See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288180865

SEISMIC SAFETY OF NUCLEAR

POWER PLANTS - A MONOGRAPH

Research · December 2015

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1193.2245

CITATIONS READS

0 70

3 authors, including:

Vijay Muthekar Ajai Pisharady

Jayawant Shikshan Prasarak M… Bhabha Atomic Research Centre
2 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS 13 PUBLICATIONS 23 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Use of Light Interference Technique for groundwater exploration View

project

All content following this page was uploaded by Vijay Muthekar on 26 December 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

SEISMIC SAFETY OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS

A MONOGRAPH

Ajai S. Pisharady
Roshan A. D.
Vijay V. Muthekar

Civil & Structural Engineering Division

ATOMIC ENERGY REGULATORY BOARD

NIYAMAK BHAVAN
ANUSHAKTINAGAR
Mumbai – 400 094
 
INDIA 
 
ii
Contents

1.0  PREAMBLE 1 
2.0  EARTHQUAKE AND ITS EFFECTS 2 
2.1  Introduction 2 
2.2  Faults 2 
2.3  How do earthquakes occur? 4 
2.4  Earthquake terminology 5 
2.5  Seismic Waves 5 
2.6  Recording earthquakes 6 
2.7  Measuring Earthquakes 7 
2.7.1  Magnitude scales 8 
2.7.2  Intensity scales 8 
2.8  Earthquake Catalogues 9 
2.9  Major Indian Earthquakes 10 
2.10  Effects of earthquakes 10 
2.10.1  Vibration of structures 11 
2.10.2  Surface Faulting 11 
2.10.3  Subsidence and uplift 12 
2.10.4  Landslides 12 
2.10.5  Liquefaction 12 
2.10.6  Tsunami 13 
2.10.7  Seiches 13 
3.0  ASEISMIC DESIGN OF STRUCTURES 14 
3.1  Introduction 14 
3.2  Aseismic design philosophy 15 
3.3  Loading effects of earthquake 15 
3.4  Structural Configuration 17 
3.5  Structural response analysis 17 
3.5.1  Analytical model: 19 
3.5.2  Modal analysis approach 20 
3.5.3  Response spectrum analysis method 21 
3.5.4  Time History Analysis Method 21 
3.5.5  Equivalent Static Method 22 

iii
 3.5.6  Soil-structure interaction 22 
3.5.7  Fluid-structure interaction 24 
3.6  Design approach 24 
3.7  Seismic Standards of India: 25 
3.7.1  IS 1893 25 
3.7.2  IS 4326 26 
3.7.3  IS 13920 26 
3.7.4  IS 13827 and 13828 26 
3.7.5  IS 13935 26 
3.8  Seismic Isolators 26 
3.9  Seismic Retrofit 27 
4.0  SEISMIC SAFETY OF NPP 28 
4.1  Introduction 28 
4.2  Level of earthquakes 28 
4.3  Seismic classification of SSC of NPP 28 
4.4  Aseismic design approach of NPP: 29 
4.5  Geotechnical aspects related to seismic safety of NPP 30 
4.6  Summary of seismic safety criteria of NPP 30 
5.0  DERIVATION OF GROUND MOTION PARAMETERS FOR NPP 31 
5.1  Introduction 31 
5.2  Geological and seismological investigations 31 
5.3  Determination of DBGM parameters 32 
5.3.1  Deterministic approach for evaluation of DBGM parameters: 33 
5.3.2  Design Basis Ground Motion in Vertical Direction 35 
5.3.3  Design Basis Ground Motion in Two Orthogonal Horizontal
Directions 36 
5.3.4  Design basis ground motion parameters for Indian NPP sites 36 
5.3.5  Probabilistic Approach for Evaluation of DBGM Parameters 36 
6.0  SEISMIC DESIGN AND QUALIFICATION OF NEW NPP 38 
6.1  Introduction 38 
6.2  Qualification by analysis 38 
6.3  Seismic qualification by testing 40 
6.4  Seismic qualification based on earthquake experience 41 
6.5  Seismic qualification based on similarity 41 

iv
7.0  SEISMIC EVALUATION OF EXISTING NPP 42 
7.1  Introduction 42 
7.2  Principles of Seismic re-evaluation 42 
7.3  Seismic Capacity Assessment 43 
7.3.1  Seismic Margin Assessment 43 
7.3.2  Seismic Probabilistic Safety Assessment 44 
7.4  Tasks for seismic evaluation 44 
8.0  SEISMIC INSTRUMENTATION 47 
8.1  Introduction 47 
8.2  Selection of instruments 47 
8.3  Location of seismic instruments 48 
8.4  Multiunit sites 48 
APPENDIX – I: ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE OF RESPONSE
SPECTRUM METHOD 52 

v
vi
 1.0 PREAMBLE
Earthquakes have been one of the deadliest hazards to human civilization till
date. Unlike hazard such as cyclone, earthquakes cannot be predicted with the
short-term accuracy required for effective emergency management. Large
earthquakes capable of causing significant impact on human life have a low
probability of occurrence. However, once an earthquake has occurred, there is
very little time for warning and action. The effect could be catastrophic.

Current seismic design methodology for conventional facilities like

residential/office buildings, bridges etc. is based on the philosophy of resisting
minor earthquakes without significant structural damage, moderate earthquakes
with limited structural damage and a major earthquake without collapse or loss
of life. Indian national standard, “Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of
Structures”, IS 1893[1] divides the country into several seismic zones and
specifies the maximum possible earthquake in each zone. It is recognized that
forces, which the structure would be subjected during an earthquake, will be
larger than those specified in the standard. At the same time, structures possess
lot of reserve capacity that is not considered in the process of design. The
experience of past earthquakes clearly indicates that if structures are engineered
properly, following codes/standards in spirit and letter, effect of this devastating
hazard can be reduced to the level of acceptable risk.

Seismic design requirements of an NPP are quite stringent than those for
conventional structures. An NPP is generally designed for two levels of
earthquake, namely the S1 level earthquake or Operating Basis Earthquake
(OBE), and the S2 level earthquake or Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) [2]. The
OBE level earthquake corresponds to that level of earthquake which is expected
to occur once during life of the plant. The SSE corresponds to the credible
maximum seismic event expected at the site and is determined considering the
local geology and seismology and specific characteristics of local sub-surface
material. The structures systems and components (SSC) of the nuclear power
plant required for safe shutdown of reactor, decay heat removal and maintaining
the safe shutdown condition, are designed to remain functional during SSE.

Seismic safety of a nuclear facility is ensured not just by design for two levels of
earthquake. There are various other design aspects that go into engineering to
ensure seismic safety of an NPP. Approach of this engineering is different from
that of conventional facilities. This monograph presents the general profile of
earthquake engineering, philosophy and methodology adopted for seismic safety
of both new and existing Indian NPP.

1
 2.0 EAR
RTHQUAKE
E AND ITS EFFECTS
E

2.1 Inttroduction [3, 4]]

Earth is a layeered planet
as depicted in figure - 1.
Its outermost layer,
crust, varies to about
100 kilometers in depth,
is made of rock and
brittle in natuure. Below
it, is the mantle
m that
extends from base
b of the
crust up to a depth of
nearly 2900 kilometers,
k
beyond whichh the core
begins. The core is Figure 1 - Struccture of earth (Sou
urce: Wikipedia
mostly iron anda nickel Commons)
and consists ofo a liquid outer core and a solid inner core. Fu urther the crust and
a
the uppermostt mantle up to a depth of 75 to 125 kilometers iss called lithospheere.
The lithospherre floats on the hot, plastic asthhenosphere, which extends to 350 3
kilometers in depth. The entirre layer of rock below the astheenosphere up to the
core is called the
t mesosphere.

The theory off plate tectonicss, presented in early 1960s [3], explains that the
lithosphere is broken into seeven large (and several smallerr) segments callled
plates, figure - 2. The plates flloat on the layer below, the astheenosphere. As pllate
glides over thee asthenosphere,, the continents and oceans mov ve with it. Mostt of
the Earth’s maajor geological activity
a occurs att plate boundariees, the zones whhere
plates meet annd interact.

The plates move slowly, at rattes ranging from less than 1 to abbout 16 centimetters
per year. Because the plates move in different directions, they t knock agaiinst
their neighborrs at boundaries. The great forcees thus generatedd at plate bounddary
build mountaain ranges, cauuse volcanic erruptions and earthquakes.
e Thhese
processes and events are calleed tectonic activvity. The earthqu uake that occurss at
plate boundaryy is known as innter-plate earthqquake. Not all eaarthquakes occurr at
plate boundariies. Though inteerior portion of a plate is usually
y tectonically quuiet,
earthquakes allso occur far froom plate boundaaries. These earth hquakes are knoown
as intraplate earthquakes.
e Thhe recurrence timme for an intrap plate earthquakee is
much longer thhan that of inter plate earthquakees.

2.2 Fauults [5, 6]

The term faultt is used to descrribe a discontinuuity within rock mass, along whhich
movement hadd happened in the t past. Plate boundary
b is also a type of fault. A
joint in rock mass is anotheer tectonic featuure similar to a fault. It is alsoo a
discontinuity in rock, exceppt that in a joint, rocks on either e side of the
discontinuity have
h not movedd. Lineaments arre mappable lineear surface featuures

2
and may reeflect subsurfacee phenomena. A lineament coulld be a fault, a joint or
any otherr linear geologgical phenomena. Most faullts produce reepeated
displacemeents over geologgic time. Movem ment along a fau
ult may be graddual, or
sometime sudden
s generatinng an earthquakee.

Figure 2 - Tectonic platee map of the worldd (Source: U. S. Geological

G Survey))

There arre two impoortant

parameterss associated with
describing faults, namely,, dip
and strikee, figure - 3. The
strike is the direction of a
horizontal line on the surrface
of the faultt. The dip, meassured
in a vertiical plane at right
angles to thhe strike of the fault,
f
is the angle of fault plane with
horizontal. Other terminoloogies
of fault arre shown in figuure – Figure 3 - Strrike and dip
4. The hannging wall of a fault
refers to thhe upper rock surrface along whicch displacement has occurred, whereas
w
the foot waall is the term givven to that below
w. The vertical shift
s along a faullt plane
is called thhe throw, and thee horizontal displlacement is termmed as heave.

Faults are classified in to dip-slip

d faults, strike-slip
s faults and oblique-slipp faults
based on the
t direction of slippage along the t fault plane. In a dip-slip fauult, the
slippage occcurred along thhe dip of the fauult, figure – 4(a) and (b). In casse of a
strike-slip fault, the movem ment, figure – 5 taken place alo ong the strike, fiigure –
4(c) movem ment occurs diaggonally across thhe fault plane in case of an obliqque slip
fault, figurre – 4(d). Basedd on relative movement of the hanging
h and foot walls
faults are classified
c into noormal, reverse annd wrench faultss. In a normal fauult, the

3
hanging wall has
h been displaceed downward reelative to the foottwall, figure – 4(a).
In a reverse fault,
f the hanginng wall has beenn displaced upw ward relative to the
footwall, figurre – 4(b). In a wrench
w fault, thhe foot or the haanging wall do not
move up or doown in relation to one another, figure - 4(c). ThrustT faults, whhich
are a subdivisiion of reverse fauults, tend to causse severe earthquuakes.

(a) (b)

(cc) (d)
Figure 4 - Types of faults (Arrow shows dirrection of relative displacement)

(a) Noormal fault; (b) Reeverse fault;

(c) Strike-slip fault; (d) Oblique
O fault
HW – Hanging
H wall; FWW – Foot wall;
(1-2)– Throow; (2-3) – Heave;; φ - Angle of hadee

Faults are nucleating surfaces for seismic actiivity. The stressees accumulated due
d
to plate movemment produces strain mostly alonng the boundary y of the plates. This
T
accumulated strain causes ruptture of rocks along the fault planne.

2.3 Hoow do earthquak kes occur?

Occurrence off earthquakes iss
explained generally by thee
elastic rebounnd theory. Thee
two sides of ann active fault aree
in slow but b continuouss
movement reelative to onee
another. Thiis motion iss
accompanied by the graduaal
buildup of elasstic strain energyy
within the rockk along the faultt. Figure 5 - Elastic strain buildup
b and strain
n
rupture (S
Source: IITK BMT
TPC EQ Tips – 011)

4
When the strain along faault exceeds thrreshold limit of the rocks, thee fault
ruptures. The
T rupture of thee fault results in the sudden releaase of the strain energy
that had beeen built up overr the years. Outcoome of this sudd
den release of ennergy is
seismic waaves. This is ellastic rebound theory
t of generrating earthquakke. The
theory is described pictoriaally in figure – 5.

Events asssociated with fauult rupture are generally

g termed
d as seismic acttivities.
The causess of fault rupturee could be humaan induced or off natural origin. One
O of
the exampple of seismic activity,
a which is
i due to humaan causes is resservoir-
induced-seeismicity (RIS). Koyna
K earthquakke of 1967 in Maaharashtra is an RIS.
R

2.4 Earthquake terminology [7]

The regionn on fault, wheree rupture takes place,
p us or hypocenter of an
is the focu
earthquakee, figure - 6. Eppicenter is the loocation on the earth
e surface verrtically
above the focus. Distancee from epicenterr to any place of o interest is callled the
epicentral distance. The deepth of the focuss from the epiceenter is the focal depth.
Earthquakees are sometimee classified into shallow focus, intermediate
i foccus and
deep focuss earthquakes baased on its focal depth, as given n in Table - 1. Most
M of
the damagiing earthquakes are shallow focuus earthquakes.

Table – 1:1 Classification of

eaarthquakes
Classificatio
on Focal deepth
Shallow focus 0 – 70 km
m
Intermediate focus 70 – 300 km
Deep focus 300 – 700 km
Figure 6 - Earthquake terrminology [7]
 
2.5 Seismic Wavess [W1, W2]
The rupturre of rock, along fault, during ann earthquake, releeases large quanntum of
energy, whhich propagatess in the form off seismic waves. These waves travel
outward from the focus off the earthquake. The waves trav vel along the surface of
earth as weell as through thhe interior of eartth at varying speeeds, depending on the
material thhrough which theey move. Seismic waves are cattegorized in twoo types,
based on thheir path of traveel as body wavess and surface waaves, figure - 7.

Body waves travel througgh the interior of o the Earth. Body waves transm mit the
first-arrivinng tremors of ann earthquake, as well as many laater arrivals. There are
two kinds of o body waves: primary
p and secoondary.

Primary waves (also know wn as P-waves) are a longitudinal or compressive waves,

which meaan that the grounnd is alternately compressed
c and dilated in the dirrection
a the fastest waaves and the firsst to arrive at a station
of propagaation. P-waves are
after an earrthquake.

5
Secondary waves (S-
waves) are transverse or
shear waves, which
mean that the ground is
displaced
perpendicularly to the
direction of propagation.
Shear waves can travel
only through solids, as
fluids cannot withstand
shear stresses. Secondary
waves or shear waves are
several times larger in
amplitude than the
primary waves generated
from an earthquake
focus.

Surface waves travel

through the earth crust
and are of a lower
frequency than body
waves. The damage and
destruction associated
with earthquakes can be
mainly attributed to
surface waves. This Figure 7 - Seismic waves [W2]
damage potential and the
strength of the surface
waves reduce with increase in depth of earthquakes. There are two kinds of
surface waves: Love waves and Rayleigh waves, Love waves are confined to the
surface of the crust and produce entirely horizontal motion. Rayleigh waves
make the particles oscillate in an elliptical motion. Most of the shaking felt from
an earthquake is due to the Rayleigh waves.

The vibratory ground motion characterizing an earthquake is caused by the

passage of seismic waves. Vibratory motion may repeat itself regularly, as in the
balance wheel of a watch; or display considerable irregularity, as in earthquakes.
When the vibratory motion is repeated in equal intervals of time, it is called
periodic motion. The repetition time, T, is called the period of the vibration, and
its reciprocal, 1/T, is called the frequency of vibration.

2.6 Recording earthquakes: [8]

Seismic waves are detected and recorded by instruments by measuring the
movements of the ground due to earthquakes. Some instruments measure the
ground displacements and are called seismographs, figure – 8. The record
obtained from a seismograph is called a seismogram. To measure the ground
accelerations, other type of device exist, called accelerographs. The

6
accelerographs register the
accelerations of the soil and
the record obtained is called
an accelerogram.

The seismograph has three

components – the sensor, the
recorder and the timer. The
principle on which it works
is simple and is explicitly
reflected in the early
seismograph– a pen attached
at the tip of an oscillating
Figure 8 - Schematic of a seismograph
simple pendulum (a mass [Source: IIT-K BMTPC Eq tips – 02]
hung by a string from a
support) marks on a chart paper that is held on a drum rotating at a constant
speed. A magnet around the string provides required damping to control the
amplitude of oscillations. The pendulum mass, string, magnet and support
together constitute the sensor; the drum, pen and chart paper constitutes the
recorder; and the motor that rotates the drum at constant speed forms the timer.

2.7 Measuring Earthquakes

The “size” of
earthquake is
generally measured by
its magnitude and
intensity. Magnitude
measures the energy
released at the source
of the earthquake and
is determined from the
record of
seismographs.
Intensity is a measure
of the severity of
shaking produced by
the earthquake at a
given location.
Intensity is generally Figure 9 – Isoseismals for Bhuj earthquake 2001
higher near the [Source: www.gsi.gov.in (W3)]
epicenter than far away. For an earthquake of certain magnitude, different
locations experience different levels of intensity. Lines drawn on a map
connecting points of equal intensity is known as isoseismals. figure – 9 shows
the isoseismals for Bhuj earthquake of 2001.

7
2.7.1 M
Magnitude scales [9, 10]
There existss, a number off scales to represent earthqu
uake magnitudde;
most commonn is the Richterr scale. Richterr magnitude, alsso known as loocal
magnitude (MML) is defined ass the base-ten loogarithm of the maximum grouund
motion amplittude (in millimeeters) recorded on o a Wood-And derson short-perriod
seismometer, located at a distance of onne hundred kilometers from the
earthquake eppicenter. Richteer magnitude scale is suitablee for representting
earthquake maagnitude below 6.86 - 7. Earthquaake magnitude is also representedd in
terms of bodyy wave
magnitudes (MMB) and
surface wave
magnitudes (MS);
they can measure
m
earthquakes up
u to a
magnitude of o 8.5.
The magnitudee scales
without satturation
level are moment
m
magnitude (MMW) and
energy maagnitude
(ME). The moment
m
magnitude scaale is a F
Figure 10 - Compparison of magnitu
ude scales [10]
way of ratinng the
seismic momeent (estimate of thet energy of ann earthquake) of an earthquake withw
a simple, loggarithmic numerrical scale. The comparison off various scaless is
shown in the figure
f – 10 [10].

2.7.2 Inntensity scales: [1,

[ 9, W4]
The intensity scale consists of a series of cerrtain key respon nses such as peoople
awakening, movement
m of furrniture, damagee to chimneys, and finally - tootal
destruction. Numerous
N intensity scales have been developed overo the last seveeral
hundred yearss to evaluate thee effects of earrthquakes, the most m popular is the
Modified Merccalli Intensity (M MMI) Scale. Thiis scale, compossed of 12 increassing
levels of inteensity that rannge from imperrceptible shakin ng to catastropphic
destruction, is designated by Roman
R numeralls. It does not haave a mathematiical
basis; instead it is an arbitrarry ranking baseed on observed effects. The low wer
numbers of thhe intensity scaale generally deeal with the maanner in which the
earthquake is felt by people.. The higher nuumbers of the scale s are based on
observed strucctural damage. Another
A intensityy scale is Compprehensive Intenssity
Scale (MSK 64). This scale is more compreheensive and descriibes the intensityy of
earthquake moore precisely. Inddian seismic zonnes were categorized on the basiss of
MSK 64 scale. Intensity and magnitude
m are coorrelated. Table – 2 compares, MMI
M
and MSK inttensity scales allong with correesponding magn nitudes and Inddian
seismic zones as per IS 1893.

8
 Table - 2: Comparison between Intensity scales, magnitude and IS 1893
Seismic zone [Source: www.riskfrontiers.com(W4)]

Mag Seismic
MMI MMI Scale description MSK MSK Scale description
nitude zone
IS 1893
Felt by almost no one.
1 Not Noticeable 2
I

II
2 Scarcely Noticeable
Felt by very few persons at rest.
II

Felt quite noticeably by persons indoors. 3 Weak, Partially observed

3
Standing motor cars may rock slightly.
III
Vibrations similar to the passing of a truck.

Felt indoors by many, outdoors by few.

IV Sensation like heavy truck striking building. 4 Largely Observed 4

Felt by nearly everyone; Some dishes, windows

broken. Unstable objects overturned. Pendulum
V clocks may stop. Awakening, Slight damage in clay buildings,
5
Sometimes changes in flow springs

Felt by all, many. Some heavy furniture moved;

VI a few instances of fallen plaster. Damage slight. 6 Frightening, Felt by most indoors and outdoors, Fine 5
cracks in plaster of ordinary brick buildings, In some
cases cracks of width 1cm.
Damage negligible in buildings of good design
and construction; considerable damage in III
VII
poorly built, designed structures; 7 Damage in plaster of reinforced building

Damage slight in specially designed structures; 6

considerable damage in ordinary buildings with IV
VIII Destruction of building, Most buildings have small or
partial collapse. Fall of chimneys, stacks, walls. 8
deeper cracks

IX Damage considerable in specially designed

structures; frame structures thrown out of
plumb. Buildings shifted off foundations. General damage of building, Most buildings have gap
9
in wall, Ground cracks up to 10cm
V
7
Some well-built wooden structures destroyed;
X most masonry and frame structures destroyed.
Rails bent. General destruction of building, part of most of
10
buildings were fallen
Few, (masonry) structures remain standing.
XI Bridges destroyed. Rails bent greatly. Destruction, Severe damage to well built buildings,
11
bridges, water dam and railway line. 8 and
above
Damage total. Objects thrown into the air. Landscape change, practically all structures above
XII 12 and below ground were damaged, surface of ground
radically changed

2.8 Earthquake Catalogues [11, 12]

Earthquake catalogues archive the information of past earthquakes. There are no
established standards on the specific contents of the earthquake catalogues.
General information that is archived for includes earthquake hypocenters, origin
times, recorded travel times.etc Earthquake catalogues with high-quality data
over large areas and long time periods are rare. The most common drawback in
generation of regional and global earthquake catalogues has been that only few
of them are based on original sources of information and rest relies on secondary
evidence and a repetition of previous lists. Geological Survey of India (GSI) had
compiled the catalogue of Indian earthquakes and contributed very substantially
to the earthquake studies in India. AERB published a comprehensive earthquake
catalogue containing earthquake data down to magnitude 3.0 for peninsular India

9
in the year 1993 [12]. This comprehensive and enlarged database is useful to
assess earthquake parameters for design of nuclear power plants and also of
other critical structures.

2.9 Major Indian Earthquakes [13]

India has been subjected to some of the worst earthquakes in the past. Around
the world, on an average about one earthquake of magnitude greater than 8.0
takes place every year as against about 96 incidents per year of magnitude range
6.0 to 8.0. Some of the greatest earthquakes of the world occurred in India. Table
– 3 summarizes the major earthquakes which hit India over the years.

Table – 3: Major earthquakes in India

Epicenter
Earthquake Year Magnitude
Latitude Longitude
Kutch earthquake 1819 8.3 23.60 N 69.60 E
Assam earthquake 1897 8.7 25.50 N 91.00 E
Bihar-Nepal earthquake 1934 8.4 26.21 N 86.21 E
Assam-Tibet earthquake 1950 8.7 24.60 N 92.94 E
Koyna Earthquake 1967 6.5 17.38 N 73.75 E
Uttarkashi earthquake 1991 6.6 30.78 N 78.77 E
Killari (Latur) earthquake 1993 6.4 18.07 N 76.62 E
Jabalpur earthquake 1997 6.0 23.08 N 80.09 E
Chamoli Earthquake 1999 6.8 30.11 N 79.35 E
Bhuj (Gujarat) earthquake 2001 7.6 23.44 N 70.31 E
Andaman Earthquake 2002 6.5 13.01 N 93.14 E
Kashmir Earthquake 2005 7.6 34.49 N 73.63 E
Sikkim Earthquake 2006 5.7 27.37 N 88.36 E

2.10 Effects of earthquakes

Main effect of an earthquake is vibration (ground excitation); there are other
effects that are also important, and have to be addressed appropriately to ensure
safety from earthquakes. In general, the major effects of earthquake are
• Vibration of structures
• Surface faulting
• Ground failure
o Landslides
o Subsidence
o Liquefaction
• Water Waves
o Tsunamis
o Seiches

10
2.10.1 Vibration of structures: [14]
The hazard due to vibration commences when the ground motion interacts with
natural and man-made structures. The resulting vibration induced loading effects
in the structure can lead to various degrees of damage or to complete collapse.
Figures – 11 depict the structural failures caused during the 2001 Bhuj
earthquake. Effects of vibration are generally mitigated by engineering measures.

Figure 11 - Structural failures during Bhuj earthquake 2001

[Source: www.nicee.org (W6)]

2.10.2 Surface Faulting [15]

Large earthquakes
generally produce a series
of permanent effects on
the ground consisting of
scarps (steep slope),
fractures, hollows and
depressions that are
expressions of slippage
and permanent
deformation occurring on
seismogenic faults. Such
features are known as
surface or earthquake
faults. Ground rupture is Figure 12 - Surface faulting

11
typically associated with shallow earthquake magnitudes 6.2 and above . Such
rupture can reach overall lengths of up to some kilometers and offsets up to
several meters. Figure-12 shows an example of surface faulting. However,
occasionally earthquake of lower magnitude can cover surface faulting occurs
owing to local and unusual tectonic conditions.

2.10.3 Subsidence and uplift

Subsidence is the
downward displacement
of ground surface. The
opposite of subsidence is
uplift, which results in
an increase in elevation
of the surface.
Subsidence can be
caused by various
phenomena, one of them
being earthquake.
Horizontal motions
induced by shocks cause Figure 13 - Subsided road [Source: Wikipedia
compaction as long as commons (W5)]
the cycles are relatively
small. Vertical accelerations in excess of 1.0g are generally required to cause
significant densification of sands. Figure- 13 shows adverse effect of subsidence.

2.10.4 Landslides
A landslide is a geological phenomenon which involves a wide range of ground
movement, such as rock falls, deep failure of slopes and shallow debris flows
that can occur in offshore, coastal and onshore environments. Earthquakes can
induce landslide. A sudden shock, from an earthquake, can alter the
configuration of a slope, causing the slipping of surface soil and rock and the
collapse of cliffs.

2.10.5 Liquefaction
Liquefaction is a
phenomenon which
occurs primarily in the
location having loosely
deposited sands and silts
with high ground water
levels. The vibration
caused by earthquake
induced higher pore
pressure (pressure
exerted by ground water
on surrounding soil
particle). When the pore
Figure 14 - Adverse effects of liquefaction during
pressure crosses the Nigata earthquake 1964 [Source: Wikipedia]
strength of soil mass,

12
disintegration of soil mass took place. This phenomenon is known as
liquefaction. Destructive effects of liquefaction can take many forms like flow
failures of soil mass, lateral spreads, ground oscillation, loss of bearing strength,
settlement etc. Figure – 14 depicts the adverse effect of liquefaction during the
Nigatta earthquake, 1964 in Japan.

2.10.6 Tsunami
A tsunami is a series of
sea waves created by
displacement of sea bed
caused by earthquake,
volcanic eruption, man-
made underground
explosions, submarine
landslides, hitting of
meteoric objects etc. It is
a class of long sea wave,
which can reach great
height when Figure 15 - Schematic of a tsunami [Source:
encountering shorelines, Wikipedia]
figure – 15. Earthquakes
are often the cause of tsunami. An earthquake occurring near a body of water
may generate a tsunami if (i) it occurs at shallow depth, (ii) it is of moderate or
high magnitude, (iii) the fault rupture causes vertical movement of rock (sea bed)
along the fault line, and (iv) water volume and depth is sufficient.

If the first part of a tsunami to reach land is a trough (draw back) rather than a
crest of the wave, the water along the shoreline may recede dramatically,
exposing areas that are normally submerged. This can serve as an advance
warning of the approaching tsunami which will rush in faster than it is possible
to run.

2.10.7 Seiches
A seiche is similar to
tsunami, but occurs in
an enclosed or partially
enclosed body of
water, figure - 16.
Seiches and seiche-
related phenomena are
observed in lakes,
reservoirs and bays. It
is caused by
earthquakes, landslides
and other non-seismic
events like underwater
volcanic eruption, Figure 16 - Seiches [Source: U S. Geological Survey]
underground man
made explosion, meterological disturbances such as storms etc.

13
 3.0 ASEISMIC DESIGN OF STRUCTURES

3.1 Introduction [8]

Earthquake causes ground
motion, and a building founded
on the ground experiences this
motion at its base. However, the
roof of the building has a
tendency to remain at its original
position. This tendency to remain
in the original position is known
as inertia. When ground
experiences sudden motion, the
roof of structure relatively moves
backwards, as if a force is applied
backwards, as shown in figure –
17. This force is called as inertia Figure 17 - Effect of inertia on a building
force. If the roof has a mass ‘m’ when shaken at its base
and acceleration of relative [Source: IIT K BMTPC eq tips - 5]
movement is ‘a’, then inertia
force ‘f’ is mass times acceleration, m x a.

Under horizontal shaking of the

ground, horizontal inertia forces
are developed at floor level of a
building, which are transferred
to the foundation through slab,
column and finally to the soil
under foundation as shown in
figure - 18. Each of these
structural elements (i.e. floor
slab, beam, column, wall and
foundation) and connection
between them must be so
designed that they, as a
structural system, can transfer
the horizontal inertia forces
safely to foundation. Walls or
columns are the most critical Figure 18 - Flow of seismic inertia force
elements in transferring the through structural components
horizontal inertia force. [Source: IIT K BMTPC eq tips - 5]

Objective of earthquake resistant design or aseismic design structure is to

transfer the inertial force, caused by earthquake, safely to the foundation without
causing undersigned damage to the structure.

14
3.2 Aseismic design philosophy [8]
Severity of ground
shaking can be minor,
moderate or strong.
Table – 4 lists the
grouping of earthquakes
depending upon
earthquake magnitude as
minor, moderate and
strong. Aseismic design
philosophy is formulated
based on the fact that
minor shaking occurs
frequently; moderate
shaking occasionally and
strong shaking rarely.
Engineering of the
Figure 19 - Performance objectives under different
structures is so intensities of earthquake shaking
performed that they [Source: IIT K BMTPC eq tips - 8]
resist minor shaking
without any damage to load bearing members, moderate shaking with limited
damage and strong shaking with acceptable damage but without collapse. Figure
– 19 explains these performance objectives on the basis of reinforced cement
concrete (RCC) framed structure with brick infill walls. RCC frame members, in
figure – 19, are the load bearing members and brick infill the non-load bearing
member.

Four important steps for earthquake resistant design of structures are i)

determination of loading effects of earthquake, ii) planning and design of
structural configuration, iii) structural response analysis to determine forces
induced in the elements like beams, columns, and iv) determination of cross
sectional parameters to withstand the induced forces by adopting suitable design
approach.

Table - 4: Classification of Earthquakes based on Magnitude

Classification Magnitude
Minor 3 – 3.9
Light 4 – 4.9
Moderate 5 – 5.9
Strong 6 – 6.9

3.3 Loading effects of earthquake

Earthquakes motion can be recorded in terms of ground displacement, velocity
or acceleration. Figure – 20 depicts the record of ground acceleration, velocity
and displacement for an earthquake recorded at an observatory. For the purpose
of determining the loading effects of earthquake, generally records in terms of
ground acceleration are preferred. Loading effect of earthquake ground motion at

15
a site is geneerally representeed
by three grounnd motion (GM M)
parameters viiz. peak grounnd
acceleration, responsse
spectrum and acceleration timme
history.

Accelerogram gives the plot of o

earthquake groound acceleration
with respect too time and is also
known as accceleration tim me
history. Accceleration tim me
history proviides information
on grouund motion
characteristicss that affecct
structural response vizz.
duration, freequency contennt
and intensity.. The amplitudde
Figure 200 - Plot of (a) grouund acceleration,
(maximum orrdinate) of thiis (b) veloocity and (c) displlacement of an
plot is know wn as the Peaak earthquakee
Ground Acceleration (PGA). A
typical accelerration time historry and PGA is illlustrated in figure – 21.

Figu
ure 21 - Typical acccelerogram

The combined influence off the amplitudee of ground accelerations,

a thheir
frequency conntents and the duration of the groound shaking on different structuures
is representedd by means of response
r spectruum. A plot show
wing the maxim mum
response induced by ground motion in singlee degree of freeedom oscillatorss of
different fundamental
periods haaving same
damping is known as
response specttrum, figure –
22.

The grounnd motion

parameters i.ee. PGA value,
response sppectrum and
acceleration tiime history of
a site, which are
a used in the Figure 22 - Typical design ressponse spectrum
design of structure are

16
known as design ground motion parameters (DBGM). The DBGM parameters
are specified at free field conditions. Ground motions that are not influenced by
the presence of structures are referred to as free field motions.

3.4 Structural Configuration [9, 16]

During earthquake, the performance of structures depends upon magnitude of
earthquake forces as
well as layout and
shape of the structure.
Since the earthquake
force is a function of
mass, the layout and
shape of building shall
be such that it is as light
as possible, and as Figure 23 - Convex and concave shapes
symmetrical as
achievable from the consideration of geometry, mass and stiffness distribution.

Building shapes are either convex or concave for the purpose of design in
aseismic parlance. A convex shape is one where it is possible to join any two
points within it by straight line without crossing the boundary. A concave shape
is one, where a part of straight line may lie outside the shape, figure - 23. A
building, convex in plan and elevation is considered as simple or regular
building, figure – 24(a). If a building is concave in plan and elevation then it is
considered as complex or irregular shape, figure – 24(b). Generally, buildings
with simple geometry are less vulnerable to damage during strong earthquakes.

It is possible to split plans with complex geometries into simple geometries and
thus make the structure more earthquake resistant. An example is breaking an L-
shaped plan into two rectangular plan shapes using a separation joint at the
junction. When two buildings are too close to each other, they may pound on
each other during strong motion earthquakes. With increase in building height,
this collision can be a greater problem. When building heights do not match, the
roof of the shorter building may pound at the mid-height of the column of the
taller one; this can be very dangerous.

3.5 Structural response analysis [17]

Responses of structure to an earthquake can be represented in terms of
deflection, acceleration as well as induced forces such as bending moment, shear
forces in the elements like beams and columns. This structural response is
generally determined by analysis.

Determination of structural response for an earthquake is the subject of structural

dynamics. Structural dynamics is a subset of structural analysis which covers the
behavior of structures subjected to dynamic loading. A dynamic load changes
with time while static load does not. Earthquake induces dynamic loading effects
in the structures. There are two general classes of vibrations in structural
dynamics- free and forced. Free vibration takes place when a system oscillates
under the action of forces inherent in the system itself, and when external

17
impressed forces are absent. Vibration that takes place under the excitation of
external forces is called forced vibration. Vibratory effects during earthquakes
fall under the category of forced vibration.

Plan Elevation
(a) Simple geometries

Plan Elevation
(b) Complex geometries
Figure 24 - Description of shapes of buildings [9]

All objects (including buildings and the ground) have a “natural period,” or the
time it takes to swing once back and forth, under free vibration. When a building
and the ground sway or vibrate at the same rate, they are said to resonate. As the
building and ground resonate, their vibrations are amplified or increased, and the
building is subjected to higher earthquake forces.

Commonly used approach for seismic response analysis of structure for design is
modal analysis. Response spectrum method and time history method are the two
basic methods of modal analysis to determine structural response against
earthquake excitation. For simple structures, equivalent static method of analysis
may be used.

18
3.5.1 Analytical model:
Simulation of the structure to a mathematical model is an important step to
analyze structural response against any load. In structural dynamics, the number
of independent coordinates necessary to specify the configuration or position of a
system at any time is referred to as the degrees of freedom. In general a structure
may have infinite degrees of freedom. Idealization permits the reduction in the
number of degrees of freedom to a discrete finite number.

Figure 25 - Analytical model representing a water tank into a SDF system

[Source: Wikipedia]

The basic idealization of a structure is single degree freedom (SDF) system. The
conversion of a water tank to a SDF model is depicted in Figure – 25. It has a
mass element (m) representing total mass and the structure (principal contributor
– water); a spring element (k) representing the stiffness of the structure
(generally the shaft); a damping element (c) representing frictional
characteristics and energy losses of the structure; and an time dependent exciting
force F(t) representing external forces acting on the structure. In case of
earthquake, F(t) is derived from the PGA and response spectrum or acceleration
time history of the vibratory ground motion.

For multi-degree freedom system (MDF), number of degree of freedom is more

than one, figure-26. The mass of the structure is also distributed along the length
and breadth of the structure. The mass of the structure is assumed concentrated at
floor levels and subject to lateral displacement only. In figure-26, MDF system
have structure mass lumped at nodal point with consideration of lateral
displacement and rotational degree of freedom. To convert the mass degree of
freedom to a discrete finite value, the masses are lumped at appropriate locations
as shown in figure-26. In case of multi degree of freedom system, m, c and k are
not single values but matrices.

The dynamic equilibrium equation of an SDF can be written as

...... (3.1)

, represent the acceleration, velocity and displacement, of the structure.

In case of seismic excitation, the external force F(t) is replaced by ,
where is the ground acceleration due to seismic excitation. Equation (3.1) is

19
the equation of motion of a SDF structural system. For MDF system, number of
equations of motion is same as that of mass degree of freedom of the system.
Solution of equation of motion can be achieved by classical method or by
numerical method depending on the nature of equation. Solution of equation
(3.1) results in determination of displaced shape of structure, or displacement of
the nodes having mass. For SDF system, number of nodal displacement is one,
for MDF system it is more than one, and equal to number of mass degree of
freedom.

Mass DOF
4x2=8
General DOF
4x2=8

Figure 26 - Analytical model representing a MDF system

A structural system vibrates with particular frequencies depending on its

stiffness and mass and these are referred to as natural frequencies of the system.
These can be determined from the solution of the differential equation of 3.1 for
free vibration condition, (F(t) = 0). Natural frequency, ω, for an undamped SDF
system (c = 0) is given by
k
ω= ...... (3.2)
m

3.5.2 Modal analysis approach

Classical solution of the equilibrium equation of a MDF becomes difficult.
Hence, we resort to either numerical techniques or a simplified method known as
modal analysis. A mode of vibration is a characteristic pattern or shape in which
a structural system
vibrates. A structure with
‘N’ mass degree of
freedom will have “N’
modes of vibration as
shown in figure – 27.
Each mode will vibrate at
a particular frequency
called modal frequency
and characteristic shape Figure 27 - Mode shapes of a three storey structure
of a given mode is known
as mode shape. The actual vibration of a structure under earthquake shaking is
always a combination or mixture of different fundamental vibration modes.

20
Generally only a few modes are of interest for rational determination of
structural response.

Modal analysis technique involves uncoupling an ‘N’ degree of freedom system

to N-single degree of freedom systems. For those N single degree of freedom
systems, the solution can be determined by classical methods. The system
responses such as displacements and accelerations (forces) are obtained for each
of the N-modes of vibration. The modal response is then combined to get the
total response of the structure.

Methods of seismic response analysis provide the maximum response in each

mode of vibration. The response parameters, such as the peak displacements,
element stresses, element forces, and moments, are evaluated for each significant
mode of vibration and then combined to obtain the total response of the
structure. There are many rules available for combination of modal responses
[18]. Widely used methods include square root of sum of squares (SRSS) and
complete quadratic combination (CQC). The most common rule of modal
combination is SRSS, which is based on assumption that the maximum values of
response do not occur at the same time and is given by following expression.
⎛ ⎞
R= ⎜
⎜ ∑
⎝ i
Ri 2 ⎟
⎟
⎠
One of the exceptions of SRSS method arises when the responses are from
modes with closely spaced frequencies. Other rules are to be used in such cases.

Generally modal analysis is performed separately for earthquakes in each of the

orthogonal directions. It is necessary to combine further the responses from these
three directions to obtain the total response of the structure. This is called spatial
combination. SRSS method as well as 100:40:40 combination method is used for
the spatial combination.

3.5.3 Response spectrum analysis method

Response spectrum method uses the seismic excitation represented in terms of a
response spectrum as the exciting force. The free vibration analysis of the
structure determines the natural frequencies of each mode (i.e. each single degree
of freedom system). Peak response of the structure at each mode is determined
from the response spectrum by knowing the natural frequency/time period
corresponding to that mode. The responses are then combined using appropriate
modal combination rule. This method is depicted in figure – 28 and is explained
with illustrative example in Appendix - I.

3.5.4 Time History Analysis Method

In time history analysis method, the input motion is a prescribed function of time
such as acceleration versus time, or displacement versus time. The analysis
consists of a time integration of the equations of motion. Either the coupled
equations of motion or the uncoupled equations of motion as is the case of modal
analysis can be treated in this method. When uncoupled equations are treated the

21
method is called modal superposition and when coupled equations are treated the
method is called direct integration.

3.5.5 Equivalent Static Method

In equivalent static analysis, the total base shear is calculated as a product of
horizontal seismic coefficient, and total weight of the structure. The value of
horizontal seismic coefficient depends on the seismic zone, type of construction,
foundation conditions and the importance of the structure. IS 1893, provides the
methodology to calculate horizontal seismic-coefficients for different locations
in India. The load generally has an inverted parabolic distribution along the
height of the structure. A static analysis with these lateral loads yields the
induced element forces.

3.5.6 Soil-structure interaction [19, 20, 21]

Civil engineering structures are founded on soil or rock. When a structure,
founded on rock or stiff soil is subjected to an earthquake, the high stiffness of
the rock maintaining the motion to be very close to the free-field motion. When a
structure founded on soft soil is subjected to an earthquake, it interacts with the
foundation and the soil, and thus changes the motion of the ground. Extent of
this interaction depends on closeness of the stiffness of the structure and the
foundation medium i.e. their relative stiffness. Soil-structure interaction broadly
can be divided into two phenomena: a) kinematic interaction and b) inertial
interaction. Earthquake ground motion causes soil displacement known as free-
field motion. However, the foundation embedded into the soil will not follow the
free field motion. This inability of the foundation to match the free field motion
causes the kinematic interaction. On the other hand, the mass of the super-
structure transmits the inertial force to the soil causing further deformation in the
soil, which is termed as inertial interaction.

Soil structure interaction is addressed in dynamic analysis modelling by direct

approach or impedance function approach. In direct approach, the foundation
medium is represented as a finite element system and the earthquake input is
defined as the base rock excitation. In impedance function approach, the
earthquake input is specified by the free field ground motion at the soil structure
interface. The soil system can be represented by means of finite elements or as a
continuum – such as visco-elastic half space (semi infinite springs). If the
foundation is rigid, the soil can be replaced by a set of equivalent springs and
dashpots to represent the stiffness and damping characteristics of foundation.
However, if the foundation is not rigid, then it becomes necessary to model the
soil.

22
Step – 1: Computation of mode shapes and periods

Model Mode - 1 Mode - 2 Mode - 3

Structural node numbers (1), (2) and (3) where masses are lumped.
T1, T2 and T3 are time periods of mode 1, 2 and 3 respectively.

Step – 2: Reading the response spectrum

Step – 3: Modal responses

Equivalent inertial force on ith node due to jth mode, Fij = Sa (Tj) . Pj. φjj . mi
Pj is the participation factor of ith node and φij is the modal displacement of ith node for jth mode
determined from modal analysis and mi is the mass lumped at ith node.

Step – 4: Determination of moment and shear in each mode

Example: Bending moment at column base

Step – 5: Combining responses from different modes

Example: SRSS method

Figure 28 - Illustration of response spectrum method [Source: www.esdep.org(W7)]

23
3.5.7 Fluid-structure interaction [21, 22]
Fluid-structure interaction happens when structure like tanks, filled with fluid is
subjected to earthquake excitation and results in sloshing. General approach is to
separate the hydrodynamic pressures into impulsive and convective parts. The
impulsive pressures are those associated with inertial forces produced by the
accelerations of the walls of the container, and the pressures are directly
proportional to the accelerations. The convective pressures are those produced by
the oscillations of the fluid.

3.6 Design approach [8]

The structure is so designed that the elements are capable to withstand the forces
induced by an earthquake. The induced forces are determined from structural
response analysis. Primary requirement for an earthquake resistant structure is
that their main structural elements are designed and constructed as ductile
elements. This enables them to withstand earthquake effects with some damage,
but without collapse. Earthquake-resistant design strives to predetermine the
locations where damage takes place and then to provide good detailing at these
locations to ensure ductile behavior of the structure.

Ductility is the property of

certain materials to fail only
after large deformations have
occurred. Figure - 29 illustrates
what is meant by ductility.
Consider two bars of same
length and cross sectional area
- one made of a ductile
material and another of a
brittle material. When pulled,
the ductile bar elongates by a
large amount before it breaks,
while the brittle bar breaks
suddenly on reaching its
maximum strength at a
relatively small elongation.
Figure 29 - Ductility
Amongst the materials used in
[Source: IIT K BMTPC eq tips - 9]
building construction, steel is
ductile, while masonry and concrete are brittle.

The building material most commonly used for construction of conventional

structures is reinforced cement concrete (RCC), which is a composite material
made of cement concrete and reinforcing steel. Concrete has a strong
compression load carrying capacity but is weak in tension and brittle. Steel is
strong in both compression and tension, and also ductile. In reinforced concrete
structure, the quantity and location of steel bars has to be so engineered that the
failure of the reinforced concrete member happens by steel reaching its strength
in tension before concrete reaches its strength in compression. This type of
failure is known as ductile failure. Ductile failure being a gradual failure is

24
preferred during an earthquake,
because it absorbs more energy
caused by vibration and thus
gives indication and long
warning period prior to failure.

The failure of a column may

affect the stability of the entire
structure, but the failure of a
beam will have only localized
effect. Hence, in ductile design
approach, it is considered
appropriate to engineer the
column as strong ductile links
than the beams. This method of
designing RCC buildings is Figure 30 - Strong column weak beam
called the strong-column weak- concept in reinforced concrete design
beam design method, figure - [Source: IIT K BMTPC eq tips - 9]
30.

3.7 Seismic Standards of India:

3.7.1 IS 1893
IS 1893 is the main standard that provides the seismic zone map and specifies
the seismic design force. For the purpose of determining seismic forces, IS
1893:2002 classifies the country into four seismic zones, Zones II, III, IV and V
(figure – 31). The seismic force depends on the mass and seismic coefficient of
the structure. The seismic coefficient of the structure depends on properties like
the location of the structure (zone), importance of the structure, ductility of the
structure etc.

The current revision (2002) has

split the code into five parts. Part –
1 deals with general provisions and
buildings, part – II with liquid
retaining structures, part-III
bridges and retaining walls, part –
IV, Industrial structures including
stack like structures and part – V
dams and embankments.

IS 1893 refers to two levels of

earthquake, the maximum
considered earthquake (MCE) and
the design basis earthquake (DBE).
MCE represents the most severe Figure 31 - Seismic zone map of India
earthquake effects considered by
this standard and DBE is that earthquake effect that is reasonably expected to
occur at least once during the life of the structure. The design approach adopted
in this standard is to ensure that minor earthquakes (<DBE) are resisted without

25
any damage, moderate earthquake (DBE) with limited damage and major
earthquakes (MCE) without collapse.

3.7.2 IS 4326
A standard that specifies the design and the required detailing for seismic
construction of buildings, was published in 1967 (IS 4326: 1967). This standard
deals with selection of materials, special features of design and construction for
earthquake resistant buildings including masonry construction using rectangular
masonry units, timber construction and buildings with prefabricated flooring/
roofing elements.

3.7.3 IS 13920 [23]

Provisions for the ductile detailing of monolithic reinforced concrete frame and
shear wall structures are specified in IS 13920 (1993). After the 2001 Bhuj
earthquake, this standard has been made mandatory for all structures in zones III,
IV and V.

3.7.4 IS 13827 and 13828 [24, 25]

Guidelines in IS 13827 deal with empirical design and construction aspects for
improving earthquake resistance of earthen houses, and those in IS 13828 with
general principles of design and special construction features for improving
earthquake resistance of buildings of low-strength masonry.

3.7.5 IS 13935 [26]

Guidelines in IS 13935 cover general principles of seismic strengthening,
selection of materials, and techniques for repair/seismic strengthening of
masonry and wooden buildings. The standard provides a brief coverage for
individual reinforced concrete members in such buildings, but does not cover
reinforced concrete frame or shear wall buildings as a whole. Some guidelines
are also laid down for non-structural and architectural components of buildings.

3.8 Seismic Isolators: [W8, W9]

Seismic isolation is a technology to protect the structure from the destructive
effects of an earthquake by decoupling the structure from the ground and
providing it with additional damping. This decoupling allows the structure to
behave more flexibly which improves its response to an earthquake. The added
damping allows the earthquake energy to be absorbed by the isolation system
and therefore reduces the energy transferred to the structure. Seismic isolation is
physically achieved by placing the structure on isolators.

The isolators are laterally flexible elements, yet they are able to carry the vertical
loads of the structure. Since the isolators are more flexible than the structure,
most of the lateral movements occur in the isolators. As a result the isolated
structure experiences less motion and reduced forces. Figure – 32 depicts the
comparison of the response felt by an normal structure and a structure on seismic
isolators.

26
 Figurre 32 - Impact of base
b isolators on seismic
s response of structures [W8]
8]

3.9 Seismic Retroffit: [27, 28, 29]

Seismic uppgradation / retrrofitting of strucctures aims at im
mproving the asseismic
performancce of structuress, which is in operation,
o in terms of their strrength,
stiffness and
a ductility, soo that can resisst seismic effeccts, stands for current
c
standards and
a maintaining desired perform mance level. The principal stagess in the
complete seismic upgraddation program mme include, seismic
s re-evaluation,
decision too upgrade, selecction of upgraddation strategy, design of upgraadation
measures, verification of upgradation,
u connstruction of upg
gradation measurres and
monitoringg.

Structures may be upgradded adopting onne or a combinaation of the following

strategies:
ƒ Loocal modificatioon
ƒ Removal
R or reducction of existing irregularities
ƒ Sttructural stiffeninng
ƒ Mass
M reduction
ƒ Sttructural strengthhening
ƒ Ennhancement of structural
s ductilitty
ƒ Ennergy dissipationn techniques.

Structural upgradation strrategies are impplemented by en ngineering apprropriate

upgradation measures. Somme of the methodds are
ƒ Damage
D repair (C
Crack filling, jackketing, shotcretin
ng)
ƒ Addition
A of new structural
s membeers (shear walls, buttresses, bracings)
ƒ Removal
R of weakkness caused by openings
o
ƒ Conventional streengthening usingg materials similaar to concrete
ƒ Fiibre wrapping
ƒ Ennergy absorptionn (Base isolationn, supplementary y energy dissipattion)

27
 4.0 SEISMIC SAFETY OF NPP
4.1 Introduction: [30]
The objective of seismic safety of an NPP is to ensure safety against radiological
hazard to the plant, personal, public and environment in the event of design basis
earthquake. Seismic safety of a nuclear facility covers five aspects,
• Determination of seismic input for the design and qualification of a nuclear
facility at a given site,
• Seismic qualification, i.e. seismic design of a new nuclear facility following
current codes/standards,
• Seismic design basis re-constitution, i.e. seismic safety assessment of an
operating/existing nuclear installation following current codes/standards,
• Seismic re-evaluation, i.e. seismic safety assessment of an operating/existing
nuclear installation and
• Seismic upgrading, i.e. enhancing seismic capacity of SSCs to newly
determined seismic hazard loads.

4.2 Level of earthquakes

In accordance with present regulation, a new NPP is designed for two level of
earthquakes - S1 level or operating basis earthquake (OBE) and S2 level or safe
shutdown earthquake (SSE). OBE is defined as that earthquake which,
considering the regional and local geology and seismology and specific
characteristics of local sub-surface material, could reasonably be expected to
affect the plant site during the operating life of the plant; it is that earthquake
which produces the vibratory ground motion for which the features of NPP
necessary for continued safe operation are designed to remain functional. If this
level of ground motion is exceeded at the site, the plant is to be shut down, then
be inspected to determine if any damage had occurred. The plant will be
restarted only after it is certified fit for operation. The peak ground acceleration
of this level earthquake in horizontal direction should not be less than 0.05g.
The return period (mean recurrence interval) should not be less than 100 years
when it is determined by a probabilistic method.

SSE is defined as that earthquake which is based upon an evaluation of the

maximum earthquake potential considering the regional and local geology and
seismology and specific characteristics of local sub-surface material. It is that
earthquake which produces the maximum vibratory ground motion for which
certain structures, systems and components (SSC) are designed to remain
functional. These SSC are those necessary to ensure general safety requirements.
The seismic event of this intensity has a very low probability of occurrence.
PGA of this earthquake level is taken not less than 0.1g. It has a return period of
not less than 10000 years.

4.3 Seismic classification of SSC of NPP: [30, 31]

Not all the structures, systems and components (SSC) of an NPP are required to
be designed for SSE. Depending on the safety related importance in the event of
an earthquake, the SSC of a NPP are categorized into three seismic categories.

28
 i. Seismic category I include those SSC(s), whose failure could directly or
indirectly cause accident conditions. Or in other words, this category
includes those SSC(s) necessary to ensure general safety requirements.
The components of this category are designed for both SSE and OBE.
ii. Seismic category – II includes those SSC(s), which are necessary for
continuous operation of the plant and these components without undue
risk to the operator, environmental and public are designed only for OBE.
iii. Components not falling under categories I and II, whose failure could not
cause undue risk, are included as category – III and these components are
designed as per the provisions of IS 1893.

4.4 Aseismic design approach of NPP:

The aseismic design of an NPP is a four step process, almost similar to seismic
design of conventional structure. The first step is the determination of ground
motion parameters; second step, related to structural layout and shape, which are
principally governed by functional requirements and equipment lay out; third
step is response analysis and the fourth one is design or qualification.

In contrast to the code based approach generally adopted in conventional

structures, determination of ground motion parameters is one of the most
important and involved processes for an NPP. For both SSE and OBE, the design
basis ground motion parameters are specified in terms of
• Peak ground acceleration
• Response spectral shape
• Acceleration time history.
Next chapter broadly highlights the methods for determination of ground motion
parameters.

Determination of structural response i.e. forces in structural elements and

acceleration levels are another major step in aseismic design of NPP. In case of
an NPP, the complexities of its structures warrant the performance of a detailed
dynamic analysis. Either response spectrum or time history analysis method is
adopted. The mathematical modeling is very involved and certain aspect of this
is presented in Chapter – 6.

Next step in seismic design of an NPP is to combine the induced seismic forces
with that of static forces. The rules for combination are specified by AERB
safety standard AERB/SS/CSE-1 [32] for concrete structures and
AERB/SS/CSE-2 [33] for steel structures. This step also involves qualification of
SSC and equipment mounted on the building structure. Details of seismic
qualification are given in Chapter – 6.

Seismic design of an NPP follows a much stringent but rational approach

considering the risk associated with the failure of nuclear power plant structure.
The basic differences in seismic design of a NPP from that of a conventional
structure are
ƒ Seismic input for a NPP is derived from site specific data, whereas the
seismic input for conventional structures is based on the average parameters
for the country given by seismic design codes.

29
ƒ In contrast to that of a conventional structure, no reduction in seismic load
on account of ductile detailing is considered for seismic design of a new
NPP.
ƒ An NPP structure is expected to perform elastically for loads corresponding
to its design basis earthquake.

4.5 Geotechnical aspects related to seismic safety of NPP [34]

Geotechnical aspects that require due considerations are examined and include
the following:
• Investigation of the possibility of liquefaction at the site, which can cause a
complete loss of the soil’s shear strength, resulting in a bearing capacity
failure, excessive settlement, or slope movement.
• Calculation of the settlement of the structure caused by the anticipated
earthquake.
• Determination and confirmation of the design parameters for the
foundation, such as the bearing capacity and allowable soil bearing
pressures.
• Investigation of slopes stability, including lateral deformation of the slope
for the additional forces imposed during the design earthquake.
• Evaluation of the effect of earthquake on the stability of earth retaining
structures.
• Development of site improvement techniques.
• Determining the type of foundation, such as a shallow or deep foundation,
that is best suited for resisting the effects of the design earthquake.

4.6 Summary of seismic safety criteria of NPP: [30]

A number of features are associated with the seismic safety of an NPP. The
criteria to achieve this are summarized as below:
• For aseismic design, SSC(s) can be grouped into three categories depending
importance related to safety. All seismic Category-1 SSC(s) should
withstand the effect of five OBE and one SSE. All seismic Category-2
SSC(s) shall demonstrate the capability to withstand the effect of OBE.
• Seismic ground motion parameter are so derived that they are site specific
and the chance of exceeding the derived values of ground motion is
extremely low.
• Structural responses due to seismic excitation are determined by analyzing
the dynamic behavior of structures and dynamic characteristics of the
excitation.
• Unlike conventional structure, methodology adopted in the aseismic design
of NPP structures is based on the concept of resisting the entire earthquake
load within the elastic range. Design of seismic Category-3 structures may
be done in accordance with Indian Standard, “Criteria for Earthquake
Resistance Design of Structures”, IS 1893.
• Safety against hazard due to geotechnical failure caused by earthquake is
ensured.

30
 5.0 DERIVATION OF GROUND MOTION
PARAMETERS FOR NPP
5.1 Introduction [2, 35]
To mitigate the seismic hazard, an NPP is designed to withstand the effects of
vibratory ground motion arising from strong earthquakes. The design basis
ground motion (DBGM) for this purpose is evaluated for each site. This can be
determined by probabilistic method or deterministic method. Irrespective of the
method, DBGM is characterized by PGA, response spectral shape and a time
history compatible with response spectrum. PGA and response spectrum are
derived based on site specific studies whereas spectrum compatible time history
is generated from the response spectrum using analytical procedures. The
DBGM parameters are evaluated for two levels of severity, S1 level earthquake
or OBE and S2 level earthquake or SSE.

For estimating the DBGM parameters of a site, the earthquake sources (e.g.
faults) around the site needs to be identified and maximum potential earthquake
of each source need to be estimated. This is achieved by conducting a detailed
investigation of geological and seismological environment of the site. The data
on historical and pre-historical seismicity are also collected.

5.2 Geological and seismological investigations: [2, 35]

Geological investigations are carried out in three stages:
i. Preliminary investigation: For identifying type of the seismic hazards
which need to be considered for the site and to organize detailed
investigations in the subsequent stages.
ii. Detailed investigations: For evaluation of the seismotectonic status of
the region and specification of design basis ground motion; and
quantifying the potential of seismically induced flooding and ground
failure.
iii. Confirmatory investigation: These investigations are required to
confirm certain presumptions made and items identified during detailed
investigation stage. Confirmatory investigations include those studies
and investigations which are to be carried out for a longer period (2 to 3
years or more).

The investigations are conducted in four scales, regional (300km minimum),

intermediate range (50km radius), local (5km radius), and site area (within plant
boundary). Each set of study leads to progressively more detailed investigation
resulting in large volume of data and information as it gets closer to the site. The
site area investigations generally help in arriving at the foundation parameters
and conducting stability check against liquefaction.

The areas are investigated through satellite imageries, aerial photographs,

detailed maps to determine tectonic structures that could be considered as the
sources for earthquakes. The historic earthquake data available in earthquake
catalogues are also collected. Information on prehistoric seismicity can be
obtained by paleoseismic studies [36].

31
Paleoseismoloogy is the studyy of the timing,, location, and size of prehistooric
earthquakes. This focuses on o instantaneous deformation of landforms and a
sediments duuring individuaal earthquakes. Paleoseismic history helps to
understand asppects of earthquuake geology suuch as regional patterns
p of tectoonic
deformation and
a the long-terrm behavior of specific faults. It can be usedd to
supplement thhe calculation
of seismic hazzard.

Using the information

obtained from the
investigations,, all regional
geological andd seismological
information are a compiled,
and all related tectonic
information within
w 300 kms
of the site aree plotted on a
map. Epicennters of all
known earthqquakes greater
than M = 3.0 are
superimposed on the same,
e.g. figure - 333. Figure 33 - Compilation
C of geo
ological informatioon
around a site with epicenteers mapped [37]
5.3 Determination of DBGMD parameeters: [2]
Based on the investigations, one would be able a to identify seismogenic fauults
(faults that aree capable of generating seismiccity) and tectoniic provinces (arreas
with diffusedd seismicity) inn the region annd the following informationn is
compiled:
1. Size anda shape of earrthquake source anda its distance from
f site
2. Seism micity, both hisstoric and prehiistoric, and max ximum earthquaake
potenntial associated with
w each source. In absence off site specific daata,
the maximum
m earthqquake potential can
c be estimated d by increasing the
maxim mum intensity of historical earthhquake by unity.

Having estimaated these parammeters of each soource, next step is the derivationn of
value of grounnd motion that caan be produced by
b each source.

The accelerattion produced by b the earthquake is a functtion of earthquaake

magnitude andd distance from m the source. Thhe attenuation off ground motionn is
represented byy attenuation relaationships. Geneerally, these emp
pirical relationshhips
have the follow
wing form:

Ln( y ) = C1 + C2 m − C3 R

t magnitude off the earthquake and R is the disstance from site. C1,
Where ‘m’ is the
C2 and C3 aree constants andd are a function of the regional geology and soil s
conditions. ‘y’ is the acceleraation at site duee to earthquake of magnitude ‘m’
‘
occurring at diistance R.

32
The acceleration is directly proportional to magnitude and inversely proportional
to distance. Hence, for estimating the maximum acceleration at a site, one needs
to estimate the upper limit magnitude and lower limit of distance.

5.3.1 Deterministic approach for evaluation of DBGM parameters:

In deterministic approach, depending on the seismotectonic conditions and
number of earthquake sources, one or more than one earthquakes will be
postulated in the region and the PGA is estimated for each postulated earthquake
using appropriate attenuation relationship. The parameters that are necessary for
estimation are: size of the earthquake (magnitude or intensity) and distance from
the site.

5.3.1.1 Evaluation of PGA for S2 level:

PGA of S2 level earthquake is
evaluated on the basis of maximum
earthquake potential (m) associated
with a fault or tectonic province
estimated with respect to minimum
distance (R) from the NPP site,
(figure – 34).

Figure – 35 depicts PGA for

different values of distance and
maximum earthquake potential,
estimated using attenuation
relationship. Using this
information, the acceleration at site Figure 34 - Calculation model showing
due to earthquakes from each the sources around a site with associated
source (with associated maximum maximum earthquake potential (m) and
earthquake potential, m and shortest distance (R)
minimum distance to site, R) is
determined. Table – 5 tabulates the maximum acceleration at site due to each
fault/tectonic province estimated from figure - 35. The maximum acceleration
among these is considered as the PGA for S2 level earthquake. A minimum
value of PGA of 0.1g is used as S2 level PGA and if the calculated PGA is less
than 0.1g.

5.3.1.2 Evaluation of PGA for S1 level:

The S1 level motion is derived on the basis of historical earthquakes that have
affected the area. In absence of detailed information, the S1 level motion can be
specified as half of the S2 level motion where S2 level motion is fixed on the
basis of seismotectonic approach elaborated above. The PGA value
corresponding to DBE level earthquake should not be less than 0.05g.

5.3.1.3 Response spectra:

Response spectrum is specified in terms of displacement, velocity or
acceleration. Response spectra used for NPP design can be Standard Response

33
Spectra as given in AERB/SG/S-11 or Site Specific Response Spectra derived
from site specific study.

Figure 35 - Attenuation equation

Table – 5: Maximum acceleration at site due to different faults/tectonic

provinces
Sl No. Max potential of Distance PGA at site
fault/tectonic province from site
1 4.0 70km 0.02g
2 5.0 90km 0.04g
3 6.0 60km 0.12g
4 7.0 120km 0.15g (Max PGA)
5 8.0 290km 0.11g

Site Specific Spectra is generally adopted in the design of NPP as due

considerations can be given for size of the earthquake, source mechanism,
distance from the source, transmission path characteristics and site
characteristics. Response spectral shape for site specific spectra is generally
derived from records of strong motion time histories at site. In case of non-
availability of sufficient records, response spectral shapes derived for sites
having seismic, geological and soil characteristics similar to that of the site under
consideration can be used.

The method for derivation of site specific response spectra is as follows:

• Several strong motion accelerograms corresponding to horizontal direction of
motion are collected from the site or from sites of similar geological and
lithological features.
• These accelerograms are normalized to its PGA, i.e. all records are divided
by corresponding PGA so that after normalization, maximum PGA is unity
for all records, figure -36.

34
• Responnse spectra of theese accelerogram
ms are evaluated
d for different vaalues of
dampinng.
• Spectraa corresponding to 84th percentiile (mean + sigm
ma) provide the design
spectra, figure - 37.

Figure 36 - Ensemble of accelerograms

a norrmalized to PGA and
a respective resp
sponse
specctrum correspondiing to 5% dampin
ng

Figure 37 - Derivation off spectral shape from

fr the ensemblee of response specttrum

5.3.1.4 Time Historiees

Time histoories of vibratorry ground motion are developeed considering all the
prescribed ground motion parameters andd correspond to both S1 and S2 levels.
Time histoories are so derivved that they aree compatible wiith the design reesponse
spectra of 5% damping. Inn addition, it is ensured that thee time history saatisfies
the constraaints on specifiedd values of peakk ground acceleraation, rise-time to
t peak
acceleratioon, duration of sttrong motion etc.

5.3.2 DBGM in Verttical Direction

The peak ground acceleraation, response spectra and spectra compatiblle time
history forr vertical directioon are evaluatedd separately usinng the same proocedure
2 rd of
as for horizzontal motion. Iff sufficient data are not availablee, it is taken as 2/3
the correspponding value allong horizontal direction.
d The saame spectral shaape and

35
time histories generated for horizontal direction of motion are generally used for
vertical motion.

5.3.3 DBGM in Two Orthogonal Horizontal Directions

Peak accelerations in two orthogonal horizontal directions are not same. It can be
quantified by the ratio between the two orthogonal horizontal directions. In the
absence of data, the peak accelerations in two directions can be considered equal.
The spectral shape and time history are same in both directions.

5.3.4 DBGM parameters for Indian NPP sites

Design basis ground motion parameters for the Indian NPP sites have been till
date established by deterministic approach. Table - 6 tabulates the PGA value for
S1 and S2 level earthquakes at all Indian NPP sites.

Table – 6: PGA values for Indian NPP sites

Site PGA – S1 level PGA – S2 level
Tarapur (Maharashtra) 0.100g 0.200g
Kota (Rajasthan) 0.050g 0.100g
Kalpakkam (Tamil Nadu) 0.078g 0.156g
Narora (UP) 0.150g 0.300g
Kakrappar (Gujrat) 0.100g 0.200g
Kaiga (Karnataka) 0.100g 0.200g
Kudankulam (Tamil Nadu) 0.050g 0.150g

5.3.5 Probabilistic Approach for Evaluation of DBGM Parameters [10]

Determination of ground motion parameters by probabilistic method is
accomplished by performing a probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA)
[10]. Unlike maximisation of single valued earthquake events as in deterministic
approach, probabilistic approach takes into account the probable distribution of
earthquake magnitudes in each source, probable distances within that source
where earthquakes could originate and dispersion of acceleration estimated using
attenuation equations. In PSHA methodology, occurrence of earthquakes is
usually considered as Poisson process. This means that the events have an
average occurrence rate and could occur independent of the time elapsed since
last event.

PSHA involves four steps (figure – 38):

• Specification of the seismic-hazard source model(s) (zonation);
• Specification of earthquake recurrence relationships which reflect
earthquake activity in the source
• Specification of the ground motion model(s) (attenuation relationship(s));
and
• The probabilistic calculation.

The outcome of PSHA is a hazard curve which depicts the annual probability of
exceedence of different values acceleration, ‘Y’, figure-39. The probability of
exceedence of a particular value of acceleration is the product of (1) probability
of occurrence of an earthquake with magnitude ‘m’ at a distance ‘R’. (2) The

36
probability of exceedence of acceleration above the value ‘Y’ given ‘m’ and ‘R’.
By summing the scenarios for all possible ranges of sources, magnitudes and
distances, one would get total probability of exceedence beyond acceleration
‘Y’. By repeating this exceedence for different values of ‘Y’, one can estimate
the seismic hazard curve of the site.

(i) (ii)

(iii) (iv)

Figure 38 - Elements of PSHA [38]

One of the major advantages in

this method is the possibility
for incorporation of
uncertainties. Uncertainties are
introduced by lack of data
and/or lack of knowledge,
inadequate modeling, etc.
These uncertainties can be
taken into account by
developing alternate scenarios
and models.

For detailed treatment of

PSHA, readers are requested to Figure 39 - Typical hazard curve
refer [10].

37
 6.0 SEISMIC DESIGN AND QUALIFICATION OF
NEW NPP

6.1 Introduction [39]

All structures, systems and components (SSCs) important to safety of an NPP are
designed or qualified to ensure safe performance against DBGM. As explained
earlier, aseismic design involves three basic steps, viz. selection of an
appropriate structural configuration, determination of seismic response i.e.
earthquake induced forces in structural elements by analysis and determination
of elemental cross section properties (cross section dimensions and
reinforcements for RCC structures, diameter and thickness for piping etc)
following appropriate codal provisions. In case of seismic qualification, the cross
section properties of structural elements are known. The earthquake induced
forces in structural elements can be determined by analysis. The structural
adequacy of the elemental cross section for the induced forces is then checked
following appropriate codal provisions.

Plant specific SSCs are designed, while generic items like pumps, motors, heat
exchangers are qualified to ensure their safe performance during design basis
earthquake. For this purpose the safety related components of a nuclear facility
are categorized into three seismic categories as explained earlier. Seismic
qualification of SSCs can be performed by the use of one or more of the
following approaches [39]:
• Analysis;
• Testing;
• Earthquake experience;
• Comparison with already qualified items (similarity).

It is also possible to use combinations of these methods. Qualification generally

includes qualification of structural integrity as well as qualification for
operability or functionality. Analysis is generally main tool for qualification,
especially where structural integrity is of main concern and that are of a size or
scale to preclude their qualification by testing. Civil engineering structures,
tanks, distribution systems and large items of equipment are usually qualified by
analytical methods. On the other hand, testing is adopted to qualify those
components which are rationally not amenable to analysis. These components
are small, sensitive devices used in plant safeguards equipment, where measured
acceleration and malfunction levels (functionality) are the failure criteria.

6.2 Qualification by analysis [22, 31]

Qualification by analysis includes the following major tasks:
• Mathematical modeling
• Analysis including main system and subsystem analyses

Modeling task includes derivation of the seismic excitation in terms of DBGM

parameters as well as modeling of the stiffness, mass and damping
characteristics of SSC. The energy of a vibrating system is dissipated by various
mechanisms, which is known as damping. It is difficult to identify and describe

38
each of these energy dissipating mechanism of a SSC. Hence, damping is
modeled in a highly idealized manner, generally in the form of equivalent
viscous damping.

Analytical model can be different according to the structural characteristics of

the components e.g. lumped mass models, one dimensional models,
axisymmetric models, two or three dimensional finite element models. Ideally
one would like to model the structure incorporating all its complexity in a full
three dimensional model in which the structure is idealized using solid elements
or shell elements depending on the configuration. But, during dynamic analysis,
these models produce local modes with little participation of mass and are of no
consequence to the global behaviour of the structure. Also a 3-D model requires
large computational effort. Hence for simplicity, an alternate approach of lumped
model which provides insight into the global behavior of the structure is used.
During the later part of the analysis, the 3-D model is utilized for obtaining a
better approximation of stress resultants near discontinuities. Both methods are
equally accepted for dynamic analysis of NPP components. The lumped mass
approach was adopted for seismic analysis during earlier days. Currently with
the advancement of high speed computing, 3-D models are also used for
complete dynamic analysis of NPP. Figure – 40 depicts the lumped mass model
of reactor building including containment structure [40] and as well 3-D model
of the containment structure of an NPP.

Seismic analysis of an NPP comprises of main system analysis and subsystem

analysis [41]. Main systems include those civil engineering structures which
house the mechanical, electrical and instrumentation systems. These mechanical,
electrical and instrumentation systems are referred to as the subsystems. Analysis
of main system and subsystem shall ideally be carried out together and such an
analysis is termed as coupled analysis. However, the coupled model may
sometimes be too cumbersome or possibly ill conditioned for analysis. In such
case, the main systems and subsystems are analyzed separately by decoupling
them from each other. Major structures that are considered in conjunction with
foundation media constitute the main system. Other SSCs attached to the main
system constitute the subsystems. There are defined criteria of decoupling the
main system and subsystem for analysis depending on their mass ratio and
frequency ratio. Main system analysis is carried out to obtain the structural
response of main system components or civil engineering structures. One of the
outputs of main system analysis is floor response spectrum, which is used as
input for subsystem analysis.

Acceptable methods of seismic response analysis of nuclear facilities include:

• The time-history method
• The response-spectrum method
• Equivalent Static method

Generally, to determine the structural response of main system components, is

carried out by response spectrum analysis method for the purpose of design.
Time history analysis method is adopted to derive the acceleration response time
history at different elevations/floors of the main systems, from which the floor

39
response spectrum is derived. Subsystem analysis is also carried out by response
spectrum method using the floor response spectrum as input. In some cases time
history analysis is carried out, especially when operability of a system is to be
qualified following stringent acceptance criteria.

6.3 Seismic qualification by testing [39, 42]

Testing of the actual item or prototype is a method of direct seismic
qualification. Seismic qualification by testing is generally conducted on shake
table. A component is subjected to input motion equivalent or similar to that of
DBGM. The motion experienced by the component being tested is measured
using the instrumentation available in the shake table and the response spectrum
corresponding to this motion is called the Test response spectrum (TRS). The
requirements to be met are specified by the required response spectrum (RRS).
RRS could be specified by the floor response spectra at the location where the
component is mounted, when a site specific test is being carried out. The
component is qualified, if it continues to perform its intended function when the
TRS envelops the RRS.

(a) Lumped mass model of (a) 3-D finite element model of

reactor building reactor building
Figure 40 - Seismic analysis model of reactor building of an NPP

Types of testing include:

• Type approval test (fragility test);
• Acceptance test (proof test);
• Code verification test;

40
 • Low impedance test (dynamic characteristic test).

Direct qualification by testing makes use of type approval and acceptance tests.
The type approval (fragility) test is generally used for standard electrical
components and mechanical components when design margins to failure,
damage or non-linear response and identification of the lower bound failure
mode have to be evaluated. Such testing is typically carried out by means of a
shake table.

The acceptance (proof) test is also used for electrical and mechanical
components to demonstrate their seismic adequacy. It is typically performed by
manufacturers to demonstrate compliance with procurement specifications. Such
testing is typically carried out by means of a shake table.

The code verification test is important for reliable analytical work. Computer
codes should be verified before their application by means of analyses made
using an adequate number of test results or results obtained from other
appropriate computer codes or analytical procedures. Low impedance (dynamic
characteristic) tests are limited to identify similarity or to verify analytical
models.

6.4 Seismic qualification based on earthquake experience

Seismic qualification of SSCs by means of the use of experience [43] from
strong motion seismic events is having a growing application.

The principal requirements of this method include that the level of seismic
excitation experienced during a real earthquake by an item identical to the one
under qualification exercise should effectively envelop the seismic design
motion at the point of installation in the plant building. The item being qualified
and the item that has seen the strong motion should have the similar
characteristics, support or anchorage arrangement. This method of qualification
is widely used for seismic evaluation of existing facilities.

6.5 Seismic qualification based on similarity [39]

In this method, particular equipment is compared with another similar equipment
which has already been qualified. The similarity principle is evoked to show that
the two pieces of equipment respond essentially the same and that the difference
between the two can only help maintain or improve the functional and structural
integrity of the equipment.

Similar appearance or geometric size does not establish a basis for dynamic
similarity. Similarity requires the documentation of related mass, stiffness and
damping characteristics. Structural laws relating to dynamic response determines
the similarity.

41
 7.0 SEISMIC EVALUATION OF EXISTING NPP

7.1 Introduction: [44]

Seismic evaluation of an existing nuclear facility is prompted by from the
following considerations:
(a) Evidence of greater seismic hazard at site than expected before,
owing to new or additional data and/or to new methods.
(b) Regulatory requirements, such as periodic safety reviews, to ensure
that the plant has adequate margins for seismic loads.
(c) Lack of anti-seismic design or poor anti-seismic design.
(d) New technical findings such as vulnerability of some structure
(e.g., masonry walls) or equipment (e.g., relays), other feedback
and new experience from real earthquakes.

7.2 Principles of Seismic re-evaluation [41, 44]

Seismic re-evaluation (or seismic evaluation) is distinguished from seismic
qualification primarily in that seismic qualification is intended to be performed at
the design stage of a plant, whereas seismic re-evaluation is intended to be
applied after a plant has been put in operation. Primary objective of seismic re-
evaluation is to review the seismic capacity of safety related SSCs of the plant
required to achieve a set of safety objectives. This review exercise is conducted
with respect to the ground motion, termed as review basis ground motion
(RBGM). The RBGM parameters are derived following same criteria of S2 level
earthquakes or SSE.

Objective of seismic re-evaluation is to assess the capability to perform the

following safety functions of an existing plant, in the event of RBGM,
‰ Safe shutdown of the plant;
‰ Maintaining the plant in safe shutdown condition;
‰ Long-term decay heat removal;
‰ Containment/confinement of radioactive inventory.

Seismic re-evaluation aims at re-assessing the safety of the plant, with respect to
the above four functions, against RBGM parameters with consequent upgrading,
if found necessary. General approach to seismic re-evaluation is outlined below:
• Evaluation of seismic hazard of the site,
• The re-evaluation focuses on those SSCs essential to achieve the desired
safety objectives without compromising the defense in depth1.
• The additional capacity of the SSC required to withstand an earthquake
is evaluated considering inherent conservatism of the original design,
taking into account certain limiting assumptions in terms of operational
status, probability of other external events, material behavior.

1
Defense in depth means provision of multiple levels of protection for ensuring
safety of workers, the public or the environment.

42
 • The seismic safety assessment uses conservatism carefully and employs
the best available techniques to evaluate capacity of the plant in terms
of RBGM parameters, and possibly resulting in upgradation.

Safety analysis is carried out to identify the structures systems and components
(SSC) required to perform safety functions satisfying the limiting operating
conditions and including those necessary to guarantee the existence of defense in
depth in the event of RBGM. Safety analysis adopts an event tree / fault tree
approach to identify the accident sequences and to list the Structures, Systems
and Components (SSC) required to ensure the safety functions. The steps
involved in safety analysis are divided into four major activities:
• Postulation of seismic induced initiating events,
• Formulation of event trees for each of the postulated events to accomplish
the required safety functions,
• Formulation of fault trees for each of the frontline systems appearing on the
event trees, and
• Determination of list of SSCs by a minimal cut set evaluation of the fault
trees.

Only those SSCs which are required to perform the safety functions satisfying
the limiting operating conditions and including those necessary to guarantee the
existence of defense in depth in the event of RBGM are evaluated. The list of
these SSCs is known as seismic structures, systems and components (SSSCs) list
(SSSCL) of the plant.

Comparison of seismic qualification and seismic evaluation is given in figure –

41. In seismic evaluation of an existing plant, seismic capacity is assured
following current seismic criteria and considering identical SSSC(s) required to
successfully perform the safety functions mentioned above.

7.3 Seismic Capacity Assessment [41, 45]

There are two main approaches for assessing the seismic capacity of an existing
nuclear facility:
‰ The seismic margin assessment (SMA) and
‰ The seismic probabilistic safety assessment (SPSA).

7.3.1 Seismic Margin Assessment:

Seismic margin is generally expressed in terms of the earthquake level that
compromises plant safety, specifically leading to melting of the reactor core. The
measure of seismic capacity adopted in seismic margin reviews is the so-called
“High Confidence, Low Probability of Failure” (HCLPF) capacity, usually given
in unit of peak ground acceleration. This is a conservative representation of
capacity, and in simple terms, corresponds to the earthquake level at which it is
extremely unlikely that failure of the component will occur. From the
mathematical perspective, the HCLPF capacity values are approximately equal
to a 95% confidence (probability) of not exceeding about a 5% probability of
failure. Using the HCLPF concept, the search for the seismic margin shifts to

43
determining the plant-level HCLPF capacity and comparing it with the review
basis earthquake.

Figure 41 - Seismic re-evaluation vs seismic qualification [43]

7.3.2 Seismic Probabilistic Safety Assessment: [41, 46]

Objective of seismic probabilistic safety assessment (SPSA) is involved the
following major activities:
‰ Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis to derive RBGM parameters
‰ Structures and components fragility analysis.
‰ Establishing plant fragility using plant logic analysis
‰ Risk quantification.

Seismic Fragility is the conditional probability of failure for a given value of

seismic input parameter e.g. PGA.

SPSA differs from probabilistic safety analysis with internal events, such that in
SPSA instead of dealing with random equipment failures, earthquake is
considered as a cause for failure; and the frequency of failure of a particular
component is computed from seismic hazard of the site and fragility of the
component. SPSA results in identification of accident sequences leading to core
damage and frequency of each of those. Principal difference between SPSA and
SMA is that SMA, instead of looking for a core damage frequency as is the case
of SPSA, looks for the level of earthquake below which core damage is unlikely.

7.4 Tasks for seismic evaluation [41]

Even though the two methods, SMA and SPSA, differ in many respects, the
major activities to be undertaken to accomplish the final goal by both these
methods are almost similar. Hence, it is generally noticed that performing SPSA
along with SMA is beneficial as most of the tasks and associated activities are

44
common. Figure – 42 depicts typical flow diagram of seismic re-evaluation
procedure of an existing NPP.

Figure 42 - Task flow for seismic re-evaluation [41]

Plant walk-down is an important task for both SMA and SPSA while carrying
out seismic re-evaluation of existing nuclear facilities. The objectives of walk
down include:
• Confirm the completeness of SSSCL, their required functions, their
possible failure modes, to screen out the SSSCs which feature a
seismically robust construction
• Collection of as-built data and assessment of seismic capacity of
components in SSSCL.

45
 • Identification the easy-fix solutions/upgrades that can be carried out
regardless of any analysis.
• To define representative configurations for further evaluations.

The main focus of walk-downs are on:

• Equipment characteristics and inherent seismic capabilities.
• Anchorage of equipment
• Load path from the anchorage through the equipment
• Spatial and other types of interaction.

The plant walk-down is generally carried out in two stages, preliminary and
detailed. Preliminary plant walk-down will be carried out by the plant operating
personnel to obtain the necessary information for generating the SSSCL. The
main objective of this walk-down is the identification of those obvious
seismically robust SSCs, which can be considered as having adequate seismic
capacity and, therefore, are screened out of further evaluations. Those SSCs,
which require a modification or whose seismic capacity is uncertain, are further
evaluated in detail during detailed plant walk-down.

46
 8.0 SEISMIC INSTRUMENTATION [39, 47]
8.1 Introduction
The main objective of the seismic instrumentation is to record the ground motion
arising due to natural and manmade disturbances and dynamic behavior of SSC
inside NPP, during an earthquake. Information recorded in seismic
instrumentation helps in:
i) Assessing safety of the plant after an seismic event
ii) Validating the aseismic design
iii) Improvement in aseismic design technique.
There are some instruments which could initiate the shutting down process of an
NPP in the event of an earthquake having high magnitude.

Seismic instrumentation is installed at nuclear power plants for the following

reasons [28]:
• For structural monitoring:
o To collect data on the dynamic behaviour of SSCs of the nuclear power
plant and to assess the degree of validity of the analytical methods used
in the seismic design and qualification of the buildings and equipment.
• For seismic monitoring:
o To provide alarms for alerting operators of the potential need for a plant
shutdown depending on post-earthquake inspections.
• For automatic scram systems:
o To provide triggering mechanisms for the automatic shutdown of the
plant.

A variety of instruments are available for measurement of earthquake response

(acceleration/velocity/displacement). These instruments try to capture the
earthquake response at the point of attachment to the structure. The range of
instruments available includes accelerographs, structural response recorders
(SRRs), peak accelerographs and seismic switches. Accelerographs record the
full history of vibratory motion during the occurrence of earthquake. SRRs
record spectral accelerations at specified frequencies and peak accelerographs
record the maximum acceleration observed at that location.

Data for immediate decision making process will not be available from SRRs
and peak accelerographs, as the recorded data require post processing. This can
be achieved by switches (both for PGA and response spectral values), which
instantly conveys information on exceedance of a set point of acceleration. With
the advances made in digital electronics and signal processing, it has now
become feasible to conduct the real time analysis of data from accelerographs
also.

8.2 Selection of instruments

The choice of the instruments is done by specialists in the field considering the
dynamic range, trigger level, frequency band, damping, recording speed etc
needed to specifically assess acceleration time history, structural response etc.
specific to seismic environment.

47
8.3 Location of seismic instruments
As a minimum, the accelerographs are located in free-field, foundation of
containment structure, two elevations (excluding the foundation) on the internal
structure within the containment of a reactor as well as on foundation and at an
elevation of an independent Seismic Category I structure. If seismic isolators are
used, instrumentation is placed on both the rigid and isolated portions of the
same and an adjacent structure, as appropriate, at approximately the same
elevations. In addition, behavior of a representative piping equipment and their
supports are also monitored with the help of seismic instrumentation.

8.4 Multiunit sites:

Instrumentation in addition to that installed for a single unit is not required, if
essentially the same seismic response is expected at the other units based on the
seismic analysis used in the seismic design of the plant. However, if there are
separate control rooms, annunciation for exceedance of set parameters should be
provided to both control rooms.

Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to Shri S.K. Sharma, Chairman, AERB for his
encouragement and support during preparation of the monograph. Sincere
thanks are due to Shri S K. Chande, Vice Chairman, AERB, for his valuable
suggestions. We sincerely acknowledge the detailed review of the drafts
conducted by Dr. Prabir C. Basu, Director, C&SED. We are also grateful to Dr.
A K. Ghosh, Head, RSD, BARC, Shri L.R. Bishnoi, SO/G, C&SED, Shri R.
Bhattacharya, Head, IPSD, Smt. Shylamoni P., SO/E, C&SED, Shri Sourav
Acharya, SO/E, C&SED for their review observations and identifying the points
for improvement in the draft document.

The authors sincerely acknowledge the use of reference documents available

from National Information Center of Earthquake Engineering (NICEE), IIT
Kanpur, United States Geological Survey (USGS), International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA), United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC),
Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) and internet websites Wikipedia and
Wikipedia commons.

48
Bibliography

Websites
W1 - Website of Wikipedia, www.wikipedia.org
W2 - Website of US. Geological survey, www.usgs.gov
W3 - Website of Geological survey of India, www.gsi.gov.in
W4 - Website of www.riskfrontiers.com
W5 – Website of Wikipedia commons
W6 - Website of NICEE from IIT Kanpur, www.nicee.org
W7 – Website of www.esdep.org
W8 – Website - http://06earthquake.org/new-technologies
W9 –Website http://www.dis-inc.com/seismic_isolation.html

Documents
1. BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS, IS 1893, 2002, “Criteria for
Earthquake Resistant Design Of Structures: Part1, General Provisions and
Buildings”.
2. ATOMIC ENERGY REGULATORY BOARD, AERB/SG/S-11, 1990,
“Safety Guide for Seismic Studies and Design Basis Ground Motion for
Nuclear Power Plant Sites”
3. Thompson and Turk, “ Introduction to physical geology”, Brooks Cole
publishers, 2nd edition, 1997
4. Falguni Roy, “Earthquakes: An Introduction”, Proceedings of the Theme
meeting on seismic qualification of nuclear facilities, BARC safety council,
2006, Mumbai, India
5. United States Army Engineer School, Sub course EN 5462, Geology,
USAES, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, 1996
6. F. G. Bell,“Engineering Geology”, Elsevier, Second Edition, 2007
7. Fintel, M., and Ghosh, S.K., "Earthquake Resistant Structures," Chapter
15, Handbook of Structural Concrete, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1983.
8. C.V.R. Murthy, Earthquake tips, Learning earthquake design and
construction, Building material and technology promotion council,
Government of India, New Delhi, 2005.
9. Sudhir K. Jain, and C.V.R. Murty, “Seismic design and retrofitting of RC
buildings”, Short course held at Ahmedabad, December 2001, CEP-IITK.
10. McGuire R. K., “Seismic hazard and risk analysis”, Earthquake
Engineering Research Institute, 2004, ISBN-13, 978-0943198019.
11. F. Ferrigni, B. Helly, A. Mauro, L. Mendes Victor, P. Pierotti, “Ancient
Buildings and Earthquakes-The local seismic culture approach: Principles,
Methods, Potentialities”, Edipuglia, ISBN 88-7228-403.1
12. ATOMIC ENERGY REGULATORY BOARD, AERB/TD/CSE-1, AERB
Technical Document, 1993, “Catalogue of earthquakes (=>m3.0) in
peninsular India”
13. Sudhir K Jain, “Indian earthquakes: An overview”, Indian concrete
Journal, November 1998.
14. S K. Jain et. al., “Learning from Earthquakes: A field report on structural
and geotechnical damages sustained during the 26 January 2001 M7.9
Bhuj Earthquake in Western India”, IIT Kanpur, India

49
15. R. Azzaro, “Earthquake surface faulting at Mount Etna volcano (Sicily)
and implications for active tectonics”, Journal of Geodynamics, Volume
28, Issues 2-3, September 1999, Pages 193-213.
16. BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS, IS 4326, 1993, “Code of practice for
earthquake resistant design and construction of buildings”.
17. Mario Paz, William E. Leigh, “Structural Dynamics: Theory and
Computation”, Springer, 2004, ISBN 1402076673
18. A. K. Gupta, “Response Spectrum Method in Seismic Analysis and Design
of Structures: In Seismic Analysis and Design of Structures”, CRC Press,
1992, ISBN 0849386284
19. Crammer S. L., “Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering”, Prentice Hall,
2007, ISBN 81-317-0718-0
20. J P Wolf, “Soil-Structure-Interaction analysis in time domain”, Prentice
Hall, 1988, United States of America.
21. AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS, “Structural Analysis and
Design of Nuclear Plant facilities”, ASCE, 1980, ISBN 0-87262-238-X
22. AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS, ASCE Standard No. 4-98,
“Seismic Analysis of Safety-Related Nuclear Structures”, ASCE, 2000.
23. BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS, IS 13920, 1993, “Code of Practice
for Ductile Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to
Seismic Forces”.
24. BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS, IS 13827, 1993,“Improving
earthquake resistance of earthen buildings – Guidelines”
25. BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS, IS 13828, 1993,“Improving
earthquake resistance of low strength masonry buildings – Guidelines”
26. BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS, IS 13935,1993,“Guidelines for
repair and seismic strengthening of buildings”
27. FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, Prestandard and
commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings, FEMA-356,
Washington (2000).
28. Dr. P. C. Basu, “Seismic upgradation of buildings: an overview”, Indian
Concrete Journal, volume 76, No. 8, August 2002.
29. Alpa Sheth, “Seismic retrofitting by conventional methods”, Indian
Concrete Journal, volume 76, No. 8, August 2002.
30. V N. Gupchup and Prabir C. Basu, “Structural safety against dynamic
loads in design of NPP structures”, Advances in Structural Dynamics and
Design (ASDD), SERC Chennai, Jan 2001
31. ATOMIC ENERGY REGULATORY BOARD, AERB/SG/D-23, Safety Guide
on seismic qualification of Nuclear power Plants (Draft 2008), AERB,
Mumbai, India, 2008
32. ATOMIC ENERGY REGULATORY BOARD, AERB/SS/CSE-1, 2002,
“Design of Concrete Structures Important to Safety of Nuclear Facilities”,
AERB, Mumbai, India
33. ATOMIC ENERGY REGULATORY BOARD, AERB/SS/CSE-2, 2002,
“Design, Fabrication and Erection of Steel Structures Important to Safety
of Nuclear Facilities”, AERB, Mumbai, India,
34. Robert W. Day, “Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Handbook”,
McGraw-Hill Publication 2002, ISBN 0-07-137782-4

50
35. ATOMIC ENERGY REGULATORY BOARD, AERB/SC/S, 1990, “Code of
Practice on Safety in Nuclear Power Plant Siting”, Atomic Energy
Regulatory Board, Mumbai, India
36. James P. McCalpin, “Paleoseismology”, 1996, Academic Press Title,
ISBN: 978-0-12-481826-2.
37. A K. Ghosh et. al, “Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for a site”,
Nuclear Engineering and Design, Vol 236, Issue 11, June 2006
38. Safety Analysis Report of Diablo Canyon NPP – A case study, LLNL
Hazards mitigation center, September, 2004.
39. INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, NS-G-1.6, Safety
Standards Series, International Atomic Energy Agency, 2003, Seismic
Design and Qualification for Nuclear Power Plants Safety Guide, IAEA,
Vienna.
40. A S. Warudkar, “Seismic Design considerations for nuclear power plant
structures”, Nu power, An International Journal of Nuclear Power - Vol.
15 No. 1 to 4 (2001), NPCIL, Mumbai
41. AERB-IGCAR/ROMG/TN-658/01, “Report on Criteria and Methodology,
for seismic re-evaluation of FBTR”, Atomic Energy Regulatory Board and
Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, India, November 2006.
42. Ajai S Pisharady & Prabir C. Basu, “Seismic fragility of components
qualified by testing”, Proceedings of the International Conference on
Reliability, Safety and Quality Engineering (ICRSQE), NPCIL, Mumbai,
2008.
43. INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, TECDOC -1333, 2003,
Earthquake Experience and Seismic Qualification by Indirect Methods in
Nuclear Installations, IAEA, Vienna.
44. INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Safety report Series – 28,
2003, Seismic evaluation of existing nuclear power plants, IAEA, Vienna.
45. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, “An
Approach to the Quantification of Seismic Margins in Nuclear Power
Plants”, NUREG CR-4334, USNRC, Washington.
46. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, “PRA
procedures guide, a guide to the performance of probabilistic risk
assessments for NPP”, NUREG CR-2300, Vol.2, USNRC, Washington.
47. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, “Nuclear
power plant instrumentation for earthquakes”, RG 1.12, USNRC,
Washington

51
 APPENDIX – I: ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE OF
RESPONSE SPECTRUM METHOD

Consider the idealized model of the three storey building shown in figure AI-1
below. Assume that the building will vibrate in the lateral direction and
vibrations in other two perpendicular directions are constrained. Therefore, this
building will have 3 dynamic degree of freedom and 3 modes of vibration.

  m = 1500 kg

k = 40 000 kN/m 
m = 2000 kg

k = 40 000 kN/m 
m = 2000 kg

k = 40 000 kN/m 

Figure AI‐1 : Idealized model of three storey building

The basic dynamic equilibrium equation of multi degree of freedom system can
be written as
Mx Cx Kx F t (I-1)
Where, M = mass matrix; C = damping matrix; K = stiffness matrix

Consider the solution of this equation to be harmonic and of the form

x = ν sinωt (I-2)

Substituting for x, in equation (I-1), the equation is transformed to the following

form for a undamped free vibration system

0 (I-3)

For the above MDOF system,

2 0 0
Mass matrix 1000 0 2 0 kg
0 0 1.5

52
and
80 40 0
Stiffness matrix 1000 40 80 40 /
0 40 40

The eigen solution of equation (I-3) will result in eigen values (ω) i.e natural
frequency and eigen vector which are the mode shapes [9].

Substituting M and K in equation (I-3) and taking an eigen solution we get

80 2 40 0
40 80 2 40 0
0 40 40 1.5

Solving, we get the natural frequency and period as,

2.138 / T1 = 2.939 secs.
5.877 / T2 = 1.069 secs.
8.219 / T3 = 0.764 secs.

The eigen vectors corresponding to each of the eigen values can be determined
by substituting the value of ω in equation (I-3) and solving it. These eigen
vectors are called the mode shapes and is represented by {φ}. Mode shapes are
nothing but a sort of scaled displaced shape of the structure for that mode of
vibration. Figure AI-2 below shows the displaced shape for first mode.

φ13

φ12

φ11

Figure AI-2 : Displaced shape for first mode

0.47 1.08
For First mode, 0.83 ; For Second mode, 0.30 ;
1.00 1.00
1.11
And for Third mode, 1.53
1.00

53
 Figure AI-3 : Modal Deformation

For a MDOF system subjected to seismic excitation, F(t) in equation (I-1) will be
M.r.xg
Here r is called the excitation influence vector. It consists of 1’s corresponding to
translational degrees of freedom along the direction of ground motion and 0’s
corresponding to other degrees of freedom.

Therefore equation (I-1) can be rewritten as

Mx Cx Kx M.r.xg

This equation can be decoupled into

y 2ω ζ y ω y .xg n = 1,2,3,…..N

Where,
and

Pn is called the earthquake mode participation factor [9] of mode ‘n’ for the
direction of the ground motion described by . It denotes how much each mode
participates in the vibration of the building when subjected to base excitation.

For the example problem the earthquake participation factor for first mode is
given by

0.47 2 0 0 1
0.83 1000 0 2 0 1
1.00 0 0 1.5 1 1.235
0.47 2 0 0 0.47
0.83 1000 0 2 0 0.83
1.00 0 0 1.5 1.00

Similarly for modes 2 and 3

P2 = -0.314 and P3 = 0.076

54
Assume that the site has a PGA of 0.15g, and the design is to be as per the IS-
1893 response spectrum (Critical damping ratio ( ) = 5%), for rock sites. Then
the spectral amplification factor corresponding to the time period of the three
modes are derived as shown in figure – AI-4 below.

Figure AI-4 : Spectral amplification factor

Table- AI-1: Spectral amplification factor corresponding

to time period
Mode Period Sa/g Sa = Sa/g * PGA
1 2.939 0.5 0.5*.15g = 0.075g
2 1.069 0.85 0.1275g
3 0.764 1.5 0.225g

Maximum acceleration in mode ‘n’ at floor ‘i’ is given by

, (I-6)

If mi is the mass at floor ‘i’, the maximum lateral force at floor ‘i’ in mode ‘n’ is
, ,

Calculation of maximum acceleration and maximum lateral force for floor 3 in

mode 1 is illustrated below:
, 1.00 1.235 0.075 9.81 0.91 /
, , 1500 1.00 1.235 0.075 9.81
1362

The maximum lateral forces at each floor calculated in similar manner for each
mode is tabulated below:

55
 Table- AI-2: Maximum lateral forces at each floor for each mode
Flr Mass φ1x φ2x φ3x A1x A2x A3x F1x F2x F3x
(kg) (m/s2) (m/s2) (m/s2) (N) (N) (N)
1 2000 0.47 -1.08 1.11 0.43 0.42 0.19 854.1 848.3 372.4

2 2000 0.83 -0.3 -1.53 0.75 0.12 -0.26 1508.3 235.6 -513.3

3 1500 1 1 1 0.91 -0.39 0.17 1362.9 -589.1 251.6

Note: Subscript ‘x’ represents floor number

The maximum storey shear Vni,max in mode ‘n’ within storey ‘i’ are obtained by
summing up the maximum lateral forces Fni,max of all floors above storey ‘i’.

Hence,
, ∑ ,
(I-7)
For storey 1 in mode 1,

, , 854.13 1508.36 1362.98 3725.47

Similarly for other storey,

Table- AI-3: Maximum shear forces at each floor

for each mode
V1x V2x V3x
(N) (N) (N)
Floor - 1 3725.47 494.86 110.72

Floor - 2 2871.34 -353.47 -261.69

Floor - 3 1362.98 -589.12 251.63

Adopting SRSS method of modal combination, maximum storey shear at floor

‘i’ due to all modes of vibration
∑ (I-8)

Therefore, for floor 1,

3725.47 494.86 110.72 3759.8

Similarly V2 = 2603.1 N; and V3= 1506.1 N

56

View publication stats