Petronas Technical Standards: Seismic Hazard Assessment For Onshore Facilities

PETRONAS TECHNICAL STANDARDS
Seismic Hazard Assessment For Onshore Facilities
PTS 11.10.02
January 2017
© 2017 PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD (PETRONAS)

All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form
or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the permission of the copyright
owner. PETRONAS Technical Standards are Company’s internal standards and meant for authorized users only.
150.5.65.197 yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com 07/19/2021 06:34:28 GMT

PTS 11.10.02
SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT FOR ONSHORE FACILITIES January 2017
Page 2 of 27
FOREWORD
PETRONAS Technical Standards (PTS) has been developed based on the accumulated knowledge,
experience and best practices of the PETRONAS group supplementing National and International
standards where appropriate. The key objective of PTS is to ensure standard technical practice across
the PETRONAS group.
Compliance to PTS is compulsory for PETRONAS-operated facilities and Joint Ventures (JVs) where
PETRONAS has more than fifty percent (50%) shareholding and/or operational control, and includes
all phases of work activities.
Contractors/manufacturers/suppliers who use PTS are solely responsible in ensuring the quality of
work, goods and services meet the required design and engineering standards. In the case where
specific requirements are not covered in the PTS, it is the responsibility of the
Contractors/manufacturers/suppliers to propose other proven or internationally established
standards or practices of the same level of quality and integrity as reflected in the PTS.
In issuing and making the PTS available, PETRONAS is not making any warranty on the accuracy or
completeness of the information contained in PTS. The Contractors/manufacturers/suppliers shall
ensure accuracy and completeness of the PTS used for the intended design and engineering
requirement and shall inform the Owner for any conflicting requirement with other international
codes and technical standards before start of any work.
PETRONAS is the sole copyright holder of PTS. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored
in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, recording or
otherwise) or be disclosed by users to any company or person whomsoever, without the prior written
consent of PETRONAS.
The PTS shall be used exclusively for the authorised purpose. The users shall arrange for PTS to be
kept in safe custody and shall ensure its secrecy is maintained and provide satisfactory information to
PETRONAS that this requirement is met.

PTS 11.10.02
Page 3 of 27
ANNOUNCEMENT
Please be informed that the entire PTS inventory is currently undergoing transformation exercise from
2013 - 2015 which includes revision to numbering system, format and content. As part of this change,
the PTS numbering system has been revised to 6-digit numbers and drawings, forms and requisition
to 7-digit numbers. All newly revised PTS will adopt this new numbering system, and where required
make reference to other PTS in its revised numbering to ensure consistency. Users are requested to
refer to PTS 00.01.01 (Index to PTS) for mapping between old and revised PTS numbers for clarity. For
further inquiries, contact PTS administrator at ptshelpdesk@petronas.com.my

PTS 11.10.02
Page 4 of 27
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 5
1.1 SCOPE ............................................................................................................................ 5
1.2 GLOSSARY OF TERMS..................................................................................................... 5
1.3 SUMMARY OF CHANGES ............................................................................................... 6
2.0 BASIC REQUIREMENTS FOR SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT ................................... 6
2.1 GENERAL ........................................................................................................................ 7
2.2 SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................... 7
2.3 REQUIREMENT OF SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT....................................................... 9
3.0 DESIGN AND EVALUATION PHILOSOPHY .............................................................. 11
3.1 GENERAL ...................................................................................................................... 11
3.2 DEFINITION OF SHAKING LEVELS ................................................................................. 11
3.3 PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................ 12
3.4 OCCUPANCY CATEGORIES ........................................................................................... 12
3.5 RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES AND OCCUPANCY CATEGORIES
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..14
3.6 SUMMARY OF SEISMIC DESIGN LEVEL ........................................................................ 15
3.7 DESIGN CRITERIA FOR LNG PLANT............................................................................... 16
4.0 SEISMIC DESIGN CODE ......................................................................................... 17
4.1 CODE PHILOSOPHY ...................................................................................................... 17
4.2 APPLICABLE CODES FOR DESIGN ................................................................................. 18
5.0 DESIGN METHOD................................................................................................. 19
5.1 STATIC ANALYSIS.......................................................................................................... 19
5.2 DYNAMIC ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................... 19
6.0 GEOTECHNICAL ASPECT ....................................................................................... 21
6.1 LIQUEFACTON OF COHESIONLESS SOILS ..................................................................... 21
6.2 SLOPE STABILITY .......................................................................................................... 22
7.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................... 24
APPENDIX 1 – OCCUPANCY CATEGORY ........................................................................... 26

PTS 11.10.02
Page 5 of 27
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This PTS provides the definition of the Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) as the basis for
development of response spectrum and base shear force to be used in civil/structural design.
This PTS was developed to standardize the design criteria in projects and facilities to ensure
safe and reliable operations of civil/structural assets.
This PTS adopts American and European Best Practices with additional requirements as an
amendment and supplement based on PETRONAS lessons learnt and best practices.
1.1 SCOPE
1.1.1 The scope of this PTS covers the requirements of seismic hazard evaluation for the proper
definition of the Peak Ground Acceleration for Civil/Structural Design and Integrity of onshore
projects and facilities including Jetty and other near-shore facilities.
1.1.2 This PTS is applicable for new facilities, for existing facilities it shall be evaluated on a case by
case basis through structural integrity assessment, subject to Owner’s approval.
1.1.3 The requirement for the detail structural analysis (static/dynamic/linear/non-linear analysis)
is not covered in this PTS. However the applicable codes and standards as listed in this PTS
may be used as manual, recommendation and guideline for detail design.
1.2 GLOSSARY OF TERMS
1.2.1 General Definition of Terms & Abbreviations
Refer to PTS 00.01.03 for PTS Requirements, General Definition Of Terms, Abbreviations &
Reading Guide.
1.2.2 Specific Definitions of Terms
None
1.2.3 Specific Abbreviations
No Abbreviations Description
1 DSHA Deterministic Seismic Hazard Assessment
2 MCE Maximum Considered Earthquake
3 OBE Operating Basis Earthquake
4 PGA Peak Ground Acceleration
5 PGD Peak Ground Displacement
6 PGV Peak Ground Velocity

PTS 11.10.02
Page 6 of 27
No Abbreviations Description
7 PSHA Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment
8 SSE Safe Shutdown Earthquake
9 ULS Ultimate Limit State

Table 1.1: Specific Abbreviations
1.3 SUMMARY OF CHANGES

This PTS 11.10.02 (January 2017) replaces PTS 11.10.02 (October 2013).

PTS 11.10.02
Page 7 of 27
2.0 BASIC REQUIREMENTS FOR SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT
2.1 GENERAL
2.1.1 The seismic hazard assessment is a method to evaluate and quantify the level of ground
motion at the site to be used as a basis in the seismic design for all PETRONAS onshore facilities
including jetty and marine facilities.
2.1.2 The objective of this PTS is to highlight seismic design requirements in addition to the code
based design requirements outlined in Table 4.1.
2.2 SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT
2.2.1 Seismic hazard assessment involves quantitative estimation of ground motion at the site.
Seismic hazards shall be analysed deterministically, as when a particular earthquake scenario
is assumed, or probabilistically, in which uncertainties in earthquake size, location, and time
of occurrence are explicitly considered. The probabilistic seismic hazard is more
representative in the definition of the peak ground motions and it is mandatory to be carried
out when the desired ground motion for particular site is not covered in any applicable codes,
standards and studies.
2.2.2 The assessment to estimate the seismic hazard shall be carried out through means of a
literature review of global, regional and local seismic hazard studies that are published, unless
site-specific seismic data are available.
2.2.3 Detailed site-specific seismic hazard assessment shall include the following:
i. A review of regional, local and site-specific geology, seismic and tectonics
ii. Collection of a comprehensive earthquake catalogue. The catalogue should have

a consistent magnitude scale and the completeness of the catalogue assessed.
iii. Characteristic of the regional seismic sources (e.g fault sources, area sources)
iv. Estimation of earthquake recurrence parameters for each source based on both
the geological and seismological data.
v. Selection of appropriate ground attenuation equations based on tectonic

characteristic of the regional and the local soil conditions at the plant site.
vi. Seismic hazard calculation (probabilistic or deterministic) to determine

appropriate ground motion parameters.

PTS 11.10.02
Page 8 of 27
2.2.4 Deterministic Seismic Hazard Assessment (DSHA)
i. Deterministic seismic hazard assessment (DSHA) shall involve the development of

a particular seismic scenario upon which a ground motion hazard evaluation is
based. The scenario consists of the postulated occurrence of earthquake of
specified size and site location. DSHA shall be described in four (4) steps as
follows:
a) Identification and characterization of all earthquake sources capable of

producing significant ground motion at the site.
b) Selection of source to site distance parameter for each source zone
c) Selection of the controlling earthquake, expressed in terms of ground

motion parameters
d) Define the hazard of the site, in terms of the ground motions produced at
the site by the controlling earthquake
ii. The adoption of a DSHA approach may be desirable where significant active faults
are in close proximity to the site and information exists about those faults that
provide either a check on the appropriateness of the PSHA results, or in some
cases will be a better model than the PSHA. The appropriateness of incorporating
DSHA elements, and the faults studies they are based on, shall be decided and
executed by a seismic expert for review and agreed by the Owner.
2.2.5 Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment (PSHA)
i. The PSHA approach is based on defining a composite probability distribution

function for a selected strong-motion parameter at a site of interest due to the
total expected seismicity in the area around the site during a specified exposure
period. The four basic types of input to be specified and appropriately modelled
for this purpose are:
a) The earthquake sources contributing to the hazard (e.g., within 500 km

radius around the site)
b) The expected total seismicity in each source
c) The site characteristics (e.g., geological and soil conditions)
d) The conditional probability that the strong motion parameter exceeds a

specified level upon the occurrence of a particular earthquake
ii. In brief the probabilistic seismic hazard assesment (PSHA) shall be described as
procedure of four (4) steps:
a) Identification and characterization of earthquake sources. The probability

distribution of potential rupture locations within the source should also
be characterized

PTS 11.10.02
Page 9 of 27
b) The seismicity of earthquake recurrence shall be characterized.
c) The ground motions produced at the site by earthquake by source zone

shall be determined with appropriate attenuation relationship.
d) Combine the uncertainties in earthquake location, size and ground

motion parameters prediction to obtain the specified return period.
2.3 REQUIREMENT OF SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT
2.3.1 The site specific Seismic Hazard Assessment need to be done when a specific ground
acceleration correspond to desired design level are not available in any local or international
codes and standards or if more stringent ground motion than those available in codes and
standards is required by Owner.
2.3.2 The flowchart for the necessity of seismic hazard assessment is presented in Figure 2.1.
2.3.3 Unless otherwise stated by Owner structures in Category 3 – Essential Hazard Occupancy as
set forth in section 3.3 in this PTS will require a detailed Seismic Hazard Assessment.
i. The data required for a detailed Seismic Hazard Assessment are:
a) A minimum of three attenuation relationship appropriate to the tectonic

characteristics of the site being studied shall be selected to determine the
ground motion.
b) Past earthquake records within 500 km radius from proposed site. The
records shall have consistent magnitude and epicentre distance scales.
c) Coordinates of the site being studied.
ii. The outputs required from a site-specific study shall be as follows:
a) Peak Ground Acceleration for each criteria (e.g OBE, SSE)
b) Design response spectra for each design level for 5% damping
c) Artificial Earthquake Motion (AEM) for time history analysis (if required
by Owner)

PTS 11.10.02
Page 10 of 27
Define the Seismic Requirement:

- Performance Objectives
- Occupancy categories
Define Seismic Design Level:

- OBE Criteria
- SSE criteria
FEL 2
Verify OBE/SSE criteria with applicable

code & standard
Code Based Y OBE/SSE criteria

Criteria avialable?
Verify with studies or previous

project within radius 100 km from
site being studied
FEL 3 Applicable?
Y
Detailed SHA
Detailed Design:
DETAIL - Static Equivalent
- Response Spectrum Analysis
DESIGN - Time History
- Geohazard
Requirements not
- Tsunami
include in this PTS
Figure 2.1: Requirement for Seismic Hazard Assessment (SHA)

PTS 11.10.02
Page 11 of 27
3.0 DESIGN AND EVALUATION PHILOSOPHY
3.1 GENERAL
3.1.1 This section defines the seismic hazard assessment philosophy for PETRONAS facilities under
seismic loading. The overall philosophy shall cover the following:
i. Defining the proper ground motion for a site
ii. Defining performance objectives for different usage categories of structures
3.2 DEFINITION OF SHAKING LEVELS
i. The seismic design practice in PETRONAS is addressing two different level of

earthquake for operating and safe shutdown level of earthquake in accordance
with the requirements of the ASCE 7, NFPA 59A and BS EN 1473. The probability
of exceedance and return periods corresponding to these shaking levels shall be
as follows:
a) Operating Base Earthquake (OBE)
The OBE is a probable earthquake to which a facility can be subjected

during its design life. All elements of the facility are designed to withstand
this event in accordance with conventional engineering procedures and
criteria, and, therefore, the facility is expected to remain in operation. The
OBE is defined as ground motion having a 10 percent probability of
exceedance within a 50-year period (return period of 475 years).
b) Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE)
The SSE is the “maximum considered earthquake (MCE) ground motion,”

according to definition in ASCE 7, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings
and Other Structures. The MCE is a ground motion that has a 2 percent
probability of exceedance in a 50-year period (return period of 2475
years). Specific requirement for LNG plant located at moderate to lower
seismicity area is set forth in Table 3.6 section 3.7.

PTS 11.10.02
Page 12 of 27
3.3 PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES
3.3.1 The performance objectives are intended to provide different level of protection from
damage, consistent with occupancy categories. The elements of these performances are as
follows:
i. Structural Integrity
The design philosophy articulated in this document calls for maintaining structural
integrity for all structures and components in a facility. This means that structures
and components shall not collapse under the design basis ground motion
specified for the site.
ii. Containment
Structures, system and components with hazardous materials shall be designed

for containment of such materials during and after earthquake. Ensuring
containment requires attention to strength, ductility, and deformation limits as
well as structural details of elements with respect to potential leak paths.
Prevention of release of significant quantities of hazardous materials into the
environment is essential to avoid endangering facility personnel and to maintain
public health and safety in the event of a major earthquake.
iii. Functionality
All structures, systems and components that are needed after an earthquake shall
be designed to maintain functionality. (i.e., continued operability during or after
the design earthquake). Maintaining functionality requires attention to strength,
ductility and deformation limits as well as to stress levels, structural details,
seismic interaction, and protection of essential systems and components.
3.4 OCCUPANCY CATEGORIES
3.4.1 For purposes of seismic hazard assessment, three (3) occupancy categories at PETRONAS
facilities shall be used as stated below. The categories depend on the consequence of failure
of the structures or facilities. Broad definitions of Low Hazard (Category 1), Substantial Hazard
(Category 2) and Essential Hazard (Category 3) are as follows:
i. Category 1 – Low Hazard
Include buildings or other structures with low hazard to human life in the event
of failure. In this category, the structures should sustain no more than repairable
when subject to a rare earthquake (OBE). The failure or collapse of these
structures under a larger very rare earthquake (SSE) shall not impact on other
structures.
ii. Category 2 – Substantial Hazard
Include buildings and structures that represent a substantial hazard to human life
in the event of a failure. This includes specific high occupancy buildings as well as

PTS 11.10.02
Page 13 of 27
structures containing sufficient quantities of hazardous materials to be dangerous

to the public if released. In this category, the structures should sustain no more
than minimum damage when subject to a rare earthquake (OBE) but they shall
(PSR)
maintain their integrity and to provide containment of the hazardous material
under a very large rare earthquake (SSE). They need not maintain their general
functionality beyond what is required for integrity or containment. If these
structures and components fail, they shall (PSR) fail in a manner that will preclude
release of hazardous material into the environment.
iii. Category 3 – Essential Hazard
a) Includes essential facilities, eg, fire suppression system, designated

emergency response centres, and also includes buildings and other
structures containing extremely hazardous materials where the quantity
contained exceeds a threshold quantity established by the authority
having jurisdiction. Structures and components in this category are
designed to maintain their functionality after the earthquake. In this
category, the main resisting members shall be essentially in elastic limits
when subject to a rare earthquake (OBE), therefore they shall remain
operational during and after such an event. These structures shall (PSR)
maintain their functionality under a large very rare earthquake (SSE).
Containment systems shall preclude release of hazardous material into
the environment.
b) Essential hazard structures are those where structures failure would

result in a substantial hazard in the wider vicinity of the structure.
3.4.2 Table 3.1 below show the applicability of occupancy category as a guideline. The final decision
shall be consulted and determined by Owner based on Process Safety Requirements.
Occupancy Category Applicability
Low Hazard LNG Class C (1), Refinery structures, Lifelines, Normal buildings
LNG Class B(1), Generally all pressurized and toxic storage less
Substantial Hazard than 20,000 m3, High occupancy buildings.
LNG Class A(1), Ethylene tanks, LPG tanks (≥ 20,000 m3), Plants
containing highly toxic (HF, H2S, Chlorine), Generally all
refrigerated storage, Fire Suppression System, Control Building,
Essential Hazard Emergency Response Centre
Table 3.1: Occupancy category
NOTE(S): (1) Refer to EN 1473 for LNG Class classification

PTS 11.10.02
Page 14 of 27
3.4.3 In all cases where the occupancy category of a lower category structure shall affect a higher
category structure, the design requirements for the higher category shall (PSR) apply.
3.5 RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES AND OCCUPANCY CATEGORIES
3.5.1 Relationship between the performance objectives and occupancy categories are shown in
Table 3.2. Hazardous material handling facilities and components shall be evaluated to ensure
containment of such hazardous material. Similarly, essential facilities and certain structures in
the hazardous material handling facilities shall be evaluated to maintain selected
functionality.
Performance Objectives
Maintain
Occupancy Maintain Structural containment of
category Integrity hazardous materials Maintain functions
Low Hazard Yes N/A No
Substantial Hazard Yes Yes No (1)
Essential Hazard Yes Yes Yes (2)
Table 2.2: Performance Objectives for Different Occupancy Categories
NOTE(S):
(1) Maintain only those functions which are required for containment
(2)
Maintain only those functions which are required for essential operations or for containment
3.5.2 The relationship between ductility demand and the performance objectives are as follow:
i. Functionality: Essentially elastic behaviour, no plastic hinges formed during and

after the event of the design earthquake. The system shall be in operational
condition with minor non-structural repair allowed in safely manner.
ii. Containment: Limited Ductility, structure may have some plastic hinges but the
release of hazardous material is avoided and evacuation can be done safely but
the system may not function and may require repair for immediate occupancy.
iii. Structural Integrity: Fully Ductile, structure may fail but shall not collapse so that
the emergency response and personnel evacuation can be done in safely manner
for life safety. System may not be able to be repaired.

PTS 11.10.02
Page 15 of 27
3.6 SUMMARY OF SEISMIC DESIGN LEVEL
3.6.1 Design requirements for all PETRONAS onshore including jetty and marine facilities shall
follow this PTS as a minimum, unless there is a specific legal requirement from local standards
authority.
3.6.2 To design for essential hazard structures, the seismic level for OBE and SSE shall correspond
with their performance objectives and ductility demand which are summarized in Table 3.3 to
Table 3.5 below:
Seismic Level Return Period Performance Ductility Demand
OBE 475 years Functionality Elastic
2475 years or
SSE 4975 years(1) Containment Limited Ductility
Table 3.3: Design criteria for Essential Hazard Occupancy Structures
NOTE(S) : (1) Refer to EN 1473 for LNG Class classification
OBE 475 years Containment Limited Ductility
SSE 2475 years Structural Integrity Fully Ductile
Table 3.4: Design criteria for Substantial Hazard Occupancy Structures
OBE 475 years Structural Integrity Fully Ductile
Table 3.5: Design Criteria for Low Hazard Occupancy Structures

PTS 11.10.02
Page 16 of 27
3.7 DESIGN CRITERIA FOR LNG PLANT
3.7.1 Two different seismic hazard levels, the Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) and the Safe
Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) shall be defined for the design of PETRONAS LNG plants as
described below:
i. The OBE is a rare event that the site may be subjected to during its design life.
This shall have a return period of 475 years.
ii. The SSE is a very rare earthquake of extreme magnitude for the facility location.
PGA and return period that shall be used are shown in Table 3.6.
Seismicity PGA Return period
Higher OBE  0.25g 2475 years
Moderate 0.15g > OBE < 0.25g Interpolation
Lower OBE < 0.15g 4975 years
Table 3.6: Hazard level for SSE
3.7.2 The different parts of an LNG plant shall be subdivided into three classes in accordance with
EN 1473. Each shall be designed to different criteria. The three classes of plant systems are
defined on basis of their importance, namely:
i. Class A
Systems which are vital to the plant safety. They shall (PSR) remain operational for
both OBE and SSE. The secondary containment of LNG tanks and fire suppression
systems shall be in Class A.
ii. Class B
Systems performing vital functions for the plant operation or systems for which
rupture can create a hazard for the plant for which collapse could cause a major
impact on the environment or could lead to additional hazard. These systems shall
remain operational after the OBE and shall (PSR) keep their integrity in case of SSE.
The primary container of all LNG tanks shall be in Class B.
iii. Class C
Other systems. These systems shall remain operational after OBE and shall not fail
on or impact other systems classes and components after SSE.
3.7.3 List of Equipment/Structures/Buildings in LNG Facilities is presented in Appendix 1 which can

be used as preliminary design. The final desicison on the seismic category shall be determined
by Process Safety.

PTS 11.10.02
Page 17 of 27
4.0 SEISMIC DESIGN CODE
This section defines the seismic design approach that shall be used for the various facilities
and structures covered in this PTS.
4.1 CODE PHILOSOPHY
4.1.1 The philosophy of a particular document indicates the general level of protection that it can
be expected to provide. Most code documents clearly state that their standards are minimum
requirements that are meant to provide for life safety but not to insure against collapse.
4.1.2 The code-specified forces are generally lower than the actual forces that would occur in a
large or moderate size earthquake. This is because the structure is designed to carry the
specified loads within allowable stresses and deflections, which are considerably less than the
ultimate or yield capacity (when using working stress design) of the materials and system. It
is assumed that the larger loads that actually occur will be accounted for by the factors of
safety and by the redundancy and ductility of the system. Life safety is thereby insured but
structural damage may be sustained.
4.1.3 Specialist code for essential hazards such EN 1473 and NFPA 59A addresses the requirements
of structures to sustain minor structural damage aftershocks for SSE and resume its function
for OBE.

PTS 11.10.02
Page 18 of 27
4.2 APPLICABLE CODES FOR DESIGN
4.2.1 Table 4.1 provides a summary of common codes and identifies the facilities that are covered
by these codes.
List of Codes Applicability
a) Normal Buildings,
b) Refineries,
c) Normal Tanks,
i. EN 1998 (Europe) d) Equipment
b) Refineries,
c) Non Hydrocarbon Tanks,
ii. ASCE 7 (USA) d) Equipment
b) General Tanks,
iii. UBC 1997/IBC 2000 (USA) c) Equipment
a) Equipment,
iv. EN 1473 (Europe) b) LNG
v. API 2610 (USA) LNG Tanks
vi. API 620 (USA) LNG Tanks
vii. API 650 (USA) Normal Tanks
a) Equipment,
viii. NFPA 59A (USA) b) LNG

Table 4.1: Applicable International Codes

PTS 11.10.02
Page 19 of 27
5.0 DESIGN METHOD
Design method for superstructure is generally divided into static-equivalent method and
dynamic method. Brief description and their requirements for each method are described in
subsequent sections.
5.1 STATIC ANALYSIS
5.1.1 For all superstructure designs it is necessary to perform a static analysis. This establishes a
minimum level for design displacements and forces. The static analysis is also useful for
preliminary design of the structure when dynamic analysis is required and for design review.
Under certain circumstances it may be the only design method used.
5.1.2 The static analysis alone will suffice if:
i. The structures, regular or irregular, in Seismic Zone 1 and in Occupancy Categories

4 and 5 in Seismic Zone 2 (refer to UBC 1997 for seismic zone and occupancy
categories)
ii. Regular structures under 75m in height with lateral force resistance provided by
systems listed in Table 16-N UBC 1997, except where Section 1629.8.4, Item 4,
UBC 1997 applies.
iii. Irregular structures not more than five stories or 20m in height.
iv. Structures having a flexible upper portion supported on a rigid lower portion
where both portions of the structure considered separately can be classified as
being regular, the average story stiffness of the lower portion is at least 10 times
the average story stiffness of the upper portion and the period of the entire
structure is not greater than 1.1 times the period of the upper portion considered
as a separate structure fixed at the base.
5.2 DYNAMIC ANALYSIS
5.2.1 Structure which is not qualified to be designed solely by static procedure shall be designed by
means of dynamic procedure. Dynamic analyses procedures, when used, shall be based on an
appropriate ground motion representation as resulted from site specific seismic hazard
assessment and shall be performed using accepted principles of dynamics design. General
description for dynamic procedures is presented in the subsequent sub-chapter.
i. Response Spectrum Analysis
a) An elastic dynamic analysis of a structure utilizing the peak dynamic

response of all modes having a significant contribution to total structural
response. Peak modal responses are calculated using the ordinates of the
appropriate response spectrum curve which correspond to the modal
periods. Maximum modal contributions are combined in a statistical
manner to obtain an approximate total structural response.

PTS 11.10.02
Page 20 of 27
ii. Time-History Analysis.
a) An analysis of the dynamic response of a structure at each increment of

time when the base is subjected to a specific ground motion time history.
Time-history analysis shall be performed with pairs of appropriate
horizontal ground-motion time history components that shall be selected
and scaled from not less than three recorded events. Appropriate time
histories shall have magnitudes, fault distances and source mechanisms
that are consistent with those that control the design-basis earthquake
(or maximum capable earthquake).
b) Where three appropriate recorded ground-motion time-history pairs are

not available, appropriate simulated ground-motion time-history pairs
may be used to make up the total number required. For each pair of
horizontal ground motion components, the square root of the sum of the
squares (SRSS) of the 5 percent-damped site-specific spectrum of the
scaled horizontal components shall be constructed. The motions shall be
scaled such that the average value of the SRSS spectra does not fall below
1.4 times the 5 percent-damped spectrum of the design-basis earthquake
for periods from 0.2T second to 1.5T seconds. Each pair of time histories
shall be applied simultaneously to the model considering torsional
effects.

PTS 11.10.02
Page 21 of 27
6.0 GEOTECHNICAL ASPECT
Preliminary study for potential liquefaction shall (PSR) be addressed in the geotechnical
investigation. Typically, saturated, poorly graded, loose granular deposits with low fines
content are most susceptible to liquefaction.
6.1 LIQUEFACTON OF COHESIONLESS SOILS
6.1.1 Liquefaction of cohesionless soils is likely to occur under the following soil conditions.
i. The sandy layer is within 15-20m of the ground level and is not subjected to high
overburden pressure.
ii. The layer consists of uniform medium–size particles. (Figure 6.1)
iii. The layer is saturated, i.e., it is below the ground water level.
iv. The standard penetration test value is below a certain level. (Figure 6.2)
Figure 6.1: Critical zone for grain size distribution curves

PTS 11.10.02
Page 22 of 27
Figure 6.2: Liquefaction Potential Evaluation Chart
6.2 SLOPE STABILITY
6.2.1 The seismic evaluation of slope stability shall (PSR) be addressed in the geotechnical study. The
slope stability related to seismic design can be grouped into two general categories i.e., inertia
slope stability analysis and weakening slope stability analysis.
i. Inertia Slope Stability
The inertia slope stability analysis is preferred for those materials that retain their
shear strength during the earthquake. Examples of these types of soil and rock
are as follows:
a) Massive crystalline bedrock and sedimentary rock that remain intact

during the earthquake, such as earthquake-induced rock block slide.
b) Soils that tend to dilate during the seismic shaking, or, for example, dense
to very dense granular soil and heavily over consolidated cohesive soil
such as very stiff to hard clays.
c) Soils that have a stress-strain curve that does not exhibit a significant
reduction in shear strength with strain. Earthquake-induced slope
movement in these soils often takes the form of soil slumps or soil block
slides.

PTS 11.10.02
Page 23 of 27
d) Clay that has a low sensitivity.
e) Soils located above the groundwater table. These soils often have
negative pore water pressure due to capillary action.
f) Landslides that have a distinct rupture surface and the shear strength
along the rupture surface is equal to the drained residual shear strength
′r.
ii. Weakening Slope Stability Analysis
The weakening slope stability analysis is preferred for those materials that will
experience a significant reduction in shear strength during the earthquake.
Examples of these types of soil and rock are as follows:
a) Foliated or friable rock that fractures apart during the earthquake,

resulting in rockfalls, rock slides, and rock slumps.
b) Sensitive clays that lose shear strength during the earthquake.
c) Soft clays and organic soils that are overloaded and subjected to plastic
flow during the earthquake.
d) Loose soils located below the groundwater table and subjected to

liquefaction or a substantial increase in excess pore water pressure. There
are two cases of weakening slope stability analyses involving the
liquefaction of soil:
 Flow slide: flow slides develop when the static driving forces
exceed the shear strength of the soil along the slip surface, and
thus the factor of safety is less than 1.0.
 Lateral spreading: There could be localized or large-scale lateral

spreading of retaining walls and slopes. The concept of cyclic
mobility is used to describe large-scale lateral spreading of
slopes. In this case, the static driving forces do not exceed the
shear strength of the soil along the slip surface, and thus the
ground is not subjected to a flow slide. Instead, the driving
forces only exceed the resisting forces during those portions of
the earthquake that impart net inertial forces in the downslope
direction. Each cycle of net inertial forces in the downslope
direction causes the driving forces to exceed the resisting
forces along the slip surface, resulting in progressive and
incremental lateral movement. Often the lateral movement
and ground surface cracks first develop at the unconfined toe,
and then the slope movement and ground cracks progressively
move upslope.

PTS 11.10.02
Page 24 of 27
7.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY
In this PTS, reference is made to the following Standards/Publications. Unless specifically

designated by date, the latest edition of each publication shall be used, together with any
supplements/revisions thereto:
PETRONAS STANDARDS
Index to PTS and Guideline PTS 00.01.01
PTS Requirements, General Definition of Terms & Reading Guide PTS 00.01.03
Minimum Structural Design Requirement for Onshore Structures PTS 11.10.01
Site Preparation and Earthworks Including Tank Foundations and PTS 11.12.01
Tank Farms
Geotechnical and Foundation Engineering - Onshore PTS 11.13.01
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS
Seismic Analysis of Safety-Related Nuclear Structures ASCE 4-98
Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (2005) ASCE 7
Design and manufacture of site built, vertical, cylindrical, flat- EN 14620
bottomed steel tanks for the storage of refrigerated, liquefied gases
with operating temperatures between 0°C and -165°C, (2006)
Installation and equipment for liquefied natural gas, European EN 1473
Committee for Standardisation, Brussels; (2007)
Eurocode 8: Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance. British EN 1998
Standards Institute, (2004)
Standard for the production, storage and handling of liquefied NFPA 59A
natural gas, National Fire Protection Association, Inc, (2006)
Uniform Building Code UBC 1997
OTHER REFERENCES
Guidelines For Seismic Evaluation and Design of Petrochemical
Facilities, 2nd Edition, Prepared by Task Committee on Seismic
Evaluation and Design of the Petrochemical Committee of the
Energy Division of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
The Seismic Design Handbook 2nd Edition, Edited by Farzad Naeim. ISBN 0-412-07891-0
Van Nostrand Reinhold.

PTS 11.10.02
Page 25 of 27
Yousef Bozorgnia and Vitelmo V. Bertero. EARTHQUAKE ISBN 0-203-48624-2

ENGINEERING: From Engineering Seismology to Performance Based
Engineering. CRC Press LLC.
Robert W. Day. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Handbook. ISBN 0-07-137782-4
McGraw-Hill.
Earthquake-Resistant Design of Structures Second Edition, S.K. ISBN 0-19-808352-1
Duggal, Oxford

PTS 11.10.02
SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT FOR ONSHORE FACILITIES December 2016
Page 26 of 27
APPENDIX 1 – OCCUPANCY CATEGORY
The following occupancy category for structures/buildings/equipment listed below may apply for
preliminary design. The final selection shall be detemined with Owner based on Process Safety
Requirements.
Class A Class B Class C
Main Substation BOG Compressor Fdn. & Shelter Non Process Building
FAR Building BOG Recondensor Fdn. & Str. Metering Station Control Room
Main Central Control Building BOG Compressor Suction Drum Fdn. Chlorination House
Fire Pump Fdn. & Shelter Pipe Rack for LNG / NG / FW Line Metering Skid Fdn. & Shelter
ESD Valve Platform Pipe Sleeper for LNG / NG / FW Line Local MCC Shelter/Fdn
Fire Water Storage Tank Fdn. HP LNG Pump Pit Pipe Racks and Pipe Bridge
LNG Tank secondary Containment ORV Structure Misc. support, platform and walkway
LNG Tank Pile and Foundation LNG Tank Primary Containment Pipe Sleeper for Others
Scrub Column Road Crossing Culverts
Endflash Vessel Waste Water Treatment
Feed Gas/ HHP Propane Pre-cooler Potable Water
Ethane Sphere Tank Instrument Air
MR Separator Wet Air Receiver
Feed Gas/ HP Propane Vapouriser Seawater Intake Pumping Station
Bunker Fuel Storage Tank LNG Drain Pump.
Feed Gas/ MP Propane Vapouriser Flare
HTF Storage Tank Impounding Basin
Scrub Column Overhead Condenser Crane Hoist
Main Cryogenic Heat Exchanger
MR/HHP Propane Vapouriser
MR/HP Propane Vapouriser

PTS 11.10.02
Page 27 of 27
Class A Class B Class C
MR/MP Propane Vapouriser
MR/MP Propane Vapouriser

Petronas Technical Standards: Seismic Hazard Assessment For Onshore Facilities

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Petronas Technical Standards: Seismic Hazard Assessment For Onshore Facilities

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PETRONAS TECHNICAL STANDARDS

Seismic Hazard Assessment For Onshore Facilities

© 2017 PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD (PETRONAS)

150.5.65.197 yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com 07/19/2021 06:34:28 GMT

150.5.65.197 yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com 07/19/2021 06:34:28 GMT

150.5.65.197 yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com 07/19/2021 06:34:28 GMT

150.5.65.197 yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com 07/19/2021 06:34:28 GMT

1.2 GLOSSARY OF TERMS

1.2.1 General Definition of Terms & Abbreviations

1.2.2 Specific Definitions of Terms

1.2.3 Specific Abbreviations

1 DSHA Deterministic Seismic Hazard Assessment

2 MCE Maximum Considered Earthquake

3 OBE Operating Basis Earthquake

4 PGA Peak Ground Acceleration

5 PGD Peak Ground Displacement

6 PGV Peak Ground Velocity

150.5.65.197 yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com 07/19/2021 06:34:28 GMT

7 PSHA Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment

8 SSE Safe Shutdown Earthquake

9 ULS Ultimate Limit State

1.3 SUMMARY OF CHANGES

150.5.65.197 yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com 07/19/2021 06:34:28 GMT

2.0 BASIC REQUIREMENTS FOR SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT

2.2 SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT

i. A review of regional, local and site-specific geology, seismic and tectonics

ii. Collection of a comprehensive earthquake catalogue. The catalogue should have

v. Selection of appropriate ground attenuation equations based on tectonic

vi. Seismic hazard calculation (probabilistic or deterministic) to determine

150.5.65.197 yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com 07/19/2021 06:34:28 GMT

2.2.4 Deterministic Seismic Hazard Assessment (DSHA)

i. Deterministic seismic hazard assessment (DSHA) shall involve the development of

a) Identification and characterization of all earthquake sources capable of

b) Selection of source to site distance parameter for each source zone

c) Selection of the controlling earthquake, expressed in terms of ground

2.2.5 Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment (PSHA)

i. The PSHA approach is based on defining a composite probability distribution

a) The earthquake sources contributing to the hazard (e.g., within 500 km

b) The expected total seismicity in each source

c) The site characteristics (e.g., geological and soil conditions)

d) The conditional probability that the strong motion parameter exceeds a

a) Identification and characterization of earthquake sources. The probability

150.5.65.197 yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com 07/19/2021 06:34:28 GMT

b) The seismicity of earthquake recurrence shall be characterized.

c) The ground motions produced at the site by earthquake by source zone

d) Combine the uncertainties in earthquake location, size and ground

2.3 REQUIREMENT OF SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT

i. The data required for a detailed Seismic Hazard Assessment are:

a) A minimum of three attenuation relationship appropriate to the tectonic

c) Coordinates of the site being studied.

ii. The outputs required from a site-specific study shall be as follows:

a) Peak Ground Acceleration for each criteria (e.g OBE, SSE)

b) Design response spectra for each design level for 5% damping

150.5.65.197 yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com 07/19/2021 06:34:28 GMT

Define the Seismic Requirement:

Define Seismic Design Level:

Verify OBE/SSE criteria with applicable

Code Based Y OBE/SSE criteria

Verify with studies or previous

Figure 2.1: Requirement for Seismic Hazard Assessment (SHA)

150.5.65.197 yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com yokoyama.naomi@jgc.com 07/19/2021 06:34:28 GMT

3.0 DESIGN AND EVALUATION PHILOSOPHY

i. Defining the proper ground motion for a site