Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 7c104096-d040-463a-a94b-a0af08ab3478
Document Type: srp
Title: DYNAMIC TESTING AND ANALYSIS OF SYSTEMS, STRUCTURES, AND
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0702/ML070230008.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 3
Section ID: 3.9.2
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
cant/licensee may use other approaches to formulate the forcing function. However, sufficient supporting justification should be provided to demonstrate that the selected approach is technically sound and realistically predicts the forcing function. In addition, an assessment of bias errors and uncertainties should be provided. C. Acceptable methods of obtaining dynamic responses for vibration and stress predictions are as follows: (i) If a numerical model is used to compute mode shapes and FRFs, the modeling approach should be documented along with the model itself. Uncertainties and bias errors for both the approach and the specific model should be provided along with their bases. Additional guidance on numerical uncertainties and bias errors can be found in RG 1.20. (ii) Force-response computations are acceptable if the characteristics of the forcing functions are predetermined conservatively and the mathematical model of the reactor internals is appropriately typical of the design. (ii) If the forcing functions are not predetermined, either a special analysis of response signals measured from reactor internals of similar design may predict amplitude and modal contributions or parameter studies useful for extrapolating the results from tests of internals or components of similar designs based on composite statistics may be used. The latter approach should be used only when the expectation that flow-induced vibration or acoustic resonance will not occur for the operation conditions covering the extrapolated range of the forcing functions is shown beyond doubt. D. Vibration predictions should be verified by RPV, steam, feed water and condensate piping, and safety relief valve test results. This procedure should consider all sources of bias errors and uncertainties. If the test results differ substantially from the predicted response behavior, the vibration analysis should 3.9.2-20 Revision 3 - March 2007 be modified appropriately for more agreement with test