ML20204F664

Rev 1 to Environ Qualification Rept of Two Duct Sealants

ML20204F664
Person / Time
Site:	Perry
Issue date:	05/28/1986
From:	Farwell C, Rusen W, Woeste R FARWELL & HENDRICKS, INC.
To:
Shared Package
ML20204F659	List: ML20204F664 PY-CEI-NRR-0505, Forwards Rev 1 to Environ Qualification Rept of Two Duct Sealants, Per Sser 8,FSAR & Reg Guide 1.52.Rept & Testing Demonstrate That Integrity of Sealants in Conjunction W/Ductwork Acceptable
References
20137, 20137-R01, 20137-R1, NUDOCS 8608040270
Download: ML20204F664 (17)

Text

-

FarweTT 4 Hendricks. InE Report Number _ _ 20137 Revision ~

1 R1 Date: May 28, 1986 l ENVIRONMENTAL, QUALIFICATION REPORT OF TWO DUCT SEALANTS Prepared for CLEVELAND' .'ECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY 10 NORTH CENTER ROAD PERRY, OHI0 44081 Prepared by FARWELL & HENDRICKS, INC.

1000 FORD CIRCLE MILFORD, OHIO 45150 (513) 831-9390 PREPARED BY:

W'74f_ -

William M. Rusen R1 Engineering Manager __

l APPROVED BY: ,

CHARLES R. *.

W O.Ad h N

• FARWELL, JR. **, ,

Royff. Woeste . I Ma nYg e r , Quality Assurance . E4543 l

?"

REVIEWED AND Signature ( __ _

'%.T*fA~ A .

AP OVED BY:

i i

hlPd

r. ClaF es . Farwel r..P.E.

Pt u'a'!n"/ '-

'' b '

R1 i

ief Exec ve Offic r Da te $'e7f r

/ - Ed P.E. Stamp l Customer: , / d((d.' Date 6-/7-66 pohnCichello-CEICompany pgj!S2BMSEMA E

S 2 013 7. 0 PG0 0 5 R1

l. QUALIFICATION

SUMMARY

AND CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS Report No.: 20137 Rev. No.  : 1 R1 Volume  : 1 of I Date  : 5/28/86 Customer P.O. No.  : 0-9151-61 Customer  : Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company Address  : 10 North Center Road Perry, Ohio 44081 Summary  : The test sample's leak rates were less than l allowable for all functional tests. Seismic test levels were met or exceeded except as noted in ROA 002.

Test Sample (s) : Foster 30-02 Sealant GE Silpruf Sealant This report is in accordance with the contractual document, test plans, and applicable anomalies defined in Appendices A, B and C as presented to Farwell & Hendricks, Inc. by Cleveland Electric Illumina ting Company.

l f

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

20137.0PG006 1.1 Environmental Test Summary The following is a ta bul a ti on of the environmental te s ts performed in this program.

TABLE 1.1 Environmental Test Summary Description Comments Inspection of Equipment R0A 001 Baseline Functional Test Radiation Exposure (normal and accident doses)

Post Radiation Functional Test Thermal Aging (1000 hrs)

Post Thermal Functional Test Seismic Test #1 R0A 002, 003 Post Seismic Functional Test Thermal Aging (Balance of required)

Seismic Test #2 Post Seismic Functional Test 1.2 Record of Anomaly Summary The following is a tabulation of the anomalies recorded in this program. A complete description of the program anomal-ies is presented in Appendix A. The Program contained a total of 3 ROA's.

TABLE 1.2 i

Record of Anomaly Summary ROA Number Description Comments 001 Calibration of Flowmeter Use As Is 002 Test levels - Seismic Test #1 Use As Is 003 Extra Seismic Test Use As Is

2 013 7 . 0 PG0 0 7

2. INTRODUCTION

, 2.1 Purpose The purpose of this report is to document the results of

the qualification program performed by Farwell &

Hendricks, Inc. for Cleveland Electric Ill umi na ti n g Company.

This program was c'onducted at the Farwell & Hendricks, Inc. facilities in Mil f ord, Ohio from 9/17/85 through 3/.25186. . __

Testing was conducted in accordance with the NEQ Test Plan in Appendix B. Testing was performed to demon-strate proper performance of the test sample's Class 1E functions.

2.2 Reference Regulations and Specifications The following documents in addition to those listed in Appendix B & C provide the guidelines for the perfor-mance of the subject program:

IEEE 323-1974, "IEEE Standard for Qualifying Class 1E Equipment for Nuclear Power Genera ting Stations".

IEEE 344-1975, "IEEE Recommended Practices for Seismic Qualification of Class 1E Equipment for Nuclear Power Genera ting Sta tions".

IEEE 381-1977, "IEEE Standard Criteria for Type Tests of Class 1E Modules Used in Nuclear Power Genera ti ng S ta tion s" .

IEEE 383-1974, "IEEE Standard for Type Test of Class 1E Electric Cables, Field Splices, and Connections for i Nuclear Power Genera ting Stations".

2.3 Defini tion of Terms commonly

! The following are definitions of terms used

! within this report.

ACTIVATION ENERGY - Parameter in the Arr henius Equation to determine service and accelerated aging. times and/or tempera ture s . -

AGING - The ef fect of operational, e n vi ro n me n tal , and system conditions on equipment during a period of ti me

. up to, but not including design basis events, or the process of simulating these events.

i

20137.0PG008 2.3 (continued)

ARRHENIUS EQUATION - The ma thematical expression relat-ing activation energies and environmental temp era ture s .

BASELINE FUNCTIONAL TEST - Reference measurements made to establish initial test equipment operability and/or condi ti on s.

CLASS 1E EQUIPMENT - Equipment and systems that are essential to emergency plant shutdown and maintenance in a safe condition af ter the design basis event.

COMMON CAUSE FAILURES - Equipment malfunctions or f ail-ures that will occur in all identical equipment due to the same cause.

COMP 0NENTS - Parts, sub-assemblies, and/or assemblies comprise the equipment to be qualified.

CONSTITUENT MATERIALS - Any of a group of compounds or substances used in the manufacture of a component or assembly.

FUNCTIONAL TESTS -

Measurements made of critical pa ra me te r s after each phase of the test program which are compared to the baseline functional test da ta to determine effects of each test phase on the s a f e ty-rela ted opera tion of the subject component or assembly.

INSTALLED LIFE - The interval from i n s tall a ti on to removal, during which the equipment or its components may be subject to design service conditions and sy s tem demands.

MAINTENANCE INTERVAL - The defined calendar time and/or operating cycles (or a combination of both) during which specified performance i s e xpec ted wi thout requirement for maintenance or adjustment.

MARGIN - the difference between specified service condi-tions and the simulated conditons used during the test qualification program.

QUALIFIED LIFE - The period of time, prior to the start of a design basis event, for which the equipment de-mon s tra te d its ability to meet the design . requirements for the specified service conditions. At the end of its qualified life, the test sample must ma i n ta i n its ability to perform the safety-related functions required for the po s tul a ted de sign-ba si s and post design-ba sis events.

1

2 013 7 . 0 PG0 0 9 2.3 (chntinued) j REQUIRED RESPONSE SPECTRUM - The shock response acceler-ation levels, as a function of f requency, required for seismic qualification of a test sample. ,

RESONANCE - For the purposes of this qualifica tion pro-gram, a structural resonance is defined as an amplifi-i cation of the response of the test sample at a given structural loca tion wi th respect to the input motion, where the response amplification factor is grea ter than or equal to two (2), and the re sponse exhibits a cor-responding phase shift from the input motion.

SAFETY-RELATED EQUIPMENT - See the definition for Class 1E Equipment.

SERVICE CONDITIONS - Environmental, loading, power and signal conditions expected as a result of normal operat-ing requirements, expected extremes (abnormal) in opera-ting requirements, and postulated conditions appropriate for the design basis events of the plant.

TEST SAMPLE - A device, compone n t, or assembly tested for the specific purpose of its qualification..

TEST RESPONSE SPECTRUM (TRS) -

The shock response i

acceleration levels, as a function of frequency, achiev-ed during a seismic qualification test.

TRANSMISSIBILITY - The acceleration response at a given point on the test sample divided by the test table j input accelera tion. The resultant plot gives a visual indication of structural resonances.

d b

f O

i

,__,-_-.___.m..__..__.,,,__-__-----.c.y ,,___ ..- ___ . ,

20137.0PG010

3. DESCRIPTION OF EQUIPMENT The equipment subjected to the environmental qualification program reported herein consists of two 24" sections of 12" x 12" duct capped on each end. The sealants are placed internally in the longitudinal mechanical joints (Pittsburgh lock), e x te r n a l l y on the longitudinal joints, be tween the e x te rnal s ti tc h welds on the transverse duct flanges and under a plate which covers a 1" a hole in the side of each duct sample. In addition a plate covering a 1" hole in the side of each duct has been provided without sealants for leak comparison before and af ter sealant applica tion. This hole is intended to simulate the attachment of the instrumentation to the ducts. -

This equipment is identified in Table 3.1 TABLE 3.1 EQUIPMENT

SUMMARY

F&H Tag Number De s c ri p ti on 20137-01-01-01 Foster. 30-02 Sealant 20137-02-01-01 GE Silpruf Sealant

20137.0PG0Il R1 4 DESCRIPTION OF TEST PROGRAM AND SEQUENCE The test program reported herein incorporates segments which simulate operational service conditions, accident and post-accident con di ti on s , and extreme service conditions, as applicable, for the prospective installa tion. The following is a brief description of the subject qualification program.

4.1 Safety-Rela ted Functions In all test phases, the primary concern is not only to demons tra te the te s t samples a bili ty to survive the

, subject tests, but to demonstrate their ability to con-tinue to perform all intended safe ty functions through-out the opera.tional service conditions tests, as well as the design-basis event. Failure of the test samples to perform these functions is considered an anomaly. All anomalies for this program are recorded in Appendix A.

4.2 Service Conditions The servi ~ce conditions which provide the basis for this qualifica tion program are described in this section.

The normal opera tional service conditions, extreme service conditions, seismic conditions, and accident and pos t-accident condi tions f or the qualification program reported herein are presented in Table 4.1.

TABLE 4.1 SERVICE CONDITIONS Temperature Average 116*F Loss of Site Power 177'F for 100 hours0.00116 days <br />0.0278 hours <br />1.653439e-4 weeks <br />3.805e-5 months <br /> Accident 144*F for 180 days Ra dia tion ( T o ta l integra ted Dose)

Normal 9.4 x 106 rads gamma R1 Accident (180 days) 4.1 x 107 rads gamma R1 Seismic 5 OBE a t generic HVAC levels 1 SSE

2 013 7. 0 PG012 R i

4.3 Test Sequence The test samples were subjected to the following test sequence.

R1 a) Receiving Test samples were received and logged. Receiving forms and/or bills of lading are a part of program docume n ta ti on.

i b) Component Visual Inspection '

3 Test samples were given.a visual inspection af ter receipt. Items were assigned control numbers and placed in controlled storage, c) Baseline Functional Tests A de termina tion of the "as received" operability of the test samples was made to provide da ta to compare against future functional test data for the purpose of determining the extent of functional de-gra da tion caused by the quali fi ca tion program.

Functional tests were performed before and af ter the sealing plate was installed on the sides of the test samples.

d) Radia tion Exposure / Post Radiation Functional

' The tes t sample was shipped to an approved radi-a tion f acility where it was subjected to normal and accident radia tion test doses. Afterwards, func-tional tes ts were performed to assess the radiation effects on test sample performance, i

e) Thermal Aging / Post Thermal Functionals a

The test samples were exposed to an environment of elevated temp e ra tu re s to a ccel era te the aging j process. The test sequence was modified after lI approxima tely 1000 hours0.0116 days <br />0.278 hours <br />0.00165 weeks <br />3.805e-4 months <br /> of thermal aging to include i

a seismic test that would provide qualifica tion for less than 40 years if the samples failed at the comple te aging program. Afterwards, functional tests were performed to assess the effects of thermal aging on test sample performance.

i i

2 013 7 . 0 PG013 4.3 (continued) f) Seismic Qualification #1/ Post Seismic Functionals The test samples were subjected to a series of seismic events at the required levels except as noted in R0A 002, found in Appendix A of this report. Afterwards, functional tests were performed to assess the effects of seismic testing on test sample performance.

g) Thermal Aging / Post Thermal Functionals .

The test samples were exposed to an environment of elevated tempe ra ture s for the remainder of the required time to age the samples to 40 years.

Functional tests were performed upon completion.

h) Seismic Qualification #2/ Post Seismic Functionals The test samples were subjected to a series of seismic events at the required levels. Afterwards, f unc ti onal te s ts were performed to assess the effects of seismic te s ti n g on te s t sample performance.

1) Repackaging / Shipping The test samples were returned to Cleveland Electric Illumina ting Company.

d O

2 013 7 . 0 PG014 4

5. TEST PROCEDURES i

This section documents the procedures followed for the test reported herein. These procedures are in accordance with Quality Assurance requirements in 10CFR50, Appendix B, ANSI N45.2-1977, ANSI /ASME NQA-1-1983, and Fa rwell & Hendricks, Inc. Qua l i ty Assurance Manual and Technical Procedures Manual except as noted in ROA 001. Additionally, all te s t-ing conducted met the requirements of 10CFR21, 5.1 Baseline Functional Tests

The Baseline Functional Tests were performed in

. accordance with the Test Procedures described in I Appendix B. Da ta from these tests are presented in Appendix D.

5.2 Radiation Exposure The radia tion aging portion of the subject program was performed at Isomedix Inc., Parsippany, New Jersey, under the supervision of Farwell & Hendricks, Inc. te s t engineers.

i The subject test samples were exposed to gamma radia-tion da ta To ta l In tegra ted Dose of5,524 x 10 7 rads gamma for the 20137-01-01-01 and 5.488 x 107 rads gamma for the 20137-02-01-01 sample rads (airequivalen t). A Cobal t-60 source wa s used. Certification of radiation aging results are provided in Appendix E. Table 5.1 documents the ra di a tion requirements for each test

. sample.

! Following radia tion exposure, functional tests were performed by Farwell & Hendricks, Inc. in accordance with the procedures described in the NEQ Test Plan p re se n te d in Appendix B. Da ta from these tests is presented in Appendix D.

5.3 Thermal Aging l Tha tharmal aging portion of the subject program ws:

i performed at Farwell & Hendricks, Inc., Milford, Ohio.

4 Thermal aging parameters were obtained from material analysis using the computerized Sys tem 1000 Radia tion and Aging Effects Library. .

! The present s ta te-o f-the-a r t allows for artificial

! a ccelera tion of time / tempera ture ef fects by subjecting

. test samples to tempera tures grea ter than their actual

! environmental conditions but less than their lowest specified constituent material temperature maximum. The.

l I

2 013 7 . 0 PG 015 5.3 (continued) considered to be insignificant. Thus, aging conditions are based on the properties of the non-me tallic con-s ti tue n t ma terial s, with aging times and/or tempera-tures defined by the Arrhenius equation.

The thermal aging program con si s te d of placing the subject test articles in an environmental chamber for a specified time interval at a predetermined aging tempe ra tu re . Table 5.2 documents the aging times and tempera ture s for the test sample. Test data is pre-sented in Appendix F.

J At approxima tely 995 hours0.0115 days <br />0.276 hours <br />0.00165 weeks <br />3.785975e-4 months <br />, at the customer's request, the test samples were removed from the aging oven and functionally tested. See ROA 003, Appendix A. The

' samples were then subjected to a seismic test program as specified in the test plan. This additional testing was performed to insure the samples would be qualified for a portion of the 40 year life of the plant. The samples were f unc ti onally te s ted a t the end of the seismic testing and returned to the aging ovens for the

, remainder of the required thermal aging.

Following Thermal Aging, f u n c tional tests were performed in accordance with the Functional Test Procedures described in the NEQ Test Plan presented i in Appendix B. Da ta from these tests is presented in Appendix H.

~

5.4 Seismic Qualifica tion Test #1 and #2 Seismic testing was performed in accordance with the Test Procedures described in the Seismic Test Plan pre sen te d in Appendix C. Test data is presented in Appendices G, H. I, J, and K.

Following Seismic Qualification, functional tests were performed in accordance wi th the Functional Test Procedures described in the Seismic Test Plan pre sen ted in Appendix C. Da ta from these tests is presented in Appendix D.

__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ , _ _ . _ , _ , _ ,__._,.-_,.,_-,m . _ _ _ ,

20137.0PG016 R:

TABLE 5.1 RADIATION AGING REQUIREMENTS F4H TAG NUMBER REQUIRED TID ACTUAL TID DOSE RATE 20137-01-01-01 5.34 x 107 5.524 x 107 2.44 x 105 rads, gamma rads, gamma rads./ hour 20137-02-01-01 5.45 x 107 5.488 x 107 2.45 x 105 R1 rads. gamma rads. gamma rads / hour l

2 013 7 . 0 PG 017 i TA8LE 5.2 THERMAL AGING TIMES AND TEMPERATURES Aging F8H Tag Number Oven # Temperature Aging Time (Deg. C) (hours) i 20137-02-01-01 3&2 110*C 994.94 accumulated Silpruf for Seismic Test #1 i

3091.98 accumulated for Seismic Test #2 20137-01-01-01 3&2 110*C 994.94 accumulated Foster for Seismic Test #1 1518.83 accumulated for Seismic Test #2 4

1 1

2 013 7 . 0 PG 018

t. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA The acceptance criteria are the safety-function requirements tra n sl a ted to criteria tha t could be applied during the qualification program. The acceptance cri teria employed were:

a) Seismic Test Response Spectra (TRS) must envelop the Required Response Spectra (RRS) by a 105 margin.

b) The sealant material shall retain its function as demon-strated in functional tes ts a f ter each portion of the test program as specified by the test plan.

l l

2 013 7 . 0 PG 019

7. TEST RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS A summary of the results and conclusions are presented in this section.

7.1 Test Results The results of the qualification program reported here- i in are summarized in Table 7.1. This table relates to the test sample numbers to their associated test data locations in the Appendices. Relevant photographs of the test set-ups are presented in Appendix K.

7.2 Conclusions It is concluded, based on the data obtained in the qualification program reported herein that the test samples identified in Section 3 met the acceptance criteria defined in Section 6.

i e

[

2 013 7 . 0 PG 0 2 0 TABLE 7.1 QUALIFICATION

SUMMARY

FAH Tag Number Completion Association S ta tus ROA's 20137-01-01-01 RA, TA, S 001, 002, 003 20137-02-01-01 RA, TA, S 001, 002, 003 RA - Radiation Aging TA - Thermal Aging S - Seismic

.