ML20140A725
| ML20140A725 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone, Haddam Neck, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1985 |
| From: | Opeka J NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY CO., NORTHEAST UTILITIES |
| To: | Charemagne Grimes Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| 861231, A05084, A5084, IEB-80-11, NUDOCS 8601230356 | |
| Download: ML20140A725 (89) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_ N L8TILITIES o.nor.i On.c.. . s.io n sir i. Boriin. Conn.ciicut E5C$ s7aNS~
+ce *<ea wa "~ P.O. BOX 270 HARTFORD. CONNECTICUT 06141-0270 L L J CZ'C,"O.',g; (203) 665-5000 December 31,1985 Docket Nos. 50-213 50-245 A05084 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attn: Mr. Christopher 1. Grimes Integrated Safety Assessment Project Directorate U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Gentlemen:
Haddam Neck Plant Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No.1 Masonry Wall Design, IE Bulletin 80-11 Request for Additional Information In a July 22, 1985 letter (I) the Staff provided a request for additional information for both the Haddam Neck Plant and Millstone Unit No.1. In addition a site visit / audit was requested to review calculations and discuss the responses to the enclosed requests for additional i ormation. As summarized in the Staff meeting summary of November 14, 1985 the Staff and licensees met on October 28 - 30, 1985 to discuss and review plant modifications made in response to IE Bulletin 80-11. We have enclosed the responses to the requests for additional information enclosed in the July 22, 1985 letter (I) and have also incorporated the Staff comments provided during the October 28 - 30, 1985 site meeting. As identified in the November 14, 1985 meetirg summary (2) the licensee committed to clarify the effect of identified cracking on selected masonry walls by performing a plant walkdown of Millstone Unit No. I to identify any wall cracking. This walkdown was performed at Millstone Unit No. I and no cracking was identified as discussed in the enclosed Millstone Unit No. I response. Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company is still investigating this issue for the Haddam Neck Plant and will provide a response to the NRC by February 14, 1986. 8601230356 851231 PDR G ADOCK 05000213 PDR (1)3. A. ZwoLinski letter to J. F. Opeka, dated July 22, 1985. (2)F. M. Akstulewicz meeting summary, dated November 14,1985. m Zarc L c
}jf .2zr MLr"Ad EGee o i I,ol .r2 i ff EGe6/sa s t%)R. dort I i aM4 stol-13 Drs t t
2-The attached responses provide our complete response to IE Bulletin 30-11. We trust you will find this information satisfactorily. Very truly yours, CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY
- 3. F. Ophke' F. M U
Senior Vice President
- or
. -1
'p Docket No. 50-245 Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No.1 Response to Request for AdditionalInformation IE Bulletin 80-11, Masonry Wall Design-December,1985 k_
Introduction In developing a response to IE Bulletin 80-11 at Millstone Unit 1, Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECO) was faced with two factors. First was the lack of seismic floor response spectra at Unit 1, at that time being reviewed under the Systematic Evaluation Program. Second, the plant operations schedule necessitated addressing the bulletin prior to receiving final acceptance criteria from NRC. As a result, NNECO took a conservative approach to the evaluation of the Unit 1 masonry walls, opting to implement modifications rather than use detailed analysis for qualification. Masonry walls and blockouts were checked against span tables which were developed using very conservative procedures. Some blockouts were qualified using a very conservative arching action approach, and reinforced walls were qualified using a conservative static approach. These procedures have been described'in our previous submittals. A large percentage of the masonry walls and blockouts were modified. The modifications consisted of structural strengthening of both walls and boundary connections. In addi-tion to seismic loads, pressure loads from pipe break and tornado ; were considered. The implementation procedure resulted in safety-related masonry walls having substantial, but unquan-tified, margins of safety. In order to answer the present request for additional information, it has been necessary to per-form a complete review of the Bulletin 80-11 calculations. Table I provides a summary of the pertinent data for each of the safety-related masonry walls at Millstone Unit 1.
Subsequent to assembling the data in Table I, an evaluation was performed to assess the margin of safety of each wall relative to the SGEB criteria. The evaluation used simplified, hand calculation techniques conforming to ACI 531-79 and the SGEB cri-teria. The evaluation procedure was as follows: - - All walls and blockouts were considered to span either hori-
- ontally or vertically. Calculations were based on simple spans between supports. Cantilever and wing walls (one ver-tical edge free) were converted to equivalent simple spans.
The wall fundamental frequency was computed based on the governing span. The seismic acceleration applied was the SEP , floor response spectrum value at 7% damping, corresponding to the computed frequency. The bending and shear stress computed was the greater of either seismic plus pipe break pressure, or tornado pressure. Stresses were calculated on a static basis assuming simple span bending. Seismic stresses were increased 30%.. Blockouts were assumed to transfer shear at unreinforced, mor-tared boundaries, provided stresses were low. The maximum com-puted shear stress at an unreinforced,. mortared boundary was less than 3 psi. l. Multi-wythe walls were treated as composite sections, provided , collar joint shear was low (the effect of this assumption is. discussed further below). The maximum computed collar joint shear was less than 4 psi. i y , , ,, ,. - .- ,- - --c.., - , - , v g - g -
- Penetrations in blockouts waro neglected, provided stresses were low. The maximum computed bending stress in a blockout was less than 20 psi.
< The results of the evaluation are shown in Table II. The seismic accelerations are from the SEP floor response spectra for 7% i damping. Calculations performed during the original Bulletin 80-11 evaluation showed that deadweight, in-plane stress, and drift effects were negligible. The allowable bending and shear l stresses given in Table II are based on ACI 531-79 and the SGEB t i criteria. For reinforced walls, the allowable bending stress shown is the allowable moment for the reinforced section divided by the section modulus of the equivalent unreinforced section. An additional analysis was performed to test the effect of the composite action assumption for multi-whythe walls. The largest block size used at Millstone Unit I was 12 inches thick. Table II-A presents results wherein all walls whose thickness exceeds 12 inches were assumed to be made up of 12-inch thick whythes. Where the thickness was not an integral multiple of 12 inches, a
, - smaller whythe thickness was used. The frequency and stresses for a single whythe were computed assuming pressure loads were
, equally distributed among the whythes. The results in Table II-A , show that the walls meet SGEB allowables even without the assump-tion of composite action. It should be noted that the results given in the following tables are for comparison purposes only. The original Bulletin 80-11 calculations remain the calculations of record for Millstone Unit 1. ! i
~
l
Questio- 1 In Response 10 of Reference 1, Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECO) indicated that the seismic evaluation of masonry walls used the floor accelerations of the original design multiplied by a factor of 5 (Response 6) and that this criterion would be com-pared with the SEP floor response spectra. Provide a summary of this comparison and the conclusions drawn from it and clarify whether the SEP spectra were actually used.
Response
In the original Bulletin 80-11 evaluation NNECO used the following for seismic loads: . For unreinforced walls, an allowable span was used which (a) made the wall frequency be greater than 20 Hertz and (b) made the wall stress be less than the allowable us'ing the floor acceleration of the original design multiplied by 1.3. For reinforced walls, there was no frequency restriction but walls had to be within the allowable moments using the floor acceleration of the original design multiplied by a factor of 5. As described in the introduction, the present review used the SEP floor response spectra. As shown in Table II, all walls except T-18 meet the SGEB allowable stresses when SEP response spectra are applied in conjunction with other extreme environmental loads as defined in the Millstone Unit 1 FSAR. Wall T-18 meets the , SGEB allowable for seismic. For tornado pressure, a detailed analysis showed that while stresses exceeded allowable at some locations, overall stability of the wall was assured by the addi-tion of structural steel. l I
1 Ouestion 2 i 4
- Identify the 24 walls that have been qualified by arching action.
1Nie NRC position on this issue states that the use of the arching action theory to qualify unreinforced masonry walls is not accep- , table. These walls should be repaired so that they can be qualified based on the SGEB criteria (3). (The NRC -position is , enclosed as Attachment 3.) l 1
Response
A total of 39 safety-related blockouts were qualified using arching action. As originally reported, 24 blockouts were
! qualified based on a generic arching action analysis. Four of l these were later found to be non-saefty related. Nineteen other blockouts were qualified using special case arching analysis. ;
) Arching action was used in cases where blockouts appeared to have 4 substantial capccity, and modification would be difficult because { of accessibility or interference problems. 1 All of the blockouts qualified by arching action are constructed of solid blocks and are multi-whythe with tight boundaries. In-the present review (without use of arching action), walls are , assumed. composite if collar joint shear is low, and unreinforced P i mortared boundaries are assumed to transfer shear if boundary f shear stresses are low. The results for the 39 blockouts pre-4 viously qualified by arching action are presented in Table III. j As can be seen, a substantial margin of safety exists in com-j parison with SGEB allowables without the use of arching action. > ) The maximum bending stress is less than 3 psi, and maximum collar i joint shear is less than 4 psi. Both values are quite low. t
~
Table III-A presents results when whythes are assumed
- noncomposite'(see discussion of Tables II and II-A in the introduction). Stresses are.still within the SGEB allowables. ,
! Thus, these blockouts have adequate capacity to resist seismic i and pressure loads without relying on arching action, i
- l
Question 3 Identify the number of walls that required modifications in order to be qualified under the NNECO reevaluation criteria, and spe-cify how many of these can be qualified under the SGEB criteria (3) design method after modification.
Response
One hundred forty walls and blockouts were modified under the original 80-11 evaluation. The results of the latest review (described in the introduction) for the modified walls are pre-sented in Table IV. Each of the modified walls meets the SGEB criteria. , Question 4 Exhibit C-2 in Attachment 2 of Reference 2 lists the allowable shear stress for reinforced walls in ficxure as 1.1 /f'm; this agrees with ACI 531-79. However, the revised Exhibit C-2 in ' Attachment 6 of Reference 1 lists the allowable value for out-of-plane shear as 1.5 /f'm. Explain why this value was chosen for reinforced walls.
Response
The allowable shear stress for reinforced masonry in bending given in ACI 531-79 is based on beam bending of masonry spanning
~
openings such as doors or windows. In this case bending is in the plane of the wall and reinforcement is provided horizontally to carry tensile stresses (as in concrete beams). e
In the original 80-11 evaluation, it was felt that out of plane response of a wall was more analagous to a slab than a beam, and the allowable shear should be based on a peripheral shear model. The value of 1.5 /f'm was derived using formulas for peripheral shear in plain concrete slabs. However, as described below in the response Question 5, the walls have adequate margin of safety with respect to shear to also meet the ACI 531-79 allowable of 1.1 ff'm. Question 5 Exhibit C-2 in attachment 2 of Reference 1 indicated that an increase factor of 1.5 for allowable masonry shear stress was used for reinforced walls. If a basic allowable of 1.5 ff'm was used (as suggested by Exhibit C-2 [13) and an increase factor 1.5 was applied to it, that would be equivalent to applying an increase factor of about 2 to the basic allowable found in ACI 531-79, which is 1.1 ]f'm. The SGEB criteria [3), however, allow an increase factor of only 1.3 for masonry shear. Indicate whether the maximum shear stress in the reinforced walls still meets the SGEB criteria, which is based on ACI 531-79. If any walls would not qualify, provide the percentages by which the SGEB allowable are exceeded.
Response
Table V presents the results of latest review for reinforced masonry walls. The allowable shear stress given is 1.1 /f'm, as given in ACI 531-79, increased by a factor of 1.3 in accordance with the SGEB criteria. A comparison of computed shear stress to allowable shear stress shows that the reinforced walls still meet the SGEB criteria. I
Ouestion 6 Indicate whether any walls at the Millstone Unit I were built without mortar. If so, the walls must be modified so that loose blocks do not impact safety-related equipment. Provide some , sample sketches or drawings of this type of modification if applicable to this plant.
Response
None of the safety-related masonry walls at Millstone Unit I were built without mortar. O e 9 1 t l . . i
TABLE 1
SUMMARY
OF DATA FOR SAFETY-RELATED WALLS Column (1): Wall identifier (2): Wall type: S = span wall C = cantilever wall W = wing wall B0 = blockout V = vertical l (3): Whether wall was modified (4): Whether wall was qualified by arching action (5): Whether wall is reinforced (6): Nominal wall thickness (inches), (7): Weight of attachments (psf) (8): Pipe break pressure load (psf) (9): Tornado pressure load (psf) (10): Governing wall span (feet) O i i e b 9 4 0
TABLE I l l (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) T-30 5 YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 T-36 S YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 T-37 S YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 T-44 S YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 T-39B S YES NO NO 6 11.7 0.0 0.0 7.5 T-39B S YES NO NO 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.2 T-8 S YES NO NO 8 1.4 0.0 0.0 8.8 T-2D S NO NO NO 8 3.3 0.0 0.0 7.3 T-2E S YES NO NO 6 1.5 0.0 0.0 7.3 T-26A S YES NO NO 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 T-26B S YES NO NO 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.4 T-28 5 YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 T-33A S YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.6 T-33B S YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.3 T-33C.D 5 YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.9 T-34 5 YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.6 T-35 S YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.1 T-38 W YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.5 T-45 S YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.5 T-3 S YES NO NO 4 3.5 0.0 0.0 6.8 T-4A S NO NO NO 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.8 T-4B S YES NO NO 12 8.8 0.0 0.0 4.8 T-4C S.W NO NO NO 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.9
; T-4D S YES NO NO 12 12.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 T-7 S YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.6 T-24A S.C YES NO NO 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.7 T-24B S YES NO NO 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 T-24C S YES NO NO 4 5.3 0.0 0.0 6.6 T-25A S YES NO NO 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.5 T-25B S VES NO NO 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 T-25C' S YES NO NO 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.5 T-31A S YES NO NO 8 1.5 0.0 0.0 9.4 T-31B S YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 T-31C.D 5 YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.5 T-6 S YES NO NO 8 1.7 0.0 0.0 6.6 T-16 5 YES NO NO 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.3 T-40 S YES NO NO' 6 2.0 0.0 0.0 8.6 T-42 S 145 NO NO 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 T-23A BO,V iQ YES NO 18 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 T-23B BO .'3 YES NO 18 2.0 0.0 0.0 8.0
*T-23C BO NO YES NO 18 8.4 0.0 0.0 5.0 T-23D BO NO YES NO 18 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 i T-23E BO YES NO NO 18 _ 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.7 T-23F , BO NO YES NO 18 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.0 T-23G S YES NO NO 6 1.6 0.0 0.0 6.8 T-23H C NO NO NO 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.3 T-23J S YES NO NO 6 5.0 0.0 0.0 8.1
, 7-51A S,W YES NO NO 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.6 T-51B S YES NO NO 4 1.8 0.0 0.0 5.6 7-51C S YES NO NO 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.3 l T-18 5 YES NO NO 8 7.0 0.0 144.0 7.6 T-22A S NO NO NO 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.7 T-22B W NO NO NO 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 T-22C W NO NO NO 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 T-22D W NO NO NO 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) T-22E W NO NO NO 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 T-22F S NO NO NO 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 T-22G S NO NO NO 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 T-29A S YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.0 T-29B S YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.3 T-50 S YES NO NO 4 3.0 0.0 0.0 6.9 T-53A S YES NO NO 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.5 T-53B S YES NO NO 4 0.5 0.0 0.0 6.5 T-53C 5 YES NO NO 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 T-53D 5 YES NO NO 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 T-5A BO YES NO NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 T-5B BO YES NO NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.4 T-5C BO YES NO NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 T-5D BO YES NO NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.4 T-SE BO YES NO NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.4 T-5F BO YES NO NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.4 T-5G BO YES NO NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.4 T-5H BO YES NO NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 T-9 BO YES NO NO 36 4.3 0.0 0.0 8.0 T-10 W YES NO NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.7 T-11 BD YES NO NO 36 5.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 T-12 BO.V YES NO NO 36 2.0 72.0 0.0 4.0 T-13 BO.V YES NO NO 36 0.0 72.0 0.0 4.0 T-94A,B S YES NO NO 16 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 T-20 S YES NO NO 36 40.0 72.0 0.0 3.5 T-95A,B S YES NO NO 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.5 T-22H W NO NO NO 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.3 T-52 5 YES NO NO 8 3.0 0.0 0.0 7.5 T-89 S YES NO NO 8 7.0 72.0 0.0 5.2 T-1 SV YES NO YES 12 8.0 72.0 360.0 13.2 T-27 SV YES NO YES 12 4.5 0.0 360.0 16.8 T-21A SV YES NO YES 12 6.0 72.0 0.0 16.7 T-21B SV YES NO YES 12 0.0 72.0 250.0 16.7 T-21C' SV YES NO YES 12 6.0 72.0 360.0 16.7 T-32A,B SV YES NO YES 12 3.0 0.0 360.0 9.7 T-32C.D SV YES NO YES 12 2.2 0.0 360.0 16.7 T-47 SV YES NO YES 12 1.1 0.0 360.0 16.7 TB-1 BO YES NO NO 36 0.0 72.0 0.0 2.8 TB-2 BO NO YES NO 36 0.0 72.0 0.0 5.8 TB-4 BO NO YES NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.7 TB-5 BO YES NO NO 56 0.0 72.0 0.0 3.5 TB-6 BO YES NO NO 56 5.0 72.0 0.0 3.3 TB-13 BD YES NO NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.3 TB-14 BO YES NO NO 36 0.0 72.0 0.0 4.8 TB-15 BO YES NO NO 36 5.0 72.0 0.0 5.0 TB-19 BO NO YES NO 36 0.0 72.0 0.0 5.0 TB-20 , BD YES NO NO 36 5.0 72.0 0.0 4.5 TB-25 BD YES NO NO 36 5.0 72.0 0.0 3.0 TB-26 BO YES NO NO 36 5.0 72.0 0.0 4.5 TB-28 BO YES NO NO 56 0.0 72.0 0.0 3.5 TB-29 BO YES NO NO 36 5.0 72.0 0.0 2.8 TB-36 BO YES NO NO 36 0.0 72.0 0.0 4.5 TB-41 BO YES NO NO 36 5.0 72.0 0.0 2.7 TB-43 BO YES NO NO 36 5.0 72.0 0.0 7.1 TB-44 BO YES NO NO 36 0.0 72.0 0.0 7.1 TB-45 BO YES NO NO 36 5.0 72.0 0.0 2.8 TB-16 BO YES NO NO 36 5.0 72.0 0.0 5.0 TB-22 BO YES NO NO d6 5.0 72.0 0.0 4.5 I
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) TC-23 BO YES NO NO 36 5.0 72.0 0.0 2.8 TB-35 BO YES NO- NO 36 5.0 72.0 0.0 4.5 TB-46 BO YES NO NO 36 5.0 72.0 0.0 5.3 TB-3 BO NO YES NO 36 0.0 72.0 0.0 3.0 TB-7 BO NO YES NO 56 0.0 72.0 0.0 2.9 TB-30 BO NO YES NO 36 0.0 72.0 0.0 3.0 TB-31 BO NO YES NO 36 0.0 72.0 0.0 2.5 TB-32 BO NO YES NO 36 0.0 72.0 0.0 6.0 TB-37 BO NO YES NO 36 0.0 72.0 0.0 2.0 TB-40 BO NO YES NO 36 0.0 72.0 0.0 2.0 RB-1 BO YES NO NO 60 8.6 0.0 0.0 7.0 RB-3 BD YES NO NO 60 11.6 0.0 0.0 7.0 RB-4 BD No YES NO 60' 2.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 RB-5 BO NO YES NO 60 5.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 R-2 S.C YES NO NO 48 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 R-3A W No NO NO 14 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 R-3B S,W NO NO NO 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.3 R-3C C NO NO NO 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.5 R-4 S YES NO NO 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.5 R-5 S NO NO NO 48 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 R-6 S YES NO NO 24 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 RB-2 BO NO YES NO 60 19.6 0.0 0.0 7.0 R-9 S YES NO NO 24 7.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 R-10A S YES NO NO 24 7.0 0.0 0.0 7.5 R-10B C NO NO NO 24 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.3 R-13A S YES NO NO 6 5.0 0.0 0.0 7.3 R-13B.C 5 YES NO NO 6 5.0 0.0 0.0 6.8 R-13D S YES NO NO 6 5.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 R-13E S YES NO NO 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 R-14 5 YES NO NO 20 9.1 0.0 0.0 6.0 R-15A S YES NO NO 16 7.0 0.0 0.0 6.7 R-15B S YES NO NO 16 7.0 0.0 0.0 7.8 R-20 S NO NO NO 20 7.0 0.0 0.0 7.2 R-20B i S YES NO NO 20 7.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 R-8A S YES NO NO 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.1 R-8B S YES NO NO 60 2.1 0.0 0.0 5.0 R-11 BO YES NO NO 48 1.9 0.0 0.0 4.7 R-16A S NO NO NO 20 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.1 R-16B C NO NO NO 20 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 R-16C S YES NO NO 48 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.5 RB-6 BO YES NO NO 24 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 RB-7 BO NO YES NO 30 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.8 I RB-8 BO NO YES NO 30 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 RB-9 BO NO YES NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.9 RB-10 BO YES NO NO 30 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 RB-11 BO NO YES NO 30 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 RB-12 BO NO YES NO 30 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.9 RB-14
- BO NO YES NO 24 2.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 RB-15 BD NO YES NO 24 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.9 RB-21 BO YES NO NO 30 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 RB-23 BO YES NO NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 RB-30 BO NO YES NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.0 R-1A S YES NO YES 8 2.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 R-1B,C S NO NO YES 8 2.0 0.0 0.0 10.8 R-1D S YES NO YES 8 1.0 0.0 0.0 9.7 R-1E S NO NO YES 8 2.3 0.0 0.0 9.0 R-7A S YES NO YES 8 2.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 R-7B S YES NO YES 8 0.5 0.0 0.0 10.8
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) R-7C 5 YES NO YES O 2.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 R-12A S YES NO YES 8 ' 2. 0 0.0 0.0 10.4 NO NO YES 8 2.0 0.0 0.0 10.8 R-12B S R-12C S YES NO YES 8 2.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 R-18A S YES NO YES 8 2.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 YES NO YES 8 2.0 0.0 0.0 11.0 R-18B S R-18C S YES NO YES 8 2.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 YES NO 24 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.7 RB-13 BO NO RB-16 BO.V NO YES NO 24 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.6 RB-19 BO NO YES NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 RB-20 BO NO YES NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 RB-27 BO NO YES NO 42 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 RB-22 BO NO YES NO 30 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 YES NO 24 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 RB-24 BO.V NO BO.V YES NO 24 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 RB-25 NO 1.5 RB-33 BO NO YES NO 24 0.0 0.0 0.0 NO YES NO 48 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 RB-26 BO 2.6 RB-31 BO.V NO YES NO 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 BO,V NO YES NO 24 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 R-17A R-17B BO.V NO YES NO 24 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 i f f e e (
^'
TABLE II COMPARISON WITH SGEB CRITERIA Column (1): Wall identifier (2): Frequency (Hertz) . (3): Response spectrum acceleration (g's) (4): Bending stress from SSE + PBOC (psi) (5): Bending stress from Tornado (psi) (6): SGEB allowable tensile stress (psi) s l (7): Shear stress from SSE + PBOC (psi)
~ "
(8): Shear stress from Tornado (psi) (9): SGEB allowable shear stress (psi) . (10): Maximum collar joint shear stress (psi) O I a i S N i
# s %
i 3 l' r /
.d h-i n
i i. TABLE II (1) (2) . (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (G) -(9) (10) L T-30 20 0.45 29.1 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.0 35.9 0.0
- T-36 57' O.31 7.2 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-37 32 0.43 17.8 0.0 63.6 2.4 0.0 35.9 0.0 i T-44 20 0.45 29.1 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.0 35.9 0.0 '
T-39B 23 0.63 44.6 0.0 63.6 4.8 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-39B 18 0.68 49.3 0.0 63.6 4.3 0.0 35.9 0.0 ., T-8 22 0.35 42.2 0.0 63.6 2.1 0.0 47.0 0.0 T-2D 37 D.33 12.5 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 35.9 0.0 . T-2E 28 0.35 17.2 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 35.9 0.0 ! T-26A 108 0.46 5.7 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 35.9 0.0 i T-26B 25 0.62 32.4 0.0 63.6 2.7 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-28 128 0.31 3.2 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 35.9 0.0 ! ! T-33A 22 0.45 26.9 0.0 63.6 3.0 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-33B 38 0.42 14.5 0.0 63.6 2.1 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-33C.D 26 0.45 23.2 0.0 63.6 2.8 0.0 35.9, 0.0 i T-34 47 0.33 9.3 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.0 35.9 0.0 1 T-35 54 0.31 7.6 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 35.9 0.0 i T-38 23 0.45 26.3 0.0 63.6 3.0 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-45 23 0.45 26.3 0.0 63.6 3.0 0.0 35.9. 0.0 T-3 20 0.35 25.3 0.0 63.6 2.0 0.0 35.9 0.0 '. T-4A 57 0.30 14.0 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 47.0 0.0 1 T-4B 112 0.30 7.3 0.0 63.6 1.0~ 0 . 0. 47.0 0.0 i T-4C 42 0.33 20.8 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.O* 47.0 '0.0 I T-4D 157 0.30 5.3 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 0.0 T-7 22 0.35 20.9 0.0 63.6 2.3 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-24A 23 0.63 36.6 0.0 63.6 2.9 0.0 35.9 0.0 , T-24B 21 0.65 41.2 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.0 35.9 0.0 4 T-24C 21 0.65 48.0 0.0 63.6 3.9 0.0 35.9 0.0
, T-25A 125 0.46 4.9 0.0 63.6 1.1 0.0 '35.9 0.0 T-25B 24 0.52 28.7 0.0 63.6 2.9 0.0 35.9 0.0
, T-25C- 125 0.46 4.9 0.0 63.6 1.1 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-31A 23 0.45 27.0 0.0 63.6 3.1- 0.0 35.9 0.0 2 T-31B 20 0.45 29.1 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-31C.D 23 0.45 26.3 0.0 63.6 3.0 0.0 35.9 0.0 : 1 T-6 45 0.33 9.9 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 35.9 0.0
- 4-16 79 0.30 5.1 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 35.9 0.0 l T-40 20 0.65 44.8 0.0 63.6 4.2 0.0 35.9 0.0
! T-42 21 0.45 28.2 0.0 63.6 2.2 0.0 35.9 0.0 {' T-23A 93 0.35 10.1 0.0 27.6 1.6 0.0 47.0 2.3 T-23B 61 0.35 15.4 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 47.0' 2.9
. T-23C '154 0.35 6.2 0.0 63.6 1.2 0.0- 47.0 1.9
? T-23D 61 0.35 15.3 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 47.0 2.9 .
, T-23E 67 0.35 14.1 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2.7
} T-23F
- 48 0.36 19.9 0.0 63.6 2.2 0.0 47.0 3.3 J T-23G 33 0.38 -15.9 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 35.9 0.0
- T-23H 28 0.39 18.1 0.0 63.6 2.0 -0.0 35.9- 0.0-4 T-23J 21 0.42 28.3 0.0 63.6 2.8 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-51A 33 0.56 22.7 0.0 63.6 2.2 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-51B 31 0.57 25.9 0.0 63.6 2.5 0.0 -35.9 0.0 T-51C 37 0.55 19.6 0.0 63.6 2.0 0.0 35.9 0.0 4
T-18 32 0.35 15.8 80.0 63.6 2.2 17.1 35.9 0.0 '
p T-22A 81 0.30 9.9 0.0 63.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 0.0 , T-22B 163 0.30 4.9 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 0.0 l T-22C 163 0.30 4.9 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 0.0 i'T-22D 72 0.30 11.1 0.0 63.6' 1.2 0.0 47.0 0.0 [ ' l 1
, . - -- _ - _ , . -. ___. . _ _ _ . , . _ . . _ _ _ . . ~ , , _ . _ . . _ _ . , - - , _ , ,., _ .. . ~ . . , - - . - . .
(1)- (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)' (7) (8) (9) (10) T-22E 145 0.30 5.5 0.0 63.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 0.0 T-22F 209 0.30 3.8 0.0 63.6 0.5 0.0 47.0 0.0 T-22Gi 543 0.30 1.5 0.0 63.6 0.3 0.0 47.0 0.0 T-29A 25 0.45 23.6 0.0 63.6 2.8 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-29B 19 0.35 24.0 0.0 63.6 2.5 0.0 35.9 0.0 7-50 20 0.35 25.2 0.0 63.6 2.0 0.0 35.9 0.0 2, T-53A 34 0.38 14.9 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-53B 24 0.39 22.0 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-53C 21 0.47 29.8 0.0 63.6 2.3 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-53D 120 0.35 3.9 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-5A 313 0.30 2.6 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 1.5 T-5B 190 0.30 4.2 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 T-5C 185 0.30 4.3 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 T-5D 190 0.30 4.2 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 T-SE 190 0.30 4.2 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 T-5F 190 0.30 4.2 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 T-5G 190 0.30 4.2 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 T-5H 313 0.30 2.6 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 1.5 T-9 122 0.30 6.6 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 2.5 T-10 68 0.30 11.7 0.0 63.6 2.2 0.0 47.0 3.3 T-11 311 0.30 2.6 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 1.6 T-12 3 488 0.30 2.3 0.0 27.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 1.7 T-13 489 0.30 2.3 0.0 27.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 1.7 l T-94A.B 139 0.30 5.8 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 1.5 T-20 612 0.30 1.9 0.0 63.6 1.1 0 . 0, 47.0 1.6 T-95A,fi. 86 'O.30 9.3 0.0 63.6 0.9 0 . 0. 47.0 0.0 T-22H 47 0.33 18.6 0.0 63.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 0.0 T-52' 35 0.43 17.0 0.0 63.6 2.4 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-89 69 0.85 46.5 0.0 63.6 9.5 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-1 " 14 0.60 177.1 406.5 672.3 10.8 24.7 52.5 0.0 T-273 9 1.13 282.5 657.6 672.3 13.5 31.4 52.5 0.0 T-21A 9 0.80 331.2 0.0 672.3 15.9 0.0 52.5 0.0 l T-21B 9 0.80 319.9 452.3 672.3 15.4 21.7 52.5 0.0 T-21C.. 9 0.80 331.2 651.3 672.3 15.9 31.3 52.5 0.0 T-32A,B 26 1.13 92.8 219.2 672.3 7.7 18.1 52.5 0.0 T-32C.D 9 1.13 274.7.653.6 672.3 13.2 31.3 52.5 0.0 T-47 9 1.13 270.8 651.3 672.3 13.0 31.3 52.5 0.0 TB-1. 1035 0.:10 1.1 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 1.2 TB-2 230 0.30 4.9 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 2.5 TB-4 359 0.30 2.2 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 1.4 TB-5 994 0.30 1.0 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 1.4 , TB-6 1148 0.30 0.9 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 1.3 TB-13 741 0.30 1.1 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 1.0 TB-14 347 0.31 3.3 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 47.0 2.1 TB-15 311 0.31 3.7 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.0 47.0 2.2 TB-19 313 0.31 3.7 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.0 47.0 2.2 TB-20 384 0.31 3.0 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 ' TB-25 *8E5 0.31 1.3 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.'O 1.3
- TB-26 384 0.30 2.9 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 TB-28 994 0.30 1.0 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 1.4 TB-29 1029 0.30 1.1 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 1.2 TB-36 386 0.31 3.0 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 TB-41 1092 0.30 1.0 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 1.2 TB-43 154 0.31 7.5 0.0 63.6 2.1 0.0 47.0 3.2 TB-44 155 0.31 7.4 0.0 63.6 2.1 0.0 47.0 3.1 TB-45 1029 0.30 1.1- 0.0 63.6 0.8 RO . O 47.0 1.2-l TB-16 311 0.31 3.7 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.0 47.0 2.2 TB-22 384' O.31 3.0 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0
. - -- - - _ . ,. . , --, , ,. , ~ , . . , . , . , . , - . - - ,
. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) TB-24 1029 0.31 1.1 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 1.2 TB-35 314 0.31 3.0 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 s.. TB-46 282 0.31 4.1. 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 47.0 2.3 TB-3 669 0.30 1.3 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 1.3 TB-7 1428 0.30 0.7 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 1.1 ' 1 TB-30 869 0.30 1.3 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 1.3 TB-31 1293 0.30 0.9 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 1.1 TB-32 217 0.30 5.2 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 2.6 TB-37 1956 0.31 0.6 0.0 63.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 0.9 . TB-40 1956 0.30 0.6 0.0 63.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 0.9 RB-1 265 0.37 3.8 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2.7 RB-3 264 0.37 3.8 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2.7 RB-4 266 0.37 3.7 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2.7 . RB-5 265 0.37 3.7 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2.7 R-2 417 0.37 2.4 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 1.9 R-3A 36 0.39 14.4 0.0 63.6 2.7 0.0 35.9 1.3 R-3B 64 0.37 7.6 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 35.9 0.0 R-3C 45 0.37 10.8 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 35.9 0.0 R-4 86 0.37 11.5 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 47.0 0.0 a R-5 652 0.37 1.5 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 1.5 j R-6 145 0.37 6.8 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.0 47.0 2.3 RB-2 263 0.37 3.8 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2.7 R-9 122 0.47 10.4 0.0 63.6 2.1 0.0 47.O' 3.2 R-10A 92 0.47 13.8 0.0 63.6 2.5 0.0 47.0 3.7 R-10B 282 0.47 4.4 0.0 63.6 1.4 0 . 0, 47.0 2.1 R-13A 27 0.52 28.2 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.0 35.9 0.0 R-13B.C 31 0.52 24.5 0.0 63.6 2.9 0.0 35.9 0.0 R-13D 22 0.55 36.3 0.0 63.6 3.6 0.0 35.9 0.0 R-13E 15 0.57 49.2 0.0 63.6 3.9 0.0 35.9 0.0 R-14 119 0.52 11.9 0.0 63.6 2.2 0.0 47.0 3.3-R-15A 77 0.52 18.4 0.0 63.6 2.4 0.0 47.0 3.7 R-15B 56 0.52 25.3 0.0 63.6 2.9 0.0 47.0 4.3 R-20 82 0.52 17.1 0.0 63.6 2.6 0.0 47.0 3.9 R-20Bf 67 0.52 21.0 0.0 63.6 2.9 0.0 47.0 4.4 R-8A 51 0.47 24.8 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 47.0 0.0 E-8B 521 0.47 2.4 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 47.0 2.4 R-11 468 0.47 2.7 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.0 47.0 2.3 E-16A 168 0.52 8.2 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2 . 7. R-16B 321 0.52 4.3 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 R-16C 144 0.52 9.6 0.0 63.6 3.0 0.0 47.0 4.5 RB-6 209 0.37 4.7 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 1.9 , RB-7 143 0.37 6.9 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 2.6 RB-8 261 0.37- 3.8 0.0 63.6. 1.3 0.0 47.0 1.9 RB-9 163 0.37 6.0 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 2.6 . 4 RB-10 133 0.37 7.4 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2.7 RB-11 725 0.37 1.4 oO . 0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 1.1 RB-12 269 0.37 3.7 0.0 63.6 1.2 .0.0 47.0 1.9 RB-14 *106 0.37 9.3 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2.7 RB-15 215 0.37 4.6 0.0 63.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 1.9 5 RB-21 408 0.26 1.7 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 1.1 RB-23 556 0.37 1.8 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 1.4 i RB-30 40 0.26 17.4 0.0 63.6 2.5 0.0 47.0 3.7
- R-1A 11 0.44 63.0 0.0 ~
358.0 3.2 0.0 52.5 0.0 i R-1B,C 10 0.45 68.5 0.0 358.0 3 . d4 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-1D 13 0.42 50.9 0.0 358.0 2.8 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-1E 15 0.40 42.9 0.0 358.O' 2.5 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-7A 11 0.52 74.4 0.0 358.0 3.8 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-7B 11 0.52 77.5 0.0 358.0 3.8 0.0 52.5 0.0 i
, , , -. m._.-, - - , . . , . . . ,. r - , _m ,, . . . , , . . . . _
- l) (2). (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
; -7C 11 0.52 74.4 0.0 353.0 3.8 0.0 G2.5 0.0 11 0.56 CO.1 0.0 35%.O 4.1 0.0 52.5 0.0 -
12A _ 12B 10 0.56 86.7 0.0 358.0 4.3 0.0 52.5 0.0 12C 11 0.56 80.1 0.0 358.0 4.1 0.0 52.5 0.0 __ 18A 11 0.69 98.7 0.0 358.0 5.1 0.0 52.5 0.0 18B 10 0.69 110.0 0.0 358.0 5.3 0.0 52.5 0.0 18C 11 0.69 98.7 0.0 358.0 5.1 0.0 52.5 0.0
~ - ~ - - - 13 162 0.37 6.1 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 47.0 2.1
- -16 772 0.37 1.3 0.0 27.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 1.0
- -19 489 0.26 1.4 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 1.1
' ~ ~ - - - 20 489 0.26 1.4 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 1.1
--27 4057 0.47 0.3 0.0 63.6 0.5 0.0 47.0 0.7 22 154 0.37 6.4 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 47.0 2.5
- 24 1304 0.47 1.0 0.0 27.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 1.0 25 1304 0.47 1.0 0.0 27.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 1.0
- 33 2318 0.47 0.5 0.0 63.6 0.5 0.0 47.0 0.7
- -26 2830 0.47 0.4 0.0 63.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 0.9 31 1157 0.26 0.6 0.0 27.6 0.5 0.0 47.0 0.7 1_ZZZ 17A 1304 0.52 1.1 0.0 27.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 1.1 17B 1304 0.52 1.1 0.0 27.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 1.1 e
O e 9 J G 4
TABLE II-A 4 COMPARISON WITH SGEB CRITERIA (NON-COMPOSITE) Column (1): Waldidentifier (2): Frequency (Hertz) (3): Response spectrun acceleration (g's) (4): Bending stress from SSE + PBOC (psi) (5): Bending stress from Tornado (psi) (6): SGEB allowable tensile stress (psi) (7): Shear stress from SSE + PBOC (psi) , (8): Shear stress from Tornado (psi) (9): SGEB allowable shear stress (psi) (10): Maximum collar joint shear stress (psi) 9 I 1 1 e 4 e i e T
- nm e ,e... ,- .-m. , --. m - .- ,. .-- -
-(1)z (2). (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) +
T 20 0.45 29.1- 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.0 35.9 NA T-36 57 0.31- 7.2 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 35.9 NA T-37 32 0.43 17.8 0.0 63.6 2.4 0.0 35.9 NA T-44 20 0.45 29.1 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.0 35.9 NA i T-39B 23 0.63 44.6 0.0 63.6 4.8 0.0 35.9 NA 4 T-39B 18 0.68 49.3 0.0 63.6 4.3 0.0 35.9 NA T-8 22 0.35 42.2 0.0 63.6 2.1 0.0 47.0 NA T-2D 37 D.33 12.5 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 35.9 NA T-2E- 28 0.35 17.2 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 35.9 NA T-26A 108 0.46 5.7 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 35.9 NA T-26B 25 0.62 32.4 0.0 63.6 2.7 0.0 35.9 NA T-28 128 0.31 3.2 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 35.9 NA T-33A 22 0.45 26.9 0.0 63.6 3.0 0.0 35.9 NA T-33B 38 0.42 14.5 0.0 63.6 2.1 0.0 35.9 NA 4 T-33C.D 26 0.45 23.2 0.0 63.6 2.8 0.0 35.9 NA , T-34 47 0.33 9.3 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.0 35.9 NA , T-35 54 0.31- 7.6 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 35.9 NA T-38 23 0.45 26.3 0.0 63.6 3.0 0.0 - 35.9 NA T-45 23 0.45 26.3 0.0 63.6 - 3.0 0.0 35.9 NA T-3 20 0.35 25.3 0.0 63.6 2.0 0.0 35.9 NA _ T-4A 57 0.30 14.0 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 47.0 NA i i T-4 B- 112 0.30 7.3 0.0 63.6 1.0 0 . 0. 47.0 NA l T-4C 42 0.33 20.8 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0- 47.0 NA e T-4D 157 0.30 5.3 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 NA T-7 22 0.35 20.9 0.0 63.6 2.3 0.0 35.9 NA T-24A 23 0.63 36.6 0.0 63.6 2.9 0.0 35.9 NA ,' T-24B 21 0.65 41.2 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.0 35.9 NA T-24C 21 0.65 48.0 0.0 63.6 3.9 0.0 35.9 NA . T-25A 125 0.46 4.9 0.0 63.6 1.1 0.0 35.9 NA ! t T-25B 24 0.52 28.7 0.0 63.6 2.9 0.0 35.9 NA ) T-25C 125 0.46 4.9 0.0 63.6 1.1 C.O 35.9 NA I T-31A 23 0.45 27.0 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.0 35.9 NA l T-31B 20 0.45 29.1 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.0 35.9 NA i T-31C,D 23 0.45 26.3 0.0 63.6 3.0 0.0 35.9 NA T-6 45 0.33 9.9 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 35.9 NA T-16 79 0.30 5.1 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 35.9 NA T-40 20 0.65 44.8 0.0 63.6 4.2 0.0 35.9 NA T-42 21 0.45 28.2 0.0 63.6 2.2 0.0 '35.9 NA T-23A 46 0.35 20.2 0.0 27.6 1.6 0.0 47.0 NA
! T-23B 30 0.35 31.1 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 47.0 . NA 2-T-230 76 0.35 12.8 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 NA T-23D 31- 0.35 30.6 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 47.0 NA T-23E 33 0.35 28.1 0.0 63.6- 1.8 0.0- 47.0 NA T-23F
- 24 0.36 39.8 0.0 63.6 2.2 0.0 47.0 NA T-23G 33 0.38 15.9 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 35.9 NA-T-23H 28 0.39 18.1 0.0 63.6 2.0 0.0 35.9 NA 1 T-23J 21 0.42 28.3 0.0 63.6 2.8 0.0 35.9 NA I T-51A 33 0.56 22.7 0.0 63.6 2.2 0.0 35.9 NA T-51B 31 0.57 25.9 0.0 63.6 2.5 0.0 35.9 NA T-51C 37 0.55 19.6 0.0 63.6 2.0 0.0 35.9 NA T-18 32 0.35 15.8 80.0 63.6 2.2 17.1 35.9 NA
, T-22A 81 0.30 9.9 0.0 63.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 NA T-22B 163 0.30 4.9 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 NA
- T-22C 163 0.30 4.s 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 NA T-22D 72 0.30 11.1 0.0 63.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 NA
-.-- _ . --_ - . - - _ . - - . , - --. . - , , , , - - - . - - a,, ,--.n--- --, -. _ ,. __ . , , _ _ , , , - - - , . - . , , , . . .
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) '(6) (7) (8) (9) -(10) T-22E 145 0.30 5.5 0.0 63.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 NA . T-22F 209 0.30 3.8 0.0 63.6 0.5 0.0 47.0 NA T-22G' 543 0.30 1.5 0.0 63.6 0.3 0.0 47.0 NA T-29A 25 0.45 23.6 0.0 63.6 2.8 0.0 35.9 NA T-29B 19 0.35 24.0 0.0 63.6 2.5 0.0 35.9 NA T-50 20 0.35 25.2 0.0 63.6 2.0 0.0 35.9 NA T-53A 34 0.38 14.9 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 35.9 NA T-53B 24 0.39 22.0 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 35.9 NA T-53C 21 0.47 29.8 0.0 63.6 2.3 0.0- 35.9 NA T-53D 120 0.35 3.9 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 35.9 NA T-5A 104 p.30 7.7 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 NA T-5B 63 0.30 12.7 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 NA T-5C 62 0.30 13.0 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 NA T-5D 63 0.30 12.7 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 NA T-5E 63 0.30 12.7 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 NA T-5F 63 0.30 12.7 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 NA T-5G 63 0.30 12.7 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 NA T-5H 104 0.30 7.7 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 NA T-9 40 0.30 20.2 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 NA T-10 23 0.30 35.2 0.0 63.6 2.2 0.0 47.0 NA T-11 103 0.30 7.9 0.0 63.6 1.1 0.0 47.0 NA T-12 162 0.30 7.0 0.0 27.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 NA T-13 163 0.30 6.9 0.0 27.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 NA T-94A.B 70 0.30 11.5 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 NA T-20 189 0.30 6.3 0.0 63.6 1.2 0 . 0. 47.0 NA T-95A.B 86 0.30 9.3 0.0 63.6 0.9 0. 0- 47.0 NA T-22H 47 0.33 18.6 0.0 63.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 NA T-52 35 0.43 17.0 0.0 63.6 2.4 0.0 35.9 NA T-89 69 0.85 46.5 0.0 63.6 9.5 0.0 35.9 NA T-1 18 0.60 177.1 406.5 672.3 10.8 24.7 52.5 NA T-27 11 1.13 282.5 657.6 672.3 13.5 31.4 52.5 NA , T-21A 11 0.80 331.2 0.0 672.3 15.9 0.0 52.5 NA T-21B 11 0.80 319.9 452.3 672.3 15.4 21.7 52.5 NA , T-21C 11 0.80 331.2 651.3 672.3 15.9 31.3 52.5 NA T-32A.B 34 1.13 92.8 219.2 672.3 7.7 18.1 52.5 NA T-32C,D 11 1.13 274.7 653.6 672.3 13.2 31.3 52.5 NA T-47 11 1.13 270.8 651.3 672.3 13.0 31.3 52.5 NA TB-1 345 0.30 3.3 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 NA TB-2 77 0.30 14.7 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 NA TB-4 120 0.30 6.7 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 NA TB-5 199 0.30 5.1 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 ' 4'7 . 0 NA TB-6 226 0.30 4.5 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 NA TB-13 247 0.30 3.2 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 NA TB-14 116 0.31 10.0 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 47.0 NA TB-15 103 0.31 11.3 0.0- 63.6 1.5 0.0 47.0 NA TB-19 104 0.31 11.1 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.0 47.0 NA 47.0 TB-20 127 0.31 9.2 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 NA TB-25 *285 0.31 4.1 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 NA TB-26 127 0.30 .9.0 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 NA TB-28 199 0.30 5.1 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 NA TB-29 339 0.30 3.3 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 NA' TB-36 129 0. 11 9.0 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 NA TB-41 360 0.30 3.2 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 NA TB-43 51 0.31 22.8 0.0 63.6 2.1 0.0 47.0 NA TB-44 52 0.31 22.3 0.0 63.6 2.1 0.0 47.0 NA . TB-45 339 0.30 '3.3 0.0 o63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 NA TB-16 103 0.31 11.3 0.0 G3.6 1.5 0.0 47.0 NA , TB-22 127 0.31 9.2 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 47.0 NA
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) TB-24 339 0.31 3.4 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 NA TB-35 127 0.31 9.2- 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 47.0 NA TB-46 93 0.31 12.5 0.0 63.6 1.6 _O.0 47.0 NA TB-3 290 0.30 3.9 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 NA TB-7 286 0.30 3.5 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 NA TB-30 290 0.30 3.9 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 NA TB-31 431 0.30 2.6 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 NA TB-32 72 0.30 15.6 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 NA TB-37 652 0.31 1.8 0.0 63.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 NA TB-40 652 0.30 1.7 0.0 63.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 NA RB-1 52 0.37 19.6 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 47.0 NA RB-3 51 0.37 20.0 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 47.0 NA RB-4 53 0.37 18.8 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 NA RB-5 52 0.37 19.2 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 NA R-2 104 0.37 9.5 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 NA R-3A 18 0.39 28.9 0.0 63.6 2.7 0.0 35.9 NA R-3B 64 0.37 7.6 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 35.9 NA R-3C 45 0.37 10.8 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 35.9 NA R-4 86 0.37 11.5 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 47.0 NA R-5 163 0.37 6.1 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 NA R-6 72 0.37 13.6 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.0 47.0 NA RB-2 50 0.37 21.0 0.0 63.6 2.0 0.0 47.0 NA R-9 60 0.47 21.3 0.0 63.6 2.2 0.0 47.0 NA R-10A 45 0.47 28.3 0.0 63.6 2.5 0.0 47.0 NA R-10B 141 0.47 8.9 0.0 63.6 1.4 0. 0. 47.0 NA R-13A 27 0.52 28.2 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.O* 35.9 NA R-13B,C 31 0.52 24.5 0.0 63.6 2.9 0.0 35.9 NA R-13D 22 0.55 36.3 0.0 63.6 3.6 0.0 35.9 NA R-13E 15 0.57 49.2 0.0 63.6 3.9 0.0 35.9 NA R-14 58 0.52 24.6 0.0 63.6 2.3 0.0 47.0 NA R-15A 38 0.52 38.0 0.0 63.6 2.5 0.0 47.0 NA R-iSB 27 0.52' 52.4 0.0 63.6 3.0 0.0 47.0 NA i R-20 41 0.52 35.1 0.0 63.6 2.7 0.0 47.0 NA R-20B 33 0.52 43.2 0.0 63.6 3.0 0.0 47.0 NA R-8A 51 0.47 24.8 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 47.0 NA R-8B 104 0.47 12.2 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 47.0 NA R-11 116 0.47 10.9 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.0 47.0 NA R-16A 84 0.52 16.5 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 NA R-16B 160 0.52 8.7 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 NA R-16C 36 0.52 38.5 0.0 63.6 3.0 0.0 47.0 NA 1 RB-6 104 0.37 9.5 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 NA RB-7 48 0.37 20.7 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 NA RB-8 87 0.37 11.4 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 NA RB-9 54 0.37 18.1 0.0 63.6 1.7 .O.0 47.0 NA , RB-10 44 0.37 22.3 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 NA RB-11 242 0.37 4.1 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 NA RB-12 90 0.37 11.0 0.0 63.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 NA RB-14 53 0.37 18.8 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 NA RB-15 108 0.37 9.2 0.0 63.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 NA RB-21 136 0.26 5.1 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 NA l RB-23 185 0.37 5.3 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 NA RB-30 13 0.26 52.2 0.0 63.6 2.5 0.0 47.0 NA R-1A 19 0.44 63.0 0.0 358.0 3.2 0.0 52.5 NA '
- R-1B,C 18 0.45 68.5 0.0 358.0 3.4 0.0 52.5 NA R-1D 23 0.42 50.9 0.0 358.0 2.8 0.0 52.'5 NA R-1E 26 0.40 42.9 0.0 358.0 2.5 0.0 52.5 NA R-7A 19 0.52 74.4 0.0 358.0 3.8 .O . 0 52.5 NA i R-7B 18 0.52 77.5 0.0 358.0 3.8 0.0 52.5 NA i
.--- . _. . _ . . - _ - _ _ _ _ ., , ,m-.
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) R-7C 19 0.52 74.4 0.0 358.0 3.8 0.0 52.5 NA R-12A 19 0.56 80.1 0.0-358.0 4.1 0.0 52.5 NA R-12B 18 0.56 86.7 0.0 358.0 4.3 0.0 52.5 NA R-12C 19 0.56 80.1 0.0 358.0 4.1 0.0 52.5 NA R-18A 19 0.69 98.7 0.0 358.0 5.1 0.0 52.5 NA R-18B 17 0.69 110.0 0.0 358.0 5.3 0.0 52.5 NA R-18C. 19 0.69 98.7 0.0 358.0 5.1 0.0 52.5 NA RB-13 81 0.37 12.2 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 47.0 NA RB-16 386 0.37 2.6 0.0 27.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 NA RB-19 163 0.26 4.3 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 NA RB-20 163 0.26 4.3 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 NA RB-27 1014 0.47 1.2 0.0 63.6 0.5 0.0 47.0 NA RB-22 51 0.37 19.2 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 47.0 NA RB-24 652 0.47 1.9 0.0 27.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 NA RB-25 652 0.47 1.9 0.0 27.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 NA RB-33 1159 0.47 1.1 0.0 63.6 0.5 0.0 47.0 NA RB-26 708 0.47 1.8 0.0 63.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 NA RB-31 386 0.26 1.8 0.0 27.6 0.5 0.0 47.0 NA R-17A 652 0.52 2.1 0.0 27.J 0.7 0.0 47.0 NA R-17B 652 0.52 2.1 0.0 27.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 NA 6 e G l . I i l
TABLE ~III BLOCK 0UTS QUALIFIED BY ARCHING ACTION COMPARISON WITH SGEB CRITERIA Column (1): Wall identifier (2): Frequency (Hert:) (3): Response spectrum acceleration (g's) (4): Bending stress from SSE + PBOC (psi) (5): Bending stress from Tornado (psi) (6): SGEB allowable tensile stress (psi) (7): Shear stress from SSE + PBOC (psi) (8): Shear stress from Tornado (psi) . (9): SGEB allowable shear stress (psi) (10): Maximum collar joint shear stress (psi) s 1 O O e e l f
(1) (2) (3) (G) (5) (6) (7)_ (0) (9) (10) T-23A 93 0.35 10.1 0.0 27.6 1.6 0.0 47.0 2.3 T-23B 61 0.35 15.4 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 47.0 2.9 T-23C 154 0.35 6.2 0.0 63.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 1.9 T-23D 61 0.35 15.3 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 47.0 2.9 T-23F 48 0.36 19.9 0.0 63.6 2.2 0.0 47.0 3.3 TB-2 230 0.30 4.9 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 2.5 TB-4 359 0.30 2.2 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 1.4 TB-19 313 0.31 3.7 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.0 47.0 2.2 TB-3 869 0.30 1.3 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 1.3 TB-7 1428 0.30 0.7 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 1.1 TB-30 869 0.30 1.3 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 1.3 TB-31 1293 0.30 O'. 9 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 1.1 TB-32 217 0.30 5.2 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 2.6 TB-37 1956 0.31 0.6 0.0 63.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 0.9 TB-40 1956 0.30 0.6 0.0 63.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 0.9 RB-4 266 0.37 3.7 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2.7 RB-5 265 0.37 3.7 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2.7 RB-2 263 0.37 3.8 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2.7 RB-7 143 0.37 6.9 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 2.6 RB-8 261 0.37 3.8 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 1.9 RB-9 163 0.37 6.0 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 2.6 ' RB-11 725 0.37 1.4 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 1.1 RB-12 269 0.37 3.7 0.0 63.6 1.2 0.0.' 47.0 1.9 RB-14 106 0.37 9.3 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2.7 RB-15 215 0.37 4.6 0.0 63.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 1.9 RB-30 40 0.26 17.4 0.0 63.6 2.5 0.0 47.0 3.7 RB-13 162 0.37 6.1 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 47.0 2.1 RB-16 772 0.37 1.3 0.0 27.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 1.0 i RB-19 489 0.26 1.4 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 1.1 l RB-20 489 0.26 1.4 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 1.1 RB-27_ 4057 0.47 0.3 0.0 63.6 0.5 0.0 47.0 0.7 RB-22 154 0.37 6.4 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 47.0 2.5 RB-24 1304 0,47 1.0 0.0 27.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 1.0 RB-25 1304 0.47 1.0 0.0 27.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 1.0 RB-33 2318 0.47 0.5 0.0 63.6 0.5 0.0 47.0 0.7 RB-26 2830 0.47 0.4 0.0 63.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 0.9 RB-31 1157 0.26 0.6 0.0 27.6 0.5 0.0 47.0 0.7 R-17A 1304 0.S2 1.1 0.0 27.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 1.1 R-17B 1:'.04 0.52 1.1 0.0 27.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 1.1 I
. . . - _ ~ -
TABLE III-A BLOCK 0UTS QUALIFIED BY ARCHING ACTION COMPARISON WITH SGEB CRITERIA (NON-COMPOSITE) Column (1): Wall identifier (2): Frequency (Hertz)
-(3): Response spectrum acceleration (g's)
(4): Bending stress from SSE + PBOC (psi) (5): Bending stress from' Tornado (psi) I (6): SGEB allowable tensile stress (psi) (7): Shear stress from SSE + F30C (psi). (8): Shear stress from Tornado (psi) (9): SGEB allowable shear stress (psi) (10): Maximum collar joint shear stress (psi) s b 4 i
- e
?
l l l l_____________-___-______-_-_.__________-__--__-_--_---__-___--__---_------_---------_----_---_._-
' ' ~ ~ ^' ^ ~ ~ ~ ^
} 33,_ [
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8' (9) '(10)
. T-23A 46 0.35 20.2 0.0 27.6 1.6 0.0 47.0 NA !
T-23B 30 0.35 31.1 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 47.0 NA T-23C 76 0.35 12.8 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 NA T-23D 31 0.35 30.6 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 47.0 NA T-23F 24 0.36 39.8 0.0 63.6 2.2 0.0 47.0 NA TB-2 77 0.30 14.7 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 NA TB-4 120 0.30 6.7 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 NA TB-19 104 0.31 11.1 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.0 47.0 NA ' i TB-3 290 0.30 3.9 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 NA
- TB-7 286 0.30 3.5 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 NA TB-30 290 0.30 3.9 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 NA TB-31 431 0.30 2.6 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 NA TB-32 72 0.30 15.6 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 NA
, 7B-37 652 0.31 1.8 0.0 63.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 NA TB-40 652 0.30 1.7 0.0 63.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 NA l RB-4 53 0.37 18.8 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 NA j RB-5 52 0.37 19.2 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 NA RB-2 50 0.37 21.0 0.0 63.6 2.0 0.0 47.0 NA RB-7 48 0.37 20.7 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 NA RB-8 87 0.37 11.4 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 NA RB-9 54 0.37 18.1 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 NA RB-11 242 0.37 4.1 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0; 47.0 NA RB-12 90 0.37 11.0 0.0 63.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 NA RB-14 53 0.37 18.8 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 NA RB-15 108 0.37 9.2 0.0 63.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 NA RB-30 13 0.26 52.2 0.0 63.6 2.5 0.0 47.0 NA
- RB-13 81 0.37 12.2 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 47.0 NA
, RB-16 386 0.37 2.6 0.0 27.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 NA RB-19 163 0.26 4.3 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 NA 1 RB-20 163 0.26 4.3 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 NA RB-27 1014 0.47 1.2 0.0 63.6 0.5 0.0 47.0 NA RB-22 51. 0.37 19.2 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 47.0 NA RB-24 652 0.47 1 29 0.0 27.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 NA RB-25 652 0.47 1.9 0.0 27.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 NA RB-33 1159 0.47 1.1 0.0 63.6 0.5 0.0 47.0 NA RB-26 708 0.47 1.8 0.0 63.6 0.6 0.0 47.0 NA i RB-31 386 0.26 1.8 0.0 27.6 0.5 0.0 47.0 NA R-17A 652 0.52 2.1 0.0 27.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 NA R-17B 652 0.52 2.1 0.0 27.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 NA l I l
TABLE IV MODIFIED MASONRY WALLS COMPARIS0N WITH SGEB CRITERIA Column (1): Wall identifier (2): Frequency (Hertz) (3): Response spectrum acceleration (g's) (4): Bending stress from SSE + PBOC (psi) (5): Bending stress from' Tornado (psi) (6): SGEB allowable tensile stress (psi)
- (7)
- Shear stress from SSE + PBOC (psi),
l (8): Shear stress from Tornado (psi) (9): SGEB allowable shear stress (psi)
, (10): Maximum collar joint shear stress (psi)
O l I
,. c . - n,- - ,-- ~n., -
TABLE IV (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (C) (10) T-30 20 0.45 29.1 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-36 57 0.31 7.2 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-37 32 0.43 17.8 0.0 63.6 2.4 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-44 20 0.45 29.1 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-39B 23 0.63 44.6 0.0 63.6 4.8 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-39B 18 0.68 49.3 0.0 63.6 4.3 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-8 22 0.35 42.2 0.0 63.6 2.1 0.0 47.0 0.0 T-2E 28 0.35 17.2 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-26A 108 0.46 5.7 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-26B 25 0.62 32.4 0.0 63.6 2.7 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-28 128 0.31 3.2 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-33A 22 0.45 26.9 0.0 63.6 3.0 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-33B 38 0.42 14.5 0.0 63.6 2.1 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-33C.D 26 0.45 23.2 0.0 63.6 2.8 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-34 47 0.33 9.3 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-35 54 0.31 7.6 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-38 23 0.45 26.3 0.0 63.6 3.0 0.0 35.9 0.0
- T-45 23 0.45 26.3 0.0 63.6 3.0 0.0 35.9 0.0 l_ T-3 20 0.35 25.3 0.0 63.6 2.0 0.0 35.9 0.0 i T-4B 112 0.30 7.3 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 0.0
. T-4D 157 0.30 5.3 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 0.0 T-7 22 0.35 20.9 0.0 63.6 2.3 0.0. 35.9 0.0 T-24A 23 0.63 36.6 0.0 63.6 2.9 0 . 0 '- 35.9 0.0 T-24B 21 0.65 41.2 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-24C 21 0.65 48.0 0.0 63 4 3.9 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-25A 125 0.46 4.9 0.0 63.6 1.1 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-25B 24 0.52 28.7 0.0 63.6 2.9 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-25C 125 0.46 4.9 0.0 63.6 1.1 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-31A 23 0.45 27.0 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-31B 20 0.45 29.1 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-31C.D 23 0.45 26.3 0.0 63.6 3.0 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-6 45 0.33 9.9 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-16 79 0.30 5.1 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 35.9 0.0 , T-40 20 0.65 44.8 0.0 63.6 4.2 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-42 21 0.45 28.2 0.0 63.6 2.2 0.0 35.S 0.0 T-23E 67 0.35 14.1 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2.7 T-23G 33 0.38 15.9 0.0 63.6 1.9 0.0 35.9 0.0 ' T-23J 21 0.42 28.3 0.0 63.6 2.9 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-51A 33 0.56 22.7 0.0 63.6 2.2 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-51B 31 0.57 25.9 0.0 63.6 2.5 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-51C 37 0.55 19.6 0.0 63.6 2.0 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-18 32 0.35 15.8 80.0 63.6 2.2 17.1 35.9 0.0 i T-29A 25 0.45 23.6 0.0 63.6 2.8 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-29B
- 19 0.35 24.0 0.0 63.6 2.5 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-50 20 0.35 25.2 0.0' 63.6 2.0 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-53A 34 0.38 14.9 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-53B 24 0.39 22.0 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-53C 21 0.47 29.8 0.0 63.6 2.3 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-53D 120 0.35 3.9 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-5A 313 0.30 2.6 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 1.5 T-5B 190 0.30 4.2 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 T-SC 185 0.30 4.3 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 T-5D 190 0.30 4.2 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 T-SE 190 0.30 4.2 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 T-5F 190 0.30 4.2 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) T-5G 190 0.30 4.2 0.0 G3.G 1.3 0.0 47.C 2.0 T-5H 313 0.30 2.6 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 1.5 T-9 122 0.30 6.6 0.0 63.6 1.7 0.0 47.0 2.5 T-10 68 0.30 11.7 0.0 63.6 2.2 0.0 47.0 3.3 T-11 311 0.30 2.6 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 1.6 T-12 488 0.30 2.3 0.0 27.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 1.7 T-13 489 0.30 2.3 0.0 27.6 1.2 0.0 47.0 1.7 T-94A.3 139 0.30 5.8 0.0 63.6 1.0 0.0 47.0 1.5 i T-2J 612 0.30 1.9 0.0 63.6 1.1 0.0 47.0 1.6 T-95A.B 86 0.30 9.3 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 0.0 T-52 35 0.43 17.0 0.0 63.6 2.4 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-89 69 0.85 46.5 0.0 63.6 9.5 0.0 35.9 0.0 T-1 14 0.60 177.1 406.5 672.3 10.8 24.7 52.5 0.0 T-27 9 1.13 282.5 657.6 672.3 13.5 31.4 52.5 0.0 T-21A 9 0.80 331.2 0.0 672.3 15.9 0.0 52.5 0.0 T-21B 9 0.80 319.9 452.3 672.3 15.4 21.7 52.5 0.0 T-21C 9 0.80 331.2 651.3 672.3 15.9 31.3 52.5 0.0 T-32A.B 26 1.13 92.8 219.2 672.3 7.7 18.1 52.5 0.0 T-32C.D 9 1.13 274.7 653.6 672.3 13.2 31.3 52.5 0.0 T-47 9 1.13 270.8 651.3 672.3 13.0 31.3 52.5 0.0 TB-1 1035 0.30 1.1 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 1.2 TB-5 994 0.30 1.0 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 1.4 TB-6 1148 0.30 0.9 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 1.3 TB-13 741 0.30 1.1 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 1.0 TB-14 347 0.31 3.3 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 47.0 2.1 TB-15 311 0.31 3.7 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.O' 47.0 2.2 l TB-20 384 0.31 3.0 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 TB-25 865 0.31 1.3 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 1.3 TB-26 384 0.30 2.9 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 TB-28 994 0.30 1.0 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 1.4 TB-29 1029 0.30 1.1 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 1.2
- TB-36 386 0.31 3.0 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 75-41 1092 0.30 1.0 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 1.2 TB-43 154 0.31 7.5 0.0 63.6 2.1 0.0 47.0 3.2 .
TB-44 155 0.31 7.4 0.0 63.6 2.1 0.0 47.0 3.1 TB-45 1029 0.30 1.1 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 1.2 TB-16 311 0.31 3.7 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.0 47.0 2.2 TB-22 384 0.31 3.0 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 4 4B-24 1029 0.31 1.1 0.0 63.6 0.8 0.0 47.0 1.2 73-35 384 0.31 3.0 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 2.0 t TB-46 282 0.31 4.1 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 47.0 2.3 RB-1' 265 0.37 3.8 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2.7 RB-3 264 0.37 3.8 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2.7 R-2 417 0.37 2.4 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 1.9 R-4 86 0.37 11.b 0.0 63.6 1.4 0.0 47.0 0.0 R-6 145 0.37 6.8 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.0 47.0 2.3 R-9
- 122 0.47 10.4 0.0 63.6 2.1 0.0 47.0 3.2 R-10A 92 0.47 13.8 0.0 63.6 2.5 0.0 47.0 3.7 R-13A 27 0.52 28.2 0.0 63.6 3.1 0.0 35.9 0.0 R-13B,C 31 0.52 24.5 0.0 63.6 2.9 0.0 35.9 0.0 R-13D 22 0.55 36.3 0.0 63.6 3.6 0.0 35.9 0.0 R-13E 15 0.57 49.2 0.0 63.6 3.9 0.0 35.9 0.0 R-14 119 0.52 11.9 0.0 63.6 2.2 0.0 47.0 3.3 R-15A 77 0.52 18.4 0.0 63.6 2.4 0.0 47.0 3.7 R-15B 56 0.52 25.3 0.0 63.6 2.9 0.0 47.0 4.3 R-20B 67 0.52 21.0 0.0 63.6 2.9 0.0 47.0 4.4 R-8A 51 0.47 24.8 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 47.0 0.0 R-8B 521 0.47 2.4 0.0 63.6 1.6 0.0 47.0 2.4
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) R-11 C68 0.07 2.7 0.0 63.6 1.5 0.0 07.0 2.3 R-1CC 1C0. 0.52 0.6 0.0 63.6 3.0 0.0 47.0 4.5 RB-6 209 0.37 4.7 0.0 63.6 1.3 0.0 47.0 1.9 RB-10 133 0.37 7.4 0.0 63.6 1.8 0.0 47.0 2.7 RB-21 408 0.26 1.7 0.0 63.6 0.7 0.0 47.0 1.1 RB-23 556 0.37 1.8 0.0 63.6 0.9 0.0 47.0 1.4 R-1A 11 0.44 63.0 0.0 358.0 3.2 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-1D 13 0.42 50.9 0.0 358.0 2.8 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-7A 11 0.52 74.4 0.0 358.0 3.8 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-7B 11 0.52 77.5 C.O 358.0 3.8 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-7C 11 0.52 74.4 0.0 358.0 3.8 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-12A 11 0.56 80.1 0.0 358.0 4.1 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-12C 11 0.56 80.1 0.0 358.0 4.1 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-18A 11 0.69 98.7 0.0 358.0 5.1 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-18B 10 0.69 110.0 0.0 358.0 5.3 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-18C 11 0.69 98.7 0.0 358.0 5.1 0.0 52.5 0.0 e 0 e 4 i e 4
#3 9 e 4 9 8
- 4 e a
TABLE V ~ REINFORCED MASONRY WALLS ! COMPARISON WITH SGEB CRITERIA i , t Column (1): Wall identifier , (2): Frequency (Hertz) (3): Response spectrum acceleration (g's) (4): Bending stress from SSE + PBOC (psi) [ (5): Bending stress from' Tornado (psi)
! (6): SGEB allowable tensile stress (psi) j (7): Shear stress from SSE + PBOC (psi).
(8): Shear stress from Tornado (psi) ! (9): SGEB allowable shear stress (psi) (10): Maximum collar joint shear stress (psi) c
. e d
j ' i i t l i j , s
TABLE V (1) (2) (3) (C) (0) (6) (7) (8) (0) (10) T-1 14 0.60 177.1 406.5 672.3 10.8 24.7 52.5 0.0 T-27 9 1.13 282.5 657.6 672.3 13.5 31.4 52.5 0.0 T-21A 9 0.80 331.2 0.0 672.3 15.9 0.0 52.5 0.0 T-21B 9 0.80 319.9 452.3 672.3 15.4 21.7 52.5 0.0 ! T-21C 9 0.80 331.2 651.3 672.3 15.9 31.3 52.5 0.0 T-32A.B 26 1.13 92.8 219.2 672.3 7.7 18.1 52.5 0.0 T-32C.D 9 1.13 274.7 653.6 672.3 13.2 31.3 52.5 0.0 T-47 9 1.13 270.8 651.3 672.3 13.0 31.3 52.5 0.0 R-1A 11 0.44 63.0 0.0 358.0 3.2 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-1B.C 10 0.45 68.5 0.0 358.0 3.4 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-1D 13 0.42 50.9 0.0 358.0 2.8 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-1E 15 0.40 42.9 0.0 358.0 2.5 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-7A 11 0.52 74.4 0.0 358.0 3.8 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-7B 11 0.52 77.5 0.0 358.0 3.8 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-7C 11 0.52 74.4 0.0 358.0 3.8 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-12A 11 0.56 80.1 0.0 358.0 4.1 0.0 52.5 0.0
! R-12B 10 0.56 86.7 0.0 358.0 4.3 0.0 52.5 0.0 , R-120 11 0.56 80.1 0.0 358.0 4.1 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-18A 11 0.69 98.7 0.0 358.0 5.1 0.0 52.5 0.0 A-18B 10 0.69 110.0 0.0 358.0 5.3 0.0 52.5 0.0 R-18C 11 0.69 98.7 0.0 358.0 5.1 0.0 52.5 0.0 e
d i 4 4
-, .._m
OUESTION 7 Identity whether any OA/OC records are available to ensure conformance of masonry construction to desion drawinas and specifications. nesnonse The safety-related nasonry walls at the Millstone Unit 1 Power Plant have been systematically analyzed for their functional capability. These evaluations were performed by Parthouake Enqineerino Services (EFF), Boston, Massachusetts, for NUSCO, in response to and to the requirerents of NRC I& E Pulle tin 80-11. The report of the reevaluation was submitted to NRC staff ner Reference 4. The oricinal enoineerino, desiqn, and construction of these walls were by Ebasco Services, Incorporated. The insnection of construction and workmanship of block walls was
- controlled by use of the cricinal desion drawing and the adherence to the construction specification, Reference 1. The specification quarantees the control of the construction qualities by the contractors / subcontractors. " The werk covered by this specification includes furnishino all labor, material, tools, couipment, scaffoldina and other appliances recuired to perform the masonry work. The materials procured fer masonry walls by this snecification were to the recuirements of ASTM specifications. The construction cuality of these masonry walls was maintained at least ecual to the local building code and this specification during the construction phase. Durinc this period prints of the engineerino drawings were made available to facilitate the contractors to follow the secuence. The inspection of the work was reserved by the encineers to monitor and check that the workmanship and secuence of construction were to the drawing recuirementn. Therefore, it con he concluded that the masonry walls at Millstone Unit 1 (MP1) were encineered, desianed, built, and inspected by a systematic nanner.
Sections 4.5 and 4.6 of the latest ACI S31-79 huilding code requirements for concrete masonry structures provides the specification of material acceptance for masonry work and the inspection requirements during the construction phase. Thouah the referenced specification for the masonry work is much earlier than this ACI buildino code requirement, the requirenents imposed by the specification meet or exceed the intent of the ACI building code. Moreover, as part of the reevaluation report, the MP1 facilities were surveyed by the team of engineers to obtain the field data. The survey of the facility includen visual inspection of the masonry walls as to its soundness, such as cracks in the blocks / joints, chippings, or any such physical damages. The drawings and other documents used in gatherino necessary data found that the masonry wall thicknesses, locations, and material were
consistent with the physical an-built conditions. This inferb that an inspection proqram existed durino the course of ' construction and thus Reference I was effectively enforced. Durina the modification stane, reinforcinq bars were encountered when attempting to bolt through nasonry blocks. These observa-tions provide further confirmation that walls were reinforced per the original desion drawinas. In orcier to enhance the confidence level, samr les of blocks collected randonly have been tested for compression and water absorption according to the requirements of ASTil C-140, Reference
- 3. The specimen's compressive stronath from the testn in pci on cross area indicated that the blocks have an inherent hiqher strength, Table 7-1, as compared to the values used in the reevaluation report, Reference 4 The relative strenoth values sunnentn that the values in Table 7-1 used in the final report usino criteria, Heference 2, are conservative.
Based upon the precedino information, i t can be concluded that cor.formance of masonry construction to desiqn drawinos and specifications was maintained. - f i j m- e
f/ paterencer
- 1. Chasco Services, Incornarated, Snecification for flasonry for fiillstone fluclear Power Station Unit 1, document flo .
ftPC-f!I-A3, Revision 1, dated October 5, 19 r,7.
- 2. Design criteria No. DC-1, Revision 3, by Earthauake Encineerina Services (CES), Boston, flassachusetts, for tiillstone Nuclear Power Station Unit 3, attachment to Reference 4.
- 3. Concrete block wall test report, nroiect No. 50,858, by Dricos, Norwell , flassachusetts , dated August 13, 1985
- 4. U. G. Counsil letter to B. D. Grier, ?JRC, subject: flillstone Power Station Unit 1, I&C Dulletin 80-11, flasonry Wall Design, f:ortheast fitilitier, Novenhor 4, 19 flo , A010 21.
CS-D6-22
TAnLP 7-) f9f0NRY DIOCKS STP!7Kml PPOPEFTIES Tested Nm1 Block Tyre Coran. Strecs Used in flasonry On Italls Peevaluation Test Gross Alma Report Description Samples In Psi f'rn Values in Psi Pemarks Blocks
- a. AS17' C-140 Randern Fim (Hollow Unit) 7trb. Oldo. 1,625. -
Pef. 3
- b. ASTf1 C-90 -
1,350. C-129 Pef. 1 - . 630. Ref. 2 C-145 - 1,080. Blocks
- a. ASTft C-140 Random From 4,010. -
Ref. 3 (100/ solid unit) Aux. Bldg.
- b. ASTT1 C-90 -
1,350. C-129 Ref. 1 - 630. Ref. 2 C-145 - 1,080. CS-D6-23 I
AUDIT OUESTION Provide a survey of masonry walls at Millstone Unit No. 1 to identify any signs of cracking.
RESPONSE
In response to the above request, a walkdown of the walls included in the IE 80-11 bulletin was performed. This walkdown encompassed almost all walls in the program with the exception of a small number of walls which were inaccessible due to high radiation levels. The walkdown revealed no indications of cracking or other signs of distress. Subsequent to the above survey, 33 walls were randomly chosen and their original walkdown drawings obtained. These drawings were reviewed to determine if the original evaluation indicated any signs of cracking or distress. The examination showed 20 walls which were noted as having some focm of cracking prior to modifications. It is noted that the majority of cracking was along the boundaries with only a few locations where step cracks
! were shown. These 20 walls were resurveyed to verify the indications on the walkdown drawings were addressed. In all cases modifications were employed which oliminated any adverse effects these cracks would have on the walls structural integrity. These modifications included installation of plates or angles along the boundary or grouting of step cracks.
Based upon this survey the applicant feels that all structural i discontinuities were addressed in the original evaluation and i have not reappeared. Therefore, the assumptions made in response to the IE 80-11 bulletin about the physical condition of the walls remains valid. i CS-D7-18
Docket No. 50-213 3 Haddam Neck Plant Response to Request for AdditionalInformation IE Bulletin 80-11, Masonry Walt Design i December,1985
INTRODUCTION TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MASONRY WALL DESIGN, IE BULLETIN 80-11 HADDAM NECK PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-213 t In order to respond to the questions, a review of the calcula- , tions was performed. This review indicated that the walls could : be grouped into five categories which are:
- a. Walls CYPAB 107 and 108, CYDG 1002 and 1003, and CYTB 2005 were actually column strips at the edge of reinforced concrete walls. These column strips were tied to the wall by anchor bolts which woro drilled through the column strips into the walls.
The anchor bolts bear on the columns by base platos. Thus, those column strips becomo an appendage to the reinforced concrete wall and the allowable stresses in blocks are nonsignificant.
! b. Walls CYPAB 201, 202, 203, and 204 woro modified and qualified as structural walls in the SEP program. These four walls were modified to act as i
reinforced shear walls, and after modifications i behave as reinforced concreto sections. The accelerations used on those walls were directly from the SEP program. Thorofore, those walls fall outside the scopo of the IE Bulletin and will not , be considered further. ' i
- c. Walla CYPAB 102, 103, and 104: CYSB 1002; CYSB 1003 and CYTB 1000 woro qualified by assuming that they could fail but a metal barrior was erected so that the blocks could not fall and impact equipment. lionco, allowable stressos are not a factor in this caso.
- d. Walls CYPAB 101C, 1010, 101E, and CYDG 1004 woro qualified as having lower stresses than allowables in accordance with NUSCO critoria. The only modifications to those walls were to add angles and
- plates on the boundarios for stability
- considerations. Those four walls may be impacted by critoria changos. Ilowever, those walls were analyzed using very consorvativo analytical techniques.
- o. The root of the walls were modified structurally as their stresson were higher than allowable strossos in the l0SCO critoria.
The modifications, in t general, reduced wall stress substantially below allowables and that is expected to be a favorablo factor when comparing them with allowables in the NRC critoria which are not significantly lower than those in the NUSCO critoria.
QUESTION 1 In Response 17 of Reference 1, Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company (CYAPCO) indicated that the seismic evaluation of masonry walls used estimated floor spectra based on the Interim Seismic Design Ground Spectrum and that this criterion was later compared to'the SEP floor response spectra. Provide the conclusions that were drawn from this comparison and clarify whether the SEP spectra were actually used.
Response
Table 1 lists all the block walls at the CY plant at the time of the NRC IE Bulletin 80-11 project. The table also summarizes the available data in response to Question 1 of the recent NRC inquiry. The column of design responses gives the accelerations in (q) used to evaluate the walls. These accelerations are 1.3 times the spectral accelerations for the fundamental frequency of the wall. The 1.3 factor is (per criteria) to allow for contribution of higher modes. The spectral accelerations are from the floor response spectra used in the Bulletin effort. The SEP response accelerations are unfactored spectral accelerations from the SEP floor response spectra for the fundamental frequency of the walls. . The SEP floor response spectra were developed for the Category I structures of the CY plant and were available after the IE Bu11etin.80-11 effort had been concluded. As noted in the table, the SEP program did not require spectra developed in all the buildings which had walls in the IE Bulletin 80-11 scope. Walls CYPAB 107 and 108, CYDG 1002 and 1003, and CYTB 2005 were actually column strips at the edge of reinforced concrete walls. These column strips were tied to the wall by anchor bolts which were drilled through the column strips j into the walls. The anchor bolts bear on the columns by base plates. Thus, these column strips become an appendage j to the reinforced concrete wall and the allowable stresses I in blocks are nonsignificant. Walls CYPAB 201, 202, 203, and 204 were modified and qualified as structural walls in the SEP program, and as ' stated earlier need not be discussed further.
- Walls CYPAB 102, 103, and 104; CYCT 1001; CYSB 1002, and l 1003; and CYTB 1008 were qualified by assuming that they 1 could fall but a metal barrier was erected so that the j blocks could not fall and impact equipment. llence, allowable stresses are not a factor in this case.
o Wall CYPAB 101C was originally qualified on the basis of arching ac.tlon. A reevaluation of this wall indicates that the vall in its present configuration is not safety related; i.e., tallure would not jeopardize any safety-related equipment. In the original evaluation many walls were classift'ed safety related on a very conservative basis. The rest of the walls were qualified on the basis of modifications designed to reduce allowable stresses to comply with criteria developed for this project. During the design of the modifications, the calculation files show that the designer did one of the following: .
- a. Calculated those stresses being considered as '
controlling and compared them to allowables,
- b. Calculated demand forces (monents, shears, and axial forces) which were considered to be controlling ar.d compared them to allowables.
- c. Calculated displacements and compared them with allowables.
The stress ratio (R y ) column in Table 1 gives the maximum-ratio of calculated stress to SGEB allowable stresses for those valle for which stresses were calculated as described in (a) above. This ratio is not calculated for those walls where the atresses were not calculated specifically. Hovover,'those stresses can be calculated now and the-ratios R g ascertained. The stress ratio (R column in Table 1 estimates the' ratio of calculated stresde)s to SGEB allowable stress if the salls were qualified to the SEP floor response spectra (where-applicable). The calculated stresses for the modified walls are based on a set of very conservative assumptions. .Som9 of the more significant of these are
- a. The spectra accelerations used for the design of modifications is from an envelop of floor response spectra at the top and bottom of the walls rather t:han an average of the two which would have been more appropriate.
- b. ThbfJ$Camentalfrequencyofthemodified walls and the stress calculations were uniform'ly based on one-way action of the walls. Plate Ltwo-way) action of tPe walls would be more appropriate and lead t) lower calculated stresses.
- c. Codirectional forces on the wall were combined on an absolute sum basis rather than on the j t -
basis of SRSS. The later combination would be
\t
a more appropriate and lead to lower calculated stresses.
- d. Factoring the spectral accelerations from the fundamental mode of the wall by 1.3 to reflect contribution of higher modes is very conservative.
y e. The SEP floor response spectra are envelopes s for the whole floor. Using a floor spectra at i the location of the block wall would be more t appropriate and lead to lower spectral accelerations. u f. In response to Question 7, some insitu test ^ data is presented for masonry units at the
's site. As can be seen from Table 7-2, the allowable stresses are higher for the in-place properties than those used in the original calculations. Therefore, it would be more appropriate to base the R y and R ratios on 2
the insitu properties.
- g. Recent investigations indicate that the criteria initially used to classify walls as safety related was very conservative.
Therefore, some walls whose ratio R is greater than unity may not be requi3ed for safe shutdown of the unit. Further investiga-tions could be made to determine the actual safety category of walls as needed. A review of the table indicates a portion of the walls with a stress ratio R greater than unity. As stated previously, CY PAB 101C has been determined to be nonsafety related, and therefore the stress ratio R 2 greater than one is of no significance. In order to address the stress ratios exceeding unity, a systematic evaluation of the conservatisms mentioned above hac been performed. This evaluation was initiated for CY >AB 101E, which exhibited the hi host stress ratio R (3.19). Theoriginalanalysiswas$nvestigatedindetall and four areas of obvious conservatism were chosen for evaluation. Some of these areas included a more rigorous calculation of the walls frequency so that a more appropriate spectral acceleration is chosen, and also including the effects of higher modes thereby eliminating i i the need to amplify the fundamental mode by 1.3. The j spectra at the top and bottom of the wall which is much more appropriate was utilized. Finally, the maximum moment in the wall was calculated on a much more rigorous bases utilizing two-way action. This reevaluation resulted in the reported stress ratio R being reduced from 3.19 to an
/
i acceptable value of 0.76. The more rigorous frequency portion contributed 72.4 percent, multi-mode consideration 13.6 percent, utilizing average spectra 9.1 percent, and revised moment calculation contributed 4.9 percent to the total reduction. This evaluation has demonstrated the conservatisms inherent in the original evaluation, and t. hat by eliminating these reduces the ratio R to an accepts 01e 7 level. Therefore, it can be concluded tnat the SEP spect ra and SGEB criteria have no adverse impact on the original evaluation. r
i QUESTION 2 With respect to Attachment 2 in Reference 1, explain how the wall attachment weights were determined. Indicate why these forces are divided by the area of the entire wall.
Response
The earlier submittal to NRC referred to in Question 2 of ', subject NRC request was misleading. It gave as an example i for anchor bolt pullout evaluation a case where the bolts. I were qualified by inspection due to low pullout loads. Calculations shown on the same sheet where equipment weight was divided by total area of wall were for the purposes of retrofit design rather than for evaluating pullout integ ri r' y of appendage attachments. Attachment 1 to this response gives two examples where the attachments were not qualified by inspection and show a full evaluation of punching shear in wall as well as bolt stresses vs. allowables per criteria. l f P
~~s , _ , y- w -.y r-w-pr - , r-- r- e r- -- y
QUESTION 3 With respect to Attachment 5, Section 5.1 (Appendix A) in Reference 1, CYAPCO indicates that allowable stresses can be increased by 33 percent for OBE seismic loadings. However, the SGEB criteria, Section 3(a), expressly forbids the increase of allowable stress when wind or seismic loads (OBE) are involved. CYAPCO should identify the walls that require an increase in allowable stress for OBE load combinations in order to be qualified. Also, pro'rL;- tr g, actual percentage increase in allowable stress that is needed to qualify these walls.
Response
Although it was stated in Section 5.1 that OBE allowable. stresses could be increased by 33 percent, this was not considered in the reevaluation. In response to the IE 80-11 Bulletin, only stresses for the SSE condition were considered. This was because SSE yielded larger ratios of actual stress to allowable stress than the OBE even without consideration of 33 percent increase.
QUESTION 4 In Response 11 of Reference 1, CYAPCO indicated that all allowable stresses were increased by a factor of 1.67 for load cases involving SSE. The SGEB criteria permit increase factors of only 1.3 for masonry shear'and tension normal to the bed joint and 1.5 for tension parallel to the bed joint. CYAPCO should identify those walls which would not qualify
~
if the SGEB factors were used and provide the percentages by which the SGEB factored allowables are exceeded.
Response
Table 1 presents the results of a comparison of the calculated stresses to the SGEB allowables. The stress ratios Ry and R 9 indicate which walls do not meet the SGEB criteria as stated. In response to Question 1, a number of conservatisms that are inherent to these types of calculations are presented. As stated in Question 1, quantification of these conservatisms for the largest ratio R9 indicate that overstressed conditions do not result from utilization of SGEB criteria. n.
. . .. - ~
QUESTION 5 Identify the total number of walls that required modifications in order to be qualified under the SGEB criteria (2). Also, indicate how many of these are i unmortared walls.
Response
All the walls investigated unde: the IE Bulletin required some form of modification. The introduction to these responses describes some of the modification types. It is l felt that if all the conservatisms were eliminated from the original evaluations that the amount of overstressed conditions would be negligible and additional modifications L would not be justified. This has been quantified in response to Question 1. There were three walls which were unmortared in this evaluation, which were CYCT 1001, CY PAB
'102, and CY PAB 103. These walls were qualified by addition of barriers which prevented collapse of these walls onto safety-related equipment.
s b 4 1 i l 1 l l l i t
QUESTION 6 In Response 8 of Reference 1, CYAPCO stated that one wall at the Haddam Neck plant was analyzed using the " arching i action" technique. Identify this wall. The NRC position on this issue states that the use of the arching action theory to qualify unreinforced masonry walls is not acceptable. These walls should be repaired so they can be qualified based on the SGEB criteria (2). (The NRC position is provided as Attachment 3.)
Response
Attachment 2 gives revised calculations for wall CYPAB 101C which shows that eliminating some of the exaggerated conservatisms in the original analysis. reduces wall stresses to within allowable. These calculations are based on original floor spectra and criteria used for IE Bulletin 80-11 work. The differences in the revised calculations from those used for the original report are:
- a. The original analysis calculated the wall f requencies and stresses cm the basis of a 24-inch vertical wall strip in beam action with the mass of all the wall appendages lumped in the middle of that strip. This is clearly conservative as the wall aspect ratio is 2:1 and thus will have considerable two-way action.
In the revised. calculations, the fundamental frequency is calculated on the basis of a simply supported plate with the mass of appendages distributed over the whole plate. This frequency is varied over a range of +15 percent to find the maximum response acceleration per criteria.
- b. The original criteria calculated the moment on the wall due to the vertical accelerations on the appendages and lumped all those moments and added them on an absolute sum basis-to the out-of-plane wall moment at the center of the 24-inch strip.
The revised calculations calculate the out-of-plane moment at the center of the plate due to horizontal motions on the basis of ACI code for two-way slabs. This_-is conservative and plate theory will give lower moments. We then added the moment from-the bulletin board (which is the only appendage close to the middle of the wall) due to vertical motions to
the out-of-plane moments due to horizontal motions on an SRSS basis. c.- The remainder of the stress evaluations are the same as the old calculations. The final maximum stress we calculate is 21.2 psi compared with an allowable of 17.8 psi, or 20.5 psi based upon in-place properties, according to'the SGEB criteria.
- d. As can be seen from Table 1, the ratio R greatly exceeds unity. . A recent investihation of this wall has indicated that failure of
-this wall would not affect. safe shutdown,of-the plant, and therefore the wall is not safety related. Thus, the stress ratio R 2 reported is acceptable.
CS-D6-17 i 1 l
M QUESTION 7 Identify whether any OA/0C records are available to ensure conformance of masonry construction to design drawings and specifications.
Response
The safety-related masonry walls at the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Plant have been systematically analyzed for their functional capability. These evaluations were performed by URS/Blume and Associates for NUSCO, in response to and to the requirements of NRC I&E Bulletin 80-11. The original engineering, design, and construction of these walls were by Stone & Webster Engineering, Boston, Massachusetts. The inspection of construction and workmanship of block walls was controlled by use of the original design drawing and the adherence to the construction specification, Reference 1. The specification guarantees the control of the construction qualities by the contractors / subcontractors. The work covered by this specification includes furnishing all labor, material, tools, equipment, scaffolding and other appliances required to perform the masonry work. The materials procured for masonry walls by this specification were to the requirements of ASTM specifications. The construction quality of these masonry walls was maintained at least equal to the local building code and this specification during the construction phase During this period prints of the engineering drawings were made available to facilitate the contractors to follow the sequence. The inspection of the work was reserved by the engineers to monitor and check that the workmanship and sequence of. construction were to the drawing requirements. Therefore, it can be concluded that the masonry walls at Connecticut Yankee (CY) were engineered, designed, built, and inspected by a systematic manner. Sections 4.5 and 4.6 of the latest ACI 531-79 building code requirements for concrete masonry structures provides the specification of material acceptance for masonry work and the inspection requirements during the construction phase. Though the referenced specification for the masonry work is much earlier i than this ACI building code requirement, the requirements imposed by the specification meet or exceed the intent of the ACI building code. Moreover, as part of the reevaluation report, the CY facilities were surveyed by the team of engineers to obtain the field data. The drawings and other documents used in gathering necessary data found that the masonry wall thicknesses, locations, and material i were consistent with the physical as-built conditions. This l l l l l
7_ infers that an inspection program existed during the course of ; construction and thus Reference I was enforced to the fullest extent. In order to enhance the confidence level, samples of blocks collected randomly have been tested for compression and water absorption according to the requirements of ASTM C-140, Reference
- 4. The specimen's compressive strength from the tests in psi on gross area indicated that the blocks have an inherent higher strength, Table 7-1, as compared to-the values used in the reevaluation report, Reference 2, or the ACI 531-79, Section 4.3, minimum values.
The attached table 7-2,.which describes.the relative strength values, suggests that the values used in the final report are conservative and well below the maximum values suggested by the code. Based upon the preceding information, it can be concluded that conformance of masonry construction to design drawings and specifications was maintained. P l
+
'I
References
- 1. Stone & Webster's specification for masonry work for Unit 1, Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Plant, Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company, Haddam, Connecticut, dated July 14, 1965.
- 2. Final report on safety-related masonry walls at the.
Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Plant prepared by URS/Blume and Associates for Northeast Utilities Service Company dated August 1981.
- 3. Summary of Design Conditions, Nuclear Power Plant Unit 1, Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company, Haddam, Connecticut, dated April 1964 and revised through May 1966.
- 4. Concrete block wall test results by Briggs, Norwell, Massachusetts, dated December 8, 1984.
CS-D6-9
TABLE 7-1 MASONRY BLOCKS PROPERTIES COMPRRESSIVE STRESSES ON GROSS AREA Test Test Results Values Used In Description Samples Mean Values Final Report Remarks Blocks (1) Random 1,513 psi 1,260 (lowest) - Ref. 4 (2)(a) ASTM C-129 Assumed - 350 psi Ref. 2 (b) ASTM C-90 - 1,000 psi Gr. A FS-D6-10 J
r - -. TABLE 7-2 MASONRY STRUCTURES BUILDING CODE ALLOWABLE STRESSES, PSI Values Values Factor of Code Per From Safety Description (Minimum) Report Test Code / Test Compressive strength of f'm 800. 700. 1,000. 1.14/1.43 concrete masonry Floxural (compressive) F, 0.33 f'm 264. 231. 330. 1.14/1.43 Baaring On full area F 0.25 f'm 200, 175. 250. 1.14/1.43 On one-third area F 0.375 f'm 300. 262.5 375. 1.14/1.43 or less
^
Shear s No shear reinforcement Floxural members
" 1.1 f'm 31.1 29.1 34.8 1.07/1.20 Shearwalls M/VD > 1
- 0.9 f'm 25.5 23.8 28.5 1.07/1.20 M/Vd v < 1 m 2.0 f'm 56.6 52.9 63.2 1.07/1.20 Tonsion No tension reinforcement (m = 1,000) (m 0 = 750.) (m = 1000)
'T:nsion normal to bed joints Hollow units F 0.5 mg 15.8 13.7 15.8 1.15/1.15 Tsnsion parallel to b:d joints in running bond Hollow units F 1.0 m 31.6 27.4 31.6 1.15/1.15 o
Modulus of. elasticity Em 1,000 f'm 800,000 420,000 1,000,000 1.9/2.38-Modulus of rigidity E 9 400 f'm 320,000 ,168,000 400,000 1.9/2.38
- . - _ _ _ _ - _ ~
F- 7
.9 Audit Ouestion During the site walkdown, several cracks were noted in walla CYTR 1009 and CYTB 1010, provide the staff a response on the cause of the cracks and what action is required to address this issue.
Response
The licensee is still investigating these two areas and will have a complete response for staff review by January 31, 1986. CS-D7-20
TABLE 1 RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1 OF NRC INOUIRY a sep Calculated a4 SEP response Wall ID Direction of Wall Fundamental Design accelerations Number Response Orientation Frequency Response for 7% damping (Hz) (g) (g) CYPAB102 & N-S Out-of-plane NC 0.55 1.93 CYPAB103 E-W In-plane NC 0.55 1.66 CYPAB104 N-S Out-of-plane NC 0.55 1.93 E-W In-plane NC 0.55 1.66 CYPAB107 N-S Co'lumn NC 0.55 1.93 CYPAB108 E-W NC 0.55 1.66 CYCT1001 N-S In-plane NC 0.55 NA E-W Out-of plane NC 0.55 NA CYSB1002 N-S Out-of-plane 14.8 0.97 NA E-W In-plane 40.5 0.61 NA CYDG1001 N-S ' Out-of-plane >10 0.45 NA E-W In-plane >11.5 0.63 NA CYDG1002 N-S Colunn >10 0.45 NA CYDG1003 E-W >11.5 0.63 NA ffSF1001 N-S Out-of-plane >33 0.34 NA E-W In-plane >33 0.45 NA CYSF1002 N-S In-plane >33 0.34 NA E-W Out-of-plane >33 0.45 NA
4 4 i Str rs Ratio Stress Ratio R1 R2 Barriers added to contain wall if failed Barriers added to contain wall if failed C21unn strip bolted to concrete w211 Barriers added to contain wall if fciled Barricrs added to contain wall if failed 1.03
- C21umn strip bolted to concrete wall ,
1.24
- L .j O.26 * 'I i
8
Table 1 (continued) a seo
. Calculated ad SEP rekponse , Wall ID Direction of Wall Fundamental Design accelerations Number Response Orientation Frequency Response for 7% damping (Hz) (g) (g)
CYPAB101A. N-S 'Out-of-plane 27 0.26 .54 E-W In-plane >33 0.26 .42
. CYPAB101B N 60" E Out-of-plane >33 0.26 .43 N 30' W In-plane NC 0.59 1.93 CYRAB101C N-S Out-of-plane 17.8 0.36 0.95 E-W In-plane >33 0.26 0.42 CYRAB101D N-S In-plane 22.5 0.39 0.67 E-W Out-of-plane 16.5 0.39 0.81 CYPAB101E N-S Out-of-plane 16.5 0.39 1.12 E-W. In-plane 22.5 0.39 0.56
- CYPAB101F N-S In-plane >33 0.26 0.46 E-W Out-of-plane 23 0.33 0.55 CYDG1004 N-S Out-of-plane 20.5 0.34 NA E-W 'In-plane- >33 0.21 NA CYSB2002. N-S -Out-of-plane 12.3 0.39 NA E-W In-plane. >24 0.50 NA CYSB2003 N-S In-plane 24 0.39 NA E-W Out-of-plane 11.8 0.50 NA 4
CYPAB105 N-S Out-of-plane 23.8 0.39 0.58 E-W In-plane 23.8 0.39 0.51
- 'syfNP$g . .
It - i 4'i r'I!!i iIii 2ibW i o _ i 7 8 8 3 9 4 7 t 7 0 1 3 1 7 2 a . . . . * * * . R 0 1 3 2 3 0 1 2 sR s e r t S o i t 7 3 3 6 6 4 2 6 a 3 3 9 8 8 3 8 *
- 6 R . . . . . . . * * .
1 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 0 sR s e r t S o ..
Table 1 (continued) a seo Calculated ad SEP rekponse Wall ID Direction of Wall Fundamental Design accelerations Number Response Orientation Frequency Response for 7% damping (Hz) (g) (g) CYTB1009 N-S Out-of-plane 13.4 0.98 0.61 E-W In-plane >23 0.34 0.50 CYTB2004 N-S Out-of-plane 27.7 0.98 0.25 E-W In-plane >23 0.34 0.78 CYTB1010 N-S In-plane 23 0.34 0.50 E-W Out-of-plane 11.6 0.65 1.33 CYTB2005 N-S Column 16 0.98 0.28 E-W 16 0.61 0.82 CYRAB106 N-S Out-of-plane 17 0.39 1.12 E-W In-plane 17 0.39 0.81 CYTB1007 N-S Group of >13 0.98 0.42 E-W Several Walls NC 1.30 0.61 CYSF2001 N-S In-plane >33 0.34 NA E-W Out-of-plane >33 0.45 NA CYSBlOO3 N-S Out-of-plane NC 0.10 NA E-W In-plane NC -- NA CYTB1008 N-S In-plane NC -- 1.56 E-W Out-of-plane NC 1.30 0.78
r Str Is Ratio Stress Ratio R1 R2 0.68 1.30 ,
- 1. -
0.38 1.01 e t, Column strip bolted to concrete wnll 0.68 2.18 1.22 0.74 f:: i 0.73
- i Barriers added to contain wall if failed J
Barriers added to contain wall E if foiled v ri e f
Table 1 - Notes
- a. N-S means north-to-south; E-W means east-to-west. North is defined as " grid north",
b.- Column means that the wall identification number represents a rectangular pilaster 1
- c. NC means "not Calculated;" the peak of the response curve was used.
- d. The design response is equal to 1.3Sa (Sa is the response spectral acceleration).
- e. Stress Ratio R1 is the maximum ratio of calculated stresses to allowable stress per
- f. Stress Ratio R2 is equal to stress ratio R1 factored by ratio of spectral acceleratj those estimatM in IE Bulletin 80-11 project.
R2=R1 ad
- g. .(*)~ identify walls in buildings which were not in the SEP scope-of-work.
- h. (**) identify walls which were qualified to criteria other than stresses (e.g. alloi displacements).
4
1 ; ,
- d ii
,. 13, ri
$. :hi A
.-It;;I '.
- 1
& i < > , y se h.
' ;, y -j * ,
,.kr 4N; st r
o t t c j e
. o l r p
e l . l a x b w a P a M E w a S o
= l t n l o 1 i a n R d ,
, a e s n i t t m r a n u e l e l t u m o i c o c r l m c a k c e c C l o R n b l) N o, Ta
I comparison of SSE Stresses in CY Block Walls With Allowable Stresses per NUSCO Criteria and NRC Criteria , CalculatcJ Stresses in Wall t. a : bt bt
*: *: - n < a a sa u. g n ., m a, o ,o n -
S'"$ $ au .a t 8 8 s- a. s a s- a 8 n 8 n 2 8 E n s- 2 8 8 n 8 9 qu . . - .- - - . -
.E. 8. 'd .*
m . 2 2 2 Q Q o. u = Q 2 e p Q p u. m 8 Q 4 0 d d a b b b 0 b d b b b c b G d b ['"*j"j*l' 45.7 (I6) - 10.8 - - - - - 33.6 - - 4.5 28.1 - - 28 34.8 r - 23.06 17.8 {l", ,",Nomal
, 22.9 (8.97) 4.65 3.98 6.6 5.8 15.3 15.3 6.0 - - - 11.8 - - 6.8 10.4 21.7 12.9 18.38 30.9 I *"'
21.7 21.7 15.7 7.24 4.48
, 39.8 (15.5) 38.4 S.83 - - - - - - - - - 21 - ,
t lane 15.7
, , 48.6 ( ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12 - - -
*( ) Allowable Stresses for Uninspected Walls .
** Calculated Stresses Readily Available from Calculations
+ .. .o ATTACICIENT 1A ,
CALCULATION PACKAGE COVER SHEET Proj ect: d o u u t e. m c.w T D A w w 3 Lo us W A tt.g Client: M D.6 4.ca Calc. No: ( D P 4 6%#1 h Subj ect: OMhbabu OF W kW This calculation package has been prepared, checked and approved in accordance with procedures in the URS/Blume Quality Assurance Manual. lev Prepared By Date Checked By Date Approved By Date
% fg h f-Z(-fb 5 W'OV 4C As) 11~lb4 U V l
I i l URS/Blume 11/26/80 I
*, .- ?
.{
URS/BLUME 130 Jessie Street (at New Montgomery) g San Francesco, CaMomia 94105 6 NO JOB NO B
- 9' - 3 JOB C 6 Bloct:. 00 L W . W 6 t u A Ttat4 BY JSM DATE 16- Li- D d CLENT w s c. SUBJECT C 6 946431 A DMD *EOE DATE Il 26-60 A N O.3 sis su~ m nol out G *L4ur W Actog (GTcl P T.-) OLLsehoLE vee,num is. + w . i s 1.
bet ~t,0ct.LLunT\et) . 4O g Accmog sTe o s lo"? p *>l ML'it mu m W%csy v E 57tzed 200 6 PSI Nbf3] 82.7 pil MLYtMMM M6 8V2. STU u $ 39.7 PSI m n u rnum ne vuenm e u>att. . e st e .5 " M AximMn ] C AP k, Q 6 LDL W l.17 3 usant t oes a c.sacceTEr prz. escrns Quctue ww a 9 on , v utr, s e is.) mxn, m m ~~ ~ r u.o w-r r MOXIMuM M l3e } DP) MAYlmm otrotemuo ve.om ca.LWeg Logoh * ,CC)iY RI-T*CT E hsW%T ( AP A t er] )N k*IT r mn. c w acir,> - e s vies
,m- e4 e '
g 9 O E
,e g i URS/BLUME 130 Jeesse Street (at New Montgomery)
San Francisco, CeMornia 94106 SEET NO
- ^ JOB NO S*f e'l JOB C h thtec1 (0 4t(_ GVOLunitM BY Q SM DATE 11
- O
- D CUFNT w 64o SUBJECT C 8PQtb idi A C6ED TOE onTE ti-26-e,o
'M *Lwtr t scow w Y2 Qu t,no I.Ib a bas t. hunm,w . LE g (4 Ax,inwm Sk eits. dirtie 5$ #
Ib E P9) At.t.w w I,( 'b9 M I M AYt mum b w pc u svE- 67s e ^ 4 9 5edI su.wa.d tc 5 % ys) Suu 3 Cosmcitur = 51% acum.u .s33 b N ALL BotTeo mTucweve rNte noe.qwnTg-
'6
UMb/ t$LUMt-iso J st'r e' (an e uonesomerg ! San, Fennosco, C'aWorrue 94105 BHEET NO j JOB NO 8tl#0 - Os joe C '( - ELOCR w, LS By IDE mrE 7- P) t %Ct:IT curNT >Jt lCC O SLBJFCT C V AA A,101 (A) OktL* ,A tmTE 6/5/enJ . l . o ,si ; j' . U , T ,2 8 V cA Og
= '4' .
.a *
. - , ~ ~ %* S n ct ;
I i , ; . si s .
.y. ~~N >
3 : -.::- . n _-. \ . .~ 7,,
,:. ]n . .. - -- i V ,, ,,
F tu d, - lg 2 is
\t ,-
3, -
@ (. ,,,c .
o - M, -
*f
$y '
-- Y(G P l '
e w4 "E,le *.E .
, I s 3 J .E s ' i
'g mg, *C, , c _ -q ".f 2 4
( k,,g, .y,,J ( g l g) s a
. e .. -
_ = -
- l. *
&,6' .
! : F*
1 , e ' i
-(L f
e- o w. et ~J c' 3- .: ., 3 $a . F s
~
,.) \ U
)t- I U *1 J i
,- h- ,r c >k . . g4 et,o it
* %ye ('f ed i
- 2 -
p, ' a v y?- *- .B E 7 18 '
., a R'i g R o' '
Q t
- jg gi l '
t.
-32 C *i
. 3 22 g . -
,g -
L >9 ' ls %3 .- 1 r fp e g ., aN L r 0 1 "w 3 Qw <- 4
'.t f <
f
$ 'd. 3 ' -5 ' '
, i q* uJ i 'N -h g i # !h $ I t
-g n v 1
- T __ g -7 <) , ,
.
- I '
~i ~
, 2,)
ts 4 i y e* > .
,., -1 r -+ l *
- s ' *--
%b M,tg '* t s' -a i
- - ' .J- - g .a . s
. - . e y '\, g 3 *t. s e * , ,i
,i I
a.. e Si E *
"1 i
t g . ,
. , l l s t, -
a .
., . r . .- s Wj. -r
_ - e. .I t -- . tg s =
%mt' .} 'r
) 8 -
. *4, s. 'e s= t / ,
l
.. ' .0 1L r
, -{ rs a Il . ' g 1 --
,.' .g i ,E i
--s 0.J e
.t \ a.. c 4 . .
, ah= ..:...^ -
s
.. ,, ,, yy ,
. c
.. .- A c-s . ~.
9 y
) ( {' % ' 1' '
l Vl a = , . 1
'I j .ll .,- e, e pJa
,, s .
9* .
'x , , . ,.
5', ' "/ t* N '
- i
o 1
- in .
. t . t .u I
g (
\
4
) d!
.*T ',131 f., ' .
** b '
c
=
- n. .
^ qL u, 4.,..
j ji' D% A- .$,
- r , .
- f. ,, p- .
dl y,.. ( . i' ;i- r 1 .' k f.
- a ..s
. h .i ..
, y
' ~1 j'.k'i -
/
.ll ,
4 r s
.; I
,ql *(
i . , -( f.'. . l, ' , *
.h , ,, .
U ;, . . ; s , ', 2 ? ,,.
<.1 a : , ..
".1.. 5.
2 j '
+
t. (' . ' EURSIBLUME i' , 3 , 130 Jessie Street (at New Montgon=ry) e SHEET NO O San Franceco, Califorria 94105 T __
,. - JOB NQ hD40-of JOs C Y-- GL OC.k VVALLC BY IC;: DATE 7-2# 80 cuENT MdECO SUBJECT CY- 9% iO I (A) CHKOM DATE 4 5/6s Ti. Glab ELEV. 35'-6
TOP GLAs
.., > - s m . f.
a - 2b" l v
, } ,.
T o T ^ 9 "TO P Clc. , sw 4 ex-prT ' .
]/ ,,
1 au 3"# pi p in's A 4 h , Ter A 2!i#
%% e - -,-
M ~3
\(
x . M g' ' gi> cs cua:. act.s net coepier , I
" [g) Q , 6fx 6%" t~g ,
t ~ , . D4"i ' ' PW
- i. Q CYP /OtOl4 5
/
,1i N v f
, 7*
/.' ,
/
'/, .
' / '.
./
T/c. cla Et_E v. .21 - b , 6 ,. s e ? . - e m , c: s. c 3
< e y
v s v. CY PAGIOl- A s
~
GECTiod h- A ; ( Th l
- ._ ~ .n_~..
s
. e. .
.- t*, -
L URS/BLUME 130 Jessie Street (at New Montgomery) San Francoco. Canfornia 94105 SHEET NO 10 JC8 NO%o-3 JOB c-\ 6Locc W c.tL Lh tlu e. Tis N BY Q'h DATE lo" 6 -s o
,3
'. CUENT uu s co SUBECT 03PQ6 pin ombr0E DATE 10-1b-80
\.
, QT LC 4%W $ 6 t hkT h t
, l. 2 Y k Lareuz. Pi p er use fue wegaT *c 22" scu ( pie cr i f pc uT- 8.475 h
(* mTot. '"T ' 7 4 SD
\ T"7c t. ~ 5, a b 3 ht AfI'na%M ATC 5964 Lt.aqTA ~l:. ID -C toeit3hr/swpe T n ' EI.* % t o '5 clb s s#ep a r I
'l., W 3 C. . FTTA ChecNT S U hM T F lxT M it*> , Iq awht.5, t.t c EST. 50 b') C u ce wTctsrs o l-ow? AT MiospM 3 ( >w& tTS F_.5T. WT , Toet ca.,mn s 2N bt-ET, 'ioTc.L. LtWN # cwo rr '- 6 cwn., X F 6p aa: 25'
' Toh t. COT o r (,owou iT ' 25 Y '2_t 60 b5 i
D ooG
- IDD b) (= t T.
y - - - --- e
.. . . .. 3 URS/BLUML:
130 Joose Street (at New Montgomery) San Francaco. Californes 04105 MT NQ lI ( JOB NO Gots-3 JOB b 3 Buck- mu L U Mu@04 ,. BY d5 M [ RTE 8 o- % -
- o CLENT w 6to SUBECT 4 6 P % )ol D- CHKbIOE DATE lb- 13-80 prracur,eu r to e in ww ' c3T, D O4TL T i l M C pssun s a 6 %83 L 6ccTiao LOT = 2y %b + 4 9 ly f 3 : 23e\bs 14 I. TsTA S loot 23= = 33 e lh3 O
smi.h
, e; so n., e t .... ,
P 22 sws TARWwT E14 W S t 6
.t' 4
.%g h
s I
4 Ou
.D 9
URS/BLUME 130 Jessie Street (at New Montgomery) San Franceco CaMornia 94105 SE ET NQ 4% <^ JOB NQ EM*-3 JOB LC BlotE.w n,L e4nLubThM BYdSm DATE l *- t 2 -so CUENT $J% L= SUBECT L$ 9 h f51oI n o*bIOF DATE li-2(,-8o GREZ K bon c spec gTg f' " c- e p uz. ~Pi t c 1. q,s Solb3 - -
)
C%Ti sr o mu4Hr he. we p =a. c = s o lbs - p a ; .
- e e,r 1F en + -
r 3)t.rm --s bciiw m f* ; ; 2",sr E6 - T-wt. harnc a t. bcc [
~
T:S E d + . irs Y 5 % 6Glb ~ Torabeiwra u T.cc e Tw I,3% .39 xs o : 'Z2 lb fE n d As t %* fx Ra' sb y 5 + 22 x o = S V 5' Ib3 W !, e..- p ,_ n e re e.,~ c c e n cir o p DC b Ib Do17 8M A Qstu - 4 m c6%n) rs t o e g . V[i rbw , , , 1 E FFtzwc scene neca = 'iT (.V ig & lg)xi kg
= s.t 3 &
' l AL.Lounots STschs : 2. E So 33 h)
%= M x h
- 63 y S.66 - 300 4$ > ll 6 I b w--
1
i 1 - l
.'~
- ATTACHMENT 1B CALCULATION PACKAGE COVER SHEET Project: Coun tggm u t- M A u m es- b t w,g. W Au.s .
Client: M W. C b Calc. No: C,3946 \o) C, Subj ect: A N A\,.%W OF CAJ bt.L, This calculation package has been prepared, checked and approved in accordance with procedures in the URS/Blume Quality Assurance Manual. lev Prepared By Date Checked By Date Approved By Date O h /2-/Gk \*2 80 ""[*r C .QAM I *-I V9c D URS/Blume 11/26/80
. \
URS/BLUME 130 Jesse Street (at New Montgomery) San Franosco, Cahlomia 94106 MT NQ { g JOB NG 6 i*'} JOB C3 GL.t.Y. Wobb kN otu nt o '4 BYd$e EWrE 11-1 -So CUENT wus ou SUBJECT (L$ P Q r& (ol C, CHKD IDE DATE ll- 5-N 5 e man) s aesu tv s cut ot: 'Pta W kN nin51S P.Ei e sD .0%< ~.l! scsc pst 3) g ME' NCC e ba."T Q L , ll13 \l k.GTi6n t, sue.Tr sreess : Ih b p5i v att. 3"J.7 esi oC mra m n e tur : IBb77 in-lbs G.QsT'6 ST EGss
- 6 ") PS I D C t W " ') 9 CTw'O E ti4"lG i.D
? MO%IMMM (%Q.CWl%} $TEtSS IC1b ED I nacmun u rns >is r 6TEk% s M,( 4 (,l.9- 16 7 p3, 7 ggg : Sbb g5; at i b AVI mw ~'t 4:244'9643 otr FLE Cneed = .M m *W imum" 3" c on c iTj : .b b $ @ .5" myteca..a m an , m uto nT sTass = 7. S es e attow= Ssp 3, Id PLnog not.tosis
- e. b o b .7%sti .3% sa.c-
$c as: . Wg ss G noss a -ra t .l83 3 \l e n. Tit.a u M OY l r$ a m C,m pre 6stse STGe65 s 9 9.4 PS I Tau # D%b PSl oV
~,, s ,. m s m s s - 26.s es, ntt = w.7 r, m U3 M ' suoes , mooi n onn+s a cgu.mco
i ( ' URS/BLUME - 130 Jessie Street (at New Montgomery) San Frarcsco, California 94105 SHEET NO h ! JOB NO 80ao.cf Joe C.Y- Block hlALLS BY IO E DATE 7-2.1-80
~
CLIENT CUICO SUBJECT CYPAg ro l (c) CHKD h ' DKiE S b /'$C 3 t M 50
.s -
o.g, 3 1. vi
- i '
_ f.
^
e I A -,_ J. W
,' n s 9-p ,
? e m N
\
% O a i3\\ j~4 a r s, T
O t ' i a
'; \ v 9 /
u , eT, I [O , g% e ') 3 ,f ,I s
^
g, I g
% c ,- i $' ,
~
. h a n <
'*, y 1 o t V s - 1 N
, '{ '.
e b
- z
~'
i a s , j Tt a e >
% p$e
% r D @ c O s
g*- #
,.-3
$1 3
e w=; 3e e { ) *M l k l
,= O,
~
l , - - o , -
._ y u 4 i O
( (, ' O (3
"g - c
'% 2 n .,
g g"
, i i C b .,,, O ) -- $ i- Y* , ,$\$a. '2
- v*a v -
W .q s h ", ,, d 11),
- v $ 4 T w 7 N. D ,l 9
.3 : e iu , = to n __ w t-
'J
)
.c ,% .*
0 ' h el v. I, g f S f u Ph .
- w s
% t - J o
4 .b \. r p 'e -o eJ % j
-1
.e .
r ! i a ' 2 t : .. b \ E i d - k
$/
Jas.* 9* , gj y ..c d 3 c 9 g , .Q 97) .--_- : _ - --- - - - -
.- ] - y-t3- a v e
g s
- -e _ .a
._ a_
- -..j v
5
~
i _ _1m r s . r . - s f s. a Y ' h f- 3., , ( - c,- e a s
. .a q
v s r f y
. & N 'v ' q v
,,. V -
y p - - J h t-
"sg a
w MS 21 e- N. e ..,fggs s. e ;- t- g
't
' >m o (w _. u u,
~
- (
i URS/BLUME 130 Jessie Street (at New Montgomery)
San Franceco California 94105 SE ET NQ 7 CN- 6 LOC k W A LL 5 sy10E DATE 7-2". sD 7-. JoS NO S Me. ei JOs CUENT Odsc o SUBJECT CY-PAGlOl[C) CHKbJtM DATE f/ h Th ELav. 3 5'- 6 r
- o u
b
-t c
m
/, n( ,
4-
/,,
/ .
/
ERY LACE 00 {A CAR.E S , C oubt. HTS
/,
/
4 PlPES. ARE
*~
/
"/
CcVTAiNE D N THIS L , ARE A. /
, o ,/
<- /
r.
. /
/
r T mv 1$ PnPE FE To EMIG AWCf To f / l RADie hC Te\lE
" C /
E M Fa37 C / TN ELEV. Eli6* rgs q C YPA6 t O l - C EECTe oN 0 .S {NTg)
~.
.. .; ,. ('
.~
URS/BLUME 130 Jessie Street (at New Montgomery) San Francisco, Cahfornia 94105 SHEET NO O (" JOB NO$640, el JOB Y 3/cr* E M (( b BY M DATE 7.81-h cueur 4Mce susaect dvPA8 lcI c e m d J: h mye W 6 / b
\lsEvt F(zsm rdrang paum %om
( a_ _ ... - e 1
~
Q . A k u ,>
't I
!i
?
-l- -
c),
\r
_ s -f
; j%_C_
e _ _a g p> 5 2 e hi
~ ~
A 3 3k w_y
.l __i _a _ - _ _
Q g __ j_ _ s _ - _. _ _ _ s O( T.
- t 1 q y ,-
Ts i 1 -
;t s
4 I &m e <.,* Qg M ~yI-A N A t Q 3 b . i a
% %g i 1 1 2u h j
l _t I_ - -l I
. r__ _
-i f= g g - !_;l _ __ __
- i S
g - ,_ . _ _ _ y i S _i
' ' _ , f' n
.%g 3 ~
c 7-o k,.
, ':<9 '
ch i a4 E N -
,r 11 i- -- - - -
w a ,ez .: _ 1 U l'
,- r- . l
_i y . q e w -
,1 L
o s O s i i
! \
i l l Je "5% 'o ks - u=
- ka3 we Ek h "E > tg i
c' s. :
. URS/BLUME * " 130 Jessie Street (at New Montgong.sh SHEET NO San Francaco. Cahnia 94105
,C JOB NO So4o-3 JOB C6 GLo64. Whb\ %N4tW7tM BYd$m [MTE W 12-&o CLIENT uus co SUEUECT 940uoit estr L ech otT% CHKD IDE [MTE 10-G-80 TOE. MsLL%> MbS=wn 3Lo csc.S 19 . :. 1,25" Tuu_wT hsco P: u nyh
=- 53 y 4r ( AM td X l,6 = 7ob A+ Zbo
%, %m bmn t r ca. T acc 3/it 300 lh3 U" 5I2 l%$
(. A
' /g " 3 64 Ib3 G)l 5 'J o lh s 34 " 4t t, IL 3
% specri.~, att, p 3 , 3 ,,,, y g , g g y gew,g-h hYINM 3% ==r A3 3 - 6 3 Sc44 6 ,
- 30. 70 PO 8
( ba'#w 9 g Y[ gg
~.
h
i ! k
' UPS/BLUME 130 Jessie Street (3 New Montgoe.. y)
San Francisco. California 94105 SHEET NO 3E ( ; JOB NO 6s40-3 JOB Ct %:a ct (pst t_ EN tt% cTtst4 BY JS M DATE f o 17-bc CUENT ws. co CFe(D TD F DATE 10 21- 80 SUBJECT ATTAC45LwT SsLT CAPacsT $ Mast e Tue bees useo To R1TACR CAMPwtWS To EL-cK. tu ntt. S MC DF uouw 5 4 Bob T6f E A Coustevam.'IC vetur MR. A 150t.T 5 PwLt. %T C4PacAb MA Mstedw tM' cutc wL.ott.C) , mhso % ntt] sto cK. 5 % u Ao L, w_ (, e
. I
.3- ,
p t J -
.. . j
. e,
-r i f . g' .k.',
, I w.e n r.
MuNou owT EF F t- zTe v G' Sqgag Ggen h: ty d + t ) y T. hwau Grecss :-
'7 N' i
he %TM cc)O 15 tacer. Sw: 700 y,i ALLw agg.o $T.Rew s 2. Noo 53 pn O
~- - - -
., ) URS/BLUME 130 Jesse Stat (at New Montgomery)
San Franosco, CaWornia 94105 NO xs m e'4'- A jog (c G W C Wh\.L. Fv 6LunTHM BV O SM DATE N' 3 ~ % D CUENT m s a SUBJECT CNAbl0I C' CHKbIDE DATE ll 80
- 2. cuTtr Tsi (nxu 3 3 es- ._ n,7 lbs 4s Tg _5 D t I.M . 3 '? - _l2.lh5 t.
??,7 163 '
3 ATR44mw > , Y
- d6 X f.3%.37 : Ll.L OS 9 Cappcr3(P8~
T ~- 3c x t.3 x .5 7 # I4.4 lb3 (
* , 2 , i
- URS/BLUME 130 Jesase Street (at New Montgomery)
San Francisco, Camomie 94106 SHEET NQ 3 JOB NQ 8o4**3 JOB ($ B Lo 6 2. W h\ L, thlb W 4Tt* W BY46M DATE I- 3' b3 CLIENT N%44 9 RFCT l'$ Ph6t01( OED 3?C DATE 11 8 0 cucac -Putt any Y O C(AT' o f- EsLTS uoLptu g CITTC(,9m M S 9 wCL Q cc.cto2 uisau N h\ uv.5 C'T2TtLT1L.
- II3 $
O wT s Y [L,uw C * .N ]
\ w PLaes C if $
a _. & l 6%L L ETi r4 63 0 0 D k_ h M AYlvwun PwbL%T- To n te et (,wgg 4
- AT ure t,YL g oty M ' 53 h ace h ir I*1(CTicb\.L=ros _
y
* ( i k k X 1, kl h ) E .. gg \h $
SL T ace h e'T. owT g-Pi.4ue L.mp s T2 = i+4 % t.u .37 34,A la s L Y ovcc3 D E To Iu E ,aur Locos i %, r u.a.a--cc rsw r seauun or s' Y3 :(I44 %I3 X 96)V E : (g % sxit Tv a = lQ + 3 4, ( : 4 k. 6 t>.wr
ATTACll!!ENT 2 URS/BLUME 130 Jesse Street (at Ne w Montgomery) San Francseco, CaMornia 94106 9EET NO / JOB NO 6S'6(-Ol JOB CN Rlott( LJ b BY C fl DATE 9/f 7/h 9 CUENT MMf o SUBJECT C9 PAR f oi-C Ws o v i e-w c, d tv u QED (WE 4 s --,3 c,( Auw-fcams usig elc:k Co<g -(o cJcJ1 L {w y c,'es ed
+L w.it 2..w , J .'c w to eJ ded c s t %, - %
usch. oc _m c uc-a ,1 - y_ m 4. p., 4'cd w Apdg .a Co-WneI h % dS$ b* (.c. e,cu~ hJ m.J s A to u ,<: 2 , J e d ~ cd ( . y AcJ .: p 3 s co b /~d sg s ass m.dl.cA)
s jo
~URS/BLUME 130 Jeesse Street (at Ne w Montgomery)
San Francoco. CaMornie 94105 9EET NQ l ( JOB NO 6 T 6 6-O! JOB C9 8'o C (C W By 68 tgrE i[14 hI CUENT W9 O SUEUECT CYPA 'l loI-C %-wmTL w oub turE
/ ry T/c (le v. 1f 4 l
i: ,
';;'.:,~y,,,,*.
, e , , ,, 4 ..
(, ' a , , ', % ' ,' ', , .,' m,', p , #
':,.?.*
.o
.4 .
. ' ' , , c ', . , . ,,
,.s 7 e .
,, , , , g ,
- O.
i
'P w y..
'o - EWp 2 y 4
4 .ol to,s . ' . .. . e
, o CSP 95 ,
ah 15lb ,p' gi ry e.,1 'y ,
- N j au,fICM ,, .,s-
' 'f
- m
,9
- u. - 1s.st s ost.4l(i A
l 2'so*> y
, f.,
~
o
~
+0
'1
,6 W6L L 3 *p s A
-_ (- ,
6 t J% ,4#, s sJ ;- >. w* .
. 'V
'O T/L. c la,1 g' g e P / <) y ? _
?., g v ', .. " .
n , ^ ,r '
, *'m'n
,, , :~' .p . . n,' ,, . : ,
yc ,' . e < . 7,~p. _ , < . r e 4. .
,4 . ,
g '
/ o
' " e 2 8'o.y y_ 6 s
/ O
,c .. . . - . _ _~
22 8' - ELE A7tod voc W of c '/ P A G 101 - C u n t.L NA:_ ~ rg / / s c/ulde 8.rj ut so Ib g 95 la cpe.1 i a t.a p seu t a t I; at . ,r us b aw,ge,.9 J.acq r,1, e,g* i Cy*P f 3 h\ft$is es < bj W$ = I4 't lbly j e 'n 8' # e n n -e 4" ua . -t.;4 p,p a a1=. so as ; a .- a i ' e g y 5- ; a t.=. 3r/65 ; e ,.o
~ URS/BLUME 130 Josee Street (at New Montgomery)
. San Franaeco. CaMornia 94105 N NO ?.
JOB NO S$ 6 [-Cf JOB b Blot)( Wa.$. BV G3 CRTE 4//(4 5 CUENT W V o SUBJECT Wdk Cy #%3 IOI- C GE e. M.k m CHKb [MTE Eplp d m.w) s M CyFA6 Wl-C cRd.Jc 6-4 4 c. .LJi O(0 4s Ib
%lleles bo, J A so ff k N :99 lb C,s% So th
//
I/4 P N- 3o Ib TcA c~1 zsq lbs 0 d - d - fl cm F w J 4. - d F y og ror CS pl d d.J Q Pml (" p
~
p"; 1 1, g N / r,,- m.r- ~c- m.a u.,.e p.(~ a o.s jN
, c 'L -
he - \/ V . # ' L A '81 g q 76 , f{cd 'a % eelc % A/L 0
"^g : - = . o c, , ( l b . Set I %f ,
fyJ exIsuutn a t *e = 20 I , o o o o 2. t>~l Ill 5 lit. IEN'f m= 1. f 2 4to
~
Ib . E g,[ m 4 wM d sulftj W a 4 cy;e4
' ~
i URS/BLUME 130 Jesse Street (at New Montgomery)
. San Franosco, Caufornia 94106 SEET NQ 3 Joe NO $ f 8 s-Ol JOB (se M loe er emb gy S6 (WE oh64 (
cuENT N *Se o SUBJECT waM c v #A 8 101. c roo-u ah OED (WE
? '#' O**
- 4 ' %
-f = } ( 4 y
*1x.coln ( .os )
{ .H (7.g, g,;T ) s.6so oo ~ 17 8 H2 2 '47.
-f ~ l5 8 20.S H% -Inf) <
6.g~. q bwa ~ wand 2v" st.cp (cJ. .cygg ,oi.c ) f - so.9 dr .I is'/ f, ; (. 3 - /2.f HR
URS/BLUME 130 Jeesse Street (at Ne w Montgomery) San Franaeco. Caulamia 94106 W NQ 4 JOB NO 61Il6-ol JOB Cy %ck w \ BY 48 DATE 4//7/FC CUENT MuieO SUBJECT C V Ph G 101 -c wo w (11
- w CHKD DATE Sles cdcJc&na rkt ~~,.~m W.g m. .. . .1 J 14 -ca -s pa n j %
J A gie bg AcI ,,is- 56 (FP (f %-f u S ) L He,ces u%* fs e hpa.I to$io s a. S kA h" , o. st ') (0 f e 3 ses.- C = 0 08 3
^
s ro' ' - iz 4 aciu. A.i 5 P~
~J w> e ((< dM # igCJ p- J -a f
m; u .- ra t:~: se J c= (~ ra s h11 $ e \u . W ' 6 w ,- +L 7 y, A & (s vas/ni- ~ e ,J . r. 4 A r>a d a-- s-(eig al v s.e c 3 w all s ed A c1 9 M ll, eqc b-1) (- (a y--g d /S. I hs U'"ac s) S a= o.zs g = o.2 g n 3 6 6 9 = 102 2. A /s,? W =lolez 4 0o: 52 = . l 6 4 f Ib/l 1 Vl4 : .o81 x.li4Sx(ItGf=-2l8% l6 5 l vsk voielk
% au nwn im wU ott v s at L @ f
+4 p t A . C y ML ab.d an E J.g tk.,
- c. 4.. L q plci a L lang sr- Jish(c.e y. clcsh w
P3c 6 M A Code ** mn M M io % t uc J.i% Jddl n9s ( abdMs ubj.:M ( o J.'e d ad-n;p ak th & e>f L aJt (rh
-a w L <o k.,a z.,M c pJ 4 ~ ~x c - - ). '* 't- H Jh sin'p a& L ll. W 6 ,J
% ,= 'j .i.2 lb/J n u. J .. % . g "
,e .
URS/BLUME 130 Jessie Street (at New Montgomery) San Frandeco. CaBlornea 9425 SEET NQ f JOs NO FJM-OI JOs C'/ G loc t. uM sy 5r3 DarE #87/lf f CLENT MuMo SUEECT C4 PAdt0t-C m o, W] a di* M C*D DATE Eu k & s'e cMle.\ =< om 2ff 5% C g..a wJ<a w.JccJ -<AA , .g x. 7(g): ,i,33 Ac _0 b ca. P= wJ AJ t M ced saamic P = m D oac') + m( il3 5) P:m x l. ll3 $ = d Xi il3 e' < t.Ji = mag fu b.dl4. bec < d P = 1 2 x t \ \ s = 1.s sc is lJ s'A A ssq R. hwiloh 6.m <d (o be ad g,J spm o.9 L vJ.] n= '? x ecd-Q= l. a i c x t i Mg10 69 16 _ i /J v,A x -c ~ * -J L Ao w,iu JJ w 3 s.3 Gda A o.ccorcic~.- c , is +(~e cied e. i c4 (a w cs - Je bd w h wa d , Ma=lT Ha . 1 3 x '116 t = ti l . 2 lb A / d v.J1(3 1 C4'G N AdN b ten d b do A itorld %d . Med ap J s.e ss AA 63 s= h d+(Ni r /(z si l)2 +(lo 617 4 . s , n 2. . is L / s m,a
URS/BLUME 130 Jeesse Street (at New Montgomery) San Frenoeco, CeMornee 94106 6 NO 5
~
JOB NO $$l6-01 JOB CV f$lcrClG W BV s R DME 9/0/15~ cuEMT Mc 0 m swCT CVPA6 l0 l-C Go W Abqn OED DME wxc ~ m M% p L: u s= 1c- '- +<<' t = 3 3, rAx y n.t 6 a-~n = 282 -
- 21. *-
i y,9
%w .- 11 2. psi j $ gel.$7(87e12,4 9 it '
% < % o k- . /
M FTy e o. i /*o *o5he il7 Pk LW Verlied 5(elp ur .m - 9,3 e
h_ _ [ b !!? T RS/BLUME "# % b 130 Jessie Street (at New Montgomery) San Francisco, Californea 94105 SHEET NO l - aos no Bo40-os aos C Y- BLOCK WALLC sy Ice oare 9-16-Bo CUENT NUCCO sua]ECT BLOCR SECTION PROPERTIEC. avbl@n twel'UIO l BLOCK l&"x 8 "x l2" SECT /oN PROPERTIES. REFERENCE ~ BASALT ROCK Co. INC . PRODUCTC CA TAluGUE . 0 MATERIA L DENSI T Y = 150 LBS/FT
- A Jo/NT N.L CALCULA TIONS INCL UDE V8 " MORTAR
~
#f; 54'. 5d ~ &~
- 24 i3
, a a .<
i . l
-~
ti" N # nk &. pg
/ % - , - .
i , I'I
+-
/6 "
VOLONE of KOLib BLOCK sa 16 X ll'8 X8= If 88 N WEIGHr cF COLID 8 Loc.k a 160X 1988 a /29 L8S. 172B
\f0LUAIE 0F =850m Hollow Block a /4 88 - 2fB '2S+ 7/2f)xS.c427x 8 WE/(,HT OF HCLlew BtCCk => 150 X 8 50 ,, 74 (gg.
1728 i
T .,* l , . k Pap Azi Ib rae Street ist New Montgomery) San Francisco. Cahfornia 94105 SHEET NO
~ xe no 8040-os Joe C.Y- BLOCi< WALLS gr ice oarg 9.jg . g o CLIEur NUSC6 SUBJECT BLOCK GECT/oN PROPERTIES CwbJ 64 care 1/n/ c) ff0RIZONThl STRIP:( scoo stock.)
I77 = 8 X H 425 .= l0 4 7 &; * .
^
(2. . E Syy - 2 s -
#5 8 x ll 62S = igo .2 iar 4 .t-Av = 8 x II.i2s = 93lN e .,
f~ l gn HOLLOW BLOCK
- Eyy =
1o47 - 8x 8.&25 = S19 mA
/2.
S yy =. I- SI9 = tog . gin ' Il42Q2 Av = 3x8 = 24 m
- 1 I
.}}