ML071360356

Proposed Use of a Fiber-Reinforced Polymer System at the Oconee Nuclear Station, Presentation Slides

ML071360356
Person / Time
Site:	Oconee
Issue date:	05/14/2007
From:	Duke Power Co
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
Download: ML071360356 (15)

Text

~Duke WPower Proposed Use of a Fiber-Reinforced Polymer System at the Oconee Nuclear Station Presentation to:

The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

Rockville, MD May 14, 2007

Duke Duke Participants PC: Power

" Larry Nicholson, Manager, Safety Assurance

" Rich Freudenberger, Tornado-HELB Design Basis Group

• Stephen Newman, Regulatory Compliance

" Jim Sumpter, Regulatory Compliance e Clifford Davis, Major Projects Group

• Lawrence Llibre, Major Projects Group

" Tommy Mills, Major Projects Group 5/16/2007 2

PDuke Agenda OPowere

" Introductions

" Purpose of Meeting w Identify information needed to license the use of FRP to strengthen masonry walls at ONS

" Brief Description of the Natural Phenomenon Barrier System

• Timeline

• Example Exercise using Design Method

• Discussion of Additional NRC Comments to Duke's RAI Response

• Closing Remarks 5/16/2007 3

Brief Description of the Natural Phenomenon ,Duke Barrier System 'Power Unit 3 Control Room North Wall --",

• SSF Elevated Trench (5 locations) 5/16/2007 4

Brief Description of the Natural Phenomenon Duke Barrier System Power Construction Pictures 5/16/2007 5

Brief Description of the Natural Phenomenon Duke Barrier System Powero o Application: Bond-critical application for flexural strengthening of non-load bearing, infill masonry walls to resist higher design loads.

Note: Application is similar to traditional technique of employing externally- bonded steel plates.

• Loading Condition: Uniform pressure on masonry wall resulting from tornado-induced differential pressure and possibly tornado wind causing tensile stresses in FRP system.

Note: FRP system will not be relied upon as a compressive reinforcement.

5/16/2007 6

Brief Description of the Natural Phenomenon ' Duke Barrier System ,Power

• Example Location: Exterior surfaces of selected Units 1, 2, and 3 West Penetration and Cask Decontamination Tank Room walls.

Note: FRP system will be shielded from sunlight (i.e.,

UV) by siding.

• Environment: Ambient temperature and humidity conditions associated with local climate and Auxiliary Building equipment rooms.

Note: FRP system will not be located in a high radiation environment or exposed to high temperature gas and/or liquid.

5/16/2007 7

Brief Description of the Natural Phenomenon a Duke Barrier System WPower Typical FRP Application

.Existing Unreinforced Masonry Wall Vertical FRP Reinforcing Horizontal FRP Reinforcing 5/16/2007 8

Timeline Timelne ro-- `Po Duke we r FIBER REIN FOR CED POLY MER LAR MMUMSONOW I06o2100 PROJECT PHASE, DATE S T NH S . T W TH  : ] S i, .'V TH F S DO 2 3 1 2 3 4 5

.....3/23/06

. " 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 6 = 8 9 10 11 12 Duke/NRR Pre-LAR Meeting (Rockville, MD) 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 4/05/06 25 26 27 28 29 30 23 24 25 26& 27 28 29 27 28 29 30 31 NRR Meeting Summary Letter 30 31 II 6/01/06 S lb k

- . . . i*TH $,

1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 At 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NRR RAts received (1st set - via emcil) 11 10 12 13 14 15 16 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 12 13 14 15. 16 17 18 8/76/06 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Iiiii 81706*

24 25 26 27 28 29 30 29 30 31 26 27 28 29 20 Duk RAIrepose. sntvi.e ai 9/14/06 Duke/NRR conference Call d"',- b 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 12/7/06 3 4 5 6L7_ 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 9 10 4 5 6 7 8 NRR RAls received (2nd set - via email) 10 11 13 14 15 16 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 12/12/06 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 28 29 30 31 25 26 27 28 Duke/NRPuli Meein (Rcvle MD NRR Issues meeting agreement letter L

J i....

1/11/07 131

-apil_

IH 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 3/14/07 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Duk RAIrepose.frma.ysumite 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 15 16 17* 19 20 21 11 12 13 M 15 16 17 13 [4 15 16 17 18 19 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4/18/07 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 29 30 27 28 29 30 31 1 5/16/2007 9

, Duke Example Exercise Using Design Method 'Power I z mmý --------

5/16/2007 10

Discussion of Additional NRC Comments Duke to Duke's RAI Responses Power "Iwý : o--- " ý, , ý1- 1111

- 1 ý ý , , , :. - Ný , ý , ý4MONEVVI-1 I -, - , ý ---- ` JjjMjvWML'-

, , , ,"ý - , I,- - ý ýý Ref.: Issues Table 5/16/2007 I1I

P Duke Closing Remarks 4kPower

" Questions

• Action Items 5/16/2007 12

Oconee Nuclear Station FRP RAI Issues Item#l k -2NRCIssue- Dtk oillt Resolution of,Item~;  ;

FRP 1 Enclosure 3 to the letter listed 53 walls that 0 This appears to be an introductory, summary

• Simple beam and plate theory will be currently planned to be strengthened using FRP. statement of the content of Enclosure 3 to used to calculate masonry wall The walls include single-wythe 8" hollow-core Duke's response to the RAI. stresses.

concrete block and double-wythe 4" solid concrete brick. The aspect ratios (height/width) Duke presented the proposed analytical FRP will be substituted for steel of walls vary from 0.6 to 2.9. The edge methods and detailed equations in Enclosures reinforcing when necessary.

conditions bottom, andofboth wallssides, are mortat-joint edgesedges at top, 4calculations and 5 to itsusing response and mortat-joint at thesetoequations the RAT. are Sample The ls various f5 alconfigurations ilb one from the top, bottom, and one side. presented in Enclosures 6 and 7 to its list of 53 walls will be bounded response to the RAI. Test data to substantiate (meets code allowables) by one of the We made very clear to the licensee in our the analytical methods is presented in two design methodologies proposed previous meetings that the licensee needs to Enclosures 8 and 9. The test data is evaluated in the RAI response. These present their specific methods (equations) for using the analytical methods and detailed methodologies are supported by test using FRP to strengthening the particular type of equations of Enclosures 4 and 5 to data.

masonary walls and submit test data that can demonstrate their validity and conservative If a wall does not meet one of these substantiate the methods (equations) that they results. two methodologies, the wall(s) will propose to use. However, the licensee failed be physically modified to meet the again to response to this request. criteria.

0 Test coupons and pull tests will verify FRP strength and adhesion.

FRP 2 Instead, the licensee responded that it would use This statement appears to indicate a 0 The more conservative reduction ACI 440.2R-02 or FRP system manufacturer's misunderstanding of the information factors from either the FRP system method, as documented on page 9 of Enclosure presented in Enclosure 5 to Duke's response manufacturer or ACI 440.2 will be

5. to the RAI. On page 9 of Enclosure 5, Duke used.

stated that it would use the working stress design method (our current LB) for reinforced masonry to design the FRP flexural reinforcement. To supplement these equations, Duke also stated that it would use the environmental and strength reduction factors and most restrictive strain limitations (i.e., allowable stress) for the FRP from ACI Duke will provide hardcopies of the RAI response (with all enclosures) to all present at the May 14th meeting.

Page 1 of 3 DRAFT DOCUMENT - FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY

Oconee Nuclear Station FRP RAI Issues N7RC Issue Duk Co metS Re'j tii It~i '.

-ft 440.2 or the FRP system manufacturer.

Based on the types of masonry construction tabulated in Enclosure 3 to Duke's response to the RAI, only two fundamental wall types exist: simply-supported one-way span and simply-supported plate (4 sides). Additional test data would be representative of these two types of masonry construction.

FRP 3 The licensee agreed with the staff in our Duke presented test data to substantiate the previous meetings that ACT 440.2R-02 had not proposed analytical methods in Enclosures 8 and 9 been reviewed and adopted by the ACI code, to its response to the RAI. The parameters, extent, and the staff did not accept it as an accepted and format of any additional test data require method. However, the staff stated that it would clarification.

accept the licensee's methods if they can be substantiated by, or were derived from, test data.

During our last meeting, the licensee referred the method and substantiation as a box and stated that only walls falling within the box could use the method.

FRP 4 During our last meeting, the licensee did not See Response to FRP #2.

know how many types of walls they had and therefore did not know how many boxes they would have. Now, they know the types of walls they plan to strengthen using FRP, but provided no single box. For an example, based on available test data, a box can be established for walls of single-wythe 8" hollow-core concrete block with mortat-joint edges at top, bottom, and both sides for aspect ratios between x and y and another box can be established for walls of double-wythe 4" solid concrete brick with mortat-joint edges at top, bottom, and one side for aspect ratios between x and y. The licensee needs to establish as many boxes as required to Page 2 of 3 DRAFT DOCUMENT - FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY

Oconee Nuclear Station FRP RAI Issues jeJ NRoIsuebme; iets Resolution fi em cover the 53 walls.

FRP 5 1have also reviewed the FRP system Duke does not understand the intent of this manufacturer's (FYFE CO.) design manual, and statement.

it has no reference to Oconee's walls.

FRP 6 It is the licensee's responsibility to provide the See response to FRP 2.

methods (equations) for using FRP and present test data to substantiate the adequacy of the methods for Oconee walls.

FRP 7 The NRC stated that there is an engineering If this statement refers to the applicability of (Conf. mechanics problem with the way Duke is plate theory in the computation of masonry attempting to equate the test data with the given wall internal forces/moments for the simply-call note) methodology. supported plate (4 sides) assumption, Duke cites the position of ACI 530, Masonry Standards Joint Committee, on the matter as reflected in the Commentary on ACI 530-05, Section 1.1.3:

"For allowable stress design, linear elastic materials following Hooke's Law are assumed, that is, deformations (strains) are linearly proportional to the loads (stresses).

All materials are assumed to be homogeneous and isotropic, and sections that are plane before bending remain plane after bending. These assumptions are adequate within the low range of working stresses under consideration."

Page 3 of 3 DRAFT DOCUMENT - FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY