The essential difference between Revision 1 and the original issue of this report is the analysis of the anchor bolts that tie the steel dome of the primary tank to the concrete tank dome. The reevaluation of the AP anchor bolts showed that (for a given temperature increase) the anchor shear load distribution did not change significantly from the initially higher stiffness to the new secant shear stiffness. Therefore, the forces and displacements of the other tank components such as the primary tanks stresses, secondary liner strains, and concrete tank forces and moments also did not change significantly. Consequently, the revised work in Revision 1 focused on the changes in the anchor bolt responses and a full reevaluation of all tank components was judged to be unnecessary.

The overall scope of the project is to complete an up-to-date comprehensive analysis of record of the SDT System at Hanford. The "Double-Shell Tank (DST) Integrity Project - DST Thermal and Seismic Project" is in support of Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-48-14.

The essential difference between Revision 1 and the original issue of this report is in the spring constants used to model the anchor bolt response for the anchor bolts that tie the steel dome of the primary tank to the concrete tank dome. Consequently, focus was placed on the changes in the anchor bolt responses, and a full reevaluation of all tank components was judged to be unnecessary. To confirm this judgement, primary tank stresses from the revised analysis of the BES-BEC case are compared to the original analysis and it was verified that the changes are small, as expected.

The overall scope of the project is to complete an up-to-date comprehensive analysis of record of the DST System at Hanford. The "Double-Shell Tank (DST) Integrity Project - DST Thermal and Seismic Project" is in support of Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-48-14.

This report summarizes the results of the Double-Shell Tank Thermal and Operating Loads Analysis (TaLA) combined with the Seismic Analysis. This combined analysis provides a thorough, defensible, and documented analysis that will become a part of the overall analysis of record for the Hanford double-shell tanks (DSTs). The bases of the analytical work presented herein are two ANSYS{reg_sign} finite element models that were developed to represent a bounding-case tank. The TaLA model includes the effects of temperature on material properties, creep, concrete cracking, and various waste and annulus pressure-loading conditions. The seismic model considers the interaction of the tanks with the surrounding soil including a range of soil properties, and the effects of the waste contents during a seismic event. The structural evaluations completed with the representative tank models do not reveal any structural deficiencies with the integrity of the DSTs. The analyses represent 60 years of use, which extends well beyond the current date. In addition, the temperature loads imposed on the model are significantly more severe than any service to date or proposed for the future. Bounding material properties were also selected to provide the most severe combinations. While the focus of the analyses was a bounding-case tank, it was necessary during various evaluations to conduct tank-specific analyses. The primary tank buckling evaluation was carried out on a tank-specific basis because of the sensitivity to waste height, specific gravity, tank wall thickness, and primary tank vapor space vacuum limit. For this analysis, the occurrence of maximum tank vacuum was classified as a service level C, emergency load condition. The only area of potential concern in the analysis was with the buckling evaluation of the AP tank, which showed the current limit on demand of l2-inch water gauge vacuum to exceed the allowable of 10.4 inches. This determination was based on analysis at the design waste temperature of 350 F and the full 60-year corrosion allowance on the tank wall of 0.060 inch. However, analysis at a more realistic temperature of 250 F or corrosion allowance of 0.025 inch results in an acceptable demand/capacity ratio according to the ASME code criteria. Thus, buckling of the primary tank is judged to be unlikely for the current lack of corrosion in the tanks, and the expectation that the maximum waste temperature will not exceed 210 F. The reinforced concrete structure was evaluated as specified by the American Concrete Institute (ACI) code requirements for nuclear safety-related structures (ACI-349). The demand was demonstrated to be lower than the capacity at all locations. Revision 1 is being issued to document changes to the anchor bolt evaluation. RPP-RPT-32237 Rev. 1, Hanford Double-Shell Tank Thermal and Seismic Project-Increased Liquid Level Analysis for 241AP Tank Farms, described changes to the anchor bolt modeling and evaluation which were implemented in response to the independent reviewer's comments. Similar changes have been made in the bounding tank analysis and are documented in RPP-RPT-28968 Rev. 1. The conclusions of the previous releases of this report remain unchanged.

The purpose of this study was to determine the sensitivity of the dynamic response of the Hanford double-shell tanks (DSTs) to the assumptions regarding the constitutive properties of the contained waste. In all cases, the waste was modeled as a uniform linearly elastic material. The focus of the study was on the changes in the modal response of the tank and waste system as the extensional modulus (elastic modulus in tension and compression) and shear modulus of the waste were varied through six orders of magnitude. Time-history analyses were also performed for selected cases and peak horizontal reaction forces and axial stresses at the bottom of the primary tank were evaluated. Because the analysis focused on the differences in the responses between solid-filled and liquid-filled tanks, it is a comparative analysis rather than an analysis of record for a specific tank or set of tanks. The shear modulus was varied between 4 x 103 Pa and 4.135 x 109 Pa. The lowest value of shear modulus was sufficient to simulate the modal response of a liquid-containing tank, while the higher values are several orders of magnitude greater than the upper limit of expected properties for tank contents. The range of elastic properties used was sufficient to show liquid-like response at the lower values, followed by a transition range of semi-solid-like response to a clearly identifiable solid-like response. It was assumed that the mechanical properties of the tank contents were spatially uniform. Because sludge-like materials are expected only to exist in the lower part of the tanks, this assumption leads to an exaggeration of the effects of sludge-like materials in the tanks. The results of the study show that up to a waste shear modulus of at least 40,000 Pa, the modal properties of the tank and waste system are very nearly the same as for the equivalent liquid-containing tank. This suggests that the differences in critical tank responses between liquid-containing tanks and tanks containing sludge-like materials having a shear modulus not exceeding 40,000 Pa are unlikely to be greater than those due to the uncertainties involved in the definition of the design ground motion or in the properties of the tank-waste system. This is the fundamental conclusion of the study. The study also shows that increasing the waste extensional modulus and shear modulus does not lead to increased mass participation at the impulsive frequency of the liquid-containing system. Instead, increasing the waste stiffness eventually leads to fundamental changes in the modal properties including an increase in the fundamental system frequency.

Rev 1 of this report provides corrections and clarifications in response to reviewer comments arising during a project review meeting held June 7-8, 2007.