NUREG/CR-5679 

SAND 98-2701

Design, Instrumentation, and

Testing of a Steel Containment 

Vessel Model 

Sandia National Laboratories 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 

Washington, DC 20555-0001
AVAILABILITY NOTICE 

Availability of Reference Materials Cited in NRC Publications

NRC publications in the NUREG series, NRC regu

lations, and Title 10, Energy, of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, may be purchased from one of the fol

lowing sources: 

1. The Superintendent of Documents 

U.S. Government Printing Office 

PO. Box 37082 

Washington, DC 20402-9328 

<http://www.access.gpo.gov/sudocs> 

202-512-1800 

2. The National Technical Information Service 

Springfield, VA 22161 -0002 

<http://www.ntis.gov> 

1-800-553-6847 or locally 703-605-6000 

The NUREG series comprises (1) brochures 

(NUREG/BR-XXXX), (2) proceedings of confer

ences (NUREG/CP-XXXX), (3) reports resulting 

from international agreements (NUREG/IA-)XXXX, 

(4) technical and administrative reports and books 

[(NUREG-)XXX) or (NUREG/CR-XXXX)], and (5) 

compilations of legal decisions and orders of the 

Commission and Atomic and Safety Licensing 

Boards and of Office Directors' decisions under 

Section 2.206 of NRC's regulations (NUREG

XXXX). 

A single copy of each NRC draft report for com

ment is available free, to the extent of supply, upon 

written request as follows: 

Address: Office of the Chief Information Officer 

Reproduction and Distribution 

Services Section 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Washington, DC 20555-0001 

E-mail: <DISTRIBUTION@nrc.gov> 

Facsimile: 301 -415-2289 

A portion of NRC regulatory and technical informa

tion is available at NRC's World Wide Web site:

<http://www.nrc.gov> 

After January 1,2000, the public may electronically 

access NUREG-series publications and other NRC 

records in NRC's Agencywide Document Access 

and Management System (ADAMS), through the 

Public Electronic Reading Room (PERR), link 

< http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html>. 

Publicly released documents include, to name a 

few, NUREG-series reports; Federal Register no

tices; applicant, licensee, and vendor documents 

and correspondence; NRC correspondence and 

internal memoranda; bulletins and information no

tices; inspection and investigation reports; licens

ee event reports; and Commission papers and 

their attachments. 

Documents available from public and special tech

nical libraries include all open literature items, such 

as books, journal articles, and transactions, Feder

al Register notices, Federal and State legislation, 

and congressional reports. Such documents as 

theses, dissertations, foreign reports and transla

tions, and non-NRC conference proceedings may 

be purchased from their sponsoring organization. 

Copies of industry codes and standards used in a 

substantive manner in the NRC regulatory process 

are maintained at the NRC Library, Two White Flint 

North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 

20852-2738. These standards are available in the 

library for reference use by the public. Codes and 

standards are usually copyrighted and may be 

purchased from the originating organization or, if 

they are American National Standards, from

American National Standards Institute 

11 West 42nd Street 

New York, NY 10036-8002 

<http://www.ansi.org> 

212-642-4900

DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by 

an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United 

States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their em

ployees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes

any legal liability or responsibility for any third party's use, or the 

results of such use, of any information, apparatus, product, or 

process disclosed in this report, or represents that its use by 

such third party would not infringe privately owned rights.
NUREG/CR-5679 

SAND 98-2701

Design, Instrumentation, and 

Testing of a Steel Containment 

Vessel Model

Manuscript Completed: February 1999 

Date Published: February 2000 

Prepared by 

V. K. Luk, M. F. Hessheimer, G. S. Rightley, 

L. Dwight Lambert, E. W. Kiamerus 

Sandia National Laboratories 

Albuquerque, NM 87185-0744

Prepared for 

Systems Safety Department 

Nuclear Power Engineering Corporation 

Tokyo, 105 Japan 

Under Funds-in Agreement No. DE-F104-91AL73734 

T. Hashimoto, NUPEC Project Manager

Division of Engineering Technology 

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Washington, DC 20555-0001 

Under Containment Integrity Under 

Extreme Loads JCN A1401 

J. F. Costello, NRC Project Manager
NUREG/CR-5679 has been reproduced 

from the best available copy.
Abstract

The Nuclear Power Engineering Corporation (NUPEC) of Japan and the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

(NRC), Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, are co-sponsoring and jointly funding a Cooperative Containment 

Research Program at Sandia National Laboratories. As a part of this program, a steel containment vessel model was 

tested to failure in the high pressure test on December 11-12, 1996. The model, which is representative of a steel 

containment for an improved Japanese Mark II Boiling Water Reactor Plant, has a geometric scale of 1:10 and a 

thickness scale of 1:4. The objectives of the steel containment vessel model test were to obtain measurement data of 

the structural response of the model up to its failure in order to validate analytical modeling, to find the pressure 

capacity of the model, and to observe the failure mechanisms. 

The steel containment vessel model was surrounded by a contact structure, which provided a simplified 

representation of some features of actual concrete shield buildings in reactor plants. The model underwent radial 

expansion under internal pressurization, and the gap between the two structures closed in local areas where contact 

occurred. This special feature was designed to provide measurement data on load re-distribution on contact between 

the two structures to validate the contact algorithms in finite element codes. 

The model and the contact structure were instrumented with strain gages, displacement transducers, contact detection 

devices, pressure transducers, and thermocouples. More than 97% of the installed instruments survived the high 

pressure test. 

After 16.5 hours of continuous operation with monotonic increases in pressure, the high pressure test was terminated 

when a leakage was detected and the pressurization system at its maximum flow capacity could not maintain the 

pressure inside the model. The maximum pressure achieved during the high pressure test was 4.66 MPa (676 psig) 

or approximately 5.97 times the scaled design pressure. Posttest model inspection revealed that the leakage was 

caused by a large tear, approximately 190-mm-long, along a weld seam at the outside edge of the equipment hatch 

reinforcement plate. A small meridional tear, roughly 85-mm-long, was also discovered in a vertical weld inside a 

semi-circular weld relief opening at the middle stiffening ring above the equipment hatch. 

The posttest metallurgical evaluation provided critical information on the deformation pattern and the failure mode 

and mechanisms of the two tears and on the strain concentrations in a few locally necked areas. All material 

deformation and tear observed in the samples, which were made from the sections removed from the model, were 

ductile in nature. There was no evidence of material flaws, defects, or brittle behavior in the base metal or welds. 

The tears that occurred resulted from exceeding the local plastic ductility of the alloy.

iii NUREG/CR-5679
Contents 

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................................................ iii 

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................................... Xi 

Acknowledgments ...................................................................................................................................................... xiii 

Acronyms ..................................................................................................................................................................... xv 

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 1-1 

1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................................... 1-2 

1.2 Scope of the Steel Containment Vessel Test ..................................................................................... 1-2 

1.2.1 M odel Features and Scale .......................................................................................................... 1-2 

1.2.2 Loading ...................................................................................................................................... 1-3 

1.2.3 Response .................................................................................................................................... 1-4 

1.3 Project Organization ......................................................................................................................... 1-5 

1.4 Project Schedule ............................................................................................................................... 1-5 

2. Design and Fabrication of the SCV M odel ......................................................................................................... 2-1 

2.1 M odel Description ............................................................................................................................ 2-1 

2.2 M odel Fabrication ............................................................................................................................. 2-1 

2.3 M aterial Properties ........................................................................................................................... 2-1 

3. Design and Fabrication of Contact Structure ...................................................................................................... 3-1 

3.1 Background ....................................................................................................................................... 3-1 

3.2 Design of Contact Structure .............................................................................................................. 3-1 

3.3 Fabrication and Installation of Contact Structure ............................................................................. 3-1 

4. Instrumentation of the SCV M odel ..................................................................................................................... 4-1 

4.1 Instrumentation Objectives ............................................................................................................... 4-1 

4.2 Instrument Types .............................................................................................................................. 4-1 

4.2.1 Strain M easurements ................................................................................................................. 4-1 

4.2.2 Pressure M easurements .............................................................................................................. 4-2 

4.2.3 Displacement Measurements .............................................. 4-2 

4.2.4 Temperature M easurements ....................................................................................................... 4-3 

4.2.5 Video Coverage ......................................................................................................................... 4-3 

4.2.6 Contact Detection ...................................................................................................................... 4-3 

4.2.7 Summary of Instrumentation .................................................................................................... .4-3 

4.3 Data Integrity Verification ........................................... : .................................................................... 4-3 

4.3.1 Instrument Continuity Checks .................................................................................................... 4-4 

4.3.2 Instrument Functionality Checks ............................................................................................... 4-4 

4.4 Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 4-4 

5. Pressurization System ........................................................................................................................................ 5-1 

6. Data Acquisition System ..................................................................................................................................... 6-1 

6.1 DAS Scope ................................................................................................................................. ...... 6-1 

v NUREG/CR-5679
6.1.1 DAS Objectives ......................................................................................................................... 6-1 

6.1.2 DAS Requirem ents .................................................................................................................... 6-1 

6.2 Description of the SCV Data Acquisition System ............................................................................ 6-1 

6.2.1 Hardware Description ................................................................................................................ 6-1 

6.2.2 Software Description ................................................................................................................. 6-1 

6.2.3 Data Acquisition Perform ance Requirements ............................................................................ 6-2 

6.2.4 Data Storage Requirem ents ........................................................................................................ 6-2 

6.3 Software Validation and Verification Testing .................................................................................. 6-3 

6.4 Input/Output File Structure ............................................................................................................... 6-3 

7. SCV Pressure Tests ............................................................... 7-1 

7.1 Leak and Instrum entation Test .......................................................................................................... 7-1 

7.1.1 Test Sequence ............................................................................................................................ 7-1 

7.1.2 Pressurization System ................................................................................................................ 7-1 

7.1.3 Instruments ................................................................................................................................ 7-2 

7.1.4 Summ ary .................................................................................................................................... 7-2 

7.2 Low Pressure Test ............................................................................................................................. 7-2 

7.2.1 Test Sequence ............................................................................................................................ 7-2 

7.2.2 Pressurization System ................................................................................................................ 7-2 

7.2.3 Instrum ents ................................................................................................................................ 7-2 

7.2.4 Sum m ary .................................................................................................................................... 7-2 

7.3 High Pressure Test ............................................................................................................................ 7-3 

7.3.1 Test Conduct .............................................................................................................................. 7-3 

7.3.2 Termination of Test .................................................................................................................... 7-4 

7.3.3 Summ ary ................................................................................................................................... 7-4 

8. H igh Pressure Test Data ..................................................................................................................................... 8-1 

8.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 8-1 

8.2 Local M odel Response Adjacent to Equipm ent Hatch ..................................................................... 8-1 

8.3 Global M odel Response .................................................................................................................... 8-2 

8.4 Leak Behavior ................................................................................................................................... 8-2 

8.5 Sum m ary and Discussions ................................................................................................................ 8-2 

9. Posttest M etallurgical Evaluation Results ........................................................................................................... 9-1 

9.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 9-1 

9.2 Description of Dam age and Sam ple Locations ................................................................................ 9-1 

9.2.1 Tear and Deform ation at the Equipm ent Hatch ......................................................................... 9-1 

9.2.2 Tearing and Deformation at Openings in the Middle Stiffening Ring ....................................... 9-2 

9.2.3 Localized Deformation at Vertical Welds in Lower Conical Shell Section ............................... 9-2 

9.3 M icrostructures and Properties of Steel Alloys ................................................................................ 9-2 

9.3.1 SGV480 Alloy ........................................................................................................................... 9-2 

9.3.2 SPV490 Alloy ............................................................................................................................ 9-3 

9.3.3 W eld M etal ................................................................................................................................ 9-3 

9.4 M etallographic Analysis of Dam aged Regions ........... *. ................................................................... 9-5 

9.4.1 Samples from Dam aged Region around Equipment Hatch ........................................................ 9-5 

9.4.2 Samples from Dam aged Region in M iddle Stiffening Ring ....................................................... 9-6 

9.4.3 Samples from Deformed Vertical Weld Area in Lower Conical Shell Section ......................... 9-6 

9.5 Conclusions ...................................................................................................................................... 9-6 

10. Sum m ary and Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 10-1 

11. References ....................................................................................................................................................... 11-1 

NUREGICR-5679 vi
Appendices 

A Design Drawings of the Steel Containment Vessel (SCV) Model ................................................................ A-1 

B Design Drawings of the Contact Structure (CS) .......................................................................................... B -1 

C Uniaxial Tensile Test Data of SGV480 and SPV490 Steels......................................................................... C-1 

D SCV Instrument List and Drawings ................................................................................................................ D-1 

E Input/Output File Structure for the SCV/DAS Software Package............................................................ E-i 

F High Pressure Test Data Correction ................................................................................................................... F-i 

G Test Data Files for the High Pressure Test ............................................................................................... G-1 

H Acoustic Emission Results ................................................................................................................................ H-1 

I Listing of All Sample Hardness Measurements (Rockwell B Scale) .......................................................... I-i 

vii NUREG/CR-5679
Figures

1.1 Elevation of an improved Mark II boiling water reactor containment building ........................................... 1-7 

1.2 SCV model showing that the equipment hatch and the top head flange were welded shut .......................... 1-8 

1.3 Comparison of prototype containment and SCV model .............................................................................. 1-9 

1.4 Layout of the test site ................................................................................................................................. 1-10 

1.5 SCV model installation into the fragment barrier through its roof. ........................................................... 1-11 

1.6 SCV model with exterior instrumentation ................................................................................................. 1-12 

2.1 Elevation view of the SCV/CS assembly ..................................................................................................... 2-3 

2.2 SCV model .................................................................................................................................................. 2-4 

4.1 Strip strain gage nomenclature .................................................................................................................... 4-5 

4.2 Configuration and nomenclature of rosette strain gage ................................................................................ 4-5 

5.1 Control system schematic for SCV pressurization system ........................................................................... 5-2 

5.2 Piping and valve schematic for SCV pressurization system ........................................................................ 5-2 

6.1 SCV/DAS hardware configuration .............................................................................................................. 6-4 

7.1 Planned pressurization sequence for the leak and instrumentation test ........................................................ 7-5 

7.2 Profiles of recorded pressure by pressure control system and temperature by RTDs for the leak and 

instrumentation test ...................................................................................................................................... 7-5 

7.3 Pressure profile recorded by the two DAS pressure transducers measuring pressure inside the SCV 

model for the leak and instrumentation test ................................................................................................. 7-6 

7.4 The planned pressurization sequence for the low pressure test ................................................................... 7-7 

7.5 Profiles of recorded pressure by pressure control system and temperature by RTDs for the low 

pressure test ................................................................................................................................................. 7-7 

7.6 Pressure profile recorded by the two pressure transducers for the low pressure test ................................... 7-8 

7.7 Detailed breakdown of the planned test sequence for the high pressure test ............................................... 7-9 

7.8 Recorded pressurization sequence for the first stage of the high pressure test .......................................... :7-9 

7.9 Recorded pressurization sequence for the second stage of the high pressure test ...................................... 7-10 

7.10 Recorded pressurization sequence for the third stage of the high pressure test ......................................... 7-10 

8.1 Posttest interior view of the equipment hatch .............................................................................................. 8-4 

8.2 Interior elevation of equipment hatch .......................................................................................................... 8-5 

8.3 Strain history of a few critical gages around equipment hatch ..................................................................... 8-5 

8.4 Posttest interior view of the small tear at the middle stiffening ring ............................................................ 8-6 

8.5 Free-field hoop strain at upper conical shell section, elev. 2536 mm .......................................................... 8-7 

8.6 Hoop strain at knuckle region, elev. 3319 mm ............................................................................................ 8-7 

8.7 Hoop strain at spherical shell section, elev. 3132 mm ................................................................................. 8-8 

8.8 Hoop strain at lower conical shell section, elev. 1254 mm .......................................................................... 8-8 

8.9 Hoop strain at lower cylindrical shell section, elev. 500 mm ...................................................................... 8-9 

8.10 Hoop strain at top head region ..................................................................................................................... 8-9 

8.11 Radial displacement contours (1Ox) at 4.5 MPa ........................................................................................ 8-10 

8.12 Radial displacement contours (10x) at azimuth location of 2700 .............................................................. 8-10 

8.13 Radial displacements at middle conical shell section, elev. 1850 mm ....................................................... 8-11 

8.14 Radial displacements at upper conical shell section, elev. 2536 mm ......................................................... 8-11 

8.15 Time histories of pressure transducer, flowmeter, and thermocouples in the last twenty minutes of 

the high pressure test .................................................................................................................................. 8-12 

9.1 Elevation view of SCV model identifying sectioned sample locations ........................................................ 9-8 

9.2 Exterior view of the equipment hatch (after removal of barrel) showing torn and necked areas ................. 9-9 

9.3 Interior view of the tear next to a vertical weld seam inside a weld relief opening in the middle 

stiffening ring .............................................................................................................................................. 9-9 

9.4 Exterior view of stretched paint coating along vertical weld seam in lower conical shell section ............. 9-10 

9.5 Exterior view of equipment hatch showing the tear at 740 and sectioned sample locations ....................... 9-10 

9.6 Interior view of tear at location 740 near the equipment hatch .............................................................. 9-11 

9.7 Exterior view of a local area around equipment hatch showing the necked region at location 106' 

and samples for metallurgical analysis ...................................................................................................... 9-12

NUREG/CR-5679 viii
9.8 Interior view of a local area around equipment hatch showing the necked region at location 1060 ........... 9-12 

9.9 Exterior view of the tear at location 2010 in middle stiffening ring ........................................................... 9-13 

9.10 Close-up of exterior view of local deformation as paint cracks at the vertical weld seam at location 

340* in lower conical shell section ............................................................................................................ 9-13 

9.11 Sample SCV-340 taken from vertical weld seam at location 340' in lower conical shell section ............. 9-14 

9.12 Sample SCV-74-1 near bottom of tear adjacent to equipment hatch: (a) shear tear in lower hardness 

weld HAZ in 9 nmn SPV490 wall material, with weld fusion zone on right; (b) view to right of (a) 

showing fusion zone and weld HAZ into 17.5 mm SPV490 reinforcement plate. Reaustenitized 

HAZ areas are dark regions on either side of fusion zone ......................................................................... 9-15 

9.13 Sample SCV-74-3 near top of tear adjacent to equipment hatch: (a) deformed and necked region in 

weld HAZ of 8.5 mm SGV480 wall material with weld fusion zone on right; (b) view to right of (a) 

showing fusion zone and weld HAZ into 17.5-mm-SPV490 reinforcement plate ..................................... 9-16 

9.14 Microstructure of necked region (sample SCV-106-1) at 1060 location near equipment hatch: (a) 

thinning deformation in weld HAZ in SPV490 alloy plate with weld fusion zone at right side; (b) 

view to right of (a) showing weld fusion zone and HAZ of 17.5-mm-SPV490 reinforcement plate ......... 9-17 

9.15 Microstructure of necked region (sample SCV-106-2) at 1060 location near equipment hatch: (a) 

thinning deformation at base metal and weld HAZ in SPV490 alloy plate with weld fusion zone at 

right side; (b) view to right of (a) showing weld fusion zone and HAZ of 17.5-mm-SPV490 

reinforcem ent plate .................................................................................................................................... 9-18 

9.16 Local shearing associated in Sample SCV-74-2 with tearing near inner and outer surfaces near tear 

initiation site, and typical of the entire tear away from the initiation site, 100x ........................................ 9-19 

9.17 Relative absence of local shearing below the tear surface in the interior of Sample SCV-74-2 

denotes the actual tear initiation site, 100x ................................................................................................ 9-19 

9.18 Microstructure of Sample SCV-21. The neck in the vessel wall was located at the left side of the 

bottom of the hole in this view .................................................................................................................. 9-20 

9.19 Cross-sectional microstructure of vertical weld at 340' location between plates of 9 mm SPV490 

steel, Sample SCV-340: (a) plate material at left, necked HAZ at center, and weld fusion zone at 

right; (b) weld area to right of (a) showing, left to right, weld fusion zone, slightly necked HAZ, and 

9 m m plate ................................................................................................................................................. 9-2 1 

Tables 

4.1 Instruments Installed on SCV Model for High Pressure Test ...................................................................... 4-3 

9.1 Compositions and Properties of SCV Steel Alloys ...................................................................................... 9-2 

9.2 Hardness Values for SCV Sam ples .............................................................................................................. 9-4 

9.3 Thickness Reduction Measured in Necked Regions of Each Sample .......................................................... 9-5

ix NUREG/CR-5679
Executive Summary

A cooperative containment research program, co-sponsored and jointly funded by the Nuclear Power Engineering 

Corporation (NUPEC) of Japan and the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research at the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC), was established at Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) in 1991 to continue the research effort 

on containment integrity. This program consists of conducting static, pneumatic overpressurization tests at ambient 

temperature on two scale models of actual containment buildings for nuclear power plants in Japan. The two models 

are the mixed-scale steel containment vessel (SCV) and the 1:4-scale prestressed concrete containment vessel 

(PCCV) models. The high pressure tests provide test data to validate the analytical methodology to predict the 

structural behavior of nuclear containment buildings under pressure loading beyond the design basis accident. 

This report provides a detailed account of all activities in the SCV model test project. The SCV model is 

representative of a steel containment for an improved Japanese Mark II Boiling Water Reactor Plant. The model has 

a geometric scale of 1:10 and a thickness scale of 1:4. The objective of the SCV model test is to obtain measurement 

data of the structural response of the model up to its failure in order to validate analytical modeling, to find the 

pressure capacity of the model, and to observe the failure mechanisms. 

The SCV model was surrounded by a contact structure (CS), which provided a simplified representation of some 

features of actual concrete shield buildings in reactor plants. The gap between the two structures would shrink and 

eventually close in local areas where contact occurred when the model underwent radial expansion under internal 

pressurization. This special arrangement was designed to provide measurement data on load re-distribution on 

contact between the two structures to validate the contact algorithms in finite element codes. 

The high pressure test on the SCV model was conducted December 11-12, 1996 at SNL. After 16.5 hours of 

continuous operation with monotonic increases in pressure, the test was terminated when a leakage was detected and 

the pressurization system at its maximum flow capacity could not maintain the pressure inside the model. The 

maximum pressure achieved during the test was 4.66 MPa (676 psig) or approximately 5.97 times the scaled design 

pressure. Posttest model inspection revealed that the leakage was caused by a large tear, approximately 190-mm

long, along a weld seam at the outside edge of the equipment hatch reinforcement plate. A small meridional tear, 

roughly 85-mm-long, was also discovered in a vertical weld inside a semi-circular weld relief opening at the middle 

stiffening ring above the equipment hatch. 

The model and the contact structure Were instrumented with strain gages, displacement transducers, contact detection 

devices, pressure transducers, and thermocouples. More than 97% of the installed instruments survived the high 

pressure test. All data from the high pressure test were properly corrected, and the complete set of corrected test data 

is included in this report. The equipment hatch area was heavily instrumented with strain gages to record its 

deformation response. Some gages located close to the large tear recorded high strain concentrations and provided 

the qualitative information used to infer the strain history at the large tear. No gages had been placed near the small 

tear that was not predicted in the pretest analysis. The global free-field model responses were provided by the gages 

in the upper conical shell section. The test data registered by these gages, with a maximum strain reading of about 

2%, suggested that the model behaved in an almost axisymmetric manner. 

Detailed posttest metallurgical evaluation was performed to obtain definitive information about the tear initiation site 

and the failure mode and mechanisms. The evaluation was performed on samples that were machined from the 

sections removed from the model. Evaluation results provided critical information about the deformation pattern and 

the failure mode and mechanisms of the two tears and on the strain concentrations in a few locally necked areas. The 

large tear at the equipment hatch experienced strong local necking deformations that occurred in the weld heat 

affected region of the SPV490 alloy plate. Hardness measurements and metallographic analysis indicate that heat 

from the welding process resulted in localized microstructural alteration and reduced hardness and strength of the 

SPV490 alloy plate. The small tear also occurred within the weld heat affected region of the SGV480 alloy plate.

xi NUREG/CR-5679
All material deformation and the two tears observed in the samples were ductile in nature. There was no evidence of 

material flaws, defects, or brittle behavior in the base metal or welds. The tears that occurred resulted from 

exceeding the local plastic ductility of the alloy.

NUREG/CR-5679 xii
Acknowledgments

The Steel Containment Vessel (SCV) project consumed eight years of hard work and concerted effort from many 

people to bring it to its successful completion. The Project Team deeply appreciates their support and cooperation. 

The Project Team acknowledges guidance, support, and encouragement from Drs. Hideo Ogasawara and Kenji 

Takumi, current and former Director and General Manager, respectively, Systems Safety Department, Nuclear Power 

Engineering Corporation (NUPEC) of Tokyo, Japan. The Project Team is also indebted to Dr. James F. Costello, 

Senior Structural Engineer, Structural and Geological Engineering Branch, Division of Engineering Technology, 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, for his continuous guidance and encouragement. 

Special thanks are extended to the engineers at Hitachi Works, Japan, for the design and fabrication of the SCV 

model and to the staff at Chicago Bridge and Iron Services, Inc. for designing, fabricating, and installing the contact 

structure. 

The Peer Review Panel members made a significant contribution to the program's success by their periodic program 

reviews and valuable suggestions.

Xlli NUREG/CR-5679
Acronyms

ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers 

BWR boiling water reactor 

CPOT cable potentiometer 

CS contact structure 

DAS data acquisition system 

DET Division of Engineering Technology 

DOE Department of Energy 

DoR Data of Record 

GPIB general purpose interface bus 

HAZ heat affected zone 

JIS Japan Industry Standard 

LOCA loss-of-coolant accident 

LVDT linear variable differential transformer 

MITI Ministry of International Trade and Industry 

MST Mountain Standard Time 

NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

NSS nuclear steam supply 

NUPEC Nuclear Power Engineering Corporation 

PC personal computer 

PCCV prestressed concrete containment vessel 

PLC programmable logic controller 

PWR pressurized water reactor 

RES Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 

RTD resistance temperature detector 

SCV steel containment vessel

XV NUREG/CR-5679
SEM scanning electron microscope 

SNL Sandia National Laboratories 

UTS ultimate tensile strength 

V&V validation and verification

NUREG/CR-5679 xvi
1. Introduction

The Nuclear Power Engineering Corporation 

(NUPEC) of Japan and the US Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC), Office of Nuclear Regulatory 

Research have co-sponsored and jointly funded a 

cooperative containment research program at Sandia 

National Laboratories (SNL). NUPEC was founded 

in 1976 as the Nuclear Power Engineering Center 

under the initiative of academia and private 

corporations. Supported by the Agency for Natural 

Resources and Environment of the Ministry of 

International Trade and Industry, NUPEC is 

mandated to advance the performance and public 

acceptance of commercial nuclear power plants 

through engineering tests, safety analyses, 

information acquisition and analyses, and public 

relations activities. Within NUPEC, the Systems 

Safety Department is conducting research for the 

integrity of reactor containment vessels during severe 

accidents. Containment integrity tests include 

experiments and analyses of debris cooling 

phenomena, hydrogen combustion behavior, fission 

products transport behavior, and containment 

structural behavior. In addition, this department at 

NUPEC coordinates the cooperative containment 

program with the NRC and manages program 

activities with SNL and other subcontractors. 

The Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) at 

US NRC plans, recommends, and implements 

programs of nuclear regulatory research, standards 

development, and resolution of safety issues for 

nuclear power plants and other facilities regulated by 

the NRC. Within RES, the Division of Engineering 

Technology (DET) plans, develops, and directs 

comprehensive research programs and standards 

development for nuclear and materials safety. In the 

nuclear safety area, there are programs in the design, 

qualification, construction, maintenance, inspection, 

and testing of current and advanced nuclear power 

plants. For materials safety, program activities 

include material characteristics, aging, and seismic 

and engineering aspects of these facilities and 

materials. Within DET, the Structural and Geological 

Engineering Branch has the lead for determining 

structural adequacy of structures and systems and for 

the coordinating and interfacing activities associated 

with the ASME Code Section III. This branch 

coordinates the cooperative containment program 

with NUPEC and manages SNL activities. 

Sandia National Laboratories is a multi-program 

national security laboratory, operated by Sandia

Corporation, a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin 

Company, for the US Department of Energy. Sandia's Nuclear Energy Technology Center has 

provided engineering and scientific support in the 

areas of reactor safety and safeguards to the NRC and 

the DOE for more than 20 years. A significant area 

of support has included analytical and experimental 

efforts to address issues related to severe accidents 

and containment integrity. 

This cooperative containment program builds on the 

combined expertise of these organizations and 

continues to advance the understanding of the 

response of nuclear containment structures to 

pressure loading beyond the design basis accident and 

the ability to predict, analytically, the structural 

behavior. This is accomplished by conducting static, 

pneumatic overpressurization tests at ambient 

temperature of scale models of actual containment 

vessels for nuclear power plants in Japan. NUPEC 

and the NRC formulated the overall scope of the 

program and NUPEC, under the contract by Ministry 

of International Trade and Industry, Japan, is 

responsible for design and construction of the models. 

Sandia is funded by NUPEC to develop and operate a 

facility for conducting these tests, review the model 

designs and provide design support, instrument the 

models and collect data during the pressure tests, and 

report the results of the test. The NRC is funding 

Sandia to perform pre- and posttest analyses of the 

models and to conduct the pressure tests. All funding 

is directed to Sandia through agreements with the 

Department of Energy's Work-for-Others Office in 

the Science and Technology Transfer Division. 

Tests of two containment models have currently been 

authorized under this program. The first test of a 

mixed-scale model of an Improved Mark-II type steel 

containment vessel (SCV) for a Boiling Water 

Reactor (BWR) was conducted in December 1996. 

This report describes the preparations leading up to 

the SCV test, the conduct of the pressure test, and 

presents the results. The results of the pre- and 

posttest' analyses performed by Sandia are reported 

separately (Porter et al., 1996; Ludwigsen et al., 

1998). Preparations are currently (1998) in progress 

for the second test of a 1:4-scale model of a 

prestressed concrete containment vessel (PCCV), and 

the results will be documented in a separate series of 

NUREG contractor reports.

1-1 NUREG/CR-5679
1.1 Background 

Containment vessels in nuclear power plants 

comprise, with the penetrations and other pressure 

boundary components, the final barrier between the 

environment and the nuclear steam supply system. 

The functions of the containment are to: 

1. contain any radioactive material that may be 

released from the primary system (reactor vessel, 

steam generators, piping) in the event of an 

accident; 

2. act as a supporting structure for operational 

equipment. 

For US containments, the design loads and their 

combinations as well as the response limits are 

specified in the American Society of Mechanical 

Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. 

Initially, severe accidents were not part of the design 

basis due to their perceived low probability of 

occurrence, and pressure relief valves were not 

required. In Japan, MITI Directive controls the 

design of containment, and the design standard of 

containment is specified in the MITI Notification No. 

501 and in JEAG4601. Containment buildings have 

been an integral part of commercial nuclear power 

plants in Japan and the United States since the first 

units were constructed in the 1960s. 

With the accident at Three Mile Island in the United 

States in 1979, attention turned to the capacity of 

containment systems beyond their design basis. 

Sandia conducted a preliminary study (Blejwas, 

1982), commissioned by the NRC, to identify some 

experiments that had been conducted to investigate 

this issue but concluded that the scope of the tests and 

the data did not provide sufficient insight into the 

problem. As a result, a program, including scale 

model tests coupled with detailed structural analysis, 

was formulated by the NRC to investigate the 

integrity of containment systems beyond their design 

basis. The primary objective of the NRC program 

was, and continues to be, the validation of analytical 

methods used to predict the performance of light 

water reactor containment systems when subjected to 

loads beyond those specified in the design codes. 

While some insights could be gained into structural 

response and failure mechanisms of actual 

containments, it was also recognized that the 

determination of the capacity of actual containments 

could not be determined solely from tests of 

simplified scale models. The results of this program,

as summarized by Parks et al., (1991) concluded that 

there was significant reserve capacity in the 

containment vessels to resist loads above the design 

basis and that although the analytical efforts were 

encouraging, uncertainties remained about structural 

response and failure mechanisms. 

Remaining uncertainties regarding the response of 

containment structures led to discussions among 

NUPEC, the NRC, and SNL that culminated in a 

1991 agreement to start the NUPEC/NRC 

Cooperative Containment Program. In parallel with 

this cooperative program, there are independent 

efforts sponsored and conducted by both NRC and 

NUPEC. These efforts include investigating the 

response of penetrations (Parks et al., 1991; Lambert 

and Parks, 1994), the effects of aging on containment 

structure capacity (Cherry, 1996), and the seismic 

capacity of containment structures (Nakamura et al., 

1997; James et al., 1997). 

1.2 Scope of the Steel Containment 

Vessel Test 

Nuclear power plants in Japan and the United States 

generally utilize one of two types of light water 

reactor systems, boiling water reactors (BWR) and 

pressurized water reactors (PWR). The containment 

vessels for the boiling water reactors in Japan are 

typically free-standing welded steel shells surrounded 

by a reinforced concrete reactor shield wall. Typical 

of this type of containment is the improved Mark II 

containment vessel. A sectional view of the 

prototype containment is shown in Figure 1.1. The 

improved Mark II is based on the original General 

Electric Mark II containment; however, it features a 

containment volume approximately 30% greater than 

that of the standard Mark II for improvement of 

maintainability of the containment vessel. There are 

no examples of improved Mark II containment 

vessels in the United States. However, the unique 

geometry of the improved Mark II containment, 

fabrication details and procedures, and aspects of 

interaction with the concrete shield building are 

relevant to the severe accident studies of BWR Mark 

I containments in the United States. As a result, 

NUPEC and the NRC agreed on a scale model of an 

improved Mark II BWR containment for the first test 

subject in the Cooperative Containment Program. 

1.2.1 Model Features and Scale 

Consistent with the objectives of the sponsoring 

organizations, the features and scale of the SCV

NUREG/CR-5679 1-2
model were chosen so that the response of the model 

would mimic the global behavior of the prototype and 

local details, particularly those around penetrations, 

would be represented. Because both NUPEC and 

SNL (under NRC sponsorship) were continuing 

component tests of both full-size and scaled 

penetrations, it was decided that the penetrations 

represented in the SCV model, the drywell head and 

the equipment hatch, would be non-functional, i.e., 

they were welded shut and the flanges would be 

represented by continuous structural elements 

(Takumi, 1992). Some non-functional structural 

elements of the SCV model are shown in Figure 1.2. 

It is not very difficult to analyze the wetwell portion 

because of its configuration and the presence of a 

wide gap between the containment vessel and the 

shield wall in the wetwell, and therefore the decision 

was made to model only the upper portion of the 

model. Hence the concrete basemat and the wall

basemat junction were omitted from the scale model. 

Furthermore, the effects of internal structures and 

components were judged to be negligible on the 

structural response of the containment and were not 

included in the model. The model was truncated in 

the cylindrical portion, above the normal height of the 

suppression pool. A stiff ring girder and heavy 

spherical closure head were attached to the model at 

this elevation to complete the pressure boundary. All 

model penetrations needed solely for test purposes 

(e.g., instrumentation and pressurization ports, 

personnel access) were made through this bottom 

head. A comparison of a prototype containment and 

the SCV model is shown in Figure 1.3. 

Finally the scale of the model was chosen so that the 

features and fabrication details of the prototype could 

be reproduced with relative ease, while allowing the 

model to be fabricated in Japan and shipped to the 

test site at SNL via conventional surface transport. 

Considering these criteria, it was decided that an 

overall geometric scale of 1:10, resulting in a model 

roughly 3 m in diameter and almost 6 m tall, would 

allow an adequate representation of the details of 

interest while keeping the model small enough for 

transport. Due to the thickness dependence of the 

material properties, it was also decided that the scale 

for the vessel wall thickness would be 1:4, to utilize 

materials with mechanical characteristics similar to 

the prototype. This "mixed scale" also reduced the 

fabrication and handling difficulties that would have 

occurred with a very thin vessel wall. 

Although this mixed scale would perturb the 

prototypical vessel pressures by a factor of 2.5 (10/4), 

membrane and bending strains in the vessel are

linearly related to pressure; therefore the response of 

the model should still resemble that of the prototype. 

While this mixed scale would affect the buckling 

response of the torispherical drywell head, the 

prototype was designed to preclude buckling at the 

design pressures. 

Finally it was recognized that under severe accident 

conditions of temperature and pressure, the improved 

Mark II containment might make contact with the 

surrounding concrete shield building and respond 

differently than a free-standing model would. It was 

decided to include a contact structure around the SCV 

model that would interact with it in a manner similar, 

although not identical, to the prototypical shield 

building. 

Details of the design and fabrication of the SCV 

model and the contact structure are described in 

Chapters 2 and 3. 

1.2.2 Loading 

By definition, the scope of this program was limited 

to addressing the capacity of containment vessels to 

loads beyond the design basis, the so-called severe 

accident loads. Design accident loads for light water 

reactor containment vessels are typically based on the 

loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) and are defined by a 

"bounding" pressure and temperature transients. The 

term "severe accidents" is used to describe an array 

of conditions that could result in loads, in excess of 

the design basis loads, on the containment. The 

definition of severe accident loads, which is not as 

rigorous as the design basis loads definition, results 

from a consideration of various postulated failure 

scenarios of the primary nuclear system, up to and 

including a complete core meltdown and breach of 

the reactor pressure vessel. The resulting pressure 

and thermal loading characteristics depend on the 

unique features of the nuclear steam supply (NSS) 

system and the containment structure in addition to 

the postulated accident. 

For this test program, it was necessary to decide 

whether both thermal and pressure loads would be 

applied to the model, either separately or 

simultaneously, what the pressurization medium 

should be, and whether the transient characteristics of 

these loads should be considered. Prorammatically, 

the decision to perform a static, pneumatic 

overpressurization test at ambient temperature was 

dictated by risk and cost considerations and previous 

experience.

1-3 NUREG/CR-5679
The effects of severe accident temperature loads on 

the structural response of the containment building 

are primarily limited to (1) the effects of elevated 

temperatures on the mechanical properties of the 

materials and (2) the mechanical loads resulting from 

differential or constrained thermal expansion. The 

effects of temperature on the material properties can 

be determined from standard material tests methods. 

These test results could be incorporated into the 

evaluation of the prototypical containment vessels 

without adding this complexity and cost (in terms of 

generating the thermal environment and protecting 

the instrumentation) to the SCV model test. 

Regarding the stresses imposed by differential 

thermal expansion, there are only a few locations in a 

steel and/or concrete containment building where 

these effects are significant, notably at the junction of 

the containment wall and the basemat or, in the case 

of the SCV model, at the gap between the 

containment vessel and the shield building. Again the 

added complexity and cost of simulating the thermal 

environments to reproduce these local effects was 

judged not to be justified for the SCV model because 

the model penetrations were non-functional. Both 

NUPEC and SNL (under NRC sponsorship) have 

separately conducted tests of full-size and scale 

models of penetrations under combined severe 

accident pressure and temperature conditions to 

address these local effects. Therefore, the decision 

was made to conduct the SCV model test at ambient 

temperature. 

The containment volume during a severe accident 

consists of a combination of air, steam, and other by

products of the accident, including hydrogen and 

particulates (aerosols). Because the primary program 

interest is in the structural response of the 

containment to pressure loads and not measuring leak 

rates (see Subsection 1.2.3), there is no need to 

reproduce the containment environment. Hence, the 

choice of a pressurization medium becomes 

somewhat arbitrary and is dictated by safety and 

operational considerations. Hydrostatic testing is 

preferable from a safety viewpoint; however, it raises 

operational problems and requires protection of 

sensitive electronics and wiring from the water under 

high pressure. Pneumatic testing, while more 

dangerous, does not present any risks that cannot be 

managed cost effectively and does not require any 

unusual measures to protect the instrumentation. 

Nitrogen gas was chosen as the pressurization 

medium for the SCV model tests primarily for 

operational considerations. Fairly large quantities 

could be delivered at the test site in liquid form with a 

limited amount of fixed equipment. Nitrogen gas also

has the advantage of being dry for instrumentation 

considerations, and it allows more accurate estimates 

of leakage rate if a small leak should develop prior to 

termination of the test. 

The design and operation of the pressurization system 

are described in Chapter 6. 

The test plan and conduct of the pressure tests are 

summarized in Chapter 7. 

1.2.3 Response 

The SCV model instrumentation suite was designed 

to measure the global behavior in free-field locations 

of the model and the local structural response of the 

model near discontinuities. Global response 

measurements included both displacements 

referenced to a global or fixed reference and surface 

strain measurements at a regular pattern of azimuths 

and elevations to characterize the overall shape of the 

model. Local response measurements consisted of 

surface strain measurements concentrated near 

structural discontinuities. In areas where membrane 

behavior was expected to dominate the response, only 

one surface of the model, typically the interior, was 

instrumented. Where significant bending could 

occur, both surfaces were instrumented. Both hoop 

and meridional strains were measured. 

Because the representative penetrations were not 

functional in the model and it was not expected that 

the model would exhibit any significant leakage prior 

to gross structural failure (i.e., material separation 

resulting in uncontrolled venting) rigorous leak rate 

measurements were not performed during the high 

pressure test. Therefore, pressure measurement 

requirements were limited to characterizing the 

mechanical response as a function of pressure and to 

control the pressurization rate. While there was no 

attempt to simulate severe accident temperature 

conditions, a limited set of thermal measurements was 

taken to maintain the ambient temperature at near 

steady-state conditions and to correct strain 

measurements for any temperature variations that 

might occur. 

In addition to these quantitative response 

measurements, the response of the SCV model was 

also monitored qualitatively using still and video 

(normal speed) photography and acoustic monitoring. 

The design and implementation of the model 

instrumentation suite are described in Chapter 4.

NUREG/CR-5679 1-4
Performance requirements and features of the data 

acquisition system are summarized in Chapter 5. A 

summary and discussion of the high pressure test 

results are provided in Chapter 8. The results of the 

posttest inspections and metallurgical evaluations are 

summarized in Chapters 9. The corrected test data, 

including a description of the corrections applied to 

the raw data, are included in the appendices along 

with a summary of the acoustic emission data 

recorded during the test. 

One important aspect of the SCV model response in 

the high pressure test is the concept of failure. There 

were no explicit failure criteria defined for the SCV 

model in advance of the pressure test. In the United 

States, the functional failure for the prototypical 

containment is defined in the regulations as 

containment leak rates exceeding 1-1.5% of the 

containment volume per day (Lobner et al., 1990), 

considering maximum offsite dose rates due to fission 

product release to the environment. In Japan, the 

functional failure is defined in design specification 

made by the utility company and not in the 

regulations. This concept of functional failure is not 

meaningful for a test of the structural capacity of a 

containment vessel model, especially when most of 

the operational leak paths have been eliminated from 

the model (Horschel et al., 1993). In the case of the 

SCV model test, the pressurization system was 

designed to allow the model to be pressurized to 

levels significantly above those expected to cause 

local strains in the model to exceed the ultimate strain 

limits of the materials. The test would be terminated 

when the model and the pressurization system were 

incapable of maintaining or increasing the model 

pressure or when the safe operational limit of the 

pressurization system was exceeded. In this report, 

the term failure refers to the operational inability 

to maintain pressure in the model, not functional 

failure of the containment system in terms of leak or 

dose rates. 

1.3 Project Organization 

As noted in the Introduction, NUPEC and the NRC 

are the sponsoring organizations for this cooperative 

containment research program. Programmatic 

authorization to pursue this area of research is 

provided to these organizations by the ministerial or 

executive offices of their respective national 

governments as dictated by statute. Technical 

guidance was provided by panels of expert advisers 

from academia and industry in each country. In 

Japan, the Structural Advisory Committee met

regularly with NUPEC personnel to review the 

program plans and status, while in the United States, 

a special Peer Review Panel provided the same 

support to NRC and SNL personnel. 

Within the cooperative framework agreed on by 

NUPEC and the NRC, NUPEC designed and 

supplied the SCV model (fabricated at Hitachi 

Works, Ltd., a major BWR vendor in Japan) to SNL 

for instrumentation and testing. NUPEC also funded 

SNL to provide programmatic and design support to 

plan and prepare the test site, instrument the model, 

and design and assemble the data acquisition system. 

In addition, NUPEC also provided funding for the 

design (by SNL) and the fabrication (by Chicago 

Bridge and Iron Services, Inc.) of the contact 

structure. NRC funded Sandia to perform pre- and 

posttest analyses of the model and to conduct the test. 

Regular Technical Working Group meetings were 

held in both Japan and the United States, involving 

program personnel from NUPEC, (including its 

contractors), the NRC, and Sandia. The purpose of 

these meetings was to plan and coordinate program 

activities and resolve technical issues. Separate 

meetings were held to discuss administrative issues 

related to cost and schedule. 

Both NUPEC and NRC funded SNL to coordinate a 

Round Robin Analysis effort. This activity consisted 

of inviting other nuclear safety research organizations 

from government, industry and academia in the 

United States, Japan and other countries to perform 

independent analyses to predict and evaluate the 

response of the SCV model. SNL acted as the focal 

point for this effort in terms of disseminating and 

consolidating the work of the participating 

organizations. Six independent organizations in 

addition to NUPEC and SNL participated in this 

effort, performing pre- and posttest analyses and 

meeting before and after the SCV model test to 

discuss and compare analysis results. The efforts of 

these Round Robin participants are documented in 

separate NUREG Contractor Reports (Luk and 

Klamerus, 1996; 1998). 

1.4 Project Schedule 

The SCV model test project commenced in June 

1991. The model designed by NUPEC was 

fabricated at the Hitachi Works in Japan in 1994 and 

delivered to the Containment Technology Test 

Facility-West at Sandia National Laboratories, 

Albuquerque, New Mexico on March 8, 1995. Figure

1-5 NUREG/CR-5679
1.4 illustrates the layout of the test site. The SCV 

model was housed inside the fragment barrier 

(Building 9949). A safety zone consisting of a 

circular area with radius of 304.8 m (1000 ft) was 

maintained and monitored throughout the high 

pressure test. The command center in Building 9950, 

situated about 600 m away from the SCV model, 

served as headquarters for conducting the high 

pressure test. 

The installation of the model into the fragment barrier 

through its roof is illustrated in Figure 1.5. Figure 1.6 

shows the model, with exterior instrumentation, 

inside the fragment barrier. After completing the as

built measurements of the SCV model, the contact 

structure (CS) was designed, fabricated, and installed 

over the SCV model on December 5, 1995. Prior to 

installation of the CS, all instrumentation of the 

exterior of the model was installed, and the 

instrumentation on the inside of the model was 

completed by September 1996. A pretest analysis 

meeting for the Round Robin participants was held in

Albuquerque on October 1-2, 1996 to review the 

predictions by each participant and inspect the model 

prior to the pressure tests. 

A leak and instrumentation test of 0.2 Pd was 

conducted October 3, 1996 followed by a low 

pressure test to 1.5 Pd on November 7, 1996. The 

high pressure test of the SCV model began at 10:00 

a.m. Mountain Standard Time on December 12, 1996 

and was completed at 2:30 a.m. the following 

morning. Six months after the test, the CS was 

removed to allow visual inspection of the exterior 

surface of the model. Sections of the model were 

then removed for the detailed metallurgical 

evaluation. The corrected test data were sent to the 

sponsors and Round Robin participants, and a 

posttest Round Robin meeting was held in 

Albuquerque May 20-21, 1998 to discuss the test 

results and compare the posttest analyses. This final 

test report was completed for publication and 

distribution in December 1998.

NUREG/CR-5679 1-6
Suppression 

Chamber 

Access

-Gap 

Steel 

Containment 

Shell

Figure 1.1 Elevation of an improved Mark II boiling water reactor containment building.

1-7 NUREG/CR-5679
Figure 1.2 SCV model showing that the equipment hatch and the top head flange were welded shut.

NUREG/CR-5679 1-8
0

Figure 1.3 Comparison of prototype containment and SCV model.

1-9 NUREG/CR-5679
200 0

Figure 1.4 Layout of the test site.

NUREG/CR-5679 1-10
Figure 1.5 SCV model installation into the fragment barrier through its roof.

1-11 NUREG/CR-5679
Figure 1.6 SCV model with exterior instrumentation.

NUREG/CR-5679 1-12
2. Design and Fabrication of the SCV Model

2.1 Model Description 

The steel containment vessel (SCV) model is scaled 

1:4 in shell thickness and 1:10 in overall geometry 

from a prototype Improved Mark-TI Boiling Water 

Reactor (BWR) containment structure. A concrete 

shield building surrounds the actual containment. The 

model, weighing 15,800 kg, is 2.9 m in its largest 

diameter and 5.9 m tall, with an enclosed volume of 

about 21 m3. 

The essential features of the SCV model are illus

trated in Figure 2.1. The SCV model is partitioned 

into various sections by means of a top head flange 

and three stiffeners. From the top of the model, the 

model is composed of a top head, a knuckle region, a 

spherical shell section, a conical shell section, a cy

lindrical shell section, and a thickened bottom head. 

The SCV model includes some details of the actual 

containment such as the equipment hatch penetration 

and reinforcement plate, the drywell head, and the 

SGV480/SPV490 material transition location. All 

other hatches, airlocks, and inward penetrations are 

omitted from the SCV model. In addition, the lower 

wetwell and the wall-basemat junction were not in

cluded in the model. Instead, a thick bottom head 

was selected to complete the pressure boundary. All 

internal structures that do not affect the structural 

responses of the model under pressurization are 

omitted from the model. All thickness variations in 

the model occur on its outer surface and the inner 

surface of the model is smooth. The design drawings 

of the SCV model are in Appendix A. 

The SCV model in Figure 2.1 is shown surrounded by 

a contact structure (CS) whose design and fabrication 

is described in detail in Chapter 3. Appendix B con

tains the design drawings for the CS. 

The design pressure of the prototype containment is 

0.31 MPa. The design pressure, Pd, for the model is 

calculated as: 

10 (geometric scale) x0.31 MPa =0.78 MPa (11 3psig) 

4 (thickness scale) 

Figure 2.2 shows the SCV model seated inside a 

shipping cradle prior to its placement in the fragment 

barrier.

2.2 Model Fabrication 

The SCV model was fabricated at Hitachi Works, 

Ltd., Japan. Sections of the model were cold rolled 

and welded along meridional joints to form ring seg

ments. Stiffeners were attached by horizontal welds 

to the interior of ring segments. The middle section 

of the model was completed by joining together all 

ring segments with horizontal welds, followed by the 

welding of the equipment hatch reinforcement plate. 

The top and bottom heads were formed separately as 

single-unit sections. The three sections were eventu

ally welded together to form the model. The design 

drawings of the model are included in Appendix A. 

All weld procedures performed on the SCV model 

were based on the Japan Industry Standard (JIS). The 

welded portions of the SCV model were the same as 

those of the actual containment. The JIS numbers for 

the two steel alloys in the SCV models are: 

SGV480 steel: JIS G 3118 (weld material: JIS Z 

3212 d 5016) 

SPV490 steel: JIS G 3115 (weld material: JIS Z 

3212 d 5816) 

There was no post-weld heat treatment used for any 

weld procedures. Welding the equipment hatch unit 

caused a sizable amount of local radial inward de

pression. This local out-of-roundness was revealed 

through the as-built measurements of the model. 

The integrity of all weld joints was examined by dye 

penetrant tests. A leak-proof pneumatic test at 1.125 

Pd was conducted on the fabricated SCV model by 

NUPEC at Hitachi Works. 

2.3 Material Properties 

The portion of the SCV model above the ring support 

girder consists of two materials: SGV480 steel and 

SPV490 steel. According to JIS specification, the 

SGV 480 steel is prescribed to carbon steel plates for 

pressure vessels for intermediate and moderate tem

perature service in JIS G 3118. SPV 490 steel is pre

scribed to steelplates for pressure vessels for immedi

ate temperature service in JIS G 3115. The nominal 

properties for these two materials are:

2-1 NUREG/CR-5679
0 minimum elongation:

* minimum yield strength: 265 MPa 

"* tensile strength: 480 to 590 MPa 

"* minimum elongation: 17% 

SPV490 steel: 

"* minimum yield strength: 490 MPa 

* tensile strength: 610 to 735 MPa

- 18% for 9 mm thickness 

- 25% for 17.5 mm thickness 

Uniaxial tensile tests were also conducted on speci

mens of the virgin SGV480 steel and SPV490 

steel plates. The specimens were taken from the ac

tual material lots used to construct the model. Tensile 

tests were performed on material taken from 12 loca

tions on the model, with different shell thickness. 

The data on measured material properties are pro

vided in Appendix C.

NUREG/CR-5679

SGV480 steel:

2-2
z

Nomenclature: 

Location Designation 

THD 

KNU 

SPH 

UST 

UCS 

MST 

MCS. 

MCI 

LCS 

LST 

LCYS

Description 

top head 

knuckle 

spherical shell 

upper stiffener 

upper conical shell 

middle stiffener 

middle conical shell 

material change interface 

lower conical shell 

lower stiffeners 

lower cylindrical shell

Figure 2.1 Elevation view of the SCV/CS assembly.

2-3 NUREG/CR-5679
Figure 2.2 SCV model.

NUREG/CR-5679 2-4
3. Design and Fabrication of Contact Structure

3.1 Background 

In the prototypical plant, the reinforced concrete 

shield building surrounds the steel containment vessel 

(SCV). The shield wall is not a uniform axisymmet

ric shell, but a complex arrangement of floor slabs 

and walls that define functional areas. In some areas, 

concentric wall panels are located adjacent to the 

containment vessel, while other areas are open. 

Wherever the shield wall approaches the containment 

vessel, a gap of 90 mm is maintained between the 

structures to allow for thermal expansion of the con

tainment vessel under normal operating conditions. 

Under severe accident conditions, the containment 

vessel could expand and make contact with the con

crete shield wall due to temperature or pressure 

loading or a combination of both. It was concluded 

that the response of a free-standing SCV model might 

differ significantly from the prototypical containment 

vessel partially confined by the shield wall. In addi

tion, one of the test objectives was the validation of 

codes used to analyze prototypical plants, and mod

eling of contact between the containment vessel and 

shield building poses a significant challenge for nu

merical simulations. 

As a result, it was decided to place a surrogate struc

ture representing the concrete shield wall over the 

SCV model to allow an investigation of the contact 

mechanism and provide a more realistic simulation of 

the containment vessel responses. Various options 

for the surrogate structure were considered with re

gard to the difficulties and the associated expenses of 

the fabrication and installation processes. The final 

choice was a concentric, axisymmetric steel shell 

called a contact structure (CS). 

3.2 Design of Contact Structure 

The CS is a bell-shaped structure (Figure 2.1) con

structed of SA-516-70 steel with a nominal thickness 

of 38 mm. This material has a nominal yield strength 

of 258 MPa and a nominal ultimate strength of 476 

MPa. The CS was designed to remain elastic due to 

contact up to 10 Pd. The bottom of the CS was 

welded to the top surface of the ring support girder 

after it was placed over the model, and its top was 

open at the elevation of the knuckle region. The CS 

did not touch the exterior surface of the model at any 

point prior to the pressure test.

The pressurization test on the SCV model was ini

tially planned to be executed in two phases: the SCV 

model as a stand-alone structure in Phase I and sur

rounded by an unstiffened surrogate structure in 

Phase II. The test plan was later revised to conduct 

the pressurization test in a single phase with the CS as 

the surrogate structure. The gap dimension of 18 mm 

was chosen so that it was adequate to meet the origi

nal Phase I test objective and, at the same time, suffi

ciently small for the contact between the SCV model 

and the CS to take place prior to the termination of 

the high pressure test. The fabrication tolerances of 

the SCV model and the CS were also taken into con

sideration in deciding the final gap dimension. 

Prior to designing the CS, the SCV model was meas

ured at 20 elevations along each of eight azimuths at 

450 intervals. Reduction of these measurements (Ap

pendix B) showed that the axis of the SCV model is 

close to the theoretical axis with the maximum devia

tion less than 7.4 mm. The exterior radius of the 

SCV model at each measurement elevation, except 

location # 6 which has a deviation of 7.4 mm, is 

within the specified tolerance of ± 6 mm. 

There were 70 holes, 12.7 mm in diameter, drilled in 

the CS in four arrays, 900 apart. These holes were 

used to measure the gap between the CS and the SCV 

model for aligning the CS during its installation, and 

later to install the contact detection devices to moni

tor the gap closure during the high pressure test. In 

addition, four 50.8-mm depressions were counter

bored into the inside of the CS to allow for continua

tion of strain measurements of the SCV model after it 

had contacted the CS during pressure testing. The 

lead wires of strain gages placed between the two 

structures would most likely be squeezed when local 

contact occurred. Appendix B contains the design 

drawings for the CS. 

3.3 Fabrication and Installation of 

Contact Structure 

The CS was fabricated at Chicago Bridge & Iron 

Services, Inc. The spherical, conical, and cylindrical 

sections of the CS, constructed of SA-516-70 steel 

plates with a minimum thickness of 38 mm, were hot

formed to shape in a hydraulic press. These sections 

were welded together by pre-qualified weld proce

dures. After stress relief, the CS was mounted on a

3-1 NUREG/CR-5679
vertical boring mill for final machining of the inside 

diameter. The mill was programmed to cut the inside 

diameter to the precise shape described on the design 

drawings in Appendix B. The specified tolerance on 

the CS radius of -0 mm and +4 mm at any elevation 

was well within the accuracy of the mill. 

As shown in CS Design Drawing No. 2 in Appendix 

B, there is a cutoff plate in the conical section, situ

ated underneath the opening for the equipment hatch 

barrel of the SCV model. This cutoff plate served to 

facilitate the installation of the CS over the SCV 

model. After the CS was placed over the SCV model, 

the cutoff plate was field-welded onto the CS. This 

weld process generated excessive local heating to the 

conical section and caused an extensive amount of 

radially inward depression, with a maximum inward 

movement of 6 mm at one of the measurement openings in the cutoff plate. (Incidentally, this locally 

depressed area on the CS was situated very close to 

the similar depressed area of the equipment hatch on 

the SCV model.) Therefore, the final gap measure

ments still fell within the reasonable range of more 

than 13.36 mm (see drawings in Appendix B). 

After the CS was installed over the SCV model, the 

gap dimension between the CS and the SCV model 

was measured at each of the 70 measurement loca

tions. By design, the gap dimensions at the lowest 

three measurement locations (in the lower cylindrical 

shell section of the SCV model) are much larger than 

the design dimension of 18 mm (see Appendix B). 

The majority of measured gap dimensions every

where else lie between 18 mm and 22 mm. A mini

mum gap dimension of 13.36 mm was recorded at a 

measurement location below the equipment hatch.

NUREG/CR-5679 3-2
4. Instrumentation of the SCV Model

This section provides a consolidated account of the 

instrumentation system on the steel containment ves

sel (SCV) model. It includes a detailed description of 

the types and the location of instruments installed on 

the SCV model and the contact structure (CS). The 

entire instrumentation effort is documented in detail 

in the SCV Instrumentation Plani. 

The selection of the types and the locations of instru

ments was partially guided by the predicted response 

of the SCV model in the pretest analysis effort (Porter 

et al., 1996). 

4.1 Instrumentation Objectives 

A suite of instruments was installed on the SCV 

model and the CS to monitor the response of the 

model during the high pressure test as well as to 

gather data to satisfy the following program objec

tives: 

1. To measure the strain distribution, both mem

brane and bending components, on the interior 

and exterior surfaces of the model; 

2. To measure the displacements of the model, 

relative to the CS and to the bottom head of the 

model; 

3. To measure the gap sizes between the SCV 

model and the CS; 

4. To provide information on the spread of contact 

between the SCV model and the CS; and 

5. To relate all data to the internal pressure loads on 

the model. 

4.2 Instrument Types 

This section discusses the types of data that were 

gathered on the SCV model and the CS during the 

high pressure test. The decision on instrument types 

is based, in part, on the previous containment experi

ences at Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) and the 

pretest analysis predictions as well as the program 

Rightley, M.J. and Lambert, L.D., "SCV Instrumenta

tion Plan," Project Report No. R-SN-S-001, Rev. B, 

Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 

September 1996.

objectives of the experiment. The cost and the rela

tive complexity of instrument installation and data 

acquisition were also considered in the decision proc

ess. 

4.2.1 Strain Measurements 

One of the methods to evaluate the structural behav

ior of the SCV model in the high pressure test is 

through the measurement of local strains over the 

model surface. These measurements were made us

ing standard electrical-resistance strain gages, which 

were installed in selected locations and a variety of 

orientations, to record local model responses as a 

function of the pressure loads. The decision on the 

location and orientation of the gages was based on 

pretest analysis predictions of the model response and 

engineering judgment. 

The selection and placement of strain gages were 

designed to provide information on both global and 

local responses of the model. The global response 

includes deformation in the free field, which is far 

away from any structural or geometrical discontinui

ties, and axisymmetric behavior. In this project, there 

were many strain gages installed on the model to 

measure local responses to capture the maximum 

membrane and bending strain components and the 

steep strain gradients. 

All strain gages, except those around the equipment 

hatch, recorded strains in either hoop (circumferen

tial) or meridional (axial) direction. Around the 

equipment hatch, gages were aligned in a radial man

ner (with respect to the hatch geometry) to provide 

data on the complicated deformation pattern. There 

were strain gages installed on both the interior and the 

exterior surfaces of the model. A few matching pairs 

of interior and exterior gages were placed to provide 

strain histories to calculate local bending moments. 

All exterior gages and their lead wires might be dam

aged at locations where local contact occurred be

tween the SCV model and the CS. There were four 

counterbored holes drilled in the CS to allow con

tinuous monitoring of four strain gages after contact. 

Multi-element strip gages were installed in areas 

where large strain gradients were predicted by the 

pretest analysis. These areas included the top head 

near the knuckle and around the equipment hatch. 

Figure 4.1 shows a typical strip gage configuration. 

The strip gages, which were 10 elements long but

4-1 NUREG/CR-5679
with only five of them wired, had a cross axis com

pensation gage installed immediately adjacent to them 

to allow for posttest correction of the inherent cross 

axis sensitivity errors. There were 17 strip gages 

installed on the exterior surface and 13 on the interior 

surface of the SCV model. Bending moments were 

obtained through the use of single element gages 

mounted to the exterior surface opposite one of the 

strip elements. One of the dilemmas of placing strip 

gages is that these must be mounted on a smooth sur

face, but were targeted to measure large strain gradi

ents that usually occurred around discontinuities with 

rough surfaces such as weld seams. Therefore, the 

strip gages could provide only limited information for 

their intended purposes. 

Another type of multi-element strain gages installed 

on the SCV model was the three-element strain ro

sette gages, designed to measure biaxial strains. The 

rosette gages, shown in Figure 4.2 in the 00, 450, 900 

configuration, were intended to provide membrane 

strain data to determine the principal strains and ori

entation of the principal axes. These gages were in

stalled in areas where bending moments were consid

ered very small, such as the free field midway 

between the stiffener rings. 

Single-element strain gages were used to determine 

local strains both on the interior and exterior surfaces 

of the model in areas where the strain gradient was 

predicted to be small or, as stated previously, to pro

vide complementary data for evaluating bending mo

ments opposite the strip gages. Orientation of the 

single-element strain gages, in either hoop or meridi

onal direction, was based on the pretest analysis pre

dictions. 

4.2.2 Pressure Measurements 

Accurate measurements of the internal nitrogen gas 

pressure in the SCV model at all times during the 

high pressure test were essential for two reasons. 

First, the readings from the pressure transducers 

guided the pressurization sequence of the test con

duct. Second, the history of the pressure data was a 

key component for the integrity of the entire set of the 

test data. 

Two high-accuracy pressure transducers used to 

measure the pressure history of the high pressure test 

were mounted on one of the four support legs at the 

bottom side of the ring support girder. The transduc

ers were connected to the inside of the model with a 

6.35-mm-diameter stainless steel line through one of

the instrumentation feedthroughs (see Figure 2.2). 

Posttest evaluation indicated that the two transducers 

recorded almost identical pressure data. 

4.2.3 Displacement Measurements 

Displacement data were instrumental in providing 

integrated information on the global deformation be

havior of the SCV model. A host of displacement 

measuring devices was used to collect this set of data. 

The most commonly used displacement measuring 

device in this test project was the variable-resistance 

linear displacement transducer (also known as resis

tance potentiometers or rheostats). Capable of pro

ducing displacement data over the expected ranges of 

tens of millimeters, these transducers operated 

through the use of a spring-loaded wire cable 

mounted to a known reference location. The other 

end of the cable was attached to the desired meas

urement location on the model. The baseline zero 

displacement of the cable was recorded prior to the 

high pressure test. The length changes in the cable 

(either extension or retraction) caused by the motion 

of the attachment point were sensed as changes in the 

resistance of the potentiometers. The data were then 

correlated to the linear distance change between the 

anchor point and the attachment point. 

A central support column, rigidly anchored inside the 

model along its axis with attachment to the ring sup

port girder, provided the reference frame for all inte

rior horizontal and vertical cable potentiometers. The 

interior horizontal cable potentiometers were oriented 

radially to measure the local radial displacements. 

One vertical and two horizontal cable potentiometers 

were also installed at the base of the central support 

column to monitor its movements. In addition, exte

rior horizontal cable potentiometers were installed on 

the SCV model and anchored on the inside walls of 

the fragment barrier to provide additional displace

ment data. 

The motion of the central support column was also 

monitored to allow for the determination of absolute 

displacement data. Two inclinometers were installed 

at the top of the central support column to measure its 

tilt along orthogonal axes. The posttest evaluation of 

the tilt data indicated that the rotation of the central 

support column was negligible, so the displacement 

data were not adjusted for this. 

Ten linear variable differential transformers 

(LVDTs), installed through the openings placed in the

NUREG/CR-5679 4-2
CS, were used to monitor the gap closure between the 

model and the CS. The LVDTs operated by moni

toring the change in length of a probe that was inte

gral to the housing of the transducer. An AC input 

signal and signal conditioning electronics were re

quired to modulate the AC output to a DC voltage 

suitable for the data acquisition systems. These de

vices were chosen for the gap width measurements 

because the probe tip, which contacted the measure

ment surface, was free to slide along the surface in 

case in-plane motion occurred. 

4.2.4 Temperature Measurements 

Temperature data of the SCV surfaces were recorded 

to provide compensation to the strain gage data that 

were sensitive to temperature changes between the 

environment in which the gage was calibrated and the 

one in which it was used. All measured strain data 

were compensated for this temperature difference. 

Thermocouples were installed on both the interior 

and the exterior surfaces of the SCV model to record 

the temperature data. Because the temperature sensi

tivity of the strain gages is very small in the range of 

temperatures to which the model was exposed during 

the high pressure test, only a few of these transducers 

were installed. 

4.2.5 Video Coverage 

Internal video coverage of the SCV model was per

formed to observe the large-scale deformation and the 

potential failure of the model at a few selected loca

tions. High pressure compatible video cameras were 

used to gather these data. 

Three cameras were used to monitor the interior of 

the SCV model, two on the top head (with different 

angles and fields of view) and one focused on the 

equipment hatch. In addition, seven standard video 

cameras were used to record the exterior of the 

model, three on the top head, three on the equipment 

hatch and one for an overall view. 

4.2.6 Contact Detection 

Pin-type standard industry microswitches (low volt

age) were inserted through the openings in the CS 

shell to monitor the gap closure between the SCV 

model and the CS. They were set to actuate within 

one millimeter of the inner wall of the CS providing 

an on/off signal to the data acquisition system.

There was a total of 56 contact detectors installed on 

the CS in meridionally aligned rows arranged every 

90". (The LVDTs mentioned in Section 4.2.3 re

placed the contact detectors at 10 locations with azi

muth angles of 0' and 2700.) 

4.2.7 Summary of Instrumentation 

Table 4.1 lists the types and the number of instru

ments installed on the SCV model for the high pres

sure test. 

Table 4.1 Instruments Installed on SCV Model for 

High Pressure Test 

Instruments Number Used 

Strain Gages single elements (meridional 

direction): 121 

single elements (hoop direction): 34 

strips (5 elements): 30 

rosettes: 98 

Pressure 2 

Transducers 

Displace- CPOTs : 66 (55 horizontal, 

ment Trans- 11 vertical) 

ducers LVDTs: 10 

Inclinometers: 2 

Thermo- type K: 11 

couples type T: 9 

Contact 56 

Detectors 

4.3 Data Integrity Verification 

Two types of instrument checking activities were 

performed to ensure the data integrity for the high 

pressure test: (1) instrument continuity checks and (2) 

instrument functionality checks. These checks were 

done at regular intervals beginning with receipt of 

the instruments themselves through the readiness 

demonstration of the integrated instrumentation/data 

acquisition system. The results of these checks, 

documented on standardized forms, are part of the 

formal test record to ensure the data quality and data 

storage viability. 

Functionality verification was based on two methods 

of instrument integrity evaluation. These methods are 

described below.

4-3 NUREG/CR-5679
4.3.1 Instrument Continuity Checks 

Basic continuity checks were performed on a regular 

basis for each instrument. These checks indicated 

whether the active element of any particular instru

ment was still intact after the instrument had been 

transported, handled, installed, and wired. In addi

tion, because the measured resistance of the sensor 

was recorded, any anomalous changes to the electri

cal character of the device became apparent if 

changes in the measured resistivity were observed. 

The record of these checks also acts as a quality as

surance document to maximize the percentage of suc

cessfully installed instruments on the model. 

4.3.2 Instrument Functionality Checks 

Instrument functionality checks were performed by 

actually monitoring the output signal of a particular 

instrument and verifying that signal for a known input 

stimulus. This process required a low level of stimu

lation of the sensor and an estimate of its response magnitude. 

Full functionality checks were performed in the later 

stages of the installation and electrical connection of

the instrumentation to verify the integrity of all wiring 

junctions that were made in the instrument's signal 

path. These checks were especially helpful to ensure 

that the multi-pin pressure feedthrough connectors 

had been wired properly according to the wiring dia

grams for the data acquisition system. In addition, in 

the event that open circuits were observed during the 

initial operation of the entire system, identification of 

the problem's location was greatly simplified by us

ing functionality check results. 

4.4 Summary 

Appendix D lists the instrumentation, including in

formation on the installed location and the sensor 

designation. Appendix D also includes a set of three 

instrumentation drawings that provide the location 

and orientation of the instruments. Locations of the 

interior and the exterior gages are illustrated in the 

first two drawings. The third drawing shows the gage 

locations surrounding the equipment hatch. Appen

dix D documents are sufficient to identify the loca

tion of each instrument and its associated data acqui

sition system (DAS).

NUREG/CR-5679 4-4
Gage ("a" -No11 

(Nearest to reference point)

4 cm

II

Figure 4.1 Strip strain gage nomenclature.

(hoop

(meridional -- 

direction)

Figure 4.2 Configuration and nomenclature of rosette strain gage.

NUREG/CR-5679

U 

UP

A

4-5
5. Pressurization System

The SCV Pressurization System is a computer

controlled gas pressurization system designed to es

tablish and maintain the prescribed pressure and tem

perature in the steel containment vessel (SCV) model 

during the high pressure test 2

. The SCV Pressuriza

tion System consisted of the following components: 

"* high pressure source 

"* valve gallery 

"* heaters 

"* control system 

The high pressure source consisted of a truck with 

liquid nitrogen that was gasified at the truck and 

regulated to a prescribed pressure and temperature. 

The source pressure was specified to be approxi

mately 17.25 MPa (2500 psi), and temperature was 

maintained at about ambient temperature inside the 

fragment barrier (-15°C). The nitrogen truck was 

located near the command post (Building 9950 in Fig. 

1.4). The pressurized nitrogen gas was then piped 

above ground onto the Containment Technology Test 

Facility site and into the valve gallery located adja

cent to the fragment barrier (see Fig. 1.4ý. 

The valve gallery consisted of several valves, a 

flowmeter, and several sensors and was used to con

trol the flow of nitrogen gas. The valve gallery skid 

contained the hookup for the pressure source, a 

pneumatic isolation valve, two pressure relief valves, 

two automatic fill valves, an automatic bleed valve, a 

manual bleed valve, two pressure sensors, two tem

perature sensors and an output line. The nitrogen gas 

was then piped through the fragment barrier wall and 

into the SCV model. The flow of nitrogen gas 

through the valve gallery could be maintained

between 100 and 1500 scfm up to the maximum al

lowable (from a site safety aspect) pressure inside the 

SCV model of 12.4 MPa (1800 psi). 

The high pressure test was conducted in day and night 

time in December when the atmospheric temperature 

might be less than 10°C. The nitrogen gas inside the 

piping might be cooled flowing from the source to its 

entry into the SCV model. Therefore, in addition to 

the gas temperature being controlled at the source, the 

gas could also be heated in the piping prior to enter

ing the SCV model. The piping system consisted of 

an outlet from the valve gallery into a rigid piping, 

through the fragment barrier, to a heater source, 

which contained four 5 kW immersion-type heaters, 

before entering the SCV model. These heaters were 

installed to provide additional heating to the nitrogen 

gas, if needed, to maintain its temperature within an 

ambient range (-15°C). In addition, a backup heater 

was placed inside the SCV model to heat up the gas 

should its temperature inside the model drop below 

the ambient temperature. 

The control system consisted of a personal computer 

(PC) that communicated with a programmable logic 

controller (PLC). The PC and the Pressurization 

System operator were located in the command post, 

and the PLC was installed on the valve gallery skid 

adjacent to the fragment barrier. The PLC read the 

necessary data: the flowmeter, temperature at valve 

gallery and inside SCV model, and pressure in and 

out of valve gallery and inside SCV model. This set 

of data was then sent to the PC. Based on the data 

received and requirements input by the operator, the 

PC sent the information back to the PLC that con

trolled all the automatic valves on the valve gallery, 

and the heaters inside the fragment barrier and the 

SCV model. Schematics of the entire pressurization 

system are shown in Figures 5.1 and 5.2.

2 Klamerus, E.W., "SCV Pressurization System Data 

Package," Project Document No. R-SN-I-006, Rev. A, 

Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, Sep

tember 1996.

5-1 NUREG/CR-5679
Command Post (9950)

Figure 5.1 Control system schematic for SCV pressurization system.

I Isolation 

Nitrogen Gas Supply Valve 

2000-3000 psig 

• Flow Control Ball Valve 

SPneumatic Ball Valve 

S1Pressure Relief Valve

3000 psig 

Set Point

Controlled Manual 

2000 psig Bleed Vent 

S Valve Valve 

High Flow 

Control

Low Flow 

Control

0 Flowmeter SCV 0-1800 psig 

Figure 5.2 Piping and valve schematic for SCV pressurization system.

NUREGICR-5679 5-2
6. Data Acquisition System

This chapter describes the steel containment vessel 

(SCV) data acquisition system (DAS), its software 

and hardware assembly, and specific requirements for 

its performance. The validation and verification tests 

on the DAS were performed to demonstrate its com

pliance with the requirements. A detailed description 

of the DAS is available in the SCV DAS User's Man

ual3 . 

6.1 DAS Scope 

6.1.1 DAS Objectives 

The DAS played an important role in the high pres

sure test. It served to provide data on the model re

sponse to guide the conduct of the test and to assem

ble and store data systematically throughout the test. 

The DAS was required to fulfill the following tasks to 

ensure its proper functioning: 

1. Be fully functional, approved, and verified at the 

time of model testing. 

2. Provide a real-time display of sensor output in 

engineering units to monitor operations. 

3. Be capable of scanning sensor data during pres

sure testing within two minutes, performing sta

bility checks, and storing dynamic and Data of 

Record (DoR) data. 

6.1.2 DAS Requirements 

The primary requirements of the data acquisition and 

display system for the high pressure test were: 

1. To record the output of the instrumentation in a 

minimal noise environment with high confidence 

of accuracy; 

2. To store the raw data in a protected file on re

dundant media during the acquisition; 

3. To allow for control of all pertinent data acquisi

tion parameters during the test; 

3 Rightley, G.S., "SCV Data Acquisition Systems User's 

Manual," Project Report No. R-SI-S-019, Rev. 0, Sandia 

National Laboratories, NM, April 1998.

4. To display data on the monitor, upon request 

during the test, from any instrument or group of 

instruments; and 

5. To provide posttest copies of the data files, in 

either PC or Macintosh format on a convenient 

storage medium. 

6.2 Description of the SCV Data Ac

quisition System 

6.2.1 Hardware Description 

The SCV/DAS hardware configuration is shown in 

Figure 6.1. There were approximately 800 instru

ments installed on the model. Each of these instru

ments was connected to a terminal board by lead 

wires. From the terminal board the signal from the 

instrument was carried to a specific channel on a spe

cific card located in a mainframe. The channel loca

tion defined the general purpose interface bus (GPIB) 

address for the gage, allowing for correct acquisition, 

tracking, and recording of the data from the gage. 

There were several mainframes located in the alcove 

of the fragment barrier. From the mainframes, a fiber 

optic cable carried the signals from all the instru

ments to the data acquisition computer located in the 

command post. The data acquisition computer stored 

the data on redundant media and also made the data 

available to the display computer, which allowed the 

response of instruments to be tracked on a real-time 

basis. The stored data were protected and used for 

posttest data analysis. 

6.2.2 Software Description 

The software that was used to control the data acqui

sition system and to display the acquired data during 

the test was developed through the use of National 

Instrument's LabviewTM software package. The ba

sic building block of LabviewTM is called the virtual 

instrument (VI). A VI is similar to a sub-program or 

a module of code. The data acquisition program was 

made up of multiples of VIs each representing a code 

module with a specific purpose. 

The SCV/DAS software was separated into three 

major parts: the primary program group used to 

gather and store the data during the test, a secondary 

program group used to display the data during the 

test, and a utility group of programs to be used both

6-1 NUREG/CR-5679
before and after the test. These utility routines were 

designed to accomplish the following tasks: 

1. formation of the configuration file and channel 

set-up, 

2. DAS system diagnostics and self-testing, 

3. channel and instrument integrity evaluations, 

4. noise evaluations, and 

5. posttest data presentation and storage. 

6.2.2.1 Software Structure 

The data acquisition software (the primary group) 

required input information in the form of configura

tion files and was responsible for data scanning, im

mediate redundant data storage, and fault limit detec

tion and announcement. 

The data display software (the secondary group) used 

as input the data that had been gathered by the data 

acquisition software. The display software accessed 

not the stored data files on the acquisition computer 

but rather global variables that were shared by the 

acquisition and display computers. This software was 

responsible for displaying the test data on demand in 

the form requested by the user. Several different dis

play modes were developed, including a stability re

view, strain and displacement distributions, and a 

primary graphical user interface. 

The primary responsibilities of the utility group were 

to provide the necessary information on input channel 

configuration to the data acquisition and display 

softwares. 

6.2.3 Data Acquisition Performance Re

quirements 

The DAS was required to read accurately all the data 

channels and to perform specific operations based on 

the readings. The following set of terms was used to 

describe the pertinent qualities of the data acquisition 

system: 

1. sampling time - the amount of time needed by the 

DAS to record one channel of data in a typical 

data scan. This quantity included the time 

needed by the computer to perform data proc

essing and multiplexer switching operations, but

did not include the time to display the data after

wards or to scan channels on another mainframe. 

2. scan time - the total amount of time required for 

the DAS computer to scan all the configured 

channels, excluding any data display or "write

to-disk" commands. 

3. mainframe scan time - the total amount of time 

required for the DAS computer to scan all the 

configured channels on a particular mainframe. 

4. cycle time - the amount of time required for the 

DAS software to perform a complete scan and to 

store the data on specified storage devices. 

5. load penalty - defined as the time penalty in

cuffed in the DAS performance caused by the in

put/output processing requirements. 

6. data of record - all data collected during the scan 

in which the entire test system had been declared 

"static" during one pressure step. These data 

were the final test data because the test is de

signed for static recording. All other data used to 

evaluate the stability of the test system were not 

considered "Data of Record" but were recorded 

and protected in the same manner. 

Based on this terminology, the following set of DAS 

performance requirements was developed: 

1. data acquisition with a sampling frequency of 

greater than 100 Hz, 

2. maximum scan time of less than 90 seconds for 

the entire set of configured channels, 

3. maximum cycle time of 180 seconds, and 

4. maximum load penalty of 6. 

6.2.4 Data Storage Requirements 

To ensure that uncorrupted data were properly stored 

during the test, it was required that the test data be 

immediately stored on two storage devices. One of 

these devices was required to be a removable medium 

(such as a Bernoulli disk). The second device was 

the data acquisition computer's hard drive. Addition

ally, the data were stored in the shared global vari

ables for use by the display computer.

NUREG/CR-5679 6-2
6.3 Software Validation and Verifica

tion Testing 

A carefully planned series of tests was run on the 

DAS software package to ensure that the collected 

data were error free and properly protected after be

ing read by the DAS. This effort, called validation 

and verification (V&V), was structured to allow mi

nor changes to the software to be made in the course

of package development. The entire software pack

age was tested in its final form, and the results of the 

V&V testing were documented before the DAS soft

ware package was used to collect test data. 

6.4 Input/Output File Structure 

Details of the file structure for the SCV/DAS soft

ware package are provided in Appendix E.

6-3 NUREG/CR-5679
-- - Data Report 

Terminal Storage Fl 

BoardDevice 

I • IE--r-'AE o 

Main ramecquisition 

Computer Display 

Computer II 

L 

Data Acquisition System 

Fig. 6.1 SCV/DAS hardware configuration.

NUREG/CR-5679 6-4
7. SCV Pressure Tests

The Steel Containment Vessel Model Test Plan4 and 

the ES&H Operating Procedure 5 describe the tasks 

performed to prepare the steel containment vessel 

(SCV) model for the three pressure tests. These tests 

were conducted in the following order: 

1. leak and instrumentation test (0.2 Pd) (October 3, 

1996), 

2. low pressure test (1.5 Pd) (November 7, 1996), 

and 

3. high pressure test (model failure) (December 

11-12, 1996). 

Each test was conducted in accordance with the test 

sequence described in the SCV test plan. There was a 

pretest briefing preceding each test to ensure that all 

required pretest checklists for all test operations were 

completed. A posttest briefing was held immediately 

after each test to collect all relevant documents gen

erated during the test and the completed posttest 

checklists verifying safe shutdown of the tests. 

The conduct of the three pressure tests is summarized 

in this chapter. Data from the high pressure test are 

described in Chapter 8. 

7.1 Leak and Instrumentation Test 

The leak and instrumentation test was the first pres

sure test on the instrumented SCV model. It was con

ducted October 3, 1996 to verify that the model was 

leak proof and to check the functionality of the in

stalled instruments, the pressurization system, and the 

data acquisition system. The maximum pressure for 

this test was set at 0.2 Pd or 0.172 MPa. 

7.1.1 Test Sequence 

This test consisted of three load cycles as shown in 

Figure 7.1. The first load cycle was a 0.1 Pd test con

sisting of two pressure increments of 0.05 Pd or 0.04 

MPa. The dwell time for each of the two pressure 

4 V.K. Luk, "Steel Containment Vessel Model Test Plan," 

Project Report No. R-SN-S-003, Rev. B, Sandia Na

tional Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, December 1996. 

5 V.K. Luk, "ES&H Operating Procedure - Testing of the 

Steel Containment Vessel (SCV) Model," Project Report 

No. R-SI-S-005, Rev. B, Sandia National Laboratories, 

Albuquerque, NM, December 1996.

stages was 30 minutes or longer for performing all 

system functionality checks. Depressurization fol

lowed this cycle and was done in one step. The sec

ond load cycle was a 0.2 Pd test with two pressure 

increments of 0.1 Pd or 0.08 MPa. There were two 

pressure stages with a dwell time of two minutes 

each. Depressurization followed and was done in one 

step. The same procedure was repeated in the third 

load cycle except that this time the pressure rise of 

0.2 Pd was done in one step. The purpose of the sec

ond and the third load cycles was to check the per

formance of the pressurization system subjected to 

different pressure increments. 

The actual pressurization sequence for the test was 

recorded independently by the pressure control sys

tem and the two pressure transducers installed inside 

the SCV model. Figure 7.2 shows the pressure pro

file recorded by the pressure control system for the 

three stages of the pressurization sequence. The 

readings of pressure profile on the two pressure 

transducers are plotted in Figure 7.3. These trans

ducers produced almost identical pressure readings. 

The temperature of nitrogen gas inside the SCV 

model was monitored by two resistance temperature 

detectors, one just below the apex of the top head and 

the other at the gas inlet in the bottom hemisphere. 

The temperature variations are shown in Figure 7.2. 

The temperature recorded by the upper thermocouple 

was consistently higher than that recorded by the 

lower one. The reason for this temperature variation 

is that the four elements of the robust heater provided 

excessive heating to the incoming gas and the hotter 

gas had a tendency to rise upward. Action was taken 

after the test to modify the software controlling the 

functioning of the heater to moderate and limit the 

heat supply to the incoming gas. 

7.1.2 Pressurization System 

During the first load cycle, a leak was detected at the 

purge valve installed on the SCV model. This valve 

was tightened and the leak stopped. A leak was also 

found at the manual vent valve on the valve gallery. 

The seal inside this valve was replaced after the test. 

In addition, an identical valve was installed in series 

on top of the existing valve. This valve was moni

tored closely during the low pressure test.

7-1 NUREG/CR-5679
7.1.3 Instruments 

The posttest evaluation was performed on the test 

data recorded by all strain gages, displacement trans

ducers, and the linear variable differential transformer 

(LVDT) displacement transducer. The plotted data 

on most instruments appeared reasonably appropriate 

as responses to pressure loading, suggesting that the 

instruments functioned properly. 

The data for the instruments installed at the 43 stan

dard output locations for the Round Robin pretest 

predictions were also evaluated. These data did not 

show any unexpected behavior. 

A few questionable plots were identified, leading to 

an extensive re-inspection of wiring and installation 

of the instruments for these plots. The sources of the 

impaired instruments were found, and the problem 

was then fixed. 

7.1.4 Summary 

The leak and instrumentation test provided the first 

chance to examine the performance of the SCV model 

under pressure loading and to exercise the pressuri

zation and data acquisition systems. All test objec

tives were accomplished. All problems that were 

detected from the data of this test were repaired after 

their root causes were discovered. 

7.2 Low Pressure Test 

The low pressure test was conducted November 7, 

1996. The objectives of this test were: 

1. To detect any leakage on the pressurization sys

tem and the subassemblies of the SCV model, in

cluding bottom head flange, pressure flange and 

feedthroughs at pressures up to 0.5 Pd; 

2. To perform functionality checks on installed in

struments and associated wiring, data acquisition 

system and display computer at pressures up to 

1.5 Pd; and 

3. To execute this test as a dress rehearsal for the 

high pressure test. 

7.2.1 Test Sequence 

The low pressure test was performed according to the 

planned pressurization sequence in Figure 7.4. The 

pressurization sequence was slightly modified to accommodate leak tests to be performed at pressure 

levels of 0.14 MPa, 0.28 MPa, and 0.39 MPa. The 

pressure level of 0.39 MPa was maintained for 60 

minutes to allow test personnel to secure the test site 

and evacuate from it. The actual pressurization se

quence for the test was recorded independently by the 

pressure control system and the two pressure trans

ducers installed inside the SCV model. Figure 7.5 

shows the pressure profile recorded by the pressure 

control system. The readings of the pressure profile 

on the two pressure transducers are shown in Figure 

7.6. 

The temperature of nitrogen gas inside the SCV 

model was monitored by two resistance temperature 

detectors, and the temperature profiles are shown in 

Figure 7.5. The temperature recorded by the upper 

thermocouple was consistently higher than that shown 

by the lower one. Even though the heat supply from 

the heaters was moderated, it was still difficult to 

obtain closer temperature readings from the two 

thermocouples. To reduce the temperature effect on 

the variations of responses of instruments, the tem

perature inside the SCV model, recorded by these two 

thermocouples, would not be allowed to exceed 38°C 

(100°F) at any time during the high pressure test. 

7.2.2 Pressurization System 

No leakage was detected on the pressurization system 

during each of the three pressure levels when the leak 

test was performed. The manual vent valve on the 

valve gallery, which was repaired after a leak was 

found during the leak and instrumentation test, func

tioned well during this test. 

7.2.3 Instruments 

The posttest evaluation was performed on the test 

data recorded by all strain gages, displacement trans

ducers, and LVDTs. The plotted data on most in

struments appeared normal in response to the pres

sure loading, thus indicating that the instruments 

functioned properly. 

7.2.4 Summary 

The low pressure test was conducted November 7, 

1996, and all test objectives were accomplished. Af

ter careful posttest evaluation of data plots for all 

instruments, it was found that all installed instruments 

functioned properly except the two exterior weldable 

strain gages installed on the lower cylindrical shell 

section.

NUREG/CR-5679 7-2
7.3 High Pressure Test

The high pressure test was allowed to proceed only 

after the functionality checks of all operating systems 

were satisfactorily completed because this test was set 

up for a monotonic pressure rise and the cycle of un

loading and reloading was not desirable. The pretest 

briefing, held December 10, 1996, was attended by 

all high pressure test personnel. At the briefing, the 

functions and responsibilities of every member of the 

test team were reiterated, and all pretest checklists, 

excluding a few which needed to be completed on the 

test day, were signed off. The high pressure test was 

conducted December 11-12, 1996. All corrected test 

data are part of this report (Appendix F). High pres

sure test data files are provided in Appendix G of this 

document. 

7.3.1 Test Conduct 

The high pressure test started at 10 a.m. December 

11, 1996 after the pretest preparations had been ac

complished. The test proceeded in accordance with a 

planned pressurization sequence that was divided into 

three stages: 

First stage (0 - ;t4.6 Pd) 

During this stage, the SCV model would expand 

as a stand-alone structure. The model behaved 

essentially in the elastic domain throughout this 

stage. 

" Second stage (;.4.6 Pd) 

This pressure condition was held constant for 30 

minutes to demonstrate the accomplishment of 

the original Phase I- test objective, which was in

tended to make sure that the model behaved as a 

stand-alone structure and that no contact between 

the model and the contact structure occurred 

during this stage. 

" Third stage (ý-4.6 Pd - model failure) 

The model behaved in the plastic domain 

throughout this stage. As the pressure continued 

to increase, so did the time required to arrive at a 

state of steady structural response. Accordingly, 

the incremental pressure rise for each step was 

reduced, and the dwell time during each step was 

lengthened. 

A detailed breakdown of the planned test sequence up 

to 5.52 MPa (800 psig) is shown in Figure 7.7.

The recorded test sequence in the first stage is shown 

in detail in Figure 7.8. In each dwell time of at least 

six minutes, data were collected in every two-minute 

interval, during which critical data were compared 

using the following criterion: 

Q ,-Q ,- At< 0.02 

Qt - At 

where Qr and Qt - & are the data at the current and 

the previous time interval, respectively. The critical 

data set for the stability criterion included all strain 

gages and displacement transducers except strain 

gages on the exterior of the contact structure, and 

gages (cable potentiometers [CPOTs], inclinometers) 

which monitor motion of the central column. The 

decision to proceed to the next pressure increment 

was dependent on the number of critical gages pass ing the stability criterion. Typically, the percentage 

of critical gages satisfying the stability criterion 

should exceed 95% before proceeding with the next 

increment; however, in some instances, the decision 

was made to proceed even though a lower percentage 

of gages passed. All pressure rise steps were set to 

take three minutes to reach an equilibrium condition, 

except a few starting steps that took more time. 

The first stage was completed at an internal pressure 

of 4.2 Pd when the average displacement of four dis

placement transducers (00, 900, 1W80, and 270*) at a 

given elevation reached 9 mm. 

The temperatures inside the model, recorded by the 

resistance temperature detectors (RTDs), were not 

allowed to exceed 38°C (100°F) at any time during 

the test. After each pressure step, when either steady

state temperature reached 32°C (909F), the heaters 

were turned off for subsequent steps until the steady

state temperature dropped to 16°C (60°F). 

7.3.1.2 Second Stage (4.6 Pd) 

The pressure condition of 4.2 Pd was held at a con

stant level for 30 minutes in the second stage (see 

Figure 7.9>. 

7.3.1.3 Third Stage (4.6 Pd - model failure) 

The model behaved in the plastic domain throughout 

this stage. Figure 7.10 shows the recorded test se

quence in this stage. The pressure rise time was kept 

at a minimum of three minutes for each pressure step.

NUREG/CR-5679

7.3.1.1 First Stage (0 - 4.6 Pd)

7-3
The maximum pressure increment was maintained at 

0.1 Pd for each pressure step. 

The dwell time increased with pressure because the 

SCV model took a longer time to achieve its equilib

rium state in the plastic domain. Data were collected 

in two-minute intervals, during which critical data 

were compared using the same criterion described 

before. The next pressure increment was followed 

only after this criterion had been satisfied. The 

maximum strain was monitored very closely every 

where on the SCV model to identify potential failure 

locations. The increase of strain or displacement as a 

function of pressure at critical locations was also 

monitored at all times during the high pressure test to 

provide an indicator of an imminent model failure. 

In addition to the instruments such as strain gages and 

displacement transducers, an acoustic emission de

vice consisting of 24 sensors was installed on the 

SCV model. This device continuously monitored the 

SCV model and provided additional information to 

indicate potential locations of model failure. The 

device and its results generated from the test are dis

cussed in detail in Appendix H. 

7.3.2 Termination of Test 

At about 2:30 a.m. on December 12, 1996, after ap

proximately 16.5 hours of continuous and monotonic

pressurization of the SCV model, rapid venting of the 

model was observed, and the pressurization system, 

operating at capacity (1300 scfm)4 was unable to 

maintain pressure in the model. A decision was then 

made to terminate the test. The maximum internal 

n: .,ure achieved during the test was 4.66 MPa (676 

psig) or roughly six times the design pressure. Prede

termined procedures were followed to depressurize 

the model, to store all test data securely, and to com

plete all posttest checklists. 

A few hours after the test was terminated, safety pro

cedures were followed to enter the fragment barrier, 

to unlock the bottom flange, and to gain access to the 

interior of the SCV model. It was found that a tear 

approximately 190 mm long, developed along the 

weld seam at the outside edge of equipment hatch 

reinforcement plate. This tear might cause the model 

leakage leading to the termination of the high pres

sure test. 

7.3.3 Summary 

The high pressure test of the SCV model was con

ducted December 11-12, 1996. The test was termi

nated when a tear developed at a pressure of 4.66 

MPa (676 psig) or approximately six times the design 

pressure. The evaluation of the data recorded by all 

instruments and the posttest inspection of the SCV 

model are discussed in detail in Chapter 8.

NUREG/CR-5679 7-4
30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0

0

.2? 

0. 

a..

30 60 90 120 150 18 

Time (min) 

Figure 7.1 Planned pressurization sequence for the leak and instrumentation test.

L--j I

.0

0.207 

0.172 

0.138 

0.103 

0.069 

0.034 

0.0

CL 12 0.= 

I0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 

Time (sec) 

Figure 7.2 Profiles of recorded pressure by pressure control system and temperature by RTDs for the leak 

and instrumentation test.

NUREG/CR-5679

tM 

Z 

0.

7-5

0. 

0 I

IL 

I."

f 
0.2

0 .15 ....................... ........................ ......................... .. ...... ............... ... ............. ..... ................ .. -0.15 

a_.. 

I-I 

\a. 

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 

Time (minutes) 

Figure 7.3 Pressure profile recorded by the two DAS pressure transducers measuring pressure inside the 

SCV model for the leak and instrumentation test.

NUREG/CR-5679 7-6
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 

Time (min) 

Figure 7.4 The planned pressurization sequence for the low pressure test.

180 

140 

CD '4 100 

CL 

U, 

U) 

0."92 60 

3OO 9• 

275 

175 -- -Tenperature Top 

12504 

125 

175 2 

150 

214 

2S 

00

0 5000 10000 15000 

Time (sec)

200DO 25000

2 

2 

0

2E

30000

Figure 7.5 Profiles of recorded pressure by pressure control system and temperature by RTDs for the low 

pressure test.

NUREG/CR-5679

1.242 

0.966 

IL 

0.690 

0.414 CL 

0.138 

0.0

20

0

0

C.

0

7-7
1.2

1-.-- PG-I-BHD-2 

0.8 

2 0.6 

(IL 0. 

0 0.4 •• 

0.0 

-0.2 i I I I 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 

Time (min) 

Figure 7.6 Pressure profile recorded by the two pressure transducers for the low pressure test.

NUREG/CR-5679 7-8
200 400 600 800

800 5.52

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0

Time (min) 

Figure 7.7 Detailed breakdown of the planned test sequence for the high pressure test. 

-I 

Ste Chrcteristic: 

-II 

-II 

A = 2 

--

m 

_T_(hold) = 20 psi 9te -- ap)|3miue T:od)=6miue 

F I I I I I I I [ I I I [ I I ! I I L I I

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

4.14 

3.45 

2.76 

2.07 

1.38 

0.69

A3 fA

350 40035 4 

Time (min) 

Figure 7.8 Recorded pressurization sequence for the first stage of the high pressure test.

NUREG/CR-5679

0

4.82 

4.14 

3.45 I. 

2.76 

2.07 . 

1.38 

0.69 

- 0.00 

1000

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

(A

C) .) 

a.

L. 

0.

c. 

1! 

a.

7-9

0
600 , 

550 

500 

450 

250 300 350

Time (min) 

Figure 7.9 Recorded pressurization sequence for the second stage of the high pressure test.

Step Characteristics: 

- AP = 6 psig 

T (ramp) = 3 minutes 

T (hold) = 8 minutes 

-1 1 1 l i lt 1 1

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500

12.42 

11.04 

9.66 w 

8.28 

6.90 

5.52 

4.14

Time (min) 

Figure 7.10 Recorded pressurization sequence for the third stage of the high pressure test.

NUREG/CR-5679

0. 

a)

4.14 

3.80 " 

a. 

3.45 a. 

- 3.11 

400

CD 

0. 

CL

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600

7-10
8. High Pressure Test Data

8.1 Introduction 

The high pressure test was terminated at a pressure of 

4.66 MPa (676 psig) or 5.97 times the scaled design 

pressure. This test produced two tears in the steel 

containment vessel (SCV) model: a large tear along 

the outside edge of a weld seam at the equipment 

hatch reinforcement plate, and a small tear inside a 

semi-circular weld relief opening at the middle stiff

ening ring. There was a large array of strain gages 

installed around the equipment hatch to provide in

formation on the local model deformation behavior 

around the large tear, but no gages were installed near 

the small tear to provide a record of local deformation 

leading to its occurrence (Matsumoto et al., 1997; 

Luk et al., 1998). 

Attention in Section 8.2 is focused on the local high 

strain concentrations and steep strain gradients 

around the large tear. The free-field responses and 

the displacement profiles of the model were examined 

to provide an overall perspective of the global model 

behavior. A detailed discussion of these evaluations 

is presented in Section 8.3. 

More than 97% of the instruments survived the high 

pressure test. Many of the failed gages, consisting 

primarily of gages on the exterior of the model, were 

damaged when the model made contact with the con

tact structure (CS). The raw strain data were cor

rected to compensate for temperature variations and 

cross-axis strains, and the displacement data were 

corrected to account for any movement of the center 

support column to which the displacement transduc

ers were anchored. The data correction process is 

detailed in Appendix F. The complete data record is 

included in Appendix G. 

8.2 Local Model Response Adjacent to 

Equipment Hatch 

An extensive array of single element, strip, and- ro

sette strain gages was installed around the equipment 

hatch to obtain a relatively accurate map of the local 

strain pattern. The network of interior strain gages 

and the location of the large tear are shown in Figure 

8.1. The same mapping of gages and the large tear is 

graphically presented in Figure 8.2, highlighting a 

few critical strain gages around the equipment hatch 

viewed from the inside of the model. A strip gage 

(STG-I-EQH-16) installed adjacent to the upper end 

of the large tear registered a maximum strain of 4.2%,

and the two rosette gages (RSG-I-EQH-12 and -8) 

above it recorded maximum strains of 3.7% and 

2.8%, respectively. The rosette gage (RSG-I-EQH

22) slightly below the lower end of the tear recorded 

a maximum strain of 1.3%. However, the highest 

strain reading, 8.7%, was recorded by a strip gage 

(STG-I-EQH-37) situated at 3 o'clock, just above the 

material change interface. Posttest inspection discov

ered a local thinned area directly below this gage, 

indicating excessive local deformation might occur 

there. Figure 8.3 shows the strain data recorded by 

these gages around the equipment hatch. 

Although the pretest analysis results predicted failure 

in the vicinity of the equipment hatch at pressure lev

els very close to the actual failure pressure, a detailed 

comparison of the calculated and measured strains 

highlights some areas of discrepancy. First, posttest 

observations indicate that the highest strains occurred 

in the higher strength SPV490 shell, below the mate

rial change interface, rather than in the weaker 

SGV480 shell as predicted by the analyses. Second, 

the near-field strains around the equipment hatch 

were almost double those predicted by the analysis. 

Finally, it was a local shell area, detected in the pre

test inspection, whose thickness was about 20% 

smaller than its neighbors, that was the focus of con

cern in the pretest analysis. However, this local thin

ning appeared to have little effect on the response in 

the vicinity of the equipment hatch. 

A small meridional tear, approximately 55 mm long, 

was found in a vertical weld (at an azimuth angle of 

201') inside a semi-circular weld relief opening at the 

middle stiffening ring above the equipment hatch 

(Figure 8.4). It appeared that this small tear, which 

might have occurred first, did not grow, and the pres

surization system was able to compensate for any 

leakage through this tear. This tear had a counterpart 

at a similar, diametrically opposed detail. While no 

tear developed at the opposing location, necking in 

the weld was observed. The pretest analysis did not 

predict any high strain concentrations in the vicinity 

of the small tear, and therefore no strain gages were 

installed there to record the strain history. In the 

posttest analysis effort, a three-dimensional finite 

element model, reflecting the structural details sur

rounding the small tear, was generated to investigate 

the local strain distribution (Ludwigsen et al., 1998).

8-1 NUREG/CR-5679
8.3 Global Model Response 

The global model response was monitored using the 

strain gages at free-field locations and an array of 

interior displacement transducers that measured the 

strains and the displacements, respectively, at several 

elevations along four cardinal azimuths (0°, 900, 1800, 

and 270*). 

The maximum free-field hoop strains ranging from 

1.7 to 2.0% were measured by four exterior gages at 

4.5 MPa (560 psig) at the upper conical shell section 

at an elevation of 2536 mm above the ring support 

girder (Figure 8.5). The strain recording by two exte

rior gages, RSG-O-UCS-9a and -13a was interrupted 

when the gages were damaged by the contact between 

the model and the CS. Hoop strains calculated from 

the displacement measurements (Ar/r) were consistent 

with the strain gage measurements at these locations. 

The narrow range of strain variations suggests that the 

model, excluding the area around the equipment 

hatch, behaved in an axisymmetric manner as ex

pected. 

The hoop strains at the four cardinal azimuths in 

other regions of the SCV model are plotted in Figure 

8.6 for the knuckle region, Figure 8.7 for the spheri

cal shell section, Figure 8.8 for the lower conical 

shell section, and Figure 8.9 for the lower cylindrical 

shell section. The plots of the hoop strains in these 

figures demonstrate that the SCV model deformed in 

an approximately axisymmetric fashion in these re

gions. Figure 8.10 shows the variation of hoop 

strains at the top head region. The four rosette strain 

gages that measured these strain data were placed at 

various radial distances from the model apex. In par

ticular, the gage at 1800 was very close to the edge of 

the torospherical head. This gage might be subjected 

to a dissimilar combination of loading due to its loca

tion, resulting in a different set of hoop strains from 

the other three. 

The spatial variation of displacements at the four car

dinal azimuths at 4.5 MPa is shown in Figure 8.11. 

The displacement profiles were completed by inter

polating the data recorded by the transducers at vari

ous elevations. It should be noted that the displace

ment pattern is fairly axisymmetric with the exception 

of 90', the azimuth where the equipment hatch is lo

cated. The displacements at this azimuth location in 

the lower conical shell section, below the material 

change interface, were much larger than those at the 

free-field azimuths (0Q, 1800, and 270*). This is of 

particular interest in light of the fact that this area was

actually compressed inward during fabrication of the 

model and this was also the area where the large tear 

occurred. 

The spatial variation of displacements as a function of 

pressure at a representative free-field azimuth (2700) 

is shown in Figure 8.12. This figure indicates a dis

proportional increase in radial displacement of the 

model between 3 and 4 MPa, suggesting that global 

yielding of the model might occur somewhere in this 

pressure interval. Observable slow-down in radial 

growth of the model occurred beyond 4 MPa when 

the model made local contact with the CS. 

Additional radial displacement plots at the middle 

and upper conical shell sections as a function of pres

sure are shown in Figures 8.13 and 8.14, respectively. 

The manner in which the plots in these two figures 

and Figure 8.5 started to curve upward at about 2.5 

MPa suggests that the onset of global yielding of the 

model might have occurred as early as 2.5 MPa. Ad

ditionally, it can be inferred from these figures that 

generalized contact between the model and the CS 

began at pressures between 4.0 and 4.5 MPa. 

8.4 Leak Behavior 

The time histories of the pressure transducer, the 

flowmeter, and the two thermocouples during the last 

twenty minutes of the high pressure test are shown in 

Figure 8.15. These time histories may be useful in 

evaluating the leak behavior of the SCV model during 

the propagation of the large tear. The leak rate can be 

approximated directly from the flow rate data when 

the pressure reading remains steady. For the duration 

with unsteady pressure, the leak rate can be estimated 

from the information in this figure. 

8.5 Summary and Discussions 

More than 97% of instruments survived the high pres

sure test. All test Data of Record were corrected for 

posttest evaluation. An extensive network of strain 

gages was installed around the equipment hatch area 

to record the local deformation behavior. Recorded 

data provide a fairly accurate mapping of the local 

response in proximity to the large tear. 

The global free-field response of the model can be 

characterized by the hoop strains. The narrow range 

of variation of these strains at a given elevation sug

gested that the model, excluding the equipment hatch 

area, might behave in an axisymmetric manner in the 

high pressure test. Displacement data indicated that

NUREGICR-5679 8-2
the equipment hatch area overcame an out-of round

ness from a local inward compression caused by the 

welding of the equipment hatch onto the model and 

that it underwent additional expansion, exhibiting 

larger radial displacements than those at the other 

azimuth locations of the shell section.

The high pressure test data were evaluated and com

pared with the pretest analysis predictions (Ludwig

sen et al., 1998).

8-3 NUREG/CR-5679
STG-I-EQH-1

Thinned Area 

(-85mm long) I I

Tear 

(-1 90mm long)I

Figure 8.1 Posttest interior view of the equipment hatch.

NUREG/CR-5679 8-4
(1350) 1 180*

(inside view) Note: All dimensions in mm 

STG: strip strain gage 

RSG: rosette strain gage 

Figure 8.2 Interior elevation of equipment hatch. 

9.00% 

8.00% ! 

:;-RSG-I-EQH-]2a 

7.00% ---MSTG-I-EQH-16b 

STG-I-EQH-37a 

6.00% -+-RSG-I-EQH-Sa 

.RSG-I-EQH-22a 

5.00% __ 

' 4.00% 

3.00% 

2.00% __ 

1.00% ,.-,• 

0.00% . 

0.00 0.50 1.00 1 .0 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.(

Pressure (MPa) 

Figure 8.3 Strain history of a few critical gages around equipment hatch.

8-5 NUREG/CR-5679

0.

00
Above Below 

Figure 8.4 Posttest interior view of the small tear at the middle stiffening ring.

NUREG/CR-5679 8-6
2.50%

2.00% __ __ __ __ _4 i~ iii (0') oN-UUC9 0000 -- RSG-O-UCS-il a(900) 

-*-RSG-O-UCS-13a (1800) 

1.50% RSG--UCS- .. A-' ,(2700) 

---- - Analysis @ 90' -S 

--- A-- Analysis @ 180_ 

- Analysis @ 270* 

1.00% 

0.50% 

0.00% ... . . . . 

0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 

Pressure (MPa) 

Figure 8.5 Free-field hoop strain at upper conical shell section, elev. 2536 mm.

0.00% r = =.. = 

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00

Pressure (MPa)

Figure 8.6 Hoop strain at knuckle region, elev. 3319 nun.

NUREG/CR-5679

5.00

C

5.00

8-7
0.00%__ __+ 

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00

Pressure (MPa)

Figure 8.7 Hoop strain at spherical shell section, elev. 3132 nun.

C

0.50%-o 

0.45% RSG-I-LCS-9c (0 degrees) 

0.40%: -RSG-I-LCS-10c(180degrees) -_______ 

0.35% 

0.30% 

0.25% 

0.20% 

__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ __ _

0.10%

0.05% j 

0.00% 

0.0 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00

Pressure (MPa)

Figure 8.8 Hoop strain at lower conical shell section, elev. 1254 mmn.

NUREG/CR-5679 8

5.00

5.00

8-8
CD

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 

Pressure (MPa) 

Figure 8.9 Hoop strain at lower cylindrical shell section, elev. 500 mm.

-0.40% 

0.00

-RSG-O-THD-3a (90 degrees) 

RSG-O-THD-5a (0 degrees) 

4 RSG-O-THD-9a (180 degrees) 

-RSG-O-THD-7a (270 degrees) 

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00

5.00

5.00

Pressure (MPa)

Figure 8.10 Hoop strain at top head region.

NUREG/CR-5679

_C

8-9
1600.00

1400.00 

1200.00 

E 1000.00 

E 800.00 

- 600.00 

400.00

200.00 

0.00 L 

0.00

1800.00 

1600.00 

1400.00 

E 

. 1200.00 

1000.00 

S800.00 

600.00 

400.00 7 

200.00 

0.00 

0.00

500.00 1000.00 1500.00 2000.00 2500.00 3000.00 3500.00 

Elevation (mm) 

Figure 8.11 Radial displacement contours (10x) at 4.5 MPa.

500.00 1000.00 1500.00 2000.00 2500.00 3000.00 3500.00 

Elevation (mm)

Figure 8.12 Radial displacement contours (10x) at azimuth location of 2700.

NUREG/CR-5679 8-10
25.00 

S20.00 

1 15.00 

10.00 

5.00 

0.00 

0.0 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 

Pressure (MPa)

Figure 8.13 Radial displacements at middle conical shell section, elev. 1850 mm.

0.00 &A 

0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 

Pressure (MPa)

Figure 8.14 Radial displacements at upper conical shell section, elev. 2536 mm.

NUREG/CR-5679

30.00

0.50 1.00 1.50

--.- HCP-I-MCS-4 (0&) 

--u-HCP-I-MCS-5 (900) 

---- HCP-I-MCS-6 (1800) 

- HCP-I-MCS-7 (2700) 

e 90_ - •80° 

"°-270' 

.1,-4

.cl

0

2 

2 

a

25.00 

20.00 

15.00 

10.00 

5.00

8-11
4.4 

4.3

70

2:14 2:15 2:16 2:17 2:18 2:19 2:20 2:21 2:22 2:23 2:24 

Time of Day (h:m) December 12,1996 

Figure 8.15 Time histories of pressure transducer, flowmeter, and thermocouples in the last twenty 

minutes of the high pressure test.

NUREG/CR-5679 8-12
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

8-13 NUREG/CR-5679
8. High Pressure Test Data ..................................................................................................................................... 8-1 

8.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 8-1 

8.2 Local M odel Response Adjacent to Equipment Hatch ..................................................................... 8-1 

8.3 Global Model Response .................................................................................................................... 8-2 

8.4 Leak Behavior ................................................................................................................................... 8-2 

8.5 Summary and Discussions ................................................................................................................ 8-2 

Figure 8.1 Posttest interior view of the equipment hatch .......................................................................................... 8-4 

Figure 8.2 Interior elevation of equipment hatch ...................................................................................................... 8-5 

Figure 8.3 Strain history of a few critical gages around equipment hatch ................................................................. 8-5 

Figure 8.4 Posttest interior view of the small tear at the middle stiffening ring ........................................................ 8-6 

Figure 8.5 Free-field hoop strain at upper conical shell section, elev. 2536 nm ...................................................... 8-7 

Figure 8.6 Hoop strain at knuckle region, elev. 3319 mm ........................................................................................ 8-7 

Figure 8.7 Hoop strain at spherical shell section, elev. 3132 mm ............................................................................. 8-8 

Figure 8.8 Hoop strain at lower conical shell section, elev. 1254 mm ...................................................................... 8-8 

Figure 8.9 Hoop strain at lower cylindrical shell section, elev. 500 mm .................................................................. 8-9 

Figure 8.10 Hoop strain at top head region ............................................................................................................... 8-9 

Figure 8.11 Radial displacement contours (lOx) at 4.5 M Pa .................................................................................. 8-10 

Figure 8.12 Radial displacement contours (10x) at azimuth location of 2700. ...................................................... 8-10 

Figure 8.13 Radial displacements at middle conical shell section, elev. 1850 mm ...................... 8-11 

Figure 8.14 Radial displacements at upper conical shell section, elev. 2536 mm ................................................... 8-11 

Figure 8.15 Time histories of pressure transducer, flowmeter, and thermocouples in the last twenty 

minutes of the high pressure test ................................................................................................................ 8-12 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ................................................................................................... 8-13

NUREG/CR-5679 8-14
9. Posttest Metallurgical Evaluation Results

9.1 Introduction 

A visual and metallurgical analysis of the steel con

tainment vessel (SCV) model was performed after the 

high pressure test that caused damage at several loca

tions on the model. The purpose of this analysis is to 

determine the extent that the condition and properties 

(such as microstructure, strength, ductility, or flaws) 

of the two steels, SGV480 and SPV490, and struc

tural assembly features contributed to the observed 

damage at each location. This analysis attempted to 

assess, in particular, whether the damage was prema

ture due to any existing conditions in the steel shells. 

The findings from the metallurgical evaluation should 

be evaluated in conjunction with the results of the 

posttest model analysis in order to complete a com

prehensive failure analysis of the model. The details 

of the metallurgical evaluation results are reported by 

Van Den Avyle and Eckelmeyer (1998). 

9.2 Description of Damage and 

Sample Locations 

Three types of localized damage regions were visu

ally observed on the model. These are discussed in 

detail in the following sections of this chapter. The 

damage locations and the approximate sizes of sec

tions cut from the model are shown in Figure 9.1. 

I. At the equipment hatch, a tear formed at the 740 

azimuth at the junction of the hatch reinforce

ment plate and the 9-mm-thick SPV490 steel 

plate at the lower conical shell section. Symmet

rically on the other side of the hatch at the 1060 

location, a localized neck formed at the similar 

position (Figure 9.2). 

2. Damage occurred at two locations 180' apart, 

associated with the middle stiffening ring. A tear 

formed in the model wall next to a weld relief 

opening in the stiffening ring (Figure 9.3) at po

sition 2010, and a local neck formed at the simi

lar location at 21 . 

3. Local necks formed within the vertical weld lines 

at the 160' and 3400 positions in the lower coni

cal shell section (Figure 9.4). These necks and 

other areas of local deformation were visible on 

the exterior surface of the model where the paint 

coating cracked.

9.2.1 Tear and Deformation at the 

Equipment Hatch 

The tear at the 740 position near the equipment hatch 

was approximately 190 mm long, with an additional 

several centimeters of localized necking extending 

from either end of the tear (Figure 9.5). The local 

deformation is evident from the cracked paint. An 

interior view of the same tear is shown in Figure 9.6. 

Three samples were cut from the area of the tear for 

metallurgical analysis. These samples included SCV

74-1 and SCV-74-3, which came from the untom 

locally deformed regions on either end of the tear, 

and were mounted and sectioned to examine the de

formation and local microstructures. Sample SCV

74-2 spanned the tear, and its fracture surfaces were 

analyzed by scanning electron microscopy to deter

mine the failure mode. 

The structurally equivalent location near the equip

ment hatch at 1060 showed similar localized necking 

deformation, however here the strain was not large 

enough to result in tearing (Figure 9.7). The total 

length of the local deformation was approximately 85 

mm. Two samples were cut from the necked region, 

SCV-106-1 and SCV-106-2. Figure 9.8 shows an 

interior view of the local area around the equipment 

hatch where the deformation appears as offsets in ink 

grid markings in the necked location. 

In both of these locations, the high strain concentra

tion followed the weld seam between the thick (17.5

mm-thick SPV490) equipment hatch reinforcement 

plate and the thinner (9-mm-thick SPV490) model 

shell. In Figure 9.5, the horizontal measurement tape 

was placed at the material change interface along the 

line of the horizontal weld seam between the middle 

conical shell section (8.5-mm-thick SGV480 steel) 

and the lower conical shell section (9-mm-thick 

SPV490 steel). Most of the deformation and tearing 

occurred along the weld seam between the reinforce

ment plate and the lower conical shell section; how

ever, the localized strain also was detected across the 

horizontal weld seam into the SGV480 steel shell in 

the middle conical shell section. Sample SCV-74-3 

(Figure 9.5) contained material from both alloys (the 

reinforcement plate and the middle conical shell sec

tion).

9-1 NUREG/CR-5679
9.2.2 Tearing and Deformation at 

Openings in the Middle Stiffening Ring 

The middle stiffening ring (19 mm thick, 55 mm 

wide) was welded circumferentially edge-on around 

the middle conical shell section (8.5-mm-thick 

SGV480 steel). At locations 210 and 2010, 180' 

apart, there are weld relief openings cut out of the 

stiffener ring next to the model wall to accommodate 

the vertical welds joining the steel plates forming the 

middle conical shell section. These openings are ap

proximately semi-circular and 32 mm wide. A tear 

formed in the model wall at the weld relief opening in 

the stiffening ring at location 2010, and a local neck 

formed in the similar site at location 210. The 

tear/local necks are vertically oriented within the ver

tical weld seam. Figure 9.9 shows an exterior view of 

the torn area at location 2010 and the sample SCV

201 that was cut out transverse to the tear direction. 

A similar sample was taken at location 210 (SCV-2 1). 

9.2.3 Localized Deformation at Vertical 

Welds in Lower Conical Shell Section 

Local necks formed within the vertical weld seams at 

the locations 1600 and 3400 that connect the two steel 

shells forming the lower conical shell section (Figure 

9.4). These shells are made of 9-mm-thick SPV490 

steel. A close-up exterior view of this local deforma

tion is shown in Figure 9.10. A sample, SCV-340 

was cut out for metallurgical analysis (Figure 9.11). 

9.3 Microstructures and Properties of 

Steel Alloys 

The compositions, strength, and ductility values for 

several thicknesses of the two steel alloys, SGV480

and SPV490, used to construct the SCV model are 

reported in Table 9.1. Analysis of polished cross

sections of the samples taken from the model showed 

that the two alloy steels were substantially different. 

To characterize the relative strength levels of welds 

and alloy base metal at regions of the SCV model 

where damage occurred, indentation hardness meas

urements were taken on the specimens for metallurgi

cal analysis. The Rockwell B scale was used for all 

hardness measurements, which were calibrated to 

standard test blocks and were taken in the thickness 

dimension of the steel plates. Specimen surfaces 

were ground and polished. The hardness values were 

correlated to the ultimate tensile strength using pub

lished tables for carbon steel (ASM Metals Hand

book, 1967). Base metal hardness measurements 

were typically taken at the edge of the specimen, as 

far as possible from any weld within the specimen. It 

should be noted that the base metal hardness would 

normally refer to metal plate that did not experience 

plastic deformation or any weld heating. However, 

the base metal location might have experienced some 

heating from the weld process in some cases, and was 

likely influenced by the overall plastic strain in the 

SCV model wall in all cases. 

9.3.1 SGV480 Alloy 

This material was found in sample SCV-21 and the 

thinner half of sample SCV-74-3. This alloy was 

specified to have a minimum yield strength of 265 

MPa, 480 to 590 MPa ultimate tensile strength, and a 

minimum elongation of 15-17%, depending on thick

ness. The data shown in Table 9.1 indicate the mate

rial met these specifications

Table 9.1 Compositions and Properties of SCV Steel Alloys 

Alloy Thickness Composition Yield Strength Tensile Strength Elongation 

(mm) (%) (MPa) (MPa) (%) 

SGV480 7.5 0.18 C, 0.23 Si, 1.16 Mn, 403 556 26 

0.007 P, 0.001 S 

SGV480 8 Same as above 389' 532 26 

SGV480 8.5 Same as above 411 560 24 

SPV490 9 0.10 C, 0.24 Si, 1.29 Mn, 710 727 27 

0.002 P, 0.001 S, 0.48 Ni, 

0.03 Cr, 0.17 Mo, 0.04 V 

SPV490 38 Same as above 566 650 45

NUREG/CR-5679 9-2
This alloy's base metal microstructure was found to 

consist of a heavily banded ferrite and pearlite. This 

is typical of a hot-rolled carbon steel. Its Rockwell B 

hardness number was found to be 89.2, suggesting an 

ultimate tensile strength of -610 MPa (ASM Metals 

Handbook, 1967). The average hardness measure

ments are given in Table 9.2; a complete listing of all 

hardness values is given in Appendix I. This is -10% 

higher than the reported ultimate tensile strength 

(UTS) of 560 MPa, indicating that this material expe

rienced net section yielding and a small amount of plastic strain hardening during the high pressure test. 

No undeformed plate was available for hardness 

measurement, since the SCV model experienced 

plastic deformation. 

When welded, the reaustenitized heat affected zone 

(HAZ) transformed mostly to a ferrite and pearlite 

microstructure similar to, but somewhat finer than the 

base metal. A limited number of hardness measure

ments indicated that the heat affected zone was 

slightly harder than the base metal, 92.8 Rockwell B, 

due to the finer microstructure. Based on the ob

served microstructures, it is unlikely that the proper

ties of this material would change significantly with 

variations in section thickness. 

9.3.2 SPV490 Alloy 

This material was found in the thicker half of Sample 

SCV-74-3, as well as in both halves of samples SCV

74-1, SCV-106-1, SCV-106-2, and SCV-340. This 

alloy was specified to have 490 MPa minimum yield 

strength, 610 to 740 UTS, and 18-25% elongation. 

The measured yield and ultimate tensile strengths, 

reported in Table 9.1, are 710 and 727 MPa, respec

tively, for the 9-mm plate material. Strengths are 

substantially lower for the 38-mm plate material (566 

and 650 MPa). 

Base metal hardness measurements from a reference 

plate of SPV490 steel plate, which is not a part of the 

model, showed an average Rockwell B value of 98.8 

+0.07 (Table 9.2). This number compares well with 

an overall average base metal hardness of 97.4 

Rockwell B from the cut samples, correlating to an 

UTS of -733 Mpa, which is consistent with the re

ported UTS of 727 MPa. 

The SPV490 alloy was found to have a much differ

ent microstructure, one typical of low-carbon marten

site or bainite. This most likely was the result of

cooling from the hot rolling (or austenitizing) tem

perature (ASM Metals Handbook, 1990). When 

welded, a much different microstructure was devel

oped in the SPV490 reaustenitized HAZs. These 

HAZs were found to have significantly lower hard

ness, 90.7 Rockwell B in areas that had not been sub

stantially deformed (Table 9.2). The measurements 

of undeformed HAZs were taken on the 17.5-mm

thick plate side of the welds, where the increased 

thickness did not allow plastic deformation. This 

suggests a HAZ ultimate tensile strength of -625 

MPa, which is 100 MPa lower than that of the base 

metal, and near the lower design specification limit 

for UTS. More detailed hardness measurements indi

cated that the lowest HAZ hardness occurred near 

both sides of the boundary of the reaustenitized HAZ 

and the adjacent partially austenitized material, where 

the alloy was completely tempered, but not austeni

tized. These areas of lowest hardness are the logical 

result from the heating of the welding process of the 

model. 

The band of reduced hardness is quite narrow, at least 

in the thick sections; it is approximately 2-3 mm wide 

in the thick (17.5 mm) sections of SPV490 speci

mens. Beyond that the hardness seemed roughly 

equivalent to that of the bulk base metal. The avail

able samples did not permit measurement of the width 

of the decreased hardness band in the thin SPV490 

specimens, where extensive plastic deformation and 

necking occurred. 

The metallurgy of this steel, particularly the con

trolled cooling required to obtain the desired me

chanical properties, makes it highly likely that prop

erties would vary with section thickness. This 

apparently is responsible for the lower strengths re

ported in Table 9.1 for thicker sections of this mate

rial. 

9.3.3 Weld Metal 

Metallographic examination revealed that all of the 

welds were made in multiple passes. Frequently the 

initial passes were made on the inside of the model 

and the later passes on the outside. The hardness of 

the fusion zones (Table 9.2) was found to an average 

Rockwell B hardness of 95.6, with the final fusion 

regions being slightly harder (-97), and the altered 

earlier passes being slightly softer (-94). No signifi

cant weld defects were observed in any of the sam

ples.

9-3 NUREG/CR-5679
Table 9.2 Hardness Values for SCV Samples 

Listed in order are: Rockwell B Hardness Averages, Standard Deviations, and Numbers of Measurements. 

Sample Material Base Metala HAZ Fusion Zone 

SCV-74-1 SPV490 98.1 91.5 95.1 

±1.03 ±1.06 ±1.05 

10 5 5 

SCV-74-3 SPV490 94.2 90.9 92.1b 

±0.39 ±1.80 ±0.96 

5 5 5 

SCV-74-3 SGV480 89.2 92.2c Same as above 

±-f0.15 ±1.49 

5 5 

SCV-106-1 SPV490 97.4 92.1 97.1 

±1.12 ±1.69 ±1.11 

20 5 15 

SCV-106-2 SPV490 97.0 88.6 95.0 

±1.34 ±1.04 ±2.58 

15 5 10 

SCV-340 SPV490 98.0 96.7c 97.6 

+-0.84 ±1.83 _-0.55 

20 10 15 

SCV-21 SGV480 88.8 92.8 95.5 

±1.26 ±0.56 _±0.92 

5 4 6 

SGV480 Avgd 89.0 92.8 95.5 

SPV490 Avgd 97.4 90.7 96.2 

SPV490 98.8 

Reference Plate _--0.07 

10 

a "Base Metal" measurements, except for the SPV490 reference plate, were taken at the far edges of sectioned samples; these 

samples experienced some plastic deformation, and the sample edges might have been heated during welding of the structure. 

b Fusion zone between SGV480 and SPV490; not included in averages. 

C HAZ deformed during pressurization of vessel; it is likely that hardness of material prior to deformation was lower, not included 

in averages. 

d Weighted averages; more hardness measurements were made in some samples than others. See Appendix H.

NUREG/CR-5679 9-4
9.4 Metallographic Analysis of Dam

aged Regions 

9.4.1 Samples from Damaged Region 

around Equipment Hatch 

The SCV model test was terminated when an - 190

mm-long tear developed in the model wall adjacent to 

the equipment hatch at the 740 location. Macro

examination of the fracture surfaces indicated that 

this tear initiated in the 9-mm-thick SPV490 shell 

near where it was welded to the thicker reinforcement 

plate of the same material. The tear extended parallel 

to the weld from this initiation site in both directions, 

one half remaining in the 9-mm-thick SPV490 shell, 

and the other half crossing into the 8.5-mm-thick 

SGV480 shell. The corresponding area on the oppo

site side of the equipment hatch at 1060 location ex

hibited substantial necking, but no tearing. 

Table 9.3 Thickness Reduction Measured in 

Necked Regions of Each Sample 

Sample Material % Thickness Necking 

Reduction and Tear 

Location 

SCV-74-2 SPV490 44.6a HAZ 

SCV-74-1 SPV490 3 8 .4b HAZ 

SCV-74-3 SGV480 41.5' HAZ 

SCV-106-1 SPV490 15.0 HAZ 

SCV-106-2 SPV490 31.1 HAZ 

SCV-21 SGV480 12.8 HAZ 

SCV-201 SGV480 37.8 HAZ 

SCV-340 SPV490 11.9 (side 1) HAZ 

4.2 (side 2) a near tear initiation site 

b just ahead of tear 

Seven samples were examined from the deformed and 

torn regions near the equipment hatch: three from the 

tear initiation region (SCV-74-2 A, B, and C), one 

from each end of the tear (SCV-74-1 and SCV-74-3), 

and two from the necked region on the opposite side 

of the equipment hatch (SCV-106-1 and SCV-106-2). 

Each sample consisted of a thin section of the model 

shell (8.5-mm-thick SGV480 in sample SCV-74-3, or 

9-mm-thick SPV490 in all of the other samples) 

welded to a section of the thicker (17.5 mm) rein

forcement plate of SPV490 which surrounds the

equipment hatch. The thickness reductions measured 

in each of these areas are shown in Table 9.3. It is 

apparent that both materials underwent substantial 

plastic deformation prior to tearing. 

Metallographic examination of all of these samples 

revealed weld fusion zones, adjacent weld heat af

fected zones, and base metal microstructures. These 

are shown in Figures 9.12 through 9.15. In all cases 

necking was found to have concentrated in the weld 

heat affected zone. Eventual failure occurred by a 

-45* shear in the heavily deformed regions. No other 

flaws or provocative microstructural features were 

found to be associated with these failures. 

Figure 9.12(a) shows the torn SPV490 HAZ near the 

lower end of the tear at the 74' location (Sample 

SCV-74-I). This weld connects 9-mm-thick SPV490 

shell on the left to the 17.5-mm-thick SPV490 rein

forcement plate around the equipment hatch. The 

weld fusion zone, with at least five weld passes, is 

shown in Figure 9.12(b); the thicker plate is on the 

right. The necking and subsequent tearing are con

centrated approximately 10 mm away from the fusion 

zone in the lower hardness region of the HAZ. Taken 

near the other (upper) end of the tear, Sample SCV

74-3 shows a similar view of the necked region in 

SGV480 shell in the HAZ of the weld to the equip

ment hatch reinforcement plate (Figure 9.13). The 

samples taken from the necked region on the other 

side (1060) of the equipment hatch have the same 

appearance (Figures 9.14 and 9.15). 

The figures of the SPV490 alloy plate, combined with 

hardness data discussed in Section 10.3.2, provide 

information to estimate the extent of thermal soften

ing of this material away from the welds. The HAZ is 

comprised of two regions: (1) a dark etching reaus

tenitized part of the HAZ below the weld fusion zone, 

etched dark in Figures 9.11 through 9.15, and (2) a 

lightly etched band of reduced hardness next to the 

reaustenitized dark HAZ (measured to extend an ad

ditional 2-3 mm into the thick sections of SPV490). 

The reaustenitized HAZ depth ranges from 4-6 mm 

for both the thin and thick sides of the welds. This 

indicates that the depths of thermal penetration were 

similar for the two thicknesses. Because the band of 

reduced hardness in the metal adjacent to the reaus

tenitized portion (dark region) HAZ is approximately 

2-3mm wide in the thick sections of SPV490, it is 

reasonable to conclude that the reduced hardness 

band in the thinner plate would also be on the order 

of 2-3 mm.

9-5 NUREG/CR-5679
Metallographic examination of samples near the tear 

initiation site (SCV-74-2 A, B, and C) revealed evi

dence of substantial local plastic shear deformation 

below the tear surface near the inner and outer plate 

surfaces (Figure 9.16), but less local sheai deforma

tion in the interior of the model wall (Figure 9.17). 

This suggests that failure initiated internally within 

'the material, rather than at surface defects. 

The tear surface on Sample SCV-74-2 was examined 

in the scanning electron microscope (SEM) to deter

mine tearing crack growth mode and to check for 

flaws or initiation sites. The entire surface of the 

sample was comprised of ductile shear voids, char

acteristic of ductile shear overload failure. No sur

face or subsurface flaws were noted. On these tear 

surfaces with ductile shear void, it was not possible to 

locate individual tear initiation points. The detected 

tear morphology is consistent with ductile overload 

tearing failure, by shear, after the neck formed. 

9.4.2 Samples from Damaged Region in 

Middle Stiffening Ring 

Sample SCV-21 at the 210 location, in the middle 

conical shell section, consisted of two sections of 8.5

mm-thick SGV480 shell vertically welded together 

and then welded to a perpendicular stiffening ring of 

the same material. This ring was designed with an 

approximately 32-mm-wide weld relief opening adja

cent to the inner model surface; the openings were 

over the vertical welds. Deformation of the stiffening 

ring during the high pressure test caused localized 

plastic deformation of the model wall at the opening 

and produced a vertical necked region within the ver

tical weld. 

Sample SCV-21 consisted mostly of weld metal and 

HAZ (Figure 9.18). The sample is aligned along the 

direction of the stiffening ring, and the opening in the 

ring is captured in cross-section. The wall plate is at 

the bottom of the section, with the neck evident at the 

bottom of the opening (the model vertical direction is 

perpendicular to the micrograph). The necked region 

is primarily composed of weld HAZ. The hardness of 

the wall was found to be consistent with that of the 

SGV480 wall material in sample SCV-74-3. The 

measured reduction-in-area in the wall adjacent to the 

cut-out of the stiffening ring is shown in Table 9.3. 

The tear surface of the tear in Sample SCV-201 was 

viewed in the SEM to determine the failure mode. 

The SEM results indicated that the tear formed pri

marily in shear as a ductile overload failure. No

flaws were noted that would have contributed to pre

mature failure. The measured reduction-in-area in the 

wall adjacent to the cutout of the stiffening ring at 

2010 is shown in Table 9.3. 

9.4.3 Samples from Deformed Vertical 

Weld Area in Lower Conical Shell Sec

tion 

Sample SCV-340 consisted of two sections of 9-mm

thick SPV490 plates welded vertically to one another. 

The microstructures and hardnesses of the fusion 

zone, HAZs, and base metal were similar to those 

described previously (Figure 9.19). Deformation was 

concentrated in the HAZs adjacent to each side of the 

weld, because of the low hardness in these regions. 

The reductions-in-area measured for each side of the 

weld are shown in Table 9.3. 

9.5 Conclusions 

1. Strong local necking deformation occurred at two 

locations around the equipment hatch; at one, the 

740 location, a large, stable shear tear formed 

which caused a leak in the SCV model. These 

deformations occurred preferentially in the weld 

heat affected region of the SPV490 alloy plate. 

2. Hardness measurements and metallographic 

analysis indicate that heat from the welding proc

ess resulted in localized microstructural altera

tion and reduced hardness and strength of the 

SPV490 alloy plate. The region of reduced 

hardness adjacent to the weld included the 

reaustenitized (dark etching) weld HAZ, 4-6 mm 

wide, and a narrow zone of reduced hardness 

HAZ, approximately 2-3 mm wide. The weld 

fusion zone was not significantly softer than the 

SPV490 base metal. 

3. A second tear formed in the model wall, at a 

weld relief hole in the stiffening ring, at the 201' 

location where a vertical weld joined plates of 

SGV480 steel. A similar region at 210 location 

formed a localized neck. These deformations 

also occurred within the weld heat affected re

gion. 

4. The microstructure and hardening mechanisms 

present in the SPV490 alloy make it sensitive to 

thermal history from the forming or welding pro

cess. The SGV480 alloy is less sensitive because 

of its simpler microstructure and chemistry.

NUREG/CR-5679 9-6
5. All material deformation and tear observed in the 

samples were ductile in nature. There was no 

evidence of material flaws, defects, or brittle behavior in the base metal or welds. The tears that 

occurred resulted from exceeding the local plas

tic ductility of the alloy.

9-7 NUREG/CR-5679
C.,

UCYS (Stiff. 

S 

UST (Stiff.'

MST (Stiff. 

I 

L 

LST (Stiff. "A" & 

LI 

Top of Rii

%/ Location of Model Tears 

Figure 9.1 Elevation view of SCV model identifying sectioned sample locations.

1o
411 

Necked Tear 

10607 

Figure 9.2 Exterior view of the equipment hatch (after removal of barrel) showing torn and necked are• 

Figure 9.3 Interior view of the tear next to a vertical weld seam inside a weld relief opening in the middle 

stiffening ring.

Is.

9-9 NUREG/CR-5679
Figure 9.4 Exterior view of stretched paint coating along vertical weld seam in lower conical shell section.

'4-3 

74-2

Figure 9.5 Exterior view of equipment hatch showing the tear at 740 and sectioned sample locations.

NUREG/CR-5679 9-10
Figure 9.6 Interior view of tear at location 740 near the equipment hatch.

9-11 NUREG/CR-5679

OE
SCV-1O06-2~ 

"SCV-1 06-1 -

2

Figure 9.7 Exterior view of a local area around equipment hatch showing the necked region at location 106' 

and samples for metallurgical analysis. 

"" I ; 

{r I/i 

Z" o * •r

Figure 9.8 Interior view of a local area around equipment hatch showing the necked region at location 1060.

NUREG/CR-5679 9-12
Figure 9.9 Exterior view of the tear at location 2010 in middle stiffening ring.

1 4 

t 4 

t 

4 4) $ 

V 3, 

Of j I 

.4' '4 1 

1

It' V 

ii 4 4 44 .4 

444'j 44 /$ 

S 1 

0 

4 1 7: 

IlL

Figure 9.10 Close-up of exterior view of local deformation as paint cracks at the vertical weld seam at loca

tion 3400 in lower conical shell section.

9-13 NUREG/CR-5679
Figure 9.11 Sample SCV-340 taken from vertical weld seam at location 340' in lower conical shell section.

NUREG/CR-5679 9-14
(a)

(b)

Figure 9.12 Sample SCV-74-1 near bottom of tear adjacent to equipment hatch: (a) shear tear in lower 

hardness weld HAZ in 9 mm SPV490 wall material, with weld fusion zone on right; (b) view to 

right of (a) showing fusion zone and weld HAZ into 17.5 mm SPV490 reinforcement plate. 

Reaustenitized HAZ areas are dark regions on either side of fusion zone.

9-15 NUREG/CR-5679
(a)

(b)

Figure 9.13 Sample SCV-74-3 near top of tear adjacent to equipment hatch: (a) deformed and necked region 

in weld HAZ of 8.5 mm SGV480 wall material with weld fusion zone on right; (b) view to right of 

(a) showing fusion zone and weld HAZ into 17.5-mm-SPV490 reinforcement plate.

NUREG/CR-5679 9-16
(a)

(b)

Figure 9.14 Microstructure of necked region (sample SCV-106-1) at 1060 location near equipment hatch: (a) 

thinning deformation in weld HAZ in SPV490 alloy plate with weld fusion zone at right side; (b) 

view to right of (a) showing weld fusion zone and HAZ of 17.5-nun-SPV490 reinforcement plate.

9-17 NUREG/CR-5679
(a)

(b)

Figure 9.15 Microstructure of necked region (sample SCV-106-2) at 106' location near equipment hatch: (a) 

thinning deformation at base metal and weld HAZ in SPV490 alloy plate with weld fusion zone 

at right side; (b) view to right of (a) showing weld fusion zone and HAZ of 17.5-mm-SPV490 re

inforcement plate.

NUREG/CR-5679 9-18
Figure 9.16 Local shearing associated in Sample SCV-74-2 with tearing near inner and outer surfaces near 

tear initiation site, and typical of the entire tear away from the initiation site, 100x.

Figure 9.17 Relative absence of local shearing below the tear surface in the interior of Sample SCV-74-2 de

notes the actual tear initiation site, 100x.

9-19 NUREG/CR-5679
Figure 9.18 Microstructure of Sample SCV-21. The neck in the vessel wall was located at the left side of the 

bottom of the hole in this view.

NUREG/CR-5679 9-20
(a)

(b) 

Figure 9.19 Cross-sectional microstructure of vertical weld at 3400 location between plates of 9 mm SPV490 

steel, Sample SCV-340: (a) plate material at left, necked HAZ at center, and weld fusion zone at 

right; (b) weld area to right of (a) showing, left to right, weld fusion zone, slightly necked HAZ, 

and 9 mm plate.

9-21 NUREG/CR-5679
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

NUREG/CR-5679 9-22
10. Summary and Conclusion

After about five years of preparation spent designing 

and fabricating the steel containment vessel (SCV) 

and the contact structure (CS), instrumenting the 

model, and developing the data acquisition and pres

surization systems, the high pressure test on the 

modelwas conducted December 11-12, 1996 at San

dia National Laboratories. The high pressure test was 

terminated, after 16.5 hours of monotonic pressure 

loading, when the pressurization system with its 

maximum flow capacity could not maintain the pres

sure inside the model. The maximum achieved in the 

test was 4.66 MPa (676 psig) or 5.97 times the scaled 

design pressure. 

Posttest inspection revealed that the leakage was 

caused by a large tear, approximately 190-mm-long, 

at a weld seam at the outside edge of the equipment 

hatch reinforcement plate. A small meridional tear, 

about 55-mm-long, was also discovered in a vertical 

weld inside a semi-circular weld relief opening at the 

middle stiffening ring above the equipment hatch. It 

is speculated that the small tear developed at a lower 

pressure than the large tear. Posttest analysis of the 

acoustic emission data partially supports this specu

lation. However, the propagation of the small tear 

was self-arrested, and the pressurization system was 

able to compensate for the leakage caused by it. 

A unique feature of this project is the presence of the 

CS over the model. The CS, representing some func

tions of a surrounding shield building, provided an 

almost rigid structure with which the model made 

contact after the gap between the two structures was 

closed. 

There was a large variety of instruments installed on 

the model and the CS, including rosette, strip and 

single element strain gages, displacement transducers, 

LVDTs, contact detection devices, pressure transduc

ers, and thermocouples. More than 97% of these

instruments survived the high pressure test. An exten

sive array of strain gages was installed around the 

equipment to capture it deformation response. Some 

gages, whose positions were very close to the large 

tear, recorded high strain concentrations and provided 

qualitative information used to infer the strain history 

at the large tear. Detailed posttest metallurgical 

evaluation was carried out to obtain definitive infor

mation on the tear initiation site and the failure mode 

and mechanisms. No gages were place near the small 

tear that was not predicted in the pretest analysis. All 

corrected test data are part of this report (Appen

dix F). 

The posttest metallurgical evaluation produced criti

cal information on the deformation pattern and the 

failure mode and mechanisms of the two tears and on 

the strain concentration in a few locally necked areas. 

Samples made from the sections removed from the 

model underwent different evaluation processes. 

Major metallurgical findings are summarized below: 

"The large tear at the equipment hatch experi

enced strong local necking deformations that oc

curred in the weld heat affected region of the 

SPV490 alloy plate. Hardness measurements 

and metallographic analysis indicate that heat 

from the welding process of the model resulted in 

localized microstructural alteration and reduced 

hardness and strength of the SPV490 alloy plate. 

"* The small tear also occurred within the weld heat 

affected region of the SGV480 alloy plates. 

" All material deformation and tear observed in the 

samples were ductile in nature. There was no 

evidence of material flaws, defects, or brittle be

havior in the base metal or welds. The tears that 

occurred resulted from exceeding the local plas

tic ductility of the alloy.

10-1 NUREG/CR-5679
11. References

Arai, S., T. Matsumoto, M. Goto, Y. Naruse, T. 

Mieda, and H. Yamanaha, "Pressurization Test on the 

Equipment Hatch Model," Proceedings of the 14'h 

International Conference on Structural Mechanics in 

Reactor Technology, Vol. 5, pp. 9-16, Lyon, France, 

August 17-22, 1997. 

ASM Metals Handbook, Desk Edition. 1998. 2nd 

ed., Materials Park, Ohio: ASM International, pp. 

72-73, Table 8. 

ASM Metals Handbook. 10"h ed., pp. 389-423. 

1990. "High Strength Structural and High Strength 

Low Alloy Steels," section "Acicular ferrite/low

carbon bainite steels," pp. 404-405. 

Blejwas, T.E., A.W. Dennis, R.L. Woodfin, and W.A. 

Von Riesemann. Background Study and Preliminary 

Plans for a Program on the Safety Margins of Con

tainments. NUREG/CR-2549, SAND82-0324. Al

buquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. May 

1982. 

Cherry, J. "Analysis of Containment Structures with 

Corrosion Damage," Proceedings of the 2 4 h Water 

Reactor Safety Information Meeting, Vol. 1, pp. 333

352, Bethesda, Maryland, October 21-23, 1996. 

Horschel, D.S., J.S. Ludwigsen, M.B. Parks, L.D. 

Lambert, R.A. Dameron, and Y.R. Rashid. Insights 

into the Behavior of Nuclear Power Plant Contami

nents during Severe Accidents. SAND90-0119. Al

buquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories, June 

1993. 

James, R.J., Y.R. Rashid, J. Cherry, N.C. Chokshi, S. 

Nakamura. "Analytical Prediction of the Seismic 

Response of a Prestressed Concrete Containment 

Vessel," Proceedings of the 1 4th International Con

ference in Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technol

ogy, Vol. 7, pp. 151-160, Lyon, France, August 17

22, 1997. 

Lambert, L.D. and M.B. Parks. Experimental Results 

from Containment Piping Bellows subjected to Se

vere Accident Conditions. NUREG/CR-6154, 

SAND94-171 1, Vol. 1. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia 

National Laboratories. September 1994. 

Lobner, P., C. Donahoe, and C. Vavallin, Overview 

and Comparison of U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power 

Plants. NUREG/CR-5640, SAIC-89/1541. San Diego, CA: Science Application International Corpora

tion, September 1990. 

Ludwigsen, J.S., V.K. Luk, and M.F. Hessheimer. 

Posttest Analysis of the Steel Containment Vessel 

Model. NUREG/CR-6649, SAND99-2954. Albu

querque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. De

cember 1999. 

Luk, V.K. and E.W. Klamerus. Round Robin Pretest 

Analyses of a Steel Containment Vessel Model and 

Contact Structure Assembly Subject to Static Internal 

Pressurization. NUREG/CR-6517, SAND96-2899. 

Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. 

November 1996. 

Luk, V.K. and E.W. Klamerus. Round Robin Posttest 

Analyses of a Steel Containment Vessel Model. 

NUREG/CR-5678, SAND98-2700. Albuquerque, 

NM: Sandia National Laboratories. December 1998. 

Luk, V.K., J.S. Ludwigsen, M.F. Hessheimer, 

T. Matsumoto, K. Komine, and J.F. Costello. "Re

sults of Steel Containment Vessel Model Test," Pro

ceedings of 1998 ASME/JSME Joint Pressure Vessels 

and Piping Conference, San Diego, California, July 

26-30, 1998. 

Matsumoto, T., K. Komine, S. Arai, V. K. Luk, M. F. 

Hessheimer, and J. F. Costello, "Preliminary Results 

of Steel containment Vessel Model," Proceedings of 

the 14th International Conference in Structural Me

chanics on Reactor Technology, Vol. 5, pp. 81-87, 

Lyon,' France, August 17-22, 1997. 

Nakamura, S., Y. Sasaki, K. Horibe, M. Nakajima, K. 

Hoshino, T. Takahashi, T. Hagesawa, T. Kei, T. 

Meida, K. Takigushi, and H. Akiyama. "Plan of the 

Seismic Proving Test for Reinforced Concrete Con

tainment Vessel: Test Plan and Test Model Design," 

Proceedings of the 14'h International Conference in 

Structural Mechanics on Reactor Technology, Vol. 

11, pp. 83-90, Lyon, France, August 17-22, 1997. 

Parks, M.B., H.P. Walther, and L.D. Lambert. "Ex

periments to Determine the Leakage Behavior of 

Pressure-Unseating Equipment Hatches," Proceed

ings of the 11fh International Conference on Struc

tural Mechanics in Reactor Technology, Tokyo, Ja

pan, August 1991.

11-1 NUREG/CR-5679
Porter, V.L., P.A. Carter, and S.W. Key. Pretest 

Analysis of the Steel Containment Vessel Model. 

NUREG/CR-6516, SAND96-2877. Albuquerque, 

NM: Sandia National Laboratories. November 1996. 

Takumi, K., A. Nonaka, K. Umeki, Y. Yoshida, 0. 

Oyamada, H. Furakawa, K. Saito, J.F. Costello, W.A. 

von Riesemann, M.B. Parkes, and R.A. Watson,

"Plan on Test to Failure of a Steel Containment Ves

sel Model," Proceedings of the 5h Workshop on 

Containment Integrity, NUPEC/CP-0120, SAND91

0173, Washington, DC, May 12-14, 1992. 

Van Den Avyle, J.A. and K.H. Eckelmeyer. Posttest 

Metallurgical Evaluation Results for SCV High Pres

sure Test. SAND98-2702. Albuquerque, NM: San

dia National Laboratories. 1998.

NUREG/CR-5679 11-2
Appendix A

Design Drawings of the " 

Steel Containment Vessel (SCV) Model

A-1 NUREG/CR-5679
A Aoosa-o II II 1841

B , 

INSIrDE -\ý

I234-08'.2-

............ r w~ 

8

23i,1F0 434434..8 30 PI044 6,

rn-

Figure A.1 Steel containment vessel (SCV) model - dimensional layout.

LA

--WICT-L 

4GV480 

so

sn 

S 

ovl-fo

V49o 

V48D 

SFVC2B

s.-PL

U-Mý-k

ýPý19D 

-1

Eolls. 

LO -- , 

i-0

4 8 0 

8us3DL. 

MIDR..... 

L. 4 Lq._ 

U ýL, Lol. $M9.

r -------------

C (.:.),$-,)

2 ....... 

4 

3 

117' T 

.I.W. - 1 -4 

111:11'... 4 

22
III -, _____ * 

0*

NNffi ii -

0*

.LITiIU2L

B-B IN' NIS IN2 NISI

270'-

lit S I 

\Vii .... 6NNI.N 

3L1 -4,II

-A - -INN

I, 11.1 IJI 11 

- 7L]IZ 

'N III 1 INN '4 



I4N

G 11- 6 ING0 

-~I -- N -.' -

- Wi 1 

(IJ -- I1I KI AVIJI IN IN NI u.N

VPJNLL1LI-IIJLU * 10 

-N L, L?'N 11 1 iIi( TN 

CNL 010

Figure A.2 Steel containment vessel (SCV) model - middle section.

E~~ŽXiiJ - E~ 

/ýH.WýU 

1\~~J/Q2Hitachi Lt~jI N I 

N ?7 7T

F-,' 

0\
'-'I 

N

CFigure A.3 Steel containment vessel (SCV) model - upper section.
Appendix B

Design Drawings of the 

Contact Structure (CS)

B-1 NUREG/CR-5679
R(((C5A0(I4M An AS ;SI-5 02 1(944- AUC(401 S (4 Kos09i 40.4 35.14(4.. -

- -- -- -1'I I 1 11 50

I IA ((3 M( 0( 05 1930f IM TO 4 )1.&C 01(01191; STIMRL ST445 9(0( -W AII.59 

A

.o .H..

d9ALAA

I3AAAAAIA. 44(91410 44.54)44&444

3,

L 35,l&S(ASA(A .95.355(54 311.55.

clajZ7XZZtZXI 

05)4 IlA 904 40 MS) (

- - ((3 A4 AA4 SCVVESEL 

ASEM0,U (U) * ,.'..UNCLk0SII(O *4': 

Ji SS.UUtOStjttO*,At SI S3PAU-S(4 A34* 45 A tat SASS

Figure B.1 Contact structure (CS) assembly.

IL

p45A

.. - I

I - I

a

a

-:.. .. . ý .-. K:ý : ;ý ' , . ý ." 0 ... ý rO'. - ý .s 1.4. - M 
* ttI1iAt AI'Mll -L"I'C,itItl 

*. A1L t.IMItt S ARE 1t .. 

.50,z. I f on.I 151 I e, Re* toT. It, 'wI 51 mi.11 

l-0 012. V AR 

ORA T VAg 

-2 oz.)

27e[ 

A

%t ICI#~ L t* I

Figure B.2 Contact structure (CS) details.

5111£

. L"D.

I
6L9 -"dD/D g of alN 

•',•.!St" .• ¢,:•'• , . -, 

G 

C,,g 

= . .

. 

-

1 

I 

0 , .• 

.

70 Gr_
WAWA1011 PPII 11101I 1.1414 191111 (4IIIIII I(I 114106146110(611(61IO

z 

0%~

93868545(6 Or4(0. PIS440ANCI48 FRS A IIRI 401TO 50441461 140114119

@8

'35'

27 .946 

23.245 

23 .628 

2DAN1 

23 .248 

_22.9 1 

23 .491 

22 .986

45' 

225' 

246' 

315.

9.6520 

19.666 

19.6139 

19 .584 

19 .481

45' 

'35' 

806' 

725' 

710' 

315'

19.34i_ 

19.314 

19.3:4. 

19.31.4 

I(1.3"14 

11,144

NOTES: 

9. ALL DIMS. ARE IN DECIMALS OF' AN INCH. 

2. INCH TO MILLIMETER CONVERSION: INCHES x 25.40 

3. WORK THIS DWG1.V419TH OWM. NO. SKI AND SK3.

SSU4I. "05 AI9OVIV. 

SLS'SN ey: 4- 27-..9 5

-XA.

Figure B.4 Measurement data on the as-built steel containment vessel (SCV) model.

I- -

04)

61' 

115.

29.385 

79.058 

29 .319 

29.313 

29i,444 

29.585 

2ý9.466 

74.5118-

MINI IRAD. - R-H POINT IAIIMIJIH INAII. - R-11 POINT FAII;;F11 liz. --Til-ly-1111 Film-, -TI

5.3I" I M j6' 53.944 6. 51.311,fl ?.6 

4!1WT15 r31 '' S.f 5401"A" 4* 53.089 45' 51.339 4%.' 11 

WW'lr N51.46 9' 51.429 _____90 .'o 52!LI 154!96I .' 5 9o. 

44305i 5r.32@ il! 135* 57,314 ('1 54 3 66 135 51..114 15 .64 . 4135' 49.16 

1811 186'7!. o 51.415 _1 480' 51.462 5.8186' 514.116 In' S3 .993 S1 I8N 51.161 31 180' 49.341 

7)* W16225' W1.286 58..786 725' 725' 54.661 225' 5.2.911 225' 51.136 225' 49.317 

216' 51.436 216' 51.414 ?t-216' 54.694 216' 152.81? 216' 51.204 210- 49.491 

15 W.51 1 315' 51.398 _315' WA.N6 W4.411 315 315' 52.9.935 315315 4 49.5431 

ANALYSIS( Or IS193JC 181101 If9AN DNili III III 1(9931814.61 60(011(6 

e1016 -r , I [9101911NF A 1 [890IRA. -' MN I [ AZIMUT RAO3HJ46..J -R 1101111 0)168111 IAI. IlR- I019INI A?16811 HAD. -R' POINT AZIMUTH RAO9. - R- POINT AZIMUTH RAO. - R' 0lIN 9196146[RAO. "R' 

a. 41.694 6. 44.5811 4' 43.361 9' 47.111 a. 6 46.92?29626 3S.142 me 32.90~ o 10 *1)a I' (5) 45' 41.145 45 4.6751 0 45' 4324 45' 47.120 45'1 563 L6864 45. 32.611, 

go go 332 9655'1. o 42.721 516'1 41.1 IN 96'. 39.73 96' 35.694 9' 33.041 

W35 41.612 135' 44.645 1 135- 43.218 AEi 135' 42.114 1 115' 48.854 135' 39.614 A 35. 35.A44 1 I3, 37.?316 

18j6- 41.619 t le, 44.694 0 1 K 8 4.483 HIP' 42.241 It186 414.16 486'9.@@HI 35.358 ler 33.o7( 

225* 41.561 227' 44.3 725' 43.349 225' 47.1224 ?75' 41.636 225' 39,155 225' 35.355 225, 33.C

2(' 4,6428' 4.95216' 43.331 716' 42.3 2(6' 46.95 210' 39.6W 216' 35.14421' 3.1 

4.15 132 315' 4454 3 .3( I:15 315' It ,' I6 635 39.164 315' 35,431 315' 32.1i1
1japoW (A3S) PaSSOA )UawUUIB)uo3 jaiaS ;fl1nq-sv Oafl uO Hupp )uattiamSW jo ulaillnpaj Sfl ajniq~

Ol x & n 11A" .M W .H 

* 1011 NYi I II5 X11 I)3 I N1l u1111 S IH ~ 11l 

.I.riILl)r.I I -

_ us_ AUmXIum 

LJm"9 

WAOIIUV NOV 03051

IX mw111 0L -, Summa 4

191,1i IX61 KJ'61 C19'61 O96 0 

oil, ___ 69V___ 1z9,1ee8t 6141 R 

Ito 9,- ill' 9,M .? UI PXX6*4 6116? (DI~ 9h*Yr 'lieil~ 0 MIZ KVIG NIt6 

661. C9r Dal* 6111. 41,1 W)VN t1S1IO 

jar 911(61 fel"Co OpfYf] IWO6 

6616' E909 XI' 1,11 Si'lrlo VM*1 itri s'p (1) 

111,21II vz' Kills 61V11 rS Is X IIs (j1 _________ 161r 61515 OWNR S C19*s (t 

I C N~ ily oXUI 1S9 OWSII Iu's NVlSI los I' -

9W. -IIII !111 9911s 611.. UP1111 XIs lLIXXI" I XXIIIi 9s 111SVV 92z%19 9(s, 'lIIHN VrI'11l*i y VIs.--.-- I HL 

'I.HIH IXIXer [s I!-~LL VW111 pI S V

ID VII IV1NIISN 11111

z

NO Sv M IMININ a INIM III IVWXYH In IVA VVII LA
"MEASUREMENT 0. 90" _80° 

HO13LE 'N ,A (MM) B (MM) A-D (MM) A (8M) I D MM A-B (MM I A 0114) B (MM)

176.35 1 45.44 I 130.71 I 165.86 I 41.48 I 124.:38 I 1.2.52

0

45.64 I 1360 1 16524 - 1 45.11

A-B tIMPit

3 144.48 45.19 99.29 135.33 -11.07 94.26 1110.50 45,59 104.91 153. i2 - 45.11 109.31 

4 114.07 44.45 69.62 105.49 39.34 66.15 120.02 45.57 74.-15 12261 45.14 77AT 

5 63.93 , 44.88 19.05 53,19 39.83 13.36 65.41 43.41 22.00 7003 45.42 24.61 

6 63.60 45.21 18.39 60.60 40:31 20.37 62.94 42.39 20-55 67.06 44.07 22.99 

7 64.14 45.34 18.80 62.00 40.89 21.11 6609 43.36 22.73 

a 66119 45.21 20.98 62.15 39.34 22.81 66.19 42.42 23.77 

9 64.77 - 44.96 19.01 69.06 39.67 29.39 61.26 39.62 21.64 6490 42.47 22-43 

7 45ý2 1 1 4!ý2 I 5.4ý !2 9 20.17 63.83 39.1 Z 24.7FI 62.74 39.47 E3ýý7 ý5,. 2 23.00 3.; 7 2ý 9Z 6,., 4i 2 2 

11 1 67.7 22.35 61.19 37.72 62.2 4. HE 1_2 1 67.79 45.31 1 22.49 58.17 37.52 1 20.65 63.88 39.55 24.33 6386 1 41.61 22.25 

13 1 66.34 45.06 1 21.28 56.39 37.01 1 19.38 63.93 1 39.63 24.00 6.1.11 1 41.33 22.78

70.10 I 44,68 I 25.42 1 62.41 I 44.17 18.24 I 68.50 I 44.32 I 24,18 I 68.25 I 44.63 I 23.62

65.94 1 44.63 1 21.31

63.04 I 44.55 3 18.49

61.75 I 44.65

A 4 t-1t . t tt- .t+AtI VI) --

oVC. *pA.~x P-- -- t~l 'M t tt' t C~tAt s,0 SAY 1"101t C,ttI+p• 

S•IIIK$ {1141.1N ml 

* - I c tl ti P * (VA" 11*11 At lit Pt t(IAI~t *ItP3Iit(

AZ3I1UTH 0'. 184'. 270'tCt + + o..+°..+o. 0.73311 o,. ,1M ,'~Y'jIl4 .2 ...... ,..... ...... SI METRIC UoCA•'•.d( '1.0 -- \ .... 

F B conta-'. ct3!1t .. ..

Figure B.6 Final measurement of gap size between steel containment vessel (SCV) model and contact

structure (CS).

I.

Z 

CA) 

es 

O.,t

14

--I

00

4-

IiJ

I

)

a

P

XD4CIItC Pg£Cl•nq•
Appendix C

Uniaxial Tensile Test Data of 

SGV480 and SPV490 Steels

C-1 NUREG/CR-5679
Table 1. Dimensions of Test Specimens 

D L R P 

(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) 

-14 50 15 60 

-10 35 12 50 

-6 21 10 35 

-4 14 6 24 

-3 11 4 20

L: Gage Length 

R R

TRI-6403-12.-0

C-3 NUREG/CR-5679
z Table 2. Outline of SCV Material Tests

C) 

".0

Location Material Thickness Table Direction Specimen 

(mm) Number Number 

1 S Roll R1, R2 

Top Head Shell SGV480 6 Rectangular T1, T2 

2 Roll R3, R4 

Top Head SGV480 Rectangular T3, T4 

3 Roll R5, R6 

Conical Shell 3 SGV480 7.5 Rectangular T5, T6 

4 Roll R7, R8 

Spherical Shell SGV480 8 Rectangular T7, T8 

5 Roll R9, RIO 

Conical Shell 2 SGV480 8.5 8 Rectangular T9, T10 

6 ,.11 R11, R12 

Reinforcement Ring SGV480 9.5 9 Rectw ,jlar TI l, T12 

7 Roll R13, R14 

Reinforcement Ring SGV480 12.5 10 Rectangular T13, T14 

8 Roll R15, R6 

Reihforcement Ring SGV480 19 11 Rectangular T15, T6 

9 Roll R17, RIB 

Flange, Hatch Cover SGV480 20 12 Rectangular T17, Ti8 

Hatch SLeeve 

10 Roll R19, R20 

Knuckle SGV480 28 13 Rectangular T19, T20 

11 Roll R21, R22 

Cylindrical Shell SPV49 9 14 Rectangular T2 1, T22 

Conical Shell 

12 Roll R23, R24 

Hatch Reinforcement Plate SPV490 17.5 15 Rectangular T23, T24

TRI.6403-013.0
Table 3. Failuie Results of Tensile Test 

Locationl Specimnc- Gage Length Elongation Elongation Initial Dimter Final Diameter Reduction of 

I _ L (mm) Lf '(mm) (%) D (mun) Df (mm) Area (%) 

RI 11.0 15.12 38.0 3.01 1.34 1 20.2 

R-1 |1.0 15.23 32.5 3.01 1.47 76.1 

TI 11.0 15.49 40.8 3.01 1.33 80.5 

"T2 11.0 15.34 39.5 3.01 1.33 S0.5 

R3 11.0 15.17 37.9 3.01 1.50 75.2 

2 R4 11.0 15.20 38.2 3.02 1.51 j 75.0 

""3 11.0 14.78 34.4 3.00 1.52 i 74.3 

T4 11.0 15.03 36.6 3.00 1.54 I 73.6 

R5 11.0 15.22 38.4 3.00 1.36 1 79.4 

3 R6 11.0 15.33 39.4 3.01 1.36 j 79.6 

"T5 11.0 15.39 399 2.99 1.41 77.8 

"""6 11.0 15.24 32.5 2.99 1.36 79.3 

R7 14.0 19.61 40.1 4.02 1.92 77.2 

4 R& 14.0 19.02 35.9 4.02 _ 1.99 1 75-5 

77 14.0 19.20 37.1 4.01 2.02 1 74.6 

TS 14.0 19.38 32.4 4.02 2.07 73.5 

R9 14.0 19.48 39.1 4.01 J .. 1.94 76.6 

5 RIO 14.0 19.99 42.8 4.03 1.94 76.2 

""9 14.0 19.27 37.6 4.03 2.10 72.8 

T10 14.0 19.08 36.3 4.00 2.08 J 73.0 

R1l 14.0 19.64 40.3 I 4.02 I 1.8O 80.0 

6 R12 14.0 19.73 40.9 4.00 1.82 79.3 

T11 14.0 19.40 32.6 4.01 2.09 73.1 7 

T12 14.0 19.22 37.3 4.02 1.99 75.5 

R13 21.0 22.53 3539 6.01 2.90 1 76.7 

7 R14 21.0 28.64 36.4 6.01 2-91 76.6 

"T13 21.0 28.79 37.1 6.02 3.01 75.0 

T14 21.0 28.72 36.8 6.00 2.92 751 3 

RIS 35.0 49.33 40.9 I 10.00 5.16 j 73.4 

8 R16 35.0 48.83 39.5 10.01 T 19 74.1 

T15 35.0 49.00 40.0 10.01 5.15 73.5 

T16 35.0 49.37 41.1 10.00 5.12 73.8 

R17 35.0 49.43 41.2 1.01 [ 5.07 74.3 

9 Ri 35.0 48.82 39.5 10.00 I 5.11 73.9 

T17 35.0 48.21 37.7 10.02 I 5.38 71.2 

T18 35.0 49.16 40.5 10.03 5.34 71.7 

R19 50.0 69.26 38.5 14.01 7.38 72-3 

10 R.20 50.0 I 70.22 474 14.01 ] 7.29 73.0 

T19 50.0 68.78 37.6 14.00 7.54 71.0 

T20 I 50.0 I 68.76 37.5 14.01 1 7.57 70.8 

R21 14.0 I 18.17 29.8 4.02 1.63 83.6 

11 R-2 14.0 12.21 30.1 4.02 ! 1.67 I 82.7 

"712 1 14.0 18.04 f 28.9 4.02 1.52 85.7 

"7-2-2 14.0 -17.90 27.9 4.01 1.64 83.3 

123 35.0 45.50 30.0 10.01 4.36 j 81.0 

2 R24 35.0 45.48 29.9 10.01 4.42 I 80.5 [ 723 i 35.0 45.64 30.4 j 10.01 4.48 I 80.0 

"""2-4 1 35.0 45.71 30.6 10.01 1 4.42 80.5

C-5 NUREGICR-5679
80 

70 

60 

S50 

.40 

-. 30 

20 

10 

0

0 10 20 30 40 50 

Strain ['] 

Figure C. 1. Stress-strain curves for SGV480: thickness 6.0 mm plate, location 1.

.7-

so 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

I0 

0

0 10 20 30 40 

Strain [/]

73

50

Figure C.2. Stress-strain curves for SGV480: thickness 6.0 mm plate, location 2.

NUREG/CR-5679 C-6
0 10 20 30 40 .5.0. 

Strain [%] 

Fieure C.3. Stress-strain curves for SGV480: thickness 7-5 mm plate. location 3.

10 20 30 40 

Strain [/]

- R7 

-R8 

II 7...R

50

Figure C.4. Stress-strain curves for SGV480: thickness 8.0 mm plate, location 4.

NUREG/CR-5679

80 

70 

60 

- 50 

"40 

&-30 

20 

10 

0

so 

70 

60 

50 

40 

"j 30 

20 

10 

0

0

C-7
80

70 

60 

50 

S40 

Cr 

_30 

20 

10 

0 

so 

70 

60 

40 

.30 

20 

10 

0

PR9 

.. .T9 

-... RI0

0 10 20 30 40 50.. 

Strain [A] 

Figure C.. Stress-strain curves for SGV480: thickness 8-5 mm plate, location 5.

0 10 20 30 40 

Strain [%]

R I 1 

LY2 T ----- 71

50

Figure C.6. Stress-strain curves for SGV480: thickness 9.5 mm plate, location 6.

NUREG/CR-5679 C-8
80 

70 

60 

"2 50 

L 40 

Cwn 

Cn 

- 30 

20 

10 

0

0 10 20 30 

Strain F%'!

40 50.

Fig•re C.7. Stress-strain curves for SGV480: thickness 12.5 mm plate, location 7. 

) I I iI~i~ 

II ~~ .. 1 ~ 

I I 

0 10 20 30 40 50 

Strain [%] 

Figure C.8. Stress-strain curves for SGV480: thickness 19.0 mm plate, location 8.

NUREG/CR-5679

- ~ I.

80 

7( 

6( 

" 40 

2=30 

20 

10 

0

C-9
70 

60 

50 • 

30 

20 

0 

0 10 20 30 40 50"

Strain [o] 

Figure C.9. Stess-strain curves for SGV480: thickness 20.0 mm plate, location 9.

so 

70 

60 

50 

40 

-30 

20 

10 

0

0 10 20 30 

Strain [%]

40 50

Figure C. 10. Stress-strain curves for SGV480: thickness 28.0 mm plate, location 10.

NUREG/CR-5679

___ I 

___________ __________ ___________________________________

C-10
100 

90 

80

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0

0 10 20 

Strain [%]

30 40

Figure C. 11. Stress-strain curves for SPV490: thickness 9 mm plate. location 11.

100 

90 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0

0 10 30 40

Strain 0']

Figure C. 12. Stress-strain curves for SPV490: thickness 17.5 mm plate, location 12.

NUREG/CR-5679

C,

I I ________ ________ I I ___ 

___________________ I 

I I ________ 

I I ___________ 

I ___ ___ 

I I. I 

I I.. _________________________________________________________________________

i I

C-11I
Appendix D

SCV Instrument List and Drawings

D-1 NUREG/CR-5679
Section i. SCV Instrument List

Guide to Table D.1 

A complete table providing information on the location of all of the instrumentation is included in the Instrument 

List Table (Table D. 1). The information in the table is intended to provide the relationship between the location of 

each instrument, its name and enough data acquisition identification information to uniquely specify each instru

ment to the data acquisition system (DAS). 

The instrument ID (name) contains fields that identify the type of instrument, location (interior or exterior), location 

on the model, the number of the sensor, and, in the case of multi-element sensors, the number of that element. The 

instrument name format is as follows: 

(type abbr.)-(surface designation)-(region designation)-(sequence number in region) 

For example, the instrument names for the two strain rosettes located on the outside and inside surface, respectively, 

of the model at the apex are 

RSG-O-THD-1 RSG-I-THD-2 

The instrument types are abbreviated as follows: 

Type Description 

Abbreviation 

SSGH single strain gage, aligned in the hoop direction 

SSGM single strain gage, aligned in the meridional direction 

STG strip strain gage (will include several channels) 

RSG rosette strain gage (will include 3 channels) 

VCP vertically-aligned, cable potentiometer displacement transducer 

HCP horizontally-aligned, cable potentiometer displacement transducer 

IDT inclinometer displacement transducer 

TC thermocouple 

RTD resistance temperature detector 

PG pressure gauge 

CD contact detector 

LVDT linear variable differential transformer (displacement transducer) 

The region designation part of the instrument name is based on the area of the vessel that the instruments are in

stalled. This designation is used only to simplify the sequential numbering scheme. The designation list is as fol

lows (see Figure D.1 for the layout of the regions):

D-3 NUREG/CR-5679
Location Description Region Number 

Designation in Figure D.I 

THD top head I 

UCYS upper cylindrical shell 2 

KNU knuckle 3 

SPH spherical shell 4 

UST upper stiffener 5 

UCS upper conical shell 6 

MST middle stiffener 7 

MCS middle conical shell 8 

MCI material change interface 9 

LCS lower conical shell 10 

LST lower stiffeners 11 

LCYS lower cylindrical shell 12 

EQH equipment hatch 13* 

CS contact structure (not shown) 

* Note: This region encompasses all of the instrumentation that is installed around the equipment hatch. 

The Sensor Designation in Table D. I is the manufacturer's part number.

NUREG/CR-5679 D-4
2: -1-------------- -------

10 

33 11 -- - - - - - - - - - -----------

6 

7 - ------------ -------------------------------

81~ 

9 -- -

---------------------------------------- --

10 

13* 

11T _- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

12 

Figure D.1 Side view of the SCV model. 

All location data (i.e., azimuth angle and vertical elevation), with the exception of those instruments located around 

the equipment hatch, are measured from the following references: 

Azimuth Angle Zero Reference - 900 counterclockwise from equipment hatch centerline looking from above the 

vessel, clockwise positive (see Figure D.2) 

Vertical Elevation Zero Reference - top of the ring support girder

D-5 NUREG/CR-5679
I 0* 

2700 

900 

1800 

Figure D.2 Overhead view of the SCV model. 

Equipment hatch location data are shown in the table with asterisks after each measurement. This is to remind the 

reader that these data are taken with respect to a radial-angular coordinate system with the origin located at the cen

ter of the hatch and the zero degree reference at the "top" as viewed from a drawing, clockwise positive. To empha

size this fact, new headers are placed in the table above the equipment hatch entries.

NUREG/CR-5679 D-6
Table D.1 SCV Instrument List

Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (M) 

RSG-O-THD-1a Apex 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-THD-lb Apex 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-THD-1c Apex 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-TH D-2a Apex 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-THD-2b Apex 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-THD-2c Apex 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-THD-3a 90 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-0-THD-3b 90 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-Q-THD-3c 90 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-1-THD-4a 90 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-THD-4b 90 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-THD-4c 90 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-THD-5a 0 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-THD-5b 0 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-THD-5c 0 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-THD-6a 0 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-1-THD-6b 0 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-THD-6c 0 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-THD-7a 270 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-THD-7b 270 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-THD-7c 270 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-THD-8a 270 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-THD-8b 270 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-THD-8c 270 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-THD-9a 180 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-THD-9b 180 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-THD-9c 180 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-THD-10a 180 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-THD-10b 180 4.000" EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-THD-10c 180 4.000 EP-08-250RD-350 

VCP-I-THD-1 1 Apex 4.000 PT-101-5 

TCT-I-THD-12 Apex 4.002 C03-T

D-7 NUREG/CR-5679
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (M) 

STG-O-UCYS-la 0 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-lb 0 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-ic 0 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-ld 0 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-le 0 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-O-UCYS-2 CAG1 to UCYS-1 3.623 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-O-UCYS-3a 90 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-3b 90 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-3c 90 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-3d 90 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-3e 90 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-O-UCYS-4 CAG to UCYS-3 3.623 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-O-UCYS-5a 180 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-5b 180 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-5c 180 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-5d 180 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-5e 180 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-O-UCYS-6 CAG to UCYS-5 3.623 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-O-UCYS-7a 270 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-7b 270 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-7c 270 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-7d 270 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-7e 270 3.623 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-O-UCYS-8 CAG to UCYS-7 3.623 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-O-UCYS-9a 0 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-9b 0 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-9c 0 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-9d 0 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-9e 0 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-O-UCYS-10 CAG to UCYS-9 3.573 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-O-UCYS-11a 90 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-11 b 90 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-1 1 c 90 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-1 Id 90 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120

I CAG = Cross axis gage

NUREG/CR-5679 D-8
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (M) 

STG-O-UCYS-11 e 90 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-O-UCYS-12 CAG to UCYS-11 3.573 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-O-UCYS-13a 180 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-13b 180 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-13c 180 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-13d 180 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-13e 180 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-O-UCYS-14 CAG to UCYS-13 3.573 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-O-UCYS-15a 270 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-15b 270 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-15c 270 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-15d 270 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-15e 270 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-O-UCYS-16 CAG to UCYS-15 3.573 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-I-UCYS-17a 0 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-UCYS-17b 0 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-UCYS-17c 0 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-UCYS-17d 0 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-UCYS-17e 0 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-1-UCYS-18 CAG to UCYS-17 3.573 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-I-UCYS-19a 90 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-UCYS-19b 90 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-UCYS-19c 90 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-UCYS-19d 90 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-UCYS-19e 90 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-1-UCYS-20 CAG to UCYS-1 9 3.573 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-1-UCYS-21a 180 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-UCYS-21 b 180 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-UCYS-21c 180 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-1-UCYS-21d 180 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-UCYS-21e 180 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-I-UCYS-22 CAG to UCYS-21 3.573 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-I-UCYS-23a 270 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-UCYS-23b 270 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-l-UCYS-23c 270 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-UCYS-23d 270 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120

D-9 NUREG/CR-5679
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (M) 

STG-I-UCYS-23e 27 3.573 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-1-UCYS-24 CAG to UCYS-23 3.573 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-O-UCYS-25a 0 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-25b 0 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-25c 0 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-25d 0 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-25e 0 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-O-UCYS-26 CAG to UCYS-25 3.472 EP-08-125AC-350 

SSGM-I-UCYS-27 0 3.472 EP-08-250AE-350 

STG-O-UCYS-28a 90 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-28b 90 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-28c 90 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-28d 90 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-28e 90 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-O-UCYS-29 CAG to UCYS-28 3.472 EP-08-125AC-350 

SSGM-I-UCYS-30 90 3.472 EP-08-250AE-350 

STG-O-UCYS-31a 180 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-31b 180 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-31c 180 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-31d 180 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-31e 180 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-O-UCYS-32 CAG to UCYS-31 3.472 EP-08-125AC-350 

SSGM-1-UCYS-33 180 3.472 EP-08-250AE-350 

STG-O-UCYS-34a 270 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-34b 270 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-34c 270 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-34d 270 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-UCYS-34e 270 3.472 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-O-UCYS-35 CAG to UCYS-34 3.472 EP-08-125AC-350 

SSGM-I-UCYS-36 270 3.472. EP-08-250AE-350 

HCP-1-UCYS-39 45 3.570 PT-101-5 

HCP-1-UCYS-40 135 3.570 PT-101-5 

HCP-1-UCYS-41 225 3.570 PT-101-5 

HCP-1-UCYS-42 315 3.570 PT-101-5 

TCT-1-UCYS-43 180 3.120 C03-T 

HCP-O-UCYS-43 45 3.570 PT-101-5

NUREG/CR-5679 D-10
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (M) 

HCP-O-UCYS-44 135 3.570 PT-101-5 

HCP-O-UCYS-45 225 3.570 PT-101-5 

HCP-O-UCYS-46 315 3.570 PT-101-5 

TCT-I-UCYS-47 0 0.250 C03-T 

STG-O-KNU-Ia 0 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-KNU-1b 0 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-KNU-lc 0 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-KNU-1d 0 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-KNU-le 0 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-O-KNU-2 CAG to KNU-1 3.319 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-O-KNU-3a 90 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-KNU-3b 90 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-KNU-3c 90 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-KNU-3d 90 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-KNU-3e 90 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-O-KNU-4 CAG to KNU-3 3.319 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-O-KNU-5a 180 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-KNU-5b 180 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-KNU-5c 180 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-KNU-5d 180 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-KNU-5e 180 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-O-KNU-6 CAG to KNU-5 3.319 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-O-KNU-7a 270 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-KNU-7b 270 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-KNU-7c 270 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-KNU-7d 270 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-KNU-7e 270 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-O-KNU-8 CAG to KNU-7 3.319 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-I-KNU-9a 0 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-KNU-9b 0 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-l-KNU-9c 0 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-KNU-9d 0 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-KNU-9e 0 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-I-KNU-10 CAG to KNU-9 3.319 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-I-KNU-11a 90 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120

D-11I NUREG/CR-5679
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (M) 

STG-l-KNU-11b 90 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-KNU-11c 90 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-KNU-11d 90 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-KNU-11e 90 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-I-KNU-12 CAG to KNU-1 1 3.319 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-I-KNU-13a 180 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-KNU-13b 180 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-KNU-13c 180 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-KNU-13d 180 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-KNU-13e 180 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-I-KNU-14 CAG to KNU-13 3.319 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-l-KNU-15a 270 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-KNU-15b 270 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-KNU-15c 270 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-KNU-15d 270 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-l-KNU-15e 270 3.319 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-l-KNU-16 CAG to KN U-15 3.319 EP-08-125AC-350 

TCK-O-KNU-17 0 3.530 KQSS-1 16-U-240 

HCP-I-KNU-17 0 3.319 PT-101-2 

VCP-l-KNU-18 0 3.319 PT-101-2 

HCP-I-KNU-19 90 3.319 PT-101-2 

VCP-I-KNU-20 90 3.319 PT-101-2 

IDT-I-KNU-21 180 4.002 SSY0140-390X 

IDT-I-KNU-22 270 4.002 SSY0140-390Y 

RSG-O-SPH-la 45 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-SPH-ib 45 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-SPH-Ic 45 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-SPH-2a 45 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-SPH-2b 45 3.132 EP-08-25ORD-350 

RSG-I-SPH-2c 45 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-SPH-3a 135 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-SPH-3b 135 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-SPH-3c 135 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-SPH-4a 135 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-SPH-4b 135 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350

NUREG/CR-5679 D- 12
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (M) 

RSG-I-SPH-4c 135 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-SPH-5a 225 3.132 EP-M8-250RD-350 

RSG-O-SPH-5b 225 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-SPH-5c 225 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-SPH-6a 225 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-SPH-6b 225 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-SPH-6c 225 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-SPH-7a 315 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-SPH-7b 315 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-SPH-7c 315 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-SPH-8a 315 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-SPH-8b 315 3.132 -EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-SPH-8c 315 3.132 EP-08-250RD-350 

HCP-I-SPH-9 0 3.220 PT-101-2 

VCP-1-SPH-10 0 3.220 PT-101-2 

HCP-1-SPH-1 1 90 3.220 PT-101-2 

VCP-1-SPH-12 90 3.220 PT-101-2 

HCP-1-SPH-13 0 3.100 PT-101-2 

VCP-I-SPH-14 0 3.100 PT-101-2 

HCP-1-SPH-15 90 3.100 PT-101-2 

VCP-1-SPH-16 90 3.100 PT-101-2 

HCP-1-SPH-17 0 2.980 PT-101-2 

VCP-1-SPH-18 0 2.980 PT-101-2 

HCP-1-SPH-19 90 2.980 PT-101-2 

VCP-I-SPH-20 90 2.980 PT-101-2 

SSGM-O-UST-1 0 2.924 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-UST-2 90 2.924 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-UST-3 180 2.924 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-UST-4 270 2.924 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-UST-5 0 2.924, EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-UST-6 90 2.924 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-UST-7 180 2.924 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-UST-8 270 2.924 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-UST-9 0 2.865 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-UST-10 90 2.865 EP-08-250AE-350

D-13 NUREG/CR-5679
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (M) 

SSGM-O-UST-1 1 180 2.865 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-UST-12 270 2.865 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-UST-13 0 2.865 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-UST-14 90 2.865 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-UST-15 180 2.865 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-UST-16 270 2.865 EP-08-250AE-350 

HCP-1-UST-17 0 2.915 PT-101-2 

HCP-1-UST-18 90 2.915 PT-101-2 

HCP-1-UST-19 180 2.915 PT-101-2 

HCP-1-UST-20 270 2.915 PT-101-2 

SSGM-0-UCS-1 0 2.675 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-UCS-2 90 2.675 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-0-UCS-3 180 2.675 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-0-UCS-4 270 2.675 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-UCS-5 0 2.675 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-UCS-6 90 2.675 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-UCS-7 180 2.675 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-UCS-8 270 2.675 EP-08-250AE-350 

RSG-O-UCS-9a 0 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-9b 0 2.485 EP-08-25ORD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-9c 0 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-1-UCS-1 Oa 0 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-1-UCS-10b 0 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-1-UCS-10bc 0 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-0-UCS-1 1 a 90 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-1 lb 90 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-1 Ic 90 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-12a 90 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-1-UCS-12b 90 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-UCS-12c 90 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-UCS-13a 180 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-.-UCS-13b 180 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-13c 180 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-14a 180 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-UCS-14b 180 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350

NUREG/CR-5679 D-14
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (M) 

RSG-I-UCS-14c 180 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-15a 270 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-15b 270 2.485 EP-08-25ORD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-15c 270 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-UCS-16a 270 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-UCS-16b 270 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-UCS-16c 270 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-17a 45 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-17b 45 2.485 EP-08-25ORD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-17c 45 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-UCS-18a 45 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG---UCS-18b 45 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-UCS-18c 45 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-19a 135 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-19b 135 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-19c 135 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-UCS-20a 135 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-UCS-20b 135 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-UCS-20c 135 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

SSGM-O-UCS-21 0 2.295 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-UCS-22 45 2.295 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-UCS-23 90 2.295 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-UCS-24 135 2.295 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-UCS-25 180 2.295 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-UCS-26 270 2.295 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-UCS-27 0 2.295 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-UCS-28 45 2.295 . EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-UCS-29 90 2.295 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-UCS-30 135 2.295 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-UCS-31 180 2.295 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-UCS-32 270 2.295, EP-08-250AE-350 

HCP-I-UCS-33 0 2.694 PT-101-2 

HCP-1-UCS-34 90 2.694 PT-101-2 

HCP-I-UCS-35 180 2.694 PT-101-2 

HCP-1-UCS-36 270 2.694 PT-101-2 

RSG-O-UCS-37a 225 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350

D-15 NUREG/CR-5679
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (M) 

RSG-O-UCS-37b 225 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-37c 225 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-38a 315 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-38b 315 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-38c 315 2.485 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-39a 45 2.430 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-39b 45 2.430 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-39c 45 2.430 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-40a 135 2.430 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-40b 135 2.430 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-UCS-40c 135 2.430 EP-08-250RD-350 

SSGM-O-UCS-41 202 2.245 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-0-UCS-42 202 2.150 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-UCS-43 202 2.150 EP-08-250AE-350 

TCT-I-UCS-44 180 2.883 C03-T 

SSGM-O-MST-1 0 2.100 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-MST-2 45 2.100 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-MST-3 90 2.100 EP-O8-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-MST-4 135 2.100 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-MST-5 180 2.100 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-MST-6 270 2.100 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-l-MST-7 0 2.100 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-MST-8 45 2.100 EP-08-250AE-350 

STG-I-MST-9a 90 2.100 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-MST-9b 90 2.100 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-MST-9c 90 2.100 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-MST-9d 90 2.100 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-MST-9e 90 2:100 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGM-1-MST-10 135 2.100 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-MST-1 1 180 2.100 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-MST-12 270 2.100 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-MST-13 0 2.042 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-MST-14 45 2.042 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-MST-16 135 2.042 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-MST-17 180 2.042 EP-08-250AE-350

NUREG/CR-5679 D-16
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (i) 

SSGM-O-MST-18 270 2.042 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-MST-19 0 2.042 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-MST-20 45 2.042 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGH-I-MST-21 90 2.042 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-MST-22 135 2.042 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-MST-23 180 2.042 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-MST-24 270 2.042 EP-08-250AE-350 

TCK-O-MST-25 180 2.080 KQSS-1 16-U-240 

HCP-1-MST-25 0 2.071 PT-101-2 

HCP-1-MST-26 90 2.071 PT-101-2 

HCP-I-MST-27 180 2.071 PT-101-2 

HCP-1-MST-28 270 2.071 PT-101-2 

RSG-I-MCS-1a 0 1.821 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCS-lb 0 1.821 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCS-1c 0 1.821 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCS-2a 180 1.821 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCS-2b 180 1.821 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCS-2c 180 1.821 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCS-3a 270 1.821 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCS-3b 270 1.821 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCS-3c 270 1.821 EP-08-250RD-350 

HCP-I-MCS-4 0 1.813 PT-101-2 

HCP-I-MCS-5 90 1.813 PT-101-2 

HCP-1-MCS-6 180 1.813 PT-101-2 

HCP-I-MCS-7 270 1.813 PT-101-2 

RSG-l-MCI-1a 0 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCI-1b 0 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCI-1c 0 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

SSGM-O-MCI-2 0 1.600. EP-08-250AE-350 

RSG-I-MCI-3a 45 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCI-3b 45 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCI-3c 45 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

SSGM-O-MCI-4 45 1.600 EP-08-250AE-350 

RSG-I-MCI-5a 135 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350

D-17 NUREG/CR-5679
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (M) 

RSG-I-MCI-5b 135 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCI-5c 135 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

SSGM-O-MCI-6 135 1.600 EP-08-250AE-350 

RSG-I-MCI-7a 180 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCI-7b 180 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCI-7c 180 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

SSGM-O-MCI-8 180 1.600 EP-08-250AE-350 

RSG-I-MCI-9a 225 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCI-9b 225 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCI-9c 225 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

SSGM-O-MCI-10 225 1.600 EP-08-250AE-350 

RSG-1-MCI-1 la 270 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCI-1 lb 270 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCI-11c 270 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

SSGM-O-MCI-12 270 1.600 EP-08-250AE-350 

RSG-I-MCI-13a 315 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCI-13b 315 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-MCI-13c 315 1.600 EP-08-250RD-350 

SSGM-O-MCI-14 315 1.600 EP-08-250AE-350 

HCP-1-MCI-15 0 1.633 PT-101-2 

HCP-I-MCI-16 90 1.633 PT-101-2 

HCP-I-MCI-17 180 1.633 PT-101-2 

HCP-I-MCI-18 270 1.633 PT-101-2 

VCP-O-MCI-19 90 1.633 PT-101-2 

HCP-O-MCI-21 90 1.633 PT-101-2 

TCT-1-MCI-22 180 2.485 C03-T 

TCT-1-MCI-23 270 2.070 C03-T 

TCT-1-MCI-24 0 1.579 C03-T 

HCP-1-LCS-1 0 1-453 PT-101-2 

HCP-I-LCS-2 90 1.453 PT-101-2 

HCP-I-LCS-3 180 1.453 PT-101-2 

HCP-I-LCS-4 270 1.453 PT-101-2 

RSG-O-LCS-5a 45 1.453 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-LCS-5b 45 1.453 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-LCS-5c 45 1.453 EP-08-250RD-350

NUREG/CR-5679 D-18
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (W) 

RSG-l-LCS-6a 45 1.453 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-LCS-6b 45 1.453 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-LCS-6c 45 1.453 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-LCS-7a 135 1.453 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-LCS-7b 135 1.453 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-LCS-7c 135 1.453 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCS-8a 135 1.453 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-LCS-8b 135 1.453 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCS-8c 135 1.453 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCS-9a 0 1.254 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCS-9b 0 1.254 EP-08-25ORD-350 

RSG-l-LCS-9c 0 1.254 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCS-10a 180 1.254 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCS-10b 180 1.254 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-LCS-10c 180 1.254 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCS-11a 270 1.254 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCS-1 lb 270 1.254 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCS-1 Ic 270 1.254 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-LCS-12a 45 1.400 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-LCS-12b 45 1.400 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-Q-LCS-12c 45 1.400 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-LCS-13a 135 1.400 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-LCS-13b 135 1.400 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-LCS-13c 135 1.400 EP-08-25ORD-350 

RSG-I-LST-la 0 0.947 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-LST-1b 0 0.947 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LST-lc 0 0.947 EP-08-250RD-350 

SSGM-0-LST-2 0 0.947 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-LST-3 45 0.947 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-LST-4 45 0.947, EP-08-250AE-350 

RSG-I-LST-5a 90 0.947 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LST-5b 90 0.947 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LST-5c 90 0.947 EP-08-250RD-350 

SSGM-O-LST-6 90 0.947 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-LST-7 135 0.947 EP-08-250AE-350

D-19 NUREG/CR-5679
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (M) 

SSGM-O-LST-8 135--- 0.947 EP-08-250AE-350 

RSG-I-LST-9a -186--- 0.947 EP-08-25ORD-350 

RSG-I-LST-9b -180 0.947 EP-08-25ORD-350 

RSG-l-LST-9c - 180 0.947 EP-08-250RD-350 

SSGM-0-LST-10 180 0.947 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-LST-1 1 225 0.947 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-0-LST-12 225 0.947 EP-08-250AE-350 

RSG-l-LST-13a 270 0.947 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LST-13b 270 0.947 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-LST-13c 270 0.947 EP-08-250RD-350 

SSGM-0-LST-14 270 0.947 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-LST-15 315 0.947 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-0-LST-16 315 0.947 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-0-LST-1 7 0 0.797 EP-M8250AE-350 

SSGM-O-LST-168 45 0.797 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-LST-19 90 0.797 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-LST-20 135 0.797 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-LST-21 180 0.797 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-LST-22 225 0.797 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-LST-23 270 0.797 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-O-LST-24 315 0.797 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-LST-25 0 0.797 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-LST-26 45 0.797 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-LST-27 90 0.797 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-LST-28 135 0.797 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-LST-29 180 0.797 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-LST-30 225 0.797 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-LST-31 270 0.797 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-LST-32 315 0.797 EP-08-250AE-350 

TCK-0-LST-33 0 0.770 KQSS-1 16-U-240 

HCP-1-LST-33 0 0.852 PT-101-2 

TCK-O-LST-34 90 0.770 KQSS-1 16-U-240 

HCP-I-LST-34 90 0.852 PT-101-2 

TCK-O-LST-35 180 0.770 KQSS-1 16-U-240 

HCP-I-LST-35 180 0.852 PT-101-15 

HCP-1-LST-36 270 0.852 PT-101-2

NUREG/CR-5679 D-20
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (M) 

TCK-O-LST-36 270 0.770 KQSS-1 16-U-240 

HCP-1-LCYS-1 0 0.750 PT-101-2 

HCP-1-LCYS-2 90 0.750 PT-101-5 

HCP-1-LCYS-3 180 0.750 PT-101-5 

HCP-1-LCYS-4 270 0.750 PT-101-2 

RSG-I-LCYS-9a 0 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCYS-9b 0 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCYS-9c 0 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCYS-10a 90 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-LCYS-10b 90 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCYS-10c 90 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-LCYS-1 1a 180 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCYS-11b 180 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCYS-1 1 c 180 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCYS-12a 270 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCYS-12b 270 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-LCYS-12c 270 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

SSGM-O-LCYS-13 0 0.270 SG-159-11-50-6S 

SSGM-O-LCYS-14 45 0.270 SG-159-11-50-6S 

SSGM-O-LCYS-15 90 0.270 SG-159-11-50-6S 

SSGM-O-LCYS-16 135 0.270 SG-159-11-50-6S 

SSGM-O-LCYS-17 180 0.270 SG-159-11-50-6S 

SSGM-O-LCYS-18 225 0.270 SG-159-11-50-6S 

SSGM-O-LCYS-19 270 0.270 SG-159-11-50-6S 

SSGM-O-LCYS-20 315 0.270 SG-159-11-50-6S 

SSGM-1-LCYS-21 0 0.270 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-LCYS-22 45 0.270 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-LCYS-23 90 0.270 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-LCYS-24 135 0.270 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-1-LCYS-25 180 0.270 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-LCYS-26 225 0.270 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-LCYS-27 270 0.270 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-LCYS-28 315 0.270 EP-08-250AE-350 

TCK-O-LCYS-29 0 0.270 KQSS-1 16-U-240 

HCP-1-LCYS-29 0 0.270 PT-101-15

D-21 NUREG/CR-5679
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (M) 

TCK-O-LCYS-30 90 0.270 KQSS-1 16-U-240 

HCP-1-LCYS-30 90 0.270 PT-101-15 

TCK-O-LCYS-31 180 0.270 KQSS-1 16-U-240 

HCP-1-LCYS-31 180 0.270 PT-101-15 

TCK-O-LCYS-32 270 0.270 KQSS-1 16-U-240 

HCP-1-LCYS-32 270 0.270 PT-101-15 

HCP-1-BHD-1 0 -0.064 PT-101-2 

PG-l-BHD-1 NA NA 4040 

LC-O-BHD-1 0 -1.600 LW-190 

HCP-1-BHD-2 90 -0.064 PT-101-2 

PG-I-BHD-2 NA NA 4040 

LC-O-BHD-2 270 -1.600 LW-190 

VCP-1-BHD-3 90 -1.143 PT-101-2 

LC-O-BHD-3 90 -1.600 LW-190 

LC-O-BHD-4 180 -1.600 LW-190 

RSG-O-CS-ia 0 3.131 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-ib 0 3.131 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-lc 0 3.131 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-2a 0 2.508 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-2b 0 2.508 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-2c 0 2.508 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-3a 0 1.524 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-3b 0 1.524 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-3c 0 1.524 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-4a 0 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-4b 0 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-4c 0 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-5a 270 3.131 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-5b 270 3.131 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-5c 270 3.131 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-6a 270 2.508 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-6b 270 2.508 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-6c 270 2.508 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-7a 270 1.524 EP-08-250RD-350

NUREG/CR-5679 D-22
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (M) 

RSG-O-CS-7b 270 1.524 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-Q-CS-7c 270 1.524 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-8a 270 0.500 EP-08-25ORD-350 

RSG-O-CS-8b 270 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-8c 270 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-9a 180 3.131 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-9b 180 3.131 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-9c 180 3.131 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-10a 180 2.508 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-10b 180 2.508 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-10c 180 2.508 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-1 1a 180 1.524 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-1 lb 180 1.524 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-1 1 c 180 1.524 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-12a 180 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-12b 180 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-12c 180 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-13a 90 3.131 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-13b 90 3.131 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-13c 90 3.131 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-14a 90 2.508 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-14b 90 2.508 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-14c 90 2.508 EP-M8-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-15a 90 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-15b 90 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-O-CS-15c 90 0.500 EP-08-250RD-350 

LVDT-O-CS-16 0 3.383 GCD-121-2000 

LVDT-O-CS-17 0 3.131 GCD-121-2000 

LVDT-O-CS-18 0 2.508 GCD-121-2000 

LVDT-O-CS-19 0 1.524 GCD-121-2000 

LVDT-O-CS-20 0 0.500. GCD-121-2000 

LVDT-O-CS-21 270 3.383 GCD-121-2000 

LVDT-O-CS-22 270 3.131 GCD-121-2000 

LVDT-0-CS-23 270 2.508 GCD-121-2000 

LVDT-O-CS-24 270 1.524 GCD-121-2000 

LVDT-O-CS-25 270 0.500 GCD-121-2000

D-23 NUREG/CR-5679
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (M) 

CD-O-CS-27 0 3.2' . BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-28 0 3.017 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-29 0 2.772 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-30 0 2.640 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-31 0 2.376 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-32 0 2.244 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-33 0 1.914 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-34 0 1.719 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-35 0 1.329 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-36 0 1.134 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-0-CS-37 0 0.625 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-38 0 0.375 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-39 90 3.383 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-40 90 3.245 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-41 90 3.131 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-42 90 3.017 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-43 90 2.772 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-44 90 2.640 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-45 90 2.508 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-46 90 2.376 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-47 90 2.244 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-48 90 1.914 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-49 90 1.329 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-50 90 1.134 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-51 90 0.625 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-52 90 0.5Q0 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-0-CS-53 90 0.375 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-55 180 3.383 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-0-CS-56 180 3.245 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-57 180 3.131 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-58 180 3.017 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-59 180 2.772 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-60 180 2.640 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-61 180 2.508 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-62 180 2.376 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-63 180 2.244 BZ-2R72-A2

NUREG/CR-5679 D-24
Instrument ID Azimuth Vertical Sensor 

(Name) Angle Elevation Designation 

(degree) (m) 

CD-O-CS-64 180 1.914 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-65 180 1.719 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-66 180 1.524 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-67 180 1.329 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-68 180 1.134 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-0-CS-69 180 0.625 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-70 180 0.500 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-71 180 0.375 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-73 270 3.245 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-74 270 3.017 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-75 270 2.772 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-76 270 2.640 .... BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-77 270 2.376 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-78 270 2.244 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-79 270 1.914 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-80 270 1.719 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-81 270 1.329 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-82 270 1.134 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-83 270 0.625 BZ-2R72-A2 

CD-O-CS-84 270 0.375 BZ-2R72-A2

The location of the following gages positioned around the equipment hatch is measured relative to a local coordinate system with radial distances R and angular locations 0 specified. Measurement ori

gins are R=0 at the center of the equipment hatch and 0=0 at the top center of the equipment hatch 

increasing positively clockwise viewed from outside the SCV model.

Instrument ID Azimuth Radial Sensor 

(Name) Angle 0 Dist. R Designation 

(degree) (m) 

RSG-I-EQH-la 0 0.2600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-EQH-lb 0 0.2600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-lc 0 0.2600 EP-08-250RD-350 

STG-I-EQH-2a 0 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-EQH-2b 0 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-l-EQH-2c 0 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-l-EQH-2d 0 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-l-EQH-2e 0 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGH-l-EQH-3 CAG to EQH-2 0.3600 EP-08-125AC-350

D-25 NUREG/CR-5679
Instrument ID Azimuth Radial Sensor 

(Name) Angle 0 Dist. R Designation 

(degree) (M) 

STG-O-EQH-4a 0 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-EQH-4b 0 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-EQH-4c - 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-EQH-4d 0 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-O-EQH-4e 0 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

RSG-l-EQH-8a 45 0.3600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-8b 45 0.3600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-Sc 45 0.3600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-9a 45 0.4100 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-9b 45 0.4100 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-9c 45 0.4100 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-10a 45 0.4600 EPR-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-1Ob 45 0.4600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-1 Oc 45 0.4600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-1 Ia 45 0.5600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-1 lb 45 0.5600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-1 lc 45 0.5600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-12a 67.5 0.3600 EP-O8-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-12b 67.5 0.3600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-12c 67.5 0.3600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-13a 67.5 0.4100 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-EQH-13b 67.5 0.4100 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-EQH-13c 67.5 0.4100 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-14a 67.5 0.4600 EP-08-25ORD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-14b 67.5 0.4600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-14c 67.5 0.4600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-15a 90 0.2600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-EQH-1 5b 90 0.2600 EP-08-25ORD-350 

RSG-l-EQH-15c 90 0.2600 EP-08-250RD-350 

STG-l-EQH-16a 90 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-EQH-16b 90 0.3600-. EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-EQH-16c 90 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-EQH-16d 90 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-EQH-16e 90 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGM-I-EQH-17 CAG to EQH-16 0.3600 EP-08-125AC-350 

SSGH-O-EQH-18 90 0.3600 EP-08-250AE-350

NUREG/CR-5679 D-26
Instrument ID Azimuth Radial Sensor 

(Name) Angle 0 Dist. R Designation 

(degree) (M) 

RSG-l-EQH-19a 90 0.4100 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-19b 90 0.4100 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-19c 90 0.4100 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-20a 90 0.4600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-EQH-20b 90 0.4600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-20c 90 0.4600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-21a 90 0.5600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-EQH-21 b 90 0.5600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-21c 90 0.5600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-22a 135 0.3600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-22b 135 0.3600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-22c 135 0.3600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-23a 135 0.4100 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-23b 135 0.4100 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-EQH-23c 135 0.4100 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-24a 135 0.4600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-24b 135 0.4600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-EQH-24c 135 0.4600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-25a 135 0.5600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-25b 135 0.5600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-25c 135 0.5600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-26a 180 0.2600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-26b 180 0.2600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-26c 180 0.2600 EP-08-250RD-350 

SSGH-l-EQH-27 CAG to EQH-28 0.3600 EP-08-125AC-350 

STG-I-EQH-28a 180 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-EQH-28b 180 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-EQH-28c 180 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-l-EQH-28d 180 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-EQH-28e 180 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGM-O-EQH-29 180 0.3600 EP-08-250AE-350 

RSG-I-EQH-30a 180 0.4100 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-l-EQH-30b 180 0.4100 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-30c 180 0.4100 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-31a 180 0.4600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-31b 180 0.4600 EP-08-250RD-350

D-27 NUREG/CR-5679
Instrument ID Azimuth Radial Sensor 

(Name) Angle e Dist R Designation 

(degree) (M) 

RSG-I-EQH-31c 180 0.4600 EP-08-250RD-350 

SSGM-I-EQH-33 210 1 600 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGH-I-EQH-34 210 0.3600 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-EQH-35 240 0.3600 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGH-I-EQH-36 240 0.3600 EP-08-250AE-350 

STG-I-EQH-37a 270 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-EQH-37b 270 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-EQH-37c 270 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-EQH-37d 270 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

STG-I-EQH-37e 270 0.3600 EP-08-125MW-120 

SSGM-I-EQH-38 270 0.3600 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-EQH-39 300 0.3600 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGH-I-EQH-40 300 0.3600 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGM-I-EQH-41 330 0.3600 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGH-I-EQH-42 330 0.3600 EP-08-250AE-350 

SSGH-O-EQH-43 270 0.3600 EP-08-250AE-350 

RSG-I-EQH-44a 95 0.3600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-44b 95 0.3600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-44c 95 0.3600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-45a 265 0.3600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-45b 265 0.3600 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-45c 265 0.3600 EP-08-250RD-350 

TCK-O-EQH-46 180 0.220 KQSS-1 16-U-240 

RSG-I-EQH-47a 270 0.520 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-47b 270 0.520 EP-08-250RD-350 

RSG-I-EQH-47c 270 0.520 EP-08-250RD-350 

TCT-I-EQH-47 85 0.280 C03-T 

TCT-I-EQH-48 275 0.280 C03-T

NUREG/CR-5679 D-28
Section ii. SCV Instrument Drawings

D-29 NUREG/CR-5679
SI METRIC

too-

tt

21c0' 360'

30.

9110

-''Y I ln 959l1n196S'

UCY0 19019. V)9

VyLP 96 

VELD 45

sl-009--601 -0,4I-9'4 I.92-nl60I .1... 1K--C.1 1

1 - PJJGH KNU M-11-mys-5 L,

-$0-0T-Sel-I I--- 

2W.24

`"S1`4V 0-K-W4 I 

1193n1n 1 0 001-.3PI- 14 906-0-0211-3

001 10 I * 00691-0-u61-Il

J ,5fl1Jt0I] S011U19602 06fl-4lC3 

9060-160- 90-0-LiCO I?9 000UOI 900S-0-1960-09 906--UCSl3 

4SNDLI2 S GH-10-UCS-22 9 0069-8-lCS-e3 4 S069-O-l960-24 *0690I-S

.4iI3

0 906U-0 Sll

-U01-4 I 40069 11-60 I 9-92

! 601 TIFFr. '19

40069-0 6C0-4 - I

R- 90 -0-901 0--IO 006a9-0-960-2UCS I

I .----.-.--.- I 1S'--~- 3'H"-""- Sn*ln3" 3*. *nL9SI-5I~

1847.9 VCP 0-601-9 

-~~SS I,4-001

1579-.4.4 

14--41. SG5 -S- SI--0- S9--S- 116--O- lt

I 7sslWl1*n*IIn

- -U- ...-

06$

KST (STIFF. -C-)

4 00694 f-091-4

165

71

14

909 SSMG-S- 0069-0-UT-I S 

559-0L YSI -S - 06401 9-5 - .0 00 0:z - 3 - - -I osor. 'A' L -1'9 

2500o f* TC9-0-ICYS-29 4 S06l-9-LCYS044 6 IC-LCYS30S 4 6 00LYS- TCX 9 0-G- I2-3 4 OTXO-CS3 SG--CS2 1690LT-1 

SILL I12

liY11L(EQM INTERIOR OF11 ScyItI

WE 17A00121(0 -E 949-SH-037

-J

Figure D.3 Steel containment vessel (SCV) external gage layout.

F0 

Q) 

ONI

C

4000.7 1--h- T

37M?, 

303L% 

340Q3 

33"a6

2274.9

2099.6

:

wt VELD 43

. TOP III. 1,11I)ER A

P-M." ýW aiL. 

Mg

i

§P!;g

. SSGH-O-UCS-2

C

2693.9
Awl a, I 

7-A~
r _ 7

SI METRIC

z

RSC-I-E[OH-21 

RSG-I-EOH -20 

RSG-I-EUOH-19 

(HOlOP)S TG- I -EQH- 16 

S SGM -I- EOH -17 

RSG-I-[QI-I-44 

RSG-1--EQI -iS1 

R SG6-I-EQH -25 

RSG-I-[OH-24 

IRSG--I-CQOII-23 

RS6 -[OHEFI-22

VIEWEI1NE1al~..tuc

SSGI-I--EQI-I-3 

S I G- I -EQI-2 

R 56-I -E OH-1 

R S -I - [OH-8 

RSG-1-FOUI-1-9 

RSG-l-EQH-10 

R S6 - I -EH-Il 

RSG-I-[OI 1-12 

R SG- I- [0-1-13 

R 56-I - [0-1-14 

1 CT-I-EQOH-47

Figure D.5 Steel containment vessel (SCY) internal gage layout around equipment hatch.

SSGM -I-[1-EQ-41 

S SGH-lI-EQ1IA-42 

S SGM-1-EQI-OH-39 

S SGH-IA-l-EH-40 

RSG-l-EQI-I-47 

TOT -I-EQH -48 

STG-I-EOH-37(HOIJP) 

SSGM-I-EOH-38 

RSG-I-EOH-45 

SSGH-l-EQH-36 

S SGM-1I-EQIA-35 

SSCH-l-EQH-34 

SSGM-1-EQH-33 

R SG - I - H-26 

SSGH-J-EQH-27 

S1'G-I-[OHA-28 

R SG-lI-EQOH -30 

RSG-l-[QH-31 

GEC YUIC 

UNCAS S-IF I E C U7- DSN S C3

t:J

_--I
Appendix E

Input/Output Structure for the 

SCV/DAS Software Package

E-1 NUREG/CR-5679
Section i. File StructureDescription 

There were two basic sets of input/output files in the DAS software package: 

1. a configuration file that provided the necessary input data to the DAS software, and 

2. data files into which the recorded data were placed. 

Section ii. Data File Structure 

The output data file structure was designed to allow plotting of selected segments of data with a standard plotting 

software. This file structure has the following features: 

1. providing the users with a clear link between the columns of numbers in a data file and the location and type of 

instrument originating the data, 

2. using nomenclature for naming the files with the following information: 

(a) nature of the data contained and (b) specific type of instruments represented in the files. 

3. generating an easily accessible set of files for archival purposes anticipating future inquiries for analysis and 

presentation. 

4. facilitating rapid data correction and post-processing. 

Two separate folders below a "main" data folder organize the data files. The folder structure is shown in Figure 

E.I.

Main Data Folder S~I

Dynamic Data Folder

Strain Gage Data File 

- Cable Potentiometer Data File 

- Inclinometer Data File 

- Type K Thermocouple Data File 

- Type T Thermocouple Data File 

- Pressure Gage Data File 

- Contact Detector Data File 

-I LVDT Data File 

Load Cell Data File 

- Power Supply Data File

I Data of Record (DoR) Folder

Strain Gage Data File 

-FCable Potentiometer Data File 

Inclinometer Data File 

Type K Thermocouple Data File 

Type T Thermocouple Data File 

-- Pressure Gage Data File D 

Contact Detector Data File 

LVDT Data File 

Load Cell Data File 

L-= Power Supply Data File

Figure E.I Data file folder structure. 

All data from the high pressure test were stored as raw data signals (i.e., defined as the output of the analog-to

digital conversion steps in the DAS process). Posttest data reduction was performed to convert the raw data into

E-3 NUREG/CR-5679
the reduced data with selected engineering units. Table E. I lists the-raw and reduced data units for the instruments 

used in the SCV model test. 

Table E.1 Description of Raw and Reduced Data for the SCV Model Test 

Instrument Type Raw Data '.ajas Reduced Data Units 

strain gage strain or micro-strain (depending percent strain 

on gage factor format) 

cable-type displacement DC volts displacement (mm) 

transducer 

LVDT DC volts displacement (mm) 

inclinometer-type dis- DC volts tilt angle (0) 

placement transducer 

thermocouple temperature (IC) same as raw 

contact detectors DC volts same as raw 

pressure gage DC volts pressure (MPa) 

load cells DC volts load (Newton's) 

power supplies DC volts same as raw (data used to 

reduce instrument voltages to 

CPOT distances) 

It should be noted that the raw data in this table indicate the nature of the data signal collected from the mainframe 

without any processing. The data from some of the instruments were used to "compensate" or "correct" the raw 

data from other instruments for the purposes of optimizing data accuracy. Figure E.2 illustrates the basic data flow 

diagram for the SCV model test.

NUREG/CR-5679 E-4
Raw Data Streams

SDoTs• M • Processing I =iRelative iacmen, 

Power Supplies () ,l" 

Inclinomete ifI V I ...... .• ... Proesin Degrbee of ýTilt 

ILoad Cells (V .1- ý rces~sing J"•'l(NetnFigure E.2 Basic SCV data flow diagram.

NUREG/CR-5679

Final Output Data

E-5
Appendix F 

High Pressure Test Data Correction

F-1 NUREG/CR-5679
F.1 Introduction

This chapter describes the procedures used to correct the raw test data. Appendix D details the location and orien

tation of every instrument. 

F.2 High Pressure Test Data 

Two sets of data, a dynamic pressure set and a Data of Record (DoR) set, were collected during the steel contain

ment vessel (SCV) high pressure test. For the former set, data scans for all instruments were taken continuously throughout the duration of the test. For the latter set, the system was allowed to reach steady-state conditions before 

the "data of record" were scanned and stored. Appendix G contains the test data files for the corrected DoR pack

age from the SCV high pressure test. Data from 13 categories of gages are included: 

"* contact detectors 

"* horizontal displacement transducers 

"* tilt sensors 

"* load cells 

"* LVDTs 

"* pressure gages 

"* rosette strain gages 

"* single element strain gages - hoop direction 

"* single element strain gages - meridional direction 

"• strip gages 

"* type K thermocouples 

"* type T thermocouples 

"* vertical displacement transducers 

Data from each gage are plotted against the high pressure test's pressure history data. There is one plot per gage and, in general, one gage per plot. The exceptions to this format are the 3-element rosette gages and the 5-element 

strip gages. For these two categories, all of the elements of one complete gage are plotted on the same plot. The 

plots are organized according to the gage types listed above. They are also sequentially numbered in each gage-type 

section. 

It is important to note that the pressure values shown in all of the data plots represent gage pressure not absolute 

pressure. 

After correcting the data for various effects, the data were converted into engineering units. Details on the correc

tions are contained in Section F.3. Appendix G provides a detailed description of the data files. 

It is important to note that there are three misnamed gages: SSGH-l-EQH-17, SSGH-I-EQH-38, and SSGM-O

EQH-43. The first two gages actually measure meridional strain and are associated (cross-axis) with strip gages STG-I-EQH-16 and STG-I-EQH-37, respectively. The SSGM-O-EQH-43 gage is actually a hoop gage not a me

ridional gage. 

Appendix G also contains the calculated equivalent plastic strains for the rosette gage data. Section F.4 presents the 

equations used to obtain these.

F-3 NUREG/CR-5679
For the rosette gages, there are three elements per gage. These elements are labeled a, b, and c, and indicate hoop 

strain, meridional strain, and the strain at 450, however not in that order. For the rosette gages contained in the ex

terior of the SCV model (gage names of the type: RSG-O-XXX-XXX), the element labeled "a" indicates the hoop strain and the element labeled "c" indicates the meridional strain. With the exception of the 24 gages listed below, 

for the rosette gages contained in the interior of the SCV model (gage names of the type: RSG-I-XXX-XXX), the 

element labeled "a" indicates the meridional strain and the element labeled "c" indicates the hoop strain. For all but 

one rosette gage, element "b" indicates the strain at 450. 

The first exception is gage RSG-I-EQH-45. For this gage, element "a" indicates the 450 strain, element "b" indi

cates the hoop strain, and element "c" indicates the meridional strain. 

As noted, there are 23 more interior rosette gages that do not follow the standard direction convention given above. 

For this group of gages, element "a" indicates hoop strain, and element "c" indicates meridional strain. The affected 

g•ges are listed below. 

RSG-I-EQH-1 

RSG-I-EQH-8 

RSG-I-EQH-9 

RSG-l-EQH-10 

RSG-I-EQH-1 1 

RSG-I-EQH- 12 

RSG-l-EQH-13 

RSG-I-EQH-14 

RSG-I-EQH- 15 

RSG-I-EQH- 19 

RSG-I-EQH-20 

RSG-I-EQH-21 

RSG-l-EQH-22 

RSG-l-EQH-23 

RSG-l-EQH-24 

RSG-I-EQH-25 

RSG-I-EQH-26 

RSG-l-EQH-30 

RSG-I-EQH-31 

RSG-I-EQH-44 

RSG-I-LST-1 

RSG-I-LST-9 

RSG-l-LST-13 

F.3 Data Corrections 

This section presents the corrections made to the SCV high pressure test DoR data, including corrections to com

pensate for temperature effects, reference point movement, and such. Standard data reduction from raw data (usu

ally volts) to engineering units is not discussed. 

F.3.1 Corrections Made to Strain Gage Raw Data 

Basic strain data reduction is accomplished through two major steps: (1) firmware reduction from measurements of 

the bridge-balancing voltages to values of strain and (2) post-test data corrections to compensate for various effects 

(i.e., temperature effects).

NUREG/CR-5679 F-4
The former of these major steps will not be discussed here except to note that the data acquisition firmware auto

matically converts the voltages received from the strain gages to strain data. Therefore, for the SCV test, the raw 

data from strain gages are in microstrain. 

The latter of the two major reduction steps (referred to here as the data corrections) will be discussed in the follow

ing sections. 

The least count requirement for the strain gages used in this test was ± 0.01 % strain. The data acquisition system 

used in the SCV high pressure test recorded seven significant digits for each data point. This is not meant to imply 

that the data are believed to be accurate to that extent. A study on the uncertainty of the data from the various in

struments yielded uncertainty ranges for each type of gage used. The results of this study can be seen in Appendix 

B of the report on SCV Model High Pressure Test Datal. 

The strain gage raw data obtained during the SCV high pressure test are in the units of microstrain. Three types of 

data correction were performed on the raw strain gage data. These are corrections for gage-specific factors, correc

tions for temperature effects, and corrections for transverse sensitivity. 

F.3.1.1 Instrument-Specific Gage Factor Correction 

The data acquisition system (DAS) used in the SCV high pressure test assumed a gage factor (GFAC) of 2.0 for all 

strain gages. This value was used in the internal firmware of the DAS hardware to determine the strain values out

put by the system. However, each strain gage has associated with it a specific gage factor, which is identified and 

provided by the manufacturer. The data from each gage were corrected after the test to reflect the correct (GFAC) 

for that gage. 

F.3.1.2 Corrections for Temperature Effects 

There are two corrections that may be made for temperature effects on strain gages. The first is an adjustment of 

the strain gage data for apparent strain. Apparent strain is a value of strain that appears in the raw data as an artifact 

of the temperature at which the data were taken. This strain amount must be removed from the raw data to compen

sate for this effect. If the strain readings were taken at the temperature at which the strain gages were calibrated, 

there would be no apparent strain. 

Although the strain of interest in the SCV high pressure test was that strain caused by pressure-induced expansion of 

the model, no attempt was made to eliminate from the strain data the amount of strain caused by thermal expansion 

of the model. 

The second correction for temperature effects, a correction to adjust the gage specific gage factor (GFAC) for tem

perature, was not done. For each gage, the manufacturer provides a GFAC, a factor determined at a temperature of 

24°C. The GFAC value will change with temperature. The maximum temperature read by the suite of thermocou

ples used in the SCV high pressure test was 34.3*C. Using the curves provided by the gage manufacturer and this 

maximum temperature value, the maximum change due to temperature effects in the GFAC for any gage would be 

0.0794% of the strain reading. Given the specified gage accuracy (uncertainty), this set of corrections to the GFACs 

was not done. 

F.3.1.3 Corrections for Transverse Strain Sensitivity 

The final set of corrections performed on the strain gage data involved correcting for transverse strain sensitivity. 

These corrections were performed only for the rosette gage data and the strip gage data. For the latter we had previ

Rightley, G. S., "Steel Containment Vessel Model High Pressure Test Data," Project Report No. R-SN-S-006, Rev. C, 

Sandia National Laboratories, NM, January 1998.

F-5 NUREG/CR-5679
ously identified cross-axis gages (of the type SSGH) for use in these corrections. Transverse sensitivity refers to the 

response of the gages due to cross axis strain. 

F.3.1.4 Failure of Cross-Axis Gages 

In some cases, the cross-axis gage that was used for a rosette or strip gage transverse sensitivity correction failed 

while the primary gage itself continued to record valid data. In these cases, the rosette or strip gage data was not 

corrected for transverse sensitivity for times after failure of the cross-axis gage. 

F.3.2 Corrections Made to Cable Potentiometers 

F.3.2.1 General Corrections 

Each cable potentiometer (CPOT) has a specific sensitivity factor. This sensitivity is of the form m V/(V*in ). The 

signal in mV is normalized by the excitation voltage and divided by the sensitivity factor to obtain the CPOT length 

in inches. It is necessary to monitor the excitation voltage used for each measurement. 

For each cable potentiometer location, the initial length reading must be algebraically combined with each subse

quent reading to provide the differential displacement throughout the experiment. For all vertically oriented CPOTs 

and for all external, horizontal CPOTs this was done immediately after reduction to engineering units. For the in

ternal, horizontal CPOTs this was done later, as will be explained. 

The geometry showing the general reduction of the CPOT data is shown in Figure F. 1. It should be noted that this 

assumes that the angle between the cable's original horizontal line and its displaced line is small so that the true 

horizontal and vertical components of the displacement are equal to the indicated displacement. 

The axes and nomenclature are shown in Figure F.2. 

F.3.2.2 Corrections for Movement of Central Support Column 

Each interior cable displacement measurement was corrected for the rigid body motion of the central support col

umn. This was accomplished by monitoring the motion of the central column. 

The central column motions monitored were: 

1. rotation of the column about horizontal orthogonal axes at its base, 

2. translation of the column along these same two axes and 

3. translation of the column vertically due to ring support deformation. 

The following data were collected for this purpose: 

1. tilt of the column in two axes 

2. X-axis displacement of the column, 

3. Y-axis displacement of the column and 

4. Z-axis displacement of the column 

The following items were also used for correction of the internal, horizontal displacement measurements (after con

version from their raw, DC volts, form).

NUREG/CR-5679 F-6
I. height of gage from base of column, H.e

2. angular location of gage, 0.., measured from the 0' cardinal line, clockwise positive. 

In Figure F.2, positive x, y, and z are shown and Oy is positive clockwise with respect to the positive y-axis, and Ox is 

positive clockwise with respect to the positive x-axis. 

The correction to any internal displacement measurement can be presented in distinct segments based on the hori

zontal plane translational motion, the vertical translation, and the rotation about the column base. 

(Note that the correction must be applied to each measurement of displacement, and it must be applied based on the 

column motion data taken during the same scan, i.e., at the same moment in time, as the original displacement data.) 

F.3.2.3 Correction for Horizontal Plane Translations 

This correction was performed only on the internal, horizontal CPOT data. This correction involved an algebraic combination of the readings of the x- andy-axis displacements of the central column with the x- and y-axis compo

nents of the initial reading of each displacement gage. 

F.3.2.4 Correction in Vertical Displacement Measurements for Vertical Translations 

The correction for this gage measurement is a straightforward combination of the vertical displacement recorded 

and thevertical translation experienced by the central column base. See Figure F.3. 

F.3.2.5 Correction in Horizontal Displacement Measurements for Vertical Translations 

A sketch of the geometry for this case is shown in F.4. Note that the motion imparts an elongation of the cable-type displacement transducer. Vertical displacement measurements of the attachment point would be required to resolve 

this issue. 

A study was done which showed that the maximum effect of this motion on the displacement values was ±0.8%. 

Thus, corrections of this type were not performed on the SCV data. 

F.3.2.6 Correction in Vertical Displacement Measurements for Horizontal Plane Translations 

In a similar manner, the correction for vertical displacement given horizontal plane motion of the column was not 

performed. 

F.3.2.7 Correction for Rigid-Body Rotations 

The corrections for the rigid body rotations of the central column were not done. The data from the SCV high pres

sure test showed that there was negligible rotation of the column. 

F.4 Calculated Data 

Once the data from the rosette gages were checked and verified, an additional set of calculations was done. First, the principal strains experienced throughout the test by each rosette gage were calculated. Then these principal 

strains were used to determine the equivalent plastic strains seen. 

F.4.1.I Principal Strains 

The equation for principal strains for a 3-element rectangular rosette gages is shown in Equation 1.

F-7 NUREG/CR-5679
epq = e +e 3 ± V/(s -s3)Y +(2e 2 - el ) (1) 

Where E and E: are the gage elements located 900 apart and F, is the element located at 450. 

F.4.1.2 Equivalent Plastic Strains 

The principal strains, sp and ,q, can be used to compute the equivalent plastic strain from rosette gage data. Assume 

that the elastic part of the strain is negligible. (This assumption is valid for values of equivalent plastic strain, e', 

considerably greater than the yield strain.) Equation 2 may be used to perform the calculation. 

FP = 2 (&p 2 +S•q +spsq) (2) 3

NUREG/CR-5679 F-8
A *I (x,y) 

inclinometer I vert.displ. horiz. displ. (tl (tl - tO) - tO) = = Dv Dh (t1) (t1) - Dv - Dh (tO)(tO) 1 

horizontal 

gage Dh 01) 0- ) 

A 4 ---- 4 

Dh (tO)

Dv (to)

Dv (tl)

Hgage

IIhorizontal boom 

(900, one at 00 also) vertical gage

ring support girder

1800 cardinal line 

Figure F.I Displacement measurements (showing offset subtraction).

90° horizontal boom

point

............. \ S d 

S SCV displacement

x (towards 00) 

to ring support

rigid attachment

y (towards 900)

Figure F.2 Central column motion measurements.

NUREG/CR-5679

V V

F-9
_ xSCV Surface

indicated 

displacement actual 

displacement

ml 

El

Figure F.3 Geometry for vertical translation of central column - vertical gages.

AZ

0

indicated displacement 

actul actual dislceetSCV d~isplac~emen~t Surface 

Figure F.4 Geometry for vertical translation of central column - horizontal gages.

NUREG/CR-5679

Az

F-10
Appendix G

Test Data Files for the High Pressure Test

G-1 NUREG/CR-5679
SCV High Pressure Test Data 

On the enclosed CD, there are the data files containing the corrected DoR data from the SCV high pressure test. 

Additionally, the dynamic data pressure file is included to provide a full history of the SCV model pressure during 

the high pressure test. 

The data in these files have been corrected and checked. 

These files are Microsoft Excel files. Each file contains several worksheets. In each file one worksheet contains the 

data in column format. The other worksheets in each file are plots of the data. On the worksheet containing the 

listed data, there are a time column (minutes), a pressure column (MPa), and columns of data for the gages of the 

type specified in the file name. Each file name is comprised of the gage type and the units for the gage data in the 

file. See below for more detail. 

SCV High Pressure Test Data Files

CDVOLTS.XLS 

hcpmm.XLS 

IDTDEGR.XLS 

LCNewtons.XLS 

LVDT mm.XLS 

PGDORMPa.XLS 

PG_dynamicMPa.XLS 

TCKDEGREES.XLS 

TCTDEGREES.XLS 

VCP mm.XLS 

Strain Gaee Data are in 

RSGI _%.XLS 

RSG_2 _%.XLS 

SSGH %.XLS 

SSGM _%.XLS 

STG _%.XLS

contains the contact detector data in volts 

contains the horizontal displacement gage data in mm, all ldata is with respect to a global 

coordinate system, this means that a positive displacement indicates the SCV vessel 

growing outward, a negative displacement indicates the SCV pulling inward 

contains the central column tilt sensor data in degrees of offset 

contains the load cell data in Newtons 

contains the LVDT data in mm (gap closure) 

contains the DoR pressure gage data in MPa 

contains the dynamic pressure gage data in MPa 

contains the type K thermocouple data in degrees C 

contains the type T thermocouple data in degrees C 

contains the vertical displacement gage data in mm 

Percent Strain 

contains some of the rosette strain gage data 

contains the rest of the rosette strain gage data 

contains the single strain gage data in the hoop direction 

contains the single strain gage data in the meridional direction 

contains the strip gage data

IMPORTANT: Please note that the two misnamed MERIDIONAL gages, SSGH-l-EQH- 17 and SSGH-I-EQH-3 8, 

are located in the SSGH _%.dat file NOT in the SSGM _%.dat file. The strip gages that are associated with these 

meridional gages are STG-I-EQH-1 6 and STG-I-EQH-37. Remember that these strip gages are recording HOOP

G-3 NUREG/CR-5679
strains not meridional strains like the rest of the strip gages. Also, note that the misnamed HOOP gage, SSGM-O

EQH-43, is located in the SSGM_%.dat file NOT in the SSGH_%.dat file. 

An additional file was added to this CD.

EPScorrected.dat. contains the time and pressure for the DoR readings plus the calculated equivalent plastic 

strain values from the corrected rosette gage data taken during the high pressure test.

NUREG/CR-5679 G-4
Appendix H 

Acoustic Emission Results

H-1 NUREG/CR-5679
H.1 Introduction

An acoustic emission source location system, which operated independently of the other instrumentation data chan

nels, was used to monitor the entire surface of the steel containment vessel (SCV) model above the ring support girder. The purpose of the acoustic monitoring was to detect and approximately locate emission sources that oc

curred in the shell of the SCV model during the high pressure test in real time and then to try to gain additional in

formation on the model response through the posttest analysis. 

In the SCV model, the sources of acoustic emission were primarily crack initiation and flaw growth, and secondarily spallation or fracture of corrosion particles and rubbing of adjacent surfaces when the SCV model made contact 

with the contact structure. When an emission occurred, one or a group of sensors would detect it, and the associated 

computer program would calculate the approximate location of its source. 

Several terms that are unique to the acoustic emission testing are introduced here. A hit is registered when the 

acoustic system is triggered by an acoustic wave with an amplitude that exceeds a preset threshold passes under

neath a sensor. When several sensors are triggered by the same acoustic wave at times consistent with travel from a 

single point on the SCV model, the data set is called an event. If the time data from an event are used to calculate a 

location on the SCV model and the calculated location is consistent with acoustic travel times to at least the first six 

sensors hit, the event is called a located event. 

H.2 Acoustic Emission Sensors 

The acoustic emission system had 24 sensors that were applied to the SCV model with magnetic hold-downs and 

acoustically coupled with silicone vacuum grease. Locations of the sensors are given in Table H. 1. The meridional 

distances were measured along the interior or exterior surface of the model, starting from the ring support girder. Sensors 1-16 and sensors 22 and 23 were mounted inside the model because the contact structure prevented their 

placement on the outside. Figure H. I provides a schematic of the sensor locations. Sensors 17-21 were mounted 

on the outside of the model above the contact structure. Sensor 24 was mounted in the middle of the equipment 

hatch on the outside. 

H.3 Real-Time Test 

The acoustic emission system was a part of the high pressure test of the SCV model. The pressurization curve for 

the high pressure test recorded by the acoustic emission system is shown in Figure H.2. During the initial gas flow, there was excessive acoustic emission. The gas flow noise stopped at about 0.35 Mpa, and the first located emission 

was detected at 0.44 MPa (64 psi). Figure H.3 shows the events located by the top and the bottom sensor arrays during the test. Figure H.4 shows curves of the total signal strength from the located events versus the pressure for 

the two arrays. There is an apparent change in the slope of the curves around 3.5 MPa (508 psi) and an increase in 

the acoustic emission rate above this pressure level, but there were no serious changes until the appearance of a 

major leak at 4.62 MPa (672 psi). After the leak started, no more located events were detected. However, the leak 

produced large amounts of acoustic emission. Figure H.5 is a graph of the total signal strength, as a function of 

pressure, from all the hits during the test. The noise of flowing gas during the start of pressurization and the leak 

noise at the end of the test are quite obvious. These two events generated most of the acoustic emission during the 

test. 

The posttest examination of the interior of the SCV model showed a tear in the wall near the equipment hatch. The 

acoustic emission system did detect activity from the area near this tear. It can be seen in Figure H.3 as the group of 

events in the center of the triangle formed by sensors 2, 5, and 6. However, this activity did not appear any worse 

than several other areas shown in Figure H.5. The posttest metallographic examination of the tear showed that it 

was primarily ductile in nature. Ductile tears produce fewer and lower amplitude emissions than do brittle tears. 

The metallographic results explain why the acoustic emissions associated with the tear were not distinguishably 

recognized during the high pressure test.

H-3 NUREG/CR-5679
Table H.1. Acoustic System Sensor Locations for the SCV Model High Pressure Test

Sensor Meridional Azimuth Anoltý Sensor Meridional Azimuth Angle 

Distance (Degree- Distance (Degrees) 

(mm) (mm) 

1 510 - 13 3400 45 

2 515 94 14 3400 135 

3 515 177 15 3400 225 

4 510 274 16 3400 315 

5 1650 41 17* 3805 351 

6 1670 131 18* 3805 90 

7 1670 221 19* 3805 171 

8 1670 311 20* 3805 270 

9 2690 356 21* 37 mm from 225 

top head center 

10 2690 96 22 1210 67 

11 2675 176 23 1215 113 

12 2665 276 24* center of 

equipment hatch 

* indicates that sensor was located on the exterior of the model. 

H.4 Posttest Analysis 

Posttest analysis of the acoustic emission data from the high pressure test was done for several reasons. Accurate 

calculation of the locations of the acoustic emission sources allowed use of a clustering algorithm to determine loca

tions where critical structural damage might occur during the test. It also allowed determination of the pressure de

pendence of the acoustic emission from each of the clusters. 

The first problem in the posttest analysis was to determine which collections of hits constituted an event. The most 

important point in determining an event is to find the first sensor hit, which signals the starting time for the event. 

For the SCV model, an event definition time, which is the time interval between the detection of the first and the last 

hit in an event, of 2.0 milliseconds was chosen. A manual search of the data and the selected hits for each event 

showed this interval to be a reasonable selection. 

At a minimum three sensors are required to be hits in order to locate an emission source on a plane. The initial time 

of an event and the x and y coordinates of the source are needed for accurate data. Because the acoustic emission 

data are not very accurate in the high pressure test, a fixed trigger level was used to produce uncertainties in the cal

culated time of arrival at the sensor. Two methods of alleviating some of these uncertainties were used in this analy

sis. First, an over-determined data set was used when possible. The values from the first six sensors on the cone that 

were hit comprised the event data set. If six sensors were not hit, data from as few as three were used. A nonlinear 

least squares fitting program was used to calculate the most probable location of the source. This program also cal

culated a goodness of fit parameter for the calculated answer. Data sets that had a goodness of fit parameter of less 

than 0.85 and those whose calculated location was more than 1400 mm away from the center of the triangle formed 

by the first three sensors hit were not included in the set of located events.

NUREG/CR-5679 H-4
The second method of reducing the uncertainty in the locations was to use a simple procedure developed by Ge and 

Kaiser1 to determine what acoustic velocity should be used for the travel time from the source to each sensor that 

was hit. In the high pressure test, an extensional velocity was assumed for the waves to all sensors. The sensors that 

could not have had an extensional velocity were assigned the flexural velocity. Those whose arrival times were later 

than 10% greater than the flexural velocity would have allowed were dropped from the data set. If the calculation 

with these velocities did not have a goodness-of-fit parameter that exceeded 0.85, a flexural velocity was assumed 

for all sensors. If the parameter still did not exceed 0.85 with all flexural velocities, that event was not included in 

the set of located events. 

To simplify the problem of locating an emission source on a plane, the conical section of the SCV model that is 

made of a thin steel shell was theoretically cut along the zero degree longitude and the surface unrolled onto a plane, 

without distorting the conical surface. The cylindrical surface below the cone was also treated on the same plane as 

the cone. The distortion produced by this procedure was not thought to have a significant effect on the location of 

the events on the cylindrical surface. The spherical surface above the conical section was treated as either a cone or 

a slice of a sphere. The head of the model was treated as a cylinder with a hemisphere on its top. These two latter 

approximations proved unnecessary because of the small number of widely scattered events originating on these sur

faces. The events on these surfaces were calculated using a planar approximation of a surface within the triangle 

formed by the three first-hit sensors. 

A total of 446 events out of 650 data sets on the conical section met the criteria and were kept in the set of located 

events. Many of the discarded events were either of very low amplitude or appeared to be mixed with another event. 

The accuracy of the location calculations was approximately ±50 mm. This uncertainty is produced primarily by the 

uncertainties in the triggering points on the individual waveforms. The uncertainty due to a finite shell thickness is 

10 mm or less. 

A cluster-seeking program was used to determine the nature of acoustic emissions. A cluster is defined as a collec

tion of located events placed within a confined area. A crude estimate of the area of the conical plus cylindrical sec

tions divided by the number of located events gave a rough density of one event per 7000 mm 2. It was decided that a 

cluster should have at least ten times that density. A circle with a radius of 100 mm was chosen as the smallest area 

in light of the uncertainty in the location accuracy. The criterion for the existence of a cluster was then set as four or 

more events within this area. As each location was calculated, the program checked whether it was within 100 mm 

of any other location. Two locations within this distance form the nucleus of a cluster. The center of the cluster is 

then calculated. Each succeeding center was investigated to check whether it was within 100 mm of another cluster 

center. If it was within the 100 mm separation, it was added to the cluster and a new center was then calculated. A 

growing flaw will show a steady or increasing emission rate as the stress field is increased. A source that does not 

emit with increasing stress field is either an arrested flaw or an event which does not affect the structural integrity of 

the model, such as a corrosion particle flaking off. Therefore, if the cluster did not contain at least one event at a 

pressure greater than 90% of the failure pressure, it was not defined a significant cluster. 

Figure H.6 is a map of the flattened conical section with the cylindrical attached skirt, and it identifies all located 

events and the significant clusters superimposed over the events. Included are the positions of the sensors, the two 

detected tears in the SCV model, and the stiffener ring. A group of overlapping clusters is counted as one cluster, 

and all clusters are identified with a letter. In cluster D, the two clusters do not touch but both appear associated with 

the structural damage lying between them. 

The total signal strength is shown in Figure H.4 as a function of pressure for the entire test. Figure H.7 shows the 

total signal strength as a function of pressure for clusters A, B, C, and D, which are the largest clusters, graphed on 

the same scale. The curves for clusters E, F, and G were very similar to the Cluster D curve. The curve for Cluster 

H had about half the envelope strength of Cluster D, and the curves for clusters I and J were each composed of four 

very small events around 4.5 MPa. These curves show the severity of the clusters, and each curve provides the in

formation on the pressure level for the onset of flaw growth. In addition, the number of located events in each 50

M. Ge and P. K. Kaiser, "Interpretation of Physical Status of Arrival Picks for Microseismic Source Location," Bulletin of the 

Seismological Society of America 80, 6, pp. 1643-1660, 1990.

H-5 NUREG/CR-5679
mm-high slice of the conical section and skirt is shown Figure H.8. The peak of this curve corresponds to the posi

tion of the stiffening ring. 

The nine events located on the spherical slice were well scattered. No two events were close enough to form a clus

ter according to the chosen definition. Only one occurre, ove 4.4 MPa. The 21 events detected from the top head 

were scattered over seven of the triangles formed bv' sensors in the region. Three triangles had four or more 

events in them. In two of these triangles, the eve - ere well scattered, both in space and pressure. In the third 

triangle, formed by sensors 13-17-18, there were- ar events located within a cluster radius of 20 mm. However, the 

highest pressure event in this cluster occurred at 3.65 MPa, so the cluster was not attributed to any structural prob

lems. 

H.5 Discussion 

The only significant acoustic emissions occurred in the conical section and, to a lesser extent, the cylindrical skirt. 

The top head, the spherical slice, the knuckle region and their attendant welds gave no sign of any serious problem. Examination of Figure H.6 shows that most of the clustering of the emission sources bordered the location of the 

middle stiffening ring. Figure H.8 shows that the highest density for all located events was also found in this section. 

The only serious cluster not located near this stiffening ring was Cluster A that was located by the tear that termi

nated the test. Clusters I and J, each comprised of four events with a very low signal strength, are considered insig

nificant. 

The large tear, roughly 190-mm long, at the equipment hatch area of the SCV model occurred just above the Cluster 

A, as shown in Figure H.6. Most of the events in this cluster were located below the tear. It was thought that these 

events were produced by the precursor to the tear and that the offset of the cluster location was caused by the acous

tic path distortions caused both by the equipment hatch opening and by the tear itself. The plot of the signal strength 

as a function of pressure shown in Figure H.7 for Cluster A shows several well-spaced events below 4.0 Mpa, but 

most of the events appear above 4.2 MPa. Emission continued until the test was stopped. The events that appeared at lower pressures may have been produced by the discontinuities in the weld along the equipment hatch reinforce

ment plate. It should be noted in the graph for Cluster A (Figure H.7) that there is no emission immediately prior to the leak. The last located event in Cluster A occurred 3 minutes and 36 seconds before the acoustic leak signal was 

detected. This observation indicates that the opening that stopped the test was a ductile tear and not a propagating 

crack. 

Cluster B, whose activity plot is also shown in Figure H.7, extends downward from the stiffening ring. Posttest in

spection of the model revealed that there is no visible flaw in this region. However, after the contact structure was 

removed, many vertical parallel stretch marks were found on the painted exterior surface of the model )Figure H.9). Unfortunately, visual examination of the painted surface cannot determine whether the acoustic emissions were 

caused by paint fracture or slow tearing. There were at least two other areas on the model that had similar paint cracks but did not produce a strong cluster of emission at high pressures. The most probable interpretation is to 

associate the upper emission locations with the stiffener ring and at least some of the lower emission locations with 

the paint cracks. 

Clusters B, C, D, E, F, G, and H appear to be associated with the stiffening ring which was welded to the inside of 

the conical shell section. There are two small weld relief openings at the stiffening ring, located at 210 and 2010 near 

clusters C and D, respectively. Posttest inspection of the model revealed that there was a small tear at 210, and the 

shell within the opening at 2010 experienced local necking. It is interesting to note that Cluster D consists of two 

clusters with a gap in the middle, exactly at the position of the ductile tear. This is consistent with the tear being 

ductile and not a propagating crack. 

The question remains as to the cause of the acoustic emission in the vicinity of the stiffening ring. The ring was at

tached to the shell by partial penetration welds, leaving a small void between the shell and the ring between the welds. It is probable that this type of weld geometry may become starter sites for micro-cracking. In addition, any weld flux trapped in this void can crack with small changes in the void geometry. Both microcracks and flux crack

ing produce acoustic emissions.

NUREG/CR-5679 H-6
It had been expected that when the contact structure and the model came in contact, acoustic emission would be gen

erated by the two surfaces sliding against each other. This emission would be characterized by very long events. No 

such events or hits were detected. However, posttest examination of the contact regions showed that some wires 

between the two structures were flattened. These wires, and to a lesser extent, the thick paint on the exterior of the 

model would tend to prevent direct contact of the metal structures. The only evidence of the effect of the contact 

structure is seen in Figure H.7, the curve for Cluster C: while there was emission continuously to the failure pressure, 

the rate dropped off suddenly at 4.0 MPa. This phenomenon could have been caused by a local contact, thus reduc

ing the local deformation in the conical shell section above 4.0 MPa. 

H.6 Conclusions 

The real time acoustic emission monitoring of the high pressure test of the SCV model provided information on the 

general condition of the model throughout the test. It did not generate data to signal the onset of model failure in 

terms of failure pressure and failure locations on the model. The posttest metallurgical evaluation results indicate 

that the tear at the equipment hatch reinforcement plate was caused by a ductile shear. This failure mode might pre

vent the acoustic emission device from providing data on model failure. The ductile tearing did not generate detect

able acoustic emission at the selected threshold of detection (the trigger threshold was 45 dB - 180 microvolts out of 

the sensor). 

The posttest acoustic emission analysis identified two regions on the SCV model that suffered damage during the 

high pressure test. Cluster A is located approximately at the site of the ductile tear that ended the test. The acoustic 

emission data in Figure H.7 indicate that the major damage occurred between 4.20 and 4.30 MPa. However, Figure 

H.5 shows that the large gas leak did not start until 4.62 MPa. This leads to the conclusion that some tearing in the 

model shell occurred from 4.2 to 4.3 MPa at this site but that ductile tearing did not open the large leak path until 

4.62 MPa. The second damaged region, including the clusters B through H, was located along the middle stiffening 

ring. The partial penetration weld at the stiffening ring created a void between the ring and the shell, resulting in 

many possible crack initiation sites. Acoustic emission activity curves for the clusters along the ring indicate that 

some microcracking started at the base of the ring around 3.5 MPa.

H-7 NUREG/CR-5679
Spherical Section.. 

Head side.. 

Head top...._

0*

' Conical Section 

.Cylindrical Skirt

Figure H.I Schematic representation of the sensor layout on the SCV model.

W - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -% sr J E e.C. . 

3

2

I

"0-

0 13808 26888 3988d 52888 65888

NUREG/CR-5679

Time - seconds 

Figure H.2 Pressure as a function of time in the SCV high pressure test. 

H-8

a.

B

i

...... ....... 

........ .... 

...... ....... 

.... .... .... ---- ---- ---- ------ - - -
"Vertical Distance" 

- mm "Vertical Distance" 

- mm

1' *tI-,I 1 iil, I I I -I I I.I I. I • I I I4 M '.' , '' -, w ,,

.9 

L.J 

0 

0 

.9 

0 

-I 

S. 

.9 

-I

hull I * * Ij 

I. 

III. I'' 

I., 

IjI 

%

II f. * 

* lI*I* 

II 

El

I .I

I SI *i t I !" 

w ell 

I .'* ** 

0., 

•I I . , ' : 

. , 

. "CA 

j *~*log 

WIp I,.

,b0

Ij

-o 0 

0 C 

0 0 

t'3 

0 

C

Lip 

0

-.1
Pt4 __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ 

_

q. 

N 

S 

0 

0t 

'*1 wI U

I I I I I I I I 

e N s N ,,4 rfluoJls ljUU!S TeOj

•qJ-

~.... * 4 4 4 4 

4 4 4 e 4 4 eo oIJl 4o el .e o~ 4e ea el 

44*4 4444*o o 4444. 444*44444444.4 

* 4 4o 4 4 I 

* o e4 4 41 4 4 

* 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 I* l 4 4 .lI• 4l 4 4 4lll 4l l ll 4lll~ 

4444444444 4*ho4444. .*o44444,4 

* 4 

. 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 . . 4 4, 

* 4 4~lll 4 4 4 4 4 

. l 

* 4il 4f l * 4 4 4 4$4 4 

† 44444444. 

. e 

. i 

.

.

.

. o 

. o 

.

.

.

. a 

. o 

.

.

. * 4 o4lll 4 lg ll 4 ll l 4 4 4~llg le 

4 O4 44444444 

. 44 444 444444* 

* 4 C 4 o 

. 4 4 

* 4 4 4 

. 4 

* 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 * l ll l 4 4 4l 4 4e ll 4ll le 4 4 4lmo 

4e 44444444444444444444 .. 4444 4. 

* o 4 4 4 4 4 4 

* 

. 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 

* 

. 4 4 4 4 4 4 * 4 .l l ll lll l~ l 4 l l 4 l 4l 4l 4l 

444444444444..., O 44* 

. 44 i 

*. 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .4 4 

*. 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .4 4 

I 

. e 

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .. ll lll~iee lo eOllg ll lle 4444444444.4.4444 44444. 444444 

* 4 4 4 4 i 4 e 4 

4 

. o 4 4 4 0 4 4 

4 4 4 

. 4 e 4 4 4 

4 4 4 4 4 4 ll 4 eel 4 ll ll 4ll~ l 4ll 

44444444 o 4444 o o 

. 444 

. 4444 

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 

o 4 4 4 4 

. 4 4 o 

4 4 4 4 o 4 4 4 4 

* 4 4 4 4 4 4O 4 4~ee lll

I I I I I I I I I~ " 

ID O O M ' N 

o•uails lpUsis FlOJl

U, 

ii 

LI) 

N 

0 

I

U*I

4444444..4..oa..4,44444'44 l44 i44444444444444i4444 4 iiii 

, 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4i 

,4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 o 44o 4 i4 4 4 4 4 *' 4 4 4 4 

4444 444 .44444444444444444l4e4.4444444444444444l4 

4 4 4 o 

4 4 4 4 4 4 4o 

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 

4 4 4 4 4 

44444444444444444 

. 4444444 

4 4 4 4 4 4 

4 4 4 4 4 4o 

* 4 0 4 4 , *e4 4 4 

* 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 

4 o 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 

444444444 

. 444444444 4444444444 

III III II III II III II III II III ii ii ii 

4 i 4 4l 4 4 4 4o 4 4 4 

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 

4 o 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 o 4 

4444444444444444444444444 444444444 

I l4 4 4 I 4 4 4 44I 

I 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 144 4III 44III 4 44 444I4 44I144 44 44 44 44 

t.I 4 4 4 4 4 4 

* 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 

* 4 4 4i 4 4 4 4 

III II II II II I 4II III ii ii ii ii ii ii 

444444 i o444444444 44444444444444 

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 

4 4 4 4 4 o 4 4 

4 4 4 4 4l 4 4 4 

4I 4 4 III 44I4II I IIII I II I 4i iii 

4

in 

41' 

I-. (J) 

0 

0 

4,4 

45

0 Ia

0 

S 

0 

0 

.0 

0 

0 

0. 

0 

0 

44

4.0 I.. 

0 

In 

4.0 a

0, 

In 

on 

0 

0 

4I 

4.0 

4J 

0 U 

0 

44 

0 

.0 

0 

4.0 a

In 

0 

In 

0 

0 

.I. 

40 a0 \.0 

04r u0

in i

i
2E7

1.6E7-

1.2E7-: 

SE6

4E6-

aa

Dec 11,96 08:27:42

e i I 

Pressure - MIPa

I a 

4

Figure H.5 Total hit signal strength for entire test showing gas inflow noise and leak noise.

NUREG/CR-5679

C, 

0

I

-..-. ..--- .--

!

H-11

F O a m

i
Located Events + 

Sensors E) 0o 900 1800 2700 0 

Tears / / 

o/ /I' 

Clusters 

09 

0

so ÷ + 

" / ~+ • + K ',•,._• + F• .4+ ++ +.-itt-_ + \ 

++ 

C+ + E 

0" +,,,,+ C+L ++'- +' + + + + $ + + •+ B-L,, +"" + 

0 

E-. 6 + )+ 

6o I +I + + * + 

-50.0 -'10.0 -30.0 -20.0 -10.0 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 '10.0 50.0

x - mm x10" 

Figure H.6 Map of the flattened conical section and cylindrical skirt.

NUREG/CR-5679 H-12
Total RE envelope strength 5102 

0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 66.7 83.3 100.0 'o i I I , i

N 

U'

p

Total RE envelope strength 3102 

OO 16.7 33.3 50.0 66.7 83.3 100.0 

So i I I I 11

I' 

-w 

-0 

m 

c ) 

sLn

Total RE envelope strength w102 

0. 0 16.7 33,3 50.0 66.7 83.3 100.0 

* 0 1 I 1 1 1

Fi 

U1 

0n

0.0 

N)

.=l 

91 

ES1 

i° 

e 

CA Total RE envelope strength .102 

16.7 33.3 50.0 66.7 83.3 100.0

I w 

-U. 

0 

0. 

0

SIl 

U) 

u0 

0 

S 

f8 

Ln CA 

u1 

S.3

N 

(U. 

10 

c) 

0. 

0

C) 

I.,' 

0\ 

-8 

'-0
Number of events in a 50 mnm high bin as a fumction of 

the "vertical distance" along cylindrical skirt and conical section 

Position of Stiffening Ring ni

0.0 60 0 an n .~

. ,: u.u 180.0 210.0 240.0 270.0 300.0 

Height above bottom of Model - mm *101 

Figure H.8 Distribution of located events as a function of meridional distance above the ring support girder.

NUREG/CR-5679

0 CO 

0D 

&~

C = 

- D 

.E o 

C C 

C'j 

00 2• 

N

L2 

E 

z

I

I

H-14
2••-,Cr• ~ • • ••, • , - -, I 

'7I 

iA

Figure H.9 Paint cracks on outside of SCV model at Cluster B and the curved line encloses Cluster B.

H- 15 NUREG/CR-5679
Appendix I

Listing of All Sample Hardness Measurements 

(Rockwell B Scale)

1-1 NUREG/CR-5679
Appendix I: Listing of All Sample Hardness Measurements (Rockwell B Scale) 

Sample Material Zone Description Average Standard Devia- Raw Data 

_..... tion (s) 

Plate SPV490 Base Metal 98.8 0.7 99.2 98. 97.6 98.4 98.6 

SCV-74-I SPV490 Base Metal 98.1 1.0 98.8 99.6 98.4 98.7 98.0 

HAZ 91.5 1.1 92.8 92.1 90.1 90.4 92.1 

Fusion Zone 95.1 1.1 95.5 94.7 96.4 95.6 93.3 

SCV-74-3 SGV480 Base Metal 89.18 0,15 89.0 89. i 89.3 89. i 89.4 

(Side) ItAZ 92.20 1.49 89.9 94.3 91.4 92.3 93. I 

SPV490 Base Metal 94.24 0.39 94.8 94.4 93.9 93.7 94A4 

(Side) HAZ 90.82 1.80 90.1 89.3 89.2 92.2 93.8 

Fusion Zone 92.10 0.96 92.7 90.2 92.6 92.7 92.3 

SCV- 106-1 SPV490 Base Metal 97,36 1.22 97.4 98.6 97.2 99.0 97.2 

97.1 96.2 95.5 97.2 100,0 

HAZ 92.06 1.69 95.1 92.7 91.0 91.0 90.5 

Fusion Zone 97.21 1.11 98,6 98.6 97.8 97.3 98.4 

97.6 98.4 96.2 98.6 96.4 

SCV- 106-2 SPV490 Base Metal 96.96 1.34 94.8 95.4 95.3 96.4 99.8 

96.6 96.2 97.5 96.6 96,4 

HAZ 88.64 1.04 90.1 89.5 87.3 87.8 88.5 

Fusion Zone 94.93 2.58 94.1 94.7 96.5 98.3 98.9 

SCV-340 SPV490 Base Metal 97.93 0.84 96.8 99.1 99.0 96,5 96.8 

98.3 98.3 97.9 98.1 98.5 

HAZ 96.65 1.83 93.8 97.0 97.5 98.3 92.9 

(areas of minimum 

deformation) 

Fusion Zone 97.63 0.55 97.1 97.7 98.1 97.2 96.4 

98.6 97.4 97.8 97.7 97.2 

SCV-21 SGV480 Base Metal 88.82 1.26 89.7 90.3 90.0 88.4 87.3 

HAZ 92.75 0.56 92.6 92.4 92.3 93.7 

(undeformed area) 

HAZ 95.08 2.27 91.0 94.7 95.3 97.1 97.3 

(deformed area) 

Fusion Zone 95.53 0.82 95.9 94,6 95.7 97.3 94.7 0 

tJ' 

0'NRC FORM 335 U.S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1. REPORT NUMBER 

(2-89) (Assigned by NRC. Add Vol.. Supp.. Rev.. 

NRCM 1102, BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET and Addendum Numbers. it any) 

3201, 3202 (See instructions on the reverse) NUREG/CR-5679 

SAND 98-2701 

2. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 

Design, Instrumentation, and Testing of a Steel Containment Vessel Model 3. DATE REPORT PUBLISHED 

•ONTH YEAR 

Fe~ruary1 2000 

4. FIN OR GRANT NUMBER 

A1401 

5. AUTHOR(S) 6. TYPE OF REPORT 

Vincent K. Luk/Sandia National Laboratories 

Michael F. Hessheimer/Sandia National Laboratories Technical 

Gina S. Rightley/Sandia National Laboratories 7. PERIOD COVERED (inclusive Dates) 

L. Dwight Lambert/Sandia National Laboratories 

Eric W. Klamerus/Sandia National Laboratories 6/92 to 5/98

8. PIERHFUHMINGi OHRGANIZATIO)N - NAME AND ADDRESS (If NRC, provide Division, Office or Region. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. and mailing address: if contractor. provide name and mailing address.)

Sandia National Laboratories 

P. 0. Box 5800, MS 0744 

Albuquerque, NM 87185-0744

9. SPONSORING ORGANIZATION - NAME AN D ADDRESS (If NRC, type -Same as above", i contractor, provide NRC Division. Office of Region,. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, and mailing address.) 

Systems Safety Department Division of Engineering Technology 

Nuclear Power Engineering Corporation Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 

Fujita-Kanko Building U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

17-1, 3-Chome, Toranomon, Minato-Ku Washington, D.C. 20555 

Tokyo 105, Japan 

10. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 

T. Hashimoto, NUPEC Project Manager J. F. Costello, NRC Project Manager 

11. ABSTRACT (200 words or less)

The Nuclear Power Engineering Corporation (NUPEC) of Japan and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) are co sponsoring and jointly funding a cooperative containment integrity research project at Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) to 

conduct a failure test of a steel containment vessel (SCV) model and contact structure assembly. The SCV model, 

representative of an improved Mark-Il Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) containment vessel, is scaled 1:10 in geometry and 1:4 in 

shell thickness. The contact structure, a thick bell-shaped steel shell, provides a simplified representation of a concrete reactor 

shield building in the actual plant. The high pressure test of the SCV model was conducted at SNL on December 11-12, 1996 

to provide data on the structural response of the SCV model up to its failure in order to validate analytical modeling, to find its 

pressure capacity, and to observe the failure mode and mechanisms. 

The SCV model and the contact structure were instrumented with strain gages, displacement transducers, contact detection 

devices, pressure transducers, and thermocouples. The maximum pressure achieved during the high pressure test was 4.66 

MPa or approximately 6 times the scaled design pressure. Posttest model inspection revealed that the leakage was caused by a large tear, about 190-mm-long, along a weld seam at the outside edge of the equipment hatch reinforcement plate. This 

report describes the design, instrumentation, test operation and results of the SCV model.

12. KEY WORDS/DESCRIPTORS (List words or phrases that will assist researchers in locating the report.) 13. AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 

Unlimited 

Steel Containment Vessel, Design, Instrumentation, Failure Test, Pressurization 14. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 

System, Data Acquisition and Correction, Failure Pressure and Mechanisms (This Page) 

Unclassified 

(This Report) 

Unclassified 

15. NUMBER OF PAGES 

16. PRICE

NRC FORM 335; (2-89) SNU6400/NRC Forms