NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH) Evaluation at Argonne National Laboratory Establishing a Specific Methodology and Lessons Learned Betsy Grom, Argonne National Laboratory Alex Smith, Nexus Technical Services Corp.
34
Embed
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH) Evaluation at Argonne National Laboratory Establishing a Specific.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH) Evaluation at Argonne National Laboratory
Establishing a Specific Methodology and Lessons Learned
Betsy Grom, Argonne National Laboratory
Alex Smith, Nexus Technical Services Corp.
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Establishing a Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
Introduction
• Why is this important?– Seismically Induced Fires
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
Introduction
• Why is this important?– Rescue Operations
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
Photo Courtesy of USGS
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
Introduction
• Why is this important?– Mitigation of Hazardous Material
Release– Required by DOE Order 420.1B,
Facility Safety
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
Introduction
• Why is this important?– Ensure confinement of hazardous
materials– Protection of facility workers and public– Continued operation of essential
facilities– Protection of government property
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
Introduction
• Why is this important?– Argonne is susceptible to NPH Events
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
IntroductionI. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
Photo Courtesy of Argonne
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
IntroductionI. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
Photo Courtesy of Argonne
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
IntroductionI. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
Photo Courtesy of Argonne
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
Introduction
• NPH Evaluations are required for all Structures, Systems, and Components (SSCs)– Evaluation uses a graded approach. – Vital SSCs require a more rigorous
evaluation.
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
Project Description
• NPH Gap Analysis
• Development or update of Site Specific Design Basis Events
• Development of a Design Criteria Document
• NPH evaluation of Argonne’s hazard-category nuclear facilities
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
Performance Categories
• Structures, Systems, and Components (SSCs)
• Hazard Category (HC)– HC-1 (Reactor), HC-2 (Lots of
Static or dynamic force method as described in IBC 2000
Dynamic analysis
Analysis approaches for systems and components
IBC Force equation for equipment and non-structural elements (or
more rigorous approach)
Dynamic analysis using in-structure response spectra (Damping Values
Table JNPH-101-Q-T003)
Seismic Use group I III NA
Importance Factor 1 1.5 NA
Load Factors Code specified load factors 1.0
Scale Factors (SF) NA 0.9 1.25
Inelastic Energy Absorption Ratios For Structures
R in IBC 2000 Inelastic Energy Absorption Factors, Fμ Table, JNPH-101-Q-T003
Material Strength Minimum specified or 95% non-exceedance in-situ values
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
Seismic Loads
• Seismic Interaction– URM Interaction
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
Photos Courtesy of USGS
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
Seismic Loads
• Seismic Interaction– System interaction– Sprinkler pipe falling and breaking a
hot cell containment window– System was not designed to be
operable following event.
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
Seismic LoadsI. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
Lateral Brace Longitudinal Brace
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
SSC Evaluations
• System Evaluation Work Sheet (SEWS)
• Walk-down assessment follows the methodology established by the Seismic Qualification Users Group (SQUG), which is the basis of the DOE-GIP (EH-0545)
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
SSC EvaluationsI. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
SSC EvaluationsI. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
SSC EvaluationsI. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
SSC EvaluationsI. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
Results
• Provides quantitative input for future safety basis development.
• NPH mitigation deficiencies identified. Planning for upgrades can be prioritized:– Safety significance of upgrades– Time or funding constraints– Mission requirements
• Forms basis for future development of post-event procedures in facilities.
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned
Lessons Learned
• Employing the use of a specific methodology minimizes interpretations of requirements.
• Ensures consistency of individual analyses.
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Specific Methodology
IV. Lessons Learned
V. Questions
NPH Evaluation Specific Methodology & Lessons Learned