Although acceleration and cumulative absolute velocity (CAV) are used as seismic indexes, their relationship with the damage mechanism is not yet understood. In this paper, a simplified evaluation method for seismic fatigue damage, which can be used as a seismic index for screening, is derived from the stress amplitude obtained from CAV for one cycle in accordance with the velocity criterion in ASME Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants 2012, and the linear cumulative damage due to fatigue can be obtained from the linear cumulative damage rule. To verify the performance of the method, the vibration response of a cantilever pipe is calculated for four earthquake waves, and the cumulative fatigue damage is evaluated using the rain flow method. The result is in good agreement with the value obtained by the method based on the relative response. When the response spectrum obtained by the evaluation method is considered, the value obtained by the evaluation method has a peak at the peak frequency of the ground motion, and the value decreases with increasing natural frequency above the peak frequency. A higher peak frequency of the base leads to a higher value obtained by the evaluation method.

References

References
1.
Reed
,
J. W.
,
Anderson
,
N.
,
Chokshi
,
N. C.
,
Kennedy
,
R. P.
,
Metevia
,
W. J.
,
Osttrom
,
D. K.
, and
Stevenson
,
J. D.
,
1988
, “
A Criterion for Determining Exceedance of the Operating Basis Earthquake
,” Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, Report No.
EPRI NP-5930
.https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:19106240
2.
O'Hara
,
T. F.
, and
Jacobson
,
J. P.
,
1991
, “
Standardization of the Cumulative Absolute Velocity
,” Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, Report No.
EPRI TR-100082
.https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:23031748
3.
Kassawara
,
R.
, and
Sandell
,
L.
,
2006
, “
Program on Technology Innovation: Use of CAV in Determining Effects of Small Magnitude Earthquakes on Seismic Hazard Analyses
,” Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, Report No.
EPRI 1014099
.https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0603/ML060320738.pdf
4.
USNRC,
1997
, “
Pre-Earthquake Planning and Immediate Nuclear Power Plant Operator Postearthquake Actions
,” USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.166, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC.
5.
ASME
,
2012
, “
Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants, Division 2: OM Standards Contents—Part 3: Vibration Testing of Piping Systems, Nonmandatory Appendix D ‘Velocity Criterion
’,” ASME, New York, Standard No. ASME OM-2012.
6.
Miner
,
M. A.
,
1945
, “
Cumulative Damage in Fatigue
,”
ASME J. Appl. Mech.
,
12
(
3
), pp.
A159
A164
.
7.
Caillaud
,
S.
,
Pons
,
Y.
,
Moussou
,
P.
, and
Gaudin
,
M.
,
2005
, “
A 12 mm RMS Screening Vibration Velocity for Pipes Using ANSI-OM3 Standard and Regulatory Design Rules
,”
ASME
Paper No. PVP2005-71014
.
8.
ASME
,
2010
, “
ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 1: Mandatory Appendix I
,”
ASME
,
New York
.
9.
Japan Meteorological Agency
, 2018, “
Strong Earthquake Observation Data of Major Earthquakes
,” Tokyo, Japan, http://www.data.jma.go.jp/svd/eqev/data/kyoshin/jishin/index.html (in Japanese).
10.
Endo
,
T.
,
Matsuishi
,
M.
,
Mitunaga
,
K.
,
Kobayashi
,
K.
, and
Takahashi
,
K.
,
1974
,
Rain Flow Method, the Proposal and the Applications
, Vol.
28
,
Bulletin of the Kyushu Institute of Technology, Engineering
,
Fukuoka, Japan
, pp.
33
62
(in Japanese).
You do not currently have access to this content.