ML20210F484
Text
- }.
L. ;-} y. *: ~ % f, ;_ C [ V M i.
S [$?'h. lh'.' k' 'QW {
6%,<i%fik.J'ff.9l^l_**k!$5%V. a
\\.
'$t9.fWh, I I
Th' "' '
h ij
{,g.e; gi b' '$ ? h {'..'
"d t%j >g; e..t J
n r
m..
.h ',(.
4; 3
t
.['
,,kj? (5)
$.f i*
r
? ;'
.l-
!f yg
}Y t
1
,', ;(, ?
ss_
c t,'.
y _y
.g:
t h-m u
n.
.r ' *: ;
U[r
-E s
.j-
"TEQis Ur!L'T'E9 GE"E"3T"!G CO.
I' r
}h. :
cm::w=. re? '.'w 2
~'
N CASif. T.R.4X.H6NCERS Lfl.
p,1
_ _ 7.q. p - 2,
}
4 g,
,.0' 11ULTIMODE RESPONSE MULTIPLIER
SUMMARY
f-
'.p' REPORT (3-0 RESPONSE SPECTRUM ANAL. &
- v. -
. 'c
,/?,
VERIFICATION OF f1RM EQUAL TO 1.25)
I 2
=
sN h*
6j ca
.+
f 4':
g-y.
(v.3
- p
.w'-
th
,5 e
e 3
We k
3*
[.
n,*
e 4
2.
a a
g e
k8
?
i
)
.e e
p g
g_$.
II, g
,' e'
.L I
[i9,
[
S T
e a.
y f
- L.
A'.
J~
9.,
.e :.g r; e%
I
~*;,
s t
s y
g,
+
g o,,
' ' r ',
N
'\\
e n
l'E I
- BOOK 9 21 5
g A
f.
s.
..g
M 4.
A
?..
g s
O 4
+
TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR Tills BOOK O
S 1
i
-,==a
m
-mm---
w+,,
w w--
m--v--
---w--
--p.-----.
.g---
y.
,-y-g-
VOLUME I - BOOK 9 TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY COMANCHE PEAK UNIT NO. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS MODEL NOS.1, 2, & 3 MULTIMODE RESPONSE MULTIPLIER -
SUMMARY
REPORT
~
3-D RESPONSE SPECTRUM ANALYSIS AND VERIFICATION SUBJECT OF A MULTIMODE RESPONSE MULTIPLIER EQUAL TO 1.25 PAGE I.
INTRODUCTION 1
II. THE SELECTION OF 3-D STUDY MODELS 3
III. STUDY CONCLUSION 11 IV. STUDY SUPHARY 1.0 Modelling Assumptions 14 2.0 Seismic Input Requirements 15 3.0 Analysis Approach 16 4.0 Study Results 18 5.0 Discussions 22 e
- se e O
m-
= - - - - - -
,e gr--
-_m
,,,n
-,,,ww-e
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING CO.
COMANCHE PEAK SES UNITS 1 & 2 3-D RESPONSE SPECIRUM ANALYSIS
~
AND VERIFICATION OF A MULTIMODE RESPONSE MULTIPLIER EQUAL TO 1.25 4
i i
'1 4
l 4
Prepared by:
- 2. T. SHI I. H. CHOU S. P. LU L. GOR 0ZDI
.i I
Reviewed by:
R. Alexandru Date: Oct 30,1985 I
i i
i i
I 1
I EBASCO SERVICES INC i O NEW YORK, N.Y.
10048 l
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1
Section P_ ages I.
INTRODUCTI0h 1-3 II.
THE SELECTION OF 3-D STUDY MODELS 3-10 III.
STUDY CONCLUSION 11-13 4
IV.
STUDY
SUMMARY
14 l
1.0 Modelling Assumptions 14-15
)
2.0 Seismic Input Requirements 15-16 3.0 Analysis Approach 16-17 j
4.0 Study Results 18-21 1
5.0 Discussions 22-26 i
i 4
k l
1 i
i I
i l
1 4
i f
' O i
i l
i 3-D RESPONSE SPECTRUM ANALYSIS STUDY O
I.
INIRODUCTION The cable tray hangers are classified as Seismic Category I struciure i
and 2
they are design verified for the effect of dynamic load induced by the postulated seismic event combined with the applicable concurrent loading.
l The above design requirement is delineated in CPSES, FSAR and NRC standard review plan. There are, in general, four (4) acceptable analytical approaches to consider the seismic load in designing of the Seismic Category I structure, which are:
- 1) Static analysis (SA) method using 1.5 times the peak spectral value as an input requirement per Reg Guide 1.100 recommendation.
s
- 2) Equivalent static analysis (ESA) method using an amplification f actor to multiply the spectral "g" value corresponding to the lowest system frequency, and accounting thus for multimode responses.
This approach has been used in seismic design of cable tray hanger i
j system for many nuclear power plants such as Grand Gulf, Hope Creek, Seabrook, South Texas, Susquehanna, Limerick and Palo Verde. These i
j are the plants we know of and we believe other plants have used this methodology.
- 3) Response spectrum analysis (RSA) method using spectrum curves as an 4
input requirement d
i
)
l
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ " ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
- 4) Time history analysis (THA) method using earthquake time history as O
an input requirement.
U Each of these analytical approaches has its own merits. The cable tray hangers of the Comanche Peak Unit No. 2 project are in general design, verified by employing the equivalent static analysis method, and it is planned to also use this method for the design verification of the Unit 1 CTH's.
An amplification factor of 1.25 is used to account for the multiple modal responses during the occurrence of the ceismic event. This amplification f actor is referred to as the "Multimode Response Multiplier" (IRM), and is used to multiply the g value corresponding to the lowest frequency of the system, in each of the three orthogonal directions.
I The purpose of response spectrum and time history analyses of this study is to l
demonstrate that the amplification f actor (MRM) of 1.25 is adequate to cover the multiple modes and system effect on the total seismic response of all cable tray hanger system in both units, when used in conjunction with the response (acceleration) determined by ESA for the lowest frequency in each direction. The Multimode Response Multiplier is calculated by the following formula:
MRM = 1 Ef whe re the wgighted average "g" value obtained f rom the
- =
S response spectrum analysis results at all points of the 3-D nodel which represents the multi-span cable tray hanger system.
2 1
sf the "g" value corresponding to the conservatively
=
(9 calculated system fundamental frequency, which combines V
the hanger frequency and cable tray frequency using Dunkerley formula. The cable tray hanger, which was considered in Dunkerly formula, was also usInd la 3-D model.
The following sections describe how the cable tray hanger runs were selected to represent the actual systems, the modelling assumptions, analysis approach, seismic input requirements and summary results.
II.
THE SELECTION OF 3-D STUDY MODELS l
The MRM study deals with a small number of cases. These cases where selected l
so that all reasonable ranges of frequency encountered in the plant are accounted for. In this respect three cases were studied. Two idealized cases
, ere "made-up" to cover the low and high ranges of frequency. Furthermore, an w
actual case was studied to account for variability of hangers geometry and stiffness as well as variability of cable tray spans and size, accounting thus for the system effect.
To account for the variability of input the maximum (top floor) response spectra of four building were used for the study as well as the response spectra of the elevation where the supports studied are located.
i When the 3-dimensional finite element models of cable tray runs are I
constructed we closely simulate the dynamic behavior of the actual installed
.O 3
,___._,r
. -, _ _ _.. ~ _.
cable trey hanger system, using the same modelling techniques used for equivalent static analysis of cable tray hanger design verification program.
The seismic response of the cable tray hanger system depends on the rigidity of the system (reflected in the dynamic characteristics of the system, which in turn, are measured by the range of frequencies inherited from its l
structural and mass configuration, etc.), and on the characteristics of the input notion.
The main purpose of the study is to obtain the seismic response range which can represent the actual installed configurations of the cable tray hanger system, and demonstrate that a Multimode Response Multiplier established as i
1.25 in each direction is applicable for the seismic design verification of all cable tray hanger systems installed for Comanche Peak project. The re f ore,
O' the aforementioned parameters, i.e., the f requency of the systes and the type 1
of seismic input motion, are considered as basic criteria on selecting the proper cable tray hanger runs analyzed and the adequate seismic input motion
'as an input.
In order to cover the possible fundamental frequencies range of the as-built cable tray hanger system, three (3) different 3-D models were assembled with the f ollowing characteristics:
i i
1.
Model No.1 (Made-up toward rigid range of the spectrum) i This 3-D model consists of four (4) maximum cable tray spans (8'-0) and five (5) trapeze hangers, of which four are identical transverse type
!O 4
~. _ _
and one is a longitudinal type hanger. Both the longitudinal and transversal type are actuals and selected to provide the lowest frequencies, as close as possible to the peak.
s Three (3) layers of cable trays (12"x4") without thermolag.are located on three horizontal tiers.
The fundamental frequencies and higher frequencies in three (3) orthogonal directions of this "made-up" model are located on the right side of the spectral peak, and are intentionally chosen to maximize the MRM as explained in Section 3 (P.8).
e 2.
Model No. 2 (Made-up toward flexible range of the spectrum) i 1
The run configuration of this model is similar to Model No. I with the following exception:
Three (3) trays without thermolag are mounted on two horizontal tiers with two 12"x4" trays on the lower tier ar.d one 24"z4" tray on the upper tier.
This model provides a first frequency to the lef t of response spectrum peak.
The fundamental system frequency in vertical direction is located on the lef t side of the spectral peak, while the other two fundamental system frequencies are located on the right side of the spectral peak.
The structural :nd load characteristics of the installed system is such that it is rather unlikely to find systems with the transversal and 5
i
longitudinal frequency to the lef t of spectral peaks. The higher modes p
can be either totally to the left or at the peak or to the right of the b
response spectra depending on the location of the floor response spectrum (see Section 3).
3.
Model No. 3 (Actual Installed Run)
This 3-D model represents an actual as-installed cable tray hanger run located at EL 852.5' of Safeguard Building. The tray run consists of five (5) unequal spans and six (6) tray hangers, four of which are non identical trapeze types, one is a horizontal cantilewr, and one is a SP-7 with brace longitudinal type hanger. There are two layers of 24"z4" trays maunted on two separate horizontal tiers with 4 and 5 inch offset from the center of tiers. The two trays are fire protected by I
The rmolag.
The longitudinal fundamental system frequency is located on the lef t side of the spectral peak, and the other two are on the right side of the spectral peak. Higher mode frequencies range on all sides of the spectral peak depending on the particular location of the floor response spectrum, ie, building, elevation etc.
The characteristics and/or the variability of design parameters covered by these three (3) different models can be briefly summarized as follows:
O 6
~
s.
Types of tray hanaers OU Trapese, cantilever and SP-7 type hangers are represented in the 3-D models. Among these, some are transverse types and some are longitudinal type hangers.
b.
Type of cable trays 12"x4" and 24"x4" trays are included in the 3-D models. These two sizes of trays are the most frequent types of trays installed at site.
c.
Span Lenaths A maximum, equal span length of 8'-0 (Models No.1 and No. 2) and actually Justa11ed unequal span length varying from 6'-0 to 7'-0 (Model No. 3) are considered in the 3-D models.
d.
Number of tray layers Multiple layers of three identical tray runs and two layers of different sizes of tray run are included in 3-D models. This creates many close modes in the vicinity of the f undamental mode and this is desirable to saximize the MRM.
e.
The rmolag The effect of Thermolag was included in Model No. 3.
O 7
f.
Frequency Ranae of Models r~s f
As pointed out previously, the fundamental f requencies of these 3-D models are located in the three regions of the predominant spectnam curves, i.e., they fall into flexible, amplified and rigid'aodes response regions. The magnitudes of frequencies in three orthogonal directions of the studied cases cover the full range of spectrum frequencies and are listed in Tables A and B.
3 Relationship Between Modal Response Distribution and Spectrum Input Shape i
The magnitude of the seismic response MRM for a given tray haeger systen depends on the relative location of all major important modes with respect to the amplified response region of the spectrum curve. In order to explain and or appreciate the above important relationship j
between modal response and spectrua curve input, the frequencies (Table A) of these three (3) models were plotted on a set of response
\\
spectrum curves, which were used as the seismic input in this study.
l (see Section IV-5).
The two examples of Section IV-5 illustrate that
\\
i sodal frequency distribution vis-a-vis response curve shape is such as i
to maximize MRM value.
l l
In short, the three (3) different 3-D models, which included the above various design parameters can represent and simulate conservatively the dynamic 9
behavior of the as-installed cable tray hanger systems for Comanche Peak Project application.
2 O
8 i
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING CO.
COMANCHE PEAK UNIT 2 CABLE TRAY HANGERS d
TABLE A - Ranaes of Frequencies for fixed base lM0 DEL 1
2 1:
3 l
l MODE Direction Direction Direction l
l NUMBER VERT 1 TRANS LONGl li VERT 1 TRANS LONGl vamIl TRANS LONGl l
l I
l 1
l 9.82 l
6.22 1
3.86 l
2 l 9.95 l 7.13 l
3.86 l l
3 l
9.98 l
9.22 l
4.27 l
l 4
l 11.27 l
9.59 l
4.27 l l
5 l 11.46 l 10.10 l
13.10 l l
6 l 11.50 l 10.82 l 13.37 l
7 11.63 l 11.00 l 13.39 l
8 11.69 l 11.23 l 13.53 l
l 9
l 11.75 l
11.23 l 13.55 l
l 10 l
11.80 l 11.23 l 15.29 l l 11 1 14.95 l
11.23 l 15.29 l l 12 l 15.20 l 11.65 l 15.96 l
l 13 l 15.24 l 12.82 l 16.00 l
l 14 19.11 l 13.75 l
18.26 l l 15 l
19.36 l
14.75 l 19.22 l
l 16 l 19.50 l 15.28 l 19.36 l 17 l 19.53 l 15.98 l 22.53 l 18 l
21.11 l
16.61 l 22.83 I
l 19 9
21.92 l
18.38 1
24.17 20 22.72 l 18.72 24.50 4
s 21 l
22.85 l
19.09
.I 24.50 l 22 l
23.54 19.38 i
25.03 l 23 l 24.01 19.52 25.67 l 24 l
24.90 l 19.78 l
27.44 l
25 26.46 1
21.53 27.50 1 26 l
27.11 1
22.54 27.93 l
1 27 l
27.63 l 24.41 l
29.74 l
l 28 l
31.94 l 24.79 30.10 29 l 32.68 l
25.69 l
30.10 30 l 32.78 l 25.90 l 30.33 l
l 31 l
l 26.59 l 30.43 l
l 32 l
l 27.18 l
31.71 l
l 33 l
l 27.74 l
l l 34 l
l 28.47 l
l 35 l
l 31.88 l
l
!O i
9
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING CO.
CDMANCHE PIAK UNIT 2 ELEC MICAL CONDUIT & BOX SUPPORTS TABLE B - Ranaes of Frequencies for flexible base lMODEL 1
2 i
3 l
MODE I
Direction Direction Direction l
NUMBER VERT 1 TRANS LONG1 VERT 1 TRANS LONG1 i VERT 1 TRANS LONG1 l l
1
.i L
I l 1 l
9.07 l
5.68 l
3.72 l l
2 l
9.34 l
6.40 1
3.75 l l 3 l
9.53 l
6.84 1
4.27 l l
4 l
10.24 l 7.42 l
4.27 l 5
l 10.29 l 9.08 l
- 8. 98 l
l 6
l 10.33 l 9.66 l 8.99 l
l 7
l 10.38 l 9.67 l 13.10 l l 8 l 10.52 l
9.67 l 13.38 l
l 9 l 10.77 l
9.67 l 13.39 l
l 10 l 10.94 l
9.82 l
15.29 l l 11 l 11.02 l 10.10 1
15.29 l l 12 l 13.21 l 10.78 l
15.37 l
13 l 13.56 l
10.86 l
15.42 l
l 14 l 13.76 l 11.26 l
18.26 l l 15 l 15.07 l
11.45 l
18.72 l
l 16 l 15.67 l 11.65 l
18.84 l
l 17 l
16.13 l
12.70 l
22.35 l
l 18 1 16.42 l 13.09 l
22.63 l
l 19 l
17.15 l
13.68 l
24.15 l 20 l
17.88 l
15.25 l
24.50 l 21 l 18.90 l
15.46 l
24.50 l l
22 l 19.24 l 16.16 l
25.03 l
23 l 19.47 l
16.91 l
25.55
,l 24 l
21.10
,1 18.68 l
27.44 l 25 1
22.13 19.47 l
27.50 l 26 l
22.47 19.88 l
27.81 1 27 1
22.83 l
21.05 l
28.85 l
l 28 l
23.69 l 22.54 l
29.15 l
l 29 l
24.05 l
22.74 l
29.85 l
l 30 1
26.48 l
24.50 l
30.10 l l 31 1
27.42 l
25.68 30.10 l l 32 l
31.65 l
25.75 31.67 l
l 33 l
l 27.18 l
l 34 l 28.01 l
35 l
31.11 l
l l 36 l
l 31.52 l
l O
10
e III. STUDY CONCLUSION Q
The Multimode Response Multipliers obtained from this study are sa listed in the Tables I and II and exhibit the following important properties:
- 1) Most of the MRM are less than 1.0, and only 5% of them are greater than 1.0, with the largest value being 1.18 for the vertical direction, for model 3.
- 2) The variation of MRM for various buildings and different floor elevations is not, for most cases, significant.
- 3) The magnitudes of MRM is not influenced by the response spectrum differences of OBE and SSE events.
O
- 4) The MRM of 1.25 includes the effect of baseplate flexibility. All models of ESA approach do not account for the baseplate (base angle) flexibility when calculating the f requency. In verifying the responses by using the 3-D models both flexible base and fit base cases were considered. Therefore the 1.25 MRM can be used conservatively with ESA approach when calculating the system f requency with fixed bases.
- 5) The magnitudes of MRM depend on tim relative closeness of ttm system I
fundamental frequencies with respect to the spectral peak, and the number of higher modes located within tie amplified region., In general a fundamental frequency to the lef t of the peak gives a higher value MRM than the one on tie right of tim peak.
11
- 6) The MRM obtained using the enveloped horizontal response spectrum curves (NS and EW) as a seismic input requirement are conservative, because the spectral peak frequency. range for enveloped curves is broader than that for individual spectrum curve. Thus artificially more higher modes were located within the amplified region.
- 7) Additional conservatism inherent to the application of equivalent static analysis approach. This study demonstrates that a MRM value of 1.25 is conservative when used with the Equivalent Static Analysis (ESA) approach. The ESA has in addition conservatism built-in by the usage of simplified formulas and approaches. These conservatisas are worthy to be noted, as follows:
a) Single cable tray frequency calculation is made by assuming full design load (in Unit 2) and simple supported and conditions.
Both conditions result in the lowest fundamental frequency for the cable tray.
b) Multiple cable tray f requency value is assumed to be the same and equal to the lowest tray frequency of the set. This artificially lowers the f requency for some trays and assumes that all trays vibrates in phase and transmit at all times maximus load on the hanger.
O 12
IV.
STUDY SUMAltY A
1.0 Modellina Assumption i
e 1)
The cable tray hangers selected for the 3-D models are represented by finite beam elements, which simulate the stiffness characteristics of both cable tray hanger and cable tray itself.
The section properties (area and moment of inertia) of the tray 4
section were extracted from the static load test included by cable a
tray vendor in their seismic report of cable tray.
The cable loading is simulted by concentrated masses lumped at each of the five nodal points along the cable tray span between hangers.
I 2) i The connections between cable tray and horizontal tiers simulate the mechanism of transferring tray loading to support member for the
(
transverse type and the longitudinal type clamps accordingly.
I
- 3) The longitudinal type hangers have the capability to resist three i
orthogonal directions of the earthquake components, while the i
I transverse type hangers resist one vertical and one transverse l
(normal to tray run) earthquake components in addition to being subjected to the self-weight induced seismic inertia force in i
longitudinal direction. The modelling technique staulates this l
dynamic response behavior for different type of hangers accordingly.
j I
,i
- 4) The boundary conditions slaulate the actual installed conditions, either by moment connection or hinged connection, and the 3-D models with these types of boundary conditions are referred to as " fixed base" models.
In addition, the flexibility of the base angle and/or base plate is included in the modelling, and such 3-D models are referred to as " flexible base" models.
- 5) All offsets resulting from member assemblage (working points for braces, load of cs) are not considered in the 3-D models. The effect of these offsets on the system frequency is insignificant, therefore the effect of offsets on the overall seismic response (acceleration) can be excluded form the modelling consideration.
l However, the offset between horizontal tier and tray has been considered and simulated in 3-D model, because it affects f requency.
2.0 Seismic Input Requirements A set of 4% damping OBE and 7% damping SSE floor response spectrum ci.rves are used as an input for the 3-D response spectrus analysis. Tim floor response spectrus curves are selected f rom Reactor Internal, Reactor Auxiliary, Electrical and Safeguard Buildings. The 28 response spectrua curves included in the study cover seven elevations of the four buildings, in both horizontal and vertical directions.
O 15
i I
The floor response spectrum curves at the top elevation of each building and in addition, the response spectrum curves at the actus1 location of support are used in spectrue analysis.
As mentioned in Section 11 the magnitude of seismic response ser a given structural system depends on the characteristic of seismic input notion, which is represented by a set of floor response spectrue curves, since the seismic input notions for subject analysis represent various buildings and various floor elevations, therefore, the amplification f actor established from the resonse results of 3-D modal analysis using various seismic motions as inputs can a used in static equivalent analysis of cable tray hanger for Coasoche Peak Project.
3.0 Analysis Approach O
Multimode Response Multiplier is established by comparing the responses (accelerstions) obtained by either a time history analysis or a spectrue response analysis with the responses (accelerations) used in the equivalent static analysis. A spectrua response analysis approach was used for Model 3 in accordance with the requirements delineated in Reg.1.92 for the method of modal response superposition. A time 1
history analysis approach was utilised for Models 1 and 2, both of which exhibited " unreasonable" (see footnote) cross coupling effects among the three directions when the spectrue response method recommended by Reg.
1.92 is used.
Footnote: " Unreasonable" means that under a more accurate (ties history) analysis these modes cannot possicly add up.
l 16
I t
This unreasonable cross coupling effects were eliminated when a sinemve time history uns used as an input for the dynamic analysis of Model 1 and 2.
The earthquake time histories were not available at the time when the models 1 & 2 analyses were completed (and issued on September 19, 1985) To compensate for the unreasonable coup 11ag the g
spectrun response analyses were finished using the SRSS asthad ior superposition of all sodal responses. Time histories were made available to Ebasco by Gibbs and Hill on October 11, 1985, and a time history analysis was performed on Models 1 & 2 to reconfirm that the MRM's obtained from the previous response spectrum analyses are still conservative even though SRSS method for modal superposition was used.
The time history analyses results did confirm previous results and proves that the absolute sua for closely spaced modes should be used with caution, and response of all modes which unreasonably couple should be combined by SRSS. The f requency range of 3-D models considered in the response spectral analysis is from 3.7 29 J3 H,.
The total nodal mass corresponding to all modes response is checked to be 90% of the total mass. When it is not, the residual mass is multiplied by the largest spectral acceleration at or beyond the cut-of f f requency and applied as a rigid body force on the systes.
i O
17
\\
l l
c) Dunkerley's formula which combines tray frequency with hanger i
f frequency always give the lowest frequency value for the system. When support mass versus tray mass or the stiffness l
ratio are wry large the Dunkerley's formula gives very conservative (very low frequency) values, and results 13 large "g" increases.
d) The shif t in frequency due to base flexibility was studied and APPfCTN6 Au found insignificant ing ncrase to the "g" values.
i 6
==
Conclusion:==
As stated in ites 1, 93 percent of MRH are less than 1.0.
Furthe rmore, accounting for the conservatism associated with the enveloped horizontal response spectrua curves (item 6), the use of 1.25 MRM in conjunction with equivalent static analysis
- results in a comfortable safety margin in the seismic design verification of tin cable tray hanger systems installed at Comanche Peak plant.
- And "g" calculated at tte fundamental frequency in each of tin three orthogot.il directions.
O 13 l
4.0 study Results The analysis results obtained from the three (3) models indicate that the MRM for each 3-D model and each direction is less than 1.25.
Therefore, these response spectrus analysis results demonstrate that a
~
MRM of 1.25 as specified in the seismic design criteria for cab 1e tray hangers for Comanche Peak project is adequate to be used in the seismic design verification of the cable tray hangers, by the equivalent static i
i analyses.
l q
The actual Multimode Response Multiplier for each of three (3)
I orthogonal directions are listed below for thme (3) different models corresponding to both the fined and the flexible base conditions (Tables I and II). In addition, the MRM established from time history i
O' and response spectral analyses for Models 1 and 2 were presented in 1
1 Table III.
I I
f i
i I
l t
i 1lO la i'
TABLE 1, l O
! V MRM for the fixed base models l
l l
l l
l l
RANGE OF MULTIPLIER l
1 I
l l
l l
l lModelsl Building l l
0 B E (41)
S S E (7%)
l l
l l
l l
l i
i I
l l
l l Elevation l l Trans-l Imagi-l l Trans-l Imagi-l l
l l
(ft) l Vert I verse tudinal l Vert l verse l tudinall i
I I
I l
1 I
I I
I l
l 1
I l
l Reactor 1860.00*
10.67 l 0.99 l 0.93 0.71 1 0.94 l 0.90 l
l l Internal 905.75
'O.71 0.88 0.83
'0.75 0.91 0.81 l
l 1 l Reactor i
l l
l l Auxiliary 1899.50 l0.52 1 0.69 l 0.88 10.63 1 0.73 l 0.91 l l
' Elec t ric al 873.33 10.69 l 1.00 1 1.13 10.69 l 1.10 1 0.95 l l
Safeguard 896.50 10.85 0.95 1 0.71 0.79 0.87 0.77 l l
l l
l 1
l i
l l Reactor l
l l
l l
ll l
l l
l Internal
'905.75
'0.99 0.87 0.86
'1.01 0.92 1 0.89 l 1
l 2
l Reactor 1 810.50*
l 0.49 1 1.00 0.95 i 0.51 i
0.92 1 0.93 l l
Aus111ary I 899.50 10.8 9 l 1.16 1 0.95 0.89 l 1.05 0.95 l l
Electrical 873.33 0.87 0.98 0.92
, 0.85 0.99 0.92 l
O lll Saf eguard I 896.50 11.18 i 0.$3 0.93 il.08 U.75 0.77 l
l j
1 ll Reactor l
l l
ll l
l l
l Internal 905.75
. 0.67 0.77 0.31
'O.70 0.76 1 0.39 l l
3 Reactor l
Ausiltary ; 899.50 10.52 l 0.74 0.36 10.57 1: 0.73 0.49 l
'l Elec t rical :873.33 0.61 0.75 0.38 0.64 0.74 0.52 l
i l
852.50s 0.65 1
- 0. 72 i 0.51
. 0.64 0.79 l Safeguard 896.50 10.61 l 0.59 1 0.51 0 63 l 0.72 -
0.64 l 1
1 0.63 I I
I I
l l
ll l
l l
l
- The floor elevation where the han8er for structural model is located.
O 19
TABLE II r
MRM for the flexible base models l
l l
l RANGE OF MULTIPLIER l
l l
l l
lModelal Building l Elevation l 0 B E (41)
S S E (31) l l
1 (ft)
Vert. l Trans. I Long.
Ve rt.
Trana.
Lona. l l
l I
1 l
1 l
l l
l l Reactor 1860.00*
10.716 l 0.883 l 0.755 10.750 l 0.857 l 0.765 l l Internal 1905.75
'0.755 1 0.868 O.762 10.793 0.872 1 0.760 l 1
l Reactor l
I I
i il l
l l
i l
l Auxiliary 899.50 10.609 1 0.911 0.779 10.692 0.929 1 0.778 l l
l Electrical '873.33 0.698 l 1.004 0.778 0.704 1.009 0.756 l l
Safesuard 896.50 0.964 0.793 0.765 0.862 0.824 0.778 l l
l i
l l
l l Reactor l
l l
l l
ll l
l l
l Internal 1905.75 0.765 1 0.540 0.922 0.790 0.618 1 0.940 l i
l 2
l Reactor 1810.50*
l0.429,, 0.572 1 0.896 l0.445 1 0.684 l 0.949 l I
l l Aust11ary 899.50 l10.711 0.666 1 0.951 0.686 l 0.650 0.952 l l
l Electrical 873.33 0.661 1 0.577 0.94 9
,0.658 i 0.621 i 0.948 l l
l Saf eauerd 896.50 0.952 i 0.516 0.953 0.865 0.580 1 0.948 l l
l 1
l 1
i I
i l
l Reactor l
l l
l l
l l
l l
l Internal
.1905.75 ll.036 l 0.760 l 0.188-11.071 1 0.743 1 0.284 l 0
l 3 l Reactor i
i t
l l
l l Auxiliary I 899.50 11.085 II 0.768 0.323 11.019 0.733 0.471 l l
l Electrical l873.33 10.987 l 0.792 0.355 [1.023 0.772 O.593 l l
i852.50s 11.176 l 0.752 l 0.370 l1.171 0.799 0 533 l l Safe 8uard l896.50 l1.073 1 0.602 1 0.340 l1.102 l 0.721 i O.466 l 4
'l I
l l
l l
l l
l l
l
- The floor elevation where the han8er for structural model is located.
J l
1 O
20 i
4 TABLE III i
j MRM for Models 1 and 2 4
i l
l l
i l
I i
l I
I i
i i
}
IBoundary 1 Model l Approach l Vert l Trans l Iong l Vert 1-Trans l Long l
'1 lConditioni l
l
~
i I
t i
I l
l l Response l
. l l
l l
l l
l l
l Spectrum l 0.40*l 0.93 1 0.72* I 0.47 l 0.90 1 0.73*l i
I I
1 1
1 1
1 I
I 4
i I
I I
I I
I i
1Flemible i I Time I
i l
l I
I I
1 1
l History ll 0.45 1 0.90 0.77 1 0.46 1 0.85 1 0.78 1 I
I I
I I
l t
I
)
l I
I Response l I
I I
I I
I I
l l spectrum l 0.51 1 0.48* I 0.88 1 0.57 1 0.52* I 0.90 l I
I 2
l l
l 1
I I
I i
l I
i I
I I
I Time i
I I
I l
i I
I I
I nistory I 0.51 1 0.53 1 0.80 1 0.57 1 0.57 1 0.83 l l
l l
l l
l I
I I Response l I
I l
1 I
l 1
1 l
l l
l spectrum 1 0.30 1 1.14 1 0.80* I 0.35 1 0.s4 1 0.79*l I
I i
l I
I I
f I
I I
I l
l l
1 I
I I Time l
I I
'I I
4 l
2 1
I I
I nistory l 0.29 l 1.10 1 0.81 1 0.35 1 0.79 l 0.83 l irized I
I I
I I
I 1
I l
l l
Response l ll l
l l
l l
l.
I I
l Spectrum 1 0.61 ll 0.57* H 0.95 l 0.67 1 0.54* l 0.95 l l
2 l
l l
l l
l 1
1 i
1 I
i l
l l
1 I
I Time l
I I
I I
I I
i l
l l History l 0.61 1 0.65 l 0.85 1 0.63 1 0.59 0.85 l l
l 1
I I
I I
I I
i Note 1.
The MRM's marked with
- are slightly less than that obtained from time history analysis approach. This difference will be eliminated i
when the analysis using a detailed procedure for correcting missing modal masses is completed, and such detailed analysis is in progress as of 11/7/85.
j 2.
The detailed informations on modelling, seismic input data, and j
analyses results are contained in the attached calculation books.
O 21 i
5.0 Discussions O
Further evaluation and discussions of some significant cases provide confirmation of the conclusions which were presented elsewhere in this study.
The most significant cases are comparison of flexible vs amplified range (example 1) and rigid versus amplified range (example 2).
1.
Example 1.
Comparison of seismic response MRM of the flexible response region vs that of the amplified response region.
The longitudinal fundamental frequencies of Model No. 3 are 4.3 Hz for a 1
fixed boundary condition, and 3.7 Hz for a flexible boundary condition.
They are both at lef t side of the spectral peak curves at EL 852.5' (SSE peak at 5.5 Hz to 8 Hz) and EL 896.5' (SSE peak at 6.5 Hz to 10 Hz) 1 of Safeguard Building.
l The magnitudes of MRM for the longitudinal direction are:
1 i
i 1
i i
l l
l l
Model 3 l
Model 3 l
l l
l l
Fixed Base l
Flezible Base l
i I
I I
I i
l i
i I
l l
l Range of Amplifiedl Fundamentall l Fundamental l l
l l Building i EL I Region for SSE I Frequency l MRM l Frequency l MRM l i
i l
l I
~
l
-1 1
I Saf egua rd 852.5 5.5 Hz to 8 Hz l
4.3 Hz 0.643 3.7 Hz 0.533.
I I
I I
U i
I l
l l Safegua rd 1896.5 16.5 Hz to 10 Hz l
4.3 Hz l 0.626 l 3.7 Hz l0.4661 I
I I
I I
l l
l l
l l
l l
l l
l l
22 l
The above tabulation reconfirma the following intuitive features of MRM which is:
a) The MRM of the seismic response of the cable tray hanger system with a fundamental system frequency located at the left of the peak tends to increse as the fundamental system frequency moves close to the peak 1.e., 0.466 vs 0.533, and 0.626 vs 0.643 provided an equal number of higher modes are located within the amplified region.
This is why it is not necessary to construct systems the lowest frequency of which would be even futher lef t of the peak response than the one produced by the made-up models, le 3.7 Hz, since the made-up models have already provided a sufficient number of higher modes within the amplified region.
2.
Example 2.
Comparison of the seismic response MRM of the amplified response region vs. that in the rigid response region.
For example, the vertical fundamental system f requency of rigid base Model No.1 is 9.8 Hz and that of rigid base Model No. 2 is 6.2 Hz.
The seismic responses MRM of these two models for different buildings spectra are summarized below:
O 23 l
l I
l l
Rigid Base l
Rigid Base L
l l
l Range of Amplified l Model No. 1 l
Model No. 2 l
' Oi i
i i
i i
i i
l l
l Response Region forl Fundamental l l Fundamental l l
l Building l EL l
SSE l Frequency l MRM l Frequency l MRM l l
1 I
i l
l I
l i
I I
l l
l l Safeguard 1896.50'll5.8 Hz to 18 Hz l
9.8 Hz l 0.79 l 6.2 Hz 1.08 I
i 1
l l
I l
l 1
I i
I i
l l
l RAB 1899.50'l5.5 Hz to 7.4 Hz l
9.8 Hz l 0.63 l 6.2 Hz l 0.89l 1
l l
1 I
I I
I l
l l
1 1
I I
I i
For model 2 eleven higher modes fall within the amplified region, while for model 1 only eight higher modes fall in the amplified region.
The above summary leads to the following observations:
a) The seismic response MRM of the tray hanger system with a vertical t
fundamental system frequency located in the amplified response region (or in the spectral peak range) is larger than the case where fundamental system frequency is located in the relatively rigid response region (or for at right side of the peak), ex. 0.89 of Model No. 2 vs.
0.63 of Model No.1 (both at EL 899.50', of Safeguard Building).
b) The vertical fundamental frequency of Model No.1 is located on the lef t of the amplified response region of spectrum curve at EL 896.50' of Safeguard Building. However, it is at the right of the amplified region of the spectrum curve at EL 899.50' of Reactor Auxiliary Building, and the seismic response MRM of same hanger system is larger when fundamental frequency f alls in the flexible range versus when fundamental frequency f alls in the rigid range.
- O 24 l
l
- - _., _ _ _ - _. - -.., - - -. - - _. -. ~
This example concludes that the magnitudes of seismic responses MRM totally depend on the relative closeness of the system fundamental frequency with respect to the location of spectral peak, the number of modes within the amplified region and the position of the lowest frequency in the flexible or rigid range regardless of hanger configurations and their mounting locations.
L From above two illustrated examples, the seismic response results demonstrate that:
a) The dynamic characteristics (or frequency ranges) of three (3) 3-D models do represent most of the as-installed cable tray hanger system, because the system fundamental frequency varies from the flexible. (at lef t side of peak) to amplified (on the peak), and rigid response region j
(at right side of the spectral peak) for a given response spectrum curve.
1 i
b) The magnitude of seismic response depends on the relative closeness of the system fundamental frequency with respect to the location of spectral peak for a given spectrum curve. Since the system fundamental
~
frequencies of three (3) 3-D models represent the possible variation on frequency ranges of most as-installed cable tray hanger systems, and the response spectrum curves from different buildings and different floor elevations were used as seismic input requirements, i.e. the variation in seismic input characteristics was included in analysis.
The refore, the range of seismic response obtained from these three (3) 3-D models can cover the seismic response of various installed cable tray hanger 4
systems, and the enveloped amplification factor (MRM) established from
' O 1
25
the 3-D model seismic renponse results can be used in static equivalent analysis approach for the cable tray hanger seismic design verification of Comanche Peak project. The spectral response analysis is to demonstrate that 1.25 amplification factor envelope the range of MRM derived from these three (3) 3-D model seismic response analysis, such that a validity of using 1.25 MRM is thus concluded.
The following response spectrum graphs examplifies the relative postion of fundatmental and higher modes for various response spectrum curves.
i O
O 1
26
27 20l v
00*S 00*h 00*E 00*E 00*1 0 0 ' 0 *.
b, i
e n
I gm e
v C
w e,
f a y n
w u w w.w
,,e.
c w
wens m
n-Q,.m g g
.Elll r>.
...~f.
m e
o 0
gg n
E g ~ :. / ;
.f a
E e
m 1
x
. I I -
C e
..............:....................:.........:./..
.) s.
g gj
~,
E v.
.m y-x N e-s Q oy cow 7
s A
aw 4
g s
o ow f
(
uf*e v> = /
e m.
q e
S e ;
cg e.... K'....
... g:...
c O
E Q
.e g
g m.... * * -
3-
.e 4
y
%w o..
- g...
g
.e.
c b
.c N<
g p
....g..
4)
.....,7
.X ed E, 4
. - 4.
g a
~.
w e.
e
.e
> %g D
Y 2
4 U k o
m..
e o.
$Y W.
3 Wg
.f.......
o3
.g
...~
~
w~
c l
C5 ea u.
ud o e
..(-
ggg pp......
m
=
en
- u. E M N
c-4 N
W "u Q >.
k m w o.
g u
- a. z s
M
.k.
5....
3 l
y ty.
m N
..t.
wE
?
'""* m a s%
2o com Nr Oo=
- ta m CP)
Q Q
3 a. A smmm C
g p
H w)
F k
g 3
g c
.x e
c E
.r ow x--m x3 ch t
e o
oe z. ~. m.
a t
O e.
e w
e mmm o
~
00*S 00*h 00*E 00*2 00*1 00 *O ~
E (D)
N O I.I. 6 W 3 13 3 3 8 e
p TUSI-RUXILIRRY BLDG.
E F A L - IC. F-w 1 REFINED RESPONSE SPECTRA G!sBS 4 MILL. INC.
23P3-0%E*I*EI i
i i
pdi. r.it" no i
+
FIGURE-1316-8
,,, e e,..
3
.f r_r =.=_t w m 2e.
m psp 3
2S tos 00 s 00 n 00,c 00 3 00 1 00 0 =
y l
y f
C w
s.
w u w n-w c
w weem J
gr).. E, g6g) g m
=
m.
R A
E e
h v, 8m g
..................!............I..........
5.......
I
~
gy.
.cy J
g q ',
Q n
~
=
x k 6-q-
3 o..c.
2 +-
c Cow g
.j a
ew
~
S.
O g
tQ o o *-
- f L*"o 8"
M.o/
c Q
C g
d.l....
g vr O
Cg
-- d k
go k
=
6 g
en....W.
..,j.
.t.
Cn 4
y
- m D.
g.
.'- n' N
=
=.
L
....k.
m g
g g...
.ci N
((
_y DO 3p
.m. R w
.....y...
......g..
~ 4
.e 3
.e o
O Y
I Z
(
F
.m yQ c
m,,
s Lm.
5 k
2 gw
. g,,.
.y
., og e
W 4J
~
O C9 ga R
Wo.
LL. W F>'
Z 6,W
' s *.
' " ' ' fP)
D g
- E fra 4b L g==
w cc WC Y
4 a
C w o, a.
LE Q
w E
~
l y
gy.
......."..t.......'
.f...
{
cy wC m2 4 h.
@ c==
e-W W Cn h
" E &D COO T
3 Aw E mrum D-R Q
Hw A
g to
}
M,
.M O W N.
w==D
%k Q
'a.
\\
e
- U c
co-m o
a O
E...
O w
e eveveu e
~
00*S 00*h 00*E 00*2 00*1 00*0 -
2 (D)
NOI16W373336 1
I.:
s:.
TUSI-RUXILIRRY BLDG.
E F A L - IC. Fv 1 REFINED RESPONSE SPECTRA i
g,
!lj
,* M,"o* ' c' _--
l Ctess a MILL. INC.
7523-S !-!*f5 1
T*., W,..'t ig-
"A*,N e FIGURE-1316 8 i.
2m
7 y
,3 i
p,y-
- m 7 y-TUSI'- REFINED RESPONSE SPECTRA FOR AUXILIRRY BLDG F. I FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRR FOR SSEs ORMPING = 0.07 l *A '3 ~__
FIGURE NO. I316-8 RT ELEVRTION 899.50 FEET
~
f,8 I'
f I.000 i,
7, Y,
5, I,
7, I, ?.10.00 i.
7 110.0 p
.L l-M MAX.
RT i
DIRECT.
O 2.717 6.360
- RX o
4
- l
~'-
~
9_ 2.I10 6.250
- , Ap;. st.W j,; A'(;:.9ERT.{. At! )t-s:
- RT
_9 w
vi 2.356 6.390
- RZ m
i, s gy S Ti 6 "IT /.*r i
i i
!n o
e ne n ay z n ettso "M/gs-L o
o o
g s
s L3, I
o o
g o
O
=
2 *.
I Om
.. t m
- Ax:.
p.
- Ag; c
[
1.nJo uants pMs o
iS
,3' JR.
a.
.R
(
s a. g.*3
,.g.,7...........
y was g
F,,
u l
3 23;24 u
m
- s w
=
O e
T
%u
.e.i V.
a p m
- moe a um3
' ?
C' W g
'i 4
- 3.4 2
g
)
j l
3 T.
X
. a o.
g.,.
r N3 s
g z
u, 35 I
m a
~
e
.: c o,, 3 mg
~
S no n,ag v,
~
m
=
a s
o tm O
.u.,
- , n.
i c
o r-o i
i i
a o.
2 3
4 6
6
) 66 2
3 on l.000 10.00 10 0. 0 6:
FREQUENCY (HZ) o d.
VERT WAruRAL FREdufMGES FOR MODEL 2 RXED Bu/NDARY
~
SITF.T 82 (6/lle/05) 9 J
^
iO b) ss e gh
- g. - -
. 9 j4} ~-
TUSI - REFINED RESPONSE SPECTRA FOR RUXILIRRY BLDG
?_ 4 FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRA FOR SSEs DRMPING = 0.07 i._
j hi :
FIGURE NO. 1316-8 RT ELEVRTION 899.50 FEET it j~
~ "
I.000
?,
?,
Y, Y,
Y, 7, Y.-?,10.00 7
7 40.0 L,
nRx.
RT SincCr.
I O
2.717 6.360
- RX D
1 9_ 2.110 6.250
... Ax;,8 W ;.; AT;:9EstT.y. At!.N-5:
- RT
_9 8
d m
2.356 6.390
- RZ m
p
~~
~
S. P. ;f.,
so/t/' 8f jp gy ll
~~
~~
CHkh 6y
.t
& Mot.1
/E/91~
~~~
o o
o o
.2.
g
~
O w
,3 o
o o
g_
o
_g 3--
cc oc
.gz.
wo o
~
cs a Jo.
o n,- m y
-.p.
3 I E y h O
u s e m
I U
2 w
y* II m
3 p.;- m c
o arcs o
m X
o
. s.,.0@
.g M
et o
j g
.,,4,.
- t.........
N n
w 3-m m
"o*E unt
~
~
%m n
-vi w
w s5 q
s**
w I
parv i MNES
~,
c u
m x
2 9.31
~
yy o
c n
CD o
g
/
o 1
as
-4 r-o E
I 3
I I.
I a
3 I
' \\
3 t*e r
3 o
a i
T o.
8 8
4 8
) 6$'
M52 %
3 us
'I 1.000 10.00 2'.23 40.0
{
3:
FREQUENCY (HZI o
5 HORIZONTAL NA TURAL FRE00ENCIES FDR MODEL 2
f/xED BMNDARf'
~
srEF.T 82 (6/I4/05)
W O
l l
.7... 4 g s ~
s.
f l
1 F
co S co >n co t co a 00 1 on o 't e
.m m
y..u--~
m e
g wasa o
_a i
r s
e
=
CD n,
g mm...........
e M
=
C
""s L.
e,. -w-.m_et-h v g $ W
.e E
9 e
h
@ 9 VW 5
b Li d re HR..
o.E CE s
y e o g n,.....g.-+.
g.
.3....y
.r:....j
.n, Ws>
W A
f
- T m.*
D b<n r
s y
i s
a 6
A ^
6 w
- A g
/
EE i
e s
s s
i >
y
/I k
i i
CE m
g e t-qr
.3 p
.6 V 1 va5'r-C.c ca m
<j i-y t-e e.c r r*e m
La Oo e
o C
<A C
c g
p>
[
-qln n
.e U
g#.
z.[w Dii 4
.e w
g
.s.
y g
m.
m.
V z4 D
gy
.....j....
3 j
.e y g
- m..
O. m Be C
(
(
3 N
e k
m =%
en
.O
=
y.
.y LLJ U
M C
tr' -
es L %
c $ m, a
w e-Z g,=g m.
.....j.........................................
y y
.m g
Q t
~ u~.
o kWS y a. E m
C w
\\
g yg rge.
.n,
- m 3 Ee ODD me-
.-eme 1
O a. 6.
a m...
n e
NW Ph* S S E
g
.e
.m m e C,e wom,e o
ee a..m.
o o
e i
s a
L o
oo#5 00 h 00 E 00'E co#!
00 *o ~
~
l (D)
NO I.l WW313336 g
te p,$ g., q p,..j, g TUSI-SRFEGURRDS BLDG.
E.
i i '
REFINED RESPONSE SPECTRR l
i I --.i CIBBS 4 MTLt., INC.
0 *'11%..i_ I l _ ' l.J 1--
s.:imen.m sn.i. := wse l
W
'1
==
pjgggg.}yp.)
'!%. sn... 4!
t" -'***"..".'**"-'#<
n.,.
m 2325 m.
l
.--__~_..w..
-.... k EI, '.
32.
/e7 97 oo,s co,n co,s co,e oo,1 on 0 =
=
=
- p. m g
j
.e w
uwww Q
g p.wggg
.y i
O g
g J
a ar.e g
ev EA gri........... g.........................................
.grg
'-ls
=
C
=
A
'~-
E M:
'd-
~~
n
'N 3.g X:
Eg D
Q O g tw....
....T.......t.......
.,...g.
.tv We>
D o
L w
-Q i:
4 s
O E
w
. 6.n N
D=
- t 5
~.
E f
h k
C8 m
4
~
g o
o N
O y
l o
V E
g.
E
...:.......J.
g l
E
=
g an.
.e3
~T e
D
.e NO w
g, I
p
.c.
g N
,H
>- Q
- m..
g g
4o at U >s O.
gy q
Zw c a.
p.
..................V i E
2
.e yw R
- n.,o m%
- E
.O ww.
....y q
e a.
E.,...
k E.
g g
.O N
OwN 4
ev eri.
.y
..eri g
y z
u A w o.
ybz er)
E y
Iyg ry...................,...,.1.,.<
.tv q
? $
I
- G 'f\\!.9 C
, ? s
- d *,
- " er> 3 e
z com 'M ! ut
,6;, K m o.ss.
N
.4 o
~
- e,
9 ri.s 4
.*! n.
p ga a cg -
,L.'
ct weem g
- s. o n O t j$i 'g 3
e'4 Q *> t M 7
n mee >
ec g
, y s
NM& N f t$
i d a 1
o
.m me.
s sur O m W e
O G ulli s.m. '.g o
., W, e--
_e e D e
s o
a.
r.zl 3 i..o e e S.n cc. e #e
- e 6.
o co o e
e <r.c o
t
~
i i
e co s 00 h o0*
oo't co I 00'0 -
E (D)
N 11BW313336 w
w y
F s s -i c., R v,
TuSI-SRFEGUARDS BLDG.
5.
REFINED RESPONSE $PECTRA I q _4 c:ees a ntti,, gwe.
8 1
o WV,.J_1
. i. l. d. - l--
i I
miw.. ai is t sa vaisiso
-wt i
F1 CURE-t t-
....,asme,.:..*l!
.w =
m.
2325 m.
1 1
..... ~., -,.
t
~
j
/r7 9
f 00*S 00*n 00*E 00*t 00 *a1 00'0
- a a
a a
,a g
]
y w
w ww wew Q
g y..wggg
..y O
g O
=
-J m
m.
a w
.$.s m.......
m W#
A b
C 4
N g
3 q
E gg su v
3.~
G w.g 3........
....... f..
eo g
.~
E w
m C E.,o Q
2 Dw W
at-mu E
m (4
b j
De g
E w
8m E
d.
.d W
E T
g e..
/
e CO p
e e.
~
W p.
s e N a
\\.
A b
Z.=. 4J N.
y y
CD
=
.N.
y go..
e ps m.
v z w Zg
- m..
N D
...I k E
m w
m m
k CL rw.
s m%
en
.O l
W-
- y..
w%
.........y
=
Cr" -
g
,as o w$ o.
L q
tw n ysy k.
.m ZE-o u>.
g W
A wo l
y6a g m, Iw-gg.
................g.,.,.,.,.m....
- E m}
.cv
+ C N g %
~
q com w ; 0 S G.E : 7 i
me-
-eme t o. g es :.:. 4 Aw De s o...
r.
a a
Wg y s os a su r
2 e.
o
~ rv u e n.m
- E
.mos wome s
o amam e
% s a s e:o m C
E' S.
be P
o rs -
i i
e 00*S 00*h 00*C 00*E 00 *'t 00'0 -
E (D)
N01.lBW37333W g
is p3g.,,q p.j, g TUSI-SRFEGURMDS BLDG.
E
. REFINED RESPON$E SPECTRA
{
i I{A l 1 4 J.-
==i..i...n, GISBS 4 MfLt. INC.
- 1 1
0 %.J._1-
_r w
.
- I :
..i 0 % w,.... 3! P *** * * *
- 7,* " *- ** <
==
F IGURE-1427-8 sw n.
2315
-.n
. =
.. n n ~...
~ e.....,
i
,v.-
,,,..,..---,-,,.wy..r..-.,,
r
,l i
\\\\
iL l
,l\\)lI ij[
,1 I(f(:lI SP Qw
'5h U\\
a*
O 0
O9_m o9_s o 9*,e ooS oo3 oo.D 0 0
0 11 1
1 T
E 1
D CXTl E
L F
EHDR a)
~
.R - -
a
'.::\\
B 7
0 I
D 5
1 o
1 l
E4 >1E,sviA*
A u,
S 1, E.
H.
1i 2
D 5
d1i1 A s.At c
R 8
saA Aw f
%- M 1, mv 4
2 2
- w
)
. 1 4
R ErE6 s
s i
L cf
.f:*..
C 8
U v
- 5. - a A
i.;:...:.
G N
?f O
on
> +ss u 1 t, 4 E
I F 7t oa 4 b6 4
I
[
n
\\
t t
\\
, 9 T
.o u
ll R
T A 0. V
.c 2 2 $ > 7,
S0E h.t
- u n E
e
+ > > >.e-b ".
S V
L e
Ri 9c b.p u 9
=E 1_4 d1 f
o 7AN
- a' R
1 1
4 n 2_3I_s p
GT O
r.
0 NR 0
E FI 0
0 P
S M
0
~
A An 0
1 Y 1 A
h6 B
> s 1
T
?
r l
C al IE 7
. 4 E
9 ZL P
)
.. :.i..:-
e HR 7
7 S
A
/
(
6 X
. - i
.)
E 9
E S
T.
f Y L N
R CF E..:.i
~
A N
O 7,:Y P
E S:
Y e
U3 4 Q
.A...i R
EE Y-
~
RS E L S
J R
W E
D F
D R0 E
E O -
3 O
i NF 3 7 M
t 0
l 1
n4 A
8 FR1 E1 C.
REO PN 2
a S
- .
- * l E i ER SU 1
NG 000 SOI 1765
)
Pr R812 U
S a
TE 796 f.
n t
I n
213
/
0 U
o t5186 0
o0 n706 0
t 0
N.
121 0
r g_o9,,zo"Fm$9um i l oo oo3 ou "
1 o9=
o9*
I g im2,r c33 m mg-o"*
l yp 3sn H'-
s
,ia' p
p4* p-y n
.y 5 r.2" n
, 'j, e, e *
- v l't1-
~ -
I c ! n..p.
1 5 =',,,"'.", :: ;
g
~
~
~
.}
- 5-u,,e4i L ~
5,. s. e '. A y. n n
,L
~ -
iih jq n
,,l if'-
.! g g.3j
.3
,ua 3
Q.
Iu j',j,'!
-l l
i' i
ii)i i;'
- >j 4
=-_
22 07'84 5'l tos oo*S co*h co*E co*E 00',1 c o
- o *.
w 3
C Owm
- 4..g s
w wase n
8lll l
m p.
mil n
e.
m C
e 70 a
m e
e E
i ev....................;............:............;...
.........cy o
D e
g R
i c:.
w
' a-g o. a
- x. D 4, m, e
y mow
.a w
N m. e-T 1
w l
M c
[
w = = e.
o Lo k
.g y
i eE g.
3 i
m
..4
.f
...e
....g.
r m.
t
.e
,u 2
4 m
p o.
c n
- Q
(,
s j
dir E
D k
>-$g
.....e w
.i..
U a.
]
L
.e
.... g..............
g m
m, n.
m_
y
(.
., cqr 3
gg
... s.................
u e
?.
a cw L&. L4J e
W=e 383 o
C
.n a
ggn p.........
x y
e.
LL. C -
y *u 8
cw l
E:
.m j
.g 9... g ev.....
u
,u.
.e
. e, v.s..
n a
s.<
m.
- . n.g w =a -
e..m w
._.v ~
e
.a
~
)
.t.
a,
,y,l,-p o.e
-~
3m c.-
- a e
c..
_ ev
-o,MN M M
rw
/*
j 6
.d E
i W:-
- w,y re e i.
}I r
.u -m d,u e
8,..
gRgg 2, g e..
w c:c e
w - -- ww-m- +
c.
.~-
a iii
., i g
e a
n 1
co s co b oo's 00 2 00 1 00 0 -
(D)
N01.L BW373336 TUSI-SRFEGURRDS BLDG.
f r s n - i c.. ce v 2..
norruto nos. oust setetna
(
C1995 8 MILL. INC.
?!?? : f-9 !!
f.'@' J 8
.si. m.ii.is.
.. w e=
7;gger.gg;; y
.=
I i.
0 w+ J yes. '. e=a.*li R - M.T.,L"*-
- eens een mese p37s so.
\\
g 22 07 84 l
I lo:
1 00*S 00*h 00*E DO*2 00*.1 0 0 ' 0 *.
I
=
,e g
C w
w w
ww-~
_s ween M
W.E
..c3 g
=
n.
w
- w m
=
lllr y
N P
i S
m
.1SI $
t' T 4
g A
v y@
c e
v E
e o c e e,"
+
D O
........g O
E (9 4
4,cr+ier
- y..
o -2 w
y e
e e g *o. =g V-E s.
f MOW
- C Y
b i
A e
g i
i h
.h I.h v'.W'
\\'
g q
Gp c
- c !
k Y
i c8 t 9 o-
- N w
- E.
I Cg g.
.g 9
y ge
=
. g..
4./
.cn r
an..
O u
If
..c M
p
.g 5
=T Ng L
94..............
..e.
N g
(
I w
..g.........
6..
...c Q
t,,LJ gg.
I O
h N
Z Us
,,m y
g W....
W A
y" Z
p
.4........
.e
..y g
p.
~
st e
?.
cm l
wg=n...w........
A q
ggm O
y 4
4 g
L U
U.
EwD LE j
- l. m qu.
.N w
WE l
-@o zo com Z C==
> P= W m 3m E E.==. N.
Aw I'
E.
>= W P. m W s
E s
i
.N-m N
r we C
.C C t*
}
a C
l
,,J c
g...
C
-m-w
- a. -
00 S 00*h OD'E 00*2 00'1 00'0 ~
r l
(D)
ND11BW373336 TUSI-SRFEGUARDS BLDG.
E r s s - i c.. ce v 2..
REFINED RE5*ONSE SPECTM
'J i
' l i '
Cletl 4 p!LL. IN.
???? !=f-?af?
- q.Il ao P' 8... F '.
mi.. niii...
. c..=
' I ' '
l i
e i i
==
73, gar.g;;.f suoi e mi = 7 m
.*gi F "..!".. ",^
i l
see I
>