ML20062J273
| ML20062J273 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 11/30/1980 |
| From: | SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20062J270 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8010060230 | |
| Download: ML20062J273 (103) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
l - -
362.15 As stated in Report No. 2, SWIS Settlement Effects and Related Work, soft / loose surficial soils were removed from beneath the Pumphouse area. Figure 2, Section Profile of SWIS & PH, (Service Water Intake Structure and Pumphouse) indicated up to 11 feet of soft soil was removed. However, Boring WE-2, showed that the loose sandy silt (classified as saprolite) extends to a depth of 17 feet.
It appears that these loose saprolite were left in place. Discuss their significance on the settlement of the Pumphouse.
RESPONSE
( The log of Boring WE-2 shows that 6 feet of fill was placed at the boring location to provide a level and stable base for the drilling equipment. The original ground surface, at the base of this fill, is shown ta be elevation 358.9. The base of loose saprolite is shown to be at elevation 347.9. Therefore, the thickness of soft / loose surficial soils below the original ground surface was 11 feet, and not 17 feet. All of this unsuitable material was removed prior to construction of the West Embankment and had no influence on the settlement of the Pumphouse.
(v ',
362.15-1 m m M M 22 NOVEMBER, 1980 8010060 b - - _ - - _ _ - - -
i . -
l I !
l 362.16 The pre-construction subsurface profile of the West Embankment as shown in FSAR's Figure 2.5-102, indicated that the SWIS & PH are located in a valley with some soft / loose alluvium deposits and ;
loose saprolite. Have those materials been removed during the I construction of West Embankment and SWIS & PH7 If they were j removed, provide the documentation; otherwise, discuss the sign- l ificance of them being left in place. ,
RESPONSE
,- FSAR Figure 2.5-109 shows the elevation contours of the foundation for the West
\
Embankment. In 1973, all soft or loose surficial soils were removed and a firm subgrade was achieved at the elevations shown. This was confirmed by Borings WE- l 6 and WE-7, drilled in 1977, which did not encounter any soft / loose alluvium materials.
During foundation preparation and fill placement for the West Embankment (as well as the North, South and East Dam), a Resident Geotechnical Engineer was on-site full-time to inspect and document the work and to make recommendations to ,
facilitate achieving the required results. In his Daily Report of August 8, 1973, after approximately six weeks of work spent in stabilizing the West Embankment foundation area by the installation of French drains and removal of f
unsuitable soil, the~ Resident Geotechnical Engineer stated: "By late afternoon, ;
cars, trucks, front end loaders and Euclid dumps could drive most anywhere within the West Embankment area." On August 13, 1973, the Daily Report indicates that, j final proofrolling of the foundation area was performed with a Terex Pan and then placement of compacted fill was begun. l Placement of fill would not have been permitted had the subgrade not been stable, nor would the required 90 percent of maximum density (ASTM D 1557) of the initial i till lifts have been achieved. Six in-place density tests were conducted, on the first day of fill placement (August 13, 1973) in the West Embankment foundation area. Three tests showed results of greater than 90 percent and the other three !
i I
AMENDMENT 22 j 362.16-1 NOVEMBER, 1980 .
l l
l
e i
showed results of 86.0, 88.7 and 88.9 percent. It was concluded that too much f compactive energy was being applied to the fill which tended to shear instead of compact the subgrade soils. On the following day, fill was placed in the area directly beneath the Pumphouse using lighter compactiUn eg'11pment. Four lifts of fill were placed and density tests showed all lifts to be compacted in excess of 90 percent. f Based on the documentation presented above, taken from Daily Reports of the i Resident Geotechnical Engineer, it is concluded that all soft or loose materials were removed from the foundation area of the West Embankment prior to placement
~
of compacted select fill. ;
i
[
P P
4^
f 362.16-2 ^MENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980 l
362.17 In FSAR, Section 2.5.4.5.2, six types of backfill materials were discussed; none was called as selected fill. Discuss the relationship.
RESPONSE
The six types of backfill described in FSAR Section 2.5.4.5.2 were used for backfill of structural facilities at the plant site. The select fill materiala used for construction of the Service Water Pond Dams and the West Embankment are described in FSAR Section 2.5.6.4.P.. However, as noted on page 2.5-85 of Section 2.5.4.5.2, Zone II material used for plant site construction corresponds to the select fill used for Service Water Pond construction.
e l
l 362.17-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
6 d
4 362.;8 Table 1 of Report No. 2, Inplace Density Tests of Selected Fill l
Materials below El. 390, seemed to indicate that seven (7) selected fill materials were used for West Embankment with the optimur moisture contents varied from 13 6 to 24.5 percent and the maximum dry density varied from 100 to 115 pet. Explain how with so few moisture control tests performed in the field it can be assured that water contents of the placed fill were within the j limita of +4 and -2 percentage of the optimum moisture contents.
RESPONSE
1
, Aside from internal drainage and slope protection materials, only one material was used for construction of the West Embankment and Service Water Pond Dams.
This material was denoted as " select fill" and consisted of saprolite excavated frem both on-site and off-site borrow sources. The saprolite from all borrow sources was in conformance with project specifications. Some variation occurred with respect to maximum dry density and optimun: moisture content, as would be expected from material obtained from various borrow sources.
As shown in Table 1 of Report No. 2, a total of nine (not seven) compaction tests were performed for select fill materials below elevation 390. Further review of this table indicates that the fill was placed initially in this area in August i and September, 1973 Five compaction tests performed on the fill placed during this period indicated a very small variation in the optimum moisture content,
! with a range of 13.6 to 18.6 percent. In fact, except for one day (September 6, 1 1973), the optimum moisture content range was between 16.8 and 18.6 percent -- or less than a two percent variation. In February and April, 1977, some additional fill was placed as backfill of erosion gullies on the slope of the West Embankment. A different borrow source with somewhat different compaction characteristics was used for this work which was performed nearly four years later. Again, the variation in the optimum moisture content for the 1977 work was quite small, ranging from 22.1 to 24.5 percent.
362.18-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
i As shown on FSAR Figure 2.5-143, Sheet 4, a total of 37 compaction tests were conducted on all select fill materials placed in the West Embankment. Thirty-two in-place density tests were conducted within 50 feet of the Service Water Pumphouse and Intake Structure for moisture and density control, a substantial number of tests. As noted on FSAR Table 2.5-50, in-place moisture and density control tests were conducted at a frequency of at least once per 2000 cubic yards of fill or once per fill shift, whichever was more frequent. In addition, fill placement and compaction were continuously monitored by the Resident Geo-technical Engineer and Site Quality Control personnel. Moisture and density control tests were conducted in excess of the required frequency so that corrective action could be taken whenever it was noticed by these personnel that the fill appeared to be too wet or too dry. Also, moisture content tests were conducted at the borrow source and when the materials were found to be too wet they were aerated and dried before being transported to the fill site.
In summary, it is concluded that a sufficient number of tests were conducted to assure that the select fill materials were placed and ccmpacted in accordance with project specifications.
362.18-2 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
I 362.19 Borings WE-6 & 7, drilled in Sept. 1977 (a few months prior to '
reservoir filling), showed that the water contents of the compact-ed fills varied from 19 to 34 percent. These seem to indicate that all fills were placed much wetter than originally proposed.
Discuss their significance with regard to the predicted settle-ment.
RESPONSE i As shown in Table 1 of Report No. 2, the compacted moisture content of the select ,
fill in the West Embankment below elevatien 390 ranged from 15.5 percent to 24.3 I percent (average 20.1 percent) and was within specification limits. The moisture ,
content tests on select fill samples obtained from Borings WE-6 and WE-7 ranged d
from 19.5 percent to 31.2 percent (not 34 percent). The borings were conducted four years after the select fill was placed (except for slope repair fills). !
During this time, the groundwater level was rising into the fill and had attained 1- an elevation of approximately 365 at Borings WE-6 and WE-7 (See Table 8 of Report 2, Piezometric Levels). The moisture content tests from the test boring samples of select fill above elevation 365 ranged from 19.5 to 27.3 (average 22.8) and ;
below elevation 365 ranged from 21.4 to 31.2 (average 26.1). The average increase in moisture content of 6.0 percentage points below elevation 365 is due to the saturation of the select fill caused by the increase in groundwater level, and is about the amount of increase to be expected from analysis of the compaction curves shown on FSAR Figure 2.5-143 (Sheet 4). Above elevation 365, the increase in moisture content of 2.7 percentage points represents partial saturation due to capillary rise of moisture from the groundwater level as well l as downward percolation of precipitation.
l .
In conclusion, the moisture content of the select fill at the time of the borings confirms that the fill was placed within the specified range of moisture content.
The increase in moisture content which was measured is within the amount to be
, expected due to saturation and has no significance with regard to the predicted settlement.
i AMENDMENT 22 362.19-1 NOVEMBER, 1980 I
- _, . . ~ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . .__ . , _ _ . . _ _ . . _
362.20 Consolidation tests, as stated in FSAR Section 2.5.4.2.2, were
- performed in general accordance with ASTM D 2435-70. However, l
from the information presented on Figures 2.5-114 it appeared that '
ASTM's standard procedure was not followed for those tests.
Specifically, ASTM requires that readings should continue at least
- until the slope of the characteristic linear secondary portion of I
the thickness versus log of time plot is apparent. Later tests in conjunction with SWIS & PH investigation, similar non-conformance
{ of ASTM procedure, as shown in Report No. 2, was also noticed.
Provide the justification for making such a procedure change.
{ Also discuss the significance of this procedure change affecting
! the preconsolidation pressure, the compression index, the rate of consolidation, and the overall settlement estimates.
RESPONSE
4 The consolidation test results for saprolite, decomposed rock and compacted select fill show that in almost all cases primary consolidation occurs essential-ly instantaneously in the laboratory. The compression versus log of time curves which are plotted therefore are primarily of secondary compression. Since the
- load increments were generally applied for time periods ranging from 15 to 100 minutes, two to three log of time cycles of secondary compression were included in each increment. This is sufficient to conform to the ASTM requirement that
" readings should continue at least until the slope of the characteristic linear secondary portion of the thickness versus log of time curve is apparent". Since the two to three log of time cycles were also included in the plot of strain versus log of pressure, the resulting determinations of preconsolidation pressure and compression index, and hence the overall settlement estimate, are in accordance with accepted standards of practice, and conservative.
l 362.20-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
. i 362.21 only two borings, WE-6 & 7, were drilled after the unexpected cracks were discovered in the Intake Structure. None was drilled -
along or adjacent to the Intake Structure. Construction records showed that several types of materials were used at the West Embankment. Provide construction records and field testing f'
results which would enable an as-built section profile including soil properties to be established along the Intake Structure. If the available information is not sufficient, provide an investiga-I tion program which would provide the subsoil profile, type and l thickness of various fills, material characteristics, and con- !
solidation characteristics of subsoil and fills. !
R2SPONSE i All fill materials placed 1.t _he West Embankment below the foundation level of the Service Water Pumphouse consisted of on-site borrow materials. The construction records do not indicate that several types of materials were used to construct the West Embankment. To the contrary, the select fill materials used to construct the West Embankment below the Service Water Intake Structure and Pumphouse were basically either sandy silt (ML) or silty sand (SM) that have a relatively narrow range of physical and engineering properties. The observed variations in properties are as would be expected in any compacted fill derived from naturally occuring residual soil or saprolite. Therefore to attempt to provide profiles of the fill showing variations in properties vertically and/or hori::entally would not be appropriate or meaningful. The overall behavior of the fill would depend upon its " average" properties.
In 1973, four block samples were obtained from the on-site borrow select till '
materials placed in the West Embankment below elevation 390. The block sample testing program is described in FSAR Section 2.5.6.4.6 and the results of tests performed on these samples (UDS-1, UDS-2, UDS-3 and UDS 3) are presented in FSAR Table 2.5-59 (Sheet 6) and FSAR Figures 2.5-150 (Sheet 1), 2.5-151 (Sheets 1 and 2), 2.5-152 (Sheet 4), 2.5-153 (Sheet 1), 2.5-155, 2.5-156 (Sheet 4), 2.5-157, 362.21-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
-y , , _ _ -
o . _ .
r and 2.5-158. The block samples test results confirmed that the properties of the compacted fill were similar to or exceeded the various parameters assumed in design.
A subsurface profile along the Service Water Intake Structure is provided in Figure 362.21-1. This profile is interpreted from FSAR Figure 2.5-109 together I with Borings 4E-2, WE-5 and WE-6, as well as from information provided by the '
Resident Geotechnical Engineer. !
i i
i l
t 362.21-2 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
,' 'Il Il !) d M E ., k -
e
-u /,
lll 1
ll ll '
_g
.3
! \.e
\$ \
t
\s \
\
ki k -
t
-g, s s -
k h k e
UE . 1 g: gs
? L ;i 2 at I \ f I 4
=
'd
!'- 3, l 1 2 (
'\
i
~ =~
i 5
g
[
of 7 I
\
j 38
-8 E-
.I E 1
\
3
!s . 8$. .
- z. l3 l g-k -
I 1 -/, -
il . is, s \ s i
= 18;: : \* a i
/ '
l :*
l**, _g. 2 -
5 i
\ ~lD n a
=
I
/
s -
I l {
I I' '
n!l . :
I d 2 '
-t k e t if ga !"*' 5 g! '
hs i s sii e -
ss l di,,a 9_2i_l i "EII st I
38E s 'g )
85* 't . s gl 3 k -
3 .
i -s
- . i: '
/ -
s el 5 in.
3...
!5
. ;i E[
~
8-
-f
. 'h .
! I!.!.
._ -s j,
,( ,- .
l 3 .- .
ge Wl 's s
I w
- s s:
N l
=l
-: 1 s I!s = -
! I\ s " I I El ili lll a
l
's l s g -A l i
@l _t- I"'
!!I, !. \s l '
5,I m e n err 22 g3 6 !!"L Ig'i Ns I l N _g NOVEMBER, 1980 s:1 u d. ,\
" 't .
ls $ '
SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS CD.
VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION Figure 362.21-1 Section Profile Service Water Intake Str' e m -
And Ptztphcuse
i l
362.22 Select till materials excavated from borrow source F & G, as stated in FSAR Section 2.5.6.4.3 2, were used for most portions of the !
West Embankment and on-site borrow soils were used as fill below elevation 386.0'. The on-site borrow materials possess a relative- r ly high compressibility as indicated on Figure 2.5-125. There l were nine consolidation tests, but no compaction tests on these on-site borrow materials. The consolidation test results shown in l Figure 2.5-125 gave some indication that the behavior of those t materials are rather complex. Without any compaction test data, ;
explain, how the field placement control was achieved.
I 1
RESPONSE ,
( As stated in FSAR Section 2.5.6.4.2, select fill placed in the West Embankment below elevation 386 (the Service Water Pumphouse subgrade level) consisted only of on-site borrow material (except for surficial slope repair material placed later during pumphouse construction). In addition to the nine consolidation [
tests shown on FSAR Figure 2.5-125 for Borrow Sources F and G, six consolidation i tests were conducted on on-site Borrow materials. The results of these tests are shown on-Eigurs 5 of Appendix 2D of PSAR Section 2.5. The consolidation test ;
samples were compacted in the laboratory to 90 percent of the maximum modified j dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. ,
t t
As shown on FSAR Figure 2.5-143, Sheet 4, a total of 37 compaction tests were ,
i conducted on select fill materials placed in the West Embankment. Of that number the first 10 tests were conducted en on-site Borrow materials. These compaction tests were used for field moisture and density control. !
Based on the large number of consolidation and compaction tests performed on the ,
select fill, the compression characteristics were well documented for the specified degree of compaction. Thus, the field placement centrol was achieved ,
by requiring a minimum degree of compaction within a narrow range of water content, the combination of which was known to result in a suitable compressibil-ity of the fill.
362.22-1 AMENDMF.NT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
l l
I 362.23 No consolidation test on borrow materials F & G can be found in FSAR. Without such tests, explain how the settlements of these materials were estimated.
RESPONSE
A total of 9 consolidation tests on materials from Borrow Sources F & G are shown on FSAR Figure 2.5-125.
b l
.k 4
1 362.23-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
y ~ : A ~A --
l . ..
i
\
- r 362.24 Consolidation tests, performed in 1977 after the discovery of I cracks in the intake structure, did not follow the ASTM procedure. ;
These test results tend to over-estimate the preconsolidation pressures and underestimate the compression indices, therefore, the settlement estimates become non-conservative. The results presented in Appendix C of Report No. 2 show the trend of the compacted fills when they're subjected to different consolidation pressures. These results indicate that the compression indices increased significantly when the saturation pressures were in-creased. This implies that more settlements would be expected in 2
the future. Discuss the significance of this observed behavior on anticipated future settlement; quantify your discussion.
RESPONSE
I Refer to the response to question 362.20, where it' is shown that consolidation j
tests were conducted in conformance with the ASTM procedure.
When the compacted select fill, saprolite and decomposed rock became saturated in the field, due to the filling of Monticello Reservoir and the Service Water Pond, settlement immediately stopped and rebound began. The rebound is caused by unloading of the subsoil due to the reduction of effective stress. Settlements 7 preceded saturation and were induced by the weight of fill and water befcre s
saturation. Clearly, saturation did not change the load-deformation behavior of the foundation materials but did favorably change the effective stress regime.
Since an increase in effective stress will not be imposed in the future, no j significant future settlement is anticipated. In the consolidation test results presented in Appendix C of Report No. 2, two of the three sets of tests do indicate that the samples which were saturated at low consolidation pressures were less compressible than those which were saturated at higher consolidation pressures. However, the third set of tests indicated less compressibility within the loading range of interest. Therefore no clearly defined trend is evident.
These observations are insufficient to constitute a meaningful statistical population, but are suggestive of normal test scatter rather than the hypothesis suggested by the question. The purpose of saturating the samples at various consolidation pressures was to demonstrate that a sudden collapse of the scil structure would not occur upon saturation in the field. This was confirmed.
362.24-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
362.25 It is not clear how the revised settlement estimate, as presented in Sec. 6.4 of Report No. 2, was obtained. Provide the calcula-tion, and the soil profile and properties used for that estimate.
Also, provide the settlement estimates and back-up data for the SW and NE corners of the Pumphouse and the mid-point and east end of the Intake Structure. Discuss the significance of the estimated differential settlements, if they exist.
RESPONSE
~
Preliminary analyses indicated that the settlement which was observed in August, 1977 would have occurred if the stress in either the select fill cr the saprolite had become greater than the preconsolidation stress. This was determined by reducing the assured preconsolidation pressure in each of these materials to the stress level which existed at the time that the increased rate of settlement occurred. It was found that when this was done with either one of the two materials, the computed settlement approximated the actual settlement which occurred. When both materials were assumed to be in the normally consolidated range, the computed settlement was greater than the observed settlement. Hence it was determined that only one of these materials was exhibiting virgin compression.
i .,
Based on the above determination, it was estimated in October, 1977 that th?
Pumphouse would experience a total settlement on the order of 12 to 14 inches and the west end of the Intake Structure about 10 to 12 inches. However, the laboratory data from Borings WE-6 and WE-7, presented in Report No. 2, was inconclusive as to which material (select fill or saprolite) was the primary contributing member. Of the four consolidation tests conducted on the select fill, two tests indicated preconsolidation pressures of about 3.2 and 3.5 taf, below the expected maximum stress of 4.5 tsf, but the other two tests indicated preconsolidation pressures of about 6.0 and 7.2 tsf. Similarly, of four consolidation tests conducted on the saprolite, one test indicated a precon-solidation pressure of about 4.5 taf, less than the maximum anticipated stress of
, 6.0 taf, while the other three test results ranged from about 7.2 to 12.0 tsf.
362.25-1 l
The calculations shown on Pages 362.25-5 through 362.25-38 were performed assuming that the select fill materials were in the normally consolidated range and that the saprolite was preconsolidated. These calculations were done during the period from October 2 through October 6,1977, uhen the West Embankment fill around the Pumphouse had been suspended at about elevation 420. (The cover sheet 7 dated November 4, 1977, was added later.) The results of the calculations are summarized on page 362.25-38. !
Settlement was computed at five locations along the Intake Structure and at the f
front (east side) and back (west side) of the Pumphouse. As shown, the
{
settlement computed for the fill at elevation 420 agreed very closely with the settlement actually measured. The total settlement was then calculated assuming :
completion of the Pumphouse and West Embankment, as well as filling of the I Service Water Pond. The settlement calculated for the front and rear of the !
Pumphouse was 13-1/4 and 13-3/4 inches, respectively. Allowieg for variations of stratigraphy and material properties, it was estimated that the settlements !
vould range from 12 to 14 inches. The actual maximum average settlements, recorded in March,1978,' were about 12.1 and 13.2 inches in the front and rear, respectively. It should be noted that the calculated differential settlement between the front and rear of the Pumpheuse was due solely to the differing ,
stress conditions caused by the sloping face of the West Embankment. In actual '
fact, part of the differential settlement was also due to variations in stratigraphy.
The total settlement at the west end of the Intake Structure was calculated to be
(
8-3/4 inches. Based on this result, the estimated range of ultimate settlement !
was taken as 10 to 12 inches to account for inter-action between the Pumphouse and Intake Structure and/or the fact that the saprolite might be in the virgin compression range rather than the select fill, which was relatively thin at that location. The actual subsequent settlement was 10.5 inches. At the middle of 1 the Intake Structure the calculated settlement was 5-1/2 inches versus an actual settlement estimated to be 3 2 inches, and at the east end the calculated settlement was 1-1/2 inches versus and actual uplift estimated to be 0.4 inches. '
362.25-2 l
i
e The determination of which material (select fill or saprolite) was actually in the virgin compression state was made from data obtained from Borros points and settlement plates after fill placement resumed on October 10, 1977. By isolating the compression of the select fill from that of the saprolite, the compression indices of the materials could be computed, as shown in the calculations on pages 362.25-39 through 362.25-43 The field compression index of the saprolite horizon was computed to be 0.13 from the data at Bcring WE-6. This compares to an average laboratory virgin compression index of 0.14 from the four consolidation test results from this boring, and demonstrates that loading imposed on the saprolite after August,1977 was in the virgin compression stress range. Because the Borros point at Boring WE-7 was founded in or just above the decomposed rock, computation could not be made for the saprolite compression index at that location.
The field compression indices of the select fill material computed fecm the instrumentation of Borings WE-6 and WE-7 are 0.031 and 0.024, respectively, as compared to average recompression indices of 0.015 from block sample consolida-tion test results and 0.011 from the four consolidation tests performed on the select fill during the detailed study. These data indicate that possibly the lower portion of the select fill is in the transition zone from recompression to virgin compression or in the virgin compression zone, but that for the most part, the select fill is in the range of recompression for the imposed embankment loadings. It is noted, however, that the instrumentation for WE-6, where the recompression index is greatest, was located directly beneath an area which had been surcharged and had, therefore, experienced more load than originally anticipated. The effect on the calculated settlement of using a somewhat greater recompression index for the select fill is small when compared to the effect of the saprolite material exhibiting virgin compression behavior.
Once the field compression indices of the select fill and saprolite had been determined, it was possible to back-calculate the average preconsolidation pressure of the saprolite using the measured settlement of the Pumphouse structure. In this matter it was calculated that the probable average preconsolidation pressure of the saprolite was in the range of 3.25 to 3.5 tar rather than 6.0 taf as previously estimated. This calculation is shown on Page i 362.25-44. Once all of the soil parameters h1d thus been determined from the 362.25-3 l
l l
l l
l field instrumentation, it would have been possible to repeat the calculations on Pages 362.25-5 through 362.25-38 using the actual parameters. However, this was found to be unnecessary, since the settlement was essentially completed and no further estimates of settlement were necessary. j l
The present maximum differential across the Pumphouse, from the northwest to the southeast corner is 1.72 inches, and no apparent structural distress has resulted. The floor of the pump room was poured level after most of the settlement had already occurred and has subsequently only experienced 0.05 inches of differential settlement. The differential settlement of the Intake Structure caused some structural cracks which have been repaired. No operational difficulties are anticipated for either structure due to the settlements which have occurred or the future movements which are expected.
t J
362.25 4 1
i i
D. . , .
.+ -'
( O DESIGN CALCULATIONS ,
OWNER F1LE No.
woodward-cw coneunants ,lo ra (p a a. , ,,,, fwm se W gas , 6. s. 9 z n,T '"% PROJECT J08 No. PAGE V e &sL {. $vrosnfs?. / G tiSAot STAR')o& 7, e j 3YSTEM CALCUuTOR # d
/2v)L f MA42 lSinfAc ~IF AND INTpuG [7au ervas __
(LvNCL\ DATE "l'7 CALCULATION FOR REVIEWE F 77Z.E m / w 7" -
DATE12 2/17 RESULT 3 Eir,asrs -us ssrn em uir e vs w as n-rs on ras
$ ki?H A." h C asi S sr vAiuoas "m> La srasvss
b vatin c. c-gr7a a e rien' r
mit CSTcNf: .
fr u AT 'lo t
- a. ~
'/2 o
'lls f/LL. feNb los) C- 7"ftt rry BouYAuc/ . i
$E TTLfmfn f h *NT $
P mo *4* aw: Fa.~r . n u r Pu >> e Gmare Bsex. Eb &c =# P-me 6)nmarre.
TupAlfL '
otoo o t y)
- S 1.
It2)
/4 4 Y 362.25-5 WGA-AD-32 .
~
e _
.. .. l I DESIGN CALCULATIONS i
OWNER FILE No.
hard-Clyde Consultants g . .f. t com se PROJECT JOS No. PAGE MA0 yis y 1 2,qd ,
SYSTEM CALCULA A*3 DATE " " "
CALCULATION FOR REVI M R DATE111 RESULTS ,
$e*L k ff L 6 P-ra as . fra srrscm pr sier ra .e.ancs -c - c,
/nb w f - 2. USE TPE fo u.o wN S s ra.n r/m pty' ' /
$fLfc7 EILL : 3 93 - JCY :
$/1/tze tirs : T r'/ - 3 S o 2)se. Ra.ec -
33o-3..
LSEL . $st /177A&NE.h ~ PA.or>LE Scc y M C- 9$2 ef
$ft rc r FJL) - //2,av'U C) 9/* 7. Eas w uk,,, , fy. $fs syr 'f. :
EN&infrie. E CL o ~ fit u, bu r>~ ers on arrvera s.oraot o rt ans 2Esemeestb accx n.r si,re-a rsiv r . tin e t S ra its/K **LL 66 /N /2f lo o,P d tKsso N AA N FE /Nb tsc.at. crus.ES) I , I I i l f l l r i 1 l l l
. 362.25-6 v l l
WGA-AD-32 L . - . _ _ . - . __ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . a
* ~ - - - - - - -. - . ._ ,. ,_. -- . . . - . _ . . . _ . _
. .. ~7)L 12,
. :- O
.. ( 3 JW MD
/ oM h >
f,40
- p. 77
~-
eas
- gggytcg wATDI INTAKE STRORE ,g, a.ise.. . .es 7 ,,,
wE-s
.e.seavv ase ese = lq /aus.88'vesf asaises I =
I= I =
- k. eten .
( CsF l *e h ese' C3F I FI l as r~
% .g
'D .
las See . .. ' e.
'" " * - * = . - -
.: 1 . ':.t3;l~.9 : .. - , . .... ::::*^ . . = , ' ;. a01 t ' y
".".*.?'**""'* . C :. ' .,:.. a h - ' '-' "-C..-5w'40Li i ;.v. a ;.a - h
-~ p-*-M :..ca'ah .;..:.*_b1::J5R ::- *;;;,tLT.. .CJ.;J :
" " * *
- a:.
e _ .T .se Ps ft l *' es i,o. as Conspectro s: LECT FtLL , 3 ** g -- 2 BCspl
*
- as .
- n. .
p,
*
- s . l *f ' , ,, .
U. te
, nee- g g, 2~
N*$_ sb -- -- .. __ ,,, _g see-we. eor, , ___,,,,_--- ___,----------___,,,,_,,,WE
, , , * * " " * * = = - ,
e
~
.g b regisces Dealm I $~~ ~" we.7, s
=
sape0 LITE . ..-* see. _ R . ears-
\l 4w ,
a.
==""*""" e.
seesS* 33e. se , wt.-TPt ==4 sesse* p*'""* DEConsPOSED #0CIE
** .sers.
# l .C==
mars. tA "pov . l O Lt9840'
PUT see ,3 s
p.
*E**N *I ** e Cam TTPC PtE20 METER
^
I p " anes- 1 son =0s PoiuT aos - 1 A GRonceewAftp LEVEL Oss 10f4/77 e?
/ est se saasett LOCAT10se aseo SPn v4LUE l too- l -one s t* s .
-- . . - i en PISTem seasPLE I . es . Dama TO Ltemt Gnav AttafivtLT
'eI3* 7 tufaCT ROCa .eRam00sOR ITE pT PtTCuta taasPLE ese . '
f, , as us acca Cong saasPLE i !Y'
/ ,
e se stTTLtutNT PLATE
/ ry, L r /
3 1NFERRED STRATIGRAPMfC ' t SECTION A*A , l SERvlCE WATER INTAKE STauC M l f
.. )
362.25-7
. . . .. - - _ . _ . I e
- re l
=
- g , *//6 7L
-r , m m ,
m y. m . i , ee i g) l , i ? v ly}77
. 4 i
#. I 1
y i I' ' I / ,
""*'N e rv r_"
i
. . . t e
i e i ? t ! . 4 i sL
/
g ,) l i i i
- m , .
. .c , . , .; . /m !, j
.n __ . - t
. WJ .- -' '
-9 - v i 9 . I g l
. , l . ' p. . . .v i . . 6 1 4
- i . . ;
n e . o.
.,,m,
. n g .
i i .
) {
i i .- . . . . f
. i i
. .): . . ; i . 4 i # . . .
e .
. i . ) . . e
. . . . g. . .. - w e in . e . 3 i .
- .w . , , . j i. , . . .mme
. qi . . . i i ..
. 6 i . ' 1 . . i i., . . f . . '7 i . . g. . . i . . i g 4 . 4 . . . g I . 4\. . . , . . . i t
i . y L.
. , i . .g . . . . . 4 4 i i . . . . l . . . 4 .
me
. . . g . . . . . i e , i . . . r * . . , . . . . EX e i 6 .g i i . . . . . e . . . . . i. . . . . p. . . . i . i
- i 6 il . 6 . i =
i a. . . . 4 4 . . i i . . E.O
- k. . . * , . . . , . . . . . . , pd
. . . . . , , . , . 6 i . \6 . e , t ... . . j i . . i , . , 4 . . . . i . . . . . . mO e4
. . . . ) . . . ... -
. . i i . . . . . T . , i i . . . . . o m-
< . . . , n.i.e i.. . r . . 4 i i . . i . . 6 -- i . . i . , i i . . . am
! . 6 . . . . , ,1 . i . . . , . . . i e i . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . ^~
O
. . . i . I3 .a , 4 e i . . . . . . . i . . i i . i 6 . . , , , . <
. , , i . . i . , . 4 . . . . i . i . 6 m i . 6 . . . . . . . . . , s . g
. . . i . . . . . .\. . , i . . g . , . . . . . .
3 t
. . . , i . . . 4 . . i) . . , e . . . . , . , , e i . . i i . . Ex
. . . . . I g. i 6 . 6 i i . . i . 4 . . . . . 4 . . . . 6
*3
. . . . . . ,16 . . . . . , . n . . , . . .
i i . . . . . . 6 . . . s) e 6 . i . . . i . . . . e i .
. . . i . $
i e i i . A cg. . . . k 4 . 4 6 , . . 6 . . 4 . I i . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . i . .\l i 6 . . . . . . 6 , . . . . . . i - t . . . *
. , . . . . . . . 4 1 . , . i . 6 . . 4 ! .
. . . i . , i . 6 .
. . . . . . i n. . . . i .. . i . i .s . . 6 . . . . .
. . i i . . . . i \ , , i i i , i . . r . .. . i . . . . e i . .
. i 6 . . . . . . . . , 1 . 6 D ! . . . 6 i , e i .
- t. 1 i t .
; i . ., . , . L. . . I i, . . i A e . . i e i 4-. . t . . . . '
g
. v . . .g. . . . . . . r . . . ..)i , . . ., .,
6
. . . . , e i i i)
- g. .
9
. . I.
g e i . i , e i . i . . 9 . , i . (6 . . .
. . . . . . . l . . i di. . , , , . . . . . .. 6 . i . . . r . . . . i . . .
. . . . . . 6 . . . . .) . . , . 6 , c . . . i ; . . a . . . . . . e i ,
. . i e . , . . . . . . . . i g. . . h * ' . . i . ee l . i . . . . * . i i s , . . . . . . . . .\t t . . . . at ' t . fi . . . . . .
. . . , . . . . . . , . i 6 , , e i . ) . . i
! . i i F . . Ji i ; . . i . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 6 . . , g
- i i 8 . 4 i . . . i . . ' . 4 i 4 . . . . i , e i
. . . . . . , . . . . . 1 . . . . 4 i L i i 6 'f . . . . . 4 .
. i i 6 6 . u
. . . i . . . . . 1 . . . . f. .
. . . . . 1 , i . i L. s e i e i
" . f+ . ,
i . . . . . . i . t , i e 4 . . e 6 . i !\. 4 . .. . i e i t i . e . . f. . . . t . . . . . . .
< . . . . . . . . e i . e) l . , t . . . J e . , . . . , . . . . .
. . . . . i 6 ,f . . g, . . ag) . . j . . . . , 4
. . . . . . . . i . . . . ! . i . . . . i i\i . g . . 4 r . . I i . . . . . . .
i1 ._
. 6 i . .L i , . . . . . g
. . . i . , . < . . . . . . . . g. U i . . E ri 1 . . . . .
, e i . . i . . . . . .\ . . . . . . M . f . i . i . . . . i
. . . . . . . . . . 6 N
. . . i 1 . . . . . s . /t . . . . 6 . . . .
g
. . . . g n . . 3 i g. , , . . gag
, , , , , . Ikg% i b .d . , . $ .
. . . . . 4 . . . . . . *,,
. . /. . 6 i , . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . i . . . , ! g. . . . .
n . . r . j . .
. . . 3 -I. . i i
. . . . . f. , ,
jT . . . . . i h /' . . . . hu ! . . 8 i e f- . , W . , . . 6 i I . i w . , i i e um?
- 1 i a . . 3 . .
7 9 .l. ,, % ' .N Ad i " .. . . . e i . 6 . . . 1 g, - , , , . . 6 A. i . , . , \. . . . j s . . .
- 3 .
i . . .N $ 6 .
. . . . 6 , \. . , . . . . .
, . . . . \ i P t . w
. . i N. . m . , .
t i . A' i e ! ! 4
. . . .N i w i N- U i
,= . . , -4 d'- , 4 . . A ' i , i . %
7 , . \ ( . 4 g . i , .\ , v IN t i e
\' i t t
. i 4 . 6 . .
, i 362t25-8
\ ma a - ~ . -__
- :. c o DESIGN CALCULATIONS OWNER FILE No.
Woodward-chde coneuhants (. 7.2 c a7 "s a PROJECT JOS No. PAGE l V.C. Summe r ,,a w 6g 3YSTEM CALCULAT 4 DATE ~# " CALCULATiONFOR REVIEWERM DATE i :/ ? /~77 RESULTS o st 12e PKz rif s l l Bsi!> -a s ier< rs.us eiun Fasau- 5. waan, i Pmtre A % s "a, m reu. - m r.n. n umsrms sas Alf vmf b (9 . , , f & f-a. S _ tys() ( 15 0 f/ L L. 1/ 4 c.o/L o .j '] 2.Zf 1 SAPGotsr5 fo 4 e.co 8 N/A 4 bit. Ea&L t3 f o. o o a N/A >sa , , Y* TE : (*) /~o rt. TVNNFL lA Ls uln rious, s LL v N s r ~ c/C-seTJ I Aflumfh N 82 120 f e f.Jun M /m $8**f 334. h-) f*/t C11Anu L Att f alt. BMfA TS Puser%v1[ Vff
- lE
- f c S . $ A T 'L Att warrf4 /Al tomj's?fX tie 14.4 l
l l l l 362.25 - 9 WGA-AD-32
. . i O%
~
DESIGN CALCULATIONS ONNER FILE No. g Woodward-Clyde Consultants 6.4 t
%T ""% PROJECT J0S No. PAGE
,[. $s.'m/D C f >,e 71. D 5f SYSTEM CALCULATORd).>.2 DATE > + /1/"
M
~
CALCULATl'ON FOR REVI caTE a t/r RESULTS
- 7/2245 bis 70, B u rs ou .
l. l Ia ir>n s. .Srasss - R,mpac.,s e: 3 SG - 7, = . ; les. G c (3)(13.) z 37* psf 3r4: G s 3 9 o + (14)(>>v) = 3 6 SC p s f 32o To ' 3 6 96 + f2 si)(s o4)
- 63 / 2. fSS '
3 oo
- C ' 43 IL + (2*)( IJr.) = 10, h? psf TANI* t. : Ust . .r7n tss n ,'g7,ria ,,rse,v f y' , .7. ' Es. sea ux,
- J<.,n/~oln. %. cum is is,wsr n sa ,
,a s , r., m us us,nc. f. iu e c / sww .,.u s.5 cess rn smiss hus n e s ra , e exem w~
Rn Tr4 T.!MfL-fon b in l- h t. ! 'to NLL pub S T/t v Livst f.
& a ,,, ,. ,,a in a,n sw a , ~ ,ea we A b OP Tf b %m ff/2/? ,3 , h6 FC L L e ws,V C /A lfS lbst stv ?.;f e st-D /2f5 VL YS.
i l 362.25-10 wsA-AD-32
- n. - - - . - -- ..
6 .. .sur ~ _. __ . - . . . _ . . . - - . . . _ . .
. e . .
p 1 * -
- i m . _
. . . y v,-- s_ 7. s.a i . #
MU* hAD$N.$ . yg
. .. -. . . . . . . . _ . 'I . i4
.. /o L/77 3W . .. _.... . - . .. . -. . . . . .
. . .. _ .. __.. . ._ m.1 .. p
_ _ . _ .gg -- w-3hb( i
._ =__. _
..._.._____....__.N._
N 3O0s _(_..__ . .. Q. ., . ...
.. .- g -w s ..
- g. .
g ..,__ _ . _ .. .. . _ . . . . . . . f, . . _ . _ . . . . _ . _ .
.. E ._.!_..
.... 4 g .
_%g.-
...._ 370._ ., -__ . . . .
....~_.J._- ._;
_ p _ _._ _ . . . g . . . _ _ ., Y 4 w m s .- X _ _ a . , _ _ -.._. - 2eg my g g v =. ,
~~-~==.---..~._. O.
Z. g .,- eg a
,.== \ .e T-
.N ._
7 ... 1 X 4- y I N - r
. I _ \_ \ t ..4...._.. _
n . . . , . . . . _ m i X , .__ .
=-
.g ....._ .__ g _.- l __g 2 -.- -
\ . . . - I.._. . . _ .
3 % .. 1
.j_s__..__y
_ . . . . _..._._ : .. ...._.m. _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . . 3 _____._., _ _ _, . .__ _ _.. _ _s . . _ _ . . _ . . _ _ _ . ._. _._. ..._ ._ . _ . .
*..~f..__.
. .. _.o n1
. _ _ - 7 _. 4.- _ i .. . _ _ * . _ . . . . . . .
JJi . . . . . . . .. . _. ._ y . .. . . . * .. . . . . . . _ e _ . _ -. . ..j.. . . . . . . _ . .
. .w _ _. _ - _ . . _... _ - . - _ ...
=_ ..
.i
_ _._-. _ / .._ ..
. .3. //.T .db_@_. .._. . .
q .._ _-_ .._ . . -....
,C ,._._
- ,g s,fi . . . _ - .. . , _ . . _ _ _ . . _ . . . . ..
p (. -__ g q.. .___.__._.._4..... .. . X_ ._\_
. . . . _ . . _ . . . . _ . . N .. _ . 1
,: _.g. . p.._
_ ._2_.
- _ . . . _ Q. t . . .._ _.
\... ;_._.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,
..-_._...s
.. : . g. ..
. . _ . L.L . _. ..dp .:. a.
8 [ur..W.u.Esb. _ J'eNM .. / . d._ .'". . . . . . . . 3
- G . ~_ .. q . .. .
lo ]e .. . .
@ ..>,K~. m.. _reens .~V.
. g,3 ; _ 4'Z/.4f. l W ._% K . . .. ... . . . . , . . . . , . . ..
. .e*o*'***
f w f . */C&4?! O*L
. ._._g * ../Em O s!4(.
. _ . .\n. . . . . .1
.n . .- _._1__' .... .
._. ..Q _. + .. . . . .
.. -. __ &._. <1L tAa .ww .
. --__Q ... . -. .2.._..\. . . . . . . . . . _ _ ._..... ..
_ .t .. . . . . . . .y 2, ' .
~_.N.. . fW.Qs"/46. . . . . ..
. . *t.v _-. 3
. ._UJg"_ SAre9 g.
- e. _ - _ . . . . .. .. ..
._-- . . . . U*W ftjr.3_
f2^ . _ . . , _ , I -. . . .
.i . .. . .
. . ._ \. , .._. _
. _ ~ _ _ . , _ .. .. .. .. _ _-
.. . ... .a.N. s. _ ..._ .. .. . . . . . . . _ _ . . _.
j f .# _ . _ . p __ _ 9 ._ . ._. . . . _ ... ..
. __ . . %. ta _ . .
p . . _ _.
. _. va
.pc.%.
.. .\.. \. .. .. - .. . -.. _ ..
3/0 . _.s__........_ . . . y.
.s. . . g . . , y . . . . _ _ .
__.. M.,4 _. _ . . _ _ y....._._...
. _ . . ~ _.
. . . _ _ y:" q, . .
. . . . L.._ _y... . . . . . . . ....--._.:
4 _. _'2 . . . . . . . _ _ .. _o . . 1g. .__yggJg
,o 4 7'M b.. ._
% .0- *
- 4. <. S gn n GRE5"J NJ#) Li?.?9-11
- - - - - - -r -
4 / -)i 6 7ti. g 6 dW isMD
. i e
to/t/77 i i . i a j .
! . i f
* ' 3
- /_ /s i
i 2MM/j I 1 [. E i I i . , . _f ,, F . g i . i e i e i e l I . . .
.e.-* - '
~_ !
! 1 . . .
i I . P
,. i ;, -
t 'I! ' z. sieg 7 . . . .ji . e s 6 i gy b , . , , , . . . , , , , , . . , i , .
. . i ,
c e. TS ,-*
. i ,
er , i . , . , . . . ., . i . . . . . i e 6 (O
, e g . . . i . , , . a, . . a' ..6 e i . . . . .. g;
. . . i . , , i . , T . i . . ,
. _ , am e-
.4 3.. . i , , , ,
of. l t
- e i . . . . . . , . 3 , - i i i , . . . . . ,e
! . . . . . , # . i . . . . . . . . . . i ..m gm 41% i . . i . 6 e .. . . . . i . i
.e3
! I e e 3 e y 1 e ; # e >
. I . 4 6 4
. . . . I e e . , , i
. i i . . . t . , i e , , , W p i i , , , . . 6 i e . I . . i i e . .
giD . , , , i . . . , i . . i , . s , ,4 i , . . . . i . , . i . . . 4 i . . , , . .
. . a q s4 4 .
- i t . 4 ' r.
, , r. .
gg u w' g
. i . . . . . . . e i .i v,. . . , , . a I I . .
f 9 0 8
't ,i. t . D . i 0 l 6 .
. . s . e , i ,
, . , s . i , . . . .
. ! , t , ! . t .I+ . . i . . i # .
. Ok i e i . i , . i e e . . . . t , i . . i . , , . , , . 6 . . .
, i i . . . . , . , . . . . i 6 . i . . . . . . . . . , , , , .-
t . . I 9 . . . . . . . . I j . . 9 l 0 .
. . I . I ,
9t
, i , . . . i i e . . . , , .e p %. e . e e i , , .
1 , , . . . , , , , . . . = , , . . , , , , , .q
. . . . , , . . . . . . i , , , i r; . , . , ,
, e e . . e . 9 . e ej . . . . . . ,
6 a . . i . , , d
. M f i - I O
i i . . . . i . . 4 . 4 , i . . s . , , . O
$g . i ,
i . . i
, , i . . , i 6
, , . . a
.a f .
6 jy. yi
. . . . .q h
y E , i . m ! , .
. s . -
6 ;
. a i . .
f . . . . . . i . , , i gi% i i i . i , , , . . ,
, i ph *
- i '
e, w ie.A .. . . , " 6 , ,
. . 6
. . . 0. ' . ,
i I . 8 i
, 6 6 4 i
e i
. 6 . , ,
8 i i . . .
.. . 4 . .
- . i .
- r. . ,
s 362.25-12 . - - . . _ _ _ . - _
7/e n. 9 . .: 39 sw ,zi@
. . . _m .. _. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ..
tohh1
.. Tdl. p.!l .0.l. A h alov'. 236 (Pe r/zlvscoh/f-s) .=.
/ /
R /
. . . . . .' 3 GYo ./s$.X R.1TV .*. /
- o a. C . ,.
.-..SB*u -
- 3 '-Y. 2 f- = . ! 'I, b 'l J
O
'- .. - D oo x. 2 8 f. S 1 .
.~
G,53l c . . (- ./ 189o x. $6 A s f. . 2, '/) c - . .
/
. . . . . . . .. .. . .. . 3 3i .o 33.. & .
J - - 4
/-
.. ... , .A bf h
..S r.t.C...'.'.....q y n ao.^ .. "l.)Yb . /C.f - (/t% /L . . . .
~
.. l. ' . .G . ~ ' . $oa .
. c/n . W2G . 3 f. ) .
. . LL . .
. / 9...X /.. M ' 7.Z 9 o _.
,t h, . ., .
f
-. . . . . .. . . .. . _ , :. . ' . .. . ' f/ *? V C of -
, . s_
,. ~ .
.. a /
7.z 6 ,
. . / . Go ff . . /N oc.) . fik.f. f/ y C6l ' 3 e s*G .
........TordL'~ Q 0%$.fSS % .'.S4&S 9 .
=
3 6, G V 9 s>xso 1 [3 o c l
/
_-22SC
)(do i
a t
. .362.25-13
f m, DESIGN CALCULATIONS OWNER Fitt no* hard-Chde Consultants g , 9, g ce=*% sa =mn. gog yo.
==s - s PROJECT pagg l
l*$ U 772/7IW jis st_ yg
' 3YSTEM CALCULATOR dd DATE ava m L CALCULATION FOR .
REVIEWER L DATE >o t 77 ' RESULTS , bLt. NY '/3f AM fa sv!wf b rYX ' !*" E
$ raeL sT ef oil * (al!T. - 36s){o La)fto){ss) J (Is){rj)} = !.72ysS/$s ur .e m.cnse =[fr.. >Ona)(si asc)] +0 )(an.)g,,y,,yn,y,,g
= q. u s,,7 iss l
- 3. n n.,
1,rs e. 3..: 3 1, a' /4.1 l') S ll FLI
- t h t)(19)
- V%* g35 l t
; Tn /w r M pa ra (.C s 'S93*
C = Syoo l ,
! T~n r r a says (jp yeso -rsea, 9eo ,
Q = yfeo-ryco'-fee f, itt fo~b wr e a sn ic = /, 7z y s o' ld.s 97 of C7nu CME ' l@%)(3, wgc} + (fyge)(3 9sy)- 2,co ,e ,a'
,g 7t re t 3.7 7. x /o7
/lyL/rets* t es)(,,)
- C'/7(~ ,*rf' hr 3vi fese siits ( = See.
@ s'/co
.. g = gsj X S e S e = ~ yo o
&'
- T47f C' loo ;
+W
, 362.25-14
DESIGN CALCULATIONS OWMER FILE No. Woodward-Chde Consultants c . <f . c w Y _$ " w . PROJECT JOS No. PAGE V. C. Commer ,, ,t ,i a
$YSTEM CALCULATOR A
- D ATE ' 'n l-CALCULATION FOR REVIEWER M DATE */ A /~77 RESULT 3 I
th l I I i i -
- y r ,, ,e i, ,9 I -
m 4 < y+ j : g('
'~
~
3,- l_ (.s.s / s3) I wl.,, f,// , / y u : 7.rin wr o e c.,u - (ru-3u)<,u) tur of sieve 7vreE = (,o14 x 3cyE)hexeo { ri eu) = *. ,i tio'lls ic,,uc,)] =i.c n r,n z.s y sio' 4 s 2 .3 Y t '*, YJG- Y/!ff C ( g gg ? ENY j?J h U-y ser. es c.) I,,p i kl trn (f0 = yc9o
& ' yofa l :. T v 1 Ci Arn~ l9 = 34s*-votto c -43=
l h : -(3o y foy,r; $1g s-l2v/% cat t vL/ TI*
- M % 1**2 V ' N'
362.25-15 G-Abf92 ., . _ - _ . - - - - ~
~
DESIGN CALCULATIONS OWNER FlLE No. j Woodward-Chde Consuhants 6 .9. t I
%T_*% PROJECT l huyyy7799f JOS No. PAGE I
y,g yz ,y g SYSTEM CALCUUTOR dd DATE 'ah l' 7 CALCULATION FOR REVIEWE DATE
- RESULT 3 Wah Fo LL pr yo z. :
Tout ~r of s eis s (vo z-18s)(Ite)f(13)(84) * (Es)(TI))' 7.6L vb lls wy of $7e v ervits ' ( ff */*
- 364'o)($1 v ry) ; 114 vs*# As t 7ars si2 2/ riv#l4:
,t.tf ese '
U- $1W B S S * (es)(pg) * /Sb3 ptf t s, > e o., ,, s
- Jnewr ria.
se u . C i n .
@ ' 19 t.e
- Tatu r ;e rt potty (j~) ; / 8 o o - / 9 2.a = - /L a
& < -n e l
l 352.25-16 WGA-AO-32
l L l DESIGN CALCULATIONS owner FILE No. l h@de Coneuhants g,4.t l o T!"%,, PROJECT JOS No. PAGE l r b' UYYJM C f js s 7t. 13 g3l i 3YSTEM CALCULATOR A_'2_ DATE 'o'2 l" CALCULATION FOR . REVIEWER ' DATE /0 4 7 RESULT 3
,ni% ~rs: ,n f. ~' ro C.a r sovr ! $7/!fSZfi sfNf/ &
St Fv. JeG in An> r*>Ja ~ .c t
, fv s. ? var Pm hid &s ! Ait f / Cx C'/ W L 1 , ! I o 12 c J 7oou 2.o. e I yo ea ge s. Seso seG isz.
l
. 2. o 142. LV \Yose Sv==- S Y== i in -
3 0 /G S Ed yo so t/VYo 4Gtf 191= 0 0 /Yd 2Y 3Y9 3Y9e *//o S' 14t.
\
, [ .C IM 2 '/ Z r7.e t s1.e 36 '/f '
/120
- b. 'C Y $. 2'l /C4o iC4. >r sa, i t'd.
7 o 72. 7</ 6o. 6. o 27to . ( 6 e t/ D 2J -3&o -sse zqsf -1s. 9 e tJ t N >- t m -ina t.Isf -/31.
/J c 6 I tL +-zo /o -tow 2yss' -2
- y i/ o -/o co 2. . . 2
- oo -22so -tz sa zv2f < -N-oz -39.f 133 .( e4 57 - -Cp - Soo -res 3SG -*
'3 o . / cc.f l> 15 3 -ti3a -it s . - r so 3: ) -su *
// -3'/.( /W es 11 -s3e - co. +1r 3sc - r z.
1 l Yrr: &a. c.aa s roa a g..ww c.na , ,, .~, ygygg,wg STA!SC a y' Sue TueTsw c- l'a* m ran fati so ans S TRf G S (W TN/Lawfi$ of' s a n. 9 MherS GLf V. 42f a 362.25-17 ___m_ _ _ _ _ - - - - ,
. .' ,' ~
DESIGN CALCULATIONS Woodward-Choe coneuttants "j "f,- c ,i__s PROJECT umm" _ .a. a. _ _ Joe No. PAGE 3'3 "
,, a ss g ULA g CALCULATION FOR REVIEWER DATE /* L 77 J
RE1'LTS bintbrfit isGiv T* 70 c.onor urr $17 Euff AFNfA17/ EtiV 367 s llLcN& TJNNEL kilff ($ {Y W { bta
/ ?ygf ?h*** SL$
1 o /LOY Lo can L eo a $3t
- t/G
- S'i ' 34 1 g f9L sf f3do 7688 7 ' 8' 3 /6 6 GJ4 o 47t* 'G9VI y syd cys a L* 639f
( 12. ys*a 4s** S,t2f . - 4 '96 3 F yo' 369c (Vie y ) 2, 2e3e 2990 f*** 9 93 Y f f t,a /1La WSVo 7 ZY 14 960 9C
- Vo So to 1 g (
IL 2Vo 240 373 [ t 11 e . .seo. Zooo Z o*o 0 0 Siza 36 7 su ~39.( zuf $6 s) ~43 2 -fS* ~ 'lo o 386 15 o l o s.( 17 ir3 153* -d30 - 59* 34) 19 -p).f try SG zu -G3* - Coo + 71 164 362.25-18 i NC_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ - . _ . _
DESIGN CALCULATIONS anEn ' ' d "*
- hard-Chde Coneadtants 6. f. L G=o====a - se m PROJECT J08 No. PAGE WA yn.7t --Qu a r
SYSTEM CALCULATOR A* DATE 'a/ t / n CALCULATION FOR 3 DYTET/ITT RESULT 3 h/Pa.: 1 (o ep r ,y aF hA : 'l .5 ~ o.' a fv' f: su7C c sv
- ,; .a ; i p ,; ra a . . c .a u-assr> rr c A: rem f.,n r xr vr tJA .
$4b N o 19 L &
- 2 - yo l e t.
S -yo 23L w o z 3 t-fi fVP : 3 9 0. c . e 9 r 362.25-19 t~!D-G-[6 _
- . .. _- . __ .- ._. .- , . - - .- - _ ~ - - - .- --- .__
l L 1 ..
~~
l
, . r q u. , ~. !
.= ,#/
- .a /g a
- 97
. *. pa) l
. . ! t !
p j q .
. .e i
6
. i
. .n ;
l% . s . . . * . l ..). 4
. . 6 ps e/ p e
NC l i ,
l
/ %, . , . s uip.
n >
,4 . . . . 6 , 6ss="Z4v l
, . , , e i i . s- l 4 . . . e E i . \
D._ 3 .s
, , i !
- i . I wi j
, %, . . , . . . . . . i / .
/- l,
- i . . . - . 4 . . . . . ./
. . . ./ ;
( . . .. . . . . . . ; 7 . . . . . . . . . . . Ii / L . .f . . . .. . . . . . . 4 e f. 7 f. !
.- l
. . . . . i . 3 / -f ;
w .ae . . . . e i . . . . . . . . . _ p .j l
' i . . . ;6 . e . e .. . . . 6 . m w. ./.I. . ;
=
. . . . . i ai i e . i . . . . . i . . f /i f .
. . . a. . . . e , . . .. . . . . . . . . V j. ./ $
. . . . , ,/ .f ,f ,i
. . . . , . ... . . . . . . . . , . . i f./ I/ j
. . . . . . . , , . . r . f yr j
. . . . . . . . . . . i i . . /
f.u fi . ,
. . i . . . i i . . . . e i . . . , , . . ,f f4 . .n .f i ;
i .p . . . . .s . .. . . I/ w.p i } M h i . . . . . . . i . . . . . .f./ .I-C .' i . . . , . . , . . . . . . i i i 4 , . . . . .f . f . /s. . P% . . . . . , . . , . . . . . . . . f f. . ./ 3 g . . . . . . . . i , . ,, . , 6 i i . , 6 . . . .f fi . / 9 . . ( i , . a , . .4+ , . . , , , . ,f /**_ ; _m..
' P
. . . . i i , . ! 6 4 i . . . . .. . . . . . se . . . i /.;' . . .</
. . . e . . e i . . as, t , 4 . i , . . . . , . .;' .I . .f i . . . .
4 . . . . I i i . . . . it. . . . . . . . . . , . . . . , / Ii . ./ . . .
.? . . i . . 6 i . . 4 i e . . . .t. , e , i . . e i . , e . . . if ./ 6 ./' ! . . . . .j
.6 . . . . . i . i . . # . . . . . f I i f. . f
. es i i i . 6 . . . , e i: . e i , , . . . , .Ii s , . f. e i . . /.
. . 4 . . . ... i . . . . . . . . ./.I . . i ./ . e__. . . . f i
. . . . . . . . 6 . . . . ii . . , . . , ..a . . I.f . . . /1 . . . . . d
. . . . e, , . , . . . . . i 6 . . l . . ./,I i . fr , .
. . . . . . . i , . . i . . . . . . . . . . f.7, ./ . t . i m e f f i . r i 6 . . . . 4 . . . . . . 6 . ,, f. , . /I i e . . = . f. 3
. . e , , , . 6 . , , e , # . . . . . .I y. , e ./ . . . i . W ;
. 6 . . . . .. . e i . , e f 3 r. i ./ . i j . . . f. I
. . . . , . . . .s 6 s . , ,r, y ./ . . . . . f. # -
. _. . . . . . . - . . 3 . . f fi / . . . /r j
1 .. = . . . . . . . .. e j . f.-ri if , , . /
, . . . . . . . , ... . .. . fa f . r j . . , , . . ,r,
. . . . . . . . . . . ..e . . . . pi /t / . , . . ..if .
j i . . 6 . . . i . . 6 6 , .,./ / . .;'. . . . . . . . f' . . j i l . . , , , . . . . . . .A fl / i/ . 4 . , . . . ./. , I
! . . . . . . . . . . . i /. ./ e . . f. 6 . , , e i e f. , .; j
, . . . . . . , f. ./ . f. . . . . . i . f, . . . , i ig . , . . . . . , i /. .J> . i ./ 4 . 6 . . 6 . ji . .r g i g , . . . . . . . . . e , ., f' .f. . , . ./ . . . . . . . 6 .; . . i ,s. g. j
- s. .y . , ,
.i / - f, . .; i . . .I i i r S; 2 . * , *
- un f. *
- I, . . .
- I, , 2 2 i
.g . . . . . . . . . A.. r.. f, i . . . . ,re i . , 6 I
, i . . . . . . . . r.. f . . . . f. . . . . f . . f. w l
. . . . . . . un i . 3r,.., . r . g. . ,,' . .g .i n.. . v. -
. . i i . . / . i/I . s , i / 2 . . [
' . . ' ', . ./6 i . . . . #' . .
, ou . ' ' . t . >
. . , * . , . iIe i 6 , e . . . . s "/I . . . .
g i . , f . - . . * * . . . _' ". 6/ . . . I N .. , . . . . . . . . . . i , m,.. 4 . . . y -
- r. .
if i i . . . . . 1 f
- i. . . . . . + . f. .
6 i ./ . . . .
- g. . . .
}
v.
. ww . . e i
. ,/
.f. .
l-XB . . . . . . . . r. 4 1sn . .f4 . . . . . . I Q r j
/.
- f. . . .
5 We *
, 4
. 6
. /
.f . . , t V, , e i , ., ,
i . . . . , . . ./ , .
. . i 2 . .
- c. _
, . .f. .
+ i . . f. . .
. . . , fi . i ,
. . , f. . ,
(- s i s
. ./ . i e e
.) . . .
+
- f. , t
, . . f , . . , p .
. i. , ,
s q J. . p ' . N >
. W &- K as .*)
i . e i ! . . 4 , l
. . . l 6 4 i . .
I 1 l 362.25-20
, , . - , , , , , , , . . , . ,a- - --.---..c-.-- , , . - - - - - -. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , , - ,--- - - - - -
. . . _ _ _ . _.. _ . .._ m , _ . . _ . . _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
l e i d oe oe
. .. An ;
o1 ad- hl ,
* , ., 6 , l
$ . . . . . i .
s . . % g , a i 2 Ir %* 7 g w a 6
./ f p Mn }
_- %l p
.M,~
, n
=, .
1 l N ,.
.C r 6 . e / j
, 4 . , . . . e . . . / [
. , . . , . . . 9 , e g ,/.)' ,
. , , i . . . . 6 L e. /
l % . . . i . . . e t , . . . . ! , e . . . i . . . . w / / I t , . . . . , . ; i . , . . . .s , .f
. . . . . t . . . . i e . . * * . . . #
* /
; .a i . , , . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 f.
g ..
. e, ,
4
! . J e f't
- f. ./ 4 I
. , , i , , . . . . . . i e . 4 i . . . i . , fif R. */ g
. .. i r . + i . . i . . . . . I'/ L." - / 1
. . . . . . . ,,. . . . . . 4 , . . . . . . , .' . /f / '
e i e ti. , e e t . . .s' t/. ,/ e !
, i . i i , . . 6 . . 6 i . . . . . . . . I m ./ .
- . . i e . .vi . . . . 1 . . # , e i /. s . I . i
. . , . . . . ., . . . . . . . . 6 i i . . . . ./ 1 . . i/ i j
.( . . . . . . . ,, . t . . , e i . e e t . i . 8 i . , s/ V . . / . i l
3 . . . . . . 6 I.~ . ./ . / ! i (v3 .e, , . . . . . . , , . . . . . . , i . . . . . . . /.A ./ / t i O '
. . . . . , i , 6 6 i . 4 e t e . i . i . . t . i / 1 . / .* f. I
. N . . . i e e i 6 . , 6 , . . . . . 4 . . i , . . . ./ .r3 . , / . /.
i
,C i . . . # . i . . . . , . 4 . , e i . . . . 6 . . . . . .
e i/t / i i/ . , . y1 i i
, . . . . 4 . . . 6 i . . . i , 4 i . , , ! ! . ./ /. . 6I 6 ; . s
( /; . . . . y
. . . . . , . . . , . . . i . , t . 6 + 1 . . / 6 / e i
. 4 . . . . . , , . . i , e i . . i i t e 3/ / . i . ./ 4 ./. .
, i
.. . . 4 . . . . . , 6 . . t . . . 4 i e . . 3 . ./ /T ! ./ * . ,,1 .
.& , . . . . . . , . l . , . , . 4 . . , e . # . . i e i e . . . . !/ / i . I I , e i .J . . . . ./
f j
.g . . . . . . i . . . it. . . . . . . 4 i . i / ./ . r (. . . I g
.h . . e f . . f . .8. t i . 4 9 i 4 8 . is'./' . 9 / . .
/.. . . . /.
.N . . . . . 4 i . . . . i i . . .ti . . . i i i e . . i II / e e i . f a
. . . M . . i t< l i ,, . i . . . , , . . i . . . . . . i e . e . . I./ . , ef . . # . . i A i !
I
. . . . . . . . 6 . . . t , , . . . . . . i . ,r.I . . . ./ ! . 6 y, . .
l
. . . i 4 . . , . . . . . i ! ! . y I. . . . , / r , j.; ,e ! . . nt . l j . . . 6 . . . . . . . , . . . . . /1 .r. . . .; 6 . 6 ./' _1 . ./ . +s, . . [
. . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . . fi / . , . i f . i , i. . - i .e a,. r
. . . . , . . . . .- , . . . . . ./ .fi . . . f . . . V i i /- .' .'
.s. . . . . . . . . , . . , . .. . . . . ./. / . . . i y . . . . v.. . . . $
- f 1
- i. . .e . . . e . . . , . I.i + / . i 6 -> e ./* .
i 3 . . i 9e . . f. f . i
/ . ./ i
/ . 9 f , e . . , , i ... s e i . /. y? . . ./ . . . . / - . i e i , , f.
e i . . i i . . , , , , te, . . ./ . ./ . . i 4 / . . . . .j' . . y ; y, A
. i i 4 . . . . , . . . i e i e it. i ! */3 if i .s' i . . . / . '/. . .,.m 1 * . .
j i 6 . , i . . . i i 6 . ./ ./ i ,I i i , . r
. . e ./ . . . . - t .
i . . . i ! . . . . 6 , , , . . . ./ . I, . . . f . i . , f . . . I. . ee. . i 4
. , , . . . I f. / . p . .. . >
. . i . . . . . i 4 . 6 , , f. . vii.
. . . . I e i . 4 . . . . i /. /i i . / . , f . i /4 . j . . . . .
] %,, . . ,
, , . . . . . . . . , . t r4 ./ . . . 4 . , , f . . ,...j .; , . . .
f r . .h . . . . , . . / s/ ./ \ . i / i
/ f. 1 g* l J i i . . . . . .a I. r . .I. s-3 f. . . /,e . g
;, qj
.. . . . . . 6 i e i e e e / i 79 , . . I 1 ;s. i /. t . . /r . r . .
4 g . i i . . 6 . . . r
/ . . fi . . m, / ..
. . 2. r- . . . ...
l i ,,. s g . . . . , , i . . . . . . . un . . /i . . e .fi e i ,# .< . . . . . .
, , . , e i . . . / . . ./1 . . / ur / 6 . . .
} e . . . i 4 . , . . . i . ./ . . . .; , s - i
/. t ' . 4 .... .
j y . . . . . . . i . . . . . . ./ . .I ; . /i . . . . . . . . ; a T. , . . . . . . , . . , . ;- /f-+-+- .. /i . . . . 4 . . . i g g i , . . . . '
.s . . . . i . , IT # . . . i/ ..t *
- i . . i + . . .
- fg 4 . . . . . . . . f' s i s /s . ./ , . .
% . . . . . . n . . #./ . /
- q. . . . . . . . /
o l ._C .I.. . .
.f
, . . ..i
- i. .
Mtj . . . r :; 7 . : /. i .f . . , y . i . 's . e i/. . . . . f. . . . r P. /. . 7 ! [ i gg i- . , . .e / . . t
- e. i . f . .. .~, . .s . ,
g Ti yi
. . . . . . i
? . . W2 EWA O W * , t
}
. . . . - . 6 . , i
. I
. . + i , ,
a 4 l l 1 s i 362.25-21
..- _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ , .. . _ _ , . - I
.-. . . . . . . .- ~ - - - - - - - -- - -
7/ 6 7L l
. /S s / IM
/346 i .
l
- f%
e i e i g
. . ._1 %
j i . . , * * #W/G l
.5 9 l i . . . , . . . . . . #u1 i
' e i . . . 4 . . . i . . . e f } . , . . . . . . . . . . v. j
. . i .
a 1
.1-g ; / ;
g . 8, e ,
.g . .,. . i . , ;
. .l. . . . . . a . . .. .f . ./ [
a . .s. . , . . 1 p / I
/ g . . . i i . , , a%: 1/ / '
( . 4 . 4 i l . . .
- u. f .f [
} _
i i e i . , ,
, i
. i
. . 6 . .
.g
. .We:/. /.
/vs / f j l
. ;; i . . . 6 . . . . t i . 6 . , . , i .1r if
.a . . . . . .4 , i ! . . i # ) ./.
W . . , , , . 1, .,,i.. , i . . . . ./ . I / m . . . . , . . . . i i se, . , . 6 i . . . 6 . . . . 4 . I. / /.
. . . . . . . . . ' . . . i . ,r. .f .)
. e it.
. , ! , . . . . , . i , . . t , , t e / . I.I i
. 6 , i 6 s . 4 . i i ./ /. fw.
i ! . . . . . i i i i . . . . . . .es . . . . , . , ./ fi ./ i . 4 . 6 . J i 6 , . , . . . . 4 i , i f. .; .I. .. em i i . i. i . i i 6 . . . i 1
. . . . t . . , . /. e /
/ C ;
.c . . i . . . . . , , , i 6 . i . , . . . . i e i e e . . .A . /; I . .
(
. . . . . 6 . . 6 i i e i e . . # e . ./ j i (f) ,o . . , . . . e i . . i i 1
. . . . . :/ Ii / , , i O .- . , 4 . . . i . . 6 6 . i . 6 e . . i i . , i e , 6 4 /6 ,/ . i i .
Q . . .
. 4
. . e i e 6 . e i
. i .
e 4 /.
, e /s .I
/ ./
I. 6 ('
- s. . .
. e i . . . , , .
. . i 6 e i , . . .
e i
. , a i i 4
. Ii re 11 .f] !,
r. r . .
. . . . . i . . , . . . . . , j , i . . . e, , i / .A .A . . . . +
. i 6 . 6 i . . . , 4 . i i ..e i , i 4 ! i e i .. . r. f.I. 6 i . ,
it . . I e 4 . . i . . Q . i 6 . t . . i . . i ef .fi f 6 6 , I . . i , , i e i
*e . i . . . i . . . # . s . . . . . pf f ife . , i e . . .
I
.am . . . . . . . . , , , . . , , . . t i e i . i . e i Fi f./ , 4 i , . t .
. i . . . . i . , . , 6 i . . . . , , i . . 6 . . . /t ij f. . . . . . . 6 . . . t
. . . . 6 . . . , , . 4 i , . , e , . . i i i 6 I. y fi e e i i . . . . ./
i l t e i ! . . . . . , e . . i . , i i e i , 4 . i , tri ift f , s , # . s e e , i ./ , 4 . . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . ./ , I/ a . . . . . i e f i l
. . , . . . . . . . . . i , . t . . , a y. if . f . , . e i . . . . . _/ !
i , e 6 . . . . . 6 . . 4 . . . . . i /i . 4I. . i . i . . . . ! -fgi . 6 i . . . i * . 6 . # . , . . . 6 6 . .I , / ./P 6 . . . . . . i 4/ _ , ;
.. . . I i 6 i . , , , . . . . . ../. iAIi . i . . . . y. %
[ .y i _
. # . . 6 6 . .f /f. , . . . i,e i 1 - - ri e t
i 2 . i . t . i , , e . . I.. . ri / . . . . . i , . . , , . ./ . /. .- i . 6 1 . . t i i e . . . . 6 . r '/ . . . . # 6 . . . i f. r-
/,/ s.
- i . e
. 4 .
. . e
. . i
. , . . e
, 6 e
i
. . . . . i
. i i .
. . . i
, , e . . . i .
6 . . . , .
, , i e . .
j .. ; i ;i/ e I
./
.Isf r . .'i f . i .
I
. . . i i . i T .
e i
.eT
/j
- h. . > . I l
. . i . . s . . . , , e i s e i . . , l . . . . t if . 11 s, . e + s .n. . . . .. 7 .
, ! t , . i . *
- i . . . , . * . inI. ./ 'I . 4 . i . .AI t . ? #7 . /' .
g y g .
. . . . . . . 6 i , . 6 ,
. 6 . i 1 fi
,r/.
A i .'
.f we . .
. / /
'. r. .f .
[
, y J ,
i
- n. m 4 . i . . . . . . / / . . 1, .y J. . y
, Sy b .= n . . . . . . .) , . . L f . 1 , 1 f T M .7 . , . . . . , 6 , . . . . , , . f: / . , . . . . e ey. .; i . i ( } M i . . . i e . . . . . . s . . Af i . . . . .j . / fi . . l 2
' z- -j M e . . . . . . , , . . , , , i fi . . . . . . s. _ .fi . , . e f
i . . , , . . . . . . , ,; /; i . . . . j i e .f .A y$
,Z . . . . . . . . . . . .y . . 1 . .f. . .
, g . . . . . . . . . , . , , e . . , , ,4 . # e . 6,. ./'; . . fi 1 .
. e i . 6 . . , . . . . . t.. * . ./ 4 , ! . . .
Ng 3 . . i . , . i . . . . e s , . . . . , , /i e , . It i v. . s . .
% .g g
j .
. 6 . ..
. ,./9 6 e .
e i ./ r;
. /l , e . .
[ [ g , , , , . . . . . . , . . . 2.. . , . . .I r . , . > asg . . . . . . . . _r . .. . f. j . . . { q , . . r. ,
- t. i ju . . . 6 .
i /, . /. , i . ! ( g i i e
- j. . i- f. .7
[ m 6 , . l .) .p ,
- f. . ,
k t a i , , ... i ..r. 1 . 3 .it e e
. .//. ! !
. . . /T . , . . . . . ]
, e . 1 . . . . I ,. . . . , ,
. . . . /. ii . . i g
' . . . E . *
. . i i ,r .
t i , # . . , i 6 6 i.
,e ,
i
- . , . , t 4 . 2. .. . ie , . 1
- v. .. ,a 2 ?
4 i , I
. t . 6 i ,
t . . 6 i (
, , , , w r.vszfn . . ;
i . . , , t t i . ,. , . ,
. i 362.25-22 i
_m.. ee .. Jeg 7 L, e .
****SY A& ^
.~
g
. , I l . l .
. . . . . . N>s
[ O . . . . 6 ,. / e to i e 1GIs. i . , . / s !
* . . 6 A w ,J y l
, . . . i M i t i , . . * . , . f/ l i
. . 4 l 0
, , . . . i i . . *
. . t- ' . ' . . .
r i i . . { s . l
, . .i 4 ,
i 6 . i , e . . . . . . . . '
. g. . . . 4 . . . .
,y . .. , , ., . . . i , . . . . . i . !
I eq . . . / i . _ w i .! i e i . !e /
, . . . . 4 . .* /
, i . . . . . . , . . . . . sb I.
. . . . i . . .
t i /
, i . . . . Ai/ 1
, . . . . 'T .
i
. , . . . . ( 6 \_ :
, i i t
,t , . , , . . , . . ,. . . i . . . i . ., /. S- /, i
., . . . . . . 6 . . . +f r- .f/ l try ..p . . . , . , . , . . . ., . i/ . b // l C
.N. . . . , . . . . . . , . . u. . . e . 4 . . . it i i . I. . 7/ .
6 6 . . . . . . . . . i . . i . . . . . . .. 7 i f/ ('w . , . 6,
. 6 i .
. 6 4 . . , .
. . . . ., ( ,
i . . i. . , in , e . .
. i /
/
// n
//h T i. 6 . . . . . . . . . 6 i . . . .. . ./. . ff e i _a . .
.I, . , . 4 . . . 1. , 6 i . . . . , i aI- . // . >. '
= L
. . 6 6 i , . 6 i . , i i i
[. /: i If
; , . . . . . e . . . . . , , . s , , . . ii . . . / i. . e // e , e ... r 6,. . . . . . i a. . . .f // !
,, , . . . . , . . . . , . ( .j i ,a . .j ./' . . . ;
.N. . i . . , , . . 6 . . . . I i .T - a,
- r. . . /. . .g . e s ;
. e . . , i e i . . . .r . c . ,, 4 . /. . .p . . . ./ !
. . . . . . . . . , . . -- .- o i , ji . 7: . . ./
. . . . . i . . . , . . . . . if f. . .r ;
i . . i , . . . , . . . . A i .A, . . .' W . ,
._ ; . . . . . . . . . - . .. , i . . fi . .fa i .r g
. . e . . i . . . ., . , / i . / I.
.mi , . . i . . .. , e , i . /~ . / . . /. r
.e. i . . .i . . . . . ./ i . j f g 2 * . . . . . . , . . i/ f- , . .A i /
. 4 i . . . . . . . . . 4,e i i i . 4 f. . . . /. . i /. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . /t . . i / . . . f. ,1
. , . . , . . . . . . . . . . . v .ji ,. . . .f .A . . .
.i. . . . . . . i . . ,.I. .f f . .j e e i . . . . . . . . . , / .. . . . /# . . fi . . .
.s. . . . . , . 1, . . ./ , . . .i s.
e 6 ..l q j .c g y . ; . e . . , . . . . . . . / . . .] . y % : ,. I i . . . . . . .i. .. /. . . f, . , e f l Se b . s. ~_ , . 6 / 6 i ./. . .f. ./ s .
~1 % 3. . . . . . . .ti ./; , , . f. . i . ../ -. . e *
(, M , . . . . . ../ i . . . /4, . . . i/. n
=g, 46 .t. . . . .,/. . /. 6 4 ,. . / j .\
13 N i . . . , . , . . . ... . , , Ii ,: i . . /l v. ., c . . Q kg- . . . . .i. t /r . . . > I. ,< .
.c t
28 i . . ... . .f . .f. ., . f . t w3 i . , ,
- f. . . i . . f r ! !
em Q N
. . .Ai
. . /.
f,..
. . .j
./ t ...i h .t. .. . 6 .
l
. fi i . 4 i. . . /
4 . , , * . .f' , i sf .*f
- q. . i . . . i e */ . . 6 i . :, , ; j . . i
& i . ,
i
./ . /-* f' I f
, + di . J .
. . i , , . , cy . / s W. ..
y
/.
V 6 . . ,. p.j .
.i. . . .r .f .
"i . / /.
9 . . .<1 , , /-
.r
- g. . . s . . , , . / j. .
j . , . . .f.,*
- f. } 4 . . r/ F l. i
. . ./ .
.. . ! /6 .
i i . 6 e /1
- i . / . , .i . !
< . 4 /. t
. J
" . 1 - -
i 4
- i _v 1
, .* - Z e- e f l j . . !
, ' M [1 Nd7 . .
i , . i s e . . t 362.25-23
__._.=m.m . . - _ _ _m_. . _ _ . . - - - _ _ _ _ -_ __ .~ ~ - ie ..
*77 L Ea a **
o % 09 54 f ,-
.I' I e . I e
~
1- ! . . . . . . . , se
$ M . .
=..
g i s . i . , ..> i . . . . , . . . . . . . e i f; g
, g . e i i . . . , ,f -
. , i i .m
, s . 6 ..e . . . . /1 till A i w-i
. . . . e 7'
, . . . . . j . . . .
J e . .
. . . . i . . . . . . . , . . i , . . , . , , , . . . .
.i ( . 6 . . i
. i i , .
e i 4 .
. . 4 . . .
, . . . . . i . . . . . i . . . . . .
. a. . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . , . ! < , . i . . .
. 's. . i e t . . 6 ! , , t . 1 . i , . . . . 6 . . . , e i . . . i m i . , i . . . . I J . . .
W , . . . . . . . , . , . . . . . . ! . , . . . . a N . . i 6 e i , , . . . e 6 . . 6 s 6 e # 6 i . t 6 e e .
. . . i . e i 6 . e . . . e i . . . , e . . i i i , i e i i e t . e i . p . . . . . 4 . . , m.
. . ! f . . 6 , a 6 . , i e
- i. a /
q . . . . . i , i i , i i , {e . . . . . . . , , . . shir : i fi a . . . . . . # . . . e t . i i . . e . . . . e 4v /
. . . i , , , e i , , i l , . . . . , , . . rg/ .
3 s 9i i , . . 6 i . , . , e i . . r i ! # , , . . , 4 a e . i e . , , . t . . . /. i ( . . , . . . . . . . e i eu . . i . . . , . . . e e f: l (T) . aI . i , a , . . . , ! , e ! , 6 . i ! . i * * , , , f , e e . r) i 1 Q .m . . . . e i . e e e . 6 i , j . . . e . . , e , e . e . ..I , f . A . . e , e . . . . . i s e e ! ! . . e , i e ! . i t e 3 . i . , i i (, e
. . . 6 . , . . . , , e . 6 . . . . , i , 6 , e . . . 6 . . . i , . . , . # i/i . .s .
. . . . 6 . e i . . , 6 . i . ( . , , i e i ! . 6 i , e i . . f EL 2 T . 6 + . . . . . s i 1 , . . . e , , . 4 . , , ! , 6 i i , s Ia i JP/
, . i , . 3 . i e i i ! . I i i , , i i . 6 i
! e . e i .7, . . . . ~' 1;
- i. -
t . , , . . i 6 . i . # , e i i , , i . , , . . 6 i . / i . 7 gr , iii e i . . . . . . . . . , . 4 . e . e ( . j . , i , . . . . . . 4 , .fs . . , ifi i
- e. . . e i e i . . 4 i e . . . i . 4 . . . 6 i ./ i . . /.
' cf,
.g . . . . . , s , . . . . . , . , e i 6 . e i . , i . . I f.
.w , e . . . . 6 , 4 i 4 , e 4 i . , s e s . , i i . , . , , 6 e . 7 4 . .) . .
j e , , . . . , , e . . 6 i . . . , e i , 4 . . . . .i, i e fr. . .I . . ./ '7 '; . . /4 . i
, , . . . 1 i . . . ( , , a e e e . . . . . , , . . ! ) e i . . . 6 i e i e/ . , . . iI
. . . . . . 6 . . . . i s . . . 4 i ! . . . . I e . ./ . i . .f . . e f.
. . . . e . . i i , , . i , , , . , . 6 a . , e . 4 ! I e . I. . . / e i ef;
. . , i . . . . . . . . . i . . . . 6 . . . 4 4 . fi . . . . . I. . /, .
. . . . . . . . . . . i e i , , . . ! i e . . . /s , . , r. I.
.. . < . i 6 . . . . . . . . , . 6 i . Lfi e , e i . , . . . f . , . . . . ./ . . , /%.
j ,r r .; , e e t . . . . . . . .I i . . i .I t t i . .p . ./ .i r
. .Ie W j
j ( Ji r e i e
. . . 6 . . . i i 4 . . . . 6
- 4 e . t
! i * .
t .
== 1 1- e e
. . I
/. . t ,
a
- in /. i
- I-I.
e i , , . . . . . . 4 i . . , . . . . . . A g . . e i / , . . . . 7 . if . ./ I y i . . . . s i . . , .
. . . . e ! . . . .
. i i . 6 e
. /1 I: i .
i . .
. ,/ .
- f. .
./ i .
f. ri
. . . , e . . . , . , , , . I e e e i . . e i . 6 (! . . . , f. , i /., 3 . .
3 # . . e i . i 6 6 e . . . . . i, . . . ./ . . , . . . /i , . ./ . . j ig y . . . . . . . . . t . , 6 . l . .. . . .I e . . .I- . . . I e . fi i
. , y 2 ' . , e . !
- i . . t . e e i i. . . /- , . 6 . . /e i * . I' . ,, 4 .e .
6
, g E . . 6i .f i 4 e . .
-f1 j i i .
. .fi r i j m
.J i . . . , e e e i , . . . . . . . . . . ./ .i j i ji
. e i i , e i i , 6 6 . . . . .i i I. 4 . . i ,r. . 3 . f . , i . .;
s- . . . . . . ! . 6 i . . . .4a 7: . . . / . i . . /. f . me . 4 Z . . . . . . + . . . 6 . i een ./ . . . . e/ . . . /t , .j. .tv Q , . . , i , , . . . . 6 . , i66 .I . . I. i .I. . r . , . j ,2h . , . . . . . , . . . . , i 4 . . ise 7 i f, , . (- . . I . i . , 1 p
. , , . . i
, i 4 i , e .
. , t .
e .if
. . . . fi Ie ,
, e i if i/
.f i
i i . j
- s. . ,
I > . e. i . . . , . , a r . . , . . .t , , .i. .. /4 .. i 4 f. ./l i j . . hg .w . . .) i e . i. .) i e i /i , . r
.., < . . . , . . , , . . . .i, . / , e, , . . _. .
d . . . . . . .
. . . . .Ii . - fi . . . I e i . , .
K$ . . 6 . . i t! .I- . 'f: 1 v.
,e , . . fi . ./ , .;
*U i ,"
, , 'A f- if W *
. t i .
i
. . .it
, f,
/,
, . . j
. fi tr
, i 5 . . . .
e *,-
.,. /
./
fy r.. . a : e.
* / I>
e . f . F/ i .
. eif ,' /se 6. .
y , . .r. f .fi . . t 6 ," I s
* .F f-i
. . , .,. 2r . e
. 5 .j. .[ e i j , . e,r/ e e i
i
. 6 I
- 9 i _ A I . - M i g- ,{ - 1 A l , . 7- - are . ,s . 'T) l I . e i e e e i
. . 6 N O /I Ff1 M W -
i
. . i . .
. . I i
- l
--362.25-24__ -- - - . _-
e 1'C7L __ 1/ N I e
$D N i %
t . . . . %
% N i
' . l \ l 4 i g * ,
i . t t r I C ! . . . . t . . 4 .//)/L d' r- . . /" 6 , .
+ ,
. . . , . . . J.,_3
. 6 f'MI I e , p ar v
. ./ .
f 1
. . i . . . 6 . . . .
. i i . , . . . . . . . . , .
.2+. . . . . i , . . , , . . . i .
g . . . . 4 j
'#. , . . . . . , , e i . . . ,
. . . . . . . e i
. . , e i i i i
. . i e i i . . . . . i I
- a. . . . . . i . . . . . . .
. 4 , . . . . . , . . . . g . . . '1 f ft. 4 . . . . . . i . . s . . . i . . . . . i . . t . . i . . . /
.. i . . . i . . . . t . . . .w.,,. ./
M .J + , , i 6
. . . , , , , . ! /. i O ' .
. . . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . i . . . . . , . . y. ,
. . . . i . i. . . . . . . . . . . i.. . i . fi . l g (D
- i
. i i .
a i . . t . i i . . . . . .
. . . ... . . e i .
. .j
.I,
-V i . . . . i .... . . . . , , . i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . /. . . .
. 4 . , i . 4 . . . . . . . i . . . . 6 . if . . . .
. . . . . . . . ...i i . i . . . . . .
. . . . . . ./ . . . ;
, . . . . , , i . . ! . . . i . . 6 . . i . . ii. . . I. . .a. .
J i . . r . . , . i . i r .-_- l 1 . . . . . . . . , , . . , i . . i i f , , ./
.N . t . . . i . . . . , . . . . . , ./ i . . _ , n,( ,
. . . . . , , .., . . . . . . . , . . t .I . . 7 A_f
. i e . . e i . , . . . . . . . . . . . ( . . , . . ,
, , i . . 4f. 7/
. . . . . . . . . . . ./ . ,jf.
t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . .A . . . fj.
. . , . i , , . . i . . . .i . . . . . ./.. . ./ f
. . 1 . , , . . f. . ./j
. i * . .) J i e i . . . i . / . . . . .Iy.
9
- e .s . i
- 1. / fi
.4 t .G . ./
- ff
. i 4 . . i r . f. . . ./f. f
%, i . . . ... . . 7 . , , , y/,
g , . , . . . . . . . . . , . , . .
. / . . 4 fi f .-
g . . . . . . . . . . . . . f . . , . .j j. .j q ! , i . . . / . , . . . f r. . m y . , . . . . . . . / . . , f .f . . j
.g g . . .
j fi ..ff 6-
. . . . . . .jf, i vi Se e . . . , , . . . / r ji ea -
. /,
-e w- . . 9 i
/ / /
e t . . e i . i i . . . . . . /: . .j; . . . w r
'gs . . . . . . . . . . i uf e ,
f/. e f 3 , i . . . . . . 6 . .j . . / . fi 5 .s y l i , . . . . f. . . ./) so . t d . . . . . . . . , / . .If. , ,, a qn i
, . . . . , / . . . . / f. .4 .(-
, o * . . . . i i .'
Pe
. f r. f. / ,3 ,
e . *1 . . i i i . < e . . T.. . . . . . . .j f. , . i/ 0 p$ *
.I ' . .
. , *4 ! i f/ / f.
ed : #' ' ' ' ' ' '
/'[ > l
=
, 6 . n . . . . ,/ J ./ s. ,
M3 . . , . / / , i t *
- t /*f / ' -
i [ f ! '/ / J , . 1 l W *
. t . i / /. . ,.
.%9 4 e i. . / / /i i ., ,
l
= ! t ./ m' , . I i e I I . .i i // / I ' l
;} . . .i- . j./, j - . l
. t . s . / / . f - , . .
e i e . /// . 2- . i 6
. 5 e , / f. C . . I 1 17 J ! t
. . i f i/* j. ! .
.% e . . /J *w i
. i ar7 f, ! 4 1 . /. / . .
l . . .IJF . 1 4
-' y e B t * * -
' E b O b. E g r
0 . . .
. . fYa./".L WA -Tl';V .
i . I 362.25-25
l
' 7/ 0 71L
. LLe[ 3*
- AAD 4 i e i *
. ; 4 . *
% i
. i 6 .
a ; g . I e i . . i
; . . . i . .A o
. . t t , / w / A, . s 3
* . s f s , . , , i e . . . + t s. s
't, i i , i
-M i e 6 , . . eM, V !
e . . , , <* t
. . . . i 5 . . . . . . . i 6 . . e i .
.J. . . . .
U . , , , . . . . . .
. . s .
31 . 5 i . . . . e . . . i e . . . , . 6 i i . . t . , i i . . . . .
. . . . 6 . 4 i . . . . . . .
. .. . . t .
4 . . , i . i 1 , , . .
. . . . . i i . . . . . . . i , , .
j' . . . . . . , , , , . . . . . . . . . .
.J' . . . . . . . . . f m ..y . . . . . . . . . . . . . i 4
._.. . ./
O '
. . . . . 4 . . , . . i.. . i . . . . 6 . . . . . . . .4 f
/ . . . . . . .i i . . i . . . . . . . . . . .; . . f. .
( i. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e . . . . . . . . . u. 4 / . w .l. . . . . . . i . .. . . . . . . . . . . +N if . T e . ,. . . . . . . .,, . . i . . < i . . . . . i . . . . . M i
.t. . . .... e . . . . . 4 r , , . . t : .f. i i. i
. . . . . , , . . . . e i . . a . . . . i . 4 6 e i i f- i
.. . . . I e . 6 . .iii . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. i i . . . . . . f. .
. 6 . . 6 i . . . . . . . . . . . . ./ .
.n. . . . . . . ! , . . . . . . . . . . . . /
.i . . . . . 6 . 6 . . i . . . . . . 6 . i * /
. . . . , , 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , 4 . , t / . . .
. . . . . . .. . . t t . . . . . . , . . , . . . . . .fi . .
, . . . , . . . . . . . . . .f i .
. s . . .4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , ./ i 4. .j
\ . . ,
, t
. i
. . i .
. . , . i i
. . f+
tf.
. ep .- f e f.
. . . . . , . . . . - , . i , i .f , ,y. i i & . e . . . . , . . ,f .f.
=
y t , . . . . . . . , , f. .f. p d
. . . . , f r, s . . . . i , . . . i i . . f D . . t . . . . . . . . . i . i i . . . , f, , . . . f . f. '
% . . i . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 , . . . . . . . 6 i fi . . . ./ -fy .
u . . . . . . . . . .j . . . . .f. .; n. Q . . . . . i . . . . . , . . . . f . . . f. ; a
. . . . . i . f. . . f. f q . ! e .
3,
. . . . i i _ . . 4' fi e i f f. ,
y m . . . . . . . . . . . .t. ./n . . . .j f. no .a . . . , ,f. f f 3 , . . , . .]. . . .
- f. / .
J . . . . . . . . . . . , f; . . eft / .
.y 6 . . . . , . . . , , f . . . i .j f i
. . . . , . . . 4 4 . . . , . . f. /i .
.' 3 . . . . 6 . .j.
. fi
. . . . . . gi f. . , ,
.. . . . . . f. . ., ./
wir . . i . . . . f, . . . . ,/ ./ c 23 me
. . / . . . /. / .. .
., i i e i . . /s . . . . . . /. f .
4 .s
$. g . +. . . .j . . .f /. ,
pa '.s t -I. t / / i I _.4 .
"I ! . . t . ; # % .* j 9
om
. 6 i f j5 y .
/-
.'2 "E '
. ./ f i W
y 6
/ /
/ f. . r
' i s
i I
- . I i , // / .
.g . , ! 1 ./ / / . 1 I // .
-2,? * . , . .f f -
. . t J/ _f .
f . . //: "' i
. . i ffi .# .
. . [/ .f f e . . . /J . / . i l . . . i. // / .
l l _! 4 *
- l F , i i i
.! . . . .g/ , , I
. i V g e a
- I 2O ' b * .A E
. T' - - .vi m
. . l t
i . . i l , . , i j . . N D fl MA E / 'd i 1 l
' ' l I i l
i l 362.25-26
DESIGN CALCULATIONS OWNER F1LE No Woodward-C% Consultants g, d Eaee
" % .enme=nc.i. PROJECT
. and Emn e Scientmas J08 No. PAGE
,{* V ??? W Y y,g ,2_ zymq;4 3YSTEM CALCULATOR dd DATE * :/ / "
CALCULATION FOR REVI M R DATE 's/ 0 7 RESULTS FTTL!snft.' oC 5c d of Srnr%usE , fiL L 70 4/ 2.e ! UYf/l vuoa ' o . 84 ,, o nss-n/ os/ = {"Ji s) (. e.,.) l.y er u.. i er . (so)M){(.aot,)/ay ze + (.'d loy 95.. '
/. 9 c "
1- av s/-3 s,/ W CA* 3 s c s/ -sc V X . *(.os) lcy ,,C9T. (ic)( 1)[t.not) lop 79fo pa ] = 1.n *
- 3 c </ -3 '!2 (a)( n,)(. aa a) /.y avaa - .. so "
s r .. ~ r pn - n a (sty r)(.cas) los 15.- =
.1 v i.s..
s 2ae - an (,yya)c... e) / , , .s = a .u "
,. m... . (s)(,y...A hy &
=
c .u " . 49s" frst fa r .<, , s/1 n V 2 s' .* l.a /M cs 9 n i s H - (e) (n)(c. o o r> loy ,vi, .,. t (.'v)lo3 vroo ] *
- 2. (,.)(.e)(.19) lop,,r. sW * '
=
.3 (is)( ut)(. s9) /9 TTio 1. '1 Y (ii)(st)(.aae)/oy 7,ro no _
*o'
/c3a. -'
.c (,1)(,t)(.cosyla 4G _ o.* 6 s ea (ov)(er.) (. c o e ) 03 1 9 ..
c . * ' ,, m ~ 9 (n.) (,r) (. c o s) /cy n,3.a o. e i
- 4. u ",ooo.r m s i
362.25-27 wGA-AD-93
DESIGN CALCULATIONS Woodward-Chde Consultants ' "g"9 s ' ! c=aoe== ! sci m PROJECT JOB No. PAGE I.l Sur?u7W f ,, a gy
$YSTEM CALCULATOR /uD DATE/ d6 /->
CALCULATION FOR . REVIEWER N DATE m/t /?"7 RESULT 3 henr oc R,>.aw :c (u,. 7 s) fue fwb : f.A ffil up i oN = ( 9.)(or)l. s v) lcy g o .o = o.59
- z. (i.)(o13(.sv) loy s .2._.2 . .~ .s z -
.) (o o)(a) (.sy) ly $ 9fbo a </o "
V (.n(rt.)(.aaeykp 5, ;-- '-. o. z. "
. >.o ,.
f (n.)( 1) (. c a e) /.y ,...e as e..t
&. .foy)(ot)(.ucy) 43 i,lCe = b . o 2. "
~l 'h f/cofftL)(. ou S) Ic} p O . o 3_
I. i o " p , ,, ,, ~ s u ; Ba uwey hvsn n r. . ,, I ( 4)(it)(. .n.) ley uo ~*BV
> < . . ' '**3g-
- 1. (i )(,1)(.orz) /op T;;;', = ,,
a ti.)Iaz)(..a) lay % s *
-
- 35' ,
'/ (iz)62) /. . e) /.) U,, ', =
< fit)(. r) (. . . x) ty ,W.. . - o * "
s civ) (,,) (.a o s) / g ,"l* , - 0. v ,r '
> (i s)(o t) (. .> c ts) /cy * * - o. ve "
- z.n 362.25-28 CE-stb
~-
DESIGN CALCULATIONS OWIIER FILE no hard-Cede Consultants g . 9.i anesame. c caan.uae am a===ms , PROJEC' JOS No. PAGE L//12 /7)C f j, c q ggss) SYSTEM CALCUuTOR T DATE _ i CALCULATION FOR REVIEWE J DATE r e /"r'7 3 RESULTS I
& r-a ,,,ir.r oe hnu .c R.,i./>.s ::
Fai va </= z ls M2. 2na " i 2 r2 2 30 4 // : /<.j/ <t)/..et') /.y .ro
' o.c.
uss ,, *.ve
- z. 32 0 2c.1.
(i)(t)(.est)l.J- 2 s-a .. . sai1
- 3 s a t-3ra (i.)c on)[c.ast) Ic$ 3Y;. ' (.no)/.y 1. 2. "
V m/.aut (/1)(,2)(... t) /,; .uwt.z. - - a rs ? .. { 347-33s (, \){r t) {. co t) lc3 3 a . o s/ Ms tf; . alo yc (sei)(n}( ose) Ic3 n o .13 " . 2 - 3 r. - s . . not.Qt... e) 43 g, ' . a.rt z.cs" i N f A4 AL f.f T'itZnmJT' pretst w orf b .4 Y
*9 91 esmt was 2. e 6 " , s Jf g s r r s.r suits,ir Atlk h of Ylf STs giv t /2 AVS /
4 & A ff sirfnT* Il Pe t rry' c. c a b . 1 362.'25-29 WGA-AO-32
DESIGN CALCULATIONS : l Woodw J "",i Coneadtants ' ".(, ."f.' z. ca= dea sa s=== ca emie ea.s e s PROJECT JOS 110. PAGE tl. C. .Cumm er ,.ct up SYSTEM g , DATE /=/r 'e CALCULAT10ll F0ft itEVIEWER DATE n 4/'7 t RESULT 3
$KC of sow % .;E fits. To 4 24 h v'? /*~ .re .
ss3~114 a A * (1)I'L)(.oi t )loy g r.,,
- o.96
- L 3 7 / - 3G */ (**){* t) ((. .o t) l ry 0 & (.14)lof vr 4, s, :
)' t.o1 5.L5
~
1 3cf 3rY (ia)l.t)[i, e n s) /cy qu ... + (.>1) lcy .rs.. } = si 3f s/ -3 Y 2. (oL){*L) {.** 9) /oy e. = v ..
*.L'
- no
- f s v t - 33 a , (,2)(et)(. *= %) lop 61** e . a s'.
' i, , . .
t 33 a -sic (*a)tiz)(... ej l.y n=, = . as " .
) S/t -! o o (> 0 (o r) (.o o e) lcy f '
f o
- 7. i 7 "
i.a ra- - vu r. v a r lie ir et i 4 // : (f)[.t)[(. *stj /ey ~ 4(.iV)/op vs. * /. 7 V ~ t (i.)c.t) (.i~)/y g,a.
= 1. t a 2 (,.)(,t)(. ni) It$ W I. uc ~
ena '- J (ou (.1) (. o.e) /.y e... o.o 1 s .
< (a)c.s)(.c a s) les .u,2: s.sse
= o. e s .
p t, & e G (iv)(at)(. as) /.y i., s .. o.oa" o ., 3. .
= lis) (o n (.* a s) In si,es. ' e . , .,
t /1 n , . r . wi. 362.25-30 WGA-40-32
l .. . .. .. i
. . i DESIGN CALCULATIONS OwmER '"**
Woodward-Clyde Consultants c . 9. 7
' aas Ea .-=aw se PROJECT J08 No.
V.l Sun 1/n't PAGE
.,,e,, , ., g , a CALCULATOR DATE ev
- CALCULATION FOR g p DATE r/s m RFSULT3 P
-n= ss ,O. ,, , .. r, Grs fi u. r%.
ls itir u ~
- a?: (<) fan) (.se)/.y e.~r. u o.s1 n . (i.)f.t)(.se) /.y ,,, = o.sf 1
(iej f.t) ( 9) ley m.. es 9 9 no
*.34
- o. o 2. "
fie)(.1) ( oa u) Is esvo f is ,1 i'* o . o z -
- fir)(.1) (. ect) 43 seav. a (iv)(.1)f.oc'e)l.) , f ,,* -'
- o . 'a z "
C o 3 (is)(.t)(.os e) /'y s.),] . e o . o z. "
/. C 6 A b D o Ti o"Al-b uYAtvCJ i /, AYfil arco ,
I oN = f 9)(n.)(.oix) /s, ser-o v.. .
=
-o.sa u fiu)( 1)( cit.) /o Y;. = - o.19 .
[/ c)(,t)/,o/t) / ej 5,p o - ~#a 3 9 3 J g~ '*.1% to fit.)(ot) (.coi) / e dn yyeo r C (n.)(in)(.co e) lop or,troz.c o " ~0 Vl . ,
** u -o,s9' (su)(it)( ran / e) . I:, v o
'"-a 7 (is)(st)(.ooe) j,J , - e . V g ,
i v, 7 * * ,,
- 2.I, Z.
362.25-31 WJ-10-17
DESIGN CALCULATIONS
, Woodward-Chde Consultants J._.
! c- !Yse.m PROJECT JOB No. PAGE l V l. Surnm?f . . , ,t
. ._, p t
SYSTEN CA N T0R d DATE /*/./n l l CALCULATION FOR REMM DATE /rh /99 L RESULTS 1 l
-lv w & L s e r' /4 & tl fit t. 7w y 1.e .-
i inu aA* vp_ Sv.e I 347-219 ( e)(oa.)f(..it) loy yaa * (.'")l*y 5 ) = 2. / 0 ,,~ I 1- 3rr -3 ri ( e)(,z)[(..oz) h5 $ * ('v) /ay 5'-]
- 2 B i e > ..
= o . S e .,
3 3 e i -n s Nry.r)(.o e)loy ma y 33s-32. (>c)(,z.)(.oa c) /=3 su. g> . '
- 49 i n, s . .
f 3 L.3au ( z ) car)(, .,e) /.3 yz sa
- o. yL
-
- C,47"
'fsts w </3f
~
in Hot- , i all ( c)(iz) t. ,u) /o"- -,v, s .' o v 2. "
- 0 Bo
- L (S)(onl(.sv) lay uso ;
9 t.o. ' 1 (/r)(oL)(,o*6)l. er o e * .
- 3
J W* t o*Y or ( tc.)(* L) [ ** *) "$ ','o
<2. **
*.*'/,
f ( 1 ,) (.\) (.o us) l 9 Q a ,
- o. 8 3 )bboTo.nM s, fr L L fC&D .
L/11/L l a $
- i g){Iz) {,/W) l*j l oI si.o ,,
2-(s)(it)(.ou) /ay Q ' o.12 3 (ir)(oL)(.a c)43 ha =
- o 4
' (is )(it) {.a=e) Icy o,r..~ +.. * . 4 .
(: t.r* .~ . f ( u)(at) (.soe) Ic3 i5 u. o..J
- f. 9 e " ) D p s TrodAL.
D 362.25-32 WGA-AD-32
DESIGN CALCULATIONS FILE No. Woodward-Clyde Consultants 6.f.7 W .ae taarcamema so PROJECT g , Y, ' G r>'7/77 f r M of 3YSTEM CALCULATy*'/# CALCULATION FOR REVIEWE M DATE /W s. /** ? a Xnan ,1r HGY b o / 'd) - Bau f/?n eJ
/.e vt/t 3.u =
* ~ * " '
( i ( e)(a z) (. o t) lo,9 , re .
<38** ~ o .19
'o 2 4,.a -
(s)caz) { .oit) /3 ,, S rir)(it)(.o. s) Icy ,ye..,, s,,
,~, s - o Ys' ,,
y (is)( 1)(. a ~ s}fcp o n v7a ' ~ * *
- r (z)(,r)t.aae)/03 f& = - o CC
- L .t (*
*
- e e
f l i 362.25-33 l WGA-AD-32
.. . .. . ~ ,
DESIGN CALCULATIONS OWNER FILE Wo Woodward-Chde Consultants c. f i ew se ne ,, PROJECT J08 No. PAGE Yo b' U 17)/ n W " Jic1% y gPI 3YSTEN CALCULATOR / 38 DATE c' '-' CALCULATION FOR REVIEWER
,, DATE/*/_7 7 RESULT 3
/ u. . . .:t ~.c .
. . - ? 1 Fat re rt r v vu {nr i.
lavfr i ,i . . . < s., -
/ so > 'J sv. - ,,y ns ~~ , ) 2..si" Fdl l 2 1:S -399' H)(ot)[(. .st) y 1,.J .,.,. (.s - v.) /.y w f . I. G S .. / 3 3 Y 9 - 3 (* (i.r)( rz)(. .. e) Is., ..n a.,- o 38 #~p v 3 r r- zu ( c)(st) i G a ue)/")orn.0 # .~ * ' " ,,' j o 35, Fh . \ e { gu g.. ( u ) (,r) f a c e) /op u.s..- uas - * . u _ <) . 3.7Y'% f > i. u /c s.2 - l- ss1F2 0 **1 f.$3 ( 9)(as)[( or n! /o3, .- .s c. . / v.. U. ' (s1)/ y v.r.1'"], ; I.1 o p p u,.gg t / t)/,t)(, / v) /oy 7; .- 2 /. 81 - - . sa.t' o, 1 01)ct><. ..e) I., :,r,n, ;,., * , , i 2. - ew-a - , ] e.32,. A 'l (K) fo t.) (. a a E) loy 9 a a.o s .,,. o.s. i o 1, s o. =*' V {Ls)(tt) {, CC 2) fo$ pp ua,,,, a . I o _? / A/ , j f .** A s p . ro.wAL, Be m ey < b A t h2. o ** ' * : -a :I ' - .I. s u" FlII ( )(.1)(. o o n) l*.3isr ic)(n ) (. .a r) h , m,e.' .'.'- ~
- 1- Cy .. /
l- . , s eva < * '_(3 ~/ (s.r)(n )(. o oe)/.9 v. f,77" f)n /,r)( 1)(. 2) 43 No"- ' ~
- f 'I ' ,,
f " " ' ' ~ * ' * ' i u)(a ) {. oat) / 3 ,{,',.. - 7. 9 3 ,, / 362.25-34 I . WGA-AD-32 2 DESIGN CALCULATIONS OWNER Woodward.Chde Ccmsuhants F I LE N ',(,. l. - PROJECT J06 No. V. ( S,runW G==wsm sc m.m PAGE ,,a ya SYSTDs CALCULATOR!22L D ATE 'o n m CALCULATION FOR REVIEWE DATE /* 2 77 RESULTS %~^fL AT CfSL Cau 7v fifv Vto ! 'Hf
- s U WK ys 1950 ,,
j 2<>.1s. ( ,)'(s t) (. . , ty lay $,,r. ' W **bI ' IJ 3 " P E" 2, 3 s a - A te 3v,.8(r.),l*t) (. cot) loj isa a ' 0 ' Y6
- a
\ , r,.. - .. '3 ua-ssr i a r>(.i) f. --t) /*5 .ss , . . <' o 2" '] o . / 6 o.55'<< P k ... ug.22, f o r[( ot)(.coc51*y c'TE.J . s e ~ .g' . 4 2,c - 1..- craft.1)(...e) l*3 n. . . - *A~
- d J ca s" i f. l P. 2 :
La g w o.5Y * *O 4t** o.go _ (cc,e1 08% MLstroo Yg,f.>.e s)/cy 5 ] = W 61 * ~5. L * ~ Y ' I i (14(,1 ( . 0, u '., u rs f.'")'u vc D. - 2*= 7 tt - '3
- I L _
2 (3r)(st)(, e a c) loj u. ~ o L'! su a,i (,r)(st)(.e o e) l*gs e. 9 ) -a - u >..- - = o . ! ) ,, ' o . n FJ n y ( ro y a ) (.*ae) ley p e.a - a.1) ,V, , y p a s o ri ~di-2 a :vm v r 3 18 hvn IU* l#
- c >>(ad(.. 1.) lc3 M E9.,,~ W - C*G -
i a ro-- .j,3 g " F ,'lI t,, ( oc){st)(.ost) ,loy 5 * ~ o . ) C ' ' o.n . 1 / i()(IL)('. e e c) l*j r s a- ~ ~ *
- f= 4 '
~ a (,c)(,t)(..oe) I 9 W. v.. ~o.s- - z . o 2- P1m i u) {,1) (. a o e) /.3 ltlN".? ~ * . 2 6 M 3 . g.o ; 362.25-35 , w.a n.u - m q. DESIGN CALCULATIONS OWNER FILE No* Woodward-Clyde Consadtants g , 9. n Canam % Enonne,s. .' e . ano an . sc.m PROJECT JOB No. PAGE {* Urn # T ,, m Jy;a $YSTU4 CANTORM ' DATE < c / t i -' i CALCULATION FOR , gigg ,p _f DATE / Y F1 RESULTS 'I~, A r. p L is r o + <.!/ 4 i Fa t. n, .ct H !!10 /'M' ( ~ ^ ; is v:n / ( a e * = o
- z 5
fy a (ul;L){.C!t)fC) / 9,e ==} ~~ (evfit)' . c cej /,7 ,', ". z. "" 8***'"I 's "' } f) *1 ('rN '1)(.a. c) Icy o,9o L'=3.a$ '....v~- 1 (irf(> t) (. * . c) iof g >. <" v <. - . f ( z.;j'r,e y .'o.s) lay y a.....' o . o 'l * ' ^ e . 3 3 ',. fur roa lo vF ri . , 1 (or,y(..,t) /.3 r. a..- o.a s .. / F. A f r ..a, * . , 2 fiu)(it)(. ooe) /.y i s .. - c.6 L ,, L- (i r)(,1) (. . ) ,ay y .a..s 2: - , . o.%- .? W = 's ( 1.n Fdn 'l (lt') fit)(, o a t) by 6seos o 2 a ** < si, u- , r ( 2-y,4c.c c s) ,* , n . ./ _o t ,, ~ v , ,, g if ** j y a s ~ red Bocm .- v l e vAI. - lcy $ = o a '/ " ' "
- 1 (1)(n.)(. oix)
- 2. ( vi)(ii)(. .c ,) 'lc < $.' ' - o 41 0
".Se * - -o.Bi ',U (ir)(,z)(.e-e) by go_ ,100 - - 3 33 u pj " ~**6, (ir)(ra)(.oae) by + =o ~ uec . 'o.** f (La)f ,j f.ca g; hy Qaa : -2.sP V 362.25-36 w.a..n. , -m ~ _ _ _ . . . _ . c t . DESIGN CALCULATIONS OWNER FILE Mo Woodward-Chde Coneuhants c9N a %, saa eaw w um ss n PROJECT J08 No. PAGE * ' UIN A nint [t g:a SYSTEM CALCULATORd*3 DATE * *n / ' > , CALCULATION FOR REV M M oATE /eh/n RESULT 3 .J u s.., r t n .' o9ec /*r tc >: ft : 6 " La f Y! ? b V'r- we . I g,lA * (!L)? ?)(. ace) le e 9 e O'*0 L7 eo < s 7., ' ~j, .:[#46) *j- 2Yo 13g #' k 3 . / * *1 h"* " s s/ */ V o = o./o"# l%~) (. ?) (
- U t s. . ,
2 LO # : 0
- Ug */
*/ e.,,a,.. . (.cs:L)jQ, $ e vo. o . 3 (o . 1 1 Fn u r?cas l ls'/n un .. / I a b, ' ?.t) lr Q f :.; L) lcy gg:a ,* / 'o E3 ~ 2-(tG(it) !-ce %) / y W$ = o.I2. 2 l':.o)(a t) ( .c.:e) /.y & $ ' o V3 " ' Y ('e;. a / :. e r) /oy N ' e . 3 a ' 2, o e
- l,n v o o rs-* A'- l
- 1. . . ,ca : /
(A v'd o z 12 ' Ir~ lio t)(. c as) /a & 15%c * -e.17"' l 2 /c ' ~o.SS"' 3 / .:-).'.7,1 (3cy )(. -:2) ( . a ,L ) I ',.;y g z , ,$ '/ .1=a - ~~o*.S9 . 9 4- # (sji.Q;.:oe) loy i3 esu s ~ 3. 7 Y " ' 362.25-37 #**^" _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . - ~ , l l l DESIGN CALCULATIONS 1 ' M ER FILE No. Woodward-Clyde Coneadtants e . v. L coa =n m ta ri. i a m. se PROJECT t Camosom one aa ,u,, V. C. ,[ummer JOB No. um. ye PAGE SYSTEM TE
- CALCULATION FOR lg, y l DATE /* /t /17 l I : RESULTS I y ! e : .
I w : i ^4 4} d N d d h l '4 . ! :$ N s m es N
- I 4
. I cw , '- + = i l i(ib *t R - - - a - i <, n n -N mt w i e > - m u I ds 4 s
- I l- 4 1 R
6. ? % } = S : 3 : 'J S t, : d Y t j -l R ' 4 9l 3 -b - ~ = ~ 9 i : . ta = w. gm~ - 5 ' .i b $ Rl i d 2 9l Q w I m M4 0 > o q x ! i 1 s t . y W I ~ - * ; = % d : w ' = : L' s s 2 - 2 d a n -l s g % .N,> m\ sN h 1 b> s m i P N t 0 s s o M w m , Q" t ! q o 4s ' I = = 8 2 ' S g [ > d
- A s
l$0 - i L -_ __ i s } A (' l*> ! h> uC
- . e : !
2 o ai : : h * -R N. o n *\ o o il 9 C e = ' s $ \ w - V we : 1 0 Eo y y 4 Q * 4 w K w t C 4 5 - "5 % s O k ~ a ~ d *
- j }4 A Q @Y2 ~
* * } C & d A - O c1 t3 O s 4, 9 2 Q 7 S N k k [ d ea g 1 l I 1 w.e-u , 362.25-38 e im DESIGN CALCULATIONS OWNER FILE No. woodward-ctyd. consumants L.& d, ,, ,,,, /,rc m,c /6scG 2,, n/e . n e TM" u,,,,,,,,, PROJECT J08 No. PAGE Y 2 C-o t $. $vinori2 / cl ?//l ndTo v- 7 3 Aof! SYSTEM CALCULAT #@ $k FM g ,. LZ),. DATE " '/" REVIEWER ~W CALCULATION FOR bmft?t: lh br-?:w.is i o r~ o / ct?>laf .Yosse ': I er itA*B DATE 5? RESULTS u :n ! d,,. , c : .. v .:-' .-< ( ,.n c e r +rtt r,u,, s p- c. /l;;u ,, - e c '. o.I a. ) d,,, le s-/// a.- d l e A rcs<#y [t/ L.- uzJ ). W. '/ 's - % oll= /Ic) { i.) (o.1) /,y ,fqi
- S. ? S "
r- n- ( u) { < 1 ) { o .'-)lay [,' ,' * ~ = '). o r *
- . L = - 3 cr. c (nex t){o.1) /y Q = 3.1.
- a. o ,
~ . J " Atn,at.- c.aner r a >. - ar + o it = 4. o S _( Se - c. ) * . I s/. o 4 . Ca. = (o. lo) ( ,p = o.o3i / s la ,,,,s., le c.o o,,n -u .n ir lm . ( ,G p r. 4 /e / l Nsso.e Ce = a.so l srz-3Vc sN:'(ot.)(t)(o.1)ly. 'f l,*,' = 1. 7..> 2'lo - 3z3 V (a.c)(ii){..-)/y ' ,', '),' '. ,
- i. </ . ~ ,
z.c.~ c na at C n..*si r : s so n - !.co ( EP 4) , 2. c. C e: (o .1) ( , g ;) c . /3r , ' , < r ,- 5 $ct etsi,*cr"*-
- su s afer 0 3(. C 362.25-39 WGA-AD-32
y, .n-.--.........--.- . . . - . . . - - - . . . - . . - . _ . - DESIGN CALCULATIONS Woodward-Chde Canondtents c c-== a, a,s= . PROJECT J08 h. PAGE Y b. $cm/71f ? / 2r t 'r2. _1 g_! SYSTEM CALCULATOR H DATE O-' CALCULATiONFOR REVIEWER d DATE wr
- 1 RESULTS hstxfer c s irrs>ir c C:s w inbrf of [spetot'"& 4/
ei ,,,, ,,.~ + c:. , ,n w . ~ c- -~ u<wn c. he< nnn A'x . / /e*o 'R9 fUO, L/$? E O,o06 (C /2 )5d % C Nm ,e n , .c 4 2. . . . . s - co a.m.o.y /y q.".;'=..e-' c,,,.,:..~ . cn .,,, .
- 3. c. - .. , a .- w ' '
, s.37 s48 .!b [s =' ( c . ) Z.6 e OJ o I . 362.25-40 WGA-AD-32 1 e n l i . DESIGN CALCULATIONS l l OWNER FILE No. l Woodwward-Chde Consultants ' r -TM"u. PROJECT JOS No. PAGE V . L . S.mivia. ,,au k1 SYSTEM CALCULATORAC DATE /?N CALCULATION FOR REVIEWER DATE RESULTS hmir -t bis..Ar:;,n Ta/ v sF huc r F o s t. fm CP-7 A . ,s. , 0, /l fr c'= o., ..t a ,, . 4 -, ~ ~ - L4n7 s/21 /. V23 l yte.s - wo s Y' (t C )('2) (*.*) l 9 3 '/ 3 " e 3 7g L/. vic - n 9 a (zo) (or)'(o. s) loy i s i. L .I ' 3 % s# s or 2 9. - m (u)(.t)(a6 j9 v,.s j= z.ie so eot-na . se.s fu ()f*L)(. 6 Icy ni,U' l ' ' .,-
- 11. a o " -
.. -o / e rv JL Gmfr* frow c! 0- ll = 2. G f " -- 6 [o./o)( z.4f \fj, ,, J O. o IV l l l r l l j 362.25-41 i WGA-AO-32 ee .. ])L N AuD . i . , . . ..,i . . . , . . . . , , . , , e , , i . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . ! . i . 6 e 6 . . ! . . 6 i . . ) { i , . e i e 6 l 6 . 4 i . . .,917 1/71/ j i e i . ., e i . . I i > . . i s . . . 6 . e a . . . . . . , . . .c r i , . . *., , s , , t t i , , , . . , 6 i . , . . . i - . g) . . 6 . . i 6 i ;e ee e i . . . . . . . . , , i . , , m 3, n ' I . , . . . . , , 6 . 6 i i . , e e , i . 6 e iq.W e k . , 6 4 , , i 6 . , . , . . . . . e i , , , , i .- mw . , I I i 6 . 4 i e i j . , . 6 . . . # . e 6 . . e, . 6 , i iigi i 1 l i . # i i i # e i e . . i , . , 4 . , . i , . . 6 iii e , e i . , ,u , . ( . i . . . s . # . 6 6 6 , . . . . . . e I , a 4 4 . a 4 . . . . , . . . , t t . . e , . . . . . e i . . 6 i . .i.... . . . . i . . e . . , e i i . i i , i , # . t . i , . , ..ii.4 . , . ! ! t 4 4 : . . . . i . . . 6 . . 6 i . . , . i , , . . . . 6 . . t e e i 4 6 i 4 . . . . . i , . . . . 4 . i i 6 i . . . . . . t i t 4 . . t i i , . I m f f . . # , %=* , i t i O I @6 9 j i t . . ah i i , g j== t , ! , I 4. t . . e /. " I ! e t 6 % . i . . . /' i ; . 4 6 i e 4 67 i e if i Yt I 6 , . . i e i. e . . , ; i i i . Ne i /i . I i . .N / I f i e IT . i t .
- V
. . i/i ,, i i e ) ' o m C t ' . . m} , b 4 6 r Q , 4 , p / / t t if / . i , ' W y "' ,r' ', F \> .f f / ' m f e/ e, f I 4 - f a f6 s PRm f . /
- f t' )
t 'w, / 2 . , l t4 :n V - V I ' > i , frs / * /4 6s is / , 6) e i . . _. / I , . . . . , 6 , lq j (i . 4 , . ,.! i i
- e %L /' , ! t , ,t 1 !
4 . . i . . . . e 6 4 %' - f / ) . . 4 . s j 1 g 8 . t 8 , I t i EI / , . ! , b . f . 8 i 4 , . . . , I / , 4 i , , e i I . t e 6 6 / . / . . , . e , 6 6 , , i t i / 4 * , 6
- I t t
' . . . ; 6 > t . . , t , 8 f . , , , i , . , i . . . . . 6 i , I t , t . .r 6 .' .* . . . . i , f , , 4 i < 4 . f , . . . , , , i . . . i I , f a e r . . . . . 4 . ! 9 . y e . . e . i p A / i , f .i . 4 . . i . . . ? t , , e i . i / t , . t i t , [ e 6 i l 6 e 1 j t . / , , e i e 6 . [ j , 4* 9 . f . J' , / e , i . , . [ *a g, . 6f 6 e t . 2 i f ; e ! . 6 i i g , , i . , 4 . . s . < f f if ,! . . . e . . g i ' , i 6 . . , , . t F 6 . 6 f / .4 . / / t e e i , , , , e ' f ,% (i e t . 4 e i . t , . . . i . . . , 6 i ! , . , e e Ll , i , e / . i 4 . i , . ) O O s 6 . . , i - e i 6 . , Pub i /t .f. j e ,- , ij . i , . 6 e . + , >g 3 J . . , , i 6 . 6 , . 4 m . 6 . y 6 6 . . . . . , , } i g . == i . . . . t . t 6 t . 6 6 3 t i6 t ,
- Nt i e I. ! I i t t
- Y t i Fi t
i , ; i i e i ( i e , ,6-t- i . . i i . , , , . . , e . 6 e % j Kg . . . , , , i . . , . . . . . . .e 6 . , t 6 y . . y , e i . . . . . e i , i e , , . eg g . . . . . . . . i e i e . . , e e i eii6 , . y pr i e . i i ; i , r. , , 3,. . . . +.. s . . . , , i . g ( . . . . . . . . . . . . . V1 . . . ./ . ,,1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . i . . . . . . . . . . . /s . . iA i .A i , . . . . , . . , , . . . . . i. 6 . . . . I % . . . . . . , 6 . . . .e.j 6 i , e iA i _4 i i . . , , i . . . . . . . . . . . g . , . . 6 i . , 6 i nos A , . . 6 , 1/ , 4 . , . i i i , . . i . . e . . i . . . , i . . . . . f . . . . . . c. . . . . r i i . , , . . . 6 . . . . . . . l % . . . , , . . , , . . . , y . . . . . . . rf . . . . i , , , e i l . . , . . . 6 .aw. 6 i , is i i , , . , 4 i a i . . . .6 . , e , . . . . . . i i . . . ; . , . * , , . . &VI , t ! . at , t< i t , e i . i , . . 3 , . . . , e . . . l . * , i t , 6 . . VI . . * , mWI ! Aa, . t . ! . . . . . , i t't 6 i t . . . . ' . ' . . . i. t . . . . * . 6 i . . . . , ./i i , , . . . ma e t . . . . . . . . . . i 6 . , i i e i . . , , . , . . 1 , . . . . , . / i . . . g 4 , .,i i i e t , , . iu. I e e i e t . , i
- i . . .
. i i e i . . 6 ij . . , e e .7 . . ,4 , e . . . . . . . . 2 , , i . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . -o. , . . . . / . . . .i t Avi . i . i 6 . . . . , .g,,, i . . i e . . . .. . . t . . ,, . . . , ei y1 . . . , . . . . e e . . e ! e i .e . . . . , . . . , . t j! . g e4 . / 6 . , . . e , i 6 . . . 7+ . , . /; . . . . . . . . ! . . . . . ; . . . .fi . .,4 . . . . , . . . . . . . . . wi . . . . . . . . . ,g, . . , efi i C . .-6 ,. . , . ! . . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . , =. . . . . ;/ . gr .A ,A 6 . . i . . . . . . . . . . -r , . . . , , . ._ i . . . ./ . .a 6 . . . , , . . . . . u-2
- a . . . i i .Jl .
< . j er . . . . . . . . iI e i w 0 . . a t J. . t im . f . j .' J . , . . . . i . . . . . .- . . . . . . O _'-l 4 . . n . . . N6 . ic, . .El A /. i ., . , . 3 . . e r _ i 6 a m r, . . = , , , , , , . g . . 4g / ami . . , , f'Ne G MAuf sir 7 ism .g . rw . </ I . i > i , mi. . 3i . .q , /, 6 .r . n . - n t i 362.25-42 _- _-._,-.,-._..--_.__i l __ - _. . ~ .. - - - , =, , I SS .4 e: .s
- O & %
,.- ? , W. 7 2. . . , . 4 , i . ! i i . . , . , . . .., , , , , ,. . 4 i i 4 . . . _m. . i e e i . . e i . . , i s i . . . , . i , , . . . i e i ipyPeyi .
- 6. i e i 6 . 6 e i , . . . , . . 4 . ..o , __
b 4 i ! i . . , ! 8 . 6 t , i t 7 FID /1/ / l . . . i 6 . . . 4 6 i r i,.. \ w . , , , . , . ; . . . . . . . . . . m ,
- c. . i , , . i . , , . . , . . . . n. !
i , 6 . . . , , e i . . . . . , &7 ,i, i . . . t i . i . . . . i , i ! . t , i ) . ji M, ry j r . . 6 . . I . . . . . . . 6 , . < # 3,q 4 . . s f , , , , . . . .,. , , , . . . . . 4 , , , ,... . . , , . , , , , : . . . . . . . . . ... , 6 , , , , . . . . .... . . . . . . .... , i . , , , . .. . . 4 i . . . , , .. , , . . , ,, , , i+ . i , , , . , . . , , , , i . .... l .. . . . . . . , , i i , i . . r # , . . . , * . i . . . i . . . . . . . . ! ... , , i , . . . i i i I . . . 4 . * ! , ! 0 f f J , . i . . i . , . . . . 6 . . i j \ . # . , , , , , . . . . ' i , , e t i e i 6 , , , . . . I . . . . , i . , , i . , . . . . . !. . ! i . . 4 , , , . . . i + . . . . . . . , . . . i . . . . . . , . , . , , . . . . . l, . . , . . , , . , , . , 4 . . . . . . . . . . ; . . . i i . 6 i . . t t . . . . . 6 . i , 6 , , . a t 4 , . $ .. . . . . . >- . . . i , , , ! . . . . . . . . . i , m .. , . i , , , , , i * , . . . . . ! C3 , .,. , . . . , ei i . . , . . t +. . . . , , e i , . . , . . J f . . . , , , i , . , , . . . . . i Me . t i . , i i . . i i . , j 9F . i . . i , 4 6 i . , i . , , , , ! . . i . , , t t t 6 . . t, t i , 4 8 . t . i l g * . i i e i i , ! , g , f , , * . t , , i t . ! , , , , i , i,. . . . . , t . , , a. 6 , g , g , . . . . . i , , N1,, ~ . , , . , , . . . i . . . , , mw. i . , + i . i . . . . , i i , i , , , , , . . , i . . . . . . . i , . . . i , . . i , , , . ei . . . , , , , . , , , , i i . . . . . i i , , , , . . v . i . . . 6 , 4 i . . . , . . i * * , . . ! , e ' t . . , . . /T , , * . 6 , , , , . , . , , i - ) . , , 8 f f . .I l l . , t . l . .si . .__ N E . . i . . . . . ' - % i, . , , . . , . . , , . . . . , , . .f i %%, , , . , . . [ , + , 4 . . . 4 . 1 i , . , , , 4 i , , . . .r i e i.,. . , . . , . n ,,.6 , . .t . , t t , ,
- i . 4 , 6 i t f. , , r , - . i , , . , , , . . ,
f . . . . i , t . . . l 6 i ! . 5 . / , } / . . l . . . . . i . . . o, , . e ! , t . , 4 , . . e 4 , I ,
- 1/ t . i, . . , t . 4 i . ' . ! . , . ,[
. j , i I . , 6 . I , , l , l g , , , fl . , jl , g . t , , l ) , . 6 . f I 4w , , , , . 6 i i i . ,i , i i , . e,4 . . . , ei i . , .,. , , 4 . i , 6 i . . . . . , i . , , i i i , , . i , 6 i . . ,, . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . n . g . . . . . . . . . . . i , . . . . ,. . . , , . . . . . i . . , , , . . . . . q i . , t . , , i . . . i , i i , * . , . t , , f. t , ( t e e . . * * . t . , , , i . , . . . . I g% ! . . . . l . , i f i f ( . , p ! . . . , 6 , t /. . . /j . 6 . . , . , . , , . . , . i e , a f a s t . , . . i , . , , i 1 , . . 4 . i . vi , re i ! . , . , , e 9 . . . . . . . . 3 . e t i , , ' e i . . . . . I t 8 , . . I . si i i /,. . ' * . ' t , , ' . ' . . , i . * . . f t, . . . % . . . . , . . . , . , i , . , . . ., . . . i i , , . . , , e i . . . . . . . N i i e e , , . . . . . e e , e , . . _ , . r j i A i e , i 6 s . . . t ! . . t , , . . . . , . . i , . . , . i i , . . .A i , . i . i . . i . , , . . f . , . . ! . * ! I i i , , f f . I! l *4 I i l . . ! l , i . e , } . i I . f e , e , i i . s . . . . . . , , , . I i t f i , ff I 6 , , , . ! , i i I , , . i t i , ' . . l O. >g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , i . . . e. . .,y. i . . . i . . i . . . . . . . . . . . 6 l J . n . * , , . , . , , . , . . . * , i , y , , . . . en . , . . . , . . . ag . *
- rI , * ,
. , , , . . . . , , , , . . . . . . . . . , vi . . . . , . . . , , . , , , i NR . e . , , e e . . , , e m TI 4 . . i . . . . . - . , e . . . . . . . . . . . ! . . . . s . . . , . . 31 . . e , ,f . . . , a 7. . 6 i . . i , i . . i . . . . i ., , eM _1 . . . . . . g . . . . . . . mr . O( "a = i +
- r. F e . . . . . ,
Z . . , . wT.r,' . i . g , . 6 i & i, , e i . . j , . . . . . , . . . . , . , , . . . , , , i i . . . . . . . , , . e e . . . i , f g J e , e e . . e . i e . . . . e , . . . . . . . f * . i . . s . , ,e , t ee t i ,i , ( , . i . . i , , e . s d . , . . . y. . . , . . , e , i e , . Vi , e . i 8 . . I i , . t . . , , f . , f , i , e f i . i s 13 , W ' C , ,g 9 i N . w- J - - a ~ C an ! - a, i n 'A -. *M* 'N >s - m. ee.'% - 2- .. - Z2 jvMu ' vist 4 .f 7.,,,e
- m, -
' ~ * ' =
- r
%. t , %, . _~a g, , c. s. . 362.25-43 . ___ _ . - 1 DESIGN CALCULATIONS ww5_5 FILE no. Woodward-Clyde Consultants OWNER $ C 8 g 6- , nw se.m,,, PROJECT JOB No. PAGE Vo {
- UJ?? W 9 l' '2- ! of_'
SYSTEM CALCULATDR " # . DATE '?" CALCULATiONFOR REVIEWER DATE eL/2/"'? RESULT 3 l / Le n ,. - s <- i ? ,,,e,. r rue tisa ei .c -%nt%: r .-a 5.'t i -c & cf ra .a c k 5't.ctr rit t C, : o.otV fe,%,.,-c (f = o.ooe i OK G- o . /.f o Po 3 s' rsF % b,i er e,. -- m cs d, : rn a u ..a . t .3 s 3. '2 > </ 4 d .. ( e)/, t)'( . :,,) /,j .
- 2 or. '
3.c. . 3 W-3 s 'I (io)(n)(. 2 v) /g 7, , , = M'/ . a 36'l=3G"U V ( so)(rL) (.otal) l0y &r . . ' l. / $ " 3 7 - E 'l 1- fa1)(tt)f.or6)l*y ,o * ( ./3 Yay
- I 72" 3 n -23 a (,n (.z)[t...ey /.y M,,v.. + (. i r) I, '&&.') = 3 ss '
J3c */6 //:.j[rt) (.soe} /vy iG"~.
- O 3/
IV 300 ' 5's-2.. (n)(,1) (.ooe) hy gs, = o . 2* " Z' 11.?3 " ' hervn [g -n g is, :,, -- er I,at e cc Eav.~..:= = l3 " TH Pi , 3.1 :" to n u- 2.a ., p (a x o [(.a.e> h , =u ,. +(>vk,u..]N = . n ., - 392-33. (,1)(a)[(. as)/cp W * (,it) /ap '0.~.] = <!as < !
- I 2 f. 2 #
/' b k ' E li h? Qf t l l 362.25-44 1 l WGA-AD-32 1 ~ _ ; _ _ _ 362.26 What are the anticipated future movements for the pumphouse and the intake structure. Identify and discuss their potential a effects.
RESPONSE
5 During filling of the Service Water Pond, the Pumphouse experienced an average of 0.19 inch of settlement in February and March of 1978, due to the weight of the water. The measured settlement of the Intake Structure was 0.22 inches at the
! west (Pumphouse) end, 0.42 inches at the middle and 0.52 inches at the east end.
Immediately after filling of the pond was completed, both structures negan to rebound due to the effects of bouyancy as the subsoils became saturated. Through August 13, 1980, the average net rebound (above the elevation before filling of the pond) of the Pumphouse has been 0.82 inches and that of the west end, middle and east end of the Intake Structure has been. 0.72, 0.77 and 0.08 inches, respectively. It is anticipated that the rebound of the Pumphouse and Intake Structure will continue until the groundwater level within the West Embankment reaches equilibrium with the Service Water Pond and Monticello Reservoir. The average groundwater level in August, 1978, when seven piezometers were installed in the vicinity of the Pumphouse, was elevation 400.5. The average groundwater level in l ll Septembce,1980 was elevation 419.8. It is estimated that the equilibrium level will probably be in the range of elevation 421 to 424 and will be essentially obtained during 1981. Based on the behavior to date, it is anticipated that the total net rebound of the Pumphouse and the west end and middle of the Intake Structure will be on the order to 1.0 to 1.25 inch. Therefore, additional rebound on the order of about 0.25 to 0.50 inches is anticipated at these locations. The east end of the Intake Structure appears to have essentially stabilized. i l As previously described, future anticipated movement is small, and the differ- , ential movement that could occur is also very small. No significant effects I therefore are anticipated on either the Pumphouse or the Intake Structure to i 362.26-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
change their present condition. Provisions made for differential movement between the incoming services and the Pumphouse are described in Section 9.0 of Report No. 2, and provide for differential movement far in excess of that which Can occur. 362.26-2 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
l
\
\
362.27 Borings WE-6 & 7 revealed that the moisture contents of the in-place fill were higher than the 4 percent above optimum limit
- prescribed in the specification. No rejection or concern was l mentioned in the resident engineer's reports attached in Appendix j, B of Report No. 2. Document reports filed with NRC about this non-conformance in construction and how resolution was achieved.
RESPONSE
Refer to the response to Question 362.19. In summary, the moisture content data { from Borings WE-6 and WE-7 confirm that the select fill was placed in accordance i with specifications. Therefore, non-conformance reports were not required. 1 i i 1 1 -. J l l 362.27-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
l l : l 362.28 The special testing, presented in Section 2.5.6.4.2.8 of FSAR, appears to be trying to justify the acceptability of the nonconformance mentioned above (Question 362.27). However, the material tested at borrow source G, as shown in Table 2.5-59a, was not typical fill used. Materials from borrow source F and on-site soil were reportedly used to construct the West Embankment. The block samples UDS-21 & 22 were low plastic materials and do not represent the materials from source G, as presented in Figure 2.5-122. Provide additional background information related to the specifi-cation change and the special test: such as the date for requesting such a specification change and the date of performing the special test, why the test is necessary, .why low plastic material was selected for the test, etc. RESPONSE I The special testing described in FSAR Section 2.5.6.4.2.8 was not performed to i justify a non-conformance. As described in response to Question 362.19, all ; previous materials were placed and compacted in accordance with specifications and a non-conformance does not exist. The purpose of the testing was to determine if a greater range of moisture content could be used in the fill, thereby reducing construction delays due to wet soil conditions. The investigation into the suitability of using select fill with a moisture content up to 6 percentage points above optimum was initiated on April 26, 1977. The laboratory testing was conducted in May of 1977 and the specification change request was made on June 6,1977. The request was approved for implementation on July 22, 1977, after which time the majority of the earthworks for the Service ; Water Pond was completed. However, the filling of the West Embankment up to the foundation level of the Service Water Pumphouse was completed in 1973, so that the maximum moisture content used in that area was 4 percentage points above optimum. 362.28-1 AMENDMENT 22 NCVEMBER, 1980
l l l I l The plasticity index of the three block samples used in the special testing l l program were NP (non-plastic), 5 and 8. By comparison, of the 242 Atterberg limit tests conducted on the select fill for construction control (see FSAR Table 2.5-51), a total of 193 tests were non-plastic and the remaining 49 tests had an average plasticity index of 11. Thus, the vast majority of select fill materials were non-plastic to low-plastic and the block samples in the special testing program were representative of these materials. Block samples which were obtained from the compacted embankments, and then tested, included materials with higher plasticity indices typical of the g- materials from Borrow Source G. In particular, these included Block Samples UDS-1, UDS-9 and UDS-ll. The strength envelopes of these block samples, as shown on FSAR Figure 2.5-155, are well in excess of the envelope used for design. It should also be noted that material with a plasticity index greater than 25 were not used in safety class fills. Such materials were used for other, non-safety, fills on the site. t 362.28-2 AMENDMENT 22 ; NOVEMBER, 1980 '
362.29 The summary of 43 gradation tests from the West Embankment, as shown in Fig. 2.5-142, reveal.: ,1 that select fill was not in conformance with the prescribed gradation limits. Discuss the significance of this, specifically, in the case where materials with more fines than specified were placed.
RESPONSE
The gradation band shown on Figure 2.5-142, Sheet 4, indicates the range of gradations of samples tested during PSAR studies. This gradation band was not intended to be a specification and was not presented or used as such. The percentage of fines (soil finer than the No. 200 sieve) in the West Embankment fill ranged from about 33 percent to 78 percent, as compared to the PSAR test soils which had percentages of fines ranging from about 50 percent to 87 percent. Thus, the percentage of fines was less than that of the PSAR samples, not more. In some cases, however, the percentage of borrow material finer than 15 microns was greater than that of the PSAR samples. This slight variation of some samples would have no significant effect on the average compressibility or permeability of the West Embankment fill materials.
~
i l l 362.29-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980 ~ 1
.._ _ 1
362 30 Many of the resident engineer's reports, presented in Appendix B of Report No. 2, stated that soft and organic materials were encountered during construction. However, none of the reports indicated that probing was carried out to determine the extent of the undesirable materials. Document the removal of these mater-ials. Without such documentation, discuss the possibility of ' those materials being left in place, the effect of this error, and the significance to foundation behavior. i
RESPONSE
Documentation as to the removal of soft or otherwise unsuitable materials is presented in the response to Question 362.16. Probing was not conducted; the Resident Geotechnical Engineer based his conclusions as to the suitability of the foundation soils on visual observation of trafficability of construction equipment during proofrolling. Since all unsuitable materials were removed, there is no influence on foundation behavior. t
,~ ,
J t I 362.30-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
362 31 Ground surface elevations of Borings WE-1 through 5 were not compatible with the contours shown on Figure 1 " Location Plan, SWIS & PH" of Report No. 2. Clarify this with resolution and discussion and provide a sectional profile along the longitudinal l axis of the SWIS & PH.
RESPONSE
i The contours shown on Figure 1 of Report No. 2 represent the foundation contours after removal of unsuitable materials from the foundation area of the West Embankment in July and August, 1973 The test borings were drilled in May and June, 1973, before this excavation took place. In addition, as noted in the boring logs, several feet of fill had to be placed at each boring location to provide a level and stable surface for the drilling rig. Therefore, the ground surface elevations of the borings are several feet higher than the contours. A section profile along the longitudinal axis of the Service Water Intake Structure and Pumphouse is provided with the response to Question 362.21. 362 31-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
I l 362.32 The Intake Structure, as stated in Report No. 2, was expected to undergo a linear differential settlement with some essentially rigid body rotation, based on the geometries of the underlying soils and on the overburden along its length. Hence, no signifi-cant bending of the tunnel in the longitudinal direction was anticipated and no longitudinal reinforcement was provided in the i Intake Structure. However, our review of the boring information at the SWIS & PH area seems to indicate the boring information was not utilized for the design, because: . a. Had the information revealed by borings WE-1 through 5 been I used in the design, the incompatibility of their surface elevations with what were shown on Figure 1 " Location Plan - SWIS & PH" would have been detected and corrected.
- b. Assuming the boring locations shown on Figure 1 were correct, the surface condition would indicate that differential settle-ments should be anticipated because the east end of the SWIS is founded on decomposed rock, the midpoint of SWIS on 20 feet of a fill, the west end of SWIS and the east end of the PH on 15 feet of fill, 7 feet of loose soil, and 20 feet of saprolite, i
while the west end of PH would be on 25 feet of fill and 30 feet of saprolite. The load distribution due to the fill or l structure along the axis of SWIS & PH varied from almost zero at the east end to as much as 70 feet of fill at the west end. A non-linear settlement along this axis should have been anticipated. In addition to the boring evidence, the original settlement estimates indicate that 3 to 4 inches was expected at the PH and 1.5 to 2 inches was expected at the east end of the SWIS. With the 4 PH sitting on top of the SWIS, it is difficult to understand why
! "no significant bending in the longitudinal direction was antici-i pated."
i 362.32-1 AMENDMENT 22 ! , NOVEMBER, 1980
Provide the design criteria which were used for the SWIS & PH: including earth pressures under static and dynamic loading condi- [ t tions and under limits of differential settlements. t RESPONSE ; i Information obtained from Borings WE-1 through WE-5 was used in the original j , settlement analysis and took into account that unsuitable materials would be f removed. Refer to the responses to Questions 362.15 and 362.31 relative to the , elevations of the borings, and the removal of loose soil from the foundation area ! of the West Embankment. With the small amount of settlement (1.5 to 2.0 inches) that was originally predicted, based on the geometries of the underlying soils and the overburden l along its length, the Intake Structure was expected to settle with essentially a { rigid body rotation. Subsequent observation of the structure during ( construction confirmed ~ this assumption as no cracking occurred until the I settlement at the Pumphouse end reached 5.5 to 6.0 inches. The Pumphouse base slab is founded at El. 386' and the Intake Structure base slab at El. 367'. A ! movement joint of four (4) inches as shown on Figure 362.21-1 is provided between i the Pumphouse and Intake Structure which provides for differential settlement, minimizing any load transfer due to differential settlement or rebound. l The 1.5 to 2.0 inches of settlement was expected at the west end of the Intake f Structure, not at the east end as the question indicated. ;. 5 The design criteria used for the Pumphouse and Intake Structure is given in the ! following FSAR locations: ! Load Combinations - Table 3.8 { l Lateral Earth Pressure Distribution: ; t Pumphouse - Figure 2.5-90c ' Intake Structure - Figure 2.5-90d. ! l 362 32-2 AMENDMENT 22 ! I NOVEMBER, 1980
362 33 ACI 318-71, Section 10.6 and the code commentary were cited to justif*/ that the grouting of the cracks as wide as 0.125 inches is a precautionary step. Section 10.6.4 states this is not applicable for structure subjected to aggressive exposure or designed to be watertight. Discuss the applicability of this code to the SWIS.
RESPONSE
Limiting the epoxy grouting to cracks of width greater than 0.012 inches was based on our conclusions that the structure is not subjected to aggressive exposure and does not have to function as a watertight structure in the same way as a water retaining structure.
- 1. The Intake Structure is permanently submerged with saturated soil on the outside. The flow velocity of the water through the Intake Structure is 0.42 ft/sec. The differential
. pressure between the inside and outside of the structure is almost zero. Water retaining or water exclusion structures to which ACI 318-71 Section 10.6.4 is referring to is not !
applicable to the Intal'e Structure. ,
- 2. High chloride ion concentration (500 ppm or greater) 1.1 the most common cause of rebar corrosion and this is not present in the water. The chemical tests for the service pond water ,
showed chloride content at 5.1 ppm. 362.33-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER , 1980
1 l 362.34 Epoxy grout, as stated in Sec. 8.0 of Reoort No. 2, was used to fill the cracks. Fifteen test cores of the grouted cracks were reported taken in Sec. 8.0.F. What is the design strength of this grout? What were the confirmation test results? Provide those data.
RESPONSE
There are no special design strength requirements in the Intake Structure design related to the greut filling of the cracks. The grout used was "Concresive 1380" supplied and placed by the Adhesive Engineering Company. One of the character-istics of this, and other similar epoxy grouts is that they have a high compressive and tensile strength relative to normal structural concrete, "Concresive 1380" is no exception. The strength tests were made to ensure good l quality grout of the specified type had been used. Grout strength tests that were made during the grouting operation indicated compressive strengths exceeding th a 13,000 psi specified for the material, verifying that the grout was of good quality and a total of twenty eight (28) sets of five (3) strengths were made. Of these tests, the lowest compressive strength was 13,150 psi, and the lowest average of any set of five tests was 15,180 psi. I 1 I 1 l 362.34-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
362.35 The maximum crack width observed is stated to be about 1/8 of an inch. What was the maximum crack aidth at the upper face of the SWIS? 1 i
RESPONSE
From the inside of the structure, the geometry of the cracks showed consistently a maximum crack width at the top of walls and across the roof tapering to zero towards the bottom of the side walls. This geometry together with the small inclination to the vertical indicated a crack due to bending of the Intake Structure in the longitudinal direction. Based on the roof thickness and length of the side wall crack, it can be concluded that there is little increase in the crack width at the outer face of the roof from the inside face. Confirmation of f this assumption was made by inspecting the cracking at the end of the structure 1 where the top was clear of embankment soil. The cracks were observed at the exposed outer locations to be approximately the same wioth on the top and sides as observed from inside. 1 l l 362.35-1 AMENDMENT 22 l NOVEMBER, 1980
i j l \ 1 1 362.36 It appears from information in Sec. 8.0.D that the cracks were not sealed at the outer faces of tbs intake structure. If this is the 4 case, what is the assurance that this grout is fully and evenly l distributed along the cracks? j j RESPONSE j j Using the pressure system of grouting described in Section 8 and Appendix D of j Report No. 2, together with the pretest program and core test results we are ] confident that the grout is fully and evenly distributed along the cracks through the wall and roof. In places where some marginal voiding in the grout may occur, { this will not adversely affect the original precautionary intention. i l j The following is an extract from the final report from Mr. John C. King, the Concrete Consulting Engineer who was present throughout the grouting operations. 4 j " Based on examination of 15 cores, 4" diameter, extending from the inside face to
- within 4" of the outside face or contact with outside face reinforcement and i
j personal observation of more than 95% of the injection work, I conclude with j confidence that over 85% of the cracks are 100% filled and the remainder over 955 1 filled. The concrete surfaces of such few voids as were observed in the cores j were coated with epoxy, indicating that some epoxy grout had run out into the , i backfill after the cracks had been filled. It seems reasonable to conclude that
! epoxy grout also coats and protects such steel reinforcing bars as may pass j' through these openings." ,J l
i l
. l l
1 f 4 362.36-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
362.37 If the upper ends of the cracks were open, discuss the significance of those openings, especially the corrosion aspects of the exposed reinforcing bars. Should there be undetected and unfilled cracks through the SWIS, discuss the effects of the hydraulic gradient through the crack with regard to piping erosion of the SWIS foundation or cooling capacity and effects on pumping facilities.
RESPONSE
If the upper ends of the cracks were open with the reinforcing steel bridging the cracks prior to the grout injection, the reinforcement would be coated with epoxy grout from the passage of the pressurized grout flowing into the surrounding embankment during the grouting operation. In the event the reinforcement remains completely unprotected, its confined location and immediate environment is not condusive to corrosion. See also response to Qu'estions 362 33 and 362.36. The hydraulic gradient through the structure is almost zero from a water intake flow velocity calculated to be 0.42 ft/sec. during the event of an accident with two pumps in operation at high speed. If undetected cracks are present in the Intake Structure base slab, there will be no errosion of the foundation material because there is essentially no hydraulic gradient. An evaluation was made on the hypothetical case of future significant cracking and its effects on the safe function of the Intake Structure. The evaluation was in response to Question 2 from the NRC as listed in Enclosure 1 of their summary of a meeting held on June 13, 1980, Docket No. 50-395 dated June 23, 1980 for your reference. (Response submitted to NRC on July 3,1980.) The evaluation may also be found in response to NRC Question 2 in FSAR Cuestion Series 20.1 located following Question Series 130 in Amendment 20. 362.37-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
. .. O 362 38 Service water pump discharge lines, as reported in Sec. 5.4 of the Final Report, were discovered to have some misalignment requiring re-excavation in ceder to connect the pipes to the PH. Describe the nature of the misalignment: horizontal, vertical movement, or both and the amount of the movements. What was the condition of the pipelines already buried? Were they also misaligned? Describe the monitoring program performed along the service pipe lines?
RESPONSE
Placing of the 30 inch discharge lines for a distance of fifty (50) feet from the Pumphouse was delayed until April 1978. At that time the embankment had been completed, the pond filled, and embankment soil and Pumphouse settlement had ceased and was in the rebound mode. A trench was cut into the embankment to accommodate the 50 foot length and was adjusted for any elevation realignment to pump datums. The pipes were placed and the' dresser couplings installed. Connection to the pump lines inside the Pumphouse was not made at this time. The open trench was backfilled during the latter part of May 1978. ; In October 1978 it was found that a small rotation of the connecting flange of the external pipin6 had taken place preventing insertion of the bolts. The trench was re-excavated and it was determined that the end of the 90 bend at the dresser coupling had settled, causing some small rotation at the flange connection inside the Pumphouse. Refer to Figure 21 of Report No. 2 for installation details of the 30 inch lines. , It is concluded that this localized settlement of the pipe was due to the excavation remaining open to weathering for about two months while the pipe was l being placed with insufficient compaction directly beneath the pipe. Every effort was made to horizontally pack fill beneath the pipe but the presence of the installed pipe prevented vertical compaction of the original embankment material directly beneath the pipe. l l l l 362.38-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
8e l Before backfilling of the re-excavated trench, the sections of pipe and dresser couplings adjacent to the Pumphouse were removed. The bottom of the excavation l l compacted to normal specification values, providing a bedding that supported the pipe to the elevation necessary to align the pipe flanges inside the Pumphouse. Zone 1 filter sand was used to fill in under the pipe on either side of the invert. The balance of backfill was Zone I or II compacted fill installed as per [ l specifications. The settlement of the service water pump discharge lines had no connection with the overall settlement of the Pumphouse and Embankment. No settlement monitoring of the 30 inch line was performed.
.A 362.38-2 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
. ~
l
, 7
/
~
~
362.39 Electrical duct banks were reported in Sec. 5.3,of the final report . to have moved downward about 0.84 inches relative to the PH. It appears that no investigation or monitoring along the duct banks ; was performed. Discuss the possibility of differential settlement l along the duct banks and its effects such as causing the' duct bank '
/
to crack, the potential for corrosion, and water intrus' ion. b
RESPONSE
The electrical duct banks immediately adjacent to the Pumphouse for a distance of 28 feet were not placed until June 1978 by which time the general settlement of i the embankment had ceased and the soil das in the rebound mode. An excavation trench was cut into the embankment just prior to construction of the reinforced concrete duct banks. No monitoring along the duct banks was performed except at the entrance of the duct bank into the Pum' p house wall penetration. No l significant differential movement along the duct bank is antiticpated to occur because the underlaying embankment compacted fill in this area ties not vary in depth and initial overall settlement had taken place prior to the construction of the ducts. However, where the ducts enter the Pumphouse wall, some differential <- movement between the ducts and Pumphouse wall was anticipated Eithin 'a short distance of the duct entry. The two inch thick form joint around the duct entry was provided to allow for any differential movement, including possible future seismic events. The foam filler is much softer than the embEnkment fill, , therefore, any propping force that might develop at the wall due to differential movement is minimized. A substantial propping force (compressing -th}e joint over l.5 inches) would need to develop before any significant bending is induced in the duct banks due to differential movement. Based on the analysis, there is no potential for non-hairline cracking such that corrosion or water intrusion would occur in the electrical duct banks. Furthermore, the environment is not corrosive, as described in the response to Question 362 33 j 4 r A 362 39-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER , 1980 a _ - ! ._.
^
1 ; - i/ I 4 362.40 .- Analysis assuming a non-linear soil settlement along part of the structure was performed as indicated in Sec. 7.2 of Report No. 2. f al Provide the analytical model, assumptions, soil material properties used, and the results of the analysis. b) If the settlement information presented in Table 3 was used in ethe analysis, provide the results corresponding to the state of the settlement. c) Discuss the residual stresses in the concrete and the re-bars
. resulting from the excessive differential settlements. Dis-cuss their effects on future performance.
d) If Table 3 information has not been usM, provide your program to establish the stress conditions corresponding to various settlement conditions and discuss the residual settlement
/, stress effects ob the ability of the structure to also resist j- design loadings.
~
7 RESPONSE l ' ,i , T$e, purpose of the studies using the concepts of a beam on elastic foundation and
~
'a two dimensional finite element approach was to gain a general understanding of
. ' the behavior of the Intake Structure under varying kinds of soil conditions.
j- These preliminary studies were made in September of 1977 prior to information
, being available on the revised soil settlement analysis and before the period of y , significant settlement and cracking had cear:ed at the end of December 1977. The
,/ ,j settlement values in Table 3 of ReportJo.r2 were not used in the studies, and no i attempt
. .+ was made to preselect' soil spring / values for the models directly from
,e soll data information. For the beam on elastic foundation method, the modulus of
/b subgrade reaction used ranged fres 4.5 to 40.5 k/ft 3 , and for the finite element method the values of soil modulus,(E 2 to 1200 k/ft2 ,
used ranged from 400 k/ft
> ; y Examination of the preliminary ,studie's- confirmed the conclusion that with a
{' /' 7 j l significant change in soil spring value at the Pumphouse end of the Intake i ~. Structure, large differential displacement and significant moments will occur in the longitudinal direckion of the structure. These preliminary studies were not used to estimate the stress in concrete and strain in the reinforcing steel in 4 362.40-1 AMENDMENT 22 y a NOVEMBER , 1980
~
\
the longitudinal direction from the excessive settlement. Using crack geometry, it was estimated that there is stress of 1300 psi in the base slab and 15 tensile strain in the reinforcing steel bridging the maximum crack widths in the roof. The above values, and discussion on the residual stresses in tne concrete and strains in the reinforcing steel in the longitudinal s direction and their effects on future performance, ar e given in Report No. 2 (Section 7.2, page 30 and Section 7.3, page 31) and also in response to NRC questions in Amendment 20 of the FSAR, pages 20.1-1 through 7 (located following the 130 series questions). In summary, the Table 3 information was not used to estimate the stress and strain condition at various settlement stages of .the Intake Stru,cture. However, the maximum state of stress and strain was estimated by using the measured crack width and the geometry of the excessive settlement as discussed above. , k I
- f 36230-2 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980 ,
l l I l
e 362.41 Horizontal movements were observed at the North and South Dams. Provide additional details, such as where, when, how much and direction of the movements; and discuss the possible causes and the effects of the horizontal movements.
RESPONSE
Horizontal movements of the North and South Dams are shown in FSAR Tables 2.5-66c and 2.5-66e, respectively, through March,1980. This constitutes more than two years of records. Monitoring will continue throughout the operating life of the plant. The monitoring program is described in FSAR Section 2.5.6.8.1. Horizontal movements of dams are commonly experienced during reservoir filling. Upon filling of the Monticello Reservoir, on the north side of the North Dam, the North Dam experienced maximum horizontal crest movement of 0.05 feet north at Stations 9+00 and 10+00 (the maximum section is about Station 9+50) and 0.08 feet south at Station 12+00. These movements occurred during the period from December 2,1977 through February 20,1978, about 11 weeks. Monticello Reservoir was filled during the period from December 1,1977 through February 9,1978. The Service Water Pond, on the south side of the North Dam, was filled during the period from February 23, through March 7,1978. During this period, the crest moved to the south, with a maximum net movement of 0.10 feet south measured on March 9,1978, at Station 10+00. Through June,1980 the maximum net horizontal movement has increased to 0.13 feet South at Station 10+00. (It is ncted that monuments at Stations 5+00 and 12+00 show apparent movements of 0.27 feet south and 0.22 feet south. However, these relatively large movements occurred suddenly and tbrt stopped. Therefore, it is concluded that these monuments were probably disturbed by construction activities and the measurements do not represent actual dam crest movement.) 362.41-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
During filling of Monticello Reservoir, located on the south side of the South i Dam, the maximum recorded horizontal crest movement of the South Dam was 0.04 feet south, occuring at Station 9+00. No movement was measured at the maximum section, Station 6+00. During the filling of the Service Water Pond, en the ; north side of the Dam, the crest moved slightly north, so that the maximum recorded g movement was 0.02 feet south at Station 9+00. Again, no movement : was recorded at the maximum section. Through June, 1980, the maximum recorded ; net horizontal crest movement is 0.03 feet north, occurring at Stations 3+00, 4+00, 7+00 and 8+00. ; The horizontal crest movements of the North and South Dams were due to t unsymmetrical loadings caused by raising the water levels or both sides of the i dams at different times. The movements are considered to be of negligible , magnitude and will have no influence on the performance of the structures. The I movements essentially ceased early in 1979. i c i i 362.41-2 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980 i
362.42 Horizontal movements of the SWIS & PH and West Ecbankment were not mentioned in the documents reviewed. Sec. 2.5.6.8 of FSAR indicates that horizontal movements were measured at the North and South Dams. Justify your reasons for not making measurements of horizontal movement at the West Embankment.
RESPONSE
Horizontal crest movements of the West Embankment were not measured. Since the West Embankment has only one sloping side, horizontal movements during reservoir
~
filling was expected to be much smaller than for the other structures. Measurements indicate that horizontal movements of the North and Sou h Dams were negligible and it can be presumed that such movements of the West Emban' kment were also negligible. l 362.42-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 193C
362.43 Liquefaction potential, as stated in Sec. 2.5.4.8 of FSAR, was evaluated based on Seed's procedure. Discuss the applicability of that procedure to saprolites in light of the highly compressible nature of these materials as disclosed by labor 3 tory test results.
, RESPONSE Saprolites at the site are usually classified as silty sand (SM) and sandy or clayey silt (ML) with slight to low plasticity. These materials are formed by weathering of rock in place from parent rock, contain 35 to 85 percent fines (passing the No. 200 sieve) and retain a relic structure. These materials also contain a significant amount of mica which influences their compressibility under sustained loads.
For in-situ saprolites, the non-plastic silty sand (SM) types are expected to have the minimum liquefaction resistance. By comparison the plastic clayey silt (ML) types exhibit cohesive shearing resistance and have ?herefore a higher liquefaction resistance. The liquefaction potential of the silty sand type saprolites was assessed using Seed's empirical procedure (Seed, 1976). The justification of the use of Seed's method is discussed below. l The correlation between the field liquefaction behavior of sands in terms of cyclic stress ratio and Modified Penetration Resistance (N ) wasy established by ' Seed based on field evidence supplemented by large scale simple shear laboratory tests on Monterey No. O sand. The case histories used in this assessment are predominantly sands containing little fines (silt). Similarly, the Monterey No. O sand is a uniform medium sand mostly passing the No. 30 sieve and with no particles finer than the No. 50 sieve; its coefficient of uniformity is about 1.5 and the mean particle size (D50) is about 0.4 mm. According to data obtained by Lee and Fitton (1969), presented here as Figure 362.43-1, and confirmed by field behavior, fine sands, silty sands and sandy silts (D 50 ranging fr m 0.03 to 0.3 mm) have the least resistance to liquefaction. By comparison, the mean particle size (D50} - "* " 362.43-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER , 1980
saprolite soils ranges from 0.002 mm to 0.07 mm. These materials also usually exhibit a well defined relic structure. It follows that the bulk of the saprolite foundation materials will have significantly higher resistances to liquefaction than materials used in the correlation developed by Seed. Thus, characterization of the saprolite as a silty sand for the Seed correlation is a very significant conservatism. The value of normalized SPT blow count (N1 ) obtained in the saprolites (even in the silty sand range) would be expected to be lower than for a clean sand deposit at the same relative density. This is due to the presence of mica and the significantly higher silt content of the saprolite as compared to the sands used to establish Seed's procedure. The attendant N y parameter is therefore a second conservatism in the procedure. In summary, very conservative estimates of the liquefaction potential of the saprolite foundation soils are obtained by application of the empirical procedures suggested by Seed. The compressibility of the saprolite under static load is reflected by the SPT measurements in the more highly weathered (silty sand) zone of the weathering profile and, therefore, is considered in the liquefaction analysis. REFERENCES Seed H.B., Evaluation of Soil Liquefaction Effects on Level Ground, State-of-the-Art paper, ASCE National Convention, September 27 - October 1,1976 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. (Preprint 2752). Lee, K.L. and Fitton, J.A., " Factors Affecting the Cyclic Loading Strength of Soil", Vibration Effects of Earthquakes on Soils and Foundations, ASTM SPT 450, , 1969. r 362.43-2 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
- m. , ----
. 362.44 Slope stability analysis was not performed for the West Embank-ment, as stated in Sec. 2 5.4.10.6.1 of FSAR, because the embankment height is lower than the North or South dam. Since the as-built conditions of the Embankment were different than those originally proposed, justify the validity of not performing an analysis of the embankment. Describe the effects of the West Embankment loads on the SWIS & PH that tend to push the SWIS into the valley.
RESPONSE
The configuration and as-built conditions of the West Embankment are clearly less critical th e those of the Service Water Pond Dams. The as-built maximum height of the West Embankment is about 85 feet, as compared to about 123 feet for the North Dam and about 88 feet for the South Dam. Since the analyses on similar and higher embankments show that the Service Water Pond Dams are stable, and since the material properties are similar or better than those assumed in design, it is evident that a separate analysis is not necessary for the West Embankment. The select fill used for construction of the West Embankment is similar to that used for construction of the dams and was placed to the same specifications. As described in FSAR Section 2.5.6.4.6, a block sample testing program was 1 implemented during construction to verify that the properties of the compacted select till equalled or exceeded the parameters assumed for design. As shown in FSAR Figure 2.5-155, the static strength properties of the fill significantly exceeded the design assumptions. In addition, the dynamic properties were quite similar to the design assumptions, as shown on FSAR Figures 2.5-160 and 2.5-160a. Using conservative assumptions, the factor of safety against sliding of the Pumphouse toward the pond is 1.7 for OBE loading combination and 1.2 for SSE leading combination which exceed the minimum allowables of 1.5 and 1.1, respectively. There is a movement joint separating the Intake Structure from the Pumphouse as shown on Figure 362.21-1. The embankment is stable, as previously discussed, and the Intake Structure is almost completely buried in the embankment. Therefore, there is no tendency for the Intake Structure to slide. 362.44-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
- ~ r 362.45 Dynamic analyses of typical dam sections of the North and South dams were performed based on some laboratory test results. The materials used in construction were quite different from those ;
tested. Discuss the significance of the changed materials. RESPONSE i Dynamic analyses of the maximum North and South dam sections were performed based on laboratory cyclic load tests conducted on a composite sample obtained from the prospective borrow source. The specimens were reconstituted using a miniature Harvard kneading compactor. The test specimens moisture content of 18 percent was 5 percent above the optimum moisture content and the dry density of 107.6 pcf was , 90 percent of the maximum dry density obtained in the modified compaction test, ASTM D 1557. These specimens were designed to simulate the anticipated field placement conditions and were tested for dynamic material properties, i.e., shear modulus and damping variations with shear strain, as well as cyclic strength. Results of these tests are shown in FSAR Figures 2.5-127 through 2.5-132. The most probable values obtained from the laboratory tests were utilized for detailed evaluation of the seismic response of the embankments to SSE. It was, of course, known at the design stage that the dynamic stress-strain properties of the actual embankment soils would likely be different than the most probable values obtained from these laboratory tests as a result of field compaction and borrow source material variation. To assess the effects of possible variations , in the dynamic properties of embankment material on the response and stability of I the proposed dauts, a parametric study was conducted. Results of this study are presented in Section 2.5.6.5.7 of the PSAR. The following cases were analyzed: l
- 1. Upper bound on probable shear modulus values. The probable values were increased by 30 percent.
- 2. Lower bound on probable shear modulus. The probable values l were decreased by 30 percent.
362.45-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER , 1980
3 Lower bound on probable damping values. The values were ' reduced by 10 percent. The analyses indicated that damping reduction by 10 percent had only a minimal influence on the factor of safety whereas the modulus values had substantial influence. To verify the design values of the various parameters used in the dynamic analyses, relatively undisturbed block samples were obtained from the compacted embankments and laboratory dynamic load tests were conducted on specimens from these blocks. The results obtained are discussed in Section 2.5.6.4.6.6 of the FSAR. The values of maximum shear modulus (G ) and damping ratio obtained at different confining pressures and shear strains are shown by Figures 2.5-160 and 2.5-160a. For comparison, the upper and lower bound values of G used in the dynamic response analyses of the dams are also shown. It may be seen that these limits bound the data from block samples reasonably well, although at high pressures the assumed lower bound is not a lower bound of the data. The lower bound values of modulus measured in the verification testing result in lower induced dynamic shear stresses and, therefore, higher factors of safety for a given shear strength. The damping values obtained from the resonant column tests on block samples are shown in FSAR Figure 2.5-160a. The relationship used in the design analyses is seen to be a good representation of the sample data. To assess the dynamic (cyclic) shear strength, six stress-controlled tests were performed on block samples. The results are shown on FSAR Figure 2.5-127. Four of the six samples did not attain a strain 1 5 percent even after 1000 cycles under relatively high stress ratios. Correspondingly, the results from the , dynamic strength tests show that values used in the analyses are quite conservative. In summary, the results of the laboratory tests conducted on block samples removed from the dams show that the strength used in the analyses is quite conservative and that the dynamic properties used are within the upper and lower l bound limits. Therefore the factors of safety obtained are quite conservative. 362.45-2 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
i i ._ l l l l 362.46 For the West Embankment, highly compressible materials were used. Discuss the dynamic behavior of these materials, especially seismic induced settlements.
RESPONSE
a) DYNAMIC BEHAVIOR OF WEST EMBANKMENT MATERIALS: To verify the design values of various parameters used in the design and analyses of the dams and embankments, relatively undisturbed block samples of the e compacted embankments were obtained. The samples were hand carved and appropri-ate laboratory tests were performed on specimens obtained from the block samples. A summary of the block sample test results is presented in Table 2.5-59 of the FSAR. The results of physical properties tests on all the block samples are summarized in Table 2.5-60. A comparison of average properties in the West Embankment block samples with the average of all block samples is tabulated as follows: Property Average For Average of All West Embankment Block Samples i
, Block Samples Natural Water Content (%) 23.7 22.8
- i Liquid Limit (%) 54 55 i Plastic Limit (%) 37 41 Unit Dry Weight (pct) 93 3 92.8 i
Specific Gravity 2.73 2.73 362.46-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
.. T=
The grain size distributions of the block samples tested are shown in Figure 2.5- - 150. The comparison of properties shown above indicates that materials used in the construction of the project dams and the West Embankment are essentially ! similar and are expected to have essentially the same engineering properties. This is indeed the case as shown by the static shear strength and consolidation test results as presented in FSAR Sections 2.5.6.4.6.2 and 2.5.6.4.6.3 Maximum shear modului obtained by resonant column tests are shown in Figure 2.5-160. Associated damping values are shown in Figure 2.5-160a. The results of stress-controlled cyclic triaxial tests are plotted in Figure 2.5-127. Comparison of these test results with the results of laboratory tests during the design analysis show that the dynamic strength used is quite conservative. ; The above discussion shows that West Embankment fill materials are essentially i the same as in the North and South Dams and will exhibit a dynamic behavior ! similar to that reported in Section 2.5.6.4.2. The static load settlements of the SWIS and PH complex should not be interpreted to conclude that the compacted embankment materials are " highly compressible". As shown in Report No. 2,
" Service Water Intake Structure, Settlement Effects and Related Work", the major component of settlement of the structure is contributed by the compression of the saprolit6 foundation materials.
b) SEISMIC INDUCED SETTLEMENTS Detailed seismic evaluations of the maximum sections of the North and South dams were performed using dynamic finite element analyses. These dams were evaluated i for conditions representative of the SSE. Three additional heights of dam were i also analyzed in detail. The results obtained are presented in FSAR Section [ 2.5.6.5.6. The dynamic stability analysis demonstrated that the West Embankment fill is not subject to excessive dynamic strain as a result of motions produced during the SSE. The maximum stains are shown to be limited to a small zone near the foundation level directly under the dam crest. In this zone the predicted shear strains are less than 15 percent, consistent with a minimum stress ratio (cyclic strength to 362.46-2 AMENDMENT 22 , NOVEMBER, 1980 l __ _
I cyclic stress) of 1.20. It is pointed out that there were several conservatisms in the analysis. The most significant include an artifical time history with a strong motion duration of 10 seconds and a broad frequency response spectra as shown in FSAR Figure 2.5-166. l Permanent settlements induced by an SSE event can be very conservatively estimated using the results of investigations conducted on clean sands by Lee and Albaisa (1974). The investigations demonstrated that post-earthquake settle-ments can occur as a result of dissipation of porewater pressures induced by cyclic loading. It also shows that the settlement is independent of the way the pore pressure increases are produced, i.e., by static or cyclic loading. Using the results of stresses obtained by dynamic response analyses, the induced , pore pressures under the crest were estimated. The results of static one-dimensional consolidation tests were then used to compute the consolidation strains upon pore' pressure dissipation and the settlement of the crest. To estimate the pore pressures, the cyclic shear stresses required to capie initial liquefaction as a functi6n of initial effective normal stress were calculated from results of the cyclic triaxial tests. The results are shown in Figure 362.46-1. A comparison of the induced shear stresses and the cyclic strength at , l initial liquefaction is shown in Figure 362.46-2. This comparison shows that initial liquefaction will not occur under the crest. However, a moderate pore pressure build up would be expected in a portion of the profile. 5 Pore pressure ratio (r ) was calculated using the procedure described in detail , by Seed, Martin and Lyscer (1975). The variation of r with depth is shown in , Figure 362.46-3 These pore pressures were used together with recompression indices to calculate settlement of the crest. An upper limit maximum total settlement prediction of about 1.50 inches was obtained for the embankment crest. . This did not consider the favorable pore pressure redistribution and arching effects of the embankment, as well as the increased cyclic strength due to the additional consolidation since construction. These effects all combined would I 362.46-3 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980 i
. i t
serve to significantly reduce the calculated post-earthquake crest settlement. l i
- The embankment displacement potential under SSE loading was also evaluated using the procedure developed by Makdisi and Seed (1978). The method is essentially [
based on the concept of permanent deformations as proposed by Newmark. The failure strain of the block samples tested in isotropically consolidated ' undrained triaxial compression tests is of the order of 10 to 12 percent. These dense materials are well compacted and will experience very little reduction in t strength due to cyclic loading. ' The yield acceleration of the West Embankment, i.e., an acceleration at which a potential sliding surface would develop a factor of safety of unity, was i determined. This was achieved by using the simplified Bishop method of slices. A pseudo-static analysis was performed for the West Embankment using the computer program ICES-LEASE. The results obtained using a conservative cohesion value of 1600 psf and an undrained friction angle of 20 (same as for unconsolidated undrained tests) are shown in Figure 362.46-5. The anaylsis gives a value of yield acceleration (ky ) of 0.25 g for a factor of safety of 1.00. The maximum average acceleration (k ), for a sliding mass extending through the full height of embankment is estimated to be of the order of 0.165 g. This value is much less than 0.25 g and indicates no displacement during SSE loading. This conclusion is based on assessment from Figure 362.47-4 (Makdisi and Seed, 1978) which correlates the ratio k /k to the potential deformations. The calculation was repeated for a sliding mass extending through half the depth of embankment and again k is less than k. Correspondingly, the limit 7 equilibrium procedure indicates that no lateral displacements would be induced by the SSE. In conclusion, as demonstrated by the discussions and analyses presented above, the permanent vertical settlement of the crest of the West Embankment produced by an SSE event would not exceed 1.50 inches and is likely to be significantly less. These settlements would occur as a reconsolidation of the embankment and a ' l portion of the 31prolite foundation soils upon dissipation of excess pore ' pressures induced by cyclic loading during the SSE. ' ! i l 362.46-4 AMENDMENT 22 l NOVEMBER , 1980
REFERENCES r Makdisi F.I. and Seed H.B. " Simplified Procedure for Estimating Dam and Embankment Earthquake-Induced Deformations" Journal of the Geotechnical En-gineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 104, No. GT 7, July 1978. , Seed, H.B., Martin P.P. and Lysmer, J. "The Generation and Dissipation of Pore Pressures During Soil Liquefaction", Report No.EERC 75-26, College of Engineering, ! University of California, Berkeley, California, August 1975. Lee, K. L. and Albaisa, A. " Earthquake Induced Settlements in Saturated Sands" Journal of The Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol.100, No. G'f'4,' April ' 1974. f 1 l B l 362.46-5 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
o
.. .. O
, O
.i . . 6 O
, . . . . 6 i 1 . ..i i , , a . , ,
g
. . . . i Ti i . . .
, g .. i
. . ! . . . i g. . . 4 . i .
i 6 . i g, . . . . i i .
. . . . , i i 1J , , . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . g i . . i . . . . . .
. . . . . i . . i . . , , gi i i . . i . . a , . . . i O
' ' ' ' ' ' 'U ' ' ' O
. . . . . .g . .
O
. . i , , , , . . . . gi e i . . e
. . , . a i . . . . , . , , N E . . . . i - . . . .
1,. . Cl} . * ' ' ' ' ' . ' ' ' *1' i i ' ' ' . ' ' ' i
~
~
-. . . i . . g. . . , . .'
O H i i . . . . . . .g . , . . . . . . , N O . . . . i i . . . . i . 6 1 . . e i . . . . , i . .
- 4 L.
A. y guJ
. . . i 4 . . . .
. ! . . 1 . . . i i . . .
i i . . . . . I i i . i . i U s i 6 i . . . . 6 i . . i i i i
-. ,E .
l3 I . . . 6 . . . . i .Ai . . . . i 6 . .
. O' . . . . . . . , .y. . . . . . . i , . . .O 40
. . e . . . . . . i e i e 6 i 1l . . 6 , e . i . .. i i i
- J . . . . . . . , . . , . , . , .
.t . , . i i i
O. g e i i 6 . . i i . i . I g. . . 6 e i . . , i 4 . . . . i
- 4 . # 6 . . . . . . . . , , 1. . 4 . . . . , . . , . . ,
9 = 4 . . . 6 . i . i .y 6 . . i . . i .
~. e U _H i . . . . . . . . . a , a 6 . .g. i . , i . . . . i r . .
M gg . . . . . . . i . g, e , . . . . . . 4 . Pm M
, i . . . . . 6 , . . . . .U
. . .g 6 . . , i e i . . i .
Q i . i , e . . . i i 6 . . 4 . . . . . _Q
. , , . . . . . , i . . g . . . 4 0
. . . . . s , . . . . . . .i . i . i . . .g . . . 4 i . . I i . . . . . . 6 6 @
4 . . i i i . . i . . . . . , e i , . i , 1 i . 6 .. , i 6 , ....
. , . . 4 6 . . e i 4 6 e . . , . t . i 6 .
Lie i . 4 . 6 . i i . . 4 . . , .
. . . .e . 1 4 . . . . i . i e i . e U . i 6 . 6 .. . . i . .i i
. . . a . . . i e . . i ) i i 6 i e g . . ..,, . . , . . . i ,
, . . . . . i . . . i i 6 4 i s 4 i , 6 . 4 gi . i i , , i e i , i . . ,.6 .
. . 4 i . 4 . i e i , e i , . . 6 . . i , i i g. . . i . . . . 4 , . i 6 i .
. 4 , . . . , . . . . . i 4 6 e i i i , , a6 .i , . . . . . . ..i. 6 . O i , . . . . . . . ... . . . 1 . . . . ....... O
, , , .,.... .. . . . . . . v.. g . . , . . i , i i .
O m i . . . . .. .i ... e i . . ..,.. . ig i,, i . . . ..i.. . g
, , . . . . . . . . . . .. . i 4 . ,. i , , . y. I i . , i e . . . . , . W ,
. . . . . . i i . i i , . .. ., i , ... .4 o.... . . . . . . . us ,
. i 6 ! . 6 i 4 . . . . 6 . 6
. . . ! . .,t i i .U . . . i .. i i i b
. , . . , . 6 . i 6 , . . i i . 6 . . . , , . .g. . i . . , . . . , i
. . . . . ! . . , , ! . . . 6 i 6 . l i 6 e i 6 i , gi . . . .. , . . j
. . . . . 4 i i . . i e i e i . . . . , , 1 i . , . .
e ,
. . . . , . . . . 4 . 6 . . 6 1 i , , , i 6 . , 1 g
Q l Q
. . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . x , , ,
O
. . i i e . 6 . 4 e i i . . . 6 6 . . . . e i , i . . . 1 . , i. . . . 4 pq i . i , i 6 i i . . . . 6 . . . . 4 i . 6 6 6 . . s . i , . L- .. ... . ...
. . . . . . . s . . i i i i e i i 6 6 , , , 6 4 e i 6 . . g, 4 . .,,4 6 6 , .
. 6 i , , i 6 , i i . . 6 . 6 6 . i , aii 6 e i , e i i . .t i . 6 .... 6 6 . . . . . . . , 6 6 , 4 6 6 i i 6 ...$ , . i i . . 6 g . 6 6 i .i..
i i , . . . . . . . i e . e i . i e ..... . i 6 . . . 1, , . . . ..,.
. . . a . . . . . . . ! . . . . 6 . . , , . . .v. . . ..
. . . . . . . , . , . i e , , , , , s i i , . .g . . . . i .,.. Q i , . 4 . . . . . . . . . .i . i g. . . O
, , r . . . . . . , . . . g. . . . . Q
. 4 . . . . . . . i . . . . 6 i e i . .... , j . . . . , , i1 . . . . 4 i N
, . . . . , . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . g . . . . .
. . . i . . . . . , i i . . 6 i . 6 . . . . . .g , ,
, . . . . . . . . . . i . . . , i 6 . . 6 . . . . . . .yg, i , 6 ..i.
. . i . . . . i . . . i . . . i , . 6 i 6 . , , .
. v. . . .
. . . . . . . , i , i i . . , ......... , . . . . . ,y . , i . . .
i
. . . . i i . 6 . . i . , i . . . . 6 . . . . . i l , . i i i
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . . . i . 4 . 4 . . . i , i ,3 . . ..i Q
. . . . . . . . . i . s. ,
O
, , . . . . , , , . . . , . .g
. . . . i . . . i . . . . 6 + . . . . . . . 6 i . . . .v..... -Q-
, , . . . . . . i i . ,. . . i . . . . .
(J. 6 . . . . . . . . . i i 6 , . . . . . . i .
, , , . . , , i i , , . ,
s 6 1.
. 6 x,
. . . . . . . , i 6 x
' O i . ,
O O O O O O O O O O O o o o O o m m - - AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980 SHEAR STRESS, psf . I SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS CD. VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION 1 I l Figure 362.46-1 j Stresses Required to Causa l Initial Liquefaction l t 1 i
t
-CYCLIC SHEAR STRESS ALONG CENTER LINE o 500 10.0 0 15.0 0 20.00 2500 435 % , , ,
A. , N i , ! , i . . , ., . , i , , , i . , i , , i e , r T.. . . . , , . . , , , , , ,,. . . . . . . .
. X, . , ,3 . . , . . ... , , , . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,
[ y , , m , . . . . . , , , , , , , , . . . . . , . . , , , 4
, . \1 1 ,1 . . ! , ,.. . . , . , . , . ,.,. -
. . . . \.
. .A
. ,1
, , s ..
i . , i , , , . , i, . ! , , , , yc = 20 , , , , . 2.,, v,,s.. ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' i STRENGTH 415-e i . . . . . \,
'a 'u'.
i t, , r f
. . \ 1. . . 7 . , . . , i
. . . . , ,\ \, e e i , , , 6 i , . , . . . . . . . . . i , i . . .
. . . . , , y .s,, ... . , , , , , , , , , , , ,
, , , , . . , i X. s,,, , , ,, , . . . ,
,,,,i . . . . . . , , ,
, I . , , ,i , i \6 6 . , i 1 . , t , , . ,,r . , , , , , . . . . !
. . , . .., x 1 , ,,, , . . . . . i . e.,, . . 1 , . . .
, , , . , , ,i. , N 1, , ,, , , ,, i i , , , , .,,i,, , , . , , , .
. i i i i . i . \i i i .., ,. , . . 6 . , ... . . . . , i .
395 . . i i . . .Xg ...
, i ! . . ! ! , . , . .
t 8 . I ' 6 6 , , ,,\\ , i ! ,! I j ! .i.,6 e , ! , , I ! , , ,
. ! . 4 . , , ! i i 6 gh , e , i , i , , , ..,i, . . . i + . , .
, , t . . , . . , , .\\, .'i. i j i , , .. . . , j , . . e , , . , e
, , . . . , i 4 , , gg . . i , , . .. . . t ! . . , , , .
C ua
, , i i , i i
, . . , i,4
. , , , ..u.i
, , , , , su .
! i
, i ,
LA. > , ! t i ' i i , ) . .iu. , , , , , ! ! , ! ! i . . . i , ! . , , i
, , , . .' , , i , , , , . ss . , , , , ,i , i , i , , . , , , , , . , , , , ,
E , . . i 6 . , , th . , . . . . + . . ' . . !
- 375 , , , . .. .u _ . . . . . , ,,, , . ,
x , , , . , . . . , , , , ,. .g1 , 4 . . . . .. . ..i . , , , . . . . 4 . o
,,is......, . , ,,,, ., . . . , , ,
. . . , . . . . . . . . . is,,, . . . , , , , , , . . . . . . . , .
+
-c , , . , , , . . . . . ....s y . . . . . . . , . . . , . . . , . .
, , , . i ,
3 s,,.. , , , ,,, . , , , , ,
$ , 2,,
, i STRESS ' 3,1 ' + ' ' '
w . , ,,, , . r w. . s , . . , , , ,, i . . , . . . . 6 . . 355- ,
' , ,' ,- e i \, . . . . . . . ,' . , , .
, , , , , . , . , i ,,i i. 31, , i i . . , . , , i, , . . . .
, , . . . , , , . , , , i, ,s,.,., , , , , , .. . . , ,
, , i . , , , , ,.. .i, , .1, , . , , .. . ... , . . . . .
. . . , . , , . . , ,s .y . , , , 77,. , , , . ,
. e i , . . . . , , 1 e (, e , , . i . . . . i . . .
. . . , i . , , .., ,
- i. 1, , , , , i , . . .
. i , , . . , , i, . . 1 6 , , , , . .
. , , . . . . ! . . 6 ... . Ti , . \, . . , i 1 e i , , . . , .
3 , . . . . . .r . .y . . 4 . w35_ . . . , .q , i \, . . . . ,
. . . , , . . . , , , , , . . , . ,1, , , , , . , , , . . . .
, . , . ; . . . . , , .. . i,, . , 1 . . . . . , , , , ,
, , . , , , . . . . .. . ,i! , i . \, ,..ii i i , , , , . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . , 1, . , 1 y , . . . . . .
, , , , , . . , , . . .i, . , . . i . , , . , , ,
. . , , , , , , , . , . , i, . , , , s , , , . , ,
. . . . . . . . . . 3 . i i .1 . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . , , i .
315 . AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980 SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS CD. VIRGIL C.SUAMER NUCLEAR STATION Figure 362.46-2 Comparison of Cyclic Stresses and Cyclic Shear Strength
. O l .
l s t l I l PORE PRESSURE FACTOR r u O o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 o.5 0.6 . 1
- i. , , ,
gi ,, . , . . . , , ! . . t , . . . r . . . . . . . . .i , . . . . , g . . . . . . , , i , . , . 11 , i , , , , 6 gi . ,,, , , , , , , , . . . . , , . .
.s , ,,, . i , , , , . . , , , , , , . . . , , . , . . .
i s: , .., ,
. . i , , , , . 4 , , , , . . . ..... . . ,
i .1, i . . , . . . , , , . i , , , . . ! . . . , . , , , 20-
' 'x' i , , , , , . . , , . . . , ,
, . , i . . . . . , , . , , . . . , , . . . . ,.,,., i . . . , .
. , i 1 ,o. .
x .. , . , , , , , , , . , . . . .,. ,, , , ,
, x _ , , , . . . . . -,, ,, i . ,
x . . . , , , , . . , , , ! ,, , , , , ,
, . i , , ,X , . . i i , , . . , i . i , , i . , .. . i ,
, .4 iY . r , . . . , , ,,,i i .
. . . , ,,ii, i . , , , . . . i , i i e i , , , , ,
40
. , , ,, i ', , ' '
',x. . w. . .', ,..'...' . .
, , , . , .,. 4 , i i . . i , , , , , , i . . . . . .
i t , . . . . i , ..,. , , . i , i . , x. . . . . , ,, ,
, i . .i i i , i e e i . , , . . , , , , . . . 3g ? , . . . e , , ,, i I , . . i i, , , , , e , i . , ! . , , , . , e . ll i i ,..,,e . . . , j i . ,
i . e , ii. . i . 4 , I i , i i , . , , , T , i , ,,i, i
. ' , , , , . i , , j ( , , . !
. ! ,t 8 ' . . , , , l' , , ! . 1 . . .! .
, , , ,'. . . i . , i i , , . , . . , i . . , , is , , , i . . , , ,
i . . . . , , , , , i , , . , , , , , . , , , i . s . . . , e , .
. I ,, . . . i . . . . 6 . i . . .
60 . 4
,. . . . . . . , , . , , , , , , , ,, 1, , ,
i .
. . . . . . . . , , i , . 1 . .,,i , , , , , i i . , , , . ...i, ! .
p . . , i i i i , i , i . . , . , .,,.i+ .
. i . . . .
- u. . , , , , ri., ,i,i . i . , , , , , ,; ,,,,,,, ,
, , t i i , , i e i i I ... . .
g . .. , . , 4 4 i , , . . . . , . . . i . .I ,, . . ,
. , , . . . . # , . . , , , , , , , , , ,f. . . . . ,
a , , . . . i. . . . , , . . . i . . . . . .. . . f. . . . . i w . .. , , . . , , , 4 . , , , , , , , , , .f, , . ..., . C1 _
, . j- , , , , ,
, . . . . , , . , . . f, .i, ,
e i . . .
. .i. ,,ij i i i . , i ! # . , , i # . i e #, . ,,i i....i .
. , , . , , i , , i . , . . . . # .. , . 4 . i, , , .
,.. .. , .,.. . . i e . .p ,,,# 4 . .,, i,. . , ,
, . i , . , . , e i - e. . , , , . . . . i , ,, , .
. . , . 4 .- . . . .. . . . , i . , . . .... .
.,s . .f. . 6 , e i i . , , i e , ,.
f , . . , , . . . , , , ,. , ,
. .,, .f . . , , . , 6 , . , , , . . . i, i ., i 10 0 f , , , , , ,
. ,sn . . ! . . , e . . , i ,... , . i , ,, .
, _ f .. ., , , , , , . . . , , . . . . ... , ,
,1, , , . . . . . . ,,s., , , , . .,, ,, , ,
Jr . ,, , , . e , ,.6 i . , , ,. , i , , E, , ... . 4 i , ! . , , , . i , .. i ,,. r.i
. , . . . . e , i e . . . , , .. i,., ,
120 . . , , , , , , , , , ,
, . . . 4 j
i , 14 0-AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980 i, SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS CD. VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION Figure 362.46-3 Variation of Pore Pressure Factor with Depth in the West Embankment Due to SSE 1 1
e 5 4 8 i '
'M. l g ... =. .
t . y s,. l s .,, ,
~~
*k l ~
's -l
*.4
~
. 4 s
lt .. Veri _stion of Yield Acceleration with: (a) Normalized Permanent Displace-ment-Summary of All Dete; and (6) Average Normalized Displacement. After Makdisi and Seed (1978) AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980 SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS CD. VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION Figure 362.46-4 Variation of Yield Acceleration with Normalized l Permanent Displacement
e. t% , . , , , ,
. s o
. , , . . , , ! , , ! , t ,,, , , , I e l
i
, , . , , , , i ! , i , , , ,,,.,,, ,, , ,. . . i
, . , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , i . , , .,, l i , , , , , . . .
. . . , , , . . , , , i . . , . , . . . . , , , , , , ,
. . . . . . . . . i , , , , , , 4 . . . . . . . ,, l
, , 4 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . . , , . . 1
, , , , , , . , , , . . . . , , , i , , , , , , , , , , . ,,,
m
, , , , , , , , , , , , w o
, , i , . , , , , , , , , , . . 4 , , . i , , , , ...,. . , , ,
, , , , , . , , . , , , , , , , , , , , , , i , , . , .
, , , , , , , , , . . . ky = 0.25; ,
. . . , , i , , , . , . , , , 6 , , , , i , i i , . . , , , , , i j 2 e I , , i , i , i , , ! , , , , i , , ! , . , , , ,,*.,,, i . . 1 ,
, , . , , , , , .,,,, , , , . . , nr i , , . . . . , , , , , , , , , , , cm i , . I. i , , i . , , . . . , , e , ,,i i i ..., . .,
.r ,F=
e i , , e , , , , i . . , . , , . e ,,j . , ,,, , . . . . .j g i 6 . . . , , . , ,,, J N, y v, . o a
, ! , , , i , ,.,r i . . , , , , , ,.. ,, , , . . . . . uJ
. , , . . . , , , , . , , . , , ,,, . , , , . , g CJ i i ,
, . 6 ,
i , . . . . .
, . , 4 , . .
i ,
, , , , , . , .., , , . , , , ,,,.,, , , , , _a
, , , . , , , , , , , . ..... ., , , , , , , . , , , .e i , i , i . . . . . . , . , j i
- f. . F=-
, , , . , . , ,... . . . i , . .,,, , ,,... . . , , , , =
. , . . . . ,, . . ,f . g,
, , . , , . f. , _
.., . . i . ,,. . , , , . , , ,,,,,, ,,, , i . f. , ,, , oc
- f. r c>
>! , , , , , , . .,,.....i , , . , , , , . ,,,, ,
7 ==
, , , , , , , ,,, , , , , , . , ,,,i,, , , , , f.
, , , , , , , . . , , . , , . , . . . .f 1 , . , , , . . ,,,,,,,,, , , , , , , .. ,,, , , . .
, , , , , . , , , , , , , ,. . , , ,, , , ,f; g
,, , , i , .
, ,f . .
o ( . . , , . . . . . .. , i . .. . f f. 11
, , , . . . ....... . , ,,,.,, ., , , , ,f. y, i
, , , , , . , , , , , , . . . ,,,.., , ,, fi .
, , , , , , , . ,,.... . . . .,.i.. ,. , .i . u.
. ,f.
. . , , , ,. . . . . . , , , , ,f.
, , , i . .. , , . . .., , , f
, , , i , . . .i,,, . . . i . i , , , . ...i /
I .
. . . . i . ..., , . , , , . . . . f.
, . , , . , , , . , , , , f;
. , , . , , . , , , . f f
.s
. . i , , , , , , . , , f 4 .
m
. o
@ D w N -
O AMENDMENT 22
- FACTOROkSAFETY SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS CD.
VIRGIL C.SUARIER NUCLEAR STATION Figure 362.46-5 Pseudostatic Stability l Analysis of West Embankment l i
O c .
.~,
( 362.47 For the SWIS & PH complex, discuss the potential differential ground movements resulting from SSE in a vertical and a critical oblique direction and provide the analytical results of the effects on this complex.
RESPONSE
As discussed in response to Question 362.46, the potential permanent deformations resulting from the SSE have been reviewed for the West Embankment. The distortions due to lateral displacement and vertical settlement under SSE ( loading have been analyzed by limit equilibrium (lateral distortions) and by excess pore pressure dissipation analyses (vertical settlements) and found to be inconsequential with respect to the stability, and deformation of the embankment. The effects of dynamic forces and increased pore pressures generated during the SSE have also been reviewed with respect to the stability and post-SSE deformation of the SWIS and PH structures. The Service Water Pumphouse is founded at elevation 390 which is about 45 feet . below the crest elevation of the embankment. The invert of the Intake Structure is at elevation 370 where it joins the Pumphouse. A cross-section through this complex is shown in Figure 362.21-1. p . Settlements due to the dissipation of excess pore water pressures generated in the foundation material below the SWIS and PH structures have been assessed using the procedure described in response to Question 362.46. From this analysis, the upper limit of total settlement beneath the Pumphouse is estimated to range from 0.8 to 1.0 inches, consistent with stratigraphic differences. Actual settlements are likely to be substantially less than estimated due to the increased cyclic shearing resistance of the foundation material resulting from consolidation and secondary compression since construction. The potential angular distortion of the structure will likely be less than 0.0002 radians, assuming relatively rigid foundation behavior. 1 l l 362.47-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
.. <r A similar analysis has been made to estimate the upper limit settlements and angular distortion due to pore pressure dissipation at various locations along the Intake Structure. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 362.47-1 below:
t TABLE 362.47-1 Distance from the East End Settlement Distortion of Intake Structure (ft. ) (inches)
. 35 (Intake Portal) 0.00 )
k, - i 1 in 3000 85 0.20ij i 1 in 2800 125 0 37 .l ' I, 1 in 2650 i 165 0.55 ) ~ As indicated by the analytical studies, the angular distortion along the Intake Structure would be expected to be less than 0.0004 radians, assuming the Intake Structure to act as a perfectly elastic system. ( *y V The procedures to assess pore pressures have been discussed in detail in response to Question 362.46. Settlements calculated have been based on one-dimensional consolidation properties of embankment materials. Permanent lateral deformations were also assessed, using the procedure described by Makdisi and Seed (1978), as a function of the ratio of yield acceleration (k ) y to the calculated maximum average acceleration on the sliding mass (k ). This procedure is described in detail in the response to Question 362.46. Analyses conducted in the direction normal to the slope indicate a acceleration ratio (ky/k ) of 1.4. Correspondingly, lateral displacements in the direction of potential slip would not be expected to develop as a result of the SSE event. 362.47-2 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER , 1980
l REFERENCE i Makdisi F. I. and Seed H. B., " Simplified Procedure for Estimating Dam and I Embankment Earthquake-Induced Deformations", Journal of the Geotechnical ! Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 104, No. GT 7, July 1978. I l i i (' t 1 l t l l: { l l t i l 362.47-3 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
362.48 Describe the overall inspection program related to the reservoir including all dams, embankment, SWIS & PH, duct banks, SW pipeline, and the SW discharge. Since most conclusions presented in Sec. 11.0 of Report No. 2 need to be substantiated, what kind of additional monitoring program would be proposed? Discuss how you will implement R.G. 1.127.
RESPONSE
The requirements of NRC Regulatory Guide 1.127 will be implemented through SCE&G Surveillance Test Procedure for Service Water Pond Dam and Structures, STP-208,
, Revision 1, dated March 12, 1979. The procedure provides systematic surveillance methods and frequencies for monitoring horizontal and vertical crest movements of the North and South Dams, water level readings in observation wells in the North Dam, monitoring of vertical movements of the Service Water Pumphouse cnd i Intake Structure, and visual inspection of the dams and Tumphouse.
The horizontal and vertical crest movements of the dams are monitored by 16 monuments on the North Dam and 11 monuments on the South Dam, agreed 100 feet apart. In addition three water level observatica wells are located on the crest of the North Dam. Crest movements and water level readings were monitored on a monthly basis through June, 1980. Since the crest movement has been negligible and has essentially ceased (see Question 362.41), monitoring is now conducted on
. a quarterly basis. It is anticipated that after about one year of quarterly readings, monitoring of these items will be reduced to once yearly until 1983 Thereafter, if warranted by the results, the readings will be reduced to once every two years until 1987 and once every five years thereafter.
Vertical movements of the Service Water Pumphouse and Intake Structure are measured at four reference points located in the corners of the pump room and by three masts affixed to the top of the Intake Structure at the west end, middle, and near the east end. These seven points are presently monitored on a weekly basis, and will continue so until movement has essentially ceased (see Question 362.26). After that time, the frequency of monitoring will be gradually reduced 362.48-1 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER, 1980
. c. O to twice per year for the life of the plant unless a lesser frequency can be shown to be adequate.
4 Formal visual inspections of the Service Water Pond Dams and Pumphouse are conducted annually until 1983, then will be conducted once every two years until 1987, and once every five years thereafter, if warranted by previous inspection results. Otherwise, inspecticas will be more frequent. A check list is provided in the procedure which includes inspection of the condition of exposed concrete structures for evidence of surface deterioration, structural cracking, movement, and the condition of junctions with the embankment. The earth r Mactures are inspected for irregularities, changes in horizontal and vertal alignment, cracks, erosion, and condition of slope protection. Any other features of the Service Water Pond which may impose operation constraints on the cooling system or which may be hazardous to the dans are also to be noted. In addition to the monitoring and inspection frequencies described above, special inspections are also to be performed innediately after the dams have cxperienced an unusually large drawdown or after the occurrence of an earthquake causing noticeable ground movement at or near the site, hurricane, tornado, intense local rainfall, or other unusual event. Cartain other items are presently being monitored which are not included in STP - (' 208 because they are considered to be temporary in nature. These include seven I piezometers and seven vertical movement monuments located on the West Embankment in the vicinity of the Pumphouse and six points at the entrance of the electrical duct banks into the Pumphouse to monitor differential movement between the duct banks and the Pumphouse. No additional monitoring program is proposed as it is concluded that the data obtained from this program is sufficient to verify the conclusions presented in Report No. 2. 362.48-2 AMENDMENT 22 NOVEMBER,1980 _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - _. -}}