ML20141G079

Procedure K-2836, Spec for Dynamic Qualification Criteria for Nuclear Safety-Related Equipment

ML20141G079
Person / Time
Site:	Clinton
Issue date:	02/21/1986
From:	Heider R SARGENT & LUNDY, INC.
To:
Shared Package
ML19298D900	List: ML20141G079 U-600475, Forwards Responses to SER Outstanding Issue 7ii Re Seismic & Dynamic Qualification of Equipment Discussed in Sser (NUREG-0853).Proprietary Encls Withheld
References
K-2836, NUDOCS 8604230272
Download: ML20141G079 (27)

Text

n

. un y n c mm;;> : wym q;n,w.ry;m n.m ynv w sqKc

~.v.ww; n

9w"=r b.' w....,f b:

I~

F i WD.h*"7-#~ $ 1 SW, A' Y:%.. plW. g'Q WS:'." ' 4 a,.

m.c

~. o mw

, c, o. s..,..

t :.

E' W.l &v.y.s5fkO cD. - - -

C&.l %

ta

~

L C)%Wh&s,w=S$$NMWikf1T-?NO%n?n,

n. $;i '.i. '2.~K' L f. 't V

<,f.

9 MY l

~

a RP,M,

,4 v-M E;.,

m ~n y./ 6,.A,.v.m c w E., A m.. ah_,

NN cwyn u y,-

s m,.

.a

• i -.. m v c,Sp' 6*,W; G S...

?$ L L 23 g 3-g !'%A e%;;m t#4

c(y

/s Wy a j - j ~.s

.s y

~

~ 3 u,

.l.

.I s, y,..., a..p.g.ln. cc;

. w f...,g ',...

p c.zs,s

, ; R.. D.,; g >

w4 y ;,

,; th

.<.y,w.

,,.y~,.

y

, m. m. <

, ;,, _,. w a :. m,

.s..

. ~.

1..,

,.w;,r,n.

w_ s y g: = _. >.: y o;i a

.m m6',

1

. - - = a.::.

uv..

n. *y -:y. r

_ m m_

• * ~ - -

- ~

,, 4,.

s, N u z

- q.-

w? a:

~.

ATTACHMENT #2 4

x c

s.c

.e ys F-SPECIFICATION FOR DYNAMIC QUALIFICATION CRITERIA r

af 2

> +.

e 2.,g$

?,

t u

o

.L.,,.--.,....-,

~

.u,

~.

1 n

.s.

..,2 j ' s. f

^

,.c w y

s

.., ~n<

..,.. o,..

..,^

~

p.

s y*:.. s T,,.

. ~.. -

1,

..._.,.a

~

s... c - O

J.,

w.

.mc ~s x -

<e L

V*

..,.y, 9e.'

n.

• ~

_.*:l"

..m

. L >.,.*....

,a w,

+,,,

~.

. c,j e,

h.

c

.y...

fs z. t ;.f., -_ *,. 4,4. Y..,;

.~*.

• ' T7"-

.,4

-.y.,,..

e >

s

• =.

• A y

2

<~

- ~

... ~,,. ~

s

+,

f'

- U.,w.yC.f,

...*c a.

9;,*,-,,__..,G. W,. -y,.

l.x,_

yr

- 3

--9,,7, g~..,n; :.. :

w,,

.. - - w

~

m.

a-o p

- n. m' J,. W.-- 9,,'

x,a..g.M L m, q

.i,

m m

.mg

..m-

,1, %p^ 3,.; p s.~

+

.... +.

w3

.e 2'.

.+',%.. g>.,e,1, n~

,_%r

g..

-. t'

-.% 3 x

e.., a q,=;< s.-

1:

s,

,j' v

>q*,

v.

s 7_n

' ' +

e s

1 m..

,,/,_

y,- :e.e. - r.. ;, _ ~.

s g

~,

t,

- m

.~

=

~

w

-a

,#)

p h

^ >.

,y.

,: s n,

q.s 1 5:>.,

. - a,g <...

.s

-g s _. *"

, _ i y %. :

.., n s.

-4.-

2 w

r..

+

~

r

..,z q :

.~.

n..,' %.

s

,.. r.

-~ :v.g.

...+. ; w g..

,c-,!

n i.;.

- ~,

y

,.n

.~

t

/

" #' b L

2 7

C j 4, f-t 8604230g7=, 860418-.

PDR ADOCK 05000461 f

E PDR c

I

.m.

..,h.

..r

'..5~

r,

~21 w

/

~

' s,,7,"

t

.s

^y. '.

L

'AL.

r <? >

~;

. /

1. . a. 4

.4 m 5

,e c) t,(

s

.. $,.yr.. ;

e

,ej, s

s 4

Y b - D M

s 8

9 n.s',

. j

,. j

~ ~ - -

, ;.y-rr,y, 4.

s m - 3u.;

(

., g

,.+.

.. jg _' s. ;b.

f #

ai-

,1&.

A; 4

.P,

$[

(.

yg

-n

[

~

SARGENT & LUNDY

• s, ENGINEERS CHicAco

/

f NUCLEAR SAFETY RELATED Spec. No. K-2836 Project: 4536-32 Issue:

Orig., 02-21-86 SPECIFICATION FOR DYNAMIC QUALIFICATION CRITERIA FOR NUCLEAR SAFETY-RELATED EQUIPMENT CLINTON POWER STATION - UNIT 1 ILLINUIS POWER COMPANY ISSUE

SUMMARY

PACE ISSUF _

DATE PAGES AFFECTED Origine1 02-21-86 All I

o V

O-IS-1 v

Fina1 t-n

)

-..,- ~, ; m :._ _n _4

. _ a w, _. - ;_. _ _ _.. : 2.;

. w a

SARGENT & LUNDY E N GIN E E R S CHIC AGO q

/

NUCLEAR SAFETY RELATED Spec. No. K-2836 Project: 4536-32 Issue:

Orig., 02-21-86 CERTIFICATION OF SPECIFICATION FOR DYNAMIC QUALIFICATION CRITERIA FOR NUCLEAR SAFETY-RELATED EQUIPMENT CLINTON POWER STATION - UNIT 1 ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY I certify that this Specification was prepared by me or under my supervision and

'that I am a registered professional engineer under the laws of the State of Illinois.

n T

O Certified By:

4 Y

Date:

February 21, 1986

/,

~-

.,,1 C,. H E/op$ '

f

• '62-28850 Seal q,! REG 151ERED

PROFESSION AL,

['.

ENGINEER j+

OF R q,'l I N%-sss/,/,

9

\\

O

~

-Revision:

Certified By:

Date:

• v Final s-

=

..._..__.._..a SARGENT & LUNDY

-ENGINEERS CHIC AGO

,/

Project: 4536-32 Spec. No. K-2836

. O Issue:

Orig., 02-21-86 SPECIFICATION FOR DYNAMIC QUALIFICATION CRITERIA FOR NUCLEAR SAFETY-RELATED EQUIPMENT CLINTON POWER STATION - UNIT 1 ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY APPROVAL PAGE NUCLEAR SAFETY-RELATED ITEMS ARE PART OF TilIS SPECIFICATION ISSUE PREPARED BY REVIEWED BY APPROVED BY Orig.

02-21-86 O

,r

_Q

. /

O AP-1 Final v

6 w

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

~.,

,t-i a

SARGENT & LUNDY s

ENGINEERS u

cHacaco

/

. Project: 4536-32 Spec. No. K-2836 7"

L3 Issue:

Orig., 02-21-86

/

CLINTON POWER STATION - UNIT 1 ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY SPECIFICATION FOR DYNAMIC QUALIFICATION CRITERIA FOR NUCLEAR SAFETY-RELATED EQUIPMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PACE NO.

1.

Genera 1.........................................................

2

2. Definitions......................................................

2 3.

Bid Requirements and Contractor's Responsibilities..............

5 4.

Qualification Requirements......................................

6 5.

Qua li fic a t io n P rog rams..........................................

6 6.

Supporting Tests................................................

8 O

g.

7.

Qualification Tests.............................................

9 7

\\~/

8.

Analytical Techniques...........................................

10 9.

Supporting Calculations for Qualification Tests.................

10 10.

Analytical Qualification........................................

10 11.

Foundation Loads................................................

16 12.

Documentation...................................................

16 13.

Suggested Form for Dynamic Qualification Reports................

16

\\

_1_

l l

y~

=_w.-

.. m s

SARGENT & LUNDY ENGINEERS

?

CHICAGO g-

/

Project: 4536-32 Spec. No.,R-2836

/}.

Issue:

0 rig., 02-21-86 1V

.y CLINTON POWER STATION - UNIT 1 ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY SPECIFICATION FOR DYNAMIC QUALIFICATION CRITERIA FOR NUCLEAR SAFETY-RELATED EQUIPMENT 1.

GENERAL

1.1 Scope

This Specification establishes the dynamic qualification criteria for Nuclear Safety-Related (NSR) mechanical equipment, con-trols and instrumentation and for Class IE electrical equipment.

This criteria indicates the responsibility of the Contractor and provides the dynamic qualification requirements and typical proce-dures to qualify equipment.

1.2 Attachments

Only one attachment is used with this Specification and is included with the Project Equipment Procurement Specification (Project Specification). Project Specification attachment includes the response spectra at the applicable equipment locations (eleva-tions).

s 1.3 Applicable Documents _:

The latest revision of the following docu-

!()7 )

ments, when applicatae, forms a part of this Specification.

In the 7

event of a conflict between the referenced document and this Speci-

'~

fication, precedence shall be given to the criteria stated in this Specification.

1.3.1 ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, the edition specified in the Project Specification.

1.3.2 Applicable ANSI N45 standards, as specified in the Project Specification.

1.3.3-IEEE standards, as specified in the Project Specification.

2.-

DEFINITIONS 2.1 Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE):

The earthquake that produces the maximum vibratory ground motion for which all NSR structures, sys-tems and components are designed to perform their safety function.

This earthquake is expected to be the largest earthquake which could occur at the site during the 1,ife of the plant and in some cases is called the Design Basis Earthquake (DBE).

i 2.2 Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE):

The earthquake that produces a vibratory motion for which those structures, systems and components of the nuclear power plant are necessary for continued operation are

()

designed to perform their safety functions without undue risk to the health and safety of the public. m

--n_.~.-

.s SARGENT & LUNDY E N GIN E E R S CHICAGO g

/

.pec. No. K-2836

..f Issue:

Orig., 02-21-86

'(

u-2.3 Nuclear Safety-Related Equipment: (Seismic or Dynamic Category I Equipment) 2.3.1 The equipment necessary to assure:

The integrity of the reactor coolant pressure boundary, a.

b.

the capability to shut down the reactor and maintain it in a safe shutdown. condition, or c.

the capability to prevent or mitigate the consequences of accidents which could result in potential off site exposures in excess of the limits stated in 10 CFR 100.

2.3.2 Electrical equipment falling in this category is called Class IE equipment.

2.3.3 All NSR equipment are either active or nonactive.

2.3.4 Active Equipment:

Equipvent that must perform a mechanical motion during the course of accomplishing a system safety function.

2.3.5 Nonactive Equipment:

Equipment that must maintain its pressure j

boundary and/or str ctural integrity (but not necessarily perform

,\\

mechanical motion or have certain deflection limits) during the course of accomplishing a system safety function.

2.3.6 All equipment that is not designated as NSR but could degrade the integrity of a NSR component, shall be treated the same as a NSR nonactive equipment.

2.4 Seismic Loads:

The additional loads that may be imposed on the equipment due to the occurrence of an earthquake.

2.4.1 Hydrodynamic Loads (HL) - Boiling Water Reactors Only:

The loads that may be imposed on equipment due to the building vibratory motion resulting from the a-:tuation and discharge of main steam Safety-Relief Valves (SRVS) and/or high energy line breaks.

Vibratory motion due to Hydrodynamic Loads may be represented in the form of Response Spectra.

2.5 Floor Acceleration The maximum acceleration of a particular building floor (or equip-ment mounting) resulting from a given dynamic excitation applied tu the building.

The maximum floor acceleration can be obtained from the floor response spectrum as the acceleration at high frequencies (the flat portion of the response spectrum curve) and sometimes referred to as the Zero Period Acceleration (ZPA).

~ C

SARGENT & LUNDY a

f ENGINEERS CHICAGO g

/

opec. No. K-2836 Issue:

Orig., 02-21-86' R':'%)

2.6 Response Spectrum:

_A plot of maximum responses of a family of idealized single-degree of freedom linear elastic oscillators sub-jected to transient vibratory base input motion. Each damping value produces a different response spectrum.

2.6.1 Floor Response Spectrum:

The response spectrum when the transient base excitation is the floor motion rather than the ground motion.

The response spectra at the elevations where the equipment will be located are included in Attachment A of this document and may be called Design Response Spectrum (DRS) or Required Response Spectrum (RRS).

2.6.2 Test Response Spectrum:

The response spectrum resulting from the actual motion of the shake table for specified damping values. They may be derived by analytical techniques or by using spectrum anal-ysis equipment, i.e., real time analyzer.

2.7 Dynamic Characteristics:

The characteristics that are needed to determine the dynamic behavior of the equipment due to any forcing,

function. These characteristics are:

2.7.1 Natural Frequencies: Free vibration frequencies of the system.

2.7.2 Mode Shapes:

1.e vibrational shape of the system when vibrating at

/CI one of its natural trequencies.

Each natural frequency has a dif-

\\;.

ferent mode shape.

2.7.3 Damping Factor: A factor that indicates the rate at which the cyclic motion of a structural system is reduced.

2.8 Resonance

The condition that exists when the equipment has the same predominant period as does the applied forcing function.

component / structure /

2.9 Mathematical Model:

The idealization of a equipment as an assemblage of linear systems suitable for detailed dynamic analyses.

2.10 Detailed Dynamic Analysis:

An analysis procedure for multi-degree of freedom systems where the responses are obtained for each normal mode and then combined to predict the true response and the asso-ciated stress and deflection due to any forcing function.

2.11 Simplified Dynamic Analysis:

An analysis that evaluates the stresses and deflections due.to steady forces acting through the center of gravity of the equipment.

These forces depend on the fundamental natural frequency of the equipment and appropriate am-plification factor-to account for the possible participation of higher modes.

O 2.12 Static Analysis:

An analysis that evaluates the stresses and de-flections due to equivalent steady state forces acting through the center of gravity of the equipment.

These forces shall be chosen

" L

SARGENT & LUNDY e

C N GlN C E R S 8

cHecAco

/

Spec. No. K-2836

/~N Issue: Orig., 02-21-86 conservatively such that it results in stresses and deflections higher than those predicted by detailed or simplified dynamic anal-yses.

2.13 Supporting Tests:

Tests that are conducted to determine the prop-erties and characteristics of the equipment and to provide data needed for the analysis or qualification tests.

These tests are either dynamic or static.

2.14 Qualification Tests:

Tests that are conducted to prove that the j

equipment shall perform its safety function when subjected to the loading combinations associated with different postulated plant con-j ditions.

J I

2.15 Device:

An item of electric equipment that is used in connection 1

with, or as an auxiliary to, other pieces of equipment.

\\

2.16 Assembly: Two or more devices (or elements) sharing a common mount-ing or supporting structure.

I 2.17 Failure: That condition when an equipment can no longer perform its intended safety function.

2.18 Malfunction:

Imp [oper performance of mechanical or electrical equipment.

.%s, 3.

BID REQUIREMENTS AND CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITIES 3.l' Bidder shall submit an outline of his proposed dynamic qualification procedure as a part of the proposal.

3.2 Bidder shall be responsible for resolving with the Consulting Engi-neers any uncertainties regarding the specifications and require-ments of dynamic qualification, prior to award of Contract.

3.3 The dynamic qualification shall be achieved by testing and/or anal-ysis.

When testing is employed, Contractor shall send the Consult-ing Engineers a detailed test program for review, 4 weeks prior to conducting the test.

If the Consulting Engin'eers are not satisfied, the test procedure shall be modified accordingly.

l 3.4 The choice between testing and analysis may be made by the Contrac-tor.

However, the selected qualification program shall satisfy the requirements of this Specific ~ation.

3.5 After Contractor submits his equipment drawings for final review, he is required to submit the dynamic qualification report fo r the test results and/or dynamic calculations. The drawings, test results and analytical calculations will be reviewed fo r acceptability by the Consulting Engineers.

v ma

n__-

= -

n

-=w__._-.--

SARGENT & LUNDY ENGINCERS CHIC AGO j

/

Spec. No. K-2836 rw Issue:

Orig., 02-21-86 E p)

M 3.6 Contractor shall answer all appropriate questions the Consulting Engineers may submit after reviewing the dynamic qualification re-port.

If the answers given are not acceptable to the Consulting Engineers, Contractor shall modify the method of dynamic testing and/or the analytical procedure to satisfy the requirements of this Specification.

3.7 In cases where the equipment fails to withstand the loads associated with the postulated plant condition under the dynamic qualification program, Contractor shall be responsible for making all necescary changes to his equipment, at his own expense, so that the dynamic test results and/or the analytical calculations meet the dynamic qualification criteria requirements.

4.

QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS 4.1 The dynamic qualification of NSR equipment is achieved by assuring its structural integrity and verifying the operability of active equipment when subjected to equivalent conditions which would be seen during the postulated plant conditions.

Contractor may select one of the following qualification programs:

4.1.1 Qualification by tests only.

I 4.1.2 Qualification by analytical methods only. This method alone, shall not be used to show operability of active valve assemblies.

4.1.3 Qualification by any combination of supporting tests, supporting calculations, qualification tests and analytical calculations.

I 4.2 Regardless of the' qualification programs chosen, the conditions and requirements for those portions of the program are stated in the following sections and shall be met.

5.

QUALIFICATION PROGRAMS 5.1 Many factors control the design of a qualification program.

If qualification is to be achieved by analysis only, all assumptions used in the analysis must be given and justified.

If testing alone is used for qualification, all applicable loads shall be simulated during the test unless it can be shown that the simultaneous appli-cation of certain loads is not necessary for assuring the equip-ments' safety function.

5.2 Qualification by Analytical Methods Only:

Analytical Calculations only may be used as a qualification method in the following cases:

5.2.1 When maintaining the structural integrity is assurance that the com-O ponent performs its safety function.

G 5.2.2 When the equipment is structurally simple. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

9

- _ ---. =. - ~ -.

. - =

SARGENT & LUNDY ENGINEERS-CHICAGO j

/

Spec. No. K-2836 Issue:

Orig., 02-21-86~

u 5.2.3

' When the response of the equipment is linear or is a simple nonlinear behavior.

5.2.4 When the ef fect.of attached components and the superposition of load conditions are too complex for testing.

5.3 Qualification by Testing only:

Qualification by testing only is recormnended when the following conditions are fulfilled:

5.3.1.

The test machine is capable of producing the required motion in-accordance with the conditions stated in Section 7 of this Specifi-cation.

5.3.2 The applicable loads are of a, simple nature or it is possible to simulate them.

5.3.3 The test table allows the simulation of actual mounting.

5.3.4 It is possible to monitor the functional capability of active equip-ment during the test.

5.3.5 The structural configuration of the equipment is extremely complex and beyond the capability of mathematical modeling techniques.

(

5.3.6 The response of the equipment is expected to be extremely nonlinear.

C 5.4 Qualification by Supporting Tests and Analytical Methods (Combina-tion):

5.4.1 Supporting tests may be used to determine:

Deflection limits within which operability is maintained.

a.

b.

Dynamic parameters needed for constructing or verifying mathematical models.

c.

Damping values.

d.

Assumption to be used in the analysis.

e.

The amount of nonlinearity involved.

5.4.2 Supporting tests may be static or dynamic. The dynamic test may be conducted using shake tables or single point exciters.

5.4.3 Af ter collecting the required information from supporting tests, analytical techniques may be used, to show, that the structural integrity and/or operability of equipment is maintained without un-dertaking a complete test program.

It must be noted that without performing some supporting tests, analytical calculations alone are weak evidence for assuring operability.

v 6

SARGENT & LUNDY ENGINEERS cHicAco

}

/

p Spec. No. K-2836 O~'

Issue:

Orig., 02-21-86 5.5 Supporting tests supplemented with Qualification Tests:

5.5.1 Supporting tests for these programs may lead to the following t.ype of information:

a.

Natural frequencies.

b.

Amount of cross coupling.

Significance of simultaneous application of all applicable loads and c.

possibility of decoupling them without af fecting the reliability of the equipment.

5.5.2 Such supporting tests may simp 1.ify the qualification tests as they may permit justification for, single axis excitation, the use of a less complex wave form to simulate the forcing function and a reduced number of loading conditions.

5.6 Supporting Analysis and Qualification Tests:

This approach may be used for qualification of assemblies such as control boards, switch-gear assemblies, vertical pumps and motors, diesel generator units, etc.

An analysis approach may be used to determine the ove'ra,ll equipment integrity and response at the subassembly or component

['

locations and the su~ assemblies may be tested to the response levels that are predicted analytically, 6.

SUPPORTING TESTS n

6.1 Supporting tests may be either dynamic or static in nature.

6.1.1 Dynamic Supporting' Tests:

In these tests, the equipment may be excited by using a shake table, or single point exciters applied at a sufficient number of points to simulate the forcing function.

The excitations shall be of sufficient strength to excite all signifi-cant modes of the equipment. Typical data obtained from such tests are:

Dynamic characteristics of the equipment (natural frequencies, mode a.

shapes and damping factors),

b.

Cross coupling ef fects, i.e., the response in any direction due to the excitation in any other direction (in situations where in-stalling accelerometers in some locations is impractical, cross-coupling may be estimated based on the response of the available accelerometer locations).

The significance of the response of the equipment to vibratory mo-c.

tion to determine the necessity of combining equipment nozzle loads with other dynamic loads. _. _. _ _ ---

.u.

.. um SARGENT & LUNDY ENGINEERS CHIC AGO g

/

g spec. No. K-2836 j-s Issue:

Orig., 02-21-86 6.1.2 Static Supporting Tests:

These tests are conducted by applying static forces on the equipment.

Typical data obtained from these tests are:

a.

Static deflections and flexibility parameters that are needed for-constructing a mathematical model.

b.-

Distortion in the equipment casing, due to nozzle loads, and the de fo rma tion limits within which the equipment would maintain its functionability.

7.

QUALIFICATION TESTS 7.1 Active equipment shall be tested under operating conditions in ac-cordance with the requirements of IEEE Std. 344 and USNRC Regulatory Guide - 1.100, " Seismic Qualification of Electric Equipment for Nu-clear Power Plants".

Equivalent operating loads shall be simulated to act on nonactive equipment, but the equipment itself need not be un' der an operating condition.

The following requirements are con-ditions for a properly conducted qualification test and shall be fulfilled:

7.2 Dynawie Input:

The input for dynamic testing shall be determined

/~

from the floor motic, and shall be modified, as necessary, by the

(

test procedure and setup.

7.3 When single-axis excitation is used, cross-coupling shall be con-sidered as follows:

When performing the supporting tests the extent of the response in a.

any other direction shall be determined. To explain, let r..

be the ratio of the response in the j direction to the excitation *ln the i direction, and determine r r

r r

and r xy, rxz, yx, yz, zx zy Where x, y, z are the three principal directions of the equipment or any other set of orthogonal axes which may produce higher response, b.

The dynamic coefficients to be used in qualification tests shall be based on the values obtained from the design response spectrum in-craased by the cross-coupling factors, r..

obtained from the sup-porting tests or estimated by other accep'tk,ble means.

7.4 Mounting

The equipment shall be mounted to simulate the recom-mended service mounting.

If this cannot be done, the effect of the actual supporting structure shall be considered in determining the input motion.

7.5 Nozzle Loads: The Project Specification will state the expected (or

(T calculated) piping reaction loads on the equipment which shall be

(,,/

used in the qualification.

"w.--

=

. ~ - -

~r n

' SARGENT & LUNDY E N GIN E E R S Chic Aco

(

/

Spec. No. K-2836 Issue:

Orig., 02-21-86

,,-ss

+

1 7.6 Other Loads: Any other loads that may act on the equipment (mechani-cal,' electrical or instrument) during the postulated dynamic event must be simulated during the test, unless the supporting test (or calculations) show that they are insignificant.

7.7 Basis of Acceptability: Inspection shall be made by the test conduc-tor to assure that no structural damage has occurred.

For active equipment, sufficient monitoring devices shall be used to evaluate the performance of the tested equipment during the test. The equip-ment shall demonstra?.e its ability to per fo rm its intended safety function when subjected to all applicable loads.

A test report, which includes all test data, results and conclusions, shall be submitted to the Consulting Engineers for review.

A suggested format for the test r6;; ort is presented in Section 13.

It is recom-mended that the Contractor follow the outline of Section 13 fo r documenting the dynamic testing. This will facilitate the review of the material in the report and ensure its completeness.

8.

ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES 8.1 Analytical calculations may be used for one of three purposes:

8.1.1 To develop supporting data for performing qualification tests.

/

(\\--'

8.1.2 To qualify the aquipment using the data obtained from supporting tests.

8.1.3 To qualify the equipment without tests.

9.

SUPPORTING CALCULATIdNS FOR QUALIFICATION TESTS 9.1 Calculations may be used to evaluate the effect of the floor motion on the base of the equipment.

This would be in such cases as a device installed in a panel or cabinet, an equipment mounted on a complex structure, a valve mounted on a piping system, etc.

Calcula-tions may also be used to justify reducing the requirements for qualification testing.

10.

ANALYTICAL QUALIFICATION 10.1 The methods to be used for qualification, by calculations only or by calculations based on supporting test results, are stated in this section.

These methods will depend on the type of equipment and supporting structure.

The following defines some of the possible cases and associated analytical methods which may be used in each case:

10.1.1 Rigid Equipment and Rigid Support:

(

a.

The equipment, as well as its support can be considered rigid if it can be shown that its fundamental natural frequency does not fall in 41..

... - - - -. _. ~.. -

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

,m SARGENT & LUNDY e

ENGINEERS cMicAco

/

Spec. No. K-2836 7s Issue:

Orig., 02-21-86

(<' i 1

eJ the frequency range below the high frequency asymptote (ZPA) of the RRS.

b.

For rigid equipment supported by a rigid structure, the equipment motion shall be the same as the floor motion without amplification.

The horizontal and vertical dynamic accelerations shall be taken as the zero period acceleration from the floor response spectrum, for the elevation at which the equipment is located, as provided by the Consulting Engineers.

The acceleration values obtained shall be used to perform a static c.

analysis as described in Section 10.7.1 of this Specification.

10.1.2 Rigid Equipment and Flexible Support:

In cases where the equipment itself is a rigid body whereas its sup-a.

porting system is flexible, the overall system may be idealized as a single-degree of freedom system consisting of an equivalent mass and spring system, b.

In cases where the equipment and support systems' natural frequency falls in the frequency range below the high frequency asymptote (ZPA), the system shall be remodelled using a multi-degree of free-

'jN dom idealization.

.' dynaric analysis shall be pe r fo rmed using an

(,)

appropriate damping factor.

If the natural frequency is greater k>

than or equal to the ZPA, a static analysis shall be performed using the acceleration value corresponding to the ZPA of the RRS.

A conservative static analysis may use the peak acceleration from the RRS.

The selection of damping values to be used with the response spectrum c.

curves in determining the acceleration is a significant fa c t o r.

Un-less the contrary is stated in the Project Specification, only the low damping factors (1% for Upset / Service Level B and 2% for Emer-gency/ Faulted / Service Levels C and D) shall be accepted.

Higher damping values may be accepted only if they can be justified.

10.1.3 Flexible Equipment:

In cases where the equipment cannot be considered as a rigid body and a.

where the equipment cannot be modeled as a single-degree of freedom system, it shall be modeled as a multi-degree of freedom system.

l l

b.

A dynamic analysis shall be performed and the natural frequencies, mode shapes and modal participation factors for each mode shall be computed.

c.

Finally, by combining all the significant modes, the resultant stresses and deflections shall be de te rmined using a detailed 4

(modal) dynamic analysis method. _ _

nno

.s SARGENT & LUNDY ENGINEFRS cwicaco

/

Spec. No..K-2836 Issue:

Orig., 02-21-86 DJ M

10.1.4 Equipment Supplied with Attached Piping:

a.

For equipment supplied with attached piping, due to construction requirements, the Contractor shall perform an analyses for the at-tached piping as well as the equipment.

b.

The analysis shall satisfy the piping design criteria specified in the Project Specification.

c.

The procedure for analysis shall be determined according to the situation.

If the equipment is attached to the floor, then the equipment shall be analyzed first to determine the input to the piping.

However, if the equipment is attached to the piping only, (pipe mounted) the ar.alysis of the piping shall yield the loads to be used in the analysis of the equ'ipment.

10.1.5 Equipment Supported by Dif ferent Buildings or Dif ferent Elevations within the Same Building:

This is usually the case for piping, HVAC ducts and cable trays.

a.

b.

Stresses resulting from relative displacements at various support

[,

locations for systems identified above shall be superimposed to the stresses produced i-the system due to inertia ef fects.

(W Additional ' restraints, supports or other means shall be employed to c.

limit or reduce the high response loads.

10.2 Plant Conditions / Service Levels / Loading Combinations The loading combinations are defined in accordance with different real' and postulated plant conditions / equipment service levels (ASME, Sec. III, Components).

These plant conditions / equipment service levels shall be classified as stated in the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division 1, and in the USNRC Regulatory Guide - 1.48 " Design Linits and Loading Combination for Seismic Category I Fluid Systems Components".

The same concept of plant condition / equipment service levels shall be applied on all mechan-ical and electrical equipment, as well as control and instrumenta-tion.

However, if the stresses and deflections of the more severe loading condition / service level meets the design limits of the less severe loading condition / service level, it may not be required to check the additional loading conditions / service levels. The loading combinations for the same plant condition / service level shall depend on whether the equipment is a pressure retaining (fluid system com-ponent) or a nonpressure retaining (nonfluid system component).

In addition, the design stress limits shall depend on whether the equipment is classified as active or nonactive (passive).

\\

~---- - -.-.-.

SARGENT & LUNDY

+

E N GIN E E R S s

cHicAco

/

+

Spec. No. K-2836 A

Issue:

Orig., 02-21-86 10.3

. Service / Design Limits:

Unless otherwise stated in the Project Specification, there shall be no deflection limits required for non-active equipment.

However, for active equipment the deflection limits shall be those maximum deflections which would not impair the operability of the equipment. These limits shall be determined from supporting tests.

Engineering judgment shall only be accepted in simple and clear cases. The stress limits for nonactive fluid system equipment shall be as stated in the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III.

The stress limits for nonfluid system equipment (HVAC, controls, instrumentations, electrical equipment, etc.) which are not active are as indicated below.

For active equipment, the stress limits may be the same as those for nonactive equipment if the exact deflections were calculated, i.e., on an elastic basis for stresses below material yield and on an elastic plastic basis for stresses above material yield, 'and found to be within the limits of operability.

If the deflections were calculated on an clastic basis, then the stresses should not be allowed to exceed the yield, or equivalent yield, limits as shown in Table 10.3.

~

10.3.1 Stress Limits for Active Fluid System Equipment:

10.4 Dynamic Loads:

The dynamic. loads shall.be obtained, in the hori-zontal and vertical directions, from the corresponding resporise

[

spectra provided by the Consulting Engineers (see Attachment A) for

("V the two postulated accidents, upset and emergency conditions.

The horizontal dynamic loads shall be applied in the two horizontal principal directions simultaneously along with the vertical dynamic loads.

10.5 Nozzle Loads:

The Project Specification will specify the nozzle loads which shall be used in the qualification.

10.6 Operating Loads:

All loads resulting from the operation of the equipment such as torque due to rotating parts, vibratory loads due to eccentricities, etc.

10.7 Methods of Analysis: Acceptable analytical procedures, for the var-l ious conditions, are described in the following sections:

l l

//A

SARGENT & LUNDY CNGINEERS

.o

' s CHIC AGO F

/

Spec. No. K-2836 Q

Issue: Orig., 02-21-86 d

TABLE 10.3 - STRESS LIMITS FOR EQUIPMENT & SUPPORTS Stress Limits for ASME Section III Equipment and Plant Supports (use Stress Limits for Operating appropriate class Non - ASME Equipment Condition Loading Combination and subsections) and Supports Active Nonactive Equipt. Zquipt.

Weight + Pressure +

Service Se rvice AISC Steel Construction Normal Thermal Expansion +

Limit Limit Manual Sections 1.5 & l.6 g

Equipt. Operation Loads A

A Weight + Pressure +

• Service Service

• AISC Steel Construction Thermal Expansion +

Limit Limit Manual, Sections 1. 5. &

g Upset Equipt. Operating Loads B

B 1.6 multiplied by 1.33

+UpsetCondigion (Per AISC Section 1.5.6)

Dynamic Loads O

• AISC Steel Construction rQ Weight + Pressure +

Manual, Section 1.5 4 f

b Emerge ncy Thermal Expansion +

Service Service 1.6 multiplied by 1.6 g

and Equipt. Operating Loads + Limit Limit not to exceed 0.95 S y

Faulted Emergency Conjition B or C C or D (Per NUREC 0.800, Para-Dynamic Loads graph 3.8.4.5.6) (addi-tional 1/3 increa=e in allowable per AISC 1.5.6 is not permitted)

• For active components deflection analysis shall be performed fbr verifying operability.

In addition, operability of active valve assemblieu shall be demonstrated by testing, (dynamic or static pull tests).

Notes:

1) Equipment operating loads are those loads associated with the operation of the equipment being qualified. Equipment operating loads include but are not limited to:

a) Piping nozzle reactions b) Motor start up and running torque c) Valve seating torque and/or thrust d) Thrust load on fans and pumps

2) Upset condition dynamic loads include the operating basis earth-quake plus other postulated dynamic loads as identified in the Project Specification.

(

3) Emergency condition dynamic loads include the safe shutdown earthquake plus other postulated dynamic loads as identified in the Project Specification. &

3

_u 2 u.uu ---

m---

r--

m_ __ __

-a SARGENT & LUNDY ENGINEERS i

.t CHICAGO Spec. No. K-283'6 l

Issue: Orig., 02-21-86

/

s h

v 10.7.1 Static Analysis:

If it can be shown that the equipment and its l

support are rigid, a static analysis may be performed to determine the stresses and deflections due to dynamic loads. In this case, the dynamic forces shall be determined by multiplying the mass of the subassembly or parts of the equipment times the maximum floor dy-namic acceleration at the base of the equipment (zero period ac-i celeration from the response spectra).

These forces shall be ap-plied through the center of gravity of the subassembly or the part of the equipment.

The stresses resulting from each force (in each of the three directions) shall be combined by taking the square root of the sum of the squares (SRSS) to yield the dynamic stresses.

The dynamic deflections (deflections due to dynamic loads) shall be cal-culated in the same manner. These dynamic stresses and deflections shall be added to all stresses and deflections resulting from all applicable loads, to obtain the final resultant stresses and deflec-tions, which shall be compared with the design limits stated in Section 10.3.

10.7.2 Simplified Dynamic Analysis:

A simplified dynamic analysis may be performed, for flexible equipment, applying the same method as the static analysis but using different values for the accelerations.

The accelerations to be used shall be obtained by multiplying the g (3

values corresponding to the fundamental natural frequency from the

(" j

,\\

appropriate response spectra curves by 1.5.

If the fundamental natural frequency is not known, a static analysis using 1.5 times the l

maximum peak of the applicable floor response spectra, is accept-able. The 1.5 factor will conservatively account for possible par-ticipation of higher modes.

After this, the analysis shall follow the same procedure stated in Section 10.7.1.

10.7.3 Detailed Dynamic Analysis: When acceptable justification for static analysis cannot be provided, a dynamic analysis shall be required, and unless a conservative factor is used to aecount for the partici-pation of higher modes, a detailed dynamic analysis shall be per-formed.

A mathematical model may be constructed to represent the dynamic behavior of the equipment.

The model can be analyzed using the response spectrum modal analysis or time-history (modal or step-by-step) analysis.

The maximum inertia forces, at each mass point, from each mode, shall be applied at that point, to calculate the modal stresses and modal deflections.

The various modal contri-butions shall be combined by taking the square root of the sum of the squares of the individual modal stresses or deflections.

Closely spaced modes shall be combined by using an approach from USNRC Reg-ulatory cuide 1.92, " Combining Modal Responses and Spatial Com-ponents In Seismic Response Analysis". The stresses and deflections resulting from each of the three directions shall be combined by taking the square root of the sum of the squares, to obtain the p

dynamic stresses and deflections.

These dynamic stresses and de-flections shall be added to all stresses and deflections resulting

(

from all applicable loads and then compared with the design limits stated in Section 10.3.

v - - - - - - - - - - - - -

oa

=a _ m s.- 2

--u----c---n---==-

mc a

SARGENT & LUNDY ENGINEERS A >

chicago

/

~

Spec. No. K-2836

~

Issue:

Orig., 02-21-86 10.8 Basis of Acceptability: The resultant stresses and deflections, due to all loads inc luded in the loading combinations stated in the Project Specification, shall be within the design limits stated also in the Project Specification.

Any deviation from this criteria shall be justified and the calculations shall show that the struc-tural integrity of all NSR equipment, as well as the operability of active equipment, is maintained when subjected to the specified loading combinations. The Contractor shall submit to the Consulting Engineers a report, which includes the data, calculations, results and conclusions of the analysis. A suggested form for the report is presented in Section 13.

11.

FOUNDATION LOADS 11.1 Whether the qualification program is based on test, analysis, or combination of test and analysis, the Contractor shall be required to provide the Consulting Engineers with all the loads transmitted to the foundation.

The following loads shall be included in the calculations and the results for each shall be given separately:

11.1.1,

Dead weight 11.1.2 Operating loads

(

11.1.3 Nozzle Loads (if applicable)

\\.s 11.1.4 Pressure and thermal loads (if applicable) 11.1.5 Additional loads due to dynamic excitations 11.1.6 Any other loads which may be transmitted to the foundation during the dynamic event.

11.2 All foundation load cal'eulations shall be included in the dynamic qualification report for review by the Consulting Engineers.

12.

DOCUMENTATION The dynamic qualification report shall include all the in fo rma t ion stated in Section 13 and shall be submitted to the Consulting Engi-neers for review. It is suggested that the form of the report follow the outline given in Section 13.

13.

SUCCESTED FORM FOR DYNAMIC OUALIFICATION REPORTS It is recommended that reports containing dynamic qualification be written in the form suggested below.

Other forms of reports may be accepted as long as they include all the information stated here.

' # sh

s SARGENT & LUNDY ENGINEERS g

~ e-cHicAco f

Spec. No.; K-2836 i

Is sur. :

Orig., 02-21-86 s

Title Page The following information should be shown on the Title Page:

A.

Client B.

Contractor and Equipment Name C.

Specification Number D.

Revision Number E.

Date I - General This section should include a description of the equipment, its safety function and the qualification program used to verify this function.

In addition, the following information must be given:

A.

Project and Owner Nanes I

B.

Specification and Purchase Order Numbers Q

C.

Equipment Name and Kamber D.

Organization (s) performing qualification programs II - Data and Assumptions A.

Testing Section:.The following data shall be included:

1) Type of testing machine

2) Losds considered and attempts made to idealize them during the I

test

3) Methods used to simulate the supporting structure

4) Position and orientation of setting equipment

5) Steps taken to monitor the function of equipment during the test and tentative accelerometer locations (photographs are recom-mended).

6) Means of generating test response spectra (if applicable)

B.

Analytical Section: The following data shall be presented:

1) Loads considered

'../

2) Damping values used in the analysis,..

---

--- -- 3 b

s SARGENT & LUNDY ENGINEERS p

cHacAco i

/

Spec. No. K-7836 Issue:

Orig., 02-21-86 l

3) Codes and Standards used as bases for the analysis

4) Assumptions made for idealizing boundary conditions, converting the load criteria to actual loads used for calculations and converting the design criteria to actual stress, deformation and stability limits.

5) A list of the computer programs used in the analysis and the documentation which establish the validitp of any computer pro-gram used, if not included in the public domain.

III - Qualification Procedure A.

Testing Section: State type of test, wave form, frequency range, ac-celeration levels, axes of excitation, phase between inputs and any other data to completely describe the input motion and show it is applied.

B.

Analytical Section: State the method used in the analysis, analytic equations and their derivation from basic principles. The calcula-tions should be mentioned, if any.

IV - Results Testing Section:

This section should include the measurements l

A.

obtained from the test and their interpretations.

Findings and observations from monitoring the function of the equipment and/or inspection should be presented. The generated test response spectra curves superimposed on the required response spectra curve should be shown in this section, when applicable.

All results should be pre-sented in either numerical or graphical fom.

B.

Analytical Section:

Show actual design calculations and sketches for the mathematical models, including numbering used for the node points and numbers.

If possible, show loads, resultant fo rc e s,

moments, stresses and deformation on the mathematical model of the equipment.

V - Foandation Loads The foundation loads resulted from all applicable loads should be calculated from the previous section and presented in this section.

VI - Conclusions Give a brief summary of the results obtained from the qualification program.

A concise statement of the conclusion reached, which should satis fy the qualification requirement s, should be stated in this section. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.

n it

S ARGENT & LUNDY ENGINEERS cw;EAco

/

Spec. No. K-2836 r

Issud:

Orig., 02-21-86 u

..?

VII - Drawings Submit design drawings of the equipment and all supports. All neces-sary dimensions should be shown on these drawings.

i s

8 a

~ '

Final AA

s j

]

4.

f e

Y I

ATTAC fENT #3 9

DRAFT FSAR SUBSECTION 3.9.3.2

• "- - ~.

" ' * ' "=w...

E9 G

6 l

i

\\

l 1

l l

l l

l l'

O f

V

CPS-FSAR AMENDMENT'37 MARCH 1986

,(Y_s\\

A-a.

Valve.is designed for maximum moments which may be l

imposed when installed ir. service for inlet and l

outlet conditions of 800,000 in-lb and 600,000 in-lb, respectively.

These moments are resultants due to dead weight plus dynamic loading (9.0 g horizontal and.6.0 g vertical) of both valve and connecting pipe, thermal expansion of the connecting pipe, and reaction forces from valve discharge.

b.

A production SRV demonstrated operability during a dynamic qualification (shake table) type test with moment and "g" loads applied greater than the equipment's design limit loads.

A mathematical model of this valve is included in the main steam-line system analysis as with the MSIV's.

This analysis assures the equipment design limits are not exceeded.

3.9.3.2.1.4.3 Standby Licuid control Valve (Explosive Valve)

The SLC Explosive Valve design is qualified by type test to IEEE 344-1975.

The valve body is designed, analyzed, and tested according to ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Class l' The qualification test demonstrated the sN absence of natural frequencies below 33 Hz and the ability to Q,)

remain operable af ter the application of horizontal dynamic loading equivalent to 6.5 g and a vertical dynamic loading

('

equivalent to 4.5 g at 33 Hz.

3.9.3.2.1.4.4 Hich Pressure Core Spray Valves The HPCS valve body design, analysis, and testing is in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Class 1 or 2.

The Class IE electrical motor actuator is qualified by type test in accordance with IEEE 382-1972, as discussed in Subsection 3.11.2.3.3.

Mathematical models of these valves are included in the HPCS piping subsystem analyses.

If the valves are found to be rigid, they are qualified for at least I

the acceleration values obtained from the piping analysis.

If the valves are flexible, the piping analysis acceleration values are amplified by a factor of 1.5 and the valves are qualified for at least these higher acceleration values.

The operability of the valve assemblies is verified by static testing.

3.9.3.2.1.4.5 Control Rod Drive Globe Valve The globe valves in the CRD scram discharge volume vent and drain lines are evaluated by analysis and test for operability under the design loads that envelop the predicted loads during a design basis accident and safe shutdown earthquake.

The valve body is designed, analyzed, and tested in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Class 2 requirements.

The vendor's analysis results indicate

(.

that the valves will withstand a maximum acceleration of 4.5 g horizontal and 3.0 g vertical acting simultaneously with a safe shutdown earthquake.

The acceptance criteria for seismic disturbance and operability requirements are as follows:

f4')

4 o

AMENDMENT 37' CPS-FSAR MARCH 1986 is determined and used in conjunction with support the applicable relevant seismic response spectra.

In addition, a static shaft deflection analysis of The deflection determined the rotor is performed. analysis is compared to the from the static shaft allowable rotor clearances.

33 In case the natural frequency is found to be below a dynamic or pseudodynamic analysis is

hertz, performed to determine the amplified input accelerations necessary to perform the stress a static deflection analysis analysis.

In addition, is performed as discussed earlier, Nozzle loads from interconnecting piping systems are considered in the stress analysis of the pumps and b.

their supports.

the To complete the seismic qualification procedures, pump motor and all appurtenances vital to the c.

operation of the pump are independently qualified for in operation during the maximum seismic event (see Section 3.10).

In the accordance with IEEE 344 interaction between the pump and motor is

analysis, considered.

is concluded that the nuclear safety-related

~F

(-

From this, it pump / motor assemblies will not be damaged and will continue operating under SSE loadings and will perform their intended Tnese requirements take into account the complex characteristics of the pump and are sufficient to demonstrate and functions.

assure the seismic operability of the active pumps.

3.9.3.2.2.2 Valves Saf ety-related active valves are tabulated in Table 3.9-5 and must perform their mechanical motion in times of an accident.

Assurance that these valves will operate during a seismic and analyses for all active valves.

tests The safety-related valves are subjected to a series of teststo installation, life.

Prior prior to service and during plant a shell hydrostatic test the following tests are performed:

according to ASME Section III code requirements; backseat leakage tests; functional tests to verify that and main seat limits the valve will open and close within the specified time Qualification of valve when subjected to the design pressure. harsh environmental zones for the environmental actuators in plant is performed.

conditions over the installed life of the valve s

)

(..

3.9-75

1. ,7 >

o c.

ME 37 CPS-FSAR MARCH 1986 Cold hydro qualification tests, functional qualification tests, i ~~f and periodic inservice rnspections are performed to verify and ensure the f unctional ability of the valve.

These tests and appropriate maintenance ensure operability of the valve for the design life of the plant.

The valves are designed using either the standard or the alternate design rules of ASME Section III.

On all active valves, an analysis of the extended structure is also performed for static equivalent seismic loads applied at the center of gravity of the extended structure.

The maximum stresses and deflections allowed in these analyses show adequate structural integrity for these valves.

3.9.3.2.2.2.1 Oualification of Valve Actuators Each actuator has been qualified to demonstrate its ability to perform its function under all service and environmental conditions.

Motors and electrical appurtenances for air actuators a're seismically qualified per IEEE 344 and IEEE 323.

3.9.3.2.2.2.2 Check Valves and Safetv/ Relief Valves Valves which are safety-related but can be classified as not having an overhanging structure, such as check valves and safety / relief valves, are considered separately.

Due to the particular simple characteristics of the check valves, ti, they were qualified by a combination of the following tests and analysis:

a.

stress analysis including the seismic loads where applicable, b.

in-shop nydrostatic test, c.

in-shop seat leakage test, and d.

periodic in situ valve examination and inspection to ensure the functional capability of the valve.

The safety / relief valves are qualified by the following procedures.

In-shop hydrostatic seat leakage and performance tests shall be performed.

In addition to these tests, periodic in situ valve inspection, as applicable, and periodic valve removal, refurbishment, performance testing and reinstallation are performed to ensure the continued functional capability of the valve.

In addition, operability of active valves is demon-strated by performing static tests on representative valves.

Using the conservative methods described above these valves were qualified to perform their design function during and

-3 following any postulated event.

These methods conservatively

(

i simulate the seismic event and ensure that the active valves will perform their safety-related function when necessary.

3.9-76

( 3)