ML20235E323
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - ~ - - - ~ ~ ~ ~
9 BSD.1 & 2 CAROLINA POWER AIS LIGif COMPANY BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC F1 ANT UNITS 1 & 2 DESIGl REPORT NO. 4 SEISMIC ANALYS1ai 0F THE PRDIARY A3W SICENDARY CONTADeGNTS 15 NOVDGER 1970 8709280063 PDR FOIA 870921? .
\
,_, NENZ87-111 PDR- 4
SSEP 1 & 2 TABLE OF CDWTENTS
.Ill.lf, l
I
- 1. INTRODUCTION 1
)
II. S0IL-STRUCTURE INTERACTICH III. HDDAL ANALYSIS )
- 17. DYNAMIC ANALYSIS FOR VERTICAL EARTHQUAKE 1
i 7 EQUIPMFMI RESPONSE SPECTRA VI. DESIGN OF EQUIPMENT & PIPING E
i
- - - - . . . - d ., . -........_.m.hm h
88EP= 1 er 2 .
I. E p ococu ou Dis report will discuss the following subjects in regard to the seis-mic saalysis of the primary and secondary containments:
A. Soil-Structure Interaction
- 5. Nodat Analysis
)
C. Equipment Response Spectra D. Design of Equipment and Piping i A seismicity study and the design response spectra were previously submitted in Appendix A3 sad A4, respectively, of Volume III, Brunswick Steam tiectric Plant PSAR.
His report, together with Appendix A3 and A4 to the PSAR, constitute the data required to complete a seismic analysis of the primnry and secondary containments.
his report was prepared by United Engineers & Constructors and is based, in part, on work done by our consultants Professor John M. 31ggs of Hansen, Holley and Biggs Consulting Engineers and Dr. Robert V.
Whitman, Soils Consultant and Professor of Civil Engineering at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. )
ll l
I-1
\
\\ -.
)
I a.,
I :
i ;'
I 1
I I
i SECTION II S0IL-STRUCTURE INTERACTICH 1
f
._____A m . _ - - - - _ _ _ 4
38EP.1 & 2 i
i DBLE OF CONTENTS _
Title Pate No.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
II - 1 2.0 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE S110CTURE II - 1 3.0 MODEL FOR SOIL-SiltVCIURE INTERACTION II - 3 4.0 EVALUATION OF SPRING CONSTANTS II - 5 5.0 EFFICI 0F SOIL-SIRUCTURE DQRACTION II - 9 6.0 VARIATION OF PARAMETERS $11/DY II - 13
7.0 CONCLUSION
S II .14 References II .15 Tables II .16 Figures II - 21 APPENDIX A II - Al Une of plane strain finite element program w.
___ ____ ___ -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - ~ - - - ~ ~
- , w ypey. ,m.
ee - .. we wp M 88tP- 1 6 2 1.0 INTR (IWCT10H This section describes parametric studies made to deterudne values for the soil-springs vhich represent the effect of the soil-structure i interaction upon the response of the structure.
The final model differs slightly from the model used for this study, i.e., wall thicknesses were chaaged; however, conclusions reached regard-ing soil-spring constants are set 11 valid.
Figure 11-1 shows a cross-section through the Reactor Pressure Vessel (RFV), sacrificial shield, pedestal (these three components will be noted as the RPV System), and the primary and secondary containment structure, vnile Figure II-2 gives the model developed to analyse the I dynamic behavior of the coupled systems. Figure II 2 also indicates the model for soil-structure interaction, represented here by springs 3k , kg , I k5 and k6 '
r 2.0 CHARACIT.RISTICS OF TH.; STRUCTURE The structure is made up of three units: The f.enctor Building I
(secondary containment), the Dryvell (primary containment), and the RPV System.
All of these units are supported and hence coupled upon a massive, rigid foundation mat. The RPV, sacrificial shield and Dryvell are also coupled through springs kg and 2k . The approximate weight of these units is given in Table 11-1. Also given in the table is the weight of soil which was added to the foundstion mat as part of the soil-structure model.
The foundation mat is rectangular, approximately 190' (X-direc-tion) by 154' (Y-direction) in plan. The Reactor Building is square II - 1 s
BSEP-! & 2 in plan (142'-0" by 142'-0") for most of its height. De Drywell and the RFV System are approximately axisynenetric about a vertical axis.
Two conditions are of interest: the operating condition and the refueling condition. ne weights in Table 11-1 apply for the operating ,
y, cond i t ion. We weights of the RN System and of the Reactor Building l l
, in the refueling condition are about 5% larger and are distributed i slightly differently. The result for the coupled structure, assuming rigid soil, is that the fundassental frequency of the RW Syntes is slightly larscr in the operating condition than in the iciuoling con-dition, whereas the reverse is true for the Reactor Building. Se dynamic characteristics of the structure are determined by examining the cosaputed response (assuming rigid soil) in the Y-direction for the !
{
.* refueling condition. The two lowest natural frequencies are:
Mode Frecuency (eps) Unit 1
4.79 Reactor Building 2 6.16 RPV System As shown by the mode shapes in Figure 11-3, the first mode is the fundamental mode of the Reactor Building while the second node is the fundamental mode of the RPV System. De higher order modes have frequencies greater than 14 cps. The Drywe!! is stif f compared to
.a the RPV System, and by itself has a fundamental frequency on the I
order of 16 cps. The spring kg bctween the sacrificial shield and l
the Drywell is stiffer than the spring k 2between the sacrificial l
shield and the RPV.
II - 2
\
\
. ~ . <
58EP.1 6 2 3.0 MOEL FOR SOIL-STRUCTURE INTERACTION Figure II-4 (b) shows the model used t a represent the soil-structure interaction.
l Ef fect of dense sand: Springs k$ and k6 rePres< nt, respect ively, I the resistance of the underlying sand to translation and rocking of the structure. An additional mass is added to the fcundation mat to repre-sent the inertial resistance of this stratum. This additional mass AM was chosen such that:
1 a
1 1 pAM . <o 2r 4H !
I l
where Cs is the shear wave velocity for the dense sand and H is the thickness of the dense sand. That is to say, oH was chosen such that the natural frequency of the system containing k3 and A H equals the l fundamental frequency of the stratum of dense sand.
Ef fect of embedment : The interaction between the structure and the surrounding stratum is more complex. It is necessary to consider l two ef fects, as indicated in Figure 11-5.
- 1. If the soil well to the side of the structure tends to move less (relative to the rock) than does the structure, then the surrounding soil exerts a restraining ef fect upon the structure.
- 2. If the soil well to the side of the structure tends to move more (relative to rock) than does the structure, then the surrounding soil exerts a driving ef fect upon the structure, f
1 e
II - 3 1
1
SSEP.1 & 2 These two effects, which arc slaultaneously present in the actual situs-
=
tion, have been brought out clearly by the theoretical work and field observations by Tajimi (1). This porcion of the model is designed to take into account both of these ef fects.
Spring k4 and esass M44 repnsent the response of the soil well to the side of the structure. The ratio of k to M is chosen such that gkg j 44M equals the estimated fundamental frequency of the entire 2s soll mass. Both kg and Mg are of sufficient magnitude to ensure that the motion of mass M44 is relatively unaffected by the motion of the
) -
structure.
a Spring k3 then represents the force exerted upon the structure as the result of relative motion between the structure and the soil well to the side of the structure. This force is applied at mid-depth of the embedded portion of the structure. As will be shown later in this report, the restraining or driving ef fects proved to be minor and )
therefore position k) at mid-depth is satisfactory for the analysis.
The model in Figure 11-4 (b) incorporates all necessary features, j yet permits the engineer to see clearly what is happening in the model.
Use of a simpic model requires judgment when assigning stiffness to the l springs since higher order modes o.' deformation within the soil are not j represented. Considering the final outcome of parametric studies (see I
sect ions 5.0, 6.0 and 7.0), it is believed that this model is adequate for analysis of the carthquake response of the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant.
l II - 4 I
I
______ ---------- - - ~]
ISEP.s & 2 4.0 XYAISTION OF $1MitM CONSinNTS The basic soil properties used in the evaluation of the spring constants are given in Table 11-2.
These moduli apply for the level of strains which would occur within the soil during the operating basis earthquake (053) if no structure were present.
The finite element studies referred to in this section are described in Appendix A.
Spring kr,:
This spring represents the stiffness of the underlying dense sand with respect to the horizontal translation.
Hashiba (2) has presented the following formula for evaluating the spring constaat for an tecompressible soil (Poisson's ratio e
= 1/2):
k =
5 c ( h + 2.8[A ) (2) where A is the foundation area, H is the thickness of the soil strattas f and C is the sheer modulus of the soll. With the following parameter values, C = 3.3 x 106 psi, B = 26 feet, and A = 156 x 190 = 29,M0 f t2, the horizontal stiffness, based on Eq. (2) is found to be:
9 k5 = 5.3 x 10 lb/ft.
The resistence of the underlying sand also was analyzed uslag a plane strain finite element program with the same result as givet by Eq. (2).
Ilowever, both methods of analysis give results which are known to be on the low side of the correct value. Hashiba 's formula is based on Davis and Taylor's (3) approximate results which the authors admit are low. The planc strain finite element results will also be low because in order to convert a threcadimensional problem to a two-dimensional one, it is necessary to assume that the structure is II - 5 4
seemeum- _ * *
- J
88tP.1 6 2 infinitely long, thereby discounting the soil reaction of the end of the structure. With these considerations in mind, the spring constant with respect to horizontal translation of the soil was determined to be:
k 5
6 x 10' lb/f t Spring k6 : This spring represents the stiffness of the underlying dense sand with respect to rotation. An estimate of this spring constant can be obtained by extrapolating beyond Kobari's (4) graph for the static ground cosg11ance* for rotation. This gives a value on the order of 10I '
f t-lb/ radian for the stiffness.
To obtain a acre accurate solution, the plane strain finite element
.!)
was utill ed and gave the following results: rotation in Y-direction: .
I I
k 6 = 1.9 x 10 ' f t-lb/ radian; rotation in K-direction: M k6 = 3.9 a 10 f t-lb/ radian.
The spring constants used in the dynamic analysis were:
J k6 I
= 2 x 10 ' f t-lb/ radian in Y-direction k6 I
= 4 x 10 ' f t-lb/ radian in X-direction Spring k4 and Mass Mc6: The estimated fundamental frequency for I
the soil profile is 2.8 cps, based upon a we tghted average shear wave velocity of 800 fps. Applying Eq. (1) to the entite soil profile, with H = 72 feet:
k (Ib/ft) = 310 M44 (slugs) 4 M is large compared to the total mass of the structure.
44
- Static ground ccwnpliance is defined as the ratio of the displacement te the applied force; it is the reciprocal of the spring constant.
II - 6 t
CEP.1 di t I
, spring k3 : This is the most difficult spring constant to evaluate, in part because of lack of an adequate theory and in part because of uncertainty as to the strains (and hence as to the proper value of effective modulus) in the soil famediately adjacent to the structure.
A first estimate for k was 3
made using a plane strain finite element program together with the soil properties given in Table 11-2. This program gave the total static horisontal spring constant k, which is related to the individual spring constants by:
k=k 3 4 (3) 5 + m3 + mg l +
which for k gvery large becomes
! k=k +k (4) 5 3 I
Thus, having found k and knowing k5 (see above), k) can be found. The analysis, which considered a resisting force to be developed only on one side of the structure, gave 9
k) = 1.2 x 10 lb/f t in Y-direction 9
. > k = 0.6 x 10 lb/f t in I-direction i 3 l
Including the ef fect on the opposite side of the structure would i
mean that these values would be approximately doubled. Other studies of three dimensional effects, including the ahear stresses which develop on sides which are parallel to the direction of motion, t
b
, II - 7 1
l l
n- . l
03EP-1 & 2 suggested possibly aesther 50% increase in the above values. Consider-ing these various effects, an initial value of k) = 1.5 x 10 lb/ft was used for motion in both elirections.
Initial analyses using this value of k gave an average dynamic 3
lateral stress against the structure of about 1500 psf. This compares with an at rest effective lateral stress of about 700 psf. Thus, the I
analyses were laylying a tension against one side of the structure and l l
a stress corresponding to large strains against the other side of the struc ture.
I (3) Hence, a reanalysis was necessary and several approaches were used. I the value of Young's modulus used in the finite element program was re-duced to account for the large strains, and it was assumed that there is (4) no change in stress on the " tension" side of the structure. Terzaght 's (5) concept of horizontal subgrade was used.* On the basis of all of these approaches, the value of k) was determined to be 9
k) = 0.15 x 10 lb/ft.
SUMMARY
Table 11-3 susanarizes the values for the various spring constants.
Note that 3k is small compared to 5 k ' s that there is very little lateral interaction.
- The f actor B in Teisaghi's theory was taken equal to the depth of embedment,
, II - 8 1
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . 1
I astr.1 6 2 5.0 ErfRCT Or SOE-STRUCTURE DrfERACTION As a first step in understanding the effect of soil-structure inter-action, assume that the structure is completely rigid. The resulting system then has three normal modes. Considering mottan in the Y-direc-
- tion for the refueling condition
- 1. The first mode, which occurs at a frequency of 2.81 cps, essen-tially involves motion only of Mass 44; that is, this mode gives the response of the soil stratums by itself. The anotion of the 1
structure is very small La this mode, indicating that for the value of k used, the lateral interaction is very small.
3
- 2. The second and third modes involve coupled rocking snd trans-lation of the structure upon springs k5 and k,; the anotion of Mass 44 is very small in these esodes. If there were no cocpling between the rocking and the translation, the two natural fre-quencies would bc:*
f = 4.45 cps f
- 9.8 cp8 rock Considering the coupling ef fect, the frequencies of these two modes become 4.26 cps and 12.8 cps. The lower of these two modes involvca primarily translation: at the tor > of the outer structure, the horizontal notion caused by rocking is 257. of the total motion.
- The mass moment of inert for the rocking case in 17 x 10 II l b.-f t.2 This includes the moment i inertia of the effective mass of soil. The CC is 49.3 feet above the bottoo of the foundstion stab.
II - 9
.M- .. _ .. _. _ _ _ _ _ - .
BS EP- 1 6 2 Thus, rigid body rocking has sone, but not a major, influence upon the response of the structure.
Figures II-6 and 11-7 dcpict the first five modes of the entire coupled system, considering both structural flexibility and soil-struc-ture interaction. The response is due to an earthquake acting in the Y-direction during a refueling condition.
- 1. The first node is essentially the fundamental mode of the soil profile; the motion of the structutt is very anell in this mode.
2 The second mode is the fundamental mode of the asil-structure system. It primarily involves horirontal relative translation between the rock and the foundation and distorttaa of the Reactor Building. Ihat is to say, this mode is a combination of the fundamental mode for the Reactor Building on a rigid foundation (4.79 cps) and of the fundamental mode of soil-structure interaction (4.26 cps). Since the anass of the Reactor Building is significant compared to the mass of the foundation, i
the ficxibility within the Reactor Building combines with the I flexibility in the soil to reduce the overall fundamental frequency to 3.28 cps. Of the total relative motion in this mode, between the rock and the top of the Reactor Building, 767 is due to distortion in the Reactor Building,177. is due to translation of the foundat ton, and 77, is due to rocking of the foundat ion. There is virtually no distortion within the Dryvc11; it just rides along with the foundation. There is l
1 II - 10 1
e l
_ _- " A
l 888F-1 6 2 some distortion induced within the RPV System, even though this part of the structure is far from beir.g in a resonant condition.
- 3. The third mode is the fundamental mode of the Reactor Building steel framing above the refueling floor. The motion of the remainder of the system is very small.
4 The fourth mode is essentially the fundamental mode for the RFV System, modified slightly because of non-rigidity of the foundation (compare Figures II-3 and II-6). Note that the frequency corresponding to this mode of deformation has dropped somewhat free 6.16 cps to 5.62 cps. Foundation movement is very sas11 in this mode, and the Dryve11 and Reactor Building undergo virtually no distortion. Because the RPV Oystem is light compared to the foundation and Raaetor ,
i Building, this modo is essentially the same as the second mode i
' for the structure alonc.*
- 5. The fifth mode is a more complicated mode of interaction i
l between the foundation and the RPV System. Ihere is sonne l
motion of the foundation and some distortion of the Reactor j Building.
There are higher and more complicated modes, but they contribute littic to the overall renponse of the structure. Table II-4 indicates the effect of soil-structure interaction upon the forces developed at i
l
- In this connection, note the very small changes in the frequency of this mode during the variation of parameters study (Tables 11-5 and II-6)
II - 11
I 1
38EP 1 & 2 four key locations within the atructure. The Operating Basis Earthquake (0B8) is described by the response spectrum submitted in Appendix A4, Vol. III, Brunswick Steam Electric Plant PSAR; 4% damping is assumed in each mode, and the modal responses are combined as the square j l
root of the sus of the squares. With the rigid foundation (refer to Figure 11-3) the shear at the base of the Reactor Building comes entirely from the first mode; the shear at the RFV support and the force in spring k 2come aim at entirely r a the second mode although modes 2, 3 and 4 all contribute to the shear at the RFV support and to the 1
force in spring k 2; the shear at the base of the Drywell comes mainly J from the second mode.
Accordlag to the results in Table 11-4, soil-structure interaction increases significantly the response of the structure. This occurs I
because the motion of the foundation is greater with soil-structure interaction than for a rigid foundation (peak acceleration, square root of the sum of the squares value, of 0.143 vs 0.083). This computed result occurs partly because in this modal solution the damping in the soil la *aken just the same as the damping within the structure, i.e.,
4%. The solutions suggest that the shear strain in the sand below the foundation is about 3.0 x 104 in/in, which would mean damping of about 87. in this soil . Thus, the computed response with soil-structure interaction included is conservative.
4)
II - 12
]
BSEPol & 3 I
I !
6.0 VARIATION OF PARAMFTERS STUDY Influence of k3 : This is the least well known of the spring con-stants representing the soil. Hence, computer runs were made for cases involving a large change in this parameter. The results are sussnarized in Table 11-5. Increasing k3 above the value given in Tame W3 causes a noticeable decrease in the response of the structure, and snaken the first ande (siportant with regard to structural response.
Decreasing k) causes very little change in the response of the struc-ture, since the value for k 3is abeady maall enough so that cms l i
spring has very little influence upon the structure. The important conclusion in that the .value used for k3 is a conservative estimate.
The, choice of k 3has a major influence upon the computed dynamic lateral stress against the embedded wall of the Reactor Building.
From the results of the varbus runs and from other studies, the overage dynamic lateral stress for the operating basis earthquake is about 250 psf. This stress was )
- ained by dividing the force in spring kj by the contact area and by a factor of 2.5. The development of the value 2.5 is found on page II - 7 Influence of k 3and k 6: Estimates have been made for ranges in which k and k 6 might fall, and computer runs have been made to study 3
the possible ef fects of crrors in the values of these spring constants.
The results of these runs are summarized in Iable II-6 It is seen that changing k5can cause n ticeable changes in the response, although noch errors arising from uncertainty as to the proper value of k are l e n e, than many other uncertainties involved la the analysis of a complex st ructure for earthquake loadings.
II - 13
\
\
\ l
\
3 \
L ,,,j , . . , . , ---A-==+----* " " ' " " " " " " ~~
_ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - f
SgEF-1 & 2
7.0 CONCLUSION
S The main conclusion.from these parametric studies is that the values of spring constants listed in Table 11-3 should be used for design. While some combinations of paraseters may lead to slightly greater computed response, these incresses are insignificant in the light of the conservatism involved in the analysis. One reason for conservatism in the results obtained from the computer runs has already been mentioned: damping in the soil is assumed to be t.% same as in the structure, whereas the damping in the sail will actually be greater than in the structure.
1 II - 14 i
m_-_..
m ..._
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - ~ - ~~
)
RSEF.3 & 2 REFEROCES
- 1. Tajimi. H., " Dynamic Analysis of a Structure Embedded in an Elastic Stratues," Proc. 4th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (Chile).
1969, in publication.
- 2. Hashiba. T.,
Soil-Structure Intersection Durinz Earthquakes, Master of Science Thesis, submitted to the Department of Civil Engineering, M.I.T.,
1967.
- 3. Davis, E. H.,
and Taylor, H. , "The Surface Displacement of an Ilastic Layer Dime to Horizontal and Vertical Surface Loadias," Proc. 5th Inter-nation Conference of Soil Mcchanics and Foundation Enmineers, Vol. 7, l pp. 621-427,1961. I 4 Kobori, T., Minai, R., and Suzuki, T., " Dynamical Ground Compliance of Rectangular Foundation on an Elastic Stratum Over a Semi-Infinite Rigid I Medium, Annual Report . l Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto 1 University, No. 10 A, March 1967.
]
5.
Terzaghi . K. , " Evaluation of Coefficients of Subgrade Reaction,"
Geotechnioue, Vol. 5,1955, pp 297-326 l
l l
11 - 15 y_ . k . . _ . . . . - - - ---
. .. - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ . 1
58E?.1 & 2 k
I
}
TABLE 11-1 l
I TABUIATION OF WEIGHTS Ft2 OPERATING CONDIT10BI
)
R: actor pressure vessel-sacrificial shield. pedestal 5,530 Kips Drywell 10,850 Kips Reactor Building 107.980 Eton Subtotal 124,360 Elps Foundation met 110.690 Kips Eff 3ctive mass of soll 55.600 Kios Subtotal 166.290 Elps Total 290,650 Elps 1
i 1
1 1 '
II - 16 l
L . . . . ...._.,.u . . . . . . . . . - . ,..-...__ -L __ , ;_ n - ___ _L_
i
I l
38EP-1 & 2 l 1
l l
l TABLE II-2 TABU 1ATION OF SOIL PROPERTIES UNIT SHAR SHEAR POISSON'S YOUNG ' S WICHT VELOCITY MODULUS RATIO HDDU111 I,9.E: pef fos est , per Fill 115 6 6 750 2.0x10 0.35 5.4x10 Dense
=
sand 130 900 3.3x106 0.50 9.8x 10 6
l TAB 12 II-3 S0IL SPRINC CONSTANTS
(_
[ k)
=
0.15 x 109 lb/fe
=
kg 310 Mg 1b/ft (Mg in slugs) 9 k =
6 x 10 lb/ft 5
^
k 6
= 2 x 10 14 f t-10/ rad in Y-direction j' 4 x 10 14 f t-lb/ rad in X-direction I
[
t i
II = 17
\
i u -
BSEP-1 & 2 TABl.E II-4 RATIO 0F FORCES DEVE14 PED D STRUC'IURE BY OPERATDG BASIS EARTHQUAKE I
)
Actual Foundation Rigid Foundation Shear at base of Reactor Building 1.705
?
Shaar at base of Drywell 3.060 Shear at interface of EFV-Sacrificial Shield 1.832 with .' .tal Farce in spring k 1.895 i
)
l
-)
I
{
l l
l 1
l Ess 1 Modal reponses combined as square root of the sum of the squarca I
- 2. Shown in Y-direction for refueling condition ]
- 3. Based on spring constants in Table II-3 l 1
\
II - 18
{
-l 98EP.1 & 2 1
%ABLE 11-3 BRCENT CHANGE IN RESPONSE CAUSED BY VARYING k 3 Increase k
~ Decrease k) to 1.5 109 lb/ft to 0.01 x 109 lb/ft Sheer at base of Reactor Building -28% +5%'
Sheer at base of Drywell -21% +5%
Sheer at interface of RPV-Sacrificial Shield with pedestal 23% 4%
Force in spring h -25%
2 +3%
Frepency of 2nd mode M% -l%
Frequency of 3rd mode *
+1% ~0%
E8
- 1. Shears and forces are square root of the sue of the squares values.
- 2. Datum is responae computed using spring coastants listed in Table II-3,
- 3. Effect of increasing k analyzed for Y-direction in refueling condition.
4 Effect of decreasing k3analysed for X-direction in operating condition.
l i
II - 19 4
3_ A
i y y 1 0 9 5 t b b -
6 0 1 3 1 l
u 5
+ + +
M k k 3 3 y / /
l 2 1 p % % %
i y y 7 5 7
% % 7 4 7 0 1
t b b - - 1 2 1
~, - - -
l kk 5 6k 6 3 3 k k -
I D y 3 . I N l / %% 1 %% %
s A P 2 6 4 4 2 5 0 e e 1 - - 1 2 1 u l
$ t y - -
l b k - a a I b v T G
N s n I e i Y r R a d A u e V q t 6 s s Y k i B e l y 3 h 6
D l / %% % % %%
t s E p 1 0 2 6 7 t .
- S i 4
0 f n n I U t y o a o I A l b t i C u e s s t E H u n i L
B E s o d S c n A N e o T O h g c P t n S i g E f r n R o p i i l s t D a t g a i o r c o n e E g i r i p G n f s o N i i e u A d r r r H l c a d o C i e u e f u S q t T B - s u n N V p o E r l F e m i C o l R r o t R t e i a c c E c w f a e P a y e e s e r ot d d e s e r s o o c n i
R D ee d cd k m m r o p
f f ae d o X o d f s o f p g n r e n r n 2 3 d r e e eh i n
i s s t t r f f a s s a a ni p o o i i b b iw s s s y y r m y t
a t
a td n c c a u l el i n n e t a r r e e e : h a n a a ri e u u S S D A eh c q q E e e es r e e T h h h o r r O S S S F F F N 1 2 3 p . ,,o
[N f [h}.1!I' i ,
.:fI l[
l
,I
.,I
)]
. ~,
O $
4 1
- i = ;-
x,g - .
3' 4
i
=
V SUPPRESSION UCHAMBER C An0LIN A POWER & LIGHT COMP ANv BRUNSWICK STE AM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 PERSPECTIVE OF CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE l
II - 1 l .
.d ---h '
]
i I
I e
a o
A 4
o O
, o a
5 " "
a o o o o o
... __. K2 M..i.-
E O
o o
p i o o '
g e a {;j U w s, E am e A
uw wmo o (5
t.h <
i > < >
0 E at o-0, o e o
, e o A . ,
/ o A o l'f.gf' , '
, L __ . . w $ a(l C'
,t a,, __
/, o
-,/
=
K3 M44 K4
~
, ___:. . . _7_ u. ~ ,_ r- . . . . _ . . . .
. vv ,
v --
p _- - - _ . . _ -
._ : = - - - - - - - -
E. _
=:-~ ~ . ..
~.
~ =~. = :2
~ _ _ _-a . Uk. @e g= .ll::=- . 3.(n .;. m
- ._ .n.
=*=.-i. .-
- w:. .-J C,,.;.. *=.' - - -
, .7- ;.
"17.'. ' .' ' '
. -T?'.--~~....__
Z ~'
4,, . ._
mesmaus 6tik -
WWF . - --
~
KaW u.. .
- < wv<
.r CAROLINA POWE R & LIGM' COMPANY
~ BRUNSWICE STEAM ELECTRIC FLANT UNITS I & 2 3 1
1 I
- C ,i i MODEL OF CONTAINMENT STRUCTUAE
~ 4 11 - 2 i
&L n MLWMA w.r-Max =5=$55 0
RPV SYSTEM DRYWELL REACTOR BUILDING MODE-l 4.79 CPS
- l. 1 --
i i.
1 i'
i i-RPV SYSTEM DRYWELL REACTOR BUILDING M00E-2 6.16 CPS CAAOLIN A POWE R & LIGH T COMPANY r
BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 MODE SHAPES WITH {
RIGID FOUNDATION i i
\ l
\
' I II - 3 i i
\ -- i
\
$5 _M i
_ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ l
i mnv ,n u + 20'
< <<n u c SILTY CLAY CR- ,
FILL' iu a
. <-re --
,m ,
-28 m,, s 26 DENSE SAND l < <<<wxve en sw e < <xwve<<xuvrenysv fn w-enuv ernuf fes u -
52'
!al ACTUAL SOIL CONDITIONS I
3 4 W MDM g n
Au 1 ; "
e ,
- a
. L 1
lI6 I
S !!
"4 i M $vern u v</n wv </n nv<<nx xven xNTvernwven w (b) MODEL FOR Soll CONDITIONS i
i C AROLIN A POWE R & LIGHT COMPANY BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 MODEL FOR SOfL-STRUCTURE INTERACTION I t
~ l II - 4
~
_ - .- _m nm g- -
gpsW__ . .
.a
i i t l ,
I i
.' . ' l* a .* - - * *
- I * *
- $ . ** * *. tes EMeEoMEur
, . . , . .I . RESTRAINS MOTION
.L
- l. 1 .
+
. . ..I **. OF STRUCTURE l
._ _ _J j ,. .I *-
- ~
- . . . . . . . . . . .. . ' ..i....
u r nm w,,,n nw,((w, ,,n w[ <mus,[v wi[enw
' /
MOTION OF STRUCTURE - MOTION OF WITH0uf EMSEDMENT SolL SY ITSELF 1
1 I i l
- * ..j nl . . . . . . . . . . . . i.
a ;*..,..,.. *l /
- 4g * *
. lb)EMBEDMENT
- *. ** I .. . . .
. . *...*. INCRE ASES MOTION
.L I ** . . * . * * , * ,
.l.* . *.. OF STRUCTURE
- l
, ,. ..I.. ...
.I ., ;.
///O M V///%TTV((OTV((ONV(([TV/[OhhV(([TV/[ONW l
s
. 1 C A ROLIN A PosWe & tmHT COMPANY BRUNSWlCK STEAM ELECTRIC Pl.AN1 i UNff51 & 2 l ..
EFFECTS OF EMBEDMENT l
II - 5 4
,i \1
]
RG R3 ON ON
.l TI Te
_ CD CD AL l
AL t Eu l
Eu Rg ) RS )
S S P P L C L C L L E 8 E 2
~ - _ _ _ ~ ~ _ __ _ W 2 ,
W 6 Y 3 Y R ( R 5 D D (
2 4
~ _ - _ - - -
E f - _
\i M D M E E O E D _
T T O S M S M
y Y Y
~--_-(-
- ~ - - S S _
"_o * \
" V V -
P P R R
" _ - - - ~ f 1
CD TI -
l CD AL l AI L ) Eu )
EU S Rs
"_O* _
RB P S P
C L C 1
L L . - _ . . .- . . E 5 L 8 . - _ _ _ .- . _
_- W 2 E Y W 2 R 5
( ( -
Y D R I 3
D - -
E E D D O .
O M M M E
E M .
T _
T S _
Y S _
S ) Y S _
V _
P V R P R _
.i l
l n ,E5> &a =. cQ~nOc=*2*
,= =I gx m; g " m *=~' ,t>2M -
, ' c5O_>o _.
ga= Ec" g*I _
8F!,2g2= j =>O' oZ
-l i
=,O gf ,-- .- i ,:;.l- ! :I ,'1 ,
(l
l I
E I
I '
> I
{
i - )
VESSEL PEDESTAL ORYWELL RE ACTOR BLDG
& SHIELD MODE -5 ( 6.44 C P S )
F i
i I
1 4
CA MOLIN A POWE R & LIGHT COMPA4Y BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS l A 2 g
MODE SHAPE WITH 1 SolL-STRUCTURE INTERACTION
\ is - 7 t
1
\
k .
ett & _ ,_ _
BSEPol & 2 APPENDIX A USE OF Pl.ANE STRAIN FINITE ELIMENT PROGRAM As was pointed out earlier, one of the methods of estimating the rigidity of the soil was by means of a plane strain finite element program. This appendix gives a brief explanation of how the soil was modeled and how the results were used to arrive at a final estimate of the spring constants.
In order to model the transnational and rotational rigidity of the i I
sand enderneath the reactor structure, an element layout as shown in Figure II-Al was used. The paranneters for the sand underlying the structure are shown in this figure. The slab was modeled as a rigid body. A load was l
applied to the slab, and the displacement of point P was calculated by the 1 program. With this displacement, the spring constant was calculated as b . ,p Where F is the applied force or moment. 8P is the transnational or rotational displacement of point P, and L is the thickness of the reactor foundatior..
Note that the plane strain finite element program assumes that the soil and
} reactor foundation have a thickness of I foot, and this must be compensated for when computing the rigidity. The results were then increased somewhat to account for the fact that a plane strain representation does not account for the friction between the soil and the reactor at the ends, but rather as-
\NT sumes that the model is infinitely thick. Figure II-A2 shows the deformation of the clernents under the reactor structure due to an applied moment.
II - Al
\
\
- =Fe
.- - - a
48tP.1 4 2 To determine the stiffness of the fill to the side of the Reactor Building the soil surrounding the entire Reactor su11 ding (sand plus fill) was modelled and its equivalent transnational stiffness obtained.
The finite element layout fer this model is shown in Figure II-A3 along with the parameters *2 sed.
Since the sand and the fill can be considered as parallel springa, the stif fness of the sand was subtracted from the overall stif fness to obtain the approximate rigidity of the fill. As before, this value was increased somewhat to adjust for the plane strain representation.
Later, this value was decreased since the earthquaks-induced stress in the fill at the side of the Reactor Building was found to be large compared to the initial static stresses.
l I
l 1
l II - A2
.. . f.,
_ .= _-,-=:-
_ -- ^^
i - 9
.,,-
\/\/ \/V\/
I N{ .:
I5 e
\s N
\
A 3 s 9m N' .
N :
b y c JL N E :'
th O
Ea t e W' d ei d Ow "
- W>
i l i
l l
cAeouNA powsm a LeoHT compaa, BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS 1 & 2
,, ,, ,, ,, ,% MODEL FOR PLANE STRAIN
,_.,1 FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS ii - m
- = - L:r- === =- =
m w =-.----- - A
DEFORMED ELEMENT 000NORY
- - - UNDEFORMED ELEMENT BOUNDRY '
FOUNDATION (RIGID)
?_"_'
'"E I'"_"fL"""m'""""mu+yx 7 _
I l l l l l l
_ j___ g- y_ ___- _ _
l l 1 l l l l i
.l_ l- L__
l _ _ _.
. __< q _ _ _ ,
. _ _4 l l l l 1 -
l y- '-- y-_ -_4
- I I I I I l j a___ . _ _ _ _ _ . ._ _
j_ ; q _- p _ _. ___4 I
n l l l 1 I l
._ _4 {
l l l l. 1 I I I I I>
.- 3 I l I l l !
y I I I I l
I l l
~ '
1 I l l l i l
\ BEDROCK C Am0 Lima POWE M & LIGHT COMPANY BRUNSWKK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 DEFORMATION OF ELEMENTS FROM APPL!ED MOMENT
/
11 - A2 h
_. ===
I = -
.., ,, =.
- d "I $6 , .
2 . 2 . , , ,, , , , , , , , , 5 !
ZI !!c- I!
I l3 EE*
\/\/S/ \/\/\/ lN glg'g i .
\/ \/\/\/
-a ,
,. a 8 ,P.
s!da E
I . . .
-A -
}
l .
I ..
-4 l i I 4 .
.e i
- a 4 ,
a ::. .
I a
s 55 l g l 4 _
w i R:
66 n
er
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ ili e, o y; E a es u g 5::
'$ ** ,, ,6 ,5 , , ,, 3, ,, h i
- sluswel3 g se AA J_ !
sauewst3 y esA -
A m ___.a
---- ---- -------------------- ~ -
1
,$D - -
. ,DR r y
______-_____.y .
a
- d 3
---_ -_ - - 3W d g on c -
15- a a w =g
.- }g.
.a WI i o.
3 m
_ _ _ ___ - - - _- , _ =x m
-_, Oe en
__ ________ ___ __._ ____ gy ff m,,
. _. -.. -- !!! [ g
- a. s i
---~__ __ au ne g ,
WW W 36 ,,, ,,
\
0
, , ,5 ,. ,,, $. <, >.
o o
--______ a usl3 g es A A -
sinew s 3 y ed AA --+
\
l . \ ,
. ,r
' l I
3 88EP.1 & 2
! I t
't t
4 e
1
', SECTION TTI MDDAL ANALYSIS 4
4.
l i
h
\E i
.-hah- mM#
I BSEP-1 & 2 I
TABLE OF CONTENTS ,
.I I D Pane No.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
I!! - 1 2.0 DEscitIPTION OF MODAL ANALYSIS III - 3 3.0 IDEALIZATION OF STRUCTURE FOR DEFI2CTION ANALYSISIII - 4 4.0 IDEALIZATION OF STRUCTURE FOR N00AL ANALY3!S III - 6 5.0 FHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF TIE CONTA!!0ENT STRUCTURE ggg . 3 6.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE FOR N00AL ANAI.TSIS ggg . g 7.0 RESULTS OF N00AL ANALYSIS
!!! - 11 8.0 IN!ERACTION OF DRYWELL & SUPPRESS!W CHAMBER ggg . g3
9.0 CONCLUSION
S
!!! - 13 Tables III - 14 Figures III - 20 4_ _
__g- t
)
38Ep ! & 2 \
1.0 INTRODUCTION
s A computer program utilising a modified Rayleigh procedure is used to determite natural frequsacies, mode shapes, sodal shear forces and modal bending moments for the structure. This procedure consists of the following main steps:
(1) Select characteristic points on the structure. These points actually are the centroids of horizontal cross-sections which do not distort when the component is dis-placed horizontally. There are 45 such points on the structure.
(2) Assums a displaced shape of the structure and a correspond-ing distribution of teertis forces. Compute the lateral dis-placements and the bass rotations due to these inertia forces, I assuming that they are applied statically. f (3'f Use the shape determined in (2) to compute a new distri- I bution of inertia forces. Then compute a new deflected shape.
(4) Continue the iteration until two consecutive deflection sets are essentially the sees. Use the results of the last cycle of iteration to coepute the modal frequency and the partici-pation factoe for horizontal ground motion.
(5) Higher modes are obtained by the same procedure as the funda-25 mental mode, except that each assumed shape is first swept of
- }
the lower mode componests by an orthogonalization procedure.
,e i III - 1 l ,
7 : h 4
~~~ -
_ _ _ _____------ - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ -- ~
382701 & 2 (6) The procedure eouvergee on the modee in sequenee, etarting with the lowest frequency. For repeated frequencies, the 1
i i
first modal shape is accidental, but the second la orthogonal to the first. h number of modes to be computed is prede-l termined. l (7) h maximum modal accelerattaes are given by the product of participation factor, characteristic shape at the point of interest, and the acceleration read from the response spec-true for the mode. The accelerations are applied to the masses to yield a static inertis loading. Shears and moments sa:
then computed for the individual modes and combined by the square root of the sum of the squares method to yield the total stress resultant at the point.
(8)
The vertical earthevake ef fects are considered in Sectice IV of this report. These effects must be added to the horison-tal earthquake effects treated in this section.
The most extensive portion of the analysis is the determination of the horizont.al displacements and the base rotation of the structure due to inet tia forces. Some components are analyzed by membrane abell theory, others by beam theory accounting for both bending and shear de-format ion.
i l
I
\
til 2
\ s
\ >
L ~~ . : . ,~
= .==---
- -- f
(
I-1 kggP.1 & 2 l
2.0 DESCRIPTION
OF MODA1. ANA1 YSIS i
2.1 SCOPE
The modal shape, frequency, participation factor, gross shear forces and gross bending moments at selected points I
on the containment structure are determined. This section de-scribes the theory; the computations are performed by a set I of computer programs whose input and output is described in j this section.
2.2 ASStNPTIONS
The following basic assumptions are madet (1) Separate analyses are made for earthquake motion in the X- and Y- directions and also for the operating and refueling condition. The responses in the X- and Y-directions and for the operating and refueling condi-tions are considered uncoupled.
(2) 'Ihe displacements in the cylindrical and conical shell segments of the drywell are predicted by membrane theory.
(3) The reactor pressure vessel (RPV), the sacrificial shield, pedestal, and the concrete section of the re-actor building are analyzed by beam theory, taking shear deformations into account.
(4 ) Only shear-type deformations due to length changes in the diagonals are considered in the steel section of the reactor building.
(5 ) The displacements in the roof equal the displacements in the wall of the reactor building where they are connected, III - 3
,, .m , . -
. . . m. m.de~caer.he- M ""~ - ~ ~" ^ ~ " ~ ~#'
_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _- l
-, . .. ~ ..- . .. . -
\
28tP-1 & 2 (6)
The concrete is considered homogeneous and linearly elastic when displacements are competed.
(7)
The idealization of the suppression chamber (Sectise 3.0)
{
adequately describes its response. i
]
(8) l All floors are free of the cylindrical and conical dry-I well segments, but connected to the exterior wetla of I the reactor building.
(9)
The dynamic analysis accounts for horisontal displace-ment and rotation of the base and of the structure.
The influences of vertical base motion and of vertical j i distortions in the structure are discussed in Section IV. l (10) Because of the basic symmetry of the Beacter tuildies and the axisysmetry of the drywell and the RPV systas,
' torsion will not significantly affect the analysis !
and consequently has been neglected.
3.0
_ IDEALIZATION OF STRUCTtTE FOR DFFtICTION ANA1.YSIS The structure is decomposed into the systems shown ce Figure III-1 .
Since these systems are supported by a common, rigid foundation mat ,
they are coupled in the dynamic analysis.
l 4
III - 4
~__-. -
.A l
SSEP-1 & 2 3.1 System 1 This system consists of the following reactor build- 1 ing componenta:
a) Roof b) Steel framming above gl. 1178 4a c) Concrete floor slabs at E1. 20'-0", 5 0'-0", 80' 0" and 117' 4" d) Concreto fuel pool girders s)
Concrete exterior wells from E1. 117 8 -4" to El. -17'-0" Due to the seyuumetry of the fuel pool girders and the reactor building structure below E1.
50'-0" and the variation in well thickness, the stiffness of system 1 is differen't '
for motion in the X- and Y- directions.
3.2 System 2 This system consists of the following components:
r
_ a) Reactor pressure vessel 1 i b) RPV skirt
$ c) Sacrificial shield d) RPV pedestal y e) Drywell shell f) No springs (k1 and k2) representing the seismic
- re s traint s
)
All components of System 2 are concentric and rotationally syn.
metric, b
III - 5
\
ih
!j
_ __ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - ~ - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ _ - _ . - - .
??
. . o A
18tP-1 6 2 3.3 System 3 This system consists of the foundation mat, the drywell pedestal, the suppression chamber, the soil-springs and the point mass representing the adjacent soil nass (See Figure III-2 Mass 44 ) .
Horizontal displacements in the X- and Y- directions, l
and rotations about the X and Y axes are considetsd.
4.0 IDEALIZATION OF STRLCTtfRE FOR MDDAI, ANALYSIS q
1 he structure is represented by the 45 nodes shown on Figure !!!-2.
he modal aaslysis is based on the following assumptions:
(1) ne mass of System 1 is distributed as follows to the point masses at nodes 36 to 42:
Mass at Node 36 - from Elev.139.3' to Elev.165' 37 - crana bridge and trolley 38 - from Elev.100.5' to Elev.139.3' 39 - from Elev. 65.0' to Elev.100.5' 40 - froin Elev. 30.0' to Elev. 65.0' 41 - from Elev. 0.5' to Elev. 30.0' 42 - from Elev. -17.0' to Elev. 0.5' (Concrete superstructure only)
(2) The asas of System 2'f s distributed as follows:
(2.1) The RPV mass is lumped at nodes 1 to 9.
(2.2) The RPV pedestal mass is lumped at noden 9 to 14.
t Ill - 6 l
1
\
\
i l
~ ;
ESEF- 1 6 2 I
I (2.1) N sacrificial shield mass is lumped at modes 15 to 21.
(2.4) The drywell well mass is luarped at nodes 22 to 35. ,!
(3) N mass of System 3 is distributed as follower (3.1) h foundation slab mass is lumped at nodes 23 and 45.
(3.2) h upper section of the suppression chamber is lumped l
at mode 35 l (3.3) The dryuell pedestal mass and the lower section of the i
supprees1on chamber are lumped at node 43.
(3.4) h soil adjacent to the structure is limped at node 44 (3.5) h effective mass of soil beneath the structure to lumped at node 45.
h above distribution accounts for the level in the actual structure at dich the shear forces are to be detamined.
Thus, all unss above the level in the actual structure at which the sear is of interest is included in the mass point above that level. The distribution further is such that centroid of the idealized point masses agrees with the centroid of the actasi mass.
)
III -7 a
\. 1e
> .I t
im = m W r = r " s : p m ..-- m u.a n.a.- =
- _ - _ - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - ~~
SSEPol 6 2 5.0 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF THE CONTAINMENT STRUCTtutE The physical properties of the containment structure as prepared i
for input into the computer program for the refueling condition are listed in Table III-1 and Table !!!-2. Table III-3 and Table III-4 Itst physical properties for the operating conditian.
The seismic restraints between the ApV, sacrificial shield and dry-
)
well wall are represented by springs (kg and kg). The spring forces are computed by as indeterminate analysis of the entire model in which these forces are the redundants.
The springs and masses representing the seil-structure interaction are discussed in Section !! of this report.
6.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE FOR MODAL ANALYS!$
A modified Rayleigh procedure is used to estermine the natural frequencies and the characteristic shapes of the system. The earthquaka i
response spectrun is used to determine the maximum deflections and ac-celebrations associated with each modal response. The steps of the pro-cedure are as follows:
(1) Select 45 characteristic points on the structure as indicated on W.3are III-2. The mass of the structure is concentrated at these points.
(2)
Assume a normalitad modal shape 5 and compute the correspond-ing loads Pj at the nodes j as folloes:
=
P) W) x 0) (1)
Vj =
Concentrated weight at node j
=
f) Modal displacement at node j III - 8 I
- I m -
Il .
l 3837 1 6 2 I
t (3) Compute the displacements at modes j due to the loads deter-sined in (2).
(4) Borealise the shape determined la (3). t!se this new shape to compete a new loading free equation (1). Compute a nov l deflected shape, as described in (3). .
f (5) Repeat the iteration until two consecutive deflection sets '
are essentially the same. Thee computa the modal frequency Wu l and the modal participation factor Ts, from the expressions
, , ; e l I t8'8" + Wjf*j fj j w'*
n En (2)
Is (8"/+ fWjt("j)*
, 188 .
f Wj (') l Tn
- es (3)
!)(#"I' + [W t('))*
lsi Where j = Index for nodes 3 = Acceleration due to gravity O' = Assumed normalised displacement for moda a 6" = Computed normalised displacement for mode n 9' = Assumed normalised rotation of base 9" = Computed nomatised rotation of base A" = Actual deflection at point on which 9" is normalized W) = Concentrated weight at node j It= Homent of inertia l
f 111 - 9 l :
i i 1
I I
i mm
.;" l l RSEPal & 2 (6) P.igher modes are determined in the same manner as the funda-mental mode, except that each asassmed shape is emopt of the i Iowee mode ccaponenta en-1
$m.s
- dm,o - [ fnIn (4) nul Where 4, s "
Sw'Pt shape for mode a I
ka =
Assumed shape for mode a '
j fn "
8**ePi ng factor for mode a g- $n =
i Normalised shape for mode n j
ne sweeping factor to is determined from the expression:
It % 8n + *j 4]e 4ja in : - l*l (5) l
! !8 n' + Ewj Wjn/ !
}si Where Gj a =
Assumed normalised modal shape at node j f a jn Normalised modal shape at node j for mode a
, 0, =
Assumed base rotation en =
Normalised base rotation for mode n (7) ne maximum modal acceleration is given by:
A gn
- In d j n A o (6)
Where Aj n =
Maximum acceleration at node j for mode n In =
Participation factor for inode n
=
. O jn Normalized displacement at node j for mode a Ao =
Acceleration read from response spectrum for mode n
, III - 10 i
.'1 N m R NMPJ T E 5 5 E M M tr S *-.
1 188P.1 6 2 -
(8)
Campota tbe maximum atreae resultanta for modo a by analyaing the structure for the epivalent static loading obtained by multiplying the concentrated weights by the accelerations Aja obtained from equation (6).
7.0 RESULTS OF WL AMAl,YSIS From the reem1ts of the modal analysis, it was determined that the first five (5) modes usre significant. the computer output is pre-sented in graphic form far easier interpretation.
7.1 Figures !!I-3 through III-22 display the first five (5) mode shapes for the various design conditions, i.e.,
(a) Earthquake acting la the X-direction and Y 4treetion (b) Operating condition and refueling condition 7.2 Interpretation of mode shapes (1) W This mode is essentially the fundamental mode of the soil layer. Mode 44, which represents the soil i mass at the side of the Reactor Building is the only node undergoing significant displacement. The struc-ture is not appreciably influenced by this mode. I (2) Mode 2 l This mode is the fundamental mode of the soil-structure system. i i
4 III - 11 3;
t s .ej s $!.
as J ECRP-1 & 2 f
1 .
it consists of horisontal relative translation i .
between the rock med the foundation and distortian of the saaeter BuiEding. There is souns distortian of the RPV and practically none of the Drywell.
(3) W No ends prinnerity affects the Reactor Building structural steel framing above the refueling flose.
The balance of the meaetor Bu11 dias, the Drywell, sup-g Proeaton chamber, RFV Syaten and foundation are in-
! fluenced significamely lees.
I.
(4) M 1his ash is the fundamental mode of RPV System.
l The Reactor tailding. Drywell, suppression chamber, and l
foundation are lease influenced.
!. (5) g In this modet the Reactor Pressure Vessel and
%11 are maring in opposing directions, and the Reactor Seilding is im its second mode shape. .
7.3 Figures 111-23 thrensh 111-30 show the sumanations of the square root of the sum of the squares nodal shears for the various design conditioms.
l b' +
i III - 12 1.
[' .
r1
\;i . i g
{.
.: \
g$tP.1 & 2 7.4 Figures III-31 through 111-38 display the aussastions of the square root of the sum of the squares nodal moments for the design conditions.
8.0 IN11 TRACTION OF DRYWEL1, AND SLTPPRESSION CHAMBER For the purposes of the dynamic analysis, the suppression chsamber and Dryuell are considered to act se an integral structure. To ensure this if the structure is subjected to an earthquake, a serf.es of ver-j tical Laterlocking keys, extending 360* around the perimeter of the Drywell pedestal, is constructed. A plan view of these keys resembles a circular gear meshing the suppression chamber and Drywell together.
These keys ensure that the Dryus11 and suppression chamber function compositely.
9.0 CONCIAISION r The nodal shears, moments and accelerations were used to deter-mine tsagential shears and meridional forces. The implementation of the nodal shears, moments and accelerations will be discussed in The Contain-ment Desian Report, to be submitted to the AEC by January 1,1971.
The ground response spectre curve, which was subuitted as part of Appendix A4, Volume III, BSEP PSAR, is included as Figure 111-39.
1 III - 13
\
1 ._
- m. -
_ _____ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - ~ _ _ . _ _ _ - . - - - _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - ~ ~ ~ - ~ - ~ - ~-
R$tP4 & 2 TAB 12 III-1 t
I PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF STRUCTURE REFUEL.ING CONDITION DATA FOR DRYWEl.!.
14 vel Node 35 =
47.75 Ft.
Upper Radius = 19.92 Ft.
Iower Radius =
35.33 Ft.
Upper Wall Thickness = 4.08 Ft.
Cone Wall Thickness = 6.00 Ft.
Lower Wall Thickness = 6.00 Ft.
Weight / Unit Area W1 =
0.60 Kips /Sq.Ft.
W2 =
0.90 W3 = 0.90 Modulus of Elasticity =
3500.00 Kips /sq.ta.
Poisson Ratio =
0.15 Coo. Wst. at Node 22 =
0.00 Kips Imagth of Segment 22 =
5.00 Ft.
23 =
5.00 Ft.
24 =
5.00 Ft.
25 =
4.50 Ft.
26 =
4.50 Ft.
27 =
7.00 Ft.
28 =
7.03 Ft.
29 =
7.00 Ft.
30 =
7.00 Ft.
31 =
7.00 Ft.
32 =
4.83 Ft.
33 =
4.83 Ft.
34 =
4.84 Ft.
DATA FGt RPV AND RPV PCDESTAI.
Modulus of Elasticity =
3500.00 Kips /Sq.In.
Poisson Ratio =
0.15 Level ;4 ode 14 =
Segment 32.25 Ft.
Outer Radius Inner Radius !.ength Weight No. Tset Modular Ratio Fee t Feet Kips 1 9.686 9.166 6.00 2 36.00 8.30 9.686 9.166 8.00 3 194.00 8.30 9.686 9.166 6.75 4 208.00 8.30 9.686 9.166 10.75 5 743.00 8.30 9.686 9.166 12.50 1
6 704. 00 8.30 9.770 9.166 9.50 606.00 7 9.460 8.30 1 9.166 9.50 320.00 8.30 8 7.708 7.541 5.00 23 0.00 8.30 i 9 13.125 7.417 5.00 352.00 10 12.166 I 8.917 5.08 172.00 #
11 12.166 8.91 7 5.50 222.00 12 12.166 8.917 5.50 173.00 l
13 12.166 8.91 7 1
5.50 173.00 I III - 14 A
\ i
TABLE III-2 j
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF STRUCTURE REFUELINC CONDITION :
_ DATA FOR SACRIFICIAL SHIELD Modulus of Elasticity =
29000.00 Kips /Sq.In.
i Poisson Ratio =
0.30 }
Segment Outer Radius Inner Radius 14ng th Weight
-No. Fee t Feet Feet {
Kips 15 12.064 12.000 6.25 240.00 fI 16 12.099 12.000 8.00 i
17 241.00 12.099 12.000 7.00 "
4 18 246.00 12.099 12.000 7.00 19 246.00 12.064 12.000 9.50 20 293.00 12.099 12.000 9.50 342.00 DATA FOR LATERAL SPRINCS (kg & kg)
Shield Wall to Shell 272400.0 Kips /ft. I Vessel to Shiwid Wall 48000.0 Kips /f'.. 2
)
DATA FOR REACTOR BUILDING j
Modulus of Elasticity a 3500.00 Kips /Sq.In.
Poisson Ratio =
0.15 k?
Node No. Weight Moment of Inertia 1000 x Kip x ft2 Kips Y-Axis X-Axis 35 17409.0 34936.0 - i 36 34936.0 ai 705.0 1183.0 1183.0 37 332.0 0.0 38 0.0 j 24065.0 45586.0 34592.3 39 31289.0 70410.3 40 39352.9 31337.0 48446.3 l 65063.6 41 25998.0 52732.7 83310.9 42 8170.0 25408.9 97184.7 '
43 67400.0 163550.0 45 196199.5 I 81477.0 175440.0 256645.4 !
Segwnt Length Mment of Inertia,1000 x f t' No. Feet Shear Constant f t"2 {
Y-Axis X-Axis X-Direction Y-Direction I 36 18.0 99999.9 ,
37 99999.9 0.39300 O_39300 22.0 99999.9 99999.9 38 37.0 0.47000 0.47000 5516.0 8001.0 0.00187 I l 39 30.0 0.00248 5348.0 6890.0 0.00232 0.00313
( 40 30.0 5606.0 6819.0 41 36.7 0.00115 0.00249 7076.0 8007.0 0.00133 0.00189 III - 15 i
i', 1 4
, i 5
's d
j
r-8817-1 & 2 l
TAB 12 III-2 (Continued)
I l
DATA FGt FOUNDATION _ '
lavel Node 42 =
11.00 Ft. I level Node 43 =
11.00 Ft.
X-Direction Y-Direction IAtsral Spring Stiffness k3 (1 x 106 Kip /f t. )
0.15 0.15 k4 290.00 250.00 k5 ;
6.00 6.00 Y-Azis I-Azis I Rotational Spring Stiffases k.6 (1 x 109 tip-f t/ Rad) 400.00 Mass at Node 44 3.0 x 107 Kips 200.00 i III - 16 7
38E716 2 ~
TAB 12 11.1.3 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF S11UCTtME OPCRATING CONDITION DATA FOR WYWE1.L lavel mode 36 = 47.75 Ft.
Upper Radius = 19.92 Ft.
Imuer Radius = 35.33 Ft.
Upper Hell thickness = 4.08 Ft.
Cone Wall Thickness =
6.00 Ft.
n Imust us112hickness. =
6.00 Ft.
Weight /Unic Area W1 = 0.60 Eips/Sq.ft.
W2 = 0.90 W3 = 0.90 Modulus of Elasticity = 3500.00 Kipe/5q.Iu.
Poissom tatio = 0.15 Con. Ust, at Mode 22 = 150.00 Kips Length of Segment 22 = 5.00 Ft.
' 23 = 5.00 Ft.
24 =
5.00 Ft.
25 =
4.50 Ft.
26 = 4.50 Ft.
27 = 7.00 Ft.
28 = 7.00 Ft.
29 =
7.00 Ft.
30 = 7.00 Ft.
31 = 7.00 Ft.
32 = 4.83 Ft.
33 =
4.83 Ft.
34 =
4.84 Ft.
DATA FOR RPV & RPV PEDESTAL Modulus of Elasticity =
3500.00 Elps/Sq.In. !
Poisson Ratio = 0.15 Level Mode 14 =
32.25 ft.
Segment Guter Radius. Inner Radius 14ngth Weight Modular Ratio No. Feet Fee t Fee t Kips I 1 9 .686 9.166 6.00 224 . 00 8.30 2 9.636 9.166 8.00 82.00 8.30 3 9.6A6 9.166 4
6.75 125.00 8.30 9 .086 9.166 10.75 691.00 8.30 5 9.686 9.166 12.50 644. 00 8.30 6 9.770 9.166 9.50 560. 00 8.30 7 9.460 9.166 9.50 274.00 8.30 8 7.708 7.541 5.00 231.00 8.30 9 13.125 7.417 5.00 352. 00 10 12.166 8.917 5.08 172.00 11 12.166 8.917 5.50 222.00 !
12 12.166 8.917 5.50 173.00 1 13 12.166 8.917 5.50 173.00 III - 17
\ ,
\
6sh =
58F1&2 .
11812 III-4 PHYSICAL FRWERTIES OF si- nixE_
OPERATING CONDITig, DATA FS SACRIFICIAL m!E Hodulus of Elasticity =
29000.00 Kips /5q.Is.
Poisson Ratio = 0.30 Sepent Guter Radius Inner Radius 14agth Weight Es. Feet Feet Feet Kips 13 12.064 12.000 6.25 24 0.00 16 12.099 12.000 8.00 241.00 17 12.099 12.000 7.00 246.00 {
18 12.099 12.000 7.00 246.00-19 12.064 20 12.000 9.50 293.00 12.099 12.000 9.50 342.00 DATA FOR IATERAL SPRINGS (kg & kg)
Shield Vall to Shell 272400.0 Kips /ft.
Vessel to Shield til 48000.0 Kips /ft.
DATA FOR 8EACTOR BUILDtBC Hodelus of Elasticity =
3500.9 Eips/Sq.In.
Potason Ratio =
0.15 Node Weight No. Moment of Inertia,1000 x Kip x f t2 Kips Y-Axis X-Axis 35 17409.0 36936.0 34936.0 36 705.0 1183.0 1183.0 37 332.0 0.0 0.0 38 20863.0 40578.9 30424.7
' 39 30580.0 69450.9 39448.0 40 21337.0 I 48446.3 65063.6 41 25998,0 52732.7 42 8170,0 83310.9 25408.9 97184.7 43 67400.0 163550.0 196199.5 45 8147/.0 175440.0 256645.4 SeSment Len8th Moment of toertia,1000 ft' No. Feet Y-Axis Shear Constant f t*2 X-Axis X-Direction Y-Direction l
36 18.0 99999.9 37 99999.9 0.39300 0.39300 22.0 99999.9 99999.9 38 37.0 0.47000 0.47000 5516.0 8001.0 i 39 30.0 0.00187 0.00248 I 5348.0 6890.0 0.00232 40 30.0 5606.0 0.00313 41 6819.0 0.00115 0.00249 36.7 7076.0 8007.0
! 0.00133 0.00189 III - 18 \
g i
_( '
] -
i
.... =
SSEP.1 6 2 .
1
-TAB M III-4 (Continued)
PATA FOR 700NDATION i
level Mode 42 = 11.00 Ft. l tavel pode 43 = 11.00 ..
l l
K. Direction Y-Direction !
lateral Spring 8tiffase1 k3 (1 x 100 Kip /ft.) 0.15 0.1$
t, ' 29P.00 290.00 l k3 6.00 6.00 Y-Axis X-Axis I
totatioast Spring Stiffness k6 (1 x 109 Kip-f t/ Rad) 400.0 200.0 l .
Mass at Mode 44 3.0 x 107 Kips ' l 1
l O
i 4
\
s 4 l
III - 19 j
} '
\
l .. _ . . m._____. _ _ _ _ _
t h
. . . . ~
,. ..f.. -
.,;i L . f- '
h'
. f_
-'5l, ' l" , f, ' *' ' ,Y ' . 'q' . .' ,.. ,,' ,' ^,,
' ~ ~
,f.i,
/flf'. -: ~ ' ' ., ' Y' '
_ ,:l' < . '-'
~
l/ ,
' /.'
4 ,'
- j. 3
'$ .-' ', , l; N '- ' -
~
' '/ ,', <
^" ' ' /i, '
- f. 9 .. f '5'.
i i # b'
. e "!2 .% i tw j !
U
~
\
EE \ \
\
\
SUPPRESSH3N
=
CHAM 8tR
=
CAROLIN A Powf R & LIGHT COMPANY BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 PERSPECTIVE OF CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE !
111 - 1 l
j ...,_, -. .. . . - . = = u= ^ - - - - = ~ ^
______-,__--------'----w-'- ~ ' - -
-i O
u . . .- ,,
=~~
a ,, ,- u
, tt l ,' ,
, .1% l,1
@. . a
@ %% $A. L .
E M_ _ _a 5 76 @ 4
@ S. 'p@
e
, e.
g ,,gJ 4
(
u sa' ee % 6p \
j @ @n @ .
\
a
'/ i , M e - l'
! to to' 48 M i,ef.
@ i
,s S u... .
l @ ,, ,
A _a 4: l _. bo o -
3 k be wg r+
d
(.-
CAROLIN A POWER & LIGHT COMPANY BRUNSWICK $ TEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 IDEALIZATION FOR DYNAMIC ANALYSIS j
).,
l Ill - 2 p'
a
_ _.-m s. v .~. . . . =am
._ - - -u- - --
l A Skett' ,
I ,
a
! [ l I E I I I E I
= I e6iW ql mt l i
0 l 1- i j i <
g 1
t-'
' I i l e I
I r es se t * --4 5 % I i )
1 I t si as ena '
e i f
i f >fe h >8 1 g e i i I l l le p>9 t I li _l,h, ,,
9 m !., 4 r
_4 Ji I a6 se* -9M i e e
g j
l 4pte 8 l
' e I
^
n> ie I I. i I a i ist
' I I { l t i
l * ># t I l i a f \
i i - l.
g ,
I i \ , 1 l t l '8 e g' n i l 89 '
,, g l
{
l> l ## H l l 's ;
tb W Man 1 1 , I
', P i l
g l 8 I
i f lbl I
) !
I la l g
I k I, $
e i I l l !.tt 1,,e ! n g i g I I
i dM i I g
e l i i 1 t h>ss P* i s
l l
l 1 I \
I i 1
$'94 Ilka f g 36 te' - % :09 i '
I l bl if r
4 f
l l g d I i ; i 8 1 l l 4> 1% ( l e [ l 3 l
I l h,a dlI e .:p. -
,.i,.- e,,l t.d* I * -
- 6 ,
I I '
t EL- S 6.e* '
1 C A HOLIN A POWEH & LIGHT COMPANY BRUNShlCK STE AM ELECTRIC PLANT l g-4 UNITS I & 2 I .h i I- T-I MODE SHAPE
{ dT OPERATING CONDITION
'g/. X - DIRECTION i;
MODE - 1
.j T = .356 SEC.
U sk lli - 3 t
rk -
1 _
- 1. _
_mm _
g______m.__m---_ - -------- - - - - - - -
1 m,. 3. .. I... 9 - 1
. y ...,
i I o l l i l i l i i
- '"t--*O t-ii i l-
. 1 t i l ! I l I I i i l I
st sis' - 4*w i i iI i I '
i I pi tt p is '
l l, p' n Li is 6 1 .
, e i his I pp to ! l I, i 8 **
! ..
- 3.
.. .. +
l T>>6 -r 8
. .a i i A
iI l
i 1
l t I' e 44 I g- 1 Ii Ii
{*
i I i n I t+s , g i; o l' p' l g g gi t i , kin g t
I g. i i I :
l e. I
- a. , t i j l l
8 kie i
}
i [
, l f 8 Pd i le
, i Hi* I e g
. i* I e
a s. ,+ +. Se i I s
- ' i l' # k> e.
I h
8
,l. 'g i i e si 8 8 I
s I I e !.. t. e ! 8 t I
- l.
- I H t i 11 I l I i I
nig 't i t
4 t i i i W
l I L i
. i ! i,. !
' :s, i e6 te gy y I t . . - . .
[i gi 1 Lie l 8 ll ti lI r -
e.
I i
I ilI
- pi e4 I i i i
.... y e o- . . .
ll 1 :
, ,. . o- ',
4 , I i
1 l cAnoLINA Powen a 1.lcHT c0MPA8sY BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT !
UNITS I A 2 ;
e MDDE SHAPE l OPERATING CONDITION l' 1 X - DIRECTION l MODE - 2 l T = .R8 SEC. \ )
1 Ill - 4
,\
,. y_ _ - - - -- -- --
i
~' _..._.A
. . = - -
l
i I....... 9
~
i\ \
\ 's
\ \
\
e6 iwh---ow k-.--
\ \
\ %,
\ .
\ 1 s )
~
\ \
s
\l \s l
1 st eet* M>Se '
t i et <g
' i i I ,
t , is
<1
< >u <W !
. es e
-- Je A i
- u. * - w ,
i
' 'I"
., I l
.st 'i I l l w l I j
f , i
! I f l l
1 m, te' :4 6e I W I
. a. l
< St I
<>W < 'n as sr -p. M i i
<le l l I
)
< fl I I
i , i.
- e. . , .- ,
s t- s e o' , ,,
CAROLIN A POWE & LIGHT CC fAP A N Y PRUN5wirK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT l
' UNITS I & '
l
{
MODE SHAPE I OPERATING CONDlisON X - DIRECTION s MODE - 3
\ T = .100 SEC,
\
lit - 5 i \
, i
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- ---- - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~
0-l rg 69 q.; l .. h **
i 4 l e I 8 l '
t.14# >)f I i f I '
' i t
t I
I i
l f a is ? - - - 4 L 48 I
I i I
<ptr ;I I l , +
i i l i t
< it* :f I I ' I l
i>te '
n t - - -wi4 I l n .
ti fLo - - -4L 4" I
w % s" :-
'g
-4 ,
2, _T ,
l i
i <; 2.- l i l t l l
l I ij. j--Kl
f I
- 8 i p> nth g- i i tt I h< ie g i
td' ' ' g h l
pp .'e p,,
g l
t
\
si or : 4r> 4e '
I i !
'r.
dt.
L t'
- l. a !
<M l'
i
, ,ss .n (i "4 f.
p..
f a 1/ --448 M I
)s.t ,
n.a o ia co t,..s,, '-4%
,.,, 44 is !$ l'" 45 C A R O LIN A POWER & LIGHT courANY BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS 1 & 2 MODE SHAPE OPERATING CONDITION X - OtRECTION k MODE - 4 T = .176 SEC.
+ til - 6 t
r,r,-
- .v. g ,
m.s. 9 j .....,
t I #
I
/
I
% sw' m>Ml l t i -)
/
l
/
' . /
,l
/ s
/ /
/ /
Stest" L qwig /
j i , f~~
l "Y i ;8 g
5 i t f 4 4\
e t
- s
._I l l I W H is . .I i
' * ,4 '
F !
m e.- >w ~ff ,
t i l i g 85 I l h-l i i Ili. 'T' I I We l
I I
I i
\. + ', l \ \
l- g 1
h e i I
! mw f' \
!- /
l t t
3 f
l
's .
\
l I I i f I l
4 4 I i+ iwi j
. i
. mw j i9
.{
<W J
a I
l 8
.l}
s i l asi i l l i I i
i g i i-l <wi i i !
I l l 4 t, I <W {
,', I Ll s sen v ' .h I l ,
- j I i +4 4l I i
... , . i ;
~
CAROLIN A POWER 4 LIGHT COMPANY BRUNSWICK STE AM ELECTRIC Pl. ANT ,.
UNITS I & 2 !
MODE SHAPE i OPERATING CONDITION X - DIRECTION MODE - 6 7 * .f 40 SEC.
~
)
fil - 7 ;j 3,
ti 6 ' .j
. ... q . i. 9 ,
1 l I i I
' l . 1 m.w 4>w I I r i
- i i I 1 e
l l l l n .., q >w i r
l l
l pas rie- ,
' j l bn ris i 8 l t
=
b oa ps a l I g
. _{ a_ e m 1 4 a. A !
sa,se* M >to a I
[
slet {
g l
~ l y
e 3 f I I I"* '
ist i os e I i
i l t i l g i 8 1 4
l f I 1118 1 4
1 i 1
g se I his i 1 I t l
a H i
i i, \ I l i ' i i m w --4> * .
pe e i i
' te e l l I
l / [
$ 'se [ l ) l i . i , .
i i l I i
- t. . . t.. ! i i l .):
r'
' l !
I i I .
l I '" f !
g I
i ! j 'a !, .-
j es se - - -}>; --069 }
l !
i i ; f 1 i ne i i
I 8 g i I
i j o't :
. , I i l
' i i
, aii+
L: l i
.....- t. .. t i....
t i,; ,*".
p.,
i '
4 I (Lto c'
8 l
' l cAstou= A PoWE R & UGHT COMPANY {
BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
- UNITS I & 2 ;
MODE SHAPE I OPERATING CONDITION li Y - DIRECTION MODE - I
't T = .356 SEC. ,
j
- i Ill - 8 ,
gg.
-. L.-
- l. ,4- . ,
l.-_ e
~
3 i i l i I
1 t I
.. &-\
\
\ \
\ \
s
\
\
\
> t t RL u,' Se
, s
[ c'a r'. r I l , F >a !-- -
p j
, . u ,,
n i
p,2H 3,
1 e i
- >s*q 3 _
i i
l
, r iu.
i r ( 1 0 '8' l i I h l I I i }.
l 1 p e 3 L .
5-i l
i I
/ ,- . ' l % l 1: li r r i 3
, " s
'n ,
i, i
. I L ,e 6- 1 t-1
. .. q i i i ;
' I I I b8 I % I
, ! f***' I r t i iI i i
- s. I
- i. ., i...
I
. i i i i
{
l M i L 4' ' l I p>w h h i
- i -
i i i
. i i-r,. r i
, ,, . A , '. : ,, i '
! ~><
\l s ii,i!i i r*
i i i i
l i i i I I
i
- I II L , i j i,
- l,, l l 1 -
e i I 6
ll 1 se ts' ar I e,,
5 1 c,Anoum A Powsm a uoHT coerrawy BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 i
,f, MODE SHAPE y I
OPERATING CONDITION ;
I~ -
Y - DIRECTION i MODE - 2 s ,
.t T = .290 SEC. ,'
I
' ,s,:( lil - 9 a _ '=
i
_ _ ._. . _ _ _ _ _ . _a
}
l L
l- {'
i 6
i d j
36g415 .... I..**=- 9 g
- ==*m !
i
\
\ \ .
1 t
i t \
i-
' (,Y , \ l
\
[ ;^ ? y I; l ' '
r si,wk. TM *
.e ,
1
'g *
\
g \
s %
\; \
l \ \
\ . \
\ t 1
%'" st ur ,' '1 g at 1m i
'l Il <W e i l
3 I le t
$, l i' ,k '
.4- . e e Je 1.
66se*--HkD1 'l '~ 'l 8 l
5 i 1600 n l 1
.. a4 )
lJf 'I i l I e ,e -
,8 4 1
(d
= , <
3 l I ! {
" 4 ap l <
4 l
9 86 W ==- q>as to 8 If l
' 8
$. a T i
, W e I e
(, a f
\' O- , ate ,2 I
I i W' l (
i . I
';. I' i
.{ q g
' e l i '
<> ts 4 !
86 ta' W64a '99 l . 6 , ;
- o. !
i a l l
1 I f ild j ,'
\ ?
r I llu I -
E ?,
,a te ev e' ,
'lst es ! -
a ik7 '
si te o' ,
l t ,
C A R OLIN A POn(R & L IGH T CO VP A*p BRUNSWICK STE AM Et.ECTRIC PL ANT
- UhlT51 & 1 , -
i i
- r
' MODE SHAPL OPERATING CONDITIOed Y - DIRECTION x MODE - 3 .
T = .190 SEC.
4 in lli - 10 ,
~ l
,. \ I,
- l. I 7b$
_ _ _ . _ _ . . .. a I
<.-..,,..,m,.~ . . . , . . - ~ .
,,,..,.,.. l .. 9 ,..
t.
I '.
i I l u,w + w
- i
{
?
i i . e i
' 8 i i i '
1 at est* ~ Fha l
l i
j > tt , :e t
I l, es ', :s l
a l l
, t
- , , e, sa, ee* ~ n
, x . .- ,
. s.
, , , , . '. .s l
ist ,b'N . . a,e h i i l
, t<>a n
, v,. .
l ',<'s 't a F
- L, , ;
iw . .e F' * ' . F
- i ;
e' ,n.
{'. p Lt> '
< H ', .e o ., =
p s.
p.
.. w e n.
I oe l'
l o ..
ev e, .,
~, a4 f
E k tf c' i CAROLIN A POWE R 4 LIGHT COMPA%v
- BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PL4NT
~
UNITS I & 2 MODE SHAPE OPERATING CONDITION Y - DIRECTION
\ MODE - 4
- T = .177 SEC
+,. Ill - 11
\ -
%w 4l .
t 1
m a 7 --- .I k..! . . . ,
I I I
/ '
l I
- e6:Se * ----< i
> se#
I -/
- y I
1
/
l t
1 , ,
- g n er ses' 4>se ,' )
l l 8
i i
+
i . 4, l 198 r - a - -- *>e 3 e g 3, $
t i
< p i t
- e a I
)
i e : e l 4W 4
- S J l 1
I a 4 k ts- .n - . a Jo 1 e
e i, i
sa as' 4 > to 'i .T 6 i ~~ ; i.
i 4 ,1. . i i i i l ie 's s' t i ,.',
l l- fi, i I
\ r \ \ .~ l c
(
! - ', i ',
l
, , u,, ,
i 8 4 4 i , I a es' - >4 I h
g I l <>s
- i
- 1 pts i i I l i l a
l n ts .e L s t
e i J l
- I on * ;
s I
( l e I I one I I
,I .2 i I es te* -----< 4 ;, l
} :
}
<4 8 I I i i 8
l l :
1 l I g oss
', i I
! I '
- , ,i i 8
l
, os i I
- esn d '
?**
I I se i e eveev .' e
, as !
l
{ canot NA rouvEn a licht coM*ANv BRUNSWICK STE AM ELECTRIC PLANT
- UNITS I & 2 '
[
- MDDE SHAPE i OPERATING CONDITION
- Y - DIRECTION MODE - 6 i = .1M SEC. !
lil - 12
-m en
.- ..., . . LL
9 me -
. 1 6 I i i
! l 8 l mew - -t >w t
i l I i l l I 1 i i theet* M>Se i l [
i I j i l
' j p s: fis g a l j ist is f l l 1,= ,.
i a ,, _ . _ ,i,_. 2 i i l l i
,, i t j
ea t-
, ) ,,
)
i i
l i
,- i i
I
- . !... I, l l i st i !
l l s',t l \
l I ,a0 1 1 I e6 ts' M>ee to l I
l g l l ,
t>* s s l * \ l i l l l i on, t . i
\ l l .w ! )
i i
W l i i
,le i
gpg g l Sk ie' -l ;I9 i i i 8
> 41l ,e l
} j i
i i
I "'
i i l hiso I
,y j.e,
, l ! eO__
_EN_
1 swer v I CAROLIN A POWE R & LIGH T COMPANY BRUNSWICK STE AM ELECTRIC PL AN T UNITS I & 2 MODE SHAPE REFUELING CONDITION X - DIRECTION ;
MCDE - 1 l T = .358 SEC, I I Ill - 13 i
+
m,,.,s.... l ..... 9 .......
i e t 8 I I e t i t e6sh'---ou 'g i i n i l n
' t i
i
\ l i n a6.., L--o.m '--
I I
l F" P
[~
i e
p ,. -,. p i
g i Li I
sa H,s ,--
I
, s, so m ~
se a 4 J. A. g st ee' wi.h I ~~j ~j i e --
b 'a i i i - i
' is, e
(-. g
. , s, t ,
i , sw 8 e-- t
! , " ! l t i , p ,.i - i i
- l
'ra i
'r ,, i i
i si.Se* y> 4ei w e i L._
l i e i L ie 8 e 8 h'** I h ', I
- , a :._sa i i i , i .. i. i, l
! b 18 l 'r- I
' 1 e, e t u,. -'- ',- i i I i l
l h
'# 'p e f I as w :p '-
- so ' 8 l
e j j+
r 8
. r-t i l g i I i i I i i gn 1 3
8 i ! 1 l 1 .
i 'r ,. ,
j i~ ,e, u
!1, I I a i
a i
swaWe ..,
CAROLIN A POWER & LIGHT COMPA4v i BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC FLANT l UNITS I & 2
~
MODE SHAPE REFUELif80 CONDITION '[
X - DIRECTION 5 MODE - 2 7 =.283 SEC. 111 - M U f
3 y ,,___ l _____ 9 ,---_--
1
% \
\ \
% \
\
OttM g M> 99 g
s s \
% \
% \
\ \
t
\
(6 set * : %S h q > st i
>4g 4
< kle t e6 0e * :M w k n'* -
I A* ,4 3 :
q ,36 l- 8 I
11% 4
.. i ; i d., 8 4
" l f
4 e6 i 4
.. , , J.
i
. _-. 4, . ' i .
( fle I si
!i, l l t 18 4 ist i
- I i lH a 4
gg te* : At '99 c.
E l l
\
di t%
I I
l I
q, ed e u i l l g e. .- .
I
! a f!
' l
~~ ..
C AMOLIN A POWE R & LIGHT COMPame IRUNSWICK STE Abt ELECTRIC PLANT
- UNITS I & 2 MODE SHAPE 1
REFUELING CONDITION X - DIRECTION MODE - 3 l m
T .190 SEC. 111 - 1 6
..i- .. __ ._ _ _ --
. 6
(
E et?' =y.
_j.* 6 -
i i l-4 e i i :
)
I ,
i I i
m iW -- ' row n
I fl i
- i I f ' i
-, i
! 1 i
n sev' - a f9e }
' i '
I '
I <> :s -.
I
'g i i
I an : :.
l I
i t t s I
i l>Se Mk9 ,
i i i
i i e6 a. - H e
i QSm ..A b [ s l I
!H e 'g 3 I
8 ' il i
. > . , e i i g>g L. I i
I Md
>7 : I e l I j
I i i 1 i I f>st 1 6- l
.)'
l to , >6 s l
,1 l
1
Pa ',
P'
'r i I I
~. M. ~ l .
nw o u ' ' , .
' 'H4 s
1 ,
, 44 i -
M S' t i i '
- i. .. . . i.. . i i- i tM i }
h." !
N ghe l
aw : ee . :69 s e
s
- is '
i .
1 i e
' < i i
. .i on . i e
- l l i
- l l l l l de +
e
.
- l l t I ' '-g e, i, .- e l 44 l
- j l *
\
. ev 1 ! !
,, ~
l
C A ROLIN A Pont a & LIGHT COMPANY l BRUNSWICK STE Att ELECTRIC PLANT i Uhlis I & 2 ! !
l ,
l ' i
! MODE SHAPE I FIEFUELING CONDaTION I s X - DIRECTION WM - 4 f
~ \ T= 176 SEC.
s
_., s, j in - is
\ i F
.e
- - ++r h .emasses.--6.... .,
_ - %d
. c,. . . _
I 9... l ---,
o I
I o y
l I
l I 1
m a w' - ---o n,I q' s /
/
/
/
/
t
/
/ I' e 0
/ I so set' J-- <>Se l l \
I l g q > 41 , :e j l g t i t i * '
I ,
g
- . -; i ;
l ta, es* - w>w
[ b-A Je A l I
l < d 'g J i 4' I t Y
ln \
l
-l
\,
\
i , '
i N 'I t
I l s t
1 l t l 'p it l l l
\
- n ne t I \ l ss. w M>e #
. ' % I '
/
a ja i 1 I
l
< Bas g
l l '
i e f -b l g I
< f 4 l l l < ,,
T -! i
' ' l i I s i <1 7 1 es w - - <$m 4 8 I j i
i <
i i l l e i i l i <>4 I I I I I i ! l 1
, i d!
4 .
,,,,, A I ;l ~
l 8
I spes e* ' i
, ,, I l
{
l cAmoLIN A PowE m & LIGHT COMPANY l BRUNSWlCK STEAM ELECTRIC PL ANT f UNITS I & 2 .I MODE SHAPE REFUELING CONDITION X - DIRECTION MODE - 6 T = .143 6EC.
lit - 17 i
m ..e --., .
i I O -
e a i I e 1 e i i i I
a .w -- ).on F i '
t I
8
' l I I i i I e I I e t est* --- 2<>Se I l L I i e I
,p ag p,, ,, g 8
i e i l b" ( I l
- , h~ <'-
i m m o_ i
,t :,
sa, se* !<>h I e '" '
8 h> a. I l' ~ l l i l >
I 4 > I '
e I t a
pre ,r t ,I )
8 i , i e ' .i il i l i p> et g b 'g i 1 i n I p4 8 1
e 8 I i was i i g
i f 1 t g f I' g e i I 8 I pps l l lo a i ii '.
. -lio '
i
' , l 8 ' , ,
t p,ee l'8 , t i 3 g. I I i ' I 1
se l Lu I. . ! i i
a r 6 1 8 N 3 1 ' !
I***
f l e
,t
>6% ' I
' l .- 1 sa te' ,4-r
' 99 i, .
I !
l
}
g i i ,
i i t 1 ' i i l f"'
I I ! i l l
'" ' I 6
I
' line
' l 1 n ev e t.
rw l l 40' '" ,
~~~~~~~
t a I i avasv (, 1 C AROLIN A POW (R & LIGHT COMPANY
~ BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 MODE SHAPE REFUELING CDNDITION Y - DIRECTION MODE.1 T = .356 SEC.
Ill - 10
_..1 I
r I
\ ',
..y- ,
i,
\
.\
\
\ \
, 1 I l I t-I stset*' %89s !
l !
i r g
I pi es p ,e g--
M st l-wis 'g- g l-m, - ..ac- 4. l-l i, l .
.a. te' W>M j I t
] l .,
I gM>t6 I i g i '*I F I l 68' F ,e I i
[g His l i ~, .
'1 r-t-
's l 8
g i i I ) I I 'io r""
I as F I I
t i
- g s w,, l H>n I l 1 \, ,
_T.- . . i , , ,-4 i, h'
'en l p i t l l* v.,
fL l i 9, i i
! b aa f b i
- i. F.,, h ,.
'r !
.. i i.
1 i
L,-
i lt i i 8, I 'M' 'S ! \
l i i i I Iwiis 4 f i e i 8
I i .** I e #
= (
l ,
O i l i
sp tWe* ':
- l 1
C AR OLl8d A POWE R & LIGHT COMP AlsY BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT I UNITS I & 2
]
MODE SHAPE REFUELING CONDITION Y - DIRECTION MODE - 2 T = .306 SEC.
, lli - 19 !
l
.I = _
.. _ . . . . . -- , w l
n43,....... I...... G , . . . . . . .. .
' \ 1
\ \
l \ \
r ite\ ---o Dr r-t r
\
\ \
\ \
\ '
\ s
\s te v7' W> 98 1 4 :' <m I
t fe* <
wj
<lr4
< al v* av '.
4l '* :
,< , - 3, 7 i i ="- -
lll1.'T* < Me i
4 1
I: t s l C l
< it g i
19 m e I i ;
<t* I y l
4, :
tt 9o' :4o to 8 l : }
. hr 9' s i g, I 8 l J
'o 3 ! I
< 9 ',; t .'
1
, a < ke l
4 5' t EL io' :
IO 'M l
l
)F I l L l %
l I t I i i 6
i
\ l 1
\
!! 647' Wk $$
l l (
I i
>ff , ,1 I
i ' p-1 a,- -
I I
g l -
g 4 bf4
' l
% qi %
1 it So ~t'**
j 25 _ h, 4 8, e, l
l e
i g g'
, I >f6 8 {4 ;.
3 i-1 f c_ g
' AY a
l L t ; '
, si ; t, '.g ..
l s j u,.; e :
)
t ;
p., l '
f 4 %d* W 540 i '
i to O t I '
I
' I I 68
- _ l b& (l L >
i s, ' l I i )
f g,, te !. 4 )
{
i 41 I
,j aa it wo I
i > ,4 4 I gg,
- IL 16 W ida -+il4 I I
l >ef I
H%
_ l g
iwA -
( g = e f ,m -
40 IL= l6 C'-
.g CA ROLet A POWE R & LIGHT company
_11 BRUNSWKK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 l
MODE SHAPE
- flEFUELING CONDITION '
l Y - DIRECTION MODE - 4 f
~
T = .178 SEC.
1 111 - 21 i
! \
i L__ . .
- 1
__.__.m_----
i fL 69)
.. . h.. . . ,
l ,
l l *
- l
,3y y I
I o
l o o 9 8 4
4 S .
l \
re air 4> se p l I O < ;1 I
, >{r ,
8
. t I ors :# 4 I g 8 % I I
% J I 3
4 g% >%
i >I. 3 . , .. i tr Sn* & >%e i < >p .
f\ s i ;
l I
i I
yr e s i
I "L t
,. }
, 4 8 i i
I
, a g I e I N' tt p g i
e 8 I be- 1 i I % 1 I
- l. 8 98 i e i I
,l. I i i i
es i
i , s i
\
- ps s I
\ l i I fl M W >40 h j I
g i
l
. 1
, i i # .ti e l t j
I # l I i p i i l o** 4 h' i
, . i J. ,
I J i i o.4 ,I. ,
s 8 I (L10'==-4El , :14 l e g l 1 o li i 8 i '
i 1 8 3
1 i 1 i, g <>is 1 8 e i i I i I I i ." l,
.. ,,.,,s .. . ..., lI ..
t' i 8
I i it 28 o' 4', e i CAROLIN A Powin & LeGHT COMPANY BRUNSWICK $1EAtt ELECTRIC PLANT
~~
UNITS I & 2 .
i aI00E SHAPE ;-
REFUELWeG CONDITION j.
Y - DIRECTION as00E - 5 T = .12 SEC.
\ g lil - 22
- \ l
, \ -l
\ -
.. .h A
1 I
l[ l$7 i
I .,
i i i i t's 4 4*' >)1 '
e
' }
t
[
s 1 '
i I
i te sit %> $R 8
f e
g' oiP*' ow,e l >1 ,
' tosi it' itseol >t i I j a 0
l eso life Wes l>%
- 4 3,
- l st ao %oa 8
. pg;.at g ~ s"
~
,' w ,'4,s. l
, w., . . .
i i
hio [ e it* I I
" [, I" l g
0 81** ,o 19 e.u k>ut g h 8 I mes La > e.
l / I l i e n3 kle ft I o m' ,. e
, ~!
- , i ,-
wki'4 3' q
en M 5>en ** s, . I
- l o
3 8 I "b,0 I l
g
- 44 kite a j 8
! S
. < ,#w.. fI e
/
/ y ..
0>n
)
, "OOD W %! $
,' h h -- --< p a6 dD>a g %She ,$ ~ ~~4> *4 f.be* p n d 1% t~j x l g (* ~~A>?
I I 0". qb4 I t y i I ,
f I A. . * !8'*wp4 I I y / , . g * * i , ofamo ,e% 44
- 47 L (g. jd e* "'*::
4%
a0089 e $* M e .eDooa w eo ts n am e to choaa Wd t 44, 4 9 M CAROLIN A POWER & LIGHT COMPANY j
l BKUNSWICK STE AM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 SUMMATION OF NODAL $ HEARS OBE .08g OPERATING CON 0lTION X - DIRECTION
, all - 23
&g , - - - .-
- . . _ .-...w,
]
l t
it Hf att b k j
(4 6 4*' L'*A > )F I
1 s
i e
I i ,
e fa u' @> it i o
8 i i
eH >f f ti>t .
8
,8 a se<>71 'tm>f a sasjpfd h >%
,J 7,.. e ,a d 1 3_ l fi 80 % --4>18 8 8 !
,8 5 8
- th>f b l ,., ,1, *+' '-
8 w e g 'I a seam / , y gg ;,, , ,
t I ' I g 4 I a Gas lt* !
" 8 l / 6es,tw >?
la%e d, M k40 # to l 8 '
l ' . ' ,, L >m l ,se.,q ,
,g : -
I #
s .te ,sim 1
t i 6 l'
, ,!.ste .g.
W g
i l
L_un,ss 8
> >^
,8 rg th %bei f. - **'
- 34
- M ,8 I i g fMHr 8 (
i I l l **~> ' '
u : \
,o l p >a 44 , 8. , . , 'o *a m . ! Som 4% **
ar easio. g. lg o' ,
s~ ..,,_~
ammt $m et M 8:AROLita POWE R & LIGHT COMP AN Y BRUNSWKK STE AM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 j SUPMATION OF NODAL. SHEARS OBE .08g OPERATING CONDITM)N Y - DIRECTION lil - 24 j
- 74 _ _ y,,_ __ _
4
_ _ - - _ _ - _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - - . - _ h
IL 1%I' 8
'4 4
(L kW $7 I
I 1
l l
t 1
,,,,, ey ,.
I g tailf? titt I
, m60 79 ap ti?
8' les)i24 Joe 11%
_m t. .Um. 888 8% , 198 4 *8 * -
.. ~,, , ,
I g seas sw>!& {
I y
feet it' Wl> + y p ., i i e g
e a i
- / 28 want #
8.s p i a.
l g tett t,' *l '* e j' "
I : 4,,
- s>4 gi.* e ts wn @>an r s l 0 8
i 8 mL,n
- 3 u ,,"i .% 00
, . : .f l l f..
a r. I,W L.
, f
.# 'fle% .gn p oi l e o l j --4> .%e l%.
rt In 'Lh4: E. . ' * :n !
l W >:
l Ls ., i l
l % ,
/,.,,g_,... f %.i l 47 N
l'- it. s e -
'*"r ,
h * *'
as . ns m
=i s 4 mumNi C A ROLIN A POWE R & LIGHT COMPANY BRUNSWlCK STE AM ELECTRIC PL ANT UNITS I & 2 !
SUMMATION OF NODAL SHEAft$
OBE .08g REFUELING CONDITION X - DIRECTION '
I Ill - 25
-- =5 Y
gg ,g, M h -
,{
l 1 1 1
);
f t # 43' O >$F i
I i I
.t i e
' ?
i .
l }.
rs ..f'
&. i
> se l
j
,8 ' k <>f? sadis j 8
110 t>29 ee >?
9
,' a,;,,. m, ,-
o ex.s se , a 's =. 3 a s j
~
l'
~
EL So >)9 3 i
I sowhifh I
- i 1
\ 1 104 p et. b g' W 8
i27 ** '*
g 4 q,, ,yp j <
I
. i, ,. i l
. . ~, .
j g '
8 s ** li sil a
'I' *
.f f
.rfesh, pI l
., r IL $& >40 s lc O g
f a 8 W a>A e
s ryg,
- M6 hi1
- 8 s y I e
- ' ,,4 '
f # 3,g t . t o s,
/__%
, u i l *
!n .u ~ IAl* .n
, 4 f%
- 34 l ,,, I '
ete*mai i ~
- is e 1 l l v% t .;
i t
h L.5 % >\% k j i
- i I f CM i nd r, ito.t&o. ,, p 4% de e
it 28 o'"% g -
M u ent. ss .mmmes
. . : #,"="
C AM Ana s s POWF R & LsGHT COMPAgv BRUN5ttCK STE AM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 SuuntATION OF NODAL SHEARS OBE .08g REFUELING CONDITION /
Y - DIRECTION I I
s til - a ; I
i et att -'
- h ro iw wn
- i
- i I l
} l i
,I t
et..r meu,a i
n l worr ,ii l . 6 84 >f* ed
- t n an, >re g .er p.g
,, , 4l ,, ..4Nv'$
.j >,. ! '
4 '.
A 9,, ..s p '-
l . ...,j,v is . i l , ,
,4
, un. ,.
68.t, ,
- g '4%, ,1 i ff&> '9 g (L W >40 908n, y a g o
I se 9 l .,AUF I
~'
s, is l l / J fl.. .. .
. + 3, jw l ,,,.L,o l** .
l ,
k sa !.
,o w m ,
,~.s ,,
l I
o s I ,
l - ;.,
I L anae
,f ;g
, i i i I '**
l J- -as rt-ir(r* ' ? . ,', .. ~'as
- A 7. 44 asu2" di \
ascent # ti aumm uooss it il
. . . .. .. t.3 a"'
C A R O Len A POWE R & L10H T COMPAN Y
' l BRUNSWKK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT l UNITS i & 2 SUMMATION OF NODAL SHEARS OBE - 1.6g
- OPERATING CONDITION j X - DIRECTION i
\ s z lli - 27 3 .
\
W ._ :
i \
.M
_ J
i .I et m "*
I O !
-. J l
}
I I
A ft 199* > 3?
I d I ,
i A<r i d' i t' I e:
g.
n .r S b se yi I
f; I
j % inf! sus i1
! ,j f f1 1% >t% se. int l i e
I eto i#4 649 l>% 1 3,,,,' #
- d I' "m *'l :i ** { M 8 '
inst f L 80' p> 49 ,
8 g 14,19 L-<p 16, e Jtej l ib I 8
,' w/- ,i, ,
e I , .
W j,p8f i
gtgt , e ,
8 f
it e sHm i t.
, ...,< n.., . . , 4 f ,#' I' 8 th,/
r se ip149 g an ,
e , i I #
l 19ft 8 'g I tomof 94 h>?n q.. '.
, j - ,L , i
, , .t.. . 3, ,
p
- 64
- 44
{
I #1919 I I i I4 A%i si
('
l l.
(L 10' kJe ' :Si e'
,I ,( 8 --a> if l i
e
, \ \
I I
f l>t4 8 91>*
i
- a j t a
. gg - 8
' r L. it / "" - Af I 6** ** ! I, i -
LiL. 28 0*- I: 45 $
)
uomst e 34 u.... .. . *i J a**"
' I
' CAROLIN A POWE R S LIGHT COMPANY BRUNSWICK STE AM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 ;
i SUMMATION OF NOOAL SHE ARS -
OBE - 1.6g OPERATING CONDITION l'
i
,A J
Y - DIRECTION Jl e
L lli - 28
)
I e
1'
, l l
l 1
EL sW S >97 1
0 i
e 1
i 1
i Et sif* M> $$
i 0
,8 e Sfr e4>
g .eti Sti es j>f i '
y e.e 1 >t e to.h%
I d '8 *'
gg _g ISe a %
se soI h>w i j '
rses to: i '
i I I l
I 4441 I
rJ f a l
N 4 i #
6ttgHf a I
3 N', 16 1 ... h r e.
8 0
s 1 sed 0 Gi .
l .,4 -
,, n' m ~#1 4 . "T ':
g' 0* #s..r e .
utf1( i
~* g i i f
,I j ,3, t . f ' s =s 4 f ,l.!.lEFw * #
1 -.
lm o i I
,L- .we ;44 g, , ,
g gnf18 %>4e ! ***'* ;M I
I l f sw n* 9.,
I ' e I
y l &' ?---A >>
l g i
/ ! t.. .,
f
, i 4
,L g g .,,no ,6------ e
- b ea ut ~^' **
1 47 stssoe L---IS- 28 o" ..,,
M moons a s; emens ooesist n "amm3f**'
websS b AS M I C AROLIN A POWE R & LIGHT COMPANV 3RUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 SUMMATION OF MODAL SHEARS OBE - 1.6g REFUELING CONDITION X - DIRECTION f '
l lll
- N
_ , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..- - - - - -==w - a-a- *' O
f '
i f t 167 1
l I
(4 4%3' M>)f I
l l
l l
l 1
ftinF' > $$
l 4 Ipff ..i>t I
g pis 4eb:
g i
i
' w h 24 445 ti*
,,,,- f,rg f ... !.. f It SF ki9 i
i ' i 2.ti h > 7.- a g ,
4') >4-
%e' , '
$see A. it? e
. i
( ,a ( .++ o ? 8
- /
- l iwQ4 i e. ;
ess # 8'8,k'* ,
i s' , mew,
,,j. . ...L 4.. ,6
, , ,.. v,>~ , . _, '"
.m L ,
ie* ,'<, :a .H se a I ,
I # g.g, l .
. I',isid .O l'
e 1 w' 9' .~
g 1 .'1,9Q8 s. # 699.
a f iseu . gg h% .s g ' ' d,8 ~, ' is 8 14u ,,,
,6 w + "'*- # ,'
f, ,
e l l. .. '.hd ei f t e
=
- 0 0 4 .. 9Ufwp #A
, ~
,,.,,e.,, .
/
beel6
/
d.(4.!$ 0* -g h ewt e. sg esolb&% ten'd4 M C A 880LIN A POWEft& LIGHT COMP ANY I
1 BRUN5hlCK $1E At E LECTRif PLANT UNIT 51 & 2 SUMMATION OF NODAL SHEARS OBE - 1.6g REFUELING CONDITION
! Y - DIRECTION t
til - 30 I
tLt%f' ,
! n , .. mon I
l l
l l
f6 at' M > So l
I eq>?? si>t l
l soot >J 9 ei H2
'I I g i soc. >84 enasl>*
,,oo . ;. 2
.. wesul th ee' MbM I p.
i i ,
- ~;w,..
nasco,>l' f g i I tw
- a I
14'o0, f8 , ve% pe I /
toor$ a 8 I
1*
g * * '" / s' .,. pr i / r* s is W%>40 'I'** icec'h p 10 g i
l i ,, ,,o ppf-o
- i
. moo **
e e
i C gg i / ,,3g l. I's tm
- l ,,,,co ,w .: l*
I u,oco /w>>< s l% -
I~
$1sooo,l. ~ ~.o4 i as em
,t io /m% m :n ,
I i-l L.eiuto.:
i l l
, 1 l_'t- ,
g s I
l J. *'299 my,a
, ,g' +. e +'8008
! Y si wo . d' 4-n'.'M*o" .
w'1 _. . ., : :"*"
.. . . . . .. s w -"
. . ..... t l.a'," " '
C A ROLi4 A POWE R & LIGHT COMP ANY BRUNSWlCK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 SUMMATION OF NODAL MOMENTS OBE .05g OPERATING CONDITION X - DIRECTION
\
ill - 31 i
.}
,d _ . . ms
\
MIh
l'
!' j f t li?
l e
(46%9' > )?
l !
l f- 1 i
i !
f I f a ,, r 'M > gg I
I eal?; eini g
8 1R 4>!* Mk>?
( l e 94 i>14 rges >4 g gqqg '~
a ,A mte 6,4
- 8 **
w l . no "'*!".e i ,r l vos, p te, , j g s!!li e I
g
,44o ,' ilt i > ** % d'b -
I' i
- d 1 I i M p* $
5*
, rs , %;< ,.
'. a.*' e 2
. A, , , '
1 ,e 8 imsp,-< p*
A (4 8 d' ,,W>40 mug p 4r*
-s,I. g
- 4esos I 4t804
- 'a e4tet h6**(
l /
, .. 4 ..
,,,,I; A
,v w .
1 I I l
I IN ** /- % 1 I I l , . M2ilt i *4 s, :e4 ,
it to M >di
/-
/ -
l 19'*8 . <>:
I *
.[8 t
0
/$ '"3" ,,,s l /
l
'8'S*'
l i .<, ,4
- 44 I oium a l- gg(,., ,
i f %200908 ,,8% de
, ,u.s e r 4=It. *f o' .g . - - - . ~ . . . . .
M wo bro i . M emmmmes wonte sw de i
C A ROLIN A POWER & LIGH T COMPANY BRUNSklCK STE AM ELECTRif PLANT
_,_. UNITS I & 2 SUMMATION OF NODAL MOMENTS OBE .08g OPERATING CONDITION Y - DIRECTION
\ '
Ill - 32
\
I s.
t tt 851 i !
l 9
I
- l. n . .. 24> sr
.i it ist' D > ve eq>ft eist 1, i a i re t i29 9$ < if j
1 1 0* >f4 we <>9
. " ., a . 8 % m ess l;d "a **
l titt j ti So -i> )* ,
i N i7. i e j l esta l p e.
g 4444 p/f 1
" I 1
g a f g 1 8
, "* ani' a l I
, '"d ', ta l pi
- . l, ,,e fl a los.
- f
- -L,r 1
- 4,,, ,<i.e 8 1 l4 $ff ' >40 46 0 I
- 1 1.tmMi4
,I ,,,w .uu w1' t
, 1 A l
/ ,,,, ofA ,,
f
,' / 844869 . ai t
A i..
l I
I site * < .4 / ,, w p--%> . .
wea* e,w. ,
f 6 1a' -- ,--<Mi . :S e s' l l L* '* **-w:
I o' f , t d=968_ 3,ia I e l .i a o o .1
, r '9 "JJ ~i >4 l t mer ts a o 4' p -
a ,at 41* }$ I -
6900s.600 ,d%
.1h ,.,," y ""
.ss.is* ' J ***"
. . 2 **"
CAROLIN A POWE R & LIGe47 COMPAN Y
'- BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRif PLANT UNITS I & 2 )
a SUMMAtl0N OF NODAL MONENTS i OBE .08g .
REFUELING CONDITIOft X - DIRECTION i I sil - 33 !
, i
l.
ts ist
- 0 r,.** M> 3r f 1
i e
ti si Mk is i .' ,
1 l
I ot>t t oirt I
isoisti se <>s :
I I 1
I j vesi>ts m >s l i ,,,, 14 _ . 4 + . .. . , .
si Ao
%, >. se oscil vt.
f is t, . . . .
l i
f g se sos, sts f:
l f ,'
\
act*j n-
- e
,8 8*j ta
, .iion) > l, i / v.,.,o., I i
e.s.s ,.
8 1 l / 8 feneth>'
s # .. e, ii, #
- J
- w Emi}o * **w , , , i e i g fM>e f
l sitesi $*
s / I g l ' '*
,# tifts '
I e aeen, . g. mu e s .
I I
/
p' $> a%>sp I
f >'
,8 t- J%>)4 5
,, w n,,, y
~ - .
1 1.t'te* g y t I g i I
, i L . es. ,s 0
t I I
O L Lt*!**w54 I
- g g. ., h I I,*,ws ..d$ **
l 1
,s at _
l l
l ,'
l
- 4. :Q,, % - = - - . . . _ - l h uses . !,'t,' *= 8s ***"
l
. si b,4,*""
__ a w ,,* 1"*"
CAROLINA POWE R & LsGHT COMPANY BRUNSWICE STE AM ELECTRIC PLANT l
UNITS I & 2
)
SUMMATION OF NODAL MOMENTS !
) OBE .00s I I
REFUELING CONDITION l 4 Y - DIRECTION ,
.1
- f
, ill - 34 y-I <
l ILsH'
- tt:4*' M >H I
l I
l 1
I n ,., 4 3.
l l ot>tr e< >t 1
l esi >t d simi >S I R a 'S s..a 4 "a *-
~
tL ee > )*
' ~
j g $*s >t a- t
- test lle se4 o r/ F i t 1 e i I e,enius t
- + tst' as I .s 4,6 0 t i 1 ,,, s, W' I I s
' 8 sia.ek,7 I I , ,9 94o '"'
in ss& 8 8
g t'L Y i Ml ,,, e'
. .. ),rP '
j
, , a i f n9 8'h ' '
19s999 I l ,,,.,/ , n <
I ass.: s,/ se 4 ,,,
(Lid %bdi 4 N - *M i i
l l o W>t I e
/
I sireetr ',,
I o I I /
p i i . . . . .
' '2 l l
/ /gg.,,d,' ,1991 9 ,OI M
_,, IL 2s o" , , ,
usea 6 i si temas vonas ss.t4 t.mm"me
. . w. 1.Jlr-'
CAROLIN A POWEn & LIGHT COMPANY BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITE 1 & 2 SUMMATION OF NODAL MOWENTS 08E - 1.6g l
OPERATING CONDITION X - DIRECTION I
m-a
tL ill' '
(L l % 4'. M>$f i
?
f 5
e ftlif' Mk $$
I f i
.off i
I
.<,i j
I 3e,4 if9 uel if 1 g
I g M4 pf4 SasN i%
0 9498 Le 8% A 4 "8 **
EL Sc' '
- > )4 i i ette(>th. '
g e in.461 le I M '
g ti9t p!9 ;
4 f g i 8
' 898* j soarii '. e 1 f8 asrisk +.
I f I
f g 9ta= >+ .
8 I' g
)'
f I f /
towh ir j
'WS 8446s ll i
- I
- i. h,1 p EL W y' # >4n 4 % 3 g
I
, m#
e Nf d I h
,I i gg i f e.w" I
, D l 92 ,
y # % . ss Wisti
/
- Y
,# 9"tte f f ;g et ,9 f = " u, I 4" *o+
- n j -
4
,s-. %
y # istise p in i I l l . esu .a
!,,:l;'y' .
4 .mna, a.
8== (L 14 0* ,g h ..m o s . im O""
. . . . . . t.i 2"
. w ,, 'A ~
- CAROLIN A Powf R & LIGHT COMPANw BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLA%T UNITS I A 2 SUIAMATIOff OF NODAL heOMENTS OBE - 1.6g OPERATING CONDITION Y - DIRECTION 1
1 f l u , - >$
l
> ~h
.?
tL ast * &
IL I)*' M >H 1
i i
1 1
l l
ta of' %. , is 8 oi>ft ei>t t
I 119 I Nf 4 ft i >f l ...~. .
. . . 3 3
,,,. v.m e 4+
e6 so 'n'.1%w -
I 8
asj pr.. i e tisi wh 8 ***
- 3 se 99, N' P !
e i .e,, l l ~ . , i.
- ..+
l ,,... ** ' y l
, i s' , .....u .
, e . I IL $o' Mk40 ""'6' i l f b
/ .....,
' ... , (,.22$*A
, j i / l It l l s.,so !.f* IW*
l / taas.a g. M*6
{ l / l f ,I f b%>46 % "'
L l o ~.,,,,
*** w,g.
6, ,
IL 10' Hbdi 4, :i f i
p' /tMwe , .;
l i
i i ,I . . . . . .
, l ,
/ l p
/ ,,,,,,, l Fa-o / r . ., s-af es 18 0' ,a 21hL ... . .. . 1, llll~'
...uw'4 "'
- a. esse b se #d" CAROLIN A POWE R & L10HT COMPANY BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 SUMMATION OF NODAL MOMENTS OBE - 1.6g REFUELING CONDITION X - DIRECTION 1
\ lil - 37
\
s
.h - . . . . .- -
, ;f
-)j . 3;. epf$ra
-, >+-
i Ant. i u . v. . s ... ,. - g.
cj i
- N' D '
t 86 se9' M >40 i
b l. I et i st ei>s j '
1 i est i et ..s t>s
'44.4. g 0
es4 I > $4 *1444>I
, ,,, r. - . , ~ 4 s. 1 gg W pg
~~
l'
' g' > 84> I O
ffet i k et I
'.F, '$$ j 4
l lob ) l I l > et i 1
,1 .,,
i ss.el
.egee 4> at
-) I g
- 1 19.a. it o o .. p, ,, ; \
a go' M> as **** 4 te I i
/
/ ,,,,., L.:: t, l ..
/
Les /L.m .
,I ts.est %
St 8 W .
am l
l ,b ,,,
g '*"** tile [ 't*ld ,q ,,
' '* * ' ' " :n ey/s.. *% mai i
/
,t .2"l' w se f
f I ,
j t a
/
/
l
,/ . I.1*M > ft
/ j / s.en y ,,
/ =* e3 ,, ,,,, 9 4***"* ~89 88 N
< . uw. . . .,, ._ __
he e .oa.s.
etOD$ D t %4 M
. .. . n W"
no s su. a, wu"~ -
C A RO Liss A POWE R & LIGHT COMPANY BRUN$witK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 SUMMATION OF NOOAL MOMENTS OBE - 1.6g REFUELING CONDITION Y - DIRECTION
\ ,!
\ 111 - 38 4
. . . . . . ,,...A....... . .-_ .._._ .. , . . . . .
30' A Y\
]
fk /\
A 'N'A A/NN /'b.{'! $/
/ YN zo '
) [ '
s Nfiljhl O Pf
(^
N
^ 4 /b %Y'. '
,/ s, '\ g I .
s /
~
/
\/ s/ ,g K A e, / 1 f /05% ".I. -
IO .- -
.s , ,,N - $- x A (7 7 rw-O
.. n7,v g y r s. . . <
y ;. .. .
s
_c7- .
N/ X( 2 dfff/gN'A gi s e; , g ef_ _ . A
/ W\\(/MMNF % * '
. ... , :~_ ,c 1
[Nj M<AS^f
, X sd:.Ws/f f/ f f)fvs y Vf Q C n d
(.c. ,.: 4,t,'
V-l
?'AWhWMM:::'; ~b k b? }W D'kk
. ' .,' ',,' I
?'NbhN kNM,h
(
g s / e y h'es . .
. '. s N , gADMv/ i \ \I yNv.S' W*
X!J'. *'/ e,c 0 Y}I \'l',X N'/
' s E
.e I A s
c;itisA er A4Y N
- wanx ms w w.aemeT sn M;/p/s/ Ar. or . m Ay s VM;
- ~ M IN / IXI vM ' Ws ~ a AeM x vv TX ,!? tai %
/ .
m X ///f' ///NN nM>d %QM'A ^v' /' / s
.l Y///#JX/ ^I X7\ EEi s'MOY X /
$$lbbWlY NN 0$k'_^'V\ /
W)WWW M N%%%D Nf6&@0@l$V$@0 j / ) } / j ' ' \[': ;
/ /
(Q l ,
~
/ / $
g \
X
/ $. '
.i / /
\/ s h,/' 'E \x' .
005 007 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 to 2.0 30 Undamped Period (Sec.)
~~"] C AROUN A POM R & UCHT COVPANY
.y BRUNSWICK STE AM ELFlitif PLANT 0%ITS I & 2 GROUND RESPONSE SPECTRA til - 39
m
'i MEP.1 & 2 i
f i
);
i l
I I
! i
! i SECTION IV DYNAMIC ANALYSIS FOR VERTICAL EARTHQUAKE 1
l
)
I l
i k 3
i I
! l I <
'h-
\
, 1
BSEP.1 & 2 .
I I
i
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Although vertical motion will not excite this structure as much as l
{ horisontal motion, it is necessary to make a dynamic analysis and add l
the vertical response to the horizontal response to obtain a complete picture of the maximum structural response. An outline of the dynamic analysis follows.
2.0 DYNAMIC MODEL The same mass points were att11aed for the vertical response as were used for the horizontal response, see Figure trI-2. The appropriate stiffness propertaes wure determined by the computer progress, described below, directly. The geometry, section properties and appropriate de-grees of freedom were used as input.
The assumption han been made that there is no amplification of ver-tical motion through the soil and consequently the bottom of the founda-tion has been fixed. Due to the basic symmetry of the structure, rocking was not considered to be significant for vertical socion.
2.1 Analytic Procedure the SAMIS (Structural Analysis and Necrix Interpretive System) computer program was used to do the analysis. In this program, the dynamic equations are selved using Jacobi's method. The results of the computer program are eigenvalues (frequencies) and eigesvectors (mode shapes).
IV - 1
\
\
. . , . , .,_,m...--mm--="
i
, BSEP.1 & 2 l
2.2 Result s and Implementation of Dynamie Analysis Appendix A4, volume III, of the Brunswick Steam 4
Electric Plant PSAat concludes that the ground response spectra for vertical motions of an operating basis earthquake (Ost) should be two-thirds (2/3) of the horisontal response spectra and 2 x 2/3 or 4/3 the horizontal spectra for vertical motions due to a design '
basis earthquake (DGE).
t! sing the fundamental frequency of the computer soletion, the horisontal response spectra were entered, its and the spectret acceleration for the 08E was found to be 0.13 and for the DBE 0.133 These spectral accelera-tions were multiplied by the nodat masses, and the re-sultant meridional forces were added to the effects of the horisontal motions.
"R 3.0 INDIVTDUA1, Ft,00R RESPONSE j
In many cases, individual floor elements supported by vertical walls have relatively lower natural frequencies then the structure.
If this is the case, the floor elements should be analyzed as though supported on the ground, i.e., their maximum response is determined on the basis of the factored horizontal ground response spectra and their natural frequency. The floor systems are of beam and 91ab IV - 2
\
gm , _ ,_m .i m .n Partakh y # E W M F MllEENN
- ~
7 BSE? 1 6 2 1 .
construction. Because of missile, live load, and shielding criteria, 1
thick slabs and deep beams are required. These sections result in 3
very stiff fleer systems which have small natural periods.
j 1
To check the possibility that the response of the individual !
l I floors miBht he greater than the response of the structure, the following analysis was made.
The most flexible floor oss determined and its natural period }
calculated. The horisontal ground response spectra (Fig. III - 39) were entered and the spectral acceleration determined and factored for the OBE and DBE. These spectral accelerations were smaller than e
the accelerattana determined for the structure, i.e. 0.13 for cut and 0.133 for DBE. Therefore, the accelerations calculated for two '
structure will be used for the individual floor responses. ;
r 4.0 ColeCLUSIONS From an examination of the frequencies and mode shapes, it is concluded that the significant motion of the structure is rigid 4edy motion. The effects of the vertical motions are insignificant when compared to the ef fects of the horizontal motion; however, these effects have been accounted for in the containment design.
l l
1 y IV - 3 I
i mb _.,
,....,..-...----.m.a:-- ~~ * 'Nr.actamrwWeget**wirava-'a' 6N
91 B8tF.1 & 2 I
I SECTICIt V EQUIPMENT RESPONSE SPECTRA 1
I i
i l
l l
1 f
1 I
i 9
' ^
-- i -
- - ' amann '*- y_ -1
- ^ - -
]
i
1 j<
1 asEP.1 6 l!
i
}I i
14512 0F CON!ENTS I i!
111ds, Pane No. ;
1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
V-1 2.0 ASSUMPTIONS V-1 q 3.0 TRBORETICAL DEVI24PMDrf V-1 1 1
4.0 VERIFICATION OF ANALYTICAL DEVE14PMENT V=6 5.0 EQUIPIENT MAGNIFICATION GIEVES V-7 6.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE V-7 I
- 7. 0 EQUIPMENT RESPONSE SPECTRA CURVES V - 10
8.0 CONCLUSION
V - 11 ,
j i
Notation V - 12 !
i Table V - 13 )
Fi8ures v - 14 3
i !
t
. _ =
wn - - -__ =a
1 BSEF-1 & 2 ~
h 1
I J
4 .
1.0 IltT1t000CTI0tt l
1 he procedere outlined in this Section is a method of seismic i
analysis for equipment, piping, and other items supported by the structure. The procedure requires that a modal analysis of the {
structure be made using the response spectrum approach. The model analysis was described in Section !!!.
=
l 2.0 ASSUMPTIONS the equipment is assumed to behave elastica 11y. Se elastic be- 'l h 3 l
(
havior of the equipment is not considered in the dynamic analysis of the structure, but this does not result in error becauta the mass of the f
equipment is maall and will not affect the structuru's response.
The analysis of the equipment takes into account the modification , .
of the ground motion due to the elastic distortion of the structure. -
j This presents a difficulty because the response spectrum analysis of I the structure provides only the maximum andal accelerations and not a time history of the structural response which could be used as input far the equipment dynamic smalysis. The present method avoids this difficulty by providing directly the maximum seceleranon of the equipment mass which is then converted into equivalent static loads for structural analysis.
- l i
The results of this analysis are consistent in accuracy with the predicted '
ground motion. .
1 3.0 THEORE a 1 cal, DEVEtDPMEfff The discussion below deals first with the single degree-of-freedom systems tooth equipment and structure) and then considers extensions to V1 l
i l
. h
\ b 4 s
., .. i - M --
g I
i'
}l 38 0-1 & 2
- i ,
the multi-degree-of-freedom caos. The two single degree systems are considered to be coupled as chose in Figure V-1. The single mass and fl
(
Ii s
sprinC shoun for the structure may actually represent any one of the mornst modes of that system. Before beginning the development, it is useful to consider the two limiting cases of equipment response.
3.1 Rimid Eauismaat If the equipment is very stiff compared to the support-ing structure, the former " rides along" with its support and the notion, including the memimum acceleration of the equip-ment mass, must be the sarse as that of the supporting point en the s truc ture , i .e. , A,,, = Asas, where A,,,, = maximum modal acceleration of equipment in mode e associated with mode a of the structure.
Asne = maximum acceleratica of structure in mode a at point of equipment support.
The notations are defined where they are first used and also summerised on the notation page at the end of this section.
3.2 flexible Eouinment If the equipment is relatively very flexible, i.e.,
T M Ten, the internal distortion of the structure is us-important, and the equipment behaves as though supported directly on the ground, i.e. , A a a A,,g, where l T,, = natural equipment period in mode m.
T en = natural period of structure in mode n.
A.,g a maxieum nedal acceleration of equipment in made a due to 31rection ground nootion.
V-2 l
i
\.
\
\\
, $4L
I l B8EP.1 & 2 3.3 Dynaste Ecuattoms j
Between these two limiting cases, thets is a resonant ef fect between the, equipment and the structure. This resulta l
fram the fact that the structure's motion has harmonic com-
)
ponents with frequencies equal to the natural frequencies of -
the structure. If the equipment has a natural frequency close i
i i
to one of these , the support motion is amplified. Near the point of resonance, the maximum acceleration of the equipment .
{
may be several times that of the supporting point. This is similar to the classical case of an elastic system subjected 4 to sinusoidal support motion. Houever, in this particular case, a steady-state condition does not exist because the sup- )
port motion is not purely harmonic due to the irregularity f 5
of the earthquake ground motion and, furthetsore, the harmonic 3
components of the structural response are damped. Nevertheless, 1, the maximum response of the equipment may be much larger than that '.
k of the structure at the point of equipment support. j Based on the above, it is considered that the significant '
input to the equienent consists of a series of damped harmon-
{
ics, each of which corresponds to one of the normal modes of the structure.
The input is therefore taken to be:
'yg , ( t ) : Agn, e 5 "n' sin w t (1)
V,, = Acceleration of the equipment support at time t V*3 i h.
m m ._ a
383701 & 2-t As = Fraction of critical damping to the structure wn = Natural frequency in mode n The equation of motion for the equipment is then 4
Ue + wem v,+2S e em w se : -Ysem (2) where ue
= Equipment. acceleration relative to support se
= Equipment velocity relative to the support w
om= Equipment naturai frequency 8e = Fraction of critical desping for equipment ue
= Equipment displacement relative to the support This equation may be converted into the acadimensional form.
y + 4,8 [.T,,3,g ,, 4 , T n \ g, g . , ~ ,,n 2r r (Temf ( em)
(3) wherea
'8h 98h This equation has been numerically integrated to obtain j
(
9 mon for given damping coefficients and various values of the ratio Ten /T,, . The maximum equipment acceleration is then I
computed by Asne 4 r' b \a
\ Tem / 9 mon (4 )
This leads to nondimensional plots such as shown in Figure V-2 which could be used to find directly the maximum equipment response corresponding to each mode of the struc-ture.
Note that for small values of T / Tan, the factor
{
Aemn/Asne approaches unity which is correct for very rigid equipment, i
l V.4 4 swee ensame==,-wesen.
_ -- l
SSEP.1 di 2 'l' I
1 The above approach is set valid if T : set,,, i.e., the j ,
equipment is relatively flexible, because the ground motion <
J rather than the structure's action is the dominant 1sput. i In this case, an alternative approach is used. It is assumed i
that the equipment is subjected to the ground motion but that )
- i
.. i the effect is magnified by the structure. It is further as-eumed that the magnificatism factor is the same as the ratio j
I.
of maxima structural response to ground estion input when ;
j the latter is a pure harisonic with a frequency equal to that e :
l j of the equipment. His is bened on the fact that the most h{&
3 significant harmonic components of the earthquake mottoe with df respect to the equipment are those which are in saar reeccance i f
with the equipment. Therefore, the magnification factor is !
given by the classical soluttau 'I 8
Aemn - a *
'3' e Vg
($) ;i) 859 '
l- +4 #s '
This solut?,on also leads to nondimenstenal plots, one
{;
of which is shown in Figure W3. For large values of T / Ten, note that Aemn/Aeag approaches unity which is cor-rect for very flexible equipment.
The two approaches outlined above together provide the desired result for the complete range of T /T Further en.
I investigation (see paragraph 4.0 below) leads to the recom-mendation that the first method, based on structural action, j be used up to T /T en = 1.25, and that the second method, l based on ground motion, be used for larger period ratios.
V-5 l
CEF.1 & 2 -
4.0 VERIFICATION OF MTROD DEVEtDPERT To verify the development stated above, the system shown in Figure V-1 ans subjected to the recorded El Centro ground motion. The maxi-num acceleration responses of structure and equipment were determined by numerical analysis for various values of T., and T en. The results were plotted in the same nondimensional forms as Figures V-2 and V-3.
In Figure V-4, the ratio Aeon /Asne is plotted for comparison with Figure V-2. I i
c It is first noted that below T / Ten = 1.25 the four j curves are quite close together. This indicates that the solution may
[f f
be made nondimensional as in Figure V-2 without significant error.
I f Above T /Ten = 1.25 the curves diverse as expected, thus indicating h that in this range the equipment response is not solely a function of the empport acceleration. A, . It is also noted that in the applicable
! range, the shape of the curve in Figure V 2 agrees well with those in t
F Figure V-4. The numerical values of the ordinates also agree well j except at the point of resonance which is difficult to predict by any me thod.
In Figure V-5, the ratto Aemn/^eas is plotted for comparison with Figure V-3. Above T /T,, = 1.25, the four curves are close together in-dicating that in this range the solution may be made nondimensional as in Figure V-3. Below the resonance point, the curves diverge as predicted I i
because the equipment response is a function of A sne rather than A, g.
In the applicabin range above T ,/ Ten = 1.25, the theoretical curve of Figure V-3 agrees very closely with those of Figure V-5.
f V-6 4
l g8EP.i & 2 j
It is concluded from the above comparison with results for the El Centro aarthquake that the development is valid and that Figures V-2 and V-3 may be used as the basis for analysis of equipment. 'the sismi-ficant parts of this conclusion, upon which the recommended smothod is based, are s (1) the equipment response curves may be nondimensional as in Figures V-6, V-7 and V 8 and (2) since the theoretical considera-tions are general, the method is valid for any earthquake.
5.0 EOUIPMENT MAGNIFICATION CURVES Theoretical curvea such as those in Figures V-2 and V-3 were computed for the damping combinations used in Figures V-6, V-7 and V-8. In adei- l tion, results for the El Centro input, such as shown in Figures V-4 and i
V-5, were obtained for the same damping combinations. The recommended i magnification curves (Figures V-6, V-7 and V-8) are somewhat modified versions of the theoretical curves. The modification consists of small l
changes in ordinates to provide closer agreement with the El Centro re-sults. The only appreciable changes occur at the resonant peaks. It ,
I is believed that the recommended analysis curves provide a reasonably accurate prediction of equipment response.
6.0 ANAL.YTTC PROCEDURE The discussion in part 4.0 above relates to the case in which the '
structure and the equipment each have a single degree of freedom. How-ever, the results also apply to any modes of the two systems, i.e., the response in any mode m of the equipment associated with any mode n of 4 i
I 4
i V-7 3
~k e -
\ $.
4 .. .
. ~
.gg l .
8387 1 6 2 the structure may be determined. The problem now is to devise methods for combining the effects of the structure's modes on one of the equip-meat modes.
Two analytic procedures have been developed above, one based on the structure's motion Asne, and the other based on the response to ground motion A*mt. The two procedures require different methods of combin-ing the effects of the structural modes. In general, however, the square root of the sum of the squares apprasch is used.
For those modes determined by the first procedurs, there is no dif-ficulty, and eq. (9) below includes within the radical the sum of the squares of the modal accelerations. For those determined by the second procedure, homever, it is assumed that the total effect is a weighted average of the individual modal effects. The neighting factor, applied to the square of the modal acceleration, is taken to be (Tsn X (snel',
where ';
Ten a participation factor for structure mode n.
4sne = characteristic shape function for structure mode a at point of equipment support.
The difference in the two treatments stems from the fact that modal accelerations based on Asne are in some way additive, whereas those based on the ground motion A,mg, each include a magaf fled ground motion and are in no way additive. 1 I
It should be noted that the eq. (9) below pro =vides the correct re-sult in the two limiting cases of " flexible" and " rigid" equipment. For example, if for all structural modes Tem / Ten " @ , only the second V-8 l
l l l A __A _ g g h &ii h ll
88t?-1 & 2 l
tem exists and Ab = A,,, for all modes. Hence, A., = A,,g which is l
1 the correct result. On the other hand, if for all modes T, /Tan = 0, '
only the first term e xis t s and Ab = A,,, . Hence the modal accelera-tion of equipment, A,,, is l's Aem * [iAsnel,J (6)
The right-hand side of this equation ta the square root of the sum of I the squares value of total structure acceleration which is the correct value of the equipment acceleration in this limiting case.
l The following describes the procedure used to determine the equip-
)
ment response spectra curves for equipment supported at various nodes of the structure.
(1) Assume an equipment period (Tes).
(2) From modal analysis results (Section III) record periods of the structure for first five modes (T,3). These are the significant structural modes.
(3) Calculate T / Tan *
(4) If T / Tan 5 1.25 enter Figure V-6 or V-7 (depending on the damping coefficient) with T / Tan and obtain Aemn/A sne*
(5) From modal analysis record A sne' (6) Calculate A'emn* \Asne Asne (7) where A mn
=
maximum acceleration of the equipment in mode a which is associated with the struc- l l
ture's mode n.
l l v-9 e
a Mf Mal ins iL Gb T k Nk*km '
__ I --
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ a
l 88EP.1 & 2
=
- 0) If Tem / Tan > 1.25, enter Figure V-8 with Tem / Ten to obtain Ae /A g-(8) From ground response spectra curve (Figure III-39) read A,,, for the values of T., and A, being considered.
(9) Calculate A"em a f ' " Asmg (8)
- \ Aemg (10) From modal analysis (Section III) record T , and (,,,
)
f and calculate the questity (T.,x(m 1.
r l
(11) Calculate n' the following quantities l l AL [ ( A'e m n i' e (Tan (snel (Tan (sne ^~sen) l ,
for mode n associated with AL (Figure V-8). j (12) Calcu1 4 te '
Aem 8 ' *
( A'emnI' +T ir #sne ), (I)
. sa . i (13) A,, represents one point on the equipment response curve, for one T . I j
(14) Assume various T , and calculate suf ficient A., to accurately
]
plot the equipment response curve.
l ,
1 7.0 EOUIPMENT RESPONSE SPEC 11tA CURVES Figuras V-9 through V-28 are equipment response spectra curves for i
{
different percent critical structural damping and critical equipment {
damping, for equipcent supported at various nodes of the structure, and '
generated by the procedure described in part 6.0. See Table V-1 for l index to curves, l
{ 4 1
?
( V - 10
~
h l a !
0 $.
' . 'h;
' p,um M "
^ ^ ^%A%ECM
_ _._ _ -U
18EPol & 2 -
i 8.0 CONCW510ll Using the equipment response spectra method in conjunction with a model analysis yields conservative static loads from which, as described la Section VI, an analysis of the equipment and piping can be made.
1 1
1 e
l I
)
i V - 11 l k
y 1.o ;
t; l s (
\ ,
---_---__m- _ _ _ . . _ _ . . _
CEP.16 2 !
. i Elt14111tlL A, Maximum modal acceleration of equipment i i
A A , due to direct ground motion A. A, associated with mode n of the structure A
one Maximum acceleration of structure in modo n at point of equipment support '
T, Natural equipment period in mode a I T
Natural period of structure in mode a u, Relative displacement of equipment Y, Time-varying acceleration of structure at point of equip-ment support.
A, Fraction of critical desping in equipment As Fraction of critical damping in structure i Ten Participation factor for structure mode n 4one Characteristic snape function for structure mode n at point of equipment support
., Natural frequency of equipment in mode m Natural frequency of structure in mode n g
Nondimensional aquipment displacement V - 12
\
-e-
- y*- ~ 'g{1[i))
- _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - - - - - - - - - - - 1
't C~tP 1 & 2 i M
W roR REstons: srsenA CnVES
, 1 Pereant critical Damoinn Figure Structure &
A h gla, Structural Jeuinnent f,1ging Earthovake f V-9 Reactor Ridg.
T
- II. 139'-0 125 Crane 4.0 4.0 mE i V-10 Reactor Rids. E1.117'-4" 4.0 .5 at V-11 Reactor Rids.11. 80'-0" 4.0 a
.5 et 1 V-12 Reactor 31ds. El. 50' 4" 4.0 .5 at j V-13 Reactor 514 3 . H. 20'-0" 4.0 .5 est j V.14 V-15 Reactor 814g. u.-17'-4" Dryve11 4.0 .5 et j 1
E1. 93'4" & H. 4'-6" 4.0 V-16
.5 at i Sacrificial Shield i E1. 78'4" & E1. 31'-0" 4.0 .5 et l V-17 RFV Pedestal #
- 1 E1. 31'4" & E1. 4'-6" 4.0 .5 est l V-18 Reactor aldg. u.117'-4" 4.0 1.0 est )
V-19 Reactor 814 3 . H. 40'-0" 4.0 1.0 et l V-20 Reactor tidg. H. 50'-0" 4.0 1.0 at g ,
V-21 i {
Reactor Sids. E1. 20'-0" 4.0 1.0 et I V-22 Reactor 31ds. U.-17'-0" 4.0 1.0 mg Y-23 Reactor Bldg. H.139'-0" T
125 Crana 7.0 7.0 asE V-24 Reactor Bldg. E1.117'-4" 7.0 2.0 2.0 ESE {
V-25 Raaetor tidg. F.1. 80'-0" 7.0 2.0 2.0 asE V-26 Reactor 81ds. E1. 50'-0" 7.0 2.0 2.0 et V-27 Emactor 31ds. E1. 20'-0" 7.0 2.0 2.0 Est V-28 Rasctor 81ds. E1.-17'-0" 7. 0 2.0 2.0 ast V - 13 -
e.
'4 5
f is
- - - - - - --- - - - -- ~
2ht.
T,, EQUIPMENT Tsn STRUCTURE
- E
,,,m i,,,,,,
+ 7 GROUND MOTION
= - . - -
CAROLl% A Powt R & LIGHI COMP ANY BSUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS I & 2 COUPLED SINGLE DEGREE OF FREEDOM SYSTEM v-' j
O O
> k.
E E
O II e $C S gd "
. . b.
N 7
y >
0N u g e- > p 3 V et 3 e oW g 3d4 W q
N e I
=
g i W m ,
5
- m # *:: I" l z $9
, E*2 "
39E N 4 U J
"& EN 4 a s, o e 9 p
5 g W eu 03= 8 W
i "" # 2 i
l ** . .
44 N
}
I
. . b.
I 1
2 l _:
m
. .N a e i
n km b
o en
'd
,NT l
l in l
--N I
E-l 1
.g'oo
- o e
o 4
4 e
o n
o
', L
>(t ll >= .
7 . >= .
> < .h.
N
{j a b 7 3 >
ok u
a e g
2 %d ee >
c tal ,q
- s 4 M -
e == 1
? == =m gs L
e
, ,N 4 ad g*
N ?N K d a O E en h$ E nN U 3 u a j
. . 8
%% 'N n
, ,kg O
< ..g n
. ."~
/
/
p#
e***** O O
m**=%=%. %g a
N
\ N
\ 'd i
\ l
\
\ o
\ d i
\ .
I, .N I- *
- 3. , ,
,e ~ O 6
6 6 o '
f g e s i a L
D=
l
- a. -
. . . b.
- ,eh
! N t
- T
- i a > '
g ok "E $
- ~ : a y C, 8 o a .l, ,e o w
- o. *
,) g l -
%%
- w 3deW
. l . - d l
'g E J
- e 1 8
,
- EE Re l
- I '
n 2 ma = l j i . 'l 'W 4 mg a j
- I l -
a v o i i :
gl
- 3g
- o. g no .
==
<a
- oo--
- 0. o* : I a
e
.l j
. g. . ,
e
- N l
.
- I !
I l t.
I *
- l. - :
I
, I .
- l\. .a i ,/ / .
! //
.a
- / -
/ ;F's'/
... / O
,*. p . . D.
- .,. .g
! .g*N. % % )
't
.$\*Q d I l
1
- 1
, o i
- i
\Y..l '.
0 '
e e
N g
g .
< <s=
6 : o o o s' o 6 o o e e p g \
m
-m . h . ... .
\'
- d e > E N g 4 l
'M {N T
- 5W w MN ug E N u i
> 0
- 0 * *> ** *
%% m C
- g ,g4 -
. OW z a =s
- c w< ,. -
w E
. E ME hX
$ 2"3 5 ie -
a <u s
- l l l fI E s a g 2282 2E g oo"2 g ej :
2 "a i ,
e 1, 8
'A
.f f ,
i R
/ *J
/
/ l
/ .
/ . m l .i '
l .
- p* g, .
le
.:.... 1:- 8
..,y -
1
% g' .
% O s -
- s il
\ 'd
\
\ *. .
r.
\'
o W
l' 'd 4
.l
.i e
- I . .N O
e Ie E_
e- O o o
! eis C. o o o l o e e , w l
L .
.=
___.____ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - . _ _ a
k t.1
[
[ g g
T A
a.
hk
'M a~ i k' n j }.
~
ltw N
' I
~
k eTN g i
s ~E i
/' < j o
11 H
}
/
a $ ~
/
e '. ~
Q- e * /
(
11
/
E~
l l
t
.I lQ o 6 6 o '
o o o tg g g e n e' = .
1
>=-= .
== - . .. .. _. _ . .. - -
1
.. y . .--
yw n . ~,- . . j H p E m a
.c!
gy Wit lgg t
UE u~ 65E
,_ ,. g Esa sig
.,- nts E$
R = 3,e3
) k >" E D J
!E 55
!g>s! e vi "5.
3 E82 g a l n # $
o - w e e a W % Q
. .a
,?
o i
j :_ o o
o ' '
t~ o
. o o o e 4 w n 7
h$
x v
o re
-l W.
t 4
.q g O
~ 5-to- #
!li 5 *".i .
08
.m.4 >- s#
go wN5 E
$2' 2== z*B !
<w s<
s i t:-
29 Ig
.ct a g N
s
)
. 9_
$ "o -
- m ,
- u s )
" e -
R a ,1 ei I i'
O I
. 1 1 4
A
" I A
</ ' O.
o o '
O. oc e e , =
3, :
.t
f"
]
- . i O
E llI g
h -
9 , , ,
> a =4 " '
< a -g . '
- ~ -g, ow= >
s :s 5e
$ $ e. "J " U
'd 2c < i;oIai
~~
- 9"* ~
..O os e -
g Eg
~
= 5" g-Eg83;y(C f ;
- l. 2WD *sigjg=..
Ue
= :
1 l-aa <W b hh 0
L 2 2 s b<
- ! . e gsW - *>
l o m ya u
, e IE oa * $c .fG".8 I d ! W { gg 3[
n
. o --
! i O
w l
i a
. .9 Oa
~
O
- f' W
O l .."O 1
N
'd l
? -
o O O O 6 0,d o
t m N .
(#1 Nollv W 3"l3 337
[
d f
> 4 r
)
Os i.
- T t
>$ h
.: a.
a m I g a .. 8 a
3 )
oM '>
9 m gE 5e e- +
I b ee U U -
. .o
~ 3E* !E,85 ! -
- z~ if- i
- g5lg!!Igl
- st..
. .. !:E = sg ys:: ;j
> o .- ..
1w s
- I.sae N
i
~
e E*E E l5 ,2
~d uDa I D h e. !i,
,a i II . ;.,1
) . .8 o ' :' \
. 4' a-t a
N w -
. .v!*
on O
E f
- =
. . e, 1 t o ;
. h o
. .N
< ~~.
o l . : , ! , , ! ,
9 9
o 9 o o o 00 e o W W (B) NOl1VW31300V l
\ ,. .
t s . . ._
-.-n--
, x-g sw ua ls.
a=5 ,
>f id" >k(
3 g3 3 l
,ga lin - t
..C - *z"
=<g I s5 i E gg ..
l
$5 N
-3 is l i!b I
n 8 E
, si i I
,% E
- l t i11 I
il _ .
"d l e
'd ,
U taa
. WIS
,g ,
o a
.g
. .N g
.Q
, . - O o
o o. O. o 4 m n -
o (5) N011VL 313 33V
.j I
h
-n I n
1,,,_ i
- 4 E ,
i; < t e 2d gI e I l Ew >
- v. .aI'I" !
E ee .
l 5 E * !t, I
l S :. !! gl
. i,5l":: l Ici 8! i 1 . .
a
.a i a gi$ $
e
)
ss
=z I a
$s u3 M U
) .
. =!
E I
=t lll
~
~
b
.g
\
. 'd q
.e
- 4 6a o
a
.g'
. ,M
)
l
- N
- f
'd i
, , . - 0 I s
6 6
6 oo (
. i i A a o
, (O NollvW3'I333V 1
I .
_g g . _
p ..: . ,. .
I "y a
!:E 3
oW "I .A
,3 3 I
l U N >% 9 < >
h N b 8!
EE* !E;$5I! 5
~A *x~
lll lu t
- ii~ijlilis!!r 1 i;Irl'sli
- : ,i e u s
lt i !!
.g
. .9 0
U W
. .9 -
ooO ;
a
'W
. . G.
O
. .n g
N h *d
.pO e
- ~ -
i i . I i l O 0 0 0 4 o s n v -
(B) N Ol1 V W 3'13 3 3 7 J
l
. I
- 6* . no .sen, ms
. . . . . .w -* woope>=, - * ..a.- w - w m. __
\
l > hkb I
\
2 I s{ m.
.$.a i e
$id ua j IUe $
2 ".14 BI g g:55 I
E $ tS
$ h II fkk
.e i5 l!kl sE "
5 \
EE 1 ('
f h
"6 \
\
"d , \
d
! e$-
'60 3
s
.g'
.m \
g N
d i
..g
' o od O O '
(b) N 011TW3'3 00*
W 1
._-->m__.""* ^
- i n
E b *I 2 3 E
se- =* g.
II!l
.sg 1
E g-
..o -
- ," E** EIIe Ig iE i < lga Ud g g"a ;
4 j
e -= Eg
- <w o =w E .I SE
=z E #5 9
. Om gk b "6 5 3 s [ ((
. .b.
o E w-du 92
- wW "w , ,.
o o
Ea -
gE O h.ggh "
UI : -
g e 9 >w w
%eJ oJ = En
- == . ..!
o
. vas:
atw was ,
1 won B-W e >
d g,g>E ,
% n w$"
EMo E l -
a w t,te i
kW 5 g O
z o=tw sa hMW G
O E
- . O O O. O.
- s e n -
o (H N0dvW37333V i
l
\
If
,., * ' ^ '
~~ i 1 .
'l
- g<
. I*
- y
!d {J '
'l
$k u a EIy
$ $ ee s* $ st -
i o -
l "= .. S 8 s!..
W D Ed e25 Et s e ,'. y. v n 10 e
5
! E a .
- s =E a oI
-J 6 = gg w g ..
o B I
~ .
E i *
.J G
-a !
- e. E
- 2w $w o*
h $
s$, O
~ ~ w 4: *O ao oo g
oa m
w g
3..; 5.;
. ,w una
.g . , , .
W is I wot Ng W
. .1 w9E o . ,
W 4
> 0 N .J e ; .;:
~
$. .k.wN f E W w
o O
' =
O.
g O. k I-M N $
(t) N011VW 3"l333V
\
t mi \
O
-"m-WY
^
A[ _ . ,-- -.,-
ne r ,- - - , * -
.. _ _ . , - ,.r-
- i I:
- E
'2 I Ilh i e_ n!s!al 8gi 35" 82;lailc6 g= -
..o . -
jia l
- !E e188
- [11
~
e :!
Es3El r gg l o aw gIe5 ,
-l 85 ry i 8
5 a= ea I "6 = lt sag.g.
g a
a "6 ,
i
- 3
$3 EE -3 b ta ; [
g E "3 :
=; b _
s.
trl J[,-
- e
' .9 .
!
Rd Ed . .oE.
uEw
=a.g _
UC=
e, d
w..
g 2 a fo;*
u 545
- 5 w
- m%$
g _
b O
. . o = l 6, o, o, o, o,0 s e u - o (D) NOl1VW3 7333V ll i I
\s
Ik;k<ll jll 1li lIl ((ilIj 4 J
s , i 3 o
u v* )
T =W v t
y N 0, r-s A r t M s
A F L uSeT s su ,e t
P Tees 0 M
O IC
=OL8:
e nA e E - as tT FTO UMs v C R eVERI T T T uEsOeC t
H C2 L O ER8 A G E E t t
L& T tRf OF L E nA O G l
0 a I cGe eI
- . t s
M S ef erE f
R A T Rsf uO A T MM41 = = mae E EI L RS f EE A$$
se wTN O
D P SU cSOT E T u P N. L 9 A K rR:S A: : es 0
0 e CI s
aOeAtCtTs eT0E s
t if fU t 8 A s mC8 mA T : tsT Se x t W
_ O S R N OEps rf a
t t
e cO eCCMG U Rueu e A s
RHT CE C TOfo A EE OIT 0 C U SEAw R C t t RT 0 B =V t
8 f sE R eS M I
OOPA PFOs m
E s
^
7 _
_ 0 6 _
0 _
)
C E
5 (S 0 D _
O I
R _
E _
4 P _
0 .
3
'O 2
0
'O 0
0 0 0
~
00 4 3 o.
2 0 l
_?=9>*ew'wo"*
a
-l1 !l l ,l
9.-g, ; ,,.. y
, ----r-v.w-~ .
I !E i '
- O-I!all 18"819
- s p-32 o . - - h ge
$. : s$f nisi --
!g a ,
l I:
l
!! lr!gsl5!e l!cE!!
l 'o =
l
_. ; =
l .
1 1
.y
.a. e o oo 6
. y a.
.g
- .N ea -
, l ,
9 o o o. 0 0 e a u -
o (6) No 1yg3-l3ppy
}
,l i'1!1I111lIilq;l!lIii ' ,iIl -
2 E
T t I s
T O# (Y Y N P P F H o
s A UGG T 8 A L S t sU 3 P P f sO e
- , '. k
\.% s t
i0LS:
t s 8 TB -
\,
OC I EA UMes e
V CR rV e EROT PT0 ER8 T T pL H C2 OEt E c eC s A G E TORR I
L L& RA 0 OF E O 0 & I Fe04t e G%% g M S e t T (MPe s= 41 t s e 1
R nOA Ts - B AT U Rt LR E Se ee J E S
_ r EI A4S Ou TN TuPMD CBO P SU E P f t
T L . :a 9 A K SO:sA E Ts s _
E T 4aC R NA:
S C00gTUE3E 8
0 M CI I NA7 I m Ts K L W f eCR Ut Cerea
- 8 O
R N A
CU S OMOs P
TOTO SEAH s
a U _
R t RT _
RR ER 0 C n B t Y e OOPA eB O e
B e
FFOE E
s 7
0 _
~
0 0 ).
C E
S 5 (
0D O
I R
E
- 4 P 0
3 0
2 O
I. -
.O
- * - - - - - O.
0 0 0 0 0. O 4 3 2 1 O
e zo.=4Ew*wuU8 Il, I l l il l'
, c p g -,
=
A i
!$ z g6 gg . l O
u I >
a ,
t U ve 8
..o a
- ,< =
site g u
7 3 n; . z g:E ig
. = = .
i=
. e <= g8 52* i
.ig '
O EM =EE I. i
.g o I, gI5 E i
!g .
6 3i: ry a !. l w %:5.. .s ,
i
- E h- i e
e 'd 9
s U
} W i f . .9 U
- oo
} E
. = t, i
i y Tg o'
O
. .n N
'd ,
. i . O b Od d O 6 T m n - 0 (6) NOl1VW 3 7 3 33V s
\
\
i (
.6 --
\
A 4
\
4E
> A l
!qd b N
!.w v $l-ll l" E
.I 2
=
N
..g 1 ""
o $U !'I! * * ~
a 1e 5 E
i 5; ". :. I g rv
- O en 3 O '[
. .$ 4W
. 5 a -u 5 . e -
gg 5 I i
.e 5= 5 i a .
l
- lgo81Elsl
=
, t g
i
.g j g 1 a3 1
.g al
'l
. .N
,g
" o E O d od o,
4 4 A -
o (6) N 011V W 3"l3 3 3 Y 4
l
\j
.. .t, .. L
j, b
i
! .h' E ..
R i
re- Is gg ! l
- _ ; si
- 9 eL 8-:'I 8g:
l i o
l"-
ni gitt r,i.
e.s
<w E 8 li1.14:
- s. .
i 5! 9 *Eg li"le
[i .
2 I r.g, a , a.g" *g t-
"d lt gi !!
=
1
.g i
O
{ 'd _
i
' d
. n*
.o n 9
. .; 0
. .y I
.g
'ci o o o$
o 0 e e u -
o (B) N011TW373 33V l
l 1
.. A I - , ,
_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ b
1 7 ..
I - 4 E
> x k-
.i e* a
{- !d g{ gs .
r 4
Iw u > I !., *
.,' E P4 35.
- E ,8 "
..q . -
..! s
!!! !Ij!2A2 i lid
~
o m :a s 0
<w EW g5 jk! 5 Q
"-l1i 8
85 5
!! e lIlI!!!
a ! t 8 _._
w
.d
. .e g
O me de i 9
-l a i 'W
. . . a, o
M
.g
.g s - . O O 4 4 0 **
w a n - o (5) N011VW 31333v h
I
_ . _ . . _ _ . . _ . .E
, )
e B h- E I E
a I i i5 6.g5 m i
g aw la>g s $ g.. > l v.
2 v .. 8.s EfY8, t t,-
242 35* "in 5" - '
..o ."- 2g..! ggt 22
- $2Es s :::::,
E gf8
i a j ., 2E
, , l
. E8 -
"o I"I i.e 8 !,
39 !*55 e '
5I. !!
I!! . !Eg ag gr 5 6 In !!y!
388 "o v a g,- a .ggg 6.
.g o.0 w )
.i!2
'6 a e
=
w
, .T. &
o n
'Y
,N
.o O
o o o. o o T M N -
0 (H N0dVW3V337 i
l i
.J:_ _
-~
I k . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - s
- i. E E ,* n 2d gg 58I" yyI i
- v. >
R ,W"* sae
_ = 5
- 33
" "a . -g;,!gRNA _
" o - g ..
i -
=5: 18, in .;;
- I 2o*
li EllE( "'
gg
.*o =w I .
= ht 5I Qg=5 E
t y..
K II'g ,.
=r
$3
$ t I '
g E et
- l 1 .,
'd E lf a
l; g lll J .
..k.
1 O
.I w
.d = a
., 9 e'
.1
. .Mg N
.1 'd 1
L
. o
- O O 0 o*
s n u -
o
(#1 N011VW3'13 33V I
s
.i . \
-- '- * ^
' E me>
O e .
..we e w ,.m Ne Id ed '8 - - - ~ ~
h
. ,, g g n
s.
- E
- =
8 i a, ikIr si go - 2 1 '
5W *5*
- i ua - !-A "s Egt 58" g<;g !
sd* 8-
..o .
,e- -! ggcAA 44 5o
- g...ag
. ; 5 ::: .e
= o. am t! 5,(a
- z Io,
.a ,w 9 o gb i.0"sr rv s 55 gi 5 5 Es
- i, -w g 8E i [..
t
, , e, o
u EC ,
= = a-32 = Wg g s 588 o
!! 5 g
. .e 9
0 W
6aO
=
W
. . T. &
C
. .n g
o, N
l
- - - O 6 o 6
6 oc w n n a 6 (8) N011VW 31300y i
i
\
._ j ... ..,..m.. . ~ + . - .. .msn.
__.______ - - --- J
, .c--
, t - 4 E t .
u
,.= 5
! ! gja. 2 P
.j i ;g [ ..
s
[
Eh!
"M {q[!l bd t $bn i
e5 ** . 8
." " - 2!g" i ..o -
5=l!l:gy4A2 l :. ;;
r "
o .n:a ge 3 g 'sr o---
o .w zv E g!$. s c -
La 5 E* E<hat-
. si Er g G ggg "6 g u; . ...
[.
N
, ,w o
U W
.$ w o oo E
'W
. . S.
O
. .m I
. .N
'd i
O 5
d 6 0 '
00 I A N "
o (5) spol1yg3 73ppy i
\. . !
i . _ _ . - . . . _ . - . -
A
. __________ . .l
I,<
88tP-1 & 3 f
l SECTION VI DESIGN OF EQUIPMENT AND PIPING j
.a I
l l
i
. )
g 88tP.1 & 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page No.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
VI - 1 2.0 DAMPING VI - 1 3.0 ANALYSIS AND DESIGN VI - 2 i
4.0 ALIAnlABLE STRESS AND DEFLECTION CRITERIA VI - 2 5.0 TESTING VI - 5 6.0 CERTIFICATION VI - 6 l
{
- 7. 0 YENDOR REQUIREMENTS VI - 6
, 8.0 NUCLEAR STEAM SUPPLY SYSTEM VI - 6 9.0 OTHER NUCLEAR STEAM SUPPLY COMPONENTS VI - 10 e
_ _. U
g n
RSCP.1 & 2
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this section is to describe the methods used to I,
assure that all Class I equipmene and piping shall remain operational under the operating basis earthquake cosaditions and to remain fune-tional under the design basis earthquake conditions to allow for a safe and orderly shutdown of the plant.
Applicable sections of this report appear in the detailed speel- ;
fications for systems and equipeest furstished for the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant.
Determination of significant modes of vibrations and frequencies is accomplished either by analytic means or by tests. Once the fre- ,
quency(s) is known, the appropriate responae curves cr entered and, for the specified damping value, an acceleration is determined. This acceleration serves as a basis for an maalysis or test to assure the adequacy of the equipment as explained in detail below.
2.0 DAMPING Percent of critical daeping has been selected as indicated in Table VI-1.
i
! TAB 12 VI-1
- )
i I
Item Percent of Critical Despins
! oBe pg
- 1. Concrete Structures 4% 7%
- 2. Piping 1/2% 2%
- 3. Equipment
- 4. Pumps i
- b. Motors 1% 2% 3
- c. Switchgear
- d. Exchangers
- s. Tanks
- f. Batteries and Racks 3 Cable Tray Systems
- h. Diesel Generator Units
- 1. Others
- 4. Cranes 4% \ 7%
VI - 1
?
e 1
i l
n B8EF= 1 In 1 1 These values have been selected as being conservative for the material used and associated stress levels.
3.0 ANALYSIS AND DESIGN For those items not being tested, the follovir.g is performed as a minimums (1) Determination of significant frequencies, mode shapes and participation factors by an acceptable analytic means.
l (2) Use of floor response spectra to determine equipment accel- !
erstions. For wait mounted equipment, response is inter-pelated between adjoining floor respcases.
(3) Determine modal shear and mossents for the significant modes where the equivalent static leading is obtained by the method described in Section III, paragraph 6, itema 7 and 8.
(4) Combine modal shears and moments by the sum of the absolute values if three modes or less and by the square root of the l j sum of the squares if more than three modes.
(5) Determine stresses and deflections where appropriate. See j
] Section 4.0 for stress and deflection criteria.
l (6) For components and systema not readily analyzed, see Section 5.0 on testing.
4.0 ALIDWABl.E STRESS AND DEFLECTION CRITERI A )
The following specifies the acceptance criteria under the design I basis and operating basis earthquakes:
i
\
s VI - 2 ,
\'
\
l.
t
C'EP.1 & 2 5
4.1 Oseratian Basis Earthouska (CBC f The primary steady-etate stresses, including those i
?
originating from dead weight loads, operating loade, and operating comperatures, when combined with seismic loads, shall be within the allowable working stress limits as set forth in the appropriate design Code er 8tsaderd. Local, self-limittag secondary stresses may exceed allowable values to the esteet permitted by the appropriate Code or 8tandard.
The Codes or Standards shall includes
- a. American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC)
Manual of Steel Construction i b. American Society of Mechanical tagineers (ASME)
Boiler and Pressure vessel Code Section 1 -
Power BoilersSection II -
Material SpecificationsSection III -
Nuclear VesselsSection VI!! -
Pressure vessels Division land 2 Section IX -
Welding Qualifications A8ME Code for Tumps and Valves fer Nuclear Power
- c. American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
Code for Pressure Piping 331.1.0-1967 Power Pipias
- d. American Petroleum Institute (AFI) Standards
- e. American Water Works Association (AWA) Standards
- f. Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineerg (IEEE)
Standards for Nuclear Applications l
5'
( VI - 3 i
i t _ i 1
. a
)
dl '
H RgEP-1 & 2 l
l mere the appropriate Code or Standard permits stress increason for various load combinations which include earth-quake loads, such stress increases shall not be permitted.
The resulting loads and deflections shall not interrupt normal operation of the structures, systems, or components, under the OBE.
4.2 Desian Basis Earthquake (DBE) f Primary steady-state stresses, including those originating -
from deed weight loads, operating load , and operating tempera- f, 1
i tures, when combined with seismic stresses resulting from ,
4 I
the amplified response at the appropriate level of the build-ing to the DBE ground acceleration wherein the horisontal l' l and vertical forces occur simultaneously, shall be maintained ,
within 90 percent of the minianse guaranteed yield strength of f i
, the material. Local, self-limiting stressas may exceed yield I strength to the extent permitted by the appropriate Code or ,' ,
Standard. The resulting loads and deflections under the DBE shall permit a safe and orderly shutdown of the plant with Class 1 equipment remaining functional.
4.3 Were no applicable Code or Standard lists stress limits, }
stresses resulting from the earthquake in combination with other loadings shall be limited to 60 percent of the yield stress for the OBE and 90 percent of yield for the DBE.
I f
t I
i VI - 4 5
. A
- 3
88EP-1 & 2 i
5.0 TESTING For systems or components not readily analyzed, a testing program is initiated by the supplier. The progra:s is as follows:
(1) A frequency search is performed by subjecting the equipment to sinusoidal impulses with frequencies ranging from 1 to 20 cycles per second. This portion of the test determines the resonant frequency (s) of the equipment.
(2) Once the resonant frequency is determined, the floor response curves are entered and the acceleration associated with the t
equipment frequency is selected. To account for inaccura-
. cies, a + 20 percent band on the frequency obtained shall be used, and the highest acceleration in this range shall be the value selected; for frequencies out of the 1-20 cps I
range, end values of the response curves are ueed.
(3) The equipment is then subjected to the acceleration determined
, from (2) at its associated f requency for a minimum of two hun-I dred cycles.
(4) In addition to requiring that the structural components of the equipment respond adequately, other components required l I
j for a protective function are monitored to assure that the I
4 protective action may be performed when required.
l l
(5) Tests are conducted on similar equipment to thoac supplied I
{
1 to the projects. Support conditions are similar to the sup- l i ports supplied for the project. i 8
i i l I l i l vi - 5 i
i 1
BSEP.1 6 2 -
1 (6) Testing on components is acceptable provided that it is demon- ,
f strated that the test simulates actual conditions for the I a !
f total system.
{ (7) Where limitations of the test facility require reduction of t
some of the equipment operating parameters, it must be shown that these reductions do not invalidate the test results.
6.0 CERTIFICATION Design calculations and test data and interpretations are signed by a registered professional engineer and are subject to review by the Owner or his designated representative.
7.0 VENDOR RIX)UIREMENTS -
Each bidder is required to submit with his proposal an outline of how he intends to satisfy the seismic criteria. The successful bid-der is required to submit for approval to the owner or his designated j representative a detailed report specifying a step-by-step procedure for proving the adequacy of his equipment. ,
8.0 NUCLEAR STEAM SUPPLY SYSTEM 7
8.1 Inst rumentat ion and Controls I
The modulen* will be designed to withstand and perform their functions during an operating basis earthquake (OBE)
- Module - is defined as "any assembly of interconnected conponents which con-
- stituten an identifiable device, instrument, or piece of equipment."
t Sections VI-l through V1-7 do not apply to GE supplied Class 1 equipment.
i 1
v1 + 6 I
_ , - - . . . _ . . .i.
1 R$tF.1 & 2 ,
and a design basis earthquake (DBE). This qualification will be ascertained by either analytical techniques or by vibra-tion testing techniques, or by a combination of the two tech-t niques. A seismic specification covering the following pro-l cedure is made a part of the purchase order.
8.2 Vibration Testing Where vibration testing is used alone or in conjunction with the analytical methods, the piece or pieces to be tested will be vibration tested in each of the three mutually per-pendicular rectilinear axes using the procedure described below:
- a. Evaluation Methods:
Selected devices will be qualified for acceptability to l meet seismic requirements using one of the following techniques:
- 1) Testina - Enclosures and devices will be vibration tested using a sinaaoidal shaker as outlined in the following paragraphs. Equipment operation will be monitored during vibration unless stated otherwise.
(a) Resonance Vibration Test: Resonant f requencies of the devices will be determined by performing an exploratory vibration sweep over the fre-quency range of interest at a double-amplitude displacement that provides less than 0.5g acceleration in each of the three mutually perpendicular rectilinear exes. The equip-
! ment will then be vibrated for at least two minutes at each of the observed resonant frequencies using selected displacements, t VI - 7
\
\
\
i
88tP.1 & 2 Enclosures containing devices being tested will be mechanically emplored for local resonances f l
only and will not be operating during vibratio1.
Af ter completion, if no resonances in the devices ,
being tested are observed, then the next test
) will be performed.
(b) vibration Endurance Test: The device will be vibrated over the frequency range of interest for a designated time period at approximately , i
? l twice the acceleration used in (a) . nove in the two horizontal axes and in the vertical axis.
In addition for certain selected devices where-operation might be significantly limited by some maximum acceleration, the maximum fre-I quency of vibration of interest or the resonant i frequency of the device will be maintained and i
the acceleration amplitute increased until a j nondestructive malfunction is observed.
(c ) Instruteentation Mountina Simulation Test :
Whenever possible, the devices will be tested while actually mounted in the panel or in a manner simulating actual conditions. In exceptional cases, the mounting sism..ation may be performed with the equipment nonoperating in an actual enclosure if sufficient vibration data is taken to relate back to the operating test results and show adequacy of inounting.
\ VI - 8
\ \
. _4 .. . . . - . . . .
_ _ b_
1
BSEP- 1 & 2
- 2) Calculations (a) Pressure boundary devices will be considered qualified if the combined seismic and norina!
i a
loads shall not cause stresses to exceed those of the applicable ASE Section 111 or .
1 i VIII Seiler Code.
(b) Basis of Acceptability - Acceptability will be based on the ability of the equipment to
, withstand unchanical stresses and to perform its principal operational functions without spurious generation of vibration-induced sigasts which might result in a false safety ac tion. Proof will be manifested in the following ways:
I l
VI - 9 4
4
\ .. . . _ . . . , . . -. ~ . . ,
88EP-1 6 2 (1) Data Sheet - Data sheets will be prepared for each enclosure or device tested out-lining the test methods and measurements performed and summarizing results.
(2) _ Calculations - Calculations will be pre-pared in a standard and consistent format for each device where applied.
8.3 The Class I instruments for the followinC essential systems shall be analyzed or tested to ensure performance of their safeguard functions during and after as earthquakes Reactor Protection System Nuclear Boiler System CRD Hydraulic System Standby Liquid Control System Neutron Monitoring System Emergency Core Cooling Systems Process Radiation Monitoring Systems Reactor Assembly 9.0 ETHER NUCLEAR SJEAM SUPPLY COMPONENTS This equipment is supplied to a specification of 0.75g horizontal and 0.07g vertical with no increase in stress, and 1.5g horizontal and
- 0. 148 vertical with no loss in function.
Where required, the owner or his designated representative shall perform an analysis to determine whether a system is in resonance with the building. If the response indicates accelerations greater than
- l. ,
l the static coefficients specified, supports will be modified to bring l the system out of the resonant frequency range.
VI - 10 l_
_ - - - . _ - . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ 1