Electric Power Research Institute Keywords: EPRI NP-7146-SL R1 Earthquakes Project 2925-07 Seismic effects Final Report Seismic qualification June 1995 Electrical equipment ‘Mechanical equipment Equipment anchorage Guidelines for Development of In-Cabinet Seismic Demand for Devices Mounted in Electrical Cabinets LICENSABLE MATERIAL NOTICE: This report contains proprietary information that is the intellectual property of EPRI. Accordingly, itis available only under license from EPRI and may not be reproduced or disclosed, wholly or in part, by any Licensee to any other person or organization. Prepared by ‘Stevenson & Associates, Inc. ‘Wobum, MassachusettsINTEREST CATEGORIES Seismic hazards and engineering KEYWORDS Earthquakes Seismic effects Seismic qualification Electrical equipment Mechanical equipment Equipment anchorage REPORT SUMMARY Guidelines for Development of In-Cabinet Seismic Demand for Devices Mounted in Electrical Cabinets These revised EPAI guidelines provide utilities with conservative, generic in-cabinet amplification factors for use in seismic evaluations of devices mounted in nuclear power plant electrical cabinets. Two altemate methods are also provided to obtain more realistic, less conservative in-cabinet demand. BACKGROUND _ The seismic capacity of electric relays and other cabinet or rack- mounted devices in nuclear power plants is normally determined by shake-table testing. For these tests, the relay is generally mounted directly on the shake table. The seismic demand fcr the relay is usually available only in terms of a floor. response spectrum at the base ofthe cabinet to which the relay is attached. The floor-motion amplification caused by the cabinet is needed to make demand and capacity values compaible so that relay seismic aoceptabilty can be evaluated. Because there are many types of electrical equipment cabinets, each with different dynamic characteristics, simplified methods are needed to define generic, conserva tive amplification values without expensive mathematical modeling and analysis. OBJECTIVE To provide generic seismic amplification factors for devices ‘mounted in nuclear power plant electrical cabinets. APPROACH __ In the earlier report, the authors determined generic amplification factors for vertical panels and benchboards. The original intent of the current project ‘was to develop similar but distinct factors for relay cabinets as well. In the process of reviewing the combined data for all electrical cabinets, the authors concluded that the fundamental frequency of the cabinet was at least as important to determining a \(S(@,4)) codes oa = 2 3 RSUMD = >'(S(w.2)-5(@.2)) ae 2 38) & [RSUMDY sons) aes where ay, j= 1 to nrs, are frequency points at which the response spectrum is defined. The calculations are continued until the convergence limit or maximum number of iterations specified by the user is reached, For this study, a 1% convergence criterion was used and achieved for each of the three different base motions. ‘Step 2 - Calculate Elevated PSD The governing equations for a structural system subject to base excitation may be written as a set of de-coupled equations for modal degrees of freedom 3-5EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material ‘Method of Analysis Gt Bod+ora ST (434) where ais displacement amplitude of mode shape i, a», are the frequency and damping ratio of mode, andTx is the modal participation factor for the ith mode due to base excitation in the nth direction. Reference 11 provides the derivation of this formulation in detail. Proportional damping is assumed for this formulation. The physical displacements are related to the modal displacements by w= Duar (eq. 3-10) where ®s is the mode shape value of the ith mode at the kth degree of freedom and xis the structure displacement at the kth degree of freedom, relative to the base. Using the definition of 2 ey (eq. 3-11) Hi) = OF a +2j500 the response can be written in the frequency domain as, Xo) =-Y Oahi(o) LT Uo) (eq. 3-12) where Xi(w),U,(w) are the Fourier transforms of acceleration time history for the kth DOF, and nth direction base motion, respectively. Assuming the base motion input is a zero-mean stationary Gaussian random process, it can be represented by its acceleration power spectral density function alone. Pre-multiplying both sides of the equation above by the complex conjugate of X:() and taking the ensemble average yields Pro) = 2E{ S(o) X(@)} (eq. 3-13) =D LV oedaih(@)Hi (OY, LT alin 2E{T()Ue (@)} where the * signifies the complex conjugate. Ps,1(@)is the acceleration PSD of the kth DOF and E{ } is the ensemble average operator. Assuming the base excitations in all three directions to be uncorrelated allows the cross terms in the second double summation to be ignored. P2(0)= YY Oidalio) Fh (@) Tal n Pi.(@) (eq. 3-14) 7 * 3-6EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material ‘Method of Analysis ‘The equation above represents the relative acce'eration of the kth degree of freedom. Pe, x(a)is. the acceleration PSD of the base motion in the nth direction. The absolute acceleration PSD of response is Prete, (@) = Px() +| ( +25 Tbe etico)}) Pao) (4. 3-15) ‘where r is the global direction coincident with k. The first term in the above expression is acceleration relative to the base. The second term incorporates the base motion in the rth direction. Note that all three directions of motion are included. The foregoing derivation for the calculation of amplified PSDs is rigorous. As implemented it includes full coupling between all modes and, instead of working with the pseudo-acceleration spectrum, calculates the absolute acceleration directly. Step 3 - Calculate Amplified Response Spectrum From Elevated PSD ‘The following formula is used to calculate an acceleration response spectrum from an acceleration PSD we wa (eq. 3-16) stoxs)-{-amol (2) wa} where ? 3-17) m= muax)= fa"|H(@) Po)do n=02,4. (a. 3-17) and where Haof o'+4ac&o? (eq. 3-18) (ot-0') +4areo The ICRS for degree of freedom k is calculated by substituting P(@) = Psca)«(@) into the above equations. 37‘Method of Analysis EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material Accson) as ast ‘Base Response Spectra fr Database In-Cabinel Demand Calculation ‘Normalized to 192PA 0ancing Au AIT flo 0 Frgueney Figure 3-1 Base Response Spectra Used for In-Cabinet Amplification Factor Investigation 3-8EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material “Analysis Results 4 ANALYSIS RESULTS 4.1 In-Cabinet Amplification Factors For Database Cabinets ‘A gross in-cabinet amplification factor was calculated for all cabinet-BRS combinations. Based on an observed relationship between fundamental frequency and AF, the calculated values were sorted by cabinet fundamental frequency. Figures 4-1 to 4-3 plot AF versus fundamental frequency for each BRS. Based on the observed pattern, 3 frequency bins, further divided into sub-bins, were defined by which to classify the cabinets, Sub-binning was needed in order to provide a suitably refined AFe versus frequency relationship. The bin boundaries are graphically identified in Figures 4-1 to 4-3. Figures Al to A20 in Appendix A show the controlling ICRS for the top one-third of cabinets in each bin for the RG. 1.60 BRS. The 84% non-exceedance probability (NEP) AF value is considered to be a reasonably conservative level for generic purposes if used in combination with a conservative base motion (2). The table below identifies the 84% NEP AFe value for all the various bin-BRS combinations. Each was determined by assuming a log-normal probability distribution within each sub-bin and extracting the 84% NEP value. The lognormal assumption was checked by plotting In(AF.) versus normal score of each bin for the R.G 1.60 results (Figures 4-4 to 4-8), ‘The formula (i - 0.5)/n was used to determine the empirical NEP (13). The lognormal plots exhibit fairly good linearity, indicating that the Iognormal assumption is reasonable (a best fit line is also shown on each). Note that the 84% NEP value corresponds to a normal score of 1.0 in the plots. Table 4-1 84% NEP AF; Values (g/g) BIN Range RG 1.60 Shoreham ‘Catawba la 35-11 Hz 127 315 124 Tb I-13 Hz 104 244 9.72 2a 13-17 Hz 3.43 223 33 2 17-20 Hz 570 2.02 255 3 above 20 Hz 3.95 20 2.85 4-1EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material Analysis Results 4.2. Correlation To Physical Configuration For the purpose of this discussion, VPBs that satisfy the reference 2 caveats are termed standard ‘VPBs. There are 42 standard VPBs in the database. As seen in Figures 4-1 through 4-3, thirty of these VPBs fall into Bin 2 and five fall into Bin 3. Therefore, with 35 of 42 standard VPBs above 13 Hz, Bin 2a results conservatively represent most VPBs in the database. Seven standard VPBs have frequencies below 13 Hz (all are in Bin 1b). Of these, four cabinets have first modes with substantial substructure action and little or no global participation (becoa31 at 11.71 Hz, becoa2 at 11,69 Hz, p6Olel at 12.5 Hz, x1 at 12.7 Hz). Another cabinet is only marginally below 13 Hz (ferow2, 12.8 Hz) and has a relatively low response. InBin 1b, standard VPB €2c23 is a single section Vertical Panel with integral front and side walls and open in the rear. Also of interest, the depth of the cabinet exceeded the width (36" by 30” in plan). The first mode, at 11.27 Hz, is a side-to-side twisting mode. Cabinet c078&c27 at 12.5 was discussed earlier. Its physical configuration is within, but at the limits of the VPB class, and the location of the controlling ICRS is excluded by the caveats. PB caveats in this report exclude sub-structures with frequencies below 13 Hz and single section Vertical Panels with potentially low frequency side-to-side modes. A caution guarding against a worst case combination of details, such as wide bay spacing combined with a thin wall gauge, and the potential for low fundamental frequency is also included. With that, itis reasonably conservative to assume that a VPB meeting those caveats falls in Bin 2a. Ten out of the thirteen RPs fall into Bin 1. RP caveats are based on the physical configuration of these cabinets. However, because of the small number of samples in the RP database and demand sensitivity in this frequency range, a caveat regarding fundamental frequency is included (in addition to physical configuration) All RP’s in the database had a fundamental frequency above 9.5 Hertz. A 9 Hertz lower bound is ‘a reasonable practical limit given existing conservatism in the recommended methods. The caveat requires the seismic review team (SRT, 3) to have confidence that the cabinet fundamental frequency is above 9 Hz. With that, itis conservative to assume that an RP meeting those caveats falls into Bin 1a, 4.3. Conservative Generic In-Cabinet Amplification Factors Conservative generic amplification factors are calculated based on the highest of the observed 84% NEP AFe values (R.G. 1.60 run for all bins) and conservative values for correction factors. The table below identifies the input values and the resulting effective amplification factors. The values used for Ct and Cm are justified in the paragraphs that follow. 42EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material Analysis Results Table 4-2 Conservative In-Cabinet Amplification and Correction Factors BRS BIN ARE @/) aT] CoCr “AFe Gia) RG 1.6 a 127 055 TD 582 1b 104 035 AZ 477 2a 8.43 0.55. WA2 3.86. 2 570 0.60 7 3.1 3 3.95 0.60 TAD 237 Broadband Correction Factor Cs. A.0.55 g/g value is used as the broadband correction factor for Bins 1a, 1b and 2a, based on the narrowband nature of high response cabinets. The assumed Cb value is lower than the 0.60 value used in the original study (i.., reference 2). The lower value is justified by new guidelines released since that study (5) and a more detailed investigation into the nature of controlling ICRS. The narrowband demand effect can be quantified by calculating a bandwidth to center frequency ratio (B) for all controlling ICRS. The B ratio and its application are described in Appendix Q of reference 5. That document recommends a 0.55 correction factor for B values below 0.20. Figures 4-9 to 4-11 plot B versus AFe for the three input motions. The R.G. 1.60 results are most significant because the B values are tied to the most conservative AF values. Almost all B values are below 0.20 Hz/Hz, and most lie between 0.15 and 0.17. B values for controlling ICRS tend to be low for the other input motions also, except for low amplification cabinets. ‘The correction factor is increased for higher frequency bins (0.60 at Bin 2b and Bin 3) because the narrowband behavior tends to decrease as the cabinet dominant frequency gets closer to the rigid range of the BRS. Multi-Axis Correction Factor Cm Reference 6 cites a correction factor of 1/1.2 as reasonable ‘when comparing a multi-axis test to single axis demand. This value is used based on the presence of a dominant mode and direction for cabinets with high amplification. ‘The multi-axis correction factor is increased to 1/1.1 for Bin 2b and 1/1.0 for Bin 3 (Le., no correction for Bin 3) because single-axis behavior tends to decrease as the cabinet dominant frequency gets closer to the rigid range of the BRS.Analysis Results EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material ‘Gross Amplification Factor (AFg) Vs. Fundamental Frequency RG 1.60 Input <—tn2 > < a3 ___> Figure 4-1 Gross Amplification Factors For Database Models, R.G. 1.60 BRS ‘Gross Amplification Fat (AF) Ve. Fund ‘Shorenam input yental Frequency <0 > <2 > <3 —__> ot et f at oe) Figure 4-2 Gross Amplification Factors For Database Models, Shoreham BRS 44EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material Analysis Results ‘Gross Amplification Factor (AF) Ve. Fundamental Frequency ‘Catawba Input <2 > << on —__> Figure 4-3 Gross Amplification Factors For Database Models, Catawba BRS mma! Probapitty Plot wa. Figure 4-4 Bin 1a Gross Amplification Factor Probability Plot, R.G. 1.60 BRS 45EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material Analysis Results ‘in 10 AFg Lognermal Probabiy Pot Figure 4-5 Bin 1b Gross Amplification Factor Probability Plot, R.G. 1.60 BRS Figure 4-6 Bin 2a Gross Amplification Factor Probability Plot, RG. 1.60 BRS 46EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material, Analysis Results 1 Probaby Pot Figure 4-7 Bin 2b Gross Amplification Factor Probability Plot, R.G. 1.60 BRS bina Ara Figure 4-8 Bin 3 Gross Amplification Factor Probability Plot, R.G. 1.60 BRS 47EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material Analysis Results Banewidth Factor) ve aro Amplieatin Factor Roisomee re Figure 4-9 ‘Bandwidth Factor Vs. Gross Amplification Factor, R.G. 1.60 BRS lat Factor (0) ress AmpBfeation Factor Shennan mut Figure 4-10 Bandwidth Factor Vs. Gross Amplification Factor, Shoreham BRS 48EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material Analysis Results ‘sanewitn actor) Ore ARPHRaton Factor uve oat ons. “. 7 + Figure 4-11 Bandwidth Factor Vs. Gross Amplification Factor, Catawba BRS 49EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material ‘Alternate Approach 5 ALTERNATE APPROACH 5.1 Method Of Analysis The simplifications associated with a generic in-cabinet amplification factor tend to obscure some aspects of cabinet dynamic behavior. This section presents an alternate approach to estimating in- cabinet seismic demand that retains more sensitivity to base motion and actual behavior. This method is essentially the “response spectrum method” extended to provide demand on relays. Additional steps account for the frequency content of the acceleration demand and the desired form of the demand parameter. Eq, 5-1 below is presented as an alternate expression for calculation of in-cabinet seismic demand. In-cabinet demand is still expressed as peak 5% spectral acceleration at device locations. However, in place of generic amplification of the base spectrum peak, factors related to dynamic behavior are applied to the spectral acceleration at the dominant natural frequency. Sail fer, 5%) = Seol fa, 4) Re My (eq. 5-1) R i( fel, 5%) (eq. 5-2) ZPA, ‘Above, fais the frequency of the cabinet’s dominant mode; ais damping of the dominant mode (C6 critical); Reis the ratio of the peak of the 5% ICRS to its zero period acceleration value ZPAl, and Mris a factor accounting for the multi-degree-of-freedom nature of the response. In this case Sw is the BRS corresponding to dominant direction of the dominant mode. Usually Rz and Mrare not known, However results of this analysis indicate that, for the types of equipment under consideration, reasonably conservative generic values can be determined for these parameters. The dominant frequency is normally the fundamental frequency. ‘Mraccounts for effects such as participation factor of the dominant mode, multi-mode response, and multi-axis input. Rz is related to the type of motion that generates the ICRS. For example Rz ‘would be about 3 for a rigid response to a broadband earthquake ground spectrum. Rz would be about 10 for steady sinusoidal input at the cabinet fundamental frequency. For this analysis Sui(f, 5%) has been rigorously calculated for all applicable locations of a given cabinet. Rz can therefore be obtained directly from the controlling ICRS. Once Re is known, Mr can be calculated using eq, 5-1 and fundamental frequency for fe. The relationship should provide 5-1EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material ‘Alternate Approach a good model of behavior if in-cabinet response is dominated by a single mode in the flexible range. 5.2 Application To Database Cabinets And Results Mrand Rz values were extracted from the response analysis results. ‘The values were plotted against fundamental frequency for all ground motions (Figures 5-1 to 5-6). Mrand Re were also plotted against AF for the R.G. 1.60 BRS (Figures 5-7 to 5-8). The results indicate that reasonably conservative generic Mr and Rz values can be used for this equipment class. Based on Figures 5-1 to 5-6, there is significant scatter for both Mr and Re when plotted versus frequency. However, based on Figure 5-8, R is well correlated to AFy. It also tends to be found in a relatively narrow 6 to 7 range for high amplification cabinets. There is more scatter for Me, It is not surprising that the multi-DOF effect is a major source of variability. There is an overall trend of decreasing Mr with increasing frequency (see Figures 5-1 to 5-3) and, consistently, decreasing Mr with decreasing AF (Figure 5-7). There is also likely to be significant correlation between Re and Mr Visual inspection of the plots and trial and error calculations were used to establish conservative generic values for Mrand Re. Values determined for the major bins are shown in the Table 5-1 Table 5-2 demonstrates that the values are conservative. In that table, in-cabinet demand is calculated using Mrand Rz and compared to the rigorously calculated 84% NEP values. Table 5-1 Generic response factors BN Mi Re MieRz 1 25 625 163 2 22 6.25 13S 3 20 45 9.00 For Table 5-2, in-cabinet seismic demand was calculated using three different methods. The 84% NEP values are per the response calculation of database cabinets and represent the standard for conservatism. Simple Method 1 values represent the result of the amplification factor method (eq, 3-1 with AF from Table 4-2). Simple Method 2 values represent the result of the alternate method. All values are uncorrected, but this does not effect the comparison. ‘Simple Method 2 values are determined using the requisite BRS and values of 10, 15 and 22 Hertz as representative dominant frequencies for Bins 1a, 2a and 3. Equipment damping is consistent with Section 3. Given that, the demand is calculated using eq. 5-1 and the response factors in Table 5-1 5-2EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material ‘Alternate Approach By reading the values across each row the results of the methods can be compared. The generic Mrand Rz values are shown to be sufficiently conservative by comparison of the Method 2 column to the 84% NEP column (Method 2 is equal or higher in all cases). Benefits of the alternate approach are quantified by comparing the Method 2 column to the Method 1 column. Relative to Method 1, Method 2 produces much less conservative values for the Shoreham motion in all bins. For Catawba, there is relief et the higher frequency bins. Method 2 takes advantage of lower spectral demand at dominant frequencies, relative to peak spectral demand, for the Shoreham and Catawba motions. There is no benefit for the R.G. 1.60 BRS because the 84% NEP values are controlled by that motion. Table 5-2 In-Cabinet Demand Comparison by Calculation of Sai(f, 5%) () BRS) BIN Database iple Method iple Method 2 84% NEP Using Generic AFg___ Using Generic Mf, Rz RG la 398. 398, 445 2a 26.4 264 26.6 3 124 12.4 73.1 Shoreham la i21 88 22.1 2a 8.56, 324 15.6 3 7.68 15.2 9.54 Catawba la 42.9 48. 439. 2a 205, 298. 25.5 3 10.1 13.9 10.1 The broadband and multi-axis correction factors, combined with the spectral demand and response factors, produce the equivalent demand for comparison to a 5% TRS generated using broadband, multi-axis input. Defined in eq. 5-3, the term DF (effective demand factor) is used to combine all factors. Eqs. 5-4 and 5-5 are then used to conservatively estimate in-cabinet seismic demand. Eq. 5-5 includes a requirement that the resulting demand must exceed the BRS peak value above 4 Hertz. This conservatively guards against underestimating demand when fa is well into the rigid range. The 4 Hertz lower bound is consistent with the GIP (reference 3) and represents the assumed lower limit of relay sensitivity. DF.=CoCuR:My (eq. 5-3) Soa = max{Saf f,Es)} for f > fa (eq. 5-4) [DEM1 = DF Sot (eq. 5-5) erate na en = Sod f,5%) for f san} 53EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material “Alternate Approach Table 5-3 identifies conservative DFe, fa and Ea values by bin, where fa is the lower bound of the dominant frequency fs. DFe values are based on the response factors of Table 5-1 and the correction factors cited previously. Table 5-3 Generic frequencies, dampings and effective demand factors BIN al Dre r 9 3%, 80 2 13 3.5% 65 3 20 3% 55 ‘Also note that the zero period acceleration value of the ICRS can be conservatively estimated using eq. 5-6 below and the Mrvalues in Table 5-1. ‘ZPAi = My Sot (eq. 5-6) 54EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material “Alternate Approach ht 0 Fc Fonte Frage To team Bas, 2 “+ ~ : Fe wee 2 Figure 5-1 Malti-DOF Factor Vs. Fundamental Frequency, RG. 1.60 BRS LORS Pak 27 Rat ae anda Frguney ao sot 3° . #5 Figure 5-2 ZPA Factor Vs. Fundamental Frequency, R.G. 1.60 BRS 55EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material ‘Alternate Approach woo onan 5 . r Figure 5-3 ‘Multi-DOF Factor Vs. Fundamental Frequency, Shoreham BRS Figure 5-4 ‘RS Penk 2A ata Fandanertal Frwy ZPA Factor Vs. Fundamental Frequency, Shoreham BRS 5-6Alternate Approach at 00F Fer Fundam raganey caowos nt Bas z= a 2 7 . 5 Figure 5-5 ‘Multi-DOF Factor Vs. Fundamental Frequency, Catawba BRS 2 exe Pekar Fonte ony 5. as . 4 : . neg 7 Figure 5-6 ZPA Factor Vs. Fundamental Frequency, Cataviba BRS 5-7EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material ‘Alternate Approach Sea oad Bu ita Le - ; aa Figure 5-7 ‘Multi-DOF Factor Vs. Gross Amplification Factor, R.G. 1.60 BRS Sea eS aero Shr fee |e . ts 3 *,. Figure 5-8 ZPA Factor Vs. Gross Amplification Factor, R.G. 1.60 BRS 58EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material ‘Simplified Methods 6 SIMPLIFIED METHODS TO ESTIMATE IN-CABINET DEMAND 6.1 Amplification Factor Method ‘The generic amplification factors below are based on the results presented in Section 4. They include the broadband and multi-axis correction factors and are valid for BRS shapes similar to or bounded by those used in the study. The equation below (repeated from Section 3) is used to calculate demand. Note that Sso(fxo, '5%) is the peak of the 5% damped BRS. DEMis the estimate of in-cabinet demand for comparison to a typical 5% TRS. Further guidance on comparing capacity to demand is presented in the GIP (reference 3). DEM is equivalent to the product (IRS*AF) in Section 6 of that document. DEM = AF. Sod foo,5%) (eq. 6-1) ‘An AF. value of 6.0 g/g is recommended for © VPB that generally satisfies VPB caveats, but has violations such that fundamental frequency may be below 13 Hz, but not below 9 Hz. The cabinet must still strictly meet caveats VPB6 and VPB7 with regard to applicable locations. or © AnRP with unknown fundamental frequency but satisfies RP caveats, ‘An AF value of 4.0 g/g is recommended for © VPB with unknown fundamental frequency but satisfies VPB caveats. or © AnRP that satisfies RP caveats and has fundamental frequency above 13 Hz ‘An AF. value of 2.5 g/g is recommended for © Cabinet that satisfies VPB or RP caveats ard has fundamental frequency above 20 Hz 6.2 Alternate Method The alternate method is based on the analysis presented in Section 5. The equations below (repeated from Section 5) are used to calculate demand. DEM is the estimate of in-cabinet demand for comparison to a typical 5% TRS. Further guidance on comparing capacity to demand 61EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material ‘Simplified Methods is presented in the GIP (reference 3). DEM is equivalent to the product (IRSeAF) in Section 6 of that document. Sut = max {Sol f,&)} for f 2 fa (a. 62) DEM = max{ DEM! = DF Ses (eq, 6-3) = MAX) DEM? = Suk f,5%) for f 24 He! Values of fa = 9 Hz, Ee 4% and DFe= 8.0 g/g are recommended for © VPB that generally satisfies VPB caveats, but has violations such that fundamental frequency may be fall below 13 Hz, but not below 9 Hz. The cabinet must stil strictly meet caveats ‘VPB6 and VPB7 with regard to applicable locations. In this case fa may be set to the fundamental frequency value. or An RP with unknown fundamental frequency but satisfies RP caveats. Values of fa = 13 Hz, &4 = 3.5% and DFe = 6.5 g/g are recommended for © VPB with unknown fundamental frequency but satisfies VPB caveats. or © Cabinet satisfies VPB or RP caveats and has fundamental frequency above 13 Hz; in this case ‘fa may be set to the fundamental frequency value. Values of fa = 20 Hz, E4 = 3% and DFe = 5.5 g/g are recommended for © Cabinet satisfies VPB or RP caveats and has fundamental frequency above 20 Hz; in this case ‘fa may be set to the fundamental frequency value. In Section 6.4, calculation of in-cabinet seismic demand is demonstrated in four examples problems. Note that the method includes a practical simplifying assumption when fundamental frequency is unknown, In that case the DFe and damping values for the lowest acceptable bin are used (this is conservative). As an option, it is acceptable to calculate a demand value separately for each of the three major bins, In that case, three DEM values are calculated using the values in Table 5-3 and the BRS peak value within each bin. The demand is then set to the highest DEM value of all applicable bins. For an RP that meets the caveats but its frequency is unknown, DEM is the highest of all bins, For a VPB that meets the caveats but its frequency is unknown, DEM is the higher of Bin 2 or 3. 6.3 GENRS Software The GENRS software package is described in reference 2. GENRS may be used to calculate an ICRS for a cabinet (VPB or RP), however the alternate method in Section 6.2 may be used in place of GENRS. The alternate method often provides a more favorable assessment of in-cabinet demand. 6-2EPRI Proprietary Licensed Material ‘Simplified Methods ‘When GENRS is used in the future, it should be used in conjunction with the caveats in this report. For a VPB that meets the VPB caveats of this report, GENRS may be used with the default parameter values identified in reference 2. For an RP that meets the RP caveats of this, report, GENRS may be used with 9.0 Hertz furdamental frequency value, along with default values for other parameters. For the VPB class, the default parameters in GENRS are consistent with a 4.5 amplification factor, which is higher than the 4.0 value recommended here. Based on this and an examination of reference 2, it can be safely concluded that GENRS results, using default parameters, are more conservative than the Bin 2 84% NEP values of this report. GENRS was not originally applicable for the RP class. However, for an RP, a lower bound frequency parameter of 9.0 Hz provides sufficient conservatism relative to the results of this, report, Use of that value and defaults for the other values results in a 9.1 amplification factor RG. 1.60 motion. This compares to a 5.82 84% NEP corrected value in this report. Based on this and an examination of reference 2, it can be safely concluded that GENRS results, using a 9.0 Hz fundamental frequency value and defaults for other parameters, are more conservative than the Bin 1 84% NEP values of this report. 6.4 Alternate Method Examples In this subsection, calculation of in-cabinet seismic demand using the alternate method of Section 6.2 is demonstrated in four examples. The examples make use of Figures 6-1 and 6-2. Case la Given: An RP that meets RP caveats, base response spectra per Figure 6-1 Determine: In-cabinet seismic demand. Step 1: Determine lower bound frequency fa, damping Es, and demand factor DF. ~ Per Section 6.2, for this cabinet fa=9.0Hz; &4=4% — DFe=8.0 ‘Step 2: Determine spectral acceleration demand value Sus. ~ Per Equation 6.2, need maximum value above 9.0 Hz, 4% curve; from Figure 6-1 Su = 0.50g (at 9.0 Hz) Step 3: Calculate in-cabinet demand DEM. ~ Per Equation 6.3 DEMI = DFe Su= (8.0)(0.50g) = 4.08 DEM2 = maximum of 5% curve above 4 Hz = 1.5g DEM = max(DEMI, DEM2) = max (4.0g, 1.5) = 4.0g ‘Summary: In-cabinet seismic demand: DEM = 4.0g 63