한국지진공학회논문집 (Journal of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea)

  • 제27권1호
  • /
  • Pages.25-35
  • /
  • 2023
  • /
  • 1226-525X(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-1099(eISSN)
한국지진공학회 (Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

원전구조물의 비선형 시간영역 SSI 해석을 위한 경계반력법에 의한 유효지진하중과 PML의 적용

Application of Effective Earthquake Force by the Boundary Reaction Method and a PML for Nonlinear Time-Domain Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis of a Standard Nuclear Power Plant Structure

  • 이혁주 (전남대학교 건축토목공학과) ;
  • 임재성 (전남대학교 건축토목공학과) ;
  • 문일환 (한국전력기술) ;
  • 김재민 (전남대학교 토목공학과)
  • Lee, Hyeok Ju (Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Lim, Jae Sung (Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Moon, Il Hwan (KEPCO E&C) ;
  • Kim, Jae Min (Department of Civil Engineering, Chonnam National University)
  • 투고 : 2022.11.11
  • 심사 : 2022.11.24
  • 발행 : 2023.01.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Considering the non-linear behavior of structure and soil when evaluating a nuclear power plant's seismic safety under a beyond-design basis earthquake is essential. In order to obtain the nonlinear response of a nuclear power plant structure, a time-domain SSI analysis method that considers the nonlinearity of soil and structure and the nonlinear Soil-Structure Interaction (SSI) effect is necessary. The Boundary Reaction Method (BRM) is a time-domain SSI analysis method. The BRM can be applied effectively with a Perfectly Matched Layer (PML), which is an effective energy absorbing boundary condition. The BRM has a characteristic that the magnitude of the response in far-field soil increases as the boundary interface of the effective seismic load moves outward. In addition, the PML has poor absorption performance of low-frequency waves. For this reason, the accuracy of the low-frequency response may be degraded when analyzing the combination of the BRM and the PML. In this study, the accuracy of the analysis response was improved by adjusting the PML input parameters to improve this problem. The accuracy of the response was evaluated by using the analysis response using KIESSI-3D, a frequency domain SSI analysis program, as a reference solution. As a result of the analysis applying the optimal PML parameter, the average error rate of the acceleration response spectrum for 9 degrees of freedom of the structure was 3.40%, which was highly similar to the reference result. In addition, time-domain nonlinear SSI analysis was performed with the soil's nonlinearity to show this study's applicability. As a result of nonlinear SSI analysis, plastic deformation was concentrated in the soil around the foundation. The analysis results found that the analysis method combining BRM and PML can be effectively applied to the seismic response analysis of nuclear power plant structures.

키워드

과제정보

이 연구는 한국에너지기술평가원의 연구비 지원(과제번호: 20193110100020)으로 수행되었습니다.

참고문헌

  1. ASCE 4-16. Seismic Analysis of Safety-Related Nuclear Structures and Commentary, American Society of Civil Engineers. Reston, VA. c2017.
  2. Wolf JP. Dynamic Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis. Prentice-Hall. c1985.
  3. Lee EH, Kim JM, Lee SH. Nonlinear Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis of a Seismically Isolated Nuclear Power Plant Structure using the Boundary Reaction Method. EESK J Earthq Eng Soc. Korea. 2015;19(1):37-43. https://doi.org/10.5000/EESK.2015.19.1.037
  4. Kim JM, Lee EH, Lee SH. Boundary Reaction Method For Nonlinear Analysis of Soil-Structure Interaction under Earthquake Loads. Soil Dyn Earth Eng. 2016;89:85-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.07.020
  5. Bielak J, Christiano P. On the Effective Seismic Input for Nonlinear Soil-Structure Interaction Systems. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 1984;12:107-119. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290120108
  6. Penzien J, Chen CH, Lee YJ, Hsiau HN, Katayama I. Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis Using Multiple Input Motions. Developments in Dynamic Soil-Structure Interaction. Editors: GGlkan P, Clough RW. NATO ASI, Springer, Kemer, Antalya, Turkey. 1992;390:167-178.
  7. Bielak J, Loukakis K, Hisada Y, Yoshimura C. Domain Reduction Method for Three-Dimensional Earthquake Modeling in Localized Regions, Part I: Theory. Bull Seismol Soc. Am. 2003;93(2):817-824. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120010251
  8. Kyhlemeyer RL, Lysmer J. Finite Element Method Accuracy for Wave Propagation Problems. J Soil Mech Found. Div. ASCE. 1973;99(5).
  9. Deeks AJ, Randolph MF. Axisymmetric Time Domain Transmitting Boundaries. J Eng Mech. ASCE. 1994;120(1):25-42. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1994)120:1(25)
  10. Kellezi L. Local Transmitting Boundaries for Transient Elastic Analysis. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng. 2000;19(7):533-547. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(00)00029-4
  11. Liu J, Gu Y, Wang Y, Li B. Efficient Procedure for Seismic Analysis of Soil-Structure Interaction System. Tsinghua Sci & Tech. 2006;11(6):625-631. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1007-0214(06)70244-9
  12. Berenger JP. A Perfectly Matched Layer for the Absorption of Electromagnetic Waves. J Comput Phys. 1994;114(2):185-200. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.1994.1159
  13. Basu U, Chopra AK. Perfectly Matched Layers for Time-harmonic Elastodynamics of Unbounded Domains: Theory and Finite-element Implementation. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng. 2003;192(11-12):1337-1375. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7825(02)00642-4
  14. Bermudez A, Hervella-Nieto L, Prieto A, Rodri'guez R. An Optimal Perfectly Matched Layer with Unbounded Absorbing Function for Time-Harmonic Acoustic Scattering Problems. J Comput Phys. 2007;223(2):469-488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2006.09.018
  15. Kucukcoban S, Kallivokas LF. A Symmetric Hybrid Formulation for Transient Wave Simulations in PML-truncated Heterogeneous Media. Wave Motion. 2013;150(1):57-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wavemoti.2012.06.004
  16. Fathi A, Poursartip B, Kallivokas LF. Time-Domain Hybrid Formulations for Wave Simulations in Three-Dimensional PMLtruncated Heterogeneous Media. Int J Numer Meth Eng. 2015;101(3):165-198. https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.4780
  17. Nguyen DV, Kim JM. An Efficient Mixed Finite Element Perfectly Matched Layer with Optimal Parameters Selection for Two-Dimensional Time Domain Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis. Int J Struct Stab Dyn. 2022;22(2). 2250017.
  18. Nguyen DV, Rhee IK, Kim JM. An Efficient Time Domain Perfectly Matched Layer Scheme for Transient Elastodynamic Analysis of Three-Dimensional Unbounded Media. J Vibration and Control. submitted.
  19. Lee JH, Kim JK, Kim JH. Nonlinear Analysis of Soil-Structure Interaction using Perfectly Matched Discrete Layers. Comput Struct. 2014;142:28-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2014.06.002
  20. Pled F, Desceliers C. Review and Recent Developments on the Perfectly Matched Layer (PML) Method for the Numerical Modeling and Simulation of Elastic Wave Propagation in Unbounded Domains. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering. 2022;29:471-518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-021-09581-y
  21. Skelton EA, Adams SD, Craster RV . Guided elastic waves and perfectly matched layers. Wave motion. 2007;44(7-8):573-592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wavemoti.2007.03.001
  22. Chew WC, Weedon WH. A 3D Perfectly Matched Medium from Modified Maxwell's Equations with Stretched Coordinates. Microw Opt Technol Lett. 1994;7(13):599-604. https://doi.org/10.1002/mop.4650071304
  23. Chew WC, Liu QH. Perfectly Matched Layers for Elastodynamics: A New Absorbing Boundary Condition. J Comput Acoust. 1996;4(4):341-359. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218396X96000118
  24. Collino F, Monk PB. Optimizing the Perfectly Matched Layer. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng. 1998;164(1-2):157-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7825(98)00052-8
  25. Idriss IM, Sun JI. User's manual for SHAKE91: a computer program for conducting equivalent linear seismic response analyses of horizontally layered soil deposits. Center for Geotechnical Modeling. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. University of California, Davis. c1993.
  26. Jeremic B, Jie G, Preisig M, Tafazzoli N. Time Domain Simulation of Soil-Foundation-Structure Interaction in Non-Uniform Soils. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2009;38(5):699-718. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.896
  27. EPRI. Seismic Evaluation Guidance: Screening, Prioritization and Implementation Details (SPID) for the Resolution of Fukushima Near-term Task Force Recommendation 2.1: Seismic. Rep. No. 1025287, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA. c2012.
  28. Seo CG, Kim JM. KIESSI program for soil-structure interaction analysis. J Comput Struct Eng Inst Korea. 2012;25(3):77-83.
  29. Kim JM. Development of Fundamental Technologies for World Class Nonlinear Fluid-Structure-Soil Interaction Analysis of Liquid Storage Tank through Development of p-version Dynamic Infinite Elements and Sloshing Shake Table Tests. Rep. No.14CTAP-C077514-01. Chonnam National University R&DB Foundation. Research Funding Support Organizations: Korea Agency for Infrastructure Technology Advancement. c2016.
  30. Ngo VL, Lee CH, Lee EH, Kim JM. Semi-Automated Procedure to Estimate Nonlinear Kinematic Hardenging Model to Simulate the Nonlinear Dynamic Properties of Soil and Rock. Appl Sci. 2021;11(18).
  31. ABAQUS. ABAQUS 6.14 Analysis User's Manual. Dassault Systemes Simulia Corp. c2014.