ML20003E746
| ML20003E746 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 02/28/1981 |
| From: | LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20003E745 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8104100397 | |
| Download: ML20003E746 (284) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:.
\
O t
"'^"' 'S'* " ^ S S'S S"""'
O FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS i l l t b SHOREHAM < NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 i l [g[O REVISION 4
.aereceu .> w- FEBRUARY 1981 l
81041003%]
LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES O Text, Table (T) , Revision or Fiqure (F) Number EP-1 through EP-4 4 1 through :cv 4 1-1 through 1-4 4 T1-1 (4 pages) 4 F1-1 and F1-2 4 F1-3 and F1-4 3 F1-5 through F1-8 4 F1-9 and F1-10 1 F1-11 3 2-1 througn 2-11 4 T2-1 through T2-5 4 F2-1 1 , F2-2 and F2-3 3 F2-4 and F2-5 4 F2-6 through F2-8 3 F2-9 4 F2-10 and F2-11 1 F2-12 3 F2-13 and F2-14 4 F2-15 through F2-17 3 F2-18 1 i F2-19 and F2-20 4 s 3-1 through 3-6 4 T3-1 through T3-6 4 F3-1 through F3-22 4 4-1 through 4-16 4 T4-1 4 T4-2 and T4-3 3 T4-4 't F4-1 through F-5 4 F4-6 1 F4-7 through F4-9 4 5-1 through 5-12 4 T5-1 4 T5-2 and T5-3 3 TS-4 and T5-5 4 TS-6 1 T5-7 3 TS-8 1 T5-9 3 T5-10 1 T5-11 3 FS-1 through FS-47 4 6-1 through 6-5 4 T6-1 4 : T6-2 through T6-6 3 OJ F6-1 4 EP-1 Revision 4 - FeDruary 1981
LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES (CONT
- D)
Text, Table (T) , Revision or Figure (F) Number F6-2 through F6-4 3 F6-5 4 F6-6 through F6-8 3 7-1 through 7-11 4 T7 -1 4 F7 -1 Orig. F7-2 through F7-5 1 8-1 througn 8-3 4 9-1 through 9-20 4 T9-1 through T9-4 3 T9-5 through T9-7 4 T9-8 (3 pages) 4 T9-9 through T9-22 4 F9-1 through F9-3 3 F9-4 through F9-13 4 10-1 through 10-6 4 T10-1 4 F10-1 and 10-2 4 R-1 through R-3 4 Appendix A Title Page 4 A-1 through A-14 4 i Appendix B Title Page 4 B-i through B-iv 4 & B-1 3 W , B-2 through B-8 4 TB4-1 4 FB2-1 through FB2-5 4 l FB3-1 through FB3-4 4 FB4-1A through FB4-1C 4 FB4-2A through FB4-2C 4 FBb-1 through FB6-5 4 FB7-1 through FB7-4 4 Ag cadix C Title Page 3 C-i through C-iii 4
) ; C-1 through C-10 4 FC3-1 through FC3-15 4 Appendix D Title Page 4 j D-i 4 i TD-1 (2 pages) 4 TD-2 (3 pages) 4 l TD-3 4 ,' 02 0-1 tnrough 020-58a 4 020-59 and 020-60 4 ! 020-61 2 020-62 through 020-64 4 l
020-65 3 020-66 througn 020-68c 4 T020.68-1 through T020.68-3 4 EP-2 Revision 4 - February 1981
i I l LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES (COlff *D) Text, Table (T) , Revision or Fiqure (F) Number F020.68-1 4 F020.68-2A and F020.68-2B 4 F020.68-3A and F020.68-3B 4 F020.68-4A and F020.68-4B 'A F020.68-5A and F020.68-5B , F020.o 8-6A and F020.68-6B 4 F020.68-7A and F020.68-7B 4 F020.68-8A and F020.68-8B 4 F020.68-9A and F020.68-9B 4 F020.68-10A and F020.68-10B 4 F020.68-11A and F020.68-11B 4 F020.68-12 and F020.68-13 4 020-69 3 020-70 4 020-71 3 F020.71-1 through F020.71-4 3 020-72 and 020-73 4 020-74 3 020-75 4 F020.75.1 3 130-1 through 130-6 4 130-7 1 I O 130-8 through 130-15 4 O Appendix E Title Page 3 i E-i 3 Eii and Eiii 4 [ E-1 through E-17 4 TE4-1 3 TE4-2 4 TES-1 (2 pages) 4 TES-2 4 FES-1 through FES-8 4 Appendix F Title Page 4 Appendix G Title Page 4 G-i through G-iv 4 G-1 through G-22 4 TG-1 'and TG-2 4 TG-3 (2 pages) 4
'lT3-4 through TG-9 4 FG-1 through FG-25 4 Appendix H Title Page 4 H-1 and H-2 4 FH-1 through FH-6 4 Appendix I Title Page 4 Appendix J Title Page 4 J-1 and J-2 4 TJ-1 4 Chart 1 4 s
EP-3 Revision 4 - February 1981
LIST OF EFFECTIV12 PAGES (CONP 'D) Text, Table (T) , Revision or Figure (F) Number FJ-1 4 Chart 2 4 FJ-2 4 mart 3 4 FJ-3 4 Chart 4 4 FJ-4 4 mart 5 4 FJ-5 4 Chart 6 4 FJ-6 4 Appendix K Title Page 4 K-1 through K-111 4 K-1 through K-12 4 TK3.1-1 4 TK3.2-1 4 TK3.2-2 (2 pages) 4 FK3.1-1 through FK3.1-16 4 FK3.2 -1 through FK3.2-11 4 1 O i l l l l \ - EP-4 Revision 4 - Feuruary 1981 l l
TABLE OF CONTElffS ) Page SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE 1-1 1.2 SCOPE 1-1 1.3 STATUS OF CONSTRUCTION 1-2 1.4 SUPPORTING PROGRAM 1-2 1.5
SUMMARY
OF DESIGN ASSESSMENT 1-2 1.6 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT OF SUPPRESSION POOL STRUCTURES 1-4 SECTION 2 - LOADS AND IDAD COMBINATIONS 2.1 IDAD DESCRIPTION - SUPPRESSION POOL HYDRODYNAMIC LOADS AND RELATED EFFECTS 2-1 2.1.1 Safety / Relief Valve Actuation 2-1 2.1.2 Steam Quenching Vibrations 2-1 2.1.3 IDCA Loads 2-2 2.1.3.1 Design Basis Accident 2-2 2.1.3.2 Intermediate Break Accident 2-3 Q 2.1.3.3 Small Break Accident 2-3 2.2 IDAD COMBINATIONS AND ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA 2-4 2.2.1 Reinforced Concrete Structures 2-5 2.2.2 Steel Structures 2-5 2.2.3 Piping and Equipment 2-6 2.2.4 Reactor Pressure Vessel and Internals 2-6 2.2.5 Combination of Dynamic Responses 2-6 2.3 OTHER DYNAMIC LOADS 2-7 2.4 APPROACH USED FOR DESIGN ASSESSMENT 2-8 2.4.1 Submerged Structure / Pool Swell Loads 2-8 2.4.2 Building Response Ioads 2-9 2.4.3 Related Effects 2-11 SECTION 3 - SRV LOADS
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3-1 3.2 POOL BOUNDARY LOADS 3-2 3.2.1 Design Basis Load Definition 3-2 3.2.1.1 Ramshead Load Specification 3-3 3.2.1.2 Ramshead Load Summary 3-5 3.2.2 Evaluation Basis Load Definition 3-6 O i Revision 4 - February.1981
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT
- D)
Page SECTION 4 - LOCA LOADS 4.0 GENERAL 4-1 4.1 ANALYTICAL METHODS AND DISCUSSION OF LOADS 4-1 4.1.1 Vent Clearing 4-1 4.1.1.1 Submerged Structure Loads Due to Vent Clearing 4-1 4.1.1.2 Basemat toads Due to Vent Clearing 4-2 4.1.2 LOCA Bubble Formation 4-2 4.1.2.1 Submerged Structure Loads Due to LOCA Bubble Formation 4-3 4.1.2.2 Pool Boundary Loads Due to LOCA Bubble Formation 4-3 4.1.3 Pool Swell and Fallback 4-3 4.1.3.1 Impact Loads on Small Structures from Pool Swell 4-5 4.1.3.2 Lnpact Loads on Large Structures from Pool Swell 4-5 4.1.3.3 Drag Loads on the Downcomer Vents Due to Pool Swell 4-5 4.1.3.4 Drag Loads on Structures Other Than Downcomer Vents Due to Pool Swell 4-6 4.1.3.5 Loads on Grating Due to Pool Swell 4-6 4.1.3.6 Suppression Chamber Boundary Loads During Pool Swell 4-7 4 .1. 3 . 7 Drywell Floor Loads Due to Pool Swell 4-7 4.1.3.8 Fallback Loads 4-8 4.1.4 Quasi-Steady Vent Flow 4-8 4.1.4.1 Vertical Loads on the Downcomer Vents Due to Viscous and Pressure Forces of Vent Flow 4-8 4 .1. 4 . 2 Pool Boundary Loads Due to Condensation Oscillations 4-9 4 .1.4 . 3 Subrierted Structure Loads Due to Condensation Oscillations 4-9 4.1.5 Chugging 4-10 4.1.5.1 Lateral Loads on Downcomer Vents Due to Chugging 4-10 4.1.5.2 Pool Boundary Loads Due to Chugging 4-11 4.1.5.3 Submerged Structure Loads Due to Chugging 4-11 4.2 SHOREHAM PLANT SPECIFIC LOADS AND RESPONSE CONDITIONS 4-11 4.2.1 Vent Clearing 4-11 4.2.2 LOCA Bubble Formation 4-11 4.2.3 Pool Swell and Fallback 4-12 4.2.3.1 Dnpact Loads on Small Structures Due to Pool Swell 4-12 4.2.3.2 Impact Loads on Large Structures Due to Pool Swell 4-12 4.2.3.3 Drag Loads on the Downcomer Vents Due to Pool Swell 4-13 4.2.3.4 Drag Loads on Structures Other than Downcomer Vents Due to Pool Swell 4-13 4.2.3.5 Loads on Grating Due to Pool Swell 4-14 11 Revision 4 - February 1981
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT
- D)
Page 4.2.3.6 Suppression Chamber Boundary Loads Due to Pool Swell 4-14 4.2.3.7 Drywell Floor Loads Due to Pool Swell 4-14 4.2.3.8 Fallback Loads 4-14 4.2.4 Quasi-Steady Vent Flow 4-15 4.2.4.1 Vertical Loads on the Downcomer Vents Due to Vent Flow 4-15 4.2.4.2 Pool Boundary Loads Due to Condensation Oscillation 4-15 4.2.5 Chugging 4-16 4.2.5.1 Lateral Inads on Downcomer Vents Due to Chugg2.ng 4-16 4.2.5.2 Pool Boundary Loads Due to Chugging 4-16 4.2.5.3 Submerged Structure Ioads Due to Chugging 4-16 SECTION 5 - DYNAMIC RESPONSE OF PRIMARY STRUCTURES 5.1 STRUCTURAL RESPONSE 'IO SRV !. DADS 5-1 5.1.1 Sumnary of Results 5-2 5.1.2 Containment Structures Response to SRV Ramshead Loads 5-4 5.1.2.1 Response to All Valve Sequential Discharge 5-4 5.1.2.2 Response to ADS Discharge 5-4 O' 5.1.2.3 Response to Three Adjacent Valve Out of Phase Discharge 5-4 5.1.2.4 Response to Single Valve Discharge 5 -5 5.1.2.5 Response to All Valve Simultaneous Discharge 5-5 5.1.2.6 Response to Three Adjacent Valve Simultaneous Discharge 5-5 5.1.2.7 High Frequency Response Study 5-6 5.1.3 Containment Structures Response to SRV T-Quencher Loads 5-7 5.1.3.1 Response to All Valve Discharge 5-8 5.1.3.2 Response to ADS Discharge 5-8 5.1.3.3 Response to Three Adjacent Valve Discharoe 5-8 5.1.3.4 Response to Single Valve Discharge 5-6 5.2 STRUCTURAL RESPONSE TO LOCA LOADS 5-8 5.2.1 Sumary of Results 5-9 5.2.2 Containment Structures Response to LOCA Loads 5-10 5.2.2.1 Response to Vent Clearing 5-10 5.2.2.2 Response to Condensatios Oscillation Loads 5-10 5.2.2.3 Response to Chugging 5-10 5.3 STRUCTURAL RESPONSE TO ANNULUS PRESSURIZATION IDADS 5-11 l O iii Revision 4 - February 1981
i TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT eD) l Page ' SECTION 6 - PRIMARY STRUCTURES ASSESSMENT o.1 INTRODUCTION b-1
6.2 DESCRIPTION
OF STRUCTURES 6-1 6.3 DESIGN CRITERIA AND LOADS 6-1 6.3.1 Design Criteria 6-1 6.3.2 Loads 6-2 6.3.3 Load vw Jinations 6-3 6.4 METHOD OF ANALYSIS 6-3 6.5
SUMMARY
, DESIGN MARGINS, AND CONCLUSIONS 6-3 6.5.1 Containment Internal Loads 6-3 6.5.2 Design Margins 6-5 6.5.3 Conclu sions 6-5 SECTION 7 - CONTAINMENT LINER ASSESSMENT 7.0 GENERAL 7-1 7.1 BASEMAT LINER 7-1 7.1.1 Load Sources and Design Criteria 7-1 7.1.1.1 Load Sources 7-1 7.1.1.2 Design Criteria 7-2 7.1.2 Combining and Applying Loads 7-2 7.1.2.1 Combining Loads 7-L l 7.1.2.2 Assumptions 7-3 7.1.3 Basemat Liner Analytical Methods 7-3 7.1.3.1 Strain Displacement Relations 7-3 7.1.3.2 Stress Concentration Factors 7-4 7.1.3.3 Basemat Liner Static Analysis 7-4 7.1.3.4 Basemat Liner Anchorage System 7-4 7.1.4 Basemat - Summary and Design Margin 7-4 7.1.4.1 Strains and Stress froia SRV Discharge 7-4 l 7.1.4.2 Operating Stress Range Comparison 7-5 7.1.4.3 Strain Evaluatic n per ASME III, Division 2 7-5 7.1.4.4 Fatigue Analysin 7-5 I 7.2 WALL LINER AND ANCHOR SYSTEM 7-6 7.2.1 Load Sources and Design Criteria 7-6 7.2.1.1 Load Sources 7-6 l 7.2.1.2 Wall Liner Design Criteria 7-7 7.2.2 Combining and Applying Loads 7-7 7.2.2.1 Combining Loads 7-7 7.2.2.2 Fatigue Load Combinations 7-7 7.2.2.3 Assumptions on Number of Events per Combination 7-7 l 7.2.2.4 Stress Concentration Factor 7-8 7.2.3 Wall Liner Analytical Methods 7-8 l 7.2.3.1 SRV Loads 7-8 iv Revision 4 - February 1981
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT eD) Page 7.2.3.2 Pool Swell Loads 7-8 7.2.3.3 Condensation Oscillation and Chugging Loads 7-9 7.2.3.4 LOCA Vent Clearing Loads 7-9 7.2.4 Justification of Quasi-Static Analysis 7-9 7.2.5 Wall Liner Summary and Design Margin 7-10 7.2.5.1 Wall Liner Strain from SRV Only 7-10 7.2.5.2 Wall Liner Comparisons per ASME III, Division 2 7-10 7.2.5.3 Wall Anchorage Summary 7-10 7.2.5.4 Operating Stress Range Comparison Summary 7-10 7.2.5.5 Wall Liner Fatigue Analysis Sununary 7-10 7.2.6 Piping Penetrations 7-11 7.2.6.1 Load Combinations 7-11 7.2.6.2 Design Criteria and Method of Analysis 7-11 7,2.6.3 Results of Analysis 7-11 SECTION 8 - ASSESSMENT OF THE SECONDARY CONTAINMENT AND OTHER STRUCTURES
8.1 INTRODUCTION
8-1 8.2 SECONDARY CONTAINMENT 8-1 8.3 DRYWELL FLOOR AND SUPPORT COLUMNS 8-1 8.4 DRYWELL STRUCTURAL STEEL 8-2 l 8.5 DOWNCOMER BRACING 8-2 8.6 PLATEORMS, LADDERS, AND WALKWAYS 8-3 8.7 CABLE TRAY AND CONDUIT SUPPORTS 8-3 i SECTION 9 - PLANT PIPING, COMPONENTS, AND EQUIPMENT ASSESSMENT 9.1 BOP PIPING AND EQUIPMENT 9-1 9.1.1 Piping System 9-1 9.1.1.1 Reevaluation Procedures 9-1 9.1.1.2 Analytical Techniques 9-3 9.1.1.3 Results 9-5 l 9.1.2 Equipment 9-7 9.1.2.1 Succ7ry 9-7 l 9.1.2.2 Dynamic Loads and Stress Limits 9-8 9.1.2.3 Reevaluation Procedures and Results 9-10 9.1.2.4 Requalification Plan 9-12 9.1.2.5 Potential Hardware Modifications 9-12 9.1.2.6 Operability Pssurance 9-13 9.2 NSSS PIPING AND EQUIPMENT 9-13 O_/ s 9.2.1 9.2.2 Introduction Reevaluation Procedures 9-13 9-13 v Revision 4 - February 1981
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONP 'D) Paqe 9.2.3 Reactor Pressure Vessel Supports and Internal Components Evaluation 9-15 9.2.4 Floor Mounted ECCS Equipment Evaluation 9-17 9.2.5 NSSS Safety-Related Instrumentation Evaluation 9-17 9.2.6 NSSS Piping and Pipe Mounted Equipment Evaluation 9-18 9.2.7 NSSS Operability Assurance 9-20 SECTION 10 - CONDENSATION INSTABILITY DURING SRV DISCHARGE
10.1 INTRODUCTION
1J 1 10.2 BULK TO LOCAL TEMPERATURE DIFFERENCES DURING SRV DISCHARGE 10-1 10.3 SUPPRESSION POOL TEMPERATURE RESPONSE 'IO TRANSIENTS INVOLVING SRV DISCHARGE 10-2 10.4 SUPPRESSION POOL TEMPERATURE MONITO"ING SYSTEM 10-4 REFERENCES R-1 APPENDIX A LEAD PLANT ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA (NUREG-0487, APPENDIX D) POSITIONS j APPENDIX B CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE DESIGN MARGIN APPENDIX C FLUID-STRUCTURE INTERACTION (FSI) l APPENDIX D RESPONSE TO NRC QUESTIONS APPENDIX E FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY CRITERIA FOR MARK II PIPING APPENDIX F APPENDIX F IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK APPENDIX G JUSTIFICATION OF MARK-II LEAD PLANT SRV DESIGN i EASIS LOAD DEFINITION APPENDIX H POOL SWELL MODELING APPENDIX I PROPRIETARY APPENDIX J SNPS SUPPRESSION POOL TEMPERATURE TRANSIENTS APPENDIX K SUBMERGED STRUCTURES v1 Revision 4 - February 1981 i i
. . . ~_
LIST OF TABLES m Table Title 1-1 Summary of Loads 2-1 All Possible Hydrodynamic Load Combinations 2-2 Load Combinations and Load Factors for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2-3 Load Combinations and Stress Limits for Structural Steel 2-4 Load Combinations and vceptance Criteria for Piping and Equipment 2-5 NSSS RPV and Internals Loading Combinations and Acceptance Criteria 3-1 Summary of Mz.ximu a and Minimum Wall Pressures for Sequential SRV Discharge 3-2 Summary of Maximum and Minimum Wall Pressures for Automatic Depressurization System Actuation 3-3 Stznmary of Maximum and Minimum Wall Pressures for Asymmetric SRV Discharge 3-4 Summary of Maximum and Minimum Wall Pressures for Single Valve Discharge 3-5 Loads on the Quencher Body 3-6 Loads on Quencher Arm 4-1 Summary of IDCA 7f f ected Structures 4-2 Drag Coefficients of Various Shapes 4-3 Shorenam Data for DBA Transient and' Pool Swell Analysis 4-4 Drywell Pressure as a Function of Time for DbA 5-1 Maximum Values of Dynamic Loads in the Basemat l and Superstructures fmm a Sequential All Valve SRV Discharge i'l. Ramshead , 5-2 Maximum Values of Dynamic Loads in the Basemat from a Simultaneous All Valve SRV Discharge with Ramshead 5-3 Maximum Values of Dynamic Loads in the Super-structures from a Simultaneous All Valve SRV Discharge with Ramshead 5-4 Definition of Internal Loads 5-5 Maximum Values of Dynamic Loads in the Basenut and Superstructures from a Simultaneous Three Adjacent Valve SRV Discharge with Ramshead 5-6 Maximum Values of Dynamic Loads in the Basemat 4 from LOCA Vent Clearing Loads 5-7 Maximum Values of Dynamic Ioads in the Super-structures from LOCA Vent Clearing Loads ID V vii Revision 4 - February 1981 J
LIST OF TABLES (CONT *D) Table Title 5-8 Maximum Values of Dynamic Loads in the basemat from Axisymmetric 20 Hz ChugJi ng Loads 5-9 Maximum Values of Dynamic Loads in the Super-l structures from Axisymmetric 20 Hz Chugging Loads 5-10 Maximum Values of Dynamic Loads in the Basemat from Axisymmetric 30 Hz Chugging Loads ; j 5-11 Maximum Values of Dynamic Loads in the Super-l structures from Axisymmetric 30 Hz Chugging Loads
- 6-1 Load Combinations and Load Factors for Reinforced l Concrete Structures l
6-2 Defir.ition of Internal Lcads 6-3 Basemat Design Internal Loads Just Outside Pedestal l 6-4 Reactor Pedestal and Primary Containment Design Internal Loads 6-5 Mir.imum Design Margins for Flexure and l Axial Tensile Loads 6-6 Minimum Shear Reinforcemeist Requirements l 7-1 Stress Cyclic Data for Fatigue Analysis i 9-1 Feedwater Piping 301 9-2 Core Spray Piping 100 9-3 Reactor Water Clean-up Piping 012S ( 9-4 Functional Capability Evaluation l 9-5 Primary Stress Intensity Comparison l 9-6 Support Load Comparison 9 -7 Submerged RHR Piping 9-6 Summary of hesults 9-9 Steam Dryer Support Bracket 9-10 Stabilizer Brackets Loads Ccxnparisvn (KIPS / Brackets) l 9-11 CRD Penetrations New Load Comparisons (KIPS) 9-12 Core Spray Spargers (P 9-13 Shroud Buckling (KSI) M+B , KSI) 9-14 Core Support Beam Buckling aP (PSI) 9-15 Top Guide Beam Bending (PM+B ,KSI) 9-15 Top Guide Beam End Pins (Shear, KSI) 9-17 Top Guide Holddown Latch (KSI) 9-18 Vessel Suppor+ Skirt 9-19 Shroud Support 9-20 Load Assessment - Component: Main Steam Pipang l 9-21 Load Assessment - Component: Recirculation Piping 9-22 Nomenclature l 10-1 Summary of the Shoreham Pool Temperature Results i O viii Revision 4 - February 1981
LIST OF FIGURES O Fiqure Title 1-1 Suppression Chamber Piping Composite - Plan El. 208-0" to 408-0", North 1-2 Suppression Chamber Piping Composite - Plan El. 208-0" to 408-0", South 1-3 Suppression Chamber Piping Composite - Plan El. 408-0" to 638-0", North 14 Suppression Chamber Piping Composite - Plan El. 408-0* to 63*-0", South 1-5 Suppression Chamber Piping Composite - Section 1-1 1-6 Suppression Chamber Piping Composite - Section 2-2 1-7 Drywell Vent Piping - Sheet 1 1-8 Drywell Vent Piping - Sheet 2 1-9 Drywell Vent Piping - Sheet 3 1-10 Drywell Vent Piping - Sheet 4 1-11 SRV Discharge in Piping Suppression Chamber l 2-1 Event-Time Relationship for SRV Discharge Due to Anticipated Plant Transients 2-2 Event-Time Relationship for the Design Ba6Ls Accident 2-3 Load Combination History Structure Affected: Drywell Floor Accident Condition: Iarge (d\ 2-4 Line Break (DBA) Load Combination History Structure Affected: Downcomers Accident Condition: Large Line Break (DBA) 2-S Load Combination Hittory Structure Affected: Downcomers Accident Condition: Intermediate Line Break 2-6 Load Combination History Structure Af fected: l Downcomers Accident Condition: Small Line Break 2-7 Load Combination History Structure Affected: l Downcomers Accident Condition: No'e 2-8 Load Combination History Structures Affected: l Wetwell Walls Above the Water Level Accident Condition: Large Line Break (DBA) 2-9 Load Combination History Structure Affected: Submerged Wetwell Accident Condition: Large Line Break (DBA) 2-10 Load Combination History Structure Affected: Submerged Wetwell Accident Condition: Intermediate ! Lire Break l 2-11 Load Combination History Structure Af fec ted: Sub-morged Wetwell Accident Condition: Small Line Ereak l 2-12 Load Combination History Structure Affected: Sub-
/\ merged Wetwell Accident Condition: None b
ix Revision 3 - November 1978 i _ _ _ _ _ _ _
LIST OF FIGURES (CONP 'D) Figure Title 2-13 Load Combination History Structure Af fected: Small Submerged Structures, Columns, and Piping Accident Condition: Large Line Break (DBA) 2-14 Load Combination History Structures Affected: Small Submerged Structures, Columns, and Piping Accident Condition: Intermediate Line Break 2-15 Lo9d Combination History Structures Arfected: Smc.ll Submerged Structures, Columns and Piping Accident Condition: Small Line Break 2-16 Load Combination History Structure Affected: Small Submerged Structures, Columns, and P1 ping Accident Condition: None 2-17 Load Combination History Structure Affected: Small Structures Above Pool and Below Breakthrough Accident Condition: Large Line Break (DBA) 2-18 Load Combination History Structures Affected: Small Structures Above Breakthrough Accident Condition: Large Line Break (DBA) 2-19 tuid Structure Interaction Model 2-20 Asymmetric Pressure Distribution 3 Adjacent Valve Simultaneous Discharge i 3-1 Phenomenon of Safety / Relief Valve Blowdown into Suppression Pool 3-2 Cross-Section of Suppression Pool and Definition of Suppression Chamber Walls' Loading Zone for Ramshead load Definition l 3-3 Orientation of SRV Line Discharge Devices (Rams-heads) for Sequential SRV Discharge l 3-4 Typical All Valve Sequential SRV Discharge Forcing Function for Ramshead Device - Zone 14 l 3-5 Orientation of SRV Discharge Line Devices (Rams-ht. ads ) 'or Automatic Depressurization l 3-6 Typical Automatic Depressurization System Actuation Forcing Function for Ramshead Device - Zone 14 1 3-7 Orientation of SRV Line Discharge Devices (Rama-heads) for Asymmetric SRV Discharge 1 3-8 Typical Asymmetric SRV Discharge Forcing Function for Ramshead Device - Zone 14 3-9 Orientation of SRV Line Discharge Device (Ramshead) for Single Valve Discharge 3-10 Typical Single SRV Discharge Forcing 31nction for Ramshead Device - Zone 14 3-11 Normalized Pressure Time History for All SRV's Discharging Simultaneously and in Phase on Ramshead Device. 3-12 Normalized Pressure Boundary Load Distribution Around the Circumferential Direction cn Prunary x Revision 4 - February 1981
1 LIST OF FIGURES (CONT *D)
- . Fiqure Title
! Containment for Three Adjacent SRV's Discharging
- Simultaneously and in Phase Based on Ramshead Device.
'3-13 KWU T-Quencher 3-14 KKB Pressure Trace No. 35 3-15 KKB Pressure Trace No. 76 i 3-16 KKB Pressure Trace No. 82
- 3-17 Normalized Pressure Distribution on Suppression i
Pool Boundaries - Symmetric and ADS Cases 3-18 Normalized Vertical Pressure Distribution for All Cases and for Submerged Structures 3-19 Normalized Pressure Distribution on Suppression. Pool Boundaries - Asymmetric Case i 3-20 Normalized Pressure Distribution on Suppression Pool Boundaries - Single SRV Discharge Case I-3-21 Loads on Quencher (without pressure loads) r 3-22 Loads on Quencher Arms - (withnnt pressure loads) . 4-1. . Schematic Representation of the Pool Swell Model 4-2 Pressure Drop Due to Flow across Grating Duration of Load: 0.5 Sec O 4-3 4-4 Assumed Pressure Distribution for al Boundary -
-Loads During Pool Swell Drag Pressure.for pf = 62.4 (14 /ft3) l 4-5 Downcomer Model for Lateral Load Assessment 4-6 Pool Boundary Chugging Loads 4-7 Vent Liquid CI aaring Velocity Following a DBA 4-8 Containment Pressure Response During Pool Swell - Following a DBA 4-9 Pool Surface Elevation and Velocity Following a DBA 5-1 Amplified Response Spectra of Vertical l Acceleration, Top of Reactor Support Pedestal, All Valve Sequential Discharge - Ramshead 5-2 Amplified Response Spectra of Vertical l l Acceleration, Primary Containment at Elevation i
of Stabilizer Truss, All Valve Sequential Discharge - i Ramshead 5-3 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal (N-S) l Acceleration, Top of Reactor Support Pedestal, All Valve Sequential Discharge - Ramshead ' 5-4 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal (N-S) . Acceleration, Primary Containment at Elevation of Stabilizer Truss, All Valve Sequential Discharge - Ramshead l 5-5 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal (E-W) l Acceleration, Top of Reactor Support Pedestal, a V All Valve Sequential Discharge - Ramshead
!. j xi Revision 4 - February 1981
._____...__.._.._.__._.u..,,,.______.__..____.....,__,_,_._._..._, . _ _ . .
LIST OF FIGURES /CO r D) Fiqure Title l 5-6 Anplified Response Spectra of Horizontal (E-W) A,:celeration, Primary Containment at Elt
- ation r
of Stabilizer Truss, All Valve Sequential Discharge - Ramshead l 5-7 Amplified Response Spectra of Vertical Acceleration, Zop of Reactor Support Pedestal, 3 Adjacent Valve Out of Phase Discharge - Ramshead
! 5-b Amplified Response Spectra of Vertical Acceleration, Primary Containment at Elevation of Stabilizer Truss, 3 Adjacent Valve Out of Phase Discharge - Ramshead l 5-9 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal (N-S)
Acceleration, Top of Reactor Support Pedestal, 3 Adjacent Valie Out of Phase Discharge - Ramsnead
! 5-10 Amplified Resp onse Spectra of Horizontal (N-S)
Acceleration, Primary Containment at Elevation of Stabilizer Truss, 3 Adjacent Valve Out of Phase Discharge - Ramshead I 5-11 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal (E-W) Acceleration, Top of Reactor Support Pedestal, 3 Adjacent valve Out of Phase Discharge - Ramshead l 5-12 Amplified Response Spectra of Borizontal (E-W) Acceleration, Primary Containment at Elevation of Stabilizer Truss, 3 Adjacent Valve Out of Phase Discharge - Ramshead 5-13 Critical Locations 5-14 Positive Sign Convention for Interna) Loads 5-15 Mat Hoop Moment Just Outside Containrtent All Valve Simultaneous Discharge 5-16 Mat Radial Shear Just Outside Cont ainment All Valve Simultaneous Discharge l 5-17 Mat Axial Force Just Outside Containment All Valve Simultaneous Discharge 5-18 Mat Hoop Force Just Outside Containment All Valve Simultaneous Discharge 5-19 Amplified Response Spectra of Vertical Acceleration, Top of Reactor Support Pedestal, T-Quencher All Valve Discharge - Pressure Trace No. 1 1 5-20 Amplified Response Spectra of Vertical Acceleration, Top of Reactor Support Pedestal, T-Quencher All Valve Discharge - Pressure Trace No. 2 l S-21 Amplified Response Spectra of Vertical Acceleration, Top of Reactor Support Pedestal, T-Quencher All Valve Discharge - Pressure Trace No. 3 l 5-22 Amplified Response Spectra of Vertical Acceleration, Top of Reactor Support Pedestal, T-Quenchar All Valve Discharge l 5-23 Amplified Response Spectra of Vertical Acceleration, Primary Containment at Elevation of Stabilizer xil Revision 4 - February 1981
I l l LIST OF FIGURES (CONP *D) O Fiqure Title l Truss, T-Quencher All Valve Discharge 5-24 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal Acceler- l ation, Top of Reactor Support Pedestal, T-Quencher All Valve Discharge 5-25 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal Acceler- l ation, Primary Containment at Elevation of Stabil-izer Truss, T-Quencher All Valve Discharge 5-26 Amplified Response Spectra of Vertical Acceleration, l Top of Reactor Support Pedestal, T-Quencher 3 Adjacent Valve Discharge 5-27 Amplified Response Spectra of Vertical Acceleration, ! Primary Containment at Elevation of Stabilizer Truss, T-Quencher 3 Adjacent Valve Discharge 5-28 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal Acceler- I ation, Top of Reactor Support Pedestal, T-Quencher 3 Adjacent Valve Discharge I 5-29 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal Acceler-ation, Primary Containment at Elevation of Stabilizer Truss, T-Quencher 3 Adjacent Valve Discharge 5 .30 LOCA Vent Clearing Idealized Pressure Time History O 5-31 5-32 LOCA Chugging Idealized Pressure Time Histories Amplified Response Spectra of Vertical Acceleration, Top of Reactor Support Pedestal, LOCA Vent Clearing j 5-33 Amplified Response Spectra of Vertical Acceleration, l Primary Containment at Elevation of Stabilizer Truss, LOCA Vent Clearing 5-34 Amplified Response Spectra of Vertical Acceleration - Top of Reactor Support Pedestal - IDCA Axisymmetric Condensation Oscillation 5-35 Amplified desponse Spectra of Vertical Accele-ration - Primary Containment at Elevation of Stabilizer Truss - LOCA Axisymmetric Condensation Oscillation 5-36 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal Acceleration, l Top of Reactor Support Pedestal, LOCA Asymmetric Condensation Oscillation 5-37 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal Acceleration - Primary Containment at Elevation of Stabilizer Truss - LOCA Axisymmetric Condensation Oscillation 5-38 Amplified Response Spectra of Vertical Acceleration,
- Top of Reactor Support Pedestal,~LOCA Axisynsnetric Chugging 5-39 Amplified Response Spectra of Vertical Acceleration, l Primary Containment at Elevation of Stabilizer l
Truss, LOCA Axisymmetric Chugging 5-40 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal i O Acceleration - Top.of Reactor Support Pedestal - LOCA Asymmetric Chugging xiii Revision 4 - February 1981
LIST OF FIGURES (CONT
- D)
Figure Title I 5-41 Amplitied Response Spectra of Horizontal Acceler-ation, Primary Containment at Elevation of Sta-bilizer Truss, IDCA Asymmetric Chugging 5-42 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal Acceleration - Reactor Vessel Elevation 100 AP from Recirc Line Break 5-43 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal Acceleration - Shieldwall Elevation 137 AP from Recirc Line Break 5-44 Amplified Response Spectra of horizontal Acceleration - Pedestal Elevation 90 AP trom Recirc Line Break 5-45 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal Acceleration - Reactor Vessel Elevation 119 AP f rom Feedwater Line Break 5-46 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal Acceleration - Shield Wall Elevation 137 AP from Feedwater Line Break 5-47 Amplified Response Spectra of Horizontal Acceleration - Pedestal Elevation 90 AP from Feedwater Line Break
@-1 General Arrangement of Reactor Building 6-2 Critic &l Locations 6-3 Positive Sign Convention for Internal Loads 6-4 Primary Containment Wall Reinforcing Details El 88-0" Tb 608-0" 6-5 Reactor Support Wall Reinforcing Details 6-6 Containment Mat-Top Reinforcing Details 6-7 Containment Mat-Bottom Reinforcing Details 6-d Flexure and Axial Load 7-1 Reactor Containment Liner Floor Details 7-2 Mat Liner - Details of Welds 7-3 Mat Liner - Calculation of Liner Displacements Using Mat Mid-Thickness Displacements 7-4 Liner-Anchor Model 7-5 The Amplification Factor 4 As a Function of the Frequency Ratio r for Various Amounts of Viscous Damping 9-1 Feedwater Piping 301 9-2 Core Spray Piping 100 9-3 Reactor Water Cleanup Piping 012S 9-4 ARS - Primary Containment, Upset - Horizontal SRSS (SRV + OBE) - Ramshead 9-5 ARS - Primary Containment, Upset - Vertical SRSS (SRV + OBE) - Ramshead 9-6 ARS - Primary Containment, Faulted - Horizontal xiv Revision 4 - February 1981
LIST OF FIGURES (CONT
- D)
C) ,1,ure ,1t1e SRSS (SSE + IDCA + SRV) - Ramshead 9-7 ARS Primary Containment, Faulted - Vertical SRSS (SSE + LOCA + SRV) - Ramshead 9-8 ARS - Secondary Containment, Upset - Horizontal. SRSS (SRV + OBE) - Ramshead 9-9 ARS - Secondary Containment, Upset - Vertical SRSS (OBE + SRV) - Ramshead 9-10 ARS - Secondary Containment, Faulted - Horizontal SRSS (SSE + LOCA + SRV) - Ramshead 9-11 ARS - Secondary Containment, Faulted - Vertical SRSS (SSE + LOCA + SRV) - Ramshead 9-12 Definition of Static Coefficients in FSAR 9-13 NSSS Design and Evaluation Flow Chart 10-1 Pool Temperature and Pressure vs. Time With and Without Wetwell Heatsinks - Case 2A 10-2 Pool Temperature and Pressure vs Time With and Without Drywell and Drywell Heatsinks - Case 3A O i O xv Revision 4 - February 1981
SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION
\_/
1.1 PURPOSE The purpose or Revision 4 of the Design Assessment Report (DAR) is to present the completed design assessment of the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 (SNPS- 1) for nydrodynamic loads associated with safety / relief va?.ve (SRV) discharge and the postulated loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) in a BWR Mark II (MK-II) containment. The method used to define, apply, and combine the loads are in compliance with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Lead Plant Acceptance Criteria (1,23 as outlined in Appendix A. As one of the three lead plants identified in Section I.B.1 of Rererence 1, the basic supporting document for the SNPS-1 design assessment is the MK-II Containatent Dynamic Forcing Functions Intormation Report (DFFR), Revisicn 2,(3,*). Acditional references will te cited where the methods are d1iterent trom those cescribed in DFFR Revis_on 2 or where a particular loading condition was not addressed in DFFR Revision 2. 1.2 SCOPE Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) letters of April 18 and 21, (A) 1975 to Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO) discussed tne SRV and LOCA hydrodynamic loaa phenomena associated with tne BWR MK II containment. Specific requests for additional information included with each letter formed the initial basis f or the SNPS-1 design assessment. In the course of investigating the MK-II hydrodynamic phenomena, the requirements for cesign assessment have been refined, and are now contained for tne leaa plants (e .g . SNPS-1) in References 1 and 2, referred to as tne Lead Plant Acceptance Criteria (LPAC) . In Appendix A, the LPAC are adoressed item by item to document the compliance identified in Section 1.1. i Tne SNPS-1 DAR toge ther with the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) and reports referenced by each of these principal licensing documents, constitute sufticient basis for preparation ot a Safety Evaluation Report (SER) and issuance 01 an Operating License (OL). Certain items currently outside the scope of the LPAC will be addressed in an ammendment to the DAR Revision 4 in the first quarter of 1981. These are as follows:
- 1. Condensation load data trom the 4T condensation oscillation (CO) test program ( S ) and the JapanE se Atomic Energy Research Institute (JAERI) multivent test program. Refer to Section IV.A of Reference 2.
[} v 1-1 Revision 4 - February 1981
I
- 2. SNPS-1 unique T-quencher load definition based on f ull-scale data taken from the Karlstein test program. Refer to Section II.B.5 of Reference 2.
- 3. Downcomer and SRV discharge line f atigue evaluation.
- 4. A multivent dynamic analysis for downcomer chugging lateral loads consistent with the singic vent dynamic analysis required by I.B.1 (cl of Reference 1.
In addition, the SNPS-1 DAR will be revised to address the generic long term program (UTP) CO and chugging load methodologies as these are accepted for use by tne NRC (refer to Section III.A.1 of Reference 2). Results from application of these methodologies will be compared to the existing design assessment basis for SNPS-1. 1.3 STATUS OF CONSTRUCTION Overall construction of the Shoreham plant is 90 percent complete. Construction of the following structures is essentially complete:
- 1. reactor building, (secondary containment)
- 2. primary containment,
- 3. reactor pressure vessel (RPV) p edestal,
- 4. drywell floor, support columns, embedded downeomers and downcomer Dracing,
- 5. primary containment and basemat liners and anchors, and
- 6. major piping and supports.
1.4 SUPPORTING PROGRAM The MA-II supporting program is described in Section III of Reference 2 and in Reference 6. The generic LTP is considered confirmatory for SNPS-1. 1.5
SUMMARY
OF DESIGN ASSr,SSMENT A design assessment has been perf stmed on structures, equipment, and piping subjected to loads resulting dir ectly or indirectly from suppression pool hydrodynamic phenomena. These are as follows:
- 1. reactor building basemat, primary and secondary containment structures,
- 2. containment internal structures including the RPV pedestal, drywell floor and support columns, 1-2 Revision 4 - February 1981
- 3. basemat and containment wall liners, f g (4 . downcomerm and bracing,
( /
'"' as platforms,
- 5. auxiliari containment- structures such laddere, and support frames,
- 6. safety-related piping and pipe supports located within primary and secondary containment, and
- 7. safety-related equipment located within -primary and secondary containment.
Section 2.1 provides a general description of the suppression pool hydrodynamic loading phenomena with Sections 3 and 4 providing more detail for the SRV and LOCA loads respectively. Load combinations , acceptance. criteria, and' the methods of combining peak dynamic responses are given in Section 2.2. Non-suppression pool hydrodynamic loads with which hydrodynamic loads must be combined are identified in Section 2.3 with the appropriate FSAR reference. Section 2.4 describes the approach used in performing the SNPS-1 design assessment for each of the three following classifications of loading f unctions:
- 1. Submerged structure / pool swell . loads - loads directly applied by suppression pool hydrodynamic pnenomena- to wetwell internal structures and tne drywell floor,
/ }
- 2. Building response loads - suppression pool hydrodynamic
\_/ loads applied directly to the
- suppression . pool boundaries (containment shell, Dasemat, and RPV pedestal) and then indirectly to structures, piping, and equipment in the drywell and secondary containment due to nullding dynamic response.
- 3. Related effects -
other design assessiaent activities - related to suppression pool . Jrodynamic phenomena but not included in the above classifications, such as suppression pool te".perature response and downcomer/SRV discharge line fatigue evaluations. Sections 5 through 9 provide the results of the SNPS-1 design assessment. Section 5 covers the dynamic responses ot ~ the primary structures and provides the amplified response spectra (ARS) used in the nuclear stean supply system (NSSS) and balance of plant (BOP) piping and equipment evaluations wnicn results are presented in Section 9. baction 6 presents the design assessment results for the primary ' structures, Section 7 the results for the containment liner, and Section 8 the results for the secondary structures. Section 10 describes the suppression pool temperature response to plant transients involving SRV discharge and descrines 'the pool f- temperature monitoring system. U 1-3 Revision 4 - February 1981
Taole 1-1 provides a summary of suppgession pool hydrodynamic loads used in the SNPS-1 design assessment for each affected structure. Although SNPS-1 has installed KWU "T" Quenchers as the SRV discharge devices, the design assessment is based upon the bounding SRV-ramshead loads as requested by Criterion II.2 (a) of Appendix D to Reference 1 and shown in Tatle 1-1. The design assessment has demonstrated that sufficient design margin exists in plant structures and components to withstand the additional ettects of the hydrodynamic loads. Certain design moditications were required to achieve this result, as discussed in the appropriate sections. Completion ot the items identified in Section 1.2 is not expected to change this condition. 1.6 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT OF SUPPRESSION POOL STRUCTurtES Figures 1-1 through 11 are provided to show the location ano size or the wetwell and internal structures. O
~
G 1-4 Revision 4 - February 1981
- . - . , , _ _ . . - _ _ ~ ~. _ _--,-----a --- ,. .s-._ . . . . _ - . - - - -
,O f b
'k k -
TABLE 1-1
SUMMARY
OF LOADS ? Load Loadi13 References _ load Class-DescriMion Class DFFR LPACsao3 g itication(*3- ' Cossnents '
. I. IDCA RELATED A. SUPPRESSION POOL BOUNDARIES
- 1. Vent clearing U 4.4.5.1 S 1, II . A.1 Secondary Note 2
- 2. Pool Swell Air U 4.4.5.3 S1, II.A.2 Secordary Note 2 Slug /Wetwell II.A.3 Aira mce Compra.
- 3. Condensation G (12)
Oscillation Primary / Note 5 Secondary
- 4. Chugging G 4.3.3 B. WETWELL COMFONENTS (except downcomers)
- 1. Vent Clearing U o.4.5.1 III.A.1 Secx>ndary
. 2. Air Bubble U (13) Secondary Formation
- 3. bulk Pool U 4.4.1 I.A.2 N/A Note 6 Swell *ransient Model
.U
~
, 4. bulk Pool 4.4.4 S1, II.A.2 ' Primary Relocate Swell heightt3D Vacuum breakers
- 5. Pool Swell Impact
- a. Small U 4.4.6.1 I.A.6 - Primary Moditied/ Relocated Structures Bracing & SRV Supports
- b. Grating U 4.4.6.4 I.A.3 Primary' Removed / Redesigned Platiorms
! 6. Pool Swell Drag U - 4.4.5.2/ III .B.1 (e) ' Primary Restrain Drywell Floor 4.4.7
- 7. hool Fallback U 4.4.5.4 Secordary i
1 of 4 Revision 4 - February .19st '
s A
- J 'J U 4 TABLE 1-1 (CONT'D) 1 Load Loadta> References Imd Class-Description Class DFFR LPActaos M it icationt * > Columents i
- 8. Condensation U (13) Primary Note 7 Oscillation l Drag
- 9. Chugging Drag U (13) Secordary J C. DRYWELL FIDOR
- 1. Bulk Pool Swell U 4.4.6.6 1.A.4 Prisutry Restrain Drywell Floor D. DOWNQ)MERS
- 1. Vertical (a) Vent Flow U 4.2.3 Secordary Drag e
(b) Pool Swell U 4.4.8 Secondary Drag i 2. Lateral-External (a) Air Bubble U (13) Secordary Forination 1 (b) Condensa- U (13) Secordary tion Oscilla-tion drag f (c) Chugging U (13) Secordary
- Drag I
- 3. Lateral-Internal 1
a l (a) Single Vent G 4.3.2.3 1.B.1 Secondary Note 8 (b) Multi Vent U 4.3.2.4 1.B.2 Secondary Note 9 II. SRV HELATitD A. SUPPRESSION POOL BOUNDARIES ( d
- 1. Single Valve U 3.2.4(**3 II.2 Secondary Note 2 i
- 2. Asynenetric U 3.2.4 ( *
- 8 II.2 Secordary Note J
- j. 3. AnS D 3 2.4 II.2 Primary Notes 2 6 5 l
.4 of 4 Revision 4 - February 1981
( f} d V U TABLE 1-1 (CONT *D) Loart Loadsa> References Imd Class-Description Class DFFR LPActao) M ltication(*) Conuments
- 4. All Valves U 3.2.4t*'8 II.2 Secondary (sequential)
B. SUBMERGf,D STRUCTURES U 3.4.1.2(**) III.A.2,31, Primary Note 7 II.C.1, III.B.2, III.B.3 C. DISCHARGE DEVICE SUPPORT U 3.3.10 Secordary l r (* 3 G - Generic DFFR Load. U - Generic DFFR Method, plant specific load value. (a) The design assessment utilizes previou.ly calculated loads which are greater than those now developed in the DAR using the methods ot Reference 3 of this report. This note applies only to primary containment structures, not to piping and equipment. 1 (" This includes all bulk. pool swell and "frotha during IDCA transient. (*3 Refer to Appendix B, Question 020.26 for definition. (O These are primary loads for piping, secondary loads for structures. Pipe st.pport modifications have been made f or building response loads.
* *
- Pool Swell Model provides maximum airslug and wetwell airspace pressure for I.A.2 above and velocity for I.B.S. and I.B.6.
('D Combination of condensation oscillation and SRV dir bubble submerged structure loads is controlling for pipe support moditications required in suppression pool. 4 (*) A dynamic analysis will be performed in the long term as required by Lead Plant Acceptance Criteria (LPAC) I.B.1 (c) - (see Appendix A) . (*> A static multivent analysis has not been performed subsequent to bracing relocation (refer to Section 8.5). Multivent etfects will be included in the dynamic analysis identatied in Note 8. The basis for the planned multivent cynamic analysis is given in the appropriate DAR section. ! (ao) Lead Plant Accep*=nce Criteria (LPAC) or NUREG-4487, Supplement 1 .(S1) Section modifying applicable DFFR Rev. 2 requirement (see Appes.!'M A) . (a s > DFFR ' Rev. 2 includes no tuquirement for assessing wetwell airspace compression. Static analysis of suppression chamber boundaries above maximum swell height for maximum wetwell airspace compression has been included in the structual 4 design assessment. 3 of 4 Revision 4 - IVbruary 1981
D f ( - J t TABLE 1-1 (CONT *D) stas condensation Oscillation load not defined in DFFR, Rev 2. Potential for such a load was identified in LFFR Rev. 2, Section 4.2.2. (*** LOCA submerged structure loads other than vent clearing jet and bulx pool swell not identilied in DFFR key. 2 (Sections 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4.5). Refer to appropriate DAR sectice and Appendix K. (**D Ra:nshead load is bounding for T quencher and is applied in accordance with LPAC II.2. Refer to Appendix A and Appendix N. (as s Load defini tion for ramshead subsequent actuation required by .md Case 1 or LPAC II.2 (b) is moot. T-quencher data Dase
.used in Appendix H includes subsequent actuation data and shovs existing ramshead load is bounding.
tasa SNPS-1 asynrnetric case conservatively e:aploys three adjacent valves instead of two required by LPAC II.2(b), Lead Case 2. (**) Load Case 5 of LPAC II.2 (b) shown in Appendix H to be less severe than ramshead sequential actuation (load Case 4 of LFAC II.2 (b) when representative T quencher load definition is used for simultaneous entry, in phase oscillation case. Frequency range required by LPAC II.2 (c) Lounded by ramshead sequential as described in Appendix H. Sequential actuation case . (Case 1 of DFFR, Rev 2, Section 3.2.t.1.2) is therefore ccuservative for all-valve actuation. (*** Jet load negligible as described in LPAC III.A.2 and Supplement 1 II.C.1. Air clearing load modified by LPAC III.B.2 and applied for T quencher per LPAC III.B.3 (see Appendix A). 4 of 4 Revision 4 - February 19W1
e
}
180* Sa# O' G E ELECTRICAL SPARE l PENETRATION SPARE ' (TYP)
,..\
s I1$ h5\ SUPPRESSION POOL T- ' LEVEL INSTR. 4'
. ' ' g. ?
/ b' f s /'
fa,f ' , a m ~' l'Z.-' 8 y+z f - 38-9*/
=- - S- u sau
/ Ws 4(90 ['
y f f9fNsp\
jk.l jV'. 1 ( I'
/./N 7 - - ' kN.
Nef M eh t,\ / s i, ,p SPARE ,'f.,
. j ,
A S j > s p, bi-f
\ '
_:-~ _ _.A .' -
- - - . _,L , f ..
t-~~__ ' 4 x l
.. , /
2 90* S 8 W l 3 ,, , 270*GE - RHR DISCHARGE (TESTING) l+ ( FIG. 4-5) 0 5 10 f a a a a i i n a a 1 SCA L E - F EE T i
\
HPCI TUR8INE EXHAUST VACUUM BREARER I HPCI TURBINE EXNAUST IS*4 0-00* 'I f,e l ION 2L 5t' '/i 6 PRL CONTMT J2 Sl ' 'I 9 o y jf
,g ,' ,
HPCI SUCTION f
,' RCIC TUR8iNE EXHAUST o
.. - - . o ,
'/' , AUST UM l s
e e'/ , BREAKER f,
#/ KEY ~P LAN N
4, e ' RCC VACUUM
;f r ' Q, ,7 PUMP EXHAUST cY' Y'
. 'M <
s 7 n cTvE**'"'" M CORE SeRAv suction / [ \ h ..I Y
' [q lI5 4t 1 O
\ , /, -
. hs# .cVN k <-
SPARE I : .
^ -
,\
j' .
" """ 'SCH ARGE(TESW)
,.- p 7, ,,
- 'di _
e
< 2 . C -. m (j,J2 27o saw visi si so cE tMATCH LINE - rio.1-2 FIG l-1 SUPPRESSION CHAMBER PIPING COMPOSITE-PLAN EL 20'-0" TO 40'-O", NORTH SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS !
REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981 _ - _ _ = _ _ _ _ _ - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ .
I L [EIn!EUrYri !$ 3--Q.}y/ .- R - Qtf y ... \ %\ )
, g
. ., l ./ l "su"cNoY ,
{) h , *
, 4 i \ ; __ __ .-
d /
,# # /
\
7\ ng pk-9q N 14 4 1 24* oowiecouta T e '
. l (TYP1 g ,
\
- x g /- ,
yG , <j y
' ~-
x IM ( FIG.1- S ) O*S&W 180' G E O 5 10 t i n e if n a a e I SCALE- F E ET b I f
n !S ?OO*-OO" h e5 S
$ YS
-. l- .
f-MATCH LINE-rio :-l
\
k39 \k%
\ "-
5y, ',3;I {
/
, l I
(q
-70n SUPPRESSION POOL CLEANUP /
PUMPDOWN PUMP SUCTION M - l , (7_
.t q
. , c .
g,g, s EI.38 -s" (
.l PRI CONTMT N 2 J2
[mbs
.y / p
' }
- w -
s KEY PLAN SUPPRESSION POOL LEVEL INSTR.
, F I G. 1- 2 SUPPRESSION CH AMBER PIPING CCWOSITE-P L AN E L. 20'- O" TO 40'- O", SOU T H SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWi:lt STATION-UNIT I PL ANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4 -rEBRUARY i981
L 180' S8W ( O* GE l+ f
,/ /
#-'~TZb I ORYWELL EQUIPMENT DRAINS
/ LH SPACEAK* E\ *' .
- STEEL . . = = = e= E h c
... f S 5" L +
- d' - rt A HATCH \
,,[n' PRE2 55:ON
',S
,c 6. , f s' s
'N * [/ s
.X .- J 8
's \
j- ' I
- l 24*DOwNCCVG6 (TYP) .
../{ ELECT PENETRA
+5T *
~' PJWOR M '
/ -' E L 4 7'- ft"
,W's d'
. s
( r24 VAC UUM\ N s-
. BREAKERS \g i b -
/ O / m j / .,
N"SUPP /6sPm cu , n CHAMBE g J,h - b .s l ,/ ' DCECTiCN J SPR'dg
- gi 1 ,Y ' .
SN"3,[c,"' / #
@ [f?' 'h'9g !['
*"#"* ~
v ' l ' j i
'l -
$, l 90* Saw 2 ,,
( M ,_ j@ M _4 M th! 2-' ? ! [h _ 270* G E I+ ( F IG.1 - 5 ) O 5 10
,,iie i i , ii SCALE-FEET f
I s
t , HYDROGEN RECOMBINER AND DRYWELL FLOOR SEAL PRESS. 'N 15*0d 00*
* ~
~~
E 6 2L PRt. CONTMT .32 J N $ B3
- i. a' o Zy
~ '~
" Z '^ttU.". K P
s j a a g 4., ...,.. , a62W g fs 8
'[/ %, 'x KEY PLAN h\. *N h (,5
~
+
/' -
DRYWELL FLOOR ORAINS
,, V ,l /- . ,,,,
{, O
-18* PURGE AIR EXHAUST ~
h '
',q, . 4 -
M
- ). @ g -
\ t m & @ \
; Q \;
m e o I
'N S
~ @.. +2 s, m# ONN"SUON CHAM 9Fa v 3 t
_ /~A I -' ^ ?. a
/h _ rh /'Th __
CJ __j j 2 27o Saw f-MATCH UNE -(FlG. B-4) (FIG.1 6) 90* G E FIG l-3 SUPPRESSION CHAMBER PIPING COMPOSITE-PLAN EL 40'-O" TO 63'-O", NORTH SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 3 NOVEMBER 1978
I
\
w... r- L W W ~~ sq/ G *~ Q/ , {. c , 1 i
~
K 'XM E Av s' N ,,
.g n ::-
e [p .m [hMD. sw w we.fite 4
.T . I J 3s .
,[.
3 g g O i G 8 a O:
'S g r---HAM)R AL (TY9 g
-E
'4*C E
/O ,'.s
*? .'.
u 9 MYDRO.GEle.f REco mE
./
%[,t ,..,S'e, q
/ '%
i/. . l s; s f
- g. - =
18' PURGE AaR SUPPLY R
? ? . ?
SC A LE - FEET f I I 6
y co' L*SR uce., I (Mrs UNE- r8s s 3 7~~ w ; ';.,.;..' " g _ w q _ , q{ W~, [
~ FL CL6/ 4" ,* j j
- PL ATF f
; n'*-"'
q y ;/r ,qng,. g 8
- .- , /
i~ / Q '.
/ .
(/_.) /
,1
~' * *
/ n unn courur Y{} 18 S- A
[s t'a,>,
\\ KEY PLAN
- - r. . 68 .-
g' ...,, 'y N s s' l s ~b' *d
. - 7
, . .. . . x,...... -
- ';'L".u.
. -a . ".#.1, rc
,es. >> l LIFl3.1-5) FIG. I-4 SUPPRESSION CHAMBER PIPING COMPOSITE PLAN EL 40'-O" TO 63'-O" SOUTH SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 3 .'KNEMBER 1978
3 i k,.e
~ . . - <
** %e p *.
~-8' ***<
--M 1[ (R' 2 .
w cRv=En rtam gg g.6' f,
< r, 8 N
* ' :.'.. t ll ej : ...
=
=-
1 . : .. : .: MYDROGEN PECOM8tNER l ) ) - a I W' J CM i mf, l
-j- 8 DIA L#eE a i 3
v l t
-M.e. . .E! ^.t w < j t
o PURGE T ll I
! l l 1 ll!l 1 I
i
.!, 6 I
l e ir .. _
. g e
- k. .h - . _ _*, . . , ..- :
I i r i 8
- r I
; 'I
, : x Il l l OO*N COM.R bracing EL 27'-9' '
j 8 l ,
- .t et zr.g
- N+ . +
~
n -4
**--c -F-j i
_-+-7--
- 4. .....4-_,.
< ' 7 l;> y .
a 6
- i. -^
l V'.. f
's i ! l :; t
'l i l
W1N _,j . El 9
- 1 l
. , l ,\ l I !
@ l 4I g
- DOeNCOMERS (68J >
;j $TAAthE gi t f /
;l
!l Jl y..c T n any 4 i l 789 !
. ' l rua u re, , ,I,). . f+. _
I! _ l_! ! / i :._!;._ p___ _ . 7,
,, . .j, ..- .,.
f '
. , ,u M. sa T.
L F.$T9LNER l-I r [ 1 l l l l
i e i
# $ *,
- 5*7, CA-B .
- - _ _ - - ,. ,, 'I,
, f l
*
- m(actC A PfDE5fAL *
- i o T.ru ,
FLOOR St AL
, . FtJLA tb 63- C
.. s
.)
, 1 ., . ..
,l , ..
\ ::._ ~.- = -: ..a . .u a ,., . ;.
w . . _;
, eu . .
9'
. __ , p_gAl ; ,
~ ~
__ -ls. 1~~" ! Ti " I l (kur uw a ;
" i
....- . . . . ..--. . > . . , 3- u l ym x j j 1I i
, -co, et 4iod m3.l,b-7 ',; 4 p '
\
' J [* tt o o" '
i ..I' l} 44 - o.. x ;
;a s 6 sair um 91 c ;. .1., ,
l ! l ~+~ J ~W:&~ tC e j kb p , _] ow* 4-C g
' ' i ,
., u ,- c ' -
- . _. s. L. ,.- .--- J, --
^
a .
-j i *
, ,j _ - -. -
i .[u e.g J] _I y G h - $4414(9 L .: , . . .s
*;. . -x. . :
, *' s,* *
.* ? ~l. 2 ??
. q -
SuP**(%sOh prjr N wp MTices sinone n ~ I"'o*O'SCHA# (F 'esw, 6 3
. CORE $pAAT wcms st w. ,P'. asp U MTCEt*NQ4) -
SECTION l-1 FIG.1-5 SUPPRESSION CHAMBER PIPING COMPOSITE - SECTION I-I SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UN T I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AN( LOCA LOADS J REVISIC 4 4- FEBRUARY 1981
I I J r N-M % M
,Y
,I l jf
! i 4 i i
i li i
/ }
i
*i* l m f* c
'cra L 6y (~ [ r 4: i
}
s f ;. , , f .
. .3 l ,
! j L_; w==
- il J /
A si s=aJ -w j **=
,M-.
I /p%
! ! -: 1 i !'
Ig4 s I , , e; i 1 i.. .: /[ . N T _ .U, b i ~,, - ^ a
~
[ m r[l
; ,,g P, ,
- IL , . uj _ _' __ i_.i, $ i l.i
- ~ _ _ _ _
_. .; ;
- l l
{ j M}] jg i ' wmwu ' eii m,w wI i i,
. t AN = u+tv -- d-~i. !3 i
-; } .?' ,% , ) " ,7'i lLq L
ii f, t -
< e 4 -9 a
_,- _ _ ,h f, " k. y+jb;'f, l .
!. h, } , ;
fl v_ A ' 8 Lca "l { 3 hi!;giri , 9m
+
me
+
H i i i . H lI (g s I
, jm 6 b ,+L
,y . ~ ,,
I I( 8 I
) - "
a
; o ; .' + j j ; +.4'WJ i ' ?
% i m -M+ 3
!!' ;g,
**:, ef -i ! l $ fh
!, I e 5 Y , l CJ 6 1
a i-r s .. , : i ,- ., rgt., t w , l ,p99 y i, 4 1 l ' , , f' ~]il I
,,f ji
. %,x ~a'i . [-a 3, , .
r m i, . 1 O ] . I fk . [:,.. i: I: I w f -i- ! jl M
. u _.J .
~
I n,
, i .
ai I 3:. > t!i n. i .i + 1 j { } '! !, i
' [ t
'Lj{- ij - i' .
h h' ; . ' ' : a *
.i, , , , .i s
; . L .' ! '
l i g l; 3o I {' l, i 1 - l. It 3
- [w-.-
>, i
; i. =<
jl 8 .
/ h Ig M rsa4 1; M rs...uME qse
.f.j ' .
u,.q. . _: 1 c. _, _; m y ,- t-1.- i
'j ' ) j f .-.
M >^O A*(-E F 9 'f 5! M :- % j f i >
; .. .' ... => %. - A r. ht. g .
<! t, f
'k' '
.h g l !
!f 1 l'. ,
l 1: - ' iI ~ u i
}
.i Ie 4
I, 4 $ i N
. , e .
g h ' T p {,- 7
~ , Mi. =
m s es. %=. 5x .: w r*at+ d_.rl ~t ;
,- ( ,
i <e<ia>
- u ty i4
-; t..
i 2,-
,n .
i fi% 's ~ % ]~ ~
+ . ;
; i) \ l t > N 'ra sa : w e-ll i *l Y,%.
- g. t j i I .. x.- \
i'
, s -
m i\"*I. . . dM as ., % %,l s f** xw (a- +-+ e.w= s p % au 2 u **
/
T- Q.f W*'lES - t919: 4 h I
.I
l
<m - .
-~ a
.l *, v,
\n.*,.*A . ~
{ fr%1 irb.ii i i r i i _A f lb
--..& ..~
I .[} 1. 1 I IX
,j _I I I I i E 1l q
'l IDI '
blII i IT._] l fl l~ if Ti di i I I 1 d
+ . . * = - . . - , . ~ ,;.,
i : a I
.1
, -- A p c rfe r e= '*< - - -
p - (
.ya
- Th% < i .,.r 1, ,
1
) g l ih< ++. ,,+- ,
. H; f 4
/
I
~
! I
- 4. . w . _,
RHR SUP Cet $ PRAT Ab A L. l l l l
-- * * ' " , " " g fggg gppg y
)
~'
l- ' t a siv l l l , l , l l I I i i ' 1 l I ,,
-soPengtsiog Kux l
, e q
- , p-" ACCL% HAtl*l
. .. w .
I _.,,4,,. = k yLl 4 :.n "- \- t~ ta m r n-l Mj(! '
-' M $)
!i ji. 8 i
l . f, j
! j.n.i 1%
i , ( yea IL"";3; .1 i a Th~) :. '- 7 I # l 1' I l i
- I II +
p
? '. . IU b 5
_ m'- u.H......,<,A,,,,,,. i y,G *, . > g 1:. hgE=+mg5grez&.awre YQv t
- 9 '.7 ~~ - - J .- . .. -
%. e..-.
t ~%
. .aure LWLEL 26Y
; o. ,
o ;,..<g i y;! I utm'
.A s Li
%e. _ . .. ...
letar-r qi l gil a .- r ,
! N 8> >
6 t i
,ti 8
l '
, p g
i ri III
'p el t t:,
A.. b_ I t'Ib% .E l* _. J
- N.
p u i l - LO8tf SPRAW
'N -
l l' j l ,,w. a [k' 8 ^ t{i i! p.a ( l
,e e f ei
'l j . . ..4-'
( PUUP beXTunse W3 STR&itef 4 I ' J' f* .. J ,
! 1 0 &~ --4HR NUP SvCTON
\1*'.
y
' Aa.o sta==t=
i i 0' I wen te e PU9eP SUC1Las O
/ _f 7 t dH li Y Ob
< \ , j Ab[ MAM"
, , . ... , x . . : .. ., .
,.. n .-
- a. t . :. l :- - : ;.;l
*sT) f airB*NE FNHad$7 RCic TifamiNE PuuP StXianN pCit foneM ( COL' 4 f eites SPAAL(M) A*eD StpAMR g uesAJST AND Nm,"* $PARref R
' SECTION 2-2 FIG.1-6 SUPPRESSION CHAMBER PIPING COMPOSITE - SECTION 2-2 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS I
REVISION 4 -FEBRU ARY 1981-i.......... ..
70s a en r,[ f ', E o s ,e-r-/
/-[$w'* *M 11
- J , . M taaet s \..
to Irv CD #v(t) . .'1..# . 7 ossa osse
.e . m. .
t 095C 0940
# .=- ' ~
~ '
eli 093E 094F u
' ^
A gri m ogy / s er essa osa s ss. c .. g ov er-a
',,,4,.
J g A E -Ct ss - 54 post osau
"" I' s
/
- pg',"7. ' A Y' .
,; .1,c.. .t ,. , n . ,, , < '.- N/
'< c
' ===. "'N"e-) "J -
A4
..........n.,i s% ' s . r ce , -
ODI . .op.se 8
~
\ ,, y:! s of ,* g s.- ') J, e -* oplo
/ .
p
/ cc-er , t , , .
p s *$ r ( _> ~,e t
.N d C. .% ,u ks f Y x ~
; e e p
.-l
/ 'd*"
o,.
.f ; , , e / ,
4 x' R v retna
- 60 su
/
- o. . ,
19_ j
- 7) N"'5F1
- 44' / o, / ., \,
N, 5
'j(
4 v. . .
*/ I 90 i
y ,&r- ,- w ,1 < T la o. s. , oe-n1
, , y.
' oe
- r. 4 ) y %s4K\y'
_q _ g;;; a
=
-e
_. 3r j
,!f:,, '. fi t
sn m % ')
' [J
' ,,l, , ,5-s s s ,y. ,
*~
3 3 4 = ,,2 u. - r p- ,, ,
\l ,\ e
\
t . W <. , V s , , .; . > .L .
~
,, 4 aa$ e .
.e -cj id q ,,1 ? ,% \ ( .. '
- 5,;;;; N
,{,
w...
, y, '(9,9 ' - ,
s'
*' - N, Q'"Eg.' '/'
~~ rn a
, , t~
. .o
./ . Q\ L.
j g s 4z < te s; q\ .
.,, , , y ss 1g, ,
.r. y. om - -
s -ca sa . uN
= .c.c. m. . . .or
. % ae coac (f ) omao s.
g 3 1- 6 u ,, g. ggfw A
.y s o " ' .' , o .1, o,. e ,e d w-y k*s y i
/
I I P-so F
, typ.37 ! g
/ -r
\ p.,, s N r xU o *' ' " ' -p s o, ,.
1
' .;O r - c.c ,;'g*J l
s.i r_..M.7.2.'..d'.'.Iae'scw su t , om x 20 m vtcurvo - /o n s s
,, , c,,c
- o, .,
g etwd+tre -- w,, s N<s "F ~ ra - -+A -
.TE.- 4. , c .,,,,
y-
.~ , . - . c, s
v-- . "%;; - o ,, c.A, I' tac,.
, \ /\ 4 ,
(t rP) 7T - . _ _ 9J559t%so,e (*weeta actf% e- ....,. ... , / l _...L et.n et w < I - .. . - - 7- + NiI'.3$ 8-8 3 e - - , ~. ,
, .c.<.-"<' PL N EL. 8..'. .O.'.
a.ur,A -n 4 ii O 2 6 0
. .LE-FEET
l a e.gicica fez 7.*.O 'Z,'L. ao. e co'm' c etn ,. "{'*0tas ,t,,g ut rca ? f'" M " " *"
} r k.
r- J ]! saAce=G Asstwstifs4 tuotoutmis To et l F e s oss outta et miswter To et cuto** c-
.. [
NE TaaLE XsW F04 0 dA-- A$ut Q SA 36 beownim sitLD fo cLE84 Siat t 3- f.C*I[o""IO^"I"I"I T woLE roa [totita Pim s r , PI.N D.ET, . i.oiA
! As SY8 A (TR ACE ADILITT REQ'0)
,w , ,0 & ,, .Tso W sn 8
~
baasto*A* harPLE. 4 Arti d fI3 ao*dT8Nh Yo****DS vT*T . Mj ' y p P op s p,3t gg I i,
/ /_ ad' is2TE: S& Awv C 'D0' "
'50"cstaw.E w M. sid -
O ve Gnoovt Tc@)A.-
/ 6ccavoe op amser. pat V,
- uos ] e'% 74 pt x
( s,( f D N s.cuto es eteseeso to % next te* Msm. - x 9
- 3) tt. 330] I _4 tL ,
( __, l
'\ '7' \g ik$ KLt a 2[$ pimf / T yp ,m y m l[% l , , gs a ritte c.s4L wott 'm NNsy cwt %n ai 3 CAP e .
q ,_, ,
/
Op 65 og gio ,ca g,5g c,cg / y A wt om ute to w na. {gg wt.N u&T ww p 2_ N
/ - op. n
- _sitTasttt*rcatene q
A . X gg g,p,,3 g gggag , TO D 4 LE NGT94 4 0E Y4 f L p,PE 2d ie4u g ,
/s g G8 *A &CIV WE MM R
/ (p ig ,.go y DETAll A , be e-m As.wr 3 sa t06 GR B) a y- o 3, wz oP44 7
/' o a iz is 24 g, 3_3 fu
$ob imqu 3cn / 1
' c a ' t - "' "
% t 4 _ -
.s f ,.< REACTOR sW7, bg/ . ' .,4 Q "Eoc5
a A-a # #*
/i a' f\ '
, .8 c DET 8, V
- r.~ ,-
, vi e,,
- + d x
= .- -
N 7 .- .' 7- i.
,s
\ *
. _/
-r t ;. i 9943 J ,j .".
'- CEYat M
.*. s mo) g
% l C.,;, wy ,
jv s {$
- y. \.
k.
'M
- N 1 w -0740 , ../,v P4 ,
t>i - 7 91 s 3 1 L FIL * m
- p. .tr'2_f ._ ?.9)
- s S4 ExistthG \
-- y V .. (e r.a) .
EMBEDWENT ,
's
/
'*a .
ka " % _J( '.- ' . CE T Ai
/ /- . -3"
(,
,g ,
s,
.. . - e a t ; ,,z,.,,,,,,L,,
/ 7[*.., h N N C
,,,,3 ,
I'/a"DI A PIN (TYP)
- m 's (f
=
--or ras r -4y -Vx' se v j ExlSTING
/ <* a eo ,-
, y -
f
, rCOLL A84
'xi .L e ..
- o,#
/ i
/
La b N k'4. p
,Y 3.,x.,
'o ,,
tI.cm'" - y - s _IS
,A .D T3 ( REACTCR l .
N , g mA< ~
~ ' N
-c a.
< 8t a'F EL 47'Q9) '
/. f N - 6.i t_-
VIEW 1-1 Q EL 33'-O"
,, o .
N Q' % 'N j - 's\ ja u s
;/ T
,o<u.ro' u.tm-io ,
- S t.'." a M .r# # " DETAIL,,B o
,. .m3 um -
! x . < - wn , m,m.
, , ,oyo ms -,o x , ,. . . .
g3- z' s .. O ,,, t, t amur34STFAS69ase(foo FP u c'** W
, ', o,.o 6 1_,
.s - gp : .
, . .w
- 3. ,,f y , 37.,, s
. . _sj W.,
- r. v. urt as s u . . .co .ca...m,=.c.carcw oi .m usc coAA e
~ .- -
- % NUCLE AR SfEETY PELATED
&p/ T,WoT*v.("
u- ro '.7 .x
\, GA CAT. 1 m.r.e,, c sa s) y , g
, - c,.- sa .<1 tmara 50 se sanisico io. O ev s e o nve enri was)
<*.....e,
=== c==a sm t :,o.
ams aw arv umn gs FIG.1-7 m,oa
-gg*
y * " "
!l,I DRYWELL VENT PlPING-SHEET 1 t- '? SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT l
~ h, y [lhz PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS m =
3 , i REVISION 4 -FEBROARY 19 81
a wasa set #aes j E TA8Li C (FIG l ICS
, , . j'Cae a wrto FJ aneta t%* Tutu aar i J js,. J7- ,:.r_ .
- l' T***s av i I / 'M7i "i 7- (t33g
/pt i ~ - [<t ! E'S on stw 1-1
_..{ g 9 1 f ' '/ 8 C ALE -f mCMES ik nHL " SMS IF samar-a a
,,' T* L(mic t E
{t g [a's l ,"g[o78 j
\'33 y\6acovt-. ic
.. y l li-
; - -g ueAt m
t1 inaca sair wao+s- ,f
!,:_ ;Ja I
I - su i=c c ria +-iml/~ j cam e - {CL
... , _ ,g,p4w. 2..~.
., L.o ,o .
.. ct
. . . . . . g s 3 sever g k
( A'tCHOR SUJ0b Esg 7t4% ELE 5tRFN6TM FOR 5tuC5 b4JOcPSI
~
g*, y,g ;p FIELO TO SJif was vf LD STFsE as ,vM ron tTuOS - SC M SI F#%esHa sh5 fall ACCOaDi% YO SPEC SM6064 f- _[___ ] StC1004 Il a%) wamusactuRE A5 ptCowugasofD lessiquCTson (- - ^l; ' , - - Y NOTES: RE esFOR
$1tD spacegG Cass gg Asama4GED TO SJtt SpacNGrvtpfsCaLA
, DETAIL K waizo,.Csests rat vea roc-e Paaso uimSta=ct to t c< svuo ij.
j SCALE NONE rt wie i- r i g$'acfW
. Att PL Af f W AT1 FOR BR4(ING & a as0 4< 56 piek 4 Pipf '#t at ivet3assgT3 ta st asutu] Sa% 3 (
. 2 ' *9 *\ ' ' ** *M ..'.!.._ ?T$
i I P(# I \_.~ ]. l PL A s h; E nts -
%q (teswat.
emi. mcut.D.E. m itici or aarset
. N 4., **.(N 5AJtSK.(f eeds i Es we to I
3%s , -nW' l '- 't q E Affp ME l'
~
p"Y
,q, f 1 ,
r- - g., , j isie d h 9sLe /$oi.3c.3 l
\
s s g
\ ,
l/ / C' l'\ t 1s
~
T t y/ </ - @/r.ti-st. .,, cse y':. w: (~ ,,,4 ./
. . s
.s .
1
! y
'y hy AL ' 4, U s* *Md -
h!
, r - 2 cst
; -s
- \
x k m'
-. eino i n g..
m.
'"' ^"./tj.", Lou. PA RTI AL PLAN e , Eg 62' y"
.C.m -,..,
l
/ ( eta 6 -stan w, a) immrp-- ._
, /
IlG l-7 .w ' r- / (Ter) - ' .N O ' 5 - m 7
%FIG .. .,w -
I- 7j ,, f w.ca u.6 f1 <m fj g, access "O'*a'
# sauce.a (v v) e f--____ __%_- . . . _ _ _. -. _ , ,. co.gcc uga , . pg
' 1 a .;
N F7 IL 8 9) f
#j e)k )
[AM A,wa,e para t'% ova xas Na rY'~T Ps .nro.es
\
9 f
,4 N9 ,
/ carrte g3 h
ett. ar -s y e i %,:n. t -.,
.f vit ve,
. oi ....a.u a s. can
_ r aive.a m , A A $THE I ng */,. d g[.r. LWL M o I y s d' A - b' lll l l 1 ' C'6 Nw q;A /8, h ,I) . T [p_. 4
- CC'eC COL q , 2s- .[' \ t 'de aj \ w : /). ,
m o /-
/
4 .s. eq '- a 1._ .. - _J
- .s . . _ .
] ,N / ^
7-7 (FIG l-7)
\ ear,tt t possfions ,oa om.... pai .., canta a .r. om..cc e PLA N stoon stas mtswat itsf cow'*etR tasvtt maet tr:G l-9; a=e o .we.es i,n u % .ans:
? 9' ,C ,,_ ,,,, a w As,orm M AT'L NOTE 2
- tuts ae unt% cr sus, ets *o rirty.s rm scata-inc. ins to *./ tua au m.it ..Te#,A<,e.P,m , ,< art awm as o a ce s no av ~<. ro a ct n 4%E 4 90 4 5 TO BE Asvf m SA*,,4 Ga% of. GH 70 LRE 55 Of43h.'d P(stared AND IS TO CC%FOland TO AL AIP EWt .e T5 0r $ C2 3 DELETED 4 ALL 444'EMAL 43Mt4fdTS F@ lM P(. A%v$EMHIIA(N'S, I B4FFJ M AsVY5JTC A4 6 WHQ (C8 5 DLtedTMF6 To Elf A5&E ]D CC2,EXYPT THAT pe*ptCTQ.# Ef 4'- Q O*f8L(e.6 / i m m.r,u n
- a W r.a t ,,p)
** V omo 'mctm De=a< 'aeanso, a.o t,(
meRCATION O T4 ASa( CEOE Sy>gG' . f5 eOT q[Q D
/ - s yn' ves.6 ((easte tem enae y a l, A ta s e;t e <)
g ,5{l d'h 6 singJ vouE DSCHMrE L9{ fo ti As4E C (C S pca_ - m . g . .r_**m. iW' d E EL 6+ -a l amt 7 asuc Cygwn, i.(m_g m. c,, Lysis at.m o A a., . 3,
. num m,... ...... A .,, a e;
, o.a waC marts o,o cw. .o, ,mmuo.
,,o o,,,,, -
; IE# '
I SgPPO.T (t v P)
- r. - s' # 4 S.T,t ."A.tui .E W..e.'. . GP S.$# 4Gt t ,ipt e TratAwTv s **o o u em *Tw *~Ts I
s
- %<,... ... ,soa.;.m. .m . ri. . .r > o,. Car etas,e.,o .c s<sita
_,__. _ _\3 . 4_ _ _ _ . _ _ ,, .
,, _ ,,,s g,, u ,,,,,,, 3 m , , ,,
; - f' - 4--
- - - '3 1 ;
G__ g g y e , .,. g,, , g . ,3 say( P-8.Mf E0 W% CMAP A5 Y4 P5%~. Wtu iz u Nso,s mo .rsammo u< .vx
,, : .ao,, C,tw
. ! i
%- .______.L m ls .g .
,3 c ,3 c ,,,
('m . 7_ -a- __ _.---J 4 '%
- s J1D_.W.%, ~3 - '
CAN NOr PE. De4** (D DCtPT eme W l'Tiet arMah , I _ _ [_ !] or tes rotteaws om vt2 caes a [
, ,. - # ..rcor w, m ,.v m s, # 2. w ,ru.
C"t n ^*W W W M W W "a M W " c*'C s g i.$"#
,g*
h.di'59 es eeoc4L r+ssoicaTas socartomLocaTeca,,oa mo siris soviv tat menucav.ifcceae.e emama, an==
% ._____r_ .
g ' i I VA 1 - evs am . m .m . m.. ,
?
** m 5^" . ,
l av .tu vu.,7 P,P,., . . . < . .
- v . ,.i,.
i _.., y __*_q*".____- - - - - - g m otAa tocAT.0,,o . m. u .c TT P,.,P,. ,.,,.-. DavetLL vamT Pirius see-4
,s.... 1 -1o
, g'THAf E PL ATE 5 TO 88V D65CM PIPM$ in SUPPRES$1Cgg C Aagte ,jg, l g[
. COtseClot esTH 1.OC4flOne l Or PtPF 48*osti$
' f lG.1 - 9
. j NUCLEM SAFETY RELATED u w'si 2 1. Q A CAT. I
,+ soih.& 5-0 w ; x7yes 9 ? 9 *9 SC AL E -se.cMt t (fle.1-9) F I G. 1 - 8 DRYWELL VENT PIPING-SHEET 2 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION -UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND t.DCA LDADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 198ll
, 1 1 ,
, o.:...c..e#.-
o ver =.a=na r
; p i (se as
<t j 'osreetc.sta P8'E s .
jraere>r
-c j' ,-:s%z .' nu n an
- ## y-- - :e sastrea s .n. .c.ww > 4 - r
[o / # I' y Y J d -e {* Cae e811b F.,Alb af CSA AAdf .$ g ,'. v . n. , J O/ tvA's rta tr** we u. =s u.* i-n E [ ' ' ' '
- m. ( :/ g+ u s .
-t , c z.
t _ m-
, u._ k.,_ e,I .
.. p . > ..
'Nb W -7l \y, N NJ ^
dfln' _ 1 Y C < A.' .,i,, ,. /- 7/,.
... .- , -. .... ,. i . e '
><s
.j v ,
~
\ / s ,
- x. l f p. o r t."J^ti.*v* %g* 4 4 -= 5' /
e, 's .a .J.........,.%* s
~
Gr ls *4
'A*w *LA't)
.,v. ..
y .ru '
~
no or l
-o.<n. y . sa...3 f
. a ,,e:-n mn 1
y "W; , N # $M E % ConseeComed D , _ .) SL72 E.L..& h ** 7
. -m
<. M_ . ., n,,g.N_},--___, .
N. .
-** #*--, (
*: I 8 4 g* I a .~ -- Of51:sp .4
.gcas,,,i,c g s e, 47 sowso bms, ar .at moi q gj [, , h4
- g. g pg g y k L- t t<
.3 astwo on v_r ata ) '.
\ -< w
) t
';Q
- w. a ge. ~m ) -'
l 4 eea . ....we e
'a !
a . < r .,a e i e ,.t e e.,,*m.t, n a ri r st t,eicat >? = = * * * *
- e
- u. ss rsI.a- ws,w mn- 8
\ L.
{a. .,- - .' wrt V J,1..--- ___.__-
-- lg*
9-9(FCs 1- 6 ) o . 4 e sa t I #
. TALI-f40*ES BAA, ptAt' e a 6 .' 6 L t -84 e
5 4A7FL 8 at N 1 ( PI4 (Pild
-* s
,/h
- FOR C Psiv 70 Pete L f tr,t.e a g w* *
( rr,e at'- u m y ow
-4 y"... . ..u q (T TP)
~
~ ~
,% g N ** ~ ./ j/
\ ....
2 9 POLE TO BE LOCAf f D AedD , *g
' *~. # \' 5' DRIL LED IN p g[Lp A5Mfl0 SA36
() PfFE SUPP0af DE T. I o e in i,s t f 1 j seats-incase g',a'-o , t P. (,% tairect e Pos.rm ou. r. rtoon wa s entst vi m sa f vaa r c ( no 1-so) ,{ e o ? in is .s._ %
"'" pt uast a
" 6^ 3
.c.ta...c. .
m
.7
..[ -C - - - -
. _ ,_[. % . _ .
il caa. oxes tru aus v,Pe i -aauto a sareta e s g .
,.g ,.
w-y,y,j 3,u,to ,, a,eto
,=
, ,,..s, .,,,, , .Pm.L ....t. s , .
w-suo > g- / it vM r. wl marrtl etr'e ' ') DETAIL P (FIG l-ll)
/$ '
! ?
N 5 scatt-eucuss
, , g _.,e t.
'k :M y '
3 r q,d "~ ^'O
#-J00(tvP)
( 3 nore.
%',, I 54 4C6 GA y -
y , **
.A s nae s sem . A.bne.t.E.'m e i.er >
o w ie.e PtPt ie.C ASE D ise (xISTR A ast!D SA 806 GAB PiPf
+.99 ASIM A-307FOft ed AmstD*A*SAEFLt K'5'i J i ,# g'* a a g'9 Afe,*g ggg gg.106 G4& PIPE OukY gal cna tot's- f vPic4L karrot es (
e . n _._ .
,e 4 m=*t 5' '
_j ( V NOTES L SCALE AS $40TED s' g
; ) L 2.u s<t au. O rts 4 mr our.s. rue s-*
" b rtoo,, u.u,r, {
h.*
- NUCLEAR EMETY RELATED
~m QA CAT. I
.,..-g T , :- ,
# aa e e e.
(9 9)
=
~"
- DLYht X kz N marnaatPiPt m vs e, , ,,
- e. i, , .
.e. t i -i.c .
pig, y . 9 Y Gk DRYWELL VENT PIPING-SHEET 3 SHOREHAM NUCLE ^.R POWER STATION-UNIT I
"' PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FGit SRV "J,0 LOCA LDADS l b $h REVISION 1-APRIL i 1977 l
i t 1 TABLE A
% DomwCOesta to SAACE *th (ChWCTION A%%EwSLV f vPf 6 DCessC0enE7 Do e#- Al%'Y 00 em- A 5 5*v Dooh- A l l*v Do sie- A ll*Y A55 y ess or pegor Pm Cout a TYPt C0esE A frPt Coast m TYPt CCist a TvPt TYPE allT l Comest C' 08- taatt e 08- TAaLE 8 OP. TsSLE e Op. Tasta e taaLE A floms e e 23 as 45 ai 67 25 e 4 2 12 6*- 6 29 2 e 24 s2 46 is so 2s 2 2 7 d- o' c 3 1 25 IS 47 44 69 22 3 4 7 6-O' 44 4 1 26 e de I5 to 23 e 2 7 dg C 5 2 27 9 49 e6 71 22 S 2 7 6-O' C 6 3 28 10 50 15 72 23 ee 7 F 60~ E 7 3 29 9 $1 17 73 22 7 2 9 60' M S 4 30 II 52 24 74 23 0 2 3 7715 2 F4 9 5 30 42 63 it 75 22 9 4 6 60 8[
10 2 32 13 64 is 76 23 to 2 4 !S* W 41 Il 3 33 to 55 19 77 22 16 2 5 35*-30 63 _ l,2 3 34 IS 56 19 70 23 12 2 S 3'/- 36 +22 83 4 35 16 57 20 79 22 83 2 4 6-6 83 44 _ 5 36 15 58 15 90 23 , se 2 4 38730' G 85 6 3F 07 69 21 ei 22 4% 12 6 O*-O' ( 16 7 38 24 60 16 92 23 _ 16 2 4 44'-4S' (f 87 6 39 et 60 22 SS 22 IF 2 4 0*- O' C 38 7 40 95 62 23 64 20 st 2 4 O* O' 41 19 9 48 49 63 22 65 22 19 2 4 201S' _2 C 9 42 e5 64 23 e6 23 20 2 4 2sES t? 21 10 el 20 65 22 et 22 21 2 4 3 9* 3d C5 22 9 44 e5 66 25 es 23 22 is 4 st sd [
' Fo" T
^
23 is 3 24 2 e d o' a 29 2 5 d-d c f 2 6s wott in eaAct to at tocatto A=0 Daittto in resto g ap, , I erto s
&)r[
* +
s y e s*
/ ( s c
roa(pg= top % t=sra set vaatt c e, M4 )g
/
. ,J#
~s g-
/
/
jo, g 2 h. $ @L( a4to unu ,, syn p 3, y M o .s . cf Cu m y$4Y [g"' 3desb
* >\
4' & \ g* O /\
+-L--
i 1
'sq
~) gyg y % - - ._ . _
i 4s22.5
'* tb r h
\ i[a 'ptivP' g i DETAll E A. -- M
?8 4 ? '8 sate-.=c is _
et aav [ i
. . d. j 7
(CGl-7) , phy
- f DETAll F j' ^~
y . o a e s sn n - 2 sc at a-e mcat s a
, ', af{TYs0 IFIG l'Il - T j*t Stirs '~ d P -* y a(TeyptSrns irm VE NCte 3 SEF NCTt 3 (FIG l.7) S - '
(FIG l-7) u'E 4 Y?"^t "scate -inc at s 4 f , p (FIG l- 7) _e s O $ l
.I l
l l
TABLE B TABLE C - . _ ,.. ... , ..A____ PDs LOCATE)ms d88W t cent 30 LI%M N O y WJ8tt 4 Inf M9f a husef ALLNGY% CE TAIL (AisGL E **) pgg WM WE y 1y lie sorM 4'Ti 3) me NEQD gg peg w uggg l O' A 615000 26 ,4j AdU iM *l g ( r 30' Ci-s S 637-30' i *6- O' 2M 30' 28i-4 S S 64 504D se S'+S
- A e6 DI A k' 77-fi
- 15o 30 190 0 226 he2 -4 5 [ h 7'- t>h M igj'Ds A h 77's)
' 33 -30' iso O' 214 -85 28i-4 5' O [}M te x8 26 2-e} F03 &s1 } l6 l j g7 (L d.g*
(fas 70 f f tS 14 S* 4 S' seCA O li4 iS' 258 45 E 4 2-2 [XFIG M r$ $ 3* O .24* 4S' 161 0' 2 31 IS' 2V-4S F Rf ut to 1 -2* D , M ff 6 62 #*-4 5' l E ., C ' 2 31-8 S' 265-0 30'* 0' G G4 M e 44E E * '
~i 4~ T~ p. ' d'--
[Ti .re r Tsamen j . . L ino loco < 3 ^ 3a 2cw --- ., ss w 4 s A~ .o AL hA ' w,
. ar z
t y v 3c %4.< _ . - - a eijne 2 3 s,ois _ [, .. . /_ l- , , ., -
- i. t o ' * .*
g r m O* 0' < 3 7' n u d 3C - - - - - - - - - - - - - L 158 = 4 s } 2 6 2f ,A I* que Fw int v vm .li so . .O - t o
. by p U1
$ J,s 6ek
'2rse ised e= 4 s/ T 2 A Tsai43) m .Tstw _ P . q, . . ,
N __& u y,e ',7d*J T=oT;EM i 3o
'~
i'e? sc' o Ee som e 4- t { A ( \tt 5,13j'
,c 3s , , , , _ __ _ _ , o 4,3 4 , ,g A g.,= g, ._,,.,,,,3,,,,
as ,u 30 mn
, q ,. ,o ,4 3 sA-eir m,i sv . . o. m4 . . nooo P5a m s,..,.
u.a.e 4,, , . c4 3uoo Au,50 r F30 27s % 3 s' is.
-- eY Tsios4r j 4 e s) A
( 3a ,46'W Mi -- - u c4 e io 49F A =_qsag P30' j rv.w EW '-- _T _._ v gion, i. 31,g ., WFi.WTgg _ __ ._ _ , Ti7 ~ ,4 3447- DETAll V ho' 2 rf.3c- .,7 g Z__ m ei,i. . i f aroih Uios N 6 i-8) gan - I4S 53 30 134 30 F*'> G 22% 30 g 4 d 3[5'i 5 '
- A COWRINATION TONSUE PL ATE @t TA!L O FCR OP-454 DP47 is DEQuipf D FOR en ACE S i
+ 30' C 3*- 30 2 76*-3d 327*30 -l BET eE E N ANGLE S 37 s5A53"O F081 WE MPE m5 N&T Pipe $PLfCE etLL 81 FIELO *ELCED. OTMER WE ustas AS SPECIFIEDI b es0TT5:
' .a i m si a v Pee sc i SCALI A5 heOf(0 2 WEFeet N0'15 APO (FEHENCE CwG FIG 4*8
T f go of a 3 ALL 6*3 Kn 80 P.PE M) AL TS SETom Aret ll! s%
.-T i GNAM 8 UrA
.Sgg 60 'M n l b* I' f _498 % p, C ) ETac nu t h ? Pt a'E g-(*,A 3tO-L 8 4 OP waTL .# N) N ja p Luf D *'t A0 F 0e G4 Wv q e-g <
~
e if M 5. wig-)C400 P9) 4 , e f L p h; ,*r 5(r [ .( 'o s h, pA /
- e- E gtsesam{ 't"'E"uZ "Ejw' O -~
l M '~ SM. ; gh /5'[*li
. )L 62 6 s is te- . :. ra m
(*
% i As.
{
.J A -
[
- d' r.
A aPv g - I
)S ,/ 4 *g5 *22*M 4 3 9Cr;
'"7, E :\*
_ .i l , CE Tall G
. l
' . l
.a f *P F40 C(TAIL FCil FLut o
-DE 2hMVP)
- P( AD 8C#G'NG & 4*OI A *d f *4 r
x c.- , _a . u n e w er m1, m o CA CAT. y t > f<'mFCoe SestaRtcGSAN3 j N y l.1 _1h u-# 7wo ammutAsi n 465 h
\
f L 59 3) l (Sa-333-tm 6 04 Waft g ^$LEEW 16 C.a a ) T"an 2**/ alTm htw.N.3400 PSI) f, g g (tA 333-t# 6 OR haft p( - m TM Svuih
- 3C&OO PS O
=o v.a f
> n DETAll W r 8 -so'iaan r1 e.. o. au , o.sc a.cc OETA!L J ("' " FIG. 1 - 10 o in as JJ_ w'J u*
wi.' ,'N " c s> i.r.i..> DRYWELL VENT PIPING - SHEET 4 L. . J f" - -f 7'8'"I SctE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I A-A PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA UDADS
- St si.c r.c= A a v.cos o%t s ,eun P.RT f aa LuCS TO BE LG( ATED SC' REVISION 1- APRIL 1977
I flh@tQ**' ecrem [ ,e,ws . mx s utcre en o.rm is i w n .>
*t usc=_ T
, \
Yh15"" \ em, a = -_ I '{ye " ,f Q(&, /Q : Iw FL?&'** +
* :l '
pgy7,7w s .
- .*1
^.
p,E3sgg, . - , ea,, , .
\ , ,
~~
s'\
^ '
'? E %5E o 'n ll$E" tw ~s
- q. ,
' ll\ .
r
'5 0n o '3 , %'*
1} wer-s
-
- Maes ss'- s. ..nm s.
..n2 7' . -' ,, * '6 -
,N ~._ , e , , = s n Y * '
s /
'p'g" qN N
, ., ~ . . ~ . .
f ,x DJ<7/- .. .- . J O,
~j .
(K ,L,a, ;. s g 4. g pv'
*f
- hy dn p / ': A 's
- \Y , , . n<
... a -
k,. p5 s' g', ' ' / 8 mu pse m et
\\~'\
9'- t ' s,ow<
\
o ~~ u'hqs,
,~'. -
f.9-x_.,p Tag Et
< .g ~ .
\
~
g,,9;;n\t .' T
\'
/ ..
, ff
.a y
- f_3 ,'.
n,_ yin.. zusw
,s
/ y o O s C j
= =.
.s.. m.. s 4Q Qus +.- ?
w'
%O A "
.f.,S.
o
~'
Nh4 / 1 i' \ f i ECALE FEET i6
1 l E
, , , , u e -v >> D 3
a t
- 1. .
g g Aj r.v' n a m => <
}% El SE 0*
u Aw. pas tr t
\.
..a.,.c A .r
- c. c a= <t" I 4 84A'M yy
- n. e . ,,, ,> ,J
- G* N
[]O srq H ("': y Q 4 X/NQ,4 ';.' , :A - ifsi!M . otrAn. u g,
'p j,mx%
s e
-f.y p.u3
.m.....<.
'*"I
- N,/ '\ 3/4s
~
y c,,s e 3,. s,3 _..w-w - p,,v _w, - s N u - s.:gyn m._, ow m.
,, , ,;,, , ,. n g ,, a,,,, _
I xou wr.- - , n' g x. 0
\
w . 3% >,\
% , n ,
at
,a. . .,,,.;
.i m.
s f.<e. emu-3 'r " ys - i ese to, E. % 4.
=g;; pg t n. ! . . . -v._. ,m N. , , ~.. .)
3
. u- a 3 ;
u <s.au m n.
,.> r
, m-
~ 1 n e_ y, g em .-
y ..- ; ,..
- . . %y: '
g . _~. m . 27 g " N "' [ -d . ) 4M-4, J <x b_y - t- ~., .o a ss .: .,... m ,.. ,
._ ..g
'4
. .._i nEM i l lm x m es m i..o.u n su-c
., / % LE \ 'j f7[$n'h'Wjp [np/yw A u- y U ev # a
' e erts L, .g~. . lu.U:.b parg e" s i ,,m ms . ....s a e.a . m . ..
/ /(x- 2 .m <m s to u w m.
W 8 y / ggw 3. u e a r* 4 Y L M hsCTLS Ta%GE ts? t est m s i * . = c~~m - ~< * **.
/ g z c se 7. rp,e p.g,3,pu, N
[seas s c m,
}.( g$).
! / t '_G ')
- O 3
"~
r
; ~ ~ ~, ,, a u -
nuo g I. ^ ,y ,C, ' <7:, j/./ NaCLEAR SArETY RELATED
- d. ,j 4
.k ~...o m n n GA C AT. !
,f @M '" " '
~,xtwc.,
A R'*a n u - l j
/
/ FIG. 1-il SRV DISCHARGE PIPlNG IN SUPPRESSION CHAMBER SHOn'EHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS 9 f
REvlSION 3. NOVEMBER 1978 f
SECTION 2 LOADS AND LOAD COMBINATIONS 2.1 LOAD DESCRIPTION - SUPPRESSION POOL HYDRODYNAMIC LOADS'AND RELATED EFFECTS This section briefly summarizes the source of hydrodynamic loads and general sequence of events , in addition to the loads described in .the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) , for safety / relief valve (SRV) a ctuation , a design. Dasis loss-of-coolant accident (DBA) , an intermediate break accident (IBA) , and a Small break accident (SSA) . 2.1.1 Safety / Relief Valve Actuation Actuation of SRV's during normal plant operating conditions may produce transient loadings on components and structures in- the suppression pool chamber region. Prior to actuation, the SRV discharge line contains atmospheric air and a column of water at the submerged end of the SRV line in the pool. Following SRV actuation, pressure builds up inside the piping as. steam compresses the air and forces the water column out of the pipe. When the water is expelled, the air follows the water column into the pool in the form of a high pressure bubble. Upon entering the pool the bubble expands and accelerates the surrounding pool water since the ambient pool pressure is lower than the buoble O pressure. Tne momentum of the pool water then causes tne buoble to over expand until the bubble pressure eventually becomes negative with respect to the ambient pool pressure. This negative pressure slows down and finally reverses the motion of the water, leading to the contraction of the bubble. This sequence of bubble expansion and contraction will be repeated until the nubble reaches the pool surf &ce, due to the buoyant forces. During the period of the bubble oscillation, pressure loads will be transmitted throughout the pool, resulting .in dynamic loads on pool boundaries and submerged structures. The analysis method used for computation of the SRV loads of SNPS-1 1s described in Section 3. The event-time relationship for SRV discharge is shown on Fig. 2-1. 2.1.2 Steam Quenching vibri.tions Steam quenching vibration phenomena occur when hign pressure, high temperature steam is continuously discharged at high mass velocity into a water pool which nas a significantly high temperature. Test data demonstrate that this does not occur for either normal suppression pool temperature or ror low steam mass velocity conditions. These phenomena are discussed and an p analysis of the suppression pool temperature for the Shoreham 4 plant is presented in proprietary Section 3.4 and Section 1C , O 2-1 Revision 4 - February 1980 m
2.1.3 LOCA Loads Section 2.2 of the Mark II Containrynt Dynamic Forcing Functions l Information Report (DFFR) ( 3 ) disvusses postulated accident conditions and typical time historier of the response of the Mark II (MK-2) pressure suppressiou containment to LOCA's. The report discusses the following accidents:
- 1. Design basis loss-of-coolant accident (DBA)
- 2. Intermediate break accident (IBA) , and
- 3. Small break accident (SBA).
2.1.3.1 Design Basis Accident When a large loss of coclant accident (LOCA) occurs, the mass of steam released into the drywell causes rapid pressurization of the drywell and expulsion of water standing in the downcomer vents. Following vent clearing, air purged from the drywell forms individual buobles at the downcomer vent exits wnich rapidly expano as tney are charged from the drywell. When the bubbles expand sufficiently, the upward motion of the pool becomes essentially one-dimensional and the bulk pool swell phase begins. The pool surtace continues to move upward until gravity dnd the increasing pressure in the airspace brings the pool surface to rest. Air beneath the pool surface rises through the water slug and communicates with the wetwell air space in a relatively temperate " break through" process and pool f allback cegins. At the terminatior of fallback, the pool is restored to its " pre- sw ell" conditior. with most of the drywell air having been transferred to the wetwell airspace. The total duration of vent clearing, bubble formation, bulk pool swell, and rallback is approximately _ seconds f or Shoreham Nuclear Power Station - Unit 1 (SNPS-1) . As the purging of the drywell air continues , the vent rlow becomes increasingly pure steam. The vent flow may be considered quasi-steady in that the rate of change of mass flow at any point in time is relatively small. For a containment DBA, this phase lasts approximately 25 seconds. Containment peak pressure und maximum vent flow is reached during this phase at approximately 10 seconds atter the event begins. Condensation of steam vent flow during the quasi-steady flow phase is continuous, but pressure oscillations have been observed in large scale tests. This phase is reterred to as condensation oscillations. When the vent mass flux falls below 4 -6 lbm/ft2-sec, the candensation becomes intermittent. This phase is referrea to as chugging. The DFFR presents the following dynamic loads for a typical MK-2 plant DBA: 2-2 Revision 4 - February 1980 O
- 1. pressure load,
() 2. 3. temperature load,
. vent clearing loads,
- 4. pool swell loads,
- 5. pool fallback loads,
- 6. pool boundary loads during condensation oscillations and chugging, and
- 7. downcomer loads.
The analytical models used to compute these loads and the plant specific loads are presented in Section 4. The event time relationship for a DBA is shown on Fig. 2-2. 2.1.3.2 Intermediate Break Accident An intermediate break is an accident which results in a suf-ficiently rapid loss of reactor pressure vessel (RPV) . fluid such that the high pres" e emergency core cooling system (ECCS) cannat maintain reactor water level. A steam or liquid line break of approximately 0.1 tt2 is defined as an intermediate breakE3). l () The drywell pressurization rate resulting from an intermediate break is significantly less than that from a D3A. Consequently, the vent clearing load is less than that resulting from a DBA and there is no significant suppression pool swell. Condencation oscillations and chugging do occur, however. The maximum short term suppression chamber pressure is 26.6 psig, the pressure resulting from drywell air carryover; and the associated short term pool temperature is less than 1400F. Since a high drywell pressure signal scrams the reactor, the sequence of events following a scram eventually closes the main steam isolation valves (PSIV). The closure of the MSIV's results in an increased RPV pressure that is relieved by opening multiple SRV's. Consequently, the suppression pool boundary may be subjected to a pressure loading from this SRV discharge when the suppression chamber is pressurized. 2.1.7.3 Small Break Accident l The small break accident is defined as a small leak in the reactor system within the drywell which does not depressurize the l reactor by fluid loss. With the reactor and containment operating at normal conditions, f a small break will allow discharge of reactor steam to the 2-3 Revision 4 - February 1980 l I
,m. . , _ - . _ , . . , . . - , _ . . . - , - _ , _ _ . _ _ . . , . ,. . - _ . . - - .
4 drywell. The drywell pressure will increase and result in a high drywell pressure signal that scrams the reactor and isolates the containment. The drywell pressure will continue to increase at a rate depending on the size of the postulated steam leak. This pressure increase will depress the water level in the vents until the water is expelled and air and steam start to flow through the vents to the suppression pool. The air flow rate is sufficiently low that pool swell is not encountered. Vent clearing is tollowed by chugging for an SBA. The suppression chamber is gradually pressurized at a rate dependent on the air carryover rate. Eventually, all the air will be transferred to the suppression chamber and the suppression chamber pressurization rate will then be controlled by the suppression pool neatup rate. Tne maximum short term suppression chamber pressure is approximately 26 psig trom drywell air carryover, and the associated pool temperature is less than 1400F. In the long term the pool temperature rise may be greater as discussed in Section 10.3. 2.2 LOAD COMBINATIONS AND ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA The suppression pool hydrodynamic loads as well as the mechanistic relationships between SRV and LOCA loads have been descrioed in Section 2.1. These relationships form the basis for MK-II load combinations. All possible load combinations resulting Iran this basis are presented in Table 2-1. Following are several important f eatures of these pcasible load combinations:
- 1. All combinations of SRV and LOCA loads could occur with or without an operating basis earthquake (OBE) /saf e shutdown earthquake (SSE) , seismic event.
- 2. Without a LOCA event, any number of SRV's may actuate, as determined by pressure set points.
- 3. Witu an SBA or an IBA event up to approximately two-thirds of the SRV's (low and intermediate set point groups) could actuate on s et point pressure or the automatic depressurization system (ADS) valves could be j actuated.
As important as the identification of all possible load combinations is the appropriate designation of acceptance criteria for structures and components to be evaluated. Once l acceptance criteria are associated with possible load combinations it becomes evident that many simplifications to Table 2-1 can be made, while still retaining all controlling load combinations. The resulting design basis load canbinations and acceptance criteria will vary for different types ot structures and components, since different design procedures and codes are 2-4 Revision 4 - February 1980 O l
applicable. These are discussed in detail in the following sections. b) (_ 2.2.1 Reinforced Concrete Structures The load combinations and acceptance criteria for the SNPS-1 reinforced concrete structures, including the basemat, pedestal, and primary containment, are presented in Table 2-2. This is consistent with Table 5-2 or the DFFR, Rev. 2ca). As discussed there, the factored load philosophy of the strength design method is employed for the assessment of MK-II hydrodynamic loads. This is consistent with the original factored load design in accordance with ACI 318-71, " Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete"(7). Load combinations 1 and 2 (Table 2-2) for normal operation with and without thermal effects are based on ACI 318-71, Paragraphs 9.3.1 and 9.3.7. Load combinations 3 through 7a cover the same combinations of events as ASME Section III, Division 2te), with SRV actuations also included. With the inclusion of SRV loads, load factors are adjusted to provide consistent safety margins. It is noted that substantial simplification from Table 2-1 has been achieved by two means. First, SBA and IBA effects are grouped together. This is reasonable since their effects are generally comparable and both can occur with the same possible SRV actuation cases. Second, the various SRV actuation cases are not called out separately. For design assessment purposes, the 7-s severe SRV actuation case possible should be considered. g' 'j most For Shoreham, the maximum results trom any SRV actuation case, including an all valve discharge, are conservatively used in comDinations with SBA and IBA events as well as in combinations without LOCA events. 2.2.2 Steel Structures Load combinations and acceptance criteria for steel structures in the Shoreham plant are presented in Table 2-3 (steel structures are not addressed in Ref erence 3) . Unfactored loads are used with stress allowables wnich reflect the probability of occurrence of each load combination. The stress allowables are in accordance with the AISC " Specification for the Design, Fabrication, and Erection of Structural Steel for Buildings"( *) . This approach is identical to that used in the original design with the dynamic effects of SRV and LOCA loads now included. Table 2-3 contains one further simplification from the load combinations presented in Table 2-2 for reintorced concrete structures. This is the grouping of all LOCA events under the one heading of LOCA. This reflects the fact that for the assessment of steel structures, the general approach has been to conservatively combine the most severe effects of LOCA loads and O 2-5 Revision 4 - February 1980
I l l SRV loads in all required combinations. This extra conservatism l has not been applied in all cases, however. I 2.2.3 Piping and Equipment i Load combinations and acceptance criteria for balance of plant (BUP) and nuclear steam supply system (NSSS) piping and equipment are presented in Table 2-4 which is consistent with Taole 6-1 of DFFR, Rev. 2ts). The load combination methods are described in Section 2.2.5 and are consistent with Attachment II ot Reference 10. The applicable load cases and the dynamic analysis procedures used for SNPS-1 are consistent with Attachments III and V of the NRC LPAC as follows: SEB-2 and MEB-4 : Use 115 percent peak broadening of ARS SEB-3 and MEB-5 : Use Reg. Guide 1.92 to combine modal responses MEB-2 : Use OBE damping for normal / upset con-ditions Use DBE damping for emergency / faulted conditions Mea-7 (a) : Annulus pressurization ef fects are com-bined with SSE, inclusive within Load Case No. 6 in Table 2-4 MEB-7 (b) : "OBE plus SRV" loading condition is assessed by Load Case No. 2 in Taole 2-4 MEB-8 : Criteria to assure functional capability for all essential components in Appendix C are in conformance with NUREG/CR-0261 I and consistent with Attachment V-B of l NRC LPAC 2.2.4 Reactor Pressure Vessel and Internals l l Load combinations and acceptanca criteria for the RPV ant , I internals are presented in Table 2-5 Although presented in a sonewhat different form, these combinations cover all those l presented in Table 2-4 for piping and equipment. 2.2.5 Combination of Dynamic Responses For all the mechanical systems, components, and supports in Tables 2-4 and 5, the dynamic responses to the dynamic loads such as LOCA, SRV, and OBE/SSE are combined by using the " square root of the sum of squares (SRSS) " nethod. Tne NRC topical report l 2-6 Revision 4 - February 1980 O t I 1
evaluation (11,12) and Revision 1 of NUREG-04 84(13 ) accepts the SRSS method for the MK-II load combinations. O h For ' the ruinforced concrete primary containment, concrete secondary structures, and for steel structures, the design basis shown in load combination Tables 2-2 and 3 is to use the more conservative method to combine the dynamic responses due to seismic and hydrodynamic loads by absolute summation. 2.3 OTHER DYNAMIC LOADS The Shoreham design basis loads are defined in or are derived from information presented in the SNPS-1 FSAR(**). The major design loads, in addition to normal operating conditions, result from LOCA and seismic events. 4 The original design basis LOCA- loads in the FSAR include the quasi-static pressure and temperature in the containment, pipe rupture loads, and annulus pressurization. Containment transients including annulus pressurization are defined in FSAR Section 6.2.1(1*). Pipe rupture loads are described in Section 3.6 and Appendix 3C of the FSAR(**). The Shoreham design basis earthquake ground response spectra are defined in FSAR Section 3.7(1*). One special subset of seismic load not discussed in the ESAR is reterred to as seismic sloshing and is described below. () Sloshing is a term used to describe the dynamic response of the suppression pool water due to movement of its boundary walls - the primary containment, pedestal, and basemat. This pool response ha s been determined for both the ope rating basis earthquake (OBE) and the saf e shutdown earthquake (SSE) . A mathematical procedure has been developed which utili7es a rinite element representation of the fluid and a combinat on of analytical and numerical solution techniques. Tne major assumptions are that the pool boundaries are rigid and that the water behaves as an incompressible, inviscid fluid having irrotational tlow. The governing equations of the fluid can be written in a form which separates the spatial eigenfunctions from the equations governing the liquid motion. This results in a normal modes expansion of second-order dynamic equations under a combination of forced and parametric excitation for each mode. . The tinite element method is used to find the matrix representation or the equations governing the oscillation modes. The equations are solved by standard numerical methods to obtain the eigenvalues and eigenvectors (natural frequencies and oscillation mode shapes). Time dependent modal responses are determined by common numerical techniques and modal superposition is used to obtain the final solution in terms of free surface oscillation profiles and the pressure and velocity rields in the pool. 2-7 Revision 4 - February 1980 4
-, . , ,- n . - , . .- -
~
An exact solution for the eigenvalues for liquid in a circular cylindrical tank is available. Natural frequencies obtained by the present finite element method approach exact values as more elements are used. An exact solution is not available for an annular circular tank, but calculated frequencies also converge asymptotically as more elements are used. The assumption et rigid walls has also been studied parametrically and found to be applicable for the geometry of the SNPS-1 suppression pool. The maximum free surface deflections for the SNPS-1 suppression pool have been found to be 2.1 feet for the OBE and 4.2 feet for an SSE. Maximum dynamic wall pressures have been found to be 1.27 psi for an ObE and 2.54 psi for an SSE. These are not considered to be significant structural loads. Other design loads include wind, flood, and missiles as describes in FSAR Sections 3.3, 3.4, and 3.5,(1*) respectively. 2.4 APPROACH USED FOR DESIGN ASSESSMENT The following sections describe the manner in which the SNPS-1 design assessment for suppression pool hydrodynamic loads has been carried out. The sources of suppression pool hydrodynamic loading are identified in Section 2.1 and the load combinations and acceptance criteria are provided in Section 2.2. Section 2.4.1 described the way in which loads acting directly on the suppression pool Doundaries are addressed in tne SNPS-1 design assessment. Indirect loading due to building response is discussed in Section 2.4.2. Section 2.4.3 covers hydrodynamic load considerations not appropriate for Sections 2.4.1 or 2.4.2. 2.4.1 Submerged Structure / Pool Swell Loads The hydrodynamic loads described in Section 2.1 act on the submerged boundaries of the suppression povi and on structures within the pool. During pool swell, hydrodynamic loads also act . on the wetwell airspace boundary, and the drywell floor, as well l as structures in the pool swell zone above the supprescion pool. i Figures 2-3 through 18 describe the time relationstaps of l hydrodynamic loads acting on the following structures:
- 1. Drywell floor - Fig. 2-3
- 2. Downcomers - Figs. 2-4 through 7
- 3. Netwell walls above water level - Fig. 2-8 1
- 4. Submerged wetwell - Figs. 2-9 through 12 1 5. Small sunmerged structures - Figs. 2-13 through 16 i
I 6. Small structures above pool, below breakthrough - Fig. ! 2-17 2-8 Revision 4 - February 1980 O
- 7. Small structures above breakthrough - Fig. 2 (q V'
; Section 3 discusses SRV discharge.
the suppression pool boundary loads-due to-Section 4 discusses the LOCA-related suppression pool boundary loads. due to vent clearing, condensation oscillations, and chugging as well as the vertical and chugging lateral' loads on the downcomers. The methods used to' calculate the bulk pool sweli transient are also discussed .in Section 4. ' Appendix K descrines the metnods used to calculate loads on' sutruerged structures within--the suppression ' pool due to SRV discharge, i downcomers vent clearing, condensation oscillations, 'and chugging as well as loads on structures in and above the pool due to pool swell. SRV discharge and IDCA-related suppression pool boundary loads affect structures and components outside the suppression pool oy exciting primary .snd secondary containment motion. 'The method used to calculate these building response loads are described in Section 2.4.2. 2.4.2 Buildino Resoonse Load To determine the dynamic response et the containment structures
-when subjected to SRV discharge and LOCA loads, a tinite element based computer program, " Dynamic Stress Analysis of Axisy= metric Structures under Arbitrary Loading," developed by S. Ghosh and E.
Wilson and modified by Stone 6 Webster (SSW) was utilized. This program is S6W code designation ST-200.
's. J The three-dimensional axisynnetric continuum is represented either as an ax1 symmetric thin shell, or solid of revolution, or a combination of both. The axisymmetric shell is discretized as a series or trustums of cones and the solid of revolution as triangular or quadrilateral toroids connected at their nodal point circles.
Tne reinf orced concrete containment structures which include the mat, the primary containment, the shield wall, the reador pecestal, and the secondary containment are modeled' using axisymmetric shell elements. Two RPV shel? models are developed from the reactor vendor's simplitied vertical and horizontal lumped mass representation (* beau model') . Tne stifIening etrects of tne RPV stabilizer, star ' truss, and inner and outer
- bellow seals are also included. The major dimensions of tne I
structures and identification of their general arrangement are illustrated on Fig. 2-19. Figure 2-19 depicts the structural inodel used to represent the complete reactor building and supporting soll. As indicated there, solid axisymmetric elements are used to represent the soll I to a racius and depth of approximately 1.5 mat diameters, with , ax1 symmetric thin shell elements representing the structures. Tne external dimensions cf the soil were selected to preserve , Ov 2-9 Revision 4 - February 19:30 I
-.~, -- .- . -.
.' ? Ik free-field motions. The boundary conditions for the soll, at a radius of one and one half times the mat diameter, were tested by changing from " free" to " supported" conditions with no significant difter ace in building response. The depth of the soll layers was selected to preserve a uniform stress field along the radius.
The shear modulus of the foundation soil is 13 ksi. Results from SRV analvF4" have demonstrated that, although the soil shear strains are rc; m 2;ely large, the dynamic behavior of the building and supporting foundation are essentially unaffected by variations in soil shear modulus. Comparisons of results by representing the soil with constant shear modulus, static or zero-strain modulus, and strain-dependent shear modulus give essentially the same results for building response. In the analysis, the soil continuum is assumed to behave essentially as a homogenous isotropic solid. Because of the large diameter / thickness ratio, the basemat is modeled as a thin circular platt. To account for the relatively large eccentricity between tne mat middle surface and its intersection with the superstructures, special elements in the form of rigid links are int.roduced. A closer spacjpg of elements is used in the area of the suppression pool with increasing element size in areas sufficiently far from the pool. This spacing has been used because the loads are applied to the pool boundaries within this area and orecise definition of internal loads is required. The equations of motion are solved numerically by direct integration. The effects of structural damping have been l included in the dynamic analysis unless otherwise noted. The l Rayleigh damping technique is utilized in which the damping l matrix is assumed to be linearly proportional to the mass and ! stiffness matrix of the structure. The constants of proportionality are chosen so that the 4 percent damp-ing for reinforced concrete structures is obtained at frequencies of 10 to 125 Hz. These limits were selected in order to conservatively encompass the range of frequencies in which significant dynamic response occurs. The SRV and LOCA load definitions are defined in Sections 3 and
- 4. In general, the pressure loads on the suppression pool boundaries due to an SRV discharge or LOCA event vary both circumferentially and meridionally with time. At any point in time this pressure field can be represented meridionally by a discretization into zones and circumferentially by a Fourier series at each of the meridional zones. Therefore, the spatial and time-wise variation cf pressure can be respresented by 1
4-10 Revision 4 - February 1980 9 l
pressure time histories at each zone for each Fourier series O' term. Figure 2-20 provides a graphical representation of the manner in which typical pressures profiles are represented and applied to the structural model in terms of line forces and moments at the respective nodal circles. The equations of motion are solved numerically by direct integration and the acceleration time histories at selected locations are computed. Amplified response spectra (ARS) are developed from the resultant structural ?cceleration time-histories. The computer program *TIMHIS68, cone designation ZZ-126, is used to generate the ARS. This program obtains the exact analytical solution to the governing dirterential equations of motion tor single degree of treedom elastic systema for the successive linear segments of excitation. These ARS are used as input to evaluate the adequacy of the piping systems and other mechanical equipment. 2.4.3 Related Effects The SNPS-1 design assessment for hydrodynamic loads is not l limited to suppression pool load definition and plant response. In the case of SRV steam discharge, it is necessary to avoid a set of ccnditions where the potential exists for unacceptable suppression pool loads. The conditions of concern are s_ simultaneous high mass flux and high pool temperature in the vicinity of the SRV discharge device. The local temperature /hass l flux limit for the KWU T quencher device is discussed in Section I 3.4 and Appendix I. The maximum temperature difference between the mass average (bulk) pool temperature and that in the vicinity of the quencher is discussed in Section 10.2. Section 10.3 and Appendix J provide a description of the suppression pool bulk temperature transients for various events involving SRV l discnarge. Tne culk pool temperature transients are compared l against the local temperature limit for the device less the maximum bulk-to-local temperature ditference. Section 10.4 describes the SNPS-1 suppression pool temperature monitoring system which alerts the operator to take certain actions to mitigate the suppression pool temperature transients . Tnese actions are consistent with the plant technical specifications. t I O 2-11 Revision 4 - February 1980 1 l
TABLE 2 . ALL POSSIBLE HYDRODYNAMIC LOAD COMB 1 NATIONS i l
-N +SRVo_;11 1 1
N +0bE +SRVo - All ; N- +SSE +ShVo_gy) N +SRVAN +SBA , N +OBE +SRV;g3 +SBA l ^ I N +SSE +SRV;g3 +baA
- N +SRVo_g/3 +d5A N +0BE +SRVo-r/ a +SBA N +SSE vSkVo _ g/ 3 +SBA N +IbA
+SRVo-r/3 N +0BE +IBA
+5RVo-r/s
) N +SSE
+ SRVo -z/ s
+ILA N +5RVo_,f3 +IbA N +0BE +SRVo_,/3 +1BA l N +SSE +SRVo_gf3 +IbA N +DBA N +0BE +Deh N +S5* +DbA Legend:
N = Normal Operating Loads ObE = Operating Basis Earthquake SSE = Sare' Shutdown Earthquake SRVo_;11 = Actuation of up to All 11 SRV's SRV;gs = Actuation of ADS Valves SRVo 7/3 = Actuation of up to 8 SRV's SBA = Small Break Accident IbA = Intermediate Break Accident DbA = Design Break Accident 1 of 1 hevision 4 - February 1981
, . ,-n-, ..-,.. ,,,.,,, . , n.- . - . - , , . ..... ,, . , - - , -
(h ) t
\
% /f
= .- .-
. . =.
. 3 A A d - e w y a* n
- m.
N e o. - e=
- a. oe ' o. o e e e- c= . e. e- e- c. -e e- g 3 9 w 5 4 4 J' o' O. n , ,
d 8 0 0 8 9 i '8 I g , u' o e o. o e o e o. o. - . . ,' . 43 0 8 s e e e= c. e. e e D 3, a e'.< e- :
'* Aa
, o o ka ]~#
c r & e e o. o. o. o.. A A e - n-u .D b<e t e i e- e e e s e c= >
.O C .4 G
*4 e J A C 4 A G n' n' t1 s N ca o e g 9 3 . .e
< c,
^ d u eg 3
> . d
*
- e-14 5 8 I 1 c= 8 e $ $ e= 1 -4 a Q v - < , U e U . . < x
-A Q n n -
N e o C g 8 9 9 ' 33 A M 2 * *
- g 4 w Q J. 4 Al i l 8 e* I e i .I e i 2 3- n.s z 4 2 +J -s 3 .5 u Q S 1 A ->
d M 'u. e-
< rA o oe- oe e U @ al 4 e
- a. o . us e n 'c y- y 0
X mit 8 $ i 8 I i 6 e e e" w
@ 4 G. 7 as
$ u w f.
4 7. 2 A. & 6 H U C g al A N ** e O
- e. s(
W f g ad
. =
.g-
.9.4 e
c= N e C 2 4 5 d i I $ 6 i J J e I e b w h a 4 o w c -I o ' N>, - N 4 O x w w 4 4
- w e5 o e o Q O Q.
-p W +J e
~ ' *
'9 U N ai a a s e 1 1 d o I $ $ $ 2
% w e o a A s. x e P b e 0 l
4 0 .C e s 4 .e e e E x o oe o O , w6 e e e e.1 > e 2 5 $ al 4 ** c* i l i i *" I i 2 ** < a. it. E z Qe A< la' K X M O ce O 4 4
- o. o.
oe c e o. 4 x 04 e e- e 4 0 e I a- 4 0 32 e, 4 x l- t- n o o o -e e e e o. o. o. o. o. e e. o. .3 t c 3 x eq e e- e= c- e e e a= c. e-a c .o. $ w w *J 7 3 3. s U w a e o. oe %, oe o o o oe oe 4 4 1 9 e e e e o o e % A- u. c) e. e- e= e= e= s- c- e= e e ~w w 5 e c
@ .. p e 4 0 S w - w
. E e e vg e .. g ,4, g y
* > > * *
- b (* A A O- 3 1 > eg -4 -4 c ec > e> e4 > e a C 9 MM %D q -7 7 q U
-eG. ,.e c. - .< d Eu IA au da C
3 E5 e e -
.a. .c 9
o e EH EE 6 o o o> og g. e
- u. e <
oe u. o 33 U s a s o < .. a e
$ ok ok oU $ $ EU be
'<u <n z ma <w < maoN EN EN m s' 0 0 0 0 e ~5 e
p z3 z3 zo 4 4 e > t f f E ** c. 50 5 5$$$ -g z e a e e a e a e. O e y < e e3 e N n t 3 e 4 N t' o o j ym c-en>
A m
\ .
TABLE 2-3 f IDAD COMBINATIONS AND STRESS LTMITS M)R STRUCTURAL STEEL LOAD STRESS EON. Cond. D L g T g 30 k E SS IA E A r 1.0 Normal 1.J 1.0 1.0 - - - - - - - - 1.0 1.0S w/o Temp 2.0 Normal 1, ') 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - - - - - - 1.0 1.SS 4 w/ Temp 3.0 Norinal 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - - - - - 1.0 1.SS 4 Severe Env. 4.0 Abnormal 1.0 1.0 - - - - - 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1.0 1.6S S.0 Abnormal 1.0 1.0 - - - 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1.0 1.6S Severe Env. 6.0 Normal 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ... - 1.0 - - - - 1.0 1.6S . Ext. Env. i 1 7.0 Abnormal 1.0 1.0 - - - - 1.0 1.0 1.0 1. ' 1.0 1.0 1.7S Ext. Env. DEFINITIONS D = Dead loads LOCA = LOCA Pressure and Dynamic Pool Ioads L = Live Inads TA = Pipe Break Temperature Ioad 2o = Operating Pressure Loads- RA = Pipe Break Temperature Reaction Loads To = Operating Temperature Loads Rr = Reaction and Jet Forces Associated with the Pipe Break Ro = Operating Pipe Reactions SRV = Safety / Relief Valve Loads Eo = Operating Basis Earthquake S = Required section strength based on the. Eg;3 = Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) elastic design methods and allowmble stresses detined in Part 1 of the AISC
= Spec 311 cation for. the Design, thbrication, and Erectic,n of Structural Steel for Buildings =
^
1 of 1 Revision 4 - February 1981
TABLE 2-4
\
LOAD COMBINATIONS AND ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA FOR PIPING AND EQUIPMENT Load SRV SRV Case N(*) ALL ADS OBE SSE IBA(2,3) DBAta) Design _ Basis i 1 X X - - - - - Upset 2 X X - X - - - Upset (*) 3 X X - - X - - Emergency (*) 4 X - X X - X - Emergency (*) 5 X - X - X X - Emergency (*) 6 X - - - X - - Emergency (*) 7 X - - - - - - Normal (1) N - Normal load consists of pressure, dead weight, and sustained loads. (a) Use either IBA or SBA, whichever governs. j (3) SBA, IBA, and DBA shall include all event induced loads, which l are applicable, such as possible annulus pressurization, pool i swell load, condensation oscillation load, chugging loads,
, ,/ etc., as defined in Section 4
(*) Piping functional capability is assured in accordance with the procedures of " Functional Capability Criteria for MK II Plants" in Appendix E. Higher stress limit than the level specitied in this table may be used, providing functional capability is assured. I l l I lO l 1 of 1 Revision 4 - February 1981
TABLE 2-5 l ((() NSSS RPV AND INTERNALS l i LOADING COMBINATIONS AND ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA Operating Conditions , Load Combinations Categories
- 1. N+SRV( all ) Upset i 2. N+0BE Upset
- 3. U+SSB Faulted
- 4. N+ (OBE+SRV( all )) Upset
- 5. N+ (SSE+ SRV( all )) Faulted l b. N+ (SBA+SRVC aspn )) Emergency
- 7. N+ (IBA+SkV< asyn )) Faulted
- 8. N+ (SBA+SRV( ADS )) Emergency
- 9. N+ (SBA/IBA+SSE+SRV ( ADS)) Faulted
(} 10 . N+'DBA C APP ) +SSE) ' * # Faulted l (1)From rated power initial conditions. O l 1 of 1 Revision 4 - February 1981 l
. _ _ . _ _ . _ _ ~ _ _ . . _ . . . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ . _ . _ _ . _ _ _._ - - _ -. __
i O O O i l t I ' z 9
!/ S/R VALVE WATER CLEARING b
i E - 8 e ((j S/R VALVE AIR CLEARING 2 O i 4 3 // / / / /////} S/R VALVE STEAM FLOW / / / /r 1 . i l o 10'
- TIME (sec) 4 I FIG. 2-1 EVENT-TIME RELATlqNSHIP FOR SRV DISCHARGE DUE TO ANTICIPATE t. ANT TRANSlENTS SHOREHAM NUCLEAR PL STATION -UNIT I PL ANT DESIGN ASSESSN- . FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS 4
REVISION l - A PRIL 1977 t
O v v v ss s s s E R
\
U UA l
\ \
\ \
'SUPP ESSI NCYAM ER TEMP RATURE L ESSURE FLUCTUATIC)N
\ssxxxsxxxxxxxxxxxsxxxxxsNNxxxxxxxxxxxxNN . .
DOWNCOMER WATER CLEARING DOWNCOMER AIR CLEARING 1 I I DOWtdOMER STEAM FLOW i- sNNNNNN\\\\\\NN' 5 I I u Ns POOL SWELL l POOL FALLBACK a i O CONDENSATION OSCILLATION AND CHUGGING
\\\\\
; ECCS FLOODING OR SPRAY ACTIVATION Il 0.1 0.6 1.2 2 4 lb 60 100 500 10' TIME ( sec',
i i FIG. 2-2 EVENT-TIME RELATIONSHIP FOR THE DESIGN BASIS ACCIDENT SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 3-NOVEMBER 1978 _ i
.w.,%...
i
%) J DEADWEIGHT; SEISMIC LOADS; LOCA PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE TRANSIENTS ACCUMULATED WATER ON FLOOR u
JET IMPINGEMENT AND
$ PIPE WillP -
a P 8 8 NEGATIVE LOAD DURING REFLOOD DOWNCOMER VERTICAL REACTION LOADS NEGATIVE LOAD o OsNNCOMER FOLLOWING SPRAY
' ACTUATION (REQUIRES
' " TRAL OPERATOR ACTION)
POOL SWELL REA TION AIR LOA 15 COMPRESSION
> SECTION 4 s
t t t 3 g g 0.6 1.2 4 60 >100 >600
- TIME AFTER LOCA (sec)
FIG. 2 - 3 NOTE: LOAD COMBIN ATION HISTORY CONSIDER ATION IS GIVEN TO REACTION LOADS ON THE STRUCTURE AFFECTED: DRYWELL FLOOR [y*,Egte ',',o "y"O" 0T",E",STRU
,ut, , TURES SUCH AS ACCIDENT CONDITION: LARGE LINE BREAK (DBA)
SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN A3 ESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA t.OADS REVISION 3-NOVEMBER 1978
i O O O 1 DEADWEIGHT; SEISMIC LOADS; LOCA PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE TRANSIENTS; HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE INCLUDING SEISMIC EFFECTS; 1
, NEGATIVE NEGATIVE
- ' LOAD DURING LOAD VERTICAL REACTION LOADS REFLOOD FOLLOWING SPRAY Z SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOADS __
! ;- DUC TO C0rOENSATION OSCLLATONS L CHUGGING > SECTION 4 (REQUIRES OPERATOR 5 ACTION)
I g
, o LATERAL o LO AD (CHUGGING) i z
! k 3 ~ SWELL AND FALLBACK FRICTION LOADS
. i e 0.6 24 15 60 100 >600 j TIME AFTER LOCA (sec)
FIG. 2-4
; go7g. LOAD COMBIN ATION HISTORY i
CONSIDER ATICN IS GIVEN TO RE ACTION LOADS CM THE STRUCTURE AFFECTED: DOWNCOMERS oowNCOMER FROM OTHER STRUCTURES SUCH AS THE ORYWELL FLOOR AND STRUCTURES ATTACHED TO THE ACCIDENT CONDITION: LARGE LINE BRE AK(DB A) DOWN COMERS. SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4 - FEBRUARY 8983 l l i _
b V w/ V i 4 DEADWEIGHT; SEISMIC LOADS; LOCA PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE TRANSIENTS; HYOR0 STATIC PRESSURE INCLUDING SEISMIC EFFECTS; 1 LATERAL LOADS (CHUGGING) i > SECTION 4 5 SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOADS { DUE TO CONDENSATION OSCILLATIONS AND CHUGGING g - 8
- $ VERTICAL REACTION LOADS
< E S MULTIPLE SRV , NEGATIVE LOAD ACTUATION ON FOLLOWING CPRAY SETPOINT UP ACTIVATION (REQUIRES TO 1/3 TO OPERATOR ACTION) 2/3 0F VALVES
, SECTION ,
3 - , ADS ACTUATION 4 a a l ! 4 T > 120 T+5 min. >600 TIME AFTER LOCA (SeC) FIG 2-5 i notes; LOAD COMBINATION HISTORY I T IS BREAK AREA DEPENDENT STRUCTURE AFFECTED' DOWNCOMERS BUT IS TYPICALLY IN THE ACCIDENT CONDITION:lNTERMEDI ATE oRoER op 2 To s u N uT Es.
- 2. CONSIDERATION IS GivEN TO LINE BREAK REACTION LOADS ON TH SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNITI DOWNCOMER FROM OTHER STRUCTURES. PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS i
REVIS10N 4 -FEBRUARY 1981 i
o o O DEADWEIGHT; SEISMIC LOAl>S; LOCA PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE TRANS!ENTS; HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE INCLUDING SEISMIC EFFECTS; j g MULTIPLE SRV y ACTUATION ON OPERATOR ACTUATION OF SRV FOR REACTOR h f/3TO2/3 C00LDOWN
/ SECTION 3 a 0F VALVES J
- r. il VERTICAL REACTION LOADS SECTION 4
' ADS ACTUATION SECTION 3 I I l I t 4 600 1800 6 HRS DAYS TIME AFTER LOCA (sec) c N IDERATION IS GIVEN T0 REACTION LOADS on THE nowNcoute spou orwEn sinoctunE!L LOAD COMBINATION HISTORY STRUCTURE AFFECTED: DOWNCOMERS ACCIDENT CONDITION: SMALL LINE BREAK SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 3-NOVEMSER 1970
O O O DEADWEIGHT; SEISMIC LOADS; HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE INCLUDING SEISHIC EFFECTS O TO ALL SRV LINES ON SETPOINT 5 AIR BUBBLE 0SCILLATION PRESSURE AND DR AG > SECTION 3 t' R 8 - i es 25 a S b t l TIME i 1 FIG. 2-7 gg7g, CONSIDERATION IS GNEN TO REACTION LOADS LOAD COMBINATION HISTORY oN THE DOWNCOMER FROM OTHER STRUCTURES STRUCTURE AFFECTED: DOWNCOMERS ACCIDENT CONDITION: NONE l SHORE!!AM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT EESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS l REVISION 3 NOVEMBER 1978
O O O 4 DEADWEIGHT; SEISMIC LOADS; ! LOCA PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE TRANSIENTS: I e i POOL SWELL '
- AIR g COMPRESSION
- P i y > SECTION 4 O
HYDROSTATIC E LOAD DUE T0 g WATER SWELL , 3 i a i 0.6 I.2 TIME AFTER LOCA (sec) NOTE: CON 5' DER ATION IS GIVEN TO REACTION FIG. 2- 8
' " L WALLS ROM IT E*HEo s"TRUCTUREs LOAD COMBIN ATION HISTORY STRUCTURES AFFECTED:WETWELL WALLS ABOVE THEWATER LEV EL ACCIDENT CONDITION:L ARGE LINE BRE AK (DB A)
SHOREH AM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LO ADS REVISION 3. NOVEMBER 1978
O O O DEADWEIGHT; SEISMIC LOADS; LOCA PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE TRANSIENTS; HYDR 0 STATIC PRESSURE INCLUDING SEISMIC EFFECTS; DOWN-COMER VENT CLEARINC L CONDENSATION OSCILLATIONS 5 AND CHUGGING
+-
5 BUDBLE 5 v FORMATION E ~ 5 S t I I e 0 0.6 1.2 4 60 TIME AFTER LOCA (seC) NOTE I" *E
- FROM ATTACHED STRUCTURES FIG 2-9 STRUCTURE AFFECTED: SUBMERGED WETWELL ACCIDENT CONDITION: LARGE LINE BREAK (DBA)
SHOREH AM NUCLEAR POWER STATION- UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOC A LOADS REV!SION 4 -FEBRUAPV 1981
l
; DEADWEIGIT; SEISMIC LOADS; LOCA PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE TRANSIENTS; I
HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE INCLUDING SEISMIC EFFECTS; j l MULTIPLE SRV ACTUATION ON SETPOINT-UP TC , SECTION 3 1/3 TO 2/3 0F j y- VALVES
! y '
i 5 o f E ADS ACTUATION > SECTION 3 i 3 . i 1 CONDENSATION OSCILLATIONS AND CHUGGING 4 SECTION 4 i -1 a , i i , 4 T >l 20 T + 5 MINUTES . TIME AFTER LOCA (Sec) NOTE: )'
- i. T IS BRE A K ARE A DEPENDENT,BUTIS FIG.2-10 TYPIC ALLY IN THE ORDER OF 2 TO 5 MINUTES
' " " " "^ "
LOAD COMBIN ATION HISTORY . ' 00"THE WET 7ELLLS R M ATT H STRUCTURE AFFECTED: SUBMERGED WETWELL-STRUCTURES- A CCIDENT CONDITION:INTERMEDI ATE LINE BREAK i SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT l PL ANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV ANDLOCA LOADS REVISION I - APRIL 1977
DEADWEIGHT; SEISMIC LOADS; LOCA PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE TRANSIENTS; HYvR0 STATIC PRESSURE INCLUDING SEISMIC EFFECTS; \ 3 ACTUATION OF 1 SRV MAY OCCUR. SETPOINT
- SECTION 3 1/3 TO 2/3'0F 6 VALVES b <
R 8 2 s 3 f
, , . . i 4 1800 6 HRS TIMEAFTERLOCA(sec)
NOTE: CONSIDER ATION IS GIVEN TO RE ACTION LOADS ON THE WE TWELL WALLS FROM FIG. 2-11 ATT ACHED STRUCTURES. LOAD COMBINATION HISTORY STRUCTURE AFFECTED: SUBMERGED WETWELL' ACCIDENT CONDITION:SMALL LINE BRE AK SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSEMENT FOR SRV AND LO,C A LOADS REVISION I- A PRIL 1977 t
O O O DEADWEIGHT; SEISMIC LOADS; HYDR 0 STATIC PRESSURE INCLUDING SEISMIC EFFECTS f.CTUATION OF SRV ON PRESSURE SETPOINT 0 TO ALL VALVES 5 h AIR BUBBLE OSCILLATION PRESSURE AllD ORAG l E SECTION 3 5 a s i TIME NOTE: CONSIDER ATION IS GIVEN TO REACTION FIG. 2 -12 i LO ADS ON THE WETWELL WALLS FROM ATTACHED STRUCTURES. LOAD COMBINATION HISTORY ACCIDENT CONDITION: NONE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I , PL ANT DESIGN ASSESSMENTFOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS i l REVISION 3 .NOVEM8ER 1978 { t
O O O i DEADWEIGHT; SEISMIC LOADS; LOCA PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE TRANSIENTS; HYDR 0 STATIC PRi.f*URE INCLUDING SE S'<!C EFFECTS m 00WNCOMER ] VENT CLEARING JET LOAD i 5 , 1 C E POOL SWELL > SECTION 4 i 5 u DPAG LOADS E
; k FALL S BACK LOADS SUBMERGED STRUCTURE LOADS DUE TO CONDENSATION OSClLLATIONS AND CHUGGING s
1 a R 9 R a I 0.6 1.2 2.34 15 60 TIME AFTER LOCA (sec) NOTE: I* "I CONSIDER AT ON IS GIVEN TO RE A CTION LOAD COMBINATION IwlSTORY
""ES i r $E0NrU!Nc"E[osNu"c"TtIREs STRUCTURE AFFECTED: SM ALL SUBMERGED STRUCTURES, COLUMNS, AND PIPING .
ACCIDENT CONDITI ON: L A RGE LIN E BRE AK(DBA) SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I
; PL ANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRVAND LOCA LOADS 4
l REVISION 4 -FEBRUARY 1981 I
1 O O O l i l DEADWEIGHT; SEISMsC LOADS; LOCA PRESSURE AND TEtiPERATURE TRANSIENTS; g HYDR 0 STATIC PRESSURE INCLUDING SEIStilC EFFECTS i 4 4 SUBMERGto STRUCTURE LO ADS DUE TO CONDENS ATION OSCILL ATIONS AND CHUGGING > SECTION 4 1 5 m ' E E o MULTIPLE SRV j g ACTUATION ON , g SETPOINT UP TO g 1/3 TO 2/3 0F a VALVES
> SECTION 3 1
ADS ACTUATION a i , 4 T>120 T + 5 min. TIME AFTER LOCA (sec) NOTES:
- 1. T IS BREF.K ARE A,0EPENDENT, FIG. 2 - 14
' ' L '" " * "
$'2 TOIdNUTE LOAD COMBINATION HISTORY
- 2. CONSIDERATION IS GIVEN TO REACTION STRUCTURES AFFECTED:SMALL SUBMERGED t.0aoS cN SUBMERGED STRUCTURES FROM STRUCTURES. COLUMNS. AND PIPING OTHER ATTACHED STRUCTURES. ACCIDENT CONDITION'. INTERMEDIATE LINE BREAK SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4 - FEBRUARY 1961 s
,)-
DEADWEIGHT; SEISMIC LOADS; LOCA PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE TRANSIENTS; HYOR0 STATIC PRESSURE - INCLUDING SE!SMIC EFFECTS 7 4 4 5 1 , 0 TO ALL VALVES ON PRESSURE SETPOINT AIR BUBBLE OSCILLATION FRESSURE AND ORAC
- E SECTION 3 b
\ - t i i TIME AFTER LOCA NOTE: FIG. 2-15 CONSIDERATION IS GIVEN TO REACTION LOADS
"" LOAD COMBINATION HISTORY STRUCTURES AFFECTED:SMALL SUBMERGED S"TYc*n"Eo sin $$$nYs"' 8 STRUCTURES, COLUMNS AND PIPING ACCIDENT CONDITION' SMALL LINE BREAK SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS ,
REVISION 3-NOVEW8ER 1978
. O O O
- DEADWEIGHT; SEISMIC LOADS HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE INCLUDING SEISMIC EFFECTS !
E 4 0 TO ALL VALVES ON PRESSURE SETPOINT 5
- { AIR BUBBLE 0$Clll Ail 0N PRESSURE AND DRAC E
8 SECTION 3 E E
- 3 a
i i J TIME i NOTE: FIG 2-16 8
$" sus'E*d'00 $8dITUdS!R H LOAD COMBINATION HISTORY
- ATTA C H E D STR UCTU R ES .
STRUCTURE AFFECTED:SMALL SUBMERGED STRUCTURES, COLUMNS, AND PIPING ACCIDENT CONDITION'. NONE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS I REVISION 3-NOVEWSER 1978
3 7 9 1
) R A S E B D S A
O D M S ( O l E L i RH K A O N UGA C . TU E I O 3 COR TL N U R B NNID O I S
'. d E r N UA a
v E c nI N V R L A L R O S L REEI T GAR Y R A TO M B R SF O SWA RT T S: OL EN I DL: WE 4 HE EN OM N NC T BO PS O I RS I T OEDT A SE T FNI FA D ES I C E A A LA S N C N LO UN ldEROC NG I N' UPOT MS
' 7OCC T EFNAE D H
1 2DU VD ET
.AR OIC RN OA
)
c CI OT BC HL F L S A A SP 3 e 1 2 s ( A K C C O S AS L BD O T N E I S 4 LO LL A F A R E T F A R P i 2 E M T 1 I E T R U S T S D A D A R A O E O L P L M C E G 1 1 T A t R S D U I N E A S E R
; U T S H S G E T I R CS E P AD i
PA D A MO A C ]L E O D L e 6 0 5.$ b oE O
O O O i l. 4 9 l Of LDWEIGHT; SEISMIC LOADS LOCA PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE TRANSIENTS I i 5 P 5 8 o a 8 _a i TIME AFTER LOCA FIG. 2-18 LOAD COMBIN ATION HISTORY STRUCTURES AFFECTED:SMALL STRUCTURES ABOVE BREAKTHROUGH ACCIDENTCONDITION:LARGE LINE BREAK (DBA) SHOREHAM NUCLE AR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 1- APRIL 1977
J
)
L
'D A
e (R R ) T A M F O h E C A F R U ) S T R E A E L M v T D A D F O W M I P L ( O O T O "O ( P -
'3 "O N . -
"9- O L '8 I
S E .
'9 S L 2 E E 2 R _
P L P . _ E U _ S d
- pzOu >m4OZoOwm -,ooo" r
o o o " " _- o n o " o " S O L R 7 . A ER 6 E S ZAS I TS pzoo>m y_.mg G IL SU o " o o " o o D W B O R
; L L ADT B L TN .
7 E SA R B 1 O ; 4 T C aaa3dgz* smwown.. A E o v o o o
- o. !
o o mo o o o o " oo
- o. '1 -
R T>oe 1 J. ( t ' , 1
'N
4 llOS IN3S38d38 SIN 3W373 0170S I
- ,892 ;
l
}Cg* Cf Cf $
d x - N s
\
s
\
l s
\
s
/ \
s
\
s h
/ '
x . _(
/e x s
< / ;'
< x s
< / N: < N x; F< / / ' K N / ' H< / x
-< N 'a
a i rh FIG. 2-19 y FLUID-STRUCTURE INTERACTION MODEL SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PL ANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4 - FEBRUARY 1981
ASYMMETRIC PRESSURE O DISTRIBUTION N l<j o ha f 41.7'R 4 PEDESTAL PRIMARY CONTAINMENT CIRCUMFERENTI AL DISTRIBUTION O SUPPORT PRIM ARY d PEDESTAL CONTAINM E NT
%:l.
SUPPRESSION POOL
=
/
d \ o u o y j } W_ - t LONGITUDINAL DISTRIBUTION FIG. 2-20 ASYMMETRIC PRESSURE DISTRIBUT!ON fid - 3 ADJACENT VALVE SIMULTANEOUS NSCHARGE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PL ANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4 - FEBRUARY 1981
f SECTION 3
3.1 INTRODUCTION
The pressure oscillation in the BWR suppression pool resulting from safety / relief valve (SRV) blowdown transients' is a design consideration. A phenomenological representation ot' an SRV piping system discharging steam into the suppression pool of a-BWR plant is shown on Fig. 3-1. The opening of the SRV results in the discharge of the water colunn from the SRV line, followed by the discharge of air, and then steam. Because of the initial inertia of the water column in the line, the air volume will be compressed, and the backpressure will increase until the water column is expelled into the suppression pool. Upon entering the pool, the discharged air volume immediately forms air bubbles. Formation of the air bubbles provides a mechanism for the exchange of pressure energy to kinetic energy of the surrounding water medium, causing a pressure oscillation in the pool. The oscillating bubbles, in turn, impose periodic forces on the pool boundary and submerged structures by transmission of pressure and velocity fields through the pool. Discharge devices are provided at the submerged ends of the discharge lines for load mitigation. A ramshead device was originally selected for the Shoreham plant. However, various test results have shown that the quencher device has better. j O performance than the ramshead: namely, the quencher device produces smaller pressure loads on the pool boundary submerged structures; and the quencher device provides a smooth and i steam condensation at high pool water temperature ana low steam I mass flux. Therefore a quencher device was selected and installed in the Shoreham plant to replace the original ramshead device. l The quencher device installed in the Shoreham plant is the T-quencher designed for Mark II plants by KWU as described in Reference 15. This particular quencher device was selected because the tests conducted by KWU at Karlstein(15 3 and operating plants like KKB provide a well-defined data base for Improved load definition for the Shoreham plant. In Section 3.2, the pool boundary load definition is described for both the design basis rtmshead and the evaluation basis T-quencher load specification. Section 3.2.1 describes the design basis load definition derived from the ramshead methodology. l Section 3.2.2 describes the evaluation basis load definition i derived trom the T quencher methodology. Representative pressure amplitudes and pool boundary pressure time histories are also given. O U 3-1 Revision 4- February 1981 l i l f , . ~ . - , . _ _ _ ,_
Descriptions of the submerged structure loads due to SRV discharge, including the quencher device design loads, are presented in Section 3.3 3.2 POOL BOUNDARY LOADS The formation of oscillating air bubbles in the suppression pool after the actuation of safety / relief valves produces transient loads on the wetted pool boundary. The characteristics of the transient pool boundary loads depend largely on the SRV discharge device and the plant parameters. This section presents the Load definition for both the design basis ramshead load specification and the evaluation basis T-quencher load specification. 3.2.1 Design Basis Load Definition In October 1978 the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed the review of the Mark II lead plants (Shoreham, Zimmer, and LaSalle) design basis LOCA and SRV loads and issued the lead evaluation report NUREG-0487( * ). The report concluded that the use of the ramshead device is unacceptable for Marx II plants. However, in order to meet the lead plants
- licensing schedule, a conservative load definition was required to be established in advance of the T quencher qualification programs.
On this basis the NRC determined that the ramshead load specification, as prescribed by the analytical models and calculational procedures in DFFR Rev. 2(*) was generally acceptable as a load specification for Mark II T quencher air discharge loads. To comply with the NRC load evaluation conclusion and to ensure sare operation of the plant, the ramshead load specification in DFFR Rev. 2 was selected as the Shoreham design Dasis SRV load deiinition. Two exceptions were taken with excessively conservative requirements stated in NUREG-0487. The first relates to the SRV load actuation case reterred to as Load Case 5 and the second relates to the prescribed bubble oscillation frequency range. Both of these issues are discussed in detail in Appendix G. It is shown there that the Shoreham design basis ramshea d load derinition, with the noted exceptions f rom NUREG-04 87, still results in loads which are conservative with respect to those resulting from the actual T quencher device.
~
3-2 Revision 4- February 1981 G
3.2.1.1 Ramshead Load Specification
/G The ramshead load specification for Shoreham pool boundary load t] is in complete agreement with the analytical models and the calculational procedures prescribed in Sections 3.2.2 through 3.2.4 of DFFR Rev. 2(3).
The major elements of the load specification for computing the pool boundary load due to a single SRV discharge are as follows. Tne pressure rise in the SRV line air space and the resultant dynamics of the water leg in the SRV line following valve actuation are computed using the line transient model. When the line clears of water, a bubble formation model is used to compute the" initial conditions of the air bubble formed by the complete expulsion of air from the line. A bubble dynamics model is then used to calculate the subsequent oscillatory bunble pressure history. Loads on the pool boundary caused by the bubble transient are computed using method of images and potential flow theory. Finally, the perturbations from a base case boundary load, as calculated by the above methodology, are presented as " influence coefficients" for a given change in each input parameter. These intluence coefficients are used to obtain the pool boundary loads with the appropriate plant parameters. In accordance with DFFR Rev. 2(3), the following load cases
/~'N constitute the complete basis for the plant design assessment:
. C Case 1 - All SRV discharge in sequential actuation l ! Case 2 - ADS SRV discharge l Case 3 - Asymetric SRV discharge Case 4 - Single SRV discharge l ! A brief discussion of these design basis load cases is provided as follows: Load case 1: All SRV discharge in sequential actuation. The sequential actuation of all valve.s is discussed in paragraph A, Section 3.2.4.1.2 of Ref erence 3. This is a mechanistic discharge case and it considers the discharge of the SRVs at their setpoints for a linear pressure rise in the reactor pressure vessel (RPV). The plant-specific line characteristics, including the line length and friction losces, are incorporated l for each discharge line. l Load Case 2: ADS SRV discharge The ADS SRV discharge case is described in Section 3.2.4.1.2 of l Reference 3. The automatic depressurization system consists of seven valves which are symmetrically located and actuate
- simultaneously at the same system pressure. A conservative upper V
3-3 Revision 4- February 1981
bound for the system pressure was selected. The specific discharge line characteristics were considered in the load evaluation. Load Case 3: Asymmetric SRV discharge The asymmetric loading cise is conservatively constructed by considering the simultanccra blowdown of three adjacent valves having identical setpoints but dif ferent line characteristics. To yield a bounding condition for this asymmetric load case, all bubbles are assumed to enter the pool simultaneously. Load Case 4: Single SRV discharge The SRV which produces the largest pool poundary pressure is used to establish the single SRV discharge load case. To address the measured load increase under consecutive valve actuation second pop conditions which occur when a single valve is actuated two or more times in rapid succession, Ref erence 1 defined the load multiplier factors of 1.6 on predicted peak negative loads and 1.4 on predicted peak positive loads to be applied on the single valve actuation conditions. I
! DFFR Rev. 2 did not establish a load case for the consecutive ! valve actuacions. For the Shoreham plant, the single valve consecutive actuation load case, with appropriate multipliers, is l bounded by the other design basis load cases.
Prior to the establishment of the four design Dasis load cases, two additional load cases had been investigated: Case 5 - All SRV discharge, Dubbles enter the pool simultaneously and oscilate in phase Case 6 - Three adjacent SRV discharge, bubbles enter the pool simultaneously and oscililate in phace It has been demonstrated in Reference 3 that these two load cases are not credible for Mark II plants. The " simultaneous and in ! phase" Case 5 stated above is consistent with Section III.C.2.b.1.1 of Ref erence 1 which has been referred to as " Load Case 5" in previously published public documents. A detailed discussion on the Justification of excluding Load Case 5 from design assessment is provided in Appendix G. Since both Cases 5 and 6 were originally utilized in the evaluation of the Shoreham primary containment structures, the definitions are retained here to show added evidence of design conservatism in the containment structures. 3-4 Revision 4- February 1981
The load evaluation report ( 1 ) concluded that the use of the ramshead device is unacceptable because thermal instability
~
occurs at a certain threshold temperature during the steam , s quenching process. In contrast, the quencher maintains stable steam condensation at much higher pool temperatures. A detailed discussion of the temperature limit for stable SRV discharoe through the T quencher device is provided in Appendix I. 3.2.1.2 Ramshead Load Summary For the suppression pool configuration with the SRV discharge device arrangement as shown on Fig. 1-11, the pressure profile and the pressure time-history on the pool boundaries (the reactor pedestal wall, the primary containment wall, and the basemat) have been calculated for those six SRV load cases described in Section 3.2.1.1. All SRV ramshead? are assumed to be located 8 feet from the top of the basemat cover slab. The submerged portion of the suppression pool is divided into 27 zones for analytical purpose. Tne specific pool geometry and definition of the 27 zones are shown on Fig. 3-2. For each load case, the resulting forcing functs.ons for each zone are placed in a computer file and accessed from the file for structural analysis. It should be noted that the theoretical metnodology used results in pool boundary pressures having instantaneous rises from zero to near peak amplitudes. Based on observed test results, a pressure rise time on the order of 20 to 50 m-sec is considered to be more realistic but has not been incorporated in the calculated pressure histories. The effect of this rise time on (s) structural response is discussed in Section 5.1.2.7. Case 1: All SRV discharge in sequential actuation The specific locations of the discharge devices (ramsheads) are presented on Fig. 3-3. Table 3-1 summarizes the maximum and minimum pressures in each of the 27 zones. Figure 3-4 illustrates a typical time history of the circumferential average pressure. This specific forcing function is the one that applies
- to Zone 14. The effect of including the individual discharge l line characteristics and sequential SRV discharge is that the
! oscillating bubble pairs from one discharge line to the next are i not exactly in phase. l ADS SRV discharge , Case 2: I l The automatic depressurization system consists of seven valves which are symmetrically located as shown on Fig. 3-5. Tne maximum and minimum pressures in each zone are summarized in Table 3-2. A typical circumferential average forcing function for the ADS actuation loading is presented on Fig. 3-6, for the forcing function applied to Zone 14. l f% k_ 3-5 Revision 4- February 1981
Case 3: Asymmetric SRV discharge The location of the ramsheads for the three lines used in this evaluation is shown on Fig. 3-7. The maximum and minimum pressures for each zone are sumnarized in Table 3-3. A typical circumferential average forcing function for the asymmetric loading is presented on Fig. 3-8, for the forcing function applied to Zone 14. Case 4: Single SRV discharge The single SRV discharge loading case has been analyzed to account for the actuation of an SRV which produces the largest pool boundary pressure. The location of the line used in this evaluation is shown on Fig. 3-9. The maximma and minimum pressures for each zone are summarized in Table 3-4. A typical circumferential average forcing function for the single SRV actuation load case is presented on Fig. 3-10 for the torcing tunction applied to Zone 14. Cases 5 and 6 (Non-design Basis) SRV discharge load cases 5 and b assume that the bubbles enter the pool sim'11taneously and oscillate in phase and are used for containment structural assessment only. A normalized pressure time history curve on the pool boundaries is presented on Fig. 3-
- 11. For the load case with all SRV's discharging simultaneously and in phase, this pressure profile is uniformly distributed along the circumferential direction. For the load case with three adjacent SRVs discharging simultaneously and in phase, the pressure distribution shown on Fig. 3-11 varies along the circun.ferential direction as shown on Fig. 3-12. For both load cases 5 and 6 a frequency range of 5 to 10 Hz was investigated.
3.2.2. Evaluation Basis Load Definition See Proprietary Supplement of this report. 3-6 Revision 4- February 1981 O
TABLE 3-1
SUMMARY
OF MAXIMIM AND MINIMUM AVERAGE WALL PRESSURES FOR SEQUENTIAL SRV DISCHARGE (Sequential Discharge of All SRVs Based on Ramshead Methodology) Maximum Pressure (psid) Minimum Pressure (psid) Zonett) Local t a ) Average (3) Local (2) Average (3) 1 1.72 0.78 -0.37 -0.21 l 2 5.06 2.31 -1.07 -0.62 3 8.12 2.73 -1.65 -0.98 4 10.73 4.98 -2.10 -1.29 t 5 12.78 6.01 -2.43 -1.53 ! 6 14.21 6.80 -2.67 -1.71 l 7 15.14 7.37 -2.82 -1.84 8 15.64 7.72 -2.91 -1.91 9 15.88 7.90 -2.96 -1.96 10 16.32 8.06 -3.01 -1.99 11 18.43 8.71 -3.31 -2.12 12 20S17 9.28 -3.69 -2.22 13 20.45 9.42 -3.69 -2.24 14 20.25 9.42 -3.56 -2.23 15 20.45 9.53 -3.55 -2.24 16 21.02 9.73 -3.65 -2.26 0, 17 18 21.57 21.86 9.92 10.01
-3.76
-3.81
-2.29
-2.30 19 20.99 17.02 -3.84 -2.30 20 22.43 10.10 -4.09 -2.31 21 25.73 10.31 -4.67 -2.34 22 30.33 10.51 -5.49 -2.39 23 31.16 10.14 -5.63 -2.42 24 27.23 8.59 -5.24 -2.26 25 26.56 6.60 -5.40 -1.93 l 26 20.36 4.00 -5.01 -1.37 l 27 7.32 1.33 -2.27 -0.50 l
l l l (1) See Fig. 3-2 for definition of zones. (a) Maximum or minimum in both space and time. (3) Maximum or minimum in time of circumferential average. l 1 l l 1 of 1 Revision 4 - February 1981
TABLE 3-2
SUMMARY
OF MAXIMIN AND MINIMUM WALL PRESSURBS FOR AUTOMATIC DEPRESSURIZATION SYSTf:.M ACTUATION (Simultalteous Actuation of Seven SRVs Based on Ramshead Metnodology) Maximum Pressure (psid) Minimum Pressure (psid) ZoneC*) Local (2) Average (33 Localta) Average (3) 1 1.46 0.66 -0.31 -0.22 2 4.26 1.94 -0.93 -0.65 3 6.78 3.14 -1.51 -1.05 4 8.85 4.22 -2.02 -1.41 5 10.36 5.11 -2.43 -1.70 6 11.56 5.81 -2.74 -1.94 7 12.51 6.31 -2.95 -2.10 8 13.10 6.63 -3.07 -2.21 9 13.40 6.79 -3.13 -2.27 10 13.68 6.93 -3.22 -2.31 11 15.56 7.53 -3.64 -2.51 12 17.41 8 04
. -4.00 -2.68 13 17.49 8.15 -4.01 -2.70 14 17.00 8.13 -3.89 -2.67 15 17.14 8.22 -3.88 -2.68 16 17.78 8.41 -3.98 -2.72
(__ s 17 18 18.39 18.68 8.57 8.65
-4.08
-4.13
-2.76
-2.78 19 18.86 8.66 -4.16 -2.78 20 20.16 8.75 -4.37 -2.81 21 23.18 8.97 -4.87 -2.87 22 27.38 9.20 -5.57 -2.92 23 29.67 8.76 -5.63 -2.76 24 29.15 7.12 -5.19 -2.23 25 23.u3 5.15 -5.07 -1.58 26 18.32 3.08 -4.65 -0.93 27 7.02 1.06 -2.20 -0.40 (1) See Fig. 3-2 for definition of zones.
(2) Maximum or minimum in both space and time. (3) Maximum or minimum in time of circumferential average. l 1 of 1 Revision 4 - February 1981
. ~ . - . , _ . _ _ .
TABLE 3-3 U S_UMMARY OF MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM WALL PRESSURES FOR ASYMMETRIC SRV DISCHARGE (Simultaneous Discharge of Three Adjacent SRVs Based on Ramshead Methodology) Maximum Pressure (psid) Minimum Pressure (psid) Zoneta) Loca182) Averace(3) Localta) Average (3) 1 2.11 0.71 -0.48 -0.14 2 6.24 2.11 -1.41 -0.42 3 10.07 3.42 -2.29 -0.68 4 13.43 4.59 -3.05 -0.91 5 15.15 5.56 -3.08 -1.10 6 18.16 6.32 -4.14 -1.25 7 19.51 6.86 -4.45 -1.36 8 20.31 7.21 -4.63 -1.43 9 20.68 7.38 -4.71 -1.46 10 21.19 7.54 -4.84 -1.49 11 23.61 8.18 -5.46 -1.62 12 25.65 8.73 -5.99 -1.73 13 26.02 8.85 -6.02 -1.74 14 25.81 8.82 -5.88 -1.72 15 26.06 8.91 -5.88 -1.73 16 26.74 9.10 -6.01 -1.75 17 27.37 9.27 -6.15 -1.78 Os 18 27.69 9.36 -6.22 -1.79 19 27.82 9.37 -6.26 -1.80 20 28.63 9.45 -6.50 -1.81 21 31.44 9.65 -7.04 -1.84 22 35.76 9.80 -7.77 -1.86 23 36.07 9.25 -7.70 -1.74 24 32.08 7.58 -7.02 -1.49 25 26.73 5.40 -6.35 1.21 26 20.50 3.20 -5.42 1.86 27 7.07 1.06 -2.38 ' .34 .l 1 i (1) See Fig. 3-2 for definition of zones. ' (a) Maximum or minimum in both space and time. l (3) Maximum or minimum in time of circumferential average. l 1 1 I
\
() l 1 of 1 Revision 4 - February 1981
TABLE 3-4
^
S M.ARY OF MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM WALL s PRESSURES FOR SINGLE VALVE DISCHARGE (Based on Ramshead Methodology) Maximum Pressure (psid) Minimum Pressure (psid) Zone (n) Local (2? Average (3) Local (2) Average (3) 1 1.19 0.31 -0.25 -0.05 2 3.51 0.92 -0.74 -0.16 3 5.66 1.49 -1.16 -0.25 4 7.54 2.00 -1.51 -0.34 5 9.02 2.42 -1.79 -0.41 b 10.05 2.76 -2.00 -0.47 7 10.67 2.99 -2.12 -0.51 8 10.98 3.15 -2.19 -0.54 9 11.11 3.22 -2.21 -0.55 10 11.52 3.29 -2.29 -0.56 11 13.74 3.58 -2.73 -0.61 12 15.b5 3.83 -3.10 -0.65 13 15.70 3.88 -3.10 -0.66 14 15.14 3.87 -2.96 -0.65 15 15.26 3.91 -2.94 -0.65 16 15.93 4.00 -3.05 -0.66 17 16.56 4.08 -3.15 -0.67 s 18 16.86 4.12 -3.20 -0.68 19 17.07 4.12 -3.24 -0.68 20 18.57 4.16 -3.52 -0.69 21 22.01 4.25 -4.15 -0.70 22 26.86 4.30 -5.04 -0.70 23 28.08 4.04 -5.28 -0.66 24 23.71 3.31 -5.31 -0.57 25 25.27 2.44 -5.20 -0.48 26 19.53 1.61 -4.80 -0.36 27 7.38 0.57 -2.34 -0.14 (a) See Fig. 3-2 for definition of zones. (a> Maximum or minimum in both space and time. (3) Maximum or minimum in time of circumferential average. l l l 1 of 1 Revision 4 - February 1981 l 1 l 1
__. .~_ _ _ .._._ _ _ ____ _._. _ . ____ . . _ _ . , _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ - . - j i TABLE 3-5 ll LOADS ON OUENCHER BODY .' (Based on KWU Report - Reference 8) ! t i i i 4 ; 4 1 P i i e i i ! l t i PROPRIETARY - See Proprietary Supplement ! l to this Report , i I 4 f i t t r i t i 7 f i i r r i i 1 of 1 Revision 4 - February 1981 1
, v v---,w wwe--w e -wwvn,-eer--w-,,, e-=w.--, -n.,mewe- ---- - - - - - ~ ~ -
- i 4
I . i l i t ; TABLE 3-6 ' c I IDADS ON OUENCHER ARM ! l (Based on KWU Report - Reference 8) ! l ? l. 1 i t i ( l i l l r I i l L l l I i t
- t i :
I f PROPRIETARY - See Proprietary Supplement f to this Repor t r I. t 4 I i ! i i I f F i i i l f l l f t , I 1 i I 4 b ! i i l 1 b e i l l l 1 of 1 Revision 34 --February 1981 , i i 1 I
- - . . . - . . - _ . ~ . . .,-.-,._ -,--- -..-------,.- -.- - -- - --- ,. ...- - -, ,,-~-- -, - ,-..--- . . . - , . . . - , , - , '
SAFETY / ........ ....:......:3 , REL EF ::
....=.!:i:::i$ ,
MOVING STE AM lid: ' g MOVING AIR
!\ /
MAIN STEAM SYSTEM o STATION ARY AIR
# h SHOCK WAVE WATER
~ -- ~ ~~ I f
/
='
'=---
I f 555 ili , O ,
?
)
/
/
g WATER SURFACE j SUPPRESSION POOL
- i s tilit t iti i s iittis ti ti titt:ri h
INITIAL RESPONSE T. # m _/ %
~
fy j n _ PRESSURE g LOADS
- OSCILL ATING -
. AIR BUBBLE P, l LATER RESPONSE FIG. 3 - 1 PHENOMENON OF SAFETY / RELIEF VALVE BLOWDOWN INTO SUPPRESSION POOL SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STA"lON - UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR 'RV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4 -FEBRUARY 1981
SUPPORT PRIMARY I k PEDESTAL CONTAINM ENT C - vr~.t. 27'-c _ _2
~
2 (TYP) 4 I v20NE NUMBER +--- SRV DISCH ARGE LINE 18' I i I E L.17 '- O" 8 BASEMAT COVER S L AB EL. 9'-O" BASEMAT [ COVER SLAB
. '[
, .. h ,
': 13.OO'H
- 15.94* =
c 18.89' -
= 21.83' p 24.78'
- 27.70'
= 27.72' :j
= 30.67' :
, 3 3.61'- -- r-
= 36.56 :
- 39.50' PEDESTAL RADIUS - 13.0 FT.
CONTAINMENT RADIUS -39 5 FT, NOTE POOL DEPTH-18 FT. NOT TO SCALE SUBMERGENCE DEPTH-10 FT. FIG. 3-2 CROSS-SECTION OF SUPPRESSION POOL AND DEFINITION OF SUPPRESSION CHAMBER WALLS' LOADING ZONE FOR RAMSHEAD LOAD DEFINITION (s
) SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION - UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOAD 3 REVISION 4 - FEGRUARY 1981
FOl3F-1350 , Fol 3 H - 160.7
- 7 .- FOl 3 L- 212.2
- n
% p Fol3C - 237.9' F013 J-10 9.3' 8 v O = e O e O, ,
g O
} f d U
[E
- O O O
\
04 O A o ~ J PEDESTAL a O b-O O- 1~ . # \'\
\ FOl3 A-263.6 0 O
O '' O 'Y FOl 3 G- 8 3.6 a
# O O
F Ol 3 K- 57. 9a O, FOl3 D - 3 4 0.7 ' FOl 3 E -6.4' O - 10
- 27.7 ' -
" h OaO M Oa O 8' \ , 34.2' -
o x . NOTE
^'
NOT TO SCALE. FIG. 3-3 ORIENTATION OF SRV LINE DISCHARGE DEVICES (RAMSHEADS) FOR SEQUENTIAL SRV DISCHARGE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I ! PLANT DESIGN ASSESSistENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS l 1 REVISION 4 -FEBRUARY 1981 i I
O 12 1 ye - 2 I 6 12 E c aYs V 8
)
s E l l m 0 -
]
O e
< ( , e s
-4 I I I I O O.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 TIME. AFTER FIRST BUBBLE CLEARED (S C) 1 F I G. 3 - 4 TYPICAL ALL VALVE SEQUENTI AL SRV DISCH ARGE FORCING FUNCTION FOR RAMSHEAD DEVICE -ZONE 14 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS R EVISION 4 - FEBRUARY 1981
Ch* FOl3 L - 212. 28 FOl3H-160 70 8 T O
, O i FOl 3 J - 109. 3 0.
ds ' O FOl3 A-263 6' O O d g O 90^ - - - - - - 270* W
' '38-3'5 FOl 3 K-57. 9* O '
,O O =
O w 0\ , O FOl3E-6' 8 O' NOTE NOT TO SC ALE FIG. 3-5 ORIENTATION OF SRV DISCH ARGE LINE DEVICES (RAMSHEADS) FOR AUTOMATIC DEPRESSURl2ATION O SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS R EVISION 4 - FEBRUARY 1981
a 1 -e.- O O O 4 12 y8 - n \ a ; i e _E Yn }
! o @
O - 4 I I I I I l 0 0.13 0.25 0.38 0.50 063 0.75 08,3 TIME AFTER FIRST BUBBLE CLEARED (SEC) t FIG. 3- 6 , TYPICAL AUTOMATIC DEPRESSURIZATION SYSTEM ACTUATION FORCING FUNCTION FOR RAMSHEAD DEVICE- ZONE 14 , SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1
- PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4- FEBRUARY 1981
a 1800 1607' i 135o g l CONTAINMENT y
\
O k( D CENT SRV) F013Fk PEDESTAL 109.3' Q Q Up gb F013 '?/ \' (ADJACENT SRV) s ,A 90 270' I
\
3' I o' NOTE NOT TO SCALE FIG. 3-7 ORIENTATION OF SRV LINE DISCHARGE DEVICES < (RAMSHEADS) FOR ASYMMETRIC SRV DISCHARGE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION - UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4 - FEt3RUARY 1981
4 O O O 12.00 = 1 w 2 l O 8.00 - O E5 b W F
$ 4.00 -
8 W k O.OO - lg w k I I I I i e i 4,00 O.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 TIME AFTER FIRST BUBBLE CLEARED (SEC) l FIG. 3- 8 TYPICAL ASYMMETRIC SRV DISCHARGE FORCING FUNCTION FOR RAMSHEAD DEVICE -ZONE 14 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION -UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENTFOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4 - FEBRUARY 1981
O ~ b, 18 0
- T
,f-- CO NTAIN M ENT i
FOl 3 F- 135' O O I N
-- 3 4 2' I %. , N PEDESTAL s
I O* , NOTC NOT TO SCALE FIG. 3-9 ORIENTATION OF SRV LINE DISCHARGE DEVICE (RAMSHEAD) FOR SINGLE VALVE DISCHARGE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4 - FEBRUARY 1981
_ 1 8 9 1 Y S R D A G4 U O 8 0 N1 I CE RN1 A A O L C R B E F OO TO FZI 4
- NL N EEUD 0 GC - N E 1
RI N A V I A V OV E 7 H EI TR R C D A S t 0 TR ISDS O D AE R F E T V H W EN S O RS MP M S 6 ARS E RAE i 0 ES L RLS G O CA NI F U N N
)
S G C N MS I E 0 S L O AE A TH D 1 I ( -
- 5 3 CI C ET 0D RN E . PN OA R
A GI F TFSP YUHL E L C E e 4. L
- 0B O B B
U T S I R F 3 i 0R E T F A E M I 2 T . e _ 0 1 i 0 t '
- - - 0 0 _
0 4 3 2 i o j Z $8 9E UaOg NeY< _O
! ^ iil ! ;'
ll1llil!
g g SUPPORT
, PEDESTAL y ,- PRIMARY
,e. CONTAINMENT P' .
l . SUPPRESSION POOL F p. b 8 *
. 26 PSI 1.0 -
13 PSI : o : ll PSI _ o' ** .,- *
'. f PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION O.8 --
0.6 -- E - 8
$ O.4 -
E n a e n J 0.2 E o - Z O -
- 0. 2 -
~
i l ! I I
- 0. 4 O O.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 TIME (SEC) i l FIG. 3 - 11 l
NORMALIZED PRESSURE TIME HISTORY FOR ALL SRV's DISCHARGING SIMULTANEOUSLY AND
- (T IN PHASE BASED ON RAMSHEAD DEVICE i V SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 l PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4 -FEBRUARY 198!
O O O 10 -
~
m.
@ 08 -
j E 06 - O - N 3 04 -
<r
~
O O.2 - O I I I I I I I I ~1 1
-11 0 -90 50 -30 -10 0 0 10 30 50 70 90 11 0
- CIRCUMFERENTI AL COORDINATE (DFG) s FIG. 3- 12 NORMALIZED PRESSURE BOUNDARY LOAD DISTRIBUTION AROUND THE CIRCUMFERENTI AL DIRECTION ON PRIMARY CONTAINMENT FOR THREE ADJACENT SRV'S DISCHARGING SIMULTANEOUSLY AND IN PHASE BASED ON RAMSHEAD DEVICE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981 2
~---o -- a- - n A-l O O O 4
4 l THIS FIGURE CONTAINS PROPRIETARY lNFORMATION i I i .i FIG. 3-13 KWU T-QUENCHER ,! SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4 - FEBRUARY 1981 i
~ ~ ~ ~
i THIS FIGURE CONTAINS PROPRIETARY INFORMATION I FIG. 3-14 KKB PRESSURE TRACE NO.35 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PL ANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS i REVISION 4 - FEBRUARY 1981
O O O 4 i i 1 i i THIS FIGURE CONTAINS PROPRIETARY INFORM ATION l l FIG. 3-15 l KKB PRESSURE TRACE NO.76 l SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4 - FEB 1ARY 1981
O O O i i i THIS FIGURE CONTAINS PROPRIETARY INFORMATION l l I i FIG. 3-16 KKB PRESSURE TRACE NO. 82 SHOREHAM NUCLE AR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PL ANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS R EVISION 4 - FEBRUARY 1981 i
1
; O O O 1
1 t a i THIS FIGURE CONTAINS PROPRIETARY INFORM ATION 1 l l i FIG. 3-17 NORMALIZED PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION ' ON SUPPRESSION POOL BOUNDARIES-SYMMETRIC AND ADS CASES SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 r PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS. REVISION 4 - FEBRUARY 1981 I
4 O 4 d F i O THIS FIGURE CONTAINS PROPRIETARY INFORM ATION i 4 4 i l k l FIG. 3- 18 NORMALIZED VERTICAL PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION FOR ALL CASES AND FOR SUBMERGED STRUCTURES
% SHOREHAM NUCLE AR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 i
PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4 - FEBRUARY 198I
~
_e,, v- r =e,-i w-- er -ew----. .er- ,.,-,,.--w -.--* - - - - . - - - - .. ,w-.- -- - - --.----~r--r
sa- - m 4 O 1 Q THIS FIGURE CONTAINS PROPRIETARY INFORMATION l l l l l FIG. 3-19 NORMALIZED PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION ON SUPPRESSION POOL BOUNDARIES-ASYMMETRIC CASE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4- FEBRUARY 1981
O
%J O THIS FIGURE CONTAINS PROPRIETARY INFORMATION FIG. 3-20 ,
NORMAllZED PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION ON SUPPRESSION POOL BOUNDARIES-O SINGLE SRV DISCHARGE CASE SHOREH AM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1
< PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981
. . _ _ - - - . ~ . . . , _ . . . _ _ . _ . . - . ~ , . - . - - _ . - - . . _
( 5 O J THIS FIGURE CONTAINS PROPRIETARY INFORMATION i l r FIG. 3-21 LOADS ON QUENCHER WITHOUT PRESSURE LOADS O SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PL ANT DZSIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4- FEBRUARY 1981
O I THIS FIGURE NTAINS PROPRIETARY INFORMATION O FIG. 3-22 LOADS ON QUENCHER ARMS WITHOUT PRESSURE LOADS O SHOREHAM NUCLE AR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4- FEBRUARY 1981 _..____..u
SECTION 4 m LOCA LOADS (v) 4.0 GENERAL A general cescription of the loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) is given in Section 2.1.2. The sequence of even ts . described in Section 2.1.2 causes direct dynamic loading of the structures and components comprising the vapor suppression portion of the Marx II (MK-II) containment system (suppression chamber boundaries, downcomer vents, and other piping and structures within the suppression chamber). The transient nature of these forces is generally termed the dynamic f orcing runction for tne loaoing conoition in question. The bases for specifying forcing runctions for given loading conditions are presented in Section 4.1. Plant-unique input and calculations of plant-unique loads tor Shoreham are presented in Section 4.2. Specifications or other LOCA related loads including tne pressure and temperature loads on the containment pressure boundary; downward and upward dirierential pressure loads on the drywell floor resulting from maximum vent flow and condensation of steam in the drywell; pressurization of the annulus formed ny the reactor vessel and tne biological shield wall; and seismic loads due to the assumed design nasis earthquake concurrent with the design nasis accident (DBA) are presented in the FSAR. 4.1 ANALYTICAL METHODS AND DISCUSSION OF LOADS As outlined in Section 2.1.2, there are five periods of interest i during a LOCA transient related to direct dynamic loading of the l vapor suppression system. Tnese are: vent clearing, air bubble i formation, bulx pool swell and rallback, quasi-steady vent f1cw, and chugging. Table 4-1 describes the structures directiy l affected during each pnase and identifies the specific -section where the load is defined for Shoreham. 4.1.1 Vent Clearing Vent clearing loads result from tne accelerating water Jet appearing at the vent exit during the vent clearing process. Tt jet loads may act on submerged structures located near tr downward projection of the downcomer vent and on the basemat. L 4.1.1.1 Submerged Structure Loads Due to Vent Clearing l l l The vent clearing Jet acts on structures in the jet path either by drag or by direct momentum transfer. The generic approach for calculation or vent clearing jet loads is provided in Reference 11 and is based on the jet model described in Reterence 10. Criterion III.A.1 of Appendix D to Reference 1 raises concern about the method described in Reference 17 in two major areas: consideration or acceleration drag and the calculation of ' (\~- sunmerged structure loads outside the jet but near the jet 4-1 Revision 4 - February 1981 l l l l ,
boundary. The latter concern arises from the realization that some motion may be imparted to the pool mass by the vent clearing jet which is not presently includ ed in the 3et model. To overcome this modeling limitation, work has proceeded on an improved Jet model which includes a treatment of the significant xinetic energy imparted to the pool mass by vortex ring fonnation at the vent exit. High-speed movies of the vent clearing process in sub-scale, single cell dye tests nave shown that energy dissipated from the jet in the formation of this vortex ring greatly reduces the degree of penetration into the pool when compared to the predictions of Reference 16. Although the lead plants support the generic ring vortex as part of the MK-II long term program, expediency dictates adoption of the position outlined in Reference 1, Crierion III. A.1, parts (b) and (c) for consideration of induced flow loads. Acceleration drag will be modified as described in Criterion III.A.1, part (a). 4.1.1.2 Basemat Loads Due to Vent Clearing The vent clearing jet acts on the basemat by direct momentum c::ansf er. For a maximum jet velocity of 60 ips at the source, tae maximum impingement pressure with the basemat 10 ft below the vent exit is shown to be 33 psid using highly conservative nethods as outlined in Section 4.4.5.1 of Reference 3. Section III.B.2 of Reference 1 accepted the 33 psi overpressure, but inferred that tne MK-II generic position has been to apply the overpressure uniformly below the vent exit and then linearly attenuate the overpressure to zero at the pool surface. This is not a correct interpretation of the generic approach which calls for application of the overpressure to the basemat only. This issue has been resolved in Section II.A.1 of Reference 2 which states that a 24 psi overpressure is acceptable based on a review of 4T test data. The overpressure is applied uniformly to i the basemat and to the pool boundaries up to the vent exit l elevation, then linearly attenuated to zero at the pool surface. The 24 psi overpressure is acceptable as long as (mhL) / (AP/AV) VDW 5 55 Bru/ft2-sec where: ( m = Vent mass flow - lbm/sec h = vent enthalpy - Btu /lbm L = vent submergence - ft Vgg= drywell volume - ft3 AP/AV = pool area / vent area ratio For plants exceeding the limit, the F. 4 psi overpressure is increased by: 0.27 [ (mhL) / (AP/AV) %yg -55 ', psi. 4.1.2 LOCA Bubble Formation once the water in the downcomer vents is expelled, drywell air vent flow begins to form bubbles at the vent exits. The bubble center is assumed to be stationary on the vent centerline, one 4-2 Revision 4 - February 1981
vent radius below the vent exit. As the bubble is charged from the drywell, it continues to expand estaclishing three-dimensional acceleration and velocity fields in the pool. The G motion of the pool water results in drag loads on small submerged structures. At the same time, the air bubble pressure adds to the local hydrostatic pressure on the pool boundaries. Tne end of the LOCA bubole formation phase is referred to as the " switch timea as described in Reference 17. The " switch time" is .the . l time the spherical bubbles first touch each other or the pool boundary. 4.1.2.1 Submerced Structure Loads Due to DCA Bunble For=ation The generic methodology for the calculation of submerged structure loads due to LOCA bubble formation is oiven in References 17 and 18. The bubble dynamics and ~ charging l relationships may be coupled or uncoupled at the option of the user. Criterion III.B.1 of Aopendix D to Reference 1 calls Ior l additional margin to be applied to the generic methodology in the areas of bubble asymmetry, steady- versus unsteady drag coefficients, superficial versus maximum local velocities and accelerations and interference etfects. The lead plant generic position on each of these irans is given in Reference 19 as modified by Section II.C.2 of Reference 2. 4.1.2.2 Pool Boundary Loads Due to LOCA Bubble Formation c The bubble formation phas a of pool swell is considered part of (') bulk pool swell for purposes of pool boundary load assessment. Pool boundary loads due to pool swell are discussed in Section 4.1.a.6. 4 .1. 3 Pool Swell and Fa).lback In general, structures and components within the suppression chamber including piping, valves, piping supports, platf orms, and the downcomer vent bracing system may be subjected to impact, drag, and tallback loads resulting from bulk pool swell. Bulk pool swell is t he term describing the upward movement of the suppression pool water above the exit plane of the vents due to I the injection of drywell air beneath the pool surface. The pool swell phencuenon occurs i==ediately af ter vent cleiring and the formation of air bubbles at the vent exits following a large LOCA. As air flow continues from the drywell, the bubbles expand and coalesce. At the time the tubbles contact one another or the pool boundaries, the' pool motion becomes essentially one-dir.ensionally upward as described in Reference 17. The continued l expansion of the air forces the slug of water above it to accelerate and rise upward causing the pool swell. The velocity of the pool surface associated with this pheno =enon causes impact and drag forces to be exerted on structures wnich are within the swell zone. Pool swell is eventually terminated due to the co=pression of air in the suppression chamber freespace and the negative acceleration due to gravity. Once the swell is u/ terminated, communication is established between the air bubble 4-3 Revision 4 - February 1981
and the air compressed in the suppression chamber freespace during a relatively temperate process (as compared to the breakthrough characteristics of the Mark III containment system) without generation of any significant froth. A pool swell analytical model (PSAM) used to predict bounding pool swell velocity and acceleration transients for MK-II containments is detailed in Section 4 of Reference 20 and shown schematically on Fig. 4-1. A general description of the computer code used to implement the model is included in Appendix H along with the results of benchmark problems for comparison with the results of the three classes of MK-II containments provided in l Section 4.4.4 of Reference 3. These problems are used to verify the proper operation of the code. Qualification of the PSAM itself is provided by comparison with test data in Section b of Reference 20 and in Reference 21. l Criterion I.A.2 of Appendix D to Reference 1 calls for the application of a 10 percent margin to pool swell velocities calculated using the approach outlined in Section 6.7 of l Reference 20. The 10 percent margin will be applied. As noted in Section 3.2 of Reference 22 and Section 5 of Reference 20, the maximum pool swell height observed in the 4T Test Program for values of initial vent submergence and drywell charging rates characteristic of MK-II containment systems is less than 1.5 times the initial vent submergence. However, Run 31, a minimum vent area, minimum submergence, maximum blowdown case where saturated liquid rather than saturated steam was initially discharged due to a water slug left inadvertently in the blowdown line, shows a swell height on the order of 1.6 times the initial vent submergence. Because of this particular run and because a very minimal amount of splashing was observed several feet above the bulk pool swell height in the Run 29 conductivity probe data submitted in response to NRC Question 020.46, l Criterion I.A.1 of Reference 1 calls for the use of the PSAM described above to specify swell height (with a lower limit of 1.5 vent submergence) . The use of the PSAM to specify loading criteria for events occurring near the end of the transient represents excessive conservatism due primarily to the assumption of constant slug mass during the bulk swell process. A second alternative method proposed by the MK-II owners Group for specifying maximum swell height has been accepted by the NRC as outlined in Section III.A.2 of Reference 2. This alternative method retains 1.5 times vent submergence as the lower limit on maximum swell height, but bases the maximum swell height specification on a conservatively high estimate of wetwell air compression. Loads resulting trom pool swell include impact on structures above the initial elevation of the pool but oelow the maximum swell height, drag on structures and orating, and drag loads due to fallback between the maximum swell height and the elevation of the vent exit plane. The impact torce on a body occurs over a 4-4 Revision 4 - Fecruary 1981
l , time period, t, and typically the force versus time profile l auring this period is such that the force increases to a maximum () s ,/ s value during the first half of the time period and then decreases to the value- ot the drag force during the second half of the l period assuming flow continues around the structure. A typical I torce profile measured during PSTF tests is shown on Fig. 4-33 or Reference 4. The duration, t, of the force varies from about l 7 msec for small structures to about 100 msec for large structures. The drag forces apply during the time the slug is translatting past the elevation of the obstruction. I 4.1.3.1 Impact Loads on Small Structures from Pool Swell l A small structure subjected to pool swell impact, causes the j water to flow around it, thereDy impa rting drag forces in addition to the impact forces. I-beams, and other similar structures having any one horizontal dimension less than or equal to 20 in. are considered small structures. The impact loads on small structures are calculated in accordance with Criterion I.A.6 of Appendix D to Reference 1. Criterion I.A.3 of Appendix D to Rererence 1 specifies a multiplier to account for the dynamic nature of pool swell loads on grating. This is discussed in Section 4.1.3.5. 4.1.3.2 Impact Loads on Large Structures from Pool Swell [) The pool surface impact on a large structure leads to higher N/ 1mpact loads than those which occur on smaller ' targets. This is because the larger structures cause deceleration of the entire water slug wnereas, in the smaller structures, the water slug is almost entirely diverted around the body except for the limited amount or water which is decelerated in the immediate vicinity of the impact area. A structure is considered large it it has a dimension in a horizontal plane greater than 20 'ih . The number of large structures in MK-II containment is limited and each is treated on a case-by-case basis. I 4.1.3.3 Draq Loads on the Downcomer Ve.Nts Due to Pool Swell A vertical load is imposed on the downcomer vents due to the upward movement of the slug of water initially above the vent exit during pool swell. In Equation (4-32) or Reference 3, the l shear stress for flow along the axis of the downcomer vents is j given as: l Tg = Cr ov2 (1) 2c x Where Cr is given as 0.0023 for a geon etry, viscosity char-
acteristic length and velocity typical of IM-II containment. The q_j total area t6 which the shes stress is applied is equal to:
4-5 Revision 4 - February 1981 L
A r = n Dr L (2) where Dr is the outside diameter of the vent and L 1s equal to the thickness of the water slug which is taken to be equal to the initial vent submergence. Calculation of the drag load is based on the maximum velocity for both the swell and the fallback phase and is calculated in Section 4.2.3. 4.1.3.4 Draq Loads on Structures Other Than Downcomer Vents Due Due to Pool Swell l Reference 17 describes the method used to calculate drag loads on structures within the swell zone with a projection onto the plane of the pool surface. Some of the concerns raised by Criterion III.B.1 of Appendix D to Reference 1 with respect to the nethodology of Reference 17 apply here as well as in Section 4.1.2.1. Resolution is provided in References 2 and 19 One concern not applicable to Section 4.1.2.1 and not covered in Referen7e 19 1s blockage effects due to downcomer bracing (Criterien III.B.1 (<e) ) . The MK-II Owners Group finds this criterion acceptable. 4.1.3.5 Loads on Grating Due to Pool Swell Based on Section 4.4.6.4 of Reference 3, the drag loads on grating are calculated using the expression: ED = Pg A g (3) g = pressure dif f erential across the grating given on Fig. 4-2, and AG = solid area of the grating (for grating with open area less than 60 percent) or AG = total area of the grating (f or grating with open area equal to or greater than 60 percent) l The results given on Fig. 4-2 are based on a velocity of 40 fps. The duration of the load is taken to be 0.5 sec, beginning with the time the pool surface reaches the elevation of the grating. To account f or th e dynamic nature of the initial load application the FD is increased by the f actor 1 + N1 + (0.0064 Nf) 2 for Wf
<2,000 in./sec where W is the width of the grating bars in inches and f is the natural frequency of the lowest mode of bar vibration. Application of this f a ctor brings the load specification for grating into compliance with Criterion I.A.3 of Appendix D to Reference 1.
O 4-6 Revision 4 - February 1981
4.1.3.6 Suppression Chamber Boundary Loads During Pool Swell [~')
\_/
The pressure developed in .the-air bubble (air vented into the suppression pool) will cause additional loading on the l suppression chamber -walls. At the same time, the suppression chamber boundaries above the instantaneous pool surface are i loaded by the increase in suppression chamber airspace pressure. The maximum value of these pressures can be obtained- from the l pool swell analysis and are applied statically as uniform increases in the suppression pool hydrostatic pressure. In Section 5.2- of Reference 22, this is shown to be conservative. The loading condition is shown conceptually on Fig. 4-3. Criterion I.A.5 of Appendix D to Eaference 1 requests an asymmetric bubble pressure loading case. This criterion, as modified by Section II.A.3 of Reference 2, requires that an asymmetric pool boundary load equal to 20 percent of the maximum air bubble- pressure be statically applied. The MK-II Owners Group finds this acceptable. Section III.B.3.a.1 of Reference 1 establishes that the wetwell pressure transient may be taken from the PSAM. Section II.A.2 or Reference 2 further establishes that the wetwell pressure may be limited to that consistent with the drywell floor uplift specification. 4.1.3.7 Drywell Floor Loads Due to Pool Swell () The drywell floor is the structure that separates the drywell and the wetwell (suppression chamber) . It is referred to as the diaphragm floor in Reference 3. At the end of pool swell the l potential exists for an uplif t dif ferential pressure to act on the drywell floor due to the increase in suppression chamber airspace pressure during the final stages of bulk pool swell. The net upward load on the drywell floor.was shown in the 4T Test Program to be less than 2.5 psid. Table 2.1 of Reference 22 l calls for the application of a 2.5 psid uplift pressure as a bounding condition. No net . downward load is specified as a result of pool dynamic considerations. Criterion I.A.4 of Appendix D to Reference 1 calls for a l modification to the above specification whereby the uplift diff erential' pressure is equal to 8.2 - 44. (F) psi if F 50.13 and 2.5 psi if F >0.13 where F =- (break area) (pool free surface area) (suppression chamber airspace volume)/ (drywell volume) (vent I area)2 The MK-II Owners Group has found this alternate i specification acceptable. l As noted previously, there is no significant froth generated in the MK-II containment system as a result of pool swell. Reference 22 does not specify a froth bnpingement lead on the l drywell floor. O 4-7 Revision'4 - February 1981 l 1
4.1.3.8 Fallback Loads There is no pressure increase in the suppression pool boundary during tne pool tallback. The structures within the suppression l pool will experience drag forces as determined by Fig. 4-4 and Tanle 4-2. Tne fluid density is taken to be that of water althougn it is now a two-pnase mixture or air and water. The velocity during rallback is computed by assuming acceleration by gravity as tollows: Vg; = 9.83VH o (4) l wnich is taKen Irom Section 4.4.5.4 of Reference 3 wnere H is the initial vent submergence in feet and VEB is the terminal tallbacK velocity in t eet per second. Equation (4) is based on a swell height ot 1.5 vent submergence. For a swell helgnt of any multiole or vent sunmergence: V73 = 8.03 VRao (5) where h is equal to swell heignt/ vent submergence. The terminal fallnacK velocity is used to compute all drag torces on structures within the swell zone. The duration of the tallbacx phase is based on the average tallbacK velocity. 4.1.4 Quasi - Steady Vent Flow After the end or pool swell for a large LOCA or during the initial pnase or an intermediate LOCA, tnere is a period of quasi-steady vent flow. This regime is characterized by drag forces on the downcomer vents acting downward anc condensation
- cscillation loads on the pool boundaries.
l l As described in Section 6.0 and Table 2.1 of Reference 22, no significant laterai loads on the downcomer vents aue to n1gl.-and medium-mass flow condensation have been observed in the 4T Test l l Program and none have been specified in Ref erence 3. ( 4 .1. 4 .1 Vertical Loads on the Downcomer Vents Due to Viscous and Pressure Forces or Vent Flow l Section 4.2.3 of Reference 3 describes tne method for calculating the vertical load on the cowncomer vent due to viscous and pressure torces resulting from the two phase, two component vent l Ilow. Equation (4-2) of Reference 3 is as follows: 2 fo 32fo LG3 C p TOT (6) 20 Dg f C l l l where: FTOT = total force on the vent under consideration 1 4-8 Revision 4 - February 1981 i l
C = friction factor for all liquid flow (h (. / C 2 fo
= two phase multiplier from Fig. 4-10 of Refer-ence 3 (given as a f unction of pressure and quality)
L = length of the downcomer vent G = mass flux in the vent A = flow area of the vent p
= density of the liquid phase in the vent D = diameter of the vent pipe g = gravitational constant The above equation neglects the load due to unbalanced pressure forces on the pipe which is shown in Reference 3 to be l negligible. For F se a small.
TOT 4.1.4.2 Pool Boundary Loads Due to Condensation Oscillations As a result of the 4T Test Program, high and med.am mass flux condensation oscillation loads have been defined that were not In Section 6.1 of Reference 22, the l () previously specified. specified pool boundary load for high mass flux condensation is 4.4 psi peak-to peak amplitude (PPA) with a frequency content of 2 to 7 Hz for a-24 in. downcomer vent. A sinusoidal wave form should be assumed over the entire submerged pool boundary. As noted in Section 6.0 of Reference 22, condensation loads may l begin as early as t+ = 4.0 sec following the DBA. When the mass flux decreases to approximately 11 to 12 lbm/ft2 sec as. discussed in Section 6.2 of Reference 22, the l condensation oscillations change amplitude and frequency content. The pool boundary load specified in the above reference for medium mass flux condensation is 7.5 psi PPA with a frequency content of 2 to 7 Hz. This load is applied as above, with a sinusoidal wave form over the entire submerged pool boundary. 4 .1. 4 . 3 Submerged Structure Loads Due to Condensation Oscillations There is no generic methodology Ior calculating submerged structure loads due to condensation oscillations. The method developed by Stone- S Webster for Shoreham is described in Appendix K. O G 4-9 Revision 4 - February 1981
4.1.5 Cnuqq1ng Chugging is the term applied to the intermittent condensation of steam at the vent exit which occurs after the air has been essentially purged from the drywell and the vent steam mass flux has tallen below a threshold value of 4 to 6 lbm/f t2 sec (Section l 5.5.2, Reference 23) . Chugging is characterized by the collapse of the steam bucole at the vent exit whien results in the generation or loads on the downcomer vent and on the pool boundary. Pressure fields generated in the pool may also result in loaas applied to submerged structures. 4.1.S.1 Lateral Loads on Downcomer Vents Due to Chuqqing As described in Reference 22 and turther discussed in Reference 14, a review of the 4T Test Program results has indicated that the equivalent static load on any single downcomer vent will be less than 3,000 1c. Sectior. 4.3.2.3 of Reference 4 and Taole 2.1 l of Reference 22 call tor the application or an 8,800 lo equivalent static load tor the assessment or lateral loacs on the vents due to chugging. In analyzing a particular structural element, the et'ects of multiple vent chugging may have to be considered. Once the number or vents artecting the loading or a particular element is l cetined, the appropriate load from Fig. 4-10a of Reference 4 can be applieo to each downcomer vent in the direction which maximizes the combined load on that element. Figure 4-10a of Rererence 4 1s based on a probability or 10-* tnat tne loading condition specified would be exceeded in 265 chugs. l Criterion I.B.1 (b) or Appendix D to Reference 1 calls for increasing the equivalent static load of 8,800 lb oy the ratio of downcomers natural treguency to 7 Hz for 24 in. vents with natural treguencies between 7 and 14 Hz and bracing (if any) located at least 8 feet above the vent exit. This requirement will De met by the MK-II containment lead plants. l A dynamic analysis ot downcomer response to chugging will be provided in the long term as required by Criterion I.B.1 (c) ot Appendix D to Reference 1. The load definition included in Criterion 1.B.1 (c) is not expected to be the load definitian established by the long term program. Theretore, the lead plant assessment tasis for dynamic vent lateral loads due to chugging la .that given in Reference 24. The static and dynamic load detinition are shown on Fig. 4-5. Criterion I.B.2 of Appendix D to Rererence 1 calls for application of a multiplier of 1.26 to multivent loads taxen from l Fig. 4-10a of Reference 4 in addition to the Irequency ratio multiplier mentioned above. This requirement will also be met by the MK-II containment lead plants. O u-10 Revision 4 - February 1981 l
'4.1.5.2 Pool Boundary Loads Due to Chuqqing / As suggested -in Reference 25 and further discussed in Reference.
14, the pool boundaries are subjected to a uniform loading with a pressure intensity of +4.8/-4.0 psi and an asymmetric loading condition with a maximum pressure ot +20/-14 psi. The asymmetric circumferential variation in pressure is shown on Fig. 4-6 which is taken from-Reference 25. The chugging data presented in Ref erence 25 are for 20 and 30 Hz,- respectively. Tne load is assumed to be applied uniformly below the elevation of the vent exit plane and then decrease linearly to Zero at the pool surrace. 4.1.5.3 Submerced Structure Loads Due-to Chunqing There is no generic methodology for calculating submerged structure loads '.ue to chugging.- The method developed by Stone & hebster for Shoreham is described in Appendix K. 4.2 SHOREHAri PLANT SPECIFIC LOADS AND RESPONSb CUNDITIONS The Snoreham spectric loads resulting from a LOCA are discussed in this section. Rererence is made to the lead plant generic load specification metnods outlined in Section 4.1. 4.2.1 Vent clearing [ The generic approach to calculating submerged structure and
\/ Dasemat loads due to vent clearing is given in Sections 4.1.1.1 and 4.1.1.2, respectively. Shoreham will rollow the lead plant generic approach. Shoreham has completed the assessment of l -
basemat loading during vent clearing using the water jet clearing velocity presented on Fig. 4-7. The maximum velocity is about 58 l rps. Using tnis value, the maximum pressure at the basemat would be < 33 psi as, described in Section 4.1.1.2. Foradded conservatism, however, an impingement pressure calculated using the unattenuated vent exit velocity was applied to the Shoreham
~
l basemat as shown on Fig. 5-30. This forcing tunction was applied to the basemat only. The Shoreham design has also Deen assessea for the statically applied 24 psi overpressure applied to tne basemat_ ano containment walls below the vent exit- (attenuated linearly to zero at the pool surface) as described in Section 4.1.1.2. The valde of (mhL) / ( AP/AV) Vgg ror Snoreham is less than 55.0 Btu /ft2-sec. 4.2.2 LOCA bubble Formation Shoreham has completed the assessment of submerged structure l loads due to LOCA bubble fornation using the " coupled" option of
. ;'rence 17. Snoreham has followed the lead plant generic resolution ot issues rolsed by Criterion III.B.1 or Appendix D to Ref erence 1 as described in Section 4.1.2.
O 4-11 Revision 4 - February 1981
4.2.3 Pool Swell and Fallback l Pool swell is analyzed as described in Section 4.1.3. The plant parameters used in the analysis are presented in Tatle 4-3. Table 4-4 presents the short term pressure transient ot the containment to a DBA calculated using the LOCTVS computer l code (26). This snort term pressure transient includes the ettect of inventory in the broxen recirculation suction line. Figure 4-8 shows the variation of bubble pressure and suppression chamber pressure with time up to neximum swell height. After maximum swell neignt has Dean reached, the suppression chamber pressure is tanen to ne ths from the containment analysis transient presented on FSAR FS. 6.2.1-6. Figure 4-9 gives pool surface elevation and velocity as a f unction of time f ollowing the DBA. A margin of 10 percent has been applied to the velocity when used for design assessment. Vent clearing occurs at t = 0.59 sec and maximum swell height occurs at t = 1.22 sec. All results presented on Figs. 4-8 and 9 are Ior vent sucmergence of 9 Ieet which is generally controlling. However, f or structures near the pool surrace, the minimum submergence case (8 feet) produces the highest velocity ano is useo tor design assessment. Structures within tne suppression enamner may ne divideo into two groups , tnuse above the initial pool surface (plant el 26-0 to 27-0) and those below the initial pool surface. Structures above ' the initial pool surf ace may be subjected to impact as well as drag loads, while those below the inicial pool surrace are sun 3ect only to drag. In general, all loads discussed in this section occur within the pocl swell zone, defined as tne region above the vent exit plane (plant el 18-0) and nelow the maximum swell height. The maximum swell height f or Shoreham is 2.2 vent submergence (plant el 47-0) . This value was obtained by the alternate methoc described in Section 4.1.3 (wetwell airspace compresslou approach). The plant specitic calculation for Shoreham is presented in the plant unique response to NRC yuestion 020.68 l (Appendix D) . 4.2.3.1 Impact Loads on Small Structures Due to Pool Swell Tne impact loads on small structures located above the initial l pool surface have been calculated as described in Section 4.1.3.1. In Section 4.1.3.1 a small structure is defined as a pipe, an 1-beam, or other similar structure having one horizontal dimension less than or equal to 20 in. I 4.2.3.2 Impact Loads on Large Structures Due to Pool Swell A structure is considered large it it has a dimension in a horizontal plane greater than 20 in . There are no large structures within the Shoreham swell zone. 4-1; Revision 4 - February 1981
4.2.3.3 Draq Loads on the Downcomer Vents Due to Pool Swell As described in Section 4.1.3.3, the shear stress on each downcomer vent during pool swell is calculated using Equation (1) and the maximum pool swell velocity of 42.8 ft/sec (see Fig. g 4-9). Then, with a 10 percent margin applied to velocity: 1 T f
=
(0.0023) (62.4) (42.812(1.1)2 = 4.91 lbf (2) (32.2) ft2 The area over which the force acts is: Af = II Dg L= H (2.0) (9.0) = 56.5 ft2 Tne upward drag force per downcomer vent during pool swell is:
- Ff =A p Tg = 277.4 lb = 0.28 kips To calculate the drag load during fallback, it is necessary to know the fallback terminal velocity. From Equation (5) , the
terminal fallbacx velocity is: V pg = 8.03 k(2.2) (9.0) = 35.7 ft/sec For fallback then:
- ] Tp = (0.0023) (62.4) (35.712 = 2.65 lbf
,/ (2) (32.2) ft2 For the same A , the downward force acting on each downcomer vent during fallb$ck is then:
Fr = At Tp = 160.8 lbf = 0.16 kips For reference, the static weight of each downcomer vent is approximately 4.3 kips. Vertical drag on the downcomer vents due to pool swell and fallback is insignificant compared to other loads. 4.2.3.4 Draq Loads on Structures other than Downcomer Vents Due to Pool Swell Shoreham has completed the assessment of drag loads due to pool l swell using the approach outlined in Section 4.1.3.4 and Reference 17. Shoreham has followed the lead plant generic resolution of issues raised by Criterion III.B.1 of Appendix D to Reference 1. Appendix K describes in detail the manner in which the Shoreham assessment of pool swell drag loads on structures other than the downcomer vents has been conducted. In particular, compliance with Criterion III.B.1 (e) of Appendix D to Ref erence 1 has been O-
- demonstrated. This criterion, which was not assessed in 4-13 Revision 4 - February 1981
Reference 19, covers the effects of blockage on the drag coefficient of the downcomer vent bracing system. 4.2.3.5 Loads on Grating Due to Pool Swell l There is no grating in the pool swell zone. 4.2.3.6 Suppression Chamber Boundary Loads Due to Pool Swell l As discussed in Section 4.1.3.6, the lead plant position is to apply the pressure of the air bubble and the wetwell airspace statically as a uniform increase in the suppression pool hydrostatic pressure froa the basemat to the vent exit and above the maximum swell height, respectively. For Shcreham, the air bubble and wetwell pressures are obtained from Fig. 4-8. Note that the maximum wetwell pressure is taken to be the instantaneous drywell pressure plus the maximum uplift ditferential pressure or 2.5 paid trom Section 4.2.3.7. Pool swell boundary loads are not applied to the pedestal since tnere are downcemer vents within the pedestal and the ratio or pool area to vent area tor the region outside the pedestal is not sufficiently ditterent trom that inside tne pedestal to indicate that a significant difference in bubble pressure would exist during pool swell. The asymmetric case called for by Criterion 1.A.5 of Appendix D to Rererence 1 and Section II.A.3 of Reference 2 has been included in the Shoreham design assessment as well as the uniform case described anove. j 4.2.3.7 Drywell Floor Loads Due to Pool Swell i ! As discussed in Section 4.1.3.7, a 2.5 psid uplif t pressure is applied to tne drywell floor during pool swell for purposes of design assessment. Since the "F-tactor" for Shoreham is greater tnan 0.13, the 2.5 psid meets the required uplift specification described in Criterion I.A.4 of Appendix D to Reference 1 and NRC guestion 020.69 (Appendix D) . The drywell floor is designed Ior the maximum downward ditferential pressure shown on Fig. 6.2.1-6 or the FSAR. The long term depressurization of the drywall and l conseque nt upward load on the drywell floor is mitigated by the I vacuum Dreakers as discussed in the FSAR. The drywell floor is dlso designed to react to the impact and drag loads or tne vent bracing during pool swell. l 4.2.3.b Fallback Lcads l Fallback loads are calculated as described in Section 4.1.3.8. l In Section 4.2.3.3, the terminal fallback velocity tor Snorenam was shown to be a maximum of 35.7 tt/sec. The duration or the fallback phase of pool swell using the average velocity ot 17.9 tt per sec and the pool swell height ot 20.0 ft is 1.12 sec. Post pool swell wave loads associated with fallback are considered to be less severe than the seismic slosning condition l 4-14 Revision 4 - February 1981 l l
described- in Section 2.3. During seismic slosh, the pool moves as a coherent mass of high density and is, therefore, capable of generating larger loads than the highly aerated pool present
-' immediately after pool swell. There is no generic -load specification ~for post pool swell. waves.
4.2.4 Quasi-Steady Vent Flow For drag on the downcomer vents and condensation oscillation loads on.the pool . boundaries during quasi-steady vent- flow, i Shoreham is using the lead plant-generic methodology described in. Section 4.1.4. Submerged structure loa ds - due to condensation oscillations are described in Appendix K. 4.2.4.1 -Vertical Loads on the Downcomer Vents Due to Vent-Flow As described in Section 4.1.4.1, the vertical load on the downcomer vent due to vent flow is calculated using Equation (6). The following parameters are used'in this analysis: C ro = 0.02 ij = 150 (based on a quality of 33 percent). L = 45 f t G = 133.0 lixn/f t2-sec (maximum) () A = 2.95 ft2
=
4 62.4 lbm/ft3 Pf D = 1.94 ft ge = 32.2 ft/sec2 The resultant force is 0.90 kips on each downcomer vent. .This ! load is small compared to the weight of the dowcomer and will not be discussed further. 4.2.4.2 Pool Boundary Loads Due to Condensation Oscillation The condensation oscillation forcing functions. for design assessment of the pool boundary are specified in Section 4.1.4.2. High mass flux condensation is assumed to begin at t = 4.0 sec rollowing the DBA. At t = 20.0 see following the DBA, the steam mass flux approaches 11.0 lbm/ft2-sec (threshold value. for transition to medium mass flux condensation) and medium mass flux j condensation is assumed to begin. At t = 25.0 sec following.the DBA, the steam mass flux approaches 6.0 lbm/fta-sec and chugging. is assumed to begin as described in Sections 4.1.5 and 4.2.5. i-O i I 4-15 Revision 4 - F,ebruary 1981
4.2.5 Chuqqing 4.2.5.1 Iateral Loads on Downcomer Vents Due to Chuqqing The assessment of the Shoreham downcomer vents and vent bracing system has employed the methods described in Section 4.1.5.1. In the summer of 1979, the Shoreham vent bracing was lowered from plant el 33-0 to el 27-9. Prior to this design change a satisfactory static analysis had been completed for both the single and mul'. vent cases. Since the design change the static analysis has been reevaluated for the single vent case, and a dynamic single vent analysis has also been performed. Because of the complexity of multivent analysis, it was decided that only a dynamic multivent analysis would be performed. This work is in progress using methods which will be included as part of the long term program. The dynamic multivent analysis accurately reflects the nature of the chugging lateral loads and will provide the best assurance of design ad equacy . Results to date indicate acceptability of the current design. 4.2.5.2 Pool Boundary Loads Due to Chuqqing Section 4.1.5.2 specifies the chugging forcing function to be used for assessment of the pool boundary. 4.2.5.3 Submerged _ structures For submerged structure loads due to chugging, a plant unique approach has been employed as described in Appendix K and. the response to NRC Question 020.75 (Appendix D) . l l l l 1 l l 9 l 4-16 Revision 4 - February 1981
.f
\
TABLE 4-1
SUMMARY
OF LOCA AFFECTED SMUC'11)RES Type of W dino Conditions . Structures Drag Impact Suppression Experiencing Steam Steam Water Air Bubble from Due to Chamber Air LOCA Ir> ads condensation Flow Jet Pressure Pool Swell Pool Swell Pallbact Costuression Structures below 4.2.4 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3.8 Pool surface 4.2.5 4.2.3.4 Structures above Pool Surface 4.2.3.4 4.2.3.1 4.2.3.8 4.2.3.2 Downcomer vents 4.2.5.1 4.2.4.1 4.2.3.3 4.2.3.3 Drywell Floor 4.2.3.7 4.2.3.7-Containment Wall 4.2.4.2 4.2.1 4.2.3.6 4.2.3.6 4.2.5.2 Pedest al 4.2.4.2 4.2.5.2 Basemat 4.2.4.2 4.2.1 4.2.3.6 l 4.2.5.2 POTE: temnbers refer to sections of this report. 1 of 1 Revision 4 - February 1981.
TABLE 4-2 DRAG COEFFICIENTS OF VARIOUS SHAPES _ body Shat.e C Reynolds Nurrber D Circular Tube - Q 1.2 10
- to 1. 5x 10 5 Lenoth/ Width l
Elliptical Tube 2:1 0.6 4x104 Q 0.46 105 4:1 0.32 2.5x10* to 105
=
O 8:1 0.29 2.5x10* c^> 0.20 2x105 Square Tube 2.0 3.5xiO* 0 h 1.6 10* to 105 O Angle of Impact , Triangular Tubes =1200 2.0 10* 1200 1.72 104
- 900 2.15 10*
= 900 1.60 10*
; 600 2.20 10*
/
= 600 1.39 10*
_ 300 M 1.8 105 A
; 300 1.0 105 Semicircular Tube
} 2.3 4x10*
1.12 4x10* 1 of 1 Revision 3 - November 1978
TABLE 4-3 SHOREHAM . DATA EVR DBA TRANSIENT AND POOL SWELL ANALYSIS DRYWELL
- 1. Free Air Volume 192,500 ft*
- 2. Temperature (initial) 135 F
- 3. Pressure (initial) 1.0 psig
- 4. Relative Humidity 201 SUPPRESSION CHAMBER
- 1. Free Air volume 138,500 ft3
- 2. Water volume 81,350 fts
- 3. Temperature (initial) 90 F 4 Pressure (initial) 1 psig l S. Relative Humidity 1001 BREAK AREA
- 1. DBA - Recirculation Line Break (with pipe 4.34 fta inventory considered)
VENT SYSTEM s 1. Submergence 9 ft Os 2. Diameter 23.25 in.
- 3. Number of Vents 88 ADDITIONAL DATA FOR POOL SWELL ANALYSIS
- 1. Drywell Pressure Transient Table 4-4
- 2. Suppression Pool Surface Area 4,250 ft2
- 3. Vent Area 259.5 fta
- 4. Vent Loss Coefficient (excluding exit loss) 1.0 4
O 1 of 1 Revision 3 - November 1978
TABLE 4-4 DRYWELL PRESSURE AS A FUNCTION OF TIME FOR DBA l (EFFECTS OF PIPE INVENTORY INCLUDED) Time after DBA (sec) Drywell Pressure (psia) 0.0 15.70 0.59 39.78 0.70 41.02 0.80 -42.07 0.90 43.06 1.00 44,00 1.10 44.88 t i i l 1 i 1 of 1 Revision 1 - April 1977 __ . ~ _ _ . - - . . _ . . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ . - . _ _ _ _ - _ _ .
d O PRESSURE OF SUPPRESSION , AIR HA SPACE, PsN
\\\\\\\\\(\\\\ DOWNCOMER VENT N POOL SURFACE AT N ANY TIME, t 7
~ ~~ ~~~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _
\ #
* \ vw
\
\ --- - --_ - -- - - - [ t=0, INITI SURFACEAL POOL a -
o
- WATER SLUG r \
\ 8B /
\ '
Sm
~~ - -
- - _ - _ - _ - _ - - - m----~
(PRESSURE Ps)
\ 7
=
\ SUPPRESSION N POOL
\NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN FIG 4-1 SCHEMATIC REPRESENTATION OF THE O POOL SWELL MODEL SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LO ADS REVISION 4 - FEBRUARY 1981
4 25 _ 20 m
.5 N _
I 5 a 15 - P z w e - W La. 1 E o IO - w m 4 y m - m w m 1 5 - O ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' O.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 OPEN AREA FR ACTION i i l l l FIG. 4-2 i PRESSURE DROP DUE TO FLOW ACROSS GRATING DURATION OF LOAD: 0.5 SEC SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION - UNIT 1 i PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981 i ! 1 i
. _ . , _ _ - . , . _ . _ , _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . - , , , _ . . . . . . . . . _ . _ - . ,.. _ .... ..__._. . , . . - _ _ , _ . . . . , . _ , - . _ . - . . . , . , _ . . .-._-.,..__,_-...I
s O l t I 1 DOWNCOMER VENT PRESSURE OF SUPPRESSION i i CHAMBER AIR SPACE, P \\\\\\\\\\\Y\\' P8 N A # M AXIMUM POOL SURFACE ELEVATION
- ::_-_::::_::- :::_ :: ='
{
/
\ /
/
/ \ WATER SLUG
\
; /
/
\ ==_=:= _
l g AIR SLUG (PRESSURE P,)
+ Pe g /
O l <
\ ,_- = -_-_-_-----:_- x : _,,, _-: - -
y
\ s -
,,,-- SUPPRESSION POOL
\ 2 N
~~
N
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
I -- - - - ACTU A L ASSUMED l FIG. 4-3 ASSUMED PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION FOR POOL BOUNDARY LOADS DURING POOL SWELL O, SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS
- REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981
O _ 30 - 25 -
^
N ~ 2 h
~
e 20 - n.
$ - 9 3 %
m 4
* ^)
00 q/ g 15 - a. O : - s9 to - g .D 5 - O .1 - o o to 20 30 40 so VELOCITY, v (f ps) ClG 4-4 DRAG PRESSURE FORpf =62.4 (Ibm /ft3 ) O SHOREH AM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981
///// ////
=
RN N K
- = F STATIC: y F : 8.8 KIPg DYNAMIC:
F(t) : A(r) SIN ri/ r FOR O<L*r A(r) = (50-2O r/3ms) K-lbf Ks SPRING CONSTANT OF BRACING SYSTEM 7p NATUPAL FREOUENCY OF OOWNCOMER FIG. 4 - 5 DOWNCOMER MODEL FOR LATERAL LOAD ASSESSMENT ' O SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981
O O O
+ 20
+ 15
- B
- + 10 Q.
~
A y +5 - - - - -_- - - - - - -- -- -- - - - m
"") --
W 0 e -- 1 a _
== -- ----,
3_ _ - - - - - B
-10 --
O* 90* 180' 2706 360' ANGLE OF APPLICATION (DEGREES) NOTES: A. UNI 'ORM LOADING C1NDITION
+ 4.11/-4.0 PSI , 0" T9 360' O. ASYMMETRIC LOADING CONDITION M AXIMOM +20/-14 PSI CIRCUMFERENTI ALLY ATTEN UAT ED AS SHOWN.
FIG. 4-6 POOL BOUNDARY CHUGGING LOADS SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION- UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENTFOR SRV AND LOCA LOADP i i REVISION I- APRIL If' /7
D < g e. 'a F, 1 6 9 1 S Y D R A
- A U , O R . L S E
A F I C - 6 TO I 4 0 N L N UD o Y - N i s T N A i v I C O RV I E R O T A S L TR E 4 p SO V R F a- E T G N N W E a I R O P M S
' 0 AARS EBA E S LDE L SA C
D AC , UN I U NG NG I QI M S I WAH ED 7- L O 4 4TL ET RN u 4 I
.NLOA GEOHL -
' 0 FVFSP 6,
a s ) L.. S D N O C
' 3 E 1 /
0 S ( E M I T
' 2 0
w m. - 5
' O
- - - ~ - - . O 0 0 0 O 0 0 o O 7 6 5 ' 3 2 e
-Uwmha t'u3w> gbaU Zw>
O g m
! e
O O O 50 DRYWELL PRESSURJ +2.5 PSID DRYWELL 40 - BUBBLE
$30 un b
! E o
$ SUPPRESSION CHAMBER i y 20 -
n. 1 i 10 - 4 i g VENT CLEARING ENr,Cf POOL SWELL PHASE n ] 4 0 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
- O O.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 i.4 1.6 TIME AFTER LOCA(SECONDS) i FIG. 4 -8
- CONTAINMENT PRESSURE RESPONSE DURING POOL SWELL FOLLOWING DBA ,
SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I ' t PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS ! REVISION 4 - FEBRUARY 1981
O O O 50
- n VELOCITY -
wU ow N 5 mL g g 30 - o-am E> gd \ 2.2 VENT SUBMERGENCE k g g 20 - O$ mm
< _J 88 ga g 10 -
w VENT CLEARING % W '
-- E L E VATION
' I I I O
O O.2 0.4 06' O.B l.0 1.2 1.4 TIME AFTER LOCA (SECONDS) FIG. 4-9 POOL SURFACE ELEVATION AND VELOCITY FOLLOWING A DBA SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT l l PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4 FEBRUARY 1981-
SECTION 5 r (% DYNAMIC RESPONSE OF PRIMARY STPUCTURES 5.1 STRUCTURAL RESPONSE TO SRV LOADS The' safety /rellet valve (SRV) discharge loads have been detined in Section 3. As stated in Section 3, the ramshead discharge device loads consitute the Shoreham design assessment basis and bound the loads associated with the actual T quencher (1N)) device installed in the plant. In a limited number of applications where the ramshead load definition was found to be too conservative, building response data based on the TQ load definition was used. Theref ore, loads associated with both the ramshead and TQ discharge devices are considered here. The piping systems to which the TQ response data were applied are discussed in Section 9. The following SRV load cases are considered for the ramshead discnarge device:
- 1. All valve sequential discharge All valves tire sequentially according to setpoint pressures. Individual line characteristics are accounted for in the phasing of the buncles. Figure 3-4 shows a l typical pressure time-history. The maximum average basemat pressure is 10.0 psi.
- 2. Automatic depressurization system (ADS) discharge l The ADS valves fire simultaneously and the cubbles enter the pool according to line characteristics. Figure 3-6 l shows a typical pressure time-history. Tne maximum average basemat pressure is 8.65 ps1.
- 3. Three adjacent valve out of phase discnarge l The three adjacent valves fire such that the bubbles enter the pool simultaneously but based on identical setpoints and consideration of tne different line characteristics. Figure 3-6 shows a typical pressure l time-history. The maximum average basemat pressure is 9.36 pei.
- 4. Single valve discharge A typical pressure time-history is shown on Fig. 3-10.
The maximum average basemat pressure is 4.12 psi.
- 5. All valve simultaneous discharge l The bubbles enter the pool simultaneously and in pnase.
3 The normalized time-history and corresponding pressure profile were shown on Fig. 3-11. Maximum basemat l . 5-1 Revision 4 - February 1981
pressure is 26 psi. This most conservative load case has been used for th e design assessment of the primary , structures.
- 6. Three adjacent vi!.ve simultaneous dischargo The bubbles enter the pool simultaneously and in phase.
The time-history and meridional pressure profile are the same as those of Case 5. A 60 degree circumferential variation of load was considered to be representative of three adjacent valves and was depicted on Fig. 3-12. SRV load Cases 5 and 6 described above were originally utilized in the design assessment. Reference 3 does not recognize these as credible cases, but rather specifies load Cases 1 through 4 above for the design assessment. Load Cases 1 through 4 are used to evaluate the adequacy of piping components and equipment. Load Cases 5 and 6 produce a more severe state of stress for the reinforced concrete, they are retained for the structural assessment. The actual discharge device installed in Shoreham is the TQ. The following four TQ load cases are considered here:
- 1. All valve discharae
- 2. Automatic depressurization syscem (ADS) discharge
- 3. Three adjacent valve discharge
- 4. Single valve dis narge As described in Section 3.3, for the interim TQ load definition the entry of a'r bubbles into the suppression pool is assumed to be simultaneous and in phase for all load cases considered.
Three pressure traces from Brunsbuttel, as discussed in Section 3, are selected for plant assessment. To ensure a conservative i load definition, a pressure amplitude multiplier of 1.1 is used. l The frequency content of the time histories is varied by stretening or compressing the time history traces into a longer I or shorter duration by a factor varying from 1.8 to 0.9. 5.1.1 Summary of Results The containment structures were subjected to a dynmaic analysis under SRV discharge loadings. The time-histories and time-wise maximum values of internal loads have been conservatively determined. Acceleration time-histories and ARS were also generated. The major conclusions from the analysis are:
- 1. The dynamic response of the containment structures is oscillatory in nature and the maximum values of internal 5-2 Revision 4 - February 1981
loads are generally comparable to those resulting from a fs small or intermediate break accident. U 2. The primary structural responses of the containment structures to SRV loads are transverse shears, longitudinal bending moments, and axial forces at the junctures of the reactor pedestal and primary containment with the foundation mat.
- 3. The maximum integrated vertical load on the basemat occurs in ramshead load Case 5, the all valve simultaneous discharge.
- 4. Ax1 symmetric (all valves) SRV ramshead discharge loads, Case 5, result in the largest internal loads on the l containment structures in the area of the suppression pool.
- 5. A comparison of ARS from the different SRV ramshead disenarge events indicates the following overall behavior:
- a. Vertical response to an all valve sequential discharge (Case 1) is comparable to a three adjacent valve out of phase discharge (Case 3) .
- b. Horizontal response to an all valve sequential
/% discnarge (Case 1) is comparable to a three
(,,/ adjacent valve out of phase discharge (Case 3) .
- 6. TQ loads result in less severe structural internal loads than those from the design case of ali valves discharging simultaneously with a ramshead device.
7e ARS from the TQ loads are less severe in the frequency range of importance for piping and components than those from ramshead loads.
- 8. The following observations are made regarding ARS resulting from the three TQ design pressure traces (refer to Section 3 for descriptions) :
- a. ARS from pressure trace #2 very nearly envelope results from curves #1 and #3 in a majority of locations.
- b. ARS from curve #1 are comparable to curve #2 at high frequencies, but less severe at lower frequencies.
- c. ARS from curve #3 are comparable to curve 72 at low frequencies, but less severe at higher frequencies.
fs 9. For all three TQ pressure traces the important high frequency responae tends to decrease as the time scale is (N-) expanded, i.e., as the predominant frequency is lowered. 5-3 Revision 4 - February 1981
The conclusions summarized here, in part, are utilized in Se tion 6 for evaluation of the design adequacy of the containment structures. S.1.2 Containment Structures Response to SRV Ramsnead Loads Both structural forces and ARS were computed for all six load cases. Note that ARS from Cases 1 through 4 are used for design dsSessment of piping and equipment while structural forces f rom the more conservative Cases 5 and 6 are used in Section 6 for structural evaluation. 5.1.2.1 Resoonse to All Valve Sequential Discharge Tne dynamic response of the containment structures was determined for the SRV discharge event of all valve sequential tiring (load Case 1, Section 5.1.3. ?) . Results in terms of internal load time histories and ARS are presented here. The circunderential variation of pressure for tnis event was represented in the dynamic analysis by the use of five Fourier narmonic terms. Time-wise maximum values of internal loads at critical locations l In the suppression pool region are shown in Table 5-1. A comparison with Tables S-2 and 3 shows that sequential firing of all valves results in less severe internal loads at critical locations than does simultaneous firing of all valves. ARS of overall vertical and horizontal accelerations were generated and representative results are presented here. Figures 5-1 through 6 con tain vertical, horizontal (U-S) , and horizontal (E-W) ARS at tne top of the reactor support pedestal and tne primary containment at the elevation of the stabilizer truss. l S.1.2.2 Response to ADS Discharge A comparison of applied load time-histories for the two events of all valve sequential tiring and ADS discharge show general similarities. On tnis Dasis, it is considered that the structural response due to an ADS discnarge event can be represented by applying a factor to the results obtained from the detailed sequential firing analysis. The factor based on the ratio of pool boundary pressures is 0.86. S.1.2.3 Response to Tnree Adlacent Valve out of Phase Discharge A detailed dynamic analysis of the containment structures wnen subjected to the pressure loads of a three adjacent valve out of phase discharge was performed. ARS de/ eloped from the acceleration tbne-histories were determinsd with results presented here. 5-4 Revision 4 - February 1981
Three Pourier . harmonic terms were uced to represent the _,-~ circumferential variation of the pressure loads.
~/ Figures 5-7 and 8 show ARS or overall vertical acceleration at
' l the top of the reactor support pedestal and tne primary containment at the elevation of the ntabilizer truss. Overall horizontal ARS in the principal direction of loading are shown on Figs. 5-9 and 10. Figuies 5-11 and 12 show overall horizontal l ARS in the cerpendicular direct 4 on. This response is associated with the fact that the bubbles are out of phase. 5.1.2.4 Responde to Single Valve Discharge l As in the case of an ADS discharge event, it is considered here that the results of a single valve discharge can be obtained by multiplying the results of the three adjacent vaive out or phase discharge oy a tactor. The tactor based on the ra tio of pool boundary pressures is 0.44. 5.1.2.5 Response to All V11ve Simultaneous Discharge The dynamic internal load time-histories for the reactor pedestal, primary containment, and foundation basemat~ resulting trom an all valve simultaneous discharge loading (load case 5 of Section 5.1) are defined in this section. Figure 5-13 identifies the critical structural locations.
~~N Table 5-4 provides a definition of internal loads ani Fig. 5-14 l g) indicates the corresponding positive sign convention for the basemat and superstructures.
One Fourier harmonic term was used to define this axisymmetric event. Structural damping is omitted when determining the time history response of the internal loads for the containment structures. This is done in order to provide an upper bound for the containment stresses calculated in Section 6. It should be l noted, however, th;c with the inclusion of structural damping and a realization- that the applied hydrodynamic pressure is negligible afcer 0.60 sec, the ensuing dynamic response will decrease correspondingly. Table 5-2 shows the maximum values of l bending mouent, transverse shear, and axial load at various radial positions along the basemat. For the reactor pedestal and primary containment in the region of the suppression pool, Table 5-3 provides a definition of the maximum values of internal loads. 5.1.2.6 Response to Three Adiacent Valve Simultaneous Discharge l The oynamic response of the containment structures to an asymmetric SRV discharge load (load Case 6 of Section 5.1) was l detennined . A 60 degree circumf erential variation of load was considered to be representative of three adjacent SRV's discharging as described in Section 3. O b 5-5 Revision 4 - February 1981 ga e-.- - - - _
Ten Fourier harmonic terms were used to represent the circumferential variation of the load in the dynamic analysis. The use of 10 Fourier terms provided not only a detailed solution to the dynamic problem, but also insight regarding the significance of the higher harmonic terms. As in determining internal loads due to an all valve simultaneous discharge, structural damping was omitted. Again, this provides an upper bound for the containment structures internal loads. l Table S-5 shows the maximum values of bending moment, transverse shear, and axial load at selected locations along the nasemat, primary containment, and reactor pedestal. A comparison of Tables S-2 and 3 and Table S-S for the all valve and three adjacent valve simultaneous discharge cases indicates that an all valve SRV discharge loading generally results in higher internal loads for the containment structures in the suppression pool. 5.1.2.7 High Frequency Response Study As described in Section 3.2.1.2, the wall pressures calculated for the ramshead loads used the conservative assumptions of instantaneous rises from zero to near peak amplitudes, while pressure rise times on the order of 20 to 50 m-sec are actually considered to be more realistic. The effect of this rise time on structural response has been studied and found to be significant on predicted high frequency (above 100 Hz) response. As discussed below, it has been determined that the incorporation of a realistic short pressure rise time more realistically represents and greatly reduces the high frequency component of structural response currently predicted based on pressure time histories with instantaneous pressure rises. The SRV ramshead discharge caeL used in this study is the sequential actuation of three adjacent valves. This case was l selected because it generally results in the largest calculated high f requency responses (although the ef f ect is similar for all l ramshead load cases) . For this case a very short pressure rise l time or 10 m-sec was incorporated at the beginning of the pressure transient. No other cnanges to the pressure time histories were made. This revised time history was then applied to the structural model with no changes in the model or method of i analysis. Building response spectra were generated trom the ! resalting acceleration time histories and compared to the original results. Results are presented on Figs. 5-15 through 18 for the rour curves which had the largest high frequency responses horizontally and vertically in the primary and secondary containments. The greatest reduction occurred where the response had been the highest, horizontally in the primary containment. The original curve had high amplification from 50 Hz to well over 100 Hz. The revised curve has no significant amplification above 5-6 Revision 4 - February 1981
I 100 Hz. In all cases the response spectra were unaffected at the
- lower frequencies.
V Although the study described above has shown that the building response resulting from the ramshead loads contains unrealistically high response in the high frequency range, due to t:1e instantaneous pressure rise hypothesized, the curves continue to be used as the conservative design basis. In Section 9.1.2, however, tnis effect is taken into account in the reevaluation of equipment. 5.1.3 Containment Structures Response to SRV T-Ouencher Loads The dynamic response of containment structures has been determined for the SRV discharge loads specified for the TQ device. The analysis has considered four load cases - all valves, ADS, three adjacent, and single valve discharge. For each load case the structural response was determined for all three TQ pressure traces with five time scale factors applied to each trace to encompass a broad range of predominant frequencies. The time scale tactors utilized were 0.8* (providing the highest frequency), 1.0, 1.2, 1.4, and 1.8 (providing the lowest treguency). Tne individual ARS resulting from the three pressure curves each with five time scale factore are all enveloped to produce conservative ARS for the assesument of piping and mechanical systems. (~N The magnitudes of the three TQ pressure traces are to be ( ,) increased by a constant multiplier of 1.1 to obtain the design time histories. However, no multiplier has been included in tne dynamic structural analysis for TQ loads nor does it appear in the results presented here. All results must be increased by the l multiplier before use in the design assessment. I In order to view the differences in response due to tne three pressure traces and also to see the effect of altering the frequency content by time scaling the curves a set of comparison plots of ARS have Deen developed. The vertical response at the top of the pedestal due to an all valve discharge is used as representative of the behavior. Figures 5-19 tnrcugh 21 contain l ARS plots developed for the three pressure traces, with the plot for each curve identif ying the general effect et time scaling (altering the frequency). Two conclusions can be drawn from these results. First, in the Irequency range above approximately 10 Hz, the response tends to be most severe f or the higher trequency cases of each curve (for the smaller time scale f actors) . Also, it is noted that the response to curfe No. 2 nearly envelopes tne response to curves No. 1 and 3 at all-treguencies. Curve No. 2 can be characterized as having the most regular snape of the three, generally resembling a decaying sinusoidal curve. f3 V
*This is even slightly beyond the range specified in Section 3.2.2.1. ,
5-7 Revision 4 - February 1981
l 5.1.3.1 Response to All Valve Discharge Structural response to the all valve discharge has been developed for all three curves each with five time scale factors. Enveloped ARS have been developed of the 15 individual ARS. In order to oresent a more realistic description of TQ ARS, the effects or the time scale factor of 0.8 are not included in the representative figures pres ented here, since this factor is outside the range of the TQ load definition. Vertical response is predominant from this axisymmetric event. Reprasentative l Vertical ARS are presented on Figs. 5-22 and 23 at the tTp of the pedestal and at the primary containment at the elevation of the staollizer truss. Horizontal response to this eveet is exclusively in shell radial ' breathing
- modes. Horizoctal response at the same structural locations is presented on l Figs. S-24 and 25. Again, note that the multiplier discussed in Section 3 has not been included in the results.
l 5.1.3.2 R_esponse to ADS Discharge As in the case or SRV discharge with the ramshead device, ADS results can De obtained by applying a factor to the results of the all valve discharge. Since ADS 13 very nearly ax1 symmetric this factor is obtained by taxing the ratio of integrated pressure on the circumterential pressure distriDutions for the two load cases. l 5.1.3.3 Response to Three Adiacent Valve Discharge Structural response to this asymme tric event has also been O completely determined. Enveloped ARS of both vertical and l horizontal response are presented on Figs. 5-26 through 29 for the top of the pedestal and the primary containment at tne elevation of the stabilizer truss. These results do not include the load multiplier or 1.1. 5.1.3.4 Response to Single Valve Discharge Single valve discharge response can be obtained by tactoring the results of the three adjacent valve discharge. Factors for the vertical and horizontal response are obtained by comparing the ratios for Fourier series Ooetticients of the circumferential pressure distribution of these two load cases. 5.2 STRUCTURAL RESPONSE TO IDCA LOADS This section describes the behaviol of the containment structures when subjected to dynamic LOCA loads. The LOCA transient events considered in th:s section are vent clearing, air buDble pressure, condensat:on oscillation, and chugging. These events are described in detail in Section 4. Vent :learing jet and air bubbie pressure loads occur consecu ively and are treated together here. These loads are characterized by an initial impact on the basemat followed by 5-8 Revision 4 - February 1981
transient suppression chamber air bubble pressures on the pool p boundaries. This event pressure on the casemat of 44.7 psi at a time ot 0.57 seconds is axisymmetric with a maximum uniform after the IDCA begins as shown on Fig. 5-30. The value ot 44.7 l psi is the pressure at the main vent exit and, has not been attenuated in order to provide an upper bound to structural response. Sections 4.2.4.2 and 4.2.5.2 describe the concensation oscillations and enugging pool boundary loads, respectively. Figure 5-31 depicts the idealized chugging load time-history used for the dynamic analysis. Internal loads are computed for the basemat, reactor support pedestal, and primary containment. Amplified response spectra I were generated for these dynamic events and are used for the assessment of piping systems and equipment. l Resuits of this section are used in the assessment or primary structures (refer to Section 6), as required by the load combinations discussed there. 5.2.1 Summarv of Results l The dynamic response of the containment structures to transient LOCA loads was determined. Structural internal load time-histories, acceleration time-histories, and ARS have ceen developed. The following is a sumnary of significant results:
- 1. Containment structure internal loads in the suppression pool region due to LOCA vent clearing are less severe than those due to the long term static pressures and temperatures associated with a LOCA. Therefore, tne assessment of primary structures (Section 6) is based on l the long term effects of LOCA as defined in the PSAR.
- 2. Chugging and condensation oscillation loads are not a source of significant containment structure internal loads.
- 3. Vertical ARS due to vent clearing and ax1 symmetric chugging are generally comparable, with vent clearing response the greater at frequencies lower than 15 to 20 Hz and chugging response greater at the higher f req uencies .
- 4. Vertical ARS due to ax1 symmetric chugging are generally comparable to, but somewhat less than, vertical ARS due to all SRV sequential firing with ramsheads.
.A 5. Horizontal ARS due to asymmetric chugging are less severe Ij ^
than those due to three adjacent SRV discharge with ramsheads (either simultaneous or out of phase) . 5-9 Revision 4 - February 1981
5.2.2 Containment Structures Response to LOCA Loads 5.2.2.1 Response to Vent Clearing The transient pressure loads described in Section 5.1.3 vere applied to the structural model and the dynamic response determined. One Fourier series term was used to represent this axisymmetric event. Time-wise maximum values of internal loads have been computed and are presented in Tables 5-6 and 7 for primary structures in the region of the suppression pool. Selected ARS of overall vertical accelerations are presented on Figs. 5-32 and 33. 5.2.2.2 Response to Condensation Oscillation Loads The dynamic response of the structure trom the axisymmetric condensation osciallation load was determined. The condensation oscillation load as defined in Section 4.2.4.2 is a sinusoidal varying load having a peak-to peak pressure amplitude of 7.5 psi to 4.4 psi with a single f requency ranging from 2 to 7 Hz. As stated in Sectior. 5.2.1 containment structures internal loads due to condensation oscillation loads are small and Appendix B shows that the containment structures have ample design margin. ARS curves of vertical acceleration which envelop the 2 to 7 dz condensation oscillation load are shown on Figs. 5-34 and 35. They have higher peax amplitudes than the axisymmetric chugging ARS. However, since the peak occurs at a frequency ot 7 Hz (period = 0.14 sec) and there is no significant power in the range above 7 Hz, they will not significantly affect the piping system and equipment response since most of their natural treguencies lie above 7 Hz. The ARS curves of horizontal ARS are shown on Figs. 5-36 and 37. They have a smaller peak acceleration than the asymmetric chugging ARS. 5.2.2.3 Response to Chuqqing The dynamic response of the containment structures to tne oscillatory chugging loads was determined. Both axisymmetric and asymmetric chugging events were considered with characteristic treguencies of 20 and 30 Hz. The axisymmetric chugging loads were represented by one Fourier series term while two terms were used to represent the overall behavior of the asymmetric event. Internal load time histories were developed, as well as acceleration time histories and ARS. Tables 5-8 and 9 present time -wis e maximum values of containment structure internal loads in the suppression pool region for the axisymmetric 20 Hz chugging event. Tables 5-10 and 11 present the same Information 5-10 Revision 4 - FeDruary 1981
for 30 Hz axisymmetric chugging. Results due to asymmetric chugging are of comparable magnitude. C_) ARS curves which envelop the response from the 20 and 30 llz cases were generated. Figures 5-38 and 39 present ARS of overall l vertical acceleration due to axisymmetric chugging while Figs. 5-40 and 41 present overall horizontal ARS due to asymmetric l chugging. 5.3 STRUCTURAL RESPONSE TO ANNULUS PRESSURIZATION LOADS Annulus pressurization (AP) refers to the dynamic asymmetric pressurization of the annular space between the reactor pressure vessel (RPV) and the shield wall following a double-ended rupture (DER) of a high-energy line at the safe-end weld to the RPV nozzle. As stated in Section 2.3, AP loads are described and discussed in Section 6.2.1 of the Shoreham FSAR(ne). This section contains a description of the method used to calculate the dynamic structural response to AP loads. Representative ARS of the resulting building accelerations are also presented for tne two postulated pipe rupture events that result in significant AP loads. These are DER's of the feedwater or recirculation suction lines at the RPV nozzle. A similar rupture of a main steam line does not result in AP loads since it is attached to the RPV above the top of the shield wall.
,ess The dynamic structural analysis for AP loads utilized the mathematical structural model previously developed for seisnu e analysis and described in Section 3.7 of the Shoreham FSAR(***.
It is a " lumped mass" beam type model with a total of 47 mass points included to represent the RPV, shield wall, pedestal, primary containment, secondary containment, and basemat. This includes the addition of three mass points on the shield wall to obtain more cetail in the area of direct load application. The forcing tunctions applied to the structural model consist of three components. They include the annulus pressure transient, the direct nozzle blowdown force, and the pipe rupture restraint reaction force, all or which occur concurrently. The annulus pressure has a time varying spatial distribution. Thereiore, at each time step or the calculated pressure transient, the pressures are integrated over the surface areas of action to ontain the unbalancea forces acting on the RPV and shield wall, respectively. These integrated pressure loads are then applied to the appropriate modal points on the matnematical structural model simultaneously with the direct nozzle blowdown and rupture restraint reaction torces. The dynamic solution is ODtained by time history modal analysis using the computer program STRUDL (SSW Computer Code designation ST-15 as described in the FSAR). Since AP is a thulted condition, the structural damping values used are those (T prescribed for a safe shutdown earthquake. The dynamic solution consists of time histories of structural displacements, forces, (msl 5-11 Revision 4 - February 1981
and accelerations. ARS of building accelerations are generated using an exact analytical solution as described in Section 2.4.2 for the hydrodynamic loads. Results of the dynamic analysis indicate significant horizontal accelerations in the immediate vicinity of the applied loads, i.e., on the RPV and shield wall. The response is very localized, and substantially attenuated at the base or tne RPV and shield wall (top of the pedestal) . Response of the primary containment is not significant while the secondary containment is virtually unaffected. No signiricant vertical response occurs. ARS of horizontal accelerations at points or maximum response in the RPV, shield wall and pedestal are presented on Figs. 5-42 through 44, respectively, for AP loads resulting from a recirculation suction line breax. In this case, the break location coincides with a principal axis of the model and therefore, there is no perpendicular component of horizontal response. Note that tne peak structural acceleration (zero period acceleration) is about 19 while the pean ARS value is about 4g. Figures 5-45 through 5-47 present horizontal ARS at points of maximum response for a reedwater break. In this case, the break is located 45 degrees from the principal axis ot the model. Thererore, two perpendicular components of equal amplitude result. For this event, the peak structura l acceleration component is again about 1g while the peax ARS valve is about Sg. Since tnese curves represent two equal perpendicular components , tne peak resultants are actually 1.414 times greater. A complete set of ARS curves including vertical responses were generated at several points throughout the reactor building (including primary and secondary containments) ror both tne recirculation suction and feedwater line breaks. These results are ut!.11 zed in the evaluation of all plant piping and equipment components. O 5-12 Revision 4 - February 1981
I TABLE 5-1 l o MAXIMUM VALUES OF DYNAMIC LOADS IN THE BASEMAT AND l SUPERSW UCTURES FROM A SEQUENTIAL ALL VALVE SRV DISCHARGE WITH RAMSHEAD(*3 BASEMAT Radius Ms3 MTT QS Nss NTT (ft) (ft-k/ft) (f t-k/f t) (k/ft) (k/f t) _(k/tt) 11.10- -49 -50 5 12 12 11.10+(2) 144 -63 -31 21 12 l 26.40 -79 -62 11 17 12 i 41.10-ta) 145 -28 23 16 12 41.70+ -125 -39 12 -11 10 PEDESTAL Elevation Msg MTT 9S U SS NTT (f t) (f t-k/f t) (f t-k/f t) Jh/ft1 _(k/f t) .(k/f t) 6.00(*) -33 -6 10 27 -8 12.00 6 1 8 24 -9 l l PRIMARY CONTAINMENT i Elevation Msg MTT QS Nsg NTT (ft) (ft-k/ft) (f t-k/f t) _ (k/t t) (k/it) _(k/f t) 8.00(*) 107 18 -21 13 -4 12.00 29 4 -20 13 5 l l (1) For design calculations all values can be considered positive or negative. (2) Radius to pedestal wall centerline is 11.1C f t. (3) Radius to primary containment wall centerline is 41.70 f t. (*) Base of pedestal and primary containment is at el 8-0. 1 of 1 Revision 4 - February 1981 i _
TABLE 5-2 MAYIMUM VALUES OF DYNAMIC LOADS IN THE BASU4M FROM A SIMULTANEOUS ALL VALVE SRV DISCHARGE WITH RAMSHEAD(1) l Radius MSS MTT 9S NSS NTT (f t) fft-k/ft) fft-k/ft) (k/t t) (k/r t) (k/t t) 6.00 -249 -250 -21 -35 -35 11.10-ta) -244 -247 -11 -35 -35 11.10+ -530 -291 58 -19 -32 16.20 -266 -286 40 -16 -26 21.30 198 -239 28 -17 -23 26.40 138 -?O2 -19 -17 -22 31.50 92 169 25 -17 -21 36.60 84 140 31 -17 -20 41.70-(3) 179 119 27 -17 -19 41.70+ 234 153 -21 14 -17 48.02 123 136 -18 12 -14 54.35 -76 113 -14 -11 -14 60.68 -87 88 -12 -10 -13 67.00-(*) 134 61 -11 -9 -13 67.00* 123 65 -7 -7 -12 72.00 -87 58 -6 -7 -12 77.00 -55 53 6 6 -11 O 82.00 87.0
-23 0
50 49 5 4 4
-3
-10
-10 (1) For design calculations all values can be considered positive or negative.
(2) Radius to pedestal wall centerline is 11.10 ft. (3) Radius to primary containment wall centerline is 41.70 tt. (*) Radius to secondary containment centerline is 67.00 ft. O 1 of 1 Revision 3 - November 1978
i TABLE 5-3 MAXIMUM VALUES OF DYNAMIC LOADS IN THE' SUPERSTRUCTURES FROM A SIMULTANEOUS ALL VALVE SRV DISCHARGE WITH RAMSHEAD C1 ) l PEDESTAL Elevation Mss MTT QS NSS HTT (ft) (f t-k/f t) (ft-k/ft) (k/ft) (k/ft) (k/ft) 8.00ta) 114 18 -34 -56 -49 l 12.00 16 2 -15 -56 -46 16.00 -13 -3 -5 -55 -18 21.00 -10 -2 2 -55 -13 26.00(3) -3 -1 - 1 -55 -5 l l PRIMARY CONTAINMENT Elevation Msg MTT QS Nss NTT (ft) (f t-k/f t) (f t-k/f t) (k/ft) (k/ft) (k/f t) 8.00(2) -126 -21 16 25 29 l 12.00 -66 -11 -14 25 43 16.00 31 5 9 24 42 s 21.00 -29 -5 5 24 32 s_) 26.00(3) -20 -3 4 24 -22 l (*) For design calculations all values can be considered positive or negative (2> Junction of basenat with superstructure (J) Top of suppression pool ( NJ 1 of 1 Revision 3 - November 1978
I
)
l _ TABLE 5-4 l-DEFINITION OF IMPERNAL LOADS (1) ; M33 Rad.aal (longitudinal) . bending moment (ft-k/ft) positive (+) when causing tension on top of mat and inside surface of superstructure Ns-3 Axial (longitudinal) force (k/tt) positive (+) when causing tension in mat and superstructure QS Radial (transverse) shear (k/f t) positive (+) when acting upward on outer face of mat and radially outward on superstructure MTT - Tangential (Hoop) bending moment (ft-k/ft) positive (+) when causing tension on top of mat and inside surface of superstructure NTT - Tangential ' (hoop) force (k/ft) positive (+) when causing tension in mat and superstructure QT Tangential (hoop) shear (x/ft) NST In Plane membrane shear (k/f t) O (1) Refer also to Fig. 5-13 O 1 of 1 Revision 4 - February 1981
TABLE 5-5 l O MAXIMUM VALUES OF DYNAMIC LOADS IN THE BASEMAT AND SUPERSTRUCTURES FROM A SIMULTANEOUS THREE ADJACENT VALVE SRV DISCHARGE WITH RAMSHEAD t a > BASEMAT Radius Msg MTT 9S Ngg NTT (ft) (ft-k/ft) (ft-k/ft) (k/ft) _(k/ft) ~( k/tt) 11.10-(2) 52 42 -11 -8 -8 11.10+ 152 52 -48 15 -8 26.40 -125 -81 -5 12 -6 41.70-(3) 136 25 27 -7 -7 41.70+ 60 36 6 -8 -6 PEDESTAL Elevation Msg MTT 9S Ngg NTT (ft) (ft-k/ft) (f t-k/f t) (x/f t) (x/ft) (k/tt) 8.00(*) -45 -10 14 33 -11 12.00 4 -2 9 27 -9 PRIMARY CONTAINMEhT > Elevation Msg M TT 9S Ngg NTT (ft) (f t-k/f t) (f t-k/f t) (k/ft) (k/tt) (k/tt) 8.00(*) 67 11 -14 22 -5 12.00 17 -3 -14 22 10 (1) For design calculations all values can be considered positive or negative. (2) Radius to pedestal- wall centerline is 11.10 f t. (3) Radius to primary containment wall centerline is 41.70 tt. (*) Base of pedestal and primary containment is at El 8-0. O 1 of 1 Revision 4 - February 1981
I TABLE 5-6 MAXIMp': VALUES OF DYNAMIC LOADS IN THE BASEMAT WOM LOCA VElfP CLEARING IDADSC1) Radius Mgg MTT QS Ngg NTT (ft) J _f t-k/f t) (f t-k/f t) (k/ft) Ik/ft) (k/ft) 6.00 -432 -424 22 56 56 11.1F-(2) -386 -407 12 56 56
- 11. -802 -474 46 16 50 16.20 -650 -533 36 21 39 21.30 -571 -531 33 25 35 26.40 -459 -501 40 28 33 31.50 -303 -451 52 30 32 36.60 -97 -377 65 31 32 41.70-(3) 175 -277 57 31 32 41.70+ -529 -369 47 -27 23 48.02 -266 -315 41 -21 17 54.35 -111 -262 27 -15 14 60.68 108 -216 18 -11 12 67-00-(*) 135 -178 12 -73 10 67.00+ -117 -188 10 -11 10 72.00 -70 -169 10 -10 9 77.00 50 -154 7 -7 8 82.00 23 -144 5 -5 8 87.00 0 -136 3 -3 7
(*) For design calculations all values can be considered i. (2 ) Radius to pedestal wall centerline is 11.10 ft. (3) Radius to primary containment wall centerline is 41.70 ft. (*) Radius to secondary containment wall centerline is 67.00 ft. l l O , 1 of 1 Revision 1 - April 1977 l
I TABLE 5-7 O V MAXIMUM VALUES OF DYNAKIC LOADS IN THE SUPERSTRUCTURES _FROM LOCA VENT CLEARING LOADSC1) l PEDESTAL Elevation MSS MTT QS NSS NTT (ft) (f t-k/f t) (ft-k/ft) (k/ft) (k/ft) (k/ft) 8.00(2) 170 27 -49 -51 -68 l 12.00 29 4 -51 -70 -22 16.00 -17 -4 -4 -50 -31 , 21.00 -14 -3 2 -49 -2 ' 26.00(3) -3 0 1 -48 3 l PRIMARY CONTAINMENT 21evation Msg M TT QS NSS NTT (ft) (ft-k/ft) (f t-k/f t) (k/ft) (k/ft) (k/ft) 8.00tz) 361 60 -53 -17 -73 l 12.00 178 29 -47 -17 -108 16.00 72 12 -30 -16 -102 21.00 -57 -10 -15 -16 -72 O(_/ 26.00(3) -59 -10 -2 -16 -39 l (1) For design calculations all values can be considered positive or negative. (2) Junction of basemat with superstructure (3) Top of suppression pool O V 1 of 1 Revision 3 - November 1978
TABLE 5-8 O b MAXIMUM VALUES OF DYNAMIC LOADS IN THE BASEMAT FROM AXISYMMETRIC 20 Hz CHUGGING IDADSC 1) Radius M M Q Ngg NTT (ft) (f t-kff t) (ft-kfft) - (k/ft) (k/ft) (k/ft) 6.00 -23 -24 -4 4 4 11.10-(2) -16 -20 -2 4 4 11.10+ 47 -21 -11 9 5 16.20 -39 -27 -8 8 6 21.30 -37 -29 -4 7 6 26.40 -25 -28 5 7 6 31.50 -13 -23 6 6 6 36.60 -18 -15 8 6 6 41.70-(3) 50 12 7 6 6 41.70+ -35 -10 2 -3 5 48.02 -21 -9 2 -2 4 54.35 -13 -8 1 -2 4 60.68 11 -7 1 2 3 67.00-C*) 11 -6 1 2 3 67.00+ 10 -7 1 1 3 72.00 7 -6 1 1 3 77.00 4 -5 -1 1 3 82.00 2 -5 0 1 2 87.00 0 -5 0 0 2 G( g 1 l l (1) For design calculations all values can be considered i. (2) Radius to pedestal wall centerline is 11.10 ft. (3) Radius to primary containment wall centerline is 41.70 ft. (*) Radius to secondary containment wall centerline is 67.00 f t. I I I I ( l \_)) i 1 1 of 1 Revision 1 - April 1977 l -
TABLE 5-9 MAXIMUM VALUES OF DYNAMIC LOADS IN THE SUPERSTRUC'IllRES 1 V FROM AXISYMMETRIC 20 Hz CHUGGING _LOADSC8) l PEDESTAL Elevation Msg MTT QS N33 NTT (ft) (f t-k/f t) (ft-k/ft) (k/ft) . (k/ft) (k/ft) 8.00(2) -14 -2 4 -12 4 l 12.00 2 0 4 -12 -4 16.00 6 1 -2 -13 -5 21.00 3 0 -1 -13 -5 26.00(3) -1 0 -1 -13 -2 l PRIMARY CONTAINMENT Elevation Msg MTT 9S NSS NTT (ft) (ft-k/ft) (f t-k/f t) (k/ft) (k/tt) (k/ftl 8.00(2) 21 4 -5 6 4 l 12.00 6 1 -5 6 6 16.00 -11 -2 -3 6 9 21.00 -10 -2 2 6 9 S 26.00(3) -4 -1 1 6 7 l b (1) For design calculations, all values can be considered positive i or negative. I (2) Junction of basemat with superstructure (3) Top of suppression pool 1 of 1 Revision 3 - November 1978
0 TABLE 5 ,1_0, MAXIMUM VALUES OF DYNAMIC LOADS IN THE BASEMAT
/ FROM AXISYMMETRIC 30 Hz CWUGGING IDADS C 1 )
Radius Msg M TT QS NSS N TT (ft) (ft-k/ft) (ft-R/ft) (k/ft) (k/ft) (k/ft) 6.00 -17 -18 -5 -8 -8 11.10-(2) -16 -17 -3 -8 -8 11.10+ 46 -19 -9 -10 -8 16.20 24 -20 -6 -9 -9 21.30 -25 -19 -3 -9 -9 26.40 -23 -16 2 -8 -8 31.50 -13 -14 5 7 -8 36.60 22 -10 7 7 -8 41.70-(3) 50 16 6 7 7 41.70+ -25 -9 -2 -5 -7 48.02 -16 -7 -2 -5 -6 54.35 -12 -5 -1 -5 -6 60.68 8 -5 1 -5 -6 67.00-(*) 10 -4 1 -4 5 67.00+ 10 4 -1 3 5 72.00 8 4 -1 3 5 77.00 -4 4 -1 2 5 82.00 -2 3 -1 2 4 87.00 0 3 0 0 4 O (1 ) For design calculations all values can be considered +.
- l. (2 ) Radius to pedestal wall centerline is 11.10 ft.
(3) Radius to primary containment wall centerline is 41.70 ft. (*) Radius to secondary containment wall centerline is 67.00 f t. O 1 of 1 Revision 1 - April 1977 l i
~___, __ ..___ , -
TABLE 5-11 MAXIMUM VALUES OF DYNAMIC LOADS IN THE SUPERSTRUCT*JRES O' FROM AXISYMMETRIC 30 Hz CHUGGING LOADS (1) l PEDESTAL Elevation Mss MTT QS NSS NTT Ift) (ft-k/ft) (f t-k/f t) (k/ft) Ik/f t) Jk/ft) 8.00(2) -14 -2 4 9 3 l 12.00 -2 0 4 9 -3 16.00 6 1 -2 9 -5 21.00 3 0 -2 10 -5 i 26.00(3) -1 0 0 10 -2 l PRIMARY CONTAINwlENT Elevation fis3 MTT 9S NSS IETT (ft) (f t-k/t t) (f t-k/rt) (k/f t) -(k/i t) (k/t t) 8.00(2) 26 4 -6 4 4 l 12.00 -6 -1 -6 4 7
! 16.00 -14 -2 -4 4 12 21.00 -15 -2 2 4 14 26.00(3) -9 -1 1 4 13 l (1) For design calculations all values can be considered positive or negative l
(2) Junction of basemat with superstructure. (3) Top of suppression pool. i 1 of 1 Revision 3 - November 1978
s %) s 3.00 -- 7
- ~ . - , - - - ..- - i..- -
--_, -.i --r _.- .....-.-.. l-
.j; - :,
E I b f .! l ..j , ; ;- , . ptM rf 3:twirte:tmeepbN ).;'
< ! .: i ;
DLbrs; . u: qlites;hertabh i i 2.50 - 3.---- .~ ~ - , -~t- - ' ~ m w - - t
; ~~ ,l I- '
i tt tD t~t f @ w. .ottH.ttseq. h l' l tt't ~ i. 1 ; i , . i
.i.
; :i, t!
-- 2.00 l *!. i I . { l !
.a
' !: :lll- -
r, -- . o I .i e
- - ,1 , ! ! ;; t ii 1
.i..
g ., .--
-Q!;. .g q .. 4 . j. ,
- q. .[. .- -.--
yH $: q;l: jjj
;- . i'-
.r:'
;l: i: -l- ;
-l: .jj ; ,';lj j j g gp
< i.so E
w
' ,1 1i ;
'j; 6,
. t' i ; !'. ,
i, '
.i ,
, i t !, i: t i . ' !ii! !. it
- pijh.
1 .. ..
- N p.D ,: ;: Qr m. _M ,:... l';;. Q. 1:, ,.- t) ..J.
4 d .g. . ,. .., r. . . . .. . . ...a . . 4']j ll! o o si>
- t i!
i,! , j ! ! ', 1 1!!! i;l; g lli
,,j !jl l
,i;:
1.-
;3.' lllt .
llii ,i!
- + i
.t: i ,.h 1: 4, t.
- ' ' ; 4
, ;; ; 0.{, ! jjj; }! !
4 i.00 - -
/h, jlll ;':,
;l!
- ! t. j j j ,: !l V! :;;; j!!! i ll}
l;l{l};;.; , .,. H! I al r!! @llo., WN _..: :! L. 2.:..... : C l N:i;llJ
,l.. N U 4'a t -
ui
- f. ((!.
. . . .- li . 4.... m . .- . . - . . ,.
-._ui till ;: ; i, Hli li:: M:-MQ- h!
t! .i - i m' ou ;
iii. :o!
!i jfl! j/ I ; i(!
T.. l! !:!l l : !!!! l:di it: !ln!f
!:': tit ,' i .
t , M. r t p g ,
; g.g m ry hh h gtrba-n-3
;t 1
7t"
.- 43g .:
Ik hN 5. qQ-" ny m! m iiH N ff y J.7 up n; gh
.. .!;! . .. , . ..,1., , , ,4ji O.00 J. >
" .24 O.00_. 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0 PERIOD (SECOND)
FIG. 5-I AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF VERTICAL ACCELERATION j TOP OF REACTOR SUPPORT PEDESTAL l ALL VALVE SEQUENTIAL DISCHARGE-RAMSHEAD SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4 - FEBRUARY 1981.
C t r' t r' t 3.00 __ _ __ _
, . _ , _ _ p . _ 7. _ -
.,. g _
__) ' ' ; ildi Ill: et{ 7- Qljll-l 1 j ljl . lift . r ,_ ._ ame;butu/JJ
.. .. ., i -i P-_ __ i D'.011' #5 !!1RiptiDWWIW DLbtd J p5:!LLMIptt putipd'l -' !i!':l t: .' ' :
, l i'
! - - 1 ,
! !- t i
2.50 -a- 4- ---Tr-
. , . . . , ,,,g i g , ,, .,, ,.
a
'i .
,l l l Il III II Ihi' lli .
. f. , ; s. a m. w, :, p) .
i I
.i.
< ,-l ,
't .
, .r
, , i
; t. :.
g 2.00 ; [j - - ---- -- - l { --
----t
. .. . , , o , , .., o. .,.,;1 ou .i - .... e i, ..
O , 'lL,
. db+ . 7 . !f( il [i.;f' t i,.lfI' t , . . ,
45 .f ..E- ilIE 7 5I d ,. 4 h{ f., l- f. - I ' [,. ' '
'I.j,. i!'
.;!{ I 4
e 1.50
,- .1 %; :,. .
. ,, l, i ' ,
,,1 m
i,. .
- 6
.,. m, f ! i j f !. i,
- . o a ,
j f. :,
,i h,,: 'i, ,l' >,,'
g.,,l' w , 1 , ,,.
, '.,,,; .t .. i>!..'t
. , t. ii!.
i l,. ,,' i l, 'it, ': i
.,i. . !.:: .
! ; ! '. j!!' ,i 1, ' ! I i, { l. i. t l
d ' '
- I{ ;l ', i 6t i
i! lqi ) , j ! -I j .I f 6 66i I i I!!I
' ~
d [!i. T l; 'I!'
.,m. ]l j i H Ih. .,
'l[: [i ilA fil, jil . j
'!m!I %[,
E Di.i"i{j+h IN
'[6 f nI Ir[i[ ;
[ !. ~l, ' o 4 1.00 ---l--
, i lt ife i
i i, - r( l#. ) i . f 1 : u
';rI l, ! it
, i fi i i
ji;! .(({ {Ijf f ! + : l,/, ' j '!',' . , ' li! tll :j;, < ; {o;! !!! ll!l !!fI f! l{
'?' .
l
- u. ,- : mi Jl ...
3 ', , w ,m. . - , n
,,gn .
nb..-n%{ ! 4 s ,. ..+ .- .-. ,#. ,1 ..++ . .. ~ ..~ m, f ,l!.'
., l g} !-7 .'
'.. ii f. il! i. t , ,
ll}!
.,.! lll1 i.i t ' i, .' l. ; f I !! li 1 !!
o i 1 . i
;,i >1
. . . , ! . i .
., i l
, i . .
,f,, , . 1 i 15.1 t ;i l.i ,. .
i: F- I
,k' "i h
!ll,1 I ;!!l
;j (: l' Il'I s l i f 'l
'w . .i .W~!
i I@Yn
. j. . . . ,' b. , . . o ,N, d!i o, gu _n.1 ' A
. v}.%. . ,$ , ** * *...-g,,
4 _ . . .. t
.#. . } .. .
. i. 4*
.I -
- i.
["
, . . i i . ;. t, .'
-n. ._.
l !!i: !!); . i;ll
.!,i.
g ;1 :l jjj .i j ;jI ' ,
. ,. . 4 .
O.00 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0 10 0.12 0.14 016 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND ) FIG. 5-2 AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF VERTICAL ACCELERATION PRIMARY CONTAINMENT AT ELEVATION OF STABILIZER TRUSS ALL VALVE SEQUENTI AL DISCH ARGE-RAMSHEAD SHOREH AM NUCLE AR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981
O V O V (s~ 1 i 3.00 y' - - 3--- ---~~-----.-----v---.
-)-----
I{+llJIl Ij}' l':'l'
.I iil W El l 4 H M '!+q l
.I'
.l: 4 . ,
*t U- 22,'ut; K'o+eegar!tt prem:-;%di 8 '
4_ -
.p, ,d ,
, , , 4 4 s
_j
, i l
! i' . on
. t]i , ' P up" a;ota: :ps.:run *c ihrikal. .; , ,
2.50 - - - +
! . . ; 'l ;- cioraL as:Ina rsa roakserik) : ;i.
t r-= - - - -
-- ,,; 79
- t t Ir.g, t- - - ,,3 py ,, . ,,,, ,
il. tttr tur, ,d, ir .i ht r+tt tilt .:,.
.1 e ,.
tt.i-I
- p- , ,
1
, 2.00 i
= i..-
5
- i , i l' i
, o w
l' .i:
- 1 . , 1-
'l . .. i ;. : ;
6 , . i .. t
,I.j ;
, 4 ,
Z o
... LU .[;
{ 4- ' .l .,,,ifji ,[t . . .
.- y a . _ . . . . . , . - . '! 1 J.-. 41.. . .. g
! } .!l,
- ...;j','j
. , - +
't
.y :; !!-
,r::l.
',,,I
- i. .t . '
-^': tp:
i .t i- ::i
'l',i
. 4 E 1.50
! I E' ' ' '
i w I
' l'!
I I '. i .
.!: !l1l j't
,.;4 l 'I '
l1 l !. .liil i .'I' 'I; llll t ;-
-l'
. .. it i'i!j: .l
,jl4 l
! 4; ll j 'i W..,u ldt'
- i. , . -
,1 i ij g.
- _ u2 .a W,. , 4p0 i
!p;i. 4 -.,q;;idy;j i o . 4il ', ;:'
;;;. .[7l.1j:
l j!I!'j! :l t:' l.l pilij .1;jd.,. ,:! !:
,,i 3l: :::: i i t .lIjil!!j
;i t l!i; y
4 t ii! IIll li!!
',~
L .OO 1
'.! ! ' !; !!! .- ti! !!!! , 1,1ill!
!!j.
- !!!it.
.\
' ,t ! l .t: :l .U! !t ;! i llll IN 'N 1
! i!;i . ;'l lil; : l
;~'
lll; ein l-i: .,: ti: l !, J
,i , ;i!: I; ;; i 1: !}: li!
Hj t'hl'h:
~ ,
Tit
- it;i i 71 n ' I + ,!i+m- ",7,,+
ttt 1.- ~: f.r, r ri; iT. p i t, '1.T "j "Tt* t d :.' [i; It,; F, f'. !.,ij t!I Iii. i :<<. e
!!. n.
i :i i ii il. i, i
.;, , i . 1 4 l
i: q :i! ! tit: !! !::! 6 1 g ': ! ; , , i. ' i, ! !; i!.e h. 0.50 ' ^ ll' !
;, ftl i ' \.,'l ilIl 1,! ti ij:l
,i ; ; ; ,. ; ' .' j i, .! .l - l 1,
. l j!I l j:
'i l' ll'.I h! ,!j9 ! ! ?,' i.
j
. , 4 LfM jih MO ir,ji i E.....p 4;N l -
aH--- -@ :I! I' lI! iQ r ir lh' M tH! !!!l!!!! !i!! ,!! !!!i M@a1 ,I '
- o.OO
- - h = 7F, i!! l!b }
O.00 0.02 0.04 0 06 008 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 PERIOD ( SECON D) FIG. 5-3 4 AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF HORIZONTAL (N-S) ACCELERATION TOP OF REACTOR SUPPORT PEDESTAL ALL VALVE SEQUENTIAL DISCHARGE-R AMSHE AD SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 195
\
3.co q--- - , , g , i!
,'r. I i l ,
i~ (({ Il e l!rij nl-rpa.j l li lllia {li ' il, i
,, j _ .
}n{..nl ne{ meets . !!i '; .
i ! i l 7
- - . iu 0:.otpj p:,:t
-f[ rea:Durta n. ' i, ,,;'
- ,h ol br2, paa rostouriub;! - - ,.. &: .is -
2.50 . '. -.--
-r--- - - - ,
4 p. m., %,, . . i ! I lt .I git t t i t t ' t t f.l itti
-,I mmIIlt tit!! t" '
j
- 1. .
', : : ,t:l'.,
.-. 2.o0 -M. -i --- b-- l -~
- - h --- -- - d--
l- = S - - t- i ; I i i:
;': i!ii ,, !!
[ -5
;hd:y;g
', ;l 7 7. ! ;Ilg 1 - i!. ,, .[ '
7 ,, p !:%:,g h;,;i,j iO.!jit .k ijia j ; d,
>'; !!;l;, ;, ; ;;;;.il ;; ,
- . l_--- ,.
- i. 1 ,
y i.- . .
- l_ g.
, i.5o , ,, ,, m _ ,_ t- .a w
.: 1,:
- i. . it
.i i
m t
- 3. , ,
;t m[,3 7; j! ;
4 .. j: l'. j- 'I!:l ! ,! p O
, ;;. .r. ,- ;jt, 7 m y, ,, .
m ;7 r t- Im'- 7 g , r.ii
- : i!
1.t i
, i i '
>! ' t. , ,.
t
- ', : i' i.
i;3: 6' pl!;i t ;
! ;j, ,,, !!jl
((gl l l i ; ,!
.jg, t.co " -
,+ + - -
' .+
I, .. t. .i
., i:t
,4 i: it;,
.,i, jf-
' ;!;j ;;;; +ii j ,!l,j t
, ,l lt-{ il#[ ici
!I,
!. !. . J N' it. i a. . ~
='
- n. .. ._
}Oij
.b }. L.1 jilb
{tll 1 yt ': a , ;l'i ;!: !!;! ; !4 ! Tit
- j. ih; ' ,; ;W
- g ,q , i;
-1 li
ji!,
.;: ;!i, ; F lt:
o.5 o ' ~
.. - -? - -
- i. , :,.
!!! :i;l N' !j j ;.
1g'g i,':E. til 4; u!!libj ph'g!
. . 11
.;.- { f , u; , '
Nl; L
- 9. .. 1 j
g,g g n.'
, 1-. m!t.E.
o y --c.m M.A, .- 1, --.,.1... my y. !jjj .
- g. i li. . >. ! q> .h. j .
. . p4 0.00 0.02 o.04 o.os o.os o.io o.12 o.14 o.is o.ts o.2o o.22 o.24 PERIOD (SECOND )
FIG. 5-4 AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF HORIZONTAL (N-S) ACCELERATION PRIMARY CONTAINMENT AT ELEVATION OF STABILIZER TRUSS ALL VALVr_ SEQUENTIAL DISCHARGE-R AMSHE AD SHOREH AM NUCLE AR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISloN 4- FEBWJARY 1984,
- n. m\
(m f k \__ 3.o 0 -; . .
}. w}l l4tm-j41tmg(rtur{ n imog l{
' ll l illi- j
, ,, l l;
r.m t '-*n=raaj awin kalt: .i
' )
.l- ..
i v . - - 2.50
- i i D!.tM :D5311RrpR,0 WINK,,. , 1-
, ---t-- ---,-.p , - -
r
~
a m. mwi. . ;
~ ~ ~ ~
I l t . b.. ' l' 3} li I till tj!! !!! .i
.; } .l. - i j
. 4, l ) .
I l i i
} ' ' f- f j
g 2.00 .----- - - - -
-- -p -- -
-- -L------ - -- - --.-- -. --
--- - 3 :.
l _ i i ;, 4., .4 .... j: ill .Hi ;' , z ;
~!
o.
} ;. ' . ,.; .! . . a . - ..
i _l ....,_'. ,. .., ll!.
.l 7 . ~ .t,,.i.t s ,'! '
- l. I :t ;m.l
< I.50 4.
't.
..r .. ,{i, ;j.i l l .j cr , > , .4 4,
. ,4
- i .,
.i ,4 4 ,, 4 .
W IfIf ' li I.
*t! E . !l !
f l I! l ,, "[ll '. ff i 'f j !' t ? a '.., '. u.t i. .l ;{ i
- 4. : !.
.i .i r i ..;.: +i .: NH EN .h.j
. l. . ' , . . 1
!....,; ; .; ,: +i t .jm ;;;: :
w 1. -._.. , e i... . . ~ . _
. , . . . . . . - . ... - . . - . ...4. .-.
44 ,. 6, ' o 1, : , f i i 7 .g, .r. , 1, ; i t >
- . 9 ((F
;)!41 li,ri ,. ,
.. 9 o .j i , ! ;. i i , -
. ., :, t j ,,- . l,. .i , ti ,:; 4
, i
. m' h,14, i.((
! i
< gg , _
. , . .. : 4 . 4, i. l ,
..1 a 4 ,, . . .it 4 ,i, t l ,; , :
, , ,! L.
t, j ; f
.i..
i , t. .{ i>i> jit
.i,,
,tn !
,+
,l ,
i.'. *1 v, .
'i '
; . 'i .
i.. . .
! {, i, .r fie . .l .
t o , it .t 8
. n .,
g ,, ,1 n t u ,' r ILL :in:- . ., m. ,. a_. . M, ,i f. idt ,; ~ .
- m. 1a; j :e
, j l. i {i t'i:j li l .;
i.
'. . i d,,t, a. Ti !.-., i i; i'
ij . i, i i ; ;, , ..,. :, .;i, l 3. ,,4 2
. .t i . i il .it.7 Ij;t . . ,
, i. i , i> . ,i .. .! 4 5 i l '! ,' '
I
.i I
'I '
, . , , 1,.
- i. t 2:
.:i. i t,
j' ,in
' ' " 'o'. p' ,il4'i;[
t
" ;l 3,i t,',
0.50 ' '
!; li. ,;
- F .
i;
- j . ! ! .t' 'n, Qr.m' !!li .!l; ,
m ! .: :o; H. ! t !u. m , p - . t. . . u a 7 b"G ' k~y [1,"nA. ; y, . ; b '
-- - L -- - -- --: 21-
@ ipdid p- %~ lit jtQ
!,I ! t :::.' C' tih :lll'jj{ 'ji f j:!!g
...;i! '
.ll; :
o.co ''e ' 7tr[]p.o4 oi < -i ~"9""- - ' ' ' ' '" o.co o.o2 o o.os oos o.io o.i2 o.i4 o.is o.i s o.2o o.22 o.24 PERIOD (SECOND) FIG. 5-5 AMPLIFIED RiESPONSE SPECTRA OF HORIZOtJTAL(E-W) ACCELERATION TOP OF REACTOR SUPPORT PEDESTAL ALL VALVE SEQUENTIAL DISCH ARGE-RAMSHEAD , SHOREHAM NUCLE AR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981-
r {
\ %
300 ,,, , o* - '
- - *- - 1
- ; - i, . , ~ gr 7 --
, , ! l -- < ~--
h - : I o ,, :, i ,l! D DI 3 D$:Ill.$lb8! DSPIMl l b Dr)j 06:lttert*! Derikblt. i i
! --- , .i I i 2.50 - b + -
pe , +- -+
.y ;, ,;z,g gg g ,, g ;;- + - -
?+~
flil pl l 1 tilt fitt it; ', 'i !ll :
;- 1 ll;; I '
, f. t l- ;
i
- 200 -- - i-- - - - 3- +- -
- b- --* -4 4
?+1 H Wl -+--- E, - L -r +
0 : ! e i: i i ' !' , 4: 1
!!! !',l
;l:'
-l'l; s :
e l- l - i l . ,,
.i:
1 :ii e .it6:i 1
~l < e; l!l i.t.
-l- l 2 . .il; i r-
' t, :, ! . i : )- -
! } -t i +,4-
' 1
! r 4 . + *+
o ,
-1
,r:i ; , li ' i ::, :: :
;; l 'i l.
i ,,, i: i i g i i ...t I ir b '
- l. I j; I:'
** " k' - l!!'! ;4 t ,
-' e ,
i ) ** lSO -"l."* - + * - - - ---t- - -- 4-* - -- - - ' ~ ~ " * *4-- ', -" " * * *
- u---~+ + 4-W lij !ff ! f! [ '; :i-!I : f, I
!.t ,
'.i',
li f, . , !! .l; lI[! f!, l [: I l !
!ff W
J
- i:'
.l' l t i >; !!
T *t l i' j!li *! ! it,'
!!'l l' It !
t! l, - t li i l l :' f'4l!-
;t 1 l!
o l I {!ji {ll 1.;j {ljljj j j!i! l'j gj ltt !!!! ! i ,,i ;< , ii. ,j i ; t
- !' ill' ++++-> jj !!
i O l' ji ji' l l, l at 1.00 "*++ + + * -
,j
+--+ -: + - - - -* --- -- -- - ---- - ---+ +*+-- * +- ++-~ +-+ + + +w+ + - + - dl l *f-
-l -+I
- + - - ' -
; l Il fff, !lf! li!! i.i lI' { <
Ii ?I !lIl lff lII! II I'! l ! Ifi ll! 4, . i;, h it !II ffh .! . . , < '. 11;'. f!! d!!' jj{ ! .f . l. f ,. l .
;l.
.. /li. i -l'.
ii; t!, ii
'4 .
lll1 ,'
,4, l i ?l ii l .- l l'. , l ,
i l il 1 l l il O50 ~ ~"
;q -*+
j'
, ;)
'*+ - -- - - - + - - -- -- - - - - + - + - --*
li., I ,t,
.li !!Il ,
+t i , .,
+" + + '
t le I 4+"* + ll 1
, i.
,. m, i ,; e s
g i.. m. ~. i
, ,o, j, i,i gi, i j .
M V Q d 'Il II.< II
.l,1 ii, ;,,; D. .C...
.l !l'; ,. l l If
;i-
, j f,
'li: . . . . . .
i
,[ !,; 1; O 00 O 00 0.02 O04 0.06 0 08 0.10 O 12 0 14 0.16 0.10 0.20 0.22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND)
FIG. 5-6 AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF HORIZONTAL (E-W) ACCELERATION PRIMARY CONTAINMENT AT ELEVATION OF STABILIZER TRUSS ALL VALVE SEQUENTI AL DISCH ARGE- RAMSHE AD SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOC A LOADS REVISION 4- FEBRUAMY 1980'
O 13 f~ O U k 3.00 -
.r- q
- r- - ~
~
l - . i -- - - 7-~ F --~ l *:j)l
-l '
i T ,{ s(( { f- t W4 44 HUHH tht uja. ;.' ' . i r . .r.[ 0[ a=* f ar+ri t raalaiartm a' !
.l;..l!!i .! l if g[ $ctCaa:t Aren' puirtW ' ' ',.
'i -[ ,;i OtDrCas:gLtaratipuirgath -- i----
! . 1 ,
2.50 , , , , , ,,; : - p- - - - - ' y- -- - i[.[
- 1 ! l.i 7.f[^ U[y,,,
rt t"tt _ . ., w f,i' t t. i t ':} . !,
. t t t t t. t t 4 > , .
- l. l :l l-g , no . _ g_ j,, . -.
__Q.-._ .-_..f-_ _ - . - - --
..- _ ; ._-f .,,
1 j;i!, ., i. . : .i : i .i!'
; !- !;i. l jjt; :i.;
U hl b, E J' z
d M -+ +- d- di' ;r ID'f,ih,l !j; "l '..' E
', N iii ! '! ~ -b. ,iI" ij! !!i: I,,ljll
.l- ' "!!i4' j ;i!.
o .
.i.;:!i
' ,l l l:::'
- p '
;!! .i : :'!
- j .. .!!' : 4; t
;!;i < l.50 , , ,
e
'i t' i
, d. '
it i:- ;l '
.. . ij!- .it: - i: 11 ;' i!i; i!!
i ..
- !il l:t ii jjj!,%
w ;!! !!' h l. -
'p t'j!I;;,
ll .
': -lll !:. l:ll![:i! .. , 1 !!'i !!'i d :t:1. , ;;
ii -
!i i i
i i . i jiTj .. ., 1 ;:. IM' illi
!i;! 'll1 7lJ, iih jT 11',
*r' i
! } l o
o ,. i.: l . l ll ! 4
,l q :
i
.i
,I .
..:..: 4
.' i tl: .1, i .i ! : i 4, I
t it ; . . I!' 4lll !!!l If if lth l!! ! ,, h ' 'i ' ' I liltflj ! I lI! I f 'ff! l}l d hn f N., h M- % qf! i 4 f fN Q-[ - -- -
*i h, !;df,il !
li
~- -- +
!}lfL 3
!;:l +l i de j ' 4; << :: .i.i \ . :i i
4 t~ ! i 4 y .;.lg.!4 1, ; jj 4 i g
- i !tt t :: i: !l! ! ! ;. l g3g
, i: t. ,, i . . , . . .. + - . . .. N-i .! i! 11 i I ! !'
1
,itp!
+
l, y pth f [i H [i i.i l. !,,; :;- i 7t+!l ti , ln-y , i
%g: --
- 9. qj(( j1r h<!! g 7,.-l h -e rdh+; c ggg tii
;i::
,;i lltii lii i< ,
i
. .i !
1.,
.il, ! rll,11 H o.00 0.02 0.04 o.os 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0. i s 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND)
FIG. 5-7 i AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF VERTIC AL ACCELERATION TOP OF REACTOR SUPPORT PEDESTAL 3 ADJACENT VALVE OUT OF PHASE DISCHARGE-RAMSHEAD SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISloN 4- FEBRJARY 198#
0 C a 8 J 3.00
, , m! 7 -- ; - - - - - - . ~ - - - - 7
, g ----
' . ' ' . .<. .. ;..' _ . j k{ linaj !!! larnr n- rm ljj lc 1 I till lui. .i.
3 1 , ; _
'an t' 1- l I, ; !
- - - - - pi.pt- 2' as :JLutros!a urtsa: ' i' I ! ,
' . ! 0;pt 2} es:rt.t.argat a urrup;} t ti.
2.50 - --1-- -
----t---- -r--. - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
{. f g ll [ f f f 4 . .
; a '
' l < ;l j- ', ,ij; 'l i ; '
I o 2.00 ----i--a -- a 4 + - - - - - - - - - - --
---r---
---t 4l.
t f
/1 i I
i i :. .: f
- ,;: l(:;j {l,;.
3 ,
'4 f :;-
ip7 . . ; i -
--t- '2 il ; Hjli-- j I 7
i-- i
,i'.i . .
j i
;' , ist; . ;t< ; .,{ l,;,
4 1.50 - 'I tr vi, t i i t ': , ;#; ;t- >>i' .' . .e,, i
} }} , ','ti. I ' 't
, 4 -
1 . : i 3; W i '!j ll !! ; ,
- ~ '. ii :l{l ji! t ; li!'
d i }l!' y L -. ' ; ; '.
. -l. 'h. ]ll!:{j j '1[ fl..j .- [ <l !!1 !.
j l! ;j j: ' h,d Q { ', .
.-vpi o ! j' .,j:
..,1. '
, t 3 it
, i l[., .;4 y !i.
ii) iii' !!!! :!:' y
.!,r {i.;,!
}
; i t ,1 j
f l
, lll: i lt'l
) i;:i'. i L: I j. ..- - ,
- i, i i!
ullt ; 1) i {p. i1' f f' i,,: ll?
.u u pu 4.
{' . E; . - : y ,ji ; 4
;! J; '-
'ol . , .1 o __4 aa m,41 ij.
j p';! g.' itd :lf:j
!i ' '
- ,l ..i
- ;;!i k
^; ;j ;, th Ii it!'
?'li lll i
;j IM 2 [l '; I,f' j j l; !i !.. !!! ! l f !.,. ! ;l
.' kei).
'i!: i'
{. .i I,m, ' .i ll' (( '
\
M .'! t lij.!!!l
!jj ll l l
{ l! 'j ! ! ! ,' ; lli: l {,i!' i m -.!
,,. l D !
7 .*l
; hlt i ; ..ll -]- !
m 11!! Pl
. . ... , . 4 gI !m W t jffi W;fff' llfwfj m!!
'! 1 l
'! l i! l 'jj li}i j}l ((f 0.00 'I l
O.OO O.02 0.04 ^6 O08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.I6 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND) FIG. 5-8 AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF VERTICAL ACCELERATION PRIMARY CONTAINMENT AT ELEVATION OF STABILIZER TRUSS 3 ADJACENT VALVE OUT OF PHASE DISCHARGE-RAMSHEAD SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DEStGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOC A LOADS
- REVISION 4- FEBRUARY.1981
e
.Oh 2 >-
n ~
- 8 N O_ 4 (s .
- t. ._r,___._ ._.,
p..__ ___~.,4__.__
, ._,a..
.._,..o_._. g H v .
_. . . J .._- ,.. ...u....q- . . g w g l
._..o .. h _.e.... . .
_ .a _... .._.5._..
+ . . .4_. W 4
. _ t_ .__ _._ tf..__
_.. i _. p_ J g _._. ..__p._. u
. , - _4___ ._. . _ . . . _
, y o
.,_ ,.. _ --. ._..w__ . C .. ___j____._._. . . _ .
- _ _ . 6 O < b._
._ _ w _- __..._4.- r.~._ .~ ..,.._
_...L..._ O W
.+ .- w. y. . . .
_ _ w ._ . .
.m 4 5
~
d_+- 3,
.. m. .E. _+u _a._._. _ . ~
_.r.___ ....%.. _ . _ , . _ . _ U) w
.-_y_._ -_w.
._ ._g... g g
_m. _ o _
+
- .gg 1..-
m r
. - _.m. 4 ._. . ._ . . .
. . . + . . . . ___.1_-_._
.- _, o : y
. o_.a.n.. y. . . . , _, ._ . g .._ _-. , _ . - .a_. 4 2 4
__ . . . . . _ _ _ .._g.. - o - g
,e a a ,DB g-4 w __-_.w+-_
..4 E 5 -..o _4_. .2.4 _
+
- v. - __+_ _ -..L__._... . . . - - , , . _ . as A i
l a%. + -. ._ _ - .a__ ...+ q W m
,a4m n
dd bp.
.__4.
..,.__+ -
_ .y__+__
-___b._ +.
H n a
%, ysgg ye.2
- - . . - _ _ . . . . . . _ . , _ . ... . , . . - . _ . . - . _ _ . CD g [ 4 ma
$w e i
._.i_ .. _, . 6 O 4 a l ._%d wr .
,oE .g.._ .
} .__ _ __... .
N I
,g- g..g .
. _. . . _ .; .. _ ___.a..... _ _ _ _, _ - . ~ _ . .
g g 4
;p,q
},,
gu .,._ _ .._ ..i._...___.
~_-f_.- . _ _ _ . _ . ' _ ' _ . , . O J U_) "O
-++ sm .o. h4 m_, a , .-_.4___ _ r e g4 O>J
; - _ _ _1 . __ _-.a______
k H zo _ IT._
~ ^ Z '~_.1
~17_ _ . __ . . . ,
; O MW3Z O y y3 , <
} __e , ... .._, _. . ..._ .- _ _ . . . ~ . .. - . _
,, 4 .._.4_._. ;
47,
.. a, .
,_4_ , ,.
__ _4...__. . . _ EWIog m
+.~4. . .
ggag e. O g 4m
.' I .. -+ -
1 j s- -+. 1- oo g p g Omg pO
! t ._ J. . . _! . ~_ _ p _. . _ . . j.. o u) o,O F 2 s
_,.3 w z 4 , - g ;- ; a l I w W 0- O 3W L . . __ f f- i
- Um W -')
} .
i O~ ZM W EO2 m o '> zm I i 1, i
} ,
i .I' t O mJqw O 9_-.. I
. _ . .~ . . . . .,. . e g O.
m Qqw m l , L. . .;T~. - .C 'l : w W H '> Oq J
, . O a.
gH3z
%jZzq l
j l l' _ d O o r - 1 Wg W g4 sw o 1
.. .. .. _1_ 1. .- -
- l: -
~ __ _
J- ' {~ f~ CD b IL 4 T O
- C . ::~1 ^:i:: _ *~.
- O C J O ~3 WH l _ ._.. ._ .u _-.
_ _g..%
..7_ _
o a1 omz _- _ _ . _6 2 O 4O4 j [.. . .-
._e._. ._. - + - ,
g4%%..J gg 1 .__ ._ _. .___ 4 _ . . _ _ + . _ . . .. _ _ _ l ._ _
.__+_.___.
.-.__..-_i
._.._4-..+.
(, g
.q:n,. r ,-r- .. . g ._. _. g l .
j k
,4e -._'. .s.
% 9g , _.A .-. .
4,_._._ .l __y..
+ _ _
. _ . _ .._4..._.
_+. ._. j . _ __.4 . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . .____4 . 9 { .: T.~T ~ '_L _~~'^~~TK
- L'~~ . ~_T O
,. . . . _ _ . y -_
. ._. _ _ .1,
. _ . . - ._,_ _ ,_ ,- 4.,.
4 --
. - - - - , . . .. y
,._-4..-
.) . . - . s. .
_ . _p.- - N
. O j
.,, ,a_. _ _ - _ , . _.o g g . _ , _ . ~
_QpM1 -. .N .,.
..*-4_.-,
L... -_
-.4- ...e._ ,
b _ . . ...uh. _ . . _
. _ ._ . . ._-. .. .___...__.{__..,___.-.-..,
I,
., _..__ . _ _ q-i t I ~ ' ~ ' ~ -~ -t' ~+^
. _ - _ _ _ . .._ o
'~~ "---
O_ O O O O O O OO O q O o O eo O j m n N a - O O NJ (D) NOl1VB31300V I
(~ p D
\
300 ,,,, .
.r
, y -. ; --
i 1;
' i
'!' I l !
}
j <-{ } II [41- ij w!- f N{4 lil-y '; ' u a. '
; t .
n { {aam e mu l:', !ll: .! ypty:at:ntkreatbertaq::J; , 0.0r3, as:ttt.nreslawim,M
, i:
2.50 ~~ - - -- - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - p.,, , up ,
..l_..
fitt- titj tttt~ 1 1 Il1- f
;. .u, a
~
v , i.
#j.
l
< -l." ~ . , - m y::
- -- i l i
- :i:j
g 2.00 , :, :
, j
-- F - - -f-- , , ,, , ,, ;,;, , ,
j if f '
' !ff!
, ; [*t'
!' j; p- l' ft ,
,i 4
- !: ';l flll ;ll1 ! l
,f l
-l:'I 4 ,A '
' I'
.!{ l\ :: I'$!! !.l. '
d I 1 .50 ! ---* '!'
$ i '}' I?'i lii '
i
! '. I
.j l i . '!
l ij} ; ;' ' }.
.{ ;
[ ff 3
'-*i, ; -+---+ - -
-f -
t
~f if - --
N il!I - l 1l!k ff-l fh !
-f i i l l f,*I 1 !' !
1.00 , -
! I. I l',l if !! ! l - ..f!!
. '. .'l !fll 1fl .. !!lf f ffh 1
flf y :-. 1-, .. .. ' ... .- ... .... . . dh ll..
,,, di 1 '
/s. . L ; m o , ! n i oi no n a u u y '
q:l L3 }y
~-
e;
.4-.
., gg,y
- . ~
.- y j q j y! g lW li!! Q j p
.p 0.0 0 -! ' ' I I 'I !I+! i, t 1 li:i . . It 0.00 0.02 004 0 06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0 14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND) i FIG. 5-10 AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTR A OF HORIZONTAL (N-S) ACCELERATION PRIMARY CONTAINMENT AT ELEVATION OF STABILIZER TRUSS 3 ADJACENT VALVE OUT OF PHASE DISCHARGE-R AMSHEAD SHOREHAM NUCLE AR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 l
PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS l , REVISION 4- FEBRUARY IM
,0 I" (~~
V ( C
'8
;l "T ~ '.i'- .:.'
] .. . . ii i
. i. i i.
I : ,I ' '
,3 1
':(- .
!, ;,: tl!
i ii*. '! I, -
,,,' ij 'g . j ill . .
..}<. - }..
;lI if L ,;,;. .: pl ,U. ,;,.
!; ;. p. '
.Q
.: A{us.t{ :..}- + P -- -
n=r - I. {l% i,(l 't. i: l j { ;i . ;':i ' '
'l:.l L L:1LIEM:0J$0K jaus'UEE. ' - '. ' '
- t'l
,t . -
~: ~. l': ;
ti
'i i:i. . t. :!,!!
'! i; '
.i i{'
i i sur .e =rCass- nyl.
;;i; Ii.. W Ci ?
USO , t~ TT, - ~ ~"
~~T ' ' ' ' ~ ~ t F - 2 m - - m-d umo li
..' i!!i 'i!: I' i : 1 1 '.
'i
',. I i f:. b -
l' ' l
' '. ': II;' ! I[1 l.b 'llpll I II ![. ;i n' ll', '
!'. !! Il ! j!i I! i!h 'iiI IH' :'i ot 'ifi j
"I;l 7
.I-'. Ild ' l.
; l j ,t .
i
- h: :
i.
. ' > i 'l 'l
' ' d ' ' 'l !
- l- ji ,r. *: -
,,,, o4o i t: ..! ; i :l :' il ,:t- 1
.i S. i h:! _Jl i ' l I!j! i' ! I' !
l >!l
, .l, l II' l :l'j i,; 'l j, j!
jl g [IJ .hl ! # .O 4" l q!,.%,.[.- ' I %!I . !i.,p: .. { p i
! ,;. l !
.',l l .I .
i ,,l- :
- 1. ti;t 1 b,! ii l. j
< o.3o i
! .Ji '. 1 p .
4: a: i> .4 i
;j 2_ . . -
j , i.
,.! . i w i '
- l. ij I: ,ei j
.,l p
i l . l i i l j i g: N gl l jt ,y g1 e ! _ ! ..i , p 4 . . . tw o , ij i l l i:i 1 . , l i l' 0 0.20 1 h i ! !L -' I 'I' ! ' il! ' l
' ! lI ! lI i
't l!' !!!! '!!! j. '
ll!; .It lo
!i! :. l i lj l ~!! I I ! l
! l !N
} .
.y. .1. . ... 1 .
.g' l l l. ll! ..ql,1. 1:1 l _I L j i :I. li j':' 44: j;.
.' ";, j!If l-
.i l -!
'!'l.
M " ' ' !- ! - i O.10 1 r
.' Jii u t '!
j ..' . i . ,' e i f 1 . . 1
., ij i i i. ,, .
' ijj, C !! i!' l!,!i ;!!l', ii ' I I k [. , . - !
;p y!;j F ll l} !!
1.L fs- '. -h. a A,t;, i 3
.ll
..! r. apa g.
!:0 0;Il lt.
f.l' l el1 i, [-
~[-
'y y I7 tpu!., ,pL +; m f,]t.p 4
lll l. --- j,.; "n : lit
-" :l :l* rt
!.-- r l,i , m
!: a I .' ,li: f,,, r -
- 't t 't 1 0.00 . - i - - - -
0.00 O O2 0.04 O06 0.08- 0 .10- 0 12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0 22 0.24 i PERIOD (SECON D) FIG. 5-11 AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF HORIZONTAL (E-W) ACCELERATION TOP OF REACTOR SUPPORT PEDESTAL 3 ADJACENT VALVE OUT OF PH ASE DISCH ARGE-R AMSHE AD SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1991 -
/' /9 /' \
b/ \ 0.60 . i , q-- ,
!l j ,' . !
R' l l I
- j. ,. .
p 5 ;'
}i.;l; 1,(( }{.5 i l,
.lJillJltn'.ack.jrat{.--{::ll lifl il
. tadL i i
' .i '
4 EDi$stt88:lllatsa;nurgte:1
= '
l :l I j r!I b ;Q'd
.- , i !!t ;1. !' i!! Ents:tas:It1AFea,'nWint$'!'
~~p '
, 3 050 -~
,j: < -----
4
--~
l-- i
'ff
%_ .g...
tftt'ff,>. I: .b I .fi . f ,!1tj!!11
! fttttttt!
l :l-
.lj + , .i . .
(1 .. . . .
! t li ,
. 1, I.,: ;1: .I 0 40 - - , - -- -
- . : 4 4
- + - - -
m-- - - . - -- ' : -
=
0 i i'
.j :
t I
~
! . 4: .
i;;! ', ! ; . .. . ;i; .,
, t . i, $ i 5, q!4 :
,. f ., _i >
- i ,. ,i. ,
- ..r . -. ., .4 .: .g. ; i .i .s ..
o
..,.i.;
i- i. .w. 1 i:< i o I .-. . . i
.! i 4 -,
, .i+ - ,
,4
. aJ .- j# u 6t .'- .. I ! ,. i .st 1.- :
.,'i .' ! 4 :
.t
',* : ['
- ji i .!i' i'
.l]t+ ';'
? i'I 8 H l
<r o,3o i
,- l i .
;; i<, <
. :1!!' :!::
a: g .. i..
- , . i,.= e., . ..- i. i ... ,+.,t,ie.
- , , i. . s
,,+. ist lit.
+ ,.+
l, ,i , . , < , i !;;
.i .i-.,,.
i
- 1. , t . 4, ; . ...
- , . ,. . . . ii ,
. 4 l .!..:
_a , , ,, > > ..
.. ; 4.. i.
i
....4
. L.
.. . .,; . i .+,. .t+ . .
w . . , .- m . - . . .. . . . .- -. . . .-&.. .... . . . . . . ,.- . . + + .. . 5.,,... t ., . , - .... i , , : o }.; I. ,
,.t.
{. 4!. 9.,, 4,i . . ; Ili, !f;,
;: .tii 4. }6
- f! '
o t: ! :. - i r-
. ;; ;!t : li;i !; i :t'! - l :. t 1 };'t ;!j,- :: 7j.
4 0 20 . ' "- -- - - - -
-~!l"~ h i f:,
I !
- :l: !ll
' +,
!!' I .
- i. l .- l; !!!! j ;;
I,,' .; :. , }, , ,l;jl;!!' l I
.l.... .
.l. :
6 .
.i, Li..i 4.s.. .4... . ; u, :>
it; s4,. 3 s t, 4 4 ..
>t 4! , .1.,
ei,1 -
...4,. .
- t .. -
- i. .a i d. 4 ,i .
eii i . ,. i.: 3 .,, .i . , . 1i.. t 46 jai' 5
; ., 7 I *! r t }t ,( >
, i* t t If'4 iili >!!l ;.. ii!!
' 4 ifl; f '*i.".. p , j . ~' -
l , ! i;;. , :;;i i, !!!! 0.10 t~ .e - -;- -=
;.e.
;i., . ,,+; . .,
+ ! ,. +, i...
. , 4 i :
4
,r 3 . , i .i 1 ,. , I +. !
}.;, ..c. i .+ .1
- i.
4 4 +i ,i ,. i ,i 4, 4. ,.
!!i' .; . .
' ' .s
.i ., ,
1
. t i
l s
. . : jttw ' : : ; - ,,
t.;;
!: 1 j
i!: ; ik ,
.,s.; ; L.j P. .111; i.i
- . .) fla . ;ni
.i.
;. u. i.
- i. . a.; ;
j!!; 3
,,,t: .
.g' I ,
. . . - ,n-i.
9:,. i ..
,,.. .i r. i, .: t:i , .
..j; 3
t ,i , ,
.' .,,. 4 +.4,4+-
i
'jl ,
!!- '! i~ ' ' ' ' ' '
0 00 - O 00 0.02 0 04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0 12 '.64 0 0tG 0 t8 0 20 0 22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND) FIG. 5-12 AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF HORIZONTAL (E-W) ACOELERATION PRIMARY CONTAINMENT AT ELEVATION OF STABILIZER TROSS 3 ADJACENT VALVE OUT OF PHASE DISCH ARGE-RAMSHEAD SHOREhuvi NUCLEAR POWER STATION- UNIT 1 PL" e DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4- FEBRUARY 1989
i O f e 41.70 FT. ; 4-- I I .l O FT. --> s
/
":.b.
/
4 .'e
- p .' Ti.'
;>s
. :s. m'.
A.. SUPPRESSION POOL .P.'* TOP OF POOL n
~ :_-:-___-___ ::__ _ _ _ :__ ____ ,_y _
. b' _ - _ ::__ ,_ _ :::_ _ _ _ _ :_ _- .
tHWL EL. 27'-O" h-O i. 4.
,' .6 -
;)'>
DASE OF Y. Id' COVER SLAB MAT . SUPPORT EL. 9'- O' INSIDE ., , BASE OF PRIMARY PEDESTAL AT IDE CONTAINMENT ja
,. , 3 , CONTAINMENT
\
}.?.,.s ,..^ , ,* . g . s , . s . , g . ..R.,
-EL.8, O',
.y. . . g . . , . . .
o
. e
[:> .A.,
*],
t i 1 i FIG. 5- 13 CRITICAL LOCATIONS O SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I PLAk~ DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS l REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981 l
- l. - . _ . . _ - - _ . . _ _ _ _ . . . _ . - _ _ _ _ .
l i l i l O _Nss n Os _
\ OUTSIDE OF NsT SUPERSTRUCTURE II QT N
-l V/
M Os y N ss q 4 TOP OF MAT OT M ss n M TT
' N / N
' / Os NsT N7 l l l l l l i FIG. 5-14 l l POSITIVE SIGN CONVENTION l FOR INTERNAL LOADS l SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT I l PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS l REVislON 4-FEBRUARY 1981 l' L
)
%d ' k
=
.I \ -
) I E
^
I E j T o t 9
- o 2
y k I I h) V 2 g
$ h x
H b @ h
' I '
?
8 2 9 3 0.00 0.10 0.20 0 30 0.40 0.S0 0.60 TIME (SEC) FIG. 5 -15 MAT HOOR MOMENT JUST OUTSIDE C.aTAINMENT C ALL VALVE SIMULTANEOUS DISCHARGE \ SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981 1
O 8 i
~
) {
n
- \,
3 p A
$8 -
h l \, O ( 8 5 W v 8
)
m i
<t o E e H
8 5 k l N j 'O.00 0.10 0 20 0 30 0.40 0.50 0.60 TIME (SEC) l FIG. 5-16
- MAT RADIAL SHEAR JUST OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT l
ALL VALVE SIMULTANEOUS DISCHARGE SHOREHAM NUCLE AR POWER STATION-UNIT I
-}- PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981
O E 5 8 b
.. f u '
G N 8 5 d g f I k Z 8* 8 u l f _J - $ s o \ ( % l 1 N o a u i i l _A , i 1 A J P) i o o f i 1 r 8 l ' f Y f f ; ; : i E n
'O.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0 50 0.60 TIME (SEC)
FIG. 5 -17 MAT AXIAL FORCE JUST OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT l ALL VALVE SIMULTANEOUS DISCHARGE p]g g SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981
1 0) C#
=
f f 8 i f
" r i i
I x km > U I 2 I 8 w E i f f ! I I e l i a 9 r 8 8 v i z e i s ' F g l < 2 l ); l
- o v i :l l
I ! i t l-8 E I t i a 9
\
"0.00 0.10 0.20 a.so a.4a g,gg g,go TIME (SEC) l l
l l 1 FIG. 5-18 j MAT HOOP FORCE JUST OUTSIDE CONTAihMENT ALL VALVE SIMULTANEOUS DISCHARGE ($ ( ,1 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS j 1 l l i REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981 r
O O O 3.00 r i
. l.0 P6RCENT* OSCILLATM DAl#PW6 2.5C -
.' .ll ! }
1 ij . . !. ' I'
'!llkf.!'.l. ,
l . [}; ,l t k'.0 itdE $ TALL' hAcTch ..
! i-
[ ; 2.00 - 1,2aTIMt scALt FicroR G ; . t: i r f '
.l *+ ,
' '[i,'
- j
- g. l 1.4 sfliAE SC ALE {ApTCP
!. ,.l ' j; . ;, ,
i f, ll{ 1 z ; 1.ssianeESCALEfACTof l!{ i .
;( , j, -
l i- - . .. - . . *
- . 4 i
- i. * ;; j f F_ ll y' 'i'.i' ' ;t.l :, j i!4;l.
~
7
~ $ ,.! ;!!!f'.[. :,+!<
[ ., , .i : 1 w m. n f a, #
;j ;j
. , 4 j . , , . - , -[ . . - 'o 7' i
, }l, '! '
n' ] .(; 1:' ll;' t'eq.;
,i- ,i i l'l,'
o j ' 4 i- -
! !. ' i.
' !' [{'
it, o 1.00
, ; ! !!, l l
.j. i +
< w {;- - s 7 - ~ q' I i;[ >
4 - . l p ; ,
;l .[7 7 -- -
l;
..+..
..t\
7.',f 'I < l l .< ~,.' .. . . , ; i!1 .i.
+: ;
,,: {;
.i:;l:
-...:. .l 3 0.50
};j .- . ........ ...
I i-g 0.00 g!!jq ggi]p g 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND) NOTE: THE PRES $URE MULTIPLIER USED HERE IS EQUAL TO l.O FIG. 5- 19
-AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF VERTICAL ACCELERATION
, TOP OF REACTOR SUPPORT PEDESTAL T-QUENCHER ALL VALVE DISCHARGE-PRESSURE TRACE NO.1 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS r REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981
J J N 3.00 - 4.0 PERCENT OSC4LLATQR DAMPmG l 2.50 - ! l
, . i l
l j'- ii lI!is i) 'Il jg I l
~
; ; h 1 Md *SdMN dCTM hl^d1.25' s. 1 8 I. ' / 1MC 3CALE FACTDh i j, I
;Lf,; 'j .
,p.*
I l.4
- TIMC SICALE FACTDM i,, , j-l 2 I '
h--W *~-- 1.4
- 1'IMC SCALE FACTDR
, 4 -
'l O -
'f] .. i.,
.l. i ; l' '> #
i{ ,[
.l .
s . i1 1,
; ,[ ' a f, 4 .
- t i ,
' .i ;9 y 1.50 itj !- ,,
- 7-~ l: ;
r;j c1
.um .1i j f p{ '.j ,
w H .pi,r . . I r,rt_ h .i ; i:' ; p, q r c._. .e mur i , t-
,r 4;y g .
N l. ;% _. ( .' lJ .
] l: i jI I .ii j
'k . l I ,, [ i N
6- '
.- .. -i. 4 f: ;i' f',; .- ! ,t
' f - .L u: ,, N 'fj i,! l
- i. lf I! '. I I{,lIf
#{. h,[!! n I I pj j . 4 p ..
L.. l e,- .. r"d W., r
; Wg~.hin j -
y l.i ,
\ M :(n llI avh , L.' r !i ! .
- ' . :. . . <' 2' ..
il 2IiL '* +% i: ij
'*" M ' ~t}' ;! ~'I
,[
[ gjiji g gn ag" ..'
~'
f- Ophyhhllhl% mih -q. lm 3 h['-gQ ima aia . m -
- Mm, t
, q! ngw gm{
0.00 - 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND) 4 I NOTE: THE PRESSURE MULTIPLIER USED FIG. 5- 20 1 HERE IS EQUAL TO 1.0 AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF VERTICAL ACCELERATION TOP OF REACTOR SUPPORT PEDESTAL T-QUENCHER ALL VALVE DISCHARGE-PRESSURE TRACE NO.2 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981
l O ~ CJa) 3.00 - l 1.0 PGtCEyr OsclLLATOR DAMP!NG l , j
- l t ,
i .
! ' b 2.50 - ; ! I i' ;
' l *
- ! i e !
I l
; j-i i j, }lli.
ll! t li.il i'i l j
}
i rh [I T l {' g~g . I '[ D- Y.I E' S'dA E ,_ 3 e f p-- :.2 : T1ME SCALE rACToft ' , l
. }; ;
i _h f ~ 1.4
- TilWE SCALE f ACTOR f , :l- ;l, , .j; ; ;
Z l , .' --t 1.8
- 1*4WE SCALE f ACTOR I .!' >
- $1 -
!: l i -
o '
- l 4 .. 1 . ji l !.': i 3:
' s . !' '< < i ;4 ', }ii + >>' . .i
' P4--l *l I l t it e i
l w l50 *
'I ~
'; I
. I, !;l' ,, ;, !
I: L j!;! i
~' I i I li; ~ , d'-t ij
! j : 'i:
- .,. '
- 3 t'- 4 i;ji i
[;j : i 1: rl!1 {' !! :[ +!; ! lj ', {l{tl-
! i
,:ll
- : ! ll ;
.t.
1 o o
,5 , ;t-
.,i t i, 7-*;4, 4
t . /, i ' i I
. ' 'l- j
;tl l t
+p.,;j. ,
- i
;,,j;j 1
[ 4
.l. 1 4
. . ;4,._ . .
4 1.00 -' t;- l-m-
' i rl}, [
f7
} !;
ll ,r
,, r4 f, ;
~
! i l,3 s.',,l, I
. ..2 _2 .
.1
'4;;
-, _. 4 g .i . ,, ,
. . T.1', + .4 ..p! 4 ! q.e..
4 i. ;j;t-l . i.
.y .p .
_q,_ , , g h .,, . , T ,,,, 94;; ,a
,.4,. - gj g, 4.
s
- g. .; ;_
- ,,,, 4
- _ _
py - ;l!.yg 7; ...- g i. g-' I If l tty t. ....: l i4: ? (:h.-g q: , c . k, -r:W i p
;l
- !!p.yl+i-- lp;,'; AJS N, g *tpr_l
,, m
, 4, .t t 4.. -
.a ...v j; .,1 V
,- 1:11tiI . ;
4, y,, . U. r .
.gy4 y .. ',,
4
.g O.00 li il !iit ? !!
~
l! l , f;!l -
,,:l 'l lW! tif N
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND) i NOTE: THE PRESSURE MULTIPLIER USED FIG. 5-21 HERE :s Eouat To to AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF VERTICAL ACCELERATION TOP OF REACTOR SUPPORT PEDESTAL T-QUENCHER ALL VALVE DISCHARGE-PRESSURE TRACE NO.3 SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS i REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981
/' O /N V U 3.00 ,
- t' l> 'l ;
, . ' . 9',
. . . . . .. . . _4_ .. i.. a. l.. .. .
_ . .. .L I l _,','
'.",+:p.+. '.,'," "4...'..
.,4..,
L. [. n
.i,
., e
.:,.. 7
,+.
. 3. .... ., I 4,.
, . .. ,7 2.50 ,
Lj;. +>' p EimsbMt@risti .,[,J,M3 jO {9j,_' n 2 m- ~n-w 3-qr
.' ' 4:d E:' ft}}
'I'
' 'i tr j ' Pr.-Pri rE
- auntin 2Du3tLE
- merpp
- 3NIFind i; 1 $
IW ;;; ^ g 2.00 g j,,,..,,,4 7_
- .I
.+.
.m3_, _ ,
,Q, w
e 4 v. . l ,, ,. ,
,..y z '
4 n. : - i. .- *L t!i _. L
. .' .U,, 2d' 4._
-.7
,',t o, i: t
.L. i
*.* t4.++..;l i ,,..
r i. a.
,a l . . .
.l.
'g.'
.2
- . p,
7 .sp,ua,. "+' '
uO ~ ' - a- -- I .. - + -+ - + + - -+- ta *!!. .i. i
!!' t+ 1,1 l! li.~ t i ;;;
d r.__. 12 4_ .. .!. r...._.. . . _. _ . _ __.. . . . . . . . .s.. . _
'..1;L124 tlt* .;j& I !!;
t- # nu t t: o :- . : ,. u -
-t
* * '- f ' '- -~++
*4'
* + **
1.00 A i
./ .? * - !! g l -
+
u. f, .s ;'j i . . ^ -. ..p - p.y. *4
"::. iH it3 rid; :r 4:
uf! nq g re ., Tm y .
......q --
~
~%#
f{ :. [ !; NQg,4 "'* %
';I l L% ...
.. 1
,.i,
. __. .. . i. .
i
.~. ,. ,
- 4. 5 4;
t,i>
, ,I .
0.00 O.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND) NOTE: THE PRESSURE MULTIP_lER USED pl3, 5. g g HERE IS EQUAL TO 1.0 AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF VERTICAL ACCELERATION TOP OF REACTOR SUPPORT PEDESTAL T-QUENCHER ALL VALVE DISCHARGE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-F'.3RUARY 1981
J J s 3.00 --
?
- ,i i
, . . . , . . ... .. .i. t . , ,,
-,.+...
i
.+.
. .._. 7
_. - . 4
;i . ii.
.,4 . _
; . ... . . ._ 4. .. ..
g i .g- . .. _.. 4 - , - . . . _ . .. . . gl- i+=tas aurtab;- -- 1 .. .
; r ;nn;;-r e
;iM.!:
. . . .._._.__n_-__ ;
- 4* *4tk w=&i- i i a- . a :?+!'
jjii jij-j trti,a i & -igggg kDBFIBG ..N i'.
' * 't
.ptyy.tyyt : - --- - !- nit atm 3gggg;. - d.j ,;.,
2.00 g ,,. t,
.}, ,, . ,3 ...__ ; __g,__. ,, , .
, , ,. r .. .. ., _. ._ . _. ... ., __. _ .
. . . l, .
_ .. , _ . . ..1 aTL . , , , - . .
- 4. .
..o 4-2 -- - - _ . - -. _ - - - + - . - -
l +; ; +:
' 3 ' * - -* - *' '- - + ** -~++
.-..-.,.7'.. . .-q ' f. i *>3
, .O._ g t g.. <{..
+'4+.
. . ' .. ,.4 . i ,+i + ..t.,.
_ ..o..
'.' _--.4 4 .. .. .. . .
4 o' ' - - -
+- <
_-t.- .+h +.
-+-.. .*.4+ . . . t+
w . 1 m . T ,, . - ..
.. . , , ,4+> .
_; , ,. _t . r . _ .. . _ . ,,., ... ... , 9 +. . .h, + .- W .. .. . .., 4 . i , . 14 .t .o., _.. . 4 e -. a,
.IIi+ n+, . . . + +t., +at. ..+u+
u ...w-.
. t- - li4>+, p+
. +- .: , .
- i. ,,
. .t . , !
g . . . . . , i t
..g 4 A_. .
u ... 7. 4l i.. t. i,. c
- - - ,e . , , + .4 -; .
& 44. .
. . .a. . , 4.
,, ... ,, , .. a. . . - . . . . . .. . . _ . . . ,
,,.,,7...
... . , . ... .,.4 ..._.,e..
.j 4 .+ .p.
,,q. .1,g .
4 -
. . . ..f. -
,,. .. . .+
.4
.... m...., at. T- _ %.#-..g r4-+ .
4 4+ - -. . . . .
.-,-.4 i i
, i . .
s-,, 4
,,,s . > ;
.-i .4... ia.. .,ti, W.. : ,&, _ t + - . _ + i
. . , i,4t. t u. 4
,. ..,3,,. 4e -,;}
a Tj@.!p.
,3 -, ... t - + . .. .,
p" s . 3 ,. -
.u. _t, .-_ . . ..,4
.p 4
' " **' I'
' ~ ' '
' ' O * '~.. . ' ~~ ~
O SO ' ' ." . . . .
'.' j i g --
'gm>-... .
. , 7 . . . - . . i. .. cw,
,.,+g;..~
M,t: ~ , .. ,:
%n
;;;;1. ;..
- i. . : . * +i g~,,~,~#**...A. e.et . ,t- *< ...
f -
.I.
.i . .
.,. ..4. . , .
.i. 5.%
1 - .. NT* "3 ., T=t j.
.{...
. . i g ,. .
- g. , l ,.
t . .i: : ... .- 4 .
. - . i.
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.i8 0.20 0.22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND) NOTE: THE PRES $URE MULTIPLIER USEo FIG. 5- 2 3 AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTR A OF VERTICAL ACCELERATION PRIMARY CONTAINMENT AT ELEVATION OF STABILIZER TRUSS T- QUENCHER ALL VALVE DISCHARGE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981
e
.e e
p < ad n ( " s
. l,
. . ..o.
. O F 4
E m 1
>c4
.-+ttt E
w h-
. +,. .,.a. ..
y
, 1... .- . ..+ + v. ,,,,3 ,
. s.
.:k..J . + + ,. . . m N
W g 2 O l li.'
. i M.
O O M 44 4 gu- . . . .~. 6
.. ~,....
.ma i sss
..,.as r,
w..s > .
.,..-.a .m .. ..
+ . + ...... . _l._ - a . =
.7. . .
.. g g. ..gg -- . . . . . . . . . . .
.....4.
o 4 0
.u . . i._ .
S-- q
" Z O v .. . . ,o, .g.gs p ... .t.
..y4
.. .. u . . J.-..
.} . . .. .
.gg.
R ~. .t _~ ~ . . _.m
. . . . .- , - , . . . . ~. O o _a
+-
~. ._. ~.
^^
.- N 4
.m..... m.
- d. . ... .._ 4 ._ _.. . . . .
E o s.. i n.n. .._ ~
- u. . ,..
. . ,.. O -I W O
.p. f u.-..
. m ._. .
, . ~ . _ ....4._ e z 4 o -a
... .u wM. .j. l..
. _ ..L,.. .4
~
o H EFo 4 -7...
. ,. _ <.1 h.3 . . -.
4 h- m 4 z z oy
]k
. + . .
.l6 L.
il , .
...d.. h 0
.. i . .g .k .p. ..
r.. a mZ m@
+ . . . .. . . . . .
- 4. ..
._.E N
i 6u
*N Ub h.
-..A.. .
* +.
E h -4 htt4 S + 40e +- .j - +- . g
- 4. .
O t 44h N 6 0+ - +
-1 f' b
@ Q ==3.@b
.w...._ f f- .1 + i' l +4 44-4 +44 + .i
+me. e .- gb h
4.. -+4h4
++.44
+4+.
+
. .i., O., 4 g g
^ ^ f. T d y) 3
- d: .J i _ ._.: 6- Z om o @ aI a. sm
^
. i.. ._ _ .
l'.
._. . . . . o
.. . - . - 4 .7+. .. .. .. .. . m.. g
_. . u.a. _ ....h__.. . -. j._.. . . _ _ . _. .. _. ... ~ . - . , O o y) o qm yn
.g. . , .
j _. .
- g. - y g 4 N 4- L
-- m g U go o- 4 g nz
'{. nu oW
..1..
; p. g
. !;., , -,{ . .
o 7 zgg s mq g g g u gW
. . . .ai. -
g-
.a. !f,, s E
. }2..
.i . ., ..
m.
...,3 4t ,n, i 4. . . , _ . W g _l,L g Z 4 o g-g _, , .4 - - . . - . .. . . O a. , jog wH O. UO o Ezq i
I 9 ,. a,
.4 - . - . . .
....+.... ,,._e
.,4..
*~.
O O gL
.o .. ,.. .
.-. ...g
.4. .a.._-. -_.
,2 .
-.w ..-_- . y .e++
.,, , . , _.t..
o2 O.g IJ u . ...
. . - , . _ , ..._..4 . ..
4,.
. , ,. . . .~.m p..t ;
.,_ .1,
. . . _ , .. -.__.-.4 , _ . . . ;. . ; .* _
}q. .- -;.. .
.p. -.
.u...-+_.. .p+ _.w
_J ., a . _ .
- , , + .. -]*-
-e 0
4 ... -- 44 .-.. + * . - , . . , , ..'* *
. i, 4 i . . 7. 4 .+
_ . . ._. 4 O
; ' +
.e 7 7 ,. ,t +44 .
7
, 4
'. e i 4 - 4 i
m
.+.
...e..,
4.
, . . . .e.. ...
.' o.. ,-
.n
. ,, ....j.. ~ . ,
+,e, y .-, .y
,w a.
44
.,7
.+. -
-,+
,a o
~
O w tth H, e; . b .- d P-e M
+.. ,-
s
,.r
[. , .$4., ..i .., v -+.-.
, .,. - 4: i. .2... . . , *g, .
+.. g
- l. .. 4
.g .,
+ - - , I +
.,4
. L.-
.W' L'
- s. g ,
...e.. +
, . 7. e .. ,- 4 4, , a 4. g .
4 . . ._e
. . h_. 3 4.,
- m. . .
,e
- a. 7; g 3
,. a 4 . 6 2so y;
_. ... . ~ . 4 --+,. g j.
..m .. n -. 4, - .. ..,. .
,3
, s ..
-g.. .....J. A
_L1.
.. 4+
+ . , .
m m
-__.- .s--.... . . , . . - + 4 ,, y; g ,_., O N2
.4,.--.._
._J, 4
..o.._.,_+=~**9
. . + , - . .
;+... . . +- . . - o a .o wg 4 . 1.-.
..y.
7 4. ,., .
..,}.
gy
' ' ~
gg
- 4. gN N . . . . _i
..v.
.. _ . J .. _ _ . w g ,
,. -}. . .. h. .~ . .
t. o p o o Z s o o O o O o Od so an t n N . O d o' d O o' O o s (D) N011VHT1333V
() m
) v Q v
3.00 , -i -
+ > i
. i: , , , , .
. i i
t, .' ,; 4, i
- 4. ,4._._ 1
'?.
,i
,..J. . ._ . . a.,- -
.._,. . . _ _ _1 R4.; - t *
. i ! :
,e
,ii- .
,! r ,
, < ;i;t 4i 6
., - , . .i ,. ;.p , .
,{: , ,, . ...
i 2.50 *
.i. .
.; . , . . , '... i. ., .
2M l Ti" U; tCUDEqps :14p%ne erwt mey,Eq;.
- t ap .q<4
. +..
_O -I 4.
- 4. '
.Op- -._s. wm e am yt t a- r air -7'-....
.7 ,;;'
- ' i , _ "I
!" 7
. .1-
'l t e-
.l If 7
.Fr? nib U;DECDE:14R D:.03r.DE:lttirrne nneggd Durn ' '
2.00 n ..:, , 4 i. 444 . ttTr Um3.-,- "'=' e , Hu a
- u. r .
ti - . 1
,, 4 t . ..
2, . .. i.,i. . , 5;' .., .
. +L; . . r,__. .
_._.li..
. 1 2 4+r
. - q+-+t _ __ _ _ _ . . __ . . __ .
. _ , _ . . _,. . . . _. . . _ _. _i ,.
.44, 4. .
4
. 7 _.,
' 'i - -
t r l' I
. '3 ': .tt . ,
. 6-
_O_
.e ' , . .
; i, l ,' l . ,.-. ..t
+.'
p. 4 1.50
. j -
'~ '
t . 46, ac > i .
.i.4.+ .,,' ' '
- i.rI j '
4 ,+ + W ,, . . . . .. .. . J
> 4
. i .f .- , , , _ .
t ( 4,:
.$ .f .,.
,t+
6 i. t. e,J i ,4 , 1 t.
.~. ...
g i 9, 1, . ,.4, j, u
. 4,.i
' . 6 ,: . .
i
.-t, t i, j
.._4 6
c ii ; 1' t ij t.;.. . . .; . 4 i . y .} : 4 6
' . p..
-{
.i.
.., t
. 7
' 9.i+
t*** 61 t , .! 4 . l ., .
+4 -
't ' ' ' ' ' ' '
4 1.00 :' ' ' ' ' '
- 4
- t. t.
1
,t. .
t r -1 . i 5
.4, + , ', i t
.t . .- -
i., ,, 1. 5 er 4 . 6, 1,.i
,.. ,.: i; ,
,. ,I ,
- i. ,, . ..!.4 .. .
51 l.. ., U; .,it". T 41 p4L WT, T ii i ' . ; i ;- T, T, i,i, t, 'TTI.T,M- 'T!T, WIT
;ii 4, j,..
T.. Tt. .. TT'T r' .;it
.t. .p p.
t _-.-i,r.t gof,
.,1 41 4 ,4
,,1,,. ! , ,
- 4. pi
- t. .. .
4 g . ... ,,, 1 7 ,,. g,g . . ., . ., , . ei , , :. .. ,.. ... ,,. , ,. , ,.4 . , 4, s i . -4 . n. a._,. t.4 . . . , i , ., i 1 . ,ia ...,
- . 6 .
6 : , ,11
;, .y.
2
. . . . .!... c. g ,-;
r (
,(t .
.jl ,;
l. I . . i .
*+TT ~
-*+
7;'j T T7'+
- ., 7 ..;.- - - ' -m t q '~ m ~-t~- - - - -
3 TT ~~ + - - -
. .t ...
- n. .
l' 0.00 ~ ' - O.OO O.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND) NOTE: THE PRESSURE MULTIPLIER USED FIG. 5- 25 HERE IS EQUAL TO 1. AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION PRIMARY CONTAINMENT AT ELEVATION OF STABILIZER TRUSS T- QUENCHER ALL VALVE DISCHARGE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PL ANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1961
x V J d 3.00
,i.
i ,; . i i I t-
-, . , I 4
.. ,i ,
- p. _ . .
. . , . .. .. -.9 . . . -. _ . - , . .
. _ _ _. ,i . ._ , .. ._.r.
._. , - . .p. . . ._.
+l , .... .. . . . . . L, , , , i i . 1 ,. ,: ...
'!!' 'lg.
' I
't
, = !' .
, , i , , ,
2.50 4 . .. i 4 .g.. . 4 . . . i l 4 .
~
'l ' , IIII 38it.I.RIPlQh ,. .
11.! ' .. .- .. .. .. .. ..._.. . . . - . . _ . . . . . III'
- 7i"tarWhgg3 y,'_.., _.
!!' . . <.. $!'j!Zbis3L$ikilll$h 7'
~
M- tr.tstatsaturte+ pedi g 250 ;, ,
. ; ; ,. ;;g y p, gy.. .
n ,,y q i; ., , 2
, . . + .
. .{
-~
+.oL . . . . . ,.. -. .. -. . . , . 4..
L
., -. ...- . _ . , %g
. A .
--+ t .-
l
.,d
- +
l
.w.
.}
.+,P --
gi *
.,9
,.~.,'..$
O__
'- l t ,l l I:
, ,.- .' .(: m+."?.++. ,.!'
l l; ;i ' i J
- ++.
p 4 4
** . ].' l ,.
t . . t 1.50 ,' a: :
,4 !. . i. i i
- i. .i.....
.i 4, ..
+
w 7 i 4.: .";,
-8 .!'+.2a
.,j ..Lu. . . ;.; .a ... _. _L al M '_:.i. .. i +
- r'+- .;4c - A,j.
w 1.II
. B, i i,.. , . i t , . ,.
o .
. i.
g .,6 . ,.. . . 4 . ,1 , . . i . . . -
.s, i . !. +4. .;6 .
. i . ,
4 1.00 .i
.... :,a., . , ,
1,4 j ,t 4 l . .it , s. .: .Ia 7: i+r .,I . . ' ,. - *r i s, + 4f,. t,.. 4 l 4 .: g +t.1 if i i t ,. +g. d t , , . . 4 .-. . , , . ; ++t .
" , . ,,', ~' tt' t ~rin '~
,t +n TT tr .. r. ti, n- ~;,,r, -
pp}Ti.
.4 i ".;1,. .t ,
i, T., +T-- @tt hQ,e
. 4
.;i
, . , . ,i ,
,;.. 'j,' . i; T+. t, --I'.3 ...' , ,. 6,i.
. . 1 . . .. . . , . , t . . . ,.. i, .;
i i gg..I. ."' t ' '; ' ' 7 '1
'. +' t'.
0.50
,;3
... q g,mg;:p***'
g*:' Q ij' 4++
*14 '!
) ,1 4 l ;l 4
; }: ; '.. A
.- 6 .
i j
-r* '
, j ;i
.jf
': ;l
;i t 1;;i
{1, ! I' , ., f{ h, .~ N Mh #'~"^
'f M
.4,,,
t41 . 14. ., 4
,1,4_ , i t , . . , ..... .. , i.
0.00 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND) NOTE: THE PRESSt.mE MULTIPLIER USED FIG. 5-26 AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF VERTICAL ACCELERATION TOP OF REACTOR SUPPORT PEDESTAL T-QUENCHER 3 ADJACENT VALVE DISCHARGE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PL ANT DESIGN ASSESE MENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981 J
a
) J v
)
3.00 --
. - ~ ~ . - - - -
r
.1, . . , . . ._... . . _ . . 4 .. , . ... , _ . _ _ _ . _ . _. . . . . _ - . __. _ - .., u __ ... _ J ,.,.;i_ 4441 t ' ' '
ri- 4 {- 6 !i.,-{ '. !!:! -l , 2.50 '
*1' _
4 _. . g etN+*+,-trmr 4g y g i; tl
;i!+j jj
* {d)
~
. . . . 4,a !.... .. . . . . . ._ __ __
- r. 7 t-WP- r ;
ii' !- '-
- 7. t&g d A , i.c':- @4; u ;. j:4;
,. u r. ) -- ---
trup2; .ixp.):-4 dgin'.'l ; .
'h'. .-- 2.00 - -- - - - -
o
~
z
,ll
- g. .
_ . . a - -... 4-i 4
-t t PM ""
..1..
D i "'F#tWfM 4-
'!: ' ;' ;;,' ;jvi l'.! ' '1 ;
gy I .QgS_4z:.Q;: t[
- ' +-*.
7 7 p E:.' it:; 61.; .'. . TT 11 t t:
' j: j'. T 4
'" + "
g 1.50 '. 4 'i ' ' , ' .
' ]". +.
e,.. ., ii: .i .,. .:, w t
.i
; !I!1 : fli; *iu a..l
'ij p+'t ' . t' d . u_ .4 ..m .._._
_ . _y'!!..; 1; il!r ;;!' '; i! :j :'b.it 4 .27 7 t I h
- lit I}y';2]
o "t o .t
' :- t ; !!.r. , g ., Lt;t; hp .:i T]a < 1.00 i-pp !, !,o!1 ' iW 11;; '!4*! s, t
- 1. l : ,' '
i t lti, M. L i . i . . ..t. . ,4 o, p 4 . p ~fK jf
*'*-^-
~* ' ~ ' ' ' *
. " '", ,,;;T '
- i ,* T ^
',',i. [. .t t. t, fi . ' 7 7.,, *, }.
ii. j 4 _.
.n i
..t.
jg ,, ,j ;",..tp1 m.
.', i l.'
by .
., . r' 1.,
. i ; ", -[' +L.. .,.f
*"' }' -.
t M 0.50
' .A '.t ,i ., '., . r. . 3,.. ... ',' .'. ' -'
#+;tt
, i; . 4
.\.. i.
.ilr . , i. ,. : : ,.
. . 4,, ..+i .
, . . i. .
. , .. t . p . .
in u _; t:l: ;p + ; ;- & g J.
.:;; !;t: r Qm.- .
N + _K.4' _; ..: n . . _. 2 - . _ . ' . ..._.i. t
+ g-
,.pT4g
-. .4- -
.. i W. . EEk_. . . t. _
.==%p-,:t4_.. _.
rd. r ,t
' 4' '
0.00 O.OO O.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND) NOTE : THE PRES $URE MULTIPLIER USED FIG. 5- 27 AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA 0F VERTICAL ACCELERATION PRIMARY CONTAINMENT AT ELEVATION OF STABillZER TRUSS T-QUENCHER 3 ADJACENT VALVE DISCHARGE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION -UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS m REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981
\
Qs . 3.0 0 -- -- T - - -
--- - r <, ' - - -- - - - - - - - - ,-- --
, i l
I ! '... : ).. It , I '!~ i,
;l j i
!j i *-
i i I
'li-, r l }
2.50 -
': :::::::::; oteca$:nlateatewth
> : ,i! ., .,
- it. . i
,' , l ; J. '. l !, .i1 h.! . .; i; .! . J atilidiit $1 SOL.4$ JtL4 M W1 .. . . .
1;!' .
'~ > !; ,i
;! ll
- I ' i, iI*I !!! $!@LZ$$ :$(L$4Rf'$
4tNH$4 O!Ota T 881:!LLA $8itlA03 i
$latj g 2.00 j ,
,,, j g;, ;,;g(q ,; ,
I{ ' i , , 'i
~
h E
!$i i(( 'h{ jI!!i'. . i i fl lI llll- ~'!~ p- li '
1 ! y i. 1.50 +~,
=
, j j .
y i; , , w ! !' I i; ' ; t
'f J j . ' i .. ,
,i 'i.
y ,
; g , .
,3 -4 o Il- 'l,,j l; i *
~l }
, i o ,
l
.; i 4 1.00 .- L- i
- ~ - -
J. -- r l- 4 ---- --- - - - - - ---
'l
!fj .
'!.i ; l ! l
! ;' ' 'li i
' ' i .
f !l ! !! I ' i; i
~[ l O.50 O ^ -9 1 - -
~
y tij; .- ,
'I
~~~E "I*'*"*--- ..,',',' - .7
'l f l'J. [.:, i ; g '. ,'
; l.
"J W N -
~
i
.AE J.*J'.'J.ar:-- -- ---
g -'
l i t 0.00 --
' I b O.00 0.02 0.04 0 06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND)
NOTE: THE PRESSURE MULTIPLIER USED HERE IS EDUAL TO I'O~ FIG. 5-28 AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION TOP OF REACTOR SUPPORT PEDESTAL T-QUENCHER 3 ADJACENT VALVE DISCHARGE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY !981
3 00 - ",- - - -
.4 ;
j ,
, , . ;. . ll -
.{. ... - , _ . . . ; 4.. .- . _.
9-
. 42 . _... .
. .j iiJ .
i t-
!': l! i::i' ! !' 1 i;.l !. '
.I 2.50 4 1 - -
! . I
'"**bi*i.'M "$s;!LLaTea!DlaFI I;
. ; . .u
-l q.mt
.t.. t" Matep;w saa w!ttmaca. m e_. _.
.i:
,titiattR
!Ltp' ras nuts $'~
2.00 i . ! , Ecse: tat:tt.t.a:realalartash i g ;
=
, ,,r, ;m,g __ su
, ,p ,}-
,i ,,, , ,,
- i. .
. .!6:'
I ;, . !ij z 4 ., i
; :). _; .a ....
o 8: - , - : ' 4 9: ._5'
' i it >
p ; l. ~!
.,{l 4 ll!. 4
. i ,;4..
,;,i.,I , j-E .
., . i ; i 41' l' , ! i, t kJ l '
l ' l .; ; ,
' t ;;. ,i . li! .,1 ill d ,: f ; . , i. 2
; ;; .I .1-h.[.
4 .-*
' rr - --r-1
'hel'k-[ -
o :l;i: . :i: ; , t::1 , o - -., ,ji 4 i i,
; *l:, :ji et 1.00 -
-- .- o- . . - . - - - -. -- . - + . . . -
i -
.l .- ,h.
l' . i:
! !, !'I.i 9 ,
l 1 -}. , i ; t i .. ':
,i /, .+,[. .s 4 .
, , - i ;
} , ,
0.50 I j %-*.
- -- - - - ~
' , .l-. . ._.........;;;;;;;;.::.._
.i g.[i i ; , - - - - ,
.l- : l.. t I
0.00 ' O.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.10 0.20 0.22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND) t f NOTE: THE PRESSJRE MLJLTIPLIER USED FIG. 5- 29 HERE IS ECA TO 1.o AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION PRIMARY CONTAINMENT AT ELEVATION OF STABILIZER TRUSS T-QUENCHER 3 ADJACENT VALVE DISCHARGE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION-UNIT 1 PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981
SUPPORT PRIMARY
-{ PEDESTAL CONTAIN M ENT
^?6 * :
4, ."
-- -l ,.
.- . - ___=_______- . ', c .= ,
*~
. .s ir l- 1r 1r 1r 1r
. v. ; r. v, - - , + . . - <; g -
*f,,*.4.- . .-
...,..>.. ~
a . s - ' * *.. _ s... *.'.',. , , , , . .
*u :.
. . . . . .. ..' o. -s: ' ' ;-
PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION 50 - O _ 40 - ON BASEMAT E S 3g , ON CONTAINMENT w E D m 20 - - M W E
- 10 -
l 0 I I I ' O.O O.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 TIME AFTER LOCA (SECON DS) FIG 5-30 LOCA VENT CLEARING I IDEAllZED PRESSURE TIME HISTORY. SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION -UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981
( -
~
s' g
~~
- i. ~s .
SUPPORT *'
,- . ' *; PRIMARY PEDESTALN, c,( s s,
/ CONTAINMENT v . .-
. 4-- ---t
, . o- - .
-r ir ir 1r ir 3r ,.
. :, . ' , s , p - -
o ,- , o ,
.- . . ..o. . . . . -
u -,u , ,- *. , u,;g'*o,
.* .' . . ; ~ . , *.'
~. *, ;-
PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION
= 20 HZ s \AA Am" "
2 Id V V er IL O Y I I I I O.0 O.I O.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 TIME (SECOND)
= 30 HZ E , A A A M y
LJ yyy- - C: C. l l l I I I I O.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 TIME (SECOND) FIG. 5-31 l LOCA CHUGGING IDEALIZED PRESSURE TIME HISTORIES 'O SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION -UNIT l PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 1981 v- -
,v,y re - + ,- y ,w-w q mn.m- --s -e ya a e , m w ,c-,w- e ---e e- m - - -,, ~a e
o) o O ( w- (v) (-) 3.gg ,,-- . 4
--.3_.~ .
...3 11 HH f fii- 1,!!,glig.yjuy utgij ,
o --pa.g emeusmanneo wne, m nonnauarn:a wnem.: - i 2.50 -; - --- o ff IIiffIkiiiiji:.tikt iilt i i t' , g
- 2.00 - -
',- -- - - . . - --~ -. -- 4 ,
i o
.i i
I. ,e i
, .j i
4' I t l ' l 2' r y - .,' , l. l t
.ay
- s
. . ...lI i
;.'H .
t 4 , O 1 . l :-
- r. 1 i e i
.i. , , . !, ' . ., .
.g i
. t..
d
- D 1.50 . - -
I~ i . m u. .
, . , o. e ,
, % n. g
+ , ...
W -;
.':l ti .',,
ji ! i: .!t
'.:. ;:i :', .,. , ,
J W
.i.9 .; ;.2. . . _ . .
' i j li U. h:i++ .in .Ji . , g !... ;;. ...; _. ,1. _ .g_
, i -
iji; ii. ;; '-
.: t .
y !:, . -
..2h! l,'!lji, !!! !!!! ;!! pq lI' i I
ti :I'[ 3.g '..
,gg .! .
. r..w _
'i
'K,
[ M
!,ilIl!} y;; ME i,. .,,
f .. ~..1.,,'
,l '
'{'!n,;
m . s/x.%oQ i !:i'
+.= ... w.
c M%= 1 + [14-
.- uo
%;..J. i:u wky w;i. o
- o,
. , .p ,--e - -
;; 7,,,
T..... ::: q: ! . ;!: FI lii! Nli !!:i <t' ' '-
. ';;L%- J! n!l ,,, i:
g'3g l l ' ~,Mf.
,1w*l'.
p . ... _ ... I,. !!. . llll !:' g:
!!L p ;. . gl 6'h:
;m . ,lu: 1i; j: o';. .ui l li ! !!!' i <:
y g . . - u;! tij! uj g li!! lI'%g . q. ol. L .
, i :: , tu . i,. ,: m c 0.00 -- - -
0 00 0.02 0 04 0.06 0.08 010 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 PERIOD (SECOND) FIG. 5- 32 AMPLIFIED RESPONSE SPECTRA OF VERTICAL ACCELERATION TOP OF REACTOR SUPPORT PEDESTAL LOCA VENT CLEARING SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION -UNIT I PLANT DESIGN ASSESSMENT FOR SRV AND LOCA LOADS REVISION 4-FEBRUARY 198'l
I
\
w (
\%s/ 0)}}