独立行政法人原子力安全基盤機構 0 outline of japanese seismic design review guide of...

2

独立行政法人原子力安全基盤機構

Content

Ⅰ. Formation of seismic design code in Japan

Ⅱ. Outline of Japan Nuclear Safety Committee’s

Seismic Design Review Guide;

comparing Before and Revised

Ⅲ. Comparison the point of seismic design practice

　 between Japan and USA

　　Ⅳ． Conclusion

3


Ⅰ.Formation of seismic design code in Japan

Nuclear Safety Commission ・ Regulatory Guide for Reviewing Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Reactor Facilities (15pages) → 　 1981July 　Established 2006 Sept. Revised

METI (Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency)

・ Ministry Code No62 “Technical code for Nuclear

Power Reactor Facilities Article5 Seismic requirement” (1 page)

Japan Electric Association (Utilities) ・ Technical Guidelines for Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants

JEAG4601 ( ～ 1300pages) →1970,1984,1987,1991 Completed gradually (English version: NUREG/CR-6241) Now 　 revising

Endorse

JNES

Technical support

4


Formation of seismic design code in Japan NSC Seismic design Reviewing Guide (Revised)1.Introduction2.Scope3.Basic Policy 　4.Classification of Importance in Seismic Design

5.Determination of design basis earthquake ground motion

6.Principle of seismic design Policy, Seismic force for each class

7.Load combinations and allowable limits

8.Consideration of the accompanying events of earthquake

Tsunami, Collapse of inclined plane 　

JEA JEAG4601 （ Now under revising ）1.Basic items　　　 Purpose, Scope, Basic policy 　2.Classification of Importance in Seismic Design

Classification, seismic force for each class

3.Earthquake and basic earthquake ground motion for seismic design Earthquake ground motion, Tsunami evaluation

4.Geological and ground survey

5.Safety evaluation of ground and seismic design of civil structures R/B base, around inclined plane, outside civil structures

6.Seismic design of building structures Material, load combinations and allowable limits, structural design, response analysis, seismic margin

7. Seismic design of equipment / piping system Load combinations and allowable limits, seismic force, response analysis, function maintenance evaluation, energy absorbing support

NSC Introduction to Safety Examination of Geology/Soil of NPP ( Not revised)

5


Each task for the present ; after NSC Guide revised

NSC ・ Review Seismic Re-evaluation of Existing NPPs by utilities ・ Revise “Introduction to Safety Examination of Geology/Soil of NP

Ps”

METI (NISA) ・ Review Seismic Re-evaluation of Existing NPPs by utilities

・ Investigate lessons learned from the Niigatakenn-tyuuetsu- oki earthquake and effect to Kashiwazaki NPP

・ Upfill Ministry Code No62 Article5 “Seismic requirement”Utilities (Japan Electric Association ) ・ Seismic Re-evaluation of Existing NPPs according to revised NSC Guide ・ Review JEAG4601 according to lessons learned from the earthquake and re-evaluation of NPPs

JNES

Technical support

6


Ⅱ. Outline of Japan Nuclear Safety Committee’s Seismic Design Review Guide; comparing Before and Revised

7


◆ ◆ NSC rNSC revisevised Sep. 2006ed Sep. 2006 their “Regulatory Guide for “Regulatory Guide for reviewing Seireviewing Seismic smic Design of Nuclear Power Reactor Design of Nuclear Power Reactor Facilities” ,Facilities” ,

to reflect seismological and seismic engineering prto reflect seismological and seismic engineering progress after 1995 Hyougo-ken Nanbu Earthquake. ogress after 1995 Hyougo-ken Nanbu Earthquake.

◆◆ 　　 NISA promptly required utilities to re- evaluate seiNISA promptly required utilities to re- evaluate seismic design of all existing NPPs according to revissmic design of all existing NPPs according to revised guide.ed guide.

◆ ◆ Utilities started re-evaluation from the step of geologiUtilities started re-evaluation from the step of geological surveycal survey

8


Item 　 Before Revised

Design Base Design Base Earthquake Earthquake DefinitionDefinition

・ S1: Return period more than 10000y

Stay in elastic region ＊・ S2: Return period more than 50000y

　 Keep function ＊　＊　 Class 　 As 、 A 　 component

・ One DBE Ss:

Consider active fault hereafter

late Pleistocene (80000-130000y before)

Keep function ＊・ Sd for design (Not earthquake) to stay in

elastic region ＊ Sd=α×Ss ; α 0.5≧ ＊　 Class S component

Geological Geological SurveySurvey

Use most updated knowledge and technique

Consideration of Consideration of Vertical Seismic Vertical Seismic ForceForce

Fv= 1/2 FH (Static) Define Fv dynamically

Over DBEOver DBE

EarthquakeEarthquake

Possibility of over DBE earthquake cannot be denied. Risk by over DBE is to be assessed for reference

Seismic Seismic ClassificationClassification

As, A, B, C S (old As and A), B, C

Old A class ranked up to As

Phenomena Phenomena

accompanying accompanying earthquakeearthquake

ConsiderConsider 　　 the effect of;the effect of;

・・ Tsunami,Tsunami,

・・ Collapse of around inclined planeCollapse of around inclined plane

1. Main points of the revision1. Main points of the revision

9


Basic Earthquake Ground Motion Ｓ 1




BeforeBefore

RevisedRevised

Active Faults

Past Earthquakes

Seismo-tectonic Features

Intra-plate Earthquakes

Basic Earthquake Ground Motion SsBasic Earthquake Ground Motion Ss

Inter-plate Earthquakes

Gro

un

d m

otio

n E

valu

atio

nG

rou

nd

mo

tion

Eva

lua

tion

Considered Earthquakes （①）

Gro

un

d m

otio

n E

valu

atio

nG

rou

nd

mo

tion

Eva

lua

tion

Considered Earthquakes （①）

（ Horizontal componentonly ）

Both Horizontaland Vertical

（②）（②）

（③）

（③）

（④）

（④）

Near Field Earthquake

Maximum Design Earthquake

Extreme Design Earthquake

Shallow Inland Earthquakes

Design Earthquake Ground Motion SdDesign Earthquake Ground Motion Sd

Site-specific Ground motionwith specified source

Ground motion with non-specified source

1.1 DBE Definition - Earthquake Research Flow1.1 DBE Definition - Earthquake Research Flow

10


BeforeBefore

RevisedRevised

Active Faults

Past Earthquakes

Seismo-tectonic Features

c. Intra-plate Earthquakes

a. Inter-plate Earthquakes

b. Shallow Inland Earthquakes

・ Earthquake documents

・ Active faults research

・ Seismicity near site

◆ Consider with each research methods

◆ Consider with each source type

DBE Definition - Earthquake ConsiderationDBE Definition - Earthquake Consideration

11


BeforeBefore

RevisedRevised

◆ Empirical methods (Response spectrum evaluation)

◆ Empirical methods + Strong motion evaluation using Earthquake source model

Point source

Consider the effects of the fault plane

Evaluate the Ground motion directly

DBE Definition – Ground Motion EvaluationDBE Definition – Ground Motion Evaluation

12


BeforeBefore

RevisedRevised

Consider Near-field Earthquake (M6.5) Consider Near-field Earthquake (M6.5) by way of precautionby way of precaution

周期（s）

擬似速度応答スペクトル(cm/s)

0.01 0.1 1 10

1

10

100

Estimate the upper level of the ground Estimate the upper level of the ground motion due to the earthquakes source motion due to the earthquakes source of which are difficult to specify in spite of which are difficult to specify in spite of detailed survey in the vicinity of the of detailed survey in the vicinity of the site, site, directly on the basis of near-source directly on the basis of near-source strong motion recordsstrong motion records

周期（s）

擬似速度応答スペクトル(cm/s)

0.01 0.1 1 10

1

10

100

DBE Definition – Near-Field EarthquakeDBE Definition – Near-Field Earthquake

13


BeforeBefore

RevisedRevised

◆ ◆ Consider the active faults that has activity in 50,000 yearsConsider the active faults that has activity in 50,000 years

◆ ◆ For Ss, consider the active faults that has activity in the late PleistoceneFor Ss, consider the active faults that has activity in the late Pleistocene（（ referring to last Interglacial stratareferring to last Interglacial strata ［［ about 80,000 – 130,000 years beforeabout 80,000 – 130,000 years before ］）］）

Active Fault of Low activity (Return period more than 50,000 Active Fault of Low activity (Return period more than 50,000 ））　　→　　　→　 Consider as the source of SConsider as the source of S22

Active Fault of high activity (Return period more than 10,000 Active Fault of high activity (Return period more than 10,000 ））

　　→　　　→　 Consider as the source of SConsider as the source of S11

Consider as the source of Inland Earthquakes for SsConsider as the source of Inland Earthquakes for Ss

　　　　 Active Faults ConsiderationActive Faults Consideration

14


In-landIn-land

Seismic profiling by Seismic profiling by controlled seismic sourcecontrolled seismic source

Seismic ProfilingSeismic Profiling

Off-shoreOff-shore

　　 Supersonic wave surveySupersonic wave survey

・・ Over 10km Over 10km beneathbeneath

the sea bottom can bethe sea bottom can be

searchable now searchable now

1.1. ２２ Geological SurveyGeological Survey

Requirement for most updated technique and more Requirement for most updated technique and more detailed survey in the vicinity of the sitedetailed survey in the vicinity of the site

RevisedRevised

15


BeforeBefore

RevisedRevised

Consider Vertical Seismic Force as ½ as Horizontal, staticallyConsider Vertical Seismic Force as ½ as Horizontal, statically

Consider Both Horizontal and Vertical Seismic Force dynamicallyConsider Both Horizontal and Vertical Seismic Force dynamically

Dynamic

Dynamic

1.31.3 Consideration of Vertical Seismic ForceConsideration of Vertical Seismic Force

16


BeforeBefore

RevisedRevised

As

A

B

C

4 classes

RPV, PCV etc.

ECCS, RHRS etc.

Main Turbine System etc.

Other Facilities

3 classes

C

B

S

Ａ s 　…　 Designed with Ｓ 2

also designed with Ｓ 1

Ａ　…　 Designed with Ｓ 1

（ Maintains Safety Function ）

（ Remains within Elastic limit ）

S 　…　 Designed with Ｓ s

also designed with Ｓ d

（ Maintains Safety Function ）

◆ Ａ and As classes are integrated into S class



2. Seismic Classification2. Seismic Classification

Sd ＝ α×Ss , α 0.5≧

17


Aseismic classification 　 and 　 seismic 　 force

★ 　 Total of four classifications of A, B, C class, and still more important As class.

Before

（ Note 5 ） CI ： Story shear coefficient to Static force required by civil code for non-nuclear structure（ Note 6 ） Although turbine equipment is classified into C class according to a functional classification, turbine equipment of BWR is B

class 　

PRESENT Example of Major facilities

Seismic force Aseismic

importance BWR PWR

Basic earthquake ground motion S2

Ａｓ

・Containment Vessel ・Control Rod ・Residual Heat Removal

System ・Emergency Diesel Generator ・Reactor Pressure Vessel

etc


System ・Emergency Diesel Generator ・Reactor Vessel

etc Basic earthquake ground motion S1 or 3.0CI either large

Ａ・Emergency Corel Cooling System

etc ・Safety injecting System

etc

Seismi force of 1.5CI (Note 5)

Ｂ

・Waste Disposal System ・Turbine equipment(Note 5)

etc

・Waste Disposal System etc

Seismi force of 1.0CI Ｃ・Main Generator

etc

・Main Generator ・Turbine equipment(Note 5)

etc

18


Example of Major facilities

REVISION

BWR PWR Aseismic

importance Seismic force


System ・Emergency Diesel Generator ・Reactor Pressure Vessel

etc


System ・Emergency Diesel Generator ・Reactor Vessel

etc

・Emergency Corel Cooling System etc

・Safety injecting System etc

Ｓ

・Horizontal sesmic force and vertica seismic force

(dynamic)due to the basic earthguake ground

motion Ss are combined both in the unfavorate direction

・Elastic design ground motion Sd or 3.0CI either large

・Waste Disposal System ・Turbine equipment(Note 5)

etc

・Waste Disposal System etc

Ｂ same as present

・Main Generator etc

・Main Generator ・Turbine equipment(Note 5)

etc

Ｃ same as present

Revised

It is changed into a higher rank from the present classification.

Total of three classifications of S, B, and C class. (Present As and 　 A class were unified and it considered as S class.)

REVISED

19


Load combination and allowable limitBefore

★Load combination and allowable limit corresponding to four classifications

PRESENT

Allowable limit Load combination Aseismic

importance Facilities

(1)Capability fully deformation (margin of ductility) as a structure and appropriate safety margin to ultimate strength

(2)Allowable stress based on a

suitable standard and standard

(1)Basic earthquake ground motion S2 and normal load, etc

(2)Either basic earthquake ground motion S1 or static load and normal load, etc

Ａｓ

Allowable stress based on a suitable standard and standard

Basic earthquake ground motion S1 or static load and normal load, etc

Ａ

same as the above static load and normal load, etc Ｂ

same as the above same as the above Ｃ

Building/ Structure

(1)Even when the structure of a portion carries out plastic deformation fairly, excessive modification, a crack, breakage, etc. arise and the function of facility is not affected.

(2)Yield stress or the allowable limit of equivalent safety

(1)Basic earthquake ground motion S2 and operating load,etc

(2)Basic earthquake ground motion S1 or static load and operating load etc

Ａｓ

Yield stress or the allowable limit of equivalent safety

Basic earthquake ground motion S1 or static load and operating load, etc

Ａ

Allowable stress based on a suitable standard and standard

Static load and operating load ,etc

Ｂ

same as the above same as the above Ｃ

Equipment/

piping

20


REVISION Facilities Aseismic

importance Load combination Allowable limit

Ｓ

(1)Basic earthquake ground motion Ss and normal load ,etc

(2) Elastic design ground motion Sd or static load and normal load, etc

same as present

Ｂ

Building/ Structure

Ｃ same as present same as present

Ｓ

(1)Basic earthquake ground motion Ss and operating load, etc

(2)Elastic design ground motion Sd or static load and operating load ,etc

（１）Stress analysis is same as the present .

(2) The check of active component to basic earthquake ground motion Ss is based on comparison with the acceleration using the actual probed examination ,etc

Ｂ

Equipment/ piping

C same as present same as present

Revised

★Load combination and allowable limit corresponding to three classifications

REVISED

21


3 ． Consideration to the phenomena accompanying earthquake

★The concrete demand is not described

The demand to the natural disaster of a landslide, tsunami or high tide, and others is specified independently.

BeforeBefore

RevisedRevised

(1) Influence of the safety function on the ｆ acilities by collapse of a circumference slope

(2) 　 Influence of the safety function on the ｆ acilities by tsunami

★Followings 　 should be taked into account in the seismic design

The maximum height of tsunami ＋ The water level at the time of high water

★Height of installation of plant ★Water proof design ｏf

facilities or equipment etc

The minimum water level of tsunami ★Management by the design

of facilities or equipment etc

22


Ⅲ. Comparison the point of seismic design practice

between Japan and USA

Here present Japan side

23


１．１． Load combinations and allowable stress limitsLoad combinations and allowable stress limits

Operating states and earthquakes are combined as above, considering probability of earthquakes and probability and duration of accidents.

1year

1day

1hour

1min

DependentEvent

Probability

( / year )

Operating States

( / year )

Earthquake

Com

bina

tion

wit

hS 1

Inde

pend

ent

Eve

nt

S1 (Dependent)

(Ex.) Taking into account of occurrence of S1 in the long term after LOCA

1year

1day

1hour

1min

DependentEvent

Probability

( / year )

Operating States

( / year )

Earthquake

Com

bina

tion

wit

hS 1

Inde

pend

ent

Eve

nt

S1 (Dependent)

1year

1day

1hour

1min

DependentEvent

Probability

( / year )

Operating States

( / year )

Earthquake

Com

bina

tion

wit

hS 1

Inde

pend

ent

Eve

nt

1year

1day

1hour

1min

DependentEvent

DependentEvent

Probability

( / year )

Operating States

( / year )

Earthquake

Com

bina

tion

wit

hS 1

Inde

pend

ent

Eve

nt

S1 (Dependent)

(Ex.) Taking into account of occurrence of S1 in the long term after LOCA

Outlines of Japanese Practice Outlines of Japanese Practice (Based on JEAG 4601)(Based on JEAG 4601)

24


Allowable Stress of Piping (Type 1)

Allowable stress state

Stress Class

Primary stress

(including bending stress)

Primary +

Secondary stress

Primary +

Secondary + Peak stress

ⅢAS 2.25 Sm3 Sm

Fatigue usage factor

<= 1.0ⅣAS 3 Sm

S1 (ⅢAS) , S2 (ⅣAS)

25


2.2. １１ Spectrum Modal AnalysisSpectrum Modal Analysis

4. Response Analysis

of the Building

3. Input the DBE into the Building, Taking into

Account of the Ground

2. Design Base Earthquake 1. Target Spectrum of DBE

Design FRS FRS

6. Dynamic Design Analysis of Components Based on their Own Proper Periods

5. Making of FRS for Reasonable Evaluation of Components

26


◆ 　 Shear-Beam Modeling of Building○ 　 Consolidates each mass

of each facility and building structure to the floor Level

○ 　 Evaluate Stiffness of Column & Bearing-Wall against Bending-Moment & Shear Force

2.1.1 Structures2.1.1 Structures

27


◆ 　 Response Analysis of Building

○ 　 Modeling of Building

○ 　 Input Ground-Motion from Analysis of Soil

○ 　 Evaluate Response of Each Floor

28


・ Stress must be below allowable stress・ Deformation must be below allowable deformation・ Shear strain must be below allowable strain for Ss

Stress

Collapse

Maximum Load

Linear AreaAllowable Strain for Ss

Shear Strain

Limit Strain

29


Beam Element (Wall)

Mass-Stiffness Model 3-D FEM Model

■ 　 Mass-Stiffness Modeling

■ 　 FEM Modeling

質点Mass

Beam Element(Wall)

Beam Element(Floor)Mass

◆ ◆ 　　 Structures ModelStructures Model

30


　　　　　　　　 Japan 　　 USA

・ Occasionally, static force 3Ci *

(for As,A Building) is dominant 　

* 3 times larger than civil code for

general structure

?

◆ 　 Structures design result

31


・・ Structures - WallStructures - Wall The walls of NPPs’, arranged in a well-balanced manner, are about 10 times as thick as those of general buildings. Reinforcement have a far large diameter than that of general buildings, and is arranged more densely.

32


・・ Structures - Base mat Structures - Base mat

The NPPs have strong foundation slabs 3 – 7 meters thick to withstand a great seismic force.

about 3 – 7 m

33


2.1.2 Piping Systems2.1.2 Piping Systems

RPV

Response Stress Allowable Stress<

Evaluation

Dynamic Design Analysis of equipments based on their own proper periods

Own Proper Periods (s)Res

pon

se A

ccel

erat

ion

(G

)

Input

Allowable Stressex.Allowable stress state ⅢAS ： 2.25SmAllowable stress state ⅣAS ： 3Sm

34


◆ 　 Design floor response spectrum, Damping Factor

Japan USA

Design floor response spectrum:

10 ％　 Peak Broadening to absorb

model or analysis uncertainty

?

Damping Factor

JEAG4601

・ piping 0.5 ～ 2.5 ％・ welded structure 1.0

・ bolt, rivet fixture 2.0

・ PCCV 3.0

・ reinforced concrete 5.0

RG1.61

・ variable according to

stress level

35


2.2 Time Historical Analysis2.2 Time Historical Analysis 　　 for major facilitiesfor major facilities

Time (s)

Input DBE waveA

ccel

erat

ion

(G

al)

CRD Guide Tube

CRD Housing

Fuel Assembly

Separator

Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV)

RPVStabilizer

PCVStabilizer

Rea

ctor

Bu

ild

ing

Diaphragm Floor

Sh

rou

d

Th

erm

al W

all

Earthquake responses of some components around reactor are evaluated as a coupled system with the building and the ground.

36


　　 Japan 　　 USA

・ Support for hot piping and component;

・ Mechanical snubber or 　 Oil snubber usually adopted ・ Energy absorbing support like Lead Damper will be adopted for APWR

( Code prepared and verification test finished)

Sticking 　 problem resolved?

◆ 　 Piping and component support 　design

37


3.1 Achievement of Tadotsu-Shaking Table1985 1990 199

52000 2003

Phase I (Proving Test of component)

PCVs (PWR,BWR), RPVs (PWR,BWR), Core Internals (PWR,BWR), Primary Recirculation Loop (BWR), Primary Coolant Loop (PWR)

Emergency Diesel Generator System,Computer System, Reactor Shutdown Cooling System

Main Steam & Feed Water piping with EBS,RCCV, PCCV, Steam Generator with EBS

1980

Seismic Tests for Regulation

NUPEC JNES

Fragility Test Series

2006

Phase III (New Design and Fragility)

Phase II (Proving Test of System Facilities)

3. Technical Expertise for Seismic Response of Facilities3. Technical Expertise for Seismic Response of Facilities

38


3.2 Example1 Concrete Containment Vessel

Reinforced Concrete Containment Vessel (RCCV)

scale : 1/10

39


Simulation

Design

Tests

◆ 　 Results 　 (RCCV)

increasing input motion gradually (from 2×S2)

Results:

○RCCV was safe up to 5×S2.

○RCCV collapsed by shear force

　 at 9×S2.

40


2.2 Example 2 Seismic Fragility Tests

A:Horizontal Shaft Pump

B:Electrical Panel

C:Control Rod Insertion of PWR

D:Control Rod Insertion of Ｂ WR

E:Large Vertical Shaft Pump

C: D: C.R. INSERTION

A: E: PERFORMANCE FOR ROTATION

B:ELECTRICAL FUNCTION

4141

◆ 　 Data Example: Fragility of Electric Panels

EVALUATION METHOD EXPERIMENT

TEST PANELSCRITICAL ACCELARATION

(x9.8m/s2)CRITICAL PARTS

INPUT ACCELARATION

(x9.8m/s2)TEST RESULTS

Main Control Panel 5.6 (S-S) display system 6 (S-S, F-B) No Malfunction

Reactor Auxiliary ControlPanel

9.8 (F-B) module switch 6 (S-S, F-B) No Malfunction

Logic Unit Panel 6.7 (S-S) power unit 6 (S-S, F-B) No Malfunction

Signal Processing Panel 4.4 (S-S) AC controller card 4.3 (S-S)Error of AC

controller card

Instrumentation Rack 4.2 (S-S)differentialpressure

transmitter6 (S-S, F-B) No Malfunction

Motor Control Center 4.5 (F-B) auxiliary relay 6 (F-B)

Error of magneticcontactor causedby auxiliary relay

chatter

Power Center 4.4 (F-B) air circuit breaker 5.0 (F-B)Damage of aircircuit breaker

Metal-Clad Switchgear 4.2 (S-S)vacuum circuit

breaker4.7 (F-B)

Damage ofvacuum circuit

breaker

DIFFERENT TYPE PANELSCRITICAL ACCELARATION

(x9.8m/s2)CRITICAL PARTS

Logic Unit Panel 6.2 (S-S) auxiliary relay

Motor Control Center 7.1 (F-B)molded case circuit

breakerPower Center 4.3 (F-B) protection relay

Metal-Clad Switchgear 4.0 (S-S)vacuum circuit

breaker

4242

Comparison the point of seismic design practice between Japan and USA

Hoping USA side will be presented in near future

4343

Ⅳ. Conclusion ・ Research on Niigataken Tyustsu-Oki Earthquake July 2007is now on-goi

ng

・ This colloquium seems to be good occasion to present followings sequentially

1. Research output on the earthquake and influence to Kashiwazaki NPP 2. Lessons learned 3. Re- evaluation result of existing NPPs

　　４． How item 2 and 3 treated in Japanese seismic design code

独立行政法人 原子力安全基盤機構 0 outline of japanese seismic design review guide of...

Documents

独立行政法人原子力安全基盤機構 0 outline of japanese seismic design review guide of...