ML20147F187
| ML20147F187 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07001308 |
| Issue date: | 12/01/1978 |
| From: | Dawson D GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | Empson F NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7812210358 | |
| Download: ML20147F187 (3) | |
Text
_
= --....
- ... -.-.- -..--- ~ - - - - ~..
.-.x.,_
.?
l GENERAlh ELECTRIC
" * "^" " " " " "
^
i,s.:EiVED PROGRAMS DIVIS1ON CENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY,175 CURTNER AVE., SAN JOSE CAllGRQ Og2gg g
SPENT FUEL SERVICES OPERATIOM U.E{
JEG-DMD-270 W: "
ZCTION Docket No. 70-1308 0 mc PUBUC DOCU'EST R00%
""** " d ""~
/
Y %,
December 1, 1978 V
i g
/j DOCKEttD r
USNRC Office of Nuclear Material Safety & Safeguards 2
i i
Attn: Mr. F.M. Empson, Project Manager l~
DEC U 51978 >
NMss I
Fuel Reprocessing & Recycle Branch MAIL sECUON U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to SOCKET CLERK 7915 Eastern Avenue Silver Spring, MD 20910
<b z
__m
~
= ~._.g.QgReferencatfiemo-to:. L. C? Rosseifromi F.JQ EmpsoiE rpj Co n fe rence. Ca.l l ; -
s TT/22778 (USNRC)
SUBJECT:
SEISMC RESPONSE COMPARISON - EL CENTRO AND RG 1.60 Gentlemen:
In response to our telephone conference of November 22, we have performed an analysis of the Basin 2 touth wall to develop a specific comparison of results under the El Centro and RG 1.60 spectra.
The south wall was selected for this comparison because it is the only wall not poured against rock, as are all other basin walls.
This analysis utilized the same techniques as involved in the analysis described in Revision.B5 of NED0 21326 (Subappendix A.15-A), in-volving General Electric's version of the finite element computer program SAP IV.
Critical inertial stress due to seismic load is summarized in the attached table for element 18 (the critical element) showing minor differences between the results based on El Centro and RG 1.60..Likewise, the maximum stress in element 18 due to the combined effects of hydrostatic and seismic forces.shows immaterial differences between the results of the two response spectra.
~
Due to th'e relatively high natural frequency of the wall, there is
~
~
~
c essentially no difference between results obtained under El Centro and RG 1.60 spectra.
1135g 7812210353
].?[
(
c^
m
n
- ---- s a - - -
,.i.~..,,a..~,
- w.rza
?
- .y
,f j
r
' j.
[
GENERAL $ELECTR5C
?_
L i
t-1 n-1 F-Please contact Hal' Rogers if you have further questions re-
-f L
garding this matter.
- t
-Respectfully,:
1 r
1
)
i D.M..Dawson, Manager l
f:-
Licensing & Transportation L
408*925-6330' MC 861-l 1
DMD:HAR:bn-Attachment 1
1 4
A 9a'Jp, !
hk?~5?$D....Q..;=.=:::::: _ a.a m..--m.
T. m.
j.:-;i :. _ L..
?~~-L W =.., ~
- . -: u~w:: ; w..
r
~~
~
l k,.
g ep 9'
~
-4g *fPWMk ' 4w..
g
.a--.-
ee
/
+ - A Pg j
i t
..m f
u.;
. CRITICAL ' INERTIAL STRESS [1bs/ft ] ELEMENT 18 2
f Mode El Centro 2%
RG 1.60 4%
El Centro 5%
RG 1.60 7%
J No.
(1)
(2)
(1)
(2)
(1)
(2)
(1)
(2) 1
-4.68 4.58-
-4.87 4.76 -12.73 12.45 -9.36 7.15 2-
-3.12 2.50
-3.69 2.46 - 13.<49 5.66 -7.38 4.92 3
3.78
-4.38 3.87
-4.48 7.56
- 8.76 7.80 9.03 4
2.70
-2.93 2.84
-3.08 5.40
-5.86 5.69
-6.17-5 2.34
-2.50
- 2. 51
-2.68 4.68
-5.00 5.02 -5.36 4
6
.022
.008
.023
.008
.044
.016
.046
.017 7
.372
.217
.404
.236
.744
.434
.812
.458
!:' ~2.III.-iSRSS
+7.67
+7.83
--+8.18
+8.09.+18. 52 +18.00 +16.16 +16.00 y
mg==+.
where (1) and (2) are face 1&2 of element 18
+ tensions compression
% percent of critical damping e
-.