ML18018B762
| ML18018B762 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 08/31/1984 |
| From: | EBASCO SERVICES, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18018B761 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8409130325 | |
| Download: ML18018B762 (79) | |
Text
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS RESPONSE TO SHNPP SER OPEN ITEM (3)
MAY, 1984 REVISION 1 " August, 1984 EBASCO SERVICES, INC.
2 World Trade Center New York, NY 10048 8409130325 84090b PDR ADOCK 05000400 E PDR
't Y
~
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION" PAGE LIST OF FIGURES .AND TABLES PREFACE 1.0 ABSTRACT 2.0 'NTRODUCTION 3.0 'COPE 4.0 NOMENCLATURE & DEFINITIONS 5.0 'ETHODOLOGY 8
6.0 DESCRIPTION
OF FINITE ELEMENT MODEL 10
- 7. 0 . RESULTS 13 8.0, " PIPING COMPONENTS OTHER THAN ELBOWS 17 9.0 - CONCLUSIONS 21
- 10. 0 REFERENCES 22 TABLE F"1322.2.1 Limits of Primary Load or Stress for Service Loadings with Level D Service Limits, ASME Code Section III, Division 1.
APPENDIX A A-1
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES Fig. la Schematic Representation of the finite element modeled elbow.
Fig. lb Plots of the elbow finite element model Fig. lc Plots of the elbow finite element model Fig. 2 Stress strain curve of the modeled elbow material Fig. 3 (M- 9' Finite Elements Results of the l-l/2" elbow Fig. 4 (M- & ) Finite Elements Results of the 3" elbow Fig. 5 (M- 8' Finite Elements Results of the 6" elbow Fig. 6 (M- 8 ) Finite Elements Results of the 12" elbow Fig. 7 (M- g ) Finite Elements Results of the 14" elbow Fig. 8 Deformation of the modeled pipe under the applied moment Fig. 9a-d Typical Progressive Deformation of the elbows cross section obtained from the finite elements results Fig. 10 Progressive elasto-plastic stress distribution obtained from the finite elements results Fi,g. 11 Percentage of Ovalization versus bending moment Fig. 12 Representation of Decrease in Cross-Sectional area of an Elbow under applied Bending Moments.
Fig. 14 Stress Patterns in Tees Under Limiting Bending Moment Case TABLE I, Summaiy of Class 1 Auxiliary Piping to be Evaluated for Functional Capability TABLE 11$ Summary of Material and Physical Properties of the Analyzed Pipe Sizes TABLE III, Ovalization and Percent Change in Area for Alternate Code Definitions of Component Limit Moments
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS PREFACE This report was prepared in response to SHNPP SER Open Item 8(3) and presents the methodology and evaluation criteria which demonstrate the functional capability of Class 1 auxiliary piping as required by USNRC SRP 3.9.3 Appendix A (NUREG"0800, July 1981). (4)
SHNPP SER Section 3.9.3.1 SER Open Item 8'(3) Functional Ca abilit of Class 1 Auxiliar Pi in S stems "For ASME Class 1 auxiliary piping systems, the applicant has used a stress limit of 3.0 Sm, as stated in Appendix F of the ASME Code, (1) Section III, for use in equation (9) df Paragraph NB-3652. The faulted limit used by the applicant is intended to ensure structural integrity and not the functional capability of the piping system. The applicant believes that these limits provide assurance that the piping will not collapse or experience gross distortion and, thus, will not cause a loss of capability to perform their safety function. The staff has not accepted the justification provided by the applicant and considers this item open."
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PQ'ING SYSTEMS 1.0 ABSTRACT Functional capability of piping components is defined as the capability to deliver rated flow and retain dimensional stability when the design and service loads, and their resulting stresses and strains, are at prescribed levels. This report presents the methodology, evaluation and acceptance criteria used in demonstrating the functional capability of Class 1 auxiliary piping systems. The scope of this report is limited to the evaluation of essential Class 1 auxiliar i in for the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant.
Generically, the issue of functional capability for piping was not identified as an NRC concern until July 1981, when the NRC issued NUREG-0800 which included SRP 3.9.3 (4) and its Appendix A, the acceptance criteria adopted by the NRC for functional piping. Almost simultaneously, the NRC approved NEDO-21985 (3) as an acceptable basis of demonstrating functional capability. Prior to the NRC's
\
adoption of these criteria, passive components in essential systems were considered operable if they met the pressure integrity considerations of the ASME code pursuant to Regulatory Guide 1.48 (8) . NEDO-21985 presents criteria for evaluation of functional capability to be used in conjunction with elastic analysis of piping systems. It specifically recognizes that more sophisticated techniques such as elastic plastic analysis may be employed to reduce the conservatism resulting from NEDO-21985 criteria.
The criteria presented herein make use of equations and definitions given in the ASME Code and are principally based upon inelastic analysis techniques. A deformation limit in terms of an ultimate moment for different pipe sizes is established; Thee limit was selected such that small reductions in the cross-sectional area are assured. The reduction in cross-sectional area is given in terms of ovalization which indicates the formation of an eliptical shape Definitions and Nomenclature of underlined terms and phrases are presented in Section 4.0
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 A XILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS
2.0 INTRODUCTION
Piping systems and components essential to plant safety should be capable of delivering rated flow and retain dimensional stability when the design and service loads, and their resulting stresses and strains, are at prescribed levels. The ability to do this is termed functional ca abilit . A piping system might lose its functional capability through the occurrence of a significantly reduced flow area.
The ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III provides rules for piping design and analysis for Class 1 piping systems in Sub section NB. While Code rules provide levels of allowable stress limits to assure pressure retention capability, they may not assure the functional capability of certain system components under all designated loading conditions.
In the past, the question of functional capability was addressed by selecting conservative stress limits usually presented by multiples of the yield strength of materials. In addition, elastic analysis techniques are generally employed.
The techniques employed in this report utilize inelastic methods of piping analyses and establish deformation limits such that small reductions in pipe cross-sectional area are assured. Finite element analyses of three dimensionally modeled elbows (shell elements), with elasto-plastic strain hardening material properties and with large deformation considerations are conducted. The functional capability of essential piping is evaluated by computing the ovalization and resulting percentage change in flow area for different values of moments applied up to failure.
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEAROQ HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS 3.0 SCOPE The scope covered by the methodology, and evaluation criteria presented in this report is limited to Reactor Coolant Systems (RCS),
essential Class 1 auxiliary piping components. The analytical approach is to perform an analysis for elbows and extend the results to other piping components by appropriate techniques.
The piping of the RCS is required to maintain its functionability as well as structural integrity under all loading conditions including the Level D loading. In essence, the piping is required to retain dimensional stability such that it will deliver its rated flow. Under Level D loading, the piping may undergo permanent plastic deformation as depicted from the ASME Code allowables being 3S m
or 0.7S u and, therefore, plastic analyses are required to ascertain the piping deformation under the level D loadings.
Table I presents a summary of the RCS Class 1 auxiliary piping to be evaluated for functional cap'ability. A total of five (5) Class 1 auxiliary pipe sizes ranging from 1-1/2" to 14" in diameter were considered.
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS 4 0 NOMENCLATURE & DEFINITIONS 4.1 Ovalization indicates the formation of an elipsoidal'ross section as depicted below Ovalization, 8 D, is the maximum decrease in the elbow diameter as it deforms into an elliptical shape.
SECT. kA 4.2 Percent ovalization = ~ D x 100 Di-4 x 100 D
nominal 4e3 Percent chan e in Area, ~ A x 100 = ~1 x A x B/4 " (PDi 2 )/4 x 100 A ~ (Di )/4 where, Di = inside diameter of the elbow cross section A "- Minimum inside diameter of the deformed shape B = Maximum inside diameter of the deformed shape D = Nominal size of the pipe
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS 4.0 NOMENCLATURE & DEFINITIONS (Cont'd) 4.4 ~ is the enforced rotation of the ends of the elbow 4.5 M is the moment resisted by the elbow 4.6 Instabilit moment, M is the moment at which the moment resistance decreases for an increased rotation, i.e. the moment at which the tangent to the M- 8 curve is horizontal.
4.7 B2 is the stress index as per ASME Section III NB 3650 Equation 9, that accounts for the reduction of the moment carrying capacity of a fitting or weld.
4.8 ~F yield strain = .002 X ~8, and Sy is the yield stress.
E 4.9 t is the pipe thickness 4.10 R is the pipe nominal radius elastic section modulus 4.12 Mult (Gerber) ~ the ultimate moment calculated on the basis of the strain power law [Ref. 2].
4.13 Functional Ca abilit - Ability of a component, including its supports, to deliver rated flow and retain dimensional stability when the design and service loads, and their resulting stresses and strains, are at prescribed levels.
-6" CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS 4.0 NOMENCLATURE & DEFINITIONS (Cont'd) appropriate subsection of Section III, Division 1, of the ASME Code.
selected as the basis for the design of a component.
4.16 Functional S stem - That configuration of components which, irrespective of ASME Code Class designation or combination of ASME Code'lass designations, performs a particular function (i.e., each emergency core cooling system performs a single particular function and yet each may be comprised of some components which are ASME Class 1 and other components which are ASME Code Class 2).
4.17 LOCA - Loss of Coolant Accidents " Defined in Appendix A of 10CFR Part 50 as "those postulated accidents that result from the loss of reactor coolant, at a rate in excess of the capability of the reactor coolant makeup system, from breaks in the reactor coolant pressure boundary, up to and including a break equivalent in size go the double-ended rupture of the largest pipe of the reactor coolant system."
This condition includes the loads from the postulated pipe break, itself, and also any associated system transients or dynamic effects resulting from the postulated pipe break.
4.18 MS/FWPB - Main Steam and Feedwater Pi e Breaks >> Postulated breaks in the main steam and feedwater lines.
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS 4.0 NOMENCLATURE & DEFINITIONS (Cont'd) 4.19 Pi in Com onents - These items of a piping system such as tees, elbows, bends, pipe and tubing, and branch connections constructed in accordance with the rules of Section III of the ASME Code.
4.20 Postulated Desi n Basis Events - Those postulated natural phenomena (i.e.y OBEy SSE)y postulated site hazards, (i.e., nearby explosion),
or postulated plant events (i.e., DBPB, LOCA, MS/FWPB) for which the plant is designed to survive without undue risk to the health and
-safety of the public.
4.21 SSE - Safe Shutdown Earth uake - Defined in Section III(c) of Appendix A of 10CFR Part 100.
4.22 Service Limits - The four limits for the service loading as provided in the appropriate subsection of Section III, Division 1, of the ASME Code; Level A (Normal), Level B (Upset), Level C (Emergency),
Level D (Faulted).
4.23 Service Loads - Those pressure, temperature, and mechanical loads provided in the Design Specification.
4.24 Essential Class 1 Auxiliar Pi in - Piping and piping components required to shutdown the reactor and mitigate the consequences of a postulated design basis accident by transporting a specified quantity of fluid from one point to another point, with a specified pressure drop between the two points.
"8" CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS 5.0 METHODOLOGY 5.1 Loading and Modeling Approach 5.1.1
Introduction:
The application of shear and normal forces and out of plane and torsional moments on elbows do not result in any appreciable ovalization. Therefore, for a certain level of stresses in the elbow the highest ovalization is attained when the stresses are attributable to in plane bending. Henceforth, in this study pure bending is applied on the ends of the elbow, and in order to assure the condition of pure bending the ends of the piping on each side of the elbow are unconstrained.
5.1.2 Loading
A pure bending moment is applied on each of the unrestrained ends of the elbow. The direction of moment is such .that it produces tensile stresses on the concave side of the elbow (closing moment),
see Fig. (1).
The elbow is loaded via enforced rotation of its ends which is monotonically increased until failure takes place at the elbow.
- 5. 1. 3 Model:
A model of a 90 elbow of radius 1.5D with two straight pipe segments of length 4D on each end is considered in this study. The reason for using the straight segment of the pipe is twofold.
First is to provide a sufficient zone for the plastic hinge to develop about the center (45 0 plane) of the elbow, and second is to set the location of the loading point with its inherent assumptions (small linear displacement and elastic stress distribution) remote from the .center of the plastic hinge. See Fig.(1).
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS 5.0 METHODOLOGY (Cont'd) 5.1 Loading and Modeling Approach (Cont'd) 5.1.4 Finite Element Code:
The MSC-NASTRAN [Ref. 7] Version 63 Code, Solution 66 is implemented to conduct the elasto-plastic large deformation analysis of the elbows.
5.1.5 Boundary Conditions~
For the pure moment loading of the elbow in its plane of curvature, two planes of symmetry exist.
- l. 45 0
plane of the elbow, normal to the centerline of the piping, i.e. symmetry about the piping mid-length.
- 2. 0"180 0 plane of the cross section containing the centerline of the piping, i.e. symmetry about the plane of curvature of the elbow.
Therefore, both conditions of symmetry are utilized to reduce the model to 1/4 its original size.
Free boundaries are provided for the end points at which the rotations are applied.
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS
6.0 DESCRIPTION
OF THE FINITE ELEMENT MODEL
'0 Twelve (12) equal shell elements are used to describe the 180 segment of the pipe cross section in the circumferential direction. Along the length of the straight segment of the piping, 5 subdivisions are used, the first three from the free end length ~ D, the fourth and fifth are of length 2D/3 and D/3 respectively. Along the elbow 9 closely spaced subdivisions are used (5 each). Therefore, a total of 168 (12 x 14) shell elements, connecting a total of 195 grid points (15 x 13) are used to describe the 1/4 model, [figures lb and lc].
A rigid body element is used to connect the grid points on the free end of the elbow such that when the moment is applied at'he center of the cross section, a linear elastic stress distribution develops at the free pipe cross section.
6.1 Material Properties:
A 'stress-strain curve of elasto-plastic strain hardening properties is used to describe the shell elements material properties, (Figure 2].
n The curve is digitized from the strain power law (S S 0 Q )
in the plastic region, whereas in the elastic region the modulus of elasticity as per ASME Code is used. The constants n and S 0 are determined from the equations:
n=L (14 Q )
S =S (Q)n An approach that is widely used in the Literature, (2, 9, 12) which is proven to render excellent match of the experimental stress strain data (12). The ultimate stress S and the ultimate strain u u
are extracted for the material at the temperature from Ref. (10) and
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS
6.0 DESCRIPTION
OF THE FINITE ELEMENT MODEL (Cont'd) 6.1 Material Propertiess (Cont'd)
Stainless steel material A-376-304 and A-376-316 are used in this analysis, for which the following parameters are given:
~So ( si) u E( si) ~u 'Su( si) ~Sm( si) Svu(si)
A-376-304 78,023 0.1865 25.5 x 10 6 0.205 58,058 16,200 20,400 A-376-316 89,014 0.2056 25.5 x 10 6 0.2283 65,700 16,700 20.500 6.2 Yield Criterions The von-Misses yield criterion is used to represent the state of the stresses within each element, the equivalent stress 'of which is given by:
S 1/2 [(S "S ) + (S -S ) + (S "S ) ]
equ where S , S , S are the three principal stresses.
Failure of the material is postulated when the equivalent stress as computed by von"Misses stress criteria exceeds the ultimate stress as defined in the stress-strain curve used.
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS
6.0 DESCRIPTION
OF THE FINITE ELEMENT MODEL (Cont'd) 6.3 Large Deformation:
A large deformation feature is utilized in order to account for the effect of the ovalization of the pipe cross section on the moment carrying capacity of the elbow. The cross sectional ovalization reduces the pipe section modulus, i.e. reduces the value of Moment/max stress. The moment may still be increasing due to the plastic flow which allows greater portions of the cross section to be subjected to higher stresses.
"13-CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS
- 7. 0 RESULTS The M- 9 curves are obtained for all elbows of the pipe sizes listed in Table 1, and are given in Figs. 3 through 7. Typical deformation shapes and stress distribution are given in Figs. 7 through 10. On the M- g curves, scales of 'X ovalization and / change in cross sectional area are provided in order to )udge the functional capability at the different values of applied moments. Also scales of the maximum stresses and maximum strains which are encountered at the outer fibres of the convex side of the elbow are provided in order to indicate the state of the stress at the different values of applied moments.
The M- tI curves display the pipe softening as the applied rotation g increases past the instability point. The instability moment shown on the figures is defined on page 4 of this report.
On each curve, the ultimate moment values due to Gerber [2] is provided for comparison purposes. The curve M(Gerber)/B2 is included. The M- &
curve is consistently higher than M(Gerber)/B2, for all values of moment up to the instability moment. The ultimate moment due to Gerber is referred to herein as M ult 1
In Table 3, a summary of the percentage ovalization and percentage change in area is computed for a number of limit moments of the analyzed pipe sizes. The selection of those moments is based on definitions analogous to those of the ASME Code of the allowable design limits as per the rules of Appendix F for the design by analysis of piping components under Level D loading. Table F-1322.2<<1 of the ASME Code is included in the Appendix to this report for convenience.
-14" CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS 7 ' RESULTS (Cont'd)
The allowable moments are described as followsc (1) M(3S m
)/B2!
M(3S )
m is ,the moment that corresponds to an elastic stress distribution on the pipe cross section of a maximum value of 3S m This moment is then divided by B in order to account for the reduction in moment carrying capacity of elbows due to ovalization and stress concentrations as per Equation (9) of Section NB 3652.
(2) O.7M :
MI is the instabilit moment, as defined in Appendix F, and is the value at which the moment carrying capacity of the pipe reduces, or at which the deformation increases without bound, i.e. the value at which the tangent to the M- 9 curve is horizontal. The values of MI are indicated in Figs. 3 to 7 of this report.
M collapse as defined in Appendix F, is the moment at which the distortion is twice the value of the calculated initial departure from linearity, i.e. M(2 Q ); the moment pertinent to maximum strain of twice . g . In this report a conservative evaluation of the collapse moment is based on a yield stress of 2.3S m F y is obtained from 2.3S m = S 0 ( Q ) . Notice that the overestimation of the limit moment results in a magnification of the functional capability parameters. See Appendix A for further
.discussion.
The values of M collapse are directly extracted from the finite elements results, for the calculated value of 2.0 Q by using the strain scale of the M- 8 curves. The 0.9 is inherent from the limit moment assumption (S = 2.3 Sm).
-15" CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY
~IS
~
SHEARON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS 7.0 RESULTS (Cont'd) 0.7 M 1
B2:
M as previously defined is the ultimate moment due to testing ult 1
(Gerber, Ref. 2], which meets the code definition as an instability moment, and hence the factor 0.7. The division by B2 is meant to transform the test results on straight pipes into applicable'alues for elbows and other components.
From Table '3, it is evident that the employment of (0.7 MUlt1
/B2) as' limit moment is conservative since its values are in general, low'er than the other limits (with the exception of the l-l/2" diameter pipe, for which 0.7 MUlt /B2 practically agrees (slightly larger) with M(3S m )/B2.
1 F
The employment of (0.7 Mult /B2) as a functional capability criterion is in general, more appropriate than M(3S ) since the former is obtained by plastic analyses which can better represent the'lastic deformation phenomenon of elbows ovalization. However, for the specific pipe sizes considered, the highest ovalization pertaining to M(3S m )/B2 equals 1.01/ and the maximum area change for the same moment equals 0.13/, which are negligible. Note that prior to failure of the pipes, ovalization up to 45% and decrease in area as high as 351 are recorded (Figs. 3 to 9) but such moments are never approached if the requirements of ASME Codes are met. Typical percentage ovalization versus the bending moment in the elbow is shown on Fig. 11. As can be seen, ovalization is negligible for moments as close as 807. of M , after which it increases exponentially.
Therefore, use of Level D stress limits is meaningful for these pipe sizes.
-16" CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS 7.0 RESULTS (Uont'd)
The relationship between the instability moment predicted by the finite, element plastic analysis and the instability moment drawn from the test results (0.7M I and 0.7Mult /B2) is demonstrated and is .particularly accurate for the pipes of large t/R ratios.
The differences at smaller values of t/R (thinner pipes) is apparently due to the susceptability of thin pipes to local instability encountered in the tests due to the stress concentrations under the test loading apparatus rather than the instability moment collapse.
The primary stresses attributable to the bending of the elbow are accompanied by local secondary stresses that change from tension to compression across the thickness of the pipe wall and act in the circumferential direction of the pipe.
CAROLINA, POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS 8.0 PIPING COMPONENTS OTHER THAN ELBOWSs 8.1 Functional Capability of Tee and Branch Connections.
8.1.1 Introduction Presented here is a simplified engineering explanation aimed at proving that the functional capability of the tees and branch connections is well assured when the structural integrity Code requirements are satisfied.
The explanation provided is an analogy between branch connections and elbows so that the conclusions obtained from the plastic analysis of elbows can be utilized. It consequently follows that the discussion on functional capability is applicable only to tees and branch connections of the pipe sizes and thickness to radius ratios covered in the elbow analysis.
8.1.2 Tees versus Elbows For an elbow, the decrease in cross sectional area under an applied bending moment is attributed to the ovalization of the circular section under the influence of the radially inward resultants of the tensile and compressive membrane forces in the concave 'and convex side of the elbow. This fact is schematically shown in Fig. 12. For a tee connection, while the decrease in cross sectional area is attributed to the same phenomenon, it is much more difficult to visualize and assess. This is due te three reasons:
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS 8.0 PIPING COMPONENTS OTHER THAN ELBOWS'Cont'd) 8.1 (Cont'd) 8.1.2 Tees versus Elbows (Cont'd)
First, the tee has three legs and as such, it could be sub)ected to three bendi'ng moments, the interaction of which is not immediately obvious. Second, unlike the elbow where stability can be achieved only if the bending moments at each leg are equal, for the tee there are infinite combinations of balanced bending moments acting on the three legs. Third, the distribution of stress and internal forces is more complicated in tees than in elbows.
The above three items must be addressed for any sound comparison of functional capability between tees and elbows.
8.1.3 Bending Moments on Tee Legs (the limiting case)
It will be shown here that as far as functional capability is concerned, all possible bending moment combinations on the three legs of the tees are bounded by a limiting case. This is the case where the tee is loaded by two equal bending moments on two perpendicular legs, (much as an elbow is loaded). To show that this is the limiting case, reference is made to Figure 13a which shows a tee loaded by a bending moment at each leg. The behavior of this tee can be thought of as resulting from the super-position of two loading conditions; one attempting to close the flow area, and other counteracting the first, attempting to open the flow area. This is schematically shown in Figure 13b. It is evident that the absence of the counteracting moment would result in the greatest area reduction.
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS 8.0 PIPING COMPONENTS OTHER THAN ELBOWS: (Cont'd) 8.1 (Cont'd) 8.1.4 Stress patterns in the Tee For the limiting loading case, namely, that where the tee is loaded similar to the elbow, the stress patterns are schematically represented in Figure 14. As can be seen from the stress distribution at section AB and section DC, the resultant forces acting at points B and D are similar to their counterparts (concave and convex sides) on the elbow. This will tend to close the diagonal cross section BD which does not represent a flow cross sectional area. The cross sections AB, CB, DC, however, will not be subject to ovalization. It is these latter sections that deliver the rated flow. Figure 14 shows how section DB may be ovalized while the perpendicular section (AB, BD 6 DC) shift more or less rigidly.
It can thus be concluded that the flow sections of tees and branch connections will ovalize less than elbows of the same properties.
Since it was documented by elasto-plastic analysis that elbows undergo negligble area reduction under bending moments meeting Code requirements for structural integrity, the same holds true for tees and branch connections.
-20" CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS 8.0 PIPING COMPONENTS OTHER THAN ELBOWS: (Cont'd) 8.2 Discussions on the Functional Capability of Straight Pipe and Reducers.
For the s ecific ie sizes and schedules considered in this stud it was concluded that the functional capability parameters are acceptable for all elbows analyzed at the level D limits 0.7 M , M(3S m )/B2'ollapse
, M and 0.7M ult /B2.
Notice that M(3S m )/B2 is consistently bounded by 0.7 M of elbows. Since straight pipes are more stable than elbows, for comparable loadings i.e., less prone to ovalization> it can be conservatively concluded that the functional capability will always be assured for straight pipes if level D limits are met.
Recognizing that B2 ~ 1.0 for reducers, that reducers are gradual transitions in straight piping,. and that B2 has been demonstrated to be a meaningful parameter for functional capability, it is concluded that reducers are stable relative to elbows and not prone to gross deformations.
Therefore, elbows are considered to be the limiting case.
"21-
. CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABII ITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS
9.0 CONCLUSION
S It has been demonstrated by finite element elastic"plastic analysis on elbows that meaningful functional capability limits can be derived based on the ultimate moments as defined by Gerber modified by the B2 stress index for the piping component. Small deformations are assured if stresses less than 70% of the modified limit are maintained in the piping system. This criterion should be valid for any pipe size.
For the specific cases of relatively thick piping found in the Class 1 portions of pressurized water reactors and for Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant in particular, it is demonstrated that the small deformation limit defined above is bounded by a stress of 3.0S m calculated by an elastic analysis. Therefore, for these specific cases, the ASME III Level D limits do in fact represent acceptable functional capability limits.
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS
10.0 REFERENCES
- l. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Division 1>
Pressure Vessels, 1977 Edition with Addenda up to and including Summer 1978, ASME, New York, NY.
2~ Gerber, T.L., "Plastic Deformation of Piping Due To Pipe Whip Loading", ASME Paper No. 74-NE-l, ASME PVP, Nuclear Materials Division, June 1974.
- 3. Rodabaugh, E.C., "Functional Capabi'lity Criteria for Essential 'Mark II Piping", Nuclear Energy Engineering Division, General Electric Company, San Jose, California, NED0-21985, September 1978.
- 4. USNRC Standard Review Plan, 3.9.3 Rev. 1, ASME Code Class 1, 2 and 3 Components, Component Supports, and Core Support Structures, Section 3.9.3.1, Loading Combinations, Design Transients. and Stress Limits.
- 5. Rodabaugh, E.C., and Moorey ST E y "Evaluation of the Plastic Characteristics of Piping Products in Relation to ASME Code Criteria", US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG/CR-0261, July 1978.
6~ Liuy T H j Johnson' ~ Ry and Chang, K. C ~, "Functional Capability of ASME Class 2/3 Stainless Steel Bends and Elbows", Nuclear Technology Division, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, ASME 83-PVP"66.
- 7. McNeal Schwendler NASTRAN, Version 63 released August 12, 1983.
- 8. USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.48, "Design Limits and Loading Combinations for Seismic Category I Fluid System Components".
-23" CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS
10.0 REFERENCES
(Cont'd)
- 9. Hollomon, J.H., "Tensile 'eformation" ASME Meeting, New York, February 1945.
- 10. Hanford Engineering Development Laboratory - Nuclear Systems Materials Handbook, TID-26666 ll. Smith, C.V., "The Temperature Dependence of Yield Strength and Tensile Strength of Several Steels," Symposium in Elevated Temperature Properties of Austenitic Stainless Steels, Miami Beach, Florida, June 1974
- 12. Oladimegiy M K y "Material Properties Application in Pipe Rupture Analysis" Applied Physics Technical Report - APRT-20, Ebasco Services Incorporated, New York, 1981.
CAROLlNA POMER AND LIGHT COHPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POllER PLANT SUNRY OF CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING TO BE EVALUATED FOR FUNCTIONAI. CAPABILITY TABLE I DESIGN BASIS EVENT ~
SURGF. LINE RHR LINE(HL ACCUH LINE(CL HAIN STEAH FEEDMATER SAFE SHUTDOMN REACTOR COOLAHT PIPE BREAK PIPE BREAK PlPE BREAK PIPE BREAK PIPE BREAK PIPE BREAK ~ARThtAEAEE Lfne Attached Line Attached to S stem/Class I Line Line Attached to An Loo Reactor Coolant S stem 14" Surge Line Sl SI SI SI SI E 4" Pressurizer Spray SI/N (I) SI SI SI SI SI SI SI RCL Drain N SI SI SI SI SI SI SI RTD H SI Sl SI SI SI Sl SI RPV Vent N N Sl SI SI SI SI SI RPV Bottom Incore Sl SI SI SI SI SI SI SI 6" Pressurizer'ORV Sl 'SI SI SI SI SI SI SI Inlet 6u Pressurizer SRV SI SI SI SI SI Inlet Chemical & Volume Control S stem 3" Charging SI/N (1) SI SI SI SI SI SI SI 3" Letdovn N SI Sl Sl SI SI SI Sl 1-1/2" RCP Seal Mater SI SI SI SI SI SI SI In]
3/4" RCP Bypass N Sl SI SI SI SI SI SI 2" boron In] (C/L) SI E E E E E E Residual Heat Removal S stem 12" RHR Suction SI SI Sl SI SI SI SI Ssfet ln ection S stem 12" Accumulator Is] SI SI SI E 6" SIS to Cold Leg SI E SI E 6" SIS to Hot Leg SI SI SI 'E
TABLE - I NOTES AND DEFINITIONS Essential line - required to function and maintain its pressure boundary.
non-essential line {structural integrity line) - required to maintain its pressure boundary only.
not required to function or maintain its pressure boundary.
SI - for hot leg break N - for cold leg and crossover leg break
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS TABLE II PROPERTIES OF ANALYZED PIPE SIZES NOMINAL MOMENT PIPE OUTSIDE INSIDE WALL INSIDE OF SECTION e/R SIZE PIPE DIAM. DIAM. THICKNESS AREA INTERTIA MODULUS THICKNESS SHAPE (IN.) SCHEDULE (IN.) (IN. ) (IN.) (IN.2) (IN.4) (IN.3) NOM. RAD. B2 FACTOR 1"1/2 160 l. 90 1.338 0.281 1.406 0.483 0.508 0. 3471 1 4978 1 46510 160 3.50 2.626 0.437 5.42 5.03 2.876 0.2809 1.6416 1.4355 160 6.625 5.189 0.718 21.15 59.0 17.81 0.2434 l. 7864 1.4141 12 140 12.75 10.50 1.125 86.6 701. 109.9 0.193 2.0573 1.3878 14 160 14.0 11.188 1.406 98.3 1017. 159.6 0.2233 1.7802 1.40377
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ACME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS TABLE III OVALIZATION AND PERCENT CHANGE IN AREA FOR ALTERNATE CODE DEFINITIONS OF COMPONENT LIMIT MOMENTS MODIFIED APPROACH ELASTIC PLASTIC (FINITE ELEMENT) TEST RESULTS LINE SIZE 0 'Mcollanse
& ELBOW COMPARISON M(3Sm)/B2 0. 7MI (Sy 2.38m) 0.7 Mult/B2 PARAMETERS PARAMETERS 106 in-lb 106 in-lb 106 in-lb 106 in-lb l-l/2" Moment 0.0165 0. 017 0.019 0.0169 B2 ~ 1.4978 Ovalization 0.81/ 0.87/ 1.88% 0.87/
t/R 0.3471 Area Change 0.13% 0.157% 0.40% 0.157/
3 II Moment 0.0851 0.095 0.106 0.0833 B2 = 1.6416 Ovalization 0.93/ 1.41/ 2.48% 0.925%
t/R = 0.2809 Area Change 0.13% .21% 0.43% 0.12%
6" Moment 0.485 0.541 0. 623 0.454 B2 1.7864 Ovalization 0.85/ l. 45% 2. 87/ 0.613%
t/R ~ 0.2434 Area Change 0.07/ 0. 17% 0. 41/ 0.037%
121I Moment 2. 676 2.99 3.47 2.49 B2 2.0573 Ovalization 1.01/. 1.71% 3. 74% 0.698%
t/R ~ 0.193 Area Change 0.048% 0.12% 0.43% 0.032%
14 II Moment 4.357 5.18 5.94 3.997 BZ = 1.7802 Ovalization 0.64/ 1.61% 2.84% 0.405/
t/R ~ 0.2233 Area Change 0.04% 0,16% 0.40% 0.030%
FIG. 1-A SCHEMATI(: REPRESENTATION OF THE FINITE ELEMENT MODELED ELBOW l
~ f> ~
~
z EC X111 ew z 111 Y ZlllOUT OF THE PAGE e 180 A
x0 SECTION A.A.
111 Cp O~ ~ '..k~Y 4D cP",.O~
0 Y ra-14 R~D/2 R I.SD YlllIN THE PAGE
+~0 Cy 9Q (Xo ~ BASIC COORDINATES SYSTEM
~ CARTESIAN COORDINATES AT THE FREE END (Xl1 le 111'11 (r,e,zI CYLINDRICALCOORDINATES AT 8 5 OF THE ELBOW (ro. 8 o, Z ) ~ CYLINDRICALCOORDINATES AT
(~) DEGREES OF THE ELBOW
FIGURE 1b PLOT OF THE ELBOW FINITE ELEMENT MODEL 6" P ELBOW
~ CP&L SHEARON HARRIS
Ar reef h vU )0 d%4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '1 ~ ~
~ ~
e t
FlGURE 1c PLOT OF THE ELBOW FlNITE ELEMENT MODEL 6" P ELBOW CP&L SHGARON HARRlS
~ 4 FIGURE 2 STRESS STRAIN CURVE OF THE MODELED ELBOW MATER IAL 90 70 A37$ 31
.A378 TYP ffH {TEMP ~ $ 50o) 30 0.025 0.05. 0.075( .10 0.125 j0.15 :0.175 0.20 [0.225 IIII I llllll STRAIN {IN/IN)
CPSIL SHEARON HARRIS
FIG. 3 (M.e) FINITE ELEMENTS RESULTS OF THE fN" ELBOW I
RUN (jj(AM 81PAG98, 6" e i!I I.I I I I I .I !i ELBOW SHED 180 MATER(AL h 3 7 8 TYPE 304 i! '( Jt(I.
()~I
(
. '.III 'I
. ,: ' i'..!
DATE 4/7/8 1
ri. (
4.8 9.8 14.0 17.9 21.0 23.6 25.6 i!Ii i!;i jl! I I.:.'j ! li 15" 'ELBOW-% OF OVALIZATION'.:'..'. ':
'i I:I',j I,"'I ,I:; -,:';! ,"I: ::
I .oB 1.26( 8.7 14.2 16.3 15.3 III!Ilijillllilllllllll<llllllllillllllUI!lllliilK-:i::::.:'"j,':"
0.0 45.0 60 66.0 68 058.1 58.168.3 41.938.5 1.5" ELBOW-MAXEQUIV. STRESS (KSI) .'
0.16 0.209 0.24 0.253 I IIII kn.253 llljilll!IIII::ilillll! IIjj/,'I'jIII!Y,'jIjl
~ ~
((! I'
'I! :!'(it
~
EFFECTIVE PLASTIC STRAIN I
0.06
!)
I(
I ~ I:
Cl :II I ~
III I ~
~
) 'I z
I-R I II'I 0.03 :I( ::l 0
il I: .l ( II1
~
i(l: I:
I~
RBER /82 !i li II ;:I
'. I g( ~
lI.
('LB FINITE LE NT AN IS-0 0.02,
- I I!l : I:jib .I}( !II'
~:;
I'jl
'75/SZ[
I
'.I',I I ii I(i: .II:
- I I: ' ::
~
I ~
I: Ill, ~
'III
- .I :::::!'I Ii' 0.01 I ~
~
I: I I I Ij li ill ~~
I ~I
'.5
~
~I Ij I II' ~ ~
I 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 C (aLll I )
SHEARON HARR(S Ul illl li 0 (RADIAN)
FIG. 4
{M.e) FINITE ELEMENTS RESULTS OF THE 3" ELBOW 8.88- 6.67- 11.77) 19.13 3" ill E LBOW-% OF I I OVALIZAT10 N
'I '
I I'Ilail III! '!s oi.oSI: !1.33'I 1.16 I o7I 13.56 ELBOW-% AAEA CHANGE
~
~ ~I~~
~II~~
~
~
~~
~
I, ~
~~
<< OL:. i II~
~ ~
I~~
~
~I~~~
~ ~
!!~~~
~
I ill, I.i
~~I
~~~ ~ !~~~
~
~
~
~ ~
~
I ! 44.7:. 53.3 55.5, 57.9 ELBOW-MAXEQUIV. STRE SS IKSI) i I Ijl Ij
- .:..26 lll II IIIIIII IIIIII
.048 .10'1 .128 160 .1SS
!I I j ELBOW-PLASTIC STRAIN
.: .24 I Is I'I I ii::;
'ii:ri I: !I
~2..20 s,s jl!
.:.18
.1.!
'.:: I.feIII i!i ANALYSIS-3'l
'"Flif(i
~
- .14 EE LEMENT EL BOW
'll le ~
- j ;,' I
,':.;.12 i
.'MM, I
- .I!
i i. I I 2
GER BER I 2I3
..10 I)':II I I I.
I
- I I Q,'i 7G l82 I
I i;I: Ilf:
"I I (jl I/I I I
- .'..06 'I
'.:I:.':
~
jlj II >>
f'I II I:'i:
)
I >>I
.I. I>>'
~ ' >> ~
ji I~ I I
ii I fail':
I f i.!I jf-: ~~
le :~ li ;::I I!i ~s; le
.02 sr, ~
I .III :::! 'Ii: ;:::
fi,: .Il. 0!: ilj! I II
~ I !i!: 'I I ::I:I II
'.3
~ e ~
I'. ".:: ;.ii I'i j I io2), I'!I...
CP82L-i:
'I>>
"i: '"I 0.1!
~
..'HEARO I Is I
Ili.lill" II"'
I l lii!ilili!iI<i!III
- o6f
.'lo.7,:'Iti,il! ! o.S 0 ~ I II
'll>>I
.i .'1.l i: II 1.2 I
lll RUNNAME 803AG85 I/08/84 I31 GERBER/83 8(RAOI AN)
Ill RUN NAME 803ACF 3/38/di
FIG. 5 (NM) FINITE ELEMENTS RESULTS OF TKE 6" ELBON
.I >>>>; II~ ~ I 'I ~
e I
L'-I I~ I",'jjl 'LASTRO PLASTIC LARGE DEFORMATION ANALYSIS I I:I, l ~
ll e I
)'6" ELBOW SCHEDULE 160 MATERIALA378.TYPE 30i I j
II>> ~:I I ~ ',I]
I
!:il) ')I'
,I .I'l
,I I'uIII
~ I ll! I!I
'll: iw
~
) i! el l 6" ELBOW-X OF OVALIZATION
)
':li !
j I
) IIII Illl6!ll!!I!Illll!I!III!IIIIIII I:)I I'lI e>> llIIIIIIIII!ill!
I'I'>>L i)i jji:
~1I6 I 1
,jl! IMFltTlllNIlt! IINIIIIINIINIIINIIl
'.", I) 6' ELBOW-EQUIVALENTSTRESS {KSI)
- .'P
.: I) ll. I': ttt!I!II!ItI!l"TTIIIIII'III!t!IIIIN 8" 'LBOW-PLASTIC STRAIN
>>I I II"':I".
e i)j:
e
- i I Il<l ii'I;
.:;!e.'I I
jj I'j: >>:: SIS-6" INITE ELEM ELBOW I)I.'ljj I.gl ijl', ~
Ie
['!llj:,:.!~ll GERBER/B2 l.lj I" i .6
~ 'lij
~
I II .
~ I: )) I 7 GERBER/82
,I
- .i i::: li:.
- Ii llj ijl II i i) I! )i-.
I:; !j .I>>l I~I
'JI . II
"': I) I jl Pjq
- i); I I>>
I
~
I.
>>. I I
.2 .7: 1.0 1.3 1.5
'CPiL. I 31 I
SHEARON HARR I ll g(~~An( RUM 804A047, ~ 10@i
FIG. 6 (M.8) FINITE ELEMENTS RESULTS OF THE 12" ELSOW
'j' IIo II ol ~ I LII
- ol
!Ii III. .Io ~
- I
~~
~
lo"
- a.l I ~
~
I I
I.;..
II
'I IIII Io It!! Iljj'~ Ijl
.s,; ana I I:;I
- II .I'i!il 0 <<9 NWNIIINNlllllllllllllNIINIINIINllll II o 'li; I II
- pl ~ o
'll IIIHIIHIIIIHIIIHIHHIHHIIHIHIHIIHIIHHII
.:L'!I:
I:! 12" ELBOW-EQUIVALENTSTAESS {KSI
- I,'it I an,ll I) w 'll a
Ch In I
an NINNNIMNlNNIIINWIINN i'I':
<<Iasi!
o 12" I I ELBOW-PLASTIC STRAIN I I'
~
I ~
!'.ll FLATTENIN E LBOW kLI i: '%C HANGE I EA ELASTROPLASTIC LAAGE DEFORMATION ANALYSIS
'i1! I I.
ill! I 17'IPE. SCHEDULE 14OMATEAIALA378.TYPE 318 Ll
':12.0.
<><I::.'Ili'IIRABQH3 I' {RAD.)
IIUN NAME E'l2 AG 83,44.54 SOZAGFV 33044
4 5~
Fla. 7 (M.e) FINITE ELEMENTS RESULTS OF THE 14" ELBOW Ilt! j'I l i I: I !
I L' FI:I.. J-'l I ~I I
li-I.'l:
I(:'" '.:
I(l
~~
ill: ': ~
"I
~ I I~
~
II.
,I 10.1 19.32'i 25.77 (i) 30.27! 32.88 m.87 ELBOW-5 OF OVALI2ATION: '-lI"
~~
18,0 01)
(
2(
I J !I( l(I 'l I I J Iiil (',,!.:-I lli', lli!.:!ll::liIl:. Al IIII I I !I I H .ii:
,,03 9.78 15.98 t l20.91 23.98 27.44 I 14" ELBOW-% CHANGE IN AREA (
~
I I t!
67.40 I
57.88 JJ I
liiiil('ti!ilii i I llll l'i" 41.47 47.64 65.44 ELBOW-EQUIVALENTSTRESS IKSI) 14.0 I II I II I 03 068 23 .167 J
179 189 197 li" ELBOW-PLASTIC STRAIN I II I I I I:
ELASTROPLASTIC LARGE OE FORMATION ANALYSIS 14" PIPE. CHEDULE 160 MATERIAL A376.TYPE 304 12.0 I I.
I
- I'0.0 I I: (
~
I~
R
,Jll 'I!:
I I- FIN T ANALYSIS- BOW i!!
z ~
I
~
I'i I
~
II:
~~
I ~~
0 ;I Ilh (((i I II:.
~
I I: :I '. I 8.0 ER BER 82
'-!JI!
g II I~ ~I
~ I I I I:I il lt:I 4.0 82 Igl'l (ill(
I I'
~ II I I~
~
Ij-I(l"i II: .il. I;
~:(I: ii"." I!:
~ ~ II -~
I I (~
I t(
I! I Ig ,i II J. I jl J I: j( I I: ~
0.2 0.5 tl (;J: (I JIO 6J: ltl (j0 7i '0.8 0.9 1.0 I(
culpa'L III IIII il e<e~o~uy HARRIS ÃI'HEARON
~,!
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ it Ill~ IO ~
FIGURE 8 DEFORMATION SHAPE OF THE MODELED PIPE UNDER THE APPLIED MOMENT 6" ELBOW SCH 160 SUBCASE 4, 6 1407 'I 307 1207 t'07 1
180 ~ t00
! 1007 1707 HHI 1101 1907
>407 107 107 I 007 0.0 0&
SCALE 1:6 IS USED FOR SOTHPIPE I.ENGTH AND ITS DEFORMATIONS.
CP&L SHEARON HARRIS I
i
FIGURE 9 TYPICALPROGRESSIVE DEFORMATION OF THE 200'90'70~
ELBOW'S CROSS SECTION OBTAINED BY THE FINITE ELEMENT METHOD P EL8OW 160'00'2"
~ ~
V 140'20'30
~ ~ V
.x 150'10'40'20'50'10'
~
P p ~ ~
~~
~ ~
r B .vC,. ~
<<'r '
230'20'40'10'50'60'00'901 100'60'0'70'0'80'90'0 19 13, " 700
'l( 290'0
. )X~ o.i RUN: E12AG83, 4 &84 310'0'
~
A-SUBCASE 2,09,8 .08 RAD 300'0'10'00
.DISPLACEMENT 8- SUBCASE 4,01, 8~.308 RAD '+
1 DISPLACEMENT C -SUBCASE 4,30, II+.888 RAD DISPLACEMENT
', ~
'~,' '>"
1
~ ~
~
CPSL SHEARQN HARRlS 320'50'0'0'0' 20'400 30'30'
FIGURE 10 PROGRESSIVE ELASTO.PLASTI TRESS DISTRIBUTION OBTAINED FROM THE FINITE ELEMENTS RESULTS l I~
II jl ji) 'l ll LI ji j!IJ Jl):
tj ',jr II)
I illl ill! iiii alii liil Illi Ill xiii "I i
II )
~
14" P PIPE ELBON SCH 160 MATERIALA376 I,l) I TYPE 304 I III I
I KSI 28.6 KSI I 39.9 KSI 62.2 KSI Ol ~ I I
)
I!
I
- I I
gO tl tj I 3 l.o ')
I 63.6 I
I li !I .I I
)SUBCA SE 1.2 SU AS E2 10 UB CASE 3 10 UBC ASE 4.10 I I I I i!j )I II I I
IL!j I
)L. II I
rii CP)tIL SHEARON HARAIS
FIGURE 11
- ?s PERCENTAGE F LATTENINGVERSUS BENDING MOMENT ELASTO MLASTIC LARGE DEFORMATION ANALYSIS 2" 4 ELEBOW 14" P ELBOW 1.5" P ELBOW 6" p ELBOW 25 sty p 10
'=:0.4 r "-"=. 0,6 p== 0.8 -1,2 ~" =1.8 M/MI (MI ~ INSTABILITYMOMENT)
CP&L SHEARON HARRIS
FIGURE 12 REPRESENTATION OF DFCREASE IN CROSS SECTIONAL AREA OF AN ELBOW UNDER APPLIED BENDING MOMENTS
FIGURE 13 TEE SECTION UNDER GENERAL BENDING MOMENTS 13-A t
M1+ M~
13-8 M1 M2 M1 M1+ M~
FIGVRE 44 STRESS PATTERNS IN TEES UNDER LIMITING BENDING MOMENT CASE 0
AROSS SECTION C-0 B'ROSS.SECTION A-B c'
I
]tt II FREE II
- g. i END /1 I
I I
I I I gC 1 I M C'1 w. l I 1 l 1 1
l 1
l 1
1 C'ROSS-SECTION B-C
A-1 CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS APPENDIX A SENSITIVITY STUDIES INTRODUCTION In this report, the strain power law is used to describe the material stress-strain data in the plastic zone; whereas the elastic properities are defined by using, Young's modulus of elasticity E as given in the code, see Figure 2. The intersect point which is the proportional limit S equals P
20.4 ksi for the A-376-304 material and equals 20.5 ksi for the A-376-316 material. Accordingly, the yield stress S defined by the 0.2X strain offset equals 26.4 ksi for A-376-304 and 27.08 for A-376-316. The code values for S of the two materials at 650 F equal 17.9 ksi and 18.5 ksi respectively. The quoted values of S and S clearly indicate that the strain power law inherently overestimates the stress values in the small stress zone. However, in the report, the stress-strain curves of Figure 2 are not modified to reflect the code values of S , since it is believed that the results of plastic analysis are independent of the stress-strain data in the small-strain zone.
Sensitivity studies are conducted, however, to document the above concept and to prove beyond any doubt, that the functional capability parameters (ovalization and change in area) remain acceptable when using the material presentation that meets the code value of S which is referred to hereafter as Material (3). It has been demonstrated that the instability moment M is insensitive to the changes in S and S , yet p
it depends mostly on the ultimate stress value S u and on the shape of the stress-strain curve at large, regardless of the details of it in the small-strain zone.
e A-2 CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS APPENDIX A INTRODUCTION: (Cont'd)
For the "new material" (3) that meet the code value of S , the functional capability parameters remain to be very small and practically negligible, at the code limit moments of M(3S ) and 0.7 MI.
Moreover, the functional capability parameters at t'e collapse moment M as c
defined by Appendix F of the ASME Code and according to the values of Paragraph 11-1430 proved to be of even smaller values for the "new material (3) II
A-3 CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS APPENDIX A ANALYSIS AND RESULTS Figure A. 1 illustrates .3 material representation of the SS A 376-304 material as employed in this sensitivity study<
A summary of the 3 repr'esentatives is given as follows:
Material Proportional Yield Stress Representation Unit Sp Sy Plastic Number Description 10 psi Ksi Ksi Properties Material used 25.5 20.4 26.4 Strain power in Report law as shown (Fig 2) on Fig 2
'(2) Extremely 25.5 4.0 14. 0 softened material in the vicinity of Sy (3) Code value of 25.5 12.221 17.9 Sy is best fit The 3 materials are employed in the Finite element analysis of the 6" elbow and the performance curves (M- g ) are determined. Figure A.2 represents the (M- g ) curve of the Material (2). and Figure A.3 represents the (M-& )
curve of the Material (3). By comparing the aforementioned figures with their Material (1) counterpart (Fig 5), it becomes apparent that M has hardly changed from one material to the other. In fact 2', and 1/2% deviation of M are recorded for material (2) and (3) respectively w.r.t MI of Material (1).
The results of the 3 material representations are augmented in Figure A-4, which displays the moments as functions of percentage flattening (ovalization). A scale of the '1. change in ar'ea is also included.
A-4 CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS APPENDIX A ANALYSIS AND RESULTS (Cont'd)
Figure A-4 proves that the / flattening vary but only slightly (1%) from one material to the other and clearly indicates that t'e flattening at the M(3S )/B2 and 0.7 MI moments are still negligible.
m The comparison parameters of the 3 material representation are presented in table A-l.
A-5 CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS APPENDIX A COLLAPSE MOMENT Mc The collapse moment M collapse 11 definition used in this report represents an upper bound that is analogous to the code definition. The collapse moment M
c is introduced here for comparison purposes. M c
is defined in accordance with Appendix F'nd by using the rules of II-1430. The values of M
c along with the illustration of the code interpretation of II-1430 are presented in figure A-5. The flattening and percent change in area at the M values of the 3 material representations are given on figure 5. It is c
then concluded that the functional capability parameters evaluated at Mc are much smaller for the softer materials since smaller values of Mc are obtained for the latter.
4 A-6 CAROLINA POWER AND. LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS APPENDIX A BACK-UP STUDIES:
M(3Sm) versus Mule:
Computations of the elastic moment that correspond to a maximum stress of 3S m
of a straight pipe, i.e. M(3S ), for different pipe sizes that vary
~ ~
from 1-1/2" to 14", and for its various pipe schedules> i.e. various t/R ratios, were conducted. Similar computations of the ultimate moment M 1 as defined by Gerber (2) were also undertaken. The values of S m and S u are 0
taken at a 650 F temperature.
ratio of 0.7 versus M(3S )/B2 for elbows are plotted versus The M ult /B2 m t/R 0 . As expected, the ratios of moments as obtained from the vast range of sizes and schedules, all fell on the same curve. Illustrated in Figure A-6 is the mentioned curve, which can be thought of as 0.7S u /3S m times "Gerber's shape function". The shape function is also plotted versus t/R 0 for the variety of the pipe sizes. In order to bring the comparison in perspective, the ratio of 0.7S u /3S m is used as a multiplier to the shape function and the resulting curve is included on Figure A-6. A cut-off point of t/R
.26 exists, where 0.7 Mult exceeds M(3S ) for higher values of t/R0 and m
visa-versa.
The shape factor (function) is defined as the ratio of the limit plastic moment with uniform stress distribution versus the elastic moment of the sand maximum stress value. In other words, the ratio of the plastic section modulus to the elastic section modulus.
It is clear from Figure A-6 that the "shape factor" inherent in Gerber's definition of Mult is bounded by the conventional shape factor and that both functions exhibit similar trends.
A-7 CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY
~
SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS APPENDIX A BACK-VP STUDIES: (Cont'd)
M(3Sm) versus Multc (Cont'd)
Notice that the range of t/Ro of the pipes considered in this report is from 0.18 to 0.296 (quoted in the report are values of t/R from .223 to .347 for which R is the nominal radius).
The 1.09'.
highest exceeds M(3S ratio of
).
M(3S m 'lt
)/0.7 For the 1-1/2" pipe (t/Ro ~ 0.296),
M for this range of piping equals the value of 0.7 M slightly m
A-8 CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS APPENDIX A LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure A"1 A-376-304 Material Presentation in the Small-Strain Zone for Sensitivity Studies.
Figure A-2 Elasto"Plastic Large Deformation Analysis 6" Elbow-Schedule 160 Material A376 Type 304 Figure A-3 Elasto-Plastic Large Deformation Analysis 6" Elbow-Schedule 160 Figure A-4 Elasto-Plastic Large Deformation Analysis 6" Elbow-Schedule 160 Material A376 Type 304 Figure A"5 Elasto"Plastic Large Deformation Analysis 6" Elbow-Schedule 160 Figure A-6 Conventional Shape Function Versus Gerger's "Shape Function" for Pipes TABLE A"1 Ovalization and Percent Change in Area for 6" Elbow using Different Elasto-Plastic Material Properties for "Limit" Moments
F URE A1 A-376-304 MAT REPRESENTATION IN THE SMALL-STRAIN FOR SENSITIVITY STUDIES I
40
-' -j.
- I::::
- -::I:::::::::::::::
Tj 55 I
- I': 'ii lii: !(t jl: 11
~
FI 1:
I' : !! II: .Ij:
ll!I I::ll ;:I L'j
'.:..30: .
ii! II !Ijl I::! '"':. ii i!i !Ii il! IIFI ggi(:I!: jii
~
I! --:
281
~
!Ii !!i i!I: 'Ij '!
I:F I:::
l!ji:::',
'I i t ii 'li (::;:
ll!!'!
(3 i'!!i )ii! Iii PROPORTIONAL
!Ii Ii <I f (ijj iiP, li:
I: I I
-II ! jt.'t!I !(I '2)
MATERIAL LIMITSp YIELD STRESS/
'QQQQ,";i I
ji 5 I' : .t 11
"'I I'I!!"i i KSI KSI IJ II lll ',I jljj Ili iIl.:
- } il I I Iijl lri Ii':
(1)
I:! I't I! i! .! I II 'I AEPOAT 20.4 28.4
<h :i:: 'li'.I)(
Y i Jlj L'i I jii I! II tilt I
i jj IF I III.I (2)
I<I Ij!Ill)j!:I') )I I tl} I EXTREMELY 4.0 14.0
<it I<t
'L i!!lii' .!l: : I!:
jill j)l: SOFT tt: ijil iL}
I Ot .'..,
I".I !il:j 'I!I I
I<'i I ji 18:: (3) il!}J:-;:
AA')j :I"
'.". Iii.: ! I)! "i I::iti"ti}'::i:: CODE 12221 17.9 BEST FIT wL~" ;I
.::I 16.
II ill'I '!i) ijii
()I I"::: '.:. ';
- 'i,i4-' II ! Il:: '!:I I I:
" il fi': Ii 11 II it 11 It ~
I)::
'i;;:I:;lj I:i; L! '(j!
'.:,:j'I':-'.:::: ,:t.:I;;
I I'l I:I III ~I': illj lj::
"i' ll 5;ll
'ii "I: I; 'i::
<)'s i::!ii:::!I::::(
!I!i'! I I: I: ;.'I: lii:: ::.: Fi: j)!::
!:!i !iii i " ! i
- I.: .I ill I "..
I II <Ijj "!i :I ':I
- ..10! .I:5 !! I I,I II Fi ii! ,'i::}:.: '}
I! ll
'lli
!i:::. II ~ LL IIE ( 'i I i!i!!!!'ii! I I I '8,'il II I ii:i i i)i li
- 1 I'I II
....,6 it: i!i: ;I<:
I i iL! :i! I
!!(tj
'1}I "I'" ""
!i::::I.'."..'I li! Idl L::ill
!)}l II li'. iil :ii II: ~'~,
I ".
!I! !.I!,I (I,'i'. I I):
I:i,
'!4 I.':.-.
'.! I: 1.":
f!I it) l<
!Ili II:
'll :it! 'ii: ii'i i :::
jii:: ::t
- -::2; :5I :; .I"!
i!: !: :i:i i: ii:! I!" I!i! !!I. i!I: i!5: )I 001 '.003 005 007 009 Ij'i!5 I ":!011:j!
'STRAIN t)NRNI" iiil 013 015 017 it'2 i.019 CPS< L SHE/RON HARRIS
A-2 ELASTO PLASTIC LAR FORMATION ANALYSIS ~ ~ i~::!L'::l.:: : ill ~ 6" 4I ELBOW-SCHEDULE 160 MATERIALA376 TYPE 304 I'.: lll: eil:::I: tl j ~ ~ I
~ Ie
~
I co
~ ~
- Ti %
I FLATTENING. '; '. i t".'-':I.I!
~ I II; I'I'
- I<<l ~
- alI ~
tlr ill esl
~
II II I~ 1 j ~ I:I: 1 m: .O I~ .<<I
~ ~
~ ~ ~
i:i!
~ ~ I<<f ~ ~ ~
% CHANGE IN AREA I~
.!i! ~ ~
I ~ I: ~ I:: ~ ~ alta L ail ,'f I sl Ie ~ ,.EQUIVALENT S R I" j ~ I'i'i i I
~
~ fe:
' I'
~
~
I
~ .'tel ilj!'PLASTIC STRAIN ii
~ ~
i i)la f~ I j!I I lett I:jl 'is II)l Ii I:
~ I : ~ le
~ ~
~~
~
I
~
~
~ ~
I."
~
I ~ j
~ ~
I
~ ~
III I If lit: : II ~ I I'.: I ~ ~ lj:I I~ st i bl:
;~
~
lit: I
~
~
I ;l II<<
~ I II:I I
( je
~
"'i i's".
I I
,': i liii!',I ~~
~ I
~
j
~ I: : ~ I:
ii': 'i'i I: t "I I tt
}I Ii j
~ ~
ifti stj:
~
f I:I ~ jl LL I: I' f
~ a
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ I I
~
}: !! i ~ ~
~
I' z II
~
li! fill I ~ fff Lllf Ill I tel
' l j I I I~
Cl Cl iU I ii i I II })' le z ~ ~ II I Jl ill lie I ~I ii I ll I al I.I !Lii it)l lel
;!ii 9! IJI I ills
~ ~ a'.t) el I 'I'I all I lj ~ ~ I !: I la Is
'j"
~
~ ~
I )J)i!H ielj
'I
.I
~
~
i II. I~ I ~ I
'll 1
~
~ ~
I}i ie el
- f': ill) I Ijs
~ ~ a
~
~ ~ i if}s I! I ~
,,"JII I~
~ ~
- el I 'I ~
I Jj I'
~
~ ~
~
~ II ~ ~
L} } s ~ ~ jijj li ~~ ii'- !,'ii IIII: ~
}I ~ I:
I}}
~ I I
I~~
~
I L'll :ell "i 'fj):i':-: ~ i Ill I~ j!jj I~ ~ ~~ Iftl::IjI;;: jl 'llI i:"i'lli ill' ~ IiI ~:I !': ll::jl
~ if, al I'j jl I ~ ~ ;I I
~ I 'i I<<'.I ~~
tj,l
~
j :. g:I ~tl.: j ~ I ~ I
~ ~
~~ ~ ~
~~
~ ~
el :::::it:}IesI: I: ~ ~
- I I. ~,'.
~
I I:.
~ II
<<I: << I
-I I ~
!iii I!!: .~
~
<> it I }lie 'I
~s Isl .::I ~
I Sjal I I s
~ I, sl I~
I ~ ~ i!ii jijj I'III
.Iss IIL I'.;l I: :s',i :iil jl'I I I sill ."I
~
ss s
- Ij-<<- <<1 Aii I~ ~
- I: :sl: I Ij'is}
- ie: jij: I'Ij sis. i' ~
!is '!'I !Il .':I I:I: It: !i,i si j a
I 1 I'is ~ s' ~ ~ ".Il:::l I:j ~ :e
~ ~
.It :i,!! :jl'.:I
'IlI Il.t 'i:
~
I I: slit I:Lt I.': II I": I :jt: s ~
~ III I: el
;I!i !}Ii jji s!sI; etl
~
1 lgl. tti: " :I
~ ~ ~ ~
':I I IL I ~ ~
II tl ss s
' l ~ I 'sl I
ls I~ Is ~ I "I'i j'jROTATION (RADIANS)::I j. I!Il I jl ij s' jJ}/jt" " ' }j' os}i Ii:
~
ss RUN NAME: }to6AG39 8/12/84 CP&L SHEARON HARRIS
Fl A4
~ I
'>>I "
i ELASTO PLASTIC LARGE OEFORMATION ANALYSIS . }.. . j I
'I ~ ~
. 6"
~ I "i "I E LBOW SCHED 160
- I':I
~
I ia.'..":: !Li !L
~ ~ ~
I
- >>j' I ::I: sl Ij:I
.5.
!:!Ij (II ~!jf
~
~~
~ ~
~ ~
si ~
!jlif
'I I I ~~ ~ I I of I
~ I
- I::'.: ::: !if;:I fe ~~
I \I ~ pji! :i'.i i'!: .i I
~
at
~ >>
.:I <<.'I:: ~ !ifjI
~ I ~ oI
~ ~
el:: I
~
sl
'II
~
- ii:.I iiil il
!!!jj!i
~ ~ ~
I
": I tat SAR EA CH ANG E :::: II. '!I I~
~ ~ ~
pit j
- I tel :I:I r :"illI ill: ii! i.li I~
il: ! I ~ .:I a~
~ ~
I I I ijj iiii bi
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
i}i, >>'I
~ ~
~>>
~ ~
~ !.I I'.I ~
I~
~
~~
I I
~ ~
~ ~
I.s.! lal: II: : fo ~ I Illa I I I!}I L!j! :,I":.Ie,'l ', el I jll sl I ~ ~ I ~
~ I i:!.'!i!'i j' slit ~ ~~ ~~
t!: i j'::i ':j . I ~ : II~ j"j }!! lla I" "I'iil'III :ols j'ji I I
! I!
e I. a ot>> g' '!ii 'Ji:tli h.". ~ I. I ~ I I:: !I'I fli! i"i
~ I
~ ~
'li! . Ij I~ I
~ I Fal:t!.!:I~: I jll
~ ~
03 :;i ji I ILI ~ ~ I
~
~
I I'
'L~~~uiL I~ '!Ii ol ttt
~ ~
- 02 tl: I I: i!. I it ~ e a
~ t z Iaiij,: L ij:
JI .I I' ' ~~ i I:
~
~ ~
I ~ I~
~ I I
~~
~ :is!, I~ I I~
Cl ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ I i:..:! ::i ii;; :I!I II.I
'>>::I
~
js I 7Mi jp: I:I I 'l l
'I I: iiliI 'ill
~
oil ~
!I ".:: ! Ill ! I"! Ill! j. .
~ ~ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ ~ I z
1 I! i
'It!let'll'ljl'tl...
;3S /B2:,;
~~
- i" I ~ ~
- .'}j:f; illI alii t:!
Lie I t I,.
!Ii ~ .I ~
! i'ti! !I:i I!iIj Ill! Il
- J' ~~
O I I>> I :fil I ~ I I
~~ :il!
I ~ ~ '.
!.j I
~:I I
~~ I ~ I
'jt!i jj'I !jill I': I~
I': 'I
~ ~
I I! Lit: I ~ :: I I I I~ il~: i t jj II I~
~ Ii ~
I ~ ~ ~
~
fat I I ~ ..
~ ~
~~ I~ t ~
sl ~~ ' :Ij ~ I u i -'i xiii j-:i
~
joij I ~ ~
'l l: 'I:I j':! .' I':I
~ ~ ~
lj I 2-
~ ~
~
i!!i !!Ii i ; ~ ~ i I'j jjji,'i ::al ltL i
- I::
jij lii! !jL! .:!:! I ~ ~ I~ ~ ~ ~
~
el t l!.!..... i" ~ ~ I~ ll: I:I. i!!
~, I!i o!i I 'I::
i ~
~ ~ I~ ~ ~ ~
I Ill
~
~ ~
~ ~ I jell }I II ~ Ii ~ I I! o
~ ~ ~ sl I le I
- Ij I: ,::
iL I I :jj: if!}::!!iii ji I:I I ~ lail Ill Ill'lie I III ijl j'll ill "j4 ijl I
~
I
'32 FLATTENING ii ll
~ ~ ~ ~
ii16 I : .". 2 I 28:-'20' lg li % ~ ~ j iji: I ~ ~ II I j' i i I CP6t L RUN NAME: 806AGe7 .4/7/84 SHEARON HARRIS 806AGXX 8/8/84 806AG39 8/12/84
-5
~
FIG U 1 I I "I' 'I ""I I ELASTO.PLASTIC LARGE DEFORMATION ANALYSIS e 6" ELBOW SCHED 160
' I -I ~
t
.rOs ~ I I:
~~
- I '
~
-'!.60 ."'.
~
~ ~ ~
e M o.556 x 10 ~ II
% OVALIZATIONo 1.70% I ~I.
AREA CHANGE ~ 0.19%%u iil iel
%%uo
'e
~ t tt 'jo a
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I ol
~ ~~
I:e t.: ::: :::: I ~ I: 50::: jii ~ ~ ~
~
~ ~
e ~ jl-. I'.I
~
I;! I:
~~~~
~ ~
~ i:I
~
o
~
~
e I e
":I lo I:I
~
io
- ll I::: 3 .'ll :: I I II' i ~
e I Ij ~
}s
~
l!: !!Ij !i i li : .!j ~~
.':: ':;; Ijii ilail )i{i{i}lilill ill} il'i Il:!: !Ije sill ~ i; lj I CD sl :lol M ~.342 x 10 j.
Z :tj'!I'4 i:: i'I'i!ii'.j'!ex I ~~ ~
~~~
~ ~
Jq I! i OVAL IZATION eo 0.93%%d CD
%%uo AREA CHANGE ~ 0.09%%uo "" "I CD jjt.30::::.:,I; I~ ~ ~ %%uo lilt ~~!Ij I
I~
~e Ii.
I- I i 'jjj i i ! i: z
~ e
!I
~
'i'Ics III I ~ '"lt I I I
e
~
lt ji}t Jt: I:I! ji!'ll!srl ~ ~
~
I II' 'll lie ~ ~ o je le o I sl i i:".:!j:i.:l stills : ,I lett: I:
~ ~
I I I ~ Ie
~ e ~
I: 'll II iilllijill jlj; IIi ij li'l
~
20!
,otl
~ ~
~
~
I'l I o' Ii ,!I I
~
j QZIil
}."I '.}ll I! i I lal ~
}LI},:4 LL i}I{(!I:
l,' e ll'; I e
!}I}!$ {tj t}il M ~ .14 x 10 Is Ij'I il "': %%d OVALIZATION~ 0.29%%d I~ ~ ~
I'I 'I" 'I 'I AREA CHANGE ~ O.oz%%d;. ll i:I'e,l Ila ::I'I I ji
%%uo Ii I iliJ I "igji!i .': IIII Jit"'I ~~~e I' i!i: i,!! "Ij! Ilia I j ";I':! Ie Il ejl ii! I': jis ;Its
~ nH!
~ ~
lal tji.:I'.: I li'!II !I{: ttji II ll:: I., ii'j :!:.! Iiij J
~ ~~ ~
I I I:
- i!i : i , itl sl I: I .j'ilt 'il ili il:
!!:-'l:
~ I Iee I,.~
~ I
~ ~ ~
II I Itl! ,";.'l:; si I: e ~
'! I. ii'i e ~ I ~
sl! I II a!I oil I I j' let ~ ~ ~ ~ s.' le . II
!! I ;i I!i. tjtl::t. "! jell
~
.'I:.i I~
~ ~ ~~~ ~
!.,j!},!I j!! ::.I::: lls: I~ i
~
I :I Is i'll e
'i I
I" Ul
~
P~!:,::; je;'I !Iie }.o1e! j .02'i 'it'i" I .03 ij:!I ls e I
.04ij jllj ll!j ~
Ie ROTATION! ~ I I" 'I'I 'Ii le . .:Ie I It I !' Ii CP&L RUN NAME: 806AG87 4/7/84 806AG3$ 8/11/84 SHEARON HARRIS 806AG1A 8/3/84 806AGXX 8/8/84
F RE A-6 CONVENT IONA E FUNCTION VERSUS GERBER'S "SH NCTION" FOR PIPES
~ ~ ~~~~
I>> sl
':,:,.::i:[', ~ ~ .j,l
)e.l 'I
.I I~
s
;I!
- >> ~
)
~~ I ~ :I >>
~
I>> >> ~ ~ i>>I
~ ~
ls
>>>>I
~
.'. ~ .). ~ .". Ii I ~ i'i'te' I)!jjl!i i:,1:I:- 1>>1 I ::t'i.
~
~~
~
~ ~ ~
~ I~ "i
~~
- I
- E I:a
~ I: ".'.:~
.'"..I ~; .".E
.>>I
): >>I: : I:I
~~ ~
- I el 11.
~ : I ~ '.
- IJ e>> I~ )
iel) II>> all:I la i>>t I >>I ~ ~
'I~) i":i I
~
~ ~ ljel ~
!I>>>>:I ~~ ~~
!)::.!j
~ ~
- . '!ll I
~
1 I ~ ei! j Ii!) lie ~ ~ I)>> I
~~ ~
I:>>: ~ ~ ~ I~ I' I
~ :~I
~
11 I I): >>>> ~~ I~ ~ f~ I>> ejlf I'I'::I!.>>>>
~ s E'" : >> ! Its ~
1
~
I
)Ii'I :I:: I
~
I I~ I! I I >> e>>I >>:I ~~ I ~ isa
~
I
i;i
)>> I'I: ~
~ I
~ ~ !~
a!.I
~~
(
- gll I~ 1 ~
<Qs
~
ifi ~
~ to
~~ ~
I >>:I ~ I ~ I~
~ ~
I i ~ ~ s I
~ ~ SHAPE FACTOR '.:
~ ~ I ~I :I jl ~ >>I:sl: t;e !>>
o ll ) et I sa'I : I I: ~
')I >>I i'! il
~ ~
>> I~ ~~
I~ I i
'ii I i I I:
'.:I I I!.' .... 0.7 ou
'SHAPE FACVOR! >!V:t):. I) ~ ls
~
~~
3Sm IS ~ O OIOI i 'I "il I ~
'Ie il~ e ~ ~
I ~ ~
~ ~ ..... M1/M2 ~ ~
lie I~ ) I>>:tl: I~ jjj jt ~ I )I)I ()Ia I il al
~ ~ ~ ',>>!)
- I: I::: I, I!!) I tf >>' t/R I: >>
;Ess sst:( I 'i >> ~~ >>
- 0.1! I) O.2-"" 26 0.3 t,il jlo.4:J I.0.5>> "t; "o.6
~~ sa I 07L ::ILI
)I:I '" iili ';i I' i ~~
II I >> s ~ ~ I I
>> I I I~
'!i ! I::
I~ !ii'l !)l'l
'uj
- ii iii! il'! !ii! I: I'a' I!)I'a:I: Ii ii I l)I I li ii'i i li i I 'I I I I
Ij iil! i' tl I
~
~ t jl jl ~ I')ls I) I ~~
'I '"u)t !GERBER!:
~ 1 Mi1 I!It I:I :I!'!li'g~ iil: I I >>Is EE i "'I
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I ii,'i 't)t I I ~ JJjl.'" j~i:i uil ~ ~ i la) Itl ii:i >>) ~ ';I I 'i ljl} I~ I I":I! >> I : Is>>: ie:!I !iii I'jtj
~
)
'>>! M )3Sm)
!!I! Il ! 'I I:I: ill'.
~
ei I (Hi II'
~ ~
gil>> ME
~ 1st: I I~ :>>':>> B2 I) fl lL'I L!j ei";:
~ I!.
~ ~ >>;I au 581 KSI (>>I
'>>: la" :I>> ~ !>>
~ ~ i;i'I'i.!;j :: I i II >>::::: I,'ll I jl I I I) li :: ", ;I:; !I)i !1>> ; Sm ~ 162 KSI IIs I~ >> I sj I~
L') >> ,jL I)>> ~ ~ ~ I~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ II ~ I~ I ~ I ~ ~ ua I~ itii (>> tl !!i( :!i !!ii ~ ~ ~
>>:I ei: >> : I!: :I; ~
I~
'I>> '!
~ ~ I :I:
I i!:!):::; I '- i'!ii;j ~ ~ ~ ~ I!Ii IIti leg I : ia. Iii ~ ~ ~
~~ ~
I!)~ '.!s ejtt a) j
'I Ias I~
'p..
~
!!i ~ I i!i!:i:ii ~ ~
>>:: ~
!jjl (I >>ie ~ I~
I>> .!I.. >> I la'.I .'.".'.',". I: :I>> "': "i :I ~ I I; 'Ji: a))e
~ ". iiL;>> t,
'i!i ~
~ ~ Li >>>>!
I ls
- I'.I !.j i tljl ~ ~
a>>! )j:! :>>: ~- : I .". .". .". ".. I >>I ~ I i,l) tjii >>: I
- I0.2::,
I jsl j; I>>;i>> j I : 0.4'::.
- ):: :: ~ e i
06'))i: 0.7 0.8 I~ ~ ~ lss:
'. ll !
~
I'I !ii :il' I CP&L SHEARON HARRIS
~ ~
~ ~
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF ASME CLASS 1 AUXILIARY PIPING SYSTEMS TABLE A-1 OVALIZATION AND PERCENT CHANGE IN AREA FOR 6" ELBOW USING DIFFERENT ELASTO-PLASTIC MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR "LIMIT" MOMENTS APPROACH ELASTIC PLASTIC (FINITE ELEMENT) LINE SIZE 6 ELBOW COMPARISON M(3Sm)/B2 0.7MI PARAMETERS PARAMETERS 106 in-lb 106 in"lb Mc Moment 0.485 0.541 0. 556 Material (1) B2 = 1.7864 Ovalization 0. 85% 1. 45/ 1.70% t/R 0.2434 Area Change 0. 07% 0. 17% 0.19% 6" Moment 0.485 0.534 0. 14 Material (2) B2 1.7864
~ Ovalization 2.62% 3. 42% 0.29%
t/R 0.2434
~ Area Change 0.41% 0.59% 0.02%
Moment 0.485 0.547 0.342 Material (3) B2 ~ 1.7864 Ovalization 2. 25% 3. 08/ 0.93% t/R 0.2434 Area Change 0. 31/ 0.48% 0.09%
'I
'i ~
ii4s g Tab(c F-NK2 1 SECTION III, DIVISION I APPENDICES TABLE F-13222-1 LIMITS OF PRIMARY LOAD OR STRESS FOR SERVICE LOADINGS WITH LEVEL D SERVICE LIMITS Systcns F-]322.1
~n F.U2KZ Load <<
Stress
()Sate (4) I C<<npisncres f
Plaics (3) L)(
C~ Swoons (Note (3) l Stress Z.csw) ]Jsnl NO-)22], NS.)2)0 F.D2).1 O.TSe Lyse j for materials Table )-1.2l far mau isis Tab)a ).1.1 (Nj ll)l L)sr I but not oO.TS, (Nate l1)l ancnaue LniutL Varvss lF DSO), ln Oiepareti<sn <<'i Fe ].Ssn( a sss )21).12 F.DZ).2 (Note ty)) dread fnnn F.DZ].]ta) <<
F.DZ]dta)
]assr f hn not >O.yse (Note l])l (lsoics l1), ly))
stress ratio Load P,. Stress $ >> ),Os~a F DZ]dta) F-1)21.1lc) F-])1).) OTS j far ioaas ieisloie la)i Sane as coneansins
)neiasuc fi<<tK Stress 0 TSn F.])1I.] s,'.-s,>!) f O.yso s -ts -s ' '~">>
Coiisose iaaa Load F 0.1F, based on S, ~ ZJS ar on 1)$ F.])ZI,2 Fs aeriwd h sirn F-])11.]id)
~i~)ss.l b .~ io.ys.
or F.])2].)tas Suess reuo )0$ f<< toads F, (Nose iI)) stress $ >> O.TS, t Sandie as comoonens F.l)ZI,)
~ iastic Loaa)' tLTFi or iaaas'rain. nrnre i iisiaaraty ])ZI.I Fn n sr + tsi -Sr)!) Same as comoonents F.] )11,)les Strain um load Loaa F F ])2].]tf)
(Nate O.yt, Fw n Sr is)l
<< iaaaslarn.
tsi
~
Sr)f).bin Saeie as ac mtKnnro F-])1 ~ .S not oF, (Note loll tne'astK Stress O.T S F.DZI.O ts S !) f (isola t])) Sa ie aS Camacinena Usc greater of limits Specified. Vsc lesser of limits specified. NOTES: (1) S, value at temperature sha)t be specified and justiFied in Design Report. (2) ~s denotes the coRapsc load based on lower bound theorem of limit anat)scs or as *fined in F 1321.1(d). (3) The Design Limits sctecscd from this Table eall bc used in conjunction with F-1323 and F-]32I, as applicable, in order to des~inc Jle
))mits fort, Fand F .
(I'l Higher limits for S>> may be used as spccificd in A-9000, where the type of stress field is ta]en into accounL, (S) Si is thc trsK effective S~ associated with PlastiC instabi)ity f F.132I ~ ). (O) For compressive )oads or stresses, the ski)ity ieauirements of F-132S shall be mct. (7) This method is no', permitted if deformation )imits are stated in Design SpeciTicati'ons. (dl Fa denotes the )oad assOciatcd wivl thc strain limit Placed on the comooncnt IF-]321.1(f)I.
C 1 A ~w I}}