Ground motion input in seismic evaluation studies
This report documents research pertaining to conservatism and variability in seismic risk estimates. Specifically, it examines whether or not artificial motions produce unrealistic evaluation demands, i.e., demands significantly inconsistent with those expected from real earthquake motions. To study these issues, two types of artificial motions are considered: (a) motions with smooth response spectra, and (b) motions with realistic variations in spectral amplitude across vibration frequency. For both types of artificial motion, time histories are generated to match target spectral shapes. For comparison, empirical motions representative of those that might result from strong earthquakes in the Eastern U.S. are also considered. The study findings suggest that artificial motions resulting from typical simulation approaches (aimed at matching a given target spectrum) are generally adequate and appropriate in representing the peak-response demands that may be induced in linear structures and equipment responding to real earthquake motions. Also, given similar input Fourier energies at high-frequencies, levels of input Fourier energy at low frequencies observed for artificial motions are substantially similar to those levels noted in real earthquake motions. In addition, the study reveals specific problems resulting from the application of Western U.S. type motions for seismic evaluation of Eastern U.S. nuclear power plants.
- Research Organization:
- US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Washington, DC (United States). Div. of Engineering Technology; Risk Engineering, Inc., Boulder, CO (United States)
- Sponsoring Organization:
- Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC (United States)
- OSTI ID:
- 286264
- Report Number(s):
- NUREG/CR-6466; ON: TI96013810; TRN: 96:023267
- Resource Relation:
- Other Information: PBD: Jul 1996
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
Impact of ground motion characterization on conservatism and variability in seismic risk estimates
Impact of insufficient energy content in the design time history on the structure response