ML19256E826
| ML19256E826 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 10/09/1979 |
| From: | FUGRO, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17174A134 | List: |
| References | |
| TASK-03-06, TASK-3-6, TASK-RR NUDOCS 7911150321 | |
| Download: ML19256E826 (27) | |
Text
......_.- _ _
REPORT ON SITE-SPECIFIC DESIGN SPECTRA DRESDEN NUCLEAR PLANT Prepared for:
NUCLEAR SERVICES CORPORATION 1700 Dell Avenue Campbell, California 95008 Prepared by:
FUGRO, INC.
Consulting Engineers and Geologists 3777 Long Beach Boulevard Long Beach, California 90807 4
1335 004 October 9, 1979 79111503d pano j
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page i
1.
INTRODUCTION 1
2.
DETERMINATION OF SSE AND DEVELOPMENT OF SITE-SPECIFIC SPECTRA 2
2.1 Seismotectonic Zones 2
2.2 Seismicity.................................
5 2.3 Seismic Design Spectra 8
3.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATONS 11 4.
REFERENCES 12 1335 005 UCRO
l.
INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of geologic and seismologic investigations and the determination of site-specific seismic design spectra for the Dresden Nuclear Plant.
The scope of this investigation was limited to a study of existing litera-ture and special reports, including Safety Analysis Reports (PSAR and FSAR) and Safety Evaluation Reports (SER) for nuclear power plants in the site region.
The nucleus of the report, presented in Section 2, has been divided into three major subsections.
Subsection 2.1 deals with the tectonic zonation of the site region and provides backg round information on tectonics and f aulting required for subsequent subsections.
Subsection 2.2 describes the general seismicity of the site region and establishes the maximum earthquake for the determination of the Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE).
Subsection 2.3 addresses the development of design spectra associated with the SSE.
Comparisons of the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Regulatory Guide 1.60 (NRC R.G. 1.60) and the site-specific design spectra are made, and site-specific design spectra are provided for both horizontal and vertical component directions.
1335 006 16'"a
2 2
2.
DETERMINATION OF SSE AND DEVELOPMENT g
OF SITE-SPECIFIC SPECTRA a
~
2.1 Seismctectonic Zones Introduction
_2 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations, Appendix A of 10 CFR Part 100, provide that the SSE be determined on the 1
basis of an evaluation of tectonic provinces, correlation of earthquakes with tectonic structure, and capable faults within the site region (200-mile r adius of the site).
In practice, these evaluations are difficult because of a lack of knowledge i
on the causes of earthquakes in the central and eastern United States.
The delineation of tectonic provinces for this study is based
_d on a review of PSAR's, FSAR's, and SER's of nuclear power plants in the region surrounding the Dresden site.
Earlier safety analysis reports for nuclear plants such as Dresden, Braidwood 2
Station, Byron Station and La Salle County were prepared before c
5 establishment of criteria outlined in Appendix A of 10 CFR Part E
100, and thus, they do not provide the details necessary for tectonic zonations required by present usage and regulations.
=-;
=*
SER's for the Clinton, Callaway, Koshkonong, Marble Hill, A
Hartsville, Phipps Bend, and Black Fox nuclear power plants I
provide more up-to-date information on the parameters acceptable to the NRC.
These SER's repeatedly and clearly indicate that the NRC does not accept tectonic zonations that dif fer sub-stantially from those described by King (1969), Roge rs (1970),
]
Eardley (1962, 1973), or Hadley and Devine (1974) unless the
=
applicant were to provide a substantial new body.of data.
2 1L===
1335 007
3 Although our study is based on the traditional tectonic provinces as outlined above, numerous recent seismologic and geologic investigations suggest that modifications of the traditional province boundaries r.ay be warranted.
For example, the Wabash
^
Valley faults at the northeast tip of the Mississippi Embayment seem to be more appropriately associated with the Mississippi Embayment province rather than the Central Stable Region.
This zone of f aults and relatively high seismicity surrounding the northern end of the Embayment which does not appear to be typical of the Central Stable Region has been referred to as the Francois-W bash Region province (W ston Geophysical Corp.,
St.
e a
1979).
Other major geologic boundaries within the Central Stable Region such as the subsurface Grenville Front which separates unmetamorphosed igneous basement from metamorphosed igneous and sedimentary basement may provide a basis for further subdivision of the province (Weston Geophysical Corp.,1979).
However, such subdivisions would have no ef fect on the determi-nation of site-specific seismic design spectra for the Dresden site.
Tectonics Figure 1 shows a highly generalized picture of the major tec-tonic provinces in North America in accordance with established tectonic subdivisions.
The Central Stable Region province extends from the Appalachian Mountains to the western Cordillera; and from the edge of the Cretaceous and (or) Tertiary deposits of the Coastal Plain tectonic province on the south through and including the Laurentian Shield of Canada.
The site is within 1335 008 7,s o
m 4
the Interior Lowlands subprovince of the Central Stable Region 7
which comprises much of the midwestern United States.
As described by Eardley (1962), the Interior Lowlands is a region comprised of sedimentary rocks overlying Precambrian crystalline basement which have been broadly warped into arches, basins, and other structures mainly as a rerult of Paleo zoic epeirogenic activity.
Figure 2 is a generali zed tectonic map ot the Interior Lowlands subprovince at surrounding provinces showing the location of major geologic structures.
The major arches (Kankakee, Cincinnati, and Findlay), were formed in the Paleozoic Era by downwarping of the adjacent basins ( Mi ch ig a n, Illinois) rather than by uplift along the arches.
The structures northwest of the site such as the Mineral Doint anticli ne, Meeker's Grove anti-cline, Fond du Lac syncline, and Waterloo syncline fo rmed during Precambrian to Mississippian times.
The La Salle Anticlinal belt
.?
is a series of en echelon anticlines which formed near the close of the Paleo zoic era.
The tectonic structure nearest (34 km) the site, the Sandwich fault zo n e, is about 160 km long with a na maximum displacement of about 275 m.
The last movement appears to have occurred prior to Meso zoic time (225 million years ago).
Detailed siting investigations in conjunction with the Clinton nuclear plant verified that there has been no movement on the E
feature at leaGt in Pleistocene time (the last 2 to 3 million years), and thus, it is not a capable fault.
In summary, the geologic structure of the sita region is typical of the Interior Lowlands portion of the Central Stable Region with no indications mi fac.o i333 009
---DW
5 of tectonic activity in Cenozoic times and thus there is no e
reason to expect future tectonic or seismic activity to be locali zed in the site area.
E 2.2 Seismicity The seis..icity west of the Appalachian province is cha racteri zi.
by infrequent earthquakes having low to moderate intensities.
Regional seismicity maps (Coffman and Von Hake, 1973; Hadley and Devine, 1974; Stover,1977), show rather randomly dispersed seismicity throughout the whole central U.S.
except for a few I
areas that appear to have more frequent earthquakes.
These areas occur near Attica, New York; near Anna, Ohio; in the Mississippi River-Wabash River Valley of Tennessee, Missouri, southern Illinois, and Indiana; and along the Nemaha Uplift in Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska.
Most of the larger earthquakes I
within the province are associated with these areas; for example, an intensity (MM) VIII near Attica in 1929, an intensity VII-VIII Anna, Ohio event of 1937, an inMnsity XII New Madrid event of 1811-1812, and several intensity VII events along the Nemaha Uplift between 1867 and 1956.
These events are generally considered to be associated with geologic structures.
The Attica event has been attributed to the Clarendon-Linden structure (see Black Fox SER), the Nemaha events are associated with a long linear feature extending from about Oklahoma City to the Omaha, Nebraska area (see Black Fox SER; Docekal, 1970; and Steeples and others, 1979).
EaIthquakes in the Mississippi River-Wabash River valley region are associated I
1335 0'10 GRO
6 with deformation that has occurred along a northeast trending synclinal trough along the Mississippi River called the Mississippi Embayment.
This mode of deforma* ion is continuing today and the Mississippi Embayment may locally alter the regional stress regime of the continental interior (Street and
~
others, 1974; also see Callaway SER).
The Anna events have been the most difficult to associate with geologic structure but investigations in conjunction with the Marble 11111 nuclear plant (Dames and Moore, 1976; Seismograph Services Corporation, 1976) have shown that the deep structure in the Anna region is very complex and undet3ain by several faults (Bowling Green, Champaign, and numerous other unnamed f aults), igneous intrusions, and complex lithologic contrasts.
The seismici ty may be associated with strain release along such features (Mauk, 1978; Nuttli and Herrmann, 1978).
==
5 The largest historic earthquakes in the central U.S.
were the 5'
1811-1812 New Madrid, Missouri, earthquakes of epicentral intensities ranging f rom X to XII (Fig. 3).
Thes" events are E
within the Mississippi Embayment tectonic province more than 300 km souta of the site (Fig. 2).
Isoseismals estimated by Nuttli (1973) for these earthquakes indicate that the Dresden E
un site was in a zone of Modified Mercalli intensity VI.
The largest earthquake in the Central Stable Region tectonic province appears to be an intensity VIII event in the Keweenaw Peninsula of Michigan in 1906, but this intensity is considered (Co f fman and Van Ha ke,1973; Nuttli and Zollweg, 1974; Nu ttl i,
1335 01i 3
3s...
7
=
1974) to be anomalously high.
The epicentral area is highly faulted and heavily mined; and much of the damage and other phenomena associated with the earthquake were apparently enhanced by these features (Hartsville SER).
The small felt area is more in ne with an intensity III-IV earthquak.
ug g es ting that this earthquake was a very shallow, low magni-tude avent (M=3.6) with a high local intensity.
The conditions surrounding this event are not characteristic of the Central Stable Region as a whole, and chus, this type of event is not expected to occur outsic 2 of the Keweenaw area.
The largest random earthquakes in the Centr'l Stable Region province are of epicentral intensity VII (MM).
A number of earthquakes of this intensity have occurred in the site province within about 300 km of the site (Fig. 3).
The closest one to the Dresden Nuclear Power Plant site was the 1909 Beloit, Wisconsin earthquake vSich occurred near the Illinois-Wisconsin border, approximately 150 km frcm the site, r
Based on the discussions above, the maximum earthquake to be
=
ronstdered in the determination of the SSE is a random earthquake of maximum MM intensity VII occurring at the site.
The level
~
of shaking at the site from this event is considered to be greater than the shaking at the site from repeated occurrences of earthquakes similar to the 1811-1812 New Madrid, 1937 Anna, Ohio, o r 1929 Attica, New York, events.
1335 012 s
GRO
8 2.3 Seismic Design Spactra Approach.
The general cpproach to determine the level and shape of site-specific design spectra representative of the postulated maximum earthquake at the Dresden site was to:
o select accelerograms recorded under conditions similar to the ma.Imum earthquake, o
compute the response spectra of these accelerograms, and o
determine ave. aged smooth spectra from the sample of these response spectra.
Representative Records.
Accelerograms were chosen from recording stations close to the epicenter of small earthquakes such that the intensity at each recording station was identical to the maximum postulated MM intensity at the site (VII) and the local site geology at each recording station i
. in general similar to that at the cite (bedrock).
The six selected accelerograms and their recording conditions are listed in Table 1.
All of the accelerograms were recorded within 31 km of the epicenters of earthquakes between magnitudes 5.2 and 5.8.
The magnitudes predicted for an event of epicentral intensity VII from statistical correla-tions of local magnitude with epicentral i> tensity (Brazee, 1975; Gutenberg and Richter, 1942; Murphy and O' Br ien,19 78) lie within this ra ng e.
1335 013 jao.o
9 Computing response spectra directly from representative acceler-ograms recorded at stations in the zone of MM intensity VII, is considered the best procedure to determine SSE design spectra representati<e of the maximum earthquake.
This method makes the best use of the existing data and avoids uncertainties associated with the use of:
(1) correlations relating intensity with peak acceleration, (2) peak acceleration ;o set the level of the design spectra, and (3) attenuation relationships which may not adequately represent the attenuation ot ground motion for the Dresden site region.
Site Specific Spectra.
The 2, 5 and 7 percent damped response spectra of both hori-zontal components of the six representative accelerograms are shown in Figures 4, 5 and 6, respectively.
Smoothed site-specific spectra for 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7 percent of critical damping were developed from a statistical analysis of the ordinates of the 12 representative response spectra at selected periods.
The smoothed spectra are plotted in Figures 7 and 8 represent site-specific design spectra corresponding to the and mean and mean-plus-one-standard-deviation levels, respectively.
The average peak acceleration of the 12 records. or the ze ro period anchor of the smoothed design spectra corresponding to the mean level of shaking, is 0.075g, wu.le that for the
=
mean-plus-one-standard-deviation level equals 0.125g.
A comparison of the spectra in Figures 7 and 8 reveals that the shape of the 0.075g and O.125g design spectra are generally similar.
funno i335 014
10 A comparison of the mean design spectrum with the 0.07 NRC R.G.
1.60 spectrum for 2 percent critical damping is shown in Figure 9.
A similar comparison between the mean-plus-one-standard-deviation design spectrum and the 0.125g NRC R.G.
1.60 spectrum is shown in Figure 10.
Both the mean and the mean-plus-one-standard-deviation spectra are generally much less than the NRC spectrum over the entire period range except at periods arourA 0.15 see where they are about the same level.
Similar differ-ences are seen when comparisens are made at other dampings.
The site-specific design spectra in Figures 7 and 8 are considered to be a reasonable representation of the levels of shaking which cou ! be expected at the site from the postulated maximum earth-quake.
The NRC spectra are not representative because they were derived from a statistical analysis of response spectra of western U.S. accelerograms recorded an sites varying from deep alluvium to rock for earthquake magnitudes mostly in the 6 to 7 range and epicentral distances between about 20 to 60 km.
Vertical Design Spectra.
The 2 percent damped response spectra of the six vertical components of the representative records are shown in Figure 11.
Figure 12 shows a comparison of the mean levels computed for both ' the horizontal and vertical components of the repre-sentative spectra.
This figure implies that site-specific design spectra equal to one-half the corresponding spectra for the horizontal components (Figs. 7 and 8) would be con-servative estimates of the SSE levels of shaking for the
^
vertical component.
133b 015
n.
t
.... -. i-
=
11
)
3.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The maximum postulateu earthquake that could affect the Dresden i
site is a random, small magnitude event producing a MM intensity J
VII at the site.
The site-specific design spectra associated s
with this maximum event that are recommended for the SEP analysis
_2 of the Dresden Nuclear Power Plant are the mean spectra shown j
in Figure 7.
There are a number of reasons for selecting the q
mean spectra.
First, the occurrence of an intensity VII at the site during the remaining life of the plant is un.'.ikely as
]
there are no known capable faults in the site region, and there
-a have not been any earthquakes of intensity VII within 150 km of m
!j the site (and only two of this size within 300 km) during historic 7
time.
Second, even if the site were to experience intensity VII i
shaking in the future, the expected level of the corresponding
]
ground motion would be consistent with the mean design spectra.
a Firially, the underlying philosophy of the SEP for existing nuclear
-s q
power plants is to rake realistic rather than over-conservative assumptions in the assessment of the seismic safety of these facilities.
In our judgment the mean design spectra shown in Figure 7 are compatible with this philoscphy.
7 Vertical design spectra aqual to one-half the mean horizontal design spectra are recommended.
Although this fraction is less m
than the value of two-thirds currently recommended by the NRC, this level was established by e site-specific analysis.
a bGRO
4 M
g 4
' y_ _ _ y_ _ _ _ _ R_ __
g S...
..s Y._..==a_____._.... ?f L
w hr s
____,g_
d d
m f.
'4 l
a
?_$
x 4\\
t' y
n'.
Wy.
.,e-
^
. t.
P 9
.g_
'A t
Y z.
2
-oj j.
a 8
t
'fo W
~
v.,.
9
- ~^' ~ ' ' '
e e
' ' ' ' ' ' ~ ~ ^ ' ' ^- ' - - '., * ;]t-- -' ' '. " ~ ' - ' ' - ' ' ^ ~ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
- - ' ' " ' ' - ~ - - ' ^ * - ' - '
a
-^~^~'s'
... _ l, i n _ _ _21,.-
s.
~w.
~
- L_# m
_ 1 s__
w
.s
^
- [
.' j 13
~
l Mauk, F. J.,1978, Geophysical investigations of the Anna, Ohio L '
earthquake zo ne :
Ann. Prog. Rept. prepared for the U.S.
?
9 i N.R.C. UMGM-NUREG-78/03.
L _
Murphy, J.
R., and O'Brien,
- n. J., 1978, Analysis of a worldwide f.1 c
strong motion da*a sample to develop an improved correla-L' tion between peak acceleration, seismic intensity and i
i_
other physical parameters, NUREG-0402, U.S. NRC.
Nuttli,O.
W., and Zollweg, J.
E., 1974, The relation between l
felt area and magnitude for central United States earth-1
[
quakes:
Seismol. Soc. Am. Bull., v. 6 4, p. 7 3-8 6.
i e !l-Nuttli, O.
W.,1974, Magnitude-recur rence relation fo r central l,:
Mississippi Valley earthquakes:
Seismol. Soc. Am. Bull.,
v. 6 4, p. 118 9-1208.
l Nuttli, O. W., and Herrmann, R.
B., 1978, State-of-the-art fo r i
1 assessing earthquake ha zards in the Ur.ited States, Repo rt l
J 12 - credible earthquakes for the central United States U.S. Army Engineer W terways Experiment Station Misc.
a
,(,
Paper S-73-1.
(-
Rogers, J.,
1970, The tectonics of the Appalachians:
New York, L
Interscience Publishers, 271 p.
gj Seismograph Service Corporation, 1976, A review of geophysical
} ~
I" survey of the Anna, Ohio area:
Unpublished document L$a i
submitted to Sargent and Lundy for Marble Hill Nuclear
- [4
- L Generating Station, 10 p.
l Steeples, D.
W., DuBois, W.
M., and Wilson, F. W., 1979, Seis-micity, faulting, and geophysical anomalies in Nemaha
!- ~
.g ~
County, Kansas:
Relationship to regional structures:
j,,
Geolog y, v. 7, p. 134-138.
sl l k%
~J Stover, C.
W.,1977, Seismicity map of the conterminous United States and adjacent areas, 1965-1974:
U.S. Geol. Surv.
r Misc. Field Studies Map MF-812.
L+*
Street, R.
L., Herrmann, R.
B., and Nuttli, O. W., 1974, Earthquake mechanics in the central United States:
Science, v. 184, p. 1285-1287.
^
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1975, Safety evaluation report related to construction of Callaway Plant Units s
.i 1 and 2:
NUREG-75/076.
(
, 1975, Safety evaluation report related to con-L struction of Koshkonong Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2:
f' NUREG-75/092.
l*:
7e j
I i
1335 018 P)-
s GRO 2
f
- 1 g
d.
+
14
, 1975, Safety evaluation report related to con-struction of Clinton Power Station Unita 1 and 2:
NUREG-75/013.
1976, Safety evaluation report related to con-struction of Harcsville Nuclear Plants Units Al, A1, B1, and B2:
1977, Safety evaluation report related to con-struction of chipps Bent Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2:
n NUREG-0101.
1977, Safety evaluation report related to con-struction of Black Fox Station Units 1 and 2:
W ston Geophysical Corporation, 1979, Eastern United States e
tectonic structures and provinces significant to the selection of a safe shutdown earthquake:
Report pre-pared for Systematic Evaluation Program Owners Group.
1335 019 w=
hGRG
I I
TABLE 1 ACCELEROGRAMS MOST REPRESENTATIVE OF MAXIMUM EARTHQUAKE AT DRESDEN NUCLEAR POVER PIANT SITE I
I
.picentral Maximum Acceleration Earthquake Distance (g)
Record Magnittde (km)
Incal Geology Horimntal Vertical I
I 1957 3an Francisco Sand and clay over Alexander Bldg.
5.3 15 thin bedded shale
.04,.05
.03 ard sandstone I
1957 San Francisco Franciscan chert Golden Gate Park 5.3 12 and thin inter-
.08,.10
.04 bedded shale I
1957 San Francisco Dune sa:d over
.09,.06
.04 State Bldg.
5.3 15 clay, sand and gravel I
1935 Helena, tbnt.
Limestome bedrock Federal Bldg.
5.8 6
.03,.03
.01 I
I 1970 Lytle Creek Mesomic granitic Cedar Springs 5.4 19 rock
.07,.06
.06 I
1975 Mendocino County Cretaceous rock I
Cape Mendocino 5.5 34
.20,.10
.04 I
1335 023 g
p-
I Rr- 0 i
i
\\
t N
M+a
=
d n
(
- star,,tui 2 #A
/
'(
\\
CD,)
g
~
NORTH AMERIC AN 4
g CORDILLERAN PROVINCES I;
/
/g,L
/
l r..-l<%%r. /-Q,/
t
}
/ GULF C0AST GEOSYNCLINE _
ARMTIC':
1
\\
p.
./
C0ASTAL LOWLANDS
. 0 TEM.
s K
88LF 0F MEXtC0 8
=,LES 1335 cm~
M I
PR0]ECT NO.*
78-179 NUCLEAR SERVICES CORPORATION GENERAllZED REGIONAL E
TECTONIC PROVINCE MAP 4 7s riaunE i
J
\\
,\\-
1 i
a a
1 Sa' 4;~
C a
t
\\
EXPLANATION 3%
SHIELD
- -~~
s._
HICH ANGLE FAULT; HACHURES ON DOWN THROWN SIDE q
WHERE KNOWN, DASHED WHERE APPROXIMATELY 1222212 LOCATED OR COVERED BY YOUNCER DEPOSITS.
l c
o j
tono =To o ARCH; SHOWING APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF AXIS l
7 MAJOR LINEAR UPLIFT
,,,,,,.p 3._
\\
M^
4 4
n pf/
MAJOR ANTICLINE OR ANTICLINORIUM
'W M UOR SYNCLINE OR SYNCLINORIUM i
n SOUTHERN EDGE OF L AURENTI AN SHIELD l
L
\\
TECTONIC PROVINCE 80VNC3RY i
l q
H l
[
/#
1335 022
~
k 0
100 200 MILES s
l.
MODIFIED FROM HADLEY AND DEVlNE,1974
=
Q
\\
AND HOWARD AND OTHERS, 1978 f*h (E
PROJECT NO.*
78-179 A
NUCLEAR SERVICES CORPORATION 4 @*
TECTONIC 14AP OF 35 *-
CENTRAL STABLE REGION, DRESDEN SITE AREA 4-79 FisuRE 2 e
n
-s1=
l
,m..
F '.
[
g$
./~,..~.
\\
\\.,
u p
/
%d k
./,Yg8 00f
\\
~
_)
l
/
m:
i
).
t
/-j
.i
)
l 4l l
l l
4^
-\\*
]
/
{!
/
/
N (~ #
j I
t
.s
( $10U1
/
roNooutage N.
UPLIFT
$YNCtlNE N._...-
y
-43*
siME m olNl MICHIG AN BASIN
/"":al:=:#..
M4 cnicaso f
- +<,
x, A'g p
9]5 Y,, SITE f
k
)
I 4
/
x
... i i
/
/
d 5
l e
x 3
f x
X
/
8I ILLIN013
%p
-asa
/
G
/
I i
~
/
/
I I
/
'/
I sAsiN 1335 023 5'[g OZARK J/
l
&'ON e
s s.
s e_p p'
o
^\\
\\
tutsa.
/
/
/
h,
'N N A!HVILLE /
e
\\
!D0llE g%
f
/g p
p
+
/
00ACHITA FGl.0 BELT
_ 33 s-I
____i
8 0
85n I
90*
I C
f 95*
x
\\
()
E' W
_45" 9
s
(,... -' \\
l.
e
- " * " " " ~
1
, MINNEAPOLIS u
i II I
i l
r
/
/
i l
/
I i
n p"
MADISDN glLWAUEE 1
/
OETR0ll',
o j
I
\\
/,s l
-- Q - -m o
1, i
o 1909 Vil o
p e
CHICAGO
-~ ~ ] '~ ~ ~i
%[
I',
i 0 o J
DES MOINES 1
0 l
o i
1937 VII 3
I b SITE iS37 ' " ' " '
o
, 4 0-I,"=,
]
o i
o gg3g;vil 1876 U g O
o o 1931*yli COLUyBUS O 1909 Vll
{
-i
+
SPRINGFIELO INDIANAPOLIS
(
O s
n r
o 4
IL ANSAS CITY i o
I, i
o Q 1899 Vll 100lSylLLE ST. LOUIS o i
i j
j 1903 Vil o,,,, }
o o
?-
~. ~ ~S l
t f
)
~ ~ ~ '
....I
_r'
- ' - ~ ~ ~ -
"~
1811, 1812 Kll o
I HASHytLLE e5 0
100 200 230 400 500 1
' ~ I K LOMETERS EXPLANATION MGRO
~
'j o
MM INTENSITY LESS THAN Vil HISTORIC EARTH 00AKES
[
O MM INTENSITY Vil DR GREATER IN THE REGION ARQUNO ORESDEN NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITE 4-79 FIGURE 3 1335 024
FREDUENCY, cps
... 3.
- 2.. 1.,. 5,,,, 1..... 7,.. 5..,.. v. 3.
.,2- <n *
- 1,.1
.07
.05 S
3,0.
1,0....,.
20 15 r
n1 1
4no I,Y\\',[,
(
,f ': '1
QN
[I
/
n's.'
, x/,
'y a
\\.
\\
b
3 m
F-r
- m s
s r
c....
.,4
=
v u
a u.,.. -...
a O
x
', l,/ y
\\
E; q'
y s
',' y NN
.- a,-
..v 2
+.
',s y~
e s
s x
- ,,.c
.; x.
p 0.
8
~
y y -.~
x
- c...'x.
t,.,.,
t i.
o 1
ex ls
,7 w12 4
4 N.
n.
'k
.. ~
r r
r * -. " * * - ~
.2 p
7 y
s x
b I
4 h
b I '.
c Of, jH I
(
E PERIOD (secs)
T335 025 PROJECT No.:
78-178 o
NUCLEAR SERVICES I::
HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA MOST E
REPRESENTATIVE OF MAXIMUM EARTHQUAKE.
2% DAMPING 4-79 FIGURE 4
I FREQUENCY, cps 30 20 15 10 7
5
, 3,.,
- 2... 1. 5..,, 1,,,,,,.,7, i... 5. r.,.... 3.m.,2...v i i. 1m,n.7
.05 0
-I
/
im
- J r', - y y j 4 ', 'i 1
-N y
y' j
).
i 3
j y,.
i
~
Ig%-
< s
,p n
y 5
,+,
s 2' o
'. ' ' ' REPREi_NTATIVE REC 0KD1 ' '
- 6. > 'l) r.,.,,,
c k
' c,.,
p 1
, y.,
\\
ion v"s 4a
- 1957 ALEXANDER BUILDING r 4 iao g
s a >
s
./ -
80 o 1957 GOLDEN GATE PARK L
+
L'g.
go r
I"-
+. 1957 STATE BUILDlhG s
u' x-A L-4 e A
- - - 1
/
1s..-
60 A
- 1G35 FEDERAL BUILDING y.
. - g 4c, - '.
3', s... -, s.
.r ' 'r A 1970 CEDAR SPRINGS r
L 40 I ::j' O t.175 CAPE MEND 0CINC s
t.
s
^
i g
',)
m a
'l4 v.,
-s.
s s
20 s.<,
,x.
,s 4
s a
,\\"
'y g
N.
x v
io
- t..
a.
v
.4
,.s y
., ~
2 C
4 h'
\\
~
s' y
8 4
3 N
3 s
v g
54 SQ s
s x A-x,
,t
.w-x t
x 3.
a.
6 b
~
.A..
8 u,
- s 1
r r
4
- 4..
x o
_s
?, * ';.
4
' 'i' '
'r'*
o i
s
.t.
a l
=
I3 s
[
.e
\\
4
-x 1
./.
2 s.,
1 y
t'[
~
s.
y l
s
.y,t c
8(-
i.
I s
y 1,
a
.~
k k
k b
k 2.
A 4
6 e,
4 y
4 p, \\
I$
~
r'~ ;-
4
~
'r 4
r 0
'\\
i
'N,. - s $
~
2 S
.i
=
.2 s
s r
l-1 1
p a
g
( u.
v v.W y 5
.t 3
PERIOD (secs)
}33'5 O')6 PRO M CT NO.*
73 173 NUCLEAR SERVICES HORIZONTAL. RESPONSE SPECTRA MOST E
REPRESENTATIVE OF MAXIMUM EARTHQUAKE.
5% DAMPING 4-79 FIGURE 5
I
~
FREQUENCY, cps I".
30 20 1 5... 10...,,7.-,
- 5......., 3
,-.2... 1.,. 5,,,, 1,,, <,.,7,,... 5...,,,,,.,3
.1.
- 7....,... 1,,,1 0 7
.05 4gg 4gg -g
' [' ; '
y y 's i
. r'. m y 'v
- i t a T.
x I
, N.
N
's
- i 1
y,
3 y
,f s -
IQ-
,sv A, ' a
)
e
< x (y
s zoo j,
1 REPRESENTATIVE RECORDS.'.*
6
)
s,,. i c,,.
i i
e 1957 ALEXANDER BUILDING s
ion s..,
, c, o s, $.
o 1957 GOLDEN GATE PARK s
3 33 7
s I:
~
+ 1957 STATE BUILDING s
' h'#.'
- 1935 FEDERAL BUILDING
'O
,' ' V
/ '
4 s
^ <
s A 1970 CEDAR SPRIN3S
/t.
F, * ' r - N' E1975CAPEMENC0CINO f. ' 'r ' -
i 4L 40 I&
.j
=
i
.s r
,s N
.A J
,e
.b I,
- 2 4
s 20
,' l 3 J
sg y
y s
s I
j 4
h.
)
('
I 8
, \\.h J'
N I-xo n1
. t, '
..x io
>... ~..
C s
.r,
'. n' i
.N '
.'N r
e
. s, r
m 2,.
m.
.. x
. s..
x..
x
. s._
o I.
. s x
e U
r
.r, s.
s o
3 3
4 Ig g
v x
4 y
N
~..
. ~..
2 s
v L,.
s f-
- t..
u
.~
. x.
g s
s.
. ~
u w.
w.
w.,.
c Q
t:
ls 3,.
,y y.
- k E
s
,p y
s Ij
> N.,
0
.~
4 s
p A
n yo
.w y r v
PERIOD (secs) 13.2 027 PROJECT NO.,78-17g "E
NUCLEAR SERVICES
=
2 HORIZONTAL RESPONSE SPECTRA MOST I:
REPRESENTATIVE OF MAXIMUM EARTHOUAKE.
7% DAMPING 4-79 FIGURE 8
I FREQUEWCY, cos 30 20 1,5 10
- -,7 -.5..... 3 2,.. 1. 5...
1,,.r..-.
.,.5.
,... 3
. 2,.r, r,.,.I,,., 0 7 I
400
.05
)l, , f. 'l,A('iN
- N
,A ' N'l M.j 'N' N l
,f > I V 'Ni
,400 iN h' 'N -
- s N
s t
4 P
y s
t.
t N/
1
- S,N/.' ' /'
3, y /
w' J
q\\
/ s DESIGN SPECTRA I I%
5 200 r p.,*
k'-
4 af
? 4
~ -
n
~
- .~ ^
~~y
,. 4
- ~.*
7 200
< p.
[,'*3
}, ; [ s. r,, /
'.a,
l "MEAN' ^
i
< +
t.
5,%
/'
I E~
- '\\
>/ -
,a ICf)
M'
<[ >
/.
A y.k
.s v'
v -
4 t
~
f
.4 y
v 10 0 s
<,',<,r,.,% ; ' y P 80 ' + ~
s
'. }~
.F h.
/ - P M
I=
' A ? -%;p, 6c
-5.,-
L,/
h., e L A,4~7 k
s f
's f.
h.y t,
d.
\\/ - 60 N, [ ',,'
,3,~ ' -
f j
g 40 y r' y' ~ %.{.
v.
.' y '~
/2 ~r ' x 40
~.
Iy
/
-,)
~.,
J,/
t t
F
.', q
)
i, x1 e
,1
,y
.i x.
e x
.,/
i 20
,4 - /L s
- 'x
'.( N N,
'... ~. ~
.M-.
v; A
e
~-
Is I-s
,r3 7 <
20
,/
3 4
- 2
( 'A
- 3l l'
,e s
'A
=
,s f
q>
i u) y, t-v/ - ' = '
5 K
8.,
' g., i
,5
-- N s
N.
x J
i y'
h.sq--
f i.
ja
~t I
-, y 3
qt
',7 f 4 3 ~ k,a-
- /,4 V
10
+
c
/
s v
~
g 6_ -, +, yw-.
4y p a
x /
1 p
,,.. s
./ v
,4, -y y
p.
8
/
s :
-/ '
~
,i
/
a
.g
'j g
p.
6 s.
L x
.4, -
5,
x - L
,.,,4v
=
i A-L A
wX-A-+ -
6 L._
+y 4..-
I.;
..N,.
,q..<
, N< g s
),g e
., j x -
st 1
,x o
/
~*
3 s
O
'i,'
T'
' T '. '".'
b, ' 'i' ' "[ ~ ~
/
s 4
l y'
r
't I :=,
LU
~\\, '.
/
f f
i N
/
4
=
f e '.k, i
/
sx
'y f,,
.L
.y.
> f x
,e s NN
~
s,;
2 x s
,r. ',-
s.
',. '., y
~ N j
,/
t
.[
x F
t
',.V
'j
', /
s s
/
_./',,. '
i
, \\;
/*
z y
e A,-
s/
,f
,y s
v w
~4 i.,
N.
s.
s
,br
-;- Y
- /
-,' g/-.
1 s
H 1-I w
~
- . /
fv 8
y./
w
--k/,
,4. /
es A,,-
A
),.
A/
L e. A A
,A
,17,
-4 6
9, :,/
!. O, w
i i
y 4
'- " -c,
,s A
~
'L y v
'v y
(J '~
',/
r~~-~
v s
v
- be r 5
/
<1 4
c~',,/
'j',
%,s,'
x N
a f
,.]
y/
's y
s.
a.
f
}
,-,/
x
\\'
=
ei x y'
'/
(
.k 2 2'
-4
.i f'~.
v' r',-,f A.
4 s
y
/
.Ad N.-
.2
~
v y y
. ~
t y'
Vs
~'
}h'-
s y
j' 7
y
, A J /s.'
s l,x ; f ff,
','x , 'x '
i f?
N I,< N;
},"[
,\\., i!,, ' -
is/
W C4 06.08 m
, m m -
2 4
6 8 4
?
4 6 8 10 PO PERIOD (secs:
333b 028 i
PROJEci NO.:
78 178 NUCLEAR SERYlCES
.auf f
SITE-SPECIFIC DESIGN SPECTRA REPRESENTATIVE OF MEAN LEVEL.
4-78 nount 7
I I
FREQUENCY, cps 400 -.20-.15... 1,0,,...,7. -.5..... 3.
- 2... 1. 5.... v,,,,.,7-i... 5.
..... 3 30 1
--,2....r,.,,.1., m 7
.0 5, -
0 t., ' (,Nl.
4 '< i ts 400
. 4 i,
,3
.' I f
',j/ y o
-v1 3 nl i
s I,g f
t.'
y y;.x t.
y l.:
a x
< p' i
' DESIGN SPECTRA.I
.l4 N,
I
,Z.
$,,. 3 N'
J o
a 4 r r
.0<,
l c '.. -
.s
.w 4
MEAP + 1 6,-
E;(
- f,'.x, v,
'c,,',
)
y j
i V
i e
i,,
i t.
.i i.
ic,9
.,4
- %., <, '^
k e 4 ', / 4 v-IOU s
y d
s
't s
{,.
<(
. y.%
4' 'g,
s 1,.
ac p
r-HJ s.
.s
.. - v
+
w h,-
( ~ 7,.
s
's L,-
A L 1.j 7
L,-
L A t
,is,/,
60 s,
h, 0
A f,,
{
.e
'. { <~ '.l
.; e 4
/ ([ 'r ' - - * -
r r
y p.
y ". y.
- j., '.y ' s 4;
40 7,.
o s,
h,,.
f n
y p~
n 1
q IA
~
-A e.
- A V
e
,'t r
'N
.i
%; _\\ N i
'y 7
\\
L.
- s ' v, A,.., -
27
-.5-
-h
.4 20 y,#
,s.
.g
]
P f[
j' y
,V
)
f
(
j N
i
=
I,Sq g
Ni
' 'j/
-;/ N y
N.
h - e,-. -
, =. ;
kq<+
,y/
q
=
s
'O vs
- a v
,.4 V
to
- +,
s c
t I
(,
3 9,. ' -. ' *. - 'p' '$
y
\\
4 { +
,er p
v.
y y 8
+
-v 7
,b, s
v
- r *-
E L ' a
.A.
6 4--
~-
k +
b L e A 6
a,,
p
/
.../
N, f
.si "s.
i"s
/ e t
4 i
i
'.s I
,/
5, g, s-i',
,/ i s
g L
I=
b d ~~ -- - - + -
4
=.
e-+'
O
- w v
.- s s.-
,e 3 -.
d
/
), '
5 h,
s
)
5,,/
1.t.J I
e
. g[
I,'
,, ' /u N
/ <'
,e
,F s
4
. p ',)
'g\\'
3,,
q3.n. y u.,..-
- u. ;+
2 e
I
\\ ~\\
'q,,.,/
~,=
f
=
a a
e a
p
'},
'j
}
r 1
x, s
3
,Y
's D'AMPlNG'd
?'
4
_h
[
',y
~
\\ 1 1%
h^y s, ", L e,, ",,
y i
4~h
-2
.e _. s e
.s b
y s
.~
v./
, >4 p..;
,'N
\\ 3
\\
5 C
_ k /-
.%.,,1. < ',
s' A J
_ :,f IN k <
A, L
L
.L /
K K / A
/
6 4
,f.?
t
/
=
4 ),',
's o
~
4 e o
r 8
5 4 /b
,"h,"-
v 4
y'%.,
k,.
p'%1.'w Y v
v 4
5 w
y '- - {
i
,,1
- g/
/
/
/ y y
t s
p
?
L,
[. ';f
_i j
'r\\
v' b
- "~*
e' 5 - l~{
~'
v' y,-
y
.2
~
,r r
~.
~-
- ~ - -
y
/.
_t
=
y j
(;
4 s
,,. ' N/,
/
s
,. f
/
i, N s.
s
} <A i i
,4 ie v
N.
e -
N. i. i
'. i I
i./
s
/Ev w
s
._u,.m.,.,
1 i
1 a
1 1
'1 j
04 06 OH I 2
4 e H i
/
4 6 8 10
- 'O PERIOD (secs) 13h 029 I._
PROJECT NO.:
13 179
-l' Ij NUCLEAR SERVICES SITE-SPECIFIC DESIGN SPECTRA REPRESENTATIVE OF NEAN-PLUS-ONE-l STANDARD-DEVI ATION LEVEL i
4-79 FIGURE 8
I FREQUENCY, cps
-.0.m.5.... t.o.... 7.
5,........3.-.
- 2... 1., 5,... I..,,.,7,,..,5....,....,3.,.. 2....,,,,,.,I,,,,,0, 7
.05.r.,
e
,,3 0 2
1 Is s
-x j
r,.T i
N" r', e y 3xJ
- i r s, - T -,-,
' s, h
4 y
1 /
).
y' t
sq-Ib
.(1 '
,(
,h<
, s
+
I.
. ~,
- a. u r.,, )
s
.s s
4 3
v. ;
y
.)
/
e
. N ',
'r.
[
X i i..
,g s
I$
..b y
k 4
e l O(',
.wi
,' J v
hM' 6
y.ll 4
8 s
N.'.# t..
1.
- l..
=
Hr;
.e y.
tQ I s,.
w a
o a
a e
<y.
1,, is N l.,,
N-1,
),.
d, ig,,
t>0 E
(L L, L b,4e. e.
e A
a e x
,r i
s,
.N s
s.
L 4
.N'.
p..
k 4r J
40 g,.
,y
-f 7
-y Ii i
h
)
I y
)
)
b a
k.
.x y
4
,4 s'x 2 <,
,a su a
,.y s.
I t
to
~, ~.
's,7,
's,,.
0.07g NRC R.C. 1.60
/
y, b,
\\. t.'
' HORIZONTAL DESIGN SPECTRUM
,L x
,v w
s t
e
,,r s
q '
L. - v.. i s.
,'y' 1,
' q._s s,
10 j v 3
7 y
f4
..c y
-g
- ,,. 8 k.
y -
8
., v
.e v
v
.. ~
/
~t A.,
,'k v ',2v. ',. ' t.,
L.-
\\ A.,.
a e,
s.
i.,
A
, -- A s --
6 x,
I:=
sp, g'
<s, e
g
,,f.
- 2
?'
.,, b
<L u
/,
r ' +. -
o l' '.'r'**
!" ' 3 '.'"'i-'~
4
~
.~
\\
.J
.s t-
>/
I L.
U
)
s y
s 4
=
/
1
~
w
/
,F f
y'
, '/
s g
f 9.
../,.
a'.
/.'
x t
s, #
- L a s
c
.e A e
2
.A
- g i
s m i i
y s I
'{
' N
,. -', - )
y
/ i s
"j/
,\\,
g y
?-
/ s. 'L
^ /-
1 Q./, y 3
yL
/
~
, j, g
~
g
'7 f
r I.y
/l,/ N
,kr 8
-;,* y
.4 w
g
/ y y
M w'
.,g 7
~
, u,.,
e x.,
x, u,u
(..x.
t.'
t us-x.
t e
e s
\\
- 4
(
/ MEN'U,< w.f \\ %c ' l _\\
l,(y 's., ",.
.5,'
=
=
c",i 4,*-
v' l
4
/
4 v.
i y
v
/ %,, I ri
- /'
l, E Q~%,I'
=
=
i'
~y s
Y,"
V.
a
' e'
\\
t'k
/
i/
,4 4
i.
e e
r.
I*
- -.
- v r-
- d, i-i
-si-'h.2 2
v r-r.-
'~
V,- l%
\\,y s
},\\. / j
/
. V.
s s
s
\\
.ff
/
!/
/.,./g
=
' } < "g I,4
?.l 'i Ti i3 J.
'./
e
/
e, s
s s
C4 Ota OH '
2 4
o H I 4
6 8 10 PO PERIOD (secs) e PROJECT NO.:
78-179 I :.'
E NUCLEAR SERVICES I
NRC SPECTRUM COMPARED WITH MEAN LEVEL 0F SITE-SPECIFIC DESIGN SPECTRA.
25 DAMPlNG 4-79 FIGURE 9
I FREQUENCY, cps
- Ig
.0
,gg. 30 _2 01 5. 10.... 7.
5......... 3.... 2... 1. 5... 1,,,. n,,7...,.5...... 3,.
- 2....,,.. 1,., 0 7- -.5"'""
4 no
' 3 x y 's r
' j r' a y xn
- i
,/j
,- s s
s x
V
- Nl
/ ['," h I
, ', =
't, 'P P'/x,%'
/
s e
s 4
y lx
/.s x
j w N [-
s'
- t A,. N' iN r' /
.)
s i
e e
-/
x 1,n
/.
. 'i I
/
4
's s
f
.(
.. =.
i 3
/ i J'
l y
/
. s, ',; No z.,
.r s ),,
/;
- n.,
n.
, cy,, F -/ 4 3
3.g x
-',s
/< h,,,, q.,
l i
i i
F i
s:. f.".. -
c
, v ;,,,,,
1 4..,
.- s.
i F
L + 4 , /a g'-}fy,Qu'.y l
p i
v o-
.? p
'). '.
10 0
'g 3
v j.;,
.,/.
r o
m, I:
s.
'i i,
., [ y, i..,
x nc L,
A Ag f x,-
t, / L A,.f,e' / g-b,e 1
Q 60 N
y
,, ' y.'
,s s' y 'j,+y
,f...
g 5,
,'.',;s s
/,.
s
, s y
40 f.
'p g,*a 2
4c -.
, =p
- l Id
=
er
=
4'Q, O.125g NRC R.G.1.60
.2_
s.
.- a s,
,' a y
i 4
i J
e s
4 HORIZONTAL DESIGN SPECTRUM v 's N' 20
,A Is rh 7,- t 4,.,q
- w;s 2 c.
%,s,. s
. - - -- s
< /
.s
, 37 p
' 7 '
's
(\\.
.' v g
3 v l/,
n
./ x
=
q,
/
xi f
f.-
l /<N yI/
,s x-e t
y' u,
's
/
L~,
e s
p
< s N
s s
_ - v[ ~ 1-4,,m
/ / v 3x,qq gyg*
3NK
_. <,.4
+
v to 4
to w.%m,.,A y
' ',. w/ 4 -,
. 's
)g ',,
,y
,/
./.
s
, v b x, *
,i,/ 8, 4
~
,i j' x, s
A 6<
,r.
. 2 't -
L L. \\
.4,
/'
/
x,
)
6
- L-L A
,A,
, r b +' - 6 I,
f r
,o x s,p;s ;.
N'/N[
'..*t
,3
/
s g
f
(
1 k,
/ . o>f
-J'
~
l
(
I s
s
\\
x L
=
,s.
,,. /,
s s
s u
1' 3
I
/v 4d f 'b *,
l'f 4
< ] 'i' *]' 7 - ~
O
? f'/ '
'I /,/ y f, / j. ' ', k s
. '" s I5 s,
'j\\x f'/
{'
N 9
" x' V
/ / /
(
N f,
I i
'N
\\
g%,3,p, l '. ' t
/ /
r, T N x /
,, c4 '41,,. L >'
.I
/.
i
+y 2
A c
,s
~ - -
N s
y\\
,' /
/.'a f.o
,/
i
,' \\
/ -
r',.y ' /,f
/
/
is ',
X-
{
/
L y
,f
/
,./
f,,, y,
/.s
,/
- m%/.
ms.
v' s.
v'
/,'
i
./
,s
', /,'
<1 4'MEAN + 1.O'/ _x g
,/
,x q
I
_.f
~
e 4... s v.-
+.-
s
,..+.-
-).
}s w.,,4../
i
/- e x,1 s,.
- x x,
/,
o A / b si sx, -,.
~
f m
L..A /
,%/
'A,e 'A
'A A
!'i 4
- A
~! '- Y, q,,<
,./
A <-
N, 4" Y(~. 'N ~' .
/
6
.y, o
/
.x s
f,.
,f
,f Vx 3
3 3
/ c
. < s i, N
' ! y Ii,.'x ' kpx i
4 - r' ' ".l v
'vl.
./ l L
4
~
4
, /s, F-s<
,/
f '-
A
'x i
l
/
r
/ c y,,
I
(: /
6
/
, /-
,/ >\\
x y
/
s
,r
=
[y
/
/t /
xL \\
N +.
f,/sj', i,/{$ -N
,h
./ r,/-f s /
/
- j
,Il - r j -
f," N,;,
I,1
\\, *,x 'g s
/
.2
- 7,. -
v y
-u 2
,o -f k 7
- x. - s -
pqv
/
y Is >
,I y
,A p/ /,
.3
- s. - -
i f
i f
.i /
/s a
s y
'N l/
sI/,
,'>s /j,, s,
y s
y
's
'/
/
,/
x >/ '$-
l
,4 l
I
,t
> /
s-s =
5
^ > '
I N,xN,
/ s
! /; x s
l /; s
/l x'
/-
l,/ N
/. /
p(
i I
04
.06 OH I 2
4 6 8 i P
4 6 8 10 PO PERIOD (secs) 1335 031 PROJECT NO.:
78-179 I:.
2 NUCLEAR SERVICES I:"
NRC SPECTRUM COMPARED WITH MEAN-PLUS-ONE-STANDARD-DEVIATION LEVEL OF SITE-SPECIFIC DESIGH SPECTRA.
2% DAMPlNG 4 70 FIGURE 10
I FREQUENCY, cps
-,.-,2......... 1... v 0 7 05 30 20 15 to 7
5 3._... 2... 1. 5... 1,,. r. 7.
- 5.....,3
-.r-y'. ;
i r,q y %,; j
- i 43i
-x g, >'. 2
_sI
),. y i-s-
t.
t.
r',
r y t
y
, y,
~s
. i.
'v
)
< \\
.i '
MEANSi'ECTRAI f
3 e
i de -
,b, y o, ' e, coa
,. e e.,
- . _., i p
soo a,
g*
g
=
y,.,
~
,"q h,,,' v tl c
/
e i
v.
- 7. -
~. '
g(y i 3.y v
.' s A
v
J v'
idO
(
a e
t
<0
)
I 4
4
(
l
+
s 1,.
s' v
a i.
y Md by' Hf,
+ s e
ae v
y
('g s
w
,* g q ? c,.x,-
x.,
L.
t LA.
u,.
u w
o
~,.
, ~..
f.
- % g, \\h
40 J
. +
.U s
=
=.
,p sp s
a
-p
's_
- t e i
6 r
=
a J'
4
,x N
e 4
'k J.
J
. l..
.4 20 4
=.
.k s
,.v.
~
A s
= ' $,'
]
[
g g
s'
)
t i
v y
x
,.,,, y
., -.,L L
s,
y v
L 2
. -, a
-v' io n
-p C
S N
y ',,,. -
s r ',... r 3,
~
8 8
g x.
.+
e c..
c a
.s o
_s..
3..,;..
o p..r..
4 s
m
)
,4 4
(
(
2 i
~.....
s s
..h,
1 w
t f',
')/
\\
.u, a
~,.
l pRuowt;-
~
.y,
~
y,
. ~
't
. x.
x s.
., VERTICAL,.
t s.
t t
t t
(,
5
.s
~
3 4
4
~,... w :
.s 4
x.~.
x 5
?
o y
y
- k k.
p-
_?
}
y y
r
't
).
v' r
s G4 Ob u i e.
H
,")
o 4
PE RIOD (secs) 1335 032 PROJECT No.:
78-179 NUCLEAR SERVICES COMPARISON OF MEAN LEVELS OF REPRESENTATIVE SPECTRA HORIZONTAL VS VERTICAL COMPONENTS.
25 DAMPING 4-79 FIGURE 12