Seismic response of electrical cabinets considering primary-secondary structure interaction with contact nonlinearity of anchors

References

• Penzien J, and Chopra AK. Earthquake response of appendage on a multi-story building. In: Proceedings, 3rd World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, New Zealand. Vol. 2. https://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/wcee/third_conf_NewZealand/#VOLUME_II; 1965.
   Google Scholar
• Lim E, Chouw N. Review of approaches for analysing secondary structures in earthquakes and evaluation of floor response spectrum approach. Int J Protect Struct. 2015;6(2):237–261.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ankit D, Saran B, and Gupta A, et al. Reduction in seismic demand by using equipment structure interaction. In: 25th conference on structural Mechanics in reactor technology USA, Charlotte, NC; 2019. https://repository.lib.ncsu.edu/bitstream/handle/1840.20/37799/SMiRT_25_ESI_Paper_final.pdf?sequence=1#:~:text=The%20effect%20of%20equipment%2Dstructure,of%20cabinet%20anchorage%20and%20relays
   Google Scholar
• Burdisso RA, Singh MP. Seismic analysis of multiply supported secondary systems with dynamic interaction effects. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 1987;15(8):1005–1022.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta A, Bose MK. Significance of non-classical damping in seismic qualification of equipment and piping. Nucl Eng Des. 2017;317:90–99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryu Y, Jung W, Ju B. Vibration effects of nonclassically damped building-piping systems subjected to extreme loads. Shock Vib. 2016;2016:1–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim E, and Chouw N. Consequence of main-secondary structures interaction for seismic response of secondary structures. In: Annual New Zealand Society of Earthquake Engineering Conference, Auckland, New Zealand; 2014. p. 21–23. https://www.academia.edu/17539297/Consequence_of_main_secondary_structures_interaction_for_seismic_response_of_secondary_structures
   Google Scholar
• Lim E, Chouw N. Prediction of the response of secondary structures under dynamic loading considering primary secondary structure interaction. Adv Struct Eng. 2018;21(14):2143–2153.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tran TT, Cao AT, Kim D. Fragility assessment for electric cabinet in nuclear power plant using response surface methodology. Nucl Eng Technol. 2019;51(3):894–903.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tran TT, Cao AT, Kim D, et al. Seismic vulnerability of cabinet facility with tuned mass dampers subjected to high- and low-frequency earthquakes. Appl Sci. 2020;10(14):4850.
   Google Scholar
• Salman K, Cho SG. Effect of frequency content of earthquake on the seismic response of interconnected electrical equipment. Civil Eng. 2020;1(3):198–215.
   Google Scholar
• Gupta A, Cho SG, Hong KJ, et al. Current state of in-cabinet response spectra for seismic qualification of equipment in nuclear power plants. Nucl Eng Des. 2019;343:269–275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salman K, Tran TT, Kim D. Grouping effect on the seismic response of cabinet facility considering primary-secondary structure interaction. Nucl Eng Technol. 2019;52(6):1318–1326.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salman K, Tran TT, Kim D. Seismic capacity evaluation of NPP electrical cabinet facility considering grouping effects. J Nucl Sci Technol. 2020;57(7):800–812.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tran TT, Kim D. Uncertainty quantification for nonlinear seismic analysis of cabinet facility in nuclear power plants. Nucl Eng Des. 2019;355:110309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho SG, Kim D, Chaudhary S. A simplified model for nonlinear seismic response analysis of equipment cabinets in nuclear power plants. Nucl Eng Des. 2011;24(8):2750–2757.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hur J. Seismic performance evaluation of switch board cabinets using nonlinear numerical models [Doctoral dissertation]. Georgia Institute of Technology; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Hur J, Althoff E, Sezen H, et al. Seismic assessment and performance of nonstructural components affected by structural modelling. Nucl Eng Technol. 2017;49(2):387–394.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nahar TT, Rahman MM, Kim D. Seismic capacity evaluation of fire-damaged cabinet facility in a nuclear power plant. Nucl Eng Technol. 2020;53(4):1331–1344.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pürgstaller A, Gallo PQ, Pampanin S, et al. Seismic demands on nonstructural components anchored to concrete accounting for structure‐fastener‐nonstructural interaction (SFNI). Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2020;49(6):589–606.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pürgstaller A. Seismic performance of post-installed fasteners in concrete with supplemental damping device at structure-fastener-nonstructural-(SFN)-level [Dissertation]. Vienna (Austria): Department of Structural Engineering and Natural Hazards, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Gallo PQ, Moghaddasi M, Pampanin S, et al. Hysteresis model for concrete anchors subjected to shear loading. ACI Struct J. 2019;116(1):5‐16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SAP2000v.21. Integrated software for structural analysis and design, computers and structures Inc. Berkely, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Rinaldin G, Amadio C, Fragiacomo M. A Component approach for the hysteretic behavior of connections in cross-laminated wooden structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2013;42(13):2023–2042.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brincker R, Zhang L, Andersen P. Modal identification from ambient responses using frequency domain decomposition. In Proceedings of the18th International Modal Analysis Conference(IMAC); 2000 Feb; San Antonio,Texas.
   Google Scholar
• Sackman JL, Kelly JM. Seismic analysis of internal equipment and components in structures. Eng Struct. 1979;1(4):179–190.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC). Design response spectra for seismic design of nuclear power plants. USA: Regulatory Guide; 2014
   Google Scholar
• Chen Y, Soong TT. State-of-the-art review: seismic response of secondary systems. Eng Struct. 1988;10(4):218–228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh S, Gupta A. Seismic response of electrical equipment subjected to high–frequency ground motions. Nucl Eng Des. 2021;374:111046.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braverman J, Morante R, Houston T, et al. Evaluation of ASCE 4-16 and AISC 43-18 (Draft) for use in the risk-informed performance-based seismic design of nuclear power plant structures, systems, and components. Brookhaven National Lab (BNL) United States; 2020.
   Google Scholar