ML19326E072
| ML19326E072 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 07/17/1980 |
| From: | LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO. |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8007250568 | |
| Download: ML19326E072 (120) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:__ _
,
g5 5 4 9 1 FINAL REPORT ON REACTOR VMSEL REPAIR
.--..._. - _.. ..
SHOREHAM I NUCLEAR POWER STATION l
;
!
'
~
'
" Ml""" [=nco vo l h "u' B & '
- =
8007250(hf _- _ _- _ _x_ _ _ _ _ . . . .. .. . . ._-_ --
.
r-
* !! ,.- ,
i .
-
TABLE OF CONTENTS r
=i I ABSTRACT II INTRODUCTION
, III EXAMINATION AND EVALUATION
'I
; A. Ultrasonic Evaluation Prior to Repair
,P Metallurgical Evaluation Prior to Repair
;
- c. Examination and Evaluation After Repair
'
IV HISTORY OF REPAIR V CONCLUSIONS
'
VI EXHIBITS EXHIBIT A " Report of the Shop Ultrasonic Examination of the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 Reactor Pressure Vessel Welds" EXHIBIT B " Metallurgical Evaluation Team Investigation
- Regarding Cracking in Nozzle to Shell Welds"
, EXHIBIT C Weld Repair Program EXHIRIT D " Report of Examination Excavation Program for Verification of Reported Crack-Like Ultrasonic Reflectors.
Review and Approval of Weld Repair Program 1; Procedures and Specification.
- l I
'~ Shop Auditing Functions During Weld Repair Program." EXHIBIT E Report of the Shop Ultrasonic Examination of the
- Revorked Nozzle to Vessel Welds in the Shoreham Uuelear Power Station Unit 1 Reactor Pressure
_g Vessel. ie EXHIBIT F Report of the Shop Ultrasonic Fxamination of the
Buttered Areas of Recirculation Inlet "ozzles C & D and Jet Pump Nozzles A & B. ! !# EXHIBTT G Combustion Engineering's " Nozzle Veld Investigation !, for Long Island Lightinr Co." dated August 29, 1973
., !
,- - .- -
'
, .- .
-
.,-.,.
.
-
FINAL REPORT ON SNPS-1 REACTOR VESSEL REPAIR
' ABSTRACT I
The Long Island Lighting Company has completed an intensive examina-
- r- tion of two reactor pressure vessul recirculation inlet nozzles
' (13-31kC, 13-31hD), which led to their subsequent repair.
,_ All full penetration velds in the Shoreham reactor pressure vessel '
were ultrasonically examined and evaluated in accordance with the acceptance criteria found in ASME Section III. This effort was carried out by General Electric, the NSSS vendor, and Combustion '~ Engineering, the reactor pressure vessel supplier. The Long Island
- , ' Lighting Company assigned its Architect-Engineer, Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation, the responsibility for the engineering management and certain quality assurance functions related to the overall examination and repair program. Southwest Research Institute was engaged by LILCO to provide independent nondestructive
'
testing and metallurgical consultation on various aspects of the program. Throughout all major aspects of the program, General Electric, Combustion Enginering, Stone & Webster, .and Southwest Research Institute consulted with each other and jointly agreed on the engineering, fabrication att quality control details which were ultimately carried out. LILCO sas routinely appraised of the progress of work and all major decisions which potentially could affect the ,. outcome of the repair and the ultimate <.sceptance of the vessel. Thus, this report represents the application of a team approach for evalua-ting and correcting an unusual fabrication anomaly. At the time of this submittal, the Shoreham vessel has been successfully repaired, hydrotested and "N" stamped and is presently in storage at the Shoreham site. II INTRODUCTION The Shoreham Unit 1 reactor pressure vessel was originally designed and t' purchased to meet the 1965 Edition of Section III of the ASME Code, up through and including the 196f inter Addenda. It was later upgraded,, le Code requirements of the 1968 Edition
'
as far as practicable, to meet of Section III of the ASME Code, up through and including the 1968 Summer Addenda.
-
To provide additional information concerning the full penetration velds [ of the Shoreham vessel during manufacture, the General Electric Company specified an in-process ultrasonic examination for information purposes 9 only. Based on the results of this examination, some UT reflectors were detected which warranted further consideration. This led to
-additional examinations made by G.E. During a routine Stone & Webster -
Long-Island Lighting Company quality assurance audit on February 2 h, j '1972, the "information only" UT examination reports were audited. As
, a result of that audit, some were judged potentially significant enough to warrant further investigation.
if s A "r-- - 7
'~~
'
.. -
.-
~
4 r- < 2
;' Further preliminary invest!;ations confirmed the' presence of ultrasonic i l i reflectors having crack-like characteristica, /When appraised of these ,
early findings, LILCO met with its consultants, NSSS vendor, and the reactor ! {- pressure vessel supplier on August 8, 1972. A broad-based plan of ,
'
action was established at that meeting whereby two task forces were formed to further evaluate the significance of thenondestructive
,
examination data then available. An ultrasonic testing (UT) eval-uation team ves formed and charged with the responsibility of identifying those veld areas that did not meet the acceptance , standards of ASME Section III with Addenda through the Summer of l 1968. A metallurgical evaluation team was also formed to review the fabrication history of the suspect velds for the purpose of providing LILCO with assurance in the event repairs were necessary, that such repairs could be successfully accomplished. On July 31, 1972, Region I of the Directorate of Regulatory Opera-
,
tions was verbally informed of the existence of the preliminary
'
ultrasonic test data referred to above and LILCO's intention to thoroughly evaluate its credibility. On September ik, 1972, the AEC conducted an audit / inspection of the Shoreham reactor pressure
'
vessel fabrication records at the Combustion Engineering facilities in Chattanooga, Tennessee. At that time the LILCO representative informed the AEC audit team of the general nature of its ongoing investigation and its intention to submit a full report when all the facts were available. On October 6, 197P, in a letter directed to Mr. Frank Krucisi, Director of Regulatory Operations, LILCO reit-erated its prior verbal com=unications to the Commission. On October 19, 1972, the Director of Regulatory Operations confirmed receipt of the LILCO interim report. cf October 6, and on October 2h, 1972, J. P. O'Reilly, Director of Regulatory Operations, Region I, informed LILCO of their findings resulting from the commission's September Ib,1972 audit of the Shoreham vessel. Mr. O'Reilly's October 2h letter outlined the understandings previously conveyed as
,
to the nature and scope of the LILCO investigation, together with the
\ request that a full report be filed upon completion of the program.
{ This Final Report on the Shoreham Unit 1 Reactor Pressure Vessel Repair fulfills this commitrent.
,
III EXAMINATION AND EVALUATION A. Ultrasonic Examination Prior to Repair As a result of the review of ultrasonic data accumulated by
'
the General Electric Company's specified "information only" UT examinations and additional examinations by G.E., it was ( decided that a re-examination of all full penetration reactor pressure vessel velds be performed. The support skirt attach-
- ment velds were.also to be examined. These examinations verc conducted by Combustion Engineering ultrasonic test operators, J
,
_ - _ _ _ . _ _ _ ________ ____ - ____. 1 - j ,. .
'
1,. g (
'
3
<- %
.
- with Southwest Research Institute as observers. In addition, the UT evaluation team comprised of Level III members rep-Il resenting General Electric, Combustion Engineering, Southwest
- Research Institste and Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation reviewed all data collected.
t =(, The procedures used during the ultrasonic re-examination of the Shoreham vessel had been previously developed and agreed to by
, the UT evaluation team to meet or exceed the nondestructive I acceptance standards of ASME Section III, 1968 Summer Addenda.
{ They included O' (straight beam), 45' angle beam and 60* angle beam techniques to further assure that all significant ultra-sonic reflectors with indications exceeding ten percent of l -l the Code-defined Distance Amplitude Calibrated (DAC) level vere recorded and evaluated. All phases of the re-examination vere performed by personnel
'f certified. to appropriate qualification levels as defined in ,
SNT-TC-1A with final interpretation and evaluation performed l by the Level III members of the UT evaluation team. The UT 1 evaluation team, during data revies, plotted the orientation and size of reflectors based on the determination of the effective
.' beam spread, metal path, metal path change, and relative probe .f position as well as amplitude response. Re-examination on a team basis was performed at all areas considered q,uestionable. Radio-r graphs of these areas were also reviewed.
I r The detailed procedures, test data, and conclusions of the UT evaluation team are presented in Exhibit A. The UT team's primary conclusien was that the heat-affected zone of the velds of
- ~ nozzles 13-31hc and 13-31hD contained crack-like ultrasonic reflectors exceeding the acceptance standards of paragraph N625,
'; Section III, 1968 Edition of the ASME Code. The data indicated that the entire circumference of veld nozzle 13-31kC, to a depth of 5 1/2 inches, and two areas of veld in nozzle 13-31hD, to a depth of 5 inches, should be excavated and repaired. It was also
'$ concluded that all other full penetration velds re-examined in k the program meet the above ecceptance criteria. The ultrasonic reflectors previously reported in veld seam 1-308C have been correlated with the appropriate radiographs and have been evalu-
,,
ated by the UT evaluation team as Code acceptable slag inclusions. f- B. Metallurgical Evaluation Prior To Repair
- The Metallurgical Evaluation Team reviewed all the available .
,,
fabrication and metallurgical infor=ation applicable to the Shoreham reactor pressure vessel nozzle velds. The Team was composed of senior technical personnel from Combustion Engineering Corporation, Stone & Webster Fngineering Corporation, Southwest
. Research Institute and General Electric Company. In performing
.l its activities, the Metallurgical Evaluation Team reviewed velding
-.
'? _ _ _ ___
___
--
'
..
r l . h
.-
j and heat-treating records, base metal and veld metal mechanical property records, fabrication practices, elec- ,, trode storage and control procedures, in-process nondestructive i testing results, joint preparation design, in-process repairs, L and the results of investigations and repair techniques per-formed on other vessels. From the ultrasonic examination data, r-the metallurgical evaluation team could not specifically 3, identify.a conclusive cause for the crack-like ultrasonic reflectors; however, they did make specific velding recommenda-
,.
tions for inclusion in the repair procedure. These recommenda-
.
k-tions are set forth in the metallurgical evaluation team's statement (Exhibit B).
The metallurgical evaluation team also reviewed the repair }_ specification for the subject nozzles on the basis of recent
-
experience gained from similar repairs on other vessel nozzle velds. The team determined that the specification as finally j" approved could accomplish a successful repair with a high degree'of reliability. General Electric Company Specification g No. 21A1987, revision 1 dated May 10, 1973, " Reactor Pressure T
,
Vessel Revork Repair Specification" was approved by the metal-lurgical evaluation team and is incorporated as part of " Exhibit C." i C. . Examination and Evaluation After Ren_ air
,
After the veld areas containing reflectors exceeding acceptance
,
standards were removed on nozzles 13-31hc and 13-31hD, the nozzles were revelded and ultrasonically examined in the hot state. No a rejectable UT reflectors were detected at this time and the veld.s . vere stress relieved. After stress relieving, the vessel was allowed to cool to ambient temperature and re-examined ultra-L. sonically and radiographically. At that time, rejectable slag inclusions were found in nozzle veld 13-31hC. The location and g' circumstances under which these inclusions were located are more (^ fully described in Exhibit D, Section III, " Unusual Occurrences." Subsequently, these defects were removed and the areas revelded, stress relieved and examined, both ultrasonically and radiographically, 4-at ambient temperature. Final acceptance of repaired nozzles 13-31hc and 13-31hD was granted in the final report of the ultrasonic eval-untion team dated December 26,1973 (Exhibit E). IV HISTORY OF REPAIR A meeting of the Metallurgical Evaluation Team held at Chattanooga on
July 9 through July 11, 1973, attended by representatives of General Electric, Combustion Engineering, Long Island Lighting Company, Southwest
, Research Institute and Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation, resulted in the concurrence of their summary report (Exhibit B). In addition, 3 an in-situ metallurgical investigation program was finalized. This investigation was designed to confirm, to the extent practicable, the '
findings of the ultrasonic evaluation team. The excavation and sub- ., sequent metallographic investigation was directed by Southwest Research Institute and is incorporated in their summary report (Exhibit D). Combustion Engineering conducted an independent investigation, the result
.
of which is included in'their report dated August 29, 1973 (Exhibit G). _
,_
_ _ _ .
.
*
$ .i ?
.-
.-
5 l A table of quality controlled hold points covering the repair ; cycle was developed for the repair program. The QA program
'
. i included witnessing by General Electric, Long Island Lighting l Company and Stone & Webster, and was agreed to by all parties prior to the initiation of the program.- Exhibit C incorporates l r- ~
'
the_ quality assurance program which was enforced throughout the !
' repair. l l
j Excavation of all defective areas was completed and the cavities j vere repaired-in accordance with General Electric's Specification Number 21A1987, Rev. 1. The largest crack (of a total of three) l extended 5 inches around the 10-inch diameter nozzle and was no
" ; more than 0.5 inches deep through the 6-inch thick wall. The l welds were examined by the hot M.T. and hot U.T. method found l acceptable and the vessel was released for stress relieving.
t. I After completion of the stress relieving operation and cool-down
"
to ambient temperature, the nozzle veld repairs were ultrasonical3y l tested and nozzle 13-31hc was found to have two areas containing l (, nonacceptable reflectors. Nozzle 13-31hc weld was radiographed, and the reflectors were identified as unacceptable slag inclusions. ) 1 ." Combustion Engineering prepared and submitted to General Electric ,
) '
a " Request for Approval to Repair" document' describing the defects ; and outlining the reapir and inspection operations. This document was approved by General Electric and reviewed by S&W and SWRI, and issued as a special repair procedure. The slag inclusions which were not located in the redeposited weld metal were removed, working from the inside of the vecsel. The cavity was repaired and the repair area was hot magnetic particle examined and found to be sound. The cladding was then replaced
,
and the entire nozzle veld ultrasonically tested and found to be J free of rejectable reflectors. The vessel was then released for
'
stress relieving. After stress relieving and cool-down to ambient temperature, the nozzle veld was ultrasonically tested, radiographed, jp and liquid-penetrant examined. .
.The ultrasonic test data for the reactor pressure vessel repaired
!. nozzle velds 13-31hc and 13-31hD vere reviewed by the Ultrasonic Evaluation Team and accepted in their report dated December 26, 1973. Prior to the repair, the safe-ends of nozzles 13-31hC, 13-31hD, along j vith jet pump instrumentation nozzles A & B, were ultrasonically
. examined, and the recorded indications submitted to the Ultrasenic Evaluation Team for review. Their acceptance statement dated December 27, 1973, is incorporated in Exhibit F.
V CONCLUSIONS Based on the acceptance of the inspection data by the Ultrasonic Evaluation Team, the vessel was released for assembly and then hydro-statically tested. The vessel successfully passed the hydrostatic
. test and received an "N" stamp in accordance with the requirements I
of the ASME Code Section III. Mn
.. ,. - - - , . , - . , - - - -
i,- '
.
(?
-,
.
6
,
The repair program has been acceptably completed in accordance with applicable codes, criteria, and approved fabrication and
, , quality assurance procedures. Thus, the Long Island Lighting Company, based on the evidence generated during this repair pro-gram, in addition to supporting documentation supplied by General
- Electric Company, Combustion Engineering and Southwest Research Institute, concludes that the Shoreham Unit I reactor pressure vessel is fully acceptable for its intended service.
'
l l
'
!
l
,
i l
.
l
.
;
-
I
,
P
,I '
I l-
- -- ...
L.
.. .. .
- ?- n. w ... ,...
. .
EXHIBIT A
" Report of the Shop Ultrasonic Examination of the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 Reactor Pressure Vessel Welds"
.
s l l l l l l
...
.. .*
.- ,
. , .
.
,..
.,
REPORP OF. THE SHOP ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION OF THE SHOREHAM
'"
NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT . I REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL WELDS ( ..
-s t.
-.
..
4 L. prepared for Long Island Lighting Company
'- 175 East-Old Country Road ,
Hicksville, New York 11801 5
, -
..
<
.
.
, This is a joint report by the Shoreham Unit #1 Evaluation Team consisting of Certified Level III Ultrasonic Examiners from
"
General Electric Company Combustion Engineering Inc.
,
Southwest Research Institute Stone and Webster
!. .
't r-4 April 27, 1973 .. 9'O
,--.
.
~.-
*-
6 4
. . ,
.'V y > ... '~ TABLE OF CONTENTS . .
,
,
1.0 Introduction
" .. 2,0 Summary of Results
- - 3.0 Purpose of Examination
'
- 4.0 Scope of Examination
.
.
5.0 Procedures and Techniques
~
t" 6.0 Organization for Performing and Evaluating the Examinations , 7.0 Evaluation of Results ! 8.0 Conclusions and Recommendations & i Table 1 List of Weld Seams
-
Appendix A UT Evaluation Team (Guidelines) Statement Appendix B Ultrasonic Examination Procedures Appendix C Design of Calibration Standard (drawing) t Appen@ix D Evaluation Team Statement on Measurement of Through Wall Dimensions
' Appendix E List of Reference Documents
. I I S
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
e -
. ._:-
.*
, .. I 1.0 Introduction ,
-Jul ultrasonic examination of the Shoreham Unit No. 1 reactor s
[ pressure vessel welds was conducted March 5 through April 14, y 1973, at the Combustion Engineering shops located in Chatta-nom.. Tennessee. The examination procedures and data recording levels were agreed to and approved by each Evaluation Team member prior i to conducting the examination. The Evaluation Team consisted of Certified Level III Ultrasonic Examiners, one each from Combustion Engineering, General Electric, Southwest Research I ( and Stone and Webster.
,
Examination of the welds was conducted by Combustion Engineer-
, ing personnel, with Southwest Research personnel present as f observers .
The data from the ultrasonic examination was reviewed by the Evaluation Team to' identify those weld areas which did not meet the ultrasonic examination acceptance standards of Para-graph N625 of Section III of the ASME B&PV Code, 1968 edition. 2.0 Summary of Results
' ,
Two welds were found to contain areas which do not meet the I acce'ptance standards of ASME Section III. They are Recircula-tion Inlet Nozzle to Vessel welds 13-314C and 13-314D. All other welds examined were found to be in compliance with the acceptance standards of Section III. _
.-- . 1; s ..
.
m u I
~"
3.0 Purpose of Examination v 3.1 The-ultrasonic examination of the Shoreham pressure vessel m y- welds was performed to detect and evaluate all reflectors which
- j. might exist in the weld seams. The examination was conducted il T. in the fabrication shop to avoid the possibility of detecting
"'
reflectors, during the plant site preservice examination, which k.. would not meet the acceptance standards of Section III. .rm '("
3.2 To assure the detection and evaluation of all reflectors
'
which could present future evaluation problems, the examination I. v requirements and recording levels were made more restrictive 3 than required by Section III. The amplitude of an indication (; requiring evaluation was more stringent than that required by Section III (10% of DAC instead of 20% DAC). Although not re-
,
quired by Section III, extensive data on transducer movements t and the changes in metal path and amplitude as the reflector 3_ was traversed was recorded. This data was used by the Evalua-
- r- tion Team to better define the nature of the reflector.
.
l- 4.0 Scope of Examination
- L 4.1 The welds examined are listed in Table I, and consisted of q all full penetration reactor pressure vessel welds, including the support skirt to vessel weld. The safe end welds were not
'
examined.
.,. 4.2 The base metal adjacent to the weld, the heat affected c zones and the weld metal were examined fram the vessel outside
.:
..
2
..
6
'
,
, ,,; a surface usir , straight beam (O*) and two angle beams , 45' and
' '
60'. The. _41ght beam examination of base metal extended for a distance of twice the material thickness on each side of the
,,
weld, except where nozzles, flanges or other obstructions made one side inaccessible. The angle beam examinations were per-
', - formed from both sides of the weld and along the weld in two opposite directions. Angle beam coverage was restra ced by the
'
same obstructions as the straight beam coverage. t
. 5.0 Procedures and Techniques 5.1 The ultrasonic procedures to be used were agreed-on and I
approved by CE, GE, SwRI , and S&W Level III personnel in ad-vance, and are attached as Appendix B. The coverage and levels at which data was recorded make this examination one of the 4
.
most thorough shop examinations of a reactor pressure vessel known to date. Sound beam angles of 45* , 60* and 0* (straight
'
beam longitudinal wave) were specified to assure that all re-flectors of interest would be detected. All angle beam reflect-ors equal to or greater than 10% of the basic calibration (DAC) response described in ASME Section 7.II were recorded as to their position (transducer position and indication metal path), ampli-
tude, and length at the 10%, 20%, 50%, 100% and maximum ampli-
, tude response positions for each direction of scanning.
5.2 -The design for the reference standards (Appendix C) were t reviewed and coacurred in by Level III personnel from CE, GE, SwRI and S&W. Each standard provided a clear path basic
-
s
- <
,
'
-
calibration reflector at 3 depths below the surface, either in actual pieces of the material from the Shoreham Unit #1 reactor
,.
_ vessel, or from material obtained from similar reactor vessels. Thesa. reference standards were compared ultrasonically with the vessel to assure acoustic similarity. Each reference standard is marked to assure that its identity is not lost. These refer-ence standards meet the ASME B&PV Code Section III requirements and are intended to be used throughout the facility's life as the pressure vessel calibration standards. Their design also provides for calibration of equipment whether the examination
'
is to be performed fram the clad or unclad surface of the vessel.
'
,
.
5.3 ~ Th; equipment used and the methods of checking . its perform-ance during examination were established, reviewed and agreed to by the Level III personnel and are included as.part of the written procedures in Appendix B.
,
6.0 Organization for Performing and Evaluating the Examinations 6.1 Discussions between representatives of the Long Island Lighting Co.; General Electric, Atomic Power Equipment Depart-ment; Combustion Engineering, Nuclear Components Division;
- Southwest Research Institute, Department of Special Engineering Services; and Stone & Webster, resulted in a decision to conduct
' the examination and evaluation on a team basis. Figure I shows the-team organization, with one member each from Combustion
- Engineering, General Electric, Southwest Research Institute, and Stone and Webster. Each member was certified at Level III
.
-
- - -g,
.
,
.. .*
J
., ~
.
.,
o ORGANIZATION
,
.
Long Island Lighting Company A a 4 1 i l I I I GE-APED l _ _ _. _ _J
!
, L____3 i l
.
I i l C-E ! l l l I i
"
i i ; Y t 1 Stone & " SwRI Dept
-
Webster ' Evaluation Team Special
- Shoreham -
Level III Engr. Project Services 4_ - - - -* * " - - ~ S&W GE CE SwRI
"
', 1 f-___...--14 uE I i
!
s GE 4.] Pasident +_.! ! SWRI APED QC l Observer
! 4 i '
l l CE l Nuclear QC ! a __l t CE UT Examiners
----Information and coordinaticn
, l Responsibility Technical Data FIGURE I Organization for Ultrasonic Examination of Shoreham Unit #1 Reactor Pressure Vessel
_ s g
*' >*
, i-
, -
a
-
for the ultrasonic. method, in accordance with the American Society for Nondestructive Testing's " Recommended Practice
,
,
SNT-TC-1A Supplement C (19 6 8) " . Combustion Engineering per-sonnel who performed the ultrasonic work were certified at p Level I or II. A SwRI observer, Level II or III, was present at all times during the examination.
. . . -
6.2 The Evaluation Team met as required to review, verify,
'
reexamine, and evaluate the results obtained by the examiners. At the March 15, 1973, meeting a "UT Evaluation Team Statement" agreement was reached listing the ground ru.'.es which were to be
.
followed by the Team. See Appendix A.
- - -7.0 Evaluation of Results
' 7.1 The Evaluation Team reviewed all data recorded by the
,
examiners on each of the 72 weld seams, their heat affected zones, and adjacent base metal areas. The welds examined and evaluated are listed in Table I. In each case where reflectors were reported by the examiners, their data was analyzed. Where clearly acceptable conditions, in accordance with the ASME Sec-tion III acceptance standards, were not confirmed by plotting, additional ultrasonic examinations of that weld area were per-formed by the Evaluation Team members. In such cases, shop radiographs were also viewed as an aid in interpretation of the ultrasonic information. 7.2- All areas examined, with the exception of those described in paragraphs 7.4 and 7.5, were found to be free of reflectors
. _ __ -_ . - --.
_ .
,
'
.
.
r- ~ L
"
which equal or exceed the ultrasonic acceptance standards of
~
l. the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III paragraph N625, 1968 edition with addenda through Summer 1968. All
,
reflectors reported, with the exception of those discussed in , I- paragraphs 7.4 and 7.5 were judged to be produced by acceptable short slag inclusions or scattered, acceptable, porosity. None (~ i of these areas produced any crack-like ultrasonic data. 1-7.3 Longitudinal seam weld 1-30 8C in the upper shell course contains a series of closely spaced ultrasonic indications j ranging in apparent length from 1 to 5 inches. Examination'of P l_ the radiograph of this area reveals closely spaced acceptable intermittent slag within the weld. The apparent ultrasonic p I length of the indications is produced by their close spacing, I thus appearing continuous to the ultrasonic beam or by a slag L line below the radiographic level of detection. The judgement 1 of the evaluation team is that the ultrasonic indications are produced by acceptable slag witi.An the weld. It is concluded I that this weld is in compliance with the acceptance standards i of ASME Section III. { t 7.4 Recirculation Inlet Nozzle Weld 13-314C contains midthick- [ ness angle beam reflectors which do not meet the acceptance
$ ,. standards of Section III. These reflectors produce angle beam
(- indications equal to 50% DAC, and which, in the judgement of t' the Evaluation Team, have continuous crack-like characteristics
,
with an identifiable through-wall dimension. The crack-like indication extends over an area from the 355*-0*-35* azimuth.
-
l
,
-
'
..
'
i-
, -
The remainder of the circumference contains numerous indications, L seen by both the 45* and 60* examinations. These _ndications c
'
- l appear as short intermittent reflectors with no detectable
-- r-- through-wall dimension. The distribution frequency, and depth
'
below the surface of these reflectors, is such that the integrity
.
~
- of 90% of the mid-plate fusion zone is in question. The area of lesser concern is the 51* to 90
- azimuths.
- ("
- l The straight beam examination results revealed numerous linear j indications in the HAZ which exceed the Section III acceptance
.,_ standards. The following azimuths contain linear indications l
- l. which exceed 100% DAC for lengths greater than 3/4 inch and thus do not meet the acceptance standards.
, 9* 18* 26* 202* 247*
'I4 10* 20* 28* 203 329* 13* 42* 240*
'
22* 357*--360
- l
.
,
Taking a more conservative approach to Section III, that of
'
measuring the length between the 50% DAC points, the follow-ing additional areas do not meet -the standards -( 45* 122* 180* 230 282* 'I t. 49* 129* 210* 235* 298* 51* 132* 215* 245* 353* 92* 134* 217* 268 111* 173* 227 272* L <! Figure 2 is a polar plot of the ultrasonic indication in this weld.
-
I A -
"
M.- -
# g hhjfh e p~vpm 10 B.h$ em g n-w%.a.
ns, wM n gs &.-
- x. p swau . t. .km. -
wW m u.++p o d.w -
' ,g 9 4 d; M @LIMIT!OF,EACH h g M M M, RING . A QT M $h.M+n~,mM' G . ~ 4W d W I M.nMP5&W Qh@vR $ $ 5 F % 2 N @"
.
OUTER IN . - a ; .azg . x. ng? -. O BEAM ggpnw.mm.vimwqgM.w;gQ@@g.c?gcgW REPRESENTS 100 DACN
%
gj m .. NER RINGyd,3N
, Mpgd,www.wa+sw,% e fmmmy x.w wn;
.
.
. m @I @* ?MWOUTER RIN
~
}ey mI wg.R.EFLECTOR 't
.wmwwww AMPLITUDEMST$e. G
- s?p wmM~. :tn h'G31. 60 % isE w 3agng gM. sgwynn MWD m:
e* y TV,h $qng; m g y; & M " " ' W Q: 6 ?gv.y- g %,4 : m p n,;q ws%w ge. g y. itj.n ,,..; m% j! Q M ' f nu -
.Au# ,
-
,e .
,. A, m a %( y +.,p m% q g~ g2se,,m .p
.
g 3O* "" M W
,
q 330* %q.gd . +. 3
.
& w
.n a . - n . e gs.ug. w 8 <
m m x.-mO Q M,d W. o m m.n W."s. . nn.,kM Q #a,,.
-
3.$a
,
q%..~Mh[&'kn,.,.wsp,ym.~ $ 6 M' NW ' E N.b y CQ[g k' y x 4 R wnM M @O'w.,5 'M%.;. U dT'hMMN o<, r 4, & M Q k h hk' .M;rS9 k N . '.h 0 h
-
I
% 4 ,b y n f : a 3M .e s -
N" h:+H m$ it,.cx w ,g:. Q kg .W m vW 4:U. nn M -~mW .f%% %o.
- r. ~Jmu@Q&;mc 6 LV n n we g^> ~m>m%Mg. . 4v g>.4 ,, qV- 60* ..%. p .-3
' _W m.3OO
, -
- -
# ..
-
-
Q Q ypf _ % ' ,f .u] Q, s
'*
yf@ p n- mn., ,. . ,
- ,,e
_, u.
.
.. x
.
,, ~ .
,.
s ,i _# ;
., m. . n -
b.?hhb$.h :h i Y
.w ,,e ..
&
'
?k. sY'
- r$M 3%j a : 3; 4
- w .
- - ,
. t g
//
/
+
G.W;. rgg 3 &6 _
;;] ;
4,,..d c ~a, p- :,:w m.::~ :. % , m.w
.
,+ 4:m:j}:...w
.
..
s o v ..
.
s
, ;<: y%;
. ,
.' :,; .;
- A "mp.m^
-
D > .J . ' .~ l ,, x.v J, , ;, p,;,p ,. ~f .L.
; . ~. ,
'
y p[- gy' .
- $ j f
,
=
x i s. . .wL- ,- lk. ~
'
.~L~ * *1 & ' * ' **
$1 ( ; .f;*
Wh y j r *
<
.f w a+e- g_ m
,,
- -
23 4
. ;g~% .f , . ee ;
L.tg
,
..
' ~ r, . . .ic y ~
/' - x. v. ~
q .+ : E--__
~
92V
'
NOZZLE WELD . i
,
;
w . O* g! 2,. h,,m ~r wa v ,
.
_
.
-
-e .
1,4C .
- - - -
- =
.
,.
q~' re , N O.13 3,/'i. y
,
-
MMM g:A
;m&- ? %c,1. :0 : .
W w .e
,>..W, %,%
* (g^ /<
.~c
. ;- 4 e m 1.
&.,.p,,m,'*. -
% ; ,. <
.- . ,.
s
>
, = . .
p ,,e+ . ~. . . . , / s , , .
.-
.+ g : *,.
e f a .,
-
L&Qc;); % Q t~ '
"y M
,
l
.
-;;;g ua
. g m.
, q w
-
,'
,
//s'/s y/
,ss
/ \ &
s s s
.
.
..
~ -'
.y n
ss n ^sl/
.-
. .. .
,/ /
,
s ' , , M)y%
.
y
.:W -
.a p g C
/ / l g 4 S. 3 ap:;ArL[*h ~
. nm G/p / .\ %. ~
v. v , e. . . y ;s
\
['y Q O' .r m 3)m Y hi ;; g 'i,, ,' 120' ' ' .
-
,
x o.:N - ;7. f. j
, m %. .
;.
-
C
,.....%., ,v m -
g>n,y
, w
- 1. x, - , ,,,
- , ,
,
,a <
,. ..
s -.... g ...e ,. m7
.
, .
.
, ~.,. .
~o
, ,
, .
'"
Q :
.9.}, a -~. W.
.
.
u.. ~ . g, ..o- ;.;+ . . ,
. ;; w
. .
.,
-
-
/,
-
.,
.n., . . . ,
w-
, ,
~.,I
,
,v s.;r
..
-
. ,
.
- ..
m ,,e v r t i ' * . ll . -
# ' ,
- c.4% 1 r , 8 .. y .m
. .
f M ~ h m,g [ [j ' ,jj ,,.6~ .
'
I- { .[- q h.% . .k $ [ M . 7;lr;.., 210 ' t M~ :
" '
15 0 '
"
, '
'
'
p-@R W'9l M
, - -
^
A
~ ' '
M ".ix, %w'~ ' wwf
,i,
*;
w- : -
.
, - -
,;
. ,
,. p
- m r,,m ..
- c. :. 34 . . , ,
.
.
.
.a5'..u, .<,
,
w
- ,
e
- 9
.
.e c
*:
-
'
..
gy .. 7- - b; e SwRI NOVEMBER,1973 p[l, t o ^
~ CRACK w m -
TYPE INDICATIONS- ' UNACCEPTABLE, PER SEC. til q; ,e - -
. c. ; . y l
>
~ ~
_ _ !:,,, MARGINAL, PER SEC.111 C. , I' I: , ,2 ACCEPTABLE INDICATIONS _
+ v #, ACCEPTABLE INDICATIONS qi 9. ; wm c-mm 3 .c,4 e - s- . ...
.
,> - -
.-- r - .
v$me;v-m FIGURE 2A PLOTS OF 0 - BEAM INDICATIONS
, .
.
,I,gM W. FIGURE.2B.. PLOTS OF 45 & 60 BEAM INDICATIONS
'
~ nuv5UutrVL EvP n_-____-_ _ _ _ _ .
-. _ - __ ___. _ _______ _
'
_
--
,
__
,
1
-
7.5 Recirculation Inlet Nozzle Weld 13-314D contains mid-
'
thickness angle beam reflectors which do not meet the acceptance ' I standards of Section III. These reflectors produce angle beam
- ..
indications equal to 50% DAC, and which, in the judgement of { the Evaluation Team, have a conti.tuous crack-like characteristic 4
. with an identifiable through-wall dimension. Three such areas
[ were detected. They are
' .
O azimuth 3 inches long
; ,
28* azimuth 3 inches long 215* azimuth 5 inches long i. The straight beam examination of the HAZ revealed that, in I
;
addit!.on to the two crack-like indications, the area from the
, 5* through 72* azimuth contains linear indications at the mid- -
thickness. These reflectors are in close proximity to the HAZ
'
and produce indications of 50% to 150% DAC. Figure 3 is a 1 polar plot of the ultrasonic indications in this weld.
- I h
,
8.0 Conclusic s and Recommendations I i 8.1 Recirculation Inlet Nozzle Welds 13-314C and 13-314D con-F tain ultrasonic indications which do not meet the acceptance i standards of Section III. Each weld contains one or more areas which, in the judgement of the Evaluation Team, are in all likelihood cracked. Each of these areas exhibits an identifi-able through-wall dimension.
.
't I' i
.
..
W uw w whw fw.nm &p .wwmu + carw m.;.pnem n s.w + - - . w.
- gm ero-..m q v. y e M%m.am
.
--
m.}wQ ,m y&. ,.w, %. . y M,4
,
n W g gw,e,yn n~~.p. %
,e ww 'E: p e a. y w, aEOUTER w
,
, ,
LIMIT,OFL , , _, MWp/d" O EbEA .eEACH .
%' MIDDLE
'
v%URING' p e ;p REPRESENTS w y g - .M.f9.JE 100%ww map . x 2.3;w% 3 . wy yRING' - 45 , ,. B EAM ,,a
"
0 -B d3 OW.m;, c,K o nm. DAC
/smn ~ w x-gw w c *:ga REFLECTOR a 3 s~ r: ;y~ .w.:, aw x,;p ~AMPLITUDEif:s:
3
~ -~x -u
~ ~
5 ~; y+W xn
- s y~
- s. d*:Md ;. .w< n*Mw'cm '., cS:OUTE'R c<<:, x
.
R
- n. , n.r ;;,~y, yi.m. , v .,.,...-+ .s . ,
g.:w y; ... x .ygg : M y;
-
3 , i .. a ;w , -g, ~. ND
.
N. .,dd33'O w .,p. . . , . .., INM m g%g g d.%. NMM.a um .o.a. . n pg.
'
,mm WSM 3 0.
( g 3, ,. g m4 y ; y ._ URM@n.mn MdMw,$-@@.. . r.j u d g.%, @w% ~5m-_%a i ~w.pQygt 4 .? q M g~ g.gg wn , a.a m.,m,
- c. . . .
.,:,~.,., .. , ~
- g. :
w . <; m. y. w ,c ,,n %m ,.
,. .
,
, , . .
.~. .v.2~..
.
x
.
..~ n ~..ug,m, ,. + ; - ,; ..
-
W W,m.n_
-
.
s ; p%. - . . ,9.t ;;n. ~ y;w : >e n.'~.17 -u - 1 ,r, : < ' ; s '. .s c'. +. w wy n,n
-
, ,
n
.
-, a.
ua :.,+-
.
.. .
.
+n>
.
m. 5 -m
.
' '
- m. vWnv4 9- %.;m m.p%
> ;i %.n .. .g: . ..- r- v.
pf b w, .;.lbjf [ n? j~ %~,q;
^
AL e ,l%r .e - rxp(,m'&mm?' .. .g . mc . ',xl. :., . w, . c .L l ; ~j'?l!.y
- m. - a..; e .
+
~
,.;y - -
, r "Y ,f,l.: N, . .:w G.&.. .,: ,
ts: . m; xt,x
. .-
.
M r. .:9 +- - ~ '. : .7 : 2
.%, - , y M.nr , n .3M
.('."
- w. - w - n ,+
g;x.; nrm,w.,.]l3OO* ' T.. V .
'
- ( ,4
~
pos Y
.p.- '[o $ . . e
,,)
.~
m*' 3.. 1-
. * .
_-+.,'Q"
.
- o. _ .e. #., ., .,. -_
,
.. .
,.
s~,-
% ;k: .1 6, c0. e,*..[n Y[ *y c >
~,
2.&
..n.n _. ..
< o .- .#
-
. . .
.
n'. ,' * . - .. w w h n . . . f. . ; ;.- - n y, ': ' . U&;
.
Oj;"v,;fc m
,,g: ; % .%
g .', a
.
i
. . .m n, ,y.. '%..a* a. ;&u,7..
.
4 ~s
.
W
.
e, r . -
. r ,t - .
- 3. . ~ , .
3
- 4. ,1 3
.. .. , , ~
v _ w. . .x. A . -
. .
.w
.
r.m2aA+
. .
'
-
. .
_ .. m (N. ,.y~
.
' , , .
-..
,%.. _ . & -
n.4 ,, 2 k,,& ,r - I wq . e
>m .
-.
- .
y
. a :p
.,
,. .
, ;,sL
.
,
, ; ;.'
m . s
.
.w_ .
'
,
,
_
'
.. ; ; . y 34
~
- f,,. gQ.bff.",*s:y
,
. . , ,
,. . .
- q. ;;.
7 ; ',j_",
_
- '. C
* '+ '
s "g." .
,., .a
'
,,P.
* * '
i
* *
.N . d - 53 )
m,1.,.;
.- '
, n- g
' _
p*g270;.
- %- NOZZLE WELD ~
-
. .
. - --ooo s:
x,~: .
, . .
.
-
.;
. N Oi 13-314D
'.
.
. . .
.
-
[ +
._
'
2 i t .;
.o,
,
- .
x.
~
,,. . .
.#-
- m.7 .
c.I ~_ -'~~ . . .
- .
-
.,
.
. L s.
'A.
4,
..
a'P .,,
.
*fV e -
, , y ., 7
- 4. , , , +, - . .
_
, m e, e m . . ~ .
,
> -
- -
%. .
. wn
,
.
- ~
m;; ,
.
. . ,
. -
- . . ,
, , , - .
.
!,,,,,j ., 1 .
[M '
.%' *n'- [ ',,
_ y -N - w" "
,
-
,;- %
t . m. ( .
' y r. ; ,,, J. ,s. -
. . . . , . . , , . .
. - s
\ nl ..,,2*~- w.' s. m ~ :.
- ..,.,
.
-
,
.
.
;,. :
a' ,.
.~...a'E w' .;+y' x I g W
g ,g E
f [
~
.,
;
~ - -
"
n- - J
- ~
..
.
., x~ w o*240* a-. . . - . .II- .. p'r . -
.i
.
- . , r. .
. r,_ .m--
-
-- . . ,
-
12 0 o
. . .
< " w.
j ; (> . ,.,
, c ._ m* m. . -
g m
&~ .
'
I *
' 2*: * y l lq'M:
,
.s
- %. ,- r.*Cn e' m *: m..,
' e sq y
r
~
,
r .' ,;n ,.,,'
. , l r
'A :
,
,
f 24k,..
'
<y3- . '+~ , -
'r ._ - y. ,
*
- y. *
, 7
+
!
MQ4 - f( s -o
* .
,
,
-
,
,
..
_
.f -
, .Q.a
( ;4 + . , 1 ,., ~gw.,
,
. ?,
_
- -
, , , -
-~
., , .,., .
, .
,
.
- ,.. .
.'s (.
.
y.~.. , =, ~ ~*
. , .
,;. 8, 3
p , m
, . , .,
. , -
,
4 _ ,
,
,g .- .
. , , ,
- , ,. .
- x. 1 s, ~.. .
, .,; -
.
,
. ., , n ,. .=no h)y y.
, .s , ,
2, . ,
.
.; n -
e ,~, ..
, , -
'u ~
._.c. u- -
*
',\_. . :l . [ A*l ,
%_ 'K v.l ~
,uv
. .
v
.
., .
..-
. ,
- ,
e . ." . v--
'
( .. m.c .t
-
, ,
,
-
'
'3,,
1
,,
SwRI NOVEMBER,1973
, @, _ CRACK- 'TYPE INDICATIONS l., CONTINUOUS INDICATIONS y ., - -
-
;
. ~
.
_ -
,
% -
l
,.
ACCEPTABLE INDICATIONS m . ,
'
. ' .o
[ l
.
ACCEPTABLE INDICATIONS _ , .,
,.2 -
- 4e.W, , FIGURE,3A PLOT OF; 0 BEAM INDICATlONS
;,R., ' . FIG U R E 3 B P LOTS . O F 45 AND 60 BEAM INDICATIONS n - ^
. .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
,-
..
- -
8.2 If areas containing indications which exceed the acceptance standards are excavated, the Evaluation Team recommends that the excavations be extended to cover the following azimuths: ) [ Nozzle Weld 13-314C - 85* Clockwise through 50' (a total of 325*)
;
Nozzle Weld 13-314D - 350' Clockwise through 80* (a total of 90') , 195* Clockwise through 250* (a total of 55')
.
The basis for this recommendation is the presence of short inter-
,
mittent reflectors in these areas. The reflectors have no ! detectable through-wall dimension. However, their distribution, frequency, and depth below the surface is such that in the event i of incomplete removal of these indications, future ISI examina-tion results may be subjected to extensive evaluation and re-examination. This would result in additional personnel radiation exposure and could extend refueling outage time. I l i ' Respectfully Submitted
,
2'[M
-
Combtistion Engineering
.
Southwest Research Institute i
$
m Stone and Webster
!
l
>
i { General Electric
\
i Certified Level III Examiners 1
!
! A
--
.- . _ - .
.
, . ,
"
( -
. .
Table 1
'
Weld Seam Number Location Remarks 1 13-308 Flange to Vessel Upper Shell Course Examined and Evaluated _, 4-308A ' Upper Shell to Upper Intermediate Shell Examined and Evaluated Course (Girth)
'
l-313 Lower Intermediate Shell to Recirculation Examined and Evaluated ' - Nozzle Shell Course (Girt 1)
-
6-307 Recirculation Nozzle Shell Course to Examined and Evaluated Lower Head Upper Torus (Girth)
,
4-306 Lower Head-Upper to Lower Torus Examined and Evaluated 5-306- Lower Head-Lower Torus to Dollar Plate Examined and Evaluated 1-308A Vertical Seam Upper Shell Course Examined and Evaluated 1-308B Vertical Seam Upper Shell Course Examined and Evaluated -,
'
1-308C Vertical Seam Upper Shell Course Examined and Evaluated ., 1-308D Vertical Seam Upper Intermediate Shell Examined and Evaluated Course 1-308E Vertical Seam Upper Intermediate Shell Examined and Evaluated Course f 1-308G Vertical Seam Lower Intermediate Shell Examined and Evaluated Course 1-308H Vertical Seam Lower Intermediate Shell Examined and Evaluated Course 1-308J Vertical Seam Lower Intermediate Shell Examined and Evaluated Course
'
1-307A Vertical Seam Recirculation Nozzle Examined and Evaluated Shell Course 1-307B Vertical Seam Recirculation Nozzle Examined and Evaluated
- Shell Course 1-307C Vertical Seam Recirculation Nozzle Examined and Evaluated
;_ Shell Course ..
T44 Y > s. s f
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. r-l[ . Tablo 1 . cont'd
.
Weld
'E Seam i Number^
Location' Remarks ! Il
.( 306A Meridional Weld Lower Head Upper Torus Examined and Evaluated '
i
- - 1-306B Meridional Weld Lower Head Upper Torus Examined and Evaluated !
- } j
' 1-306C Meridional Weld Lower Head Upper Torus Examined and Evaluated
~
1
- I9 l-306D Meridional Weld Lower Head Upper Torus Examined and Evaluated '
l-306E - Meridional Weld Lower Head Upper Torus Examined and Evaluated. l; l-3Gdr Meridional Weli Lower Head Upper Torus Examined and Evaluated
, 1-306G Meridional We] Lower Head Upper Torus Examined and Evaluated I
t'- 1-306H Meridional Weld Lower Head Upper Torus Examined and Evaluated ,.
;( 2-306A Meridional Weld Lower Head Lower Torus Examined and Evaluated il 2-306B Meridional Weld Lower Head Lower Torus Examined and Evaluated >
lt[ 2-306C Meridional Weld Lower Head Lower Torus Examined and Evaluated 2-306D Meridional Weld Lower Head Lower Torus
,
Examined and Evaluated 2-306E Meridional Weld-Lower Head Lower Torus Examined and Evaluated
- ) 2-306F Meridional Weld Lower Head Lower Torus Examirad and Evaluated if 15-316A Nozzle-to-Shell' Main Steam Examined and Evaluated 1 15-316B Nozzle-to-Shell Main Steam Examined and Evaluated
,
15-316C Nozzle-to-Shell Main Steam Examined and Evaluated q
,
15-316D Nozzle-to-Shell Main Steam Examined and Evaluated 4-316A Nozzle-to-Shell Feedwater Examined and Evaluated 4-316B Nozzle-to-Shell Feedwater Examined and Evaluated !$ 4-316C Nozzle-to-Shell Feedwater Examined and Evaluated i 4-316D Nozzle-to-Shell Feedwater Examined and Evaluated d 1 ! { t l
'
! b 4
, . _ . _ . _ , _ _ _ . ___
.;
m o
. - _. _
,,
C Tablo 1 - contd
.I ' ,- ~
Weld
- v. Sean (i Number Locati~on Remarks
.,
ll-316A Nozzle-to-Shell Core Spray Examined and Evaluated . ll-316B Nozzle-to-Shell Core Spray Examined and Evaluated
- [- 15-315 Nozzle-to-Shell - CRD Hydraulic Return Examined and Evaluated 13-314A
'
Nozzle-to-Shell - Recirculation Inlet Examined and Evaluated 13-314B Nozzle-to-Shell - Recirculation Inlet Examined and Evaluated 13-314C Nozzle-to-Shell - Recirculation Inlet Examined and Evaluated if i 13-314D Nozzle'-to-Shell - Recirculation Inlet Examined and Evaluated 13-314F Nozzle-to-Shell - Recirculation Inlet Examined and Evaluated 4-13-314F Nozzle-to-Shell - Recirculation Inlet Examined and Evaluated j i 13-314G Nozzle-to-Shell - Recirculation Inlet Examined and Evaluated 13-314H Nozzle-to-Shell - Recirculation Inlet Examined and Evaluated l 1?-314J Nozzle-to-Shell - Recirculation Inlet Examined and Evaluated
!
,7- 13-314K Nozzle-to-Shell - Recirculation Inlet Examined and Evaluated 3 4-5-314A Nozzle-to-Shell - Recircula aun Outlet Examined and Evaluated
, 5-314B Nozzle-to-Shell - Recirculation Outlet Examined and Evaluated i
19-314A Nozzle-to-Shell - Jet Pump Instrumentation Examined and Evaluated '
]
i 19-314B Nozzle-to-Shell - Jet Pump Instrumentation Examined and Evaluated 17-315 Nozzle to Lower Head - Drain Examined and Evaluated I 2-318 Closure Head Flange Weld Examined and Evaluated j 3-318 Closure Head Upper Torus to Disc Examined and Evaluated 1-318A Closure Head Meridional Weld Lower Torus Examined and Evaluated
] l-318B Closure Head Meridional Weld Lower Torus Examined and Evaluated 1-318C Closure Head Meridional Weld Lower Torus Examined and Evaluated u.
f.
- i-s
-
T c
- ... . .
_ ( "Tabi'o 1 - contd c l .
. Weld , : ..
Seam a Number Lo' cati'on Remarks I' 1-318D Closure Head Meridional Weld Lower Torus Examined and Evaluated r' j, 1-318E Closure Head Meridional Weld Lower Torus Examined and Evaluated .. 1-318F Closure Head Meridional Weld Lower Torus Examined and Evaluated t- 1-318G Closure Head Meridional Weld Lower Torus Examined and Evaluated i~ 1-318H Closure Head Meridional Weld Lower Torun Examined and Evaluated -( 2-317A Nozzle to Closure Head - Instrumentation Examined and Evaluated j
~
Nozzle
'
2-317B Nozzle to Closure Head - Instrumentation Examined and Evaluated
,--- Nozzle 1
4-317 Nozzle to Closure Head - Vent Examined and Evaluated ,. ( k e t i
!
A' 9
.
.
[ t !
.
V l l If
- i 1
1
-
"' " .y APPENDIX 'A' h LILC REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL p
[. . UT Evaluation Team Statement March 15, 1973 ,
.._- The objective of the UT evaluation team is to identify to LILCO a
those weld areas that do not meet the ultrasonic examination acceptance standards of Section III. The 1968 Edition of Section l['} III'with Addenda through the Summer of 1968 shall be used. The [ evaluation team shall consist of one individual each from: a , Combustion Engineering, Southwest Research Institute, Stone Q
.-
Webster and General Electric. These individuals shall be certified
,
to Level III for UT per SNT-TC-1A. The G.E. representative shall l be designated the team leader, and shall be responsible for writing _
! the evaluation statement. ~
t l The members of the evaluation team will receive the data gathered
,
from the UT examinations. After each set of the following welds have been examined, the team will meet to review the data. The
,
Evaluation Statement for each set of welds will be reported to l LILCO as soon as possible after the evaluation is completed.
. .
I
- 1. The nozzle to shell welds in the lower shell.
- 2. The nozzle to shell welds in the upper intermediate shell.
.
- 3. The nozzle to shell welds in the upper shell
- 4. The welds in the lower assembly.
I
- 5. The welds in the upper assembly, i 6. The welds in the top head.
In reviewing the data and writing the evaluation statement, the i following steps shall be taken: .
.
- 1. Evaluation team will review the UT data, i
2 Agree on areas which need further investigation.
-,
l ..
.
( g. i* 3. Re-scan areas , on a team basis , as required. The team may
'
c- use any UT technique available to them, as required, to reach agreement. This may also include the reviewing of radiographs. -
- 4. Attempt the. resolution of any different interpretations.
[^ ( 5 If agreement is reached, the team shall draft a joint final p statement. The statement shall identify the weld seam by k number. The statement shall give the team's evaluation as f to whether or not the weld meets the UT acceptance standards. 4 of Section III. If the weld is evaluated as not meeting the C ( acceptance standards of Section III, the team will attempt
.+ to identify the reflector and give its location, length and
-
whether or not a through wall dimension appears to be present. i These final reports shall be submitted to LILCO in appropriate t diagramatic format. (i.e., polar charts of the % DAC for each l crystal). 6 If the team cannot reach agreement, the members shall seek consultation from within their respective separate organizations.
'
- 7. If the team still cannot reach agreement, the team shall draft a statement as in 5 above but with the maj ority and minority
;
l opinions labeled. The report shall be submitted to I. J. Burkc, Project Manager, shoreham Nuclear Power Station, LILCO,
;
11801
'
175 East Old Country Road, llicksville, N.Y. All official evaluation statements will be transmitted from the team.t o n~g . Combustion j Engineering and_ Gene J. Electric to LILCO.
' -
- l. 's _M- <K ,
y* Lit - - Swk1 l +
,
*
.a
,a j
.
*
./
*
. s- l..\ l' .1 I/.f/t,,r,
. . .
( ,,f;g,;) ) ,l. L0*
.'
, nl ,,, a .
Ch ) -) , j SW ( f,'l l * ' l <y '; , ' i. , t Gd -
-_
.
r-
..
*
- ba** *
- COMBUSTION ENGINEEllING, INC.'
*
. APPENDIX .8..
,
NUCLEAR COMPONENTS DEPARTMENT 3 c, s u, .
..
*
( Specification No.: N-2.4.4.72(a)'
. . Date Issued: April 10, 1973
(- . Page . 1 of 9 . (, . Issued By: Nuclear Quality
*
,
Engineering, RH
,..
i., -
'
.
PROCESS SPECIFICATION FOR -
,. ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION OF LILCO SUPPORT SKIRT '
1 TO REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL WELD
*
..
f 1.0 Purpose
-
L
, 1.1. The support skirt to the reactor pressu 'e vessel weld y' No. 4-309,. including weld buildup No. 3-206, is covered ,
by this procedure. - 7 1.2 The ultrasonic examination procedure described herein meets
;. the requirements of the ASME Doller and Pressure Vessel '
Code 1968 Edition of Section III, with Addenda through Summer.of 1968, Appendix IX, Paragraph IX-340. i I 1.3 This procedure covers both straight-beam and angle-beam
'
methods using manual contact pulse-echo ultrasonic tech-niques for the examination of welds, heat-affected zones
- (HAZ) and adjacent base metal. . . , ,
, ,
2.0 Personnel ( 2.1 All personnel performing ultrasonic examination shall be
- qualified in accordance with IX-400 of Section III of
} the ASME Code, (SNT-TC-1A, Supplement C).
. .
,
,
3.0 pquipment and Surface Conditions t 3.1 Pulse-echo ultrasonic.equipmen.t (Branson 600 or 301, Sonic MK 1, Sperry Type UM, or Equivalent) shall be used
, with a single search unit contact method. All instru-i monts shall be equipped with db calibrated gain or at-tenuation control. /
( 3.2 Straight beam examination shall be performed using a longitudinal wave scarch unit having a nominal frequency
-
of 2.25 MH and an arca no greater than one square inch.
,
- Scarch uni $s with other sizes and frequencies may be used t-
- for exploration or study of flaw indicati,ons or as re-
.
quired to obtain adcquate sonic penetration.
-
1 i 3.3 Angle beam examination shall be performed using a scarch unit having a nominal frequency of 2.25 MH 7 and an area
.
'
of 1/2 to 1 square inch unless variables such as material
'
grain structure require the use of other frequencies and
'
sizes to. assure adequate penetration. Search units will y be fitted with wedUes to provide shear wave beam angles
-as'follows: .
- _ _ _ . . __ _ _. ________
,
"
-
( '. . * * *
~'
.
- COMaUSTION ENGINEERING, INC...
.
- g , ,
Nu, CLEAR COMPONENTS DEPARTMEN()
'
-
Specification No.: N-2. 4. 4 . 7 2 (a)' Date Issued: April 10, 1973 f,,
*
'
Page _2 of 9 -
- 12. Issued sy : Nuclear Quality
'
- Engineering, RH r
- b. 3.3.1
'
The beam angles in the material shall be 45 f2 and . 4 ' 60 13 degrees with respect to perpendicular of the contact surf ace when ' examining for defects trans-verse to the weld. - ",-
'
4
-
'3.3.2 The beam angles used to examine for defects parallel 4
to the weld are determined by the weld joint design,
- selecting those angles which are most nearly normal
.I, - to' fusion lines. (See Figure 1.) Angles used during L examination shall be recorded.
, '( 3.4 Surface preparation shall be as follows:
i( . 3.4.1 Contact surfaces shall be free of weld spatter and
,' any condition that wm:.1d interfere with free move-q t ment of the search unit or impair coupling of ultra-sonic vibrations to and from the material examined.
.
,' ,3,4.2 Finished weld surfaces, where accessible, shall be adequate to prevent inturference with interpretation'" -
of the examination. Weld surface's shall blend into
;
.
, the su'rface of adjacent base material.
3.5 Glycerine shall be used as a couplant in sufficient quantity a-
'
to maintain continuous sonic contact. 1 ~ 3.6 Calibration shall include the complete U.T. system for both y straight and angle beam weld examination. Any change in q search units, wedges, couplants, cables, operators, U.T. instruments, or any other components of the system shall be
..
cause for recalibration. Calibration shall be checked at j~ the start and ' finish of each type of examination, but not later than after four hours of examination. This check will be made on the 3/4T hole: 1 Amplitudo deviations more than 2db or metal path
- deviations greater than 5% require :alibration and
.and re-examination of production material examined L, . .
since the last acceptable' recheck of. calibration. If the m'etal path change does exceed'5%, areas
- r. ,
of reportabic indications shall be re-examined.
'
4.0
'
Instrument Calibration, 4.1- Distance-Amplitude Correction
, Coropensation for the distance traversed by the ultrasonic beam as it-passes through the material shall be provided l
.
.-
-s J .
s
..-
( )'. % .
.
** .
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC.S
-*
- n. NUCLEAR COMPONENTS DEPARTMENTP
- t s l Specification No.: N-2.4.4.72(a)
- Date Issued: April 10, 1973
'l Page 3 of 9 .
L
*
, Issued Byf~ Nuclear Quality
.
,
Engineering, RH
~
4,1 (contd)- by the use of distance-amplitude' correction p curves, construct'ed as follows: Determination of Curves . -
'
'; Distance-Amplitude Correction (DAC) curves shall be con-
..
.
structed by utilizing the responses from the basic cali-
,. bration holes in the basic calibration block. Couple the i search unit to the examination surface of the LILCO cali-( bration block Nu. 205H-7594. Adjust delay and range
,
controls so that horizontal screen divisions convert into I' inches of' metal path. The first point on the curve is L obtained-by placing the search unit as near as possible, but not'less than 3/8 node, except 1/8 node when this beam f path exceeds 2 inches, from the calibration hole.and posi-( tioning for maximum response. The gain control is then set so that this response is 75 percent of full screen.
-
This is the primary reference response. Without changing l the gain, the search unit shall be placed similarly at other nodal positions, covering the contemplated exami-
- nation distance range and corresponding responses marked on the screen. These points shall be joined by a smooth ' ,
line, the length of which sh'all be such as to cover the *- cxamination range but shall not be extended more than 1/8
.
node from & reference calibration point. An additional l curve, 50 percent of the DAC, shall be constructed by joining the half-amplitude points with a dash line of a similar length to that of the DAC curve.
'
i S.0 Examination ,
- 5.1 Acceptance Criteria for Reference Standard Material
,
The calibration reference standard will be f abricated
- j. from material of.a grade and class known to be similar
'
to the test piece. The calibration reference standard
'
blocks will roccive heat treatment similar to that of the production material.
.- ~
.Of prime im'portance in the selection of the material to l be used in the fabrication of the standard block is the
.. assurance that plate laminations do not exist in an area of.the standard which would " shadow" or otherwise affect
-
a sound beam directed toward a reference hole. If possible,
"
the basic calibration block material will be selected so as to be entirely free from laminations. If lamination-free
~ matcrial is not availabic, the decision on the acceptabi-lity of the availabic material will be made on the basis
of technical judgement and recommendations of Lcyc1 I,II ,
. Ultrasonic testing representatives of G.E., C-E, S&W and
,,
SWRI. 4
,
. -
m ' i- *
- . .. .
' -
.
, ,
* , . COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INCs,
,, ' NUCLEAR COMPONENTS DEPARTMENT ..
,
3 Specification No.: N-2. 4. 4.72 (a)
'
l Date Issued: April 10, 1973 -
;
O , Page 4 .of 9 ' J . Issued By: Nuclear Quality >
-
- Engineering, RH .
\
~
>
5.1 (contd) For the purposes of' basic calibration block m- material, .the presence of a lami,n,ation will be defined ' *- -
"
-
by the f.o11owing criteria: "Using'a 2.25 MH straight
-
beam longitudinal wave contact scarch unit, Iet the ... ins,trument~ gain to give 80 percent 6f' full scre'en signal - t from a clear area. Any area where <the back wall signal
, is reduced to one-half'of that amplitude, accompanied ... . "' by an intermediate signal with amplitude greater than 10 percent of full screen height originating from within the test piece will be considered a lamination for the ,
purposes of this examinatier.." 1, 5.1.1 A 1 to 1 relationship between the LILCO cali-bration blocks acd the support skirt weld will be
~
used. 9 5 /2 Scanning .
-
5.2.1 Scanning Rate - The scanning rato at all times ' will be sufficiently slow to allow careful obser- ' vation of thu ultrasonic instrument screen and !
,
will not exceed 12 inches per second of search unit movement. Successive scan paths' will overlap
,
a minimum of 1/4 of the transducer active area i
'
width. L - - 5.2.2 Base Material - To the extent possible, all areas through which sound will travel during the angle - 1 beam examination shall be scanned with a straight beam search unit to detect reficctors which might
-
affect the interpretation of angle beam results, b Scan with sensitivity set to an average 80 percent < back reflection from the calibration test block ' (described in Paragraph 4.1) in the areas clear of drilled holes. ' 7 When a straight' beam indication is detected which L- - has an amplitude of 40 percent of screen height, or greator, its extent, position, depth and ampli-tude will be recorded. Consideration muct be given to these reflectors during interpretation of wold , examination results, but their detection is not-a basis for rejection of the basc. material.
-.
.
-
,. . _ . . . . . _ . . .
.- . .
.. .
,
,
' ' COMBUSTION ENGINEERING,.INC.
- NUCLEAR COMPONENTS DEPARTMENT Specification No.: N-2.4.4.72(a)
"'
- Date Issued: April 10, 1973
-
Page 5 of 9 .
.
b Issued,By: Nuclear Quality
.
Enginacring, RH r . .. .
- )
' "
5.2.3 Sensitivity Leve'l - Exc.ept as specified in'5.2.f,
~ - the reference level sensitivity for monitoring I discontinuities is the primary reference response '
corrected for distance by the distance-amplitude
' '
curve. Angle beam scanning shall be performed at a gain setting of five (5) times the reference level , 1
' sensitivity. (14 db increase in gain.) Longi- -
'tudinal wave wold scanning shall be performed at I \ a' gain setting of two (2) times the reference level 4 sensitivity. (6 db increase in gain.)
'I 5.2.4 Reference Level - The reference for monitoring dis-l continuities is the primary reference response cor-rected for distance by the distance-amplitude
-
correction curve. . 1 . 5.2.5 Detection of Defects Parallel to the Weld - The search unit shall be placed on the contact surface with the beam aimed about 90 to the weld and-4 manipulated laterally and longitudinally so that the ultrasonic beam passes through all of the . weld i metal and heat affected zcnes. I 5.2.6 Detection of Defects Transverse to the Weld - The j weld, where existing component geometry permits, j ' will be scanned with 45 and 60 angle beams directed along the axis of the wcld in both directions to
, detect reflectors oriented transverse to the weld.
Scanning will be sufficient to assure that all pos-l- sible portions-of the weld are examined.
"
5.2.7 The weld shall be examined from the outside surface i- as indicated in the attached sketch usine straight beam longitudinal waves, 45 and 60 angle beam
; shear waves. Instrument calibration shall be ac-
- 1. , complished in accordance with 4.0.
1 5.3 ~ Data Recording
'
.;
. ,
l' 5.3.1 All angle beam indications in excess of 10% of the j
.DAC and all longitudinal wave indications in excess i of 50% of the DAC shall be recorded on the LILCO l Ultrasonic Indication Record. (
1 . a
'
e
- COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, ING b[ , .,.
.-
kNCLEAR COMPONENTS DEPARTMfNT
' Specification No.: N-2. 4. 4. 72 (a)
' **
'
- Date Issued: April 10, 1973 - '
- Page 6 of_ 9
- -
. Issued By: Nuclear Quality
- - -
Engineering, RH
.
c 5.3.2 The LILCO Ultrasonic Indication Record forms, -
> -
attached as Appendix A, shall be used to record . ..
'
the examination. Recordable indications may
.
additionally be shown on a sketch which will
;
show position in relation to reference surfaces
' - ~
and axis. Information relative to the size and
, depth of recorded indication.shall be shown. A
[t.
.
*
.
record of the examination shall be maintained in sufficient detail to permit duplication of the
'
test. Data for reflectors longer than one inch shall be recorded at maximum intervals of one inch of reflector length.
,
5.4 Reference Points for Physical Measurement l The centerline, as marked, of upper torus to lower torus circumferential weld number 6-306, shall be used as a reference line. The reference point on this reference line shall coincide with the. vessel 0 point. Distance along the reference line will be measured in inches clock ~~
- ' .
wise from this point as viewed from the flange end of the vessel. The W dimension shall be taken with a flexible
@F# 1982-184-l tape along the outer surf ace.
6.v m ul ua i.on and Reporting Criteria GENERAL @ ELECTRIC I ATOMIC POWER EQUIP DE am ~I iAN JOSE. CAUFORNIA Co: Lsisting of Certifled Level III 1Dd1V1 duals from C-E, S&U, G.E. and SwRI.
, APPROVED
, AS CHECKED BELOW D Not Approved. Revise and resub. mit for approval.
'
SwRI ,,
,
b /;4-/f -J,3 p p{ ceed w:th fabrication.No further action required. Pro- Date j
'
O As noted n evh p<oceed wirs fabric;thn and tubmit f nil ceri- C-E . 'd fg- [ [ / 3 9 '- / d - 7 3 fied transparency and priats. Date l N*N,Is. . G.E. I b.' #/~M'73 O Without comments. Proceed *:+. Date fabricttion and submit fee >l certi. fed transparency and prints. l
-
S&M M ! h, u. /f,e n 9 -//- 73 NSh 9 I Date: 00UC
~l I
$ dAh Approval is in regard to general de- !
I sign and cbetroli;ng din ensions. TNs t *
. does not constitute acceptance of any t designs, rna'erials or equipment whkh ,
will not fulfill the functional or pee.
'ormance requirements established by ,
l
, . the purchase contract. i '
! .
*
. _ _ _ -
_
. - - - - - - - - - - - -- -~
,m' e- n rm; wp:.c 3 - m m '
a-2. 4.o . 72 t es..
' ~
- . ,
' *'
, .
-
- Appandix A- . , , ,
. Pagn. . oE . 9") n.szeisein ULTRASONIC INSPECTION REPORT ~ ~ '
---
.
-
- COMDUSTION ENGINEERING,INC.
CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE.
. . ' T - ' NUCLEAR QUALITY ASSURANC "
,
.
CONTRACT: JOB & CONTROL NO.:
'
"
SEQ. 'DATE I I ., CO5!PONENT: QTY.: SEAM,PART OR CODE NO.: TYPE SEAh!: GIRTl!O LONG NOzztE . - -
.
M1P SPECIFICATION TYPE INSPECTION: RECEIVING
-
IN. PROCESS O FINAL 0 . RESULTS OF TEST: CO5!PLETE - INCO51PLETE SATISFACTORY
'
'
.
UNSATI.SFACTORY REJECTION NO: REPORTABLE INDICATIONS
" ~ *
'
INSPECTOR (S). AND
'
c; -
.: . , ,
(A
. .
.. ..
. -
v TEST "' DAC
'
-
' "
,
.
.g ' SET-UP -...
'
a 10 #!
' "
.Y.E' 45aO so O .',
.
BM HAZ . sensitivity . oB 9- . .
' N.
B.R. % 1.D. O O.o. O 8 . , rREOUENCY i.p D 2.2s s.o 1W!SLOCK ANGLE a '
,
7 ,
*
.OTHER -
*
.
g ,- . .
.
CAllBRATION BLOCK NO. -
.R , T
- 5 '
.' JACK - '
.
TRANSDUCER S/N 4 l - Fli.TER/ DAMP
'
.
'
.
l CABLE S/N , , 3 REJECT OFF
'
, .
2 . . EQUIP. MENT S/N - SWEEP DELAY
,1
'
,
.. I..{.'
C.E S/N ' RANGE
'
- o. , .
PULSER / RECEIVER 'PYPE O l' 2 3 4 5,. 6 78 9 10 - -
. MATERIAL CALIBRATION
'
' COUPLANT: WATERO GLYCERINE O
- " ^ " " ' ~
SWEEP DIAL
. O :ro os tiox -
'
SILICONE GREASE C O 14 ou (sxl INCHES /DIV.
- SWEEP RATIO
-
O a ou (2xi
~
. TEST TEMPERATURE: TIME (MILITAllY) _
,
CALIBRATION SHEET NO.
, ,
Reviewed by Level III Examiners ' AMBlENT . ELEVATED 0 aF swRI ,'
-
.
l' GE
,~.
.
'
.LILCO
-
y . .
- m > 7+v - .--. . - . . . _ . , . _ _ , ._ _ ,r _ ,,,c, , , . c, , ,,__ , __
__.,
' ' * ' ' '
Ni2.~4.4.72(.1) -
-.~~~"
.'
.
'
Appendix.A .
-,, j, g
BASE MATERIAL SCAN DATA SHEET :Page 8- of 9.- ..
- -- ,
.ONTR ACT NO. SEAM, PIECE OR CODE NO. l .D. O.D.E] DATE, / / -- ---
'
.
.vrtsn;
#
lAllBR ATION SHEET NO. S"":ET NO. __ O F TIME * ?? e i __ e i Iti twt 3 EAM LENGTH 'g l $ ] -l ----- . i r s. p: b,,e h v...s .3 START END INSPECTORS & - i
- y_b __ !'-
' "*' '
~EST PAR AMETERS: ' - START END ' ME ASU RED THICKNESS w 4
-
(L) rncasured from - l
- . SEARCH UNIT .R ATIO i Wj W-2 Lj Wi Vy *L Wg W2 L2 Yl1 W2 I- W1 Yh P
"
PEdK BACK IN. : O R B O,T fCPACC Cy'W AMP P ~g
-
. .
--
.
, .
. ,
! . !- '
-
-
l . l I i
! I I
'
ll
-
I I 11 1.
' -
l l- . l l -l
-
l 1
. ..
l _
, . ..
I i
-
-
I
.
.
. l
-
.
--
.
,
L l . Reviewed by Level III Examiners: SuRI -
- CV SOAN CO'.1PLETE b NO REPORTABLE INDICATION O non LItco --
-
_---____ ___-- reauwaum__ _ ___ _.__ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _. _
_-
. ., , . _ . , _ ., , , ._ m, -
,
,
y n'ELu sCAfJ- VATA d.-teel appeno.tx A . . , .
~
,,.w Page_ 9 of .9 .. - - '
.
CONTRACT NO. SEAM, PIECE OR CODE NO. 1.D.O O.0.0 DATE -/ / - - -- ' --
-.
CAllBR ATION SHEET NO. %t SHEET NO. OF . TIME . . SEAM LENGTH
-
i d'T1m. i st
-
j j yl - TEST PAR AMETER: START END INSPECTORS E
j
IIj h] 'j------
I' "
.., W '2 ---
.
START END -
' -
**!
*(L) measured from: TYPE OF TEST HAZ 450 600 .
1-1 *L I2 V/1 l' W V!2 l MP MPI MP !OAC i i i a i X.R FILM NO. 10 20 lg 53 l 103 T. lax 100 50 20 l 10 l 10 20 l 50 100 Max 100 TCP O!i 80T7'"' 50 l 20 - 10 10 20 50 100 Max 100 50 20 ,JO l Max . CVt OR CC'!. l \ l
- s . .
-
-l .
-
.
t, . i i l i
~
I _' I I .
.
.
_- 1 i l i i i i - I i l l 1 1 I _ . . l ~ i l I !
~
l 1 1 i t __ _ I I
.
-
4 _. l l l l I 1 - Reviewdd by Level III Examiners:. SwRI
'
SCAN COMPLETE O NO REPORTABLE INDICATION: O GE
.**
SCAN INCOMPLETE O nEPOnr^cteiNo: CATIONS O . LILCO -. . C-E - - . . . ,
;. .. ~
O .*:. . . WELD Y '
. # G-300 e,
O *$osincus Ang AS
/ '
p / MEASW2ED A t.ctJG
'
- i. : > Sv2 FACE.
'
\., L: ,. m N .- .
,
f -
.
CN . . a
% 'i N EE/S#ENcc ,
- y .4,; ~ uas e .
[ f'.
. -. gf k $\ h^
>
-
_
}' go & R9
(~
.
\ h, h-
\ gn -
.
\e
, / \ '
@M x\ 45' R
f \e
$i ^
'-
,
gg* ( , kl~
,.
\\
\-
.
+
// '
JELO ~
'
P4-309 L. C' y y, Bd!LD-UP Wfl0 _
*
,
W 3-30b
.
-
Elfs/IR E 1 _ S CAAtAL/1La _ p,trrg axi
-
..e.
-
a ,-
,
,-
- COMDUSTION, ENGINEERING, INC.
,
. NUCLEAR COMPONENTS DEPARTMENT
.
d
.
-,
- . Specification No. : N-2.4.4.62(a)
Date Issuod : February 12, 1973 Page 1 of 16
- c. '
Issued By: Nuclear Quality Engineering, RH
, ,
a PROCESS SPECIFICATION FOR SHOP .
-
ULTRASONIC EXAMINATICIT OF LILCO
'
.
REACTOR VESSEL
,
- 1.0 Purpose 1.1 Loagitudinal, circumferential, and nozzle-to-vessel welds are covered by this procedure.
-
.
1.2 The ultrasonic examination procedure described herein meets the requirements of the ASME Doiler and Pressure vessel Code 1968 Edition of Section .III, with Addenda
- through Summer of 1968, Appendix IX, Paragraph IX-340. "1 1.3 This procedure covers both straight-beam and angle-beam methods using manual contact pulse-echo ultrasonic techniques for the examination of. welds, heat-affected zones (HAZ) and adjacent base metal.
2.0 ' Personnel 2.1 All' personnel performing' ultrasonic examination shall be qualified in accordance with IX-400 of Section III of the ASME Code, (S NT-TC-1A , Supplement C). 3.0 Eauinment and surface conditions
.
3.1 ' Pulse-echo ultrasonic equipment (Branson 600 or 301,
. Sonic MK 1, Sperry Type UM, or equivalent) shall be used with a single scarch unit contact mothod. All
, instruments shall be equipped -with dB calibrated gain [ ' or attenuation control. I
*
..
..,
-
.
,s COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC. *
, NUCLEAR COMPONENTS DEPARTMENT
'
Specification No. : N-2.4.4. 62 (a)
~
Date Issued: February 12, 1973
,
'Pege 2 of 16 Issued By: Nuclear Quality Engineering, RH
-
,
,
3.2 Straight beam examination shall be performed using a
- . longitudinal wave search unit having a nominal frequency of 2.25 MHz and an area no greater than one ,
square inch. Search units with other sizes and , frequencies may be used for exploration or study of . flaw indications or as required to obtain adequate sonic penetration. .I 3.3 Angle beam examination shall be performed using a
,
search unit having a nominal frequency of 2.25 MHz and an are,a of 1/2 to 1 square inch unless variables such as material grain structure require the use of other frequencies and sizes to assure adequate peno- ,
-
tration. Search unitn wi31 he fitted with wedges to provide shear wave beam angles of _45 I2 degrees and 60 3 degrees measured on an Int block. This infor-mation will be recorded on the appropriate calibration forms. Search units using other frequencies, sizes and beam angles may be used for exploration or study of flaw indications. .
, 3.4 Surface preparation shall be as follows:
3.4.1 Contact surfaces shall be free of weld spatter and any condition tha* would interfere with free movement of the search unit or impair coupling
, of ultrasonic vibrations to and from the ma-
{ terial examined. 0 3.4.2 Finished weld surfaces, where accessible, shall be adequate to prevent interference with inter-
,
pretation of the examination. Weld surfaces
,
shall blend into the surface of adjacent base material. 4 3.5 Glycerinc shall be used as a couplant in sufficient
. quantity to maintain continuous sonic contact, t
. . ._. __. . _ _ . . _ _ __ _ . _ . _ -__ . _ _ _ .
>
., =
a
- COMBUSTION ' ENGINEERING, INC.
r - NUCLEAR COMPONENTS DEPARTMENT
'
Specification No.: N-2.4.4. 62 (a) Date Is' sued: February 12, 1973
~
.
,
Page 3 of 16 Issued By: Nuclear Quality
,
Engineering, RH
'
~
. 3.6 Calibration shall include the complete U.T. system for both~ straight and angle beam weld examination. Any
-
'
+ change in search units, wedges, couplants, cables,
~
U.T. instruments, operators, or any other components ' *
, of the system shall be cause for recalibration. Cali-
- e -
bration shall be checked at the start and finish of each [ . type of examination, but not later than after four hours of examination. This check will be made on the 3/4T .
'
-
hole: -
- .
L Amplitude deviations more than 2dB or metal path deviations greater than 5% require calibration and re-examination of production material examined since the last acceptable recheck of calibration. If the metal path change does exceed 5%, only' areas of reportable indications shall be re-examined.
- 4.0 Instrument Calibration 4.1 Distance-Amplitude Correction - Compensation for the distance traversed by the ultrasonic beam as it passes
. through the material shall be provided by the use of distance-amplitude correction curves, constructed as <
follows: Determination of Curves - Distance-Amplitude correction (DAC) curves shall be constructed by utilizing the responses from the basic calibration holes in the basic; calibration block. Couple the search unit to the , examination sdrface of the block equivalent to the l examination surface of the production material. Adjust
~
delay and - range controls so that horizontal screen
- divisions convert into inches of metal. path. The first ; point on the curve is obtained by placing the search unit as near as1 possible but not- less than 3/8 nede, ,
except 1/8 node when this beam path exceeds 2 inches, ( from the calibration hole and positioning for maximum
'
. : response. The gain' control is then set so that-this-
,
response is 75 percent of full screen. This is the primary reference-response. Without changing the gain, ,
- the. search unit shall be'placed'similarly at other nodal ~
.
i
- v -
- , . - - . ,* . _ . , , . .-
r- . ..-
.
.- -
.
.'! tJ
,
P L COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC.
, NUCLEAR COMPONENTS DEPARTMENT r-i.
~
Specification No.: N-2.4.4.62 (a) Date Issued: February 12, 1973 Page 4 of 16 jC ' l -- Issued By: Nuclear Quality Engineering, RH r- , ij - y_ 4.1 (Continued)
!" . .
positions, covering the contemplated examination
- p. distance range and corresponding responses marked
;
on the screon. These points shall be joined by ,a - smooth line, the length of which shall be such as
-
to cover the e:: amination range but shall not be ex-tended more than 1/8 node from a reference calibration point. An additional curve 50 percent of the DAC shall be constructed by joining the half amplitude
,, points with a dash line of similar length to that of the-DAC curve.
5.0 Examination I 5.1 Accentance Criteria for Referenced standard Material
~ All basic calibration reference standards will be i fabricated from material of a grade and class known ' to be similar to the test piccc. All basic cali-bration reference standard blocks will receive heat , treatment similar to that of the production material.
Of prime importance in the selection of the material to be used in the fabrication of the standard blocks is the assurance that plate laminations do not exist
'
~
3 in an area of the standard which would " shadow" or otherwise affect a sound beam directed toward a re-
'forenced hole. If possible, 'the basic calibration 7- block material will be selected so as to be entirely
, free from laminations. If lamination-f ree material is not available, the decision on the acceptability
- of the availabic material will be made on the basis
,
of technical judgement and recommendations of Level III Ultrasonic' testing representatives of GE, C-E, i SWRI and Stone and Hebster.
.. .
..
.
._ ___ __ _ ___ _ ___ - _____________
p, .
'
e- , , COMDUSTION ENGINEERING, INC. NUCLEAR COMPONENTS DEPARTMENT '
.
Specification No.: N-2. 4.4. 62 (a) Date Issued: February 12, 1973 i Page 5- of 16
~
Issued By: Nuclear Quality I" Engineering, RH
' -
u 5.1 (Continued) C' . For the purposes of basic calibration block material, u the presence of a lamination will be defined by .the following criteria: "Using a 2.25 MHz straight beam i' , longitudinal wave contact search unit, set the instru-i ment gain to give 80% of full screen signal from a clear area. Any area where the back wall signal is '
, reduced to one-half of that amplitude, accompanied by, -
an intermediate signal with amplitude greater than 10% of full screen height originating from within the l test piece will be considered a lamination for the ' purposes of this examination."
! 5.1.1 Trans fer -- A' l to 1 ~ relationship between the LILCO basic calibration blocks and the equivalent ,
area of the vessel will be used. I , i Basic calibration blocks for LILCO vessel, fur-5.1.2 nished by G.E.-APED, are identified as follows : 205-H-7594 7.25" thick, 205-H-0424 6.0" thick and 205-H-0424 4" thick, per G.E. Drawing
~
-
131C7902, Rev. 2 ' Scanning 5.2 - 5.2.1 Scanning Rate -- the scanning rate at all times will be sufficiently slow to allow careful observation of the ultrasonic instrument screen and will not exceed 12 inches per second of ( search unit movement. Successive scan paths will overlap a minimum of 1/4 of the transducer active area width. 2.2.2 Dase Material -- After the weld is completed but before the angle beam examination, the area of the base material through which the sound will travel in angle beam examination (2T each side
- of weld) shall be completely scanned with a
-
' straight beam search unit to detect reflectors which might affect the interpretation of angle beam results. Scan with sensitivity set to give 80% of full screen back reflection from plate material IT away from the weld. Reset e
_- _ -______________ - __-______ _
~
.
,
- - r' "
*
,r; f
'
- COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC.
C . NUCLEAR COMPONENTS DEPARTMENT i Spccifi6ation No.: N-2. 4.4. 62 (a)
'
Date Issued: February 12, 1973 is Page 6 of 16 Issued by:- Nuclear Quality
^
Engineering, RH ( 5.2.2 (Continued)
'
,.
sensitivity for each plate as required to give an 80% of full screen back reflection. When a
,
- .
.
. . - laminar reflector is encountered, its indica- -
tion will rise as the back reflection falls.
"
When the laminar indication exceeds the back reflection record position and depth of the
~
reflector. Consideration must be given to these reficctors during interpretation of weld exami-nation results, but their detection is not'a 1 basis for rejcecion of.the base mat'erial.
- )
'
'
. 5.2.3. Sensitivity T.cvol -- Except as specified in 5.2.2, the reference icvel sensitivity for monitoring discontinuities is the primary' re-ference response corrected for distance by the t
,
distance-amplitude curve. Angle beam scanning shall be performed at a gain setting of five (5) ti.mos the reference level sensitivity. (14db increase in gain.) Longitudinal wave wcld scanning shall be performed at a gain sotting of two (2) times the reference level sensitivity. (Gdb inc.rease in gain.) 5.2.4 Reference Level -- The reference for monitoring l discontinuities is the primary reference re-sponse corrected for distance by the. distance-amplitude correction curve. S.2.5 Dctoction of Defects Parallcl to the Ucid -- The search unit shall be placed on the contact ' surface with the beam aimed about 90 to the
,
wcld and manipulated laterally and longitudinally
.
{
.
1 l
. ..
.. ....
,
~,-
-.
tp .
'
- r-
.! ,
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC. "
,
. NUCLEAR COMPONENTS DEPARTMENT l Specifirn. tion No.: N-2.4.4. 62 (2)
Date Issued: February 12, 1973 I 7 of 16
. Page i
- Issued by: Nuclear Quality
.r . Engineering, RH
-
>! ' ' u. y 5.2.5 .(Continued) ll e
-
so that the ultrasonic beam passes through all T- f the wcld metal and heat affected zones on
- . . - . , one-half of the Vee path in clad areas snd ful1 -
Vec path in areas which are not clad. This examination will be performed from both sides
; of the weld where component geometry permits.
-
C 2.6 Detection of Defccts Transverse to the Weld -- f All welds and HAZ, wher'e existing component geo-me'try permits, will be scanned with 45 and 600
; angle beams directed along the axis of the weld i and IIAZ in both dircctions to detect reflectorc
. oriented t,ransverse to the wold and EAZ. Scan-ning will be sufficient to assure that all por-
-
tions of the wold and HAZ are examined.
'
- 5. 2. 7' The closure head instrumentation nozzle-to-head wolds will be examined with a straight beam longitudinal wave scarch unit from the inside surface of the closure head. Angle beam, 450
'
and GO O shear wave examinations shall be applied
, from the outside surface of the closure head.
l Instrument calibration shall be accomplished in
'
accordance with 4.0.
,
i , 5.2.8 All other welds chall be examinad from the out-side surface of the vessel usit.; straight beam ', -longitudinal waves, 45 and 600 angic beam shear
'
. waves. Instrument calibration shall be accom-plished in accordance with 4.0.
.
#
'
.
-
.
+
b
--
.
.
.
.
>* ,
k p i-
,+ .
- l. ,
'
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING
, NUCLEAR COMPONENTS DEPARTMENT
- n . .
d.;- Specification No.: N-2.4.4.62 (a) ,
'
. Date Issued: February 12, 1973 l
,
Page 8 of 16
'
t- . Issued by: Nuclear Quality
,
- ,; Engineering, RH
Ik.'
, 5.3 -Data Recording
- ,: -
-
-
5.3.1 All angle beam indications in excess of 10% of 7 the DAC and all longitudinal wave indications ~(~
. . in exccas of. 50% of the DAC .shall be recorded . .
on the LILCO Ultrasonic Indication Record. _
.
f 5.3.2 Indications from the cladding will not be re-ported unicss, in the opinion of the operator, a
; non-typical condition is being observed.
'
I.
- 5.3.3 The LILCO Ultrasonic Indication Record forms
- d' attached as App.?ndix A shall bc used to rccord
~L the examination. Reco.rdable indications may additionally bc .Thown on a sketch which 5,iill show position in relation to reference surfaces 't and axis. Information relative to the size and
,
depth of recorded indications shall be shown.
,! '
A record- of the examination shall be maintained
! in sufficient detail.t'o permit duplication of
,_ the test. Data for reficators longer than one inch shall be recorded at maximum intervals of
!
one inch of reflector length. 't . 5.4 Reference Points for Physical Measurement t
,. 5.4.1 Nozzle-to-Shcll Melds I .
l A reference line about-cach nonzic shall be. , -, marked near the wcld centerline. This line j
- [ shall be a whole number of inches from the centerline of the respective no le. The O
!
degrec azimuth of each nozzle shall'be toward 4
,,
the vessel flange. Each five (5) degrees of Azimuth, numbered in a clockwise direction as f' viewed -from the vessel exterior, shall bc
' !. numbergd at 30 0 intervals ' around the nozzlc. -
Radial lines . shall 112 drawn at cach five (5)
.
'
__ .
.
' rT,, 1
** .* *
- . .
d- , COMBUSTION ' ENGINEERING, INC. NUCLEAR COMPONENTS DEPARTMENT n i l' Specification No.: N-2.4. 4. 62 (a) . y. Date Issued: February 12, 1973
-
.
Page 9 of 16 .I - Issued by: Nuclear Quality .,t. Engineering, RH
- /
L.4 ,
;
5.4.1 (Continued)
- ..
degrees of azimuth. A second circle shall be r drawn with radius increased by 2 times the test
,
. .
-
. . .. piece. thickness.. - -
. ..
[ 5.4.2 Longitudinal Butt Wolds (vertical or axial)
!
Three reference lines shall be drawn, one on ' ' or near the centerline of cach longitudinal butt (. weld and parallel lines- 2T cach side of the weld centerline. Distance along the centerline shall l' be measured from the centerline of the circum- 'l fernntial un)d at the end of thn Jongitudinni
,,,
wcld nearest the vessel flange. - ) .
-
5.4.3 Circumferential Butt Welds (girth) '
'
Three reference lines shall be drawn. Ono, on I or near the centerline'of each circumferential
,
weld'and paralici lines 2T each side of the weld
'l centerline. The reference point shall c)incide with the vessel 0 0 poin'
Distance along this
., reference line shall be measured in inches clock-
,[ wise as viewed from the flange end of the vessel.
- , -
5.4.4 Weld Locations f Weld scam identification and socation saall be as 1' shown on "Lilco Ucid Identification Plan." This [. plan is attached as I.ppendix B. 6.0 Evaluntion and nacorting criteria
- t 6.1 The recorded data shall be reviewed by an evaluatica V team. This evaluation team will-consist of certified Y .
i -
'
nf
(. ...'
...
.
g ( ~. , t S~
,
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC. c, NUCLEAR COMPONENTS DEPARTMENT I ( Specification No.: N-2.4.4.62 (a)
- r. Date Issued: February 12, 1973
[ Page__10 o f, 16
-
Issued by: Nuclear Quality Engineering, RH l l .
;- 6.1 (Continued) level III individuals from Stone & Uebstor, Southwest l' Research Institute, General Electric, and Combustion i .. > Engincaring, Inc. . . . - . .,
1 ( V PF & 1982-l82- 3 GENERAL @ ELECTRIC
-
ATOMIC POWER EQUIPMENT DEPT. SAN JOSE. CAUFORNIA
, AS CHECKED BROW SWRI -(
'
-/-c. u. 3-So-7a Date
. O Not Approved. Revia and resub. ,
j rnif fcr approval. cced *ta f i io C-E gr- *
,
-[ s ~~! W -
j O As noted. Pc vise. preceed with fabricet.on ard sulyr.it final certi. Date ( fied tran:parency and prints.
'
1
* *"'"'
GE } , (
, f *b O ~ f i O VrthouI comreents. Proceed with
! fnLricat?cn and sw;2mit f;nal certi- Date f.cd tracsparency and prints.
.
,.
&&W $ , A s '. AZ/) M 5 .b O ~ ~
- AN Dato f
Approval is in regard to general de-( s:en eed centrollieg dite isions. This does not co s?ir.te accipt: ca of any es dyrs. n e t'ials or equipment which
< wit; not fs fUl the fsnetonal or per-
! fe maact rcq svewnts established by 3 i the pu ch;st con rset, f
.
.
d I -
.
e
.
. . . _ , ,, ~ . - y -+. . ..
,; ' _- ,
'
x: .: yu .~. z -. - ;3 .. . . .
'
' *
- c4 -2 . * . 4 . 6 4. g u ) , n ep :inw a.2 ' A -
' -
,
"
Page 11 of 16 '
- February 12, 1973 eau n h ,
-ULTRASONIC INSPECTION REPORT CO.llBUST10N ENGINEERING,INC. '
'.
.: NUCLEAR QUALITY ASSURANCE -
- CIIATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE CONTRACT: JOB A CONTROL NO.: SEQ. DATE / / .
COMPONENT: QTY.: SEAM, PART OR CODE NO.: TYPE SEAM: GIRTII LONG NOZZLE -
-
M&P SPECIFICATION - TYPE INSPECTION: RECEIVING ' IN. PROCESS FINAL
'
RESULTS OF TEST: ' COMPLETE INCOMPLETE O SATISFACTORY UNSATISFACTORY REJECTION NO: REPORTABLE INDICAT' lONS , INSPECTOR (S) AND , TEST DAC SET-UP
.
10 BM HAZ 45 60 0 l SENSITIVITY DB 9 B.R. % 1.D. O.D. 8 FREQUENCY 1.0 0 2.2s O s.O 11W BLOCK f NGLE 7 , OTHERU__ 6 CAllBR ATCN BLOCK NO. JACK R T 5 ' TRANSDUCER S/N h FILTER / DAMP CABLE S/N 3 REJECT OFF 2 - EQUIPMENT S/N SWEEP DELAY 1 . C E S/N O RANGE . PULSER / RECEIVER TYPE. MATERIAL CAllBRATION
"""" '
SwEee Di At COUPLANT: WATER GLYCERINE O O 20 od nox) O 14 ou (sil INCHES /DIV. SWEEP RATIO SILICONE GREASE O s ou (2xi CAllBRATION SHEET NO. TIME (MILITARY) TEST TEMPERATURE: Reviewed *by Level III Examiners AMBIENT ELEVATED OF SWRI GE LILCO
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
--
C-E a
, \
-
; _
. _ .
.
KL g, .
.
.,
, 2 - Jd
- .
a-n t ~ CF c , t - ~ AE c w - BR
~, -
=~
=
O I
-
]
l
~ T
'
-
- r w
A R KP iil
-
m3 - [' EAM a "., ' h u1,@
$,
"- '
PA o
'ai - s:l I C
[ R LE u e i ' glI P W WEI - d, T O CC I WC SGLC
- NT . - -
UN M p 3 HOO C T TT I A 7 R
- 9 1 / ACA BO -
6 EO R S L O
'c 1
(
,
2 / 22 f1 o H : y ' TP N P
.
s 2 r E MI r
. 1 E E D e ora uAT MI \
n D T 2 i gb & V
- m
_
\
a o^ F - n e "0
.
j E
, 0 W I
_ T O I E o
, E I E S N H O. S E
L l
, S D. N e A
1 K v _ T A F C 2 L e D O IH W y S T _NAC
,
R O T D P E. / V 1 b d S C U e E S w
.
_ L A P A S E 2 i e OO I . . N L v
,
R O O I M S S e N N E N N R O O T E T 2 I T T I
, .
A A A _ M D E W C C
,
O E I D D I E C HS IN N I S R j E E
, A O W L L B B D
_ E A A C T T
. D D R R E
I N N L OO E E
- P P P l E E
,
R R M O
. A N E
S
.
_.
~.
2 OO W E E T T T T E E R R 1 L L A A
-
# P P
-
O
.
T T Y M V S S OO N C C T N N I
- A C N 1
E S L E R S AC
-
H E n- S
.
S T o J 1 O - NN OH T E M f d r W 2 T I G A er
-._ C T N R u -
A A R LE A a s
;
R B P e W T I M T m N L A S E
) - -
O C A E T L ( 3 S
- L C.
.- -. ::: :w. --
. ; .. , ,___ ,_ n . ;_ _, ;- _; ,_ .
,
)
,
- .i .4 ~. . 62 ( , , A1.y . nd i.. .; m. j i
**
Page 13 of 16 WELD SCAN DATA SHEET **"* February 12, 1973
.-'
CONTRACT NO. SEAM, PIECE OR CODE Nu. l.D. O.D.O DATE / / wua! CAllBRATION SHEET NO. SHEET NO. OF - TIME , . t.' n
--- .
. : stawe SEAM LENGTH - '
{{3- -{ ----- - - START END 8 II * "'" ' TEST PARAMETER: INSPECTORS __ .& l ~j *[-] Mf
.,
3---- - START END - .1-l ~ ~2 ~ Z ~ ~~2
*: *(L! measured from: TYPE OF TEST HAZ_ 450 600 L1 *L I2 W1 W W2 MP MP MP DAC X-R FILM NO.
I i TOP CR BOTTOM 101 20 50 100 Max 100 50 20 10 10 20 50 100 ?.iax 100 50 20 10 10 20 50 100 i Max 100 50 20 10 Max CW OR CCW (;, -
.
g
.
I i
,
__ w Reviewed by Lovel III E:'aminers: SwRI SCAN CO?.;PLETE FJO REPORTABLE INDICATIONS GE
"'"
SCAN INCOf/PLETE O nEeDaTAate iNOiCAriONs LILc0
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- --____ _ _ _ _ _ _
g_g
.
..
.
..
-
_
--
.
2 _.
., .
. . ..
7; -
.
..
m
-
7 77 ; o, 73
-
--
a :_. y a a
--
,
.
p L3
,,
-H W -L'- ,
.
3 *
%I i
'
'
,s
$oa 20" m"
_ __ _ g '2'h - l O _ _ _. - Iv - - _ _ . - 1
'
t l , GIRTH gems & Lo
.; ! -
l i i j
-
l
% \.
N . O . WN h / ,f 1 300 - i RN 60
/
) L = DISTAricE FRord O NOZZLE. Posenos A2inuTu on.
!.
\ )
/
-
z4oo N s W=VJEL DisvucE D FROM CMWR N ...,_,>
-
/ izo
, ;
ur=
-_,,.
"
. N-2.4.4.62 (a) r
APPENDIX B 4
. , _
Pcgo 15 of_16 k tu February 12, 1973 gh
-
. nt x
7 k L. g t 2 % < r's I q
'
l
-
'
I
'
- A US s I A $" $OE L' %
[ vu u a 3 90$ 4
- '
+ ~%i I- ,
-
gv
'-
I.
,1 O s ! l* $. 9 L 3 '
%
'.
,
~.m, Q.'Qs..
g.
$ a;m o,mv _., ' ~ i ~7 lh"fy*wg .2 s "
re- R 4. : @ [~R
. .
.
. .
,
. , .s m3 z.
.
i , = l j s e at
'
4 eg m (o v, - , 3 pyg,x =; c- , w - 4 %
- e. 0 g%
9 4 S. 9
- 4 4 %
7'E 'I"*o .__ .. -- o m -- _ . . . . . _ _ . . . . . . . _ _ , o s
.i .
%
aG/g tir_o._r-_,
'
I l~ ,K G V L C f-/ l
; " N-'
- _ _ __. _ _ _ __ _
96 g
'
,
*
; ,
f(o,g
"
" "'~'
y, inen i ' l ' I kO$
- Lg ss i
,
4 o ' N t M w e g '4
. 5 ~10C'l g
-
.S -
5 O, u5i '([s..) $ss g E3
'
s m = i I % , o POg i l g[[
~~
l s g ' - dotw w
. w rner
...
,
$a.fr^ ~~ ~n3ft-T #N ~~l
',q$(?%
~
- e eor-i I
h.e ~
-
! 1
.
l l .yQ u m
~
i -
$
n $
%
r k v . ! , __
.
-, . i
- I .. c ..
;
* '
ll-N-2.4.4,62 (c) , APPENDIX B i~
,
Page 16 of 16 . !
'- April 13, 1973 -
Revision 1 .
;
(s . . p
*
.
' '
. C' 2 70* 180* W C' l' t ..
?
n \ [, \ L
- i-w y pf mi-si,z .
'
,_. 2-312A 4-3f7 '2-3/7 8 '
!' 3. gig
~ *
. / / I \ \ \
c,' . I t,,1 l \ A l
-
y a\ u m4 %
'
.
\' / kc \ kg '
<-
- i. /
5 9I ,
,
<k \ _\
% s
\
.
'
/ 2 3 /c3
'
.
e 1 .-
,
9 *
-
. .
. .
e T '
!. . -l i
b
*
,
'
. \
I
.
l
,,
e
..o..
3
.
, _ , _ . . . . _ . _. . - . - -. s , w. < --
rn --
~- ~
-
' ~ ' ' ' ~ ' ' ' ' ' ' ^ ' '
.- ' '
.
I
..
,
,
2
,
.
i 3 l ? ! 4 8 . h htiNpfgyggg,jgig$.ytss.MUMME .l ylC,,I%,
._. ~ . ... .__ ,
.
. . . . #.1- r... . . .y .- f e.yf
; -.LTR A%oNsC TEST CAL 18 RATION
-/ * - F. * ,8 2. * - S WCSSEL
.+. . TAI.DA R O S.- -. wyguuuu er m r v' rssrL wates Puncen sto PAsLT souAar woTeseQ) sea,oc uNes A
SEE hoTE 5 SEE hoTE 7 CONTACT SC ate AN .sANT aracE: To oc rarr e, au.sr Amo w.LL ' FCF-2tA87.57 - IN TEMPERE W.r SOWGHNES O u al" MowEM(NT [ SANo stMT F4Nis T SE A.tC.E.THAT gA CCErrAstE. (r,AtT st.Att rito set [o) ,g , , , , , ,
-
gI ii .
; l i l
/.
-scases uur stE wofs 7 se.* s.c o.a<. ,.. oc n e m'=(.a.tu s.'.sa. u. ,a .8.^.*..='t"'.
.= ue == - *
. a ir m f ~, , l.
~
; ;
T' F ,{ -v-
, = .=ca
- *..-
s oL af-- 4 .
. .
_ t- i. . s .* _
. . . . . . . .
_
-I
-
.
.
i., ; _.l . , ., ..u.m..e.m. e,.a.
.u n. :: n. .u.,
.u ..
-
- . , , ..
,l e
_4 . i.
- u . .. .
-
I ,.
,
-
, ~.
-
.u, ......u. o, -.na. ,s. -
i t vl ... t .... c,
.,rsatt.u .- . -
c oiA / s u.au nut sum -
.
s - v o.Ao),.o= TA.ts uno.s.n. uu. s -
-
i
, ,,.. ,
2't l
, -p t
.
\ tars.At . A. 3,=,Ao ocrE==..Arion otes s,
.. .. . . . ,, tou .. ,
%,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
c., ii- -
-
-
.
ns t ..cAi. Ao.us
;;;=,
.c..c ...
- m. ..,,,
a co se -
'4 % MlH D D.MSN5 oM - CLAoCaNG S. eM
.
.: ..S. 50 S.E I.ts Ot.t ..n p . ate.es.ll -
** *
""""'"* *
/~cnEAMto otA (6)cAuamFRoH TAstC AT.og FL A1 toTTOM t.otr5
-
800 a T.aos l u aaot6.saa/ /scmsst SEE Nors u ts 7 .2y / ,Nogts. src NOTE G. .g s. una.n. ana nosam. acesm. or as 3.ee to at .u.c. e a s. e to r.nu e. -
-
-
.. cntoLr ,l,o 4 :P s
' 4 i.! :g ir! "* 3. su.ec u=rs ..c e er e=* <aa. unicas -
i G. .do :i
<< . .
.: . .
..r a-,
" = a 'a ~5 '-'a ' *"""' - -
g ik;.e..
-
% .
$'..5 *aa.c'.* w. 5no .a.a'e s
.m e .c.ee,.s. .. < iou ,ua..,.='*u*
. "no . -
i
.
1 soo i
.. t,os. ...
_: c
/, '
9 i ro. ; l . : .~
.
- -
-
.-o 'M, ,. J., i o
.I .e s oo
- ' ;
,-
, . ; l_4.
'
-..______. .i;;;i:
.ah : i E. s Iac i *,
anso.A.cr
- s
.
.-
n : , . g- -
-5 n
.
t $.. .i i
.
. '.' I =>
* .
. C)
*' I III
~3 8o* 8E " .005 MAE o(EP $CRl&C u C ON CONTACT SQRFAC E.
Loc
- e 35 5 sEE HoTC E *
,
- IDENTIFIC METAL STAMP AT6oM .33 p oN T.MHis S.vRFAcE.' g[*_
O .sts o.A DIREAMED HsGe CHARACTERS - arAM SP INFOR M ATsost AS FoLLoWS - - oC T ERM.R.EAO.oet HOLES MADE FRoed r AT stt NOTr 4 - _ CoNTR ACT No '--- M ATL. SPEC. - HOLC 1AMETERS Hr No. - t- aAst McTAi.TNu
'C. g.o,c.D~ g oc3 -
-
Q,fffry o.A o,.g } . x.xx { - x.xx Y W.xt - 300-*00 'e8 - d.oo- 6.00 .250 .25 0:- . U. T CAllBRATION STANDARD $
". oo - e oo _,3 2 .3i2 -
Laoo-.ooo .srs .srs .- - . . . l oVE.t .0 00 4 g. 2t g fh lN9p l C ALO4aw.. w.TN f gf .175 PLUS .04. Foot c EAcw .co sucurutur mE incacA>c in t
.
c-M.ua ozh, . wr.,cs,f.e',; i
; -
_ j e ,,n,,.r.,,.g.u= ==-.... w l vv
- l .3Au. A Josc-eco. -l' .13. .. lC. 7 302.
-..- i i a i a I i .i 4 i i s****""^ l .
- R3 "3 I ! I '
I
. . .
APPENDIX ~C' t t
.
e m .
- d~
A C' APPENDIX D _
- EVALUATION TEAM STATEMENT ON THE DETERMINATION I OF THROUGH-WALL HEIGHT OF CRACK-LIKE REFLECTORS IN '
THICK WALL PRESSURE VESSELS ,- I s The' evaluation team is aware of two methods of. estimating the
/ "
size of reflectors by ultrasonic methods. L
- p. The first of these methods relates size to amplitude. . On occas-
). ' ion this method results in a fair estimate of size if the re- '~ flector in question is a round type such as a hole, pore, or in L some cases a corner reflector, that is, the discontinuity is i p perpendicular to and breaks rhcough the plate surface. The , crack type indications judgeu to be in the Shoreham pressure vessel welds are mid-thickness and therefore do not meet any of these categories. In addition, the indications are not believed
,
to be truly vertical and have jagged interfaces which tend to scatter the sound beam rather than reflecting it all back to the receiving transducer. Therefore, we would not expect to see a
.
L meaningful relationship between amplitude and the through wall height of a crack. Past history on cracks in other vessel welds has shown this statement to be true.
' The second method involves geometrically plotting the orientation I and the size of the reflector via the use of .ef fective beam l' spread, metal path and metal path change as the reflector is i traversed. In this method the metal path (distance from the transducer to 'the reflector) along with the positions of the
, b
.
. O
'
.["* i
, ,, APPENDIX D - Contd N
; t:ltnsducer are' recorded as the reflector is traversed. The
. . effective beam spread is matermined by the same method with
'
the transducer being traversed across a hole in the calibra-T' tion block. A cross sectional plot is then made of the weld l 4 showing the apparent location, orientation and size of the re-
, flector. This is a sound, technical approach; however, insuf-
, ficient destructive correlation has been conducted to establish 4
-
a reliable relationship between these parameters and the through a _w all dimension of the reflector. It is therefore the opinion of 1 the Evaluation Team that until additional correlation is com-
] piled, no numerical through wall values ct;< be assigned to crack-like indications.
..
' i. .
/ Combustion Engineering d'
~
, .
Southwest Research Institute v
, A m Stone and Webster l
( O General Electric
$
a I' ,
. ,'
l t
-
-- .
, , . ..
.
.
-
'.
-p:: . ; ;
,.
-, -
,..
A .' n:
._,
}
,r}. . t d'
.
APPENDIX E
'
5
.t f r *. -? ' LIST OF REFERENCE DOCUMENTS U .(.
- d. 1. ASME B&PV Code Section III 1968 Edition.
- r
- ! 2. ASNT Recommended Practice No.-SNT-TC-1A (196 8 Edition) 3 -- Supplement C, Ultrasonic Testing Method.
1-i} g.
,
'
,
,/" $, \ .
,'
s Y - u?\,
,
. 3
.
.
>L i( '
- i.
. .
N = ;(
- .
,
.
, j s I
-- - ,. -.
.
- . -.
-
.
- t g.
- - ,
.
,
I i . I
<
- /
i
,
i EXHIBIT B
., 's
- Metallurgical Evaluation Team Investigations Regarding Cracking in Nozzle to Shell Welds'
' .
h
\ .
h I a. E-4
.
i lh t P ( i
- l. .
l
.Q . - -
.. , ..-
.
..
"
L r-r,
,
SUMMARY
REPORT -- >- Metallurgical Evaluation Team Investigations
..
., , Regarding UT. Reflectors in Nozzle to Shell Welds ,_ And Proposed Repair Procedures , ,.. L
..
I , p. Prepared for , Long Island Lighting Company " 175 East Old Country Road
- Hicksville, New York 11801
.
I l l l i i This is a joint report prepared by a Metallurgical Team consisting of 1 individuals from: ' Combustion Engineering, Inc. Southwest Research Institute Stone 6 Webster Engineering Corporation General Electric Company ;
, -
_ -_ _ -___ -____ ___ - _______-_-____ 4 ,, .-
*
( .: ~ f'~ I INTRODUCTION ll The Metallurgical- Evaluation Team is composed of representatives from Combustion r
.
, t Engineering, Stone a Webster, Southwest 'Research Institute and General Electric. .
~ ,, This team has the charter to review all of the available fabrication and
- i. metallurgical information applicable to the Shoreham reactor pressure vessel, r which presently is in the fabrication shop. The purpose of this review
'
was, in case a repair of a weld is called for, to provide LILCO with sufficient c' assurance that a successful weld repair could be accomplished. This task
.
force took full advantage of advances in the state of the art technology
- ( from metallurgical investigations conducted by Combustion Engineering on
- ( similar problems in other reactor pressure vessels.
(
- II
SUMMARY
.L The work of the Metallurgical Evaluation Team consisted of:
'
A. A review of the fabrication history of,the reactor pressure vessel 5 with an emphasis on welding and heat treating. B. A review and evaluation of the chemical and mechanical properties
, ,
certificates for the base metals and weld metals that are in: l- 1) Nozzle to shell weld 5-314A. A crack had been previously found in this weld by X-ray during fabrication and had been satisfactorily ll repaired prior to final post weld heat treatment. ~ These records were reviewed to determine any similarities or differences between this
- t
,
weld and those meeting radiographic requirements but containing_ ., ultrasonic reflectors having crack-like characteristics.
- 2) Nozzle to shell weld 13-314C and 13-314D. These welds met all l
radiographic requirements. They have now, however, been evaluated to contain UT reflectors having crack-like characteristics. It should be noted that judgement as to whether or not a U.T. reflector results from a crack or from another type imperfection is presently an experience I 0 _ _ - _
- ,15 '
1:
~.-
- c, .- ,
j x i-
'factsr. Whsre tha jcint svalurtion taam judgsment indicates tha q a
.: U.T. reflector "could be" from a crack, it is termed to be a U.T. 1 reflector having " crack-like characteristics".
- f '
k 'C. A Metallurgical Evaluation Team meeting with the Combustion Engineering, Inc. 7- metallurgical and quality control staff. The purpose for this meeting was
-
to discuss and evaluate Combustion ' Engineering's investigati.ons related I' to nozzle to shell weld cracking. a-
-D. A Metallurgical Evaluation Team meeting with the UT Evaluation Team. ,
,:( , The purpose for this meeting was to discuss the results of the UT
- y. ' investigation and to determine the recommended volume of material to be 4 removed and the area to be repaired.
.I
- 3. As a result of the above work, the Metallurgical Evaluation Team reviewed, it commented upon and subsequently agreed with General Electric repair
't' specification 21A1987. This specification is the summation of the Metallurgical
- r Evaluation Team's recommendation for
es
- 1) The location 4 volume of material to be removed prior to repair welding.
lt 2)- Conservative and practical repair requirements to assure that, when it repairs are made, they will be fully acceptable to Section III as ; well as the original equipment specification. In addition, the repaired nozzles will meet the acceptance standards for UT per Paragraph N-625 ( of the 1968 Summer Addenda of Section III, ASME Boiler and Pressure .,. ij. Vessel Code. 1 III. SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION 't ,, A. Fabrication and metallurgical information regarding welds 5-314A,13-314C ~f and 13-314D in the .LILCO RPV was reviewed by the Team.
- 1. The fabrication sequence used for installing the nozzle into the shell and making the weld. The fabrication history was taken directly 4
. -- - . . .. . . .
r- .
-
. .
.
r 7, i from the shop travelers. 7 ,
- 2. The fabrication methods used during the sequences of installing
+ and welding the three nozzles.
"'
- 3. The materials certification reports for the base materials and f
welo materials. These certificates contained both the mechanical
-
properties and caenical analysis of the materials.
- 4. Welding procedures used for installing the nozzles and for
.f.
,
back-cladding the weld. .r- S. Post-weld heat treating cycles for the welds in question. 3
- 6. In-process and final non-destructive examinations performed i
,
, on the welds. The final non-destructive examinations performed on the base materials including the weld preparations.
! i, , 7, The weld preparation design and fit-up parameters. ( 8. In-process repairs to the welds. s.
, B. Storage and handling procedures for low hydrogen covered electrodes 1 1
( were reviewed. a C. Steps taken by CE, based on their laboratory and manufacturing
- investigations, to reduce the risk of nozzle weld cracks in
( vessels presently in fabrication was reviewed.
$
- l ' D. Review of experience obtained in repair of other vess*1s.
,
IV. FINDINGS ,l A. All the materials associated with welds 5-314A,13-314C and 13-314D have the correct chemistry and met the minimum requirements fer mechanical properties. All the materials and processing reviewed by the team was felt to be satisfactory. No deviations were noted.
.
B.. Subsequent to the completion of all the nozzle to shell welds on the
. .
_ r .
.
.
,.
,- o
- i. Shoreham RPV, a crack was found by radiography by CE in a r, nozzle to shell weld on a similar reactor pressure vessel. The entire weld containing the crack was removed by Combustion Engineering for
. investigation. A CE report of the investigation was presented to the USAEC. Each team member was given a copy of this report. He conclusions
'( on this report were that:
- p3 1) " Hydrogen Delayed Cracking" was considered to be the mechanism most
'
likely responsible for the nozzle crack. I' 2) Maintenance of the correct preheat temperature is the most .t.
,
important parameter in preventing " hydrogen delayed cracking" in the weld. f 3) here was no evidence of hot short cracking (liquation and
'
separation of grain boundaries) or stress relief cracking
'
-(stress rupture due to loss of ductility at stress relief s
temperatures).
'
C. The Metallurgical Team held a meeting with the quality control and
<
metallurgical staffs of Combustion Engineering to discuss the t possible reasons for nozzle to shell weld cracks. f i The Metallurgical Team agreed that on the basis of the metallurgical and metallographic evidence presented in the investigation of B. . ':ove , there was no indication that cracking was due to post-weld heat trer*ing. The
. possibility that cracking may be related to the fact that certain electrodes 4' used in the fabrication of the SNPS-1 RPV were higher in tensile strength than the base metal (but within specification requirements) wts reviewed he 1eam felt that there was no evidence to prove that the probability of nozzle cracking is increased when the tensile strength of the veld metal . '
is greater than the base metal. A discussion was held regarding CE's 9 ._. _ _ _
.. . _ - .
_ l
~' . .
. L, -
' '
e,
- l. conclusions in their AEC report that " hydrogen delayed cracking" was the l r, most'likely mechanism for that nozzle crack.
I D. During the metallurgical analysis an attempt was made to draw certain
. - ',
parallels between the welds with known cracks and the welds in the LILCO ,
- s. i
,
RPV with crack-like' UT reflectors. Manufacturing procedures and
!
- i. sequences of operations were reviewed. Although these were somewhat f similar in nature, a direct correlation of al,1 parameters could not be made
'
to the LILCO vessel. i E. As a result of the discussions in B and C above, the Team agreed on the i
,.
following parameters as likely contributors to delayed cracking. i 1) Preheat temperature and the maintenance of that preheat temperature c durir:g the fabrication cycle. I
- 2) Restraint across and along the weld joint (a factor in all heavy joint
'
welds). s
- 3) Total amount of strain induced into the weld and HAZ during welding
(
, (a factor in all heavy joint welds) .
- 4) The residual hydrogen content of the weld and HAZ.
i F. Aftet evaluating the information gathere.d from the meeting, the review of records and procedures, and the experience gained in repair to other i vessel welds, the Team agreed that a satisfactory repair could be implemented.
;
G. A final review meeting of the Metallurgical Team was aeld to review the results of the ultrasonic examination with the U: Evaluation Team 1 and to define the recommended volume of metal to be removed and repair
<
welded. , The joint UT/ Metallurgical Team meeting resulted in the Metallurgical t Team agreeing on the following recommended extent of repair. il r '
-
.
.
>
- f. .
.. .
>
. _
.
' ~ ~
- 1) Wald 11 314C. Ma cntire circumfarsnes (360 ) of tha wald shall ba' C excavated to a depth of 5-1/2 inches below the OD surface. The l i' groove, for all excavations, shall be a 100 prep on the nozzle side p
; of the weld, a 1/2 prep on the plate side of the weld, a minimum
- v. radius of 1/2 inch and the weld-plate interface shall be at the bottom
;!
3- of the groove. P 2) Weld 13-314D. Two areas of this weld shall be excavated. The first 'i ~ area is between azimuths 1950 to 250". The depth shall be a y. 3-minimum 'of 5 inches below the OD surface. He second area
,_ is between 3500 to 800 . %e -depth shall be a minimum of 4-1/2 inches i
4- below the OD. _ The groove shall be extended out to remove the reflectors that are 3-1/2 inches below the CD surface and 1.2 inches away from [ the original OD weld / plate interface. He same weld prep geometry
'
used for "C" nozzle shall be used for the "D" nozzle.
.
V. CONCLUSIONS s The Metallurgical Team could not determine the exact cause of the earlier I q cracked nozzle weld (5-314A) . This had been found by production ' a radiography and had previously been removed and repaired satisfactorily. ) E ne classification of the crack-like UT reflectors in the other two nozzle welds in the Shoreham Unit #1 reactor pressure vessel is not known.
%e Metallurgical Evaluation Team has recommended practices for removal ,
and repair of specific areas in tl.ese joints. Practices recommended for use in a repair are: A. Minimum preheat temperature of 350 0 F. B. Check the preheat before each pass. C. He bore of the nozzle plugged during preheat to prevent heat losses. D. Moisture content of all low alloy steel covered electrodes required to be a maximum of.40% at the time of weld deposition. s
.E. Visual examination of each layer of weld metal.
j.
. .-. __-
.. . - - - .
._ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-, .
-
.
*
..- ,. .
7
-
F. The weld prep angle increased to 10 on the no::le side and 22-1/2
-
- on the plate side.
,
G. All laminar type indications removed from the weld prep edges to a depth of at least 3/4", repaired, and complete documentation of laminations 7-which go beyond 3/4". t H. Prior to welding, the heat affected :one caused by air are gouging
,
is removed.
; The repair specification is the collective recommendation of the Metallurgical Team of how a repair should be performed on the LILCO-Shoreham Unit #1 reactor pressure vessel. On the basis of experience gained from similar repairs on other vessel no::les using similar repair '-
procedures, it is the Team's opinion that successful repairs can be accomplished utilizing the recommended repair specification. 1 Respectfully submitted he _,4/
-
-- -
n,a JW COMBUSTION ENGINEERING,INC. y Q w:::. SOITTHWEST RESEARCH INSTIT'JTE T W Q 1
# STONE 6 WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORP.
V' nnh
-
k_r 2N_f GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY sw .
.
-
f, i. =
,
4 +
.,
5
&
e I
-- %
J' f EXHIBIT C WELD REPAIR PROGRAM t i i . s _ 1
*
.
e
.
. ._ .
.
,-- .,
, ~ .'
'
s
.L
-,
- 1. .
;n , i. .-
i[.
.
Y~ WELD REPAIR PROGRAM 1t
,
. , - C0llTENTS
. .
',- -
I. ' Introduction j' ' . . . II.- . Quality Assurance Program ); ' III. " Reactor Pressure Vessel Rework Repair Specification," Document No. , 21A1987 Rev. 1 General Electric Co., May 10, 1973
.
t t .
,
.f
*
,
. .
1 i e T I
', -
- l. '
I __ _ . _ _ _ . _
i: . :..
*
'I Ni.' . .
' ~ '
I. . Introduction
't .'
The following program defines the engineering, manufacturing and quality
-- assurance requirements for effecting repair of the nozzle to shell velds of
!
'
the Shoreham Unit 1 Reactor Pressure Vessel. 1 The engineering and manufacturing requirements are based upon the experiences {' t.' of General Electric Co. in repairing defects of a similar nature on other reactor pressure vessels. These requirements have also been reviewed by members of the Metallurgical Evaluation Team. f-
.
- 7. .
e- . i
- S k
..
't .
.
,
,
.k i
p e
.
~
. .
. .-
l
' MANAGEMENT AND QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM FOR THE REPAIR OF N0ZZLE WELDS ON THE p ,- SHOREKAM REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL ,- .
]
'
.The Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO), its Architect-Engineer, Stone &
Webster Engineering Corporation, the NSS Supplier, General Electric Company, y, and the reactor pressure vessel fabricator, Combustion Engineering, have established Quality Assurance Programs to assure full compliance with the - 18 point criteria-delineated in Appendix B to 10CFR50. This repair program
'
is to be managed utilizing the Quality Assurance Programs and organizational j' relationships which existed during fabrication since the vessel has not been 3_ hydrostatically tested or "N" stamped.
- " LILCO has also ret'ained' Southwest Research Institute (SWRI) to provide
'j ~ consultation and the witnessing of shop repairs. SWRI participated in the review of rework procedures and will maintain 100% shop coverage during the
,. layout of the excavation zones, excavation, revelding and heat treatment. ! '
The organizational relationships of the various parties for management and Quality Assurance of this work are shown in Figure No. 1 attached. i
- { Consistent with contractual and previous working agreement, GE-APED vill assume the responsibility for the repair program. Coordination and manage-
,~ ment direction vill be the responsibility of the GE Shoreham Project Manager. ! Technical direction of the repair vill be the responsibility of the R~eactor 4
Design Engineering Group within APED. The GE Resident Purchasing Representa-
,
tive serves as a liaison between APED and Combustion Engineering. The APED Quality Control organization vill audit, monitor, and in some cases, witness
. the repair. General Electric Company presently has a full time Resident QC representative at the Combustion Engineering, Chattanooga works who vill be used for surveillance of this repair.
Separate, independent audits will be performed by LILCO and S&W utilizing a system of' mandatory Hold Points as shown in the table of Hold Points attached.
'
The primary objective of the Quality Assurance Program is to insure that the
'
repair is conducted in full confor=ance with the specifications and drawings developed specifically for this program. The following specifications and t - doeurents vill apply: ' GE Specification 21A92h2, Revision 0 GE Specification 21A9242AD Data Sheet, Revision 6 GE Repair Specification 21A1987, Revision 1 GE OC Plan 209, Revision 5 Q ASME Section III 1965 Addition through Winter 1966 Addenda,, i and Article h, Appendix I, II, IX, and X of Section III, 1968 Edition, through Summer 1968 Addenda.
, -Table of Hold Points, Shoreham Reactor Pressure Vessel ; Nozzle Weld Repair ,,
b i
.
k
.
__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ .
;--
i..
., ,
,
g, . . 2
,,, \
Combustion Engineering vill carry out the veld repairs based upon detailed
-
Combustion Engineering shop procedures which implement GE-APED Specifica-Ltion 21A1987, Revision 1 and referenced documents. The Combustion Engineering ( Quality Control Organization vill control-the repair operation utilizing their
, QC System /QA Manual which complies with the 1971 edition of the ASME Code Section III. This Manual was approved by the ASME "N" Stamp Committee as
~~
recently as April-1972. . GE QC has also reviewed and concurred with the Combustion Engineering QA Program. r-
..
.
,
6 ( 1
,.
i
.
- a
,-
II
'
e
!
A l i
.
I
,
f.
.
_ - - _ _______ _ _ _ . _
.
.
. ?
,, TABLE OP HOLD POINTS i
>
SHOREHAM N0ZZLE WELD REPAIRS G.E. LILCO/S&W L
~
- 1. Preparation of Nozzles 13-31h C&D for Repair
.
- a. Inspect etching and veld prep per drawing Hp r- b. MT final surfaces of all cavities in recir-Hp
(" c. culation inlet nozzles per procedure UT areas around cavities per procedure Hp Hp Ep .
'
- 2. Repair of Nozzle Welds 13-314 C&D
- a. Hot M.T. Laminar repairs per procedure Hp Hp
?
- b. Hot UT complete seam per procedure (from f vessel OD) Hp Hp
- c. MT & UT repair cycle. Hold heat. Hp r d. Hot MT areas repaired per procedure Hp l e. Hot UT complete seam per procedure Hp
'
- f. MT and UT repair cycle. Hold heat Hp Hp
'
- 3. Final Heat Treat
?*
- a. Review furnace charts and release furnace operation Sign Off Hp
[ b. P.T. repair cycle
- c. Review film and release Sign Off Hp
- d. MT complete circumference of two recir-
'
culation inlet nozzle veld seams 13-31h C&D per procedure Ep Hp
- e. UT complete circumference of two recircu-I, lation inlet nozzle veld seams 13-31h C&D L per procedure Hp Hp
. h. Replace nozzle safe ends and internal attachments i
- a. P.T. Weld preps for attachments Fp
- b. P.T. repair cycle Hp
- c. PT velds per procedure for the following
, velds: Ep
- 1. Two jet pump nozzle to safe end velds 3p c 2. Two recirculation inlet nozzle to safe i end welds Hp
- 3. Three surveillance specimen brackets Hp
}. h. One C.D.P. coupling Hp i- 5 . Repair cycles, any of above Hp
- d. UT safe end velds par procedure Hp Hp
- e. . Review film Hp Ep
- f. UT and RT repair cycle. Review film Hp j
- g. Release GE Sign Off Hp* i
> \
*To-include audit of documentation l i
l j
.
.~ J
-
-- ., _ _ _ _ ~y- ~ , . - .__.,- ~ . . _ . ,_.; c . _ , ~ . - - ~# ~_,
y , -- ; _,
,
__
,
. . . . - . ., > t a
.
4
.
' STONE & WEBSTER GENERAL ELECTRIC g ,8,U EERING
-
ENG ING -- = _ . - ___ VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT g I I . I LILCO G. E. C.E. SEW MANAGER-NUCLEAR l Q.A. MANAGER Q.A. MANAGER . Q. A. MANACER PROJECTS l l l U LCO l LILCO S E.- APED C. E . S&W PROJECT QA. MANAGER Q.A. O C. R Q.C. l I I l l S&W , l LILCO
+ PROJECT ,
1 QA. STAFF . _y i l l l l G. E. SOUTH WEST GENERAL ELECTRIC l RESI NT PROJECT l RESEARCH INSTITUTE I G.E. g REACTOR DESIGN G E. l PURCHASING l l l l l C0eA8USTION ENGINEERING g COMBUSTION ENGINEERING CHATTANOOGA WORKS I CHATTANOOGA WORKS I I 1 -
-
l I I QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM M ANAGEMENT l QU ALITY CONTROL FOR VESSEL REPAIR I . SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 I
'
UMG ELAMD un'SMG COW %NY l .%,
.- - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
rOENERAL( lELECTRIC
't t .
'
.-
NUCLEAR ENERGY DIVISION DocumInt No. 21A1987 Rnv. 1 m , - > ,,, ,, f General Electric Class
- .
_) , . ~ . > TRANSMITTAL - --
.
.( ,,c.,....
~
1
.
.
'
'
0 . PROJECT (S)
'
" i;
, ., ,
'
*
,_, REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL N07.ZLE REWORK , u ,, . .g ,
C , ' p' . . .
. , .
TYPE OF [] PURCHASE' SPECIFICATION REPLACES
- r. DOCUMENT:[] SYSTEM DESIGN SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT NO.
) [] INSTALLATION SPECIFICATION '
[h] REPAIR SPECIFICATION
'
*
[ PIPING OR COOLING SYSTEM INVOLVED ( RESPONSIBLE ENGINEER GR SCHMIDT ISSUED nY ' MP REZOS DATLJUN 131973 5I -( REFERENCES y MASTER PARTS LIST (MPL) NOS. (S) B11-A001
SPECIFICATIONS
~
DRAWINGS ! OTHER kA r 1 y REVISION RECORD REVISED PER (ECA, ECN, ETC.) *iCN NE 34250 f SHEETS AFFECTED 6,7,11.,.& 15 REVISION IDENTIFIED WITH /' ,
'
'- COMMENTS:
.
< DISTRTRUTION
!
L NAME MAIL CODE COPIES NAME MAIL CODE COPIES-
. ',; '
GR SCllMIDT 743 1 PH GREGORY 717 1 PR03 LO 'G ISLAND L LGHTING TOTAL 11+2R ES1
/
{ ENGINEERL.NG AB01 [Rootg j.Cnt. File 366 uo DA J 4 TOTAL 08 Blakley 399 1 i 354 i Hamilton 399 1 595 LIB i PCF ECN -1 711 l' 722D 1
} 742 1-Moe l l 742 3-DCC i i
I
'
f'
,
L
*
.
I s
. 10/4/68
l
; -. .
!*
'
'
REVISION STATUS SHEET
-
i 21A1987
'{- 1~
'
DOCUMENT NO. REV' GENER AL h ELECTRIC O IC 10N NUCLEAR ENERGY DIVISIO N MPL#: Sub to Bil-A001 r,
@ SPECIFICATION DRAWING 007ggg 7ypg Repair Specification
.
e-DOCUMENT TIT .E REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL N0ZZLE REUORK
~'
LEGEND:
,.
'n
'( , EIS IDENTIFICATION: RPV N0Z REWORK
+
.< .
R EYl510NS lC f, O Control Issue
- 1
-( l Per ECN NE 34250. Sheets 7, 6, 11, l (, ' 15 affeeted. Revisions identifie W tii h a spade (t)). j
,
[f(pcRw.t(Mi.2.6% Z.3 i
'
pfd 6-/3--73131973 JUN q iL ; '$
- (,
c. f
$
(
"
. i ' 1, I ., f
.
f !
.. d l 4
'
- i. DESCRIPTION OF GROUPS PRINTS TO u2os " " '5 UE IIAUSER,, g.,
,
o g,,,
'
GR SCllMIDT
'
osua o ' 2 1 MAY 101973 - t o c a tio~ co~t o~s~rer $~ ~ o-m s3 m -
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
7.. ' U -
'
GENER AL h ELECTRIC ATOMIC POWER EQUIPMENT DEPARTMENT
.
******' l l987 """'l mt REPAIR SPECIFICATION '"'aa. 2 tmt C~ virus
(. ' REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL N0ZZLE REWORK __
"
r t
- l. SCOPE 5(- , ~1.1 The following defines the engineering requirements for the removal of ultra-sonic reflectors detected in nozzle to shell attaching welds and subsequent rework
,-
of the reactor pressure vessel. h 1.2 The work is to be performed at t. Seller's plant with the vessel in the horizontal position.
,-
l
'
- 2. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS, CODES, AND STANDARDS
-,,
1 2.1 General Electric Company Documents
'
2.1.1 Work in connection with this rework is to be performed in accordance with the provisions of this specification. The performance of such work, however, (; shall not be inconsistent with or violate the requirements of Specification 21A9242AD. 2.2 Codes and Standards
.. a. American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler
] and Pressure Vessel Code. (1) ASME Section III - Nuclear Vessels.
/ } 2.3 Other Doctr2ents \- ,. a. Combustion Engineering Drawings and Procedures. -
E-234-260 and E-234-261.
.
( (1) ! (2) cpcc N-2.4.4 62 (a). {t 1
.
!
,
J (.
;
.
4 j-
,
r~ -. =
"
b GENER Alb ELECTRIC H ATCMIC POWER EQUIPMENT DEPARTMENT
>
.. c. .. 21A1987 r.. . 1 n ac ... 3 .
r-
-
L
-
,
- 3. DESCRIPTION
'
_; 3.1 This specification delineates the codes to be met, .the requirements for the. rework and the records to be accumulated. 4.
-
REQUIREMENTS
'4.1 Codes and' Applicable Documents 4.1.1 All repairs shall be in accordance with ASME Section III, 21A9242AD, Rev. 6, and this specification. The applicable code addenda is specified in Specification 21A9242AD, Rev. 6. In the case where there is a conflict between these documents, this situation shall be brought to the Buyer's attention for resolution. - ,
4.2 Removal of Reflectors
, 4.2.1 The welds to be excavated and repaired are nozzle to shell welds 13-314C ; and 13-314D. '
4.2.2 The final excavations of these welds shall be as follows: 13-314C, excavate the entire circumference of the weld to a minimum depth of 5.5 inches below the 0.D. (The interface between the plate and weld shall be at the bottom of the excavation.) 13-314D requires two excavations. One shall be between 195 degrees and 250 degrees l with a minimum depth of 5 inches below the O.D. surface. The second area is between [ 350 degrees to 80 degrees. The depth shall be a minimum of 4.5 inches below the 0.D. surface. The second excavation shall be extended out to remove the reflectors that
, are 3.5 inches below the O.D. surface and 1.2 inches away from the original weld / plate j interface. The weld / plate interface shall be at the bottom of both excavations.
6 4.2.3 The excavation shall be by grinding, chipping or air-are gouging. { : (
!
i 1 1 f
.
l
.
*
;- . .
'
I GENER AL h ELECTRIC
-.
" ATCMIC POWER EQUIPMENT DEPARTMENT .
' 21A1987
,, c e. ~ o. ...,..1
[ e...... 4 r (
,.,. 4.2.4 If a reflector is to be removed by air-are gouging, the following require-1 ments shall apply:
(.
-
- a. The area shall be preheated to a minimum of 300*F.
h b. The minimum area to be preheated for air-are gouging shall
' meet the requirements of Paragraph 6.2.6.1- (c) of 21A9242.
p c. At the conclusion ' of air-are gouging, the preheat may be lowered { slowly to room temperature.
- d. The maximum interpass temperature during air-are gouging shall
~ not exceed 500*F. Both the minimum preheat and maximum inter-f pass temperature shall be checked during gouging,
- e. The air-arc surface shall be chipped or ground to remove a
'
minimum of 0.13 inches. Care shall be taken to assure that _ all the surfaces have adequate (0.13 inches) of material removed. Include all areas where local gouging is below the general surface of the groove. [ ( 4.2.5 As an alternate to the local excavation, the entire weld may be removed by thermal cutting. The cutting shall be planned such that the volume of metal that j contains the questionable Ultrasonic reflectors are left intact.
.
4.3 Preparation of the E.xcavation
,i
(' 4.3.1 The sides, ends, and bottom of the groove shall be ground smooth.
; 4.3.2 The transition from the bottom to the ends and sides of the groove shall ;, have a 0.5 inch minimum radius. , 4.3.3 The sides of the groove'shall have a minimu.s angle of 10 degrees from the ; vartical on the forging side and 22-1/2 degrees on the plate side.
( 4.3.4 The ends of the groove shall have a minimum angle of 30 degrees from the ( vertical. ( ., 4.3.5 The intersection of the sides and ends of the groove shall have a 0.5 inch j minimum radius.
! '
4.3.6 The weld metal / plate interface shall be at the bottom of the groove, i _ i i l'
\
f. a
. _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _
~
.
.
,,
'
t - GENERAL (s >?ELECTRIC ATCMIC POWER EQUIPMENT DEPARTMENT [~ ..c.~o. 21A1987 .....1
'
naa no. 5
,_ .
-
t ' 4.3.7 Af ter the groove has been finally prepared and has passed all the required , . _ non-destructive examinations, the excavation shall be mapped. The map shall locate tha excavation to a permanent RPV feature. The map shall be of sufficient detail
.
co that the location, length, vidth, and depth of each excava~ ion t is known and racorded, e n ( 4.4 Non-Destructive Examination > 4.4.1 The excavation layouts are based on Ultrasonic Test data. After the question- } ( able material has been removed per Paragraph 4.2, and prepared per Paragraph 4.3, the I gr:ove shall be magnetic particle examined. The magnetic particle examination , cpplies to both the general surfaces of the groove and any area where laminations
;
have been removed. When the groove meets the acceptance standards for MT, .the area ' cround the excavation shall be UT examined. Both 45 and 60 degrees angle beams shall ba used. If additional unacceptable UT reflectors are found, excavating shall be i centinued until they are removed. The final surface shall be MT examined. f 4.4.2 During the welding, each layer of weld shall be visually examined by a certi-( fird quality control inspector or a welding engineer. Undercut shall be removed. l The beads shall merge smoothly into the walls of the groove. The visual examination shall be performed with the aid of a high intensity light. A written visual inspec-
,
tion record is not required for this in-process examination. I , 4.4.3 At the conclusion of all welding, the final surface shall be MT examined. l
,
(Hot). Also, the entire nozzle to shell weld shall be given a hot UT examination. i All indications requiring repair pursuant to the applicable ASME Code or this { sptcification shall be repaired prior to the final post weld heat treatment. { 4.4.4 Subsequent to the final post weld heat treatment, the entire nozzle to r' chall weld shall be MT, UT, and RT examined. The examinations and any repairs chill be in accordance with the applicable ASME Code and this specification. ( ! ! I t i i
.
w
'
"
'GENER AL h ELECTRIC ATCMIC POWER EQUIPMENT DEPARTMENT
[ i c e. ~o. 21A1987 e v. ~o.1
. . . . . . 6 p .
,
i
\
S 4.4.5 All ultrasonic examinations shall be in accordance with Combustion' Engineer-ing Specification N-2.4.4.62 (a) . All ultrasonic indications that exceed the accept-
'
ance requirements of ASME Section III, Paragraph N-625 -(1968 edition through the Summer 1968 Addenda) shall be repaired. This applies to both the hot and cold Ultra- .,s sonic examination. The Seller shall caly be responsible for meeting these U.T. j requirements for the weld metal and HAZ defined by the map required in Paragraph
'
4.3.7.
~ -
- a. For the hot ultrasonic examination, the same procedure shall be used I except that a high temperature couplant shall be used. The calibra-tion block shall also be heated to the same temperature as the RPV.
- ,[ Aftet 20 minutes of contact, the sensitivity of the transducer shall
'( be verified on the calibration block. The sensitivity of the trans-ducer shall also be verified after any cool down period. If, during ' 7 the verification, the amplitude is not within + 2 db. of th< D.A.C. j curve, all the area examined since the last verification shall be reexamined.
,
1 4.4.6 Magnetic particle examination shall be by the prod method prior to PWHT and i the yoke method af ter the final post veld heat treatment. During the MT examina-tion of the excavation, all laminar indications, no matter what their length shall J' be repaired. The repair of these laminations - shall be in accordance with Para-graph 4.5.5. j 4.5 Miscellaneous Fabrication Recuirements 4.5.1 Arc strikes (or prod marks) on the RPV shall be disposed of in the follow-
,
ing manner. I t
- a. Stainless steel and nickel-chrome iron alloys. Grind the surface to be visibly clear of the arc strike. Liquid penetrant examine f
?
the final surface. 4
- b. Carbon and low alloy steels. Areas that will be post weld heat treated shall be ground to remove all visible evidence of the
( arc s trike. The area shall be liquid penetrant or magnetic par-
! ticle examined. For areas that have received a final post weld heat treatment, the following steps shall be taken.
(1) Grind to remove all evidence of the arc s trike. (2) Etch the area with a fresh solution of 10 percent ammcaiu:a persulfate in water (or Buyer approved equal). Any remaining 4
;
heat affected zone shall etch as a dark spot, line or circle. (3) Etch and polish to remove the heat af fected zone. (4) Magnetic particle or liquid penetrant examined the final sur-face.
' (5) An are strike removal procedure shall be prepared and qualified.
4 This procedure shall specify the allowable method (s) of applying the etchant, the minimum etchant application times based on various base metal temperatures and methods of post cleaning. '
r . .
'
- Ii ,
GENER AL h ELECTHIC
, , , ATCMIC POWER EQUIPMENT DEPARTMENT - ) s.a c . ~ o. 21A1987 acv. ~o. 1
- j. Pa s s ~o, 7
F i L. i 4.5.1 (Continued)
~
- c. Wall thickness. Minimum wall requirements on drawing shall be
-
checked prior to are strike removal. Suitable precautions shall c be imposed to ensure that the minimum thickness remains af ter arc l strike removal. !, () 4.5.2 Cleaning
.
s a. All the requirements of Specification 21A9242 AD are in' ef fect. , b. Any paint on the RPV shall be removed by sand blasting or l' polishing prior to post weld heat treating. If the RPV is !. given a local stress relief, only the paint in the area heated above 550*F need be removed. ( 4.5.3 All structural and pressure retaining cast or wrought austenitic stainless steel shall not be subjected to heating above 800*F. If any of the above material will be subjected to temperatures exceeding 800*F, these materials shall be removed,
,
and replaced af ter the heating operation.
, 4.5.3.1 Structural austenitic stainless steel weld metal may be subjected to heat- ,
ing above 800*F if it can be demonstrated that the weld metal contains a minimum of ' 7 percent ferrite before the heating operation or 5 percent ferrite af ter the heat-ing operation. The ferrite content may be determined by chemical analysis (only l for the 7 percent determination) metallography or a magnetic method. 4.5.4 If any stainless steel is to be removed, a detailed removal procedure ( shall be prepared. The procedures shall control the removal such that a minimum ( of 0.19 inch of austenitic weld material re ' ins over the low alloy or carbon steel af ter a part or weld is removed. If the thickness is less than 0.19 inch,
, APED shall be notified. A special procedure shall be qualified and used to pre-vent the heat affected zone from going into the low alloy or carbon steel during re-ins tallation -f the stainless s teel.
I L ,
-
_ . _ _
7, .
.
.
-
. . n 4 G E N E R A L () E LE CTR IC 7 ATCMIC POWER EQUIPMENT DEPARTMENT
. ,. c c . ~ o. 21A1987 .c....1 4
n or = 2.
- . .
8
,-
,
f
, ,_
4.5.5 Repair of Plate Laminations in the Excavation (Weld Prep) , I, a. All laminar type indications on the weld prep surfa.ce shall be removed by grinding. The laminations shall be removed for at p least 0.75 inch into the plate. If the laminar indications t still exist, these indications shall be recorded as to their azimuth, depth into the plate, depth below the plate 0.D. sur-
~ face and length. The resultant cavity shall be repaired as follows: '
(1) The cavity resulting from the grinding shall '>e
,
,
MT examined and then repair welded. This repair
.
weld shall be done prior to the welding of the \ excavation. (2) The repair welding of the cavity shall be done j using the same preheat and welding pra edure as for the excavation.
'
(3) When the cavity has been welded, it shall be ground smooth. The final surface shall be MT examined. (4) If the repair of the cavity meets the MT acceptance standards, the repair welding of the excavation may proceed.
, (5) As an alternate, the cavity may be welded up con-currently, with the repair weld, if the lamination -
is completely removed and the local grindout can be contoured to a minimum slope of 3:1. t 4 4.5.6 The radiography and the ultrasonic examination of the final repair shall include the repair of any laminations. 1 4.6 Preheat , 4.6.1 For P12B and P3 base materials, the preheat temperature shall be 350*F minimum. The preheat shall be maintaic.3d until the start of post weld heat
'
k treatment. This paragraph supercedes the minimum temperature required in Para-graph 6.2.6 of 21A9242. The minimum extent of the area to be preheated shall
; meet Paragraph 6.2.6.1(c) of 21A9242.
.
.
4
_ _ _ _ _ .. __
.
GENER AL $ ELECTRIC - ATCMIC POWER EQUtPMENT DEPARTMENT
..ce. .. 21A1987 ,,,,,,,,,1 nan na. 9 ,
4 4.6.2 - control of Preheat. The preheat temperature shall be measured using a con-tact method such as temperature indicating crayons or contact pyrometers. Indirect l' temperature measuring methods are not acceptable at discances greater than 6 inches. f, For weldments that must avait post-weld heat treatment for longer than one hour, a low preheat alarm must be used. This must be an alarm that uses light or sound to show when the preheat is low. A preheat procedure shall be instituted that specifies
'(1) the heat source, (2) location of heating unit, (3) maximum and minimum distance of heating source from the material and weld joint, (4) location of air baffles, (5) maximum and minimum metal temperature during welding, (6) low heat alarm system, (7) temperature determination method and equipment, (8) audit freque'ncy, and (9) audit records. In addition to the normal shop QA checks, during welding, the weldor shall check the preheat temperature prior to depositing each bead. Both the minimum and maximum temperature shall be checked.
4.6.3 Whenever a nozzle is under preheat, the bore of the nozzle shall be plugged ' with non-flammable material. The plugs shall be tight enough to stop the movement of hot air through the nozzle bore. , 4.6.4 Once the vessel has been preheated and weld. lug kne started, the preheat shall not be allowed to drop below 350*F.
- a. If preheat falls below 350*F but is above 300*F, the following shall be done. All welding shall stop. The preheat shall be raised to the required temperature. The weld shall be ground smooth, then given a MT examination and a close visual examination with the aid of a high intensity light,
- b. If the preheat temperature falls below 300*F, all welding shall stop.
The preheat temperature shall be raised. The entire weld shall be removed. The excavation shall be returned to its original dimensions plus an additional 0.250 inch to remove the heat affected zone. The requirements of Paragraphs 4.2.j4.3 and 4.4 shall apply to this removal operation. 4.7 Welding 4.7.1 All nozzle to shell welds shall be performed in the flat position (lG). Out of position welding may be allowed under specific circumstances. The submittal of c welding procedure for out of position welding, shall be the method for request-ing approval. 4.7.2 If the reflectors are removed by cutting the entire vcid from the vessel, the repair weld shall be made from inside the RPV.
.
r*, .. i b G E N E RsaA L k') E LE CT R I C ,
!
g
'
y, ATCMIC POWER EQUIPMENT DEPARTMENT
'
l ..cc.... 21A1987 . c v. ~ o. I t n o . ... 10
!~ .
b 4.7.3 Care of Electrodes and Fluxes. All electrodes, bare filler wire, and fluxes !r shall be stored and cared for so as to prevent pickup of moisture and other contami- '(, nants. Active fluxes shall be processed to avoid segregation within acceptable limits
.
of alloys and particle sizes. All low alloy covered electrodes must be controlled 7 such that a maximum moisture content of the coating at the time of deposition does not exceed the requirements of ASME Section II, SFA-5.5. A procedure for receiving,
'
storing, issuing, using, returning, reprocessing, 'and disposal of electrodes shall
. be instituted for shop usage.
-, 4.8 Post Weld Heat Treating
, ,
r 4.8.1 At the conclusion of all welding and in-process examinations, the welds shall .;, be post weld heat treated. The post weld heat treating shall be in accordance with Section III of the ASME Code, and the applicable GE specification. l( ~ ' 4.8.2 The procedure for heat treating shall require two separate systems for supply-ing fuel or electrical energy to the furnace. If there is a loss of "off-site" ener-4_ gy or fuel, the back up supply shall have sufficient capacity to allow the Reactor Pressure Vessel to be cooled at a controlled, acceptable rate. Both the fuel or ener-i gy reserve capacity and the cooling rate shall be determined by the Seller. The cool-
,
a ing rate shall be justified by the thermal analysis,
,
4.8.3 The procedure for the Post Weld Heat Treating shall be specific as to a) the number and location of the thermocouples to be used, b) the heatup rate, c) the cooling
-
rate, d) the maximum gradients in the RPV uall in the axial direction, e) the maximum
' .
gradient between the RPV wall and the shroud support gussets, shelf and cylinder, f) gradients through the nozzles, g) holding time at the heat treating temperature, and h) allowable temperature range. t 4.8.4 Inters tage Stress Relief. If interstage. stress relief is planned using a local furnace, the requirements of Paragraph 4.8.2 and 4.8.3 shall apply. d . i 4.9 Therrol Analysis * ( 4.9.1 Extent of thermal analysis shall be outlined by Seller for Buyer approval g so as to accomplish the following objectives:
- a. Assure that no harmful gradient will be created during the i
stress relief and any other significant heating operations. a
- b. Assure that the gradients in and around the shroud .:upport will g not result in a permanent distortion which would cause the
-[ shroud support cylinder, jet pu=p adapter weld preps, or CRD stub tubes to exceed original specification requirements (dimen-
,
sional).
.
All thermal analyses required for the above shall require Buyer approval prior to actual heating operations.
- p
(
. . _ . . . - . ._
r, ,. .
,
'
.
f I ,J
.
G EN ER A L..(--) ELECTRIC r- ATCMIC POWER EQUIPMENT DEPARTMENT l
. ..c c = o. 21A1987 " < w. a o- 1
- 4 paea no, 11 ;
F . , l
;. - <
p 4.10 As-Built Dimensions
"
()4.10.1 Seller shall prepare a drawing with tables for the reporting of as-built
..
.
dimensions to be submitted initially for approval of format and completeness and later resubmitted as certified with data filled in to the tables. The as-built
$- ?
data shall be taken prior to any heating operation. Particular items to be in-cluded in the drawing are: I s a. Shroud Support Cylinder - see Figure 1
,
- b. Jet Pump Adapter Weld Prep - see Figure 1
(
- c. Deleted
- d. Deleted I
- e. Support Skirt Flange shall be reported in format used on original
'- as-built drawing.
r f. Deleted d d 8 Deleted
~
l
'
.
i i h. Vessel Centerline datum -A- shall be relocated with respect to the scribe f lines on the vessel flange and the shroud support cylinder. S
.
- 1. CRD Stub Tube - A representative sarple not to be less than 20 nozzles i to be determined by the Buyer shall be measured and reported. The for-mat used on CE Drawing E-234-261 would be acceptable. If it can be f adequately demonstrated to the Buyer's satisfaction that no distortion L of the bottom head penetrations has occurred, they need not be "as-built."
- j. For nozzle positions; see Figure 2.
i e i . i
.
\
l
,
e >Y r
*
,
. .-
'
.3 GENER AL C ELECTRIC j
,, ATCMIC POWER ECUIPMENT DEPARTMENT se c c. =o. 21A1987 = a v. ~ o. 1 5
" " "*- 12 -
.
l 4.11 Submittal Requirements (For Approval by the Buyer) r ( 4.11.1 Procedures
- a. Procedures submitted by the Seller and approved by the Buyer I,
are one of several types of process documents used by the L Seller to guide shop operations. The Buyer transmits these documents to their u,tility/ customer for information. If the
' ~
Seller wishes to change a shop operation covered by a pro-cedure, this procedure shall be revised and resubmitted for
'
approval. A revision shall be made even if the change does
, not deviate from code or specification requirements.
- b. During fabrication, if ,peration deviates from the approved procedure, but is not a deviation from the contract require- -
ments, it shall be reported for information c nly. A revision
'
of the procedure as a result of this deviation is not required unless the deviation will be used in future operations. 4.11.2 Drawings. A drawing shall be made that shows:
,
- a. The location of the reflectors to'he removed.
- b. Specifies the procedures to be used , remove the reflectors, examine the excavation, weld the excavation, examine the weld, heat treat the weld and examine the final rework.
,
- c. During f abrication, the drawing shall be revised to define the location and size of the final excavations.
,
4.11.3 Integrated Manufacturing Plan. This plan shall define the step by step operations that will be required to accomplish the repairs. This plan shall list the procedures that will be used to accomplish each operation. The plan shall be l prepared for each weld. The approved plan shall also be used to establish formal j witness and audt points. These points shall be incorporated into the shop trav-clers in order to give the GE-QA representative prior notification of planned in-spections.
'
4.11.4 Thermal and Stress Analysis 4.11.5 Welding Procedures . 4.11.6 Electrode Storage and Control Procedures 4.11.7 Preheat and Post Weld Heat Treating Procedures , 4.11.8 Non-Destructive Examination Procedures l . 4 1
__ - - _ - _
,: '-
_. -..
,, . .
e
.; GEN ER AL w.DO ELECTRIC ATCMIC POWER EQUIPMENT DEPARTMENT '
'
.
' I s c c. . . 21A1987 cv. ..
u ...c... 13 rj , 4.11.9 Procedures for Mapping and Lo'cating the Excavation
,,
v 4.11.10 Dimensional Check Procedure
,. 4.11.11 The N-1 form shall reflect the correct base metals, and all cther changes that are the result of the repair.
4.11.12 List of records and documents related to this major rework that are to be maintained for the life of the vessel. 4.11.13 Arc Strike Removal Procedure
; )
4.11.14 Etching Procedure
,
t 4 9 9 1
. _ . .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-.
'
t . GENER AL h ELECTRIC r- ATCMIC PODED EQUIPMENT DEPARTMENT se sc. =o. 21 A1987 = c v. = c. 1 ' ra o s ... 14 7
'
l f
-
R ' (- TO VESSR". REPORT "R" AND "T"
- CENTERLINE -A- AT O*, 30'. . .330* -
12 LOCATIONS TOTAL T (~ .
- s L
3+
~
l REPORT "S" S AT 0*, 90', N / f 180', 270'
%
i U TO ELEV r
"0" L
, e
.
t
,
SilROUD SUPPORT "AS-BUILTS" FIGURE 1 - t
__ ._ -_--. . - . _ .- . _ _ . ,
"
GEN ER AL h ELECTRIC l I- r ATCMIC POWER EQUIPMENT DEPARTMENT se re. wo. 21A1987 .co. o. 1 e... a o. 15 . Fin al
- p,
-
Place reference marks on the vecsel shell and nozzle at o', 90*, 180*, and 270*. Record dimension "D" at these locations.
-
sa ( O'
- -
.
'
(
'.
(
.
y '
- -
u i i f F r , l
,
h
-
i l 1 l 1
- l i
i I N0ZZLE POSITION h FIGURE 2 Check for shifting nozzle cente-line with respect to vessel OD at outer end of the ;
,
nozzle on all' nozzles that will 'ue* heated' a'uove 550*F.
' ,
. .
.
.f~~
,
.
. . , _
- t
,
f' t EXHIBIT D
,
" REPORT OF EXM4INATION FXCAVATION PROGRAM FOR VERIFICATION OF REPORTED CRACK-LIKE
; ULTRASONIC REFLECTORS" REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF WELD REPAIR
, PROGRAM PROCEDURES AND SPECIFICATIONS
.
SHOP AUDITING FUNCTIONS DURING WELD REPAIR PROGPR4 1 1
- i 4
,
,, e--
_
* ; r, ~.
i
- 4 .. ,.
-
1
- [' ,
- i EXAMINA' ION EXCAVATION, REPAIR, ' AND AUDIT PROGRAM FOR NOZZLE WELDS OF THE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR
,!~ POWER STATION--UNIT 1 REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL '
L
,
.
+f EXHIBIT D 4L For Final Report -I
- '. .
,
, t i - ;; '. ( -t
,
- f
. , l , Prepared by: Southwest Research Institute
,, , July 1974 1h
{ . Approved by:
,
n' %
- y C. E. Lautzenheiser l Vice President-(. ~ Division of Quality Assurance l- Systems and Engineering I(.
u __
_. .. . _
'
, . - .
.1
.la, .
- I :- .
~I;
.. .
,
.['
. ,- e .
j f-'
, j.-
- ..
7 EXHIBIT D
- s t
- r
- .a i
- l " Report of Examination Excavation Drogram for Verification of Reported Crack-Like Ultrasonic
< Reflectors. 'I
-' Review and Approval of Weld Repair Program ,,, Procedures and Specifications. if . Shop Auditing Functions During Weld Repair Program." l
-
1: .
.
9 i i j l
!
I
- y. -
I _ '
, .
I
- -
'
., i a " 1 ._
.
., .
w y + r- - 9-.*
_ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( _.
'
.
- ( s ',
~ Il . 'l : TABLE OF CONTENTS Page .N-j~)I I. INTRODUCTION 1
- ,-, -
Jl} II. DISCUSSION 2 1 A. Examination Excavation Program for Nozzle Welds b[].] by Southwest Research Institute 2
'
1 Weld 13-314C 2 1 2 Weld 13-314D 2
B. Observations by Southwest Research Institute 2
- a. C. Conclusions by Southwest Research Institute 3 D. Review of Procedures and Specifications Related to
; the Repair Program by Southwest Research Institute 3
- E. Audit of the Shop Operations at Combustion Engineering
,
During Repair Cycle by Southwest Research Institute 4
- )-
' .
III. WELD 13-314C SLAG INCLUSIONS 5 IV.
SUMMARY
- EXAMINATION EXCAVATION PROGRAM 6 I
- !
t {
,
%_
s '
.
1 t
C
. -..
+
.r-r * 'k.j],. -
- I
$ "
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page
.
1 Excavation and Examination Procedure 8 J
- 2. Excavation Plan for Nozzle Weld Seam #13-314C 9
., ..
3 Excavation Plan for Nozzle Weld Seam #13-314D 10
- 4 Magnetic Particle Replica of Indication at 0* Azimuth _
.
- of Weld 13-314C 11 r- 5 Magnetic Particle Replica of Indication at 11* Azimuth
- ,! . of Weld 13-314C 12 6 Magnetic Particle Replica of Indication at 20* Azimuth ., of Weld 13-314C 13 7 Magnetic Particle Replica of Indication at 8* Azimuth
- l-
of Weld 13-314C 14 .~
, .s 8 Metallurgical Surface Replica of Indication at.
,!l 11* Azimuth of Weld 13-314C 15 9 Metallurgical Surface Replica of Indication at 8* Azimuth of Weld 13-314C 16
; 10 Magnetic Particle Replica of Indication of 217* Azimuth
'[ of Weld 13-314D 17 lr. I1 Magnetic Particle Replica of Indication at 0* Azimuth of Weld 13-314D 18 12 _ Metal'argical Surf,ce Replica of Indications at
- 217' Azimuth of Weld 13-314D 19
, 13 Metallurgical Surface Replica of Indication at
- { 0* Azimuth of Weld 13-314D 20
,
e
.
,
.
'
. .. _
.n.
'
. .- .
U. P
.- j , '
- I. INTRODUCTION
.
b
-Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), under contract to Long Island a Lighting Company (LILCO), performed the following services during the
.,
'
nozzle weld repair program of the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station-Unit ,1 reactor pressure vessel (RPV).
-
,j A. Directed the nozzle weld examination excavation program.
; : The purpose of the program wa to:
. :
,
.a 1 Confirm the reported findings of the ultrasonic evaluation
-
.
team. el 2 Classify the reported " crack-like" ultrasonic reflectors as to exact nature, i. e. , cracks, slag, or lack of fusion. B. Reviewed all procedures and specifications related to the
repair t=rogram. C. Provided sufficient audits of the shop operations during the j actual repair cycle to assure the correctness and adequacy
, of the repair, i ! ; , % ,
t
- i.
- t
, . - - - -
um .
;p. -
L, m. ll II. D'SCUSSION -n. [ A. Examination Excavation Program n An examination excavation program was establisited to provide
- j j ~ access to specified surfaces within the two nozzle-to-shell welds. The procedure steps, the surfaces prepared and the examinations performed,
] - -are depicted in Figures 1, 2, and 3. The purpose of this examination exca-a vation program was to confirm the ultrasonic evaluation team's reported findings and to classify the nozzle weld defects as to type, i. e. , cracks, r slag, or lack of fusion, b,
- 1. ' Weld 13-314C
[ The ultrasonic evaluation team determined that a continuous crack-like ultrasonic reflector existed in this nozzle-to-shell weld extending g over an area from the 355' - 0* - 35* azimuths. .t The examination excavation program for this weld (Figures 1 - and 2) initially prepared faces A, B, C, and D for viewing. Figures 4, 5, and 6 show replicas of magnetic particle indications found on faces A, B,
.
and C at azimuths 0* ,11* , and 20* , respectively. Face B was then further worked by removing additional mat erial to prepare face B' at 8' azimuth. According to the ultrasonic data, the createst magnitude crack-like indica-tion was at this location. Figure 7 shem s the magnetic particle replica of y;i the defect found at this location
-
Metallurgical surface repl'cas were prepared from faces B and j B', and the metallurgical structures of tnese surfaces are shown in Figures 8
- 4. and 9, respectively.
j 2. Weld 13-314D A similar program was performed on this nozzle-to-shell weld i as was performed on weld 13-314C. Figures I and 3 describe the examina-
-
tion steps performed for this weld. 1 Figures 10 and 11 show the magnetic particle replicas of sur- ) faces E and F at azimuths 217* and 0*, respectively. Figures 12 and 13 show the metallurgical structures of these two surfaces as reproduced from
; metallurgical surface replicas.
'B. Observations by SwRI Regarding the Examination Excavation Program
;
i The magnetic particle rep'licas and photo micrographs from the metallurgical surface replicas clearly show that metallurgical cracking has 2 I
.q, .
,
N. D l\ J occurred in those areas where they were assessed to be crack-like by the
. . , ultrasonic evaluation team. -
.o.
- i" The nature of the cracks observed in weld 13-314D were primari'.y through wall in nature and were contained within the heat affected zone of
- }yl the plate material. The maximum through wall dimension measured by
' SwRI in the LILCO RPV nozzle welds was 0. 5 inch. ,
The ultrasonic evaluation team's assessment of weld 13-314C described a continuous crack like ultrasonic reflector from 355*-0*-35*.
'
g, Also, significant isolated re. tors were found in this zone when the 0* j (straight beam) UT procedure was performed. As indicated in Figure 2A of Exhibit A of Summary Report, these 0* beam reflectors were in the range
,s ;
of 200% to 300% of the reference distance amplitude calibrated, (DAC) curve.
,
- I As can be seen on the magnetic particle and metallurgical surface replicas, taken from the examination faces, there are significant metallurgi-
,
cal separations parallel to the original plate surface which also have through wall components (Figures 5, 7, 8, and 9). l C. Conclusions by SwRI Regarding the Examination Excavation Program The' ultrasonic evaluation team reported that nozzle welds 13-314C , , and 13-314D contained ultrasonic reflectors which were sssessed to be crack-like in nature.
'
In the areas selected, the destructive metallurgical examinations confirmed without exception that the assessments of the ultrasonic evaluation .; tea ns were correct. Where they reporten the existencc of "crach-like" .. ultz 1 sonic reflectors, the metallurgical examinations confirmed them to be crac(s.
1 D. Review of Procedures and Specifications Related to the Repair Program by SwRI
,
1 The procedures and specifications developed to control the weld repair program, for the two reported defective Shoreham RPV nozzle welds
; (13-314C and 13-314D), were reviewed and concurred with by the members j of the metallurgict.1 evaluation team. This team was composed of members from Stone and Webster, General Electric, Combusti- Zngineering, and 1 SwRI.
.! ,
;
As has been pointed out in the Summary Report by this team, Exhibit B of the "Shorehr.m Nuclear Power Station-Unit 1 Summary Report Reactor Pressure Vessel Nozzle Weld Repairs," the exact cause or causes of the observed cracking could not be ascertained. Based on the evaluations and 3 investi 'tions performed by this team it was, however, possible to define
,
'. 6 l t r e n ~~= --
. - .
w .
!,. ..
L. . P O - specific controls and procedural parameters that, when properly used, would assure that the weld repairs could be accomplished with a very high degree of 3 assurance that the recurrence of " crack-like" ultrasonic reflectors would not
;i be possible.
fi Ultrasonic re-examination of the repaired areas, by the original ultra- -d sonic team, confirmed the adequacy of those controls and procedural param-eters to prevent recurrence of the cracking, r, ti-L E. Audit of the Shop Operations at Combustion Engineering During
-
Repair Cycle by SwRI t During the nozzle weld repair program, performed on the Shoreham RPV, SwRI provided for LILCO shop audit coverage as listed below: 7, b 1 Shop audit coverage during the defect examination excavation
,
program and during the remainder of the defect excavation
-
prog ram. 2 Witnessing of nondestructive examinations performed on the j weld repair cavities. t y, 3. Shop audit coverage during the repair cycle to assure quality
, perforer.nce and compliance with approved procedures.
- 4. Witnessing of interim nondestructive examinations (visual and
;i magnetic particle) conducted during the weld repair cycle.
- 5. Witnessing during the post weld heat treatment after the repair weld cycle.
1
,'
- 6. Witnessing during'the final nondestructive examinations. (The final ultrasonic examination was witnessed by the original ultra-sonic evaluation team and is covered by their final report. )
1 .s '4 i c. 4 .j
. . . .-. .
,
.
r] .
- kJ .
III. WELD 13-314C SLAG INCLUSIONS
- [' -
Aside from minor deviations, only one significant problem o curred
' ;
during the repair weld cycle. The problem which occurred was that ut,on
,
re-radiography by Combustion Enginee ring of nozzle weld 13-314C, two
; films displayed unacceptable slag inclusions in the weld material. The two azimuth locations were 85* to 105* and 175* to 185* at depth locations of m approximately 1-1/2" from the RPV inside surface. The evaluation of this d' problem can be summarized by the following:
~
.p 1 The ultrasonic examination team assessed both indications to }; be acceptable in accordance with ultrasonic acceptance standards used originally on these welds. -p .; 2 A plotting of the geometric locations disclosed that these two radiographic indications were not located in the redeposited weld repair metal.
.
3 A re-examination of original ASME Code acceptance films, Type AA film, 2t sensitivity level, confirmed the existence of both indications but within the Code limits of acceptability.
-
'4 The radiography performed after weld repairs was done using
'
a fine grained film, Type M, with a resulting sensitivity in excess of ti.c Code required 2t hole in the penetrameter. It is the opinion of Southwest Research Institute that, on the basis of the original Code acceptar<:c radiographs, these two radiographic indications
; did not exceed the limits of Code acceptance and could therefore have i remained within the welds. They were, however, not acceptable on the re-radiographs. The slag was removed and the areas were repair welded by i Combustion Engineering which removed any question concerning those two i
indications. . t i . .t
, +
5- -\
. . ,
, .,
'
i r'. r, .
!3 t.
IV.
SUMMARY
- EXAMINATION EXCAVATION PROGRAM n
'
f A. It is the opinion of Southwest Research Institute that the results of this program confirm without exception the assessments made by the altra- ,p sonic evaluation team. On this basis, all unacceptable " crack-like" ultra- {j sonic reflectors in the welds of the Shoreham RPV have been identified and successfully removed.
- 7..
{; B. It is the opinion of Southwest Research Institute that the procedures and specifications developed by Combustion Engineering, Inc. and by General
- r. Electric Company were adequate for the RPV nozzle weld repair program.
,
.L C. It is the opinion of Southwest Research Institute that the repair program j has been acceptably completed in accordance with applicable Codes, criteria, i .; ;, approved procedures, and specifications.
.!
..
, ,- \
o
!, *
>r - . , '. _ 4 , I{'.
-
i
~!
i
?
i. L. t L 6 I
. - --
. - _ . _
f_r, -. .I L. e -
,
,, . 2 L)
-
{I i,' q f" .
-
- k .)i
!- e [' t-a (M
!, ,
w r . (' t. ILLUSTRATIONS 7, I t
- 7. -
i
!
t
<
t
<
< f i
- g. .
i ki. a> i 4, i i' ! > s!
-
i . 7 'f}
. .-.
a, ., 0
..,- .
. r-. E XAM,tNATION PROCEDUR E s 1 EXCAVATE AS SHOWN IN SECTION "O D TO DEPTH AS APPLICABLE. ARC AIR GOUGE AT 300*F MIN. PREHE A T (SEE PREHE AT PROC. EP 3067 5), p GRIND & MT SURFACE PER C.E. SPEC. 2 4.2.4 (dl.
'~ Pl.UNGE BY CHIPPING, GRINDING OR ARC AIR. (IF ARC AIR IS USED 2.
PHEHE AT PER EP 3067 5). -r 3 GRIND F ACES A, B,C, D,E & F IN PREPARATION FOR METALLOGRAPHIC E X AMIN ATION. I 4. POLibH F ACES A B,C, D. E & F FOR ETCHING l 5 ETCH FACE 3. f *
- 6. PHOTOG R APH iACES 1
- 7. MT FACES
,[~ .,' B. PHOTOGRAPH F ACLS
.
- 9. MAKE ACETATE REPLICAS /.5 DIRECTED BY SwRI REP. (4 TOTAL)
- [
CONTINUE IF REQUIRED AS FOLLOWS: {
- 10. REMOVE 1/2" FROM FACES A,8.C, D, E & F AS DIRECTED TO EXPOSE F ACES A*. B', C', D', E *, & F'.
'
- 11. REPEAT STEPS #3 THRU 49 AS DIRECTED.
f 12. REVERT TO DWG. E 233 291 & COMPLETU t:XCAVATION & PROCEED TO REPAIR.
'
p :
' '
oo N. Z* 9 m
; , o 1 l 1/2"R (TYP.) f 3 '
Y NOZZLE I r WEL
!
PLATE .l \ i I I if
;
EXCAVATION s CONTOUR AS DEFINED ON
\
) I
;
DWG E.233 201.
/ 1 l
l SECTION "D D" IF 5.6)(C-6) FIGURE 1 EXCAVATION AND EXAMINATION
, PROCEDURE
"
,
8
! -
, .+
L,
,-
i VIEW "A. A" (G.7)
- i NOZZLE WELD SEAM #13-314C
.
"C" 0* *
(E-Si 0 l
-~
,'C **
[' ~ D c-L { 270* t 90* {- J
'
L %~J/ % d --
-
J 180*
"D" (G-6) "D"(G4)
- -j + -D-0-
'
30* 45* (TYP) ,,
/ FACE A. FACEB
- s f
/
p ,
/ \ / FACE C* \g
%
N
* **
I-
.N BOTTOM OF
-b- I'lI4"
->- EXCAVATION
" D' "D ' ' AS DEFINED ON DWG E 233-291.
SECTION "C C {F-8) FIGURE 2 EXCAVATION PLAN FOR h'OZZLE WELD SEAM #13-314C 9 -
'. 'e
.
~
. VIEW ~8 8"4G.7)
N0ZZLE WELD SEAM # 13-3140 O
"s . go I
"E"
. _ _ (C41 'U, fT -N\
- D / -
\N o v \
.
-
'I 270* + .;
+
90*
.
jg "E" (C 6)
.
O AD L
- /
P "E" 180* 195, I 'I 350' OR 195*
., [ AZIMUTH LOCATION AS {
P .pa SPECIFIED BY SwRI REP. AFTER CAVITY IS OPENEO. (REF 31/4"
\ [' EXCAVATION CONTOUR
\ j AS DEFINED ON DWG.
E-233-291
//
PACE E'(195* 250*) FACE F'(350* 80*) APPROX. )
;
FACE E (195* 250*) { FACE F (350* 80*) J. ! SECTION "E E"(8,C-8) I
+ i o .. ,
IG 6) FIGURE 3 EXCAVATION PLAN FOR NOZZLE WELD SEAM #13-314D _ 10 t _ _ _ _ ,
- i. .
! -- -
e4 r i L. p VESSEL "OD" SURFACE i-g JL I L. ' T' l ! PLATE WELD '- 3n l' l
.-
,
lf
'
M
?z a
t. .- 1 Is l l ' . . l ' l L FIGURE 4. MAGNETIC PARTICLE REPLICA OF '~ INDICATION AT O' AZIMUTH OF WELD 13-314C , (Face A, Figure 2) 1X Magnification
.
11 f _.
. _
. . _ _. -- -. - _ _ _ . __. __ . . . . . _. ...
, . .
l!
.. .~
l
-- -
t L. m f **
'!
?
...
;
-
VESSE L "OD" SURFACE
!_. ;
u
- .
f . - g~e WELD PLATE T~ 3"
. . ,
i
.
.
]
u
.
b .
.,
I t
, - . .
t.
.
l
. '
FIGURE 5. MAGNETIC PARTICLE REPLICA OF INDICATION AT 11' AZIMUTH OF WELD 13-314C
,
(Face B, Figare 2) 1X Magnification
.
12 l
.
.
,. . ,
li I L
.
I I 1
..
)
i~
.
Il l 1.- 1 f VESSEL "OC" SURFACE '
.
d 7~
. . .
. r-
!
~. PLATE WELD
!
,
3"
. . .
.
W ;, .y _. c
"
g.o.;m
.,
V
.. E, ,g.,;
sq
-
e _.,"
,,
;
-
W. 2 b hIkN
.
i
\. .
I
- ,
d t.. l FIGURE 6. MAGNETIC PARTICLE REPLICA OF l INDICATION AT 20* AZIMUTH OF WELD 13-314C (Face C, Figure 2) 1X Magnification !,. 1+ 13 il
-
. _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - . . - - _ _ = _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .-
c- . . Ii ( ., I
- I"
I t
,.
-
!
, _ VESSEL "OD" SUR FACE
. u 4
r i e a-. t
-
.
WELD PLATE l
.-. 3" i
(s
, ,,
-l
..
( u i^
.
.. I
-l h[id
. lC. Kb1 s.
.i
- t ..
I t, !I 1s FIGURE 7. MAGNETIC PARTICLE REPLICA OF INDICATION AT 8' AZIMUTH OF WELD 13-314C [ (Face B1, Figure 2) 1X Magnification l > i 14
'
l __
___.___. .__ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ .-_ r- .
,
-ll,
\.
-
'f
, 4 l lI 4
.
,
~
,~ , g
._ .,
~
{ u k,. __
, l.
1
. -
*
, VESSE L
. - , ! .'O _ "_) h
~~
- . l
,._
As Received
'
, Replica 1X Mag.
-
! .
;\
.i~
'
Plate / Weld
. . . . . , , . .
. . ' -: . , .
6
'
, ' "..E"!OM ^i ~ . :A' ~
'
'
- ' f ? ..
,,{iV?,MIOE.(:fl t ,
vLre, . ~ to -i.e
, - _-_ affe,g(;riA , g
.l
.
t
.
Photomicrograph of
'
Crack Structure 20X Mag.
'
1 1 1
!
., i FIGURE 8. METALLURGICAL SURFACE REPLICA OF l INDICATION AT 11* AZIMUTH OF WELD 13-314C l
,
(Face B, Figure 2) l
,
l
'
l 15
!
"
, '
- - - - - . . . , , --
_ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ ',, .
. .
- s j
.L.
- il J
- .-
. _ _ . . . . . . _ .
Plate / Weld
~ . _ . .
. .
. ,
- l--- ,
.x>
'
.
. , - ' . ,
'
**mm ' ., , f.f l L .>
.
,.
,
,. 3;
'. o
.
"
-
As Received
,_,
Replica 1X Mag.
, '.. ,.
-l e. 16 an a-
+ s..:w : . a- ' V
'
M
;.
,, l"SiM z?g Q{y,]. y,
, \
q;,;:fy
+ 4..+.. q
.. :
.. F Ei
..
.
L. ..- 3 of ,
,
w .,
'~ -
>-
$ .gy; ,.
--
-
g34.
.v ~.
.; , . - ., y p ,.y
- N,y .' .,
,
5g
, .. fpfg j-M ,,,,
.
j ,gl; pg _ _ i
-
, - , , ,
- m. f. e,
,,, ^ a>V,*u,
*+.
MM 1r ** Q*
~s.3.+
,;
..
"
._~v.m.b.7 e
" v > y p? j ~.p.9
,l'.. 38.. '
,
- , ? .W:ss .h. T ' '&.
*
,. n. c - % g'U.,. d, kp~^ ..
'
Mn.; wjq, my;whaw(MJWEM'd, Mg E#.-
-
O.,' .r.an.su
?$M!f.D .
' 't ' e
. ja 0 4. q..s ;U.e,ra.;:rt
.e
<'
e
@
a .w;p cu QT z u,,.. REf"'NI
-
,
n .=
, g-j'
.
. ., . s Photomicrograph of Crack Structure
- s ny,.,. .,d%.
,
.
, k.~N . <. c.;;
20X Mag. Q .g.);e $fDQ....-.... r.3 **.>
-
.;-
....
.g$.ss.'Q w.uD.F
.
. 4'W'.
.:.w ,.,
k a J,y .gg. .& .
. 1
- \- .
i
,. I t
,; FIGURE 9. METALLURGICAL SURFACE REPLICA OF
, INDICATION AT 8* AZIMUTH OF WELD 13-314C l (Face B', Figure 2) t
.,- 'I t 16
.
_ w --? -
-. a - - - - - -. -- -
r' . l
'. _. ._
L.
,
,,
s .-
. . . .
. :
\}
,,
- i t/
VESSEL "OD" SURFACE
!m A
.
.f 1
',.
.(
i
.
PLATE WELD
.,
_
.
.T q
-e . &. , . ylf-8
; .
, w:.~ ,.7. _E s.
t .- M 3-3/4"
,
'
g 9
"
i m 2 .cs
*
- 5. .% L.'( *- h
-
'
ME d
'
S%: 4
,.
. C...h.i. y; 9 g ; .:n e
. F ' ?::y j *Q ueitah a
'
i
'.-
1 ( i .>
\. , FIGURE 10 MAGNETIC PARTICLE REPLICA OF
!! INDICATION OF 217* AZIMUTH OF WELD 13-314D tt (Face E, Figure 3) 1X Magnification i l 'k . 17
.
, .
7, , ,
'!
,' ( . . .- l( ' r- ,
,
I- '(.
VESSEL "OD" SURFACE
'
&: l 1 i !' i
. -
,7_
WELD PLATE
, -
I
,
3-3/4" j~ F Y
..
!
. , .
'
t
.
A
} \
.. 'I
.
b 1
\
1 [ FIGURE I1 MAGNETIC PARTICLE REPLICA OF
, INDICATION AT O' AZIMUTH OF WELD 13-314D l (Face F, Figure 3) IX Magnification P
18 I ,.
- - - < , - _ , - - - . , _ . _ - , _ . - - ,, ,_, - . _ _
. - - - _ ~ . - - - - _ . , - -. - - - - - - - - - - - = - . - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - = - - - - - - - - -
--
. .
- . . . .
. . . .
,
6 .<, f VESSEL Plate / Weld
.- "OD" Crack #2, 20X Mag.
.!i .\. . i' h
- ( ' q 9'
.
- s. .
i r- .E N
.
'
'
' ' ^ . EAA
'
As Received -d . 4i
,
Replica IX Mag.
,
.,'
'
-
nr: e
'
.
Plate / Weld Crack #1, 20X Mag.
, .
k.
;
(
,' FIGURE 12 METALLURGICAL SURFACE REPLICA OF '
INDICATIONS AT 217' AZIMUTH OF WELD 13-314D .. 19 j
~
_ _ _ _ _ . . _ - __ _ _. ___ . _ _ _ _ _ _ .
'
'f] In s
.
.
.
,<, i l\ /[1 <
.
/ls r .l-
-
[ /') SSgz 'L/ ODir Plage / elg
..
e + i; L ,,.
, *'IVed
- I i ep] na lg ag, l njQjy!
4-sh gs,y.
,
*
+ !
a Li
.. ?
3.j;
,
'v
;.
t ,
- xn
? f*
^
f" ^ 1
- .
,
r$Ahe c g; Q>:,n,n
'Igiff
.
v'
'
' { MN Phog icrogp *' c ,,,, ,, Uctnye 4;;QQlY w.
,
;
20% ' " kag,,, ,'8Ure ,; f145:s;@ 5 55^$dh$ ll
,'
- y
^' Q Q ~ ' .,. !f 1
FIGURE 13. METALLURGICAL SURFACE REPLICA OF I INDICATION AT O' AZIMUTH OF WELD 13-314D i ( 20
)
_.
- - , . - . .
.
;{ ' ,, - .
(' ;
,
s
,
,
,
,
. , . 1- s e l .\ 4 ( t, EXHIBIT E il i REPORT-0F THE SHOP ULTRASONIC
-
EXAMINATION OF THE REWORKED N0ZZLE TO VESSEL WELDS IN THE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR f POWER STATION - UNIT 1 REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL
.
s 9
' ' ,
i 't
\ # i ','
-, i l
\ !
.i I
! .
2
->
$ 1 1
/
f.. s
.- - ., . -,.
*: ..
*
,- a, k.,
.
,
'
7 .
'
.
, .
f.', *
)!
REPORT OF THE SIIOP ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION OF THE REWORKED NOZZLE TO VESSEL WELDS
, . , IN TIIE SilORE!!AM NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
*
! UNIT 1 REAQTOR PRESSURE VESSEL
-
s -
-
.
s
\~
-
.
-
I.s $. -
, , . -
. .
. .
,
('
*
- t. -
*
-
7 F
- s. ,
prepared for ,
,
, Long Island Lighting Company f 175 East Old Country Road
'- Hicksville, New York 11801
-
,
is
- ,,
1 -
. ,
1
'-
This is a joint report by the Shoreham Unit No. 1 Evaluation Team consisting of Certified
-i Level III Ultrasonic E::aminers from
.
.'
Combustion Engineering Inc. General Electric Company ( Southwest Research Institute Stone and Webster Engineering Corp. 1 u .
, December 26, 1973 i
!
.
( .
.-
i
'
.
g P t- .
-
- -
F" T l- . o i Introduction
- ! The March / April 1973 cxamination of the Shorcham Unit i reactor pressure vessel III identified two weld seams which did not meet .
f the ultrasonic acceptance standards of Paragraph N625 of Section
'
_ III of the ASME Doiler and Pressure Vesscl Code, 1968 Edition. P . [i An ultrasonic examination, following rework, of nozzle to vessel
,
weld seams 13-314C and 13-314D was conducted October 22 and ' . [, '
'
November 14, 1973. ['
"
The examination procedures and data recording levels were as agreed to and approved by each Team Member and are contained i in the reference document ( . The Evaluation Team consisted s- of Certified Level III Ultrasonic Examiners, one each from
.
'
Combustion Engineering, General Electric, Southwest Research ( Institute, and Stone and Webster. Examination of the welds was conducted by Combustion Engineering ~ personnel in CE 's Chattanooga, Tenn. , shops . Southwest Research
, Institute personnel were 'present during the examination as -
observers.
.
.
- Data Review 4
,
The Team Members have reviewec. all the data produced during the
' '
ultrasonic examination of the reworked weld seams. It was determined that the data was complete and that all of the re-i quired scans were reported. Instrument calibration sheets were , compared with thone for the March / April shop examination prior i
,.
to the rework and showed satisf actory instrument adjustment and good agreement with the earlier examinations. Ultrasonic indi-I cations exceeding 100 DAC werc evaluated separately by the Team Mcmbers. They were then reviewed for position, length and whether a through-wall condition could be es tablished.
,
III" Report of the Shop Ultrasonic Examinauion of the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 Reactor Pressure Vessol", dated April 27, 1973.
'
-
v .; e d'
-
-.
-
-
p ,. : .
,
.
(_ .
.
.
. ,,--. ,
-
l .
" Results
[' ' Nozzle. wold scams 13-314C and 13-314D were found to show minor indications which plot as spots with little or no length or
'-
-
-
)' !'
through-wall condition. No crack .like or unacceptable slag inclusions were indicated.in the welds or heat affected zones.
-
,
\
s- Conclusion ,
- -
.
IN
>
The Shoreham Unit 1 reactor' pressure vess'el inclu ling the re-
-
worked areas in weld seams 13-314C and 13-314D, is the judgment 7 of the, Ultrason.i c Evaluation Team, meets tlie ultrasonic examina-
- s. cion acceptance standards of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel' Code, Section III, Paragraph N625, 1968 Edition.
Respectfully submitted,
@ d 2',,: $}d$dl~ Combustion Engineering CT[ -T T D , Southwest Research Institute
.: .,. L4I. , ', Ah - Stone and Webster
'
-
j.
"
[. -
/ General Electric , '
Certified Level III Examiners
'
.
.
- i. ,
-
-
. .
D
.
. I
) . .
.
-L.
=
.
,-. . - . - -
-h. , --
. . . .. . . . - -. .. ._ _- -- ______
j~^_, ,,
) ,
. . . .
,.
\t
?~
r. t
.
'
.
(~ 'i 5 i -'s , , EXHIBIT F REPORT OF THE SHOP ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION OF THE BUTTERED AREAS OF RECIRCULATION i INLET N0ZZLES C&D AND JET PUMP N0ZZLES A&B
!~ \
s' i f
-
1
!
a T' t 1 k '.
?
i 4
-
L. 1 ( t i. f' f
,
y..
.
y- '
-*
O *~ Decemb::r 27, 1973 7 4. UT Evaluation Team Statement
)
4 i' The Shoreham Unit 1 Ultrasonic Evaluation Team met Dect..ber 27, 1973 to evaluate the ultrasonic procedure being used, and the results being { obtained on Recirculation Inlet Nozzles C and D and Jet Pump Instrumentation
-
(~
', ; Nozzles A and C.
!r The conclusion of the evaluation Team is that the search unit with two 0
'-
h" x 1" transducers (transmit and receive) with a 22 included angle between j the transducer produced excessive noise. The noise levels were such that a s valid examination of the buttering was not considered possible using the 1
- ( procedure as previously approved.
.
The portion of the procedure used for examination of buttering was cor-
'
rected to replace the two transducer search unit with a single " diameter 2.25 MHz straight beam unit. The validity of this revision was verified by
.the Team members present both on the calibration standards and on the vessel.
7-i Calibration in accordance with the revised procedure produced an impeuve-4 ment in signal to noise ratio of an order of magnitude. The following revisions were made to N-2.4.4.81(a) dated November 12, 1973. Revise paragraph 3.2 to read: 3.2 Search units 3.2.1 Examinction of the finished weld shall be performed
> using -------- (same as previous 3.2.1)
'3.2.2 Examination of the buttering shall be performed using
. ,r - ,!
- .
a \" diameter transducer with a nominal frequency of Search units with other sizes and frequencies
~
2.25 MHz. ./
- 1 t
.
.-- .- y ,
~
. .
.
3.2.2 (Cont'd) h may be used as required, with approval of the UT Evaluation Team.
-
'
Examination of.the buttering on Recirculation Inlet Nozzles C and D and e Jet Pump Instrumentation Nozzles A and B was witnessed by the evaluation team.
,
Evaluation of the examination data revealed spots with no measurable
-
length or through wall dimension. ~
,_ ,
Conclusion On the ' judgment of the Ultre=onic Evaluation Team the buttering meets the ultrasonic examination acceptan'ce standards of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III Paragraph N-625,1968 Edition.
>
M Combustion Engineering, Inc.
, . fu '^ ' * %: Southwest Research Institute N. bc - * - Long Island Lighting Co./
Stone & Webster
"
~
MC General Electric
,
I
.
Certified Level III Examiners
.
k i 'i .
~
.
. - . . __
_ _
- _; ,
~ ;; , ; .; .
. - <-
-
, ;+
J-
.,
y * .. , l;
- '
f d [ t ,
~
- i
- ,-
_ x r
-
.
.
,1
- ..
i
,
.,7, . .
-
1-i a EKRIBIT G s [ COMBUSTION ENGINEERING'S N0ZZLE
- t. WELD INVESTIGATION FOR LONG ISIAND
!
,
LIGHTING CO." DATED AUGUST 29, 1973
..
'
. 4
;f -
'
.. I
.
u I
.,
9 .f
-
.
- 6 :
'
,
i i
'
-
'
<
'
A :.- i l
- a
\ .,.
f.
~
. L T, ^ , ? i k,-
!-
' , :.
'[
}' 3 l'
-
, f'.
.
.-..
.,.~
- t. .
h th i ,
?.
, . . i h rs'-
"
..
g , i, - - -
,e- . - . , . - -.... ;,-. . .
,,__.,_.-..-.._..._......,,-_..--,....._,_m
, , ,.-__,. , - , , ... ,_. ,-_,.-e--~-
'
e *
.
COM8USTION DIVISION. COMBUSTION ENGINEEfUNG. lNC. 911 W MAIN Si, CHOTVANOOGA. TEEt 37402 615-365-4631 Metallurgical Research and Development Depanment , _ August 29, 1973
'
[ COMBUSTl0N DIVISION F { Nozzle Weld Investigation
>
Long Island Lighting Company GE Contract 3067
'
Project No. 960001, Job No. E-32615
.
I An "in place" metallographic evaluation was requested by Nuclear Quality Engineering Department on two recirculating inlet nozzle welds, numbers
,
314C and 314D, for the subject contract. Metallography was required to determine the size and nature of indications reported by ultrasonic testing.
,
Arc-Air gouging and grinding, prior to metallography, was executed according to,in.ctructions on C-E Drawing E-233-293, Rev.1 (areas in Figure 1), and was supervised by Quality Engineering personnel. Six faces from the two nozzles were initially selected per Drawing E-233-293. Of these, areas se-lected for detailed metallography were located at 0 azimuth and 207 azimuth
'
on nozzle 314D and 11 azimuth on nozzle 314C. An additional face, at 9 *
, azimuth, on nozzle 314C was examined metallographically after work was F completed at the 11 location .
i Metallography consisted of grinding each of four excavated faces to a 320 x
'
grit finish for magnetic particle testing. These areas showing the M. T. indications were photographed after which final polishing was performed. A 3% nital solution was used to etch the polished surfaces which were then
'
photographed to show the orientation of the weld deposit and base metal. Plastic replicas were made on each face at the area showing M.T. indications and brought to the laboratory for microscopic examination and photomicrography. ' Figures 2 and 3 show photographs of each of the examined faces, at 1X magni- , fication, with magnetic powder outlining the indications (left) and after [ metallographic preparation (right). Photographs are shown in Figure 4 of three other locations which were ground and lightly etched prior to magnetic particle , examination . No other metallography was performod on the areas. f_ The chart below lists the location of the examined faces, distance from the OD . surface to the top of the defect, and approximate through-the-wall depth of the I { defects . Also included in this list is information pertaining to the three areas
-1 - .. .. -.
Nozzle Weld Investigation Long Island Lighting Company August 29, 1973
.
which were magnetic particle tested and photographed only. Through-the-wall F' measurements were calculated, using measurements made from the IX magnifi-cation photographs in Figures 2, 3 and 4 and assuming the faces were ground on 25* and 45* slopes as'noted below. The total weld thickness was about 6-7/8" . [' Per DWG. Distance - Measurements , Location E-233-293 from OD (In.) from Through-the-Wall . Nozzle Azimuth Face Slope Surface (In . ) Photographs Length (Approx . In . ) 1
!
- 1. 314C 11' b 25' 3.500 approx. 0.10 0.090 314C 9* b' 25* 3.500 0.25 0.226 314C 0 a 45* 3.375 0.05 0.035 7
'
314C 25 c 25 3.250 spot spot
'
314C 30' d 45 3.188 0.55 0.385
, ,
314D 0 f 45* 3.500 0.40 0.280
'
314D 207 e 45 3.750 0.45 0.315 i b Microscopic examination of the replicas of the areas showing the indications revealed inclusions present in the base metal heat affected zones with cracks f' in the HAZ and extending slightly into the weld deposit. Photomicrographs in Figures 5 and 6 show the location of the defects in relation to the weld beads. r i
- Through-the-wall depth denotes the total area in which defects were present.
j In most cases, notably surfaces d and e, the defects were not continuous in this zone. W f
,
D. D. Crisp l DDC:mc attachments
>
________ ____ ____ _ _ _____ _ __ _ _ l
- -_ _ ..
. , .
L. 1
~
7A ,c
-
l
- 6. ;W
*
.df R]r .
pOb .
,_ M ~/a.d?
" ,
~
ff 314C
- f.,e ma
,.g y , :n,.a uu
- -
..
,.s
,i" a4( fQ1e"w _h ,:jyh
.
N
, 4d
%,4cl:&g,.j/MSf[ 314D A y /. :+2 h ~
' ~ : !O n % , !:1% @ ?)Q, y @yes $
dit g Tg+4ypx:
- . :- ,l y
,4 1
-[,
'
- ' -
.
_ _
'
c _, [., ,
.
.
;~ _. .} l
..j _
.
o
,. ,
--
>- .** ,,
' '
,
i ! ) I
- er . , j
}
r
-
*
-
g,W-s - W:
-
~ '. . .
i
,
,.. ._..., g .', 1
% --
-
<
.s
.
.
p..
'
#
.
' '
; ,
- .
l.' % .
;;' .,
, ;=
g ;.
.
. . . .
.
; q 9., -.
-
.t, -
,
-
. , 3,.
'
'
- er ,,i . .-
'. . '.L. ,'c -Q '.' -
. ._
_
' ,
. s
'
'
'
{. _ _ . . ;.9 2
.
,
l -
..
- u. .. . . ... ,. .. .
-
.
; %, . ~ ol s. . , ,q -
'
-
_
',,-
' e .
. ;,
--
.
. .
- . .
.
, .
.
,. .
.. . . . . - 7
. - . : .%
r s l Figure 1 l
' i, Upper: Overall view of nozzles 314C and 314D.
Lower: Close-up view of nozzle 314C (left) and 314D .(right) showing excavations l P for metallography. i. 9
\
L. - . -__ - - . _ - .
.
' , . .
.:
,, .r Myy . .u,w; " .
-
,- .->
,, S Fisi. fhryqw. . - >-
1 . svg -
~,. m -
c eg a .g~~ m
-M.:*L-
, .
. --: ..%e
_
,
.
.
w j.g'
? (. .
~. i g ~jy-
,,
'
~n u . \ ~.t
-' -
l , E
.
.
.*
(. y- ~L
-
,
-
.,
,
w~ -
.
e, ; ' -;- .
.
.
. . . .
.. :.
..
- r. ;,
,
,. . , , -
4 ' s f3 O =. Lp < . ' - - t'
~
; W t.?r: -
a
-.
.
i m
-
g .
,- .
h ?. L. 1 r
.
o,
/ ig-,. -
_~
.1
'
.g
,
'
, ,
'
an.- n :-
.
^
"'g C w ..a'
,_gy.
+:'GR , .Ai{ ' , .,. g ; ~;. .,
.. ,
.,
f%. ,,, ,s M
'
'
$ru ;
*t.r.<,
Mi,* -
< '=t m
. 1. .
,
l g
'
b M , . . a
~
, ~ YM$$i1:
,
. . ?' .-
1MNiBt!! f r O Mffy'N $$.2.
-n.' w>p g-.c S gi t u ~
m .% : N} ' .y
- r
' '
n.
~2.r A !4p 4-OkQ , N5 1M;;ch.y. y
;p;-L g ..: , :% F n.
v M E' #{94%.3 .
%
- g, t ..
L b).Q?C2'-Rt ;Q
' Q b ; 2 x + /g e
&
.:!W '!Wfr. *
#Ah
+> w # d s:c c2 p. * :,c . 4i-
- r,2 k[w-3 t r,(m.
..
-
, .. _.
Yb.,1d73L.'If M ' dU $$,D1 US '
, .
,
Figure 2 Upper: Nozzle 314C, 9 azimuth, (left) M.T. indication,(right) after polishing and etching. Lower: Nozzle 314C,11 azimuth, (left) M.T. indication, (right) after polishing
>
and etching. ,_ , The nozzle weld is to the left in all the views shown above. ,.
,
i k gm 2 - - - - - - - - - - - -__ ,- - - - - - - - - _ _ ----e-,, - ------,w, , , - - - - - - - , ~ , - - - . - - - . - . - -,
_ ._ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ P+1
, .
l.
-,
y
- L' n y5- -
. - .
; 2 .,1 -
. -e .- as~ 5
'
i f-
\
.(
- , e
,4 ,.;a..i N .. J.; t. ' , p1.gr.
~
#
gC ' st
.;f,ip
,
' i_l 'l #M:
":i 7d %fy;sw
' ~
3 D*: N y{$1d*5 ., Q
. I: *"h
"
'
+ sT{- -
.,:.,
, , .
-
*r.
r ;;::7gs
- Wr p .
.. -9@:e >c.
-s a
v'f, ea
, %f y
, j' $f;u
;g
-.
u
&u - .
.
..
w . < , *
*
.
..
.
}
m : ; Q ,..w- .- s .-* . .,
'
' 1 :/, 2 N
rj.','i+ ,
;U 'it' l
.I5-~ '
t
p** -'
.P
-
-e r. 3c +~ ' *t ~ } 9, .
., .. . g - . w ~5m '4!<
;;, -
;
gi , . . . , , w,.
. ,
, ;. , s~.
; y.
-
. ..
y >
.f,.9,$ ?.4 >
2
. .- +
- 9- . ;, - - ; .. ,
[- f: 9 ;. .2 \
, p e 5 ( ,~ t l V ..
-
tu . + L by ;+ t.. :
-
-
.
3
'
y g A c~e:p i
;g -
,
g $. ., ..
<
y-- . , . -
- , z . . ::: . -
-
..- : 2 ;...;. :
q )
*~
'
>. :u M. h
'
% ;! i m s d.w t;4 t t;-M. ,
m-R,
,
l l 1, Y
?1
, L Figure 3 Upper: Nozzle 314D, 0 azimuth, (left) M.T. indication, (right) after polishing and etching. ,
.
Lower: Nozzle 314D, 207 azimuth, (left) M.T. Indication, (right) after polishing
"
and etching. Weld material is to the left in the above views. I L
.-.
.- __ - . . - _ _ . .,
f .
, .
l..
..
,
-
,. g.
.
w-
- .,
- ,
4 a.,.<. .
- u. w a:M
- e. w. ;> < -
m
.
m
,, A
.; , x t A .: * - b :q .,-. ,
tgg%:'* --s . ; ' " '
-
- s ?,
;.
,
>3c* ;~~ )-qqf,4 . -
~'*gg ,
l
'
. . , m G,
_% %. . .pg
,
'.:w,. , j 9 2. ,. . ~g. -. #
-
., -
,,:
,:n. :nk
..
-.
.
. ~e .
1 n. .w.w. .
. n,k.
i ce ;s '
- N ;.wa./;,e em't ,m wp.w w (..p, '..3y
't;. ,, .@v.
ufMG W. .W:Q.,A a .
%s r
.s. s*v*.= . rs -- +
.e. -
- g,,
.
7 Q*,, x
- g. , .w t /. ,., .
.
.
n wn.c pm~n,~g.?
. .c.%g t m.,,n .&2 -
$. -
, n y ,..
'
,
'Y.wprw
'* 41 :. g er9 w; W.;.M- ;p.v.
.
g r uW,, u i 1
;;4;: s .. -
. ..
f ~ }MWr%%4% < ** r%:ij yym ~ g.r:fv &~.: i 1 yn;Q*;
,_
p -ay, y %, +Rk xs 4Q
,pzw:f;g;m- 1 o ngy - .;g
.
.,:p g:.- 9 As
'g- ;., qe^
~,;)? gg 4Lp. :W -';)
-
VL*v- .
,:
+ . :: M
,.. w- ~ %v-4afr%
. _
;;MQnm p#*? ^ g;: *x,$ %g g; g;.g , y ,+' % {jp3
' ( .f-fp
- a sw
'
.
- ;>,y y: ;~; n. . l
,..- m.v?g a.w .e
. u.<
<,
.
., ,
M.kwA;i ..-
-
. .
. . ..
.
- - n.g)..r Gs..am% w.m~casp. .
- .) L,A ; m.s.mhyi-sp msM.. )
~q*,9- ?,y.
.
a.- .& as.gWoosa .t
,
- r;',-Rchty@nly:.?r- .h l
*4 n l
7.:, p e:w yt:.ti,'
-
w:r ,.;r a.C-wr;%;Lt.
, .,
W:. f ...'-5 %.> :
@$
> 3:~ K - ..
2m .
.I
-
,s.
.
V, t - Figure 4 l< Other surfaces on nozzle 314C with M.T. Indications which were not polished ' and etched for replication. (Upper) O azimuth, (lower left) 25 azimuth,
. (lower right) 30* azimuth. Nozzle weld is to the left in the above photographs.
--
=- ere- , -- . - - - . -
-
- t. O
.
--
.
,
.L ? 'g,
-
-
-
.
%p$'~$&
Fikf
-
,
"
L ( Men u afr @ t ,
.
~ ?; - ..
'
ak? - f,f , N 9,ozzle 314C 1
-j Azimuth 7g%,pecfcg .
,
12X Mag. I. .t Em~DN $g p y0y r a-.. .
.
,
\;
fn f :Nl &k'94h. y$ ,y 7Y'y-Q
'
'
' ; 9 .
r 1 49 %w ewne2 C am,? g. . .
;
[ i d($b h;2.g&wke
&
$ .kh h '? l,
.
*
' ' Mg?
.
...
.
,h,d, . .d h,.hd.
.. . ..
.x
; .g -
.? . . .
~ ..
3 (khp. . ,'i- J,
,
N [ ';;h.I f- ' ewpmg.t . f'..d 4 . V %.J';{ k;s:.
*
, ; gg ? 4 - .-; x Nozzle 314C l 'dd; 4 4 km
~
't t
'
;
- 11 Azimuth i 7 s;.'. 12X Mag.
' 4p:,9 58[{3;g.eq 7dMt ; g ,
.
~,
s.
. .
. pp_, .
..
e
.,- _
h%*40- II . 6 4
-
t M , ..i fNr[M ' I - .i '.,~ - a
' -
3Ja ..
,
'[.at y p ,y.nj p ?k . .'f .-hid'g~ ' F t.'i
_
-
. :*-.7w&.:*',Nif
- ~e.h j V&jv;b... s !< f v i *!{p' , -.l ~ &, '
.
, _
'
!
.,
'
Q ~1', E Q :." ,,},{-
.
,;.,..q. ? ? : 1 ;- }. rp, : -( g.
f
-
Figure 5 l The above photomacrographs were made from replicas of the indicated faces. i Weld material is toward the upper side of the figure. L _ _ _ - - . _ - - - _ _ - . - . _ _}}