NRC-96-0042, Forwards Markup of Draft Rev 0 to Design Criteria Document FERMI-DC-76230-1, Cchvac Duct & Duct Support Qualification, Summarizing Results of 960301 Meeting

Forwards Markup of Draft Rev 0 to Design Criteria Document FERMI-DC-76230-1, Cchvac Duct & Duct Support Qualification, Summarizing Results of 960301 Meeting

ML20101N537
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	04/03/1996
From:	Gipson D DETROIT EDISON CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
CON-NRC-96-0042, CON-NRC-96-42 NUDOCS 9604080425
Download: ML20101N537 (65)

Text

e e Dougits R Gipton D Seruor Vee Premdent Nuclear Generation Detroit re-6400 North Dme Hghway Newport, Michigan 48166 (313) 686-5249 April 3,1996 NRC-9C ,042 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk '

Washington, D. C. 20555-0001

References:

1) Fermi 2 NRC Docket No. 50-341 NRC License No. NPF-43

2) NRC Letter dated December 7,1995, Fermi 2 Control Center Heating , Ventilation and Air Conditioning System (including Safety Evaluation on the same subject)

3) NRC Letter dated February 21,1996, Control Center Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (CCHVAC) Concern Resolution

Subject:

NRC March 1,1996 Meeting to Discuss Fermi 2 CCHVAC Duct and Duct Support Structural Oualification Approach l In Reference 2, the NRC provided Detroit Edison with a Safety Evaluation regarding j the structural qualification of the Control Center Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (CCHVAC) system for the Fermi 2 plant. The NRC Safety Evaluation noted some deficiencies in information previously provided by Detroit Edison and identified the several remaining concerns. These concerns and Detroit Edison's plans for resolving them were discussed in a meeting at NRC Headquarters on February 7, ,

as documented in the Reference 3 NRC letter. As stated in the Reference 3 letter, Detroit Edison and the NRC staff agreed to hold additional working level status meetings as necessary to assure that the analyses and other activities planned by Detroit Edison, when completed, would resolve all of the NRC concerns. The results of the first of such meetings on the subject of CCHVAC duct and duct support structural qualification are summarized in the enclosures to this letter.

9604080425 960403 PDR ADOCK 05000341 P PDR fM' ,

.. USNRC

, April 3,1996 NRC-96-0042 Page 2  ;

i Enclosure 1 is a list of participants in the March I meeting. The technical discussion at the meeting was structured around a February 29,1996 draft version of the Fermi 2 ,

CCHVAC Duct and Duct Support Qualification design criteria document. A markup i of the February 29 document is provided in Enclosure 2, reflecting the discussion with ;

the NRC on March 1. Enclosure 3 provides supplemental responses to the two issues i discussed in the meeting which required additional clarification.

Detroit Edison is proceeding with the CCHVAC duct and duct support structural qualification on the basis of the changes shown on the Enclosure 2 document and the supplemental responses provided in Enclosure 3.

No commitments are being made in this letter. If you have any questions on this matter, please contact Mr. Robert Newkirk at (313) 586-4211.

Sincerely, ,

Enclosure cc: T. G. Colburn M. J. Jordan H.- J. Miller A. Vegel

• Enclosure 1 to

. NRC-96-0042 Page1 Meeting Attendees March 1,1996 l Fermi 2 CCHVAC Duct & Support Structural Qualification Name Affiliation Timothy Colburn NRC/NRR/PD3-1, Fermi Project Manager Mark Hartzman NRC/NRR, Mechanical Engineering Branch Kamal Manoly NRC/NRR, Section Leader, Mechanical Engineering Branch l Robert Newkirk Detroit Edison, Licensing Supervisor l Kenneth Howard Detroit Edison, Mechanical / Civil Engineering Supervisor l Abdul Alchalabi Detroit Edison, Work Lead, Mechanical / Civil George Abdallah Detroit Edison, Engineer, Mechanical / Civil Enver Odar Raytheon Engineering & Construction, Task Lead W. L. Chao Raytheon Engineering & Construction C. Y. Chiou Raytheon Engineering & Construction l

l l

4 l

I l

l l

l eEnclosure 2 to NRC-96-0042 DETROIT EDISON COMPANY l

ENRICO FERMI POWER PIANT UNIT 2 DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1

(

l CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT SUPPORT OUAIJFICATION l

l I

l

& r Amc sh/7c mcrac DRAFT l

t i

t l DRAFT REVISION RO R1 R2 R3 R4 DATE-1NiHV96 l PREPARED MM REVIEWED APPROVED

. e

[ CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (Ml9/96)

PAGE 1 OF 35 3f/7 ( "/P)

Revision Log REVISION NO. DESCRIPTION OF REVISION DATE APPROVED 0 (DRAFT) DRAFT ISSUE i

i I

1 l

l 30501ENR.SPE G/29/M,2:04 pan)

3 CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERhB-DC-76230-1 ,

SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96) l PAGE 2 OF 35 l l

Table of Contents EAEC Cover Page Revision I.og . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 BACKGROUND ..............................................3  !

1. 0 S CO PE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 i 2.0 ACRONYMS .............................................,5 1

3.0 DESIGN B ASIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1 Functional Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.2 Applicable Specifications and Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.3 General Qualification Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.4 Calculation of Duct Properties and Stresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.4.1 Rectangular Ducts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.4.2 Rou n d Du ct s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3.5 Duct and Duct Support Qualification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3.5.1 Seismic Component Combination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3.5.2 Design l. cads . . . . . . . . . . .......................... 13 3.5.3 Guidelines for Design Load Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 t

3.5.4 1.oad Combinations and Allowables ....................... 15 3.5.5 Duct / Duct Support System " String" Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 3.6 Cases Requiring Special Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 3.6.1 Stresses Due to Internal Pressure and Panel Vibration ........... 20 3.6.2 Stiffener and Companion Angle Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

4.0 REFERENCES

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 FIG URES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 APPENDIX A - CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT SUPPORT DATABASE . . . . . . . . . . . 34

! APPENDIX B - OBE & SSE DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA .................35 I

30501ENR.$PE W29% 2:04pm)

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 3 OF 35 l l

BACKGROUND The NRC letter of December 7,1995 to DECO (Reference 1) identified the remaining unresolved concerns / deficiencies regarding the demonstration of the structuralintegrity and functionality of the Fermi 2 CCHVAC duct and duct suppons under the combined loading due to dead weight, maximum j expected internal pressure (negative or positive) and the postulated seismic event (SSE), in 1 accordance with the committed standards ANSI /ASME N509-1980 for ductwork (Reference 2i AISC for duct suppons (Reference 3).

Some of the NRC concerns / deficiencies involve specific errors and inconsistencies in duct and duct suppon structural adequacy calculations provided to the NRC, and are inherently addressed by the fact that new calculations will be generated in accordance with this design criteria. Other concerns / deficiencies involve methodology and allowables used in duct and duct support adequacy calculations; these generic items are specifically addressed in this design criteria and are summarized as follows:

Calculation of duct cross sectional propenies will use bare metal thickness (e.g. 0.0478 inch for 18 gauge).

Effective duct sections will be detennined based on guidance from the AISI manual and industry publications. These effective duct sections will be used in calculating seismic responses, internal loads and support reaction loads.

'l Seismic response loads resulting from the simultaneous application of three-directional design basis seismic effects will be used. The applicable response spectra curves are attached for both the OBE and the SSE in Appendix B. These curves are reproduced from UFSAR Section 3.7 (Reference 4).

Damping values used will not exceed 7% and 4% in the analysis of duct / duct support systems with rectangular and round ducts, respectively, for SSE effects (4% and 2% respectively for  !

OBE).

Stresses in rectangular duct due to internal pressure loading will be calculated using industry guidance and finite element analysis of h_ni.; duct segmentW se e

Demonstration of adequacy of duct discontinuities, such as Tee's and Wye's, will be through detailed finite element analysis on a bounding case basis using industry guidance.

Calculation of duct and duct suppon maximum stresses will be based on the combination of dead M501INR.SPE G/29/96,2:00pm)

1

[ CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 )

SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96) i PAGE 4 OF 35 l

weight, maximum pressure and three-directional design basis canhquake response loads. Both the OBE and the SSE response loads will be considemd, as identified in the load combinations.

Structural accepunce criteria for duct and duct suppons will be based on minimum published yield and ultimate strengths of materials used.

1 1

• Duct maximum stmsses will be limited to 0.9 Fy of the duct material for SSE (0.6 Fy for OBE)  !

per ANSI /ASME-N509-1980 (Reference 2), and duct suppon member stesses shall be governed by the acceptance criteria of UFSAR Table 3.8-19 for structural steel (Refemnce 4). <  ;

In addition, the NRC staff acknowledged the testing performed on the section of duct with high "reponed" negative pressure of-22 in. WG and acceptability of msults (the test was at -20.5 in. WG and inleakage was within Technical Specification limits). The staff miterated their expectation that the remainder of the ductwork also be proof tested. In conclusion, the staff recommended and requested that requalification of the Fermi 2 CCHVAC duct and duct suppons be performed and completed prior to restan from the next refueling outage scheduled to begin in September 1996. ,

In response to the NRC letter, DECO has fonnulated an integrated action plan to close all the unresolved NRC concerns / deficiencies identified in the December 7,1995 letter, and meet the requested schedule (RF05 Stanup). The plan includes both CCHVAC system and structural qualification aspects, and addresses all duct and duct suppons included in DECO Calculations HA-05/89-686 (Reference 5) and HA-09/89-696 (Reference 6). This design criteria concentrates on the methodology, approach and acceptance limits as they penain to the structural evaluation aspects of the plan.

Z L.LUduct '

g >>l M H M , $ A Y _

,yjk t<.tl BMc S& Gy /~ aswu~d pu m4 -

4 30W ENR.SPE G/29/96,2:04 pun)

[ CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1

, SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE S OF 35 1.0 SCOPE -

This design criteria provides the basis for the structural adequacy evaluation of Seismic Category I CCHVAC rectangular and round duct and duct suppons when subjected to the simultaneous application of dead weight, internal duct pressure (normal operating / maximum credible) and three-directional canhquake (OBE/SSE) loads. This criteria is applicable to all duct and duct suppons addressed in DECO Calculations HA-05/89-686 (Reference 5) and HA-09/89-696 (Reference 6).

The criteria describes the methodology, approach and acceptance criteria used for evaluation, and considers all applicable NRC unresolved concerns / deficiencies identified in the NRC letter of December 7,1995 (Reference 1).

This criteria is applicable to the structural adequacy evaluation of ducts, duct fittings (e.g., Tee's and Wye's, and transitions), duct supports and their anchorages, and to the design of structumi modifications to these components if required.

The HVAC duct and duct suppons to be evaluated within this scope are listed in Appendix A. This appendix will evolve into a database summarizing duct and duct suppon characteristics.

2.0 ACRONYMS l l

AISC -

American Institute of Steel Construction l AISI -

American Iron and Steel Institute ANSI -

American National Standards Institute ASTM -

American Society for Testing and Materials 4

AWS -

American Welding Society CCHVAC -

Control Center Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning GRD -

Grilles, Registers, Diffusers OBE -

Operating Basis Eanhquake SRSS -

Square Root of the Sum of the Squares SSE -

Safe Shutdown Eanhquake 3.0 DESIGN BASIS 3.1 Functional Requirements 4

l Seismic Category I ductwork perfonns a primary safety function and is essential for the i j safe shutdown and the maintenance of a safe shutdown condition of the plant. The ductwork must remain functional during and after dynamic events under all applicable M601BNR.8PE Q/29/96,2:0erm)

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERhD-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 6 OF 35 loading combinations. This requires the maintenance of a duct's overall stmetural integrity and flow capacity without significant air leakage. This is achieved by supporting the ductwork to limit the stress in the spans to acceptable levels.

3.2 Applicable Specifications and Standards Ductwork and components covered by this criteria are governed by industry standard ANSI /ASME N509-1980 (Reference 2), and duct supports are govemed by AISC

" Specification for the Design, Fabrication, and Erection of Stmetural Steel for Buildings" (Reference 3). Ducts and duct suppons evaluated using this criteria are constructed in accordance with the Enrico Fermi Duct Construction Brochure (Reference 7). For the evaluation of existing duct and duct supports, and design of modifications if required, the i following additional documents shall be used, as applicable.

• American Iron and Steel Institute, " Cold-Formed Steel Design Manual" (Reference ,

8).

• American Welding Society, AWS-A5.1 (Reference 9).

• American Welding Society, AWS-A5.6 (Reference 10).

• American Welding Society, AWS-A5.18 (Reference 11). l l

For sheet metal and stmetural steel used in HVAC duct and duct supports, the following mechanical propenies shall be used:

Material Soecified Yield Strength. F y Tensile Strength. F..

ASTM A526/A527 33 ksi 45 ksi galvanized steel sheet ASTM A575 (M1020) 32 ksi 50 ksi

=1 2.=: Mac8vd ASTM A36 stmetural shapes 36 ksi 58 ksi 3.3 General Qualification Approach The general qualification approach to the stmetural adequacy evaluation of the ductwork, duct suppons and components identified in Section 1.0 shall include the following:

G/29/96. 2:04pm) 30501ENR.5PE

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1

[

SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 7 OF 35

• Determination of forces and moments at critical duct sections and suppon reactions caused by dead, seismic, and pressure loads (Section 3.5.5).

l

• Determination of stresses due to dead and seismic loads in ductwork includicg duct i fittings (Section 3.4).

• Determination of pressure-induced stresses in ductwork (Section 3.6.1).

]

l

• Establishment of applicable load combinations and design allowables for ductwork and i supports, and comparison of the above forces, moments and stresses against the allowables (Section 3.5.4).

This approach shall be implemented by performing the following specific activities:

For Ductwork and Duct Components (a) Review existing duct / duct suppon system data to identify seismically flexible systems, systems with highest internal pressure, and largest duct systems.

(b) Perform structural evaluations of the identified rectangular duct systems, including:

• Manual (hand) calculations to establish duct panel stresses 6.S $ 3.Y./ d 3C l.

• Detailed finite element analysis of solested-duct segm nts with internal duct pressure greater than Iginch WG,2nd!:: ef $D;;; -:- _-: duct segments with "b L54AL J 5. /, /*

pressure 74u.a~_ Lless IhaNinch WG.au. M t'r}"dat fe=wn 4 ws/l M .w L, 6

• Debe[ fin nt Nysis of selected duct fittings (e.g. Wye's, Tee's, elbows).

Genegalculations to address structural adequacy of duct seams, companion 7 46 54 A 6' 2 anglesg stiffeners r.d i .%. .uf I

(c) Establish that the size, gage and qualification of round ductwork in the scope identified in Section 1.0 is bounded by the rectangular ductwork evaluated.

Evaluation of round duct seam welds, if required, shall be performed.

I (d) Evaluate selected duct transition pieces between rectangular and round duct segments.

sosolsNR.sPE Ot29/96,2:06pm)

[ CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT SUPPORT QUALIFICATION DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96) ,

PAGE 8 OF 35 l (e) Design duct hardware modifications, if required.

In performing the above, bare duct metal thickness shall be used in calculating duct section properties. >

For Duct Suooons (a) Review existing duct / duct support system data to identify seismically flexible systems,

, systems with highest internal pressure, and largest duct systems.

(b) For the identified flexible, highest pressure, and largest duct systems, determine the specific suppon configurations and establish allowable support capacities. These shall be established by review and validation of existing DECO calculations (DCxxxx series calculations).

(c) Pmpare coupled duct / duct support system " string" analysis models of the identified duct systems, with supports represented by spring elements and appropriate equivalent suppon masses (or by three-dimensional support models), and the duct segments represented by beam type elements with " effective" duct section properties. 'Ihe l configuration of the model shall be based on the original stress report generated by Robert Irsay Company / Fluor Pioneer, Inc. which is an attachment to the DECO DCxxxx series calculations.

(d) Perform dynamic response spectm type analysis of the identified systems for the  ;

simultaneous application of three-directional seismic loads (OBE/SSE), in combination j with dead weight effects.

I l

(e) Compare the resulting duct support reaction loads to the established allowable support capacities and establish suppon adequacy or determine capacity exceedance.

(f) Design hardware modifications, if required, and establish modified system adequacy.

Modifications shall be designed based on total structural system behavior to facilitate constructibility.

(g) Establish adequacy of the identified rigid systems (remaining population) based on comparison with flexible system results, including an Extent of Condidon review for modifications.

G/29/96. 2:04pmo 30501ENR.SPE

__m _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ -__ _ _ _ . _ _ _

. . l 1

~

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 9 OF 35 )

3.4 Calculation of Duct Propenies and Stresses The methodology for calculation of duct pmpenies and stmsses presented in this section

! Sas been generally developed based on the information contained in Reference 12.

Reference 12 provides test-based and analysis-based information for ductwork in nuclear power plants, and has been widely used in several op rating nuclear power plants as well as plants under construction.

Figures 3.4-1 and 3.4-2 illustrate the modeling of a rectangular and round HVAC duct considend as a beam. For seismic and dead load evaluation, 3 is required to determine j

the longitudinal membrane stress f and the shear stress f,. These stresses are calculated

, from the overall response of the duct to dead and seismic loads.

The section propenies to be used to calculate stresses at a given duct cross-section are described in Sections 3.4.1 and 3.4.2 for rectangular and round ducts respectively (see Reference 12 for the basis of the equations in these sections).

3.4.1 Rectangular Ducts (a) Effective Section Moduli - Figure 3.4-3 shows a W x H rectangular duct and the effective sections that shall be used to compute the bendia.g stresses.

Only the four duct corner angles are assumed to be effective in resisting bending moment. The size of the corner angle on each duct wall depends on whether the wall is acting as a web or a flange for the panicular axis of bending being considered. Each axis of bending is tmated separately.

If 0.5 h,y and 0.5 hoare sizes of the corner angle on the duct dimension H for each axis of bending, the values of h,, and ho are calculated from the following equations:

W h,, = p/f (3.4.1-1) 1.0, for a, s 0.673

' I

-- (1.358 0.461 ), for 0.673 < a, < a, Oi Oi pi =

1 [0.41 + 0.59 (h) - 0.22), for a, a a, (3.4.1-2a)

Of Ja Oi 30$0!ENLSPE G/29/96,2:04pe)

~

. CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 10 OF 35 where:

i = y or z a; = 1.052 (H) (4)* (3.4.1-2b)

(k;)K t E a, = 0.256 + 0.328 (H) ( ) (3.4.1-2c) ki = plate buckling coefficient = '^^ f" - eW d[ D[ "db I

vke)4 f. & s t =

duct wall thickness (bare sheet metal)

F, = duct plate yield stress  !

l I

E = duct plate modulus of elasticity f, = 0.6Fy, for OBE load combination f, = 0.9Fy, for SSE load combination Similarly for the duct dimension W, the values of W,y and W, am calculated by substituting W for H and W,i for h,i.

(b) Axial Area - The axial area for tension is the gross area. FJr compression, the areas of corner angles in Figure 3.4-4 are used to determine the effective area A, = A, = 2 (W, + h,)t (3.4.1-3) where h, and W, are computed from equation (3.4.1-1) using k = 4.0 and 4 1 l

(3.4.1-4)

F,,for OBE Load Combination N" 1.5 F,, for SSE Load Combinatior, p p '. p y L ;t4 w ill k d f 4$&* '

• j$2$ ' ^ *'y msnm

..sn uIf &a' 6 4~ a%am v

:J ~ s e u ba.

- CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 11 OF 35 The stress F, is defined as follows:

F" = (3.4.1-5) 1.92 w L u E~ 6 n Q b b :

I F" F (3.4.1-6) yn ,,

F' (1 - 4 F,), for F' > 22 ,

F, for F, s pZ \

W h

• F' = (3.4.1-7) l i

( E )2'""

r I M where:

K= effective length factor taken equal to 1.0 for continuous spans and

'l.0

. for cantilever spans l 1

i l

(n),, = maximum of (KL') and (KL.) -

r r, r, l

L, = duct length between suppons for bendir.; in the y-direction for l continuous spans and duct length for cantilevers L, = duct length between suppons for bending in the z-direction for continuous spans and duct length for cantilevers 30501ENR.SPE G/29/96. 2:04pe)

1

~

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 l SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 12 OF 35 l (c) Radius of Gvration. r - The radius of gyration used for both y and z-directions are those of gross cross-section l

l ry = (I /A,)

y r2 (3.4.1-8)  ;

i r, = (I/A,)ir (3.4.1-9) l I, = full moment ofinertia about y-axis

! I, = full moment of inertia about z-axis (d) Shear Area - The shear areas used for calculation of shear stresses along y and L z-axis directions in Figure 3.4-3 are those of full flanges and full webs, respectively.

(e) Torsional Sectional Properties - The torsional moment of inertia and section modulus shall be calculated using full cross-section as follows:

l

~

1

!- 2ty2H2 1,

gg (3.4.1-10)

S, - 2t WH (3.4.1-11)

L l

3.4.2 Round Ducts  ;

i l Moments of inertia, section moduli, radius of gyration and axial area are calculated on the basis of full, unreduced cross-section. The shear areas used to calculate shear stresses along the y and z-directions are taken as half of the full cross-sectional area.

l A, - .E (D,2 _ p;2) (3.4.2-1) 4 i

30501ENR.SPE G/29/96,2:04 pun) l

l l

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 13 OF 35 A, = A, = 0.5A, (3.4.2-2)

S, = (Dl-D[) (3.4.2-3)

S, = S, = 0.5S, (3.4.2-4) l V

r' = r. = ( 2A, )n2

' (3.4.2-5) l where:

Do = outside diameter of the duct, in.

D, = inside diameter of the duct, in.

l l

3.5 Duct and Duct Suppon Qualification 3.5.1 {

Seismic Component Combination For both OBE and SSE, the resultant effects (resultant stresses) of toth horizontal and venical earthquake components shall be determined by combSting the individual effects by the Square Root of the Sum of the Squares (SRSS).

3.5.2 Design Loads Suppons must be qualified for dead load and seismic loads. In addition to these loads, ducts must be qualified for the Operational and Design Basis Accident i maximum internal pressure loads. Load combinations are defined in Section l 3.5.4. Specifically, the following loads mus'. be considemd:

l l

l DL - Dead I.oads. The dead load shaU include self-weight of the support and the duct, including coatings, insulation, other accessories and l attachments.

30501ENA.SPE G/29/96. 2:04 pup

, CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96) l PAGE 14 OF 35 OBE -

Openting Basis Eanhquake loads based on UFSAR Design Basis OBE Spectra.

SSE -

Safe Shutdown Euthquake loads based on UFSAR Design Basis SSE Spectra (i.e. SSE=DBE).

P/ -

Operating pressure in the duct system (measured in inches of water).

P,* -

Maximum pressure in the duct system (measured in inches of water) resulting from a credible single active failure during a Design Basis Accident.

• The duct internal pressures are being re-calculated and will be provided by the HVAC Systems Group.

3.5.3 Guidelines for Design Load Application The following sections provide guidance on specific aspects of duct and duct support loads determination.

l 3.5.3.1 Seismic 1. cad Application The damping value to be used for evaluation of duct and duct supports depends on duct configuration and earthquake level as follows:

1 Duct Configumtion Eanhquake Damping Rectangular Ducts OBE 4%

and their Supports SSE 7%

Round Ducts and OBE. 2%

their Supports SSE 4%

Accelerations shall be taken from the appropriate, damped design response spects of the floor to which the supports are attached. In the case of supports attached to the wall, the adjacent floor design response spectra with the highest magnitude responses m a swa m omm,tw

. CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 15 OF 35 shall be used.h Applicable design response spectra curves are provided in Appendix B. For damping ratios not included in the curves in Appendix B, a linear h interpolation should be used, as permitted in Regulatory Guide 1.60, Positions C1 and

• N i C2 (Reference 13).

51 j: 3.5.3.2 Pressure Load Application l

• k o y,

4 '

'c b

Internal duct pressure does not produce significant stresses in round ducts; for rectangular ducts, however, pressum stresses may be significant. 'Ihe determination

. 4 I of resulting stresses in rectangular ducts is described in Section 3.6.1.

j l u 4 3.5.4 Load Combinations and Allowables hi  :

i1 The following load combinations shall be considered:

} .

4 For Ductwork For Suonons ,

1 --

j

. *D T4 (1) DL + P + OBE (1) DL + OBE N.

~

(2) DL + P, + SSE (2) DL + SSE

%, The allowables for evaluation of ductwork are shown in Section 3.5.4.1 and for duct s p supports in Section 3.5.4.2.

i  ;

4 N,

, i i *, 3.5.4.1 h Overall Stress Criteria for Ducts D

b 1. Combined axial tension and bending stresses in the duct plate shall not exceed the appropriate allowable values of F .

I Q I Where F. = 0.6 F y, for Lead Combination 1 F. = 0.9 F,, for Load Combination 2 The axial tensile stresses shall be based on full area.

2. Combined axial compression and bending interaction coefficient in the duct plate shall not exceed unity using the allowable values described below.

The axial compressive stresses shall be based on effective area defm' ed by Equation (3.4.1-3).

30501ENR.SPE (2/29/96. 2:04pm)

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 16 OF 35

$a. N 4 F4 the axial compressive stress allowable, is defined by Equation (3.4.1-/)

W n & ao '

F,

3 [r s 0.15,

(

and for F*'> 0.15:

F3 = F,,, (1 F'I)

F, 4

F s; = F,,, (1 F"E)

F, where:

,4 4 wu w I . M,/-J 7

f4 = uk.] wn Auy &

Fy = bending stress allowable about y axis fam[-

1 F., = bending stress allowable about z-axis F = 0.6 F, for I. cad Combination 1 F = 0.9 F, for Load Combination 2

'* is! cer;=nic: :: =x; S: F, ;' J' k ;c...p.;d u;ig cffs;;,, ms Jc,",,d by 4:2:! (3.' ! 3), : d :h: for F, ;P.J: k ec.c.p.;d ;;bg i'J-atee-F , 12 & E 23 (Q')2,for Load Combination 1 Il 30501ENR.sPE Q/29/96, 2:04pm)

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QLW.JFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 17 OF 35 rr2 E F* - 1.5 x .123 (KL,)2,for Load Combination 2 r.

(/V4, TL Me 63 fei Wllf Y S 4

a J

& L dSL 64) ,

IL/ r/ A& 3f in which i = y or z K = effective length factor taken as 1.0 for continuous spans and 2.0 for cantilevers.

1, = duct length between supports in i direction for continuous spans and duct length for cantilevers.

= radius of gyration for bending about i - axis as defined by equations (3.4.1-ri

8) and (3.4.1-9), respectively.

3. The combined in-plane sh' ear stresses shall not exceed the allowable value F, for OBE; and 1.5 x F,, but less than 0.52 Fy , for SSE.

(a) For ducts with Pittsburgh lock longitudinal seams F, = 0.6 [24000 K, (f)2+ 0.1 (F, - f,)] s 0.4F, (3.5-1) where:

K, = Shear buckling coefficient for unreinforced webs = 5.34 su h = Depth of web (rectangular duct dimesion W or H as appropriate), in.

A moista.sn amm. 2:2s,e

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 18 OF 35  !

i f, = Pressure induced longitudinal tensile stress, ksi, from Section 3.6.1.

Equation (3.5-1) is the minimum strength recommended in Reference 14 for webs of ducts in which duct corners are not reinforced for longitudinal stmss, as is the case for ducts discussed here.

l (b) For round duct with Acme lock longitudinal seams F,, = 13955 [ ]

[f] s 0.4 F, (3.5-2) l where:  !

l R = duct radius, in.

L = duct length, in.

- I t =

duct thickness, in. (bare sheet metal) i Equation (3.5-2) is based on Reference 15. i l

l

-3.5.4.2 The allowables for various suppon elements are as follows:

Elements Load Combination Allowables Steel Stmetural (1) AISC allowables Members and Connecting Welds (2) 1.6 x AISC allowables but less than Fy *

• But less than 0.58 F, for shear stresses, and less than F,, for critical buckling stresses.

The allowables for existing suppon anchorages are specified in DECO Calculation DC No. 2935, Rev. O, " Design Methods - QAI Ductwork Suppons" (Reference 16). For modifications, the requirements in DECO Specification 3071-226, Rev. J, " Purchase and Installation of Concrete Anchors" (Reference 17) will be followed.

10501ENR.$PE

@% 2M

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 i SUPPORT QUAllFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 19 OF 35 3.5.5 Duct / Duct Suppon System " String" Analysis A duct and duct support system, from termination point to termination point, shall be i&mlind into an analysis system. An example is shown in Figures 3.5.5-1 and 3.5.5-2.

l 1

l The system shall be analyzed by using the response spectmm analysis method with the appropriate floor design response spectra in Appendix B. The analysis shall include

)

dead load including accessories, and vertical and two horizontal seismic loads. The  !

forces at critical sections resulting from these analyses shall be used to determine stmsses in the ductwork (see Section 3.4).

l The method for combining the three seismic directional components shall be the SRSS approach described in Section 3.5.1.

l Duct Modeline The ducts shall be idealized as three dimensional (3-D) beam elements. For rectangular ducts, the two shear areas shall be based on two full web depths. The torsional moment of inertia shall be based on gross cross-section. The axial area shall be based on:

Am =

(A, 4 A,) (3.5.5-1) where:

A, = gross cross-sectional area A, = effective axial ' cross-sectional area (in compression) detennined from Equation (3.4.1-3) using a stress f, equal to the SSE load condition.

The analysis moment of inertia (1/) shall be calculated as follows:

I,'" A I ,

, (3.5.5-2) i 30$01ENR.SPE p% 2:04pa)

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

4 CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUAIEICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96) l PAGE 20 OF 35 l

wkm:

I, =

Moment of inertia based on effective cross-section (Section 3.4) 4 using a flange stress = 0.90 x yield stress.

A =

0.85 for rectangular companion angle ducts (Reference 12) l A =

1.00 for round ducts For round ducts, the axial area and the three moments of inertias shall be based on gross cross-section. The shear areas each shall ^oe one-half the gross area.  ;

J t

Sunoort Modeling The supports shall be modeled in the system analysis or shall be idamli7eA as linear springs.

3.6 . Cases Requiring Special Consideration t

3.6.1 Stresses Due to Internal Pressure and Panel Vib:stion f 3.6.1.1 Pressure Stresses v

7 In a rectangular duct with companion angle transverse joints, internal pressure produces longitudinal stresses that are significant for companion

,f JL, angle and duct evaluation. For round ducts, longitudinal membrane C' stres$s caused by pressure are negligible.

Studies of rectangular ducts using a large displacemer.t finite element analysis show that for the same companion angle size, spacing, and duct

[ plate thickness, the stresses in a rectangular duct are less than the stresses produced in a square duct of size equal to the larger dimension of the rectangular duct (Reference 12).

4 4

l H501BNR.SPE G/29/96,2:04pm)

, CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUAllFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

L PAGE 21 OF 35 The tensile stress due to pressure in the duct plate near the Wenewesse-27AM isines shall be obtained fr'o m the following equation:

l 62.4 , f)2/3 f,l', = Ci ( E-)V3 (P x (3.6.1-1) 24 1728000 t where:

f, = longitudinal tensile stress in duct plate near companion anglesP/h E = moduTus of elasticity of duct plate, ksi f = stiffener spacing, inches P = internal pressure, inches of WG t = duct p. late thickness (bare sheet metal), inches Ci =- correlation factor, see Table 3.6.1-1.

Y hI The compressive stress at mid-distance between the, stiffeners at duct corner shall be calculated from the following equation:

62.4 ,f)5 f'I = C, ( E )"'

- (P .t (3.6.1-2) 24 1728000 t where:

f, = compressive stress due to pmssure at duct corner at mid-distance betweegstiffeners C= 2

% e74/

correlation factor, see Table 3.6.1-1 3.6.1.2 Panel Vibration Stresses The out-of-plane inenia forces acting on the duct walls cause stresses similar to pressure-induced stresses.

Using a peak floor spectral acceleration, for convenience, the resulting tensile stress, near the companbn angles, shall be calculated from the following 30501ENR.SPE G/29/96,2:04 pin)

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUAIRICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 22 OF 35 equation:

f,, = C ( E-)'" ## $" (3.6.1-3) 24 (144000 t )

where: .

f,,, .

/4w longitudLial tensile stress in duct plate near companion angles, ksi A

Ci = the same as in Equation (3.6.1-1) a = 1.5 x the maximum floor spectral acceleration (envelope of horizontal and vertical components) at applicable damping, g units w = dead weight of duct wall including insulsion, pounds per square foot ,

The compressive stress due to panel vibration shall be computed as aw f,,=C,(E-) (3.6.1-4) 24 ( 144000 tf)M where:

f,, = compressive stress due to panel vibration at duct corner at mid-distance between stiffeners V _ ;,ql C2 = the same as m Equation (3.6.1-2)

Because panel vibration is considered as a separate modal response, when combining these stresses with seismic beam response of the duct, they shall be combined on an SRSS basis.

30501amt.sPE O/29/96. 2:04psm)

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUAIEICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 23 OF 35 3.6.2 Stiffener and Companion Angle Design The stiffeners and companion angles on rectangular ducts shall be evaluated for load combinations of Section 3.5.4. In addition to the loads presented in these combinations, the following additional loads shall be appropriately added to these combinations:

1. The contributory effects of a GRD, if present in the adjoining panel, on the stiffener / companion angle (Figure 3.6.2-1).

2. Additional compressive axial forces resulting from the plate tension field action.

This is necessary because the allowable panel shear stresses are based on tension field action. These axial forces may result from duct dead load and seismic loads.

The distribution of plate self-weight, seismic, pressure and GRD loads on stiffeners / companion angles shall be in accordance with Figure 3.6.2-1.

The axial force in the stiffener / companion angle due to panel tension field action shall be calculated by the following equation:

F, = V({} [ [ t + ({)]W - {}

where:

V = duct dead load shear in the panel, or

= vertical seismic shear (OBE or SSE), or

= horizontal 1 seismic shear, or

= horizontal 2 seismic shear a = stiffener / companion angle spacing h = stiffener / companion angle length This load shall be appropriately added to the load combinations.

M501ENR.SPE (2/29/96. 2:04pe)

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 I SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 24 OF 35 For the loads and load combination described above, the stiffener / companion ,

angle rectangular frame shall be analyzed using appropriate boundary conditions '

at the comers. The resulting stresses shall be limited to the AISC allowable (Reference 3). I For round ducts, stiffener / companion angle design is not necessary. )

l l

l l

l sosoiamt.srs or2,m,2:os,w

I CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUAllFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96) l PAGE 25 OF 35 TABLE 3.6.1-1 CORRELATION FACTORS C AND C2 FOR i PRESSURE STRESS IN RECTANGULAR DUCTS

• l C, C2 Eqs. (3.6.1-1) Eqs. (3.6.1-2)

Duct or Fitting (3.6.1-3) (3.6.1-4)

1. Straight ducts, rectangular-to-rectangular transitions and offsets 0.84 0.47

2. Wye fittings: 1 i

a. All straight branches 0.79 0.16  :

b. Curved branches with crotch at companion angle  ;

(Figure 3.6.1-la) 0.50 1.27 l

c. Curved branches with crotch away from companion angle (Figure 3.6.1- 0.91 1.24 lb)

3. Elbows 0.84 1.27

4. Rectangular-to-round fittings:

a. 22 gauge 0.61 0.38

b. 20 gauge 0.71 0.42

c. 18 gauge 0.92 0.61

d. 16 gauge 1.13 0.84

• Factors given are applicable up to a pressure of 10 inches of water gauge (See Reference 12).

30501ENR.5PE W29N. 2:04 pac

~

l CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 l SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 26 OF 35

4.0 REFERENCES

1. NRC Letter entitled " Fermi 2 Control Center Heating, Ventilation and Air-Condidoning l (CCHVAC) System (TAC No. M89596)" dated December 7,1995 from Mr. T. Colburn I to Mr. D. Gipson.

2. " Nuclear Power Plant Air Cleamng Units and Components", ANSI /ASME '.4509-1930.

3. " Specification for the Design, Fabrication, and Erection of Structural Ste'J for Buildings",

American Institute of Steel Construction, 7th Edition and 8th Edition) as noted.

4. Fermi 2 Updated Final Safety Analysis Repon.

5. Hopper and Associates, "Stmetural Evaluation of Ducting Systems 2848-3,4316-1, 4326-6, and 4316-7, " Report No. HA-05/89-686, May 31,1989.

6. Hopper and Associates, "Stmetural Evaluation of CCHVAC and SGTS Ducting Systems Calculations," Report No. HA-09/89-696, September 29,1989.

7. " Duct Construction Brochure", Enrico Fermi Atomic P.P. Unit #2 3071-104-Type 1.

i

8. " Cold-Formed Steel Design Manual", American Iron and Steel Institute,1986.

9. " Structural Welding Code", American Welding Society, AWS-A5.1.

10. American Welding Society, AWS-A5.6.

11. American Welding Society, AWS-A5.18.

12. Amin, M. et al., " Seismic Qualification of HVAC Ducts: Criteria and Application Experience." Proceeding of the Fourth Symposium on Current Issues Related to Nuclear Plant Structures, Equipment and Piping, Orlando, Florida,1992.

13. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.60, " Design Response Spectra for Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants".

30501ENR.SPE AN,2M

l

', CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96) '

PAGE 27 OF 35 j i

14. Sherboume, A.N., and Haydl, H.M., " Ultimate Web Shear Capacity in Large Rectangular j l Ducts", Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 7,1980, pp.125-132. l

15. Schilling, C.G., " Buckling Strength of Circular Tubes", Journal of Stmetural Division, l l Proceedings of ASCE, Vol. 91, STS, October 1965, pp. 325-348.  ;

16. DECO Calculation DC No. 2935, Rev. O, " Design Methods - QAI Ductwork Supports".

1 l

17. DECO Specification 3071-226, Rev. J, " Purchase and Installation of Concrete Anchors".

l 1 l

I l

l l

l r

, l l

I waisum. set a/2 eros,2:os ==>

s

)

~

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERhE-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION -

REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 28 OF 35 i

/' K&~ GOLL (

l /

! (Su. AxlJ l n / l l

N N 1 NX l l

4 N 4 MEMBRANE STRESS IN THE RECTANGULAR DUCT PLATE FIGURE 3.4-1 I

f

/

v'~ f%

fy l l

/%

/~%%

m l

MEMBRANE STRESSES IN NE ROUND DUCT PLATE FIGURE 3.4-2

,,, amm. mus=

y: ,

O

~

Z Y

/

X 3x x lN H

\

-a x

i DETAIL A MEMBRANE STRESS IN THE RECTANGUIAR DUCT PIATE HOURE 14-1

%Z x

'N [Y fy B

/s lx <A r w x iN DETAll B MEMBRANE SIRESSES IN THE ROUND DUCT PIATE MGURE 14-2

~

l j .

I

, CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 29 OF 35 l

l l W 0.5 Wey

=  ; 0.5 Wez

+ -

m Z p p

h "

Mz

" Mz gh _

gh y *-

My My I-y 9 9 i

o o c) Duct Moments b) Effective Duct Section 1 c) Effective Duct Section for My for Mz EFFECTIVE DUCT CROSS-SECDONS USED TO CAlfUIATE SECT 10N MODUU Sy AND Sz FOR RECTANGUIAR DUCIS MGURE 14-3 0.5 We

+ ---

W p

h l

h

.c -

l F 9 0

I Effective Duct Section Effective Duct Section For Tension For Compression EFFECIWE CROSS-SECHONS POR RECTANGUIAR DUCIS FOR AX1AL IIMDING FIGURE 14-4 30501ENR.SPE ON,10M l

i

~

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 30 OF 35 RECTANGULAR TO ROUND DUCT TRANSITION ELBOW 3D 2D q_ _

FLOOR PENETRATION ABOVE 3D 2D 7 OFFSET 20 2D 2D

, X AI IA

(( 2D 59WWWMJ @

DAMPER FREE END 2D 20 2D 2D 1 1 /

2D 2D ELEVATION A-A 2D 2D GRD.

TEE CONNECTIONJ Y}\

1D 1D 3D 3D Z

X IuN VIEW OF TYMCAL, DUCTWORK AND SUff0RTS FIGURE 315-1 miote m.sra oram, mm

l . l CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 l

SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 31 OF 35 2D lX% % X X % M l N 2D m m g

h- 2D *

% n .At 5A k

)(

) .  !

l DAMPER jg

M 2D l

l 2D 2D 3C d

l ==3  : n i

• DC ELEVATION A-A

)(

M 2D l GRD WT. yg l

t DE I l

l l DI Yd )

i M 1D l

l

)(

(

Z) wr

~

y X

, IDEAT17FD COMPtJER MODEL OF DUCIWORK SUPPORT SYSIEM F10URE 315-2 1

30501ENR.SPE Q!29/96,10:25am) l

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FaMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (?lt9/96)

PAGE 32 OF 35

} N

'N -

1 CA s

o) CROTCH AT COMPANION ANGLE

? 4

\  ?

CA l

l b) CROTCH AWAY FROM COMPANION ANGLE WYE CONFIGURATIONS IN TAB 2 3fd-l 4

F1GURE M1-1 moism.srs ornm, mm

', CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 33 OF 35 A) OPERATING PRESSURE S/2 W = PS I lWI WHERE P = PRESSURE, psi

=

z S = STIFFENER SPACING -

O@

z (INCHES)

[ Z

@b OP

. -sm S CONTRIBUTARY AREA IN PRESSURE B) SEISMIC LOADING i) DUCT PLATE WEIGHT & SELF WEIGHT

1) Wpi - (q, )(S)(g) ,

STIFFENERS l Wpi l y

• h

• WHERE gg = (LOAD OF PLATE + INSULATION M45 /~

5 g + COATING) PER

/

/ 453 Zb L.,

• O SOUARE INCH O{g O Z 3 2) W, = (q,)(g)  ;

( j \y  ;

Qbg ag q, = STIFFENER LOAD op3 ogy PER INCH

- -Im a Jmm g = SEISMIC

' ' ' ACCELERATION LF- E HT CONTRIBUTARY AREA TE FROM PLATE ii) GRD LOAD STIFFENERS o N ' _ _ _ eg

) '

1. __ gro 1

__ _ Ow

/ 1 fa_ 95o t i I I I I s s W = (TOTAL GRD WEIGHT)(g)

GRD IDADING ON STIFFENER / COMPANION ANGLES MGURE M2-1 sosoisna.srs (2tzes,e, ic;2s.mo

• e

',' CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUALIFICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 34 OF 35 l

j APPENDIX A - CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT SUPPORT DATABASE i

1 (LATER) l l

l l

l -

e l

i i

30501ENR.8PE (2/29N,2 04 pan) l l

4

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

CCHVAC DUCT AND DUCT DESIGN CRITERIA NO. FERMI-DC-76230-1 SUPPORT QUAIRICATION REVISION O DRAFT (2/29/96)

PAGE 35 OF 35 APPENDIX B - OBE & SSE DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA (Figures B-1 through B-20) 30501ENR.SPE W29N,2:04n)

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

e PREQUENCY. CPS SO 33 20 10 5.0 3.3 2.0 1.0

( .i. iiii i . . ii.. iii. n.. . i i i i . iii iii, is.o

- .l.l... .

10.0 _ .. . . .

_ , , i . . . , , ,, , ,

88 - i i i t i i ii i ii i SA I I I l l 1 ll i 5 DAA ING l 1 I I I II II I I f,in naarino Ii4 4.0 l l 1 l l l ll '

I //'/ *%.8DAMPING .i lI g  !

= s ty 2.0

/f2 '

i 3 1.5 I i l 11 l#l hl I I I

I 1.o l y - e e t u"t , e e e a g - . s < n .s e li gg tut e n , s

'** 0s _ , , , , , , gggf , gg , , , ,

nu \M y')

- i i i i i l l i 4

l 1.

I I l //// '

\\h l I l 1 IL /# h% I 0.3

=

=

r% & NNs  %

5 l '[ ' [I l l l \W\

N NN l 0.10 - - i . . . . . i i . .X ( \\ l

~ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' \

0.Os -

t t i i iei i i i e i i Aw

- 1 I I l 1 II i i i i i i M

' t t I t l i f t il t It.,lIllltlt1iiitlttit' Iilfltitti I ltlt' tlt 1 11 3NI o.o2 o.03 c.04 o os u.os o.os 0.1 0.1s om 0.3 o.4 c.s o.s os 1.0 1s PERIOD. SECOND l

,,,,,e Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT l FIGURE 3.7-38

( HORIZONTAL FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA OPERATING-8Asl8 EARTHOUAKE ELEVATION 841.5 FT - SLA3 3 REACTOR / AUXILIARY BUILDING NORTH-SOUTH ENT SARGENT & LUNDY REPORT NO. SL-382 B-1 .

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

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

$ I j - , 1 i

( . .

P....ur.

,. ,, - u ,, ,

" iiii till I i l i i 4 1 11I ( 1 64 4444 ill i I 4 6 1 I il4i till

! 1SA I

j 1SA _

u l -

4 u -

1 y .

"~ -

l 4A . X% SAAFING

" ~

~ 1% DAartNG

! 3A 25 SAMPING

• i ,,

MV  :

l j

i i

E ,,

E E

lA

/#f

/#

R\\

\\ \ \

l' i

3 "

/// / \\\\ .

~

/#/ \\\\

luu

/// \\%

l u M/ \%

-)

GA i -. ///  % i E h 3 .::

f \NT  :

~

F s d

\\ %  :

/  %

E i

'gh a

i 0.20 "

\\\ s g 9

T \ V. -

gg \\\ =

MX

• SAB  %\ '

,, "lill IIII' I 1 i i sitt siti  :: titi i i e i. , i viilisi OAE 033 OA4 OAB OAS 0.00 0.1 0.18 02 SJ OA OA DA OA 1A 1A  :,

PERIOD $5CONO

• e Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 3.7-37 HORIZONTAL FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA OPERATING-8 Asis EARTHQUAKE ELEVATION 841.5 FT- SLA8 3 REACTOR / AUXILIARY BUILDING EAST-WEST SARGENT & LUNDY REPORT NO.SL-2BB2 O I B-2

. I,'..

9-ensausNCY, cps So 33 So Jo BA 3.3 2A

=) i!4 661 6 i i l i I 4 4 444 iIII tA

- l i ll till I i i i i 4

446i*

1sA ,"

~

1M ,

~

EA

~

u EA

- MM DAMPING ~

AA '

n E / ,'. 2% DAMPING 33

[

s // / _ SE DAMPING dl

=

q 3,g

$ " l a " //rf gu g

/// / tu \

$ =

/// / \\\ \

//// \W h o, #// W(

( o, a su om 5

1. \%

e s xxs\s

,, / \\

o.ts -

ss ,

o.1o "

~

NN\ \ k \

om _

x x \\

Y\ \\

~

om M \\

,, 1iii i s t s' i i , il t- I' ieis' isie iiii N

om citi i i i i- i i; ,ielii om om om om om o.t o.is o. em oA em o.s em i.e is PsMion, secono Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPOR F6GURE 3.7-38

(

HORIZONTAL FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA OPERATING-8 ASIS EARTHQUAKE ELEVATION 669.0 FT - SLAR 4 SARGsNT & LUNDY REPORT No. 5L-2682 REACTOR / AUXILIARY BUILDING NORTH-SOU COMPONENT B-3

j . g'..

3,>. .

1 a 4

i e

PREQUENCY CPS 30 33 20 3 20A to .

j -i e 6 1 EA 3.3 2A

' ill i 4 6 6 4 I 1A i

6 I Iii t i ll l l 14 1844 4

~ 6 6 4 18A 6

4 I I4i4 d

~

1 10A _

, ~

A, 8A _

U I , M5 DAMPlNG f _ >

1% DAMPlNG

\.

4A _ [j'3E OAartNG

= n f r SE DAMPING i

b 4

- s ///

(

i 22

' g - ,

Il_

ll rM E (/

3 1.5

- 1 f

I "

> 18

) ,.

{m 1

l 03

//r/ \u\

t . / /// \u \

I -

/g; \ \\ \ >

5

! ( k"" -

/#

//// \\\ \

- \\\\

" //

i \t 1 j u _

/ '

Oh f x

}

1

{

u:: .

s /

\q\h 0.15 .,

I 2

j - KK T 0.10 _ \\\

<<s i Om _ ~  % i \\

N N\\

i On \\\\

9 111 111I I I 1l I' Iii 1!IIi IfII  %\\

i om gas IIlIi ili1' I I' I I I ' I!

4 1 0.04 0.05 0.08 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.3 II3I Il 0.3 OA GA SA OA 1A i

i PERIOO,SECONO la ,

a

j. .

i Fermi 2 i

i j

UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS RE FIGURE 3.7-39 i

' HORIZONTAL FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA OPERATING-8 ASIS EARTHOUAKE ELEVATION 869.0 FT - SLAS 4 SARGENT & LUNDY REPORT NO. SL-2082 REACTOR / AUXILIARY BUILDING EAST-W 1

i.

B-4 a

. . _ . _ _ . . . _ -._m_ .. ___ __ .____.__m _ _ . - ~ . . ~ . . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ - _ . . _ . . . . ~ _ _ . _ . . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . . . _ ..__

c, l

4 PRoOUENCY, CPo so 33 20 to oA 3.3 2A 1A o.

,6 4 4 e iiiI 4 4 i i i i 4 46l iliI 4All i i i i l i l 1 li

!614 ltIg

~ _

l 15A ~

m _

lum

, 1oA _

i , on "

i j . as n===G _

l 5A 1% DAMPING l g, / 5MH ~

l //. " * * " " "

E 1s . .

g- -

j M l I ,A i Ill- A\ E f

a

5. 1.o

. ) '

! = 9 1

$g -

/J // 6 \\\\ =

• cA // fI \\\\ =1

] ,

ffj j gggg i

/// f \\\\ H

/ /// \NA -i

( ,,

'///  % H

^

\

)

cA oA i

% N sNN sAs N

E

=

=

0.1s E

~ (\\\ 2 o.to ~ \

~ i \\\ =

om -

\ W ~'

~

\%\ =

om ~

itit isti t om i i e i t' i is sitt iiis titi i iI t- i il i i iT sie r em 0A4 om om om o.1 c.1s oA oA e4 oA .oA oA 1A 1A 2.t PERion, sECONO

. Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT I

FIGURE 3.7-40

(, HORIZONTAL FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA OPERATING-8 ASIS EARTHQUAKE ELEVATION 884.5 FT - SLAB B REACTOR / AUXILIARY BUILDING NORTH-SOUTH SARGENT & LUNDY REPORT NO. 5L-2002 B-5

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

i o

s

. FRs0UsNCY. cps I

so 33 20 10 SA 3.3 1A 1.0 t

=,4 111 1161 1 6 I i i i ii6i i i il Iiii Illi I i i i i i ilIi ilth i

1 152 j 2 ~

=

i0.9 , ,

~

j sA ~

4 6 a . - -

1 sA 2% DAMPtNG

~

} sa / 1% DAMPtNG

~

t 4A // 2% DAMPtNG -

_ su nam,,Na .

l

)

U B

W// i a

f

.= _ .

4 lll: ) l *

'c

'I" -

f \ .

3 1A 1

/ )  :

2 5 -

) ( -

E M - e i / //

r

\\\\ t -

s' OA

= t / /// \\\\ -

l $ , 3 f fff gggg .

! //// \\\\ -

l 5"" -

////  %% -

1

, //// RQ -

(~

" E //-

, Y %k i l

cA E

E

/ T$N N,NNN 3 3 i

0.15 _

~ g g p .

0 10

- \\M N s (\ -

, - . . . s us om

- e i

-=-

I \ \\\ .

j _ , g 1 - l om \\\

! ""I I I I IIlI l ll I l l I lIII Illl l llI l11l I I I l' l I IIl Ill j . om om 0.04 om om om o.1 c.ts 0.2 sA oA es o.s os 1.0 1A  :

i PsMion, stCONO ~

l d

1 s

Fermi 2 j UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT 1 FIGURE 3.7 41 t

{ ( HORIZONTAL FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA OPERATING-BASIS EARTHQUAKE ELEVATION 884.5 FT - SLAB 5 REACTOR / AUXILIARY BUILDING EAST-WEST SARGsNT & LUNDY REPORT NO. SL.23s2 COMPONENT 2

B-6

l

~

• \

4 i .

j FREQlJENCY. CPE l

. i to 33 to o'

~

to BA l g 3.3 2A 1J "iiii lill i i isa i i e i eilI t i ll Ii11 idgl i i i i i i iiil lith=

i som _ 1

- -J

82 -

~_ l g, ,

)

. = n 1 1 SA _1% DAnspiNa l j ,, / mz Ani=a -

s en a4=ima -

l u

d / "'" 8^ *iao  : I

/ '

i - -

4 u

M -

= /

i h s, rr d i

iE ,,

=

/r/ -r / \ s i '

/. I \ T \ -

i g oA ## \ \ \\ -

i s /h / \\ \\

j j ,, //N \ \\ \ -

! o,

/#/ \ \ \N -

i

1. // \ W W

o, -

l 2

5

,, 5

1. 8 i

\\% j i  : N,H  :

o,  : ssh  :

o.i.  !

M s 5

4 - -

i

j. o.to

j i _

1 om -

- 1 il om -

-. ,, m i e i iiii i i i i i i iiii iiii iiii' iiii , i , , i i i 3 i i ,

i i i ,;

j om om o.m o m oss o.os o.1 o.is o.: o.: sa o s o.s om ia is i l P Rion. secoNo 4

j

Fermi 2 j UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT j FIGURE 3.7 40 b' . HORIZONTAL FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA f SAFE-SHUTDOWN EARTHOUAKE l . ELEVATION 841.5 FT - SLAS 3 i REACTOR / AUXILIARY BUILDING NORTH-8OUTH I SARGENT & LUNDY REPORT NO. SL-2ss2 COMPONENT 1

l B-7

1

• , l l

l

. 1 PREQUENCY, CPS '

i 9 33 20 to BA 20A 3J IJ 1A SJ

f. g... ..

. . . . . . .... . . . .... .. . . , , , , , ,,,, ,,,3 192

~

=

- - 1

- =

- - I su -

~

. sa ,,, - i mm.

SA *

~

" 1 d

EA 1% DAMMNO  ;

'# / 2% DAMPlNG = l

= - 5% DAMM800

= l 4

= r 10E DAMPING

= j

=

v

)

=

1 3,, , i. / -

i i

D 13 E ll AV 1 i 5 -

E I ,.0

/  :

E ""

// // \ \ \ \ =

E //;'/ \ \ \ \ =

///. '

\ \ \' m =

~

1. 1. 1. 1. \\ \ \

$u ,,

//# \ N W

~

- 7// \ s\ s\\s -

( = p ,

,y 3 -

OJ \ E E

- W\\DN  :

s s 0.1s Nds w 3

~

0.10 _

~ m _.

SAS , i

• 028 ~

OAS

' ' ' ' ' I ' I IIII IIII III! III! I I I I I I IIII I I I I' 022 0A3 0 ' ' ' '.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.1 0.1s 02 e2 04 ,03 OA 02 1A IJ 2.t PERIOD, SECONO a

e Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

( FIGURE 3.7-41

( HORIZONTAL FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA SAFE-SHUTDOWN EARTHQUAKE ELEVATION M1.5 FT - SLAB 3 REACTOR / AUXILIARY BUILDING EAST-WEST SARGENT & LUNDY REPORT NO.IL-20s2 COMPONENT B-8

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

l

. I l

. 1

. l FREQUENCY CPB

{

ao 33 2o le i

5.o 3.3 2A 'o.

k' =t Ia6 illi i e i i e i 4 444 t i ll iiii Illi i 4 4 4 4 4 1.o iiii til i

,a -

" - 1

,o  : _=

., ob _

SA <

SB #

u y = - ,

=m _

E f , toK DAAAPING 3,

3A ~

f =

u _

)

e 13 E

//.

4 _

5 a

n ,,

g g

1/

// / /

\

\ \ (\

e

=

oA // / / \\ \\ =

ffff g g gg q l

//# \\% Hf

$" on zV \\\N -

1. N% -

I i g #  % 5 5

e.:

. %xt s E

u E

o. _

=

a U

n.to _ ,

~ 1 =

on _

• oAB ==

om "ltff i i ifif f f  ! t ffff f ft tfti i ftii f f f f f fftf f f f tj om om o.o* o m o m om o.1 a.is o.: o.3 oe os em os 1.o ia a.c >

PERIOD SECONO i

O Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY, ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 3.742 HORIZONTAL FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA

• SAFE-SHUTDOWN EARTHOUAKE ELEVATION 859.0 FT- SLA8 4 REACTOR / AUXILIARY BUILDING NORTH 40UTH SARGENT & LUNDY REPORT NO.3L.2es2 COMPONENT B-9

PREQUENCY, CPS 50 33 20 it 5.0 f, 3.3 2A 1.0

=,,,4 i i 4 6444 i i i i i i eiii i6ie i

- -- t i ll illi i e i i i iiii 1844 15A

~

tu

- i M l .

1 <

SA *

~

'# , 1% DAMPING

• p- 2% DAMPtNG .

/ 5% DAMPtNG  :

10% DAMPtNG .

E" 13 E

MW  !

5

- 14 -

i i /// f

/ \ \\ \

\ b E " i .

/// / \ \ \ \

5 -

/// / \ \\ \

yu

~

/// / DN \

~

o #// NWN 2 u

A .

0/ \% -

02 y  :

0.2 %h  :

- 3  :

0., .

A  :

0.10 ,,, ,

on -

om ~

0A, ' ' ' ' ' III! IIII IIII I!II I II I em I I I IIII Il I I '

OA3 0.04 0.05 0.08 cm 0.1 0.1s 0.2 OA DA GA OA CA 1A 1.s gl PERICO, SECONO l

Fermi 2 l UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT e

FIGURE 3.7 63

(. HORIZONTAL FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA SAFE-SHUTDOWN EARTHOUAKE i ELEVATION 859.0 FT - SLAB 4

{

REACTOR / AUXILIARY BUILDING EAST-WEST ,

SARGENT & LUNDY REPORT NO. 3L.2682 B-10

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

1 a

e PREQUENCY, CPS 90 33 20

( -i i 4 i Illi i i i t i i 10 iiii I l li SA ii44 3J till i 2A

,4 i i i I 1.0

• iiii lith OJ 15A M

18A "_ -

SA SA w

, 1% DAMPING EA 3% MNO 4A _

I / WEDAMMNG "

, 7 3pg yng -

E I A /  ;

M -

i

- / -

• ~ =

1A 5

[//13 r

N _

E I# -

// / / \ \ \\ -

$ // / / \ N AX 3

OA _- jf f j g g g3 .=

= -

// / N N w p

i // \\\\

g * -

Ng -

( /

E N@ +

E NNSs  :

0.2

. \bNs  :

b 0.15 _ ,

~

~

. =

' O.10 _

~

1 =

OAS ~

m me OAE M "1 I I I I1il' I I I I l 1II1 Illl l l Il 1Ii! IIll I I ll l llIl I I I l' j Sat 0A3 0.04 0.08 OAS 0.05 0.1 0.15 OA SJ OA OA 0A OA 1A 1A 2.C l l

PERIOD, SECONS l

l Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 3.7-64

(, HORIZONTAL FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA SAFE-SHUTDOWN EARTHOUAKE ELEVATION 884.5 FT- SLAB B

, REACTOR / AUXILIARY BUILDING NORTH-SOUTH SARGENT & LUNDY REPORT NO. SL-2es2 COMPONENT B-11

I I

e

, PREQUENCY, CPS 5 33 20 10 5.0 3.3 20A 2.0 ' 1.0 0J W8 8 8 iiii i ii i i i i44 4468

(. 1sa

=

8 IIla il44 4 4 i i i i iiI4 i446-

=

~

10 2 _ ,

a i

~

OA ~'

• ~

1 -

g3

~

EA \

j a 1% DAMPtNG = I 43

( , 3% DAMPtNG -

3A * ** =

- - io _

~ # 2

,A - / -

1.5 E i

- 1.0 i

)

//.

\( E l

E  ! ' // I I i\\ \\ ii -

~ '

E s

03 " 8

'I //

I\

\\

\\

\\

9 '

i l'

' ~

DA 0,

// i '/ \\ \\ -

JV \\g -

( 0.,

E Wh i CA E

%ss9s  :

l 0.1s

~

%NT \O\N -

= l

~

0.10 -

02 ,~ '

f -l DM

• 0.M

'' I I I I I IIII IIII IIlI III! I I I I I I lIll l I I l' 0.03 0.03 0.04 ' .0s 0.Os 0 0.00 0.1 0.75 0.2 OJ 04 OA 0.s 03 la 1A 2.0 PERIOD. SECONO 4

Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 3.7-65 HORIZONTAL FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA SAFE-SHUTOOWN EARTHOUAKE ELEVATION 884.5 FT - SLA8 5 REACTOR / AUXILIARY BUILDING EAST-WEST SARGENT & LUNDY REPORT NO.5L-20s2 COMPONENT B-12

. _- . _ _ _ . . _ . _ . _ . .m.. . - . _ _ _ _ . . . _ . - _ . . _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ . - _ - - . . _ . . _ . _ . . _ _ . . . .._ _ . _ . . -_

e PA8QUENCY, CPB g,oo 33 20 to 5A 3J 2A 1A sA y iIi till i 4 4 i i i i&4i I&4& I i gggg t i ll till & I 1 3 gggg

,o -

=:

2 POR EQUIPMENT LOCATED WITHIN A =

omTANCs - a PacM THE WALL WNgRE C toA _ t 18 T,HE THICIO6ESS OF THE SLA3.

]

BA [ "

J u

SA 42 _

Z

~

2A E

M% DAMPING -

1% DAMPING [

2% DAMPING =

m 2.o _

l ,, E e

1/. ' ' " ' " ' ' "

• j

.  :- 1 f;;; 1 A C 0

=

ar I /H \ _  ;

g oA l F '

I\ - I

=

s ## t i\ \ _

~

I I I\ \

luu -

/

1

\\ A

( u  : (\ \ \ -

oA E \\ \\ i 02 E

) N -

\ '

=

o.15 5 N\ x  :

4 o.to [

~

Nu\ -

om "

AW -

~

N L =

. om T -

' ' ' I I I' I IIII IIII IIII IIII l ' I I om l' I I IIIi l l l l' om om o m o m o m , o m o.1 o.ts oA eA od oA o.s oA 14 2A 1A PERICO, SECONO Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 3.7 43 VERTICAL RESPONSE SPECTRA OPERATING-8 ASIS EARTHOUAKE REACTOR / AUXILIARY SUILDING WALL ELEVATIONS 641.5 FT,6593 FT, AND 8843 'T SARGENT & LUNDY REPORT NO.SL-2882 B-13

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

1'1 1

i .

1

{ PREQUENCY, CPB t

50 33 20 10 BA 2A 2A 1.0 .

OJ 4

=4444 4446 I i i i i i iiii i d it iiii lill i i i .I i i iiii ligh

{ 15A ,

i "

M a.m h 100 -

M

~ -

SA =

l,

• l .=

l 8A EA

}- =

43

, %% DAMPING "

1 l

f ,1% DAMPING

= f / 2% DAMPING I 38 .".

r b ~

l 2

f f ff 7 5% DAMPING -

~

! ~

8

/ // ~

l Iu 5 g

// 5 I  : -

1

) ~ / . i y hl e

/1 1 ~

l y =

=

l li i / \ \\

g p j

03 ,

/ //

f g, e

\\

ggg =.

an

/#

i \ \\\

l $"" l

/1/ \ \\\

1. \\ \% -

( i '

1. \\ M i

=

.= . N%  %

t 0.15 u

\

l

- y ,,,,

1

- e j 0.10 ,,,,

g -

em - '"

t nuo sm k e.i

! "'IIfI f I f l' f Om I I I f' I fIfI fIfI' I1lf Ifil I I I IlilI til I f I I f f I f*

I em Oas 0.04 0.0s Om 0.oe e.1 e.18 OJ SJ OA QA SA OA 1A 1A S,0

, PERlOO. SECONO i

i i

Fermi 2 i

4 l

UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT 4'

FIGURE 3.7 45 d I VERTICAL RESPONSE SPECTRA l OPERATING-BASIS EARTHOUAKE i REACTOR 8UILDING SLAB l ELEVATIONS 641.5 FT,659.5 FT, AND 684.5 FT

< SARGENT & LUNDY R EPORT NO. SL-2GR2 j B-14 i

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

d .

FREQUENCY, CPS Se 33 20 ' 10 SA 3.3 2A

(- lll,6 e i l li43 3 4 3 4 3 1 3 6gi 4444 34gi ll44 4 l l g g g 1A iggi gggw 0

~

ISA -

iu  : ,

.=

. SA ", "

- == l a -

u

~

~

l

~ l 42 _

3 _

2A 3

i

,. ME DAMPING {

,1% DAMPtNG Z '

= l

. 2.0 I

_ g 2% DAMPtNG ~, l 5 ,*

• E=

1A (

~

l s =

2 -

f '"

g

~

i l

~

y ,

$ 03

~

' ' \ \

I l.  ? 'd \\ '"

l hr-3/

• 1. 0 \\ -

N -

} ll l

,, \\\ \ - ,

/!r \\\ % -

( /# \\V >,

0,

s. 4 0.15 g

p gxx

=

~  :

0.10 _ - ~

~ \ M -

Om -

\ \D ""

~

(NA ==

Om D' "

Om

' ' ' ' ' ' IIII IIII' IIII IIII I' ' I' 8 I I I I I' III I 02 OA3 0.04 02 Om 02 0.1 0.18 0.2 SJ OA OA SA 03 1A 1A 2A PERIOD, SECONO Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 3.7-88

~ VERTICAL RESPONSE SPECTRA OPERATING-BAS 15 EARTHOUAKE AUXILIARY BUILDING SLAS ELEVATIONS 5833 FT,9133 FT, AND 859A FT SAMGENT & LUNDY MEPORT NO. SL-2332 B-15

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

w PREQUENCY, CPS 90 33 20 10

(. ll,,4 4 1 1 4eii i i i e a 4 4 444 6l1 BA 1i14 3.3 4443 4

'2A

.i 4 l l g 1A 3ggg 3gg i

15A 10A

%E DAMP 8NG

. = )

f 1% DAMPING '

" ff , 2% DAMPING sr s% DAMPING 77 ,

l ~A //

~

E h -

l </

1.5 E V,h

- =

= J s

t l

r ,

\ -

h il ) \\ \ 6 E #1 SA ." . \\ \

g gg g g"

j,f A/ \ \\\

1. \\\ ',

I 1 W  % ..

,, l 0.2

._/

~

0.15 0.10 - '

~

' m .

4 em -  % -

i

~  % .

em A

. ,, 1eii s ii t' i i e i e' ei eiie iist! ieii stii e i itii i siiiei sii cm SAS 0.04 cm 0.0s om 0.1 0.15 03 03 OA 03 OA 02 1.0 13  ;

PERIOD, IG COND e

Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT .

FIGURE 3.7-87 VERTICAL RESPONSE SPECTRA OPERATING-8A818 EARTHQUAKE AUXILIARY BUILDING SLAB SARGENT & LUNDY REPORT NO. SL-2GB2 B-16

e .

PREQUENCY,CPE 90 23 20 10 SA 32 2A 1A 0

(~ lll,4 4 4 4 Illi i 4 I 4 1 I I ila l i ll IIIi till i I I i 4 4 4III lilg 1sm

- 2

POR EQUIPMENT LDCATED WITHIN A DISTANCE = 2t PROM THE WALL WHERE ISA ,

t 18 THE THICKNEES OF THE SLAE.

=

sa

_.Z _

AA ~

1% DAMPlNG 3,

/ 2% DAMPlNG E

/

[ r WE DAMPlNG

'10E DAMPING g

g3 W _

)/ * -

g3

-  : /  :

n

=

lr%

II

\/

/\ Y

=

n g3 II / r \

s - F/ F / \\ -

l" Hr

// / J

/ 3 \\

\ \\

~

// // \ \\\ -

( .-

E

- ///./ \\ M E1

. k [

~

& f -

j

'" v/r \ N g a 818 r

s x%w A  :

=

- , i -

,A, _

~

Om t ifff f f t f i  ! IIII IIII I!I! I!I! I I I IlI I IIII I I I I*

• DRE GAS DAe 02 DAS DM D.1 0.19 02 92 DA 02 DA 02 1A 92 g,,

PERIOD, SECONO a

Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 3.7-92 VERTICAL RESPONSE SPECTRA SAFE-SHUTDOWN EARTHOUAKE REACTOR / AUXILIARY BUILDING WALL ELEVATIONS 641.5 FT,859.5 FT, AND 684.5 FT SARGENT & LUNDY REPORT NO. SL-2882 B-17

e W

PREQUENCY, CPS ll:,4 i e i iiei 13 2A 33 g e 3 g g g ,

= I I I '. I I II Iiii Illi 4 e i g g g gggg ggg

=

10A

{

en -

g EA 4A _ _

=

=  :

- 1% DAMPfNG 5

,, y j. z%oAasmNG E - 8% DAA4 PING lg / l M 1o% DAAAPIN3 =

- = - =

~ / -

p 1.s "

r

/ 2

( "

// 2 .p g

==

$ og ~

'l i j g ;q _

g  !! ! s \ \\ -.

guu ~

h /

// //

p g gg m

~ -

h \\ -

/// /,

{ -

u E /W s\\x

\\%

i

.2 WV

=

N ,

x <

5

! o.1s _  % \\\ g i

o.t o -

NN% - A____

O

~

j om

~

~

em

~

om ' ' ' ' 'I'l l i I fl I I Iet ,It, ,,,, ,,,, , ,

om oma o.oe o m o m , , , , , ,,,,

I l' f f fIIt- I t la

• 2 82 DA 02 en os la ,s ,,,

PeRion secomo Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFET ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 3.7-94 VERTICAL RESPONSE SPECTRA SAFE-SHUTDOWN EARTHOUAKE REACTOR BUILDING St AS SARGENT & LUNQY REPORT NO. SL-2GS2 ' '

B-18  !

i i

l

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

e i'

s t . s i FREQUENCY, CPS 1

1 0 3 20

( 10 SA 3J 3, 1A 0-30.0>Jiiiisis i i i e a i sisi iin sei, iiii , , , , , , ,,,, ,,,

) 15A t "

4 . -

10A I l ,

s, .

SA -

=

1

$A ==a l

l EA .-

l 4A _ "

lll 2 s 3A -

=

3 =

i [ ,, til DAMPI'NG Z j

2 lll

/ ass oAMP NG -

~

l gr _ ' 5% DAMPfNG 1A '

, - = - 4 1A 1 < li -

k,\ /

i

! SA a -

/

'Y l II V\

l ,,

g ft '

i d\\ _

{ .A

/ // A \\ _

f

.A  : e/// / T \

\\ -

/s// \\%' m l ll: T m

.A

- /e s =

l / /

E / - // s s

o.1s 4

l o.1o em

[

~

xs3k '

=

~

em -

gg 9III' I f f l' f i l i: I I IIIf lllti l lll 9lll 9 g g g g gi ,,9, yy y 9 eas om o.os o m o m om s.1 e.ts cA SA 04 OA sA os 1A 1A 2A

' PEReco, sECOND k

• l

' l i

Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT 4

FIGURE 3.7-95 f,

f VERTICAL RESPONSE SPECTRA i SAFE-SHUTDOWN EARTHOUAKE

{ AUXlLIARY 8UILDING SLAS j .

ELEVATIONS 583.5 FT,8133 FT, AND 8593 FT SARGENT & LUNDY REPORT NO. 5L-2882 a

B-19

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

0 FREQUENCY, CPS 90 33 20 to 5A 3J 2A

('. 20A

.""1 1. 4 4 118I i i i i i l iiil i i il 1iii llii i i I i i 4 1A 4444 4 416m 0

1sA ," =

~ "

'OS =

sa "

I

~ '

sa '

9 j ,.1% DAMPING SA l

l. yj 7 , 5 DAMPING 4A /

R MNG s J '10E DAMPING ~

24 -

4 9l s :l J

// / /

iE ,, E

/ / // \\ \\

5 E / / / / \' \\ -

3 =

/ / /./ 1( \\ -

// // h \\ -

/ /// \ \\ -

04 ~

( OJ O.1 ' ~

0.15 ' l

=

=l o.io 9::::m::a  :'

am _

SAB ~

' ' ' ' III! IIII I!!!

DJE III! I I I I I I IIII I I I I' em oAs om om om o.as e.i o.is e.:  : e4 e.s os om is i.s a; 1 PERIDO, SSCOND e

Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 3.7-96 VERTICAL RESPONSE SPECTRA SAFE-SHUTDOWN EARTHOUAKE AUXILIARY BUILDING SLA8 ELEVATIONS 643.5 FT AND 677.5 FT SARGENT 4 LUNDY R8tPORT NO. 3L.2SR2 B-20

Enclosure 3 to 1

1,"*'NRC-96-0042 e

i DECO - FERMI 2 CCHVAC CONCERN RESOLUTION TASK SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES TO THE MARCH 1,1996 MEETING During the working meeting with the NRC on March 1,1996, the contents of DECO's design criteria document for the CCHVAC duct and duct support structural qualification'were reviewed and discussed in detail. It was pointed out during this meeting that the design criteria document has been developed based on industry experience and approach used for the design or structural adequacy evaluMion of Seismic Category I HVAC duct and duct supports on many nuclear plants. _ The approach and the methodology in the criteria document is not intended to be a continuation of the methodology used in the documents previously submitted in response to the NRC concerns, and therefore their contents are not specifically utilized nor validated.

To ensure our understanding of the NRC concerns and more importantly to ensure that the design criteria document properly considers the resolution of the concerns, the contents of the NRC letter of December 7,1995 and the attached SER were reviewed in detail and all applicable issues were identified and considered in the document.

As a result of the working meeting, a few minor clarifications to the contents were suggested and are being implemented in the criteria document. Two issues were left for further consideration and, although they were discussed in some detail, it was concluded that additional explanations and discussions were required.

These two issues are as follows:

(1) Validity of the assigned plate buckling coefficient, K,i for web type behavior given in Equation 0.4.1-2b for the effective section calculation of rectangular ducts, (2) Explanation of the treatment of the transverse bending and membrane stresses generated in the rectangular duct under internal pressure.

This supplemental response provides the additional explanations to the above issues, and describes DECO's finalized approach on their implementation in the CCHVAC task.

• =t = 1

e 1

• il Rectanaular Duct Effective Section De. termination Section 3.4.1(a) of the design criteria document provides the guidance for the determination of the effective duct sections. The plate buckling coefficients K i are .

identified as 4 for the case where the duct section behaves as a flange, and as 40 for the case where the duct section behaves as a web which is subjected to a stress t gradient due to bending. The Ki of 40 for web type behavior is larger than the value stipulated by AISIin equation B2.3-4 of Ref. 8 of the design criteria document, which gives a Ki value of 24 when f,:=-f 2. Recognizing this difference and the fact that the b/t ratio for some duct sizes are beyond the dimensional limits of the AISI design manual, specific evaluations and justifications were provided in Ref.12 of the design criteria document. These justifications were based on the results of actual duct behavior during tests and also results of detailed finite element analyses.

Although, as discussed during the working meeting with the NRC, the exact theoretical definition of the duct section behavior (i.e. what is flange and what is web) during the simultaneous application of the seismic. vibratory effects is difficult to define due to the complex time dependent nonlinear nature of the problem, sufficient justifications have been documented to provide a conservative practical approach for the calculation of the effective sections.

The use of effective sections in modeling the rectangular duct as beam elements is  ;

considered a refinement based on a realistic and conservative approach, and the methodology described in DECO's design criteria document for calculating the effective sections reflects this widely accepted and used industry approach.

However, for further conservatism in representing the portion of the duct behaving as t a web during blaxial bending, the lesser value of 24 will be used. Accordingly, the design criteria document will be revised to indicate that Ki for web action will not exceed 40, but 24 will be used in the evaluations. This value of 24 for web action will be used for the effective section utilized for the beam action of the duct as well as for the determination of the resulting stresses in the duct. If the need to use Ki of 40 is determined, it will be documented and assessed on a case by case basis.

2) Transverse Stresses in Rectanaular Duct due to Internal Pressure Effects The ducts at Fermi 2 were fabricated and installed in accordance with the SMACNA code requirements, which incorporate configurations safely resistant to the internal pressure effects, developed based on considerable operating experience. The normal operating and the maximum internal pressure levels are being calculated for Fermi 2 CCHVAC utilizing realistic postulation of single failure criteria and system operating parameters. These maximum pressures are expected to be at or below six inches w= 2

e i

water gauge for the great majority of the duct segments, a pressure level well within j

the SMACNA table values. One, or more likely two, relatively short duct segment runs are expected to have maximum calculated pressures of 12 to 14 inch water gauge, requiring special evaluations. (The 22 inch water gauge pressure value mentioned in the December 7,1995 letter does not exist and is expected to be closer to a pressure of 14 inches water gauge).

j The tota! CCHVAC rectangular duct population of varying duct sizes, stiffener

! spacings and metal thicknesses at Fermi 2 can be grouped into the following five

] major groups:

i Grouo Duct Size (inch) Stiffener Soacina S1(inch) Metal Gaucet#1 i 1 < = 12 60 18

! 2 < = 30 30 18

! 3 < = 48 30 18 4

4 < = 60 24 18 8

5 < = 72 24 16 i

The duct panels for group 1 deflect and bend under the applied uniform pressure by spanning between corners (transverse behavior), while the larger ducts in groups 3, 4 and 5 deflect and bend in the direction between stiffeners (longitudinal behavior).

The duct panels for group 2 behave sirnilarly between corners or stiffeners.

The transverse behavior has not been specifically included in the design criteria document since the stresses resulting from transverse effects (membrane and bending), though present and relatively high, are not collinear and not combined with the stresses resulting from dead weight and earthquake, and are not controlling, as has been widely documented in the industry (e. g. Ref.12 of the design criteria document, CCL Report A-318-80 for the ASCE Committee on Materials and Structural Design by R. Yow, etc.). The governing stresses, which directly combine with the dead load and seismically induced stresses, are, however, considered and calculated as described in the criteria document, by equations in Section 3.6.1.1. These equations are valid for duct internal pressure levels of 10 inches water gauge or less.

To quantitatively demonstrate that the transverse stresses are not governing, by examples, the ducts in groups 1 and 2 were evaluated under pressure effects normal to the panels. The approach given in Timoshenko's " Theory of Plates and Shells" 1st Editio'n was used for the duct in group 1 and a large deflection finite element computer analysis was used for the duct in group 2. The governing behavior of ducts in groups 3,4 and 5 for which the panel dimension is limited by the stiffener spacing are covered by the stress formulae of 3.6.1.1.

For group 1, the duct metal stress can be calculated based on small deflection theory w .= 3 I

o, -

a because it falls in the linear region of the curve for b/a approaching zero shown in Figure 136 of Timoshenko. The maximum stress in the plate is the transverse stress at the middle of duct corners. This stress is equal to the bending stress since the membrane stress is equalto zero. The maximum transverse (bending) stress for this group for an internal pressure of 6 inches water gauge can be calculated as follows:

42.4 1 gfa f= x I2 V = = 1728000 , g,$3 gy 2 h* g , ( p. o 4 7 g) z l

l 1

This value is well below the allowable.

To demonstrate that transverse stresses are not governing for group 2, a 30 inch by 30 inch duct panel with fixed end boundary conditions all around subjected to internal pressure of 6 inches water gauge normal to the panel was studied by performing large deflection ANSYS finite element computer analysis. For all elements in the model, the maximum transverse stresses are well within 0.6 Fy (i.e. maximum membrane +

bending stress was equal to 6.3 ksiin this example).

As the validity of the equstions for the determination of governing duct stresses in Section 3.6.1.1 is limited to pressures of 10 inches water gauge or less, a detailed three dimensional finite element analysis will be performed for all ductwork segments subjected to pressures higher than 10 inches water gauge. The model will be as conceptually shown in the attached figure. This model will be subjected to a uniform calculated pressure, and all stresses of interest will be obtained from the analysis, ircluding the transverse (membrane and bending) stresses. The calculated stresses resulting from the duct internal pressure effects will be combined with the corresponding collinear stresses from the dead weight and seismic analysis results.

In addition, the 30 inch duct evaluated in the above example will also be similarly analyzed to confirm the behavior and the results. The design criteria document specifies the above type analysis in Section 3.3.(b) which was revised to provide l further clarification. '

• coi .= 4

1 D~~* Folm 6007 (Rev. 4/93) l 0 CALCULATION SET NO. REV COMP. BY

• **" GENERAL CHK'O 8Y COMPUTATION l

SHEET muu enAL v0o O DATE DATE f 1

! PROJECT l MU @ 1 DATE DATE l SUBJECT JO l l

l l

l I

[ , ! 444 4

4 h .-

+

i i t

~

8: 8 8:

.. i

.. A-A Si = Spacing between stiffeners i

I l

l l

l l

I i

I i

_. _