RS-03-045, Request for License Amendment Related to Heavy Loads Handling

Request for License Amendment Related to Heavy Loads Handling

ML030650593
Person / Time
Site:	Dresden
Issue date:	02/26/2003
From:	Simpson P Exelon Generation Co, Exelon Nuclear
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RS-03-045
Download: ML030650593 (132)

Text

ExekIen.

Exelon Generation www exeloncorp corn Nuclear 4300 Winfield Road Warrenville, IL 60555 10 CFR 50.59 10 CFR 50.90 RS-03-045 February 26, 2003 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001 Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3 Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-19 and DPR-25 NRC Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50-249

Subject:

Request for License Amendment Related to Heavy Loads Handling

References:

(1) Letter from J. S. Abel (Commonwealth Edison Company) to U. S. NRC, "Dresden Station Units 2 and 3, Quad Cities Station Units 1 and 2, Dresden Special Report No. 41, Quad Cities Special Report No. 16, 'Reactor Building Crane and Cask Yoke Assembly Modifications,' AEC Dckt. 50-237, 50-249, 50-254 and 50-265," dated November 8,1974 (2) Letter from J. S. Abel (Commonwealth Edison Company) to U. S. NRC, "Dresden Station Units 2 and 3, Quad Cities Station Units 1 and 2, Dresden Special Report No. 41, Supplement A, Quad Cities Special Report No. 16 -

Supplement A, 'Reactor Building Crane and Cask Yoke Assembly Modifications,' NRC Dckts. 50-237, 50-249, 50-254 and 50-265," dated June 3,1975 (3) Letter from K. R. Jury (Exelon Generation Company, LLC) to U. S. NRC, "Request for License Amendment Related to Heavy Loads Handling," dated September 26, 2002 In accordance with 10 CFR 50.90, "Application for amendment of license or construction permit,"

and 10 CFR 50.59, "Changes, tests, and experiments," Exelon Generation Company (EGC),

LLC, is requesting a change to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-19 and DPR-25, for Dresden Nuclear Power Station (DNPS), Units 2 and 3. The proposed change will allow DNPS to revise the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) to include a description of a load drop analysis performed for handling reactor cavity shield blocks weighing greater than 110 tons with the Unit 2/3 reactor building crane during power operation.

Between 1974 and 1976, Commonwealth Edison (ComEd) Company, now EGC, extensively modified the DNPS reactor building crane with the intent of qualifying the crane as single failure-proof for its full rated capacity of 125 tons. In support of a Technical Specifications amendment

~03

February 26, 2003 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 2 request to support spent fuel cask handling, we provided information regarding these modifications in References 1 and 2. In this information we stated that the fuel casks used would weigh up to 100 tons with a 10 ton lifting rig.

In a teleconference with the NRC on September 20, 2002, the NRC stated that it considers the DNPS reactor building crane approved as meeting single failure-proof criteria only for loads of up to 110 tons. The top layer of reactor cavity shield blocks at DNPS, Units 2 and 3, consists of two pieces. For DNPS, Unit 3, each piece of the top layer of reactor cavity shield blocks weighs less than 116 tons. Based on a review of dimensional drawings, it is expected that each piece of the top layer of reactor cavity shield blocks for DNPS, Unit 2 will weigh more than 110 tons and less than or equal to 116 tons. The reactor cavity shield blocks may be moved prior to and during reactor disassembly, and can be stored on the refueling floor of the operating unit.

Since the reactor building crane is only approved as single failure-proof for loads of up to 110 tons, the proposed use of the crane to move the reactor cavity shield blocks weighing greater than 110 tons with a unit at power increases the possibility of a load drop which could damage safety-related equipment. This requires NRC approval in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59.

However, as demonstrated in Attachment 1, the proposed change involves no significant hazards consideration.

In Reference 3, EGC submitted, and the NRC approved a one-time use of the reactor building crane to handle loads up to and including 116 tons in order to handle the Unit 3 reactor cavity shield blocks during refueling outage D3R17. EGC committed to submit an additional license amendment request to permanently resolve this situation. EGC is evaluating the reactor building crane to determine the feasibility of increasing its single failure-proof rating. This process will not be completed in time to allow lifting the reactor cavity shield blocks for refueling outage D2R18, which is scheduled to begin in early November 2003. EGC has completed a load drop analysis following the guidelines of NUREG-0612, "Control of Heavy Loads at Nuclear Power Plants,"

Appendix A for handling reactor cavity shield blocks and has determined that the handling of these shield blocks can be completed safely without increasing the single failure-proof rating of the reactor building crane.

We request NRC approval of the proposed change by October 24, 2003, to permit heavy load handling operations for refueling outage D2R18.

This request is subdivided as follows.

1. Attachment 1 gives a description and safety analysis of the proposed change.

2. Attachment 2 provides the proposed revisions to the UFSAR.

3. Attachment 3 provides a copy of the load drop analysis calculation to assist the NRC review.

The proposed change has been reviewed by the DNPS Plant Operations Review Committee and approved by the Nuclear Safety Review Board in accordance with the requirements of the EGC Quality Assurance Program.

February 26, 2003 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 3 EGC is notifying the State of Illinois of this request for a change to the operating license by transmitting a copy of this letter and its attachments to the designated State Official.

Should you have any questions concerning his letter, please contact Mr. Allan R. Haeger at (630) 657-2807.

Respectfully, WIhR Patrick R. Simpson Manager - Licensing Mid-West Regional Operating Group Attachments: Affidavit Attachment 1: Description and Safety Analysis for Proposed change Attachment 2: Proposed Revision to the UFSAR Attachment 3: Calculation DRE02-0064, Rev. 0 and Rev. OA, "D2/3 Load Drop Evaluation of the Reactor Shield Plugs" cc: Regional Administrator - NRC Region IlIl NRC Senior Resident Inspector- Dresden Nuclear Power Station Office of Nuclear Facility Safety - Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety

STATE OF ILLINOIS )

COUNTY OF DUPAGE )

INTHE MATTER OF EXELON GENERATION COMPANY, LLC ) Docket Numbers DRESDEN NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3 ) 50-237 and 50-249

SUBJECT:

Request for License Amendment Related to Heavy Loads Handling AFFIDAVIT I affirm that the content of this transmittal is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.

Patrick R. Simpson Manager - Licensing Mid-West Regional Operating Group Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public in and for the State above named, this X i day of

-42 688ea ,20O0 Notary u lic

Attachment 1 Request for License Amendment Related to Heavy Loads Handling Description and Safety Analysis for Proposed Change 1.0 Introduction In accordance with 10 CFR 50.90, "Application for amendment of license or construction permit," and 10 CFR 50.59, "Changes, tests, and experiments," Exelon Generation Company (EGC), LLC, is requesting a change to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-19 and DPR-25, for Dresden Nuclear Power Station (DNPS), Units 2 and 3. The proposed change will allow DNPS to revise the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) to include a description of a load drop analysis performed for handling reactor cavity shield blocks weighing greater than 110 tons with the Unit 2/3 reactor building crane during power operation.

EGC requests NRC approval of the proposed change by October 24, 2003, to permit heavy load handling operations for a refueling outage which is scheduled to begin in early November 2003.

2.0 Proposed Change UFSAR Section 9.1.4.3.2, "Reactor Building Overhead Crane," will be revised to add the following statement.

A load drop analysis has been performed for handling the Units 2 and 3 reactor cavity shield blocks weighing greater than 110 tons for the designated safe load path to show that a postulated load drop will not affect any safety-related equipment, as there will be no scabbing or perforation of the concrete under the refueling floor, and the overall response of the floor system is acceptable. This load drop analysis was performed in accordance with the guidelines of NUREG-0612, Appendix A. The load drop analysis methodology was reviewed and approved by the NRC. The designated safe load path, hoisting height restrictions, and the weight of the load on which the analysis was based are described in station procedures. When handling shield plugs weighing greater than 110 tons, crane controls incorporate travel limits and hoisting height restrictions.

3.0 Background Between 1974 and 1976, Commonwealth Edison (ComEd) Company, now EGC, extensively modified the DNPS reactor building crane with the intent of qualifying the crane as single failure-proof for its full rated capacity of 125 tons. In support of a Technical Specifications amendment request to support spent fuel cask handling, ComEd provided information regarding these modifications in References 1 and 2. In this information we stated that the fuel casks used would weigh up to 100 tons with a 10 ton lifting rig.

In a teleconference with the NRC on September 20, 2002, the NRC stated that it considers the DNPS reactor building crane approved as meeting single failure-proof criteria only for loads of up to 110 tons. The top layer of reactor cavity shield blocks at DNPS, Units 2 and 3, consists of two pieces. For DNPS, Unit 3, each piece of the top Page 1 of 7

Attachment I Request for License Amendment Related to Heavy Loads Handling Description and Safety Analysis for Proposed Change layer of reactor cavity shield blocks weighs less than 116 tons. Based on a review of the dimensional drawings, each piece of the top layer of reactor cavity shield blocks for DNPS, Unit 2 is expected to weigh more than 110 tons and less than or equal to 116 tons.

The reactor cavity shield blocks are moved prior to and during the refueling outage, and are stored on the refueling floor of the operating unit.

In Reference 3, EGC submitted, and the NRC approved, a one-time use of the reactor building crane to handle loads up to and including 116 tons in order to handle the Unit 3 reactor cavity shield blocks during refueling outage D3R17. EGC committed to submit an additional license amendment request to permanently resolve this situation.

EGC is evaluating the reactor building crane to determine the feasibility of increasing its single failure-proof rating. This process will not be completed in time to allow lifting of the reactor cavity shield blocks for D2R18, which is scheduled to begin in early November 2003. EGC has completed a load drop analysis for handling reactor cavity shield blocks weighing greater than 110 tons and up to 116 tons following the guidelines of NUREG-0612, Appendix A and has determined that the handling of these shield blocks can be completed safely without increasing the single failure-proof rating of the reactor building crane.

The proposed UFSAR change requires NRC approval in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59.

The lifting of the reactor cavity shield blocks weighing greater than 110 tons at power and movement to the refueling floor of the operating unit increases the possibility of a load drop, which could damage safety-related equipment, since the crane is not single failure-proof for this load. However, as demonstrated in this amendment request, the proposed change does not create a credible possibility of a new accident.

4.0 Technical Analysis The reactor building crane is designed to handle loads up to 125 tons and has been designated as single failure-proof for loads of < 110 tons. Thus, the reactor building crane is capable of lifting reactor cavity shield blocks (the heaviest of which weighs approximately 116 tons) without significant probability of a load drop.

Safe load paths for the movement of the reactor cavity shield blocks have been designated to minimize the potential effect of a load drop while remaining within the practical limitations due to the size of the reactor cavity shield blocks and the space available on the refueling floor. These load paths are governed by the following considerations.

• General practices incorporated into DNPS procedures as a result of NUREG-0612 ensure that heavy load heights are maintained as low as practical and that the movement of heavy loads over the spent fuel pool and open reactor cavity is prohibited. The load path incorporates these considerations.

• The radius of the semi-circular top layer of reactor cavity shield blocks is approximately 21 feet 6 inches. The load path ensures that the reactor cavity shield Page 2 of 7

Attachment I Request for License Amendment Related to Heavy Loads Handling Description and Safety Analysis for Proposed Change blocks remain over reactor building structural members supporting the refueling floor during movement.

• Since the reactor cavity shield blocks are handled only on the refueling floor, which contains no safety-related equipment, a drop of the reactor cavity shield blocks in the designated safe load paths would not directly impact any such equipment.

A load drop analysis has been completed for the designated safe load paths. The load drop analysis used 116 tons as the maximum weight of the pieces from the top layer of Unit 3 reactor cavity shield blocks. Based on a review of dimensional drawings, it is expected that each piece of the top layer of the Unit 2 reactor cavity shield blocks will weigh less than or equal to 116 tons. The weight of each piece of the top layer of the Unit 2 reactor cavity shield blocks will be verified to be within the assumptions of the analysis. If necessary, the load drop analysis will be adjusted for variations in weight above 116 tons, using the methodology described in the current calculation.

The load drop analysis shows that a postulated drop of the reactor cavity shield blocks from the heights assumed in the analysis will not affect the capability of safety-related equipment located on the floors below the refueling floor to perform its function, as there will be no scabbing or perforation of the concrete under the refuel floor, and the overall response of the floor system is acceptable. This load drop analysis is contained in and was performed in accordance with the applicable assumptions described in NUREG-0612, Appendix A, as follows.

• The load is dropped in an orientation that causes the most severe consequences.

• The load is dropped at any location in the designated safe load path.

• The analysis postulates the maximum damage that could result, i.e., the analysis considered that all energy is absorbed by the structure that is impacted.

Conformance to all of the guidelines of NUREG-0612, Appendix A is further discussed in the attached calculation.

In addition, the following controls, which are not discussed in the attached calculation, will be implemented in accordance with NUREG-0612, Appendix A.

• Mechanical stops, electrical interlocks, or similar automatic controls will restrict travel outside the designated safe load path.

• Mechanical stops, electrical interlocks, or similar automatic controls will be provided to prohibit lifting the reactor cavity shield blocks above the height assumed in the analysis.

• These controls will be designed to allow activation of the travel and lifting restrictions when handling the reactor cavity shield blocks, unless a particular piece is shown to weigh less than 110 tons.

Further, existing procedural controls will be modified to include the following to ensure that the load drop analysis assumptions are preserved.

Page 3 of 7

Attachment 1 Request for License Amendment Related to Heavy Loads Handling Description and Safety Analysis for Proposed Change

• The applicable procedures will describe the weight of the shield blocks assumed in the analysis, the safe load path, and the hoisting height restrictions for the reactor cavity shield blocks.

• The applicable procedures will ensure that the mechanical stops, interlocks, or automatic controls are not bypassed during handling of the reactor cavity shield blocks, unless a particular piece is shown to weigh less than 110 tons.

In summary, the load drop analysis and controls ensure that a postulated drop of the reactor cavity shield blocks weighing greater than 110 tons will have no effect on spent fuel, fuel in the reactor vessel, or safety-related equipment.

5.0 Regulatory Analysis 5.1 No Significant Hazards Consideration In accordance with 10 CFR 50.90, "Application for amendment of license or construction permit," Exelon Generation Company (EGC), LLC, is requesting a change to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-19 and DPR-25, for Dresden Nuclear Power Station (DNPS),

Units 2 and 3. Specifically, the proposed change will allow EGC to revise the DNPS Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) to include a description of a load drop analysis performed for handling the reactor cavity shield blocks weighing greater than 110 tons with the reactor building crane during power operation.

The proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

The proposed change will allow use of a load drop analysis performed for handling the reactor cavity shield blocks weighing greater than 110 tons with the reactor building crane during power operation. The load drop analysis demonstrates that dropping a reactor cavity shield block within the designated safe load path from the heights assumed in the analysis will not affect the capability of safety-related equipment to perform its function. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

The proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

The proposed change will allow use of a load drop analysis performed for handling the reactor cavity shield blocks weighing greater than 110 tons with the reactor building crane during power operation. The load drop analysis demonstrates that dropping a reactor cavity shield block within the designated safe load path from the heights assumed in the analysis will not affect the capability of safety-related equipment to perform its function. Therefore, the proposed change will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

Page 4 of 7

Attachment 1 Request for License Amendment Related to Heavy Loads Handling Description and Safety Analysis for Proposed Change The proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

The proposed change will allow use of a load drop analysis performed for handling the reactor cavity shield blocks weighing greater than 110 tons with the reactor building crane during power operation. The load drop analysis demonstrates that dropping a reactor cavity shield block within the designated safe load path from the heights assumed in the analysis will not affect the capability of safety-related equipment to perform its function. Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed change does not result in a significant reduction in the margin of safety.

Conclusion Based upon the above evaluation, EGC has concluded that the criteria of 10 CFR 50.92(c),

"Issuance of amendment," are satisfied and that the proposed UFSAR change involves no significant hazards consideration.

5.2 Applicable Regulatory Requirements and Criteria In NUREG-0612, the NRC provided regulatory guidelines in two phases (Phase I and 11) to assure safe handling of heavy loads in areas where a load drop could impact stored spent fuel, fuel in the reactor core, or equipment that may be required to achieve safe shutdown or permit continued decay heat removal. Phase I guidelines address measures for reducing the likelihood of dropping heavy loads and provide criteria for establishing safe load paths, procedures for load handling operations, training of crane operators, design, testing, inspection, and maintenance of cranes and lifting devices, and analyses of the impact of heavy load drops. Phase II guidelines address alternatives for mitigating the consequences of heavy load drops, including using either (1) a single failure-proof crane for increased handling system reliability, or (2) electrical interlocks and mechanical stops for restricting crane travel, or (3) load drops and consequence analyses for assessing the impact of dropped loads on plant safety and operations. NUREG-0612, Appendix A provides guidance regarding load drop analyses.

The Phase II guidelines apply specifically to the proposed change discussed in this amendment request. As discussed above the proposed change meets the Phase II guidelines.

Generic Letter (GL) 85-11, "Completion of Phase II of Control of Heavy Loads at Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG-0612," dated June 28,1985, dismissed the need for licensees to implement the guidelines of NUREG-0612 Phase II based on the improvements obtained from the implementation of NUREG-0612 Phase I. GL 85-11, however, encouraged licensees to implement actions they perceived to be appropriate to provide adequate safety.

In NRC Bulletin 96-02, the NRC staff addressed specific instances of heavy load handling concerns and stated that licensees were responsible to ensure that heavy load handling activities with the reactor in operation did not constitute an unreviewed safety question by creating the possibility of an accident not previously evaluated or by increasing the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

Page 5 of 7

Attachment 1 Request for License Amendment Related to Heavy Loads Handling Description and Safety Analysis for Proposed Change As discussed above, the proposed change is being submitted for review in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59, because the proposed change increases the possibility of a load drop. However, as noted in Section 5.1, the proposed change does not create the credible possibility of a new accident.

6.0 Environmental Assessment EGC has evaluated the proposed change against the criteria for identification of licensing and regulatory actions requiring environmental assessment in accordance with 10 CFR 51.21, "Criteria for and identification of licensing and regulatory actions requiring environmental assessments." EGC has determined that the proposed change meets the criteria for a categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22, "Criterion for categorical exclusion; identification of licensing and regulatory actions eligible for categorical exclusion or otherwise not requiring environmental review," paragraph (c)(9), and as such, has determined that no irreversible consequences exist in accordance with 10 CFR 50.92, "Issuance of amendment," paragraph (b). This determination is based on the fact that this change is being proposed as an amendment to a license issued pursuant to 10 CFR 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,"

which changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area, and the amendment meets the following specific criteria:

(i) The proposed changes involve no significant hazards consideration.

As demonstrated in Section 5.1, the proposed change does not involve a significant hazards consideration.

(ii) There is no significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluent that may be released offsite.

The proposed change will allow use of load drop analysis for handling the reactor cavity shield blocks weighing greater than 110 tons with the Unit 2/3 reactor building crane during power operation. The load drop analysis demonstrates that dropping a reactor cavity shield block within the designated safe load path from the heights assumed in the analysis will not affect the capability of safety-related equipment to perform its function. There will be no significant increase in the amounts of any effluents released offsite. The proposed change does not result in an increase in power level, does not increase the production, nor alter the flow path or method of disposal of radioactive waste or byproducts. Therefore, the proposed change will not affect the types or increase the amounts of any effluents released offsite.

(iii) There is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.

The proposed change will not result in changes in the configuration of the facility.

There will be no change in the level of controls or methodology used for processing Page 6of7

Attachment 1 Request for License Amendment Related to Heavy Loads Handling Description and Safety Analysis for Proposed Change of radioactive effluents or handling of solid radioactive waste, nor will the proposal result in any change in the normal radiation levels within the plant. Therefore, there will be no increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure resulting from this change.

7.0 References

1. Letter from J. S. Abel (Commonwealth Edison Company) to U. S. NRC, "Dresden Station Units 2 and 3, Quad Cities Station Units 1 and 2, Dresden Special Report No.

41, Quad Cities Special Report No. 16, 'Reactor Building Crane and Cask Yoke Assembly Modifications,' AEC Dckt. 50-237, 50-249, 50-254 and 50-265," dated November 8, 1974

2. Letter from J. S. Abel (Commonwealth Edison Company) to U. S. NRC, "Dresden Station Units 2 and 3, Quad Cities Station Units 1 and 2, Dresden Special Report No.

41, Supplement A, Quad Cities Special Report No. 16 - Supplement A, 'Reactor Building Crane and Cask Yoke Assembly Modifications,' NRC Dckts. 50-237, 50-249, 50-254 and 50-265," dated June 3,1975

3. Letter from K. R. Jury (Exelon Generation Company, LLC) to U. S. NRC, "Request for License Amendment Related to Heavy Loads Handling," dated September 26, 2002 Page 7 of 7

Attachment 2 Request for License Amendment Related to Heavy Loads Handling Proposed Revisions to the UFSAR j

DRESDEN - UFSAR Rev. 5 January 2003 9.1.4.3.2 Reactor Building Overhead Crane f('r 6 The 125-ton capacity reactor building overhead crane main hoist is single failure proof. Within the -R ilo1ob dual load path, the design criteria are such that all dual elements comply with the CMAA Specification No. 70 for allowable stresses, except for the hoisting rope which is governed by more stringent job specification criteria. With several approved exceptions, single element components within the load path (i.e. the crane hoisting system) have been designed to a minimum safety factor of 7.5, based on the ultimate strength of the material. Components critical to crane operation, other than the hoisting system, have been designed to a minimum safety factor of 4.5, based on the ultimate strength of the material. Table 9.1-3 lists the results of the crane component failure analysis.

The reactor building overhead crane and spent fuel cask yoke assemblies meet the intent of NUREG-0554._)hjt (O9, (55Ti 0,tVJt II(Li t3M All analyses for handling spent fuel casks, performed relative to the overhead crane handling system l loads have been based on the National Lead (NL) 10/24 spent fuel shipping cask which weighs 100 tons (Figure 9.1-18) and the HI-TRAC 100 transfer cask which weighs less than 100 tons (Section 9.1.2.2.4). If larger casks are used, additional analyses will be required to assure safety margins are maintained.

Administrative controls and installed limit switches restrict the path of travel of the crane to a specific controlled area when moving the spent fuel cask. The controls are intended to assure that a controlled path is followed in moving a cask between the decontamination and hatchway area and the spent fuel pool. Administrative controls also ensure movement of other heavy loads such as the drywell head, reactor vessel head, and dryer separator assembly is over preapproved pathways.

Technical Specifications state refueling requirements. Station procedures prohibit movement of heavy loads over the spent fuel pools or open reactor cavity except under Special Procedures The crane reeving system does not meet the recommended criteria of Branch Technical Position APCSB 9-1 (now incorporated into NUREG-0554) for wire rope safety factors and fleet angles. The purpose of these criteria is to assure a design which minimizes wire rope stress wear and thereby provides maximum assurance of crane safety under all operating and maintenance conditions.

Because the crane reeving system does not meet these recommended criteria, there is a possibility of an accelerated rate of wire rope wear occurring. Accordingly, to compensate in these design areas, a specific program of wire rope inspection and replacement is in place.

The inspection and replacement program assures that the entire length of the wire rope will be maintained as close as practical to original design safety factors at all times. This inspection and replacement program provides an equivalent level of protection to the methods suggested in wire rope safety and crane fleet angle criteria and will assure that accelerated wire rope wear will be detected before crane use.

"Two blocking" is an inadvertently continued hoist which brings the load and head block assemblies into physical contact, thereby preventing further movement of the load block and creating shock loads to the rope and reeving system. A mechanically operated power limit switch in the main hoist motor power circuit on the load side of all hoist motor power circuit controls provides adequate protection.

9.1-23

DRESDEN - UFSAR Rev. 5 January 2003 against "two blocking" in the event of a fused contactor in the main hoist control circuitry. This power limit switch will interrupt power to the main hoist motor and cause the holding brakes to set prior to "two blocking."

2 The reactor building refueling floor has been designed for a live load of 1000 lb/ft . The entire reactor building refueling floor (with the exception of the fuel pool and open reactor cavity) is considered a safe load path zone.

A 9-ton load drop has been analyzed. The results show that the refueling floor can survive a drop from 7 feet without scabbing damage. Procedures limit the 9-ton lift height to a maximum of 7 feet.

Existing procedural controls limit both the height of a lift to clear obstacles and require the use of the most direct path to laydown areas.

Wn The reactor building overhead crane meets the single-failure criteria stated in NUREG-0612. As A ,

required by CMAA-70, the maximum crane load weight plus the weight of the bottom block-,divided U by the number of parts of rope does not exceed 20% of the manufacturer's published breaking -t NOllO1.5 strength.

The reactor building overhead crane main hook has:

A rated load capacity = 250,000 lb Block and rope weight 20500 lb Total weight lifted = 270,500 lb This weight is supported by 12 parts of wire rope with a published breaking strength of 175,800 pounds.

Total weight lified/Num ber of parts of rope 270,500 12.8%

Breaking strength of rope 12 x 175,800 As can be seen by Equation 1, this is less than the 20% CMAA-70 requirement.

A detailed analysis of the possibility of horizontal displacement of the cask in the event one of the redundant rope trains fails has been conducted. It has been confirmed that the horizontal load displacement will not exceed 21/2 inches throughout the critical elevations of lift. At the high point of the lift, with the cask above the operating floor, the static displacement of the load is approximately

/2 inch with a total static plus dynamic displacement of approximately 1 inch. The total horizontal displacement of the load when the cask is submerged in the spent fuel pool is approximately 21/2 inches. A larger total horizontal displacement, approximately 9 inches, can occur with the load at its lowest elevation, that is with the load at the grade elevations. However, it should be noted that the NL 10/24 100-ton cask and the HI-TRAC 100 cask, which are the heaviest loads to be lifted through the equipment hatchway, are 7.33 feet in diameter and 7.83 feet across the cask yoke and approximately 8.25 feet in diameter and 8.5 feet across the cask yoke respectively. The equipment hatchway has a minimum 20.08 foot square opening (See Figure 9.1-20). Local protrusions of ductwork along the vertical path of the cask through the hatchway reduce the cross section to approximately 19.5 feet. Since the path of the cask is controlled by limit switches which restrict the position of the cask during lifting to 46 inches from the center line of the hatchway, lateral clearances in excess of 4 feet are available.

9.1-24

Insert A A load drop analysis has been performed for handling the Units 2 and 3 reactor cavity shield blocks weighing greater than 110 tons for the designated safe load path to show that a postulated load drop will not affect any safety-related equipment, as there will be no scabbing or perforation of the concrete under the refueling floor, and the overall response of the floor system is acceptable. This load drop analysis was performed in accordance with the guidelines of NUREG-0612, Appendix A. The load drop analysis methodology was reviewed and approved by the NRC. The designated safe load path, hoisting height restrictions, and the weight of the load on which the analysis was based are described in station procedures. When handling shield plugs weighing greater than 110 tons, crane controls incorporate travel limits and hoisting height restrictions.

Attachment 3 Request for License Amendment Related to Heavy Loads Handling Calculation DRE02-0064, Rev. 0 and Rev. OA, "D2/3 Load Drop Evaluation of the Reactor Shield Plugs"

CC-AA-309 Revision 1 ATTACHMENT 1 Design Analysis Approval Page 1 of 2 DESIGN ANALYSIS NO.: DRE02-0064 PAGE NO. I Major REV Number: 0 Minor Rev Number:

[ f]BYRON BRAIDWOOD STATION STATION DESCRIPTION CODE:(co18) S03

[ J CLINTON STATION X] DRESDEN STATION DISCIPLINE CODE: (Coil)

[ ] LASALLE CO. STATION S QUAD CITIES STATION SYSTEM CODE: (Coil) 00 Unit:[XJO [ [1]2 [ 133 TITLE: "D2/3 Load Drop Evaluation of the Reactor Shield Plugs X ] Safety Related [ 3Augmented Quality [ 3Non-Safety Related ATTRIBUTES (CO16)

TYPE VALUE TYPE VALUE PROJ 11331-015 COMPONENT EPN: (C014 Panel) DOCUMENT NUMBERS: (C012 Panel) (Design Analyses References)

EPN TYPE Type/Sub Document Number Input (YIN)

CALC / ENG l DRE98-0020 Y REMARKS:

C&ComEd\d3\cookies\dreO20064 doc

CC-AA-309 Revision 1 ATTACHMENT 1 Design Analysis Approval Paaep 9 f DESIGN ANALYSIS NO. DRE02-0064 REV: 0 PAGE 2 Revision Summary: Initial Issue Added Pages: 1 - 99, Al - A9, B --B4, C1 - C3 Electronic Calculation Data Files: (Program Name, Version, File Name extension/sizeldate/hour/min) slabCap.xis, 9/27102, 24 kB, 5:56PM; dreO20064.mcd, 9/30/02, 466 kB,12:58PM; dreO20064.doc, 9/30/02, 166 kB,1:32PM Design impact review completed? [ ]Yes [' ] NIA,PerEC#:_

(If yes, attach impact review sheet)

Prepared by: Kurt Koesser __ _5

/ I h/3/oz .

Print I Dat Adam Al-Dabbagh Reviewed by: Mohammad Amin '/3b/0 2 Print I si Date Approved by: C. N. Petropoulos /1*! -

Print /in TDd~

External Design Analysis Review (Attachment 3 Atiached)

Reviewed by: LV's-t C.taj /4-L As-- g °-

Print Date Approved by: j Lyti1 - _____Z_-,_

Print Sign Date Do anyASSUMPTIONS/ENGINEERING JUDGEMENTS require later verification? [ ] Yes [X] No Tracked By: AT#, EC# etc.)

C.\ComEd~d3\cookies\dreO20064 doc

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REV. NO. 0 PAGE NO. 3l TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION: PAGE NO. SUB-PAGE

_____________________________________ ________________NO.__

Title Page 1 Revision Summary 2 Table of Contents 3 Purpose / Objective 4 Methodology and Acceptance Criteria 5-7 Assumptions / Engineering Judgements 8 Design Inputs 9 References 10 -11 Calculations 12 - 95 Summary and Conclusions 96 - 99 Attachment A S&L Evaluation No. SL-007347 Al -A9 Attachment B Figures 1, 2, and 3 B1 - B4 Attachment C Design Input for Administrative Cl - C3 Control of Load Movements I L C \ComEd\d3\cookies\dreO2OO64 doc

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REV. NO. 0 PAGE NO. 4 PURPOSE / OBJECTIVE Purpose / Obiective The purpose of this calculation is to determine the maximum lifting height for the heavy load movement of each of the three layers of the Unit 3 Reactor Shield Plugs. The maximum lifting height will be evaluated for the entire travel path, from the initial location over the Unit 3 Reactor Cavity to the specified Laydown Area for each layer of shield plugs. The lifting height is controlled by the ability of the concrete structure below to survive a postulated shield plug drop from the maximum lifting height.

The objective of the calculation is to determine a safe load path for the removal of the Reactor Shield Plugs. The removal of the shield plugs is one of the first steps in the refueling process.

Background

The Reactor Building crane is rated at 125 tons. However, based on certain documentation, the NRC has indicated to the Station that the crane is presently rated as Single Failure Proof (SFP) for up to 110 tons.

There are three (3) layers of Reactor shield plugs. There are two (2) shield plugs in each layer and each layer is 2 feet thick. Each shield plug has the shape of a semi-circular disc. The diameter of the top layer shield plugs is approximately 43 feet, with the successive layers of plugs having smaller diameters. The shield plugs that form the top layer are the heaviest shield plugs. Exelon has determined (via an actual weighing process) that the top shield plugs and their lifting apparatus weigh slightly less than 116 Tons (232 kips).

This calculation is performed to assess the existing concrete structure for postulated load drops resulting from the movement of the shield plugs.

C.\ComEd\d3\cookies\dre020064 doc

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REV. NO. 0 PAGE NO. 5 METHODOLOGY AND ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA Methodology NUREG-0612, Sections 5.1.4 (2) and 5.1.5 (1) (c) (Reference 2), requires that a load drop analysis should conform to the guidelines of Appendix A of the NUREG, as applicable, if the crane is not Single Failure Proof (for the specific load movement).

NUREG-0612 Appendix A guidelines will be followed as applicable to the present load drop analysis.

Reference 1 provides general guidelines and formulations for the evaluation of impactive and impulsive loads. Reference 4 provides ductility requirements for reinforced concrete structures. Reference 6 provides structural design criteria for Dresden Station.

The methodology used in this calculation to evaluate the postulated load drops is described below.

1. Due to the anticipated small lifting height and large contact surface of impact (the plug is a half circle disc with a diameter close to 43 feet), and the corresponding low impact velocity, perforation of the floor will not occur. For an asymmetrical load drop (side drop of plug when only one or two of the three lift points of each plug fail), the potential for scabbing is possible. Therefore, scabbing will be investigated. This calculation will be based on the local damage equations given in Reference 1.

2. The overall adequacy of the impacted structural elements (beams, slabs, columns, and walls) will be determined by calculating the total strain energy in the impacted elements corresponding to an allowable ductility limit, and comparing this energy to the impact energy imparted to the impacted elements.

3. The yield resistance of the elements resisting the impact in flexure will be determined using an acceptable approach. The approach described in Reference 1, modified as described in this section of the calculation, will be used in this calculation.

4. The moment of inertia of the section will be determined using Reference 1, Section 3.1.8 and Figure 3.1.10. The energy absorption of the impacted elements will be calculated using constructed elasto-plastic load-deflection diagrams for elements. The ductility limit will be determined using Reference 4, Appendix C, Section C.3, and the area under the load-deflection diagram up to the applicable ductility limit will be used as the measure of energy absorption capacity of elements.

C:AComEd\d3\cookies\dreO20064 doc II I

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REV. NO. 0 PAGE NO. 6

5. The shear failure load is estimated using ACI 318-99 (Reference 5). The shear failure load shall be at least 1.20 times the flexural resistance load in order to use the flexural mode of failure to calculate the strain energy. Otherwise, the ductility ratios given in Reference 4, Sections C.3.7 or C.3.9 shall be used. This requirement is stated in Reference 4, Appendix C, Section C.3.6.

6. Failure at the sling attachment or lug failure will result in a tilted drop of the shield plug. This drop usually results in half the impact energy of the full drop (when a failure at the crane hook occurs) due to the smaller travel distance of the shield plug center-of-gravity. In this calculation, most load drop scenarios are evaluated for full drop, unless noted.

7. The impact energy to be absorbed by the overall deflection of the impacted structural elements is less than the total kinetic energy of load drop. Some kinetic energy is dissipated during impact. This loss, which can be computed by equating the momentum of the entire system before and after impact, is most conveniently taken into account by multiplying the available kinetic energy by a factor. The value of this factor is dependent on the mass of the falling object and the effective mass of the impacted structural elements. The value of this factor is calculated by using equations from Section 15-4 of Reference 3.

8. This calculation will use the actual in-place concrete compressive strength, as specified in Reference 6.

C \ComEd\d3\cookies\dre020064.doc

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REV. NO. 0 PAGE NO. 7 Acceptance Criteria After local damage effects are ruled out, the acceptable drop height is based on the ability of the impacted structural elements to absorb the remaining kinetic energy after loss due to impact is taken into account. This energy absorption limit is determined using elastic - perfectly plastic load-deflection diagram for the affected elements up to the allowable ductility limit applicable to these elements.

The ductility limits are determined from Table 5.1 of Reference 1 and Appendix C of Reference 4.

Computer Software Used in the Calculation

1. Microsoft Word Microsoft Word 97 SR-1 Product ID: 53491-419-5449024-21064

2. Microsoft Excel Microsoft Excel 97 SR-1 Product ID: 53491-419-5449024-21064

3. MathCad MathSoft Mathcad 2001 Professional S&L Program No. 03.7.548.10.2/0 The computer software listed above was used to prepare these calculations. These programs, accessed on the S&L LAN, have been validated per S&L Software Verification and Validation procedures for the program functions used in the calculation.

This calculation was prepared using the following S&L PCs:

PC No. 8334 C:\ComEd\d3\cookies\dreO20064 doc

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REV. NO. 0 PAGE NO. 8 ASSUMPTIONS / ENGINEERING JUDGMENTS Assumptions

1. Hard missile impact is assumed. Energy lost in the deformation of the dropped plug itself is ignored, which is conservative.

2. For yield deflection calculation, the moment of inertia of the reinforced concrete structural elements is the average of the cracked and uncracked moments of inertia, in accordance with Reference 1.

3. The dead load of the impacted structural element is considered in determining the strain energy of the element.

4. The shield plug weight, including the lifting apparatus, is considered to be 116 Tons (232 kips). This is conservative.

No unverified assumptions are used.

Additional minor assumptions are made and justified in the body of this calculation.

Engineering Judgments Minor engineering judgments are made and justified in the body of this calculation.

C \ComEd\d3\cookies\dre020064.doc

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REV. NO. 0 PAGE NO. 9 DESIGN INPUTS

1. The in-place concrete compressive strength is taken from Reference 6.

2. Beam, slab, and column sizes and reinforcement are obtained from References 11, 12, 13,18, 19 and 20.

3. The shield plug size and reinforcement are obtained from References 14 and 21.

4. The shield plug weight of 116 Tons (232 kips) is based on actual weighing of the top layer of shield plugs by Dresden Station on September 20, 2002.

5. The rebar strength is obtained from Reference 6.

6. The movement and laydown areas of the six (6) shield plugs are specified by Dresden Station. Figures 1 through 3 in Attachment B are constructed based on this information. The lifting heights specified in the figures are the result of this calculation.

7. Per Attachment C of this calculation, the requirements described in Item 3 of Section 1 of Appendix A of NUREG-0612 will be satisfied by Dresden Station through administrative control of the plug movements in the evaluated areas shown in Attachment B, Figures 1 through 3.

C.\ComEd\d3\cookies\dreO20064.doc

REV. NO. 0 PAGE NO. 10 CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REFERENCES Ref. Document No. / Title Rev. No. Remarks No. or Date 1 Second ASCE Conference on "Civil September Engineering and Nuclear Power, Volume V: 1980 Report of the ASCE Committee on Impactive and Impulsive Loads", September 1980, Knoxville, Tennessee 2 NUREG-0612 July 1980 "Control of Heavy Loads at Power Plants" 3 "Roark's Formulas for Stress and Strain", 6th 6th Edition Edition, by W. C. Young 4 ACI 349-97 1997 "Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety Related Concrete Structures" 5 ACI 318-99 1999 "Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete" 6 TDBD-DQ-01 1 "Topical Design Basis Document - Quad Cities Units 1 & 2 and Dresden Units 2 & 3 -

Structural Design Criteria" 7 S&L Evaluation No. SL-007347 0 Attachment A "Evaluation of a Postulated Drop of the Top Two Reactor Shield Plugs (Cookies) During the Weighing Operation" 8 Drawing B-200 AF 9 Drawing B-208 S 10 Drawing B-209 N 11 Drawing B-235 E 12 Drawing B-236 H 13 Drawing B-237 H 14 Drawing B-242 C 15 Drawing B-630 AA 16 Drawing B-638 H C:AComEd\d3\cookies\dre020064 doc

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REV. NO. 0 PAGE NO. 11 Ref. Document No. / Title Rev. No. Remarks No. or Date 17 Drawing B-639 D 18 Drawing B-665 C 19 Drawing B-666 D 20 Drawing B-667 B 21 Drawing B-672 000 4/1/1968 22 S&L Form 1715 Q "Standard Specification for Concrete Work" 8/2/1965 .-

23 Calculation DRE98-0020 2 "Evaluation of Reactor Building Superstructure" 24 Drawing B-206 Q 25 "Yield Line Formulae for Slabs" 1972 by K. W. Johansen 26 Sargent & Lundy Engineering Evaluation, 10/26/98 Control No. D-1298M, "Evaluation of Drywell Shield Plug Drop While the Units Are Operating" 27 Drawing B-257 F 28 Drawing B-687 A I i i

_ _ I i.

I1 I. i I_ i ti I- I i I I C:\ComEd\d3\cookies\drr020064.doc

1CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 12 CALCULATIONS Introduction This calculation will determine the maximum lifting height for the heavy load movement of each of the three layers of the Unit 3 Reactor Shield Plugs. The maximum lifting height will be evaluated for the entire travel path, from the initial location over the Unit 3 Reactor Cavity to the specified Laydown Area for each layer of shield plugs. The lifting height is controlled by the ability of the concrete structure below to survive a postulated shield plug drop from the maximum lifting height.

The objective of the calculation is to determine a safe load path for the removal of the Reactor Shield Plugs. The removal of the shield plugs is one of the first steps in the refueling process.

IfI CM

\fXnmm;ed~rd'Ak nmFe nkiesQlrrcongnn4 mrrd

\pnnk!rrcdVflflA mril Page 12 OF 95 Paae 12 OF 951

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 13 Travel Path of Reactor Shield Plugs The travel path of the three layers of shield plugs must be evaluated because the weight of the top and middle layers exceeds the 110 Ton SFP rating for the Reactor Building Crane.

The travel path of the shield plugs is limited by the allowable reach of the Reactor Building Crane hook The allowable reach of the crane hook for the top, middle, and bottom layers of shield plugs was determined in Calculation DRE98-0020 (Reference 23).

For the top and middle layer shield plugs, the maximum lifted load is 116 Tons (232 kips), and the maximum crane hook reach is 27'-3" north of Column Row N (equivalent to 1'-6" north of Column Row M).

For the bottom layer shield plugs, the maximum lifted load is 108 Tons (216 kips),

and the maximum crane hook reach is 15'-9" north of Column Row N.

The travel path of the Unit 3 shield plugs are briefly described below.

Unit 3 Reactor Shield Pluas The six Unit 3 concrete Reactor Shield plugs are situated at the intersection of Column Lines K and 47, over the Reactor cavity.

The four shield plugs from the top two layers (top layer and middle layer) will be moved south along Column Line 47. The shield plugs are then moved east between Column Lines L and Mto Column Line 41. The shield plugs will then be moved north along Column Line 41 to the intersection of Column Lines K and 41, over the Unit 2 shield plugs. The two Unit 3 top layer shield plugs will be placed on top of the Unit 2 top layer shield plugs. The two Unit 3 middle layer shield plugs will then be placed on top of the Unit 3 top layer shield plugs.

The two bottom layer Unit 3 shield plugs will be moved south along Column Line

47. The shield plugs are then moved east between Column Lines L and M to Column Line 41. The shield plugs will then be moved south and east to the area between Column Lines 39 and 40. At this time, the shield plug is orientated in the north-south direction. The shield plug will be laid down between the two column lines within the specified area of Figure 3 of Attachment B. The Unit 3 shield plugs will be stacked on top of each other.

Refer to figures in Attachment B for plan of load paths for these shield plugs.

A detailed step-by-step description of the travel path is provided on the following pages. The purpose of this description is not to delineate exact movements to be followed. The description is provided as a guide to area descriptions in the figures of Attachment B that form the basis for evaluation of elements to define the height limits that are provided in Attachment B.

~~.

I rnr~rl ~ i-'ae1 1 Ir.ZmFr\Arokn:Hn~i)4mfld Pase ig OF 9.5I

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 14 Detailed Movement Sequence on the Travel Path The orientation of the in-place Reactor Shield Plugs are shown on Drawing B-242 (Ref. 14) and Drawing B-672 (Ref. 21). The diameter ("chord") of the in-place shield plugs are positioned as follows:

Top Layer Shield Plugs: Chord along the north-south axis.

Middle Layer Shield Plugs: Chord along the east-west axis.

Bottom Layer Shield Plugs: Chord along the north-south axis.

The detailed movement sequence of the Unit 3 shield plugs from the in-place position to the Laydown area is described below. Each of the two semi-circular shield plugs in each layer is moved separately.

Later in this calculation, the underlying concrete structures at each point along the load path will be evaluated.

Unit 3 Top Layer Shield Pluas

1. Lift the shield plug to a maximum height of 1'-0" above the top of the floor at Elevation 613'-O" (shield plug chord orientated in north-south direction) from the in-place location (with center-of-gravity along Column Row K) and move the center-of-gravity of the shield plug east or west to Column Row 47.

2. Move the shield plug south (shield plug chord orientated in north-south direction) along Column Row 47 up to the limit of the crane hook (about 1'-6" north of Column Row M).

3. With center-of-gravity of shield plug along Column Row 47, rotate the shield plug 45 degrees (until chord is orientated in northwest-southeast or northeast-southwest direction).

4. With center-of-gravity of shield plug along Column Row 47, continue to rotate the shield plug another 45 degrees until chord is orientated in east-west direction. Position the shield plug between Column Lines L and M as practically possible.

5. Move the shield plug east (shield plug chord orientated in east-west direction), north of and parallel to Column Row M, to the midway point between Column Rows 47 and 46.

6. Continue to move the shield plug east to Column Row 44.

7. Continue to move the shield plug east to Column Row 43.

Pa14

. 1)1 !3 I I=^,ffi onn -^A Page 14 OF-95 I Ll:tlom-u~u\(;Umluzuirucut 41

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 15

8. Continue to move the shield plug east to Column Row 42.

9. Continue to move the shield plug east to Column Row 41.

10. With center-of-gravity of shield plug along Column Row 41, rotate the shield plug until chord is orientated in north-south direction (if required).

11. Move the shield plug north (shield plug chord orientated in north-south direction) along Column Row 41 until the center-of-gravity of the shield plug is over Column Row K.

12. Move the center-of-gravity of the shield plug in the desired direction and lower the shield plug on top of the Unit 2 top layer shield plugs.

Unit 3 Middle Layer Shield Plugs

13. Lift the shield plug to a maximum height of 1'-0" above the top of the floor at Elevation 613'-0" (shield plug chord orientated in east-west direction) from the in-place location (with center-of-gravity along Column Row 47) (apex of shield plug faces either north or south).

14. Move the shield plug south (shield plug chord orientated in east-west direction) along Column Row 47 up to the limit of the crane hook (about 1'-6" north of Column Row M). Position the shield plug between Column Lines L and M as practically possible.

15. Move the shield plug east (shield plug chord orientated in east-west direction), north of and parallel to Column Row M, to the midway point between Column Rows 47 and 46.

16. Continue to move the shield plug east, north of and parallel to Column Row M, to Column Row 44.

17. Continue to move the shield plug east, north of and parallel to Column Row M, to Column Row 43.

18. Continue to move the shield plug east, north of and parallel to Column Row M, to Column Row 42.

19. Continue to move the shield plug east, north of and parallel to Column Row M, to Column Row 41.

20. Lift the shield plug from current height of 1'-0" above the floor to a height of 2'-6" above the floor.

- -- I a . 5 - -5I Itom~HSrkn~rnnG I .DU I C U U Il UV V

-~i mtod W

Page 15 OF 95

l CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 16

21. With center-of-gravity of shield plug along Column Row 41, move the shield plug north (shield plug chord orientated in east-west direction) along Column Row 41 until the center-of-gravity of the shield plug is over Column Row K.

22. Move the shield plug in the desired direction and lower the shield plug on top of the previously placed Unit 3 top layer shield plug.

Unit 3 Bottom Layer Shield Pluas

23. Lift the shield plug to a maximum height of 1'-0" above the top of the floor at Elevation 613'-O" (shield plug chord orientated in north-south direction) from the in-place location (with center-of-gravity along Column Row K) and move the center-of-gravity of the shield plug east or west to Column Row 47.

24. Move the shield plug south (shield plug chord orientated in north-south direction) along Column Row 47 up to the limit of the crane hook (about 1'-6" north of Column Row M).

25. With center-of-gravity of shield plug along Column Row 47, rotate the shield plug until chord is orientated in east-west direction. Position the shield plug between Column Lines L and M as practically possible.

26. Move the shield plug east (shield plug chord orientated in east-west direction), north of and parallel to Column Row M, to the midway point between Column Rows 47 and 46.

27. Continue to move the shield plug east, north of and parallel to Column Row M, to Column Row 44.

28. Continue to move the shield plug east, north of and parallel to Column Row M, to Column Row 43.

29. Continue to move the shield plug east, north of and parallel to Column Row M, to Column Row 42.

30. Continue to move the shield plug east, north of and parallel to Column Row M, to Column Row 41.

31. For the second Unit 3 bottom layer shield plug at this location, lift the shield plug from current height of 1'-0" above the floor to a height of 2'-6" above the floor.

0FI

-Pa Is= A n e .^ Page 16 OF 95 1 I  : o u'u-t.' ,

REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 17 .l lCALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064

32. Move the shield plug southeast (shield plug chord orientated in east-west direction) to the area between Column Lines 39 and 40. At this time, the shield plugs will be rotated to be orientated in the north-south direction.

The shield plug will be laid down between the two column lines within the specified area of Figure 3 of Attachment B.

33. For the first Unit 3 bottom layer shield plug that is moved, set the shield plug on the floor at Elevation 613'-O". For the second Unit 3 bottom layer shield plug that is moved, lower the shield plug on top of the previously placed Unit 3 bottom layer shield plug.

a7, t or IIC:\ComEd\da\oCokies\oreUrU0t4.mc.

I _ %J _ In - - - - -IX Pagre I7. F no

lCALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 18 Structural Elements Affected by Travel Path The structural elements affected by the travel path are discussed below.

Columns The concrete columns affected by the travel path are listed below (see B-208

[Ref. 9] and B-638 [Ref. 16]), along with the column sizes (see B-235 [Ref. 11]

and B-665 [Ref. 18]).

M-49 (33" x 33")

M-48 (36" x 36")

M-47 (33" x 33")

M-46 (36" x 36")

M-45 (36" x 36")

M-43 (36" x 36")

M-42 (36" x 36")

M-41 (33" x 33")

M-40 (36" x 36")

M-39 (33" x 33")

Columns M-49, M-47, M-41, and M-39 are smaller than the other columns and therefore will control. Column M-47 will be evaluated in this calculation as representative of the critical case.

Beams The concrete beams affected by the travel path are listed below (see B-208 [Ref.

9] and B-638 [Ref. 16] ), along with the beam sizes (see B-236 [Ref. 12] and B-666 [Ref. 19] ).

North-South Beams:

5B8 (33" x 54") (Column Rows 39 & 49/ L-M) 5B7 (27" x 54") (Column Rows 39 & 49/ M-N) 5B23 (36" x 54") (Column Rows 40 & 48/ L-M) 5B22 (36" x 54") (Column Rows 40 & 48/ M-N) 5B6 (27" x 54") (Column Rows 41 & 47/ L-M) 5B5 (27" x 54") (Column Rows 41 & 47/ M-N) 5B4 (36" x 69") (Column Rows 42 & 46/ L-M) 5B3 (36" x 69") (Column Rows 42 & 46/ M-N) 5B2 (33" x 66") (Column Rows 43 & 45/ L-M)

East-West Beams:

5B21 (30" x 54") (Column Row M / 49-48) 5B1 0 (24" x 48") (Column Row M / 39-48)

Paae 180F95 I II r-r \nmdd~okaSdp2O4mer ir4rcflflAP4 mrd Page 18 OF 951

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 19 .I Beams 5B7, 5B6, and 5B5 control for north-south beams and Beam 5B10 controls for east-west beams. Beams 5B6 and 5B10 will be evaluated in this calculation. The reason for this selection is detailed in the section of this calculation dealing with "Selection of Critical Structural Elements".

Slabs The concrete slabs affected by the travel path are listed below (see B-208 [Ref. 9]

and B-638 [Ref. 16] ), along with the slab thickness and designations (see B-237

[Ref. 13] and B-667 [Ref. 20] ).

Slab "R" (18") (Column Rows 39 - 41 / L-N)

Slab "T" (18") (Column Rows 41 - 42/ L-M)

Slab "R" (18") (Column Rows 41 - 42/ M-N)

Slab "S" (18") (Column Rows 42 - 43/ L-M)

Slab "V" (24") (Column Rows 43 - 44/ L-M)

Slab "R" (18") (Column Rows 44 - 45/ L-M)

Slab "R" (18") (Column Rows 45 - 46/ L-M)

Slab "R" (18") (Column Rows 46 - 48/ L-N)

Slab "B1" (24") (Column Rows 48 - 49 / L-M) -

Slab "R" (18") (Column Rows 48 - 49 / L-M)

Removable slab panels between Column Rows 42 - 43 & 45 - 46/ M-N) are not in place and will not be evaluated.

Slab "R" controls. Slab "R" will be evaruated in this calculation. For additional discussion, see the section of this calculation titled "Selection of Critical Structural Elements".

Walls The concrete walls affected by the travel path are listed below (see B-208 [Ref. 9]

and B-638 [Ref. 16] ).

Column Row L Wall (Reactor Wall) (60" thick)

Column Row 44 Wall (24" thick)

The Column Row 44 Wall controls. The Column Row 44 Wall will be evaluated in this calculation.

l- ---- I I r-zmr^Rrnkn~r~~n4mnr Page 1 9 OF 95I I- 1- I- u - - - _urusIuvus

. --wu.

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 20 Material Properties and Constants The actual and in-place concrete compressive strength for the Unit 2 and Unit 3 Reactor Building are listed below.

This calculation will utilize the in-place concrete compressive strength. The minimum in-place concrete strength for Units 2 and 3 will be used in the calculation.

fcnominal:= 4000-psi (Ref. 6, 8, 15) (Nominal strength) fcactual_u2 4700- psi (Ref. 6) (In-Place Strength - Unit 2) fcactual_u3 := 5000-psi (Ref. 6) (In-Place Strength - Unit 3) fc := miri(fc_actualu2,fc_actuaLu3) fc = 4700 psi (Controlling strength)

The reinforcing bar yield strength for the Unit 2 and Unit 3 Reactor Building is listed below.

fy:= 60000-psi (Ref. 6, 8, 15)

This calculation will determine the effect of a postulated load drop using the methodology given in Reference 1. Reference 1 provides Dynamic Increase Factors (DIF) for concrete and steel structures under various loadings. The DIFs for concrete and steel are tabulated below. The DIF's tabulated below are from Reference 1, Table 5.4.

DIFc := 1.25 (DIF for concrete compression)

DIFS:= 1.10 (DIF for tension and compression in concrete reinforcing steel with fy = 60 ksi) .t, This calculation will (conservatively) not include DIFs, unless the use of DIFs is absolutely necessary to determine if a successful load path and lifting height are achievable.

DIFc := 1.00 DIFs := 1.00 I

- - -Paae 202 OF I

I WjUM-I-o.-s mA-.H

. ___ OF 95

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 21 Selection of Critical Structural Elements Introduction The description of the travel path of the Reactor Shield Plugs and a list of the structural elements affected by the travel path were given in previous sections of this calculation.

This section of the calculation will determine the critical structural elements that must be evaluated for the potential load drops. The selection of the critical structural elements is based on the size of the structural elements and the required orientation of the shield plugs at points along the load path.

The critical cases that must to be evaluated will be enveloped into several potential load drop scenarios. These scenarios will be evaluated in detail in this calculation.

_ 2 O ,I Ii-I z ilU

- - - L,.A ,, nnr "n u.);UUui\acooIsuluxareu I m- -AaA I

o u

Pame 21 OF 95 1

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 22 Selection of Critical Structural Elements for Detailed Analysis

1. Beams within the Load Path Unit 2 beams are Marks 5B2, 5B4, 5B6, 5B5, 5B22, 5B23 & 5B10 - Drawings B-208 (Ref. 9), B-209 (Ref. 10) & B-236 (Ref. 12).

Unit 3 beams are Marks 5B6, 5B4, 5B5 & 5B10 - Drawing B-638 (Ref. 16),

B-639 (Ref. 17) & B-666 (Ref. 19).

Review of above drawings shows that the size and reinforcement of beams with similar mark number are identical for the two units. The review also indicates that Beam 5B6 is the weakest of the north/south beams within the travel path (smallest size of beam, smallest size of stirrup with larger spacing while the rebars are comparable). Therefore, Beam 5B6 is selected as a typical north/south beam.

In the east/west direction, all the beams within the travel path are 5B10, therefore, Beam 5B10 is selected as the typical east/west beam.

2. Slabs within the Load Path Unit 2 slabs are Marks R, S, T & V - Drawings B-208 (Ref. 9), B-209 (Ref. 10) &

B-237 (Ref. 13).

Unit 3 slab is Mark R - Drawing B-638 (Ref. 16), B-639 (Ref. 17) & B-667 (Ref. 20).

Review of above drawings shows that the reinforcement of slabs with similar mark number are identical for the two units. The flexural capacities of these slabs are calculated on the Excel spreadsheet shown on the next page.

Per Ref. 1, the flexural resistance of a slab for a concentrated force (R) is expressed as:

R = (2)(2t)( Mupos + Muneg) where Mupos is the average of positive moment capacities at midspan in both directions.

Muneg is the average of negative moment capacities at all supports in both directions.

IJI.- l I t___ o \ _ _ .:_- ,_n.-- . . - - ut Nn1 VAOR~?

I C \Com~t~OXd\dCOOKies~areUzuuo4' mII_ ,

REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 23 I ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064

2. Slabs within the Load Path (continued)

Moment Capacities of Slab at Elev. 613'-O" (Ref Dwgs B-208, B-209, B-237)

Parameters fc 4700 psi fy _60000 psi phi 0.9 b 12 in North / South Direction _

Ne Moment Slab t Ave d Reinforcement Reinf Area (sq intft) Pos Moment No (in) (in) Bottom Top Bottom Top a Cap (k ft) a Cap (k ft)

R 18 16 #8 at 12 #8 at 6 0.79 1.58 0.99 55.12 1.98 106.73 S 18 16 #8 at 18 #8at 15 0.527 0.632 0.66 37.16 0.79 44.38 T 18 16 #B at 12 #8 at 6 0.79 1.58 0.99 55.12 1.98 106.73 V 24 22 #8 at 12 #8 at 12 0.79 0.79 0.99 76.45 0.99 76.45 V 24 22 #8 at 12 #8 at 9 0.79 1.053 0.99 76.45 1.32 101.12 Sla Siab tt Ave -v d - Reinforcement Reinf Area (sqWest Direction East/I Dntt)Pos Moment -

N Moment No (in) (in) Bottom Top Bottom Top a Cap (k ft) a Cap (k ft)

R 18 16 #8at 9 #8at6 1053 1.58 1.3 72.69 1.98 106.73 S 18 16 #8at8 #8at5 1.185 1.896 1.48 81.37 2.37 126.39 T 18 16 #8at9 #8at6 1.053 1.58 1.32 72.69 1.98 106.73 T 18 16 #8 at 9 #8 at 5 1.053 1.896 1.32 72.69 2.37 126.39 V 24 22 #8at6 #8at6 1.58 1.58 1.981 149.39 1.98 149.39 24 22 #8at6 #8at5 1.58 1 1.896 1.981 149.39 2.371 177.58

- - 7 n ,.,,-

I. . . _ __- t -- - - - -I

.n __ _l.__.-.1 rap2e4 Co WI :S: I I G:\UomLadaz\cookies\rnreuH u.4 Flmu

REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 24 CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 See Excel spreadsheet on previous page for the flexural capacities.

Slab R:

RR  := (55 2+72.69)-kip ft]+ (106.73-4)-kip-ft]

RR =1.072x 103ftkip Slab S:

RS 2{[ (37.16 + 81.37). kip ft] + (44.38.2 + 126.39-2)-kip-ft]

RS = 908.863 ft kip Slab T:

RT 2{[(55.12+ 72.69) -kip-ft] + (106.732 +106.73 + 126.39) *kip-ft]

RT =1.103x 10 3ftkip Slab V:

RV := 2.{ (76.45 + 149.39) -kip-ft] + (76.45 + 101.12 + 149.3 + 177.58) *kip-ft I RV = 1.502x 10 3ftkip Along the travel path, the load drop will engage 2 adjacent slabs as shown:

V&S Rv+ RS = 2.411 x 10 3ftkip S &T RS+ RT = 2.012x 103ftkip T&R RT +RR = 2.175x 10 3ftkip R&R RR+ RR = 2.14 4 x 103ftkip Page 24 OF 95 C:\ComEd\d3\coaokes\dre020064 mcd

lCALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 25 The resistance of Slabs S & T is approximately 6.5% less than the resistance of Slabs R & R and T & R. The beam located between Slabs R & R is 5B6 (27" x 54") while the beam located between Slabs S & T is 5B2 (36" x 69"). Beam 5B2 will have larger resistance compared to Beam 5B6 due to the larger beam size and higher beam reinforcement. Therefore, as a result of the review, the total resistance of Slab S & T and Beam 5B2 is larger than the total resistance of Slab R & R and Beam 5B6 by engineering judgment.

On the above basis, the controlling structural elements in the path towards Unit 2 when the plug orientation is in the east-west direction, consist of two adjacent Mark R slabs and the north/south beam 5B6 located between the two slabs.

I

_a_ -- A--b I II u:w a

Irt ---

coJsuu VAq AA n,,-M e

Pawe 25 OF- Ub

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 26 Selection of Critical Scenarios for Detailed Analysis The evaluation of the following load drop scenarios envelopes all potential load drops of the Reactor Shield Plugs on to the Reactor Cavity and on to the floor at Elevation 613'-O". The load movements are limited to the areas shown in Figures 1 through 3 (Attachment B).

The description of structural elements in the load path and the size of the 43' diameter semi-circular discs being moved have guided the selection of Scenarios 2 through 5 below. Scenario 1 is needed to address a potential drop on the Reactor cavities.

The controlling load drop scenarios are described below:

1. All cases of the drop of a shield plug on to the Reactor cavity (Units 2 and 3).

2. Full drop of a shield plug on a single column (Drop Height = 1-0").

3. Full drop of a shield plug on a system of two adjacent slabs with a beam in between the slabs (Drop Height = 2'-6").

4. Full drop of a shield plug on two adjacent columns (Drop Height = 2'-6").

5. Full drop of a shield plug on wall at Column Row 44 (Drop Height = 2'-6").

Notes:

a. Scenario 2 covers the case of a full drop of 1 foot on a wall

b. Scenario 4 covers the case of a full drop of 2'-6" on a wall and a column.

- I Paae 26 OF 95 I

=- -- Aoo Page 26 OF 951 Ir a _ _

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 27 Scenario 1 I -1 - - - 1 I1,

- - - nn~f:

I L,:11,,Uli]rUUOL;UUKif:lbUlt:vruuv.111u -a Paae 27 OF 95 I Page 27 OF 951

[CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 28 Scenario 1 All cases of the drop of a shield plug on to the Reactor cavity (Units 2 and 3).

Shield Plug Drop During Initial Lift from Unit 3 Cavity and During Laydown on Top of Unit 2 Shield Plugs Capacities of Plugs The plug is reinforced per Section 13-13 on Ref. 21:

1. 9 at 12" oc (top and bottom) in the short direction

1. 11 at 4.5" oc to # 11 at 6" oc (bottom) in the long direction

1. 11 at 12" oc to # 9 at 12" oc (top) in the long direction Determine shear capacity of the plugs (See Section 11 on Ref. 5)

Rplug1 := 21.5-ft in - 0.5-in - 0.5(4-in) top layer plugs Rplug2 := Rplug1 in - 0.5-in - 0.5(4-in) middle layer plugs Rp'ug 3 := Rplug2 - 2.in - 0.5-in - 0.5(4.5-in) bottom layer plugs (21 .125 "

Rplug = 20.75 ft tplug := 24-in 20.354) l dve= PI9_ 5in U1 2in+L1 dave :=tplug . 1.5. in4 -1.41

-j2.6

-in 4-i[n2 128. in +1.41 -in)-

(1.56.2in'2) 12 in

))

5.5-in J

] dave =21 .507in Tv:= 0.85 fc := 4700-psi

. ^,Pa.e 28 OF 951 I C.XComEMc\di3\oOKieS\reUZUU0 mou

lCALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 29 I mryi Paqe 29 OF951 lD ----------- mM P

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 30 Determine flexural capacity of plugs c.g.

C A F--

I I

I I

I I

I I

I Support along curve only Actual Configuration Idealized Configuration (8.966'f C 4 Rplug C = 8.807 ft 3-n 8.639 1 (9.862)

A := 1.1-C A= 9.687 ft .... considered

'K9.502)

(18.828 (18.828 '

A +C = 18.494< ft A+ C = 18.494 ft

' 18.141) 'K 18.141 )

(38.256 B :=22\Rplug2 _ C2 B = 37.577 ft

'K36.86 )

I1- .m.

1--. J . .-- -- - . - --

Pane 30 OF 951 I

m

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 31 (0.492 A+C = 0.492 B

0.492)

Calculate cracked moment of inertia using average of #11 at 5.5" oc in the long direction and #9 at 12" oc in the short direction (1.56-in2)* 12*in + 1-in2 5.5-in As = 2.202A.2 in As :=

2 b := 12.in d := dave d = 21.507in P:= b*d As p = 8.531 x 10 3 EC := 57000-/ Ec = 3.908X 103 ksi 29000 -ksi n = 7.421 n :=

p-n = 0.063 Per Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10 F := 0.043 Ict := F.b.d3 lct = 5.133 x 103 in b-tplug 3

[gross - 12 lgross = 1.382 x 104 in4 Ict + 12 Igross ave := 2 1

(12 lave 3 thomo := b thomo = 21.1 6 3 in

- -. -- -- I Pa o3 U-9 I- r I tU.%kom1orUxcoo

.I r lwslurvu--

A -m Page 31 OF 95I

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 32 Per Ref. 3, Table 26, Case 2, for a/b = 0.49 teq := thomo qunit := 1ksf 0.36q-unit- B' 2 r1.176 Ct :=2 - ay = 1.135 ksi teq 1.092 "0666')

-0.08.qu in Ymax := 3 Ymax = -0.62 Ec te( -_0.574)

(87.812 b teq2 Munit:= 6 Munit = 84.722 kip-ft 81.52 )

Based on Ultimate Strength Design Om:= 0-9 fyYrebar:= 60-ksi As -fYrebar a = 0.23ft a 0.85-fc-b pMc := OM.AS4fYrebar d- pMc = 199.441 ft kip Per "Yield-Line Formulae for Slabs" (Ref. 25)

(2.681 6*4Mc qu := qu = 2.779 ksf b (Rplug) 2 2.888) 1.88x 103 ULtotalf := [qu ULtotal f = 1.88x 103 Ikip 1.88x 10 rn~~~~ . .......

-.- -.- -AAA-

~~~pn- OF-i - -

Iaq Q3n v_-

r IC:\ComEd\d3\cookiesXdreO2UU.m._

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 33

[ min(ULtotalv) min(ULtotalbr) =

2.109 x 1i03' 2.861 x 103 kip min ( Ukotal-f) 1.88 x 103 (min(ULtotaLv) Shear ULtotal := min(ULtotal-br) Bearing min ( atotal-) Flexure ULmin := min(ULtotal) ULmin = 1.88x 103 kip (Flexure controls)

R:= ULmin R = 1.88x 10 3kip From above results, the flexural mode of failure will govern. Note that the shear resistance of the plug is considerably higher than the flexural resistance.

Review of Shield Plug Ledge Shear Resistance Reference Drawings:

B-242 (Ref. 14), B-257 (Ref. 27), B-672 (Ref. 21), B-687 (Ref. 28).

The ledges where the shield plugs are being seated are part of the 5'-0" thick circular wall that forms the top part of the shield structure. Each ledge is 5" wide and 2'-1" deep. The entire surface covering the three ledges is reinforced by a 1/2" thick stainless steel plate that is anchored to the concrete wall by steel straps.

For each ledge there are two sets of straps. One set is horizontal and the second set is diagonal and both sets are spaced at 12" on center.

By comparison to the shear resistance of the shield plug seated on the ledge, the ledge shear resistance is substantially larger. In addition, all the ledges are continuous and all are part of the top of the shield wall.

Based on the above facts, by engineering judgment, the shear resistance of each ledge is higher than the shear resistance of the shield plug. Therefore, the shear check of the shield plug governs.

-- - -- -- I II n

\Imm~rlH.R~r

- w, cwo6rl

-vu~ -

incr

>\u

)fl mrd

,4 Pawe 33 OF 95

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 34 .I The following conditions will be addressed in the calculation below:

1. The drop of a lower layer plug onto the cavity and dry well head

2. The drop of a middle layer plug on the top of the 2 bottom layer plugs (all plugs from Unit 3).

3. The drop of a top layer plug on the top of the 2 middle layer plugs (all plugs from Unit 3).

4. The drop of a Unit 3 top layer plug on the top of the 2 Unit 2 top layer plugs.

5. The drop of a Unit 3 middle layer plug on a Unit 3 top layer plug, which is sitting on a Unit 2 top layer plug.

I II C, mrd Page 34 OF 951 r \Com;:rdt'd3\nciooktiedreOn0n6 CmFd\,1\rnnkl\r1mfl9flOR4 rni PaaeS4OF95I

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 35

1. The Drop of a Bottom Layer Plug onto the Cavity and Dry Well Head Per Ref. 26, the energy demand was calculated to be 636 kip-in for a plug weight of 184.5 kips and a lifting height of 6" above the floor. Readjust the energy demand for the higher plug weight and an additional 6" lifting height.

Wbottom := 216-kip ....weight of the bottom layer plug per Ref. 23 Wboftorn a2_new= 1.171 CC2-nw: 184.5. kip To account for the higher lift height of 12" (instead of 6") above the floor, the parameter al as calculated in Ref. 23 must be adjusted as follows:

Ahdrop: 6-in alnw:=(6.67-ft + Ahdrop) + 2.73-ft

_new := 6.67-ft + 1.88-ft a1 _new= 1-15 8 Enew := 1new a2_new.( 5 4 0°in kiP) Enew = 732.015 kip-in Based on Ref. 23, the drywell head is capable of absorbing 1800 kip-in of energy within the allowable strains. Therefore, the drop of 1'-0" above the floor is acceptable.

-- _e

- Ia I I LXLOtUU\GUK~tbl~l!U4VU"I lR.u a-b:S.-44.nnlfA

-- my P~age on the9 I5

lCALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 36

2. The Drop of a Middle Laver Plug on the Top of the 2 Bottom Laver Plugs (All plugs from Unit 3).

Ae = 0.138ft Ae = 1.658 in Per Ref. 4, a ductility of 10 may be used. Conservatively, ductility of 5.0 is used.

g :=5.0 II Es:= R-(g -0.5)-A Es = 584.47ftkip 2

M := 224-kip ....weight of the middle layer plug M1 := 2.(216-kip) ....weight of the 2 plugs resisting the drop (bottom layer plug)

Per Ref. 3, page 718, Case 2 1+17 Ml k := 35 M k = 0.398 01 + -. 1) 8 M Impact energy to be absorbed by the impacted plugs = M

• h

• k. The drop will engage two lower plugs.

2Es h = 13.105ft Maximum height of drop of the shield plug on the M-k middle layer plugs I^ _ _lAnA

-COMA-- *:-\ -

I

.--a ....

r--Ar

-- ~ ~J~nnn -raae .j Plage u-a6 OF 95I I ,

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 37

3. The Drop of a Top Laver Plug on the Top of the 2 Middle Laver Plugs (All plugs from Unit 3).

The drop of a top layer plug on the middle layer plugs will have less drop height and more in-place plugs to resist the drop. Therefore, the lifting height of 1'-0" is acceptable.

SummarV of Unit 3 Pluqs over Unit 3 Reactor Cavity Based on the determined height of drop above, the Unit 3 shield plugs can be safely lifted up to 1'-0" above the floor at Elev. 613'-O" above the Reactor Cavity.

Paa 7O 5 II L.- I mUUI

- --- ..- tV

'Ju l Page 37 OF 951

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 38

4. The Drop of a Unit 3 Top Laver Plug on the Top of the 2 Unit 2 Top LaVer Plugs The drop of a Unit 3 top layer plug on the Unit 2 top layer plugs will have less drop height and more in-place plugs to resist the drop than Item 2 above. Therefore, it is not critical to determine the safe maximum lifting height.

5. The Drop of a Unit 3 Middle Laver Pluq on a Unit 3 Top Laver Plug, which is sitting on a Unit 2 Top Laver Plug Elev. 613'-O".

Based on the load path and laydown process, the laydown area of the Unit 3 top and middle plugs will be on top of the Unit 2 top plugs. The Unit 3 middle plugs will be 2" above the in-place Unit 3 top plugs during stacking.

Calculate the impacted energy which will be realized by the two plugs being impacted.

M := 232-kip ....weight of a top layer plug Ml := 2.(232.kip) ....weight of the plugs resisting the drop (2 top layer plugs) 1 +17M 17 Mi 35 M k = 0.389 ....Ref. 3, page 718, Case 2 (1 + -)

8 M Paq-38OF 5 hi n \i. _ - Paqe 38 OF 95 I wslu ------

-. 1oua v-----

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 39 Eio := 2-in.(232-kip)-k E1o = 180.69kip-in Calculate the strain energy of the two plugs at flexural yield

( Ymax10 I ki Ae = 0.149ft Ae = 1.786in ULmin = 1.88 x 103 kip 2-ULmin Ae Ese = 1.679 x 10 kip-in > E1o = 180.69kip-in se Therefore, the impact is acceptable and the impacted plugs will remain elastic due to the impact.

Calculation to Assess Potential Perforation This section of the calculation will address the potential of perforation of the floor slab at Elev. 613' due to impact by the dropped shield plug.

Perforation is not possible due to the following reasons:

1. Both plug and slab are made of reinforced concrete and may suffer local crushing at the impacted surfaces during impact

2. The impact area is large which reduces the impact intensity.

3. The impact velocity is very low considering that the maximum drop is 2.5 ft.

Additionally, the calculation on the next page confirms that scabbing is not expected to occur. Non-occurrence of scabbing implies that perforation can be ruled out.

t-'aqe i Ut.- b in.,',4.tV2AAA mPr4 II rtmrSrllcn:Hnnn4mprl r.l Pagen3 OF 95I

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 40 Calculation to Assess Potential for Scabbing This section of the calculation will address the potential of scabbing of the floor slab at Elev. 613' due to impact by the dropped shield plug.

To address the scabbing of the bottom face of the slab, Equations 4.1.1.1.2-la and 4.1.1.1.2-5 of Ref. 1 are used. Note that scabbing will not occur if the failure is above the crane hook. Failure of a lug may cause the impact at the plug corner with a smaller impact area. Consider that an impact area of one square foot as the plug drops and impact the floor surface.

d := -2 d = 13.541 in ....diameter of an equivalent circular missile 7C N :=0.72 ....flat nosed body 180 k = 2.626 psi h := 2.5-ft ....drop height considered V := 2-(32.2- ft h V = 12.689-2 sec seC Conservatively consider that the weight of the plug comer which may break away during impact is 10000 lb.

Wcorner:= 10000*lb

\10.8 (sec ii.

Wcorner d . ft x b4kN n l= - j In lb in 1000.-d in x= 1.904in -= 0.141 < 0.65 d

ts := d

• 7.91 -( - 5.0(d) ts = 13.708 in < 18" (minimum slab thickness)

Scabbing is not likely to occur.

II t..J. I

£LU LJ t/vr,o A

lI fA A -,M Pame 40 OF Paoe 40 OF 951 95 I

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 41 Sr Scenario 2 i-agi - -

I m,'l

-M Page 41 OF-95

. 1 omt cl co --- - .uu Mw-

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 42 Scenario 2 Full drop of a shield plug on a single column (Drop Height = 1-0" COLUMN M-47 (ELEVATION 613'-0")

The column at Column Row M-47 controls. Compute the maximum axial capacity of the concrete column at Column M-47, at refueling floor Elevation 613'-O".

bcol 33-in (Ref. 18) hcol 33-in (Ref. 18)

Ag (bcol) .(hcol)

Ag= 1089in 2 Longitudinal reinforcement consists of 12 #11 bars (Ref. 18).

AS11 := 1.56-in 2 (Ref. 5) dl 1 :=1.41 *-in (Ref. 5)

N11 :=12 (Ref. 18)

Ast (N11)-(Asl1)

Ast = 18.72in2 Stirrups are #4 @ 18" (Type 2) (see B-665 [Ref. 18]):

Ast4 := .20Q in2 (Ref. 5) d4 := 0.5. in (Ref. 5)

Determine the controlling mode of failure for Column M-47. Two modes of failure will be investigated, based on the following parameters:

1. Buckling capacity of column

2. Crushing capacity of column based on modified ACI Code formula Ir*fmrxAanka~rn0G I (*X mMd mrrI Pace 42 OF 951 Paoe 42 OF sI

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 43 Tabulate and compute the material properties of the column:

Esteel := 29000-ksi Econc := (57000). (fC) ( DITc) (psi)

Econc = 3907.7ksi N Esteel Econc N = 7.421 Compute the gross moment of inertia of the column:

19 := ( bcol) -(h co,)3

-1 1g = 98826.8 in4 Compute the cracked moment of inertia of the column using the methodology given in Reference 1, Figure 3.1.10.

covercol := 1.5-in (Ref. 5) dcol := hcol - covercol - d4 - (0.5) .(di1) dcol = 30.295 in AScOI_pOs := (4) (As1)

Ascol pOs= 6.24 in2 PcoI Ascou_pos (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.1 0)

Pcol = 0.006242 pn (pco 1) (N) (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10) pn = 0.04632

-- -- I I r-1%

rI..n rI' fAMA~111-xu~wl~eruuu lu i Pace 43 OF 951

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 44 Ascol-neg (4).(As1i)

AScol neg = 6.24 in2 AScoIneg PcoLneg (bcol) -(dcol) (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10)

Pcolneg = 0.006242 Pnneg := (PcoLneg) (N) (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10) pnneg = 0.04632 Pnneg (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10)

Pratio :=

pn Pratio = 1 Determine the coefficient "F" from Reference 1, Figure 3.1.10 for the following values:

Pratio = 1 pn = 0.04632 F := 0.032 (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10)

Compute the cracked moment of inertia for the column using Reference 1, Figure 3.1.10:

lcr := (F) [1 (bcol) (d col)3 I lcr = 29361.4 in4 Compute the average moment of inertia for the column using Reference 1:

la = 64094.1 in4 l C\ComEd\d3\cookies\dre020064 mcd Page 44 OF 95

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 45 .

Compute the clear length of the column between Elevation 613'-0" and Elevation 589'-0" (reduce gross column length by depth of shallowest beam framing into the column at Elevation 613'-0":

Lcol := (613 - 589) -ft - (4 -ft)

Lcol = 20ft Tabulate the value of "k" for the column (use k = 0.8):

kcol := 0.8 Determine Buckling Capacity of Column:

() 2 (Econc) (la)

Pcit col :=

[(kol) *(Lcol)]2 Pcrit_col = 67056.2 kip Determine Crushing Capacity of Column:

Determine the crushing capacity of the column by modifying the ACI Code (Reference 5) formula for compression (at minimum eccentricity). The ACI formula will be modified by replacing the 0.8 factor in the numerator with 1.0 (The minimum eccentricity requirement that necessitates the 0.80 factor does not apply here).

c := 0.70 (Ref. 5)

Pcrush-col := (1-00) (0c)[ (0.85) (fc DIFc)Y(Ag-Ast) ... (Ref. 5)

L+ (fy DI Fs) (Ast)

Pcrush_col = 3779.3 kip Determine Controlling Column Capacity:

Pcolcontrol := min(PcritcolPcrush-col)

Pcol control = 3779.3 kip Paae 45 0F95 I I fznm r AAl\d-- -ti-%,jrnf lAnfZA -M Page 45 OF 951 I

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 46 Applied Energy of Load Drop and Energv Absorbing Capacity of Structure Compute Area of Concrete Slab Affected by the Shield Plug Drop:

This is the area of the slab to be considered as effective mass sitting on top of the column.

Rplug := (21 -ft + 5-in) Rplug = 21.417ft (Plug Radius)

The slabs around Column Row M-47 are 18" thick. Compute the area of the slab to be considered as effective mass by adding the plug radius and the slab thickness.

tslab:= 18-in RS Rplug + tslab (Effective radius)

RS= 22.917ft Aplug : (2 (Effective area)

Aplug = 824.941 ft2 Tabulate Weight of Upper Concrete Shield Plug:

Pplug := 232*kip Compute Weight of Concrete Structures Near Column M-47 to be Considered Part of Effective Mass Sitting on Top of the Column:

The concrete shield plug will be moved from the area above the Reactor cavity (near Column Rows K-47) south along Column Row 47 to a location possibly above the concrete column at Column Row M-47. During this move, the center of gravity of the shield plug will be aligned with Column Row 47.

An investigation will be made to determine the effect of a load drop near Column Row M-47 of the shield plug. The weight (mass) of the existing concrete structure under the shield plug at Column Row M-47 must be determined. The existing concrete structure includes the concrete column, beams, and slabs. The effective length of the column will be taken down to the top of the next slab (at Elevation 589'-O").

The slabs around Column Row M-47 are 18" thick. The east-west beams (5B110) framing into Column M-47 are 24" wide x 48" deep (the depth includes the slab thickness). The north-south beams (5B5 and 5B6) framing into Column M-47 are 27" wide x 54" deep

- -- -- -- I I n~r1Paq C d\4~nI~c~~r~l~A~A 46 0! - 5 I II ra \DU mr~*~nkndo~O4mnr UUII~MU GCV~ll Page 46 OF 951

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 47 .l Weight of Slab (Under Shield Plug):

Yconc := 150.pcf Mi a (Aplug) (yconc) (tslab)

Mi a 185.61 kip Weight of Beams (Under Shield Plug):

Determine net weight of beams framing into Column M-47.

This computation considers that the long axis of the shield plug (2 x plug radius) is orientated in the north-south direction.

bNSbm:= 27.in hNSbm 54-in bEWbm 24-in hEWbm 48-in LnetNSbm (2) (Rs) -hcol LnetNSbm = 43.083ft LnetEWbm := (Rs) - bcol LnetEWbm 20.167ft Mlb: (bNSbm) (hNSbm - tslab) (Lnet_NSbm) (Yconc)

M1b1 = 43.622kip M1 b2:= (bEWbm) (hEWbm - tslab) (LnetEWbm) +(conc)

Mlb2 = 15.125kip Mlb := Mlbl + Mlb2 M1 b = 58.747 kip Paqe47OF9SI c:\comEd\d3\cook!es\dreO200G4 mcd IICXomEd\d3\cook1es\dre020064 mcd Page 47 OF 951

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 48 Weight of Column (Under Shield Plug):

Determine net weight of Column M-47 between Elevations 589'-0" and 613'-O".

Lnetcol := ( 6 13 - 5 8 9 ) ft-tslab Lnetcol = 22.5ft MI C :=(bcol) (hcol) -(Lnet-col) (icons)

Ml c= 25.52 kip Total Weight of Existing Concrete Structure (Under Shield Plug):

M1 :=Mla+ Mlb+ Mlc Ml = 269.882 kip Determine Energv Losses if Shield Plug is Dropped on Top of Column M-47:

Refer to Roark & Young (6th Edition), Chapter 15, page 718 (Reference 3).

Determine K factor. Use Case 1 (moving body of mass "M" strikes axially one end of a bar of mass Ml, the other end of which is fixed, with additional mass

[slab + beams] at the end of the bar).

1 Mic Mla+Mlb)1 K LPplug Pplug 2

+mc Mla+ M1b j rpplug Pplug K = 0.47 drop := 1.00-ft Efinal := (Pplug)-(drop)-(K)

Efinal = 109.085kip ft (Impact Energy)

I p s.m*.Ji IItj .tJtJnoo mMv Pane 4R PnA OF gAS5I 48 OF Il

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 49 Maximum strain in concrete column:

£ := 0.002 Lnetcol = 22.5ft Compute deflection of column at maximum strain:

Ae := (c) (Lnet col)

Ae = 0.54in Tabulate the allowable ductility ratio of the concrete column for impulse and impact load (Reference 1, Table 5.1, page 2-112):

9duct := 1.3 (Ref. 1, Table 5.1, page 2-112)

(Ref. 4, Appendix C)

Compute the energy absorbing capacity of the concrete column (by computing the area under the load-deflection curve):

Es := (Pcoltcontrol) [ (Ae) (0-5) + [(iduct) '(Ae) - (Ae)))

Es = 136.054kip ft (Strain Energy)

Compare the applied energy with the energy absorbing capacity of the structure.

Efinal = 109.085 kip.ft < Es = 136.054kip-ft OK Modify the energy absorbing capacity of the concrete column (computed above) by including the effect of the dead load carried by the column.

PCoiDL:= Mia+ M1b PcoiDL = 244.359 kip Compute Reduction in Energy Absorbing Capacity of Column from Dead Load:

EcolDL:= (Pcol_DL) (9duct) *(Ae)

ECotDL = 14.295 kip-ft (Dead Load Strain Energy)

IIf'.

( \Omdd-okamdrnO fnm 4Mnnvi1 49 OF q9; II Panre 4g

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 50 Compute Modified Energy Absorbing Capacity of Column from Dead Load:

Esf := Es - EcolDL Esf = 121.759kip-ft (Net Available Strain Energy)

Compare the applied energy with the energy absorbing capacity of the structure.

Efinal = 109.085kip-ft < Esf = 121.759 kip-ft OK Summary The concrete column at Column Row M-47 is capable of withstanding a postulated load drop for the drop height tabulated below:

drop = 1ft for the load tabulated below:

Pplug := 232-kip using the DlFs tabulated below:

DIFC = 1 DIFS = 1 I CXComFd\dVnnki\r1rpOOflR4rncd r:\Com~td\d3q\rnkie.sqldreO20n64-mcdI Paae500F95I Pagie 50 OF 951

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 51 Scenario 3 Po.o 1 O I II r.r 10111u"O A..,tA..,jVAfA

^HSollc~~cn ---

.,,,-A

-- A Pa-RIt OF:

-1 orI

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 52 Scenario 3 Full Drop of a Shield Plug on a System of Two Adjacent Slabs with a Beam in between the Slabs (Drop Height = 2'-6").

BEAMS Beams 5B7, 5B6, and 5B5 control for north-south beams and Beam 5B10 controls for east-west beams. Beams 5B6 and 5B10 will be evaluated in this calculation.

Beam 5B6:

Beam Flexural Capacity:

This calculation considers that the postulated drop occurs when the shield plug diameter is parallel to the east-west direction with the shield plug centered over the beam. For this configuration, the impact of the postulated drop will be resisted by the beam and the slabs on both sides of the beam.

From previous computations:

fc = 4700 psi DIFC = 1 DIFs = 1 Compute the flexural capacity of north-south beam 5B6.

Beam properties and reinforcing are tabulated on drawing B-666 (Ref. 19).

bNsbm = 27in hNSbm = 54in

- -- --- I P 5 O 95 I II I.,m UIIIu.1UVeCVuI--- 1,%_,%I. ftOAnonA - Page 52 OF 95

- I

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 53 Flexural Reinforcement:

Bottom Bars (Positive Moment):

5 #11 "A" Bars, no "B" Bars Top Bars (Negative Moment) (North End):

"C" Bars: 6 #11; Cut-Off: 4 #11 @ 9'-0" "D" Bars: 4 #11; Cut-Off: 4 #11 @ 9'-0" Top Bars (Negative Moment) (South End):

"C" Bars: 6 #11; Cut-Off: 4 #11 @ 12'-0" "D" Bars: None xsp := 3.5 in Spacing of rebar layers "A" & "B" and "C" & "D" cover := 1.50-in (Ref. 12 and 19) covern := 3.00-in (Ref. 12 and 19) dstirrup := 0.5-in (Ref. 12 and 19) d11 = 1.41 in (Ref. 4)

Compute effective depth for positive and negative moment reinforcement:

dpos:= hNSbm - cover - dstirrup - (0.5) .(dj 1) dpos = 51.295 in dneg-N : hNSbm - covern - dstirrup- (0.5)-(d 11) - (0.5) .(xsp) dneg-N 48.045 in dnegs := hNsbm - covern - dstirrup - (0.5) .(dj 1) dnegs = 49.795 in Compute the average value of "d" for negative moment reinforcement in the beam:

dneg-N + dneg-s dnav :

2 dn-av 48.92 in Pari 53 OF 95 I I -.r-__nm,4%A1M I m

- - -tA-qXA-n13rnCA z~oGulllsrluullu.

-Mr 53 F Pr,5 Paae!;.

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 54 Compute Flexural Capacity of Beam:

Tabulate properties and constants:

m := 0.90 Npos := 5 NnegN := 10 (Maximum)

Nnegs := 6 (Maximum)

AS11 = 1.56in 2 As pos := (Npos) (Asj 1) As pos = 7.8 in2 As neg N := (Nneg-N) (Asj1) As negN = 15.6 in2 (Maximum)

As-neg-S := (Nneg-S) (Asl1) As neg S = 9.36 in2 (Maximum)

Flexural Strength of Beam:

fc = 4700 psi Compute the value of PI for the specified concrete strength (between 4000 psi and 5000 psi).

i :=0.85-(.05) fc -(4000 psi)]

= 0.815 Positive Moment Flexural Capacity:

Tpos :=(As pos) -(fy) -(DIFs)

Tpos 468 kip apos: Tpos (f1) (fc) .(DIFc) .(bNSbm) apos = 4.525 in Ir-krom~d\d3\nookies\dreO20064.mcd Pawe 54 Paae OF 95 54 OF 95 I I CAComFd\dS\cookies\dre020064.mcd

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 55 cDMn-pos: ( m)(Tpos) {dpos 2a)os DMn-pos = 1721 ft-kip Negative Moment Flexural Capacity (North End):

Tneg-N (As-neg-N)-(fy).(DIFs)

Tneg-N = 936kip Tneg_N ane-N (pl) -(fc) *(DIFc)*(bNSbm) aneg-N = 9.05in dIMnneg-N ((cm)(Tneg.N) {dneg N _ane )N QMnneg-N = 3055.1 ft-kip Negative Moment Flexural Capacity (South End):

Tneg S (As-neg-s) (fy)>(DIFs)

Tnegs = 561.6kip Tneg-S anegs (P1j)(fc)-(DlFc)-(bNsbm) aneg-s = 5.43in (DMnneg S := (m)(Tneg S) (dneg S- 2 )

(DMnneg-S = 1983ft-kip II '.S. ttJa t1T.* mrH E.4\,n'kiA,4rrn'~rvf; -Mx Pnianef

. '1 5 -. P Or -- I

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 56 Compute Average Value of Negative Moment Flexural Capacity (North and South Ends):

M (c Mn-neg-N + 4DMn-neg-S)

't _neg~average:= ~ 2 "Mnneg-average= 2519.1 ft-kip Compute Resistance Factors for Beam Compute the resistance factors for the beam.

(Reference 1, Table 5.2, page 2-113).

Use formulation for a multi-span beam.

Moment Resistance Factors:

Lbm := 25.75 ft (Total Length of Beam 5B6)

Moment Resistance Factor:

(4) (4'Mn neg.average+'Mn-pos)

RM := Lm Lbm RM= 658.655kip Rbeam := RM Rbeam = 658.655 kip Note that this is the resistance based on a concentrated load, which is more likely representative of impact due to lug failure instead of failure above the crane hook.

Therefore, this application is conservative since the impact energy due to lug failure (side drop resulting in concentrated loading) is half that resulting from full mass drop through the total drop height.

As a result of this conservative approach, this evaluation covers both types of impact.

II(:\nFrl\rckrRrr:2O4mMd :6 I Pane 56 OF 95I

-.. 1.- -------- Iuvvvv.... _' - _

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 57 Compute Allowable Ductility Ratio:

Compute the allowable ductility using Reference 4, Section C.3.

Based on a review of the number of positive and negative reinforcing bars at the middle and ends of the beam, it is concluded that the middle of the beam is a reasonable location to apply the equation of Reference 4, Section C.3.3.

Note that the Reference 4 Commentary indicates that, in the equation for the permissible ductility ratio, the coefficient of 0.05 was chosen instead of 0.10 to provide additional margin of safety against overestimating ductility.

Npos = 5 Nneg-N = 10 (Maximum)

Nneg S = 6 (Maximum)

Nccutoff := 4 (Ref. 12 and 19)

NDcutoff := 4 (Ref. 12 and 19)

Compute number of negative moment rebars at beam mid-span.

Nneg-midspan := Nneg-N - NC_cutoff - ND_cutoff Nneg-midspan = 2 Compute permissible ductility per Reference 4, Section C.3.3:

Ppb :-(Npos) .(As, 1)-

b- (bNSbm)-(dpos)

Pp-bm = 0.005632 (Nnegmidspan) (As 1)

Pnbm :=

(bNSbm) (dpos)

Pnbm = 0.002253 IC\n~~3coisde204mrd Pawe 57 OF 951 I m rnir4rcfl9flflRd med Pane 57 OF 95 I

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 58 0.05 A1 duct_limit-bmmidspan :(Ppbm - Pn bm)

I1 ductlimit-bmmidspan = 14.797 > 10 (Max. per Ref. 4, Sect. C.3.3)

Use p = 10 as a maximum based on Reference 4, Section C3.3.

Page I I C.\rom~rrid3\e-ookies3~dren20064-mcdI I Paae 58 58 OF OF 951 95 I

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 59 Beam Shear Capacity:

Compute the shear capacity of north-south beam 5B6.

Beam properties and reinforcing are tabulated on drawing B-666 (Ref. 19).

Beam 5B6:

Shear Reinforcement:

Stirrups (# 4 bars) are placed as follows:

18 bars @ 6" spacing from North end.

Balance of bars are placed @ 12" spacing.

dstirrup = 0.5in Astirrup := 0.20-in 2 Av (2) (Astirrup)

Av= 0.4 in2 SPstir-N := 6-in (Stirrup spacing at north end [to 9'-0" from north supp.])

SPstirS 12-in (Stirrup spacing at south end)

Use an average stirrup spacing of 9 inches:

SPstir-average := 9-in Compute Shear Strength:

(DS:= 0.85 Use average "d" for shear strength computation:

dn_av = 48.92in 0Vc_bm_aver := ('S) *(2).. f-l(Ip6)(bNSbm) .(dn av)

(DVcbmaver = 153.9 kip HI I -_~l~~o~~lau

-u~u~--

r

-4n~lHlrnin\rnnl

. I -fi pn~na r);: Or v_ vr - I I

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 60 (Av) .(fy) (dn-av)

OVs-bm-aver =

SPstir average sV-_bmaver = 130.5 kip I'Vn_bmaver := 4V_bmaver+ (DVsbmaver (DVn-bm-aver= 284.4kip Compute Shear Capacity and Shear Resistance Factors Including Adjacent Slab The concrete beam cannot fail without also failing the slab.

Compute the shear capacity and shear resistance of the slab itself. For this computation, the effective width of the slab will be taken as the total clear length around the outer perimeter of the two slabs adjacent to Beam 5B6. Note that the length of the sides of the slabs directly adjacent to Beam 5B6 are not included in the total length computation, because Beam 5B6 and the two adjacent slabs are postulated to fail as a single system.

tslab = 18 in (Slab thickness) aslab := 24.5.ft (Minimum E-W center-center slab dimension) bslab:= 25.75-ft (Maximum N-S center-center slab dimension) badj-bm-min := 2.00 -ft (Minimum width of adjacent beams)

Tabulate widths of adjacent beams:

b5B4 := 36-in bNSbm = 27in (Beam 5B6) b5B23:= 36-in b5B10 := 24-in bwall := 30.in (North wall)

Leff_slab := (2) .[(2) (aslab) - (0.5)-(b5B4+ b5B23) - bNSbm] ...

+ (2) .[bslab - (0.5) *(b51B10) - bwall]

Left_slab = 1584 in

- -- -- -- I mo-l Paq

&3U- -5 I Page 60 OF 95 It,%C[i- =

%,';U ltbUtv-V 411,

REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 61 CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 Slab Reinforcement (Drawings B-237 and B-667 [Ref. 13 and 20]):

Slab "R" (Ref. 13 and 20):

Flexural Reinforcement:

All bars are # 8 Bottom Bars (Positive Moment): N-S # 8 @ 12"; E-W # 8 @ 9" Top Bars (Negative Moment): N-S # 8 @ 6"; E-W # 8 © 6" d8 := 1.00-in As8 := 0.79-in 2 coversiab := 1.00-in (Ref. 13 and 20) dslab := tslab- coverslab- (0.5)-(d 8 )

dslab = 16.5 in Slab Shear Capacity:

OVnslab  := ( S) -(2) . (Vpi)(Leff slab) (dslab) 4DVnslab = 3046 kip Compute Shear Resistance Factors Including Effect of Slab Compute the shear resistance factor for a concentrated load applied to the beam and slab at mid-span. For this case, the reaction at each end is one half the applied load.

Shear Resistance Factor:

Rvcombined (2) .(4Vn bm aver) + 4Vn_slab Recombined = 3614.8 kip

• - tr ~Pace61 OF951 I C.AComEd\d3\cooKies\dare --

ZuWut6.mcu I

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 62 Compute Slab Section Properties Compute the section properties of the slab.

beffslab := 1-in (Unit width of slab)

The slab unit width of 1 inch is used so that the formulations are consistent with Ref. 1 Table 5.3, which are given in terms of capacity per inch unit width of slab.

tslab = 18 in coverslab = 1in d8= 1 in dslab = 16.5 in Esteel = 29000ksi Econc = 3907.7 ksi N = 7.421 Compute the gross moment of inertia of the slab:

'g_slab := (.i.J)(beff slab) .(tslab) 3 ig slab = 486 in4 Compute the cracked moment of inertia of the slab:

Use the methodology given in Reference 1, Figure 3.1.10.

The cracked moment of inertia will be computed in the negative moment region of the slab, adjacent to Beam 5B6. Therefore, the top bars (# 8 @

6") will be used to compute p.

Asslabpos := (2).(As8) N-S # 8 @ 6" Asslab-pos = 1.58in 2

---

n Pame 62 OF 95 II rl-rnmrfdirilnnki-np<~o\drpnoo64n mrd mM Paae62OF95 I

lCALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 63 bbarslab := 12-in (Effective width of slab for rebar spacing)

Asslab-pos (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10)

Pp-slab (bbar slab) . (dslab)

Pp-slab = 0.0079798 pn := (Pp-slab).(N) (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10) pn = 0.05922 Determine the coefficient "F' from Reference 1, Figure 3.1.1 0 for the following values:

pn = 0.05922 F := 0.037 (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10)

Compute the cracked moment of inertia for the slab using Reference 1, Figure 3.1.10:

'cr slab := (F) [(beff slab) (dsIab)3]

lcr_slab = 166.2 in4 Compute the average moment of inertia for the slab using Reference 1:

_ ig_slab + 'cr slab la_slab 2

la slab = 326.1 in4 IC.\CnmEd~d3\cookies\dreO20064.mc d Paqe 63 OF 951 I

IC.\ComEd\d3\cook!es\dre020064.mcd Paqe 63 OF 95

[CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 64 .

Compute Slab Stiffness:

Use Reference 1, Table 5.3. Consider the slab to be fixed on all four sides with load at center of slab.

DC := 0.17 (Poisson ratio for concrete) bslab baratio :=-

aslab baratio = 1.051

%Xlab:= 0.0671 (Reference 1, Table 5.3)

(12) -(Econc) (ia slab Kslab :=

(aslab) (aslab) 2(1 _c2) aslab = 24.5ft Kslab = 2715.1 kip in Kslab = 32580.8 kip Compute Slab Average Reinforcement:

Determine the average slab reinforcement for positive and negative moment.

For positive moment reinforcement (bottom rebars), take the average of the reinforcement in the north-south and east-west directions. The bottom reinforcement is: N-S # 8 © 12"; E-W # 8 @ 9" For negative moment reinforcement (top rebars), take the average of the reinforcement in the north-south and east-west directions. The top reinforcement is: N-S # 8 @ 6"; E-W # 8 @ 6" Apos slab := (0.5) [AS8 (129in) (As)

Apos slab = 0.922in2 I

Faje 0-9 IIo

- rr4t\^tlerrntn --- Page 64 OF 95I U %%.,U111rUU0%L; rljvaul"_Wr_ 91.1.

lCALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 65 Aneg-slab (0.5).[(2)(As 8 ) + (2) .(As8)]

Anegslab= 1.58 in2 Positive Moment Flexural Capacity:

Tpos := (Apos-slab) (fy) (DIF s )

Tpos = 55.3 kip Tpos

( 13)*(fc) *(DI Fc)*(bbar-slab) apos= 1.203iin (DMn psslab:= (0m)(Tpos) {dslab- apos DMn-pos-slab = 65.9ft-kip Negative Moment Flexural Capacity:

Tneg : (Aneg-slab) (fy) (DIFs)

Tneg = 94.8 kip Tneg (P1 )*(fc)*(DlFc)*(bbarslab) aneg = 2.062 in (DMnneg slab ((Dm)(Tneg). dslab - -

(DMnneg-slab = 109.98ft-kip rage tut-rII %,.%%,VI onn"nA AI..A')flAA

- -\n-1,;-%A-incrl susebu tuuu",,v morz mr4 P-age 65 C)F 95I

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 66 Compute Slab Moment Resistance Factor Compute the slab resistance factor using Reference 1, Table 5.3, for a slab with fixed supports on 4 sides and load applied at the center.

R 2 n (DMn-pos slab + D'Mn-neg-slab) bbar_slab RM_slab 1105.4 kip Compute Beam Stiffness:

bNsbm = 27in hNSbm = 54in Compute the gross moment of inertia of the beam:

ig-bm (i).(bNSbm)-(hNSbm)3

'g_bm = 354294 in4 ig_bm = 17.086ft Compute the cracked moment of inertia of the beam:

Use the methodology given in Reference 1, Figure 3.1.10.

Npos= 5 dpos= 51.295 in Asbm-pos := (Np 0 s) (Asl1)

Asbm-pos = 7.8in2 Pp. bm _ ASbm-pos (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10)

(bNSbm).(dpos)

Pp_bm = 0.0056319 I

C.\ComEd\d3\cookies\dre020064 mcd Page 66 OF 95

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 67 pn : (Pppbm)-(N) (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10) pn = 0.0418 Determine the coefficient "F" from Reference 1, Figure 3.1.10 for the following values:

pn = 0.0418 F := 0.027 (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10)

Compute the cracked moment of inertia for the beam using Reference 1, Figure 3.1.10:

'crbm := (F) .[(bNSbm)-(dpos) 3

'cr_bm = 98390.4in4

'cr_bm = 4.745 ft4 Compute the average moment of inertia for the beam using Reference 1:

la bm 'g_bm + 'crbm la_bm 226342.2 in4 la_bm = 10.915 ft4 6F5 I C-nmdR~oisdo2 4mcd Page 67 OF 95

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 68 Compute Combined Beam and Slab Moment Resistance Factor Compute the combined beam and slab moment resistance factor by combining the moment resistance of Beam 5B6 with the moment resistance of the two (2) adjacent slabs.

RM = 658.655kip Rbeam = 658.655kip The beam moment resistance is reduced by a factor that accounts for the area of the two adjacent slabs that are tributary to the beam.

RM[combined Rbeam -(2) { slab )(RM

+ (2) slab)

RMcombined = 2316.7 kip Compute Ratio of Moment and Shear Resistance Factors Compute the ratio of the shear resistance factor to the moment resistance factor of the combined beam and slab section.

Rvcombined RatioMv :

RMcombined RatioMv = 1.56 > 1.20 (Flexure Inelastic Behavior is applicable)

IIIC:-\Com~d~d3\cookipes;dreO20064.mr-d CAComEd\d3Xcnokis\drO2OO64.mcd Pane 68 OF A.51I R flF

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 69 Compute Stiffness of Combined Beam and Slab Section:

Compute the stiffness of the beam / slab using the formula from the following reference.

(Reference 1, Table 5.2, page 2-112).

Use stiffness formulation for a multi-span beam.

Stiffness Usinq Nominal Concrete Strength (fc = 4700 psi):

Econc = 3907.7ksi Lbm = 25.75ft (92) (Econc) (la bm)

Ke bm :=

Kebm = 33096.6 kip ft Compute Stiffness of Combined Beam and Slab Section Kslab = 32580.8 kip Kcombined (2) (Kslab) + Ke bm Kcombined 98258.2 kp ft Compute Deflection of Combined Beam and Slab Section:

RM combined Ae combined=

Kcombined Ae_combined = 0.283in Ae_combined = 0.02358ft Page 69 OF 95 I II:

r' ,,,IcAdrnflflflA nmF^r\Hi'krnnklein~drer0n00nn C Cnmr W.\wUEl~uS-7\WU-mrri mrd

---

VS Page 69 OF 951

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 70 Compute Enermy Absorbing Capacity of Beam / Slab Compute the total energy absorbing capacity under the Load - Deflection curve for the beam / slab system. The energy absorbing capacity will be based on an upper limit of ( 10 )*( Ae-combined ) on the Load - Deflection curve.

At a deflection of 10 times the elastic deflection, the energy absorbing capacity of the beam / slab will be:

Es:=(RMcombined) (Ae_combined) (10 -0.5)

Es= 518.9kip.ft (Strain Energy)

Paae 70 OF 95 I II t;.%k'UMr axc3L Ur eb 1arVVV4.114 A Paae 70 OF 95I

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 71 Determine Energy Losses if Shield Plug is Dropped on Beam / Slab:

Refer to Roark & Young (6th Edition), Chapter 15, page 718 (Reference 3).

Determine K factor. Use Case 4 (moving body of mass "M" strikes transversely the center of a beam with fixed ends and a mass of Ml 1).

From previous computations:

Pplug = 232 kip (Weight of shield plug)

Mia = 185.612kip (Weight of slab under shield plug) 13 Mia K [1+(35) (P~u)

[ (2 5Pplug I

[i + C -}(F:gJ]

Kbm = 0.662 Compute Kinetic Energy Applied to Beam / Slab:

Compute the kinetic energy applied to the beam / slab for the drop height given below:

drop = 1 ft Applied Kinetic Energy:

Efinalbm := (Pplug).(drop)-(Kbm)

Efinalbm 153.536kip.ft (Impact Energy)

Compare Applied Kinetic Energy to Energy Absorbing Capacity:

Compute the kinetic energy applied to the beam / slab for the drop height given below:

drop = 1 ft Efinal bm = 153.536kip.ft < Es = 518.9kip.ft OK mmd I C \ComF~r\d3.\coonkiesdrerOn0on I C\nm~~d!~,n Pa2771 OF Parne AS5 mrd ~~dc~flflAd 0F951

lCLUAION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 72 .l Compute Reduction in Energy Absorbing Capacity of from Dead Load:

Dead load of combined beam I slab system:

Mia = 185.612kip WDLcomb := Mia WDL-comb = 185.612kip Conservatively compute the strain energy of the dead load.

EDLcomb := (WDL comb).(10).(Aecombined)

EDL-comb = 43.763kip.ft Compute Modified Energy Absorbing Capacity of Beam I Slab:

ESfinal comb := Es - EDLcomb Es-final-comb = 475.1 kip ft (Strain Energy)

Compare Applied Kinetic Energy to Energy Absorbing CapacitV:

Compute the kinetic energy applied to the beam / slab for the drop height given below:

drop = 1ft Efinalbm = 153.536kip-ft < Es-final comb = 475.1 kip-ft OK Compute Kinetic Energy Applied to Beam / Slab for Alternate Drop Height:

Compute the kinetic energy applied to the beam / slab for the alternate drop height given below:

dropalternate := 2.5.ft Applied Kinetic Energy:

Efinal_bmralt := (Pplug)-(dropalternate)-(Kbm)

Efinal-bm-alt 383.84 kip.ft (Impact Energy)

II ir4.- ---

4lluu~~ouzl~ou...u, fil;-%rnsnnfl^A

-r Poar 72 OF 95 I

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 73 I Compare Applied Kinetic Enerqy (Alternate) to Energy Absorbing Capacity:

Compute the kinetic energy applied to the beam / slab for the alternate drop height given below:

dropalternate 2.5ft Efinalbmalt = 383.84kip-ft < ESfinalcomb = 475.1 kip-ft OK Summary:

The system consisting of 2 Mark "R" slabs with beam type 5B6 in between is adequate for the most severe drop of the plug from a height of 2.5 feet.

i-'ae( U I A.f A l ,.. - a t. __ A n -AA Pace- 'M OF- !An I C.XComad\da\cOOKies\dreuouut24 nmcd

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 74 .

Beam 5B10:

Drop Assessment When The Plug Orientation in The North-South Direction and Centered Between Two Columns With The C.G. at The Center Of Beam Type 5B10 This calculation section is added to address the potential of drop if the plug happens to be orientated in the north-south direction and located between two column lines of slabs type R and potentially centered over beam Type 5B10.

The slab's resistance in bending and shear has been evaluated earlier in this Scenario, where two adjacent type R slabs with beam type 5B6 were considered for plug drop on the beam and the two slabs. The drop height was determined to be 2.5 feet.

Since the slabs are identical, we will calculate beam 5B10 resistance in flexure and shear and compare these resistances to those of beam 5B6. If the comparison yields comparable resistances, it would be concluded that the drop height for this system will also be 2.5 feet.

Beam 5B10 Flexural And Shear Resistance Beam Flexural Capacity:

Compute the flexural capacity of north-south beam 5B1 0.

Beam properties and reinforcing are tabulated on drawing B-666.

Beam 5B10:

bNSbm := 24-in hNSbm := 48.in Flexural Reinforcement:

Bottom Bars (Positive Moment): 7 #11 "A" Bars, no "B" Bars Top Bars (Negative Moment) (North End): 7 #11 "C" Bars Top Bars (Negative Moment) (South End): 7 #11 "C" Bars IP.\u.

1. ~

Pane 74 OF 95 I U. . _

lCALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 75 xsp := 3.5-in Spacing of rebar layers "A" & "B" and "C" coverp 1.5-in covern 3.0 in dstirrup := 0.5-in dj1:= 1.41 -in Compute effective depth for positive and negative moment reinforcement:

dpos : hNSbm - coverp - dstirrup - (0.5) -(dj 1) dpos 45.295 in dneg-N := hNSbm - covern - dstirrup - (0.5)-(djj) - (0.5)-(Xsp) dneg-N = 42.045in Compute Flexural Capacity of Beam:

Tabulate properties and constants:

(DM = 0-9 fy = 60 ksi Npos := 7 NnegN := 7 Nnegs := 7 As11 := 1.56-in2 Aspos : (Npos)-(As1i) Aspos= 10.92 in2 As neg N (NnegN) (As11) As negN = 10.92in2 As neg S := (Nneg S) (Asl1) As negS = 10.92in2 Rine 75 OF g I II - - -1.'_FXtne~A-fanAA&

4 i.

-- A

.uzuuu Paae 75 OF 951

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 76 Flexural Strength:

Pi = 0.815 fc = 4 7 00psi Positive Moment Flexural Capacity:

Tpos (Aspos) (fy) Tpos = 655.2kip apos (Pi) (fc).(bNSbm) apos = 7.127 in (DMnpos := (<m)(Tpos){ dpos pos)

FMn pos = 2050.7ft-kip Negative Moment Flexural Capacity (North and South Ends):

Tneg-N := (As-negN) .(fy) TnegN = 655.2kip Tneg-N . _, 4 i7;n aneg-N := (P1).(fc)-(bNSbm) c'neg-N = I -I<

rI I 4oMn~negN := (Om)(Tneg-N) {dneg N 2 )

OMn-negN = 1891 ft-kip Compute Resistance Factors for Beam Compute the resistance factors for the beam.

(Reference 1, Table 5.2, page 2-113).

Use formulation for a multi-span beam.

- -- -- I Pac 76 F 5 Ir,.

l :-womlajlxou~euleuuuoll

-UU T-crUnIVJnrlJ

- -UI*,l mrH Page 76 OF 95

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 77 Moment Resistance Factors:

Lbm := 24.5-ft (Total Length of Beam 5B10)

Moment Resistance Factor (North End):

(4) *(cDMn neg_N + (DMn pos)

'l VI IN --

Lbm RMN = 643.537kip Rm:= RMN Rm = 643.5 kip vs 658.6 kip for beam 5B6 (See page 56)

Beam Shear Capacity:

Compute the shear capacity of north-south beam 5B1 0.

Beam properties and reinforcing are tabulated on drawing B-666.

Beam 5B10:

Shear Reinforcement:

Stirrups (# 4 bars) are placed as follows:

10 bars @5", 6 @6" Balance of bars are placed at 12" spacing.

4'S = 0.85 dstirrup = 0.5 in Astirrup := 0.20-in 2 Av := (2)-(Astirrup) Av = 0.4in2 SPstirN := 5-in SPstirS := 5-in C:\ComEd\d3\cookies\dre020064 mcd Page77 OF 95

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 78 Shear Strength:

North End:

OVcN ((S) (2) .Jc.(/i)(bNSbm) (dnegN)

_Vc N = 117.604kip WVs N (Av) .(fy) .(dnegN)

- SPstirN

_Vs N = 201.816kip DVnN:= OVcN + (VsN (DVn N = 319.42 kip vn :=<Vn_N Vn = 319.42 kip Compute Shear Resistance Factors Compute the shear resistance factor for a concentrated load applied to the beam at mid-span. For this case, the reaction at each end is one half the applied load.

RV :=(2). (<IVn)

Rv 638.8 kip vs 568.8 kips for beam 5B6 (See Page 60)

(2)-((DVnbmaver) = 568.8kip Summarv Since both the flexural and shear resistances for beam 5B10 are comparable to those of beam 5B6 (flexural resistance is 2% lower and shear resistance is 12% higher), the analysis for Scenario 3 is also applicable when the shield plug is orientated in the north-south direction and dropped over Beam 5B10.

I (-\Cnm~rd\r3\cookiesqktreO20064-mcd Page 78 OF 951

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 79 Scenario 4

- _ Ad 7Aq ---- I II A -,nsHrnkn~r~~~ Page Yu OF 95

-- >~rcvv~r

---

*v

lCALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 80 .

Scenario 4 Full drop of a shield plug on two adjacent columns (Drop Height = 2'-6")

TWO COLUMNS IMPACT (SCENARIO 4)

Introduction Column M-47 is a 33' x 33" column that was evaluated in Scenario 2 for a drop height of 1'-O". Column M-41 is a 33' x 33" column identical to Column M-47.

Scenario 2 used a very conservative approach, where the entire mass of the shield plug was considered to be dropped on a single column. This approach is conservative because at the worst orientation of the plug over one column, the wall on Column Row L will share the effect of the drop with the column.

Scenario 4 addresses a more realistic situation.

This scenario addresses the case where the shield plug is lifted to a height of 2'-6" with the shield plug located above two columns. The total strain energy of the two adjacent columns is compared to the applied energy.

The columns to be considered in this scenario are Columns M-41 and M-40.

These columns are selected because the shield plugs will need to be lifted to a height of 2'-6" in the area above these two columns.

Tabulate Material Properties:

Yconc = 150 pcf 7 := Yconc y = 150pcf Tabulate Resistance of Column M-41 (33' x 33")

Column M-41 is a 33" x 33" column and is identical in size to Column M-47 that was addressed in Scenario 2.

From Scenario 2:

PcoL-control = 3779.3 kip Al (33-in) 2 Al = 1089 in2 R1 Pcol_control R1 = 3779.3 kip

_ I I -H m I~~~~~~~

W;Q Pame 80 OF 95I vtllU Ut:o vt::

lCUU-lU

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 81 Compute Properties of Column M-40 (36" x 36")

Calculate Resistance of adjacent column M-40:

A2 := (36-in) 2 A2 = 1296in2 Compute Combined Resistance of Two Columns:

Since the column number of bars and size are the same in both columns, the resistance in compression of the larger column can be calculated as follows:

R2 := R1 +0.85-0.7-fc-(A2-A1)

R2 = 4358.2 kip The combined resistance of the two columns can be calculated as follows:

R := R13+ R2 R = 8137.4 kip Applied Energy of Load Drop and Energv Absorbing Capacity of Structure Compute Area of Concrete Slab Affected by the Shield Plug Drop:

This is the area of the slab to be considered as effective mass sitting on top of the column.

This area was previously computed in Scenario 2. From Scenario 2:

Rplug = 21.417ft (Plug Radius)

The slabs around Columns M-40 and M-41 are 18" thick. Compute the area of the slab to be considered as effective mass by adding the plug radius and the slab thickness. From Scenario 2:

tslab = 18 in RS = 22.917ft (Effective radius)

Aplug = 824.941 ft2 II rC:\Cnm~rd'\d3\ckies\rdreO2006g4-mrr nmFd\dnnki\rmfl2OO4m,'rI panAe PrinRl F AS II 81 oFg

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 82 I.

Tabulate Weight of Upper Concrete Shield Plug:

Pplug = 232 kip Compute Weight of Concrete Structures Above Columns M-41 and M-40:

An investigation will be made to determine the effect of a load drop of the shield plug between Columns M-41 and M-40.

The weight (mass) of the existing concrete structure under the shield plug during the rotation of the shield plug or during the diagonal move toward the laydown area of the lower shield plugs must be determined. The existing concrete structure includes the concrete columns, beams, and slabs. The effective length of the column will be taken down to the top of the next slab (at Elevation 589'-O").

The slabs around the columns are 18" thick. The east-west beams (5B10) framing into the columns are 24" wide x 48" deep (the depth includes the slab thickness). The north-south beams (5B5 and 5B6) framing into Column M-41 are 27" wide x 54" deep.

The north-south beams (5B22 and 5B23) framing into Column M-40 are 36" wide x 54" deep.

Calculate Masses of columns and masses supported by the columns:

2 WC1 := 22.5-ft-(3-ft) -. y WC1 = 30.375 kip (Column M-40)

WC2 := 22.5 -ft.(33. in) 2 .y WC2 = 25.523 kip (Column M-41)

Weight of Slab (Under Shield Plug):

tslab := 18-in Mia := (Aplug)-(yconc)-(tslab)

Mia = 185.61 kip lc \comEd\d3\cookies\dreO20064 mcd Page 82 OF 95

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 83 Weight of Beams (Under Shield Plug):

Determine net weight of beams framing into Columns M-41 and M-40.

This computation considers that the long axis of the shield plug (2 x plug radius) is orientated in the north-south direction.

Beams Wbeams [24.5-ft-2-ft.2.5-ft + 16-ft-(3-ft-2.5-ft + 2.25-ft-2.5.ft) ] y Wbeams = 49.875kip Determine Energy Losses if Shield Plug is Dropped on Top of Columns M-41 and M-40:

Refer to Roark & Young (6th Edition), Chapter 15, page 718 (Reference 3).

Determine K factor. Use Case 1 (moving body of mass "M" strikes axially one end of a bar of mass Ml, the other end of which is fixed, with additional mass

[slab + beams] at the end of the bar).

M2 := Wbeams+ Mla M2 = 235.487kip (Beams and Slabs)

WC := WC1 + WC2 WC = 55.898 kip (Columns)

K :=L[iW ( }M~J+p~J2 Pplug)

+( Pplug) r+1.WC)+ M2 12 l+ Pplu9)

-2 + Pplug)

K= 0.459 drop := 2.50.ft Pplug = 232 kip Efinal : (Pplug)-(drop)-(K)

Efinal = 266.5kip.ft (Impact Energy)

II C-NromP~frl-d3\c-nnk-ies~-krren9006 CnmFr\pnirrnr1flflP4 mcd md PaCIA 83 OF Paae R3 OF g;A951 I

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 84 Maximum strain in concrete column:

E := 0.002 Lnet col := 22.5-ft Compute deflection of column at maximum strain:

e := (F) -(Lnet-col)

Ae = 0.54in Tabulate the allowable ductility ratio of the concrete column for impulse and impact load (Reference 1, Table 5.1, page 2-112):

ILduct := 1.3 (Ref. 1, Table 5.1, page 2-112)

(Ref. 4, Appendix C)

Compute the energy absorbing capacity of the concrete column (by computing the area under the load-deflection curve):

Es := (R)'[(Ae) (0.5) + [(Aduct) -(Ae) - (Ae)f]

Es = 292.9kip.ft (Strain Energy)

Compare the applied energy with the energy absorbing capacity of the structure.

Efinal = 266.492kip-ft < Es = 292.948kip.ft OK Modify the energy absorbing capacity of the concrete column (computed above) by including the effect of the dead load carried by the column.

PcoLDL := M2 PcolDL = 235.487kip Compute Reduction in Energy Absorbing Capacity of Column from Dead Load:

ECOIDL := (PCOIDL) >(1duct) (Ae)

EcoLDL = 13.776 kip ft (Dead Load Strain Energy)

I CnmP C.Nrnmred\ed3\cookLesn\dre02006n4

\pnne,\rfrs.flflAA mc myt Paqne flF I OFt 951n,

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 85 Compute Modified Energy Absorbing Capacity of Column from Dead Load:

Esf := Es- Ecol-DL Esf = 279.172kip.ft (Net Available Strain Energy)

Compute the applied energy with the energy absorbing capacity of the columns.

Efinal = 266.5 kip.ft Esf = 279.172kip.ft OK Summary The two concrete columns at Column Rows M-41 and M-40 are capable of withstanding a postulated load drop for the drop height tabulated below:

drop = 2.5ft for the load tabulated below:

Pplug:= 232-kip using the DlFs tabulated below:

DIFC = 1 DIFS = 1 I Cr\rnmF~d \mr\ki-rkrrO200rA.mM En-- or Nr (nc I

, - -- - - r-me OAw--

C-D

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 86 .I Scenario 5 I CAComEd\d3\cookies\dreO20064 mcd Page 86 OF 95

l CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 87 Scenario 5 Full drop of a shield plug on wall at Column Row 44 (Drop Height = 2'-6")

WALL ON ROW 44 Evaluate the wall along Column Row 44. Compute the maximum axial capacity of the concrete wall at refueling floor Elevation 613'-O".

bwall:= 12-in (Ref. 18) hwall := 24.in (Ref. 18)

Ag-wall (bwall)- (hwall)

Ag-wall = 288 in2 Longitudinal reinforcement consists of # 6 bars @ 12" spacing (Ref. 24).

As6 := 0.44-in2 (Ref. 5) d6 := 0.75-in (Ref. 5)

N6 := 2 (Ref. 24) (Total number of bars in 12" length of wall)

AstWall : (N 6 )-(As 6 )

Ast wall= 0.88 in 2 Determine the controlling mode of failure for the wall. Two modes of failure will be investigated, based on the following parameters:

1. Buckling capacity of wall

2. Crushing capacity of wall based on modified ACI Code formula Tabulate and compute the material properties of the wall:

Esteel = 29000 ksi Econc = 3907.7 ksi N = 7.421 C:\ComEd\d3\cookies\dreO20064 mcd Page 87 OF 95

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 88 Compute the gross moment of inertia of the wall:

19 := ( ( bwali) *( hwail)3 Ig= 13824 in4 Compute the cracked moment of inertia of the wall using the methodology given in Reference 1, Figure 3.1.10.

coverwali := 1.5-in (Ref. 5) (Conservative) dwall := hwall - coverwall - (0.5)- (d6 )

dwall = 22.125 in Aswall p = (N6) 2(As6)

ASwal-pos  :=

Asalpos = 0.4 in2 Aswall-pos (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10)

Pwa~ll :-(bwall) *(dwaIl)

Pwall = 0.001657 pn := (Pwall) (N) (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10) pn = 0.0123 SwaLneg =(N6) .(AS6)

Aswall neg = 0.44 in2 Aswall-neg Pwall_neg:= r (wal (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10)

- (bwall) *( dwall)

Pwall_neg = 0.001 657 pnneg := (Pwall-neg) (N) (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10) pnneg = 0.0123 II .MwaOuu... HrM,~IV~A m.^

I.

Pann RR OF A95 O-

lCALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 89 Pnratio : eg (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10) pn Pratio 1 Determine the coefficient "F" from Reference 1, Figure 3.1.1 0 for the following values:

Pratio = 1 pn = 0.0123 F := 0.01 (Ref. 1, Figure 3.1.10)

Compute the cracked moment of inertia for the wall using Reference 1, Figure 3.1.10:

lcr : (F) [(bwall) (dwall)3]

lCr = 1299.7 in4 Compute the average moment of inertia for the wall using Reference 1:

Ig1 + 'or la 2 la = 7561.8in4 Compute the clear length of the wall between Elevation 613'-0" and Elevation 589'-0" (reduce gross wall length by depth of thinnest slab framing into the wall at Elevation 61 3'-0":

Lwall := (613 - 589)-ft - (1.5-ft)

Lwall = 22.5ft Tabulate the value of "k" for the wall (use k = 0.8):

kwall := 0.8 Determine Buckling Capacity of Wall:

(,N) 2. ( Eco) -(Ia)

Ponit wall

[(kwall) -(Lwall)] 2 Pcritwall = 6250.9 kip

-- I I - ..- 4,.A Page w1 OF Y5 11 I ,

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 90 Determine Crushing Capacity of Wall:

Determine the crushing capacity of the wall by modifying the ACI Code (Reference 5) formula for column compression (at minimum eccentricity). The ACI formula will be modified by replacing the 0.8 factor in the numerator with 1.0.

' 1c := 0.70 (Ref. 5)

Pcrush wall :=(1-00). ((c) [ (0.85) *(fc DIFc) (Ag wall- Ast wall) ... 1 (Ref. 5)

L+ (fy- DI Fs) (Ast wall) I Pcrushwall = 839.9 kip Determine Controlling Wall Capacity:

Pwallcontrol := min(Pcritwanl,Pcrush wall)

Pwallcontrol = 839.9 kip t-'ae~ U- -b I I wA^.A^~fb,,^o~

IL;:\auotaasco - - --

esuuuu a-

---

w Page 90 OF 95I

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 91 Applied Energy of Load Drop and Energy Absorbing Capacity of Structure Compute Area of Concrete Slab Affected by the Shield Plug Drop:

This is the area of the slab to be considered as effective mass sitting on top of the column.

This area was previously computed in Scenario 2. From Scenario 2:

Rplug = 21.417ft (Plug Radius)

The slabs adjacent to Column Line 44 between Column Rows L and M are 18" and 24" thick. Compute the area of the slab to be considered as effective mass by adding the plug radius and the slab thickness (use minimum slab thickness of 18").

From Scenario 2:

tslab = 18in RS = 22.917ft (Effective radius)

Aplug = 824.941 ft2 Tabulate Weight of Upper Concrete Shield Plug ("Cookie"):

Pplug := 232-kip Compute Weight of Concrete Structures Near Column M-47:

The concrete shield plug will be moved east from the Unit 3 side to the Unit 2 side along a path north of Column Row M. During this move, the center of gravity of the shield plug will be over the wall at Column Row 44.

An investigation will be made to determine the effect of a load drop of the shield plug over the wall at Column Row 44 . The weight (mass) of the existing concrete structure under the shield plug at Column Row 44 must be determined. The existing concrete structure includes the concrete wall and slabs. The effective length of the wall will be taken down to the top of the next slab (at Elevation 589'-O").

The slabs around Column Row 44 are 18" and 24" thick.

Yconc := 150.pcf

- - - - - -I- - - - - -

II - %umlAIlUlUo -r4<~~o~~nnt UUFsiluzI J=V-.'

~=Page 91 OF 95

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 92 Weight of Slab (Under Shield Pluq):

tslab_min: 18-in tslabmax 24 in M1aw (Aplug) * (tslab mi tslab maxj Ml aw = 216.55 kip Weight of Wall (Under Shield Plug):

Determine net weight of the wall between Elevations 589'-O" and 613'-O". Weight of wall is based on a length of wall equal to the radius of the shield plug.

Leffwall:= Rplug Leffwall = 21.417ft Lnetwall (613 - 589) *ft - tslab Lnetwall = 22.5ft Mlcw := (Lefftwall) (hwall) (Lnetcwall) '(conc)

M1 cw = 144.56 kip Total Weight of Existing Concrete Structure (Under Shield Plug):

M1W:= Miaw+ Mlcw M1 w = 361.109 kip Ir.I %rnm;=d\rlqkcookiescdrerOn0nnr C nm\\ki\r4rA9Aflt mcdf mrd Pacie 92 OF 951 Paae 92 OF 951

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 93 .l Determine Energv Losses if Shield Plua is Dropped on Top of Column Row 44 Wall:

Refer to Roark & Young (6th Edition), Chapter 15, page 718 (Reference 3).

Determine K factor. Use Case 1 (moving body of mass "M" strikes axially one end of a bar of mass Ml, the other end of which is fixed, with additional mass

[slabs] at the end of the bar).

[1 + (1)(M 1 cw){ Miaw]

_pug Pplug l +( 1 )(Mlcw)+(Mlaw (2) (Pplug) (Pplug K = 0.425 drop := 2.5-ft Efinal (Pplug)-(drop)-(K)

Efinal = 246.406kip-ft (Impact Energy)

Maximum strain in concrete wall:

£ := 0.002 Lnetwall = 22.5ft Compute deflection of wall at maximum strain:

Ae := (s) (Lnet wall)

Ae = 0.54 in Tabulate the allowable ductility ratio of the concrete wall for impulse and impact load (Reference 1, Table 5.1, page 2-112):

9duct := 1.3 (Ref. 1, Table 5.1, page 2-112)

(Ref. 4, Appendix C)

I II r'lrnmr:rirf'Ar-enL-ioQXrfrpngnOA4

( mFd mrd md Panie 93 OF 951 PacieO3OF9SI

ICALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 94 Compute the energy absorbing capacity of the concrete wall (by computing the area under the load-deflection curve):

The value of PwalLcontrol must be multiplied by the effective length of the wall.

Es := [(Pwall control) - Leffwall ).[ (Ae) .(0.5) + [(lduct) -(Ae)- (e)))

Es = 647.556kip.ft (Strain Energy)

Compare the applied energy with the energy absorbing capacity of the structure.

Efinal = 246.406kip.ft < Es = 647.556kip.ft OK Modify the energy absorbing capacity of the concrete wall (computed above) by including the effect of the dead load carried by the wall.

PwallDL:= Mlaw Pwall-DL = 216.547 kip Compute Reduction in Energy Absorbing Capacity of Wall from Dead Load:

EwallDL := (PwaIl_DL) (9duct).(Ae)

EwallDL = 12.668 kip ft (Dead Load Strain Energy)

Compute Modified Energy Absorbing Capacity of Wall from Dead Load:

Esf : Es - Ewall-DL Esf = 634.888 kip.ft (Net Available Strain Energy)

Compare the applied energy with the energy absorbing capacity of the structure.

Efinal = 246.406kip.ft < Esf = 634.888kip-ft OK IXr-Xrnmr-rf\ri.'A'u-nnkipq\rlrpn9nOFA-mM v- Pane OFu 951; 94 OF Pave 94 95wvv>sis vvl

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REVISION NO. 0 PAGE 95 Summary The concrete wall at Column Row 44 is capable of withstanding a postulated load drop for the drop height tabulated below:

drop = 2.5ft for the load tabulated below:

Pplug := 232-kip using the DlFs tabulated below:

DIFC = 1 DIFs = 1 raqe Uh I*em~t~xnnierrnnG II b:bHZXJUV\tb\ItUU-4A'IflAA mprt mMd b Paqe 95 UP- 95S

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REV. NO. 0 PAGE NO. 96

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS This calculation determines values of maximum safe lifting height for movement of Unit 3 Reactor Shield Plugs (plugs) for storage in Unit 2 during outage of Unit 3 and the return of these plugs to Unit 3 at the end of Unit 3 outage. The lifting of the plugs takes place on Unit 3 and Unit 2 Reactor Cavities and above Reactor Building floor Elevation 613'-0".

There are three layers of plug. There are two plugs in each layer. Each plug has the shape of a semi-circular disc of thickness 2'-0". The diameter of the top layer of plugs is approximately 43' with the successive layers having smaller diameter.

Each of the top plugs weighs 116 Ton (232 kips). This exceeds the single failure proof (SFP) rating of the Reactor Building Crane, which is 110 Ton (220 kips). The load drop analyses performed in this calculation are performed to comply with Sections 5.1.4 (2) and 5.1.5 (c) of NUREG-0612 (Ref. 2), which requires a load drop analysis when the SFP requirements are not met.

The load drop analyses performed in this calculation to determine the maximum lifting heights meet the intent of the Appendix A of NUREG-0612. The portion of the appendix that is applicable to heavy load drop evaluation is Section 1 "General Considerations".

This section has 10 items. The table below summarizes the applicability of the 10 items to the scope of this calculation, and when the item is applicable, the table states whether the intent of the requirement or the requirement itself is met.

C.\ComEd\d3\cookies\dre020064 doc

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REV. NO. 0 PAGE NO. 97 NUREG-0612. Appendix A, Section 1. Items 1-10 Item Applicability Analysis No.

1 YES Considered and Evaluated.

Requirement Met.

2 NO 3 YES The RB Crane does not restrict the travel area within the designated load path via mechanical stops or electrical interlocks.

However, Dresden Station will administratively control load movements to the evaluated areas (see Attachment C of this calculation).

Therefore, the intent of this requirement will be met.

4 NO 5 NO 6 YES Analysis is based on this requirement.

Requirement Met.

7 YES Analysis is based on this requirement.

Requirement Met.

8 YES Analysis is based on this requirement.

Requirement Met.

9 NO 10 NO Refer to Figures 1 through 3 (Attachment B) for the travel paths that are evaluated for each layer of plugs. These figures specify the maximum lift heights that are determined in this calculation. These evaluations consider effects of local damage and overall damage to the supporting reinforced concrete structure.

For local damage, it is shown that for the calculated maximum heights, impacted floor slabs will not suffer back face scabbing. Equations from Ref. 1 based on NDRC local damage equations are employed to obtain this conclusion. This is an expected result in view of the size of the impactor (plugs) and the slow velocity of impact corresponding to 2'-6" maximum drop height.

CA\ComEd\d3\cookies\dreO2OO64 doc

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REV. NO. 0 PAGE NO. 98 For overall damage, the energy balance is used to show that for the maximum heights calculated the ductility limits of the impacted structural elements as determined from Appendix C of the ACI 349 (Ref. 4) will not be exceeded. When flexure controls, the ductility limit for beams and slabs is determined to be 10. In order to conclude that flexure govems, it is verified that the shear strength exceeds the flexural strength by at least 20%. When axial compression governs, the limit of ductility is 1.3 from ACI 349.

In the overall damage evaluation, elasto-plastic load deflection diagrams developed from the component capacities from ACl 349, and stiffness calculations from Ref. 1 are used. The area under this diagram must exceed the energy of the fall reduced by the losses that take place at the instant of impact. These losses are calculated using equations from Chapter 15 of the book "Roark's Formulas for Stress and Strain" (Ref.

3).

Two factors of conservatism exist in the overall impact evaluations. These are:

• The effect of increase in yield and crushing strengths due to high strain rate effects encountered in impact loading are ignored, and

• The entire weight of the plug is assumed to drop the full amount of the drop height.

If failure occurs at the lift points or slings, the center of gravity travels less due to ensuing rotation of the plug prior to impact.

In making these overall impact evaluations, due to the size of the plug more than one floor element may become engaged in the impact process. The following five load drop scenarios were considered to envelope all potential load drops of the plugs on to the Reactor Cavity and on to the floor at Elevation 613'-0". Note that the load movements are limited to the areas shown in Figures 1 through 3 (Attachment B). The scenarios considered are:

1. All cases of the drop of a shield plug on to the Reactor cavity (Units 2 and 3).

2. Full drop of a shield plug on a single column (Drop Height = 1'-0").

3. Full drop of a shield plug on a system of two adjacent slabs with a beam in between the slabs (Drop Height = 2'-6").

4. Full drop of a shield plug on two adjacent columns (Drop Height = 2'-6").

5. Full drop of a shield plug on wall at Column Row 44 (Drop Height = 2'-6").

The following notes apply to the five scenarios above.

C.\ComEd\d3\cookies\dre020064 doc

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REV. NO. 0 PAGE NO. 99

a. Scenario 2 covers the case of a full drop of 1 foot on a wall

b. Scenario 4 covers the case of a full drop of 2'-6" on a wall and a column.

Based on above evaluations it was determined that the ductility limit of 1.3 for axial compression and 10 for flexure will not be exceeded. Therefore, maximum heights of 12" (1'-O") and 30" (2'-6") in Figures 1 through 3 are acceptable.

C:\ComEd\d3\cookies\dreO20064.doc I

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REV. NO. 0 PAGE NO. Al ATTACHMENT A S&L Evaluation No. SL-007347 C.\ComEd\d3\cookies\dre020064 doc

4-Attachment A CONTROL NO. D-1298M pX SAFETY-RELATED Calculation No. DRE02-0064 PROJECT NO. 10338-021

[ I NON-SAFETY-RELATED RevisionNo. 0 Page AZ PAGE 1 OF 8 l]REGULATORY RELATED

[] RELIABILITY RELATED COMED ENGINEERING EVALUATION FORM DRESDEN/QUAD CITIES SYSTEM CODE: DRE-1600, QC-0020 PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE for accepting Ioad drops This engineering evaluation provides the basis of an engineering judgment aid-Quad Cities station. The associated-with the removal of any one of the shield plugs in Dresden onto the lower layer shield objective is to consider only drops-resulting from-a shield plug dropping head. Load drops on the plugsrorfrom the drop of the lowest layer shield plug onto the drywell was initiated to support operating floor are not within the scope of this evaluation. This evaluation shield plugs while the unit the the ongoing ComEd efforts to reduce the outage duration by removing is in coastdown.

ASSUMPTIONS I, than 6 inches above the

1. It is assumed that the bottom of the lifted shield plug will be no higher parameters for the LaSalle operating floor. This evaluation is performed by comparison to the critical this 6 inch limitation,

3) has Station. The detailed evaluation of the LaSalle load drop (Reference load movement procedures. This 6" and this assumption is reasonable based on typical heavy the result of this evaluation.

limitation shall be stated in any procedure that specifically relies on INTERFACING COMMENTS BY:

Name of Commentor Caic. No. Signature of Commentor Division Consultant 10-26-98 Prepared By: N. 4 Signature r-UZLIUI I vn P-roiect Manager 10-26-98 Reviewed By: IV-/ -I Position Date Signature h Consultant 10-26-98 Approved By:

(Zinnolti ra Position Date PADRESDENWECHANIGMI12981VIDoc

e Attachment A Kr1e'n 8 Calculation No. DRE02-0064 rit:. Revision No. 0 Page A3 CONTROL NO. D-1298M

[XI SAFETY-RELATED PROJECT NO. 10338-021

[ I NON-SAFETY-RELATED PAGE 2 OF8

[ ] REGULATORY RELATED

[ ] RELIABILITY RELATED COMED ENGINEERING EVALUATION FORM DRESDEN/QUAD CITIES SYSTEM CODE: DRE-1 600, QC-0020

2. There are no unverified assumptions.

DESIGN INPUT Refs I a througt

• For shield plugs of Dresden and Quad Cities, the geometry parameters are from if.

Refs. I g and 1h.

• For shield plugs of Dresden and Quad Cities, F'c and Fy are from thickness information is from

• For Dresden and Quad Cities drywell head material, radius, and Refs. 2a, 2b, 2c and 2d.

lb and 3.

• LaSalle shield plug and drywell head information is from Refs. Ia, PADRESDENWMECHANIC\D-1 298M.DOC

tiinWy

[XI SAFETY-RELATED CONTROL NO. D-1298M

[]NON-SAFETY-RELATED PROJECT NO. 10338-021

[]REGULATORY RELATED PAGE 3 OF 8

[]RELIABILITY RELATED COMED ENGINEERING EVALUATION FORM DRESDENIQUAD CITIES SYSTEM CODE: DRE-1600, QC-0020 REFERENCES Attachment A I. Sargent& LundyDrawings: RevisionNo. 0 DRE02-0064 Calculation No. Page A4.

a. LaSalle, S-768, Rev. D

b. LaSalle, S-268, Rev. F.

c. Quad Cities, B-252, Rev. G

d. Quad Cities, B-234, Rev T

e. Dresden, B-242, Rev. C

f. Dresden, B-216, Rev. J

g. Dresden, B-200, Rev. AF

h. Quad Cities, B-1 88, Rev. F

2. CBI Drawings:

a. Quad Cities, Drawing 7, Rev. 4 (Contract 9-6735)

b. Quad Cities, Drawing 3, Rev. 4 (Contract 9-6735)

c. Dresden, Drawing 7, Rev. 2 (Contract 9-4646)

d. Dresden, Drawing 3, Rev. 0 (Contract 9-4646) 1,

3. Calculation L-000061, "Reactor Shield Plugs-Heavy Load Assessment," Rev.

January 17, 1996 (LaSalle) 1996

4. Sargent & Lundy Calculation pS-0288, Project No. 09936-002, Rev. 0, June 24, 1996

5. Sargent & Lundy Calculation LS01 65, Project No. 09936-002, Rev. 0, July 2, P:ADRESDENWMECHANIC0D1 298M.DOC

I

_Mr . Lunfys

[XI SAFETY-RELATED CONTROL NO. D-1298M

[ NON-SAFETY-RELATED PROJECT NO. 10338-021

[]REGULATORY RELATED PAGE 4 OF 8

[ RELIABILITY RELATED ENGINEERING EVALUATION FORM COMED SYSTEM CODE: DRE-1 600, QC-0020 Attachment A DRESDEN/QUAD CITIES Calculation No. DREO2-0064 EVALUATION Revision No. 0 Page A 5 The evaluation is made by comparing the shield plug and drywell head relevant parameters for Dresden, Quad Cities and LaSalle stations. Reference 3 is a detailed evaluation of a similar load drop evaluation for LaSalle. Based on similarities to the LaSalle evaluation, certain drops for Dresden and Quad Cities can be considered acceptable. Where a key parameter varies such that acceptability by direct comparison to Reference 3 is not possible for Dresden and Quad Cities, information from References 4 and 5 is used to judge the acceptability of the particular load drop. The description of the postulated load drops and bases for acceptability follows with the aid of relevant parameters summarized in Table 1( at the end of this evaluation).

Description of Drop Scenarios Considering the geometry of the drywell cavity and the three layers of the shield plugs, clearly, the critical type of load drop will result when one of the two third layer (lowest level) plugs drops into the cavity. This type of drop has the potential for striking the drywell head. Several scenarios are possible as follows: (1) direct vertical drop into the cavity due to a failure in the crane operation, (2) failure of the lug on the symmetry axis of the half-circular shaped plug and rotation of the plug about the horizontal axis passing through the other two symmetrically located lugs, and (3) failure of one of the symmetrically located lugs and rotation about the horizontal axis passing through the remaining lugs.

Reference 3 has considered these three scenarios for LaSalle. A brief discussion of these and comparison to Dresden and Quad Cities is provided below.

1. Vertical Drop of a Third Layer Plug Into Cavity In this case, the dropping plug impacts the lowest level ledge in the cavity and impact is absorbed by the flexure of the plug. LaSalle calculation (Ref.3) shows that the plug flexural strength is quite adequate to support the impact load. Any scabbing of the plug is not considered to be of consequence to cause leakage and loss of containment function.

PADRESDENUMECHANIC\D1298M DOC

L-undtV..

CONTROL NO. D-1298M

[X] SAFETY-RELATED ROJECT NO. 10338-021

[ ] NON-SAFETY-RELATED Attachent AGE 5 OF 8 REGULATORY RELATED

[ RELIABILITY RELATED Calculation No. DRE02-0064 Revision No. 0 Page A/ COMED ENGINEERING EVALUATION FORM DRESDEN/QUAD CITIES SYSTEM CODE: DRE-1600, QC-0020 plugs have the same Referring to Table 1, we conclude that since Dresden and Quad Cities steel strength values; this thickness, slightly heavier bottom reinforcement, same concrete and drop is also acceptable for Dresden and Quad Cities.

2. Drop Due to Failure of Lug on Line of Symmetry of Plug symmetrical lugs causes the In this case the rotation about the horizontal axis through the two for LaSalle, this interruption falling plug to impact the lowest ledge. Based on Ref.3 discussion the plug strikes the drywell of the motion either prevents any strike on the drywell head, or if case 3 below discusses the head the energy will be less than the uninterrupted drop. Since with Case 3.

uninterrupted impact on the drywell head, Case 2 is considered bounded similar lug configuration to Because Dresden and Quad Cities have similarly shaped plugs and these stations, and Case 3 LaSalle, the above Case 2 conclusion for LaSalle carries over to also bounds the Case 2 drop for these stations.

3. Drop Due to Failure of a Symmetrically Located Lug that an uninterrupted In this case, because of the cavity and plug geometry, Ref. 3 concludes motion of the plug and impact on the drywell head is possible. After considering the rotational by the drywell head is momentum transfer during impact, the energy required to be absorbed calculated to be 540 in.kip (Ref.3) for LaSalle.

analysis of the LaSalle Reference 3 performs a nonlinear, large-displacement, elstoplastic the patch load applied at the drywell head under patch loading normal to the shell surface with program ADINA was used to likely location that plug impacts the drywell head. The computer mid-thickness (i.e.,

calculate the deflection under the load and the values of maximum load-deflection curve membrane) and maximum surface strains. The area under the calculated increased. Reference 3 is the energy that shell absorbs as the applied load magnitude is by the shell equals shows that at the maximum surface strain of 0.78%, the energy absorbed level of deformation in the the energy demand of 540 in.kip. The solution is terminated at this shell.

strain and 6% for Reference 3 uses strain acceptance limits of 2% for maximum membrane based on maximum surface strain. These values are conservative limits established PADRESDEN\MECHANIC\D1 298M.DOC

[aX SAFETY-RELATED Attachment A CONTROL NO. D-1298M

] NON-SAFETY-RELATED Calculation No. DREO2-0064 PROJECT NO. 10338-021

[]REGULATORY RELATED Revision No. 0 Page A7 PAGE 6 OF 8

[]RELIABILITY RELATED ENGINEERING EVALUATION FORM COMED SYSTEM CODE: DRE-1600, QC-0020 DRESDEN/QUAD CITIES containment tests, as referenced and discussed in Ref.3. Based on the fact that energy demand for the LaSalle load drop can be accommodated at the maximum surface strain of 0.78%, the LaSalle load drop was considered acceptable in Ref. 3.

The energy demand is directly related to the drop height. By referring to Table 1 at the end of this evaluation, we note that relative to bottom of the third layer plugs the drywell head in Dresden and Quad Cities is lower than that at LaSalle. This effect of height difference can be estimated by increasing the LaSalle energy demand by the ratio.

exl = (6.67 + 2.73) / (6.67 + 1.88) = 1.10.

(Note: 2.73' = 2'- 8 23/32", 1.88' = 1'-10 1/2" from Table 1, and 6.67' = three times the thickness of one layer of shield plugs plus 2" for gaps and 6" for the maximum height above the floor.)

Another amplification factor is needed to account for the slight difference in the weight of the plug in LaSalle and Dresden/ Quad Cities. By referring to Table 1, this weight factor is a2 = 184.5/ 172 = 1.07 Consequently, the energy demand for Dresden/ Quad Cities becomes E = 1.10 x 1.07 x 540 = 636 in.kip.

Because the Ref. 3 calculation was terminated at the balance point for LaSalle, and because load-deflection curve is nonlinear, reference is made to the results of other S&L calculations for similar shells loaded similar to the LaSalle drywell head analysis. These are obtained from Refs.4 and 5. The drywell heads analyzed in these references were designed also by CBI and are for similar vintage BWRs. Reference 4 shell has a radius of 16'-2" and thickness of 1.5".

Reference 5 shell has a radius of 18'-11" and thickness of 1.5". In these respects, these shells are considered comparable to the Dresden/ Quad Cities drywell heads.

The Ref. 4 analysis was carried out to the maximum surface strain of 2.7% (corresponding maximum membrane strain was 0.74%). The Ref. 5 analysis was carried out to the maximum surface strain of 2.3% (corresponding maximum membrane strain was 1.13%). For both P.ADRESDENWMECHANIC0D1298M.DOC

Al Attachment A CONTROL NO. D-1298M

[XI SAFETY-RELATED Calculation No. DRE02-0064 PROJECT NO. 10338-021

] NON-SAFETY-RELATED Revision No. 0 Page Ag PAGE7OF8

[]REGULATORY RELATED

[ ] RELIABILITY RELATED COMED ENGINEERING EVALUATION FORM DRESDEN/QUAD CITIES SYSTEM CODE: DRE-1600, QC-0020 further load the model, analyses, at the point of solution termination, it was possible to indicating the absence of any cliff in the load-deflection curve.

1800 in.kip. This energy is The energy absorbed by the shells in Refs. 4 and 5, well exceeds Quad Cities. It is, therefore, much more than the energy demand of 636 in.kip for Dresden/

is acceptable. Because of concluded that the Case 3 load drop for Dresden/ Quad Cities deformation of the shell at localized inelastic deformations at the location of impact, permanent the containment function of the the impact location in the form of a dent is expected; however, drywell head will not be impaired.

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS the removal of shield plugs has The consequence of a load drop into the drywell cavity during By comparing the key been evaluated for Dresden/ Quad Cities when the reactor is operating.

load drop has been analyzed input parameters to the parameters for LaSalle for which a similar energy absorption capability of in detail (Ref. 3), and by comparing to the load-deformation and that the worst case load drop in similar drywell heads calculated in Refs. 4 and 5, we conclude the drywell head is expected; Dresden/ Quad Cities is acceptable. Some localized denting of however, containment function will be maintained.

reactor cavity where a plug The limitation of this evaluation result is that, in the vicinity of the at no time, be raised higher than may drop into the cavity, the bottom of the shield plug should, any procedure that relies on 6" above the operating floor. This 6" limitation shall be stated in the result of this evaluation.

onto the operating floor.

This evaluation does not address any drop of the shield plugs P:\DRESDENWMECHANIC\D1 298M.DOC

r=W'V- Lun4fldy1 Attachment A CONTROL NO. D-1298M SAFETY-RELATED NX Calculation No. DRE02-0064 PROJECT NO. 10338-021

[]NON-SAFETY-RELATED

[ ] REGULATORY RELATED Revision No. 0 Page A9 Ffnq I PAGE 8 OF 8

[ ] RELIABILITY RELATED COMED ENGINEERING EVALUATION FORM DRESDEN/QUAD CITIES SYSTEM CODE: DRE-1600, QC-0020 Table I Comparison of Shield Plug and Drywell Head Parameters in LaSalle, Dresden and Quad Cities

LaSalle Dresden Quad Cities Item 1.0 SHIELD PLUG 19'-100" 19'-1 1/2" 19,- 0" 1 1 Radius 2'0" 2 1-O n 2' 0" 1.2 Thickness 185.4 kips 172 kips 185.4 kips 1.3 Weight #9 @ 12" and 1.4 Top Reinforcement #8 @ 12" and #9 @ 12" and

1. 7 @ 12 #9 @ 12" #9 @ 12"

1. 11 @6" and #11 @ 6" and #11 @ 6" and 1.5 Bottom Reinforcement #9 @ 12"

1. 7 @ 12" #9@ 12" 4 ksi 4 ksi 4 ksi 1.6 F, 60 ksi 60 ksi 60 ksi 1.7 Fy 1.8 Distance from Bottom of Lowest 2'-8 23/32" Shield Plug to Top of Drywell Head 1V-10A/2" 2:-8 23/32" S&L S&L 1.9 Designer 3 d .)

(Shield plug information from References la through I h an 2.0 DRYWELL HEAD SA-516 Gr 70 2.1 Steel Type SA-516 Gr 70 SA-212 Gr B 15-1 o" 17'-3 3/4" 17'-3 3/4" 2.2 Radius 8'-0 314" 8'-1 0 9/32" 8'-1 0 9/32" 2.3 Height 1-3/8" 1-7/16" 1-7/16" 2.4 Thickness CBI CBI CBI 2.5 Designer 2d and 3)

(Dr well Head Information from References 2a, 2b, 2c, PADRESDENNMECHANICD1 298M.DOC

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REV. NO. 0 PAGE NO. B1 ATTACHMENT B Figures 1, 2, and 3 C \ComEd~d3\cookies~dre020064 doc

CALCULATION NO. DRE02-0064 REV. NO. 0 PAGE NO. C1 ATTACHMENT C Design Input for Administrative Control of Load Movements CAComEd\d3\cookies\dre020064 doc

CONSTANTINE N To: ADAM ALDABBAGH/SargentIundyiSARGENTLUNDY, MOHAMMAD PETROPOULOS AMINISargentIundy@SARGENTLUNDY, KURT H KOESSER/SargentIundy@SARGENTLUNDY 09/28102 11:12 AM cc:

Subject:

Re: FW: Status of Dresden Crane LAR

-- Forwarded by CONSTANTINE N PETROPOULOS/Sargentlundy on 09/28102 11:10 AM -

CONSTANTINE N To: dean.galaniseexeloncorp.com PETROPOULOS cc: allan.haeger~exeloncorp.com, kishin.chhablanieexeloncorp.com, tmothy.loch~exeloncorp.com 09127/02 02:33 PM

Subject:

Re: FW: Status of Dresden Crane LARD Cookie load drop D3 2002.do Dean:

A The attached file responds to the question, and shows the applicability of the NUREG-0612 Appendix items to the hravy load drop analysis.

Best Regards Constantine dean.galanis@exeloncorp.com Attachment C Calculation No. DRE02-0064 Revision No. 0 Page C2

Dresden Unit 3 Reactor Shield Plug Heavy Load Drop Evaluation Compliance with NUREG-0612 Appendix A the movement of the The approach used in the evaluation of postulated heavy load drops for NUREG-0612. The portion of Appendix A reactor shield plugs meets the intent of Appendix A of 1 "General Considerations".

that is applicable to the heavy load drop evaluation is Section The table Section 1 of Appendix A has ten items that should be considered as appropriate.

the evaluation, and shown below discusses the applicability of each one of the ten items to in the analysis.

whether each applicable item is either fully met or its intent is being met NUREG-0612, Appendix A, Section 1, Items 1-10 Item No. Aplicabilit Analysis

_1 Yeasrlilu-l1u Ind Renuirement min?~u..,._... Met.

2 NO YES The RB Crane does not restrict the travel area within the designated load path via mechanical stops or electrical interlocks. Per conversation with Mr. Tim Loch, the movement of the crane will be controlled administratively by reactor services based on input from engineering.

Therefore, the intent of this requirement will be met.

4 NO s.I 5 1 NU I Met.

^ SA A_. ._:- ---or nn

-- thi rpni dirmmnnt Reqluirement 6 1 Y.~zi Mflasybb Is UdrU ULI LIII '-- , Me t -

on

• c - m n a-IM l-lI I FI-!-

in

• 7 YFI.S I CO-u- I lAlA HRIVSI IS hae 1 lC ~uu I IDUs IsI A -A.1_ u - _. . ._.-. - . ___ -----

1 Analysis is based on this requirement.

Requirement Met.

8 II Y tS _

.- I-,

C I I NU .

L 1U I, 1-N aJ _

Attachment C Calculation No. DRE02-0064 Revision No. 0 Page C3 FINAL

ATTACHMENT 2 CC-AA-309-1 001 ExelknSM Design Analysis Minor Revision Revision 0 Cover Sheet Nuclear P(ce~ I-oF3 Last Page No. 3 Analysis No. DRE02-0064; Rev. OA Revision EC/ECR No. EC (Eval) 340053 Rev. 0 Revision

Title:

D2/3 Load Drop Evaluation of the Reactor Shield Plugs Station(s) Dresden Is this Design Analysis Safeguards? Yes E] No Z Unit No.: 2&3 Does this Design Analysis Contain Unverified Assumptions? Yes fl No 3 Safety Class Safety Related System Code 00 ATI/AR# None Description of Change Calculation No. DRE02-0064, Rev. 0, addressed the load drop evaluation of the Reactor Shield Plugs. Though page 1 of the calculation Rev. 0, shows the calculation to-be applicable for both Units 2 & 3, the conclusion (Page 96) only addresses the movement of the Unit 3 shield plugs.

This revision (minor) provides an evaluation to show that the Rev. 0 of the calculation is also applicable to the load drop of the Unit 2 Reactor Shield Plugs (Item "A"). Additionally, this minor revision also addresses the actual weights of the Unit 3 Concrete Shield Plugs (cookies) as determined after Rev. 0 of this calculation was approved (Item "B").

Note: On page 19 (Rev. 0), in the section noted "Slabs", the last slab listed should be Slab "R" (18") (Column Rows 48-49 / M-N). Column Rows L-M as shown in Rev. 0 is incorrect. This correction has no impact on the final conclusion of the load drop evaluation.

Calc.DRE02-0064 Minor Rev.Cover Sheet.doc Disposition of Changes (include additional pages as required)

ATTACHMENT 2 CC-AA-309-1001 Design Analysis Minor Revision Revision 0 Cover Sheet ANALYSIS No. DRE02-0064; Rev. OA Page No. 2 of 3 Item "A": Applicability of Rev. 0 of the Calculation for Unit 2 Shield Plug Drop.

The Reactor Shield Plugs are moved over the concrete slabs, beams and columns between column lines "L" and "N" of the refuel floor, elevation 613'-0" (Refer to Attachment "B"). The travel path for the top two layers of the Reactor Shield Plugs of Unit 2 are similar (Opposite Hand) to that evaluated for Unit 3 (Refer to Attachment B, Pages B2, B3 and B4). The bottom layer of the Unit 2 shield plugs are normally stacked on top of each other between column lines "46" to "49" and and "L" to "N".

The load path from Unit 2 to Unit 3 is basically opposite to the load path from Unit 3 to Unit 2 which was addressed in Rev. 0. Rev. 0 of this calculation evaluated the adequacy of the following concrete elements which are required for the load drop of the Unit 2 shield plugs and found them acceptable:

Columns (page 18): M-39, M-40, M-41, M-42, M-43, M-45, M-46, M-47, M-48 and M-49.

Beams (page 18): Column Rows 39-40-41-42 / L-M and M-N; Column Row 43-45 / L-M; Column Row M / 39-44 & Column Rows 46-49 /L-N.

Slabs (page 19): Column Rows 39-42 / L-N; Column Rows 42-46 / L-M; Column Rows 46-49 / L-N.

Walls (page 19): Column Row L / 39-49; Column Row 44 / Dryer-Separator Pool Wall to N.

The configuration, size and thickness of the shield plugs of Units 2 & 3 are the same (Reference drawings B-242

& B-672). The weights of the Unit 2 shield plugs are assumed to be the same as those considered for the Unit 3 plugs in the Rev. 0 analysis. The actual weights of the Unit 3 plugs were found to be less than the estimated weights (refer to Item "B" below). The five load drop scenarios considered for potential load drops of the Unit 3 plugs on the Reactor Cavity and on the floor at elevation 613'-0" (Page 98) are also applicable to the Unit 2 shield plugs since the configuration of the Unit 2 and Unit 3 refuel floors and the configuratuion of the Unit 2 and Unit 3 reactor shield plugs are similar.

Based on the above qualification of the Unit 2 concrete elements for load drops, the analysis performed in DRE02-0064 (Rev. 0) is also applicable for load drops of the Unit 2 concrete shield plugs. Refer to Attachment "D" for identification of the Unit 2 Concrete elements qualified in Rev. 0 for load drops.

Item "B": Record of the Estimated and the Actual Weights of the Unit 3 Shield Plugs:

Estimated Weights (CaIc. Rev. 0) Actual Weights (EC 339901)

Top Layer Plugs: 116 Tons (Page 4) 114.9+0.36=115.26 Tons & 112.9+0.36=113.26 Tons Middle Layer Plugs 112 Tons (Page 36) 105.0+0.36=105.36 Tons & 106.5+0.36=106.36 Tons Bottom Layer Plugs: 108 Tons (Page 35) 100.0+0.36=100.36 Tons & 99.2+0.36= 99.56 Tons Note: 0.36 Tons is the weight of the rigging for the concrete shield plugs as weighed and reported by "Reactor Services Group" on 09/12/2002 (Reference email - Attachment page "D2").

The Reactor Building Crane has been designated by the NRC to be single-failure proof up to 110 tons. Hence, the lifted loads equal to and below 110 tons do not require "Load Drop Analysis". Therefore, for the Unit 3 plugs, based on the actual weights shown above, the middle layer and the bottom layer shield plugs can be lifted and moved around without any restrictions. Only the top layer shield plugs should be lifted and moved with the restrictions specified in the Rev. 0 of the calculation (Refer to Attachment B, Page B2). The Unit 2 plugs have not been accurately weighed. After their weights are determined, an evaluation will be performed to identify any load lifting/movement restrictions. Until then, the Unit 2 plugs will be lifted and moved with the same restrictions that were applicable to the Unit 3 plugs when they were moved before their actual weights were determined (refer to Attachment B).

Conclusion and Summary:

Calculation DRE02-0064 (Rev. 0) which was performed to address the "Load Drop Evaluation" of the Unit 3 Reactor Shield Plugs is also applicable for the "Load Drop Evaluation' of the Unit 2 Reactor Shield Plugs" Additionally, based on the actual weights determined from the Unit 3 shield plugs, various restrictions described in the calculation (Rev. 0) for the movement of the middle and the bottom layers of the Unit 3 shield plugs are not required since their weights are below 110 tons, the single-failure proof capacity of the crane.

ATTACHMENT 2 CC-AA-309-1 001 Design Analysis Minor Revision Revision 0 Cover Sheet C- A LC 3Dp-c L O 6+ -t OA Pe- 2 - 5 Ci-4 Preparer Kishiri Chhablani ac'n- '/3i I >

Print Name ( Siqn Name Reviewer Robe rt A. Koncel Print Name

(?(14; a AJ Sign Name 1//3/03 Method of Review Z Detailed Review El Alternate Calculations E1 Testing

/7 , I

/

1i2^al\AI^t5o-

.. ... .. 2, . . .

Mfe~tvlt:W-tnUt. ,,I I - /f Approver Tim Loch y

'I rev --

S _

-t--&X-e3 Print Name / Sign Name (CFor -Ememal Analyses Onily)

Exelon Reviewer N/A Print Name Sign Name Approver N/A Pnnt Name Sign Namne

Chhablani, Kishin (LC-V-0 PAC,& ZD-L -

From: Purdy, Kenneth M. ( A)

Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 10:00 AM To: Chhablani, Kishin

Subject:

RE: Weight of Strongback & Rigging for Shield Blocks Kishin The weighing of the Reactor Head strongback was performed as a pre outage activity there was no WO number

--- Onginal Message-----

From: Chhablani, Kishin Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 9:15 AM To: Purdy, Kenneth M.

Cc: Loch, Timothy L; Speroff, Randy D.

Subject:

FW: Weight of Strongback & Rigging for Shield Blocks Ken, I sent a email earlier about back-up information regarding Unit 2 Vessel Head Weight. Please also verify and inform me the WO numbers for weight of the Strongback. Thanks, Kishin

---

Original Message---

From: Chhablani, Kishin Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 11:09 AM To: Haeger, Allan R.

Subject:

FW. Weight of Strongback & Rigging for Shield Blocks FOR YOUR INFORMATION KISHIN

---Original Message--

From: Chhablani, Kishin Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 9:19 AM To: Speroff, Randy D; Reda, Joseph S.

Subject:

FW. Weight of Strongback & Rigging for Shield Blocks If the following information is not correct please inform me. Thanks, Kishin

---Onginal Message----

From: Chhablani, Kishin Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 3 32 PM To: Chhablani, Kishin

Subject:

Weight of Strongback & Rigging for Shield Blocks THIS IS FOR RECORD PURPOSES:

JOE REDA GOT A CALL FROM RANDY SPEROFF TODAY AT 15:25 HOURS GIVING HIM FOLLOWING ACTUAL WEIGHTS OF THE STRONGBACK AND THE RIGGING FOR SHIELD BLOCKS:

STRONGBACK: 9400 LBS.

RIGGING FOR SHIELD BLOCKS: 710 LBS.

KISHIN CHHABLANI 09/09/2002 1