Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Seismic response characteristics of nuclear island structure at generic soil and rock sites

  • Published:
Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The number of traditionally excellent coastal lithologic nuclear power plants is limited. It is a trend to develop nuclear power plants on soil sites in inland areas. Therefore, the seismic safety and adaptability of non-rock nuclear power plant (NPP) sites are the key concerns of nuclear safety researchers. Although the five site categories are clearly defined in the AP1000 design control documents, the effects of nuclear power five site conditions and soil nonlinearity on the seismic response characteristics of nuclear island buildings have not been systematically considered in previous related studies. In this study, targeting the AP1000 nuclear island structure as the research object, three-dimensional finite element models of a nuclear island structure at five types of sites (firm rock site (FR), soft rock site (SR), soft-to-medium soil site (SMS), upper bound soft-to-medium site (SMS-UB), and soft soil site (SS)) are established. The partitioned analysis method of soil-structure interaction (PASSI) in the time-domain is used to investigate the effects of site hardness and nonlinearity on the acceleration, displacement, and acceleration response spectrum of the nuclear island structure under seismic excitation. The incremental equilibrium equation and explicit decoupling method are used to analyze the soil nonlinearity described by the Davidenkov model with simplified loading-reloading rules. The results show that, in the linear case, with the increase of site hardness, the peak ground acceleration (PGA) and the peak of acceleration response spectrum of the nuclear island structure increase except for the FR site, while the maximum displacement decreases. In nonlinear analysis, as the site hardness increases, the PGA, maximum displacement, and the peak of acceleration response spectrum of the nuclear island structure increase. The peak value of the acceleration response spectrum in the nonlinear case is greater than that in the linear case for FR, while smaller for SR and soil sites. The site nonlinearity reduces the peak values of the response spectrum for SR and soil sites much more as the site hardness decreases. The results of this study can provide a reference for design of nuclear island structures on soil and rock sites.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anastasopoulos I, Gelagoti F, Kourkoulis R and Gazetas G (2011), “Simplified Constitutive Model for Simulation of Cyclic Response of Shallow Foundations: Validation Against Laboratory Tests,” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 137(12): 1154–1168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ANSYS (2017), ANSYS User’s Guide, ANSYS Inc.

  • ASCE 4-16 (2016), Seismic Analysis of Safety-Related Nuclear Structures, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Reston, Virginia, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ba ZN and Liang JW (2010), “2.5D Scattering of Incident Plane SV Waves by a Canyon in Layered Half-Space,” Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 9(4): 587–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolisetti C (2010), “Numerical and Physical Simulations of Soil-structure interaction,” M.S. Thesis, Dept. of Civil Structural and Environmental Engineering, State Univ. of New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolisetti C, Whittaker AS and Coleman JL (2018), “Linear and Nonlinear Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis of Buildings and Safety-Related Nuclear Structures,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 107: 218–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolisetti C, Whittaker AS, Mason HB, Almufti I and Willford M (2014), “Equivalent Linear and Nonlinear Site Response Analysis for Design and Risk Assessment of Safety-Related Nuclear Structures,” Nuclear Engineering and Design, 275: 107–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Centre International Seismic Safety (2011), Guidance Document Task 1: K-K Unit 7 R/B. Structure. 2011. ISSC: Vienna, Austria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen GX, Jin DD, Zhu J, Shi J and Li XJ (2015), “Nonlinear Analysis on Seismic Site Response of Fuzhou Basin, China,” Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 105(2A): 928–949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen GX, Pan H, Long H and Li XJ (2013), “Dynamic Constitutive Model for Soils Considering Asymmetry of Skeleton Curve,” Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 5(5): 400–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen GX, Wang YZ, Zhao DF, Zhao K and Yang J (2021), “A New Effective Stress Method for Nonlinear Site Response Analyzes,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 50(6): 1595–1611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen SL, Guo QC and Zhou GL (2020a), “Partitioned Hybrid Method for Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis of Nuclear Power Structure,” Chinese Journal of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, 52(1): 258–282. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen SL, Lv H and Zhou GL (2022), “Partitioned Analysis of Soil Structure Interaction for Nuclear Island Building,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 51: 2220–2247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen SL, Tang G, Liu QF and Ding HP (2010), “A Direct Time-Domain Method for Analysis of Three-Dimensional Soil-Structure Dynamic Interaction,” Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 30(2): 24–31. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen SL, Wang JQ, Liu QF, Zhou GL and Tang G (2017), “Asynchronous Parallel Algorithm for three-Dimensional Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis Based on Explicit-Implicit Integration Scheme,” Science China: Technological Sciences, 47: 1321–1330. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen SL, Zhang J, Guo QC, Zhou GL, Liu QF and Wang JQ (2020b), “Time-Domain Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis of Nuclear Facilities on Non-Horizontal Layered Site,” Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 42(2): 308–316. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Chopra AK (2012), Dynamics of Structures (4th Edition), Computers and Structures, University of California at Berkeley, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman JL, Bolisetti C and Whittaker AS (2016), “Time-Domain Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis of Nuclear Facilities,” Nuclear Engineering and Design, 298: 264–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardin BO and Drnevich VP (1972), “Shear Modulus and Damping in Soils: Design Equations and Curves,” Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, 98(7): 667–692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang X and Kwon OS (2020), “An Integrated Simulation Method for Coupled Dynamic Systems,” Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 35: 1115–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang X, Kwon OS and Kwon TH (2021), “An Integrated Simulation Method for Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis of Nuclear Structures,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 50: 2634–2652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Idriss IM and Seed HB (1968), “Seismic Response of Horizontal Soil Layers,” Journal of the Ssoil Mechanics and Foundation Division, 94(SM4): 1003–1031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeremić B, Tafazzoli N, Ancheta T, Orbović N and Blahoianu A (2013), “Seismic Behaviour of NPP Structures Subjected to Realistic 3D, Inclined Seismic Motions, in Variable Layered Soil/Rock, on Surface or Embedded Foundations,” Nuclear Engineering and Design, 265: 85–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jin Y, Yin X and Wang G (2015), “Effects of Different Ground Condition on Seismic Response of Nuclear Island,” Journal of Huaqiao University (Natural Science), 36: 710–715.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kabanda J, Kwon OS and Kwon G (2015), “Time and Frequency Domain Analyzes of the Hualien Large-Scale Seismic Test,” Nuclear Engineering and Design, 295: 261–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanai K (1952), “Relation Between the Nature of Surface Layer and the Amplitudes of Earthquake Motions,” Bulletin of Earthquake Research Institute, 30: 31–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karatzetzou A, Fotopoulou S, Riga E, Karapetrou S, Tsinidis G, Garini E, Pitilakis K, Gerolymos N and Gazetas G (2014), “A Comparative Study on Nonlinear Soil Response Analysis,” Second European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Istanbul, Turkey.

  • Li FR and Chen GX (2020), “Nonlinear Seismic Response Characteristics of CAP1400 Nuclear Island Structure on Soft Rock Sites,” Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations, 4: 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu JB, Du YX, Du XL, Wang ZY and Wu J (2006), “3D Viscous-Spring Artificial Boundary in Time Domain,” Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 5(1): 93–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luco JE (1969), “Dynamic Interaction of a Shear Wall with the Soil,” J Eng Mech Div Am Soc Civil Eng, 95: 333–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lv Hao and Chen SL (2022), “Analysis of Nonlinear Soil Structure Interaction Using Partitioned Method,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 162: 107470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lv Tao, Yang Qiuyu, Geng Xueyong, Chen Liwei and Yang Lijian (2010), “Study of Influence of Rock Hardness on Characteristic of Seismic Response of Bedrock-Foundation of Nuclear Power Plants,” Rock and Soil Mechanics, 31: 1319–1325. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lysmer J and Kuhlemeyer AM (1969), “Finite dynamic model for infinite media,” Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, 95(4): 859–878.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin P and Seed HB (1982), “One Dimensional Dynamic Ground Response Analysis,” Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 108(7): 935–954.

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC Regulatory Guides 1.60 (2014), Design Response Spectra for Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyke RM (1980), “Closure to ‘Nonlinear Soil Models for Irregular Cyclic Loadings’,” Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, 106(11): 1281–1282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rong MS, Li HG and Li XJ (2013), “Applicability of Davidenkov Model for Soft Soils in Sea Areas,” Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 35(S2): 596–600. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Solberg JM, Hossain Q and Mseis G (2016), “Nonlinear Time-Domain Soil–Structure Interaction Analysis of Embedded Reactor Structures Subjected to Earthquake Loads,” Nuclear Engineering and Design, 304: 100–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trifunac MD (1972), “Interaction of a Shear Wall with the Soil for Incident Plane SH-Wwaves,” Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 62(1): 63–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuñón-Sanjur L, Orr RS, Tinic S and Ruiz DP (2007), “Finite Element Modeling of the AP1000 Nuclear Island for Seismic Analyzes at Generic Soil and Rock Sites,” Nuclear Engineering and Design, 237(12–13): 1474–1485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vucetic M (1990), “Normalized Behavior of Clay Uunder irregular Cyclic Loading,” Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 27: 29–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang GX, Chen L and Yin XQ (2016), “Seismic Response Analysis of Nuclear Buildings on Non-Rock Foundation,” 2016 3rd International Conference on Engineering Technology and Application, ICETA 2016, 908–914.

  • Wang ZJ, Fan G and Han JW (2013), “Reference Strain γr in Hyperbolic Modelling of Dynamic Shear Modulus of Soils,” Second International Conference on Geotechnical and Earthquake Engineering, ASCE, 271–278.

  • Westinghouse Electric Co. LLC (2011), AP1000 Design Control Document, Revision 19, Westinghouse Electric Co. LLC, Butler County, Pennsylvania, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yi P, Wang QK and Kong XJ (2017), “Aseismic Safety Analysis of a Prestressed Concrete Containment Vessel for CPR1000 Nuclear Power Plant,” Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 16(1): 55–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao DF, Ruan B and Chen GX (2016), “Validation of the Modified Irregular Unloading-Reloading Rules Based on Davidenkov Skeleton Curve and the Implementation in ABAQUS Software,” The 7th China-Japan-US Trilateral Symposium on Lifeline Earthquake Engineering (ASCE), Shanghai, China.

Download references

Acknowledgement

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of this work by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 51978337, U2039209).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil and Airport Engineering, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, No. 29, General Avenue, Jiangning District, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 211106, China

    Hao Lv & Shaolin Chen

  2. College of Safety and Environmental Engineering, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao, 266590, China

    Hao Lv

  3. College Resources, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Tai’an, 271019, China

    Hao Lv

Authors
  1. Hao Lv
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shaolin Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shaolin Chen.

Additional information

Supported by: National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos. 51978337 and U2039209

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lv, H., Chen, S. Seismic response characteristics of nuclear island structure at generic soil and rock sites. Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib. 22, 667–688 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-023-2186-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-023-2186-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation