Paper K1/1"

NUCLEAR ENGINEERING AND DESIGN 20 (1972) 303-322.

NORTH-HOLLAND PUBLISHING COMPANY

EARTHQUAKE RESPONSE ANALYSIS

OF REACTOR STRUCTURES

Berhn 20-24 September19TI

N.M. NEWMARK
Department of Ctvll Engtneering, Untverstty of Ilhnots,
Urbana, Illinois 61801, USA

Received 8 November 1971

The general nature of the principles upon which earthquake resistant design ISbased is descnbed with particular
reference to components and elements of nuclear reactor facilities. Special attenUon is paid to the response and
design criteria of items of equipment or of components that are mounted on or attached to responding elements,
and basic procedures are developed to bound the dynamic response of such items.
Consideration is given to vertical as well as horizontal excitation, and to the combination of the effects of the
vanous excitations. Suitable approximations are developed for inelastic response estimates.
One section of the paper is devoted to relative motions of points some distance apart, and to bounds for such
relative motions.
Recommendations are made for the general criteria govermng the design of nuclear facdlties, includmg the basic
parameters governing response characteristics and energy absorption.

1. Introduction
When a structure or a component piece of equipment or instrumentation is subjected to earthquake
motions, its base or support tends to move with the
ground on which it is supported or with the element
on which it rests. Since this motion is relatively rapid,
it causes stresses and deformations throughout the
component considered. If this component is rigid, it
moves with the motion of its base, and the dynamic
forces acting on it are very nearly equal to those associated with the base accelerations. However, if the
component is quite flexible, large relative motions or
strains can be induced in the component because o f
the differential motions between the masses of the
component and its base. In order to survive the dynamic motions, the element must be strong enough as well
as ductile enough to resist the forces and deformations
imposed on it. The required strength and ductility are
functions of stiffness or flexibility, among other things.
Unfortunately, the earthquake hazard for which an
element or component should be designed is subject
to a high degree of uncertainty. In only a few areas of
the world are there relatively long periods of observations of strong earthquake motions. The effects on a
structure, component, or element, depend not only on

the earthquake motion to which it is subjected, but

on the properties of the element itself. Among these
properties, the most important are the energy absorption within it or at interfaces between the element
and its support, either due to damping or inelastic
behavaor, its period of vibration, and its strength or
r~sistance.
It is the purpose of this paper to describe the general nature of the principles upon which earthquakeresistant design is based, with particular reference to
components of nuclear reactor facilities, and to consider the development of design spectra for the design
of major parts of such facilities or components. Additional attention is paid to the response of items of
equipment or instrumentation that are mounted on
parts of responding elements or components themselves, where the response of the supported equipment or component is influenced to a major extent
by the nature and type of the response of the primary
element on which it :s supported.
Much of the introductory part of this paper is taken
from Newmark [1, 3, 7], with some additions and
clarification based on more recent work.

304

N.M Newmark, Earthquake response ana(vsls of reactor structures

2. Loading and environmental criteria

In determining the seismic motion for which a facility should be designed, one must proceed by correlating available records and observations with qualitative reports of the effects of earthquakes, and by
making comparisons with observations in samdar geological regions. One must often make inferences from
the geology and tectonic structure of the region to
estimate the possible intensity of an earthquake which
might occur in the future. In some regions, maximum
or extreme earthquakes might not have occured in the
historic past.
In order to specify adequately the earthquake intensity for the design earthquake, one must do more
than determine the maximum probable acceleration
of the ground. The character of the earthquake motions must also be described in a way that is representatlve of the geologic conditions, taking into account
the local soil conditions including overburden depths
and characteristics, presence of water, depth to basement rock, and the like. A better measure of the freefield earthquake motions is a description which mcludes not only the maximum ground acceleration but
also the maximum ground velocity and displacement,
with some measure of the number of pulses or the
duration of strong motions that should be considered.
These quantities are dependent on the geologic and
foundation material characteristics and on the interaction between the soil or rock and the structure supported on it. Tilting or tipping of the foundation materials under the structural foundation must often be
considered.

3. Principles of seismic resistance

The permissible level of response of a structure,
element, or component, must be associated with the
loading criteria. The response criteria should properly
be dependent on the type of structure, the relative
cost of repairs for minor damage, and the hazard in
terms of possible loss of life should the item fail or
reach extreme deformation hmits. The seismic resistance of an element is a function primarily of its natural frequency of vibration, its damping and energy absorption in the elastic range, and its ductility and
energy absorption capacity an the range before failure
Occurs.

Natural frequencies of vibration can be computed

from the mass and stiffness &strlbutaons of the element or component, but are affected to a large degree
by the Interaction with the foundations or with other
supporting elements on which the component in
question is based.
The energy absorption m the structure from damplng depends on the nature of the structure itself, the
type of joints or connections within it, and the level
of stress or deformation which it undergoes during the
dynamic motion. The damping involved is also a function of the mechanisms at the interfaces between the
component and its supports or foundations.
The Importance of damping is indicated by the
fact that dynamic response of a structure in an earthquake may be affected to a greater degree by damping
than by almost any other parameter. This is especially
true in those instances where long-sustained nearly
harmomc motions are involved.
In the design of a structure, the designer can choose
to resist the motions in various ways. He may elect to
use a flexible, energy-absorbing structure which can
comply with the base motions readily; or he can use
a rigid structure to hmat the relative deformation withan the structure itself. In the former case, the stratus
m the structure are determined primarily by the maxamum transient base displacement, and an the latter
case they are determined primarily by the maximum
transient base acceleration. In tl~e intermediate range
of stiffness, the energy absorbing capacity within the
structure is of the greatest importance, and involves
both the strength and ductdity in a balanced fashion.
A trade-off between ductility and strength as available,
in general, for the intermediate range of stiffness, although only deformability is involved for very flexible
elements, and only strength is involved for very rigid
elements.
The basis for these observations will become clearer
in the summmary presented later in this paper concernlng the response of elastic and inelastic simple
dynamic systems.

4. Special design considerations

A number of points are often overlooked in the
design of structures or components to resist dynamic
motions. A summary of some of the more important

305

N.M. Newmark, Earthquake response analysis o f reactor structures

factors, but by no means a complete listing of all of

them, is contained hereto.
The motions due to an earthquake occur in both
horizontal and vertical directions in a complex manner.
It xs necessary to consider the interactions between
the responses in the various directions, and especially
important to consider the interaction between the
vertical and the maximum horizontal response. VerUcal loads, and eccentricities of the vertical loads caused
by horizontal displacements, must often be taken into
account with especially heavy structures that carry
large masses at or near the points which may deflect
a great deal. Some of the resisting capacity for horizontal motions may be used up by the secondary effects of the eccentricities of the gravity loads.
Quite often, the vertical motions may produce
vertical stresses in the structure or element that exceed
by a large amount those stresses due to the inertial
forces corresponding to the vertical acceleration multiplied by the mass of the element. This is true when
the frequencies of vxbration in the vert:cal direction
of the element or component are in the range where
major amplification of response can occur.
One must also consider the combination of the
stresses that arise from the horizontal and vertical
excitations occurring more or less simultaneously.
One of the factors that is commonly overlooked
~s the matter of relative motions between the parts or
elements of a system having supports at different
points, because the support motions may not occur
simultaneously. Hence, there may be transient relative motions which produce strains in the structure,
in addition to the strains produced by the dynamic
effects of the overall motion. This is especially important in piping, electric wiring, or other elements
connecting parts of a facility.
Finally, there are a group of items which do not
lend themselves readily to analytical consideration.
These concern the details and material properties of
the element or component, and the inspection and
control of quality in the construction procedure. The
details of connections of the structure to its support
or foundations, as well as of the various elements or
items within the structure or component, are of major
importance. Failures often occur at the connections
and joints because of inadequacy of these to carry the
forces to which they are subjected under dynamic
conditions. Inadequacy in properties of the materials

can often be encountered, leading to brittle fractures

where sufficient energy can not be absorbed even
though such energy absorption may have been counted
on in the design.
In order to insure that the intent of the designer is
achieved, control of construction procedures and appropriate inspection practices are necessary. It is important that the practical aspects of seismic design be
emphasized and that both designers and constructors
be fully aware of their importance.

5. Elastic response to seismic loading

A detailed description of the response of simple
elastic systems, or more complex structures and elements, subjected to dynamic loading and especially
to seismic loading, is given by Newmark [1 ]. In general, it can be shown as indicated in [ 1], that the
response of a simple damped oscillator to a dynamic
motion of its base can be represented graphically in
a simple fashion by a logarithmic plot as shown m
fig. 1. In this figure, there are shown on the plot,
using four logarithmic scales, the following three
quantities:
D = maximum relative displacement between the
mass of the oscillator and its base,
V = maximum pseudo relatwe velocity = coD,
A = maximum pseudo acceleration of the mass
of the oscillator = w2D.
In these relations, co is the circular natural frequency
of the oscillator.

50\

f~

/\

AN

/\

,c" /

%~/

,:,>:

7-,, M.o..

5 ~"v/'
,,

0,1

o% / X

Vm=15,n,/sec, % v , / ] ~ . .
am=0,3 g

H\/~
0,2

0:.'5

2R Z \ / ~ .
I

i,~%/~\00~1"'~ \

2
5
Frequency, cps

;q
I0

20

//

50

Fig. 1. Typical response spectrum for earthquake motions.

306

N M Newmark, Earthquake response analysts oj reactor rtructures

The effective maximum ground motions for the

earthquake disturbance for which fig. 1 is drawn are
maximum ground displacement d m = 10 In, maximum
ground velocity v m = 15 in per sec, maximum ground
acceleration a m = 0.3 g, where g is the acceleration of
gravity. The curve shown is a smooth curve rather than
the actual jagged curve that one obtains from a precise
calculation. The symbols 1, 2 and 3 on the curve represent oscillators, item 1 having a frequency of 20
cps, item 2 of 2 5 cps, and item 3 of 0.25 cps. It can
be seen that for item l the maximum relative displacement is extremely small, but for item 3 it is quite large.
On the other hand, the pseudo acceleration for Item 3
is relatively small compared with that for item 2. The
pseudo relative velocities for Items 2 and 3 are substantlally larger than that for 1tern 1.
The advantage of using the tripartite logarithmic
plot, with frequency plotted also logarithmically, is
that one curve can be drawn to represent the three
quantmes D, V, and A. The pseudo relative velocity
IS nearly the same as the maximum relative velocity
for higher frequencies, but differs substantially for
very low frequencies. It is, however, a measure of the
energy absorbed in the spring. The maximum energy
in the spring, neglecting that involved In the damper
of the oscdlator, is M V 2, where M is the mass of the
oscillator.

The pseudo acceleration is practically the same as

the maxunum acceleration, and the quantity M A IS
precisely the maximum force in the spring Theretbre,
the pseudo acceleration is exactly the same as the
maximum acceleration when there Is no damping.
In the discussion and figures which follow, we shall
use the term "velocity" for V, and "acceleration" for
A, without the explanatory words maximum, pseudo,
relative or absolute.
There are many strong motion earthquake records
available. One of the strongest that has been measured
is that for the E1Centro earthquake of May 18, 1840.
The response spectra computed for that earthquake
for several different amounts of damping are shown in
fig 2.

o~

0,05

0,1

0,2

0,5

I
2
Frequency, eps

10

20

50

Fig. 2. Response spectra, E1 Centro earthquake, May 18, 1940

North-South Lirectlon.

/ ~

/- Dampn
i gFactor,,8=0

2--

\
/

\
H,\
'O

// f

4 o2

o.~ - - [ /
/
/
O 05

0.03

<9
(3

0.05

"\
0 I

0,2

0,5
I
2
Undamped Natural Frequency, f, cps

l0

20

30

Fig. 3. AmphficaUons m response spectra, El Centro 1940 earthquake, elastic systems.

307

N.M. Newmark, Earthquake response analysis of reactor structures

The oscillatory nature of the response spectra, especially for low amounts of damping, is typical of the
nature of response spectra for earthquake motions in
general. A replot of fig. 2 is given in fig. 3 in a dimensionless form where the scales are given in terms of
the maximum ground motion components, in this
figure, the ground displacement is given by the symbol
y, and the subscript m designates a maximum value.
Dots over the y indicate differentiation with respect
to time.
It can be seen from fig. 3 that for relatively low
frequencies, below something of the order of about
0.05 cps, the maximum displacement response D is
practically equal to the maximum ground displacement. For intermediate frequencies, however, greater
than about 0.1 cps, up to about 0.3 cps, there is an
amplified displacement reponse, with amplificatmn
factors running up to about three or more for low
values of the damping factor/L
For high frequencies, over about 20 to 30 cps or
so, the maximum acceleration is practically equal to
the maximum ground acceleration. However, for frequencies below about 6 cps, ranging down to about
2 cps, there is nearly a constant amphfication of acceleration, with the higher amplification corresponding to the lower values of damping. In the intermediate range between about 0.3 to 2 cps, there is nearly
a constant velocity response, with an amplification
over the maximum ground velocity. The amplifications
also are greater for the smaller values of the damping
factor.
The results shown in fig. 3 are typical for other inputs, either for other earthquake motions or for simple
types of dynamic motion in general. The data from
which fig. 3 was drawn, as well as other similar figures,
are taken from Newmark [l ], and Veletsos and Newmark [2].

6. Inelastic response to seismic loading

Let us now consider the situation m which the
simple oscillator has a spring which can deform inelastically during the response. The simple resistance-displacement relationship for this spring is shown by the
light line in fig. 4, where the yield point is indicated,
with a curved relationship showing a rise to a maximum
resistance and then a decay to a point of maximum

=~Relot

y
0

mn

/~

~.eo,,~eRe,o,,o

/ O,O,so,oce n,
/

I /-Useful Llm,,

/oo,u [
/ | ,
Uy

Um-Uy

um

Displacement

Fig. 4. General resistance-displacement relationship

usetul limit or failure at a displacement um. An effective elasto-plastic resistance curve is shown by the
heavy line in the figure, rising on a straight line to a
point where the yield displacement is Uy and the resistance ry, and then extending without appreciable
increase in resistance to the maximum displacement
u m. The effective resistance curve is d, awn so as to
have the same area between the origin and Uy as the
actual curve, and again the same area to the maximum
displacement point. The ductility factor/a is defined
as the ratio between the maximum permissible or useful displacement to the yield displacement, for the
effective curve.
It is convenient to use an elasto-plast~c resistancedisplacement relation because one can draw response
spectra for such a relation in generally the same way
as the spectra were drawn for elastic conditions in
figs. 2 and 3. In fig. 5 there are shown acceleration
spectra for elasto-plastic systems having 2% of critical
damping for the E1 Centro 1940 earthquake. Here, the
symbol Dy represents the elastic component of the
response displacement, but is not the total displacement. Hence, the curves also give the elastic component of maximum displacement as well as the maximum acceleration, A, but they do not gwe the proper
value of maximum velocity. This is designated by the
use of the symbol V' for the pseudo velocity drawn in
the figure. The figure is drawn for ductility factors
ranging from 1 to 10. It is typical of other acceleration
spectra for elasto-plastic systems, as indicated by the
acceleration spectra shown in fig. 6 for the step displacement pulse sketched in the figure.
Fig. 6 is drawn for a step displacement pulse corresponding to the two triangular pulses of acceleration

308

N.M Newmark, Earthquake response analysts o f reactor structure~

A ~ '

OuchhtyFactors, F

0.5 --(b~/

,)/---

o,z/~'~
->i ,.E0,1

0,05
0.05 0.05

0.1

0,2:
05
1
2
5
10
20
50
UndompedNolurol Frequency,f, cps
Fig. 5. Acceleration response spectra of elastoplastic systems, two percent critical damping, E. Centro 1940 earthquake

Foetors, p.

2"/2

0,5

ill

~ljl~illti

0,2
0,1

y//'/y

0.05

l/

%v 2 "
,g
"re ,~"1
o" [
o,o2'
?'1 / |

ylj -+-y
;
i

YI A , --Ym ' , t
,

0,5
I
2
5
I0
20
Notural Frequency,f, cps
Fig. 6. Acceleration response spectra for undamped, elastoplastic systems, step displacement.
oo2

005

o,

02

shown, where the total length of time required to reach

the maximum ground or base displacement m 1 second.
The frequency scale shown m fig. 6 will be changed for
any other length of time, t, to reach the maximum displacement by dividing the frequencies f by t. In other
words, for a step displacement pulse that takes 0.2 sec,
the abscissa for a frequency of 1 cps would be changed
to 5 cps, and that for 3 cps in the figure would be

changed to 15 cps, etc. The general nature of the similarity between figs. 5 and 6 is important.
One can also draw a response spectrum for total
displacement, as shown in fig. 7. This is drawn for the
same condmons as fig. 5, and is obtained from fig. 5
by multiplying each curve's ordinates by the value of
ductility factor/x shown on that curve. It can be seen
that the maximum total displacement is virtually the

309

N.M. Newmark, Earthquake response analysi~ of reactor structures

,A

iIIo

Ouchhty Factor, ~=10~ 5-/.~'~'.~k..~. X, \ / \ \

\'N Is
"

<~/~e
/ j ,"//
/
/"
'

,,

~I"o.~ ,,~., /

\\

/ v l /
0,1 / ~'~

0'~)505 0.05

0I

IN,/O\

0,2

0,5
2
I0
20 30
UndampedNaturalFrequency,f, cps
Fig. 7. Total displacement response spectra, elastoplastic systems, two percent critical damping, E1Centro 1940 earthquake.
same for all ductility factors, actually perhaps decreasing even slightly for the larger ductility factors in the
low frequency region, for frequencies below about 2
cps. Moreover, it appears from fig. 5 that the maximum
acceleration is very nearly the same for frequencies
greater than about 20 or 30 cps for all ductility factors.
In between, there is a transition. These remarks are applicable to the spectra for other earthquakes also. One
can generalize about them in the following way for
general nonlinear relations between resistance and displacement.
For low frequencies, corresponding to something
of the order of about 0.3 cps as an upper limit, displacements are preserved. As a matter of fact, the inelastic systems have perhaps even a smaller displacement
than elastic systems. For frequencies between about
0.3 to about 2 cps, the displacements are very nearly
the same for all ductility factors. For frequencies between about 2 up to about 6 cps, the best relationship
appears to be to equate the energy m the various
curves, or to say that energy is preserved, with a corresponding relationship between deflections and accelerations or forces. There is a transition region between 6 and 30 cps. Above 30 cps, the force or acceleration is nearly the same for all ductility ratios. For
convenience, one might modify these relationships
slightly, as discussed subsequently.

7. Design spectra and design criteria

In the light of the preceding discussion, we can now
develop a basis for design of structures,, elements, or
components, where these are subjected directly to the
ground or base motion for which we have maximum
values of displacement, velocity, and acceleration. We
first proceed with selection of values of damping.
Table 1 is reproduced from Newmark [3] and Newmark
and Hall [4], and gives the percentage of critical damping for various types and conditions of structures or
elements, as a function of stress level. It represents
the best information available at the present time, but
certainly involves a great deal of judgment and interpretation.
Amplification factors for the various ranges in the
response spectrum were considered in [3] and [4].
The values determined therein for a number of earthquakes, with some smoothing and reduction of peaks
to present a reasonably consistent prohability of failure
or survival, are given in table 2. The amplification
factors given in that table are used in connection with
fig. 8a, as explained below.
In general, for any given area or site, estimates might
be made of the maximum ground acceleration, maximum ground velocity, and maximum ground displacement. The lines representing these values can be drawn

310

N . M Newmark. Earthquake response attalyst.s o? ~eaclor structures

Table l
Damping values.
Stress level

Type and condition

of structure

Percentage of
critacal damping

1. Low, well below

proportmnal hmlt,
stresses below -~
yield point

a. Vital piping
b. Steel, relnf, or prestr cone.,
wood; no cracking,
no joint shp

0.5

2. Workmg stress, no
more tha~ about
yield point

a. Vital piping
b. Welded steel,
prestr, concr.,
well reant, concr. (only
slight cracking)
c Relnf. concr, with
consxderable cracking
d Bolted and/or rxveted
steel, wood structs
wxth nailed or bolted joints

0.5 to 1 0

3. At or just below
yield pomt

4. Beyond yield point,

with permanent strata
greater than yield
point hmit strain
5. All ranges

a. Wxtal piping
b. Welded steel, prestr, concr.
(without complete loss in
prestress)
c. Prestr. concr with no
prestress left
d Reinf. cone.
e. Bolted and/or raveted steel,
wood struets, with bolted joints
f. Wood structs with nailed joints
a Piping
b. Welded steel
c. Prestr. cone., relnf, cone.
d. Bolted and/or riveted steel,
or wood structs

0 5 to 1.0

2
3 to5

5to7
2

5
7
7 t o 10
10 to 15
15 to 20
5
7 to 10
10 to 15
20

Rocking of entire structure *

a. On rock, e > 6000 fps
b. On firm soft, c/> 2000 fps
c. On soft soft, c < 2000 fps

2to5
5 to7
7 to 10

* Higher damping values for lower values of seismic velocity, c.

on the tripartite logarithmic chart o f w h i c h fig. 8a is

an example. The lines showing the ground m o t i o n
m a x i m a m fig. 8a are drawn for a m a x i m u m ground
acceleration o f 1.0 g, velocity o f 48 m / s e e and displacem e n t o f 36 m. These data represent m o t i o n s m o r e mtense than those o f any k n o w n or postulated earthquake. T h e y are, however, a p p r o x i m a t e l y in correct
p r o p o r t i o n for a n u m b e r o f areas o f the world, where
earthquakes occur either on firm ground, soft rock, or
c o m p e t e n t sediments o f various kinds. F o r relatively

soft sediments, the velocities and displacements might

require increases above the values corresponding to
the given acceleration as scaled f r o m fig. 8a. However,
it is n o t likely that m a x i m u m ground velocities in excess o f 3 to 4 ft/sec are obtainable under any circumstances.
F o r each o f the a m o u n t s o f damping shown in the
figure, or tabulated in table 2, the amplified displacements are shown on the left, the amplified velocities
at the top, and the amplified accelerations in that part

N.M. Newmark, Earthquake response analysis of reactor structures

. Spec,ro Fo, ..;o,,;.

I "x/
"^

NI /

I~//v,.
~

r//l

/ \

\/

A~

0%

~'~K" ~

/'o

/\
0 5

I ,o__/~,

~"

", /

,~ -~,/ i \ \ . ~ ' ~ x "

/\.

/
I

"

\/

o,~\v/N\x~.

/ \,

/\/iX,

"/

x/\\/>~,lk
~x ma.-~, . ~

IX / \

\..
0,2

/x

Ground Mo 0

"x / \

I
0,1

"4/

2%

5
Frequency, cps

/X,
I0

/
"

t\

/1\

/[\/1%
20

same scale factor relative to the maximum ground acceleration compared with 1 g.
The amplification factors given in table 2 and shown
m fig. 8a differ somewhat, especially for low values of
damping, from those gwen in [5] for a number of
earthquakes. However, for damping values from 1.0
to about 5%, they are in reasonably good agreement
with those given m [5]. The general shape of the spectra m fig. 8a is in reasonable agreement also with those
computed in [5].
Table 2
Relatwe values of spectrum amplification factors.

oo.\,
\/]x,

"

Amplification factor for

Critical
Damping (%)
,

50 ~

311

I00

Fig. 8a. Basic design spectra normalized to 1.0 g, elastic

systems.

of the right-hand side of the figure for which the lines

are parallel to the maximum ground acceleration line,
but lie above it. We shall identify these portions of
the line as the amplified displacement region, the amplified velocity region, and the amplified acceleration
region, respectively.
At a frequency of about 6 cps, the amplified acceleration region line intersects a line sloping down
toward the maximum ground acceleration value, and
intersecting that line at various frequencies, depending on the damping. The intersection is at a frequency
of about 30 cps for 2% damping, and the other lines
are parallel to the line for 2% damping. These lines
are designated as the acceleration transition region of
the spectra. Finally, beyond the intersection with the
maximum ground acceleration line, the response spectrum continues with the maximum ground acceleration
value for higher frequencies.
The spectra so determined can be used as design
spectra for elastic responses. The spectra are completely described when the maximum ground motion values
are given for the three components of ground motion,
and the damping is known. When only the maximum
ground acceleration is given, the values used for maximum ground velocity and displacement are taken as
proportional to those in the figure, or as scaled by the

0
0.5
1

2
5
7
10
20

Displacement

Velocity

Acceleration

2.5
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.4
12
1.1
1.0

4.0
3.6
3.2
2.8
1.9
1.5
1.3
1.1

6.4
5.8
5.2
4.3
2.6
1.9
1.5
1.2

To use the spectra for inelastic behavior, the following suggestions are made. The amplified displacement
region of the spectra, the left-hand side, remains unchanged for total displacement, and is dixnded by the
ductility factor to obtain yield displacement or acceleration. The upper right-hand portion sloping down at
45 , or the amplified acceleration region of the spectrum, is relocated for an elasto-plastic resistance curve
by choosing it at a level which corresponds to the same
energy absorption for the elasto-plastic curve as for an
elastic curve shown for the same period of vibration.
The extreme right-hand portion of the spectrum, where
the response is governed by the maximum ground acceleration, remains at the same acceleraUon level as for
the elastic case, and therefore at a corresponding increased total displacement level. The amplified velocity
portion of the spectrum then is obtained by drawing
a straight line transition in the newly located elastoplastic spectrum, between the amplified displacement
and amplified acceleration regions. The frequencies at
the corners are kept at the same values as in the elastic
spectrum. Similarly, the acceleration transition region

3l2

N.M. Newmark, Earthquake response analv~ts o f reactor structures

of the response spectrum IS now drawn also as straight

line transition from the newly located amphfied acceleration line, using the same frequency points of intersection as in the elastic response spectrum.
In all cases the "inelastic maximum acceleranon"
spectrum and the "inelastic maximum displacement"
spectrum differ by the factor/~ at the same frequencies.
An earlier procedure for the defimtion of inelastic
response spectra for design was presented by Newmark

Determined By b~slorhon Or Strom

/ [
/_

[1 ] in the form shown in fig 8b. In thin figure the displacement bound, the velocity bound, and the acceleration bound are determined, respectively, by keeping
the displacement constant, the energy constant, and
the force in the spring constant, and drawing the corresponding maximum response displacement limxts.
However, In no case can the acceleration rise above the
level corresponding to the velocity limit, and in no
case can either the acceleration or the velocity rise
above the level corresponding to the displacement
bound.
The revised procedure presented In this report was
from Newmark [7]. A sketch of the resulting desxgn
spectrum is shown in fig. 8c for 2% dampmg, for an
elasto-plastic system with a ductility factor of 5. Both
the maximum displacement and maximum acceleration
bounds are shown, for comparison with the elastic
response spectrum. The dashed lines DD, VV, and AA
are bounds above which the spectra cannot rise, for
the damping level assumed. A lower bound for AA is/aA,
which corresponds to a lower bound for AA//~ of.4.
In other words, the amplified inelastic maximum acceleratmn response cannot be less than the maximum
effective ground acceleratmn.
In using these design rules for nuclear power plant
facilities, one should give attention to a number of
special topics, some of which were outlined previously

~,2,3Det. . . . . . d By Energy
AI,2

Det. . . . . . d By Force Or St. . . .

E2

%S

71
fo

fb

fc

Fig. 8b. Response spectrum displacement ]imtts, ~pproxim~tion for inelastic systems.

rX

J/

X/~

13<.

,oo!\..A._~/ \ ~.~% A \ \ /
d
"

'

q / N .IX/ \ j . > kXI.

\1/

~.~./k / r \ /

" ~ ~,--

.~ oo~_.~_A \ /

\J,,'k.
Xl
\
\

/~

"

'~k

PO

0"//1

JD~

\/

Inelastic- Moxcnum Acceleration Y~,1~

t\

/=\

/~

\/

I \ ^~1~.

17 .

i./%
0

C) l

02

/~.AA

,/

[~

A "%/ iNT.~/\

A \/

h.

;.+...+..,
O'

~/A

"e

05

5
I0
20
Frequency, cps

50

I00

200

Fig. 8c. lnelasUc design spectra for ductihty factor of 5.

500

I000

N.M. Newmark, Earthquake response analysts of reactor structures

in this paper, and others of which are discussed in

some detail by Newmark and Hall [6]. Of course, the
elasto-plastic response spectra can be used only as an
approximation for multi-degree-of-freedom systems.
In the development of a design spectrum one may
choose to use an "effective" value of maximum ground
acceleration rather than an actual value, particularly
in cases where the higher spikes of acceleration are associated with very short durations and correspond to
velocity changes much smaller than the maximum
ground velocity, or where the duration of the earthquake motion is extremely short and the influence on
failure or inelastic behavior is thereby lessened.

the author's colleague, Dr. M. Amin, for the elastic

response spectra of several earthquakes. The results
for the three components of motion for the E1 Centro,
California, earthquake of May 18, 1940 and the Taft
earthquake of July 21, 1952 are shown in figs. 9 and
10, respectively, for 2% of critical damping.
There are several interesting features of these response spectra. For example, the frequencies of the
spikes are not the same except m a few instances; the
responses for the two horizontal directions show crossovers and significant differences in some ranges of
frequency; and the vertical response is equal to or
greater than the maximum horizontal response in the
high frequency region, but is somewhat to a great deal
less in the intermediate and low frequency regions.
It is suggested that until further information becomes available the following design criteria be used:
1. The design spectrum for vertical response be considered equal to that for horizontal response for
frequencies in the amplified acceleration range or
higher frequencies.
2. The design spectrum for vertical response be considered equal to two-thirds that for horizontal response for frequencies in the amplified velocity or
displacement ranges.
These rules may be considered conservative for the
E1 Centro 1940 earthquake, but they are definitely

8. Vertical and horizontal excitation

Since the ground moves in all three directions in an
earthquake, and even tilts and rotates, consideration
of the combined effects of all these motions must be
included in the design of important structures. When
the responses in the various directions may be considered to be uncoupled, then consideration can be
given separately to the various components of base
motion, and individual response spectra can be determined for each component or direction of transient
base displacement. Calculations have been made by

5o

% , - . ,.,,.v.- v

=\../.~_~/

Vert,col

"0.2,

!\./P',../

"

'~

. . . . .

'

00I

0.05

O, I

0.2

IN o~.o. A \ / \

~_

I/

\ I/~

/\~A",'~,/

I ^~v.. / ~

/~

o,"

7',,

x, Z

X~J

"k-"",z.
--~

0,02

,.i

\/

"~
o-A"

Ns

- - -

",

7.,, ./'., ,'Cb

7,,
I

,%/

313

o"

0,5
I
2
Frequency, cps

I0

?0

50

I00

Fig. 9. Elastic response spectra for three components of El Centro earthquake of 18 May 1940.

314

,V.M Newmark, Earthquake response

analysts o f reactor structures

/\

/~/

!)5 A' 'j

O. / / ~ ,~% Domp,ng,\~ ~OO

W o'
o,

- - -

OI

002

,,9,

0,05

/.~xOo~//~\
o" \ / \ /
,./

,./

<,

..oo:

O,I

02

05

IO

20

50

I00

Frequency, cps

Fig. 10. Elastic response spectra for three components of Taft earthquake of 21 July 1952.

not overconservatlve for the Taft earthquake of 1952.

Since the responses for motions m the various directions may not occur at the same time, it is considered reasonable to combine the effects of the several
components of motion In a probabllistlc manner, by
taking the maximum stress, deflection, or other specific response as the square root of the corresponding
responses to the individual components of motion.
The effects of transient tipping, ultmg, and rotation of the ground during an earthquake have not been
studied extensively. An elementary treatment of some
aspects of these movements has been given m section
7.7 of [8], and the effects of rotation of the ground
about a vertical axis on the accidental torsxon in symmetrical buildings, for example, is given in sectmn
15.6 of the same reference
When the responses of the structure or component
are coupled, the analysis becomes much more complex
and a three-dimensional [or at least two-dimensional]
response analysis must be considered. However, data
regarding the simultaneous input motions must be
used in such an analysis, and little guidance is available
on this topic.

9. Response of light equipment and attachments

Various procedures have been suggested to slmptify
the design of light eqmpment mounted on a respondmg structure subjected to earthquake or other dynamic
motions. In one of the earhest procedures such as that
given by Newmark [9], attention was called to the fact
that the maximum response, even when the light equipment was tuned to a frequency of the system on which
it was supported, could not exceed the square root of
the ratio of the mass of the primary system to that of
the secondary system. A more detailed study by Newmark, Walker, Veletsos and Mosborg [10] has been
made. From that reference, figs. 11 and 12 are taken
and presented herein. Fig. 11 shows the notation of a
single-mass-spring primary system supporting a singlemass-spring secondary system. The frequency ratio of
the secondary system to the primary system was consldered to have a range of values, and the mass ratio 7
had a wide range of values. The spring &stortlon ratio
was computed for three response spectra, one a constant displacement bound, the second a constant velocity bound, and the third a constant acceleration bound,

315

N.M. Newmark, Earthquake response analysts of reactor structures

Primary System

Secondary System

vvvw~

Nvww~9

~'u I

~ ),=0,05

-I=," u 2

v/p

~,/

S = U2--LI I

PZ=K/M,

P2 = k / m ,

7" = m / M

Fig. 11. Notation, two-degree-of-freedomsystem.

0 05

OI

02

05
I
2
Frequency Roho, p/P

Fig. 12b. Spring distortion bounds, secondary system, step

velocity.

7=0'05

s.s_
D

il
0,1

0,2

!,

A/p 2
0,5

I
2
Frequency Retina, p/P

I0

Fig. 12a. Spring distortion bounds, secondary system, step

displacement.
0
O,i

corresponding, respectively, to a step displacement,

a step velocity, and a step acceleration pulse. The
curves shown in figs. 12a, b and c are for these three
conditions, respectively. The systems considered have
no damping. However, it is seen that even for tuning
of the secondary system to the same frequencies as
that of the primary system, the maximum response
is again x / 1 / 7 or the square root of the ratio of the
primary mass to that of the secondary mass. The
spring distortions for the two modes of the combine,t
systems were considered to be added in numerical
value, and consequently the curves represent an upper
bound to the spring distortion of the secondary system.
The upper bound to the response of the secondary
system can then be obtained directly from the basic
response spectrum for the primary system. The upper
bound to the acceleration that can be used with the
secondary mass is merely p2 times the spring distortion

0 2

0.5

lO

Frequency Ratio, piP

Fig. 12 c. Spring distortion bounds, secondary system, step

acceleration.

bound of the secondary system, where p2 lS the circular frequency of the secondary system.
Of course, if the secondary system has damping in
it, the maximum response is limited also by the quantity 1/(2/3). Hence, as soon as the ratio of the masses becomes small enough so that the damping m the second
ary system governs the maximum response, then a
further decrease in the mass of the secondary system
has no effect on the spring distortion bound.

10. Maximum response of "tuned" light equipment

The studies reported m the preceding section are

316

N.M. N e w m a r k , f~arthquake response analysts o~ reactor structures

for very simple primary and secondary systems. A

more recent study made by the author considers a
much more complex primary system with a simple
secondary system, as shown in fig. 13(a), for example.
The primary system can be other than a linear spring
mass arrangement, however. The only limitation involves a single spring and mass for the secondary system which is connected to one of the masses in the
primary system. Fig. 13 (b) shows the way in which
the frequencies in the combined system differ from
those of the primary system. The heavy dots con show
the frequencies of the nth mode of the primary system, and the cross X shows the frequency p of the
secondary system. When the frequency of the secondary system falls between two of the frequencies of the
primary system, then the frequencies of the combined
system are shifted away from p as shown by the direction of the arrows in fig. 13 (b). When the frequency
of the secondary system falls on one of the frequencies
of the primary system, the frequencies of all of the
modes of the combined system are shifted away, in
the same fashion, but there are two frequencies at or
near p such that one of them is shghtly above and
one is slightly below p. Both are very close to p when
the mass that IS added is small. We shall consider this
situation only in the following discussion.
The frequency of the secondary mass is given by
eq. (I):
p2 = k/m

(1)

The mode shapes for the nth mode of the primary

system are given by Un" When these are normalized so
k

) Secondory System

that the participation factor Is unity, according to

eq. (2),
1 "M'6
c

17

,
--

u ?/

"M'u

(2)

then one can define the normalized displacements of

the nth mode by u n , where
Un = C n ~ n .

(3)

From the fact that the participation factor is unity

for the modal displacements u n , it follows that
I'M

u n = uT
n . M . Un

(4)

It also follows from the orthogonality of the modal

displacements u n and u i for mode n and mode i, that
Ut7T "M ' u t = 0.

(5)

Because the added mass is very small, it has little

if any influence on the primary system. Let us consider, that the modal shapes of the combined system
are the same as those for the primary system, with
the addition of the modal deflection of the added secondary mass, which is represented by the symbol ~o.
If the displacement o f the mass of the primary system
to which the secondary system is attached is represented by Un', then the value of~Pn is given by eq. (6):
U ~

~on -----

(6)

2/p2
1 - co n

M3
":::'%%"

~ Pomory S y s t e m /

........

o ) Ltghf SecondorySystem Added To Pr=mory System

However, for the added mode which has a frequency

p, the displacement of the mass m in that mode is
given by eq. (7)
~op ~-- 1 - Z n ~ O n .

~n' Frequency Of n'th Mode, Prlmory System

p, Frequency Of Secondary System

{ b ) Frequencies Of Combined System

Fig. 13. Simple secondary system with complex primary

system.

(7)

This equation follows because of the fact that the algebraic sum of all of the normalized modal displacements is unity if the system is subjected to motion
only at its base.
It IS noted that eq. (6) gives an infinite value for
~0n when p = con. This obviously not the case, and
therefore the situation needs further investigation
when the secondary system is tuned to one of the

N.M. Newmark, Earthquake response analysis o f reactor structures

frequencies of the primary system. In this case, let us

consider the added frequency p being very nearly the
same as 9n, with ~0n and ---p representing the displacements of the added mass in the tuned nearly identical
frequencies. Let us define also the displacements for
mode n and mode p of the masses of the primary system as precisely one-half those of the displacements
of the nth mode of the primary system. Then we obtain the following results:
(1" M " u n) + m~Pn = 1 (UTn . M " u n) + m~on 2, (8)
T
(1 "M" U n ) - m ~ o p _--~1 [u
, n "M" Un)+ m~op2 , (9)

These results are obtained by considering the combined

system with the same general procedure as was used
to obtain eq. (4).
Let us now choose to make the modes n and p
orthogonal to one another if we can do so. We shall
try to do so by using eq. (10).
m~On~Op = 1

(uTn" M ' u n )

"

(10)

We shall also choose to make the algebraic sum Ofgn

and 9p unity in order that we have the proper relationship for the participation factors. This Is exemplified
by eq. (11).
~on - %

= 1.

(11)

Then eq. (8) can be put into the form:

~on 2 _ ~on = J / 4 m ,

(12)

(13)

where
=

uTn "M" u n .

Similarly, eq. (9) can be put into the form:

~Op2 + tpp = J / a m .

(14)

317

Now since the nth and pth modes have very nearly
the same frequencies, they are additive directly, and
we shall designate the sum of the absolute values of
~0n and ~Opby the symbol ~0. We can then obtain the
relation:
~o =

l~Onl+ kOpl"~X/-J/m.

(17)

This equation is essentially the same as the relation

described in the preceding section for a primary system having only a smgle mass and spring.
Of course, if the primary system has only one mass
and spring, then the normalized modal deflection u n
is unity, and J becomes M.
Calculations were made for several simple cases to
verify the accuracy of eqs. (6), (7), and (17) for zero
damping. These equations are quite accurate even for
relatively large added masses. When the added mass is
even of the same order of magnitude as the primary
effective mass J, the relationship given by eq. (17) is
within 10 to 20% of the results obtained by precise
numerical analysis and eqs. (6) and (7) are in error by
about the same amount.
When the secondary system is a more complex system having a number of springs and masses arranged
in an arbitrary fashion with several points of support
on the primary system, then the treatment required
becomes more complex. In this case, the modes of the
secondary system must be defined for base motions
at the points of support corresponding to the motions
of the primary system in the mode for which the frequencies of the primary system and the secondary
system are equal. Under these circumstances, the appropriate definition of the participation factor uses,
instead of unity in eq. (2), the proper value of the acceleration vector to be applied to the secondary system to make it move without distortion with the
same displacements of the points of support on the
primary system as that of the primary system. Then
one can derive eqs. (18) and (19), which have a reasonable form and are fairly simple to use.

The solution of eqs. (12) and (14) leads to the following:

~ X[~,

(18)

where
'Pn = + X / J I m + 1 ,

(15)

- g p = - X / 7 / m + I .

(16)

] = otn "m o~n .

(19)

318

N M. Newmark, Earthquake response analvsts o2 reactor struetures

In eq. (19) the quantity a n is the mode shape for the

secondary system that has the same frequency as the
nth mode of the primary system
When the secondary system IS supported on only
two points of support, the relationships required to
obtain the normalized mode shapes for it are relatively
simple since these involve substituting a strmght hne
having the appropriate Intercepts, corresponding to
the motions of the primary system at the two points
of support, instead of a unit displacement everywhere.
Where the number of supports of the secondary system IS greater than two, then there are relative stratus
introduced m the secondary system owing to the displacements of the primary system, in addition to
those caused by the dynamic responses of the secondary system interacting with the primary system. This
problem is inherently more complicated, and for the
time being, eqs. (18) and (19) should be considered
merely as heuristic relationships that lead to a better
understanding and a reasonable approximation to the
behavior of a complex system. In all cases, however,
one must take account of the possibilities that for
multi-degree-of-freedom primary and secondary systems, more than one mode of each may have the same
frequencies. This leads to even more than the usual
amount of difficulty
As an example of the results of calculations to verify
the accuracy of the foregoing relations, tables 3 and 4
were prepared for a main system of 2 masses to which
a light third mass and spring were added. For table 3
the main system has circular natural frequencies of
1 and x/3-hz. The effective mass m mode l IS 3.0 and
In mode 2, 1.0 When the added mass is 0.03 and is
tuned to a frequency of 1 0, the responses, as Indicated
in the table, are quite accurately given by the approximate relatmns, and the absolute sum of the modal
strains for spring 3 IS about 105 for a uniform velocity
spectrum of 10 in/sec, in accord with eq. (17). The
excess over 100 comes from the third mode which is
not considered in eq. (17), but can be computed from
eq. (6).
Table 4 IS for a system having real parameters and
for a more typical response spectrum, similar to the
right-hand part of fig. 8. The amplification for acceleration of the added mass is, of course, also just over
100
The amplification factors at resonance are affected
both by the damping factor/3 and by the effective mass

ratio 7. Their effects are almost, but not quite, mteJchangeable. The net combined effect IS fairly well
bounded by the relation
amplification factor ~ -

1
-

2/3+v5

(20)

This relation is applicable directly when/3 is very

small or very large compared with X/'Y. However, when
/3 is of the same order of magnitude as x/y, a more accurate but less conservative value is
l
4/3 + V/2/_

(21)

At resonance or near it, the effectwe value of damping/3 is very nearly the average of the values for the
main system and the secondary system. This effective
value, however, should be used only in eqs. (20) or
(21), and not for the response of the main system,
which is still governed by its own value of damping
factor.

11. Relative m o t i o n s

It is often of Importance to have information about

the relative motions of two points either close together
or some moderate distance apart, in connection with
the design of structures supported on or in soil or rock
Information concerning relative motions, as determined
from measurements, is often difficult to interpret or
to assess. However, where it is fairly clear that a wave
motion IS propagated in one direction without interference with other waves in other directions, and where
the change in shape of the wave from point to point
is relatively small, one can make inferences about the
relatwe motions between nearby points In a fairly
simple manner, as outlined here. For example, consider
two points, point 1 and point 2, at a distance b apart,
as shown in fig. 14. Consider a displacement O at point
1 and p plus an increment at point 2, as Indicated. Now
let us consider a situation where a wave is propagated
from point 1 towards point 2, with a displacement in
the form given by
a = f (x - c t ) ,

(2 2)

in which c is the velocity of tills particular wave propagatlon and t is the time. Then the various derivatives

319

N.M. Newmark, Earthquake response analysis o f reactor structures

Table 3
Parameters
Masses or
weights:
3
1
Spring consts:
6
1.5
Scale factor for weights, masses and springs = ****

0.03
0.03

Mode

Frequency

Circ. ~equency

Circ. ~equency squ~ed

1
2
3

0.1475451
0.1713524
0.2761886

0.9270535
1.076639
1.735344

0.8594282
1.159152
3.01142

Normahzed modal values

Mode

Mass no.

Displacement

Strmn

Acceleration

1
1
1

1
2
3

0.2318585
0.760761
5.411904

0.2318585
0.5289025
4.651143

0.1992657
0.6538195
4.651143

2
2
2

1
2
3

0.2766675
0.7419382
-4.661827

0.2766675
0.4652707
-5.403765

0.3206996
0.860019
-5.403765

3
3
3

1
2
3

0.491474
-0.5026992
0.2499226

0.491474
-0.9941732
0.7526218

1.480035
-1.513839
0.7526218

Spectral parameters
Spectral bounds: Displacement = 1000 in
Velocity
= 10 in/sec
Acceleration = 100 g
Response spectrum combinations
Combination

Mass no.

Dlsplacement[ml

Strain [in]

Acceleration [g]

ABS sum

1
2
3

7.9029
17.9943
103.1175

7.9029
15.75568
104.6993

3.538065E-2
6.156534E-2
0.2712418

SRSS

2
3

4.569429
11.1058
72.69716

of the displacement p w i t h respect to x and t are given

by the following relations developed by N e w m a r k [ 11 ].

x = f' (x - ct) ,

(23)

4.569429
9.167651
71.09927

a2= -c'

0t

020- c2f"

0.0240574
3.567694E-2
0.184195

(25)

(x - ct)

(x

ct)

at 2

a2P - f "
Ox 2

(x - c t ) ,

(24)

F r o m eqs. (23) and (25) one derives the following

result:

(26)

320

N.M. Newmark, Earthquake response analysts oJ reactor structures

Table 4
Parameters
Masses or
weights.
3
1
Spring consts
5400
1350
Scale factor for weights, masses and springs = 10

0 03
27

Mode

Frequency

Circ. frequency

Circ. frequency squared

1
2
3

4.426354
5.140573
8.285659

27.81161
32.29917
52.06033

773.4854
1043.237
2710.278

lb sec2/m
lb/ln

Normahzed modal values

Mode

Mass no.

Displacement

Strmn

Acceleration

1
1
1

1
2
3

0.2318585
0.760761
5.411904

0.2318585
0.5289025
4.651143

179.3392
588.4375
4186,029

2
2
2

1
2
3

0 2766675
0.7419382
-4.661827

0.2766675
0.4652707
-5.403765

288.6297
774.0171
-4863.389

3
3
3

1
2
3

0.491474
-0.5026992
0.2499226

0.491474
-0.9941732
0.7526218

1332.031
-1362.455
677.3596

Spectral parameters
Spectral bounds Displacement
Velocity
Acceleration
Freq. at drop-off and at base
Base acceleration value

= 12 m
= 30 m/sec
= 0.75 g
= 6,24 Hz
= 0.3 g
Response spectrum combinations

Combination

Mass no.

Dlsplacement[m I

Strain [in]

Acceleration [g]

ABS sum

1
2
3

0.2120531
0.5402318
3.343894

0.2120531
0.4251735
3.31465

0.7219165
1.475324
7.728459

0.1256076
0.3548612
2 403559

0.1256076
0.2558937
2.29884

0.4350296
0.8697725
5.359989

SRSS

2
3

3p _
ax

1 op
c 3t

(27)

strain e is o b t a i n e d f r o m eq. ( 2 7 ) , a n d the m a x i m u m

strain at p o i n t 1 is t h e r e f o r e

and similarly, f r o m eqs. ( 2 4 ) and ( 2 6 ) o n e o b t a i n s

o z j = 1, 32P
3x 2

(28)

c 2 3t 2

In the case w h e r e O is m the d i r e c t i o n o f x , t h e n the

e m = --Om/C ,

(29)

in w h i c h o m is the m a x l m u m v e l o c i t y at p o i n t 1.
In the case w h e r e p is p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o x , e i t h e r
h o r i z o n t a l l y or vertically, the m a x i m u m c u r v a t u r e at

N.M. Newmark, Earthquake response analysts of reactor structures

to it from that corresponding to the strains determined

from the equations.
Other relationships are of importance in the case
where the motions are caused by more general disturbances than a wave of nearly constant shape transmitted
in one direction. For example, it is apparent that the
maximum change m the d:stance between points 1 and
2, ~b21, is related to the maximum displacements at
points 2 and 1 in the following way.

,o + b 0.-~p

321

-2

Fig. 14. Relatwe displacements.

point 1 is obtained from eq. (28), and is as follows:

6b21 1> Umax, 2 - Umax,1
curvature = am~C2 ,

(33)

(30)

where a m is the maximum acceleration at point 1.

These relations, m eqs. (29) and (30), are often of
use in determining the maximum strain that must be
experienced by an element extending over some distance, or the maximum curvature in an element, as
for example a tunnel, pipeline, or other structure.
When the displacements in the region considered
are those associated with horizontal shearing displacements occurring without longitudinal or extensional
strain, then the displacement p is perpendicular to the
wave front. For this case there is also an extensional
deformation of an embedded element such as a cable
or pipeline or tunnel, but the relations governing it are
slightly different from eq. (29). Consider the case
where 0 is normal to x in fig. 14, but the element considered makes an angle 0 with x. The maximum shearing distort:on 7 :n the element :s
= ( o / c ) cos 2 0

In many instances, this relaUon may be trivial because

the maximum displacements may be nearly equal, but
since they do not occur at the same time, it is obvious
that the maximum transient change in length must be
greater than the difference m the maximum displacements. It is, however, true that the maximum change
in length is less than the difference between the maximum displacement at either point 1 or point 2, less
the minimum displacement, or the displacement in the
opposite direction, at the other point. The minimum
displacement would of course be zero, if the displacements do not reverse in direction. This relation is expressed as follows:
6b21 ~< [ Umax, l,2 - Umin,2,1 [

(34)

Similarly, the maximum change m length between

points 2 and 1 must be less than the maximum strata
anywhere along the line connecting the two points,
multlphed by the length, as given in the following relation:

with maximum value

6b21 ~< emaxb.
7m = o m / c .

(31)

as in eq. (29). However, for the maximum longitudinal

strain in the element
e = (o/c) sin 0 cos 0 = (v/c) sin20
and the m a x n a u m value is
e m = Om[2C.

(35)

For the special case where the maximum strata is

related to the maximum velocity by eq. (29), corresponding to a wave transmission situation, then one
can derive from the preceding equation the following
result:
6b21 ~< [(b/c) Omax,2,1 ] .

(32)

For either eq. (29) or (32), slippage of the soil

against the element may reduce the force transmitted

(36)

For the special case where the deflection transverse to

the line is given by an arc of a sine curve, as in the
relation
Y = Ym sin lrx/b
(37)

N M Newmark, Earthquake response analysts o/ reactor structures

322

then the curvature IS obtained by the second derwatwe

of the relation as follows
curvature
max

_ ~2y I
= _(Tr2/b2)y m ~ Y m / C 2
~x2 } ma~
(38)

F r o m this relation and eq. (30) one derives the following result.

Ym ~ - ( b 2 /r2c 2) a m

(39)

This Is apphcable, however, only for the special case

considered.

References
[ 1 ] N.M. Newmark, Current Trends in the Seismic Analysis
and Design of High Rise Structures, Chapter 16, m
Earthquake Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood
Chffs, N.J., (1970) 403.
[2] A.S. Veletsos and N.M. Newmark, Design Procedures
for Shock Isolatxon Systems of Underground Protectwe
Structures, Vol III, Response Spectra of Single-Degreeof-Freedom Elastic and Inelastic Systems, Report RTD
TDR-63-3096, Vol. III, Contract AF 29(601)-4565,
Newmark, Hansen and Associates for Air Force Weapons
Laboratory, June 1964
[3] N.M. Newmark, Design Criteria for Nuclear Reactors
Subjected to Earthquake Hazards, Proceedings of IAEA
Panel on Aselsm~c Design and Testing of Nuclear Facthties, Japan Earthquake Engineering Promotion Society,
Tokyo, (1969) 90.

[4] N.M. Newmark and W.J. Hall, Selsmxc Design Criteria

for Nuclear Reactor Facilities, Proceedings Fourth World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Santiago, Chile,
II (1969) B4-37.
[5 ] Freddy Garcla and Jos~ M. Roesset, influence of Damping
on Response Spectra, Research Report R70-4, InterAmencan Program, Department of Cwfl Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, January 1970.
[6] N.M. Newmark and W.J. Hall, Special Topics for Consideration m Design of Nuclear Power Plants Subjected to
Seismic Motion, Proceedings IAEA Panel on Aselsmlc
Design and Testing of Nuclear Facilities, Japan Earthquake
Engineering Promotion Socxety, Tokyo, (1969) 114.
[7] N.M. Newmark, Seismic Response of Reactor Facflaty
Components, in' Seismic Analysis of Pressure Vessel and
Pxpmg Components, D.H. Pai,' editor, ASME (1971).
[8] N.M. Newmark and E Rosenblueth, Fundamentals of
Earthquake Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood
Chffs, N.J. (1971).
[9] N.M Newmark, Notes on Shock Isolation Concepts, m:
Vibration m Cwfl Engineering, Butterworths, London
(1966) 71.
[10] N.M. Newmark, W.H Walker, A.S. Veletsos, and R.J.
Mosborg, Design Procedures for Shock Isolation Systems of Underground Protective Structures, Vol. IV,
Response of Two-Degree-of-Freedom Elastic and
Inelastic Systems, Report RTD TDR-63-3096, Vol. IV,
Contract AF 29(601) - 6253, Newmark, Hansen and
Associates for Air Force Weapons Laboratory, December
1965.
[ 11 ] N.M. Newmark, Problems m Wave Propagation m Soil
and Rock, Proc. International Symposmm on Wave
Propagation and Dynamic Properties of Earth Materials,
Univ. of New Mexxco Press (1967) 7.