ML20203A899
| ML20203A899 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05200003 |
| Issue date: | 02/11/1998 |
| From: | Joseph Sebrosky NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9802240145 | |
| Download: ML20203A899 (47) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_ ____ - ___- __ _ -
, February 11, 1998 APPLICANT: Westinghouse Electric Corporation PROJECT: AP600
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF AP600 MEETING TO DISCUSS AP600 STRUCTURAL MODULES The subject meeting was held on January 20 and 21,1998, at Brookhaven National Laboratory in Upton New York. Attachment 1 is a list of the participants. Attachment 2 contains the handouts provided by Westinghouse during the meeting. This attachment includes miscellaneous changes to the standard safety analysis report (SSAR) that were agreed to during the meeting to resolve issues. Westinghouse took an action to incorporate these changes in a future SSAR revision. The purpose of the meeting was to review structural calculations in order to resolve final safety evaluation report (FSER) open items that were sent to Westinghouse in a December 9,1997, letter. Attachment 3 provides the details of the results of the review for the selected FSER open items. A draft of this meeting summary was provided to Westinghouse to allow them the opportunity to comment on the summary prior to issuance, original signed by: Joseph M. Sebrosky, Project Manager j Standardization Project Directorate Division of Reactor Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 52-003 Attachments: As stated cc w/atts:_ See next page _ DISTRIBUTION: See next page 1 DOCUMENT NAME: A:UAN_STRC. SUM To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachment / enclosure "E" = Copy l with attachment / enclosure "N" = No copy OFFICE PM:PDST:DRPM l DE:ECQSg l D:PDST:DRPM l NAME JMSebrosky:sg hcTl TCherFD TRQuay $4 DATE 02/ff/98 f/ 02/9 /98 02/ 9/98 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY e-m
- C-~{ []
9002240145 980211
l DISTRIBUTION w Jttachments: Docket File PUBLIC PDST R/F TKenyon BHuffman JSebrosky DScaletti JNWilson DISTRIBUTION w/o attachments: SCollins/FMiraglia,012 G18 - BSheron,012 G18 BBoger,012 G18 JRoe DMatthews TQuay WDean,016 E15 ACRS (11) JMoore,015 B18 TCheng,0-7 H15 C1 3gchi,0 7 H15 i i
/
pFo3 4
.n
< , , 'dd _
..)
I Westinghouse Electric Corporation Docket No. 52-003 cc: Mr. Nicholas J. Liparuto, Manager Mr. Frank A. Ross Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Analysis U.S. Department of Energy, NE-42 Nuclear and Advanced Technology Division Office of LWR Safety and Technology Westinghouse Electric Corporation 19901 Germantown Road P.O. Box 355 s Germantown, MD 20874 Pittsburgh, PA 15230 Mr. Russ Bell Mr. B. A. McIntyre Senior Project Manager, Programs Advanced Plant Safety & Licensing Nuclear Energy institute Westinghouse Electric Corporation 1776 l Street, NW Energy Systems Business Unit Suite 300 , Box 355 Washington, DC 20006-3706 Pittsburgh, PA 15230 Ms. Lynr, Connor Ms. Cindy L. Haag Doc-Starch Associates Advanced Plant Safety & Licensing Post Office Box 34 Westinghouse Electric Corporation Cabin John, MD 20818 Energy Systems Business Unit Box 355 Dr. Craig D. Sawyer, Manager Pittsburgh, PA 15230 Advanced Reactor Programs GE Nuclear Energy Mr. M. D. Beaumont 175 Curtner Avenue, MC-754 Nuclear and Advanced Technology Division San Jose, CA 95125 Westinghouse Electric Corporation One Montrose Metro Mr. Robert H. Buchholz 11921 Rockville Pike GE Nuclear Energy Suite 350 175 Curtner Avenue, MC-781 Rockville, MD 20852 San Jose, CA 95125 Mr. Sterling Franks Barto i Z. Cowan, Esq. U.S. Department of Energy Eckert Scamans Cherin & Mellott NE 50 600 Grant Street 42nd Floor 19901 Germantown Road Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Germantown, MD 20874 Mr. Ed Rodwell, Manager Mr. Charles Thompson, Nuclear Engineer PWR Dasign Certi'ication AP600 Certification Electric Power Research Institute NE 50 3412 Hillview Avenue 19901 Germantown Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Germantown, MD 20874 Mr. Robert Malers, P.E. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Radiation Protection Rachel Carson State Office Building P.O. Box 8469 Harrisburg, PA 17105-8469
. s AP600 MEETING TO DISCUF . AP600 STRUCTURAL MODULES 1 MEETING ATYENDEES JANUAR 20 AND 21,1998 d6ME ORGANIZATlON DON LINDGREN WESTINGHOUSE RICHARD ORR WESTINGHOUSE TOM CHENG NRR/DE/ECGB JOSEPH BRAVERMAN BML(NRC CONSULTANT)
JOE SEBROSKY NRR/DRPM/PDST ! 1 Attachmen' 1
i NRC Structural Meeting - 1/20 - 21/98 FSER Open items related to Structural Modules FSER Ooen items 220.121 Design of shear studs 220.122 Critical sections for CIS modules added to SSAR 3.8.3 Critical sections for fuel pool modules added to SSAR Appendix 3H in response to FSER Open item 220.128 Summary reports are internal AP600 documents made available to NRC to assist during structural reviews 220.123 Implementation of design procedures in des!gn calculations - 220.126 Air baffle evaluation for air flow fluctuations 220.128 Auxiliary building roof slab Shield building roof covered under 220.124 Critical sections for auxiliary and shield building provided in SSAR Appendix 3H Documents 1100-SUC-101, Rev.6 Structural wall modules - Containment Internal structures GW-SUP-003, Rev 2 Structural Analysis Methodology for Steel-Concrete Composite Panels with Welded Shear Studs. 1100-SUC-003, Rov.1 Structural modules - Shear studs, General design 1200 SUC-101, Rev/h Structural moduler - areas 5 and 6 - auxiliary building MT03-S3C-022, Rev.1 IRWST Steel Wall Structural Design Summary reoorts to assist review 1100-S3R-001 Design Summary Repci Containment Internal Structures 1200 S3R-001 Design Summary Report Auxiliary and Shield ,N,h; Buildings Status of FSER Ooen items Attachment 2
4
- C HAAKJS ~Tu SSM SfenoVS 37 MP 3. 8, lhterpele IWurem sde$)wl 0 Iss N M qenin k F S fA U p llt w ans c % es s k ,, % attal.1 py> .
e W-9 4 4-D- e
@D4 4 +
m 4 999 e e W
'hh 1
% -4. A e$ = w.Nw m- e 3.w me - -+ + - ge ww's-- e e.w gne .aae-h w s , e+e---> e---pegw- e e 44- e 4mema wW 4M 4 -e -
-e wwe s et ,-
6 -aewg, , amp ee g6 apea-- O he .~- e -m e+-=. wem e- -. -wa.*-* .++- .m -mem e,w me--.ee--,
. w . .. -e ww --e.--e.
" u +6W6 -Wh ) *w'-* - 4h w tMeg 4'.re-W @h Gete9* M -@+- *-59 e*- p eyN** 6 e'- -- *4
- 4Mm - h M 64M ' WM h m.6 eA4 -gui-e g~ em-h mN9 wo e-e. *+9O _.
@W s6e =>wm dwe 4+r-*
_ .-- ...____ __.m. .__ _ _ . -. . . . _ _ . .
.e. __ , _ __. - . _ _ ... __
w - + - , .. mmesom < w -. - . . . - , - - . - . -= . .++-e e- -. ~..h -a,--- --.m. *- a*=-- - *
- am,,.e , mm-. --w+--.me* a, owme. amm .m. meme, -- as. -.ew.- .mme.... *-
. -w = = . + e-.
+
+w
- w--wm-ne n, e, '
e - @@ 9 im4s y Dee g - - -
- 3. Design of Structures, Components, Equipment, and Systems 3.7.2.14 Determination of Seismic Category I Structure Overturning Moments Subsection 3.8.5.5.4 describes the effects of seismic overtuming moments.
3.7.2.15 Analysis Procedure for Damping Subsection 3.7.1.3 presents the damping values used in the seisnue analyses, For structures comprised of different material types, the composite modal damping approach utilizing the strain energy method is used to determine the composite modal damping values. Subsection 3.7.2.4 presents the damping values used in the soil-structure interaction analysis s 3.7.3 Seismic Subsystem Analysis "Ihis subsection deschs the seismic analysis methodology for subsystems, which are those structures and compents that do not have an interface with the soil structure interaction analyses. Structures and components considered as subsystems include the following: w{ uth a Structures, such as floor slabf miscellaneous steel platforms and framing
=
Equipment modules consisting of components, piping, supports, and structural frames Equipmr t including vessels, tanks, heat exchangers, valves, and instrumentation a Distributive systems innding piping and supports, electrical cable trays and supports, HVAC ductwork and su; orts, instrumente '.m tubing and supports, and conduits and' supports Subsection 3.9.2 describes dynamic analysis methods for the reactor internals. Subsection 3.9.3 describes dynamic analysis methods for the primary coolant loop support system. Subsection 3.7.2 describes the analysis methods for seismic systems, which are those structures and components that are considered with the foundation and supporting media. Section 3.2 includes the seismic classification of building structures, systems, and components. 3.7.3.1 Seismic Analysis Methods Tne methods used for seismic analysis of subsystems include, modal response spectram analysis, time history analysis, and equivalent static analysis. The methods described in this subsection are acceptable for any subsystem. The particular method used is selected by the designer based on its appropriateness for the specific item. Items analyzed by each method are identified in the descriptions of each method in the fc,llowing paragraphs. 3.7.3.2 Determination of Number of Earthquake Cycles Seismic Category I structures, systems, and components are evaluated for one occurrence of the safe shutdown earthquake (SSE). In addition, subsysteins sensitive to fatigue are evaluated for cyclic motion due to earthquakes smaller than the safe shutdown earthquake. Using Revision: 17 [ Westinghouse 3.7-23 October 31,1997
/
~ _ - __ _ _ _ _ _ _
, n
- 3. Design of Structures, Components, Equipment, and Systems l
I ( { j snalysis rr.ethods, these effects are considered by inclasion of seismic events with an amplitude not less than one-third of the safe shutdown earthquake amplitude. He number d_ of cycles is calculated based on IEEE 344-1987 (Reference 21) to provide the equivalent
.. fatigue damage of two safe shutdown earthquake events with 10 high-stress cycles per event.
j Typically, there are five seismic events with an amplitude equal to one-third of the safe shutdowt. earthquake response. Each event hac U high-stress cycles. For ASME Class 1 i piping, &c fatigue evaluation is performed based on five seismic events with an amplitude 3 y equal to one third of the safe shutdown earthquake response. Each event has 63 high-stress cycles. d'^ When seismic qualification is based on dynamic testing for structures, systems, or components ' C containing mechanisms that must clunge position in order to function, operability testing is
$ performed for the safe shutdown earthquake preceded by one or more earthquakes. The
- 3 number of preceding earthquakes is calculated based on IEEE-344-1987 (Reference 21) to j provide the equivalent fatigue damage of one safe shutdown earthquake event. Typically, the i preceding earthquake is one safe shutdown earthquake event or five one half safe shutdown g earthquake events.
o 3.7.3.3 Procedure Used for Modeling
?t ne dynamic analysis of any complex system requires the discretization ofits mass and elastic 3 ( properties. his is accomplished by concentrating the mass of the system at distinct (C ;, y
( characteristic points or nodes, and interconnecting them by a network of clastic springs representing the stiffness properties of the systems. The stiffness properties are computed (
'; rs either by hand calculations for simple systems or by finite element methods for more complex g systems.
y) J 1F Nodes are located at mass concentrations and at additional points within the system. Hey 3 g are selected in such a way as to provide an adequate representation of the mass distribution _ -:: e and high stress concentration points of the system. E b k
- d3 At each node, degrees of freedom correspondirig to translations along three orthogonal axes, 5 gi 2 and rotations about these axes are assigned. He number of degrees of freedom is reduced b by :he number of constraints, where applicable. For equipment qualification, reduced degrees
- d. 2 e' of freedom are acceptable provided that the analysis adequately and conservatively predicts 7 j! the response of the equipment.
He size of the model is reviewed so that a sufficient number of masses or degrees of freedom
- t. n ;- are used to compute tue response of the system. A model is considered adequate provided 3 2 y : hat additional degrees of freedom do not result in more than a 10 percent increase in
[3 -f response, or the number of der *" of freedom equals or exceeds twice the number of modes
- g. with frequencies less than 33 N .
L-- p -d \ __f Dynamic models are prepared for :he followirg seismic Category I steel structures. Response I spectrum or time history analyses are performed for structural design. Revision: 17 October 31,1997 3.7-24 [ Westhghat!Se
- 3. Design of Structures, Components, Equipment, and Systems guide the operator on a timely basis to determine if the level of earthquake ground motion requiring shutdown has been exceeded. De procedures will follow the guidance of EPRI Reports NP 5930 (Reference 1), TR-100082 (Reference 17), and NP-F ' (Reference 18), as modified by the NRC staff (Reference 32).
3.7.5.3 Seismic Interaction Review The seistric interaction review will be updated by the Combined License applicant. Bis review is performed in parallel with the seismic margin evaluation. De review is based on as-procured data, as well as the as constructed condition. I 3.7.5.4 Reconciliation of Seismic Analyses of Nuclear Island Structures l l De Combined License applicant will reconcile the seismic analyses described in subsection 1 l 3.7.2 for detail design changes such as those due to as-procured equipment informatiogg If g, Q it is necessary to update the soil structure interaction analyses, these analyses pfd bes( I performed with site specific soil properties using seismic input defined by the.,Ir.spohse e spectra y $$ l given in Figures 3.7.1 1 and 3.7.12. f Tevdune are an.pf46lr ink! on an m d/mn 3.7.6 References e., o}e.,F wA A m.L4 J .4c el sab 37 pr*WN tk an,pLle 4 in sen.a poor mysnse spritta do acl
- 1. EPRI Report NP-5930, "A Criterion for Determining Exceedance of the Operating Basis Earthquake," July 1988.
%c{ f4e de;ijn A.;i3.pfog mponj, ,pect7. &y
- 2. Uniform Building Code,1991. N# *
- 3. ASCE Standard 4-86, " Seismic Analysis of Safety-Related Nuclear Structures and Commentary," American Society of Civil Engineers, September 1986.
- 4. ASME B&PV Code, Code Case N-411.
- 5. H. B. Seed, and I. M. Idriss, " Soil Moduli and Damping Factors for L,. 4ic Response Analysis," Report Nc. EERC 70-14, Earthquake Engineering Research C;nter, University of Califomia, Berkeley,1970.
- 6. H. B. Seed, R. T. Wong, I. M. Idriss, and K. Tokimatsu, " Moduli and Damping Factors t'or Dynamic Analysis of Cohesionless Soils," Repon No. UCB/EERC-8914. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of Califomia, Berkeley,1984.
- 7. Bechtel Corporation, "Usert and neoretical Manual for Corr. pater Program BSAP (CE800)," Revision 12,1991.
- 8. Bechtel Corporation, "neoretical, Validation end Usert Manuals for Computer Program SASSI (CE994)," 198F Revision: 12 Apr0 30,1997 3,7 50 3 Wesdnghatise
- 3. Deelge of Structures, Cosmponents, Equipament, and Systems refueling cavity are also designed for the hydrostatic head due to the water in the refueling cavity and the hydrodynamic pressure effects of the water due to the safe shutdown
. eenhquake.
Figure 3.8.3 8 shows the typical design details of the structural modules, typical cc,nfiguradon of the wall modules, typical anchorages of the wall modules to the reinforced base concrete, and connections between adjacent modules. Concrete. filled structural wall n.odules are designed as reinforced concrete structures in accordance with the requirements of ACI-349, as supplemented in the following paragraphs The faceplates are considered as the reinforcing steel, bonded to the concrete by headed studs. De application of ACI-349 and the, supplemental requirements are supponed by the behavior studies described in subsection 3.8.3.4.1. De design of critical sections is described in the design summary repon (sce subsection 3.8.3.5.7). 3.8.3JJ.1 Design for Axial Loads and Bending Design for axial load (tension and compression), in plane bending, and out-of plane bending is in accc: dance with the requirements of ACI 349, Chaptert 10 and 14. , 3.8.3.5.3.2 Design for In Plane Shear Design for in-plane shear is in accordance with the requirements of ACI 349, Chapters 11 and
- 14. De steel faceplates are treated as reinforcing steel, contributing as provided in Section Ihf ACI 349, 10 3.8.3.5.3.3 Design for Out-of Plane Shear Design for out-of-plane shear is in accordance with the requirements of ACI 349, Chapter 11.
3.8.33.3.4 Evaluation for Thermal Lunds ne effect of thermal loads on the concrete-filled structural wall modeles is evaluated by using the working stress design method for load combination 3 of Table 3.8.4-2. This evaluation is in addition to the evaluation using the strength design method of ACI-349 for the load combination without the thermal load. Acceptance for the load combination with normal-thermal loads, which includes the thermal transients described in subsection 3.8.3.3.1,-is that the stress in general areas of the steel plate be less than yield. In local areas where the stress may exceed yield the total stress intensity range is less than twice yield. His evaluation of thermal loads is based on the ASME Code philosophy for Service level A loads given in ASME Code, Section III, Subsection NE, Paragraphs NE 3213.13 and 3221,4. 3.8.3.5.3J Design of Trusses he trusses 1 rovide a structural framework for the modules, maintain the separation 'wtween the faceplates, suppon the modules during transportation and erection, and act as " form ties" between the faceplates when concrete is oeing placed. After the concrete has cured, the trusses i Revision: 17 3 Wesdnghouse 3.8-33 October 31,1997
- 3. Desip of Structuns, Ccaporests, Equipment, aid Systems 3.8.3.5.6 Steel Form Modules he steel form modules consist of plate reinforced with angle stiffeners and tee sections as shown in Figure 3.8.3-16. The steel form modules are designed for concrete placement loads defined in subsection 3.8.3.3 2.
The steel form modules are designed as steel structures according to the requirements of AISC-N690. his code is applicable since the form modules are constructed entirely out of structural steel plates and shapes and the applied loads are resisted by the steel elements. 3.8.3.5.7 Design Summary Report ' A design summary report is prepared for containment intemal structures documenting that the I FwA cr structuies meet the a:ceptance criteria specified in subsection 3.8.4.5. R:f;;=: "' p cvid: 10 dc!p := .rj npan Cf:in! =:! = i=hd-d in 1: apen =: 110 111 Ecut wn; wd Of 1: =Nd!ng =vitj S c; i = 0 cf w n : ::: = g = : = cr = vitj NO-i =: xd of in Ocn d==: =Nding w=:r ::c=g: ri 5 =n:d==: =Nding v=:r ::c=g: :ri :::d rd Cc!=, :upponi.4 cp=.:ing a.ccr . Deviations from the design due to as procured or as-built conditions are acceptable based on an' evaluation consistent with the methods and procedures of Section 3.7 and 3.8 provided the following acceptance criteria are met.
- the structural design meets the acceptance criteria specified in Section 3.8 the _ f - _. ^=r t:ismic floor response spectra d^ "^' - :=d i; dc!;"M"m v m :p =:= by - 'han m ~M sried % arapsie c,iTen 5ge P=ls decien
- s. r.r.y.
Depending on the extent of the deviations the evaluation may range fmm documentation of an engineering judgement to perfor' nance of a revised analysis and design. %e rulh che ,
%htlfon willle documenhd th an as-Sv N-3.8.3.5.8 Design Summary of Critical Sections k nped y 1/e Co jmal latoge app l tad 3.8.3.5.8.1 Structural Wall Modules his subsection summarizes the design of the following critical sections:
- South west wall of the refueling cavity (4' 0' thick)
- South wa'l of west steam generator cavity (2' 6' thick)
- North east wall of in-containment refueling water storage tar.k (2' 6" thick) he thicknesses and locations of these walls which are pan of the boundary of the in-containment refueling water storage tank are shown in Table 3.8.3-3 and Figure 3.8.318.
nm
.vnnon nie imo Revision: Draft W Westinghouse 3.8 37 December,1997 lv@:
~
- 3. Design of Structures, Components, Equipment, and Systems elevation 66'-6" to elevation 135' 3". De minimum thickness of the faceplates is 0.5 inch.
he ceiling of the main control room (floor at elevation 135'-3"). and the instrumentation and control rooms (floor at elevation 117'-6") are designed as finned floor modules Qigure 3.8.4A A finned floor consists of a 24-it.:h-thick concrete slab poured over a McyF Floote stiffened stee. ; ce ceiling. He fins are rectangular plates welded perpendicular to the plate. !
% gp Shear studs are welded on the other side of the steel plate, and the steel and concrete act as a composite section. De fins are exposed to the environment of the room, and enhance the 3 N. heat-absorbing capacity of the ceiling (see Standard Safety Analysis Report (SSAR) subsection 6.4.2.2). Several shop-fabricated steel panels, placed side by side, are used to construct the stiffened plate ceiling in a modularized fashion. The stiffened plate is designed to withstand construction loads prior to concrete hardening.
De new fuel storage area is a separate reinforced concrete pit providing temporary dry storage for the new fuel assemblies. A cask handling crane travels in the east west direction. He location and travel of this erane prevents the crane from carrying loads over the spent fuel pool, thus precluding them frorn falling into the spent fuel pool. 3.8.4.1.3 Conta ament Air Baffle ne containment air baffle is located within the upper annulus of the shield building, , providing an air flow path for the passive containment cooling system. The air baffle separates the downwm! air flow entering at the air inlets from the upward air flow that cools the containinent vessel and flows out of the discharge stack. De upper portion is supported from the shield building roof and the remainder is supported from the containment vesscl. The air baffle is a seismic Category I structure designed to withstand the wind and tomedo loads defined in Section 3.3. He air baffle structural configuration is depicted in Figures 1.2-14 and 3.8.41. The baffle includes the following sections: A wall supported off the shield building inof (see Figure 1.214) A series of panels attached to the containment vessel cylindrical wall and the knuckle region of the dome A sliding plate closing the gap between the wall and the panels fixed to the containment vessel, designed to accommodate the differential movements between the containment vessel and shield building Flow guides attrhed at the bottom of the air baffle to minimize pressu2e drop. The air baffle is designed to meet the following functional requirements: 1 The baffle and its supports are configured to minimize pressure losses as air flows through the system ( Revisien: 17 ' October 31,1997 3.8-42 W-Westillghouse
- 3. Design of Structures, Components, Equipawat, and Systems 3.8.43.1.5 Dynamic Effects of Abnormal Loads The dynamic effects from the impulsive and impactive loads caused by P , R,. Y,, Y 3, Y,,, and tornado missiles are considered by one of the following methods:
Applying an appropriate dynamic load factor to the peak value of the tr1msient load Using impulse, momentum, sad energy balance techmques
- Performing a time-history dynamic analysis .
I:lastoplastic behavior may be assumed with appropriate ductility ratios, provided excessive deflections will not result in loss of function of any safety related system. Dynamic increase fauors appropriate for the strain rates involved may be applied to static material strengths of steel and concrete for purposes of determining section strength. 3Jl.4.3.2 Load Combinations 3.8.4.3.2.1 Steel Structures The steel structures and components are designed according to the elastic working stress design methods of the AISC.N690 specification using the load combinations specified in Table 3.8.41. 3.8.4.3.2.2 Concrete Structures The concrete structures and components are designed according to the strength design methods of ACI.349 Code, using the load combinations specified in Table 3.8.4-2. 3.8.43.2.3 Live Load for Seismic Design i k ( W cI d & **" N 0/Tbf ** i
, t. Floor live loads, based on requirements during plant construction and main ce activities, e te. are specified varying from 50 to 250 pounds per squa e foot (with the ception of the containment operadng deck which is designed for 800 pounds per square oot specified for
{E y plant maintenance condition), sm.n , ic.h mila hem 91 A m.J. op k, he w h g. inh <e ,r jvaa 4 % <sq 3,w h. rben 3 rows For the local design of members, such as the floors and beams be h4 E c=bbi- O. k u caOnd [ 4 Se:9 tic;udr a m "- r 100 percent of thh specified live loads, or 75 e 4E -- percent of the roof snow load, whichever is applicable, except in the case of the containment g3 ; f operating deck. For the seismic load combination, the containment operating deck is designed for a live load of 200 pounds per square foot which is appropriate for plant operating e condition. These live and snow loads are included as mass in calcula3g the vertical seismic forces on the floors and roof. 'Ihe mass of equipment and distributed systems is included in both the dead and seismic loads. Revision: 17 3 W8Stingh00Se 3.b.47 October 31,1997
- 3. Design of Structures, Components, Equipment, and Systems Steel Construction, Load and Resistance Factor Design, First Edition. See subsection 6.1.2.1 for additional description of the protective coatings.
3.8.4.5.3 Design Summary Report A design sumrr.ary report is prepared for r.eismic Category I structures documenting that the strt.ctures meet the acceptance criteria s_pecified in subsection 3.8.4.t4eIEciite SG runoes Me design summary report. Critical seitions included in the report are: '} h*V8 bl L Passive containment cooling system water storage tank y,m a) ' Shield building roof to cylirter connection
=
Shield building to auxiliary building connection at elevation 180' 44%h e South wall of auxiliary building (column line 1) Interior wall of auxiliary building (column line 7.3)
}
rg nw I'
- West wall of main control room in auxiliary building (column line L), elevation
{ 117'-6" to elevation 153'-0* CI up,118 = North wall of auxiliary building (column line 11 between Q and P), elevation 117' 6"
"" g#g" to elevation 153'-0"
)
Floor slab in north end of auxiliary building at elevation 135'3" including: ( 3 -1M. 4 - 9 inch concrete slab on metal deck
- 24 inch reinforced concrete slab h n3 ismma'y - 24 inch finned floor above the main control room 4, a Spent fuel pool divider wall and floor '
W DeviLions from the design due to as-procured or as built conditions are acceptable based on an evaluation consistent with the methods and procedures of Section 3.7 and 3.8 provided the following acceptance criteria are met. the structural design meets the acceptance criteria specified in Section 3.8 1 the - -f :'i_ seismic floor response spectra A sm; a::_f i: W b e ".::: T^~ pm by r $r 10 mom ewdh anephnot en%a specfalinA6eciion
- s. r. s.4 Depending on the extent of the deviations, the evaluation may range from documentation of an engineering judgement to prformance of a revised analysis and design. %e eulk of/Ac maivatson uil be dcluwk on an as.kib summary crpus j nf.
3.8.4.6 Materials, Quality Control, and Special Construction Te tfr ca,,ftomf tsum app ques This subsection contains information relating to the materials, quality control program, and special construction techniques used in the construction of the other seismic Category I structures, as well as the containment internal structures, Revision: 17 Y WBStingh00se 3.8-51 October 31,1997
- 3. Design of Structures, Composeats, Equipment, and Systems results in the largest demand for the top reinforcement in the basemat. De analyses of the three construction sequences demonstrate the following:
The design of the basemat and superstructure accommodates the construction induced stresses considering the construction sequence and the effects of the settlement time history. The design of the basemat can accommodate delays in the shieki building so long as the auxiliary building construction is suspended at elevation 117
- 0". Resumption in construction of the auxiliary building can proceed os e the shield building is advanced to elevation 100' 0".
The design of the basemat can accommodate delays in the auxiliary building so long as the shield building construction is suspended at elevation 84' 0' feet. Resumption in construction of the shield building can proceed once the auxiliary building is advanced to elevation 100' 0".
%I l p
- After the structure is in place and cured to elevation 100' 0" the basemat and structure g act as an integral 40 foot deep structure and the loading due to construction above this g elevation is not expected to cause significant additional flexural demand with respect 4 to the basemat and the shield buixting concrete below the containment vessel.
Accordingly, there is no need for placing constraints on the construction sequence above b elevation 100' 0'. ( { De site conditions considcred in the evaluation provide reasonable bounds on construction T. g induced stresses in ths basemat. Accordingly, the AP600 basemat design is adequate for d practically all soil sites and it can tolerate major Jations in the construction sequence without causing excessive defonnations, moments and shcars due to settlement over the
%k 9h plant life.
he analyses of altemate construction scenarios show ths.t member forces in the basemat are M acceptable subject to the following limits imposed for ' soft soil sites on the relative level of construction of the buildings prior to completion of both buildings at elevation 82'6*: L
)4
- Concrete vr.sy not be placed above elevation 82' 6* for the shield building or containment internal structure.
Concrete may not be placed above elevation 117'6" in the auxiliary building. 3.8.5.4.[ff Design Summary of Critical Sections The basemat design meets the acceptance criteria specified in subsection 3.8.4.5. Two critical portions of the basemat are identified below together with a summary of their design. De boundaries are defined by the walls and column lines which are shown in Figure 3.7.212-(sheet 1 of 12). Table 3.8.5-3 shows the reinforcement required and the reinforcement provided for the critical sections. k Revision: 17 October 31,1997 3,s.60
$ Westirighouse ,
_d
- 3. Design of Structures, Components, Equipment, and Systems 3.8.3.5.6 Steel Form Modules '
De steel fonn modules consist of plate reinfo th angle stiffeners and tee tions as shown in Fig"re 3.8.3-16,. De steel fo ules are designed for concrete ment loads defined in subsection 3.8.3.3.2. De steel form m es are designed as steel structures ording to the requirements of AISC-N6 's code is applicable since the fo odules are construcrc < entirely out of st steel plates and shapes and the loads are resisted by the steel elements. 5848 3.8 t5sE Design Summary Report * ' A design summary report is prepared for ehms. documenting that the g structures meet the acceptance criteria specified in subse@n 3.P.4.5. ":':=c: 10 p=vii: 1: &:ig :=:rj =per. Cf:!:d :=:!c= inied b 1: :per. =: n x. Scub :::: ad Of S: =Nding =drj . Scut ud cf =n: :::= ;=: :c: =vlrj Nerl =M rd of 5 centd==' =Ndn; :::: ::c=g: e.-1 . 5 cont:.!==: =Ndng re:r =c=g: :=1 ::d ed Cc!=n =pporJng ep: :!n; ".cor . Deviations fmm the design due to as. procured or as built conditions are acceptable based on an evaluation consistent with the methods and procedures of Section 3.7 and 3.8 provided the i following acceptance criteria are met. l . . a the structural design meets the acceptance criteria specified in Section 3.8
- the r;"M .-f the seismic floor response spectra de n^* :=d $: &d;" br!: "^^r mpc ;; 3pecnc by mc= $r !0 p--a* meef % anegara ce#ent sprohel th Oci*n
's:7.f.84.
Depending on the extent of the deviations, the evaluation may range from documentation of an engineering jud;* ment to perfonnance of a revised analysis and design. % C reJulb of. f ultiron JIIle duomenhd as an u-GvM 3.8.3.5.8 ign Summary of Critical Sections ny vah sy & c.4,ml bme applad 3.8.3.5.8.1 Struct Wall Modules his subsecu summarizes the desig f the following critical sections:
- South west w of the refueling cavity 4' 0 thick)
- South wall of t steam generator cavity '6' thick)
- North east wall of . containment refueling er storage tank (2' 6' thick)
De thicknesses and locations f these walls which are art of the boundary of the in-containment refueling water stora tank are shown in Tab 3.8.3 ~;, and Figure 3.8.318.
.woius mie.izien Revision: Draft W Westinghothe g December,1997 1
% mm -______J
;;7:_a lk
- 3. Design of Structures, Components, Equipment, and Systems Basemat between the shield buildine and exterior wall (line 11) and column lines K and L his portion of the basemat is designed as a one way slab spanning a distance of 23' 6" between the walls on column lines K and L Re slab is continuous with the adjacent slabs to the east and west. He critical loading is tiie bearing pressure on the underside of the slab due to dead and seismic loads. His establishes the demand for the top flexural reinforcement at mid span and for the bottom flexural and shear reinforcement at the walls. He basemat is designed for the bearing pressures and membrane forces from the analyses on uniform soil springs described in subsection 3.8.5.4.1. He design moments and shears are increased by 20 percent to accommodate the nonuniform sites defined in subsection 2.5.4.5. Negative moments are redistributed as permitted by ACI 349, ne top and bottom reinforcement in the east west direction of sp.m a'e equal. He reinforcement provided is shoyn in sheets 1,2 and 5 of Figure 3.8.5-3. rypelre4cemd elehdl> dog a 4 bedst @@ emes sbar rrmpene.4 6 3.6m m g y m 3y,g y Basemat between column lines 1 and 2 and column lines K 2 and N This portion of the basemat is designed as a one way slab spaning a distance of 22' 0" between the walls on column lines 1 and 2. De slab is continuous with the adjacent slabs to the north and with the exterior wall to the south. The critical loading is the bearing pressure on the underside of the slab due to dead and seismic loads. His establishes the demand for the top flexural reinforcement at mid span and for the bottom flexural and shear reinforcement at wall 2. He basemat is designed for the tearing pressures and membrane forces from the analyses on uniform soil springs described in subsection 3.8.5.4.1. He design moments and shears are increased by 20 percent to accommodate the nonur. form sites defined in subsection 2.5.4.5. De reinforcement provided is shown in sheets 1, 2 and 5 of Figure 3.8.5 3. 7' pail mdwteaw4 dJaib Aim; m 4 /mn4/ ni@M 4cr skee tvmbtemed an skn 6 A we 3 sv.s.3.
Deviations from the design due to as procured or as-bui' nditions are acceptable based on an evaluation consistent with the methods and proc res of Section 3.7 and 3.8 provided the following acceptance criteria are met.
. De structural design meets ceptance criteria specified in Section 3.8
. De amplitude of ismic floor response spectra do not exceed design basis floor response spe y more than 10 peremt Depen on the extent of the deviations, the evaluatics range from documentation of an, gineering judgement to performance of a revise 51stfIalysis and design.
3.8.5.5 Structural Criteria ne analysis and design of the foundation for the nuclear island structures are according to ACI 349 with margins of structural safety as specified within it. De limiting conditions for the foundation medium, together with a comparison of actual capacity and estimated structure Revision: ?.7 3 Westitigh0Use 3.8-61 October 31,1997
. . 3. Design of Structures, Components, Equipment and Systems 1
= . \.
. .I
' ~. ~. .
o'. 4 i'? 4 3 $ .. 3' N 1 5 D z* d s . W .a.J had W .
. h i Z$
" ' e e LI E o' b .
s o .
=.i 1 i
.E.,
- 2 L' _1.
t * %j " g< i
- h. . 1 u
.,7 ; -
,,, i , =. ....
WI - o, , -
. .a 2 pe .. . ..... . . ... .......
g q, y
............. o a
= tv d!
~
p G -- P 3 p; -..~ 3 i ...__ .-- -,,, - . ..
-o a u ,.
.. a
- g. - .
g c o ,. c .. W, .n..................................i 2* .
;, 5
, E !6 ,,} *. , ,
- g. .................. . . .s o.
................ ..... . . . . a. ..,
N'
= .' ....... . ............. -. 7 .
; /
g ., y @- @ ', 4,. .................g.... . E C g ......... y W. w .-
,4 o- C
. (as -
F
= *{
n 3'
- .:.; J,, .
'y . . 1- ......
'{
1' y . N- . . M 'e
. , o'
~~~(*
y , N - J=. . e
$5 e
-~
%W '?
k
. 5 I1 :- , .
l, # py - e o
.' 5, . ,
Figure 3.8.5-3 (Sheet 4 of 5) Basemat Reinforcement . Cross Section Revision:M 20 October.31r199- D*lb 3.8 184 W Yl85tinghouse i
.. . I
' 3. Design of Structures, Components, Equipment and Systems 9
;g'ss
[
~
K ,,., 'j g
- s -
s ;
- s , s,
,'h hh %s J%9 s: s s in fu as se '-
- sb s. ,
)
i ; M, Nggg/A l , _ y /, .. . 8 . ff a .
'fb 'Y.y .
~
ae p M'T pj
! 2!" ' 4, - (;
g hk y 55 I '> - 1 }'.: W, 2 ' l,p 94 $ . J zn
~
fee;". ' Y r : AA ain
** i e,
faL 5 , f
]2 , gs
/
s .s ,- 1
.- . s , s , .
7- 1' 4 l ??
$$?hhxSf .
/ -
- bd%' 3; ;;
gS .s. .b e LNMOM ~ 2 l N - Figure 3.8.5-3 (Sheet 5 of 5) Basemat Shear Reinforcement Revision: As 2.o Westingh0088 3.8185 T '- --- y = : W M ff
FSER Open item mg SSAR Revision: _ 15l ' 1 Revise subsection 3.8.4.7 as follows: 3.8.4.7 Testing and In Service Inspection Requirements l Structures supporting the passive containment cooling water storage tank on the shield building i roof will be examined before and after first filling of the tank. I i
- The boundaries of the passive containment cooling water storage tank arid the tension ring of I
the shield building roof will be inspected visually for =y :';; .: Of '" ;: = ff u excessive I concrete cracking before and aner Srst filling of the tank. Any significant concrete cracking I I
- will be documented and evaluated in accordanca with ACI 349.3R 96 (reference 50).
The vertical elevation of the passive containment cooling water storage tank : elative to the top I of the shield building cylindrical wall at the tension ring will be measured before and after 1 first filling. The change in relative elevation will be compared against the predicted deflection. I i e A report will be prepared summaris - B yst and evaluating the results. I There are no in service testing or inspect.. %uirements for other seismic Category I structures. 1 1 Revise subsection 3.8.6 as follows. This includes avvision shown in response to Open Item 220.119.: 3.8.6 Combined License Information "i n:d= h= :: - ;; x;=: f= -ff:f=.' ELcrd= b 5: ;n cif:f in =p;s cii: C:xt:= d L'n n .pp'. =f =
~% Combtnni Lswn aglund willts~h .
I /fhe final design of containment vessel elements (reinforcement) adjacent to concentrated masses I (penetrations)l- n ; h c f by i C ....L . J 'A... .wks and documen in the ASME I Code design report. d.39 1
'Ihe Combined License applicant $eefd examine the structures supporting the passive containmett I cooling storage tank on the shield building roof during initial tank filling as described in I subsection 3.8.4.7. 4ll
~rk Co Lad Lscenbr applS$' Y twbAn cbvn&3 % the clayn dar N eJ-pmerf0 Add to references: " " N M'b *d """*M' 38b N b '#80* b*" M * "'
somw.yepcb a JejcMe/ 6 A43echias 3, g. 3 . 5". 7, 3 f.td. 5" 3 a4 3.r.F. 4. 8f. I 50 ACI 349.3R-96, " Evaluation of Existing Nuclear Safety.Related Concrete Structures" 220.125(RI)-2
FSER OPEN ITEM 220.112 Vertical sliding plate (PaGolved) The staff's concem raised under this open item is that the SSAR did not show the size of the sliding plate (which is a portion of the air baffle and is used to accommodate the differential movement between the containment vessel and the shield building) to ensure that the displacement due to seismic events swill not affect the integrity of the air baffle. Westinghouse originally responded to this item in a letter dated January 7,1998 (NSD-NRC-98-5512). The staff reviewed this respoase and had a concem that Westinghouse did not adequately explain why tne SSAR only specified the limits of vertical movement for the sliding plate but not the limits of horizontalir.ovement. Due to this concem, Westinghouse revised the response to this item in a letter dated January 16, 1998 (NSD WRC-935525). The staff reviewed this revised response during the meeting and ' found that Westinghouse udequately addressed their concem. Therefore, the staff considers this issu's resolved. 220.113 Seismic design of the passive containment cooling water storage (PCCWS) tank (Resolved) The staff considered this issue resolved prior to ths meeting 220.114 Adequacy of seismic responses of structures due to post 72 hour changes (Resolved) Westinghouse provided their original response to this item in a December 19,1997, letter (NSD-NRC-97 5501). The staff's review of this submittal raised five concems as described below:
- 1. SSAR Figure 3.7.2-4 should be revised to incorporate the elevations corresponding to the updated seismic model.
- 2. The phrase,". . and the design changes of tank structures due to the post 72 hour action requirements," should be added to the end of the last sentence of the first bullet of Section (revised) 3.7.2.2.1,
- 3. The S3AR should commit that if any new seismic analysis is to be performed for any site conditions, the revised model (Model B) should be used.
- 4. As indicated in Westinghouse's submittal (NSchNRC-97-5251) dated July 28,1997, the comparison of floor response spectra (FRS) from Models "A" and "B" showed that the vertical FRS at Elevations 272 ft,284 ft,297 ft and 307 ft from Model"B" significantly exceed (about 20 to 25 percent) those from Model"A." if the FRS at Elevations 272 ft, 284 ft and 297 ft are to be used for the design of safety-related subsystems and components (including seismic Category li piping and components), Westinghouse should either commit, in the SSAR, to use the FRS at Elevation 307 ft in the design or include the FRS at Elevations 272 ft,284 ft and 297 ft in the SSAR.
- 5. In Sheet 2 of 2 of SSAR Table 3.7.2-23 (a new table), Westinghouse should include bending moments at Elevation 306.25 ft. These bending moments were shown in its submittal (NSD-NRC-97-5251) dated July 28,1997.
Attachment 3 {
2-Westinghouse revised the response to this item in a letter dated January 16,1998 (NSD NRC-98-5525). The staff reviewed the revised response during the meeting and found that Westinghouse adequately addressed their concem. Therefore, the staff consic'ers this issue resolved. 220.115 Adequacy of floor response spectra (Resolved) The staff's concem of this open item is related to the overall seismic analysis of the nuclear island structures. As stated in the NRC letter dated December 9,1997, because technicalissues were identified from the review of Westinghouse's seismic reanalysis (FSER Open items 220.112F and 220.114F), this open item will not be closed until Westinghotse resolve these issues. Because the staff resolved those issues regarding the seismic reanalysis (220.112 and 220.114 above) during the meeting, the staff considers this issue resolved.
- 220.116 through 220.119 (Resolved)
The staff considered these issues resolved prior to the meeting. 220.120 Code case N-284 (Action N) This issue was not discussed at the meeting. The staff had the action to review Westinghouse's response. l 220.121 Design of shear studs (Action W) Westinghouse responded to this item in a December 17,1997, letter (NSD-NRC-97-5497). The staff reviewed this response and calculation package 1100-SUC-003, revision 1. The staff also reviewed 1100-SUC 101, revision 6, GW-SUP-003, revision 2, and 1200-SUC-101, revision 4. The staff did develop a concem regarding concrete anchors based on the review of the response, the revision to the SSAR generated by the response, and the calculation packages. Westinghouse standard safety analysis report (SSAR), revision 17, Section 3.8.4.5.1 provides requirements for design of concrete anchors. This section states that the design of fasteners to concrete is in accordance with ACl 349-90, Appendix B with supplementary criteria based on three other references. This section also states that anchors are designed wherever possible with sufficient depth of embedment and side cover such that the steel anchor yields prior to failure of the concrete. The staff's concem is that the above criteria permits Westinghouse to design fasteners to concrete, including the embedded concrete anchors on the structural modules, such that the concrete fails prior to the steel yielding (i.e., non-ductile behavior). No cr',eria r is presented in the SSAR to establish the strength for such noreductile behavior. The staff position requires review of such criteria on a " case-by-case" basis. Westinghouse agreed to evaluate the commitments in this area made by the evolutionary plants to determine if they could make a similar commitment in their SSAR (Action W). I l
l 220.122 Critical sections for containment intemal structures (Action W) Westinghouse responded to this item in SSAR Section 3.8.3.5.7 and in a letter dated December 18,1997 (NSD-NRC-97-5499). The staff reviewed this response, and design calculations (1100-SUC 101, revision 6,1100-SUC-003, revision 1, and MT03-S3C-022, i revision 1) during the mooting. The staff identified that the SSAR revision proposed in Westinghouse's letter dated December 18,1997, contained several values in SSAR table 3.8.3-6 for a design load that were different than in calculation package 1100-SUC-101, revision 6. It was determined that the calculation package contained the correct information. Westinghouse took an action to check and correct the values in SSAR Table 3.8.3-6. 220.123 Implementation of design procedures in design calculations (Resolved) Westinghouse responded to this item in a letter dated December 17,1997 (NSD-NRC 97-5497). The staff reviewed this response and the selected design calculations (listed under documents in Attachment 2) during the rneeting. Based on the review of these documents the staff considers this issue resolved. 220.124 Design calculation for the shield building and the PCCWS tank (Action N) Westinghouse responded to this item in a letter dated December 17,1997. This submittalis being reviewed by the staff. (Action NRC) 220.125 Vertical and radial deformation of PCCWS tank during filling. (Action W) The staff was concemed that Westinghouse's response to this issue documented in a letter dated Dc.,embe 18,1997 (NSD-NRC-97-5499) did not adequately address monitoring of the PCCWS tank during initial filling of the tank with water. The purpose of the monitoring would be to ensure that the tank responded to the addition of the water without experiencing structural problems. Because of the staff's concem Westinghouse agreed to revise the response to 220.125 and provided a facsimile to the staff prior to the meeting (Attachment 4). The staff reviewed the i response during the meeting and because of residual concems Westinghouse areed to add the nandwritten words in section 3.8.4.7 (page 2 of Attachment 4). Westinghouse agreed to evaluate if a reference to the maintenance rule for the PCCWS tank is necessary (Action W). 220.126 Air baffle evaluation for air flow fluctuations (Resolved) The staff reviewed Westinghouse's response to this item documented in a December 17,1997 letter (NSD NRC-97-5497) and the June 11,1997, letter that is referenced in this response. The staff found Westinghouse's response to this item acceptable and therefore considers the issue resolved. 220.127 The staff considered this issue resolved prior to it e meeting The staff reviewed Westinghouse's response to this item documented in a letter dated December 17,1997 (NSD-NRC-97-5497). The staff found Westinghouse's response to this item acceptable and therefore considers the issue resolved. n -
4 220.128 Auxiliary building roof slab (Action W/ Action N)
- The staffs concem of this P. tin is that Westinghouse should provide a design summary of critical tactions in the SSAR. Westinghouse responded to this item in SSAR Sections 3.8.3.5.7 and 3.8.5.4.4, and in the proposed Appendix 3H attached to the letter dated January 9,1998 (NSD-NRC-98-5515). The staff also reviewed calculation package 1200-SUC-101, revision 4. The ' staff did noi complete its review of this item during the meeting. Therefore, the staff took an -
action to complete its review of this response. 1 However, the staff did identify changes that needed to be made to the SSAR. Westinghouse provided Attachment 5 to address the staffs concoms. Westinghouse took an action to incorporate these changes into the SSAR. 220.129 Adequacy of foundation met (Action N) 220.130 Consideration of loads due to construction sequence and settlements in the foundation mat design (Action W) Westinghouse responded to this item in its letter dated January 7,1998 (NSD-NRC 98-5512). In this letter, Westinghouse referred to a letter dated October 17,1997, and restated its position for the resolution of the staffs concem regarding the design of the nuclear island foundation mat under construction loads. The staff reviewed Westinghouse's response and found them to be unacceptable. The staffs position is that in designing the foundation mat for construction loads, Westinghouse should follow the five-steps procedure agreed to during the meeting on August 4 through 8,1997. A conference call was held to discuss the issue further. Particpants in the call
!ncluded: Don t.indgren, Richard Orr, Tom Cheng, Joe Sebrosky, and Carl Constantino.
As described in the submittal dated October 17,1997, Westinghouse selected the five most criticallocations (locations with the higheFt stresses under the combined load conditions) and demonstrated that by following the five step procedure the original design has enough margin to cover the inclusion of construction loads. As a result of the conference call, the staff agreed that the five locations that Westinghouse chose were the appropriate areas for the demonstration and the calculations properly demonstrated that the design capacity of the foundation mat can cover the additional stresses induced by construction loads. However, the staif did not agre's with the design procedure for the construction loads documented in the SSAR. To resolve this concem the staff stated that Westinghouse should incorporate the five-step procedure agreed to during the meeting on August 4 through 8,1997 (documented in the meeting summary dated September 30,1997) in the SSAR. Westinghouse took an action to evaluate providing the five-step design procedure for considering construction loads in the SSAR.
JAN IB tf 11:23 FROM AP600 DESIGN CERT TO NRC PAGE.002 FSEft Open item Open Itesn 220.125F (OITS e6312) Response Revision i Because a massive amount or water is to be contained in the PCCWS tank, the staff raised a concem that the COL applicant should monitor the vertical and radial deformation of the tank during inidal filling, and compare the measured values with the tank deformadon predicted by calculation. The staff idendfled this issue as Open Item 3.8.4.4-3 and COL Action Item 3.8.4.4-1. At the meedng on June 12 through 16,1995, Westinghouse stated that the water weight is sman, in comparison with the total weight of the shield building roof structure (estimated to be about 10 percent). Westinghouse also showed that the deflection of the roof structure resulting Dom the first All of water should be negligible. On that basis, Westinghouse contended that there is no need to monitor the tank deflections and compare the anneions against predictions. During the meeting on December 9 through 13,1996, Westmghouse repeated its justification concerning this issue. However, the staff did not agree with Westinghouset basis for not monitoring the vertical and radial deformation of the tank during initial tank filling. Moreover, the staff asserted that post. construction testing is r==wy to confirm the adequacy of the PCCWS tank. This is because the staffs review experience suggest that the excessive deformation resulting froen the , massive amount of water may cause cracking of the tank wxD and base slab, as well as water leakage inn reinforced concrete tanks with steelliners. In Revisiem 17 of SSAR Section 3.8.4.1.1, Westinghouse added a statement that leak chase channels are provided over the liner wclds to permit monitoring for leakage and to prevent degradation of the reinforced concrete wall which might result from the freezing and thawing ofleakage. Also. Westir.ghouse indicated that the exterior face of the reinforced concrete boundary of the PCCWS tank is designed to control cracking, in accordance with Paragraph 10.6.4 of ACI-349, with reinforcement sted stress based on sustained loads (includmg thermal effects). However, Westinghouse still did not commit to monitor the vertical and radial deformat;on of the tank during initial fillmg and compare the measured values with the tank deformation predicted by analysis. On the basis of the above discussion, the staff concludcd that Westinghouse's response to the staff's concem (as stated in Revision 17 of SSAR Section 3.8.4.1.1) is not acceptable. Therefore, Open Item 3.8.4.4-3 and COL Action Item 3.8.4.4-1 remain unsolved. Response (Revision 1): 1 The SSAR is revised below to show monitoring of the tank during initial filling. Requirements for i visual examination art given. The calculated deflections of the roof structure due to the first fill of I water are less than one quarter of an inch. Monitoring of tank deDections and comparison against I predictions is difficult because of the small magnitude of the deflections due to the water inventory. I Vertical deflections could also be caused by thermal changes. The vertical deflection will be I measured during tank fill and will be compared to the predicted magnitude. This wiB be used in I combination with the visual examination to confirm acceptability. DRhFT ND" 220.125(RI)-1 Attachment 4
JAN 16,'90 11:23 FROM AP500 DESIGN CERT TO NRC PAGE.003 rsEn open nem 0,e,10 /9 9 Afn 5*6 L'Md ffW46 f li. SSAR Revision: 1 Revise subsection 3.8.4.7 as foUows: 1 3.8.4.7 Testing and In-S,. vt TW rf Inspection Requirernents I Structures supporting the passive containment cooling water storage tank on the shield building I roof will bc examined before and after Srst Alling of the tank. I I
- The boundaries of the passive containment cooUng waner storage tank and the tension ring of I the shield buuding roof will bc inspected visually for excessive concrete cracking before and I after first filling of the tank. Any significant concrete cracking will be documented ad -
I evaluated in accordance with ACI 349.3R-96 (refersnoe 50). I
- The venical elevation of the passive containment cooling water storage tank reladve to the top I of the shield building cylindrical wall at the tension ring will be measured before and after i first filling. '!he change in relative elevation will be compared against the predicted I dcDection.
I i
- A report will be prepared summarizing the tett and evaluating the results.
I Rc odcti 3A6 Combined License Information "2 ^^d - h= r.c ;;pbs=: 6 .:TJ=d Lt.5d= :: S picv'f:f L, np. ^' t I Cc;b'nd L!--.= :pp"rM=. 'Ihe COL applicant should examine the structures supporting the I passive containment cooling storage tank on the shield building roof during initial tank filling as I described in subwedon 3.8.4.7. Add to refersnas: 1 50 ACI 349.3R 96,"Evaluadon of Existing Nuclear Safety-Related Concrete Structures" Db. ' I DM" MF7 220.125(RI)-2
*
- TOGL PAGE.003 **
q Appendl* 3H Auxiliary Building Critical Sections l In Section Ql.5.8, for constmined members (rotation and/or displacement constraint such that a thermal load causes significant stresses) supporting safety related structures, systems, or components, the stresses under load combinations 9,10, and 11 are limited to those allowed in' Table Ql.5.7.1 as modified above. 1 3H.4 GLOBAL SEISMIC ANALYSES A global seismic analysis of the AP600 nuclear island structure is perfor'med to obtain building seismic response spectra for the seismic design of nuclear safety related structures. His analysis is described in subsection 3.7.2. For detennining the out of plane seismic loads on slabs and wall segments, spectral accelerations are obtained from the relevant response spectra using the 7 percent damping curve. Hand calculations are performed to estimate the out-of. plane seismic forces and the correspondmg bending moment in each shear wall and floor slab element to supplement the loads obtained fmm the response spectra analyses. The in-plane seismic loads for the design of the shear walls and the slabs in the auxiliary building are based on a response spectrum analysis of the auxiliary building and the shield building 3D finite element models. he response spectrum analyses are performed for two cases: one that considers the reinforced concrete elements to be uncracked with full clastic stiffness, and the other that models the elements with 70 percent of their full silffness. De larger of the two values for each finite element, fmm these two cases, for the stress resultants is used in the design evaluation. O b 3H 5 STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF CRITICAL SECTIONS G
] Dis subsection summarizes the structural design of representative seismic Category I
, i structural elements in the auxiliary building and shield building. Rese structures are listed l g below and the conesponding lodion numbers are shown on Figure 3H.5-1. The basis for
^
l - their selection to this list is also provided for each structure. w c-3 J [; (1) South wall of auxiliary building (column line 1), elevation 66'-6" to elevation 180' 0", (Ris exterior wall illustrates typical loads such as soil pressure, surcharge, I
; temperature gradients, seismic, and tomado.)
A $ (2) Interior wall of auxiliary building (column line 7.3), elevation 66'-6" to elevation
] 160'-6' (Ris is one of the most highly stressed shear walls.)
i-
- r. (3) West wall of main control room in auxiliary building (column line L), elevation i17'-6" to elevation 153'-0". (his illustrates design of a wall for subcompartment g pressurization.)
E (4) Nonh wall of MSIV east compartment (column line 1!), elevation 117'-6" to 153'-0". (De main steam line is anchored to this wall segment.) (5) Shield building cylinder at elevation 18G'0". Revision: 20 (Draft) 3 Westinghouse 3H 8 January 9,1998 Attachment 5
4
- 3. Design of Structures Components, Equipment, and Systemas 3J.4h .5 Dynamic Effects of Abacrmal Loads dynamic effects from the impulsive and impactive loads caused by P., ,,Yp Y ,and torn missiles are considered by one of the following methods:
= Apply an appropriate dynami; %ad factor to the peak val of the transient load a Using imput momentum, and energy balance techni es
- Performing a time- tory dynamic analysis Elastoplastic behavior may be sumed with app pdate ductility ratios, provided excessive deflections will not result in loss function any safety-related system.
Dynamic increase factors appropriate the strain rates involved may be applied to static material scengths of steel and concre to rposes of determining section strength. 3.8.4.3.2 Load Combinations l l 3.8.4.3.2.1 Steel Structures The steel structu d components are designed accor 'ng to the clastic working stress design methods the AISC N690 specification using the ad combinations specified in Table 3.51.41 3.8.4.3.2.2 Concn Structures concrete structures and components are designed according to the stre design methods ACl 349 Code, using the load combinations specified in Table 3.8.4-2.
*bH.4.I 0.0.00.3 Live Load for Seismic Design r);c asp a c( d ddoec 4 ott li(db-I
, t. Floor live loads, based on requirements during plant construction and main ce activities, 5 t" are specified varying from 50 to 250 pounds per squa w..;--e p g M +_ 4 . 3- :pd te m ; tfootM$i[~apS:fi
. .i g g -- ., ;c ,g
--(i ys---'---- -- J _=_ =7 sumo Ied, mJ b k wu n..l hpr p.Q .4tta f fw h+
P I l> c.- 7r jvo.# 4 % rc4 Jn.v /*J' he s<u. .c lw4 a.x (c di k, e Far the local design of members, such as the floors and beim< I'! /- k=A 6 - ' '- - " **E S- M &r' ;.; r1;_'4- -- "R t r 100 percent of thM. specified live loads, or 75 E - percent of the roof snow load, whichever is applicable, except in the case of the containment
;; 3 operating deck. Fr Se -- H: : d - "- ^*- m ""e ""-" r i- ?-- A '- 5:4 3g & "x Sd :f E ; u l ,_. @ r int .hkh 13 .yymp- +- f~ p u eps;.:b;-
- e, t: d:dx These live and snow loads are included as mass in calculating the vettical seismic forces on the floors and roof. "Ihe mass of equipment and distributed systems is included in both the dead and seismic loads.
Revision: 17 [ Westhigh00$8 3.8-47 October 31,1997 e - _ - -
Appendiz 3H Autillary Building Critical Sections (6) Roof slab at elevation 180'-0* adjacent to shield building cylinder. (his is the connection between the two buildings at the highest elevation.) (7) Floor slab on metal decking (elevation 135'-3") (his is a typical slab on metal decking and structural steel framing.) (8) 2'.0" slab in auxiliary building (tagging room ceiling at elevation 135'-3') (This illustrates the design of a typical 2'-O' thick concrete stab.) (9) Finned floor in the main control room at elevation 135'-3' , (his illustrates the design of the finned floors.) (10) Sideld building roof /PCCS water storage tank (This is a unique area of the roof and water tank.) (11) Shield building roof to cylinder location at columns (This is the junction between the shield building roof and the cylindrical wall of the shield building.) (12) Divider wall between the spent fuel pool and the fuel transfer canal. (Dis wall is subjected to thermal and seismic sloshing loads) 3H.5.1 Shear Walls Structural Description Shear walls in the auxiliary building vary in size. configuration, aspect ratio, and amount of reinforcement. De stress levels in shear walls depend on these parameters and the seismic acceleration level. The range of these parameters and the stress levels in various regions of the most severely stressed shear wall are described in the following paragraphs. The height of the major structural shear walls in the auxiliary building ranges between 30 to 120 feet. The length ranges between 40 and 260 feet. The aspect ratio of these walls (full height / full length) is generally less than 1.0 and often less than 0.25. Therefore, these walls fall within the category oflow rise shear walls. The walls are typically 2 to 5 feet thick, and are monolithically cast with the concrete floor slabs, which are 9 inches to 2 feet thick. Extedor shear walls are several stories high and do not have many large openings. Interior shear walls, however, ara discontinuous in both vertical and horizontal directions. The in-plane behavior of these shear wa!'s, including the large openings, is adequately,re resented in thf analytical models cr A chm aus rop.w. 3%nflye., M c[ f 4 d '" E mkh u sau Jb6M >-{)my iL co.&ro.,k ycamph m udl,4 a tu e w.M The shear walls are used as the primary system for resisting the lateral lo , such as / earthquakes. The auxiliary building shear walls are also evaluated for flexure due to the ou[ chhd Mik ek'ineJ e..;d!i Of - Revision: 20 (Draft) 3 W85tingh0058 3H.9 January 9,1998
Appendix 3H Auxiliary Building Critical Sections 3H.5.1.1 Exterior Wall at Column Line I ne wall at column line I is the exterior wall at the south end of the nuclear island. The reinforced concrete wall extends from the top c.f the basemat at elevation 66*-6" to the roof at elevation 180* 0". It is 3t0" thick below the grade and 2*-3" thick above the gcade. , (s% o.d dyna,de) l The wall is designed for applicable loads including dead load, live load, hydrostatic load, lateral soil pressure loads, seismic loads, and thermal loads. As showm in Figure 3H.5 2, the wall is divided in 12 segments for design purpose. Table 3H.5 2 provides the listing and magnitude of the various design loads. Table 3H.5-3 presents the governing load combination, for each wall segment and the details of the wall reinforcement. The actual reinforcement provided is compmd to the required rebar area for each wall segment. Figure 3H.5-3 shows the typical reinforcement for the wall at column line 1. 3H.5.1.2 Wall at Column Line 7.3 he wall at column line 7.3 is a shear wall that connects the shield building and the nuclear island exterior wall at column line 1. It extends from the top of the basemat at elevation 66*- 6" to the top of the roof. The wall is 3 feet thick below the grade at elevation 100'-0* and 2 feet thick above the grade. Out of. plane lateral support is provided to the wall by the Door slabs on either side of it and the roof at the top. Wall 7.3 is designed for the applicable loads described in subsection 3H.3.3. . l For v:Aous segments of this wall, the corresponding goveming load combination and associated design loads :.re shown in Table 3H.5-4. l Table 3H.5 5 presents the details of the wall reinforcement. De actual reinforcement provided is compared to the required reinforcement area for each wall segment. Typical wall reinforcement is also shown on Figure 3H.5-4 3H.5.1.3 Wall at Column Line L The wall at column line L is a shear wall on the west side of the Main Control Room. It extends from the top c:f the basemat at elevation 66'-6" to the top of the roof. The wall is 2 Jeet thick. Out-of plane lateral support is provided to the wall by the floor slabs on either side of it and the roof at the top. The segment of the wall that is a part of the main control room boundary is from elevation 117t6" to elevation 135'-3". The auxiliary building design loads are described in subsection 3H.3.3, and the wall is designed for the applicable loads. In addition to the dead, live and seismic loads, the wall is designed to withstand a 5 pounds per squaa inch pressure load due to a pipe break in the MSIV room even though it is a break exclusion area. This wall segment is also designed to withstand a jet load due to the pipe break. The goveming load combination and associated design loads are shown in Table 3H.5-6. Revision: 20 (Draft) T Westinghouse 3H 1I january 9,1998
Appendix 3H Auxillary Building Critical Sections Table 3H.5-7 presents the details of the wall reinforcement. De actual reinforcement provided is compared to the required reinforcrment area for each wall segment. 3 H.5,1,4 Wall at Column Line 11 ' The north wall of the MSIV cast compartment, at column line 1I between elevation .I17'-6" and elevation 153'-0", has been identified as a critical section. De segment of the wall between elevation i17'-6" and elevation 135'-3"is 4 feet thick, and several pipes such as the main steam line, main feed water line, and the stan.up feed water , line are anchored to this wall at the interface with the turbine building. The wall segment from elevation 135'-3" to elevation 153'-0" does not provide suppon to'any high energy lines, and is 2 feet thick. His ponion does not have to withstand reactions fmm high energy line breaks. De wall is designed to withstand loads such as the dead load, live load, seismic load and the thermal load. The MSIV room is a break exclusion area, but the design also considered the loads associated with pipe rupture in the MSIV room, such as compartment pressurization, jet load, and th.: reactions at the pipe anchors. 'the loads on the pipe anchor include pipe rupture loads for breaks in the turbine building. The wall structure is analyzed using three dimensional finite element analyses. Analyses are performed for individual loads, and design loads are determined for applicable load combinations from Tab:e 3.8.4-2. E J-4= _ p'c=d .'U. A e.nayug ..cc for
*' r7=.
fla l h
^*='t f**m ^he wall reinforcement ,W shown in Figure 3H.5-5.
3H.5.1.5 Shield Building Cylinder at Elevation 180'-0" The thickness of the cylindrical ponion of the shield building wall is 3 feet. The wall is designed for the applicable loads described in subsection .,H.3 3. A detailed finite element analysis is performed to determine the design forces. "The amount of reinfortement in horizontal and vertical directions provided on each face is same. Typical reinforcement fmm elevation 200* 0" to 160'-6", above the auxiliary building roof, on each face,is as follows: Elevation 200'-0" to 180'-6": Required horizontal reinforcement = 3.45 inch'/ft. Provided ho izontal reinforcement = 3.81 inch'/ft. Required vertical reinforcement = 3.71 inch'/ft. Provided vertical reinforcement = 3.81 inch'/ft. Revision: 20 (Draft) T Westbghouse 3H12 January 9,1998 i 1
Appendix 3H Auxiliary Building Critical Sections or continuous. The seismic load is obtained using the applicable floor acceleration response spectrum (7 percent damping for the SSE loads). De load combinations applicable to the design of these floors are shown in Tables 3.8.4-1 l and 3.8.4-2. The design of the floor system is performed in two parts:
- Design of structural steel beams he structural steel floor beams an evaluated to withstand the weight of wet concrete during the placement of concrete. The composite section is checked for the design loads during nonnal and extreme environment conditions. Shear connectors are also designed.
- Design of concrete slab The concrete slab and the steel reinforcement of the composite section are evaluated for normal and extreme environmental conditions. The slab concrete and the reinforcement is designed to meet the requirements of American Concrete Institute standard ACI 349-90 " Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety related Structures."
l i The slab design considers the in-plane and out-of plane seismic forces. He global in-plane and out-of-plane forces are obtained from the response spectrum analysis of the 3D finite element model of the auxiliary and shield buildings. De out-of plane seismic forces due to floor self-excitation are determined by hand calculations using the applicable vertical seismic response spectrum and slab frequency. L 3H.$.2.1 Roof at Elevation 180'-0", Area % (Critical Section is between Col. Lines N & K 2 and 3 & 4) De layout of this segment of the roof is shown in Figure 3H.5-7 as Region "B." De concrete slab is 15 inches thick, plus 4.5-inch deep metal deck ribs. It is composite with 5 feet deep plate girders, spaced 14' 2" center to center, by using shear connectors. The girder flanges are 20" x 2" and the web is 56" x 7/16." The girders span approximately 64 feet in the north-south dirredon and are designed as simply supported. The concrete slab between the girders behaves as a one way slab and is designed to span between the girders. De roof girders are designed for dead and live loads, including construction loads (with wet concretc) with simple support end conditions. A one-third increase in allowable stress is permitted for the constru: tion load combination. De giniers are also evaluated as part of the composite beam after drying of concrete. De composite roof structure is designed to withstand dead and live load / snow load, as well as the wind, tomado and seismic loads. Revision: 20 (Draft) T Westlrighouse 3H-14 January 9,1998
Appendia 3H Autillary Building Critical Sections serve as the fonnwort and withstand the load of wet concrete slab. De main reinforcement is provided in the precast panels which are connected to the concrete placed above it by shear reinforcement. The precast panels and the cast in place concrete act together as a composite reinforced concrete slaK Examples of such flocis are the Tagging Room ceiling slab at elevation 135 ft 3 inches in Area 2. and the Area $!6 elevation 100*-0" slab between column
!!nes 1 & 2.
%p FIGJ26 lbou % Slab ( bh 3 H.5.3.1 Tagging Room Ceiling Ah N SW l.7. el.IlfQ Desig,n dimensions of the Tagging Room Ct.iling are as follows: /gg -
Room Size: 16'.0" x 11' 10" Boundary Conditions: Fixed at Walls J and K Clear Span.: 16'-0" Slab nickness: Total = 24 inches Precast Panel = 8 inches Cast in Place = 16 inches The twc g . east concrete panels, each 5' l'" wide and spanning over 16'0" clear span, are installed to serve as the formwork. Design of te Precast Concrete Panels: Governing Load Combinat:en = Construction Design Bending Moment (Midspan) = 14.53 ft kip /ft. Bottom Reinforcement (E/W Direction) Required = 0.51 in'/ft. Bottom Reinforcement (E/W Direction) Provided = 0.79 in'/ft. Top Reinforcement (E/W Dir-; tion) Required = (Minimum requi ed by Code) Top Reinforcement (E/W Direction) Provided 8
= 0.20 in /ft.
Top md Bottom Reinforcement (N/S Direction) Required = (Minimum required by Code) Top and Bottom Reinfo6 cement (N/S Direction) Provided = 0.20 sq. in/fi. Revis!on: 20 (Draft) T Westinghouse 3H 13 January 9,1998
Mir lij,ji ili Appendis 3H Ausillary Buildlog Critical Sections m e,uu the steel and concrete act as a composite section. De fins are exposed to the environment of the room and enhance the heat absorbing capacity of the ceiling. Several shop fabricated steel panels, cut to room width and placed side by side perpendicular to the room length, are used to construct the stiffened plate ceiling in a modularized fashion. De stiffened plate with fins is designed to withstand construction loads prior to concrete hardening.
"Ihe main control room ceiling fin floor !s designed for the dead, live, and the seismic loads.
010Vt / 3 I q'b De finned floor structure is evaluated for the load combinations listed in Tables 3.8.4-1 and pip <t. 3.8.42. , 4 ot 3d Design Methodology De finned floors are designet as reinforced concrete slabs in accordance with ACI Standard 4,[,mSITF 349. For positive bending, the steel plate is in tension. De steel plate with fin stiffeners serves tiie function of bottom t tbars. For negative bending, the potential for buckling due to Q Qawd pse. compression in this element is checked by using the criteria of American National Stand .rds Institute /American Institute of 5'eet Construction standards ANSI /AISC N690-84. Twisting, and therefort lateral buckling of te stiffener,is restrained by the concrete. The finned 11oors resist vertical an1 in plane forces for both normal and extreme loading conditions. For positive bending, tne concrete above the neutral ax's carri s compressive stresses and the stiffened steel plate re:ists tension. Negative bending compression is resisted by the stiffened plate and tension by top rebars in the concrete. De neutral axis for negative bending is located in the stiffened plate section, and the concrete in tension is assumed inactive. Horizontal in plane forces are resisted by the stiffened r are and longitudinal rebars. Minimum top reinforcement is provided in the slab in each direction for shrinkage and temperature crack control. in addition, top reinfortement located parallel to tne stiffeners is used as tension reinforcement in negative bending. De stiffened plate provides crack control capability for the bottom of the slab in the transverse direction. Composite section properties, based on an all steel transformed section, as detailed in Section Ql.1I of ANSI /AISC N690 84, are used to check the following:
- Weld strength between stiffener and the steel plate Spacing of the shear studs for the composite action
%e stiffened plate alone is designed to resist all construction loads prior to the concrete hardening. De plate is checked against the criteria for bending and shear, specified in ANSI /AISC N690-84. Sections Ql.5.1.4 and Ql.5.1.2. In addition, the weld between the sSffener and the steel plate is checked to shtisfy the code requirements.
Revision: 20 (Draft) T Westinghouse 3H 20 January 9,1998
Appendiz 3H Auxillary Building Critical Sections 3H.5J Structural Modules m th s(inhJ ed en (eSeenin4pe r Structural modules are used for the south side of the auxiliary bi ',lding. These , .;s structural modules are h built up with welded steel struen ral shapes and plates. The modules consist of steel faceplates conriected by steel trusses? 'the primary , purpose of the trusses is to stiffen and hold together ths faceplates during handling, erection, j and concrete placement. Thengeset thickness of the -i facepf ates is 0.5 inch except in
+ a few local areas. 'The nominal spacing of iss 4 0 incha. Shear studs are welded
.F to the inside faces of the steel faceplates. F ates . . welded to adjacent 5lates with full k T " penetration welds so that the weld is at le strong as the plate. 'the stmetural wall modules are anchored to the concrete base by reinforcing steel dowels or other types of connections embedded in the reinforced concrete below. After erection, concrete is placed between the faceplates.
'these modules include the spent 'uel pool, fuel tansfer canal, and cask loading and cask washdown pits. The structural modules are similar to the structural modules for the containment intemal structures (segsubsection 3.8.3 Figure 3.8.4 5 shows the location of the structural modules in the auxiliary building. The s ctural modules extend from elevation 66'-6" to elevation 135' 3".
t-docnI m m m4 gwet 3.f.L.$,3.5 3 %
"J.t.3 . t 5" w J 3.g.3.l*f The loads and load co.nbinations appilcable to the structurd modules in the auxiliary building are the same as for t!.e containment intemal structures (subsection 3.8.3.5.3) except that there are no ADS nor p. essure loads due to pipe breaks.
1 l The design methodology of these modules in the auxiliary building is similar to the design of the structural modules in the containment intemal structures described in subsection 3.8.3.5.3. 3H.53.1 West Wall of Spent Fuel Pool :.y v b. Figure 3H.5 8_shows an elevation of the west wall of the spent fuct pool (column line L. K 2), ankelem~ent numbers in the finite element model. The wall is a 4 feet thick rete IS
. filled structural wall module.
f A finite element analysis of the spent fuel building module is performed th for sel'sulle,*I eNa
'f and hydrostatic loads with the following assum;itions: '
..1!,h'gTE$ %y
.1 s
- The analysis model includes the structure between Llaes 2 and 4, Lines d I and i N, an%'
between El. 66'-6" and 135' 3', aad is fixed at the base.' 1here is-f#suf ' ' . elevation 135' 3" .
. -? M.Nk !! 47 i
* 'Ihe seismic input consists of floor
~
K m floor at El.135' 3", which are conscriat'ivElapfilFalEie$aI$ y mat 5 response spxtra. y@W!NFi,. ?M fr db d :M 2 NW - g *$I 1 T,(nmA [ bum. y %[.Q'.w 3Ha2 e . .,.. y g g >% w.v.,
.. u w w.ev <
L .- -
.c ..
Appendis 311 Auxiliary Building Critical Sections e ne thennal loads are applied as linearly varying temperatures between the inner and outer faces of the walls and floors. The hydrostatic loads are applied to the spent fuel pool walls and floors, wNch is considered full with water. This provides the loads for the design of the divider wall. ,
- Rc seismic sloshing is modeled in the spent fuel pool.
The concrete filled structural wall modules are designed as reinforced concrete structures in accordance with the requirements of ACI 349. %e face plates are treated as reinforcing steel. Methods of analysis are based on accepted principles of structural mechanics and are consistent with the gecmetry and boundary conditions of the stmetures. Both computer codes and hand calculations are used. Table 3H.5 8 shows the magnitude of typical design loads, load combinations, and the required and provided plate thickness for cenain critical locations. The steel plates are generally half inch tNck. The plate tNckness is increased close to the bottom of the gate through the wall where the opening results in high local member forces. The first part of the tabla shows the member forces due to individualloading. The lower pan of the table shows the goveming load combinations. The steel plate tNckness required *.o resist mechanical loads is shown at the bottom of the table as well as the tNckness provided. The muimum principal stress for the load combination including thermal is also tabulated. If tNs value exceeds the yield streu 9 t~.perature, a supplemental evaluation is performed. For these cases, the maximum stress intensity range is shown together with the allowable ; tress intensity range wNch is twice thJeeld stress at the temperature. 3H.5.6 Shield building roof De d.leid building roof it a reinforced concrete shell supporting the passive contair. ment cooling system tank and air diffuser. Air intakes are located at the top of the cylindrical ponlon of the sNeld building. The conical roof supports the passive containment cooling system tank as shown in Figure 3.8.4-7. De design of critical areas is discuss:d below. These areas include the tension ring at the connection of the conical roof to the cylindrical wall, the columns between the air inlets just below the air inlets, and the exterior wall of the passivs containment cooling system tank. 3 H.5.6.1 Tension ring , an i.J1 (dt" The connection between the eOnical roof and the sinald be? " is designated as the tension ring, it spans as a beam across the air inlets. The governing load for the tension ring is axial tension. The maxitnum tension is about 1100 kips under normal operating loads. SSE seismic loads result in maximum axial loads of about 1800 kips. The combined load ranges from 2900 kips tension to 800 kips compression. 'Ihe maximum axial tension results in a reinforcement stress of 34 ksi. The reinforcement will abo see tensile stresses due to other member force components, primarily torsion and bending about the Revision: 20 (Draft) T Westinghouse 3H 23 Jar.uary 9,1998
Appendix 3H Auxillary Bulldlag Critical Sections horizcntal axis. The maximum axial compression results in a concrete compressive stress of 380 psi. This is less than 10 percent of the concrete compressive strength. The ring is designed as a tension member, shear stirrups are provided to carry the shear and torsion whnout taking credit fo'r concrete shear strength. The reinforcement is shown in Figure 3H.5 9. The reinforcement required and provided is summarized in sheet I of Table 3H.5 9. 3 H.5.6.2 Column (shear wall) between air inlets The column between the air inlets has plan dimensions of 36" x 138" and is 60" high. Its primary loading is vertical load due to dead and seismic loads and horizontal seismic shear. It is designed as a low dse shear wall. The axial compression is about 1200 kips under nonnat operating loads. SSE seismic loads result in maximum axialloads of about 1700 kips. The combined load ranges from 2900 kips compression to 500 kips tension. The maximum horize. -3 shear is 2200 kips in plane and 800 klps out of plane (D.L. = 300, SSE = 500). The 2900 klps compression corresponds to an axial compressive stress of about 600 psi. These loads and the associated bendirig moments esult in a maximum concrete compressive stress of 1400 psi and a maximum concrete tensile stress of 800 psi at the base of the colu:.m assuming gross runcrete section properties. Th: reinforcement is shown in the Figure 3H.5-9. The reinforcement required and provided is summarized in sheet 2 of Table 3H.5-9. 3H.5.6.3 Exterior wall of the passive containment cooling system tank The exterior wall of the passive containment cooling system tank is two feet thick. There is a stalntess steel liner on the inside surface of the tank. The wallliner consists of a plate wit!, stiffeners and welded studs on the concrete side of tle plate. Leak char channels are provided over the liner welds. The reinforcement in the concrete wall ic, d:rigned without taking credit for the strength provided by the liner.1te goveming loads for design of the exterior wall are the hydrostatic pressure of the water, t'.w in plane and out of plane seismic response, and the temperature gradient across the ws11. The reinforcement required and ' provided is summarized in sheet 3 of Table 3H.5-9. . a n n ~ t a w u ce s 9 n ,a t . f. . i
; tw
. .[
32' h
.g ~;
- n. -
N,
. t..
- 2 f .,
^
. x. , yhiion?22* ..-
T Westinghouse 3H 24 JMuary 9,I]
Appendiz 3H Auxillary Building Critical Sections Table 3H.5 7 Interior . sll on Columa Line L Details or Wall Relaforcement Wall Segment ")"r Relaforcement on Each Face, sqJa/ft. Required Provided Elevation 117'4" to 135*.3" Horizontal 3.54 3.72 Vertical 4.74 5.12
*t 0 g
Elevation 135'.3" to Roof Horizontal 1.81 2.00 Vertical 2.19 2.56 -
/
Shear Reinforteament: T Wall Segment 4ee/ft ndes- Relaforcement, sq.la/ft. Required Provided o, _ _ t .. ._.If- .et
. , ,.L Elevation 117'4" to 135*.3" h =y; = Odi 0.88 1.2 T-HmlalsWerup 4
..~
f... 1 5' #E , ** U
?gp e* >
'\(.!
. ,- - .m;;
. J
,,p -* ;
'l
.R
*"s '_ . :'
, c
.. N we O g g
9~ 3u.32 >==r1t'983-k= a. .. ,.
. ., O 3 um Appendis 3H Auxillery Buuding Critical Sections E b
N( S' O O i G 8-d< . 8S
** EI $0 l
gi e w gI 8-W. u II i i i i i i i
! 8, l
} *i 3
8-% s.g I! I 8. t< 2 a. II II 3 O O G r Figure 3H.21 l General Layout of Auxiliary Building Revision: 20 Draft Wg January 9,1998 3H Fi
= =g i 2. ilesign of Structures. Components, Equipment, and Systems 1
v ! O O l l\ g i_________'.. _ g
- i. 1 7 I"
O 4 e , i,
- .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ......7...... p) 3 4g N p.'.. . .O.'. . . . . . . 'i.
e-- h l 3 ' j ' ' l O 4 % >hd - 12 ' 12 ;
; .f._ _ . 3____i..
g C - -----> --- I , . I b , C l ! / 3 3 I
---..---d . , i C m y 3
, . ,. j __
2
- LXI> G h i .
l , ><3x : C y , w 3 I e O b O O . OO O O O O Figure 3H.51 (Sheet 1 of 3) Nuclear Island Critical Sections Plan at EI.135'.3" Revision: 20 Draft January 9,1998 W Westinghouse 3H F2
!!!.!.?.
- 3. Design of Structures Components, Equipment. and Systems "i N.
_ N v O O l
. 3
.q.. ,
,i l
l _e 0 ' Ik, 3 [ - l ' '. . g 44-(4 y ', ........ ...., . . . . . . . . - F . . . . -] . ... . r.... . .).. . . . .- i '
. . . . . - - . . . . -- 3 3
a C l s ,,,'
.- sa s),=l. 3 .
l 5 . ! , a C l i ! .
, I G
h 3 O l 3
]
c --- -- ------ ---- --------- -- ---------- -- --- --- 3 . O O O O O .
.8 A.
, c. ',
3
, .y . / 4 1
. ; .4 riiM h,I
. Figure 3H.51 (Shect'2 'of 3 4
. ' . . .g , . 9l..
.,.. ,Q:.'
Nuclear Islahd critka.,N l
- : Ptadit EI.T8E l
. .!; u.
- q. . .
. ' / ~ t . ~5.%..,.8
. Di' . ; 74
'G 3
.5 n:
2. .' ' *M .h gup f$;p,$,f*'fggl.$j:ffh{e j if; ar 3H F3.,p. . b.,.j: .. (3; .1 y _ ,,
Tj;G "~g 3
- 3. Design of Structures, Components. Equipmeat, and Systems 80
.. _ l
... u /s ,,' ,
.. /
... 2} ! . }
n
, i _
i , i wo i i i
; i ,
n. li i i
. _( ,
- v e 1 m s
W:
, )
4, ,
- s. . . -, , ..
i
- . . , l , . '.4 i , J .I \
Wh , ,,
3 n
y c) "'.5 ..
![
),/d
. . ,X ,
rgyr"' um-- -* r i ,N. "' 3 g ,,
... - l ,-
i l
'r
..,=. -MY* .l '
. R l
1 i I t O G G O O O M?M & A e Figure 3H.51 (Sheet 3 of 3) Nuclear Island Cridcal Sections Section A.A Revision: 20 Draft January 9,1998 W Westinghouse 3H F4
o .. .
- 3. Design of Structures, Components, Equipment and Systems t... . I 9e 5' l u.s. s .
/$ $ h
- s G/. /15 '-S"
[J s.n. s
~ f-- ,
'y G s' % l J
6.. . . /.. . l 7[ '," 7;Fe5-s J/, .
*)t # 6 ' %
t.,s. s
*ote 6' N h.
- 6. .t. i
#,p e c ' N l t.rta io
/ [ gn ige 5( @ V \(a l
% ==v els>#c 0
Figure 3H.5 5 (Sheet 2 of 3) Concrete Reinforcement in Wall 11 Revision: 20 Draft December 9,1997 y Westinghouse
- 3. Design of Structures, Components, Equipment and Systems N
x
\ v
_ ._. . . .e A. - '~
. .... . .e n bh nl vp /, 7 /, 7 i
- / h h? - *'
.a ! i- .,! ! f L(L.' ! !- .G ._. ..g
~
A -
.._,_.___._.___._._._.__.. _ . . .. . .g i
i i l
.....-....}-....-.-.......-.-.-.-. _. ... 9
. /
l
.p//
- g. .
_._._ . .._ . . ...tE.l. . .
. . ..... .g PLAN VIEW SHEAR CONNECTORS CONCRETE SLAB ME T AL DECK -._- b.
iEspij%QS$2% n n n n n r ___ [f , Wi4 xt. ( 5 . FLOOR BEAMS-
<% fQ SECTION A #"
\
c/gy a.s bLf, Figur 3H.5 6
' Auxiliary Building Typical Composite Floor Revision: 20 Draft
[ Westingh0088 January 9,1998 3H.FI;
, o. .
g.,g o',. . .e }',,'.bv h 4 ih #6 5 7' $1.n. Set k/i.'fuh.uwfl.6ng
~
- 3. Design of Structured, Components. Fquipment. and Systems
/
1
/
te v ,
.a.
ljl
\
L,,,,,,,,,, k ib<dhckh-{s'cL{Ld 9 4 ._..... . . .u , ,, ,, u u.u uu.s. . ,. . uu . .. 7 ~
't e e
t . ;
/
g . ...._.. ! 1
., 4 s
i l s. y 9 l
- i. . .. .. y l
i n.
,,,..2
[ ;;. m,u,.. . l
- s. .
q..[._._....
-.uuuut ._
i , ,
. l ;
, . .F1 :
., : it
._d......... .; . . . . . . . . . . . . .r1......._. . .._.... .
[sf.EUa sI.* *e , 9 I.E'$- l l ! ! g ._ ;-. . ... . . . " us. l 1
- j u._.+ .
't : !, :
e . .
! : .m i b
9...p...... '
.....o . . . . . .
p . b.th a b.>e h k"d3 ch
! : U.ill t he Ac,, &
! . \ .
$, l l I, usill s'evajme..cd do.t..sy
- i :
i :
-. ,i ! !
i g rs! ar wa nu e= er <*
- _, e=
! i i
! ; ; g/
6 O O O sv Add neu .;he} Shcush,3 rtth&hb in ca//3 y$ Mg /ke nk. Figum 3H.5.HSheet 1 of 2) Auxiliary Building Roof Typical Reinforcement and Connection to Shield Building Revision: 20 Draft January 9,1998 W W65tingh0084 3H F12
, ea 6
- 3. Design of Structures, Components. Equipment, and Systems m*1212* s',%"
. \, . . . ./ . .
. . . A. .
l *
/ \\ / \ \/ \
< e. r ~ \ \.. , n -
l .
.t.u /
REINFORCEMENT FLOOR DETAll IN REGION "8" si t %
- n, t i
ka e a a a a h a a a .j____ aaaaaaaaaa l \ ? \ l \
+ / .
\ /
s:m m.,~c/ \ .,, - Beau
$b) hv4 tt $44mp ('r4Af t t e a, WECMANICAL CONNECTOA C'#
intt i e /:Ot'( Figure 31{.5 7 (Sheet 2 of 2) Auxiliary Building Roof Typical Reinforcement and Connection to Shield Building Revision: 20 Draft [ W6Stiflgh0080 January 9,1998 3H Fi3
Appendix 3H Auxiliary Building Critical Sections 1 l Table 3H.5 7 l Interior Wall on Column Line L s Details of Wall fleinforce.nent Wall Segment Location Reinforcement on Each Face, sq.in/ft. Required Provided Elevation 117' 6" to 135' 3" Horizontal 3.54 3.72 . Venical 4.74 5.12 1 Elevation 135' 3" to Roof Horizontal 1.81 2.00 Venical 2.19 2.56 l Shear Reinforcement Wall Segment Location Reinforcetnent, sq.in/ft. Required Provided Elevation 117' 6" to 135' 3" S :=s}& - = Occisi 0.88 1.2 H at.hi Revision: 20 (Draft) 3 Westinghouse 3H 37 January 9,1998
.}}