L-MT-06-058, Response to Request for Additional Information for License Amendment Request for Contingent Installation of Temporary Fuel Storage Rack in Spent Fuel Pool

Response to Request for Additional Information for License Amendment Request for Contingent Installation of Temporary Fuel Storage Rack in Spent Fuel Pool

ML062560369
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello
Issue date:	09/07/2006
From:	Conway J Nuclear Management Co
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
L-MT-06-058, TAC MD0302
Download: ML062560369 (170)

Text

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Operated by Nuclear Management Company, LLC 2807 West County Road 75

• Monticello, Minnesota 55362-9637 Telephone: 763.295.5151

• Fax: 763.295.1454 September 7, 2006 L-MT-06-058 10 CFR 50.90 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Docket 50-263 License No. DPR-22 Response to Request for Additional Information for a License Amendment Request for Contingent Installation of a Temporary Fuel Storage Rack in the Spent Fuel Pool (TAC No. MD0302)

References:

1)

NMC letter to U.S. NRC, License Amendment Request for Contingent Installation of a Temporary Spent Fuel Storage Rack, (L-MT-06-013), dated March 7, 2006.

2)

NMC letter to U.S. NRC, Supplement to a License Amendment Request for Contingent Installation of a Temporary Fuel Storage Rack in the Spent Fuel Pool (TAC No. MD0302), (L-MT-06-044),

dated May 30, 2006.

On March 7, 2006, the Nuclear Management Company, LLC (NMC) submitted a license amendment request for the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP) (Reference 1) to revise the licensing basis to allow temporary installation of a Programmed and Remote (PaR) Systems Corporation 8x8 (64 cell) high-density fuel storage rack in the spent fuel pool (SFP) to maintain full core off-load (FCOL) capability. On May 30, 2006, the NMC submitted the associated criticality evaluation and supporting analyses (Reference 2) as a supplement to the license amendment request.

On June 9 and July 6, 2006, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requested additional structural information following the Standard Review Plan Section 3.8.4, Appendix D, format during teleconferences with the NMC. Enclosure 1 provides the requested PaR fuel storage rack module structural design related information in the accordance with Appendix D. Enclosure 2 provides copies of several figures and drawings referred to within Enclosure 1.

USNRC Page 2 On April 26, 2006, the NRC provided three requests for additional information (RAI) related to the thermal-hydraulic and criticality aspects of the March 7, 2006, license amendment request. The May 30,2006, license amendment request supplement answered two of the three RAls. The response to the remaining RAI is provided in. provides a non-proprietary copy of sections of the PaR Report on the high-density fuel storage rack module design that have not been previously submitted.

This letter makes no new commitments or changes to any other existing commitments.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on September 7,2006.

3dhn T. Conway Site Vice President, Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Nuclear Management Company, LLC

Enclosures:

(4) cc:

Administrator, Region Ill, USNRC Project Manager, Monticello, USNRC Resident Inspector, Monticello, USNRC Minnesota Department of Commerce

ENCLOSURE 1 STRUCTURAL RAI INFORMATION RESPONSE 1.0

SUMMARY

On March 7, 2006, the Nuclear Management Company, LLC (NMC) submitted a license amendment request (LAR) (Reference 1) to revise the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP) licensing basis to allow temporary installation of a Programmed and Remote (PaR) Systems Corporation 8x8 (64 cell) high-density fuel storage rack module in the spent fuel pool to maintain full core off-load capability. On May 30, 2006, the NMC submitted the associated criticality evaluation and supporting analyses (Reference 2) for the temporary PaR fuel storage rack module.

On June 9 and July 6, 2006, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requested additional information in accordance with the guidance of Standard Review Plan (SRP) Section 3.8.4, Appendix D, Technical Position on Spent Fuel Pool Racks, (Reference 3) format during teleconferences with the NMC.

SRP [Standard Review Plan] Section 3.8.4, Appendix D, identifies the information that the NRC staff reviews with respect to the structural integrity of a spent fuel rack. He [the NRC reviewer] suggests that you provide information specific to the rack in line with the guidance there.

This RAI response provides the requested structural information and associated PaR and NMC documents. The MNGP was designed and constructed prior to issuance of the SRP, and consequently not designed to meet the SRP guidance.

To facilitate staff review, however, applicable structural design information is provided following the SRP, Appendix D format.

2.0 BACKGROUND

The temporary 8x8 PaR fuel storage rack module to be used at the MNGP (if required) was originally slated to be installed in the Duane Arnold Energy Center (DAEC) spent fuel pool. This fuel storage rack module was not installed and has been made available to the NMC, to be installed if necessary, in the MNGP spent fuel pool (SFP) in the event a full core off-load (FCOL) becomes necessary prior to operation of the MNGP Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI).

3.0 REVIEW USING SRP SECTION 3.8.4, APPENDIX D The PaR Systems Corporation developed a Fuel Storage System Design Report, (Reference 4) (contained on compact disc as Enclosure 4), hereafter referred to as the PaR Report, covering various design topics for the high-density spent fuel storage rack module sizes procured by DAEC. This report is applicable to the temporary 8x8 PaR fuel storage rack module to be installed at the MNGP (if required in the event of a FCOL). A copy of portions of this PaR Report have been provided to the NMC for application at the MNGP.

Page 1 of 11

ENCLOSURE 1 STRUCTURAL RAI INFORMATION RESPONSE provides copies of several figures and drawings that are referred to within this enclosure. Enclosure 4 provides a listing of the applicable sections of the PaR Report. It identifies the PaR Report sections submitted in the March 7, 2006, LAR; those submitted in the May 30, 2006, supplement; and those sections provided in this submittal.

SRP Section 3.8.4, Appendix D provides the current requirements and criteria for the NRC review of SFP fuel racks and associated structures. To facilitate NRC staff review, structural design information is summarized below. Specific references to the PaR Report are provided throughout this response describing how SRP Section 3.8.4, Appendix D, criteria are met.

(1)

Description of the Spent Fuel Pool and Racks (a)

Support of the Spent Fuel Racks The temporary PaR 8 x 8 high-density fuel storage rack is constructed of bolted anodized aluminum with a Boral neutron absorber in an aluminum matrix core clad with 1100 series aluminum at alternating cell locations. The high-density spent fuel storage rack module was manufactured by the PaR Systems Corporation. The module consists of an 8 by 8 array of tubes. The absorber material is sealed within two concentric square aluminum tubes. The rack is approximately 4.5 feet-square by 14 feet high.

Nominal fuel element center-to-center spacing is 6.625 inches. A more detailed description of the PaR fuel storage rack modules is provided in Section 3.2, Rack Description, of the PaR Report (pages 3.0-2 and 3.0-3).

Note: The PaR Report includes the following fuel storage rack module sizes: 8x8, 8x10, 8x11, 10x11, and 11x11 (see PaR Report, Section 3.1, General, page 3.0-1).

The 8x8 fuel storage rack module to be installed at MNGP, and the other module sizes, are a free standing design, constrained by friction only, and are designed to be unrestrained by additional seismic supports in the pool. (PaR Report, Installation Description, page 3.0-3.)

The maximum fuel storage rack module displacement was determined to be 1.05 inch (PaR Report, Section 5.4, Dynamic Time History Analysis of Spent Fuel Racks, page 5.4-14). The analysis to determine the maximum displacement was performed as described in Section 5.4 of the PaR report for a single 8x11 fuel Page 2 of 11

ENCLOSURE 1 STRUCTURAL RAI INFORMATION RESPONSE storage rack module for DAEC. (See PaR Report, Section 5.4, page 5.4-5.) This configuration bounds the potential lifting and sliding of all the fuel storage rack module sizes discussed in the PaR report, including the 8x8 fuel storage rack module to be utilized, if required, at the MNGP.

The temporary 8x8 fuel storage rack module (if installed) will be placed on the cask pad in the SFP at the MNGP. Based on the maximum displacement analysis discussed previously, with the maximum displacement of 1.05 inches, there will not be any interface concerns between the temporary 8x8 fuel storage rack module and the existing spent fuel storage rack modules or the pool walls due to the immediate spacing, which will be greater than 6 inches.

There is no impact on the spent fuel pool liner since the temporary PaR 8X8 fuel storage rack module installation will be on the cask pad and will be located a distance greater than the maximum displacement of 1.05 inches from the cask pad edge to assure the fuel storage rack module will remain on the cask pad. The location of the fuel storage rack module will be procedurally controlled during installation to ensure it is correctly located on the cask pad.

A description of interfaces between the 8x8 fuel storage rack module and the cask pad is provided in Section (3) of this enclosure.

The location of the temporary 8x8 PaR fuel storage rack module in relation to the existing fuel storage rack modules in the SFP is shown on the mark-up of MNGP Drawing No. NX-7865-15-36, entitled High Density Fuel Storage System Installation Arrangement, and is provided in Enclosure 2.

(b)

Fuel Handling The fuel handling drop accidents are not changed due to the addition of the temporary 8x8 PaR fuel storage rack module in the fuel pool. Section (4) of this enclosure discusses the evaluation of a fuel assembly drop on the PaR fuel storage rack module designs.

(2)

Applicable Codes, Standards, and Specifications The PaR fuel storage rack module is constructed from aluminum materials (except as indicated in the table below). The materials used for the PaR fuel storage rack modules construction are compatible with the SFP environment (i.e., negligible corrosion impact). Section 5.0.2 of the PaR Page 3 of 11

ENCLOSURE 1 STRUCTURAL RAI INFORMATION RESPONSE report, Material Properties, (page 5.0-3) lists the following fuel storage rack module components and their respective material or material alloy.

Top and Bottom Casting A356-T51 Side Panels 6061-T6 Angle Connectors 6061-T6 Cavity Weldment 5052-H32 Bolts 2024-T4 Rivets 5052 Body ABS Plastic Cycolac Grade T Bearing Plate on Foot 304 Stainless Tread Foot 6061-T6 Allowable stresses were based on the Specification for Aluminum Structures - Aluminum Construction Manual (PaR Report Table 5.5.4-1, Normal Limits of Stress, page 5.5-20).

(3)

Seismic and Impact Loads A Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) time history was generated for the dynamic time history analysis of the fuel storage rack modules. The response spectrum for this generated time history and the DAEC response spectrum for the horizontal and vertical directions were plotted on Figures A and B in the PaR Report (Section 5.4, Dynamic Time History Analysis of Spent Fuel Racks, pages 5.4-8 and 5.4-9 respectively). The response spectra for the MNGP spent fuel pool has been overlaid on these two figures and the figures renamed as Figures AA and BB in Enclosure 2. The time history response spectrum that was used in the PaR analysis was plotted at a 6 percent damping value. The response spectrum for the MNGP was performed and is plotted at a 5 percent damping value. As shown on Figures AA and BB (provided in ) the 6 percent damping response spectra used in the analysis envelopes the MNGP 5 percent response spectra in the frequencies of interest. If a 6 percent damping curve was available it would lower the acceleration values, therefore, using a 5 percent damping curve for comparison is conservative. The MNGP response spectrum curves for the spent fuel pool were generated consistent with the guidance of Regulatory Guide 1.60, Design Response Spectra for Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants.

As shown in Figures AA and BB in Enclosure 2, the time history response spectrum used in the PaR analysis bounds the MNGP response spectrum in the frequency range of interest (i.e., the frequency range of the 8x8 fuel storage rack module). The first natural horizontal frequency of the fuel storage rack module analyzed by PaR was 8 hz (0.125 second period)

Page 4 of 11

ENCLOSURE 1 STRUCTURAL RAI INFORMATION RESPONSE (see PaR Report, Section 5.3, Model Description, Formulation and Assumptions for the Seismic Analysis of BWR Spent Fuel Racks, page 5.3-4). As shown on the plot, at this frequency of interest, the MNGP response spectrum is well below the time history response spectrum used in the PaR analysis. The first natural vertical frequency of the fuel storage rack module analyzed by PaR was 14 hz (0.07 second period) (see PaR Report, Section 5.3, page 5.3-4). Also, as shown on the plot, at this frequency of interest, the MNGP response spectrum is well below the time history response spectrum used in the PaR analysis. Accordingly, it is concluded that the seismic evaluations in the PaR Report are bounding for the MNGP. Therefore, the PaR 8x8 fuel storage rack module will withstand the MNGP SSE loads.

Consistent with Regulatory Guide 1.92, Combining Modal Responses and Spatial Components in Seismic Response Analysis, the seismic responses are combined by the square root sum of the squares (SRSS) for the three orthogonal directions.

The SRSS is:

SRSS = [(XZ)2 + (YZ)2 ]1/2 The following assumptions were made relative to rack submergence in the SFP. It was assumed that all water entrapped within the fuel storage rack module envelope was included in the horizontal mass of the model. No sloshing effects were included due to the pool water moving with the pool walls due to the elevation of the rack modules. No increase in effective mass was used because the damping forces generated in the pumping of the confined water from the wall rack module gap is much greater than that added by external water mass effects. (See PaR Report, Section 5.3, page 5.3-6).

The PaR fuel storage rack modules discussed in the report are designed for Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) fuel assemblies. BWR fuel assemblies have a standard cross-sectional dimension, and hence the fuel assemblies modeled are consistent with those to be stored. The fuel assemblies were modeled as loose elements, free to impact on the fuel storage rack module structure through gap elements on both sides of the fuel assembly with a nominal initial clearance (gap) of 3/8 inch each side when inserted in the storage cavity. This gap is applicable to the MNGP due to the standard sizing of the BWR fuel assembly design. This approach conservatively assumed that all fuel assemblies impacted at the same time. It was also assumed that all fuel bundles were channeled (i.e.,

a fuel assembly) to result in the largest impact load to the fuel storage rack Page 5 of 11

ENCLOSURE 1 STRUCTURAL RAI INFORMATION RESPONSE module structure (PaR Report, Section 4.3, Seismic Model Description, Formulation and Assumptions, page 4.0-3a).

The dynamic analysis included interaction between the fuel assembly and the storage cavity with the use of gap elements. Interface elements allowed the fuel storage rack module to slide and/or rock (PaR Report, Section 5.4, page 5.4-5).

(4)

Loads and Load combinations The results of a dropped fuel bundle analysis and a verification test confirming the accuracy of the results are discussed in the following Sections of the PaR report.

• Section 5.6 - Equivalent Static Loads for Fuel Impact Conditions

• Section 5.7 - Dropped Fuel Bundle Analysis

• Section 6.3 - Simulated Dropped Fuel Bundle Test Three fuel drop conditions were evaluated: (See PaR Report, Section 5.6, Equivalent Static Loads for Fuel Impact Conditions; page 5.6-3.)

1.

18 inch fuel drop on the corner of the top grid castings

2.

18 inch drop in the middle of the top casting

3.

A fuel drop the full length of the storage cavity in the fuel storage rack module impacting on the bottom grid.

The buoyant weight used for the fuel bundle in the PaR analysis was 670 lbs which corresponds to a dry weight of 745 lbs (PaR Report, Appendix A.1, Beam Section Properties, Module Dead Weight Estimate and Seismic Mass Input, page A.1-25). The maximum dry weight of a fuel assembly in the MNGP inventory is approximately 675 lbs which results in a buoyant weight slightly less than that used in the PaR evaluation.

A finite element model of a fuel storage rack module was used for the analysis of the three drop conditions (see PaR Report, Section 5.7, Dropped Fuel Bundle Analysis; page 5.7-1). The analysis showed that, except for localized stresses, the computed stresses were less than the allowable stresses. The analysis showed that the fuel bundle drop caused localized effects, and some components directly beneath the load showed localized stress concentrations, but results in no overstress condition thereby ensuring structural integrity of the fuel storage rack module.

Page 6 of 11

ENCLOSURE 1 STRUCTURAL RAI INFORMATION RESPONSE A drop test was also performed which simulated an 18 inch drop on the top casting of the fuel storage rack module. The test results showed slight local deformation at the impact location. (See PaR Report, Section 6.3, Simulated Dropped Fuel Bundle Test, page 6.3-4).

The addition of the 8x8 fuel storage rack module to the MNGP SFP structure has negligible effect on the overall floor loading. The existing fully loaded MNGP fuel storage rack floor loading is 2.1 ksf. The addition of one fully loaded 8x8 fuel storage rack module will not result in a floor loading over the design capacity of 2.7 ksf. Additionally the approximately 10,000 lb temporary 8x8 fuel storage rack module will be located on the cask pad in the SFP which has been evaluated for a 200,400 lb cask load.

The pool slab load imparted from an 8x11 fuel storage rack module rocking action is an equivalent static load of 75,083 lb. (See PaR Report, Section 4.4, Dynamic Time History Analysis, pages 4.0-4 and 4.0-4a.)

The analysis results for the 8x11 fuel storage rack module bounds the 8x8 fuel storage rack module proposed for temporary installation at the MNGP due to the larger mass of the 8x11 fuel storage rack module. The 8x8 fuel storage rack module will be located on the cask pad in the MNGP SFP.

The allowable cask pad loading of 200,400 lb bounds the equivalent static impact load of 75,083 lbs that would be exerted by the PaR 8x11 fuel storage rack module (used in the analysis) if it were installed. The PaR 8x8 fuel storage rack module, to be installed at the MNGP in the event a FCOL is required, weights less than 8x11 fuel storage rack module and hence would have a smaller impact load. The location of the fuel storage rack module will be controlled during the installation process to ensure proper placement on the cask pad in the SFP.

Load combinations used in the module rack analysis are: (See PaR Report, Section 4.7, Dropped Fuel Bundle Analysis, page 4.0-9).

D + L D + L + E D + L + TO D + L + TO + E D + L + Ta + E D + L + DF D + L + Ta + E1 Page 7 of 11

ENCLOSURE 1 STRUCTURAL RAI INFORMATION RESPONSE

Where, D

=

Dead load, buoyant rack weight L

=

Live load, buoyant fuel weight TO

=

Operating thermal loads Ta

=

Accident thermal loads E

=

OBE Seismic loads including impact of fuel and modules E1

=

SSE Seismic loads including impact of fuel and modules DF =

Dropped fuel bundle loads The thermal loads resulting from combined expansion of the racks are negligible for the free standing design. However, load combinations containing TO or Ta material yield strengths were taken at 212oF, which for the aluminum alloys used in the fuel storage rack modules amounts to a reduction in yield of 5 percent, (PaR Report, Section 4.7.1, Summary, page 4.0-8).

(5)

Design and Analysis Procedures An ANSYS computer model was used for a time history analysis from which the horizontal and vertical forces were determined. These forces were then applied to a SAP IV finite element model to determine stresses.

Figure 3 in Section 5.3 of the PaR Report shows the mathematical model used for the single storage rack module time history analysis and Figure 4 shows the mathematical model for the double fuel storage rack module time history analysis (PaR Report Section 5.3, pages 5.3-11 and 5.3-12).

A 3/8 inch clearance (gap) between the fuel assembly and the can was assumed at nodes 1 and 2, and 3 and 4 (PaR Report Section 5.3, pages 5.3-4 and 5.3-5). This model conservatively assumes that all fuel assemblies move in phase and move together at all times. Each fuel storage rack module leg is modeled as spring that can maintain or break physical contact and slide to each other. A 6 percent structural damping was used for both models (PaR Report Section 5.3, page 5.3-5).

All water entrapped within the fuel storage rack modules envelope was included in the horizontal mass of the model (PaR Report Section 5.3, page 5.3-6). No sloshing effects were included due to the pool water moving with the pool walls at the elevation of the fuel storage rack modules. No increase in effective mass was used because damping forces generated in pumping the confined water from the wall - rack gap is much greater than added external water mass effects (PaR Report Section 5.3, page 5.3-6). No lateral restraint is provided by the SFP walls for the free standing fuel storage rack module design. Consequently, Page 8 of 11

ENCLOSURE 1 STRUCTURAL RAI INFORMATION RESPONSE there is no load interface between the fuel storage rack module and the SFP walls.

(6)

Structural Acceptance Criteria The normal allowables are based on the Specification for Aluminum Structures - Aluminum Construction Manual, (PaR Report Section 5.5, pages 5.5-20 and 5.5-21). The acceptance criteria for the load combinations are (see PaR Report Section 2, page 2.0-2):

Load Combinations Factored Allowable D + L S

D + L + E S

D + L + TO 1.5S D + L + TO + E 1.5S D + L + Ta + E 1.6S D + L + DF 1.6S D + L + Ta + E1 2.0S*

Where, S

=

Normal allowable stresses D

=

Dead load, buoyant rack weight L

=

Live load, buoyant fuel weight TO

=

Operating thermal loads Ta

=

Accident thermal loads E

=

OBE Seismic loads including impact of fuel and modules E1

=

SSE Seismic loads including impact of fuel and modules DF =

Dropped fuel bundle loads

• PaR Report, on page 5.5-17 the factored allowable is S 1.6.

All results are within allowable criteria identified above. Based on the seismic input discussed previously in Section (3), which bounds the MNGP seismic criteria, the results stated in Section 5.5 of the PaR Report are also bounding for an installation of the PaR 8x8 fuel storage rack module at the MNGP. The seismic models used in the PaR Report are for the PaR 8x11 and the 11x11 fuel storage rack module sizes which are conservative with respect to induced loads for the smaller, PaR 8x8 fuel storage rack module intended for use at the MNGP (if required).

The maximum fuel storage rack module displacement was determined to be 1.05 inch (PaR Report Section 5.4, page 5.4-14). This provides a factor of safety of 5.7 to the minimum clearance distance of 6 inch to the Page 9 of 11

ENCLOSURE 1 STRUCTURAL RAI INFORMATION RESPONSE nearest adjacent object in the SFP at MNGP. No significant rocking or liftoff was noted in the PaR evaluation (i.e., only pure rigid body sliding occurred). A low coefficient of friction of 0.2 was used for this evaluation which was based on testing of the PaR fuel storage rack modules.

Testing included dry and wet conditions with two surface finishes. The results generally varied from a coefficient of friction of 0.23 to 0.29 for all conditions. Because the measured values discussed in the PaR Report do not show the effects of long term contact stress and corrosion, they were considered conservative. To arrive at a value of 0.2 for the coefficient of friction, the minimum measured value was reduced by approximately 15 percent to account for measurement uncertainties (PaR Report, Section 6.1, page 6.1-6).

The MNGP SFP has been previously modified to increase the original analyzed capacity from 740 to 2237 fuel assemblies by the installation of 13 High Density Fuel Storage System (HDFSS) modules, which replaced most of the General Electric (GE) low-density fuel racks. An evaluation (see Reference 5) of the SFP structural capacity was performed for the additional loads resulting from the replacement of the existing low-density fuel racks with the HDFSS modules. The evaluation demonstrated that the existing SFP structure was capable of supporting the increased loadings. The evaluation used a 2.7 ksi load assuming the HDFSS fuel storage rack modules were installed over the entire MNGP SFP floor area, which envelopes the proposed installation of the PaR 8x8 fuel storage rack module on the reinforced cask pad area within the MNGP.

(7)

Materials, Quality Control, and Special Construction Techniques The PaR 8x8 temporary fuel storage rack module is constructed from aluminum with material property values based on Aluminum Standards and Data, 1974-1975 published by the Aluminum Association (PaR Report, Section 5.0, page 5.0-3).

Existing MNGP procedures cover the handling of heavy loads, including the installation/removal of the temporary 8x8 PaR fuel storage rack module. These procedures provide controls for load handling, exclusion areas, equipment required, inspection and acceptance criteria before load movement, and steps / sequences to be followed during load movement, as well as defining safe load paths and special precautions. The design modification process identifies and prescribes any additional controls that are necessary for an installation.

Page 10 of 11

ENCLOSURE 1 STRUCTURAL RAI INFORMATION RESPONSE REFERENCES

1.

NMC letter to U.S. NRC, License Amendment Request for Contingent Installation of a Temporary Spent Fuel Storage Rack, (L-MT-06-013), dated March 7, 2006.

2.

NMC letter to U.S. NRC, Supplement to a License Amendment Request for Contingent Installation of a Temporary Fuel Storage Rack in the Spent Fuel Pool (TAC No. MD0302), (L-MT-06-044), dated May 30, 2006.

3.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan, Section 3.8.4, Other Seismic Category I Structures, Appendix D to SRP Section 3.8.4 Technical Position on Spent Fuel Pool Racks, Revision 1, dated July 1981.

4.

Programmed and Remote Systems Corporation, Fuel Storage System Design Report, PaR Job 3091, Duane Arnold Energy Center Unit No. 1, Iowa Electric Light and Power Company, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Contract No. 13764, Revision 3.

5.

Bechtel Power Corporation, Monticello Nuclear Power Station Reactor Building Seismic Evaluation of Spent Fuel Pool Structure, Prepared for the General Electric Company, dated January 1977.

Page 11 of 11

ENCLOSURE 2 FIGURES / DRAWINGS REFERRED TO WITHIN ENCLOSURE 1 The following figures and drawing are enclosed.

FIGURE / DRAWING TITLE MNGP Drawing No.

EC 934-7865-15-36 High Density Fuel Storage System Installation Arrangement With PaR 8x8 Fuel Storage Rack Module Location Identified (on cask pad)

Figure AA Artificial Horizontal Time History Response Spectrum At 6% Damping Compared to Iowa Spec. M-303 Response Spectrum Overlaid With The Monticello Horizontal Time History Response Spectrum At 5%

Damping.

Figure BB Artificial Vertical Time History Response Spectrum At 6% Damping Compared to Iowa Spec. M-303 Response Spectrum Overlaid With The Monticello Vertical Time History Response Spectrum At 5%

Damping.

3 Pages Follow

I I 1 I

0 1 I

,,",I -&a OZX,OP) 1 0 0 d 39WLY)lC 13W lN3dS 01133\\1NOW ODt I Z m F 3 T& ' 1. S 5 ~ 1001 ? N l l j h 3 l

m yDj 1

' I l Nl l l M l n Dl U lVNOllVU3d0 llYv 0 1

~ 3 0 1 3 ~

n oairvlcul lo 01 ~

a r

-m o w W

U I

~

' s 3 i m UIW

~ h ~ u n n m )

0 3 i i v l c ~ 1 1 m *. 'sm')htm om wm' SIVF S

~

~

L I

v

' s n~ ON.

s NUI -IMIYW.)C).I~

r r l n m a tam mnra x, r m c o,mu 3lonoo 'L

' 9 N l l t n j l l M d l T t ) 3 i-mm r~nm IUL

• m1 C)Nnn R a~

3 U V Sd3DNVU Q O I IV Y 1 L IlM3Ml '9 S R ~ ~ A N I L'CR W

I W

C

/

~

nnow a

+

.ID.&a ' 2 ' I 3 mno3xmd NOlAVl7VlSNl

. IW711~1NIIL(O 37-W SllJ13ldT WlV loll 0 3 1 N W C ¶ l D W N l YmYI 'A,ZIV 3 l n W C3Ul>3dS Y3QwnN e3 I

5310N

.runmlsn c r m UUN r'mlCA rroo pm INLCDU c u s M d % DOYS +

'-3a uw a 1-ax

'(170 1-m)

S X ~ V M u WL +u mun cam WU~O 09.~VRIW v WI nmn corn wtV~ & 'WllVM LN3-C)NbLCW3 3u ).Y)YA 9-O(Y X U W J V B M l R M nrnl3n d n - m l m RRLYG m

w l cmxwhr soovllc X 7OOd 'JNllFIX3

ONRfi JZlC 17.H

.ZI' rllnaur O L

( 4 ~ 1 1 V TIVL 3 0 M A S mu (Iw Ul I F C G G -

Artificial Horizontal Time History Response Spectrum At 6% Damping Compared To Iowa Spec. M-303 Response Spectrum Overlaid With The Monticello Horizontal Time History Response Spectrum at 5% Damping Figure A-3

'?

Iowa Spec. M-303 wa Spec. M-303

% Monti I

0.125 PERIOD I N SECONDS RACK PERIOD FIGURE AA

Artificial Vertical Time History Response Spectrum At 6% Damping Compared To Iowa Spec. M-303 Response Spectrum Overlaid With The Monticello Vertical Time History Response Spectrum at 5% Damping 1

0 cu I TI' TI'+

ARTIFICIAL TIME HISTORY RESPONSE SPECTRUM

\\

w M-i Iowa Spec. M-7% Figure A-6 5% Monticell I

n n l PERIOD I N SECONDS TI' 0

I I

I I

I 3

U. U I RACK PERIOD FIGURE BB

.OO

.20

.40

.60

.80 1.00 1.20

ENCLOSURE 3 THERMAL / HYDRAULIC RAI RESPONSE 1.0

SUMMARY

On March 7, 2006, the Nuclear Management Company, LLC (NMC) submitted a license amendment request (LAR) (Reference 1) to revise the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP) licensing basis to allow temporary installation of a Programmed and Remote (PaR) Systems Corporation 8x8 (64 cell) high-density fuel storage rack module in the spent fuel pool to maintain full core off-load capability. On May 30, 2006, the NMC submitted the associated criticality evaluation and supporting analyses (Reference 2) for the temporary PaR fuel storage rack module.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) provided three requests for additional (RAI) information in a teleconference with the NMC on April 26, 2006.

Two of the three RAIs were answered in Reference 2. The remaining RAI is restated below.( )

1 (2) Please compare in table form, with an attendant discussion, the current SFP licensing basis analysis to the supporting analysis of the SFP with the installation of the additional 8X8 high-density spent fuel storage rack.

The information should include, but not be limited to, number of fuel assemblies and their distribution, the distribution of heat load, type of calculation, method of calculation of peak and average values, bulk temperature, clad temperature, Boral temperature, time-to-boiling, etc.

The response to this RAI is provided within the remainder of this enclosure.

2.0 CALCULATIONAL METHODS A summary description of the Spent Fuel Pool Cooling and Demineralizer System consists and heat loads is provided Section A below. Section B discusses the calculational methods and results.

A.

Spent Fuel Pool Cooling and Demineralizer System Description The Spent Fuel Pool Cooling and Demineralizer System consists of two circulating pumps (450 gpm each), two heat exchangers, two filter/demineralizers, piping, valves and the associated instrumentation.

The system is designed to maintain a maximum SFP temperature less than 140°F. The pumps take suction from the skimmer surge tank which receives water from the top of the SFP. Water is continuously circulated 1

Table 2 at the end of this enclosure lists the three April 26, 2006, RAIs and their disposition. On August 24, 2006, additional draft thermal-hydraulic RAIs were received and are in review. Answers to these requests will be provided at a later date.

Page 1 of 8

ENCLOSURE 3 THERMAL / HYDRAULIC RAI RESPONSE to the heat exchangers and filter/demineralizers before discharging the water through diffusers at the bottom of the SFP.

The removal of heat for an emergency heat load can be accomplished by the use of either the Spent Fuel Pool Cooling and Demineralizer System, or the Residual Heat Removal System. During refueling outages, full core offloads are allowed because heat loads are explicitly calculated and compared to cooling capabilities prior to any fuel movement that would increase the SFP heat load.

Currently, the maximum normal heat load is calculated to be 5.6x106 Btu/hour at 96 hours0.00111 days <br />0.0267 hours <br />1.587302e-4 weeks <br />3.6528e-5 months <br /> after shutdown. The current emergency heat load is calculated as 20.0x106 Btu/hour assuming a full core discharge 30 days after a return to power operations from a refueling outage and is completed within 150 hours0.00174 days <br />0.0417 hours <br />2.480159e-4 weeks <br />5.7075e-5 months <br /> after shutdown.

If SFP cooling capability is lost the time to achieve bulk pool boiling is greater than 10.3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />, providing sufficient time to establish the required makeup rate of 43 gpm (the maximum evaporation rate after bulk boiling commences).

B.

Calculation Methods / Distribution of Heat Load The calculations used to determine the decay heat used in the evaluation were based on the criteria in ANSI/ANS-5.1-1994, Decay Heat Power in Light Water Reactors, (Reference 3) applying a one-sided 95 percent confidence level and an assumed power level of 1880 MWt. The fuel assembly batch power fractions assumed were based on the actual MNGP fuel bundle assembly cycle loading plans. Decay heat due to activation of fuel bundle structural components was included in the analysis in accordance with General Electric Services Information Letter 636, Additional Terms Included in Reactor Decay Heat Calculations, (Reference 4).

Other key parameters included in the calculation were the incorporation of a nominal operating cycle length of 24 months and a maximum river water temperature of 90°F.

Installation of the proposed temporary PaR 8x8 fuel storage rack module results in the addition of an additional 64 spent fuel storage locations (cells) that would be filled in the event of an emergency full core offload (resulting in a total of 2,301 locations). Conservatively, a total of 2,358 spent fuel storage locations (cells) were assumed filled upon completion of the full core offload scenario, which is greater than the pool capacity following installation of the temporary PaR 8x8 fuel storage rack module.

Page 2 of 8

ENCLOSURE 3 THERMAL / HYDRAULIC RAI RESPONSE The results of the calculations (with the above considerations) to enable the installation of the proposed temporary PaR 8x8 fuel storage rack module resulted in the following:

Maximum Normal Heat Load 7.3x106 Btu/hour at 96 hours0.00111 days <br />0.0267 hours <br />1.587302e-4 weeks <br />3.6528e-5 months <br /> after shutdown 5.6x106 Btu/hour at 216 hours0.0025 days <br />0.06 hours <br />3.571429e-4 weeks <br />8.2188e-5 months <br /> from shutdown Emergency Heat Load 24.7x106 Btu/hour The SFP heat loads are explicitly calculated and compared to the fuel pool cooling capabilities prior to any fuel movement. This ensures that the actual SFP heat load remains within the fuel pool cooling capability by delaying, if necessary, a FCOL until the SFP cooling capacity is sufficient to remove the decay heat (consistent with current NRC guidance). With respect to pool boiling, the effect of the additional heat load can be conservatively approximated by multiplying the current time to boiling of 10.3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> times the heat load ratio. This results in a revised minimum time to boiling of approximately 8.3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />. A time period of 8.3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> provides more than sufficient time to establish the required makeup rate.

Page 3 of 8

ENCLOSURE 3 THERMAL / HYDRAULIC RAI RESPONSE Table 1 - Current Versus Proposed LAR Bases and Results Bases/Results Current Normal Heat Load LAR Normal Heat Load Current Emergency Heat Load LAR Emergency Heat Load Bases Methodology ANSI/ANS 5.1-1994(Note 7)

ANSI/ANS 5.1-1994(Note 7)

ANSI/ANS 5.1-1994(Note 7)

ANSI/ANS 5.1-1994(Note 7)

Power Level (in MWt(Note 8) )

1880 1880 1880 1880 SFP Capacity 2,237 2,358(Note 1) 2,237 2,358(Note 1)

Operating Cycle Length(Note 2)

(in months) 18 24 18 24 Nominal Fuel Assembly Discharge 141 / RFO 152 / RFO 141 / RFO 152 / RFO Maximum Mississippi River Temp.(Note 3) 90°F 90°F 90°F 90°F GE SIL 636 Decay Heat No Yes No Yes Maximum SFP Bulk Temperature 140°F 140°F 140°F 140°F Results Maximum Heat Load (in Btu/hour) 5.6x106

@ 96 hours0.00111 days <br />0.0267 hours <br />1.587302e-4 weeks <br />3.6528e-5 months <br />(Note 4) 5.6x106 @

216 hours0.0025 days <br />0.06 hours <br />3.571429e-4 weeks <br />8.2188e-5 months <br />(Note 4) 7.3x106

@ 96 hours0.00111 days <br />0.0267 hours <br />1.587302e-4 weeks <br />3.6528e-5 months <br /> 20.0x106 (Note 5) 24.7x106 (Note 5)

Heat Removal Capability (in Btu/hour) 26.4x106 Btu/hr Minimum Time to Boiling (in hours) 10.3 (Note 6)

8.3 Notes

1.

The LAR requests an increase from 2,237 to 2,301 to accommodate a FCOL. For conservatism, the MNGP evaluation assumed total of 2,358 occupied storage locations.

Page 4 of 8

ENCLOSURE 3 THERMAL / HYDRAULIC RAI RESPONSE

2.

MNGP has implemented a 2 year fuel cycle program.

3.

Maximum source water temperature.

4.

Discharge time is delayed such that the heat load does not exceed 5.6x106 Btu/hour for normal discharges.

5.

FCOL 30 days after last refueling discharge, completed 150 hours0.00174 days <br />0.0417 hours <br />2.480159e-4 weeks <br />5.7075e-5 months <br /> after shutdown.

6.

Based on postulated bulk boiling conditions (loss of SFP cooling), the temperature of the fuel will not exceed 350°F. This is an acceptable temperature from the standpoint of fuel element integrity.

7.

The MNGP uses the methodology described in ANSI/ANS-5.1-1994 (Decay Heat Power In Light Water Reactors) to calculate decay heat loads on a per-bundle or batch basis. The MNGP computer program derives the power history for each fuel bundle by multiplying the bundle Beginning-of-Cycle weight by the cycle exposure to determine the total bundle energy for a specific cycle of operation. A user specified power history can be defined to calculate the decay heat load of individual fuel batches. Individual fuel bundle decay heat at specified times, as well as total decay heat for the fuel bundles in the SFP, reactor, or for all bundles on site are program options. An uncertainty confidence interval of 1.65 times the ANSI/ANS-5.1 uncertainty was chosen consistent with MNGP Updated Safety Analysis Report assumptions.

8.

The MNGP licensed thermal power level is 1775 MWt, the 1880 MWt analysis level was chosen for conservatism.

This program methodology has been verified by comparison of output to that contained in ANSI/ANS-5.1-1994 test cases. U.S. NRC Information Notice 96-039 (Reference 5) discussed issues associated with improper implementation of the ANSI/ANS-5.1 decay heat standard. The information notice was assessed by the NMC and reviewed for decay heat calculation impact. The review concluded that the issues identified in the IN have been properly accounted for in the MNGP program (i.e., the MNGP methodology properly implements the standard).

C.

SFP and Fuel Assembly Component Maximum Temperatures In support of the SFP re-racking during which the existing High Density Fuel Storage System (HDFSS) was installed at the MNGP in 1977, a full core discharge (normal cooling available) was evaluated which filled the last 484 storage locations. A maximum heat load of 27.2x106 Btu/hour was calculated using the ORIGEN Code with the total SFP capacity of 2,237 storage locations filled by normal discharges and the full core offload. For these conditions the maximum water temperature for the SFP was determined to be less than 115°F, the maximum cladding temperature was 120.3°F, and the maximum Boral temperature in the storage tubes was determined to be 104.3°F. The emergency heat determined as part of the evaluation for the installation of the temporary PaR 8x8 fuel storage rack module is less than the HDFSS maximum heat Page 5 of 8

ENCLOSURE 3 THERMAL / HYDRAULIC RAI RESPONSE load, and the associated temperatures previously determined remain reasonable.

The MNGP safety-grade RHR System is available to provide backup cooling of the SFP providing assurance that a total loss of pool cooling will not occur. However, assuming a total loss of SFP cooling does occur, the minimum time required to reach boiling under these conditions is 8.3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />. This time period is well within the time necessary to establish a make up water source which will maintain SFP water inventory.

Neglecting the preceding, under bulk boiling conditions the temperature of the fuel as determined by the analyses for the installation of the HDFSS will not exceed 350°F, which is acceptable from a fuel element integrity maintenance standpoint.

The present heat removal systems at the MNGP have adequate capacity to maintain the pool temperature within the current MNGP design basis.

In the event of a loss of SFP cooling, the RHR System backup capacity exceeds that required to maintain the SFP bulk pool temperature below 140°F.

Page 6 of 8

ENCLOSURE 3 THERMAL / HYDRAULIC RAI RESPONSE Table 2 - Requests for Additional Information Status The NRC issued three requests for additional information (RAIs) in a teleconference with the NMC on April 26, 2006. Two of the RAIs were answered in the supplement to the license amendment request (Reference 2). The three RAIs and their dispositions are restated below:

(1)

Are there any limitations on the use of the PaR fuel rack in your LAR (i.e., only during a FCOL, by burnup, etc.)? Please state the limiting conditions explicitly.

Response provided in NMC letter dated May 30, 2006 (Reference 2).

(2)

Please compare in table form, with an attendant discussion, the current SFP licensing basis analysis to the supporting analysis of the SFP with the installation of the additional 8X8 high-density spent fuel storage rack. The information should include, but not be limited to, number of fuel assemblies and their distribution, the distribution of heat load, type of calculation, method of calculation of peak and average values, bulk temperature, clad temperature, Boral temperature, time-to-boiling, etc.

Provided in this letter.

(3)

Please compare in table form, with an attendant discussion, the current SFP licensing basis analysis to the supporting analysis of the SFP with the installation of the additional 8X8 high-density spent fuel storage rack. The information should include but not be limited to: number of fuel assemblies and their distribution, the distribution of burnup and enrichment, type of neutronic calculation to determine keff, (i.e., codes, cross sections, validation, etc.)

estimation of uncertainty, maximum worth of the installed and fueled 8X8 high-density storage rack, etc.

Response provided in NMC letter dated May 30, 2006 (Reference 2).

Page 7 of 8

ENCLOSURE 3 THERMAL / HYDRAULIC RAI RESPONSE REFERENCES

1.

NMC letter to U.S. NRC, License Amendment Request for Contingent Installation of a Temporary Spent Fuel Storage Rack, (L-MT-06-013), dated March 7, 2006.

2.

NMC letter to U.S. NRC, Supplement to a License Amendment Request for Contingent Installation of a Temporary Fuel Storage Rack in the Spent Fuel Pool (TAC No. MD0302), (L-MT-06-044), dated May 30, 2006.

3.

American National Standards Institute / American Nuclear Society (ANSI/ANS) 5.1-1994, Decay Heat Power in Light Water Reactors.

4.

General Electric Services Information Letter (SIL) 636, Additional Terms Included in Reactor Decay Heat Calculations, Revision 1, June 6, 2001.

5.

U.S. NRC Information Notice 96-039, Estimates of Decay Heat Using ANS 5.1 Decay Heat Standard May Vary Significantly, dated July 5, 1996.

Page 8 of 8

ENCLOSURE 4 PaR SYSTEMS DESIGN REPORT SECTION INDEX This enclosure provides a non-proprietary copy of applicable sections of the PaR design report produced originally for the Duane Arnold Energy Center providing information on the design and analyses supporting the PaR high-density spent fuel storage rack module design.

Previously Provided PaR Report Section Applicable Sections of the PaR Systems Report on the High-Density Rack Design LAR Encl. 3(1)

(Pages)

Supplement Encl. X(2)

Provided This Submittal(3)

1.0 INTRODUCTION

X 2.0 DESIGN BASIS X

3.0 SYSTEM DESIGN X

3.1 General X

3.2 Rack Description X

3.3 Installation Description X

4.0

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS OF DESIGN REPORT X

5.0 DETAILS OF THE DESIGN ANALYSIS X

5.1 Nuclear Criticality Safety Analysis X

5.3 Model Description, Formulation and Assumptions for the Seismic Analysis of BWR Spent Fuel Racks X

(1-25) 5.4 Dynamic Time History Analysis of Spent Fuel Racks, Duane Arnold X

(26-93) 5.5 Module Stress Analysis X

(94-134) 5.6 Equivalent Static Loads for Fuel Impact Conditions X

(135-150) 5.7 Dropped Fuel Bundle Analysis X

(151-159) 5.9 Pool and Rack Interface Loads X

5.10 Poison Can Analysis X

5.11 Module Lifting Frame Analysis X

5.12 Module Shipping Skid Analysis X

6.0 DESIGN TEST REPORTS 6.1 Simulated Minimum Coefficient of Friction Test X(3) 6.2 Bolt Clearance Test Report X(3) 6.3 Simulated Dropped Fuel Bundle Test X(3)

Page 1 of 2

ENCLOSURE 4 PaR SYSTEMS DESIGN REPORT SECTION INDEX Previously Provided PaR Report Section Applicable Sections of the PaR Systems Report on the High-Density Rack Design LAR Encl. 3(1)

(Pages)

Supplement Encl. X(2)

Provided This Submittal(3)

A.

APPENDIX A.1 Beam Section Properties, Module Dead Weight Estimate and Seismic Mass Input X(3)

A.2 Tables of Allowable Stresses for Aluminum Structures X(3)

A.3 Module Isometric X(3)

A.4 Beam Section Properties and Allowable Stresses X

Notes:

(1)

NMC letter to the U.S. NRC, License Amendment Request for Contingent Installation of a Temporary Spent Fuel Storage Rack, (L-MT-06-013) dated March 7, 2006.

(2)

NMC letter to the U.S. NRC, Supplement to a License Amendment Request for Contingent Installation of a Temporary Fuel Storage Rack in the Spent Fuel Pool (TAC No. MD0302), (L-MT-06-044), dated May 30, 2006.

(3)

These PaR Report sections were previously transmitted in an e-mail from the NMC to the NRC (Peter Tam), FW: NRC e-mail Request, Dated 4/19 for Spent Fuel Storage Rack, dated April 19, 2006.

Page 2 of 2

Rev. No, 2 3-28-78 ROGRAMMED SYSTEMS CORPORATION 3460 LEXINGTON AVE. NO., ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 551 12 AREA CODE 61 2 484-7261 TELEX #29-7473 January. 187 8 FUEL STORAGE SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT PaR Job 3091 DUANE AEQJOLD ENERGY CENTER UNIT NO.

1 Iowa Electric L i g h t and Power Company Cedar R a p i d s, Iowa CONTRACT NO, 13764

2 -

4

- : 7 ".

- c q

• D a t e b 6 C, 7Sb -

I ~ : T ~ : I -

L \\ - - _ l 1

PREPARED BY: _

1/23 -'18

- -- Englnee i g P r o j e c t Manager APPROVED BY:

Date 2-1-78

~ ~ g i n e e r i n g kanager EVISION NO.

,$.3 Date 3 -27. 78

Rev. No. 2 3-28-78 REVISION RECORD Rev. No.

Date Descri~tion Chk' d By Apprvr d By Dake Table of Contents 1

2-17-78 Header sht,rev.pg.

>/I L/T 5.

Page 1.0-1,of Section 1.0 Sect. 5.13 NAI(new)

Sect. 5.9 Sect. 5.4 (reissued)

Sect. 6 - 3 A-1

~evised Pages 1.0-1, 2.0-1, 4.0-2, 4.0-3a, 4.0-4af 4.0-8, 4.0-9, 4.0-10, 4.0-13, Rev. 3 of Section 5.3 Rev. 2 of Section 5.4 Rev. 2 of Section 5. 9 Added Page 4.0-10a.

IA. ELECT. LT. & PR. C3.

R E V I E W Approved Appr. as Wcted Q.A.

Engr.

I Grp. Ldr., _ -

I Sup. Engr. Consf.

Lic. Admin.

I I

Prcj. Engr.

Sup. Proj. Engr.

Initial. Dats I

TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION DESIGN BASIS SYSTEM DESCRIPTION 3.1 General 3.2 Rack D e s c r i p t i o n 3.3 I n s t a l l a t i o n D e s c r i p t i o n

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSION O F DESIGN REPORT DETAILS OF DESIGN ILNALYSIS 5. 1 Nuclear C r i t i c a l i t y S a f e t y A n a l y s i s 5.2 Spent Fuel Cooling and Spent Fuel Assembly Heat T r a n s f e r A n a l y s i s 5.3 Model D e s c r i p t i o n, Formulation and Assunptions f o r the Seismic Analysis of BWR S p e n t F u e l Racks 5.4 T i m e H i e t o r y Seismic A n a l y s i s 5.5 Module S t r e s s Analysis 5. 6 E q u i v a l e n t S t a t i c Loads f o r Fuel Impact Conditions 5. 7 Dropped F u e l Bundle Analysis 5. 8 Module B o l t and R i v e t J o i n t Connection Analysis 5.9 Pool and Rack I n t e r f a c e Loads 5.10 Poison Can Analysis 5.11 Module L i f t i n g Frame A n a l y s i s 5.12 Module Shipping Skid A n a l y s i s 5.13 Dose Rate C a l c u l a t i o n s DESIGN TEST REPORTS 6. 1 Simulated Minimum C o e f f i c i e n t of F r i c t i o n T e s t 6. 2 B o l t Clearance T e s t Report 6. 3 Simulated Dropped F u e l Bundle T e s t

APPENDIX Beam Section Properties, >lodule Dead Weight Estimate and Seismic Mass Input A. 2

. Tables of Allowable Stresses for Aluminum Structures Table No-Description I

Module Isometric Factors of Safety for use with alum-Allowable Stress Specification Formulas for Buckling Constants General Formulas for Determining Allowable Stresses Allowable Bearing Stresses for Building Type Structures Allowable stresses for Rivets, and Bolts for Building Type Structures Beam Section Properties and Allowable Stresses

Rev-No. 2 3 - 2 8 - 7 8 1. 0 INTRODUCTION This r e p o r t d e f i n e s t h e complete d e s i g n o f t h e h i g h d e n s i t y Spent F u e l Storage Modules t o be i n s t a l l e d a t. t h e Duane Arnold Energy C e n t e r ( D ~ C ), T h e Spent Fuel Modules a r e b e i n g de-s i g n e d and f a b r i c a t e d i n accordance w i t h Iowa E l e c t r i c L i g h t &

Power (IELP) Spec. No.21-303 and under IELP C o n t r a c t Order No.13764.

The Spent Fuel S t o r a g e system is d e f i n e d by assembly drawings, d e t a i l s and p a r t s l i s t s a s shown i n S e c t i o n 3.0 of t h i s r e p o r t.

The equipment i n c l u d e s t h e f o l l o w i n g major i t e m s :

1) Spent F u e l Module Assembly 2 )

Module L i f t i n g F i x t u r e 3 )

Module Level Adjusting Tool The d e s i g n a n a l y s i s i n c l u d e s t h e f o l l o w i n g c a l c u l a t i o n s and t e s t s :

Nuclear C r i t i c a l i t y S a f e t y A n a l y s i s Spent Fuel Pool Cooling and Spent Fuel Assembly Heat T r a n s f e r Analysis Seismic Model D e s c r i p t i o n, Formulation and Assumptions Time H i s t o r y Seismic A n a l y s i s Module S t r e s s A n a l y s i s Equivalent S t a t i c Loads f o r Fuel Impact Conditions Dropped Fuel Bun2le Analysis Module B o l t and Rivet J o i n t Connection Analysis Pool and Rack I n t e r f a c e Loads Poison Can Analysis llodule Shipping Skid ~ n a l y s i s Dose Rate C a l c u l a t i o n s Simulated Minimum C o e f f i c i e n t o f F r i c t i o n T e s t B o l t Clearance T e s t Report Simulated Dropped Fuel Bundle T e s t

Rev, N o. 2 3-28-78 2. 0 DESIGN BASIS The design i s based on PaR document e n t i t l e d, "Design and F a b r i c a t i o n C r i t e r i a For BWR Spent Fuel Racks:, S e r i a l N o.

PARSP/3091.

This document e s t a b l i s h e d c r i t e r i a f o r t h e s p e n t f u e l racks based on (IELP)

S p e c i f i c a t i o n No. M-303, l a t e s t i n d u s t r y and f e d e r a l StandardsJNRC Guidelines, and t h e PaR design and f a b r i c a t i o n procedures.

C r i t e r i a f o r t h e follow-i n g t o p i c s a r e covered i n t h i s document.

Storage Rack S t r u c t u r e Geometry S t r u c t u r e M a t e r i a l s S t r u c t u r a l Loads and S t r e s s e s f o r t h e Fuel Racks C r i t i c a l i t y Thermal Hydraulics Quality Assurance The Design C r i t e r i a a l s o d e l i n e a t e s t h e following design d a t a.

Fuel Data Pool Cooling System and Heat Load Data Seismic Response Spectrums The Loading Combinations and Factored allowables a r e given i n Table 4-2 of t h e Duane Arnold NRC s u b m i t t a l f o r t h e racks and a r e r e p r i n t e d here i n Table 2-1.

TABLE 2-1 LOADING COMBINATIONS AND FACTORED ALLOWABLES Load Combinations Normal allowable s t r e s s e s Factored Allowable Dead l o a d, buoyant rack weight Live l o a d, buoyant f u e l weight Operating thermal loads Accident thermal loads OBE Seismic loads i n c l u d i n g impact of f u e l and modules SSE Seismic loads i n c l u d i n g impact of f u e l and modules' Dropped f u e l bundle loads

3. 0 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION 3. 1 General The equipment i s defined by t h e following l i s t e d i n s t a l l a t i o n s and assembly drawings, t h e i r r e l a t e d p a r t s list and d e t a i l drawings.

1-21602-E Spent Fuel Pool I n s t a l l a t i o n A-22556-E Module Spent Fuel ~ y p i c a l D-22044-C Channel Storage Location D-22045-C Channel Storage Location AD-21949-01-D Level Adjusting Tool A-22766-E Module L i f t i n g Fixture The e x i s t i n g GE

( 2x10) BWR Storzge Racks w i l l be replaced by "high density" alumi~um modules providing a maximum storage capacity of 2 0 5 0 fuel bundles.

The c a v i t i e s. a r e on nominal 6. 6 2 5 " center-to-center spacing and are fabricated i n the following modulz! s i z e s :

Module Size Q u a n t i t y Cavities Total Cavities 2 0 5 0

3. 2 Rack D e s c r i p t i o n The high density poison BWR s p e n t fuel. racks are a n all. anodized a l u m i n u m construction, w i t h 'a fuel spacing of 6. 6 2 5 " center-to-center.

The poison material is a 5. 2 5 0 " \\!id; piece of boral 146" 1-ong

~ i l i i c h ovewlpps t h 2 active f u e l l e n g t h 1 i~:ch cn ti22 top and bottom-There is a single piece of boral between h:el elements.

Tile boral is isolated from t h e pool water by Scirig seal welded hetween two concentric square tubes, hereafter callcc? poison Tb.e P O ~ S O R cC:a.r.lS are positioned' i n t o ever-jr otl-~er s :. c. I-ac-c I.ocatic?n of tht. ~odt~lc:

to provi.clr the r-quired boi-al ;jcr)~nctry.

\\

'IL!r.;?y zre or t i e d i !I the ~ n o ~ I ~. ; l e 1::;~

tzp a ~ ~ d bot t o n (:,>.; k i n g s.

'The top castirlg is 12" deep with 5 - 9 9 t.O5 operrinys.

Into

+,

,l~e top surface of the bottom casting there are cast ~ ~ o c k e t s 7

3 every ot her o~enirig which loosely captures the psison can,

' J

?':12 bottorn surE;ice of the top casting has a mztiny L(3~1cred

.sccket w i x i c h t i g t ~ t l y positions the top of the p o i s o n can.

'-'!;e hotto!n c;:stinqs have cast h o l e s which are nachinr~rl t o s:~!lport thi: h o t t o n fittin9 of the f u e l asscmb3.y.

The top '

c-:sting pl-ovi-dc:; l a t e r a l support at the upper fuel r.i tting

i.!es.

Thr col-~i-I-c, F thc p l a t e s arc-? rive t c : h l r - 1 ~ 3 <]r,~>:j;.';~l s-:r!

to'gether w i t h angle connections.

I n t h e four c o r n e r s of t h e bottom c a s t i n g, l e v e l i n g screws allow f o r 1 1/2" l e v e l a2justment.

The bottom bezring pad p i v o t s on t h e l e v e l i n g screw so t h a t t h e f u l l pad area i s i n c o n t a c t with t h e f l o o r,

r e g a r d l e s s of e x i s t i n g f l o o r f l a t n e s s and p o s s i b l e rocking modes from seismic, These 5eet can be remotely a 2 j u s t e d by a long handled tool(AD-21943-3%-3) which i s i a s e r t e d down through t h e l e n g t h of the c a v i t y and engages i n t o a mating square hole i n t h e f o o t.

The bottom of t h e pad bears a g a i n s t t h e pool l i n e r, is 6 " d i a n e t s r - 304 s t a i n l e s s ; and i s b o l t e d t o t h e upper aluminum threaded p o r t i o n with a p l a s t i c i n s u l a t o r sandwiched between.

T h i s sandwich prevents galvanic c o r r o s i o n between t h e s e d i s s i m i l a r metals.

The p l a s t i c i s v c l m. e t r i c a l l y trapped i n a pocket t o preclude any creep during t h e 40 y e a r design l i f e.

3.3 I n s t a l l a t i o n Description Drawing I-21602-E, shows t h e new module arrangement with t h e i r f e e t l o c a t i o n s r z l a t i v e t o e x i s t i n g swing b o l t s, and e x i s t i n g modules.

The racks a r e of a f r e e s t a n d i n g design ( c o n s t r a i n e d only by f r i c t i o n ), and t h e r e f o r e, a r e u n r e s t r a i n e d by a d d i t i o n a l seismic' supports i n t h e pool.

These rack s i z e s were chosen s o t h a t t h e support feet would be approximately i n t h e c e n t e r s of the e x i s t i n g swing b o l t p a t t e r n s.

The edges of a l l p e r i p h e r a l modules have c l e a r a n c e s t o w a l l s and header p i p e s of 6 - 6 5 2 " and 3" t o swing b o l t s.

These c l e a r a n c e s provide ample c o o l i n g and s u f f i c i e n t space t o preclude any rack impacts t o t h e s e due t o c a l c u l a t e d s e i s m i c d r i f t of t h e racks.

A t t h e bottom c a s t i n g e l e v a t i o n t h e r e are t w o 3 1 4 inch bosses on each i n t e r n a l rack s i d e s of t h e s i d e s h e e t s.

A l t e r n a t i n g s i d e s of t h e racks have t h e s e bosses e i t h e r inboard o r outboard.

The boss p a t t e r n s a r e then arranged s o t h a t each rack h o r i z -

o n t a l l y i n t e r l o c k s t o g e t h e r with a p p r o x i m a t ~ l y 1/4" of c l e a r -

ance.

Under seismic e x c i t a t i o n t h e s e bosses provide t h a t a l l t h e modules move a s a group.

The bosses a l s o a i d i n proper module t o module p o s i t i o n i n g during i n s t a l l a t i o n.

The modules a r e a l i n e - t o - l i n e f i t a t t h e t o p c a s t i n g e l e v a t i o n.

Sheet 2 o f t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n drawing shows t h e c a v i t y l o c a t i o n system.

Bosses on t h e t o p c a s t i n g maintain a.75" c l e a r a n c e from t h e o u t s i d e s h e e t of one rack t o t h e n e x t -

Rev. No. 2 3-28-78, Spent Pool Cooling & Fuel Assembly Heat Transfer 7

The maximum decay h e a t load i s 1.82 ( 1 0 ) ~ t u / h r, which occu:rs when t h e spent f u e l pool c o n t a i n s 2084 f u e l assemblies i n c l u d i n g a f u l l core unload completed 181 hours0.00209 days <br />0.0503 hours <br />2.992725e-4 weeks <br />6.88705e-5 months <br /> a f t e r shutdown.

Under f u l l core unload c o n d i t i o n s, t h e bulk water temperature 0

cannot be maintained below t h e d e s i r e d maximum value of 150 F by t h e spent f u e l pool c o o l i n g system alone.

It i s t h e r e f o r e necessary t o connect t h e r e s i d u a l h e a t removal system t o t h e s p e n t f u e l pool.

When t h i s i s done t h e pool temperature can 0

be maintained w e l l below 150 F.

Under n o r ~. a l f u e l s t o r a g e c o n d i t i o n s, t h e maximum bulk water temperature t h a t occurs when t h e s p e n t f u e l pool has e x t e r n a l means of cooling i s 1 4 2 ' ~. This t e m p e r a t u r e o c c u r s when t h e pool i s cooled by one pump and one h e a t exchanger of t h e spent f u e l pool cooling system.

An a n a l y s i s was made of t h e n a t u r a l c i r c u l a t i o n cooling of maximum power spent f u e l assemblies i n t h e most r e s t r i c t i v e n a t u r a l c i r c u l a t i o n flow loop i n t h e spent f u e l pool.

The a n a l y s i s included t h e 7x7, t h e 8x8, and t h e r e t r o f i t 8x8 f u e l assembly types.

The maximum c o o l a n t temperature a t t h e o u t l e t 0

of any f u e l assembly type was c a l c u l a t e d t o be 1 7 2. 2 F while 0

t h e maximum c l a d temperature was c a l c u l a t e d t o be 189.5.F.

Under t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s t h e r e i s no b o i l i n g i n any f u e l assembly.

• NOTE:

Heat load c a l c u l a t i o n s a r e c o n s e r v a t i v e l y based on 2084 t o t a l assemblies, whereas t o t a l c a v i t i e s in-s t a l l e d a t DAEC w i l l be 2050.

The reduction of t h e s e 3 4 c a v i t i e s was derived a f t e r t h e thermal analyses were s t a r t e d by IELP because of r e a c t o r g a t e i n t e r f e r e n c e s.

4. 9 - 2

If all external means of cooling for the spent fuel pool are lost, the bulk water temperature will rise until it reaches 0

saturation (212 F). The time required for this to occur is at least 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />.

Once saturation is reached, the water will boil' and the level of the pool will fall unless makeup water is added at a rate of 33.6 gallons per minute.

An analysis was made of the natural circulation cooling of maximum power spent fuel assemblies under loss of cooling conditions. The analysis included the 7x7, the 8x8, and the retrofit 8x8 fuel assembly types. The results indicate that net boiling occurs in the upper third of the active fuel.

The maximum void fraction at the outlet of any fuel assembly type was calculated to be 0.860, while the maximum clad 0

temperature was calculated to be 260.1 F.

Seismic Model ~escription, Formalation and Assumptions In this Section the development of the seismic design approach is presented. The seismic qualifications are done via a time history analytical solution of a simplifie2 model. The loads computed from this analysis are used as input into a detail static model to determine member and plate stresses.

Rev. No. 2 3 - 2 8 - 7 8.

Various dynamic effects were accounted for in the simplified model which included the following:

1. Members of the simplified model were sized to simulate overall flexibility characteristics of the detail rack structure.

2. The fuel bundles were modeled as loose elements free to impact on the rack structure thru a 3/8" gap which is the clearance of the fuel assembly inside the storage cavity.

This idealization conservatively assumed that all fuel bundles impacted at the same instant. Also it assumed that all assemblies.were channeled, so as to provide the l'argest impact load onto the rack structure due to this stiffer section.

3. Added water mass effects were included due to rack submergence.

No increase in damping was used due to the water.

4. 4 Dynamic T i m e H i s t o r y Analysis Using t h e ANSYC computer code, a p l a n a r a n a l y s i s was done of two racks (10x11) and (8x11) s i d e by s i d e i n t h e l o and 8 c a v i t y plane.

These racks had t h e p o t e n t i a l t o l i f t up, i n t e r a c t (bang t o g e t h e r a t t o p o r bottom), and s l i d e.

Simpli-f i e d rack models w e r e used a s determined i n t h e previous s e c t i o n -

Masses of t h e s t r u c t u r e, f u e l, and water were a p p l i e d a t t h e proper l o c a t i o n.

T h e racks were s u b j e c t e d t o a simultaneous v e r t i c a l and h o r i z o n t a l SSE t i m e h i s t o r i e s t h a t were conservative based on Iowa S p e c i f i c a t i o n response spectrums.

The following f r i c t i o n c o n d i t i o n s. were used:

1)

- 8 c o e f f i c i e n t of f r i c t i o n F u l l of Fuel 2 )

- 2 c o e f f i c i e n t of f r i c t i o n Zmpty of Fuel Condition 1) wa-s considered f o r producing t h e l a r g e s t loads.

Nodal load sets when maximums occured a t various t i m e s thrcugh-o u t t h e earthquake were e x t r a c t e d, and a r e summarized i n Section 5. 4.

A s t a t i c a n a l y s i s of t h e d e t a i l e d SAP I V model using t h e s e loads was done i n Section 5 - 5.

Under t h i s h i g h c o e f f i c i e n t o f f r i c t i o n, +,

very l i t t l e l a t e r a l displacement w a s note6.

The motion was confined p r i m a r i l y t o f l e x i b l e body rocking with a t o t a l v e r t i c a l l i f t -

o f f of approximatley 1". The rack t o rack impact load was c a l c u l a t e d a t 120,000 #.

The following t a b l e summarizes t h e p e r f o o t impact l o a d and e q u i v a l e n t s t a t i c nodal load a t t h e f o o t f o r s o m e of t h e rack s i z e s -

Rev, No. 2 3-28-78 Peak Impact Load Equivalent Static Load Condition 2) was analyzed to determine the largest credible rack displacement relative to pool floor. Displacement of 1.05" was calculated, for this condition. No significant rocking or lift off was noted for these conditions; i-e., only pure rigid body sliding occurred. A.

l

~

was used to simulate a.2/CC for an empty rack. This was determined by taking the ratio of the horiz-ontal to vertica mass for the empty rack divided by the same ratio for the full rack times

. 2 /

For Example: The total horizontal mass 6ivided by the vertical mass for full and empty racks respectively which are taken from the mass summary on page 5.3-6 are:

FULL RACK =

1062/881 =

1.205 EMPTY PACK =

[136 + 181 + (745-672J / 136 = 2.86 Therefore the effective coefficient of friction for the empty -

rack based on the full rack mass is:

(1.205/2.86).

2

~

%.lfi

The following c h a r t summarizes t h e minimum nominal c l e a r a n c e s f o r t h e spent f u e l racks from various items i n t h e pool.

These clearances a r e then divided by t h e c a l c u l a t e d displacement of 1.05" f o r SSE t o d e f i n e a f a c t o r of s a f e t y f o r each item.

Desctiption Minimum Nominal Factor of S a f e t y.

Clearance Spent Fuel Walls Channel Storage Rack Reactor Gate Storage Brackets 5. 6 8

+ - 0 0 "

- - 7 5 "

Other Wall Mounted Objects Existing Floor Swing B o l t s 5.00 Min.

4. 5 Module Stress Analysis The equilibrium force sets at. 8 p, as determined in the previous section were used as input loads for tne 3-D detailed finite element SAP IV model for 11x11 and 8x11 racks. These force sets include the dead, live, and seismic loading at thht time instant when a particular nodal force is maximum-Becaus2 only a planar time history analysis was done, an equivalent set of loads was applied orthoginally to account for the s2ismic loads in the other horizontal direction-These resultant loads were then combi~ed on a square root sum of the square (SRSS) method. This resultant is very conservative because it doubles up on the vertical loading.

The results of the SAP IV analysis show that the stresses from all load cases are less than the allowable limits for the SSE condition.

4 - 6 Equivalent Static Loads For Fuel Impact Conditions The impact energy losses of the inertia resistance of nodule and collapsing of the bottom tripod on the fuel bundle fitting were quantified for the 18" vertical drop to determine the net impact energy.

Using the SAP IV model, spring rates were determined at various impact locations on the module. A static impact load was then determined f o r each of these locations by equating the elastic structural strain energy with the net impact energy. (Drop conditions 1 & 2).

For an unimpeded f u e l drop through an empty c a v i t y, t h e s t a t i c l o a d t o s h e a r o u t t h e bottom f u e l support was determined. (Drop c o n d i t i o n 3 ).

Condition 4 ) i s an a c c i d e n t c o n d i t i o n of a jammed f u e l bundle i n a s t o r a g e c a v i t y. ' Here t h e t o t a l load i s l i m i t e d t o t h e c r a n e c a p a c i t y.

The following p r e s e n t s t h e s t a t i c loads f o r t h e v a r i o u s drop and a c c i d e n t c o n d i t i o n s.

Condition Description 1 8 " drop, middle of 11x11 18" drop, c o r n e r of 11x11 Drop t h r u an empty c a v i t y Jammed f u e l bundle u p l i f t Load 4 8. 2 4 Kips 5 9. 3 0 Kips 39.1 Kips 4. 0 Kips 4. 7 Dropped Fuel Bundle Analysis An a n a l y s i s of dead and l i v e l o a d i n g (rack and f u e l weight) w a s f i r s t conducted on t h e S A P I V d e t a i l model.

I t was shown f o r t h i s l o a d i n g t h a t a l l r a c k members a r e w i t h i n 1. 0 times t h e normal allowable v a l u e s.

Equivalent s t a t i c loafis f o r, d i f f e r e n t dropped f u e l bundle cases were determined i n Section 5.6.

For conditions 1 and 2 t h e s e l o a d s w e r e applied t o t h e SAP I V f i n i t e eleme~lt model of t h e module and combined with rack and f u e l loading.

S t r e s s e s f p r each member were than t a b u l a t e d a n d compared a g a i n s t i t s allowable.

A l l members were below 1. 6 t i m e s normal allowables f o r drop conditions 1 and 2.

For condition 3 a stress a n a l y s i s of a concentrated 100 k i p s load applied i n t h e c e n t e r s of t h e bottom c z s t i n g of t h e l a r g e s t rack (11x11) i n conjunction with the rack and f u e l loading was performed.

It Fias then determined t h a t t h i s concentrated load needed t o be factored.down t o 4 7. 3 4 k i p s t o maintzin a l l member s t r e s s e s w i t h i n acceptable l i m i t s of 1. 6 times t h e normal allow-a b l e ~. This load i s 1.21 times g r e a t e r than t h e c a l c u l a t e d shear o u t load of t h e f u e l support o f 39.1 k i p s of Section 5. 6,

and t h e r e f o r e i s acceptable.

An a n a l y s i s was not done f o r condition 4, jammed f u e l bundle.

The r e s u l t i n g s t r e s, s e s f o r t h i s condition a r e assumed t o be 4/48.4

=, 0 8 2 of condition 1 s t r e s s e s.

Rev. No. 2 3-28-78 4.7.1 Summary The following t a b l e summarizes t h e loading combinations and f a c t o r e d allowable l i m i t s of Table 2-1 compared t o t h e. c a l c u l a t e d s t r e s s i n t e r a c t i o n of rack members f o r t h e various combinations.

These values a r e c a l c u l a t e d i n Sections 5. 5 and 5.7 of t h i s r e p o r t.

The a n a l y s i s computed s p e c i f i c values f o r combinations of equations 3,6, and 7.

Values f o r t h e remaining equations were computed from e x t r a p o l a t i o n of t h e s e previous values.

The e x t r a p o l a t i o n i s based on t h e following:

1) Thermal loads r e s u l t i n g from combined expansion of t h e racks i s n e g l i g i b l e f o r t h e f r e e standing design. However load combinations containing To o r Ta m a t e r i a l y i e l d s t r e n g t h s a r e taken a t 2 1 2 degrees F which f o r t h e alum-inum a l l o y s used amounts t o a reduction i n y i e l d s of 5 %.

2 ) IELP Spec. M-303 d e f i n e s SSE acce1erat:on.s a s twice those of OBE.

The i n t e r a c t i o n i s defined a s t h e following r a t i o,

(computed s t r e s s / normal allowable s t r e s s ). For c a s t i n g beam members t h e combined bending and a x i a l s t r e s s i n t e r a c t i o n i s f /F + f / F ~.

The t o t a l sum i s a

a t h e f a c t o r allowable l i m l t of T a t l e 2-1 f o r various load combinations, i. e., f o r load combinations 1, 2,

and 3, t h i s sum must be l e s s than 1. 9 -

For load combination number 7 t h e s i d e panels were evaluated f o r shear buckling using t h e following i n t e r a c t i o n f o r combined a x i a l and shear s t r e s s =

fa/1.6 Fa +

(fv/l

- 6 Fv)

• f 1. 0.

For p l a t e buckling t h e factored allowables were l i m i t e d t o 1. 6 times normal allowables.

Rev. No. 2 3-28-78.

Largest Calculated Factored Side Equation No.

Loading Combination Allowable Plates

Casting, L l m l t Condition 1 Condition 2 Condition 3 Condition 4

1. See Table 5.7.3-2

2. See Table 5.7.3-3

3. See Table 5.7.3-4

4. See Table 5.7.3-5 and Page 5.6-16

5. See Table 5.7.4-4

6. See Table 5.5.4-46 (for shear buckling

7. See Table 5.7.3-6

8. See Table 5.7.3-7

9. See Table 5.7.3-8 10.See Table 5.7.3-9 Extrapolated values 4.8 Module Bolt and Rivet ~ o i n t Connection Analysis From the plane stress output of the SAP IV analysis, force dis-tribution along the sides and edges of the 1/2" side panels were determined for the seismic load cases and dropped fuel bundle conditions. Bolt and rivet patterns were then sized per alum-inum standards for each of the load cases.

Rev. No. 2 3 - 2 8 - 7 8 4.9 Pool and Rack Interface Loads The dead plus SSE seismic vertical floor load for the racks and fuel is calculated to be 989#/cavity. For 2050 total cavities and a pool of 20' x 4 0 ' this amounts to a total vertical uniform floor loading of 2535 psf, which is acceptable compared to the 3200 psf allowable given in Bechtel report entitled "Evaluation of Spent Fuel Pool Seismic Response Spectrum and Floor Structure", dated September 1977.

The total horizontal shear on the floor in each direction is 669#/cavity or 1,371,450# total.

The bearing stress under each foot is calculated to be 4393 psi, and its associated punching shear stress is calculated at 76.8 psi.

The stresses in the threaded foot and ABS plastic insulators are shown to be within acceptable limits.

4.10 Poison Can Analysis The poison cans are not considered to be primary structural elements. However, because air is trapped between the con-centric tubes, the inner and outer tubes must be able to withstand the hydrostatic loading associated at the rack depth in the spent fuel pool. The loading due to internal air pressure from external heating, for example, pool boiling,is conservatively ignored since it opposes the hydrostatic pressures and amounts to less than 4 psi. at 212'~ pool water temperature compared to the 13 psi. hydrostatic loading. A one-inch wide cross section of the can was represented as a beam model and analyzed using the computer program "SAGS",

Rev. N o. 2 3-28-78 S t a t i c Analysis of General S t r u c t u r e s 1 a v a i l a b l e t h r u S t r u c t u r a l Dynamics Research Corporation, 5729 Dragon Way, C i n c i n n a t i, Ohio.-

S t r e s s e s a t t h e c o r n e r s and weld seam l o c a t i o n of t h e can were shown t o be w i t h i n normal allowable l i m i t s.

4. 1 1 L i f t i n g Frame and L i f t i n g Eye Analysis The L i f t i n g Frame is shown on drawing AD-22766-E.

This 2 2oin.t l i f t f i x t u r e i s comprised of a main c r o s s tube with a i r a c t u a t e d l i f t dogs a t t h e ends.

The s t r o k e of t h e l i f t dogs is such t h a t it i s capable of engaging racks ranging from 8 t o 11 c a v i t i e s wide.

The l i f t dogs engage i n mating machines holes i n t h e t o p c a s t i n g of the rack.

A l l members on t h e l i f t i n g frame and t h e c a s t i n g l i f t i n g eye were designed with a s a f e t y f a c t o r g r e a t e r than 3 : l on t h e

.minimum y i e l d of t h e m a t e r i a l.

4.12 Module Shipping Skid Analysis A long hand a n a l y s i s of t h e shipping s k i d was conducted f o r racks o r i e n t e d h o r i z o n t a l l y, v e r t i c a l l y, and i n - t i l t e d p o s i t i o n s f o r an upending condition.

The a n a l y s i s showed t h a t a l l members and i n t e r f a c e b o l t s have a s a f e t y f a c t o r g r e a t e r than 3 : l on minimum y i e l d.

4-13 Minimum Coefficient of Friction Test To verify the minimum coefficient of friction for loading geometry, environments, and pressure as found on feet assemblies of spent fuel modules sliding on the floor liner plates of spent fuel pools, simulated friction tests were conducted.

These tests were done under ideal conditions with no con-siderations given to long term contact effects and corrosion effects. Therefore, they represent the minimum friction forces and do not attempt to define their maximums.

For nominal contact pressures, minimum coefficient of frictio~

measured were

- 2 3 - - 2 9 for all conditions.

A coefficient of friction of - 2 based on these tests was used in the seismic time history analysis to determine maximum module relative displacement, This value is 15% below a minimum measured value of - 2 3 to account for measurement uncertainties.

4.14 Bolt Clearance Test Report The purpose of this test was to determine ultimate shear load capacity of bolted joints of 2 bolts with different body clear-ances, seating torques and hole misalignment. The values %ere then compared against identical bolt patterns with a dowel pin press fitted in the middle of.the bolt pattern. This test was done primarily to demonstrate equal load sharing ability of the 3/4" bolts and 1" dowel pins used on the rack side sheets bolted to the bottom castings.

Rev. No.

2 3-28-78 Conditions t e s t e d were:

1) The p l a t e s, b o l t e d t o g e t h e r with two 3/4-10 b o l t torqued:...

t o 600 in-# w i t h body h o l e of.015" clearance.

Body h o l e p a t t e r n was.015' l e s s than t h e mating hole p a t t e r n s o t h a t it i s a l i n e t o l i n e f i t on o u t s i d e edges of t h e b o l t s. T h e o r e t i c a l l y a l l t h e load would be on t h e f i r s t b o l t i n t h i s c a s e.

2 )

Same a s (1) except body h o l e c l e a r a n c e, -005" and h o l e p a t t e r n s i n l i n e.

3)

Same a s (2) except a 1".dowel with a. 0 0 0 3 -. 0007" p r e s s f i t was added t o t h e middle of t h e b o l t p a t t e r n, and body hole c l e a r a n c e of -015".

4 )

Same a s ( 2 ) except f i n g e r t i g h t.

The minimum u l t i m a t e s h e a r s t r e s s f o r c o n d i t i o n s 1, 2, and 4, i s 38.18 k s i, and 36.29 k s i f o r c o n d i t i o n 3 where a 1" dowel pin was. p r e s s f i t t e d i n t h e middle of t h e hole p a t t e r n.

This corresponds t o a 5% reduction t o t h e s t r e n g t h due t o unequal load s h a r i n g.

4.15 Simulated Dropped Fuel Bundle Test I n t h i s t e s t, a 10x7 t o p c a s t i n g was supported on t h e corners o f wooden blocks t h a t were approximately t h e same s t i f f n e s s a s t h e s i d e s h e e t s..

AT 1100# concrete block was dropped.on t h e middle of t h e c a s t i n g, an e q u i v a l e n t d i s t a n c e t o o b t a i n t h e same n e t impact energy a s determined i n Section 5.6.

Load c e l l s were l o c a t e d a t t h e c o r n e r s of t h e c a s t i n g and were summed t o o b t a i n t h e t o t a l impact f o r c e t i m e h i s t o r y.

Peak values of 25,000# were measured., corresponding t o t h e 1 8 " bundle drop. Several drops were made, and i n a l l cases there was no loss i n c a s t i n g i n t e g r i t y,

Beczuse of un-c e r t a i n t i e s i n s t i f f n e s s and damping of t h e wooden supports, t h e conservative c a l c u l z t e d impact loads i n Section 5. 6 were.

used i n l i e u of t h e measured values.

5.0 DETAILS O F DESIGN ANALYSES This s e c t i o n c o n t a i n s t h e d e t a i l design analyses a s l i s t e d below with t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e subsection number.

5. 1 N u c l e a r C r i t i c a l i t y S a f e t y Analysis 5.2 Spent Fuel Cooling and Spent Fuel Assembly Heat Transfer Analysis 5.3 Model Description, Formulation and A s s m p t i o n s For The Seismic Analysis o f BWR Spent Fuel Racks.

5.4 Time History Seismic Analysis 5.5 Module S t r e s s Analysis 5.6 Equivalent S t a t i c Loads f o r Fuel 1mpact Conditions 5.7 Dropped Fuel Bundle S t r e s s Analysis 5.8 Module Bolt and Rivet J o i n t Connection Analysis 5.9 Pool and Rack I n t e r f a c e Loads 5.10 Poison Can Analysis 5.11 Module L i f t i n g Frame Analysis 5.12 Module Shipping Skid Analysis 5.0.1 S t r u c t u r a l Calculation Nomenclature The nomenclature used i n the c a l c u l a t i o n s i s t h e same a s used i n t h e AISC Manual of S t e e l Construction S p e c i f i c a t i o n f o r t h e Design, Fabrication and Erection o f S t r u c t u r a l S t e e l f o r Buildings, and Section N F Appendix X V I I AS-.

A

=

Cross-sectional a r e a, s u b s c r i p t s used f o r.

i d e n t i f i c a t i o n E

=

Modulus of e l a s t i c i t y Fa

=

Allowable s t r e s s, a x i a l ccmpression Fb. =

Allowable s t r e s s, bending

F

=

Allowable s t r e s s, bearing P

Ft =

Allowable s t r e s s, tension Fv

=

Allowable s t r e s s, shear F

=

Yield s t r e n g t h Y

FU =

Tensile s t r e n g t h I

=

Moment of i n e r t i a J

=

Polar moment of i n e r t i a K

=

Effective length f a c t o r (columns)

M

=

Bending moment P

=

Applied load R

=

Reaction load S

=

Section modulus V

=

Shear load W

= Weight a, b, e t c.

=

General dimensions, distance between loads,etc.

c

=

Distance from n e u t r a l a x i s t o extreme f i b r e of, beam

=

Beam o r flange width

=

Depth of beam, diameter of round member

=

Computed s t r e s s, same subscripts used as f o r F

=

Length, i n inches

=

Radius of gyration

=

Thickness

=

Distributed load, lb/in.

Seismic Calculations F' - -

~ l l o w a b l e s t r e s s, "design" seismic loading. Same subsripts used as f o r F.

Calculated s t r e s s, "design1' seismic loading v e r t i c a l seismic a c c e l.

horizontal seismic

5.0.2 M a t e r i a l P r o p e r t i e s A l l rack m a t e r i a l s a r e s p e c i f i f e d i n PaR Document PARSP/3091 and a r e r e p r i n t e d h e r e i n t h e following c a r t.

A l l aluminum m a t e r i a l property v a l u e s based on: Aluminum standards and -

Data, 1974-1975 published by t h e Aluminum Association (Reference 9 )

F Min. Yield D e s c r i ~ t i o n Alloy F i n i s h a t 212O F A356-T51 Sand Cstg.

P a r t i a l machined, sand-blasted and Duranodic (grey)

T o p & Bottom Casting l 6, O O O p s i (anodized) 1/2" Side Panels 6061-T6 Duranodic Anodize (black) 32,000 p s i Angle Connectors 32,000 p s i Duranodic Anodize

( b l a c k )

Cavity Weldment 23,000 p s i S u l f u r i c Anodize

( c l e a r )

B o l t s 42,000 p s i S u l f u r i c Anodize

( b l a c k )

Rivets 5052 Body S u l f u r i c Anodize (black)

ABS P l a s t i c Cycolac Grade T

~ e a r i n g P l a t e On Foot 304 S t a i n l e s s Machined 25,000 p s i Thread Foot Hard Anodize (black) 35,000 p s i Other m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s f o r aluminum a r e :

b Modulus of E l a s t i c i t y "E" = 10.2 ( 1 0 ) p s i

@ 1 0 0 degrees F Modulus of R i g i d i t y " G "

=

3.8 ( l o 6 )

p s i

\\.J' Density

Other material p r o p e r t i e s used for 3 0 4 s t a i n l e s s a r e :

6 Modulus of Elasticity "E" = '27.7 (10 )

psi @ 200 degrees F.

Modulus of Rigidity

" G "

6

= 10.6 (10 )

p s i,

Density

=.28 lb/in. 3

ROGRAMMED 3460 LEXINGTON AVE. NO., ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55112 AREA CODE 61 2 484-7261 TELEX #29-7473 SECTION 5.9 FUEL STORAGE SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER UNIT NO. 1 I o w a E l e c t r i c L i g h t and P o w e r C o m p a n y C e d a r R a p i d s, I o w a CONTRACT NO.

1 3 7 6 4 P a R Job: 3 0 9 1 D e s i g n C a l c u l a t i o n s POOL AND RACK INTERFACE LOADS PREPARED BY

'La-DATE 1 --

':7 5 CHECKED BY DATE /-2/-78 FW7ISION NO.

2-R e v. N o. 2 3-28-78

R e v. N o. 2 3-28-78 U V I S IOIJ RECORD REV.

NO.

DATE DESCRIPTION CHECKED BY APPRV ' D BeY DATE 2-17-78 C o r r e c t e d typo pg. 5. 9 - 3 l i n e 8 para. 2 3-27-78 R e v i s e d Page 5. 9 - 3 and 5.9-4

Rev. No,. 2 3-28-78 POOL AND RACK INTERFACE LOADS The seismic analysis description is given in Section 5.3.

The broadened envelope response spectra and time histories or results of the time history analysis are given in Section 5.4.

The maximum floor load,calculated as shown in spring Kf on Figure 4, Section 5.3 was 647875#, given from Figure 2, Section 5.4.' An 8x11 and 10x11 rack were utilized in this analysis for a total rack dead weight of 148,274# (

750#/cavity).

The dead weight of the water and concrete floor within this two rack area of 65.9 ft.2 was assumed to be 212,65611 for a dead weight of 3'60,930#. Therefore, just the seismic load in the floor -

expressed as a fraction of total dead load is -k-(647, 875/360,9304 =

0.79. Since there are 21 total racks or 10 1/2 such pairs com-bining this maximum by an SSRS method the total seismic load on a per unit basis is:

A/=~I.o. 5

(.79) =. 244 (Total Dead Load)

Therefore, the combined dead plus seismic loading is 1.24 (Total Dead Load). The per cavity load contribution of the fuel and racks is 1.24 (750#) = 930#/cavity. For the entire pool (2050 cavities) the total load is 1,960,500. Depending on the com-plexity floor model this load can be distributed just over the rack area or the entire pool area.

Rev. No. 2 3-28-78 Since a planar model w a s used, t h e above loads a r e t h e r e s u l t a n t

-9.-

of a combined 2 d i r e c t i o n (one horizontal and one v e r t i c a l )

seismic.

If a t h r e e d i r e c t i o n seismic is required i n t h e pool f l o o r a n a l y s i s these loads should be scaled up.

The base accel-e r a t i o n s a r e shown i n Figure A and B of Section 5.4 a r e.5 and

.28 g respectively, Therefore t h e r a t i o of 3 d i r e c t i o n RMS t o 2 d i r e c t i o n RMS is given by:

The combined dead plus seismic loading f o r 3 d i r e c t i o n now becomes:

This value y i e l d s a t o t a l per cavity load of 989# o r a t o t a l load of 2,028,300#.

Since t h e spent f u e l pool i s 2 0 ' x 4 0 ' o r 800 f t. 2 t o t a l area, t h e t o t a l uniform v e r t i c a l seismic loading is 2535 psf.

The maximum sum of a l l t h e horizontal l e g forces of Figure 5-c is 132,650#.

On a per cavity b a s i s t h i s is 669#.

This load should be applied i n both E-W and N-S d i r e c t i o n s.

The maximum bearing s t r e s s under t h e rack f e e t i s calcualted t o be 4393 p s i.

These loads should be used f o r both OBE and SSE.

(.,

BY.... 1;,.-..

A..

S J E C T.. E L

SHEETNO.-.--------.

OF....---

C H I ( ~ : B y -.-. I...-- D*TEJ-.?IL JOB No......._..--.......--

203-1 lll.l.lll..l.

7 6 q - b~ {s-d 5 15 -SEISMIC I

I

M ~ J I Y ~ ~ ~ E ~ D M 4 u ~ ~ m

\\.25" T\\LRe#q) pmu

No. g T % j

= '7

B Y

D T

E S

U J

C T

SHEETNO............ O F..-.-.--,-

t i f cwno. sr ( ;I:DATE.I

.j:q!d

~.I~C.~.-DF..-C-?, cc.?=!.b:) !-- JOB NO...%.

%L...-_-

\\

By5-Goosk!-sHDATEr~?I&:78 SUBJE~T..EC!QL.A~AC~YSLS

---

(~C~O~~J-T]

SHE, NO..----------OF b t L D

T

?

JOB N 0.. 3 8 9 !..........----

FOOT AAIALYSIS: D + L FOR 7NE

/ I X l i RACK, D + C = 7 1

)

= i?~,670*/~;

BEARWG STRESS Ohl C ~ N P E T E fClp =

ZZ, 690*

=

955 PSI BEARlhlG STfESS Ohl PLr4STIC

-Fp = zz16 90*

=

Ps / (c F, ~ 5 4 0 0 PSI 7 4 C5-z5".P CHECK THREAD STRESSES 2 f6p

= -1'34 A X l A L STRESS ON F O O T Sol= 2z1c90" = 2044 PS I(<F,~,o&

rr/4 (3-7L'r)z PI

++A6-=./cs

ROGRAMMED SYSTEMS CORPORATION 3460 LEXINGTON AVE. NO.. ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55112 AREA COOE 612 484-7261 TELEX #29-7473 SECTION 5. 1 0 FUEL STROAGE SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT DUANE ENERGY CENTER U N I T NO. 1 I o w a E l e c t r i c L i g h t and P o w e r C o m p a n y C e d a r R a p i d s, I o w a

,CONTRACT NO. 1 3 7 6 4 P a R Job: 3 0 9 1 D e s i g n C a l c u l a t i o n s POISON CAN ANALYSIS

\\ -

PREPARED I--

10 -72; CHECKED BY

/-23-78 R E V I S I O N NO.

DATE

REVISION RECORD REV.

NO.

DATE DESCRIPTION CHK' D BY APPRV'D BY DATE

1.1 '.','I '

1.1 1,, / ; ;

.D*TE--L~!....

I...

SUBJECT......I.....-.: - - - - - - ~. ~ - ~ - ~ - - ~ - - -..

SHEET N O............ OF...----

D ~ T E - J I z - z ~ ~....-........--....-----------

1.............................................

JOB NO..........._..... ------

Po\\>or-~ C4hj A,

L J ALd 515 C O N ~ \\ I > E R ! ~ ~ E I ~ ~ E ~ - O N C A N w UYDRAUC\\C, I

' ~ R K W R F

! of ~

E W

.WGJL~ m o ~.

~JAI-EG.

A

• TOE"

.. I,

a f -. p o, 5 0 d !,, L A d I

3 6 1 S i ; - ; i...,

I

, ~ s ~ ; K. - ~. : ~.., +

-'*.-t..k

?

) :

--?-..

..'.3Fi-.

5Ap

..,hlNw<..5....

• UTE12.. T"RE

, i....

.;.'i 1...--.

d -...

.-,.--;"A L+.

Gb,P 516F ( 4 3 - 1 / ~ =.2\\$"

i.-...-

.I-

. &,(&l,t.-i+U

,/\\F1'.

'Mod: CIWG?ANC --

.I03",..

-i%% ~ E l b h l

$WAIL P-UAE b l b ~ ~ l ~ ~ f l t o d 15, C\\IJN 01'..mE.

~ ~ b G i u

( '1

' 3 = $74*(3b5) - LZ.~/

144 '4 l5,lp~:-

'. 4 3 ~

4, d k c

., i!=.ie~4r

.F LAF)

IN FEET.

'd. -..

I i-

1.

.- + 5.10-3

• BY....b:-.:.-.,

SUBJECT.............--..---------~-~--.------.

S H E E T NO............ OF....

---I CHKD. B Y / - ' J ~ ~.oATE!L?-?/~~~~

~

~

~

J O

~

NO............---.--.._I

%M TUE c o r - + p f l ~ ~

QuTpuT-. 5 k~s.

T k E L/L&qP=T" JTRE 5 I

: t - Y.

,&Y~&L-=

67.8'.; W Q ~ G N T = ~ ~ ~ ~.. ~

D U.. P b

@ ~~'A.I(G

~ 0 ! 4 5 )

,.. I ; $.

I I

.I i

I

&IAL 5 ~ ; f * ~ O V - ? E N T

-r 2 5. 4,

-t!-

+++ PLHMAR FRAME ANALYSIS *++

FORE EHD : AFT END MATER I HL

SECT I Or1 ROTAT I Or1

ZPAI.i LENGTH

.JO I t.1T

.JO I r1T CODE CODE HP~I~LE, TEMP.

CUR'y'ED :SPANS FURE END.

AFT EPiD MAT.

SECT.

ROT.

SPAN fipiGLE

.JOINT JOINT CODE CODE RADIUS HNGLE TEMP.

JO I N T COURDINATES 1 I N T Y

-7 L MHTEE I A L PROPERT I ES COIIE E

PO 1:S:SOri-.'S DENS I Ttf THERMAL 1:CIEFF IC I ENT. YIELD CROS:S-:ZECT 1 OM PROPERT 1 ES MOMEPIT OF SHEHR CODE AREA INERTIH RHTIO.

ZTRE:Z:Z RECO1*,:EE'f '*,2fiLI-lE:S IznPlB 1 PiED POIPIT 1,..':3 POINT Z/'4 JDE STRES:S I T I 1

I:: z >

R 8::EFF::l 1:

I: 'y' :I I-.

a ( 3 )

.. b R 1::EFF)

SPECIFIED EESTRfiINT:Z JOINT D IRECTION

!,2ALUE LOADING NO. I:

1 T'

PlEMBER 1.500E+01 111 1

TOTAL APPLIED F0RCE:Z:

F(:<>.: 4..-11-1-E-C1.5

.:,.=a I.

=

3.147E-1:15 FI::Z> -5

. [I 111 [I E + [I 111

44..i444.4444 I=% I=' C8 c*

a=,

.=t

,=, u=,

,=,,=a

+ + + + + + + + + +

W W W W W W W W W W

~.tl rfc Tf *.it Tf *.if

• .il L ~ I ti8 L ~ I I:IJ TIJ CIJ p.- CIJ I:IJ I:IJ I:IJ TIJ I:IJ CIJ I:IJ I:IJ I:IJ I:IJ I:IJ I:IJ

~ I J I

4d4444.-I..+44

• =, a=,

,=, a=,

,=a

,=,,=8

,=, 3,=,

+ + + + + + + + + +

W W W W W W W W W W

,=,,=, *=, a=,,-#-I a=,.=*,=, C.

IYIJ I:IJ I:IJ I:IJ f.:

I:IJ IYIJ (IJ I:IJ I:IJ I:IJ

~ I J U:I I:IJ U:I I:IJ I:IJ I:IJ I:IJ I:IJ I

• =8,=,,=,,=a t=,,=* c8,=,,=, I=,

0 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 W W W W W W W W W W

• I:IJ I:IJ Tf

1. [I I:IJ KI P:I I?:?

I:IJ 11 U:I KI b:~ I:IJ U:I KI b:~

b3 F

I I

$7) I:IJ I

O I

1. ?:I I:*:I I~:I I?:I

1. ?:I

......... I

~ ~. +, - I I > J - I. - I. +. + ~

1 I

I 1

I I.. L

(..3 w w w w w w w w w w 1.0 rit *.it Tf *.CI Tf #.it *.CI

• .i8 1.0 I:IJ IYIJ ::IJ I:IJ p~ IYIJ I:IJ IYIJ (IJ,.

I:IJ I:IJ I:IJ I:U I:IJ 1x1 CIJ I:IJ CIJ OJ I

l l

t l

l l

l l

4.4.-4.-I444.-I.+.-I

.=.,=* *3

,=v v=9

,=a

,=,

.=,.=.

+ + + + + + + + + +

W W W W W W W W W W

,=.,=#.=,,=v

• =,,-I-1

,=a

,=, $2,,=.

I:IJ I:IJ

~ I J I:IJ I:IJ i: I:IJ I>J I:IJ I:IJ

\\

ROGFUMMED 3460 LEXINGTON AVE. NO., ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55112 AREA CODE 612 484-7261 TELEX #29-7473 S E C T I O N 5.11 F U E L STORAGE SYSTEM D E S I G N REPORT DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER U N I T NO. 1 Iowa E l e c t r i c ~ i g h t and Power C o m p a n y C e d a r R a p i d s, Iowa CONTRACT NO.

1 3 7 6 4 P a R Job: 3091 D e s i g n C a l c u l a t i o n s MODULE L I F T I N G FRAME AND C A S T I N G L I F T I N G EYE ANALYSIS PREPARED BY A T E

// -, 2 7 7.

CHECKED BY b-3-3 -7 &

R E V I S I O N NO.

DATE

REVISIOIJ RECORD REV. NO.

DATE DESCRIPTION CHK' D BY APPRV'D BY DATE

INTRODUCTION The following calculations check the stresses in the lifting frame members and welds described by PaR fixture drawing AD-225S6-E.

The calculated stresses are compared'to the yield strength F of the material and are shown to have a factor Y

of safety F.S. on yield greater than 3.0.

Nomenclature used is generally in accordance with A.I.S.C. Manual of Steel

/

Construction, 7th Edition, 1973.

8. ! '. - 4 '. '. D A T E !. 1 S U J E C T Y.

J C

/

J bHtEl N U -..... Ut... /.: --.--

CHKD. ?Y. ~l//h DATE-.!,,.I.~~I

................... 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 '. 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 '. 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 ' 4 '

JOB N O. ~ Q ? (...../.0M!8 A,.#-

\\

GENERAL, F IX-T_UFE ARRPNGEMENT : SEE PaR DRAWING

'A -22556 -E.

THE SAME FJYTuRE /S USED FOR C l F T ~ ~ 4

/V FTHE 8 CAV. DlRECTiON AND rflf 11 CAY. D I R C T I ~ N.

t I

I 0

I

.,. i -

b-70.3 7 5 " RETRACTED PO 5 1 T/O N 75.50-"' MAX. EXTENDEB (74-37 5" s HQWN)

IN Ir C ~ V. DIRECTION DETERMINE MAY. LOAD P PER LIFTING FIXTURE el?

(FOR II MODULE)

APPROX. W T PE/9 CAVITY I S NL*. (SEE NOTE BELOW).

I

~

~

('I)() = a ~ & PER LIFTING EAR P =

2 DETERflIId E MAX. TRjWEL I BETWE&!/ R E n. 8 CAV. AND EXTVD, /I CAV. COA~D~TIONS

$4..

75,500" - 56.566' 2

= 12.500

NOTE: 136*/~~~.

U S E D 15 CONSERVAPVE AS CALL. w% /S /J~*/CAY.

NOTE: CAVITY ARRPNOEMEW 15 6.625(1 TO EE, WITH 5.900 HOLES.

N I S THE N U M B E R OF C A V l n E s BEING C Q ~ ~ S ~ D G R D -

I

I

' = BENblhlG YIELD COMBINED SHEAR AND TENSION F.u

= F2 - /.6 f,

( S E E PARA. 1.6.3 4.I.S.C. hklNUAL, ~ 5 - 2 3 )

/

~

b

)

L--.:.

FACTOR 0F:SAFETY ON YIELD

=

Cb

MAIN CROSz 7UEiE ANALYSIS :

CHECK 8ENDlNG STRSS lN 1 0 " ~

lo* X 3/8" SQUARE TUBE, A = 13.0 IN',

5 = 41.7 /u3,.G = 36,040 Psi.

I I

I I

I I

+ ~s,ase*

I 1

l

.. A. -.

MOMENT 4T

= 822.8*(37.0:12) = 304,53.? IN-LB 304.539 / N - t B

=,730~,,*,

fh =

41.7 / f l T i

USE PLATE AND WELD STRESS ANALYSIS DOGHO

.i.....

. I '

Fy '

30,000 RI FOR DOGHOUSE I

i

.\\A i

/

.- !. -.,z?.$L-'... :--

S f

. t.:-

L r -

3 7

w

- L - '

I

.. :. I.. I

" i..

........-.-.. &.... +.-----.-

I I

I I '..

- - X..

I 4

I,..

. F 1

8 I

STRESS.

4NACYS IS-FOR DOGHOUSE PLATES :

I t

s i

,: - - (1-687+-62!i)(7-7~)~

. :- 358.73,N4.. !;*,--.

i-."

,.!.,A;;

' "PLATGS 3..

!. i. - i t I.

f : ;

iMc

.,'I 82&@

(,T,b3 fl.T,f,7$

+

'?: ;,'V

-' p:,!'

.,,-.?.

i::,..'!

!?ic 8

2 )7.75".;

i f t b

= 4202 PSI f

. 356-73 /4?,.

I 1

A I

• 6228- -

= 460 PSI a

fttr = (-6.25

• 1.L87) 7.75 1..

7OTAC,f,. = :ftL+

f t v = 4662 PSI. ( d F t =18,000 P S I ),

a..

1-.).1

- 3 0 400 1 = Q. + ~

F.S. - 4662 ' 1 4

C H E C K 3/R *WELD AROVAJD b ~ ~ i ~ o v s e A&.

PLATE :

\\

I..

I w u =

2 [ ~ 8 p o ) 3, 9 5

~

~

~

8

)

, + - / 8 ( ~ 5 0 ) (. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f i = 2 4 4. b l ~ ~

'3 i

6

~

Y

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

D A

T E

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

S U E ~ J E C T. ~ ~ ~ ~ - -. $ !. F ~ ! ~ ~. ~.. ~ ~ X ~ R ~. ~ & ? ~ ! ! ! : < >

S H E E T N O... h...... OF...---..---

CHKD. BY:..:.:.:..DATE..).t.7;3.-.-.-----.---------------.----.-..----------------.------------.-------

, I+

f Joe N 0.3.09.!

---

 ! - W A -----

C

LOAD HOOK ANALYSLS : SEE PaR DAAWidGS AD-20977-B AND AD-22223-C.

Ab-2 0 977-B LIFTING EYE

= 35,000 PSI 5

AD-22223 -C BRACKET PLA

--7-?f-

- -... -...--. -- y---

I

?

I & 4 5 & * ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '. '

BEAM MobEL ASfUMPTlarJ 1..

DISTRIBUTE^ LOAD FOR 1.5" PLATE-I

.I

- i ASSUMED LOAD.,.;

.;I

,. ).i :.:'

r saiap.

~ I S + ~ ~ I B U T I O N 1

..../ :*i+

SHOWN.

I

E Y ! ~ : - ~. ~ ~. ! S ~ - D A T E ~ ~ ~ ~ !. ' ; ~. ~

SUBJECT./~?~/~~C~-~L!D!@~~~~!.U~C!.~~.~~P~!I!~?-?!-~~

SHEETNO..... 8..-.OF...........

CHKD. BY!i.$.?-.-.

J 0 8 ~0.3-~2/..&!&!~---

) '

w Loab HOOK ANALYSIS (CONTINUED)

CHECK BENhlNG 4 AD-20980-C.

PLATE AT LOCAT/OII/ @ =

CHECK TENSlCE -STRESS IN 1'- 8 SC(?EWS :

I I

3 35000PSI

= 4-25 F. 5. ON YIELD 8228 I...

'r" CHECK 7E4SlCF STRESS /N HOOK AT L O C A ~ O N @ t

r.

I 8

\\

CHECK STRESS OH 3/8* HOOK WELD ::

BY.'-lr.~:lV.?L!:~!!o~~~./c(~I!:L/ SUBJECT.il?l?P!!-k~,:--5.!~!.!-N.9.-!~!.~!-c!.r!<-.4!!fl<?::?'~

SHEET NO...... 7.... O F...L-: ---- -

'.t CH KO. BY: 'i-'.:r*.

o

• T E - - ~ G. / ~ ~ c......--------.----.

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii JOB NO.-%!^.!..... LO!&&---

} !

CHECK BENDING AND SHEAR STRESSES 47 COCATIOd @ :..

a A S S U M E AN AVERAGE tl/GHI AND WIDTH O F SECTION-4 I

AVG, HEIGHT 1-625"+2.125" =,-875~t 2

c375'

/.725*<2) -

A V G WIDTH

..I:

,.. - ';-A.

L.3.

-.! : j.

..'.. 2".

=. 1. 662"..!

s AVG. AREA, (/.875"x1.6(/.64~9 - = 3.537 /NC 1.662"0.87532 =.974,N,3 SECTION MoDUCOS S =

6 1

CASTING 356 -75/, 5 = /6,000 PSI FOR SHEAR ANb B W b l N G, Fb8= 5 -/.6%

= 141 3 9 PSI, '

REE PARA. 1.6.3 4.I.S.C. MANUAL ',

I? 5 -23

.i I

1 :,,.,

.5.11-12

3460 LEXINGTON AVE. NO., ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55112 AREA CODE 612 484-7261 TELEX X29-7473 JANUARY 1 9 7 8 SECTION 5. 1 2 FUEL STORAGE SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT P a R Job No. 3091 F o r DUANE ARNOLD, UNIT NO. 1 (IOWA)

DESIGN CALCULATIONS MODULE SHIPPING SKID PREPARED BY DATE 1-15-78 CHECKED BY DATE 1 A I S-78 REVISION NO.

DATE

INTRODUCTION An analysis of t h e shipping skid was conducted f o r racks orientated horizontally, v e r t i c a l l y, and i n t i l t e d which occur f o r upending and shipping conditions.

The computer program "SAGS" ( S t a t i c Analysis of General Structures) was used t o analyze a bracket on t h e skid.

This program is a v a i l a b l e t h r u t h e S t r u c t u r a l Dynamic Research Corporation SDRC, 5729 Dragon Way, Cincinnati, Ohio.

This analysis showed t h a t a l l members and i n t e r f a c e b o l t s have a s a f e t y f a c t o r g r e a t e r than 3:l on yield.

CAD:.+-

3 / ytl:a.--36.5-) ---..----.-----...--..-.---

Joe NO.-..J-U.Y-J.-,..-.--

.-----------------------.-----------~-~-----------~-.-.-'--~~-~--..

.--.----.-'--.---------I-MODULE SHIPPING SKID AM4LYSIS FOR FOUR PotAT LIFT :

NOTE.' DR Y H O D ~ L E MflSS -

11 3*&~,

FROM & P f X. 8-1 TOTAL WZ

• 113 ~ 0 ) 0 1 )

= 12, V 3 0.

P = /3,0oo*

(2) /.om DIA. HOLES (TYFI)

I I

q 4 4"J' T U B E I

4 T A N 8

=#.

ASS'ME CPENDED

= 1 3 0 0 0 AND eVENDLD c 25

( S H O W N )

AND 12 INTO PAPER,

CyECU SHEAR S T R S ON 1.00" DIA-IN Q " x ~ "

TUBE ( % I '

WALL) I F

7 -36000 CHECK ~ E A R ~ N G STRESS SCREW : Fy = 85,OoO PSI, Fp=3$000 PSI I

11 CHECK RIP 007'- SHEAK STRESS lfl 3 * ~ 3 " r

/4 ANGLE T A B ; TAB MU. 1S 1/2 SHEAR STRESS ON SCPEW I S TWO A B O V E, O R ~ / ~ o ~ s I c c F Fy =36000

/. 00" D/A, ALUM. SCREW PSI 4 /--3.500"

- 3 750*

= 2500 P S I

= ctA f, - 2 ( ~ * ~ o " ) (

• s o o ~ )

(CFr= 11,4W psi) 3-5a0

= -583

= 6.000 F-s. = wz = 5.76 3 750s

' (1.00")(.500") = 7500 PSI 2.750

= --

= -958 6.000 Es. = WE 4.32 CC fp

= 32,40OP5/'

J I

lr CHECK ~ ~ ( E A C STRESS ON /! W O SHOWN ABOVE : 0 = 4 FOR WELD.

ALLOWABLE LOAD P = CC, DA ( m ~

3250*LoaD CO*JTRIBUTION) w H E ~ E C, = /.O FOR E70 R O D, Ah)D C = - 6 4 FROM TABLE XIY.

/ 5.36 F.5. Oh).ALLOWABLE 3mL5

= 4.73 ( cONTR18r?rrOnl TO srso*LOAD 7 l 0 0 Q BASED OAJ 2/000PS/ ALL(

C O R R E S P ~ N D I A G S T ~ E S S / S 4273

= 4940~31 5.12-5

CWKO.,aY J~:.?:I::DATE-1+?-$/:?9~... L.&?:-f 3198 Y.?.... R.E!?,,)

Joe ~o..Ju?./

T.

SHEAR 5TKESS ( C ~ I U T ~ N U E D )

2 CHECK SHEAR ST4CS.5 COAJTKIBOTlOrJ D U E TO / 8 7 5 * ~ f f ~ ~

LbAD-I* 5 75 -

U S E T A B C F X V, P4-69, WHERE a = = =. =

A N D & - -

G.0 -,458 P = C C, n l = -95(/.0)(4)(6.0) ~ 2 2. 8 K I P S

'0875(21,~oo PSI) = 1725 PS/

COCREsFbr-IDHG STSESS --

TOTAL R E S L I L T ~ ~ T S ~ ~ E A R STRESS 04 WELD IS ANIOCL'SIS OF SWAR 574~555 ON SOPPORT PLATE WELDS : S E SFIEnS3B -3.

f?

PLATE^ AAE 4.0" SQ-REFER T O ~ H P u T E R. R / f l T O C ) T LOADS AT JOINT / (SF& SHEET 3

~

)

. T E ~ S I L E LOADS At?

FF(= /636*

Ahlo F<Y)= 2631 *.

MOMEUT M = 2096 Id-LB t

SEE S H E E T. 3 B F O R SECT/ON 'A - A f

. L O A D S o j e v /A c o ~ p o r e R ANALYSIS 3 5 0 ~

S i H l b n E R Tn moSd UJED ld N O D U L E 5x10 Arntvslr a= 32so$ 4.e mmtcmec E. C O N > E

• L ~ ~ ~ ~,

CHEC K SHEPR AND TEAIS ILE STZESSES

/-0#-8 SCRE-PI T. At=.6051 1dZ T H I S S C P E W SECURES ~ " ~ o D u C E T O M E S H / P P I N G SKID, Ah)D SCRcuJ SVESSES FOC UP/LID/hlG COIt)DIT/OrJ B

E L

~

WILL B E GREATER ~, 4 ~ h l FOR F O U R Pa/h)T L/FTidG CO~UFIGU&AT/ON I

f=j, = 85,000 PSI CON f3,rJED SHEAR S T P 6 S S CHECK NO. OF W G A S ~

ms. R E Q ~

I I h ( A L U M. C ~ S T / ~ ) G WIrH 5890#

T E N S I L E LOAD, F, =, 4(16,000)

= b 5 & ' + ( ~, ' 1 '

1

= 6 4 0 Q P S \\, F. s. = 3 MIN.

c< ~,=34000 PS

-34000 = ~ 4 7

= 9-13 THIS.

ES. -

( M I N - )

6000

A - A 4

4 a

+

6 6 ~

Leu -

(4 &lj. 767)1 2 5 1 f !. )

I2

= 4184 PSI 4-2/91 PSI

=

6 3 7 5 PSI

( 4F,= Zl,OOO PSI)

FORE END AFT END MHTEPIHL SECTION ROTHTION

~ ~ ~ 1 1. 1 L E ~ ~ G T H.JO I PiT J O I N T COIIE CODE HtiGLE TEMP.

JOINT COORD I NHTES

.JO I NT 8

7 L

MATER I AL PRUPEPT I E:5:

CODE E

PO 1SSOI.i." :5 DEPiI: I T','

THERMRL I ~ ~ E F F 1 C 1 ENT

'$1 E L n CRO:SS-:Z:ECT 1 Of,{ PROF'EF;T 1 ES FIOPIEIJT OF

SHEAR CODE HREH I N E R T I H RHTIO

FEE I F 1 ED RESTRHI P1T:S J O I N T DIRECT ION VALUE

+++ L O A D I N S NO.

1:

J O I WT D I

ZPLkCEMEMTS

.JU I r4T I I.:i

.i RUTHT I UP4 1

-1. 65.3G,E+[I:1 2. C.::lE+[l'3 2. [Is3e0E+

[I.>

4 1. c,:3C.E+ 03

3.6,85E+ [IZ 4.284E+ 1112 TOTAL

4. :377E-1 2

3. 5 0 [IE+ 1:1:3

z. 324E+ [1:3 FORE END FUE1:ES AFT EPiD FORCES SPHP{.-IT.

A:.:IAL

SHEAR MOMENT AT.

A X I A L SHEAR MUPlEP4T

......-...(..~D:-2-31f7.66::bb.!!6.C-)

JOB NO.-.-

2-G.2L ---.

.-.-.--me-I#

ASSUME A ~ G L E TAB-AAID 5 ~ 4 6 W YUST. 7AlrE LOAD & =7000.

REF. A.I.S.C, MAWVAL, 7 9 ~ d. ) TABLE XIV, R 4-48.

ALLOWABLE LOAD P = CC, Die (FOR

~ 9 5 0 ~ ~ 0 4 ~

C O ~ ~ T R I B O T J O ~ ~ )

WNE$E C, = /.O M R 70 W D, AND C = a 6 Q FROM TABLE XIV.

15.36 F.5.

ALLOWABLE 2.75 COdTRIBWlON DUE M 2750 LOAD

= 5.58 ( s 4 s Ea 24 000 ps/ ALLOWABLE.

CHLCK SHEAR STtsS C~hlTRjBi\\~~o/rl JuE rn 5890 S#4R LOAD-U S E T4 R C E XV, P. 4 - 6 9, uJHPPE Q =

=.a5 A ~ J B &= 2 6.0

6. o - -458 P=CC,DA = -95 (/-o)l.?X6.0) = 22.8 R ~ P s C O R R E S P O A D ~ ~ G srse SS

(~1,ooo PSI) = 5425 PSI I

CHECK SHEAR STRESS COAITRIBUTION DOE r0 LOAD C O M P ~ E ~ ) T / ~ ~ I A ~ T O PAPER:

4, aoo1) ~ 7 0 7 ) ( 74")

RESULTANT SHEAR STRESS ON WELD /S

[1(3760)'

+ (5425)'

+ /005)*

- - 6675 PSI (46 -2f,000 PSI)

FOR 5:1 F.5.

ULTIMATE STREAJQTH O F L / F T / M t C A B L E 9 USE CABLE W / 7 H ULTlnjAfE STREdGTH F, :

CHECK SHE4R STRESS 04 LOO.D/R S C R E ~ :

C~-&CK R~POOT SHEAR STeESS ON %" TABt

EMOTE SYSTEMS CORPORATION 3460 LEXINGTON AVE. NO., ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA55112 AREA CODE 612 484-7261 TELEX #29-7473 SECTION 6. 1 FUEL STORAGE SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT P a R Job: 3 0 9 1 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER U N I T NO. 1 I o w a E l e c t r i c Light and P o w e r C o m p a n y C e d a r R a p i d s, Iowa

.CONTRACT NO.

1 3 7 6 4 SIMULATED MINIMUM C O E F F I C I E N T. O F F R I C T I O N T E S T PREPARED BY i-24-1a CHECKED BY DATE

/ - a+-78 R E V I S I O N NO.

DATE

REVISION RECORD REV. NO.

DATE DESCRIPTION CHK'D BY APPV'D BY DATE

FRICTION TEST REPORT FOR YANKEE ATOMIC COMPANY 1.0 PURPOSE To verify the minimum coefficient of friction for loading geometry, environments, and pressure as found on feet assemblies of spent fuel modules sliding on the floor liner plates of spent fuel pools.

The friction values were'used in module design to determine maximum module displacements aftep a seismic event.The~e tests were done Lnder ideal conditions with no considerations given to long term contact effects and corrosion effects. Therefore, they represent the minimum friction forces and do not attempt to define their maximums.

2.0 TEST SET-UP & DESCRIPTION Picture 1 delineates the test,set-up. Two 6" diameter x 1/2" thick"304 S.S. pads were bolted onto a middle sandwich plate.

, These pads are identical to the foot assembly pad as used on the module. The middle pad sandwich plate is connected to a 3"- diameter hydraulic cylinder actuated by a hand The pad.assembly is in turn sandwiched between two stationary 1" thick 304 S.S. plates with standard hot.rol.led finish to simulate the pool liner. (see picture 2). The complete 'friction test assembly is located in the bottom of a shallow tub, capable of holding enough water such that the pad assembly can be totally submerged. The stationary plates are vertically loaded with a 5" diameter bench press.

The pad assembly is then slid between the sandwich by means of the other hydraulic cylinder. Both ;ylinders have pressure gages to measure the vertical and horizontal pulling force.

3.0 TEST PROCEDURE For normal loads of 5000 to 40,000# increments, measure the horizontal static and kinetic sliding force under the following conditions.:

1) Pad assembly with 32 micro-inch surface finsih a) Dry b) Wet (water)

2) Pad assembly with 250 micro-inch surface finish a) Wet -

Note:. because two sliding surfaces are used, the horizontal force is divided by two to obtain the sliding force by one surface. This force is then divided by the normal force to obtain the coefficient of friction.

RESULTS OF MEASURED DATA TABLE I S t a t i c Coefficient of F r i c t i o n Kinetic Coefficient of F r i c t i o n Dry 9 wet?

W e t 250 Normal Force 250 D ~ Y W wet-wet/

SUMMARY

Table I presents the coefficient of friction for the various conditions measured. The live and dead weight of four legged 10 x 10 module assembly is approximately 22,000 lbs. per pad. For. normal pad forces between 15,000 to 30,000 lbs, the variation of measured friction coefficient is.23 -. 2 9 for all conditions.

The following observations are made in reviewing the data.

1) For normal forces above 10,000# coefficients are fairly constant for a given conidition. Coefficients are always substantially lower for normal forces below 2 ) Wet values were 0-1% lower than dry values.

3 ) Kinetic values were 0-2% lower than static values.

4)_Wet values for 250 micro-inch finishes were 0-2%

lower than smoother pad surfaces with 32 micro-finishes.

Very little difference was measured for kinetic and static friction, which may be attributed to the small pad velocities maintained with the hand pump on the actuating cylinder.

6.0 CONCLUSION

S For nominal contact pressures minimum coefficient of friction measured were.23 -.29 for all conditions. Because these measured values do not show the effects of long term contact stress and corrosion, we believe these values represent the absolute minimum.

A coefficient of friction of. 2 based on these tests was used in the seismic time history analysis to determine maximum module relative displacement. This value is 15% below a min-imum measured value of.23 to account for measurement un-certanties.

7.0 PICTURES PICTURE 1 PICTURE 2

ROGWMMED SYSTEMS CORPORATION 3460 LEXINGTON AVE. NO., ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 551 12 AREA CODE 612 484-7261 TELEX #29-7473 SECTION 6. 2 FUEL STORAGE SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT P a R Job: 3091 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER UNIT NO. 1 I o w a E l e c t r i c L i g h t and P o w e r Company C e d a r R a p i d s, I o w a

' CONTRACT NO.

13764 BOLT CLEARANCE TEST REPORT PREPARED BY DATE

!-!a-7?3 DATE

/-24-78 REVISION NO.

DATE

REVISION RECORD REV. NO.

DATE DESCRIPTION CHK' D BY APPV'D BY DATE

TEST REPORT/BOLT CLEARANCE PURPOSE: To determine the deflection and ultimate load capacity of bolted joints with different body clearances, seating torques and hole misalignment. The values were then compared against identical bolt patterns with a dowel pin press fitted'in the middle of the bolt pattern.

TEST SET UP & PROCEDURE: Figure 2 delineates the test set-up.

Here a typical two bolt pattern was mocked up and loaded in a 5" diameter bore bench press. The top surface of the plates was measured with a dial indicator. The plates were loaded in 100 psi increments of the bench and deflection measurements were taken at each load.

Four different conditions were tested:

1) The plates bolted together with two 3/4-10 bolt torqued to 600 in-# with body hole of.015" clearance. Body hole pattern -015" less the mating hole pattern 'so that it is a line to line fit on outside edges of the bolts-note theoretically all the load would be of the 1st bolt, in this case.

2) Same as (1') except body hole clearance.005" and hole patterns in line.

3) Same as (2) except a 1" dowel with a.0003-7" press fit was added to the middle of an inline bolt and body hole clearance of.015. The testing for this case was done by.

n i n City Testing. The test report is found in back of this repor

4)

Same as (2) except bolts are only finger tight.

All materials were aluminum. ~ o l t s were Standard 3/4-10-uc x 1 1/2" Hex Heads, alloy 2024-T4. Bolt threads were in the shear.

RESULTS: Table one summarizes the deflection -vs-load results for four cases.

(Figure 3 presents these same results in a graphical form),

for conditions 1,2, and 4. Figure 1 and Table 2 presents results for case 3.

On Figure 3, the results for trials 1,2, and 4 are approximately linear up to approximately 22 Kips. After the load the slope incieases. This effect is accounted for by parallegramming of the bench press and should be ignored.

CONCLUSIONS: For Trials 1,2, and 4 bolt clearances, hole misalignment and seating torque had virtually no effect on ultimate failure load.

The failure load for these three cases were 25.15 ksi. The total effective 2

shear area of the two 3/4 bolts is,668 in. The failure shear strength is then 25.51/.668

= 38.18 ksi.

For load case 3 the total shear area of the two bolts plus the 1" dowel 2

pin is 1.453 in. The failure shear strength is then 52.75/1.453

=

36.29 ksi. This results in a 5% reduction in the shear strength due to the dowel pin and bolts not sharing the load proportionately.

TABLE ONE DEFLECTION OF BOLTED JOINTS Load Deflection Kips S2 S4

-023

.028

-032

.035

.0.38

.041

.045

.050

.055

.064

.074 Failure Failure

.026

.029

.032

.035

.038

.042

.045

.049

.053

.058

.065 Failure KEY -

S1 =.015 Body Clearance-Two Bolts Torqued 600 in-#/and hole Misalignment of.015" S2 =.005" Holes in Line-Two Bolts Torqued 600 in-#

S3 =.015 Holes in Line-Two Bolts Torqued 600 in-# and 1" dowel pin with -0003-7 press fit S4 = -005 Clearance-Two Bolts Finger Tight

twin ccw testlnq and Pnq~rre~_rmnq laooratoru, Inc 662 CROMWEU A V E W E ST PAUL MN 551 14 PHONE 6rz1ars-~WI REPORT OF:

LOAD-DEFLECTION TEST OF SHEAR BLOCK PROJECT:

DATE:

December 23, 1976 REPORTED TO: Programmed & Remote Systems Corp FURNISHED BY:

899 W Highway 96 COPIES TO:

S t Paul, MN 55112 Attn: Mr A1 Sturm LABORATORY NO.

14-2500 GENERAL :

On December 2, 1976, we, received a shear block for load t e s t.

The shear block consisted o f a 6 114" x 2" x 1" aluminum plate placed alongside a 6" x 2" x 112" aluminum plate and bolted together with two 314" diameter by 1 7/8" long alumlnum bolts.

A 1" diameter aluminum shear pin was also connected t o the two aluminum plates midway between the two threaded bol ts.

A load-deflection t e s t was conducted on the shear block by applying a downward force to the 6" x 2" x 1/2" aluminum plate while oriented i n a vertlcal position.

Deflection measurements were recorded a t regular load intervals using a dial indicator.

D-DEFLECTION TEST RESULTS:

~ornpress i ve Load, lb 0

1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 Table 2 Compress1 ve Deflection, in.

0 0.001 5 0.0025 0.0040 0.0055 AS A MUTUAL P n O T ~ C X l O U T O CLILUTS.

TWZ CUmLlC AM0 OUR8CLVes. ALL R L P O R T I ARC ¶ u a ~ l l T c ~ )

A¶ THE cOMVIDCNT~AL r n O r L R T Y O r CLltHTS. A H 0 AUTHOR-1 Z I T 1 0 U P O I rUmLICAT1OM 01 STATLMCUTS.

COUCLUSlOu8 OR CXTRAtTm r R 0 Y OR RCGAROIMQ OUR RLPORTs 1s RCSLRVLD rCNOtNC OUR WRITTCU APCWOVAL 6.2-7

twm CKEV kestllnh;/

ana enqlneerlnq laaoratoru, lnc.

662 CROM'NELL AVENUE ST PAUL. MN 55 11 4 PHONE 6121645-3601 REPORT OF:

LOAD-DEFLECTION TEST OF SHEAR BLOCK DATE: December 23, 1976 LABORATORY No.

1 4-2500 LOAD-DEFLECTION TEST RESULTS:

(Cont. )

Compressive Load, 1b 20,000 21,000 22,000 23,000 24,000 PAGE: 2 Compressive Deflection, in.

0.0270 0.0285 0.0300 0.031 0 0.0325 A MUTUAL PIOTZCTIOH TO CLICMTS.

THC PUSLIC rna o u r s r L v c s. ALL n c m n r r ARC YU~MITTCO A S THC c o r t r l o c M z i r L rrorrnrr or C L I ~ N T Y. AHO r u T u o r - '

.LATIOM FOR PUSLICATIOM O r STATLMCHTS.

COMCLUSIONS OR CXTUACTS FROM OR RCGAIOIMG OUR RCPOITY I S RCSCRVCO R M O I H C OUR WRlTTCM APPROVAL.

REPORT OF:

twin cirv e e s t ~ n q ana enqlneerlnq IaDoraForU, Inc.

662 CROMWELI. AVENUE ST. PAUL. MN 551 14 PHONE 612/645-3601 LOAD-DEFLECTION TEST OF SHEAR BLOCK DATE:

December 23, 1976 LABORATORY No.

14-2500 PAGE:

3 LOAD-DEFLECTION TEST RESULTS : (Cont. )

• Shear fractures occurred in the two threaded bolts and the 1" diameter shear pin.

The load-deflection t e s t results suggested t h a t the shear block started t o yield a t approxi-mately 36,000 lb.

The load-deflection curve for the shear block i s shown in Figure #I.

REMARKS :

This t e s t was conducted under your Purchase Order Number L-12319-1.

The shear block is being returned.to you under separate cover.

1 A MUTUAL PUOTCCTlON T O CLICNTS. THC PUBLIC AND O U R I C W Z I. ALL REPORTS ARC I V B Y I R C D A9 TWC COWtlDCHTIAL PZ1OPCRT7 OP CLlTWTS. A N D AUTHOR- '

IZATIOH FOR CU~LICATION oc STATV.MEHTI.

CONCLU.IONS OR EXTRACTS FROM OR RLOAROING OUR R ? ~ ? ~ R T S IS RCSCRVCD PLIIOIHC OUR WIITTEN APPROVAL.

/

I

/ I

/ I Twin. c i t y p i n y ~

n p

r i

n p

o p

6.2-9 Rv.

I

/

dl?

/ /

A /

COMPRESSIVE DEFLECTION (in.)

\\

EMOTE SYSTEMS CORPORATlON

\\ 1 1 9 3460 LEXINGTON AVE. NO., ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55112 AREA CODE 612 484-7261 TELEX 129-7473 SECTION 6. 3 FUEL STORAGE SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT PaR J o b : 3091 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER UNIT NO. 1 Iowa E l e c t r i c L i g h t a n d Power Company C e d a r R a p i d s, Iowa CONTRACT NO.

13764 SIMULATED DROPPED FUEL BUNDLE TEST PREPARED BY DATE I--t0-70 CHECKED DATE 1-24-78 REVISION NO.

7 DATE 7 r

REVISION RECORD REV. NO.,

DATE DESCRIPTION CHK'D BY APPV' D BY DATE 1

2-17-78 Deleted sentence

-/,

,./7 6 para. I from word drop.

DROP TEST REPORT 1.0 PURPOSE To determine impact loads and v e r i f y top c a s t i n g i n t e g r i t y r e s u l t i n g from a 18" f u e l drop, 2. 0 BACKGROUND I n Section 5. 2 of t h e design r e p o r t, a n e t impact energy f o r t h e 18" drop was calculated as 7802 in.-lb..

The spring r a t e a t t h e corners of t h e module a t t h e top c a s t i n g were calcu-l a t e d a t 1121 Kip/In.

I n t h i s test, a 10 x 7 top casting w a s used.

It w a s supported on t h e four corners by load c e l l s r e s t i n g on wooden blocks.

See Picture 1.

The wooden blocks w e r e used so t h a t t h e spring r a t e of t h e supports i n t h e test approximately match t h a t of t h e support-i n g s t r u c t u r e of t h e module.

2 The bearing on t h e blocks w a s a 2. 5 " square p l a t e o r 6. 2 5 in.,

Two 4 x 4 blocks w e r e stacked giving a t o t a l wood depth of 7".

The spring r a t e "K" f o r t h e wooden supports is given by t h e following equation:

Where A = 6.25 in. 2 6

E = 1-51 (10 ) psi for wood Solving yields This spring rate is slightly higher than the calculated value of 1121 Kips/In., so it will tend to give slightly higher loads.

3.0 TEST SET UP As mentioned previously, Pictures 1 and 2 delineate the test setup. The 10 x 7 casting was supported at the corners by load cells in series with wooden blocks to match the structural stiffness. Note: In the actual assembly, the top casting is supported along its entire periphery by the 1/2" side panels. So that bending stresses in the casting will be slightly higher for the tested geometry. A 2'x 2'x 2', l100#

concrete block with a 7" square x 2" LCS impact nose anchored to it under side was used to simulate the dropped fuel bundle.

A four angle guiding structure surrounded the block for safety reasons. Metal binding tape connected the block lifting eye to an overhead crane hook. After the block was lifted to the desired drop height, the metal tape was cut and impact time histories were recorded using a light beam oscillograph. The oscillograph and load cells were supplied and monitored by Test Technology of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Equipment des-

c r i p t i o n and c a l i b r a t i o n record a r e on f i l e a t PaR. -

To obtain a 7802 In.-Lb. impact energy f o r t h e 1 1 0 0 # block, t h e proper drop height is, d = 7802/1100 = 7.09".

4. 0 PROCEDURE Drop block 3. 5 " above c a s t i n g, record f o r c e impact t i m e h i s -

t o r i e s, and note any v i s u a l damage.

Repeat f o r a 7.09" drop Repeat once again f o r a 3. 5 " and 7.09" drop noting repeat-a b i l i t y of r e s u l t s.

5.0 RESULTS P l o t s 1 and 2 present t h e measured impact time h i s t o r i e s f o r t h e 3. 5 " and 7.09" drop.

The r e p e t i t i o u s runs agree very closely and are not presented.These p l o t s a r e t h e sum of a l l 4 load c e l l s o r t h e t o t a l impact force. P l o t number 1 had a peak impact force of 17,000# and p l o t number 2 had a peak f o r c e of 25,000#.

P i c t u r e 3 and 4 d e p i c t t h e s e t up p r i o r t o t h e 3'.5" and 7.09" drop.

A f t e r a l l t e s t i n g, only s l i g h t l o c a l deformations less 1/16" deep were noted a t t h e impact i n t e r f a c e.

6.0 CONCLUSION

S For an e l a s t i c impact, t h e impact f o r c e "F" can be shown t o be:

Where :

E = impact energy K = spring r a t e For a constant spring r a t e and m a s s, t h e following propor-t i o n a l l y can be shown t o e x i s t :

Where d = drop height For t h e 3.5" drop t h e measured f o r c e "F", is 17,000#.

The predicted force 'IF2, using equation ( 2 ) f o r the 7.09" drop would be :

n.

Which is very c l o s e t o t h e measured value of 25,000#.

Measurements of impact forces f o r a drop condition on t h e corners of t h e module w e r e not taken, however, an i n d i c a t i o n of t h e value of t h i s force can be made by assuming a constant impact energy and applying t h e following p r o p o r t i o n a l i t y e x i s t -

ing i n equation (1) :

Where K = structural spring rate In Section 5.2, the spring rate due to a unit load in the middle of the module top was calculated as 822.Kips/In. The spring rate at the corners of the module was calculated to be 1121 Kip/In..

Using the measured 25,000f impact force for a drop-in the middle, the approximate impact force for a drop in.the corners is:

V e r t i c a l S c a l e F o r c e k ( # I I

Horizontal Scale.

1" =.05 Sec.

. I.

Time ( s e c )

PLOT NO. 1 Impact E n e r g y -= 38 50.In/Lbs.

F o r c e

( # I Time ( s e c )

PLOT NO.

2 Impact E n e r g y = 7802 In/Lbs.

FORCE IMPACT TIME HISTORIES

P i c t u r e #1 Test-Setup Side V i e w P i c t u r e # 2 Test-Setup A e r i a l V i e w

P i c t u r e # 3 Test Setup P r i o r t o t h e 3.6" drop.

P i c t u r e # 4 7" Drop

ROGRAMMED EMOTE SYSTEMS CORPORATION 3460 LEXINGTON AVE. NO.. ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 551 12 AREA CODE 61 2 484-7261 TELEX 129-7413 APPENDIX A. 1 FUEL STORAGE SYSTEM DESIGN P!PORT PaR Job No.

3 0 9 1 DESIGN CALCULATIONS For DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER UNIT N O. l I

I o w a E l e c t r i c Light and P o w e r C o m p a n y C e d a r Rapids, I o w a CONTRACT NO.

13764 BEAM SECTION PROPERTIES, MODULE DEAD WEIGHT ESTIMATE AND S E I S M I C MASS INPUT PREPARED BY DATE /I-/4-77 CHECKED BY 3 7

DATE

[>-,5-77 REVISION NO.

I DATE 2-

/7-7 8

REVISION RGCORD REV. NO.

DATE DESCRIPTION CHK' D BY APP,' D BY DATE 1

2-17-78 Revised Sheets A.1.24

& A.1.25 Renumbered sheet A.1.26

BY.U..'-?Jrj<'~.t~D

\\ t E !. !. ~ ? ~. / / I SUBJECT <-'-!.IU!.l ; *.lj6..;,?!.'.CJ

> :f5Jklg.nl.2

-..- SHEET N O

.... V k....'....-.

CHKD.

..k.

DATE'.'!!-7.i.77 JOB ~0..3.O-2l--... LOW-

+

DETERMINE MOMENT OF INER774 1 O F TOP (SFID OUTER SECTION -'

\\, -

USE THE FOCLOW~NG APPROXIMATE CONFIBURATION, @+a+

@ + @ + @-@

I rl.737 4

BY G-~~.~~~!-.I.SH.DATE.(~:~IZ SUBJECT S.EC~~!~!!..E~RP.P.F.~~Y-.?~~!-.C!&AT!ON.>-

SHEET NO OF...--. --.--

cwm. sr: \\ ~ I ! ? % A T E.. ! ~ ~ ? ]..

. To p... G 41D 0 ' J T F 8. f ECTIQN..

JOB ~0.-399J-..........--- --

I DETERMINE zmy AND S y FOR TOP GRID OUTER S E C T I O ~.

&=A)' (14) 1.869 57.000 4,377

-633 22.838

-.241 86.476 (b xd) DISTANCE Y

/0.500" 9.500

6.9 69" 7.719" 3.750'

-700" I. h 2 o 3 0 4 0 5 0

-6 h I~ =AY'=MY (149 19.625 5 4 1.~00 39.256 4-88 6 85,641

-. 169 690.739 A

R

~

A (/HZ)

,176 6.000

,488

,082 6.090

--344 TOTAL 2

-237. x 1.500' 1.sodx4.00d

.237*~2.06$

,187~*

.438"

,812"~%000"

.32a1x2.~oo" J3 (M4)

,022 8,000

,173

,001 28,547

-.oga 3 6.659 12.494

"I &. G ~ a ~ / s H inrE 11-3-77' suojacr SECT"d PRCPLP'Y CA(CVLA710115 SHEET NO

......OF.. I.....

CHKD. sy, J L I f i - ~ ~ E.lI.'."/17 7 0 P GRID OUTER SECTIOU

/'-

JOB N O.. ~ 09.1.----....---.----

I.

- - i-

_I ( l n L )

,001 1.125

,002

.OOO.

.335

-.002 1.461 1,

= A + ~ N X ( 1 ~ 4 1

.004 5.8 45 0 07

,002 1,266

-,009 7,115 Mr=

A X 0 ~ ~ )

.028 5.922

,058

,012 2-777 w.055 8.742 AREA A (lltz)

.I78 6.000

.488

,082 6.030

-.344 12.434 I

r o 3 o 4 o 5

-6 IL t

TOTAL:

. ~ 3 7 ~ x /. 5 0 0 "

~,rod~4aoo"

. z ~ ~ ~ x z. o ~ '

./87'*.4am

.8,2"xzlioo"

.328*2.10oW 14

'.I58

-987'

. 118

-143

.456" 159"

DETERMINE 1, AND S. FOR T O P G R I D INNER SECTION.

?

1 1 7 \\, -. - u - 1

• 1 \\

L!/4 I t. 18

/

, - I

.- - >.,;,,,L.-

- ?,..

.. S C,,.. &

."I.,.

C H K D wp" D A T P ! ; /. ~ ~ ? \\

TOP t A 1 0 / N ~ ) R SECTIO JOB NO.. 3 0 9 l...............

D E T R M I ~ E AHD 5% FOR TOP GRID INNER SECTION.

DT&RMIAIE ~ ' o ~ S / O A / A L MbMEAIT OF /dR?74 7 FOR TOP G4 ID / 4 d & R SECTIOU.

U S E CASE 16 HEFVOD DtscR186D lkl Fi3RML)CAS m$ STRESS $ S T R I W ~

BY 8.4, RQAPz W.C.YOUNG, TABLE 20,P.294, 5SEd.) i 9 7 5.

AREA A IN^

-26178) 2,582 4,961

-,239 6.348 SECTION

-f 2 0 3 0

-9 h

1 r9 ( I N + )

-2(00 I)

,113

- I62

-,OO 1

,272 Y,=AX (1~13)

-, O I 4

-. ~ l s

-935 1.776

-. 143 2.459 1, =m2

= F ~ X (id41

-,001

-a074

• 336

,650

-,086

.82 7 TOTAL :

s l j l ~ (b x d)

.237\\1.505

325"~3.562

.65"%7.938 228'~

2.100 DISTANCE x

,079

.646 3

6

-362

-599

~

i 8

.,. i. i

-. t i - \\,

'. \\ I BY^.."

A T

E

?

SUBJECT SE~L?~/YPR~PERTI-<S.;~W~~.G~I~:S-

' SHEET NO OF.. 1:...._.

cHKD E

/

?

. B o ~ ~ f i. ~ R / D.. ~. r E R -. ~ ~ ~ ! - ~ ~

JOO NO..31)-?1-.........-- ---

DETERMINE 4 0 M E N T OF INERTIA I: O F BOTTOM GRID OUTER SECTION :

jt-USE THE FOLLOWIN6 APPROXIMATE COflFlGURATION, @ - @ + @ + @ -

B O T T O M CASTING x4-I

G. L a 4 -

d

. O. R !.. E. S.. 1...

JOB ~0..30.21.

~ ' i ~, U U O I J i T ;... i ~

1 8 I

/

8 I

CJ+KD, s -

I I Q A /D W Y E R S E C T / O ~.:...

-108 NO..~.OS)/

4 i

r

..,,2..r..,...

DETERMINE Iny AND Sy FOR 007704 GRlD INNER SECT/oN.

11.tb.GOt1 1S.H r)n++-l(i/-//

a l. 5 7 1, : :. ~ !.

i;.d,- r,,'LNa,*,tiu(,1r

~,. 1 -. c c r l, ivnrr

. -SHEC, N ~,

.::.vF..

CHKD..BY Ll LOA ATE!!/.!^;^^?

,it.....

BOTToM 6414 007&d S6C7/ON JOB NO..^.^^.!..........

.

• 9 DETERMlhJh I,, AN3 Sx FOq BOTTOM 6 RID OUTER SECT~ON.

TOTAL :

8.346 7,962 13,541 f,883 PE~IPMINE TaRS16UAL MOM~VT OF /Al&fT/A FOR 8 O m Y GRID O U E R SfC'T/od.

USE a s 6 /a H s T H Q D DcESCRlBED lhl F Q R M u L A ~ FOR ST..EJs $ STfAlM 8.4. Ra4RC f W. C. YOUNG, 7A8Lh 20) P. 294, a,, 1975.

DETERMINE InX AND SX FOR BoT~YWI G R \\ D INNER SEcT/ffN.

i I D U i m t d F T o R S / O ~ ~ A C MoMEh)T OF /NtPT/A ? FOR B O

~

O

~

GRID I ~ * & R 5 ~ ~ 7 i Q d.

I U S E CASE 18 NETHOD DESCZISEP /d M

4s mrQ 5 ~ 4 E ~ f f 57RA/hL I

8 Y R 4 RcARf 9 M C. YOUNG, TABLe 2 7 / ? ? 9 4, 5 & Ed, / 9 75.

BR~GOBL.IS.H DATE.!!.:~~~.?

S U ~ J E C T S ~ C T ) O ~. P ~ - Q F - ~ ~ ~

WZ/.6!/.75 SHEET NO OF... -_--_.

cwno. B..L~*DATE!-~IS/II...

..BQTTOM GR14 OUTER SFC-TlQN. T...

JOB NO..309L.........-------

9

..co!?NFR...-..-.-.-.--.-...-..-,.----.-----------.---------.

DETERMINE MOMEWT OF /&STTI9 I OF B O m M GRID OUTER SECTION :

USE THE FOLCOWIMG 4PPROX /MATE CORNER CONNGURATlON, i ' ;

0-0.0-@+@l' I

t CASTING

I RYG,*L/SH

~ ~ 1 ~. ( ( : 7 - 7 7 S U ~ J J E ~ ~

a & c f / d n PKwcni L / i C i v c ~ l i l u N J.

SHEET NO

.... Ut.,........

I C H K D E I Y J ~ ~ - D A T E I J ~ ! ~ / ~ BOTTOM QRIO DOT& S C 7 / O N. -.

JOB NO.-309.1-.--.......

..CO.R.NER.....

DET&RMJME I,, AND Sx FOR BOTmM 6Rlb OUT64 SECT/6N (CORNER).

PtSTERMlNE ~ R S / O N A L MOMAT O F /Al&47/4 7 mQ 80Vd i i R i b oofER SEcrlohJ-CORAER.

USE CASE18 METHOD DSCR\\B&b

/N F O R M U U S F O R ST4FS.S $ S ~ A I N 8 Y R.4. RoAIPK

1. M C YOUNG, TABLE 20, R Z 9 $ / -.Ed/

1975.

= $ut3 WHERE U LEA~GTH O F MEDIAN LL/Al f s.

A VERAOE: 7HICkAE5S OF S&CT/W

ev &,.Gu.~<!s~ATE.IJ:.~:.z~

SUBJECT S C

O T

S

1 SHEET NO OF DATE!

.)!!.?:il...

.BOTTO!d..G.!?. ID--/.M.N-m..sEcT!.oor/r/r/

.rrr-JOB NO..~Q.

..So. RNCR.........................................7..............

DETERMINE MOMEFIT OF /NERT/A I OF BOTTOMGRID/NN/? SCTiON\\I; U S 5 7QE FOLLOWING APPROXIMATE CORNER CQ~~FIG.URATIO~/,

D r n ~ ~ m l d E I,y ANb sy Foe aof70M GRID /ud&e Q E C T ~ O ~

(CORNER)

FOR BOTTOM GRID / u r ~ ~ + ?

s E C T I O ~

(CORNER).

DFTERMldE I,, AND S X D E E R M I X rOfl/ONAL MOMENT OF /NCRTjA J FOR TOP GRID IAJNER S ~ C I I O N - CORM R U S E C A S h /8 MEMOB PBScRlBED 1.d F O R M U U S FaRSTl'ESS b ST8f?lu 0 7 RJ. ROARK # h4 C. YOoNG, TA8LE

. 20, P. 294, 5fi. d.,,775.

ESTlMAE WEIGHT OF TOP GRID MACHINING (FOR I1 X /I MODULE)

DENSITY FOR ALUMIYUM ?=.098%~3. WRGIIT = px VOL.

TOTAL : -

APPROXlMA7E PER CAVITY WE/6NT OF TOP G R I D I S

EST/MATE WElGNT OF BOTTOM GRID MACH/N/NG (FOR II x l l MODULE)

DENSITY FOR ACUMlNVM

,098 ?4@. WEIGHT

x VOL.

APPROXIMATE PER CAVITY WE/GMT O F BOTTOM GR ID I S

B Y. ~ ~ ~ ~ R W H D A T E ! ! T ! ~ : - ~ ~

SUBJECT..~~LQ~:!..~RO?~?:~!~G~~-\\~!!.~!!G--

SWEETNO

.....----.-. OF...._.-

Il X \\I SPENT FUEL MODULE W E ff ---

IP::DATE!!/IJC:J H

Z J O B N O... SQ-21 -.---...---.

---

.-.---.--.-------------~-----~;---.-

W E I G d r

SUMMARY

FOR 11 x 11 SPENT FUEL MODULE. D E N S f l ?

7 d 3 -

TOTAL : I 13675 1 I

, APPROXIMATE MODULE WEIGHT PER CAVITY IS A

s u e ~ ~ c ~.

• E !. ~ d ! l. :

.. EA.ImPPED...WA.ZE-fi--

S H E E T N O........... OF..,.,.--,.-

JOB NO.- 389-l---...--.-

---

I------..--------

ESTIMATE WNGHJ OF MODULE I\\)TRAPPD WATER = RE Il%lI AOWLE, TYPICAL CAVITY DETAIL 15 SHOW&.

REFER T O DWG. A-22556-E, S U. 2, CAVITY DETAIL, AMD To G.E. DWG.'

U E 9 E 2 9 3.

OUTER TUBE L EAGTH 153.687" ouTsroF AREA = 49.452 IN<

INNER TUBE L EdGTH 157,750~

Qf'JTSlDE A 9EA =*a74

/ A t

/ M S I n E AIFEA,=,37.814 1Hf,

6.156 $4 I

(INSIDE)

I 7,093 SO.

TWERE ARE (64)%"D/.4. RQDS PER FVEL ASSY.

g-APPROT. LEd G T, ~ /d0.00 I /

V7 -i-TOTAL VOLUME OF /I * / I MODULE CUBE 73.875 SQ. X / 5 Z 7 5 H / G H VOLUME BOTTOM GRID F~JACHIPIIHG (s EE S/-/ET A. 1-22)

LESS VOLUME TOP GRID MACHINING v~4CK {

(SEE SHEETA.I-PI)

LESS \\lOLuMF OF 6 ) C.4N.5 1

6 1 ETOTAL O U ~ S L P E ME# ao%L N 8 E -mrM I U S I B E A ~ E / ~ ) / ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ - fq9864

+ (OUTSIDEARFA OF / N M L rU8E-R W A L I A J S I D ~.4t,4~1)57,75-/53,&

VFW 3 LESS VOLUME OF FUEL ASSY RODS 1 2l (64)(0/q)(-500)~

~ 1 6 0. ~ 0 )

TOTAL RESUIJANT VOC-OF EN7RAPP.D WATER :

479628 w3

I SVMI~.?~??'.

JOB NO..... 3QaL,.--..-.---

---

.-.------.I-~-~~---------------~~-.-.---.------------

The'following summarizes the various mass inputs/per cavity Dry Module Mass 113#

Wet Module Mass 7244 Dry Fuel Mass 745#.

Wet Fuel Mass 6 7 2 #

Added Water Mass 143# -

Total Vert.

744#/Cavity Total Horizontal 1001#/Cavity Mass Mass Dry Module Mass 113#

Dry Fuel Mass 745#

Total Vertical Mass 858#

Note: These masses are less than the values used for the seismic and dropped bundle stress analysis that are given in Page 5.3-6 Horizonatl Mass 1001 1062 Vertical Mass 858 880 Wet Weight

ROGRAMMED SYSTEMS CORPORATION

\\

3460 LEXINGTON AVE. NO.. ST. PAUL. MlNNEJOTA 55112 AREA CODE 612 484-7261 TELEX #29-7473 APPENDIX A. 2 FUEL STORAGE SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT PaR Job N o.

3 0 9 1 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER U N I T N O. l I o w a Electric Light and P o w e r C o m p a n y C e d a r R a p i d s, I o w a CONTRACT NO. 13764 TABLES O F ALLOWABLE S T R E S S E S FOR ALUMINUM STRUCTURES

REVISION RECORD REV. NO.

DATE DESCRIPTION CHK' D BY APPRV'D BY DATE

mechanical connections I:or. intcrnlctlii~tc joints of contint~otrs angles, tl~c cffcctive nct ;lrc;i sh;~ll be the gross sectional area less deductions for holes.

5.1.8 (;rip of Rivets 3 r d Roils. If tl~c grip (total thick-ness df metal being fnstenctl) of rivcts or bolts carry-ing calculntcd stress cxcccds fotlr and one-half tilncs the diameter. the allowable load per rivct or bolt shall be rctlucccl. Thc rcduccd :~llowablc load shall be the normal allowable load divitlcdby ['/n+C;/(91>)]

in wl~ich C; is the grip and D is tile nominal diilmetcr of the rivct or bolt. I f the grip of thc rivet cxcccds six times thc diameter. spccial care shall be taken lo insure that holes will be filled completely.

5.1.0 Sparing of I<ivrls ;111d Ilolts. hlirii11111rn tlist;~ncc of rivct cc111er.r sli:lll hc 3 ti~ncs the non1in;ll rivcl di;lmctcr: minirnt~m tlist;~~lcc of holt ccntcrs shell he 2l/2 tinics thc nonlin;~l I)olt tli.lrncter. In I711ilt-up corn-pression mcn~bcrs thc pitch in tllc dircction of strcss shall be such that thc :lllowablc strcss on thc individui~l outsidc shccts :~nd S ~ I R ~ C S

. trcatcd ;IS columns having a Icnglh cquill to thc rivet or boll pitch excccds thc cr~lcul;~tcd slrcss. 7'iic gagc at right anglcs to thc dircc-tion of stress shilll be such that ttlc allowable stress in thc oi~tsitle shccts. c;~lculatcd from Scction 3.4.9 exceeds the ci~lcul;rted strcss.. In this case thc width b in Section 3.4.9 may be taken as 0.8s where "s" is the gage in inches.

TABLE 5.1.la ALLOWABLE BEARING STRESSES FOR BUILDING TYPE STRUCTURES (Fb,, From Table 3.3.la Divided By 1.65 Factor of Safety or Fbn Divided By 1.2 x 1.95)

Allowi~l~le Alloy I3caring And Strcss*

Temper ksi 1100-1412...................................................... 11.0

-H 14...................................................... 12.5 20 14-7-6 Shcct............................ 53

-1'651 I'l;~tc.......................... 54

.T6.'TOS 1 O.'TCISI 1 Fxtri~sions............. 49

.T6. T651 Kollcd 1k1r................................. 53 Drawn Tube A 1cl;ld 2014-T6 Shcct ( ~ r p to 0.03Y)*

53.4

.T6. T65 I Sheet. I'late.............................. 55.2 3003-ti 12...................................................... 1 1.5

-11 14...................................................... 15

-li 16..................................................... I Y

-HI8...................................................... 21 Allow:lhlc All!)y Iknring And Strcss*

Temper ksi 5050-1132 Ih

-H34 19 5052-1132...............................................

24

-if34..................................................... 27 5083-1 1 1 1 1 2.5

-1 1321 (0.lXX 10 1.5l10)'

32

-11321 (1.501 10 3.000)'

30

-11323.................................................. 35

-I4343...................................................... 40 5086-1 11 1 I 22

-111 12 (0.IRX lo 0.4')'))'

19

~t1112(0.500103.000)*

17.0

-[I32 29

-1134...................................................... 35 5454-1 1 1 1 1...................................................... 19

-11112 14.5

-1132 27

-1 134.................................................... SO 5456-11 1 1 1............................... :.................... 27

.. 11112.,.................................................... 23

-11321 (O.IXX to 1.250)'.............................. 34

-11321 (1.25 I to 1.500)'

3 3

-1 1321 (.1.501 to 3.000)'

30

-11327..................................................... 37

-ti343 42 606 1.7'6. -1'05 I Slicct R: I'l;l~c................. 35

..1'6. T65 1. 7'05 I0. T65 l 1 01 hcr Protlucts.. 34 6063-TS (up to 0.500)'.

16

-TS {Over 0.500).

14.5

.......... 6..............................................

24

• Thickness in inches to which tllc allowtbtc stress applies. Whcrc not listed. bearing strcss applies to all thickncsscs.

mechanical connection:

rABLE 5.1.lb ALLOWABLE STRESSES FOR RIVETS FOR BUILDING TYPE STRUCTURES Allowable Minim~~rn Slicar I

Expectcd Slress or1 Designation Designation Shear EfTcctivc Before After Strcngth Area Driving Driving Procedure Driving ksi ksi I 100-H 14 Cold. as received 1 1 00- F 9.5 4

20 17-T4

Cold, as received 20 17-T3 34 14.5 2 1 17-T4

Colcf. as receivecl 2 1 17-T?

29 12 5056-1132 Coltl, as recciveti 5056-1132 1 2 6 I I 6053-T6 1 Cold, as reczivcd 6053-T6 I 20 8.5 606 1 -T4 Hot. 990' 10 1,050°F 606 l -T43 2 I 9

606 1 -T6 Cold, as rcccived 606 1 -T6 2 6 I l t t Also applies to 606 1-'1'6 Pin%.

Minimum expected shear strength divided by 2.34. See Table 3.3.3.

ALLOWABLE STRESSES FOR BOLTS FOR BUILDING TYPE STRUCTURES Allowable*

blini11111m Slicar Allowable Expected,,

Slrcss or1 Tensile Alloy Slicar Eliective Stress on A lid Strcngth A rca Root Area

'Temper ksi ksi ksi 2024-T4 37 16 2 6 606 1 -T6 27 12 I8 7075-T73 40 17 28

'Values apply to either ~ u ~ n e d bolts or unfinished bolts in holes not more than ~ / I E in. oversized.

5.1.10 Stitdl Rivets nr~d l!olts. Whcrc two or more wcb 5.1.12 Illind Kivels. Rlind rivets nlay bc uscd onl.

plates are in. cotitact, there shall be stitch rivets or w l ~ e n tlic grip lengths arid rivet-hole lolcr;inces art bolts to make them act in unison. In conlpression as recomtnended by tlie respective manufacturcrs nicmbers. the pitch and gage of such rivets or bolls shall be tlctcrmincd as outlincd in Section 5.1.9. In tcnsion nicrnbers. thc maximu111 pilch or gage of such rivcts or bolts shall not cxcccd a distance, in inches, cquill to (3 + 201) in which t is the thickness of the outside plates. in inches.

5.1.13 Ilollow-l<rid Hivcts. If hollow-cnrl rivcts wit1 solid cross sectiotls Torn portion of tlic Icngth arc usol tlic strcngth of thcse rivcts niay bc tilkcn equ:tl to thc strcngth of solid rivcts of thc sanic nl;ltcrial, pruviiict that the hottorn of thc ci~vitv is at lcast 25 pcrccnt (1:

5.1.1 1 Edge Dist;racc of Hivcts or Ilolb. The dist~nce tllc I.ivct tlinmctcr from the pi;lne o~s\\lc;lr, as nJc:lslrrcc

{rotn the ccntcrof rivet 0-

[lndcrconllwtcd stress t,w;ird hollow-end, and furthcr providcd lh:it thc!

to thc edge of the sheet or shnpc toward which the arc usetl ill loc;lti(>ns wIicrc ttley will uot bc subjcctcl pressrrre is dircctctl shall bc twicc tlic nominal dinm-to appreciilble tcnsilc strcsscs.

clcr of the rivct or holl. Whcn a shortcr cdgc distancc is used, thc i~llowahle bearing stress as shown in 'Table 5.1.la sh:ill be redoced by thc ratio: actual cdge dis-5.1.14 Stcrl Rivets. Stcel rivets sh;lll not be used i f l;lnceltwicc rivct or bolt diariieter (Scc Scction 3.4.3).

al~rminu~n str~~ctitrcs itnlcss thc alunlin~~nl is to 1.1

• The eclge tliztancc shall not bc less than 1.5 tinlcs the joincd lo stccl or w!~crc corrosion rcsist:tncc of 111.

rivct or holt diameter to shcarcd, sawed, rolled or strtrcturc is not a rcclr~irctiicnt.or whcrc tlie structure i planed edges.

to be protected against corrosion (See Section 6.6,Il

formulas for constants TABLE 3.3.4b FORMULAS FOR BUCKLING CONSTANTS For Products Whose Temper Designation Begins With -T5. -T6, -T7. -T8, or -T9 Type of hfcmbcr and Stress Intcrccpt. ksi Slupc. ksi Intcrscction Cotnpression in Columns and Ilcam Flanges Coniprcssion in Flat Platcs Coniprcssion in Kot~rid l'ubcs Under Axial End Load Coniprcssivc 13ending Strcss in Solid Kec-tangular nars Coniprcssivc k n d i n g Stress in Round 11, = I. JF.[I + %$"']

7'trbcs S1ic;ir Sfress in Flat Plates B,

C, = 0.4 I --

I,,

Cripplitig of Flat kt 5 0.35 kt = 2.27 l'lates in Compression Crippling OF 1:1;1t Platcs in 13cnding

' Ct can bc found rroni a plot of tire curves of allowable stress based on elastic atid inc1;tstic buckling or by a trial and crror solution.

TABLE 3.3.5 VALUES. OF COEFFICIENTS kc and kc*

Non-wcldcd o r Rcgions Far1 her 7'li;ln Rcgions Within 1.0 in.

I.O in. From a Weld of a Weld Alloy and l'cmper kc k,

I;,,

k,t 20 14-l'6. -ThS I $

1.25 1.12 Alclad 201 4-'T'h, -T65 1

1.25 1.12 -

(106 1 -T6,

-T65 1 $

1.0 1.12 1.0 1.0 6Oh1-7'5. -Th, -7'83 1.O

' 1.12 1.0 1.O All Othcrs Listed in Tablc 3.3.1 I.O 1.10 1.0 1.O hlrtltmls of Rounding OK Nunthcrs In Tables 3.3.6 tn 3.3.27 Thc nllow:thle strcsses in Specifications 1-6 arid Tor slcndcrncss 5 St in Specifications 7-21 arc ob-tainccl I)y rounding olT strcsscs bclow 5 k5i to the ncarest0.1 ksi: strcsscs hctwccn 5 and 15 ksi to thc nenrest 0.5 ksi; attcl strcsscs over 15 ksi to lhc nc.v-cst l.0 kci. To obtain allowahle stresses Tor slcndcr-ncss hctwccn S.,. and,.$,. thc constant is ro~rnded olT to the ne;lrcst 0.1 ksi. 'l'he cocllicicnt or the slcndcrncss ntio is roundcd ofT acccirding lo the rulc: for r~~rnihcrs betwccn 2 x Ill" and 2 x 10"".

round vfT to nc;tresl 0.1 X 10m. whcrc 11 is any posi-tivc or ncgntivc intepr. This same rulc is.npplicd to lltc coclTtcicnts in the expressions for allowable strcsscs for slcndcrncss Z St.

Skndcnicss limits S, and ST arc h;tscd on the rotrnclcd cxnrcstions Tor allowahlc slrcss ob-taincd a t dcscrikd ahovc. Values of St nnd S, bc-6.35 1-7'5 1.O 1.12 1.0 I-0 twccn 1 0 a~ttl 2.50 arc rottnclccl all to thc ncarcct 1.11. Snt:lllcr v:tluct arc rcttrncled rifr to the nc;trcst Iltc\\c cocflictcnts arc tr\\ccl in tltc fcrrniulac in Table 3 3.6.

If the u,clJ yicld strength cxcccdt 0 9 of tile parent nictnl yicld rtrenpth.

lftc allouahlc cutitprctctvc \\trcsc uithin 1.0 in of a weld chould be t;llcn cq~tnl to thc allowahlc strccc lor non-wcltlcd n~.tleriat.

t Values alto apply to -T65IO, -1651 1 extr~lsion tempers.

O. I. ;anel lnrgcr valuct to tlie ncarcsl 10. If.Tr is not meire than 5 pcr cent largcr than St. thc allownhlc strcss filr slcntlcrncss hctwccn S1 :tnd 5 1 it takcn to he Ihc s;lmc as the allr)w:thlc strcss lor slcnder-ncss 2 St. In thiq caw thcrc is no valttc for.TI and the valttc ofSZis rccalculatcd by cqttating thc allow-ahlc strcss for slcndcrnctr Icss than SI to the allowahle ~trczs for slcndcrncss B S*. using roundcd otT values.

, I Ik.VSI1IN. axial.

net scctitnn I

Any tension mcmkr:

BEALIS.

Round or nml t u k s calrcme hlrr.

nel seelion I

Reclrn~~lla..

h&s. platcq.

shapes bent ahout weak axis I -

4 On rivets a d bdts BEARING O n flal surfxcs and pins amal. pmrs OttlstanJln~

flanges and Icgs I

1;Ixt plates with P-4 h ~ t h edges wpportcd 9

4 r C Sinple weh k;m%

bent ahnut strong asis Hound or oral tuhcs COhII'RI.SSION I N BEAhlS.

R k r. prvrs hcarnl under t~nlL*rm I 1.~1 l-Iatc< w ~ t h cnmprr\\~o~rn).

h > l h ctlge~

~ r n r r w r t ~ n n

<ttppvlcd 16 Flat ~ l a t c r v l t h (compnnent I

1.ktI plalcs with under kndlns h > l h cclpcr in o u n

%!lpm~rtcd l ~ n ~ t l l l c n c d SIIIZAR nat IN WERS.

yro\\r eato on SItK$ncd flat uch*

Central Forrni~las for 1)elermining Allowable Stresses

EMOTE SYSTEMS CORPORATION

\\ \\

3460 LEXINGTON AVE. NO., ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 5511 2 AREA CODE 612 484-7261 TELEX #29-7473

- APPENDIX A.3 FUEL STORAGE SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT P a R Job N o. 3 0 9 1 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER U N I T NO. 1 I o w a Electric L i g h t and Power Company Cedar R a p i d s, I o w a CONTRACT NO.

13764 MODULE ISOMETRIC

~

REVISION RECORD REV. NO.

DATE DESCRIPTION C H K ' D B Y A P P V ' D B Y DATE

F i g u r e 3-c-I.

APPENDIX A. 4 FUEL STOFUGE SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER UNIT I,

IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY PaR Job N o.

3 0 9 1 D e s i q n calculations BEAM SECTION PROPERTIES ALLOWABLE STRESSES PREPARED BY DATE I-17-78 APPROVED BY 7

&9I/IZ=k DATE 1 / /9/7R d

REVISION NO.

DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.

P.O.

BOX 3 5 2 4 4 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 5 5 4 35

( 6 1 2 ) 854-841.4 SERIAL NO.

---a E N V I R O N M E N T A L S E R V I C E S, I N C.

S E R I A L -

NO.

R150-A. 4 D I S T R I B U T I O N O R G A N I Z A T I O N PaR Systems Corporation R E C O R D D A T E -

/ - -

E N V I R O N M E N T A L S E R V I C E S, I N C.

R E V I S I O N R E C O R D R E V I S I O N N O.

D E S C R I P T I O N A P P R O V E D -

D A T E C H E C K E D -

D A T E

I A Subi?ctl '

I G d-. -01 E '

MINNEAPOLIS Ssr:'

m:?!

ql.3~

h r<ALy,*S

.3fJA):= A<b&? 3 R By I p-r

~at.,!i I ':-

MINN. 55435 CkByr ct/a, oatrn I. * / I I - -

(612) 851-8414 SC "

L~

b

~

f 4

? W ~ L T I ~

Prokt1 5 3 Rwvimion: -

I TOP G2I3 OLITEO S E C T I O ~ ~

4 3 - A ~ - A t - 12.494 IM' 1, = b 11.50 ('e)3

- 4.4 1' 04' 3,

• IZ3.%2 $.

2.457 w 4 Scj = 18,619 fd3 S4 2,369 rd5 yy 5.212 1*1 y& =d-

lLfq4 lh4 SL'CTION D E ~ P T I O ~ ( YH A,

M f A j igA4' IS I

.n,i I, w,158

-17.3

,028,004.-/

y4 2

fl 1. 5 0 ~ ~ ~ 4 0 '.?87 12.-

5922 5. s ~ 1.125 3 n

.237"r2,0[jzn,119

.053 a07

,OCL 4

1 0

,144

.082

,012

,002 YNA 5

,0\\ix7.56 4%

6.09 2.777 1 ~ 2 ~ 6

,335

, 3 & ~ 2, 1 0

,154

-344 -0% -,m9

',a2 12.494 8,

742 7,115 1,461 YN* 8 8.742/12,4-7+

0.649'

1.

2 2

3

>v!J~ocI~

+

f

~

d

~

~

o l

M I N t I ~ I S MINN. 55435 R

1 D' D ~ a t h W.

ckByl kl7,-3 Datm if/l>. *. 177 (612) M - M 1 4 R o k t r "5 Rovisionr -

2 TOP $;LID - lNble ~ E C T I O I ~

7

~ v ~ ~ i r ' c ~ r -- -

<-C$ z I ?.

<.La),

/ !J/.'.,

I Dot.,

uL--,

=.;,t..-., 2 p

~

LI 8-.

C

- Dotr.1,'~ -;

hnkt~.-..

344

- LI!

9 I

If' 4

4 4

2 Az = g175 +,64S - 542 a 6.853 Idz 1

t t

I,&(

= 5.450 I$

St a 13,gdt IM' S =Z &z 1t~3 UITH RQWiolS - SFC7101\\5 A-A A,.,

MhaAy G4r' I4,

,167~xt.5~,944

-.54t

-,512

-$84

-,mi 8.1~0 Y.Slr 2. m

. p q,

21al 5. ~ 7 4 12,zaq 1,240 645

.I&

,043

. otq lo,4bt 9,133 l3.qsb 2.132 yw.

'?.lo3/lo,qb~

.,&O a

a

&, - l3.q5b+ 2.152 - 9. io3Lon,, = 8,329 8.52412.4 a1 = 2. ~ b t ~ '

AT CEUTEK WITI~ MLG

- SECT&

A-A 1

YK4 a41925/4,r118 a,CW 14 C

&L

= 3.01otPo)- 4*115/q,qg = I, ~ 5 q td4

. q: llts7

-,ssr 4" A. 4-3 7-b ; r o w aoo - o o x v 2 c ~ ~ a ~ :.

1~r1.1,. ~ r ?

I 550lO.I Peo%lc7r~5 A E AU~YW~X a EFFECnlrF V A

~

cT Z C T I ~ J ~

A+E v2 O b l q G i $418) a I O ~ L S NL I

t, I 2

- Y L

a A

Subloctt I _

t c

p

~

o l

2 M INNEAPOLlS

s=l =.;

&I I ~ I ~ / C ' S

'=+crlg' "LrzatLTF-\\,

I Dcrtm!l/lrf7?

MINN. 55435 D ~ )., J.,I ) * - / 7 ?

(6121 854-8414 h + t ~ 'SO Revlmiont-3t4 C ~ I ~ I I L I - E U T I WiiT! NOROLE

- 5MmJ A-k S E t T u N I

2 3

4 e.542

-4,24S - 3 3. Z

• I U ~

a r ~

q. 2 7 Z ~ G, S S ~

53.627 t rq

&,%I 2

0

~

~

.o?q

& 4 5

,4&3

, 252

,Ci&

Wca!irm.l

~y'x 6.5' f + d ' ~ a ; ~ ~ ~

2 3 2. 5

,516x 1 a 4 6 t s1,q71 2 ~ 4, ~ s ~

54.73~

2,.

lIa33 5,-

3,125 1. 2 5 V 2 5 I?,

= st,n +

- MYA z = s,q7(/io.qbt = 4,74r i

3,

- WuY5I.t 5 4. j ~ -

51*471/~,962' 72.7% Id-Sy,= 7 ~. 7 1 2 / 5. ~ ~

= 13.&1 lu3 Ip AT c a m e W I N tie^ - Sxnm b n a =47,347/4.478 = 4,Q97 1rJ ST- = 68,1J6/5,003 = 13. M I l).J

- \\

MlNNEAPOClS y = r j t FI)!=~ z ~ J / -

AI:AL\\J.J<-

MINN. 55435

>=/TIN

~L~=CI;-I

~2 (612) 854-8414 h k t t 'Sd R.virionr-1 I.#

= '/r ~ t, & 7 6 + ~. 4 l i ]

'22.651 IN' v,

= lh3d 1, e f 4 2 4,ffi lrj4 y, = {4.aa/,.i~ -,,&&

S = ~

~

2 sz = 2,739 1t.1 I:, WrrH N O !-!OLE -

A-A I

S&71ad 1 !

2 0

3 e=!

4 0

f "

E~ii~ri~a.;

.09'~3.5' i.~' ~5.75" z.a~ix

,516'Y Yh 6.97 b, 50

, 7 5 ~. 4 0 6 1,25\\25&

Ah

-. i s 5.75 2~03 I&

fz;"-jz

-,I&

1.456 lz.209

,%3 kiLy

-,I53 2.575 5.074 I

f i 2 ~ d

&, = I,fl + 3, - w&

yn4 = 7,<62/&.2&

=,954 b

L I,, = I3.54z t 1. ~ 3 - ~ ~ ~ ~ ; $. ~ =

7,8LylN4 Sq = 71 =7/2,&a

= 5.737 lu' 1 2 AT E k ' L WITH HO-E

- ~Ec.I&

5-6 5-4

,479 1. ~ 7 0

,014 1;.51z 7, q ~ z h \\

1~ee-5 S~LTION I

2 0

3 D

4 n

5 A WL?IFTCN

,09 x 5.5' I,O' K 575' 7

5

.srdx I,ZS'

.son SO' 15%

Y b 0.97 0,-

1,50 3%

1. ~ 3 3

6.

&Z I

Iqz

.474

.663

,014

-Do2 3.7-2.~901 Ah

',I50 5,750

, 7 3

.645

-.ILS 4 2 J&-+%f ML/A Lj,,.

3.7&i/b.&z =,551 '

= Z & O I +, S ~ - ~ 7 g + L. ~ ~

r J.D~BIW'

&(eq a 4.0b IN+

Mhsh\\j I ~ - ~ - b y l

-,I53

-.I48 2,875 1.433 I.lzs 1. a

,I&

-.?.rq

-.dm A.4-5

i.h<

LX.452'4 Subjnctt'.

tr,

-01 L -1 MlNNUPOllS

~

4

~

7 L)rL

'L. :,< C;

~ = L ~ s I J 3 ~ 3 3 ~ l < i l ? S h8y,.?;

Dot*

"'1 !;-J MINN. 55435 CkByt

~ a t m -

(612) 854-8414 R o + t r

'33 Revisionl-6. s 2 I 25, lei 1 98.918 1 15,852 1 i -i?S.i~1/&,862

• 3b7 '

1. J. L J A J d L ' S

> u 3 1 O C l r MINNEAaIS

....- - !T Fu 55 RA2L ht,U t \\I 51 5 MINN. 55435

-sigr\\~

o ~ " w i = e ' r w (612) 854-8414 IJOWH GQO - lNNEe ScarorJ (wfW wss~t)

SECTICN PeaEBfES A

E A

V F

~

J a EFiSecnve V A u s Q=

S ~ c ~ a s A+B A x =If2 (t2.~1+?,373) = lo.es7 A' WITH hb w - SEjC;.lor~ A-A gu 40.q44/12,~(* 3.318' 18,624/3.31~=

5.614 rd3 Qz AT mEe Wl'irf H a - =ft&

A-8 h,,

& A 7 3a=Ar12 2. S S

-.6 542

-1,554

-4.457

-,to!

10.m0 5.Ib lO'j.i9f3 0.333 0. 7 5 ~

1,0"

. L, ~ I L

.?'CO 1,734

4. oeq 3. ~ 3 13.?+5

,063 9.373 31,114 tQ4.&7

,941 4 r - m.047, s

7 Ij kr, = 31~11 4/?,qj :

3.3b' A.4-7 Sr. 1,7H/1.= *1,196 lu3

u A

i Subl+ctl

~ I J - J-.-o~

MINNEAmK W

\\

T F U F L ' k A / _ Y hfk?l.;l?

MINN. 55435 5-6-1 a\\

-2 0% ~ z. 1 1 G.C.

(6121 854-8414 b j ~ t l '50 Reviriont-I o n oco