Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T14:46:35.857Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bibliography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 March 2019

Wei-Chau Xie ,
Shun-Hao Ni ,
Wei Liu  and
Wei Jiang
Wei-Chau Xie
Affiliation:
University of Waterloo, Ontario
Shun-Hao Ni
Affiliation:
Candu Energy, Inc., Ontario
Wei Liu
Affiliation:
Candu Energy, Inc., Ontario
Wei Jiang
Affiliation:
Candu Energy, Inc., Ontario
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Seismic Risk Analysis of Nuclear Power Plants , pp. 595 - 608
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abrahamson, N. A. and Silva, W. J., 1997. Empirical response spectral attenuation relations for shallow crustal earthquakes. Seismological Research Letters, 68(1): 94–127.Google Scholar
Abrahamson, N. A. and Silva, W. J., 2008. Summary of the Abrahamson & Silva NGA ground-motion relations. Earthquake Spectra, 24(1): 67–97.Google Scholar
ACI, 1997. Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety-Related Concrete Structures, aci 349–97. American Concrete Institute.Google Scholar
ACI, 2007a. Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety-Related Concrete Structures and Commentary, aci 349–06. American Concrete Institute.Google Scholar
ACI, 2007b. Guide to the Concrete Capacity Design (CCD) Method−Embedment Design Examples, aci 349.2r-07. American Concrete Institute.Google Scholar
ACI, 2008. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary, aci 318–08. American Concrete Institute.Google Scholar
AISC, 2005. Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, An American National Standard, ansi/aisc 360–05. American Institution of Steel Construction.Google Scholar
Ambraseys, N., Smit, P., Sigbjornsson, R., Suhadolc, P., and Margaris, B., 2002. Internet Site for European Strong-Motion Data. European Commission, Research-Directorate General, Environment and Climate Programme.Google Scholar
Amiri, G. G., Bagheri, A., and Razaghi, S. A. S., 2009. Generation of multiple earthquake accelerograms compatible with spectrum via the wavelet packet transform and stochastic neural networks. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 13(7): 899–915.Google Scholar
ASCE, 1998. Seismic Analysis of Safety-Related Nuclear Structures and Commentary, asce 4–98. American Society of Civil Engineers.Google Scholar
ASCE/SEI, 2005. Seismic Design Criteria for Structures, Systems, and Components in Nuclear Facilities, asce/sei 43–05. American Society of Civil Engineers, Structural Engineering Institute.Google Scholar
ASCE/SEI, 2010. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, asce/sei 7–10. American Society of Civil Engineers, Structural Engineering Institute.Google Scholar
ASCE/SEI, 2017. Seismic Analysis of Safety-Related Nuclear Structures, asce/sei 4–16. American Society of Civil Engineers, Structural Engineering Institute.Google Scholar
ATC, 1978. Tentative Provisions for the Development of Seismic Regulations for Buildings, atc 3–06. Applied Technology Council.Google Scholar
Atik, L. A. and Abrahamson, N. A., 2010. An improved method for nonstationary spectral matching. Earthquake Spectra, 26(3): 601–617.Google Scholar
Atkinson, G. M. and Beresnev, L. A., 1998. Compatible ground-motion time histories for new national seismic hazard maps. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 25(2): 305–318.Google Scholar
Atkinson, G. M. and Boore, D. M., 1995. New ground-motion relations for eastern North America. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 85(1): 17–30.Google Scholar
Atkinson, G. M. and Boore, D. M., 1998. Evaluation of models for earthquake source spectra in eastern North America. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 88(4): 917–934.Google Scholar
Atkinson, G. M. and Boore, D. M., 2006. Earthquake ground-motion prediction equations for eastern North America. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 96(6): 2181–2205.Google Scholar
Atkinson, G. M. and Elgohary, M., 2007. Typical uniform hazard spectra for eastern North American sites at low probability levels. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 34(1): 12–18.Google Scholar
Atkinson, G. M. and Silva, W., 2000. Stochastic modeling of California ground motions. Bulletin of Seismological Society of America, 90(2): 255–274.Google Scholar
Baker, J.W. and Cornell, C.A., 2005. Vector-Valued Ground Motion Intensity Measures for Probabilistic Seismic Demand Analysis, report 150. The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University, Stanford, California.Google Scholar
Baker, J. W. and Cornell, C. A., 2006a. Correlation of response spectral values for multicomponent ground motions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 96(1): 215–227.Google Scholar
Baker, J. W. and Cornell, C. A., 2006b. Spectral shape, epsilon and record selection. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 35(9): 1077–1095.Google Scholar
Baker, J. W. and Cornell, C. A., 2006c. Which spectral acceleration are you using? Earthquake Spectra, 22(2): 293–312.Google Scholar
Baker, J. W. and Jayaram, N., 2008. Correlation of spectral acceleration values from NGA ground motion models. Earthquake Spectra, 24(1): 299–317.Google Scholar
Bazzurro, P. and Cornell, C. A., 1999. Disaggregation of seismic hazard. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 89(2): 501–520.Google Scholar
Bazzurro, P. and Cornell, C. A., 2002. Vector-valued probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. In Proceedings of 7th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Boston, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Bazzurro, P. and Cornell, C.A., 2004. Nonlinear soil–site effects in probabilistic seismic-hazard analysis. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 94(6): 2110–2123.Google Scholar
Berg, G. V. and Housner, G. W., 1961. Integrated velocity and displacement of strong earthquake ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 51(2): 175–189.Google Scholar
Boatwright, J. and Choy, G. L., 1992. Acceleration source spectra anticipated for large earthquakes in northeastern North America. Bulletin of Seismological Society of America, 82(2): 660–682.Google Scholar
Boore, D. M., 2001. Effect of baseline corrections on displacements and response spectra for several recordings of the 1999 Chi-Chi, Taiwan, earthquake. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 91(5): 1199–1211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boore, D. M., 2003. Simulation of ground motion using the stochastic method. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 160: 635–676.Google Scholar
Boore, D. M. and Atkinson, G. M., 2008. Ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA at spectral periods between 0.01 s and 10.0 s. Earthquake Spectra, 24(1): 99–138.Google Scholar
Boore, D. M. and Joyner, W. B., 1984. A note on the use of random vibration theory to predict peak amplitudes of transient signals. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 74(5): 2035–2039.Google Scholar
Boore, D. M., Watson-Lamprey, J., and Abrahamson, N. A., 2006. Orientation-indepen-dent measures of ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 96(4a): 1502–1511.Google Scholar
Bournonville, M., Dahnke, J., and Darwin, D., 2004. Statistical Analysis of the Mechanical Properties and Weight of Reinforcing Bars, sl report 04–1. Structural Engineering and Engineering Materials, University of Kansas.Google Scholar
Bozorgnia, Y. and Campbell, K. W., 2004. The vertical to horizontal response spectral ratio and tentative procedures for developing simplified V/H and vertical design spectra. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 8(2): 175–207.Google Scholar
Brady, A. G., 1966. Studies of Response to Earthquake Ground Motion. PhD thesis, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California.Google Scholar
Cameron, W. I. and Green, R. A., 2007. Damping correction factors for horizontal ground-motion response spectra. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 97(3): 934−960.Google Scholar
Campbell, K. W. and Bozorgnia, Y., 2008. NGA ground motion model for the geometric mean horizontal component of PGA, PGV, PGD and 5% damped linear elastic response spectra for periods ranging from 0.01 to 10 s. Earthquake Spectra, 24(1): 139–171.Google Scholar
Campbell, K. W., 2003. Prediction of strong ground motion using the hybrid empirical method and its use in the development of ground-motion (attenuation) relations in eastern North America. Bulletin of Seismological Society of America, 93(3): 1012–1033.Google Scholar
Carballo, J. E. and Cornell, C.A., 2000. Probabilistic Seismic Demand Analysis: Spectrum Matching and Design, report rms-41. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California.Google Scholar
Cartwright, D. E. and Longuet-Higgins, M. S., 1956. The statistical distribution of the maximum of a random function. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 237(1209): 212–232.Google Scholar
Chen, C., 1975. Definition of statistically independent time histories. ASCE Journal of the Structural Division, 101(2): 449–451.Google Scholar
Chiou, B. S.-J. and Youngs, R. R., 2008. An NGA model for the average horizontal component of peak ground motion and response spectra. Earthquake Spectra, 24(1): 173–215.Google Scholar
Choi, D.-H. and Lee, S.-H., 2003. Multi-damping earthquake design spectra-compatible motion histories. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 226(3): 221–230.Google Scholar
Chopra, A. K., 2012. Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering. Prentice Hall, fourth edition.Google Scholar
Converse, A. M. and Brady, A. G., 1992. BAP: Basic Strong-Motion Accelerogram Processing Software, Version 1.0, open-file report 92–296a. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey.Google Scholar
Cornell, C. A., 1968. Engineering seismic risk analysis. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 58(5): 1583–1606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CSA, 1981. Design Procedures for Seismic Qualification of CANDU Nuclear Power Plants, can3-n289.3-m81. Canadian Standard Association.Google Scholar
CSA, 2010a. Design Procedures for Seismic Qualification of Nuclear Power Plants, csa n289.3–10. Canadian Standard Association.Google Scholar
CSA, 2010b. Ground Motion Determination for Seismic Qualification of Nuclear Power Plants, csa n289.2–10. Canadian Standard Association.Google Scholar
CSA, 2014. General Requirements for Seismic Design and Qualification of CANDU Nuclear Power Plants, csa n289.1–08, reaffirmed 2013. Canadian Standard Association.Google Scholar
Davenport, A. G., 1964. Note on the distribution of the largest value of a random function with application to gust loading. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, 28(2): 187–196.Google Scholar
Der Kiureghian, A., 1980. Structural response to stationary excitation. ASCE Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, 106(6): 1195–1213.Google Scholar
Der Kiureghian, A., 1981. A response spectrum method for random vibration analysis of MDF systems. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 9: 419–435.Google Scholar
Douglas, J., 2011. Ground-Motion Prediction Equations 1964–2010, peer report 2011/102. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
EPRI, 1991a. A Methodology for Assessment of Nuclear Power Plant Seismic Margin, epri-np-6041-sl. Electric Power Research Institute.Google Scholar
EPRI, 1991b. Seismic Verification of Nuclear Plant Equipment Anchorage, Volume 1: Development of Anchorage Guidelines, epri-np-5228-sl (rev. 1). Electric Power Research Institute.Google Scholar
EPRI, 1993a. Analysis of High-Frequency Seismic Effects, epri-tr-102470. Electric Power Research Institute.Google Scholar
EPRI, 1993b. Guidelines for Determining Design Basis Ground Motions−Volume 1: Method and Guidelines for Estimating Earthquake Ground Motion in Eastern North America, epri-tr-102293-v1. Electric Power Research Institute.Google Scholar
EPRI, 1993c. Guidelines for Determining Design Basis Ground Motions−Volume 2: Appendices for Ground Motion Estimation, epri-tr-102293-v2. Electric Power Research Institute.Google Scholar
EPRI, 1994. Methodology for Developing Seismic Fragilities, epri-tr-103959. Electric Power Research Institute.Google Scholar
EPRI, 2002. Seismic Fragility Application Guide, epri-1002988. Electric Power Research Institute.Google Scholar
EPRI, 2005. Program on Technology Innovation: Effect of Negligible Inelastic Behavior on High Frequency Response, epri-1012967. Electric Power Research Institute.Google Scholar
EPRI, 2007a. Program on Technology Innovation: Seismic Screening of Components Sensitive to High-Frequency Vibratory Motions, epri-1015109. Electric Power Research Institute.Google Scholar
EPRI, 2007b. Program on Technology Innovation: The Effects of High Frequency Ground Motion on Structures, Components, and Equipment in Nuclear Power Plants, epri-1015108. Electric Power Research Institute.Google Scholar
EPRI, 2009. Seismic Fragility Applications Guide Update, epri-1019200. Electric Power Research Institute.Google Scholar
EPRI, 2011. Advanced Methods for Determination of Seismic Fragilities: Seismic Fragilities Using Scenario Earthquakes, epri-1022995. Electric Power Research Institute.Google Scholar
EPRI, 2013. Seismic Evaluation Guidance: Screening, Prioritization and Implementation Details (SPID) for the Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1: Seismic, epri-1025287. Electric Power Research Institute.Google Scholar
EPRI, 2014. High Frequency Program: High Frequency Testing Summary, epri-3002002997. Electric Power Research Institute.Google Scholar
EPRI, 2015. High Frequency Program: Application Guidance for Functional Confirmation and Fragility Evaluation, epri-3002004396. Electric Power Research Institute.Google Scholar
Frankel, A., 1995. Mapping seismic hazard in the central and eastern United States. Seismological Research Letters, 66(4): 8–21.Google Scholar
Frankel, A., Mueller, C., Barnhard, T., Perkins, D., Leyendecker, E. V., Dickman, N., Hanson, S., and Hopper, M., 1996. National Seismic-Hazard Maps: Documentation June 1996. U.S. Geological Survey.Google Scholar
Gasparini, D. A. and Vanmarcke, E. H., 1976. Simulated Earthquake Motions Compatible with Prescribed Response Spectra. Department of Civil Engineering, Constructed Facilities Division, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Ghaboussi, J. and Lin, C.-C. J., 1998. New method of generating spectrum compatible accelerograms using neural networks. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 27(4): 377–396.Google Scholar
Ghiocel, D. M., 2015. ACS SASSI, 3.0. Ghiocel Predictive Technologies, Inc.Google Scholar
Giaralis, A. and Spanos, P. D., 2009. Wavelet-based response spectrum compatible synthesis of accelerograms-Eurocode application (EC8). Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 29(1): 219–235.Google Scholar
Green, R. A., Gunberg, K., Parrish, K., and Munger, T., 2007. A simple uniform hazard design spectral shape for rock sites. Seismological Research Letters, 78(2): 323–343.Google Scholar
Gu, P. and Wen, Y. K., 2007. A record-based method for the generation of tridirectional uniform hazard-response spectra and ground motions using the Hilbert–Huang transform. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 97(5): 1539–1556.Google Scholar
Gulerce, Z. and Abrahamson, N. A., 2011. Site-specific design spectra for vertical ground motion. Earthquake Spectra, 27: 1023–1047.Google Scholar
Gupta, A. K. and Tembulkar, J. M., 1984. Dynamic decoupling of secondary systems. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 81(3): 359–373.Google Scholar
Gutenberg, B. and Richter, C. F., 1944. Frequency of earthquakes in California. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 34(4): 185–188.Google Scholar
Gutierrez, J. A. and Chopra, A. K., 1978. A substructure method for earthquake analysis of structures including structure–soil interaction. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 6(1): 51−69.Google Scholar
Haddon, R. A. W., 1996. Earthquake source spectra in eastern North America. Bulletin of Seismological Society of America, 86(5): 1300–1313.Google Scholar
Hadjian, A. H. and Ellison, B., 1986. Decoupling of secondary systems for seismic analysis. Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, 108(1): 78–85.Google Scholar
Hadjian, A. H., Smith, C. B., Haldar, A., and Ibanez, P., 1977. Variability in engineering aspects of structural modeling. In Proceedings of the 6th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 2729–2734, New Delhi, India. Meerut: Sarita Prakashan.Google Scholar
Halchuk, S. and Adams, J., 2004. Deaggregation of seismic hazard for selected Canadian cities. In Proceedings of 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, paper 2470, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
Hamid, A., Abboud, B., Farah, M., Hatem, M., and Harris, H., 1989. Response of Reinforced Block Masonry Walls to Out-of-Plane Static Loads, report 3.2(a). U.S.-Japan Coordinated Program for Masonry Building Research, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
Hancock, J., Watson-Lamprey, J., Abrahamson, N. A., Bommer, J. J., Markatis, A., McCoy, E., and Mendis, R., 2006. An improved method of matching response spectra of recorded earthquake ground motion using wavelets. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 10(supplement 001): 67–89.Google Scholar
Hanks, T. C. and Kanamori, H., 1979. A moment magnitude scale. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 84(5): 2348–2350.Google Scholar
Huang, N. E., Chern, C. C., Huang, K., Salvino, L. W., Long, S. R., and Fan, K. L., 2001. A new spectral representation of earthquake data: Hilbert spectral analysis of station TUC129, Chi-Chi, Taiwan, September 21, 1999. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 91(5): 1310–1338.Google Scholar
Huang, N. E., Shen, Z., Long, S. R., Wu, M. C., Shih, H. H., Zheng, Q., Yen, N. C., Tung, C. C., and Liu, H. H., 1998. The empirical mode decomposition and the Hilbert spectrum for nonlinear and non-stationary time series analysis. The Royal Society London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 454(1971): 903–995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IBC, 2012. International Building Code. International Code Council.Google Scholar
Inoue, T. and Cornell, C. A., 1990. Seismic Hazard Analysis of Multi-Degree-of-Freedom Structures. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Reliability of Marine Structures Program, Stanford University, Stanford, California.Google Scholar
Iyengar, R. N. and Rao, P. N., 1979. Generation of spectrum compatible accelerograms. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 7(3): 253–263.Google Scholar
Jayaram, N. and Baker, J. W., 2008. Statistical tests of the joint distribution of spectral acceleration values. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 98(5): 2231–2243.Google Scholar
Jiang, W., Li, B., Xie, W.-C., and Pandey, M. D., 2015. Generate floor response spectra, Part 1: Direct spectra-to-spectra method. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 293: 525–546, doi:10.1016/j.nucengdes.2015.05.034.Google Scholar
Kaul, M. K., 1978. Spectrum-consistent time-history generation. ASCE Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, 104(4): 781–788.Google Scholar
Kennedy, R. P., 1999. Overview of methods for seismic PRA and margin analysis including recent innovation. Proceedings of the OECD/NEA Workshop on Seismic Risk, nea/csni/r(99) 28: 33−63.Google Scholar
Kennedy, R. P., Cornell, C. A., Campbell, R. D., Kaplan, S., and Perla, H. F., 1980. Probabilistic seismic safety study of an existing nuclear power plant. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 59: 315−338.Google Scholar
Kennedy, R. P. and Ravindra, M. K., 1984. Seismic fragilities for nuclear power plant studies. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 79: 47−68.Google Scholar
King, A. C. Y. and Chen, C., 1977. Artificial earthquake generation for nuclear power plant design. In Proceedings of the 6th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 2609–2613, New Delhi, India. Meerut: Sarita Prakashan.Google Scholar
Kipp, T. R., Wesley, D. A., and Nakaki, D. K., 1988. Seismic Fragilities of Civil Structures and Equipment Components at the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, report 1643.02. Pacific Gas and Electric Co.Google Scholar
Kost, G., Tellkamp, T., Kamil, H., Gantayat, A., and Weber, F., 1978. Automated generation of spectrum compatible artificial time histories. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 45(1): 243–249.Google Scholar
Kramer, S. L., 1996. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Lee, S.-H. and Kim, J.-S., 1999. Generation of an improved artificial time history matching multiple-damping design response spectra. In Transactions of 15th International Conferences on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology (SMiRT-15), paper k14/4, Seoul, Korea. International Association for Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology, Korean Nuclear Society.Google Scholar
Levy, S. and Wilkinson, J. P. D., 1976. Generation of artificial time-histories rich in all frequencies, from given response spectra. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 38(2): 241–251.Google Scholar
Li, B., Jiang, W., Xie, W.-C., and Pandey, M. D., 2015. Generate floor response spectra, Part 2: Response spectra for equipment–structure resonance. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 293: 547–560, doi:10.1016/j.nucengdes.2015.05.033.Google Scholar
Li, B., Ly, B.-L., Xie, W.-C., and Pandey, M. D., 2017. Generating spectrum-compatible time histories using eigenfunctions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 107(3): 1512–1525.Google Scholar
Li, Z.-X., Li, Z.-C., and Shen, W.-X., 2005. Sensitivity analysis for floor response spectra of nuclear reactor buildings. Nuclear Power Engineering, 26(1): 44–50.Google Scholar
Lilhanand, K. and Tseng, W. S., 1988. Development and application of realistic earthquake time histories compatible with multiple-damping design spectra. In Proceedings of the 9th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 819–824, Tokyo, Japan.Google Scholar
Lin, C.-C. J. and Ghaboussi, J., 2001. Generating multiple spectrum compatible accelerograms using stochastic neural networks. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 30(7): 1021–1042.Google Scholar
Lin, C.-C. J., Liu, Z.-M., and Lin, Y.-C., 2006. New methodology of generating multiple spectrum compatible earthquake accelerogram for Taiwan area using neural networks. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Earthquake Engineering, paper 264, Taipei, Taiwan.Google Scholar
Liu, L. and Pezeshk, S., 1999. An improvement on the estimation of pseudoresponse spectral velocity using RVT method. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 89(5): 1384–1389.Google Scholar
Loh, C.-H., Wu, T.-C., and Huang, N. E., 2001. Application of the empirical mode decomposition-Hilbert spectrum method to identify near-fault ground-motion characteristics and structural responses. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 91(5): 1339–1357.Google Scholar
Lysmer, J., , Tabatabaie-Raissi, M., Tajirian, F., Vahdani, S., and Ostadan, F., 1983. SASSI. System for Analysis of Soil Structure Interaction. Department of Civil Engineering, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley.Google Scholar
McGuire, R. K., 1995. Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis and design earthquakes: Closing the loop. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 85(5): 1275–1284.Google Scholar
McGuire, R. K., 2004. Seismic Hazard and Risk Analysis. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, California.Google Scholar
McGuire, R. K., Becker, A. M., and Donovan, N. C., 1984. Spectral estimates of seismic shear waves. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 74(4): 1427–1440.Google Scholar
Mohraz, B., 1976. A study of earthquake response spectra for different geological conditions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 66(3): 915–935.Google Scholar
MSJC, 2011. Building Code Requirements and Specification for Masonry Structures, tms 402–11/aci 530–11/asce 5–11. Masonry Standards Joint Committee.Google Scholar
Mukherjee, S. and Gupta, V. K., 2002. Wavelet-based generation of spectrum-compatible time-histories. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 22(9–12): 799–804.Google Scholar
NBCC, 2015. National Building Code of Canada 2015. National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario.Google Scholar
NCMA, 1993. Research Evaluation of the Compressive Strength of in Situ Masonry. National Concrete Masonry Association.Google Scholar
NCMA, 1994. Research Evaluation of the Flexural Tensile Strength of Concrete Masonry. National Concrete Masonry Association.Google Scholar
NCMA, 2007. Section Properties Of Concrete Masonry Walls, tek 14–1b. National Concrete Masonry Association.Google Scholar
Neter, J., Kutner, M. H., Nachtsheim, C. J., and Wasserman, W., 1996. Applied Linear Statistical Models. Irwin, Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
Newmark, N. M., 1977. Inelastic design of nuclear reactor structures and its implications of design of critical equipment. In Proceedings of the Fourth Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology, paper k4/1, San Francisco, California.Google Scholar
Newmark, N. M., Blume, J. A., and Kapur, K. K., 1973. Seismic design spectra for nuclear power plants. Journal of the Power Division, 99(2): 287–303.Google Scholar
Newmark, N. M. and Hall, W. J., 1982. Earthquake Spectra and Design. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Berkeley, California.Google Scholar
Ni, S.-H., Xie, W.-C., and Pandey, M. D., 2010. Generation of modified earthquake time-histories using Hilbert–Huang transform. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Bridge Maintenance, Safety and Management, 2211–2215, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Ni, S.-H., Xie, W.-C., and Pandey, M. D., 2011a. Application of Hilbert–Huang transform in generating spectrum-compatible earthquake time histories. ISRN Signal Processing, 2011: Article id 563678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ni, S.-H., Xie, W.-C., and Pandey, M. D., 2011b. Tri-directional spectrum-compatible earthquake time-histories for nuclear energy facilities. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 241(8): 2732–2743.Google Scholar
Ni, S.-H., Xie, W.-C., and Pandey, M. D., 2013. Generation of spectrum-compatible earthquake ground motions considering intrinsic spectral variability using Hilbert-Huang transform. Structural Safety, 42: 45–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ni, S.-H., Zhang, D.-Y., Xie, W.-C., and Pandey, M. D., 2012. Vector-valued uniform hazard spectra. Earthquake Spectra, 28(4): 1549–1568.Google Scholar
Gas, Pacific and Company, Electric, 1988. Final Report of the Diablo Canyon Long Term Seismic Program, report 50–275 & 50–323.Google Scholar
PEER, 2010. Technical Report for the PEER Ground Motion Database Web Application. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
PEER, 2012. Guidelines for Estimation of Shear Wave Velocity Profiles. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Preumont, A., 1980. A method for the generation of artificial earthquake accelerograms. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 59(2): 357–368.Google Scholar
Preumont, A., 1984. The generation of spectrum compatible accelerograms for the design of nuclear power plants. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 12(4): 481–497.Google Scholar
Radulescu, J. P., Pradolin, L., and Mamet, J. C., 1997. Ultimate pressure capacity of CANDU 6 containment structures. CNS Proceedings of the 1997 CNA/CNS Annual Conference on Powering Canada’s Future, 1(2): 1122.Google Scholar
Rathje, E. M. and Kottke, A. R., 2008. Procedures for Random Vibration Theory Based Seismic Site Response Analyses: A White Paper Prepared for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. University of Texas at Austin, Austin.Google Scholar
Reiter, L., 1990. Earthquake Hazard Analysis: Issues and Insights. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Richter, C. F., 1935. An instrumental earthquake scale. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 25: 1–32.Google Scholar
Richter, C. F., 1958. Elementary Seismology. W. H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco, California.Google Scholar
Rizzo, P. C., Shaw, D. E., and Jarecki, S. J., 1975. Development of real/synthetic time histories to match smooth design spectra. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 32(1): 148–155.Google Scholar
Scanlan, R. H. and Sachs, K., 1974. Earthquake time histories and response spectra. ASCE Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, 100(4): 635–655.Google Scholar
Silva, W. J. and Lee, K., 1987. WES RASCAL code for synthesizing earthquake ground motions. In State-of-the-Art for Assessing Earthquake Hazards in the United States, report 24(miscellaneous paper s-73–1), US Army Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, Mississippi.Google Scholar
Silva, W. J., Youngs, R. R., and Idriss, I. M., 1999. Development of design response spectral shapes for Central and Eastern U.S. (CEUS) and Western U.S. (WUS) rock site conditions. In Proceeding of the OECE-NEA Workshop on Engineering Characterization of Seismic Input, nea/csni/r(2000) 2 , 1: 185–268.Google Scholar
Silva, W., Abrahamson, N. A., Toro, G., and Costantino, C., 1996. Description and Validation of the Stochastic Ground Motion Model. Pacific Engineering and Analysis, El Cerrito, California.Google Scholar
Spanos, P. D. and Loli, L. M. V., 1985. A statistical approach to generation of design spectrum compatible earthquake time histories. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 4(1): 2–8.Google Scholar
SQUG, 2001. Generic Implementation Procedure for Seismic Verification of Nuclear Plant Equipment, rev. 3a. Seismic Qualification Utilities Group.Google Scholar
Stokoe, K. H., Choi, W. K., and Menq, F.-Y., 2003. Summary Report: Dynamic Laboratory Tests: Unweathered and Weathered Shale Proposed Site of Building 9720–82 Y-12 National Security Complex, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
Toro, G. R., 1995. Probabilistic Models of Site Velocity Profiles for Generic and Site-Specific Ground-Motion Amplification Studies. Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York.Google Scholar
Tsai, N. C., 1972. Spectrum-compatible motions for design purposes. ASCE Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, 98(2): 345–356.Google Scholar
USNRC, 1973. A Study of Vertical and Horizontal Earthquake Spectra, wash-1255. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (U.S. Atomic Energy Commission).Google Scholar
USNRC, 1976. Statistical Studies of Vertical and Horizontal Earthquake Spectra, nureg-0003. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.Google Scholar
USNRC, 1978. Development of Criteria for Seismic Review of Selected Nuclear Power Plants, nureg/cr-0098. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.Google Scholar
USNRC, 1981. Fault Tree Handbook, nureg-0492. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.Google Scholar
USNRC, 1985. An Approach to the Quantification of Seismic Margins in Nuclear Power Plants, nureg/cr-4334. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.Google Scholar
USNRC, 1997. Ground Motion Estimates for the Northeastern U.S. or Southeastern Canada. In Recommendations for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis: Guidance on Uncertainty and Use of Experts, nureg/cr-6372. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.Google Scholar
USNRC, 2001. Technical Basis for Revision of Regulatory Guidance on Design Ground Motions: Hazard- and Risk-consistent Ground Motion Spectra Guidelines, nureg/cr-6728. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.Google Scholar
USNRC, 2002. Risk-Informed Inspection Notebook for Generic BWR Nuclear Power Plant. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.Google Scholar
USNRC, 2006. Combining Modal Responses and Spatial Components in Seismic Response Analysis, usnrc r.g. 1.92 (rev. 2). U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.Google Scholar
USNRC, 2010. Interim Staff Guidance on Ensuring Hazard-Consistent Seismic Input for Site Response and Soil Structure Interaction Analyses, dc/col-isg-017. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.Google Scholar
USNRC, 2012a. Guidance on Performing a Seismic Margin Assessment in Response to the March 2012 Request for Information Letter, usnrc/jld-isg-2012–04. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.Google Scholar
USNRC, 2012b. Standard Review Plan−Seismic Design Parameters, nureg-0800 3.7.1 (rev. 4). U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.Google Scholar
USNRC, 2013. Standrad Review Plan−Seismic System Analysis, nureg-0800 3.7.2 (rev. 4). U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.Google Scholar
USNRC, 2014. Design Response Spectra for Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants, usnrc r.g. 1.60 (rev. 2). U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.Google Scholar
Vanmarcke, E. H. and Gasparini, D. A., 1977. Simulated earthquake ground motions. In Transactions of 4th International Conferences on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology (SMiRT-4), paper k1/9, San Francisco, California.Google Scholar
Villaverde, R., 2009. Fundamental Concepts of Earthquake Engineering. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.Google Scholar
Walling, M., Silva, W., and Abrahamson, N.A., 2008. Nonlinear site amplification factors for constraining the NGA models. Earthquake Spectra, 24(1): 243–255.Google Scholar
Wen, Y. K. and Gu, P., 2004. Description and simulation of nonstationary processes based on Hilbert spectra. ASCE Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 130(8): 942–951.Google Scholar
Wolf, J. P., 1985. Dynamic Soil–Structure Interaction. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Wolf, J. P., 1987. Soil–Structure–Interaction Analysis in Time Domain. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Yang, J., Li, J. B., and Lin, G., 2006. A simple approach to integration of acceleration data for dynamic soil–structure interaction analysis. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 26(8): 725–734.Google Scholar
Zhang, R. R., Ma, S., and Hartzell, S., 2003a. Signatures of the seismic source in EMD-based characterization of the 1994 Northridge, California, earthquake recordings. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 93(1): 501–518.Google Scholar
Zhang, R. R., Ma, S., Safak, E., and Hartzell, S., 2003b. Hilbert–Huang transform analysis of dynamic and earthquake motion recordings. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 129(8): 861–875.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×