ML20209F795
| ML20209F795 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07109268 |
| Issue date: | 07/01/1999 |
| From: | Srinivasan R, Ulbricht L, Wong H External (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137X223 | List: |
| References | |
| IL-TP-001, IL-TP-1, NUDOCS 9907160133 | |
| Download: ML20209F795 (10) | |
Text
gFuel Solutions BNFL i victor Square i
Scotts Valley, CA 95066 Phone (408) 438-6444 l
Fax (408) 438-5206 DOCUMENT NO.: IL-TP-001 REVISION NO.: 3 DATE: June 1999 PROPRIETARY PAGE 1 OF 22 TITLE: TranStor IMPACT LIMITER TEST PLAN SAFETY CLASSIFICATION: IMPORTANT TO SAFETY Prepared By:
Zhf Date L. E. Ulbr'icht, Engineer Reviewed and Approved By:
6{M %
&&W Date R. p. Srinivasan, Director Engineering Appr ved By.
Revie 0&h 7 ll99 Date' Howard \\png, Director Quality Ashurance l
Reviewed and Approv d By:
[tr 195 7 f(lf S l
D. F. SEdeker,'Diredor Projects Date l
I l
N N065a'monmmuur 9907160133 990702 PDR ADOCK 07109268 C
PDR r
i
BNFL - FUEL SOLUTIONS DOCUMENTNO.: IL-TP-00i REVISION NO. 3 PAGE 2 OF 22 TITLE: TranStor" IMPACT LIMITER TEST PLAN ATTACHMENT II Page1of1
Title:
TranStor
- IMPACT LIMITER TEST PLAN SNC NO: IL-TP-001 Rev.3 REVISION CONTROL SHEET Rev.
Date Reason Affected Pes.
Preparer Checker Proi. Enc.
/'gg
(
gg y 0
10/97 InitialIssue All 1
08/98 Revised static and spec-All imen testing descriptions with general revision.
2 2/99 Updated figures and text All to current configuration.
Updated dynamic test Description. Revised from SNC to BFS. Other minor Clarifications.
3 6/99 Updated dynamic test 3.2,3.3,3 4 b 1hM description.
5.2,8.0 DCRN 5341-TP-002 SIGNATURES Responsibility Signature Initials Date f-rexar[l
]lW 6N7/79 15ErseE& PNl
. Chedw] PE SbhM (CGT Cfn MT QAP 3.0-2, REV 5 (3/99) i I
1
BNFL - FUEL SOLUTIONS i
DOCUMENT NO.: IL-TP.001 REVISIONNO.: 3 PAGE 3 OF 22 l l
I 1
TITLE: TranStor* IMPACT LIMITER TEST PLAN i
I TABLE OF CONTENTS Paee 1.0 -
INTRO DU CTIO N.......................................................................
......5 2.0 TE S T O B J E CTI VE S.............................................................................................. 6 3.0 ANALYTICAL MODEL VALID ATION..............................................................
.8 3.1 STATIC TEST P ROGRAM............................................................................ 8 3.2 DYNAMIC TEST PROGRAM........................................................................ 8 3.3 ANALYTICAL MODEL ADJUSTMENTS..................................................... 9 3.4 ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA............................................................................. 10 4.0 TEST PROC EDURES................................................................................................ I 1 5.0 TEST ARTICLES AND TEST CONFIGURATION.................................................... 12 5.1 QUASI-STATIC TEST CONFIGURATION.............................................. 12 5.2 DYNAMIC TEST CONFIGURATION......................................................... 13 6.0 INSTRUMENTATION.................................................................................................. 15 6.1 QUASI-STATIC TEST INSTRUMENTATION............................................ 16 6.2 DYNAMIC TEST INSTRUMENTATION.................................................. 17 7.0 TEST FACILITIES............................................................................................
7.1 FORCE AND PRESSURE LABORATORY.................................................... 19 7.2 AERIAL CABLE FACILITY............................................................................. 19 8.0, PRE-AND POST-TEST M EASUREMENTS.............................................................. 20 8.1 QUASI-STATIC TEST PROGRAM INSPECTIONS................................. 21 8.2 DYNAMIC TEST PROGRAM INSPECTIONS............................................... 21 9.0 TESTREPORT..........................................................................................................21
10.0 REFERENCES
........................................................................................................22 l
I l
l f
BNFL - FUEL SOLUTIONS l
DOCUMENT NO.: IL-TP-001 REVISION NO.: 3 PAGE 4 OF 22 l l
1-l TITLE: TranStor" IMPACT LIMITER TEST PLAN I
FIGURES l
Paee
- 1. TranStorm S hipp i n g C ask...................................................................... 7 2.CaskModel.....................................................................................................................14
- 3. TranStor" Cask Model With Impact Limiters.................................
...... 16 d
- 4. Cask Model Accelerometer Locations........................................................................ 18 l
5.' Aerial Cable Facility at Sandia National Laboratories.................................................. 20 1,.
l TABl.E
- 1. Comparison of Actual and Modeled Critical Parameters for Dynamic Test Configuration...15 l
l l
l l
i 1
I i-l l
l l
l lo
BNFL - FUEL SOLUTIONS DOCUMENT NO.: IL TP-001
' REVISION NO.: 3 PAGE 5 OF 22 l
- TITLE: TranStor IMPACT LIMITERTEST PLAN T
1.0 INTRODUCTION
BNFL - Fuel Solutions (BFS) has developed the TranStor" system for storage and transponation of spent nuclear fuel. This system is comprised of four primary components:
A scaled metal canister that provides the structural suppon and containment o
boundary for spent nuclear fuel during. storage
. A reinforced concrete cask that provides physical protection, shielding, and convective cooling for the canister during interim storage and short, onsite movement from the reactor building to the storage pad 1
' A shipping cask that provides containment and shielding during transportation e
of the canister from the storage pad to a centralized storage facility, a final disposal site, or a reprocessing facility A transfer cask that provides shielding during'onsite fuel loading and transfer operations into and out of the storage or shipping casks.
An illustration of the shipping cask is provided in Figure 1. The cask consists of inner and outer stainless steel shells separated by a layer oflead gamma shielding.
A layer of polymeric-based neutron shielding is provided outside the outer shell and is encased in a stainless steeljacket. The inner and outer shells are welded to the bottom plate forging and the top closure flange forging. The combination of the inner shell, the top flange forging, the bottom plate, and the closure lid defines the cask cavity and, with closure seals, vent, and test pon plugs and seals, dermes the' cask containment boundary. Four solid steel lifting trunnions are welded to the outer steel shell at 90-degree circumferential intervals. Removable energy-absorbing impact limiters are bolted over each end of the cask to provide
_ protection in the event of a transportation accident. The closure system is fully recessed and protected by the top impact limiter.
The stmetural evaluation of the TranStor" shipping cask design must demonstrate the adequacy of the shipping packaging under both the normal conditions of transport and the hypothetical accident conditions described in the U.S. Code offederalRegulations, Title 10, Part 71 (10 CFR 71) [Ref.1). These L
conditions include drop impact events. Therefore, the impact limiters are an essential component of the Transtor system. To demonstrate compliance with 7
l:
l l
BNFL - FUEL SOLimONS DOCUMENT NO.: IL-17-001 REVISION NO.: 3 PAGE 6 OF 22 l TITLE: TranStor IMPACT LIMITER TEST PLAN U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission requirements, the analytical model [Ref. 2]
for the impact limiters will be validated through scale-model quasi-static and dynamic testing.
This impact limiter test plan outlines a series of scale-model quasi-static tests and drop tests to be performed at Sandia National Laboratories (SNL), Albuquerque, New Mexico. The static test program will use one-eighth-scale models of individual TranStor impact limiters, or portions of those impact limiters, for controlled-rate quasi-static compressive loading in the SNL Force and Pressure Laboratory. Test fixtures that provide alignment stability between the platens of the testing machine, as well as simulation of the interface between the cask and the impact limiter, will be designed and fabricated by BFS, subject to review and approval of test fixture baseplate mounting configuration by SNL. The drop experiments will be based on complete quarter-scale models of the TranStor impact limiters and attachments. The cask model used in the impact limiter drop test program will provide an inertial and dimensional representation of the TranStor shipping cask with payload and simulation of cask features that are important to assessment ofimpact limiter performance.
2.0 TEST OBJECTIVES The major objective of the tests is to verify appropriate representation of the impact limiters in the structural analyses used to calculate impact limiter defonnations and deceleration loads experienced by the TranStor" shipping cask during the drop conditions specified in Reference 1. Validation of the analytical model will be perfonned by confirming the quasi-static crush properties of the impact limiter through the one-eighth-scale quasi-static crush test program and by confirming dynamic response of the impact limiter and attachments through the quarter-scale dynamic test program.
4
l l
l.
I!
l1
!ll!llill II1 1l!1I lli i
Il; l
22 FO 7
EGA P
de tca d
er er SNO a
ITU 3
L 0
O O
2 S
N L
N E
O U
S I
h F
IV E
g L
R FN u
B or h
N t
A L
7 P
TSET s
R e
ET g
IM IL a
l T
C P
P A
T-P L
M I
I O
ra N
tS T
n N
ar E
T M
U E
C L
n O
i D
n
7_
BNFL - FUEL SOLUTIONS DOCUMENT NO.: IL-TP-001 REVISION NO.: 3 PAGE 21 OF 22 l
- TITLE: TranStor IMPACT LIMITERTEST PLAN 1
1 I
n~ 01Tnati.OR 5.8 T@d20t@d 9.0 TEST REPORT The final report will consist of two parts. The first part will be prepared by SNL and willinclude the following:
y,-,
BNFL - FUEL SOLUTIONS DOCUMENT NO : IL-TP-001 REVISION NO.:' 3 PAGE 22 OF 22 l TITLE: TranStor* IMPACT LIMITER TEST PLAN Description of the quasi-static test setup and the generated data (force-deflection curves).
. : Reduced data and findings for all d' rop test orientations.
The second part of the report will be generated by BFS and will present a 1
comparison of the analytical results to the test data in the SNL report.
Specifically, this part of the report will contain:
Summary of the properties for the honeycomb used in both the j
one-eighth-scale quasi-static models and the one-quarter-scale drop impact limiter models.
. Comparison of the quasi-static load-deflection curves to those generated in the analysis. If any model modifications are needed, a discussion of those modifications and a new comparison to the test data will be provided.
Comparison of the analytical results to test findings for drop tests in all orientations.
The report will provide the overall conclusions about adequacy of the impact limiter design based on the criteria outlined in Section 3.4.
10.0 REFERENCES
[l}
" Packaging and Transportation ofRadioactive Materials," U.S. Code of
}
Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 71, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., April 1996.
1 (2)
SNC-95-71SAR, " Safety Analysis Reportfor the TranStor" Shipping Cask System, " Revision 2, Sierra Nuclear Corporation, June 1997.
[3)
"Regulationsfor the Safe Transport ofRadioactive Material," Safety Series No. 6. International Atomic Energy Agency,1985 Edition (as amended in 1990), Vienna, Austria,1990.
f ENCLOSURE 6 j
Redacted /Non-Proprietary Version of j
l BNFL 1.10.06.84 I
l l
l l
l l
l s
l