Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Enclosure to Serial: HNP-98-017Page 20
ATTACHMENT2
-
Calculation 52214-C-007CP&L Harris IPEEE: HCLPF Capacity Calculations
for 1X-SAB CST Tank and 1X-SN RWST Tank(40 pages)
9802230263 9802Lh~DR ADOCX 0S000eooI
IP PDR (J
9
~C
ENGINEERINGCONSULTANTS
CALCULATION COVER SH EET
Calculation No:
Project: C P L ARo+ A t Z EEE
Calculation Title: ~ " AR l E E: C L P 'CtTV
ALC LA ON i 0 iX-5A C NK
AN+ x -SM RASE T w
References: SEE S E '7 lOM 2.N
Attachments: A t2. 6s- "C" '7 AaeS
Total Number of Pages (Including Cover Sheet): 6 CE//CLu9(N/" ~TT CHMGH~S)
RevisionNumber
ApprovalDate
I///yDescription of Revision
ORIGINAL I SS
LJE'riginator Checker Approver
12312.0 1/Cove iihl(7/91)
EQE INTFANATIONAI.
T TEA&DOMAL
Jpg gp 52214
CALC. NP.Rev. 0
Jpg CP&L SHEARON HARRIS IPEEE
SuBJ<CT 1X-SAB CST Tank & 1X-SN RWST Tank
SHEET NO ~2
BY 5 L DATE ~gazoo/
CHK'D~k~ DATE ~lo 24
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE 0
t IO PURPOSE ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
2.0 REFERENCES
3.0 METHODOLOGY
4 .0 COMPUTATIONS ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
ATIACHMENT No. of PAGES
A Screening Evaluation Work Sheets (SEWS) ..................... I 2
B Walkdown Photos
C MATHCADTemplate for Seismic Response of Tank
D MATHCADTemplate for Tank Capacity Computation .......... 7
~'n
SNTTITIAYIPIAl
EQE INTEANATIONAL
JpB Np 52214 JpB CP&L SHEARON HARRIS IPEEE
CA!.c Np C407 suBJECT 1X-SAB CST Tank & 1XSN RWST Tank
Rev. 0
SHEET NO. ~>6BY S L DATE ~i3o~<d
CHK'D~l Ct DATE ~>2E(ETI
SECTION 1.0 PURPOSE
This calculation is prepared to estimate the seismic HCLPF capacity for the
components listed below in support of the IPEEE Program at the CPBL Shearon
Harris Nuclear Power Plant Unit 1 ~ The HCLPF capacity is expressed in terms of
the Review Level Earthquake (RLE) and the site specific in-structure response
spectra generated for the seismic IPEEE evaluation.
Equipment Description:
Equipment Tag ID:
Equipment Class:
Size:
Vendor:
Locations;
Condensate Storage Tank (CST) 1X-SAB
1X-SAB (1CE-090)
Flat Bottom Vertical Tank
40 ft (Diameter) by 47 ft (Height), Fluid Height of44.15'ichmond
Engineering Co., Inc.
Unit 1 Tank Building, Elevation
261'quipment
Description: Refueling Water Storage Tank (RWST) 1X-SN
Equipment Tag ID: 1X-SN (1X-SAB-SC-2)
Equipment Class! Flat Bottom Vertical Tank
Size: 45 ft (Diameter) by 45 ft (Height), Fluid Height of39.5'endor:
Richmond Engineering Co., Inc.
Locations: Unit 1 Tank Building, Elevation 261'
'EQE INTEANATlONAL
JOB NO. 52214
CALC. NO. CM7Rev. 0
JOB &
SUBJECT 1XNAB CSTTank8T. 1X~N W
\
SHEET NO. ~4
BY ~< DATE Q~o~W4
CHK'D~~~ DATE ~%
.
SECTION 2.0 REFERENCES
1) EQE Document 52214-P,-001, "Project Plan, CP8 L Harris IPEEE," Revision 0.
2) EPRI Report NP-6041-SL, "A Methodology for Assessment of Nuclear PowerPlant Seismic Margin," Rev. 1.
3) Screening Evaluation Work Sheets (SEWS), also included as Attachment A.
4) CP8L Shearon Harris Nuclear Plant Seismic Qualification Package ¹MS-863453(E) for "Condensate Storage Tank, Refueling Water Storage Tank,Reactor Make-up Water Storage Tank;" CST, Rev. 6, RWST, Rev. 7, andRMWST, Rev. 4
5) Seismic Qualification UtilityGroup, "Generic Implementation Procedure (GIP),"Revision 2, Corrected, February 14, 1992.
6) EQE Calculation 52214-C-001, "CPBL Shearon Harris: Scaling of In-StructureSpectra for Seismic IPEEE," Rev. 0.
SECTION 3.0 METHODOLOGY
The CDFM methodology from Ref. [2] is used in the evaluation of the subject
component's seismic HCLPF capacity. Because of similarity of the two tanks, only
the HCLPF capacity of the CST tank will be evaluated herein.
No specific unverified assumptions are made which significantly impact the results
of this calculation. Information used in this analysis are inferred from the listed
references and from observations and findings from the walkdown evaluation shown
in Ref. [3].
EQE INTEANATIONAL
52214 JOB CPS'HEARON HARRIS IPEEE
ALC NOC 007
SuBJECT1X-SAB CST Tank k 1XSN RWST Tank
Rev. 0
SHEET NO. ~5~BY ~ L DATE +~>CHK'D~k DATE ~&24('2'I
SECTION 4.0 COMPUTATIONS
4.1
For the seismic IPEEE program, the Review Level Earthquake (RLE) is defined as
the NUREG/CR-0098 median spectral shape anchored to 0.30g (Refs. [1 8 6]). The
RLE is used directly in the following evaluation of the CST tank (see Attachment C
of this calculation).
RLE = 0.3g
4.2
The tank response computations are attached to this calculation as Attachment C.
fi=813Hz
Vi = 1832 kips
M( = 33,830 k-ft
fc = 0.274 Hz
Vc = 67 kips
Mc = 2253 k-PSloshing Height h, = 1.6 fi
The total seismic overturning moment demand from the RLE of 0.3g
V„, = 1833 kips
MI„=33,900 k-fiThe average fluid pressure P = 16.54 psi
4.31
The tank capacity computations are attached to this calculation as Attachment D.
I
EQE INTEANATIONAL
JOB NO " JOB CP&L SHEARON HARR1S 1PEEE
cAL( No uBJE~T1X-SAB CST Tardy & 1X SN R~ST T~~
Rev. 0
SHEET NO. ~6 6
BY 5 L DATE ~4W~C24
CHK'0 ! jll~Ch DATE ~/Q Eq
~ The overturning moment capacity
M~ = 240,000 k-P
~ The sliding shear capacity (assume a conservative COF of 0.6)
1654 20'44V~ = (COF)tTVH.,+g Ts]= (0 67
~ I122+ + 8046 = 6700 kiPs1000
~ The available freeboard above the top of fluid
H~~/b~ 47 0 44 15 2 85 f?
4.4
1) Overturning Moment
HCLPF =—"(RLE)=—~(RLE) = '03g) =21gMc„p M~ 240,000
MSME M„/ 33,900
2) Tank Sliding
HCLPF =—(RLE) = —(M,E) =—(0') = 1.1gVc~ V~ 6700
V~~ V„, 1833
3) - Fluid Sloshing Height
fig 1 6 fE ( H~~//~ 2 85 ft
SECTION 5.0 CONCLUSIONS
The HCLPF capacities for subject components have been estimated. Since the
seismic margin is sufficiently high for the CST tank, similarly high HCLPF values are
expected of the RWST tank.
'EQF. INTEANATIONAL
err aurora
JpB Np 52214 JpB CP&L SHEARON HARRISIPSE'ALC.
NP. C%7 SUBJECT 1X-SAB CST Tank & 1X-SN RWST Tank
Rev. 0
SHEET NO ~iBY SL DATE ~R30 ~4.
CHK'D~ DATE ~l< Bl'I f
ATTACHMENT A
SCREENING EVALUATIONWORK SHEETS (SEWS)
SCREENING AND EVALUATION SHEET SEWS
Status Y N USheet 1 of
Plant Name: Shearon Harris Unit: 1
PART A. DESCRIPTION
Equip. ZD No. 1X-SAB
Equipment Description Condensate stora e tankI
Equip. Class Frame Su orted VerticalTanks or Heat Exchan ersAlso Flat Bottom Tanks
Equipment Location: Bldg. TANK Floor El. 261 Room, Row/Col BZ10
Manufacturer, Model, Etc. Richmond En ineerin Co. Inc.
Seismic input Elevation 261 ~
Photo Numbers
PART B. TANK HEAT EXCHANGER EVALUATION
1. Zs tank/heat exchanger of goodseismic design?
Flat bottom tank supportsTank/heat exchanger-support connectionsSupport system designTank/heat exchanger attached to morethan one storyIsolation valves on non-essential linesPipe thread joint
2. No other tank/heat exchanger concerns?
Is tank/heat exchanger itself screened out'?
[Y] N U N/A
[Y) N U N/A *Y N U [N/A]
[Y) N U N/AY N U [N/A]
[Y) N U N/A[Y) N U N/A *
[Y] N U N/A
[Y] N U
gh Ic~bc-t~>
4y Scgso +a~0 Qu.esto~Qa4Ah4c r
Cigar
oc ( )
PART C. ANCHORAGE EVALUATION
Zs strength assessment based on:
Judgement (supported by generic analysis?)Specific analysis?Other?
J[A]Other
2. Is strength adequate?
3. Zs stiffness adequate2
4. No other anchorate concerns?
Y N [U) N/A
[Y] N U N/A
[Y) N U N/A
Is anchorage adequate2 Y N [U)
SCREENING AND EVALUAT1ON SHEET SEWSSheet 2 of
Equip. ZD No. 1X-SAB Equip. Class Frame Su orted Vertical
PART D. SYSTEMS INTERACTION EFFECTS
Zs tank/heat exchanger free from influenceby adjacent elements2
Tank/heat exchanger contains soft targetsFlexibility of attached lines
Collapse of nearby equipments or structuresMasonry block walls
2. No other interaction concerns2III
I
Is tank/heat exchanger free from interaction effects'P
[Y] N U N/A
[Y) N U N/A[Y] N U N/A *
[Y] N U N/A(Y] N U N/A
[Y] N U N/A
[Y) N U
DESCRIBE POTENTIAL PROBLEMS INDICATED BY NO OR UNSATISFACTORY (Useadditional sheets, if necessary)
Photos 31 9:31, 32, 33, 44 (3)1
B TANK/HEAT EXCHANGER EVALUATIONTgis tank was identified as a seismic concern as a result of USI A-40.calculation was performed by the manufacturer, RECO, evaluating seismic loads and effects on
anchorage and structural integrity of the RWST and CST. Acceleration inputs were 0.15gvertical and ranged from 0.43g horizontal at the base to 2.46g at the top of the tank. LetterNRC-90-453, dated July 31, 1990 addressed to CPEL from the USNRC states that the tanks areacceptable.
Tank has 80 total chairs tht appear to be quite rugged. Each chair is 24" high and is madeof 1" plate steel welded together with minimum 3/8" fillet welds. Base of chair is 3.5" platesteel. Tank diameter is 40" 0". Calculation by the manufacturer addresses stress in thechairs and finds it to be within allowable.
RECO calculation for checking stress in the welds (see calc dated 11/3/81, page 24 of 30)uses allowable of 24,000 psi for 3/8" weld. Check against SMA allowable.
No threaded joints on attached piping
C. ANCHORAGE EVALUATION2 Anchorage consists of (80) 3" diameter bolts. RECO calc shows anchors to be acceptable, butthere is no indication that embedment has been verified, and no reductions for spacing andpossible edge distance have been allowed for.
The anchor bolts are on 20" center to center spacing and the bolts have a 9" edge distance seesketch 1.
The anchorage calc and cast in place bolt details should be reviewed to close out CST review
SYSTEMS INTERACTION EFFECTS" dia. pipe at bottom of tank is not very flexible. The pipe is judged to be acceptable
as~ on the pipe being attached between two chairs in which the displacement is negligible.
Another small pipe (approx. 2<.-diad attached near the top of the tank is horizontallysupported to the building approx. 8'own from the tank attachment. The pipe is judged to beacceptable based on the tank max. displacement being approx. 7/16" at the top.
All other lines where judged to have sufficient flexibility.ZS TANK OR HEAT EXCHANGER FREE OF NEED FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION 7 Yes [No)
CKAGE ID¹: 1X-SAB
FtRENCE: A-46 $ IPEEE
Equipment Description Condensate s o a e tank
Location: Bldg. TANK Floor El. 261 Room, Row/Col BZ10
) CONTENTS
(1) Drawing ¹: 2185-S-0545 Rev. 31
Otherdrawings
(2) [Y)/ N Specification:Title: EBASCO SERVICES INC. - CAR-SH-AS-10 FIELD ERECTED STORAGE
TANKS ANS NUCLEAR SAFETY CLASS 2 6 3 SEISMIC CLASS I.
(3) [Y]/ N Calculation:Title: 7 -AS-10-C SHNPP FEILD ERECTED TANKS
(4) Y /[N) Technical Manual ¹:Title:
~~) Y /[N] Valve Data Sheet
(6) OTHER: 1. NRC LETTER 0-4532. CPAL LETTER NLS-89-263 NRC DOCKET No. 50-400
COMMENTS:'I
SCREENING EVALUATION WORK SHEET SEWS
Equip. ID No. 1X-SAB
6guipment Description Condensate stora e tank
Equip. Class Frame Su orted Vertical Tanks or Heat
Evaluated by:
Daryl W. HughesDate: 03/31/94
STEVEN R. BOSTIANDate: 03/31/94
l)J
hl
Sketch 1-
SCREENING EVMUATION WORK SHEET SEWS
5~2tg- Q-~g
Equip. ID No. 1X-S~ Equip. Class Frame Su orted Vertical Tanks or Heat
F~uipment Description Condensate stora e tank
-Sketch 2
Sketch 3-
---- Sketch 4-
SCREENING AND EVALUATION SHEET SEWS
Status Y N USheet 1 of
Plant Name: Shearon Harris Unit: 1
PART A. DESCRIPTION
Equip. ID No. 1X-SN
Equipment Description Refuelin water stora e tank
Equipment Location: Bldg. TANK Floor El. 261
Equip. Class Frame Su orted VerticalTanks or Heat Exchan ers
Also Flat Bottom Tanks
Room, Row/Col
Manufacturer, Model, Etc. Richmond En ineerin Co. Inc.
Seismic Input Elevation261'!
Photo Numbers
PART B. TANK HEAT EXCHANGER EVALUATION
1. Zs tank/heat exchanger of goodseismic design2
Flat bottom tank supportsTank/heat exchanger-support connectionsSupport system designTank/heat exchanger attached to morethan one storyIsolation valves on non-essential linesPipe thread joint
2. No other tank/heat exchanger concerns2
Is tank/heat exchanger itself screened out2
[Y] N U N/A
[Y] N U N/A *Y N U [N/A]
(Y] N U N/AY N U [N/A]
[Y] N U N/A[Y] N U N/A +
[Y] N U N/A
(Y] N U
* ~< Wgoge f~-~o~( 5'st),'o n
s ~cl QQC5k:c H
el~ ~(,e r
PART C. ANCHORAGE EVALUATION
1. Zs strength assessment based on:
Judgement (supported by generic analysis2)Specific analysis2Other2
J[A]Other
2. Zs strength adequate2
3. Zs stiffness adequate2
4. No other anchorate concerns2
Zs anchorage adequate2
Y N (U] N/A *
[Y] N U N/A
[Y] N U N/A
Y N (U]
SCREENING AND EVALUATION SHEET SEWSSheet 2 of
Equip. ZD No. 1X-SN Equip. Class Frame Su orted Vertical
PART D. SYSTEMS INTERACTION EFFECTS
1. Zs tank/heat exchanger free from influenceby adjacent elements2
Tank/heat exchanger contains soft targetsFlexibility of attached lines
Collapse of nearby equipments or structuresMasonry block walls
2. No other interaction concerns2I
Is tank/heat exchanger free from interaction effects2
[Y] N U N/A
[Y] N U N/A[Y] N U N/A
[Y] N U N/A *Y N U [N/A] *
(Y] N U N/A
[Y] N U
DESCRZBE POTENTIAL PROBLEMS INDICATED BY NO OR UNSATISFACTORY (Useadditional sheets, if necessary)
B. TANK/HEAT EXCHANGER EVALUATION~is tank was identified as a seismic concern as a result of USI A-40. A calculation was
erformed by the manufacturer, RECO, evaluating seismic loads and effects on anchorage andstructural integrity of the RNST and CST. Acceleration inputs were 0.1Sg vertical and rangedfrom 0.35g horizontal at the base to 2.24g at the top of the tank. Letter NRC-90-453, datedJuly 31, 1990 addressed to CPaL from the USNRC states that the tanks are acceptable.
Tank has 76 total chairs that appear to be quite rugged. Each chair is 24" high and is madeof 1" plate steel welded together with minimum 3/8" fillet welds. Base of chair is & platesteel. (From dwg 1364-47726 Rev 2) . Tank diameter is 45'". Calculation by themanufacturer addresses stress in the chairs and finds it to be within allowable.
RECO calculation for checking stress in the welds (see calc dated 11/3/81, page 24 of 30)uses allowable of 24,000 psi for 3/8" weld. Check against SMA allowable.
NO THREADED JOINTS ON ATTACHED PZPING.
C. ANCHORAGE EVALUATION2 Anchorage consists of (76) 3" diameter CIP(from dwg 1364-47724 Rev 2) . RECO calc showsindication that embedment has been verified,distance have been allowed for,
bolts. Full tank weighs approximately 4600 kipsanchors to be acceptable, but there is noand no reductions for spacing and possible edge
D. SYSTEMS ZNTERACTZON EFFECTS
5>014.-c.-oegTHE TANK ZS INSTALLED WZTHZN A WALLED CONCRETE ENCLOSURE THAT HAS NO TOP ~ THE TANK IS 8(P
ACTUALLY EXPOSED TO THE ATMOSPHERE. HOWEVER, NEARBY EQUIPMENT OR STRUCTURES CANNOT COLLAPSENTO THE TANK BECAUSE OF THE DESZGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE WALLS.THERE ARE NO MASONRY BLOCK WALLS ADJACENT TO THE TANK.
IS TANK OR HEAT EXCHANGER FREE OF NEED FOR FURTHER ZNVESTIGATION 7 Yes [No)
~ ~
4t'I
CKAGE ID¹: 1X-SN
F %ENCE: A-46 g IPEEE
Equipment Description Refuelin wa e stora e tank
Location: Bldg. TANK. Floor El, 261 Room, Row/Col
ICONTENTS
(1) Drawing ¹: 2165-S-0550 Rev,
Other
drawings
1364-47722 REV11364-47723 REV11364"47724 REV21364-47725 REV11364-47726 REV21364-47727 REV1
364-47728 REV1
{2) [Y)/ N Specification:Title: EBASCO SERVICES INC. CAR-SH-AS-10 FIELD ERECTED STORAGE TANKS
ANAS NUCLEAR SAFETY CLASS 2 & 3 SEISMIC CLASS I
) [Y]/ N Calculation:Title: 7 -AS-10-C SHNPP FIELD ERECTED TANKS
(4) Y / [N) Technical Manual ¹:Title:
(5) Y /[N) Valve Data Sheet
(6) OTHER: 1. NRC DO KET No. 50-400: JULY 31 1 02. CPGL LETTER NLS-8 -269
~ 'I NRC DOCKET N . 50-400: JUNE 1 1 8
COMMENTS
SCREENING EVALUATION WORK SHEET SEWS
Equip. ID No. 1X-SN Equip. Class Frame Su orted Vertical Tanks or Heat
Qggipment Description Refuelin water stora e tank
Evaluated by:
STEVEN R. BOSTZANDate: 04/22/94
Jeffrey H. BondDate: 04/22/94
--- Sketch 1
EQE INTEANATIONAI.
JOB NO 52214 JOB CP&L SHEARON HARRIS IPEEE
CA|C NOC-007 SUBJECT
1X-SABCSTT~& 1XCNRWSTT~TTk
Rev. 0
SHEETNO. 9 1
BY ~L DATE 9~~~ <+
cHK'o~ os ~4~>i
ATTACHMENT B
'ALKDOWNPHOTOS
52214-C-007 B2
PHOTO ¹1
1X-SAB CST
ANCHORAGE
;,ii)(((I((j(j
-
((III~))~q)))bbbb>»'((F(((((p~,(
S,N>~>~(
I-
PHOTO ¹2
52214-C-007 83
'
PHOTO ¹3
1X-SAB CST
ANCHORAGE
t;P
PHOTO ¹4
1X-SAB CST
UPPER NOZZLES& SUPPORT ONONE VERTICALLINE
52214-C-007 B4
'E«PHOTO 45
1X-SAB CST
i OVERFLOW NOZZLE
PHOTO P6
SUPPORT FORVERTICALLINE
52214-C-007 85
I
4
f
PHOTO ¹7
RWST
PHOTO ¹8
RWST
52214-C-007 B6
t 11 ~t tjI
tg*
'Vt
c i~-.fgvg< '>t '. a ~PHOTO ¹9
RWST
I, (
~ I
IP
'I
I,) ...Ilp'
, .t \', tI I tt '- ~ r
I'
rI ~
I t
11'' ~,1 ~ g
t,
PHOTO ¹10
RWST
I I
1'
~ ~
EQE tNTEANATIONAL
52214 JOB CP&L SHEARON HARRIS IPEEE
CALC NOC-007
SUBJECT1X-SAB CST T>% & 1X-SN RWST Tark
Rev. 0
SHEETNO. C I
BY S L DATE ~t>o~d.CHK'D~~~T DATE ~10 ~~i '
ATTACHMENT C
MATHCADTEMPLATE FOR SEISMIC RESPONSE OF TANK
5iQ1$ - C- O> 7 CZ
This MATHCADtemplate presents the derivation of seismic response for the CST tank at the CPBLHarris Plant, using the methodology from the EPRI NP4041 report, appendix H, and the NUREGICR5270 comparisons report.
This template computes the response parameters which are needed in performing a tank evaluation
per EPRI NP<041 methodology for vertical tanks. Inputs required are an assumed earthquake, and
the necessary tank parameters. Two nonMimensional parameters are also needed for thecalculation of the diamond-buckling capacity, and for the calculation of the compressive buckling
capacity (elephant's foot buckling). Base units are feet, seconds, and pounds.
Derived Units:
kip-"1000 Ibf hz-1 scc ksi-1000 psi
R:=20 ft
R d'.= 48.0 ft
H:=44.15 ft
t b'.=0.25 in
td .'=0.25 in
Nominal Inner Tank Radius
Dome Radius (estimated)
Height to Water Elevation
Bottom Plate thickness
Dome thickness
Rh d '.=R d 1- cos asin — Clearance between peak of dome to spring line
Rd j
nrings .'= 5 Number of different diameter rings composing the tank shell
0.8125
0.5625
0.5000
0.34375
0.2500
~ in Shell Thickness at each ring from bottom of the tank to the top.
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
9A
Height of each ring measured from the bottom of the tank to the top.
n:= 80
):=3.00 in
Number of equally spaced anchor bolts
Anchor bolt diameter
Es.'=28.3 10 psi
Eb:=2910 psi
rr ye'= 30 10 psi3.
lbfy I
.'=62.4—ft
Ibfy s
'.= 0.284 —sm
Young's Modulus for Shell Material, SA-240 T-304 Room Temperature
Young's Modululs for Bolt Material
Effective yield stress for shell material
Unit Weight for liquid
Unit Weight for shell material
K I.'=3.25 10 psi Bulk Modulus of fluid, 3.25x10"5 psi forwater
Note that this template was created for performing response calculations according to themethodology contained in Reference 1 - This assumes a NUREG CR/0098 type responsespectrum. This is the place where the amplification factors are input:
pga:=0.30 g varatio '.= 36
mSCC
Wg)
The varatio is 36 for rock, 48 for soil
v:= varatio pga
6vd,-—pga
NEP:=50 (non exceedance probability, 50%, or 84%)
amp a(p):= if(NEP=84,4.38- 1.04 In(p),3.21- 0.68 In(p)) Definition for Spectral Amplification
amp (P):= if(NEP=84,3.38- 0.67 In(P),2.31- 0.41 ~ In(P))
amp d(p):= if(NEP=84,2.73- 0.45 In(p), 1.82- 0.27 In(p))
-t
PR+ft(i1):=ampv(P) ampd(P) —,» n
-tf2(P) '= amp a(P)'mp v(P)'ga
f3 '.=8 hz f4'.=33 hz
f4 (-t)m(P):= log(
(amP a(P) f3~log—
2
6 (((()):=[((Sf((()))(2 a O amp 6(()) 6 —+ [((>f((())) ((<f2(())) (2 a () amp„(()) v]
m(P)
S24 ~ p) '(0 f2(p))'(4-f3)'ampa(p) pga]+ (<>f3) ((<f4) ampa(p) pga f + (<>f4) pga'3
S (g,P):=S 1((,P)+ S2(g,P)
Sav(q,p):=3 Sa(q,p). 2
(Equation 1)
i:=1.. nrings
Ha:=/Ha., Hs =47 feet
t
st s 0.494 in
Obtain Cwi from Reference 2, Table 7.4:
Parameters needed for table 7.4:
H ts—~ 2.208 —= 0.002R
'
Readwff value for Cwi:
C ~ .'=0.138
Note that the distance to the component C.G. is measured from the bottom of the tank.
(Shell) (Bottom Plate)
j:= 1.. nrings W b '- kn m )'t b'y s
W,.:=2 n R y s Hrt tiWb =12.848 kip
Ws .'= Wt
W s 119.26 kip
Hr)cg,.:=QHr. (i<j)-—
tbXb .'=—
2
Xb 0.01 feet
gW~ cg,.
tXs.'=s
X s 18 384'f
(Dome)
Wh'.=(2 n Rd hd) td'ys
Wh ~13.46 kip
Ra:= asin-Rd
2 sin(a)Xh'.=Hs+hd- Rd 1- 3'a
(Liquid)
's1 ——
R ts2- —'
w =n' 'yl
W w 3 462 10 'kip
HXw:=-2
Xw 22.075'feet
Xh ~49.853 feet
P st '=y 1'H
Pst ~19.132 psi
Maximum fluid pressure occurs at base of tank
Impulsive Mode Frequency:
0 127'y sC LI'.=C WI yi
(Reference 1, equation H-2)
C LI E s'ltfI.=—2mH (ys)
fI=8.127 hz
Compute Spectral Acceleration at this frequency, damping for the impulsive mode maybe taken as about 5% (this is considered to be a conservative damping estimate)
S a(f1,5) 0.629 g (See Equation ¹1)
S ah S a(fI 5)
Compute Weight of fluid effective in the Impulsive Mode, and its corresponding C.G.:
W)'.=imh 1.732—
,1.0- 0.436—1.732—
W ~ (Ref. 3, Eqn. C3500-1,-2,-3,4)
R 2'' '' 'H 1 R (Ref. 3, Eqn. C3500-1,-2,-3,-4)
W; = 2.778'10 'kip
X; =18.315 feet
Compute Impulsive Mode Base Shear and Overturning Moment:
VI'(Wh+ Ws+ Wi)8(Ref. 1, Eqn. H-3)
M I.=—(Wh Xh+ Ws Xs+ Wi Xi)8
V I 1 832 10 kip
M I 3.383'10 'kip ft
(Ref. 1, Eqn. H4)
Estimate hydrodynamic fluid,pressure on the tank at the bottom plate
w;x;—p . 8
1.36 R H(Ref. 1, eqn. H-8: Note this is conservative at fluiddepths less than about 0.15'H)
P; 4.195'psi
tq- C-OO7
Convective Mode frequency
fc:=
t
ft 2
1.5 —~
Rtanh 1.835
R(Ref. 1, eqn. H-10)
fc 0 274'hz
Compute Spectral Acceleration at this frequency, damping for the vertical mode response isprimarily fluid controlled and is estimated to be about 0.5%.
Sa(fc,0.5) ~0.093 g (See Equation ¹1)
S ac .'= S a(fc, 0.5)
Compute Weight of Fluid acting in the convective mode and its C.G. location
R HW c:= 0.46 — tanh 1.835 — W ~ (Ref. 1. eqn. H-13)
H' w
Xc:= 1.0-cosh 1.835 ——1.0
HR
1.835R
sinh 1.835R
H (Ref. 1, eqn. H-14)
W c 720.973 'kip
Xc 33.624'feet
Compute Convective Mode Base Shear and Overturning Moment:
SacVc:=—Wc (Ref. 1, eqn. H-11)
8
SacMc" WcXc8
Vc 67013 kip
M c 2.253 10 feet kip
(Ref. 1, eqn. H-12)
Compute Hydrodynamic Convective Pressure at fluid depth "y"
y ,'= H 'his maximizes the hydrodynamic convective pressure
H- y30.267 W~ Sa " '
cosh 1.835—(Ref. 1, eqn. H-16)
Pc ~0.024 psi
Compute the fundamental mode fluid slosh height
Sach s
'. = 0.837 R—8
h s~ 1.556'feet
(Ref. 1, eqn. H-17)
Compute the vertical fluid mode fundamental frequency
4 H g ts'Es xi(Ref. 3, eqn. C3500-13)
fv =7.975 hz
Compute the hydrodynamic vertical fluid response mode pressure, based on a tankon a rigid foundation, note this pressure is also at y=H, which maximizes p.
P v —0 8'y1'H'oPv =6.476 psi
Base Shear.
tot:= 1'+V
'totI 833'10 'kip
Overturning Moment
tot ' + c
M tot 3.39'10 'kip ft
Fluid Pressures:
sh i+ c.2 2 Total Horizontal Seismic Response
Pcmax't+ sh+ .4'Pv
cmin st+ P sh "'
tmin Pst sh "'
avg= st ."'
P cm~ ~ 25.917'psi
cmin 'p '
tmin ~ 12.346'psi
P avg~ 16.541'psi
Maximum and minimum compression zonepressures at the time of maximum base moment.(Ref. 1, eqn. H-22)
Minimum tension zone fluid pressure at the time ofmaximum base moment (Ref. 1, eqn. H-23)
Minimum average fluid presssure on the base plateat the time of maximum base shear (Ref. 1. eqn H-14)
Expected minimum total effect weight of the tank shell acting on the base at the time ofthe maximum moment and base shear.
2 pga$W te .'=
(W h + W s) (1
—04 ——)
'3 gj (Ref. 1, eqn. H-26)
Wte ~122.103 kip W h= 13.46'kip
W s 119.26 'k>p
Bttfai.anna:
1. A Methodology for Assessment of Nuclear Power Plant Seismi Margin (Revision 1),EPRI NP<041-SL, Final Report, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, August,1991.
2. A.S. Veletsos, "Seismic Response and Design of Liquid Storage Tanks", Chapter 7,, ASCE, 1984.
3. ASCE Standard and Commentary - Seismic Analysis of Safety-Related NuclearStructures, ASCE 4-86, ASCE, September 1986.
Administration, August 1986.NASA SP-8007, National Aeronautics and Space
5. Newmark, N.M., and Hall, W.J.,, NUREG-CR 0098, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1978.
EQE tNTEANATIONAL
JOB NO 52214 JOB CP&L SHEARON HARRIS IPEEE
Cp,|C gO CM7 SUBJpcy1X-SAB CST Tank & 1X4N RWST Tank
Rev. 0
SHEET NO. ~ZI.
BY SL Dp,yg ~ct 30~4CHK'D~k DATE ~id ZC
f9'TTACHMENT
D
MATHCADTEMPLATE FOR TANKCAPACITYCOMPUTATION
+g%1+- C-o7
C
The overturning moment capacity of anchored tanks is computed in an iterative process. EPRINP-6041,appendix H, contains procedure for calculating the overturning moment capacity.
This Mathcad template follows the procedure in EPRI NP4041 for determining the overturningmoment capacity of tanks. This template is intended to be used in conjunction with the templateFLUIDHD. The FLUIDHDtemplate calculates the fluid hold-down forces which lead to slightlyincreased capacities for marginal tanks. This template may be used with or without consideration ofthe FLUID hold-down forces.
Derived Units:
kip=1000 ibf hz-=1 sec ' ksi=1000 psi
R:=20.0 ft
WTE.'=110.3 kip
N:= 80
5eo'.=0.45 in
Es.--28.3 10 ksi
t s:=0.8125 in
P cmin 20 74'psi
ax'.= 25.92 psi
6 ye'= 30 ksi
Tank Radius
Expected Minimum Total Effective Tank Weight
Number of equally spaced anchor bolts
Permissible uplift elongation (estimated 10% of bolt length)
Young's Modulus for the Tank Material
Tank wall thickness at bolt chair location
Minimum pressure in compression zone at the time of maximum moment
Maximum pressure in compression zone at the time of maximum moment
Effective yield stress for tank material
h s:=45 in
h c:=4.375 in
Ab:=7.069 in
Eb:=29 10 ksi
T bp'.=24.0 kiP
T Ec'.=240 kip
Depth to embedded anchor bearing surface (estimated)
Height of anchor bolt chair above tank foundation (thickness of baseplate)
Nominal Area for each anchor
Anchor modulus of elasticity (ksi)
Anchor bolt pre-load (kips)
Maximum anchor bolt load (bolt tensile capacity of 34 ksi)
Parameter needed for Figure 6:
Readwff value for delta~amma
by:=0.07
T eo' 060'~ zero delta fluid holdMown force (conservatively neglected)
kip>n
kipTei .=0.160 —
~Slope of linear approximation (conservatively neglected)
in
axial stress limitat the onset of elephant's foot buckling:
R 1S
1.'= —— S 1
~ 0.738t, 400
oye0 6'E s P cmax'R 1
1 36 ksicr:=—1- ~ 1-P (R) +ye' 112+ S
1'+
'I"j{Ref. 1, eqn. H-27)
e =2.09 10 psip
diamond buckling capacity based on NASA SP-8007:
Y:=1 —0.73 (1 —e )E,t,
o cb'. = (0.6 Y+ hY)~-
R
a cb 3 656 10 psi
Compressive shell capacity:
CB 'fto'cb( 9crp)yecby( p)] ts
C B ~15.28'~kipm
Note: the angle Beta represents the angle to the neutral axis, it is assumed prior to thestart of the algorithm.
1 + cos(P)
sin(P) —P cos(P) (I t cos(P))I -*-tmI
sin(P) cos(P)+n- P
P- sin(P) cos(P)(8:=~
i:=1,2..N
360a. .'= (i - I)—deg
(N)
5 co A"b.E b jcos(a.,) —cos(P)B., bP+ h ay h c ( 1- cos(P)
T Bi.'= ifT Bt<TBC, T B,T BC
TB '.=if/TB >0.0 lbf,TB i0.0 lb
~Te:=Tet 5eo
C'm(P):=
lVTE+ TBI
2'R + eo'P ~ C i(P)+hTe C3(P)
M2C(P)R C ~((i) C2(P) R +gTR R aos(a)+ T~a R 2 sin((i)+RTa C 4((i) R
g:=1,1.1..3
f(():=C'm(() —C B
(I):=2.9
angle .'=root(f(it)),))
angle ~ 1.352
Pa 1.352
t~
io'tg
5'lo
okiP
o
Moment Capacity:
M SC(angle) 2.4 10 kip ft
-5'Io2 3 4
Sum of anchor bolt tension (needed for shear capacity):
TB ~8.046'10 'kipi
qg.>+- C-Oo j
For tanks with minimum anchorage, hoidMown forces resulting from fluid pressure acting on thetank bottom willcontribute significantly to tthe ovoerturning capacity of the tank. EPRI NP4041,
, appendix H,contains the procedures for calculating these fluid hold-down forces as a function of tank uplift.
This Mathcad template follows the procedure in EPRI NP4041 for determining the fluid holdMownforces. Inputs are tank parameters, the output is a plot of the fluid ho!drown tension as a functionof both uplift displacement and uplift length.
Derived Units:
kipa1000 Ibf hz-1 sec ksia1000 psi
R:=20.0 ft Tank Radius H:=44.15 ft Height to Fluid Surface
t s:= 0.494 in Shell Thickness t b.'= 0.25 in Baseplate Thickness
P:=12.35 psi Minimum tension zone fluid pressure at the time ofmaximummoment
Es.'=28.3 10 psi
u:=0.30
cr „.'=75 ksi
e> '.=30 ksi
Q ye:= 30'ksl
Young's Modulus
Poisson's Ratio
Ultimate Strength of Tank Material
Minimum Yield Strength of Material
Effective Yield Strength of Material
tbI b
'.=
12 (1 —v')
Ests 3
K:=12 (1- v')
Rx:= — 3 (1- o')ts
2KxKs R
" ~("")~':l (EPRI NP4041 calls this term Mf/P)
K LF(L):= 1+2.E2 Es Ib
g4 1 Ks L I'.L2 p5
24 ~FL) 72 Es Ib 6 Es.Ib
KsL2 F(L) 12 E Ib L
P KsLe(L) '= F(I.)'2 E, Ib+
p L2 M e(L) M e(L)Mmax(L) '
4 p + pL
Fit a straight line approximation between the two end points in order to get a close-formed
relationship between uplifftension and uplift displacement:
T eo 63 165 ~1bf
inT eo:=T e(L min)
T e(L max) T eo
( (Lmax) (Lmin)) lbfTet 160 184+
in
Solve for the minimum length of plate effective in resisting uplift (corresponding to zero upliftdisplacement:
g:= 7.21 ~ in (Initial guess)
L min'=root( <Q QL m» ~ 6.836 in . (Lmin is the minimum length)
Lmax'.=19 in
tbfT eo.=63 —.
in
lbfTet ',=165 —
~in
The slope and intercept to be used in the equation maybe changed here in order to give a better fit, or more
friendly coefficients. (these are as reported in EPRI NP4041)
T() =Teo+ Tel aT(5(Lmax)) 158 198 ~ T e(L max) 155 551
lbf lbf
tb ey2
Mpb' 'u+2
inM b =0.937'kip —.
p 'nayetb Mpb x
F H.'= +2x RF H =0.243'.kip
in
FH5Tm(5):=~4M pb P I+
2Mpb
n .'= 50
i:=1,2..n
L min ~ 836
L msx 19'in
;:= exp In L—
1Lmin
1~ 1O'
1O4
4 1O4
2'100.1 02 0.3
5(t.)) 12
0.4 O.S 0.6
5(10 in) ~0.033'in
Enclosure to Serial: HNP-98-017Page 61
ATTACHMENT3
Evaluation of Fire Severity Factorsfor Turbine Building Fire Sources
(3 pages)
Enclosure to Serial: HNP-98-017Page 62
EVALUATIONOF FIRE SEVERITY FACTORSFOR TURBINEBUILDINGFIRE SOURCES
The approach adopted is similar to that described in Appendix D of the EPRI Fire PRAImplementation Guide (Reference A1). Details of the fire events were extracted from theFire Events Data Base (Reference A2). Contrary to the general approach for determiningseverity factors utilized in the IPEEE (summarized in the response to Fire Request 2, page13 of this Enclosure), fires which were extinguished using hand held extinguishers, as
well as those which self-extinguished were excluded. This is consistent with the
suppression model used for the turbine building analysis which only credited automaticsuppression.
Turbine Generator (T/G) Excitor Fires
Five (5) T/G Excitor fires occurred. Three (3) of the fires were extinguished withportable extinguishers and are not considered severe. There was no information on
suppression associated with the remaining two (2) fires. Each of these two (2) remainingfires willbe weighted as one half of a severe event. The severity factor for T/G excitorfires is therefore 0.2 (1/5).
T/G Hydrogen Fires
Seven (7) T/G hydrogen fires occurred. Three (3) resulted in the initiation of automaticgas suppression systems (probably the generator purge) and are classified as severe. Two(2) of the fires were extinguished with portable extinguishers and are not consideredsevere. The means of suppression for the remaining two (2) fires is unknown. Each ofthese two (2) remaining fires willbe weighted as one half of a severe event. The severityfactor for T/G hydrogen fires is therefore 0.57 (4/7).
T/G Oil Fires
Seventeen (17) T/G oil fires occurred. Seven (7) were extinguished with portableextinguishers and are not considered severe. Four (4) were extinguished using hosestreams and one (1) required assistance from the offsite fire department. These five (5)fires are considered severe. The means of suppression for the remaining five (5) fires isunknown. Each of these remaining five (5) fires willbe weighted as one half of a severeevent. The severity factor for T/G oil fires is therefore OA4 (7.5/17).
Main Feedwater Pumps
Ten (10) Main Feedwater pump fires occurred. Five (5) of the fires were extinguishedusing portable extinguishers and de-energizing the equipment. These five (5) fires are notconsidered severe. Four (4) of the fires required hose streams to extinguish the fires.These four (4) fires are considered severe. The means of suppression for the one (1)
Enclosure to Serial: HNP-98-017Page 63
remaining event is unknown. This event willbe weighted as one half of a severe event.
The severity factor for Main Feedwater Pump fires is therefore 0.45 (4.5/10).
Boiler Fires
Two (2) Boiler fires occurred. One (1) self-extinguished and is not considered severe.
The means of suppression for the remaining event is unknown and willbe weighted as
one half of a severe event. The severity factor for boiler fires is therefore 0.25 (0.5/2).
Pumps (excluding Main Feed water)
A severity factor for other pumps is developed in Reference Al. Nine (9) of the forty six(46) pump fires were considered severe or potentially severe. The severity factor istherefore 0.2 (9/46).
Electrical Cabinet Fires
Sixteen (16) Electrical Cabinet fires occurred in turbine buildings. Three (3) self-extinguished or extinguished when de-energized. Ten (10) of the fires were extinguishedusing portable extinguishers. These ten (10) fires are not considered severe. One (1) fireresulted in the initiation of an automatic gas suppression system and is considered severe.
Suppression for the remaining two (2) events is unknown and willeach be weighted as
one half of a severe event. The severity factor for cabinet fires is therefore 0.13 (2/16).
Transient Fires
Thirty one (31) transient fires occurred. Twenty (20) were self-extinguished, de-
energized, or were extinguished by portable extinguishers. These twenty (20) fires are
not considered severe. Seven (7) required hoses, initiated automatic deluge, or wereextinguished by offsite fire departments. These seven (7) fires are considered severe.The means of suppression of the remaining four (4) is unknown. Each of these remainingfour (4) fires willbe weighted as one half of a severe event. The severity factor fortransient fires is therefore 0.29 (9/31).
AirCompressors
There have been six (6) fires associated with air compressors. Allwere extinguishedusing manual fire extinguishers. One half of one event willbe assumed to be severe. Theseverity factor for air compressor fires is therefore 0.08 (0.5/6).
Elevator Motors
There have been eight (8) elevator motor fires in total. Six (6) of the fires self-extinguished, de-energized or were extinguished by portable extinguishers. The methodof suppression of the remaining two (2) is unknown. Each of these two (2) remaining
Enclosure to Serial: HNP-98-017Page 64
fires willbe weighted as one half of a severe event. The severity factor for elevator motorfires is therefore 0.13 (1/8).
Battery Chargers
Five (5) Battery Charger fires occurred. Each were self-extinguished, or extinguished bymanual means. One half ofone event willbe assumed to be severe. The severity factorfor battery charger fires is therefore 0.1 (0.5/5).
References
A1. EPRI TR-105928, Fire PRA Implementation Guide, December, 1995.
A2. NSAC/178L Fire Events Data Base for US Nuclear Power Plants, Revision 1,
January, 1993.
Al
Qi
,Ji
