22-010-00-Seismic Calculation Steel Frame Report

SDA – engineering GmbH
Ingenieurgesellschaft für statische und dynamische Strukturanalysen im Bauwesen
INGENIEURBÜRO FÜR BAUWESEN
Anschrift:
Kaiserstraße 100, TPH III-B
D-52134 Herzogenrath
Seismic calculation of a steel frame module with liquid Deutschland
filled containers and piping Tel.: +49 (2407) 56 848 -0

Fax: +49 (2407) 56 848 -29
www.sda-engineering.de
info@sda-engineering.de
Object: Test facility with liquid lithium Proj.-No.: 22-1064.01

Granada/Escuzar in Spain Revision: R0
Nb Pages: 16
Client: SAAS Systemanalyse und Automatisierungsservice
GmbH
Neues Leben 30, 01728 Bannewitz
Contractor: SDA-engineering GmbH (SDA)

Kaiserstr. 100, TPH III, D-52134 Herzogenrath
Document Type: Report, not public

Document Rev. Date Author Review Approval
22-1064.01 0 01.08.2022 Dr.-Ing. Ph. Renault Dr.-Ing. Ph. Michel Dr.-Ing. Ph. Renault
Signature
Passing on, copying, distribution and/or editing of this document, exploitation and communication of its contents are prohibi ted unless
expressly permitted. Infringements will result in liability for damages.
SDA-engineering GmbH
Kaiserstr. 100 TPH III-B, D - 52134 Herzogenrath
Fon +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 0 Fax +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 29
e-mail: info@sda-engineering.de web: www.sda-engineering.de
Dokument History
Revision # Date Author Modification Modified pages or chapters

reason
1 1.8.2022 Ph. Renault Corrected ab value Tab. 1
in g
2
Fon +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 0 Fax +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 29
Table of content
CODES AND LITERATURE ........................................................................... 4
SOFTWARE ................................................................................................ 4
1. TASK ORDER DESCRIPTION ............................................................... 5

1.1 Note.................................................................................................................... 5
2. SEISMIC ACTION AT SITE................................................................... 5
3. CODE SPECTRA ................................................................................. 7

3.1 Horizontal response spectrum ........................................................................... 7
3.1.1 Horizontal elastic response spectrum ........................................................................................ 7
3.1.2 Horizontal design response spectrum ........................................................................................ 8
3.2 Vertical response spectrum ............................................................................. 10
4. STRUCTURAL MODEL...................................................................... 10
5. RESULTS ......................................................................................... 10
5.1 Maximum horizontal displacement ................................................................. 11
5.2 Verification of pressure on sliding foil ............................................................. 11
5.3 Verification of maximum horizontal force ....................................................... 12
5.4 Verification of overturning .............................................................................. 12
5.5 Verification of uplifting .................................................................................... 12
6. RECOMMENDED CONSTRUCTIVE MEASURES ................................. 13
7. DISCLAIMER ................................................................................... 14
8. SUMMARY ..................................................................................... 15
9. APPENDIX....................................................................................... 16
9.1 Sliding support ................................................................................................. 16
9.2 Shock absorber material .................................................................................. 16
3
Fon +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 0 Fax +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 29
Supporting documents
Provided by the client:
[1] Herr Dr. Lenk, SAAS - Systemanalyse und Automatisierungsservice GmbH, Initial model
description, personal communication, 14.07.2022
[2] Herr Dr. Lenk, SAAS - Systemanalyse und Automatisierungsservice GmbH, Figure of container
with evaluation of center of gravity and STP-model, personal communication, 26.07.2022
Codes and literature

[3] Norma de construcción sismorresistente: Parte general y edificación (NCSR- 02) REAL DECRETO
997/2002, de 27-SEP, del Ministerio de Obras Públcas, Transportes y Medio Ambiente B.O.E.: 8-
FEB-95.
[4] Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance - Part 1: General rules, seismic
actions and rules for buildings; German version EN 1998-1:2004 + AC:2009
[5] Petersen C. & H. Werkle, Dynamik der Baukonstruktion – 2. Auflage, Springer Vieweg, 2017
[6] Bommer, J. and Elnashai, A.S. (1999), Displacement Spectra for Seismic Design, Journal of
Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 3, No. 1, P. 1-32
Software
4
Fon +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 0 Fax +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 29
1. Task order description

The following report presents the evaluation of the seismic input in form of accelerations on
a test facility, built as steel frame module, located in Granada/Escuzar in Spain. The equipment
inside the steel frame module is sensitive to ground motion excitation. Thus, the seismic forces
need to be considered and reduced. The feasibility and technical realization of a seismic base
isolation is analysed. The number and arrangement of supports and the corresponding
support reactions as well as the specifications for the installation of containers and potential
considerations for the piping and connections are discussed.
The seismic input for the steel frame module is evaluated according to the national seismic
design code NCSR-02 [3]. The seismic input is described as a design response spectrum.
Additionally, calculation of the accelerations acting on the steel frame module will be done
with and without seismic measures (isolation with rubber bearings/ springs/ friction
pendulums). The stiffness and damping properties of the specific measures are applied with
respect to commercially available products. Furthermore, the number and arrangement of
single supports will be defined and corresponding calculations of the support reactions will be
carried out, including the check of uplifting forces due to overturning. These forces are the
basis for the design of the steel frame. Finally, specifications of constructive measures for an
earthquake-proof installation of the equipment will be included.
1.1 Note
The load information from [1] and [2] on which the calculation is based is assumed to be
correct. All geometry information was taken from the plans/models provided by SAAS GmbH
and assumed to be correct. Assembly conditions not verified/checked in the structural analysis
are the responsibility of the executing companies and were therefore not considered in detail.
2. Seismic action at site

The seismic action at the building location can be taken from the national hazard map
according to NCSR-02 [3]. The regional map of the planned location of the steel frame module,
and its peak ground acceleration, is shown in Figure 1. The seismic hazard in terms of the
maximum spectral acceleration on fractured rock for a return period of 475 years is depicted
in Figure 1.
5
Fon +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 0 Fax +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 29
Figure 1: Approximate location of the steel frame module and its peak ground
acceleration (PGA) for the region of Granada/Escuzar
Table 1: Parameters for the response spectra at the steel frame module location, according
to [3]
ab 2.45 Peak ground acceleration [m/s²] (0.25 g)
 1.20 Damping correction factor [-]
K 1.00 Contribution factor [-]
ρ 1.30 Importance factor [-]
ac 3.19 Design ground acceleration [m/s2] (ab·ρ)
qv 1.00 Behaviour factor vertical [-]
Ground Type S TA TB C
I – Vs > 750 m/s 0.95 0.10 0.40 1.00
II – 400 m/s < Vs < 750 m/s 1.01 0.13 0.52 1.30
III – 200 m/s < Vs < 400 m/s 1.07 0.16 0.64 1.60
IV – Vs < 200 m/s 1.15 0.20 0.80 2.00
Ground Type II Soil amplification factor S

T [s] Sa [m/s²]
0.00 3.864
0.13 9.661
0.52 9.661
0.55 9.189
6
Fon +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 0 Fax +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 29
3. Code spectra
The maximum spectral acceleration on fractured rock Sad,R = 9,66 m/s2 at the steel frame
module site corresponds to a return period of 475 years. Due to the sensitivity of the
components inside of the steel frame, the seismic actions should be increased by an
importance factor for special importance of ρ = 1,3. The horizontal behaviour factor is taken
as µ= 1 due to assumption of no ductility of the steel frame module. The elastic spectra are
derived for ~3% damping (see Tab. 3.5 in [5]), as the steel frame module is a welded steel
construction with relatively low damping effects. The formulas and parameters to derive the
full spectrum are given below. Note that the design spectrum is equal to the elastic spectrum
for µ=1 and the same damping value. In case an overall of 5% damping are assumed the design
spectrum is lower than the elastic spectrum and thus, will not be further used for the seismic
evaluation in this case.
3.1 Horizontal response spectrum

3.1.1 Horizontal elastic response spectrum
The horizontal seismic action according to [3] is defined in terms of elastic response spectra
(2% damping) described by the function 𝑆𝑎 (𝑇):
𝑇
− For 𝑇𝑖 ≤ 𝑇𝐴 𝛼𝑖 = [1 + 1,5 ∙ (𝑇 )] ∙ v
𝐴
𝑆𝑎 (𝑇) = 𝑎𝑏 ∙ 𝑆 ∙ 𝜌 ∙ 𝛼𝑖
− For 𝑇𝐴 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 𝑇𝐵 𝛼𝑖 = 2,5 ∙ v
𝐶
− For 𝑇 > 𝑇𝐵 𝛼𝑖 = 𝐾 ∙ 𝑇 ∙ v
with:
T vibration period of a linear single-degree-of-freedom system
ab reference peak ground acceleration on rock
ρ importance factor (ρ = 1 normal importance; ρ = 1,3 special
importance)
TA = 𝐾 ∙ 𝐶/10 lower limit of the period of the constant spectral acceleration branch
TB = 𝐾 ∙ 𝐶/2,5 upper limit of the period of the constant spectral acceleration branch
S soil amplification factor
C soil coefficient
K contribution factor ranging between 1,0 and 1,5 (1,0 to 1,3 for the
continent)
v = (5/Ω)0,4 damping correction factor for values of T ≥ TA, with Ω = 3,3%
Ω viscous damping ratio
7
Fon +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 0 Fax +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 29
Horizontal Vertical
12
10
Spectral Acceleration Sa [m/s²]
0
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4
Periode T [s]
Figure 2: Horizontal elastic response spectrum with Sa,R = 9.66 m/s2 for soil type II
3.1.2 Horizontal design response spectrum

The horizontal seismic action is defined in terms of design response spectra (5% damping)
described by the function Sd(T):
𝑇
− For 𝑇𝑖 ≤ 𝑇𝐴 𝛼𝑖 = 1 + (2,5 ∙ 𝛽 − 1) 𝑇 𝑖
𝐴
𝑆𝑑 (𝑇) = 𝑎𝑏 ∙ 𝑆 ∙ 𝜌 ∙ 𝛼𝑖
− For 𝑇𝐴 ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 𝑇𝐵 𝛼𝑖 = 2,5 ∙ 𝛽
𝐶
− For 𝑇 > 𝑇𝐵 𝛼𝑖 = 𝐾 ∙ 𝑇 ∙ 𝛽
with:
T𝑖 vibration period of a linear single-degree-of-freedom system
ab reference peak ground acceleration on rock
ρ importance factor (ρ = 1 normal importance; ρ = 1,3 special
importance)
TA = 𝐾 ∙ 𝐶/10 lower limit of the period of the constant spectral acceleration branch
TB = 𝐾 ∙ 𝐶/2,5 upper limit of the period of the constant spectral acceleration branch
S soil amplification factor
C soil coefficient
K contribution factor (for the Spanish territory K=1,0-1,3)
µ ductility behaviour factor
ν damping factor
β = 𝜈/𝜇 behavior factor
8
Fon +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 0 Fax +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 29
Table 2: Parameters for the design spectra with 5%, according to [3]
ab 2.45 Peak ground acceleration [m/s²]
µ 1.00 Behaviour factor horizontal [-]
 1.00 Damping correction factor [-]
K 1.00 Contribution factor [-]
ρ 1.30 Importance factor [-]
ac 3.19 Design ground acceleration [m/s²] (ab·ρ)
Ground Type S TA TB C
I 0.95 0.10 0.40 1.00
II 1.01 0.13 0.52 1.30
III 1.07 0.16 0.64 1.60
IV 1.15 0.20 0.80 2.00
Ground Type II
T [s] Sd [m/s²]
0.00 3.220
0.13 8.051
0.52 8.051
0.55 7.658
Horizontal Vertical
8
Spectral Acceleration Sd [m/s²]
0
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4
Periode T [s]
Figure 3: Seismic inputs and hhorizontal design response spectrum with Sa,R = 8,05 m/s2 for
soil type II
9
Fon +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 0 Fax +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 29
3.2 Vertical response spectrum

According to [3], the vertical component of the seismic action shall be represented by an
elastic response spectrum, S𝑣𝑎 (𝑇), which ordinates are 70% of the ordinates of the horizontal
elastic spectrum without ductility (µ=1,0). Thus, the maximum resulting spectral acceleration
in vertical direction (on the plateau of the spectrum) is 5,64 m/s².
4. Structural model
The test facility consists of a rigid steel frame module with equipment components inside. The
fluid inside the facility is liquid lithium (350 °C). The connections and piping are executed as
expansion arches or compensators.
According to the client it is sufficient for the initial design to consider the facility as rigid. Given
the resulting horizontal seismic load, the internal components will subsequently be designed
accordingly.
The simplified engineering model with and without seismic isolation for the steel frame
module is shown in Figure 4. The assumption is made, that the steel frame module is rigid,
therefore the beam that represents the steel frame module is rigid too. The mass of all
components inside the container and the container itself is 10 t plus ~10% as safety margin,
being 11 t. The centre of mass is assumed to be at 3 m from the ground (2.675 m plus ~10%
safety margin). Based on the actual stage of design, the centre of mass position in longitudinal
and transversal direction can also be assumed to be in the geometric centre, respectively. For
the requested assessment, a simplified model (a) fixed to the ground, and a model (b) with a
seismic isolation at the level of the supports was used.
11t 11t
6m
Rigid Body RIGID 3m RIGID
11 t
2.5m
10m
a) b)
Figure 4: Sketch of idealized steel frame model and simplified engineering model (SDOF)
without (a) and with seismic isolation (b)
5. Results
For achieving the requested seismic isolation by the client, it is proposed to use a sliding film
support (PTFE foil) for the container. Based on the geometry of the structure and main steel
10
Fon +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 0 Fax +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 29
frame the seismic isolation support should be square shaped sliding films with dimensions of
8.5 x 8.5 cm to fit below the steel frame. For a better load distribution, it is recommended to
use 6 sliding foil supports, in total 3 for each long side of the container. Commercially available
products have a maximum allowable pressure of 1-15 N/mm2 and a friction coefficient μ
between 0.02 and 0.15. The thickness of such a sliding foil varies between 2-4 mm depending
on the selected product.
5.1 Maximum horizontal displacement

According to EC8 [4] the horizontal design displacement dg can be evaluated in a simplified
manner with:
𝑑𝑔 = 0,025 ∙ 𝑎𝑔 ∙ 𝑆 ∙ 𝑇𝐶 ∙ 𝑇𝐷 = 0,025 ∙ 9,66 ∙ 0,5 ∙ 2,0 = 0,24 𝑚
Parameters TC and TD in the generic Eurocode 8 correspond to the ground type B according to
[4], which is the same type of ground as soil type II according to [3]. Thus, the values can be
analogously applied from the code and are TC=0.5 and TD=2.0 according to [4] (Table 3.2).
This EC8 displacement is on the conservative side and according to [6] an average of ~15 cm
seems more adequate based on empirical observation.
5.2 Verification of pressure on sliding foil
11t ≈ 110KN
3m
13,75KN 27,5KN 13,75KN

Figure 5: Sketch of sliding supports for steel frame structure (e.g. support size 8.5 x 8.5 cm
to fit under the support frame width)
Min. support surface: 𝐴 = 85 ⋅ 85 = 7225 𝑚𝑚2
27500 𝑁
Max. support pressure (center position): = 3,806 𝑚𝑚2
7225
𝑁 𝑁
Static case verification: 3,8 𝑚𝑚2 < 4 𝑚𝑚² → Verified!
In the unfavorable case of a very large displacement due to an earthquake (e.g. ~15 cm), the
residual contact surface of the sliding bearing of 8.5 x 8.5 is not sufficient. With a support
surface of e.g. 20 x 20 cm, the remaining contact surface during a diagonal displacement would
still be 8,5 x 8,5 cm.
➔ Thus, the recommended bearing surface is 20 x 20 cm with attached sliding foil.
11
Fon +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 0 Fax +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 29
Note: Here a product with 4 N/mm² was used, but sliding foils with up 15 N/mm² pressure
capacity are available.
5.3 Verification of maximum horizontal force

As lower average coefficient of friction, μ=0.05 can be assumed (products range e.g. from 0.02
to 0.15).
𝐹𝑓 = μ ⋅ m ⋅ 𝑎𝑔 = 0.05 ⋅ 11 ⋅ 9,81 = 5 𝐾𝑁 – friction force
In the unfavorable case that the vertical seismic load is acting in the same direction as the
gravity, additionally 5,64 m/s² must be considered, which lead to:
𝐹𝑓 = μ ⋅ m ⋅ 𝑎𝑔 = 0.05 ⋅ 11 ⋅ (9,81 + 5,64) = 8,5 𝐾𝑁
The friction force of 8,5 KN corresponds to an acceleration of ~0.9 m/s2 on elastic spectrum
response, which is at the very end of the spectrum, far from the plateau. The steel frame
module will be attached to the sliding foil and move together with it under the influence of
every horizontal seismic force below 8,5 KN. For higher accelerations, which would be higher
than 8,5 KN the sliding will be activated, and no higher force is transmitted to the container.
5.4 Verification of overturning
110KN Sum of moments around A:

Ff = 9.9KN 𝑀𝑠𝑒𝑙𝑓 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 110 ⋅ 1.25
𝜇= =
𝑀𝐹𝑓 9.9 ⋅ 3
3m
𝜇 = 4.63 > 1 Verified!

A
1.25m 1.25m
2.5m
Note: The overturning around the longer side (10 m) of the steel frame module is not possible
given the check of overturning around the short side.
5.5 Verification of uplifting

Since the highest acceleration of vertical response spectrum is 6.76 m/s2 (70% of horizontal
elastic response spectrum), it is much low than the gravity acceleration 9.81 m/s2, therefore
there is no danger regarding uplifting forces.
12
Fon +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 0 Fax +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 29
6. Recommended constructive measures

Examples of products to be used for the sliding foil or sliding bearing are provided in the
appendix.
In order to allow for an adequate sliding surface it is recommended to use six supports of 20
x 20 cm made of steel plates and placed according to the sketch in Figure 5. The size of the
corresponding sliding foil support is 20 x 20 cm. On the floor a steel plate of 60 x 60 cm is
recommended to allow for enough even surface to slide in the case of an earthquake (see
Figure 6, left).
In case a very even and smooth concrete surface of 60 x 60 cm can be manufactured at the
location of each support, it could be investigated if a sliding foil with elastomeric laminate on
the lower surface could be used to achieve the same effect and omitting the lower steel plate
of 60 x 60 cm.
To account for a possible extreme displacement due to an earthquake (>15 cm) – which can
probabilistically never be excluded - it is recommended to fabricate a steel plate with
abutment and cushion (of e.g. 5 or 10 cm thickness) for stopping the container to slide of the
lower steel plate (see Figure 6, right). As cushion a PU-based foam is recommended in order
to absorb the maximum the lateral force.
Assuming a horizontal force of 9,66 KN/2 = 4830 N per corner and a foam surface of 500 x 100
= 50000 mm² the compression force results in 4830/50000 = 0,1 N/mm². Commercial products
are allowing an embedment (compression stroke) with 0,12 N/mm² (even higher in the case
of a temporary dynamic load). Thus, the full horizontal force will be absorbed by the cushion
after a displacement of around 15 mm (for a cushion thickness of 50 mm, see Appendix for
product properties).
Figure 6: Sketch of the steel support plate with (left) and without (right) shock absorbing
abutment. All indicated dimensions are in [cm].
13
Fon +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 0 Fax +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 29
7. Disclaimer
Important:
• After an earthquake, it is probably necessary to realign the container due to the
missing back-centring.
• In case of an earthquake the container can cover larger displacement distances and
the sliding foil bearing will be “destroyed” afterwards and need to be replaced to
enable a full base isolation capacity again.
The following points have to be considered:
• As the container will be placed inside a building, no wind loads have been taken into
account.
• Local effects from earthquakes, such as soil liquefaction or faulting, were not taken
into account in the analysis.
• Sloshing effects of the liquid resulting in additional horizontal loads for the tanks during
an earthquake have not been considered at this design stage.
• Fire protection of the bearings and temperature range was not considered and
depends on the requirements of the place of installation.
• All supports must be accurately horizontally levelled, and all must be at the same
height (no differences in height)!
• All slide bearings must be fitted accurately. Any unevenness on the foundations must
be levelled out. The thickness of the elastomeric bearing must be selected so that any
unevenness that remains after levelling can be compensated for and the sliding layer
can work properly.
• The outer sliding bearings "steel on steel" must be protected against corrosion and the
dimensions must be selected so that no welding effects occur.
• All bearings must be kept permanently free of dust and free to slide.
• During assembly, care must be taken not to restrict the movement of the container
building by at least the dimensions of the support plate. If, for example, flooring work
is carried out around the structure, appropriate movement joints must be provided
and filled with soft material. The filling material should be very soft fibrous insulation
material that does not resist movement.
• The required free sliding paths must be provided by arranging suitable sliding bearings.
The correct design is the responsibility of the company carrying out the work.
• The following maximum coefficients of friction must be respected:
Sliding film bearings (inner supporting area): < 0.05 and friction bearing outside (steel
on steel): < 0,1
14
Fon +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 0 Fax +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 29
• The provided solution and calculation is only at the level of a feasibility study and does
not cover a full design of all details of the construction. Thus, before an
implementation a suitable verification of all details and there dimensioning must be
carried out.
• The foundation body is not part of the structural analysis. The foundation / floor must
be designed to withstand earthquakes and the supporting floor must allow
displacements without damage. The tilting of the whole foundation and its
deformation have to be suppressed.
• The calculation only includes the verification of stability. Serviceability aspects have
not been taken into account. As a result, damage to the construction and the building
installation must be expected after an earthquake and probably necessity repair.
• The present calculation is not transferable to other containers. A transferability is not
given even with the same number of containers and dimensions. The use of the
structural analysis for other construction projects requires the approval and inspection
of the installer.
• Any assembly instructions by the manufacturers of the used and installed sliding
bearings and compression foams must be respected.
8. Summary
A base isolation of the test facility is possible and can be realized with a sliding foil on six
supports of 20 x 20 cm under the container with a counter steel plate of 60 x 60 cm. More
sophisticated bearing solutions are possible, but imply also a more complex re-design of the
container footings and concrete slab. The proposed solution requires the consideration of a
couple of boundary conditions enumerated above. The most important aspect of the
proposed solution is that there will be residual displacements of the facility after an
earthquake, and it must be but back in place. Furthermore, the base isolation sliding foil will
need to be replaced, which requires a lifting of the container. Connections with the test facility
(piping, cables, …) have to be designed in a flexible way to accommodate the potential relative
displacements of the structure.
Herzogenrath, 01.08.2022
15
Fon +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 0 Fax +49 - 24 07 - 56 848 29
9. Appendix
Examples of candidate products to be used for the proposed based isolation. Note that these
examples are not exclusive and there are other manufacturers on the market. SDA-
engineering has no engagement with those companies and is providing the reference for
illustration only.
9.1 Sliding support

Manufacturer: Heim – Elastomere Lagersysteme (www.el-heim.de)
Sliding foil:
Product: Heim Gleitfolie Typ GB (https://www.el-heim.de/index.php/produkte/heim-
gleitfolie-typ-gb-gbb)
Properties: 2 sided PTFE foil - friction coefficient of 0,04; max pressure: 4 N/mm²;
temporary horizontal deformation; thickness = 2 mm
Advantage: Very low price and easy to install.
or
Sliding bearing (combination of sliding and deformation bearing):
Product: Calenberg Ciprall® Gleitlager GFK (https://www.el-
heim.de/produkte/calenberg-ciparallr-gleitlager)
Properties: max pressure: 15 N/mm²; thickness = 14 mm
Advantage: Can maybe put directly on the concrete/floor due to the underlying dimpled
sheeting (to be checked with the manufacturer).
9.2 Shock absorber material

Manufacturer: Regupol (https://www.regupol.de/bautenschutz/)
Product: Regupol Vibration 450
(https://acoustics.regupol.de/produkte/range/regupol-vibration/regupol-
vibration-450/)
Properties: PU-rubber fibres; dynamic load peak up to 0,18 N/mm²; force dissipation 74%;
thickness = 5 cm (2 layers are glued with PE-glue)
See Page 2 for the compaction [mm] in dependance of the compression force
[N/mm²] for 50 and 100 mm thick absorber.
Note: Heim – Elastomere Lagersysteme is also official reseller of Regupol products.
16

22-010-00-Seismic Calculation Steel Frame Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

22-010-00-Seismic Calculation Steel Frame Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SDA – engineering GmbH

Ingenieurgesellschaft für statische und dynamische Strukturanalysen im Bauwesen

INGENIEURBÜRO FÜR BAUWESEN

filled containers and piping Tel.: +49 (2407) 56 848 -0

Object: Test facility with liquid lithium Proj.-No.: 22-1064.01

Contractor: SDA-engineering GmbH (SDA)

Document Type: Report, not public

Revision # Date Author Modification Modified pages or chapters

CODES AND LITERATURE ........................................................................... 4

1. TASK ORDER DESCRIPTION ............................................................... 5

2. SEISMIC ACTION AT SITE................................................................... 5

3. CODE SPECTRA ................................................................................. 7

3.2 Vertical response spectrum ............................................................................. 10

6. RECOMMENDED CONSTRUCTIVE MEASURES ................................. 13

Codes and literature

1. Task order description

2. Seismic action at site

Ground Type II Soil amplification factor S

3.1 Horizontal response spectrum

3.1.2 Horizontal design response spectrum

3.2 Vertical response spectrum

5.1 Maximum horizontal displacement

5.2 Verification of pressure on sliding foil

13,75KN 27,5KN 13,75KN

5.3 Verification of maximum horizontal force

5.4 Verification of overturning

110KN Sum of moments around A:

𝜇 = 4.63 > 1 Verified!

5.5 Verification of uplifting

6. Recommended constructive measures

9.1 Sliding support

Advantage: Very low price and easy to install.

9.2 Shock absorber material

Note: Heim – Elastomere Lagersysteme is also official reseller of Regupol products.

You might also like