Text

Summary of 721102 Meeting W/Ge to Discuss BWR Torus Ring Header Hanger Failure,Design,Design Testing & Design Alteration Considerations
	ML20141N318
Person / Time
Site:	Quad Cities, 05000000
Issue date:	11/09/1972
From:	Fishbaugher J, Jordan E; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:	; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
Shared Package
ML20141N278	List: ML20141N277; ML20141N301; ML20141N318; ML20141N347; ML20141N358;
References
	FOIA-85-782 NUDOCS 8603060153
	Download: ML20141N318 (4)
	v • d • e

,

. ( - [

${.? /$~35 November 9, 1972 Region III Files THRU D. M. Hunnicutt, Chief, Reactor Testing and Startup Branch G. Fiorelli, Chief, Reactor Operations Branch GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPA:(Y t W. TORUS PROBLEMS November 1 Pre-Meeting Conference Attendees: Reisland (L), Beratan (RO), Chan (L), McDermott (RO),

Jordan (RO), and h aderson (RO)

The meeting agenda was discussed in detail and the " tone" of the meeting was established.

DRL Meeting with General Electric - BWR Torus Ring Header Design - 11/2/72 Principal Attendance: J. Riesland, L, Chairman Rockwell, CE R. McDermott, RO Strickland, CE A. L. Levine, CE Engineer, S&L J. E. Love, GE L. Beratan, R0 S. Chan, L E. Jordan, RO:III J. Fishbaugher, RO:III F. Cantrell, RO:I J. Henderson, RO D. Zieman, L

Reference:

1. Cocmnwealth Edison report of the Quad-Cities hanger failure, June 7, 1972.

2. Region III fnapection of June 6, 1972; and consultant (Lofy) report of June 22, 1972.

3. RO summary and transmittal to L (Kappler to Skovholt),

July 27, 1972.

4. Commonwealth Edison summary report of the hanger failure, October 27, 1972.

I I omce >

..R0 JJ. ..... . ..RQ:.III . _.

8603060153 860114 summAur > .. .

11-9-72 NN.a[

11-9-72 h . RO -782 .. P,DR , , , , , , ,

DATE > -.-__. . . . . . . . . .

Forum AEC lis (Rev. 9-53) AECM 0240 v. a, oovannnetwT rnowTING OFFICE 8,7, O . 405 948 p

, /6

l

( ( ll

, . l Engien III Files - 2- November 9, 1972

)

l j

The purpose of the meeting was to review the torus ring header hanger-failure which occurred at Quad-Cities; and to discuss the design, j the recent. design testing, design alteration considerations, and schedule l considerations for resolution of the problem. l GE presented a case history of the hanger failures including a review of the original design, plus design reviews and testing subsequent to the failure, plus an explanation of applicability of the equipment to other BWR plants.

Only static and seismic loads were recognized in the original design.

Other dynamic loads, and thermal effects were not recognized. Also, poor worlananship contributed to a faulty installation. ,

Quad-Cities, Dresden, Monticello, and Millstone plants have sinilar designs and installations with respect to the torus ring header. Other BWR's either have no ring header, or a different structural configuration such that the Quad-Cities experience is not applicable.

An interim fix includes strengthening the ring hender support by replacing 3/4" bolts with 1" bolts, and repair of torch-cut holes to theorrect size and correct bearing surface. CE stated that the interi:d fix had now been completed at Quad-Cities and at "all plants similar to Quad-Cities." Adequacy of the interim fix is covered in the referenced documents. 1-Failure of the original design to recognize dynamic loadings has been the subject of design testing at the Quad-Cities plant. Most recent

, testing, completed in late-October, was described. Very preliminary results were discussed. Considerable movement of the ring head occurs t as a result of relief valve actuations; but displacement and strain measurements were within the arbitrary limits that were imposed on the test. Adequacy of GE's design and' testing program was

questioned.

Some data loss was stated to have occurred due to sensor and recorder i failures, specifically, the low of displacement data from LVDT's i during the October tests.

l The test sensors used during the October tests are listed below:

i l

Columbia LVDT DS-2000. +- 2.5 in. range Va11 dyne AP-10 pressure transducers Beak strain gauge (120 ) unidirection Bournes linear pot omer > . . . . . .. . . . . . . .

sumumc e. . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

our> . . . . .

Form AEC-3I8 (Rev.9 53) AECM 0240 u. s, covtamusar7 PaprToso orrier sete o . oos.ses

--en--. , , , -,--g~.,-- , .- ---v- --m.,,,..-mw,- ,e,--- - . , - - - . --n,,w ,+-,--w.nr-,--e e . eme r . . ,

1

( f.

4 Region III Files November 9, 1972 l

A drywell and torus pressure increase of + 0.5 peig was observed during the extended relief valve test.

Transient pressure effects upon the torus due to relief valve discharge were found to exist for 15 sec after initiation. Steady state effects were stated to be negligible.

A discussion of relief valve discharge line contents following an operation disclosed the presence of a vacuum breaker which vents the line to the drywell. (The breaker is shown on Quad-Cities P&ID as a 1 inch diameter.)

The deficiencies found by staff in the Quad-Cities Special Report No. 5 were discussed with GE personnel. ,

GE disclaimed the report and stated that it was prepared by CE and S&L and reviewed by GE.

The deficiencies included:

1. No precision is stated for stresses.

2. Model for calculations not described.

d.

3. Relief valve designation between apparently reversed.

At.this time GE is not able to assure the integrity of the torus ring s

header. A schedule was presented for completion of CE's review of test data and reanalysis of the design. Milestones are:

Outline of report available to AEC ......... 12-15-72 Final Report ............................... 3-2-73 Hain conclusions will be previewed to AEC as soon as available (expected about a month ahead of final report).

Possibility of esca11ating a similar concern to other portions of the BWR design was recognized; but resolution of the torus ring header is felt to be the most urgent concern.

omer > ...

sunume > .. . . . . .. . .

WE> . ... __ . . . . . . . . .. . . . ...

Perse AEC-Ste (Rev. 9 53) AECM 0240 tr. A covraunstat Pnottoso orra's este o . oos.ses

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

( (

Region III Files November 9, 1972 In a caucus after the meeting. AEC personnel decided:

1. L will follow GE progress.

2.

L will consider action on the problem. en immediate call to licensees for further

3. RO will forward a previously prepared bulletin (Obvious need for coordination; expectation that L will have the lead).

4. RO will probably call for collection of status info from each plant by phone.

i E. L. Jordan Reactor Inspector J. Fishbaugher Reactor Inspector s

e i

1 l

omct > ...

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

l l $URNAMC> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . ~ - - . ~ - . . .~

oart > . . . ... . . ... . . . . . . . -

l Forum AEC-5to tRev. 9 53) AECM 0240 v. a. covtapuesst Pensioso orricE tote o . 40s.see

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

r e

.s s y

W</);

s

2. .,. a u ru ip-+ww w L^-

gTs ~ ,.

DIRECTORATE OF REGULATORY OPERATIONS -

Me.o Route Slip 7, ^2O U W

^

_ _#An9?AR?109 R. T. Carlson Region I X RE: QUAD CITIES 2 - HANGER FAILURES ON TORUS E. M. Howard SUCTION HEADER - COMMONWEALTH EDISON Re,gion I X COMPANY'S REPORT TO LICENSING DATED E. J. Drunner OCTOBER 27, 1972 Region I I F. J. Long The enclosed report from Commonwealth Edison Region II X Company to the Directorate of Licensing, relating L' . C. Seidle to the failure of hanger bolts on the torus F.egion II X suction header at Quad Cities 2, is forwarded N. C. Moseley for your information (enclosure 1). ,

Region II X G. Fiorelli As you know, an R0 Bulletin (72-1) was sent Region III uX" to all operating current generation BWR facilitier D. M. F.unnicutt as a result of this problem.

Region III X U. E. Vetter Items of particular interest in the enclosed Region III X licensee report are:

G. L. Madsen Region IV X 1. The measured static vertical hanger loads G. S. Spencer at Quad. Cities 1 and 2 were found to vary Regien V X between 0 and 22,300 lbs. The original design maximum load for the hangers was 8,000 lbs.

2. Deficiencies were observed in the original installation of the hangers *

(flame cut bolt holes, etc.).

3. The dynamic loads on the hangers resulting from operation of relief valves were not considerca in the original design. Subsequent analyses by CE showed these loads are significant (up to 17,000 lbs).

As a result of the failure to consider dynamic loads at Quad Cities 2 a meeting was held on November 2,1972, between the AEC staff and the General Electric Co.

to discuss the generic aspects of this issue. During this meeting we were informed that dynamic loadings were not considered either in the design of the suppression chamber or in the design of hangers for the ECCS suction header at any of the current generation BWR's. GE informed the AEC staff that special relief valve operation tests had been conducted at Quad Cities during October 1972 to obtain data to permit evaluation of the dynamic loads on the suppression chamber and the ECCS header. GE expects that the data will be analyzed and a final report will be submitted to the AEC in approximately 5 months.

RO:HQ is circulating for concurrence a supplemental Bulletin updating R0 Bulletin 72-1.

, ., J , ,j o J y)P

')}f w'

'* DATE 11/27/72 DEC 1 1972 0

g(L

( / ,

{

s Regional Branch Chiefs .

I have also enclosed (enclosure 2) for general information a DL trip report of a visit to the Quad Cities site to witness the tests conducted by CE in October, 1972.

n lb -

RG AA.N '

R.h.McDermott .

Enclosures:

1. Com:nonwealth Edison Report

~

to DL dated 10/27/72 .

2. Trip Report to Quad Cities site dated 11/1/72

cc: G. W. Reinmuth J. B. llenderson

~

QUAD CITIES STATION SFECIAL REPORT NO. 5 TORUS RING HEADER SUPPORT FAILURE OCTOBER 26, 1972 i .

t f

COI'l10N.0;ALTli EDISON COMPAFI o.: 5 t

--_____.___--_._-_-s

'9 s

INDEX PhGE

~1'

1.0 INTRODUCTION

,2-

2.0 DESCRIPTION

OF RING IIEADER AND SUPPORT SYSTDi 2.1 Ring I!cader 2.2 licader Support System 2.3 mthod of Fabrication and Assembly 2.4 Header Support Design

3.0 DESCRIPTION

OF EOLT FAILURE 3.1 Fabrication and Assembly Deficiencies 3.2 Design Deficiencies 3.3 W thod of Failure and Location 4.0 00RRECTIVE ACTION 5.0 EVALUATION 5.1 Static Loading 5.2 Dynamic Loading .

5.3 Calculated Stresses

6.0 CONCLUSION

S 7.0 UNIT NO.1 CORRECTIVE ACTION 8.0 APPENDIGS 8.1 Unit 1 lianger Loadings 8.2 Unit 2 llanger Loadings 8.3 NIJr Examination Reports 8.4 Torus Movement Test Procedurc 8.5 Twenty-Four Inch IIcader Drawings

. ~ _ _

1.0 INTRODUCTION

During startup testing of relief valves for Quad-Cities Unit 2 on Sunday, May 28, 1972, it was discovered that four pipe hangers for the 24-inch torus suction header had failed. 'Ihe reactor was promptly shut down for investigation and repair of the failed hangers.

'Ihe 24-inch suction header encircles the torus and provides a manifold for the suction of the various ECCS pumps. The header .is connected to the torus by four 20-inch OD pipes spaced 90 degrees apart and is supported by twelve hangers which are connected to the torus shell.

Three of the four failed hangers were located within a 90 degree segnunt between two of the 20-inch connecting pipes resulting in a maximum sag in the header pipe of approximately 5-3/4 inches within that segment. The pipe hangers consist of doubic strap horizontal and vertical members connected to gussets which are welded to the torus shell and the 24-inch pipe. Failure consisted of shearing the bolts that were used to connect the vertical straps to the gusset.

Investigation revealed no other damage or evidence of excessive stress at the torus shell, the 24-inch header pipe, the 20-inch connecting ,

pipes, or the welded connections.

v.

e

,1 k _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - _ - - _ - _ - _ - _ - _ . _ _ _ _ _ - . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ - - - - _ - - - . . _ - - . . _ _ - _ _ - - . _ _ _ _ _

Q ,. .

l 2.0 IESCRIPTION OF RING HEADER AND SUPPORT SYSTDI 2.i Ring Header -

H e Quad-Cities Unit 2 containment vessel consists of a light bulb shaped drywell and concentric toms shaped suppression

- chamber. The suppression chanber is filled with water to appmximately mid-depth and a pump suction header (ring header) is attached to the outside of the torus. This header is a 24-inch OD pipe and is connected to the torus by short lengths of 20-inch OD pipe. In addition to the four 20-inch header inlet nozzles, there are six outlet nozzles which are used to withdraw water fmm the header for the Residual lleat Removal ~ System, Core Spray System, liigh Pressure Coolant Injection System, and Reactor Core Isolation Cooling System. % e header is shown on Chicago Bridge and Iron Conpany (CBI) drawing No. 216, Rev. 5 and No. 217, Rev. 5.

2.2 IIcader Support System The 24-inch ring header (suction, header) is supported by the four 20-inch pipe connections and twelve hanger assenblics.

%c hanger assemblies have horizontal and vertical members-attached to gussets on the torus shell and the 24-inch header.

Def V.ls of the asserblics are shoan on CBI drawing No. 218, Re v. 1. H e guscets consist of 1/2" thick plate welded to 1" thick pad plate which is then welded to the torus shell and a 1/2" thick collar type plate welded to the 24" pipe.

2-

( . e .

He torus diameter is very large resulting in a radius to thick-ness (R/t) ratio that is very large (300). The R/t ratio is a measure of the flexibility of the shell and its ' ability to with-stand concentrated loads. The pad plate is used at the toms shell attachment in order to spread the applied load over suffi-cient area to minimize stresses and defomations. H e smaller diameter pipe is stiff enough (R/T ratio of 30) to resist the applied load by transfer through the yoke-type collar.

The horizontal and vertical double hanger straps originally installed were 2 1/2" wide by 1/2" thick with a 13/16" diameter hole at each end for attachment to the gussets with 3/4" diameter A307 bolts.

Table 2-1 defines the ring header supports,-inlet nozzles and outlet nozzles along with their approximate orientation.

l i

i TABLE 2-1 QUAD CITIES UNIT "O. 2

!! ANGER AND N0Z2LE ORIE.VTATION d .

licader Support Approx. lleader Nozzle Nozzle Approx.

Ntsrber Orientation Number' Descrip. Orientation i

1 67*30' X-204A Inlet 45*

l 2 . 90* X-204B Inlet 135*

l 3 112*30' X-204C Inlet 225' ,

4 157*30' X-204D Inlet 315' I

5 180*' X-223A RHR 157*30' 6 202*30' X-223B RIIR 202*30'

7 247*30' X-224A Core Sr'. ray 22*30' 8 270* X-224B Core Spray 337*30' 9 292*30' X-225 IIPCI 337*30' 10 337*30' 'X-226 RCIC 292*30' i

11 0*

12 22*30' i

i 2.3 bbthod of Fabrication and Assenbly As discussed in part 2.1 and 2.2 the ring header and hanger assenblics are shown on CBI drawing flos.216,217,and218 for CBI Contract 9-6771. The hanger clip assemblies (218-A :

and 218-B) were welded to the torus shell prior to the shell l l being assembled in the baser:ent of the reactor building. With the torus assembled in the baserent the shop built header sub-asserrblics 216-B vere attached to the torus penetration at the .

i

. e .

=

field weld joints (see Dwg. 216, Section E-E for field weld location). With these four subassemblies welded in place, the umaining segments of the header were welded together utilizing temporary supports for positioning. The completion of the entire header welding was followed by the attachment of the collar type gussets (pc. 5 on Dwg. 218) to the 24" pipe header.

Because of the allowable fabrication tolerances on both thd major and minor diameters of the toms as well as the ring header and the positioning of the header, the attachnent of the horizontal and vertical hanger straps could not be completed with the as-built straps. He alignment of the horizontal and vertical straps mquired som adjustments and strap modifications.

At som locations it was necessary to decrease the length of the vertical straps by 2" to 2 1/2". Some horizontal strap lengths were changed by amounts in excess of 2". H e modifications required to complete the alignment and assembly of the pipe hanger straps consisted of some torch cutting of bolt holes in the collar gussets and hanger straps as well'as torch cutting the straps length to suit each installation. The original holes were punched.

He henger straps weru connected to the gussets with 3/4",

10UNC cap screws (bolts threaded full length). Due to the torch cutting of some of the holes in the vertical straps, there was some misalignment of the bolts and uneven distribution of the load. His was evident from the installed bolts not being per-pendicular to the straps. .

2.4 Header Stpport Desien no hanger support assemblies were originally designed for the static dead load of the 24" header plus horizontal and vertical seismic loads. H e operating bases earthquake horizontal ground acceleration is .12g. % c containment torus analysis in the FSAR (12.2.2.5) used a resulting horizontal coefficient of .40g ,

~

combined with the vertical acceleration of .08g acting simult-aneously. The original de'ign s was based on a coriputed maxinum hanger load of approximately 8,000 lbs. with the load being approximately equal for all hangers.

6 9

4 6

e 6

e 6-

~3.0 DESCRIFFION OF BOLT FAILURE l

3.1 Fabrication and/or Assembly Deficiencies It can be seen from Section 2.3 that the methods used to correct the misalignment problems encountered during assembly were less than desirable. Burning holes for bo:ts, regardless of the l craftsman, results in a nonunifom bearing surface for the bolts.

In addition, the holes that were punched appeared to have some slight coning which is conrnon for punching operations. This slight coning effect causes the bolt to be stressed at one edge sooner than at the adjacent edges.

i Although the contract drawings did not call for bolts with a clean shank, the original stress analysis was based on an unthreaded shank, 3/4" diameter bolt. The effective cross- .

sectiona

area of an unthreaded 3/4" bolt shank is .4418 square :

inches versus .302 square inches for the threaded shank. This would have increased the calculated failure load in doubic shear from 27,180 lbs. to 39,760 lbs. for the bolted connections.

1he use of 3/4" diameter bolts with an unthreaded shank would therefore have been desirabic. .

1 Since the original hanger system did not have provisions for adjustments, the exact distribution of loads on the support system were different from the theoretically calculated loading.

To assist in determining the reason for the bolt failure and its location, the loading on each vertical hanger in the I

original installation was determined. The measurements were inade by reconnecting the original straps and then applying a force with a hydraulic jack to each hanger point until the bolt in the connecticn was loose indicating that the jack was carrying all of the load. The weight in potntds was detemined !

fmm the pressure of the hydraulic fluid in the jack. The measured loads are shown in Tabic 3-1.

1 y e 7

_ _ _ = _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _

TABLE 3-1 QUAD CITIES UNIT NO. 2 ORIGINAL SUPPORT SYSTEM HANGER IDADS

SUPPORT NO. IDAD SUPPORT NO. IDAD I

5,4 k 7 3,6 k 1 13.2 k k 2 8 7.6 k

3 59.4 9 12.0k 13.0 k k 4 10 22.3 5 0.7k 11 0.7 k

11.6 k 12 k

7 113.2

Loads are as measured after replacement bolts had been installed but before any strap lengths were changed. See Appendices, Section 8.2.

It is obvious that the distribution of load is not tmifonn in that support No.10 is carrying a load of 22,300 lbs. , whereas support Nos. 5 and 11 were only carrying 700 lb. This inequity in load distribution indicates that some more precise method of hanging the ring header should have been used. It also indicates that a static load of at least 22,300 lb. could bc accomodated without failure on a 3/4" 10UNC bolt threaded its full length. -

3.2 D2 sign D2ficiencies Computing an average of the loads shown in Tabic 31 results in a value of approximately 9,400 lbs. per hanger. ' Die original maximum computed load to which the hangers were designed is approximately 8,000 lbs. 'lhe inequities in the load distribution shown in Tabic 3-1 and the average load per hanger indicate that

the method used in designing the hanger assemblies was inadequate from a. purely static condition approach. De wide range of 4

load distribution indicates that the hanger design perhaps

. should have called for some r iod of adjustment to make up for the differences in the dimensions that result from allowances for fabrication of the tonis and the 24" pipe header.

He average load per hanger of 9,400 lbs. (average of measured loads) vs the 8,000 lb. used for the original design, indicates that not all loads were accounted for ir. the original analysis.

The measured static load at hanger No.10 was significantly greater than.that measured at any of the other hangers. His j would indicate that sone dynamic effect from the testing that had been perforred, contributed the force necessary to shear the bolts in failed hangers 1, 2, 3, and 12, but did not add enough to shear the bolts in h' anger No.10. His dynamic .cffect was not identified and thus not included in the loading used for the original hanger design.

3.3 hthod of Failure and Location Le testing of relief valves (Startup Test No.' 26) was being perforced when the first indication of failure was noted. . . _ i Relief valves A then B had been tested when a 3/4" bolt was found beneath hanger No.12 which is at the point in the tonis where A discharges. A tenporary replacement bolt was installed and testing procccded with relief valves C,D, and !!. After the

testing was conpleted, failed bolts were found beneath hangers No. 1, 2, and 3. In each case, it was a bolt in the vertical hanger straps that was shcand. The relative positions of the hangers, the ring header connections', and the discharge points of the relief valves in the tonis am tabulated in Table 3-2.

Also shown on the table is the approximate as-built static loading on each hanger from Table 3-1.

TABIE 3-2 QUAD CITIES UNIT No.2 I{N12R, N0ZZUI #fD RELIEF DISalARGE ORIENTATION Approx. Header Relief liender Dead Load Orientation Connection Discharge Support on ' Support (Ib) 0 11 700' 22'30' Core Spray A 12 13,200 45' Inlet 67*30' B 1 5,400 90' 2 13,200 ,

112'30' C 3 9,400 135' Inlet 157'30' ,

RIE 4 13,000 180' 5 700 202'30' R!!R 6 11,600 225' Inlet 247'30' D 7 :3,600 270' 8 7,600 - .

292'30' RCIC E* 9 12,000 315' Inlet 337'30' Core Spray 10 22,300 G 1[PCI

l

. \

From Table 3-2 it can be seen that hangers 1, 2, and 3 are located within a 90' segment between two 20" inlet pipes which connect I the ring header to the torus. With these hangers failed, the

. span between the inlet pipes wr unsupported and dropped 5-3/4" at the lowest point. Non-destructive tests were perfonned on four critical welds on the tonis shell and the ring header .

to check for damage. No evidence of irregularitics (discon-tinuitics) were shown in these dye penetrant non-destnictive tests. See Appendix 8.3 for examination report. A stress

^

analysis of the header and torus shell penetrations was per-fomed based on the deficction of 5-3/4" in the header and no stresses were calculated to be in excess of the minimum yield strength of the materials.

As previously stated, the.cstimated load required for double '

shear failure of the original bolts is 27,180 lbs. This is based on failure at 3/4 of the ultimate strength of A307 steel and an effective cross-sectional area of .302 square inches for the bolt. This is not to say that the bolts in the hangers all failed in doubic shear. As discussed in Section 3.1, there were sorre hangers in which bolt holes were burned and which had pairs of straps with different effective lengths. As a result of these fabrication deficiencies, the load at which the bolts could have failed can not be determined. It is estimated, however, a

that at 1 cast a load of 18,120 lbs. and up to a maximum of 27,180 lbs. would be required.

i

, . r He dynamic effect of the relief valve discharging into the torus adjacent to a pipe hanger adds significant loads to th'e hanger. It is postulated that the effect is due to a pressure wave inposed on the torus shell by the expansion of the free air in the relief discharge line upon initiation of relief valve operation. In order to verify the dynamic effect and to determine the adequacy of proposed repairs /n[difications, a test uns conducted in which neasurements were taken (during relief valve operation), of relative motion of the torus. shell and the ring header in the area of a header support. These reasure: rents were used to determine maxian hanger loads. "No approaches were used in analyzing the loading. The first approach (Header Analysis) was subjecting a nodel of the header system to the observed vibrations at instrtmented points on the header.

'Ihc second approach (Toms Analysis) uses the measured dis-placenents in the torus shell, and a calculated stiffness tem to detemine hanger load. The maximum vertical hanger load was calculated to occur during the operation of the singic relief that discharges in the area of the hanger, Test E .1The maximum horizontal hanger load was calculated to occur during the simultaneous operation of all relief valves, Test R. %c maxinium values for the loads which were calculated from the ruasured displacements observed during the testing are tabulated in Tabic 3 3. l 1

r . .

TABE 3-3 QUAD CITIES UNIT NO. 2 NAXIMN DYNAMIC HANGER LOADS 4

DUE TO RELIEF LINE DISGARGE Test Et Test R lleader Toms Header Torus t Analysis _ Analysis Analysis Analysis 11,600 17,700 12,300 13,900 Vertical Load ,

0 13,600 0 Horizontal 3,600 Load ,

i Re addition of from 11,600 to 17,700 lb. to the dead weight load of 13,200 lb. on the No.12 hanger was sufficient to exceed the 18,120 - 27,180 lb. failure load for the bolt. 'The failure load for a cican shank bolt of the same material is 26,500 - 39,760 lb.

It is therefore theoretically possibic that hanger failure would have occurred even if a cican shank bolt had been used.

During the testing of relief B or C, there was enough effect on .

hanger No. 2 that it failed res01 ting in its load being distributed between hanger Nos.1 and 3. % is additional load irsuited in failure of these hangers. The hangers adjacent to the discharge of valves D and E did not fail and the reason for this can be attributed to the possibility that the fabrication technigte was better on these hangers and that the dynamic load on the hanger used for analysis is computed conservatively.

l . .. .

t

(

! 4.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION -

I ne following corrective action was taken to correct the header support deficiencies:

1. The bolt holes were drilled out to 1 1/16" diameter for 1" bolts '

2. All horizontal and vertical hanger straps were replaced with 1/2" thick by 3" wide, 36,000 psi yield material with 1 1/16" diameter bolt holes. Le approximate failure load for these straps (in pairs) is 54,375 lbs.

3. New 1" diameter A325 high strength bolts with 1 1/2" un-threaded length were' installed with positive locking tech-niques included. Theapproximatedoubicskicarfailureload '

for these 1" bolts is 70,686 lbs. ,

4. He lengths of the replacement straps were adjusted to provide l st c a unifonn distribution of loads between the hangers.

l l i

j . .

~

5.0 EVA111ATION_

5.1 Static Loading As part of the bolt and hanger strap replacement, a hydraulic jackwithdialpressuregaugewasusedtomeasuretheactual loads at each support point. The jack was raised enough to ,

i pick up the header load at cach point. After the loads were reviewed, some modification in the strap lengths effected a change in the load distribution pattern of the entire system.

1

~i The modifying of strap lengths resulted in the static dead load distribution shown in Tabic 5-1.

TABLE 5-1*

1 l QUAD CITIES UNIT NO. 2 I 2

FINAL SUPPORT SYSTB4 !! ANGER 14 ADS Load Support No. Load Support No. I 1 7,800 7 6,700 2 10,300 8 7,600 3 9,400 9 7,800 ;

4

4 7,400 10 7,200 l 5 8,300 11 8,500 j

6 7,200 12 8,900 i *Sce Appendix, Section 8.2. ,

In order to analyze for the dead load and reaction load system, a beam finito element computer program was utilized. *lltis program calculates the loads at cach hanger and cach nozzle when subjected to the header dead load plus header outlet reaction l

loads. 'These calculated loads for the hangers are shown in l Tabic 5-2. :

i 1s. ... 1

TABE 5-2 QUAD CITIES UNIT N00 2 CALCUlA111D STATIC 14 ADS AT EACH HANGER FOR ~

DEAD IDADS PWS OUTLET N0Z2LE REALTIO'N LOADS -

CALCULATED IDAD SUPPORT NO. CAlfU1ATED IDAD SUPPORT NO.

6,900 7 7,000 1

4

' 7,200 7,100 2

7,200 9 7,400 3

10,400 10 10,400 4

9,700 11 3,700 5

11,300 12 13,000 6

7,200 X-204C 6,100 l X-204A 6,400 X-204D 7,400 X-204B This table shows that the calculated loads for a balanced system would not necessarily result in uniformly loaded hanger I

straps.

5.2 lyna:nic loading In order to analyze the header support system for the maximum

! postulated load on the vertical hanger, it is necessary to i

combine the static dead load with the seismic load as well as the maximtrn relief lir.e discharge load. Utilizing .0Sg vertical i and .40g horizontal accelerations due to the operating basis carthquake (FSAR Section 12.2.2.5) and average dead load on the .

4 hangers, the equivalent maxintsn vertical load is about 6001h and the equivalent maxist:a horizontal load is about 3000 lb. For the loading due to relief valve discharge, the maximum vertical hanger load l

is chosen to be that detennined using the Tams Analysis method, Test E, and for additional conservatism is rounded up to 18,000 lbs.

~

- (see Tabla 3-3). 1he maximum horizontal hanger loading from ,

telicf valve discharge is taken fra the Header Analysis method with a value of 13,600 lbs.

When the horizontal loads are combined, it can be seen that they are small compared to the vertical hanger loads due to the.

contribution of the static dead lud in the vertical direction.'

Thus, the analysis at the hanger components to detemine adequacy is perfonned using the largest vertical load as Stemined from

. the sunmation of all loads. See Tabic 5-3 for a tabulation of the total vertical loads. The maximum horizontal load would

! be 16,600 lb. and the maximum vertical load is 31,600 lb. The failure load is approximately 54,375 lbs. with the failure point being at the strap bolt holes. ,

TABLE 5-3

~

QUAD CITIES UNIT NO. 2 MAXIMit! YERTICAL IWER LOADS OBE SEISIIC + STATIC + RELIEF LINE DISOIARGE

! Loaa nasco on Load Based on

Calc. Static Measured Static 0 SUPPORT 10. Leads Loads 1 25,500 26,400 2 25,700 28,900 3 25,800 27.000 l 4 29,000 26,000 5 28,300 26,900 6 29,900 25,900 7 25,600 25,300 8 25,800 26,200 9 26,000 26,400 10 29,000 25,900 11 22,300 27,100 9

12 31,600 27.500

-17 .

. ?

The =&v1== calcultted load is located ct hang:r no.12 and is 31,600 lb. This load is an upper bound loa 4 and it is very unlikely that it could occur.

5.3 Calculated Stresses The stresses in the bolts and hangers from the maximum vertical and horizontal loads is shown in Table 5-4. Also shown in the tabic are allowable stress IcVels adjacent to the applicable

- tabulated value.

TABLE 5-4 1

STRESSES IN BOLTS AND IW,'GERS-FINAL liANGER SYSTEM Vertical Support florizontal Support AISC Approx.

1 DL 40BE+

2 DL + 0BE+ Test E Test R Allow. Failure Test E Test E + OBE + OBL Stress Stress Load (k) 28.9 31.6 6.6 16.6 -- --

Bolt Stress 1" f A325 22 90 A = .7854 18.35 20.0 4.2 10.5 i

(ksi)

Strap Stress !

at pinhole 3 x 1/2 (ksi) 14.9 16.0 3.4 8.6 21.5 4.. 58 Strap Stress Bearing 3 1-1/16 4 hole 28.9 31.6 6.6 16.6 68.2 --

(ksi) 1 Gusset Stress ~

Bearing 3 1-1/16 4 holo 57.8 62.3 13.2 33.2 68.2 --

i .

. (ksi)

I l

lbasured dead load (see Tabic 5-1) 2 Calculated dead load (see Tabic 5-2) l 3 j Based on AISC allowabic bearing stress of 1.35 yF multiplied by 1.33 as allowed in AISC paragraph 1.5.6, and using minimum allowabic yield of 38,000 psi.

l Based on AISC allowabic stress in tension of .45 F multiplied by 1.33 as allowed in AISC paragraph 1.5.6 and using ,a minimus allowabic yicid of 36,000 psi.

1 I S

o . .

Although'the tests showed that the maximum horizontal and maxim a

~' vertical hanger loads did not occur under the same conditions, for conservatism the maximun horizontal and vertical hanger loads were assumed to occur simultaneously and the stresses in the torus shell were computed at the point where the hanger support is i

attached. Figure 5-1 defines the points in question and Table 5-5 lists the stresses at these points.

TAB (E5-5 QUAD CITIES UNIT NO. 2 STRESSES IN T0FUS AT l{ ANGER CONNECTIONS Point Stmss, psi Point Stress, psi K 8,600 P 5,800

' L 8,600 R 5,800 M 7,900 S 8,300 N 9,900 T 5,200 , ,

The stress at the midpoint between the hanger pads (point V of Figure 5-1) is 8,600 psi. These stresses are all well below the

! allowabic membrano stress for the torus material (SA-515, Gr. 70) of 17,500 psi. Minimum yield stress is 38,000 psi.

j

! Using the displacement measurements taken at the header to torus I nozzle during relief testing, the static dead load, and seismic j

loads, stresses were computed at points around the nozzle to torus junction. The static dead load could not be measured, therefore the

< computed loading on the nozzles from Table 5-2 are used. 'Ihese stresses are tabulated in Tabic 5-6. Figure 5-1 defines the points at which stresses were calculated.

e

TABLE 5-6 QUAD CITIES UNIT NO. 2 STRESSES IN 1DRUS N0ZZLE CONNECTION Point Stress, psi Point Stress, psi A 6,400 Ay 7,700 B 5,200 By 8,700 C 2,300 Cy 4,500 ,

D 2,700 D 6,900 -

1 ,

Stress was calculated in the nozzle at point F figure 5-1, and the result is 700 psi. These stresses are also less than the 17,500 psi allowable membrane stress for the material (A516 Gr. 70).

Minimum yield stress is 38,000 psi. .

~

According the operator's log book, the maximitn deficction occurred ,

in the ring header at hanger number 2 (with the hangers failed) and was estimated and recorded as 5-3/4 inches. Using this deficction the stresscc in the 20" diameter Tonis to !!cador pipes adjacent to the unsupported section of ring header were contputed. Stresses were also computed at locations in the unsupported header. These stresses are tabulated in Tabic 5-7. All stresses were less than the minimum yield strength of 38,000 psi for the material. .

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

. 1 TABLE S-7 QUAD CITIES UNIT NO. 2 STRESSES IN LEADER, TORUS AND N0ZZLES IN WE FAIIID CONDITION Stress Summary - llangers 1, 2, 3 and *.. disconnected l Maximum observed deflection from operator's log book = 5 3/4" Location Point Membrane Stress Point Membrane Stress psi psi A 21.200 Al 24,100 Nozzle X-204B Nozzio X-204B B 32,900 B1 35,200 Nozzle X-204B C 4,800 C1 3,300 10,300 D1 13,800 Nozzle X-204B D Nozzle Neck X-204B F 23,800 licader at X-204B G 29,200 lleader at centerline 11 16,100 l

i 1

I l

l i

)

1 i

l .

b

g j

1 .

e

. .,g na/

T~u s h/

4hd

~

s Q

\ .

fhp s*

l n }

g

/ x.

/

.7 3/-

/

- 1

,7 H

n FIGlRii 5-1' B

~~ -- -,-,---r s-e.. - - . . - -

6.0 CONCLUSION

S ;

De test pmgram verifies that the alief line discharge sequence introduces substantial loads into the torus and header systems. We combination of the miief line load, the torch cut holes and the i poor initial installation load dist.ribution msulted in the failure of hangers 1, 2, 3, and 12. We calculations perfoned using' the results obtained from the test program indicated that stmsses wem inposed which could have msulted in bolt failure even with drilled holes, although failure probably would not have msulted in all four supports.

It has been shown that there was no evidence of excessive ' stressing of the toms shell or the ring header as a result of the hanger failures by non-Elestmetive testing. Stresses computed with the systen in the failed condition were below allowable limits.

The revised support system has been shown to be adequate for maximum postulated hanger loads of 31,600 lbs. The approximate d

failure load has been determined to be 54,375 lbs. with the failure point being the pin holes in the hanger straps. These postulated loads are based on maximum relative displacement data taken during relief valve testing as well as design seimsic and static loading. H e postulated loads were taken conservatively high for the purpose of evaluating the revised support system. 'The ring header to toms nozzles were also evaluated using a method similar to that used for the

hangers. Stresses computed for each area all we m below allowable limits. All stresses were calculated using methods acceptable to and defined in Section III, Subsection B of the A9E Code, 1965 Edition. This is the applicable edition of the A9E Code defined by the original contract.

4 9

4 e

S

- ~ ~

7.0 LNIT NO.1 CORRECTIVE ACTION hhen the deficiencies were uncovered due to the hanger failures at Unit No. 2, the hangers wem checked at Unit Po.1. Similar condi-tions that wem discovered at Unit No. 2 were also present at ,

same Unit 1. The original hanger loadings were checked using the ,

method described for Unit No. 2 and am tabulated in Table 7-1.

TABLE 7-1 QUAD CITIES UNIT NO. 1 ORIGINAL SUPPORT SYSTEM HANGER IBADS Support No. Ioad Support No. Load 1 4,000 7 15,200 2 2,700 8 4,700 3 0,000 9 8,800 4 14,500 10 10,800 5 6,300 11 9,700 6 7,900 12 16,800

' ~

Because of the conditions found at Unit Ntuber 1, the same corrective actions were taken as stated in Section 4.0. The hanger loadings were then remeasured and the results are tabulated in Table 7-2.

I i

e 25-l

. i TABG 7-2 [

I QUAD CITIES INIT NO.1 -I t

FINAL SUPPORT SYSTD1 HANGER IDADS j

, Support No. load Sur : ort No. Load i 1 2,600 7 8,000 2 7,600 8 5 100 3 7,100 9 7,600 ,

t

. 4 7,600 10 7,600 l 5 5,800 11 6,300 6 6,700 12 7,400 i.

A comparison of the loadings on Unit Number 1 was made with those of-l' Unit Number 2. On the average, the hanger loadings (dead load) are ,

j 1

lower for Unit 1, therefom the stresses associated with the support ;

members and attachment points would be lower than those computed for Unit 2. The dead load on th'e four connecting nozzles is higher on Unit 1; however, the increase in the calculated stresses in the nozzle fmm this dead load is small and the total is still safely .

below the allowable limits.

4 hP 4

i

8.0 APPa' DICES 8.1 Unit No. 1 Hancer Loads

& a 4 d

0 e

e 4

e 9

Ceneral Electric Company Sargent & Lundy '

140 South Dearborn 175 Curtner Avenue Chicago, Illinois San Jose, California Attention G. Hoveke Attention D. K. Wille tt Cencral Electric Company Chicano Bridge & Iron Co.

1819 John F. Kennedy Blvd. . Quad-City.Nucient Power Station Philadelphia, Pa. ,

Cordova, 11Linois

Attention R. Leasburg Attention T. Ahl '

ON6/7/72THEUdIT124"TORUSSUCTIONllEADERllANGERLOADINGSWEREMEASURE TilIS WAS ACCOMPLISilED BY USE OF A IlYDRAULIC JACK WITl! KNOWN EFFECT CROSS SECTIONAL AREA MULTIPLIED BY CALIBRATED PRESSURE GAUCE READING SUFFICIENT JACKING FORCE WAS APPLIED TO PERMIT TURNING Tilt 1.0WER ll BY !!AND. AT Tile TIME OF MEASUREMENTS Tile ORIGINAL 3/4" DI AMETER BOLTS WERE STILL IN PLACE EXCEPT AT POINTS 1 AND 2 WilICil IIAD Bl:EN CilANGED TO 1".130LTS.

IIANGER NUMBER 10 WAS ASSIGNED PLANT NORTil, VITil NIRIBERS DECREASING IN A CLOCKWISE DIRECTION. TiiE FOLLO'.41NG llANCEll LOADS WERC OBSERVED AS COM WITil 6000 POUNDS INDICATED BY CD&I DESIGN.

'. 1. 4,000 7.. 15,200

7. 2,700 n. 4,700

3. 0,000 -

9. 8,000

4. 14,500 10. 10,800

5. 6,300 11. 9,700

6. 7,900 12. 16,600 l'h/ ~j d

G. F.. Gray Project Superintendent United Engineers & Constructors In e

e 28-p = - - - -

a y-- -- -y

~*

CHICAGO' BRIDGE AND I'RON'CO. '

ATTENTION T. AHL .

901 W. 22nd Strec't ' '

Oakbrook, Illinois 60521 '

N. .

ON 6-12-72 Ti!E UNIT hW3ER ONE SUCTION I!EADER ltANGER LOADINGS WERE f

MEASURED AFTER ADJUSTING REVISED HANGER SYSTEM TO IMPROVE LOAD DIS-l TRIBUTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN BY T. AllL, CHICACO

\

. . BRIDGE AND IRON CO. HANGER NUDGER 10 WAS ASSIGNED PLANT NORTH WITH NUX3ERS DECREASING IN A CLOCKWISE DIRECTION. Ti!E FOLLOWING HANGER

/ ,

LOADS WERE 03 SERVED.

.\

7. 8,000

~

-' 1. 2,600 _

2. ~ 7,600 8. 5,100

3. 7,100 9. 7,600 .

l 10. 7,600

4. 7,600 ,_

5. 5,600 11. 6,300 '

6. 6,700 12. 7,400 cc: Sargent & Lundy, G. Hoveke __'

G. E.' Gray 3 General Electric Co., D. K. Willett Project Superintendent.

R. Leasburg , United Engineers & Cons tru-

L. A. liar.ticy UE&C, J. R. D:nytryk e

l l

-, ,,n - -.

8.2 Unit No. 2 Ilanger Imads m

N N

0 6

O O

e w

G e -

~

CHICACO BRIDGE AND IRON CO. ' ** '

ATTENTION T. AHL " '

901 W. 22nd Street . -

Oakbrook, Illinois 60521 ON 6-11-72 THE UNIT *IWO 24" TORUS SUCTION HEADER HANGER LOADINGS WERE s

HEASURED. THIS WAS ACCOMPLISHED BY USE OF HYDRAULIC JACK WITH KNOWN EFFECTIVE PLUNGER CROSS SECTION AREA MULTIPLIED BY CALIBRATED PRESSURE CUACE READINGS. SUFFICIEST JACKINO FORCE WAS APPLIED TO PERMIT TURNING THE LOWER HANGER BOLT BY HAND. THE REVISED HANGER SYSTEM CONSISTING OF

, M-1020 MQ THREE INCH WIDE STRAPS WITH A325 IIIGil STRENGTH BOLTS WAS IN PLACE WITH HANGERS INSTALLED TO RE-SUPPORT THE HEADER IN Ti!E ORIGINAL POSITION. THIS IS THE FIRST SET OF LOAD READINGS TAKEN FOR UNIT #I.

HANGER NUMBER 2 UAS., ASSIGNED PLANT NORTl! WITH NUMBERS INCREASING IN A CLOCKWISE DIRECTION. THE FOLLOWING HANGER LOADS WERE OBSERVED.

r. . .

. 1. 5,400 v 7. 3,600

2. 13,200 " 8. 7,600 .

3. 9,400 "- 9. 12,000

. 4. 13,000 10. ,22,300 4 . .

5. 700 11. 700

~

6. 11,600 12. 13,200 *

~

i cc: - SarGent & Lundy, G. Hovcke

p t,. El Crsy /

General Electric Co., D. K. Willett Project Superintendent R. Leasburg United Enginecr:, & Const L. A. Harticy UE&C Inc. J. R. D:r.y tryk e e e

s - '

31 e

, .2 *

CHICAGO BRIDGE AND IRON CO. .

ATTENTION T. Allt

901.W. 22nd Str'cet .

Oakbrook, Illinois 60521 . .

ON 6/17/72 THE UNIT NUMBER TWO TORUS SUCTION I!EADER HANGER LOADINGS MEASURE,D AFTER ADJUSTING REVISED ..nNGER SYSTEM TO IMPROVE LOAD DIS HANGER ADJUSTMENT WAS ACCOMPLISHED BY REFADRICATION OF !! ANGER STRAP ACCORDANCE WITH DISCUSSION AND INSTRUCTIONS CJVEN BY T. AliL, CllICAGO BRIDGE AND IRON ,CO.I HANCER NUM3ER 2 WAS ASSIGNED PLANT NORTH WITl! NUMBERS AFTER OBTAINING READINGS, TilEY INCREASING IN A CLOCKWISE DIRECTION.

WERE DISCUSSED WITH MR. AHL BY TELEPHONE ON 6/17 AND !!E FEELS. LOAD DIS-TRIBUTION IS CURREhrLY ACCEPTABLE. THE FOLLOWING !! ANGER LOADS WERE O .

1. 7,800 7. 6,700 ,

2. 10,35'O 8. 7,600 .

3. 9,400 9. 7,800 E 4.. 7,400 ld". 7,200 ,

5. 8,300 11. 8,500-

[ -

. 6. 7,200 12. ,

8,900

)) +

G.E. Gray i Project Superintendent United Engineers & Constructors Inc.

cc: Sargent & Lundy, G. llovoke .

General Electric Co.: D. K. Willett

- - R. A. Leasburg -

L. A. Harticy UE&C INC.: J. R. D.mytryk .- . .

\ .

8.3 NIrr Examination Report e

9 f

O e

e D

= . ( (

f. ,,

i i

On June 2,1972 a liquid penetrant excmination of Unit 02 suppress, ion chamber to 24" disc.eter suction header at pene-tration X204A and B was made. The' liquid penetrant examination covered th outside surface of the veld joining the neck (27,'

pipe nozzle) to insert plate and. insert plate to torus shell; with results ofIcxamination acceptabic.

.fh ?.2Q& L j

Jim Eagle Crinnell Company /

e*

b

~.

8.4 Torus Movement Test Procedure e

e 4

e S

e b

6 i

._. _ ~ ,-_-.

- QUAD CITIES

. ., 4

. ATCulCPowE QulPMENT CEPARTMENT ' '

. u.we.22N2109

'i *

. STARTUP TEST lilSTRUCTIOMS C" "* 9 8. 0 .

P1 ant: nUAD cfTirs .

Test

Title:

Torus !!ovement Test No: 98 Revision flo: 1 Date: June 5, 1972 PREPAP,ED BY: Startup Test Design and Analysis Unit Startup and Training Subsection Atomic Power Equipment Department '

San Jose, California

( ,

APPROVED BY:

s

/. . ,

...w a J ,

o .-

e s.si s. i n t g c o s t,0 W 0Cb

.? ATcuic PoWE3 .JIPMENT DErARTMENT QUAG'ys saas. - . c s,. ..s.1

~

STARTUP TEST IllsTRUCTI0t:S' c-- 98.1 e aa w c'. 2

1. PURPOSE . .

The purpose of this test is to measure the movement of the torus surface relative to the ring header during actuation of relief valves,

.HPCI, RCIC, RHR t, surveillance testing of the core spray system.

2.~ DESCRIPTI0t1 The position of the torus surface relative to the reactor building

- will be monitored at preselected locatinns. The position of the ring header relative to the reactor building aise will be monitored at the same or similar locations. These relative positions uill be recorded during actuation of one or mom relief valves and each of the other systems. The movement of the torus relative to the ring header -

can be inferred froa these measurements. Depending upon the results of the measurements with individual systems, neasurements during the actuation of more than one system may be made.when the simultaneous operation of these systems is consistent with the design of the Quad Cities station.

3. CRITERIA 3.1 Level 1 -

(

3.1.1 Do not exceed the bulk torus air or water temperature limit specified in Figure 26.1 of the Quad Cities Test Instructions.

3.1.2 Stop all testing and return the reactor to a cold shutdown '

condition if the following displacements are exceeded:

(values to be provided before the test) 3.2 Leve_1 2

. 3.2.1 Do not exceed a local torus air or water temperature of 2000F.

3.2.2' Do not exceed a torus overpressure of'l.3' psi.

3.,2.3 Do not exceed the following displacements: ,

(values to be provided before the test)

4. IftSTALLATI0tt IriSTRUCTI0riS 4.1 Install instrunents and readout equipment as specified in the attached sheets.

08 8W L Ot

- l 7 . .

'.~

. GENEftA 9 ELE 8TillU ,

I l"ULD f,I II 3'* - -

AT'uic power EculPMEr4T oirANT4.ENT ., 1

? '.

. .. cs. ... ? ?. ' 21 A n o.

. =4A.2 .: ., ~ , -. .* c . '.1 STARTUP TEST IllSTR'JCTI0ftS 4.2 Set up telephone cc:rnunications from the coritrol room to -the location -

of the readout equipr.ent. '

4.3 It is desired, but not required that he reahout be in the same location as was used during the .orus tu.p. rature measurements test.

S. IllITI AL C0tlDITI0?:5 liOTE:

Before you perfonn this test be sure to revir:w STI 26 and STI 15 Revi for special instruc.icus or precautions to be taken.

operating procedures fog i.he HPCI, .RCIC, RiiR and core spray .r./s!..:n .

ecc.a.

5.1 Station a aan at the local panel, in contact with raa cer r":: ,

5.2 The system of interest is ready to operate. ,

wn:: canter Ifr.e.

5.3 Tarus water level is no more than 1 foot below tht:

5.4 The torus water temperature should be a3 unifen?. a'; pesP'sie, preferably near 70 F. '

5.5 The reactor mu;t be operating a.t a po::er level sufficienl iest. so Oat reactor depressurization will not occor during the

6. PROCEDURE i'.e ssquence

?!OTE: Steps 6.1 thru 6.6 should' bc done in the sequence l!< t( J.

in which the different systems are tested is not it p tzt. For T

exacple, if desired the HPCI, step 6.3, . ay be t< ued uefere L5m relief valves , steps 6.1 thru 6.6, or af ter the ECs C, sty. ~ .9.

6.1 Relief Valve 0 6.1.1 Start the recording Those data equipment and record all d.,ta f::e at least which are recorded peric,dically 3.iwid hav-1 minute.

at least 3 sets of data taken.

6 A.2 flake sure that the printer is set to the shcrtest asil:51e cyr.1 time.

at create 6.1.3 liake sure that the linear recorders are set to opers :

thcn 5 inches per second and that the timing c'akers are properly synchronized between the several recorders.

6.1.4 Operate relief valve D.

6.1.5 Record all torus and ring headef movements and tores ten'.crature -

da.ta. .

....m 38 -

. GENEDP %)- ELE CTnlC s .. .

AT:s4ic rowca criuirucNT ogen r4ENT QUAD CITICS

.. *-n. ~* 22A21t'9 acv.as.1

!a a- 98.3 co av aa ' cc e .4 STARTUP TEST INSTRtiCTIONS 6.1.6 Record the reactor presstere vessel pressure and the torus pressure

'6.1.7 Arter the movements of the torus and ripg header have da.;>ed, close relief valve B. It is expected that t,his will take one minute or less. Do not leave the relief valve open for more than 5 minutes.

6.1.8 Reepen relief valve within 5 secon<'s of the time it was closed in step 6.1.7 and allcw it to rer.cin open for 10 secends t efere reciosing. l.Il recor0n sl: auld h cuerating.during this itep.

a 6.1.9 Continue data recording until near steady-state conditions are -

reached. ,

6.2 Repeat step 6.1 excluding step 6.1.8 for each , relief valve in turn.

Each valve should be open about 30 seconds.

6.'3 Repeat steo 6.1 excludinq step 6.l.8 for a simul.taneous 30 seconds actuation of relief Valvc A & B.

6.4 Repeat step G.1 excluding step 6.1.3 for a simultaneous 30 seconds actuation cf relief valves A, B, & C.

I 6.5 Repeat step 6.1 excluding step 6.1.8 for a simultaneous 30 seconds actuation of relief valvs A, B, C, & D.

6.6 Repeat step 6.1 excluding step 6.1.8 for'a sic.ultaneous 30 seconds actuation of all 5 relief valves.

6.7 RHR 6.7.1 Start the recording equipment and record all data for at least 1 minute. Those data '.thich are recorded periodically should have at least 3 sets of data taken.

6.7.2 Make sure that the printer is set to the shortest available cycl.

time.

6.7.3 Make sure that the linear recorders are set to operate at greate than 5 inches per second and that the timing rakers are properly synchroniacd between the several recorders.

G.7.4 Start the PJiR system in one of the modes of operation which circulates water or steam to or from the torus.

. 6.7.5 Record all torus and ring header movements and torus temperaturc data. .

6.7.6 Recerd the reacter pressure vessel pressure and the torus presst e

'., '. .' , GEllER!- @ ELECT!110 ,

.}

" . ATCedtC POWER ecd'Pu!NT CEP ARTMF.HT QUAD CI7il'3

. ...:.22Ak1is m. pe.1 ,

STARTdP TEST IrlSTRUCTIO:IS . . 9 8. 4 c ~' ** * * * ' .'5 ,

6.7.7 When steady conditions are reached relative to tor.:s and '

ring header movements stop the RHR.

. 6.7.8 Continue data recording until r. ear steady-state condition.

are reached.

6.7.9 Repeat steps 6.7.4 thru 6.i.8 for each of the possiole mcdes of RHR operation with the follcuing restrictions.

, 6.7.9.1 tio water tiill be injected into the reatta. syste:7..

6.7.9.2 Any mode of operation which does not effect the txus

will not be tested.

6.8 HPCI -

6.8.1 Start the recording equipmcnt and record all data for at in.t 1 minute. Those data which are. recorded. periodically should have at least 3 sets of data taken.

6.8.2 Make sure that the printer is set to the shortest availabla cycle time.

- 6.8.3 Make sure that the linear recbrders are set to oparatn at preater than 5 inches per second and that the timing makers are properly synchroni;ed between the 'several recorders.

6.8.4 Initiate a quick start of the HPCI without injecting water into the RPV.

6.8.5 Record all torus and ring header coveicents and torus temperatur:e data. .

6.8.6 Record the reactor pre'ssure vessel pressure and torus pressure.

6.8.7 Uhen stoady conditions are reached relative to torus and ring header movements stop the HPCI.

6.Q.8 Continue data recording until near steady-state conditions are reached. .

6.9 RCIC 6.9.1 Start the recording equipment and record all data for at least 1 minute. Those data which are recorded periodically should have

.. at least 3 sets of data taken.

6.9.2 Make sure that the printer is set to the shortest available cycle time. .

3 :.

.' CENEllA' . ELECTRIC ' '

. - 011/6 CITIES

. ATOMIC POWER EQulPHENT DEPARTM2NT ,,=. -o.::2A2189 =v.er.1 8-a*.98.5 co'" ***-cc' Fj ,

STARTUP TCST IllST'iUCT10fts _

set to operate at greater ,

6'.9.3 !!ake sure that the linear recorders are :

than 5 inches per second and that the timing r.:akers ere properly

i synchronized between the several recorders.

6.9.4" Initiate a quick start of .he RCIC without injecting water into the RPV.

6.9.5. Record all torus and ring header movenunts and torus tenperature data.

6.9.6 Record the reactor pressure vessel pressure and the tores presst.r::.

6.9.7 When steady conditions are reached relative to torus and ring header movements stop the RCIC.

~

G.9.8 Continue data recording until near steady-state conditions are reached.

6.10 Core Spray 6.10.1 Start the recording equipT.cnt and record all data for at least i ninute. Those data which are recorded periodically should hae; t at least 3 sets of data taken.

6.10.2 Make sure that the printer is set to the shortest available cycle time.

6.10.3 Make sure that the' linear recorders are set to operate at greater than 5 inches per second and that the timing makers are properly synchronized between the several recorders.

6.10.4 Start the core spray system in the mode which draws water from

- or injects water into the torus. .

6.10.5 Record all torus and ring header movements and ' torus temperature data.

6.10.6 When steady conditions are reached relative to torus and ring ,.

s header movements stop the core spray system.

6.10.7 Continue data recording until near steady-state conditions are reached.

7. DATA NtALYSIS 7.1 All data will be returned to San Jose for detailed analysis.

.~ o '

. QUAD CITIES UNIT NO. 2 ,

TORUS MOVEMENT TEST Measurement # Azimuth Location 0

1 67 30' (atheadersupport) vert. between top of torus and roof of ring room on center line of torus 2 67 30' hor, at center line of torus between torus inner (Rx) wall of ring room 3 67030' vert. at center line of torus between bottom

) of torus and floor of ring room j 4 67 30' har. at center line of torus between torus and outer wall of ring room

5. 67 30' vert. at center line of ring header between ring header and floor of ring room

,; 6 67 30' hor. at center line of ring header between ring header and outer wall of ring room i

< 7 67030' on radius of torus through center line of ring header between torus surface and r.h. surface 8 67 30' vert. between upper connection point of part 6 drawing 218 and upper surface of r.h.

9 67 30' radially from center line of torus between upper connection point of part 6 drawing 218 and outer wall of ring room 0

10 45 (at center line of penetration 216 x 204A on CB6I dwg. 217, rev. 5. vert. between top of torus and roof of ring room on center line of i

torus 0

11 45 hor at center line of torus between torus and

- - . _ . inner wall of rir.g room 12 45 vert. at center line of torus between bottom of torus and floor of ring room 0

13 45 hor. at center line of torus between torus and outer wall of ring room 14 45 vert. at center line of ring header and center i

line of penetration 216 x 204A between r.h. and floor

.~

Measurement i Azimuth Location 15 45' hor, at center line of r.h. and center line of penetration 216 x~ 204A between r.h. and outer wall of ring room 16 45" vert. at center line of penetration 216 x 204A between the intersection of. penetration 216 x 204A and the torus and the floor of the ring room 17 '5 0 hor at center line of penetration 216 x 204A between the intersection of penetration 216 x ;

204A and the torus and the outer wall of the ring 18 90 hor, at center line of torus between torus and outer wall of ring room 0

19 135 hor. at center line of torus between torus and outer wall of ring room .

20 180 hor. at center line of torus between torus and outer wall of ring room ,

21 225 hor. at center line of torus between torus and outer wall of ring room 22 67U30' Radially from cdnter line of torus between torus and ring room floor as shown on sketch 23 67 30' Radially from center line of torus between torus and outer wall of ring room as shown on sketch I

6 O

1

s - .

.g Notes:

j.

A. No clamps,' attachments, or other sources of potential interaction are to be pcnnitted between the measurement devices and their supports and pipes or brackets, etc., which may move during the test. This specifically includes the torus supports.

I B. fleasurement devices 16 and 17 are to be installed in.such a way that there will be no interference with the ring header during the test.

Assume the r.h. may move as much as 2" vert, or hor. relative to the torus for the purpose of instrument install,ation.

C. All horizontal measurements are to made on a rad [us from the RPV center line.

D. Azimuth identification is from S&L drawing B-400.

i i

I i

a 4

t h

f 4

a 4

44-

- - - . . w.-_ .-,...-.g -n----,c.- - - e y,.n--- . - - -,-_- - .w.,- . , - - - - y ,,,, ,--m, e n ,,. -,,.e,--r. , , . . gn-n-_-. .,.e--

. -1 :

8 *

j. . **l

. t' "

j 1.

g I .* *. . .. i s

gg.

'i

's .[ * . . ,. . . .' . .

3 s t.-

. . . , 3 . . . . , . .

. - urameest j . 'g

jsf */. l0 1

.. s

.. . , i

.. . i . .

i.

s . . . ..,

j .

s. . ., .g .%-

3 .

[y ., . .

I'

. . ~',y . -. . . . - t- . .

.- l

/, :

. . ' ** .. ..( s

. . .s . ..

.[,, .

*. t+

..- . .s s . s. -

t . %. l d / i . . . .

i .

a .

i

' - . !"Cll .

\

s

.~.' ~..~. ,.,. .

.\-

5 t., . ... \

o l .

s.

l' *

1 I .- l

\ l I ' I

' . Measuremen$

f [fetutorestenb '

, 2. $ ll 4 13> 18o /9.s20 2/

S

<..w n . .. . -

.- . .. . =

< .. y. . . - - . .- n

.] ,

i

/- .

t. . .

.f t.

. g 4 . e ,

\ .

4 t i

\. . 'l s .

/ l :

. a

\.

( .

e g

%. . l

. s

. s e

~. . .

17*! so . -

. e .- i .

s: , .

. . . g

,/ .

. p..

. s

, .\ _. .. . - F,- . .

N . . . . . .

s '

4% ** .j3 $$t?Murcostersb

/~,

1 3,

m IL. - n, -

17,- 6, >.- , , ,

! =

7.S @ ('l Jo g

ty'-f*' Jal.

+ .

j . . . .

.. i.

e . . ., . ,

. ... . ... . . . e . .

t . .. .

s * * . ,.

.i

-45 . .

. . . . .. . . . . . . .e E'45 - I- 3la/n..

_ _ . _ _ _m . _ , _ _ _ _ . _

g. . .1 . .

.:.. a g e

. i s. . .. * ; ..

6 .

g .

. g e

E.

.! S. *

..... 3. . . l j ! *.t !.* * $ .

4 0 g , ,. 8 ,

s-

. e

{

a.....

.- -*t I

e .,,.,t.'s .g.... g ..

8 . . *.

e * * '

. .. g 6

!' I l h .

1 8

t a r . *. .

1 . g a .

- -.t.'

.t . - . .

sQ g . , ,

v

.- ;. I ,

= .

\ ,

. 3 ; e*

. g

...a ..

*8 ;

a % .. j . .

.. t - ' [ .

\ .- , ..

N\ : .. .

.t .

's ; .

3 s .

.g .

? I

l

\

l

/'

I

e B

. s .

.I t

\- ,

- - - f i

. NN , ..

t .

e

. . y

. x .

s

+

r-i

. . /

t t* .# t

.o - a' f N. .6 . .-

's,

= .*

.. l

s. * .

l a

. t

s. .

. . N .. *

/ t

\ 'g

,/

p/7. a s

,g . -

. .s. 3, 8 a l

. # N.

)

m \

, . . -% /

I_ _

1g..

. *, \

., - g, . r

. -..,.- . s*= .. #*. s/ *

/ . , j, .s N. *

4 t t .

's, e , ; . .

s

, N.N.

, / '

. = = *

.s 8 N

Ib +

.s:.. . . . ,

I i

' * . 'F

, '[

. g a .e .

3

's *

6 . .

. . t .

. * *. i

. f.

. . e. .

. g e

s

g. , ;

g l

-.j*.e a 8 *

, . . . . . . .. * . g ..

, g 8

. ., e .T l .. .

l

I !.I ! .

>l i .g. i ;

. e

.,.......s.

S

. C*l.$ .?. 14 ? .'.

L . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _

.. e ,

s m .. . , . : . . .. .e,a .

i. t, .

.!..,V;*.t.

.. . j % .

e

., . A g . .I *

.4. .

4

' . . . %S .

1 . ..

.a . . . .. . . . ..-.3 .... *

./

i . . . g. .

s l ;

t, n.

.. el. .

l.. . .. + . . : . ,

, e 1 .

. g -

4 .J

i. . .

s. .g ..ji '

. . . s.- ,

, s A - . . .

m

. .- . .+

.s ,i . ; ,

-

6 . *. ... . ,

i .. ... .

f g .

t g

y. .

.4 ,

w -

- if '

. .- I

. l

l .

'e , I. ,

. ., f

/ -

.+ - .

I

' y 4'= ,

. A .

=. p

= *- .* ; ,

. 3

.s. *

! l i , ... .-d{.$.' 1 1

.I

- , \ }

N 3 4 * .

1 -

t 6

I,

. p . '

I b * .s , '

g ,

/ -

L .- / i I

% / / I, 3% /

hQ .,

/

/ .

IO

. i .

3 o

s q k .~. o. . .

eq M

w%

A./ ='.,-

. .\

. / e N ~~,

-p . . i ' '. ' s

/ p' ,

o \

.' = f ' .

eVn p

d .[ '

" . ); i

+ . U / . s ". , , . -

. o ,

l.

s . .

% . ,/ .

. . ... .l..

v

. . ** 3 t

. . . . s

/ f- , .

, I

[

e

, / .l

s. . . '

o ./

. 3 i * -

. 8 . .

. l 3 . .

j .

. . .l t .

l

. a '

i . -i -

m

./ ,--.

. *t-O .-

e . e . ..

g .

. i ; ;- i

. . i.

- . I -

o .

B s

g

t. . .. > . :.

!. .. t t

. . . . * . ' ~ . ' .: [. *

.1. . ... .

g

. . i L5.b'-2/c))..

... .. t 4 .

..;.. 4 ..

,o \

. . . .t._..

c,.... . .. . .

c. . .

a

.o 2 . . . .

. . . i.

, '. ... . x, .. .

.. . .;. .4

t . . .

. i. ..

i

... . . . .. .. . a; g..

~+.

y o r.

Nw i '+ ,5

.a

.-g:g

. .. c ,

x .g =

s .

o v g yv.4w

.. 1 . x t s u ut

<g u to

~3' =

g i w f.s y4

'iJ a u

. .u .

u u w*

i-

. s .=. v %.. Az "

. * * = .

$ , . R . Y, %

O .

0-a t ' --o * .

Q Ma % . ' 'S f w -

-u.a s% ;s E .e

. . - v. .

4 M w e., -

D kQI d-

. Qa g 3 Qz u J *41

-1 I

L'zq bp . =h %'S

' h

r

'I o .

g' o ,S Q A\ .:. gu g*Q

..u.N ( to

.~

s t f, c y, o 4 I-

~

. mJ, Mw, l "l 4 + Jj 'L,; 4 %-2 o

\ 4 tl o %% .o

~

I s L.

~ -' 0 '~*c

A g

-i e .J 'c N.

A 1 L

' i

(, p, ' 0 I

DA

. - ., i. .

g hJw $v 97 s

M:ah 5

- - s

., g s. .ji

' . . . ,g :c, . t -r

.. g . u t

. - ,, , is e, .s y g,y g g

^\ g S*

n 4h 4 a N-t -

I g . .

r. s .

O k.

' \

[

Q \

. 1 .. .

- 1 t

'i

., L. - .

\

. s r

. .a . . .

1 .

48 gg,g . ** * * '/ 1 N ,, s i

]

' i . ! .- . .s .

, . m

,,;;,'i ' ! l .,- l 91

.r.

.. l.., r i.

. ... l-s W 3

l . .., . E

.: 3 I,

{ '

O

<. as t .). -

. V ' i- F n

,- ./.

Q , . .

{

.. 4

il >- Ld g F gi ,

i,gt a-

- u

. n- .:

e.,.

".*lj,'.)

l

. - . , 2m -

- s i

. o -

ta ( . .':1 pJ. cd

.- .; 4 p .

A: ' '

OW Z

. ,o 81

s I

O- . - 6 l .

g3 b

~ '

b

')

Q 4 w i., n - --

I8 tf

{ ,'- g s-

. , i.** .

P. O i.s a '

odw 1;,._.. .. ;

s

'l =. 66 p.

t I ! i.*,* . .*lg * ..l s

I lt e 6. j ,

9

. . . F'. ' jai l;.1;e l I

.n c.

.. . e

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

g. ;i. . ed ,ll, t ; .

I - '

._l'.l3 j3 ) I

I '.#! g I. l d e s

e . ,ls n. t *t8 ll':.

t

'D .

. wg .

F*

~

e ._. . . __ J. r -

c5 .. Oo

. $5en C 4 w IJ b I h >*( n

h. .

.' i. W .

l EEo

- 45;a

3 . . j3<

8 M wip

-I-- . *( - e. m > 4 a

ft 4

j$J

,i. a.

,0

. g,_ .. .

..e *

~; j ,

- .O *d.

./

l

O. * ..

(L / ,A

? , -..e -g

(, -

{j'-) .f, . d'-i., .(,3. _

-?" g .f~_{!.. . __1._

t ._ , , _.3..

00 %

h e * - D

, ) O -

. 68 J IT A ZZ U .

l

40 UO e

2 {

1 5' / (- .... ,

p,. j N *

!.=g ig,.rt. s/ .. f-, . _ .

y

- . . ..; 'd.. 2g :' , ,

u . . . .

O - 's'* - -. .

i; n I, d ., '. t..?- * $u.3

.oG

,e s.l.

.ilu,',in l t a zdw Igr

u. . .J

. o -

e I to 8I O

U g

l

tig i)'Ie i

-;t -. **.9

i. s. *3 3

.8 4*** " W 2 ou 4 g ,

e l lg 3

l

. . . . LdL O.. mi O 4 J * . ., 'e F won .

,b*/

a . *

g

. 4

. ll" * *

49. .

s.. .,. . .. g . ..

. . :. . .. c ... . . .

.s . .. .. .

..... c. .. . . . , . ,

.. t; ;. .

..n... .: : . .s . .

. . ... . ::. ... . r ,

.m..o. . .. . ... .

..r, ....... c.;...: n

.: . .,:. ,.i .:...

v. . :, . . . . ,

...a ..i . e . .: . i .;.. e ,. ex. p n .

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

.. .n . . .

.,...u....

c.. . . . . . .. ...

.. . . . . u : . . .. . :.... u. . . . ... . . . . .

~. . .

. ~ .

e g,F .. . ;. .4"

~-

c .

.. . [f;, ,c . .

.. . ,r. .

p 1 % aramen

.. l c.

s .

itosh.

_. s .

~ .

g slutrint -

g / arwnts

/

o- 5' Je

~

3+ . .

s . .

t-

. .. .3 ., . . . .

, , r. . . ; . . . .

.l . .

. + -s.- t .

.n. . . , . . .

. . . . .i . . .. . . . .

.s .

r

..1 .. . . _ _ . . . . . . . . . . . . .

- so . ....

h-

1 8.5 Twenty-Four Inch Diameter Header Drawings 8

0 e

a i

l 1

i I

I

~~

7,. . . , . y- , p au r:- -

a u " -- n.- - --

s

. m1N j i m.. a 6o nota u~c. ;

g

-... . ?.e p b7 m.

i<. r e.u h..g.s G .i.

t w gl%~ .w r.3. ~. p.V 1.

t 5- e o h w,i o m .g y T r f.::,y '

(

,'(' #h. (r54) EfBLA.

,.b% . . z.v3 ' i E s.g .n TJiii m T;'" . .... - n 9.

en

\ q.

4 m.u.winrm 4_. cie q),

80 wt . . 9_.3 .g;. .- . 3,s p_43,y % 4 - *. ___m,-

. @) c, 2 c, - --- s._ I '4. . , rc, , _ *r

\ M ti l .25J h 741 2+%v: k eg 6.-

cn -

gN.~.

gl L*y/'.)%

- e. -

,Q o

' n' n.

, j-9 .

' ~

'~

'I , , lQ -. 4 MB 24* 3 PE4.NR *.EZDC45

/

\ rt-t g g .. r4- 4 4 te ma'vt a bc x4 :74 2,5

. ' cc ,,

t

. . rv .is ; 4 m%. N.a i. .ms. .iii?-Q' e 6 ip:n y'{c,~:C. i, , .e IT

$*. I l r2 'T

OUTS.]

IL-el I4 R o a 4; '71% e 3 04 Yi 2.g l6 . a.2 . ~n 9

'_ f* ' te 5 & R J a 4.

A ( 4.1 - 4 . ) 6o c 8 5 PA~7 t 21

'\ ! Sl 1 1 I i if M1 M 2E 8

,~3

.v ' 4 ai 0 .-t 14 tova m e wrcus N H ,Ti 9_ K C . i

M..r1 i

i

,g [ I'*

't Lc- 9 4 5 t n 'r. a:i Sa 6 > h 4. '+. % - a

r 29. . DETAIL- C - - a . .o. -

' . .' Z 4 i im P._ P t 23

E N e '.;"% 0 ';.S l[f M - ) Q t> . 4 It*, 6 i Ft.f. R 27 c '.U a 4 ?* g 'O '23. ! Ej i ' s $53~

f t%.10 '54%ha 57:0. 5;NUG .s!E GT - -~* [MI. it

/D M r i ~

"- ~'

N, .;,

l j .

[ (*a CCI-8 4 tu r., l "L43 nuiCR iCT:,NS

. eg.;gg e ma e

-e m.t. o m 24 r3 4

4 m as.w.x .m a.3eg is?.4s h %=% P4e=L*Jahlk p,.t 6 ' 2 2.: _ r. t;

.s.n

-, ,3..

u-f ;

7-r,__Ayrpg(

3 ZW D 24*O F U LU1 MCn:N$ I .

5- 6 iR u ht.

M C4 4. T5 W) h , & . 25,,'Q.p.y 24 4 **

cm r 1

~ - i. . 4 , ..

. _I h' Z 20 E:' _

T4'U *.!/OiR \*CTC43 )

) 6 '

pg#'*'gAu.

g FICLD f4 }, g,. 4 tir st., E g q %Jh .y.3%74 h. 5Se4.Wh 2 bWe h !'A U5'6 ' h-' t h )*si;g I 6 C/ , ,*Q. Q ?

t re. ,.6 %'

"8 * ' E *

b *

5' " ' ' ' ' ' * - !6 -

'm -

2

'JL' t wpemeu.on a @ g g amt-z zu:r e c.g u v, . W % :s

' b;'

g Z %9 2

, fe ZI'ed < l'4

. :, l : , , - s ca 2'

~

g gca(J Cf.T. A. A@

g/ 7 Ikf li' 3 6 D r!4 'iCT Cet ,

Z r34 a (, @ l 8

r@ O ) ,\ . fl.. 4 . I E 4J %- *%

M .74 ts (3 5'tf '.Sct . . :)

p -

i g P

p i

h iI ow l4. j re :s ; I s 2.'es'vn-h N .Wos 8,r ,i3l e l ir. %Q (73 f. F )*61) *e, a

2i fM]

z .'., , 7o ~

l.l s 6'2 i s2 E-

~

OCT.- \

~

' rn, % i 6 t+.S o 504!c w o;E 6 er 4 ; : .3. om w sh Dat t *

\ / %6 1 2 T h d * *r f,J,- C ES ,o

~

T **

~

'S a

o. h g.5 1

2. ab b ne s Z-419.1 %

6 I i S Sfo 4 l EL G 2(D P9f ER Irr' .?. 4 ,

6 0

Q

U2A (^ y)0 to 6 I 82.

0 ,6 ' '. t fU fd4 'I

.i %,, ,ce sesumemm w.,4 r& tr ; i i e. n.c>:,'S 4.xC4 nw4.!41) a iin.npa Cs, o , -

. . , e.,

e

.p/ 6 .Cg, f- ,. .

3s muc a cemz.t

- ric. e : i , e. 60 '< m o s a s i g e

i ei 9,',_ u r,

+4 e@- Q p', n eurs. m aT eg 2 34s . g os s. t v e.e ,. ;4 n. :..

gt94 ,,, s% .

zu ri , i I re s 1: ei',:i. %.54:44.T3tv Wpj .I r :.i a 3

E,

% h.',- f\ 'N i *+~ . i n, -

1 n G ~su s .

u ~

_$ !&9 l e rt'4/ 0.s:a l .$

( l khg/,#y

,.3 0* u '

?. #* I 5 t&:2 ; v.sa .o E .:= h tr.y o f , a,, , 6, { g .f,, , g q ',U./ ,F. /

s":o . ! ; i<y. .-vo ecc3 %. e ~;~ tou s ' o v,. m :4.,

,/ ' ' l Q"<*N N s -y

$b.'"""*-

. i, m. t.

% Mgs\ h.%W% ,,;; "VQasyb.@h 3 /t Q ,'%. D i .7%f *YA #

7f,# $h0P MT. .lJG ',M 4/9 ., %, g*. */O' .

d '. 'we succa rca S, N *

y e

u $.

_ 35mE55 erne.e.mON r",n04 _ AVER o p

~

%J.

o h+,& s+ _:_

r ,

_m ..a.e n, hn utt A7 - 7*U. !

- - EEIL"- . - -!% - 5 ;,

KCTICN L-E q/(,@@%

QUADcmES U

...~.= - .=,=--'-'~.. .~ ~.~~...~ .

rn r. , , ., , .:. .r ;& ...., : .

m untn - .

~

l' .< t: .,

4 , g.g

. ' *** I .

g =, , K ZZ4 A) ,

l't ' W

- .d ,

l 3-t. #/'2-

'4 ,

tom { 1

- 1 o . ,s .e .

E \ /= .

e

\

/- ~- ,. -

oce.., -

..v -

4- 0 T' 6 ! [I"I D ' ETA g,,g 14 .

. rs-p A~'l' A%rn.eyty. A _

pp W A W 0) o.mn - 6

, g, g 4, 3 ,

'I GE g

,.s**

v . x' x ,,

_.-1-=

RT. A -

i

~~'

/ p DET.-C L

,'.__ . I.V:66'M g

CCT. A ' ' r Ci T.- B' D7 chN.*"'*I*'

I /. h' RT.- D ' \

<Q b,8 Cru d *"'s" .

2'7 h 25-N g J;

g~LGT8GY-6

ISUJ.1INhh(hOEkl ,

% r.

1 . .

?. stw {

{ g g g'. / f3QQe, .t

\ r, Y 4*:-

3 m oc,;r.n ej . .. __ ._

-- ET. A l .,

'.. .. d E

'$ .[ l CCT 6' LN w u., <

y L ~ -

c- .

\

BNui.

'G@i@' .

@u E.CTI.] Ct &

r$

_v. 725 N.h"C3Q, M'44 A. 7 n s 6 e .rm , J G't.

. ,s ,y *

$t$3,_'

eat to ee r too2 v rexs *s'ut4 tw:.s.ss if s t/c

s.m weism teatet utemd 63 fr *ts.

OtT D 7 j '

i r?"". A gg L nz Autosor'v =nacs u.iwcau.y .ta.<s 6.attrar.c

- 87 cz sec. easuasv oc.rtrita cas a e=n.c c.w*u.ss

"'"" ^""C##'*' 'O#' * ** TO 73;gi % g g y, D MArawTsc 'P AETE-ill s !.9 PaAaC444'to t f,t C74.se F1 *JA88 sen'E 03CW oft tA a.Str).%LY #443 8*!I3e FT?"a7 e.*La iCa7 TOTT2 4 UT8 **E2s ettrL siussc4 to es casstr<wien ur ac ,oi l

. q ge rt ~-g- y . g- -LR acu to Asine aars.43 ic.

A,stu aJ4s vr sc.s. rnaov.Jet ,e.e tiett.sca P s 'ste eu asec/are .

e

&*44M3 Y- E g 'Jt0 W s rrie a, e ,tesiscs e .i .433 me en 1.cs.rm ce c :

AmuSLY.6 CPP. ima run can nuta um. .- . senas=: = uar es a cu.rexr.ai.

cF9 C.f7 B .4L teuPC e MJ EGFD %O SctK1Je ta.*f 8 aJt f a2AS

- saatu vium i,vs. ,

, & 5 G44 1643 te.am*pse esit.e t:(as pus.f.17. .=

48W '-%

y C?.

.l '. .., . . s '% .

. . . r . ..~.

. . . -*ie ,

e . .

e

g nusturo .

,s .

.')

p.{tng)- y . . w. .

e

%j

,c: s 4%g

( $CGhf.NT

." \

l * 'e'**C.:f ) !'1V .15'C S p4 *

\,; ,

~.0L4T

8 .

"~ ' ?.N>" *'

/

/Db-C ) ..s_: e tyr1 e. h. lei 9 *

/ (a. w.p t: Q Q Q .t c-

- - )

4 . .t, 31 war -

~-

r

+ y.L Ti'2.' INT'

\

l Q)/ .7)NT A '

/N

),,4 s*'f W 45*

/

- g (Z.b- 3) T.'.E 't

5 5'I' 5,%

\ air

/

. % ./

y w vrm t,G.6!j To i mt.r1 .

.- v27*w T o; Per.E m T::u5 j

i g % De 7 6--E

t 's?. h

_ _tp~_ . 1 , t u aca 3-o __ L - _ . _

.r/R. A t

/

r -(l's>* 3) vers e t. a.a ame csm cru su.nswerceptu a a e or asce ::: ans

. T 2 et Mi eAnv<r*arrex.tr rusrcat2. c: .w e at:.:t e.s2 riurt as :uere tm av w..t :e tart:e_rs a-ru, tor mu.as5.a:

ru s #A:same is -s recties ::: asas ccer at:ta asse us

/.* f0. ar

.t

.mT - A

3. ezzz rnrrm re- m.,2

= vret,s: t nr.e:rs.u

m s, y 3,3, , e n ., irs ,i et,%,,er,v,or.:

.mt , c.u. =t er, r 2cre l

., sazov.

s tM W'A .' ~4 3'S *tb y 'it -' ors:e*Ta 7. t u e.7..::::

v E E.2T04. r dire:t 5;. re.cT :'.s*v. .<'N'S 5-0 W .*a ~ S .91 *AE E.."'

D.I. ! ',

k KCiKHT

< -(itG, 6) s f%"* V M*a 5 CM D ~G B 3 ccT1. s no s.mw. cr.f ~.t:s . - : :c'n N(n-c)

^

u .; ~ <> .%y 3 . -. . .

," $..,.aa.~ss.

s ,s . lCOs

.s.

,h. . . , . . . . . . .

,W .-

. . .r; :/

s. .y

{lrg -- t'$ Jg * * ,n1 j .@. . ' rrn 24'O HEADER ' .*'S. .

% ,- f 'D? k'PC'TSCJJ O-Wr.dP G;s;;.ld?2 C' 15 % ,.e , *f

. 1 . - .m.1. . w c,.(777:

-Y.

l

. . e./tn.e.ierJA?

.Wdb ; - *-* '* N

b f . 's

[.l e r 1.- w . . . _

_t :: .::::.::: c:en r.: . .. .. . . . . . . . . i

~~. .~~

~~.DPN-B - s.', -~~

,g . , *

~~(NI'* B , - g~~

~~' tp.~~

~~g.0 ,.-0 g.0 '~~
s
. ~ ~>s, p (1204D) .
( YnO.'T. s, , -
\
g1 :m -na^ . .
~~L.M~~
-@
~~4,,~~
'/ * - . .
' r (1Q' . , . Q m- ..
t '
. . . .- <s /. nuorun,ne vw.m ree o.
ne.pc ,
e.
cunra.
t:s r i- .. ..
^
-* . ' h.ig .N \'.41 l '.f'l l
.c .. , . ,. ,
BJ4!9L
' e- ( stwar : .. .. (
t 'y . 770 -g -
r--. " N,3,m ,
--, PLAM ,7 -- - - - - -
&6HEADEPu, =;----- , , ,.
,----s -
% ' -% 4 .
,N s .J.
12 @ ;
x L a m cc :
c ' -C, YGu ust ,
j.,g.3 "N-
.. _. / pg g ,w, ,. . -(* 208 C) g-
.;p 0 Q, (y l'.i t E+) ---- N,*
a .
e, -\
. !:T
~~y \~~
, . p. s
- v' j.e ,
~$A!,861 4-
, ,/
(.$o- 6, .
JWT A - ~~ ~ng.
Lu~"
i~ l c \. -Q u on
~~I A /~~
~~c,- L 91'DCRT~~
( SUFiMT N ( .JRT. Tr j ~ L K U. D IT 0Yb
- (x rc o (zig L) 46- EL) e
~~. :,. s . ,~~
~
- - . I
o f
.w l l e n .. , s... ,,-<'. u:
"f 2aA n y,p. .
12 23Ai CLIP ASSE.MSLY ! ! ,
Z' ' -! ! *2 ftn 24'#= 1 (coll){ es cW ) 6@Mi We
. . 218-2'12 f?.e. Lit
~~V2(7-l'-fi4%N5EE cc.* G'i -~~
cie. '7 i .
~
~~12. El&D CLIP A%E. Mbt.1' ."~~
~~Z18-5 12 P.'<. !$O~~
~~I 6:CU.)(sce. c.Srf.,') ~ ci i $l ,~~
ZlS-4 17. P s 5X W(4V2= l' .'W2 4sMxa c s*O do N' 8 u: ..
1( .
12 2IS 5 E. 5K h.( 24 e 8'4h* hYut ct -
8G) cro 'f.a-24 213 0 BARS 2H. U3
SK T i 2. 4 A-Ms 21 ZIB 7 do i ".n cio 48 A.c. IIEX. HD. SOL 75 4'4*-10" o ;' V.r. A 3c7 ,
<S A. C. R5G H K L.OCK M3TS W-10 . do.
'.1. . ', . . .: . '
~~w..-.,~~
- - _r. .
,..., :; , - , , ' ,. . . .y -
- - -~.
. - 9.
u .
~.:
Q S 8
~~l.Y.O /n P.AD .~~
_ IA '(l 9'd
- - i -
L',(,41!0 E 3- i - I
..o . . 'a ' I 'j , , , . - -
-j -
D. 'w%
.4 r
-g. .
,9 g. .~. -
,,.f,r,-t
., ut 1. $*; 091EEAL. PL/M I-02 / PPI'CVED ' .
- e rma rms en.r o ettme:3 .
t[<. 2.sa w2n wi. cme rTxness .
~~3. F!LLET ATTAG4HU4T M LDS ARE.~~
"* M' , 'lb t.EIMSPEC.TED ST tV.csMCiUC.
'~
CGTo< m:: c .
F'k','
PAIITICJLe .
= oom - -
Hm.v.
4 ,
-39.o .M RAD. _
m .. ,
e umgme .
~.
w - m~ m.:e . . . ~-
. .u- ,
c -! ,=.i east .-
. .o- m - - n- -. o n- e. s tr.
o.
~~., ., _s ...~~
y urugc6_ ,.tU;p gAES c Mt.TL FOR CG. V:55H.~ RGODi I .~%i- [ NII. 5.% ,,'f f5f[
{ll %' .
-NL- !' l SP=0.i'.WHYM c l #1 roe Y4*# MEADER 0 i
j r; .
.j '
. /d?' , 'NMN?Jr* ,,,
e .. .LL s.m1 %qq$ . I
~~iQ, -e -aa t~~
,- p 0.;iL?'_
l z 2b'M
. . . *-* - KS- 1 1
'-tr. i ~1'- 1.; 7 7/-E~;'EGEif r.Mte.
s
6 A ,.:....s. 4 ,.. . . . .
I
+
~~C.45UPiTdSICM CHAM 6". P.~~
~~ELEV. b'll'~~
G.
~~:c.!~~
v.
L'i a-
. n'
. W ~
h -
.J
~~s. .~~
&C *2 o .
n M/ 3i7 3 a $
. L k -
4 r^o g.
E[
U 'N/
[D
.e,
. p
~//. .D 4 , _ %
ws c, ?a
/t./ - / .: c i-
[ .
,,4..
-qu se o -
?,;f t'
./k::. van.%v:Au HucE.R omM^h 7#* 9 (!
. j .
/ (staows*2n)
- /
V $4, w
- e
, .r :. ,. m tuPPaics'OM OMLEP.
a TYP!C/C F:/CE.R..c - . PPOW ASSN _ EW
. . i
. --=
It'.0 8615 t tW @ I
@ ,, N %d i
( ,
\
kdfDLE Q
n f
-Iq.
j3
]/ _
. / - !_ IS #
ROL!fJ3 0'.lTS*D= I ' ,
~~n. COMR TO 1/4* PAO! 'edM ZP/.T.*H LDn j~~
4p- AI l AROUN D- 4-._W Q f.'A v.D M e
'S s%, ' ,,'UT. C. HORti. x s.
h* lb* 02 ht._f ;
%, *l
~
/ !! OLE . .
[ ,
o 1 EAD '47 '
-g .
,i AD % .f f 3
". i p .
,y 3i f-o I l'- 6 5 @-
jl3 :
. @ n# .
T .
e
-
~~I s ea.-~~
6 .
- f
~
^
s y s;c-
/ ,q+ UNITED STATES .;
p,,
~~m,' ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION . -~~
M WASHINGTON. O.C. 20S45
\f@.e/
% NOV 611972 e
Files (Docket Kos. 50-254 and 50-265). !
THRU: D. L7 g ema,nn, Chief, ORB #1, L k,;s k N,Q W . -
TRIP REPORT: QU6D-CITIES SITE, OCTOBER 19-21, 1972 (COMM0hWEALTH
~
EDISON COMPANY) }
Purpose of Trip _
To determine. types of tests and method of instrumenting for tests as it related to the torus ring header problem.
Also obtain information as to objective of tests and to determine what personnel were involved. .
Participates from Licensing ucre S. Chan, Mechanical Engineering, Technical Review, and J. Riesland, Operating Reactors Branch #2, Reactor Projects.
Summary ,
Objective of the tests, as explained by the 1 cad test' engineer, uas to measure the pressure wave through the torus water resulting from the actuation of one or more relief valves. The torus water temper-ature distribution as a result of the opening of these relief valves will be' measured. Confiruatory, data on torus surface movement and torus shell stress will be recorded.
o Types of ter : regarding the torus ring header system consisted of RV blowdown through combinations of valves, as well as through single valves, up to and including simultaneous bloudown through all 5 RVs and single discharge through the llPCI discharge line.
Instrumentation consisted of pressure sensors and temperature censors located at various points within the torus relative to RV discharge points. Also strain gages and displacement sensors located in selected arcas around a singic header inlet nozzle, a singic header support
, systcm, and several points on the torus in line with the singic header support syste.a.
D f "
lyf y f -.
b vgir-WIW ,
e
.. 1 1
O 8 Files NUV 0119/2 General Electric Company, APED, personnel participating directly in the tests were: a test coordinator; an instrumentation engineer; a design engineer; and a licensing engineer.
Discussion Tests A test schedule, prepared by GE, was followed under the direction of the test coordinator 'as station load desands allowed.
Tests consisted of blowing RVs in the following sequence (see enclosed sketch of RV locations):
~~1. "B" alone < 1 min torus temperature 50*F.~~
~~2. "B" alone.< 1 min torus temperature 450*F, hot discharge line.~~
~~3. "E" alone < 1 min torus temperature %50*F~~
~~4. "E" alone < 1 min torus temperature 450*F, hot discharge lina.~~
~~5. "B" & "E" together < 1 min torus temperature %50*F~~
~~6. "B" alone 425 min torus temperature %50*F~~
~~7. AB&E together < 1 min torus temperature %50*F~~
~~8. ABCD6E togetner < 1 min torus temperature %50*F Instrumentation consisted of:~~
~~1. Strain gages and displacement sensors located as shown on the enclosed diagram. The strcin gages were unidirection, but orientation unknown according to GE onsite personnel.~~
~~2. 11 pressure sensors near the B RV discharge area and 3 pressure sensors near the HPCI discharge area.~~
~~. 3. 26 temperature sensors located ir an array inside the torus.~~
~~4. Recorders with 25 mm/sce chart speed.~~
Test data will be taken to San Jose for reduction and analysis. The results arc expected to be provided to AEs for use in design analysis to verif y prc ,ent torus - torus ring header designs.
GE had advised us that they were unable to meet with us on Octooer 20, 1972, to discuss the torus ring header hanger failure, results of previous tests and their corrective action plans because those who would discuss these matters for GE were at the site performing tests. We were advised of this situation on October 18, 1972, by CE, who advised the tests on the torus ring header would be completed by October 24. We contacted T
I
s Files NOV 01572 CECO, who advised the tests were starting the morning of October 19 and expected to be ceapleted by October 21. As a result, J. Riesland, the Project Manager, RP, and S. Chan, schanical engineer, TR, made inmediate plans for observing the tests and were at the Quad-Citics site from October 19 through October 21. GE personnel at the site consisted of non-management personnel, only three of whom were participating directly in the torus ring header tests. A GE licensing engineer arrived at the site af ter our arrival; his 1.rticipation at the site was not definitely established. The GE personnel at the site for the torus ring header tests were:
E. Strickland - Test coordinator, reporting through a subunit manager, F. Brugge, for Startup Test Design and Analysis.
Mr. Strickland was in charge of the tests for GE.
~~7. Honeycutt - Instrument engineer, reporting to a subunit manager, R. Christianson, in the startup and training sub-section. This can assisted the Test Coordinator.~~
M. IicBride - Des'ign Engineer, reporting to a subunit manager, D. Ro: kwell, in the Design Engineering subsection. Mr. McBride represented Design Engineering at the site.
A. Levine - Licensing Engineer, reporting to a subunit manager, J. Benson, in the Safety and Licensing subsection. This man represented Licensing at the site.
Messrs. Strickland and Levine (who had been assigned to arrange for the GE-AEC uccting by P. Bray or GE) were asked who would participate in the meeting that Levine claimed GE would not be ready for until November 7 and 8. Levine stated he did not know at this time. When asked what managescat personnel were responsible for the program, the question was evaded. At this time, we do not know uho is in overall cnarge of the torus ring hcadcr correction project.
Our observation of the tests, the equipment configuration, and the onsite GE personnel led to the following cor.aents:
~~1. The draft " Torus iting !!cader Report" Table 3-2 is in error in that relief valve "E" discharca location is in the position shown for relief valve "C" and visa versa.~~
~~2. Hanger location numbering appears to be inconsistent relative to the above draft report and f or the tects perf ormed during October 19-22, 1972. Two areas were instrumented:~~
O
.. y
A
~
. . s e a s s
, ~
e
~~1** ~'~~~
~~NOV 0 ! 1972~~
a. The torus to ring header inlet nozzle x 204A, at 45' from selected zero, was instrumented with strain gages at 6, 9 and 12 o' clock positions on the torus shell outside the reinforcing plate diameter. These strain gages were stated by the GE test coordinator to be unidirectional, but the direction was not known by him at the time we discussed this point.
~~b. The torus, ring header, and hangers were instrumented at hanger No.1, about 67* from selected zero, with unidirectional strain gages (direction unknown) and~~
. displacement sensors. The adequacy of instrumenting only at the point of support is questionable. It was understood that during previous tests, performed in
,, July 1972 following the May 1972 hangers failure, only hanger No. 7, about 247' from selected zero, was instrumented (the above mentioned draf t report did not address the instrumentation or test program).
~~3. Maximum temperatures of torus water during the tests were not to exceed the 95'F limit of the technical specifications.~~
Thus, thermal stress for conditions that would parait expolation to accident conditions were not measurabic. The draf t report indicates that the torus and torus ring headers were designed initially for only static and DBE loads with no consideration for dynamic, thermal and shock loadings.
S,ince the purpose of the tests was to determine the pressure wave ,through the torus, there is some concern that the tests will adequately portray the forcing functions that should establish the loads and stresses for corrective design.
4. It is not apparent at this tiac why GE has delayed reporting on tests performed during July 1972 and verification of adequacy of the subsequent corrective measures as they apply to Quad-Cities and to other BUR plants. Levine advised:
~~a. Plants with the same torus ring head support design as Quad-Citics Units 1 and 2 are:~~
(1) Dresden Units 2 and 3 (2) donticello (3) Millstone Corrective measures taken for these plants were not known by Levine.
3, u _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _
F~
e s
Files h6p g 1 }cjg
~~b. Plants with different torus ring header design than Quad-Citics Units 1 and 2 are:~~
(1) TVA Browns Ferry Units 1, 2 and 3 - torus is the same design; ring header support different. Design dif ferences not known by Levine.
(2) Oyster Creek - torus is the same design; ring header is supported from the floor instead of from the torus.
(3) Nine Mile Point - differences not known by Levine.
P Whether or not corrective a'ction will be taken for these plants is not known, nor is the applicability of the Quad-Cities tests.
~~5. GE has estimated that evaluation of the data taken during the October 19-22 tests will not be completed in icss than 90 days.~~
~~Conclusions resarding the safety of the present systems for all aff ected BUas cannot be made until the evaluation is coupicted.~~
6. Strickland advised that GE has not considered usage factor in their analyses. We consider fatigue lif e as an important factor and that number of cycles of blowdown into the torus from various sources should be included in their report. .
Additionally, depcading on the results of the analyses, consideration should be given to stipulating in the semi-annual repor t the nuuber and types of these occurrences as related to the calculated safe number, and appropriate limitations stipulated in the technical specifications. Also the technical specifications should include surveillance requircaents for the torus' - torus ring header system.
7. Dynanic forcing functions, particularly regarding modes of resulting stresses, appear not to be part of the GE test and analysis prograu as we deduced from discussions with Stricklaad and Levinu. Uc consider these to be very important
~~and vill require that they be included in their program.~~
To prepare for the November 7 and 8 toating on torus ring header supports as a generic probica, a tentative agenda was prepared by Levine of CE during discussions with Chan and Riesland of Reactor Projects. The proposed agenda is enclosed. Af ter review, we finalized the agenda by telephone with GE.
. 4 S
Files O U1N We propose to work with Regulatory Operations to obtain data regarding failures, corrective measures taken, and torus and ring header arrange-ment at all BIG plants with torus configurations in preparation for discussion with GE during the forthcoming meeting.
. .vbf e ~< 5 g, John I. Riesland Operating Reactors Eranch #2 Directorate of Licensing
~~Enclosure:~~
Proposed Agenda
. cc u/ enclosure:
f..,
AGia:6usso,'L:RP ,
' e' .
DJSkovholt, L:0R
\ TJCarter, L:02 81*cppler,RO Schan, L:7.E DLZic:aann, L:0RE #2 J1Riesland, L:0RS #2 R:Giggs, L: ORB #2 9
I e
t
}.,
e y~
t
DRAFT JIRiesland:sjh 10/24/72 Basis for Proposed Agenda for Generic Integri_ty - Ring Headers
~~1. Cencric discussion of ring header torus systems for GE plants.~~
Identify similaritics ar.d differences between support systems.
AEC would like identification of the designer and constructor for each plant.
~~2. 3rief description of Quad-Citics ring header showing penetrations, relief valve discharge locations, etc. Description of identification scheme for supports and pcactrations.~~
~~3. Description of mathcuatical model for torus-ring header system, including theoretical bases for dynamic analysis. (No description of any computer program.)~~
4. Description of test requirements showing how data from test will support model. Include description of instrumentation showing location and type. (Note - AEC will probably ask how this test compared with t'hc previous test run at Quad-Citics.)
5. Describe : cst and data taken. Discuss parameters measured and show how data provides required information. Describe details on orientation of instruments, reasons for location, limitations on capability of test and instruments. Discuss trends indicated by data.
~~o. Show how results of tests can be applied to other plants.~~
~~7. Discuss basis for fatigue life of torus-ring header, if usage factor used, if not what other means to account for fatigue life.~~
~~8. Discuss how the static forces , thermal effects, vibration, shock, and carthquake loadings were accounted for in the design. Modes of otrennes for each loading, 1~~
S Corld Sprae ~ .O O *-
I4Pci .A Cortd 3 PetAY GsHsurr
$3 V
'% 2 *I *
'C 45' QMsrcamgnrz /e/;; ru:,
0 ***'T \y,, lM**
{~" r lu h ' x .304A r D t- .,g,Y "Y %* sh L 9L* w.curama tc/p:.-t's .
N N $,,
ng o o av av b'
'C} .
,e u, - po' as N1E!v Sv e~ H
.y %
yst C1N 37,u:.w.sreo nz*
W 7a 721:n;) y
' 'I
/ G pfa R 22r* / /4- g 5 2a43 n a.o ve l 9iry* %
%oza
_ /23*
. a* **
. C ' / p, '
A l. C G H R s u c x
/ h ;re ,.c u e y, TbR.U.S - TC!"!.U.S .T.1(4Q 1 ',Cf.4DG;? SY.S76.\.
r Qu AO CIY'id's UN 2 T' rll3 T d' .S T.'S . . . . . .
72s,0 26Ps37' u, + 9 . - /r - .. . . ,

ML20141N318

Contents

Text

Reference:

Enclosures:

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 DESCRIPTION

3.0 DESCRIPTION

6.0 CONCLUSION

1.0 INTRODUCTION

6.0 CONCLUSION

Title:

Enclosure:

Navigation menu

ML20141N318

Text

Reference:

Enclosures:

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 DESCRIPTION

3.0 DESCRIPTION

6.0 CONCLUSION

1.0 INTRODUCTION

6.0 CONCLUSION

Title:

Enclosure:

Navigation menu

Search