不同输入界面对AP1000核岛结构设计地基地表地震动的影响
|
摘要
在核电厂地震安全性评价中,中国规范是依据剪切波速定义的基岩面,与美国规范不同。本文基于AP1000核岛结构设计地基的场地参数模型,分别选取各个规范中定义的剪切波速700、1100、2438 m/s基岩层作为地震反应分析的输入界面,采用中美两国通用的土层地震反应分析程序计算,定量分析选取不同地震输入界面时同一地震波、同一特定场地模型的地表加速度峰值和反应谱的差异值,结果表明地震输入界面的不同,AP1000核岛结构设计地基的同一场地土层模型地表地震加速度反应谱频谱特性产生较大的变化,地表加速度峰值差异高达2.25倍,故本文建议在AP1000核电厂地震安全性评价中应基于剪切波速为2438 m/s的基岩层作为土层地震反应分析程序的地震输入界面。本文的研究结果可供后续研究和核电工程建造应用参考。
In the process of seismic hazard assessment of nuclear power plant,there are some differences on bedrock faces that were defined according to shear wave velocity between China and America code.We select different bedrock faces,based on AP1000 Nuclear Power Plant design ground parameter model,that corresponding to Shear wave velocity of 700 m/s,1100 m/s and 2438 m/s,and using two methods of Chinese and American seismic responses for soil lays,we analyze the different seismic input interface on one analysis model and one seismic input,and obtain the peak acceleration of ground motion and response spectrum.The calculation results indicate that different seismic interface in one soil model and one seismic input could result in quite different results,and AP1000 Nuclear Power Plant design surface ground motion and spectrum characteristics change greatly,and the difference of peak acceleration of ground motion can be 2.25 times.So we suggest that we should use shear wave velocity of 2438m/s as the seismic input interface in AP1000 nuclear power plant site seismic safety analysis.The results of the paper could give some guidance for the later AP1000 Nuclear Power Plant construction and research.
In the process of seismic hazard assessment of nuclear power plant,there are some differences on bedrock faces that were defined according to shear wave velocity between China and America code.We select different bedrock faces,based on AP1000 Nuclear Power Plant design ground parameter model,that corresponding to Shear wave velocity of 700 m/s,1100 m/s and 2438 m/s,and using two methods of Chinese and American seismic responses for soil lays,we analyze the different seismic input interface on one analysis model and one seismic input,and obtain the peak acceleration of ground motion and response spectrum.The calculation results indicate that different seismic interface in one soil model and one seismic input could result in quite different results,and AP1000 Nuclear Power Plant design surface ground motion and spectrum characteristics change greatly,and the difference of peak acceleration of ground motion can be 2.25 times.So we suggest that we should use shear wave velocity of 2438m/s as the seismic input interface in AP1000 nuclear power plant site seismic safety analysis.The results of the paper could give some guidance for the later AP1000 Nuclear Power Plant construction and research.
引文
[1]李小军,彭青.不同类别场地地震动参数的计算分析[J].地震工程与工程振动,2001,21(1):29-36.
[2]GB/17741-1999.工程场地地震安全性评价规范[S].1999.
[3]GB/50267-97.核电厂抗震设计规范[S].1997.
[4]ASCE 4-98.Seismic Analysis of Safety-Related NuclearStructures and Commentary[S].1998.
[5]ASCE 43-05.Seismic Design Criteria for Structures,Systems,and Components in Nuclear Facilities[S].2005.
[6]NUREG-0800,Standard Review Plan for the Review ofSafety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants:LWREdition[S].2007.
[7]AP1000 Design Control Document Rev.17[G].2009.
[8]I.M Idriss,Joseph I.SUN.User’s Manual for shake91[M].1992.
[9]李小军.场地土层对地面运动影响的分析方法[J].世界地震工程,1992,8(2):49-60.
[2]GB/17741-1999.工程场地地震安全性评价规范[S].1999.
[3]GB/50267-97.核电厂抗震设计规范[S].1997.
[4]ASCE 4-98.Seismic Analysis of Safety-Related NuclearStructures and Commentary[S].1998.
[5]ASCE 43-05.Seismic Design Criteria for Structures,Systems,and Components in Nuclear Facilities[S].2005.
[6]NUREG-0800,Standard Review Plan for the Review ofSafety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants:LWREdition[S].2007.
[7]AP1000 Design Control Document Rev.17[G].2009.
[8]I.M Idriss,Joseph I.SUN.User’s Manual for shake91[M].1992.
[9]李小军.场地土层对地面运动影响的分析方法[J].世界地震工程,1992,8(2):49-60.
版权所有：© 2023 中国地质图书馆 中国地质调查局地学文献中心