Journal of Applied Science and Engineering

Published by Tamkang University Press

1.30

Impact Factor

2.10

CiteScore

Alexander Y. Tuan This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.1 and Chun Kuang Chen1,2

1Department of Civil Engineering, Tamkang University, Tamsui, Taiwan 251, R.O.C.
2Pacific Engineers & Constructors, Ltd., Taiwan, R.O.C. 


 

Received: December 26, 2012
Accepted: April 12, 2013
Publication Date: June 1, 2013

Download Citation: ||https://doi.org/10.6180/jase.2013.16.2.02  


ABSTRACT


Due to its simplicity, shock response spectrum has become widely used as a means of describing the shock responses and fragilities of structures and equipment. This study focuses on the drawbacks of using shock excitation response spectrum for defining equipment shock tolerance. A cantilever beam with a tip mass was used to model a hypothetical equipment, subjected to strong ground motion such as that due to an explosion or a sudden excitation. The exact solution from a detailed modal analysis shows that multiple modes of response were excited. Contributions from higher modes can be more predominant than that from the fundamental mode. Assuming that the total response of the equipment is predominantly in the first mode is erroneous. Current procedures for equipment fragility tests are inadequate, not only due to physical limitations of shake table tests, but also due to the lack of a reliable analytical model.


Keywords: Equipment, Fragility, Shock Response Spectrum, Modal Analysis, Spectral Analysis, Fast Fourier Transform


REFERENCES


  1. [1] Pan, Y., Agrawal, A. K. and Ghosn, M., “Seismic Fragility of Continuous Steel Highway Bridges in New York State,” Journal of Bridge Engineering, Vol. 12, No. 6, pp. 689699 (2007). doi: 10.1061/(ASCE) 1084-0702(2007)12:6(689)
  2. [2] Zhong, J. S., Gardoni, P., Rosowsky, D. and Haukaas, T., “Probabilistic Seismic Demand Models and Fragility Estimates for Reinforced Concrete Bridges with Two-Column Bents,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, Vol. 134, No. 6, pp. 495504 (2008). doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2008)134:6(495)
  3. [3] Liang, C.-C., Yang, M.-F. and Tai, Y.-S., “Prediction of Shock Response for a Quadrupod-Mast Using Response Spectrum Analysis Method,” Ocean Engineering, Vol. 29, No. 8, pp. 887914 (2002).
  4. [4] Shattarat, N. K., Symans, M. D., McLean, D. I. and Cofer, W. F., “Evaluation of Nonlinear Static Analysis Methods and Software Tools for Seismic Analysis of Highway Bridges,” Engineering Structures, Vol. 30, No. 5, pp. 13351345 (2008). doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.07.021
  5. [5] Nielson, B. G. and DesRoches, R., “Seismic Fragility Methodology for Highway Bridges,” Structural Engineering and Public Safety, Proceedings of the 2006 Structures Congress, May 18-21, St Louis, Missouri, pp. 19 (2006). doi: 10.1061/40889(201)174
  6. [6] Yang, C. S., DesRoches, R. and Padgett, J. E., “Analytical Fragility Models for Box Girder Bridges with and without Protective Systems,” Proceedings of the 2009 Structures Congress, Austin, Texas (2009). doi: 10.1061/41031(341)151
  7. [7] Kim, S. H. and Shinozuka, M., “Fragility Curves for Concrete Bridges Retrofitted by Column Jacketing and Restrainers,” Proceedings of 6th U.S. Conference and Workshop on Lifeline Earthquake Engineering, Long Beach, California (2003). doi: 10.1061/40687 (2003)92
  8. [8] Porter, K., Hamburger, R. and Kennedy, R., “Practical Development and Application of Fragility Functions,” Proceedings of the 2007 Structures Congress, Long Beach, California (2007). doi: 10.1061/40944(249)23
  9. [9] Zhang, J. and Huo, Y., “Fragility Function of Base Isolated Highway Bridges,” Proceedings of 18th Analysis and Computation Specialty Conference, Vancouver, BC, Canada, pp. 117 (2008). doi: 10.1061/40944 (249)23
  10. [10] Chaudhuri, S. R. and Hutchinson, T. C., “Fragility of Bench-Mounted Equipment Considering Uncertain Parameters,” Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 132, No. 6, pp. 884898 (2006). doi: 10.1061/(ASCE) 0733-9445(2006)132:6(884)
  11. [11] Wilcoski, J., Gambill, J. B. and Smith, S. J., The CERL Equipment Fragility and Protection Procedure (CEFAPP), Experimental Definition of Equipment Vulnerability to Transient Support Motions, US Army Corps of Engineers Construction Engineering Research Laboratories, USACERL Technical Report 97/58, March, p. 140 (1997).
  12. [12] Dastous, J. B. and Filiatrault, A., “Seismic Displacement at Interconnection Points of Substation Equipment,” Proceedings of 6th U.S. Conference and Workshop on Lifeline Earthquake Engineering, Long Beach, California (2003). doi: 10.1061/40687(2003)61
  13. [13] Straub, D. and Der Kiureghian, A., “Improved Seismic Fragility Modeling from Empirical Data,” Structural Safety, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 320336 (2008). doi: 10.1016/j.strusafe.2007.05.004
  14. [14] Zhu, Z. Y. and Soong, T. T., “Toppling Fragility of Unrestrained Equipment,” Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 695712. doi: 10.1193/1.1586023
  15. [15] Safford, F. B. and Tuttle, R. J., “Transient Shock Fragility and Hardness Assessment of Commercial Communications Equipment,” SAE International, Document No.740801, February (1974). doi: 10.1016/ 0022-460X(89)90742-6
  16. [16] Cunniff, P. F. and O'Hara, G. J., “A Procedure for Generating Shock Design Values,” Journal of Sound and Vibration, October, Vol. 134, No. 1, pp. 155164 (1989). doi: 10.1016/0022-460X(89)90742-6
  17. [17] Salmonte, A. J., “Evaluation of Secondary and Higher Order Response Facets in Response Spectrum Analysis,” Nuclear Engineering and Design, November, Vol. 109, No. 3, pp. 433454 (1988). doi: 10.1016/ 0029-5493(88)90288-9
  18. [18] Merkle, D. H, Rochefort, M. A. and Tuan, C. Y., “Equipment Shock Tolerance,” Final Report, ESLTR-92-65, U.S. Air Force Civil Engineering Support Agency, Tyndall Air Force Base, FL, April, p. 63 (1993).
  19. [19] Coomes, J. R. and Roberts, W. B., “Report of Test on BUZZER, TYPE A-3 Submitted by Navy Yard, Portsmouth, N. H.,” Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC, NRL-1396, p. 10 (1937).
  20. [20] Kiger, S. A., Balsara, J. P. and Baylot, J. T., “A Computational Procedure for Peak In-structure Motions and Shock Spectra for Conventional Weapons,” The Shock and Vibration Bulletin No. 54, Part 2, June, pp. 223 226 (1984).


    



 

2.1
2023CiteScore
 
 
69th percentile
Powered by  Scopus

SCImago Journal & Country Rank

Enter your name and email below to receive latest published articles in Journal of Applied Science and Engineering.