ENCLOSURE 2

Attachment 8

C.D.I. Technical Note No. 05-34,"Test Condition TC15a LoadComparison for Quad Cities Unit 1," Revision 0, dated

August 2005

C.D.I. Technical Note No. 05-34

Test Condition TC I 5a Load Comparison for Quad Cities Unit I

Revision 0

Prepared by

Continuum Dynamics, Inc.34 Lexington Avenue

Ewing, NJ 08618

Prepared under Purchase Order No. 85758 for

Exelon Generation LLC4300 Winfield Road

Warrenville, IL 60555

Approved by

014 RAlan J. Bilanin

August 2005

SUMMAR Y

To date, two high resolution loads have been developed for Quad Cities Unit I (QCI) at TestCondition TCI5a, as shown below.

Test Condition Strain Gage (SG) Correction Acoustic Circuit ModelIdentifier Technique UsedTC15a Reduced 80 Hz on C main Minimum Error Model

steam line, averaged single SGS32/S34 with SG pair S3 1/S33

on C main steam line onlyTC15a-2 Reduced 80 Hz on A and C Modified Benchmark

main steam lines, averaged Modelsingle SG with SG pairs for all

failed strain gage locations

Justification for reducing the 80 Hz frequency peak (± 4 Hz on either side) may be found in [1],while justification for averaging a single strain gage with a corresponding strain gage pair maybe found in [2]. A description of the Modified Benchmark and the Minimum Error models maybe found in [3].

C.D.I. has been asked by Exelon to develop the QCI high resolution load

Test ConditionIdentifierTC15a-3

Strain Gage (SG) CorrectionTechnique

Reduced 80 Hz on A and Cmain steam lines, averaged

single SG with SG pairs for allfailed strain gage locations

Acoustic Circuit ModelUsed

Minimum Error Model

and compare its predictions against TC15a, the other Minimum Error model. This reportsummarizes the low resolution results for TC15a_3 compared against TC I 5a, in preparation fordelivery of a high resolution load for structural analysis.

MODELING RESULTS

Table I compares the minimum, maximum, and RMS pressure levels for TC15a_3 and TCl5a at27 locations on the QCI dryer. Also included in this table is the comparison for two sensordifferences from the outside to the inside of the outer bank hoods at the same location: P3 - P13(the A-B side of the dryer) and P20 - P14 (the C-D side of the dryer). Figure I plots the valuespresented in Table 1.

A comparison of these values at the 27 locations shows that the differences between the two loadcases translate into an average reduction of the minimum pressure by 0.066 psid (the averageminimum pressure in TCI5a_3 is less minimum than the average minimum pressure in TCI5a),

2

-

an average reduction of the maximum pressure by 0.027 psid (the average maximum pressure inTCl5a_3 is less maximum than the average maximum pressure in TC15a), and an averageincrease of the RMS pressure of 0.002 psid (the RMS pressure in TC15a_3 is slightly larger thanthe RMS pressure in TCI5a).

Correspondingly, for the pressure difference P3 - P13, the minimum pressure in TC15a_3 is lessminimum than the minimum pressure in TC15a (by 0.056 psid), the maximum pressure inTC15a_3 is larger than the maximum pressure in TCI5a (by 0.021 psid), and the RMS pressurein TC15a_3 is smaller than the RMS pressure in TC15a (by 0.042 psid). For the pressuredifference P20 - P14, the minimum pressure in TC15a_3 is more minimum than the minimumpressure in TCI5a (by 0.161 psid), the maximum pressure in TC15a_3 is larger than themaximum pressure in TC15a (by 0.219 psid), and the RMS pressure in TC15a_3 is larger thanthe RMS pressure in TCI5a (by 0.056 psid).

Figures 2 to 28 show the PSD comparisons for locations P1 to P27. Figures 29 and 30 show thePSD comparisons for P3 - P13 and P20 - P14, respectively. It is seen that the two load cases arevery similar, with a noticeable, yet slight, 80 Hz signal in TC15a (possibly resulting from the factthat no adjustment was made to the A main steam line strain gage data).

REFERENCES

1. Exelon Generation Company. 2005. QCI Evaluation to Remove 80 Hz from Strain GageData. White Paper.

2. Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. 2005. Quad Cities Unit 1 Main Steam Line Strain GageReductions. Letter Report No. SIR-05-208 Revision 2 (draft), KKF-05-034.

3. Continuum Dynamics, Inc. 2005. Evaluation of Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Steam DryerLoad Methodology Against Quad Cities Unit 2 In-Plant Data. C.D.I. Report No. 05-10.

3

Table 1. Summary of pressure predictions at 27 sensors on the QCI dryer, based on the first 65seconds of data collected.

PressureSensor

Number

P1P2P3P4P5P6P7P8P9

P1OPl1P12P13P14P15P16P17P18P19P20P21P22P23P24P25P26P27

TC15aMinimum

(psid)

-1.342-1.028-1.938-0.723-1.038-1.301-1.054-0.837-1.674-1.322-0.946-2.335-0.549-0.461-2.027-0.366-1.160-1.691-1.986-3.342-1.641-1.439-0.332-1.138-1.342-0.294-0.335

TC15aMaximum

(psid)

1.3411.0101.8300.7550.8131.2671.0380.8091.6951.3640.8662.2310.4030.5121.8960.2891.1351.6961.8943.6211.4611.5270.2571.1931.3480.2800.285

1.215

1.9523.877

TCISaRMS(psid)

0.4380.2240.5040.1770.1990.3470.3380.1820.5100.4360.2090.6780.1060.1140.5690.0780.2750.5010.5891.0750.4070.4350.0730.2800.3280.0770.074

0.342

0.5531.148

TC15a_3Minimum

(psid)

-1.355-1.121-1.776-0.777-0.766-1.164-1.125-0.678-1.550-1.361-0.789-2.069-0.355-0.452-2.012-0.304-1.112-1.617-2.031-3.503-1.503-1.407-0.251-1.029-1.260-0.238-0.242

-1.180

-1.928-3.821

TC15a_3Maximum

(psid)

1.4401.1401.6880.7280.7991.1711.1790.7131.5621.3930.8482.1160.3430.4891.8820.2621.0141.7011.9413.7811.4621.3510.2041.1251.2580.2450.231

1.188

1.9734.096

TC15a_3RMS(psid)

0.4640.2700.4670.1820.1940.3120.3860.1610.5180.4580.1930.7410.0870.1060.5720.0630.2870.5170.6131.1240.3950.4450.0560.2570.2950.0640.059

0.344

0.5111.204

Average -1.246

P3-P13 -1.984P20 - P14 -3.660

4

07:1. ..qcn15(1)$--4

rncn(1)

9Lq

9E.-OI

-0.5

-1

-1.5

-2

-2.5

-3

-3.5

-40 5 10 15 20 25 30

Pressure Sensor Number

Figure la. Comparison between TC15a and TC 15a_3 (minimum pressure). Pressure sensornumber P28 = P3 - P13, while pressure sensor number P29 = P20 - P14.

* _4

co

a.)

;.4

;X:Gn

5

4

3

2

1

00 5 10 15 20 25

Pressure Sensor Number30

Figure lb. Comparison between TC15a and TC15a_3 (maximum pressure). Pressure sensornumber P28 = P3 - P13, while pressure sensor number P29 = P20 - P14.

5

cof

1.4

. -

c)O

en

1.2

1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

:;

00 5 10 15 20 25

Pressure Sensor Number30

Figure ic. Comparison between TC15a and TC15a_3 (RMS pressure). Pressure sensor numberP28 = P3 - P13, while pressure sensor number P29 = P20 - P14.

0.1

N

-o

*44

0.01

0.001

0.0001

10-5

10-60 50 100 150

Frequency (Hz)200

Figure 2. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) and TC15a_3pressure sensor number PI.

(blue curve) for

6

0.1

N

t1�C14

7�.- 4

Cn

I-

V)P--�

0.01

0.001

0.0001

10 5

10-60 50 100 150

Frequency (Hz)200

Figure 3. PSD comparison between TCI5a (black curve) and TCI5a_3 (blue curve) forpressure sensor number P2.

0.1

N

*_1

ma

V:

0.01

0.001

0.0001

10-5

10-60 50 100 150

Frequency (Hz)200

Figure 4. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) and TCl5a_3pressure sensor number P3.

(blue curve) for

7

CO)

0.01

N

-o

crA

0.001

0.0001

10-5

10-6 1 QI . . . i0 51

Figure 5. PSD comparison betweenpressure sensor number P4.

200

TC15a (black curve) and TCl5a 3 (blue curve) for

0.01

N

.1

carV)

0.001

0.0001

10-5

10-60 50 100 150 200

Frequency (Hz)

Figure 6. PSD comparison between TCl5a (black curve) and TC15a_3 (blue curve) forpressure sensor number P5.

8

CO'f

I

0.1

N

C,'

0.01

0.001

0.0001

10-5

10-60 50 100 150

Frequency (Hz)200

(blue curve) forFigure 7. PSD comparison between TC 1 5a (black curve) and TC I 5a_3pressure sensor number P6.

0.1

N

C,4

0.01

0.001

0.0001

10-5

10-60 50 100 150

Frequency (Hz)200

(blue curve) forFigure 8. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) and TCl5a_3pressure sensor number P7.

9

c o5>

0.01

N

rA

0.001

0.0001

10-5

10-60 50 100 150 200

Frequency (Hz)

Figure 9. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve)pressure sensor number P8.

and TC 1 5a3 (blue curve) for

0.1

N

VC

P-o

0.01

0.001

0.0001

10

10-6

0 50 100 150Frequency (Hz)

200

Figure 10. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) and TCI'5a_3 (blue curve) forpressure sensor number P9.

10

COO(

0.1

* -

v:

0.01

0.00 1

0.0001

10-5

10-6 1 V . . I ._I

0 50 100Frequency(

Figure 11. PSD comparison between TC 1 5a (black curve)pressure sensor number PIO.

0.01 I I I I I I I I I I I

150 200'Hz)

and TC 1 5a3 (blue curve) for

N

t-".r

co--

0.001

0.0001

10 o

10-6

0 50 100 150Frequency (Hz)

200

Figure 12. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) and TC15a_3 (blue curve) forpressure sensor number P11.

11

co (

1

-11

N

P-4

0.1

0.01

0.001

0.0001

10-5

10-6 t , I . . . . . .0 50 100

Frequency(

Figure 13. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve)pressure sensor number P12.

0.001 7 I l 1 i I I I I I I

150 200(Hz)

and TC15a_3 (blue curve) for

N

u-L:

0.0001

10o

0-6

10-70 50 100 150 200

Frequency (Hz)

Figure 14. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) and TC15a_3 (blue curve) forpressure sensor number P13.

12

co%

0.01

N

-o,7:

ci:

0.001

0.0001

10-5

10-6

0 -7 1 , - I I I I I I I

0 50 100Frequency(

Figure 15. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve)pressure sensor number P14.

150 200(Hz)

and TC 1 5a3 (blue curve) for

0.1

N

._ma

0.01

0.001

0.0001

10-5

10-6

0 50 100 150 200Frequency (Hz)

Figure 16. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) and TC15a_3 (blue curve) forpressure sensor number P1 5.

13

COQ

0.001

N

C-4* n

0.0001

10-5

10-6

10-70 50 1

Freque100 150 200ncy (Hz)

curve) and TC 1 5a3 (blue curve) forFigure 17. PSD comparison between TC15a (blackpressure sensor number P 16.

0.1

N

.t-

0.01

0.001

0.0001

10-5

10-60 50 100 150

Frequency (Hz)200

Figure 18. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) and TC15a_3pressure sensor number P17.

(blue curve) for

14

CIO

0.1

N

1=4

U)

A-

0.01

0.001

0.0001

10-5

10-6

10-70 50 100

Frequency (150 200

Hz)

and TC 1 5a_3 (blue curve) forFigure 19. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve)pressure sensor number P18.

0.1

N

*_7:$

V:

0.01

0.001

0.0001

10-5

10-6

10-70 50 100 150

Frequency (Hz)200

Figure 20. PSD comparison between TC 15a (black curve) and TC I a_3 (blue curve) forpressure sensor number P19.

15

C11

1

0.1N

"-C.1-

Cnt

1:

0.01

0.001

0.0001

10

10-6

0 50 100 150Frequency (Hz)

200

Figure 21. PSD comparison between TC 1 5a (black curve) and TC 1 5a 3 (blue curve) forpressure sensor number P20.

0.1

0.01N

.-e 0.00 1

0.0001

10-5

10-60 50 100 150

Frequency (Hz)200

Figure 22. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) and TC15a_3 (blue curve) forpressure sensor number P2 1.

16

0.1

N

.

C4

v:

0.01

0.001

0.0001

10-5

1 0 -6 1 . . . . I . ' I . . . . I I I I I I

0 50 100 150 200Frequency (Hz)

Figure 23. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) and TC15a_3 (blue curve) forpressure sensor number P22.

0.001

N

co~

0.0001

10-5

10-6

10-7

10-80 50 100 150 200

Frequency (Hz)

Figure 24. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) and TC 15a_3 (blue curve) forpressure sensor number P23.

17

0.1

N

C"4* -o/

v:

0.01

0.001

0.0001

10-5

10-60 50 100 150

Frequency (Hz)200

Figure 25. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) and TC15a_3 (blue curve) forpressure sensor number P24.

0.01

N

.-

ca

V:O

0.001

0.0001

10

10-6

0 50 100 150 200Frequency (Hz)

Figure 26. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) and TCl5a-3 (blue curve) forpressure sensor number P25.

18

0.001

N

is

* C

AL4

0.0001

10 o

10-6

10-7 1 Y 1 I I I I V I I I I I0 50 100

Frequency (Hz'

Figure 27. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) andpressure sensor number P26.

0.001 I ' I I

200

TC 1 5a3 (blue curve) for

N

Cl4

P-e

0.0001

10-5

10-6

10-7

10-80 100

Frequency (Hz)200

Figure 28. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) and TC15a_3pressure sensor number P27.

(blue curve) for

19

I

0.1

N

coi

v::

0.01

0.001

0.0001

10 o

10-60 50 100 150

Frequency (Hz)200

Figure 29. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) and TC15a 3 (blue curve) for thedifference between pressure sensor number P3 and pressure sensor number PI3.

1

N

".O

.- 4

QnC�O

a�Cn0-4

0.1

0.01

0.001

0.0001

10-5

10-6

0 50 100 150 200Frequency (Hz)

Figure 30. PSD comparison between TC15a (black curve) and TC15a 3 (blue curve) for thedifference between pressure sensor number P20 and pressure sensor number P14.

20