ML20237D576
| ML20237D576 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 07/10/1998 |
| From: | Carlone P, Lane B, Mccurdy W MPR ASSOCIATES, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20237D567 | List: |
| References | |
| 083-261-BRL-2, 083-261-BRL-2-R00, 83-261-BRL-2, 83-261-BRL-2-R, NUDOCS 9808270010 | |
| Download: ML20237D576 (7) | |
Text
_ _ . _ _ _ . _ ___________ _ _____-____ _ _______ __________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
l
-s n l
MPR Assoclits,Inc.
l ilEMPR 320 mn Sueet Alexandria, VA 22314 CALCULATION TITLE PAGE l
Client GPU Nuclear Corporation Page 1 of 7 l Project Task No.
Oyster Creek Core Plate Wedge Evaluation 083-261
- Calculation No.
Transient Dynamic Evaluation of OC Shroud with Vertical Welds Failed 083-261-BRL-2 Preparer - Date Checker- Date Reviewer / Approver- Date Rev. No.
Q9 fp Q WM- %
Isolu o 7I9hs ru c w/4/% 7 ,
i l-l l
QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENT This document has been prepared, checked, and reviewed in accordance with the Quality Assurance requirements of 10CFR50 Appendix B, as specified in the MPR Quality Assurance Manual.
P
l
. . j MMPR Ilo"A'stfe?d"*'
Alexandria, VA 22314 l
RECORD OF REVISIONS Calculation No. Prepared By Checked By 083-261-BRL-2 - gg gf Page 2 Revision Description 1
0 InitialIssue i
i I
i
)
1 l
(
l l
)
4
I MPR Associties,Inc.
MMPR 320 mnssweet Alexandria, VA 22314 Calculation No. Prepared By Checked By 083-261-BRL-2 gg g Page3 1.0 PURPOSE This calculation documents the results of transient dynamic finite element analyses of the Oyster Creek reactor internals. The analyses provides a basis for the proposed installation of wedges between the core plate and the core shroud. Analyses are performed using the finite element model documented in Reference 1 with updated stiffnesses at the core plate elevation to account for the installed wedges from Reference 2.
2.0
SUMMARY
OF RESULTS Table 2-1 provides calculated loads and displacements for the shroud with failed vertical welds compared to the results documented in the Oyster Creek Core Shroud Repair Confirmatory Dynamic Analysis (Reference 1) for the shroud with intact vertical welds.
Table 2-1 RESULTS Case Vertical Bumper load (idps) Fuel Load (kips) Fuel Displacement (in)
Welds Top Bottom Top Bottom Top Bottom Relative Multiple Break. Compressed EW Intact 70 27 15 15 0.489 0.404 0.650 Best Estimate Time History Failed 72 20 14 12 0.446 0.416 0.677 Multiple Break, Normal EW Best Intact 88 38 17 19 0.484 0.411 0.650 Estimate Time History Failed 90 25 15 16 0.449 0.428 0.626 Multiple Break. Expanded EW Intact 87 61 19 31 0.525 0.441 0.720 Best Estimate Time History Failed 99 31 17 18 0.515 0.440 0.735 Multiple Break, Compressed Ns Intact 77 35 15 22 0.450 0.410 0.760 Upper Bound Tune History Failed 93 17 15 12 0.526 0.410 0.358 Multiple Break. Normal Ns Intact 85 41 1' 18 0.575 0.420 0.580 Upper Bound 'nme History Failed 73 25 19 16 0.532 0.427 0.588 l Multiple Break. Expanded Ns Intact 165 61 23 35 0.570 0.440 0.720 Upper Bound Tune History Failed 112 74 24 40 0.558 0.529 0.693 sliding at H6b, Normal Ns Upper Intact 148 95 81 73 0.394 0.403 0.137 Bound Time History Failed 141 65 81 72 0.3% 0.410 0.137 sliding at H6b, Expanded Ns Intact 147 63 97 90 0.390 0.393 0.115 Upper Bound Time History Failed 145 33 96 91 0.392 0.392 0.113 l
MPR Associtt:s,Inc.
- lii E M P R 320 mna strut Alexandria, VA 22314 i
Calculation No. Prepared By Checked By 083-261-BRL-2 gg gg Page 4 3.0 FINITE ELEMENTMODEL The analyses are performed using the finite element model documented in Reference 1, Appendix A. Figure 3-1 provides a schematic of the model. Installation of wedges between the core plate and the core shroud affects the load path between the fuel and the core shroud. Consequently the stiffness, Km (Figure 3-1), at the core plate elevation used in the
- l. Reference 1 analyses is no longer valid and must be updated to reflect the different load path.
Two configurations are analyzed:
- 1. The Multiple Breaks case is based on the following assumptions:
The vertical welds in the core shroud are completely failed between horizontal welds H6b and H5.
The vertical welds in the core support ring and the H6a-H5 shroud section are i aligned.
Horizontal welds H5 and H6a are pinned. Horizontal weld H6b is completely failed.
1
- 2. The Sliding at H6b case is based on the following assumptions: ,
The vertical welds in the core shroud are completely failed between horizontal
{
welds H6a and H5. l The core support ring is intact. !
Horizontalwelds H5 and H6a are intact. Horizontalweld H6b is completely failed. !
The stiffnesses are calculated in Reference 2 using 3-dimensional models of the core )
shroud with the appropriate geometries: !
1 Multiple Breaks case: Km = 0.48 x 10'lb/in "
Sliding at H6b case: Km = 1.85 x 108 lb/in !
4 MPR Associst:s,Inc.
MMPR 22mna su=1 Alexandria, VA 22314 Calculation No. Prepared By Checked By 083-261-BRL-2 g g Page5 K m - W $2 ness of Te M i
Ics - Iness of Core Support K,m - Aotational Stiffness of Tae Rode Im - Inertie of Top Cuide Kg . Sumper Stiffness ua - Wess of Core Support e_. oe, .. m. _ , .
g-~; g y; .
- \
- "fu "u"Tu ' /
/ g l / d
/ f- - - - - - E
- >====> X
/
/
'NYW[
/
Z Xh
, , , C C q ,
, ~[UM ) Mg 2.T - --- ---- ,. :-e
1 /
a tu -
1/-ts) e ed%a-
, s L-
$> e.
-/ m ,
/ / % ,
JE / lC /
j j/ "" M(U ) I j ~(s) 20 N ju ,
, h5,s @
/ / %
- , g -ts) @gs)--x @ q 8 '
~
gr
/
, ;w
/
e
/ / U)
M 3 h @
/////o dg
)
Figure 3-1. Finite Element Model Schematic l
1
_ _ _______ ________ _ ____ . _ _ _ __ ._ -J
9 MPR Associrt:s,Inc.
IMMPR a2mna street Alexandria,VA 22314 Calculation No. Prepared By Checked By 083-261-BRL-2 g gg Page 6 4.0 RESULTS The finite element modelis solved using ANSYS Version 5.4. The ANSYS installation -
verification is documented in QA-54-1.
The models are excited with two acceleration time histories documented in Reference 1, Appendix B:
north-south upper bound time history at node 34 in the building model ,
e east-west best estimate time history at node 34 in the building model l The models are analyzed with nominal,15% compressed, and 15% expanded time scales as identified below.
Eight finite element analyses are performed:
a multiple break case, N-S time history,15% compressed time scale
=
multiple break case, N-3 time history, nominal time scale a
multiple break case, N-S time history,15% expanded time scale a
multiple break case, E-W time history,15% compressed time scale multiple break case, E-W time history, nominal time scale
=
multiple break case, E-W time history,15% expanded time scale
=
sliding at H6b case, N-S time history, nominal time scale sliding at H6b case, N-S time history,15% expanded time scale The sliding at H6b cases listed above gave the largest bottom bumper and bottom of fuel loads and the largest bottom cf fuel displacement for the sliding at H6b cases considered in i Reference 1.
The analysis output is documented in References 3 through 10. The results are summarized in Table 2-1.
l l
m__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ ._ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ . . ._ _
MPR Asrcellt:s,Inc.
MMPR 220 mnsstreet Alexandria, VA 22314 Calculation No. Prepared By Checked By 083-261-BRL-2 g gg Page 7
5.0 REFERENCES
- 1. MPR-1579, "Confirmatog Dynamic Analysis of Oyster Creek Reactor Internals for Core Shroud Repair Evaluation," December 1994.
- 2. MPR Calculation 083-261-BRL-1, " Shroud Stiffness with Failed Vertical Welds and Installed Wedges," Revision 0. !
- 3. ANSYS Output File, "MBKBEWC.OUT," 6/29S8,12:27.
]
- 4. ANSYS Output File, "MBKBEWN.OUT," 6/2968,12:44.
- 5. ANSYS Output File, "MBKBEWE.OUT," 6/29S8,13:01.
- 6. ANSYS Output File, "MBKUNSC.OUT," 6/29S8,11:12.
- 7. ANS'YS Output File, "MBKUNSN.OUT," 6/29S8,11:31.
- 8. ANSYS Output File, "MBKUNSE.OUT," 6/29S8,12:03. !
- 9. ANSYS Output File, "SH6BUNSN.OUT," 6/29S8,13:17.
- 10. ANSYS Output File, "SH6BUNSE.OUT," 6/29S8,13:31. I i
-