Click here to make tpub.com your Home Page

Page Title: Appendix C: Commentary on Earthquake Design and Evaluation Criteria
Back | Up | Next

Click here for thousands of PDF manuals

Google


Web
www.tpub.com

Home

   
Information Categories
.... Administration
Advancement
Aerographer
Automotive
Aviation
Construction
Diving
Draftsman
Engineering
Electronics
Food and Cooking
Logistics
Math
Medical
Music
Nuclear Fundamentals
Photography
Religion
   
   

 



DOE-STD-1020-2002
Appendix C
Commentary on Earthquake Design and Evaluation Criteria
C.1.
Introduction
Earthquake design and evaluation criteria for DOE structures, systems, and components
are presented in Chapter 2 of this standard. Commentary on the DOE earthquake design and
evaluation provisions is given in this appendix. Specifically, the basic approach employed is
discussed in Section C.2 along with meeting of target performance goals, seismic loading is
addressed in Section C.3, evaluation of seismic response is discussed in Section C.4, capacities
and good seismic design practice are discussed in Section C.5, special considerations for systems
and components and for existing facilities are covered in Sections C.6 and C.7, respectively, and
quality assurance and peer review are addressed in Section C.8. Alternate seismic mitigation
measures are discussed in Section C.9.
These seismic criteria use the target performance goals to assure safe and reliable
performance of DOE facilities during future potential earthquakes. It is to be noted that these ar
merely target performance goals which need not be proven mathematically or by probabilistic
risk assessments. Design of structures, systems, and components to withst and earthquake
ground motion without significant damage or loss of function depends on the following
considerations:
1.
The SSC must have sufficient strength and stiffness to resist the lateral loads induced
by earthquake ground shaking. If an SSC is designed for insufficient lateral forces or
if deflections are unacceptably large, damage can result, even to well-detailed SSCs.
2.
Failures in low ductility modes (e.g., shear behavior) or due to instability that tend to
be abrupt and potentially catastrophic must be avoided. SSCs must be detailed in a
manner to achieve ductile behavior such that they have greater energy absorption
capacity than the energy content of earthquakes.
3.
Building structures and equipment which are base supported tend to be more
susceptible to earthquake damage (because of inverted pendulum behavior) than
distributed systems which are supported by hangers with ductile connections (because
of pendulum restoring forces).
4
The behavior of an SSC as it responds to earthquake ground motion must be fully
understood by the designer such that a "weak link" that could produce an unexpected
failure is not overlooked. Also, the designer must consider both relative displacement
and inertia (acceleration) induced seismic failure modes.
C-1


Privacy Statement - Press Release - Copyright Information. - Contact Us

Integrated Publishing, Inc. - A (SDVOSB) Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business