Working Material

INIS-XA-197

XA9952729

WORKING MATERIAL

CO-ORDINATED RESEARCH PROGRAMME ON

BENCHMARK STUDY FOR THE SEISMIC ANALYSIS AND TESTING OF WWER-TYPE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS

VOLUME 5A

EXPERIENCE DATA

Reproduced by the IAEA Vienna, Austria, 1996

NOTE The material in this document has been supplied by the authors and has not been edited by the IAEA. The views expressed remain the responsibility of the named authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the govemment(s) of the designating Member State(s). In particular, neither the IAEA nor any other organization or body sponsoring this meeting can be held responsible for any material reproduced in this document 30-45 DISCLAIMER

Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document. Title: Experience database of Romanian facilities subjected to the last three Vrancea earthquakes

Contributor: O. Coman and J.D. Stevenson

Date: November 1995 PREFACE

The Co-ordinated Research Programme on the Benchmark Study for Seismic Analysis and Testing of WWER-Type NPPs was initiated subsequent to the request from representatives of Member States at the Technical Committee Meeting on Seismic Safety Issues Relating to Existing NPPs held in Tokyo, August 1991. The conclusions of this meeting called for the harmonization of methods and criteria used in Member States in issues related to seismic safety.

With this objective in mind a Consultants' Meeting was convened in April 1992 to produce a working document for a CRP. The meeting was attended by twenty specialists coming from Eastern Europe, Western Europe, USA as well as Japan.

On the basis of the recommendations of this group it was decided that a benchmark study is the most effective way of achieving the principal objective. Two types of WWER reactors (WWER-1000 and WWER-440/213) were selected as prototypes for the benchmark exercise. The two prototypes are Kozloduy Units 5/6 for the WWER-1000 and Paks for the WWER-440/213 NPPs.

Twenty-two internationally recognized institutions (public or private companies) from fourteen countries take part in the state-of-the-art seismic analysis and testing of the two prototypes. Three other institutions are attending the meetings as observers and contributing results of their research on a voluntary basis.

The first and second RCMs were held at the Paks NPP in September 1993 and the Kozloduy NPP in June 1994 during which plant walkdowns were also performed to familiarize the programme participants with the WWER-440/213 and WWER-1000 type plants, respectively.

One of the major activities which took place after the Kozloduy RCM was the full scale dynamic testing of Paks NPP using several blasts. Results of the analyses from the research projects of all the participants as well as the testing which took place at Paks NPP were discussed during the third RCM in St. Petersburg hosted by CKTI. During this RCM a technical tour of the Vyborg Explosive Test Facility was performed.

The first set of Working Material comprised seven volumes and covered the work reported until 1995.

The volumes were arranged by topic, i.e. Volume 1 - Data related to sites and plants; Volume 2 - Generic material: codes, standards, criteria; Volume 3 - Kozloduy Units 5/6: analysis/testing; Volume 4 - Paks NPP: analysis/testing.

The present (second) set keeps the same arrangement between topics and volumes with new letters denoting additional material belonging to the same volume. Volume 5, which is new, will cover material related to Experience Data. This set comprises contributions from participants until January 1996.

No change was made to the original texts in the preparation of this set of Working Material

Aybars Giirpinar, Project Officer IAEA, Division of Nuclear Installation Safety February 1996 LIST OF PARTICIPATING INSTITUTIONS

(Responsible persons)

Belgium - Westmghouse Energy Systems Europe S.A. (Monette)

Bulgaria -Building Research Institute (Sachansky) - Central Laboratory for Seismic Mechanics and Earthquake Engineering (Kostov) - Energoproekt (Simeonov) - EQE-Bulgaria (Jordanov) - Kozloduy NPP (Boyadjiev)

Czech Republic - David Consulting (David) - Stevenson & Associates. Plzen (Masopust)

Finland - IVO International Ltd. (Varpasuo)

Germany - Siemens (Krutzik) - Wolfel (Henkel)

Hungary -PaksNPP (Katona)

Italy - Ismes S.p.A. (Muzzi)

Macedonia - Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Seismology (Jurukovski)

Romania - Stevenson & Associates Seismic Engineering (Coman)

Russia - Atomenergoprojekt (Ambriashvili) - CKTI Vibroseism (Kostarev) - The All-Russia Nuclear Power Engineering Research and Development Institute (VNIIAM) (Kaznovski)

Slovakia - Institute of Costruction and Architecture, Slovak Academy of Sciences (Juhasova)

Spain - Empresarios Agrupados (Ordonez)

Switzerland - Stussi & Partner (Stussi)

USA - EQE International (Asfura) Experience Database

EXPERIENCE DATABASE OF ROMANIAN FACILITIES SUBJECTED TO THE LAST THREE VRANCEA EARTHQUAKES

Final Report

Research Report prepared for the international Atomic Energy Agency Vienna, Austria Contract No. 8223/EN

Chief Scientific Investigator: \ Ovidiu Coman

Research team:

Dan Lungu - University of Civil Engineer Bucharest. Traian Moldoveanu - GEOTEC - Bucharest.

Senior Consultant:

J.D. Stevenson - S&A, USA

Stevenson & Associates Bucharest Office Faurei#1, P11, Apt. 80 Bucharest -784091 P.O. Box 68-61 ROMANIA

Period Covered

November 1994 - October 1995 Experience Database

Contents:

Part I. Probabilistic hazard analysis for the Vrancea earthquakes in Romania

1. Introduction

2. The Vrancea source

3. Probabilistic seismic hazard evaluation

3.1 Magnitude recurrence relationship

3.2 Ground motion attenuation

4. Site dependent response spectra for design

4.1 Site dependent frequency content of the accelerograms

4.2 Accurate seismic response

4.3 Bucharest narrow frequency band motions of long predominant period and design spectra for soft soil condition

4.4 Moldavia and Republic of Moldavia response spectra

4.5 Response spectra for the ground motions recorded in Dobrogea

5. Characteristics of the free field accelerograms from the last three Vrancea earthquakes recorded by the seismic networks of INFP and GEOTEC. Experience Database

Part II. Experience Database.

6. Philosophy of an experience-based generic approach

6.1 Qualification by earthquake experience

6.2 Qualification by testing

6.3 Qualification by Analysis

6.4 Hybrid qualification by combined analysis and testing

7. Approach and scope

8. Database structure and description

8.1 Data availability

8.2 Data requirements

9. Collection procedure

10. Experience data

11. Conclusion

12. References

13. Acknowledgment

Appendix 1. - equipment test data

Appendix 2. - description of the test facility capability Experience Database Pag. 4

1. Introduction

Earthquake experience data was recognized in US as a potential basis for a simplified procedure for verifying the seismic adequacy of equipment by Seismic Qualification Utility Group SQUG in the early 1980's. During these early years, SQUG collected data from past earthquakes and reviewed it in detail. This review was used to establish inclusion rules for definition of the generic equipment classes and screening criteria. Collection of earthquake experience data is still an important task because of the use of experience for new and replacement equipment and parts.

The nuclear industry has developed methods and procedures for using experience data to obtain equipment seismic qualification in a cost effective manner. The use of earthquake experience data for evaluation and design of equipment is expanding beyond the nuclear power industry. The lessons learned from this experience could be applied to develop an approach which would include equipment screening, equipment specific attributes to demonstrate seismic adequacy, implementation guidelines and Peer Review.

In US one result of this effort is a Generic Equipment Ruggedness (GERS) for each equipment class. The GERS is defined as the response to input motion at the base or support point for vtfiich equipment of a given class has been demonstrated, on the basis of test experience, to have sufficient ruggedness to perform as required.

This study was initiated by the IAEA Benchmark Study for Seismic Analysis and Testing of WWER Type Nuclear Power Plants.

The scope of this research project is to initiate a database setup in order to use the past seismic experience of similar components from power and industrial facilities to establish the generic seismic resistance of nuclear power plant safe shutdown equipment applicable to the Eastern European countries.

The project has the following objectives :

a) first part:

-to collect and process all available seismic information about Vrancea earthquakes; -to perform probabilistic hazard analysis of the Vrancea earthquakes; -to determine attenuation low, correlation between the focal depth, earthquake power, soil condition and frequency characteristics of the seismic ground motion; Experience Database Pag. 5

The first part of the project provide information about Vrancea earthquakes which affect the Romanian territory and also the Koslodui NPP site as a background of the investigation of the seismic performance of mechanical and electrical equipment in the industrial facilities.

b) second part

-to investigate and collect information regarding seismic behavior during the 1977, 1986 and 1990 earthquakes of mechanical and electrical components from industrial and test facilities

The second part describe the experience database structure, collection procedure and also presents the seismic/test data collected.

To setup an operational experience database will require an important amount of effort. It must be understood that this goal may be achieved only based on a long term permanent activity and coordinated cooperation. Experience Database Pag. 6

2. The Vrancea Source

The Vrancea region, situated where the Carpathian Arc bends, is the source of an intermediate depth (60-170 km) seismic activity. It affects more than 2/3 of the territory of Romania, important parts of the Republic of Moldova and a small area in Bulgaria. The Vrancea intermediate depth earthquakes produce a high seismic risk in the densely built zones of the South-East of Romania. In Bucharest, on March 4, 1977, during the strongest Vrancea earthquake in the last 50 years, more than 1500 people died and 35 reinforced concrete multistory buildings completely collapsed.

However the Vrancea region is a source of smaller seismic risk when compared with the seismic risk in Turkey (57,757 dead people in destructive earthquakes that occurred from 1925 to 1988) or in Greece. From EUROPROBE's LEVISP and DECAP Reports, the Vrancea region in Romania can be characterized as follows:

The Carpathian Arc is bounded on the North and North-East by the East European Platform and on the East and South by the Moesian Platform; inside the Arc and Westward are the Transylvanian and Pannonian basins, Fig. 2.1.

M 0 ESI AN SUB-PLATE

Fig. 2.1 Tectonic units in the Vrancea region - Romania Experience Database Pag. 7

Focus Moment Gutenberg- The three tectonic units in contact along depth magnitude Richter the Eastern Carpathians have different magnitude crustai and iithospheric thickness, heat fiow and other physical properties as weii o - as different relative motions. The Crustal seismic thickness of the lithosphere varies 2 • - 5.5 activity between about 150 km in the platform areas and less than 100 km inside the 40 Carpathians. In the Vrancea zone the No seismic lithosphere descends to more than 200 activity 60 - km and is located at about 30-40 km in 6.8 6.5 1945 Sept 07 the platform areas, 40-55 km in the 6.3 1990 May 31 80 - 6.1 Carpathians area and 25-30 km in the 7.0 6.7 1990 May 30 basin areas. The intermediate depth foci 10 - are clustered in a narrow volume: about 7.5 7.2 1977 Mar 04 20 km in the SE-NW direction, 60 km in 6.8 1940 Oct 22 120- 6.5 the NE-SW direction and 100 km in 7.2 7.0 1986 Aug 30 depth. The mechanism of the Vrancea source was explained by Fuchs et al. 14 • 7 7 74 1940 Nov 11 (1979): 16 - 7.0 6.8 1908 Oct 06 First a subduction zone was recognised 180 - in the Eastern Carpathians in the SE-NW Deepest event direction, later a paleosubduction zone in the NE-SW direction with its Southern 200. 4.0 recorded 1982 May 16 end decoupled.

Fig. 2.2 Vrancea intermediate depth events (Mw > 6.8) Adapted from EUROPROBE's DECA Project

Nevertheless, from several tectonic models proposed none of them can explain all the particularities of the Vrancea observed seismic activity : spatial distribution of seismic activity, the two types of orientation of the fault plane, etc. (EUROPROBE).

The C. Radu Catalogue of the earthquakes (M > 5.0) which occurred in the Vrancea zone from 1901 to 1994 is listed in Table 2.1. The magnitude in Catalogue is the Gutenberg-Richter magnitude (1954). This magnitude could be approximated as equal to the surface magnitude (Bonjer, 1991): M = Ms .

Conversion of the Gutenberg-Richter magnitude M > 5.0 into the moment magnitude Mw can be done using the relation proposed, for the Vrancea source, by Oncescu (1987):

= 0.92 M +0.81. (2.1) Experience Database Pag. 8

Table 2.1 Catalogue of the Vrancea earthquakes (M > 5.0) occurred on the territory of Romania during the period 1901 -1994 (C. Radu, 1994)

Nr. Date Time Lat. Long. Focus epth •o Gutenberg- GMT h Epicentral Richter h:m:s N° E° km intensity magnitude 1 1901 Sep 23 18:11 45.7 26.6 V 5.0 2 1902 Mar 11 20:14 45.7 26.6 VI 5.5 3 1903 Jun 08 15:07 45.7 26.6 VI 5.0 4 Sep 13 08:02:7 45.7 26.6 VI! 6.3 5 1904 FebO6 02:49 45.7 26.6 VI 5.7 6 1908 Oct06 21:39:8 45.5 26.5 150 VIII 6.8 7 1912 May 25 18:01:7 45.7 27.2 80 VII 6.0 8 May 25 20:15 45.7 27.2 80 VI 5.5 9 May 25 21:15 45.7 27.2 80 V-VI 5.3 10 Jun 07 01:58 45.7 27.2 80 V 5.0 11 1913 Mar 14 03:40 45.7 26.6 i V-VI 5.3 12 Jul23 22:03 45.7 26.6 i V-VI 5.3 13 1914 JulO1 01:00 45.7 26.6 i V 5.0 14 Jul31 18:23:12 45.9 26.3 100 V-VI 5.3 15 Oct26 02:59 45.7 26.6 i V 5.0 16 1917 Mar 15 20:42:46 46.0 26.5 i V 5.0 | 17 May 19 21:00 45.7 26.6 i VI 5.5 18 Jui 11 03:23:55 45.7 26.6 i VI 5.5 19 1918 Feb25 02:07 45.7 26.6 i VI 5.5 20 1919 Apr 18 06:20:05 45.7 26.6 100 VI 5.3 21 Aug09 14:38 45.7 26.6 i VI 5.5 22 1925 Dec 25 02:37 45.7 26.6 i V 5.0 23 1927 Jui 24 20:17:05 45.7 26.6 i VI 5.5 24 1928 Mar 30 09:38:57 45.9 26.5 i VI 5.4 25 Nov23 04:23:12 45.7 26.6 150 V-VI 5.3 26 1929 May 20 12:17:56 45.8 26.5 100 VI 5.3 27 Nov01 06:57:25 45.9 26.5 160 VI - VII 5.8 28 1932 Mar 13 02:53 45.7 26.6 i V-VI 5.3 29 May 27 10:42:15 45.7 26.6 i VI 5.5 30 Sep 07 18:36 45.7 26.6 i VI 5.4 31 1934 FebO2 10:59:13 45.2 26.2 150 VI 5.3 32 Mar 29 20:06:51 45.8 26.5 90 VII 6.3 33 1935 Jui 13 00:03:46 45.3 26.6 140 VI 5.3 34 Sep 05 06:00 45.8 26.7 150 VI 5.5 35 1936 May 17 17:38:02 45.3 26.3 150 V 5.1 36 1937 Jan 26 14:34 45.7 26.6 j V 5.0 37 1938 Jui 13 20:15:17 45.9 26.7 120 VI 5.3 38 1939 Sep 05 06:02:00 45.9 26.7 115 VI 5.3 39 1940 Jun 24 09:57:27 45.9 26.6 115 V-VI 5.5 40 Oct22 06:37:00 45.8 26.4 122 VII - VIII 6.5 41 Nov08 12:00:44 45.5 26.2 145 VI 5.5 42 Nov10 01:39:07 45.8 26.7 150 IX 7.4 43 Nov11 06:34:16 46.0 26.8 150 VI 5.5 44 Nov14 14:37 45.7 26.6 ! V 5.0 45 Nov19 20:27:12 46.0 26.5 150 VI 5.3 46 Nov23 14:49:53 45.8 26.8 150 V-VI 5.3 47 Dec 01 17:19 45.7 26.6 i V 5.1 48 1941 Jan 29 07:04 45.7 26.6 i V 5.1 49 1942 Apr 13 03:07:22 45.7 26.5 100 V-VI 5.2 50 Jui 29 19:19 45.7 26.5 125 V 5.0 51 1943 Apr 28 19:46:40 45.8 27.1 66 VI 5.0 Experience Database Pag. 9

Nr. Date Time Lat. Long. Focus depth "o Gutenberg- GMT h Epicentral Richter h:m:s N° E° km intensity magnitude

52 1944 Feb25 16:59 45.7 26.6 155 V-VI 5.2 53 1945 Mar 12 20:51:46 45.6 26.4 125 V! 5.5 54 SepO7 15:48:26 45.9 26.5 75 VII - VIII 6.5 55 Sep14 17:21 45.7 26.6 i V 5.1 56 [Dec 09 06:08:45 45.7 26.8 80 VII 6.0 57 1946 Nov 03 18:46:59 45.6 26.3 140 VI 5.5 58 1947 Mar 13 14:03 45.7 26.6 j V 5.0 59 Oct17 13:25:20 45.7 26.6 i VI 5.4 60 1948 Mar 13 21:05:56 45.9 26.7 150 V 5.3 61 Apr 29 00:33:40 45.9 26.7 150 V 5.0 62 May 29 04:48:58 45.8 26.5 140 VI - VII 5.8 63 1949 Dec 26 03:36:10 45.7 26.7 135 V-VI 5.3 64 1950 Jan 16 04:25:01 45.6 26.3 120 V-VI 5.3 65 Jun20 01:18:54 45.9 26.5 160 VI 5.5 66 Jul14 06:29:57 45.7 27.1 100 V 5.1 67 1952 AugO3 16:36:14 45.6 26.5 150 V 5.1 68 1953 May 17 02:33:54 45.4 26.3 150 V 5.0 69 1954 Oct 01 13:31:00 45.5 27.1 50 VI 5.2 70 1955 May 01 21:22:52 45.5 26.3 135 V 5.4 71 1959 May 31 12:51:48 45.7 27.2 35 VI 5.2 72 Aug 19 15:32:03 45.9 26.8 150 V 5.1 73 1960 Jan 26 20:27:04 45.8 26.2 .140 V-V! 5.3 74 Oct 13 02:21:25 45.4 26.4 '160 VI 5.5 75 1963 Jan 14 18:33:25 45.7 26.6 133 VI 5.4 76 1965 Jan 10 02:52:24 45.8 26.6 128 VI 5.4 77 1966 Oct 02 11:21:45 45.7 26.5 140 VI 5.5 78 Oct 15 06:59:19 45.6 26.4 140 V 5.1 79 Dec 14 14:50:00 45.7 26.4 158 V 5.0 80 1973 Aug 20 15:18:28 45.73 26.52 70 VI 5.5 81 Oct 23 10:50:59 45.72 26.48 171 V 5.1 82 1974 Jul 17 05:09:23 45.76 26.61 135 V-VI 5.4 83 1975 Mar 07 04:13:05 45.86 26.63 21 VI 5.1 84 1976 Oct 01 17:50:43 45.72 26.54 142 V-VI 5.5 85 1977 Mar 04 19:21:56 45.78 26.78 93 VII - IX 5.5 86 Mar 04 19:22:00 45.72 26.94 79 VII - IX 6.5 87 Mar 04 19:22:08 45.48 26.78 93 VII - IX 6.5 88 Mar 04 19:22:15 45.34 26.30 109 VII - IX 7.2 89 1978 Oct 02 20:28:52 45.78 26.48 164 V-VI 5.3 90 1979 May 31 07:20:07 45.57 26.38 120 V-VI 5.3 91 Sep11 15:36:55 45.59 26.31 154 VI 5.4 92 1980 Jan 14 15:07:54 45.78 26.60 141 V-VI 5.3 93 1981 Jun 18 00:02:59 45.68 26.38 144 V-VI 5.4 94 1983 Jan 25 07:34:49 45.67 26.75 160 V-VI 5.2 95 1984 Jan 20 07:24:23 45.51 26.34 135 V 5.0 96 1985 Aug 01 14:35:03 45.78 26.52 105 VI 5.5 97 1986 Aug 16 06:41:25 45.58 26.34 154 V 5.0 98 Aug 30 21:28:37 45.53 26.47 133 Vl!l 7.0 99 1988 Jan 08 16:50:39 45.54 26.26 137 V 5.0 100 1990 May 30 10:40:06 45.82 26.90 91 VIII 6.7 101 May 31 00:17:49 45.83 26.89 79 VII 6.1 102 1991 Jan 31 13:29:14.8 45.73 26.52 137 V 5.0 103 1993 Aug 26 21:32:33.5 45.70 26.62 138 V 5.1 Experience Database Pag. 10

The moment magnitude is defined as function of the seismic moment Mo which is directly related to the energy released by the earthquake (Kanamori, 1977):

M Mw = log— -10.7. (2.2)

The Vrancea events with a magnitude Mw ^ 6.8 in this century are presented in Fig.2.2.

The main parameters of the Vrancea earthquakes recorded in 1990, 1986 and 1977 are given in Table 2.2. The moment magnitude for the 1990, 1986 and 1977 earthquakes was estimated from Equation (2.2).

Table 2.2. Fault plan characteristics of the Vrancea earthquakes

Date Origin Lat. Focus Seismic Mw Fault plan solution Time of Surface time Longit. depth moment Strike Dip Slip Author fracture of km Mo o X° s fracture km2 1940 Nov 01:39:07 45.8° 150 7.70 224° 62.3° 75.5° Radu - - 10 26.7° Oncescu

1977 Source 1 93 238° 77° 104° Mulier 26 Mar 4 19:21:56 26.78° 87 9.1x10 220° 116° Tavera 20 76° Source 2 45.48° 109 205° -81.2° Rakers 19:22:15 26.30° 48° Mulier 7.1x1026 Tavera 10 2400 114 194° 87° 41° 2.0x1027 7.50 Enescu 15 63x37 Sources 1+2 2.5x1027 7.56 Rakers Mulier Bonjer 1986 21:28:37 45.53° 133 242° 70° 93.8° Apopei Aug 30 26.47° Trifu 4-6 725 Oncescu

26 140 8.1X10 7.23 225° 68° 105° Monfret 4-6 Descham ps 26 141 6.0x10 7.15 227° 65° 104° Tavera

26 1990 10:40:06 45.82° 90 3.9x10 7.02 235° 66° 98° Descham 4 26 May 26.90° 89 3.2x10 6.97 232° 57° 89° ps 5 30 Tavera

25 1990 00:17:49 45.83° 87 3.2x10 6.30 309° 69° 106° Harvard 5 25 May 26.89° 94 3.5x10 6.33 308° 71° 97° Tavera 3 31 Experience Database Pag. 11

The data base used for the analysis of the Vrancea earthquakes effects comprises digitized triaxial records from:

Romania:

(i) 1 station for the Mar 4, 1977 earthquake (this event was recorded in Romania by only one SMAC-B accelerograph located in the soft soil condition of Bucharest) (ii) 42 stations for the Aug 30, 1986 event (iii) 54 stations for the May 30, 1990 event (iv) 40 stations for the May 31, 1990 event,

Republic of Moldova:

(v) 1 station for the Aug 30, 1986 event (vi) 2 stations for the May 30, 1990 event

and Bulgaria:

(vii) 6 stations for the May 30, 1990 event (viii) 2 stations for the May 31, 1990 event.

The Romanian accelerograms come from three national networks:

N National Institute of Earth Physics, INFP: 10 SMA-1 KINEMETRICS accelerographs A Institute for Geotechnical and Geophysical Studies, GEOTEC: 4 SMA-1 KINEMETRICS accelerographs and O Building Research Institute, INCERC: more than 40 SMA-1 KINEMETRICS accelerographs.

In the City of Bucharest (2.35 Mill, inhabitants) there are 12 recording stations: 10 INCERC, 1 INFP and 1 GEOTEC.

The stations that recorded the Aug 30, 1986 and May 30, 1990 Vrancea earthquakes, as well as their maximum peak horizontal acceleration, used for the evaluation of attenuation characteristics are located in the maps appended to this chapter. Experience Database Pag. 12 Experience Database Pag. 13 Experience Database Pag. 14 OTOPENI BUCHAREST Aug. 30,1986, VRANCEA earthquake Mw» 7.2 h«133km

PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION m/s*

0.91 \ TITULESCU

078 A r 1.04 CARLTONY; ARMENEASCA

^ANOURI DRUMUL SARII|

fid Ghenceo.....--'-' BALTA ALBA

0.73

METROU IMGB1 1.5 3 km METALURGIEI / fi.3S BUC.MAGURELE OTOPENI BUCHAREST May 3O,199O,VRANCEA earthquake Mw=6.9 h=91 km PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION m/s'

DATA

2.09 BOLINT1N

0.91 METROU , IMGB1

0.90 BUC. MAGURELE Experience Database Pag. 17

3. Seismic Hazard evaluation

3.1 Magnitude recurrence relationship

The Gutenberg-Richter law for the recurrence intervals of earthquakes with magnitude greater than or equal to M was determined from the Catalogue of the Vrancea intermediate depth magnitudes during this century (1901-1994), Table 2.1. The relation strongly depends on the magnitude intervals. For magnitude interval of interest for the civil engineer (M>6)f the logarithm of the cumulative number of earthquakes with magnitude > M during the period 1901-1994 was established as, Fig. 3.1

log N (>M) = 5.462 - 0.720 M (3.1) or In N (>M) = 12.577 - 1.658 M . (3.1')

14 Intermediate depth Vrancea earthquakes

LnN= 12.577- 1.658 M

6 6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8 7 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8 Magnitude M

Fig.3.1 Cumulative number of events with magnitude M > 6.0 from 1901 to 1994

The average number of Vrancea earthquakes per year with magnitude greater than or equal to M results in (n = N/94), Fig. 3.2:

log n (>M) = 3.489 - 0.720 M (3.2) or In n (>M) = 8.034 - 1.658 M . (3.21)

The standard deviation of the In N approximately indicates the coefficient of variation of the N in Equation (3.1): VNs

Ln N and M are negatively correlated and the correlation coefficient is very high: p=-0.98.

1 -

Intermediate depth Vrancea earthquakes S3 t O. [ i | 1901-1994 | 5 0 1 ^^

*-—^_ •• A ! . 1 . ! 1 i : ! ; W-~-^^. j

k)g n =3.489-0.720 M 0,01 ! — . 1 ; ; i 1

3 I i : ill!

i ! i i 0.001 6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8 7 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8 Magnitude M

Fig. 3.2 Gutenberg-Richter magnitude recurrence relation for the Vrancea source (M > 6.0)

The mean return period (in years) of an earthquake of magnitude greater than or equal to M is the reverse of the number n (>M):

1 T(> M) = (3.3) > M)

Substituting the magnitude of the most important Vrancea earthquakes in the last 60 years into Equation (3.1) one obtains the corresponding return periods from Equation (3-3):

Nov 10, 1940 M = 7.4 T = 70 yr Mar 4, 1977 7.2 50 Aug30, 1986 7.0 36 May 30, 1990 6.7 22 May 31, 1990 6.1 8

The magnitude fractiles corresponding to building code return periods are estimated in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1 Magnitude of Vrancea earthquakes having specified return period

Return period, yr 10 25 j 50 100 >200 Magnitude M 6.23 6.79 | 7.20 7.62 8.00 Experience Database Pag. 19

It is emphasized that an extrapolation of the fitted model(Equation 3.2) outside the region of data (100 yr) is uncertain while the interpolation among the data is always safe. From historical data, the magnitude M = 8.00 corresponds (in Table 3.1) to 200 yr return period. The maximum magnitude for the Vrancea earthquakes is steel a questionable problem that should be solved by seismologists. The extreme value models for the maximum annual magnitude M > 4 during the period 1934-1994 lead to the following fractiles corresponding to 50 yr and 100 yr return periods, Fig. 3.3:

T = 50 yr T = 100yr

Gumbel distribution, for maxim 7.03 7.40 Weibull distribution, for minim 7.11 7.48

The results are somewhat lower than that obtained from regression analysis for M > 6.0. The coefficient of variation of the magnitude time series is relatively small, 0.125 and the skewness 1.39 is close to that of the Gumbel distribution (1.139).

Magnitude M 5.5 6 6.5 7.5 -60 Intermediate < iepth Vranceaj earthquakes -70 1901-1994 -80 -90 J "100 | t -110 T f -120 r 13 -130 -h i2 -140 i- -150 -|- -160 f- lih =-0.771 + 2.864 In M -170 -j- -180 -i-

Fig. 3.3 Relationship between focal depth and magnitude M > 6.0

Investigating the possible relationship between the magnitude of an destructive earthquake (M > 6.0) and its focal depth, the following dependence was found from Table 2.1, Fig. 3.4:

In h = - 0.771 + 2.864 In M (3.4) or h = - 199.21 + 46.18 M. (3.4') Experience Database Pag. 20

The correlation coefficient p=0.78 implies a moderate joint linear tendency between h and M. The standard deviation of the In h indicates approximately the coefficient of variation ofh: = 0.176.

The standard deviation of h in Equation (3.4') is ah = 19.53 m. The earthquakes of magnitude smaller than 6.0 display non-correlation between h and M, Fig. 3.3.

3.2 Ground motion attenuation

The strong ground motions produced by the May 30, 1990 and Aug 30, 1986 earthquakes in Vrancea-Romania were recorded at over 60 stations. The Bucharest accelerogram of the largest recorded seismic event from Vrancea source, on March 4, 1977, was joint to the". ;1986 and 1990 set. The data set was recorded at sites with different soil .conditions: medium stiff soil condition in Moldova, soft and very soft soil categories in Bucharest, etc. TheiNFP (10) and GEOTEC (4) stations are mounted in free-field recording conditions. The INCERC stations are mounted either in free-fieid or in the underground of the buildings. A clear definition of the recording conditions for all those stations is not available. The ground motion attenuation relations were studied by applying the regression procedure to the larger of the horizontal PGA components, to the vertical PGA as well as to the maximum horizontal PGV and PGD components. One to three so-called anomalous observations on each azimuth were not included in the analysis. Mean and mean plus one standard deviation attenuation relation appropriate for Vrancea intermediate foci were established by non-linear multi-regression of the available set of peak ground accelerations, as function of magnitude, focal depth, hypocentra! distance and azimuth. The following Joyner - Boore model was applied :

inPGA = Ci + c2 M + c3 !nR + c* h + a inPGA P (3-5) where:

PGA is the maximum peak ground acceleration at the site M - the magnitude R - the hypocentral distance h - the focal depth cr inPGA - the standard deviation of In PGA variable P is a binary variable (0 for mean attenuation curve and 1 for mean plus one standard deviation attenuation) ci, C2, cs, C4 are the data dependent coefficients.

Taking into account: (a) The deep structure in Vrancea where three tectonic units come in contact; (b) The stability of the angles characterizing the fault plane and the motion on this plane; c) The ellipse-shape of the macroseismic field produced by the Vrancea source; the attenuation analysis was performed on two orthogonal directions, corresponding to an Experience Database Pag. 21 average direction of the strike of the fault plan, ~~° = 225°, and to the normal to this direction. As a result 3 circular sectors (of 90° each) centered on these directions were established :~~

a) The first sector contains stations in Bucharest area and in central Walachia, on the « younger, thinner and warmer » (Oncescu, 1993) Moesian Platform; b) The second sector contains stations in Moldova, on « old, thick, and cold » (Oncescu, 1993) East European Platform; c) The third sector contains stations in Eastern part of Walachia and in Dobrogea, including Cernavoda Nuclear Power Plant site as well as the contact line between the East European and Moesian platforms.

The distribution of the accelerogram data set on seismic events, sectors or azimuth and hypocentral distance is given in Table 3.2 and Table 3^3. The May 31, 1990 event has a very small magnitude, return period and focal depth (M=6.1, T=8 yr, h=79 km) and was not included in the prediction of the attenuation phenomenon in the range of large magnitudes, return periods and focal depths (M > 7.2, T > 50, h > 100 km).

~~Table 3.2 Distribution of data on events and Table 3.3 Distribution of data within azimuth hypocentral distances~~

Earthquake AS! Hypocentra j Earthquake Al! Mar Aug May event ! 4 30 30 s distances Mar 4, Aug 30, May 197 1986 1990 R: km 1977 1986 30, event 7 i i 1990 s Epicentral area 1J - 6 1( 4 1( 10 v ! 90-110 | 4 1 Bucharest 1 19 20 40 110-130 4 4 azimuth - 10 9 19 130-150 7 8 15 Moldova azimuth - 7 17 24 150-170 1 3 2 6 Cernavoda 170-190 20» 7 27D azimuth 190-210 j 2 151} 17'> Alt data set 1 42 50 93 210-230 2 2 4 230-250 4 3 7 > Included in the data set analyzed for 250-270 2 2 every azimuth 270-290 3 3 290-310 4 4 >310 3 3

~~Including City of Bucharest data~~

Attenuation characteristics of the observed maximum peak ground acceleration from 1990, 1986 and 1977 Vrancea events are given in Fig. 3.4 and in Table 3.4. The results represent an improved version of the previous investigation (Lungu et al., 1993).

The effect of the single data obtained in the largest recorded Vrancea event in Romania (March 4, 1977, T = 50yr) was extremely strong in the multi-regression procedure, Fig.3.5. Experience Database Pag. 22

~~Table 3.4 Parameters of directional attenuation for 3 Vrancea intermediate depth earthquakes, Equation (3.4)~~

Complete set Bucharest Moldova Cernavoda of azimuth & NPP data Bucharest azimuth Ci 5.432 4.726 3.953 5.560 c2 1.035 0.976 1.020 1.154 c3 -1.358 -1.146 -1.069 -1.561 c4 -0.0072 -0.0066 -0.0060 -0.0070 SlnPGA 0.397 0.353 0.376 0.372

~~Using the data only from 1990 (T = 22 yr) and 1986 (T = 36yr) Vrancea events and the simplified model:~~

~~In PGA =bi + b2M + b3lnR + amPGAP (3-6) the resulting PGA are much lower than that predicted by the Equation (3.5).~~

~~For multi-regression procedure on NPP azimuth a fictitious data for the Mar 4, 1977 event, in Cemavoda, was included. i~~

~~However, the model (3.6) proved to be very useful for the comparison of the azimuthal attenuation phenomena in greater and deeper 1986 event and in smaller and "shallower" 1990 event, Table 3.5.~~

~~Table 3.5 Parameters of attenuation relation for the 1986 and 1990 Vrancea events:~~

~~In PGA = ai + a2 In R + OIOPGA P~~

Complete Bucharest Moldova Bucharest Cernavoda Event set of azimuth azimuth & NPP data Moldova azimuth a! 1986 15.565 14.864 11.978 12.691 18.678 1990 10.562 9.084 6.887 8.499 11.280 a2 1986 -2.092 -1.954 -1.370 -1.526 -2.711 1990 -1.138 -0.844 -0.395 -0.798 -1.298 CJlnPGA 1986 0.458 0.328 0.551 0.417 0.368 1990 0.315 0.341 0.215 0.296 0.296

~~The regression results in Table 3.4 and Table 3.5 reveal the following features of the Vrancea ground motions attenuation:~~

~~(i) The azimuthal dependence of the attenuation pattern i.e.: Experience Database Pag. 23~~

~~- A slower attenuation on the Bucharest azimuth compared with Cernavoda (NPP) azimuth~~

~~Complete set of data~~

~~400 In PGA = 5.559+1.154 M-j 1.561 In R-O.cio7h \ \ I - ' j\\ ; fbrT=100yr|~~

~~h=133km In PGA =15.565 -2.092 In R~~

~~In PGA 10.562-1.138 In R 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Hypocentral distance, km~~

~~Bucharest azimudi + Moldova azimuth~~

~~400 !ln PGA = 3.953 + 1.020 M - 1.069 In R - 0.006ih o i fort = 100vTJ I | 300 \i V so ~\r I Ij 1 M = 7.2 o h = 109 km S > 200 BUCH. taPGA= 12.691 - !.526InR~~

~~2 100~~

~~In PGA =8.498- 0.798 !n R 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Hypocentral distance R, km~~

~~Fig. 3.4 Multi-regression model prediction of the mean attenuation and observations of maximum PGA Experience Database Pag. 24~~

~~Bucharest azimuth~~

~~400 - 1.146 InR 300 100 yr / = 7.2 , o h= 109 km M = 7.0 BUCH. «-£ 200 h=133km o to PGA = 14.564 -1.954 In R N J 100 - 1 h = 91km i / i to PGA = 9.08J9 - 0.844 to R~~

~~50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Hypocentral distance R, km~~

~~Bucharest~~

~~400 to PGiA = 9.547 + 0.175 M - 1.159 lnJR forT=100yr 50 yr S 300 o 03 200 in PGA = 14.8fe4 - 1.954 to R §~~

~~= 91km| to PGA = 9.089 -0.844 to R 0 ^ 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Hypocentral distance R, km~~

~~Fig. 3.5 Comparison of the mean attenuation found from multi-regression and regression procedures for 3 Vrancea events Experience Database Pag. 25~~

~~Bucharest azimuth~~

~~400 In!PGA = 4.726 +l0.976 M - 1.146 In R- 0.0066 n + 0.353 P~~

~~50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Hypocentral distance R, km~~

~~Complete set of data~~

~~400 . !ln PGA = 5.423^ + 1.035 M - li58 In R - 0.0072 h + 0.397 P \! 73 J3 300 o I T=100yr ! 8 Mean + 1 St. deviation 2 "> 200 3 N 100 T 3~~

~~50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Hypocentral distance R, km~~

~~Fig. 3.6 The 50 yr and 100 yr Vrancea earthquakes. Predicted mean and mean plus one standard deviation values of the peak horizontal acceleration Experience Database Pag. 26~~

- A somewhat slower attenuation on the Moldova azimuth compared with Bucharest azimuth (ii) A slower attenuation on the direction of the fault plane (N45E) compared with the normal to this direction (N135E) (iii) A faster attenuation for deeper focus and/or greater magnitudes (iv) A greater standard deviation of the attenuation function for deeper focus and greater magnitudes (v) A vertical acceleration attenuation slower than the horizontal acceleration attenuation (vi) A velocity attenuation faster than the acceleration attenuation and slower than the displacement attenuation.

Predicted values of the peak horizontal acceleration for 50 and 84 percentile, as function of hypocentral distance, return period of magnitude and azimuth are given in Fig.3.6. Experience Database Pag. 27

~~4. Site dependent response spectra for design~~

~~4.1 Site dependent frequency content of the accelerograms~~

~~The analysis of the frequency content of ground motions combines stochastic and deterministic measures.~~

The stochastic measures of frequency content are related to the power spectral density (PSD) of stationary segment of the ground motion. They are the s (Cartwright & Longuet - Higgins) dimensionless indicator and the f1Ol fso and fgo (Kennedy & Shinozuka) fractile frequencies below which 10%, 50% and 90% of the total cumulative power of PSD occurs.

~~Cumulative power of the PSD is defined by:~~

~~Cum G(coi) = J G((o)dco. (4.1) 0~~

~~G(oo) is the one-sided spectra! density of the stationary process of ground acceleration.~~

~~The s bandwidth measure is defined as a function of the spectra! moments of G(co):~~

~~s = (1 - A.22/ X.0^4) (4.2)~~

~~(4.3)~~

Narrow frequency band seismic processes are characterized by s values greater than 0.9. Wide frequency band processes have s values greater than 2/3 and smaller than 0.85. The duration of the stationary power of the ground acceleration process was selected as D = T0.g - T0.i , where T0.s and T0.i are the times at which 90% and 10% of the total cumulative energy of the accelerogram are reached.

~~Cumulative energy at the time ti is given by:~~

~~E(ti) = j[a(t)]2dt (4.4) o where a(t) is the ground acceleration time history.~~

~~Alternating duration definitions are: T0.95 - T0.05 (Trifunac and Brady, Jennings), T0.75 - T0.05 (Kennedy et al.) etc. Experience Database Pag. 28~~

The deterministic measures of frequency bandwidth are related to structure maximum response to the ground motion. They are the fc and fD control (corner) frequencies as defined by Newmark in the tripartite log-plot of response spectra :

~~fc = 1/Tc = (1/27i)(max SA / max SV) (4.5)~~

~~fD = 1/TD = (1/2:I)(max SV / max SD) (4.6)~~

SD, SV and SA are respectively the relative displacement and velocity response spectra and the absolute acceleration response spectra of the SDOF structure. The correlation between the stochastic median frequency fs0 and the deterministic control frequency fc was found very strong. From regression analysis, the correlation coefficients between f50 and fc are very high 0.77 + 0.95, irrespective of the frequency bandwidth, the peak ground acceleration, the type of component (horizontal/vertical), or the earthquake magnitude. Examples of the frequency content of site-dependent Vrancea accelerograms are given in Table 4.1 -=- Table 4.3. Normalized PSD (of unit area) for typical recording sites in Romania are presented in Fig.4.1-^Fig. 4.4.

~~4.2 Accurate seismic response from time history~~

Response spectra from the time history must be computed at sufficient frequency (period) intervals to have a good resolution of spectra! ordinates. The ASCE 4-86 Standard for Seismic Analysis of Safety - Related Nuclear Structures suggests the frequencies in Table 4.4.

~~Tab!e4.4 Suggested frequencies for calculation of response spectra (ASCE 4-86)~~

~~Frequency range, Hz Increment, Hz 22-34 3.0 18-22 2.0 15-18 1.0 8.0-15 0.50 5.0-8.0 0.25 3.6-5.0 0.20 3.0-3.6 0.15 0.5-3.0 0.1~~

The last line of Table 4.4 can be recommended only for broad frequency band motions. For the narrow frequency band motions of long predominant period (Mexico, STC, 1985; Bucharest, INCERC, 1977 etc.) as well as for motions characterized by control periods Tc > 0.5 s, the following increment is suggested:

~~Frequency Increment Period range Increment range 1.0-2.5 s 0.05 s 1.0-3.0 Hz 0.10 Hz 2.5-6.0 s 0.50 s >6.0s 1 s Experience Database Pag. 29~~

~~A set of 100 frequencies (periods) is thus selected to produce accurate response spectra. In Fig. 4.6 * Fig. 4.13 the structural damping is E, = 0.05.~~

~~Table 4.1 Frequency content of the Vrancea ground motions recorded in the City of Bucharest~~

~~Station Earthquake Comp PGA s PSD frequencies Control frequencies 2 - - cm/s fio '50 ^90 Hz fc Hz~~

~~Bucharest, Mar 04,1977 NS 194.9 0.97 0.4 0.69 2.0 0.75 0.53 INCERC EW 162.3 0.91 0.4 1.44 4.1 0.84 0.50 O ; Vert 105.7 0.82 0.5 2.57 8.3 1.35 0.46~~

~~Aug 30,1986 US 88.7 0.95 0.5 0.74 3.8 0.79 0.63 z EW 95.2 0.92 0.6 1.85 4.8 1.09 0.57 Vert 28.0~~

~~May 30,1990 NS 76.6 0.78 1.1 2.57 5.2 2.13 0.26 EW 98.7 0.84 0.8 1.94 4.9 1.35 0.57 Vert~~

~~I Bucharest. Aug 30.1986 NS 135.4 0.94 0.5 1.25 3.7 1.02 0.68 Magurele, EW 114.6 0.88 0.5 1.75 . 4.6 1.11 0.68 !NFP' Vert 50.3 0.76 1.2 4.01 - 9.9 1.85 0.20~~

May 30,1990 NS 89.6 0.79 1.2 3.63 8.9 3.45 0.29 -; EW 87.0 0.89 0.6 1.88 5.0 1.32 0.45 Vert 59.5 0.72 1.5 4.63 11.4 5.00 0.26 Baita Alba May 30,1990 N101W 52.6 0.77 1.1 3.51 5.5 2.70 0.43 O N169E 65.8 0.85 0.7 2.00 5.3 2.44 0.32 Vert 53.5 0.76 1.5 4.39 9.3 1.65 0.61

~~Carfton Aug 30,1986 N60E 78.2 0.91 0.6 1.50 4.1 1.11 0.65 O N30W 68.6 0.90 0.5 1.37 4.9 1.05 0.62 Vert 31.0~~

~~May 30,1990 N60E 104.9 0.88 0.7 1.88 5.1 1.32 0.45 N30W 110.5 0.80 1.1 3.32 5.8 2.86 0.55 Vert 106.7 0.76 1.8 4.76 11.7 3.57 0.31~~

~~Drumui Aug 30,1986 Sarii O May 30,1990 N84W 117.3 0.80 1.0 3.63 5.7 2.50 0.68 N174W 116.8 0.76 1.7 3.19 5.3 3.03 0.34 Vert 81.6 0.70 2.3 5.13 8.8 4.76 0.22~~

~~EREN Aug 30,1986 N10W 156.0 0.91 0.5 1.71 4.8 1.52 0.61 O W10S 105.8 0.89 0.5 1.89 5.8 1.45 0.61 Vert 42.0~~

~~May 30, 1990 - - - - Experience Database Pag. 30~~

Station Earthquake Comp PGA 8 PSD Frequencies Control frequencies fio *50 fgo 'C fD 2 Hz cm/s Hz Bucharest, Aug 30,1986 M15E 86.7 0.92 0.5 1.25 4.0 0.82 0.60 ISPH E15S 76.7 0.84 0.6 2.51 5.1 1.82 0.38 A i Vert 40.1 0.80 1.2 3.63 9.0 1.92 0.32

~~Bucharest, May 30,^990 *JS 73.9 0.90 1.0 2.01 6.0 1.33 0.50 ARM J 55.7 0.84 1.0 3.52 8.0 2.00 0.88 A Vert~~

~~May31,f990 NS 22.2 0.83 1.2 2.76 4.8 2.56 0.65 0.87 1.5 2.76 6.8 1.96 0.51 '- 23.4 Vert 19.5 0.83 1.0 3.27 11.1 1.96 0.29~~

~~Metalurgiei Aug 30,1986 W32S 69.8 0.94 0.5 0.88 2.7 0.75 0.63 O '- •1M32W 43.7 0.86 0.6 2.00 4.6 1.56 0.27 Vert 21.0~~

~~May 30,1990 N127W 59.0 0.86 0.8 2.31 4.4 1.85 0.56 : i N37W 76.3 0.84 0.9 2.69 5.1 1.23 0.37 Vert 43.2 0.72 1.9 5.01 10.9 3.45 0.22~~

~~Metrbu : Aug 30?1986 N120W 72.7 0.92 0.6 1.12 3.8 0.66 0.65 IMGB1 N30W 57.7 0.85 0.6 2.31 4.6 1.64 0.68 O Vert 27.0~~

~~May 30,1990 N120W 60.1 0.86 0.9 2.06 ; 4.1 1.49 0.55 i N30W 90.8 0.88 1.0 1.99 ' 4.8 1.49 0.60 Vert 50.1 0.77 1.4 3.94 7.7 3.85 0.43~~

~~Militari Aug 30,1586 NS 92.2 0.91 0.5 2.00 3.7 1.35 0.62 O EW 79.6 0.88 0.6 2.13 4.1 1.82 0.65 Vert 33.8 0.77 1.6 4.82 12.1 1.62 0.28~~

~~May 30,1990 W92N 95.3 0.84 1.1 2.44 5.3 1.72 0.59 N178E 51.1 0.84 1.2 2.94 6.3 2.50 0.29 Vert 43.8 0.77 1.5 4.32 10.3 2.78 0.30~~

~~Panduri Aug 30,1986 N131E 90.6 0.85 1.0 2.37 4.8 1.33 0.54 O N139W 101.2 0.88 0.6 1.97 4.3 1.25 0.69 Vert 68.1 0.75 1.2 4.62 9.6 1.67 0.55~~

~~May 30,1990 N131E 127.9 0.77 1.9 3.13 5.0 3.45 0.31 N139W 136.6 0.76 1.3 3.57 5.5 3.23 0.66 Vert 57.9 0.72 1.6 4.70 10.0 3.23 0.36~~

~~Titulescu Aug 30,1986 N145W 89.6 0.91 0.5 1.63 4.3 1.18 0.62 O N55W 79.8 0.86 1.0 2.38 4.7 1.67 0.66 Vert 61.8 0.74 1.3 5.08 11.0 1.59 0.44~~

~~May 30,1990 N145W 56.4 0.79 1.2 3.19 5.8 2.38 0.48 N55W 71.5 0.83 1.0 2.63 5.7 1.89 0.38 Vert 37.6 0.74 1.4 5.11 11.0 3.13 0.25~~

~~Seismic network: • National Institute for Earth Physics, INFP O Building Research Institute, INCERC A Institute for Geophysical and Geotechnical Studies, GEOTEC Experience Database Pag. 31~~

~~Table 4.2 Frequency content of the Vrancea ground motions recorded in Republic of Moldova~~

~~Station Earthquake Comp PGA s PSD Frequencies Control frequencies~~

fio fso f» fc fD cm/s2 Hz Hz Chisina Aug 30, Y309 191. 0.65 1.3 6.31 7.9 4.16 1.38 u 1986 Y310 8 0.86 0.7 2.02 7.4 1.49 0.94 2311 212. 0.68 2.5 5.35 9.4 5.00 0.41 i f 120. 4 May 30, Y659 77.5 0.55 5.1 7.96 12.8 3.12 0.51 1990 Y660 83.8 0.79 1.8 4.65 10.4 3.70 0.47 Y658 63.9 0.56 5.1 7.96 12.8 7.14 0.27

~~Cahul May 30, Y671 129. 0.65 1.3 6.49 10.1 3.57 0.48 1990 Y673 1 0.68 2.5 5.35 9.4 3.84 0.39 Y672 90.5 0.69 3.2 5.54 11.6 5.88 0.27 136. 7~~

~~Table 4.3 Frequency content of the Vrancea ground motions recorded in Bulgaria~~

Station Earthquake Comp PGA s PSD Frequencies fio fso fso cm/s Hz 2 Russe May 30, N20E 87.3 0.80 2.1 3.00 8.3 1990 May 31, N20E 11.9 0.70 2.4 5.15 10.1 1990 Shabla May 30, N29W 32.9 0.78 0.5 3.73 5.9 1990 May 31, N29W 8.6 0.79 2.0 3.39 5.15 1990 Kavarno May 30, NS 30.5 0.90 0.5 1.85 3.8 1990 Provadia, May 30, NS 47.7 0.60 3.0 3.98 5.14 Sait Plant 1990 Bozveii May 30, NS 60.2 0.87 1.0 1.94 3.9 Village 1990 EW 54.0 0.87 1.1 2.00 4.1 Vert 20.3 0.88 0.9 2.63 6.1

~~Varna May 30, N72E 28.1 0.78 1.0 3.07 5.9 1990 Experience Database Pag. 32~~

~~0.35 Statio;n : Bucharest - INCERC 1977;NS;M=7.2 0.30 1986;NS;M=7.0 1990; NS; M=6.7 C 0.25~~

~~u 0.20 a. I 0- 0.15 -a s 0.10~~

~~0.05~~

~~0.00 10 20 30 40 50 Frequency (rad/sec) Fig. 4.1 Modification of the narrow band frequency content in the soft soil condition of Bucharest as function of magnitude~~

~~Station : Munteie Rosu~~

~~1986;NS 1986; EW 1990; NS 1990; EW~~

~~0.00 10 20 30 40 50 Frequency (rad/sec) Fig. 4.2 Narrow band frequency content in a southern Sub-Carpathian location Experience Database Pag. 33~~

~~S O~~

~~I I~~

~~10 20 30 40 50 Frequency (rad/sec) Fig. 4.3 Frequency content of a strong ground motion recorded in epicentral Vrancea area on Aug.30,1986~~

~~0.12~~

~~0.10 8/30/1986; NS 5/30/1990; NS 5/31/1990; NS Q~~

~~•3 0. o~~

~~0.02~~

~~0.00 10 20 30 40 50 Frequency (rad/sec) Fig. 4.4 Broad frequency content of a ground motion in epicentral area Experience Database Pag. 34~~

~~4.3 Bucharest narrow frequency band motions of long predominant period and design spectra for soft soil conditions~~

For narrow frequency band ground motion, the predominant frequency fp is the abscissa of the highest peak of the PSD. The reverse of the predominant frequency, i.e. the predominant period TP = 1/fP, can be easily found in the periodicity of the autocorrelation function of the accelerogram.

The seismic records in Romania for 4 Vrancea earthquakes were analyzed to identify narrow frequency band motions of long predominant period and their corresponding locations. It was established that, in the South, in the East and in the center of the city of Bucharest the principal peak of narrow frequency band spectral density indicates soft soil conditions of 1.5-1.6 s long predominant period, Table 4.5 and Fig.4.5.

~~Table 4.5 Frequency content of 8 long predominant period components produced by the 1977 and 1986 Vrancea earthquakes in Bucharest~~

Station Event Com PGA s PSD Control Sttma P frequencies periods fio fso f90 Tc TD PGA cm/s2 Hz Hz Hz s s Bucharest, Mar 04, NS 194.9 0.97 0.4 0.69 2.0 1.34 1.90 3.16 0 1977 INCERC (East of Buch) EW 162.3 0.91 0.4 1.44 4.1 1.19 2.02 2.56

~~Aug 30, NS 88.7 0.95 0.5 0.74 3.8 1.26 1.58 2.81 0 1986~~

~~Carlton Aug 30, N30 68.6 0.90 0.5 1.37 4.9 0.95 1.61 3.31 0 1986 W~~

(City center) j Bucharest, ISPH Aug 30, N15E 86.7 0.92 0.5 1.25 4.0 1.22 1.66 2.43 A 1986 (City center) Metaiurgiei Aug 30, W32 69.8 0.94 0.5 0.88 2.7 1.33 1.60 2.96 0 1986 S (South of Buch) Metrou IMGB 1 Aug 30, N60E 72.7 0.92 0.6 1.12 3.8 1.49 1.52 2.94 0 1986 (South of Buch) Bucharest Aug 30, NS 135.4 0.94 0.5 1.25 3.7 0.98 1.46 2.69 Magurele, iNFP 1986 (South, outside Buch) u Experience Database Pag. 35

In the soft soil condition of Bucharest, the long predominant period has the tendency to become larger as the energy- released by the earthquake increases and the width of the frequency band has the tendency to become broader as the earthquake magnitude decreases. The long predominant period of the ground vibration was experienced during the 1977 severe earthquake and 1986 moderate earthquake, but was not observed during the 1990 small earthquake. This was the consequence of both non-linear behavior of the soft soil profile at the site and of the source mechanism (magnitude and time of fracture, etc.)

In station Bucharest INCERC the soil profile contains 24 m of wet soft clay in the uppermost 40 m. The median and 0.1 probability of exceedance normalized acceleration response spectra produced by the Aug 30, 1986 and the May 30, 1990 Vrancea earthquakes in the city of Bucharest were represented and compared in Fig. 4.6.a and b. The dangerous (to the town) spectral peak located in the long period range (T > 1.0 s) is present in the 1986 earthquake (Mw = 7.2) - as well as in the 1977 earthquake (Mw = 7.4) - but is absent in the 1990 small event (Mw = 7.0). It may be emphasized that the spectra in Fig.4.6 come from different soil categories in Bucharest, including both soft soils and other soils. For soft soil conditions the maximum response in the long period range occurs when the structure period is close but slightly less than the predominant period of the ground shaking, Fig 4.7. For the 8 narrow frequency band motions recorded in the city of Bucharest the normalized acceleration (P) and velocity elastic response spectra are presented in Fig.4.8 (0.05 damping). The maximum dynamic amplification, p having 50 and 10 percent probability to be exceeded was found close to 2.5 and over 3.0 in the period range 1.2 - 1.5 s. The maximum dynamic amplification, p for the NS component of the Mar 4, 1977 Vrancea earthquake is 3.16 at a structure period of 1.2 s. The long spectral acceleration branch (0.2 - 1.5 s), the very short constant velocity branch (1.5-2.0 s) and the higher dynamic amplification (p > 3) are the consequences of the narrow frequency band content with long predominant period of the accelerograms. The following formula may be used to represent the normalized design spectra for the soft soil condition of Bucharest, Fig.4.8 :

~~Median p 0.1 prob. of exceedance p~~

~~0<= T < 0.12 s 1 + 16.7T 1 +12.5T 0.12 <:T <1.5 3 2.5 1.5 <:T <2s 4.5/T 3.75/T 2<= T 9 /T2 7.5/T2.~~

The results obtained for Bucharest narrow frequency band motions indicates that normalized mean response spectrum ordinates recommended in EUROCODE 8 for extreme subsoil class C are unconservative at least for the Romanian case of soft soil deposits, Fig.4.9. Experience Database Pag. 36

~~0.35 1986; N120W; Bucharest- IMGB 0.30 1986; W 32S; Bucharest - Metalurgiei~~

~~0.25 "5j~~

~~t/3 0.20~~

~~! ).15~~

~~"3 ).1O~~

~~0.05~~

~~0.00 10 20 30 40 50 Frequency (rad/sec) Fig. 4.5a Narrow band frequency content of horizontal accelerations recorded in the South of Bucharest \~~

~~0.25 1986; N15E Buchares,t- ISPH 1986; N60E; Bucharest - C arlton _ 0.20 h c a~~

~~o 0.05 f A A~~

~~0.00 10 20 30 40 50 Frequency (rad/sec) Fig. 4.5b Narrow frequency content of horizontal accelerations recorded in the center of Bucharest Experience Database Pag. 37~~

~~SUCHAKJfeSl Aug 30,1986 : 20 Comp~~

~~prob ofexceedance~~

~~BUCHAREST i 1990:22Comp~~

~~0.1 probiofexceedanee~~

~~0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3.5 Period s. Fig. 4.6.a Mobility of response spectra in the soft soil condition of Bucharest as a function of source mechanism and magnitude Experience Database Pag. 38~~

~~prob ofexceedance~~

~~-/ May 30, 1990 j~~

~~0.5 1.5 2.5 3.5~~

~~Fig. 4.6.b Comparison of Bucharest response spectra of the 1986 and 1990 Vrancea earthquakes Experience Database Pag. 39~~

~~Table 4.6 Response spectra characteristics for Bucharest recorded accelerograms~~

~~Station Earthquake Comp. PGA SA™* SVmac sew SAnJ Tc TD 2 cm/s cm/s cm/s cm PGA s s~~

~~' Bucharest Mar 4,1977 • NS 194.93 615.88 130.87 39.49 3.16 1.34 1.90 i INCERE ;• EW . 162.34 415.28 78.61 25.32 2.56 1.19 2.02 : Vert : 105.76 231.95 27.42 9.52 2.19 0.74 2.18~~

~~Aug, 30,1986 i NS •• 88.69 249.06 49.77 12.50 2.81 1.26 1.58 • EW : 95.26 241.96 35.52 9.94 2.54 0.92 1.76 Vert 28.00~~

~~May 30,1990 , NS : 76.64 219.74 16.57 10.01 2.87 0.47 3.80 : 1 '- - - EW 98.74 277.39 32.49 9.02 2.81 0.74 1.74 Vert~~

~~; Bucharest Augl30:1986 : NS 5135.40 364.67 56.78 13.17 2.69 0.98 1.46 I Magurele, : EW 3114.65 321.82 46.03 10.86 2.81 0.90 1.48 .- INFP; • Vert : 50.27 168.32 14.39 11.66 3.35 0.54 5.09~~

~~May30,1990 i NS •: 89.59 314.69 14.53 8.05 3.51 0.29 3.48 : EW 3 87.11 210.48 25.56 9.06 2.42 0.76 2.23 " Vert ~ 59.46 237.04 7.55 4.56 3.99 0.20 3.80~~

~~: Balta Alba May 30,1990 N101W 1 52.56 236.53 13.80 5.07 4.50 0.37 2.31 • N169E • 65.86 152.45 10.03 5.04 2.32 0.41 0.41 • Vert ' 53.52 289.43 28.77 7.50 5.41 0.62 0.62~~

~~Carton Aug 30,1986 *• N60E 78.18 240.90 34.39 8.35 3.08 0.90 1.53 : N30W 68.56 211.00 32.05 8.22 3.08 0.95 1.61 Vert 31.00~~

~~N60E 104.90 302.05 36.60 12.95 2.88 0.76 2.22 N30W 110.50 439.86 24.86 7.19 3.98 0.35 1.82 : Vert 106.70 305.02 13.79 7.13 2.86 0.28 3.25~~

~~Daimul Sarii Aug 30,1986 ------~~

~~May 30, 1990 N84W 117.30 375.01 23.71 5.53 3.20 0.40 1.47 N174W 116.80 438.18 23.31 10.83 3.75 0.33 2.92 Vert 81.62 288.10 9.43 6.88 3.53 0.21 4.58~~

~~May 31,1990 N84W 37.15 118.73 6.53 3.72 3.20 0.35 3.58 N174W 20.40 91.39 8.33 5.42 4.48 0.57 4.08 Ver 17.56 73.83 6.77 5.06 4.20 0.58 4.69~~

~~EREN Aug 30,1986 N10W 156.00 408.22 43.17 11.28 2.62 0.66 1.64 W10S 105.80 322.29 35.58 9.31 3.05 0.69 1.64 Vert 42.00~~

~~May 30,1990 ------~~

~~Bucharest. Aug 30,1986 N15E 86.75 210.60 40.91 10.83 2.43 1.22 1.66 ISPH E15S 76.75 269.65 23.46 9.83 3.51 0.55 2.63 Vert 40.06 139.49 11.46 5.67 3.48 0.52 3.11~~

~~Bucharest, May 30, 1990 NS 73.88 202.08 24.07 7.76 2.74 0.75 2.02 ARM EW 55.71 189.53 15.21 2.73 3.40 0.50 1.13 Vert~~

~~May 31,1990 NS 22.17 95.60 5.99 1.48 4.31 0.39 1.55 EW 23.41 78.73 6.33 1.99 3.36 0.51 1.98 Vert 19.47 51.14 4.18 228 2.63 0.51 3.42 Experience Database Pag.40~~

~~Table 4.6 (cont'd)~~

~~Station Earthquake Comp. PGA SAnax sv™, sew SAW Tc TD cm/s2 cm/s2 cm/s PGA s s~~

~~} Metaiurgfei Augf30,1986 3 W32S 69.78 206.34 43.69 11.12 2.96 1.33 1.60 3 - N32W -43.68 190.54 19.43 11.33 4.36 0.64 3.66 Vert 21.00~~

~~May 30,1990 5 N127W > 59.02 216.74 18.77 5.34 3.67 0.54 1.79 * r 1 N37W 76.32 179.10 23.21 10.08 2.35 0.81 2.73 Vert ; 43.25 171.22 7.81 5.65 3.96 0.29 4.55~~

~~; Metrou, Augi30,1986 : N60E ; 72.71 213.44 50.80 12^9 2.94 1.50 1.52 , IMGB i • N30W / 57.75 222.35 21.43 4.98 3.85 0.61 1.47 Vert 27.00~~

~~May! 30,1990 • N30W .-90.80 276.28 29.65 7.87 3.04 0.67 1.67 ? i < N120W 1 60.15 214.31 22.82 6.63 3.56 0.67 1.82 • Vert 3 50.09 220.63 9.11 3.40 4.41 0.26 2.35~~

~~: Militari Aug33O, 1986 J NS : 92.19 312.91 36.66 9.45 3.39 0.74 1.62 - EW : 79.57 348.96 30.52 7.45 4.39 0.55 1.53; Vert 33.80~~

~~May. 30,1990 i N92W • 95.34 290.80 26.99 728 3.05 0.58 1.69 3 •i 3 N178E ; 51.13 183.39 11.76 6.38 3.59 0.40 3.40 ; Vert 43.79 157.02 8.99 4.76 3.59 0.36 3.33~~

~~Panduri Aug 30,1986 . N131E 90.61 296.53 35.22 10.41 3.27 0.75 1.86 •N139W 101.20 342.60 43.66 10.00 3.39 0.80 1.44 J Vert 68.11 165.05 15.86 4.61 2.42 0.60 1.83~~

~~May 30,1990 N131E 127.90 540.87 24.78 12.72 4.23 0.29 3.23 N139W 136.60 565.38 2787 6.69 4.14 0.31 1.51 Vert 57.95 201.91 10.11 4.41 3.48 0.31 2.74~~

~~Trtulescu Aug 30, 1986 N145W 89.57 323.39 43.66 11.21 3.61 0.85 1.61 N55W 79.84 247.95 23.84 5.71 3.11 0.60 1.51 Vert 61.86 150.60 15.21 5.53 2.44 0.63 2.29~~

~~May 30, 1990 N145W 56.40 219.04 14.49 4.85 3.88 0.42 2.10 N55W 71.50 230.41 19.51 8.11 3.22 0.53 2.61 Vert 37.62 121.00 6.18 3.94 3.22 0.32 4.01~~

~~Seismic network: • National Institute for Earth Physics, INFP O Building Research Institute, INCERC A Institute for Geophysical and Geotechnical Studies Experience Database Pag.41~~

~~3.5 MemjuIMGBJ~~

~~2.5~~

~~4> N~~

~~1.5~~

~~0.5~~

~~0 0.5 1.5 2 2.5 3.5 4 Period, s~~

~~4.5 Metrou IMGB BUCHAREST! Aug 30, 1986, N60E Comp I ! 3.5~~

~~/Augj30, 1986 W32S Comp 2.5~~

~~CIS~~

~~o Z 1.5 INCERC zMar 4 1977 NS Comp 0.5~~

~~0.5 1.5 2 2.5 3.5 Period, s~~

~~Fig. 4.7 Normalized response spectra for the narrowest frequency band Bucharest records Experience Database Pag.42~~

~~3.5 -~~

~~bolt soil condition m entral,~~

~~.3 I 0.1 prob of exceedance~~

~~3.5~~

~~.1 prob of exceedance 3.5 -r~~

I 30,1986 > 2.5 i- JX on • 8 O A Mar.4, 1S77, NS o 1.5 jr BUCHAREST Soft soil conditic n in 0.5 Centre! South and Fast t // ..,f-,. / zones i—i—I i—i—i I I i I i—I—i II i i i—i 0.5 1.5 2 2.5 3.5 Period, s

~~Fig. 4.8 Median and 0.1 probability of exceedance design spectra for Bucharest soft soil Experience Database Pag.43~~

~~Soft soil condition m ! entral, South and East~~

~~< CO "8 "c5 E o~~

~~EUROCpDE 8,19p3 C~~

~~0 0.5 1.5 2 2.5 ••• 3 3.5 Period, s Fig. 4.9 Site-dependent design response spectra for the soft soil condition in Bucharest and EUROCODE 8 Experience Database Pag.44~~

~~4.3 Moldova and Republic of Moldova response spectra~~

The characteristics of the accelerograms recorded in the last three Vrancea earthquakes on the territory of Moldova are described in Appendix 1, Table A.1 -s- Table A.6 (for INFP and GEOTEC records) and in Table 4.2, Table 4.3, Table 4.7 and Table 4.8 (for INCERC records and records from Republic of Moldova).

~~They are:~~

~~(i) Peak values of ground motion parameters: PGA, PGV and PGD~~

~~(ii) Maximum values of response spectra: SA, SV and SD~~

~~(iii) Maximum values of normalized response spectra: SAmax / PGA, SVmax / PGV and SDmax / PGD i.e. the dynamic amplification factors for response~~

~~(iv) Cartwright & Longuet-Higgins frequency bandwidth measure of power spectral density: s~~

~~(v) Kennedy & Shinozuka fractile frequencies of power spectral density : fio, fso,~~

~~(vi) Central or corner periods of deterministic response spectra : Tc and TD.~~

Opposite to the Bucharest narrow frequency band records, the Moldavian records have broad and / or intermediate band frequency content. Such records were obtained in the seismic stations from Dochia, Bacau, Onesti, Vaslui, Barlad, Cahul, lasi etc.

However, narrow frequency band horizontal and even vertical ground motions were recorded in two important stations in Sub-Carpathians: Muntele Rosu and Istrita. The maximum corner period for these stations was : 1.5s- Muntele Rosu and 1.4 s - Istrita.

From Fig. 4.10, a negligible mobility of the response spectra to different earthquake magnitudes can be observed. This indicates soil categories which are completely different in Moldova than in Bucharest, on Romanian Plain.

~~It is also important to give emphasis \6 the local site effect in Chisinau, Y310 comp, Aug 30, 1986 event, Fig.4.11. Experience Database Pag.45~~

~~4.5~~

~~4 MOLDOVA 3.5 Aug30, 1986 : 17 Comp~~

~~on •o 2.5 8 2 0.1 prob ofexceedance 1.5~~

~~;MW=7.2 1~~

~~0.5~~

~~0.5 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Period, s~~

~~4.5 - MOLDOVA - May 30, 1990 : 18 Comp~~

~~< ~ 2.5~~

~~p 2 - 1 V - 0.1 prob ofexceedance 1.5~~

~~=/ "\ o.S Mw=7..0~~

~~0.5 i 1 •—•—- •—-—~~

~~• . 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 Period, s Fig. 4.10.a Influence of source mechanism and magnitude on spectra! shapes in Moldova Experience Database Pag.46~~

~~4.5 - MOLDOVA ; - 0.5 prob ofexceedance 3.5 - I May 30, 1990 : 18 Comp • • o2.5 s £3 ' A-\ O z Aug 30, 1986 : 17 Comp 1.5 E/ 1~~

~~0.5~~

~~0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Period, s 4.5~~

~~May 30, 1990 : 18 Comp MOLDOVA 0.1 prob of exceedance~~

~~v: /\ s~~

~~1.5 -/ Aug 30. 1986 : 17 Comi 1~~

~~0.5~~

~~0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 Period, s~~

~~Fig. 4.10.b Comparison of response spectra in Moldova for the 1986 and 1990 Vrancea earthquakes Experience Database Pag.47~~

~~Table 4.7 Response spectra characteristics for accelerograms recorded in Moldova by the Building Research Institute seismic network~~

~~Station Earthquake Comp PGA SAmax SDmax SAmax Tc TD PGA cm/s2 cm/s2 cm/s cm s s Adjud May 30, N50E 75.63 287.27 27.05 8.67 3.80 0.59 2.01 O 1990 N40W 86.60 448.84 27.59 14.67 5.18 0.39 3.34~~

Bacau Aug 30, NS 105.0 330.90 24.53 4.74 3.15 0.47 1.21 0 1986 EW 0 300.67 13.72 4.43 4.39 0.29 2.03 68.48 Birlad May 30, NS 142.7 408.07 41.26 8.89 2.86 0.64 1.35 0 1990 EW 0 468.97 40.11 15.17 3.53 0.54 2.38 132.9 0 Focsani Aug 30, W07S 224.2 664.84 78.39 23.00 2.97 0.74 1.84 UCA 1986 N07W 0 703.29 53.84 9.33 2.61 0.48 1.09 0 Vert 269.4 463.06 14.20 7.07 4.22 0.19 3.13 1 109.6 4 May 30, N97W 92.16 268.06 37.93 15.20 2.91 0.89 2.52 1990 N07W 108.6 418.33 60.67 24.88 3.85 0.91 2.58 0 lasi Aug 30, NS 57.53 187.77 25.36 12.80 3.26 0.85 3.17 0 1986 EW 136.3 461.53 64.90 10.34 3.39 0.88 1.00 0 Onesti Aug 30, N200E 156.1 586.23 40.66 8.15 3.76 0.44 1.26 0 1986 May 30, N200E 232.1 918.26 43.79 12.37 3.96 0.30 1.77 1990 N290E 111.8 373.69 29.19 8.47 3.34 0.49 1.82

~~Vaslui Aug 30, NS 152.9 532.76 27.13 8.44 3.48 0.32 1.96 0 1986 EW 179.5 574.31 46.64 7.64 3.20 0.51 1.03~~

~~Table 4.8 Response spectra characteristics of the Vrancea ground motions recorded in Republic of Moldova~~

Station Earthquake Comp PGA SAmax SDmax SAmax Tc TD PGA 2 2 cm/s cm/s cm/s cm S s Chisinau Aug 30, 1986 Y309 191.79 952.21 36.00 4.14 4.97 0.24 0.72 Y310 212.75 616.08 65.76 11.08 2.90 0.67 1.06 Z311 120.38 599.80 19.58 7.54 4.98 0.20 2.42

~~May 30, 1990 Y659 77.50 236.94 12.21 3.82 3.06 0.32 1.97 Y660 83.31 359.99 15.30 5.17 4.30 0.27 2.12 Z658 63.89 221.45 5.03 3.01 3.47 0.14 3.77~~

~~Cahul May 30, 1990 Y671 129.05 497.38 22.06 7.22 3.85 0.28 2.06 Y673 136.65 529.84 21.51 8.80 3.88 0.26 2.57 Z672 90.54 393.76 10.84 6.18 4.35 0.17 3.58 Experience Database Pag.48~~

~~< •o N =5 2.5~~

~~0.5 1.5 2.5 Period, s~~

~~(KISHINEV) May 30, 1990~~

~~2.5~~

~~Fig. 4.11 Mobility of response spectra in Chisinau as a function of source mechanism and magnitude Experience Database Pag.49~~

~~o 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Period, s Fig. 4.12 Response spectra for Vrancea motion recorded in Cahul, Republic of Moldova~~

~~Provadia N20E Comp~~

~~Bozveh Village NSiComp~~

~~0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Period, s Fig. 4.13 Response spectra for three Vrancea motions recorded in Bulgaria Experience Database Pag .50~~

~~4.4 Response spectra for motions recorded in Dobrogea~~

The frequency content of the motions recorded in Dobrogea is quite different than the frequency content of the motions recorded on Romanian Plain. A typical for Dobrogea broad frequency band content was recorded in station Carcaliu. For Cemavoda area, all available accelerograms were obtained from the 1986 and 1990 Vrancea events in the soft soil condition of the City Hall. There are no records on the Cemavoda NPP site, on limestone. The analysis of the City Hal! records presented in Appendix 1, Fig.4.14 and Fig.4.15 shows:

~~(i)The uni-rnoda! PSD has its peak near the predominant frequency of the site:~~

(ii) The width of the frequency band has the tendency to became narrower as the PGA level increases. The City Hal! records were transferred to NPP site using deconvolution analysis, Fig.4.16 and Fig.4.17. The mean ratio of NPP-PGA to City Hall-PGA was found 0.75.

The acceleration response spectra for the six City Hal! records, from three Vrancea events are characterized by a very small coefficient of variation. This indicates a very homogenous frequency content at this site.

~~NPP~~

~~CITY- HALL 100-16.30 NH&~~

~~Vs-917 mis~~

~~-2.1 tffm3 t-l95ff/m 9.00 m -2033 1Of Vs-SGOm/s -21X0 ^nrrnr" —777?777777/ /1 TTJITUT 2.6 km~~

~~Fig.4.16 Shear waves velocity of soil profiles in Cernavoda Experience Database Pag.51~~

•

~~C ! 4- cERINAVODA •: 1 City Hall~~

~~A ' mg30, 1986~~

~~ize d S A •' /' 1 NS Comp i . Norm a '• -j • A : M V EW : K Vert i ii* V~~

~~o — ^-^- •....r^^.Tzr.—: - - ' -L" 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Period, s Fig. 4.14.a Normalized acceleration response spectra in Cernavoda~~

~~C ERN A VO IDA CityHaD i May 30, 1990~~

~~VI T3 1) N~~

~~O Z~~

~~0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Period, s Fig. 4.14.b Normalized acceleration response spectra in Cernavoda Experience Database Pag.52~~

~~0.14 : Cernavoda - City Hall~~

~~0.12 1986 ;NS; PGA=49.3gal 1990 ;NS;PGA=107.1gal a 0.10 2 0.08~~

~~0.06~~

~~o 0.04~~

~~0.02~~

~~0.00 4 0 10 20 30 40 50 Frequency (rad/sec)~~

~~0..14 n Station : Cernavoda - (fity Hall 0. .12 1986 ; HW ; FliA =bi.ygai 1990 ;EW; PGA = 100.4gal 0..10 tra l Dcnsit ; 0.08 <*> a 0.06 n 0.04 IY\ o~~

~~0.02~~

~~0.00 10 20 30 40 50 Frequency (rad/sec) Fig. 4.15 Mobility of frequency content of horizontal accelerations as function of PGA level Experience Database Pag.53~~

~~r FISIRE 5-a Deconuolutton finaiys.s KlRE 3-c DeconwoluiLan Analysis Cernawiiia City Hall and hPP site Cernavoiia City Hall and 193£ W-ancsa event, f£ 15B0 Vrancea euent, NS G.SO~~

~~CiurSf _j_ D.40~~

~~! 2.50~~

~~z : •» n ;p~~

~~: I [iO.iO i J V UKnp 10. 100. Frenuencu Hz Hz~~

~~rISJFE 3-b FIolfiE z-b Dezonwlution finals:s Csrnauods City Hall and WP z'r.s Ce'nawida CHy Hall and H 13E6 Vra.rcK event, Ql 199G V-ancsa event, EU :.5O~~

~~= 2.13~~

~~j B - -n~~

~~j 0.C3 :.OJ i IOC. 100. rrei]uen:y Hi Hz~~

~~Fig 4.17 Deconvolution Analysis Experience Database Pag.54~~

~~5. Characteristics of the free field accelerograms from the last three Vrancea earthquakes recorded by the seismic networks of INFP and GEOTEC.~~

~~Table 5.1 Peak values of the ground motion parameters~~

~~Table 5.2 Maximum values of response spectra~~

~~Table 5.3 Amplification factors for response spectra~~

~~Table 5.4 s (Cartwright & Longuet-Higgins) frequency bandwidth measure of power spectral density~~

~~Table 5.5 fio, fso and f90 (Kennedy & Shinozuka) fractile frequencies of power spectral density~~

~~Table 5.6 Control (corner) periods of response spectra Experience Database Pag.55~~

~~Table 5.1. Peak values of the ground motion parameters~~

Station Comp Aurj 3D 198R May 3D 19Q May 31 195n PGA PGV PGD PGA PGV GD PGA PGV PGD cm/s2 cm/s cm cm/s2 cm/s cm cm/s2 cm/s cm Bacau NS 88.8 9.2 2.2 132.0 8.5 2.8 84.5 6.4 1.4 Z 24.9 1.8 0.9 31.8 3.4 1.4 18.6 1.6 0.9 EW 72.7 8.2 2.1 122.7 16.6 5.5 63.0 5.5 1.1 Barlad NS 112.1 11.1 2.5 85.8 6.8 1.6 Z - 108.1 4.1 1.2 27.1 1.3 0.7 EW 148.5 17.1 8.5 80.0 7.0 0.7 Bucharest- NS 135.1 22.2 3.8 89.6 4.6 1.8 Magurele.lNFP Z 50.3 4.2 2.1 59.5 2.4 1.3 - EW 114.9 16.3 3.4 87.0 16.2 4.3 Carcaliu NS 70.0 3.8 1.1 164.0 11.6 4.8 59.0 3.0 0.5 Z 25.3 1.9 0.3 41.9 3.7 1.6 19.6 2.5 1.1 EW 69.7 4.8 0.7 88.8 4.1 1.0 46.5 1.7 0.6 Cernavoda NS 49.2 7.7 4.6 107.0 9.9 3.3 66.5 5.8 2.3 Z 63.0 4.7 4.3 5304 7.5 4.3 15.9 3.0 2.3 EW 62.0 6.3 3.9 100.3 9.9 2.8 37.0 3.7 1.9 Focsani NS 273.2 36.6 9.4 Z 122.7 5.5 3.3 - - EW 297.0 31.9 4.9 lasi NS 66.9 7.4 1.3 95.8 7.4 1.5 49.1 2.9 0.7 Z EW 99.6 7.9 1.3 106.5 6.5 1.5 52.8 4.0 0.8 Istrita NS 109.2 16.6 7.6 92.8 23.4 8.6 Z 43.2 6.2 1.7 - 43.1 9.6 3.2 EW 71.6 10.7 4.7 59.0 11.3 8.7 Munteie Rosu NS 79.1 17.0 5.3 65.5 12.9 3.8 (Cheia) Z 39.9 6.2 2.2 30.5 4.5 2.7 - EW 33.9 5.5 3.8 47.3 12.8 3.6 Surduc N40W 89.0 19.4 9.5 44.4 3.5 2.9 A Z - 40.7 4.9 2.8 17.2 2.7 2.9 W40S 97.2 19.8 9.6 21.0 3.2 2.3 Vrancioaia NS 82.4 15.1 4.0 119.6 13.1 5.2 43.8 3.9 1.2 Z 39.0 6.6 3.2 63.3 7.4 2.5 26.7 1.6 0.5 EW 140.8 13.2 3.5 157.3 13.6 5.7 102.4 7.7 1.8 Bucharest W3S 73.9 11.4 3.1 22.1 2.1 0.4 ARM Z - 19.5 1.7 0.9 A S3E 55.7 4.8 1.3 23.74 2.5 0.7 Dochia NS 50.8 3.0 0.8 Z 20.6 1.4 0.7 - - EW 37.8 2.6 1.0 Experience Database Pag. 56

~~Table 5.2. Maximum values of response spectra (damping 0.05)~~

Station Comp Auo.30. 1986 Mav30. 1990 Mav 31. 1990 ) SAmax sv s D-nax SATOx SVmax E max SAmax svmax Dmax cm/s2 cm/s2 cm cm/s2 cm/s2 cm cm/s2 cm/s cm Bacau NS 370.9 22.5 7.8 688.9 25.7 7.4 381.3 18.7 5.0 _ Z 94.0 6.3 47 133.8 9.7 3.7 73.8 4.7 3.2 EW 313.7 21.3 9.2 527.8 41.4 10.2 371.5 15.7 3.6 Barlad NS 492.4 26.6 5.9 315.1 17.9 4.0 Z - 413.0 10.6 4.4 111.3 5.0 3.4 EW 542.6 47.1 14.2 ^226.1 21.4 2.3 Bucharest- NS 364.9 56.8 13.2 314.9 14.5 8.0 Magurele.INF Z 168.4 14.4 11.7 237.2 7.5 4.6 - EW 322.0 46.0 10.9 210.6 25.6 9.1

Carcaliu NS 281.8 7.9 2.9 619.3 19.8 9.9 280.9 6.9 1.3 _ Z 93.3 5.4 1.3 143.5 8.6 3.7 73.0 4.0 2.3 EW 277.0 14.6 2.0 310.5 13 1 3.7 236.3 4.7 2.5 Cemavcda NS 191.4 23.4 24.7 399.4 31.8 10.6 313.0 23.7 12.6 _ Z 218.5 20.5 21.9 158.3 20.2 16.4 51.4 12.2 13.4! EW 2843 22.0 22.3 481 0 39.7 11.3 190.1 12.9 11.5 Focsani NS 763.2 87.6 25.6 Z 508.8 19.4 15.4 - - EW 871.4 68.2 22.8 lasi NS 226.1 17.6 4.7 449.6 23.9 3.4 215.7 10.2 2.0 •7 L EW 268.1 20.2 4.0 472.3 16.2 3.4 191.6 12.9 2.0 Istrita NS 269.5 48.9 17.9 285.5 59.1 28.4 Z 140.8 23.0 5.2 _ 150.9 27.5 8.8 EW 232.9 29.8 12.2 220.0 33.8 24^ fvtunteie Rosu NS 214.3 51.1 15.5 189.3 33.0 9.6 (Cheia) Z 123.7 14.7 12.9 125.9 12.6 11.0 - _ EW 128.3 21.1 16.8 164.8 31.4 12.0 N40W 40.9 28.6 229.8 13.6 14.6 A z - 146.4 20.1 16.2 69.3 14.3 15.5 W40S 287.8 45.1 24.6 73.0 11.6 12.8 Vrancioaia NS 287.3 27.5 11.0 356.2 37.8 11.4 186.9 9.1 4.3 _ Z 142.4 16.0 11.6 212.4 16.9 6.4 94.6 6.0 3.1 EW 437.7 31.8 14.8 695.4 35.4 12.4 371.4 16.7 3.2 Bucharest W3S 202.2 24.1 7.8 95.7 6.0 1.5 ARM Z - - - - 51.2 4.2 2.3 A S3E J 189.6 15.2 2.7 78.8 6.3 2.0 Dochia NS 183.2 8.7 4.1 Z 83.3 4.3 2.9 - - EW 146.6 6.7 3.3 Experience Database Pag.57

~~Table 5.3. Amplification factors for response spectra~~

Station Comp Auq 30, 1986 May 30. 1990 Mav31. 1990 SA SAmax max svmax "Amax sv^ Dmax svmax Dmax PGA PGV GD PGA PGV GD PGA PGV PGD Bacau NS 4.17 2.44 3.54 5.21 3.02 2.64 4.51 2.92 3.57 Z 3.77 3.50 5.22 4.21 2.85 2.64 3.96 2.94 3.55 EW 4.31 2.60 4.38 4.30 2.49 1.85 5.89 2.85 3.27 Barlad NS 4.39 2.39 2.36 3.67 2.63 2.50 Z - 3.82 2.60 3.67 4.10 3.85 4.85 EW 3.65 2.75 1.67 2.82 3.05 3.28 Bucharest- NS 2.70 2.56 3.47 3.51 3.15 4.44 Magurele.INF Z 3.35 3.42 5.57 3.98 3.12 3.54 - P EW 2.80 2.82 3.20 2.42 1.58 2.11

Carcaliu NS 4.02 2.08 2.63 3.77 1.71 2.06 4.76 2.30 2.60 Z 3.69 2.84 4.33 3.42 2.32 2.31 3.72 1.60 2.09 EW 3.97 3.04 2.85 3.49 3.19 •a yn 5.08 2.76 4.16 Cernavoda NS 3.89 3.04 5.37 3.73 3.21 3.21 4.70 4.08 5.48 Z 3.46 4.36 5.09 2.96 2.69 3.81 3.23 4.07 5.82 EW 4.58 3.49 5.69 4.80 4.01 4.03 5.13 3.48 6.05 Focsani NS 2.79 2.39 2.72 Z 4.15 3.52 4.67 - - EW 2.93 2.14 4.65 lasi NS 3.38 2.38 3.61 4.69 3.23 2.26 4.39 3.51 2.85 Z EW 2.69 2.56 3.15 4.43 2.49 2.26 3.62 3.22 2.50 Istrita NS 2.46 2.95 2.35 3.07 2.52 3.30 Z 3.26 3.71 3.06 - 3.50 2.86 2.75 EW 3.25 2.78 2.59 3.73 2.99 2.79 Munteie Rosu NS 2.71 3.00 2.92 2.89 2.62 2.52 (Cheia) Z 3.10 2.37 5.86 4.13 2.80 4.07 - EW 3.78 3.84 4.37 3.48 2.45 3.33 N40W 3.72 2.11 3.01 5.17 3.88 5.03 A Z - 3 60 4.10 5.78 4.03 5.30 5.34 W40S 2.96 2.28 2.56 3.47 3.62 5.56 Vrancioaia NS 3.48 1.82 2.75 2.98 2.88 2.19 4.26 2.33 3.58 z 3.65 2.42 3.62 3.35 2.28 2.56 3.54 3.75 6.20 EW 3.11 2.41 4.22 4.42 2.60 2.17 3.62 2.16 1.77 Bucharest W3S 2.73 2.11 2.52 4.33 2.85 3.75 ARM z - 2.62 2.47 2.55 A S3E 3.40 3.16 2.07 3.36 2.52 2.85 Dochia NS 3.60 2.90 5.12 Z 4.04 3.07 4.14 - - EW 3.88 2.57 3.30 Experience Database Pag. 58

~~Table 5.4. s, frequency bandwidth measure of power spectral density (Cartwright & Longuet-Higgins indicator)~~

~~Station Comp Aug30, 1986 May 30, 1990 May 31, 1990~~

~~Bacau NS 0.86 0.70 0.79 - Z 0.81 0.79 0.80 EW 0.83 0.84 0.79 Barlad NS 0.77 0.80 = Z - 0.65 0.71 EW 0.81 0.85 Bucharest- NS 0.94 0.79 Magurele.INF Z 0.76 0.72 - P EW 0.88 0.89~~

Carcaiiu NS 0.61 0.64 0.58 ~ 2. 0.73 0.71 0.72 EW 0.71 0.64 0.55 Cernavoda NS 0.84 0.89 0.89 - Z 0.72 0.78 0.82 EW 0.81 0.87 ' 0.87 Focsani NS 0.88 = Z 0.58 - - EW 0.85 lasi NS 0.86 0.72 0.79 z z EW 0.86 0.70 0.79 Istrita NS 0.92 0.93 Z 0.93 - 0.94 EW 0.93 0.93 Muntele Rosu NS 0.97 0.95 (Cheia) Z 0.90 0.90 - EW 0.94 0.95 Surduc N40W 0.80 0.64 A Z - 0.74 0.79 W40S 0.86 0.71 Vrancioaia NS 0.87 0.70 0.70 - Z 0.91 0.82 0.81 EW 0.85 0.70 0.70 Bucharest W3S 0.90 0.83 ARM Z - 0.83 A S3E 0.84 0.87 Dochia NS 0.73 I 2 0.55 - - EW 0.72 Experience Database Pag.59

~~Table 5.5. f™, fso and fgo (Kennedy & Shinozuka) fractile frequencies of power spectral density~~

Station Comp Aug 30 1986 May 30, 1990 May 31 1990 fio fso f90 fio fso f90 fio fso fso Bacau NS 1.2 2.26 6.4 1.0 4.39 5.9 1.6 2.38 6.4 z 1.2 3.76 9.0 0.9 4.51 9.1 1.2 4.01 8.8 EW 1.1 3.13 5.8 0.8 2.13 6.0 1.2 2.38 6.5 Barlad NS 1.2 3.63 6.4 1.4 3.00 4.8 Z - 3.4 6.64 13.0 1.8 6.54 10.4 EW 0.7 3.26 5.6 1.2 2.48 4.8 Bucharest- NS 0.5 1.25 3.0 1.2 3.63 8.9 MagureleJNF Z 1.2 4.01 9.9 1.5 4.64 11.4 - EW 0.5 1.75 4.6 0.6 1.88 5.0 i t Carcaliu NS 3.0 7.02 11.3 2.9 6.27 11.8 3.4 7.27 11.5 _ Z 2.1 4.76 10.7 1.6 5.64 11.9 0.9 5.51 11.6 EW 2.5 4.39 10.0 2.6 6.64 10.8 2.9 7.89 11.1 Cernavoda NS 1.2 2.51 4.5 1.1 2.13 4.5 1.5 2.13 3.0 _ Z 2.6 5.01 9.1 1.9 4.51 9.3 1.6 3.01 8.4 EW 1.6 2.76 4.8 1.5 2.26 4.1 1.6 2.26 2.88 Focsani NS 0.6 2.13 4.5 _ Z 2.9 7.27 9.9 - - EW 1.1 2.26 4.6 lasi NS 1.0 2.38 6.6 1.1 4.01 9.3 1.4 3.15 7.9 •y z 1.1 2.01 6.1 1.2 5.89 8.8 1.0 2.90 8.3 Istrita NEWS 0.6 1.63 3.4 0.5 1.25 3.5 _ Z 0.7 1.38 3.9 - 0.1 1.00 3.9 EW 0.7 1.63 3.3 0.6 1.38 3.4 Muntele Rosu NS 0.5 0.63 1.6 0.5 1.25 2.1 (Cheia) Z 0.7 1.50 3.8 0.9 1.88 3.0 - _ EW 0.6 1.25 3.3 0.5 1.25 2.4 Surduc N40W 0.8 2.61 5.1 2.0 4.01 5.8 A Z - 0.9 3.78 8.6 1.5 5.39 9.7 W40S 0.5 1.69 4.7 1.2 3.88 6.4 Vrancioaia NS 0.8 1.82 3.5 0.6 2.51 4.5 1.5 2.84 4.8 _ z 0.6 1.36 3.8 0.6 3.26 9.0 1.3 3.18 8.2 EW 1.2 2.42 4.2 1.5 3.26 4.6 1.7 3.34 5.5 Bucharest W3S 1.0 2.01 6.0 1.2 2.76 4.8 ARM z - - - - 1.0 3.27 11.1 A S3E 1.0 3.52 8.0 1.5 2.76 6.8 Dochia NS 2.1 4.14 10.5 _ Z 3.0 8.90 12.0 - - EW 2.0 4.39 9.3 Experience Database Pag.60

~~Table 5.6 Control (corner) periods of response spectra~~

~~Station Comp Auq 30, 1986 May 30 1990 -May 31, 1990~~

Tc TD Tc TD Tc TD s s s S s s Bacau NS 0.38 2.19 0.23 1.80 0.31 1.67 u Z 0.42 4.65 0.46 2.36 0.40 4.25 EW 0.43 2.70 0.49 1.55 0.26 1.43 Barlad NS 0.34 1.39 0.36 1.41 1 i Z - 0.16 2.65 0.28 4.19 EW 0.55 1.89 0.59 0.66 Bucharest- NS 0.98 1.46 0.29 3.48 Magurele.lNFP Z 0.54 5.09 0.20 3.80 - D EW 0.90 1.48 0.76 2.23 Carcaiiu NS 0.18 2.30 0.20 3.15 0.15 1.19 L_! Z 0.36 1.50 0.37 2.69 0.35 3.62 EW 0.33 0.85 1.76 0.26 0.13 3.28 Cernavoda NS 0.77 6.61 0.50 2.09 0.48 3.34 i—- Z 0.59 6.72 0.80 5.10 1.49 6.93 EW 0.49 6.38 0.52 1.78 0.43 5.60 Focsani NS 0.74 1.84 Z 0.24 4.99 - - EW 0.49 2.10 lasi NS 0.49 1.67 0.33 0.90 0.30 1.26 Z EW 0.47 1.24 0.22 1.30 0.42 0.98 Istrita NS 1.14 2.30 1.30 3.03 i : Z 1.03 1.42 - 1.14 2.00 EW 0.80 2.57 0.97 A.52 Muntele Rosu NS 1.50 1.90 1.09 1.82 (Cheia) Z 0.75 5.53 0.63 5.48 - EW 1.03 4.94 1.20 2.40 Surduc N40W 0.78 4.38 0.37 6.75 A Z - 0.86 5.07 1.30 6.80 W40S 0.99 3.42 0.99 6.97 Vrancioaia NS 0.60 2.51 0.67 1.89 0.31 2.99 i i Z 0.71 4.54 0.50 2.39 0.40 3.22 EW 0.46 2.93 0.32 2.20 0.28 1.21 Bucharest W3S 0.75 2.02 0.39 1.55 ARM Z - 0.51 3.42 A S3E 0.50 1.13 0.50 1.98 Dochia NS 0.32 4.24 ij Z - EW 0.29 3.04 Experience Database Pag.61

~~Part II Experience database~~

~~6. Philosophy of an experience-based generic approach~~

As the data base of equipment qualified by testing has grown, it has become apparent that "generic" seismic qualification in a broader sense is feasible. In other words, by establishing and observing certain specified "similarity" rules regarding the use of a specific category of equipment, no additional qualification effort may be necessary for equipment which meets the "rules" for inclusion in a category. An equipment item can be qualified by reference to qualification of an identical or similar item tested or analyzed to levels that envelope the required response spectrum of the item to be qualified.

~~Thus, generic consideration is the first characteristic of this approach.~~

~~The second characteristics is use of "experience" data. There are four types of experience data which have been used or are being considered for use :~~

~~• historical earthquakes~~

~~• testing~~

~~• analysis~~

~~• Hybrid Qualification by Combined Analysis and Testing~~

~~6.1 Seismic Qualification by Earthquake Experience~~

The direct seismic qualification of items by the use of experience from strong motion seismic events has seen limited but growing application. It has been only within the past ten years that data from strong motion earthquakes have generally been collected in the detail and quality necessary to provide the information required for direct application to individual items. Such direct qualification requires that seismic excitation of the item at its point of installation in the building structure effectively envelopes the reference or required seismic design input motion. It also requires that the item being qualified and the one which underwent the strong motion earthquake be the same model and type or have the same physical characteristics and have similar support or anchorage characteristics. In the case of active items it is also necessary in general to show that the item performed the same functions during or following the earthquake, including the potential aftershock effects. In general, the quality and detail of the information used to directly qualify individual items of the basis of experience data should not be less than those required for direct qualification by testing. As in the case of direct qualification by analysis, testing on hybrid methods, earthquake experience may also be used as the basis for qualification by the indirect method. Experience Database Pag.62

~~6.2 Qualification by Testing~~

The use of historical earthquake data has been informative, and it is expected that test data will augment the historical earthquake data in several ways. This can best be seen by considering the attributes of the two approaches. The attributes of earthquake data are:

~~- Real earthquake motion are involved.~~

~~- Field mounting/anchorage are typical of actual installation.~~

~~- Naturally aged equipment forms the data set.~~

~~- For nuclear power plant equipment that is also found in non-nuclear facilities (refineries or conventional power plants), the information base is large.~~

~~- Equipment has been subjected to realistic operational conditions.~~

~~- The data includes the effects of actual interfaces to connecting equipment or systems.~~

~~Test data offer a somewhat different set of attributes.: Because of this, the two methods complement each other:~~

~~-Tests involve relatively high levels of simulated earthquake input motions that are measured and documented.~~

~~- Test methods incorporate a number of conservative aspects.~~

~~- Floor Required Response Spectra (RRS), used as test input criteria.~~

~~- Over-testing is common (to "envelope" the RRS).~~

~~- Broad-band Test Response Spectra (TRS) are typically used.~~

~~- Generally, the Zero Period Acceleration (ZPA) of TRS is several times greater than that of the RRS.~~

~~- Documented functional tests are normally included.~~

~~- Some failure mode information is available.~~

~~- Some fragility test data exist (from tests to failure).~~

~~- Some artificially aged equipment (thermally aged, irradiated) has been tested. Experience Database Pag.63~~

Because of these attributes , it is believed that test data can provide additional information which will be beneficial, particularly in showing that many equipment items are sufficiently rugged to perform satisfactorily.

It is commonly used to qualify industrial equipment which is impossible to analyze and whose functionality before, during and after an earthquake has to be assured. The most common form of seismic qualification by dynamic testing uses shaking tables. The component to be qualified is mounted on a programmable shaking table and table provides the required base motions to the component.

~~When reduced scale testing is performed, similarity requirements associated with indirect methods of seismic qualification must be considered.~~

~~6.3 Qualification by Analysis~~

Seismic qualification by analysis is generally applied to items such civil engineering structures, tanks or distribution systems. In the analytical approach to seismic qualification, the actual component or subsystem is modeled by a mathematical model. Subjected to seismic excitation, a set of structural mechanic parameters such as stress, load and deformation is used to quantify the response of the subsystem. Judgment on qualifying the subsystem is based on comparison of the calculated responses to allowable responses. Broadly speaking, the modeling can be classified into static modeling and dynamic modeling. Static modeling is used when the subsystem is sufficiently rigid so that its fundamental frequency exceeds 33 Hz. For more flexible subsystems, dynamic modeling is necessary to take into account the possible dynamic amplification effect due to seismic excitations.

Especially after Kobe 1995 earthquake , as after California 1994 (the so called "California - Kobe symptoms "), the seismic qualification by pure analysis began to be banished from the most up-to-date norms. And that because structural engineers are now again questioning about what to do in order to offer public credibility like" antiseismic safety".

It must be said that comparison are pointing out sensible differences between dynamic identification of industrial equipment performed by pure analytical methods and that performed by experimental approaches, which differences results in unacceptable high level of approximation regarding the maximum actual stress, strain, load or deformation ( key parameters for acceptability in seismic qualification). And, one of a lot of other things, the damping factors used in the "analysis" of equipment should be based on field testing and experience (the quantity of insulation, the size, location an number of supports gaps, the frequency of response and the use of elastoplastic or energy absorbing support devices may all have an effect on the damping).

The main drawback in qualification by analysis of so complicated structures as shows industrial equipment is the possibility (maybe certainty) of human error through modeling (and also the inherent approximations). Modeling accuracy depends on the analysts' skill in representing the subsystem and its boundary conditions in an analytical model. The Experience Database Pag .64 analytical model has to be sufficiently detailed to include all probable modes of failure under seismic excitations. The inappropriate representation of boundary conditions and treatment of nonlinear gap effects can have a large influence on the calculated response, although such modeling uncertainties are not readily quantifiable in general terms.

Virtually assuming that the mathematical model is properly formulated, there is the uncertainty of material properties and representation of the energy dissipation mechanisms which are commonly lumped under the heading of equivalent viscous damping. An accurate representation of damping is very difficult (as we already said) because the generally lack of knowledge of the energy dissipation mechanisms involved. The equivalent viscous damping value is a function of the materials used, the construction details and the stress level. I table 6.1 it is presented a comparison between natural frequencies obtained by analysis, shaking table and low impedance experiment.

~~One other important disadvantage in industrial equipment qualification by analysis is that it is difficult (even impossible) to demonstrate functionality.~~

~~All things mentioned before contribute to assume that pure analytical method is a very important tool in seismic qualification of industrial equipment, but only as a second step in hybrid method.~~

~~6.4 Hybrid Qualification by Combined Analysis and Testing~~

The hybrid combined analysis and testing method is the best approach to seismic qualification of industrial equipment which makes use of the advantages of both methods. The commonly used procedures are given below: a. A vibration test is performed and the dynamic characteristics and system parameters are identified, using identification techniques. A simplified analytical model is then generated and the model parameters are adjusted to match the test identified values. This calibrated model is then used to generate response spectra for equipment and appendages on the system. b. Another application of combined analysis and testing is the experimental verification of analytical models and model assumption. Generic type calification of equipment are best performed by this technique, because of low-costs and high credibility. Dynamic in situ complete modal identification of equipment structures by low power experiments is performed and then a technique is proposed , which systematically adjust the model of the equipment ( finite element model, by instance) to produce an update model in agreement with measured modal results. One of the possible approaches is to consider the desired perturbations in stiffness and damping matrices as gain matrices in a feedback control algorithm designed to perform eigenstructure assignment. The improved stiffness and damping matrices combined with the analytical mass matrix, more closely predict the modal test results. The technique is applicable to undamped, proportionally damped, as well as non-proportionally damped items. Therefore, the method utilizes the Experience Database Pag.65

~~"in situ" test data available in the form of natural frequencies, damping ratios and mode shapes.~~

~~When is needed, the functionality is more completely analyzed by testing parts of equipment on small and non-expensive vibrators.~~

Test methods in which the test specimen can be excited to clearly define the mode shapes and natural frequencies of the test specimen are acceptable. The acceptance criterion shall demonstrate that sufficient data has been recorded to identify and clearly define all natural frequencies and mode shapes within the frequency range of seismic input motion ( 1 Hz to 33 Hz). Natural resonant frequencies between 0-40Hz +l-qiiipmenl/Type Manufacturer Seismic Calculated by a team from: experiment "Polilehnica" University Civil Fngineering Institute Low-impedance of Bucharest of Bucharest experiment "G" constniction, protection 1TRD Pascani 23 4 00 40 - 24 sheath Signal box Electrocontact Botosani 16.4 (V) 26 30 17 Electric switch box for Contactoare 22.6 18 24 23 mechanisms driving Buzau 26.4 (H) 26 Heating & ventilation variator Electrotehnica S.A. 70 (V) 120 135 70 I included for instance) Low voltage distribution panel Automatica 3.8 10 14 5 with apparatuses 4.7 and 7.4 16 22 5 and 7 (H) Main distribution Panel I Automatica 6.3 19 15 6 4.9 (H) 10 12 5.5 Main distribution Panel II Automatica ' 5 16 16 5 10 12 Low voltage panel PL 32 Automatica 5.2; 14.5 and 27 10 19 12 23 5; 14 and 26 (H) (V) - 36 - 38 Low voltage panel PL 19 Automatica 15.75 and 27.8 22 38 24 - 16 and 27 13 and 30.1 40 20 - 13 and 30 (H) Low voltage panel PL 1620 Automatica 10 22 20 11 6,3; 21,4, 30 - 23 40 - 26 40 7; 21; 30 (H) Honeycomb type chiller Electroputere Craiova -pump head: 16.5; 22; 29 -40 -40 17; 22; 30 16.8;22;23.4;29 1,22; 24; 30 (H) 17 16.5 (V) -casing: 17.8 couldn't be calculated couldn't be calculated 18 (H) 23.4; 27.3 (V) 23,28 Table: Natural frequencies of various equipment (H=horizontal; V=vcrtical) Experience Database Pag.67

~~7. Approach and scope~~

The study approach involved the identification, collection, and aggregation of existing qualification and fragility test data into a computerized data base. First, the sources of test data were identified, then test data were extracted from the available test reports and collected into a structured data base. Once the data had been collected, they were aggregated into sets for which a Generic Equipment Ruggedness Spectrum (GERS) have to be constructed.

Table 7-1 lists equipment of interest (items required for hot shutdown) as defined by SQUG/USNRC. Based on the EPRI study, equipment was classified as mechanical, electrical, or relays. The specific equipment classes include :

• Batteries on Racks •Contactors and Motor Starters • Battery Chargers • Switches • Inverters • Manual Control Switches • Motor Valve Operators • Transmitters • Electrical Penetration • Instrument Rack Components Assemblies • Solenoid-Operated Valves • Distribution Panels • Air-Operated Valves • Switchgear • Safety Relief Valves- • Transformers • Automatic Transfer Switches • Motor Control Centers • Chillers • Control Panels • Motors Experience Database Pag.68

~~TABLE 7.1 TYPICAL HOT SHUTDOWN EQUIPMENT LIST~~

~~Mechanical Equipment~~

1. Vertical pumps and motors 2. Horizontal pumps and motors 3. Motor-operated valves 4. Air-operated valves(including solenoid valves) 5. Heating, ventilation and air-conditioning HVAC; 6. Pumps (turbine driven, diesel driven 7. MSIVs (Main Steam Isolation Valves) 8. Pilot-operated safety/relief valves 9. Spring-operated safety/relief valves 10. NSSS mechanical equipment (Control Rod Drive Mechanisms) 11. PORVs (Power Operating Relief Valves) 12. Air compressor and air accumulators 13. Heat exchanges, tanks (anchorage review only) 14. Atmospheric steam dump valves

~~Electrical Equipment~~

1. Low-voltage switchgear 2. Metal-clad switchgear 3. MCCs (Motor Control Centers) 4. Transformers (unit substation type) 5. Motor-generator sets 6. Distribution panels 7. Batteries and battery racks 8. Battery chargers 9. Inverters 10. Diesel generators and associated equipment 11. Electrical penetration assemblies 12. Transformers (other than unit substations) 13. Automatic transfer switches 14. Remote shutdown panels

~~Instrumentation~~

1. Transmitters (pressure, temperature, level, flow) 2. Switches (pressure, temperature, level, flow) 3. Resistance temperature detectors and thermal couples (RTDs and T/Cs) 4. Relays 5. Control panels and associated components 6. Instrument racks and associated components 7. Instrument readouts (displays, indicators such as meters, recorders, etc.) 8. Neutron detectors Experience Database Pag.69

~~8. Database structure and description~~

~~8.1 Data Availability~~

The Post - earthquake Investigation (PI) Project must be setup to conducts reconnaissance and detailed research investigations of the performance of power and industrial facilities affected by earthquakes. The objective is to gather field experience data on structures and equipment similar to those in nuclear plants and to study the genera! seismic behavior of power and industrial facilities. Such investigations form the foundation of the experience based approach to seismic evaluation of equipment. This effort is also the main vehicle by which the earthquake experience database is maintained and kept credible and viable for future equipment qualification use.

An updated, current base of data is essential to the credibility of the experience-based approach to seismic qualification of equipment. The continuing P! investigations of the performance of power and industrial facilities in earthquakes is needed to substantiate and where possible, increase the ruggedness levels developed to date, to broaden the scope of equipment types, and to identify, for special consideration, outliers or deviations from the base of observed behavior. The PI investigations are the only way to evaluate the seismic performance of equipment in its actual installed and operating environment. They also provide insights into seismic behavior of structures and their effects on equipment and serve to identify new areas of earthquake vulnerability and research needs such as the behavior of electrical switchyard equipment.

In US the PI project maintains a network of contacts with 45 US nuclear utilities and with foreign organizations (primarily through utilities and the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI) to obtain information after an earthquake. EPR! has also established a poo! of 30 expert investigators from 17 organizations from which to form an investigation team. When an earthquake occurs, EPRI makes an immediate assessment of its significance based on information about its genera! effects on developed areas. !f the earthquake is considered significant, EPR! sends a reconnaissance team to the area immediately for a period of up to a week to identify and investigate local facilities. If a sufficient number of facilities are found in the area and ground motions are high (above .2 g to .25 g), a research team revisits that area

A key element of the approach is the availability of existing experience/test data which is complete and adequate for the purpose of constructing GERS. Earthquake data mainly may be found in the post earthquake reports owned by utilities. In the absence of a organized program regarding post earthquake investigation, site nstrumentation, screening and fileing of the earthquake data it is very difficult and time consuming to collect such information at required quality.

Test data are owned either by manufacturers or utilities and reside either in their files or in those of the test laboratories. Test data are of varying degrees of quality depending on date of test performance and institutional variations in procedure and experience. Consequently, an approach to data collection should be developed to observed proprietary restrictions where necessary, while still obtaining the needed information. Experience Database Pag.70

~~Data are available principally in two forms : 1) test reports or 2) Seismic Qualification Review Team (SQRT) report forms.~~

~~Data sources have included :~~

~~• test laboratories,~~

~~• utilities,~~

~~• vendors,~~

~~• other institutions such as national laboratories and architect-engineering firms.~~

The general types of information required are equipment description (type, size, weight, etc.) . Information is also collected concerning the year of testing , type of test (e.g., biaxial , sine, etc.), the test spectra, physical modifications (if any), failure mechanism (if any), and operational requirements and performance.

Test data was provided by EUROTEST SA (test lab.), under a cooperative agreement. S&A has also a cooperative agreement with ISPE (utilities engineering company) to provide earthquake data from a selected number of electrical plants. Unfortunately ISPE did not provide us the requested data. The process of earthquake data acquisition is steel ongoing.

~~8.2 Data Requirements~~

~~Engineering judgment is required to assess how many data points are required and to define the inclusion rules (rules for membership in the class or "club" of equipment).~~

The library of historical earthquake data used by US SQUG has anywhere from 50 to 500 pieces of data per equipment class. As there was some uncertainty as to the input during the historical earthquake, it was felt that a large number of data points in different earthquakes was helpful in offsetting this uncertainty. In addition, equipment details (mode! number, year of manufacture, etc.) were not known with certainty, thus a large data sample tended to account for class diversity. With test data, the uncertainty is less since the input motion amplitude and the equipment condition are known, as fewer data points are required-experience showed that 5 to 10 were sufficient. Experience Database Pag.71

~~9. Collection procedure~~

Figure 9-1 outlines the data collection process. Data are extracted from a test reports or Seismic Qualification Review Team (SQRT) Forms. These are first reviewed by an equipment qualification engineer to determine if the data are suitable for inclusion in the data base. The initial screening criteria are :

~~• Does the equipment item match the specifications of one of the hot shutdown list classes ? (Table 7.1 )~~

~~• Does the report adequately describe the equipment and test procedures ?~~

~~• Does the report include test response spectra (TRS) and all other necessary information?~~

If, in the reviewing engineer's judgment, the test report meets the requirements for inclusion in the data base, certain data are extracted and entered into a computer file, where they are organized in "fields" for subsequent manipulation and accessing.

~~The database fields provide a basic description of the equipment item and summarize the information available. The database includes information concerning :~~

~~• equipment descriptors;~~

~~• size, weight, and manufacturer/model code number ;~~

~~• year of testing ;~~

~~• type of tests and test documentation ;~~

~~• anchorage used during testing;~~

~~• number of sub components tested (if detailed in the test report);~~

~~• quantification of available TRS ;~~

~~• any exceptions or comments related to performance during testing; and~~

~~• any failures.~~

In this report , the term "exception" refers to a variation that results from problems with test fixtures, test procedures, or test methods. Test organizations also use the term "anomalies" to describe these variations in order to distinguish them from actual equipment failures. The term "failure" refers to inability to meet the acceptance criteria Experience Database Pag.72 during or after a dynamic test. In most instances, a failure will be equipment malfunction and not structural failure. -

The spectra reported are generally TRS. The only time TRS would not be used is if they were not available, or if they could not be used due to proprietary considerations. In either of these situations, the Required Response Spectra (RRS) would be used instead given that the test report or equipment file indicated that the test level enveloped the RRS.

In test report, the TRS are shown either as graphs or as discrete ordinate values of spectral acceleration. The TRS data must be stored in the data base as discrete values at selected frequencies. The data base also includes the spectral damping value, TRS type (SSE or OBE), and test direction. Since some test specimens may contain sub components tested at the same time and which may also be of interest in the data file, they are also included in the data base along with the corresponding in-equipment TRS.

Equipment must be classified by evaluating design details and material which affect dynamic response and ability to resist loads. Equipment types which have similar operating principles and design features, but differ mainly in size, could be classified in the same subclass. If there are significant differences, a different classification (i.e., a subclass) would be used. The final result is to identify low-diversity sets of data, or "clubs", appropriate for the equipment items that are included.;

In a typical test report, there are multiple TRS, since at least five OBE tests and one SSE test are performed in one direction, then repeated for a second direction. They may be slight variations in amplitude for different inputs in the horizontal and vertical directions.

After all the information has been entered into the data base, it is reviewed and independently checked for accuracy with respect to test report information. Once the data have been collected and checked, they must stored on magnetic media. Experience Database Pag. 73

~~Figure 9.1 Data collection process~~

~~i Obtain Test i Report~~

~~Reviw Data for Suitability and Completeness~~

~~No Reject Data if incompite or unsuitable~~

~~Assign code numbers~~

~~Select Representative Spctra~~

~~Enter in Database~~

~~r Store on Disk & Transmit to Central Data Bank Experience Database Pag.74~~

~~10. Experience data~~

Based on equipment list (Table 7.1) two cooperation agreements have been set with 1SPE and EUROTEST (electric engineering company and test lab.). We received only preliminary information from !SPE based on site visit performed to Bucharest West and Brazi electrica! plants. Both plants have been heavily affected during the 1977 earthquake. The roof of the main electrical building collapsed and important structural damages have been reported. For auxiliary structures where no structural damages have been observed no equipment failure or malfunction were reported. For this reason ISPE extended the investigations to other two electrical plants. Equipment check list forms have been distributed. ISPE promised to provide us the filled checklist forms at the end of October. This data will be reported as an addendum to the present report.

EOROTEST provide us very useful and good quality information. An equipment list tested by EUROTEST is presented in table 10.1. Test data checklist for the following equipment have been collected and are presented in appendix 1 :

~~No. Generic Class Equipment type~~

~~1. Electric Motor ASCEN, 0.63 Kw~~

~~2. Electric Motor ASAD 100-4, 2.2 Kw~~

~~3. Air operated valve Pneumatic Control Valve CSC 3/86~~

~~4. Chillers Honeycomb chiller for power transformer with forced oil and air circuit~~

~~5. Low voltage switd ar Double microswitch ex-proof~~

~~6. Batteries Stationary batteries with tube plates~~

~~7. Instruments Electric flow signailizer for potential explosive atmosphere~~

~~8. Instrument racks Drawer Rack~~

~~9. Instruments Explosion-proof casing pressostat~~

~~10. Instruments Pressure gauge 0>60, axial head type G25~~

~~11. Instrument racks Valve supplying capsular pane! TCV~~

~~12. Panel boards Ex Signals box~~

~~13. Switch boards Low voltage pane! Experience Database Pag.75~~

~~14. Switchboards - Electric switch box for driving closing/opening mechanism~~

~~15. Panel boards Distribution panel for illumination~~

~~In appendix 2 is presented a brief description of EUROTEST facility. The quality of information provided by EUROTEST meet the requirement to be included into database. Experience Database Pag.76~~

~~Table 10.1 SEISM TESTED PRODUCTS IN SC EUROTEST SA~~

No Item Manufacturer Test date Test result 1 Power Supplying Rack I Automatica 29.11.84 adequate design I.P.A. no. R4/449 Bucuresti 73303-300 2 Frame Distributing Rack DR I Automatica 29.11.84 adequate design IPA no. R4/449 Bucuresti 73303-200 3 | Conventional Automation I Automatica 29.11.84 adequate Panel TC design IPA Bucuresti ! no.447.73-801K-l-V5 4 d.c.Distribution Panel I Automatica 29.11.84 partial . TCC-1-220V (rack A. A-A) Bucuresti adequate design IITPIC diagram 242- 2185-37/c a.c. Power Supplying Panel for I Automatica 29.11.84 inadequate MOV, design IITPIC circuit Bucuresti : diagram 241-6671-01 & 241-6671-02 Panel 1(TF21 - l),3(TF21-3),4(TF22-4) 6 ; d.c. Panel T 24-801 I Automatica 29.11.84 adequate i Bucuresti 7 : Stationary' Battery with Tube I Acumulatorul 25.12.84 adequate ; Plates 16S-320 Bucuresti 8 Stationary Batten,' with Tube I Acumulatorul 25.12.84 adequate i Plates 8S-640 Bucuresti 9 Stationary Batter)' with Tube I Acumulatorul 25.12.84 adequate Plates 16S-350 Bucuresti 10 Explosion-Proof Casing I.M.F. Bucuresti 12.03.85 inadequate ! Pressostat with Membrana i Atmosphere separator ' G 9132153208010 11 Pressure Gauge O60 for I.M.F. Bucuresti 31.05.85 adequate i Automation, with Axial Pin ; Type G25 12 Explosion-proof Casing I.M.F. Bucuresti 31.05.85 inadequate Thermostat with Capillary- Tube & probe type G923 Experience Database Pag.77

No Item Manufacturer Test date Test result 31 Separator Membrane for IEPAM Birlad 23.11.85 partial Differential Pressure Electronic adequate Transducer FE-3DM+MS 32 Level Electronic Transducter IEPAM Birlad 24.11.85 partial with Change-Over Switch adequate Reverser GFE 7BT 33 Turbulent Current Brake Control Electromotor 28.02.86 inadequate Pannel TC-22R Timisoara 34 Asynchronuous Three-Phases IME Bucuresti 20.02.86 adequate Motor. Explosion Proof AS AD 80A-4; 0.55kW; 1500rpm;380V 35 Asynchronuous Three-Phases IME Bucuresti 20.02.86 adequate Motor, Explosion Proof AS AD 100-4; 2.2kW; 1500rpm; 380V 36 Asynchronuous Three-Phases IME Bucuresti 20.02.86 adequate Motor, Explosion Proof AS AD 132-S-4;5.5kW;1500rpm; 380 V 37 Asynchronous Tliree-Phases IME Bucuresti 20.03.86 adequate Motor, Type ASCEN 0,63kW 1500rpm 38 AdjustablePower Source IPA Brasov 16.04.86 inadequate 10-110Vd.c.;20A 39 Asynclironous Three-Phases IME Bucuresti 20.03.86 inadequate Motor, Type ASCEN SN 12,5kW; 1500rpm 40 Low Voltage Distribution Panel I Automatica 24.05.86 adequate witli Detachable Drawers and Bucuresti Apparatuses "Distribloc CNE" 41 G- Execution Protection Sheath ITRD Pascani 10.06.86 adequate 42 Signalling Box -Explosion-Proof I Electrocontact 30.06.86 adequate Code 7020 G I-1 Botosani 43 Double Microswitch I Electrocontact 01.07.86 inadequate Explosion-Proof Botosani Code 6145 G I-1 44 Temperature Pneumatic IEPAM Birlad 28.07.86 adequate Transducer GT.PT 45 Capsular Bars 0.4kV; 2500A IPTE Alexandria 15.08.86 partial adequate Experience Database Pag.79

No Item Manufacturer Test date Test result 46 Electric Switch Box ExD 11BT4 I Contactoare Buzau 30.09.86 inadequate for Driving Mechanisms of Closing''Oppening 47 Electric Stationary Lead I Acumulatorul 13.11.86 adequate Accumulators with Tube Plates, Bucuresti Type PAS, for C.Ch.Drobeta, 8S-640 48 Electric Stationary Lead I Acumulatorul 13.11.86 adequate Accumulators with Tube Plates, Bucuresti Type PAS. for C.Ch.Drobeta, 16S-350 49 Main Distribution Panel I Automatica 04.11.86 adequate 0.4kV; Type POWER CENTER Bucuresti 50 Control Box Type CC21 I Automatica 10.11.86 adequate Bucuresti 51 Control Box Type CC9 I Automatica 10.11.86 adequate Bucuresti 52 Lamp Fitting with" Incandescent ELBA Timisoara 28.11.86 partial Lamps for NPP Tvpe PCN adequate 3x60W N4 53 Lamp Fitting with Incandescent ELBA Timisoara 28.11.86 partial Lamps for NPP Type AIN 60W adequate 54 Lamp Fitting with Fluorescent ELBA Timisoara 28.11.86 partial Lamps Type FIPAD 01-240 N4 adequate Hanged on 2 chains 55 Lamp Fitting with Incandescent ELBA Timisoara 28.11.86 partial Lamps Type FIDIO 03-440 N4 adequate Hanged on 4 chains 56 Lamp Fitting with Incandescent ELBA Timisoara 28.11.86 partial Lamps for NPP Type PCN adequate lx60WN4 57 Lamp Fitting with Incandescent ELBA Timisoara 28.11.86 partial Lamps for NPP Type AIN adequate 60W N4 Mounted on Wall 58 Low Voltage Panel PL 1607 I. Automatica 22.01.87 adequate Bucuresti 59 Low Voltage Panel PL 1610 I. Automatica 22.01.87 adequate Bucuresti Experience Database Pag .80

No Item Manufacturer Test date Test result 60 Low Voltage Panel PL 19 I. Automatica 22.01.87 adequate Bucuresti 61 Low Voltage Panel PL 32 I. Automatica 22.01.87 adequate Bucuresti 62 Low Voltage Panel PL 1620 I. Automatica 22.01.87 adequate Bucuresti 63 Capsular Panel for Valve I. Automatica 26.01 87 adequate Supplying TCV Bucuresti 64 Lamp Fitting with Incandescent ELBA Timisoara 14.02.87 partial Lamp Type AEI 1x25W N4 adequate Mounted on Wall 65 Lamp Fitting for Safety ELBA Timisoara 14.02.87 adequate Illumination Type CDIA-01 N4 66 Lamp Fitting for Safety ELBA Timisoara 14.02.87 adequate Illumination Type CDIA-02 N4 61 Lamp Fitting for Safety ELBA Timisoara 14.02.87 adequate Illumination Type LMCER-01 N4 68 Lamp Fitting with Mercury-Arc ELBA Timisoara 14.02.87 adequate Lamp for NPP Type IEV 250 N4 RS, Mounted on Wall 69 Rotameter Type Flow Indicator ITRD Pascani 28.02.87 adequate with and without Limit Contacts, DRD-92 G 70 Pilot Valve with Pneumatic IEPAM Birlad 07.03.87 partial Control G-VCP 3/2 adequate 71 Lamp Fitting for Fluorescent ELBA Timisoara 16.03.87 adequate Lamps Type FIRA01-240 N4 72 AdjustablePower Source IPA Brasov 16.03.87 adequate 90-110Vd.c,;20A 73 Continuous Isotope Analysis G-Plant 03.09.87 adequate System for Heavy-Water Rimnicu-Vilcea 74 Asynchronous Tliree-Phases IME Bucuresti 17.12.87 adequate Motor. Type ASCEN SN 2,5kW; 1425rpm 75 Galvanic Separator SAN 11-NS FEA Bucuresti 20.02.88 adequate 76 Current Signalling Unit FEA Bucuresti 19.02.88 adequate SAN 21-NS No Item Manufacturer Test date Test result 77 Temperature Adaptor on 2 FEA Bucuresti 18.02.88 adequate Connexions ELT-164 NS Wall Mounting 78 Temperature Adaptor on 2 FEA Bucuresti 22.02.88 adequate Connexions ELT-164 NS Field Mounting 79 Galvanic Separator SG-36-NS IEIA Cluj-Napoca 20.02.88 adequate 80 Current Signalling Unit IEIA Cluj-Napoca 20.02.88 adequate USC-36-NS 81 Electric Flow Signallizer for IPEA Ploiesti 09.11.88 inadequate Potentially Explosive Atmosphere and G-Execution 82 Thermoresistance TTR 1.4.06. ITRD Pascani 26.01.89 adequate NS III; TTR 1.4.07. NS III; TTR 1.4.09. NS III 83 Electric Motor Type ASCEN IME Bucuresti 03.03.89 adequate 0.63; 1395 rpm 84 Protection Sheath TT 600-10- ITRD Pascani 18.03.89 adequate R081-PT-A 85 Electric Compressor 4 ECR 350 I. "Timpuri Noi" Buc. 27.04.89 adequate 86 Forged Protection Sheath for ITRD Pascani 29.05.89 adequate C. Ch. Drobeta Tr. Severin 87 Flow-Meter Probe ANUBAR ITRD Pascani 25.05.89 adequate 88 Room Thermoresistance ITRD Pascani 08.08.89 adequate Code TTR 7.2.01.7.4.9.01.0 Hor. Mount. & Vert. Mount. 89 Regular Thermoresistance ITRD Pascani 16.08.89 adequate Code TTR 1.6.1.7.3.5.1.0.1.0, Norn. Length 750 mm, Hor. Mount. & Vert. Mount. 90 Regular Thermoresistance ITRD Pascani 16.08.89 adequate Code TTR 1.3.1.6.3.5.3.7.2.0, Nom. Length 500 mm, Hor. Mount. & Vert. Mount. 91 Metallic Rack for 19" Drawers, I. Automatica 11.09.89 adequate D048 Bucuresti 92 Electric Motor Type ASCEN, IME Bucuresti 23.11.89 adequate lOkW. 1440 rpm, 380 V, class F 93 Distribution Panel for I. Automatica 29.11.89 adequate Illumination 5623-LP-33 Bucuresti Experience Database Pag.82

No Item Manufacturer Test date Test result 94 Generator Unit AGI 650-N "23 August" Bucuresti 01.12.89 adequate 95 Thermostat with Capillary' Tube IMF Bucuresti 12.12.89 adequate and Probe with 2 Microswitches, code C 52 32 96 Simple Pressostat for Medium IMF Bucuresti 12.12.89 inadequate Pressure, code 914 97 Valves Battery BR 472 AN 3 IEPAM Birlad 23.01.90 adequate 98 Ignition Device for Flare Head, IPEP Bacau 26.01.89 adequate Execution G-I-l 99 Level Magnetic Indicator IAMC Otopeni 11.07.90 adequate IMN-4G 100 Flow Measurement Elements ITRD Pascani 22.08.90 adequate with ANNUBAR Probe 101 Hydrogen Sulphide Sensor IP A Craiova 11.09.90 adequate 102 Indication Device 1 AIS NS IAEM Timisoara 26.09.90 adequate 103 Generator Unit AG I-650-G "FAUR" Bucuresti 30.10.90 adequate 104 Devices Type NOTOR 3 AG "Neptun" Cimpina 19.12.90 partial R400x4 for Electrical Driving of adequate Industrial Mechanisms 105 Devices Type NOTO 3 2AG for "Neptun" Cimpina 19.12.90 partial Electrical Driving of Industrial adequate Mechanisms 106 Thermostat with Room Probe IMF-SA Bucuresti 25.09.91 adequate Code G.924.21.31.04.001.ON 107 Presostat with Diaphragm and IMF-S A Bucuresti 26.02.92 adequate Piston Code COS 108 Switch with Fusible IFAR 32A Electroaparataj 15.05.92 adequate Code 5329 D3 NS3 Bucuresti 109 Pressure Gauge 60 for IMF-SA Bucuresti 02.06.92 adequate Instrumental Air Code N.02.2 110 Monopoled Automatic Switch Electroaparataj 12.06.92 inadequate 100 A Code 4805 D5 IJWN 4R Bucuresti 111 Microcontact with Hinged Arm Electroaparataj 12.06.92 adequate Code 3368 D3 NS3 Bucuresti 112 Switch with Fusible IFAR 100A Electroaparataj 15.06.92 adequate Code 5327 D5 N4R Bucuresti 113 Triphased Inductive Reactance ICPE-SEE 14 06.07.92 inadequate 40nHz; 600A Bucuresti Code RIT 40-600-3 80-NS III Experience Database Pag.83

No Item Manufacturer Test date Test result 114 Automatic Switch AMRO-16A Electroaparataj 15.10.92 adequate Code 4635 D5NS3R Bucuresti 115 Galvanic Separator SG 36 NS IEIACluj 30.11.92 adequate 116 Relay RI 13, RS-72500 AT with Relee SA Medias 09.12 92 adequate PlugCF-llVdc. 117 Honeycomb Type Chiller with SCTRAFO- 23.04.93 adequate Forced Air and Oil Circulation Electroputere SA for Power Transformers Craiova RTCF-150 118 Combinated Distribution Electric I Automatica 07.06.93 adequate Panels 48 V d.c/220 V a.c. Bucuresti PL1585A/PL1581A TD 55000-072 119 Intermediate Miniature Relay for Relee SA Medias 15.07.94 adequate d.c. Type RM-S,N 81001 120 Galvanic Separator SAN 11 NS FEA SA Bucuresti 15.09.94 adequate 121 Current Signaling Unit FEA S A Bucuresti 19.09.94 adequate SAN21NS 122 Temperature Adaptor Connected FEA S A Bucuresti 22.09.94 adequate on Two Wires ELT 164 NS 123 Differential Presostat with IMF SA Bucuresti 15.11.94 adequate Diaphragm and Piston Code N04.2 Experience Database Pag .84

~~11. Conclusion~~

The scope of this research project is to initiate seismic experience database collection for mechanical and electrical equipment listed in table 7.1. The first part of the study presents seismic information collected from the seismic national networks. Also a comprehensive probabilistic hazard analysis for the Vrancea earthquakes have been performed based on available instrumental and historical data. The results of the hazard analysis provide the magnitude-recurrence relationship, ground motion attenuation and site depended response spectra as a background for the seismic experience database.

~~Taking into account:~~

- the deep structure of the Vrancea source where three tectonic units come in contact - the stability of the angles of the fault plane and the motion on this plane - historical data of the seismic events reported in the last 200 years - instrumental data for 1977,1986 and 1990 Vrancea earthquakes - the ellipse-shape of the macroseismic field produced by the Vrancea source it was observed:

- slower attenuation on the direction of the fault plane ^(N45E) compared with the normal direction (N135E) - faster attenuation for deeper earthquakes and /or greater magnitudes - greater standard deviation of the attenuation function for deeper earthquakes and greater magnitudes - vertical acceleration attenuation slower than horizontal acceleration attenuation - velocity attenuation faster than the acceleration attenuation and lower than the displacement attenuation - in soft soil conditions the predominant period has the tendency to become lower as the energy of the earthquake increases; -the width of the frequency band has the tendency to become narrow as the energy of the earthquake increases; - the dynamic amplification factors have the tendency to decrease as the energy of the earthquake increases

Predicted values of the peak ground acceleration for 50 and 84 percentile, as function of hypocentra! distance, return period of magnitude and azimuths are presented. Note that a good prediction have been obtained for a return period up to 100 years.

~~Further research it is necessary in order to consider the correlation between the free field motion characteristics and soil data.~~

Considering theUS experience, the second part of the study describe the philosophy of an experience based generic approach, database structure and collection procedure. Also data availability and data collected are presented. Note that in Romania there are no Experience Database Pag .65 coordinated programs for post earthquake investigation, or seismic experience data coiiection. Considering the limited budget of this project, cooperation agreements have been set with ISPE (electric utility engineering company) and EUROTEST (test iab). in order to collect seismic experience data checklist forms and an equipment list were provided by S&A. Due to difficulties encountered during seismic data collection from(no post earthquake investigation reports, low cooperation of utility technical staff, etc.), this process require more time and effort. The seismic experience data will be reported in an addendum to this report until the end of this year.

So the experience data presented in this report comes only from the test laboratory EUROTEST. They provide us a full list with mechanical and electrical equipment that have been tested (proprietary information) and test data information for a limited set of equipment. Also EUROTEST expressed their disposabiiity for future cooperation. Note that EUROTEST activity is based on a QA program and this is reflected in a good quality of data.

This report demonstrate the availability of seismic experience data and initiate the data collection process. The future of this process is strongly depended by creating an organized an coordinated national/international program. A seismic expert team must be set and maintained for post earthquake investigation, data collection review and validation. Once the experience database will become operational the first benefit will be the reduction of the seismic safety evaluation effort related with mechanical and electrical equipment. Experience Database Pag.86

~~12. References~~

2.1 Achauer U., Granet M., Deschamps A.t Enescu D., Oncescu L., Zugravescu D., Demetrescu C, Fuchs K., Bonjer K.-P., Wenzel F., 1993. Lithoscope Contribution to EUROPROBE's Vrancea Integrated Seismic Project (LEVISP), Geophysicalisches Institut, Universität Karlsruhe

~~2.2 Achauer U., Oncescu L, Spakman W.t Wortel R., 1993. EUROPROBE's Dynamics of the East Carpathian Arc Project (DECAP), Geophysicalisches Institut, Universität Karlsruhe~~

~~2.3 Bolt B.A., 1989. The nature of earthquake ground motion. Ch.1 in The Seismic Design Handbook, edited by Farzad Naeim. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York~~

2.4 Bonjer K.-P., Apopei !., 1991. Ermittlung und Vergleich von Skalierungsmodellen für seismologische und ingenieurseismiche Kenndaten im Nahbereich von Erdbeben aus der Vrancea-Region und dem Oberrhengraben. Bundesministerium für Forschung und Technologie, Geophysikalisches Institut, Universität Karlsruhe

2.5 Deschamps A., Patau G. Lyon-Caen H., 1990. Study of an intermediate depth earthquake in Vrancea (Romania), May 30, 1990. Preliminary report, Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, Université de Paris 7

~~2.6 Deschamps A., Monfret T., Romanowicz B., 1986. Preliminary source parameters of the Romanian earthquake of Aug 30, 1986 from Geoscope Network Data VLP and BRB channe!s,_EOS Trans., AGU.67, 44~~

~~2.7 Constantinescu L, Enescu D., 1985. The Vrancea earthquakes. Editura Academiei, Bucuresti (in Romanian)~~

2.8 Fuchs K., Bonjer K.-P., Bock G., Cornea !., Radu C, Enescu D., Jianu D., Nourescu A., Merkler G., Moldoveanu T., Tudorache G., 1979. The Romanian earthquake of March 4, 1977. II Aftershocks and migration of seismic activity. Tectonophysics, 53, p.225-247

~~2.9 Kanamori H., 1977. The energy release in great earthquakes. J. Geol. Res., 82, 20~~

2.10 Katayama T., Seismic Risk as expressed by acceleration response of single degree of freedom system. Bulletin of Earthquake Resistant Structure Research Center. No 12, March 1979, University of Tokyo, p. 15-20

2.11 Müller G., Bonjer K.-P., Stökl H., Enescu D., 1978. The Romanian earthquake of March 4, 1977.1. Rupture process inferred from fault-plane solution and multiple- event analysis. J. Geophys, 44, p.203-218 Experience Database Pag.87

~~2.12 Oncescu M.C., 1987. On recurrence and magnitude of Vrancea earthquakes (in Romanian). Report CFPS-34-1987~~

2.13 Radu C, 1974. Contribution a l'etude de la seismicite de la Roumanie et comparaison avec la seismicite du bassin Mediterraneen et en particulier avec la seismicite du Sud-est de la France. These de Dr. Sci. Universite de Strasbourg

2.14 Radu C, Oncescu M. C, 1980. Focal mechanism of Romanian earthquakes and their correlation with tectonics. I Catalogue of fault plane solution (in Romanian). Report CFPS/CSEN/30.78.1 2.15 Rakers E., Muller G., 1982. The Romanian earthquake of March 4, 1977. Ill Improved focal model and moment determination. J. Geophys., 50, p. 143-150.

~~2.16 Tavera J., 1991. Etude des mecanismes focaux de gros seismes et sismicite dans la region de Vrancea-Roumanie. Institut de Physique de Globe de Paris, Universite Paris 7~~

2.17 The March 4,1977 Romanian earthquake, Editura Academiei, Bucuresti 1982, (in Romanian). Ch.3 The source of the March 4,1977 earthquake and its associated directivity effects, by Enescu, D. Ch.4 Seismicity of the territory of Romania with special emphasis on Vrancea region, by Radu, C.

3.1 Algermissen ST., Leyendecker E.V., 1992. A technique for uniform hazard spectra estimation in US. 10th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Madrid, 19-24, July, 24. Proceedings. Vol.1, p.391-397. Balkema: Rotterdam

~~3.2 Cornell C.A., 1968. Engineering seismic risk analysis. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. Vol.58, No.5, p. 1583-1606~~

~~3.3 Drakopoulos J.C., 1984. Report for the Task Group on Calibration of attenuation laws. UNDP/UNESCO Project on earthquake risk reduction in the Balkan region. RER/79/014, Athens~~

~~3.4 Esteva L, Rosenblueth E., 1963. Espectros de temblores a distancias moderadas y grandes. Chilean Conference on Seismology and Earthquake Engineering. Proceedings, Vol.1, University of Chile~~

3.5 Joyner W.B., Boore D.M., 1981. Peak horizontal acceleration and velocity from strong-motions records including records from 1979 Imperial Valley, California earthquake. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, VoL71, No.6, p.2011-2038

3.6 Kamiyama M., O'Rourke M.J., Flores-Berrones R., 1992. A semi-empirical analysis of strong-motion peaks in terms of seismic source, propagation path and local site conditions. Technical Report NCEER 92-0023 National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New York at Buffalo Experience Database Pag.88

~~3.7 Lungu D., Aldea A., Demetriu S., 1995. Seismic zonation of Romanian based on uniform hazard response ordinates. 5th International Conference on Seismic Zonation, Nice, Oct. 17-19 (to be presented)~~

3.8 Lungu D., Demetriu S., Radu C, Coman O., 1995. Uniform hazard response spectra in soft soil condition and EUROCODE 8. 7th International Conference on Application of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering, ICASP-7, Paris, 10-13 July (to be presented)

3.9 Lungu D., Demetriu S., Radu C, Coman O., 1994. Uniform hazard response spectra for Vrancea earthquakes in Romania. 10 * European Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Vienna, Aug.28-Sept.2, Proceedings. Balkema: Rotterdam

~~3.10 Lungu D., Demetriu S., Coman O., 1994. Prediction of Vrancea strong motions for design. Second International Conference on Computational Stochastic Mechanics, Athens, Greece, June 13-15~~

3.11 Lungu D., Coman O., Moldoveanu T., 1995. Hazard analysis for Vrancea earthquakes. Application to Cernavoda NPP site in Romania. 13th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil, Aug. 13-18.

3.12 Niazi M., Mortgat C.P., 1992. Attenuation of peak ground acceleration in Central California from observations of the 17 October, 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol.21, p.493-507

3.13 Radu C, Lungu D., Demetriu S., Coman O., 1994. Recurrence, attenuation and dynamic amplification for intermediate depth Vrancea earthquakes. XXIV General Assembly . European Seismological Commission, Athens, 19-24 Sept.

3.14 Radu C, Vlad M.N., 1991. Progress report of Romania for Task Group 3: Correlation of macroseismic intensity with acceleration and other parameters of strong ground motion, Zagreb, May 20-24, p.A2.7-A2.9

~~3.15 Radu C, Apopei I., 1977. Application of the largest values theory to Vrancea earthquakes. Publ. Int. Geophys. Pol. Acad. Sc, A-5 (116), p.229-243~~

~~3.16 Radu C, Apopei I., 1977. Macroseismic field of Romanian earthquakes. Symposium on the Analysis of Seismicity and Seismic Risk.Liblice, Oct. 17-22, Proceedings, p. 193-208~~

3.17 Sigbjomsson R., Baldvinsson G.I., 1992. Seismic hazard and recordings of strong ground motion in Iceland. 10* World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Madrid, June 19-24, Proceedings, Vol.1, p.419-424. Balkema:Rotterdam Experience Database Pag.89

~~4.1 Anderson J.C., 1989. Dynamic response of buildings. Ch.3 in The seismic design handbook, edited by Naeim F., Van Nostrand Reinhoid, p. 81-119~~

~~4.2 ASCE 4-86. Standard for seismic analysis of safety-related nuclear structures and Commentary. American Society for Civil Engineers, NY, 1986~~

~~4.3 ASCE 7-93 and ASCE 7-88. Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. American Society for Civil Engineers, NY, 1993 and 1988~~

4.4 CEN/TC 250/SC 8/N 83/ENV 1998-1-1, EUROCODE 8, 1993. Earthquake resistant design of structures. Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings. Seismic actions and general requirements for structures

~~4.5 Clough R.W., Penzien J., Dynamics of structures. Me Graw Hill Book Co., NY~~

~~4.6 Ghiocel D., Lungu D., 1975 Wind, Snow and Temperature Effects on Structures Based on Probability. Abacus Press, Kent, England~~

~~4.7 Kanai K., 1985. Engineering seismology. University of Tokyo Press, p. 105-110~~

~~4.8 Kennedy R.P., Shinozuka M., 1989. Recommended, minimum power spectral density functions compatible with NRC Regulatory Guide 1.60 Response spectrum. Prepared for Brookhaven National Laboratory~~

~~4.9 Kennedy R.P., 1989. Comments on proposed revisions to standard plan seismic provisions. Prepared for Brookhaven National Laboratory~~

4.10 Lungu D., Scherer R.J., Coman O., Zsohar M., 1994. On the Phenomenon of long predominant periods of ground vibration during 1990,1986 and 1977 earthquakes from Vrancea source. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Earthquake Resistant Construction and Design, ERCAD, Berlin, 15-17 June. Proceedings.Vol.1, p.51-59 .Balkema: Rotterdam

4.11 Lungu D., Coman O., Cornea T., Demetriu S., Muscalu L, 1993. Structural response spectra to different frequency bandwidth earthquakes. 6th International Conference on Structural Safety and Reliability ICOSSAR '93, Innsbruck, Aug.9- 13. Proceedings, Vol.3, p.2163-2170. Balkema: Rotterdam

4.12 Lungu D., Cornea T., Demetriu S., 1992. Frequency bandwidth of Vrancea Earthquakes and the 1991 edition of Seismic code of Romania. 10th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 19-24 July, Madrid, Proceedings, Vol.10 p. 5633-5638. Balkema: Rotterdam

~~4.13 Lungu D., Popovici A., Cornea T., 1992. Studies concerning the structural behaviour of buildings in Bucharest to Vrancea earthquakes. First International Experience Database Pag.90~~

~~Conference on Disaster Prevention in Urban Areas, ICDPUA-1, Teheran, May 11- 13 -~~

4.14 Lungu D., Cornea T., 1990. Grounding of design forces in Romania based on Vrancea seismic records of 1986 and 1977. 9th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Moscow, Sept., Proceedings, Additional Vol., p.63-72

4.15 Lungu D., Demetriu S., 1990. Duration effect on RMS acceleration. Application for Vrancea and Armenia earthquakes. 9th European Conference on Earthquake engineering, Moscow, Sept., Vol. 10A, p. 164-173

~~4.16 Lungu D., Cornea T., 1989. The 1986 and 1977 Vrancea earthquakes. Stochastic analysis of their spectra! content and structural effects. Constructii Nr.3-4, p. 25- 50. (in Romanian)~~

~~4.17 Lungu D., Cornea T., 1988. Power spectra in Bucharest for Vrancea earthquakes. Symposium on reliability-based design in civil engineering. Lausanne, July 7-9. Proceedings Vol.1, p. 17-24~~

~~4.18 Lungu D., Ghioce! D., 1983. Probabilistic methods in structural design. Editura Tehnica, Bucharest (in Romanian)~~

4.19 Martin R.G., Dobry R., 1994. Earthquake site response and seismic code provisions. NCEER Bulletin, Vol.8, No.4, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New York at Buffalo, p. 1-6

~~4.20 Mohraz B., Elghadamsi F.E., 1989. Earthquake ground motion and response spectra. Ch.2 in The seismic design handbook, edited by Naeim F., Van Nostrand Reinhold, p.32-80~~

~~4.21 Okamoto S., 1985. Introduction to earthquake engineering. University of Tokyo Press, Second edition, p. 102-105~~

4.22 Scherer R.J., Riera J.D., Schueller G.I., 1982. Estimation of the time-dependent frequency content of earthquake accelerations. Nuclear Engineering and Design 71, p.301-310. North-Holland Publishing Co.

~~4.23 Schueller G.I., editor, 1991. Structural dynamics. Recent advances. Springer- Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg~~

~~4.24 Schueller G.I., Shinozuka M., editors, 1987. Stochastic methods in structural dynamics. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston, Lancaster~~

~~4.25 Simos N., Philippacopoulos A.J., 1993. Theoretical bases of DIGES. Brookhaven National Laboratory, Prepared for US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 111p Experience Database Pag.91~~

~~4.26 Takizawa H., Jennings P.C., 1980. Collapse of a model for ductile reinforced concrete frames under- extreme earthquake motions. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol.8, p. 117-144~~

~~4.27 Trifunac M.D., Brady A.G., 1975. A study on the duration of strong earthquake ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol.65, p.581-626~~

~~4.28 Vanmarcke E.t 1984. Random fields: analysis and synthesis. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts~~

4.29 Withman R.V., editor, 1992. Proceeding from site-effects workshop. Oct.24-25 1991. Technical Report NCEER-92-0006, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New York at Buffalo

~~7.1 Seismic Equipment Qualification Using Existing Test Data, EPRI NP 4297, Oct. 1985~~

~~7.2 Generic Seismic Ruggedness of Power Plant Equipment, EPRI NP 5223s, Rev 1. August 1991~~

~~7.3 S.J. Eder, R.P. Kassawara, Neil P. Smith, Future uses of earthquake experience data, Proceedings of the fifth Symposium, Orlando Florida, December, 1994.~~

~~7.4 R.P. Kasssawara, P.W. Hayes, K. Mertz, The use of experience data for seismic qualification of advanced plant equipmen. Proceedings of the fifth Symposium, Orlando Florida, December, 1994.~~

~~7.5 K.K. Banyopathyay, R.M. Kenneally, Guidelines for seismic qualification of equipement based on experience. Proceedings of the fifth Symposium, Orlando Florida, December, 1994.~~

7.6 EUROTEST - Seismic qualification in EUROTEST- Bucharest. Analysis, Testing, Earthquake Experience and indirect Methods. Advanced in Modern Low-cost and Reliable Seismic Qualification of Industrila Equipment. Research report 1995.

7.7 O. Felecan, A. Olaru, EUROTEST - A critical approch towards seismic qualification by analysis for electrical equipment. First National Simposium on High Voltage Tests, Mesurements and qualification of Electrical Equipment, Craiova, Romania, Sept. 1996 - to be presented. Experience Database Pag.92

~~13. Acknowledgements~~

~~This work was supported by the INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, VIENNA, under Contract No.8233/N.~~

The KINEMETRICS INC., Pasadena, California generously made their strong motion analysis software available for the investigation of Vrancea accelerograms used in this report. We wish to thank very much to Jean Marie Fort and Dan Radulescu for this.

~~The report is the result of a co-operative effort made by the members of the group.~~

The data for the hazard analysis were obtained from: (i) Dr. C. Radu and M. Rizescu, National Institute for Earth Physics, Bucharest-Magurele; (ii) Dr. H. Sandi and S. Borcia, Building Research Institute, Bucharest; (iii) Dr. T. Moldoveanu, Institute for Geophysical and Geotechnical Studies, Bucharest; (iv) Dr. Vasily Alkaz, Institute of Geophysics and Geology, Academy of Sciences of Moldova, Chisinau and (v) Dr. M.C. Oncescu, Geophysicalisches Institut, Universitat Karlsruhe.

Experience data was collected in cooperation with Ovidiu Felecan - Program Manager, Pomiliu Taras - Scientific Director from EUROTEST and losif Bilcan - Head of Thermo- mechanical Department, Nicolescu Nicolescu - Head of high pressure pipes, from ISPE Bucharest. We wish to thank very much for their cooperation and contribution to this report. Experience Database Pag.93

~~APPENDIX I~~

Equipment test data 1. FORM ID: MOT 002 2. GENERIC CLASS: Electric Motor 3. GENERAL EQ. TYPE: Electric motor type ASCEN 4. SPECIFIC EQ. TYPE: - nominal power: 0,63 kW - nominal voltage: 380 V a.c. - nominal rpm: 1395 - nominal frequency: 50 Hz - cos (p = 0.749 - insulation class: F - current intensity: 1.76 A 5. MANUFACTURER STANDARDS: STRNS 396/87; NTRNS-0-Appendix 4; STRNS 397/24.10.88 6. MANUFACTURER/MODEL: IME-Bueuresti / 14 F 4 T-4 F IM 1001 7. SIZE: 344 x 230 x 230 mm 8. WEIGHT: 42 kg 9. ELEVATION (CG): 100 mm (est.) 10. SOURCE OF INFO.: seismic test 11. TEST ORGANIZATION: LCCNE - ICPE (nowadays EUROTEST SA.) 12. TEST PLAN: 397/24.10.88 & 397A 1 8.1 1 .SX 13. TEST REPORT: B.I. 5061 • 03.07.1989 14. ENVIRON. QUAL.: - Thermal accelerated ageing (B.I. 5344-10.11.1989: B.I. 5086 04.03.1988). Description: - specimens: three dismantled motors (rotor + stator) - temp.: 200 deg. C. duration: 514 h - Radiation (B.I. 5131 31.03.1988) - Specimens: three motors - Flow: 400 KRad/h; Integrated dose: 40 Mrad: Duration: 100 h: Temp.: 21-25 deg C Humidity: 45-55%; Press.: 1 aim - Vibration ageing ( B.I. 5306/12.09.1988) - Acceleration: 1.5 g; Frequency: 50 Hz: Duration: 1 h - During test, motors were running, unloaded 15. TEST DATE: 02.1989 16. INPUT DIRECTION: Triaxial. simultaneous, independent inputs 17. TEST TYPE: - triaxial. monofrequencv - sine sweep. 5 octave/min - frequency range: 1 -=- 44 Hz - 5 DBE 18. FLECTION MONITORED: RPM. idle running 19. ACCEPT CRITERIA: - no abnormal voltage or spurious operation - no structural damages 20. RESONANT SEARCH: not measured: usecTdamping ratio: 1% 21. TEST MOUNTING: floor, on support plate 22. ANCHORAGE: - 4 bolts M8x25, nuts, washers and Grower washers - motor on support - 4 bolts M10x75, nuts, washers and Grower washers -support on table 23. DAMAGE: none 24. COMMENTS: - RRS required by STRNS 396/87 are in accordance with TENDERING DOCUMENTS 79 RN 34322-003(R) - Add No.2 - App 1 and 79 RN 34612-001- Add No.2 - App - SEISMIC REQUIREMENTS - Damping value: 1 % - Motor running and RPM variation have been estimated by noise monitoring - Support - bolted steel plate 230 x 230 x 20 f - Motor AdC£N^O,6O AW 2- Ma^a c/e7/7cercar/ £ r J 6 tf8* 25'- drA&4#45 4- Grower A/<9- 6TA3 7S££/2-SO- J/AS 7277-SO - 46

~~7- er A//O- ~~iS 76S6/2 -uc o o - c/s jbr//7c/j-rs c/ //7oforv/c// /D c/e ?/?cerccsr/ oe/o/s?/ce RRS TRS axa laterala-TEST i 1Q-NuV-c~~~~

~~R /WWM w* vww 1ICPE LCCNE I ncercare la se ism~~

~~3.75000 / \~~

~~I ••* \ \ 2.50000 1~~

~~- >^-" —„ —•• \ r. '. , ••"" 1.25000 ;~~

~~anor tiza re 1% 0.00000 - i,.CO0CO 10.0000 50.0000 Hz IHEB MOTOR 0.63kW/i500rp« seria P61405 RRS TRS axa verticala-TEST 1 *" 30-WJV-88 vl.VVVW - ICPE LCCNE Incercare la seisn 5.75000:~~

~~2.50000.~~

~~i.25000 \ anortizare IX O.OOOOOE i.OOCxX) 10.0000 50.0000 IMEB HOTCR 0.63kU/i500rpB seria P61405~~

~~/if , cf-D/recf/e ' 1~~

~~A/77Or//zar£>/3 * /%•~~

~~T Amorf/zare/3~~

~~Aqarfttqrefi* 2%~~

~~ver//cc/0 Amorf~~

o NOfA. 1. FORM ID: MOT 001 2. GENERIC CLASS: Electric Motor 3. GENERAL EQ. TYPE: Asynchronous three-phases motor - explosion proof 4. SPECIFIC EQ. TYPE: - nominal power: 2,2 kW - nominal voltage: 380 V a.c. - synchron speed: 1500 rpm - nominal frequency: 50 Hz - cos cp = 0,72 - insulation class: F - protection degree: IP 55 - zone: I 5. MANUFACTURER STAND.ARDS: NTRG 189/83 6. MANUFACTURER/MODEL: IME-Bucuresti / AS AD 100-4 7. SIZE: 405 x 340 x 250 (mm) 8. WEIGHT: 43 kg 9. ELEVATION (CG): 125 mm (wall mounting), 210 mm (floor mounting) 10. SOURCE OF INFO.: seismic test 11. TEST ORGANIZATION: ICPE-LCCNE (nowadays EUROTEST SA) + co-workers for technical assistance ; 12. TEST PLAN: -.'27.11.1985 . l 13. TEST REPORT: B.I. 295 / 20.08.1986 14. ENVIRON. QUAL.: II;S atmosphere resistance - cone. 18-22 ppm; temp. 40-50 deg C; rel. humidity 70-80% test duration 21 days 15. TEST DATE: 06.1986 16. INPUT DIRECTION: Triaxial independent inputs 17. TEST TYPE: - test frequency range: 3-31 Hz - continuous sine test - 10 cycles at each testing frequency - 1/2 octave spaced test frequencies - 5 (five) OBE - 1 (one) SSE 18. FUNCTION MONITORED: - before test and during OBE: - phase current (idle running) - absorbed input power (idle running) - before and during SSE: - insulation resistance 19. ACCEPT CRITERIA: - no abnormal voltage or spurious operation - no structural damages - noise level < 77 dB at a distance of 1 m - vibration velocity •-' 1.8 mm/s 20. RESONANT SEARCH: no resonant frequency was found within the frequency range ofl-r33Uz. - used value of damping ratio: 4% 21. TEST MOUNTING: - Ox & Oy: wall, on an L shaped support - Oz: floor, on the same support 22. ANCHORAGE: - 4 bolts M8x25, nuts, washers and Grower washers - for the motor - 4 bolts Ml0x75, nuts, washers and Grower washers - for the support 23. DAMAGE: none 24. COMMENTS: - support's amplification factor fa= 1,1 - RRS and test sequence as required by NTRG 189/83 - the TRS envelops the RRS shaped for a percentage of critical damping of 4% Anoxa 3 Pagj0/20 POZ'ITIA DE MONTAJ A MOTOARELOR PE CELE 3 DIRECT)}.

~~/////Z//7/7 Fig.2 •~~

~~Fig. 3~~

~~/. Merger \//branict ?• b/spoe/fiv 2. -d/'spoa/V/^/ c/e crs 4. Wo/or cfe Anexa 1 'l CUIT AKl«H:x?LOAIY<\ AiiTIIffii G 139 AGTIOMARII AK^TuRXIDR DKODSTA TUi^liU oBVSRI-K " Fila 3/2~~

~~r : : ''' ' f% •-.'; ••.>""::rlr>^U"-:. ,•> ffabelul 3~~

~~P n a . •• •'*-.. •• ?* •ip.r ".. M min 'iTIPUL; MOTORULUl kW rot/tnin In " Mn- Mn~~

~~•;f-- • ;•:•?.-..•-• r^yt*;,. .=/-*;-v;'''/i...-ji^''.1'.;.; 2 p = 4 ." 1500.-•r'M!-1':^f:-"-•'• -'-'Vvi-'v-'-i--'-'~~

~~ASAD 80a-4 0,55 1350 64 0,68 •2.2 1400 -is- ASAD132M-4- 5,5 1450 86 0,76 2,2~~

~~Fig.1~~

~~2//2~~

*';'? ""•.. 1. FORM ID: VCP.001. 2. GENERIC CLASS: Air Operated Valves 3. GENERAL EQUIPMENT TYPE: Pneumatic Control Valve 4. SPECIFIC EQUIPMENT TYPE: - work pressure lObar . - control pressure 1.5-10bar - nominal diameter 4mm - valve position normally closed - spring reseted valve 5. MANUFACTURER STANDARDS: CSG 3/86 + Changes 1 and 2 6. MANUFACTURER / MODEL: I.E.P. AM. Birlad / G - VCP 3/2 7. SIZE [mm]: 55 x 36 x 20 8. WEIGHT [kg]: 0.300(esl.) 9. ELEVATION [mm]: 10 (est.) 10. SOURCE OF INFO: Seismic test 11. TEST ORGANISATION: Lab. INCREST, Lab. I.C.P.E.-L.C.C.N.E. 12. TEST PLAN: 20A/7.02.1987 13. TEST REPORT: B.I. 10015/7.03.1987 14. ENVIRONMENT QUALIFICATION: -cyclic humid heat test: - 2 cycles, 12+12 h each, +40 deg C & return to 20 deg C, rel. humidity 90% -vibration test: - a=3g, 1 h, f= 12; 18; 25; 40; 55 Hz, without control signal & 1 h, same frequencies & acceleration with 10 bar control signal -shattering test: - a=lg; f^lOO shatt./min; 40 min - alter each test airtightness and functioning have to be checked. 15. TEST DATE: 03/1987 16. INPUT DIRECTION: single axis 17. TEST TYPE: - continuous sine test - 14 cycles at each testing frequency - 1/2 octave spaced test frequencies - test frequency range 1-33 Hz - 5 (five) OBE along each axis - 1 (one) SSE along each axis 18. FUNCTIONS MONITORED: - air-tightness of the pneumatic circuit was monitored before, during and after the seismic test. 19. ACCEPT CRITERIA: - proper air tightness of the pneumatic circuit. 20. RESONANT SEARCH: - no resonant frequencies found in 1-33 Hz frequency range - the natural frequencies of the system - above 33 Hz 21. TEST MOUNTING: - vertical: -floor, on intermediate support - horizontal (s/s, fb): -wall, on intermediate support 22. ANCHORAGE: - flange bolted on shaking-table (M26xl,5) - intennediate support bolted on flange (4 screws MIO and nuts) - specimen bolted on support (2 screws M4 and nuts ) 23. DAMAGE: - no structural damage 24. COMMENTS: -Required qualification spectra (Ref. CSG 3/86) were table input spectra. A loss of control pressure was noticed at one of the two tested valves. This loss had no influence on valve operating condition and air-tightness of the control circuit is not an accept criterion. Only one intermediate support was used, on three different positionings, in order to test specimen along each axis. W.I.Et, CU O'C^ANDA PI^'J^/.-XCA Til" G VCP 3/2

~~R p 7 VVV A~~

~~Piese de schimh r'ecorhdnefoJe". I Gornihrd OR~~

~~G VCP 3/2 i I 4. DODDDO. IL CU C0I5A1IDA n.So G 33-87 TIP C, VCP 3/2 Flla 3/4~~

~~ill~~

~~-£t-i>- vn:~~

~~Piese de schimb recomaridak i- Gorniluro OR 200QJ360- Z-GamihrS OR 2000.0360 3 - Arc campresfe 3802 0234~~

~~j ?•: !~~

~~VCP 3/2 I 4.4. / 000000 q. Z. . TIP G VCP 3/2' -20/.23~~

~~iMin im)^ n J nni vr~~

~~/8O~~

~~< f C C( < ( < it ( ( r i ( i t < 2O~~

~~11.1~~

1 I'"' " I \ I I 1 I I I fTI f /< / / fff /oo Ansomblu supori pfr. verificore lo seism. io/ • OL 50 groshne 40 pn'ndereo produsyJuf se foce prin gaun'Je de $5 cu Zsuruhuri cu cop hex. M If x 50 si p/'uJrfe hsxocjonote M h- . Fig. 2. NE' Clb cOMPARATIE INTRE SPECTRUL DE RASPUNS SPECTRUL DE RASPUNS DE 'iNCERCARE-

~~1 I UiA.1 UU 1/ bo nr. h/rfncercarsj incercaru \ndsurti nr.\7r°ctava~~

~~i 111 yr^.jjj.\i in: JULiii \~~

~~hp CNE- "J COMPARAjiE INTRESPECTRUL DE RASPUNS~~

~~CERUT-&CtSISPECTRUL DERASPUNS DE 'iNCERCARE- j~~

~~MS1// V~~

y/^r 76 <&(•'* i f l.FORM. ID.: CHIL001 2. GENERIC CLASS - Chillers 3. GENERAL EQUIPMENT TYPE- Honeycomb type chiller for power transform with forced oil and air circulation 4. SPECIFIC EQUIPMENT TYPE - nominal dissipated power 150 kw - protection class T2 - nr. of electrofan groups 2 pcs - total caloric transfer surface 96 nip - oil volume 701 - chiller mass whitout oil 900 kg - power consumption - idle running: 6.2 kw: - loaded: 6.4 kw

5. MANUFACTURER STANDARDS: SI 49839/09.11.92 6. MANUFACTURER MODEL: SC TRAFO Electroputere SA/RCTF - 150 7. SIZE [mm]:2400 x 1600 x 750 8. WEIGHT [kg]: 970 9. ELEVATION [mm]: 300. 10. SOURCE OF INFO: Seismic test 11. TEST ORGANIZATION: EUROTEST SA 12. TEST PLAN: 9/8.04.93 13. TEST REPORT: RI 99 23.04.93. 14. ENVIRONMENT QUALIFICATION.:vibration test:- triaxial. independent - horizontal acceleration 0.6 both axis - vertical acceleration 0.- - sine-sweep. 1 octave/m 20 cycles, 10-55Hz 15. TEST DATE: 04T993. 16. INPUT DIRECTION: tnaxial. independent 17. TEST TYPE: - Monofrequency. sine - beat test - Test frequency range l-33Hz, 1/2 octave spaced, plus resonant frequencies. 15 cycles each sine beat. 3.5 sec paused, total duration including paus 123 sec. - 5 OBE -1 SSE IS. FUNCTION MONITORED: After test: - insulation resistance and dielectrical rigidity: air tightness 19. ACCEPT CRITERIA: No structural failure. Measured values of insulation resistenee and dielectrical rigidity and air tightness as required by SI 49S39 20. RESONANT SEARCH: direction vertical longitudinal lateral mesuring point pump end 16.5 16.5;22;29 16.74;22:23.4;29 casing 23.4:27.3 - 17.75 - damping ratio not calculated 21. TEST MOUNTING: - floor; on 4 supports - one for each corner 22. ANCHORAGE: - supports on table: 4 bolts M20 - specimen on supports: 4 bolts M20 x 105, washers and Grower washers 23. DAMAGE: None 24. COMMENTS: - Test sequence as required by: CHANGE A. SI nr 49839 fig 182 - Support construction: square plate 500 x 500 x 50 [mm] fixed on 4 bossages. Total support height 135 [mm]. ICMET DESEN DE INSTALARE T4 55366 Di . ; CRAIOVA BATERIE DE RACIRE TIP RTCF .ISO Editial 10.07.1991 "1

~~L. 505 _ 18~~

~~Caracteristici tehnice ; -CGpacitcte de rdcire: j min150Kw -Puterea COnsu.TiGta In gel: 6,2Kw -Puterea consumGta n sar-~~

-MQSG neta fare ulei: max9C0Kg -Voiumul de ulei: 70 I i -Elecfropompa tip- ERMO100J -Eiectroventijator ^.o- VAT?5D0Vv -Presiunea Tn rdcitor ia pro-: i ba hidrau'icG: 5bcrri ; ! -Suprafcta totala de tran- ; ,-•• .

~~I r r~~. v~r~~

~~r ..... ' ---••.- ---- • . U- !~~

~~•• ,''- / • •'• ...-•' y •-~~

~~" • - 1 . ' 1 \! . | ... X..~~

~~.... t f-~~

~~T I • A~~

~~! J~~

~~.'" : «• 'HUtltr y(G ICMET DESEN DE INSTALARE T4 55366 Di CRAIOVA BATERIE DE RACIRE TIP RTCF .150 Editial 10.07.1991 ~~1~~

~~1595~~

~~- 505 _ 1350£~~

~~Caracteristici tehnice ; -CGpacitcte de rdcire: j min150Kw !~~

~~-Puterea consurnGta In gel: ; •V - V // v •/, \- 6,2Kw, -Puterea consuniGta n sar-; ana: 7,4Kw \ -Masa neta fcra ulei: <~~

~~-Voiumul de ulei: 70 I I -Elecfropompa tip- ERMO10CI -Electroventijator u\o- VATPSDOVv -Presiunea Tn racitor la pro-! ba hidraulicG: 5 bcrri~~

~~-Suprafaja totala de tran- !••. ! sfer caloric-. 9 6 m^ ! i , ! -Nivel global de zgo-mot: I I max83+3 dB~~

~~l\/-.r I -Ota ; L"t:, I~~

~~isc~~

~~rri Z /e/-?J i •'<.:•,v.ta~~

~~Z.C:\-i i i-j I •> • "•~~

~~ttf i \ ^:% q 'I a ill | ! i i~~

~~• • •, '•*•'~~

~~. •) *. *' I '• : : r . • • 5 tl "I 5 i •* i ' * ' < J 3 S""iI i i i '.\' V. i I ij j~~

~~. ' ' i \ • ;. • '•' ' • ' ' 0.CO0CO £5. COCO 50.C\XO 1S5.000 seconds~~

~~axa longitudinal a~~

~~! i i I~~

~~5 ; V I "rrnm- trr~~

~~..4 .i.J-. n ii , - J | i!i j- M \ \ i L-H I If! | W I ! ~r s~~

~~_l I I I I I I ! I 1—1 1—J L. *- ' • * ' ' 1 1 ! ' -• ,',~~

~~o.cccoo " ' sccondi iO:49 axa verticals cz--r.rr.-5o~~

~~! > 4 11 U: •> i' I s II I I I I~~

~~,,..,., • • -it' • > S« - - - - t I 1! I ! 1 I I I~~

~~ICMLT - f:.'.CIiC.;< TIP KrJH-~~

~~F/'q. {O 1 ill* 'FREQ RES? H2 - tifiG' ~ •^'"•HfJIH Y: 20'.0dB 4048 X: O.OOHz + 200H2- - •-••••:•• •*(!•• 431 C ]~~

~~•.•*•• • '• - I~~

~~f * ,~~

~~: -'•»• ---~~

~~\fb (00 . /(SX? • 2oo 1'liO ' REZGHHNTE' SUPORT S?,T.R3CIxE-CRR'!0VR-VEr.T-Ci~~

TO TV 1"1 C - i IM « •• core RL-H •*. ~' .* 11 UClriT : in., ii-y r' <" U I' n J f FT t r^ flVERfiG ING- rcrifx °1500 <1 •» » V •*_ » : 1 i V U N\ V rrin iuunz iF = 250mHz AT'l.SSais w «. *« i k. A corn pcopo wEIuHIIHG1 l\= L . U HBHHIHG

~~CH.fi: 10V + DC-DIRECT !T:DftTU 1 riAU/i"; •mi «> »' I t » CH.B-. : *. • ' D I' I 4 1 G N E R ri T 0 R r \ •• !' 11 •! y f N11 • n N • *• »•~~

~K 9. l.FORMID: DSW001 2. GENERIC CLASS: Low voltage switchgear 3. GENERAL EQUIPMENT TYPE: Double microswitch ex-proof 4. SPECIFIC EQIUPMENT TYPE: - nominal voltage 380Vac - nominal current 4A - nominal frequency 50 Hz - protection class: IP 54 5. MANUFACTURER STANDARDS: NTR-G 131/83 STR-G131/A,B,CJD-85 6. MANUFACTURER/ MODEL: Electrocontact Botosani/6145 Gil 7. SIZE: [mm] 180x110x210 8. WEIGHT: [kg] 2.4 (est) 9. ELEVATION: [mm] 100 (est.) 10. SOURCE OF INFO: Seismic test 11. TEST ORGANIZATION: ICPE-LCCNE (nowadays EUROTEST SA) + co-workers for technical assistance 12. TEST PLAN: 59/3.06.86. 13. TEST REPORT: BI 1482/9.07.1986 14. ENVIRONMENT QUALIFICATION: - vibration resistance test - thermal test: -cold: -25 deg C. 16 h -dry heat: *-55 deg C. 16 h -humid heat: 6 cycles 12+12h at 40 deg C - salty mist 15. TEST DATE: 06/1986 16. INPUT DIRECTION: single axis 17. TEST TYPE: - continuous sine lest - 1.2 octave spaced lest frequencies, 16 cycles at each testing frequency - test frequency range: 1-33Hz - 5OBE •+• one SSE along each axis 18. FUNCTION MONITORED: - during test: -the electrical working - the microeircuit breakes duration (<5msec) - the electric contacts state - after test: - the proper working of the microswitch - mechanic and electric work during 15 manoeuvres at 380V/4A 19. ACCEPT CRITERIA: - circuit breakes signaled by the LED - proper mechanic and electric working during 15 manoeuvre at 380V/4A - no microcircuitbreakes -5msec - no abnormal voltage - no spurious operation - no structural failure 20. RESONANT SEARCH: No resonant frequency was found in the frequency range 1-3 3 Hz with a sweep rate of 2 octaves/min. 21. TEST MOUNTING: - floor; with 2 mainstays 22. ANCHORAGE: - support on table: 2 bolts M6 - specimen on support: 1 bolt M6 23. DAMAGE: None 24. COMMENTS: - RRS and test sequence as required by STRG/C-85-fig.4. Discrete RRS and TRS are established in l-33Hz frequency range (11 steps for each OBE and 10 steps for SSE) , ,cM. _ JNSTffUTUL OE CERCETARE STItNflHCA $1 WGfNERIE Nr. buU«n z/J TtHNOLOGICA PENTRU INDUSTHIA ELECTROT6HNJCA

~~OBSSRYAIII SI HBg~~

Avind in vodera e& pro&usal mi este eahilltrat static, for£a re- zultata din. eonapunarea ecoator forte ereasS wn xocaaent oar© aolioi- ta^urulmrllo 1 de fisare* Arind In rsdere c3 la e tneerear* anteri oar& aceate funiburi »-au clSbit permltind amplifioarea aolloitS- rilor seisznlce aplicato produsulul# as recooandS. prlndarea lul in 4 euniburl (douS pe fieoare parte vezi figura 2)« I INSTITUTUL DE CERCETARI PENTRU jNDUSTRIA ELECTROTEHNICA Pag

~~S3E - dizeofcia Oi'~~

~~1,017 l,42o 2fol3 2,041 4,o3o 5,683 3,oo5 11,263 ot2o4 0,538 1.035 1*592 2.372 >291 3.138 +2 +2 +4 +9 +5 3.044 +1 S33 - OY 22,743 32. 3,o83 3.o64 +0~~

~~CB2 - diroo^io 02~~

~~f j/fls/ I,oo9 l,41o 2,ool 2,019 3.996 5,639 8,ol4 11,207 o.574 I,o83 1,553 1,555 1,551 1,547 l,57o +0 +4 +4 • +3 +3 +5 0B3 - 03~~

~~16,o45 22,762 32,loo a TK7 1,579 1,513 l,55o ^07, +5 +1 • \ +3~~

~~3GS -direcfcia 02~~

~~l,4-oo 1,904 2,0oo 3,965 5,596 11,232 a L^ o,2oo 0,543 I,o27 1,6o7 2-399 3,27o 3.043 +3 4.X +7 ' G03.- OZ~~

~~16.020 32,o66 j 3,o75 3,oo6 V..^/ +u produ3ol© ou aoidilo 544,546 caro' aufoot izjcercato puaotolor 1,2,3 din £is,4 32SG 131/O-Q5* 0B3 - diraofcLa QX(544), 0Y(546)~~

~~o,994 1,397 ! 1.935 2,847 4.O29 5,659 8,ol5 11,283 0,213 o,572 1 I,o07 1,563 1.505 1,571 1.550 1,581 8 ' 9 I 4 +S •4" 0B3 - diroot~~

~~| 16,o43: 22,736 32,049 ku; 1,537 • 1,522 1,541 Srffi/I •! M _ tNSTKUTUL OE CERCETARE ^TUNIlFlCA $» tNGJNERIE Nr. ' T£»TNOLOGICA PEN7RU INDUSTRIA ElECTROTiEHNJCA fog~~

~~SSS - dlrac^ia 0X(544), OY (346)~~

~~2,ol4 2,841 4,026 5,675 8,o23 11,293 I,o3o 1,611 2,4oo 3.317 3,147 3.067 •3 L tl9 .±5 _*2 SS£ - CK(544), OY ($46)~~

~~032 - dlreo^ia 0Y(544), 0X^546)~~

~~I,ol9 1,424 2,o2o 2,849 4,o42 5,693 8,oo3 11,294 o,2o6 0,572 1,074 1,552 1,569 1.553 553 •3 V7 •3 •4 h OBS - dlreotila 0Y(544), 02(546)~~

~~33B « diroc^ia 0Y(544), QX(546)~~

~~lfol3 1,421 2fol5 2,844 4,o31 5,687 7,993 11,255 o,533 I,ol6 I,6o2 2,4ol 3,292 3.184 385 •1 7 & +2 ±7O i S3S - 0X(546)~~

~~15,996 31.933 3,lo6 3,128 +4 +4 OBS - dlrectiia OZ~~

~~I,ol6 l,42o 2,ol4 2,839 4,o2o 11,292 O,2o2 O.573 l89 lf567 1,582 1*618 1,612 •. y . 0U3 - GZ~~

~~16to2 31,977 1,617 1,497~~

~~SS£ - diroo^io OZ~~

I,ol5 1,428 2,o25j 2,357 4,o46 5,691 8,o3o U.206 o,2o5 o,531 I,o24 1,616 2,421 3,3o3 3,184 3.132 +2 til 2 1. FORM ID: GAT 001 2. GENERIC CLASS: Batteries 3. GENERAL EQ. TYPE: Stationary batteries with tube plates 4. SPECIFIC EQ. TYPE: - nominal voltage: 16 V dc - nominal capacity: C10=350 All (discharge in 10 hours) 5. MANUFACTURER STANDARDS: NTRG 81/82 6. MANOJFACTURER'MODEL: ACUMULATORUL - Bucuresti / 16 S - 350 7. SIZE: 201 x 104 x 565 mm 8. WEIGHT: 243 kg 9. ELEVATION (CG): 280 mm 10. SOURCE OF INFO.: seismic test 11. TEST ORGANIZATION: ICPE-LCCNE (nowadays EUROTEST SA) + co-workers for technical assistance 12. TEST PLAN: "Acumulatorul" - 05.1986 13. TEST REPORT: B.I. 2411/13.11.1986 14. ENVIRON. QUAL: - \hS action test: cone. 10 ppm; temp. 23-27 deg C; rel. humidity 70-80° o; duration 21 days - climatic test: cold: -5 deg Cr 24 h dry heat: MO deg C, 24 h humid com. heat: -M0 deg C, 93°o rel humidity 15. TEST DATE: 06.09.1986 16. INPUT DIRECTION: single axis (i.'b. ss. v) 17. TEST TYPE: - tvb & s/s: continuous sine 5 cycles/test frequency, test frequency spaced: 1/3 octave I -=- 2 Hz 1/2 octave 2 -=-33 Hz - v : sine sweep for 3-33 Hz manual operated shaking table for l-3Hz - 5 OBE & 1 SSE on each axis IS. FUNCTION MONITORED: - 180 A*;*'_" output current intensity for 5 sec, during OBE and SSE - output voltage, before & alter test - discharge capacity and current intensity - after test - air tightness - alter test 19. ACCEPT CRITERIA: No abnormal voltage or spurious operation, no structural failure 20. RESONANT SEARCH: f/b: 9.24H/; 12.766Hz s/s:9.338Hz: 12.691 Hz v: not measured - used damping ratio: 5°o 21. TEST MOISTING: rack: floor mounting 22. ANCHORAGE: batteries fixed between two rails bolted (4 M 20 x 80) on the shaking table. stilTened using two supplementary rails bolted on the other two 23. DAMAGE: 24. COMMENTS: - For the vertical axis lest using sine sweep input made resonant frequencies measurement not necessary' - The input for the shaking tables have been calculated in 1CPE- LCCNE (now EUROTEST S A), using the required FRS - FRS have been required by INCERC - The considered damping ratio: 5 % - Horizontal tests have been performed by INCREST - air tightness checking has been required by NTRG 81/82, point 4.1.3

~~/. .. •».~~

~~Fif cfedrica Batorie.~~

~~• A' ' .~~

~~F/Q.2.~~

~~1G S-3ZO /& 5-35o~~

~~f/'a. 3 Dirocfir d& acfionarc. •y.~~

~~I N C E R C echipam enC ACU M u L ATORUL contr.£275/'86 RRS ,TRS peniru n=5% — acceleratia la masa~~

Echipameni INivel excitatie \IDir9Ctie. 16 5-350(0)0) QBE 1 ' - • • vertiCOig. - CALCUL RE5P0MSA- VERIFICAT , DATA REVlZlEl SPEC THE BIL TEMA SEF SECTIE- 0 ing. •27 06. Endctjc/nu iEndcec^u" tu 1386 i* ^i '\c (\f '. Calificare seismica I N C E R C ec'nipcment.ACUMULATQRUL contr.4275/c6

~~RRS , TRS ppniru n= 5 % /2 ,_ accelerate la rnasa 1 ttip.Me ttiiii~~

~~•I 'i •Jfist fill !! i il !i Ml nUT!~~

~~';/ j jj [j Ml I!~~

~~pi-mnmf IlililliiS~~

i I ! iii II I !.i :' B 'til .. Hi ii i! I! jLiiii 1.0' V25" 159 20 "2.52 317 '«r iiW 6.35 ou 10.C312.7015.0 2 G'.S 25.4 32.0'Hz -chipoment ' Nivol excitatioi Direciie verticnlg. 16 S-35Q14QQ1 I OBE; 2 • -' i Kr',TO!l',A Mil. Tl »AA J;ing. L o 27.06. E nac eat*iu 's936

~~•i.,-? -J-.-l/-S fJv/.L'-'ir, 1 t'-f-i' /''~~

~~SPECTRE DE RASFUNSIMPOSE (FRSJ Dir&ctio OriZOHtC1 L^J-UXUii-ljj::!.;~~

~~ill;! hi"W~~

IMPUSE {FRS1 .' : Dirc-c-jGOrizontGld ' l.FORMiD:FSX00i 2. GENERIC CLASS: Instruments (Relays) 3. GENERAL EQUIPMENT TYPE: Electric flow signallizer for potential explosive atlimosphere 4. SPECIFIC EQUIPMENT TYPE: -Operating environment: - normal, corosive. inflammable fluids, - current velocity 0.5... 1 lm/s - fluid temperature: -15degC...+110degC - normal protection degree:±P65 Microswitch: voltage 125Vac 220Vac 48Vdc current 5 A 2 A 1A cos<|> 0.3 0.3 no. of cycles 105 105 105 - max. preasure: 64bar

5. MANUFACTURER STANDARDS: STR-MIP 21425''87 6. MANUFACTURER MODEL: IPEA Ploiesti SEC 15 7. SIZE: [mm] 160x160x110 8. WEIGHT:[kg] 2.7 9. ELEVATION: [mm] 60 (est.) 10. SOI TRCF, OF INFO: Seismic test 11. TEST ORGANIZATION: ICPE-LCCNE (nowadays EUROTEST SA) - co-workers for tecluiical assistance 12. TEST PLAN: 478 17.06.88 13. TEST REPORT: BI 5378 9.11.88 14. ENVIRONMENT QUALIFICATION.: - climatic qualification: - 16 h at -25 deg C (rd: STAS 8393/2-77) - 16 h at +-55 deg C (ref STAS 8393/3-77) - 6 cycles at 40 deg C• (12 f 12 h humid cyclical heat) ref. STAS 8393.5-81 - in the first 15' after test, specimen must fulfill the requirements of points 4.5. 4.6. 4.9. 2.16 from STR-MIP 12425 '87 - FLS atmosphere resistance qualification - cone. 8-12 ppm; temp. 23-27 deg C; rel. humidity 70-80°o; duration 21 days 15. TEST DATE: 06 1988 16. INPUT DIRECTION: single axis - horizontal - fh 17. TEST TYPE: - continuous sine. 20 cycles test irequency - 1 2 octave spaced lest frequencies. l-33IIz - 5 OBK T 1 SSE 18. FUNCTION MONITORED: -before, during and alter test: - microintorrupiions detection and duration 19. ACCEPT CRITERIA: - no abnormal suppiy voltasie. no spurious operation, no structural failure. Acceptance tlireshold of interruptions duration, 0.5s.(ref. STR-MIP 12425/87) 20. RESONANT SEARCH: No resonance in the test frequency range (l-33Hz) 21. TEST MOUNTING: - floor, on a frame 22. ANCHORAGE: - bolted (4 screws Nil6 - nuts + washers) on a frame support, bolted on the shaking table. 23. DAMAGE: - no structural damage - functional failure appeared after the first OBE 24. COMMENTS: - The two specimens failed the test, at first OBE. - Measured microintemiption duration have been over 0.5s (threshold value) - During test, a pressure of lbar has simulated a current velocity of 6,7nvs. At this pressure, measurements before seismic test have indicated very small interruptions duration. (25-30 ms) - The accepted tlireshold value has been exceeded for frequency range 7-3 3 Hz - The shaking table input spectra (not RRS) have been required by STR-MIP 12425 87. \'\ SEMNALIZATOR ELECTRIC DE :URG~E~RE PI" ! FATMOSFERE POTENTIAL EXPLOZ1VE SI "G ' i

~~(4-JHE3r-~~

~~SCHEMA ELECTRUA \. CORP APARAT 2. DiSPOZiTIV ,DE^ RACORDARE 3. DISPOZITIV ' REGLAJ 4. FLANSA i . 5- ELEMENT SESIZOR~~

~~R ELECTRIC 'DE CURGERE IN CONSTRUCTIE ANTIEXPLOZ1VV S!"G" TIP SEC E* G-'F~~

~~- -^ •"•"• FIG.5 _, _. i: ./v^iLMi '_-K_ LLLC TRIG LJc LUKULKC I--I. >-!ATMOSFERg--PgTENTIAL'EXPLOIIVE SI " G " PAG.~~

~~SCHEMA E'LECTRICA 1 CORP APARAT 2 DISPOZITIV DE RACORDAR . 3.PRESETUPA 4.INEL 5. ELEMENT SESI7OR~~

~~5'>'NALlZATOR ELECTRIC DE CURGERE IN CONSTRUCTIE ANTIEXPLOZIV SI "G" TIP SEC E>;G - 2F~~

~~••--". FIG. 4 i \'t our-i.sALIZAlUK ELECTRIC DSL LUrtGERE Hi. : ' 1ATMOSFERE POTENTIAL FXPLQTVF-SI ,,G".~~

~~SCjjEMA- -ELECTRICA r 1 CORP APARAT . Z CiSPOZlTIV DE RACORDAff: 3 DfSPOZITiV -REG-LAJ FLANSE ELEMENT SESIZOR 0 -.0~~

~~SE?HNAL1ZATOR ELECTRIC-DE CURGERFIN CONSTRUCTIE ANTlEXPLOZiV/ ~~ Si"G" TIP SEC Ex G-1S : ~~ ~ FIG. 3 J-211"-ti'/Jj'.i.M ti ,'..!~~

~~OBE- ox.oy • •••i —.... OBE-07~~

~~4 5 8 _:. 16 .32 ; f(Hz) INTRARE LA MASA VOBE >-•" ^~~

~~F •~~

~~S S E - ox, oy v.'~~

~~SSE-oz~~

~~4 5 8 16 32 '• ••-..=f(Hz)~~

~" -"M ASA" ^S S E < « • t '• • FIG. 1 . 1.FORMID.-RCK001 2. GENERIC CLASS: Instrument Racks 3. GENERAL EQUIPMENT TYPE: 1911 Drawer Rack 4. SPECIFIC EQIUPMENT TYPE: Destined for electrical apparatuses 5. MANUFACTURER STANDARDS: NTRNS-0- Aiiexa4; PO-0000-007-010 6. MANUFACTURER /MODEL: I Automatica Bucuresti / D048-A001 7. SIZE: [nun] 686 x 763 x 2132 8. WEIGHT:[kg] 150 (est) 9. ELEVATION: [nun] 1000 (est.) 10. SOURCE OF INFO: Seismic test 11. TEST ORGANIZATION: ICPE-LCCNE (nowadays EUROTEST SA) - co-workers for technical assistance 12. TEST PLAN: 259/19.06.1986 13. TEST REPORT: BI 5313 26.09.1989 14. ENVIRONMENT QUALIFICATION: - vibration resistance test (ace. lo STAS R 9321-72) - life duration test (ace. to STAS 553 4-80) 15. TEST DATE: 09 1989 16. INPUT DIRECTION: iriaxial. independent & single axis 17. TEST TYPE: Ox.Ov.Oz - continuous sine . monolrequency resonant frequencies - 1 2 octave spaced test frequencies. 5 cycles at each testing frequency - test frequency range: 1 -3311/. - one OBE along each axis Oz:- continuous sine: - test frequency range 1-2.5Hz: -36 octave spaced test frequency - 16 cycles at each test frequency - test frequency range 2.5-33 Hz:- 116 octave spaced test frequency - 16 cycles at each test frequency - one ORK 18. FLECTION MONITORED: - after test: - structural integrity 19. ACCEPT CRITERIA: - no structural failure 20. RESONANT SEARCH:-Ox: 17.96117 : ()y: I2.7IIz Oz - not measured - used value of damping ratio: 4°<> 21. TEST MOUNTING: - iloor 22. ANCHORAGE: - 4 holts Ml 6. nuts, washers and Grower washers 23. DAMAGE: None 24. COMMENTS: - The RRS as required by "Spectra de raspuns 302 - IRNF. DS 20000-030" - The TRS closely envelops the RRS for the considered damping ratio of 4°.i. or

~~62O~~

~~'/7a./ \ - \~~

~~j i 1 i~~

~~•'•'•' • •:' ir':;.~~

~~.1 - Ah- ) I r " n - A2n i 1 At n 1 % • t \ 1 ' i r~~

~~fly. 2 m.e ^~~

• * ' : ' CNE CERNAVODA U1-U5 .'.' SPECTRE DE RASPUNS DE PROIECTARE''. DPAfTDfl r> f '••• / c J J • • ;• .-•••••< r L. / V / r\ cy Z/M opvr} c/t? "oz//Ofr>c/?/2cyr£>-. '••••":L ' ; - < DBE-DIRECT!A \ O/Z/ZOA/TALA • • "-• '- ' COEF. AMORriZA%E=*%\ Pantru SDE valorile hmulresc cu (0,65

~~i'i~~

~~il ! 10~~

~~m •j~~

~~,-i~~

~~j '. ( <_j_'_~~

~~(Ml V r '. -.\i ,-, >^ 1 ; j^ j • _ -\'t~~

\ '••'''"*, fa*

~~/•—•' X. ,~~

~~^A^r- V->JSJO5 COMT1UUU~~

~~I. C. C. V. D.'C.-FiLlALA 1A51 . or-~~

h; AUTOMAV.C^ bUCUK l.FORMID:PRS001 2. GENERIC CLASS: Instruments 3. GENERAL EQ. TYPE: Explosion-proof casing pressostat with membrane atmosphere separator 4. SPECIFIC EQ. TYPE: - Adjusting differential pressure: 3-r25 bar - Fixed differential pressure: 4—40 bar - Contacting error: ±1,32 bar - Highest permissible pressure: 150 bar 5. MANUFACTURER STANDARDS: NTRG 161/83 6. MANUFACTURER/MODEL: LMF-Bucuresti / G-913 7. SIZE: 180x97x87 (mm) 8. WEIGHT: 2 kg 9. ELEVATION (CG): 50 mm (est.) 10. SOLTRCE OF INFO.: seismic test 11. TEST ORGANIZATION: ICPE-LCCNE (nowadays EUROTEST SA) + co-workers for technical assistance 12. TEST PLAN: PI/21.11.1984 & 12.03.1984 13. TEST REPORT: B.I. 899/31.05.1985 14. ENVIRONMENT QUALIFICATION: - vibration resistance test - thermal test: -cold: -25 deg G 16 h -dry heat: H 55 deg C. 16 h -humid heat: 6 cycles 12+12h at 40 deg C - salty mist

15. TEST DATE: 04.1985 16. INPUT DIRECTION: single axis 17. TEST TYPE: - 5 QBE - one SSE for each axis (Ox. Oy. Oz). sine-beat test (10 cycles test frequency) -test frequencies between l-r33 Hz. 1/2 octave spaced - test acceleration: 1.1 times the accelerations required in the test plan 18. Fl"NOTION MONITORED: - before, during and after test: external pressure, microswitch position - before test: commutation acordingto NTRCi 161 83 - during test: contacting error 19. ACCEPT CRITERIA: good functioning, no structural failure, no spurious operation, admissible contacting error values within ± 1.32 bar 20. RESONANT SEARCH: no resonant frequency below 33 Hz 21. TEST MOl TNTI.\G: floor mount, on support 22. ANCHOR AGE: bolted on support 23. DAMAGE: none 24. COMMENTS: - Seismic parameters required by NTRG 161/83 were not achieved within low frequency range (l-=-4 Hz), because of imposed testing installation limitations - Increased acceleration values were used because of the rigid type supports - Three pressostats were tested at the same time, on the same support • •. > • ' f 'T* " *

~~96,3 56,5~~

~~2raco_rauri /V/~. /M7C/U? '/^ VA .€ /~~

~~' P/JrOA/MAA/UA/L~~

~~/o -« norma/?/?c/?k~~

~~I \~~

~~-• comun S ^7~~

~~f/c/.2 1 : •'. Ki.STiYUT'JL I-1'--- ':' :; ••' ••-••• '~~

~~S? N~~

~~- (T l/T~~

~~I <.'i~~

~~i CO CJ i i §x I 1V * ~! v; g \n~~

~~V •~~

~~Ul CO 0~~

~~—I xv~~

~~. IS \~~

~~0 - CM r-v~~

~~)•:• \ i ' \~~

~~._ _U , \ \~~

-1

~~i • *- ;~~

_ J 1. FORM ID: MAN 001 2. GENERIC CLASS: Instruments 3. GENERAL EQUIPMENT TYPE: Pressure gauge 4>60 for automation, with axial head, type G25 4. SPECIFIC EQUIPMENT TYPE: - casing diameter: d>60 - measurement pressure range: 0-2.5 bar - class of accuracy: 1.6 - Bourdon type elastic element - protection: IP 54 5. MANUFACTURER STANDARDS: NTR-G 98/84 6. MANUFACTURER / MODEL: IMF Bucuresti/Type G25 7. SIZE: [mm] O60 x 50 8. WEIGHT: 0.3 kg 9. ELEVATION: [mm] 25 (est.) 10. SOURCE OF INFO: Seismic test 11. TEST ORGANIZATION: ICPE-LCCNE (nowadays EUROTEST SA) - co- workers for technical assistance 12. TEST PLAN: — 13. TEST REPORT: BI 89531.05.1985 14. ENVIRONMENT QUALIFICATION: - vibration resistance test - thermal test: -cold:-25 deg C. 16 h -dry heat: -55 deg C 16 h -humid heat: 6 cycles 12 -12h at 40 deg C 15. TEST DATE: 04/1985 16. INPUT DIRECTION: single axis 17. TEST TYPE: - 5 OBE - one SSF along each axis (Ox.Oy.Oz). sine-beat test (10 cycles, beat) - Test frequencies between 1 -33 Hz. 1 '2 octave spaced -Test acceleration: ! 1 times required acceleration according to NTR-G 1.82 18. FUNCTION MONITORED: none 19. ACCEPT CRITERIA: No structural failure and no spurious operation. 20. RESONANT SEARCH: Because of the small dimensions of manometers, no exploratory search lor resonant irequeneies was performed. 21. TEST MOI TvTING: - floor mounting, on support plate; 22. ANCHORAGE: - screwed on NPT 1 4 tliread manometer (to support), support on shaking table: 4 bolts 23. DAMAGE: None 24. COMMENTS: -Seismic parameters required in NTR-G 98-84 were not achieved. — becausec>f testing installation limitations- within low frequency range (l-4Hz); - Acceleration values were increased because of the rigid type support. - Three manometers mounted on support were tested at the same time.

~~t;i-vr«\! INDUSTIll A KLKCTUCVrr.liNiCA~~

~~•f »^±. INSTITUTUL, DE CEKCETAM PKNTRU. Nr. bulclin INDUSTI'JA ELF.CTROTICHNICA~~

•

~~| , | .. _. ]% .? i 1 — _ 1^ |- j -4 a . 1 1 0 1~~

1 __ H—4- — 1 1 1 a o 1 __J i . 1 ! - t 1 1 I . -L — L 1 • i > . u cV l 1 VI. ' ___ _*» __l I i M .1 1 1 • i • 1 I |\ i ! W 1 ..11 °r ^> - 1 'v; .. 1 | 1 • i ! "^ • 1 i - ! T 1 i I 1 1i —. 1 - -i^

i 1 •* I L_ | J. - l.FORM. ID. TCV001 2. GENERIC CLASS - Instrument Racks 3. GENERAL EQUIPMENT TYPE-Valve supplying capsular panel TCV 4. SPECIFIC EQUIPMENT TYPE - Input voltage 380Vac/50Hz: current: 100A - 2 panel supplying circuits \ protection 1P50 -15 valve supplying circuits 5. MANUFACTURER STANDARDS STR-N 83'85 6. MANUFACTURER' MODEL AUTOMATICA Bucuresti/TCV 7. SIZE [mm] 1500 x 810 x 540 8. WEIGHT [kg] 350 (est) 9. ELEVATION [mm] 600.(est) 10. SOURCE OF INFO: Seismic test 11. TEST ORGANIZATION: ICPE-LCCNE (nowadays EUROTEST SA) + co-workers for technical assistance 12. TEST PLAN:—- 13. TEST REPORT: RI 78'26.01.87. 14. ENVIRONMENT QUALIFICATION.: - fire resistance - shattering test (for transportation): 1 2 h transportation by 30 knvh on a rough way 15. TEST DATE: 12.1986 16. INPUT DIRECTION: single axis 17. TEST TYPE: - Ox, Oy: 5OBE along each axis, continuous sine test (5 cycles) at the test frequencies - test frequencies between i-33Hz. 13 octave spaced, plus resonant frequencies - Oz: - sine-sweep within 2-33Hz range - continuous sine, hand-operated within l-2Hz range - 5 OBE 18. FUNCTION MONITORED: -Before and alter test: input voltage (380V). switches and relays functioning -During test: switches functioning -After test: - insulation resistance and dielectrical . rigidity 19. ACCEPT CRITERIA: No abnormal voltage or spurious operation, no structural failure, switches and relays functioning •*- insulation resistance and dielectrical rigidity according to STR N 83-85 20. RESONANT SEARCH: Ox- 13.375 IIz & 15.25 Hz Oy- 15.25 Hz Oz- not measured - used value of damping ratio: 5°o 21. TEST MOUNTING: tloor mount, on support 22. .ANCHORAGE: bolted 23. DAMAGE: none 24. COMMENTS: Shaking table input values according to RRS 5% damping (appendix of STR-N 83/85). SISTEM SUPORTI SI ACCESORn INSTRUMENT RACK INSTRUMENT RACK SYSTEM REVIZIA :0

~~Denumirea: TABLOU CAPSULAT ALIHENTARE VANE.-TCV xa 7 •^>'-"7 // L " COVPARATIE INTRE SPECTRUL DE RASPUNS CERUT-RRSSf SPECTRLl DE RASPUNS DE INCERG ARE -TRS >-~~

~~octc\. \±T7crttani Nrlhcerccm. incorccm I/CPE S CCMPASAT/E INTRE SFECTRUL DE R-ASFUNS I -RRSS! SPECTRLZDEfMSPUNS DE IKCERCARE-TRS -~~

~~A'/Ve/ j Directly \N9N:irat FUttQt jrbci r.i Nr.'ncercc.n:\ Incarccrii I I nnsirc r.r\ n~~

~~1 1 !~~

~~I - i j [ • : ! i •: ) f ] —i i : i ; i • ; ! i i \ 13 1 1 . i t '• ! ! : I i \ i i * * - - i i i •! i * • i ! I i • • 1 i I : i • i • V i • 1 ! i 1 j ! ;•~~

~~1 1 i i 1 '• • i : i t i f t ; 1 I ; ! ! : \ f~~

~~i :•'!,- j i i I i ' | i ? .1 j i'j j~~

~~i • i t i I 1 • -1 % ! j ' 1 1 i i • i I . 1~~

~~i I j : • i I~~

~~t • 1 i i ! i i , • - 1 1 i L 4 j j > \ i I -- - H "r*i—r~- —i i • j i t j i i • J 1 1 i . 11 ; ! i • • i 1 . : -i 1 i i : i . • t ; • ( f ; i { 1 ' ' 1 j\ i -r V \y~~

~~( \ i ; —»—•• - \6 — f y,—- i 1 1 1 1 r ±111 "I" j i , i 3 2 u i 2 fl • Ft~~

~~/.V rnmt (Jfjn - V(;rifiujf l rj «../~~

~~Calificare seismica : INCERC echipament,,AUTOMATlCA c. £338 /'86 RRS ,TRS pentru n=5% 2 — acceleratie la'masa m/As -~~

~~FIG. 1 Echir>ament Nivel excita:i< Directie~ TC7 0B£ 1 verticala~~

Eracoanu Siancu 1. FORM ID-.SBX 001 2. GENERIC CLASS: Panel Boards / Switchboards 3. GENERAL EQUIPMENT TYPE: Ex Signals box 4. SPECIFIC EQIUPMENT TYPE: - Input voltage: knob: 300Vac lamp: 220Vea - Thermal nominal current: 6 A - Knob nominal current: 1A - Protection: IP 54 5. MANUFACTURER STANDARDS: NTRG 137/1983 6. MANUFACTURER / MODEL: I. ELECTROCONTACT Botosani/7020 GI-1 7. SIZE: [mm] 305x114x110 8. WEIGHT: 7Kg (est) 9. ELEVATION: [mm] 50 (est.) 10. SOURCE OF INFO: Seismic test 11. TEST ORGANIZATION: ICPE-LCCNE (nowadays EUROTEST SA) ~ co-workers for technical assistance 12. TEST PLAN: PI /'26.11.1985 13. TEST REPORT: BI 1386 30.06.19S6 14. ENVIRONMENT QUALIFICATION: - shattering: a-lOg: f=l-3 Hz; no=4000 - H2S action test: 100 ppm; 23-27 deg C; 70-80V-O rel. humidity - themial test: -cold: -25 deg C, 16 h -dry heat: -r55 deg C. 16 h -humid heat: 6 cycles 12+12h at 40 deg C - salty mist 15. TEST DATE: 11-12/1985 16. INPUT DIRECTION: single axis 17. TEST TYPE: - Continuous Sine Test. 5 QBE and one SSE along each axis - Test frequencies between 1-33Hz, 1/2 octave spaced, plus the resonant frequency 18. FUNCTION MONITORED: After test: - lamps functioning at 220Vac - dielectric rigidity in cold. dry. warm and wamp slade (voltage 2.5 Yae.lmin) 19. ACCFPT CRITERIA: No abnormal voltage and no spurious operation, no staictural failure. Measured values of dielectrical rigidity according to STAS 553-4/1980 20. RESONANT SEARCH: Oz: appr. 16.4IIz Ox. Oy - no resonant frquencies - damping ratio: not calculated 21. TEST MOUNTING: - wall mounting, on support 22. ANCHORAGE: - 4 bolts M6 23. DAMAGE: None 24. COMMENTS: - The three specimens (20,21,24 series) have been tested at the same time using 4 configuration: 1. Ox: 20,21.24 2. Oz: 20,24 3. Oy: 21,20 4.Oy:24;Oz:21

fc.cel.fgl" Er.lgll.3. • "",:;.• PKUDUSj Cuti» da seniulizare Ex ——r - •• "' 1.399' " •1.211• '?y>-\ rtr.fabricaUei 21/85 ; 24/03 *. 20/83 , 1.541 •t.ni " 1.1141 •I.141 • .;••/: fipul mcercarau da v«\ificare seisiuca. (0BEi_

~~; ;: r 1.595 •Mil "~ . Kr.incercan J ' ; . ' 3 • '• : .\ : r ^^'Vi...V; '" . 1.5*1" •l.oSI t 6 i-'il " 1.54k •8.851 "-'*'-. Oaroctiai Ox.0x.0x • .^,:v;i:;; ^v"\-.. " ...-•,.~~

~~Data: : •« : ; 'A:- - ^^"^teyfej '^V^HA-. ^-. • •~~

~~IFr. Hul Accel • >9l tr.lqW -•-' • :. • ':• ...... t 1 — ...... j ! 11.297 1.57? " '•f.'08t 1 16 .035 " 1.531 •1.011 1 22.755 1.5(15 •1.611 1 31 ,936 .4« -I.OOl -•'~~

•!

de Ex "Cod 7020G IFr. Ihil Actei ,lg) • ..Hf.f*bricaW»l 21/05 I 24/05 ! 20/C5 . 1 1 .093 0.397 t|,2|| 1 1 ,4H ( .540 M.I4I 1 2.007 1.394 ' •».3?l' 1 2,b3) . 2.959 M.41I . . ap.iucarcarii *•• ' I'". 1 4 .013 2.972 tti.791 1 5 .fetiB 3 *<3 «t.(4l Ux.Ux.Ox ' 1 8 .029 2.997 -J.0I1'

*''. •>••**'» •'• 7

~~Accel.Igl~~

~~3.385 •0.311 3.814 ti.en 3.174 •1.171 4,617 STHNT1FICA Şl .TEHNICA~~

•l * : '.... fftQbUS i Cutie de sennxlizăre £x Cod 7020G ficcel.Ig] i V; • «r.fabricaţie: 24/85 ; 20/85 8.424 •8.221 ,4/ : L':v.;;*.:-..fipui :*,••'* x i «o -vs.' rf fci.s «ei Snisa " tl)6£) 1.117 ««.121 'iiîill r

~~... • -.. i ,•- -~~

~~. LrtZ i~~

~~«D.G3i "1.698 •1.201 1.499 -O.b-Jl 1.501 il.bOl~~

~~.Cutia tx~~

~~1 1.DJ2 •0.241 : .414 •I.U! Tipul inc«rc»rui d» v«rtfior« «o)«nlca (SSE) •B.Sil 3.250 •1.761 14.010 3.304 • 1.121 Directiai Qz.Qz. •J.24I h nil i.2S3 <0.2tl Datai 03.I2.1VQS~~

3.314 î.ît? 3 4«3 •0.431 4.334 H. «31 1. FORM ID: LVP001 2. GENERIC CLASS: Switchboards 3. GENERAL EQUIPMENT TYPE: Low voltage panel 4. SPECIFIC EQUIPMENT TYPE: 220 d.c. & 220 a.c.. 50Hz 5. MANUFACTURER STANDARDS: STR N 83-85 - Appendix 1 6. MANUFACTURER / MODEL: AUTOMATICA, PL 19 7. SIZE: [mm] 800x800x1000 8. WEIGHT: 200 kg (est.) 9. ELEVATION: [mm] 400 (est.) 10. SOURCE OF INFO: Seismic test 11. TEST ORGANIZATION: ICPE-LCCNE (nowadays EUROTEST SA) + co-workers for technical assistance 12. TEST PLAN:-/14.10.86 13. TEST REPORT: RI 75/22.01.87. 14. ENVIRONMENT QUALIFICATION.: - fire resistance - shattering test (for transportation): 1/2 h transportation by 30 km/h on a rough way 15. TEST DATE: 09-12/1986 16. INPUT DIRECTION: single axis 17. TEST TYPE: Ox & Oy axis - Continuous Sine Test (5 cycles at the testing frequency) range: l-33Hz.L'3 octave spaced plus resonant frequency. - 5 OBE along each axis. Oz axis - Sine-Sweep: 2-33Hz - Continuous Sine: 1-2Hz 18. FUNCTION MONITORED: Before and after test: - input voltage - proper working of switches and relay After test: - insulation resistance and dielectrical rigidity During test: - the proper working of power supply circuits 19. ACCEPT CRITERIA: No abnormal voltage and spurious operation, no structural failure. Measured values of insulation resistance and dielectrical rigidity required by STR N 83-85 20. RESONANT SEARCH: Ox-15.73Hz & 27.8Hz Oy-13Hz & 30.125Hz Oz - not measured -damping ratio 5°o 21. TEST MOUNTING: - floor mounting 22. .ANCHORAGE: - 4 bolts M10. nuts and washers 23. DAMAGE: None 24. COMMENTS: - Shaking table input values according to RRS 5% dumping. (Appendix of STR N 83-85) - TRS closely envelops the RRS. MEbERE DIN FAJK

~~iOQ JQSL ±L! I~~

~~700 -r r _row BlSl~~

~~JtLiTfi J580~~

~~_. 520_ * •> i "VT7- ". ..J HSO1~~

~~i 350 Q • •*/• —~~

~~: Et~~

~~SUOJ i25D I ® £/8T 1 0 150~~

~~320 32o lo :•:: f~~

~~Simboi b ecu pare~~

~~PBOf-r P&16~~

~~A/5/6 ZI W •* H O/J/3 .<• ®~~

~~worn:~~

~~Supori sir cteme 3 // 5 Tb Pr- HO. /o/. o 2 7~z Tb Pr. PU02O -/?/•/"~~

~~Masa Nr. «au STA5 6oc Obsenaki Makrial neta~~

~~Qi-t?l • k *^ *s tti • 5^P int}. K ?^no.u 3-3M220 ho CHE CERUAVODA • Lucr.«) PLAN ECHIPKRE PUPITRU~~

~~0115 COMPARAŢIE INTRE SPECTRUL DE RĂSPUNS CERUT-RRS ŞlSPECTRUL DE RĂSPUNS DE ÎNCERCARE- TRS~~

măsură nr.uf Curba nr. \s.>JnCorCcre\ încercării TrpF /.Avrc>A V _ Nr.ba&rnlrcp ^ClS , ' '• . '' Ansxa ..^.. COMPARATIE INTRE SPECTRUL DE RASPUNS CERUT-RRSSISPECTRUL DE RASPUNS DE INCERCARE- TRS PurrJde \jrincercarQ:i mcQrcarii Usuru l » Calificare seismica • NCERC1 echipament,, AUTOMATICA c. 4338/'86

~~RRS , TRS pentru n= 5 % — — acceleraţie la masa~~

~~r rratrî-iă:~~

TO 126 159 20 2r.? 5.0L 6.35 3.0! 10.CS Î2.?C 100 2Q'o XA 32.0 Hz Echipe Nivel excitaţie- Direcţie ţno; 1 PL 19 ' OBEI. • '•• tir>!" PRELU- r. îESPOt VERIFICAT DATA CRAT ML Tf-MA SKF Ş|:"CTiE'i 0 if i ing.l 23/2. Siancu • 1986

I l.FORMID:ESB001 2.GENERIC CLASS: Panel Boards Switchboards 3. GENERAL EQUIPMENT TYPE: Electric switch box for driving closing/opening mechanism 4. SPECIFIC EQILTMENT TYPE: - Input voltage: 380V ac./50Hz - Control voltage - local: 220Vca - remote: 220 Vdc - Nominal insulation voltage: 500 Vac - Nominal thermal current: 16A 5. MANUFACTURER STANDARDS: CSG 1-86 6. MANUFACTURER/ MODEL: I Contactoare BuzanEXD II BT4 7. SIZE: [mm] 330x600x770 8. WEIGHT: 150 kg. (est) 9. ELEVATION: [mm] 400 (est.) 10. SOURCE OF INFO: Seismic test 11. TEST ORGANIZATION: ICPE-LCCNE (nowadays EUROTEST SA) -t- co-workers for technical assistance 12. TEST PLAN:91/19.07.86 & 5 1986 no 2 5 13. TEST REPORT: BI 2188/9.10.1986 - BI 216330.09.86 14. ENVIRONMENT QUALIFICATION.: - shattering (wrapped) - a^lOg: 1=80 shatt. min; no of shatt.: 4000 - vibration ageing (unwrapped) - a=lg: f= 10: 20: 30: 40: 55 Hz: duration: 2 h at each, lest frequency 15. TEST DATE: 07/1986-08-'1986 16. INPUT DIRECTION: single axis 17. TEST TYPE: INCREST:6x.Oy axis - 5 OBH (0.1 5g) - one SSli (0.3g). sine-sweep test - test frequencies between l-33IIz, 1/2 octave spaced, plus resonant frequencies - acceleration values over required values (STR INCREST 13 86) Oz: - 5 OBE - one SSE - Sine-Sweep within 3-33Hz range - Manual operated shaking table for 1-3Hz 18. UNCTION MONITORED: -Before test: idle running and load functioning of the mechanism according to CSG 1-86 -After test: - load functioning, according lo CSG 1-86 -During test: - correct functioning according to CSG 1 -86

19. ACCEPT CRITERIA: No abnormal voltage and spurious operation, no structural failure, proper functioning according to CSC} 1-X6. 20. RESONANT SEARCH: Ox.Oy: 22.56Hz; 26.6Hz Oz - not measured - used value of damping ratio: 5% 21. TEST MOUNTING: - floor mounting 22. ANCHORAGE: - 4 bolts 23. DAMAGE: None 24. COMMENTS: TRS greater than RRS, because of the specific test method - Shaking table input values according to RRS with 5% damping. (CSG 1-86)

~~Calificare seismica • I N o b r\ Xif „ CONTACTOARE BUZAUl' oo pentru n= acceleratie \a maso /2 ir./s c-o.o • oOO ; si.Xtitrkmo 3?.O -^—y—V. 25.0 ! 7Q0 j j 15 0 J/-~~

~~' 12.70 -; 1004~~

~~•? 7 .1 d J Jj l., L~~

.i.:1 Mjl hn 0.2 I J.j—ii 1.0' 1.2S 1.59 2D 2.52 3.17 4.0 5.C4 6.35/3.0 1O.C812.71316.0 2Q16 254 32.0 Hz Echipament |Nivel excitatie. lDirectie. FIG 1 OBE-1;- ' -\ veriicnlo m ' inn. _.. 1 • fk? toflt 'Calificare seismica ÎNCERC echipament -CON™™RJF..- i! RR5,TRS pentfj n = 5%

~~acceleraţie \a masă~~

~~i- i~~

~~.1.~~

~~j . i i i~~

0.2 1.0' 1.26 I'i9 20 2.52 3.17 L.Q 6.35 ?& taa.T2?e :5.Q2ai&2s^ 32.0 HZ Echipnrnent iNivol: unitate ' ini;ire€ti^. , J ©fâfe^L *.i : mtok: CALCUL CPt'CTHE BlL a i 1- - ' _ •'-naceanu F. Bra tu "slu

®.'<*• n 1. FORM ID: DPI 001 2. GENERIC CLASS: Panelhoards / Switchboards 3. GENERAL EQ. TYPE: Distribution Panel for Illumination 4. SPECIFIC EQ. TYPE: - nominal voltage: 380 V - three phase - nominal frequency: 50 Hz 5. MANUFACTURER STANDARDS: STR-NS 465/87 6. MANUFACTURER MODEL: AUTOMATICA-Bueuresti / 5623-LP 33 7. SIZE: 2000 x 600 x 300 (mm) 8. WEIGHT: 60 kg (est) 9. ELEVATION (CG): 120 mm (est.) 10. SOURCE OF INFO.: seismic test 11. TEST ORGANIZATION: ICPE-LCCNE (nowadays EUROTEST SA) - co-workers for technical assistance 12. TEST PLAN: — 13. TEST REPORT: B.I. 5381 29.11.1989 14. ENVIRON. QUALIFICATION: - accidental conditions test: 40 degC. rel. humidity 95°o. no condensed water. 72 h - transportation lest: wrapped. 1/2 h transportation by 30 km h on rough way - life duration qualification (min. 30 years I.d.) 15. TEST DATE: 1 1.19X9 16. INPUT DIRECTION: Single axis 1 7. TEST TYPE: Ox. Ov axis - test frequency range: l-i-33 Hz - continuous sine test - resonant frequencies - 1 6 octave spaced test frequencies - number of cycles at each test frequency: - 1 -r 5.04 Hz: 5 cycles - 5.04 -f- 10.S U?: 10 cycles - 10.8 -=- 33 H/.: 15 cycles -5(five)SDE Oz axis - test frequency range: 2 -=- 33 11/.: sine sweep test - test frequency range: 1 -=- 2 Hz: discrete frequencies-1 3 octave spaced - 5 (five) SDK. 18. FUNCTION MONITORED: the acceleration in five points (null bar, contactors, electric collection, support bar) 19. ACCEPT CRITERIA: after lest: proper mechanic and electric work of the components during 3 manoeuvres on offal 3 x 38'0 Y 50 Hz 20. RES( IN ANT SEARCH: - Ox - 13.1 2 11/ (frequency range: 1 -=- 33 1 Iz) - Oy - 19.7"1 I Iz (frequency range: 1 4- 33 Il'/t - Oz - not measured - damnim: ratio not calculated 21. TEST MOUNTING: floor 22. ANCHORAGE: 4 bolts Ml6. nuts, washers and Grower washers 23. DAMAGE: none 24. COMMENTS: The RRS as required by STR-NS 465 87: SDE = 2/3 DDE RRS - 1,5 FRS; RRS"= 1.5 SDE - DBE MASA.DE 1NCERCAR1

~~1- grupide LQbt 2-qrup 2 de ca^-uri (cab/jri de alifrter:! 3-,-fevi- cabluri rti tevi cabiuri~~

~~8qc'jri 0 1B r pentru surub H"J~~

-h

~~5561 PL1555A PL1581 A • VEDERE GE ± 1 sus ,—I~~

~~Fig.l ' DETAL11 CE MONTAJ PE MASA-DE INCERCARI ' •' 2.2. Montajul aoolorometrolor şi legăturile electrice p«ntra alimentarea dulapului sînt date în figura ZI~~

să

~~. \ 3'; încercarea la solicitări seismice *pa direcţiile~~

"• •-••'•.•••**'• .'* , Qg.OY;oz;j • . * ..:.'. • • \ ; f 3*1 »-Solicitările seisaioe pe direotiile OX,OY s-au făout la 1CCPDC Iaşi în perioada 21-24.0^1989» laoeroarea explorativa' pentru determinarea ireoven- ţ«lor de rezonanţa s-* faout prin metoda impulsului^. Pe direcţia OX t Pr « 13,12 Hz' - . 2e direcţia OY x Pr - 19,77 Hz S-au efectuat cîte 5(oinoi) înoaroari de tip SDE ppkatr de înoeroare.^ Spectrul de-răspuns CtJt/A pentru orizo:\j;alu( CCC,OY) este dat în figura 3. . •? . •• • - i - Metoda de încercare a fost cea cu sinus oontinuu la fixa distanţate la şesina de octavă şi la de rezonanţa în gana 1 - 33 Hz, diferind numărul de oi&luri po fcntorvale de freovenţâ dupcl cum urmea^St în gana 1 - 5,04 Hz oîte 5 oioluri la fiecare freovenţă de înoercaro, în gama 5,

~~•WP -!— !§,-~~

~~. 2O I s '//S~~

~~—r*--- . ' QUO f/y. /• Q //~~

~~) I ...1_ I~~

~~• f«-*l-l —~~

~~COUTlMUU -Y. (2'TESTE) PIG. 5". T"\L\ALA DC LP 5'5 1 -) -•-,—-, ' ^k~~

~~. ~ -^ -.—.— **r~~

~~t 8 C4 1 ~ ."sib~~

~~Ke SINUS Y~~

~~•i.C.C.P. D.C-- T1UALA \k%\ ClE'CERNAV'ODA U1~ US SPECTRE OE RASPUNS DE PROIECTARE- PENTRU Dt'/afiur/ ae DBE-DIRECTIA~~

~~Penfru SDE valorile accelerafiilor se - mmulfesc-cu—0,65.-~~

~~FRECVENTA (Hz) 1 N.CEKU „ AUTOMATICAL,' ISC 0.7631/1989~~

Echipameril: Tcblou ilumihql"sV'prize^-523-LP 33., •.•.."*

~~l_l~~

~~Nivel exciiaue "TDirectie.~~

~~VER'.FICA'l ;1 !JAIA -SEF-SECflE-l! APPENDIX !!~~

~~Description of EUROTEST Laboratory capability A T€ST s.n~~

Cercetare, incercari echipamente, inginerie industrials si servicii stiintifice Research, Equipments Testing, Industrial Engineering & Scientific Services Recherche, essais pour equipments, inginerie industrielle & services scientifiques

~~313, Splaiul Unirii, 73 204 Bucharest 3, Romania. Tel: 40(1)321.72.42, 321.72.43 Fax: 40(1)323.26.28 Registered in the Register of Commerce at. no. J 40 - 20 978 -1992. SIRUES code 401263271~~

~~LOCA (Loss Of Coolant /Accident) simulation for different pressure/ temperature requirements~~

Our company carries over 12 years of experience in testing equipment to severe environment conditions, and precisely to LOCA simulated environment, aimed at certifying the operating capability of various types of equipment bound to function in safety related circuits of the reactors at Cernavoda nuclear power plant, specifically those under the reactor's main envelope. We already tested wide ranges of electric motors, switchgear, relays, control and automation panels, electric cables, pressure gauges and pressure control devices, a.s.o. All tests were performed following the specific pressure / temperature diagrams of the Cernavoda cooling and safe shutdown systems (fig.1), but, due to the fact that the environmental parameters are computer controlled, and the installations allow a large fan- out for pressure and temperature values or gradients, we could easily simulate LOCA environmental conditions particular to other types of reactor's accidents. Consequently, our goal is to extend in this stage the testing activities to simulations of WER (PWR) - specific loss of coolant accidents, therefore allowing complete testing and capability assessement of safety related equipment operating in power plants in Eastern Europe or the former USSR. To our knowledge, prior to service laboratory testing of the such equipment was in most cases very insubstantial, when performed at all.

~~Summary presentation of the state of the research work~~

As stated above, EUROTEST has already performed testing and operating capability assessement research for many types of electrical equipment. All tests were conducted following standard procedures, locally developed and accepted by the designer and the builder of the plant, the LOCA test being the final stage in the Class 1E qualification program (that included: thermal life estimation, functional and vibration aging, radiation aging and seismic tests). All tested specimens came out with a report that include: the description of the testing procedure, testing parameters, relevant values monitored during the test and measured afterwards, conclusions and measures to be taken in order to improve the general behavior and design of the equipment. The block diagram of the LOCA testing installation is presented on the following page; fig. 1 (below) illustrates a standard temperature / pressure diagram for CANDU type reactors: fig.1

Tests are usually performed according to international standards such as: IEEE 323r 79-3650-DG-003 and TS-XX-60000-6 (specific to CANDU type reactors), but can be conducted following WER or other reactor's type specific diagrams. The same installations can be (and already were) used for conditionning and testing of electrotechnical, mechanical, hydraulic systems for uses other than nuclear. All activities are submitted to a quality assurance program, locally developed and approved by the relevant romanian organisations

~~Type of activity~~

~~Activities on the LOCA testing facilities were mostly experimental, but helped a lot for the development and evolution of products fit for the use in nuclear power stations.~~

~~Description of the experimental facilities~~

The LOCA simulation facilities include three testing enclosures, having volumes of 45 m3 (horizontal), 30 m3 (vertical) and 6 m3 (horizontal), connected to an autonomous steam supply. The facility also disposes of independent power station, water treatment station, heating and instrumental air supplies (see the block diagram above). Saturated steam is supplied at 208 °C and 18 bar. Controlled water spaying with treated fluid can be performed at 20 - 90°C. Parameter control is automated - pre programmed, with precisions of ±2°C and ±0.1 bar. The process is computer controlled, and surveillance is performed through graphical displays and / or printed reports. Data acquisition is performed by means of a PC IBM compatible computer, provided with a multi purpose (National Instruments) board (16 channel) AT-MIO-16 -F -5. Data acqiusition and processing is performed by 486 PC's, using LabView 3.0. Specimens are tested in energized condition, at the nominal parameters values, and continuously monitored. The facilities' independent power station can supply specimens in the following range of voltages and currents: - alternative voltages: 0.4... 15 kV; - alternative current: 0...2000 A; - continuous voltages: 0...4 kV; - continuous current: 0...300 A. The facilities also include a complete electrical testing laboratory, fully equipped.

~~Accelerated thermal and/or operational ageing~~

The acceleration techniques we use allow degradation mechanisms not to differ from those normally occuring during the actual operating life. It is also possible to perform combined stress ageing (thermal, electric, operational, humidity) taking into account the synergistic effects involved. The main features of our thermal ageing laboratory are:

• Enclosures: 100 - 2000 dm3 with overtemperature protection and a temperature control accuracy + 1.5°C, for temperatures up to 300 °C. • Complete monitoring of specimens aged in operation. • The voltages and currents ranges available largely cover all supplying needs. • Controlled environment enclosures can generate and maintain relative humidity up to 95 + 5% and temperatures ranging from -70°C to +40 °C. • Data processing and storage are computer aided. • High voltage testing facilities (up to 100 kV) are available.

Accelerated ageing techniques apply to any electric, automation or electronic equipment, providing fast, reliable and significant data about the equipment's safe operation life. Testing equipment and instaterions at EUROTEST S.A.

•Experimental laboratory and in situ seismic testing of equipment using a high power entirely computerized shaking table (MTS - USA production, 6 degrees of freedom) and various facilities to check up performing functions. The main facility is a seismic test system MTS 469 (USA) with two seismic tables. The seismic test system contains the following hardware: - The seismic table- supports the specimen to be tested; - Special bumper assemblies and a concrete foundation/reaction mass provide damping for table motion in the event that excessive lateral or longitudinal actuator displacements occur. - Horizontal and vertical actuators apply the force and motion necessary to create the desired table movement during seismic testing; - The hydraulic power supply system and the hydraulic distribution system provide hydraulic power for peak system performance and deliver hydraulic fluid to the system actuator servovalves, respectively; - The nitrogen spring cylinder provides static support to the table when hydraulic pressure is not being applied to the system actuators. - The analog control system conditions and controls analog program command and feedback signals for operation of the test system. The analog control system, or analog console, houses the main controls and indicators used in operation of the test system. The analog console consists of the following control units: - Oscilloscope- Monitors electrical signals from the analog control console. - Readout Selector- Allows the operator to select specific signals listed on the front panel for readout on the system oscilloscope or any other suitable analog readout device. - Pressure Temperature Monitor Panel- Control unit for nitrogen spring cylinder and HPS temperature monitoring. - System Control Panel- Centralized control unit for system fault detection, table ramp positioning, range selection and hydraulic pressure and program run/stop functions. - 469 Control System- Multiple chassis housing the module circuitry which receives and conditions program and feedback signals to generate the command signals that control the servovalves. - The digital control system provides computerized program management through the conversion of the command signals from digital to analog forms and the conversion of the feedback signals from analog to the digital forms. The purpose of the digital control system, or digital console, is to provide test waveform creation and data storage functions. It also acts as one of the test waveform sources for the test system, and provides data acquisition, processing and storage functions for system motion and specimen response data acquired during testing. The digital console also contains a main power on/off switch and the necessary fans, power supplies and interconnecting cables. - The seismic tables are computer controlled: a PDP unit with MTS original software for tables driving and data acquisition and processing or a PC 486 with EUROTEST SA software: virtual signal analyzer (based on LABVIEW soft package). System specifications are the following:

~~System 1 ( master table ); - Table size : 2meter x 2meter - Maximum specimen weight: 500 kg (3000 kg special case ) - Controlled degrees of freedom : 6 ( x,y,z,9x,9y,8z )~~

~~Horizontal- Vertical (Z) Dynamic characteristics longitudinal (X) & lateral (Y) Displacement ±265 mm ±177 mm Velocity ±2.14 m/s ±1.43 m/s Acceleration ±5g ±3.35 g~~

~~-Operating Frequency Range : 0,5 ...50 Hz~~

~~System 2 ( small table ): - Table size : O.75meterxO.75meter - Maximum specimen weight: 60 kg ( 100 kg special case ) - Controlled degrees of freedom : 4 ( x,y,z,8z )~~

~~Horizontal- Vertical (Z) Dynamic characteristics longitudinal (X) & lateral (Y) Displacement ±324 mm ±217 mm Velocity ±4.6 m/s ±3.15 m/s Acceleration ±7.7g ±5.16 g~~

~~- Operating Frequency Range : 0,5 ...33 Hz - Both systems can test oversized specimens (only weight is limited) •Vibration and Shock Testing of Industrial Equipment in NPPs~~

~~Main facilities are the following:~~

~~1. Vibration Shakers, Model VE 100 ( P.R of CHINA )~~

- The shakers may be transported on the testing site. Shaker control, data acquisition, processing and storage can be made by using a PC 486 with a specially data acquisition system and dedicated software (made in EUROTEST SA). -Operating Frequency Range : 5 ...3000 Hz -Excitation position : horizontal or vertical -Max. Acceleration :±120 g -Max. Velocity : ±18 m/s -Max Displacement :±12.5 mm -Max Loading Weight: 120 kg

~~2.Shock and Shattering Testing Machine, Model Heckert St 800 (Germany)~~

-Command from analogic console -Table size: 0.5 m x 0.4 m -Maximum LoadingWeight: 400 kg -Maximum Shock Acceleration (unloaded): 800 g - Shock Form: semi-sine - Maximum Shock Frequency: 3 Hz - Data acquisition, processing and storage can be made by using a PC 486 with a specially data acquisition system and dedicated software (made in EUROTEST SA).

~~• Portable System for "IN SITU" Seismic Testing~~

- The system consists of a portable vibration shaker, a Notebook PC486 with data acquisition module and dedicated original software based on LAB VIEW 3.0 (see appendix figures 1-5) and a set of B&K accelerometers, amplifiers and different fixtures. Using this system and a combined experimental-analytical testing method, the seismic resistance of large and/or already mounted equipment can be assessed. •Structural Dynamic Experimental Analysis System (for finding the dynamic basic characteristics of equipment by "in situ" low energy and low cost experiments and monitoring real mode shapes by original software).

- The main facility is a portable system for vibrations testing and IN SITU modal analyses, with data acquisition and processing on PC Notebook and dedicated original software based on DAQWARE, LABVIEW (see appendix figures 1-5).

~~Other Facilities:~~

~~- Dynamic data B&K aquisition lines and B&K standard calibration system - for accelerometers.~~

~~•Climate and LOCA Laboratory Testing Using Various Stalls~~

- The main facility is the LOCA simulation and testing equipment including a master testing enclosure of 6 m-* (horizontal), connected to an autonomus steam supply. Saturated steam is supplied at 208°C and 18 bar. Controlled water spraying with treated fluid can be performed at 20-90°C . Parameters control is automatic, with precision of ±2°C and ±0.1 bar. The process is computer controlled and surveillance is performed through graphical displays and/or printed reports . Data aquisition is performed by means of an IBM-PC compatible computer provided with a multipurpose (National Instruments) board (16 channels) AT-MIO-16-F-5 . Data acquisition and processing is performed by 486 PC's, using dedicated software packages based on LABVIEW 3.0. Specimens are tested in energized conditions, at the nominal parameters values, and continuously monitored .

~~•Aging Test and Analyses (Thermal, Operational, Mechanical)~~

- Using a combination of facilities in order to assess complete operating life of equipment. Main facilities are the 40 electrical drying ovens with forced ventilation and 5 climated cabinets. EURgTESTS.A. LabVIEW Analizor dc hecvcnla cu 1B caoalc 25KHz/AT-MI0-1GL9 dB Ratpunt in fiecvenla P 14.1- 'T ' "

~~p ' *—\ +~y~~

~~0.0 100 0 200.0 300.0 400 0 500.0 800 0 700.0 798 9 Shannon m0. x 1119.73 y 1119.73 ml: it 1119.73 1119.73 dx 1119.73 dy 1119.73 Hz ,~~

~~-c —Volti — Vol.lj I Functie de timp~~

~~I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I • I I I I I I I I I~~

;p v.oooo ;pooo 0.00 Compensafe automata B, Baleieii anteiioare! Nivel declansare. V Histetezis,V 005)11.62 |D Cane Domemuc Sens c Inloimahi A * 0192 C 0 1 V T 1000 Canal de lefennla ace A P * 125k 50 00E*3 S 1 1 V t 1021 Accdefometm 1 GO X Sc/i=> 50 00E*3 ScA <> 50.00E+3 '. 2 20 mV t 0 993 Accelerometru 2 tn ^ t t V-X ,; Hann 3 0 345 Punte'1 Nr med mp 8§ C Med viff ! 4 20 mV 0 44G Punte 2 C 0 Nr. med imp 5 *10~V "-: 1 000 : aux ;N(. med e( * *., I 0 Nr. med tl 6 1000' 1000 7 r Nu *• 1000 * 1 000s Sens 8 r t-n x 9 Nu 1 000 -0 IV ) Dom inregistfarn 10 Nu Yooo

~~,cc 11 Nu r 1 000 i x 908«m o 12 Nu 1000 oo tn t 0 00 Comp supl r 13 Nu J 000 • patacureptaf~~

~~14 Nu 1 0001 „ •!28-August-{995" , " *• t v *• ***** #• 15 1 V 1 000, Canal XVI !iii4«sm lnfotmatii globale *V* I •• t-> Specimen 17 m. 120H2 5kH2.0.005mA2/r2/Hz 'CD o1" en~~

~~'O;O I'8~~

~~, o~~

~~, 10-~~

~~O- O O~~

~~•1^~~

~~liCD :!:-O~~

~~' -:-o So O CD O ;•:--.. < n ai • (M 1 " v> ? CO en : IT) cr oj.; N.~~

~~FIG.2 DYN7 VIRTX.TAL INSTRLTMENT THAT ASSOCIATES MEASURED DYNAMICAL CHARACTERISTICS TO THE GEOMETRICALY DEFINED STRUCTURE CO .~~

~~3 •j - CO *=* CO CD: 1/ LJ cr c: UJ g CD . r50 E O 1 -™ .s LD 00 "(6 CM . ^^ eri •> X CC CM o 1 Q CO <~~

~~1 0. 0~~

~~O T5> CD~~

~~•5:~~

~~•M p.;~~

~~cn ;~~

~~: CM : en oo •. _j< u Is o~~

~~FIG.3 VIRTUAL INSTRUMENT FOR IDENTIFYING MODAL SHAPES AND MOTION DISPLAY EUROTEST S.A. Functie do transfer; Dqm fr P * 204£ ~ *J r2o6 ocf "{Jj o'q^ C 2048 ~J1200 00 'J'tfixr 1 4 : • 2 '~~

~~3 00 *06 | :io.4 • • S H |Nyquist • Cit AS Bal Rot 2a A |CF C2 Am G Afa §§ a 00~~

~~•80.0=, , , , 0.0. 50.0 .100.0 150.0 200.0 I jiilco 51.57 -25.45 • [I66.67 H-28.86 • • u ||C 2 • O Faza.gradeji53.8 O •-o~~

~~2: O~~

~~2 \ 1 tin- 2 00 2i o CO CO ^_ 1 2. en JO r~ a~~

~~CD CD CM *r -•• lf> i O~~

~~UJ;~~

~~FIG.5 VIRTUAL INSTRUMENT FOR DAMPING COMPUTATION USING HILBERT TRANSFORM •1 Pi Slier~~

~~ore?~~