a r.d 7.r a l y r : r :

A Decadc of Progrest,

Cloud, P.

L. et. r2., T f. ; t r[.,

Arcr. Scr. cf t'crh. Trgrs.,

N.Y.,

N.Y.,

1972.

2.

Biot, M.A.,

Analytsca) and Txperir ental l'c thod 5 it Tngineering Scisr: log,, Trans AFOT. 2C', 7 3 C L - 4 ' 5.,

1942.

3.

Burrus, S.,

Structural and Mechanical Ecssstancc, CCID 179C 5, I.avrence livermore Laherateric s, Liverr:rc,

Ca., 1979.

4.

Florean, Samuel C., "The T.xistential Tlee ures c f Enginecrin ", p. 19, St. Martins Prers,

':.Y., N.Y.,197C.

5.

Berhevit:,

L..

Scismic 7nalysis of Prirar-, Tiriny Syster.s fer Nuclear Generating Systers, Fearter and Fuel Processing Technology, Argennc Natl. Lar., Ta:1, 1969.

6.

Clcud, R. L.

Structural Mechanics Ap-licd tc Pr essur-ized Water Reactor Syster.r, Nuclear Engir.eering art.

Design, V.

46, No.

2, April, 1976.

7.. Criteria of the ASME Boiler and Pressure vessel Code for Design by Analysis in Sections III ard VIII, Division 2, Amer. Soc. of Mech. Engrr.,

N.Y.,

l'. Y.,19 f f.

8.

Nonlinear Scil-Structure Interaction, EPRI NP-945, Prepared by 1:eidlinger Assoc., 1978, Electric Pcver Research Inst., Palo Alto, Ca.

9.

Study of Nonlinear Effects on One-Dimensional Earth-quake Response, EPRI NP-865, prepared by Science Applications Inc.,1978, Electric Pover Research Inst.,

Palo Alto, Ca.

10.

Applications in soil structure Interactien, EPRI NP-1091, Prepared by URS/Blume, 1979, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, Ca.

1.1..

Bo hm, George J.,

Damping for Dynamic Analysis of Reactor Coolant Loop Systems, Topical Meeting on Reactor Safety, Salt Lake City, Utah, March, 1973, Conf-730304 Avail. NTIS.

y '~=q."., }.. p y"6..ps K

......~

.-- a 3,.ngy:

7 g =.m n t' ' T egf

• mm-a L

$ $$l..)

h a '. k E.'.

N 195

12.-

Manague, Nicaragua Earthquake or Dec. 23, 1972, Earthquake Engineering Research Inst., Nov., 1973.

ggERAL ELECTRIC pggpgingy IHFORMAT10M 1

Q(.Y1

- r TABLE 1

SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF NUCLEAR PLAh75 1955 Static Methods Introduction of Ground Spectra Buildings Considered Rigid 1960' Building Motion and Amplification of Spectra considered 1965 Dynamic Analysis and Amplified Response Spectra First Applied to Piping Ground Spectra Change Soil Structure Interaction Considered Ground Spectra 1970 Change 3 Directional Earthquakes Regulatory Guides 1.92, 1.6 in., 1.60 Damping Changed Bisher Site g Levels Considered Systematic Reevaluation 1975 Program Seismic Safety Research 1980 I. TVUW M! R_.0TR.!,0

... s...

o l

P ' j' -

' :.- - - e T =,

t r, 7.*.]

'N

' i.~.. 2 O a f./

..,;- $ ! O ii

-w=

l i

l 197 l

SEII:4IC PERFORiANCE OF PGVEm PIPIMG TACIL*TY DPSIGN BASIS EARTFOUAXE

_cng Beach Steam 0.2 g Static 1933 Lcng Beach, 3: 2:icn, 5 Units l'agnitude 6. 3 0.25 g at site (e st. )

e r... Cc anty 0.2 g Static +

19 5 2 Tehac'..a pi, 2:ea= Statica 3iot Res. Spec.

Magnitude 7.7 Stm. & F.W.

Line 0.25 g at site (est.)

7co ?c er Plants Unk..cwn 1364 Alaska, in Alaska

• agnituda 8.4 Se':ere g le*:el 1:

e:

Zhugach ?:wer 0.1 g Static l?f4 A1 ska 7' ant, A..c hc ra ge,

3.2 ; at site :e st. '

A l a s *<. a 721'sy Fc. er 0.2 cr 0.25 g 13 1 3an Ter..a..de, P l s..t - 3 7 nits Ma;..itude 6.1

• s Angeles, Ca.

3.25 g at site (es:.'

Esso Refinery 0.2 g USC 197 2 :'a..agua, :ic.

2..: ;u a, :::c.

.3. ;n t: de 7. 5 3.39 g at site

' easurad)

E n ?. '. ; f

.:0. :r

" n k..c wn

' 3 7 2 **an2;ua,::ic.

'.1.. : -3 l ::s 3.6 ; 2: site 'e st. )

r..2 ;ua, ::: c.

T: IRE E'ERE ::0 FAI' URFS CF

.' STER PIPI:G AT SITES AMD EART!!CilAKES LISTFD ABOVE

-.e r,

..s36-G

& B O

s Dr0

.a.. r..a r. m. i l. -g 6.,=s 4

i

'. ' M f.4 D V FT ' *. Tt P I'8 0. 7 3 0 !.I

~'

l s

1.:

I

=

t "a

(.* f a

t-- T..

E*

s!-

~

N-

=

.a t

. 2::

s s.

a A.

,=

3

. s. _, = -

c

~

m.-

s E

z-ss. :s ss.t.

[

=:..=..

o

=

.,, 5..... =,. = 2 s

.1 c.

~ ~ -

.~

.T e

=. -.. -...

a-c

-__11.22

.,, - -. 2

(.

_ stas;~~-

i.

3 1

s

.A 1.:.aa a 2 r.;.r

.A-

=

. ~ ~.

e 5 5. p y s y i c "

v

.....==66=sss

.\\l

=

C

.m

"*3a.

os.-

g

)L e e

..m.,.,

.s -

\\

g y

\\.

\\ttt

\\Mt c

u a

-aan1t. :::

s.a.

a

-n u

(

)*:*s t-= t e r t

\\,...

asas.{..{.asas e

-lW p d***

w i

w.

• 4 22222E2222 w

'K,.\\ '= 't.f

..,.= c.,.. c c,

C E-

~.~,.,~~-.

g

'333333355

\\.-

12::::::::

~ ~ ~ ~m.,

u t.**=======

c, u.

3 g

i&.

I \\

.a C

h\\ it E

'.)..:

.III I I I

I I

IliI I I I

I f

hV311183 IN3383d) DNidWVO 199

b i

RCSERT L. CLOUD ASSOCIATES. INC.

.. ~,........

mmw m;cTRIC F.1h.. --= " *

..,- - !s a rr,p 5 ' T' E.. 3 n vm '.] gad,, tigAliQts i

..- u -

c.G a, z. d b d (.U E g Sept. 17, 1979

.4' Mr. David Coats Project Engineer Task 10/ TAP A-40 Structural Mechanics Group Nuclear Test Engineering Div.

Univ. of Ca.

P.O.

dox 808 Livermore, Ca.

94550 s

ear ' Dave, Confirming our telephone conversation, I will be able to attend the meeting on Sept. 25 at the San Francisco Airport.

I have just completed reading your draft report and would like to compli-ment you for such a complete and thorough job.

I am certainly in general agreement with the report, and have only two comments, one general and one specific.

My general comment is that I believe your report, which in many ways is an intellectual Orttique of the overall approach to seismic design, is an ideal place to point out the absence of an overall unifying philosophy of design.

The funda-mental problem of seismic criteria and seismic design has gone unremarked.

This basic problem is the piecemeal. approach to safety via design.

The concept seems to be that each parameter or step of seismic analysis and design should have its own safety factor.

This approach, which appea.rs to have evolved by default, in the absence of an overal rationale,

.ats the stage for two undesirable events.

One ts the unchecked accumulation of design margin, so uch so that in fact it is difficult to know the

tsi.argin and, based on the observations I pre-

{..edat the earlier meeting, one suspects that

)

O i

e i

.s.

4 C..C.'i;24!.,h,. m m S I

dG C

-I'Ce.'33Ifff CWfiNi!bN currenthesignmarginis@greaterthanrequired.

The second undesirable aspect of this 3

approach is that the regulatory process becore. d debate over every design parameter.

The need t).e has evolved is to show there is margin on every parameter and it is no longer possible to loch 61 the total situation or " big picture", if you w12),

and invoke a judgement against general cratc :L.

Even though a great deal of thought ar.d study has been given to the individual aspects of seismic design, the overall approach appears to be uncritical and not at all organized.

The only rationale in the entire process designed to estab-11sh specific safety margins is in the ASME Code, which is the last step in the process.

In any event. I believe you have a good opportunity in this report to point out the dificiency I've just a

discussed provided, of course, you agree that it is a ' deficiency'

-The second comment I have is a very specific one.

I do not agree with the recommendation under I.D.

Time History Analysis.

In the formulation of artificial earthquakes, little or no attempt is made to reproduce earthquakes as nature makes them.

l There are instead twenty seconds or so of white noise of frequencies within a prescribed band.

It seems to me that any piece of equipment or l

structure excited by any single such uniform strong motion for such a long interval will certainly ex-hibit a response equal to or greater than that of any natural earthquake with equal peak acceleration levels.

If so, it would follow that a single art-ificial time history with a response spectrum which envelopes a broad base design spectrum is more than sufficient.

I hope these comments prove helpful, and I will look forward to seeing you on the 25th.

l l

Your

ruly, R. L. Cloud 201

i

/

APPENDIX Es COMtENTS GI JUNE 19-20, 1979, TASE 10/A-40 MENTING IN 8FfRESDA, MARYLAND, Ale SUPPORTING DOCLH M TS Note Appendia E is an unedited copy of a letter report dated 9 July 1979 from W. J. Hall and N. M. Newmark.

GENERAL ELECTRIC

. fiCFRIETARY INFORMATLON 1

WeF1

r GENkNAL ELkCINIC COMPANY PROPRIETARY INFORMATION Table 3-20 Factor of Safety for Piping l

Failure Mode:

Pipe Rupture Factor Symbol Factor of Safety Code F

2.1 g

Load F

2.1 g

Material Response F

1.3 g

Inelastic Energy F

2.0 Absorption E

Design Response F

14 th Spectra Analysis F

1.5 g

Oamping F

1.3 D

')

4

)

76

~-

e 7"

\\ '

fD bgyGP.c. f-ppCtt.'T(

E 9 tv krc

.m-Cr6 W7t II.

Ps pW e SyTSP n

f..' y w 6 s 3c i d Q G Tvt R,'c~ 5 i n~' _' ~ ~~

. t+PG.... _

(.

~1 (2. C I.Q..

. c. - -.: 3

~4 L. C S

i. ~~..-.....'- -

.. u J u.,

. - a t 4.

cg

is

..t.-

g, y p.

.a

..... c. - 4

..OTH E f t..

.. T vP 'Es...

b.

i~' 4 c~tJ

( F F. \\cwvCriyT '

~~

~ L tMcitt c. ic. (fif. k.EFr%E )~ ~ '

2.

.T

. 4 _ _.. G e.t e n M.

= 9 p i w(.. -s

( ATTAM kWT e J

(.

.p

..A..

N D.

Pt E.s._.<... t o.--

...__-.-......a__

f. =. A. V t. - t *. ' s e6 g

e, t f - O. h.

Qr

o. c 7 - c. 4 p

l b.

fIPES '> 10 4

.. tl..

1.

l

..___...__.._____.._As Oft _?

A:1 ' _~_ _ f _Y _ _ _ _ _ __. _ _

u,

e..

- o. L:

l t

I

... _..I _.1.' b.._ _ __ _'.__

NYb

=

2,._

c,vprort r r-e.mune s

' D/r-D bd WilCE$.

D, w

... _ - - - - - AF% ( pl'E 4WM + PW bt.9 (.- D [

(.

z w w.e.

......i ML L a.1 O F"n

!L..

O A TNEYL.

La hl D A AISD.ib I i rv L n A.D C Nor

f~

GENERAL ELECTRIC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION g.

DNiiiT~CEI T[o'tT~(~7 si(' "(-M ies Ii D

bhp'0E,,[POM,

fife._fTT#65,

l.

4. 2 0 -- 4, 7 S~ p'n U,E..

MesT

, 'LEL'CPE ( 7 QPE%Cp fe.' C cP D } F W'C-y At.7 5 5,

[3 A f4ET) At>

C E F T ETIC')

BT.tWTE TM W L O f.E M oJ90

. p.

U. C..._ _..

s..

h..

.... _.. _ _ _D+3'&ol C oppiT 4 9cLvQE

/r0S, 7,, _

"J.

0.-

W.V 0

b, pr&p W9 WTs h_

3-b.

Y.. WD "I.'

O b.

$.'k b

b.

Mc'PEL a

~ '

keLt/} TOP / T(,

Id k

C, 7'IME' N#} ~

~~}

~ ((

oPAE' 4 E tTid.M

~ /5

['

f

\\

C c t!%~TFHT v' t.

IJoV-Ced%Tet'T t 'o 0%

e ph e p u vcr h..

. - -.Oh< l 0 n HL-l i

f.

(7tts !

'L

~ ~ ~~ " ~ ~~~ ~

- - -.- f_cr* L u T-( C~sT rt.-s rE.. _.

W-

\\

1. VO4(A f.. CTo (L e f. - c eF ETW A T' S M_.. _. -..

p - -. __.

I see Pe P;

F.,

Fm F.,

F F

/

5, p

v l

i Vb_.E:

t

?c = h SHE C 4 96 HM Mr 'H i

h-ST &Et t PAT'o To Y' ELD

'e r>o'7' e N l

t F,.

PVTET t* L 4 Tt tu eT' o Ns Di/c.TtuT'T rm I l u

h 3,

Ofh I'

f d

E

3 GENERAL ELECTRIC PROPR!ETARY INFORMATION i

r

~P. G6Eifs diLoQ cdTPoe

(""T DJ

~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "

rae,, is s iw6 e.

e h er.l. s v 3 y o.ic ~

2.

'.r E P'~Y ' e. ['~f (- TtM.

),

,I Pc.

F. = 2.1 u

......Ep. w _l A

. Fy. z.o Fw

,It

.F3 r. 5-

.F. p. =.t. 3.

~

._._.._ [.. _...... _._.

=

=__.

.. ___ _ _.. _... _..._ __. _ _ __... w 1~70g

=.

Y tL. T_

@~ O l e-

~

_.. n_

. c

_.... _ _.~ (. u.

u

• i

~~' C V 5 3~~[G EAvdt c>P.._A-Drr'i* 4.. _.

~

L on.B- (

t

' M . [_ E._ # '._. b N W

.PtedTf._

W WW

"?

_..._.._.._y......oHvn r-E % -

=tnuaM of. t s w Cr LE cev

(

tH PA Lv M oF TVE tyT r4 57 %T E. H b

6 0ff_o ttT_ f__A. L o r 2 C Dv6 To 6P T H 'c_

lea C :

NT N f'f_T3.. b __J Q G ?_. t:_ P'd

O

/

WENERAL U.EDTFT TRQ.[E.!&I$E.......,.l '_$1 i..#;w m%.

c, pA.y c oe pm s o v

' -~~- ~ -

._ _.. Pfle J E( 7... _.. ___.

ft 4

.. 4rW M.1. G,,,

f.

4.7o o 4.19

d. W

....... ie

.._. _ -1 t &

_y__.____._._

._t_o4 4.h - t o.$"~

OK-o.h

0. f 7 - c, (. 3.. _ _

i d. '_T. _ __._.3. l. ~l 5 '

o,1.4-o.\\ l

.o.5(- 0,C l

4y.

..._LiMcTt"k _ __

.2. q..__L1. l.

c.2 - o.3 7 c.T T - e. O

.M6 M hTTA C W i

_T_ _T A C b...

4F eM A WT S

=_

M T--

...eh,._.

._m

]

o i

1

\\

]

b"TT A C NME9 T ~ A 1

~f Vypy-j 'dy ~ nip,QG -~9p(.,t,a

~~

~ ~ ~ - -

N

( g) f

{,. }

W Js

[? i [> r rJ d -

6T"5M 3y An.

Fm M*w STEN 1 MN p WATEtt.

<>F cE W1En 7&

I. e '(

o.T I c.5 7 b.1 s 0 t' O. C 8

&cPopltm AT*MrE %

Coq'T Sf6*] 95*

~7 8 }

o.Ti o.r?

P-(f7%

( o. +5-0.19

e. C 1

__ 4ftq W)CLT"N~Mhd*

A. %.

c.1 r

e. Le e

V (0.45 0.1]

". S c lesLWT CW& "V %ym-

].be o. h.

o. C z.

e

~7. 4 j

o. T I

o. 4 )

C cepcW97 ca.'s sp.

r, s.

o.h

c. 4 t

/ru*' be] W^ tEh-le,1S C 26

8. T 7 4-f s o.17

e. 6 o htt>

4. h

0. H~

4.77 I

N

.~..... _ __ __.

.. I " 7 *~.

. _f.d_*

P' D

..... _.. _ _.. -._ - P.ROPRIETARY INFORMAT!0F.._.

6 o

..N

.B_j..

- N.rt-pipistr.

> t e c.}..

,o

~ ~ ~

~

UW fig fn

- @tae %

4.5f

4. t')

8. A $

P hind 3,gp p,1, o, : /.

yD rN C4Y.vic{ wgo, -

\\W o.1 &

o.C.

C4FDW4T6 AT*RN.T TW 3, if" o.14

0. F

. 64F W PG } %lW 7 3, Bf"'

C."L 7

c. C o (4Fn _

7 o.g

o. ( z

%$T} (dFW 1

c,t

c. C a,,,

C.etL W T Cl N G'sM.<-

g

@f QD'T c" 7'-

3 tI~

o TI 0'

/tVt t1. * *n W wA"!Crt M+

3.t i 0.1/

o.

M k)c _ _

'7 f

c. 3 i C. C. 4 i

g

'I.e

~ ~--

'1T

, g.g. gg.a.T._!.@....~ ~ - - ~..

.g h

-e.64

.e.m 6 m e-86.W

.uu.*

.6 4W.'N_m..

s...-ee e.m..

N_

. O m.@

.O M

.__....Om M_

.__SM

.@.6+.

a N

. e m m.

-e.i.

.....i.

~

m m.

m.

x-n e

l I

TABLE 7.2-1 l

STRUCTURE FRAGILITY VALUE - ZION UNITS 1 AND 2 g

)

i Median Variab(11ty 7

i Structure Critical Component / Mode Acceleration

]

Capacity (g)

1. g

1. g 3

I I

• 7 '1 Reactor Butiding Foundation Slab Soil Failure 0.73 0.32 0.29 l- "

l Reactor and Auxiliary Buildings Impact 0.78*

0.28 0.41 Pressurizer Enclosure Roof Collapse 1.8 0.39 0.34 ' ', -

Containment Wall Shear Failure 2.4 0.38 0.38 e.

Buttress Plates Vertical Shear Failure 2.4 0.35 0.37 k-?'

l u l*w Contafrument Wall Flexural Failure 5.1 0.35 0.36

!O Internal Structure Shear Anchors 6.5.

0.35 0.36 'i i" l"

Foundation Slab Shear Failure

7. 3 '

O.32 0.36 r, L l

. Auxiliary Butiding Conente Shear Wall Failure 0.73 0.30 0.28 i.wi Concrete Roof Diaphragm 1.4 0.31 0.33 lC f' i

Masonry Walls 1.7 0.50 0.26.!'[']

Crib House Pump Enclosure Roof Collapse 0.86 0.24 0.27 ?2.' ;,'

N-S Intake Walls Failure 2.5 0.23 0.27 E. e N-S Guide Walls Failure 3.9 0.22 0.27 E-W Intake Walls Failure 5.4 0.27 0.27 d,

C.

0.83 0.28 0.29.O Condensate Storage Tank Tank Wall Failure Underground Pipes Pressure Boundary Failure 1.4

'0.20 0.57

• Applicable only with a median lower bound of 0.74g and pg = 0.29.

t an.e.nenen. e.

e I

3.

g: 3

=3 m: 23 2

3*

S

• • 3 3 32 3 323 ::::

s-e.s.

s.

.e s.. s....

I J

s ec :

=

= az

zenz

=

==

ec==cm==

\\

r s...

.s

.s

.s.

.s..

s.

s...

5*.

i:

=_== s 6.== Tes

's's = =

:==ss

net:::

~-

.s -

s.

.s _ a

..e s.

.s.

s

..e_

eas.4 sa

-I :::g.

is

(

l

. l:.

a as ms

==

ass

x=sss i

3.[

se ses us.s es

.s..

so......

s...

I I!!

me a re se es se

a e se asssmeme 4 i.ls i di i ed en add assi di ind i dass n-: ~nds i r.

i

==

.l.

e== x

==

==

== =

s

======== I 3:j wg s es.

.s

.s sse asss es s... es.s

....s...

B 1:'1 w

8: 8

~

8:

8 5*

e es s we aw zes zuse a;

__2 a sass esses we E.

_s:-

N l

E sa 1

==

==

z====

=~

==

==

y[,

'"t u-e se e s.

...ss sees es s... s.s.

es..ss..

n.

m 5

w

~

1.

_s

(

E.

E 31.1 883 a ** a 24 834

_. 3 83% _3 *

• s s.

.._M 3

r g:

.s-ae g

E "I

.I I

1 l :I til!.."

ctp

" ~

j ts tr:

_1 1:: :

c:

::. E

_3:n 5:

M 3.N2 5 15 53nn:

-n

-Ja is-3

+-

su I 33 3:

3

-:: 3 33 O

334 3 :.:

=f 3-

=a:::.s k:.t 1.1.11::

"15 C"3 2

.1 et 1::1.1 1

1

.1 i e

~33. r41

s a=:s k a

a a::s: :::

g r

r:::

rre FTi E M rri

_. = 4:r 3.=.:.:

g:r e r 3.j.:

r

_er.:

ggs g

.3 2

3 322

}322 J,M MM ;;;;

223 X 23 ;

2 22 ;;;

W

==C P '

s:

=== = 3322

2222...

= 22 m-2 3.: 3.E 32 f:r 3:.:::::222 3:.::. 2:

8

3

..c m.m Fi-E,!, r="

(

g

' g

., t,

=

g'g.

t

=,

er y

III:

s:

vss y

'ht ) !)hh 15EEEEEE 4:) C7 3

)E hh bhh

.ehh

~)

3 g..,...

_e _e _r,.

z,. -......:-..

M --

t see

.sz se se: s _tzt 23: *--

3 2

a saa

.z sa sa= =.asa 1 1:

12::

a f,4. fa a as 3 13

J JJJ AdJJ

}J IJJ J 3424 33333333

(-

i C:3 g

I 1

,i Egg

=

1

1: e r.

s 1 r.

g ij

-s

.==

_ se

==

SI :s.:

g -1 x 8-

-r h2:-

.s'zi e t nj 5_)'

.s. :lt_ = :

. 5_:e:::- 1 1 3.

n-

=-~:-

4

_:= al n:

1 t

s__ A;f_g..

e-.-

5:

2 3

88 3-1.3)

--=

al g 3...

.e-

,:_:3.:

i

_s:

a

c. II:. st.

r

• rs= s 3

n s.t _g.t *

• r-z. elk 2: 24-

.t g..:..r

_r s-4:_t_r 's _r_r_r 85_ _ -l_r : : r, 3.t s

-u as 3-....

22 33.3

.e.s.

.. _u.x. k-3:

s..

_.-.f j

7j:0j_.

7...i 7.2-13

\\

O o

I

\\

33.

233 3 32 23 3 32333:

C 33:

523:

==

tt:5 RRRs t-

.s.

4.

.s....

4....

E f

1, z= === Rect.

z:e==

==

t

tc cett:

an==

=== = ze

.s s 4....

s...

sa I-),il_. M_I:s 29: ~ (;

3; : 3; - q

,g s's;

==s:

z.:

s;-:

.... a.

..as..

~~~. ;

1

(

x:

l

. l_1 3:33

=23 3 3:

23 3 2323 23:32 3:3 03 33:2

• • • t s.

3:

3 w.sse.

es

..s s....i I

.,k3 3322 3:3 3 22 33 3 3:2222

22

22 33 1:22 2222F

.i.li i.si

=~a e is as i na.iii ai-ii

~is sisi 1112,

i a:

l k

k IE E.N.

EI.; I

3. I.

(3 3 qqqqmq qqag; qqq:

q.

q qa,q qq:: i

., 2

.....l n.

B w

-2.

I 1

"g g

E R

m2 e 3:

3: e e zt:=

33::-

3 33 3:

3.,12_==e as gga a as

_a a aggees g-e.

..sa sa

-a.e

____e 3

s

.c

==

N

=a g

g

• • }g 2222 222 2 22 22 2 2:22

22 2:22 22

22 2RRR -

se s 4.s 22 g

Ji y.

ss.s ess s

.4 sw ss..e

.s.s es

.s..

m 2

I E

~

N

~

2.

(.

}{3 RRRR 333 3 33 33 3 33R323 33332 3333 RR 333R 33332 N

g.: aaaa aaa a __

_a a aaaaaa aaa_a aa__

aa

_a_a w

a:

g B

W

. 1:1 11-

s

.I.::1 it.::

.. t si g

3_ Sj j jft 3:

a _3j_13 -

ss s 2:s.sj JI:::=s:

)==:

]ggen.

d 8-. s1

s s 1 s

-s su

=sa sga-s4.a

:u

...e a.:

=

[tr

31 13 mzzst:ji.t e

2

t t

i. t.z_ z. i. t e

Ja.: iia k.t a = k:.

as mm 1

-- st.'

=ajg

====:as: 3

=s a sss:s:s:

g

s:,

erre r

er a

e ::::

2 r_, r

=

=

==

2:::

ss

[:

33333

..x x ::

a: x x:::::

xx:::

a:::

O s

2222 3 3..

32

= 2:2222 22::

z.:-

2222:

2

.2..

322 22 22 s2 3::

12:

.. 3:

W C",>

i

... 22:23:

==:1

. 2.2 ggy 73

(

.e-E gs I I II 3

_g rm, m

.t 3.

s=

- z ~P*

! IIII i'3 h hi

'g'g ) kgI'.Ig khisI

'g' ass 'I hhhI

-h I

5 g..

g

... g.

5 3..

._, p%

gggg

_ye_g:

_g

_l

_g

-C saa a sa sa a as s a assa-sssa sas-assyi

(

3 333'3' J:: J Ja J4; ; J43'434 14:43 J444 3'3 Ja:a:!

aas::

2 T--

-Tg rri 5

CO E

E E

r

=

~s ar

I=-

=

3, g2. i j

<r:

=-

! :e je

.5 *l g=r e

. 1z. :.g s.

r r--

-2 l 3-

. __g;

:).

1

--1f.5.

iax:;.:- Ia..

-J

=,1l_.

s..tg!

• c= t ;

r-=

e 3

L,4

-tr

--s:

-I)Ig=s3:

i ts:

1=aca-::<:. s r

.c=1l.j-2er:!:,-:!I 3:g,3,3.3)3 1 e yr I !g:egI

,.g rrr e=e 2: s-1

.szz.,

,.

1:irr -l32 patst

=

C"3 3

t "Irr l'.!!

I

tr ~

.s:::__szer5,.1j:s-ggg ini::

sss

.ss

-,= :a 3!:

,21,,=s a=zz

,.rt 2

3_--... j--......

3_.-..

==== 3. =_-. y_-_.,

s2==

j 7.2-14

O r

R R

7 o.

4 TABLE 7.2-2 (continued)

FRAGILITY DESCRIPTIONS FOR ZION EQUIPENT m,d.a Ground sueuer.i e

e.io-t e

f.es. -

e niceierei.en e,,,,,

,,,,,e,,,I telement Setem6C Secommse Structurel tesosase totenset tapacity lessement (sostity (6 s)

System e temessent Lacetten la Structure therectoristlca emet. Itethod facter esteense f

• ter arspense factor Capacity B

's og electik:S.bor (Hee vp g

elmeseimerei.es a.me.m-no.w.. acu v

in.eu w ls e I min se.r 3.m e.n 9.u

..n r.n e.w e.re, e.. m e.=

a. m. su-e w w.. acu.e si.uca in i.=

e.n 8.n

.. n s.=

e.as e.=

.n e.N lose n tremen or

w. m. m-no.we. acu.e seu inssa.edi 1.m e.n I.u e.n n.se e.m i.n e.M e.se e

electett se.ier gene op

e. rr,,

i mu no.e a.o. me. m-ru.nwe. acu v.st ine.e m i i.m

.. n i.u e.n r.o e.m e.m e.n n =4.ce co ooi c ters

.. m.. m -

no.m.. aco.e e.s.e n.we lesi 8.m

..n i.u 1.o

.. w e.m e.o 3

c ir.,s

. sie,. m-

. e.ssi.e vest s.ie 8.e.

e.ii s.li s.ss e.>

e.e.

e.w i

tlostek funer iles sec)

I) inserters Aum. eldg. ser-pleegbh. Active foot (Assumed) 1.e4 e.7f l.et e.74 le.7.

e.M F.00 e.M e.m g

f) etstettetten Penel Ame, eleg. Gef-Flestele. Active Stette Amelysts 1.m e.FF l.52

..te F.n e.M e.ee e.lf e.le i

i flectek 8tuer (IM teCl

1. ) gottersee a esces aus. elde. est-Floattle, actles feet e Amelpole I.m e.Pf 8.M e 33 e.

e.lf 1.M 0 08 9

S 3 et aus unce Ana, eldg. 447-Flesttle. Active fest (Assessed) 8.m e.it 1,5#

.7e F.fi e.le e.ee

e. N e9 effette funer 6

il Cere=4 leseteters heside, erede Leuel Flestete pesetse se Smeltfketten 38 en M

M M

11 4 e.M ti le e.M Ifte seleet usee quallf ted by static emelysts, and the ester escstere sore quellffed by test.

Isolese tonen fras lectlem 4 of this report.

en Aselltery entideae Fettere. Table d.88.

• folere listed ese for cose of ao sell fett under centelement telletag beee est. For frestitty descelotten Sectedene sof t fellere, see n ure 6-4 and Sectlen S.f.3.3.6.

Posteleted septed fettere due to sett fellere es e treet et the centelamset sonettetten.

e billeret ose Seteemittent reley chatter er treeter tete which see cameldered recovereble vie amamel reset.

Perumment emmage Estlasted to eccer et sou61e these velgeg.

t MN.$a L.t v *

,?.

M.....

g~)h 4 4 }~.T..

3..

g d 4

ur,,

=a a **

q>.'

e.

1

,e*

1 TABLE 7.2-3 N

FRAGILITY OF KEY ZION STRUCTURES AND EQUIPMENT Syseel Structure /Eguipment aI An

1. U Off site Pmeer 0.20 0.20 0.25 Ceramic Insulators

'!25 VAC Distribution Panel

• 0.60 0.37 0.50 125 YDC Buswort*

O.60 0.37 0.50 5ervice Water Pumps 0.63 0.15 0.36

(

4.160V $witchgear (chattering)*

0.72 0.35 0.47 400V $witchgear (chattering)*

0.72 0.36 0.47

]

4004 Motor Control Centers (chattering)*

0.72 0.34 0.47 Aus111ery h11 ding-Fa11ere of 0.73 0.30 0.28 Concrete shear Wall Refueling Water Storage Ted 0.73 0.30 0.28 0.33 Q

Interconnecting Piping /5ot) 0.73 Failure Beneath Reactor kilding lapact Between Reactor and 0.7t**

0.28 0.41 Aust11ery hildings

)

Q Condensate Storage Tam 0.83 0.28 0.29 Q

4.160V 01esel Generators

• 0.36 0.35 0.37 i

Q Crib Mouse Collapse of Pu g 0.86 0.24 0.27 Enclosure hoof Q

Safety Injection Pumps 0.g0 0.20 0.37 Contalment Ventilation Ductwort 0.g7 0.20 0.62 and Campers O

125 vDC satseries.nd n.ct.

1.01 0.2 0.63 Core Geometry 1.16 0.25 0.42 l

6 Reactor Coolant Systa Relief Tad 1,19 0.20 0.63

'[

~ '

4.160V Transformer 1.3g 0.25 0.60

....s 5ervice Water Systs bried Pipe 44*

1.40 0.20 0.57 O

Cst Pietag 20-1.40 0.20 0.57 0

Availlary nutidia,-ratiure of Coacret.

1.40 0.31 0.33 Roof Diaphrays O

Failure of Masonry Walls 1.70 0.50 0.26 O

Centairuneet Ventilation Systa 1.74 0.49 0.23 Fan Coole.-s O

Collapse of Pressurizer 4:1osure 1.80 0.39 0.34 Roof Tragility values indicated are for chatter, relay trip. or other intermittent er easily recoverable conditions. genrecoverable failure is

", 3 supected to occur at about three times the indicated fragility value.

• • Applicable only with a median laser bound of 0.74g and $y

• 0.29.

7.2-16 l

o O

t

\\

tln/sn f TTh Cll IEDT h

-- Ty Wi 74j

- JTifT6

%MTLEj A -

- " ~ ~ ~ ~ - - ' - ~

W TA

' s.o y LA HE P ' c k.

w

~ '

4j676 W kg f n.

'fg

~

5 N.M ).

.... _ 3 91..

. P..?.]

1. Y E W s l2 Pi86-.

t,'1 c.1 o t.

, PAiw McAM fip +

3.3 o.1

o. c p.s o n.c. g, p vc.-

3. rF

, o.%

o.n C. (1. 0 o E. e e/0-

"L ' G

4. \\"1

c. d l

l s

.l

.. [

_U.

.. b

' # 3.2.

1. O t

N N _ h*

M N

M.. _.. _

..a.e O

O s

,ea. _ pe w

-g p.. g @ EF0Bg g un m,

,g,qg,,yp e,

ee es

.ee.

g

..*M**..

h h

... m

.e N.h

~ -. -

1 l

I l

i s

e1 f

J a

e 3

1 e

s.

s 3

z e

s 2

a e

a e

a s

4 5

5 1

8 t

t P

f l

.C

\\

l:.

.a.a

=

.a.a

.a e..a P-[

.a 8

I'

=:

3 3

3 3

y.

3 3

3 3

3 3

3 3

3 3

s i.:

3 3

5 3

3 3

3 3

t

=

g

=

3

{r

- i l

i y

3 3

a. a.

s

=

=

s e

a c

s

=

z a,

a. a.

a.

a z

s a

z z

c

,.g s's,

.=

..s.s.s a

.s.s s

.s.s

.s

=

a r{;

.s.s a

s I

! i I

E 3

3 3

3 3

3 3

3 3

3 3

3 3

3 3

3 3

3 3

3 3

3 3

3 3

1

.t E gI}g

.i

.s 'l.=

r t er I-ss8 1

i

,i'i

=.

.s

=

=

=

=

=

=

v

.=

j ',

{'

,i1),q a

a a

a a

a a

a a

.s a

a a

a a

a a

a e

a a

a a

a a

a

,t p

=

-r z

z z

z z

z z

a

.=

.= l 3

I

..i

.s

.i 3

3 3

3 s -<.

a,.

si r

e.

t T

.I T

I le T

I

.T T

T T

i

}'

T lI,l d

l lt { {[}{

j,. { ({ ((

] ((5

{z l :. l !

.g g,,.,

t'{p

(((( ((

t

{s ((

3 f a.

l a

z

.z a

s s

u a

s s

s g

I t

4 s..

-1

• • d i

s I

t i

I 1

i..

1

,3 i

i 1

.I g

,3 i

$[

E E

{

5 i

$ fI

$ f

$ {

.}

{

{.,.$

s z

z z

a zz a

a z

z z

a t

e a

z;:

i 5

i t

i i

i i

ii i

i1 i

i 1

i:

i i

i i i G(

g r

?

t t '

t ~ t ';

i t t~

1~

i t' !~

I" 1~ !~

I"

! !~

t 1~

E;11

\\

uz uz sg> a

\\.

L i

.i a

.i

i ai

.i i

si

-s s

.i z; l si si m

r.s a

a a

s t

r e

e :g rg r3.

s.

s 2.

s.

s a sa s

s

=

e re r '-

e-r-.

-a

2

-t r-r =;

.e

.e.*

.i

, i.

.g

.s

.s i

s l.a a

s va 5

.,.1 a

e u

t g

-s.

g. g t

.., c:

4g z-r 3.g

(

fg 3

I-.g I

3 a

g a

i-4 4

e 4

g 4

4 4

4

.s e i.

I i

i M

M 4

4 3

M M

J N

4 5

4 ii i

4 i:

i' i:

i i:[ :

5 s

t

.c T

q$

s ar

i

• er j:

y i *I 9

p a

a a

a s

9 9

9 9

8 9

9 a

+

9 a

9 9

s e

9 9

s i !![

i Ii i ij i

3..3

.E e

5 2

h.

i.

.M

.d.I.

.k

.a

.a a

a

,f _:

s

.[

s j

p*

3 l

yT gg

(

i si sa j

(

f i

t

.e

..a a

1 y

a 4

a s

s i( T [ 'I

s14 -:I::

a.E 43 e

a 1'3{

s t:

4KKVa e

, 2 g2 n ~5 g4

{T f 8-]

0 e

3 1

i i

i i

i l

1 4

i 3

5 y d.

2 3

.e s

3

.s 3

a 3

.a 8 s

5 5

5 a

s 8

3 3

8 8 8

=

f.

.I i

I

/g

.i i

a s

2 a

a a

e a

s a

e e

a u

s 5

a e

s 3

a a,

a 4

a' i.

! I t:

s s

.a s..s s.

a a

a s

a.

a e

i' s

y g

g g

3 3

3 3.s 8

3 ip*

3 3

3 3

s s

3 3

3 3

3 3

3 3 3

=

=

=

ta i i r

wl*

d s

s a

e.

=

3 a

a

.r a.

• p k Ii s p{:.;.

t s

s

=

=

=

l

• g a

s s

a 3

a s

s s a

a 3 a a

s s s l.s,.s 1

i i 1

,r,j. ;

.l.

..l.3 3

g 3

2

.t 3

g g

g g

g g

3 3

3 3 8 8

8 8

3 3

8. - s 3 8

l=

l i,

i 2

2 1

3 T.

1-t.

{

3 2

S 3

3 1

1 3

3

.a t

'l i

j

.a 3I

=

=

=

a 3

=

=

=' =,

o.r.,

\\.

l 2.

1 2, :g i:.} e:

i-

i s:

g ':

i i

i i

i i

i i

I s

e, e.

e

-l s ri.

e i

0 li, s

,i,i I Ii.t.1rrl t

q :I si i.si I,:

a2 r

r r

r r rr tv l

,jr i

,t 1

>=

a ir i

,i i 1, i t i i ti 1

i t

i. !

t i i t. rt 1'

f si 18

{

[

3

.j I I

I I

i

.i

.i

.a r:

1

,s i

i t

i e

i c I I

r. >( f I

! i 8

a

,. i

.a

.i

.i

! i

.i

.i s

1

c :

i i

. si i

i e i

s. t - t -' t: t s' t' t

i i

i i t

s i

's si i

i i

i i

i l

t t

t-r it-t-t-

i i-i t

t t i-tt 1.:it I:

II ill lli ! !I'-?i !!

ail ai; k zi sg:T II il. lli ii i i

2 a si si e t si si si ut si si

a a.

z z z

z I

f i

il lI i

il il il II il il i

i i :

a

.f 3

.a a

i a

a I.

y *.

j

,a

~ -;

i g

y

(

i

• ..(je; I

1:j

[

i i

,$! !;i (

5 f

O I

t' 2 5l fif (i I !!

i d $ ;'

c.

f 2

4 5

'3 J ;i s fi 4

=

Ji 9

9

.T 4

5 5

4 I

g i

'B

. 1[

ig y

e a

e e

a a y

y

=

s:

i 2

i,r f a

si a

e a

e e

p a

e s-a' a'

a sl p,

r a

a e

s 3

p a

a il i ;l1 i

-)

t. i i i i I ! !!i i

i i

s ii i ii i i

(;i.

1

{} si*

i< i}

'i 'i i

! j

[15

-t i

i li!!

jij1 ij ij j,'}l

.I*4=(I'y*Igiri:r[1 tit 1gppgg yyU {}fi y yyy{ QJ']* P:

3 I

t i

j ij i t li is is di i

i

5 =:

. I. $(ip,iQ' y,p

] gjg j

?*

p 1

/

.s.a

.a a

a a

s a

a s

.s

.a

.s s

a

=

.s.a i

s

/

a

.l.

I 1

s a

e a

a s

pj

.s.

.a.s

s..s

.s.a s..e

.a a

s s

.s.s s.s 1

f!!

$...e s.

.s.s.

.a

,a.e 2

a z

.s.s.a

.a a

.a g.

=

4 s

.s

.a

.a a.

e.

a a

a a

a a

a a

a s

a.

a.

s a

a 2

i

\\

3

.s.s.s a

s a

s a

s a

a s

s a

s a

s s

a e

.s

.a a

a

s a

=

=

3 a

a a

a a

a a

a a

a a

a a

a a

a a

a a

a a

a a s e

I t i s.

a a

a a

.a a

.s.a s

.s.s a

.a s

a

.a.e.a.s a

.a.s..

)

s e

w

=

4 4

s I

1 a

q

.s.a

.a

a. l

.s.a a

a a

a a

a

a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. -a e

e l}g,l3 1

.s e

e e

e e

r

=

=

.=

=

=

=

=

.= =.

.=

e e

r

_

=

. =

s 4

a a

i 2

's. ssI ass,s a

s a

s sss s ssss x.' s s ss

,l15 I?,

3, J

J J

J J

J J

J J

i 8

2 i, i, i

.,~..

1

s.,

s s

s s

s

,s

!! i.

I l.:)

s 1

.i

)ili jj j

i l il 1.l r

y li

!2 i i i

1 I

t i

s t

i j! }!

I i i ! !!!

i !i i}

i i i i i i i i i i

! i!

Ill

_{.i :t 1

t a

e a

a ee a

a e

e e

a e

e a

e t t t t

t t

3 3 }.

i.

}

}

i.

}

} }.

}

}

i.

} }.

l. i. }.

l.

i.

}

} }.

i.

l. I 1

!s!

si;,i s3

~3 1:n si si s

s si s

s si s

s si s

si s1 23 23 si si s

s si:

I 7

1 o

il i !!

11 i

il !! !!

11

! ! it !! !! ll !!'

l*

I1 i

3 s

t I

i j

}!

f 8

i j

.9 al is !!

s s

t i ea j s j.j sjiesi i

s s'l j s s s

I h'

h h!' h 6

6

' I:

j I3 12 h

k i

k h

h h

k k

s k

s s

b k

6 h

s

.5$

3I s

h.

h_

h h

h L

L L

~-

L.

6 L

L L

L L_

c s

=

=

=

I

(

a

=

eee d

i s

ee e

e e

e ie i

d d

d d

i d

s i

e

s. s I

I I I I I I I I I I I

I I

I !

I I i i i

! l ! ! !

I' i 11 hj i

s 1

1 1

1-1 i

I i

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 m nl312 1-3:

1 Aj -

! Idah r : ta a

8

1 e

f es.

t I

\\

i I

l I

.i r

s. s.

s.

.s.s z

e a

a s

=

a

/g I

B 3

S S

E a

S a

8 5

3 3

3 g

e.

.I a

a.

.E

.s a

s

.s a

s

.s

.s s

.s i

.a.a

.a a

e i

I l

h!..

.e

.a b

s al

.c ',.e ei.e

.e -i.e

.e..

e a

u e

=

n.

l'g s

-3 a

=

=

s

.j!

a.

.a a

a a.

a.

a a

=

a jF3

.s.s.a.a a

.s a

.a

.s a

a

.a.s.s

.a.a

,g, l

l l

.{ { -

s a

e a

a s

a a

a e

a s

a e

s s

a

.g p,

).{g{1

.s.s.a a

1

.a.s.

s a.:

.a.s s,

1) a.

i

.a.e.e

.s 18)

=

==

r e

e a

e e

e e

a:

e a

s s

=

=

=

.=

.=

ys!

t a

21 2 s

s t

3 1

2 j

i i j

'i 2

3 I:

3 3

3 J

J JD3T 1

s 1

1 1

1 1 18 1 a

a q

d=?

s

}

}

}

}l 1l y

i 11 1

s rl 1

1 1

1 1.'

Ji s

s s

)

s y

a s

s n

• z s

s i

s g

si 11, n

12 i i g

=e 5"9 3

}

f 3

gg 1

.J 3

3

.e I,

2 3

g

}

.i

.r

.i

~

,-M i j j j j j

j J

3 3

i 3

3 3 Y

i.

-i i

{ i 2

1 p

!!}

}. }.

} }.

} }.

s e

e a

t s

c

,s 3

.t

.t

.I-i I

_I

)

}-}Iri }s::

'.bsII: I: 3:

.}.

J-r 2

'2 **r g

358 si si s

si s

si IIIlIIl'II *d i'

a 1

1 2

s I

}] j! j il

} }l j'31ElII i

• 'II I

I 1 *\\ t i

I i.

1 3

8

-qr s

t t

i.

e

-I T

l.i j

j i

3 3

3 j 3 ::

i

I I

i i

3 }G E

E 5

I E

E we(

3)'

.EI* ll 5

I i

b h

k k

kh h

h I

a sI:t k

h h

k as: L L

~~

1 '

1 1

5cs 3

1 1

s

=jj

{

.ej i

s 2

E

~

g g

5 5

g g gg 3

j e

o e

e a

a e

d i

}3 i !ii!!!

i

! ! ! !! 5! !!

l g

t t

?

f IIf3 iS

2. j 3

• il d l

• o{

I a

4 i

i L L 1111 h h si sf M *ilf $'Ulil r 'I 5

7

f I

fg*

8 2

2 3

3 3

3 3

3 8

3 2

2 3

1 3

t r

(([

3 3

4 3

a e

3 5

a m

v e a

a e

a s

5 a

E i

8 g

8 s

a s

8 s

C.

.a

.e 8

3 3

3 8

8 8

.S s

8

=

.,. [

i lf*

V

,t

't:

8 8

3 13i 3

3 3

3 3

3 4

3 3

3 3

3 3

t'

{ {E Eg.

O l.

i fe l

l e

e I

a s

.a.e

.i e

a a

s i

r-{

l gjjf a

a 3

3

.a.a a

.s

! y..

a 4

a 4

i I

e 3

3 3

3 4

1 3

=

3 3

3 4

2 1

3 g

g g

.t e tjgt 8

3 E

3 3

5 3

3 3

3

.E

{ o,r;.=

g s.

. (. $

2 3

3 2

g1 2

2

=

2 g

l i.1

+

8 g

g l

Ir 4

.t g

$I I

I E

3 3

ft{I 3

3 3

3 4

4 3

4 2

8

?

.t s

a i

{

{

,t i

i E

I I

I t

(

g

a. :

e 3

3 lt.

I. e if 1

• 2 s

t

~i 83 85 8

[1f al I] [3 2'1p{

:3 :2 j

g-t:

t 2

}8 k

I tjI E ji -

1 r

4 i

g

(

1*

m e,

r[tt ((

tiry i ;;

tt; r r rr ti r* r*:* r :L.rs i

i e

=

ss 3

J

=.

g gg m

}g i ; ij i

}

} d<

i sI i

i i

i r

I !<- i k

i MW

?i ii i

i

? ?? i i iT i i

i e

p a.,i s

J1 4

4 e-1 1

1 i

ii i

I

=e y

i I

lf i I IE i

f

{ li 1$

1323:I.I r

r i

f g

na

(

a s..!.

{i w%

1 y,

e r

gyl.e.e e

,e y

n= 3-1

>y I

t J

5 i

-i t

5 i i

j i

j i j j

!81 1

I a

8 i

fI I

f i

i e

d J

w d,'

{i

{!

?

i ji

?

i8

• 4 e

2 s

f I

e EJ f#

F A

f; 7

7 7

i W si ti li i

1

.ii.

.i

.i

.i

.i 2

a 3

1

.: I

.f li

'00 g

g 3

IC =.s.

!_ ji b M, II g'

1 1

gQ ii E

3a a

a 3a a

a a

a e

s

t a

E t

t d*

4

==p s

2 2

t. vs.:m E a su a d r

G 3

=

{: )g !.:

e u

K 3

s. u s C

=:

!w v

e a

2 OU E,

1i L so 1

3 4

.t

^

s y

g.a s

I i..

r 3

.a '

.v 4

s 4

If i

'~

f'i {"I

!u'il

i* ti f,j

?,a

.li l

.f 4 l MfIFIIfM'b dt13 FE TIT 7TmfT?F n

~..

I 4

I I

I

\\

l r

3 S

E E

E 8

a a

s a

i.

.C

.E 3

.a 3

e i

,,r 1 a

a a

a a

e m

a e

s a

a

=

j

.e

.e t

a g

a g

3 3

8

.i p-3 3

3 3

g 3

3 3

j I

1 3

a

=

a e

a e

a e

r a

a e

jj.

3

=

e

=

r, e 8

z

=

=

=

l

.j:

=

=

a

.=

a.

=

.s v.

J p.

s a

a a

s a

s.

a a

a a

a a

.a.e s

=

=

=

.((

z.

a

.u,

l.{la

• I

.a

.a a

.s

=

u

..)

I s

i E

E E

E 2

3 2

3 E'

3 2

3 3

y 3

E.

E.

3. :

3

.i i

t "o I3l a

e e

a e

a e

e e

e e

e e

e e

e e

jjs s

s s

s I.

e I

1SI i

i i

a a

a

^. ^ ^

a 3

-i i!

3 o

y E

r t

C-El *

{

I

[

f 3

I T jil l3 3

3 1

3

': 5 3

3 8'

8

=Y'1 11 i }}

ai i i

i i

i El i.'8 1

i Iii iI l.a

., y g#

c{7 -

l 1

1 13 i

I I

i i

i I

I

~

i -

e.. 2

.sI

1:

a a

(

3 r

• n y na 6

2

u. - -.:

e r

r t

s 3

i t

i i

i e

3 5

5 i

5

.t I

I in

]

3 i

}

}

}

}

3 J 3:

J I J:

3 JlJ g

s n r.

3 1'

s : :

a s' s s at 2

a st ia 1:a a

z r

E.*

i i

i ?! s:

a wd'

'l

7. I J

i 1

i i

- u.

s

}

f

y c:

a r:.c.

,s s

p, 1

y 3

s y

s.

q=.

e1 5

y e

.i I

G g

V

,y.

, g. ~

j a

Il ki k ki 3

k 2

6 h

h 6

5 3

k k

,.x.9 t

e...ss "-

.1. I:i.I:

.?.

1

• . = ".

3]

}. }: }}.1:

I t

1:

.s.o.t. I:

1 s(

3.AI;i.g:)i:

. :;I 1:*I:

}

3 g: : ::

l.I.j i.

12 3.3 30 3. 5:

i y

M ( s)

,3 }

3a Ad }:} 32 1.g :

e 4, y

I.

i R.t-

.t G.

.E R

• . a. ; *..u. ;.I

.11 l

g d,.!.!

22

.d 5

it t

4 9

a

.,1-S.

r s

}

.s t

t.

r.

r s

y

..i..

! h r,_I L

2. Lh$

~~*~.4.- 7:

rJ ? M

~

i I

i{,

=

s 5

/

a a

a a

a a

a

=

=

a a

a

,. s a

2 3

3 3

3 3

3 3

3 s

a

.s 3

3 3

3 f.r

&. =v

.t 11.1 e

x:

n e r

a r-r x v

=n.

}s:3 i

=

=

=

e

=

=

.s

.l

, [ *g

=

=

=

1 E

2

=

E 2

2 3

1 2

=

=

=

i3 -

1.

s a

a a

s a

a s

a a

..IJ '

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

.}l,

=

=

z e

e e

a a

p I

i t

! s.}ls 8 1 s

.a

.a.a s.

.a a

u I

I.L

. =. :

r.

.p

.j.

l

}Il3

.= =.

8 }

=

e r

=.

=

=

e r

e e

=

=.

=. =.

=

s..*

,f i

a

.i n-l. s t

1

:\\3.li.

s s

s s

a a a

a o

a r

s-a 3

'I.

31 yl

-I. ;.

p. l' I J

1 3:. lJ J1 is p

II: ;

si:

{I ;)

3

.j,:

.1 li35 5

5 1

5 5

i 3.t '. 3 3

3 22:

}

12 !

1 I

33 i

r 3

1 5

18

.i y

.s s

.s.

a I]

I :il

).

I1 I I!

]

5 I

I 1.1 I

)

q-

.m 2

I

?

r e

e e

r e'

1 1

1.

1 5

.t

.t

.t 1

.E

.C.

.E

.C

.E 1

3 9

1}}

.1 1

Ji 3 5

1 2

3 3

3 3

1 1

J 1.

I s

l 3:5 u

r; r 1

s r

r i

s s

e e

r u

z.;

i

~

s s

i 4

s 3

s 3

i

.i s

s s

a u

s a

s s

. = l l

I.

g

.i

.I

.I

.e e

e s

.s

.2 s

E

-c 1

..s y

1 1

e

-1 f.:-

-,1,I

,l

.i e

,a a

1

-1

-1 g

-,1 s

1 L.

1;

.I.

i g

r e

g

]

t 6

6 a

6 2

2 a

a a

s

.1:

1I ms e

a a

a u

e e

r

+

3 :g e

e a

e

\\

~

(. y

-y..

.E'.!.-

!! se

.I 4

.K L

5 3

.I

.I s.

s g

s e

s i

e i

f I

'8

[

}

}

}

,]

{

f.f I

5{

3eb !

} j-53

- E:it ; c. Lt d,Mli

=

=

= l 5

I Eg 5

e-I'

.I fl!

l 8

g t r. a Lu t r a

i i

P 1

/

3 3

I 3

3

=

g a

S F

3

.s e l s

5,

/

5

.t g

S 8

8 8

R 1

3 a

a i

3 p"

.s.e 3

.S 3

2

.s.s l

J 1!,

O

.e 6 g-a s

.I,

.=

s s :s s

s'

• A Q

.)

}

a.

a.

e a

a e

a a.

m

• I'3 1 j)

.s

.s e

a

=

=

.a.a 33

,j[:

3 3

j.g {3

}

s.

a s

s s

s s

a.

g

.i I

.,s 3

3 2

t E

E E

E g

E.

a s

8lgj,l3 1

.e.s s

s a

s

=_ s_

g s

k 7

2 L

}

z z

-i

-i

-I l 2

2

. - }.

s

,2 1

s J

- se 1: 1:

.ne nr s

il

}} }} }

$ l l il

!$ !II} II

,I

!j. )}.I.i j!

21 21 e-

,t tr 1

1 I

,i I

?!

i 2a{!

li g

=jj j

\\

s s

e s

-s l

5 1

s s

s s

c n

1 3

-3 J

J J

3 I !

,8 1 1, 3

ls

.t s.

ai T li y

3 s

)

a'} a) a r

a sj 23 al 3

<t j {

i i

I l

{

}I,

.i s

1 k

n a

a ga s n

,i i

5 i

i i

i i

i i

i i

5, m,

ss n e

e t

t t

t 1

s

'i Il li ! ! ! !

E i !

E c

!}]I l

i I

'Il1

{,1

,i}-,s,},I-,I}-I}-r,I !

E I

I l', li l

ej 3

1 11 1 41 41 r

n

=

s slset 3

i g

.(

11 6, -l

-v r

.i

.i ):; "is

• s:

5 I 9

f r

)

a i

j ]i

{

t i

t

! j g.

[

'lIl'a38 3 d

I I r

r l

f_4 1 li! i:Iil i !

I I i r.a [1 i e

s 1

"Mb fYM N

NUCLEAR POWER SYSTEMS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MEMO SENERAL ELECTRIC DATe:

S.C. Delzell Spt. H. M80 TO.

PROPRITi,RY INFORMAT10bso Res O~se U.N. Sinha/SL Li, FROM:

DATE.

FOR:

ACTION O PERRY MAIN STEAM PIPING STRESS ANALYSIS SUBJECT LETTER REPORT WITH ADDITIONAL M.S. BREAK LOAD DECislON O INFORMATION

REFERENCES:

1.

Perry Dynamic Loads (a)

Seismic Transmittal 6/15/79 A.K. Kundu (b)

SRV Transmittal 9/19/79, A.K. Kundu (c)

LOCA Transmittal 9/19/79, A.K. Kundu (d)

A.P. Report 9/12/79, A.K. Kundu (e)

SRV Transmittal 1/25/80, A.K. Kundu (f) AP Shell Analysis - Main Steam Line Break, 8/4/80, P.N. Kaul The purpose of this letter is to report the results of the new load evaluation of Perry Main Steam Piping including the effects of Main Steam Line Breaks Load Case in the analysis.

By this letter the piping Final Safety Ahalysis Report tables are formally issued. and all pipe mounted equipment loads are transmitted to the responsible equipment engineers.

SUM 4ARY, The analysis detennined that the piping and suspension have sufficient design capability to acconnodate the new loads combined by the square root of the sum of the squares method.

The accelerations and loads on pipe mounted equipment and the reactor pressure vessel meet the requirements of the applicable interface requirements documents.

Since the piping system meets all design requirements, Piping Analysis is proceeding with the issue of the formal stress report.

BASIS AND ASSUMPTIONS The evaluation was based 6 and limited by the following assumptions:

- The loads on the piping due to building vibration have been calculated using the multiple response spectra method (NDYN-9) minimizing unrealistic

, conservatism.

Reference two, the transmittals from the Dynamic Loads Unit are the final design basis loads for the piping.

The Sunner of 1979 Addeda of the Code was used as the basis for the piping evaluation.

ec'. L.M. Keene, K. Kumar, C.W. Dillmann, E.O. Swain, J.C. Major, P. Binesh, D.L. Murray, C.T. Nieh, B. Deb, T. SooHoo

9 GF*MT'FAL ELECTRIC Sept. 11, 1980 S.C. Delzell PROPRITl,RY !NFORMATION i

DOCUt1ENTATION The attached tables and figures sumarize the results of the new load evaluation.

Pipe mounted equipment loads are to be used in the preparation of equipment Final Safety. Analysis Report tables.

All data is verified and will appear in the issued stress report.

Figure la Stress Analysis Diagram - Main Steam Line A lb Stress Analysis Diagram - SRV Lines ic Stress Analysis Diagram - RCIC Figure 2a Stress Analysis Diagram - Main Steam Line C 2b Stress Analysis Diagram - SRV Lines Figure 3a Stress Analysis Diagram - Main Steam Line D 3b Stress Analysis Diagram - SRV Lines Table 1.0 Class 1 Piping Load Combinations Table 1.1 Main Steam Line A - Class 1 Piping Stress Summary Table Table 1.2 Main Steam Line C - Class 1 Piping Stress Sumary Table Table 1.3 Main Steam Line D - Class 1. Piping Stress j

Summary Table -

Table 2.0 Nomenclature for Load Combinations Table 3.0 FSAR Table Load Combinations Table 4.0 Main Steam A - Highest Stress Summary Table Table 4.1 Main Steam C - Highest Stress Sumary Table Table 4.2 Main Steam D - Highest Stress Summary Table Table 4.3 Main Steam A - SRV Highest Stress Sumary Table Table 4.4 Main Steam C - SRV Highest Stress Summary Table Table 4.5 Main Steam D - SRV Highest Stress Sumary Table Table 5.0 Snubber Lead Combinations Sumary Table Tabla 5.1 Main Steam A - Sumary of Snubber Loads Table 5.2 Main Steam C - Summary of Snubber Loads Table 5.3 Main Steam D - Sumary of Snubber Loads Table 6.0 Safety Relief Valve Acceleration Load Combinations Tabl e 6.1 Main Steam A - Safety Relief Valve Acceleration Summary Table Table 6.2 Main Steam C - Safety Relief Valve Acceleration Summary Table Table 6.3 Main Steam D - Safety Relief Valve Acceleration Sumary Table

kl " D ", P [,

7L,,pjn,g,]pyypfg[%;:!)jQ7 Sept. n, us0 S.C. Delzen

}

Table 7.0 Safety Relief Valve Inlet and Outlet Flange Load Combination Table 7.1 Main Steam A - SRV Inlet and Outlet Flanges load Sumary Tables Yable 7.2 Main Steam C - SRV Inlet and Outlet Flanges Load Sumary Tables Table 7.3 Main Steam D - SRV Inlet and Outlet Flanges Load Sumary Tables Table 8.0 Main Steam Isolation Valve Load Combinations Table 8.1 Main Steam A - MSIV Load Summary Table Table 8.2 Main Steam C - MSIV Load Summary Table Table 8.3 Main Steam D - MSIV Load Summary Table Table 9.0 RPV Nozzle Load Combinations Tabl e 9.1 Main Steam A - RPV Nozzle Lead Summary Table Table 9.2 Main Steam C - RPV Nozzle Load Summary Table Table 9.3 Main Steam D - RPV Nozzle Load Sumary Table Table 10.0 Main Steam A - Head Fitting Forces and Moments Table 10.1 Main Steam C - Head Fitting Forces and Moments i

Table 10.2 Main Steam D - Head Fitting Forces and Moments Table 11.0 Main Steam A - Anchor Near Drywell Table 11.1 Main Steam C - Anchor Near Drywell Table 11.2 Main Steam D - Anchor Near Drywell Table 12.0 Main Steam A - Lug Guide Table 12.1 Main Steam A - Guide Table 12.3 Main Steam C - Lug Guide Table 12.4 Main Steam C - Guide Table 12.6 Main Steam D - Lug Guide Table 12.7 Main Steam D - Guide h

e

s S.C. Delzell Sept. 11, 1980

}

If you have any questions concerning the interpretation of this data, Piping Analysis cill resolve them.

~

f

~

e l

O Shu Lin Liu, Associate Engineer U.N. Sinha, Manager

- Piping Stress Analysis II Piping Stress Analysis II

/fa

, 'u s

L 1

2 e

J k

• I l

l l

~

l l

.o-

~

~

CF 4

s

• 'c

' 'aaf 1

l N

(3

==

4 m

+M w

--NOZIL E_

C g

.. T I=

si.is.e..

5 res

{T--

'.j!iEM "3*'

lu

+A A

E

'.m'N" 47,"'

LOCAL COORDINATE SYSTEft 4s 3

=

l h

O 8 I 204 i

58H i

.a:P M

O l

E m

-E0o 4

i i

27 j

di 10 2.

n Ts io2 A 28 25 25 y og to gg4 i

U '7 Ei t7 4 24 Stos 2

I to f13 I

5104 5105

+Y

• o sl2 d

to

+Hy 170" 110 rig s

tts,

y ya L 3

~

(Ed' s f/s O

e

,e f2o

-4

+ bt,

4M*

u

+x l

90

+z

^

GLOBAL COORDINATE SYSTEM y

P FIGilRE 1 - a STRESS ANALYSIS DIAGRAM - MAIN STEAM LINE A

4 S

e.

1 m

M a

i

'8'V c.s; I

f P

}5 4,

LET u

>=u g6 l5 fM *kl,, ='>

25

=

32l e e rr f

n

,~pg,.{,pu--,,[_r.]~L-

• +'

a l

'yha

,2%>

,e fg Flow y4 f*

g nttuggy sto5 42 7_p/

Vss

%d3 y#

hr

1. E 4T ldWA 10Wgp10M gg130maosggg3g39 5

B Etcunt,_

slarss ANAtysyS___ptpaghM - SRV L,INrS

I, l

Stol 1

g ec m

os7F g2

{

6.. E 61 OD 3si 5205 3

/

sc 2 0 2.-

88 E

1 SM

,M

'tgN.

9 5 m

."N

)

.g 3205 o

=

o 31

+Y (

e 32H 4,

I

+%

,/270 Blot A

B2o2 s

10 0 ISO %

/

$2p

{

p

• b 's

. n, o

s'

,o 4

N tX Alt l

~

ejo.

tot i

tZ fo3 03 AM 8

GLOBAL C0 ORDINATE SYSTEM y

55o f

FIGURE 1-C STR.ESS_ ANALYSIS DIAGRAM - R,Cl_C,

i i

300 8

+F y

8

\\

S-4 s [

O

,g

sdies; 1

g

_mumt oman uma 7 in e

{

7 J

• "K d

3 m

• a..,,

c u +g 2._.l ",,

• a _

,1 g.

(

T

,u>

+A

' g%

13:g g

'Qsy' g >

p c,, -

A uw saane. ulim.i N l. w j

7% 1,=g LOCAL 000RDINATE SYSTEli E

h 4

,D,q yee D

I e

)

4 A

.TN' i

n o

4 Em i

82 5 SolC D

,' b sts a

l n7 sore.

n 93

}

O d

IST 4

i j '

4

.$ 17

,,/

4 32 8 1

1 ;

33 gg : 1 20 H

9 y

2 h

i i

is I

J 12 )

l 23 26 154 i

15 8 24 i #33

'E N

)

foo N

28 g3,

O y

2I a

1Po Ily i

fro Un l

44o Ik

!*i

{

'9z *'

93 y

8 j

FirMRE. 2 - a STRESS ANALYSIS DAIGRAM - MAIN STEAM LINF C 1

~

k': WW O Y.gf [5} T5'

> 3 b v

w,e. $ 31.J.

6 -

I m

l2 RJt.V. C. G.

g g >:.

o

,,1 gg" 65 go 3g l

p q

E I

m 5

et FLOW tuntut, o

5

'T

5 32 ez m

i

$7 L

64 4 is7 -N 4

I S7 o

'8 m

6 M

w Eo f e4 6

as 18 5 N

30 se *,

I j

IM fM no y

N

'r2e 4

4 "5sjy g

O 5

4 M

Gr.

'a

.3 -

7

'2' is ;

7, u

te 13e elf,2

'S sc,gew h

3 y

64 y

Jce 10 3 4

12 0 staur_

DYI

')

URuy 104 g3/ g[

74

~

(

3 1)121 d'

• d

)).90\\-w a l

)

7' 1

6

1. 22 4k so a

p war d ses h

7 p

7' (TYPecAL)

,w w 0

4

(

3"M 9;

"foy d

Asoc.uost o],uo*

G s

,q~~.

/

g 4

ex N

.d%)

O' so 2 local cooerwum smm J

GLOBAL C0 ORDINATE SYSTEM

~

J

t

'~'

i GENERAL $ ELECTRIC NUCLEAR ENERGY DIVISIONS nev, o

~

l-I "If.h,.i=E T =I E

3 s-a e

i Ss

=g k

C

=

s s

a LaJ

.m I

t a

O E

N f

e M

i J

e w

f. /

=

-a z

=

m 8

y M

w

/"

E g

f f

g" z.u

<g s

=,

=

5 b,

2 X

5; R

+

-I

=

W $

d X

Ct 7l s

m

..m, I

s m

\\

fi

+g g

m b

f.

s e

3

+

i 3

r I

e s,.

1 E

h E

/

"gg;

g. Y a

I

'f Ig ol

~

+

8*1 GENERAL ELECTRIC PROPRIETARY INFORWIATION

er 1

a 4-e

', m

.,c

ET m

o,.

l 3[E Yg f/ g :.: : f.$

,a.

N l:

{,_j 5y;=7

• A u l.$, $-

~

4

,. ' lZ-2E s

??

'Mce*

J

- Fil

,r l

• st Y l

• r F9 5mo o

oa 3,

1 muu l

xs -t S7 4 si 3

ao -

v l

ijg ::xs o

h E

,, 4 9 g

"s q u_

si" n().,

a

'4 m

s.

~

~

r IS 4

(

se O

is 11 l

m,

=

l 60 y

2 to

+Y 11

,' y N

l

't

'73 0

y e

j 2m O*M y

4 s

l

.\\

I6 pp4

~'

i

??

1 s

+g

}75 sw----

to t

4 V ~ +x

', '., e

+ w, Q

to

+2 l

8

" U8dl COORDINATE SYSTEM l

U""E 3 - )

STRESS __ ANALYSIS DIAGRAM. SRY_ LINES-

e 0829803 ASSOCODOE3 TABLE 1.0 CIASS 1 - PIPING LOAD COMBINATIONS GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY SPEC NO.

22A7134

.REV. NO.

[

~

j SELLING WATER REACTOR SYSTEMS DEPARTMENT PAGE NO.

PERRY MAIN STEAM THE LOADINS COMBINATION USED POR THE ANALYSIS se lose ARE AS FOLLOW DESIGN I

PD + WTl

+ OBEI' LEVL B 1

PP + WTI

+ SORT ((OBER last

+ t TSV les2 3

i LEVL 8 2

PP + WT1

.+ SORT ((OBEl 1se2

+ t RVI tes2

)

)

LEVL B 3

PP + WTI

+ SORTi(08E8 loo 2

+ ( RV2I Ise2 3

1 LEVL B 4

PP + WTl

+ SORTi(OBEl les2

+ t RV2SViles2

)

i LEVI. C I

PP + Wil

+ SORT ((CHUGI Des 2

+ ( RVI les2

)

LEVL C 2

PP + WTl

+ SORTi(CHUGI lee 2

+ t RV2ADile=2 3

LEVL C 3

PP

• WTl

+ SORT (ICHUGI Des 2

+ ( RV2SVI)es2

)

LEVL C 4

PP + Wil

+ RV1 LEVL C 5

PP + WTl

+ RV2B LEVL C e

PP + WTI

+ Rv2SVI LEVL D I

PP + WTl

+ SORTi(SSEI

)**2

• i RV21 les2 1

LEVI. D 2

PP + WTl

+ SORTi(SSEI

)se2

+ ( TSV lee 2

)

LEVL D 3

PP + Wil

.+ SORTi(SSEI les2

+ ( CHUSI lee 2

• ( RV2ADIlost I

LEVL D 4

PP + WTl

• SORT ((SSEE les2

+ t CMUGI les2

• ( RV2SVIles2

)

LEVL D 5

PP + WTl '

+ SORTi(SSEI tes2

+ ( CONO Ilse2

+ ( RV2ADites2

)

LEVL D e

PP + WTl

+ SORT ((SSEI pos2

+ ( COND Ilse2

+ ( RV2SVlies2

)

LEVL D 7

PP + WTl

+ SORT (ISSEI les2

+ ( MSSRKlies2

)

LEVL D e

PP

• Wil

+ SORTi(SSEI les2

+ ( COND lies 2

+ ( RV1 los2

)

LEVL D e

PP + WTl

+ SORTi(SSEI tes2

+ t CHUGI nee 2

+ ( RV1 les2

)

LEVL D 10 PP + Wil

+ SORTi(SSEI les2

+ ( API les2

)

j essNOTE**e ALL UNITS ARE IN POUNDS. INCHES EMCEPT NOTED 1

1 h-tugu 84gP 'p'3 4pf +c% ~ -

l t

I

)

=

=

3

2.. 8 8 0 8 8. 3 3. M c N n = = = - - = - 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 0 8 8 8 0 O

O 0

000000000000 W

40000000000000000000000000000000000

-.4 2j-

>3 N M M.,e,. N N N,a e,.,..............,......

SOON 0..OM

-NONNM.

w Ce OeONNN0-N-N0M---=O-00--

OCOOOOONOOOOOOOOOO-O-OCTOOOONOOOOO ee TTMNcM-COeSveeNNNNecTTMNCOOpeeeees M E d. e. s s. e n. m W C. T. T. T. M. M M M. M M M M M M M M M M. M N N N N N. N N.

e C000000000000000000000000000000000 O

e W

• NNeOM-MD-MNMeeOceCNMcMmeMNON-ONTOT kneewNee=NMMTOTT@NeMM.--Se==mTONMcNM

=ecNMNoeNeo-emNeoveNMMeeccesc-eece e

Q CTTM-OeSeeCOmmeseeOCemeeNNecew W

MMMMMMNNNNNN----~~NN========== Conn

==-~

n+

=0 EZNGO-COSTOe=CONONM-SMN=NinNONMOWQec L

eTMe==NNNNOMTeMTeMONONCO----~~-O-~

COON==COOOOTOCOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOTQ1 e

ee

• N

-eMeNeeeN==OpegecTOMMNNOceseNONNN=

N E s h m. T. T. M. M O N. N. N. N = = = = = = = = = = = = C. O. O O. O. C. O. C O. O.

0 W

C000000000000000000000000000000000 eJ O

eg W

e4 coe=eNaNM-MeMOONOM--OSNococNONeTet o k

>MNeT=TNTeOveeTO-Se-M-eeNeceNM-Nomen M

e a OcMappeeMeeNeOOvceMM-OeeencTNNomNN 4 =

e 4

NMOOMN--c===COSeeNNNNNecTTTvvN-S s N STMNNNNN=====

e 1

p.

.e Oes>

00...............................

> Z2ea WZNTS-NM--eNNMOmmetNTCOOpeceWecccceN g

et M

COceONONN---M--TOWNNo-ONC---oCN-44

.WeL COONCOOOOOOCCCOONOOOOOCCCCOOTTTTCC f

>Ce se W<a eseNo---eNNNTM=---COceaseeeeNNNNNN E S. T.T. T. M M M O N N. N. N N N. N N. N N. N N N. =. =. =. =.=. =... =.=. =...

ele e

e g

C000000000000000000000000000000000 e

e 0

g e

W c N,.

NNM-N-g e o m = = N y

No,..........

e eeceNOeNe E

1. CeO-MveNTM--e=NTheeTT e=pNNeevocNe e

b ONNTeeOMecTONNM=CNeTT NOCOM-meeeep e

e O

M SceneeeevcTTMMNNN=====COOCCommemme v

e MNNN----------------=====---

M e

J U

e W

X N e

>C M 4 e(

WZOONWOe-NNMM--SNeemeeN Oce-TNSNMOOO b N e

J NM@TMTMWTNeeNOC=====O CONON====M-~

M N eE OOOOOOOOOOONOOOOOOOOO TTOCOO-COT-T b

e4 e

W e

-SNeeeTTMMMMMMNNNNNNNN======COCOOO N

eN

- E M. M M M N. N. N. N. N. N. N N N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N N. N N N. N N. N. N. N.

. ee m O e

e C000000000000000000000000000000000 m Z eZ e-O rY u

e4 W

esmNNeNo-NNTN-MNTNCOMNo-e-e@NCee-e W

sE MTow-NNoCOMM-CONCNvvM-ONOMoeTMNTMCe F.. -

A e

OtheMQeMONem-seeccTTveN-OS-eeNNNNp i.*

l M e>

0 NOWTO-SCCeemmemeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeece eg N=----

==

d 4

oa J mr '.fe

>eW W

y 3eL

>2SONeOM-e--ececceseWNNNOCvpNNOCO c..................................

L*.r, W

N-e*f e

i g

e J

NMetMNecNM=-T====N-OOeoMNCT==N-

=0

.("

]

COOOOONOOOO-CO-COOOOOOTTOTOCOCT CO e

ge em E

09ecM-SeeeeeNNNNeeeeeeeecTvvvvvvTt

( e g

Se O E S. T. T. T. M. M. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N N.N. N N.N.N.N N. N. N. N Le 4

C000000000000000000000000000000000.

e

. t. :

a

.m

-e e<

<xa 99-0McWON M

.e-.eNNoMOSMemeNNNM E

We Me-MetheNeceNev=TOMMONNe@CNC-NeceTT W e TNacTONNMeNOMMMooceNemeeNTTNMNN---

4 mo a NovvCCeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeNeeeece L.

E u>e N====-

• g, noE J L'

4

.5 U

eq L t,.

M -gsW O

e EOs>

ZOONGOMae-SC-WCONeceNNCNOCTOMNCOTNO f

OM

>>eM J

NMeTMNMTeO-N===e==N=O-CMONoe===O-N Y. -

Que C O O O O O O O N O-C O-C O O O O O O O O T T O T C O C T O C O i

g WCe Z e

r 5

aJW9 GN=CCeeeeeeencOppenmcompTvitvMMMNN r.

e g WE*4 E T.M.M M.M. N. N. N N. N N.N. N. N. N N N N. N.N N. N. N.N.N.N N N N N N. N. N. N u4 eg e ry O pJEe C000000000000000000000000000000000.

3 e

4Wab O

L...

O g>eg W

3 4

Yz( et m3.meNOMOMTA-MNONveMTN-MN-OSONT=TCOT L

eW M-MONNMeOTecceeeeeeNeo-N=centeTN NMMe-CenMCM-==CCCCCCCCCCeeeNenTTT

. 4.1 W

eL 90s SeeeeeeNNNNNNNPNNNNNNNNNNecesseece E. 5*

N Ze g

=

6 g

-e g

w Je j

T

-e 30 N

ee WZONGOm MOSO-OvecemNN=ccOecNONMT=

CO.

8 3e O

NOTM.

N=NMS-N=O---ONaN==O-NC=CO CO e

OOOO-C=OTNOCOTOOOOOOOTOTOTOCOO C0 e

-,____m

i 2

O 8888888 W

OOOOOOOO 4

-e.......

(

N3 4 900 000 h.

==0 0-N OCT TNT ee eNNNeeM I

M E N. N.N. N N N. N

)

OOOOOOO 1

OW e

m

.eweNN=w NnNeeeNOe e

eNONNNM U 900000M W==----*

1 i

e

=D EEeeOOcpv L

-ONOOOO O4YCC0N e

ae N

-~~~-==

0 N E C. O. O C. C. C. C.

W C000000 eJ O e3 W

eR Sm=MONM eN

>MNeMOf4NN e

E N99994M e

4 eN e

.e CDe>

00 ZZeE W Z O = N M O O.m e<

m MMeeM=

.WeL 0000T-=

>Oe ea WCe betennv gLe E=.=...-.-.

e e

e

• C000000 8

O e

W e

9 e-9 e N N e e

MccN=mb=

s 04Tvbv0 e

O 9999998 T

e O

e J

)

e W

e 50 e4 WZOOOpvec N

e

.J

-ONOOON N

8 E COOONot e(

e eW e C0S9998 E N. N. =. =. =..- -

e>

ee O

e S C000000 2

eZ e-Q O

e<

W emetop.

W e E M o v v f4 N T T L

e ceNN=Om M

e>

Q eheseeN eE eE J N*W W

3 e g,

> g e

wZMMcDeOT e

d

=@OOONO 8

OOOOOTN Ee ae eg to MMNNNN=

g Le GENNNNNNN b

bbbbbbb E

s e

O M km.

W g (E e M=OveeO We MN=Noeve 8

>e COe@CCM Me S

SONNNNN u>e W8 E J O

e(

w M -geW

>C i

e EQe>

W 2== M c C O e v l

0m

>>ee a

C= CON 00 i

UUe COOuiON

[

1 Se3 W4oZ e

2

.J W. e - a NNNO c

E N. =. =. =. e.e.

g wee (

i u4 eE e O pJEe C000000 i

e 4We>

0 l

C E>eE W

.t t

4 WCeE M e = =,. f9 0 m N NTN l

Z3*W OmeO tge e.,M,,-

i 8

e, 8

O.

-e a.

l

.O M*'*388388 t

N 8

8' 8 ' ~

e

h ep T

=

0W OOOmeNNNNN99ccinnnnN========CCOOCO

v. =. =. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W

0000000000000000000000000000000000.

NO nOWODNom@nenN=eNovn=Nv9e@OOWNoe=e=

b Nnvnp@covmom@MNT=m@CONCNO=tnNNC=N=

C000-O==O0=C0000-0000000-O==C000-0 ee NN@@cO6MN==O*mmmmmmeeeeeeNennnn===

.n E W @ @ @ @ @ c c o n c i s. n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n 1

0 00000CCC00000000000000000000C0000 e

l O

i W

Nwon=me@CO=nNenNCoewenk@=nkmememOc NnNONNnNNwcm@vNnnw@cvNNN=CComn==www=

Ov=NNNThen-cov@@OTTN===CCep==@eOmm e

O

@@@CCC=C@@@CnNC 000000C000SCCCeceNN W

nennnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN=NNN=====

n+

=e..................................

E2pN@eCmC@e@v=nonNWOnmenhv=ONOSTN=np L

p@venCTONONON=c@vnmCN@ven-NNCCon==

-OCCO-==O-COCC=OCOC=CCCCC=OCCCC=CC e

ee N

n@eN@NN==Cmee@@@@CisnnnnnnN N E N D %. n n n n N N N = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = N N N = = O m O

O

=

........................ =. =. =. =. =. =..

W C0000C0000000000000000C000000C0C00 e J O

e g W

W e <

e=mONNTNne=@mNONoO@mmNmmWTvmNev=NN M

E

>M%CveWenCnOOmomNTvneceNe@==mov=mome eN e

E

@7n=NCnnNm@nN=@mmn@n@@cCan@meenNON 4

e

-NN=ceG==COCCCeGCONNnNNNNNe@@@@@O0 b

eN O TONNN=========

a Z

e C

M e N 00....................

e t W2NTCeNC=cenNnonneWOe@~=ceNNnMTOY=ce e4 M

CC=CNNCnin@N==m==MNC========NCCONO

• We L C00000000-0C00000===OC0000000CN=C=

D

>Ce ea m

W<e e==Come@@vvTnN==COCme@n====CCCCCCC E N C. C o n t. y n n n n n e n n n. n n. n N N N. N N N. N N N. N N N N N. N EAe m

e m

CC000000000000000C0000000000000000.

m e

w e

C y

e W

p e

e = = N = e @ C W @ N O N C T' O N o v v N e @ c N C N N T @ e e m m m

M-NCONSNomovNve-mme-cNvnvN@nvNcmenN e

CCCvChomeNNmTMWDCOenCNvn-mecovnnMN e

e Q

coeNNW@eeeeNNSWW@@nc@vnNN=========

gg e e

TNNNNNN===========================

n e

J

=

s W

b 8

e e

W ncCONenOnemNece=NOnvNoe= cec = ENC @Ce b

N eO J Nonv@Cenovo@m=Nnva@mNNCn========TN 0-000=CC=O=O0000C=0000C=00000000==

N e

W e

e e

n

~@@cccc@CnwnnnnnnnNNNNNNNN========

M e =

E S n n n n n n N. N N. N N. N N N N N N N N. N N.N. N. N N N N N N N N N N m

eg e

m 00000000000000C0000000000000000000.

e E u

e<

0 O

eW W

nonno-Con =cceconNnenvNeNvemeC@nONe i

W e >

mW=ve@vCvvempovovboppv=moNNeNocevv0 4

L eM Nm@vn,NN=mN@nnm-eCO@@cvnn@N===CCOnn u.

e o

e,,,

,,-CCmmammeeemammememmeemmmee ez n=========

u e=

J i s

-s 36

=

ze g

Ye WkMcCNenmCONC@mOnTNnCWec=#=nNONMe@NO e

a sen@wmomNunsoneNcc=nC=nNn==n===cv-C=0000-0000C==O00=O-00=0000v000=O=

wr#

k e Ee ee 7'. x%, #

coconvvN==COOmmeeNNNN

<e

" " * '.'. '.'.'.'.". ". ". ".".". ". ".". ". ".".". ". N N e @ @ e e @ e c o n cN."."."."."".".**".".".

T$

H

'M be C3C0000000000000000000000000OC0000 mm - 1 t

M e

O

/

2 ee W

eSComme@=N@........................

d LWe e,=mN,Nnoc-m,ennt=np@mvv@=vvNvnCNeme

.j[ #."#

<Es

@nmece~e,-G,C=w@ceme,e W e

=SNN@vv=e@novnNeCNMNNC=vCnNmNeNNN@

Me O =TTTTTT=mCCemmmmmemmmememeGemeeee@

U>e n=======

==

4s w (p g

N MeE J

• O 8 < W

/s

=EeW pg..................................

• A w

E en u=noceNnmoOONemnNOc=@ewNcO-wnceConNm g

=

ou nnee J Nant eO=nNN,CmWwennoNw==nmC=NeN===

- p3 a

WW 00s C=CC C-0C000-00==0-0C00==0C0010000 Je

=g W<e*2 e

eW Og JWe CCCwnnNNCeeNNNNNN@@@@@@@@nennencCn r% MD

=

e

=p wee (

E v. e.n. n n. e n. n e N. N. N N N N. N. N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N. N JEs 0000000000000000000000000000000000.

er**n ~ W-U eg 9

=

'9 7 NQ O

<We d O

E=o g W

W

=

W<e E SCCNeeCCOWnNvnNONCn=TnN=NO=v=N====

EM 23e W MOCONOWme@@ve=CenNn@@nNeNN-OcvCNem@

g.A NovNom=@@mmNNN@@@cgvvynnennNNN=cQC e

nemamomeeNnNNNnNNNNNnNNNNNNNNNNNNN N

e 2

O

=*

O e

de

=

n

-e no..................................

WZncNonCOeceN=ceOOemnceOnNTeCe=NGCCC

=

a e

O NC@ won =CwnNn*N=NC==DNn==N=C====n=0 C

e 0-00000===O-0C0000C=~T000010000-44 s

I 4

O 888888888888888888888.?.888

(

[gC000000000000000000000000

_E.........................

N

.N.N.M M. 3 e e 8 2 =O. N. W T 8 O - D O O. N

<...C00000-00,-00-O - N,M M N =,,N 8 O

-N-NO

.~=

=

0 COCOSeeeeeeeeeNNNNNNWW4WM S E M M. M S N N. N N N. N. N. N N N. N N N. N N N N N. N N N j

,0000000000000000000000000 O

w. MeSSO@ONe~eoeMOSovekTmMwT NmTWNOMN-ONSNM-Me-ev-e--So-s MN-08NN=CSSSeeNNcccN-Seev Q N N N N O W @ @ e n C C C O.S C p p p W O T T T M w

---

=-~~~ -=== ----------

m+

O i

E E W M S O G N O S M e O M N O= N O p = O e W N e t t

===M-OC=-NM--C===O-NONNNO C O O - C O C O C - T O O T O O T T O T = = -- N e

ee N

SONE @CTTMMMMMMMNNNNNN==--

O NE0000000000000000000000000

=

W C000000000000000000000000 eJ Q

.m w

eR MMTNO99NeWOWNeeOpmeNNMW@m aN _>MONdNN=OSNMNOMNMebpSAMSWMW E

-N=NC-OSNSDWOMMN-OmeeNTTM e

4 STTMMON-==--==--~~

eN e

..e 00 80sN WENOS@ecNmeWNNOMO=OOMTSCWOO Zeg e 4 W NO-cNCOONTT@NeeMN=eSO-MMT

.We -T0-0000-000TT00---T-

>O.L ea w<

e OSSSSS998eceeNNNNo.eWompec Ese KN......=.......=.......=.=....

e e

0000000000000000000000000 e

O e

w e

B-p-e SM-NNST NOWSTOSNST=

e WNN@@e NOTheve OM@ce@CNC-M e

NaCOS SONOTMN SWCTMESNOTM e

O -.-

.C O O O O.O.O.Q ~c e O S e e S c e e e e e lI e

e

-. - -~~~

M e

J e

W k

e

)C a

WESOvNMM-CONepeO=ec NONOTO N

eU J

-MN===~

ON0006M00 ONNNON i

N e

O=00000 TOO=T-TO-T O-==NT ew a

ef a

=======O00000000099999988 E N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N N N N. N. N. N =. =. = =. =. =. =..

i e=

eg O

e S O@@O000000000000000000000 i

I eE eq g

Q eW W

==N-TOGOOONONM=pSeOOS-NNN W

e>

WeONTNOT@--CONNTNNSOSeMON-s,:,

E ee SMS$ete--NNNSSOCVNNCOCOee

• 3 n

e U eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee@NN

^^ '..

et V

• a e-J v *.,g

.s Ned Eet c.........................

",s s

t 2

o EOeWee-e MS-TCOSON-NSWOONY e

4 ON-N===

W--COMS COOONNNNQ

.i ea e

T00-000 COOCT==TOOOO-=T-N f.

g ge se 4e CoppcepCOTTTTTMMMNNNNNN==

T E

Le S E N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N N. N. N. N.

u E

we Os C000000000000000000000000 s

O ea w

Me

........... MNNTTTMSMT Es NN-TNSMTONT we MOCTTOSSNWe@SSO OSO6@TNO-M w

we geopCTTTTNN=--

CONWCCOTMN

.s

. g ne g geeeedeeeeeeeeeeNNNNNNNNN a

>e w

N net J t*

e o eR w e -'

>s'*

>ENMeWO=eeWS-OO

~

• M ~EsW O

EOsN W

CON =NOWOONT

=

OM NNeM J

~~N-O-==O--MO

-COCONNONNO i'*.

WJ 0 0 e.

00-09000-00-T T-COOT =0~-N 3

=m West e

s?

UQ Jye=

e CTTTTMMMMMMMNeeeeeNNNNNNe p Wsed T N. N. N. N N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. =... =. =. =. =. =.....

=

6 Q

4 g S JEe 0000000000000000000000000 a.

5..*,$

' (4 (we>

43 g>eE<et y 9NOS-MMe. ENS.ON-e c e e, N M N N - - C e 3 =a,,,, n s.4

=

- O N O N,. ee MMM=NO M-N s.t NNeee. e e e e

,e,e N,N,N,e e,,,,,M a

e OO9ebN 8 8e 4

N e

5

=e Je

=. 8...

-e Se g -e2

• 0 00

• 2 * * *T 2 " 8 N "

• 3 -

=.

NN Se eT e e

=O600-00600-O e

OCT O-00 8

6

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

.n.-

--a

• =

b 8

.-e ao a 8 8 8 8 3 3.o.N n.N-------- 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8. O R

.u......

v. e... o. O. o. o. o. o. o.

0 90000000000000000000000000000000000

(

_5,............................,....,..

. t N

N R. N 2 8 8 e, - N - N N, 9 0 3.... M -. -

M-

~..

-N.

(

,9 MOSO NNONN==

=O-===---

O000000000000000000000-~ 000000000 se SSeepMNN=ee==OSSSSSSSNWTveeeeeeece M E W e. 9. O. S. e. p C. W. T. T. T..T. T. M M M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M M N N N N N N N N. N.

0000000000000000000000000000000000 O

COONNNeceseMeSOSMNSeNNNTTNeM9pMSON.

W NeeNOeeMNOTeeSecev-MNMOSNeve-MNTM-TN e

e-OSMNeeNM-ecTSSSONTSONOMMN==99999 i

O NNSW-OSSSee===COCONO--OSeceseccoop W

MMMMMMNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN=======----

@+-0 SENOOW9-Sepv=WNONOM-e=M-WN

-WONWOO A

eMOT===NNNOTeetMeSOMNNOC

--M--O-C000--000000000000000000 O

OCTOOT-e me

.N 09MNOceNONOCOTTTMMNN===OOOOSSONNN-O N E O N S. T. T. M O N N.

... =. =...... =. =. =. =. =. =. =. =. C. O. O O O O. O.

~

W C000000000000000000000000000000000

• J O

ea w

eR S-STSMNeNONeeSNO999 esp =WNeeeONSONO aN

> n p T O M c e T C-e W = e O T M O T O C = M S-e O N M T e e v e e y

e E eNNNecevbTvemeSecTOOv=COSSTT-MN-ON M

e 4

- M O T N N = D O S e e e N N N N N N N e e e e n c o m e n--

eN g STMNNNN==

8 e.

.e gO feen WENve M--TOceTON==NMTTOOSCOmeWOOCOC-

>E 1e g e 4 a C00 NNONMATCOe===N==N-N==O--CON-MM

.We L 000 COOOOOONOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOTTTTOC

>Ce ea W4e N N N p p v = C O S e e e 9 C O N N-C O O O S e e e e e e e e N N ele E N T. T. T. T. M M M M. N N. N N N. N N N N. N. N N. N. N = = = = = = = = = = =

m e

e e

C000000000000000000000000000000000 m

o O

m o

W W

e TON-S SMMe=NMSveeM=NT-eTOMNeveeWNe g

a M-0960 TNTMen@==OceNO-ONNeSeveveCMC e

-SeNS GONONeeNepMMSWTTNaeTTMNN==CO e

O

=COTTG99CCGTMMTTNN======OOOOOOOOOO g

e TNNNN=============================

j M

e J

a h

e D

g (

e ETONWOOO-NOM-MN=e GemNeon C-90T94-9 N

eO J NMeTOMSMeTN9eTNO

===O---

N-CO=N-CO W

e C000000000000000 000000-00TT00000 b

eW e

e2 e

-eNeeNeeOOMMMMMMNNNNNNNN==========

E W M M. M. O. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N N N N. N. N. N. N. N. N N. N N. N. N N N. N N N. N N.

e-eg M

O.

e e CC00000000000000000000000000000000 M E eEe q O

c eW W

Tc-ONS-OSTNMN=eTMO-TNeeeSNONapvvNO.

(

Q W eN M-OSMTONWNWSWCSMONNCOT-OSN-SNNNNC=S t

L em

-veeNNMNONOCOS-NeeWTTNMONN===SSSSe i e e

C ecTvv==COeCOceaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees O

e2'a N------==

em

>ed g

Zeg O

,O 3

We ETONSOMec-Oe me-W=ecS-=cNmNSCOOTC-N.

p Ee J NMeTONOMNew

M--T=N=SNW=COMO--O

J N o C0000000000

=O00-0000000000T9-0400 ge se de WebeWTMMN-eeSeeeeGNNNeeeeeecOOOOMO G E N T. T. T. T. O. M. M. M. O. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N. N N. N N.

Ee we p

Os C000000000000000000000000000000000 M Ie!

h E (Es eeNenNOMTcNo-eeSOTNSTNO=SO-NTOMMOS we WT-NOsceseNNenSeONemecc==MSSeNeeSce eeNN-STNO@MNeNONSTNN-CMSGNNNNeWSov N e gU>e eeC e emene-O-COSeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeNee N====~----

wee J U

e4 W

M -geW

>O

• EOsN W E T O e O N M O G O-= e m e = W N G = e O = N S C O M N a C O M T =

OM

>N oe J NMveeNMOONMT-OS-e-==--TN=MNCO-OW--

UUe C00000000000-00000=O000004OCC=T000 WWee2 e

J JW4=

a TN e p m N-O S e e N NNN ee e e e e c o m p e c c om T T T T S West E S. M. M. M. M. M.M. M. N. N. N. N. N. N N. N. N. N N N. N. N. N. N. N N N N N.N N. N N N e

p4 eg e O

JEe C000000000000000000000000000000000.

8>. ewe >

(

w<et NNOWNONMTOWNON-NeopeMON-SOMSMM-cTc.

-)

c N s.

W E3eW WN=eNON=MNGCOWONOTSeNNOSNcM-NOSSTcM W

eL TOeenceWNOSeNNeocMMMMMNNNNN==OSSee b

sos e C ee e e e e e e NNNNNNN NNNNNNNN NNNNN e e c e

(,d I==

N Ze 2,

l

=. O

= e N

es WETNO WOMW=

-e-Se-GONeeOONvappTTOO*C 8

6e O NWM TON-N

===NO-=M=N=O=O-==CC--NON e

OOO 000-0

-OOOOOOTOCOT=OOOOTOOTOOT e

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

i l

SENERALOELECTRIC

~

NUCLEAR ENERGY DIVISON i

f

' (

TAILE 2 NOMENCLATUPI

/

Annulus Pressurisation Loads (Inertia Effect)

AF

=

g AP, Annulus Pressurization Imads (Anchor Displacement Loads),

=

4 Chugging. Lead (Inertia Effect)

CIDG

=

3 Chugging Load (Anchor Displacement Loads)

CIDG

=

D Condensation Oscillation (Inertia Effect)

COND

=

y

COND, Condensation Oscillation (Anchor Displacement Effects)

=

Operating Basis Earthquake (Inertia Effect) 03E

=

g Operating. Basis Earthquaka (Anchor Displacement Load)

OBE

=

D Operating Pressure F

=

GUERAL ELECTRIC F"

Design Pressure-

=

PROPRIETARY INFORMATION Peak Pressure F,

=

Fms = Peak Pressure Due Automatic Transient Without Scram Event F

3 Safety Ralief Valve Opening Loads (Acoustic Wave)

M1

=

Safety Balief Valve Basemat Acceleration Loads (Inertia Ef f ect)

W2

=

7 Safety Ealief Valve Basemat Acceleration Loads (Anchor Displacenant Loads)

W2

=

D

1. 8 Safety 1/ Valve Basemat Accolaration Due to Automatic Depressurization W2

=

g System Valve.

= Safety 1/ Valve Basemat Acceleration Due to Automatic Depressurization System Valve (Anchor Displacement Loads)

Safe Shutdown Earthquaka (Inertia Effect)

S$Z

=

g Safe Shutdown Earthquaka (Anchor Displacement Loads)

SSE

=

D Thermal Expansion TE

=

Turbine Stop Valve Closure Loads TSVC

=

Vent Line Clearing Loads (Inertia Eff act)

VLC

=

g

~

Vent Line Clearing Loads (Anchor Displacement Loads)

VLC

=

D Dead vaight W

=

RY2 3Y = Safety Relief Valve Basemat Acceleration loads due to a' single valve opening g

(Inertia Effect)

Ih2 $V = Safety Relief Valve Basemat Acceleration loads due to a single valve opening 0

(Anchor Displacement Lo, ads) i

b

)

TAB LE, 3 LOAD C0f61 NATION AND ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA FOR NSSS PIPING AND PIPE MOUNTED EQUIPMENT A

NO.

LOAD COMBINATIONS SERVICE LEVELS 1

Nomal Operating and Operating Basis Earthquake Design Condition 2

Normal Operating. Operating Basis Earthquake, A and B Operating Transients t

3 Normal Operating and operating Transients and C

Operating Basis Earthquake 4

Normal Operating and Small Break Loss of Coolant C

Accident and Associated Operating Transients 5

Nomal Operating and Irtfrequent Operating Transient C

6 Nomal Operating and Operating Transients and Safe D

Shutdown Earthquake 7

Nomal Operating and Large Break Loss of Coolant D

Accident 8

Normal Operating and Intermediate Loss of Ccolant D

Accident and Associated Operating Transients and Safe Shutdown Earthquake 9

Nomal Operating and Large Break Loss of Coolant D

Accident and Safe Shutdown Earthquake GENERAL El.ECTRIC PROPRIETARY INFORMAT!0H 4

f s

-,-,_,,v-n,

_a-..,,,.,

,n

---n

,..---m.,,.-n, - - - - - - -

- - - - ~

PERRY class 1 PIPins NIstt37 STK55 SIMtARY - MAIN STEAM A y

TABl.E 4.0

.,,7 item Nighest A11ewable Retto Governing (2)

Identificatten of locattee Evalented (1)

Calculated Llatts Actual Generic Load of highest stress points stress / Usage Factor Allowed Comb. No.

Joint 029 Torsionsi Guide rytmery 5 tress Eq. 9 < 1.5 13,964 pst 28,725 pst 0.49 1

C001 near let Inboard MSIT testgi Osadt ten Joint 029 Torsional Guide Frloery Stress

&1.55 22,466 Pst 34,470 pst 0.65 2

Cool near let Inboard MSIT Eg. 9 = 1.55,B y

Service Level Joint 029 Torsional Guide

,Prfeery 5 tress

& 1.85 22.046 Psl 43,088 Psi 0.51 5

cool near let Inboard MSIT Eq. 9 < 2.255,C 7

Service Level Joint 029 Torsional Guide C001 near ist Inboard MSIV 38,805 pst 57,450 pst 0.68 8

Service Lev 8

Joint 002 First Elbow Secondary Stresses Eq.12 < 3.05, 52,025 pst 57,450 pst 0.91 2

U P us S M ry Joint 62 SRV Sweepolet l

~

Stress wtthout thermal 35,182 pst 54,600 Psl 0.64 2

Expensfon Eg.13 < 3.05, J int 029 Torsionsi Guide 0.26 2

Osmulative Usage Factor 0.26 1*0 C001 near let Inboard MSIV U < 1.0.

(1) All equations used are from Ast1E 88PV Code, Sec. III 3650.

(2) Generic combinations 1 through 9 are evaluated.

t ;{g' }%[ kNb, p r, g y t 3 W O ? M

^

PERRY g g j pgpggg NIOfEST STE55 StMtRRY -

MAIN STEAM C

~

TABLE 4.1

,..y Iten Nt t

Alloweble Astle Severning(2)

Identificatten of location Eveleeted (1)

Ca colated Listts Actual _

seneric toad of highest stress pelats Stress / Usage Facter Allowed Coe6. No.

Joint 023 Torsional Guide rr.._ y 5 tress Eg, 911.5 13.709 Psl 28,725 Psi 0.45 1

near Inboard MsIV Seefse Condt ten Joint 023 Toretonal Guida Frimary 5 tress 8 1.55 31,14s pst 34,470 Psi 0.90 2

near Inboard Msiv i

Eq. 9 = 1.e5,3 7

Service Level Joint 023 Toretonal Guide Primary Stress 8 1.85 30.763 pst 43,088 pst 0.71 4

near Inboard Msiv Eg. 9 < 2.25Sg y

Service Level C Joint 023 Toretonal Guide

"' O I

near Inboard Ms1V Psi 0.78 8

Eq. 9 1 3.

45,018 psi 57,450 Service Love D i

Joint 002 First Elbow Secondary Strestes 41,678 pst 57,450 pst 0.73 2

Eq. 12 < 3.0S.

Joint 155 sweepotet Primary plus Seconda gtresswithouttherma 36,522 pst 54,600 pst 0.67 2

RPensfon Eq. 13 < 3.05, Joint 023 Torsional Guide' Camelative Usage Factor 1.0 near Inboard Msty 0.40 0.40 2

U < 1.0.

(1) A11 equations used are from AsttE BSPV Code, Sec. IfI - NB-3650.

(2) Generic combinations 1 through 9 are evaluated, i

• g*g,

't

~ ~

y y '\\ 6 1 * ? '.

1

PERRY (lUL551 PIPING M190tST STRESS SINetART = MAIN STE.W D Q

TAB 1.E 4.2

...7 Itse Mtghest Alloweble Retie eeVernins(2)

Identificatten of lecetten Eveleeted(1)

Calculated Lielts Actual _

Generic Load of highest stress points Stress / Usage Factor Allowed Comb. No.

y,g n 5g,ggg Joint 024 - Torsional Guide Eq, 9 < 1.5 15,427 pst 28,725 pst 0.54 1

cD01 Near let inboard MSIV gg Joint 024 - Torsional Guide gg, g 1.35. 4 1.55 26,946 pst 34,470 pst 0.78 2

CD01 Near let inboard MSIV y

l ser, tee LeveT e Joint 024 - Torsional Guide Y<

5 & 1.85, 26,114 pst 43,0ss pst 0.61 4

CD01 Near let inboard MSIV 5erVice Level C Joint 024 - Toretonal Guide

. Prfmary Stress cD01 Waar ist inboard MSIV 41,114 Pst 57,450 Ps1 0.72 s

Eq, 9 < 3.05, D Service LeveT J int 002 - First Elbow Secondary Stresses Eq. 12 < 3.05,

51,859 psi 57,450 PSI 0.90 2

Pr b ry les seconda Joint 062 - snV swe potet h

37,580 pst

~54,600 pst 0.69 2

g, Eg. I3 < 3.05,

Joint 024 - Toretonal Cuide Omm1stive Usage Factor 0.62 1.0 0.62 2

CD01 Near let inboard MSIV U.<_ 1.0 (1) All equations used are from ASME 88PV Code, Sec. III - NB-3650 (2) Generic combinations 1 through 9 era evaluated.

N011WlHOINI MN131HdOHB 3111103131VH3N33

TABLE 4.3 f1AIN STEAN A

~

ASE Code class 3 Safety / Relief Valve Discharge Piping - Highest Stress Suunnery s

LIMITING RATIO IllENTIFICATION OF l

ACEPTANCE STRESS CALCULATED ALLOWABLE ACTUAL LOCATIONS OF HIGlEST l

gALLOWAnLE)

LOADING STRESS POINTS - N00E CRITERIA TYPE STRESS LIMITS POINT NUISER l

Based on ASE B&PV l

Code,Section III.

NS-3600 5, a) 490'F= 570 psi For SA-106 Gr. B.

Destyi Condition Sustained 4,587 15,000 0.31 1

Joint 041 Eq. 8 1 1.0S toads h

Servico levels A88 e

(Normal & Upset)

Occasional 9,573 18,000 0.53 2

Joint 056 Condt tion:

Losds Eq. 911.2Sh Eq.10 i S Mennal 9,573 18,000 0.53 g

2 Eq. 11 1SA*Sh Expansion 8,392 18,000 0.47 Joint 073 l

0

.I

.3 gg@S$$[;-@i t[dk$'.

@M.B 3 liv w

TABLE 4.3 (Continu:d)

ASE Code Class 3 Safety /Re11cf Valva Discharge Piping - Highest Stress Suunnery

^

LIMITING RATIO Iut.nsIFICATI(pl 0F ACCEPTMICE STRESS CALCtA.ATLD ALLOWABLE ACTUAL LOCATIONS OF HIGHEST gALLOWABLE)

LOADING CRITERIA TYPE STRESS LIMITS STRESS POINTS - N00E POINT NUfGER Servico level C (emergency) Condition:

[,'

'I 9,5ii5 27,000 0.354 4

Joint 56 1

Eq. 9 1 8.Sh Servica Level D (Fa'31ted) Condition:

Primary ASE Code Case Loads 10*587 36,000

0. 29t.

8 Joint 041 160 8-1 Eq. 9 $ 2.4Sh i

P NOTES:

(1) Appropriate loading combinations of Table 4.3 were considered and the calculated stresses are reported for the ' governing loading combination.

(2)

Refer to Figure 1.b for the identification of node point numbers.

kv'~MN13mdeed onu 1tuasse

TABLE 4.4 MAIN STEAM C ASE Code Class 3 Safety /Re11of Valva Discharge Pipizg - Highest Stress Suunnary lim TING RATIO

$ut.n11FICATIN OF ACCEPTANCE STRESS CALCULATED ALLOWABLE ACTUAL LOCATIMS OF HIMST

)

gALLOWABLE)

LOADING CRITERIA TYPE STRESS LIMITS STRESS POINTS - N00E POINT NUf8ER Jased c2 ASE B&PV Code S ction III, 10-3600 'F = 570 pst Se a)480 F;r SA-106 Gr. 8 Design Condition Sustained 5.011 15,000 0.33 1

Joint 120 L ads

]q. 811.0Sh Elbow servica levels A&B (Nonnel & Upset)

Occastoraal in 10 9,485 18,000 0.53 2

Condttitn:

Loads Elbow 2q. 911.2Sh 9,485 18,000 0.53 hint 120 Jg.101 SA Thermal 2

Elbow Mnt 103 Eq.11 1 Sg+Sh Elbow Strut p

4

1 TABLE 4.4 (Continu:d)

JI.)

ASE Code Class 3 Safety / Relief Valve Discharge Piping - Highest Stress Susmary LIMITING RATIO IutnIIFICATIM OF ACCEPTANCE STRESS CALCULATED ALLOWABLE ACTUAL LOWIMS OF H!aEST CRITERIA TYPE STRESS LIMITS

{ ALLOWABLE)

LOADING j

STRESS POINTS - N00E POINT NUMBER 5ervice level C

[ emergency)Conditfon;

[,"

9,468 27.000 0.351 4

Joint 120 Eq. 9,< 1.8S Elbow h

krvico level D k

[Fs21ted) Condition:

Primary 10,366 36,000 0.288 8

Joint 103 GE Coda Case Loads 160 B-1 Elbow Eq 9 < 2.4Sh I

I L

I NOTES:

(1)

Appropriate loading combinations of Table 4.4 were considered and the calculated stresses are

~

reported for the governing loading combination.

, (2)

Refer to Figure 2.b for the identification of node point numbers.

i k

MrJT131W3D9

=

TABLE 4.5 MAIN STEAM D ASE Code Class 3 Saf;ty/Rellof Valva Discharge Piping - High;st Stress Susanary LIMITING RATIO IstnIIFICATIGI OF.

ACCEPTANCE STRESS CALCULATED ALLOWABLE ACTUAL CRITERIA TYPE STRESS LIMITS

{ ALLOWABLE)

LOADING LOCATIONS OF HIGHEST STRESS POINTS - N00E POINT NUISER Based on ASE B&PV Code Section III.

NO-3600 'F = 570 psi Su a)480 For SA-106 Gr. B Design Condition Sustained Loads 4,605 15,000 0.31 1

hint M1 Eq. 8 1 1.0Sh Elbow j

Servica levels A&B GNormal & Upset)

Occasional Condition Loads 9,540 18,000 0.53 2-hint 073 Elbow

}q. 911.2Sh i

Eq.131 SA 9'540 18,000 0.53 Joint 073 Thermal P "SI "

2 Elbow Eq. 11 1Sg+Sh 7,879 18.000 0.44 Joint 056 Elbow k

Wk'}"

31Pi3LO l

l-

e.

TABLE 4.5 (Continued)

ASE Code Class 3 Safety /Reiter Valve Dischwge Piping - Highest Stress Summary i.'

LIMITING RATIO anIIFICATION OF ACCEPTANCE STRESS CALCULATED ALLOWABLE ACTUAL LOCATIONS OF HIGIEST CRITERIA TYPE STRESS LIMITS

{ ALLOWABLE)

LDADING I

STRESS POINTS - N00E POINT NUteER Servt:0 level C (emergency) Condition:

[,'

U 9,520 27.000 0.353 4

Jo1nt 073 i

f 1

Eq 9 5 8Sh o

Servico level D (F21ted) Condition:

[,"

U 12,257 36,000 0.340 8

ASE Code Case bo 160 5-1 Eq. 91 4Sh 2

i i

l l

1 I

NOTES: (1) Appropriate loading combinations of Table 4.5 were considered and the calculated stresses are reported for the governing loading combination.

(2)

Refer to Figure 3.b for the identification of node point numbers.

i h

.e r n n. p n :

c 4

,e GENER AL @ ELECTRIC NUCLEAR POWER SYSTEMS DMsCN GENERAi. ELECT 2IC COMPANY e 175 (URTNER AVENUE o SAN JOSE. CAUFCRNIA 95125 M/C 682, (408) 925-2606 MFN-013-84 KWH-002-84 s

February 1,1984 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Washington, D.C.

20555 Attention:

Mr. D.G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing Gentl emen:

SUBJECT:

IK THE MATTER OF 238 NUCLEAR ISLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC STANDARD SAFETY ANAI.YSIS REPORT (GESSAR II)

NCKET NO. STN 50 t 87 SUBMITTAL OF PROPRIETARY INFORMATION IN RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING SEVERE ACCIDENT REVIEW OF GESSAR II

Reference:

C.O. Thomas (NRC) letter' to G.G. Sherwood (GE), " Request for Additional Information Regarding Severe Accident Review of' GESSAR II," January 26, 1984 The reference letter requested additional information regarding the severe accident portion of GE's GESSAR II submittal.. Attached please find responses *to the questions included in the reference letter. Also attached is a rationale for the treatment of fire and flood event unc6rtainty analysis.

We are requesting that the attached information be withheld from public disclosure and considered as proprietary pursuant to Section 2.790 of 10 CFR Part 2.

Very truly yours,

~

3

./

.!k.

irk, Manager

'R Systems Licensing Nuclear Safety & Licensing Operation Attachments

• Draft cc:

F.J. Miraglia (NRC) w/o attach.

D.C. Scaletti (NRC) w/o attach.

A. Thadani (NRC) w/o attach, g p3 ( [. [f( i [If gg,c, y [,t/s, y

C.0. Thomas (NRC) w/o attach.

P u

L.S. Gifford (GE-Bethesda) w/o attach.

I lC AI

[

R. Villa i

K A

GENERAL ELECTA I _ _C C0MPANY AFFIDAVIT I, Joseph F. Quirk, being duly sworn, depose and state as follows:

1.

I am Manager,'BWR Systems Licensing, Nuclear Safety & Licensing Operation, General Electric Company, and have been delegated the function of reviewing the information described in paragraph 2 which is sought to be withheld and have been authorized to apply for its withholding.

2.

The information sought to be withheld is contained in proprietary responses to questions in support of the Severe Accident portion of

~

the 238 Nuclear Island General Electric Standard Safety Analysis Report (GESSAR II)'.

-3.

In designating material as proprietary, General Electric utilizes the definition of proprietary information and trade secrets set

.forth in the American Law Institute's Restatement Of Torts, Section 757.

This definition provides:

"A trade secret may consist of any formula, pattern, device or compilatton of information which is use'd in one's business and.

which gives him an opportunity to obtain an advantage over competitors who do not know or use it....

A substantial element of secrecy must exist, so that, except by the use of improper means, there would be difficulty ~ 1n acquiring informa-tion....

Some ' factors to be considered in determining whether given information is -one's trade secret are:

(1) the extent to which the infor mation is known outside of his business; (2) the i

extent to which it is known by employees and others involved in I

his business; (3) the extent of measures taken by him to guard the secrecy of the information; (4) the value of the information to him and to his competitors; (5)~the amount of effort or I

money expended by him in developing the information; (6) the ease or difficulty with which the information could be properly acquired or duplicated by others."

I 4.

Some examples of categories of information which fit into the L

definition of proprietary information are:

a.

Information that discloses a process, method or apparatus where prevention of its use by General Electric's competitors without license from General Electric constitutes a competitive economic advantage over other companies; b.

Information consisting of supporting data and analyses, includ-ing test data, relative to a process, method or apparatus, the application of which provide a competitive economic advantage, e.g., by optimization or improved marketability; l

L

o c.

Information which if used by a competitor, would reduce his expenditure of resources or improve his competitive position in the design, manufacture, shipment, installation, assurance of quality or licensing of a similar product; d.

Information which reveals cost or price information, production capacities, budget levels or commercial strategies of General Electric, its customers or suppliers; e.

Information which reveals aspects of past, present or future General Electric customer-funded development plans and programs of potential commercial value to General Electric; f.

Information which discloses patentable subject matter for which it may be desirable to obtain patent protection; g.

Information which General Electric must treat as proprietary according to agreements with other parties.

5.

In addition to' proprietary treatment given to material meeting the standards enumerated above, General Electric customarily maintains in confidence preliminary and draft material which has not_been subject to complete proprietary, technical and editorial review.

This practice is based on the fact that draft documents often do not appropriately reflect all aspects of a-problem, may contain tentative conclusions and may contain errors that can be corrected during normal review and approval procedures.

Also, until the final document is completed it may not be possible ta make any definiti -

datermination as to its proprietary nature.

Generaf Electric is r. t generally willing to release such a document to the general public in such a preliminary form.

Such documents are, however, on occasion furnished to the NRC staff on a confidential basis because it is General Electric's belief that it is in the public interest for the staff to be promptly furnished with significant or potentially significant information.

Furnishing the document on a confidential basis pending completion of General Electric's internal review permits early acquaintance of thL staff with the information while protecting General Electric's potential proprietary position and permitting General Electric to insure the public documents are technically accurate and correct.

6.

Initial approval of proprietary treatment of a document is made by the Subsection Manager of the originating component, the man most likely to 5e acquainted with the value and sensitivity of the information in relation to industry knowledge.

Access to such documents within the Company is limited on a "need to know" basis and such documents at all times are clearly identified as proprietary.

7.

The procedure for approval of external release of such a document is reviewed by the Section Manager, Project Manager, Principal Scientist or other equivalent authority, by the Section Manager of the cognizant Marketing function (or his delegate) and by the Legal Operation for technical content, competitive effect and determination of the accuracy of the proprietary designation in accordance with the

L

. standards enumerated above.

Disclosures outside General Electric are generally limited to regulatory bodies, customers and potential customers and their agents, suppliers and licensees only in accordance with appropriate regulatory provisions or proprietary agreements.

8.

The document mentioned in paragraph 2 above has been evaluated in accordance with the above criteria and procedures and has been found to contain information which is proprietary and which is customarily held in confidence by General Electric.

9.

The information mentioned in paragraph 2 provides fracture mechanics and leak rate calculational methods, qualification of piping-for the leak-before-break approach, and the probability of a LOCA in reactor coolant system piping.

10.

The information-to the best of my knowledge and belief, has consistently been held in confidence by the General Electric Company, no public disclosure has been made, and it is not available in public sources.

All disclosures to third parties have been made pursuant to regulatory provisions of proprietary agreements which provide for maintenance of the information in confidence.

11.

Public disclosure of the informaton sought to be withheld is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of the General Electric Company and deprive or reduce the availability.of profit-making opportunities because:

Itwasdevelopedwk.ththeexpenditureofresourcesexceeding a.

$500,000.

b.

Public availability of this information would deprive General Electric of the ability to seek reimbursement, would permit competitors to utilize this information to General Electric's detriment, and would impair General Electric's ability to-maintain licensing agreements to the substantial financial and competitive disadvantage of General Electric.

E c.

Public availability of the information would allow foreign competitors, including competiting BWR suppliers, to obtain containment information at no cost which General Electric developed at substantial cost.

Use of this information by foreign competitors would give them a competitive advantage over General Electric by allowing foreign competitors to produce their containments at lower cost than General Electric.

8 b

.__~.--,,

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

) ss:

COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

)

~

Joseph F. Quirk, being duly sworn, deposes and says:

That he has read the foregoing affidavit and the matters stated therein are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief.

Executed at San Jose, California, this I day of 6ERuAA,(/, 198I.

}l JoppphlF. Quirk' Gebieral Electric Company Subscribed and sworn before me this d day of grmenard 198 coeocococococo.ecocococecocee j

OFFICIAL SEAL

~g j f

KAAEN S. VOGELHUBER N6TMYPUBLIC,STATEOF[LIFORNIA I

NoTAsty PusUC.CAUFORNIA

!b SANTA CLARA COUNTY ' aO l

My @ Empires Dec. 21,1984 2

osecosecesoconomonosoo KWH:pc/LO1314 t

i I

i l

t

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY PROPRIETARY INFORMATION Question 720.154 It has been indicated that the individual $_ values were not estimated; however, the combined p for the overall median factor of safety was established on the basis of engineering judgment.

Therefore, to better understand this process and its adequacy, provide a detailed analysis for one of the p values by examining individual components with a comprehensive discussion of the site-specific effects.

Response

l l

ic b c::

l 3cuc&

Ac bcd.

l I

KWH:rf/G01031*-5 1/3/83

-_