ML20076K601

Evaluation of TMI-1 Steam Generator Tube/Tubesheet Repair, Technical Evaluation Rept.Proprietary Info Deleted

ML20076K601
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	07/08/1983
From:	Leonard L, Shook T FRANKLIN INSTITUTE
To:	Rajan J NRC
Shared Package
ML20076K599	List: ML20076K596 ML20076K601
References
CON-NRC-03-81-130, CON-NRC-3-81-130 TER-C5506-311-3, TER-C5506-311-312-31, NUDOCS 8309150004
Download: ML20076K601 (137)

Text

'

J INFORMATION TECHNIC'AL EVALUATION REPORT l

EVALUATION OF TMI-1 STEAM GENERATOR TUBE /TUBESHEET REPAIR REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF PROCEDURES DEVELOPED FOR ONSITE REPAIR-0F THI-1 STEAM GENERATOR TUBES BY EXPLOSIVE EXPANSION FRC PROJECT C5506 FRC ASSIGNMENT 10 NRC CONTRACT NO. NRC-03-81-130 FRC TASKS 311, 312, 313 Preparedby Franklin Research Center 20th and Race Streets Philadelphia, PA 19103 FRC Group Leader: T. Shook L. Leonard Ptapered for Nuclear Regulatory Commission .

Lead NRC Engineer: J. Rajan Washington, D.C. 20555 July 8, 1983 This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States d

Govemmt 't. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, or any of their

/ employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or respon:lbility for any third party's use, or the results of such use, of any Information, appa-ratus, product or process disclosed in this report, or represents that its use by such third party would not infringe privately owned rights.

a%

.00. Franklin Research Center A Division of The Frank!!n Institute The Bensemm Frankin Partmey. PMa Pa. 19103(215)448 1000 0309150004 830909 PDR ADOCK 05000289 p PDR

TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT EVALUATION OF TMI-1 STEAM GENERATOR TUBE /TUBESHEET REPAIR REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF PROCEDURES DEVELOPED FOR ONSITE REPAIR

, OF TMI-1 STEAM GENERATOR TUBES BY EXPLOSIVE EXPANSION FRC PROJECT C5506 FRC ASSIGNMENT 10 NRC CONTRACT NO. N RC-03-81 130 FRC TASKS 311, 312, 313 Prepared by Franklin Research Center 20th and Race Streets Philadelphia, PA 19103 FRC Group Leader: T. Shook L. Leonard Frepared for Nuclear Regulatory Commission Lead NRC Engineer: J. Rajan Washington, D.C. 20555 l

• July 8, 1983 This report was preparted as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, or any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibliity for any third party's use, or the results of such use. of any information, appa-ratus. product or process disclosed in this report, or represents that its use by such third party would not infringe privately owned rights.

l Prepared by: Reviewed by: Approved by:

n -) _ __

k/ Y Y Department Director (Acting)

~

Principal Author ' Group Leader Date/7l!!G I Date' ~ $ ~ $b Date' 1l0l03" 4

. .00. Franklin Research Center A Division of The Franklin Institute The Bervemm Frankhn Penmey. Phne Pa. 19103 (215) 448 1000

^

• f **

TER-C5506-311/312/313 CONTENTS Title Page Section

. . 1 1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . 3 l 2 SCCPE . . . . . . . . . .

. . 4 3 EVALUATION CRITERIA. . . . . . . . . .

. . .' . . . . . . 5 4 . TECHNICAL, EVALUATION . .

4.1 Licensee's Repair Qualification Program . . . . . 5 4.1.1 Description of the Licensee's Repair Process . . 5 4.1.2 Historical Background of Repair Process. . . . 6 4.1.3 Analytical and Experimental Background of Repair Process . . . . . . . . . 7 4.1.4 Adequacy of the Seal Between the Primary and Secondary Sides of the Tubesheet . . . . 9 4.1.5 Effects of the Kinetic Expansion Process on the Tubesheet Dimensional Integrity . . . . 10

• Effects of the Kinetic Expansion Process 4.1.6 on the Design Adequacy of the Welded Connections in the Tubesheet/Shell Section . . . . . . 12 Adequacy of Residue Removal. 12 4.1 "2 . . . . . .

4.1.8 Effects of the Kinetic Expansion Process on Tube Pretensioning . . . . . . . . 13 Adequacy of Tube Pullout Strength . . . . . 14 4.1.9 4.1.10 Stress Concentration in the Tube Transition Length of Expansion . . . . . . 15

/.h 11i by Frankim Research Center A Oweenen af the Frenahn ennense

. .. ,a TER-C5506-311/312/313 CCNTENTS (Cont.)

Section Title Page 4.2 Licensee's Evaluation Program of Stress and Performance of Tube /Tubesheet Assembly. . . . . . 16 4.2.1 Stress and Performance of the Expanded Tubes I Subjected to Various Load Conditions . . . . 16 4.2.1.1 Normal Operating Pressure . . . . . 16 4.2.1.2 Thermal Transient . . . . . . . 17 4.2.1.3 Flow-Induced Vibration. . . . . . 17 4.2.1.4 Seismic Accelerations and Displacements . 18 4.2.1.5 Loss-of-Coolant Accident . . . . . 18 4.2.1.6 Main Steam Line Break . . . . . . 18 4.2.2 Tubesheet Ligament Strongth. . . . . . . 18 4.2.2.1 Change in Ligament Width Af ter Repair . . 19 4.2.2.2 Warping of Tubesheet . . . . . . 19 4i2.3 Effect of the Change of Tube Pretension Load . . 19 4.2.3.1 Frequency of Vibration of Expanded Tubes . 19 4.2.3.2 Fatigue Life of Expanded Tubes. . . . 20 4.2.3.3 Buckling of Expanded Tubes. . . . . 20 4.3 Independent Test Program . . . . . . . . . 20 4.3.1 Test specimens . . . . . . . . . . 20 4.3.2 Test Procedures . . . . . . . . . 20 4.3.3 Leaktightness Tests. . . . . . . . . 23 4.3.4 Tube Interference Fit and Tubesheet Residual Stress . . . . . . . . . 24 4.3.5 Tube Pullout . . . . . . . . . . 29 4.4 Onsite Monitoring of Repair Process . . . . . . 31 f-N Eh Frankhn Research Center IV A (beten el The Feensen m

a, ,, ,

TER-C5506-311/312/313 CONTENTS (Cont.)

Title Page Section OPEN ITEMS . . . . . . . . . . 35 5 . . . .

CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . 36 6 . . . .

7 REFERENCES . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . 38 APPENDIX A DOCUMENTS RECEIVED APPENDIX B MEETINGS ATTENDED.

APPENDIX C STATEMENT OF CONSULTANT APPENDIX D TEST PROCEDURES APPENDIX E TEST DATA APPENDIX F PHOTOGRAPHS OF TEST ASSEMBLIES

,- -.2 s V

'J Uda wFrankhn w ther, Researc.h m Center

TER-C5506-311/312/313 FOREWORD i

This Technical Evaluation Report was prepared by Franklin Research Center under a contract with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Division of Operating Reactors) for technical assistance in support of NBC operating reactor licensing actions. The technical evaluation was conducted in accordance with criteria established by .

the NBC.

Contributors to the technical content of this report were L. Leonard, T. Shook, V. Luk, C. Davey, D. Decleane, and R. Brooks of Franklin Research Center.

i l

vii g'u.h U.J Frankhn Research Center 4 fearsa of h Fw w I

i

i ,

TER-C5506-311/312/313

1. INTRODUCTION In November 1981, steam generator tube leaks were discovered at Three Mile Island Unit 1 (TMI-1) during pressurization for functional testing following an extended cold shutdown period. The conclusion reached by the Licensee, GPU Nuclear, after the performed failure analysis was that sulfur contamination caused intergranular attack and cracking in the upper ends of the Inconel 600 tubes in the regions of the weld heat-affected zones and the 2-in roll seals. Because most tube cracks were in the upper 2 in of the 24-in-thick tubesheet, the Licensee proposed establishment of a new load-bearing and leaktight seal below the defects as the optimum manner in which the generators could be restored to service. The Licensee further proposed that the new seal be formed by kinetic (explosive) expansion of the individual tubes and that an expanded length of 6 in be qualified as meeting the load-carrying and leaktightness objectives.

To verify the adequacy of the proposed repairs and to demonstrate that the kinetic expansion would not compromise the structural integrity of the generator, GPU Huclear, in association with Babcock and Wilcox (B&W) and

• Foster Wheeler Energy Application (Foster Wheeler) , conducted a series of tests and analyses.

• As a further check on the proposed repair process, Franklin Research center (FRC), under contract to the NRC, conducted an independent t'esting program and reviewed the Licensee's data and analyses regarding the repair's effects on the generator.

Expansions were carri3d out on mock-ups that simulated the actual materials and surface conditions in the once-through steam generators (OTSGs);

leak testaand pullout tests and dimensional measurements were performed on the expanded samples, both in the as-expanded condition and after they had been subjected to load and thermal cycling that simulated 5 years of typical service. In addition, full-scale expansions were performed on a comparable B&W steam generator to evaluate the stresses imposed by the repair process and their effects on the OTSG structure.

4' q .% _1_

).h Frankhn ar Re,se.e.rch

.e in r . .C..enter

TER-C5506-311/312/313 The results of the various testing and analyses programs indicated that GPU Nuclear should implement the repair process, and the procedure was carried out. At the time of publishing this report, FIC had not received documentation of the evaluation of the repairs by eddy current, dimensional, and hot functional testing.

Included in the present report are (1) a discussion of the Licensee's testing and analyses, (2) a presentation and discussion of FIC's tests and i

analyses, and (3) FIC's conclusions concerning the expected adequacy of the repair procedure and its influence upon the structural integrity of the generators.

The appendices present docunents received, meetings attended, test procedures, test data, and the statement of a consultant with considerable experience and expertise in the field of explosive expansion techniques who was retained by FIC for this projact. Photographs of the test assemblies are also included.

I l

l dj' -h

'J.a Frankhn Research Center

[

4 w e n. n -

't e.

TER-C5506-311/312/313

2. SCOPE The scope of the evaluation was as follows:

1. Review the Licensee's development and testing programs and conduct independent testing to evaluate whether the Licensee-developed kinetic expansion repair procedure is capable of producing a tube /tubesheet seal with less than a specified leak rate and greater than a specified pullout strength.

2. Carry out independent analytical and experimental work to determine whether the kinetic expansion repair procedure has any adverse of fects on the OTSG's structural integrity.

l l

[ 2%  %'J.h Frankhn Research Center A Onamen el The Feasuen w

.. .=

TER-C5506-311/312/313

3. EVALUATION CRITERIA The Licensee specified that the repair process must satisfy all applicable design parameters originally used for the TMI-l OTSG and must comply with the requirements stated in the following documents:

GPU Nuclear TMI-l OTSG Tube Repair Preliminary Specification No.

1101-22-006, Rev. 4, including codes and standards listed in Paragraph 3.2 [1]

Babcock and Wilcox (B&W) Company's Explosive Expansion Qualification Requirements for Mechanical Testing (61-1134292-00) for Explosive Expansion Repair of CTISGs [2] .

Specifically, the kinetic expansion repair process was to result in a tube-to-tubesheet seal with a leak rate less than 3.2 x 10 ' lb/h per tube and a pullout strength greater than 3140 lb.

l l

l

% 4_

g'Ju U. Frankhn Research Center 4 w a w w r, L

c _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

. r.

TER-C5506-311/312/313

4. TECHNICAL EVALUATION 4.1 LICENSEE'S REPAIR QUALIFICATION PROGRAM 4.1.1 Description of the Licensee's Repair Process Based upon a developmental test program, GPU Nuclear, in association with B&W and Foster Wheeler, developed a tube repair method using an explosive (k inetic) technique [3] to expand a sufficient length of undamaged tube below the defects to form a new tube /tubesheet seal. Although specific details of the expansion process are considered proprietary by GPU Nuclear, it can be jexplosiveexpansionwasde,emedoptimumtoeffecta new seal without inducing distortion in the tubesheet. In this procedure, a detonating cord charge is inserted in a polyethylene tube or " candle" which, in turn, is placed in the tube to be expanded. The explosive force from the charge drives the candle against the tube, forcing it against the tubesheet.

The total length of the expansion joint and the portion of that length to be qualified for specific leak rate and pullout strength goals were selected primarily on the basis of the locations of the tube defects and the maximum number of tubes that would be repairable by a standardized procedure.

Accordingly, all repairable OTSG tubes were expanded over 17 in. Those tubes with defects more than 11 but less than 16 in below the top surface of the tubesheet were expanded over a 22-in length in all cases. The lower 6 in of the expansion is the qualified seal.

The tube /tubesheet seal is a mechanical interference rather than a metallurgier.1 weld between the tube and the tubesheet and is influenced by such variables as the size and nature of the explosive charge, the mechanical characteristics of the tube and tubesheet materials, the spacing between the componenth, and the nature of the components' surfaces.

.?- h -5 .

f'J.'ha Frankkn b a w in .

Re.s,-arch Center

l i

TER-C5506-311/312/313 4.1.2 Historical Background of Repair Process The use of explosive energy to form metals is not a new techniquer its applications and successes predate the aerospace age (4), and the process for explosively expanding rings has been discussed in some detail [5]. In forming a specific shape, the explosive drives the workpiece metal into a forming die. In order to distribute the pressure uniformly over the workpiece and to eliminate local hot spots and fragments from the detonated explosive, a trans-mitting intermediary medium, usually water, is placed between the workpiece and die. In addition, the space between the workpiece and die is usually evacuated.

In the repair process for the MI-l OTSGs, the tubesheet served as the die, a tube was the workpiece, and the transmitting medium between the explo-i sive charge and the tube was a polyethylene tube or " candle." This applica-tion of explosive expansions to seal a tube into a tubesheet is not a new process, and a few examples should suffice to demonstrate the effectiveness of this technique. In 1967', a leaking heat exchanger was successfully repaired by explosive expansion. Operating pressures of 1500 psi and poor surface finishes in the tubesheet holes and variation in their bore size did not adversely affect the integrity of repaired joints (6] .

j I ,

A number of feedwater heaters have been explosively expanded in their original fabrication in a manner similar to that proposed for the TMI repair

[7]. As of August 1970, Foster Wheeler had built 200 feedwater heaters using exp,losive expansion, with up to 3000 expansion joints per heater.

Leaking heat exchangers have been explosively repaired while under 1500 psi steam pressure [8] . For example, the Yimpact section of Yorkshire i Imperial Metals used explosive expansions to seal against leakage under pressures up to 170 atmospheres in a waste-heat exchanger which had rolled and welded tube /tubesheet jo,ints [9] . Subsequently, all joints were expanded as an additional safeguard against leakage.

Explosive expansion of carbon steel, brass, and Monel tubes into carbon steel tubesheets has been achieved in retubing operations on feedwat.er heaters

[10]. Hydrostatic, vibration, and thermal cycling tests have been applied to

~

. yh e hh Frankhn

% v in. rResearc.h o. . C.r nter

. . . - . - - , . - ~ . _ . . - , . - . . - -- - - - - , - - . - , . . - - - -

'. e.

l TER-C5506-311/312/313 verify the integrity of explosively expanded joints. For example, Monel (SB 163) tubes expanded into a carbon steel tubesheet achieved pressure seals to 12,000 psi af ter 100 thermal cycles and 500 h of vibration cycles.

In the Conner's Creek plant of Detroit Edison Company, in-place repairs

were made to replace existing tubes,with 304 stainless steel tubes against SA 179 carbon steel tubesheets [10}. In this case, concentric grooves were cut into the tubesheet to provide good seals and to increase pullout strength.

4.1.3 Analytical and Experimental Background of Repair Process The magnitude of the explosive charge required to achieve a tube /tubesheet seal to meet the requirements indicated in Section 3 of this report were determined in an experimental development and j

testing program conducted by Foster Wheeler in conjunction with B&W and the Licensee [11,12,13,14] .

Using the method in Reference 5, FRC calculated an approximate pressure intensity necessary for tube expansion and found fair agreement with the appropriate explosive charges determined in the Licensee's experimental program. Because information on the dynamic stress-stress behavior and work hardening of the tube material, Inconel 600, was not available, the relative intensity of the ' expansions was determined solely by experimental testing [

l t

It was demonstrated experimentally by both the Licensee and FRC that this procedure produced an adequate tube pullout resistance [15] . In addition, leakage data derived as a result of the experiments conducted for the Licensee and at FRC showed that, although some leaks may be expected immediately after expansion, the leak rate tends to decrease with time at the operating pressure of the OTSGs.

Although, the repair process (described earlier) of kinetically expanding tubes onto tubesheets is not new, this is the first application of this method to repair a nuclear steam generator tube in what is, in metallurgical terms, a i

~7-

%y-h M Frankhn Research Center A Osuissen of The Fransen insense

. - , . - - - - , - - - - - . - - - - . . - - . - . , - . ._ --..-.-. ..- -- - . - ., , - - - , - - - _ - ~ , _ - .,-

TER-C5506-311/312/313 sensitized condition, i.e., grain boundary precipitation of carbides had resulted from the stress-relieving heat treatment applied to the generators following their original fabrication, which involved mechanical tube rolling i

and seal welding of the tubes on the outside surface of the tubesheet.

Forming a new seal length below the old one and thus eliminating the upper i

cracked region of tubing from consideration is also a novel application.

l Finally, the tube /tubesheet crevices were in an oxidized or corroded state stemming from both service operation and idle downtime exposure.

. Based upon the history of successful applications of the explosive expansion of tubes into a tubesheet, both in fabricating new heat exchangers and in repairing in-service ones, there did not appear to be any serious j

questions concerning the technical feasibility of the expansion process.

Rather, efforts were concentrated on assuring that the procedure would be adequate to meet the tube /tubesheet qualification specifications (Section 3) for strength (pullout) and leaktightness, while at the same time not adversely affecting the structural integrity or fatigue resistance of the generators as a whole.

Accordingly, to evaluate the adequacy of the repair process, the Licensee and FBC conducted comprehensive qualification testing programs using small scale models [12.13] . In addition, the ofrect of the kinetic expansion

' o process on the structural integrity and the performance of the tube /tubesheet

[ assembly and its supporting system was assessed [3, 15].

l Conditions representative of those in the OTSGs were reproduced in test samples. The Inconel 600 tube samples were from the same production heats as those used in the orSGs and were of two different st.rength levels. The tubesheet steel met the same specification - SA508 C12 - as the tubesheets in the OTSGs. All materials were heat treated to simulate the stress relief treatment to which the generators were subjected and to oxidize or corrode the tube /tubesheet joint surfaces to a condition similar to the actual ones' in the l OrSGs.

Single tube /tubesheet expansion samples (Figure 1.1 in Appendix D) were used for initial evaluations and for developing procedural specifications.

Tubes were then expanded into 10-tube mock-up assemblies on which leak and gA I.UU Frankhn a >== am. r, Resear.ch

. w. C. enter

TER-C5506-311/312/313 pullout tests could be carried out (Figure 1.0 in Appendix D) . The presence of cracks in the CFISG tubing was taken into account in the mock-ups with a simulated 360* crack. Two separate tube lengths were placed in each tubesheet hole. A 2-in stub length was initially rolled into the tubesheet test block and then it and a longer test section, which included the 6 in to be qualified as the new joint, were explosively expanded.

The assemblies, which permitted an evaluation of the effects of after hits on individual tube /tubesheet seals, were subjected to leakage tests under representative pressure differentials between the inner and outer diameters (ID and OD) of tubes. In addition, the assemblies underwent thermal and axial load cycles to simulate 5 years of operating service, including start-ups, shutdowns, power changes, and accident conditions such as loss of cooling (LOCA), main steam line break (MSLB) , and feedwater line break (FWLB) .

Tests have also been run on an out-of-service B&W steam generator at Mt.

Vernon, Indiana, to investigate the effect of the kinetic expansion process on equipment similar to the TMI-l OTSGs.

4.1.4 . Adequacy of the Seal Between the Primary and Secondary Sides of the Tubesheet As stated in Section 3, the design objective for the kinetic expansion was to produce a seal to limit the total primary-to-secondary leakage from the TMI-l OTSGs to 1 lb/h per plant under plant operating conditions, or 32 x 10 lb/h per tube (there are 31,062 tubes per plant) . The technical specification limit for the plant is 1.0 gal / min (500 lb/h) total leakage for both generators.

The water leak tests were conducted by the Licensee in accordance with Reference 11 and the logic chart in Figure 2-16 of Reference 15. Seven expanded assemblies, consisting of the 10-tube corroded blocks with 360* fully severed tubes as described previously, were subjected to a series of leak tests using domineralized water at 70*F + 15'F. The tests evaluated the effects of the expansions and of thermal and axial load cycling equivalent to 5 years of plant operation (Section 2.4.2 of Reference 15) on the leakage rate.

A _9_

J A Frankhn Research Center A Qmmen of Th. Fm W

- - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ \

TER-C5506-311/312/313 The test specimens were subjected to a pressure of 1275 psi on the primary side to simulate normal operating conditions (Para. 4.4.2 of Reference

1) and 1275 psi on the secondary side to simulate the LOCA condition (Para.

5.3.1 of Reference 16). A water leak test was performed on a block subjected to 2500 pai to simulate the worst accident, the MSLB condition (Para. 5.3.1 of Reference 16).

The leak test results indicated a 99% statistical confidence level that the water leakage rate for 99% of the as-expanded tubes was less than 132.4 x

~

10

-6 lb/h per tube (3),* which exceeds the qualification goal of 32 x 10

• lb/h per tube. The tubes subjected to thermal cycling yielded leak rates varying from 1.18 x 10

-6 to 187.4 x 10 -6 lb/h per tube. The leak rate

~

results for tubes after roon-temperature axial load cycling were 30 x 10 lb/h per tube af ter 90 hours0.00104 days <br />0.025 hours <br />1.488095e-4 weeks <br />3.4245e-5 months <br /> of curing (17) . One test block was tested at temperatures ranging between 10'F and 400*F, and the leak rate results showed insignificant variations.

According to Reference 3, during the repair process at TMI,15 new eddy current test indications were detected in the 6-in qualification zone out of approximately 435 initial expansions in both steam generators. The Licensee determined that these new indications most likely were not from new defects caused by the expansion process, but rather from defects which were below the threshold of detectability of the eddy current testing technique employed prior to expansion. Based on fiberscope examination, these defects appeared I

l to be pits and scratches of a size that would not influence the reliability of the joints, l

4.1.5 Effects of the Kinetic Expansion Process on the Tubesheet Dimensional Integrity The objective of the kinetic expansion process was to explosively expand tubes into the tubes,heet wi*hout altering the ligament and the pitch distance i of the tubesheet. It was therefore essential to maintain, af ter the kinetic

• The statistical confidence level of 99% for 99% of the tubes, referred to as 99/99, is also used in the tube pullout evaluation in Section 4.1.9.

A 3.'Ju Frankhn Research Center A Dramen of The Frannan temeue

,. ~. _ __ ,

J l

TER-C5506-311/312/313 expansion process, the dimensional integrity of the tubesheet, which has a direct bearing on the tubesheet ligament strength. Using charges determined i in the test program, the Licensee found a minimal effect on the diameter of adjacent tubesheet holes in the 10-tube test blocks due to the expansion process.

Full-scale tube expansion testing in a similar steam generator at Mt.

Vernon using strain gages and profilometry also showed no degradation of the tubesheet ligaments [3].

In this test, a maximum tensile stress of 95,000 psi was recorded' during.

the expansion process. In spite of the fact that the static yield stress of the tubesheet was 67,000 to 70,000 psi, no residual strains were noted following the expansion._ The Licensee concluded that the dynamic yield strength of the steel, which can be up to twice the static yield, was not exceeded and thus no deformation would occur in the TMI-l DTSGs.

i However, since only a limited number of tubes were expanded at Mt.

Vernon, it is not clear that this is a valid conclusion. Furthermore, there will be tubes distributed throughout the TMI-l OTSG tubesheet which will

require 22-in reexpansions, and this additional, nonuniformly distributed deformation could induce some tubesheet warpage. Accordingly, it is _

be made on the tubesheets at TMI following the  ;

, recommended that measurements -

g repair process to establish the degree of warpage, if- any.

I At the time of this final report preparation, FE had received no information as to whether tubesheet warpage had been evaluated by the Licensee.

A number of welds at the top of the upper tubesheet at TMI were cracked during the expansion process. The mechanism responsible for this cracking and its effect on the tubesheet ligaments in the immediate vicinity of the damaged welds have not been identified and evaluated. At the time this report was written, FE was informed that the cracks on the outside face of the tubesheet were ground away to eliminate any stress risers. Since the actual qualified tube /tubesheet seal is in the last 6 in of the 17-in expansion, these welds no longer serve any leak-prevention or load-bearing purpose; thus, grinding of the welds should not present any proclems.

da b

!Lh Frankhn Research Center A Diemen et The Fransen m

- . , - - - , _ - - . _ - . _ . - . - , ------ - _ - . - ~ . ,_

i l

4 TER-C5506-311/312/313 4.1.6 Effects of the Kinetic Expansion Process on the Design Adequacy of the Welded Connections in the Tubesheet/Shell Section The kinetic expansion process may affect the structural integrity of welded connections in the vicinity of the tubesheet, especially in the tubesheet/shell junction. 'Io determine the nature of this effect, the Licensee used strain gages and an accelerometer to measure loads impossd at two locations on an out-of-service steam generator at Mt. Vernon (18,19] . ,

one location was the junction between the inlet header and the tubesheet, and i

the other was a' de shell weld location underneath the tubesheet. The strain gage measurements were taken at the two ends of a diametral row of 132 tubes expanded at the same time. On the basis of these data, the peak stresses and stess intensity were calculated for fatigue evaluation. An accumulative usage factor

• of 0.12 was calculated on the basis of the conservative assumption

that every expansion, including those in faraway rows, will produce the same stresses at these locations. 'Ihe low usage factor led the Licensee to conclude that the welded connections in the tubesheet/shell section would not i

be affected by the expansion process and that it is acceptable to use simulta-neously a maximum number of 137 charges, a combination of 132 charges in the longest row plus up to five misfires from the previous row.

4 .1.7 Adequacy of Residue Removal O

The kinetic expansion process produces sulfur residue and polyethylene cartridge debris which must be removed. There were concerns over the inherent sulfur residue derived from the explosive material used in the repair process (pentaerythritoltetranitrate), even though the sulfur content as sulfates does not normally exceed 0.5% as sulfuric acid [20]. This concern was partially alleviated by the Licensee's specification that any material, i.e, candles or explosives, to be introduced into the OrSGs contain no more than 250 ppm sulfur and 250 ppm total chlorides and fluorides. Also, the polyethylene cartridge captures a large portion of the reaction products from the detonation. The

• The usage factor is defined as the percentage of the useful life consumed

~

through cyclic loading.

M M'

t. bu Frankhn Res,earch C. enter a o, a e th. ,.

i

TER-C5506-311/312/313 1

surface contamination problem was further mitigated by precoating the exposed ,

surfaces of the steam generator with which is a water-soluble cleaning agent with no critical contaminants and for which there are extensive application data [15]. The Licensee successfully demonstrated the application of , in test mock-ups and Mt. Vernon tests [15] .

A remaining concern is the polyethylene cartridge perforation. During i

preliminary and qualification testing, " blow-throughs" occurred in cart' ridges

[21] . Testing and analyses were conducted by the Licensee to examine the Metallographic analyses expanded tubes that have experienced blow-through.

were performed on test specimens to assess the condition of the tube ID at blow-through locations which might experience higher local stresses than any other portions of expanded tubes. The' Licensee has not addressed this issue l

in Topical Report 008 [3], and FIC has not been informed of any action concerning this aspect of the expansion process evaluation.

4.1.8 Effects of the Kinetic Expansion Process on Tube Pretensioning All tubes of the steam generators were pretensioned at the fabrication According to Para.

stage so that they would not be in compression when cold.

3.5.3 of Reference 1, the repaired tube tensile preload shall not be changed This design objective of by more than + 30 lb at ambient temperature. _

• maintaining the tube preload tension is necessary in order not to change the vibrational characteristics of the tubes.

The change in the pretension in the tubes due to the kinetic expansion j

I process is a direct function of the change in the length of the tubes caused by the repair process. The Licensee conducted induced strain tests on test blocks to take length measurements of tubes before and af ter the From the viewpoint of material benavior, The net change in length of tubes after 'may therefore be insignificant, leading to the general belief that the change in tube pretensioning due to the repair process will Induced also be minimal. The Licensee's test results confirmed this belief.

4h b Frankhn Research Center A b g( N Fw w

.. ,=

a TER-C5506-311/312/313  !

strain measurements taken before and after the expansion process showed maximum longitudinal strain values which is less than the design limit of 30 lb.

4.1.9 Adequacy of Tube Pullout Strength The bonding at the interface of the tube and tubesheet produced by the kinetic expansion process is purely mechanical, and the holding strength is the frictional force derived from the contact surf ace pressure between tube and tubesheet. It is therefore important to maintain tight contact in order to sustain the desired holding strength at the bonding surface.

According to Para. 3.5.2 of Reference 1, the repaired tube is expected to sustain the maximum design basis axial tensile load of 3140 lb from the 177-FA MSLB accident analysis (see Table 5-7 of Reference 16) . Satisfying this qualification objective requires that no slippage will occur at a 3140-lb load. The Licensee conducted tube pullout strength tests in accordance with Foster Wheeler Test Procedure No. 5054-QT-9 [11]. The effects of thermal cycling, axial loading, and the number of af ter-shots on the tube pullout strength were evaluated. Seven 10-tube test blocks were subjected to pullout tests at an ambient temperature of 70*F + 5'F, and one test block was maintained at an elevated temperature of 330*F during testing.

Several factors interact to influence the elevated temperature ' pullout s trength. These factors include the relative coefficients of thermal expan-sion of the tubesheet and tubes, the degree of relaxation of the circumferen-tial residual stresses contributing to the tube-tubesheet seal, and the lowering of tha yield strength of both the materials. The latter factor is important since overcoming the friction between the two surf aces involves yielding of surface irregularities on the interacting, unbonded components.

The differences in the coefficients of expansion lead to a tighter joint at elevated temperatures, while stress relaxation and : lowered yield strength would degrade pullout capacity both at the elevated temperature and subse- '

quently at lower temperatures. The short-term effect of 610*F temperature g.h -14 f.Ud Frankhn Research Center A Ommon et The F,m m

TER-C5506-311/312/313 exposure was demonstrated by the Licensee's pullout results af ter 30 cycles of 70*F to 610*F to 70*F. A slight decrease in pullout at room temperature was noted,

, Accordingly, it is unlikely that a more prolonged 600*F exposure would critically degrade the room temperature pullout strength.

The Licensee's pullout tests at 330*F on one 10-tube block which had been thermally cycled as described above gave, and a 99/99 statistical confidence of pullout As pointed out by the Licensee, this , . in mean pullout load at elevated temperature is stat'istically significant, and it is attributed to the reduction in yield strength of the material at elevated temperature.' No testing was done at the 650*F design temperature. However, when the 330*F data were extrapolated to the 650*F design temperature, a mean slip load of was obtained, and, assuming that the standard deviation would be the same at 650*F as at the 330*F test temperature, it was concluded that the 3140-lb goal would be

• easily met". Although it is not clear that the extrap-olation is valid, the 3140-lb pullout load goal is so conservative [17] that there appears to be no cause for concern that tube slippage will occur at 650*F under an MSLB.

Additional confidence concerning the adequacy of the repair procedure was gained af ter the tube pullout test conducted at Mt. Vernon showed a load-I carrying capability 4.1.10 Otress Concentration in the Tube Transition Lenoth of Expansion A requirement imposed on the repair process was that the magnitude of the residual stresses at the transition region between the expanded and unexpanded portions of the tubes on the downstream side of the expansion be minimized in order to reduce the possibility of stress-corrosion cracking. Since an abrupt transition results in higher residual stresses and larger stress concentra-l tions, the goal was to limit the transition length to between 1/8 and 1/4 in l

• See footnote on page 9.

l l

.gf,t:s O.UU Frankhn Research Center A Omeen af The F#enneninsense ,

TER-C5506-311/312/313 (Para 3.6.1 of Reference 1) . It was further required that the residual tensile stresses (both circumferential and axial) in the transition region should be less than 45% of the 0.2% offset yield stress at room temperature (Para. 3.6.2 of Reference 1) . Stress examinations were conducted at Penn-sylvania State University using special X-ray diffraction and strain gage techniques to find post-kinetic expansion tube stresses in the transition area at the bottom of the expansion and at a second point near the middle of the expansion. The Licensee stated that the requirements were met (3]; however, the detailed test results were not made available to Fir. at the time of this writing.

4.2 LICENSEE'S EVALUATION PROGRAM OF STRESS AND PERFORMANCE OF TUBE /TUBESHEET ASSEMBLY 4.2.1 Stress and Performance of the Expanded Tubes Subjected to Various Load Conditions An evaluation was made of the stresses on and the performance of the expanded tubes when subjected to the following load conditions:

a. normal operating pressure

b. thermal transient

c. flow-induced vibration o d. seismic accelerations and displacements

e. loss-of-coolant accident

f. main steam line break.

4.2.1.1 Normal Operating Pressure The normal operating differential pressure is 1275 psi (Para. 4.4.2 of Reference 1). Seven 10-tube blocks were subjected to a series of water leak tests specified in Foster Wheeler Document No. 5054-QP-1, Rev. 1, Para. 5.4

[11) and Test Procedure No. 5054-QT-6, Rev. 0 (11) . The operating pressure was supplied on the primary side of the tube for six of the test blocks; the seventh block was pressurized on the secondary side (discussion of this is found in Section 4.2.1.5). Results of the leak rate tests performed by GPU Nuclear have demonstrated that the seal between the primary and secondary

g. n ,"=ib 3.h Frankhn Research Center ACnemenafTheFr m m

TER-C5506-311/312/313 throughwall cracks) in tubes, they would remain, stable and would not propagate under these loads.

4.2.1.4 Seismic Accelerations and Displacements According to Para. 3.2.2 of Reference 1, the repaired tube is a Seismic Category 1 component in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.29 and a Class 1 component in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.26. The seismic boundary (the portion of the tube /tubesheet configuration which should be seismically qualified) for the expansion extends down to the end of the qualified 6-in length. This change in the structural configuration of the expanded tubes is minor and will probably not produce any significant effect on the performance of tubes subjected to seismic displacement and accelerations. However, the Licensee has not addressed this issue in the topical Report 008 [3] . ,

4.2.1.5 Loss-of-Coolant Accident The loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) is simulated by the pressure loading test described in Section 4.2.1.1. The test pressure of 1275 psi from the secondary side of the tubes is conservative in view of the value of 925 psi given in Reference 16 (pp. 5-6).

4.2.1.6 Main Steam Line Break A main steam line break (MSLB) subjects the tube to a tension of 3140 lb

[16), the highest tension of any design condition. In o. der to simulate this condition, a pressure of 2500 psi was applied on the primary side (Para. 5.3.1 of Reference 16) in the water leak tests discussed in Section 4.1.4 of this l report.

4.2.2 Tubesheet Ligament Strength

! An evaluation was made of tubesheet ligament strength due to:

l

a. change in ligament width af ter repair

b. warping of the tubesheet.

A d'J rlh Frankhn Research Center

% w Tn. P a ma m i

TER-C5506-311/312/313 sides of the tubesheet is functionally effective with leak rates well below the technical specification limit but slightly higher than the repair design objective of a maximum water leakage rate of 1.0 lb/h per plant.

4.2.1.2 Thermal Transient Reference 22 (the specification for the Licensee's thermal cycling program) states that transient No.1 (heatup/cooldown) goes from 70*F to 557'F and back to 70*F, and that there are 240 full design cycles to simulate 40 years of service. Also, there are 64 design cycles related to thermal transient loading for reactor trips. To simulate 5 years of service, the test procedure required thermal cycle conditioning of seven 10-tube test blocks from 70*F to 610*F and back to 70'F 38 times (30 heatup/cooldowns and 8 reactor trips) [1] . The effects of these cycles on leak rates and pullout strengths are discussed in Sections 4.1.4 to 4.1.9.

4 . 2.1.3 Flow-Induced Vibration A tube vibration test was conducted during the design stage in the 1960s using a typical OrSG Inconel tube with 0.625-in outer diameter, a length of 52 f t 1.375 in, and a wall thickness of 0.035 in [23] . The test specimen, which represented the exposed portion of tube, was fixed at the ends to simulate the effect of the tubesheet and was supported between the ends by supports similar to those in the full-sized unit. The test results demonstrated satisfactory performance of tubes during vibration. Since the expanded portion of the tube inside the tubesheet was not included in the vibration test, the kinetic repair process did not affect the established test results.

According to Reference 3, the Licensee evaluated the effect of a high cycle flow-induced vibration bending load plus a thermally induced steady axial load on tubes. A maximum axial tension of 500 lb can be exerted on tubes due to the shell-to-tube temperature dif ference during steady state operation.

The flow-induced vibration loading combined with a cooldown of 100*F/h can generate a maximum tube tension of 1107 lb. The Licensee's study showed that if there were any undetectable defects (i.e., defects with less than 40%

A [J.Su Frankhn Research Center A Onumen af The Fransen W4aemme

- . _ .-_.w

=. ..

TER-C5506-311/312/313 4.2.2.1 Change in Ligament Width Af ter Repair According to Reference 3, the test results from test blocks and the Mt.

Vernon steam generator showed minimal changes in tubesheet ligament width due to the expansion process'.

4.2.2.2 Warping of Tubesheet There is concern as to whether the process will cause the tubesheet to warp due to nonuniform expansion of the holes through the thickness. It has been postulated by the Licensee that the unit A tubesheet might have alr' eady been warped, based on the high concentration of defective tubes in the peripheral area of the tubesheet.

This problem should be addressed by the Licensee (Para. 3.5.4 of Reference 1).

j I

I 4.2.3 Effect of the Change of Tube Pretension 14ad

! An evaluation was made of the effect of the change of tube pretension load ont

a. frequency of vibration of expanded tubes

b. fatigue life of expanded tubes e c. buckling of expanded tubes.

4.2.3.1 Frequency of Vibration of Expanded Tubes The amount of pretension to which a tube is subjected affects the natural frequency of the tube, i.e., the higher the pretension, the higher the frequency. If the pretension is altered due to the direct effect of the repair process on the tube or the indirect effect on the tube due to warping of the tubesheet, the natural frequency will change. Various analyses (23]

have shown that the change in frequency due to change in tension will be less than 6.5 Hz for a 200-lb difference in tension. The Licensee's test results showed a maximum reduction of. in tube pretension due to the expansion i process. Thus, the repair process has a minimal effect on the frequency of

. vibration of the tubes.

.mefh., -

~

NUdA Q,umosose Frankhn Research Center W Trit Frenman w

l TER-C5506-311/312/313 4.2.3.2 Fatigue Life of Expanded Tubes i Since the tube pretension change is small, there is no reason to expect that the fatigue calculations, based on transient loads presented in Reference 16, Para. 6.2.3, would significantly alter the fatigue life of expanded tubes.

4.2.3.3 Buckling of Expanded Tubes In the absence of pretension, the largest negative load (compression) of

-775 lb in the tube occurs during transient No.1 [ Reference 16, Yable 5-4) .

Since the pretension is 1000 lb, a small perturbation in pretension should not put a tube in danger of buckling, which will occur at about -700 lb (23) .

4.3 INDEPENDENT TEST PROGRAM 4.3.1 Test specimens All tubes and tubesheet samples tested were supplied by Babcock & Wilcox, along with data characterizing the materials. All samples were heat treated to simulate strength levels and surf ace conditions in the OTSGs. Drawings of the test assemblies, whien were either single-tube or 10-tube mock-ups, are shown in Appendix D.

The test specimens consisted of two 10-tube /tubesheet mock-ups, six sing 1'e tube /tubesheet mock-ups, and insert assemblies which provided the means of detonation for the expansion process.

One of the 10-tube assemblies was shipped directly to FRC for expansion and subsequent tests. The second was expanded by Foster Wheeler Corp. and then shipped to FRC for similar testing. These two (identical) units are depicted in Figure 1 of Appendix D. The single-tube assemblies and the plastic insert primacord assemblies are seen in Figures 1.1 and 1.2a, respectively, of Appendix D.

4.3.2 Test Procedures .

The tests which comprised the independent test program are listed below.

A detailed description of the test procedures is given in Appendix D. Some A

_20

['/.dd Frankhn Research Center A (bamen af The Fsumeninesame

TER-C5506-311/312/313 test data appear in the text of the reports the remainder of the data appear as Appendix E.

The tests were patterned after those conducted by the Licensee [11],

thereby providing an independent evaluation of the explosive expansion process. Unless otherwise specified, the tests listed below were performed on one or both of the 10-tube test assemblies. The tests were as follows:

o receiving and inspection / measurements and marking o hign yield and low yield tubes identified and marked o roll expansion and explosive expansion of one 10-tube assembly (The other was expanded by Foster Wheeler Corp. and delivered to FBC for further testing.)

. o explosive expansion of three single-tube assemblies o bubble tests o axial load cycling o pullout attangth tests o leak tests (secondary-to-primary, and primary-to-secondary) o residual stress measurement o micrography.

Dimensional measurements were made at various junctures in the test program.

Certain elements of the test program were deleted, including thermal cycling of all test assemblies. The rationale for deletion of thermal cycling is as follows:

During service transitions, the maximum temperature difference that can exist between the tubes and the tubesheet at the joint must be very small compared to the temperature difference between the tube in the main body of the generator and in the massive tubesheet. Since the latter tempera-ture differences are responsible for the axial stresses that are included in the axial cyclic tests, and since cycling of hoop and radial stresses will have a negligible influence on tube pullout strength in comparision with that of axial cycling, tubes were not cyclically " conditioned" to simulate thermal gradients betwen the tube and the tubesheet.

D M'J& Frankhn Res,earch C. enter a w w in. , in.

s TER-C5506-311/312/.i13 '

A number of tests on the single-tube assemblies were deleted due to budget and schedule considerations. The original intent of these test samples was that they would serve only as " practice" pieces prior to the tests on the larger 10-tube assemblies. The tests which were deleted are so noted in t Appendix D.

Two of the single-tube assemblies were instrumented with strain gages in an attempt to measure instantaneous strain during the expansion process.

These tests were unsuccessful primarily due to the inability of the strain gages and external wiring to remain mechanically intact during the expansion process.

The requirements that 4 specific minimus joint strength and a maximum allowable leak rate be maintained for a minimum of 5 years of service operation defined the test parameters. The loading that the tube /tubesheet joint will experience in service over a period of 5 years owing to temperature transitions, including start-ups and shutdowns, was simulated by axial cycling. Following a *conditioni/.g" with the appropriate number of cycles at each service stress range, the tubes were tested for leakage under pressure conditions representative of normal oprirations and of loss of pressure on either the primary or secondary side. Next, the load required to pull tubes out of the tubesheet was determined.

• Thermal conditioning was performed in Foster Wheeler Corporation's qualification test program. Some of these tests were witnessed, and the pullout and leakage data were reviewed (see Section 4.1.7) for tubes so conditioned. Thus, this aspect of simulated service life was more than adequately covered.

s No conditioning with simultaneous thermal stress and representative load variations was or will be carried out in any of the various evaluation programs.

Such testing should not be required since pullout and leakage results af ter axial conditioning indicate the tube seal is acceptable.

For some specified tubes, the residual stresses induced in the tubesheet were determined by strain gaging sections of the tubesheet and then machining out the expanded tube.

['J.h AFrankhn Reseetch Center Ossenen af The Feensen m

l f .

TER-C5506-311/312/313 4.3.3 Leaktightness Tests Two 10-tube blocks were initially subjected to a low pressure (125 psi) primary-to-secondary bubble test (Nil) (Appendix D) to assure that no gross leakage was present prior to any of the load cycling tests. As shown in the ,

test results (Appendia E), a few bubbles did emanate from most, tubes, but there was no evidence of a total lack of a tube /tubesheet seal.

Following the axial load cycling to simulate 5 years of service condi-tions, in which no tube exhibited any sign of slippage, the test blocks were subjected to both primary-to-secondary and secondary-to-primary leakage tests as detailed in the test plan (N17 and N18) . The leakage rates after 72 h are summarized below:

Pressure Average Leak Rate Tube Assembly (psig) Pressure Direction per Tube (lb/h) -

~

F-1 1275 Secondary to Primary 6.37 x 10

~

F-1 1275 Primary to Secondary 2.49 x 10 '

~

F-1 2500 Primary to Secondary 2.94 x 10 '

F-2 1275 Secondary to Primary 1.07 x 10 -5 F-2 1275 Primary to Secondary 1.28 x 10 ~$

~

F-2 1275 Primary to Secondary 1.90 x 10

-5 The qualification leakage goal set by GPU Nuclear was 3.2 x 10 lb/h per tube based on a total leakage of 1 lb/h from both OTSGs, whereas the technical specifications limit is 1.0 gal / min (500.22 lb/h) total leakage for both generators. For comparison, the Licensee's tests ranged from 1.18 x

-6 -6 10 to 187.4 x 10 lb/h per tube. From the data above, it is clear that the leakage rate from block F-1 was about twice that of block F-2. The latter block met the acceptance level goal, whereas the former slightly exceeded this goal for one test condition but was well below the technical specification limit of 500 lb/h. Accordingly, it must be concluded that these tests indicate the kinetic expansion does lead to an adequate leaktight seal between the tube and tubesheet.

~

nkhn Research Center A Chess.n of The Feepean w

.. ,a TER-C5506-311/312/313 4.3.4 Tube Interference Fit and Tubesheet Residual Stress There were several approaches to evaluating the degree of the interference fit between a tube and the tubesheet. In the 10-tube assembly (F-2) expanded at F14C, the ID and CD of each tube and the ID of the tubesheet hole were measured prior to expansion and the ID of each tube was measured following each expansion. The tubes in F-2 were in two sections: the first 2 in were separate lengths to simulate a full circumferential crack at the 2-in location. These " stub" ends, which initially had been roll-expanded, were exposed to the kinetic expansion process with the 6-in test region. In the j data in Table 1, the D, measurements at the 1-in location reflect the use of different tubing for these stubs, which were not part of the qualification tests.

Af ter the first expansion, the D y measurements were essentially the same for all sections of the tubes including the stub ends. The first expansion clearly induced an interference as indicated by the fact that the diametral change due to the first expansion was greater than the tube hole

clearance. The diametral change due to the second expansion was at least one ordec of magnitude smaller than the change from the first expansion. This difference indicates that the second expansion contributed only slightly to the interference fit and that excessive deformation of the tubesheet was not a concern.

l The test data for the single-tube blocks 3A and 3D contrast with those for the 10-tube block in several aspects. Not only is the first step diametral change in the single tube less than that for the first step in the tube in the 10-tube assembly, but the total accumulated diametral change af ter the second expansion, which caused about 1/4 to 1/5 of the total tube expansion, was also less than that for the 10-tube first step. Fur thermore ,

this total diametral change was less than the original tube /tubesheet clearance, indicating a relatively poor tube /tubesheet joint. The basis for this phenomenon appears to be the fact that the simulated tubesheet tube in the single-tube mock-up increased in outside _ diameter after each expansion, and thus, did not effectively restrict the explosive energy to expanding the

$h U.UU Frankhn Research Center A Osuomen af The Frannan ineamme

TER-C5506-311/312/313 Table 1. Tube and Tubesheet Dimensional Data Demonstrating Effects of Two Expansions Block F-2 Inside diameter of tube At 1-in location Tube Do Di D2 D1-Do D2 -D1 1 0.5615 0.5653 0.5655 0.0038 0.0002 2 0.5615 0.5652 0.5657 0.0037 0.0005 3 0.5619 0.5657 0.5659 0.0038 0.0002 4 0.5625 0.5652 0.5655 0.0027 0.0003 5 0.5625 0.5649 0.5665 0.0024 0.0016 6 0.5621 0.5662 0.5667 0.0041 0.0005 7 0.5621 0.5661 0.5665 0.0040 0.0004 8 0.5625 0.5678 0.5680 0.0053 0.0002 9 0.5615 0.5673 0.5680 0.0058 0.0007 10 0.5629 0.5668 0.5681 0.0039 0.0013

• At 2 1/8-in location 1 0.5500 0.5653 0.5660 0.0153 0.0007 2 0.5500 0.5649 0.5653 0.0149 0.0004 3 0.5508 0.5660 0.5666 0.0152 0.0006 4 0.5500 0.5649 0.5657 0.0149 0.0008 5 0.5503 0.5645 0.5655 0.0142 0.0010 6 0.5500 0.5653 0.5657 0.0153 0.0004 7 0.5498 0.5657 0.5660 0.0159 0.0003 8 0.5510 0.5662 0.5662 0.0152 0.0000 9 0.5502 0.5652 0.5655 0.0150 0.0003 10 0.5495 0.5650 0.5657 0.0155 0.0007 At 3 1/4-in location 1 0.5502 0.5648 0.5653 0.0146 0.0005 2 0.5495 0.5665 0.5670 0.0170 0.0005 3 0.5510 0.5660 0.5658 0.0150 -0.0002 4 0.5502 0.5660 0.5661 0.0150 0.0001 5 0.5510 0.5663 0.5667 0.0153 0.0004 6 0.5504 0.5648 0.5651 0.0144 0.0003 7 0.5500 0.5659 0.5661 0.0159 0.0002 8 0.5512 0.5655 0.5655 0.0143 0.0000 9 0.5504 0.5653 0.5658 0.0149 0.0005 10 0.5498 0.5652 0.5655 0.0154 0.0003 Do = inside diameter of tube before expansion.

D1 = inside diameter of tube after first expansion.

D2 = inside diameter of tube after second expansion.

D1 -Do = diametral change due to first expansion.

D2 -D1 = diametral change due to second expansion.

Note: All dimensions are inches and measured from the face of the block.

g.A hu Franklin Research Center A Drueesen ed Tang F,enamn h j

TER-C5506-311/312/313 Table 1 (Cont.)

Block F-2 Clearance (calculated from data on first page of Table 1) e At t 1/8-in Location Tube hg h hs-h Dry = (Di-Do )-(Dys-DT) 1 0.6403 0.6284 0.0119 0.0034 2 G.6400 0.6285 0.0115 0.0034 3 0.6395 0.6284 0.0111 0.0041 4 0.6400 0.6287 0.0113 0.0036 5 0.6390 0.6281 0.0109 0.0033 6 0.6390 0.6289 0.0101 0.0052 7 0.6395 0.6284 0.0111 0.0048 8 0.6400 0.6284 0.0116 0.0036 9 0.6395 0.6283 0.0112 0.0038 10 0.6390 0.6284 0.0106 0.0049 At 3 1/4-in location 1 0.6403 0.6284 0.0119 0.0027 2 0.6400 0.6287 0.0113 0.0057 3 0.6395 0.6281 0.0114 0.0036 4 0.6400 0.6285 0.0115 0.0043 5 0.6390 0.6282 0.0108 0.0045 i

. 6 0.6390 0.6286 0.0104 0.0040 7 0.6395 0.6281 0.0114 0.0045 8 0.6400 0.6283 0.0117 0.0026 9 0.6395 0.6280 0.0115 0.C034 10 0.6390 0.6263 0.0107 0.0047 DTS = diameter of tubesheet hole before expansion.

AT = utside diameter of tube before expans'Sn.

D -D

• 1**#*"#**

TS T Dgy = interference.

Note: All dimensions are in inches.

A g'/.du Frenidin Research Center A Onneuem of The Fremen w

o ..

TER-C5506-311/312/313 Table 1 (Cont.)

l l Test Specimen 3A 1

At 1-in location Do D1 D2 D1-Do D2 -D1 Tube inside diameter 0.5495 0.5590 0.5610 0.0095 0.0020 Block outside diameter 1.1420 1.1425 1.1440 0.0005 0.0015 clearance = 0.0112 At 2 1/8-in location Tube inside diameter 0.5498 0.5580 0.5598 0.0082 0.0018 Block outsida diameter 1.14 15 1.1440 1.1450 0.0025 0.0010 clearance = 0.0111 At 3 1/4-in location Tube inside diameter 0.5496 0.5580 0.5602 0.0084 0.0022 Block outside diameter 1.1425 1.1440 1.1445 0.0015 0.0005 clearance = 0.0110 Note: All dimensions are in inches.

~

. n ,=b f'J.;

J Frankhn Research Center A Domeen af The Freneen m

,. l TER-C5506-311/312/313 Table 1 (Cont.)

Test Specimen 3D At 1-in location Do D1 D2 D1-Do D2 -D1 Tube inside diameter 0.5494 0.5585 0.5610 0.0091 0.0025 Block outside diameter 1.1435 1.1455 1.1455 0.0020 0.0000 clearance = 0.0111 At 2 1/8-in location Tube inside diameter 0.5520 0.5582 0.5598 0.0062 0.0016 Block outside diameter 1.1435 1.1440 1.1450 0.0005 0.0010 clearance = 0.0132 Tube inside diameter 0.5496 0.5583 0.5610 0.0087 0.0027 Block outside diameter 1.1428 1.1448 1.1450 0.0020 0.0002 clearance = 0.0110 Note: All dimensions are in inches. .

l i

l dg 'h -. 3.Du Frankhn Research Center s w e m r<m m

TER-C5506-311/312/313 tube. On the other hand, the larger mass of the 10-tube tubesheet appears to have forced the deformation of the tube.

In an attempt to monitor the strain incurred at the OD of the single-tube tubesheet, strain gages were mounted on the ODs of test blocks which were then subjected to expansion (Tasks N3 and N4) . Unfortunately, the shock waves detached the gage's or the wire lands; thus, no meaningful data were obtained from these tests.

Strain gages were successfully used in measuring the tubesheet ligament springback which occurred when expanded tubes were machined out of 10-tube block F-1 (Task N21) . Based on these tests and the data in Table 2, the following observations were made:

1. In general, some amount of strain relaxation in the tubesheet ligaments occurred in the immediate vicinity of a tube that was partially machined and removed. This phenomenon was more pronounced for tubes with low yield strength, i.e., in ligament 7-10.

2. The stress state of the tubesheet ligaments away from a tube subjected to me. chining appeared unaffected by the tube removal process.

- 3. The accuracy of measuring a small amount of strain relaxation in the tubesheet ligaments did not appear to have been affected by the machining process. There were no noticeable rises in the ligament c

temperature in the area where machining and strain gage data reading took place.

~

4. The small measured amounts of strain relaxation in the tubesheet ligaments indicate that the kinetic expansion did not induce excessive plastic deformation in the tubesheet nor did it alter the dimensional integrity.

4.3.5 Tube Pullout The data for tube pullout tests on mock-ups F-1 and F-2 are summarized in Table 3. As discussed previously, six of the tubes in assembly F-1 were lef t intact in the "tubesheet" so that residual strain measurements could be conducted on the ligaments between tubes on cross sections of the assembly.

The qualification pullout load goal of 3140 lb was based on the worst case,

-bFrankhn Research Center g'J.h A Denmon of TM Pim ensamme

)

TER-C5506-311/312/313 Table 2. Residual Strain Measurements on 10-Tube Block, F-1 Strain Levels in Micro Strains (u in/in)

Ligament 1-4* l-5 4-5 5-6 6-7 6-10 7-10 Cut Depth (in)

Before clamping 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Clamped -1 0 0 0 +2 -1 +2 After Tube 1 -60 -24 -1 0 +3 -2 +3 1/4 N-S Machining out -56 -35 +1 -1 +3 -2 +3 1/2 N-S

-44 -27 +2 0 +3 +2 +4 3/4 E-W After Tube 4 -54 -27 -1 -1 +4 -3 +6 1/2 N-S

-54 -26 -4 -1 +5 -3 +7 1/2 E-W

-54 -26 I*I - - - -

3/4 E-W

-54 -27 -3 -2 - - -

3/4 N-S After Tube 5 -

-34 -30 - 12 +7 -4 +11 3/4 N-S

. -51 -36 -30 -46 II +7 -5 +11 3/4 E-W After Tube 6 -51 - -38 -19 - 12 -2 3/4 EWNS After Tube 7 -50 -40 -35 -48 -16 -115 3/4 NSEW After Tube 10 -50 -41 -35 -36 +15 -223 3/4 NSEW Unclamped -50 +42 -36 -35 +17 -226 Note: N-S and E-W are arbitrary nor'th-south and east-west locatiens at which the tube was milled away to the tubesheet to the depth indicated.

• See Figure 1.2.b.

a. - indicates reading did not change.

b. Gage disconnected, reading doubtful. No further readings possible.

gu%

U.J Frankjin Research Center A Oswesen af The henamn h

TER-C5506-311/312/313 l

MSLB-induced thermal length changes of the tube and tubesheet/shell assembly.

Since an eiongation strain of 0.0016 in/in in each tube would nullify the thermal length change differences (15], the stress on each tube is strain limited. Accordingly, in the qualification tests, if there was no slippage or reduction in load prior to 0.0016 in/in elastic plus plastic strain, the joint would clearly be adequate for generator service. However, the load to cause ~

this strain could be less than 3140 lb, and in keeping with the original qualification goals, the tests on block F-1 were continued until the maximum load that could be sustained by the joint was achieved.

As shown in Table 3 for test block F-1, the total elongation at maximum load of each tube relative to the bottom surface of the tubesheet was well above 0.016 in, the elongation corresponding to 0.0016 in/in strain in a 10-in-long tube. The elongations on the high yield (HY) tubing were about s half those for the low yield (LY) tubing, consistent with the larger amount of plastic deformation in the latter. These results clearly indicate the ability of the joint to satisfy the pullout strength goals.

For block F-2, the total tube movement (elastic and plastic deformation plus any slippage) was monitored and loads were determined for yielding (when the load versus time curve under constant loading rate deviated from linearity). As can be seen in Table 3, as expected, the load on each low yield tube at yielding was close to or below the 2140-lb goal. At elongation of 0.030 in (0.003 in/in strain) and 0.060 in (0.006 in/in strain), the maximum load had not yet been reached in any tubes, but the elongations were so much larger than could be expected on actual steam generator tubes that tests were not continued to actual pullout.

4.4 ONSITE MONITORING OF RCPAIR PROCESS Repair processes performed on the TMI-l A and B steam generators were monitored by means of a series of telephone conversations with the resident NBC inspector, Mr. Skip Young, and by visiting the site to confirm that repairs were proceeding in a generally satisfactory manner.

. r,=c U h Frankhn Research Center A Cosimen af The Frenamn m

'TER-C5506-311/312/313 Table 3. Summary of Tube Pullout Testing A. Block F-1 Tube Elongation Tube Strength Max. Load (lb) at Max. Load (in) 2 HY 4100 0.051 3 LY 4000 0.105 8 HY 4050 0.041 9 LY 3800 o.092 B. Block F-2 Load (lb) at Tube Streng th Yield Load (lb) 0.030 in 0.060 in 1 HY 3800 3900 4120 2 HY 3500 3740 3900 3 LY 3200 3275 3500 4 HY 3750 3800 4000 5 HY 3700 3820 4000 6 LY 3034 3275 3450 7 LY 2900 3090 3275 8 HY 3750 -- 4060 9 LY 3170 3430 3675 10 LY 3150 3300 3500 g'J. 'Ju -bFrankhn Research Center A bessen of The Fem m

TER-C5506-311/312/313 It was determined that there were some early problems with ignition of the ordnance cord. This cord communicates detonation from a single point, an electric blasting cap, located outside the steam generator, to each part of located within plastic tubes (candles) in the tubes of the generators. Where detonation failed to occur, in the bundle did not receive enough energy to initiate them relia.bly; the problem was solved by using Another factor contributing tio the early difficulties was what was thought to be a " bad batch"

- Subsequent batches performed reliably and this, resulted in a very high percentage of successful detonations.

At the time of the first site visit, diametral measurements were being made at 1-in spacings along the longitudinal axis of the tube. Although there was some difficulty in the interpretation of the results, it was determined that the expansions were within previously defined diametral limits. No adverse reports have been received following the initial problems.

Eddy current testing for crack detection was begun immediately af ter the first expansions were made. First examinations showed indications of defects that had not been detected earlier. As discussed in Section 4.1.4, the Licensee concluded that these indications were primarily pits and scratches which were detected by addy current testing equipment more sensitive than that used previously and that these defects would not influence the reliability of the joints.

Cleanup after expansions was difficult. The plastic candles adhered tenaciously to the tube wall and blasting air from the bottom of the generator was ineffective. Pressure from the underside of the candle was increased to 700 psi to make the process more efficient.

n ,==.:: '

I'J.hA Chaenen Frankhn Research Center of The Frenshn m

TER-C5506-311/312/313 It appears that the repair procedures were conducted according to the qualification program set forth by GPU Nuclear and its contractors. In the case of the early detonation failures, the number of repeated hits on tubes that had already been expanded could increase chances of leakage, but planned bubble leak tests should indicate such leakage. It would be well to pay particular attention to the regions of the generators where these repeated hits occurred.

O a

g'J.tu d2sFrankhn Research Center -34_

awww%w

i TER-C5506-311/312/313

5. OPEN ITEMS As ...dicated previously, at the time of issuance of this report, several open items remain to be addressed by the Licensee. While some or all of these may have been dealt with, no information on them has been received. Thus, these topics are listed belows

a. an evaluation of warpage distortjon, if any, of the tubesheets of the TMI-l OTSGs

b. a consideration of the number and severity of candle " blow-throughs,"

the possible effects of these blow-throughs on the cleanup of tubes, and the residual stresses and stress-concentrating effects associated with these blow-throughs

c. an evaluation of the validity of extrapolating 330*F pullout load test data to 650'F

d. the conclusions concerning the X-ray measurements of the residual stresses in kinetically expanded tubes (work done at Pennsylvania State University).

It is not expected that any of the above items will be critical to the generator's return to service. However, an accurate appraisal of the expected long-term life of the generator requires that they be fully taken into account.

I'.rh I.'Ju Frat %n Research Center A Chasten el The Fe m

TER-C550 6-311/312/313

6. CONCLUSIONS Based on the evaluation of the Licensee's qualification program and the results of the independent test program, the following conclusions have been reached:

1. The kinetic (explosive) expansion technique is an effective means for repairing the cracked tubes in the TMI-l once-through steam generators (orSGs). By forming a new tube /tubesheet seal joint below the cracks in the tubes, the cracked regions are essentially removed from the system.

2. expansion procedure accomplishes a tight seal without ex'cessive deformation of the tubesheet. ,

3. In order to maximize the number of tubes that can be salvaged, all tubes were expanded for 17 in. The lower 6 in of this was the length qualified in the Licensee's test programs and evaluated in FRC's independent test program. It is expected that tubes with defects up to 11 in below the upper face of the tubesheet can be repaired in this manner and that tubes with defects between 11 and 16 in below the upper face of the tubesheet will be repaired by reexpanding a 22-in length.

l

4. It is anticipated that after the tubes have been expanded, a seasoning l

l will be required to reduce leakage to acceptable levels. Both the Licensee's and FRC's test programs have shown that the probable leak

• rate is well below the Technical Specification of 0.016 lb/h per tube, and approaches the qualification gcal of 3.2 x 10-5 lb/h per tube.

5. In general, the results of testing and analysis nave been favorable in terms of having met the Licensee's qualification requirements.

Thus, to the extent that the test assemblies represent a reasonable simulation of the TMI-l OTSG, the repair process implemented at TMI-l should meet its objectives.

A list of open or unresolved items -(to FHC) is presented in Section

5. It is not expected that any of these items will be critical to the generator's return to service. However, an accurate appraisal of the expected long-term life of the generator requires that they be fully taken into account.

l g, 'rh

)' . A Frankhn Research Center A Dme.n of The Fransen insanwe

_ _.---.-__.. _,.--, _ _-.-_~_. ~, .__

TER-C5506-311/312/313 It should also be emphasized that there are some fundamental differences between the test assemblies and the actual generator which could affect the success of the repair process. These differences are as follows:

a. length of expansion .

b. number of tubes simultaneously expanded

c. tube length (different impedance to expansion)

d. geometry of tubesheet

e. variation in tube-to-tubesheet crevice conditions.

i It is not anticipated that these differences will have a major adverse impact on the effectiveness of the repair process. In this regard, the hot functional tests in the start-up program st}ould critically evaluate the state of the generators. .

O g'. ,i' , ).h Frankhn Research Center A Onsesen of The Fraseen w

TER-C5506-311/312/313

7. REFERENCES

1. GPU Nuclear DtI-l OrSG Tube Repair Preliminary Specification No. 1101-22-006, Rev. 4

2. Babcock & Wilcox B&W Explosive Expansion Qualification Requirements for Mechanical Testing (61-113429-00) for Explosive Expansion Repair of OTSGs June 2, 1982

3. GPU Nuclear Topical Report No. 008, Rev. 2, " Assessment of TMI-l Plant Safety for Return to Service After Steam Generator Repair" March 29, 1983

4. L. Zernow and I. Lieberman

" Explosive Metal Fabrication, A Technical-Economic Tradeoff" Behavior and Utilization of Explosives in Engineering Design,12th Annual Symposium, ASME, March 2-3, 1972

5. A. A. Ezra Principles and Practice of Explosive Metal Working Industrial Newspapers Limited, London,1973, pp.112-116

6. R. A. Mottram and R. V. Andrew

" Tube Expansion and Welding by Explosives" Engineer, September 29, 1967

7. " Explosive Breakthrough in Tube Expansion" Welding Design and Fabrication, August 1970

8. R. A. Mottram

" Explosive Tube to Tube Plate Expansion" Proceedings of Meeting of High Pressure Technical Association March 14,1969

9. Pipes and Pipelines International June 1978, p. 32 10 . F. J. Locke, R. V. Collins, J. W. Schroeder, and D. E. Bidell

" Explosive Forming Speeds In-place Retubing of Feedwater Heaters" Power, September 1978, p. 84

11. Foster Wheeler Development Corporation TMI-l Steam Generators Repair Qualification Program for Kinetic Tube Expansion:

1. q'r h U.,iuwFranklin a e in r,Researc.h Center

m

• .e TER-C5506-311/312/313 Document No. 5054-QP-1, Rev. 1 Test Procedure No. 5054-QT-1, Rev.1, Kinetic Expansion General Requirements Test Procedure No. 5054-QT-2, R,ev. 1, Tube Tensile Tests Test Procedure No. 5054-QT-3, Rev. 2, Kinetic Expansion of Tubes in Tube Blocks Test Procedure No. 5054-QT-4, Rev. O, Kinetic Expansion Proof Load Test Test Procedure No. 5054-QT-5, Rev.1, Kinetic Expansion Thermal Cycle Conditioning Test Procedure No. 5054-QT-6, Rev. O, Kinetic Expansion Hydrostatic Leak

{ Testing i

Test Procedure No. 5054-QT-9, Rev.1, Kinetic Expansion Tube Pullout Tests Test Procedure No. 5054-QT-10, Rev. O, Kinetic Expansion Induced Strain Tests 18

12. Babcock & Wilcox 10 Tube Leak and Load Test Fixture B&W Drawing No. 1134899 D-05 13 . Babcock & Wilcox Test Blocks for Induced Strain, Residual Stress, and Annulus Effects l B&W Drawing No. 1134900 A-02 May 21, 1982

14. Babcock & Wilcox Corroded Crevice Mock-up Assembly B&W Drawing No. 1134950 D-01 15 . GPU Nuclear GPUN-TDR-007, BAW-1760, "'IMI-l Once Through Steam Generator Repair:

Kinetic Expansion Technical Report" November 1982

16. Babcock & Wilcox B&W-10146 Generic Topical Report

" Determination of Minimum Required Tube Wall Thickness for 177-FA l

Once-Through Steam Generator" l October 1980

17. Three Mile Island Unit 1 - Once Through Steam Generator Repair Kinetic Expansion Technical Report PROPRIETARY November 1, 1982 - Draft l

.% gI) ."A Frankhn Research Center A Cwesen of The Frenahn W l

l

t TER-C5506-311/312/313

18. Babcock & Wilcox B&W Drawing No. 131102 E, Rev.12

19. Babcock & Wilcox B&W Drawing No. 131112 E, Rev.12

20. R. Meyer, Explosives verlag Chemic, Weinheim, New York 1977

21. C. Davey, L. Leonard, T. Shook, and R. Marshall FRC Trip Report - Mount Vernon B&W Plant Franklin Research Center August 15, 1982

22. Babcock & Wilcox B&W Functional Specification No. CS (F)-3-33 March 6,1969

23. Babcock & Wilcox B&W-10002, Topical Report "Once-Through Steam Generator Research and Development Report" August 1969, Para. 6.2 g'J.h Frankhn Research Center A Cbviesen af The Freness.We w

APPENDIX A DOCUMENTS RECEIVED A

. . . . Franklin Research Center A Division of The Franklin Institute The Ben 3erran Frankhn Parkway. PMa . Pa 19103(215)448 1000

TER-C550 6-311/312/313 APPENDIX A DOCUMENTS RECEIVED FOR C5506, ASSIGNMENT 10

1. M. J. Graham Letter to T. A. Shook, FRC.

Subject:

Transmittal of TMI-l CTSG Specs GPU Nuclear , 02-Jul-82 E&L: 4434

2. D. D. Mokris Equipment Specification for Once Through Steam Generator Babcock & Wilcox, 08-May-70 CS-3-33 ,

3. R. E. Ham General Functional Specification for Reactor Coolant System Components Babcock & Wilcox,15-Jul-70 CS (F) 3-92/NSS-5 .

4. R. E. Ham Functional Specification for Steam Generators Babcock & Wilcox,15-May-70 CS (F)-3-33/NSS-5

5. J. W. Merchent Functional Specification for Steam Generators Babcock & Wilcox, 06-Mar-69 CS(F)-3-33

6. Steam Generator Operation With Less Than Four Reactor Coolant Pumps

• Babcock & Wilcox, 06-Mar-69 CS (F)-3-33, App.1

7. C. E. McCracken Memo to R. Jacobs.

Subject:

Reports Received from GPUN During the June 22, 1982 Meeting with GPUN

^

USNBC, 25-Jun-82

8. TMI-l Steam Generator Status - ACRS Subcommittee GPU Nuclear, 07-Jun-82

9. N. C. Kazanas Technical Data Report: TMI-l CTSG Recovery GPU Nuclear, 14-Jun-82 TDR No. 343 i

i nklin Research Center A Daemun af The Fmpeen m

TER-C5506-311/312/313

10. J. D. Jones, R. L. Jones, and J. S. Olszewski

. Technical Data Report: TMI-l OrSG Failure Analysis Report .

DRAFT ONLY - NOT FOR RELEASE GPU Nuclear TDR No. 341 i

j

11. Specification: OrSG Tube Repair; PRELIMINARY i

GPU Nuclear, 11-Jun-82 i 1101-22-006 12 . N. C. Kazanas and G. E. Rhedrick TMI-l Steam Generator Recovery Program; Task 7: Primary System Review, Reactor Coolant System Inspections and Requalification.

Appendix C: Examination Results GPU Nuclear, 00- -82

13. R. Jacobs Summary of Meetirg with GPUN on June 28 and 29,1982 Concerning GPUN's Steam Generator Recovery Program; Three Mile Island, Unit No. 1 USNRC, 14-Jul-82

14. R. J. Baker Letter to D. G. Slear, GPU Nuclear.

Subject:

Transmittal of B & W Informal Review of Franklin Procedures Babcock & Wilcox, 23-Aug-82 GPUN-82-224 15 . T. J. Morgan QA Data Package: 12" Single Hole Tubesheet Mockup Induced Strain Test / Annulus Effect Test Babcock & Wilcox, 25-Aug-82 e 23-1135711-00

16. T. J. Morgan QA Data Package: 10-Hole Tubesheet Hockup with Low and High Strength Shott and Long Tube Pieces Babcock & Wilcock, 18-Aug-82 23-1135713-00 17 . TMI-l Steam Generators Repair Qualification Program for Kinetic Tube Expansion: Qualification Plan Foster Wheeler Development Corp., 09-Aug-82 50 54-QP-1, Re7. 1 9

18. TMI-l Steam Generators Repair Qualification Program for Kinetic Tube Expansion: Kinetic Expansion General Requirements Foster Wheeler Development Corp., 09-Aug-82 SC 5 4-QT-1, Rev . 1 A-2 blFranklin 4} Research Center A Desumen of The Pm m

a. ..

TER-C5506-311/312/313 f

19. TMI-l Steam Generators Repair Qualification Program for Kinetic Tube Expansion: Tube Tensile Tests Foster Wheeler Development Corp. , 09-Aug-82 5054-QT-2, Rev. 1

20. TMI-l Steam Generators Repair Qualification Program for Kinetic Tube Expansion: Kinetic Expansion of Tubes in Tube Blocks Foster Wheeler Develcpment Corp., 09-Aug-82 5054-QT-3, Rev. 2

21. TMI-1 Steam Generators Repair Qualification Program for Kinetic Tube Expansion: Kinetic Expansion Procf Load Test Foster Wheeler Development Corp. ,16-Jul-82 5054-QT-4

22. TMI-l Steam Generators Repair Qualification Program for Kinetic Tube Expansion: Kinetic Expansion Thermal Cycle Conditioning Foster Wheeler Development Corp. ,17-Aug-82 5054-QT-5, Rev. 1

23. TMI-1 Steam Generators Repair Qualification Program for Kinetic Tube Expansion: Kinetic Expansion Hydrostatic Leak Testing Foster Wheeler Development Corp. ,17-Aug-82 5054-QT-6

24. TMI-l Steam Generators Repair Qualification Program for Kinetic Tube Expansion: Kinetic Expansion of Tubes Into Tube Blocks for Franklin Institute Evaluation Foster Wheeler Development Corp. ,12-Aug-82 5054-QT-8

• 25. Evaluation of Tube samples from TMI-l Babcock & Wilcox, 00- -82 77-1135317

26. J. F. Pearson Letter to D. G. Slear, GPU Nuclear.

Subject:

Overall Expansion Length for Tube Repair at TMI-l Babcock & Wilcox, 09 Jul-82 GPUN-82-177, Propria:ary

27. Once-Through Steam Generator Research and Development Report Babcock & Wilcox, 00-Aug-69 BAW-10002, Proprietary

28. Once-Through Steam Generator Research and Development Report Supplement 1 Babcock & Wilcox, 00-Jun-70 BAW-10002, Supp. 1, Proprietary nk!!n Research Center A Dnemen of The Fmeen kusmae l

.. ,- )

i l

l TER-C5506-311/312/313 1

29. Determination of Minimum Required Tube Wall Thickness for 177-FA 1 j once-Through Steam Generators Babcock & Wilcox, 00-Oct-80 BAW-10146

30. C. McCracken Memo to V. Benaroya.

Subject:

Status Update for TMI No. 1 Steam 1 Generator Repairs f USNRC , 10-Se p-82

31. C. V. Dadd Memo to R. W. McClug. Subjects Travel to Harrisburg, PA, August 8-9, 1982 to Discuss the Eddy-Current Inspection of Three Mile Island Unit  !

1 Steam Generators Oak Ridge National Laboratory,17-Aug-82 i

32. D. D. haedonald Letter to V. Benaroya, NBC.

Subject:

Review of B&W Document No.

77-1135317, "Evaluacion of Tube Samples from TMI-l 30-Aug-82

33. TMI-l Steam Generators Repair Qualification Program for Kinetic Tube Expansion: Kinetic Expansion Tube Pullout Tests Foster Wheeler Development Corp. , 03-Sep-82 5054-QT-9

34. TMI-1 Steam Generators Preliminary Tests for Kinetic Tube Expansion:

( Residual Stress Measurement of Test Blocks at Pennsylvania State l

University Foster Wheeler Development Corp., 03-Sep-82 l 5054-PT-2, Rev. 1

35. Specification: TMI-l OTSG Tube Repair GPU Nuclear, 10-Aug-82 ,

SP 1101-22-006, Rev.

36. R. Marshall Letter to T. A. Shook, FRC. Subj ect: Transmittal of Comments Regarding Kinetic Expansicn Demonstration of August 5,1982 Ebasco Services Inc., 24-Sep-82

37. TMI-l Steam Generators Preliminary Tests for Kinetic Tube Expansion:

Residual Stress Measurement of Test Blocks at Pennsylvania State University, Foster Wheeler Development Corp. ,16-Sep-82 5054-PT-2, Rev. 2

38. J. H. Taylor Affidavit Concerning the Designation of Proprietary Material Babcock & Wilcox, 22-Sep-82

_nklin Resea_rch_

_ Center

TER-C550 6-311/312/313

39. TMI-l Steam Generators Repair Qualification Program for Kinetic Tube Expansion: Kinetic Expansion Tube Pullout Tests Foster Wheeler Development Corp. , 22-Sep-82 5054-QT-9, Rev. 1

40. TMI-l Steam Generators Repair Qualification Program for Kinetic Tube Expansion: Kinetic Expansion Induced Strain Test Foster Wheeler Development Corp. ,17-Sep-82 5054-QT-10 ,

41. TMI-l Steam Generators Repair Qualification Program for Kinetic Tube Expansion: Kinetic Expansion Corroded Crevice Effects Test Foster Wheeler Development Corp., 24-Sep-82 5054-QT-ll

42. TMI-l Steam Generators Repair Qualification Program for Kinetic Tube Expansion: Kinetic Expansion of Westinghouse Blocks Foster Wheeler Development Corp. , 24-Sep-82 5054-QT-12

43. H. D. Hukill Letter to J. F. Stolz, NBC.

Subject:

Transmittal of TMI-l OTSG Repair Drawings, Nos. 1311022, Rev.12 and 131112E, Rev. 12 (Attached)

GPU Nuclear Corp. , 25-Oct-82 5211-82-252, Proprietary

44. E. J. Wagner et al.

Interim Report of Third Party Review of Three Mile Island, Unit 1, Steam Generator Repair 27-Sept-82

45. D. L. Baty Examination of TMI-l Reactor Vessel O-Ring and CRDM Closure Insert - Final Report Babcock & Wilcox, 03-Jun-82 RDD:83:5490/5494

46. W. A. McInteer and G. M. Bain TMI-l Recovery - RNS Retainer Examination Babcock & Wilcox, 20-May-82 RDD:83:5489:01

47. A. K. Agrawal, W. M. Stiegelmeyer, and W. E. Berry Final Report on Failure Analysis of Inconel 600 Tubes from OTSG A and B of Three Mile Island Unit 1 Battelle Columbus Laboratory, 30-Jun-82 nklin Research Center A Dnemen of The Fouruen humans

48. T. J. Morgan QA Data Package 10-Hole Tubesheet Mockup with Low and High Strength Short and Long Tube Pieces Babcock & Wilcox, 29-Jul-82 23-1132760-00

49. C. McCracken Memo to V. Benaroya.

Subject:

TMI-l CISG Status Update USNBC, 18-Nov-82

50. C. V. Dodd Memo to R. W. McClung.

Subject:

Travel to Bethesda, Md.,

October 18-19, 1982, for Meeting on Repair of Three Mile Island Unit 1 Steam Generator Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 27-Oct-82 1027-46-82

51. D. D. Macdonald Letter to V. Benaroya, NBC.

Subject:

Review of GPU Nuclear Submissions on TMI-l OrSGs to NBC, October 18-19,1982, and of Battelle Columbus Final Report on Inconel 600 Tubes 23-Oct-82

52. T. M. Moran Assessment of TMI-l Plant Safety for Return to Service Af ter Steam Generator Repair GPU Nuclear, 07-Dec-82 Topical Report 008, Rev.1

53. J. P. Moore et al.

Three Mile Island Unit 1 Once-Through Steam Generator Repair Kinetic Expansion Technical Report Babcock & Wilcox, 00-Nov-82 GPUN-TDR-007, Proprietary c

54. P. E. Troy ,

Letter to T. Shock, FBC.

Subject:

TMI-l Kinetic Expansion Repair Program; Procedures Approvals Babcock & Wilcox, 07-Sep-82

55. TMI-l CISG Repair Process Description / Qualification GPU Nuclear,15-Sep-82

56. P. E. Troy Letter to T. Shook, FBC.

Subject:

TMI-l Kinetic Expansion Repair Program Residual Stress Measurements Procedure Babcock & Wilcox, 22-Sep-82 I

nklin Research Center A Oheeson of The Fm kuunne

__ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ ._ _ _ ._ _ _..___________..______o

3

57. TMI-l Steam Generator Repair Safety Evaluation GPU Nuclear, 30-Sep-82

• SE 120012-006, Proprietary

58. v. Benaroya Memo to J. Stolz.

Subject:

Evaluation of TMI-l Plant Safety Subsequent to Recovery from OTSG Corrosion Problems USNIC, 28-Jan-83

59. J. F. Stolz Letter to H. D. Hukill, GPU Nuclear.

Subject:

Assessment of TMI-l Plant Safety for Return to Service After Steam Generator Repair.

Request for Additional Information.

USNIC, 07-Feb-83 '

60. C. McCraken Memo to L. Frank, S. Kirslis, J. Rajan, D. Sellers, P. Wu.

Subject:

Preparation of TMI-l SER for Restart Subsequent to the OTSG Repairs USNIC , 08-Mar-83 i

O A-7 j b Franklin

^ n==n or The FrResearch n.nn in. . Ce.nter i

, . - . . ,,,--..,..--.,_--,n---. , - - , , , - , _ . , - . , - , , . - .,--w, , . - , , . , . - , . . .

I APPENDIX B w

MEETINGS ATTENDED O

O Franklin Research Center

~

. . J.

A Division of The Franklin Institute The Bengrrun Frannhn Parkwev Phila , Pa. 19103(215)448 1000

TER-C550 6-311/312/313 APPENDIX B - Meetings Attended Date Site Purpos e_

June 11, 1982 Bethesda, MD Finalize scope of work on Assignment 10 June 22 Livingston, E FW presentation of technical details of explosive process June 28, 29 Bethesda, MD GPUN presentation of background details of OrSG failure analysis July 21 Livingston, E Qualification program schedule August 5 Mt. Vernon, IN Multiple tube expansion demonstration; -

meeting with consultant August 12,13 Livingston, E Witness expansion of 10-tube block assembly August 20 Lynchburg, VA Discuss details of FRC RAI August 26 Livingston, E Witness Licensee tests September 10 Philadelphia, PA FW/BW witness of 10-tube block expansion September 15 Bethesda, MD GPUN presentation on repair process October 18 Bethesda, MD Finalize Licensee plans October 28 Harrisburg , PA Witness production tube expansion B-1 nklin Research Center A Chomson of The Framen humame

APPENDIX C -

as==

STATEMENT OF CONSULTANT O

A'. ltFranklin Research Cent A Division of The Franklin Institute i The Benjarrun Frankhn Parkway, Ptula. Pa. 19103 (215)448 1000

ATTACHMENT .

TRIP REPORT KINETIC EXPANSION DEMONSTRATION ,

MT VERNON, INDIANA

, AUGUST 5, 1982 ,

The kinetic expansion demonstration performed by Foster Wheeler and B 6 W in the B C W Mt Vernon plant.

As we are Ell aware, the kinetic technique for expansion of tubes in steam generators is a very acceptable one that has been used by suppliers for the last twenty (20) years. There is no question that this technique is a very acceptable one for Three Mile Island steam generator, however, I cannot over stress the importance of using .the right variables in this program.

Some of the more important considerations are:

1) The air gap between the candle and the tube prior to the expansion. Large air gaps will tend to fragment the candle.

It was noted in this demonstration that a large number of candles were fragmented which adds to the time required in high radiation levels for clean up.

2) It is important to have knowledge to the hardness factor range of the tubes in a unit since this is directly related to the required force for proper expansion:

3) To minimize the anount of candle rupture there have been some techniques used in the past that may be considered, such as:

bringing the candle temperature down by refrigeration into the 40-45 degree range prior to installation. Again, the main concern being the amount of time it would take for the cleaning of the unit.

C-2

lb'plf EBASCO SERVICES INCORPORATED  ; /Jv; P O. Box 1189. Elma. WA 98541 (205)482 4428 Telecco er (206)482-5111/5120 September M1032 --

DiSTT80T!GN

- - -TO } i:UT :I DATE l

SPC  !

, I

! l Mr T A Shook ,

f j

' i Franklin Research Center ' l A Division of Franklin Institute ,6 - -

20th and Race Streets  ! '9J NO:

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 " 2 g.  ;,2 C/, HER:

Dear Mr Shook:

Attached for your review are my comments regarding the Kinetic Expansion Demonstration at Mt Vernon, Indiana on August 5, 1982.

Should you have any questions concerning the information contained in the attachment, please feel free to contac+, me at the above referenced address.

Very truly yours,

,  ! R Marshall

. RM:jkb:hs Attachment cc: J E Ramondo - NY0 .

...a g ' ...:, tN ...,

...>y -

of

\*:'.:. wo # o i

C-1 Q-U

ATTACHMENT PAGE ,

It has been the writer's experience using this expansion technique that, upon the performance of a hydro on completion of the program, there will be numerous slight tube weepage. This weepage will disappear when the unit is subjected to a hot flow of water thr,ough the secondary side which will develop an iron oxide in the annulus between the tube and the tube sheet. Much research in this area has been done by the industry and this reaction has been verified.

Because of the high radiation levels in the units and the potential airborne contamination that wil,1 develop during this program, I cannot over stress the importance of the development in techniques to shorten the exposure time in the placement, removal and cleanup.

Robert Marshall l

l C-3

APPENDIX D EE :

TEST PROCEDURES l

O

. . . . Franklin Research Center A Division of The Franklin Institute The Benprmn Franen Parkway. Phda.. Pa 19103 (215) 448 t 000

4 * ..

TASK N1 - RECEIVING, INSPECTION, AND MARKING OF SPECIMENS l.1 GENERAL All materials (tubes and tube blocks) received will be subjected to the following procedure:

-Inspect for conformance of configuration of the 10-tube blocks in accordance with B&W Dwg. ll34899D, Rev. 4 (Figure 1.0) and of the one-tube blocks in accordance with B&W Dwg. 1134900A (Figure 1.1).

-Visually inspect and confirm oxide coatings on tube holes and the tubes, and note presence of any contaminants and rust. Do not disturb oxide coatings except to measure tube dimensions outside of test region.

-Visually inspect for identification per B&W certificates to verify traceability and for damage, including evidence that moisture protection had not been maintained during shipment.

-Recora inspection acceptance or discrepancy on test log sheet.

-Review certificates, test reports, etc. received for each item received as follows and as applicable:

(a) Stress Relieve Treatment (b) Oxide Coatings Parameters t , (c) Material Test Reports (d) Dimensional Data Report I (e) Certificates of Conformance

-Verify markings of acceptable items for maintaining traceability to B&W markings, heat numbers etc.

-Test blocks shall be stored to prevent oxide coatings deterioration by placing in an oven or in a plastic bag with B&W-supplied desiccant. Prevent contact of desiccant with oxide surface.

-Items will be allowed to come to ambient temperature prior to test.

1.2 TUBES ASME. SB-163 Inconel 600 tubes (0.625-in OD x 0.034-in minimum thickness), af ter stress relieving and with surface conditioning simulating oxidation conditions at TMI-l steam generator upper D-1 nklin Research Center A Damon af The Fsusuen humane

- . . . - - . - , . - - -. - . . - . - , . - ,,- - - - . - - - - , - - . - . . . .,_..-s.--

THE BABCOCK & WILCCX COMPANY powet oswa Anow oaour

=tvisic= s l

• R"**

.  ! ,t --- t .i i w ucceo e .:,~...

w sn : y <

i / t

e. 4 4 1

I !.

!!! l.143I.OO5 O.C.

'I SCR\BE UME To \MC\c.A it. .

t

.ji

_ A. Pob\7\ou OF MEAbuREMEM%

3

j 799 %cTW FM%

i8 "i I ____ __ ____ _

i 11 - -

j

. i

__]___ iss

\

I et It -

A. 2

,i ! : 3 21

!! I @ A .010 tii 18' T E S"T" A. S I QUAN.

sl[

'{i RE%\cuA\. 57RES% rat VS2. .(44%.001 ,

8

\MQuCEO 5"TRA\M \t!MO .(,64 0.0 c:L 5 llll:: \NDuCF O STRMM L7 7. '/(r, ,r.3C .oot: 5 I:! -

'":! MA*TER\AL.*. SA,508 C\ 7.t.

i.i li:

• i8 IIi i!

i. t .

1.:

. i I .I i

I -. E AL = E-D-9 E

• * : 5. * * % I;f. W r e. 1MC\)CEO 57RA.\M

....., ..- 9. w J . / m,/A TEST McCW\.1P ****' t \34.900 l a 1 Figure 1.1. Induced Strain Test Mock-up D-3 d0i Franklin Research Center A Dueson of The Fransen trusade

= .

l TASK N1 - RECEIVING, INSPECTICN, AND MARKING OF SPECIMENS tubesheet crevice, will be supplied by Babcock & Wilcox. It is

, essential that this oxide condition at tube CD in the region to be 4 expanded remain undisturbed during all pre-expansion steps. Tubes may be either high . yield or low yield specimens. Each tube shall be identified as to whether it is a high yield or low yield specimen. Tubes shall be marked with "H" for high yield and "L" for low yield. Tube yield strength data obtainea from tube tensile tests (Procedure No. 5054-QT-2) will be recorded on data sheets when available.

1.3 10-TUBE TEST BLOCKS Stress-relieved ASME SA-508 CL. 2 test blocks (12 in thick) with 10 gun-drilled holes per block will be used. Details of the assembly are seen on Figure 1.0. The holes will be drilled to a triangular

. pitch of 0.875 in. The nominal hole diameter will be 0.644 in.

The hole surface will be conditioned to simulate oxidation conditions at TMI-1 steam generator upper tubesheet crevice. It is essential that this oxide condition remain undisturbed during all pre-expansion steps. The block OD will be sized to accommodate a standard Schedule 160 pipe cap for sealing during leak testing.

Two test blocks with the above description will be supplied by B&W

. and protected from moisture during shipment. One test block will be supplied completely assembled with tubes expanded. The other test block will be supplied with tube (part 7) rolled in place with remainder of assembly by FRC.

o .

Care must be taken while handling the blocks to prevent disturbing the oxide conditioning in ,the block holes in the region to be expanded.

. 1.4 ONE-TUBE BLOCKS Stress-relieved ASME SA-508 .CL. 2 test blocks (12 in thick) with a j gun-drilled hole will be used. See Figure 1.1 for schematic. The j hole surface will be conditioned to simulate oxidation conditions at TMI-1 steam generator upper tubesheet crevice. It is essential daat this oxi.de condition in the holes in the regions to be 1

D-4 ranklin Resear

~.~ ch. Center

a. ..

TASK N1 - RECEIVING, INSPECTION, AND MARKING OF SPECIMENS expanded remain undisturbed during all expansion steps. Six test blocks with the abovt description will be supplied,by B&W and protected from moisture during shipment.

1.5 POLYETHYLENE INSERTS Low-density polyethlene pentrothene NA 301, polyethylene resin, melt index 1.2, censity 0.917 inserts will be procured from the

• Thielex Plastic Corporation. They will have a configuration shown

- in Figure 1.2a. Dimensions for inserts will be inspected to the requirements of Figure 1.2a.

1.6 DETONATION CORD Detonation material for the kinetic expansion will be ,

purchased from the Ensign Bickford Company. _ __

Grain, size cerr.ifications will be filed in the data log sheet. The cord will be analyzed for grains /f t every 50 f t and recorded in the data log book. Detonation cord will be stored in an isolated magazine area.

1.7 Six (6) test specimens No. 3 shall be supplied. They shall be marked 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D, 3E, and 3F. The Licensee shall supply ,

tube block shall be marked by etching on the outside surface at no more than 1 in from end of tube block. Marked end shall be considered the secondary and of the tube block. The tubes shall be marked by etching on the outside surface at no more than 1 in from end of tube. Marked end shall be the secondary end of the tube.

Tubes 3A, 3B, and 3C are to be high yield tubes. Tubes 3D, 3E, and 3F are to be low yield tubes.

1.8 Keep the test specimens 3C and 3F unassembled in case additional tests need to be performeo.

1.9 Take the assembled tube /tubesheet and, with reference to Dwg.

1134899D, Rev. 4 (Figure 1.0), mark "F1" on test specimen parts No.

2, No. 3, No. 5 and No. 6: subsequently, unscrew part No. 3 and mark the tubes at the primary side from 1 to 10 as show in Figure 9

D-5 ranklin Research Center A DMmen af The Frauen bushes

- .-.-__,w..-.- , . _ . , _ _ _ , , - . - . . . _

i l

l i

l TASK N1 - RECEIVING, INSPECTION, AND MARKING OF SPECIMENS 1.2b. Mark the primary side with "P" located above tube 2 as shown in Figure 1.2b.

For reference, row 1 consists of tubes 1, 2, and 3, row 2 consists of tubes 4, 5, 6, and 7, and row 3 consists of tubes 8, 9, and 10.

1.10 Unscrew part No. 5,and mark the secondary side with "S" located above tube 2, and mark the tubes at the secondary side from 1 to 10 corresponding to the numbers at the primary side as shown in Figure 1.2c.

1.11 Take the unassembled tube /tubesheet components and, with reference to Dwg. Il34899D, Rev. 4 (Figure 1.0), mark "F2" on the parts No.

2, No. 3, No. 5, and No. 6.

1.12 Identify the location of tube hole 2 on the primary side, reference

end with tubes rolled in place, and location of high yield and low yield tubes, part No. 7, and mark the primary side of part No. 2 with "P" located above tube hole 2 as shown in Figure 1.2b. Mark all holes at the primary side from 1 to 10 as shown in Figure 1.2b.

• 1.13 Mark the secondary side with "S" located above tube hole 2 and mark the tube hole at the secondary side from 1 to 10 corresponding to the numbers at the primary side as shown in Figure 1.2c.

4 1.14 Select the high yield and low yield tube specimens (part No. 8) for

~

proper assembly in accordance with the tube specifications shown in Figures 1.2b and 1.2c. Mark the tubes,from 1 to 10 for proper assembly with tube holes of part No. 2. The tubes shall be marked by etching on the outside surface at no more than 1/2 in from end i

of tube. Marked cnd shall be considered secondary side of tube.

(

i l

A Deveen of The Frenten Insehme l

l

s l

l

)

)

)

r i

I D-9 4000U Frankiin Research Center A Dmenon of The Fransen kemiute

TASK N2 - MEASUREMENTS OF TEST COMPONENTS 2.1 Prior to expansion, test specimens must be stored in an oven or in a plastic bag with B&W-supplied desiccant to prevent oxide coatings deterioration. Prevent contact of desiccant with oxide surface.

Take the assembled test specimen "F-1" and measure the inside 2.2 diameter of each tube at 1, 2-1/8, and 3-1/4 in from the primary face of the tube block. Record data.

2.3 Before assembly of each single tube block (see Figure 1.1) and corresponding tube, measure the length of the tube and tube block and measure the outside and inside diameters at 1 in, 2-1/8 in, and 3-1/4 in from the primary (unmarked) end of both tube and tube block. Care must be taken to avoid disturbing the oxide conditioning in the tube block hole and on the tube outside diameter in the region to be expanded. Take dimensions at 90* to strain gage location (reference paragraph 3.2) af ter strain gages are installed.

2.4 Before explosive expansion of test specimen "E-2," measure the inside diameters of each rolled tube or tuba hole at 1 in, 2-1/8 in, and 3-1/4 in from the primary face of the 10-tube block. Measure the outside diameter and inside diameter at 1/8 and 1-1/2 in from the expansion (unmarked) end of each tube. Care must be taken to

- avoid disturbing the oxide conditioning in the tube block hole and on the tube outside diameter in the region to be expanded.

O nklin Research Center A Denman of The Frannen inesame

.---a

)

I .

TASK N3 - INSTALLATION OF STRAIN GAGES FOR SINGLE TUBE BLOCKS 3.1 Prior to expansion, test specimens must be stored in an oven or plastic bag with B&W-supplied desiccant to prevent oxide coatings deterioration. Prevent contact of desiccant with oxide surfaces.

3.2 Take single tubesheet specimens marked 3A and 3D and, before expansion, install two element rosette 90* planar strain gages along two axial lines,180' apart, on the outside surface of each tubesheet. Three strain gages are to be located on each axial line at 1 in, 3-1/4 in, and 5-1/2 in from the primary end.of the

• tubesheet. Axial lines shall be referenced A and B and readings shall be labeled 1A, 3-1/4A, 5-1/2A, 1B, 3-1/4B, and 5-1/2B. All ,

strain gages shall be zeroed and connected to a magnetic recorder for recording of strain during explosive expansion.

i G

l i

nklin Research Center A Deuunan of The Fromen humane

TASK N4 - EXPLOSIVE EXPANSION OF SINGLE TUBE MOCKUPS Install tube section for specimen 3C into corresponding single tube block so that the primary tube end is flush with the primary face of the block.

Maintain the tube and block temperature during these and subsequent operations between 60*F and 100*F.

Insert detonation cord lengths into each plastic so that the tapered end is flush with ,the detonating cord. Heat-fuse cord with its plastic on this end. ,

At the expansion site, __

into the test hole from the primary face for first step of expansion. Tape the end of the cord-plastic assembly and the tail cord together. Then tape the detonating cap to the end of the " tail" cord. Flastic insert shall rest on the tube end.

i l

Remove spent items and clean the test specimen of deposit lef t by explosion.

Install tube sections for specimen 3F into corresponding single tube block so that the primary tube end is flush with the primary face of the block.

nklin Research Center A Denson of The Fransen wme

TASK N4 - EXPLOSIVE EXPANSION OF SINGLE TUBE MOCKUPS

~

Expand tube /tubesheet 3F in accordance with paragraphs 4.2 through 4.10.

Install tube section for specimen 3A into corresponding single tube block so that the primary tube end is flush with the primary f ace of the block.

Maintain the tube and block temperature during these and subsequent operations between 60*F and 100*F.

Insert detonating cord lengths into each plastic so that the tapered end is flush with the detonating cord. Heat-fuse cord with its plastic on this end.

At the expansion site, connect ta y recorder for recording of strain readings during explosion expansion (reference paragraph 3.2 of tas': N3).

Remove spent items and measure and record the outside diameter and the length of the tube block and the inside diameter and length of ,

the tube. Outside and inside diameters shall be taken at the three strain gage sections, 90* to strain gage locations, referenced at 1 in, 2-1/8 in, and 3-1/4 in from primary face of test block.

bnklin Research Center A Dumen of The Fransen bisonne

TASK N4 - EXPLOSIVE EXPANSION OF SINGLE TUBE MOCKUPS Remove the strain gages and clean the test specimen of adhesive used for strain gages, debris, and deposita lef t by explosions.

Install tube sections for specimen 3D into corresponding single

- tube block so that the primary tube end is flush with the primary face of the block and explosively expand specimen 3D using the same procedure as for specimen 3A given in paragraphs 4.14 through 4.23.

Remove the strain gages and clean the test specimen 3D cf adhesive used for strain gages, debris, and deposits left by explosions.

o 9

h e

~ ~ _anklin Rese rch.

. Center

TASK N5 - BUBBLE TEST FOR SINGLE TUBE /TUBESHEET 5.1 For the test specimens 3A, 3C, 3D, and 3F, perform a secondary-to-primary-side bubble test, using 125 1 1,0 psi nitrogen. The test shall be made at 70*F 115'F.

5.2 Connect N2 bottle with pressure regulator, shutoff valve, and precision pressure gage -(range O to 200 psi) at the extended tube end (secondary side) .

5.3 Immerse the entire test setup in a container filled with distilled water.

5.4 Apply 125-psi pressure using N2 bottle and pressure regulator at the secondary side of the tubesheet, and check for leakage in the

• test setup.

5.5 If there is no leakage between the above parts and the pressure at the secondary side is steady and equal to 125 psi, start the bubble test: close the shutoff valve and start the clock at the same times record the pressure versus time until the pressure falls to 10 psi.

I NOTE: Any leakage at gage, valve, or tubesheet connection is unacceptable since it will give a false reading.

5.6 Note size, location, and rate of air bubbles if any.

5.7 Terminate test after 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

(Test deleted) t 1

i l

l l

i j D-15 nklin Research Center A Dommen af The Fransen humane l

i

. _ . . , . . . . . . . ..-..._,.-__m

~

• TASK N6 - PULLOUT AND AXIAL LOAD TEST FOR SINGLE TUBE /TUBESHEET 6.1 Remove excess length of tube (tubesheet assembly 3C) by cutting at approximately 2 in from secondary face of tubesheet.

6.2 Weld tube plug in secondary end of tube.

6.3 Measure extension of tube from the secondary face. Measure from tubesheet face to plug face.

6.4 Place tube /tubesheet assembly into Instron testing machine using fixtures as shown in Figure 6.0a.

6.5 Using Instron machine, perform the following axial load cycling test at ambient temperature of 70*F j 10*F:

a. 100 cycles 780 lb compression to 1110 lb tension

b. 180 cycles 635 lb compression to 175 lb tension

c. 6040 cycles 510 lb compression to 125 lb compression The specified cycles should be applied at not more than 1 Hz frequency. The tolerance on all cycling forces should be j 5 lb.

The tube subjected to the cyclic loads should be aligned with the center line of the actuator applying the load. Record all loading.

6.6 Remove tube /tubesheet and axial load fixtures from testing machine.

6.7 Measure extension of tube from secondary face. . Measure from tubesheet face to plug face.

6.8 Place tube /tubesheet into testing machine for pullout (pushout) test using fixtures as shown in Figure 6.0.

6.9 Place grit into each tube to a level within 1/4 in of the secondary tubesheet face and install pushrod on top of grit.

6.10 Apply load gradually, approximately 10 lb/sec. Record load and tube movement relative to tubesheet at both primary and secondary faces. Visually monitor tube behavior. Continue' test until relative movement at primary end is at least 0.030 in. Accuracy of l

rclative lisplacement measurement should be + 0.0001 in.

6.11 Remove tube /t abesheet and pullout fixture from test machine.

1 1

A Osumen of The Fransen irumouse

e I

l-f I

i M

Obhu Franklin Research Center

^%orrher% %

TASK N6 - PULLOUT AND AXIAL LOAD TEST FOR SINGLE TUBE /TUBESHEET 6.12 Measure extension of tube from secondary face. Measure from tubesheet face to plug face.

6.13 Repeat procedure of paragraphs 6.1 through 6.12 for tube /tubesheet l assembly 3F.

(Test deleted)

D-18 000 Franidin Research Center A Censson at The Fransen m

TASK N7 - MICROGRAPHY 7.1 Cut the tube /tubesheet assemblies 3A and 3D at 1 in, 3-1/4 in, and 5-1/2 in from the primary face of the tubesheet (reference Figure 7.0). Care should be taken to avoid excessive roughing of the surface or inducing of strain in the tube or tubesheet during saw cutting.

7.2 Prepare the primary face (reference surface in Figure 7.0 marked IP) of the 1 in to 3-1/4 in block and both faces of the 3-1/4 in to 5-1/2 in block (reference surfaces in Figure 7.0 marked 3-1/4P and 5-1/2S) for micrography by polishing these surfaces.

7.3 Perform micrography of the polished faces, references IP, 3-1/4P, and 5-1/2S.

7.4 Etch faces IP, 3-1/4P, and 5-1/2S and perform micrography of these polished and etched faces.

(Test Deleted)

D-19 Oh ranklin Research Center A Dmmon of The Fe inessues

TASK N8 - RESIDUAL STPESSES 8.1 Af ter micrography is completed, install three (3) double strain gages on each of the polished and etched faces (reference surfaces in Figure 7.0 marked IP, 3-1/4P, and 5-1/2S). Strain gages are to be mounted as close as possible to the inside diameter of the tubesheet at 120* intervals about tubesheet centerline.

8.2 Zero all strain gages and subsequently machine inside tubes so that they can be collapsed and removed. Remove inside tubes and record strain gage readings.

(Test deleted) e l

l D-20 nklin Research Center A DMesen af The Fransen Insense <

TASK N10 - EXPLOSIVE EXPANSION OF SPECIMEN "F-2" 10.1 Install the 10 tubes (part No. 8, Dwg. ll34899D, Rev. 4, Pigure 1.0) from the secondary side, matching the numbers on the tubes with the numbers of the holes in the tubesheet and butting unmarked (primary) end of each tube (part No. 8) against rolled tube (part No. 7). All 10 tubes are to be in place during explosive expansion of any one tube. Secure in place without staking.

10.2 Maintain the tubes and block temperature during these and subsequent operations between 60*F and 100*F.

t l

t

{

l 10.5 Cut detonation cord lengths for each tube expansion equal to the

- ~

length of expansion 10.6 Insert detonating cord lengths into each plastic so that the tapered end is flush with the detonating cord. Heat-fuse cord l

nklin Research Center A Common of The Fremen Insense l

~~

TASK N9 - ROLL EXPANSION OF SPECIMEN 2 9.1 Install the 10 tubes (part No. 7 in Dwg. Il34899D, Rev. 4, Figure 1.0) from the primary side, one by one, matching the numbers of the tube with the numbers of the holes. The tube should project 3/16 +

1/64 in above the primary side of the tubesheet. Each tube shall be roll expanded at the primary end to 55 in-lb for a depth of 1-1/4 in from the tube end.

9.2 After roll expansion, measure inside diameters of rolltd tubes per paragraph 2.4.

t

= .

nklin Re$earch Center A Dheuson of The Franamn me

i TASK N10 - EXPLOSIVE EXPANSION OF SPECIMEN "F-2" with its plastic on this end. '

10.7 If applicable, prepare detor.ating cord " tails" to facilitate simultaneous expansion of more than one tube and to keep detonating " cap" debris away from test face.

10.8 At the expansion s'ite, insert proper 8-in-long plastic insert primacord assembly from the primary face of the test block into the proper tube. Ecference proper tube and primacord assembly from expansion sequence given in paragraph 10.4 above. Reference proper primacord assembly from paragraph 10.6. Tape the end of each cord-plastic assembly and the tail cord together. Then tape the detonating cap to the end of the " tail" cord. Plastic insert shall rest on the tube end. Cover unshot holas with rubber plugs to protect from debris.

10.9 Perform detonation, remove spent items, and record expansion on test log sheet. If misfire occurs, take corrective action to expand tube. Do not proceed to subsequent sequence until tube has

, been expanded.

I i

~

10.13 After completion of expansion of all tubes i measure and record the inside diameter of each tube hole at 1, 2-f/8, and 3-1/4 in from the primary face of the 10-tube block.

A Dmmon of The Fransen m

TASK Nll - BUBBLE TEST FOR SPECIMENS F-1 and F-2 11.1 For test specimens F-1 and F-2, perform a secondary-to-primary-side bubble test using 125 f; 10 psi nitrogen. The test shall be made at 70*F + 15'F in distilled water and at a maximum depth of 15 in.

11.2 Weld tube plugs, part No. 9, in secondary end of tube (reference Figure 1.0, B&W Drawing 1134899D, Rev. 4) . Welded plugs must be air-tight. Check ait-tight welds by immersion of block in distilled water.

11.3 Assemble welded end cap, reference part (5) and (6) , on secondary end of part (2) against a gasket to obtain a leak-free connection between tubesheet and end cap.

11.4 Connect N2 bottle with pressure regulator, shutoff valve, and precision pressure gage (range O to 200 psi) at 'the provided coupling in part (6) (see Figure 11.0 for test setup) .

11.5 Immerse the entire test setup in a container filled with distilled water.

11.6 Apply 125 psi pressure using N2 bottle and pressure regulator.

Check to insure that there is no leakage between parts (2) and

. (5) , parts (5) and (6), or in any connection of the N2 source.

11.7 Start the bubble test by setting pressure at 125 psi and then closing the shutoff valve. Record pressure versus time after -

closing of shutoff valve. Record by reading pressure gage at 5-pai or 1/2-hour intervals, whichever occurs first, for a minimum of 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />. Record water temperature at same intervals.

11.8 Check tube /tubesheet assembly for gas bubbles. Note the size, location, and frequency of any bubbles. Make a video record of bubbles.

11.9 For test specimens F-1 and F-2, perform a primary-to-secondary-side bubble test using 125 f; 10 psi nitrogen. The test shall be made at 70*F + 15'F in distilled water and at a maximum depth of 15 in. -

11.10 Assemble end cap, referen~ce part (3), on primary end of part (2) against a gasket in order to retain a primary side pressure.

11.11 Immerse the entire test setup in a container filled with distilled water.

nklin Rese

~. ~_ arch. Center .

TASK Nll - BUBBLE TEST FOR SPECIMENS F-1 and F-2 11.12 Apply 125 psi i 10 psi pressure using N2 bottle and pressure regulator. Check to insure that excessive leakage does not occur at the gasket and that pressure can be maintained for a minimum test period of 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

11.13 with pressure maintained at 125 psi i 10 psi, start the test by checking the secondary end of the tubesheet for gas bubbles at the tube /tubesheet interfaces and at the weldsent of each tube plug.

Note and record the time, size, and location of any bubbles that l

are released from the specimen during 0 to 5 min, 30 to 35 min, 60

'- to 65 min, and 115 to 120 min of test period.

1 A D.-25 00hij Franklin Research Center Am= a.tn r w i, u.

O soi.cs p0.1102-5 S N-21 10- 312 I Franklin Research Center " ."'d

E, 9

A DMsion of The Franluin insutute th.o , e. m e.,6 ,ema..r. ioios

"" E

• t/* M//52.

D 'TI

o QfffAd ]

I L'E Ml'r~' E

r 5lIil .- .% th'[iS't/d[ $'sjQS]>h*lq' .4 //.4$gf yj( T4 pt Ap'd?f pG

$ fd' E'MI/l.'IT

//L'GU!/}h's. N .

~ J. l t 4! &'ll ~ ~ ~

_ SKCGtibdAf Sibl '_ '['

l~ A N N NNkN X 'N,1 I70 h tu,

?/[//,-

I// X .

CD'3

/////$'NYWNh%?b ,_

--- - - o

.*,e f

~~

8 0 1 -t I. ,*' - ,, o

} . .~_~. _ ,

Y. * - l /

"T'M X N's \ \'E J .

h'~

s . .

' Dl5 TI L L L b W/\ ft

' ss\ , N, .,

,j,,

" / /, ' / / / / / / // / / / / ' / '/ / / / / / / / >'/~,' / / / / /;' /,', / 'iU D'

/

T77 7 / .' a' . . i Figure 11.0. Secondary-to-Primary Bubble Test Setup

TASK N12 - THERMAL CYCLING 12.1 Install three thermocouples: two on the ID of tubes No. 9 and No.

10, 6 in from the primary side, and one on the CD of the tubesheet, also 6 in from the primary side (thermocouple range 50*F to 700*F) .

12.2 Using thermal blankets or an electric oven with a temperature control, , perform the following thermal cycling:

a. 30 heatup/cooldown cycles from 70*F (+0/-25'F) to 610*F

(+25/-0 *F) to 70*F (+0-25'F)

b. 8 reactor trip cycles from 70*F (+0/-25'F) to 610 *F (+25/-0*F) -

to 70 *F (+0/-25'F)

c. I stuck-open turbine bypass valve cycle from 610*F (+25/-0*F) to 400*F (+0/-25'F) in 10 minutes.

During thermal cycling (a) and (b), the temperaturs difference between tube and tubesheet shall not exceed 100*F, and the rate of temperature change of the tubes shall not exceed 10*F/ minute. The maximum temperature difference between the tube and tubesheet during thermal cycle (c) shall not exceed 30*F.

(Test Deleted) e e

A Dumamon of The Frenten Insehme

TASK N13- BUBBLE TEST - POST THERMAL CYCLE 13.1 Af ter thermal cycling, perform a primary-to-secondary-side bubble test in accordance with paragraphs 11.9 through 11.13.

(Test deleted)

O 9

D-28 renidin Rese

. - ~_ arch. Center .

_ _ . - - _ - - .- . = ~ . - . . . - _ _- . - _ - _ - _ _ - - - . . _ -

1 l

TASK N14 - AXIAL LOAD CYCLING i

l 14.1 Calibrate Instron machine,and recording system using FRC known weights.

14 .2 Measure extension of each tube from secondary face to plug face and l

i record data.

l 14.3 Install tube /tubesheet assembly marked F-1 into Instron machine using fixtures and arrangements as shown in Figure 6.0.

14 .4 Correct axial load (12 lb) and readout for dead weight of adaptors .

or fixtures, if any. Check to insure that the tube being subjected

• to cyclic loads is aligned with the centerline of the actuator applying the loads and that mounting is not susceptible to buckling l or side loading.

14.5 Using the Instron machine, apply the following axial load cycling at ambient temperature of 70*F i 10*F for each tube separately, starting with tube (1)

a. 100 cycles 780 lb compression to 1110 lb tension

b. 180 cycles 635 lb compression to 175 lb tension i c. 6040 cycles 510 lb compression to 125 lb compression.

The spesified cycles should be applied at not more than 1 Hz frequency. The tolerance on all cycling forces is + 5 lb.

' 14.6 Perform axial load cycling for all tubes,1 through 10, in that order., Decord load limits of each cycle.

f 14.7 Measure extension of each tube free secondary face to plug face and

record data.

l 14.8 Perform axial load cycling for tube /tubesheet marked F-2 using the procedure in paragraphs 14.2 through 14.7.

l 1

1 D-29 l}"UU' a Franklin Research Center A Osamen af The Fansen humane i

I m-.---,, -,-,n , . , , - - - - - - - . , , - . . , , , - , . - - , . - -- -

J TASK N15 - BUBBLE TEST - POST AXIAL LOAD 15.1 After axial load cycling is completed, perform a primary-to-secondary-side bubble test in accordance with paragraphs 11.9 through 11.13.

O e

G e

9 4

nklin Research Center A Ohemen of The Frarmen inseeuse

i TASK N16 - MEASUREMENTS - POST AXIAL LOAD 16.1 After completion of axial load cycling, make the same measurements as in paragraph 2.2 and record them.

(Test deleted)

}

e

-i 4

O F

D-31 ranidin Research Center A Denman of The Fw w

o TASK N17- LEAK RATE TEST 17.1 Perform leak rate test with a secondary-to-primary AP of 1275 psi (125 psi) at room temperature of 70*F 1 15 ' F.

17.2 Using an N2 bottle with pressure regulator and the test setup as shown in Figure 17.0, charge the accumulator to 200 psi (+30 psi) by opening shutoff valve (4) . Close valve (4) after accumulator has been charged.

17.3 Connect the handpump at shutoff valve (3) . Make sure that shutoff valves (3) and (5) are open and charge the accumulator and the secondary side of the test specimen with distilled water at 12751 25 psi. Use air vent plug to eliminate air at the secondary side of the test specimen. When the air is eliminated and the pressure reaches 1275 1 25 psi, close shutoff valves (3) and (5) and disconnect the handpump.

17.4 Connect the handpump at shutoff valve (1) . Make sure that shutoff valves (1) and (5) are open and shutoff valve (2) is closed.

Charge the primary side of the test specimen with distilled water.

Use air vent plug to eliminate air at the primary side of the test specimen. When the air is eliminated and the pressure reaches 20 psi (+ 10/- O psi), close shutoff valves (1) and (5) and disconnect the handpump.

17.5 Adjust N pressure regulator and open valve (4) to maintain accumulator pressure at 1275 psi (125 psi) . Open shutoff valve (2) very slowly. Do not collect the water at valve (2) for the first 5 minutes. Af ter 5 minutes, begin collection of the water.

Record pressure and the collected leakage every 2 hou,rs for a minimum period of 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />. ,

17.6 Maintain pressure and collection of leakage (seasoning) either for a period of 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> or until the amount of leakage in any 2-hour period is the same as the amount. collected in the previous 2-hour

period, or the change between the amounts collected in the last two periods is less than 10% of the change between the amounts collected in the two previous periods.

17.7 The leak rate test shall be initiated as soon as " seasoning" is completed by maintaining the pressure at the secondary side at 1275 pai (g 25 psi) and recording the accumulated leakage. Record the accumulation of leakage water every hour up to and including the amount accumulated in an 8-hour period. (GPU specifications are 116 cu mm maximum in an 8-hour period.) ,

l D-32 1 000 Franklin Research Center A Dhaman of The Freas on bushee

y ww

.s x.i s

x du o

} - .

w

% ~v o-C

-g 1

-t s s

b =

@s J v v

(*, +

l  %\ \ il d x

=p i l\. s'\h', ?

3 3QN f0 e)k s\s.3 s 3 y 'y CcE l $ u; a y's d -

Lp os, 3 v,

y

/

/ Ui?i6 ,

/ bi

/nu o

, c, . .h s n ey - -

NN .

h. A a

t g- %Q lo

• ys \\ }sx i

• NN' N

m

. 'J E 3.k s ! \N .'Ns

= -g Nk \g : i \\ s.

l'  % A g h NN . N NN i dn W'-

4g 14.,

M

\\ ,s\ '

NN o Tm t N, NN gN \

A]\ ,N $

- N *. T \s  %  :

(

~

_kk' ! . .<' h. E i w 2 c  : a

c. -a

~

g3 s R$LFiys\'N y Fe x%Q NN i s - 5, e.

/g 9

.ss \Nb!

x L- gsg u '

Nxs ,.6 %

I O g

s s A. e

$ h\ Y N\ )- k$

u.fl 't d'N b-d W// 9 n -% e .: -

5E$

M q

sk

-4 g K /n)/ 5 s ) ,\

U'@* f 4Rt, T J N ms a 3 I .

g 'N ,,

5' C

I Tl I ' ' ' ' ' " " H - '- I \

4I %  %

/CLL-<d -

g O

'\

\

(

l t$

> c=.

D-33 I

J 001) Franklin Research Center A Duneen of The Frenata insensee

TASK N18 - LEAK RATE TEST l

18.1 Perform leak rate tests with a primary-to-secondary AP of 1275 psi (125 psi) and with a primary-to-secondary AP of 2500 psi (1 25 psi) . Maintain room temperature at 70*F 115*F.

18.2 Using an N2 bottle with pressure regulator and the test setup as shown in Figure 17.0, but with the block reversed, charge the accumulator to 600 psi (130 psi) by opening shutoff valve (4) .

Close valve (4) after accumulator has been charged.

! 18.3 Connect the handpump at shutoff valve (3) . Make sure that shutoff )

valves (3) and (5) are open and charge the accumulator and the primary side of the test specimen with distilled water at 1275 psi 1 25 psi. Use air vent plug to eliminate air at the primary side I of the test specimen. When the air is eliminated and the pressure reaches 1275 psi 125 psi, close shutoff valves (3) and (5) and disconnect the handpump.

i

' 18.4 Connect the handpump at shutoff valve (1) . Make sure that shutoff valves (1) and (5) are open and shutoff valve (2) is closed.

Charge the secondary side of the test specimen with distilled water. Use air vent plug to eliminate air at the secondary side of the test specimen. When the air is eliminated and the pressure

- reaches 20 psi (+ 10/- O psi), close shutoff valves (1) and (5) and disconnect the handpump.

, 18.5 Adjust N2 pressure regulator and open valv'e (4) to maintain accumulator pressure at 1275 psi (125 psi) . Open shutoff valve (2) very slowly. Do not collect the water at valve (2) for the firs ~,5 minutes. Afcor 5 minutes, begin collection of the water. i Record pressure and the collected leakage every 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> for a minimum period of 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />.

18.6 Maintain pressure and collection of leakage (seasoning) either for l a pericid of 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> or until the amount of leakage in any 2-hour l period is the same as the amount collected in the previous 2-hour peric.,d, or the change between the amounts col.lected in the last two periods is less than 10% of the change between the amounts  !

collected in the two previous periods.

18.7 The leak rate test shall be initiated as soon as " seasoning" is completed by maintaining the pressure at the primary side at 1275 psi (125 psi) and recording the accumulated leakage. Record the accumulation of leakage water every hour up to and including the amount accumulated in an 8-hour period. (GPU specifications are 116 cu ma maximum in an 8-hour period.)

ranklin Research Center A Osmeen of The Fremen insanne

- _ - , , . . , - _ , _ . ~ _ _ _ . _ - , . . _ _ . , _ _ _ _ . , __._ ,__,_.. _....--,. -

TASK N18 - LEAK RATE TEST 18.8 Adjust N2 pressure regulator and open valve (4) to maintain accumulator pressure at 2500 psi (+ 25 psi) . Do not collect the water at valve (2) for the first 5 minutes. After 5 minutes, begin collection of the water. Record pressures and the collected leakage every 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> for a minimum period of 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />.

18.9 Maintain pressure and collection of leakage (seasoning) either for a period of 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> or until the amount of leakage in any 2-hour period is the same as the amount collected in the previous 2-hour period, or the change between the amounts collected in the last two periods is less than 10% of the change between the amounts collected in the two previous periods.

18.10 The leak rate test shall be initiated as soon as " seasoning" is completed by maintaining the pressure at the primary side at 2500 psi (+ 25 psi) and recording the accumulated leakage. Record the accumulation of leakage water every hour up to and including the amount accumulated in an 8-hour period.

a

$ $f A Duman of The Fransen m

.. l TASK N19 - PULLOUT LOAD TEST 19.1 Calibrate Instron machine and recording system using FRC knowa weights. Correct axial load (12 lb) and readout for weight of adaptors or fixtures, if any.

19.2 Install tube /tubesheet assembly marked F-1 into Instron machine with tube marked (2) positioned for pushout. Use fixtures and arrangement as shown in Figure 14.0.

19.3 Place grit into the tube marked (2) to a level within 1/4 in of the secondary tubesheet face and install pushrod on top of grit.

19.4 Apply load gradually, approximately 10 lb/sec. Record load and relative displacement between secondary face of tubesheet and secondary tube end. Visually monitor tube behavior. Continue test until relative displacement at secondary end is at least 0.060 in.

Accuracy of relative displacement measurement should be + 0.0003 in.

19.5 Remove tube /tubesheet assembly.

19.6 Repeat procedure of paragraphs 19.2 through 19.5 for tubes marked (3), (8), and (9) in that order. Take care not to load or disturb tubes marked (1) , (4), (5), (6), (7) , or (10) of tube /tubesheet assembly marked F-1.

19.7 Install tube /tubesheet assembly marked F-2 and repeat procedure of paragraphs 19.2 through 19.5 for tubes 1 through 10, in that order.

O

_nklin Rese_ arch._ . Center

- - - -- . ~_ ,

TASK N20 - MICROGRAPHY 20.1 Cut the tube /tubesheet assembly marked F-1 at 2-1/4 in, 4-7/8 in, and 7-1/2 in from the primary face of the tubesheet (reference Figure 20.0). Care should be taken to avoid excessive roughing of the surface or inducing of strain at the cut face of the tube sheet or tube.

20.2 Prepare the primary face of the 2-1/4 in to 4-7/8 in block (reference surface marked 2-1/4P in Figure 20.0) and both faces of the 4-7/8 in to 7-1/2 in bleck (reference surfaces marked 4-7/8P and 7-1/2S in Figure"20.0) for micrography by polishing these surfaces.

20.3 At the polished surfaces (references 2-1/4P, 4-7/8P, and 7-1/2S) perform micrography around tubes 4, 5, 6, and 7.

20.4 Etch faces 2-1/4P, 4-7/8P, and 7-1/2S and perform micrography of these polished and etched surfaces around tubes 4, 5, 6, and 7.

A Duman of The Freseen insumme

o 2. 4f'7k l

PR8 MAW I r ucouoAcy SID E [ i Cr es

[ _1 2 5 P -7 2.+b 40 4 f B LcCk 4' p ,

e 7y 5

<--- 4 -7 h 7 8 Lec.:

I

{

l l

Figure 20.0 ,

Obb0 Franklin Research Center A % or ne rr en m

I TASK N21 - MEASUREMENT OF RESIDUAL STRESSES 21.1 For the test specimen marked F-1, perform measurement of residual stresses in the tubesheet ligaments shown in Figure 21.0a.

. 21.2 Af ter micrography is completed, install double strain gages on each of the seven ligaments shown in Figures 21.0a and 21.0b. Repeat this pattern at each of the polished and etched faces (references 2-1/4P, 4-7/8P, and 7-1/25 in Figure 20.0) for a total of 21 strain gages. Strain gages are to be mounted equidistant from each tube hole.

21.3 Zero all strain gages and subsequently machine inside tubes so that the tubes can be collapsed and removed. Remove tubes and record strain gage readings.

l A Dmeson of The Fransen insamme

)

D-40 Joo I @a Franklin w w w rr. Resea.rch

%. Center e

1 a O

h h kb A Chesson of The Frerehn W

i APPENDIX E ev --

TEST DATA I

O

. . . Franklin Research Center A Division of The Franklin Institute The Benjamm Frankhn Parkway. PMa.. Pa. 19103(216)448 1000

Task N2 Project 5506-10-312 Data are in Table 1 of the report.

Task N3 Project 5506-10-312

1. Installation of strain gages was completed on specimen 3A.

expansion was accomplished on September 30, 1982. Impact of explosive expansion caused strain gages to separate from specimen and caused separation of the lead wires to the strain gages. No useful data -

obtained.

2. Strain gage mounting procedures and lead wire arrangement were modified and two gages were installed expansion was accomplished with modified strain gage installation in order to evaluate strain gage mounting and wiring procedure. Procedure appeared satisfactory. Gages and lead wires appeared to have remained in place However, no valid data were obtained.

9 E-2

dN 5506-10-312 E-1

[ J Franklin Research Center ,, o c,,w o. . a o. .

Ld"'* *,MMTS*

DATA SHEET - RECEIVING, INSPECTION, AND MARKING Task N1 l

j 1. As received in shipping box, the plastic bag containing the 10 hole I

tubesheet block was torn on both ends by the tubesheet threads. The bag has 6 holes approximately 1/2" long, 3 holes approximately 1" long and 1 hole approximately 2" long. In addition, there are four splits previously taped sheet. Marking on the bag is as follows:

10 Hole Tubesheet Mockup Corrosion Conditioned Per TP-526 5??? 5045-SP2-76085?-1-2 7-22-87 Also received, six tubes approximately 24" long and sealed in plastic l

bag. Also received, additional tubesheet block with tubes in place.

As received, tubesneet block with tubes in place was sealed in double plastic bag. .

2. Torn plastic bag containing tubesheet block placed inside additional bag and resealed for later inspection.

3. Tubesheet blocks removed from bags, marked and resealed.

4. Six single tube blocks received in sealed individual bags. Six tubes received in sealeo bag marked low yield.

5. Ten (10) tube /tubesheet block removed from plastic bags for inspection.

Desiccant in internal vented bag has mostly blue color indicating it is still active. Some crystals are white. Small amount (about teaspoon) of dessicant is loose in bag with tubesheet. Inspection of holes under high intensity lighting indicates slight reddish oxide near end of holes (approximately 1/4" and very insignificant). Inside diameter of holes looked clean and free of loose reddish oxide. Unit was resealed with fresh desiccant. (9/9/82)

-h.

l l

b00blJ Franklin Research Ce. :er .

5506-10-312 c ,.,. , o,,, 3,,,

E-3 o,,,

A Dwisson of The Franklin instatute g, , ,,, g /, o,,,

%sk N3;GtPlohn/C EXM-MStoa of TUSG 3D y 1.15 ' 5 I;t " <

~ ,-

l tent,c uasarco t . l ima aet.

mc rec,,i -m,s co -- i f

-/-, .

/

I S$

ff -

ftx bi n ukt. Sret A N &SbC$ LJCh 6 D IU ' Trit 4(( blArM6TrRA M.Y c/Pos u re P&tres , s r '1WCC Avl A t. ' Lo c.A Tr u dS n 5.M.Jod

% ec ,i.J y 6-Vde uclta.+ Ion (N,k be nJ FPI f f br,Qa. ,

-fo 40 kh= l 6'r2M A) (ISMA4 mc.A$uf'E o TMC CA6C Ghuti ()BL6 ia er M a iTLoA % R S/6Dkl. SETrW6 /vum8ER svuid PCAk (H}LOCL i .* Tlh,,,ww 1 JoHf &!dCK s tr E I / Cigc x gov (Sito; Qt ~ ). y o c Z l NXIKL i 3 00 2.Z f-a b 3. CIAC X 300 25 't -

-! '2 A-X th L Y 300 ;L4 5400 i 5 CIKC X .500 ?5 4,xct hw Lpir 26 #-

( 5 ht tA L 1 3CO

+380 n'050 4 C/4C V 300 2 '4 1 6 4 A-X I A L X 7' 0 0 38 ~ ll 00 1 5 CIRC y 5 co 9 01 X400 to 5 AXI AL 2 500 30 ~ S CO II h { f A(,. [ ~5 00 $l WOO 5 39 00 '

II 4 ,ff 14 f. y 300 32 -300 .

l I3 DE ra.oMEDod ?JL.A C FORM CS-FRC41

d **

5506-10-312 E-4 Ll 0J Franklin Research Center ,, o ,,, 3 .,., o ,,, ,,,. o ,,,

^ D f 2 ?.f!*," d T I Pc}'

Ftsk N3 ; 6h5IVE GGAUSlod Dr TVEE 1) 10 /.3ol$ y Calcul k of cS4ri S u s;+. .i. t Aaw SS Gwg,' freserst S i+n-h ,J,  ;

5 VJ u b ,, [1ge aca h.4t o'n 5 V J <. c4ca he,tjsn

.1 OO t zo e K+w 2 06 lF 500:1t ofeJ C'r 4 500 r4 s 9ri ll0o cmy 3c.,oh 20'O g .c . h 9,0 VJe o stp o yolJyc. --

• a ap s n " q e .

(a..o VJc)('2.ca O '-(n'*o*.)(sop'

) r^E) -> Ro mv = 0. 5a ,,,y/ = lc 6

TOUrr 6 /f 64rm levC{ fib,14)

• Br 00+jv + Yol? e)

% (pa ) = (i. n % ){ n t% c)

Task N9 Project 5506-10-312 Data are in Table 1 of the report.

--g, FORM CS-FRC41

5506-10-312 E-5 UlllJ Franklin Research Center 8v Dam wk.a Daw Rw. Deu A Drvision of The Franklin insatute Title DATA SHEET - TASK N11 - BUBBt.E TEST FOR SPECIMEN F1

1. Secondary to primary bubble test on tube /tubesheet marked F-1, started at 11:15 on August 30, 1982. Pressure set at 125 psi. Water temperature 73*F. Small leak at gasket between parts 2 and 5. Test terminated and gasket resealed. Bubble test restarted at 0930 on August 31, 1982.

Pressure decay verse time as follows:

Time PSIG 2 0930-8/31/82 125 73 1030 .

125 73 1130 124.8 73 1230 124.0 73.8 1330 123.8 73.8 1442 122.4 73.8 1530 122.0 73.8 1630 121.8 74.0 1705 121.0 74 0830-9/1/82 109.0 75 0952 108.0 75 1037 107.8 75 1130 107 75 1250 106 75 1330 105.8 75 1430 105 75 1530 104 75 1549 104 75 Test Tenninated at 1549 FORM C&MC41

d 5506-10-312 E-6 l ij Franklin Research Center u o. ,, o ,,,

g .. ., o,,,

kDr# %"M N q

""*0ATA SHEET - TASK N11 - BUBBLE TEST FOR SPECIMEN F1 (CONT.)

Secondary to primary ~ bubble test on tube /tubesheet marked F-1 started at 0930 on 8/31/82. No leak at gasket. Pressure steady and no apparent leaks or bubbles. Very small bubble stream observed between tube and tubesheet at tubes #4 and #8 at 1130. Also at 1130 bubbles of various site are discovered inside top of all tubes. Unable to determine whether bubbles result from air entrapped in tube before starting test, or whether air is escaping past tube plug, or whether air is collecting from air originallydissolved in water.

Small probe is used to move bubbles at upper inside surface of tubes. Small bubble stream continues at tubes #4 and #8 after removal of bubbles at inside of tubes. Videotape of bubbles at tubes #4 and #8 taken at 1145 hours0.0133 days <br />0.318 hours <br />0.00189 weeks <br />4.356725e-4 months <br />. No additional le'aks discovered at 1406 but bubbles inside tubes have reformed, source unknown. At 1454 hours0.0168 days <br />0.404 hours <br />0.0024 weeks <br />5.53247e-4 months <br /> leak between tube and tubesheet at #4 continue with bubbles being slightly larger and of much lower frequency (18 to 35 sec interval). At 1705 leak still visible at tubes 64 and #8. At 0830 on 9/1/82, all tubes have large bubbles entrapped inside tubes, small bubbles escaping at tube #4 at 10 to 15.second interval and can no longer detect bubbles at. tube #8. At 1200 hours0.0139 days <br />0.333 hours <br />0.00198 weeks <br />4.566e-4 months <br />, can no longer detect bubbles at tube #8, bubbles at tube #4 escaping at 10 to 15 second intervals. At 1430 hours0.0166 days <br />0.397 hours <br />0.00236 weeks <br />5.44115e-4 months <br />,

, cannot detect bubbles escaping at tube #8, bubbles at tube #4 escaping at 60 to 90 second intervals. Large bubbles continue to reform slowly inside each tube, approximately at butting of tubes. Test terminated. Still im-possible to determine whether bubbles forming inside tube result from leakage past tube or past tube plug or possibly slow migration of oringally entrapped

, air.

a 5

t ..

Protect Page s

5506-10-312 E-7 (I J Franklin Research Center

,, o,,, ..,., o,,, ,, o,,,

^n D.".'*3CC"4"RTP r ,,e DATA SHEET - TASK N11 - BUBBLE TEST FOR SPECIMEN F1 (CONT.)

1. Primary to secondary bubble test started on tube / tut'esheet marked F-1 at 906 hours0.0105 days <br />0.252 hours <br />0.0015 weeks <br />3.44733e-4 months <br /> on October 4, 1982. Pressure set and maintained at 125 psi + 10 psi. Average frequency of bubbles at tube and tubesheet interface noted as follows:

Tube #1 2 minute 39 second interval

1. 2 . 58 second interval

1. 3 very slow

1. 4 2 minute 37 seconds

1. 5 1 minute 53 seconds

1. 6 very slow

1. 7 no bubbles observed

1. 8 4 minutes 58 seconds

1. 9 1 minute 30 seconds

1. 10 3 minutes 25 seconds No bubbles observed at tube plugs.

Bubble size is estimated at 1/16 to 1/8" diameter.

2. At 1000 hours0.0116 days <br />0.278 hours <br />0.00165 weeks <br />3.805e-4 months <br /> on October 4,1982, average frequence of bubbles noted as follows:

O Tube #1 1 minute 36 seconds

1. 2 5 minutes 56 seconds

1. 3 4 minutes 25 seconds

1. 4 2 minutes 9 seconds

1. 5 ' 2 minutes 55 seconds

1. 6 1 minute 52 seconds

1. 7 no bubbles observed

1. 8 one bubble observed

1. 9 5 minutes 38 seconds

1. 10 11 minutes 25 seconds l

No bubbles at tube plug.

3. At 1055 hour0.0122 days <br />0.293 hours <br />0.00174 weeks <br />4.014275e-4 months <br /> on October 4,1982, average frequency of bubbles at tube and tubesheet interface noted as fellows:

romu come ei l

• • i '

l d

5506-10-312 E-8 i . J Franklin Research Center ,, o,,, .., o ,, ,, o ,,,

kDrD d C '," M u D DATA SHEET - TASK N11 - BUBBLE TEST IOR SPECIMEN F1 (CONT.)

Tube #1 5 minutes 4 seconds

1. 2 2 minutes 28 seconds

1. 3 no bubbles observed

1. 4 2 minutes 11 seconds J #5 2 minutes 15 seconds

! #6 one bubble observed

1. 7 no bubbles observed

1. 8 one bubble observed

1. 9 3 minutes 23 seconds l #10 5 minutes 38 seconds l No bubbles observed at tube plug.

Bubble size is approximately 1/8" diameter.

Test tenninated at 1106 hours0.0128 days <br />0.307 hours <br />0.00183 weeks <br />4.20833e-4 months <br />.

l i . .

l i

l

sh emiset 5506-10-312 Pese E-9 l . J Franklin Research Center h Date Wk.d Date Rev. Date A Devision of The Frankhn institute T.ve DATA SHEET - N11 - BUBBLE TEST FOR SPECIMEN F2

1. Secondary to primary test on tube /tubesheet marked F-2, reference paragraphs 11.1 to 11.8 deleted because test does not identify source of the leak.

2. Primary to secondary bubble test started on tilbe/tubesheet marked F-2 at 1355 hours0.0157 days <br />0.376 hours <br />0.00224 weeks <br />5.155775e-4 months <br /> on October 4,1982. Pressure set and maintained at 125 PSI + 10 PSI. Average frequency of bubbles at tube and tubesheet interface noted as follows:

Tube #1 no bubbles observed

1. 2 no bubbles observed

1. 3 55 seconds

1. 4 no bubbles observed -

1. 5 no bubbles observed

1. 6 27 seconds

1. 7 - no bubbles observed

1. 8 41 seconds

1. 9 13 seconds

1. 10 20 seconds No bubbles observed at tube plugs.

• Bubble size estimated at 1/16" to 1/8" d,iameter.

3. After 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />, the average frequency of bubbles was noted as follows:

j Tube #1 no bubbles observed

! #2 no bubbles observed

1. 3 one bubble observed

1. 4 no bubbles observed

1. 5 30 seconds

1. 6 15 seconds

~

l

1. 7 one bubble observed l

1. 8 25 seconds l #9 13 seconds .

18 seconds

1. 10 sonu c u m

a

%' il l ;J Franidin Research Center eniect 5506-10-312 veen E-10

,, o,,, ... o,,, , , , o,,,

lwr 0L"OYE m.

DATA SHEET - N11 - BUBBLE TEST FOR SPECIMEN F2 (CONT.)  ;

4. At 1555 hours0.018 days <br />0.432 hours <br />0.00257 weeks <br />5.916775e-4 months <br /> on October 4,1982, average frequency of bubbles noted as follows:

Tube #1 no bubbles observed

1. 2 no bubbles observed

1. 3 one bubble observed

1. 4 no bubbles observed

1. 5 1 minute 5 seconds

1. 6 10 seconds

1. 7 1 minute 1 second

1. 8 37 seconds

1. 9 13 seconds

1. 10 20 seconds No bubbles noted.at tube plugs.

Bubble size estimated at approximately 1/8".

Test terminated at 1559 hours0.018 days <br />0.433 hours <br />0.00258 weeks <br />5.931995e-4 months <br />.

O Task N14

- Project 5506-10-312 ,

Full chart reccrdings of all axial load cyclings are on file at FRC.

e ronu cunom

DATA SHEET, TASK N15 Project 5506-10-312

1. Primary to secondary bubble test started on tube /tubesheet marked F-1 after axial load test at 0945 hours0.0109 days <br />0.263 hours <br />0.00156 weeks <br />3.595725e-4 months <br /> on October 8,1982. Pressure set and maintained at 125 psi + 10 psi. The number of bubbles at the tube and tubesheet interface oblierved in a 5-minute observation period of 0945 hours0.0109 days <br />0.263 hours <br />0.00156 weeks <br />3.595725e-4 months <br /> to 0950 hours0.011 days <br />0.264 hours <br />0.00157 weeks <br />3.61475e-4 months <br /> is as follows:

Tube Number of Bubbles

1. 1 4

1. 2 2

1. 3 4

1. 4 4

1. 5 3

1. 6 . 0

1. 7 1

1. 8 1

1. 9 2

1. 10 1 No bubbles observed at tube plugs.

Bubble size is estimated at 3/16 to 1/8" diameter.

2. In a 5-minute interval from 1500 hours0.0174 days <br />0.417 hours <br />0.00248 weeks <br />5.7075e-4 months <br /> to 1055 hours0.0122 days <br />0.293 hours <br />0.00174 weeks <br />4.014275e-4 months <br /> on October 8,1982, the number of bubbles observed at the tube and tubesheet interface is as follows:

Tube Number of Bubbles

1. 1 2

. #2 2

1. 3 4

1. 4 3 -

1. 5 2

1. 6 0

1. 7 2

1. 8 1

1. 9 1

1. 10 0

3. In a 5-minute interval from 1150 hours0.0133 days <br />0.319 hours <br />0.0019 weeks <br />4.37575e-4 months <br /> to 1155 hours0.0134 days <br />0.321 hours <br />0.00191 weeks <br />4.394775e-4 months <br /> on October 8,1982, the number of bubbles observed at the tube and tubesheet interface is as follows:

Tube Number of Bubbles

1. 1 3

1. 2 2

1. 3 4

1. 4 2

1. 5 2

1. 6 0 E-11

3. (Cont'd)

Tube Nurnber of Bubbles

1. 7 0

1. 8 2

1. 9 1

1. 10 0 No bubbles observed at tube plug.

Bubble size is approximately 1/8" to 3/16" diameter.

Test terminated at 1155 hours0.0134 days <br />0.321 hours <br />0.00191 weeks <br />4.394775e-4 months <br />.

G E-12

DATA SHEET, TASK N15 Project 5506-10-312

1. Primary to secondary bubble test started on tube /tubesheet marked F-2 after axial load test at 1300 hours0.015 days <br />0.361 hours <br />0.00215 weeks <br />4.9465e-4 months <br /> on October 19, 1982. Pressure set and maintained at 125 psi + 10 psi. The number of bubbles at tube and tubesheet interface observed in a 5-minute observation period of 1300 hours0.015 days <br />0.361 hours <br />0.00215 weeks <br />4.9465e-4 months <br /> to 1305 hours0.0151 days <br />0.363 hours <br />0.00216 weeks <br />4.965525e-4 months <br /> is as follows:

Tube Number of Bubbles

1. 1 4

1. 2 13

1. 3 4

1. 4 7

1. 5 19

1. 6 7

1. 7 2

1. 8 1

1. 9 2

1. 10 1 No bubbles observed at tube plugs.

Bubble size is estimated at 3/16 to 1/8" diameter.

2. In a 5-minute interval from 1330 hours0.0154 days <br />0.369 hours <br />0.0022 weeks <br />5.06065e-4 months <br /> to 1335 hours0.0155 days <br />0.371 hours <br />0.00221 weeks <br />5.079675e-4 months <br /> on October 19, 1982, the number of bubbles observed at the tube and tubesheet inter-face is as follows:

Tube Number of Bubbles

1. 1 5

1. 2 12

1. 3 4

1. 4 3 1 #5 24

! #6 11

1. 7 4 j

1. 8 6

1. 9 4

1. 10 1

3. In a 5-minute interval from 1400 hours0.0162 days <br />0.389 hours <br />0.00231 weeks <br />5.327e-4 months <br /> to 1405 hours0.0163 days <br />0.39 hours <br />0.00232 weeks <br />5.346025e-4 months <br /> on October 19, 1982, the number of bubbles observed at the tube and tubesheet inter-face is as follows:

Tube Number of Bubbles

1. 1 3

1. 2 9

1. 3 6

1. 4 1

1. 5 18 i #6 13 1

E-13 l

1 l

i

3. (Cont'd)

Tube Number of Bubbles

1. 7 0

1. 8 6

1. 9 1

1. 10 1

4. In a 5-minute interval from 1500 hcurs to 1505 hours0.0174 days <br />0.418 hours <br />0.00249 weeks <br />5.726525e-4 months <br /> on October 19, 1982, the number of bubbles observed at the tube and tubesheet inter-face is as follows:

Tube Number of Bubbles

1. 1 6

1. 2 13

1. 3 5

1. 4 0

1. 5 28

1. 6 13

1. 7 1

1. 8 8

1. 9 1

1. 10 3 E-14

Project Page 5506-10-312 E-M 00jU Franklin Research Center ,,

^ D 8 2 f M " D .$i$'

. [ND&DDC Title Task N17, Secondary to Priniary Side Leak Rate Test, Specimen F-1 Test started at 10:15 on October 9,1982.

Liquid collected in graduated flask.

Date Time Pressure Temp. Liquid Collected Oct. 9 1015 1275 75' O Oct. 9 1020 1275 -

0 Oct. 9 1220 1275 - 0 (Small droplet on inside of

. tube but not measureable)

Oct. 9 1420 1275 - 0 (Small droplets on inside of tube but not measureable)

Oct. 9 1530 1275 -

Note (1)

Note 1) Unable to measure water leakage since water droplets adhere to inside of tube and are not collected in graduated flask. A one-quarter inch (6.35 m) I.D. tube was mounted vertically against a 1/64" graduated machinist scale. Distilled water was added to primary side to bring ~

water level up to the base of machinists scale. Secondary side pre-ssure was maintained at 1275 psi. Readings were taken as follows:

Date Time Pressure Water Height Temp.

Oct. 9 1535 1275 psig 42/64 78'F Oct. 9 1735 1275 1-5/64 78'F Oct. 9 1935 1275 1-33/64 77.5"F Oct. 11 0845 1275 11-3/8 72 F f

! Note: Water was drained from tube, through valve (1), to reset water level at bottom of scale. Readings taken as follows:

Press ure Water Height Temp.

Date Time Oct. 11 0900 1275 32/64 72*F Oct. 11 1107 1275 1-16/64 75' 1275 1-60/64 77 Oct. 11 1300 Oct. 11 1500 1275 2-44/64 77 1275 3-28/64 78 Oct. 11 1700 Oct. 12 0845 1275 8-48/64 76 F FORM CS-FRC 81

Project Page M[ .

'] .I Franklin Research Center 5506-10-312 E-16

^ d'" ef Di d.7MND

. IND& DOC Title Task N17, Specimen F-1 (Cont'd)

Note: After 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> of seasoning,10/9/82 to 10/12/82, water was drained thru valve (1) to reset water level at bottom of scale and initiate eight (8) hour test. Readings taken as follows:

Date Time Pressure Water Height Temp.

Oct. 12 1015 1275 32/64 76*F Oct. 12 1115 1275 55/64 77 Oct. 12 1215 1275 1-15/64 77 Oct. 12 1315 1275 1-36/64 77 Oct. 12 1415 1275 1-60/64 77 Oct. 12 1515 1275 2-20/64 77 Oct. 12 1615 1275 2-42/64 78 Oct. 12 1715 1275 3-1/64 78 Oct. 12 1815 1275 3-24/64 78 Test was terminated at 1815 after 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of collection. Total water collected in 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> was 3-24/64 - 32/64 = 2 56/64 = 2.875 in.

= 73.025 mm Volume = (73.025 mm) ({-) (6.35)2 = 2312.64 cu. mm.

or 289 cu. mm/hr. -

e Mt 1 FORM C34RC41

Project Page E-17

~ ~

0000 Franklin Research Center Date Ch W Date R ev. Date A Dmsson of The Franklin Institute gg Task N17. Secondary to Primary Side Leak Rate Test, Specimen F-2 Test started at 1700 hours0.0197 days <br />0.472 hours <br />0.00281 weeks <br />6.4685e-4 months <br /> on 10/22/82.

Date Time Pressure Water Height Temo.

Oct. 22 1700 1275 1-56/64 79 F -

Oct. 23 NO READINGS Oct. 24 '

NO READINGS Oct. 25 0850 1275 7-24/64 73.5*F Note: Reset water height to 1 inch at 0850 hours0.00984 days <br />0.236 hours <br />0.00141 weeks <br />3.23425e-4 months <br />.

Oct. 25 1000 1275 1-6/64 75.5 Oct. 25 1115 1275 1-12/64 76 Oct. 25 1214 1275 1-17/64 76 Oct. 25 1300 1275 1-21/64 76.5 Oct. 25 1400 1275 1-29/64 77 Oct. 25 1504 1275 1-35/64 77 Oct. 25 1610 1275 1-42/64 77 Oct. 25 1710 1275 1-48/64 77 Note: 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> of seasoning completed. Eight hour test as follows.

Oct. 25 1730 1275 1-49/64 77'F Oct. 25 1830 1275 1-53/64 77.4 Oct. 25 1930 1275 1-58/64 77.5 Oct. 25 2030 1275 1-62/64 77.5 Oct. 25 2130 1275 2-1/64 77.6 Oct. 25 2230 1275 2-5/64 77.5 Oct. 25 2330 1275 2-10/64 77.6 Oct. 26 0030 1275 2-14/64 77.6 Oct. 26 0130 1275 2-16/64 77.5 Test terminated at 0130 hours0.0015 days <br />0.0361 hours <br />2.149471e-4 weeks <br />4.9465e-5 months <br /> after 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of collection. Total water collected -

in 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> was 2-16/64 49/64 = 31/64 = .484 inch

= 12.3 mm Volume = (12.3 m) ({} (6.35)2 = 389.6 cu. m or 48.7 cu. m/hr.

FORM CS-FRC41

5506-10-312 E-18 d)j Franklin Research Center , o,,, o .,., o,,, g ,,. o ,,

$.D02ld!' DYE JND & DDC Title Task N18, Primary to Secondary Side Leak Rate Test, Specimen F-1 Test stated at 9:30 on 10/13/82.

Date Time Pressure Water Height Temo.

Oct. 13 930 1275 - 77'F Oct. 13 935 1275 48/64 77 Oct. 13 1135 1275 3-57/64 78 Oct. 13 1335 1275 6-12/64 78 Oct. 13 1535 1275 7-40/64 77 Note: Reset at 1535 to 48/64 water height.

Oct. 13 1735 1275 1-62/64 78 Oct. 14 835 1275 6-14/64 76 Note: Reset at 835 to 24/64 water height.

Oct. 14 935 1275 40/64 77 Oct. 14 1135 1275 1-4/64 77 Oct. 14 1335 1275 1-32/64 77 Oct. 14 1535 1275 1-56/64 77 Oct. 14 1717 1275 2-12/64 77 Oct. 15 835 1275 4-24/64 75 Oct. 15 935 1275 4-32/64 76 Oct. 15 1135 1275 4-50/64 77 Oct. 15 1335 1275 5-12/64 77 Oct. 15 1535 1275 5-32/64 78 Oct.15 1715 1275 5-51/64 78 Note: Reset at 1715 to 32/64 water height.

Oct. 16 920 1275 2-20/64 -

Note: 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> of seasoning completed. Eight hour test as follows:

Oct. 16 930 1275 2-20/64 83*F Oct. 16 1030 1275 2-29/64 78.5 Oct. 16 1130 1275 2-40/64 78 Oct. 16 1230 1300 2-48/64 78 FORM CS.FRC-81 J

M "**

5506-10-312 "* E-19 0000 Franklin Research Center g o,,, cy , ., o,,, ,,,. o,,,

^P=St.St"dir?

T,ti.

Task 18, Specimen F-1 (Cont'd)

Da te Time Pressure Water Height Temp.

Oct.16 1330 1275 2-58/64 78.5 Oct. 16 1430 1275 3-4/64 79 Oct. 16 1530 1275 3-12/64 79 Oct. 16 1630 1275 3-20/64 79 Oct. 16 1730 1275 3-28/64 79 Test was terminated at 1730 after 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of collection'. Total water co lected in 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> was 3-28/64 - 2 20/64 = 1 8/64 = 1.125 inch

= 28.575 mm Volume = (28.575 mm) (f) (6.35)2 = 904.9 cu. mm or 113 cu. mm/hr FORM CS-FRC41

DUOIb Franidin Research Center *'~

5506-10-312 E-20

$. D 82 f M " D Nii"of ND & DDC Title Task N18, Primary to Seconda:7 Side Leak Rate Test, Specimen F-1 Test started at 1830 hours0.0212 days <br />0.508 hours <br />0.00303 weeks <br />6.96315e-4 months <br /> on 10/16/82 Date Time Pressure Water Height Temp.

Oct.16 1830 2500 32/64 79*

Oct. 16 1835 2500 32/64 79 Oct. 17 NO READINGS Oct. 18 0830 2500 5-60/64 72 Note: Set water height to 32/64 at 830 hours0.00961 days <br />0.231 hours <br />0.00137 weeks <br />3.15815e-4 months <br />.

Oct. 18 1030 2500 56/64 76 Oct. 18 1230 2500 1-16/64 77 Oct. 18 1430 2500 1-40/64 75 Oct. 18 1630 2500 1-63/64 75.5 Oct. 18 1715 2500 2-4/64 76 Oct. 19 0830 2500 3-54/64 73 Oct. 19 1030 2500 4-8/64 78 Note: Reset water height to 32/64 at 1030 hours0.0119 days <br />0.286 hours <br />0.0017 weeks <br />3.91915e-4 months <br />.

Oct. 19 1230 2500 53/64 77 Oct. 19 1530 2500 1-20/64 76.5 Note: Reset water height to 1 inch at 1630 hours0.0189 days <br />0.453 hours <br />0.0027 weeks <br />6.20215e-4 months <br />.

Oct. 19 1630 2500 '

76.5 Oct. 19 1730 2500 1-10/64 76 Note: 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> of seasoning complete. Eight hour test as follows:

Oct. 19 1830 2500 1-20/64 77*F Oct. 19 1930 2500 1-31/64 77.6 Oct. 19 2030 2500 1-40/64 78 Oct.19 2130 2510 1-50/64 78.4 Oct. 19 2230 2510 1-60/64 78.5 Oct. 19 2330 2525 2-8/64 78.8 FORM CS-FRC41

]

l .f A, "*'

%%4 SM 2 P.ge _

0000 Franklin Research Center ,, o,,, Cn.x e o ,, n .. o. .

t ? = O . W e w r?

Title Task N18, Specimen F-1 (Cont'd)

Date Time Pressure Water Height Temp.

Oct. 20 0030 2525 2-18/64 79 Oct. 20 0130 2538 2-29/64 79 Oct. 20 0230 2550 2-41/64 79 Test was terminated at 0230 hours0.00266 days <br />0.0639 hours <br />3.80291e-4 weeks <br />8.7515e-5 months <br /> after 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of collection. Total water collected in 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> was 2-41/64 20/64 = 1-21/64 = 1.328 inch

= 33.73 mm Volume = (33.73'm) ({} (6.35)2 = 1068 cu. mm or 133.5 cu. m/hr.

FORM CS-FRC41 L

ON *'

5506-10-312 "* E-22

$ 0) Franklin Research Center ,, o ,,, en. ., o,,, ,,,, o ,,

A Division of The Franklin institute Title Task N18, Primary to Secondary Leak Rate Test, Specimen F-2 Test started at 1030 hours0.0119 days <br />0.286 hours <br />0.0017 weeks <br />3.91915e-4 months <br /> on 10/26/82.

Date Time Pressure Water Heicht Temp.

Oct. 26 1030 1275 1-56/64 77.5*F

~

Oct. 26 1158 1275 6-4/64 78 Oct. 26 1230 1275 7-28/64 78 Note: Reset water height at 1-2/64 at 1230 hours0.0142 days <br />0.342 hours <br />0.00203 weeks <br />4.68015e-4 months <br />.

Oct. 26 1302 1275 2-8/64 78 Oct. 26 1430 1275 5 79 Oct. 26 1630 1275 8-24/64 79 Note: Reset water height at 1 inch at 1645 hours0.019 days <br />0.457 hours <br />0.00272 weeks <br />6.259225e-4 months <br />.

Oct. 27 0830 1275 12 76*F Note: Reset water height at 16/64 at 0840 hours0.00972 days <br />0.233 hours <br />0.00139 weeks <br />3.1962e-4 months <br />.

Oct. 27 1030 1275 57/64 78 F Oct. 27 1230 1275 1-32/64 77.5 Oct. 27 1430 1275 2-3/64 77.5 Oct. 27 1632 1275 2-28/64 78 Note: Reset water height at 8/64 at 1634 hours0.0189 days <br />0.454 hours <br />0.0027 weeks <br />6.21737e-4 months <br />.

Oct. 28 0843 1275 2-16/64 76*F Oct. 28 1050 1275 2-32/64 77 Oct. 28 1307 1275 2-48/64 78 Oct. 28 1430 1275 2-54/64 78 Oct. 28 1620 1275 3 78 Note: Reset water height at 32/64 at 1621 hours0.0188 days <br />0.45 hours <br />0.00268 weeks <br />6.167905e-4 months <br />.

Oct. 29 0843 1275 1-3/64 74*F Note: 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> of seasoning corpleted. Eight hour test as follows:

Oct. 29 1030 1275 1-10/64 76.5 Oct. 29 1130 1275 1-12/64 76.5 Oct. 29 1230 1275 1-18/64 77 Oct. 29 1330 1275 1-24/64 77 FORM CS-FRC 41

5506-10-312 "* E-23

$)I JFranklin Research Center ,, om cy , ., o,,, n ,,. o,,,

A Dmsion of The Frankhn Insutute Title Task 18, Specimen F-2 (Cont'd)

Date Time Pres sure Water Height Temp.

Oct. 29 1430 1275 1-30/64 77 Oct. 29 1530 1275 1-34/64 77 Oct. 29 1630 1275 1-38/64 77 Oct. 29 1730 1275 1-42/64 78 Oct. 29 1830 1275 1-47/64 78 Test tenninated at 1830 hours0.0212 days <br />0.508 hours <br />0.00303 weeks <br />6.96315e-4 months <br /> after 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of collection. Total water collected in 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> was as follows.

1-47/64 10/64 = 37/64 = .578 inch

= 14.68 mm

= 465 cu. mm Volume =(14.68mm)({}(6.35)2 or 58.1 cu. mm/hr.

Test started at 1000 hours0.0116 days <br />0.278 hours <br />0.00165 weeks <br />3.805e-4 months <br /> on 11/1/82.

Time Pressure Water Height Temp.

Date Nov. 1 1000 2500 32/64 78'F Nov. 1 1200 2500 47/64 78 Nov. 1 1400 2500 1 79 Nov. 1 1600 2500 1-16/64 79 2500 2-42/64 80 Nov. 2 1600 2500 3-27/64 79 Nov. 3 1426 Nov. 4 0900 2500 3-46/64 76.5 F Note: Reset water height to 1 inch at 0904 hour0.0105 days <br />0.251 hours <br />0.00149 weeks <br />3.43972e-4 months <br />.

Note: 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> of seasoning' completed. Eight hour test as follows.

2500 1-2/64 77'F Nov. 4 1000 2500 1-9/64 78 Nov. 4 1100 2500 1-18/64 79 Nov. 4 1200 .

2500 1-25/64 79 Nov. 4 1300 2500 1-34/64 79 Nov. 4 1400 2500 1-40/64 79.5 Nov. 4 1500 FORM CS-FRC41

. = _ . , _ . . - . _ .-

• ** "*" E-24 5506-10-312 d bb Franklin Research Center ,, o ,,, a .,., o,,, , , . o,,,

^ UOl2fd!'"dTII$

JND & 000 Tiu.

Task fl18, Specimen F-2 (Cont'd)

Date Time Pressure Water Height Temp.

Nov. 4 1600 2500 1-48/64 79.5 Nov. 4 1700 2500 1-53/64 80 Nov. 4 1800 2500 1-57/64 80 Test tenninated at 1800 hours0.0208 days <br />0.5 hours <br />0.00298 weeks <br />6.849e-4 months <br /> after 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of collection. Total water collected in 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> was as follows:

1-57/64 2/64 = 55/64 = .859 inch

= 21.83 m Volume = (21.83 m) ({} (6.35)2 = 691 cu. m or 86.4 cu. m/hr.

e 9

e FORM CS-FRC41 j

Project Page 5506-10-312 UCCD Franklin Research Center

$.D82i.,[l'1Tiii$' LC & JS & DDC T,ve Task N19 ' Pullout Load Test - Specimen F-2 Tube #1 Tube Displacement Load 0 0 0 265

.0005" 1225

.001 1460

. .0015 1700

.0025 1945

.003 2250

.0035 2500

.004 2650

.0045 2800

.005 3000

.0055 3200

.006 3375

.0065 3500

.007 3800 Yield

.030 3900

.060 4120 Tube #2 0 0

.0 40

.0035 210

.004 250

.005 310

.006 400

.008 500

.009 625

.010 835

.0105 1100

.011 1330 FORM CS-FRC41 I . _ - _ . - - _ _ _ - _ _ _ - , _ - . . . - _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ - - _ _

"'*i"' P* E-26 5506-10-312 O){i 00 Franklin Research Center ,, o,,, . .,., o,,, ,,,. o,,,

$UOf2ld7diEP2 Task N19 - Pullout Load Test - Specimen F-2 (Cont'd)

Tube #2 (Cont'd)

Tube Displacement Load

.0115 1700

.012 1875

.0125 2050

.013 2200

.0135 2350

.014 2500

.0145 2660

.015 2800

.0155 2950

.016 3050

.016 3190

.017 3300

.0175 3380

.018 3480

.019 3500 Yield

.030 3740

.045 '

3870 .

.060 3900 Tube #3 0 0

.0 -

25

.001 460

.0015 540

.002 800

.0025 1090

.003 1250

.0035 1400

.004 1700

.0045 2000

.006 2100

.0065 2220 FORM C3 FRC41 J

b '**

5506-10-312 E-27 Ub0d Franklin Research Center ,, o,,, cy,., o,,, ,,,. o,,,

A Division of The Franidin insutute Tetle Task N19 - Pullout Load Test - Specimen F-2 (Cont'd)

Tube #3 (Cont'd)

Tube Disolacement Load

.007 2300

.008 2490

.009 2600

.010 2700

.011 2800

.012 3100

.015 3200 Yield

.030 3275 .

.045 3380

.060 3500 Tube #4 0 0

.0 40

.0005 600

.001 1260

. .0015 1300

.002 1600

(

.0025 1670

.003 1857

.0035 2000

.004 2100

.0045 2200

.005 2300

.0055 2400

.006 2500

.0065 2630

.007 2750

.0075 2830

.008 2900

.009 3070 FOAM CSFRGM

N ***

5506-10-312 "* E-28 bl Franklin Research Center By Date Ch'k'd Date Rev. Date A Divtsson of The Franklin Institute rice Task N19 - Pullout Load Test - Specimen F-2 (Cont'd)

Tube #4 (Cont'd)

Tube Displacement Load

.010 3300

.011 3550

.012 3700

.013 3750 Yield

.030 3800

.060 4000 Tube #5 0 0

.0 185

.0005 800

.001 1100

.0015 1300

.002 1500

.0025 1600

.003 1750

.0035 1900

.004- 2000

.0045 2180

.005 2300

.0055 2430

.006 2500

.0065 2620

.007 2700

.0075 2800

.008 . 2900

.009 3100

.010 3300

.011 3500

.012 3600

.014 3668

.015 3700 Yield FORM CSJRC 81 J

! ta N * #'

5506-10-312 E-29 000.! Franklin Research Center ,, o,,, en ., ., o,,, ,,,. o,,,

@C827.f!'"d"2%IEE Title Task N19 - Pullout Load Test - Spe'cimen F-2 (Cont'd)

Tube #5 (Cont'd)

Tube Displacement Load

.030 3820

.045 3870

.060 4000 Tube #6 0 0

.0 115

.0005 240

.001 300

.0015 380

.002 480

.0025 610

.003 730

.0035 850

.004 950

.0045 1090

.005 1200

.0055 1350

.006 1440

.0065 1550

.007 1700

.0075 1825

.008 1930

.0085 2000

.009 2100

.010 2350

.011 2570

.012 2750

.013 2875

.014 2975

.015 3034 Yield

.030 3275 FORM CS-FRC 81

r ,

"'i' ' " E-30 5506-10-312 N))j 0

Franklin Research Center

^U.'."i"82?f!'"D!"'II"f

. o ra,.

Task fl19 - Pullout Load Test - Specimen F-2 (Cont'd)

Tube #6 (Cont'd)

Tube Displacement Load

.045 3360

.060 3450 Tube #7 0 0 0 158

.001 570

.0015 780

.002 1050

.0025 1700

.0045 1900

.005 2000

.006 2500

.0065 2364

.007 2400

.0075 2500

.008 2570

.0085 2630

.009 2690

.010 2760

.011 2800

.012 2900 Yield

.015 2956

.030 3090

.045 3172

.060 3275 ,

l 3

FORM CS-FRC-81

I I ..

Protect "***

5506-10-312 E-31 b j Franklin Research Center ,, o,,, c, ., ., o,,, n, . o,,,

^tS 27.fMead W' Tette Task N19 - Pullout Load Test - Specimen F-2 (Cont'd)

Tube #8 Tube Displacement Load 0 0 0 150 0 Reset 800

.0005 927

.001 1150

.0015- 1300

.002 1530

.0025 1650

.003 1740

.0035 1800

.004 1970

.0045 2100

.005 2200 -

.0055 2400

.006 2475

.007 2600

.008 2800

.0085 3000

.009 3150

.010 3340

.011 3560

.012 3680

.013 3750 Yield

.015 3800

.045 3900

.060 4060 Tube #9

' O O O 150

.0005 1075

- .0015 1600 FORM CS-FRC41

.. 1

• i"'

5506-10-312 "* E-32 N[0 IJ j Franklin Research Center ,, o,,, ..,., o,,, ,,,, o,,,

^ dol 2 @7AUEF Task N19 - Pullout Load Test - Specimen F-2 (Cont'd)

Tube #9 (Cont'd)

Tube Displacement Load

.002 1774

.004 2000

.0045 2500

.005 2285

.0055 2400

.006 2550

.0065 2650

.007 2800

~

.0075 2875

.008 3000

.0085 3074

,.009 3150

.0095 3200

.010 3270

.011 3170 Yield

.030 3430

.045 3540

.060 3675 ,

Tube #10 .

0 0 0 170

.0005 530

.001 650

.001 1000

.002 1300

.0025 1575

.003 1760 FORM CS-FRC-81

r-Project Page 5506-10-312 E-33 qIpi UJdb. Franklin Research Center ,, o,,, oy,., o,,, ,,,' o,,,

^ D821.fl'Yd7'iIt' Title Task N19 - Pullout Load Test - Specimen F-2 (Cont'd) Tube #10 (Cont'd) Tube Disolacement Load

                                    .0035                  1900
                                    .004                   2080
                                    .0045                  2200
                                    .005                   2400
                                    .0055                  2500
                                    .006                   2675
                                    .0065                  2775
                                    .007                   2900
                                    .008                   2974
                                    .009                   3000
                                    .010                   3083
                                    .012                   3150 Yield
                                    .015                   3220
                                     .030                  3300
                                     .045                  3385
                                     .060                  3500 l     ,

l l i FORM CS-FRC41

s

                                                                                                      .. t N                                        5506-10-312                              E-34 y^000 Franklin Research Center 3,                  o,,,  3 .,.,    o,,,   , , .      o,,,
              ^ UO82fd!'"D$ Pef
                .                              LC & JS & DDC Task N19 - Pullout Load Test - Specimen F-1 Tube Reference

• Tube Reference
• Tube Maximum Tube No. at Start at Finish Displacement Load 2 1.724 1.775 .051 4100 lb 3 1.750 1.875 .105 4000 lb 8 1.700 1.741 .041 4050 lb 9 1.755 1.847 .092 3800 lb
• Note, tube reference is dimension from tube plug face to Instron mounting plate for tubesheet.

Task N21 Project 5506-10-312 . Data are in Table 2 of the report. ronu cse nc si

m APPENDIX F m-PHOTOGRAPHS OF TEST ASSEMBLIES l 1 1 1 l . 0. Franklin Research Center A Division of The Franklin Institute The Bensemn Frawn Parkway, PNLa.. Pa 19103 (215) 448 1000 \

 /

0 Y PAGES F-1 to F-7 LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK \ l l l l}}