ML20138J817

Summary of 851203 Meeting W/Util,Bechtel,United Engineer & Constructors & Eqe,Inc Re Util Proposed Cable Tray Qualification Program Which Utilizes Dynamic Testing as Opposed to Traditional Linear Elastic Analysis

ML20138J817
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	12/11/1985
From:	Nerses V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8512180060
Download: ML20138J817 (78)

Text

x

, mn g

p t

:C

• WC 11195l,,

N,,

r JDocket Nos.:

50-443 p

-and 50-444 k

>r.

iAPPLICANT:

.Public Service Company of New Hampshire -

'New Hampshire Yankee Division FACILITY:

Seabrook Station, Units l'and 2

1. E a

D

SUMMARY

OF-MEETING HELD 0N DECEMBER 3, 1985 TO DISCUSS' CABLE. TRAY QUALIFICATION PROGRAM (DYNAMICTESTING)-

'W 10n. December 3,.1985, representatives of Public Service Co. of New Hampshire

+ and others met with the NRC staff to present and discuss the applicant's R

' proposed cable tray qualification program which utilizes dynamic testing as

.f sopposed.to traditional linear elastic analysis. Attendees are listed in f

? Attachment 1. - Highlights of the meeting are summarized below. Copies of all

.viewgraphs shown at the. meeting are presented in Attachment 2.

TCompleting the seismic qualification (construction) of cable tray supports at Seabrook by traditional linear elastic analysis methods will. require that a-substantial amount of axial bracing - both~ horizontal and' vertical -be idesigned and installed.. By utilizing dynamic testing methods to qualify cable-6 tray supports versus traditional analysis, the applicant seeks to demonstrate L

'that the existing support configurations (those with and without horizontal q

bracing)areseismicallyadequate.

The purpose.of the. meeting was to provide the applicant an opportunity to idescribe the cable tray. qualification program and receive any comments of the o

NRC staff.. Details of the qualification program are contained in Attachment 2.

'LThe applicant will finalize its report and submit it to NRC for review and approval in about two weeks.

The' applicant presented a'. video tape recording of some of the dynamic testing

-(conducted at ANCO. Los Angeles). The tape is in the custody of the.

NRC Seabrook. Project Manager.

07

• 851218006o estati Victor Nerses, Project Manager t

PDR. ADOCK 0

[

PWR Project Directorate #5' c

).A Division of PWR Licensing-A

.m

?.

Attachment:

1 l1.

List of Attendees

2./ _ewgraphs;-

Vi

+

~

i

[ 0FC : -

• PD35-p.....:

'NAMEi anne 11.

' VNer s DATE tillD/85-

/85

/-

r

~

fs,

'0FFICIAL RECORD COPY-g i

i U1 1

.o l

p1 a

,o p '"%s c

7

,qy UNITED STATES

_y' m

g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION r,;.['

.C WASWNGTON, D. C. 20555 OEC 111985 Docket Nos.:

50-443 and 50-444 APPLICANT:

Public Service Company of New Hampshire -

New Hampshire Yankee Division FACILITY:

Seabrook Station, Unit's 1 and 2

SUMMARY

OF MEETING HELD ON DECEMBER 3,1985 TO DISCUSS CABLE TRAY QUALIFICATION PROGRAM (DYNAMIC TESTING)

On December 3,1985, representatives of Public Service Co. of New Hampshire and others met with the NRC staff to present and discuss the applicant's proposed cable tray qualification program which utilizes dynamic testing as opposed to traditional linear elastic analysis. Attendees are listed in.

Highlights of the meeting are summarized below. Copies of all viewgraphs shown at the meeting are presented in Attachment 2.

Completing the seismic qualification (construction) of cable tray supports at Seabrook by traditional linear elastic analysis methods will require that a substantial amount of axial bracing - both horizontal and vertical -be designed and installed. By utilizing dynamic testing methods to qualify cable tray supports versus traditional analysis, the applicant seeks to demonstrate that the existing support configurations (those with and without horizontal bracing) are seismically adequate.

The purpose of the meeting was to provide the applicant an opportunity to describe the cable tray qualification program and receive any coments of the NRC staff. Details of the qualification program are contained in Attachment 2.

The applicant will finalize its report and submit it to NRC for review and approval in about two weeks.

The applicant presented a video tape recording of some of the dynamic testing (conductedatANCO,LosAngeles). The tape is in the custody of the NRC Seabrook Project Manager.

M.

/r

(,

Victor Nerses, Project Manager PWR Project Directorate #5 Division of PWR Licensing-A

Attachment:

1.

List of Attendees 2.

Viewgraphs

n.y _

m y..

4.

Mr. Robert J. Harrison

Public Service Company of New Hampshire Seabrook Nuclear Power Station

. i.-

Ce*:

Thomas Dignan, Esq.

E. Tupper Kinder, Esq.

John A. Ritscher, Esq.

G. Dana Bisbee, Esq.

Ropes and Gray Assistant Attorney General

~225 Franklin Street Office of Attorney General 1 Boston,-. Massachusetts '02110.

208 State Hosue Annex Concord, New Hampshire 03301 y

.Mr. Bruce B. Beckley,- Project Manager Public Service Company of New Hampshire Resident Inspector Post Office Box 330.

Seabrook Nuclear Power Station Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 c/o-US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Post Office Box 700 Dr. Mauray Tye, President Seabrook, New Hampshire 03874

Sun Valley Association-

- 209 Sunner Street Mr. John DeVincentis, Director Haverhill, Massachusetts 01839 Engineering and Licensing Yankee Atomic Electric Company

' Robert A. Backus, Esq.-

1671 Worchester Road O'Neil, Backus and Spielman Framingham', Massachusetts 01701

116 Lowell Street-Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 Mr. 4. M. Ebner, Project Manager United Engineers & Constructors Ms. Beverly-A. :Hollingworth 30 South 17th Street

-7 A Street Post Office Box 8223 Hampton Beach, New Hampshire 03842

' Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 William S. Jordan III Mr. Philip Ahrens, Esq.

Diane Curran.

Assistant Attorney General Harmon, Weiss & Jordan State House, Station #6 20001 S Street, NW Augusta, Maine 04333 Suite 430 Washington, DC -20009 Mr. Warren Hall Jo Ann. Shotwell, Esq.

Public Service Company of Office of the Assistant Attorney General New Hampshire Environmental Protection Division Post Office Box 330 One Ashburton Place Seabrook, New Hampshire 03874 Boston, Massachusetts 02108 Seacoast Anti-Pollution League D.~ Pierre G. Cameron, Jr., Esq.

Ms. Jane Doughty

-General Counsel 5 Market Street Public Service Company of New Hampshire Portsmouth, New Hampshire 03801 Post Office Box 330 Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 Mr. Diana P. Randall 70 Collins Street

. Regional Administrator, Region I Seabrook, New Hampshire 03874 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 631 Park Avenue 19406 New Hampshire Civil Defanse Agency Richard Hampe, Esq.

King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 107 Pleasant Street Concord, New Hampshire 03301 a

4 ; i..

Public Service Company of Seabrook Nuclear Powcr Station New' Hampshire cc:

Mr. Calvin A. Canney, City Manager' Mr. Alfred V. Sargent, City Hall

' Chairman

~

-126 Daniel Street Board of Selectmen Portsmouth, New Hampshire 03801 Town of Salisbury, MA 01950 Ms. Letty Hett Senator Gordon J. Humphrey

. Town of Brentwood ATTN: Tom Burack-RFD Dalton Road U.S. Senate

~

.Brentwood "New Hampshire 03833' Washington,.D.C. 20510 Ms. Roberta C. Pevear

_ Senator Gordan J. Humphrey

Town of Hampton Falls. New Hampshire ATTN:-Herb Boynton

.Drinkwater Road 1 Pillsbury Street Hampton Falls, New Hampshire 03844 Concord, New Hampshire 03301 4

'Ms.: Sandra Gavutis Mr. Owen B. Durgin, Chairman i

Town of Kensington, New Hampshire Durham Board of Selectmen RDF 1.

Town of Durham East Kingston, New Hampshire 03827 Durham, New Hampshire 03824 x

Charles Cross, Esq.

Chairman, Board of Selectmen Shaines, Mardrigan and Town Hall, McEaschern South Hampton,'New Hampshire 03827 25 Maplewood Avenue Post Office Box 366 l

-Mr. Angie Machiros, Chairman Portsmouth, New Hampshire 03801 Board of Selectmen for the Town of Newbury 1

Newbury, Massachusetts 01950-Mr. Guy Chichester, Chaiman l

Rye Nuclear Intervention Ms. Cashman, Chairman Committee Board of-Selectmen c/o Rye Town Hall Town of Amesbury 10 Central Road Town Hall Rye, New Hampshire 03870 i

c

.Amesbury, Massachusetts 01913 Jane Spector

-Honorable Richard E. Sullivan Federal Energy Regulatory Mayor, City of Newburyport Connission Cffice of the Mayor 825 North Capital Street, NE City Hall Room 8105-Newburyport, Massachusetts 01950 Washington, D. C.

20426 Mr. Donald E. Chick, Town Manager Mr. R. Sweeney Town of Exeter New Hampshire Yankee Division 10 Front Street Public Service of New Hampshire Exeter, New ilampshire 03823 Company 7910 Woodmont Avenue Mr. William B. Derrickson Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Senior Vice President Public Service Company of 1

New Hampshire ~

Post' Office. Box 700, Route 1 t

Seabrook, New Hampshire 03874

Meeting Summary Distribution

-DockeCor[ Central: File' NRC Participants NRC PDR Local PDR C. Tramnell PD#S Reading File S. Chan J. Partlow (Emergency Preparedness R. Ballard only)

D. Jeng Branch Chief J. Ma Project Manager F. Rinaldi OELD W. Johnston E. Jordan K. Manoly B. Grimes ACRS (10) cc: Licensee and Plant Service List s

h6 S-

?

List of Attendees For Applicant NRC Staff-

. White,. Yankee' Atomic C. Trammell R

D. Johnson,. Yankee Atomic S. Chan J. DeLoach, Yankee Atomic.

R. Ballard R. Sweeney, New Hampshire Yankee' D. Jeng J. Ma F. Rinaldi W. Johnston K. Manoly Others NRC Consultant P. McMahon - Bechtel P. Keshishian A. Dufault - VE&C C. Haughney - Comex Corp.

S. Swan - EQE, Inc.

K. Lee - Bechtel

- F.1Rigamonti - UE&C F. DeAngelis - UE&C

~J. Redding - Texas Utilities Generating Co.

~

- P.'Yanev - EQE, Inc.

R. Kincaid - EQE,.Inc.

5

)

e e

'~

^

/]/kulo d 2 m

Sea arook Station New Hampshire Yankee Cable Tray Support Qualific~ation Program AGENDA INTRODUCTION R. WHITE - YAEC QUALIFICATION PROGRAM D. JOHNSON - YAEC DEVELOPMENT TEST METHODOLOGY AND P. McMAHON - BECHTEL RESULTS ANALYTICAL CORRELATION P. McMAHON-AL DUFAULT

& EXTRAPOLATIONS TYPICAL PERFORMANCE OF S. SWAN - EQE INC.

i CABLE TRAY DURING SEISMIC EVENTS IMPLEMENTATION AND CURRENT D. JOHNSON STATUS

.I t

P i

o PURPOSE OF MEETING DESCRIBE QUALIFICATION PROGRAM OBTAIN NRC STAFF FEEDBACK o

ORIGINAL METHOD FOR CABLE TRAY SUPPORT DESIGN LINEAR ELASTIC ANALYSIS i

UTILIZED 4% & 7% STRUCTURAL DAMPING METHODS LEAD TO DESIGN AND INSTALLATION OF EXTENSIVE LATERAL & AXIAL BRACING FOR SEISMIC LOADING e

a f

M

. - + - -

,-e-

, -,.--,,,,-----i, - -., -, - -,- - -., -

I QUALIFICATION PROGRAM o

SELECTED CONFIGURATIONS MOST REPRESENTATIVE OF SITE ARRANGEMENTS PERFORMED SETS OF DYNAMIC TESTS ON THREE CABLE TRAY SUPPORT CONFIGURATIONS (WITH AND WITHOUT BRACING)

PERFORMED STATIC CONNECTION TESTS TO OBTAIN CONNECTION ROTATIONAL AND FATIGUE

• CAPABILITIES DEVELOP'A CORRELATION BETWEEN TEST RESULTS (DYNAMIC AND STATIC) AND ANALYTICAL MODELS OF TESTED ASSEMBLIES.

PERFORM SENIOR ENGINEERING LEVEL WALKDOWNS TO DEFINE EXTRAPOLATION MODELS PERFORM ANALYTICAL EXTRAPOLATIONS TO TRAY SUPPORT CONFIGURATIONS WHICH ARE NOT GEOMETRICALLY BOUNDED BY TEST RESULTS PERFORM EXTENSIVE AS-BUILT PROGRAM TO VERIFY SUPPORT ARRANGEMENTS AND HARDWARE DETAILS ISSUE FINAL REPORT - JANUARY 1986

--s j

-m 1

QUALIFICATION TEAM DON JCHNSON YANKEE ATOMIC o CABLE TRAY BRACING TASK TEAM COORDINATOR PETER McMAHON BECHTEL o TEST DEVELOPMENT o TEST DYRECTION TO ANCO LABS o CORRELATION STUDIES o EXTRAPOLATION ANALYSIS AL DUFAULT UE&C o ELECTRICAL SUPPORT DESIGN SUPERVISOR SAM SWANN EQE o DEVEL'OP COMPARISON OF SEABROOK CABLE TRAY TO SEISMIC EXPERIENCE DATA BASE

-ANCO. LABORATORIES o SITE FOR DYNAMIC AND STATIC TESTING V

_s s.

w e

~

r CABLE TRAY SUPPORT QUALIFICATION PROGRAM OBJECTIVE o

UTILIZE DYNAMIC TESTING METHODS IN LIEU OF EXISTING PROJECT ANALYTICAL METHODS TO QUALIFY CABLE TRAY SUPPORTS o

PRIMARY GOAL - ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR COMPLETING THE PROPOSED AXIAL BRACING (HORIZONTAL & VERTICAL) o SECONDARY GOALS

. ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR COMPLETING THE BALANCE OF THE TRANSVERSE BRACING AND FOR CONTINUING THE STRUT-NUT HARDWARE CHANGE-OUT PROGRAM BENEFITS o

SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE SCHEDULE IMPACT - CABLE TRAY SUPPORTS ARE.A CRITICAL PATH ACTIVITY o

SAVE SUBSTANTIAL ENGINEERING COSTS il o

SAVE SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS o

SAVE' SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF ESTIMATED STEEL TONNAGE

_5 REDUCE BUILDING CONGESTION 4

em-

- - - -+=,-.,,, - -.,

.,%y

,.,--.._,.---,.v-.

SEABROOK CABLE TRAY SUPPORT I

~

CONC OR STEEL

////

////'

l / J / //// / / / / / / // / //

7 c

CABLE TRAY (TYR) i 4---

i TRANSVERSE 30 M

(TYP) '

BRACE t

=

CABLE. TR AY f

'i M

P1004 (TY R)

\\ TR AY SUPPORT (TYR)

( T Y P.)

I P1001 (TYR )

FRONT ELEV SIDE ELEV l

~

.N

j l

5 TRANSVERSE j'

BRACE l

/

/

/

i

~

/

/

1 h

_J i

TYPICAL TRAPEZE-TYPE TRAY SUPPORT

s CABLE TRAY SUPPORT

^

PROGRAM STATUS DECEMBER 1985

~

PROPOSED BRACING BUILDING STEEL (1bs)

' DIESEL GENERATOR COOLING TOWER FUEL STORAGE SERVICE WATER PUMPHOUSE CONTAINMENT 55,600 PAB 48,650 CONTROL BUILDING 85,100 ELECTRICAL 1UNNEL 15,500

- t.

~

MAIN STEAM FEEDWATER PIPE CHASE 500 TOTAL STEEL 205,350 lbs

.o

. o-

i i

l 4

SUPPORT FOR TESTING APPROACH o

INHERENT SEISMIC CAPACITY DEMONSTRATED IN THE PAST BY BECHTEL & SEP TESTING PROGRAMS o

TRADITIONAL LINEAR ELASTIC ANALYSIS CANNOT ACCOUNT FOR SEISMIC RESISTANCE IN TERMS OF:

- DAMPING OF THE SYSTEM

- NONLINEARITY OF THE CONNECTIONS

- ACTUAL SYSTEM RESPONSE BEHAVIOR o

DYNAMIC TESTING IS AN ACCEPTED SEISMIC QUALIFICATION METHOD BY THE USNRC STANDARD REVIEW PLAN SECTION 3.10 b

O

1

- Service Kater Pumphouse (Analysis)

]

Steam 6 Feedwater II e -

Pipe Chase (East) (Testing)

,C 7 Reactor Containment Building (Testing) l Turbine j

Fuel Storage e

Building (Analysis)

Building i

c i Containment Enclosure

+-

Ventilation Area (Testing) 2l

-Primary Auxiliary Building J

(Testing)

Administration

.Y q

RHR Spray Equipment Building Vault (Testing) l Diesel Control Cooling Tower --+

Building Generator (Unit 1)

(Testing)

Building (Analysis)

(Analysis)

Seismic Category 1 Buildings

.y Qualified by Testing or Analysis muse m

.e

-MET.'IODOLOGY i

o PERFORM PROOF & FRAGILITY TESTING OF REPRESENTATIVE SUPPORT CONFIGURATION SYSTEMS UNDERSTAND DYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS INVESTIGATE PERFORMANCE AT VARIOUS SEISMIC INPUT LEVELS o

. UTILIZE BOUNDING SEISMIC INPUT o

UTILIZE ANALYTICAL EXTRAPOLATIONS 50 EVALUATE OTHER SUPPORT CONFIGURATIONS THE FOLLOWING SIGNIFICANT PARAMETERS ARE BOUNDED BY THE EXTRAPOLATIONS:

ARS

\\

CONFIGURATION HEIGHT l

NUMBER OF TRAY TIERS CABLE LOADING l

T-e vvna ett*-Ny M NP-*W'4 94^<**>+eyg4

• 'm-+e p-eyWe-%r&+ya g

w-w

++cP-*n3

--qw e

r-e-t

=m-w'e v w-w-T--r4uWc-='r'=-4w v'

T

e

,7o, 5 h a ' ps $,a a,' "oo3 0e$[O3 3 e

g

.U

[

g g

,E^

g t

]

I J

.=5

[

I I

_y "0

f c

s n

_g u

g

_g e

a, l

e

,g s

_g

• 5 i fV/g E,3[rY8,,go O"l2 e

_g

, k"

_g

,g 3

l l-T

(

1J

.r-i.lll E

l cI" i

g' -

c e

. 5 1

l

. a

,u f

4

'6 1 *-

i" 1

3' A,)4-u 1

IlI a

(

b

~-

T" e

u' e

"0

su n

T

.WLi 3

c l

n el i

g; e

e[

4 m

mjp u',

F 1

.i3JijJ.

l

/

f 2

[

m F

_i

_n S

s l

m p

3 o

_I-e s

s t

s

.I-u t,n g_

s i

t

_I-

'c u p

)

e g

c r

r lI u

Cu a w,-

n

• 0 c

c

'6 s

i.

S

.y i

3 s

S s

c o

u L

i E

t w

M l

l n

S s

l U

u a_

l l

e i

M s

E-P_

s h

_ E c

_.H-

._.u i

.I-s c.

t sa s

fi L

u i

'J n

e_

l-,

[

S S

= ].

=

E kem

?IL S

s u

M i

u.

"0 1

i s

,' rp %'.

([ L.(1. r -

(f{e

'8 L.

(

2

{

2 2

un

_l

- L I

[

i N4

'9 -

'o h 4

b

'9hn

'9 "

'i s

s I

2 e

Eh e

i

ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA o

SUPPORT CONFIGURATIONS SHALL MAINTAIN STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY JOINT SLIPPAGE IS ALLOWED o

CABLES SHALL MAINTAIN ELECTRICAL INTEGRITY o

SYSTEM DISPLACEMENTS SHALL NOT ADVERSELY IMPACT ADJACENT SYSTEM COMPONENTS t

e

=

.. ~ _.,.. _ _,......

_. _ _.. ~ _,.

3-

~

RELATED ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED 10CFR50.55(C) REPORT ELECTRICAL CABLE TRAY o

SUPPORT HARDWARE TEST CONFIGURATIONS INCLUDED ALL REPRESENTATIVE VENDOR HARDWARE NRC CAT INSPECTION VIOLATION AS BUILT o

COMMITMENTS SEISMIC INTERACTION WITH-ATTACHED SYSTEMS o

CONDUIT AND WIREWAY FIRE PROTECTION PIPING V

O O

9

=

SEABROOK CABLE TRAY SUPPORT SYSTEM PERFORMANCE TESTING PURPOSE o

STUDY THE PERFORMANCE AND DYNAMIC BEHAVIOR OF TYPICAL CABLE TRAY SUPPORT SYSTEMS, DETAILS ~AND MATERIALS o

DEMONSTRATE CABLE TRAY SUPPORT SYSTEM INTEGRITY TO ENVELOPE SEISMIC, CONDITIONS o.

INVESTIGATE'.' CIRCUIT FUNCTIONALITY o~

INVESTIGATE CONNECTION PERFORMANCE.

INCLUDING BEHAVIOR UNDER CYCLIC LOADING o

STUDY SYSTEM BEHAVIOR OF BRACED AND UNBRACED CONFIGURATIONS o

UTILIZE RECORDED TEST DATA TO DEVELOP ANALYTICAL MODELS FOR CABLE TRAY SUPPORT SYSTEM EVALUATION o

COORDINATE TEST PROGRAM WITH BECHTEL RACEWAY TEST PROGRAM

• 4 e

e.

-, -, ~....

~. e

..n,,._.------.-

--,---,-w-,-..-m,,n.,,,,,-,-_

SEABROOK. CABLE TRAY SUPPORT' TYPES i

CONC OR STEEL q

.. / / / / / / h / / / / / s / / / / /

/1//

////

\\

\\

,/

CABLE TRAY

\\

/

(TYP)

{

i

/

30*

TRANSVERSE

/

BRACE

' M (TY P) '

ii ii M

/

i, T

CABLE TRAY

",N P1004 M

(TYR) l (TYR )

TR AY SUPPORT P1001 W"

!=

"L" (TYR) r (WR) s FRONT ELEV SIDE ELEV

).

~

i

')

)

/

~

/

/

/

/

N.

~

~

TRANSVERSE

/

BRACE

/

/

/

/

/

y

,, g

NOTE : "L " VARIES FROM 5'-0" TO 10'0':

BRACE (TYPEVERYl t

TRAY)

I TYPICAL TRAPEZE-TYPE TRAY SUPPORT TYPE @

SEABROOK CABLE TRAY SUPPORT TYPES

~.

////_ ///

CONC OR ).

_ ///

////

STEEL TRANSVERSE BRA,/

[, CABLE CE TRAY W

/

z e

I:

It a

P1001

/

i i

/

(TYR)

-/

8 dimmmmbs 1

i CABLE M

P1004 4.___

j n

N TR (y

u 4

1:

J" 8

~7/: " ~ ~ 7,'

' 7~ -

~~

~~

i

~

10'- 0 " _

s/,c r

// <r

_W l_

"L"

_I

( NAX.). ~

'~

j FRONT ELEV

/

SIDE ELEV

~

/

,/

TRANSVERSE

/

BRACE 1

/

/ *, -

i

,-/

N AXIAL

/

NOTE:

"L

• VARIES FROM 5'-0" TO 10'-0*:

BRACE

,/

(TYR ER y

. /%

/*

~

s TYPICAL FLOOR TO CEILING TYPE TRAY SUPPORT TYPE

t' SEABROOK CABLE TRAY SUPPORT TYPES

////

////

////

CONC OR R

STEEL

~

i y (P1004_

j TR AY. SUPPORT i

i a

j TY R )-

i n

i 1

(TYR) j

\\"

\\

f

• w+

P1001 "L"

AXIAL BRACE (TYR )

4 FRONT ELEV SIDE ELEV

/

/

/

. f,',

s.

NOTE: " L" VARIES FROM 5'- 0" TO 10'O.-

\\

c.

{ AXIAL BRACE (TYP. EVERY T R AY)

TYPICAL WALL BRACED TYPE TRAY SUPPORT TYPE (ALSd @ )-

SEABROOK CABLE TRAY SUPPORT TYPES y

i

%%.'s.*

y c:;*..Wn;*; \\

4,y y--

g n i

f,.

---=

g:

N O 9

l en k

@fCd&E TfAY (TYP) y x

\\

s WP/00f(TYP) i l

I.

ii Y

PIm4 --

1

=

l (TYP)

,-.J u/

a:0" MAX S/OE ELEVA TIOAJ TYPICAL TRANSITIONAL TYPE TRAY SUPPOPT TYPE @

i SEABROOK CABLE TRAY SUPPORT TYPES 4

i 2/, cz / / / / /

E0., WALL

1. //

EO

_[ -CABLE TRAY

-CABLE TRAY

/

i WALL

/

a r,

Q,

)

l l

/

9 P1004

/

~

(TYRD

/

I, _ _

I

~ P1004

' _. w..

's

~,

/

i a

[;

c-t

/

l--P1001

/

a..

_ 10'- 0"-

_'W (TYR)

/ 1-J.gg7f7

~ (MAX.${tV P10 1-c p

TYPE @

ELEV-TYPE M

/ //1././ ////.L1.4

,.;. o

[SCABLE TRAY

,i

, 8' 4 e.

i

'.-CABLE TRAY A

FEMBEDDED

/

l P1004

\\

l

- l' STRUT i

(TYR) g

~

l bl---P1001 A-q

'e't

.I

>l, (TYR) f" rf

'lI-WALL-}

EO.

~

'1

~

L-P1001

• e~

-~

w l

_ 10' 0" _

• W"i (TYP)

=

(MAXI ELEV ELEV TYPE TYPE

SEABROOK CABLE TRAY SUPPORT TYPES

/ / / LJ / / / / /_,/ / /

/ ///// ////2 /////_

=

rCABLE TRAY e/

(

i i

P1004

\\

i n

e s

/

(TYR)

/

~

\\/

,- /

_A L

i r

i P1004 P1004 -

PD 4

/1 1

y

. E0.

p WAR

=

'.i.

-P 1001 b

=

=

s

-P1001

^ *w =

(TYP)

.ELEV ELEV TYPEO PO e

E-All CABLE TR AY

./// / / // / / / 4f / // /

' ~~

y/3o y'

30 7

1 U-P 1001 04

/

)

/

\\

s a

i e

P1004 j

]

(TYR )

j li

/

/ /

- P OO1

'W (TYR)

/3(

T[PEh ELE TYPE @

ELEV

5 9

S lma-inu

}{f{,

,A

~

1 _M

---__.,,--.----n-

- ~

O o

e,( n i

_ co

~

i

,, vs %

5 c

%.a i I

~_

m

-.,,a e

9

E"

-.,ow y-y..+,

, - =,. - --r9,-

3

,,-,p.,

..,yv,m-%,

,,n,

.w,4 mm,-w w w.,-

.e--c-, - - -

,.y.--

---mm.-.,

m..

m 3

-4

h m -

.w

-n t..

iu.-

m e

I l

=

Wi r

E

~

-l 1

=

i

)

b J

l F

l CAS-

{/

^

M e

F l

I e

1 i

---

e-,e w-

a f

_i. >

vi

//

i, n

_1_ '

~

__i

.1_

_ s s. -

.--. a s. 2 1 i iI 1

+o 04 40 04

~:T \\ l *i:~

33DU,TYP

'l l t m 33FO l s s l' 33fo Tl lT-i l.I i 8 I i

1l1II l1 II IIII IIl l I I II gi li 4

iiIl

.!!p!!

_ di_1_

i i !,! i i

i i

3 ANCHORS i iii r

-i i 'i r rTfrr I IIi

' III l

I I l

I [' g,

lli lllli l l1 I

$ e

y j

Ns I,i l

V liIi P

11.1

__L,i 'l l saoqM;lr,Ilii i iii

_ _ _. __ _ _u i l

i I

53 o4 - ;:;I IIi 33 m tr, i9p! I 4

i 4

i pl_

i i

INTERMAL COMUECTIOA/S TRAY SUPPORT CONNECTIONS

--m a

O r

s 0

8 a.

A I

j l'lh ssm.m u-

--3 2r i!lf : x,m 7x,

iji+

\\

r3

- [

ii i,

sss jjji s ss sseo I

g

~t' 33,3 s

s gg l1hY

l gs \\ \\

ll

\\g\\g\\

o i,

\\

i I f o,i t s s vi-r ii i n s i:

1 BRACE COMMECTIONS_

a_

} l'l j 33gj,77

[ C T N T N 1: N / S O E 0 E C 0 T ..r e S R S R F R R T _2r e a.. f 7Ov row 4 .wamoo* i ~

1

i!

l\\i l p b, l ,p - k. tip$ - D( k' g % s I 3. '43 + 4 %w{%fe L g ?.AN

p%e

~q \\ p., 'gi sh ~s yf .p p%,%tyll;r.-r -;;Q. 4 ~ r '9,.y llj, .x.. e 'y / l e ll ,X s G s ( 2 TEST SEQUENCE - CASE A PRELIMINARY TESTING, LOW LEVEL RANDOM o MODE TNPUT TO DETERMINE FREQUENCIES, SHAPES AND DAMPING RATIOS EARTilQUAKE TESTING OF CONFIGURATION A AT FRACTIONAL SSE INPUT LEVELS AND (1) o (3) FULL. LEVEL SSE. FIVE

FATIGUE TESTING OF CONFIGURATION A; OBE LEVEL EVENTS FOLLOWED BY A SINGLE SSE o

LEVEL EVENT REMOVE ALL BRACING FROM-TEST CONFIGURATION. o PRELIMINARY TESTING, LOW LEVEL RANDOM o INPUT TO DETERMINE FREQUENCIES, MODE SIIAPES AND DAMPING RATIOS EARTilQUAKE~ TESTING AT SSE LEVEL AND AT o LEVELS EXCEEDING SSE LEVEL. O e +

• ~<-

s~... _ -. _ _, _,.,. ..._..,_-.m_,. .._w. ___y ~, TEST SEOUENCE - CASE B PRELIMINARY TESTING, LOW LEVEL RANDOM MODE -o INPUT TO DETERMINE FREQUENCIES, SHAPES AND DAMPING RATIOS -EARTHQUAKE TESTING OF CONFIGURATION B AT o (2) FRACTIONAL SSE LEVELS AND (1) FULL ' LEVEL SSE. FIVE FATIGUE TESTING OF CONFIGURATION B; o OBE. LEVEL EVENTS FOLLOWED BY,A SINGLE SSE LEVEL EVENT TA . EARTHQUAKE TESTING OF CONFIGURATION B A o LEVEL EXCEEDING THE SSE LEVEL ) i REMOVE ALL BRACING FROM TEST CONFIGURATION. PRELIMINARY TESTING, LOW o LEVEL RANDOM INPUT TO DETERMINE FREQUENCIES, MODE SHAPES AND DAMPING RATIOS. [ EARTHQUAKE TESTING OF UNBRACED L CONFIGURATION AT SSE LEVEL. o ' FLOOR TO DISCONNECT BOTTOM CONNECTIONS AT F'LOOR' SUPPORTS. PRELIMINARY TESTING, LOW o LEVEL RANDOM INPUT TO DETERMINE FREQUENCIES, MODE SIIAPES, AND DAMPING RATIOS. EARTHQUAKE TESTING OF UNBRACED o CONFIGURATION AT SSE LEVEL TEST SEOUENCE - CASE C o PRELIMINARY TESTING, LOW LEVEL RANDOM INPUT-TO DETERMINE FREQUENCIES. MODE SHAPES AND DAMPING RATIOS EARTHQUAKE TESTING OF CONFIGURATION C AT o (2) FRACTIONAL SSE LEVELS AND (1) FULL LEVEL SSE FATIGUE TESTING OF CONFIGURATION C: FIVE o OBE LEVEL EVENTS FOLLOWED BY JL SINGLE SSE LEVEL EVENT EARTHQUAKE TESTING OF CONFIGURATION C AT A o LEVEL-EXCEEDING THE SSE LEVEL REMOVE ALL BRACING WITH STRUT CONNECTION o HARDWARE. INSTALL LONGITUDINAL BRACES CONNECTING S3 & S4 WITH BOLTED CONNECTIONS. INSTALL TRANSVERSE BRACE AT S3 WITH WELDED CONNECTIONS. EARTHQUAKING TESTING AT SSE LEVEL. o REMOVE ALL BRACING. EARTHQUAKE TESTING AT SSE LEVEL. O i t DATA RECORDS o ACCELEROMETERS DISPLACEMENT POTENTIOMETERS o-o STRAIN GAUGES LOAD CELLS' o o LVDT E e 6 e I v b' S G L ,W OJ = N .m'_M' r_A. - ~ ) 1-r -,V- ~~ ~ . - ~m_ s e A- _.- F VMw _~ N .. N = ~.2

• N j

._6, f ~~ v r__- o N O< --E:- OJ O QJ 4 e a ._a m as a 4 ' 1 9 2 5 b Nv W 2__ M >=- N 'N e-O _ A-IM 6IM I

---

seessa-- -----

M-D J

l i

)

i Z

g

_R___.

H m

O

.O 5:2

= 4-2, D

O O

c t

1 O

I 1

i i

n

,,......-.._-.Q,----~..

.,-,- -,.. -., +

-c,

O 0,

5 e

G ff)

.dl~

s r-w

.x.

N

'h M

nN m_

e I

t e

e e

> ?

__mm---

W-w' e

E 4-z

?

e4 s

{

I

W t

.\\

~O

• • 6 i.

t L.,

l OBSERVED PERFORMANCE (REPRESENTATIVE) e

'APPROXIMATELY 40% SSE INPUT LEVEL NO VISIBLE DEFORMATION OF CONNECTION e

HARDWARE ISOLATED BOLTS LOSE SOME TORQUE e

APPROXIMATELY 60 TO 70% SSE INPUT LEVEL e'

NO VISIBLE DEFORMATION OF CONNECTION e

HARDWARE A FEW BOLTS LOSE SOME TORQUE ISOLATED BOLTS (TYPICALLY DIAGONAL BRACES) o e

BECOME' LOOSE 1

i APPROXIMATELY 90% SSE INPUT LEVEL 4

e Z-CLIP' DEFORMATION ISOLATED SLIGHTLY MORE BOLT LOOSENING THAN PREVIOU e

CATEGORY (A FEW BOLTS BECOME LOOSE) e 5

g e

4 k

i

-w

---

ee-e, e

e i,-r-ww-e-e

-,,s-------enyeve--o----,rer+ves--#--,e,--..,,-yw,,*<wery--y

,,-e--

w w,, v, t w w - w n o.m w,- m = w w, w v ww

,w--

em es yvv-w,*,,,e w m ee-,=y-g---g-=

-,eewwgre

OBSERVED PERFORMANCE (REPRESENTATIVE)

CONT'D APPROXIMATELY SSE INPUT LEVEL e

CABLE TIE BREAKAGE e

Z-CLIPS" DEFORM MULTIPLE e

ACUTE BRACE CLIP ANGLE DEFORMATION OR e

. FRACTURE 1" DIAMETER CONDUIT CLAMP MOVEMENT e

'Z' CLIP TRAY SLIPPAGE -(W/ MIX OF BENT AND e

USAGE) f APPROXIMATELY 100% TO 130% SSE INPUT LEVEL e

MANY CABLE TIES BREAK e

OVERHEAD GUSSETED ANGLE WELD FRACTURE e

OVERHEAD PlOOO DEFORMATION o

VERTICAL SLIPPAGE OF HORIZONTAL MEMBER e

MINOR HORIZONTAL MEMBER ROTATION

-e ISOLATED INTERNAL CONNECTION DEFORMATION e

DIAGONAL BRACE AND OVERHEAD CONNECTION e

BOLTS LOSE SOME TORQUE J'

-e rw

,..~,g,,

.__..-y_-_.,_

__,,,.r--

e

M MAXIMUM DISPLACEMENTS, r

BRACED BRACED UNBRACED (FATIGUE) i LONGITUDINAL 4.3" 5.2" 4.6" CASE A TRANSVERSE 2.6" 5.2" 3.8" LONGITUDINAL 1.6" 4.0" 2.0" CASE B TRANSVERSE 2.7" 4.6" 3.8" REPRESENTATIVE DISPLACEMENTS CASE-A (BRACED)

TEST - 7.3.1.2.7 (

70%-SSE)

LONGITUDINAL TRANSVERSE O.96" 1.92" e

t

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

-e--

.c

,-----en-e-----.--rn,-e--e-,,r--

,wn-,,wn--

-4r--,e.---

---w

.m----

w--

e

e 9.

g o

DAMPING - CASE A

~

LONGITUDINAL TRANSVERSE TEST 22%

36%

. 7.3.1.2.6 - PARTIAL SSE W/ BRACING 22%

25%

OBE W/ BRACING 7.3.3 23%

27%

7.3.7 - SSE AFTER (5)

OBE W/ BRACING 9

9

.m,,

9T

a e

a

,m-em f

f DAMPING - CASE B LONGITUDINAL TRANSVERSE TEST 30%

27%

7.6.0.1 - PARTIAL SSE-W/ BRACING 32%

28%

7'.6.2 - OBE W/ BRACING 7.6.7 - SSE AFTER (5) 33%

32%

OBE W/ BRACING b

4 e

9 i

e

+

e s

.,-n,

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

,n-

-,.-n-..

v.w.-,,,,

w

.n

n. w, m.,

.e,,,n,-

F 4

I

\\

\\

i COMPARISON OF TEST DATA

.VS.

' BRACED-FRAME' ANALYSIS

- CASE A -

- ENVELOPE SSE -

BRACE LOAD

• METHOD DAMPING DEFLECTION LONGIT.

(OSI)_

TRANSV.

(@S3).

S1 STATIC 7%

0.9" O.6" 81.6k K

RSA 20%

0.2" O.2" 17.5 4.3" 2.6" 3.8K TEST

• MAXIMUM TENSILE LOAD E

e

i DIAGONAL BRACES HORIZONTAL BRACE VS.

SUPPORT #1 i

CASE A - DIAGONAL BRACE a'

CASE B - HORIZONTAL BRACE I

CASE B CASE A TEST 4000#

3800M OBE #1 3300#

f 3000#

OBE #2 3000#

1000#

_OBE #3 I

i 3000H 500H l_

OBE #4 3000H 500H OBE-#5 4500#

750M

.SSE e

9 l

a e

i 4

.u

1 RESULTS PRIMARY CONNECTION INTEGRITY ENSUR35 TEST o-SAMPLE OVERALL INTEGRITY TO SEISMIC LEVELS IN EXCESS OF ENVELOPE SSE TYPICALLY, DISPLACEMENTS ARE GREATER AND o

BRACE MEMBER STRESSES LESS THAN PREDICTED

- BY ' BRACED-FRAME' STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OVERALL INTEGRITY WAS DEMONSTRATED FOR THE o

THREE TEST SAMPLES IN BOTH BRACED AND

-UHBRACED CONFIGURATIONS.

HORIZONTAL BRACES ARE MORE EFFECTIVE IN o

RESISTING SEISMIC LOADS THAN DIAGONAL BRACES DAMPING VALUES IN EXCESS OF 20% WERE o

RECORDED THROUGHOUT THE EARTHQUAKE TESTING TESTED CABLE DID NOT EXHIBIT ANY PHYSICAL o

WEAR OR DAMAGE.

NO-LOSS OF CONTINUITY WAS OBSERVED WHEN MONITORED SOME LOCALIZED DAMAGE-WAS OBSERVED o

TWO KEY FEATURES WERE OBSERVED:

JOINT o

FLEXIBILITY AND AMPLITUDE DEPENDENT FRICTIONAL LOSSES DUE TO CABLE VIBRATION, ETC.

FATIGUE TESTING DEMONSTRATED SYSTEM o.

SOFTENING DUE TO REPEATED TESTS, HOWEVER, SYSTEM INTEGRITY WAS MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT EXCESSIVE STRONG MOTION SHAKING m

-.--.-.---m.

-, -.,,,----,,rm-e,,..~,,..c-+----,.

CONNECTION TEST o

PURPOSE STUDY THE PERFORMANCE OF TYPICAL CABLE o

TRAY SUPPORT CONNECTIONS.

PROVIDE SPRING CONSTANTS FOR CABLE o

TRAY SUPPORT ANALYTICAL STUDIES.

MOMENT RESISTANCE AS A FUNCTION OF ANGULAR o

~

ROTATION (M VS. 8)

LOAD RESISTANCE AS A FUNCTION OF o

DEFLECTION (F VS. 8)

CYCLES TO FAILURES AT SELECTED VALUES OF o

ANGULAR ROTATION (N VS. 9)

S

-g I I II II i1 (I

ll 3500 M vs. G; Pvs. A Il I(

p

/a.i ! I rh.

~

.-.w m

///////////f////////

II II I I

'l 'l 33 pc l l ii Mys. O; W/.wC'9b Phys i e 40 0.1..

_. _ _. _. L. -..

///////////// ///////

33M II l ll\\

M vs. G

_ _ _L 1_ $_ _ _ _

I 7///////////////////

II

/ /

33E4,3 SED

//

e vs. s I /

/!

i r

// //////////////////

CONNECTION TESTS i

-, ~,., -

,.--,n

..,...,..-,-_---.-,._.,,--e

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

.w.--,,

,,.,,,-,-.--,ne.---

i l

4 1-

' mlilllilllllJ lIf my g

4...mmm,-y r.

q.

r.T [..,,,..; A w

. f x,,

~

35 3..

f-

~I t

l

> <y M

CONNECTION TEST SET-U P G

e e

O 4

EE z

r-I H

\\

o CC s

I

</

i l

e s

't 2,

o i

_J O

\\

<kn om e

a_

>-l H

q I

L L

\\

x,N i

w 2

1 2

2 2

1 a

s a

i l

( m-x) 1N3 WOW

\\

I

1

)

i i

1 RESULTS_

CONNECTIONS EXHIBIT NONLINEAR BEHAVIOR o

CONNECTIONS CAN UNDERGO SIGNIFICANT o

ROTATION WHILE STILL SUSTAINING LOAD ANCHOR-CONNECTIONS CAN UNDERGO REPEATED o

CYCLES AT TESTED ROTATIONS S

S e

h e

CORRELATION STUDY o

PURPOSE UTILIZE RECORDED TEST DATA TO DEVELOP ANALYTICAL MODELS FOR CABLE TRAY SUPPORT o

SYSTEM EVALUATION BRACED-FRAME' ANALYSIS)

OBSERVATIONS (TEST VS.

o BRACE MEMBER LOADS BY ANALYSIS EXCEED TE

.o MEASUREMENTS TESTED SUPPORT RESPONSE (LOAD DISTRIBUTION, ETC.) DOES NOT CORRELATE

~

o WITH ANALYSIS BRACED SYSTEM DISPLACEMENTS BY ANALYSIS

.o ARE LESS THAN TEST RESULTS CONCLUSION o

DAMPING AND CONNECTION BEHAVIOR NEEDS BE INCLUDED IN ANALYTICAL MODELS o

G y-,---,+,,-,w---,_..---. _.,,.

w.,,my,,.

,,,.v

,~ e m --+,. -, -. -.

_y-m.,.mm,me,w..,--,-_.

9 4

I i

e C

0 0

C

~

C C

0 S-O 1

g,

~

3AY e

e O

y

..m.i-i.-- - - -.

.v y-.

y-r.--

,-y y

. ~~..,

,--.m.

-w_-

TEST ANALYSIS toNa1TuDrNAL 3.3 3.6 TEST A TRANSVERSE 5.7 5.4 LONGITUDINAL 3.6 3.5 TEST B TRANSVERSE 6.0 5,2 t.ONa1TUD1NAt 5.8 5.7 TEST C 5.6 TRANSVERSE FUNDAMENTAL MODE COMPARISONS O

i

TEST ANALYSIS LONGITUDINAL

,h Q

TEST A TRANSVERSE 2.6 2.5 t.ONG1TuD1NAL 2.9 2.9 TEST B TRANSVERSE 4.3 4.0 FUNDAMENTAL MODE COMPARISONS (W/O BRACING) e 0

~

AM Ke f

G3 Kb u

P B

i k

2 r

~

1 l

l ROTATIONAL DRACE POST BRACE ANCI!OR STIFFNESS STIFFNESS LOAD LOAD MOMENT DEFL.

(a) "

~"

"I" (K ) E (P)

(B)

(M)

(K )R AD B IN INFINITE O

4.0 0

0.03 O

15

'O.15 3.6 5.0 0.58 1000 5

0.72 2.1 21.4 0.98 3500 0

1.49 0

44.3 2.03 3500 0

2.17 0

.27.8 3.04 1000 0

0 3.33 0

0 4.75

-._-rm.,

i

~

1 TEST COMPARISON OF ANALYTICAL METHODS i

WITH TEST DATA BRACE METHOD BOUNDARY DAMPING DEFLECTION LOAD Q ]I"

{ g' STATIC PIN 7g Q,

[, f RSA PIN

201,

.5'".

47" RSA SPRINGS 201-TE$T IN k

,..r%

.,.y

,-.-,.._,,,-,_-,.w,_p~._,,__,,-.wr,--m-,y,-.,,.,_..,g_m.m,.,,-w p,-

u ~z F-o CC x-. -

2

~

IN3 WOW

~

O e

r e

,-.m.-+-m

---

,-----,,,.,,nww,-,

R_ESULTS CONNECTION FLEXIBILITY MUST BE ACCO FOR TO REFLECT PROPER LOAD DISTRIB o

FREQUENCY CORRELATION o

RESPONSE CORRELATION o

KEY ET JMENTS TO ASSESS FRAGILITY o

ANCHOR TENSION o

ANCHOR ROTATION o

BRACE DISPLACEMENT o

CONNECTION FLEXIBILITY IS MORE IMPORT THAN FLEXURAL STIFFNESS OF THE STRUT o

DETERMINING LATERAL SYSTEM FREQUENCY.

EXTRAPOLATION OF ANALYTICAL MODELS TO OTHER GEOMETRIES NOT DIRECTLY ENVELO o

ROTATION AND DISPLACEMENT TEST CASES.

LIMITS WILL ESTABLISH PRIMARY CRITERIA.

e 1

l

CABLE TRAY SUPPORT PROGRAM SEABROOK STATION UNIT NO. 1 WALKDOWN PHASE I_

B_OUNDING CONFIGURATIONS A PLANT WALKDOWN WAS PERFORMED E NOT BOUNDARY SUPPORT CONFIGURATIONS o

GEOMETRICALLY ENVELOPED BY THE TES CONFIGURATIONS.

THE FOLLOWING DATA WAS RECORDE WALKDOWN FOR EACH BUILDING, ELEVATION o

SECTOR:

CONFIGURATION DESCRIPTION o

NUMBER OF TYPICAL SUPPORT TYPES o

NUMBER OF TRAY TIERS o

ESTIMATED HEIGHT OF THE SUPPOR o

SUPPORT SPACING o

ESTIMATED CABLE FILL o

TYPE OF' PRIMARY CONNECTION o

ATTACHMENT DESCRIPTION o

_m.,-

y

-w

,_.r

+-----'w--

+--g 7

w

-W-r'e*--r--

wNT

=

SEABROOK STATION PHASE I WALKDOWN DATA

SUMMARY

TRAPEZE SUPPORTS TIERS - B HEIGHT - 14'-6" WIDTH - 4'-O" SPAN '- 10'-0" 1

FLOOR TO CEILING TIERS 11 HEIGHT - 23'-O" WIDTH - 4'-O" SPAN - 10'-0" WALL MOUNTED TIERS - 11 HEIGHT - 23'-O" WIDTH - 3'-O" SPAN 6' TO 10'-0" DOUBLE SUPPORTS TIERS - 6 HEIGHT - 15'-O" WIDTH - 6'-O" SPAN 10'-0" THE ABOVE CONFIGURATJONS WILL BE STUDIED WITH

. APPROPRIATE VARIATIONS IN BRACING. TRAY LENGTHS

~ ~

'AND CONDUIT / WIREWAY LOADING.

9 D

,, -,,, - - - - -, - - - - -, - ~ ~ -

-,n-~.--_,,,_-+--,-e-4,

---,,-wem,

,--,,,-,-~,-w

.,.,--nw+.,

v-,,--ewe

<wn,

+---e

CABLE TRAY SUPPORT PROGRAM SEABROOK STATION UNIT NO. 1 DESIGN & AS-CONSTRUCTED PROGRAM BUILDINGS TO BE COMPLETED BY TEST / ANAL AND MAIN STEAM IN THE CONTROL, CONTAINMENT, PAB, ELEC R ALL SUPPORTS FEEDWATER PIPE CHASE AREAS "A E TRAY RE-ARE BEING PREPARED TO SERVE AS INSPECTION.

FIRM THE THE AB0VE "AS-CONSTRUCTED" D CABLE TRAY TEST / ANALYSIS QUALIFICATIO l

CERTIFIED ENGINEERS ARE PREPA I

DRAWINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THESE DRAWINGS ARE ISSUED N45. 2. 6.

ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARD JOB PERMANENT PROJECT RECORDS.

THECERTIFIEDDRAWINGSARECbu TY QUALITY ASSURANCE RECORDS WH OF THE WORKMANSHIP TO FORM T ASSURANCE PACKAGE.

~

.a e

Y

^.

t 1,

( *,,e *,

\\L/

J 9

~

._ ]

y U

(.

m r

n n

J 9

f ug()

l p

al g

g

{3 l

e H

a

=

-1

(- (- h e

1 y'

em n

J

)

q 1

31,G, 4,m ",.

t LI w

n, n

v

~

u I

N x

/

7 I

y$.

N 5

+

r bo h 8

o r

f-

/

l

>l '[

7 _/

u I

f

AS-CONSTRUCTED SKETCHES DESCRIPTION IIEM 0FFSET DIMENSIONS 1

t BRACING MEMBER TYPE OR SIZE 2

TRAY SIZE J

3 CONSTRUCTION IDENTIFICATION 4

i IDENTIFY TRAY HOLD-DOWN 5

IDENTIFY ANCHOR PLATES OR 6

EMBEDDED STRUTS IDENTIFY COMMON MEMBERS AND 7

REFERENCE ASSOCIATED PACKAGES ELEVATIONS 8

HORIZONTAL DIMENSIONS INCLUDING J

9 TRAY S' PAN i

BRACING LOCATION i

10 4

u on- ~. -

,y g

e.

.~

w n---n-.,

-m.

-e.y

-n-c-

IMPLEMENTATION QUALIFICATION PROGRAM e

DIRECTLY BY TEST RESULTS EXTRAPLATION ANALYSIS RESULTS ENVELOPE CONDITIONS, e

, LOCATION SPECIFIC CONDITIONS e

ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS J

e ANALYZE ANY UNIQUE SUPPORT CONFIGURATIONS e

OR CONNECTIONS SUPPORT MODIFICATIONS e

MODIFICATIONS IDENTIFIED TO DATE ADD THRU BOLTS TO BOOT DETAIL e

SUPPORT SAFETY RELATED BUS DUCTS SEPARATE FROM THE CABLE TRAY SUPPORT e

SYSTEM OPEN NRC ISSUES CLOSE-OUT e

1 CLOSE OUT REPORTS WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE L

O 1

_ _ _.. ~. _

s IMPLEMENTATION (CONTINUED) e FSAR REVISION THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE FSAR WILL BE REVISED TO INCORPORATE THE TESTING QUALIFICATION PROGRAM:

l SECTION TITLE 3.2.1 SEISMIC CLASSIFICATION 3.7(B).3 SEISMIC SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS 3.7(B).3.15 ANALYSIS PROCEDURE FOR DAMPING 3.10(B).3 METHODS AND PROCEDURE OF ANALYSIS AND TESTING OF SUPPORTS OF ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT AND INSTRUMENTATION INCOPORATION OF AS-CONSTRUCTED DR'AWINGS e

VERIFY THE ADEQUACY OF BOUNDING CONFIGURATIONS ASSURE THAT ANY DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION DEVIATIONS ARE ADDRESSED IN THE QUALIFICATION PROGRAM 4

0 t

e

,--.----r,<,

s,

c 4

IMPLEMENTATION (CONTINUED) e FINAL REPORT DOCUMENT THE DETAILS AND RESULTS OF THE QUALIFICATION PROGRAM.

T11E FINAL REPORT WILL INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO:

DETAILS PRESENTED IN THE

SUMMARY

REPORT 1.

2.

TEST RESULTS 3.

QUALIFICATION ANALYSIS RESULTS 4.

EQE EVALUATION REPORT

.5.

CLOSE-OUT OF ISSUES 6.

CLOSE-OUT PROGRAM OF CALCULATIONS 7.

FSAR REVISIONS e

FINAL REPORT ADDENDUM ISSUE AN ADDENDUM TO INCLUDE THE INCORPORATION OF AS-CONSTRUCTED DRAWINGS J

l n

i e

~

I PROGRAM STATUS LEGEND C - Completed I-P - In Process F - Future STATUS A.

Pre-Test C

1.

Develop test configurations (representative)

Perform walkdown C

Develop and approve test reports 2.

C 3.

Develop RRS C

4 Develop time history input C

Pre-assemble configurations A and B at seabrook 5.

Develop analytical models and perform dynamic C

6.

analys,is for correlation C

Establish test instrumentation 7.

C Perform pre-test inspection of configurations B.

B.

Testint C

1.

Test A - trapeze C

2.

Test 3 - floor to ceiling C

3.

Test C - T9/T10 and vertical trays I-P 4.

Connection testing Comparison of Seabrook trav details with Seismic troerience C.

Date - tot c

1.

Perform site walkdown C

2.

Perform comparison C

~

3.

Issue Final Report O

e 43 e

s v-1 LEGEb'D C - Completed I-P - In Process F - Future i

l f

STATUS i

D.

Analysis i

Perform walkdown to identify extrapoistion models C

1.

and issues l

I-P 2.

Perform correlation analysis I-P Perform extrapolation analysis 3.

F Perform walkdown to review extrapolation results 4

F Perform additional analysis (as required) 5.

F Develop support modifications (as required) 6.

E.

Close-out F

Close-out of program and licensing issues 1.

F 2.

Develop qualification s.rgument F

3.

Revise FSAR F

Review (as available) as-constructed details 4.

F 5.

Close-out calculations F

6.

Issue Final Report Issue addendus to Final Report when As-Builts are 7.

F complete L

t e

44-t

,.