ML20080T009

Summary & Evaluation Rept of Rl Cloud & Assoc Rept, Diablo Canyon Unit 1 Idvp - HVAC Components

ML20080T009
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	09/01/1983
From:	BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY
To:
Shared Package
ML20080S984	List: ML20080S989 ML20080S991 ML20080S994 ML20080S998 ML20080T003 ML20080T005 ML20080T009 ML20080T013 ML20080T016
References
FOIA-83-483 NUDOCS 8310180624
Download: ML20080T009 (5)

Text

'. .'

. f

= ',

, S.IMMARY AND EVALUATION REPORT Report

Title:

Diablo Canyon Unit 1 Independent Design Verification Program, HVAC Components' Report No. ITR-31, P 105-4-839-031, Revision 0 Report Date 1/14/83 Author Robert L. Cloud Associates Edward Denison Project Manager 8310180624 830901 PDR FOIA CALSOYA83-483 PDR

3 INTRODUCTION The Interim Technical Report 31( 'R-31) prepared by Robert L. Cloud and

. Associates (RLCA) for the Diablo Canyon' Nuclear Plant Independent Design Verification Program (DCNPP-IDVP) has been reviewed. -

ITR-31 summarizes the independent analysis and verification of a sample of heating, ventilating and air conaitioning (HVAC) components from DCNPP-1.

The sample consisted of the Volume damper 7A and the supply fan S-31, both located in the auxiliary building of DCNPP-1. The analysis and verificatinn showed both the volume dimper and supply fan to have sufficient structural integrity to withstand the effects of the postulated Hosgri earthquake.

However several generic concerra relating to Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) design analyses for HVAC components were noted and recomaendations for additional verifications to address these concerns were made.

SUMMARY

OF REPORT Volume damper 7A and supply fan S-51 were selected by RLCA as the initial' sample of DCNPP-1, HVAC components fer independent analysis and verification.

.e Volume damper 7A is located in the Unit 1 auxiliary building, at elevation 154 feet. The damper is a 24 inch diameter circular blade type.

The damper blade is operated by an electric motor actuator. Damper 7A is installed in a 24 inch diameter circular vertical duct in series with an identical Volume damper 7. The damper is attached to the duct by bolted .

flange connections. This run of duct is attached to sheet metal plenums, which are supported from the ceiling and floor siab.

Supply fan S-31 is located in the Unit 1 auxiliary building, at elevation 140 feet. The fan is an electric motor driven centrifugal fan. It draws air in through side inlets and expels air to the attached duct, which is attached to the fan by a flexible coupling. The fan is anchored to the floor slab.

The independent design verification of each . component consisted of

1. a field verification of the components' physical dimensions and configuration,

2. the developrent of a finite element mathematical model simulating the mass and stiffness characteris-tics of the component,

3. the determination of forces and moments for key areas -

of the component followed by stress detenninations 1 using standard engineering approaches,

4. - a comparison of computed stresses to stress allowables,

5. a comparison of the independent analysis to the PG&E design analysis.

Since no specific structural criteria relating to the HVAC components were addressed in the licensing documents, the following criteria were used.

Loading combinations were taken fr'am Chapter 5 of the Hosgri report.

Allowables for the Volume damper were determined using the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel (B&PV) code, Appendix XVII. Allowables for the supply fan

~

were determined using mechanical equipment criteria from the Hosgri report and material yield strength criteria fra ASME B and PV code yield strengths for component supports. Allowables for concrete expansion anchors were taken from the PG&E Engineering Standard for Ccncrete Expansion Anchors.

The finite element analysis of Volume damper 7A and attached ducting and supports showed the component to exhibit natural frequencies in the rigid range. Consequentially the equivalent static method, using the appropriate Hosgri floor response spectra zero period acceleration amplification factors, was used -to evaluate the forces and stresses in key locations. All stresses were found to be below allowables with the closest approach to the allowable being computed for a fillet weld on the damper actuator mounting plate (9346 psi vs.14,400 psi allowable).

The finite element analysis of supply fan S-31'showed the component to -

exhibit natural f,requencies below the rigid range. The computation of forces and stresses was therefore performed using'the response spectrum method. In

. . this ' analysis response _ spectra data corresponding to the component location and' 4% damping were 'taken from the Hosgri ' report. ~ The calculated stress were -

all below allowables, The closest approach to the allowable occurred for a frame member exhibiting a stress of 26885 psi vs. a 36,000 psi allowable.

_ Reviews of the PG&E design. analyses for both components were made with <

the intention to compare the design analysis results to the independent analysis results. However, the model usea in each design analysis differed so greatly from that used in the independent analysis as to preclude direct >

c ompa ri son. Instead a complete review of each design analysis was made to judge its adequacy.

The IDVP considered the methodology Osed in the design analysis of the Volume damper 7A to be acceptable because the system is rigid and conservative assumptions were made. The design analysis of the supply fan S-31 on the other hand, was found to be deficient. In the analysis unrealistic boundary conditions, inappropriate assumptions and incorrect data were used.

The IDVP issued five E01 reports for these two components. None of-these

! errors were of major significance since the verification analyses showed all stresses to be below allowble. The E01's have either been closed or classed error class C. The deficiencies found in the design analysis of the S-31 fan, however, were considered generic concerns. Because of these, the IDVP has .

recanmended that a review of the modeling of a sample of two types of fans and -

verification reviews of one of each type of HVAC component be undertaken.

EVALUATION The.ITR presents an adequate description of the procedures followed by RLCA in performing the independent analysis of the HVAC components. These procedures are acceptable and did uncover deficiencies in the PG8E design analyses for each couponent.

0 The ITR presents only a cursury description of the actual independent analyses. On the basis of the information provided no judgement of the technical adequacy of -these can be made. ' However audits of other RLC'A analysis docunents have indicated that the RLCA review and analysis procedures are both comprehensive and technically correct.

No specific structural criteria relating to HVAC components were addressed in the licensing docurents. RLCA developed structural criteria based on appropriate sections of the Hosgri report and the ASME B and PV code.

As such.the developed criteria should conform with the licensing requirerents -

and are acceptable. ~ -

v Spectra data were .taken from the Hosgri report. The degree _of correspondence between the data and the controlled Hosgri spectra data set is not discussed. For the final qualification of the components considered, the adequacy of the spectra data used must be assessed. The Diablo Canyon Project Interim Technical Program is addressing this issue.

The IDVP identified three generic concerns and therefore recommended additional sampling. The procedures used by the IDVP are acceptable and support _their find.ings. An additional sample should be reviewed as

,4 rec ommended.

-