ML20210S778
| ML20210S778 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 01/27/1987 |
| From: | Bullock R, Cones M TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20210S752 | List: |
| References | |
| CEB-87-02, CEB-87-2, NUDOCS 8702170705 | |
| Download: ML20210S778 (10) | |
Text
g
'b
- TVA 10752 iOE4f 51 TITLE
'O ENCLOSURE 2 Sequoyah Nuclear Plant - Concrete Nondestructive Testing
~
p SAR SECTIONS VENDOR CONTRACT NO.
KEY NOUNS UNID SYSTEMIS)
Concrete, Nondestructive Testing REV (FOR RIMS USE)
RIMS ACCESSION NUMBER B41
'87 0127 003 APPLICABLE DESIGN OOCUMENTS R1 R2 R EF ER ENCES R3 R4 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY OFFICE OF ENGINEERING civil ENGINEERING BRANCH REVISION 0 R1 R2 R3 R4 DATE JAN 2 'l 1987 PREPARED CHECKED REVIEWED M
EA OOR APPROVED cc: RIMS, SL26 C.K 8702170705 870206 PDR ADOCK 05000327 P
CEB REPORT SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT CONCRETE NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING
~ Introduction A review of.the computer printout of the " Concrete Cylinder Data" (CSG-87-005), which is the data base of the strength tests of standard cured concrete cylinders from Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, revealed periods of time when the results did not meet the requirements of General Construction
' Specification No G-2 for Plain and Reinforced Concrete. This specification required that no more than 10 percent of the strength test results be below the specified strength for specified strengths equal to or greater than 3000 psi and no more than 20 percent for specified strengths less than 3000 psi.
The effect of this deficiency on the Category I structures was investigated using estimated in-place strengths which were developed using the results of a test progrom reported in CEB 86-12 " Study of Long Term Concrete Strength of Sequoyah and Watts Bar Nuclear Plants." It was later verified that the equivalent specified strengths based on 90 days standard cured cylinders also satisfy design requirements. Nondestructive concrete testing was performed to provide additional verification of the adequacy of the inplace concrete. This
. report documents the results of those tests.
Procedure
~
Six mixes which had time periods when more than 10 percent of the strength test results were less than the specified strength were investigated. These mixes were:
300.75 AFW, 301.5AFW, 401.5AFW, 500.75 AFWG, 500.75 AEW, and 800.75 BFW.
(The 401.5AFWR mix had been previously evaluated). Using a computer printout of the " Concrete Pour Card Data Base" (CSG-87-004) an attempt was made to randomly select a number of pours that were placed during acceptable strength periods and a number of pours that were placed during low strength periods but which contained only one mix. If the selected pours were accessible they were tested per ASTM C803 for penetration resistance and per ASTM C805 for rebound number.
7 Test Results Test results are listed in Table I.
When initial selections were made from' the pour data base it was not noted that some pours were split. Three pours, 0-A2CPABAB15B, 20D and 21A (0Bs. 1, 12 and 13) which required 301.5BFW l
DNEl - 1344M l
[
~,
e concrete were split and were completed using 401.5 AFW concrete during a low strength' period.
Initial selection was to represent low strength 4000 psi
- concrete but since the pours incorporate substantial quantities of other
. mixes, the test results were attributed to the lower strength mixes.
Two pours. 0-A2CPABAB24-13 and-16 were split and both partial pours were tested. The Iower portion of -13 (Obs 15) was placed with 4000 psi concrete-during an acceptable strength period whereas the upper portion (Obs 5) was placed with 3000 psi concrete during a low strength period. The lower portion of -16 (Obs 17) was also placed with 4000 psi concrete during an acceptable strength per.iod whereas the upper portion (Obs 18) was placed with the same mix-during a low strength period.
Strength test results for both 28 and 90 days are provided when samples were attributable to specific pours. The pours randomly selected during low strength periods were selected without regard to such test results. The test results indicate that even though the pours were made in low strength periods, the specific tests attributable to the pours were not low in strength.
The column headed ESS provides the equivalent specified strength (approximately the strength below which no more than 10 percent of the strength test results would occur) for the time period in which the pour was made. The column headed PE provides the average probe extension and the column headed RN the average rebound number for the tested pour. All slabs were tested from the underside. Five unital were subtracted from the rebound numbers determined vertically upward before listing here,and comparing them to the other rebound numbers determined horizontally.
Discussion Only the 3000A and 5000A mixes have sufficient data for independent analysis.
Table 2 contains the statistical analysis of the 3000A rebound numbers.
Sample 1 contains the pours made during time periods with acceptable strengths and sample 2 those made during time periods when there was an excessive number of low strength test results. Note that the average and the median of rebound numbers is higher for sample 2 than for sample 1.
Table 3 contains similar information for probe extensions. Differences between sample 1 and 2 are not statistically significant.
Tables 4 and 5 contain the analyses of rebound numbers and probe extensions for 5000A concrete. Again, differences between sample 1 and 2 are not statistically significant.
Table 6 contains the regression analysis for the 90 day strength of standard cured cylinders as a function of the rebound numbers. The data is plotted on figure 1 together with the 95 percent confidence limits for the mean and for individual test results. Table 7 and figure 2 contain similar information for 4
probe extension data. The fit of the regression equations for both test methods is not good. The probe and rebound hammer regression equations have correlation coefficients of 0.19 and 0.55, respectively, (1.0 equals perfect fit). The lowest rebound number obtained. 34 (Obs 1), appears to indicate a concrete with a standard cured 90 day cylinder strength of 4900 psi.
DNE1 - 1344M i
Conclusions The following conclusions are made.
1.
The test data does not indicate any unacceptable concrete.
2.- The test data does not indicate a statistically significsnt difference between the concrete placed during low strength periods and that placed during acceptable strength periods.
Reference:
IMalhotra, V.
M., " Testing Hardened Concrete: Nondestructive Methods,"
Monograph No. 9. American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Mich.
+
e O
3 l
DNE1 - 1344M i
I l
_,_-,_m-_
TABLE 1
OBS MIX DAY 28 DAY 90 ESS PE RN-POUR FEATURE 1 3000A
.3000 1.66 34 0-A2CPABAB158 WALL 2 3000A 3890 6615 3000 2.13,42 0-A2CPABAB09-06A WALL
-3 3000A 3165 5580 2600 2.17 49 0-A2CPABAB10-17H SLAB 4 3000A 3390 4990 3000 1.83 39 0-A2CPABAB22-02A SLAB 5 3000A 4960 7075 2600 2.01 51 0-A2CPABAB24-13 WALL 6 2000A 3470 5130 2700 2.05 40 0-A2CPABPT-B-14C, WALL 7 3000A 3000 2.09 44 0-C2CPCBCB1-05E WALL 8 3000A 4280 3000 2.19 56 0-C2CPCBCB1-12A SLAB 9 3000A 3570 5240 3000 1.90 39 05D-CPDADGB-4-3E-WALL 10 3000A 3550 3000 2.11 51 1-R2COR1RB1-3-10D SLAB 11 3000A 4045 6190 3000 2.12 44 2-R2CPR2RB2-3-10D SLAB 12 30008 2670 3890 3000 1.96 43 0-A2CPABAB20D WALL 13 30008 2370 3575 3000 2.18 49 0-A2CPABAB21A WALL 14 4000A 4000 1.99 41 0-A2CPABAB18A WALL 15 4000A 5080 8490 4000 1.99 51 0-A2CPABAB24-13 WALL 16 4000A 4910 6580 3300 2.23 47 0-A2CPABAB24-14 SLAB 17 4000A 4840 7470 4000 2.15 52 0-A2CPABAB24-16 WALL 18 4000A 4980 7215 3300 2.24 57 O-A2CPABAB24-16 WALL 19 5000A 4800 2.22 53 0-A2CPABAB25-01P WALL 20 5000A 6795 8595 4800 2.09 52 0-A2CPABAB25-1U WALL 21 5000A 4800 2.25 55 0-A2CPABAB25-1Y WALL
- 22 5000A -5465 7520 5000 1.93 55 1-R2CPR1RB1-15A
' WALL
'23 5000A, 4800 49 1-R2CPR1RB1-23A WALL 24 5000A 5005 6510 4800 48 1-R2CPR1RB1-24A WALL 25 5000A 5625 7305 5000 1.99 59 1-R2CPR1RB1-4-23C WALL l
26 5000A 6350 9550 5000 2.09 45 1-R2CPR1RB1-BA WALL 27 5000A 6010 8390 5000 2,06 42 1-R2CPR1RB1-9A WALL 28 5000A 5400 7995 4600 2.10 57 1-R2CPT1RB1-4-23B WALL 29 5000A 6100 8630 4800 2.10 53 2-R2CPR2RB2-11A WALL j
30 5000A 6385 8210 5000 2.05 56 2-R2CFR2RB2-15A WALL 31 5000A 5990 7340 4600 2.00 52 2-R2CPR2RB2-4-16E SLAB 32 5000A 4800 1.93 43 2-R2CPR2EB2-4-17E BEAM 33 5000A 6380 9090 4800 2.09 49 2-R2CPR2RB2-4-18E WALL 34 5000A 5270 7500 5000 2.03 49 2-R2CPR2RB2-BA WALL 35 8000B 7690 9975 8000 2.13 56 1-R2CPR1RB1-16A COL
'6 8000B 6400 9055 8000 2.12 57 2-R2CPR2RB2-16A COL Day 28 = Strength test result at 28 days Day 90 = Strength test result at 90 days ESS = Equivalent specified strength l
PE = Average probe extension RN = Average Rebound Number 1
~
' TABLE 2 - Two-SAMPLE AMAt YSIS RESULTS - SOOOA REBoublD b!O.
=====__-=====m,--
-&=--
=-
____s====
Sample i Samrle 2 Pooled Sample-Statistics: Number of Obs.
8 3
11 Average 43.625 46.6667 44.4545 Variance 49.410~
24.3333 46.0602 Std. Deviation 7.02928 5.S5947 6.78677 Median 43 49 44 Conf. Interval Ter Diff in Means:
95 Percent (Equal Vars.)
Sample 1 - Sample 2
-13.4383 7.35501 9 D. T.
(Unequal Vars.) Sample 1 - Sararle 2
-14.3148 8.23147 4.4 D.T.
Conf. Interval for latic of Variances: 0 Percent Sample i + Samrle 2 Hurothesis Test fcr HO: Diff = 0 Ccmputed t stattstic = -0.662 vs Alt: NE Sig. Level = 0.524555
~
at Alrha = 0.05 se d: net reaect HO.
TAB \\_E 3 - Two-SAMPLE AMAt.Ysts REStJt T5 - SOOOA PROBE EXTEM510kl
..m Sample i Samrle 2 P:cled Sample Stat:st:cs: Number of Obs.
S 3
11 Average 2.00375 2.07667 2.02364 Variance 0.0345696 6.933335-3 0.02S4232 Std. Deviation 0.195929 0.0S32666 0.168607 Median 2.1 2.05 2.0?
Cont. Interval for Diff. in Means:
95 Percent (Equal Vars.)
Sample 1 - Sample 2
-0.331206 0.155373 9 D.T.
(Unequal Vars.) Sample 1 - Samrle 2
-0.259919 0.113965 6.2 D.T.
Conf. Inter.al for Ratio of Variances: O Percent Sample 1 + Samrie 2 Hwrothesis Test for H0: Diff = 0 Comruted t statistic = -0.638794 vs Alt: NE Sig. I.evel = 0.53S871 at Alpha = 0.05 so de not reject H0.
I
TABLE 4 - TWO-SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS - SoooA REBOUMD MO.
__.____ _____===_________
Samrle i Samrle 2 Fooled Sample Statistics: Number cf Obs.
6 10 16 Average 50.8333 51.1 51 Variance 42.1667 15.S778 25.2667 Std. Deviatten 6.49359 3.95469 5.0266 Medtan
- 52 52 52 Conf. Interval For Ot tf. in Means:
95 Fercent (Equal Vars.)
Sample 1 - Sample 2
-5.33534 5.30201 14 D.F.
(Unequal Vars.) Sample 1 - Samrle 2
-7.15061 6.61728 7.3 D.T.
Conf. Interval for Eatic cf Variances: 0 Fercent Sample 1 + Sample 2 HStothesis Test for HO: Diff = 0 Comruted t statistic = -0.102733 vs A!t: NE Sig. Level = 0.919632 at Alrha = 0.05 so do net reject HO.
TAh : 5 - TWO-SAMPLE ANALYSTS RESULTS - 5000A PROBE EXTENston Sample f Samrle 2 Fecled Sample Statistics: Numter cf Obs.
'6"i 8
14
. Average 2.025 2.0E75 2.06643 Vartance 3.27E-3 0.01035 7.69167E-3 Std. Deviation 0.0571339 0.104163 0.0377021 Median 2.04 2.0?!
2.075 Conf. Interval Ter Dif f. In Means:
95 Fercent (Itual Vars.)
Samrle 1 - Sample 2
-0.175725 0.0307:52 12 D. T.
(Unequal Vars.) Samile 1 - Sample 2
-0.168266 0.0232665 11.2 D.F.
Conf. Interval for Fatic of Variances: 0 Fercent Samrle 1 + Sample 2 Hypothesis Test fer h0: Diff = 0 Comruted t statistic = -1.5306S vs Alt: NE Sig. Level 0.151775 at Alpha = 0.05 so do not reject H0.
TABLE G - REGREsstou AHAL'T515 - LINEAR MoDEL : Y = a + bX DeFendent variable: DAY?O IndeFendent variable: IN Standard T
Prob.
Parameter Estimate Error Value Level InterceFt
-3S7.155 2266.65
-0.170805 0.865752 S!cre 152.9 45.6296 3.35097 2.5608E-3 Analysts of Vartance Source Sum of Squares Dr Mean Square F-iatio Prob. Level Model 21414705 1
21414705 11
.00256 Errer 47677197 25 1907088 Total (Corr. )
69091902 26 Correlation Ceef ficient = 0.556727 P.-squared = 3;.99 Fercent Stnd. Errce of Est. = 1350.97 TABLE. 7.
asc#assion ANAtysis - LINEAR MODEL :- Y = a + b K Dependent variable: DAY 90 Irdependent variable: PE Standard
,,,y T
Prob.
Parameter Estimate Error Value Level Intercert 529.496 7014.01 0.0754912 0.94045 Slope 3217.96 3389.8 0.949307 0.351927 Analysis of Variance Source Sum of Stuares Dr Mean Square T-Ratio Prob. Level Model 24S4733.S 1
2484783.8
.9
.35193 Error 66173851 24 2757244 Total (Corr.)
6865S635 25 Correlation Ccef ficient = 0.190233 R-squared =
3.62 Fercent Stnd. Error of Est. = 1660.5
, p m
$4
.O I
i 1
-l l
l l
l I
l 1
1.
t i
1 g
.g-g
-W
~ '
0
~
1 3
F-
~
Z El 2-g)
O Z
J l
-O m
g W
T-3 3
1 gg z
e O 1-3 3
'x 3
W I E F Z
J0 O
3 Z
eZ H W J
^
LE in o
O F
W V
W 3
g i
O Z
O H
M O
m
.g.
9 W
C gg W
W a
g a
e O
e N
O O
O O
O O
O O
V N
X o
H19 N 3 td1S AVO OS
9 M
i
.I
- i. l
- 1. ql l
l 1
I i
1 I
i Z
O 8'
g.
m N
g N
E x
W 3
n Z
W 5
H m
X 2
O g
......,.E 7
N1
- 8. *
~
N O
WZ H
W E O 3
3 g
g; Z
W G E x
F-H F X
kM 3
W N
......s...
3 k
W D
m o
2 E
O 1
H W
m W
G g
O W
E 0
+
t [
t i
(D 0"
O O
O O
O X
Q b
0 M
t e
m H19N3815 AVO OS i
b\\
- ~ ~ - - ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ - ~ ~ - - ~ ~ ~ ' " ~
" " " ~ ~ " ~ ' " ~ ' ' ' ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
-