ML20211E403

Rept on Containment Structural Integrity Test for Public Svc Co of New Hampshire,Seabrook Station Unit 1 (SB-1)

ML20211E403
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	06/16/1986
From:	Bhatt K, Ghosh D, Mudge T UNITED ENGINEERS & CONSTRUCTORS, INC.
To:
Shared Package
ML20209E304	List: ML20209E299 ML20211D986 ML20211E040 ML20211E144 ML20211E226 ML20211E331 ML20211E403 ML20211E458 ML20211E494 ML20211E574 ML20211E585 ML20211E591 ML20211E603 ML20211E610
References
FOIA-86-678 9763.102-SB-1-S, 9763.102-SB-1-S-IT, NUDOCS 8610220442
Download: ML20211E403 (109)

Text

Unded Engineers & Constructors Inc. 215 422 3000 **

30 South 17th Street Telex 83 4203 I -

I

-l Post Offes Box 8223 Telecopier 215 422 4648 g 3 Philadelphia, PA 19101 l

- United Engineers SConstructors  ;

A Raytteesee Company REPORT ON CONTAINMENT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST FOR PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SEABROOK STATION UNIT 1 (SB-1) l Report No. 9763.102-SB l-SIT Revision Date: June 16, 1986 Prep. Checked Approved No. Date By By Q/A By Prepared By: M D. K. Ghosh Reviewed By:

l ~K . C. Bhatt Q/A Review By:

T. G. M/dge Approved By: N M MdMk K. M. Kalawadia Approved By: MU f ff/ w s' B. J. Huselton 8610220442 861014 '

PDR FOIA CURRAN 86-678 PDR

CONTAINMENT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST SEABROOK STATION - UNIT 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION DESCRIPTION 1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION 2.0 PURPOSE

3.0 CONCLUSION

3.1 General 3.2 Results 4.0 SPECIFICS OF CONTAINMENT 4.1 Physical Description g 4.1.1 ' Gene ra l -

4.1.2 Base Mat 4.1.3 Upright Cylinder 4.1.4 Dome 4.1.5 Containment Components 4.1.6 Other Interface Structures 4.2 Design Basis 4.2.1 General 4.2.2 Reinforced Concrete Structure 4.2.3 Liner Plate and Anchorage System 4.2.4 Containment Components 1

i SB-1 SIT

I TABLE OF CONTENTS (Contd.)

)

SECTION DESCRIPTION 4.3 Materials of Construction 4.3.1 General 4.3.2 Concrete 4.3.3 Reinforcing Steel 4.3.4 Liner Plate and Anchorage System 4.3.5 Equipment Hatch, Airlock and Penetration Sleeves 4.4 Figures 5.0 CONSTRUCTION 6.0 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST 6.1 General Description

/

6.2 Preparation (Pretest) 6.3 Conductance 6.4 Posttest 6.5 Figures 7.0 TEST PROCEDURES 7.1 Technical Procedure 7.2 Containment Surface Inspection (Pretest and Posttest) 7.3 Structural Integrity Test (Conductance-of SIT) 8.0 INSTRUMENTATION 8.1 General 8.2 Extensometers 8.3 Temperature f

8.4 Dewpoint Hydrometers 11 SB-1 SIT

F TABLE OF CONTENTS (Contd)

/

SECTION DESCRIPTION 8.5 Pressure' Gages and Pressurization Equipment 8.6 Data Acquisition System 8.7 Optical Measurements 9.0 TEST DATA 10.0 COMPARISON OF TEST DATA WITH ANALYTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE VALUES 10.1 General 10.2 Behavior and Significant Parameters 10.3 Basis of Predicted Values 10.'4 Comparison of Test and Predicted Values of Displacement 10.4.1 General 10.4.2 Radial Displacements of Cylinder 10.4.3 Radial Displacements of Cylinder Adjacent to Equipment Hatch 10.4.4 Equipment Hatch Diameter Change 10.4.5 Radial Displacements of Cylinder Adjacent to Personnel Airlock i

10.4.6 Personnel Airlock Diameter Change 10.4.7 Vertical Displacement of Cylinder 10.4.8 Vertical Displacement of Dome 10.4.9 Recovery After Depressurization 10.4.10 Summary f .

iii SB-1 SIT

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Contd)

SECTION DESCRIPTION 10.5 Comparison of Test and Predicted Concrete Cracking 10.5.1 General 10.5.2- Areas Other Than Equipment Hatch and Personnel Airlock 10.5.3 Equipment Hatch and Personnel Airlock Areas 10.5.4 Recovery After Depressurization 10.5.5 Summary 10.6 Tables 10.7 Figures 11.0 EVALUATIONS 11.1 Accuracy of Measurements i

11.2 Deviations and Dispositions 11.2.1 General 11.2.2 Cylinder Radial Displacements 11.2.3 Cylinder Radial Displacements Adjacent to Equipment Hatch i

11.2.4 Cylinder Radial Displacements Adjacent to Personnel Airlock i

, 11.2.5 Diameter Changes of Equipment Hatch and j Personnel Airlock 11.2.6 Cylinder and Dome Vertical Displacements 11.2.7 Concrete Behavior 11.2.8 Special Conditions i

11.3 Safety Margin l

l .

l l

iv SB-1 SIT l

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Contd)

SECTION DESCRIPTION 12.0 APPENDIX A' USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.136 - Materials, Construction and Testing of Concrete Containment, Revision 2, June 1981.

13.0 Article CC-6000 of ASME B&PV Code,Section III, APPENDIX B Division 2, 1980 Edition.

14.0 APPENDIX C UE&C Specification for Structural Integrity Test Spec. No. 9763.006-5-5 15.0 APPENDIX D SIT Predicted and Acceptable Data 16.0 APPENDIX E SIT /ILRT Equipment Protection List 17.0 APPENDIX F TECt!NICAL PROCEDURE NO. TP-13

, 18.0 APPENDIX G General Test Procedure GT-M-106 - Containment Surface Inspection 19.0 APPENDIX 11 Primary Containment Structural Integrity Test Procedure No. 1-PT(I)-36 20.0 APPENDIX I Brewer Engineering Laboratories, "Seabrook Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 Reactor Building Structural Integrity Test Results." Technical

, Report No. TR-20422(842).

21.0 APPENDIX J SIT Pretest Containment Surf ace Inspection Reports 22.0 APPENDIX K SIT Posttest Containment Surf ace Inspection Reports I

23.0 APPENDIX L Special Conditions

NRC Unresolved Item Associated with the Containment SIT 24.0 APPENDIX M Chronological Log 1

y SB-1 SIT

{

l.0 GENERAL INFORMATION Owner.

Public Service Company of New Hampshire, et al. (PSNH) 1000 Elm Street Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 Engineering Supervisor Yankee Nuclear Services Division (YNSD) 1671 Worcester Road Framingham, Massachusetts 01701 Engineer - Constructor United Engineers & Constructors Inc. (UE&C) 30 South'17th Street P. O. Box 8223 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 Construction Managers United Engineers & Constructors Inc.

30 South 17th Street

( P. O. Box 8223 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 Site Location Seabrook Station Approximately 6000 Feet East of Seabrook, N. H.

at termination of Rocks Road Description The Seabrook Station (SB) is a two-unit nuclear plant. Each unit is rated at 1200 MWe anj includes a four-loop PWR and a tandem com-pound, six-flow turbine generator. The Structural Integrity Test (SIT) for Unit I was performed to demonstrate that the Containment responds in an acceptable manner to the specified internal test pressure of 115% of the design pressure.

The Integrated leak rate test (ILRT) was conducted by others in conjunction with the SIT and was performed after SIT peak pressure but prior to completing depressurization. The ILRT started at 39 psig SIT depressurization plateau. The ILRT is not within the scope of this report.

( .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 1-1

2.0 PURPOSE General Design Criterion 1 of Appendix A to 10CFR Part 50 requires that structures, systems, and components of nuclear power plants important to safety be tested to quality standards commensurate with the importance of the safety functions to be performed.

To comply witis the above criterion, it is committed in the FSAR, Section 3.8.1.7, that a preoperational structural integrity test will be performed at 1.15 times the Containment design pressure (52 psig).

To meet the above commitment, the SIT was performed in accordance with the requirements of the following documents:

1. USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.136, Revision 2, " Materials, Con-struction, and Testing of Concrete Containments" (Appendix A).

2. Article CC-6000 of ASME B&PV Code,Section III, Division 2 (hereinafter referred to as Division 2), 1980 Edition (Appendix B).

3. UE&C Specification No. 9763.006-5-5, " Specification for Struc-tural Integrity Test", Rev. 3 (Appendix C).

The Seabrook Unit 1 Containment is considered as non prototype as defined in CC-6212.2. The Consolidated Edison's Indian Point Unit No. 2 and Washington Public Power Supply System Unit No. I are the prototypes for this test.

f SB-1 SIT Page No. 2-1

i l

2.0 PURPOSE (Cont'd.)

The purpose of this report is to present the observations, results and conclusions of the SIT for Seabrook Unit 1 Containment struc-

. ture, conducted during the period of March 15, 1986 through March 21, 1986.

i l

( .

3 i

i f

k .

J l SB-1 SIT Page No. 2-2

l I  :

3.0 CONCLUSION

3.1 General The structural integrity test (SIT) of Seabrook Unit 1 Containment structure started on March 15, 1986. The integrated leak rate test (ILRT) was performed by others in conjunction with the SIT and it started at 39 psig depressurization plateau on March 17, 1986.

After completion of the ILRT on March 19, 1986, the SIT resumed and it was successfully completed on March 21, 1986. Figure 6-1 shows Containment pressure cycles.

Based on an evaluation of the test data and a comparison of the test data with the predicted / acceptable data, it is concluded that the test results correlate satisfactorily with theoretically pre-dicted response. and the Seabrook Unit I concrete Containment structure has responded satis.factorily to the test pressure loads.

Therefore, the Containment structure has satisfied the structural acceptance criteria of ASME B&PV Code,Section III, Division 2, Subarticle CC-6213, 1980 Edition.

The majority (about 94%) of the instruments performed well and sufficient data were recorded. Based on these data, positive con-clusions are drawn regarding the performance of the Containment s t ructure. A total of sixty-six (66) instruments were used, of which only four (4) were inoperative. The malfunctioning of these

! instruments (Section 11.0 and Appendix I) did not affect the conclusions made with respect to the acceptance of Containment SIT.

SB-1 SIT Page No. 3-1

r-

{

The discussion of the results is primerily based on measured data from the peak pressure 60.2 psig which is 115% of the design pressure (52 psig). Tables 10-1 through 10-7 compare measured displacements for pressure 60.2 psig with the analytical and acceptable values.

Displacements for all pressure plateaus,are included in Appendix 1.

Figures 10-1 through 10-5 exhibit analytical, acceptable and measured radial deflections of the cylindrical wall for various pressure plateaus. Table 10-8 presents deflection recovery 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br /> after depressurization. Concrete crack pattern plots and photo-graphs are presented in Appendix I.

3.2 Results 3.2.1 All but one (IG26) measured displacements are below the acceptable values. The measured horizontal deforestions (IG26) of the equip-ment hatch opening at pressures 60.2 and 52 psig are about 16.4%

/ '

and 8.2% highe'r than the respective acceptable values. This does not meet the acceptance criteria of CC-6213(d). For' explanation of this deviation, see Sections 10.2, 10.4.4 and 11.2.5. All measured radial displacements are in excellent agreement with the predicted -

values (Sections 10.4.2, 10.4.3, 10.4.5). Measured maximum radial displacement at IG29 where potential voids were identified behind the liner plate (Ref. NRC Blue Sheet 047 in Appendix L), is within the acceptable value. Additionally, IG29 recovered to about 86%

af ter depressurization, thus confirming the elastic behavior of the liner plate. There was no evidence of any localized distress to the liner plate. Vertical displacements of the cylinder and the done are considerably lower than the predicted values. Explana-tions for such behav'ior are provided in Sections 10.4.7 and 10.4.8.

i i

i l

f

• i SB-1 SIT Page No. 3-2 i

i

r i

Generally, higheb : ..' ; tete tensile strength than what was assumed in analyses, resulted in reduced cracking and hence, lower displace-ments. The pattern of dome displacements is in agreement with the predicted one. The ' flattening' of the done ' apex occurred as predicted.

The deflection recovery twenty (20) hours af ter depressurization is more than the minimum recovery value of 70%. About 50%.of the instruments (operational) recovered about 80% or more. Only.IG3A recovered to about 58.2%; this is attributed to instrument error because recovery of similar channel IG3B is about 80%. There is no evidence of any inelastic behavior. Recovery measurements of the personnel airlock deformations (IG27 and IG28) are erratic; these are prone to error because of significantly small values of both measured and predicted values. Based on an evaluation of deflection recovery, it is concluded that the response of the Containment I structura under the SIT conditions is elastic in nature and it meets the requirements of CC-6213(C).

3.2.2 The concrete crack pattern plots are presented in Appendix 1. The maximum crack widths (except two cracks on two discrete zones near the personnel airlock - Ref. Sections 10.5.3b, 10.5.4 and 11.2.7) recorded are 0.015" which is within the predicted / acceptable values. All cracks closed to 0.005" or smaller after depressuriza-tion. Multiple in-line cadwelds (Appendix L) did not result in large cracks local to the areas; small cracks were distributed over the areas.

3.2.3 There was no yielding of rebars based on an evaluation of crack widths and displacement data.

i -

SB-1 SIT Page No. 3-3

(

3.2.4 There were no visible signs of permanent damage or any signs of localized distress either to the concrete structure or to the steel liner (Appendix K).

3.2.5 The structural concrete showed a greater tensile strength under the SlT conditions than what was assumed to develop analytically pre-dicted values. This resulted in reduced cracking and hence, smaller displacements.

t .

J

{'

SB-1 SIT Page No. 3-4

4.0 SPECIFICS OF CONTAINMENT 4.1 Physical Description 4.1.1 General The steel lined concrete Containment (Containment) is classified as a Seismic Category I reinforced concrete structure. The Containment is comprised of three basic reinforced concrete structural elements - the circular base mat with reactor pit, an upright cylindrical shell and a hemispherical dome. A continuous welded steel liner plate is anchored to the inside face of the base mat, cylinder and dome to function as a leak-tight membrane.

The base mat, cylindrical shell and the dome behave as a single integrated structure under the applied loading conditions.

l -

4.1.2 Base Mat The base mat is a circular reinforced concrete structure, 153'-0" in' diameter and nominally 10'-0" thick. There is a cavity in the base mat under the reactor vessel. The mat is founded on en-gineered fill-concrete which extends to the sound bedrock. The base liner at the top of the base mat is 1/4" thick carbon steel plate and is welded to leveling angles which are embedded in con-crete. The base liner is covered with a 4'-0" thick fill mat.

The fill mat is not anchored to the base liner and is not a part of the Containment.

SB-1 SIT Page No. 4-1

l l

l 4.1.3 Upright Cylinder The reinforced concrete upright cylinder is nominally 4'-6" thick with an inside diameter of 140'-0". It extends from the top of the base mat to the spring line at the intersection of the cylinder and the dome, a distance of 149'-0". The large openings in the cylinder are the . Equipment Hatch opening which is 28'-0" in diameter and the Personnel Airlock opening which is 7'-1 1/4" in .

diameter. The area around the Equipment Hatch opening is thickened to a dimension of 8'-9" for a diameter of 45'-0" which then tapers back to the shell at an angle of 45*. The Personnel Airlock is similarly thickened to a dimension of 6'-6" for a diameter of 18'-l 1/4". See Figures 4-2 and 4-3 for respective details.

The cylinder liner is primarily constructed of 3/8" thick steel plates in a cylindrical shape of 140'-0" diameter joined with full I

penetration,' continuous welds. The cylinder liner is attached to

~

! the base liner by a knuckle which consists of 3/4" thick plates.

In all areas where the cylinder is penetrated by pipe sleeves, including the Equipment Hatch and the Personnel Airlock, the liner thickness is 3/4". The liner is anchored to the reinforced concrete cylinder by means of vertical " Tee" sections whose stems are welded to the external side of the liner with two 3/16" con-tinuous fillet welds, thus providing anchorage for the liner to the structural concrete wall.

i

}

I .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 4-2

-4.1.4 Dome The reinforced concrete done is a hemisphere of 69'-11 7/8" inside radius and thickness of 3'-6 1/8". The done thickness increases uniformly from a tangent point on the done above the spring line to form a tangent where the done meets the spring line at the out-side diameter of the cylindrical wall.

The done liner is 1/2" thick and flush with the cylinder liner on the outside face. The liner plates are joined with full penetra-tion continuous welds and are joined to the cylinder liner at the spring line. The anchorage system of the done liner consists of tees on a 5'-0" grid pattern. A bent stud 'is provided at the center of each of the 5'-0" x 5'-0" panels.

4.1.5 Containment Components I . ,

The' Containment components include the equipment hatch, personnel airlock, piping penetrations, other penetrations, etc. Metal sections of the Containment pressure boundary which are not backed by concrete, are' covered by ASME B & PV Code,Section III, Division 1, and are not within the scope of this report.

4.1.6 Other Interface Structures To avoid interaction, other internal and external structures have not been connected to the Containment cylinder or dome. All the internal structures are supported on 4'-0" thick fill mat on top of the base mat liner. The fill sat is not anchored to the base liner. The entire Containment is enclosed by a minimum of 15" thick reinforced concrete Containment enclosure. The Containment enclosure building is supported on a separate foundation mat.

SB-1 SIT Page No. 4-3

4.2 Design Basis 4.2.1 Ceneral The design of the Containment assures that the reactor and con-tained systems can operate without undue risk to the public health and safety. The primary function of the Containment is to contain or control the release of radioactive or hazardous releases which escape from the reactor coola[tt pressure boundary in the event of the design basis Loss-of-Coolant Accident (LOCA).

In addition, it serves as a biological shf >sid and provides missile protection for safety related systens and components.

The design of the Containment structure includes the following major structural elements:

I a. Reinforced concrete structure

b. Steel liner plate and its anchorage

c. Penetration assemblies Brief descriptions of design bases for the above structural ele-ments are given in the following sections. For detailed descrip-tions, see SB-1 FSAR Section 3.8.1, Docket No. 50-443 and the Containment Design Report No. 9763.102-CDR-1.

i .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 4-4

i 4.2.2 Reinforced Concrete Structure The reinforced concrete Containment was designed to withstand all credible conditions of loadings which included construction loads, normal operating loads, test loads, loads resulting f rom the design basis accident and loads due to adverse environmental conditions.

Effects due to various loads with appropriate load factors, were combined in accordance with the requirements of Division 2. In the design emphasis was given to accident and earthquake loads.

Various combinations of load effects were investigated under both the service (including test pressure condition) and factored load conditions to determine the greatest strength required of the structural sections of the Containment.

The design was performed in accordance with the requirements of Division 2. In the design, actual rebar configuration was con-(

• sidered a'nd the liner plate was not considered as a strength ele-ment. However, interaction of the liner was considered in the analysis of the concrete containment to determine the liner behavior. Stresses and strains in rebars and concrete were deter-mined for various load conditions and compared with the design allowables of Division 2. The Containment has the capability of withstanding pressure.and temperature transient loads in excess of those associated with the LOCA without loss of functional integrity.

4 I( .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 4-5 l

l

_ . _ . . _ . - - - - - . ~ - -- -. _ - - --- --- -

4.2.3 Steel Liner Plate and Its Anchorages The steel liner plate and its anchorages were designed in accord-ance with the requirements of Division 2. For all the loading conditions (service and factored), strains in the liner plate and displacements in the liner anchors were determined and compared with the design allowables of Division 2; this ensured the leak-tightness of the liner. Force-displacement relationship of liner anchors was established f rom the experimental data. The adequacy of the liner subjected to various cyclic loads was considered using fatigue methods and limits of ASME Code Section III, Division 1.

The design of brackets and attachments connected to the Containment liner was performed in accordance with the design requirements of Article CC-3750 of Division 2.

4.2.4 Penetration Assemblies I .

The penetrations were designed to resist pressure loads, thermal loads and mechanical loads, such as piping reactions, etc. with-out loss of structural and leak-tight integrity. The anchorage system for the penetration was designed in accordance with the requirements of Division 2.

Metal portions of all penetration assemblies (including equipment hatch and personnel airlock), not backed by concrete, met the design requirements of various subsections of Division 1, as applicable.

i 4

i .

l SB-1 SIT Page No. 4-6

4.3 Materials of Construction 4.3.1 General n,

The basic construction materials used for the Containment include concrete, reinforcing steel, metallic liner plate, steel plates and pipes (sleeves) for penetrations. Detailed material specifi-cations were prepared to ;ensply with the requirements of Division

2. The materials were tested for quality, strength and other para-meters of acceptability to meet the requirements of Division 2.

The basic specifications and properties for these materials are as follows

.

s 7 4.3.2 Concrete '

, The ready mixed concrete is a dense dsrable mixture of sound coarse t * ~

aggregate, fine aggregate, cement, water and admixture in accord-ance with the material, proportioning, mixing, transporting, placing and testing requirements of Division 2. Except as noted below, the Containment was cons t ructed of concrete which has a 28 day standard compressive strength of at least 3000 psi. Conc-crete with a 28 day standard compressive attength of at least 4000 psi was specified for the base mat including the reactor pit, bottom 25 feet of the cylinder, regions around equipment hatch and personnel airlock and the region from E't. 115'-0" to 9* above the spring line. -

4 -

( ,

SB-1 SIT Page No. 4-7

4.3.2 Concrete (Cont'd.)

e The following concrete properties were used for the design: s Static Modulus of Elasticity 3.0 x 106 psi for f e ' = 3000 psi 3.605 x 106 psi for f e ' = 4000 psi Coefficient of Thermal Expansion 6.5 x 10-6 in/in/*F Poisson's Ratio 0.15 Maximum Aggregate Size 3/4" I Density of Reinforced Concrete 150 lbs/cu ft Cement Type II having moderate heat of hydration 4.3.3 Reinforcing Steel Reinforcing stcci 1: high-strength deformed billet steel bars conforming to ASTM A 615 " Specification for Deformed Billet -

Steel Bars for Concrete Reinforcement" Crade 60. This steel has a minimum tensile strength of 90,000 psi and a minimum elongation SB-1 SIT Page No. 4-8

4.3.3 Reinforcing Steel (Cont'd.)

of 7 percent in an 8" specimen'. The following material properties of reinforcing steel were used in the design:

Design Yield Strength 60,000 psi Modulus of Elasticity 30 x 106 psi Coefficient of Thermal Expansion 6.5 x 10-6 in/in/*F Reinforcing bars sizes #14 and #18 are joined by mechanical butt splices known as cadweld splices where splices are required. The splice sleeve material conforms to ASTM A 519 and meets the code

! requirements. The end plate materials for a terminated rebar, conforms to SA 537 Class 1 or approved equal. These anchorage assemblies provide mechanical anchorage for the terminated rebars predominantiy in the equipment hatch and personnel airlocks.

4.3.4 Liner Plate and Anchorage System The materials for the Containment liners are in accordance with CC-2500 of Division 2 and are as follows:

i 4.3.4.1 The steel liner is carbon steel conforming to ASME SA-516

" Specification for Carbon Steel Plates for Pressure Vessels for Moderate and Lower Temperature Service", Grade 60. This steel has a minimum yield strength of 32,000 psi and a minimum tensile

! strength of 60.000 psi with a elongation of 21% in an 8" gauge length, to failure.

I

(

, t .

i SB-1 SIT Page No. 4-9 l

l

i 1

I i

4.3.4.2 The anchorage system tees and brackets and attachments to the liner plate are ASME SA 36 or SA 516 - Grade 60 or SA 516 -

Grade 70.

4.3.4.3 All backing strips are of the same material specification as the item being welded.

4.3.4.4 Studs and stud welding materials are in accordance with the re-quirements of UE&C Specification No. 9763-WS-4B.

4.3.4.5- All welding materia'.s conform to the requirements of UE&C Speci-fication No. 9763-WS-4A and ASME Section II, Material Specifica-tion Part C -

Welding Rods, Electrodes and Filler Metals.

4.3.4.6 All liner material are normalized and sections in excess of 5/8" thickness were impact tested to 15 ft. lbs. at 20*F in accordance with the requirements of Division 2. For penetration, the Equip-ment Hatch and Personnel Lock,.the test temperature was specified as -10*F in the heat affected zone and -25 F in the parent metal.

4.3.4.7 When required, welds were Post-weld heat treated in accordance l

with the requirements of Division 2.

4.3.4.8 The following additional liner plate properties were used for the design.

Modulus of Elasticity 29 x 106 psi Coefficient of thermal expansion 6.5 x 10-6 in/in/ F Poisson's Ratio 0.30 Corrosion of the liner plate is minimized by a protective coating on the interior surface in accordance with UE&C Specification 9763.006-41-7.

I i

SB-1 SIT Page No. 4-10 l

4.3.5 Equipment Hatch, Personnel Airlock and Penetration Sleeves The materials for equipment hatch, personnel airlock and penetra-tion sleeves are as follows:

Equipment Hatch ASME SA 516, Gr. 60 Normalized Personnel Locks ASME SA 516, Gr. (0 Normalized or Gr. 70 Normalized Rolled piping penetration sleeves ASME SA 516, Gr. 60 Normalized Seamless piping penetration sleeves SA 333, Gr. 1 Fuel Transfer Sleeve ASME SA 240, Type 304 Stainless Steel The portions of the Equipment Hatch and Personnel Lock, within the jurisdiction of Division 1, were designed and detailed by the Fabricator.

( -

I -

SB-1 SIT Page No. 4-11

\

4.4 Figures Figure 4-1: Typical Section through Containment Showing Boundaries of ASME Section III, Division 2 Code Figure 4-2: Containment Structure Equipment Hatch with Compression Type Personnel Airlock Figure 4-3: ~ Containment Structure - Breech Type Personnel Airlock i

i l .

l- SB-1 SIT Page No. 4-12

e PWMOsmWL (tOCs -

[

l l

C CCMTAemmesef .

F.e l#8*

teeCLOSygg maa nanna  %

g . q touspengest mafCe LOCAftON PLAN ser.11 hg*

leseSWEl b i vrTeeesi.e.

W E M 00mg pgy3g. spesso Lee EL 199'.4*

teto ... . - t C ,s .

, tar.e'iLD

- Sis *Teocstome PLAft POB CYueGOG SSSeese OP sestemeat STSUCTURES Of OftB COSGS n -

tr aetfA4 SGCTIOnes BACEED ST COneCNft-

-asme SeC. m. eev.

JarTAL SgCTsOneS taCESS ET COseCSETE.

I asas Sec.a. osv. 3

\. .--

/ i,0.

.,y

< .O P a. ,is.- . .m :. ....- w- . ..e 3r- w te L LOCE 4

I ,, 45* 0*

actfat POefeOssa OP ALL esttm housecaev.

ef f t ase aGd almt MCW E m 3<=

{ - Sysftm.aSant SGC.M.Osw e2

. M . lAs* TeeCE LeGG PLAft pot anaf Aaeo Ptf tIfI# Mat " " '*v.

almt SECTIOes E. Osw 2 -- pat anat gesOf Pa87 08 k

EL14fe'.0= COnetWl*=y 1 IL e-137 0*__ 4 4 4 '

,,, , [ ,

lasCtOSuet guaceoG anaf ,

40inte C0045 g 7 Lao .0=

haSt asa h stACf08 P1T

, , t L.1-14 7*. 3 *

'5 T 0* Otaast ?? e _l l

l TYPICAL SECTION THROUGH CONTAINMENT PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SHOWING BOUNDARIES OF ASME SECTION til, gs SEABROOK STATION - UNIT 1 DIVISION 2 CODE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST REVISION FIGURE 4-1

55 PO N

v5 4 77 az =

50 $

Oy Q

r -

lrc

.EI se s 7

ll B

y ,1 l5 ui

. t2i F" 7

r e

• b 4-a W

yW -

W

>ya 6 8>  :

,- r- -'

ai b 1

sd0 <8

=-

2 ga .

!= Mt i _8

~~~ A m 5, 55 5, 554 i ~

E 89 ~~

8 7

-- O y -

-jh- F

-h4]-

W~!

q < o5 Q

ov - _ _ _ . . ,_

\ 3,M-s<5 E7 l yI

.o .i Q>-

.u .. ,. o <

. a .. ..

r , . , .

.. . , . 4 g:;

5y y3 s ,

e

• ;o,

• "* * $=

,e 9.w g 8 w

=* - , . .

- s. e-r-

a 3

..I_:, :

. .d .

s e

s,,

.. ... a i V

r- O t.

e s a

:. x g

. teen c .o< ;

8 r- .. .

d * = .i ..

.:t o..s./2 g '* 3

, i* - ' d? '.i 'I *

[ ,;, , , k.f. . ' ' * *I..

, wygd- ' . ,Q Q .. i_j .a ,e

. u i,.W + f i , a 4 M oyd yi,,,

~n e ao sd j g bh I ' " I~cTar . t: ,_

h -

. _ gs.: 3 *,,d . .-I - A, d A E _w' h ~

s 4 * -l 5 ' i

f. ' {1;1 I

. _ _ ., 's<= SS. i.

b. '- -

d ra : 0.3.u z .

= a t / -: s : :: n em s O s< d w*<&s *s

( E O e e e= y

. gw_:r ..  ;

gg x ,

I 3$$E h.t;i5,5-~ j;.

hs ., o

t. .;,

N

^ _.,

i .

l l

l

! ' 20'- 0*

i FACE TO FACE OF GAsRET I e 3 . no s or . ,. . ..

[hle STUBS . 24 svuos pen M'M, P_b L ).; ,

10l Row touALLY spaCEO l .,  %$- c" II

+a 5W (Tw / Ej -

r ,t a..<Ju htECit.70n. W .~ c z<>n,,

NETRATION t-a ei i

on- mm ,

4 N i ci FIELO .ELDED 1

\ f" p Ts. I Wif I ONLY})

. ' EL. a s'- o' u -d

\ g_

g gp ,,,,, ^)q

+'tV]T\ ELECTRitAL rp

+ PER$oMNE LOCn (g,,.

\ 'd l g g -

q _1

e. :

i NIwoE lT L,

c0NTn0L p--' p.:, m yg f. ,, L I

3/8" LINEN ( ['-;, -

gii

+e PANEL L

• INSIDE CNTMT.  %.'. ,

,3/g" LINEN PL.y ~ S-4 8  ;,J - e SECTION A.A MS908 CNTMT.I lWT4p {,q

! .! / @

l SECTION 0 5 PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE BREECH TYPE SEABROOK STATION - UNIT 1 PERSONNEL AIRLOCK CONTAINMENT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST REVISION l FIGURE 4-3

5.0 CONSTRUCTION The cylinder and dome liners were erected independent of the place-ment of concrete in the cylinder and done. Wind girders were used on the liner during construction to resist wind and construction loads. The liner was subjected to survey control during its erection to maintain specified tolerances for overall roundness, plumbness and local deviations. Deviations from specified toler-ances were corrected prior to concrete placement. The liner of the completed structure was substantially true to theoretical shape.

The dome liner was fabricated and ass'embled on the ground, and was erected in place in two lifts.

Cylinder concrete was placed in approximately 5'-0" lifts. Con-crete placement rates were monitored and restricted throughout i placement.

• Concrete placement in two areas of the cylinder was done separately from the surrounding concrete. These areas are the construction blockouts around the equipment hatch and the personnel airlock. The cylinder and the dome liners were used as the interior formwork and the exterior formwork was tied to the liner plate by means of approved methods. During the placement of concrete, the thickness of the cylinder was locally increased at the junction of the cylinder with the base mat, where rebar placement was out of t

tolerance.

For detailed construction data, see SB-1 Containment Construction Report.

I I

i i

k -

l SB-1 SIT l

Page No. 5-1 l

1

. . _ . - ~ . ,

6.0 . STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST (SIT) 6.1 General Description Af ter completion of the construction of the Containment structure and simultaneously. with the integrated leakage rate test (ILRT),

the Structural Integrity Test (SIT) was performed. The entire test (SIT + ILRT) was performed in the period of March 15, 1986 through March 21, 1986. The ILRT started at 39 psig SIT depressurization plateau af ter all the specified SIT -measurements at this pressure plateau were completed. SIT measurements at the next depressuriza-tion plateau (26 psig) resumed after about 62 hours7.175926e-4 days <br />0.0172 hours <br />1.025132e-4 weeks <br />2.3591e-5 months <br /> from data acquisition at 39 psig pressure plateau.

6.1.1 The basis for the performance of the SIT was UE&C Specification f No. 9763.006-5-5, Structural . Integrity Test, Revision 3, and Technical Procedure No. TP-13, Structural Integrity Test, Revision 3.. These documents are presented in Appendices C and F

respectively.

(

6.1.2 Brewer Engineering Laboratories, a unit of Teledyne Engineering Services (hereinafter referred to as the SIT Contractor), was con-

.tracted to provide, install and monitor all required deflection

(

i instrumentation and perform crack mapping under the supervision of United Engineers & Constructors Inc. Brewer Engineering was also responsible to prepare a report on the test results.

I 1

l

\

- i .

i SB-1 SIT Page No. 6-1

6.1.3 Detailed responsibilities of various organizations in the conduct-ance of the S1T are discussed in the Technical Procedure TP-13 (Appendix F).

6.1.4 All pressurization equipment, piping and control were furnished and operated by New Hampshire Yankee Start-Up Test Department (NHY STD).

The testing. was performed using atmospheric (oil-free) air. The Containment was subjected to the test pressure of 60.2 psig (115%

of design pressure of 52 psig) in five approximately equal pressure increments. See Figure 6-1 for Containment pressure cycles. The specified pressure plateaus were 0,13, 26, 39, 52 and 60 psig, both during pressurization and depressurization. After observing at least one hour hold period at each pressurization /depressurization plateau, all SIT data were recorded; the pressure was held constant at each specified pressure plateau for as long as it took to acquire I all data. Cracks were monitored and mapped at each pressurization plateau and at 39.0 psig and 0.0 depressurization plateau.

Pressurization was conducted at a uniform rate of approximately 2.8 psig per hour, but not to exceed 3.5 psig per hour. Depressuri-zation was conducted at a uniform rate of approximately 4.8 to 4.9 psig per hour, but not to exceed 5 psig.

6.1.5 Temperature differential between the Containment interior and the Containment enclosure space was maintained less than or equal to 65 F.

( .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 6-2

(

6.1.6 The primary considerations during the SIT were to make deflection measurements at selected sections, and to monitor and map crack pattern at predetermined locations. Appendix D provides SIT predicted and acceptable data. All acceptable values are 30%

higher than the predicted values. Acceptable values for the test results were used to determine whether the Containment was react-ing within the upper boundary of the design and to decide whether it was safe to proceed to the next higher pressure plateau.

Direct current differential transducers (DCDT's) were utilized for displacement measurement. The deflection measurements (Figure 3 in Appendix C) include the following:

1. Diametrical growth of the cylinder. Radial deflections of the cylinder.

It

2. Radial defl'ections of the, cylinder around the Equipment Hatch and Personnel Airlock.

3. Diameter changes of the Equipment Hatch and the Personnel Airlock.

4. Vertical displacements of the cylinder near the spring line relative to the base mat.

5. Vertical displacements of the dome at the apex and two other approximately equal spaced intermediate points between the apex and the spring line.

t. .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 6-3

o 6.1.7 The deflection recovery 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br /> (approximately) after complete depressurization was evaluated to interpret the behavior of the Containment.

6.1.8 Cracks were monitored and mapped during the SIT at all designated locations shown on Figures 6, 7 and 8, and sheet A6 through A9.1 in Appendix C. The mapping areas include the following

1. Area near the spring line (Ref. Sh. #A6)

2. Area near the' aid-height of the cylinder (Ref. Sh. #A6)

3. Area near the cylinder-to-base mat intersection (Ref. Sh. #A7)

4. Areas near Personnel Airlock and Equipment Hatch (Ref. Sh. #A8 and A9)

5. Area near Electrical penetrations (Ref. Sh. #A9.1)

Areas noted in Items 1 ~ through 4 above were selected based on requirements of CC-6233. Area near electrical penetrations was selected based on pretest inspection.

l .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 6-4 l

6.1.9 Additional considerations were given during the SIT to address NRC concerns (Appendix L) relative- to the following items:

Potential voids behind the Containment liner plate at Elevation

(-) 23.0', Azimuth 350*.

The additional instrument IG29 was installed on the liner plate at this location to measure radial displacement.

Crack patterns at locations of multiple in-line cadwelds.

Mult iple in-line cadwelds were identified to exist on some of the -ertical rebars located in areas identified on Sheets A7 and A9.1 of Appendix C.

6.1.10 The exterior concrete and the interior steel liner were inspected before and after the SIT.

I 6.1.11 An equipment protection list was prepared and necessary actions were taken to protect all pressure sensitive structures and equip-ment / components.

6.1.12 A comparison of measured test data (for all pressure plateaus) with predicted and acceptable values is given in Appendix 1.

Section 10.0 contains a comparison of test data with analytical and acceptable values at peak pressure plateau of 60.2 psig.

Deflection recovery 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br /> (approx.) after depressurization is also retabulated in Section 10.0.

6.1. f3 Section.11.0 addresses evaluations of accuracy of measurements, deviations and safety margins.

SB-1 SIT j

Page No. 6-5

l

'l

! 6.1.14 UE&C as the Designer was present at the site during the SIT. The Authorized Nuclear Inspector (ANI) was notified about the test.-

l and the test was witnessed by the ANI.

1 6.1.15 Chronological Log of all SIT activities is ine'luded in Appendix M.

6.2 Preparation (Pretest)

Prior to the SIT, the f ollowing steps were taken to ensure the successful conductance of the SIT.

6.2.1 All interior and exterior access facilities, such as platforms,.

scaffolding, cranes, etc. were provided. See Appendix F.

6.2.2 The annulus space between the Containment and the enclosure build-ing was inspected to ensure that sufficient clearance is available I between the Containment and adjacent structures. Platforms, ladders, etc. were modified, as required, to assure at least 1 1/2"

! free growth of the Containment wall.

6.2.3 The 2 ton temporary monorail inside the Containment was removed prior to the SIT because the monorail was not designed for differ-erential movement during the SIT.

6.2.4 All unncessary construction equipment was removed f rom the a nulus space. All pressure sensitive structure and equipment / components were protected, vented or removed and a checkoff list (Appendix E) was prepared to ensure such work.

6.2.5 All temporary lighting, power and ventilation were installed as necessary.

1 .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 6-6

r-6.2.6 All sealings for the Containment were completed. 'The equipment hatch cover was installed in place and the 0-ring seals were pressure tested.

6.2.7 Pretest inspections of the accessible Containment interior liner and exterior concrete surface were performed to determine if the liner or concrete was damaged or exhibited any localized distress.

Inspection was also conducted to evaluate restrictive items, if any, attached to the liner sytem with rigid connections which would interfere with liner free growth. Pretest inspections were performed by YNSD Start-Up Test Department (STD) in accordance with requirements of " General Test Procedure GT-M-106" (Appendix G). Reports on pretest inspections are included in Appendix J.

6.2.8 Designated concrete mapping areas (including additional mapping area determined from pretest inspection) were painted with white f paint and marked with one-foot square grid lines prior to the start of the SIT. See Appendix C.

6.2.9 All data on predicted and acceptable deflections, and crack dimensions and patterns, were provided. Also, the format of re-cording all' data was provided (Appendix C).

6.2.10 All instrument support stands were-installed per procedure included in Appendix H.

I 6.2.11 All necessary instrumentation and data acquisition equipment for this test (including connection to wiring, grounding and power cable) were installed, operated and calibrated per Spec. 5-5 (Appendix C) and procedure included in Appendix H.

l

(

l

~

l

\ -

l SB-1 SIT f Page No. 6-7

(

6.2.12 The computer-based multi-channel data acquisition system was in-stalled at Elevation 0.0' in the electrical penetration area adjacent to the Containment. Prior to connecting the ins t rume n-tation cables to the data acquisition, each cable was checked for proper identification, continuity and leakage to ground.

6.2.13 Instrumentation for monitoring and recording temperatures inside and outside the Containment was installed.

6.2.14 bewpoint hydrometers were installed inside the Containment to I monitor and record Containment internal dewpoint temperatures.

6.2.15 Test gages were installed to monitor Containment pressures.

These gages were calibrated prior to use.

6.2.16 Communications were established between monitoring stations, the I. data acquisition area and th*e compressor station area.

• 6.2.17 The STD Director was responsible to make sure that all pretest inspections and surveys were complete, and all seals, instrument

~

j calibration and equipment would perform their intended . functions.

The STD Director was also responsible to provide and maintain restricted test areas; unauthorized personnel were prevented f rom

- entering these areas.

t 6.2.18 All related test procedures (Section 7.0) were developed, reviewed and approved.

l 6.2.19 All personnel involved in the performance of the test were briefed.

i i

i 1( .

! SB-1 SIT

I l Page No. 6-8 i

-, y ee.., -,wm +v--- - , - , - - - - - - - - - , , - ,,,,-er,,v--om,r---,, ----,--,,----------~e,----.--rn,-,- e,---, e we-,vn,w- - - - - - , - ------e- p er,-

i 6.2.20 Authorized Nuclear Inspector (ANI) and UE&C Field QA were notified of the test.

6.2.21 The Unit Shift Supervisor and Shift Test Director were notified that the test was about to commence.

6.3 Conductance The SIT was conducted in accordance with the requirements of UE&C Spec. 5-5 (Appendix C) and the final test procedure 1-PT(I)-36 (Appendix H). Checkoff lists on pressurization /depressurization were prepared to verify that all areas under the responsibility of various personnel were completed before authorizing pressurization /

depressurization to the next plateau. These lists were signed off by the following personnel:

I' SIT Contractor's Senior Test Engineer ANI UE&C Field QA UE&C Engineering (as Designer)

SIT Test Director

\ .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 6-9

i 6.3.1 Figure 5 in Appendix C shows planned pressurization and depressuri-

-zation schedule and pressure plateaus. Figure 6-1 shows Contain-ment actual pressure cycles. The predetermined pressure plateaus are 0.0, 13, 26, 39, 52, 60, 52, 39, 26, 13 and 0.0 psig. Table 6-1 shows dates, times, pressures and temperatures for' SIT.

6.3.2 At the predetermined pressure plateaus, all required data were recorded at least one hour af ter achieving the required pressure plateau. Before proceeding to the next pressure plateau, all measured displacements were compared with the predicted values by the Designer in order to ensure that there were no indications that the Containment was responding in an unacceptable manner.

6.3.3 The exterior concrete surface of the Containment was irspected for crack patterns. All cracks 0.01 inch in width or greater were

~

mapped and monitored at the predetermined areas at each pressuriza-I tion plateau and at 39.0 psig ~and 0.0 psig- depressurization plateaus. Photographs of each cracking area were also taken at each mapping time. All related concrete cracking data were evalu-ated by the Designer.

6.3.4 Temperature differential between the Containment interior and the Containment enclosure space was monitored and reviewed to ensure-that it did not exceed 65*F.

6. 3. 5' In order to get all required displacement and crack recovery infor-mation,_the monitoring continued for about 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br /> after 0.0'psig depressurization plateau was achieved. Acceptable recovery was achieved.

( -

SB-1 SIT Page No. 6-10

i

~

6.3.6 At no time during the SIT were any observations made or incidents occurred which required delay in,the test or caused concern about the safety of the Containment.

6.4 Posttest Af ter the completion of the SIT, all test equipment was checked and those which had exhibited erratic behavior or became loose during the test were identified. This is addressed in the SIT Contractor's Technical Report TR-20422(842) which is included in Appendix I.

All equipment and temporary supports, etc. were removed. A final survey of the Containment interior liner and outside concrete surface was made in order to determine if there were any visible signs of permanent damage or localized distress due to pressuriza-tion. None were found. The posttest inspections were performed t

in accordance with' the requirements of General Test Procedure GT-M-106 (Appendix G). Reports on the posttest inspections are presented in Appendix K.

I .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 6-11

6.5 Figure Figure 6-1: Containment Pressure Cycles I . .

l l

l l

l l

! ( ,

SB-1 SIT Page No. 6-12 l

SEABROOK SI ATION UNIT I SIT /lLRT TEST SEQUENCF NOTES:

1.

• SIT Data Points.

2. After observing at least one hour hold peribd at each pressurization /depressurization plateau, all SIT data were

~

r PEAK PRESSURE SIT h 60.2 psig .I 3. ILRT started at 39.0 psig 60 f '*" ** " * **"*

y -

j ILRT (By others)

• -.5 4. Final SIT data were recorded I

• f _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ at about 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br /> after

A 50

/ ']* f

,---__------,'s comp l ete depressurization.

j i -

i

// \

\

n y 40 r;

,/

'.* l-- - - - - I i i

\, \ t E

I i SIT f

[!

N 30 -

\,

T U, 20 -

/ .

P / 'g

• S .N h,

S i

'o

/

/, i

- . -r o , ,

, _____4.__._ y o 20 40 so 80 toc 120 140 1

3/15/86 3'20'"6 07:w HOURS i335 i .

PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE CONTAINMENT PRESSURE CYCLES SEABROOK STATION - UNIT 1 CONTAINMENT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST REVISION l FIGURE 6-1

7 f TABLE 6-1 (Sheet 1 of 4)

DATES, TIMES, PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES FOR SIT MEASUREMENTS Temperatures' F Date Time Pressure (psig) Inside Outside Dewpoint March 15, 1986 07:14 0.0 78.30 53.43 48.51 (1) 15 8:59 2.00 84.64 53.88 49.93 15 10:59 9.38 84.21 54.14 51.36 15 11:59 12.06 84.25 54.95 51.79 15 12:26 13.25 84.15_ 53.82 51.59 15 13:29 13.10 79.86 54.73 51.51 (1) 15 15:59 15.42 82.96 55.38 52.58 I 15 *17:59 21.08 84.01 58.55 53.21 ,

15 18:59 23.47 84.34 59.06 53.94 15 19:59 26.17 84.50 58.98 54.27 15 21:03 26.0 81.14 59.46 53.61 (1) 15 23:02 26.45 81.81 59.09 54.02 15 23:59 29.10 83.80 59.13 54.75 16 1:59 34.64 84.56 59.17 56.14 16 3:33 39.11 85.05 59.09 56.48 16 4:36 -38.9 82.09 59.40 56.26 (1)

I .

i SB-1 SIT

4 TABLE 6-1 (Sheet 2 of 4)

DATES, TIMES, PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES FOR SIT MEASUREMENTS Temperatures F Date Time Pressure (psig) Inside Outside Dewpoint March 16, 1986 6:59 40.28 83.46 59.19 56.35 16 8:59 45.93 84.96 58.91 57.41 16 10:59 51.78 85.43 58.91 58.92 16 11:03 51.99 85.48 59.40 57.83 16 12:06 51.8 82.79 59.61 58.37 (1) 16 15:07 51.78

• 81.92 59.47 58.13 16 15:59 53.90 83.85 59.03 58.34

( 16 17:59 59.55 85.'30 59.73 59.31 16 18:18 60.45 85.38 59.91 59.32 16 19:23 60.2 83.06 59.93 59.35 (1) 16 22:24 59.0 81.11 60.2 60.31 16 22:59 55.20 78.99 60.07 58.00 16 23:19 54.56 78.50 60.57 57.55 16 23:59 51.36 77.45 60.41 56.70 17 01:03 51.8 81.48 60.56 56.61 (1) 17 01:59 47.33 80.15 60.56 55.60 17- 02:59 45.48 77.94 59.82 53.24 17 03:59 40.42 76.86 60.53 50.78 17 08:11 39.6 82.26 60.72 52.10 (1)(2)

\ .

i SB-1 SIT

I TABLE 6-1 (Sheet 3 of 4)

DATES, TIMES, PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES FOR SIT MEASUREMENTS Temperatures F Date Time Pressure (psig) Inside Outside Dewpoint March 19, 1986 16:51 50.63 84.01 64.45 55.70 (3) 19 17:21 49.94 82.15 64.11 55.12 19 17:51 47.55 78.56 62.29 53.82 19 19:07 41.34 74.78 64.66 51.17 19 20:50 32.89 72.19 64.'30 48.52 19 22:47 25.02 71.97 64.23 44.10 I 19 23:53 25.2 75.37 64.20 44.16 (1) 2k) 00:50 24.58 74.28 63.66 43.50 20 01:50 19.84 70.09 63.71 40.06 20 02:50 15.02 68.26 63.41 36.25 20 3:24 12.29 67.55 63.93 34.74 20 04:28 12.5 73.76 64.91 36.23 (1) t .

SB-1 SIT

( TABLE 6-1 (Sheet 4 of 4)

DATES, TIMES, PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES FOR SIT MEASUREMENTS Temperatures *F Date Time Pressure (psig) Inside Outside Dewpoint March 20, 1986 05:50 8.57 68.67 64.60 32.32 20 06:50 4.74 67.43 64.45 28.99 20 07:50 2.01 67.92 64.18 26.86 20 10:50 0.85 74.66 63.95 27.88 20 -11:50 0.76 75.56 64.44 28.37 20 14:37 0.0 21 '07:19 0.0 21 08:52 0.0 (1)

{-

Notes:

(1) Primary pressure plateaus are anderlined.

(2) ILRT activities started af ter SIT data were recorded at 39.6 psig

~

depressurization plateau.

(3) Depressurization started after completion of ILRT activities.

SB-1 SIT l

7.0 TEST PROCEDURES In order to perform the SIT in accordance with the requirements of Article CC-6000 of Division 2, various test procedures were developed.

These procedures are as follows:

7.1 Technical Procedure Technical Procedure . No. TP-13, " Structural Integrity Test" was de-veloped to serve as the basis for Specification 9763.006-5-5. This procedure identifies the work scopes of UE&C, YNSD STD and the SIT Contractor in the conductance of the test. TP-13 addresses, in great detail, all access facilities such as platforms, scaffoldings, cranes, lighting, power, HVAC, communications, etc. required before, during and after the SIT. TP-13 and Spec. 5-5 describe the locations of instrumentation for various displacements, and concrete crack i

• mapping areas. Planned pressurization /depressurization schedule and pressure plateaus are also shown in these documents. Spec. 5-5 and TP-13 are presented in Appendices C and F respectively.

7.2 Containment Surface Inspection (Pretest and Posttest)

The ASME code requires that the exposed exterior concrete surface and the interior steel liner surface of the Containment shall be inspected before and after the SIT. General Test Procedure CT-M-106,

" Containment Surface Inspection" was prepared to perform such inspec-tions. The objectives of this procedure are as follows:

a. Perform visual inspections of the exposed accessible interior and l

exterior surfaces of the Containment.

l

( .

i SB-1 SIT Page No. 7-1

l

b. Perform crack surveys at readily, accessible locations of the exterior concrete surf ace of-the Containment. l Procedure GT-M-106 is presented in Appendix G.

7.3 Structural Integrity Test (Conductance of SIT)

Primary Containment Structural Integrity Test Procedure No.1-PT(I)-36 was developed to perform the SIT of the Containment structure. This procedure includes, in part, the following documents furnished by the SIT Contractor:

4

a. Technical Report TR-20422(836): Procedures for calibration, in-stallation and operation of instrumentation necessary to conduct the SIT.

• I b. Technical Report TR-20'422(837): Installation Procedure for tempo-rary f rames for the SIT.

c. Technical Report TR-20422(835): SIT Contractor's quality assur-ance plan.

Pressurization /depressurization concurrence and sign-off sheets are also included in this procedure.

Procedure 1-PT(I)-36 is presented in Appendix H.

s f

4

( -

l .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 7-2

\

~

l ,

l l

s

, i l

i i i

8.0 INSTRUMENTATION 8.1 General The proposed locations of instruments for measuring various deflec-tions of r.he Containment are shown on Figure 3 in Specification 5-5 (Appendix C). Additionally, the Data Recording sheets Al through A5 in Spec. 5-5 identify the specific elevations and azimuths of the individual instrument. As-built instrumentation locations are shown in the SIT Contractor's Reports TR-20422(836) and TR-20422(842).

These reports are included .in Appendices H and I respectively.

Report TR-20422(836) provides a set of procedures for the calibration, ,

~

installation and operation of instrumentation necessary to monitor and record the test data (displacements, crack widths, etc.). For detailed descriptions of deflection measurement instrumentation, see the above reports.

[ .

A surmary of various types of instruments used during the SIT'is

.given below:

8.2 Extensometers

! Displacement measurements were made using Trans-Tek direct current I

l differential transducers (DCDT's) with integral signal conditioning.

DCDT's are displacement transducers producing a DC voltage output proportional to displacements. The calibration of DCDT provides a scale f actor (in units of inches per volt) which allows the conversion of raw voltage to units of inches.

SB-1 SlT Page No. 8-1

t Where it was possible to install rigid mountings isolated from the Containment wall, the DCDT core was attached to a spring-loaded plunger. The plunger was preloaded to impinge against the Containment wall. As the wall deflected, the plunger followed the wall, thereby

~

moving the core which in turn induced voltage change proportional to the wall displacement.

Diametrical, vertical (both for cylinder and dome) and equipment hatch radial displacement measurements were made utilizing a taut wire de-vice and a DCDT. The taut wire device was 1/16" diameter Invar steel.

The invar wire was fixed to the liner plate at one end (fixed) and connected to specially-designed taut wire bracket at the other end.

The bracket was designed to maintain a constant tension in the wire at all times independent of deflection. Relative motion between the taut wire device and the fixed end was transmitted by the lever arm to the DCDT (Figures 1 and 2 in Appendix I).

Each DCDT was mechanically calibrated in the field just prior to installation. A precision micrometer head was used to determine the sensitivity and linearity of each individual DCDT. No temperature compensation was required because of the thermal properties of the Invar wire. -The coefficient - of thermal expansion of the wire is less than 0.2 X 10-6 in/in/*F.

l' l

l l

t .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 8-2

Sixty-six (66) - displacement measurements were made and these are itemized as follows:

Seven (7) Containment diametrical Fifteen (15) Containment radial Twelve (12) Containment radial around equipment hatch Twelve (12) Containment radial around personnel airlock Two (2) Equipment hatch diametrical Two (2) Personnel airlock diametrical Four (4) Vertical near spring line Twelve (12) Dome non-vertical (six vertical deflections were computed from these non-vertical deflection measurements).

8.3 Temperature Measurement Devices i

Twenty-six (26) Foxboro dual element RTD's were used ' to monitor temperature inside . Containment. Two (2) additional Foxboro RTD's were installed outside Containment, one at approximately 116' elevation and one at (-) 26' elevation, to obtain Containment wall differential te:Operatures. The RTD accuracy was + 0.28'F with sensitivity of j; 0.05*F. These RTD's are permanent plant equipment.-

8.4 Dewpoint Measurecent Devices Six (6) Foxboro lithium chloride type dewpoint sensors were used to monitor humidity inside Containment. Sensor accuracy was j; 1.78'F with sensitivity of f; 0.5'F. These dewcells are permanent plant equipment.

( .

I SB-1 SIT Page No. 8-3 l

i

-8.5 Pressure Gages and Pressurization Equipment

~

Pressure Gages Two (2) 0-150 psig pressure gages were installed in the pressurization line piping - to monitor pressure during pressurization and during the Containment inspections at each pressure plateau. Gages were Ashcraf t t

Bourdon tube type with an accuracy of + 1/2% full scale.

Pressurisation Equipment.

Eight (8) Atlas-Copco oil-free air compressors were rented for SIT /ILRT. The total capacity was approximately 9600 cfm. Two para-llel af tercoolers and a refrigerated air dryer were installed down-stream of the air compressors. Maximum pressurization rate was 3.5 psi /hr with an average rate of approximately 2.8 psi /hr.

I Depressurization was accomplished via the pressurization path with the compressors disconnected. The maximum depressurization rate was 4.9 psi /hr with an average rate of approximately 4.8 to 4.9 psi /hr.

8.6 Data Acquisition System The computer-based multichannel data acquisition system (Figure 1 of Report TR-20422(836) in Appendix H) is comprised of the following:

DCDT's used to sense the actual deflection Cabling to the instrument setup A Fluke Model 2240 data logger A Hewlett-Packard Model 85 microcomputer l A Hewlett-Packard Model 82901M disc drive i

i A Hewlett-Packard Model 82905B printer l .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 8-4

The system had the capability to perform signal averaging, monitor data channel stability, and convert DCDT input signals to displace-ments in inches by storing calibration factors for each DCDT. The system has the further capabilities of data storage on magnetic disc or tape as well as generating measured and computed displacement data.

8.7 Optical Measurements Crack patterns were recorded for all cracks by visually inspecting the crack mapping areas. Crack widths of 0.010 inch or greater were measured using optical comparators with a resolution of 0.001 inch.

Accuracy of the optical comparators was confirmed by visual compari-son with gage blocks.

i i

a

( -

SB-1 SIT Page No. 8-5

9.0 TEST DATA 1

Required data accumulated during the structural integrity test and reported by the SIT Contractor are presented in Appendix I. Dates, times, pressures and temperatures for SIT measurements are tabulated in Table 6-1. Figure 6-1 shows the Containment pressure cycles. .

SIT predicted and acceptable data prepared by UE&C are contained in Appendix D. ,

All data related to deflections at pressure 60.2 psig are retabulated 1 in Section 10.0. Discussions on test data, and evaluations are con-tained in Sections 10.0 and 11.0 respectively.

Containment pretest and posttest surface inspection reports are presented in Appendices J and K respectively.

i i

4 k

SB-1 SIT Page No. 9-1

10.0 COMPARISON OF TEST DATA WITH ANALYTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE VALUES 10.1 Genersl The comparison of test data to analytically predicted values of the same items requires a prior discussion of the following:

The Containment structure's behavior under the postulated loads.

The parameters which have significant influence on the struc-tural response to thase loads.

The analytical basis for predicted values.

These significant parameters are used to rationalize the dif ferences (or deviations) between the measured test data and predicted values.

The above items are discussed in the following sections:

10.2 Behavior and Significant Parameters The Containment s t ructure is designed as a reinforced concrete pressure vessel with the integral steel liner plate acting as a leak-tight membrane. The principal structural elements of the vessel are hemispnerical dome, cylindrical wall and circular base mat. These structural elements behave as a single integrated system under the applied loads. The Containment as a whole behaves as a membrane structure except in areas of local discontinuity, such as, large openings and intersection of the wall with the base mat and the dome (spring line). The pressure loading induces hoop and meridional tension membrane forces as primary force system, and bending moments and transverse shears locally at the discontinuity regions. The base I

a SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-1

mat has significant bending moments and shears in addition to membrane forces due to plate characteristic. The tensile membrane forces are resisted by both rebar and concrete at low stress levels. When concrete cracks, i.e. stress levels erceed the tensile strength of concrete, rebars become the principal load resisting elements. In the analysis, tensile strength of concrete (300 psi) was assumed to be approximately 1/10 of the specified concrete compressive strength (fe ). This value is significantly lower than the actual placed con-crete strength and the aged strength at the time of the S1T. Per Division 2, liner is not considered as a strength element. However, the S1T condition is essentially internal pressure without significant temperature. Therefore, the liner is, in fact, a load carrying element and becomes a significant strength element when concrete cracks.

The hoop force is the major membrane force in the membrane region of I the cylinder and is given by No = pR, where p is. the internal pressure .

and R is the cylinder radius. Stresses at pressure 60 psig will far exceedtherealistictensilestrength(7.58/ ff)ofconcreteandthe concrete will be fully cracked (vertically oriented). In fact, when internal pressure reaches approximately 35 psig, the radial displace-ment is controlled by the effective steel (including liner, and hoop and seismic rebars) in the hoop direction. Therefore, the analyti-cally predicted values of radial displacements for pressures in excess of 35 psig are quite accurate. As noted before, the role of liner was not considered in developing the predicted values of displacements (Appendix D); if required, these values may be adjusted to include the

~

effects of the liner plate. The meridional membrane force in the cylnder is given by Nx = pR - Dead Load. Horizontally oriented cracks 2

( .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-2 l

I

a may develop depending upon the concrete tensile ' strength. These cracks would occur first at higher elevations because less internal pressure is required to overcome the dead loads at higher elevations.

Under the SIT conditions, peak pressure 60 psig may or may not induce horizontal cracks in the cylinder. As noted before, in the analysis concrete cracking was based on concrete tensile strength of 300 psi.

Under the SIT conditions, the actual concrete tensile strength could reach as high as 600 psi. Therefore, the analytically predicted vertical displacements of the cylinder which are dependent on concrete

tensile strength, could be well above the measured test displacements.

Additionally, the role of liner plate was not considered in developing the predicted values.

4 The hoop and meridional forces in the done are as given by l pR,and g - Dead Load, respectively. As.with the meridional stresses j 2 2 in the cylinder, the membrane done stresses may or may not induce I

concrete cracking, depending upon the actual concrete tensile strength. Dome displacements are dependent on this parameter plus l the role of liner which was not considered in developing the predicted i

values.

In addition, the dome to cylinder junction is a discontinuity region of the shell because of potential mismatch in hoop stiffness i of the two shell parts. No mismatch is present when dome's hoop stiffness is one-half (1/2) of the cylinder's hoop stif fness. When both the cylinder and the done are uncracked, the mismatch is partially compensated by the reduced stif fness of the dome. As the cylinder hoop forces produce cracking, the cylinder stiffness reduces signifi-cantly and the mismatch increases. If cracking occurs in the dome, the mismatch is small. The change in hoop stiffness occurs because the stiffness of a cracked section is governed by the area of steel (rebar plus liner). By design, done hoop rebar area is one-half (1/2 )

the cylinder hoop rebar and by analysis, dome hoop force is one-half (1/2) the cylinder hoop force.

t SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-3

4 When a significant stif fness mismatch exists, the dome-displacements l' are less than those for the cylinder and the discontinuity effects introduce bending moments and transverse shears to restore the com-patibility of the two parts. The effect on the displacement behavior is the ' pulling-in' of the cylinder and ' pulling-out' of the dome.

The bending moments produce a variation in meridional stresses across the sections and may produce or increase concrete cracking locally at the spring line.

The cylinder to the base mat junction is another discontinuity region where local bending moments and ' transverse shears develop due to the discontinuity effects. The cylinder at this region undergoes very 1 small radial displacement because of large restraining effect of the base mat. Due to large discontinuity moment in the meridional direction, the cylinder may experience partial cracking on the inside face.

The equipment hatch and personnel airlock are large openings which i

disrupt the membrane behavior of the shell. Local bending moments and transverse shears develop around the openings due to the discon-tinuity effects and also there are local increases in the membrane forces. The area around the opening is thickened locally with a boss l and a transition zone where rebar quantities are significantly in-creased in order to maintain the rebar stress levels within the design allowables of Division 2. Due to bending moments, stresses vary across the sections. Cracking, if it occurs, may be on one side and l extends partially into the section. The stiffness characteristic of the sections depends on the extent of cracking and hence, the concrete tensile strength. The effects of a stiff uncracked boss on the local

(. .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-4 i

, _ , _ . , , . . _ . . _ . . _ . , , . _ . . . . . _ _ . . _ _ _ , _ . . _ _ - , _ _ . . _ _ , _ . _ - _ - _ . . . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . . _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ , _ _ _ . _ _ . . . . ~ _

t displacements are to restrain the radial growth of the vertically cracked cylinder. A cracked boss will also restrain radial ' growth but to a lesser extent. Depending on the nature and extent of crack-ing in the boss area, the deformations of the opening itself can vary significantly. The dominant effect is ovalling with ' stretching out' occurring in the hoop direction. Therefore, the analytically pre-dicted displacements of the openings could vary significantly from the measured test values. Note, the analysis of the large openings for internal pressure loads was based on uncracked sections, and liner plate was not considered as a strength element.

The following summarizes the significant parameters which af fect the Containment behavior during the SIT pressurization:

1. The rebar area in the cylinder which controls the hoop stiffness and hence, the radial displacements.

2. The concrete tensile strength which determines the concrete crack patterns, i.e., at what pressure, the concrete cracks.

3. The liner plate, in reality, acts as a load sharing element when concrete is fully cracked. This would, to some extent, affect the stiffness and hence, the displacement. Note, the liner plate is not considered as a strength element per Division 2.

I The area of steel is accurately known and this permits quite accurate predictions of radial displacements. The tensile strength' l of concrete is much less accurately known, and this strongly influences the vertical growth of the Containment, dome-to cylinder

( .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-5

mismatch, stiffness of the large opening's boss area and the ovall-ing of the opening itself. The membrane hoop - forces for pressure 60 psig will produce vertical cracks in the cylinder; depending on the conuete strength, this pressure may not produce horizontal cracks in the cylinder (even at the highest elevation) or cracking in the ' dome and the large opening boss area. Combined effects of bending moments and meridional forces will produce partial concrete cracking on the inside face of the wall sections at the cylinder-to-base mat junction and probably around the large openings.

10.3 Basis for Predicted Values The Containment response was obtained using four different finite element models for the following structural elements:

1. Entire Containment cylinder, dome and mat neglecting the openings and the reactor pit.

2. The Containment base mat, the reactor pit and 55.0' of the cylindrical wall.

3. A shell segment with equipment hatch opening.

4. A shell segment with personnel airlock opening.

The model for the entire Containment considered the structure to have axisymmetric geometry neglecting the reactor pit and openings. The shell model was fixed at the top of the base mat. It was used for the analysis of axisymmetric loads such as, dead load, pressure and temperature. The finite element model used layering through the wall 4 .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-6

r thickness and represented concrete (solid elements) and all steel elements (membrane shell elements) with their appropriate position in the wall. The concrete tensile stre,ngth was assumed to be 300 psi and an iterative process was utilized to determine the ' cracking pattern' of the concrete shell consistent with the SIT peak pressure of 60 psig and -dead load. The concrete elements were assigned con-sistent orthotropic properties. Deformations, ar.d wall forces and moments were determined for each load.

The Containment base mat analysis was performed using a three dimensional finite element model of the base mat, reactor pit and 55.0' of the cylindrical wall. This portion of the cylindrical wall was included in the model in order to represent the stiffening effect of the Containment shell on the mat. The stiffening effect of the internal structures and fill mat was not considered since there is no structural connection between these structures and the base mat. The I

internal structures and the fill mat were not modelled, but the loads they transmit to the base mat were considered. Because of the symmetry, only one half of the structure was modelled. The concrete was considered to be uncracked and the reinforcing steel was not in-cluded in the model. The rock foundation was considered to be rigid.

The analysis of the equipment hatch and personnel airicek were per-formed by the finite element method using a three-dimensional model of a quadrant of the Containment cylinder and dome. Two models were used since the two openings are sufficiently separated to allow independent analysis. The concrete was assumed uncracked for all mechanical loads and cracked for thermal loads only. Symmetry and anti-symmetry boundary conditions appropriate for the loading were used. .

i

(

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-7

7--

For detailed analyses of all the structural elements of the Contain-ment, see Seabrook Containment Design Report 9763.102-CDR-1.

-10.4 Comparison of Test and Predicted Values of Displacement 10.4.1 General Displacements are a global indicator of structural behavior and as such are the best measure of all structural performance. When dis-placements are within predicted limits, the state of stress will also be within design levels. Apparent deviations from the pre-dicted limits require explanation for the causes. In addition, there must not be localized distress as indicated by local bulging and/or excessive cracking with wide crack widths.

Appendix D provides SIT predicted and acceptable values of displace-ments for v'arious pressures. Appendix I compares the measured values with the predicted and acceptable values for all pressure plateaus.

10.4.2 Radial Displacements of Cylinder All radial displacements for pressure 60.2 psig are retabulated in Table 10-1. Values of radial displacements shown for instrumenta-tion IGl, IG2, IG5, IG6, IG7 and IG8 are one-half the diametrical growth. Figures 10-1 through 10-5 exhibit analytical, acceptable and measured radial deflections of the cylindrical wall as a function of wall height.

( .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-8

The predicted maximum radial displacement was 0.97" (IG5 and IG6 at El. 89.2'); this compares to the measured value 0.73". The accept-able value is 1.26". The measured maximum radial displacement is 0.82" at IG7, E1. 59.4'; this is less than the predicted value 0.90". The measured average radial displacement (IG7 and IG8) at El. 59.4' is 0.73" which is the same as that for 105 and IG6 at El. 89.2'.

The measured average radial displacement near the spring line at peak pressure 60.2 psig is 0.593". This signifies the ' pulling-in' behavior of the cylnder at the spring line.

IG29 (E1. -23.0', Az. 350') was provided to monitor the behavior of the liner plate where potential voids were identified (Ref. Blue Sheet 047; Appendix L). The predicted maximum radial displacement at this location was 0.172" which is about 11% lower than the measured value 0.193". However, the measured value i's within the acceptable limit of 0.241". Note, IG29 is located only 7.0' above the base mat, and as such full membrane hoop force does not develop at this location. Concrete is not expected to crack in the hoop direction (i.e. vertically oriented cracks). Therefore, the radial displacements are controlled by the uncracked concrete, and the analytically predicted values may not be as accurate as for the cracked sections. See discussion in Section 10.2.

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-9

l Radial deflections increase as a function of the cylinder height from the top of the base sat and the maximum displacements develop at about 40.0' (membrane region) above the base mat, as predicted.

See Figures 10-1 through 10-5. In the membrane regions, radial displacements of the cylinder remain basically constant; near the spring line displacements are reduced due to ' pulling-in' (discon-tinuity effects) of the cylinder. The pressure range 26 to 39 psig produced sufficient hoop stresses to exceed the tensile strength of concrete and thus caused hoop cracking. See crack pattern charts in Appendix 1. Hence, for pressure range, 26 to 39 psig and above, 4

radial displacements are dependent on the ef fective area of steel in the hoop direction and the displacement predictions are quite accurate.

All changes in diaraeter and the radial displacements of the cylinder at all pressare plateaus are within the acceptable limits. The

~

cylin.det's actual deformations are in excellent agreement with pre-dictions, and accordingly, the state of stresses in the hoop rebars is compatible with design. This measure of performance is a good

[ indicator that the shell structure is behaving as designed.

! 10.4.3 Radial Displacements of Cylinder Adjacent to Equipment Hatch Table 10-2 compares respective values of radial displacements for pressure 60.2 psig. The comparison shows that all measured values are consideraS1) lower than the predicted ones; this is due to minor cracking observed in the boss area. The boss is a 'hard spot' in the membrane region of the cylindrical wall and it does i

not move under pressure as much as the balance of the wall. As

! discussed in Section 10.2, the opening introduces discontinuity in the membrane region, and due to the discontinuity effects, large f .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-10

l l

j I

bending moments develop around the opening. The combined effects of the membrane axial _ tensile forces and bending moments produce partial concrete cracking. The measured maximum radial displacement of 0.868" was recorded at channel R10; this compares to the pre-dicted maximum displacement 1.326" also at R10.

10.4.4 Equipment Hatch Diameter Change Table 10-3 compares the respective values of equipment hatch opening deformations for pressure 60.2 psig. Data for channel IG25 are scattered and questionable. See Appendix I for details. Up to and including pressure level 39 psig, the measured horizontal deforma-tions (from IG26) are within the acceptable limits. The measured horizontal deformations at pressures 60.2 and 52 psig are about 16.4% and 8.2% higher than the respective allowable values. This occurred because the predicted values were based on uncracked boss

(

sections; whereas at higher pressuies some cracking occurred around the opening, thus decreasing the stiffness and this, in turn, increased the deformations.

10.4.5 Radial Displacements of Cylinder Adjacent to Personnel Airlock Table 10-4 compares the respective values of radial displacements for pressure 60.2 psig. All measured displacements are in good agreement with the predicted values. The measured maximum dis-placement of 0.75" was recorded at channel R22, as predicted (0.935"). For behavior of the boss region around the opening, see discussion in Section 10.4.3.

SB-1 SIT I

Page No.10-11

r

(

10.4.6 Personnel Airlock Diameter Change +

Table 10-5 compares the respective values of personnel airlock

, opening deformations at pressure 60.2 psig. All measured deforma-tions are lower than the predicted values. The magnitudes of dis-placements are significantly small due to _the stiffening effect of the boss region. The ovalling of' the opening as predicted by analysis was confirmed by the measured data.

10.4.7 Vertical Displacement of Cylinder Table 10-6 presents the predicted, acceptable and measured vertical displacements .of the cylinder near spring line relative to the base mat at pressure 60.2 psig. Measurements from channels IG20 and IG21 are in good agreement. Values from IG22 are questionable; see notes in Table 10-6. Measurements from IG23 are only about 10%.

I lower than the average value of IG20 and IG21. All measured dis-placements are considerably lower than the predicted values as expected. Measured data indicate that concrete was uncracked in the meridional direction even at peak pressure. This is confirmed by the absence of significant horizontal cracks (Ref. Figure 3 of Appendix I) at the spring line. Furthermore, stresses in the meridional rebars (Ref. SB Containment Design Report 9763.102-CDR-1) at the spring line section for test pressure 60 psig are about

! 22.29 ksi, compared to the design allowable of 45 ksi and rebar yield strc_4 (fy ) of 60 ksi. Additionally, the predicted values were based on assumed concrete tensile stress of 300 psi; the actual tensile stress.(7.5e [ c) during the SIT is expected to be in the l'

range of about 580 (+) psi. The uncracked state of concrete resulted in very low vertical displacements at 60.2 psig and lower pressures.

For further discussion, see Section 10.2.

l

( .

i SB-1 SIT l Page No. 10-12 l

1

1 i

10.4.8 Vertical Displacements of Dome Table 10-7 compares the respective values of dome vertical displace-ments (at the apex and at two other approximately equally spaced intermediate points between the apex , and the spring line) at pressure 60.2 psig. All measured displacements are considerably lower than the predicted values. This was expected for reasons discussed in Sections 10.2 and 10.4.7. The 26 to 39 psig pressure l produced vertical cracking in the cylinder and this resulted in reduced hoop stiffness of the cylinder. This cracking progresses into the dome only locally at the spring line. The dome does not show significant cracking even at 60 psig. Therefore, a significant mismatch in the cylinder and dome stiffnesses exists. Addition-ally, assumed lower tensile strength of concrete also contributed to the higher predicted values. The pattern of dome displacements is in agreement with the predicted value. The ' flattening' of the f dome apex was" predicted; displacements .at the apex (IG24, El.

188.99') are lower than those at IG24a and IG24c (El. 182.4').

10.4.9 Recovery after Depressurization The recovery measurement is an indication of the elastic behavior of the Containment structure. The acceptable minimum deflection recovery 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> af ter depressurization is 70% or more of the maximum deflection (CC-6213). Final recovery readings (Appendix I) were taken about 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br /> after depressurization and these values are retabulated in Table 10-8.

6 SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-13 i

During the SlT, the significant stresses occur in the hoop rebars in the cylinder. Therefore, the overall recovery behavior is best demonstrated by the recovery of radial displacements of the cylinder. All radial measurements (IG3A through IG29) of the cylinder recovered more than 70% of the maximum displacements. The radial displacement recovery at IG3A was 58.2%, and this can be attributed to instrument error because the displacement recovery of similar channel IG3B was about 80%. All radial displacements local to the equipment hatch (R1 through R12) and the personnel airlock (R13 through 24) recovered more than 70%. About 75% of the radial displacements in the cylinder recovered 80% or more. All radial displacements local to the personnel airlock recovered about 80%;

whereas 33% of radial displacements local to the equipment hatch recovered 80% or more. Channel IG29 where potential voids (Appendix L) were identified behind the liner plate, recovered 86%, thus confirming the elastic behavior of the plate, and the absence of any local distress due to pressurization. The satisf actory recovery measurements of the cylinder are a positive indication of the elastic behavior of the Containment structure under the SlT condi-tion, as predicted.

The recovery of the equipment hatch opening deformation (IG26) was about 77.5%. Recovery measurements of the personnel airlock defor-nations were erratic; these are prone to error because of signifi-cantly small values of measured and predicted deformations.

( .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-14

All vertical measurements of the cylinder recovered about 70% or more. All dome taut wires recovered more than 70%; 80% of the wires recovered about 80% or more. Note, 20-hour recoveries for 1G23 and 1G24c-10 are 69.3% and 69.4% respectively; these are nearly equal to 24-hour minimum allowable recovery of 70% per CC-6213c. Based on an evaluation of recovery rate, it is concluded that 24-hour recoveries for these channels will exceed the minimum value allowed by the Code. Rebar stresses in the cylinder vertical re-bars (except at the cylinder junction with the base mat) are very low under the SlT conditions; therefore, there is no possibility that the structure could behave inelastically.

10.4.10 Summary Radial displacements / diameter growth of the cylinder are the best indications of shell performance. The predicted displacements are I .

in excellent agreement with the measured value. The satisfactory -

recovery measurements are a positive indication of the elastic behavior of the Containment st ructure under the SlT conditions.

The structure did not show any evidence of local distress, globally or locally.

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-15

4 10.5 Comparison of Test and Predicted Concrete Cracking 10.5.1 Ceneral The prediction of crack pattern and widths is based on behaviar of prototype Containments. The predicted maximum crack widths at peak pressure 60 psig in the membrane regions (excluding discon-tinuity regions around the large openings) are expected to be 0.025" or less, spaced approximately 18". Crack widths in the vicinity of the equipment hatch and personnel airlock may be greacer. The acceptance criteria for cracks are as follows:

a. The maximum crack width at peak pressure 60 psig is 0.035" averaged over a length of 20'-0". These exclude crack patterns in the vicinity of large openings.

t

b. Crack widths after depressurization are predicted to be less than 0.01".

Crack pattern plots for various designated areas (Appendix C) are exhibited in Appendix 1.

k .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-16

10.5.2 Areas Other Than Equipment Hatch and Personnel Airlock

a. Region near the base of the cylinder wall

'(Ref. Figure 1 of Appendix I)

Cracks were not detectable up to'and including pressure 52 psig.

Some small cracks (horizontal and vertical) developed at pressure 60.2 psig. Widths of these cracks were less than 0.01". This type of crack pattern was expected because of the behavior. of the wall at the junction with the base mat. Due to the combined effects of membrane meridional tensile force and discontinuity moment (producing tension on the inside),

cracks are expected to develop on the inside face behind the liner. Additionally, membrane hoop forces in this region are very small and, therefore, no significant vertically oriented cracks are expected to develop.

b. Region at mid-height of the cylinder wall (Ref. Figure 2 of Appendix I)

No cracks were detected up to and including pressure 26 psig.

Numerous vertically oriented cracks developed at peak pressure 60.2 psig. This was expected because hoop force is the major membrane force in the membrane region of the cylinder.

Stresses in the hoop direction at pressure 60.2 psig will far exceed the realistic tensile stress of concrete in the hoop direction and, therefore, concrete will be cracked in the hoop direction, resulting in vertically oriented cracks. Absence of significant horizontal cracks indicate that the stresses in the I .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-17

F meridional direction are, as predicted, less than the actual concrete tensile stress. See discussion in Section 10.2. The measured maximum crack (vertical) widths were 0.011"; crack spacings were ' about 15" (+). Cracks' closed tighter after depressurization; the maximum crack widths recorded after depressurization were only 0.005".

c. Region at the spring line (Ref. Figure 3 of Appendix I)

No cracks were detected up to and including pressure 26 psig.

At pressure 39 psig, several vertically oriented cracks devel-oped; maximum crack widths were 0.012". Crack spacings were about 24" (+). Cracks which developed at 39 and 52 psig, did not open up at the peak pressure 60."2 psig, i.e., maximum crack widths were still 0.012". Additi'onally, several minor (width i 0.01") horizontal cracks with large spacings were detected at the peak pressure. Most of the cracks closed to less than 0.01" at 39 psig depressurization plateau. All cracks closed to 0.005" or smaller after depressurization.

d. Region at El. 5.0'. Az. 59.9' (Electrical Penetration Area)

(Ref. Figures 6a and 6b, Appendix I)

Numerous cracks were identified on this area as a result of SIT pretest inspection (Appendix J). All cracks were under 0.01" in width and they were marked in field with black markers. Pre-existing vertical cracks started to open up at 52 psig pressurization plateau and the maximum crack widths recorded were 0.012". At peak pressure 60.2 psig, numerous vertical and horizontal cracks developed. The maximum crack

( .

i SB-1 S1T Page No. 10-18

(

(vertical) widths were 0.015". Horizontal cracks were not significant and widths of such cracks were under 0.01". All crack widths recorded af ter depressurization were 0.005" or smaller.

Note, some of the vertical rebars in this area were identified to have multiple in-line cadwelds (Appendix L). A comparative study of crack pattern on dif ferent areas of the cylinder as discussed in this section (10.5.2), shows that multiple in-line cadwelds did not result in large cracks local to the area.

Therefore, it is concluded that multiple in-line cadwelds did not have any significant effect on concrete cracking.

10.5.3 Equipment Hatch and Personnel Airlock Areas

a. Equipment Match Area (Ref. Figures Sa and Sb of Appendix I) .

No cracks were detected up to and including pressure 26 psig.

The area around the hatch experienced vertical cracking due to hoop stresses. The maximum crack width was 0.013" at 60.2 psig.

No significant cracking was evidenced on the boss area. Most of the cracks developed on the transition zone and at the intersection of the transition with the boss area. All cracks closed to 0.005" or smaller after depressurization.

i-SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-19

c

b. Personnel Airlock Area I

(Ref. Figures 4a and 4b of Appendix I)

No cracks were developed up to and including pressure 26'psig.

At 39 psig, cracking started to develop on the transition ,

zone and at the intersection of the transition zone with the boss area. The maximum crack widths in the designated area were 0.012". However, two larger cracks were observed beyond the designated area at pressure 60.2 psig. These cracks were located at the intersection of the boss area with the transi-tion zone (@ 9 o' clock and 3 o' clock). The crack @ 9 o' clock location had widths 0.03" to 0.04"; widths of similar cracks located @ 3 o' clock were 0.05" to 0.06". Except those two large cracks, all cracks closed to 0.003" or smaller after depressurization.

10.5.4 Recovery After Depressurization I

The final crack measurements were taken about 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> after de-pressurization. All cracks closed tighter after depressurization.

Except two large cracks near the personnel airlock, all crack widths closed to 0.005" or smaller af ter depressurization. The crack at 9 o' clock near the personnel airlock closed to 0.007" -

0.015" (minimum 62.5% recovery) and the 3 o' clock crack closed to 0.02" (66.7% recovery). The 24-hour recovery of crack widths is much better as evidenced by the posttest inspection report (Appendix K).

10.5.5 Summary The crack pattern plots are shown in Appendix I. As predicted, vertically oriented cracks developed at about 39 psig pressure due to high hoop stresses. The maximum crack widths recorded were 0.015". This excludes two large cracks observed beyond the desig-nated area near personnel airlock at pressure 60.2 psig. Horizon-

! tal cracks were not significant and widths of horizontal cracks were less than 0.01". All crack patterns are satisfactory. All cracks closed tighter on depressurizat. ion, thus indicating elastic behavior.

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-20

i 10.6 Tables Table 10-1: Radial Displacements of Cylinder for Pressure 60.2 psig Table 10-2: Radial Displacements of Cylinder Adjacent to Equipment Hatch Opening for Pressure 60.2 psig.

Table 10-3: Equipment Hatch Diameter Change for Pressure 60.2 psig Table 10-4: Radial Displacements of Cylinder Adjacent to Personnel Airlock for Pressure 60.2 psig Table 10-5: Personnel Airlock Diameter Change for Pressure 60.2 psig Table 10-6 Vertical Displacement of Cylinder Near Spring Line Relative to Base Mat for Pressure 60.2 psig Table 10-7 Vertical Displacement of Dome Relative to Base Mat for Pressure 60.2 psig Table 10-8: Deflection Recovery 20 Hours af ter Depressurization i

l l

i k '

l SB-1 SIT

! Page No. 10-21 i

~

R%

TABLEId-L i

RADIAL DISPLACEMENTS OF CYLIt: DER FOR PRESSURE 60.2 PSIG (Excluding Areas Adjacent to Equipment Hatch and Personnel Airlocks)

Instrument Location Analytical Acceptable Measured No. Elevation Azimuth Valun -(inch) Value (inch) Value (inch)

IG1 (1) 131.0' 00 & 1800 i.03 1.34 0.46 (2)

IG2 (1) 131.0' 900 & 2700 1.03 1.34- 0.42 (2)

IG3A 114.58' 00 0.96 - 1.2$ 0.582 IG3B 114.58' 1800 0.96 *

'1.25 0.604 IG4 114.58' 900 & 2700 ,,0.96 1.25 0.53 (3) i .-

l IG5 89.2' 00 & 1800 0.97 1.26 0.73 (2) 0.73 (2)

~

IG6 89.2' 900 & 2700 0.97 1.26

(

IG7 59.4' 00 & 1800 - 0.90 1.17 0.82 (2)

IG8 59.4' 900 & 2700 0.90 1.17 0.64 (2)

IG9A 33.0' 380 0.96 1.25 0.742' IG98 33.0' 2180 0.de 1.25 0.003 (3) 4 IG10 33.0' 1280 0.96 1.25 0.691 4

IG11 31.5' 3080 0.96 1.25 0.734 IG12 9.5' 420 0.89 1.16 0.742 IG13 9.67' 1300 0.89 1.16 0.632 IG14 10.0' 2220 0.89 1.16 0.843

IG15 9.25' 3100 0.89 1.16 0.771

(

SB-1 SIT i Page No. 10-22 J

__-.-..-.-.,-_,--.-,.___y , . .._m_ , , . . _ . _ - _ , . - _ _ _ , . _ . _ . _ , _ , _

,_,...,y, ,, ,,,__..,,,.,,y , .<_ 4 - - - -.-.

j TABLE 10-1 (Contd.)

RADIAL DISPLACEMENTS OF CYLINDER FOR PRESSURE 60.2 PSIG (Excluding Areas Adjacent to Equipment Hatch and Personnel Airlocks)

Instrument Location Analytical Acceptable Measured No. Elevation Azimuth ~ Value (inch) Value (inch) Value (inch)

IG16 (-)25.0' 00(-) 0.118 0.15 0.103 IG17 (-)25.0' 900(-) 0.118 0.15 0.105 IG18 (-)25.0' 1800(+) 0.118 0.15 0.092 IG19 (-)25.0' 2700(+) 0.118 0.15 0.135 IG29 (-)23.0' 3500 0.172 (4) 0.224 0.193 Notes:

I>

(1) Located on the done. .

(2) Values shown are one-half of measured diametrical growth.

I (3) DCDT inoperative. See Appendices III and IV in Appendix I of this report.

(4) This analytical value of displacement for IG29 9 El. (-) 23.0' is different from that shown in Appendix I because in Appendix I displacement .for IG16 9 El. (-) 25.0' was considered as the displacement for IG29.

' ( .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-23 i

- , , . . ., - - . , - - - - - - - . , , - - - - , , - . , . - r- . . -.--

TABLE 10-2 uDIAL DISPLACEMENTS OF CYLINDER ADJACENT TO EQUIPMENT HATCH OPENING FOR PRESSURE 60.2 PSIG I

Ins t rument Location Analytical Acceptable Measured No. Elevation Azimuth Value (inch) Value (inch) Value (inch)

R1 51.46' 1500 - 0.66 0.86 0.352 R2 37.04' 161.70 0.853 1.11 0.532 R3 22.62' 1500 0.707 0.92 0.393 R4 37.04' 138.30 0.853 1.11 0.476 R5 59.29' 1500 0.79 1.03 0.322 R6 37.04' 167.90 1.039 1.35 0.688 R7 14.79' 1500 0.845 1.10 0.407 R8 37.04' 132.10 1.039 1.35 0.608 R9 72.04' 1500 0.982 1.28 0.401 RIO 37.04' 177.50 1.326 1.72 0.868

( Rll (-)4.96' 1500 0.923 1.20 0.463 R12 37.04' 122.70 1.326' 1.72 0.742 TABLE 10-3 EQUIPMENT HATCH DIAMETER CHANGE FOR PRESSURE 60.2 PSIC I

Ins t rutsent Analytical Acceptable Measured No. Orientation Value (inch) Value (inch) Value (inch)

IG25 Vertical 0.073 0.095 0.151 (1)

IG26 Horizontal 0.334 0.44 0.512 (2) l l

l Note: (1) Data for IG25 is invalid. See Appendices III and IV in Appendix I of

! this report, l

(2) Measured displacement is larger than the acceptable value. See Section 10.4.4 for explanations.

( .

SB-1 SIT  !

Page No. 10-24 ,

i

TABLE 10-4 RADIAL DISPLACEMENTS OF CYLINDER ADJACENT TO PERSONNEL AIRLOCKS FOR PRESSURE-60.2 PSIC

(

Instrument Location Analytical Acceptable Measured No. Elevation Azimuth Value (inch) Value (inch) Value (inch)

R13 33.75' 3150 0.887 1.15 0.703 R14 29.5' 318.50 0.887 1.15 0.725 R15 25.25' 3150 0.904 1.18 0.702 R16 29.5' 310.90 0.89 1.16 0.714 R17 35.62' 3150 0.903 1.17 0.714 R18 29.5' 320.50 0.909 1.18 0.725 R19 22.25' 3150 .0.936 1.22 0.721 R20 29.5' 3100 0.904 1.18 0.741 R21 38.25' 3150 0.934 1.21 0.745 R22 29.5' 322.10 0.935 1.22 0.750 R23 20.75' 3150 0.955 1.24 0.719

[ .

R24 29.5' 307.90 0.935 1.22 0.733 -

TABLE 10-5 PERSONNEL AIRLOCK DIAMETER CHANGE FOR PRESSURE 60.2 PSIG Instrument Analytical Acceptable Measured No. Orientation Value (inch) Value (inch) Value (inch)

IG27 Vertical 0.035 0.046 -0.053 IG28 Horizontal 0.10 0.13 0.002 1 .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-25

TABLE 10-6 I VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT OF CYLINDER NEAR SPRING LINE RELATIVE TO BASE MAT FOR PRESSURE 60.2 PSIG Instrument - Location Analytical Acceptable Measured No. Elevation Azimuth Value (inch) Value (inch) Value (fuch)

IG20 115.33' 00 1.41 1.84 0.409 IG21 115.33' 1800 1.41 1.84 0.423 IG22 117.33' 900 1.44 1.87 0.433 (1)

IG23 117.33' 2700 1.44 1.87 0.374 Note:

(1) This value-is questionable because the DCDT exhibited erratic behavior during posttest calibration. Furthermore, during posttest inspection it was found that some of the metal. counterweights used with taut wire device IG4 (located directly above IG22) had fallen onto IG22 and resulted in damage to the IG22.

See Section 3.1.5 in Appendix I.

l

( .

SB-1 S1T Page No. 10-26

TABLE 10-7

{ VERTICAL DISPLACEMENTS OF DOME RELATIVE TO BASE MAT FOR PRESSURE 60.2 PSIG P.T. Location Ins t rument Analytical Acceptable Measured Location Elevation Azimuth No. Value (inch) Value (inch) Value (inch)

IG24b 152.0' 00 IG24b-1 1.90 2.47 0.528 (1) 1800 IG24b-2 IG24d 152.0' 00 IG24d-7 1.90 2.47 0.509 (1) 1800 IG24d-8 IG24a 182.4' 00 IG24a-3 2.31 3.0- 0.605 (1) 1800 IG24a-4 IG24c 182.4' 00 IG24c-9 2.31 3.0 0.619 (1)

( ,

. 1800 IG24c-10 IG24 188.99' 1800 IG24-5 2.154 2.80 0.408 (1)

(Apex) &

00 IG24-6 IG24-9 0.461 IG24-10 Note:

(1) These values are obtained by adding cylinder average vertical displacement of 0.416" (IG20 @ 00 Az., IG21 @ 1800 Az.) to the respective calculated values of done displacements shown in Appendix I (Pages 23 and 24 of Appendix VI).

I k-SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-27

TABLE 10-8 DEFLECTION RECOVERY 20 HOURS AFTER DEPRESSURIZATION Daflection Instrument Deflection (inch) Recovery- l Type No. @ 60.2 psig l @ 0 psig  % Remarks Dome Radial- IG1 0.46 0.126 72.6 IG2 0.42 0.124 70.5 Cylinder IG3A 0.582 0.243 58.2, Less than 24 hr. min.

Radial allowable recovery of 70% per CC-6213c.

See Section 10.4.9.

IG3B 0.604 0.123 79.6 IG4 0.53 - -

DCDT inoperative IG7 0.82 0.183 77.7 IG8 0.64 0.146 77.2 l IG9A 0.742 0.133 82.1 IG9B 0.003 - -

DCDT inoperative IG10 0.691 0.142 79.5 IGil 0.734 0.141 80.8 IG12 0.742 0.159 78.6 IG13 0.632 0.126 80.1 IG14 0.843 0.165 81.7 IG15 0.771 0.157 79.6 IG16 0.103 0.010 90.3 IG17 0.105 0.010 90.5 IG18 0.092 0.008 91.3 IGl9 0.135 0.027 80.0 IG29 0.193 0.027 86.0 I .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-28

TABLE 10-8 (C:ntd.)

DEFLECTION RECOVERY 20 HOURS AFTER DEPRESSURIZATION I

D2flection Ins t rument Deflection (inch) Recovery Type No. @ 60.2 psig_ l @ 0 psig  % Remarks Radial R1 0.352 0.094 73.3 Adjacent to Equipment R2 0.532 0.124 76.7 Hstch R3 0.393 0.094 76.1 R4 '0.476 0.118 75.2-R5 0.322 0.086 73.3 R6 0.688 0.143 79.2 R7 0.407 0.090 77.9 R8 0.608 0.133 78.1 R9 0.401 0.097 75.8 R10 0.868 0.164 .

81.1

(

R11 0.463 0.093 79.9 R12 0.742 0.15 79.8 Eqpt. Hatch IG25 0.151 -0.475 414.6 Data invalid. See Dica. Change (Vertical) notes in Table 10-3.

IG26 0.512 0.115 77.5 (Horizontal)

Rtdial R13 0.703 0.142 79.8 l Adjacent to l Parsonnel R14 0.725 0.147 79.7 Airlock (PAL) l R15 0.702 0.145 79.3 l

R16 0.714 0.145 79.7 R17 0.714 0.141 80.2 l

l R18 0.725 0.141 80.1 i

! R19 0.721 0.151 79.0

!( .

l R20 0.741 0.146 80.3 l

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-29 l

TABLE 10-8 (Contd.)

DEFLECTION RECOVERY 20 HOURS AFTER DEPRESSURIZATION D2flection Instrument Deflection (inch) Recovery-Type No. @ 60.2 psig l @ 0 psig  % Remarks Radial 'R21 0.745 C.146 80.4 Adjacent to PGrsonnel R22 0.750 0.148 80.2 Airlock (PAL)

R23 0.719 0.151 79.0 R24 0.733 0.142 80.6 PAL Diam. IG27 -0.053 -0.033 37.7 Less than 24 hr. min.

Ch nge .(Vertical) allowable recovery of 70%

per CC-6213c. See Section 10.4.9.

IG28 0.002 -0.017 950.0 (Horizontal)

Cylinder IG20 0.409 0.118 71.1 Vertical

. IG21 0.423 0.101 76.1

( IG22 0.433 0.258 40.4 IG22 was damaged during SIT. See notes in Table 10-6.

IG23 0.374 0.115 69.3 Nearly equal to 24 hr. min.

allowable recovery of 70%.

See Section 10.4.9.

Dome Taut Wire IG24b-1 0.831 0.164 80.3 Extensions IG24b-2 0.174 -0.022 112.6 IG24a-3 0.719 0.181 74.8 IG24a-4 0.387 0.107 72.4 IG24-5 0.458 0.131 71.4 IG24-6 0.337 0.066 80.4 IG24d-7 0.155 -0.022 114.2 IG24d-8 0.828 0.17 79.5 IG24c-9 0.373 0.107 71.3 IG24c-10 0.771 0.236 69.4 Nearly equal to 24 hr. min.

al.lowable recovery of 70%.

See Section 10.4.9.

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-30

(

10.7 Figures Figure 10-1: . Radial Displaceinent for Pressure 13 psig Figure 10-2: Radial Displacement for Pressure 26 psig Figure 10-3: Radial Displacement for Pressure 39 psig Figure 10-4: Radial Displacement for Pressure 52 psig Figure 10-5: Radial Displacement for Pressure 60 psig

( .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 10-31

.' g9 f* SP RIMG LNE, E L. fig.o '

i l'

,;. I40 1

'. l t

l .

.' I

'2

l .

~

? I .

l I y 10 0 l y V .

$ A CCEPTABLE AMALYTICAL.

I i 2 80 g S

MLA GUR60 F

I -

l g

l

W I 60 l ,

l

. l i  : W li N

i: .

g O I ;e 2 l l

3 40 /j F

. O ///

s /

~;  ; /,

. 1o I/

//

/f o

I (U o 0.25 0 50 0 75 1.00 1 25 f.5 0

(

. o,Ac o,,,tecE Lur iu ,~C-MAT EL (~) 30.O'

, t -

PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHtRE RAOIAL DISPLACEMKNT FOR SEABROOK STATION - UNIT 1 #RE##UNE U ###

CONTAINMENT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST REVISION l FIGURE 10-!'

__. 149 f SPRIMG LINE', E L. f f 9.0

) 1

.i

'40 l

( 1 l f,  ! '

t i  !

i I .

l l 12 0 j

.l l l I i l I I

l j

,3 too ,

. p g ACCEPTABLE d

W I f A N A LYTICAL

u. I y i 2 80 i MEASURED

. p I 2 I

!'. G I

.; 3 i ,

I 60 8 l

l 1 r it I

. l'

• W I -

! O 2

l I

l

!- ] 4o l

f I > / *

.' U '

,/ l r s .

/

t /,l to /)

/

l l

/ */

\ /,

N o

f l

$[UN

(

o o. 2s RAMAL DISPWEMEW W o.so o.7s 1. c o im

t. 2s f.s o 7 ,, ,, gA,c MAT

• EL (-) 30.0'

?

lk .

PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE RADIAL DISPl.ACEMENT FoR SEABROOK STATION - UNIT 1 PRES 5URE 26 PSIG CONTAINMENT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST REVISION l FIGURE 10-2 t

F' e -

1 . ,

I si k v4o l i ). 1

'. I t l t I

t l 11 0 ,l

'l.- s i

I s I I

• I s I '

. I

.f too l  ;

e i 1 j AccEPTA BLE, j g

• I ANALYTICAL i

i 2 80 I

I y I messunec e I

W I 1 I so

- I

- 4 r N l

'? ' w I  ;

! O I /

2 1 ,

} 40

/

i > / s

/

l V s ,/ s

/

/.

s

/

! to

/ //s '

, . /

/,V

/

o .

1 o o. 2s o.so o.7s 1. o o i.2s t.s o C[LN e,o,,e oi, Place E.wr iu i-Cs MAT CL (-3 30.0' l

k . -

PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE RADIAL DISPLACEMENT FOR SEABROOK STATf 0N - UNIT 1 PRE 550RE JS PSIg CONTAINMENT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST REVISION l FIGURE 10-3

,f g, p spRlwG LINE. EL. f19.0 L

I I l' g

\

< i j

' 1. i t

'i l i I I

.i

.-  ! o

/

I l i ,

10 0 I f I

.- y i I a I '

.' W Acc EPTABLE i

[

i 2 80 3 ANALYTICAL V

l l

t/

c. 1 I e s MEASURGO 5 /

1 so I i

l 8

. d l w

1' .

! O I

2 / '

,/

40

.i

/

< \ q / l

. / /

/

s'

. p i /

I /

/

/'

' s{/

/. /

o

$(~5 D o c. 2s

..o,,e o.so o.75 ois,teCE Eur iu

f. c o l~cN 1 25 f.s o t ,,,, ,, ,,,,

MAT EL ( ~) 30.0 PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE RADIAL DISPLACEMENT FOR SEABROOK STATION - UNIT 1 CONTAINMENT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST PRESSURE 52 PSIG REVISION l FIGURE 10-4

p 5 P R I MG LINE. E L. f 19.0 '

b t i I i i

,; f40 l

' 1 l '

f >

- I I

'l tzo l j

I

I j .,

10 0

,{.

> I I

& l I ACCEPTASt E AMALYTICA L i,

2 80

- \

. y } s M6AsuRED

' 7

'. 1 G

- \  ;

W \ s I 60

~. 1 ,

• e I r ,

If W i o  ! O j

, 40 /

U / /

s / /

/

s 20

/

/

/

7"/*/

/'/,

• O I

fJL(U o 0.25 05o 0 75 1. O o I.25 f.5 o

( =Aorat oisptACEMewr iM iwes l ,,, , ,,,,

MAT EL (-7 30.0 i(

PUBUC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE RADIAL D15 PLACEMENT FOR SEABROOK STATION - UNIT 1 PRESSLRE 60 PSIG CONTAINMENT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST I

l REVISION l FIGURE 10-5

11.0 EVALUATIONS J

11.1 Accuracy of Measurements As discussed in Section 10.0, the overall behavior of the Contain-ment structure during the SIT was satisfactory and was in good agreement with the predicted behavior.

A total of sixty-six (66) instruments were used to measure various displacements of the Containment structure. Appendix I contains a list of test exceptions. Ten (10) channels were identified to have some problems during the SIT. Three (3) DCDT's (IG4, IG98, IG22) were definitely inoperative; data from IG25 were scattered and questionable. Problems (i.e. wrong polarity, incorrect scale factor etc.) associated with the remaining six channels (IG3A, IG10, IG20, IG26, IG27, IG28) were resolved, and data were corrected l accordingly in Appendix 1.

For a detailed discussion of test (instruments) exceptions, see Appendix I. In summary, only four i

channels out of a total of sixty-six gave incorrect data measure-ments during the SIT. A discussion on deviations, dispositions and corrective actions is given in the following sections:

11.2 Deviations, Dispositions and Corrective Actions 11.2.1 General All but one (IG26 @ 52 and 60.2 psig) measured values for the SIT are less than the acceptable values established from analyses.

The four channels ~ which did not give correct data have no effects to .

draw positive conclusion with respect to the acceptance of the Containment structural integrity.

l -

SB-1 SIT Page No. Il-1

i 11.2.2 Cylinder Radial Displacements All measured radial displacements (Table 10-L) are less than the accepta: ale values. Twenty-two (22) ins truments were used to measure cylinder . radial displacements / diametrical growth. Only two channels (IG4 at El. 114.58' and IG9B at El. 33.0') were inoperative. However, displacements at these elevations are

~ based on data from the functional DCDT's at the respective eleva-tions. Since IG4 (El. 114.58') was inoperative, radial measured displacements at El. 114.58' are based on data from IG3A and IG3B (both at El. 114.58'); measured displacements at IG3A and IG3B are in good agreement. Similarly, measured radial displace-ments at El. 33.0' ~are based on data f rom IG9A (El. 33.0'), IGIO (El. 33.0') and IGil (El. 31.5'), excluding defective channel I'G9B . Readings from IG9A, IG10 and IG11 are in good agreement.

The 20-hour radial displacement recovery at IG3A is 58.2% which is

' less than 24-hour minimum recovery of 70% per CC-6213c; this is attributed to instrument error because the displacement recovery of similar instrument.IG3B is about 80%.

Based on comparison of measured data to predicted values and acceptance' criteria,.it is concluded that no corrective action is required and the acceptance criteria of CC-6213 is satisfied.

11.2.3 Cylinder Radial Displacements Adjacent to Equipment Hatch All measured radial displacements are less than the predicted /

acceptable values (Table 10-2). All instruments (R1 through R12) were operational and functional. No deviatione, are reported.

k -

SB-1 SIT Page No. 11-2

i 11.2.4 Cylinder Radial Displacements Adjacent to Personnel Airlock All measured radial displacements are less than the predicted /

acceptable values (Table 10-4). All instruments (R13 through R24) were operationaJ and functional. No deviations are noted.

11.2.5 Diameter Changes of Equipment Hatch and Personnel Airlock Equipment Hatch The horizontal deformations .(Table 10-3 and Appendix I) of the equipment hatch opening at pressures 52 and 60.2 psig are about 8.2% and 16.4% higher than the respective acceptable values.

This deviation occurred because the predicted / acceptable values were based on uncracked concrete sections. At higher pressures, minor cracking occurred on thickened concrete around the opening, I thus reducing the stiffness and increasing deformations. For detailed discussions, see Sections 10.2 and 10.4.4. Vertical deformations from IG25 were scattered and questionable. However, vertical deformations are so small that they are subject to error.

Deflection recovery percentage (Table 10-8) of the hatch opening deformation was very good. Based on explanation and the dis-position for ' apparent deviation'given in Sections 10.2 and 10.4.4, it is concluded that no corrective action is required.

Personnel Airlock All measured deformations are less than the predicted / acceptable values (Table 10-5). The magnitudes of all deformations are very small due to the stiffening effect of the boss area. Computer printout had elevation identifications for IG26 and 27 transposed.

This problem was corrected af ter 52 psig and all data presented are the corrected ones.

( -

SB-1 SIT Page No. Il-3

1 11.2.6 Cylinder and Dome Vertical Displacements All measured vertical disp.lacements for the cylinder and the dome are significantly lower than the predicted values (Tables 10-6, 10-7). This deviation is on the conservative side. Sections 10.2, 10.4.7 and 10.4.8 provide explanations for such discrepan-cies. It is concluded that the actual concrete tensile strength during the SIT was auch higher than the assumed value used in analyses and this contributed to the higher predicted values.

As noted earlier, channel IG22 on .the cylinder was inoperative.

Data from functional channels IG20, IG21 and IG22 are in good agreement and are used to obtain cylinder vertical displacement near the spring line with respect to the base mat. Initially there was a problem (Appendix I) with the printout of the calcu-lated dome deflections due to an inappropriate data format. This' I problem was corrected af ter 39 psig pressurization data scan and all data reported in Appendix I are the corrected ones. As dis-cussed in Section 10.4.8, the pattern of dome displacements is in agreement with the predicted one. Deflection recovery after depressurization is very good as indicated by the data presented ,

in Table 10-8. Based on the above, it is concluded that no correc-

. tive action is required.

11.2.7 Concrete Behavior Concrete crack patterns monitored and recorded during the SIT do not indicate any unusual conditions. The maximum widths of cracks (excluding two large cracks near the personnel airlock) detected at the peak pressure 60.2 psig were 0.015" which is well below the acceptable limit of 0.035" (Appendix C). All cracks closed to 0.005" or smaller after depressurization.

k -

SB-1 SIT Page No. 11-4 1 1

, l

The two localized cracks at 3 o' clock and 9 o' clock on the edge of the boss transitions at the personnel airlock were larger (widths 0.03" to 0.06") than cracks on the balance of the shell. The local discontinuities in geometry (thickness) and rebar pattern (bending around the opening)' localized the concrete cracking with resulting greater widths at these two discrete zones. The recovery (closure) of these cracks was consistent with that of the balance of the shell indicating elastic behavior. As such the performance is predictable and acceptable, and no corrective action is necessary.

Additionally, final posttest surveys of the concrete surface were made to determine whether there were any visible signs of permanent damage or localized distress due to pressurization. Concrete surface appearances remained unchanged from those observed during the pretest inspections. Therefore, it is demonstrated that the concrete surface is sound and was not affected by internal pressure

{ 60.2 psig'. -

11.2.8 Special Conditions (Ref. Appendix L)

Multiple in-line Cadwelds Multiple in-line cadwelds exist on some rebars in areas shown on Sheets A7 and A9.1 (Appendix C), and respective crack pattern plots for these areas are shown in Figures 1, 6a and 6b (Appendix I). The maximum crack widths (0.015") were recorded in area near the electr-cal penetrations (Figure 6a). This is well below the acceptance value of 0.035". Multiple in-line cadwelds did not result in large cracks local to the area; small cracks were distributed over the area. All cracks closed to 0.005" or smaller after depressurization.

\ -

SB-1 SIT Page No. 11-5

a Potential Voids behind Liner Plate at El. (-) 23.0'. Az. 350' Channel IG29 was provided to evaluate behavior of the liner plate at above location where potential voids were identified. The measured maximum displacement 0.193" is within the acceptable value 0.24" (Table 10-1). Additionally, the deflection recovery (Table 10.8) af ter depressurization was 86% of the maximum deflection. The plate did not show any evidence of permanent damage or local dis-tress due to pressurization. This is a positive indication of the elastic behavior of the liner plate.

11.3 Safety Margin The concrete Containment structure responded satisfactorily to the internal pressure loads as designed . This is evidenced by the

( satisfactory overall displacements, the concrete crack pattern (extent and wid'th), satisfactory recovery of the structure and no signs of any permanent damage or local distress. Displacements are the most reliable measure of performance of the Containment structure. Additionally, it is found that the' actual concrete tensile strength is considerably higher than the design value. All stresses under the SIT conditions (load combination D+P t ) are within the design allowables; test pressure Pe (60 psig) is 15% higher than the design accident pressure Pa (52 psig). Moreover, the Contain-i ment structure was designed for load combination D+1.5 P a'Per Division 2. Therefore, the eiccellent performance of the Containment structure gives a positive assurance that the safety margin relative to the design accident pressure exceeds at least 50%.

Note, the design of the Containment structure is based on require-ments of Division 2; it considers material properties as the speci-

, fied minimums (rather than actual), and the role of liner plate is not considered as a strength element. .

SB-1 SIT Page No. 11-6

i CONTAINMENT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST SEABROOK STATION - UNIT 1 l

APPENDIX A USNRC RESULATORY GUIDE 1.136 - MATERIALS, CONSTRUCTION AND TESTING OF CONCRETE CONTAINMENT, REVISION 2, JUNE 1982 I .

., QLg June test j.# "' U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Qg i REGULATORY GUIDE

\*.... OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH REGULATORY 4U4081.138 (Tesk sc 31451 i

MN'"ERIALS, CONSTRUCTION, AND TESTING OF CONCRETE CONTAINMENTS j (Amoles CC 1000. 2000, and 4000 through 4000 of the

" Code for Concreen Reestor Vessais and Contamtments"8 )

A, INTRODUCTION formany ismeed for the first ams in 1975, was reismaed in 1977, and aessa in 1980. This rennom to the saide sadorses General Deusa Criterios 1, " Quality Standards and the fouowims arecies of the 1980 edition of the Code:

Records," of Appendia A. " General Deep Catena for CC-1000, Iseoduction, Nucieer Power Plants," to 10 CFR Part 50, "Domesas CC 2000, M.a.nat Licensus of Prad=-da= and Utuisasion Faeusses," requaes, CC.d000, Fabricanos and Construction, in part, that struseues, sy==== and auseamano insportant CC 5000, Construction, Tesans, and F=a-na= and to safety be essened, fabncated, erected, and tested to CC 6000, Structural lateerity Test of Coecrete Contana-quakty standards - ate with the insportance of snant Struccares.

the safety fasstions to be perfonned. Appnadia B," Quality Aamunnes Catena for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Comaderation wGI be sven to refersecas the Code in Reproomsmas Plants," to 10 CFR Part 50 regumes, in part, the Code of Federal Replatanes after sufficasst expenseco that osassies be estabhshed to ensue matsnais control has base F "M with its usa, la the intens, the NRC and osmool of spenal prosessoa, asch as weidans, and that i proper teenns be perforened.

staff will set forth its pa=hn. Og (gg gggggggggggy g(

the Code for u, g p rpasse in reedstory esides.

/

( This sudde describes bases acceptable to the NRC staff forimplemennas the abo e requaemeses with regard to the The NRC staff han -vehaated the provunoms comammed is the articios listed w, but has made no attempt to

~

m n.k consuustica, and tesmag ot concrets castaamments, coordisses aR literamre (standards, codes, smadehmes,remia.

taama, etc.) that may be reiswant to the subsect of this paide.

The Advisory Pa===*.== on Reester Safeguards has been comedeed a====.=g this saide and has comanned la The referenced Code incorporates the recommendances the regnatory postion. of ssoural repletary saides in an - # . Hemos.

with the immanos of thisreness to Raynesory Guide 1.134, S. Oserween.' the rossineery asides liseed below wd! he wehd=wa:

The Americes Somoty of u m= a Easmeers and the 1.10 niechamscal (Cadweld) Spuces la Reinforcias Amadeen Comerees lasetum have josatty petidshed the Bass of Caessory I concrees Strusaues. .

" Code for Consumes Reactor Vessais and Coatsanssents,"4 winsk is redened to in this smide as the Code. The Code was 1.15 Testems of Rainierenas Bars for Cassesry 1 Commees soucames.

.r et an= a .a n.s.n Tae nmmm.m. is ime m aewi.e.a me.e.m m. en e .

1.13 Strucesral Acceptamos Test for Caecrete Prunary ossen.r won me a mie.te mean. e.m.e Reeseare, -*===-ts,

=

1. .a.7.t. ".c e.eme.r, c m e m e.v.m.e.a. .m.a . -= ,

8

v. mmc.s. Needestructive *====aa= of Prussry Contain-s.sa i us. m a see AsasE .a.ma.r r . n.

AC3s .m .mes 3,19 meet Liner Weida, A ass.g g, es.- u.s Yareeseest.

a.smr amm.s

. s.samy et as c r. ses L 4te som.mass.es re = Yara. E.unn

• Commeto Pla.amasar la Casseory I Stnictures, and 1.55

.esie.

d"- me je e _ .#_**

Us #C ftStut.ATOsty Outoss ~

"* '." "Jlllll"".=.llllll ': l""ll".i"m",t" "'""'" L"l: va. - em. e -

s."

( . = l,g,";;;; ,, ,g g ,,,",,,,,;;;e ==,= :.

h *:=llll t "l"".J"lllll"f.m Ell ":::"3 * """?.",'""""" ". ' l":"""""- '

i. .

t = 1llllLa

. :".'.'.":l" =, t s. ^'."""."..Mc.:llll" se. .

"g"g".",;l:' ;=llJ'"l."."'.:ll'."':f'""

':lllll=,.

,,,,,,, ,,.;:: 2llll"e"ol:ill".*".*.",".'" L':lll:'::'l'a = =ll'"'.*"*. """."

.m.m m v

L.".""" 7._ _ "". . '" c e..i lll.ll'.".:.:. "'"

n * "'".g"e"' . . m.y

. ug ,,,,,,,,,

'.""u".a* lll:.i M: g' "t.*

mg

(

5. CC.2441(s) . Tendon Ducts ch===1a Trumpets, and t.103 Post tensooed Prestresans Systems for Concrets Trenaraos Comes Reactor Vesels and Contamments.

SubparastaphCC-2441(s) addresses only the susceptibil-Because the Code pronsons conamue to change, the sty of ducts to leakage under prestare. However, duct jouts NRC staff plans to periodacally update thas suade to accom- are more suscopuble to leakage under pressare than the modate new and tensed pronsons of the Code. ducts. The recommended prequalificataca of ducts and duct wiats in Resialatory Poecios C.3 would awa=*= the la those areas where the pronsons of the referenced Code are innafficsont for bcomass purpassa, the staff has potential for grease (or grout) leakass under masamum pressares.

provided asppesassatary psadehmes it canaders to be esoded. These guidelines are contained is the requistory

4. CC-2443.1. Static Tomade Test postion. Brief reasons for recommendans them are seven below. Different systems of prostroenns may requare different s numbers of tests for tendon systems to establish their

t. CC.2232.2(a) Seemeth Teste adequacy for uss. Van = reams within the toisrance lieues of the constructica specification in material properties and The averags stromsth of a dessa max based on mean is geosmetry of anchorages and tendons must be realastacally rather than mannaeum allowebis vahaos of air content and and- . ' '; represented is the syseem teemas.Therefore, shamp is not conservanve relanve to standard buildens com-Regulatory Poetaos C6 r======da that any system of struction practaca The limats in Regulatory Postion Cl prostresmas be astsected to a sufficasst number of tests to are tahma fross Section 4.4.2 of ACI Standard 318 77, establish its adequacy before it is adopted for uns.

"Randans Code Requarements for Remforced Concrete."3

2. CC.2243. Coment Geest for Geeused Tendon Sysseems 7. CC-4240 Cartas The 1980 verson of the Code siisumates a specific Regalatory Posnam C2 recommends umas the guadance requirement for curms concrete at toimperatures hisher is Rosnissory Guide 1.1M. **Quahficanos for Cement Grout-(~ ins for Presarmamms Tendons in Contmement Strucaarue," than 40*F. The smide recommseadanos is is accordance with ACI 308-71,~ "Recomsoended Practice for Curms rather than parayaph CC-2243 with respect to grouans of prestroemme tendons. The staff behoves that the pande recom- Concrete."3

! === dana =a provide aseded ammarance for the inteersty of "

8. CC 4333.4.2. Speise Sasqdse gromend tendoms that cannot be darectly inspected durtas the life of the contamment. The 1980 edanos of the Code, in CC-4333.4.3, requisse

3. CC.2433.2.3 Assepsamme Standede only a ,; -: v W testias program, while the paenous program periaatted penductaan, and assur sphos testans. As a resalt, CC-4333.4.2 now contradacts CC 4333.4.3. Regula.

Espostense wick the men of alloy sseel ==amenais for anchor tory Poenoa C8 provides saadenes comestent with the I

bleeks and wedes blocks (ack as A1514140) indicates that requarensets of CC-4333.4.3.

a high degne of hardoses of these materials is a factor la l "r stress.courosos) under certana commes esacimas (c 9. CC.4352 Spitsee inesienkte envuemments. Also it is asessasry to control the omsforudty of handmaus of thems =gandman A thesough

• Mechamasal spuose me commenrod to be weak llaks la the surfase esasumetten and proper pressanos before and after perforsemese of runforemas bars. Time sensgerimsof mochas.

I insendesian of these massaals sad a cioes connel is the ical spilsen la mens of hisk steses is being reemphamand in amount and uniformety of herdases in these maeariale may order to svend a camenstranes of splices os one piano is elimunnes censkins, asch asons that smay remnitin(1) uneceoptable crealdes and i

(2) incromoed sessi e that has adverse effects on 4 Prosessiom ef Preseremune Muesrisis hem iss>Tsuperneure comeses plasmuseet. la addition, this r==="=a= is Effesas comestemt with ACI 34946, " Code Respaireusents for Macamer Sadoty.Releend Concrete Structures."3 the testems of puestreemme naamnais to genufr them aemast nees a destelty ensims said temperumarsele moeded;thouetus, the omdames in Regnianery Poenonce is reessasseded. 10. CC 4444.1 Preesdure The cosamos practice is post '===a=== as adopted by g

,,,,,,,,,W,c, "

7c ",,,,,,,a*am'me"erY.E N e N am$ the Amancma Comarote lastitute (Secnoa 18.18 of ACI 338 77), is to allow the disaepency level of 25% instead of

' ausma- esame summuassa.

the 110% allowed by the Code.The paide recommendation c,,,,,,i,,,,,,,,

k s ,,,,, ,,,, ,, w seee e se,o.w.si.amannen 4en,. % ,,, m is for 2m. . , ,

4

! t.134 2

- - - - - - , _ , - - - _ _ _ _ _ , _ . _ - - . - , - - - - , , , -e,..---.-- _ _ , . - _ . . . _ , , ,*---,.-i-________m- m__ -_._. __

l l

I i

11. CC-4522.1 Toisrances for Liner Shells and Heads 3. CC 2433.2.3 - Acceptance Standards The non-mandatory guadelines of Appendix F to the Code la addanon to the rs<pairwaents a subparasraph CC 243n3,  ;

- are acceptable to the NRC staff although some of the guade- the fouomat, guidance should be used:

lines are relaxed from the pronous requarements of the 1977 edition of the Code. "The rpaumum hardness for matenal of anchor head assemblies and wedge blocks shan not exosed that of Appendix F, paragraph F.1220(c), ==*=hhha non-cimaalstave Rockweu C40. To maintaan umforanty in hardness, the toler-piuenbeess tolerances for liner shous. Cumulative tolerances ance on a demenated hardness number shan not exceed 22."

may be contrailed' in most casat by the out-of-roundness toleremose of paragraph F 1220(a). However, to ensure that a masamum cumulanve plumboess tolerance is established 4. Presse:nes of premeresses Meterials fron tes>Tessperesume for different contamment eaangmanoas. an explicit Effects recommendanon is prcmded in Regulatory Possion C.11.

la addanoa to the requiseinents in CC-2434, " Wedges

12. CC 5210.Gameret and Anchor Nuts," the following guadance should be used:

The locanoes of all maior embedmonts, sich as plates, " Materials for au toed-beenas components of prostrosang eenhedded piping paastrance sies,es, amor structural systems should be selected so that they can withstand the frasumes, and anchor boats, should be ,.;'--M identailed anticipated low temperature effects without loss in their on the denen drawings, and da--sed os fleid changes ductility Methods and procedures mamalar to those used thesoto Thas would permat verificanos that embedmonts for matenals of liners in CC-2520, 'Fractuas Toughness have been placed with full comaderanca seven to the Requesessets for Masenala,' are acceptable for quahfying t==aletag redusnom ia structural streastas. radiation shielding the matenais. Addittomany, it should be demonstrated by effectivuosa, and handrance to the placonsent and consolida- autable tests that with the mazamum auowabis flaw

• tica of comerets. mas (cracked buttosheads, wedges, and anchos nuts), the specauc components wd1 exhabit the required streasth and

[ 13. CC 6214 - Resast ductGity under the lowest annapated temperatures."

The smoond seassmos of CC-6214 pennits the he===== the option of doing nothang even after studass have been saade $. CC-2441(g) Tenden Ducts, Chemmels, Trusspesa, and

• that indicate that acceptance attens (c) and (d) of CC-6213 Tremainima Comes were sed! act met. The need to select one of the foGowup options la paraysph CC-6214 is defined in Regulatory !assmed of "CC 2441(g) Ducts " the fouowing should Pension C.13. be used:

"CC 2441(g) Duca and ductjosats "

l C, REGULATORY POSITION l 4. CC 2463.1. Stasis Temmle Test The requeessants specafled in Articise CC 1000, .2000, and.4000 through-6000of the " Code for Comesom Reactor lasased of "CC-2463.1 Static Teamle Test. Two or more Vessets and t'a=*=i====a=

• ASE Boiler and pressese Vessel statis temeBe testa ," the foEsenes should be used: .

Code, Sessies III, Divimos 2,1980 Edition. (also known as ACI 3sendent 3SMO) se assertshie to the NRC samff for "CC 2443.1 Stesic Tammie Temes. States enemie tusen "

l the mesensis, somstruence, and tening of concrete contain-meets of assisar power plaats abrect to the fodowns: Amy system of prostrummag should be subsected to a suff!-

cient samber of tests to establish its adequacy. Ju=an,qna.

1. CC 2232.2(e) .Seemeth Tasse that a adHa==t number of tessa have been perfonned as wee e a dessnytica of the test proyam should be submatted When foGowing the roquareassetsin the second sentence to the NRC for townw and approval.

of CC 2232.2(a), the word "manissum" should in used for the weed "meen" whamsverit appears, and"20.75 is." should 7. CC 4240.Casims be used lassmed of "20.73% ."

la addition to the roquaresments for curses concrete in sabssbernete CC-4240(d), the foGowing gaadance should be ,

2. CC.1243. Cement Genes for Groeted Tenden 3rsessme used:

i Regalatory Guide 1.107, "Quanine=*a= fos Cement Ceannes for Preserummas Tennes a '%=*=-t Structures," *Then the sames dady outdoor temperature is 40*F or

' { shemid be used for smadance os qualifyms srout for grouted hasher, the ======m pened of- cunne should be 7 days

~

asados systems, after plasmas concrete."

1.136 3

-. , , . . - m.- _ . . , -. _--.._, ,-a.,,,- p ,,..,---,,---m,, ,,-

_. . . __ - = . _ . . - . .

8. CC 4333.4.2 Splice Samples mch as reber supports and form nes). or covered by docu-mested fisid changes and later placed on the as. built lastead of the requirementsia mbparagraph CC-4333.4.2 drawings, renam in the form after the concrete is placed.

the following guadance should be used: Additnomally, the aspecnoe should ensure that hollow "

tubes and pipe secticas used as aspport systems or for other "Splies samples shall be production splices (cut directly '

ceasetuctaos convemence, if left embedded in the concrete, from in pense renforcement)." are filled with concrets or grout as appropnate.

9. CC 4352 5 plisse 13. CC-4214. Ratest la addienma to the requeemente la paragraph CC-4352, These aos two optanas permitend by the Code is the phrase the foHowems end=== should be used: in the asoned sentence of CC.6214 ". ressedial mensame may be undertakaa or a rotest may be conducted "; one "Mechaansel splices located in areas of high stresses should be senected if the requerements of CC-6213(c) and (maniseum compuesd teamis stress 10.5 Fy) should have (d) are not not, alternaea bars speised or adiassat splicos staggered. If tests for slip (orinternal plasme deforsmance) of the splice demon-l serase that the slip is low (Le., not to esomed 30% of the D. IAFLEAAENTATIOk.

elongonos of the unspliced her aloes the splined leasth), at i G.9 Fy, the adt ===t splices need act be staggeraL" The purpose of this secnos is to prMe informatica to j applianate negaribes the NRC staff's pians for uoms this le. CC 4464.1. Procedure resilatory saide.

Ducrepensass of alongscos of tendonsshould not exceed Except in those casse in which an applicant proposes an "255" of the diesespescaso calculated asseed of the "2105" acceptable alternaave method for complying with specified j

~

as discussed in the last two sentences of abparagraph pornome of the Commasson's regulations, the method CC-4464.1. described hereas will be used in the evalustaos of the

('

foGowung applicanoes that are docketed after May ifsl. -

II. CC 4522.1 Tolerances for Liner Shells and Hesde '

l. Preilmunary Demon Approval (PDA) apphostices and Pre- ,

The NIIC staff will uso the radah of the non mondatory limanary Duphcase Deaga Approval (PDDA)apaHaha Appeedia F to the Code for the purpose of review and "

anspecnoe. 2. Final Deega Approval. Type L (FDA-2) appucanons and Flaal Duplicate Doesa Approval. Type L (PDDA 2)

A semaisomos essemiaanse devistaos of the liner shell phsab. apph==ma==

asas of 6" or a 1 in 200 ratio, whachever is lem, shoeild be used. 3. u==='====g Liesese (ML) appucanons.

12. CC.5210 Gameret 4. Comstruenom Permit (CP) arrh-a- except for those pername of CF applientions that referoom standard The reguareensets of CC-5210 should be appismanted demens (i.e., PDA, FDA 1. FDA L PDDA, FDDA 1, by as mopection to emmus that only those entedenents FDDA L or ML) or that refesumos quatified bees plant -

shove on the denen drawings (except samor eunbedsments deeges under the rephanties opeaa.

l l

( .

l 1.136 4

l l

val.UE/ IMPACT STATEMENT w Description The value/ impact of ponnons of tlus revison to the guade are discussed below:

This Revison 2 to Regulatory Guide 1.136 pnmdes aformanon regarding the NRC staff's pamoons on the Regulatory Postions C 1, C7, C.10, and C.ll should have acceptatniity for NRC licenang acnons of Articles CC-1000, no appreciable impact on the industry or the public mace

. 000. -4000, .5000, and -4000 of the " Code for Concrete they recommend generally accepted consauccon pracuce.

Reactor Venens and Contmanients"* published jostly by the Amencan Scenety of h==d Eagmoore (ASME Regulatory Poscon C.2 recommends the use of the Boder and Pressare Vesmal Code, Sectica III. Dmmon 2, more detailed recommendanons of Regulatory Guide 1.107, 1980 Edanos) and the Amencan Concrete lasutute (ACI which include a reference to the exasung Code requarements Standard 359 80). la chose areas where the NRC staff finds of CC-2243 whose appropriate. The value/ impact and pnmaons of the refersaced Code insufficaust for heemass renomais for . _ -danons in Regulatosy Guide 1.107 purposes, suppisoiestasy guidelines are esven la the regule- have been thoroughly d*=e=* in the resolution of F'ablic tory postaoa. comments es that guade and dunas the public meenas in November 1976.

Followiss inne of Revimos 2 this guide will be penod6-cally updw. to may currest with the ASME Code, See- Regislatory Pomeons C3, C.4, C5, and CIO emphamas taas !!! Devimos 2. Thas wdl be done under pi- - the need to prequalify prostresmas rystem components by asadar to those under whach Regulatory Guados 1.84 and adequate teenas. These postions are cosastsat with the 1.85 are updated la the endorsement of ASME Code Cases, way the previously approved prestressas system com-poments were requued to be qua8ified.' The NRC staff l Vehne behoves that the Code lacks these specafic requarements.

They would help enmare the safery and integnty of the

!annonce and impiennestation of this guide will provide qualified peestroemas systesa during the useful life of the

' {

1 costasament. Thar impact on the industry should' be the NRC reviewers and applicasta a commaa bens for

understandaag the Code requuements for matenais, construc- enmimal-

, \ thos, and toetsas of concrete contanaments, thus == -arms 2 potonnat utseente meerpsetances on the degree of accept- n=gui== y Peanons C6 and C.13 remain essennally w ability for matenais, construcaca, and teenas of concaste unchanged from the November 1979 ismas of this guide for i eestamaients. public counment.

impost Ragnissory Position C9 repreemets an editorial conection to stummate a contradictica in the 1980 editaos of the Code.

Most Code requirements are now being accepted by the industry and NRC Therefoss, the endorsement of these Regaletary Postion Cl2 has besa revised to reflect Code roquaroesents would have no addanomat impact os public comments acessved and to fulfBI a need without any industry assessee inspect on the industry.

m to ese Revieles 2 of the smide shoald be ismand for impioenesta-cesess ND., %pnee see une Amansas g.,,,,,- M

• sammyM**MDer nessaso- tion as desenbod in Secnon D, " Implementation," of the 198 se, Dueema, namesmo 44339. pande.

.u r - mor=somes imi-ai minee l

1 l

l.136 5 i

-.,,,. ,,.___m_-,_ _ , , _ , , _ _ _ _ _ , , . ,_,_ _ _ , , _ , _ . _ _ _ , _ ,

t CONTAINMENT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST SEABROOK STATION - UNIT 1 I , .

APPENDIX B ARTICLE CC-6000 0F ASME B & PV CODE, SECTION III, DIVISION 2, 1980 EDITION l

(

i ARTICLE CC-6000 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF CONCRETE CONTAINMENT STRUCTURES CC4212 lastrumentation Requirements CC4100 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS CC4212.1 Prototype Containments. A CCS in-CC4110 PURPOSE corporating new or unusual primary design features not yet confirmed by tests shall be considered a in order to demonstrate that concrete containment structures respond sausfactonly to required internal prototype structure and, as such. shall be in-pressure loads. a program of masurements developed strumented for the measurement of strains as well as gross deformations in accordance with the provisions by the Designer shall be followed to provide corre-lation with theoretically predicted response and to of CC-6230.

prove the adequacy of the structure with respect to CC-6212.2 Nonprototype Containments. When quality of construction and matenal. strain measurements can be clearly correlated with

( deflection measurements obtained in previous tests SCOPE on prototype containments, strain measurements CC-6120 -

need not be taken duririg acceptance tests of non-This Article contains the requirements for initial Prototype containments unless required by the De.

acceptance testing of concrete containment strue. signer to establish that the construction is in ac.

tures. The concrete contamment structure (CCS) shall c rdance with plans and specifications, be tested for structural acceptability a,a prerequisite for Code acceptance and stamping.The requirements CC 6213 Acceptance for the structural test are contained in CC-6200. Test ~

results and conclusions shall be documented in the The CCS shall be considered to have satisfied the construcuon report. structural acceptance test if the following minimum requirements are met:

l (a) Yielding of conventional reinforcement does CC4200 STRUCTURAL ACCEL 4ANCE n t dev*l P as determined from analysis of crack REQUIREMENTS width, strain gauge, or deflection data.

(b) No visible signs of permanent damage to either CC4210 TEST CONDITIONS the concrete structure or the steel liner are detected.

Evidence of spalling.laminations.or voids behind the CC 6211 Tm hm liner are pertment considerations. Special care shall Containment structures shall be subjected to an be exercised to detect evidence of localized distress which may not be revealed by strain or deflection acceptance test by which the internal pressure is data. The significance of such distress. if detected.

increased from atmosphenc pressure to at least 1.1$ must be determined by the Designer and be ac-times the containment design pressure in five or more ceptable to the Owner.

approximately equal pressure increments. Measure- (c) The deflection recovery 24 hr after complete ments or observations as required by the Designer depressurization is 70% or more in conventionally shall be made at each such increment. The structure reinforced structures, or 80% or more in prestressed

[ shall be unloaded in increments paalleling those If the structure is partially concrete structures employed dunng theloading cycle.

249

CC421.v-CC4232 SECTION III. DIVISION 2 - SUBSECTION CC

(

prestressed (i.e vertically only. dome only, etc.), the CC4223 Alteration of Test Plan recovery requirements shall be adjusted to conform t h mil W p& m & Ws a @ p type of construction. approval of appropnate authonties, the Owner. and (d) The measured maximum deflections at points the Designer at any time pnor to conductinc the test of maximum predicted deflection do not exceed . if changing technology, desien information.'or con-predicted values by more than 30%.This requirement struction circumstance's v arra'nt.

must be waived if the 24 hr recovery is greater than 90% for prestressed structures or .80% for con-ventionally reinforced concrete structures.

CC4230 INSTRUMENTATION CC4214 Retest CC4231 Purpose If the measurements indicate that requirements (c) and (d) of CC-6213 are not met, further study by the Instrumentation shall be incorporated into the Designer will be required involving possible effects of CCS for measurement of overall deformation for creep and temperature change as well as possible nonprototype structures and shallinclude provisions inaccuracies in the measured quantities or the for strain measurements in prototype structures.

predicted values. If such studies still indicate that CC4232 Deflection Measurements requirements (c) and (d) are not fulfilled. remedial measures may be undertaken or a retest may be At each specified pressure level.a planned series of conducted. If the containment structure experiences deflection measurements and observations shall be major structural changes or significant damage made at selected locations with the requirements as requiring repairs af ter test, the acceptance test shall be outlined below:

repeated following the completion of the corrective (a) radial displacements of the cylinder at a actions. In the areas where major structural repairs minimum of five approximatelv eg'ually spaced I . are performed, additional nstrumentation sho,uld be elevations between the base slab an'd dome s'pnnaline, provided to determine whether'the structural repair is and at dome to cylinder transition. These ' mea-providing suitable structural capability. Special at- surements shall be'made at a minimum of four tention should be given to shrinkage and creep effects azimuths. The measurement at azimuths 180 deg.

caused by variations in age and composition of the apart may be the average radial displacement at these repaired area. azimuths.

(b) the radial deflections of the containment wall adjacent to the largest opening, at a minimum of twelve points, four equally spaced on each of three CC4220 TEST AND INSTRUMENT PLAN concentric circles. The diameter of the inner circle shall bejust large enough to permit measurements to CC4221 Purpose be made on the concrete rather than on the steel sime: the middle approximately 1.75 times the A complete test and instrumentatics plaf shall be diameter of the opening; and the other approximately developed in the Design Specifim% 1:0 acluded 2.5 times the diameter of the opening.The increase in in the Construction Specificaac t'W j in shall 8 met" f 6e Pemng su M measured in two describe the type and location ei instrunm.mion and mutually perpendicular directions. If other openings relate the data to the needs of the Designer regarding require structural substantiation, deflection mea-verification of design. surements as determined by the Designer shall be made in the same manner as stipulated for the largest CN W opening.

The plan shall include a description of the method (c) vertical displacement of the cylinder at the top of applying the test loads in addition to the in- relative to the base at a mmimum of four ap-strumentation location and type.This test plan shall proximately equally spaced azimuths; be available pnor to commencement of construction fd) vertical deflections of the dome of the con-tainment at the apex and two other equally spaced

( so that enough time will be available for the placement of any instrumentation to be embeddedin intermediate points between a point near the apex and concrete or otherwise installed dunng construction. the springline on at least one azunuth.

250

CC 4000 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF CCS CC 4232.1--CC.6238 CC4232.1 Accuracy of Measurements. Specifi- CC4234.3 teng Term Stabilit). Stram measunng cations for the gross deforr.-ation measurement devices of proven abihty to provide data over long devices shall provide for a minimum accuracy of penods of time shall be used. Electne resistance 2 5% of the mar.imum anticipated gross deformation gauges bonded directly to remforcing bars or to as predicted at the pomt of maximum anticipated concrete will not provide the necessary long term deflection. -

stability if the test requirements developed by the Designer stipulate that the long term strain history shall be recorded.

CC M ' Crackig CC 6 4 Panial Pmemsing. Internal in-The pattern of cracks that exceed 0.01 in. in width strumentation placed in the concrete of partially before. during or after the test should be mapped near the base wall intersection at midheight of the Prestressed structures shall be in accordance with the Provisions for conventionally reinforced structures wall. at the springline of the dome, around the larIest . .

(CC4224.1 and CC4224.3) for strams measured oper.ing. and around the second largest opemng if perpendicular to the direction of expected de-structurally loaded m a different manner from the velopment of cracks.

largest opening. In prestressed containments the crack pattern should also be mapped at the in- CC4234.5 Accuracy of Strain Measuring Devices.

tersection between a buttress and the wall. at the The accuracy of the devices used for strain mea-intersection between the top nng girder and the wall. surements shall be specified to have a minimum and on the top. shelf of the nng girder. At each accuracy of 2 5% of the maximum anticipated stram location an area of at least 40 sq ft should be mapped. as predicted at the point of maximum expected strain on the structure. The mmimum gauge length shall be 4 in, f r measurement of internal concrete strains or CC4234 Strain Measurements measurement of strams on concrete surface.

. In prototype containment > the following locations 1

.will'oe selected as a mimmum requirement for strain CC4235 Tendon Force Measurements

(

instrumentation: If tendon force and force change measurements are (as near the intersecuon of the contamment wall -

required by the Designer. the load cells used for this and the base slab at a minimum of one mendian purpose shall have an accuracy of atleast : 3% of the (b) in the vicinity of the largest opening in initial tendon force.

sufficient number to ensure satisfactorily evaluation (c) at the spnngline of the dome at a minimum of CC4236 Temperature Measurements one meridian if strain me surements are t be made. thermo-CC4234.1 Selection and Location of Gauges. Strain couples shall be installed in the concrete containment gauges placed on reinforegng bars do not provide wall near the inner and outer face at a minimum of meaningful data unless their location coincides with three locations and at one location in the dome.

the development of cracks. Thus, provision shall be Measurements from these instruments shall be made made to ensure that these instruments will be located at each pressuruation and depressurization level at points where cracks will occur if cracking is during the test as well as for a period of one week pnor expected. A method shall be employed to ensure that to the test.

, cracks will occur at or very near the location of stram gauges attached to conventional reinforcement or CC4237 Weather instruments shall be placed on reinforcement where shrinkage cracks have developed prior to testing. The limits of environmental conditions under which the test may be conducted shall be specified by CC4234.2 Strains in Prestressed Containments. the Designer. If possible. the test shall be postponed if Strain instrumentation in completely prestressed weather conditions adverse to the proper conduct of concrete vessels need not be designed to comcide with crack development if cracking is not to be expected dW during the pressure testing. Stram measunng devices CC4238 Pressure Gauges

. placed m, the concrete body will provide data which is useful in analyzing the performance of prestressed Pressure test gauges used in pressure testing shall be

( concrete structures. indicating pressure gauges and shall be connected 251

-,e , - . ,,,. - - ~ - - - ~ . -

CC.6238-CC.6261 SECTION Ill. DIVISION 2 - SUBSECTION CC directly to the component. If the indicating gauge is ~

CC4250 TEST PROCEDURE

/not readily visible to the operator controlling the pressure applied. an additional indicating gauge shall CC4251 Pretest Examination be provided where it will be visible to the operator Prior to pressure testing.a thorough exammation of throughout the duration of the test.

the structure shall be made by the Designer. The bjective of such examination is to recced such CC4238.1 Range of Indicating Pressure Gap c nditions as cracks in the concrete. liner de.

Indicating pressure cauges used in testing shall have formation, and other data which may be needed to dials graduated over'a range not less than 1% times interpret the behavior of the structure. The Designer the intended test pressure. nor more than four times shalI be on site during the acceptance testing. The -

that pressure. _

duties of the Authorized Inspector are stipulated with CC4238.2 Calibration of Pressure Ganges. All r*5Pect to this test in CA 5280 and CA 5290.

gauges shall be calibrated against a standard dead-weight tester or a calibrated master gauge prior to CC4252 Test Sequence each test or series of tests. Gaunes shallbe calibrated before and after acceptance test 7 (a) All measurements shall be recorded at at-mospheric pressure and at each stipulated pressure level of pressurization and depressurization cycles.

The containment shall be depressurized and data taken in the same number of increments as was used during pressurization.

CC4240 PRETEST' REQUIREMENTS (b) If the test pressure drops due to unexpected conditions to or below the next lower pressure level.

The structure shall be inspected visually from the entire test sequence shall be repeated. Significant readily accessible points of view to locate unusually deviations from the previous test shall be recorded I severe cracks in the exposed concrete surface- and evaluated. ,

CC4253 Test Fluid CC4241 Predictions Required Prior to Test The test requirements stipulated herem are based Predictions as to expected readings of all devices n the use of atmospheric air as the testmg fluid.

used to monitor vessel behavior shall have been made.

Stress. strain, and deformation data shall have been Modif,cauons i may be necessary if other gases or developed by the Designer using the same techniques I'. quids are used and pressure or temperature con-siderations other than those applicable to the use of as were employed in the design of the vessel. *I' *" 558"IIiC*"I' Acceptance limits shall be provided for each pres-surization increment for all devices that, in the judgment of the Designer. are necessary in order to permit a determination that the test may proceed safely to the next increment of increased pressure. CC4260 ANALYSIS OF DATA AND PREPARATION OF REPORT CC4242 Pretest of lastrumentation CC4261 Resolution of Test' Data Readings from all strain measuring devices shall be The results of the test shall be furnished to and be recorded daily for a period of one week prior to the examined by the CCS Designer. In particular.

commencement of the pressure test.This is in order to discrepancies between measured and predicted ex.

establish the stability of these instruments and tremes of strain. temperature.or deformation shall be eliminate those which exhibit excessive drift. These resolved satisfactorily. by review of the design.

daily readings shall be made at the same time each evaluations of measurement tolerances, material day, preferably very early in the morning, at which variability, and exploration of the vessel. The CCS time the structure will have achieved its greatest tests shall be acceptable if the requirements of CC-( 6213 are met.

temperature stability on a day-to-day basis. .

252

CC 6000 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF CCS CC4262-CC42L3

' CC-6262 Presentation of Data thf a comparison of the test measurements with the all wable limits (predicted response plus tolerances Data shall be presented in the final report so that f rdeflections, strains andcrackwidth direct. comparisons between predicted values and measured values may be made. (c) an evaluation of the estimated accuracy of the measurements CC-6263 Minimum Report Regsimments (d) an evaluation of any deviction (such as test The following minimum informaticn shall be results that exceed the allowble limits), the disposition of the deviations, and the need for corrective included in the final test report in accordance with CA-3340: measures (a) a description of the test procedure and the (c/ a discussion of the calculated safety margin instrumentation provided by the CCS as deduced from the test results e

S

( .

253

\

CONTAINMENT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST SEABROOK STATION - UNIT 1 APPENDIX C UE&C SPECIFICATION FOR STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST - SPEC. NO. 9763.006-5-5 l

l l

l

- _ _ - _ _ - _ - , _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ , _ _ . _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ . . . _ . . . _ . . _ . _.. _. _ _ _ _ , . . _ . - . _ _ - . _