ML20154L645
| ML20154L645 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 03/06/1986 |
| From: | Gustin H, Kuo A, Riccardella P STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSOCIATES, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20154L636 | List: |
| References | |
| SIR-86-002, SIR-86-002-R00, SIR-86-2, SIR-86-2-R, TAC-56540, TAC-60943, NUDOCS 8603120107 | |
| Download: ML20154L645 (127) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:I SIR-86-002 Revision 0 Project: GPC0-07-1 I March, 1986 I I EVALUATION OF IGSCC FLAW INDICATIONS AND WELD OVERLAY DESIGNS FOR I PLANT E. I. HATCH UNIT I - FALL 1985 MAINTENANCE / REFUELING OUTAGE I I I Prepared by: ,l Structural Integrity Associates Prepared for: Georgia Power Company 3 /4 [8(, I Prepared by: Date: H. L. Gu in I h Date: 3/$/86 Prepared by: f Date: __3 /. E /o Reviewed by: e 1cca I a] '>mucmm ,E 0603120107 060310 ASSOCl/GMIfC 'g PDR ADOCK 05000321 4' Q PDR
] Report No. SIR-86-002 REVISION CONTROL SHEET \\ SECTION PARAGRAPH (S) DATE REVISION REMARKS All All 3/6/86 0 Initial Issue I I I I 'I
I l TABLE OF CONTENTS I Page Section I NTRODUCT I O N...................... 1 - 1 1.0
1.1 Background
1-1 I 1.2 Sumary of Inspection Results........... 1-1 1.3 Sumary of Outage Activities - 1986........ 1-2 1.3.1 Re-evaluation and Upgrade of Previously I Applied Weld Overlays 1-2 1.3.2 Surface Finish improvement of All Weld Overlays.................. 1-3 I 1.3.3 Inspection................. 1-3 1.3.4 Induction Heating Stress Improvement... 1-3 1.3.5 Weld Overlay Repairs and Flaw Evaluations.. 1-4 1.4 Sumary of Report............... 1-4 2.0 FLAW EVALVATION AND REPAIR CRITERIA 2-1 2.1 Sumary of Pertinent Criteria Documents...... 2-1 2.2 Criteria for Acceptance of Flaws Without Weld I Overlay Repair 2-2 2.3 Evaluation of Previously Applied Weld Overlays and Weld Overlay Design Criteria............ 2-2 3.0 STRESS COMPONENTS AND COMBINATIONS........... 3-1 3.1 Sumary of Stress Components . 3-1 I 3.2 Stress Combinations for Weld Overlay Design.... 3-1 3.3 Stress Combinations for Flawed Pipe Analysis . 3-1 3.4 Residual Stresses................. 3-2 I 3.5 Weld Overlay Shrinkage-Induced Stresses...... 3-2 3.6 Sumary of Pipe Geometries . 3-3 4.0 WELD OVERLAY DESIGN ..................4-1 4.1 Introduction ...................4-1 4.2 Design Basis ...................4-1 4.2.1 Re-evaluaticn of Previous Overlays..... 4-1 4.2.2 1986 Weld Overlay Designs . 4-2 4.3 Weld Overlay inspection.............. 4-3 l 5.0 FLAWED PIPE EVALUATION................. 5-1 5.1 Review of Unrepaired flaw Status . 5-1 5.1.1 Previous Outages.............. 5-1 5.1.2 Present Outage............... 5-2 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Section Page 5.2 Analytical Basis 5-3 5.2.1 Review of Criteria............. 5-3 5.2.2 Crack Growth Calculation Methodology.... 5-4 5.2.3 Allowable Flaw Size Methodology 5-7 5.2.4 Effects of Weld Overlay Shrinkage 5-8 5.3 Results of Crack Growth Analysis 5-8 5.4 Evaluation of Non-IGSCC Flaws Observed 5-9 5.4.1 Weld 12BR-C-5............... 5-10 5.4.2 Weld 288-4................. 5-10 5.4.3 Weld 28A-12 5-10 5.5 Su m a ry...................... 5 - 11 6.0 EVALUATION OF WELD OVERLAY SHRINKAGE STRESSES 6-1
6.1 Background
6-1 6.1.1 Causes of Weld Overlay Shrinkage Stresses.. 6-1 6.1.2 Effects of Weld Overlay Shrinkage 6-2 6.2 Measurement of Weld Overlay Shrinkage....... 6-3 6.3 Analysis of Weld Overlay Shrinkage........ 6-4 6.3.1 Background................. 6-4 6.3.2 Modelling Details 6-5 6.4 Results...................... 6-6 7.0 Slf4 MARY AND CONCLUSIONS 7-1 7.1 Summary of Hatch Status After 1986 Outage..... 7-1 7.2 Summary of Conformance With Regulatory Requirements. 7-2 7.3 Weld Overlay Surface Improvement 7-2 7.4 Conclusions..................... 7-3
8.0 REFERENCES
8-1 APPENDIX A - WELD OVERLAY DESIGN SKETCHES APPENDIX B - FLAWED PIPE EVALUATION CALCULATIONS I I mucmm. INTEGMTY I ASSOCIMES,INC ii
LIST UF TABLES Table Page 1-1 Summary of Weld Overlay Activity for Plant Hatch Unit 1 1-6 3-1 Stress Components for Flaw Location at Plant E.I. Hatch Unit 1 3-4 3-2 Piping System Geometry Data.............. 3-6 4-1 Weld Overlay Design and As-Built Dimensions...... 4-5 5-1 Welds With Flaws Which Are Acceptable Without Repair Prior to 1985..................... 5-12 5-2 Disposition of Welds With Unrepaired Flaws Prior to 1955........................ 5-13 5-3 Welds With Post-IHSI Flaw Indications (1986) 5-14 5-4 Non-lGSCC Flaws.................... 5-15 6-1 Summary of the As-Built Weld Overlay Shrinkages.... 6-8 6-2 Weld Overlay Shrinkage Stresses at Unrepaired, Flawed Locations (IHSI Only)................. 6-9 6-3 Summary of Weld Overlay Shrinkage Stresses 6-10 I I I o mucum 11, l ASSOCIATESINC
LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1-1 Plant Hatch Unit 1 Recirculation System (A-Loop).... 1-8 1-2 Plant Hatch Unit 1 Recirculation System (B-Loop).... 1-9 3-1 Through-Wall Residual Stresses Computed at a Cross Section in the Sensitized Zone. 0.12 Inch (0.3 cm) from Weld Centerline of a Welded and IHSI Treated 10 Inch Schedule 80 Pipe.................... 3-7 3-2 Through-Wall Residual Stresses Profile for a Welded and IHSI Treated 26 Inch Schedule 80 Pipe at a Cross Section 0.12 Inch (0.3 cm) from the Weld Centerline.. 3-8 5-1 Stress Corrosion Crack Growth Data for Sensitized Stainless Steel in BWR Environment........... 5-16 5-2 Common Assumptions Used to Estimate Circumferential Crack Growth...................... 5-17 5-3 Average Effective Circumferential Crack Growth Rate As a Function of Operation Periods Used in Calculation of Time Between Inspections................ 5-18 5-4 Stress Intensity vs. Crack Depth for Bounding 12" Pipe Location. lHS! and Applied Stress (15.539 ksi) 5-19 5-5 Stress Intensity vs. Crack Depth for Bounding 28" Pipe Location. IHSI and Applied Stress (8.591 ksi) 5-20 6-1 Remote Effects of Weld Overlay Shrinkage........ 6-12 6-2 Effects of Weld Overlay Shrinkage on Parallel Piping.. 6-13 6-3 Measurement of Weld Overlay Shrinkage......... 6-14 6-4 Typical Schematic Model of BWR Recirculation System.. 6-15 6-5 Finite Element Model of the Recirculation System Piping (Loop A) 6-16 6-6 Finite Element Model of the Recirculation System Piping (Loop B)........................ 6-17 6-7 Definition of Local Coordinates and Loads at Riser to Reactor Pressure Vessel Penetration 6-18 I C STRUCTURAL DITEGRITY I tv ASSOCIAIUilfC
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
During the Winter 1905/86 maintenance / refueling outage at Georgia Power Company's Plant E.1. Hatch Unit 1, ultrasonic examination of recirculation, residual heat remova1 (RHR) and reactor water cleanup (RWCU) system welds identified 20 welds with indications believed to be due to intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC). Similar indications were previously identified at the plait ir,1982 and 1984. Of the indications observed between 1982 and the present, a total of 35 have been repaired using the weld overlay technique. An additional 11 indications have been treated with the Induction Heating Stress Improvement (IHSI) process, which has been shown to produce a favorable residual stress distribution which inhibits both growth of shallow flaws and initiation of new flaws. No identified flaws have been lef t without either weld overlay or IHSI repair. The history and status of the flaws identified at Plant Hatch Unit 1 are summarized in Table 1-1. At the direction of Georgia Power Company, Structural Integrity Associates (SI) has performed re-evaluations of all previously applied weld overlay repairs, prepared designs for those welds requiring repair this outage, and I performed analyses of those flaws treated with IHSI which were acceptable without further repair. This report documents the results of these efforts, which demonstrate that design basis safety margins are maintained after !HSI or weld overlay repairs, considering worst case interpretation of the UT indications observed during inspection. 1.2 Summary of Inspection Results Figures 1-1 and 1-2 contain sketches (Loop A and Loop B, respectively) of portions of the recirculation, residual heat removal (RHR), and the RWCU systems at Plant Hatch Unit 1. Table 1-1 provides a weld-by weld surmiary of the flaw indications identified in these systems since 1982, and the corrective action taken for each. A more I,Df7EGRITY l-1 ,. ggfg g,
n I detailed discussion of the observed flaws for those welds with flaws identi-fied during the present outage appears in Sections 4 and 5 of this report. 1.3 Sumary of Outage Activities - 1986 1.3.1 Re-evaluation and Upgrade of Previously Applied Weld Overlays In order to produce a consistent design basis for all weld overlay repairs applied at Hatch Unit 1, all pre-existing weld overlays were re-evaluated to determine their conformance with current criteria. Where necessary, addi-tional material was added to pre-existing overlays to upgrade their design to the sa:te standard as was used for design of new weld overlay repairs. The design bases used throughout this report are briefly summarized below, and I discussed in greater detail in Sections 2 and 4. 1. Where the original flaw indication was circumferential in orientation, the design basis flaw was taken to be 3600 in length and through the original pipe wall. This assumption negates uncertainty in flaw characterizaton, and eliminates the concern of potential butt weld low toughness. 2. Axially oriented flaw indications do not present a structural integrity concern. Those weld overlays previously applied to locations with only axial flaws were evaluated assuming that only leakage protection (2 layer weld overlay) and residual stress modification (to inhibit new flaw initiation) were required. 3. No credit was taken for the first weld overlay layer. 4. The as-built overlay thickness, minus 0.1" to allow for the first weld layer, was used in the evaluation. All previously applied welds were upgraded if they were determined to be insufficient to meet the above design bases. 1-2 7;I,STRUCTURJU. /, INTEGRITY ARXX,VGuilNC
I 1.3.2 Surface Finish improvement of All Weld Overlays Recent EPRI sponsored work has demonstrated that it is ossible to ultra-sonically inspect an overlay-repaired weld through the existing weld overlay. In order to do this reliably, it is generally desirable for the weld overlay surface to be smoother than the as-welded condition. in order to take the maximum advantage of these recent inspection developments, Georgia Power performed surface finish improvement operations on all weld overlay repairs (pre-existing and newly applied). This effort typically involved grinding of the overlay surface, preceeded in some cases by addition of new material to insure that the as-built thickness following surface improvement was not less than the required design thickness. The surface improvement effort will improve the demonstrable reliability of the overlays in the future by allowing Georgia Power to monitor flaws and flaw I growth (if any) underneath the overlay. 1.3.3 Inspection l During the 1985/86 maintenance / refueling outage, all previously applied and new weld overlays were ultrasonically re-inspected following surface prep-aration. In addition, Georgia Power Company and Southern Company Services performed a 100% inservice inspection of accessible welds in the systems of concern, as comitted in Reference 1. This inspection included all welds I which were treated with IHS1 during this outage. This inspection program exceeds the requirements of NRC Generic Letter 84-11 [2] and ASME Section XI [3]. 1.3.4 Induction Heating Stress improvement (IH5I) In order to ininimize future occurrences of IGSCC at Hatch Unit 1, Georgia Power Company has treated the unrepaired welds in the affected systems with the IH5! process. This process produces a compressive residual stress distribution on the inner portion of the pipe wall, which will inhibit future IGSCC initiation and growth of shallow flaws. A total of 117 welds in the recirculation, RHR, and RWCU systems were successfully treated, including all of the 12" riser safe end to inlet nozzle welds. 7 5TRUCTURAL DITEGIETY l-3
1.3.5 Weld Overlay Repairs and Flaw Evaluations In the course of the inspections performed on Hatch Unit 1, a t'otal of 23 welds were identified which contained flaws requiring disposition. Weld overlays were applied to 12 of these locations. The flaws in the balance of the locations were shown by fracture mechanics analyses to be acceptable without repair other than lH5I. The disposition of each of these flaws is included in Table 1-1. In addition to the weld overlay repairs described above, one unflawed weld (248-R-12) was weld overlay repaired to simplify future inspection of this weld. This weld is adjacent to weld 24B-R-13. The overlay on the latter weld par tially obscured weld 248-R-12, making proper placement of a UT crystal for inspection of this weld very difficult. Because of the recent improvements in inspection through overlays, it was decided to extend the 248-R-13 overlay to cover 248-R-12 also. 1.4 Summary of Report Section 2 of this report presents the weld overlay design and flaw evaluation criteria used in the analyses of Hatch Unit 1 welds. Section 3 presents stress component and stress combination data, and residual stress assumptions used in the repair and crack growth analyses. Information on pipe component dimensions is also included in this section. Section 4 discusses the re-evaluation of previously applied weld overlays and the design of overlays applied during the 1985/86 outage. A comparison of design and as-built weld overlay design dimensions is presented. A discussion of the examination requirements during weld overlay application is included in this section. Section 5 addresses flawed pipe analyses which were performed to demonstrate acceptability of minor flaws with IHSI as a repair. The fracture mechanics crack growth analyses which are the basis of this conclusion are discussed. 1-4 , STRUC11)RAL DfTEGRITY ASSOCIAIESINC
i Section 6 addresses the system-wide effects of weld overlay shrinkage on flawed locations. The analysis which was performed on the Hatch Unit I recirculation system is presented, together with predicted shrinkage-induced stress data. I Section 7 of this report summarizes the report analyses and conclusions. I I l I ,l, INTEGRITY 1-5 e' ASSOCIATESINC
TABLE 1-1 Summary of Weld Overlay Activity for Plant Hatch Unit 1 I NEit 4 IHS!' PRi-IV31 POSI-!HS! D!$ POSITION FLAW DESCRIPi10N FLAW CESCRIPTION RvCU-6-00T 4 NO CIR. l.6'I501 OVERLAY 86 RwCU-6-0U1-5 NO CIR. 1.5'!701 DVERLAY $6 RdCU-6-CUT-18 NO CIR. 1.25'I391 DVERLAY 86 RuCU-6-001-18A NO CIR. l'I431 DVERLAY B6 12AR-F-2 NO CIR.20-3011360s DVERLAY B4/ SURFACE FINISH 86 12AR-F-3 NO CIR. 20-3011360s OvtRLAY $4/SUSFACE FINISH 86 12AR-F-4 YES CIR. 4'I!31 CIR. 3.2'I321 DVERLAY 86 1:AF-6 3 NO CIR. 2.I*I501 DVERLAY 86 12AR-6 4 YES CIR. 5.375'I 201 LEAVE AS IS 12AR-H-2 NO CIR. 20-3011360s OVERLAY $4/SWFACE FIN!$H $6 12AR H-3 N0 t!R. 20-301I160s OvtRLAY 84/SURFACI FINISH 86 1248-H-4 NO CIR. 5'I351 DVERLAY 86 I 12AR-J-3 NO CIA. 20-301I!60s OVERLAY 84/ SURFACE FINISH 86 12 AR -K-2 NO CIA. 3011360e OvtRLAY 84/SU8 FACE FINISH 86 12AR K-3 NO CIR. 3011360s DVERLAY 84/ SURFACE FINISH 86 12BR-A 4 YES CIR. 2'I221 2.6'I261 LEAVE AS !$ 12tR-3 3 YES CIR. l.35'I201 THROUGH NALL AIIALS OVERLAY 86 12PR-C-2 N0 tip.20-30113606 DVERLAY 84/ SURFACE FINISH 86 128R C-3 NO CIR. 2511360s OVERLAY 84/ SURFACE FINISH 86 12BR C 4 NO CIR. 1391 DVERLAY $6 12BR-C-5 YES LAMINAi!CN LAM! NATION LEAVE AS !$ 129R-D-2 NO Cit.1501 DVERLAY $6 126R O-3 NO CIR. 2011360s DVERLAY I4/ SURFACE FINISH 86 12ER-E-2 NO CIR. 2511360s OvtRLAY 84/SUPFACE FINISH 86 126R-E-3 NO CIR. 3011360s OVERLAY 84/SURFACEFINISH$6 12BR-E 4 YES CIR. 25112.5' CIR. 2.75'1191tPIPE) LEAVE AS !$ CIR. 2'Il41(Sil 203 t-3 NO CIR. 3'!321 DVERLAY 82/SuH ACE FIN!SH 86 AI!A; 1941 22AP-1 NO AllALI611 DVERLAY 82/ SURFACE FINISH $6 22AM 4 NO AIIALI721 OVERLAY $2/ SURFACE FINISH 86 22tM-1 NO AIIALI641 DVERLAY $2/ SURFACE FINISH $6 228M 4 NO AI!ALI671 CVERL4f $2/ SURFACE FINISH 86 22AMI fCl YES INT. CIR.: 8.8'!!!! GE0 METRY LEAVE AS IS I 228P1 9C1 YES INT. CIR.tl2.7'I291 GEOMETRY LEAVE AS IS 24A E 13 NO A!!ALIS01 0/EPLAY 84/ SURFACE FINISH $6 248-F 13 NO AIIALI471 DVEPLA) 82/ SURFACE FIN!SH 86 mucmm. I 1~6 ASSOCIATESINC
I TABLE 1-1 (continued) 28A-2 YES CIR. l'I!31 LEAVE AS IS CIR. 5.25'Il51 28A-4 YES 7 A!!ALS 141 MAI. LEAVE AS IS 284-6 YES CIR. 2.5'I301 A!!AL 0.3'I291 LEAVE A! 15 2 AIIALS 28A-10 N3 CII. 50tI360s DVERLAY 64/ SURFACE FINISH 86 28A-12 YES CIR. 14'I291 DVERLAY 86 AIIALI411 i 288-3 NO CIR. 321I360s DVERLAY B4/S@FA:E FINISH 86 285-4 N3 CIR. 311!360s LACK OF FUSION IN OVERLAY B4/S$ FACE FINISH 86 NELD OVEELAY 288-8 YES 2 A!!ALS: 0.25'I 24% LEAVE AS !$ 282-10 YES 4 CIRC. 6.5' TOTAL LEAVE AS IS I 231 2 AI!ALS: 311, 261 283-!! NO CIR. 4911360s OVERLAY 84/ SURFACE FINISH 86 288-16 YES SHORT CIA. 101 CIR. 2.65'I241 DVERLAY 86 AllAL 201 CIR. 4'I181 CIR.)1.5'I401 l l I 1-7 INTEGRITY ASSOCIATESINC
I s.- V C 0 W W I w e. m C <- = m ea e;W u e.2 e o-t o i u 2Om - wm o m OVUW w J u _.) we=o -a 2. c 2 = = 3 m I 4 8 + 4 u 1 m g -I g w e e I <,.O y o an a s u I' 'a-vs eW Y W n g T ; a --y c. N .J s C g ww w. ~ m a <<s o o
- v..
_c, - - ~ v n 7t=. --t_ ~ -- r q.:ee. a. c y e .~, v.,. s Gh< <e,e o v u ( ~;g 8 eae 1 4 1% e$F<6 EN E EEs .c = cr: ts r w-(p ~ m :.,; ,6 =.. ~ u ~ 4.2-i . uid n Il ~ \\ ,y .e 7'\\st.ec~ .4. -'y i 1 V N .4 v u R ~ 4 _e ~ '. n ~~-- - Q _7%, f** n 4 s p =4 A iA e i e g Jn 92 6t or d E erk \\;( ki =; A C-g/:::. <s64 's0111 R (je t ' s__t 4e >~6 fg .m w f" A* g @ N l C N M - u (L w kh 7 2g i ill h I r 3 s e < <l 1.- i ~ = r l = D ;; b 00 g
- pw a
n a:, r s;s IWA li l 4 ~ o va G V v3 I \\ l\\/ 6 4 2 'C M5e s s ? T '+O ? F/ i S ss g se .Ng o m~ I\\. m e e N N N ew eq k ~, / O L / LC __ ', o w I I it. DFFEGUTY 3 ASSOCIATESINC 1 $ l2..O Q 3 h.. $3 C.
- g w,
I-n a Uh (f *h *A Jqd ~ o 9 m % 'H7 D i w to T I A a - M" 9 m. A w a5 c c & d iu x N J E r m. do e m a ce* n / u te os V
- n. m t 7L E* g*y
.k ('S7 Odd u Q' ?, 3., i ~, ~ * ? j, :- = z A,s, .~ e h+&i*? d,$5f E M w- $e.".?.e i f7 a h r5 9 9 J ;;. .,s
- r =
a t O si! di s. 7 d ; & i* g (, C i 9 dae 9 "g J o i & a = S" w e
- r. : =
5,n fl:t e.e :r a~-"r-i __ Y 4 ?_5_ 6 cc 4 I ~ .s t y) ?? N E l LJ i v: T ;v v n a \\ ug i at= lI .@ jJ - - -l ~ _3 ?N T f i 'i kNi d N Jgg ? 1 4 K ;;- 7 16?h=?h ? \\ N C: 2 T $ se =& 9 Es A.
- d. S.
n e ,O p\\=. PC # = co c - eii a 8 e a-s__~m e
c
~ ~ = g;. n e, 3, w n. m c-- s en i ~ ., m -- x. 9 c- ~ = .$&(
- s (u s =.$. "&
E Eg ml.\\ *- i ~ e E us n n y u I t t-v __m c: i g a a t l % 0-3 a r { C e ' R, \\ l\\./ <c i c am
- e N m +
.n r:- s u o \\ $ $ 6. d. s. c* T m? A .E e n o m E N C U M,\\lw -u A ~c l J CQ CC CC h cs N N tN N c 8 w l Ad .t ~ ei 'd( l ' i 'I c a e m D h h a J Z h -. a ' I s A 4r, 3 C
- C %
cc d Rd@ 6 5e@ d.,6.** <l :' s N u O n. "O c P-O CP. .,5.Jn f N s k. I ,j:, ,2 Q c IM ' \\'
- 7 y
. 4,,9,
- m. a
' / $. n: .N' 4 ,,3, J 0-e r-I 7 94 f (
- f!N U
-\\ l dE <e ~ m p. w* O-Ed n ,a i g se' /' \\ ow s 9-e Js,_ _ ..l k. 'o g - y os t YAE q 'o s. .D
- J-U o
+ v. o 'w" n, $ $ ; k L'ts e%c ,C Q. R, ~ o s n g N & "d
- i h
5 4 QC Rls0,,[ lad. ",i iN d w x!,5IhE IS ii m.
- e.,.
3 =. l -e e$ @\\ f3 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY O D 1-9 ASSOCNINC.
I 2.0 FLAW EVALUATION AND REPAIR CRITERIA 2.1 Summary of Pertinent Criteria Documents The evaluation and repair of flaws in primary nuclear power plant piping is governed by the requirements of ASME Section XI [3]. In particular, for flaws detected in austenitic stainless steel piping, the pertinent sub-sections of Section XI are IWB-3500 and IWB-3600. Paragraph IWB-3640 forms the basis for weld overlay repair of the IGSCC flaws identified in the Plant Hatch Unit I recirculation, residual heat removal (RHR), and reactor water clean-up (RWCU) systems. In addition to the requirements of Section XI, several other documents provide guidance for the treatment of IGSCC flaws at Plant Hatch Unit 1. These documents include: 1. U.S. NRC Generic Letter 84-11. " Inspection of BWR Stainless Steel Piping" dated April 19, 1984 [2]. 2. NUREG 1061, " Report of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Piping Review Comittee" Volumes 1 and 3 [4]. I 3. U.S. NRC letter from John F. Stolz to J.T. Beckham (GPC), dated August 1,1985[5]. 4. Letter from John A. Zwolinski (NRC) to Dennis L. Farrar (Common-wealth Edison Company) dated January 7,1986 " Inspection and Repair of Reactor Coolant System Piping - Quad Cities Unit 2" and attached Safety Evaluation Report [6]. Each of these documents modified or extended the basic Section XI require-I ments. The resulting evaluation and design bases as applied by Structural Integrity to the Plant Hatch Unit 1 flaw evaluation and weld overlay design effort are summarized below. I 2-1 INTEGRITY ASSOCIATESINC
2.2 Criteria for Acceptance of Flaws Without Weld Overlay Repair A total of 11 flawed locations were evaluated for acceptability without repair. All of these locations were treated with the Induction Heating Stress Improvement (IHSI) process to produce a favorable residual stress distri-bution. The post-IHSI flaw indications at each location were evaluated using weld specific stress information, and a conservative crack growth correlation taken from Reference 7. This analysis is discussed in detail in Section 5. Section XI [3] provides criteria by which flaws may be accepted without repair. The tables provided in IWB-3640 define an acceptable end of cycle flaw depth as a function of flaw length and applied stress. Reference 2 defines the allowable flaw depth (end of cycle) as 2/3 of the Section XI acceptable value, and also places limits on flaw length for circumferentially oriented flaws. The criteria used in this report for flaw acceptance incorporate the guidance provided in these documents as follows: 1. A flaw must be currently no deeper than 2/3 of the Section XI acceptable depth. 2. The flaw rrust not be predicted to grow to a depth which exceeds the allowable depth in (1) within the next fuel cycle, considering the effects of IHSI, and under the influence of pressure, dead weight, thermal expansion, and weld overlay shrinkage stresses. 3. Document 4 above [6] presents an NRC staff position regarding flaw size for which credit for IHSI may be taken in flaw evaluation. This position is that a circumferential flaw must be no deeper than 30% of pipe wall, and no longer than 10% of circumference. This position was used as a guideline for flaw evaluation. 2.3 Evaluation of Previously Applied Weld Overlays and Weld Overlay Design Criteria During the 1982 and 1984 in-service inspections, Georgia Power Company identified flaws requirirg repairs in a total of 23 welds at Hatch Unit 1. m uc m ua 4 DITEGUTY ASSOCIATESINC 2-2
Each of these repaired welds was re-evaluated during the 1985-86 outage to deterniine the adequacy of the existing weld overlays in light of current criteria. it was also the intention of Georgia Power to improve the surf ace finish of each existing weld overlay by grinding or wash pass application, in order to improve inspectability. The evaluation described herein also served to determine any limits on material removal for the purpose of the surface finish improvement. The previously applied overlays were re-evaluated based upon the'following: 1. Georgia Power Company provided measurements of actual pipe wall thickness and as built weld overlay thickness and lengths. 2. The first layer of the weld overlay is not considered in design evaluation, in accordance with Reference 2. Since measurements of actual first layer thicknesses were not available, 0.1" was deducted from the as-built weld overlay thickness to account for the first layer. 3. Where the original flaw leading to repair was circumferentially oriented, tht. flaw was evaluated as if it were 3600 long and 100% through wall. The weld overlay thickness which would be required to repair such a flaw was determined using weld specific stresses from Reference 8 and the computer program, pc-CRACK [9]. (This program automates the Section XI calculations). 4. The required overlay thickness from pc-CRACK was compared with the as-built overlay thickness excluding the first welding layer to determine whether the as built overlay was sufficient to repair the assumed flaw. This was generally the case. IGSCC-like flaws were detected in 20 welds, during the 1986 inspection, beyond those previously repaired. Of these, 12 were aeterminea to require weld overlay repairs. Criteria for designing new repairs were the same as those discussed above for evaluating previously repaired locations. This evalu-ation is discussed in detail in Section 4. STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY I 2-3 ASSOCIATESINC
3.0 STRESS COMPONENTS AND COMBINATIONS 3.1 Summary of Stress Components The stress information required for weld overlay design and flawed pipe analysis was taken from Reference 8. The components considered in these designs and analyses included pressure, deadweight, seismic (OBE), and thermal expansion stresses. These components are presented in Table 3.1 for each weld requiring repair or flaw evaluation. 3.2 Stress Combinations for Weld Overlay Design Section IWB-3640 of Section XI [3] defines allowable flaw depth as a function of the stress ratio (Pm+Pb)/Sm. The pertinent strcss combination for weld overlay design is therefore Pm + Pb * "p + "DW + " seismic Reference 6 recommends including thermal expansion stresses in the above Pm + Pb value, to account for the concern of potentially low toughness butt weld material. Since the design basis for the Hatch I weld overlays assumes a ~ through wall flaw extending 3600, no credit for the butt weld material is taken, so the toughness concern does not apply and thermal stresses are not induded in the design. Thermal stresses are included in the Table 3-1 for completeness, however. Weld overlay design is discussed in detail in Section 4 of this report. 3.3 Stress Combinations for Flawed Pipe Analysis A total of 11 flawed locations at Hatch I were shown to be acceptable without repair. All of these locations were successfully treated with IHSI. To demonstrate that a flaw did not require repair, a fracture mechanics crack growth analysis of each flaw is required. Input for this analysis included the applied stress, the residual stress distribution (post-IHSI), and the secondary stress which results from shrinkage of weld overlays at other ~ locations in the system. N 3-1
The steady state applied stresses which influence crack growth include components due to pressure, dead weight, and thermal expansion. These individual components are tabulated in Table 3.1. The applied stress for crack growth may be expressed as: Fapplied
- 7 pressure + # deadweight + F hermal t
in addition to these stresses, weld overlay shrinkage induced stresses are considered. These stresses are discussed in Section 6. 3.4 Residual Stresses All identified flawed locations which were not weld overlay repaired were treated with the Induction Heating Stress Improvement process (IHSI). This process imposes a compressive residual stress distribution on the inside portion of the pipe ' wall which exhibits crack growth and initiation. The post-IHS! residual stress distribution assumed for each affected pipe size (12", 28") is shown in Figures 3-1 (12"), and 3-2 (28"). These residual stress distributions were included in the crack growth analysis described in Section 5. A large body of laboratory data and analytical solutions exist on post-IHSI residual stresses in austenitic pipe welds. These data are summarized in Reference 10. These stress distributions were curvefit by third order polynomials for use in the analysis, and the resulting equations are given in Figures 3-1 and 3-2. 3.5 Weld Overlay Shrinkage-Induced Stresses Weld overlays shrink upon cooling af ter application, producing both radial and axial stresses in the repaired system. The radial shrinkage stresses are confined to the immediate area of the overlay. The axial stresses may affect locations remote from the repaired locations, however. The axial stress at the location of unrepaired flaws are included in the crack growth and allowable flaw size analyses for these locations. These shrinkage stresses for each unrepaired flaw location are shown in Table 6-2. The derivation and application of these stress values is discussed in greater detail in Section STRUCTURAL 6. ASSOCIAIESItC 3-2
are shown in Table 6-2. The derivation and application of these stress values is discussed in greater detail in Section 6. 3.6 Summary of Pipe Geometries IGSCC flaw indications;#ere observed in pipes in the reactor water clean up (RWCU-6"), recircuiation (12", 22", and 28") and residual heat removal (RHR-24") systems. The geometry of each pipe size (outside diameter and nominal wall thickness) is summarized in Table 3-2. I I 3-3 INTEGRITY ASSOCIATESINC
I TABLE 3-1 Stress Components for Flaw Location at Plant E.I. Hatch Unit 1 I STRESS COMPONENTS WELO NLNBER PRESSURE DEADWEIGHT THERMAL SEISMIC (0BE) RWCU-6-0VT-4 4193 517 850 2227 RWCU-6-0VT-5 4193 796 4314 5658 RWCU-6-0UT-18 4193 877 2237 1109 RWCU-6-0UT-18A 4193 616 921 759 12AR-F-2 6667 260 2816 801 I 12AR-F-3 6667 414 4971 2400 12AR-F-4 6667 1101 7407 1833 12AR-G-3 6667 188 4947 1593 12AR-G-4 6667 214 6284 1814 12AR-H-2 6667 387 328 1036 12AR-H-3 6667 602 6000 1212 12AR-H-4 6667 2637 7677 2103 12AR-J-3 6667 876 4588 1674 12AR-K-2 6667 300 2040 1599 I 12AR-K-3 6667 631 3771 2497 12BR-A-4 6667 1443 7407 1680 12BR-B-3 6667 344 3190 723 12BR-C-2 6667 339 3485 1422 12BR-C-3 6667 327 6416 1559 12BR-C-4 6667 1783 7792 2440 12BR-C-5 6667 1783 7792 2440 12BR-D-2 6667 396 3079 1270 12BR-D-3 6667 756 4803 1794 I 12BR-E-2 6667 142 2507 1780 12BR-E-3 6667 564 4550 2789 12BR-E-4 6667 1448 7424 1821 208-0-3 5391 643 3176 1790 m ucru m INTEGRITY NK 3-4
I TABLE 3-1 continued I Stress Components for Flaw Location at Plant E.I. Hatch Unit 1 STRESS COMPONENTS WELD NtNBER PRESSURE DEADWEIGHT THERMAL SEISMIC (0BE) 22AM-1 7250 0 0 0 22AM-4 7250 0 0 0 22BM-1 7250 0 0 0 22BM-4 7250 0 0 0 22AM1-BC1 I 22BM1-BC1 24A-R-13 7749 1036 5111 4350 248-R-13 7568 540 3139 3848 28A-2 7212 607 772 896 28A-4 7212 454 415 718 28A-6 7212 585 677 1052 28A-10 7028 417 792 2292 28A-12 7302 482 652 1457 288-3 7212 855 1000 859 I 288-4 5819 568 917 1652 288-8 7212 397 468 866 288-10 7028 444 652 2525 288-11 7028 444 652 2525 288-16 7302 1086 1272 1863 e I I
- These locations were classified as geometrical reflectors instead of flaws in 1956.
I mucrunn. 3-5 DITEGUTY l ASSOClKIEINC,
I I TABLE 3-2 Piping System Geometry Data I System Pipe Size (nominal) Pipe 0.D. Wall Thickness I (in.) (in.) (in.) RWCU 6 6.628 0.5494 Recirculation 12 12.746 0.693 Recirculation 22 22.00 1.10 RHR 24 24.01 1.15 Recirculation 28 28 1.213 (Suction) (Discharge) 28 28 1.39 I I
- I
'I lI I I 3-6 mTEcurry I ASSOCIATESINC l
l M Po M Po -300 -200 -noo o m too soo .m -200 -soo o soo 200 soo os-OUIER SURFAC[ g 06-WELDeW IIS 2cm) U, f -- wEL0tw s-h 2 [ + IHS: 1' o s-E A T~t \\7 T v;;.* w.-. h ' 0[ - 0593 12 a ' 80 i is Secml (050cm) E / f [03 t 3 6 cm$ / o 3-l W b waE Il* 0 2-g -OS { 02- -05 I l 0 I i 08-I g on- <t j O ( t L IMR ME -40 -20 o to 40 -40 -20 0 20 to MESIDual AX1AL STRESS, has RES6 DUAL CIRCUMFCMENTIAL STRESS.hei =-25.02-199.09(f) + 922.74 ({') -493.05 ({)3 Figure 3-1. Through-Wall Residual Stresses Computed at a Cross-Sect ir n in the In Sensitized lone, 0.12 Inch (0.3 cm) from Weld Centerline. of a Welded and IHS! Treated 10-Inch Schedule 80 Pipe [10]
M Pe M Po -soo -roo -soo W-vp -300 -200 -soo o soo 700 soo 400 JTER SURFACE f WELD s _3 (35 6cm) g _3 l' ht40=d 5 -- WELD + lHSI g o 5 s , -i w s e0-d **"" g n 0-1 I 5 _.i 3-?;" h I - Ral3 0433 02 cm) 6 E /* * !! 1 M' / / / lt' ( [/ OS-oS-ly ) 5 s i E 1 6 l 5 B l N. -40 -80 -20 0 20 40 -so -40 -20 o yo ao HESloual AXIAL STRESS, hel RESIDUAL CIRCUntENENTIAL r.YRESS. hoe =-19.22-228.40(f)+856.07(f)2 -616.80(f) Figure 3-2. Through-Wall Residual Stress Prof ile for a Welded and 1115! Treated 76-inch Schedule 80 Pipe at a Cross-Section 0.17 inch (0.3 cm) from the Weld Centerline [10] s D1
4.0 WELD OVERLAY DESIGN 4.1 Introduction I A total of 36 welds at Plant Hatch Unit I have been repaired using the weld overlay technique. Of these, 23 were repaired during the 1982 or 1984 outages. These pre-existing repairs were re-evaluated during the 1986 outage to determine their conformance with current standards. In addition, the surface finish of these pre-existing repairs was improved (by building up the overlay and grinding) during the 1986 outage, to improve ultrasonic inspectability. The weld overlay thickness af ter surface finish improvement exceeded the design thickness without credit for the first welding layer, in all cases. Twelve new weld overlay repairs were applied to IGSCC-like flaw indications I during 1986. In addition, an overlay which partially covered an unflawed weld (248-R-12) was extended to improve inspectability of this weld. The detailed discussion of each category of repaired welds is provided in the following sections. 4.2 Desigri Basis 4.2.1 Re-evaluation of Previous Overlays Weld overlays for all welds with previously reported circumferential flaw indications were evaluated assuming flaws were through the original pipe wall and extended 3600 circumferentially. The required overlay thick.1ess for each repair was determined based upon the requirements of ASME Section XI, IWE-3649 [3]. The applied stress ratio used in this evaluation was deternined from data pre:ented in Reference 8, with stress components combined as defined in Section 3 of this report. In accordance with NRC Generic Letter 84-11 [2], no credit in the design was taken for the first overlay layer. That is, the specified design thickness listed in Table 4-1 is in addition to any first layer thickness. Because STRUCTURRI. INTEGRITY I 4-1 ASSOCIATESINC
reliable information on first layer thickness for the previous overlays was not available, a first layer thickness of 0.1" was assumed and discounted from as-built thickness measuremer.ts. For previously repaired welds with only axial flaws present, the overlay is not required to provide structural reinforcement. Two layers of weld material are required to provide a leak barrier only, in accordance with References 2 and 4. The above design assumptions formed the basis for re-evaluation of the 23 overlays which were applied to Hatch Unit 1 prior to the 1985/86 outage. Effectively, a new design was prepared for each weld. During the surface finish operation for these overlays, the "new design" was used to guide I material build-up and grinding operations. The as-built (post-surface finish) thickness for each overlay was compared with the new design to determine acceptability of each overlay. The design and as-built dimensions for each evaluated overlay are presented in Table 4-1. The dimensions listed in the as-built columns represent the arithmetic average of measurements taken at 4 azimuthal locations. It should be noted that the thickness of the as-built overlay exceeds the design value in all cases. As-built thicknesses are the average measured thickness values following deduction of 0.1" for each pre-existing overlay. 4.2.2 1986 Weld Overlay Designs Where a circumferentially oriented flav requiring repair was detected during the present outage, a weld overlay repair was designed using the some approach as described above for re-evaluation of weld overlay repairs. The weld specific stress combinations discussed in Section 3 cf this report were used. The flaw was assumed to extend 3600 circumferentially and to be through criginal pipe wall. The progam pc-CRACK was used to size the weld overlay using Section XI IWB-3640 criteria. The design thickness included nc credit for the first welding layer. Design and as-built dimensions for the I new (1985/86) weld overlays are presented for comparison in Table 4-1. All weld overlay designs are included in Appendix A. STRUCTURAL 4-2 / AssocIArESINC
4.3 Weld Overlay Inspection The weld metal used for weld overlay application at Plant Hatch Unit I was Type 308L stainless steel, containing 0.02 wt% carbon max, material, which has been shown to be highly resistant to IGSCC propagation [11]. This material was chosen to prevent degradation of the weld overlay structural integrity by propagation of an IGSCC flaw through the original pipe wall and into the overlay. The resistance of the weld metal to IGSCC is traceable to its duplex structure (austenite-ferrite). However, because this structure is different from that normally found in the base metal, there is a possibility of dilution of the first welding layer material with base metal, which could potentially make the first layer less resistant to IGSCC propagation. NRC Generic Letter 84-11 [2] recomends that no credit be taken in the design of weld overlays for the first welding layer, to address this concern. This recomendation has been implemented at Hatch 1, as previously discussed. I In addition, Georgia Power has added three separate, conservative inspections of the weld overlays to demonstrate weld overlay IGSCC resistance and overall integrity. These include: I 1. Delta ferrite measurements of the first welding layer were made on each weld overlay. During the 1985 outage, a delta ferrite level of 7.5 FN minimum was taken as the acceptance criteria for the first layer. Delta ferrite content at or above the 7.5 FN level was considered to be indicative of minimal dilution of weld metal by base metal, and to demonstrate excellent IGSCC resistance of the first weld metal layer. If the weld metal passed this examination, the examination described in (2) below was then performed. If the layer did not pass the delta ferrite test, another layer was applied on top of the layer, and this new la3er was examined to the same delta ferrite criterion as above. 2. A first weld overlay layer which passed criterion (1) above was then examined by the dye penetrant method to demonstrate that no flaws had I " blown through" the layer. The weld metal was then carefully cleaned prior to continuing with weld overlay application. I 4-3 INTEGMTY I ASSOCIATESINC
3. The completed weld overlay was examined ultrasonically in accordance with EPRI-qualified procedures to demonstrate proper weld overlay bonding and quality and to provide a baseline inspection for future inservice inspections. The above combination of inspections make up a highly conservative demon-stration of weld overlay integrity. It is reasonable to include this first overay layer in the design thickness since the delta ferrite level does not affect structural reliability. The f act that this option has not been exercised at Hatch Unit I further illustrates the level of conservatism which has been incorporated into the overlay design. I I m ucru m N 4-4 MEM E
I TABLE 4-1 Weld Overlay Design and As-Built Dimensions As-Built Weld Design As-Built Design y 2 Number Length Length Thickness Thickness RWCV-6-D-4 2.0 2.82 0.167 0.2075 RWCU-6-D-5 2.0 2.026 0.206 0.228 RWCU-6-D-18 3.5 3.09 0.165 0.205 RWCU-6-D-18A 4.0 3.539 0.165 0.2313 12AR-F-2 3.2 3.8233 0.25 0.50 12AR-F -3 3.2 4.190 0.263 0.2710 12AR-F-4 4.0 4.528 0.257 0.389 12AR-G-3 4.0 4.517 0.250 0.2525 12AR-H-2 3.2 3.81 0.246 0.420 12AR-H-3 3.2 4.469 0.250 0.331 12AR-H-4 4.0 4.414 0.306 0.366 12AR-J-3 3.2 4.194 0.257 0.2788 12AR-K-2 3.2 4.764 0.251 0.2775 12AR-K-3 3.2 4.284 0.270 0.3575 12BR-B-3 4.0 0.242 0.257 12BR-C-2 3.2 4.066 0.249 0.4625 12BR-C-3 3.2 3.723 0.251 0.2675 12BR-C-4 4.0 4.127 0.294 0.305 12BR-D-2 4.0 4.323 0.250 0.3175 12BR-D-3 3.2 4.249 0.257 0.3800 12BR-E-2 3.2 3.983 0.251 0.300 12BR-E-3 3.2 3.839 0.252 0.2338 208-D-3 5.0 9.143 0.33 0.4075 1 Design Thickness is the result of the 1985 Re-evaluation, and not the original design in the case of previously overlayed welds. 2 De;ign and As-Built Thickness takes no credit for the first overlay layer, m u c m a r. INTEGMTY 4-5 ASSOCIATES INC
TABLE 4-1 continued I Weld Design As-Built Design As-Built y 2 Number Length Length Thickness Thickness (in) 22AM-1 5.2 6.332 0.376 0.4450 22AM-4 5.2 6.75 0.376 0.4775 22BM-1 5.2 7.777 0.7369 0.4175 22BM-4 5.2 6.638 0.376 0.466 24A-R-13 3.75 4.006 0.23 0.240 24-R-12 Blend 0.2 248-R-13 5.6 8.01 0.23 0.290 28A-10 4.2 4.643 0.48 0.5325 28A-12 4.0 0.52 288-3 6.0 6.152 0.44 0.5088 288-4 6.2 5.976 0.4029 0.6313 I 288-11 4.2 4.720 0.493 0.6475 28B-16 4.0 0.56 Field Data not yet available 1 Design Thickness is the result ofthe 1985 Re-evaluation, and not the original design in the case of previously overlayed welds. 2 Design and As-Built Thickness takes no credit for the first overlay layer. 3 Axial Flaw only. I I I 4-6 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSOCIAIMINC
I 5.0 FLAWED PIPE EVALUATION 5.1 Review of Unrepaired Flaw Status 5.1.1 Previous Outages Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code recognizes that some flaws detected by routine inspection may be acceptable for continued operation without repair. At Plant Hatch Unit 1, some minor flaws were observed during previous inspections of the recirculation and associated systems (1982, 1984) which were sufficiently shallow to allow justification of continued operation without repair [12]. These previous flaws are listed in Table 5-1. During the 1985/86 maintenance / refueling outage, all of these welds with unrepaired flaws were re-inspected using the latest EPRI-qualified ultra-sonic (UT) inspection techniques both before and af ter IHSI treatment. The results of this re-inspection of previously unrepaired, flawed welds are shown in Table 5-2. All of these_ welds were either treated with the IHSI process or repaired with a Type I weld overlay (which assumes the existence of a 3600 through-wall circumferential flaw as a design basis). The disposition of each of these welds is also shown in Table 5-2. It should be noted that two welds (22AM-1BC-1 and 22BM-1BC-1) are identified as having only geometric reflectors in the 1986 results column. This does not constitut a a conflict with previous inspection results, but rather re-interpretation of available data for these welds. To clarify this point, the following paragraph, which is taken from the pertinent inspection result documentation [13], is included: "During the 1984 refueling outage, weld number IB31-lRC-22BM-1BC-1 (pipe to branch connection weld) was ultrasonically examined. This examination revealed several circumferentially-oriented indications which were reported to GPC by INF# 184H1006. A re-examination was performed during the 1985/86 refueling outage prior to IMSI. The results of this examination revealed no significant change from 1984 data and was reported to GPC by INF# 185H1002. STRUCTURAL 5-1 ASSOCIATRINC
Another examination was performed after IHSI and this examination revealed similar-indications as detected in the 1984 and the 1985 pre-IHSI data. After carefully reviewing, comparing and evaluating all data taken on this weld, the conclusion is that these indications are geometrical type reflectors caused by the weld configuration." A similar discussion appears in the inspection documentation for weld 22AM-IBC-1 post-IHSI. 5.1.2 Present Outage During the 1985/86 inspection program 8 welds in addition to those addressed in Section 5.1.1 were determined to contain flaw indications which were acceptable without requiring weld overlay repair. These welds and the flaw indications associated with each are shown in Table 5-3. All of these welds I were treated with the IHSI process. Where available, the results are presented for both pre-IHSI and post-IHSI [13] inspections, for comparison purposes. The flaw in weld 12BR-C-5 is a laminar indication embedded in the safe-end material outside the weld heat affected zone. This flaw is acceptable by Section XI, IWB-3500 criteria, as discussed in Section 5.4 of this report. Of the remaining 7 welds, 3 are 12" pipe-to-safe end welds containing only I short circumferential flaws, 1 is a 28" pipe-to-safe end weld containing 2 short circumferential flaws, 2 are 28" welds containing only axial flews, and 1 is a 28" weld containing flaws with both axial and circumferential character. All of these flaw indications were shown to be acceptable without repair by fracture mechanics crack growth analyses, as discussed in Sections 5.2 and 5.3 of this report. I smemm. INTEGRITY MIAMINC 5-2
1 ) 5.2 Analytical Basis 5.2.1 Review of Criteria Evaluation of flaws for acceptance without repair is governed by Section XI of the ASME Code [3]. Section XI, paragraph IWB-3640 addresses the acceptance of flaws in stainless steel which are deeper than those defined as acceptable without further repair by paragraph IWB-3500. Allowable flad depth is presented as a function of applied stress and flaw length. The pertinent tables from the latest Code edition are in Tables IWB-3641-1,1WB-3641-3 and IWB-3641-5. NRC Generic Letter 84-11 [2] modifies the acceptance criteria of IWB-3640 to allow for uncertainty in IGSCC flaw sizing techniques. The allowable flaw depth defined in 84-11 is two-thirds of the IWB-3640 value. In addition, 84-11 defines the maximum acceptable length of a circumferential flaw without repair as that length which, if it is extended through the pipe wall, would lead to a flaw with less than Code safety margins on net section collapse of the flawed pipe. (This length is approximately 30% of circumference). Based upon the above considerations, the criteria for acceptance of flaws without weld overlay repair were taken as: 1. Flaw Depth: A flaw was acceptable if its predicted depth following one cycle of IGSCC growth was less than 2/3 of the appropriate IWB-3640 table value (IkB-3641-3 for axial flaws and IWB-3641-5 for circumferential flaws). It should be noted that the IHS! treatment applied to all flawed, unoverlayed welds effectively arrests any further growth for the flaws presented in Table 5-3. 2. Flaw Length: The aggregate flaw length was limited to the Generic Letter 84-11 value of roughly 30% of circumference for circumferential flaws. Axial flaws STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY I ASSOCIATESINC. 5-3
are self-limiting in length and are predicted to self-arrest long before they could gror long enough to produce a structural concern. Review of Tables 5-2 and 5-3 will show that all flaws which were considered to be acceptable with IHSI only are significantly shorter and more shallow than the above criteria limits. I An NRC Safety Ewaluation Report for Quad Cities Unit 2 [6] issued on January 7,1986 presents a criterion for effectiveness of IHSI as a repair which is based upon flaw dimensions. IHS1 is considered effective if a) the flaw is less than 30% of pipe wall thickness deep, and b) the flaw is less than 10% of circumference long. Review of the flaws listed in Tables 5-2 and 5-3 shows that all meet the depth criterion. All out 2 (welds 12AR-G-4 (13%) and 128R-E-4(12%))meetthelengthcriterion. This topic was discussed with the NRC bytelephone[14]. The conclusion was that these welds were acceptable for the next cycle, but re-inspection following a cycle of operation would probably be required. The above acceptance criteria were used with a crack growth analysis to demonstrate that the flaws listed in Tables 5-2 and 5-3 did not require weld overlay repair. These analyses are discussed in the next section. I 5.2.2 Crack Growth Calculation Methodology I An analytical model of a 3600 circumferential crack in a cylinder of radius to thickness ratio of 10:1 [15] was used for the fracture mechanics evaluation. For the pre-!HSI case, applied loading is the superposition of piping stresses tabulated in Table 3-2, and the as-welded residual stress for 28-inch pipe or for 12-inch pipe as appropriate. For the post-lHSI case, applied loading is the sum of the same piping stresses from Table 3-2 and the post-IHS1 residt.al stress distributions given in Figure 3-2 for 28-inch pipe or Figure 3-1 for 12-inch pipe. I For purposes of the fracture mechanics analysis, the axial stress distri-butions of piping stress, pre-lHS! residual stress, and post-!HSI residual I stress were all expressed in terms of third degree polynomials of the form: INTEGRITY I 5-4 / ASSOCIAIESINC
I 0 + A x + Apx2 + A x3 (II e=A i 3 x are defined as the stress and the radial dimension, where y and respectively, and A0-A3 are the coefficients resulting from the curvefit. The stress intensity f actor for a circumferential crack in a cylinder of radius to thickness ratio of 10:1 can be expressed as follows [15]. 23+ha3 AF AF) (2) KI = 'ffa (A FO1+ 34 AFI2+ where F, F, F, and F4 are magnification factors and a is crack depth. 1 2 3 For linear elastic fracture mechanics evaluation, stress intensity factors can be calculated independently for piping stress and pre-and post-IHSI residual stress distributions. The resultant stress intensity f actor is the superposition of the appropriate loading cases. A large body of laboratory data exists on stress corrosion crack growth rates for sensitized stainless steels in simulated BWR environments. These data are summarized in Figure 5-1, taken from Reference 7. These data were obtained using fracture mechanics type specimens with different crack sizes and loadings which can be characterized by the crack tip stress intensity factor,K. The data represent a wide variation in material sensitization, as well as levels of dissolved oxygen in the water. While subject to some criticism because the simulated water chemistry in these tests did not contain levels of impurities (chlorides, sulfates, etc.) that could exist in operating BWRs, the widely used power law "best estimate" curve of Figure 5-1, is believed to provide a representative crack propagation rate for plant crack growth assessments. The "best estimate" curve can be described by a power law representation of the form: da/dt = 2.27 x 10-8(g)2.26 where a is the crack depth in units of inches, t is time in units of hours, and K is the stress intensity factor in units of ksi V in. 5-5 g INTEGMTY ASSOCIAIEINC
Crack growth analyses typically make use of one of the two assumptions illustrated in Figure 5-2 regarding crack length extension, self-similar crack growth or constant aspect ratio crack growth. The former assumes that the incremental crack extension is the same as all points on the crack front, while the latter assumes that the ratio of depth to length remains constant during crack extension. Considering field and laboratory experience with circumferential crack extension, it appears that the self-similar assumption may underpredict crack length versus time, while the constant aspect ratio assumption overpredicts. Recent work by Gerber [16] under contract to EPRI provides a new approach for addressing circumferential crack extension which is more technically de-fensible than the above self-similar or constant aspect ratio approaches. This approach utilizes data generated in a laboratory stress corrosion test of a 26-inch diameter welded pipe specimen at Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories [11]. IGSCC was induced in this pipe through loading to a high applied stress in a simulated BWR environment, which was accelerated by the use of graphite wool to ceate an artificial crevice. Crack growth occurrred and was monitored both during operation and at several scheduled shutdown intervals for the test. A number of small cracks initiated early in the test, the length of which was periodically measured and the initiation of new cracks was noted and their lengths susbsequently tracked as well. At the completion of the test, there were a total of 63 cracks with a combined length of 32.57 inches. The average effective circumferential crack extension observed in this test , is presented in Figure 5-3. This rate includes both growth of existing cracks as well as new defects initiating and contributing to the effective crack growth rate in each inspection interval. Examination of Figure 5-3 suggests that an average effective circumferential crack growth rate of 0.5 mils / hour should give a reasonably conservative estimate. It should be pointed out, however, that although this is an average effective rate, it is based on a laboratory test in which the local environment, load and cycles were all intentionally modified to accelerate IGSCC relative to actual plant conditions. Test and analytical data [18] have also shown that the IH51 will STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY l 5-6 ASSOCIATESINC
I suppress not only crack initiation but also crack propagation for small cracks in both the length and depth directions. 5.2.3 Allowable Flaw Size Methodology Allowable flaw sizes for various levels of primary applied loading (Pm + P ) b have been specified in ASME Section XI, IWB-3640 [3]. A tabulation of allowable flaw sizes as a function of applied load is given in Table IWB-3641-1, from Section XI, IWB-3640. Note that this table permits very large defects in some cases (as great as 75% of pipe wall) and does not include consideration of any stress other than primary, notably secondary and peak stresses from the design stress report as well as any weld residual stresses or misalignment / fit-up stresses which might exist from construction. The argument for this exclusion is that, given the extremely high ductility of austenitic stainless steel, these strain controlled effects will self relieve after a small amount of plastic deformation and/or stable crack extension, and will have little or no impact on the loads and flaw sizes needed to cause unstable crack propagation or pipe rupture. However, some recent fracture toughness data may invalidate the above argument, at least for some classes of austenitic weld metal [19]. To account for possibility of low ductility weld metal, secondary stresses from the stress report [8] were also included in the present analyses, as required by the latest Addendum to Ref(rence 3. It is important to note that the very low measured toughness occurred only in a small percentage of the materials addressed in Reference 19, and may be of only limited concern from a probabilistic viewpoint. Indeed, most IGSCC observed to date has been restricted to weld heat affected zones, which should exhibit th,e high toughness attributed to base material. Also, the low toughness data to date has been limited to flux types of weidments (submerged arc or shielded metal arc), which are not used in current construction practice nor in weld overlay repairs of pipe cracks. Nevertheless, to address these possible concerns, the analysis procedure used throughout this report includes thermal expansion and weld overlay shrinkage effects as a primary stress condition in determining allowable flaw size from Table IWB-3641-5. ASSOCIATESINC 5-7
5.2.4 Effects of Weld Overlay Shrinkage I As the weld overlays applied throughout the recirculation system cooled, they produced an axial contraction which in turn produced a secondary steady state stress at other locations in the system. This effect is discussed in detail in Section 6. A finite element analysis of the as-repaired configuration of the recirculation system was performed to determine the magnitude of the stresses throughout the system which resulted from the aggregate shrinkage of weld overlay repairs. These stresses are presented in Table 6-2 for all unoverlay repaired flaw locations. The stresses determined by this analysis were treated as applied stresses for the purposes of crack growth analysis and as Pe stresses in the IWB-3641-5 allowable flaw size determination. The total applied stress used in crack growth analyses was determined from consideration of pressure, dead weight, thermal expansion, and shrinkage stresses. Refer to Section 6 for a detailed discussion of weld overlay shrinkage analyses. 5.3 Results of Crack Growth Analyses An analysis of the flaws in each of the welds listed in Table 5-2 was conducted by the methods described above. All of these locations were successfully treated by the IHSI process, so the further IGSCC suscepti-bility of these flaws is considered to be mitigated. Because of the concern regarding the potential low toughness of flux shielded butt weld material, the allowable flaw sizes for these evaluations were taken from Table IWB-3641-5 of Section XI of the ASME Code (Winter, '85 Addenda, Reference 3). These values expressly address the low toughness concern. For the purpose of this analysis, the additional limits of NRC GenericLetter84-11[2]wereimposed. That is, the allowable flaw dept b from IWB-3641-5 were factored by 2/3 to account for possible UT shing uncertainties. The result of this additional conservatism is that, for the flaws in question, the acceptable end-of-cycle flaw depth was taken to be 40% of pipe wall thickness for the circumferential flaw cases, which is considerably greater than the observed flaw depths (26% maximum). STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 5-8
Because of the beneficial effects of IHSI in modifying the residual stresses of the affected locations, none of the flaws listed in Table 5-2 is predicted to grow significantly during the next operating cycle. This is illustrated in Figures 5-4 and 5-5, which present stress intensity vs. crack growth for the limiting 12 inch and 28 inch flaw depths. Stress intensity due to IHSI and applied stress is presented on these figures. It may be seen that the net stress intensity for each case (the sum of the IHSI and applied stress curves) is negative for a significant portion of the pipe wall. This implies that no crack growth due to IGSCC will occur. Axial flaws which were not weld overlay repaired appear only in 28 inch pipe. The observed axial flaws are both short and shallow, and would not present a structural integrity concern even if through-wall. Crack growth analysis does not predict growth of these flaws. In summary, all flaws which are addressed in this section are predicted to be arrested by the IHSI treatment which was applied during the current outage. Present flaw depths are significantly below allowable flaw depths, which include a factor of 2/3 on Code allowable flaw depths. 5.4 Evaluation of Non-IGSCC Flaws Observed Flaws traceable to sources other than IGSCC were identified in three welds during the 1985/86 maintenance / refueling outage. One of these (12BR-C-5) was a small subsurface lamination in the base metal of the safe end away from the heat affected zone in a 12 inch safe end to nozzle weld. This location was successfully treated by IHSI. The other two locations (28A-12 and 28B-
- 4) were locations to which weld overlays had been applied.
The flaws observed in these two welds appear to be local lack of fusion or lack of bonding in some portion of the weld overlay material. The flaws identified at each of the three welds are presented in Table 5-4. All of these flaws were shown to be acceptable without repair by the methods of Section XI, IWB-3500. STRUCTURAL DITEGRITY 5-9 ASSOCIATESINC
Each is discussed in detail below: 5.4.1 Weld 12BR-C-5 This weld was determined to contain a lamination type flaw in the safe end base metal away from the Inconel butter. This flaw is a subsurface flaw and is acceptable by reference to Table IWB-3514-3 of Section XI, from where the allowable laminar area for a wall thickness of 1.2 inches may be estimated as 2.6 square inches. This value is greater than the area of the observed flaw. 5.4.2 Weld 288-4 Two lack of fusion-type flaws were observed following surface finish improvement of the weld overlay on this weld. The flaws appear to be in the first weld overlay layer. The laminar area of the combined flaws is less than that acceptable by Table IWB-3514-3 of Section XI. If these flaws are treated as subsurface planar flaws, the flaws are acceptable by the criteria ~ of Table IWB-3514-2 of Section XI. It should also be noted that the overlay thickness above the flaws is greater than the design thickness, so the structural adequacy of the overlay is not reduced. 5.4.3 Weld 28A-12 Four lack of fusion-type flaws were found in the weld overlay on this weld following surf ace finish improvement. All of these flaws have at least the full design overlay thickness above them. Consequently, the integrity of the weld overlay repair is not reduced. Each flaw has a planar dimension of approximately 1/16", and each is circumferentially oriented. Two of the flaws appear to be in the first welded layer, and two appear to be in the next layer (see Table 5-4 for a complete flad description). Although the I flaws are axially separated, for evaluation purposes, they are treated here as one flaw. The composite length of the flaws is 14.4 inches, while the cross section is taken as 0.07 inches. The composite planar area is therefore 1.008 square inches. This area is acceptable by Table IWB-3514-3. If the composite flaw (with axial and radial dimensions taken as 0.07 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 5-10
inches) is treated as planar flaw, the composite flaw is acceptable by the criteria of Table IWB-3514-2. 5.5 Summary A total of 8 welds were determined to have IGSCC-like flaw indications which did not warrant application of a weld overlay repair. All of these welds were treated with the.IHSI process, and were shown by fracture mechanics analyses to meet the criteria of Section XI, IWB-3641-5 and NRC Generic .etter 84-11 for at least the next operating cycle. In addition, non-IGSCC flaws were identified in three welds. The methods of Section XI IWB-3500 were used to demonstrate that these flaws were acceptable without repair. I mucruRn. INTEGRITY 5-11
I TABLE 5-1 Welds With Flaws Which Were Acceptable Without Repair Prior to 1985 Weld Number 1982 Result 1984 Result (if any) (if any) 22AM-1B C-1 Transverse: Intermittent Circ.: 12% x 0.5" max Nom. 11% Spot: 18% 22BM-1BC-1 N/A Intermittent Circ.: Max. 29% 28A-6 N/A Axial: 16% x 0.5" 288-16 N/A Axial: 27% x 1" I I 1 l i N STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSOCIATESINC 5-12 -,__,,,--,----,..,-n .-,,----,---,-n,
I I TABLE 5-2 Disposition of Welds With Unrepaired Flaws Prior to 1985 Weld Number 1986 Result Disposition 1 22AM-1BC-1 Geometry IHSI l 22BM-1BC-1 Geometry IHSI 28A-6 Axial: 0.3" x 29% IHSI (post-IHSI) 288-16 3 Circumferential Flaws: Weld Overlay (separated by 900)
- 1) 26.5" x 24%
I
- 2) 4" x 18%
- 3) 1.5" x 40%
I I 1 See discussion in Section 5.1.1 of text. I I I I I I m ucTu m INTEGMTY 5-13 mgig
TABLE 5-3 Welds With Post-IHSI Flaw Indications (1986) Weld Number Pre-IHSI Indication Post-IHSI Indication (if available) 12AR-G-4 N/A
- 1) Circ.: 5.375" x 20%
12BR-A-4
- 1) Circ.: 2" x 22%
- 1) Circ.: 2.6" x 26%
12BR-C-5 Lamination in Safe-End Same Base Material: 0.4" long x 0.025" deep, 0.775" from 0.D. 12BR-E-4
- 1) Circ.: 3.5" x 21%
- 1) Circ.: 2.75" x 19%
- 2) Circ.: 2.0" x 25%
- 2) Circ.: 2.0 x 14%
28A-2 N/A
- 1) Circ.: 1" x 13%
- 2) Circ.: 5-1/4" x 15%
28A-4 N/A 7 Axial Flaws:
- 1) 0.2" x 9%
- 2) 1.05" x 11%
- 3) 1.35" x 10%
- 4) 2.3" x 8%
- 5) 1.35" x 10%
- 6) 1.25" x 10%
- 7) 1.35" x 13%
288-8 N/A
- 1) Axial: 0.25" x 24%
- 2) Axial: 0.25" x 16%
28B-10 N/A
- 1) Circ.: 1-7/8" x 23%
- 2) Circ.: 1-3/8" x 20%
- 3) Circ.: 2-7/8" x 17%
- 4) Circ.: 1/2" x 15%
- 5) Axial 31% (associated with #1)
- 6) Axial 26% (associated with #3) all on elbow side STRUCTURAL N
/ ASSOCIAI'ESIIC 5-14
I TABLE 5-4 NON-lGSCC FLAWS WELD FLAW DESCRIPTION RESOLUTION 12BR-C-5 Lamination or Inclusion IHSI length = 0.4" throughwall = 0.025" depth from 0.D. = 0.775" material thickness 1.2" 288-4 Weld Overlay Inner Pass Leave as is Lack of Fusion 2 Indications:
- 1) 1.4" long depth from 0.D. = 0.6"
- 2) 1.2" long depth from 0.D. = 0.58" 28A-12 Four Indications in Weld Overlay
- 1) 8" long, 0.8" deep approx. 3.7" from upstream toe of overlay
- 2) 2" long, 0.55" deep 1.6" from upstream toe of overlay
- 3) 3" long, 0.76" deep 4.9" from upstream toe of overlay I
- 4) 1.4" long, 0.6" deep 2.6" from upstream toe of overlay Width on all 4 flaws in 28A-12 1/16"
= Circumferential Locations: 1) 58.5" 2) 76.0" 3) 87.0" 4) 65.6" I m STRUCTURAL 5-15 DfrEGRITY - ASSOCIA'IEilNC
I 10-3 E E ~ Upper Bound (Turnace Sensitizi d) / da/dt : 5.65x10-9(K)3.07 / D ro-4 g Best Estimate (Weld Sensitized ) .A da/d: : 2.27 x10-6(K )2.26 p T sims 'af f t s'
- tte's 2
- C 2 ae=
e n= t a t oes 08. T it o 's g / A st%1 'stt: a' it&*'e 2 e e 2 so. / / 0
- =t av cana: s. Ties,
I 3 lo*$ O st s '.rt o a'.iiu'e 2. - O f sy= 0 sGE Tois i. 3 / y Q edel 'att D st.g et 6
- C 2 se-O T
g 868 - 8tr $ 332 2 e t e = 36. 3 Y O se=sitiato atiisc*e :.. sas-V V 8: O cs - vies. @ ma%C Cuest.ct%Ic @ sotCes3=.Cetoo @ esasaca. mitatai nt 10,g se anc. p s $ pass. seGD%%t ha? Lag = eftse se 3si I O Sf tl tst.t.o av wt go,neGs e c, ise, el e - a,t LTs a ser*e. s ~ I 1o-7 O 80 E Jo 40 50 60 7o I Figure 5-1. Stress Corrosion Crack Growth Data for Sensitized Stainless Steel in BWR Environment mucruRm. INTEGRITY -~ ASSOCIATESINC. 5-16
I y s / (i s I a) Self-Similar Assui tion; l'-f = 2(a'-a) I 1 i l 1 's L-r 1 i i 'g ,7 N r I b) Constant Aspect Ratio Assusption; f/a = f'/a* I I Figure 5-2. Comon Assumptions Used to Estimate Circumferential Crack Growth I I mucrunn INTEGRITY I 5-17
1.0 .9 .8 .1 5 ?, 5 .6 U-25 u; .5 T3 8 bE .4 m. o 05 a = 3," .3 .I .2 oU .1 I I I I I I I I 2 3 4 5 6 / 81uder of 0, crat ion Per ierts Ine lesded in the Av(rage Crack Growth R.ite t.ile galat son \\-b 1 I I __ _ _l l I I ) 7.0'O 8.000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 Approximate Time 8etween Inspection (Hours) h Figure 5-3. Average Effective Circumferential Crack Growth Rate As a function of Operation Periods Used in Calculation of Time Between Inspections ._.ii
g jt Bf f i l n U .....L8 IIA &M&MM.......M3&IIw&...................................................................................... e 1 l 1 .= 1 l _e 4' 0 .e 1 l U .............................................................................................,. g............................ 1 \\ l S 2..........................................:.
- ..... e l
_r-1
==- T n j ) { Q f f I f f I 6 1 4 6 4 l 4 4 ,\\. l C s U 9 ll fa ..............s.. N s..................... %.N. y T / E e -e g -4 .......................................... A..... ...............................i..................,, /.. I -s
- e"-
I I I -h I 0 2 4 6 IENTHINCHES /4 CRACKDEPIH \\>> Figure 5-4 Stress Intensity vs. Crack Depth for Bounding 12" { g Pipe Location. IHSI and Applied Stress (15.539 ksi) i,
N E E g A ......in I L /....... : Ild ,................................................................................ 1... e# 1 3.........................:. 1 ...................... 65 ,,,,.= e : 2 s..................................................... .................... a V i. i. .i n --,,,,,r-S e ..................g. M........................................................................................... I i i i 1 i i 1 i 4 i \\ t I ...s.................... \\ g l e W
- /
i i m, \\ i s m .......................s......................................................................... i c3 -4......................... e .................................g n.................................................. l l - s.., ,,pr> 4 -5 I I I I I J 0 2 4 6 8 10 .l i IENIHINCHES f#7 CRACHDEPIH Figure 5-5. Stress Intensity vs. Crack Depth for Bounding 28" g Pipe Location. IHSI and Applied' Stress (8.591 ksi) b
} 6.0 EVALUATION OF WELD OVERLAY SHRINKAGE STRESSES
6.1 Background
6.1.1 Causes of Weld Overlay' Shrinkage Stresses The level of stresses resulting from weld overlay shrinkage are a direct result of the location of the weld overlay and the piping system geometry. Axial shrinkage produces tensile secondary stresses at locations co-linear with the overlay, and predominantly bending secondary stresses at locations which are separated and not co-linear with the welding location (e.g., locations separated by an elbow, see Figure 6-1). In addition, weld overlays can produce stresses at fixed points in parallel runs of piping if the two runs are tied together by a stiff run (see Figure 6-2). This latter situation is typical of 12" recirculation system risers. The highest stressed point in a recirculation system with several weld overlays is typically at a recirculation riser to inlet nozzle connection. Weld overlay shrinkage in a vertical run of such a riser produces bending on the horizontal run leading to the inlet nozzle. This bending stress is highest at the nozzle-to-pipe or pipe-to-safe end weld. Three aspects of the weld overlay application determine the magnitude of weld overlay shrinkage which will be produced. The first of these is the pipe size. Larger pipes (with correspondingly thicker walls) are stiffer and shrink less than do smaller lines. Typically the amount of shrinkage measured in 28" lines is roughly 1/4 to 1/5 of that produced on 12" pipe for the same weld overlay design. Consequently, shrinkage stresses predicted in 28" pipe are also only a small fraction of the worst stresses predicted in 12" pipe. The second factor which contributes to the magnitude of the observed weld overlay shrinkage is the length of the overlay. For the same pipe size, a longer overlay will produce greater axial shrinkage and (depending on system geometry) larger stresses than would a shorter overlay. ^ STRUCTURAL N 6-1 / ASSOCIRIESINC
The final factor which has an effect on the shrinkage is the number of weld layers applied to produce a particular overlay thickness. Field measure-ments suggest that the bulk of the shrinkage occurs as a result of application of the first two welding layers. Subsequent layers have progressively less effect. This suggests that the magnitude of the shrinkage is related to the volume of metal cooling at any one time, I compared to the amount (including original pipe wall) which has already solidified. 6.1.2 Effects of Weld Overlay Shrinkage I The stress produced by the shrinkage of weld overlays is a steady state secondary stress of a type which is not addressed by the ASME Code Section III. Consequently, such stresses will not contribute to a particular location violating Code stress limits. However, the stresses produced are not imaginary. They will have significant effects on both flawed and unflawed locations in the repaired system, and these effects need to be addressed. Unflawed Locations At unflawed locations, the stress imposed by shrinkage will combine with existing applied and residual stresses to determine susceptibility to crack initiation, e.g., by the IGSCC mechani".m. In the case of weld locations which have not received residual stress mitigation (e.g., with IHSI) the pre-existing inside surface tensile residual stresses will combine with the tensile component of stress due to shrinkage to make the location very susceptible to crack initiation. Even if the location has been treated with IHSI, the superposition of the tensile stress due to shrinkage on the IHSI residual stress pattern will tend to reduce the effectiveness of IHSI in inhibiting crack initiation. F13wed Locations At flawed locations, similar ef fects to those on unflawed locations will be / experienced. The tensile stress superimposed on the locationis s p/ ASSOCIAIESINC omxarry 6-2
I field will make the location more prone to further crack initiation. In addition, the shrinkage stress will act in concert with applied and residual stresses to promote further crack propagation and to increase the rate of that growth. Because of this effect, it is generally required thu stresses due to weld overlay shrinkage be added to applied stresses in performing crack growth calculations to demonstrate acceptability of an existing flaw without repair. 6.2 Measurement of Weld Overlay Shrinkage In order to predict the magnitude of the stresses resulting from weld overlay shrinkage, it is necessary to take measurements of the actual amount of shrinkage during the weld overlay application process. This was done manually. First, the design length of the weld overlay is " laid out" on the weld to be repaired. The centerline of the existing butt weld was determined, and the length of the design overlay in each direction (upstream and downstream of the weld centerline) was marked on the pipe using punch marks at several azimuthal locations. An additional set of marks was placed approximately 1/2" to 1" beyond each end of the design overlay length, typically at 4 azimuthal locations separated by 900 This latter set of 8 punch markings (4 on each end of the overlay region) were used to determine shrinkage. The distance between each azimuthal pair (upstream-downstream) of punch marks was measured using a vernier caliper (see Figure 6-3). The weld overlay was then applied between the inner set of markings, which define design length. Following the completion of overlay welding, the distance between the outside set of punch marks was again measured with vernier calipers. The difference between the before and af ter welding measuremerits for each azimuthal location was tabulated, and the four differences were averaged. The average value from these measurements are tabulated as the weld overlay axial shrinkage in Table 6-1, and were used as input into the analysis discussed below to determine shrinkage-induced stress at all locations in the affected system. m uc m uu. DiTEGMTY 6-3 ASSOCIATESINC
6.3 Analysis of Weld Overlay Shrinkage Stresses I 6.3.1 Background I As pointed out earlier, the stresses produced by weld overlay shrinkage are not confined to the vicinity of the repair, but rather can affect remote I Consequently, it is necessary to consider the system as a whole, locations. and to consider all overlay repairs, in determining the stresses which will result from overlay shrinkage. The analytical approach used in this evaluation includes preparation of a finite element model of the entire piping system. A typical model is shown in Figure 6-4. The actual weld overlay shrinkage measured at the repair site are input at the nodes corresponding to repaired welds in the form of " cold elements", which simulate the mechanical shrinkage observed in the I field through use of negative pseudo-thermal expansion. Mechanical anchors and rigid restraints are built into the model, but no other loads are included. After preparation of the above model, the stresses at all points in the system are calculated elastically. Because the stress at welds is of concern (rather than within components), all stress indices are set equal to 1.0. I Typically, stresses calculated in the above manner for piping larger than 12" are rarely larger than 1 ksi. However, it is not unusual to see stresses in the 12" risers which are predicted to be in the vicinity of 15-20 ksi or larger. The highest stressed locations are almost always at the junction of riser to inlet nozzle. There are several conservatisms in the above type of analysis. First of all, since the stress is clastically calculated, stresses may be over-predicted. Refining the approach to include consideration of the true I material stress-strain behavior would give more reasonable results. Sec-ondly, nozzles are typically modeled as rigid and the flexibility of elbows and other components may be underpredicted. DITEGEETY I 6-4 Agg g
Use of realistic nozzle and component flexibilties produces lower predicted weld overlay shrinkage induced stresses, as is demonstr'ated in Section 6.3.2 below. I 6.3.2 Modelling Details A finite element computer program SAP 86 [20] which is a pc-version of the well known SAPIV [21] was used to calculate the piping stresses due to weld overlay shrinkage at the recirculation system. As shown in Figures 6-5 & 6-6, two finite element models were developed: one each for loop A and loop B of the recirculation piping system. The actual weld overlay shrinkage measured at the repair site, as surre arized in Table 6-1, were input at the nodes corresponding to repaired we'ds in the form of " cold elements", which simulate the mechanical shrinkage observed in the field through the use of negative pseudo-thermal expansion. Temperature difference at the cold elements were calculated by: AT = 6 al where AT is the temperature deviation from the reference temperature at the cold element,6 is the as-built weld overlay shrinkage, a is the coefficient I of thermal expansion of the pipe material at operating temperature, and L is the length of the as-built weld overlay. Note that, in the finite models shown in Figures 6-5 and 6-6, the lengths of the cold elements were set equal to the as-built weld overlay lengths. Mechanical anchors and rigid restraints were built into the model, but no other loads were included. Since shrinkage stresses in the 28-inch pipe are normally small and are not sensitive to the boundary conditions, the 28-inch pipe to the reactor pressure vessel penetration was conservatively modeled as rigid. However, flexibilities at the riser to the reactor pressure vessel penetrations must be properly incorporated into the model to obtain realistic shrinkage stresses at the 12-inch pipes. INTEGRITY 6-5 ASSOCIATESINC t
For a typical nozzle to vessel penetration as illustrated in Figure 6-7, the stiffnesses corresponding to Fz, Mx, and M can be calculated by Reference y 22. The stiffnesses at the riser to pressure vessel penetration were calculated to be: 6 lb/in K, = 4.951 x 10 F 6 in-lbf/ rad KMx = 0.965 x 10 KM = 1.351 x 106 in-lbf/ rad. y The stiffnesses for the other three degrees of freedom at the riser to pressure vessel penetration were conservatively assumed to be 1 x 1010 lb/in or 1x 1010 in-lb/ rad. Actual values of these three stiffnesses are expected to be much smaller than 1 x 1010, and thus, the piping stresses obtained from this analysis are expected to be higher than the actual values. 6.4 Results Resulting shrinkage stresses at the recirculation system welds are summar-ized in Table 6-2 and 6 's. Note that, because the stress at welds is of concern (rather than within components), all stress indices were set equal to 1.0. From Table 6-2, it is seen that shrinkage stresses in the unflawed unrepaired welds are quite small (41.5 ksi). In fact, from Table 6-3 it is seen that the shrinkage stresses at most of the welds are small (less than 3 ksi) except at a few welds. The highest shrinkage stress is 9.13 ksi at the junction of the H riser to the cross of the ring header. The effects of these shrinkage stresses have been included in the flaw evaluations discussed previously in Section 5 of this report. Because of the design basis assumption of a 3600 through-wall flaw used for all overlay designs, as discussed in Section 4 of this report, the above shrinkage stresses will have no effect on the weld overlay designs. They are smenmm. INTEGRITY ASSOCIATFEINC 6-6
l secondary stresses, and this assumption eliminates any low toughness concern which would require their inclusion in weld overlay design. Finally, because of the small magnitude of shrinkage stresses in most welds, and the application of IHSI, the effects of weld overlay shrinkage on uncracked welds is not considered significant. I I I 'I I I INTEGRITY 6-7 ASSOCIATESINC
TABLE 6-1 Summary of the As-Built Weld Overlay Shrinkage l Weld ID WOL Length Shrinkage (in) (in) 28-A-10 4.64 0.0358 2 28-A-12 5.00 0.03433 220AM-1 6.33 0.01375 22-AM-4 6.75 0 12-AR-F2 3.82 0.146 12-AR-F3 4.19 0.276 12-AR-F4 4.53 0.3353 12-AR-G3 4.52 0.2588 12-AR-H2 3.81 0.1415 12-AR-H3 4.47 0.3485 12-AR-H4 4.41 0.3913 .12-AR-J3 4.19 0.2563 12-AR-K2 4.76 0.2278 12-AR-K3 4.28 0.365 28-13-3 6.15 0.0915 28-B-4 5.97 0.058 28-B-11 4.72 0.0893 2 3 28-B-16 5.00 0.090 22-BM-1 7.78 0.0128 22-BM-4 6.64 0.03875 2 12-BR-83 4.00 0.3288 12-BR-C2 4.07 0.1565 12-BR-C3 3.72 0.3443 12-BR-C4 4.13 0.3175 12-BR-D2 4.32 0.332 12-BR-03 4.25 0.3305 12-BR-E2 3.9C 0.1583 12-BR-E3 4.08 0.287 1 Sum of the 1986 shrinkage and the previous shrinkages measured in 1982 and 1984. 2 l As-built data not available, design weld overlay lengths were used. 6 3 As-built data not available, best estimates based on as-bui 5 agg I at similar welds were used, y g ylgjg 6-C
I I TABLE 6-2 Weld Overlay Shrinkage Stresses at Unrepaired, Flawed Locations (IHS1 Only) Weld # Shrinkage Stress (ksi) 12AR-G-4 1.082 l 12BR-A-4 0.244 12BR-C-5 0.255 12BR-E-4 0.416 28A-2 0.156 28A-4 0.147 I 28A-6 0.358 288-8 0.565 l 288-10 1.419 I i I 1I 'I I I ..~ _ INTEGRITY l 6-9 ASSOCIATESINC
l TABLE 6-3 i Summary of Weld Overlay Shrinkage Stresses WELD ID MEMBRANE BENDING TOTAL (KSI) (KSI) (KSI) 28-A-2 0.007 0.149 0.156 28-A-3 0.007 0.081 0.088 28-A-4 0.022 0.125 0.147 28-A-5 0.022 0.046 0.068 28-A-6 0.022 0.336 0.358 28-A-7 .000 0.204 0.205 28-A-8 .000 0.440 0.440 28-A-9 .000 0.516 0.516 28-A-10 0.022 0.705 0.727 28-A-11 0.008 0.398 0.406 28-A-12 0.008 0.216 0.224 28-A-13 0.008 0.356 0.364 28-A-14 0.051 0.695 0.746 28-A-15 0.051 0.434 0.485 28-A-16 0.053 0.419 0.471 28-A-17 0.074 0.897 0.970 22-AM-1 0.000 0.000 0.000 22-AM-2 -0.048
- 1. 909 1.860 22-AM-3
-0.039 1.434 1.394 22-AM-4 0.000 0.000 0.000 12-AR-F-1 0.172 5.301 5.473 12-AR-F-2 0.172 2.293 2.465 12-AR-F-3 0.134 1.870 2.004 12-AR-F-4 0.134 0.519 0.653 12-AR-F-5 0.134 0.045 0.179 12-AR-G-1 -0.243 3.340 3.097 12-AR-G-2 -0.243 3.243 3.000 12-AR-G-3 -0.127 2.488 2.362 12-AR-G-4 -0.127 1.209 1.082 12-AR-G-5 -0.127 0.069 -0.058 12-AR-H-1 0.326 8.806 9.132 12-AR-H-2 0.339 4.014 4.354 I 12-AR-H-3 0.246 3.415 3.661 12-AR-H-4 0.246 1.700 1.946 12-AR-H-5 0.246 0.016 0.261 12-AR-J-1 -0.218 2.054 1.835 12-AR-J-2 -0.218 3.140 2.922 12-AR-J-3 -0.091 2.235 2.144 12-AR-J-4 -0.091 1.069 0.978 12-AR-J-5 -0.091 0.096 0.004 12-AR-K-1 0.189 4.242 4.431 12-AR-K-2 0.189 2.644 2.833 12-AR-K-3 0.120 2.026 2.147 12-AR-K-4 0.120 0.986 1.106 12-AR-K-5 0.120 0.052 0.172 C STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 6-10 /d60CIAIESINC
l TABLE 6-3 (continued) WELD ID MEMBRANE BENDING TOTAL (KSl) (KSI) (K$l) 28-B-2 0.019 0.779 0.797 28-B-3 0.019 0.204 0.222 28-B-4 0.136 0.665 0.801 28-B-5 0.136 0.429 0.565 28-B-6 0.136 0.429 0.565 28-8-7 0.136 1.624 1.760 28-8-8 0.019 0.480 0.499 28-B-9 0.019 0.942 0.961 I 28-B-10 0.019 1.398 1.417 28-B-11 -0.136 2.624 2.488 28-B-12 0.003 1.523 1.527 28-B-13 0.003 1.050 1.053 28-B-14 0.003 0.375 0.378 28-B-15 0.133 1.809 1.942 28-B-16 0.133 1.175 1.307 28-B-17 0.134 1.195 1.329 28-B-18 0.077 0.812 0.889 22-BM-1 0.000 0.000 0.000 22-BM-2 -0.042 2.649 2.607 22-BM-3 -0.030 0.513 0.484 22-BM-4 0.000 0.000 0.000 12-BR-A-1 -0.044 3.852 3.808 12-BR-A-2 -0.044 0.858 0.814 12-BR-A-3 -0.041
- 0. 967 0.927 12-BR-A-4 -0.041 0.285 0.244 I
12-BR-A-5 -0.041 0.035 -0.006 12-BR-B-1 -0.006 3.099 3.093 12-BR-B-2 -0.006 0.465 0.458 12-BR-B-3 0.027 0.607 0.634 12-BR-B-4 0.027 0.298 0.325 12-BR-B-5 0.027 0.050 0.078 12-BR-C-1 0.342 7.972 8.315 12-BR-C-2 0.355 4.325 4.679 12-BR-C-3 0.236 3.574 3.810 12-BR-C-4 0.236 1.739 1.976 12-BR-C-5 0.236 0.019 0.255 12-BR-D-1 0.300 1.872 2.171 12-BR-D-2 0.300 4.331 4.631 12-BR-0-3 0.111 3.117 3.228 I 12-BR-D-4 0.111 1.536 1.647 12-BR-D-5 0.111 0.049 0.160 12-BR-E-1 -0.004 3.522 3.518 I 12-BR-E-2 -0.004 1.197 1.193 12-BR-E-3 -0.018 0.899 0.881 12-BR-E-4 -0.018 0.434 0.416 12-BR-E-5 -0.018 0.049 0.031 I,m /,DITEGRITY I /GLC1/GuilNC 6-11
I I I I B --s T I I A e V/////A , I I WELD OVERLAY SHRINKAGE AT C PRODUCES TENSlLE STRESS AT A ,g l e BENDING STRESS AT B I .I I l Figure 6-1, Remote Effects of Weld Overlay Shrinkage I DITEGRITY 6-12 I - A%OCIAlFSINC
I I .g l .f
- s
- s g
1 g i I I I I I WELD SHRINKAGE AT A PRDDUCES UPWARD BENDING AT B l 1 I Figure 6-2. Effects of Weld Overlay Shrinkage On Parallel Piping I 6-13 STRUCTURAL DITEGRITY l /ViSOCIAfESINC
Figure 6-3. Measurement of Weld Overlay Shrinkage I PUNCH MARKS (SEE SECTION) A A_Ap;.the L ' I; --).a.:.1.:,...1 A MAiEO$'b @ O" \\ / MEYNS X E r w e,M s M ;: qlc 5 Ali w 4 y W 4 M + X m#
- ,,; gym;
- e g,n, w.
y-u 2 -: ,gs 3, v-g_. % % %,,, J J a ; L ;.: Y
- A X1 X4 X2 I
I X3 SECTION A-A PUNCH MARKS AT 4 AZlMUTHAL LOCATIONS ( 90* APART )
- 1. PLACE PUNCH t1 ARKS BEFORE BEGINNING WELDING.
- 2. NEASURE DIST ANCE BETWEEN EACH PAIR l
( UPSTREAN/DOWNSTRE AN ) 0F NARKS BEFORL AFTER WELDING INTEGRITY ASSOCIATESINC 6 14
I I I I \\ / / ~ VESSEL INLET l / g N N 's I VESSEL DUTLET VESSEL DUTLET I '/ \\ / \\ I / RHR RHR I 'I PUMP PUMP I I I Figure 6-4. Typical Schematic Model of BWR Recirculation System I I ,31NTEGP2TY 6-15 ' ASSOCIAIMINC L
l m m m m m m \\ m no i ta m luc r ic m j e R e h t f m o) f A lep dooo m ML( f tng en mi ep m ~ l i EP em t e itns m y i FS 5 m 6 erug m i F m m m eh y) hu Ey>b p m 'l! l!l1lf-1I i i! ij ii il
M M M M ~ M M M / no M i ta lu s c M j r i ce R e M h I t fo)B l M ep do s oo ML ( tng M en mi ep li EP em M t e itnsy i FS M 6 6 e M ru g i F M M M 9 rZ M 1 l
I ~ I ( 5 4, 6 I IBo. 1 .d +y ~ V I '\\,",Tzy C(,Y x I ~ r / % e q ~ ,l,60* E 's 0g g I 'B l l l N- \\o. l I Nip- ~ ~ I \\ I f kN N iyN C' Eq,0q 's ,g s N I ~ s I N I I Figure 6-7. Definition of Local Coordinates and Loads at I Riser-to-Reactor Pressure Vessel Penetration I I I smemaI. INTEGRITY l 6-18 ASSOCIATESINC
7.0
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS 7.1 Summary of Hatch Status After 1986 Outage The 1985/86 maintenance / refueling outage at Georgia Power Company's Plant E.I. Hatch Unit 1 is the third outage at this plant during which activities were directed at the detection and repair of intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC) flaw indications in the recirculation, reactor water cleanup, and residual heat removal stainless steel systems. During this outage, Georgia Power Company identified 12 welds which required weld overlay application to repair observed flaw indications. During the 1982 and 1984 outages, a total of 23 weld overlays were applied to repair similar flaw indications. In addition, during 1986 one unflawed weld (248-R-12) was weld overlayed to improve inspectability of this weld. Consequently, a total of 36 piping system welds are weld overlay repaired at Plant Hatch Unit 1 as of the end of the 1986 outage. The weld overlay activity at Hatch Unit 1 during this outage is sumarized below: 1. All previously applied weld' overlays were remeasured, and the as-built overlays were evaluated for conformance with current criteria. For circumferential flaw indications, the design basis flaw was taken to be 3600 long and 100% through original pipe wall. Two previously applied I weld overlays were designed o1 the basis of a through-wall axial flaw. Where necessary, weld overlay thickness was increased to meet this design basis. 2. All weld overlays designed during 1985/86 were based upon an assumed 3600 long, 100% through-wall flaw. 3. No credit for the thickness of the first welding layer was taken for any weld overlay. For previously applied weld overlays, this thickness was assumed to be 0.1". For overlays applied during 1986, the actual first layer thickness was deducted fron the reported as-built thickness. 4. The surface finish of all weld o erlays was improved by grinding or by wash pass application to enhance inspectability of the weld overlay and the underlying pipe wall. STRUCTURAL N l ASSOCIATESINC 71
l I 5. Accessible welds without overlays in the recirculation, RHR, and RWCU systems (inside containment) were treated by Induction Heating Stress I Improvement (IHSI) to mitigate the IGSCC susceptibility of these welds. All treated welds were ultrasonicaly examined following IHSI. Mitigated welds included the 12 inch recirculation safe-end to inlet nozzle welds. 6. Following IHSI, a total of 8 welds were identified which contained IGSCC- ~ like flaws requiring no repair other than IHSI. These flaws were shown to be acceptable using fracture mechanics analyses based upon the criteria of NRC Generic Letter 84-11 and ASME Se: tion XI. 7. Three welds were determined to have flaws unrelated to IGSCC. These welds were shown to be acceptable by the methods of ASME Section XI. 7.2 Summary of Conformance With Regulatory Requirements The inspection program performed on the systems in questions met or exceeded the requirements of Generic Letter 84-11, as discussed in Reference 1. The design basis for new overlay design and re-evaluation of previously applied weld overlays (discussed above) was very conservative, and met or exceeded any published regulatory requirements, including those of NRC Generic Letter 84-
- 11. The flawed welds which were determined to require no overlay repair were treated with the IHSI process to inhibit further crack initiation or growth.
The criteria used for flaw evaluation expressly address the concern of flux shielded butt weld material low toughness, and meet the requirements of the latest Addendum to Section XI.(Winter 1985) and Generic Letter 84-11. 7.3 Weld Overlay Surface Improvement I Georgia Power has improved the surface finish of all weld overlays at Hatch Unit 1. This effort makes recently developed ultrasonic inspection tech-niques usable at Hatch, and allows inspection of the weld overlay and the underlying pipe wall. This will allow monitoring of existing flaw growth (if any), and detection of any new flaws. Consequently, the adequacy and integrity of the weld overlay can be continually monitored. STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 7-2 MMW
The surf ace finish improvement effort and its associated inspection enhance-ment, together with the upgrade of previously applied overlays to current standards, are significant steps taken by Georgia Power in support of the long tern. viability of the weld overlay repairs at Plant Hatch Unit 1. 7.4 Conclusions The weld overlay repairs applied to IGSCC-affected systems at Hatch Unit I were designed and applied conservatively and in accordance with all regula-tory requirements. Flaws which were shown to be acceptable without repair were treated with the IHSI process. Circumferential flaws were evaluated in accordance with the latest Section XI Addendum (Winter, 1985) which explicitly addresses the concern of low butt weld metal toughness. The allowable flaw sizes were factored by 2/3 as required by NRC Generic Letter 84-11. These flaws were demonstrated not to violate allowable depths for at least the next operating cycle. The balance of the accessible welds in the affected systems were treated by IHSI, thus minimizing the potential for new IGSCC flaw initiation. I m ucTo m DITEGRITY 7-3 ASSOCIATESINC
I
8.0 REFERENCES
1. Letter from L. T. Gucwa (GPCo) to John F. Stolz (NRC-NRR), " Pipe Crack Inspection / Mitigation Program 1985 Maintenance / Refueling Outage", dated July 1, 1985. 2. U.S. Nucler Regulatory Commission Generic Letter 84-11, " Inspection of BWR Stainless Steel Piping", April 19, 1984. 3. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI 1983 Edition, with Addenda through Winter 1985. 4. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-1061, " Report of the USNRC Piping Review Committee", a. Volume, " Investigation and Evaluation of Stress Corrosion Crakcing in Piping of Boiling Water Reactor Plants" Second Draft, April, 1984. b. Volume 3, " Evaluation of Potential for Pipe Breaks" November,1984. 5. Letter from John F. Stolz (NRC) to J. T. Beckham (GPCo) dated August 1, 1985. 6. Letter from John A. Zwolinski (NRC) to Dennis L. Farrar (Comonwealth Edison Company) dated January 7,1986, " Inspection and Repair of Reactor Coolant System Piping - Quad Cities Unit 2" and attached Safety Evaluation Report. 7. EPRI NP-2423-LD, " Stress Corrosion Cracking of Type 304 Stainless Steel in High Purity Water: A Compilation of Crack Growth Rates" June 1982. 8. General Electric Company, "Results of Seismic Evaluation, As-Built Recirculation Piping Including Replacement Actuator for F031 Discharge Valve", Design Memo 170-113, Dated September 26, 1984. 9. Structural Integrity Associates Computer Pr gram, pc-CRACK, Version 1.1 dated February, 1986.
- 10. EPRI NP-2662-LD " Computational Residual Stress Analysis for Induction Heating of Welded BWR Pipes" December,1982.
- 11. Hughes, N.R. and Giannuzzi, A.J., " Evaluation of Near-Term BWR Piping Remedies," Vol. 1, EPRI NP-1222 November, 1979.
- 12. Structural Integrity Associates, " Technical Justification for Continued Operation of Hatch Unit I with Existing Recirculation and RHR System Piping" Report No. SIR-85-010, Rev. 1, dated June 1985.
- 13. Georgia Power Company Indication Notification Forms 186H1010 dated January 11, 1986 and 186H1015, dated January 21, 1986.
STRUCTURAL DITEGRITY 8-1 NNE
- 14. Telecon between USNRC, Georgia Power Company, and Structural Integrity Associates, dated February 6, 1986.
- 15. Buchalet, C.B.,
and Bamford, W.H., ASTM 8th National Symposium on Fracture Mechanics, 1974, ASTM STP-590, pp. 385-402, 1975.
- 16. " Guidelines for Flaw Evaluation and Remedial Actions for Stainless Steel Piping Susceptible to IGSCC", Final Report for EPRI Project T-303-1, Report No. SIR-84-005, April 13, 1984.
- 17. Beckford, R.L.,
et al, " Nondestructive Evaluation Instrument Surveil-lance Test on 26-inch Pipe", EPRI NP-3393, January, 1984.
- 18. EPRI NP-81-4-LD, " Residual Stress Improvement by Means of Induction Heating", March 1981.
- 19. ASME Section XI Meeting Minutes, May 25, 1984.
- 20. SAP 86 User's Manual, Number Cruncher Microsystems, Inc. Version 1.04, I
1984.
- 21. Bathe, K.J.,
- Wilson, E.L.,
- Peterson, F.E.,
" SAP IV, A Structural Analysis Program for Static and Dynamic Response of Linear Systems" Report No. EERC 73-11, University of California at Berkeley, CA, 1973.
- 22. Shelltech Associates, " Evaluation of Reinforced Openings in Large Steel Pressure Vessels", Final Report to the PVRC Subcomittee on Reinforced Openings and External Loadings" Stanford, CA 1980.
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 8-2 mIfgg
I APPENDIX A Weld Overlay Design Sketches Plant E. I. Hatch Unit 1 1985/86 Maintenance / Refueling Outage I I NOTES: 1. Some sketches refer to wash pass application for surface finish improvement. This was not practical in the field. I Surface finish improvement was performed by grinding. 2. Some sketches include as-built dimension information. I These dimensions are before surf ace finish improvement and are not final as-built dimensions. 4 ,I
I I L I L { 1.6' I = 1.6' I g WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) = I (2) (2) g I I 7 = 0.250' (1) l V PIPE W ALL l UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM I I weld centerline I WELD DVERLAY DESIGN I (PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) I DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-F-2 (W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) g NOTES: lI I
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.47' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.5 (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
.I
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIO APPLICATION.
ll
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE.
i ll DESIGN NUMBER :GPCO-07-1 REVISION :1 DATE: 12-23-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE MI d / r2-13-7f REVIEWED BY/ DATE cfMd / /e-33-## I I
l I I L L I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) g I = g' = g' I 1 I l 1 N - - - T = 0.44' (1) l xjv V PIPE WALL I I UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM I weld centerline g l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-288-3 I ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) l NOTES: lE
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.48' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.52' I8 (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
Il
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH PASS APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLEIS ACCEPTABLE.
DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-2 REVISION : 1 DATE:12-23-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE Mbi / R-23-7f ll REVIEWED BY/ DATE dMA / /2-zs-s.r I
l l l L L I l l = 2.5' I = 2.5' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) (2) (2) j j l l 6 - - - - T : 0.33' (1) l x/v V PIPE WALL I DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM j i l weld centerline l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) l DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1E11-1RHR-20B-D-3 ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) l NOTES: l
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.38' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.35' (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH PASS I
APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE.
l DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-3 REVISION :1 DATE:12-23-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE N M /12-13-Ff l REVIEWED BY/ DATE d d / /2 -za-sa-l
I I I L L l = 2.6' I = 2.6' l WELD TRANSITION ANGLE I (2) I (2) (3) I R%isR8@sRgsl@h7 - - - - T = 0.369' (1) v g x ,f \\/ PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM I I i weld centerline WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER : 1831-1RC-22BM-1 NOTES:
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.369' EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.208' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.245' I (DOWNSTREAM), ASSUMING FIRST LAYER IS 0.1'. REQUIRED ADDITIONAL THICKNESS IS 0.161'. l
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS MINIMUM FULL THICKNESS LENGTH.
- 3. MAXIMUM TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-4 REVISION:0 0 ATE:12-16-85 I PREPARED BY/ DATE IIIMb // '2-ic-es-REVIEWED BY/ DAT /, f / t@,/tr l i
I I I ~ L I L I = 2.6' I = 2.6' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE I (2) I (3) l (2) I I i MkREs@HARR$f:BAR[@h-{ T = 0.376' (1) I yj v \\/ PIPE WALL UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM I I I weld centerline I WELD DVERLAY DESIGN I ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) I DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER : 1831-1RC-22AM-4 l NOTES:
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.376' EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
I AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.220' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.195' (DOWNSTREAM). ASSUMING FIRST LAYER IS 0.1'. REQUIRED ADDITIONAL I THICKNESS IS 0.181'.
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS MINIMUM FULL THICKNESS LENGTH.
- 3. MAXIMUM TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-5 REVISION : 0 DATE: 12-18-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE N d/ / Iz-iw !/ / iz/n/ss-REVIEWED BY/ DATEL I
l l l t i t I = 3.1 ' l = 3.1 ' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l l I (2) (2) l l l MRRRRRARsRsEsssas$h7 - - - -T = 0.429' (1) l xf v \\/ PIPE WALL UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM l l weld centerline WELD DVERLAY DESIGN ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DER NUMBER 85-120 ) l DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-28B-4 ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) NOTES: l
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.562' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.525' l
(DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1'). lE
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO WASH PASS l E APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLEIS ACCEPTABLE.
l DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-6 REVISION :0 DATE : 12-18-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE /II M// I l/dn-l REVIEWED BY/ DATE / r2/ithe l
I I I L I L 6' I = g' l WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) = l I l j 7 = 0.246' (1) I V PIPE WALL g I DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM g weld centerline WELD DVERLAY DESIGN ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-H-2 ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) I NOTES:
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.435' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.41' 00WNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
l
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH PASS APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLEIS ACCEPTABLE.
g DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-7 REVISION :0 0 ATE : 12-18-85 g PREPARED BY/DATE lIN [/12/18/Ti REVIEWED BY/ DATE I /,2/n/gr i
l l L L I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l l = 2.8
- = 2.8 I
(2) (2) l l l 1 m28A7 - - - - T = 0.2' (1) v -(AXfAL FLAW ONLY ) l \\/ \\/ PIPE WALL l i UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM l l weld centerline l WELD OVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DER NUMBER 85-120 ) l DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1E11-1RHR-248-R-13 ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) l NOTES: l
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.285' (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH P I
APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE.
l DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-8 REVISION : 0 DATE : 12-18-85 PREPAREDBY/DATE IM // 'z/d/3' l REVIEWED BY/ DATE / '2/a/er l
I I L L I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l 1=g6';=g'I l 1 mkW - -- - T = 0.251' (1) l gj v l \\/ PIPE WALL l 1 UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM I l weld centerline l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) l DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-K-2 ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) l NOTES: l
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.308' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.31' (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH I
APPLICAT10N.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLEIS ACCEPTABLE.
l DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-9 REVISION : 0 DATE : 12-18-85 PREPAREDBY/DATE /M // I btr/sr l l REVIEWED BY/ DATE / i2/n/tr l
I I I L L I g I =g6' l = lj' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) i i AsssssssssssssssEh 7 - -- -- -- T = 0.250' (1) g xjv V PIPE WALL l 1 UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM I weld centerline g l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-H-3 I (WASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) l NOTES:
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.332' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.385' I
(DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH PASS l
APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE.
DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-10 REVISION : 0 DATE:12-18-85 PREPAREDBY/DATE //MM // / /'5/W 2 l REVIEWED BY/ DATE. / '23;/sr I
I I I L L l I=g6'l=g'I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l l N - - ~~ T = 0.252' (1) l g/ v \\/ PIPE WALL UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM l l weld centerline I WELD DVERLAY DESIGN I ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) l DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1B31-1RC-12BR-E-3 ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) NOTES: l
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.252' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.265' (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH PASS I
APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE.
DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-11 REVISION :0 DATE:12-18-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE MMO // / /IS/6 1 I REVIEWED BY/ DATE I 4r / az,[I4/gr I
I I I [ l I [ l l =g6" l = f" I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) I I 4:ssWWWWWWWWR:18&E7 - - - - T = 0.257(1) g \\/ PIPE WALL UPSTREAM l DOWNSTREAM I l weld centerline I WELD DVERLAY DESIGN I ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) l DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12BR-D-3 ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) NOTES: l
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.350'(UPSTREAM) AND 0.320' (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH PASS I
APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE.
DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-12 REVISION : 0 DATE : 12-18-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE MM // n/,slsr I REVIEWED BY/ DATE A / r2/t4/g I
l I I L iL l = g' l = J' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l I i MWRHRERH$$$$WWWERh7 - ~~ - - T = 0.27' (1) I x v PIPE WALL l UPSTREAM i DOWNSTREAM l l weld centerline l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN I ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) l DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-K-3 ( WASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) NOTES: l
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.352' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.350' (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO WASH PASS I
APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLEIS ACCEPTABLE.
DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-13. REVISION :0 DATE : 12-19-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE NNrk / /11-20-F I REVIEWED BY/ DATE / /12/u[tr I
I I I L -- l L l I = 1.6' l = 1.6' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) I (2) (2) I l 1 h -- -- - 7 = 0.249' (1) I xjv \\/ PIPE WALL UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM i l weld centerline I WELD OVERLAY DESIGN I ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) l DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1B31-1RC-12BR-C-2 (LIGHT GRINDING OR W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE F NOTES: I
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.455' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.445' (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH P I
APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLEIS ACCEPTABLE.
DESIGN NUMBER :GPCO-07-14 REVISION : 0 0 ATE : 12-19-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE llIN1// st-Zo-tr / rzho /gr REVIEWED BY/ DATE bl I
l l l l L L WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) g l = 4}' = g' l I I T = 0.493' (1) \\/ PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM l I weld centerline WELD DVERLAY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-288-11 l (W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) l NOTES:
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.558' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.600'
,l 00WNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1'). l
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH ll APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE.
l! DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-15 REVISION :0 DATE : 12-19-85 ll PREPARED BY/ DATE M/do M/ n-Ao-rr REVIEWED BY/ DATE f, / rz/zo /er g
l I l L i L i=4f'I=(g';; WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) g I I I l l i Af81RRRRRRRRf928MBA7)- - - -~ ~T = 0.48' (1) v g y/ V PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM I l weld centerline WELD DVERLAY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-28A-10 l ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) l NOTES:
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.395' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.638' l
(DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH PASS APPLICATION.
I
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE.
DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-16 REVISION : 0 0 ATE : 12-19-85 l PREPARED BY/ DATE /MMA7 [/ It-w 4r / iz/u[r REVIEWED BY/ DATE g I
I I I L L I l 1 =g6' = lj' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l l Asssssssssssssssg:k/ T = 0.263' (1) l \\j v \\/ PIPE WALL l l DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM i I I l weld centerline l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) I DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-F-3 ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) l NOTES: l
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.238' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.212' (DOWNSTREAM) EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH PASS l
APPLICATION.
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-17 REVISION :0 DATE : 12-20-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE llId N '2-ze-f5-l REVIEWED BY/ DATE /#2.4/sr I
l I l L L g l =g6' =1'l WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) I I I A@jgBRRERREs@RRR$h> T = 0.251' (1) g xj v V PIPE W ALL I UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM I I weld centerline g WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12BR-C-3 ,I (W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) 'g NOTES:
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.190' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.212' il (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
i
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH PA g
APPLICATION.
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
f DESIGN NUMBER : GPC0-07-18 REVISION :0 DATE: 12-20-85 ll PREPARED BY/ DATE ET M //12-26-W REVIEWED BY/ DATE I /ndo[cr g
- u
l I I l L L l g l =g6' =1'] WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) I I l Agggggggggg@RRRgh 7 - - - - T = 0.251' (1) v g yj V PIPE W ALL i UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM I i weld centerline g WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR HUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12BR-E-2 l ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) l NOTES:
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.250' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.375' I
(DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH PASS g
APPLICATION.
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
DESIGN NUMBER : GPCD-07-19 REVISION :0 DATE : 12-20-85 l PREPARED BY/ DATE 1Y182/ / n-to-sr / iz/u/tr g REVIEWED BY/ DATE I
I I j l L L l l = 2.6' I = 2.6' l WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (2) 1 (2) (3) I Agggggggggfig@EME%2- -- -- -- [ [ T = 0.376' (1) I \\/ \\/ PIPE W ALL I UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM I l weld centerline g WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) l DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER : 1831-1RC-228M-4 g NOTES: lI
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.376' EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.300' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.240'
'I (DOWNSTREAM), ASSUMING FIRST LAYER IS 0.1' REQUIRED ADDITIONAL THICKNESS IS 0.136'. ll
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS MINIMUM FULL THICKNESS LENGTH.
- 3. MAXIMUM TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
l DESIGN NUMBER :GPCO-07-20 REVISION :0 DATE: 12-20-85 1 I PREPARED BY/ DATE II MEe / it-zo.er l REVIEWED BY/ DATE. / ela/gs-I l
I I I L L I i = 2.6' ' = 2.6' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE g l (2) I (2) ] (3) l 1 N T = 0.376' (1) l \\j v V PIPE W ALL I i UPSTREAM DDWNSTREAM i I weld centerline g l WELD OVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER : 1831-1RC-22AM-1 g NOTES:
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.376' EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
I AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.190' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.150' (DOWNSTREAM) ASSUMING FIRST LAYER IS 0.1'. REQUIRED ADDITIONAL THICKNESS IS 0.226'. l
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS MINIMUM FULL THICKNESS LENGTH.
- 3. MAXIMUM TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
I DESIGN NUMBER :GPCO-07-21 REVISION:0 0 ATE:12-20-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE IIN7 // Id to[ts-l REVIEWED BY/ DATEh / / rz o)er i
I I I L I L l =g6'I=ly'I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l I I MRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRkQ -- - - -- - T = 0.257' (1) I v xf \\/ PIPE WALL UPSTREAM l DOWNSTREAM I I l weld centerline I WELD OVERLAY DESIGN I ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR HUMBER 85-120 ) l DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-J-3 ( WASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) NOTES: I
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.298' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.185' (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
I
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH PASS APPLICATION.
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
DESIGN NUMBER :GPCO-07-22 REVISION :0 DATE : 12-20-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE //Id // Il-20-f f I /it/udr REVIEWED BY/ DATE I
I I I L L I g I = g5 = g' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) j l 1 h -- -- -~ (AXIAL LAW ONLY) = 0.2' (1) l gj v PIPE WALL V ~ l l UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM I weld centerline g l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DER NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1E11-1RHR-24A-R-13 I ( WASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) l NOTES:
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.13' 00WNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE I
OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1'.l.
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH PASS l
APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE, I
DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-23 REVISION :0 DATE : 12-20-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE M1 AMJ/ D-se.-rr /_rz/udr l REVIEWED BY/ DATE I
l I I L L I I=2.0=2.0'I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) g I (2) (2) l l N - - - - T = 0.250' (1) g xjv \\/ PIPE WALL l 1 UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM I weld centerline g l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-G-3 g l NOTES: I
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.250', EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
A W ASH PASS MAY BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH, IF DESIRED.
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH.
l
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-24 REVISION :0 DATE : 12-23-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE N O / ' 2.-23-8f l REVIEWED BY/ DATE S-b No / I2-26-( l
I I L I L g
- =(2.0' I = 2.0' ;
WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) 2) l (2) g I I - - -- - - T = 0.250' (1) l V PIPE W ALL I l UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM l l 1 weld centerline I WELD DVERLAY DESIGN I ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) I DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12BR-D-2 I NOTES: I
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.250', EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
A W ASH PASS MAY BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH, IF DESIRED. I
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH.
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
l DESIGN NUMBER :GPCO-07-25 REVISION :0 0 ATE:12-23-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE N d/,z-23-rf g REVIEWED BY/ DATE da-b #uo / t z-u-tr I I
I I I I L L 1 I = 2.0',I = 2.0' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) I 2) 2) l I AstlMssssssssssssssh7 -- - _ _T = 0.306' (1) PIPE W ALL V DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM I i weld centerline g WELD DVERLAY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-H-4 g l NOTES:
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.306', EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKN I
A W ASH PASS MAY BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH, IF
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH.
l
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES. -
DESIGN NUMBER :GPCO-07-26 REVISION :0 DATE : 12-27-85 I PREPARED BY/ DATE MYd / it-n-er REVIEWED BY/ DATE J F. @ddd/ n 17-tr l I
I I I L L I I = 2.0' I =2.0'I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) g (2) I (2) l l Assssssssssssssssh7 - -- - - T = 0.294' (1) g xj v V PIPE W ALL I I UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM i i weld centerline g l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DER NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12BR-C-4 g l NOTES: I
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.294', EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
A W ASH PASS MAY BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH, IF DESIRED.
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH.
l
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-27 REVISION :0 DATE:12-27-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE M I d/ /z-27-Fr l REVIEWED BY/ DATEJE g/[// a n ti I
l I l L I L l =2.0'I=2.0'l WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l 2) 2) j I I ~~ -- ~~ ~~ ~T = 0.165' (1) V PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM l DOWNSTREAM i I weld centerline WELD OVERLAY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER G31-RWCU-6-D-18A NOTES: g
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.165', EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
l A W ASH PASS MAY BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH, IF DESIRED.
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH,
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
g I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-28 REVISION : 0 0 ATE : 12-30-85 l PREPARED BY/ DATE N M / 'l-30-1r5' REVIEWED BY/ DATEV 6 - / /2-30-P5' g I'
l I I L L I l l = 2.0' =1.5' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l (2) (2) l l 1 M - - - - T = 0.165' (1) I \\/ v \\/ PIPE WALL l 1 PIPE l ELBOW I' l l weld centerline l WELD OVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER G31-RWCU-6-D-18 l NOTES: I
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.165', EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
A W ASH PASS MAY BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH, IF DESIRED.
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH.
l
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-29 REVISION : 0 0 ATE : 12-30-85 I PREPARED BY/ DATE M bd / 11-le-er l REVIEWED BY/ DATE 26 M / / - 3 -r I
I l I L L i I = 2.0' I (2,3) l =***I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) I (2) i l l M T = 0.167' (1) PIPE WALL l l DOWNSTgEAM UPSTREAM I (VALV ) g weld centerline g l WELD OVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER G31-RWCU-6-D-4 g NOTES:
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.167', EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
!E A W ASH PASS MAY BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH, IF DESIRED.
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH. 0VERLAY IS ASYMMETRIC BECAUSE OF THE CAST VALVE BODY.
l
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES ON UPSTREAM SIDE.
ON VALVE SIDE, BLEND TRANSITION INTO THE BUTT WELD CROWN ,g APPROXIMATELY 0.125' FROM VALVE TO WELD FUSION LINE. l DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-30 REVISION :1 DATE : 1-3-86 l PREPAREDBY/DATE M/LM l-346 / i,/s/86 l REVIEWED BY/ DATE ( l l
I I I L L l I l =(2,3)* *
- I = 2.0 ' ]
WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) I (2) - - - - T = 0.206' (1) \\/ PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM (VALVE) I g weld centerline g WELD DVERLAY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER G31-RWCU-6-D-5 g NOTES: I
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.206', EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
A WASH PASS MAY BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH, IF DESIRED. I
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH. 0VERLAY IS ASYMMETRIC BECAUSE OF THE CAST VALVE BODY.
l
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES ON DOWNSTREAM ON VALVE S10E, BLEND TRANSITION INTO THE BUTT WELD CROWN APPROXIMATELY 0.125' FROM VALVE TO WELD FUSION LINE.
I DESIGN NUMBER :GPCO-07-31 REVISION :1 DATE : 1-3-86 I PREPARED BY/ DATE MMO l-3-86 REVIEWED BY/ DATEb / /'/3/E l I I
l I l L I L I (2.0' I = 2.0' j j WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) = 2) (2) I l I I l T = 0.257' (1) PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM l DOWNSTREAM l l l weld centerline WELD DVERLAY DESIGN g (PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-F-4 NOTES: g
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.257', EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
l A W ASH PASS MAY BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH, IF DESIRED.
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH.
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
g l DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-32 REVISION :0 0 ATE : 1-23-86 l PREPARED BY/ DATE MI O// i-23-r6 REVIEWED BY/ DATE w/ / i/23,/gc g I
I I l L I L
- =e.D'I=2.0';
2 WELD TRANSITION ANGLE G) I i e 1 I T = 0.242' (1) PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM I l l l weld centerline WELD OVERLAY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12BR-8-3 NOTES: g
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.242', EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
l A W ASH PASS MAY BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH, IF DESIRED.
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH.
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
g .I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-33 REVISION :0 DATE : 1-23-86 l PREPARED BY/ DATE N d // '-23.% / r/za/r4 REVIEWED BY/ DATE / .I I
l l l WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) I L L I l l=4f',,=g1 1 I I g y VALVESHOULDER i = 0.52' (1) PIPEWAY I I UPSTREAM DOW1S]AM weld centerline g l WELD OVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-28A-12 g l NOTES:
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.52', EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
l
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH ON THE PIPE SIDE OF THE BUTT WELD CENTERLINE. 0N THE VALVE SIDE, BLEND THE OVERLAY l
INTO THE VALVE SHOULDER.
- 3. MAXIMUM TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES ON THE PIPE SIDE.
l DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-34 REVISION :0 DATE:1-29-86 PREPARED BY/ DATE I //-U-4 ( l,ht,/g4 l REVIEWED BY/ DATE l L
l l l APPROX.8' OVERLAY LENGTH
- 2' (M AX) --+
l ~15 ,/#######/### (2) VALVE (5) i PIPE WALL (3) l I l l NOTES: {. CONEL 82. 0.17' g CK
- ikiCK.
WELD 1E11-RHR-248R-12 I 4 khsitVAl.YE 82 l CENTERLINE l l WELD DVERLAY MODIFICATION DESIGN (PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120) l DESIGN FOR WELDS 1E11-RHR-248R-12 & 248R-13 l MODIFICATION DESCRIPTION: THE INCONEL OVERLAY IS TO BE EXTENDED TO BLEND WITH THE VALVE TAPER. l THE MATERIAL INDICATED BY SHADING ABOVE MAY BE REMOVED BY GRINDING IF NECESSARY TO IMPROVE INSPECTABILITY OF WELD 24-BR-12. THE FINAL SURFACE OF THE GROUND AREA IS TO BE FLUSH WITH THE SURFACE OF THE I INCONEL OVERLAY. THE MAXIMUM LENGTH OF THE GROUND REGION IS 2.0'. THE THICKNESS OF THE INCONEL OVERLAY IS NOT TO BE REDUCED. SURFACE l EXAMINATION OF VALVE CASTING AFTER OVERLAY IS NOT REQUIRED. DESIGN NUMBER: GPCO-07-35 EV SiON:1 DATE: 1-31-86 PREPAREDBY/DATE Mw / I-3/-84 REVIEWED BY/DATE NAkMlf /f/m,/n. g l
I I l WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3 )
- =
L = 4.0' = I + L = * * *-> ; l N j j (2) (2) l T = 0.5B'TfT-- jfWgp5*# IPE W ALL l TEE W ALL g I i l WELD 288-16 CENTERLINE g l WELD OVERLAY DESIGN l PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-lRC-288-16 g NOTES: l
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.56', EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
- 2. DESIGN LENGTH IS 4.0' ON THE PIPE SIDE. ON THE TEE SIDE, BLEND THE I
OVERLAY INTO THE TEE TAPER. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH. l
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES ON THE PIPE SIDE.
DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-36 REVISION :1 DATE : 2-24-86 g PREPARED BY/DATE NM ! / 2-u-g6 REVIEWED BY /DATE // / 2/24/n 4
1 I APPENDIX B 1 Flawed Pipe Evaluation Calculations l Plant E. I. Hatch Unit 1 1985/86 Maintenance / Refueling 1 Outage t I I I I I
ng-.-
e-w w
a-. e.Cc b :w. 2.:::..::.
- :. r..c :. t v :.- ty ::.:...*;;;.:.,
4 p c <., s v-2 :.. c:.4.: : r.:.:. - i:::....
- :..v.t.:i ::.*. w1.:..- -
i;; L '. FL.. :*.*t : :a*-
- 4...........
- 7...4-s
. sv 2
- t;.. s...
n :.:, .,..t. 3.l,- ).y S.,E p.p. -..., (. p.. a.-. u . ;. g :
- r. : c. -
- :..6
- ce.:.:
3 5... .A h
- t !i 1%
. I I... g.......,. e.,,.. .a u 6 ). . pL,. , 3...s. .3.... 4.. L .i;*.:::...rtr.eetag.:- aa . het p, c4::.* sa .s ..,9e.3.
- !e
.-*.c.- r C*.*I.b..; - 4 V. e. s '.
- 1. I.. e.,J J..
T - et A t l A'.
- 14. F.
0.C E 0.00 % 0.0C >w
- .A.. g=..t..c s-
.-:: Is. E:As M 1.v( AI!AL 1.0 I IIPE PMNT TI!'I IN:RE"E%i !N;FE9EC 10:0C.C 1X.0 10'.. C il CEO CEL LNITCINAL C!ic Ih CYLIN:ERl!/k0.11 CE O ------------ ---~------ E * ;E!! I N TI NS I T
- F A:T: --- ------------ ---- ----
c ::.a.. .- n .: e 6 *4!!FS l.II t , MM C.0:9 - t . 9 7 '.i? U C ",, ',h,001'cd t /: g - 4 //[/d i 0.J!?4 -16.35 5.31
- 0. C',* 6
-20.99 6.64 .. l'.. '0' C f L O
- 0 'l
^ 0.07c5 $.31 7.B' 3.0966 -29.4' 6.74 Of _ N - - - 1 0.11!: 33.4: 9.9* ttge _ C.1:48 -37.45 11.f5 v.1 -6 -4 ,a 1... .a a, u.... ~4,..,.. l,, . si. ..s I C. '.c." - 4 8. ".. !!.15 BI ,5.,.b , b.,.,. 0.:4;. 6:.!4 17 '4 i
l l i l I g--2:0 GEHi'N ! ! PAEE I I..t:.:. 4,. . t e.,. : 0.:E
- i.4
- . 6:
..,,.u~ s. I..J. 4. I..
- .(-
...a 0 :e. -54.54 ~4.'4 e.. . e.., 7 g... ., 7 .r.. ..g .;:..c: .:./C- < (s. . n) T',*{ 46 -167. a.4. t 5. s a. s w- -111.9 !!.3! I'), 4;i: ':E; -122.~4 37.26 s. e.,s7.t 1.-. e.3 41.-. C. c.r..u c te, o.e;,v
- .. e.,
a. ..., v> t e.,s,. o s. . e.,- c - i. 0.6:44 -141.!: 47.57 -l.84 '0.69 I)63?6 . 6e.. :. 4c,
- e... e,.
- 0. 6'Fs
-16~.55 't.(: 0.cil: -17~. 1 !i.06 0.7104 -18.~4 62.'5 C."I:6 -157.i$ 65.64 0.745: 194.27 69.23 0.7 !0 -200.62 7I.57 0.7572 -20t.69 76.5E 0.6;64 -212.46 E;.34 0.6256 -217.9: E4..L 0.9443 -223.51 85.17 0.0640 -230.12 92.64 G.83:2 -:36.49 97.17 O.90~4 -242.45 101.77 O.921e -245.04 106.43 i 0.9409 -25!.~4 !!!.16 -I's.05 11!.15 - 1 I 0.96 0
- 0.)2f td b1; y'( 4 R.,
g)f/g 7:cked by: ~ 1/ 4- , [0110..S. pco o1 -7 3/V Page 7 d tj ^ I!TE FPAf D A I*if LA A A/THK 100.0 -61.46 0.0 00E+00
- 0. 00 ".'0 0.3700 0.309 m er n-cu:,
B-2 I - _.. _, _ _ _ _, ~,. - - _ _ _, _,.. _, _ _,,. _
I I .......................__................................_gg --e N
- H e
-e p. l l l l . [ .[ l . 3 .g w . [ 1 .4l l ,s. p l c y I : ~3 i l /' C-* I m ,1 c e _...............l........ l 4' m W ::2
- --e l
x: H e l O A-.
- =
l2.: W ---e
- -l
- --e A v
.l i il i x:X CC 1 s---+ 8: > c l Zc -7 u.s WN 5 3-e .,:;ge go p c
- --e cn X
- g N
i 'C>
- x:
g 5-e N m a
- x:
l u:n =::,. A X I e E:>< 5 "- - -a n m cu -4 CD H N 'M8 ' Irepared by: NI PCo-o1AT$,, #_
- c. se.ct..cd b x
ecm x u:ne-e s *--* ::Z::: O =x= *
- cp - tro fi,0 l50 1
84 x P6ge - of cu I 1 l B-3 l
............. m.......... .........................._g "4 I C3 I I .............. _ w g ^ Z Gs C) M I Hi O . ~ - M C's L*" ~E LC" Q W C I. HU CG G-M E 3 ............. g m a H u W e a v p w m p., c I m Kf"? W V N O' ) ' " J-I Prepred by: I ! Checked tY ^ >MM, b HNZHZ File No. G /co- 07-3F ! age _I 9 OcccoX AN A4Hz P of B-4 i l l
I I tt L** FA E () ChFISHT 1954, 195t I
- .-...,.n.;A, Ig.:.-..Y A..,c,A.::4...$..
NL .M. SW.:3E ::.140s)9'8-E:0 5.:::,,,...... 4.a .3. e *
- t. : f a \\ r.g ;.y gg.-
T. -.... r .r.i.s,;.t: o c.*. c : : s... I..:-r.ce.r.c..,. ......... rt *..: u.o:.
- v. -. ;
- e. :, c..:.,
.e.,.
- ... e..o,.::.
..v. -: :;.:r !!:I F:F 5*;3= C,96. !T EEi C:5':S! h CEA:k ;4:hi-LA.'!' N kttres rll LLE 1: c..:: ...:v :-tE ...e>
- . a,
, c..c.. s I 5!!E :.:E:FICIEh'5 C C1 s. I.::,.I L !w!!:5 -li. :D: -::!.400:- !!6.07M -6!6.E N ':F *E E.'ilt 0.00G 0.0:0: (. R I~;.!EI" raa: !*r.E FA:it' 14*'E 1.00 At:L'E !.00 l iME Filh* T!"E Ih:REPE%? IV.'EPEN* 3XCO.0 700.0 700.0 CFA:K M:CEL:CIRCL"TEFENT!AL CEA:r I% C'L!h'E U T!R=0.!! tg:r........................ 3 f f E I S I N T D 3 ! T s F A:'C F ------------------------ LEFIH CASE CA!f !<!:E APL:5 i C.011: -5.9 2.*4 0.0??4 -9. 1 !.32 ffC)?.f $ by: NU 0.0576 -12 :: 4.?9 Ch0ched by: f _ 3/OM
- f2 CO.
W0-07-g9 0.07:9 15.0e 4.74 C.096 -17.78 5.!! 0.1.52 2:.36 5.E6 Paga / of N C.!!44 -2.91 4.39 0.15!6 -25.37 6.91 I0.I':S -27.7G 7.42 0.!9:0 -29.E9 7.4' C. !;: 31.11 6.'4 I C. ':4. ,,e.,r,
- 9.,s a
- 32. 7.'
i.56 e 0..4. B-5 i j
1 l VE;510' 1.! FA5E 2 ' I:-: AC. i C..e:
- 9..::
e s..c..:. .t.:. - t 7,. s 7 1alsG:. e 94. (.- .s,..
- 1. ~:
..s. 4.. ..e: 1 ..4. . s.. e. -4 .. t ( ..n 3 .;;.e. .g..-. -;1. - 4: -44 !!.6; l .g: -- 13,. - 4 4, ', - .e :. .7
- . r.
- 4...
s i 4. 1 c.,. :. I0.'!s: -4 .~1 10.! (.e.. 4 l. -,. .: c.4 (.::r.- 4,.,; .w.e,: ei ? e .1 ..c.e: I. 44 6 6.. --...i9 ..c.er. s .t.. s.C. s
- w....r
.. e.. : -.. . s. E r. - I*0.iil: -34.*7 I4.69 .. 4 ..?. :
- 5. e.r.
e .s (.?'it -31.73 "c.44 ... (4 .,. *s : t.74:: ..t, r.7A h .a c.,i e r - --
- 4. e.
..,5.t. 4 -:1.00
- (.2 Io.8;:
... '. t
- 3. '.2.'
31 ".4 ,,,l.- ,3.ee. .. E 4 4 :. .i. .s. 0.b4) -:0.93 33.3' I 0.8024 0.5!3: -19.7 !4.46 -19.20 35.5E 0.5216 -13.!: !6.71 0.94';3 -17.73
- 7.8!
i C.bX -17.65 37.C1 l . -l {- l II'E 691 04D7 IA A A!TM '4 700.0 - 6."2 C.( XI60 0.000 0.2500 0.202 .F.,.f,.ff.g O. -o.1. 3.7... E C CF p -CFA? -l Pn. _.2.. W 4 v.a B-6 I i l 4 - - -.. - - -. - - - - - - _ _ _ - ~
g g . a g . E a, 1 I.s. .~t, B. 8, 3,. .,e ...l.. m
- 3..
I.. .l . s l s. I.. t 's s e, p s e2 s N "l2.- e.- l-....._ w ........t........ A. ,:j., y 3 I W =r: E-~ .i I =x:t--* =ct: c :, o, w '2'" W M.
- --
- A E- -
Z 8 H eO C.*':s z cx:
== l : ces wm er;g.a gg v....................g........._
== CCB N g e o N =.s CC N f m I..
- g w
N t Ic==c, m 1 .:f:, . /./
- .; =
I g g .i - Y M N "u"=4 G '8'=4 N d"8".8 Y W-l%d i e s ' P:cgrcd by: d Ch.act.+..d tr ^ ,v-9 h k f o. G /c o - 07 " n-5.aJ 2-
- x cs:s.--. s
--e 2: e,.) =x: *
- cm
-u> x Page 3 01 _ 4 x B-7 I
L L i......................i............;...................._n g .e 1 I g m g i m -g =c e e -g I g a m m p La'J W M NE C m ~ .m ZW H 3 m* m y g.z:; w m g m O U l .1.--*-.--* --t.-*- - 1. -=== ~==**l. l.'*== g =-- m p l m m g o z m ~ p m -l2'" 3 m g acy Ia g:c g g i l e a n s g Lr") 'C' Cv3 N ---e C53 l O r M t' qj.e 2 ,,s, W W Z H :C i Cl:::' ::. L'/ a h,- k,N_ I < > M <x: O X A W M H:c l g,;) g,3, G p c o 1 N Page 4 of p.n .----.--.,n-
ts oc-CFACK it) CrJVFI&T 1958,1926 SIP.':iLRAL :UE3FliY A35 :!A'ES, Ih:. SAs J:!E, CA (4021976-2: M VEFi!3 1.1 SIFIi5 C'W,5lCN CEA3 GC.:d!ri AV'.)Sli
- .N:IM !: :P:L 9E;iN'ir. FL G Iri! AN: AFFLII; 37:15:
- ..E,
- 3. w.. -
I.'.._..c.e. .6 4 ::0.isi: 0.153' c. = =. 4.- .a.g..e.. e.,r :.s....e: ve SIGE55 C:RR:51:N lUD E5:ii'- lad;5 I LAW I:- C N 6tkret k:C !G5 !!i.270:E-02
- :iG 0.f CF D0. X 30 ETFEi! C EFF:CIEN'i CASE 10 CO C;
C2 C~ IA I-5:12 -2*.0:M -19c.09:' 9:2.740: -4 !.050, 5.;2 15.5:9:
- 0. V 0' O.0 W
- 0. X :+
ten Ca:.:. I* e.,s :.. r F. A.t...o N!!; 1.00 AFrtt-1,0 :. II"I C A l'.I T I,"E th:FE"EN! INCCE" INT 3000).0 70:.0 7 X'. 0 TFA:t R::EL:*!FCJFEtENTIAL CSA3 IN CYLIN:EFit/R*:.!) i tp;y........................ 5TFits 1%IEN!!TY CA:TGF--------~~-------------- LIFii CASE CA3E IHi!!? APL12 3.0111 -5.44 !.2: f Itcp; rcd by: dett,~ ~~ [ Ch::.':0d t,y-_' --- 0.C:: -8.0c 4.57 _ J f/g 0.03n -10.24 5.s: 0.0434 -12.3' 6.5: fde [,'g, _G pc o.o7. y ~ a 0.0!!4 -!4.:4 7.3: ~~- i 0.0665 -16.03 8.06 ^ pac 0 I of - 3 g 0.0776 17.E1 8.79 .J 0.00' -19.70 9.50 0.C993 -21.46 10.2C 0.!!09 -2!.17 10.E' O.12:0 -24.83 11.M 0.133: -:6.43 12.15 i 0.!441 -28.;4 12.65 B-9 J ) e I------*.
- ~5 0 VETS UN 1.1 FA5I 2
C.:552 -29.65 !!.55 C. I et,' -31.24
- 4.~5 I(.,.177'
-3' 74 14.95 1 c. :. 5 4. 4. e. .; 6e. s . 'a '.. "s '.
- 16. '. '.
t. 1,. - ., s. 9., .,0e. .t: .* :4 l s... sv., ..e. 4?: -4!.0; 17.65 I.:. -*. 4 .. 4. .z... v.. s. 3- . g ;. 4,. I,s ,4,. 44 9 3. *. .4. : w
- e... s-c.
.(u.,.a 0.3:lt -47.53
- 26. :
C..,,, 4:..e. 61..i .s - 4,. :,0 .c....: . 4.. c ..v.. : . g c....- .a -v..- I 0.: 6'i -47 !4 31.49 0.'77 -49.7 31.6! -4 7,, v.. 2, 5 ....e I C.4..,. e 4 9.e.; es.54 ,. 9... .. 1. .s ,.4:'" -49.73 !4.'4 s.43:4 -47.96 3'.6 ' 44'5 -46.57 35.c4 454e -4'.77 4's :o 0.It -44.'5 41.54 I0.4745 -42.70 42.94 0.4574 -4(.86 44.3' O.4490 'i.90 45.E4 I0."211 0.!!0' -36.66 47.'6 -34.12 45.90 0.5 2.' -31.27 50.46 C.543: -:6.10 52.03 I0.5!48 -I4.60 5'.6: r t t,... fQ 7 f Jg/gg _, ! 7:n no w s7 a u+ ,a j '700.) -19.23 C.000E*00 C.00:0 C.2<::0 0.2i9 ,,6 #(o-o7 y i Pg* 2 ") I t th: Ci :t-CH.CY -~~- -- l = ~ _.... __ b 0 B-10
- *e j
A
FLI DE " 5 I s' R ,I C 3 1 I DH DH r ~ H 1......................................:. 0 i i i l2 I0 5 10 15 i I 2 ll" l HUNDREDHOURS r,?ln j IIME r n li 'O
- !g n7 F B0UNDING 12" CIRCUHFEREHIIAL FLAW IHSI AND APPLIED SIRESS L.4
( l ie La .a
te p:-CR O (C) :Cc)RI5H* !?54, 1956 I ST5L:! URAL INTE5;ITV A55 :!ATES, IW:. SAN CCEE, Ct. (1051775-5:0:- VEF51:N 1.1 OLLCh:5Li FLAh SIZE EsALCAT :'i t..:. !'E F.'i 5:IE F:F !!F:'.'"r. ::O:. LUI 4EL:
- 5' ::::.":EFENT:i;
.A4 SAN I::LLTWICnE558 1.27':0
- sage e c,--
On- [shnll7p:::EE', b[:? 4rets swt \\k)PhWi0 ha,,hsuf $er $N'S ("$C -- --- 30 i ex0 w sfew 5 I1*M51:N : TEE 55: (.0COS !:E CLT51:E !!A",ETE5e 26.000 FLU 1 WEL: TVFE-EMA4:1;/E3W G =: 'rE!! RAT!0= C.70!! ILLCW: 5LE STFI55=169D.0X0 rLCh STRE55 M E!0.000: L/:!R I-LL:Wa!LE A!T 0.10 0.20 0.30 C.40 0.!0 ,.00 0.6000 0.6';00 0.6 W 0.575: 0.5C52 0.4:56 LL"WE E FLAN 5:IE F:c CIF:U?F. CFACK, FLUX WEL: 1:' CIECLMfEEE%ilAL FLA4 SAY/ WALL THICnE55= 0.693) KE*ERP.E STRE55: 6!67.0000 ECIN3 STRES5: ::19.000v .IFAN51C'. SiFESS: 74:1.0000 PIFE }JiSI:E :!AFETEF: 12.750i FSTRE55Rs!!C L'JI kEL-TY;E-EMAWf!!/5AW Q :: C'. 5109 ALifW:5LE STFE55=16~"0.0000 TLC. STFESE=UED.000: L/CRCUF 0.0) 0.l( 0.2C 0.!0 0.40 0.5) ALL0kAK E A/T 0.6000 0.6000 0.5931 0.4431 0.3546 C.2761 ALLCWAELE FLAW SIZE FOR CIRC'JMF. CR; K,FLUI WE D i OtJ d by: N 5 M -- h' Chc:2:: t 'g 12' CIRCtMFERECIAL FLAK 5"4W Fa.. i:o. Glfp 3 W;tt THI: ness = 0.69% Pago I of ~L IMEP3Rb5 SIFE53: ht67.00'0 EEC 'i3 3TRE55: 362. 00'.i B-12
l l
- -CRCK kERS:Ch 1.1 Pt.5E EtFH3::N STF.Eiir 74:4.000)
- 10. 75 '>0 lgl'EC'.T51:EDlWEIED g u l WEL*, ivFE-5F:W(:)/S:4(2;=1 l
ST Wii EST:C-0.7t!! i..Wi.E STFE33=154D.C::0 .:W 3T;Eiir5:E!0.30:3 L/C:f C-0.00 C.10 0.0 0.30 0.40 0.5C W a 3 E A/I s.6f.'O i.6'; O C.6)C0 0.4~23 40EI.E44 a EC Cr c:-Cr o l I I I c-l......,.- -..-..~ ! c~ 3 6pd_ l I r.. C tc o - - -.. 0.7. - 3 f h I', 1 1 ~ ~ ~. - _ _.... I " - - -. ~ I l B-13
\\ N h g I > m4 ASSOCKES IXC. i 3150 ALMADEN EXPRESSWAY SUITE 226
- SANJOSE, CALIFORNIA 9S118 * (408)978-8200
- TELEX 17-1618 STRUCT mammuun
__ _ _}}