| Abstract: | Seismic design and analysis of nuclear plant systems, structures and components have requested huge effort and tremendous costs in the past two decades. The extended use of sophisticated, linear response type methods (modal analysis, spectral response) and the associated conservatism are responsible for the significant stiffening of the piping systems and the multiplication of supports and snubbers. The remedy used against the seismic risk seems worse than the pain itself, and safety might be impaired rather than improved. Indeed, system stiffening increases the average load level in normal operation (stresses, fatigue, nozzle loads, etc.); supports do not behave ideally as assumed (friction, rust, etc.) and snubbers are remarkably unreliable. On the other hand, experience with actual earthquakes shows that industrial facilities designed using very simplistic seismic techniques, or even no seismic requirement at all, suffer essentially no damage, even in the case of a large earthquake. This paradox challenges the traditional seismic design techniques, and appeals for revised seismic qualification methods of piping systems. When the assumption of the occurrence of an earthquake event is made in a plant in operation, which has not been designed against seismic criteria, the use of the standard seismic qualification techniques is still more questionable; simplified (quasi-static) techniques offer in this case a valuable and economically justified alternative. The paper describes the application of the quasi-static “modified load coefficient method” to the seismic assessment of the piping in a nuclear plant in operation, designed during the pre-seismic era. |
