ML20155G798
| ML20155G798 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 04/17/1986 |
| From: | Gustin H, Kuo A, Riccardella P STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSOCIATES, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20155G784 | List: |
| References | |
| SIR-86-002, SIR-86-002-R02, SIR-86-2, SIR-86-2-R2, NUDOCS 8605070134 | |
| Download: ML20155G798 (132) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:I SIR-86-002 I Revision 2 Project: GPCO-07-1 April, 1986 I I I EVALUATION OF IGSCC FLAW INDICATIONS AND WELD OVERLAY DESIGNS FOR PLANT E. I. HATCH UNIT 1 - FALL 1985/86 MAINTENANCE / REFUELING OUTAGE I I I Prepared by: 'E il Structural Integrity Associates l !I Prepared for: Georgia Power Company I t I Prepared by: H. L . Gustin Date: f 17, IWle Prepared by: Ku ' Date: k 'Ib /fb Reviewed by: . A Date: Y17 f@ P. C. RiccardelT'a I ~., N I B605070134 860502 PDR ADOCK 05000321 ' ASSOCIAIESINC P pop
I REVISION CONTROL SHEET Report No. SIR-86-002 l SECTION PARAGRAPH (S) DATE REVISION REMARKS All All 3/6/86 0 Initial Issue 1 1-9 All 3/28/86 1 Incorporated Client & 2 2-3 51 Comments 3 3-8 I 4 4-6 5 5-21 6 6-18 7 7-3 8 8-2 A A-36 B B-18 All 3/28/86 1 Incorporated Client & SI Cormients 1 1-9 All 4/16/86 2 Editorial Changes 2 2-3 3 3-8 4 4-6 I 5 5-21 6 6-18 7 7-3 8 8-2 A A-36 B B-18 All 4/16/86 2 Editorial Changes 'I l l l lI
~
$j 'T' STRUCTURAL
$ INTEGRITY ASSOCIATEf>. INC l
I TABLE OF CONTEN Section Page 1.0 I NT RO D U CT I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 1.1 Background ..................... 1-1 1.2 Sumary of Inspection Results . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 1.3 Sumary of Outage Activities - 1985/1986 . . . . . . 1-2 1.3.1 Re-evaluation and Upgrade of Previously Applied Weld Overlays . . . . . . .. . . . . 1-2 1.3.2 Surface Finish improvement of All Weld Overlays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-3 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 EVALUATION AND REPAIR CRITERIA . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 2.1 Sumary of Pertinent Criteria Documents . . . . . . 2-1 2.2 Criteria for Acceptance of Flaws Without Weld 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 3.2 Stress Combinations for Weld Overlay Design . 3-1 I 3.3 Stress Combinations for flawed Pipe Analysis . . . . 3-1 3.4 Residual Stresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-2 3-2 3.5 Weld Overlay Shrinkage-induced Stresses . . . . . . 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-evaluation of Previous Overlays . . . . . . 4-1 4.2.2 1985/86 Weld Overlay Designs . . . . . . . . . 4-2 4.3 Weld Overlay inspection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-3 5.0 FLAWED PIPE EVALVATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 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 l 7' STRUCTURAL iii INTEGRITY
/ ASSOCIATESINC ll l
I I 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 l 5.3 Results of Crack Growth Analysis 5.4 Evaluation of Non-lGSCC Flaws Observed 5-8 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 5.4.4 Weld 24B-R-12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-11 5.5 Sunn ary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 11
~6.0 EVALVATION 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 . . . . . . . . r -3 6.3 Analysis of Weld Overlay Shrinkage . . . . . . . . . 6-4 I 6.3.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.3.2 Modelling Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-4
. 6-5 6.4 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-6 7.0 StHMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-1 7.1 Sumary of Hatch Status Af ter 1985/86 Outage . . . . 7-1 7.2 Summary of Conformance With Regulatc,ry Requirements . 7-2 7.3 Weld Overlay Surface Imprevement . . . . . . . . . . 7-2 7-3 7.4 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.0 R E F E RE NCE S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8- 1 APPENDIX A - WELD OVERLAY DESIGN SKETCHES APPENDIX B - FLAWED PIPE EVALUATION CALCULATIONS iv LINTEGRITY
/ ASSOCIATEEINC
l LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1-1 Summary of Weld Overlay Activity for Plant Hatch 1-6 Unit 1 ........................ 3-1 Stress Components for Flaw locations at Plant E.I. Hatch 3-4 Unit 1 ........................ Piping System Geometry Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-6 3-2 I 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 1985 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-13 5-3 Welds With Post-IHSI Flaw Indications (1985/86) . . . . 5-14 5-15 5-4 Non-IGSCC Flaws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sumilary of the As-Built Weld Overlay Shrinkages . . . . 6-8 6-1 6-2 Weld Overlay Shrinkage Stresses at Unrepaired, Flawed locations (IHS1 Only) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-9 I 6-3 Sumnary of Weld Overlay Shrinkage Stresses . . . . . . 6-10 I I I V
'^
sINTEGRITY
- ' ASSOCIAITElBC
I 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 . . . . . . . . . . . 5-17 5-2 Common Assumptions Used to Estimate Circumferential Crack Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-18 5-3 Average Effective Circumferential Crack Growth Rate As a Function of Operation Periods Used in Calculation of Time Between Inspections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-19 5-4 Stress Intensity vs. Crack Depth for Bounding 12" Pipe Location. IHSI and Applied Stress . . . . . . . . . . . 5-20 5-5 Stress Intensity vs. Crack Depth for Bounding 28" Pipe Location. IHSI and Applied Stress . . . . . . . . . . . 5-21 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 SWR 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 vi I,gy 3 INTEGRITYg
- ASSOCIATES.INC.
l
I
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
During the Winter 1985/86 maintenance / refueling outage at Georgia Power Company's Plant E.1. Hatch Unit 1, ultrasonic examination of recirculation, residual heat removal (RHR) and reactor water cleanup (RWCU) system welds I identified 21 welds with indications believed to be due to intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC). Similar indications were previously identified at the plant in 1982 and 1984. Of the indications observed between 1982 and the present, a total of 35 have been repaired using the weld overlay technique. In addition, an overlay was applied to one weld (24B-R-12) to enhance inspectabil.ty. 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 left without either weld overlay or IHSI repair. The history and status of the flaws identified at Plant Hatch Unit 1 are surrrnarized 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 performed analyses of those fli.ws 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 af ter lHSI or weld overlay repairs, considering worst case interpretatior, of the UT indications observed during inspection. I 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 Hatch Unit 1. Table 1-1 provides a weld-by-weld summary of the flaw indications identified in these systems since 1982, and the corrective action taken for each. A more 1-1 7 STRUCTURAL N
- u scc m su c
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 Summary of Outage Activities - 1985/86 I 1.3.) 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 same standard as was used for design of new weld overlay repairs. The design bases used throughout this report are briefly sumarized below, and discussed in greater detail in Sections 2 and 4. I
- 1. Where the original flaw indication was ci c;mferential in orientation, the design basis flaw was taken to be 360 0 in length and through the original pipe wall. This assumption negates uncertainty in flaw characterization, and eliminates the concern of potential butt weld low toughness due to use of flux-shielded weld processes (SPAW, SAW).
I 2. Axially oriented flaw indicat.ons do not present a structural integrity concern. Those weld overlays previously applied to locations with only I 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, at ustd in the evaluation.
I All previously applied welds were upgraded if they were determined to be insufficient to meet " e above design bases. I 1-2
~~2? STRUCTURAL LINTEGRITY
/ /ssocitaEsno 1
I ' 1.3.2 Surface Finish Improvement of All Weld Overlays I Recent EPRI sponsored work hat demonstrated that it is possible 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 inspectic, 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 surf ace 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 growth (if any) underneath the overlay. 1.3.3 Inspection During the 1985/86 maintenance / refueling outage, all previously applied and new weld overlays were ultrasonically re-inspected following surf ace 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 cocruitted in Reference 1. This inspection included all welds which were treated with IH51 during this outage. This inspection program meets or exceeds the requirements of NRC Generic Letter 84-11 [2] and ASME Section XI [3]. 1.3.4 Induction Heating Stress Improvement (IHSI) in order to minimize future occurrences of IGSCC at Hatch Unit 1, Georgia Power Company has treated the unrepaired welds in the affected systems with the IH51 process. This process produces a compressive residual stress distribution on the inner portion of the pipe wall, which will inhibit future 1-3 s5TRUCTURAL (, INTEGRITY ASSOCIAIES INC
IGSCC initiation and growth of shallow flaws. A total of 107 welds in the recirculation, RHR, and RWCU systems were successfully treated, including all 10 of the 12" riser safe end to inlet nozzle welds and both of the 28" safe end to outlet nozzle welds. 1.3.5 Weld Overlay Repairs and Flaw Evaluations In the course of the inspections performed on Hatch Unit 1, a total of 24 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 IHSI. The disposition of each of these flaws is included in I Table 1-1. In addition to the weld overlay repairs described above, a weld overlay was applied to one unflawed weld (24B-R-12) to simplify future inspection of this weld. This weld is adjacent to weld 248-R-13. The overlay on the latter weld partially obscured weld 24B-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 24B-R-13 overlay to cover 248-R-12 also. Since this weld was partially clad with inconel weld I metal, the weld overlay of this weld was made with Inconel. 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 I welds. I Section 3 presents stress component and stress combination data, and residual stress assumptions used in the repair and t. rack 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 1-4 gSTRUCTURAL LINTEGRITY ASSOCIAFES IfC I J
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 !HSI as a repair. The fracture mechariics crack growth analyses which are the basis of this conclusion are discussed. 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 sumarizes the report analyses and conclusions. I I wsrauenmal. 1 INTEGRITY I-5 . mgg gg
I TABLE 1-1 Summary of Weld Overlay Activity for Pla7t Hatch Unit 1 mi i :65. F:: -? F:E*-:-i :15 ' :s
.: . i i * : ' . :', F h :li: : :Es I Fa: :-:-4 F C.-: 0 5 h:
C
- 15. 1.i'15 ;
CI:. 1.5*I' : 0\E:.. D E: C.I .a Ei I N .-e-:-lE Fe:.-e 151. h: h: CIF. l.:!'I:S CIE. 1* 4n DV!;.D Ee 2VE:.4 E: 12p.e.: h: C!:. 2(-:MI:th c.!:.D E4 3 F A:E F:g;:' Et 1:A:-F- h: CIF. 20- s*!!!:0 DVES.D E4 ET:A:E ~Ih:i- is 12A:-F-4 YEi CIR. 4'Il31 :I: 3.:'I;:1 CvEF. D EL 12A: h; C!5. 2.1'I5n CVE AY Ee 12ct-5-4 YES C:E. 5. 75'I 2 ". LEAVE A! IS
- 2t.7 -H: h: CIE. 2C-3::::e'.* tvE:.Af i4'E F a: r:g:g. E-1:t.F-w-: C C ; 5. . :0-:n.h
- 0.E '. D' E4 5 F ::: rp.;i 2:
12 tJ -,-t h: CIA. 5'I!!'. C/E'. 0 E: 1:G +: h: CIE. ::-3C !h D CVEF. A* 6DSFA:[ FP.:i' it 12A*-r-2 C C!E. 3C1)3t3 CsEF.O EL/5 F A:E 5!h*E' Et 12A:-r-! C CIF. 30M h:* OVE ity 24'! F 8:E F!h:i Et 1:!:-A-4 YEE C!F. 2'1:~~. :.i'I: LE A.'E t.3 !! 1::-:-1-: YE! CI5 !. i'):n TW : i- hA.. A!'A.! D.ER.AY E! 1:i'-: 2 C C:5. 2'-3';I!e:* CvEF. AV E4 '5F A*.! TIN:f- E:
- !:-:- h: C:F. 2".I:t3 CiE;ib E4 ! F .:E F:s:5- E:
1:i: *-4 C Cit. 139'. CVE5.D El 1:i:-:-5 YE! LA' s t::A t t.': s:' : ".'. LEAJE AI !! 1::: 0 2 %: CI'. 15Ci 0'. E5..M Ei 1:F-:- C CIF. 2':I::3 C.EF.D E4/5J'FA:E rD :56 Et 1:1~ 2 C CIF 25:1:63 D i5.Ae E8!! F A:~ F:hi! E: 125'-E-3 C CIS. 3nI3ea DVEFLA< E4/Ey rA ! FIh:56. EL 12F-E-4 YEE CIS. 25:12.5' CIE. :.7!'llfitFIFE! LEAi! A5 15 C:F. 2'I:4:(5El 0\Etiat 6:'5%FA;E F:h!!" E: II t 2CE-:-: 205-:-4 C YE5 CI5. 3'I3:: AI:AL 154; A!!A' I 16:
. LEAVE A5 !!
l l i ::A -! N: A!:4.I!!! CVER.AY 6 /$ F A:i f P.:5' Ei 2'a -4 C 41:;'.17T. CVE .A E:/! F A:E *!N:!' E: l 2*P-1 < AIIA;I64; C.ERLAY E:/5Ft.:E F:%:5F !! i 2:P-4 C AI!ALI67: CVE5LAf E*oS F A:E N 5* E: 22t.* :-B:1 YEI INT. CIF.: E.E*Ill! EE:"ETS* LEt.iE A! 15 22P:-E:! YES lhi. CIP.:12.7'I:9; EEC'ETF' LEAVE A5 15 t l 24:-F-3 h: t.II A;I5*: Cithb E4/5FA:E FIN:56 Ei 24i-s-:3 m A!!A'14'
. 0.EE.4 E2'k t.:E rik:E- Et i
! ^7 STRUCTURAL 1-6 (INTEGRITY
' ASSOC 1/GES INC
I TABLE l-1 I TABLE l-1 (continued)
- sA-2 >ES tin. t'rin tEAvt AS IS
- 3. 5. $'1151 23;-4 *ES 7 A!:ALS :4! "AI. 7 41'A;,5 141 "l.t. LEA.E A5 !S
!!A-6 TES CIR. :.5'!:C! A1:4 0.:'1:41 LEA'.! AS IS 2 AIIALS EA-:0 h: CIP. 5011:e:e CiERLAf 24/ EF:A E F:h:5H 96
!A-12 YES C:R. 14*I291 D'EALAY 86 AI:ALI411
!!!-I h3 CIR. 32:1:60e SE%AY it.5LaFACE FI4!!H $6
- 25 4 ha Cli. 3:II!6:e L O Or FJ5I:n In DERAY 84/5.FFACE F!n:5H is t!L: $! LAY
!!!-! YE5 2 A!!LS: 0.:5'I :4! LEAVE A5 IS
- ii-10 YES 8 ::;:. 6.5' i iA; LEALE AS :5 I ::1 2 AI:4LS: :1,261
- 5 -:: s :::. Su :$:. :5tta 54:5.5:A:E 5:s:5r !s
- 55-16 YE5 Ed::T 14. 10: :: . 2.6:'I:41 :1E:.At la At n ::: c:n. 4's:s:
tro. i.:'r St l x I 1-7 ry(g' (DUTGRITY
- ASSOCIATESINC
V I C V yW W c C.i' @ 4 ~ '.E I g CD Cr CI y CO -
>- d C
I O u *C r kOW
..t Um6 m' CV UW y ~
I > WJ CI O 3 CL D-Z
- u _JZ 'h I 2 L 9*
a 8
-t I N.
a W 9 x* e I
, ke aC e
n I. * ' ' Oi t I ee u c c et 7
% J' '#
i. 4
$3 m
}~J s t
C I 'o tN T
\ e-- /
-- s 9
L k
% Cf. E.
.2 kU e
~
D.p H . < I y 4= _5 5< - CM.,, ic 5 ( be
.a~
e d
, i
.5<o n d. e,4-g% ',s-er ..
=== :C *'s -
I O w=1 < f 5 ' T_ -
,& s== > "
m w=- cc 5 j
< Y~i I %UI i I 4 N ,,
415 5<;< %~ ( " C' I .. R
; (Tn\i i <
~
".e .c e rr_. - M~% g- _ h
'f i s 11 #
ew4 3 cc N f>
=
y J_ n I g
%.u,??"7 m t
'N 92 c_. -
a o e 4,, 4 cr. '-
. " 1 E M & i
.gy 'm u e ddi
* \5%~ & =4 S cc <
- I u
- NMM; w-
_u _
. N. _
+
s \a t g o. 4s e~ i
#*m o m a y
M,U.id 'i ,- S fd ~/; a I
- ~
8 o g i Q-S' e *l' - x- #
- ~4
( R I, as Cf i i _lh _i\ _ i1 -f E
- k. _t '-- ~ I Iit i N JMtQL I
- i S;go 4
G Y c i s U k f h f
-s- <%. 4 T4#0
<i e w
- n. < ~.
k ke, u n eiiif s _S @ de 6 E I *
*n\ -RRES
~ M. .
7W N ' o- L O f-- _-
=
i l , '- ? - CrURlLL i 1-8 I ' ASSOCIAIESINC
M M M M
- Ar 150' A z 120 Az 90' Ar 4 ff At Kf At. 19 0* 4 s ; )2 " "f I P:A i y 2 6 ' * -.:A -- ell'-
C E ' N, 7 L
~
Q (L gg'.gg'~ f. 7 pw * *$0
\.
RR el.nR F 4 J{i,-rB r-i t l 12 6 R {} 4 t>5 hl' 1
\ ' 91 n Of* ' -es tv L '.3 360 '*~*O@l*L c'4 l
. lVR' sp.De s- A y ,7 R 9 A ,1
' g ) g sa * * $
f g a vor s y l 'et R R ^
- sL BM
)
V9 H +1 Gg2 60D1. t/ V'6*E f yf L p1 0R t-) jgbp$ I g f>= D- 81 [usR**'<' r 2 6R*f , jir s* B-8 i r iz sa A-N . otw etui r 28 8-l i l o 2o ' 7,2 sR 01 gsi-roos (dis e0
/ , i
~2A 6-2 {
?. ,y., 22ba see-:
tttnro~ .- , "' ? '***t ~~/70 8 p.3 2g-g _$ l
,,p Iw *
- j .
j',t.3in G,%R2*,,v E$v$
~ '
_ _ gg-g-4 r 28 8 se e gg ga.,5 '
-k (tt nt't,* / (y~(t,{
4 d{g k s
. E L.14 4
/
b-85B'cos m rt *o n m i \ SR f IT ' 28-B-6 f{'f-g002 % ' h
' 228M-4 a_ gg.o -
\ V D - *3 -. - -
[ 228M- l }_ __ _ qi f ,',6
-v-m ,
- . o . ,, . ;.n 2.o .1
**" ,q ni-roos) h w tt n.v.o* - .p-si
# e y3.g-it, 711.R}lR-94'iV'si.i; ,p,fs. nerea)
~ %df.#".#8 p ,
,,,. ,,in sie is n-,a a, og.a s1 R-2st-B -R I4
' a 2 rsei. e sc-2. .t101[.5*
l
. .N[ eye Et tfN, b7 l TifCIRC. TUtW
- n -'" M 84r. -
i[ 153 _ toogg *att
- t.7ep
- me n a.,ejo s,e. pm.
s e.o ....., { EL 151'-lh, - g CM- _ _ _ - f,- (1- C __ M- 0 -I2. 3 Att f. D - Wrtr> .43.ev,s r0ZT k-D-% 2g-B-33 yg.g.,y sat w<otusc. c,y.,soi
' a D-* .
._ x I
tear vm l~~l0 R *I ~ - p n ' y-D-3pC.-D-#
/ '8-"3 ,,_g_ r = y m ,. , _
p n3\ ro31t yg_6-H u a< ( = l 2. 8 11 E EllW-n' N N. >% y 8 8, ,o B LOOP nn-roz3n E E2 Figure 1-2. Plant Hatch Unit 1 Recirculation System - B-Loop 5 .
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 ASME 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 Hatch Unit I recirculation, residual heat removal (RHR), and reactor water clean-up (RWCU) systems. In addition to the requirements of ASME Section XI, several other documents provide guidance for the treatment of IGSCC flaws at Hatch Unit 1. These documents include:
- l. 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] (non-mandatory).
- 3. U.S. NRC letter from John F. Stolz to J.T. Beckham (GPC), dated I August 1, 1985 [5].
- 4. Letter from John A. Zwolinski (NRC) to Dennis L. Farrar (Comon-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 mod fied or extended the basic ASME Section XI requirements. The resulting evaluation and design bases as applied by Structural Integrity to the Httch Unit 1 flaw evaluation and weld overlay design effort are summarized below. 2-1 4 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSOCIATES INC.
2.2 Criteria for Acceptance of Flaws Without Weld Overlay Repair A total of 12 flawed locations were evaluated for acceptability without repair. All of these locations were treated with the Induction Heating Stress Improvement (IH5I) process to produce a favorable residual stress distri-bution. The post-lH51 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. ASME Section XI [3] provides criteria by which flaws may be accepted without repair. The tables provided in lWB-3640 define an acceptable end of cycle flaw depth as a function of flaw length and aoplied stress. Reference 2 defines the allowable flaw depth (end of cycle) as 2/3 of the ASME 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 ASME Section XI acceptable depth.
- 2. The flaw must not be predicted to grow to a depth which exceeds the allowable depth in (1) within the next fuel cycle, considering the effects of JHSI, and under the influence of pressure, dead weight,
.I thermal expansion, and weld overlay shrinkage stresses.
- 3. Document 4 above [6] presents an NRC staff position regarding flaw size for which credit for IH51 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 requiring repairs in a total of 23 welds at Hatch Unit 1. 2-2 STRUCTURAL LINTEGRITY AS50ClKIES IfC
Each of these repaired welds was re-evaluated during the 1985/86 outage to determine 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 grir. ding or wash pass application, in order to improve inspectability. The evaluation described herein also served I 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: I 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 was 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, the flaw was evaluated as if it were 3600 long and 100%
through wall. The weld overlay thickness 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 ASME 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 suf ficient to repair the assumed flaw. This was generally the case.
IGSCC-like flaws were detected in 21 welds, during the 1985/86 inspection, I beyond those previously repaired. Of these, 12 were determined to require weld overlay repairs. Criteria for designing new repairs were the same as those discussed above for evaluating previously repaired locations. This evaluation is discussed in detail in Section 4. STRUCTURAL 2-3
.(i 4 ASSOCIATES INC
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, dead weight, seismic (OBE), and thermal expansion stresses. These components are presented in Table 3.1 for each weld requiring repair or flaw evaluation. I 3.2 Stress Combinations for held Overlay Design I Section IW3-3640 of ASME Section XI [3] defines allowable flaw depth as a function of the stress ratio (Pm+Pb)/Sm. The pertinent stress combination for weld overlay design is therefore Pm + Pb * #p + "DW + " seismic Reference 6 recomends including thermal expansion stresses in the above Pm + Pb value, to account for t*1e concern of potentially low toughness flux weld material. Since the design basis for the Hatch Unit I weld overlays assumes a through wall flaw extending 3600, no credit for the flux weld material is taken, so the toughness concern does not apply and thermal stresses are not I included 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. I 3.3 Stress Combinations for flawed Pipe Analysis I A total of 12 flawed locations at Hatch Unit I were shown to be acceptable without repair. All of these locations were successfully treated with IHSI. I 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-lH51), and the 3-1 2rSTRUCTURAL t, INTEGRITY
/ ASSOCIATESINC
secondary stress which results from shrinkage of weld overlays at other locations in the system. I 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 + Fdead weight + Uthermal in addition to these stresses, weld overlay shrinkage induced stresses are considered. These stresses are discussed in Section 6.
I 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 proc'ess imposes a compressive residual stress distribution on the inside portion of the pipe wall which inhibits crack growth and initiation. The post-IHSI residual stress distribution assumed for each affected pipe size (12",20",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-lHS! residual stresses in austenitic pipe welds. These data are surmiarized 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 imediate 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 3-2 55.==carrv
.t' STRUCT
/MVilEiINC
1 1 allowable flaw size analyses for these locations. These shrinkage stresses for each unrepaired flaw location are shown in Table 6-2. The derivation and l application of these stress values is discussed in greater detail in Section 6. 3.6 Sumary of Pipe Geometries 1GSCC flaw indications were observed in pipes in the reactor water clean up (RWCU-6"), recirculation (12", 22", and 28") and residual heat removal (RHR-20", 24") systems. The geometry of each pipe size (outside diameter and nominal wall thickness) is sumarized in Table 3-2. i l 1 ) l l l I 3-3
; STRUCTURAL
, INTEGRITY I /GTJJIAIDiiNC
I TABLE 3-1 Stress Components for Flaw Location I at Plant E.I. Hatch Unit 1 STRESS COMPONENTS WELD NUMSER PRESSURE DEADWEIGHT l THERMAL l SEISMIC (OBE) RWCU-6-D-4 4193 517 850 2227 RWCU-6-D-5 4193 796 4314 5658 RWCU-6-D-18 4193 877 2237 1109 RWCU-6-D-18A 4193 616 921 759 I 12AR-F-2 6667 260 2816 801 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 2010 1599 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 12BR-E-2 6667 142 2507 1780 'I 12BR-E-3 6667 564 4550 2789 12BR-E-4 6667 1448 7424 1821 20B-D-3 5391 643 3176 1790 20B-D-4 5391 643 3176 1790 I amuenmm. 3-4 l ' ASSOCIAIES.lTC
I TABLE 3-1 (continued) Stress Components for Flaw location at Plant E.1. Hatch Unit 1 STRESS COMPONENTS PRESSURE l DEADWElGHT THERMAL SEISMIC (0BE) WELD NtF.BER 7250 0 0 0 22AM-1 7250 0 0 0 22AM-4 7250 0 0 0 22BM-1 7250 0 0 0 22BM-4 22AM-1BC-1 I 22BM-1BC-1 24A-R-13 7749 1036 5111 4350 3848 24B-R-13 7568 540 3139 I 28A-2 7212 7212 607 454 772 415 896 718 28A-4 7212 585 677 1052 28A-6 7028 417 792 2292 28A-10 7302 482 652 1457 28A-12 7212 855 1000 859 288 -3 5819 568 917 1652 28B-4 7212 397 468 866 288-8 7028 444 ' 652 2525 288-10 7028 444 652 2525 288-11 7302 1086 1272 1863 288-16 I
- These locations were classified as geometrical reflectors due to weld configuration instead of flaws in 1985/86.
I 3-5 1srauenmaI. l, INTEGRITY
/&OCl/GEiINC g
TABLE 3-2 Piping System Geometry Data i Pipe O C. Wall Thickness I System Pipe Size (nominal) (in.) (in.) (in.) RWCU 6 6.628 0.5494 , Recirculation 12 12.746 0.693 RHR 20 20.00 0.937 Recirculation 22 22.00 1.10 RHR 24 24.01 1.15 I Recirculation 28 28 1.213 (Suction) (Discharge) 28 28 1.39 i l I l l l
; ,yyy 3-6 >N AfBJCIATFliINC
M M i i j M Po j
-300 M Pe
-700 -soo o eco 700 soo - w) 200 eoo o soo too soo Og-OUTER SWACE gog__ , ,
WELD #eG (IS 2cm) 5 )
/
-- wtLD#eG s- l
+ sHss " O s-
[ j - - 2 1 f '
- i. U $
/ 5_ I_ hgW :._ y y *~
s 'O /
- 0 593 = [s2.= Y *~~'O 1
is Secm) 1030cml f f
/
E - R
- S 3F5.n o3 (13 6Sem) p#~ [,
w sr f w a o 3, j e g 02- -Os g a [ 02- ,o3 W
- i l
Os- I i \ $ 03
\ ^
5 g , 888NER St. MACE
-40 -10 O 20 40 eO -20 0 20 40 NESIDUAL AXIAL STRESS.kes i REssouat CIRcute EMENTIAL STRESS,hei cr = -30.71 - 212.18x hj \ ,
+ 1411.87x2 - 1505.44x3 C
! 5 m Figure 3-1. Through-Wall Residual Stresses Computed at a Cross-Section in the 9. ! - Sensitized Zone, 0.12 Inch (0.3 cm) from Weld Centerline. of a l b Welded and IHS! Treated 10-Inch Schedule 110 Pipe [10] . e
U M Pe M Po
-300 -Poo w o soo too 300 -300 -200 -800 o soo 700 300 *no OUTER SURFACE )
I WELD i s 3 3 (35 6cml 3 ,. 3 j
/
, -- WELD + INS: g FMOmd 5 u i
. - f Y
i
,no-et I II 7l _
s t owth , watt e b g so-W -l 3m(3 3t m) h *#
/ - Pel3 0m(33 02cm) 6 E
/ E, j #,
/
/ lt' //
I $
@ 0 5-
[/ 03-Iy -.
; y ,
e - , I E O N I t e o a
-90 40 J .
-20 0 N. 20 40
-60 8888tR SURFACE
-80 -70 0 20 40 ESIDual AXIAL STitESS. hel Rf sIDUAL cWecunartserstTIAL STRESS, no.
o = -28.93 - 143.55x + 467.84x2 - 261.87x3 Figure 3-2. Through-Wall Residual Stress Profile for a Welded and 11151 Treated 76-Inch Schedule 80 Pipe at a Cross-Sectvon 0.17 inch
\M (0.3 cm) from the Weld Centerline [10]
Il 8 -
4.0 WELD OVERLAY DESIGN 4.1 Introduction 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 1985/86 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 1985/86 outage, to improve ultrasonic inspectability. The weld overlay thickness af ter surf ace finish improvement met or exceeded the required design thickness without credit for the first welding layer, in all cases. Twelve new weld overlay repairs were applied to IGSCC-like flaw indications during 1985/86. In addition, an overlay which partially covered an unflawed weld (24B-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 Design Basis I 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 thickness for each repair was determined based upon the requirements of ASME Section XI, IWB-3640 [3]. The applied stress ratio used in this evaluation was determined from data presented 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 7 STRUCTURAL 4-1 l INTEGRITY
/ ASSOCIATES INC.
l l' ( reliable information on first layer thickness for the previous overlays was 1 not repeatable, a first layer thickness of 0.1" was assumed and discounted from as-built thickness measurements. I 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 I finish operation for these overlays, the "new design" was used to guide material build-up and grinding operations. The as-built (post-surface finish) thickness for each overlay was compared with the aw 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 meets or exceeds the design value in all cases. As-built thicknesses are the average measured thickness values following decuttion of 0.1" for each pre-existing overlay. 4.2.2 1985/86 Weld Overlay Designs Where a circumferentially oriented flaw requiring repair was detected during the present outage, a weld overlay repair was designed using the scme approach as described above for re-evaluation of weld overlay repairs. The weld specific stress combinations discussed in Section 3 of this report were used. The flaw was assumed to extend 3600 circumferential1y and to be through original pipe wall. The progam pc-CRACK was used to size the weld overlay using ASME Section XI IWB-3640 criteria. The design thickness I included no credit for the first welding layer. Design and as-built dimensions for the new (1985/86) weld overlays are presented for comparison in Table 4-1. All weld overlay designs are included in Appendix A. I 4-2 n mucma ASSOCIATES NC
4.3 Weld Overlay inspection The weld metal used for weld overlay application at Hatch Unit I was Type 308L stainlass 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 recommendation has been implemented at Hatch Unit 1, as previously discussed. 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:
- 1. Delta ferrite measurements of the first welding layer were made on each weld overlay. During the 1985/86 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 layer 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
" blown through" the layer. The weld metal was then carefully cleaned prior to continuing with weld overlay application.
4-3 7 STRUCTURAL t, INTEGRITY 1
/ ASSOCIKIHiINC 1
r, E
- 3. The completed weld overlay was examined ultrasonically in accordance with EPRI-qualified procedures to demonstrate proper weld overlay I 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 overlay 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 1 further illustrates the level of conservatism which has been incorporated into the overlay design. I l l m STRUCTURAL 4-4 '
- ASSOCIATESITC
I l TABLE 4-1 Weld Overlay Design and As-Built Dimensions Weld Design As-Built Design y As-Built 2 Number Length Length Thickness Thickness RWCU-6-D-4 2.0 2.820 0.167 0.208 RWCU-6-D-5 2.0 2.026 0.206 0.228 RWCU-6-D-18 3.5 3.090 0.165 0.205 RWCV-6-D-18A 4.0 3.539 0.165 0.231 12AR-F-2 3.2 3.823 0.250 0.500 12AR-F-3 3.2 4.190 0.263 0.271 12AR-F-4 4.0 4.528 0.257 0.389 12AR-G-3 4.0 4.517 0.250 0.253 12AR-h 2 3.2 3.810 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 0.279 12AR-K-2 3.2 4.764 0.251 0.278 12AR-K-3 3.2 4.284 0.270 0.358 12BR-B-3 4.0 4.113 0.242 0.340 12BR-C-2 3.2 4.066 0.249 0.463 l 12BR-C-3 3.2 3.723 0.251 0.268 12BR-C-4 4.0 4.127 0.294 0.305 l 12BR-D-2 4.0 4.323 0.250 0.318 ! 4.249 0.257 12BR-D-3 3.2 0.380 12BR-E-2 3.2 3.983 0.251 0.300 12BR-E-3 3.2 3.839 0.252 0.284 20B-D-3 5.0 9.143 0.33 0.408 I Design Thickness is the result of the 1985/86 re-evaluation, and not the l l original design in the case of previously overlayed welds. 2 Design and As-Built Thickness takes no credit for the first overla r 4-5 2' NASSOCIAIES,INC
g TABLE 4-1 E (continued) Weld Design As-Built Design y As-Built 2 Number Length Length Thickness Thickness (in) 22AM-1 5.2 6.332 0.376 0.445 22AM-4 5.2 6.750 0.376 0.478 225M-1 5.2 7.777 0.369 0.418 22BM-4 5.2 6.638 0.376 0.466 24A-R-13 3.75 4.006 0.2003 0.240 24B-R-12 Blend N/A 0.200 0.522 248-R-13 5.6 8.010 0.2003 0.290 28A-10 4.2 4.643 0.480 0.533 28A-12 4.0 6.278 0.520 0.688 28B-3 6.0 6.152 0.440 0.509 28B-4 6.2 5.976 0.429 0.631 289-11 4.2 4.720 0.493 0.648 28B-16 4.0 5.501 0.560 0.594 l l 1 Design Thickness is the. result of the 1985/86 re-evaluation, and not the original design, in the, case of previously overlayed welds, l 2 Design and As-Built Thickness takes no credit for the first overlay ! layer. 3 Axial Flaw only. l l l . l 4-6 b
/ ASSOCIATESINC l
1 f
I 5.0 FLAWED PIPE EVALUATION 5.1 Review of Unrepaired Flaw Status 1 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 operatien without repair. At 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, the welds with unrepaired flaws were re-inspected using the latest EPRI-qualified ultrasonic (UT) inspection techniques both before and after IHS1 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 1985/86 results column. This does not constitute 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: I "During the 1984 refueling outage, weld number 1B31-1RC-22BM-1BC-1 (pipe to branch connection weld) was ultrasonically examined. This examination I 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 IHSI. The results of this examination revealed no significant change from 1984 data and was reported to GPC by INF# 185H1002. mm 5-1 ASSOCIATES.INC.
l I ) I Another examination was performed after lHSI and this examination revealed similar indications as detected in the 1984 and the 1985 pre-lHSI 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-1BC-1 post-!H5I. 5.1.2 Present Outage During the 1985/86 inspection program a total of 9 welds were determined to contain IGSCC_-type flaw indications which were acceptable without requiring weld overlay repair. In addition,12BR-C-5 was determined to contain a flaw not traceable to IGSCC. These welds and the flaw indications associated with each are shown in Tables 5-2 and 5-3. All of these welds were treated with the IHS1 process. Where available, the results are presented for both pre-IHS1 and post-lHSI [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 ASME Section XI, IWB-3500 criteria, as discussed in Section 5.4 of this report. In addition, this flaw was not observable after lH5I. Of the remaining 9 welds, 3 are 12" pipe-to-safe end welds containing only short circumferential flaws, 1 is 20" with only axial, 1 is a 28" pipe-to-safe end weld containing 2 short circumferential flaws, 3 are 28" welds containing only axial flaws, 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. 5-2 3 INTEGRITY msocmume
I 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]. ASME Section XI, paragraph IWB-3640 addresses the acceptance of flaws in :tainless steel which are deeper than those defined as acceptable without further evaluation by paragraph IWB-3500. Allowable flaw 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 NRC Generic Letter 84-11 is two-thirds of the IWB-3640 value. In addition, NRC Generic Letter 84-11 defines the maximum acceptable ldngth 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 (IWB-3641-3 for axial flaws and IWB-3641-5 for circumferential flaws). It should be noted that the IHSI treatment applied to all flawed, unoverlayed welds effectively arrests any further growth for the flaws presented in Table 5-3. STRUCTURAL 5-3 m
/ ASSOCIATES,INC.
- 2. Flaw Length:
The aggregate flaw length was limited to the NRC Generic Letter 84-11 value of roughly 30% of circumference for circumferential flaws. Axial flaws are self-limiting in length and are predicted to self-arrest long before they could grow 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 IHS1 only are significantly shorter and more shallow than the above criteria limits. An NRC Safety Evaluation 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. IHSI 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 but 2 (welds 12AR-G-4 (13%) and 12BR-E-4 (12%)) meet the length criterion. This topic was discussed with the NRC by telephone [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 Metnodology An analytical model or a 3600 circumferential crack in a cylinder of radius to I thickness ratio of 10:1 [15] was used for the fracture mechanics evaluation. For the post-lHSI case, applied loading is the sum of the same piping stresses from Table 3-1 and the post-IHSI residual stress distributions given in Figure 3-2 for 28-inch pipe or Figure 3-1 for 12-inch pipe. I 5-4 I qSTRUCTUIULL su m carry
/ ASSOCIATESINC
For purposes of the fracture mechanics analysis, the axial stress distri-butions of piping stress, and post-lHSI residual stress were all expressed in terms of third degree polynomials of the form: I cr = Ao + A1 x + Apx2 + A3x3 (1) where cr and x are defined as the stress and the radial distance from the inside surf ace, 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]. K] = \/ iia ( A F01+ AFI2+ ApF3 + ha3AF)34 (2) where F1 , F2 , F 3, and F4 are magnification factors and a is crack depth. For linear elastic fracture mechanics evaluation, stress intensity factors can be calculated independently for piping stress and pre-and post-lHSI residual stress distributions. The resultant stress intensity f actor is the superposition of the appropriate loading cases. A large body of laborator. 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, sulf ates, 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 I power law representation of the form: 7 SThUCTURAL 5-5 L UfFEGRITY
' ASSOCIAIEINC
da/dt = 2.27 x 10-8(g)2.26 I 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 \[III. 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 at 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, and was accelerated by the use of graphite wool to create an artificial crevice. Crack growth occurrred ar;d I 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 these was periodically measured. The initiation of new cracks was noted and their lengths were 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 LINTEGRITY 5-6 / ASSOCIA'IESINC
I mils / hour should give a reasonably conservative estimate. It should be pointed out, however, that although this is an average ef fective 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 IHSI will 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 I Allowable flaw sizes for various levels of primary applied loading (Pm + Pb) 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 ASME 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 construc-tion. 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 Reference 3. lI 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 the high toughness attributed to base material. Also, the low 5-7
^> STRUCTURAL
' ASSOCIATES INC
toughness data to date has been limited to flux types of weldments (submerged arc or shielded metal arc). 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. 5.2.4 Effects of Weld Overlay Shrinkage 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 non-overlay 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, 1985 Addenda, Reference 3). These values expressly address the low toughness concern. For the purpose of this analysis, the additional limits I mu-INTEGRITY 5-8
/ ASSOCIATESITC
of NRC Generic Letter 84-11 [2] were imposed. That is, the allowable flaw depths from IWB-3641-5 were f actored by 2/3 to account for possible UT sizing 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). 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 IH5I 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 20 inch and 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 sucrnary, 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 inclusion and/or 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 three locations (248-R-12, 28A-12 and 288-4) were locations to which weld overlays had been applied. The flaws observed in these three welds appear l STRUCTURAL i l 5-9 s7( LINTEGRITY e ,' M IA E lliC
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 four welds are presented in Table 5-4. All of these flaws were shown to be acceptable without repair by the methods of ASME Section XI, IWB-3500. Each is discussed in detail below: 5.4.1 Weld 12BR-C-5 This weld was determined to contain an inclusion and/or 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 ASME 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. Following IHSI, the flaw could not be observed ultrasonically. I 5.4.2 Weld 288-4 Two lack of fusion-type flaws were observed following surf ace 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 ASME Section XI. If these flaws are treated as subsurface planar flaws, the flaws are acceptable by the criteria of Table IWB-3514-2 of ASME 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 surface 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 5 'O NN 1 INTEGRITY , - ~ ASSOCIATES,INC 1 1
flaws appear to be in the first welded layer, and two appear to be in the next layer (see Table 5-4 for a ccmplete flaw description). Although the 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 inches) is treated as planar flaw, the composite flaw is acceptable by the criteria of Table IWB-3514-2.
5.4.4 Weld 248-R-12 The weld overlay at this location was not applied as a repair, but rather as a method of improving the inspectability of the weld. This was necessary because the weld overlay on the adjacent weld was close enough to weld 248-R-12 to prevent adequate UT crystal movement for proper inspection of this weld. Inspection of the overlay on 248-R-12 revealed two small flaws in the overlay material (Table 5-4). These flaws were treated as subsurf ace planar flaws, and were shown to be acceptable by the criteria of Table IWB-3514-2. 5.5 Summary A total of 9 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 ASME Section XI, IWB-3641-5 and NRC Generic Letter 84-11 for at least the next operating cycle. In addition, non-lGSCC flaws were identified in four welds. The methods of ASME Section XI IWB-3500 were used to demonstrate that these flaws were acceptable without repair. 5-11 LINTEGRrrY
~ ASSOCIATESINC
I ' TABLE 5-1 I Welds With Flaws Which Were Acceptable Without Repair Prior to 1985 i 1 Weld Number 1982 Result 1984 Result (if any) (if any) 22AM-1BC-1 Transverse: Intermittent Circ.: 12% x 0.5" max Nom. 11% Spot: 18% 228M-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 l I i l I I I 5-12 I
/ ASSOCIATES.IhC
I TABLE 5-2 Disposition of Welds With Unrepaired Flaws Prior to 1985 I Weld Number 1985/86 Result Disposition 22AM-1BC-1 Geometry I IHSI 22BM-1BC-1 Geometry I IHSI 28A-6 Axial: 0.3" x 29% IHS1 (post-lH5I) 288-16 3 Circumferential Flaws: Weld Overlay (separated by 900)
- 1) 26.5" x 24%
- 2) 4" x 18%
- 3) 1.5" x 40%
I I See discussion in Section 5.1.1 of text. l l E I INTEGRITY 5-13 . mmg I
TABLE 5-3 I Welds With Post-IHSI Flaw Indications (1985/86) Pre-lHSI Indication Post-IHSI Indication I Weld Number (if applicable) 12AR-G-4 N/A 1) Circ.: 5.375" x 20% I 12BR-A-4 1) Circ.: 2" x 22% 1) Circ.: 2.6" x 26% 12BR-C-5 Lamination in Safe-End No flaw observable Base Material: 0.4" long after IHSI 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%
208-D-4 N/A 1) Axial: 0.25" x 18%
- 2) Axial: 0.15" x 16%
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) 1.3" 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%
288-10 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 I
as-cwam. 5-14 5
/ ASSOCIATESINC.
TABLE 5-4 NON-IGSCC 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 I depth from C D. = 0.6"
- 2) 1.2" long depth from 0.D. = 0.58" 28A-12 Four Indications in We ld Leave as is I Overlay
- 1) 8" long, 0.8" deep approx. 3.9" 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 i
l of overlay
- 4) 1.4" long, 0.6" deep 2.6" from upstream toe of overlay l
l i Width on all 4 flaws in 28A-12 = 1/16" Circumferential Locations: 1) 58.5"
- 2) 76.0"
- 3) 87.0"
- 4) 65.6" l
5-15 ggg b ASSOCIAIMINC
i I TABLE 5-4 (continued) WELD FLAW DESCRIPTION RESOLUT ION 248-R-12 Two Indications in Weld Overlay leave as is
- 1) 1.5" long, depth from 0.0. = 0.4" )
I 2) 1" long, depth from 0.D. = 0.5
.45" from upstream toe of
)
l overlay. l l iI l l l lI i 1 l l l d 7 sTRUcrURAL Inmconrry 5-16 -' ' ASSOCIATESINC I - . - -. . __ _ _ - _ - - - _ _ _ . _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ . - _ . _ _ _ .
I lo'3 , ' l
- Upper Bound (Turnace Sensitiza d)
I / y da/di = 5.6h1C'9(K)3.07 0 10-4 -
~
g @ y Best Estimate (Weld Sensitized )
,A da/dt : 2.2" x10-6(K )2.26 j y st s *.rt: a iu's : e r en-3 . Iat esta .;g . tiis*.
I
/
// & .St%n
,.ta'st.t.:,.a'
.- iiba'8e t... ,t.o..C 2 an-to.3 -
[$ Q 8ths
- 28 D a' .W'8 2a =
I -
/
i V 9 e r. - o, eSt - Ti e i. Q Mel 'att D st. t et s
- C t a.- C 3 164. api 332 3 et e = M.
_ O memv st D at ',se's. se . e - I , T T 8
@ CE - 1896
$ ma%C C6A ma t . Ct% t c I 39 6
@ 5060**D= . C8 Cao g esa.saDo .mi'at .at St aeg= ut I -
$ Paas . aeCD%=t hat bas eau u m.
8 Nes tstt0 Ov of LD+=C LTS at seer. w e s - o, ise. =l e - a v. I -
,g.7 e e 8 8 ' '
o 1o ao 30 4o 50 6o 7o I I Figure 5-1. Stress Corrosion Crack Growth Data for Sensitized Stainless Steel in BWR Environment I I 5-17 sTacco I.
'IINTEGRITY I / ASSOCIATESINC a
y - ~ s , [ N a I Y t' h~ \ T~I I a' Self-Similar Assu pticn; l'- f = 2(a'-a) I I I f- ~~ ~ m 's '. f. I t) Ccnstant Aspect Ratio Assuestion; f/a = l'/a* I l I Figure 5-2. Corrnon Assumptions Used to Estimate Circumferential Crack Growth I I 5-18 -_ t,
, _INTEG_RITY
1.0 -
.9 '-
.8 _
5 A A .6 - U. Uf .5 -
*> 0 r
ti 4 - B N o G g= .3 -
.2 -
O' e
.1 -
1 I I 1 i 1 , 1 2 3 4 5 6 i Mont>cr of Operat ion Per so.ls Ine leided in t he Average Crack Growth Rats t.ileulitson
\
1 1 I I I I I 2.000 4R 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 Approutwiate Time Between inspection (Hours) 5n ll Figure 5-3. Average Effective Circumferential Crack Growth Rate As a function of Operation Periods Used in Calculation of Time Between Inspections
s == - X 6...1,APPLI.D......2,E1,..................................................................................um i ! - i 1 0 4 ...........-..............................i..........................'.................!.......,/......................... S 2 .........................................._. ..... _ . / l. i f f f I t t 4 I I I I l .I . . j i s : i i . 1 . . M . . . vi , 4 E : : : c . i
.......................................... .... ................................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~
- i. x !
5 .
-6 , i , i , i 0 2 4 6 l
IENTHINCHES L;g) CRACKDEPIH
\J Figure 5-4. Stress Intensity vs. Crack Depth for Bounding 12" Pipe Location. IHS1 and Applied Stress
P f ..... %,, P S . 9..... ,. E ................................................................................ 1 ... g ' l 2 .........................!..........................!................... ! /.........................!...................... H . i i / i i i g i ................
.....j.........................j..................................................j I p -
U" n . . I I f f f g g i I i f i f 6 I 6 1 3 I I I. 4
. .i I .
i H -2 ............. ........... W v, . .
-3 ....................... ...................................................... .................................
4 .................. . 3 no : : i - , : : . . ) . j . .
\
-5 i l i I i I i I , I l 0 2 4 6 8 10 IENIHINCHES qNI CRACHDEPIH Figure 5-5. Stress Intensity vs. Crack Depth for Bounding 28" Pipe Location. 1HS! and Applied Stress k
Di
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 I 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 pretominantly 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. I 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 I 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. I 6-1 C'PSTRUCTURAL (g
/ ASSOCIATESINC g
r 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-I 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 g ~ ~
~ ~ ~~
Bit shririk age is reYated to The ol'ur5e v of metal cooYing at ~ any one Ifirie[ compared to the amount (including original pipe wall) which has already solidified. 6.1.2 Effects of Weld Overlay Shrinkage 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 111. Consequently, such stresses will not contribute to a particular location violating Code stress limits. However, the stresses produced are not imag ir.ary. They will have significant effects on both flawed and unflawed locations in the repaired system, and these effects need to be addressed. I' Unflawed Locations At unflawed locations, the stress imposed by shrinkage will combine with existing applied and residual stresses to determine susceptibility to crack I initiation, e.g., by the IGSCC mechanism. 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. I Flawed Locations At flawed locations, similar effects to those on unflawed locations will be experienced. The tensile stress superimposed on the location's stress
% gfgyM 6-2 m
ASSOCIATESINC
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 that stresses lg due to weld overlay shrinkage be added to applied stresses in performing
~
E crack growth calcilit' ions to demonstrate acceptability of an existing flaw without repair. 6.2 Measureraent of Weld Overlay Shrinkage I 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 I 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 measurements 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 .I analysis discussed below to determine shrinkage-induced stress at all locations in the affected system. I I 6-3 Q STRUCTURAL UfFEGRITY
/ ASSOCIATESHC g
6.3 Analysis of Weld Overlay Shrinkage Stresses l l 6.3.1 Background l 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 j locations. Consequently, it is necessary to consider the system as a whole, 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 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. Typically, stresses calculated in the above manner for piping larger than I 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 elastically calculated, stresses may be over-predicted. Refining the approach to include consideration of the true material stress-strain behavior would give more reasonable results. Sec-I ondly, nozzles are typically modeled as rigid and the flexibility of elbows and other components may be underpredicted. m.MM 6-4 DiTEGRITY
- ASSOCIATES.INC
Use of realistic nozzle and component flexibilties produces lower predicted weld overlay shrinkage induced stresses, as is demonstrated in Section 6.3.2 below. 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 summarized in Table 6-1, were input at the nodes corresponding to repaired welds 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: I 6 AT = OL where AT is the temperature deviation from the reference temperature at the cold element,8 is the as-built weld overlay shrinkage, a is the c tefficient of thermal expansion of the pipe material at operating temperature, and L is I 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. I .I g 6-5 [ INTEGRITY
/ ASSOCIAIESINC g
I For a typical nozzle to vessel penetration as illustrated in Figure 6-7, the stiffnesses corresponding to Fz. M x, and My can be calculated by Reference
- 22. The stiffnesses at the riser to pressure vessel penetration were calculated to be:
KFz = 4.951 x 106 lb/in 6 K,q, = 0.965 x 10 in-lbf/ rad KMy = 1.351 x 106 in-lbf/ rad. The stiffnesses for the other three degrees of freedom at the riser to pressure vessel penetration were conservatively assumed to be 1 x 10 10 lb/in or 1x 1010 in-lb/ rad. Actual values of these three stiffnesses are I 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. l 6.4 Results Resulting shrinkage stresses at the recirculation system welds are summar-ized in Table 6-2 and 6-3. Note that, because the stress at welds is of concern (rather than within components), all stress indices were set equal I to 1.0. From Table 6-2, it is seen that shrinkage stresses in the flawed unrepaired welds are quite small (<.1.5 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 6-6
'?sFRUN i,INTEGRFFY
/ ASSOCIAIESINC.
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 I I 6-7 amuerum.
/ ASSOCIATESINC
I 1 l TABLE 6-1 Summary of the As-Built Weld Overlay Shrinkage Weld WOL Length Shrinkage I (in) (in) l 4.64 28A-10 0.036 28A-12 5.00 0.066 22AM-1 6.33 0.014 22AM-4 6.75 0.000 12AR-F-2 3.82 0.146 12AR-F-3 4.19 0.276 12AR-F-4 4.53 0.335 12AR-G-3 4.52 0.259 12AR-H-2 3.81 0.141 12AR-H-3 4.47 0.348 12AR-H-4 4.41 0.391 I . 12AR-J-3 12AR-K-2 4.19 4.76 0.256 0.228 12A R-K-3 4.28 0.365 28B-3 6.15 0.091 28B-4 5.97 0.058 288-11 4.72 0.089 288-16 5.00 0.046 22BM-1 7.78 0.013 22BM-4 6.64 0.039 I 12BR-B-3 12BR-C-2 4.00 4.07 0.329 0.156 12BR-C-3 3.72 0.344 12BR-C-4 4.13 0.317 12BR-D-2 4.32 0.332 12ER-0-3 4.25 0.330 12BR-E-2 3.98 0.158 12BR-E -3 4.08 0.287 1 Sum of the 1985/86 shrinkage and the previous shrinkages measured in 1982 and 1984. l 6-8 C'{, STRUCTURAL g / ASSOWJESINC
4 I TABLE 6-2 Weld Overlay Shrinkage Stresses at Unrepaired, Flawed Locations (IHSI Only) I , Weld # Shrinkage Stress (ksi) 12AR-G-4 1.082 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-6 288-8 0.358 0.565 288-10 1.419 I I I I I I I amuerunn. 6-9 5N
' ASSOCIATESINC.
TABLE 6-3 WELD MEMBRANE BENDING TOTAL (KSI) (KSI) (KSI) 28A-1 0.007 0.149 0.156 28A-2 0.007 0.149 0.156 28A-3 0.007 0.081 0.088 I 28A-4 28A-5 28A-5A 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.125 0.046 0.336 0.147 0.068 0.358 s 28A-6 0.022 0.336 0.358 28A-7 .000 0.204 0.205 28A-8 .000 0.440 0.440 28A-9 .000 0.516 0.516 28A-10 0.022 0.705 0.727 28A-ll 0.008 0.398 0.406 28A-12 0.008 0.216 0.224 28A-13 0.008 0.356 0.364 28A-14 0.051 0.695 0.746 28A-15 0.051 0.434 0.485 28A-16 0.053 0.419 0.471 28A-17 0.074 0.897 0.970 22AM-1 0.000 0.000 0.000 22AM-2 -0.048 1.909 1.860 I 22AM-3 22AM-4 12AR-F-1
-0.039 0.000 0.172 1.434 0.000 5.301 1.394 0.000 5.473 12AR-F-2 0.172 2.293 2.465 12AR-F-3 0.134 1.870 2.004 12AR-F-4 0.134 0.519 0.653 12AR-F-5 0.134 0.045 0.179 12AR-G-1 -0.243 3.340 3.097 12AR-G-2 -0.243 3.243 3.000 12AR-G-3 -0.127 2.488 2.362 12AR-G-4 -0.127 1.209 1.082 12AR-G-5 -0.127 0.069 -0.058 12AR-H-1 0.326 8.806 9.132 12AR-H-2 0.339 4.014 4.354 12AR-H-3 0.246 3.415 3.661 12AR-H-4 0.246 1.700 1.946 12AR-H-5 0.246 0.016 0.261 12AR-J-1 -0.218 2.054 1.835 12AR-J-2 -0.218 3.140 2.922 12AR-J-3 -0.091 2.235 2.144 12AR-J-4 -0.091 1.069 0.978 12AR-J-5 -0.091 0.096 0.004 12AR-K-1 0.189 4.242 4.431 12AR-K-2 0.189 2.644 2.833 12AR-K-3 0.120 2.026 2.147 12AR-K-4 0.120 0.986 1.106 12AR-K-5 0.120 0.052 0.172 C~' STRUCTURAL 6-10 EN
/ ASSOCIAmilNC
TABLE 6-3 E (continued) 3 WELD MEMBRANE BENDING TOTAL (KSI) (KSI) (KSI) 28B-1 0.019 0.779 0.797 28B-2 0.019 0.779 0.797 28B-3 0.019 0.204 0.222 28B-4 0.136 0.665 0.801 28B-5 0.136 0.429 0.565 28B-6 0.136 0.429 0.565 28B-7 0.136 1.624 1.760 28B-8 0.019 0.480 0.499 28B-9 0.019 0.942 0.961 28B-10 0.019 1.398 1.417 I 28B-11 -0.136 2.624 2.488 ' 28B-12 0.003 1.523 1.527 28B-13 0.003 1.050 1.053 28B-14 0.003 0.375 0.378 I 28B-15 28B-16 0.133 0.133 1.809 1.175 1.942 1.307 28B-17 0.134 1.195 1.329 28B-18 0.077 0.812 0.889 22BM-1 0.000 0.000 0.000 22BM-2 -0.042 2.649 2.607 22BM-3 -0.030 0.513 0.484 22BM-4 0.000 0.000 0.000 12BR-A-1 -0.044 3.852 3.808 12BR-A-2 -0.044 0.858 0.814 12BR-A-3 -0.041 0.967 0.927 12BR-A-4 -0.041 0.285 0.244 12BR-A-5 -0.041 0.035 -0.006 12BR-B-1 -0.006 3.099 3.093 12BR-B-2 -0.006 0.465 0.458 12BR-B-3 0.027 0.607 0.634 l 12BR-B-4 0.027 0.298 0.325 12BR-B-5 0.027 0.050 0.078 12BR-C-1 0.342 7.972 8.315 12BR-C-2 0.355 4.325 4.679 12BR-C-3 0.236 3.574 3.810 12BR-C-4 0.236 1.739 1.976 12BR-C-5 0.236 0.019 0.255 12BR-D-1 0.300 1.072 2.171 12BR-D-2 0.300 4.331 4.631 12BR-D-3 0.111 3.117 3.228 i 12BR-D-4 0.111 1.536 1.647 l 12BR-D-5 0.111 0.049 0.160 l 12BR-E-1 -0.004 3.522 3.518 l 12BR-E-2 -0.004 1.197 1.193 12BR-E-3 -0.018 0.899 0.881 ( 12BR-E-4 -0.018 0.434 0.416 12BR-E-5 -0.018 0.049 0.031 l l i 6-11 C'I;,INTEGRITY STRUCTURAL ! / ASSOCIATESINC 1
I 'I . l I I y i, h l
}
T , I-I o A V//////) I l I l WELD DVERLAY SHRINKAGE AT C PRODUCES TENSlLE STRESS AT A , BENDING STRESS AT B I ll I Figure 6-1. Remote Effects of Weld Overlay Shrinkage I I 6-12 m ucTvRat
,1, INTEGRITY I - ASSOCIATESINC.
I I I < -~ l T ,
'I I -
I I WELD SHRINKAGE AT A PRDDUCES , l UPWARD DENDING AT B I l I l Figure 6-2. Effects of Weld Overlay Shrinkage On l Parallel Piping I 6-13
~pyggg m INTEGRITY
' ASSOCIATESINC g
Figure 6-J. Measurement of Weld Overlay Shrinkage I PUNCH MARKS (SEE SECTION A-A) A
- g. . :..Jg.; :a Lubdanc .u... :+od.i.0 ;A
,,p,, c~>t#h rxeur*,c n r , e v>r p
~I
. "* ' .'f, i -
, ,,Qh
? . fbY e' - NY w; m.1 4;- 3 ,; M hiiI' Mim*L 7 X Sp%A@b op12 y.ppgg<pp
' 90 mu:
- M;;."liiEW-CE ;
-wic11 ze-I :
A X1 X4 X2 l i i l X3 SECTION A-A PUNCH NARKS AT 4 AZINUTHAL LOCATl0NS ( 90* APART )
- 1. PLACE PUNCH MARKS BEFORE DEGINNING WELDING.
- 2. NEASURE DISTANCE BETWEEN EACH PAlR ll ( UPSTREAN/DOWNSTREAN ) Of NARKS BEF RE~gg
'l m
~
AFTER WELDING , 6-14 / ASSOCIATElilNC 1
- - . , _ __ - - _ - - _ . . _ - ~ . . - _ . . - -
I I I I I s s / / l - , VESSEL INLET ss -
~~ '
/ N l VESSEL DUTLET VESSEL OUTLET I
I
/
( .- / \ l \ RHR RHR
/
I lI _ PUMP PUMP I .I 1 I l Figure 6-4. Typical Schematic Model of BWR Recirculation System
^y> STRIJN
- lD I
6-15 ,_ITEGRITY1m Il
l l i I t i I ~ _ l i' E l J
/
BF8 l tMl/ v ! $ Figure 6-5. Finite Element Model of the Recirculation System Piping (Loop A) b .
i M M M M M M l i l
\
[ [ '
)
/
l i , e i C l lI i [ l 'N) y Figure 6-6. Finite Element Model of the Recirculation System Piping (Loop B) j i . l
I l 5 4
-y N
'00*
bx
'\ .
4
!I 's
!$ =
A % jl ge# N'
- tog
%. ; i t-N, 4
s xep '- f .. ,
's O \
sq\q C'
~
tog
,, E
's i s.
's
.i 5 N 3 's N
's ig l
Figure 6-7. Definition of Local Coordinates and Loads at Riser-to-Reactor Pressure Vessel Penetration I I 6-18 '
, INTEGRITY
-- ASSOCIATESINC g
7.0 SEMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 7.1 Summary of Hatch Status After 1965/86 Outage The 1985/86 maintenance / refueling outage at Georgia Power Company's Plant E.I. Hatch Unit 1 is the third outage at this urit 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 1985/86 one unflawed weld (24B-R-12) was weld overlayed to improve inspectability of this weld. Consequently, a total of 36 piping system welds are weld overlay repaired at Hatch Unit I as of the end of the 1985/86 outage. The weld overlay activ:ty at Hatch Unit 1 during this outage is summarized 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 weld overlays were designed on the basis of a through-wall axial flaw.
I 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 1985/86, the actual first layer thickness was deducted from the reported as-built thickness.
i I l 7-1 g ASSOCIATESINC g
- 4. The surface finish of all weld overlays was improved by grinding or by was, pass application to enhance inspectability of the weld overlay and the underlying pipe wall.
- 5. Accessible welds without overlays in the recirculation, RHR, and RWCU systems (inside containment) were treated by Induction Heating Stress 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 nozzie welds and 28" safe-end to nozzle outlet welds.
- 6. Following IHSI, a total of 9 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 Section XI.
- 7. ' Four 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 NRC 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 weld material low toughness, and meet the requirements of the latest Addendum to ASME Section XI (Winter 1985) and NRC Generic Letter 84-11. 7-2 O(muenim INTEGRITY
' ASSOCIATESINC
7.3 Weld Overlay Surface Improvement 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. The surface finish iraprovement 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 term viability of the weld overlay repairs at 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 ASME Section XI Addendum (Winter,1985) which explicitly addresses the concern of low weld metal toughness. The allowable flaw sizes were factored by 2/3 as reyuired 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. 3 7-3 ?(STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY
/ ASSOCIAIESINC.
I
8.0 REFERENCES
- 1. Letter from L. T. Gucwa (GPC) to John F. Stolz (NRC-NRR), " Pipe Crack Inspection / Mitigation Program 1985 Maintenance / Refueling Outage", dated July 1, 1985.
- 2. U.S. Nuclear 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 1, " Investigation and Evaluation of Stress Corrosion Crack-ing in Piping of Boiling Water Reactor Plants" Second Draf t, April, 1984.
- b. Volume 3, " Evaluation of Potential for Pipe Breaks" November,1984.
- 5. Letter from John F. Stolz (NRC) to J. T. Beckham (GPC) dated August 1, 1985.
- 6. Letter from John A. Zwolinski (NRC) to Dennis L. Farrar (Commonwealth 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 Program, pc-CRACK, Versien 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. Southern Company Services Indication Notification Forms 186H1010 dated January 11,1986 and 186H1015, dated January 21, 1986 submitted to I Georgia Power Company.
8-1 1(STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSOC N ES E g
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 I Piping Susceptible to IGSCC", Final Report for EPRI Project T-303-1, Report No. SIR-84-005, April 13, 1984.
- 17. Beckford. R.L.,
I 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, 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 Subcommittee on Reinforced Openings and External Loadings" Stanford, CA, 1960.
8-2 /STRU N l, INTEGRITY ASSOCIATESINC
I I I APPENDIX A Weld Overlay Design Sketches Plant E. 1. Hatch Unit i 1985/S6 Maintenance / Refueling Outage I NOTES:
- 1. Some sketc.hes refer to wash pass application for surf ace finish improvement. This was not practical in the field.
Surface finish ir.provement was performed by grinding.
- 2. Some sketches include as-built dimension information.
These dimensions are before surf ace finish improvement and are not final as-built dimensions. I I
I I ' ' i L I L l I I
= WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3)
I (1.6'
- 2) (2)I = 1.6' I I
I I j8issssssssssssssdh7 - - - - I T = 0.250' (1) g Vv PIPE WALL UPSTREAM i DOWNSTREAM g I weld centerline WELD DVERLAY DESIGN ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) l DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-F-2 ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) l NOTES: I 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.47' (UPSTREAM) Arid 0.51' (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1'). l 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO WASH PASS APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE.
g DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-1 REVISION :1 DATE : 12-23-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE MI N/ n-23-7f REVIEWED BY/ DATE cjMd / a-n-# I A-1
I l I I I L L I I = g' ,, = g' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) I I T = 0.44' (1) Assssssssss,ssssskh7j- - - - I V PIPE WALL
! UPSTREAM ;
DOWNSTREAM l l weld centerline WELD DVERLAY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DER NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1B31-1RC-288-3 l ( WASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) NOTES: g
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.48' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.52' l (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.
I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-2 REVISION : 1 DATE : 12-23-85 l PREPARED BY/ DATE kN / R-D-E g REVIEWED BY/ DATE dMA / a-a-se A-2
I . I l I L L I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) I = g' ;, = 2J' I 1 T : 0.33' (1)
! V PIPE WALL ! UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM I I weld centerline I
WELD OVERLAY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1E11-1RHR-208-0-3 l ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) NOTES: g
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.38' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.35' l (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH P
- m APPLICATION.
E 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE. iI DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-3 REVISION :1 DATE : 12-23-85
/lZ-13-Fr ll PREPARED BY/ DATE N'l O g
REVIEWED BY/ DATE dMd / /2-za-sa-43 lg
I I g l L 'L : i = 2.6' I = 2.6' l WELD TRANSITION ANGLE g ; (2) I (2) ,/ (3)
' d; l 4(MM)- v-- -- - T = 0.369' (1)
I \/ l l \/ PIPE W ALL l UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM i i weld centerline I WELD DVERLAY DESIGN I ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DER NUMBER 85-120 ) I ' DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER : 1831-1RC-22BM-1 ! NOTES: l 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.369' EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.208' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.245' I 00WNSTREAM) ASSUMING FIRST LAYER IS 0.1'. REQUIRED ADDITIONAL THICKNESS IS 0.161'.
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS MINIMUM FULL THICKNESS LENGTH.
l 3. MAXIMUM TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES. l DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-4 REVISION:0 0 ATE:12-16-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE Md // ,2-ic-n-REVIEWED BY/ DATE ; /idc/ar I A-4
l g - L I L I = 2.6' i = 2.6' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE
! l (2) j (2) I (3)
AT -- T = 0.376' (1) v g s hj PIPE WALL g UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM weld centerline g l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER : 1831-1RC-22AM-4 'g l NOTES: II i 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.376' EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS. ,3 AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.220' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.195' 's (DOWNSTREAM), ASSUMING FIRST LAYER IS 0.l'. REQUIRED ADDITIONAL THICKNESS IS 0.181'. ll 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS MINIMUM FULL THICKNESS LENGTH.
- 3. MAXIMUM TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
l DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-5 REVISION : 0 0 ATE: 12-18-85 l PREPARED BY/ DATE /I d/ / Iz-IW , l REVIEWED BY/ DATECf / iz/n/8s-, A-5
I I ! 'L I L l l = g ' I = g' ,' WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) T = 0.429' (1) g \j v -- V PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM I I weld centerline g l WELD DVERL AY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) I DESIGN FDR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-288-4 (WASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) l NOTES: I 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.562' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.525' (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-07-6 REVISION : 0 DATE : 12-18-85 I PREPARED BY/ DATE /II Mvb// l I l/3/rr l REVIEWED BY/ DATE / iz/ithe A-6
I I I
; L L g ;= 6'I=g';; p WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l l Asssssssssssi:g:gL%J - - - - T = 0.246' (1) l xj --
v V PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM I I l l weld centerline l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DER NUMBER 85-120 ) I DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-H-2 (WASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) I NOTES: I 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.435' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.41' (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 ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE, I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-7 REVISION : 0 0 ATE : 12-18-85
! PREPAREDBY/DATE NIIM !/12/18/T5~ l REVIEWED BY/ DATE I / 12/n/K_ A-7
I I L L g I =g ;i =g I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l l 1 i Assssssssssssl88888b7 - -- - - T = 0.2' (1) g y/ v -tAXfAL FLAW ONLY ) V PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM l DOWNSTREAM I I weld centerline g l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) I DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1E11-1RHR-248-R-13 ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) l NOTES:
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.285' (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE I 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-07-8 REVISION : 0 DATE : 12-18-85 I PREPARED BY/ DATE N // al's/8 ' 5 ,l REVIEWED BY/ DATE / i2/a/es-A-8
l fI l l L L I g I=g6' = g' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l l l . Jsss:issssBE:s&lO ---- T = 0.251' (1) g yj v V PIPE WALL UPSTREAM l DOWNSTREAM l 1 weld centerline WELD OVERLAY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-K-2 l ( WASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) g NOTES:
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.308' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.31' l (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. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE.
DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-9 REVISION : 0 DATE : 12-18-85 l PREPARED BY/ DATE NM I I b& l /8C j g REVIEWED BY/ DATE / i2/9/tr A-9
I I l l L L I I =g6', , = lj' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) 1 T = 0.250' (1) V ! PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM l DOWNSTREAM l l weld centerline WELD OVERLAY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-H-3 l ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) NOTES: g
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.332' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.385' l (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.
I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCD-07-10 REVISION : 0 0 ATE:12-18-85 l PREPAREDBY/DATE NM // /1 /'5/W REVIEWED BY/ DATE I /n//gr g $ A-10
I I L ! L g =g6'l=g'I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) I l I i MM@@gf@@k%> ~ ~ - - - T = 0.252' (1) g v -- xf
\/ PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM I i g weld centerline l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DER NUMBER 85-120 )
I DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12BR-E-3 ( WASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) ,l NOTES: !m 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.252' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.265' lE (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO WASH PASS ll l
l APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE.
! I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-11 REVISION : 0 DATE : 12-18-85 ll PREPAREDBY/DATE //MO // / DIM l REVIEWEDBY/DATE M er ,d r
/ n//$
l A-11
I I I I L ; L
=g6" = 1J" l WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3)
I I ' 48888888888888888%~7 - - - -- __ T = 0.257(1) I Vv PIPE WALL UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM I ' weld centerline WELD DVERLAY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DER NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12BR-D-3 ,l ( WASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) NOTES: g
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.350'(UPSTREAM) AND 0.320'
'l (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH PASS
's 'E APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE.
I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-12 REVISION : 0 0 ATE : 12-18-85 ll PREPARED BY/ DATE [MM // n hslsr g REVIEWED BY/ DATE e A / n /n/rc A-12
l
/
L ! L WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) g = g' l = J' 1 T = 0.27' (1) , o_ -- V PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM l I weld centerline g l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-K-3 o ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) l NOTES: I 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 W ASH PASS l APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE.
I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCD-07-13 REVISION :0 DATE : 12-19-85 ! PREPARED BY/ DATE $$ Irk / /11-z,-er l REVIEWED BY/ DATE 4 / n/udr , A-13
l l L ! L g I = 1.6' I = 1.6' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) I (2) (2) l l I i MM8MMWWWNh 7)- - - - T = 0.249' (1) l v
\/ PIPE WALL
\/
l UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM l l g weld centerline l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) l DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12BR-C-2 (LIGHT GRINDING OR W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) .l NOTES: l 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 PASS l
l l APPLICATION.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE.
il l DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-14 REVISION :0 DATE : 12-19-85 (! PREPARED BY/ DATE M IM% // it-20-er I l REVIEWED BY/ DATE6
/ r2ho /gr
ll l (I l ll I L L i
! l=
= g' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l l '
l ggpHEWWMibJ - - - - - T=0.493'(1) l PlPE W ALL g I UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM g (PUMP) l w eld centerline WELD DVERLAY DESIGN ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DER NUMBER B5-120 ) l DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-lRC-2BB-ll DRAWING ISSUED FOR RECORD ONLY NOTES: l 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.558' (UPSTREAM) EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.l'). l 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH .
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE.
l DESIGN NUMBER : GPCD-07-15 REVISION : 1 DATE:4-10-86 PREPARED BY/ DATE NM #9-<a-n REVIEWED BY/ DATE / 4/o/n I A-15
I I L I L l =
' I = g' WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3)
I ~ ~~~~~~ T=0.480' (1) PlPE W ALL I UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM l l (PUMP) weld centerline g . l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l (PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) I DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1931-lRC-28A-10 DRAWING ISSUED FOR RECORD ONLY l NOTES:
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.395' (UPSTREAM) , EXCLUSIVE OF I FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.l').
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THlCKNESS LENGTH .
I 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE. I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-16 REVISION : 1 DATE : 4-10-86
! PREPARED BY/ DATE #MM ///i'o -rG
,l REVIEWED BY/ DATE 4 r! / 9/n/rc A-16
I I l l L ,L i WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) I =g6' ; = 1 ' I i I N T = 0.263' (1) I V PIPE W ALL I UPSTREAM l DOWNSTREAM I ' weld centerline I WELD OVERLAY DESIGN ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-F-3 l ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) NOTES: g
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.238' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.212'
'l (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. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-17 REVISION :0 DATE : 12-20-85 l PREPARED BY/ DATE MIdk7 /I'2-ze-fr REVIEWEDBY/DATE M / 'e/zbr I I a
I l L L g l l =g6' I = 1 ' l WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l l l 1 /1 - l A@RRRRRRRRRRRRERR$b >
~~ - -
T = 0.251' (1) p l \/ PIPE WALL l UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM i ' weld centerline l WELD OVERLAY DESIGN I ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12BR-C-3 ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) g NOTES:
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.190' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.212' (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
I 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO W ASH PASS APPLICATION. l 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES. l DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-18 REVISION : 0 DATE:12-20-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE MX d //12-20-F.r REVIEWED BY/ DATE_I / ado /cr A-18
I I l L 'L : WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l =g6' I = e 1.6' l I i i I i ABNRRRRRRRRRRRE:gh 7 -- - - - - T = 0.251' (1) l V PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM I I DOWNSTREAM l 1 weld centerline I WELD OVERLAY DESIGN ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) ll l DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-lRC-12BR-E-2 ll ( W ASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) NOTES: lg 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.250' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.375' l (DOWNSTREAM), EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS (ASSUMED 0.1').
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIDR TO W ASH PASS lg APPLICATION.
m 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES. l DESIGN NUMBER : GPC0-07-19 REVISION :0 DATE:12-20-85
// R-zo-sr l PREPARED BY/ DATE Me*Q g
REVIEWED BY/ DATE / iz/u/tr A-19
I I ! l l L L l l = 2.6' I = 2.6' l WELD TRANSITION ANGLE l , (2) I l (2) (3) I JRRR$$$$sR@j@gsb7-)- - - - T = 0.376' (1) V I PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM I i DOWNSTREAM I i weld centerline I WELD DVERLAY DESIGN ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DER NUMBER 85-120 ) I DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER : 1831-1RC-22BM-4 NOTES: I 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.l'. REQUIRED ADDITIONAL THICKNESS IS 0.136'.
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS MINIMUM FULL THICKNESS LENGTH.
I 3. MAXIMUM TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES. I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-20 REVISION :0 DATE: 12-20-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE14 d e / n-zo-er REVIEWED BY/ DATEv # / e/n/gs-I I "
I l l l L L I
= 2.6' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE I = (2) 2.6' I l i I
(2) l (3) T = 0.376' (1) V ! PIPE WALL l UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM i i weld centerline I WELD DVERLAY DESIGN ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER : IB31-lRC-22AM-1 NOTES: l 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.376' EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.190' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.150' l (DOWNSTREAM), ASSUMING FIRST LAYER IS 0.l'. REQUIRED ADDITIONAL THICKNESS IS 0.226'. ! 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS MINIMUM FULL THICKNESS LENGTH.
- 3. MAXIMUM TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
l DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-21 REVISION:0 DATE:12-20-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE MIN /7a/to[r5-l REVIEWED BY/ DATE(s, / / rz o,/rr A-21
I I I - t i t g , =g6' I = 1 ' WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) 1 T = 0.257' (1) I o_ -- V PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM I i g weld ce$terline l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN l ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) I DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-J-3 ( WASH PASS TO BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH ) I NOTES: I 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.298' (UPSTREAM) AND 0.185' (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. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-22 REVISION : 0 0 ATE:12-20-85 ! PREPARED BY/ DATE //I D //lI 7f l REVIEWED BY/ DATE / st/zo/er A-22
I I ! I ' L ! L 1 I = 1.25'I = 2.5' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l l l (2) (2) l I ' 281MWWWBlHWWHRRREh,7 - - - T= 2 LAYERS (1) (AXIAL FLAW ONLY) I Vv PIPE WALL UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM I ' weld centerline I WELD DVERLAY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DER NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER lEll-IRHR-24A-R-13 NOTES: g
- 1. AVERAGE AS-BUILT THICKNESS IS 0.23' (DOWNSTREAM).TWO WELD l DVERLAY LAYERS ARE REQUIRED FOR REPAIR OF AXIAL FLAW.NO ADDITIONAL THICKNESS IS REQUIRED.
I 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH PRIOR TO SURFACE FINISH IMPROVEMENT.
- 3. AS-WELDED TRANSITION ANGLE IS ACCEPTABLE.
! DESIGN NUMBER : GPC0-07-23 REVISION : 1 DATE:3-19-86 l PREPARED BY/ DATE /IO / 3-2o-% REVIEWED BY/ DATE J 6 C&/deIl 3-27-4 g A-23
I I l I L L I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l I =(2)2.0' I = i I (2) 2.0' I T = 0.250' (1) V I PIPE WALL
! UPSTREAM ;
DOWNSTREAM l l weld centerline WELD DVERLAY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-G-3 NOTES: g
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.250' , 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 TRANSITICN ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
!g
! DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-24 REVISION :0 DATE : 12-23-85 ll PREPARED BY/ DATE N d/ ' 2.-23-8f REVIEWED BY/ DATE S-M No / r2-26-(
g A-24
I I I L L - I ' I =(2.0'
- 2) (2)I = 2.0' I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l I I l
I I I ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRR@DJ- ~~ - - ~~T = 0.250' (1) g V PIPE WALL UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM l weld centerline WELD DVERLAY DESIGN
! ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 )
I DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12BR-D-2 'I 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. ill l 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH .
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
I DESIGN NUMBER :GPCO-07-25 REVISION :0 DATE:12-23-85 PREPARED BY/ DATE M Ael- / 'z-23-tr l REVIEWED BY/ DATE S*-b b / iz-u-tr I A-25
I I I L L I g I=2.0',=2.0'I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) ) (2) I (2) i g ; i I AsssssssssssssssSh7 -- -~ - -- __ T = 0.306' (1) l V I PIPE WALL l UPSTREAM i DOWNSTREAM I ' weld centerline I WELD DVERLAY DESIGN I ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) I DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-H-4 I NOTES: I 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.306' , 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-07-26 REVISION :0 DATE:12-27-85 g PREPARED BY/ DATE MYd/ it-27-gr REVIEWED BY/ DATE J F. @M/ /r 17-tr I A-26
I I l 1 L L I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) I=2.0'I = (2) 2.0' ; I l i (2) I
- ~~ - - -
T = 0.294' (1) V
! PIPE WALL I UPSTREAM ;
DOWNSTREAM I i weld centerline I WELD DVERLAY DESIGN g (PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12BR-C-4 I NOTES: lg
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.294' , EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
fl 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-07-27 REVISION :0 DATE:12-27-85 ll PREPARED BY/ DATE M 2 d/ /z-2 7-Fr REVIEWED BY/ DATEJE b/[J en-fr I r l A-27 l --
lI I L L I j WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) I =2.0'I=2.0'l (2) ; (2) l l I l M8888888888888888$L7) - T- =- 0.165' -- (1) V PIPE WALL g UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM g
! weld centerline WELD DVERLAY DESIGN
( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 )
! DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER G31-RWCU-6-D-18A I NOTES: ! 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.165' , EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
A WASH PASS MAY BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH, IF DESIRED. l 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH .
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
l DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-28 REVISION :0 0 ATE : 12-30-85 g PREPARED BY/ DATE MYM / 'l-30-1r5' REVIEWED BY/ DATE 36 / n-x-tr I A-28 _ o
I I I I L
'L
- I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3)
I I =(2)2.0' I =1.5' l I (2) l I
/
l g . Jssssssssssssssssssh 7 -- -- - - 7 = 0.165' (1) V I PIPE WALL PIPE ELBOW I i weld centerline WELD DVERLAY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER G31-RWCU-6-D-18 g NOTES:
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.165' , EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
I A W ASH PASS MAY BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH, IF DESIRED.
- 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH .
jg 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
! DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-29 REVISION : 0 DATE : 12-30-85 I PREPARED BY/ DATE N /IU11-le-gr g REVIEWED BY/ DATE JE >// W A-29
I l l 1 L L I I = 2.0 ' ' = * *
- I WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l l (2) I (2,3) i l M l
T = 0.167' (1) PIPE WALL ! UPSTREAM I DOWNSTREAM (VALVE) l l weld centerline WELD OVERLAY DESIGN g ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER G31-RWCU-6-D-4 NOTES:
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.167' , 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 . 0VERLAY IS ASYMMETRIC BECAUSE OF THE CAST VALVE BODY. l 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES CN UPSTREAM SIDE. ON VALVE SIDE, BLEND TRANSITION INTO THE BUTT WELD CROWN APPROXIMATELY 0.125' FROM VALVE TO WELD FUSION LINE. ! DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-30 REVISION :1 DATE:1-3-86 l PREPAREDBY/DATE MMAN!I-3-S g REVIEWED BY/ DATE Af / i/s/86 , A-30
l l l l L 'L l
*** I = 2.0' 1 l=(2,3)
WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) l I I (2) l - - - - 'T = 0.206' (1) V l PIPE WALL I l UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM (VALVE) I l 1 weld centerline l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) l ' DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER G31-RWCU-6-D-5 NOTES: ,l 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.206' , EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS. A WASH PASS MAY BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH, IF DESIRED. l 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH . DVERLAY IS ASYMMETRIC BECAUSE OF THE CAST VALVE BODY. l 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES ON DOWNSTREAM SIDE ON VALVE SIDE, BLEND TRANSITION INTO THE BUTT WELD CROWN i APPROXIMATELY 0.125' FROM VALVE TO WELD FUSION LINE. 'l DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-31 REVISION :1 DATE:1-3-86 PREPARED BY/ DATE Dh i-3-86 REVIEWED BY/ DATE 4 / </3/rc .l A-31 ,
I I , L I L
-g ; ;
WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3) I =2.0'I=2.0'I
- 2) j 2) l I I I
I l MENWWEsWMEEWXRWEBhA7 ~~ -- (1) T = 0.257' ~~ -- V l PIPE WALL ; l UPSTREAM I I DOWNSTREAM I ' weld centerline I WELD DVERLAY DESIGN I ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12AR-F-4 lI NOTES:
- 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.257' , EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS.
A WASH PASS MAY BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH, IF DESIRED. ll l 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH .
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
lI ll DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-32 REVISION :0 DATE : 1-23-86 ! PREPARED BY/ DATE MI O // i-23-r6 REVIEWED BY/ DATE v--
/i/23,/u.
lI =
I I I L L g ; ; WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3)
;=(2.0'I=2.0'i l ,
- 2) I I
(2) l - - - - T = 0.242' (1) V l PIPE WALL l UPSTREAM I l DOWNSTREAM l ' weld centerline I WELD DVERLAY DESIGN I ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-12BR-B-3 I NOTES: .I 1. DESIGN THICKNESS IS 0.242' , EXCLUSIVE OF FIRST LAYER THICKNESS. 's A W ASH PASS MAY BE APPLIED TO IMPROVE SURFACE FINISH, IF DESIRED.
- E 2. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL THICKNESS LENGTH .
- 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES.
l DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-33 REVISION :0 DATE : 1-23-86 PREPARED BY/ DATE N d e/ i-23 n REVIEWED BY/ DATE , / t./za/tc A-33
l l WELD TRANSITION
- l ANGLE (3) I L L I
- l dI d)
I
';~ - - - -
VALVE SHOULDER I '= 0.52' (1) ll PIPE WALL lI UPSTREAM I DOW NS" REAM NALVE) (l l weld centerline WELD DVERLAY DESIGN j ( PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DCR NUMBER 85-120 ) DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-1RC-28A-12 lI. NOTES: lg
- 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. ON THE VALVE SIDE, BLEND THE OVERLAY l INTO THE VALVE SHOULDER.
- 3. MAXIMUM TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES ON THE PIPE SIDE.
I DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-34 REVISION : 0 DATE:1-29-86 l PREPARED BY/ DATE I [lP-4 g REVIEWED BY/ DATEf {l/zt,/g6 A-34 _ _ _ J
I APPROX. 8' OVERLAY LENGTH 4-2' (M A X) --> __p__
~l5
,/fff#######/ (2)
VALVE (5) i PIPE W ALL (3) l I
*:ER 2 3 WELD lEll-RHR-248-R-12 3.[0fgg1.d'.HlCK.
2 CENTERLINE 5.gDN STEEL VALVE WELD DVERLAY MODIFICAT10N DESIGN (PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DER NUMBER 85-120) DESIGN FOR WELDS lEll-RHR-248-R-12 & 248-R-13 g MODIFICATION DESCRIPTION: g THE INCONEL OVERLAY IS TO BE EXTENDED TO BLEND WIIH THE VALVE TAPER. ,a THE MATERIAL INDICATED BY SHADING ABOVE MAY BE REMOVED BY GRINDING 'E IF NECESSARY TO IMPROVE INSPECTABILITY OF WELD 24B-R-12. THE FINAL SURFACE OF THE GROUND AREA IS TD BE FLUSH WITH THE SURFACE OF THE l INCONEL DVERLAY. THE MAXIMUM LENGTH OF THE GROUND r G10N 15 2.0'. THE THICKNESS OF THE INCONEL DVERLAY 15 NOT TO BE REDULED. SURFACE EXAMINATION OF VALVE CASTING AFTER DVERLAY JS NOT REQUIRED. J DESIGN NUMBER: GPCO-07-35 RE SiON:2 0 ATE: 4-10-B6 l PREPARED BY/DATE Mh4t47 / v.w. n REVIEWED BY/DATEV4d/((M / g/n/s A-35 4
I I 7 WELD TRANSITION ANGLE (3 ) g
\' i< L = 4.0' >I 4--L= * * *- !
(2) I (2) g j l . T = o ! E ! E M is R M M M M p f " ~" IPE W ALL l TEE W ALL i i-1 I I WELD 288-16 CENTERLINE l WELD DVERLAY DESIGN PLANT HATCH UNIT 1 DER NUMBER 85-120 g DESIGN FOR WELD NUMBER 1831-lRC-288-16 I NOTES: !! 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 lI OVERLAY INTO THE TEE TAPER. LENGTH IS SPECIFIED AS FULL LENGTH.
g 3. MAXIMUM WELD TRANSITION ANGLE IS 45 DEGREES ON THE P DESIGN NUMBER : GPCO-07-36 REVISION :1 DATE : 2-24-86 PREPARED Bi/DATE NM ! / 2-2if- 6 REVI'_WED BY /DATE 7 // / 2/2y/m, lI __ A-36 j
I APPENDIX B Flawed Pipe Evaluation Calculations Plant E. 1. Hatch Unit 1 1985/86 Maintenance / Refueling Outage I
ts c:-:'A:.
; ..:,:.n-. .-:C:g .c. C6.
3 Ew.i.::* Ac .:-:
. 4 T, a:: -l; ::.,
.. s . Ir.
SAs JCSE. C* i4:2'97E-E~:. VERS . :$. 1.1 STFEEE C fE:5*3 0F;:t SR:s'n ANGEIE 5c: AI L FLAB CF O EF:sTF 141TIAL CFAC SIZE 0.37C3 h*.; T C NESS: 1.2000 MAI CFA:t SIZE F n 3:CE: 0.9600 5';EEE CCF:~5IEN : G E G T- L.h:El t LAW ID C N k t'n s a'l t IEE~EET ".270;E-CE 2.~600 0.0000 *00.00:0 STEEEE C~EFFICIEN!5 c.., ww:. .s
. c.
L Cl .. .a 5::!.I FE -40.5572 -1:0.2:53 373.955: -175.!!!9 A!!AL 14.05:0 0.000] 0.0000 0.0 E laar I C' CAEE l',
. $ 1. d.
A11AL
.3.
ECA.E FA[IOE I . '. .JV
!.C)
TI'E PRINT TIME IFREMEhi IW:EEMEh! 10000.0 100.0 100.C I CFO M"tEL:LCNEITCINt.L CR;:V IN CfLIN ERfi/R:0,1) i g; c .........................g;EEE 5 1 %iE N51i t F A:i3 -------------------- ---- LEFTH CASE ;5E 6::A11HE AIIAL _ ! c.019: -10.97 :.67
.'C
' M'.,' D. h4 M -
l 0.3:E4 0.ct 6
-:6.35
-20.99 5.31 6.64
' h:tt'ct ty:fg V#4y 7/(/ML 0.07e5 -:5.21 7.E! '",' g* CfC0-07 0.C950 -27.4' E.94 q -l Dage - -
0.:15: -:3.4: 9.97
- .f5 l C.1:44 -37.4E 0.15'6 -41.54 12.!'
C.17:E -45.5' !!.15 0.1 :: - 4 : . 5'> 14.1: g.1 C.....
. , n. . c. . a ,
0.*:St -57.06 le.:t C.247: -6!.3' 17.34
l
.I: i..- r-
..:::5 :' ' .S.4' C.:i - ; 4: :~.e-
.v. e I
- v. . -<.. ..
n -. 4 v a ,.4. ., !.. v - 0.:45 -5 .0 !!.Ci 0.3e:E -54.44 24.34 I - t . . .:. 4 '.
- 0. 4C:
-S c . *o*
;4. : )
27.:7
. 'i t-
)
0.4:24 -95.!i 2E.7E I 0.44:6 0.46C5 0.43JO
-103.00
-107.21
-!!:.53 30.3C 31.Es 33.43 I 0.449' 0.5154 0.5!76
-!!6.9:
-122.:4
-!!7.53 35.33 37.26
!9.22 0.5'c5 -13:.76 41.::
I 0.57e0 0.5952 0.6144
-!.9:
-143.03
-149.!:
43.25 45.3! 47.S: 0.63!6 -155.94 50.69 0.6525 -162.45 5 .53 0.6'20 -!65.55 36.4: 0.c91~ -!75.11 59.36 0.7d4 -12!.24 62.35 C.72:6 -157.65 65.64 0.7452 -194.27 69.23 0.7650 -200.62 72.57 0.!!7' -20i.6C 76.5E 0.E(i4 -212.46 E3.:4 I C.325: 0.5442 0.664
-217.9:
-223.5:
-230.15 E4.:6 62.17 92.64
' O.65'I -236.49 97.17 i 0.9C:4 -242.45 101.77 , 0.921e -245.04 106.43 ! 0.9405 -253.24 111.16 ! C.96:.0 -255.05 1!!.95 ~ l 1 91 A K l Ocpared by: , gjpg
^
s h..a.cked by:r
. i-ih GP l TIME rPai IA/:7 OA A A/TH .,~llo' j 01 4 - -
(.,0-o'l -.
-61.43 C.0;00E+20 0.0M0 0.3700 0.303 Page-100.0 l
1 I EN: DF g -CE O B-2 I
' == sem i
2 1:AXIALIH 2:H00PSTRESS . X i 1 2................................................................................................................................., i p n 1 ..........................!,.........................!.........................!,.........................!.... yg I. ...f
- : 6~ :
i h . . . 7""
/'"-- .
I ,
- l l
" 0 l I l
t i f I t t i
- Q I 6 4 3 i I & 3 i i I
N%: : : : : ff , 4
.......................... .........................*h. a.........................................................................
- y
- : _,,%. : :
j m : , a W i i
^
-f .
.........................!..........................!............................................e y ...........................
W. . I g .
~~"-
i , i , i l 5 -3 , i , i , Gb
, ., , ' 8 3 "
2 4 6 8 10 1
=nx
. S5" IENTHINCHES a CRACHDEPIH
- 2. e m
, ~
F HUSA/IFORAXIALFLAW(IHSI+ APPLIED)
' .J N
3 . i
.. . . ..... w . .......................... .
........._s
................ ............................... ........._ co I
I z
.................................. . . . . . . . . . _ e g
. . n 2
. . w o m cc I
o
- : : : : e-a cf:,z o x ZE o e
. .m , sc
. v w
. E 2
, - a
. . . . . g ;a
. . N
. . . . :a c_,
X t cx:: v c .
. . A x
. o
.............. .......... _ eq m . . .
Iw m 2 .-
.cx: . .
a . w I . 4 . m u :s e eo cu -4 csa l i
! Prepared by: UM
! Checked bY- s . _s 1 Y, b HWZHZ File No. G /co 3I#
Occcux s== w A H z q y Page of j 1 B-4 i 1 I
,-.,,,,_-,..__._....,.,_,_,,,._,.--,,,,,_._..--._._.,,,,,-,,._-.,-.,,.,__,,,...______,,,n,_..,_,. - - -
t rt pc.- C nect iC) COFTRIGH7 1 C E. 4 , 1 ; t," I STRUCTLIR AL INTEGFITi A590 16 TEM SAN JOSE. CA (408)978-EDOO I tC . VERSTON 1.1 LINEAR ELAETIE FRACTUEE MECHA!JICE EVALUATION I BOUNDING 28" IHEI + APPLIED ETRESS CRACt: MODEL:CIRCUMFERENTIAL CRACF. IN CVLINDER(T/F=v.li WALL THIChNESS= 1.2000 I CASE ID IH5I28F -28.9337 CO STRESS COEFFICIENTS
-142.54E9 C1 467.8417 C2
-261.8700 CT 9.0000 O.0000 O.0000 O.0000 I BND2S CRACif ------------- ----------STREES INTENSITY FACTOR------------- ------
DEPTH CASE CASE IHSI28F BND28 O.0192 -8.30 2.45 O.0384 -12.33 3.49 0.0576 -15.75 4.28 O.0769 -18.87 4.97 O.0960 -21.78 5.50 0.1152 -24.53 6.14 O.1344 -27.28 6.70 0.1536 -29.97 7.24 0.1728 -32.56 7.77 O.1920 -35.05 8.29 I O.2112 3.2304 0.2496
-37.43
-39.70
-41.97 8.79 9.28 9.79 G.2688 -44.25 10.~~
O.2880 -46.41 10.86 0.3072 -48.47 11.39
- 0.3264 -50.40 11.97 l 0.3456 -52.21 12.46 l
O.3648 -57.99 13.02 ---- G.3840 -55.93 13.67 ( Rc;;;cd by: y*Z .) X'_. NN I O.4032 O.4224 O.4416
-57.74
-re.4r
-^0.96 14.3~
15.00 15.67
, Ch:c!'.cd t;y / t
, Fil0 N O. 5 p C ! #~; p-O.4608 -62.~6 16.35 pg / Of b O. 48J O -63.61 17.04 C 49tT
. -/4.92 17.77 0.5180 -66.OC 1 G . !: 1 I 0.5 %
n . 5%.e. _ e~.11
- 6 7 . 9 :/
te,74 2: .02 I B-5
l t 'F
, E'?r- 1 1 PAGE i
_ a . -- --
..,,. > t o
* -~
' - 71 21. 5c,
- ; - 6 *-' . c - 27.!9
.c. ! v . ca ., ....<
.s"- -71.02 24,11 i .672.. -- 7 1 . -' 4 24.9D i . e- 91 -71.52 25.E7 O.~104 -' 1 . 5 6 26.76 O.7 9e -71.39 27.70 O. 74 E.8 ~71.00 28.68 O.76PC -70.45 29.e8 O.7872 -69,75 30.69 O.8064 -68.92 31.70 O.8253 -67.95 32.73 O.8448 -66.90 33.79 O.8640 -65.86 34.94 0.8832 -64.66 36.10 0.9024 -63.29 27.27 I O.9:16 0.9408 O.9600
-61.77
-60.11
-5E.32 3E.46 39.66 40.87 END OF pc-CFACI
- I l
t I INc,rtd by' 0 ' Ch;c!:cd by ?>' , Filt No. Id # ' # 7 ' 3 Page 1 of - l l l l 1 l B-6 t I l l l - _ _ _ ___.,_
=
I 1lIHSI-28" 2: APPLIED (9KSI) ! E N 6 .................................................................................................................................. S 4 .................................................................................. . . . . . . . . . .gee l I . j j j py j i
~
.........................j.........................j.........prm+"".......................j.........................{
f . . r-- : : : l 1 , . KN 0 M i i i i i i i i i 1 , i 1 I i U 0 : : : : : i 11 Is ......... ..................................................................................................................... e . . . . i < m. S -4 ............................ 1 W . y .g ......................... ......................... g
.........;.........................;........3,.3...
g . .
, -8 i I i l i I i I i I 5 0 2 4 6 8 10
- ar9? IENTHINCHES i *i!!fi i CRACHDEPIH
, m a u w e F ",w KUSAFOR28"IHSITREATEDWELD
%4 o x
u j N
'~
N o'
t n. pc -CRTQ (C) COr161GHT 1 r'E 4 1H STFU:TURAL INTEGRITY A350CIATFS. ItE SAN JOSE, CA ( 4 0.5 ) ?7 8- 8 TOi, VERS I Ord 1.1 STRESS COFFOSION CRACF GFOWTH ATMIiSIS SCUNDING 26" GROWTH IHSI + AFPLIED STFESS(G t .S I ) INITIAL CRACI: SIZE = 0.2500 WALL THICUNESS= 1.2000 MAX CRACK SIZE FOR SCCG= 0.9600 STRESS CORROSION CRAC) GROWTH LAW (S? LAW ID C N Ethres UIC IGSCBET 2.2700E-OP 2.2600 O.0000 500.OOOn I STFESS COEFFICIENTS CASE ID CO C1 C2 C:' I IHSI2BF PND28
-28.9337 9.0000
-143.5489 O.0000 467.8417 O.0060
-261.870C O.0000 I CASE ID IHSI28F Vma -
SEALE FACTOR 1.00 ENDE8 1.00 TIMC PRINT TIME INCREr1ENT INCREMENT 30000.O 700.O 700.O CRACI: MODEL:CIRCUMFERENTIAL CRACU IN CYLINDER (T/R=0.1) CRACU -------------------------STRESS INTENSITY FACTCR------------------------ ! DEPTH CASE CASE i IHS128F BND28 O.0192 -8.30 2.45 ili5O.0284 0.0576
-12.33
-15.75 0.4D 4.28 ,
g-O.0768 -18.87 4.97 L ITC;?tCd by: 'd O.0960 -21.78 5.SS -
/
t O.1152 -24.53 6.14 Ch:cf Cd tc/: _ , MM[d i ! O.1044 -27.28 6.70 Fila fio. d,(o -87 3 29 ~ O.1536 -29.97 7.24 n O.1726 -22.56 7.77 Page- 4 of n# ! 6.1920 -35.05 e.29 O.2112 -57.4: 8.79 0.2T04 -20.76 9.2R O.T49c -41. 9 ' 9.79 B-8 i
rc - F i -~ ' ' r L I OI: 1.1 FAGE 0 Zer: -44. 7 10.37
- c. 'FE- -4.,41 10,Ec
. ~ u' Z -- 4 8 . 4 ~ 11.39 0.7"e' -5v.40 11.97 6 . '. 4 5 - -52,21 12.46 0.3n45 -52.99 13.02 0.3840 -55.97 13.67 0.4032 -57.74 14.33 O.4224 -59.42 15.00 0.4416 -tO.9e 15.67 O.460E -62.26 16.35 O. 4 E'OO -63.61 17.04 0.4992 -64.92 17.77 0.5184 -66.09 18.51 0.5376 -67.11 19.26 O.5568 -67.99 20.02 O.5760 -68.72 20.78 0.5952 -69.31 21.56 O.6144 -6o.97 22.39 I 0.6336 0.6528
~0.57
-71.03
-71.34 23.24 24.11 24.98 0.6720 I O.691-2 0.7104 0.7246
-71.52
-71.56
-71.39 25.87 26.76 27.70 I O.7488 -71.00 28.68 O.7650 -70.45 29.68 0.7872 -69.75 30.68 0.8064 -68.92 31.70 0.8256 -67.95 32.73 O.8448 -66.9u _.c.. / 9 O.8640 -65.86, 34.94 0.8832 -64.66 36.10 0.9024 -63.29 37.27 0.9216 -61.77 38.46 0.9408 -60.11 39.66 O.9600 -58.32 40.87 l
l l TIME KMAX DA/DT DA A A/THI 700.O -32.22 O.OOOOE+00 O.0000 O.2500 O.208 END OF pc-CRACK
. - nn l c :. '.~:2 by s5 M~ ~
i
' Ch c!d byg ,
Fife Lo, 6 /C 0 -6 7 -3 31 M gg Page
# of [ .
B-9
I I < . g....
......g. .........g...........g...........g...
IJ~~J H I I
- : : . . ICs0 I .
"3:
CD
- : --e ::x:
- : : e-.
- 2:
. . . .3c
<:x:
s,n
- - L=:I u
- : : : : s*:::ac a
- m s== -. .-.
I : z s-.
=2
=x=
e-. z L=J s:c g.,a l
. . 5.=
2c
. =2 D U
----l-------*-~l.---------
E ----
.l----- E gllg I
. m I
g . o g gn .
. l .
gaa .. I g::::n o o
.CI:: .
mW . e
. e. .
H .. I I k* L J,. l e t' *sg9Lak M L*3 Z H :I: N, ef_ ONCOX A E^3 A 8-*:I:
!; Fib Ch::!:6 by / h , . d fl0 6#C0-07-3 l
Page 8 of d 8-10
I I pc-CFAT* (C) COPYFIGHT 1984 te ICE-STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSOCIATE Ifr . SAN JOSE, CA (405i978 6:- VERSIOf; 1.1 LINEAR ELASTIC FRACTUFE MECHANICS EVA'.UATION . BOUNDING 12" IHSI + APPLIED STRESS CRACE MODEL:CIRCUMFERENTIAL CRACE IN CYLINDER (T/R=0.1) WALL THICKNESS = 0.6930 STRESS COEFFICIENTS I CASE ID IHSIlOF CO
-30.7058 C1
-212.1766 C2 1411.8703 -1505.4352 C3 APPL 12 16.0000 O.0000 O.0000 O.0000 CRACK ------------------------STRESS I NT E NS I T Y F A C T OR -----------------------
I CASE CASE DEFTH IHSI1OF AFFLIT
-6.63 3.31 I O.0111 0.0222 0.0333
-9.75
-12.35 4.71 5.79 0.0444 -14.6o 6.71
'I O.0554 O.0665 0.0776
-16.83
-18.83
-20.80 7.54 8.30 9.05 I O.0887 0.0998 0.1109
-22.71
-24.53
-26.25 9.79 10.50 11.19 O.1220 -27.87 11.87 I 0.1331 0.1441
-29.40
-30.91 12.54 13.23 13.95 0.1552 -32.41 I O.1663 0.1774 0.1885
-33.81
-35.11
-36.31 14.67 15.39 16.11 ...
- Try;"Ed by: AlI I O.1996 O.2107 O.2218
-37.41
-38.47
-39.65 16.87 17.59 18.47 i bK"'CkCd l'Y: .
- I/M/Ab O.2328 -40.72 19.36 ' fire No (P(0-07 IVo I 0.2439 0.2550
-41.69
-42.53 20.26 21.17 22.09 ap I of g 0.2661 -43.27 i
I O.2772 O.2883 0.2994
-43.87
-44.54
-45.09 23.02 24.01 25.01 f
O.3105 -45.57 26.O? II O.3216 -45.85 27.04 B-11
I p c -: n s 'Jr ' I Or . 1.1 PAGE o -
- 4 t . 07 ?E . Or; 6.~47- -44 .1 9 29,12 a'.354: -46.34 30.24 O -4e.49 1.40 I u../>3e.50 O. 3E P1 O.3972
- n v . 4 c.
-46.35
-46.17
-..,,.,a_
3 ~. 7 5 T.4.95 O.4103 -45.89 36.15 0.4213 ~45.49 37.42 O.43:4 -44.96 36.75 O.4435 -44.33 40.09 I 0.4546 0.4657 O.4768
-43.63
-42.84
-41.99 41.45 42.8 .
44.21 I O.4879 O.4990 0.5100
-41.08
-40.10
-39.04 45.65 47.20 48.77 O.5211 -37.89 50.35 0.5322 -36.67 51.96 0.5433 -35.40 53.57 O .5544 -34.09 55.21 I END OF pc-CRACI l
i l I
)
s ._ rp. . - r y, .. j-
- t...s.r..
I t 3g. . _.
'I .r ..... , I,o 6 #( 0 e 7 - -
d Page 2. og ,6 B-12 l
I 6 . . . .. I ' I H S I -12 " . . . . 2 '. A PPLI. ED ( 16 XS I ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E i i N . 4 ..........................................:i..........................................i...... X i : S i i ! I 2 ......................................... 4..... x /.........................j............................. . , XI N 0
,e .
j j j C : : H : :
* -2 ......................................:..........................................:...........................................,:.
c.m
. -4 ...........................i....... ,/
i : : : ! - , i , i , i
*U M
'T1 7,*
()0. -- 2 4 6 40 Cd
.r..-
g FEi IENIHINCHES WE m! CRACKDEPIH
- e. o y
e t..Ms u. m XYSAFOR12"IHSITREATEDWELD N , i i
I tm pc-CRACF (C'> COPYRIGHT 1984, 19E: STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSOCIATF5. INC. SAN JOSE, CA ( 4 0E' i 97 8-E COO VERSION 1.1 FTRESS CORFOSION CRACF GROWTH ANAL.YSIS EOLIND ING 12" CIRCUMFERENTIAL FLAW IHSI AND AF PLIED STRESS NITIAL CRACK SIZE = 0.2000 WALL THICKNESS = 0.6930 AX CRACF SIZE FOR SCCG= 0.5544 STRESS CORROSION CRAC). GROWTH LAW (S) LAW ID C N Kthres i: 1 C IGSCBST 2.2700E-08 2.2600 O.0000 500.0n00 STRESS COEFFICIENTS I CASE IL IHSIlOF CO
-30.705E -212.1766 C1 C2 1411.9703 -1505.4352 C3 APPL 12 16.0000 O.0000 O.0000 O.0000 Yma" CASE ID SCALE FACTOR I IHSIlOF APFL12 1.00 1.00 TIME PRINT TIME INCREMENT INCREMENT 30000.O 700.O 700.O l
RACK MODEL CIRCUMFERENTIAL CRACU IN CYLINDER (T/R=0.1) CRACV -------------------------5 TRESS INTENSITY FACTOR------------------------ DEPTH CASE CASE IHSIlOF APF L 12 0.0111 -6.63 3.31 O.0222 -9.75 4.71 0.0333 -12.35 5.79
-14.69 6.71 IO.0444 0.0554 -16.93 7.54 O.0665 -18.83 8.30 O.0776 -20.80 9.05
[ O.0887 -22.71 9.79 ei -- g __ O.0998 -24.53 10.50 ! g ", Sbg g. 6 0.1100 -26.25 11.19 .y
-2~~.87 11.87 File t,o [fEo -o7 .gf -
1O.12:0 O.17'.1 -29.40 12.54 0.1441 -30.91 13.27 i of ~ I B-14
r -cr 'a EarION 1.1 PAGE
5; -CI.41 17.05 I c: .1c.
1774
-33.81
-35.!!
14.67 15.39 0.1 E E 'T -36.31 1o.11 0.1996 -37.41 16.83 0.2107 -28.47 17.59 0.2T18 -39.65 18.47 0.2328 -40.72 19.36 0.243G -41.69 20.26 0.2550 -42.53 21.17 O.2661 -43.27 22.09 I 0.2772 0.2883 0.2994
-47.89
-44.54
-45.09 23.02 24.01 25.01 I O.3105 0.3216 0.3326
-45.53
-45.86
-46.07 26.02 27.04 28.08
-46.18 29.12 I O.3437 0.3548 0.3659
-46.34
-46.44 30.24 31.40 0.3770 -46.45 32.57 0.3881 -46.35 33.75 0.3992 -46.17 34.95 0.4103 -45.89 36.15 I O.4213 0.4324 0.4435
-45.49
-44.96
-44.33 37.42 38.75 40.09 O.4546 -43.63 41.45 I 0.4657 0.4768
-42.84
-41.99 42.83 44.21 45.65 0.4877 -41.08 ,
I O.4990 O.5100 0.5211
-40.10
-39.04
-37.89 47.20 48.77 50.35
; g','"..d bI'jf Ch:ckcd bymd _
NI l
-36.67 51.96 iI l
O.5322 O.5433 0.5544
-35.40
-34.09 53.57 55.21 FiM Go~ S $00 'd7 '3 0 Page 5_ of 8
'Il l TIME VMAX DA/DT DA A A/THF t l 700.O -20,59 O.OOOOE+00 0.0000 O.2000 O.289 END OF pc-CRACK B-15 I
= , . . .....: . ...... .:....... ...r......... . ...... .. _
m w I c,o oo
- : : E a.J
. . g:m:;
a-o I ; Go s::a 5.a.3
- : : e-e I : : : :
- 3
. . . A
............. . . . . . . . . . _ G3 sh
- : : .-4 a I
s==
. r
- a
- : C,r> -
I : : 5:tl: oo
- : : : : :::2 ::2=
- : : : : Co -
- : : ::2= E.a.2 E 3C I
- : s::: o-a e
- : : Cao :
- : : : Ea.3 E--* e :3
- : : : SE 5 s.
8:::a
- : : Z A I :
- 2
- x:
a e-. s-. Z
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - u :n 5.2.1
.i...........t.---....-..-s............
E:E: Ea.J
. . . E a-.
. E
- =m I .
U EM v _ = I=gg:
- a C5 3 g:=:, .
I Z. aC:I" -
.,_;:3 .
,==
g.a . I .
. g n - a . n . . n .
g g2"3 Lt"J 'C' C*? C*.3 -.-4 C53 hl'lQ I O
- --CA C ---
C - e .) . 3 g ' I r )g:c::c r )::: ::: s== 5.=a su e-. -r- lP ~ - -,rt.
.t -
-~. .
B-16
I te iC' :::4* F 1524, 19Et e r . . . ;;. e.s..::: ; r. A::..- .. .. . .::. .4 ,. . SAA J:EE, C;. 14 E 875-E:'. VEFii3 1. eLLCh iLE riat SIZE EiiLUA*:3 A.L:n:!.E FLtW 5:IE FCF C'F:J" . CEO,FLL'1 MIL:
- E' Cli J"FE*Ehi!AL TL 4 SAN HALL THID WE55= !.2MO
.:s:p. e. ::.c., . v .:. . a- ,.
.c si A
,e EeN.,N. .,
. .. : ......o t::: ,n,. . . 0u, .. e gfg 5 -{ re gg ,wg u e w. - ,wp Er m S::s si;E55, c.00:
FIFE 0.'i5!!E tIA"ETEF: IE.0MC F'. L't mEL: TVFE-E%ilil54 2 =2 STEE55 R*.!!C: C.70:1 ALLCat.? E STFE55=169 0.0iC0 FLCh 5?EE55:5:550.000; LI !R:' ".. 0.00 0. l f, C.23 0.3C 0. 4 's 0.50 4 iCail.E r./T 0.60'- 0.6:00 C.600' O.595: 0.5'.E" 0.4 h 4.;0s:P.E FLA EIIE FDL CIF;U"F. C5G.FLL'I NELI 1 ' CIL:U" EEE%TIAL FLAK SAW BALL THID %'E55: 0.693' I ME"iKA%E STFIE5= 6667.0000 BEh* N STRE55: 3269.00';0 EIFAW510s STRESS: 74:4.0M0 FIFE CUT 5!:E E!AFETER= 12.750; I FLJI WELL TYLE-E".An(!)/5As!:)=: c,, i r.:::... p g v, ,e C: ALLtd;5.E SIFE55=16750.C:0' C.c~ ; I FLCs S!FE5E*M55).0%" 0.03 0.1C 0.2C L / C ; F C'.;" C.30 0.40 0.50 ALL0h F.E A/T 0.6t0' O.6000 C.5c:1 0.44:1 0.!586 (.2961 ALLC.'ILE FLt.W SIZE F0F CIR~?F. CEO,FL L'I hEd l Frp.'n:! by: E M-- - I 12' CIF:.* EFE'.*IA. Fit 4 S*.d C.%:h:a t
- g. gpq ,,g e.
3 W////+ Page I of 1 I tr L TW!:oI55=
"E"i ' ' S 5 E': ets7.%:
EEk::h3 STEE55r 3e!..CC 0.is:: B-17 I
- :- .iti :*. '. F'31 :
..... - ...a. ... ...
u..s.. . . . .: . I.
..L.......,.s.,,...:
,, :.. ..- s 6... 1 5';Ei ;" : C.7t!!
.. ::..e . p..: . :, . .u..e. ,. e. . ;g
,I r..a . ......
- . ::::,s.t.. .. . A. -s L/E:5:U' 6.00 C.10 0.: 0.30 0.10 0.5C o s . 4 .v
- x. . ti. . 3 41
,I l A.L a-:. . . t. ..m .e.ev.sc.i
. 0.6.
. .s(. 61<. . .4...
EC Cr g-050 4 I 'I I i l I I I r~- l*...,=~.
....es.,,t,.
. - - ~ e e .. em m
, h I 'r.
. I,s (f(0...0.1-3
? ------.!
I 1 - - . - - h .....-. _ B-18 I
l ' l~ f.
]
I I i I i ,I I ! I 4 IN
~
'I ASSOCXES ~SC I I I I I I
- 31S0 ALMADEN EXPRESSWAY SUITE 226
- SAN IOSE. CALF f0Rf f! A 95tl8 e (408)978 8200
- TELEX 171618 STRUCT y ;}}