ML20141K373

Trip Rept of 851126 Audit Discussions Per Slenderness Ratio Limitations for Hanger Type Supports.Ebasco Svcs,Inc Considering Adoption of Revised Procedure.Slenderness Ratios Should Be Used Only Where Uncertainties Exist

ML20141K373
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	12/05/1985
From:	Reich M BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY
To:	Shao L NRC
Shared Package
ML20141K361	List: ML20141K357 ML20141K373 ML20141K376 ML20141K381 ML20141K383 ML20141K394 ML20141K403
References
NUDOCS 8601220464
Download: ML20141K373 (3)

Text

I Doc @S,93 83:M9 [Dut90BDEWL9N MPL 6M9-G91MNalmmcM LF B5KGTlLC;75K'7 T.L .

l l WROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LADORATORY MEMORANDUM Docket No.: 50-445/446

)

DATE:

December 5, 1985 l

To: L. Shao l

)

FROM: M.Neich) -

i I suaxcT: Sumary of Audit Discussions Pertaining to Slenderness Ratio Limitations for Hanger-Type Supports for Comanche Peak

i On November 26, 1985, Brookhaven National Laboratory and Teledyne Eng-ineering Services representatives attended a audit discussion with TUGC0 and l its contractors at the EBASCO Offices in NYC. At the discussions. TUGC contractors made a presentation titled, "$1enderness Ratio Limitations for Hanger-Type Supports", which was augmented A copy of with the motion slides pictures at presented of the the $namic l testing of typical cable tray systems.

a listing of meeting attendees and a copy of the pertinent reference meeting,hed.

is attac A summary of the pertinent points made by TUGC0's representatives are listed below:

1. Ceiling mounted cable tray hangers are tension members which under the most severe CPSES seismic conditions my develop short duration, small compression forces. These types of forces are addressed in the commentary of I the Eight Edition of the AISC specification, page 5-105-Section 1.3.3, which

' concludes, "the increase in load, in recognition of random impacts,

• is not re-quired to be applied to supporting columns..."

It was stated that these comments are general and apply to the 7th edi-l tion of the AISC code as well.

2. The AISC specifications for slenderness ratio limitations for tension members are not mandatory.

3. No differences exist between the seventh and eighth editions of the AISC code regarding the slenderness ratio limitations for compression and ten-sion members.

On the basis of these observations. TUGC0 is considering to disregard the slenderness ratio limitation check in the verification of the existing Unit 1 cable try hangers which exhibit static tension forces.

l* l k

4 ADOCM 05000445 PDR

._ ~

L. Shao December 5, 1965 i

Although to date, slenderness ratio limitations have been considered in  !

the verification design of the Unit 2 cable tray hangers. ESASCO is also con- l sidering to adopt the revised procedure. To further support this position, i they claim that slenderness ratios should only be used for original designs when uncertainties exist for loads, welds, sizes, etc. For cogleted designs where absolute quantities are dealt with, the additional conservatism associated with the slenderness ratio check is not required. ,

I ja Attachments cc: P. Berler w/o attachments P.C. Wang w/o attachments i C. Hofager w/o attachments D. Jeng with attachments)

R. Lipinski with attachments) i 1

l

. y - - .. ., .,, ., . , , ._,__-_,,--.,,,,_.,_._m...,, . . , _ . . ..y.. ._-, ..,,,,._.,,- . - -. .

Dacb5,8513:12- BROOKHAVEN NAT'L LAB-CONFIRMATION 4 (516)282-2547 P.04 COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION CABLE TRAY DESIGN VERIFICATION NRC AUDIT MEETING NOVEMBER 26, 1985 AlfENDENCE LIST 4 NAME REPRESE_NTING H.A. Harrison TUGC0 J.J. Rivard Tele @ne J.L. McLean R.L. Cloud Assoc.

R.C. Iotti Ebasco Services Inc.

P.C. Wang Brookhaven National Leb.

M. Reich Brookhaven National Lab.

F. Hettinger ESA5C0 5.J. Chen E8ASCO IMPELL R.D. Wheaton Kevin C. Warapius IMPELL C.R. Hooton TUGC0 R. Su111yan E8ASCO i

J. Padalino EUASCO R. Alexandria ESASCO i

P. Bezier BNL 4

t G

l' l

l l

/

,_ . _ _ . . _ . , _ _ __ . . _ _ . . . _