TY - GEN
T1 - Advanced seismic probabilistic risk assessment using nonlinear soil-structure interaction analysis
AU - Coleman, Justm
AU - Talaat, Mohamed
AU - Hashimoto, Philip
AU - Smith, Curtis
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 by the American Nuclear Society.
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - The objective is to provide advanced seismic probabilistic risk assessment (SPRA) methods with the goal of removing large uncertainties, to the extent possible, and to provide "best estimate" seismic risk numbers. The concern is that large uncertainties in traditional SPRAs will mask other potential sources of risk and focus disproportionate time and money on mitigating seismic risk. This paper is not proposing to change the process for characterizing the seismic hazard at a given nuclear power plant site. However, there are two potential areas to remove conservatism in the SPRA process (again we want best estimate risk numbers with appropriate treatment of uncertainties so that other risks, such as risk offlooding, are not masked). One source of conservatism is in the seismic fragility approach, which comes primarily from assuming that the structure response scales linearly with ground motion level. This source of conservatism can be removed by using nonlinear soil- structure interaction (NLSSI) analysis to explicitly model the interaction between the soil and structure (i.e. the structure will slide during larger ground motions). The second source of conservatism is the response of the soil will be nonlinear for larger ground motions and NLSSI will account for this.
AB - The objective is to provide advanced seismic probabilistic risk assessment (SPRA) methods with the goal of removing large uncertainties, to the extent possible, and to provide "best estimate" seismic risk numbers. The concern is that large uncertainties in traditional SPRAs will mask other potential sources of risk and focus disproportionate time and money on mitigating seismic risk. This paper is not proposing to change the process for characterizing the seismic hazard at a given nuclear power plant site. However, there are two potential areas to remove conservatism in the SPRA process (again we want best estimate risk numbers with appropriate treatment of uncertainties so that other risks, such as risk offlooding, are not masked). One source of conservatism is in the seismic fragility approach, which comes primarily from assuming that the structure response scales linearly with ground motion level. This source of conservatism can be removed by using nonlinear soil- structure interaction (NLSSI) analysis to explicitly model the interaction between the soil and structure (i.e. the structure will slide during larger ground motions). The second source of conservatism is the response of the soil will be nonlinear for larger ground motions and NLSSI will account for this.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84945134975&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:84945134975
T3 - International Topical Meeting on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Analysis, PSA 2015
SP - 761
EP - 764
BT - International Topical Meeting on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Analysis, PSA 2015
PB - American Nuclear Society
T2 - 2015 International Topical Meeting on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Analysis, PSA 2015
Y2 - 26 April 2015 through 30 April 2015
ER -