ML050060041
| ML050060041 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 12/26/1995 |
| From: | Coward R Public Service Enterprise Group |
| To: | NRC Region 1 |
| References | |
| -RFPFR, TAC MC5111 HI-1-BB-MEE-1050, Rev 0 | |
| Download: ML050060041 (113) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION. STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-1 -BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION SYSTEM LARGE BORE PIPE CRACKING RESOLUTION Page 1 of 9
- iq
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISIOINI, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-l -BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 Tnnr Creerk Recirculation Svstem Laree Bore Pine rracrking Prtsltion P^vi;crjn n 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Pape 1.0 REVISION HISTORY ..................................... 3 2.0 PURPOSE ..................................... 3 3.0 SCOPE ...................................... , 3 4.0 DISCUSSION ..................................... 3
.0 CONCLUSIONS ..................................... 14
6.0 REFERENCES
..................................... 16 7.0 EFFECTS ON OTHER TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS ................... 17 8.0 ATTACHMENTS ........... 18 9.0 SIGNATURES ........... 19 Attachment I Recirculation Piping Fatigue Crack Growth Correlations ................. .- 20 IbliArs Attachment 2 Recirculation Piping Crack/Defect Evaluation Procedure ................. t Attachment 3 Recirculation Piping Normal Operation Vibration Crack Growth Rates ..... +15S1t, Attachment 4 MPR Calculation I0-100-01, "Bending Stresses in Elbows" ............. .. 9 55sir5 Page 2 of S9 N'
IT IS -THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-1I3-BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 1.0 REVISION HISTORY 12/26195 Revision 0 2.0 PURPOSE The purpose of this evaluation is to evaluate the potential for growth of postulated defects in the Hope Creek recirculation system large bore piping. In particular, the purpose of this evaluation is to complete the M20-92-002 & M20-92-003 ATS action items which involve growth of fabrication defects similar to those discovered during the 3R refueling outage. 3.0 SCOPE The scope of this evaluation is the shop welded large bore piping in the Hope Creek recirculation system. The large bore piping is the 12", 22" and 28" diameter piping. The piping is evaluated for cyclic loads which may cause growth of postulated fabrication hot tear defects. 4.0 DISCUSSION 4.1 Background Defect Discovery/Evaluation Inservice inspections of the Hope Creek recirculation system piping during the third refueling outage (3R) detected indications on the outside diameter (OD) of two 28" diameter pipe butt welds. The circumferential defects were located in both recirculation loops at the weld joining each riser to the RHR return tee connection (see Figure 1). The indications were identified by penetrant inspection (PT) and confirmed using ultrasonic inspections (UT). Subsequent excavation (as part of the repair) determined that the defects were circumferential with lengths up to 7'/2 inches and depths to about 7/16 inch. Although the largest single defect was about 7'h inches, adjacent defects resulted in total defect excavation lengths up to about 38 inches. All defects were removed and the two welds were repaired (Code Job Packages P-91-002 & P-91-003)YFracture meEh-ic ialctiorispW-rfor-me by Gene-ral Eletfic (Reference l) determined that the as-found defects were "stable' and gross failure would not occur during the highest loading condition, a seismic event. Page 3 of 59
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS 74 PRINTED 20041108 H- I -BB-MEE-1050 12/26195 Hone Creek Recircuiation Svstem LargeBore Pie.Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 I
~2 .
Figure 1 Hope Creek Recirculation System Geomctry (Loop A) Page 4 of 59 1q
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-i -BB-MEE-1050 12126/95 Hone Creekl Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Crackine Resolution - Revi.sinn: Failure analyses determined that the defects resulted from hot tears that initiated during welding with filler metal that contained a very low amount of ferrite (Reference 1). It was concluded that the welds which may be susceptible were those shop welds fabricated by a single manufacturer using one particular welding procedure. There are a total of 50 susceptible welds in the recirculation piping. A summary of inspection results, evaluations performed, and repair activities is provided in a "White Paper" Engineering Evaluation prepared to summarize the defect-related events (Reference 1). Safety Review Group Assessment The Hope Creek Onsite Safety Review Group (SRG) completed an independent assessment of the recirculation piping cracking issue (Reference 2). This assessment addressed the defects in the large diameter piping and a non-related fatigue cracking problem in the small diameter recirculation piping. In this independent assessment it was concluded that additional effort was required to fully evaluate and resolve the cracking issues. As a result, NDRAP 125-02-4003 was prepared to summarize the proposed program (Reference 3). Table I summarizes the status of the NDRAP action items, as follows:
- M20-92-0O1 - This item, which addresses the development of an NDE technique to identify fatigue cracks in small bore piping, has been completed.
- M20-92-002 and M20-92-003 -These items, which address evaluation of large bore piping for high cycle fatigue, are still open and require resolution.
The purpose of this evaluation is to close the remaining open items associated with these ATS items. Page 5 of 54
IT IS *THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-l-BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 Hone Creek Recirculation Svstem Laree Bore Pine . Cracking Resolution Revisinn: 0
- -- . . 1-.. - LL-=
Table I Action Status Summary (NDRAP-1 25-92-4003) Item Task Description Status M20-92-00l Prepare a specification and requisition l for program development, select a Closed Develop and implement an contractor and verify technique. ultrasonic examination I technique for early detection of Dependent on Task I completion, fatigue cracks originating from initiate examination of small bore inside of small bore pipes in 2 recirculation system pipes during Closed the recirc system. planned or unplanned shutdowns. M20-92-002 Develop a calculation that can use Closed amplitude and frequency input to Claed Evaluate high cycle fatigue of calculate crack propagation in large bore (Replaced large bore piping in the piping walls. by Task 3) recirculation system based on measurement and calculations. Utilize the calculation developed by ml Task I to calculate the risk from crack 2 propagation in large bore pipes related Open to high cycle fatigue. Complete the development of a calculation that can use amplitude and Open frequency input to calculate crack propagation in large bore piping walls. Page 6 of 59 19
IT IS IHE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-I -BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pine Crackine Resolution Revision: 0 Item Task l Description j Status M20-92-003 Prepare an examination and repair Closed specification for large bore piping in the (Replaced Prepare and utilize an recirculation system to replace the by Task 5) examination and repair current program. specification for large bore. . piping in the recirculation During suitable planned or unplanned systeng. shutdowns, hook up instruments to large sysm bore pipes in the recirculation system 2 for the purpose of measuring amplitude Open and frequency of vibrations during critical pump speed. Start measurement of large bore pipe Ope vibration amplitude and frequency. Open Revise Operations procedures to record the total elapsed time the circulation pumps run at critical speed as shown in Closed the independent assessment report. Complete an examination and repair 5 specification as explained in 9/10/92 Memo from E. Rozovsky to D. Open Bhavnani (This is a repeat of Task l). The key outstanding concern raised by the SRG is the possibility of high cycle fatigue damage in the Hope Creek large bore recirculation system piping. Specifically, the SRG expressed concern that: High cycle loads may cause other existing (but undiscovered) hot tear defects to grow to larger depths or lengths. These larger defects may be a safety hazard.
. - 1-High cycle-loads may-initiate-cracks -inthe-piping at-locations-other-than-welss; The ISI program only inspects welds, so if other cracks developed they would not be detected.
Page 7 of 59
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-1 -BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hone Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pine Crackina Resolution Reviszinn: n 4.2 Large Bore Piping Inspections Subsequent to the discovery of the weld defects in the 29" shop welds (during the third refueling outage), additional inspections were completed during the third, fourth and fifth refueling outages. A summary of these inspections is provided in Table 2. No indications were discovered in any welds other than the two which were originally cracked. No further inspections are currently planned (other than those normally required by the [SI Program and Section XI of the ASME Code). A listing of the recirculation system large bore piping welds determined to possibly be susceptible to hot tear type defects is included in Table 3. These welds are distributed throughout the piping system. Table 2 Large Bore Piping Inspection Summary Outage Inspection Scope' Results Tyrpe
.16 --28"welds - N6 indidafionsrl PT 4 - 22" welds 3R 4-12" welds Special UV 5 - 28" welds No indications 3 - 12" welds PT Both 28" welds with defects Linear indication in an 4R Special UT 4 Other welds (mixture of sizes) unrepaired section of one of the 28" welds with defects PT Both 28" welds with defects No indications SReSecial UT 2 Other welds l Notes:
I. There are sixteen potentially affected 28" shop welds, four 22" welds and thirty 12" welds (see Table 3).
- 2. The special UT method examines the outer 1/3 of the pipe wall, where the defects have been observed, Page 8 of IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS II PRINTED 20041108 H-I -BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hone Creek Recirculation Svstem Laree Bore Pipe Crackine Resolution Revitinn nl Table 3 Shop Welds Potentially Susceptible to Hot Tear Defects LOOp 12" Welds 22" Welds 28" Welds IBB12VCA-013K-1 IBB12VCA-013G-3 JBB22VCA-013-2 IBB28VCA-012.2 I BB I2VCA-013J-1 IBB 12VCA 013F-3 IB3B22VCA-013-4 11B28VCA-012-3 IBB 12VCA-013H-1 IBB12VCA-013K4 I BB28VCA-012-6 IBB1 I2VCA-0130-1 1B 12VCA-013J-4 IBB28VCA-012-7 A IBB 12VCA-013F-1 IBB12VCA-013H4 MtBV8VCA-012-1 IBBI2VCA-013K-3 IBB12VCA-013G-4 IBB28VCA-0134 IBB12VCA-033J-3 IBB12VCA-013F-4 IBB28VCA-013-6 IBB1 2VCA-013H-3 IBB28VCA.013-8 IBB12VCA-014E-1 IBB12VCA-014B-3 1BB22VCA-014-2 IBB28VCA-01 1-2 IBBI2VCA-014D-l IBB 12VCA-014A-3 1BB22\'CA-0144 IBB2BVCA-01 1-3 IBB12VCA-014C-1 IBB 12VCA-014E-4 I BB28VCA-01 1-5 IBB12VCA-014B-1 IBB12VCA-014D-4 IBB28VCA-01 1-7 IBBI2VCA-014A-1 IBBI2VCA-014C-4 IBB2SVCA-01 1-10 1BB 12VCA-014E-3 IBB1 2VCA-014B4 IBB2SVCA-014.4 IBB12VCA-014D-3 1BB12VCA-D14A4 1BB28VCA-014-6 IBB12VCA-014C-3 1BB2SVCA-014-8 4.3 Fatigue Crack Growth The growth of cracks under cyclic loading can be predicted using methods from linear elastic fracture mechanics (LESM). The basic calculational method and equations (for a given defect geometry) are independent of the magnitude of the applied load, frequency of loading, and size of the defect. Thus, one set of equations can be developed which is applicable for evaluating all cyclic loadings on the piping.
A calculational method for predicting growth of postulated hot tear defects in the recirculation system large bore piping is included in Attachment 1. Attachment I includes the necessary equations and correlations along with the appropriate material properties. The important rcsults from Attachment I are: Page 9 of 59 14
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION. STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-I-BB-MEE-1050 12/26195 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pine Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 The crack growth rate can be predicted based on load cycles, or if the loading is at a constant frequency, based on time. da = (lO-1 9 63 5 )SAK3 -' dN cda da 3600f-dT dN where: a is the crack depth (in) N is the number of cycles S is a factor to account for mean stress effects K is the stress intensity factor (ksiVin) f is the frequency (Hz) T is time (hr) Details of tiei calculation of these parameters dreincludedlin Attactineit 1 .- - The welding residual stresses in the large bore piping are most likely compressive in the middle of the pipe wall and tensile at the surfaces. However, this is not necessarily true in all cases. There is a threshold effect for crack growth. For calculated values of effective change in stress intensity factor, AK, = SAK, less than 5 ksiVin no crack growth will occur (Reference 10). 4.4 CracklcDefect Evaluation Method/Acceptance Criteria.. . ... ... Criteria for acceptance of cracks in austenitic stainless steel pressure boundary piping are provided in Section XI of the ASME Code (Reference 11). These criteria, which are based on plastic collapse (limit load) correlations, provide allowable crack depths for measured crack lengths. The application of these criteria is shown in Attachment 2. Page I0 of 9 19
Ii IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-I1-BB-MEE- 1050 12/26195 Holpe Creel, Recirculation Systern Laree Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 Applied Stresses When evaluating defects, two evaluations are performed.
- The piping is evaluated for normal conditions: pressure, deadweight and thermal expansion.
- The piping is evaluated for faulted conditions. In addition to pressure, deadweight and thermal expansion, this evaluation also includes the stresses resulting from the safe shutdown earthquake and annulus pressurization.
The faulted condition evaluation includes a lower safety factor. 4.5 Low Cycle/High Stress Loads The predominant low cycle/high stress loads on the recirculation piping are plant startups and shutdowns and the postulated design basis earthquake. Each startup/shutdown contributes a stress cycle resulting from the differential thermal expansion stresses in the piping. The design basis earthquake does not contribute a large number of cycles of load, but has the potential to apply a large load on the cracked section. These low cycle loads were evaluated by General Electric (Reference 13) and were found not to be a concern for defects similar to those discovered in the, 3R outage. The predicted crack growth resulting from startups and shutdowns was negligible (less than IO" inches per cycle). Further, the piping was acceptable for design basis earthquake loads-even with the largest identified defect. 4.6 High Cycle/Low Stress Loads There are two primary sources of high cycle vibration in the recirculation system large bore piping. These are normal operational vibration due to pumps, flow induced vibration, etc., and a particular source of vibration at Hope Creek resulting from operation of both recirculation pumps at a critical speed of about 102% rated core flow (a condition encountered infrequently in the past during the shutdown sequence)..- Page II of 59
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF 1 HE USER TO VERIFY REVISION. STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-I-BB-MEE- 1050 12126195 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 Normal Operation V'ibration The recirculation system piping vibrates during normal operation. Measurements of the vibration displacements were made during plant startup. Using these measurements, estimates were made of the vibration stresses and corresponding crack growth rates for postulated cracks (defects) in the recirculation system large bore piping. These calculations, which include the effects of mean stress and residual stresses are included in Attachment 3. The primary result of those calculations is that defect growth during normal operation is a binary function. Either the defects will grow rapidly, or they will not grow. Since the residual and vibration stresses increase towards the pipe outer surface, any defect which began growing would likely grow through to the surface. It is possible that growth could occur toward the pipe inside surface and arrest as the crack tip enters an area of compressive residual stress in the center of the pipe wall. Hope Creek has been operating for about nine years. Assuming a lifetime capacity factor of about 75%, the unit has been operating for about 2.2x 10' seconds, at a rate of about 2.4x 107 seconds per year. The frequency of vibration during normal operation is believed to be around 50 to 150 Hz. For a nominal frequency of 100 Hz, the recirculation piping experiences about 2x 109 cycles per year. This is a very large number of cycles. If any defects were present and- they began to grow, they would grow either through the pipe wall, or arrest, in less than several years (at the most). These results indicate that there are no defects still growing under normal vibration loads, and that surface inspection (PT) can be used to inspect for defects. Critical Pump Speed Vibration It is known that there may be significant vibration of the Hope Creek recirculation piping during operation of critical pump speed at about 102%o core flow (Reference IS). Plant operating procedures have been revised to adjust the pump operating conditions to preclude both pumps oppTating in the critical range. It is believed that these measures have eliminated the vibration. However, fatigue damage or crack growth may have occurred prior to the changes in plant operation. Measurements of the actual piping vibration during operation at critical pump speeds are not available, These data will be taken when the plant restarts after the R6 outage. The pipe stresses during critical pump speed vibration may be large enough that there is a concern. This concern could be both growth of existing fabrication defects and, if the stress levels are great enough, development of new defects due to fatigue. Page 12 of §9
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-I-BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 Hope Creek Operations estimates that as of June 1992, the unit has operated for about 600 to 1500 minutes in the critical pump speed range (Reference 19). As of November 1995, the unit will have spent additional time in the critical region. However, this additional time is not expected to be significant; procedure changes have been implemented to reduce the potential for operating in the critical region. Assuming about I000 to 1500 minutes, this duration corresponds to about 6xl06 to 9'106 cycles (assuming a nominal 100 Hz frequency). If defects exist, there could be slow growth (.- 10 to IO- in/cycle) which would not be evident yet by leakage. Since details of vibration stresses are not available, predicted crack growth rates cannot be determined. 4.7 Other SRG Concerns Defect Initiation In theory, fatigue cracks can develop at any location in the piping system which is stressed by cyclic loads. However, in practice it is very uncommon for cracks to develop at locations other than welds. In almost all instances, the most highly stressed locations in a piping system are at
-. welds; This is because there are stress concentration effects associated with the weld and welds - -
are typically located near highly stressed locations such as terminal ends or branch connections. As a result, the largest cracks (if any were present) would be located at welds. This concern is not considered significant; the existing practice of only inspecting welds is sufficient. It should be noted that this issue is unrelated to the concerns of large bore recirculation piping with postulated fabrication defects, since the defects would only be located at welds. Further, it should also be noted that Section XI of the ASME Code only requires inspection of welds and immediately adjacent base metal. Examination and Repair Specification The main purpose of the SRG recommended examination and repair specification was to provide guida'nc- for the data thering,:n-spctions-ah p6ssibleiraifs planbed for the 4R, SR and 6R - refueling outages. Inspections have been completed during the 4R and 5R outages and none are planned for the 6R outage. The other purpose of the specification was for defining the instrumentation necessary to measure the high cycle loads. This activity is planned for the 6R outage as a separate work order. Thus, the examination and repair specification is not necessary. Page 13 of 464
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-1-BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0
5.0 CONCLUSION
S & RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Conclusions Crack Growth Methods A calculational method for predicting growth of postulated defects in the Hope Creek large bore recirculation piping has been developed (Attachment 1). The method can be used to predict the growth of defects in the outer one-half of the wall thickness. Methods were developed for both subsurface defects and those which penetrate the outside surface of the piping. Acceptance criteria and methods have been developed for evaluating the acceptability of postulated defects in the Hope Creek large bore recirculation system piping (Attachment 2). The methods are based on criteria in Section XI of the ASvE Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code. With knowledge of the defect size and the applied loads on the piping, the defect can be evaluated for continued service without repairs. Lou Cycle Fatigue The recirculation piping was evaluated for low cycle loading in Reference I using methods similar to those developed in this evaluation. -The conclusion of the evaluation was -that failure of -- the piping from growth of similar defects due to low cycle loading was unlikely. The crack growth rate was very small and large defects could be accommodated. High Cycle Fatigue - Normal Operation It is concluded.that there are no growing cracks in the recirculation system piping. Either no defects were present to grow, the defects and loads (stresses) were such that no growth occurred, or the defects grew until they arrested. If the defects did grow, they would likely grow through to the pipe outside surface, but would not be expected to grow completely through the pipe wall. High Cycle Fatigue - Critical Pump Speed Operation There is insufficientinformation-available at this-time to-rule out growth of-postulated defects. during critical pump speed operation. This evaluation will require updating after additional information is available. Page ]4 of 59 15
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H- 1-BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 H-ope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 5.2 Recommendations The following recommendations are made based on the results and conclusions discussed in this EE: I. On the basis of this evaluation, close ATS Item M20-92-002, Task 3 (Developmcnt of Calculational Method ...). This effort has been completed.
- 2. On the basis of this evaluation, close ATS Item M20-92-003, Task 5 (Inspection and Repair Specification). This effort is not necessary.
- 3. Follow through on plans to perform tests to measure the recirculation system large bore piping vibration during operation at critical pump speeds. This is a concern not only for possible growth of fabrication defects, but also for general fatigue of the piping system.
- 4. Perform PT inspection of the 12 inch riser shop welds near the reactor vessel nozzles.
There are ten welds (one weld per risor) on the horizontal sections of the piping adjacent to the nozzles. These welds are highly loaded, due to both steady state stresses and vibration stresses. Inspections should also be performed for any welds determined to be highly stressed during the vibration testing in recommendation 3. If defects were present in the shop weld, the defects would have grown through to the outside surface. If the PT results show no indications, there are no defects of concern. (The 28" piping has already been fully PT inspected.)
- 5. Update this evaluation following the completion of recomunendations 3 and 4. The purpose of the update will be to incorporate an evaluation of the vibration stresses associated with pump critical speed operation.
- 6. Following the update of this evaluation (recommendation 5), close ATS Item M20 002, Task 2 (Risk From High Cycle Fatigue ...) and ATS Item M20-92-003, Tasks 2 and 3 (Measurement of Critical Pump Speed Vibration).
Page 15 of 59 1q
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H- 1-BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0
6.0 REFERENCES
I. H-l -BB-MHZ-0001, "Hope Creek Generating Station, Third Refueling Outage, ASME Section XI Inspections, Recirculation Piping Indications, Events, Evaluations and Actions Undertaken", PSE&G, April 2, 1991.
- 2. PSE&G Letter from D.E. Cooley to GM - Hope Creek Operations, HSR-92-018, 2/13/92.
- 3. NDRAP 125-92-4003, "Pipe Cracks in the Hope Creek Recirculation System", 3/10192 (Attached to MEC-92-1 108).
- 4. The Stress Analysis of Cracks Handbook, H.Tada, P. Paris and G. Irwin, Del Research Corporation, 1985.
- 5. ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, "Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components", Appendix A.
- 6. NUREG-03 13, Revision 2.
- 7. Deleted
- 8. PSE&G Calculation C-0141, "Stress Report - Recirc. Loop A & RHR (Inside Drywell)",
Revision 8, 4/3/95.
- 9. PSE&G Calculation C-0142, "Stress Report for Recirc. Loop B", Revision 8, 3/29195.
- 10. "Fatigue Crack Growth Correlations for Austenitic Stainless Steels in Air", L.A. James and D.P. Jones, ASME PVP-Vol. 99, 1985.
I1. ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, "Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components", Appendix C.
- 12. "Evaluations of Flaws in Austenitic Steel Piping", Journal of Pressure Vessel T-chii61ogy, Transac-tioi of the ASME,-V6l'.108,-No.-3, August 1986. - .,-
- 13. GE Nuclear Energy Report NEDC-3 1941, "Reactor Recirculation Piping System Flaw Evaluations for Normal and RHR Shutdown Cooling Operating Conditions", March 1991.
Page 16 of g lq
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-i1-BB-MEE- 1050 12126/95 Hpe Creth- Recirculation Sys~tem Lamre Bore. Piat.Crack-ing R~esoluion R~evision: 0
- 14. "Hope Creek Generating Station, Recirculation System Piping Steady State Vibration Surveillance Test", PSE&G.Procedure Th-SU.BB-332(Q), Revision 2, 4/11/86. Full power data from testing 11/1 1/86.
IS. "Piping Response, Measurement", General Electric Specification Data Sheet 22A540SAW, Revision 1, 2/7/96.
- 16. "Fatigue Evaluation of Piping Systems With Limited Vibration Test Data", S. N. Huang, ASME PVP-Vol 220, 1991.
- 17. GE Nuclear Operations Memo 123-DSB-17-0392, "Hope Creek Recirculation Snubber Reduction Analysis Preoperation and Startup Acceptability, Assessment", 4/2/92.
- 18. P SE&G Memo NE-95-1525, from A. Kao to J. Pike, 9/28/95.
- 19. P SE&G Memo from Robert Hovey to Eli Rozovsky, 6119/92.
- 20. NURBGT-03 76, "Residual Stresses at Girth-Butt Welds in Pipes and Pressure Vessels, Final Report", August 1977.
.21. EPRI NP-1743, "Effect of Weld Parameters on Residual Stresses in BWvR Piping Systems1 ', March 1981.
- 22. EPRI NP-14 13, "Measurement of Residual Stresses in Type-304 Stainless Steel Piping Butt Weldments", June 1980.
- 23. EPRI NP-2964, "Weld Residual Stress Redistribto NerGowing Cak" ac 1983.
7.0 FMPACT ON TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS None Page 17 of 5 I'9
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION. STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-1 -BB-MEE-1 050 12/26/95 Hope Creek Recirculation System Laree Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 8.0 ATTACHMENTS
- 1. Recirculation Piping Fatigue Crack Growth Correlations
- 2. Recirculation Piping Crack/Defect Evaluation Procedure
- 3. Recirculation Piping Normal Operation Vibration Crack Growth Rates
- 4. MPR Calculation 108-100-01, "Bending Stresses in Elbows" Page 18 of -59 14
I1 IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-I -BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 HIone Creek Recirculation Svstem Large Bore. Pine Crackin2 Resolution - Revision: 0 9.0 SIGNATURES PREPARER: OL/ A owere LMtAPt-ksxt,; PEER REVIEWER(S): - Zzlme') C' ew" tN/ J AJ/r-- APPROVED: I , A 40 AP CsdeI4iI Ia-7144 6/JfoZA
/-,O, 9 &
w:- !HcA 's1 ask ~ Page 19 of 59 Iq
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-I -BB-MEE- 1050 12126195 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 ATTACHMENT 1 RECIRCULATION PIPING FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH CORRE LATIONS The growth of cracks under cyclic loading can be predicted using methods from linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM). The basic calculational method and equations (for a given defect geometry) are independent of the magnitude of the applied load, frequency of loading, and size of the defect. Thus, one set of equations can be developed which is applicable for evaluating all cyclic loadings on the piping. The following is a calculational method for predicting growth of postulated defects in the recirculation system piping. A1.1 Stress Intensity Factor The basic parameter from LEFM is the stress intensity factor K,. The typical formula used to calculate the stress intensity factor is: K1 = oVqi g(.t ) t where: K! is the stress intensity factor (ksi/in) a is the applied stress absent of crack (ksi) a is the defect depth (in), for surface defects, a is the total defect depth, for subsurface defects, a is one-half the defect depth. g is a function accounting for geometry and is dimensionless t is the component thickness (in) The stress intensity factor is essentially a measure of how rapidly the local stress field at the Lip of the crack rises. The stress intensity factor is typically used in fracture toughness/brittle fracture evaluations. When the "applied" value of stress intensity factor (based on crack size, loads and geometry) exceeds the critical material limiting value, Kic, sudden crack extension and failure will occur. 41TACHMEtN I
'AGE OF PERDO2§-of 59 '4LC. NO._
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION. STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H- 1-BB-MEE-1050 12126195 1-nnne Crer Recircunation Svtem Large Tiore Pine Crarc:ine Reqnlutionn P iuik;rn O( The g geometry factor is a function of defect geometry and component geometry. For defects similar to the fabrication hot tear defects which were discovered in the Hope Creek recirculation system large bore piping, one of two factors are applicable depending on defect location. For surface defects which penetrate the pipe OD, the geometry factor, g, is obtained from Reference 4. The determination of the geometry factor is shown in Figure A I (in Figure A l, g is labeled F). The values in the figure are multiplied by a parameter (based on alt) to determine g. For the recirculation large bore piping, the ratios of inside to outside radius, r,/r., are all approximately equal to 0.9. For rl/r0-0.9, the data in Figure A I are relatively constant up to a/lt ratios of 0.8. The average value of the span is 0.6. Thus, the geometry factor, g, is determined from: gi = y. u a t where: g, is the geometry factor for surface defects Y is the value from Figure Al
- r. is the outside radius (in) r1 is the inside radius (in)
For subsurface cracks which do not penetrate the surface, the correlation from Reference 5 is used. Neglecting bending effects trough the pipe wall (the applied stress does not change significantly over the pipe wall thickness) and assuming a very long defect, the data in Figure A2 are used. g2 = Mm (from Figure A2)
.TTACHMENT I Pege 4-eIf 59- atc. NO._
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-1-BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Rsnluitinn A*ucis A .- ge J--Ii.. l U
-I 0
d 14J
.:.J
%_1 I.L.
94 145 0
%.1
-4a-t Figure Al Surface Crack Geometry Factor JTTACHMET1.-.. I JAGE .3 OF ll Page 12 of 59a
. AteLC.
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION. STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H- I-BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hope Creekl Recirculation System Large Bore Pine Cracking rResolutinn sxvgaqlt, V0.140cin- A M 1.6 7 1.5 1.4 U. a I 1.3 an
.0 E
1.1 1.0 0 0.1 02 0. 0.4 0.6 Flaw Eentricity Ratio 2r/t t well thickness aecentricity Point I outer extreme of the minor diamerar of elliips eloser to surfacal Poinr 2 inner extrem of the minor iarmnter of elilps [lurther Irom surface) Figure A2 Subsurface Crack Geometiy Factor nnAG' OF iPage 23 Et 64
.M C -~i,.,
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION. STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H- I-BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Crackiniz Resolution Revision: 0 A1.2 Residual Stresses The applied stress used in the calculation of the stress intensity factor is the total stress across the component thickness. This total stress includes not only applied stresses such as deadweight and thermal expansion, but it also includes welding residual stresses which may be present in the component. The typical residual stress profile following welding is shown in Figure A3 for large bore piping (-26" diameter). This figure is from Reference 6, but the data in this figure are consistent with the data on residual stresses in References 20 to 23. The data are selected for locations adjacent to butt-welds. The residual stress is tensile near the yield strength at the inside surface, compressive in the middle of the pipe wall and tensile again near the outside surface. However, the data are not fully consistent. In some cases, the residual stresses are slightly tensile in the middle of the pipe wall, and near the yield strength at about 314 through the pipe wall. For smaller large bore piping (-10 to 12 inch diameter), the data in References 20 to 23 show residual stress levels similar to those in larger pipes (Figure A3). However, in some cases, the residual stresses were shown to be tensile (at the yield strength) across the full thickness. In some other cases, the residual stresses were very small, almost negligible. The hot tear defects discovered during the 3R outage were located in the outer one-half of the wall thickness. Any other hot tear fabrication defects would also be expected to be located in the outer one-half of the wall thickness. In this area, the residual stresses can not be exactly predicted. Test data shows measured tensile stresses in this area which range from strongly compressive to strongly tensile. For this evaluation, the effect of residual stress is included by considering constant residual stresses at three levels- tensile yield strength, zero, and compressive yield strength. Af OFHMtN'I__I
.,t:. :jt)H
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-1-BB-MEE-1050 12126195 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pine Cracking Resolitiorn s2>t~e^^.rn
~A INSIDE WALL OUTSIDE WAt 50C -
(_ on Cn 1.0 a/t Figure A3 Large Bore Piping Axial Residual Stress Profile IMrACHMEtJT__ )
-Parc- 5 of59 -AGE_ > 0F If A1CMNV ________
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H- l-BB-MEE-1050
- 12/26/95 snne Cret-k Recirculation Svitem Largre Binre. Pine Crnrl.inc Resnoitionn Rpvirnn n A1.3 Paris Crack Growth Equation Fatigue crack growth testing has shown that the stress intensity factor can also be used to predict crack growth rates. In particular, when the range of stress intensity factor during the stress cycle, AK, is plotted against the crack growth rate (in/cycle) on a log-log plot, the data are linear. This is the Paris Equation.
da
-~=CAKE dN where:
daldN is the crack growth rate (in/cycle) C, n are constants depending on material, environment, and loading frequency AK is change in stress intensity factor (ksiVin) The change in stress intensity factor, AK is defined as: AK = (KnaX - Kni) where: K,,.s is the maximum value of the stress intensity factor during the cycle (ksi%/in) KI,,n is the minimum value of the stress intensity factor during the cycle (ksi,/in) A1.4 R-Ratio. Much data has been published to demonstrate that crack growth is a function of the mean stress present during the stress cycle. This mean stress effect can be included using the "R-ratio". The R-ratio is defined as the ratio of K..... to Krna: Kmin Kn= WFACHMUlfl I_.,_ PAGE 1 OF It
-Page 26-of-59W- ':ALC. NO._ --
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-l-BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 A1.5 Steady State Pipe Stresses The total stress is the sum of the steady state stresses, such as deadweight, thermal expansion and - residual stresses, and the high frequency cyclic stresses that might occur during operation. Thus when considering the R-ratio, olnX= ass + a'), nfln =ass - 0cy where: on= is the maximum stress during the cycle oa is the steady state stress at the postulated crack location oa is the cyclic stress amplitude 0in is the minimum stress during the cycle The steady state stresses in the recirculation piping are available from the piping stress reports (References 8 and 9). The steady state stress is the axial stress resulting from internal pressure, deadweight, normal operating temperature thermal expansion and residual stresses (if applicable). From Reference 8, the pressure plus deadweight plus thermal expansion stresses for Loop A vary from about 7000 psi to about 11500 psi. The axial stress due to internal pressure alone is between 5500 and 7500 psi, so there are some locations for which the deadweight and thermal expansion stresses are negligible. The maximum stresses are near the reactor vessel nozzles (which are the piping anchors) and at other discontinuities. For crack growth evaluations, the stresses at the location of concern should be used. A1.6 Crack Growth Material Properties The recirculation system large bore piping is Type 304 austenitic stainless steel. Since the postulated hot tear defects are in the outer half of the pipe wall, the defect surface is not in contact with reactor coolant. Thus, properties for Type 304 stainless steel in air should be used. Reference 10 contains a compilation of crack growth data for austenitic stainless steel in air environments, for varying loading frequencies and R-ratios. 0i(ACHMEfl I _
.t 8 OF 44LC NgO___- _
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H- I-BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hone Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 Reference 10 shows that acceptable predictions of crack growth can be used if the following correlations are used. n=3.3 C =C, F S where: C, is the crack growth constant log (CI) = AO +AT+A2T2 + AITV AO= -19.90901 A,= 8.1183l2x 104 A2 = -1.]321418xl04 A3 = I.0240102x 10 9 T is the temperature (0F) For T = 550TF, C, = 10 19f635 F is the loading frequency correction factor = 1.0 for T<800TF S=I+ 1.R (0.00sRs0.79) S = -43.35 + 57.97R (0.79 s R s 1.00) Thus, the fatigue crack growth of postulated defects in the recirculation piping can be predicted by: da =(o-1 9 635)SAK 3 3 dNl Since the postulated crack growth results from vibration, the crack growth can also be predicted as a function of time using: a = 3 600fa dT dN I
-Ple-248-of -9 Zet
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-I -BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hone Creel Recirculation System Laree Bore Pine Crackine Resolution Revision: 0 where: ' da/dT is the crack growth rate (in/hr) f is the frequency of vibration (Hz) Crack growth calculations are performed by numerically integrating the crack growth equations, either for crack size versus cycles or crack size versus time. The appropriate correlation for geometry factor, g, should be used based on whether the defect is considered through the outside surface. A1.7 Crack Growth Threshold Figure A4 is a summary of the 600'F data from Reference 10. Although it is difficult to observe on this figure, materials such as austenitic stainless steel exhibit three regions of crack growth on the daldN data curve. At very high values of AK (> 100 ksi'in), the growth rate is very high and failure occurs within a few cycles or less. At moderate values (5 - 10 ksiVin < AK < 80
- 100 ksilin), the slope of the data is linear and crack growth occurs rather slowly. At very low values of AK (< 5 - 10 ksiv/in), there is a threshold effect. For these low values of AK essentially no crack growth occurs. This behavior can be important in high cycle fatigue evaluations. Even if defects or cracks are present, defect growth will not occur unless the calculated range in stress intensity factor, AK is greater than the threshold.
It should be noted that when comparisons to the threshold stress intensity factor are made, the change in stress intensity factor should include the R-ratio effects. That is, an effective change in stress intensity factor, AK,,fr, should be used. The effective change in stress intensity factor is S(Km. - K..,n). For conservatism, a threshold of 5 ksiVin is assumed for the recirculation system piping. Thus, no crack growth is predicted for AKc, < 5 ksiVin.
*.YTACHMi~r { ,
-Pageg9-af- :.sjC D Oi 1-
{1 C 01 ,,,
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-I-BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution , Revision:
. w_. . . . .I --
0
*ptLIZ CYCLI nAle5 I091631tT PAN*Lt a ? B I0
_ ; 20 30 40 50 so to I Io io' 354- .
-31BL - -
3-8L - , cre-. - a, t ik 3i _I. , a1 01 3 A te1r9III*' 1a1 . A h. lC' la-? 5 I 73a940 MD 40 50 10 10 100 AFnItD CYCLICsir"sswrlmIrTY XAN4(,hji.4I-Figue A4 Type 304 Stainless Steel Crack Growth Data
- 477C.iMEW- -- I ........
-Prg--30-of-59
.:4tC. 1;0 . .
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H- I-BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 ATTACHMENT 2 RECIRCULATION PIPING CRACK/DEFECT EVALUATION PROCEDURE A2.1 Method/Acceptance Criteria Criteria for acceptance of cracks in austenitic stainless steel pressure boundary piping are provided in Section Xl of the ASME Code (Reference I I). These criteria provide allowable crack depths for measured crack lengths. These criteria, which are based on the methods developed in Reference 12, are essentially plastic collapse formulations with an elastic-plastic fracture mechanics correction for certain types of welds. The allowable defect size is determined based on the load which would lead to plastic collapse of the remaining uncracked cross section (with a safety factor). The determination of allowable defect depth and length (circumferential extent) is made by solving a set of simultaneous equations which define the stress state in the cracked condition. There are two sets of equations depending on the circumferential extent of the defect (whether the defect extends into the compressive portion of the pipe). (8 + P)
- U:
6S_( P = m 2sinp-.asinOj P. 2a t 3SM it( t) p5= l
- bT2AC? aEsNn 1;ALC. tlV.
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H- 1-BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hone Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 where: P b is the failure bending stress (ksi) Sm is the material design stress intensity (ksi) j is the offset (angle) of the cracked section neutral axis a is the defect depth (in) t is the pipe wall thickness (in) 28 is circumferential extent of the defect Pm is the piping membrane stress (ksi) The failure bending stress, P bis defined based on the type of material and welding methods used and the applied stresses. Wrought Base Metal, Cast Stainless Steel, GTAW & GMAW Welds: P b = SF(F + Pb) -P SMAW & SAW Welds: P b= Z(SF)(Pm + Pb + P/SF) - Pm where: Pb is the piping bending stress (ksi) P, is the piping expansion stress (ksi) SF = 2.77 fornormal conditions 1.39 for emergency and faulted conditions Z= 1.15[1 + 0.013(OD-4)] for SMAW 1.30(l + 0.010(QD-4)] for SAW OD is the nominal pipe size, but not less than 24 The above equations are solved to determine the allowable defect size (length and depth). However, in no cases shall the allowable defect depth be greater than a = 0.60t for SMAW and SAW welds or a = 0.75t for other materials and welds. A11ACHMENT- 2 Sag, s J9'tic32 LOF 3
-tec -3f-59-- Z .3
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-I -BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 Honep Creek Recirculation System Larce Bore Pine Crackine Resolution ! ___ Revision: 0 For the recirculation system large bore piping, the following data are applicable to the evaluation of defects:
- Most welds in the system include a portion made using the SAW process, so the SAW/SMAW correlations should be used.
- S = 17.2 ksi @ 5280 F When evaluating defects, it is important to note that the final defect size is used. The final defect size is the defect size at the end of the next operating cycle. Thus, a crack growth calculation must be performed prior to evaluating the defect. However, if the defect will be repaired and the evaluation is for the prior operating cycle, the as-found defect size should be used in the evaluation of operation with the defect (prior to repair).
A2.2 Applied Stresses The methods and acceptance criteria for evaluating the acceptability of defects were presented above. When evaluating defects, the degraded piping must be evaluated for all postulated loading conditions. Thus, two evaluations must be performed.
- The piping must be evaluated for normal conditions using the a safety factor of 2.77.
This evaluation considers pressure, deadweight and thermal expansion.
- The piping must be evaluated for faulted conditions using a safety factor of 1.39. In addition to pressure, deadweight and thermal expansion, this evaluation also includes the stresses resulting from the safe shutdown earthquake and annulus pressurization.
The allowable defect size at each location is a function of the postulated defect size and the applied loads on the piping. Since the loads are typically different at each weld, the allowable defect sizes are also different.
.fklACiMEIJT IH a3
.1M _ ,,,
*-Page-33of 59 ha -3 OF 3 O.'c.NO
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION. STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H- I-BB-MEE-1050 12/26195 Hope Creel Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 ATTACHMENT 3 RECIRCULATION PIPING NORMAL OPERATION VIBRATION CRACK GROWTH RATES A3.1 Pipe Stresses Measurements of the recirculation system large bore piping vibration during normal operation were made during plant start-up testing. The purpose of the measurements was to verify that the stresses in the piping due to the 'ibration were sufficiently low that fatigue would not be a concern (i.e., the stresses are much less than the fatigue endurance limit). The measurements of the recirculation piping vibration displacements during normal full power operation were recorded using Procedure TE-SU.BB-332(Q) (Reference 14). The full power test data was obtained at 98.6% of rated core flow. The measured peak-to-peak vibration displacements during steady state normal operation are shown in Table A3-1. As can be seen from the data in Table A3- 1, the largest steady state vibration displacements are near the recirculation pumps, near both the pump inlets and outlets. Away from the pumps, the vibration is generally lower. The vibration displacements in Table A3-1 are the steady state normal operation peak-to-peak displacements. The maximum stresses in the piping due to these displacements will be at elbows, resulting from relative motion of the elbow end points. The vibration stresses are estimated by calculating the bending stresses in elbows subjected to the relative displacements. Attachment 4 is a summary of AUTOPIPE calculations to estimate the bending stresses from small displacements in elbows of the same sizes of pipe included in the Hope Creek recirculation system. The calculations in Attachment 4 are for displacements of the elbows welded to the reactor vessel nozzles; these will be the highest stressed locations due to the measured vibration. The stresses were calculated including the short sections of straight pipe between the nozzles and elbows. The results in Attachment 4 are for unit displacements at one end of the elbow. The calculation results are shown in Table A3-2. Using the results in Table A3-2, estimated bending stresses in the recirculation system piping (at elbows) were calculated using the measured peak-to-peak displacements. These results are shown in Table A3-3. In Table A3-3, the axial displacements of sections of straight piping were used to estimate the total differential displacement at the elbows. The results in Table A3-3 show that the stresses range from very low values at some locations up to about 3000 psi (peak-to-peak). Most areas have stress levels of 2000 psi (peak-to-peak) or less.
-Page 34 7 5__
*~~~i At.,{ ,t
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H- I-BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hane Creek Recirculation Svstem Large Bore Pine Cracking Resolution Rpvision- 0 As another method for estimating the vibration stresses, Reference 16 presents the results of vibration analysis and testing of power system piping. The piping system evaluated was the primary coolant piping on a Department of Energy steam generation cell. Although the piping is not identical to the Hope Creek recirculation piping, it is representative of engineered high energy safety related piping and the results in the study can be used as a qualitative assessment. One of the purposes of the study was to determine the stresses in the piping due to normal steady state vibration and operation at critical pump speeds. This study showed that the maximum stresses in the piping were around 1800 psi or less. These results are comparable to those estimated for the recirculation piping. The vibration monitoring during startup was performed for the original configuration of the. recirculation system. Since that time, PSE&G has implemented a snubber reduction program at Hope Creek which included removal of snubbers in the recirculation system. Snubbers allow thermal expansion and slow displacement of the piping, but resist large, rapid displacements such as those associated with a seismic event. In Reference 17, GE stated that the removal of the recirculation system snubbers is expected to have little impact, if any, on the normal operation steady state vibration. 47rACHIMEN :3
-Page 35-ef .AG
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION. STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-1-BB-MEE-1050 12126/95 Hone Creek Recirculation Svstern Large Bore Pine Crackine Resolution Revision: 0 Table A3-1 Startup Testing Full Power Measured Vibration Results Piping Loop Sensor Location Sensor Number Measured Vibration
-___ .___ (mils)
Near the Top of RA SX 3 28" Pump RA-SY 2 Suction Riser RA-SZ
. .*, . RA-PX 7 Under Pump RA-PY 7 RA-PZ 7 A
RA-DX 10 Bottom of Riser RADY 7 to Ring Header
. RA-DZ 7 RA.HX 5 Above RHR R-Y1 Return Tee RA-HY _ 2 RA-HZ 12 Near the Top of RBSX 7 28' Pump RB-SY 7 Suction Riser RB-SZ 7
.RB-PX 7 Under Pump RB-PY 10 RB-PZ 7 B
RB-DX 10 Bottom of Riser RB-DY 2 to Ring Header
. RB-DZ 2 RB-HX 2 Above RHR RB-HY . 2 Return Tee Note: X displacements are in line with the pump suction, Y displacements are vertical, Z displacements are in line with the discharge risors.
-Pag er?6o59-
- 4rTAtCiIMEN-l '3
*JAGE 5 OF e.t C. PJO
T IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 X4 H- I-BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 Hone Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pine Cracking Resolution Rpevisionn: Table A3-2 Normalized Pipe Elbow Bending Stresses (From Attachment 4) Outside Wall Thickness Deflection Bending Stress Diameter (in) (in) (mils) (psi) 28.00 1.201 9 1360 28.00 1.410 7 1050 22.00 Not evaluatedsince vibrationstresses are small 12.75 0.711 _ 28 4230 Table A3-3 Estimated Vibration Stresses - Normal Operation Wall EstimatedI Diaetr wll Peak-Peak cng Location Diameter Thickness Displace.' l (psi) (psi) n(in) (mils) _____ Pump Suct. 28.00 1.201 7 1060 530 Nozzle Under Pump 28.00 1.201 14 2120 1060 Pump 28.00 1.410 19 2850 1425 Discharge 12.75 0.711_.181 ___ Riser Supply 12.75 0.711 12 1810 905 Note:
- 1. The peak-to-peak displacements were determined by adding the measured peak-to-peak displacements of the two points at each end of a run of pipe.
Page of59- . rTAcHMEN1_ 3_ AM 1 ur __ _ _
- AIC. Fif.
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION. STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-l-BB-MEE-1050 12/26195 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 A3.2 Crack Growth Rates Estirriates of crack growth rates for postulated defects can be made using the stress results in Table A3-3, stresses from the piping stress report and the calculational methods described in Attachment 1. The following parameters are important. A review of the piping stress analysis report shows that the steady state stresses in the piping vary widely, from stresses which are essentially the pressure stress alone in some areas, to near the reactor vessel nozzles where the loads are significant. The loads and resulting stresses at highly stressed locations (near the reactor vessel nozzles and RHR return tee) are shown in Table A3-4. These results are for Loop A, which is considered typical of both loops.
- The vibration stresses range from very low levels to the estimated stresses in Table A3-3.
- The welding residual stresses can vary from compressive to tensile depending on the actual location of the defect in the pipe wall and the welding parameters.
- The size of postulated defects could be a small as 10% of the wall thickness, or less, depending on how the welds were made and what materials were used. Conversely, based on inspection results during the 3R outage, they could be up to about 30% of the wall thickness.
In order to assess the potential for crack growth for all of the potential combinations of applied stresses, defect size and residual stresses, a total of sixteen sets of calculations are performed. A set of calculations (to predict crack growth rates) is performed for each possible state for each key parameter. These results provide insight into potential growth of cracks in the highly loaded areas (e.g., near the nozzles) and other areas as well. Table A3-5 is a summary of the calculations presented in Tables A3-6 to A3-21. A3.3 Results There are two key results of the crack growth calculations. These are:
- Crack growth due to high frequency loads is a binary function, either-the crack grows rapidly or it does not grow at all. There are two possible reasons why there are no known through-wall defects in the Hope Creek piping. These are (1) there are no remaining weld defects in the piping, and (2) defects are present in the piping and were growing at one time, but the growth has arrested (stopped) because the crack grew into the compressive residual stress region of the pipe wall.
- Page 38 of 5- 'kTTACHMEN1_ 3 PAGE or___
*^.1k C 110 _,
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-I -BB-MEE- 1050 12/26195 Wont Creek Recirculation Svstem Larve Bore Pine Cracking Resolution Revisionn: O If sizeable defects are present (which could possibly grow), they would have already grown through to the pipe outside surface. Table A3-5 also includes an indication whether any crack growth would have been predicted at any time during plant life. As expected, the magnitude of the vibration stresses and size of the postulated defect are most important, there is no growth predicted for the low vibration stress and 10% of the wall defect cases. The presence of large or small steady state stresses and/or tensile residual stresses can affect the potential for crack growth, but the effect is smaller. The results of these calculations indicate that there are no defects still growing under normal vibration loads, and that surface inspection (PT) can be used to inspect for defects. TrArIA1E01_ 3
--'Pagc-49-0fS9 -AG S_
OF__ _ I,'". Nr i.
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-1-BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 Hone Creek Recirculation Svstem Large Bore Pine Cracking ResoIntion Revisin-v n Table A3-4 Loop A Stress Analysis Results - Critical Locations Pipe Location Loading' MA MB Mc MTOT Size . (in-kip) (in-kip) (in-kip) ( (psi) 28" - Suction P (1362 psi) 7260 1.201 (00zN) DW 63.3 -27.3 -71.4 1=2.1--2.1 TH -1291.1 80.0 598.4 DW+TH -1227.8 52.7 527 1337 20601 = 4320 DW+TH+P 11580 28" - Below P (1643 psi) 7335
.410" Return DW -1.8 11.7 -20.3 (600) TH 171.3 1052.7 703.6 1=1.55 DW+TH 169.5 1064.4 683.3 1276 1711i=
2650 DW+TH+P 9985 12.75"- Risor P (1385) _ _ 5516 0.71(1 Nz3zle DW 3.5 0.9 19.0 TH 160.5 2.4 -95.8 DW+TH 164.0 3.3 -76.8 181 2134i= 3840 DW+TH+P 9356 Notes:
- 1. Operating pressure is taken from Reference 13, moment loadings are taken from Reference 8.
rrcHMI -3 .
-Pagc-40o9-sL-_ -r.
- 'At(; NO ._ . __..
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H- 1-BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hone
- - Creek
- Recirculation System Larce Bore Pine Crackine Resolution Revisin:- 0 Table A3-5 Crack Growth Calculation Cases Table A3-6 Steady State Stresses' "High" LJ Vibration Stresses 2 "6High" Residual Stresses 3 "Tensile" i_I_
Crack Depth (alt) 0.1 Potential Crack Growth ? _ Yes A3-7 "High" "High" "Tensile" 0.3 Yes A3-S "High" "High" Negligible 0.1 Surface Cracks A3-9 "High" "High" Negligible 0.3 Yes A3-10 "High" "Low" 'Tensile" 0.1 Pump Suction Piping Surface Cracks Only A3- 11 "High" "Low" "Tensile" 0.3 Yes A3-12 "High" "Low" Negligible 0.1 No A3-13 "High" "Low" Negligible 0.3 Surface Cracks A3-14 "Low" "High" "Tensile" 0.1 Yes A3-15 "Low" "High" "Tensile" 0.3 Yes A3-16 "Low" "High" Negligible 0.1 Pump Suction Piping Surface Cracks Only A3-17 "Low" "High" Negligible 0.3 Yes A3-18 "Low" "Low" 'Tensile" 0.1 Pump Suction Piping Surface Cracks Only A3-19 "Low" "Low" 'Tensile" 0.3 Yes A3-20 "Low" "Low" Negligible 0.1 No A3-21 'Low" "Low" Negible 0.3 Surface Cracks Notes:
- 1. For "high" steady state stresses, the maximum calculated normal operation stresses from Reference 8 are used. For "low" steady state stresses, only the pressure stress is used.
- T.T :.!;t:'a 3
- Pagel 4-of , ,I
. ,t
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-1-BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 Hone Creek RecirculationSystem Large Bore Pine Cracking Resolution Revision. 0
- 2. For "high" vibration stresses, the estimated maximum vibration stresses are used. For "low" vibration stresses, an assumed lower bound of 200 psi is used.
- 3. For "tensile" residual stresses, the residual stress is set to a constant 30 ksi. For "negligible" residual stresses, the residual stresses are neglected.
!rrA(;E1EIT 3
- Page 4 of49-W _
-0I:
3/4 _ U5
;m H-I -BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 o-rJ 00M M--
Hnne Crreelk RecircnIntinn Svstem Large Bore Pine Crackinu Resolution I RP\I;r;nn-r\GYIdI<II. n UJ LA) co Table A3-6 Estimated Crack Growth Rates 0 9' High Steady State Stresses, High Vibration Stresses, -4q Tensile Residual Stresses, a/t =0.1 a: P1 LA M OD t Deectl a l g l l K, K( Kp An, l da/dt (in) Type (in) (psi) (psiv'ini ( (psivlin) i (p ) psivin) (inlyr -4 0
;U 28.00 1.201 Surface 0.120 1.39 41580 35480 1060 905 34576 36385 21234 38.55 M 28.00 1.201 Subsurf 0.060 1.10 41580 19866 1060 506 19359 20372 11X89 5.69
-I, 28.00 1.410 Surface 0.141 1.41 39985 37643 1425 1342 36302 38985 28522 128.21 28.00 1.410 Subsurf 0.071 1.10 39985 20699 1425 738 19962 21437 15684 17.82 M
12.75 0.711 Surface 0.071 1.43 39356 26667 905 613 26053 27280 14734 10.94 12.75 0.711 Subsurf 0.036 1.10 39356 14468 905 333 14135 14800 7994 1.45 Ln z U)
-4,.
(I)
._1, -4
,I I9
- t Page 43 a . 9
zi35
-4
,- v Z u)
H-1 -BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 0;0 Hope Creek Recirculation Svstem 1a!re Bore Pine Crackinv Resolution
- svcvSau Dvinn uJ CDX co In z
Table A3-7 Estimated Crack Growth Rates 0q High Steady State Stresses, High Vibration Stresses,
--4 Tensile Residual Stresses, a/t =0.3 r M
C (A M OD l Defect n °'EC, a, Kmiw K. AK~r, da/dt (in) (in Type (in) (psi) (psiv'in) (psi) psivin) (psiin) (psiin' psivin) (inlyr) --4 0 28.00 1.201 Surface 0.360 1.58 41580 69682 1060 1776 67906 71458 41702 357.58 28.00 1.201 Subsurf 0.180 1.25 41580 39101 1060 997 38104 40098 23400. 53.12 28.00 1.410 Surface 0.423 1.60 39985 73930 1425 2635 71295 76564 56016 1189.24 rI I 28.00 1.410 Subsurf 0.212 1.25 39985 40742 1425 1452 39290 42193 30869 166.45 M 12.75 0.711 Surface 0.213 1.63 39356 52372 905 1204 51168 53576 28937 101.49 12.75 0.711 Subsurf 0.107 1.25 39356 28476 905 655 27821 29131 15734 13.59 z LI)
- 1,
-4
! j- I! I C; i :. Pagze 4 oF9
-IU czF H-I -BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution IUV L
n>,cun-A IU. UJW 0-tP1 Table A3-8 Estimated Crack Growth Rates High Steady State Stresses, High Vibration Stresses, Negligible Residual Stresses, alt =0.1 a1 OD t Defec a . K,, a0,1 K¢,Y KC, KM% AK, dald t1a~ (psh in) (iyr) --I (in) n Type in (psi (psi) (Psin (psiin) (psivn) 0 28.00 1.201 Surface 0.120 1.39 11580 9881 1060 905 8977 10786 8859 16.08 28.00 1.201 Subsurf 0.060 1.10 11580 5533 1060 506 5026 6039 4960 0.00 M 1342 8059 10742 6306 28.35 -n 28.00 1.410 Surface 0.141 1.41 9985 9400 1425 28.00 1.410 Subsurf 0.071 1.10 9985 . 5169 1425 738 4431 5907 3468 0.00 12.75 0.711 Surface 0.071 1.43 9356 6339 905 613 5726 6953 5389 4.00
<1 12.75 0.711 Subsurf 0.036 1.10 9356 3439 905 333 3107 3772 2924 0.00 FA i 0
z (A
'.^4 _, .'I I-I'I V ;
Z
°I 1 I \.
-Pre 45-of 59-
-U7 z
B-1-BB-MEE-1 050 12/26/95 U) Cu Hope Creek Recirculation Svstem Laree Bore Pine Cracking Resolution Revision; 0 0 M-4 Table A3-9 Estimated Crack Growth Rates High Steady State Stresses, High Vibration Stresses, I Negligible Residual Stresses, a/t =0.3 P1 C OD l Defect a l g aI lI , o= a l K.,, l K.". l AK, l dadt W (in) l (in) I Type l (in) l l (psi) l (psilin) (psi) (psiVin) l(psiin) l (psiVin) l (psiin) (in/yr) -4 0 28.00 1.201 Surface 0.360 1.58 11580 19406 1060 1776 17630 21183 17399 149.19 28.00 1.201 Subsuff 0.180 1.25 11580 10890 1060 997 9893 11886 9763 22.16 < 28.00 1.410 Surface 0.423 1.60 9985 18462 1425 2635 15827 21096 12385 262.95 28.00 1.410 Subsurf 0.212 1.25 9985 10174 1425 1452 8722 - 11626 6825 36.80 12.75 0.711 Surface 0.213 1.63 9356 12450 905 1204 11246 13655 10584 37.12 P1 12.75 0.711 Subsurf 0.107 1.25 9356 6769 905 655 6115 7424 5753 4.97 :9 U)
-4 C .
U)
.:t :~-;
i _ I, 1,
- 12hap rgef 9-i..
Z-03' z L/ Oa: H- 1-BB-MEE- 1050 12/26195 0t rI)M Hope Creek Recirculation System Larze Bore Pine Crackinz Resolution Re'viszinn: O 0 0 C)Z tn tD Table A3-10 Estimated Crack Growth Rates High Steady State Stresses, Low Vibration Stresses, -Il Tensile Residual Stresses. alt =0.1 m c (A r
.OD t Delect a K. Gr K KI,, I didi (in) (in) Tye I (in) (psi) (psiVin) i(psi sVin) 1 p(siin)
(Psivin) aKm (psi/'in) (inyr) 0
--I 28.00 1.201 Surface 0.120 1.39 41580 35480 200 171 35310 35651 4801 0.00 <
28.00 1.201 Subsurf 0.060 1.10 41580 19866 200 96 19770 19961 2688 0.00 28.00 1,410 Surface 0.141 1.41 39985 37643 200 188 37455 37831 5288 0.26 '9 M 28.00 1.410 Subsurf 0.071 1.10 39985 20699 200 104 20596 20803 2908 0.00 12.75 0.711 Surface 0.071 1.43 39356 26667 200 136 26531 26802 3804 0.00 12.75 0.711 Subsurf 0.036 1.10 39356 14468 200 74 14394 14541 2064 0.00 z
-1 n/
CA ', lE ! i-'
-Page 47 f e9-
-4 H-I-BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 0;0 Hlone Creek Recirculation System Laree Bore Pine Crackin2 Resolution Revision: O
- S 0
Table A3-1 1 Estimated Crack Growth Rates U) High Steady State Stresses, Low Vibration Stresses, Tensile Residual Stresses, alt =0.3 0 P1 OD lt Defect a I g l a,, l K, c¢,, KI IlK,,., I K A ,, da/dt -- 41 (in) l (in) l Type l (in) ) Ipsi (Psiin) I (s slin psi)in (psi/in) (inlyr) P1 28.00 1.201 Surface 0.360 1.58 41580 69682 200 335 69347 70017 9428 1.75 28.00 1.201 Subsurf 0.180 1.25 41580 39101 200 188 38913 39289 5291 0.26 28.00 1.410 Surface 0.423 1.60 39985 73930 200 370 73560 74299 10386 2.41 28.00 1.410 Subsurf 0.212 1.25 39985 40742 200 204 40538 40945 5723 0.34
-- 4 12.75 0.711 Surface 0.213 1.63 39356 52372 200 266 52106 52638 7470 0.81 U) 12.75 0.711 Subsurf 0.107 1.25 39356 28476 200 145 28331 28621 4062 0.00
... I tr'S .f I'C1" I I I
. I
-Page 48teF9-
'4
Zitn
-r1 _
Im 0 m li- I-BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hone Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pivc Cracking Resolution Rcvision O oO 00 co Table A3-12 '1 Estimated Crack Growth Rates Hligh Steady State Stresses, Low Vibration Stresses, --4 Negligible Residual Stresses, a/t =0.1 m OD lt l Defcct a g °.. l K l oe pK Kn) K 4 I I Ki daIdt (in) l (in) Type (in) I I (psi) l (psiSin) l (psi) l (psiSin) l (psiin) l (psitfin) l (psh'in) l (inyr) -.4 0* 28.00 1.201 Surface 0.120 1.39 11580 9881 200 171 9711 10052 4318 0.00 28.00 1.201 Subsurf 0.060 1.10 11580 5533 200 96 5437 5628 2418 0.00 28.00 1.410 Surface 0.141 1.41 9985 9400 200 188 9212 9588 4648 0.00 _9 28.00 1.410 Subsurf 0.071 1.10 9985 5169 200 104 5066 5273 2556 0.00 12.75 0.711 Surface 0.071 1.43 9356 6339 200 136 6204 6475 3305 0.00 12.75 0.711- Subsurf 0.036 1.10 9356 3439 200 74 3366 3513 1793 0.00
;U V/)
CI C, Page 49 eF 59
U .-. 4 Zv rn-_ z7I M-4 O ;v H-1 -BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hor~e Creek Recirculation Svstem Larve Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 00 o z (A Table A3-13 0 Estimated Crack Growth Rates H1igh Steady State Stresses, Low Vibration Stresses, I P1 Negligible Residual Stresses, alt =0.3 m OD t Dcfect It a a, (psi) K. (psia/in) (psi) (psis/in) K;, (psi/in) Ks,, KI. (psiin) (psivin) d(l/dl (in/yr) -4 in)I (in) (;n) ITypz 0 28.00 1.201 'Surface 0.360 1.58 11580 19406 200 335 19071 19742 8481 1.57 m 28.00 1.201 Subsurf 0.180 1.25 11580 10890 200 188 10701 11078 4759 0.00 28.00 l.410 Surface OA23 1.60 9985 18462 200 370 18092 18831 9129 2.12 28.00 1.410 Subsurf 0.212 1.25 9985 10174 200 204 9970 10378 5031 0.30 12.75 0.711 Surfacc 0.213. 1.63 9356 12450 200 266 12184 12716 6490 0.71 3529 0.00 -TI 12.75 0.711 Subsurr 0.107 1.25 9356 6769 200 145 6625 6914
-4 C
(A
- -, V; I _
oi i I cI1
-abe570-oF 59 -
-4
~-1 N) n
..Qz!
H-I -BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 00M co zT I-lope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution t#st. [ Ll 53LJ1 JvIz14. a%v 041) r-Table A3-14 Estimated Crack Growth Rates Low Steady Slate Stresses, High Vibration Stresses, In Tensile Residual Stresses, a/t =0.1
-4 rM OD I Defect a g lKa,, l l K., Km l AK,, dEL~dt <
(in) (in) Type (in) (psi) ( siVin) (psi) (psh'in) (Psivin) (psifin) ((siln) (inlvr) 28.00 1.201 Surface 0.120 1.39 37260 31794 1060 905 30890 32699 20646 37.48 28.00 1.201 Subsurf 0.060 1.10 37260 17802 1060 506 17295 18308 11560 5.53 28.00 1.410 Surface 0.141 1.41 37335 35148 1425 1342 33807 36490 27790 124.92 CV) 28.00 1.410 Subsurf 0.071 1.10 37335 19328 1425 738 18590 20065 15281 17.36 D
-- I 12.75 0.711 Surface 0.071 1.43 35516 24065 905 613 23451 24678 14397 10.69 C 12.75 0.711 Subsurr 0.036 1.10 35516 13056 905 333 12723 13389 7811 1.42 (A 591 z
-4
( 0 _z I :
-Peg s L- 59
Z;j zUW rrl ~ 0 m H-1 -BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hone Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Crackina Resolution Revision: 0 00Z 0 7 Table A3-15 4(A U) Estimated Crack Growth Rates 00 Low Steady State Stresses, High Vibration Stresses, co LA Tensile Residual Stresses, aft =0.3 E T1 P1 OD t Defect a g 0s, K., E K,, Km1 da/dt (in) (in) Type (in) (ps;) l (psifin) I(pi) (psiVia) (psiVin) (psi%'in) (psi~in) (inyr) Ui 28.00 1.201 Surface 0.360 1.58 37260 62442 1060 1776 60666 64219 40548 347.68 28.00 1.201 Subsurf 0.180 1.25 37260 35038 1060 997 34042 36035 22753 51.65 n--.4 28.00 1.410 Surface 0.423 1.60 37335 69030 1425 2635 66395 71665 54579 1158.73 -. 4 28.00 1.410 Subsurf 0.212 1.25 37335 38041 1425 1452 36589 39493 30077 162.18 12.75 0.711 Surface 0.213 1.63 35516 47262 905 1204 46058 48466 28275 99.17 12.75 0.711 Subsurf 0.107 1.25 35516 25697 905 655 25043 26352 15374 13.28 z C CA
,. ) ., ..
. I i IL-C.,
. . V .
Page re459
-4 tTZ C7 I O)
H-I-BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 _ rr Hope Creek Recirculation Svstem Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 00 Co z Table A3-16
--4i Estimated Crack Growth Rates r-Low Steady State Stresses, H-Iigh Vibration Stresses, P1 Negligible Residual Stresses, a/t =0.1 a
Ln
;U Defect g l aa ir KMAT, AK,,,. daldt M l(in) (in) Type (in) l I (psi) I (psi/in) I (psi) (psiVin) I(psi/in (psklin) (inlyr) --4 0
28.00 1.201 Surface 0.120 139 7260 6195 1060 905 5290 7099 4235 0.00 m 28.00 1.201 Subsurf 0.060 1.10 7260 3469 1060 506 2962 3975 2372 0.00 7U 28.00 1.410 Surface 0.141 1.41 7335 6905 1425 1342 5564 8247 5941 26.71 28.00 1.410 Subsurf 0.071 1.10 7335 3797 1425 738 3059 4535 3267 0.00 12.75 0.711 Surface 0.071 1.43 5516 3737 905 613 3124 4351 2812 0.00 12.75 0.711 Subsurf 0.036 1.10 5516 2028 905 333 1695 2360 1525 0.00 tn 0 z7U Ln (n
Ž7 I t.I
..E, I r. i G10i;
,,l I T-age-5~HF9-
-f LI czj
= n:
11-1 -BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 Hope Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pipe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 00' gm co Table A3-17 Estimated Crack Growth Rates Low Steady State Stresses, High Vibration Stresses, I Negligible Residual Stresses, alt =0.3 7 m 0 OD lt Defect a 8 °. K,, .o Kf K.'* Ku. AK) da/dL -'q (in) (in) Type (in) (psi) (psilin) (psi) (psiKin) (psi.Iin) (psiVin) (psis'in) (in/yr) m 28.00 1.201 Surface 0.360 1.58 7260 12167 1060 1776 10390 13943 8318 71.33 LA, 28.00 1.201 Subsurf 0.180 1.25 7260 6827 1060 997 5830 7824 4668 0.00 a z 28.00 1.410 Surface 0.423 1.60 7335 13562 1425 2635 10927 16197 11669 247.73 3,. 28.00 1.410 Subsurf 0.212 1.25 7335 7474 1425 1452 6022 8926 6430 34.67 2---M 12.75 0.711 Surface 0.213 1.63 5516 7340 905 1204 6136 8545 5522 19.37 12.75 0.711 Subsurr 0.107 1.25 5516 3991 905 655 3336 4646 3002 0.00 -4 z (A D-
- C
!Iel * ;11 ,.
Pagge 54 oF 59-
-CI H-I -BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 M-4J NJ Hone Creek Recirculation Syster Large Bore Pioe Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 00 0U o:~rI Table A3-1 8 Estimated Crack Growfi Rates - -1 Low Steady State Stresses, Low Vibration Stresses, 0 Tensile Residual Stresses, a/t =0.1 rri OD l Defect a g I ,, I K_ Il 1 l ,
,,!, l K,,, A'Ir da/dt U,4 (in) I (in) I Type I (in) I I (psi) I (psiWin) I (psi) I (psi\in) I (psiin) I (psiVin) I (psi/in) I (in/yr) 0 z
28.00 1.201 Surface 0.120 1.39 37260 31794 200 171 31623 31965 4779 0.00 28.00 1.201 Subsurf 0.060 1.10 37260 17802 200 96 17706 17897 2676 0.00 28.00 1.410 Surface 0.141 1.41 37335 35148 2D0 188 34960 35337 5273 0.26 28.00 1.410 Subsurf 0.071 1.10 37335 19328 200 104 19224 19431 2899 0.00 12.75 0.71 i Surface 0.071 1.43 35516 24065 200 136 23929 24200 3786 0.00 12.75 0.711 Subsurf 0.036 1.10 35516 13056 200 74 12983 13130 2054 0.00
--I C
tin
* .. e5 r- :
C
- t- I i o II I
- V P-ege00 59-
zxi M-f Orri H-1-BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 g);0 Hone Creek Rccirculation System Large Bore Pipe Crackini Resolution Revision: 0 oO oz 00 Table A3-19 '1 Estimated Crack Growth Rates Low Steady State Stresses, Low Vibration Stresses, -I Tensile Residual Stresses, a/t =0.3 m C LA M OD It l Defect a l g l , l l I Kml AKr l dalJdt (in) (in) I Type I (in) I I (psi) I (psilin) I (psi) I (psi~in) I (psi~in) I (psi'in) I (pAsi in) (inlyr) 0-n 28.00 1.201 Surface 0.360 1.58 37260 62442 200 335 62107 62777 9385 1.74 M 28.00 1.201 Subsurr 0.180 1.25 37260 35038 200 188 34850 35227 5266 0.26 28.00 1.410 Surface 0.423 1.60 37335 69030 200 370 68660 69400 10356 2.40 28.00 1.410 Subsurf. 0.212 1.25 37335 38041 200 204 37838 38245 5707 0.34 En 12.75 0.711 Surface 0.213 1.63 35516 47262 200 266 46996 47528 7437 0.81 12.75 0.711 Subsurf 0.107 1.25 35516 25697 200 145 25553 25842 4043 0.00 0 z (4 C (A
-. 1, ?:
I . 1
zWl M 0
- m:
H-1 -BB-MEE-1050 12/26/95 Hone Creek Recirculation System Large Bore Pine Crackinz Resolution IRe-vision: O 00 U) 0 Z FO Table A3-20 Estimated Crack Growth Rates 0
~'1 Low Steady State Stresses, Low Vibration Strcsses, -. I Negligible Residual Stresses, a/t =0.1 P1i C
;U OD (t Defect a g (a$! (K, 0',, K,, Kmin AK,, da/d~t (in) n Type I (i) I (psi) (psi/in) (pSi) I (pstin) i (psiin) (psiin) (psi, in) (inyL) 0 28.00 1.201 Surface 0.120 1.39 7260 6195 200 171 6024 6366 3929 0.00 m M
28.00 1.201 Subsurf 0.060 1.10 7260 3469 200 96 3373 3564 2200 (3.00 M 28.00 1.410 Surface 0.141 1.41 7335 6905 200 188 6717 7094 4347 0.00 2S.00 1.410 Subsurf 0.071 1.10 7335 3797 200 104 3694 3901 2390 0.00 12.75 0.711 Surface 0.071 1.43 5516 3737 200 136 3602 3873 2863 0.00 ;U 2: 12.75 0.711 Subsurf 0.036 1.10 5516 2028 200 74 1954 2101 1553 0.00 0 Cl 1.I -; 4:' -Z
- I
'I I
- Page 55 of59-
-v-
,0 I
sM l-0'i9 cz (;A t- vml H4-1 -BB-MEE- 1050 12t26195 Hone Creek: Recircmilnhion Svstem Larze Bore Pine Crackine Resolution Revision: O coZ Table A3-2 1 Estimated Crack Growth Rates 0 qvi Low Steady State Stresses, Low Vibration Stresses, --- Negligible Residual Stresses, a7t =0.3 P1 C OD Defect Ita g K, C Kl,, l K, K,,,, (AK, dn/dt W (in) (in) Tye (in) I I (psi) (Psi'in) (psi) (psiVin) psivin) (pskiin) si:in) (y'r) 6 c
-I 0M 28.00 1.201 Surface 0.360 1.58 7260 12167 200 335 11832 12502 7717 1.43 28.00 1.201 Subsurf 0.180 1.25 7260 6827 200 188 6639 7015 4330 0.00 28.00 1.410 Surface 0.423 1.60 7335 13562 200 370 13192 13932 8537 1.98 28.00 1.410 Subsurf 0.212 1.25 7335 7474 200 20f1 7270 7678 4704 0.00 M
12.75 0.711 Surface 0.213 1.63 5516 7340 200 266 7074 7606 5623 0.61 M P1 12.75 0.711 Subsurf 0.107 1.25 5516 3991 200 145 3846 4136 3057 0.00 (A 0~
)-4
-4i a
En II , -Z 1.15n _ S Q__ 9
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 H-I -BB-MEE- 1050 12/26/95 Hone Creek Recirculation S'stem Laree Bore Pine Cracking Resolution Revision: 0 ATTACHMENT 4 BENDING STRESSES IN PIPING ELBOWS
-pTi 9-ufJ95
'.A I or m A'LC N _.........
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS :t PRINTED 20041108 MPR Associates, Inc. WrIMPR 320 King Street Alexandria, VA 22314 CALCULATION TITLE PAGE Client Public Service Gas and Electric Page 1 of 9
+ 45 Pages Attached Project Task No.
Hope Creek Recirculation Piping 108-9530-100-0 Title Calculation No. Calculation of Piping Stresses from Unit Applied Loads 108-100-CBS-01 PreparerlDate Checker/Date ReviewerlDate Rev. No. Craig B. Swa ner
/72/'//
/~'-I
/I/I A !
/ ljpj/;'.-'
0 12-A155
'_f SS
; ; C
___________________ .2.
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 M PR MPR Associates, Inc. 320 King Street Alexandria, VA 22314 RECORD OF REVISIONS Calculation No. Prepped By Checked By 108-100-CBS-01 aim 1/rS 6 .i Page 2 Revision Description 0 Initial Issue IffACHMMt'l vi .. PAGE 5 or__5* rALC. NO -JU-I8 B-I£E~-~J
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 Pin iff Gus~ WMPR Associates, Inc.
.M PR 32D King Street Alexandria, VA 22314 Calculation No. 4 Pre ed By Checked By
/ Ad /t (Page 3 108-100-CBS-01 (, Pagem 1.0 PURPOSE The purpose of this calculation is to calculate the maximum stresses in a piping elbow for a unit applied load and moment for various pipe sizes and configurations.
The following pipe sizes are examined in this calculation: I Pipe OD (in) Wall Thickness (in) j 28.00 1.201 28.00 1.410 12.75 0.711 2.0 RESULTS The results for each piping configuration examined are given in Table 1.
..,P.
; r !+/-1fit_ _t; -/l m
z UI m0 - x 7 00= ('A o0-I 0 rri q C z
-I
(
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 LX -a A U-NMPRg Associates, Inc. t~M P E 320 King Street Alexandria, VA 22314 Calculation No. A Pe ed By Checked By 108-100-CBS-01 / 3.0 CALCULATION The maximum elbow stresses including stress intensification factors are determined using the AutoPIPE Version 4.5 piping analysis program. Each piping model consists of an anchor, a short run of piping, and a long radius elbow (i.e., elbow radius is 1.5 times the nominal pipe diameter). The piping geometry for each case is shown below. The piping model above is run for the following three cases: Table 2 AutoPIPE Input Piping Outside Wall Moment Arm Material Configuration Diameter (in) I Thickness (in) Length (in) Properties 1 28.00 1.201 17 304 Stainless Steel 2 28.00 1.410 17 304 Stainless Steel 3 12.75 0.711 25 304 Stainless Steel ut S
. (,.c.N A
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108
^£P R MPR Associates, Inc.
320 King Street Alexandria, VA 22314 Calculation No. Pre red By Checked By 10B-100-CBS-01 si l' csoi(IPage A,1l Pg 6 Each piping model is analyzed for two load cases. For each case the load is applied at the end of the elbow. The first case is a 10,000 ibf load applied along the pipe centerline pointing toward the elbow. The second case is a 1,000 ft-lbf moment applied so that bending occurs in the plane of the elbow. The applied loading for both cases is shown below.
r . Io -;s__L*_
;Vt!,;N2 -- 6-i }.D
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS i PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC2 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 2 AutoPIPE+4.50 MODEL PAGE 3 C 0 M P 0 N E N T D A T A L I S T I N G POINT ---COORDINATE(ft )--- DATA NAME X Y Z TYPE DESCRIPTION
*** SEGMENT A AOO 0.00 0.00 0.00 ANCHOR Rigid Thermal movements : None A01 N 0.00 1.42 0.00 A01 0.00 4 . 92 0.00 TI A01 F 3.50 4.92 0.00 A02 3.56 4.92 0.00 FORCES Thermal I Number of points in the system : 5
* *- . i
,.; NUA ,; s - -50
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC2 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 2 AutoPIPE+4.50 MODEL PAGE 4 P I P E D A T A L I S T I N G Pipe ID/ Nom/ O.D. ----- Thickness(inch)----- Spec Weight(lb/ft ) Material Sch inch W.Th. Corr Mill Insu Ling Gray Pipe Other Total PIPE1 NS 28.000 1.410 0 0.18 0 0 0 410 0 410 A312-TP304
%.'^;- i '7t _ , s5
*:;i.l: .. :-{W E/5
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC2 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 2 AutoPIPE+4.5Q MODEL PAGE 5 M A T E R I A L D A T A L I S T I N G Material Density Pois. Temper. Modulus Expans. Allow. Name Pipe ID lb/cu.ft Ratio deg F E6 psi in/lOOft psi A312-TP304 PIPEI 501.0 0.30 70.0 28.30 18700.0
... tR .. ' ST
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC2 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 2 AutoPIPE+4.50 MODEL PAGE 6 TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE DATA
- C A S E 1------ ----- C A S E 2------ ----- C A S E 3------
POINT PRESS. TEMPER EXPAN. PRESS. TEMPER EXPAN. PRESS. TEMPER EXPAN. NAME psi deg F in/lOOft psi deg F in/lOOft psi deg F in/lOOft
*** SEGMENT A AOO 0 70.00 0.000 A02 0 70.00 0.000
., i:V:l ' .{,.__-A. ..
... ,l
;r2-1so
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC2 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 2 AutoPIPE+4.50 MODEL PAGE 7 FORCES AND DISPLACEMENTS (Force - lb I Moment - ft-lb , Tran.- in I Rot.- deq ) POINT LOAD NAME CASE TYPE X Y Z Xx YY zz A02 Ti FORCE -10000 0 0 0 0 0
.T..!:t.._ f
., f ;. 55
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC2 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 2 AutoPIPE+4.50 RESULT PAGE 1 A N A L Y S I S S U M M A R Y Current model revision number : 1 Static - Date and Time of analysis ............. Diec 4, 1995 3:09 PM Model Revision Number. 1 Number of load cases .1 Load cases analyzed. T.I Gaps/Friction/Yielding considered. Ni Hanger design run. Ni Cut short included. Ni Weight of contents included. Y c ns Pressure stiffening case .0 Water elevation for buoyancy loads .... N Dot considered (x - - IC). 0O0 ib LP./
- ; . .... -I
- .. *I!;C.* I- js. A
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC2 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 2 AutoPIPE+4.50 RESULT PAGE 3 D I S P L A C E M E N T S Point Load TRANSLATIONS (in ) ROTATIONS (deg ) name combination x Y Z x Y Z
*** Segment A begin ***
A00 T1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 A01 N Ti -0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 A01 F Ti -0.007 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.011 A02 Ti -0.007 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0J1
*** Segment A end
, J
.:%-l 575'-
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC2 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 2 AutoPIPE+4.50 RESULT PAGE 4 G L O B A L F O R C E S & M O M E N T S Point Load FORCES (lb ) MOMENTS (ft-lb ) name combination X Y z Result X Y Z Result
*** Segment A begin ***
A0O TI 10000 0 0 10000 0 0 -49167 49167 A01 N T1 10000 0 0 10000 0 0 -35000 35000 A01 F Ti 10000 0 0 10000 0 0 0 0 A02 T1 10000 0 0 100*00 0 0 0 0
*** Segment A end
- :....::. -,.; .-.. I... .
* .. 3Y: ' f -
S~...
. :'H-S-S IS
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC2 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 2 AutoPIPE+4.50 RESULT PAGE 5 G E N E F. A L P I P E S T R E S S R E P O R T (Stress in psi Point Load Hoop Longitudinal Tors. Principal IMax Oct name combination Stress Max Min Shear Max Min Sl hear Loc Shear
*** Segment A begin ***
AOO SIFI= 1.00 SIFO= 1.0 T1 0 791 -791. 0 791 -791 396 MT 791 A01 N- SIFI= 1.00 SIFO= 1.00 Ti 0 563 -563 0 563 -563 282 MT 563 A01 N+ SIFI= 1.87 SIFO= 1.87 Ti 0 1051 -1051 0 1051 -1051 525 MT 1051 A01 F- SIFI= 1.87 SIFO= 1.87 T1 0 -85 -85 0 0 -85 42 NA 85 A01 F+ SIFI= 1.00 SIFO- 1.00 T1 0 -85 -85 0 0 -85 42 NA 85 A02 SIFI= 1.00 SIFO= 1I.0C T1 0 -85 -85 0 0 -85 42 NA 85
*** Segment A end
.'y[, C i ,[oLw .. .Y I,_ .@ - S.
ill.G. ! o. {-. -4F[-J
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC2 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 2 AutoPIPE+4.50 RESULT PAGE 1 A N A L Y S I S S U M M A R Y Current model revision number 1 Static - Date and Time of analysis ............. Dec 4, 1995 3:10 PM Model Revision Number ................. 1 Number of load cases .................. 1 Load cases analyzed ................... Ti Gaps/Friction/Yielding considered. No Hanger design run ..................... No Cut short included .................... No Weight of contents included ........... Yes Pressure stiffening case ............. 0 Water elevation for buoyancy loads .... Not considered
,Softl he- /.^I Aonest
".! ;: *. A._ B.-/t <
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC2 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 2 AutoPIPE+4.50 RESULT PAGE 3 D I S P L A C E ME N T S Point Load TRANSLATIONS (in ) ROTATIONS (deg ) name combination x Y z x Y ' z
*** Segment A begin i**
AO0 Ti1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 A01 N Ti 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 A01 F Ti 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 A02 Ti 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001
*** Segment A end I
.1 -1
' N,".11-
- - 47M . ..-W5'rl
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC2 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 2 AutoPIPE+4.50 RESULT PAGE 4 G L O B A L F O R C E S & MO ME N T S Point Load FORCES (lb ) MOMENTS (ft-lb ) name combination X Y Z Result X Y Z Result
*** Segment A begin ***
AOO Ti 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1000 1000 A01 N Ti 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1000 1000 A01 F TI 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1000 1000 A02 T1 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1000 1000
*** Segment A end
.: i.£i , .;. - If
.. .. .:. t . S 5S I',X X-A -0/yrE 1D
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC2 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 2 AutoPIPE+4.50 RESULT PAGE 5 G E N E R A L P I P E S T R E S S R E PO R T (Stress in psi. Point Load Hoop Longitudinal Tors. Principal Ilax Oct name combination Stress Max Min Shear Max Min SIhear Loc Shear
*** Segment A begin ***
AOD SIFI= 1.00 SIFO= 1.OC T1 0 16 -16 0 16 -16 8 MT 16 AO1 N- SIFI= 1.00 SIFO= 1.0C Ti 0 16 -16 0 16 -16 8 MT 16 AO1 N+ SIFI= 1.87 SIFO= 1.87 T1 0 30 -30 0 30 -30 15 MT 30 AO1 F- SIFI= 1.87 SIFO= 1.87 Ti 0 30 -30 0 30 -30 15 MT 30 AO1 F+ SIFI= 1.00 SIFO= 1.00 T1 0 16 -16 0 16 -16 8 MT 16 A02 SIFI= 1.00 SIFO= 1.00 Ti 0 16 -16 0 16 -16 8 MT 16
*** Segment A end *.* *
.! ;a.L'1ti.LI:I _. - , ..
.: #- }:( -X^s -) ASD
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION. STATUS PRINTED 20041108 MPR Associates, Inc. FA Mp R 320 King Street Alexandria, VA 22314 Calculation No. 108-1 00-CBS-01 Attachment C AutoPIPE RESULTS FOR PIPING MODE L 3 15 Pages Attached
- - - .4!
'L .: - . .
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC3 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 3 AutoPIPE+4.50 MODEL PAGE 1 AUTOPIPE SYSTEM DATA LISTING
* *** *** * * *** * +* ****** **** * **** *** ** * ****** ******** ***** *** *
- SYSTEM NAME : HRECIRC3 PROJECT ID : HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING PIPING CON GURATION 3 PREPARED BY :
- t. SWANNER G CHECKED BY : Xe /
PIPING CODE : B31.1-67 AMBIENT TEMP. ( deg F ) : 70.0 COMPONENT LIBRARY : AUTOPIPE MATERIAL LIBRARY : AUT01967 MODEL REVISION NUMBER : 0
. 1 -l,I;;'l d .
.*";.., A.."- - .5 11".!C. RZ1 _E-y - /2£/
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION. STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC3 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 3 AutoPIPE+4. 50 MODEL PAGE 2 P O I N T D A T A L I S T I N G POINT ----- OFFSETS (ft )----- NAME TYPE X Y Z PIPE ID DESCRIPTION
*** SEGMENT A AOO Run 0 0 0 PIPE1 A01 Bend 0 3.58 0 Long Elbow, Radius = 18.00 inch Bend angle change = 90.00 deg SIF - In = 1.80, Out = 1.80 A02 Run 1.50 0 0 Total weight of empty pipes: 416 lb
;1 -J._. .,
NIsl:;. 4. _,tt}'~
;:: _,.S
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC3 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 3 AutoPIPE+4.50 MODEL PAGE 3 C 0 M P 0 N E N T D A T A L I S T I N G POINT --- COORDINATE(ft )--- DATA NAME X Y Z TYPE DESCRIPTION
*** SEGMENT A AO0 0.00 0.00 0.00 ANCHOR Rigid Thermal movements: None A01 N 0.00 2.08 0.00 A01 0 .00 3.58 0.00 TI A01 F 1.50 3.58 0 .00 A02 1.50 3.58 0.00 FORCES Thermal 1 Number of points in the system: 5 a f. .t - I_
r I, I' ~~-9 G: A- Z
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC3 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 3 AutoPIPE+4.50 MODEL PAGE 4 P I P E D A T A L I S T I N G Pipe ID/ Nom/ O.D. ----- Thickness(inch)----- Spec Weight(lb/ft ) Material Sch inch W.Th. Corr Mill Tnsu Ling Grav Pipe Other Total PIPE1 NS 12.750 0.711 0 0.09 0 0 0 93.56 0 93.56 A312-TP304
- L. s.
,.1. -. 4 i : 1 1
Il IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC3 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 3 AutoPIPE+4.50 MODEL PAGE 5 M A T E R I A L D A T A L I S T I N G Material Density Pois. Temper. Modulus Expans. Al1low. Name Pipe ID lb/cu.ft Ratio deg F E6 psi in/lOOft psi A312-TP304 PIPEl 501.0 0.30 70.0 28.30 18700. 0
*-. _dL,-- . _
*r, ' r -
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20D41108 HRECIRC3 H14OPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 3 AutoPIPE+4.50 MODEL PAGE 6 ERATURE AND PRESSURE DATA
----- C A S E a------ ----- C A S E 2------ ----- C A S E 3------
POINT PRESS. TEMPER EXPAN. PRESS. TEMPER EXPAN. PRESS. TEMPER EXPAN. NAME psi deg F in/lOoft psi deg F in/lOOft psi deg F in/100ft
*** SEGMENT A AOO 0 70.00 0.000 A02 0 70.00 0. 000
:C.__69_
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC3 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 3 AutoPIPE+4.50 MODEL PAGE 7 FORCES AND DISPLACEMENTS (Force - lb , Moment - ft-lb , Tran. - in I Rot.- deg ) POINT LOAD NAME CASE TYPE X Y Z XX YY ZZ A02 Ti FORCE -10000 0 0 0 0 0
.,,;.- . _. 4.
(L ;:
.y d-6
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC3 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 3 AutoPIPE+4.50 RESULT PAGE I A N A L Y S I S S U M M A R Y Current model revision number : 0 Static - Date and Time of analysis ............. Dec 4, 1995 2:54 PM Model Revision Number ................. 0 Number of load cases .................. 1 Load cases analyzed ................... T1 Gaps/Friction/Yielding considered. No Hanger design run ..................... No Cut short included ................... No Weight of contents included ........... Yes Pressure stiffening case .............. 0 Water elevation for buoyancy loads Not considered FA-'e1 x lb Aeelf4,/ FOarc j i, : .... .. _..
.1:; , I: -A4-g~-<
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC3 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 3 AutoPIPE+4.50 RESULT PAGE 3 D I S P L A C E M E N T S Point Load TRANSLATIONS (in ) ROTATIONS (deg ) name combination x Y Z x Y Z
*** Segment A begin ***
AO0 T1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 A01 N T1 -0.010 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.032 A01 F TI -0.028 0.020 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.067 A02 TI -0.028 0.020 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.067
*** Segment A end
- l. I I9_..
id
,b -- 4-~~/5
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC3 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 3 AutoPIPE+4.50 RESULT PAGE 4 G L O B A L F O R C E S & MO M E N T S Point Load FORCES (lb ) MOMENTS (ft-lb ) name combination X Y Z Result X Y Z Result
*** Segment A begin ***
A00 TI 10000 0 0 10000 0 0 -35823 35823 A01 N T1 10000 0 0 10000 0 0 -14990 14990 A01 F T1 10000 0 0 10000 0 0 0 0 A02 T1 10000 0 0 10000 0 0 0 0
*** Segment A end
-- _.5-5 D. ._..
I u i-;c 1/ - .aro
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC3 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 3 AutoPIPE+4.50 RESULT PAGE 5 G E N E R A L P I P E S T R E S S R E P O R T (Stress in psi Point Load Hoop Lonqitudinal Tors. Principal lMax Oct name combination Stress Max Min Shear Max Min Sihear Loc Shear
*** Segment A begin ***
A0O SIFI= 1.00 SIFO= 1.00 Ti 0 5605 -5605 0 5605 -5605 2803 MT 5605 A01 N- SIFI= 1.00 SIFO= 1.00 TI 0 2346 -2346 0 2346 -2346 1173 MT 2346 A01 N+ SIFI= 2.80 SIFO= 1.80 Ti 0 4224 -4225 0 4224 -4225 2112 MC 4225 A01 F- SIFI= 1.80 SIFO= 1.80 TI 0 -372 -372 0 0 -372 186 NA 372 A01 F+ SIFI= 1.00 SIFO= 1.00 T1 0 -372 -372 0 0 -372 186 NA 372 A02 SIFI= 1.00 SIFO= 1.00 T1 0 -372 -372 0 0 -372 186 NA 372
*** Segment A end
. CFIJMFI t 1..... 5----.
U4LC. RD-A-L flg -
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC3 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 3 AutoPIPE+4.50 RESULT PAGE 1 A N A L Y S I S S U M M A R Y Current model revision number : 0 Static - Date and Time of analysis ............. Dec 4, 1995 2:56 PM Model Revision Number ................. 0 Number of load cases .................. 1 Load cases analyzed ................... Ti Gaps/Friction/Yielding considered. No Hanger design run ..................... No Cut short included .................... No Weight of contents included ........... Yes Pressure stiffening case .............. 0 Water elevation for buoyancy loads .... Not conside red 4= 4,000 Abt-si I I W~c;. j~_
.:. ,,F_ _
N ŽgAf-i
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20D41108 HRECIRC3 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 3 AutoPIPE+4.50 RESULT PAGE 3 D I S P L A C E M E N T S Point Load TRANSLATIONS (in ) ROTATIONS (deg ) name combination x y z x Y Z _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Z __ _ ___ - - -- --
*** Segment A begin ***
AO0 Ti 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 A01 N Ti 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 A01 F Ti -0.001 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.008 A02 Ti -0.001 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.008
*** Segment A end AT(ACiMEI'l.-_ . -...
,,,_51 t),_ __,,,
,Al.C. NO - /I-jZZ 4-1m' -/o*
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC3 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 3 AutoPIPE+4.50 RESULT PAGE 4 G L O B A L F O R C E S & M nM E N T S Point Load FORCES (lb )MOMENTS (ft-lb ) name combination X Y Z Result X Y Z Result
*** Segment A begin ***
AGO TI 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1000 1000 A01 N Ti 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1000 1000 A01 F Ti 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1000 1000 A02 Ti 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1000 1000
*** Segment A end Y.
IT IS THE RTSPONSIBILITY OF THE USER TO VERIFY REVISION, STATUS -x PRINTED 20041108 HRECIRC3 HOPE CREEK RECIRCULATION PIPING MPR Associates, Inc. 12/04/95 PIPING CONFIGURATION 3 AutoPIPE+4.50 RESULT PAGE 5 G E N E R A L P I P E S T R E S S R. E P O R T (Stress in psi Point Load Hoop Longitudinal Tors. Principal Max Oct name combination Stress Max Min Shear Max Min Shear Loc Shear
- - -_- _-- _ _-_ - _ - - _- _ _- - - 15_6_ *** Segment A begin ***
AOO SIFI= 1.00 SIPO= 1.00 T1 0 156 -156 0 156 -156 78 MT 156 AO1 N- SIFI= 1.00 SIFO= 1.00 T1 0 156 -156 0 156 -156 78 MT 156 AO1 N+ SIFI= 1.80 SIFO= 1.80 Ti 0 282 -282 0 282 -282 141 MT 282 AO1 F- SIFI= 1.80 SIFO= 1.80 T1 0 282 -282 0 282 -282 141 MT 282 AO1 F+ SIFI= 1.00 SIFO= 1.00 Ti 0 156 -156 0 156 -156 78 MT 156 A02 SIFI= 1.00 SIFO= 1.00 TI 0 156 - 156 0 156 -156 78 MT 156
*** Segment A end *
.'i!Ct2.iA r I~ - /a.4.}}