ML17213B127

From kanterella
Revision as of 17:35, 29 June 2018 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Comprehensive Vibration Assessment Program,Final Summary Rept.
ML17213B127
Person / Time
Site: Saint Lucie NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 02/28/1983
From: UHRIG R E
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML17213B125 List:
References
RTR-NUREG-0843, RTR-NUREG-843 CEN-244(L), NUDOCS 8303150538
Download: ML17213B127 (15)


Text

FloridaPov!er5Ligh>>Co.,St.LuciePlantUnit-.":2DocketHn.50-389CVi-2ee(L

}Comprehensive Vibration Assessment PrnoramFinalSummarReortFebruary1983Combustion

"-ngineering, Inc.:NuclearPou,'erSystemsPowerSystemsGroup!!indsor, Connecticut 060958303i50538 830310PDRADOCK05000389EPDR

'L~llk>~til TAP>LEOFCO<'lTEl!TS 1.ItlTRODUCT I0,'lSUtUQRYANDCO."iCLUSIOl'lS 3.VIBRATIOilAiNLYSISPROGRAll4.VISUALIl(SPECTIOil PROGPAW2of9 FloridaPowerandLightCn.,St.LuciePlantUnit;-2Comprehensive Vibration Assessment ProgramIHTROOUCT IOllTheComprehensive Vibration Assessment Program(CVAP;occasionally referredtoasthePrecritical Vibration!lonitoring Program,PV!1P)reportedhereinsatisfies theHPCRegulatory Guide1.20(Reference 1),requirements forverifying thestructural integrity ofthereactorintmalsforflowinducedvibrations priortocommercial operation.

TheCVAPprnvidehconfirmation, baseduponprototype PVhPprograms, ananalytical progranandaninspection program,thatthehydraulic excitations andstructural responses oZtheFloridaPowerandLight,1St.LuciePlantUnit2reactorinternals arewithindesignestimates andareacceptable forallnormalsteadystateandtransient modesofreactorcoolantpumpoperation.

AsstatedinReference 2,Section3.9.2.4,theilaineYankeandFortCalhounreactorsaredesignated jointlyastheValidPrototype fortheSt.LuciePlantUni.2CVAP,withSt.LuciePlantUnit2designated asa!ion-Prototype Category1reactor.Reference 3{Section3.9.2.3)statesthatthe.'lRCstaffhasaccept-edtheSt.Lucie2programprovidedthat"theapplicant submitsacorrelation oftheSt.Lucie2observedvibrational characteristics withtheresultsfromtheprototype reactors".

Reference 1requiresthatanaralysisprogramandameasurement orinspection programbeperformed fortheCVAPfor!!on-Prototype Cateqory1reactors.

TheanalysisprogramforSt.LuciePlantUnit2CVAPwasreportedinReference 2,Section3.9.2.6.Avisualinspection programwithphotographic documentation wasperformed forSt.LuciePlantUnit2inlieuofameasurement program.Thisreportsummarizes theresultsoftheSt.LuciePlantUnit2CVAPandprovidesanevaluation ofthoseresults.2.SUi!l'!ARY Ai'l0CO!lCLUSIOl!S TheSt.Lucie2CVAPwassuccessfully completed inaccordance withtherequirements of.'lRCRegulatory Guile1.20,Revision2{Reference'1).

3of9 Thevibration analysisprogram,performed inaccordance withregulatory positionC.3.1.1ofReference 1,providedsufficient evidencetosupporttheclassification ofSt.Lucie2asNon-Prototype, Category1,withthoValidPrototype designated jointlyasViaineYankeeandFortCalhoun.Comparison oftheSt.Lucie2resultswiththos.fromtheprototype reactorswasfavorable, nocorrective actionwasrequiredandnoindications wereobservedthatwouldnecessitate reactorintmalsmodifications onSt.Lucie2.TheSt.Lucie2vibration inspection program,perfor.",ed inaccordance withtheguidelines nfreoulatory positionC.3.1.3andC.2.3ofReference 1,includedinspections oftheSt.Lucie2reactorinternals bothpriortoandfollowing pre-corehotfunctional testing.Thepre-corehotfunctional testingincludedallsteady-state andtransient modesofreactorcoolantpumpoperation.

Heither,real nordurityfuelassemblies wereinpositionforthetesting.Itwasshownbyanalysisthatthoabsenceoffuelassemblies wouldyieldconservative resultsfortheCVAP.ofreactorinternals.

Thecriticalreactorinternals component withthelowestnaturalfrequency istheCoreSupportBarrel(CSB).Basedupontheminimumsignificant responsefrequency oftheCSB,thecriticalreactorinternals conponents wersubjected toapproximately 8.6X106cycles.ofvibration duringthepre-corehotfunctional testing.t(OTE:Regulatory Guide1.20Revision2recommends,a minimumof1X196cycles.Theinspection programwasperformed withoutdeviation fromthespecified operating conditions.

Hounanticipated observations orinspection anomolies wereencountered.

Theinspctionsoft"..eSt.Lucie2reactorinternals revealednodefects;evidenceofunacceptable motion,orexcessive orunduewear.Theinteriorofthereactorvesselwasvisuallyinspected afterthepre-corehotfunctional testingandfoundtobeabsentofanyloosepartsorforeignmaterial.

Insummary,theSt.Lucie2CVAPinspection programwasentirelyconsistent withtheP'/llPoftheHaineYanf:ee.and FortCalhounreactorsandv)iththeSt.Lucie2CVAPanalysisprogram.Evaluation oftheresultsoftheSt.Lucie2CVAPconcludes thatasignificart marginof.safetyforthestructulal integrity oftheSt.Lucie2reactor4of9 V

internals willbemaintained durinoallnormalsteady-state andtransient conditions ofreactorcoolantpumooperation.

VIBRATIO!I AHALYSISPROGR,"Jl Thef1aineYankeeandFortCalhounreactorstogetherconstitute aValidPrototype forthepurposeoftheSt.Lucie2CVAP.TheSt.Lucie2Plantreactorin-ternalsconfiguration hassubstantially thesamearrangement, design,size'ndoperation conditions astheValidPrototype.

Hominaldifferences inarrangement, design,sizeandoperating conditions havebeenshnv!nbytestoranalysistohavenosignificant effectonthevibratory responseandex-citationofthosereactorinternals important to,safety; forthesereasons,theSt.Lucie2reactorisdesignated Won-Prototype, Category1,fortheCVAP.Asmentioned inReference 2,Section3.9.2.4,theoretical prediction analyseswereperformed for,ilaine Yankeo(Reference 5)andFortCalhoun(Reference 6)toestimatetheamplitude, time,andspatialdependency ofthesteady-state andtransient hydraulic andstructural responses tobeencountered duringprecritical testing.ThePVl/Pforf)aineYankeeandFortCalhoundemonstrate thatthetheoretical predication methodsusedprovidedaccurateestimates 1ofthesteady-state responseofthecoresupportbarrelsystem,whenrasonablebestestimatevaluesforthemagnitude oftheinletpressurefluctuations areused.Itwasconcluded fromtheseprogramsthatflov!,inducedvibrations ofthe!laine YankeeandFortCalhounreactorinternals arewellwithindesignallowables andareacceptable forallnormalsteady-state, andtransient flowmodesofreactorcoolantpumpoperation.

Reference 2,Table3.9-4,presentsasugaryofthesignificant hydraulic andstructural designparameters fortheSt.Lucie2,HaineYankeeandFortCalhounreactordesigns.Theeffectsofthesestructural andhydraulic parameters ontheflov!-induced vibratory responseofthereactorinternals arepresented inReference 2,Section3.9.2.6,whereitisshownthatthenominaldifferences havenosignificant effectsonthestress1vels.Ingeneral,theanalysisoftheSt.Lucie2Unitdemonstratsthat:A.Thepredicted structural responses oftheSt.Lucie2reactorinternals arewellwithindesignallowables andareacceptable forallnormalsteaRy-state andtransient flov!modesofprimarycoolantpumpoperation.

5of9 Lr

~~B.Theprototype precritical vibration monitoring programs.or)/aineYankeeandFortCalhounadequately accountforthespecificdesignfeaturesoftheSt.Lucie2UnitwhicharesharedbytheValidPrototype reactordesigns.VISUALIl(SPECTIOll PROGRAMTheSt.Lucie2CVAPinspection programwasperformed pertheprocedure ofReference 4,whichmeetstheintentofregulatory positions C.3.1.3andC.2.3ofReference 1.Theinspection programincludesphotographic document-ationofthecondition oftheSt.Lucie2reactorin.ernals, bothpriortoandafterpre-corehotfunctional testing.Theinspection wasconducted intwophases.Thefirstphase(baseline inspect-ion)wascompleted onApril22,1982.Thesecondphase(post-hot functional, pre-core, inspection) wascompleted onJanuary10,1983.Peference 1requiresthatthereactorinternals criticalcomponents besub-jectedtoatleast10cyclesofvibration priortotheCVAPfinalinspec,ion, baseduponthecomponent's computedminimumsignificant responsefrequency.

TheSt.Lucie2CoreSupportBarrel(CSB)wascalculated tohavethelowestnaturalfrequency ofthecriticalreactorinternals components.

Duringpre-corehotfunctional testing,theSt.Lucie2reactorinternals weresubjected to1.19X10sec.ofcol'dflow(below350'F)and1.61X106sec,ofhotflow(above350'F).Basedupontheminimumsigniicantresponsefrequency oftheCSB,theinternals criticalcomponents weresubjecttoapproximately 8.6X10cyclesofvibration.

.")either realnorRummyfuelassemblies

!vereincludedinthe.hotfunctional testing.Thelackoffuelservestoprovidegreaterflowvelocities andforcesonreactorinternals components and,therefore, yieldsconservative resultsfortheCVAP.Thedetailedinspection proceduro preparedinaccordance with'Reference 4requiresphotographic documentation and'descriptions ofconditions observedduringbothphases,inadditiontocommentary onchangesfromthebaselineinspection.

Theinspections wereperormedandqualityassuredbyqualified inspectors.

Theinspection procedures providethetabulation afallreactorinternals components andlocalareasinspected, whichincludes:

6of9 A.Allmajorload-bearing elementsofthereactorinternals reliedupontnretainthecoresupportstructure inposition.

B.Thelateral,vertical, andtorsional restraints providedwithinthevessel.C.Thoselockingandboltingcomponents whosefailurecouldadversely affectthes.tructural integrity ofthereactorinternals.

0.Thosesurfacesthatareknowntobenrmaybecomecontactsurfacesduringoperation.

E.Thosecriticallocations nnthereactorinternalcomponents asidentified bythevibration analysis.

F.Theinteriorofthereactorvesselforevidenceofloosepartsorforeignmatter.Theanalysisprogram(Peference 2,Section3.9.2.5)identified thecoresupportbarrelupperflangeregiontohavethemaximunstressintensity.

Thisregionwas,included intheSt.Lucie2inspections tovrifytheresultsofthevib-raionanalysis, thatthemaximumstressintensities arebelowallowable stresscriteria.Acomparison ofthebaselinesuraceconditions withthoseofthepost-hotfunctional inspec.ionindicated thatnoabnormallow-induced vibration hadoccurredandthatnoreduction inthestructural integrity oftheinternals components, closureheadorreactorvesselhadoccurred.

Therewereindicat-ionsofnormalamountsofrelativethermalgrowthbetweenthestainless steelinternals andthecarbonsteelvessel.Atareaswherecontactoccurredbetweencoresupportbarrel(CSB)snubbers, guidelugs,andalignment keys,littleornowearwasindicated, butclosefi;swereevidentbydiscoloration andsomesurfaceburnishing.

Contactbetweenthereactorvessel,upperguidestructure flange,CSBflange,andclosureheadappearedunifnmwithnowear.Allstructural threadedfasteners andlockbarsappearedsecureandshowednoindications ofloading.ThegirthweldsontheCSBallappearedsoundasdidthecoreshroudwelds.Duetolackofindication ofabnormalmovementandcalculational resultsbasedonpost-hotfunctional dimensions, itisconcluderl thattheinternals wereprovidedwithadequatelateralan4axialsupport.Inoeneral,allin-ternalscomponents werefoundtobeinverygoodcondition, theircontact'of 9

II areasallappearednormalandasexpectedfollowing hotfUnctional 4testingandcomparedfavorably withtheprototype inspections.

Bof9

QEFEREHCES 1."Comprehensive Vibration Assessment Prograr.forReactorVesselInternals DuringPreoperational andInitialStartupTesting.",

IIRCReoulatory Guide1.20,Revision2,datedhay1976.'I2."FinalSafetyAnalysisReport,St.LuciePlantUnit2",DocketI'!o.50-389.3."SafetyEvaluation ReportbytheOfficeof!uclearReactorRegulation, U.S.HuclearRegulatory Cornission, RelatedtotheOperation ofSt.LuciePlantUnit2",DocketHo,50-389andHUREG-0843.

4."Precritical Vibration t'ionitoring ProgramStandardProcedure forVisualIn-spectionofReactorVesselInternals for3410iypePlants",Specification Hn.00000-RCE-413, Revision00,dated6/12/805."Analysis ofFlow-Induced Vibrations:

ilaineYankePrecritical Vibration 11onitoring ProgramPredictions",

Combustion Engineering, Inc.CEHPD-55,

.iiay30,1972.6."Analysis ofFlow-Induced Vibrations:

FortCalhounPrecritical Vibration I/onitoring Program",

Combustion Engineering, Inc.,CE~!PD-85, January1973.e7."'!aineYankeePrecritical Vibration ilonitoring Program,FinalReport",Combustion Enginering,Inc.,CE.'IPD-93, February1973.8."OmahaPrecritical Vibration lionitoring Program,FinalReport",Combustion Engineering,,

Inc.,"0~CEil-70,Iiey1974.9of9 0V(